# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1848_S44
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— 44 —

...result of that conference's deliberations with Pastor Keyl on this
subject to the Synod; and the following statement, which the conference had
proposed the Synod make on the matter in question, was now put before it
for discussion: "The Synod declares that the addition — 'the general
confession, etc., may nevertheless be retained' — was adopted solely for
the sake of imprudent preachers who might attempt to force private
confession upon their congregations, even at the risk of dangerously
unsettling or even destroying them. It further declares that this addition
is in no way meant to give support to those who equate general confession
with private confession, or who, out of aversion to the latter, fail to
work toward its introduction through instruction and teaching, as the
paragraph requires."

This statement gave rise to a long and lively discussion. The main
question was whether general confession did not in fact contain and grant
the essential element of private confession — namely, absolution — or
whether it was otherwise so disadvantaged in comparison that the wording of
that addition ought rightly to be disapproved or corrected.

The Präses finally put a formal question on this to the Synod, and it
declared its conviction that there is no essential difference between
private absolution and general absolution; it later added, however, the
following clarification: "When it is said that there is no essential
difference between private absolution and general absolution, this means,
in other words: through general absolution — that is, through the
preaching of the gospel — the same grace, the same forgiveness, and indeed
the same spiritual blessings are conveyed to those who believe, just as
through private absolution. This is not meant, however, to deny the
manifold usefulness of private absolution, as, for example, for those under
spiritual attack [Angefochtene], and so forth."

Meanwhile, a wish was expressed from several quarters that the entire
passage in Chapter V, §14, concerning private confession and general
confession, be struck out; and the Präses called on the members of the
Synod to state their views individually on this, as a result of which the
following resolution was finally moved and adopted:

"Because we have come to the conviction that everything belonging to
church order should not be prescribed to individual congregations by our
Synod's Constitution, but should be left entirely to the congregations' own
decision, we have resolved to strike the sentence in Chapter V, §14 of our
Constitution — 'Where private confession already exists... it may be
retained' — we declare, however, that in doing so we by no means abandon
the doctrine set forth in Article 11 of the Augsburg Confession: 'Of
confession it is thus taught: that private absolution should be retained
in the churches and not allowed to fall into disuse, etc.' — but intend,
with God's help, to hold fast to it, and we expect the pastors of our
association, all of whom are bound to the confessional writings [Symbole]
of our church, to remain faithful to our church's confession also with
regard to this article of doctrine, and accordingly to make private
absolution known to their congregations and recommend it, and to refuse it
to no penitent sinner who desires it."