On the basis of clear Scripture-passages, Luther taught that the whole Gospel is nothing else than God's free absolution of all sinners for Christ's sake, 2 Cor. 5, 19-21; Rom. 4, 25. On this fundamental truth the great Reformer based his entire doctrine regarding absolution, or the application of the general Gospel promises of forgiveness to individual persons, either in private confession (Privatbeichte) or in the general confession (allgemeine Beichte).
As Luther, so also the Lutheran Confessions inculcate the doctrine of absolution with great emphasis. The Smalcald Articles Art. VII declare: "The keys are an office and power given by Christ to the Church for binding and loosing sin." And the Apology Art. XII says: "The power of the keys administers and presents the Gospel through absolution, which proclaims peace to men and is the true voice of the Gospel" ; Art. XI : "We should believe the absolution and regard it as certain that the remission of sins is freely granted us for Christ's sake"; Art. VI : "We also retain confession, especially on account of the absolution, as being the word of God which by divine authority the power of the keys pronounces upon individuals." Similarly the Small Catechism: "Confession embraces two parts. The one is that we confess our sins; the other, that we receive absolution, or forgiveness, from the confessor as from God Himself and in no wise doubt, but firmly believe, that our sins are thereby forgiven before God in heaven."
Absolution has been well defined as "that special form of administering the Gospel according to which a minister of the Church or any other Christian forgives one or more persons, upon their confession, their sins." (Cp. Luther, St. L., XVI, 1795; X, 1235.) Luther: "Was ist die Absolution anders denn das Evangelium einem einzelnen Menschen gesagt, der ueber seine bekannte Suende Trost dadurch empfahe?" Hence absolution is nothing else than the Gospel individualized, or applied to individuals, Matt. 9, 2; Luke 7, 48, just as it is done in the Sacraments. What the Gospel offers to all men, absolution offers to the individual.
The Scriptural doctrine of absolution has always been a stumbling-block to those who rejected the true doctrine of the means of grace. Zwingli said: "The assurance of our spirit that we are sons of God comes from the Spirit, not from the speaking confessor." The Pietists even averred: "The confessional chair is a devil's chair, a Satansstuhl." Because the Scriptural doctrine of absolution was not distinguished by them from that of Romanism, which indeed is a perversion of the Scriptural truth, it was branded as a "commandment of Antichrist," etc.
The true doctrine of absolution, however, is firmly founded upon Scripture. Christ's words are clear and unmistakable: "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven," Matt. 18, 18. Again: "Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained," John 20, 23. (Cp. also Matt. 9, 8; 2 Cor. 2, 10.)
From these passages it is evident: a) that all who have received the Holy Ghost, that is to say, all true believers, are to remit or forgive sins; b) that this forgiveness relates to distinct persons ("whosesoever sins"); c) that all sins so forgiven by men are forgiven also before God in heaven ("they are remitted unto them").
It must be well understood that in absolution the forgiveness of sins is not merely announced to, or invoked upon, men, but actually conferred and conveyed, John 20, 23, just as this is done in the Gospel in general, Luke 24, 47. Moreover, it is God who absolves from sin in absolution. There is not a twofold absolution, one pronounced by God and the other by man; but the absolution spoken by men is God's absolution, pronounced by men in His stead. (Cp. Luther, St. L., XIX, 945.) The Augsburg Confession therefore rightly says XXV: "Our people are being taught that they should highly prize the absolution as being the voice of God and pronounced by God's command." While the confession to the minister is an institution of the Church, the pronouncing of absolution to all who desire it is an institution of God.- Auricular confession is an antichristian abomination. (Cp. Luther, St. L., XI, 582 ff.)
The absolution practised in the Roman Catholic Church is a caricature of the absolution instituted by Christ. Luther therefore rightly denounced it as "altogether Pelagianistic, enthusiastic, and antichristian" St. L., XIX, 943, because it is conditioned on the contrition, plenary confession, and satisfactions made by the applicant. Besides, absolution in the Roman Catholic Church is made dependent on the "intention" of the priest. - Another infamous feature of papistic absolution is the "erring key," which means that the absolution of the priest gives no assurance whatever that the sins are forgiven before God in heaven. Thus papistic absolution is utterly without consolation and assurance of salvation. But just that is what Roman Catholic theology desires: the sinner should not be sure of the forgiveness of his sins and of his salvation.
In opposing the Lutheran and Scriptural doctrine of absolution, Zwingli applied his supposed figure of speech, the so-called alloeosis, also to these words of the Savior, substituting for the personal pronoun "ye" the uHoly Ghost," so that they really mean: "Whosesoever sins the Holy Ghost remits, they are remitted." Zwingli's contention was that, when the Savior said: ''Whosesoever sins ye remit," this was done out of pure divine friendship ("aus lauter goettlicher Freundschaft"). "Though Christ ascribes the binding and remitting to the disciples, yet this is solely the work of the operating Spirit; ... hence there is attributed to the names of the apostles out of pure divine friendship what is solely the work of the Spirit." Cp. Christl. Dogmatik, III, p. 225 ff.
The followers of Zwingli unanimously agreed to his doctrine and likewise denied the Biblical doctrine of absolution. The reason for this is not hard to find. Zwinglianism (Calvinism) teaches the errors of particular grace ("saving grace only for the elect") and of the immediate operation of the Holy Spirit (immediata Spiritus Sancti operatio); but these two errors render absolution in the sense of Scripture impossible. According to Calvinism, no man can forgive the sins of any individual sinner, since, on the one hand, he cannot know whether the sinner is an elect or not, and because, on the other, this is the exclusive business of the Holy Spirit.
In Lutheran circles the doctrine of absolution was disavowed by both the Pietists and the synergists. Pietism misunderstood the real meaning of the divine Gospel promises (denial of objective reconciliation)1, while synergism, with its insistence on human cooperation in conversion, bases the remission of sins partly on man's own good conduct, so that neither he who absolves nor he who is absolved can know in any given case whether the absolution is effective. In both cases these Lutheran teachers erred because they departed from the doctrine of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions (rejection of the objective justification and of the sola gratia).
Those who claim that the Lutheran doctrine of absolution is a "Romanistic leaven" ("roemischer Sauerteig") fail to perceive the radical difference between the Biblical doctrine of absolution which the Lutheran Church advocates and the unbiblical doctrine of the Church of Antichrist. According to the papistic conception, absolution can be granted only by the priests (in severe cases only by the bishop or the Pope) upon adequate satisfaction rendered by the penitent individual (contritio cordis, confessio oris, satisfactio), the priest acting as judge to decide whether the satisfaction is sufficient. Absolution in that case depends on the sinner's own worthiness, obtained by performing humanly prescribed penances, which are adjudged by human standards or values. The Roman Catholic doctrine of absolution is therefore in the fullest sense of the term a "commandment of men" (Matt. 15, 9) and as such cannot mediate forgiveness, but rather leaves the sinner under the curse, Gal. 3, 10; 5, 4.
Scripture, on the other hand, teaches: a) that the Office of the Keys (potestas clavium), that is, the peculiar power to forgive or retain sins, belongs to all Christians, John 20, 23; Matt. 18, 18; 16, 19, so that every believer may absolve from sin as effectually as does a priest or bishop; and b) that absolution is based neither upon contrition (either fictitious or genuine) nor upon any satisfaction which the sinner renders for his sins (Roman Catholic doctrine), but alone upon the perfect reconciliation which Christ has made for all men by His vicarious obedience and upon God's command (John 20, 21; Luke 24, 47) to preach remission of sins in His name among all nations. Absolution is therefore nothing else than the individual application of divine pardon for Jesus' sake. Hence it should not be doubted or rejected, but rather be received in true faith, just as the divine promises of God must be believed which the Gospel proclaims in general to all sinners.
From this it is also clear why, as Luther so emphatically says, every Christian may absolve. His right to absolve is as certain as that of preaching the Gospel, 1 Pet. 2, 9; in fact, absolution is only a special form of preaching the Gospel of grace and reconciliation.
If Romanists and Romanizing Protestants aver that the power of remitting and retaining sins was granted by Christ only to the clergy, John 20, 22. 23, they fail to observe that our Lord on that occasion addressed not only the Twelve, but also other disciples; cp. John 20, 19. 24; Luke 24, 33. Dr. A. Spaeth, e. g., writes: "When this power was conveyed by the Lord, the apostles were not all present; nor were those present on this occasion all apostles. John clearly distinguishes between the Twelve (v. 24) and the disciples (v. 19). And Luke tells us distinctly that others were gathered with the disciples on that evening, Luke 24, 33. Luther therefore is right in saying: 'This power is given to all Christians. Whosoever hath the Holy Spirit, to him this power is given, that is,. to him who is a Christian."' (Annotations to the Gospel according to St. John; cp. Christl. Dogmatik, III, 227 ff.)
While some object to the doctrine of absolution on the ground of its being a "Romanistic leaven," others do so because they say it is God's exclusive prerogative to forgive sins. For this reason they regard it as blasphemous to ascribe to any man the power to forgive or retain sins. To this stricture we reply that it is indeed God's prerogative to forgive sins; however, He does not exercise this prerogative immediately (by direct announcement), but mediately, through the Gospel, which He commands His believing disciples to proclaim to every creature, Mark 16, 15. 16; Matt. 28, 19. 20. Hence God forgives sins through the very Word which believers preach in His name, 2 Sam. 12, 13; Luke 24, 47. Even when a person reads the divine Gospel promises and thus applies the absolution of the Gospel to himself, he receives forgiveness of sins not immediately (interior Spiritus illuminatio), but mediately, through the Word of the prophets and apostles, Eph. 2, 20.
To the objection that the doctrine of absolution may mislead men both to carnal security and carnal pride (Priesterstolz) we reply that the abuse of a thing does not annul its right use. If the doctrine of absolution is not to be taught because it is subject to abuse, then we must neither preach the Gospel in general nor administer the Sacraments in particular, since these are likewise subject to abuse. In passing, we may remark that the doctrine of absolution can produce carnal security or spiritual pride only if it is proclaimed in a perverted form (Romanism). Absolution in the sense of Scripture always presupposes contrition and faith.
To the objection that a minister cannot forgive sins because he does not know if the recipient is "worthy" or not we reply: Absolution does not depend on any worthiness in man, but on God's grace in Christ Jesus, which has appeared to all men and should therefore also be proclaimed and offered to all. This is done both by the preaching of the Gospel in general and by the special promulgation of the Gospel in the form of absolution. Those who announce the grace of God in Christ Jesus to men never make a mistake; for there is no clavis errans, or Fehlschluessel. The words of absolution are always as true as is the Gospel itself, of which absolution is only a special application. If any one fails to receive the forgiveness announced and proffered in absolution, the fault is his alone and not that of the absolution. For Christ's sake God has graciously remitted the sins of the whole world, 2 Cor. 5, 19. 20, and absolution is nothing else than the proclamation of this gracious forgiveness to the individual. Every one who believes this glorious fact is in actual possession of complete pardon.
Every objection to the Biblical doctrine of absolution is therefore based upon a misunderstanding of what absolution really is; and absolution is misunderstood because men fail to comprehend the objective reconciliation which Christ made by His vicarious atonement. And this, again, they fail to comprehend because they base a sinner's salvation, in part at least, on his own worthiness and not exclusively on God's grace and Christ's vicarious obedience (sola gratia, sola fide), offered to all men as a free gift in the means of grace.
As soon as a believer understands that absolution is only the application of the general pardon offered and conveyed by the Gospel, he readily understands also why Baptism and the Lord's Supper must be regarded as forms of private absolution. In both Sacraments God offers individually that grace which Christ bas secured for the whole world by His death, Acts 2, 38; Matt. 26, 26-28, and which is received by faith in His gracious Gospel promises. No matter in what manner the Gospel is applied to men, whether by general proclamation, or through Baptism, or the Lord's Supper, or the act of absolution, the sinner is always absolved, that is, his sin is forgiven; for the same joyous, comforting message is heard alike in them all : "Be of good cheer ; thy sins be forgiven thee," Matt. 9, 2.
From this it is evident that absolution should not be pronounced conditionally ("If you truly repent and truly believe, your sins are forgiven"), but always unconditionally ("Thy sins be forgiven thee"). It is true, forgiveness is received only by faith, and true faith dwells only in a contrite heart. From this point of view Luther correctly says that "every absolution has the condition of faith"; but he adds: "yet only in so far as it receives the absolution and says yes to it" St. L., XXIb, 1847 ff. On the other hand, Luther most emphatically repudiates the doctrine that the forgiveness is based upon a person's contrition and faith inasmuch as these are good or meritorious works.
If contrition and faith were meritorious acts, then indeed absolution would have to be pronounced conditionally. Since forgiveness, however, does not rest on any good work in man, but only on God's gracious disposition toward the sinner in Christ Jesus, no condition whatever attaches to it. God actually forgives every sinner his transgressions for Christ's sake, and this glorious truth should be announced to every sinner, and every sinner should believingly trust in it. Hence, as neither Baptism nor the Lord's Supper is conditional ("I baptize you in case you truly believe"; "'Take, eat; this is My body,' if you truly believe"), so neither absolution is conditional. God's forgiveness is truly offered to every sinner in every form of Gospel-preaching; for man's unbelief never makes the faith of God without effect, Rom. 3, 3. In all cases therefore absolution is to be pronounced unconditionally.
If, according to the custom of the Lutheran Church, the pronouncement of absolution is preceded by the questions: "Do you heartily repent of your sins, believe on Jesus Christ, and sincerely and earnestly purpose by the assistance of God the Holy Ghost henceforth to amend your sinful lives?" this is not to render absolution conditional, but merely to warn the secure and to comfort the penitent.
It is clear that the Scriptural doctrine of absolution can be maintained only by those who adhere to the Biblical doctrine of justification by grace, through faith in Christ Jesus. Romanism, synergism, and Calvinism err with regard to the doctrine of absolution just because they deny either the sola gratia or the gratia universalis. Where these two doctrines are denied, God's amnesty must be based upon a condition in man; but where God's amnesty is made to rest upon "certain conditions" on the part of the sinner, absolution in the Scriptural sense becomes impossible. Cp. Christl. Dogmatik, III, 223-248.