Green on Article XXV: Of the Sacraments

[Our Lorde Jesus Christe bathe knitte toguether a companie of newe people with Sacramentes, moste f ewe in numbre, most easie to bee kepte, moste excellent in signification, as isBaptisme,and the Lorde’s Supper.] The Sacramentes were not or- deined of Christe to be gased upon, or to be carried about, but that we

[…]

Sacramenta non instituta sunt a Christo ut spectarentur aut circum- ferrentur, sed ut rite illis uteremur : Et in his duntaxat qui digne per- cipiunt, salutarem habent effectum, [idque non ex opere, ut quidam loquuntur, operato ; quae vox, ut peregrina est et Sacris literis ignota, sic parit sensum minim pium sed admodum superstitiosum.] Qui vero indigne percipiunt, damnationem (ut inquit Paulus) sibi ipsis acquirunt.

Sacramentes ordeined by the

worde of God be not onely badges,

[…]

professione, but rather thei bee cer-

teine sure “witnesses, and effectual!

signes of grace, and Goddes good

[…]

dothe worke inuisiblie in vs, and • ’ | dothe not onlie quicken, but also

strengthen, and confirme our faith

in him.

Sacramenta per Verburn Dei in- stituta, non tantum sunt notae pro¬ fessions Christianorum, sed certa quaedam potius testimonia et effica- cia signa gratiae atque bonae in nos voluntatis Dei, per quae invisibiliter ipse in nobis operatur, nostramque fidem in se non solum excitat, verum etiam confirmat.

This Article was entirely recast in 1563.

(1.) The opening paragraph1 (enclosed in brackets above) was altogether omitted.

(2.) In 1553 the idea was condemned that the Sacraments have a wholesome effect, arising ” ex opere operator This phrase had been understood, at the time, to mean, that the mere act of receiving, altogether apart from a right disposition in the recipient, confers the grace of the Sacrament. Such an opinion could not, of course, be too strongly condemned.2

The condemnation, however, in reality arose from a misunder- standin^of the meaning of the expression. “ Ex opere operato ” was, in the scholastic terminology, opposed to “ ex opere opemntis ,” and was meant to exclude all idea-of human merit; it signified that Grace is given to man upon performance of the outward work, or action, to which God has attached the promise, and was

1 This paragraph was taken almost verbatim from S. Augustine’s Epistle to Januarius. The same words had been made use of by Alesius in the debate on the subject of the Sacraments in 1536.

2 The theory that the Sacraments confer grace “ ex opere operato ” was also condemned in the following formularies : —

Augsburg Confession, Part I. Art. XIII :

“ Damnant igitur illos, qui docent, quod sacramenta ex opere operato justi- ficent, nec docent fidem requiri in usu sacramentorum, quae credat remitti peccata.” ”

XIII. Articles, Art. IX.:

“Neque enim in illis verum est, quod quidam dicunt, sacramenta conferre gratiam ex opere operato, sine bono motu utentis, nam in ratione utentibus necessum est, ut tides etiam utentis accedat, per quam credat illis promissio- nibus, et accipiat res promissas, quae per sacramenta conferantur.”

Saxon Confession, Art. XV. :

“Aperte damnamus portentosum errorem monachorum, qui scripserunt, sumptionem mereri remissionem peccatorum, et quidem ex opere operato, sine bono motu utentis. Haec pharisaica imaginatio pugnat cum dicto, Justus sua fide vivet.”

not meant to imply that Grace is given for any merit in the performance of the action by man (this would be “ ex opere ojoerantis ”). Thus the spiritual partaking of Christ, whereby we dwell in Him, and He in us, is not, ordinarily,1 granted to us apart from the performance of the outward action (viz., the par¬ taking of the consecrated Elements in the Eucharist), to which Christ Himself has attached the promise of the spiritual blessing. This efficacy of the Sacrament is not, of course, owing to any virtue or merit in our action, but solely to the work performed by Divine agency through it.

The Council of Trent (Session VII.) affirmed the efficacy of the Sacraments “ ex ojpere operato”

See Canon VIII. : —

“ Si quis dixerit, per ipsa novae legis Sacramenta ex opere operato non conferri gratiam, sed solam fidem divinae promissionis ad gratiam consequendam sufficere ; anathema sit.”

At the same time the Council so worded its declarations as to guard the meaning of the expression.

Of. Canon VI. (of the same Session) : —

[…]

When the phrase “ ex opere operato ” had been cleared from the objectionable sense which had become attached to it the Reformers could no longer object to it, and the clause in this Article (enclosed in brackets above) which condemned it was, therefore, removed in 1563.

1 We must iusert this qualifying word, because we doubt not that God gives the spiritual grace apart from the performance of the action commanded, when the performance of such action has been rendered impossible by adverse circum¬ stances. We are bound to use the Sacraments wherever they may be had, but God in His operation is not tied to them.

Cf. the Rubric in the Order for “ the Communion of the Sick” : —

“But if a man, either by reason of extremity of sickness, or for want of warning in due time to the Curate, or for lack of company to receive with him, or by any other just impediment, do not receive the Sacrament of Christ’s Body and Blood, the Curate shall instruct him, that if he do truly repent him of his sins, and stedfastly believe that Jesus Christ hath suffered death upon the Cross for him, and shed his Blood for his redemption, earnestly remembering the benefits he hath thereby, and giving him hearty thanks therefore, he doth eat and drink the Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ profitably to his soul’s health, although he do not receive the Sacrament with his mouth.”

(3.) The concluding paragraph was transposed and made the first paragraph of the new Article.

(4.) The middle portion of the Article as it now stands was composed and inserted.

One small change has been since made in the wording of this section. As originally drawn up in 1563, besides the statement that the “ five commonly called Sacraments … are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel,” it also contained a very express declaration that “ Penance ” 1 hath not the like nature of a Sacrament with Baptism and the Lord’s Supper : —

“But yet have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. In which sort neither is Penance, for that it hath not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God.”

“ Sed Saeramentorum eandem cum Baptismo et Coena Domini rationem non habentes : quomodo nec poenitentia, ut quae signum aliquod visibile seu ceremoniam a Deo institutam non habeant.”

The words “quomodo nec poenitentia” and the corresponding words in the English text were omitted when the Articles were re-issued in 1571.

§ 2. OBJECT.

(1.) To condemn disparagement of the Sacraments by declaring that they are more than badges or tokens of our profession.

(2.) To distinguish Baptism and the Holy Eucharist from other ordinances “ commonly called sacraments ” by claiming for them the special title of “ Sacraments of the Gospel.”

(3.) To emphasise the necessity of a right disposition in the recipient.

§ 3. EXPOSITION.

The Name “ Sacrament.”

The Latin “sacramentum” was used in early times as a rendering of the Greek fivarripcov. It is thus used, e.g ., in the Vulgate version of Eph. i. 9, iii. 3, v. 32 ; Col. i. 27 ; I Tim. iii. 16 ; Rev. i. 20.

Our word “ Sacrament ” therefore simply represents the Greek

[…]

name “ Mystery,” wliicli has been applied to the sacred ordinances of the Church from primitive times,1 and which is still the usual name of the Sacraments in the Eastern Church at the present day. Other derivations of the name have been proposed ; e.g., it is sometimes stated that the ordinances of the Church obtained the name of “ Sacraments ” owing to the resemblance of the initiatory rite of Baptism, wherein the Christian pledges his fidelity to Christ, to the ceremony attending the Roman soldier’s taking the oath of loyalty ( sacramentum ) to his commander. However suggestive this comparison may be, it does not appear to be the true account of the origin of the term “ Sacrament ” as applied to the ordinances of the Church.

The word “ Sacrament,” meaning “ Mystery,” is capable of a very wide signification.

Cf. the Homily of Common Prayer and Sacraments

(p- 377) : —

“In a general acceptation the name of a Sacrament may be attributed to anything whereby an holy thing is signified.77

But the word is commonly used by the Church in a more restricted sense to denote —

“ Visible signs expressly commanded in the New Testament, whereunto is annexed the promise of free forgiveness of our sin and of our holiness and joining in Christ 77 (Ibid., p. 376).

See also the explanation given in the Church Catechism : —

“ Question. What meanest thou by this word Sacrament ?

“Answer. I mean an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us, ordained by Christ Himself, as a means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof.77

The Sacramental Principle.

(a) God always, by His very nature, wishes to declare Him¬ self. From all eternity, even before the universe was made, He has done so, by the eternal generation of the Son, which

1 Cf. , e.g., the opening words of the first of the series of Lectures delivered (A.D. 386) by S. Cyril of Jerusalem on the Sacraments : —

’E7 roOovv vftv Kal ira \ai, & yvrjaia Kal TrepurodrjTa tt) s e/ocX^crfas reKva, tt epl Tu>v 7Tvevp.a.TiKu>v toijtuv Kal eirovpavlwv SioCkexdrjvou pLvarripicjv,

[…]

may thus be spoken of as a Sacrament. The Son, or Word, of God, is something outward to declare God Himself, Who is hidden (Col. i. 15). r

(b) God declares Himself in Creation. The visible creation is Sacramental, being an outward sign of the invisible God (Rom. i. 20).

(c) God has declared Himself more particularly in the Incar¬ nation. The human body of Jesus living amongst men was an outward and visible sign of the dwelling of God with men, and of His union with man (Col. ii. 9).

We see, therefore, that when God uses Sacraments in the Church, His action is most suited to His own nature. He acts upon that same principle in accordance with which He has always acted.

We now come to examine the statements of our Article in detail. It treats of —

(1.) The Nature of Sacraments.

(a.) what sacraments are not .

Sacraments ordained of Christ he not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession.

Zwingli held that the grace of God is always given to the spirit of man immediately.

Gf. Fidei Ratio, § 7 : —

11 Credo, imo scio omnia sacramenta tarn abesse ut gratiam con- ferant, ut ne adferant quidem aut dispensent. Qua in re forsan audacior tibi videri potero, potentissime Caesar.1 Sed stat sen- tentia. Nam gratia ut a spiritu divino fit aut datur (loquor autem latine cum gratiae nomine utor, pro venia scilicet indulgentia et gratuito beneficio) ita donum istud ad solum spiritum pervenit. Dux autem vel vehiculum spiritui non est necessarium, ipse enim est virtus et latio qua cuncta feruntur, non qui ferri opus habeat ; neque id unquam legimus in scripturis sacris, quod sensibilia, qualia sacramenta sunt, certo secum ferrent spiritum, sed si sensi¬ bilia unquam lata sunt cum spiritu, jam spiritus fuit qui tulit, non sensibilia.”

According to this view Sacraments can never be means of grace. With regard to Baptism, therefore, Zwingli taught that it is merely the external badge of membership in the Christian community, or a sort of certificate of spiritual life, which, how¬ ever, if imparted at all, was imparted independently of the material element.

1 The treatise was addressed to the Emperor (Charles V.).

i8o

Fidei Ratio, § 7 : —

“ Baptismo igitur Ecclesia publice recipit eum, qui prius re- ceptus est per gratiam. Non ergo adfert gratiam baptismus, sed gratiam factam esse ei cui datur, Ecclesiae testatur. Credo igitur, 0 Caesar, sacramentum esse sacrae rei, hoc est factae gratiae, signum. Credo esse invisibilis gratiae, quae scilicet Dei munere facta et data est, visibilem figuram sive formam, hoc est visibile exemplum, quod tamen fere analogiam quandam rei per spiritum gestae prae se fert. Credo testimonium publicum esse.”

Of. the same writer’s words in his treatise “ De Baptismo ” : —

“Baptismus foederis vel pacti signum est, non in hunc finem institution, ut eum qui baptizari solet justum efficiat, vel fidem baptizati confirmet. Impossible enim est ut res aliqua externa fidem hominis internam confirmet et stabiliat ” (Works, ii. 63).

The same principle is also laid down by Zwingli with regard to the Eucharist : —

“Nihil ergo eorum, quae externa sunt, fidem firmare vel nos in ilia certiores reddere potest. Quod idem simili ratione de Eucharistia quoque, vel Coena Domini pronunciamus ” (Works, ii. 63).

This view of the Sacraments had spread widely on the Conti¬ nent, and had also found its way into this country. It is ex¬ pressly repudiated in our Article, as it was also by Luther, who denounced the opinion as “ diabolical,” and by Calvin, who char¬ acterised the teaching of the Zurich Reformer as u profana,” 1 “ falsa et perniciosa.” 2 3 Even those of our English divines who went furthest in their agreement with the “ Reformed ” theology rejected the idea that the Sacraments are bare signs ; 3 c.g., Hooper thus writes to Bucer (from Zurich, June 19, 1548) : —

“ You write word, reverend sir, that you cannot believe the sacraments to be bare signs. Far be such a belief from the most unlearned Christian ! … I do not write for the sake of dispute, but that I may testify to you, that the sacraments with us are not bare signs ” (Original Letters, i. 47, 48).

1 In a letter to Viret, 1542.

2 In a letter to Zebedseus, 1539.

3 Zwingli himself was not always consistent, for at the Conference at Marburg (1529) he signed the following statement : —

“ Baptismum esse sacramentum ad fidem a Deo institutum et praeceptum, non nudum signum, aut tesseram professionis Christianae, sed et opus Dei, in quo fides nostra requiritur, et per quam regeneramur,”

Latimer expresses himself more strongly : —

“ In all ages the devil hath stirred up some light heads to esteem the Sacraments hut lightly, as to he empty and hare signs ” (Ridley’s Works, p. 114).

Cf. also the following extracts from formularies : —

Augsburg Confession, Part I. Art. XIII. :

“De usu Sacramentorum docent, quod sacramenta instituta sint, non modo ut sint notae professions inter homines, sed magis ut sint signa et testimonia voluntatis Dei erga nos, ad excitandam et confirmandem fidem in his qui utuntur proposita.”

Saxon Confession, Art. XIII. :

“ Quae tamen non sunt tantum signa professions, sed multo magis (ut vetustas dixit) signa gratiae.”

Scotch Confession, Art. XXI. :

[…]

Belgic Confession, Art. XXXIII.:

“ Itaque signa ilia minime vana sunt aut vacua.”

In the Reformatio Legum the following statement is made on the subject (“ De Haeresibus,” Cap. 17): —

“Magna quoque temeritas illorum est, qui sacramenta sic ex- tenuant ut ea pro nudis signis, et externis tantum indiciis capi velint, quibus tanquam notis hominum Christianorum religio possit a caeteris internosci.”

(b.) what sacraments are.1

(i.) Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession.

The Church is a visible society, Baptism the initiatory rite admitting to Church membership, and the Holy Eucharist the pledge and security of union. The Sacraments may thus be looked upon as badges or tokens of our profession as Christians. Cf. 1 Cor. i. 13—17, where S. Paul’s argu-

1 With the wording of our Article we may compare Calvin’s definition : —

[…]

ment seems to imply that Baptism was regarded as an acknowledgment on the part of a convert of allegiance to his new Master.

But Sacraments have a far higher significance than this — (ii.) Rather they he certain sure witnesses … of grace, and God’s good will towards us.

The Sacraments are pledges of the Divine Will in regard to man, and sureties of the truth of God’s promises ; they are “ pledges to assure us ” of “ the inward and spiritual grace given unto us ” (Church Catechism).

When it is said that they are “certain sure witnesses,” it is meant that they are such witnesses of God’s grace and good will as we may feel confident will never deceive us. (iii.) Effectual signs1 of grace, and God’s good will towards us.

In other words, a Sacrament actually effects that of which it is the sign. Baptism is a sign of Regeneration, and actually effects the same. Thus in the Baptismal Office, immediately after the act of Baptism, the Priest says, “ Seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, that this Child is regenerate” ( cf . Tit. iii. 5 5 1 S. Pet. iii. 21).

Again, the Holy Eucharist is an outward sign of our Communion with Christ, and the partaking of it actually effects that Communion (1 Cor. x. 16). Cf. the words of the long Exhortation in the Communion Service : —

“For as the benefit is great, if with a true penitent heart and lively faith we receive that holy Sacrament ; (for then we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink His blood ; then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us ; we are one with Christ, and Christ with us).” …

(iv.) By the which He doth work invisibly in us.

The words “by the which” refer to the Sacraments, as is clear in the Latin text (per quae). The Sacraments are thus the channels whereby the grace of God flows into the soul ; they are the “ means whereby we receive ” the inward and spiritual grace (Church Catechism).

We should note that God is declared to be the efficient

“ They be no vain nor bare tokens, as you would persuade (for a bare token is that which betokeneth only and giveth nothing, as a painted fire which giveth neither light nor heat) ; but in the due ministration of the Sacraments God is present, working with His Word and Sacraments.”

Cause, Who confers grace by the Sacraments ; the Sacraments themselves are not efficient, but instrumental, causes of grace. Canon VI. of Session VII. of the Council of Trent (quoted above, p. 176), speaks of the Sacraments as “conferring” grace.

With the wording of our Article cf. the Belgic Confes¬ sion, Art. XXXIII. : —

“ Sunt enim Sacramenta signa, ac symbola visibilia reruin inter- narum et invisibilium, per quae ceu per media Deus ipse virtute Spiritus Sancti in nobis agit.”

(v.) And doth not only quicken (excitat), but also strengthen and confirm our faith in Him.

This clause is directly opposed to the Zwinglian theory of the Sacraments; see the passages from Zwingli quoted above, p. 180.

(2.) The Number of Sacraments.

There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord.

Of Sacramental Ordinances our Church gives a place of special honour to those two, the institution of which by our Lord Himself is expressly recorded in the New Testament, viz. : —

(a.) Baptism (S. Matt, xxviii. 19), and

(&.) The Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. xi. 23—26).

Cf. Church Catechism: —

“ Question. How many Sacraments hath Christ ordained in His Church ?

“ Ansiver. Two only, as generally necessary to salvation, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord.”

The position of the English Church is well illustrated by the Reformatio Legum, “De Sacramentis,” Cap. 2. Quid in Sacra¬ mento quaerendum sit : —

“Ad Sacramenti perfectionem tria concurrere debent. Primum evidens est et illustris nota, quae manifeste cerni possit. Secundum est Dei promissum, quod externo signo nobis repraesentatur et plane confirmatur. Tertium est Dei praeceptum, quo necessitas nobis imponitur, ista partim faciendi, partim commemorandi ; quae tria cum authoritate Scripturarum in Baptismo solum occurrant, et Eucharistia, nos liaec duo sola pro veris et propriis novi testamenti sacramentis ponimus.”

See also the Homily of Common Prayer and Sacraments (p. 376):—

“And as for the number of them, if they should be considered according to the exact signification of a Sacrament, namely, for visible signs expressly commanded in the New Testament, where- unto is annexed the promise of free forgiveness of our sin and of our holiness and joining in Christ, there be but two, namely, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord.”

The express limitation of the term “ Sacrament,” as a definite title, to seven ordinances of the Church appears to be traceable to Peter Lombard (d. 1 164), who, in the Fourth Book of his “ Sentences,” gives the name in its narrower sense to those seven ordinances which were subsequently recognised, at the Council of Florence (1430), and at the Council of Trent, as the Sacraments of the Church.1

See Canon I. of Session VII. of the Council of Trent (March 1547): —

[…]

Cf. the Creed of Pope Pius IV.: —

“Profiteor quoque septem esse vere et proprie Sacramenta novae legis, a Jesu Christo, Domino nostro, instituta, atque ad salutem liumani generis, licet non omnia singulis necessaria … illaque gratiam conferre.”

The Eastern Church also recognises the same Seven Sacraments. See, c.g., the “Holy Cathechism ” by N. Bernardaces (p. 22): —

“ Q. How many Mysteries are there, and what are they 1

“ A . Seven — (r) Baptism; (2) Unction or Holy Ointment;2 (3) the Eucharist or Holy Communion; (4) Penance or Confession; (5) Holy Orders; (6) Marriage; and (7) Prayer-oil.” 3

The formularies of the Lutheran or Saxon school, when deal¬ ing with the Sacraments, treat of two only, but at the same time

1 In England the Bishops’ Book (1537) and the King’s Book (1543) acknow¬ ledged the Seven Sacraments.

2 Corresponding to our Confirmation.

3 I.e., or anointing the sick.

they do not, as a rule, expressly exclude the other five ordinances from the number of the Sacraments. The Wurtemburg Con¬ session, however, argues at length against the reception of these five as Sacraments of the Church.

The Confessions of the “ Reformed ” departed much further in this matter, as in most other points, from the position of the Roman Church. The number of Sacraments is by them more expressly limited to two : —

Cf. French Confession, Art. XXXV. :

[…]

Scotch Confession, Art. XXI. :

“Nunc tempore Evangelii, nos duo solum habere praecipua a Christo instituta Sacramenta, agnoscimus et confitemur, quae ab omnibus illis utenda praecipiuntur, qui volunt corporis ipsius membra haberi, scilicet Baptismus et Coena vel mensa Domini, quae vulgo communio Corporis et Sanguinis ejus vocatur.”

Belgic Confession, Art. XXXIII. :

[…]

The Second Helvetic Confession, while it affirms (in Article XIX.) that there are only two Sacraments of the Church, goes on to speak in very disparaging terms of some of those other ordinances which were counted as Sacraments in the times pre¬ ceding the Reformation : —

“ Novi populi Sacramenta sunt Baptismus et Coena Dominica. Sunt qui sacramenta novi populi septem numerent. Ex quibus nos poenitentiam, ordinationem ministrorum, non papisticam quidem illam, sed apostolicam, et matrimonium, agnoscimus instituta esse Dei utilia, sed non sacramenta. Confirmatio et Extrema unctio, inventa sunt hominum, quibus nullo cum dam no carere potest ecclesia. Heque ilia nos in nostris ecclesiis habemus. Nam habent ilia quaedam, quae minime probare possumus.”

(3.) The Five Sacramental Ordinances.

Those five, commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confir¬ mation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction, are not to he counted for Sacraments of the Gospel.

Besides the two great Sacraments ordained by Christ, there are other ordinances of the Church which have a sacramental nature (i.e.9 which are “ an outward and

2 A

visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace ”), and are therefore “commonly called Sacraments”; yet they are not to be put upon the same level with Baptism and the Holy Eucharist ; they have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God. Although the two great Sacraments are thus separated from the other five ordinances named, sacramental character is not denied to these ordinances ; on the other hand, the writers of our formularies acknowledge or imply, in several passages, that they are in some sense Sacraments. See, e.g. : —

Homily of Swearing, Part I. (p. 74) : —

“ By like holy promise the Sacrament of Matrimony jknitteth man and wife in perpetual love.”

Homily of Common Prayer and Sacraments (p. 377): —

“For this visible sign, I mean laying on of hands, is not expressly commanded in the New Testament to be used in Ab¬ solution, as the visible signs in Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are ; and therefore Absolution is no such Sacrament as Baptism and the Communion are. And, though the Ordering of Ministers hath his visible sign and promise, yet it lacks the promise of remission of sin, as all other Sacraments besides do. Therefore neither it nor any other Sacrament else be such Sacraments as Baptism and the Communion are.”

We must now proceed to speak a little more in detail of the five Ordinances named in the Article, and to indicate the position they occupy in the system of our Church.

(A.) Confirmation.

The name “ Confirmation ” is traced by some to S. Ambrose,1 but does not seem to have been in common us9 before the sixth century.2

In the New Testament we have mention of the ordinance

1 Cf. “ De Mysterih,” vii. 42

“Ye have received the spiritual seal… . God the Father hath signed you, Christ our Lord hath confirmed you, and, as ye are taught by the apostolic lection, hath given you the pledge of the Spirit in your hearts.”

2 Probably the earliest example of the unqualified use of the title […] of which we can definitely fix the date, occurs in a treatise of Paschasius, a deacon of Rome (d. 512 a.d.). That writer, alluding to Acts xix. 4-6, says : —

“ See how great is the power of the Holy Spirit ! In Baptism is bestowed the remission of sins ; in the coming of the Holy Spirit gifts of supernatural powers are conferred, and miraculous signs are performed by the confirmed ” (“ De Spiritu Sancto,” ii. 4).

itself as administered by tbe Apostles to the newly baptized. In Acts viii. 14—17 we read that SS. Peter and John were sent to Samaria, and that by imposition of their hands a special gift of the Holy Ghost was imparted to those who had been previously baptized by Philip. Again, in Acts xix. 4—6 we read of special gifts of the Spirit through the imposition of S. Paul’s hands upon those whom he had previously baptized. See also Heb. vi. 2, where the “ laying on of hands ” is spoken of, and apparently connected with Baptism.

In early Christian literature the ordinance is usually called “ Chrism,”1 or anointing, aud “the Seal.”

The outward sign in Confirmation is the laying on of hands ; the inward grace, a special gift of the Holy Spirit. The spiritual life, having been begun in Baptism, is strengthened by the im¬ parting the plenary gift of the Holy Spirit to those confirmed. The Church therefore gives a special injunction to the Godparents at the close of the Baptismal Service : —

“Ye are to take care that this Child be brought to the Bishop to be confirmed by him.” …

In the East the “ Chrism ” has always been ministered with Baptism, but in the Western Church Baptism and Confirmation have been separated for nearly a thousand years. This dissociation of the two rites may be traced to two causes : —

( a .) In the early Church Baptism was normally administered at special seasons (Easter and Pentecost), in the presence of the Bishop, and the baptized were then confirmed im¬ mediately upon leaving the font. The extension of the administration of Baptism to other times, when the Bishop, who alone could confirm,2 was not present, led to the separa¬ tion of the two ordinances, Confirmation being administered, as it now is, by the Bishop in periodical visits.3

[…]

2 Exceptions have been allowed to this, especially in the Eastern Church, where Confirmation maybe validly administered by every priest, though the Chrism must have been consecrated by a bishop. Tradition, however, from the first points to the Bishop as the minister of this ordinance, and in the passages of the New Testa¬ ment already referred to it is recorded as administered by Apostles alone.

3 The 60th Canon (of 1604) orders the Bishop, or his Suffragan, to confirm at the customary triennial visitation, but in modern times it has been found necessary to hold “ Confirmations ” more frequently.

( b .) The growth of the practice of Infant Baptism also con¬ tributed to the dissociation of that Sacrament from Con¬ firmation, it being felt that the latter rite was scarcely applicable in its full significance to the baptized infant.

In the English Church, since 1662, a renewal of Baptismal vows has been required of the Candidate before Confirmation, a feature peculiar to the English rite. We must not, of course, fall into the error of supposing that personal responsibility begins with the day of Confirmation ; on the contrary, in the Baptismal Office, the Godparents are exhorted : —

“Ye must remember, that it is your parts and duties to see that this infant be taught, so soon as he shall be able to learn, what a solemn vow, promise, and profession, he hath here made by you.”

From what has been said it is clear that our Church regards “ Confirmation ” as of perpetual obligation, and gives it a very important place in the spiritual life of her children.1

With the position taken up by the Church of England we may contrast what is said in some of the Continental Confessions of the Reformation period : —

Saxon Confession, Art. XIX. :

“ In ritu confirmationis, fiebat exploratio doctrinae, in qua singuli recitabant summam doctrinae, et palam profitebantur se improbare furores ethnicos et haereticos, et velle se esse et manere verae Ecclesiae membra, et non discessuros a vera sententia, quam tunc profitebantur. Hie mos erat utilis ad erudiendos homines, et retinendos in vera agnitione Dei. Ac in ecclesiis nostris similia fiunt in catechesi juniorum, et in privata confessione, in qua pastores doctrinam populi explorant. Sed ritus confirmationis, quern nunc episcopi retinent, quid est nisi inanis umbra 1 ”

Wurtembuhg Confession, Art. XI. :

“ Non est nobis dubium, quin Apostoli initio revelati et con- firmati in die Pentecostes Evangelii, contulerint impositione manuum admirandum donum Spiritus sancti credentibus in Christum, ut variis linguis loquerentur. Et sentimus utilissi-

1 In addition to being (a) a strengthening of the spiritual life, begun in Baptism, by the special gift of the Holy Spirit, and ( b ) a solemn renewal of Baptismal vows, Confirmation is also (c) the entrance to the full privileges of membership in the Church. See the rubric at the end of the “Order of Confirmation : —

“ And there shall none be admitted to the Holy Communion, until such time as he be confirmed, or be ready and desirous to be confirmed.”

mum esse, ut pueri et adolescentes a Pastoribus Ecclesiae suae in Catechismo examinentur, et si quidem pie ac recte fuerint eruditi, approbentur ; si vero prave, emendentur. Sed ex per- sonali et temporali facto Apostolorum non est absque certo mandato Dei generate et perpetuum Sacramentum in Ecclesia statuendum.”

The estimation in which Confirmation is held by the Church of England may be further illustrated from the answer of the Bishops to the Puritan objections to the “ Order of Confirmation ” in 1661. Exception was taken to the wording of the “ Collect,” the Puritans stating their objections thus : —

“We desire that the practice of the Apostles may not be alleged as a ground of this imposition of hands for the confirmation of children, both because the Apostles did never use it in that case, as also because the Articles of the Church of England declare it to be a ‘corrupt imitation of the Apostles’ practice ’ (Acts xxv.).

“We desire that imposition of hands may not be made, as here it is, a sign to certify children of God’s grace and favour towards them ; because this seems to speak it a sacrament, and is contrary to that fore-mentioned 25th Article, which saith that ‘confirmation hath no visible sign appointed by God.’”

To this the Bishops replied : —

“ Prayer after the imposition of hands is grounded upon the practice of the Apostles (Heb. vi. 2, and Acts viii. 17); nor doth 25th Article say that confirmation is a corrupt imitation of the Apostles’ practice, but that the five commonly called Sacraments have ground partly of the corrupt following the Apostles, &c., which may be applied to some other of these five, but cannot be applied to confirmation, unless we make the Church speak contra¬ dictions.”

(B.) Penance.

The inward grace of this Sacramental Ordinance is promised by our Lord Himself (S. John xx. 22, 23), but it is not recorded in the New Testament that the grace of Absolution was attached by our Lord to any special outward sign, and on this ground the writers of our Article refused to place Penance on the same level with Baptism and the Holy Eucharist.

Of. the Homily for Whitsunday: —

“ Christ ordained the authority of the keys to excommunicate notorious sinners, and to absolve them which are truly penitent ’

(P- 495)-

Also the Homily of Common Prayer and Sacraments : —

“ For, although Absolution hath the promise of forgiveness of sin, yet by the express word of the New Testament it hath not this promise annexed and tied to the visible sign, which is imposi¬ tion of hands. For this visible sign, I mean laying on of hands, is not expressly commanded in the New Testament to be used in Absolution, as the visible signs in Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are ; and therefore Absolution is no such Sacrament as Baptism and the Communion are” (pp. 376, 377).

At first Confession was made publicly before the Church, such open confession being necessary before the guilty person could bo admitted again into the communion of the Church. At a very early period,1 however, it was recommended that penitents should con¬ fess their sins privately to a spiritual adviser, who might judge of the expediency of public confession and penance, if likely to tend to the quieting of the penitent’s conscience and the edifica¬ tion of the Church. This “ godly discipline ” of the Primitive Church had a twofold character —

(a) It was the regular form for the readmission of the penitent to Church communion and sacramental privileges.

(b) It had also for its express object the reassurance of the troubled conscience of the offender himself.

When the primitive disciplinary system of the Church fell into disuse,2 that part of the Absolution which concerned authori¬ tative restoration to Holy Communion also ceased to be used, but the reassurance of the conscience of the penitent by God’s pardon being conveyed to him through the definite outward act of the Ministry of the Church was in no way affected by the cessation of the public discipline. The power of Absolution conferred upon the Ministry by the ordaining words of Christ Himself lasted on, when the primitive disciplinary system had passed away.

This power of Absolution the Church of England still claims for her priests ; for —

(a) She has deliberately retained in her formula of Ordination

1 Cf , e.g., Origen on Ps. xxxvii. Horn. 2 : —

“ Tantummodo circumspice diligentius cui debeas confiteri peccatum tuum. … Si intellexerit et praeviderit talem esse languorera tuum qui in conventu totius Ecclesiae exponi debeat et curari, ex quo fortassis et caeteri aedificari poterunt, et tu ipse facile sanari.” …

2 In the fifth century Pope Leo the Great directed that both confession and penance should take place in private under the direction of a priest ; and in the seventh century all public penance was discontinued, a result largely owing to the publication of the ‘ Penitential ’ of Theodore of Tarsus, Archbishop of Canterbury.

of Priests those very words of Christ, which have ever been understood by all to be the basis of the power of Absolution : —

“ Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Priest in the Church of God, now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our hands. Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven ; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained/’

(b) Provision is made in the Church’s system for the exercise of this power conferred at Ordination —

(i.) In the Absolution pronounced by the priest at Morning and Evening Prayer, and in the Communion Service.

(ii.) Besides providing forms of Absolution, to be pronounced, after General Confession, in the public services of the Church, the Church of England also authorises Private Confession.

See the First Exhortation in the Communion Service : —

“If there be any of you, who by this means cannot quiet his own conscience herein, but requireth further comfort or counsel, let him come to me, or to some other discreet and learned Minister of God’s Word, and open his grief ; that by the ministry of God’s Holy Word he may receive the benefit of absolution, together with ghostly counsel and advice, to the quieting of his conscience, and avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness.”

Cf. the Office for the Visitation of the Sick: —

“ Here shall the sick person be moved to make a special Con¬ session of his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter. After which Confession, the priest shall absolve him (if he humbly and heartily desire it) after this sort : —

“ Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who hath left power to His Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive thee thine offences : And by His authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, In the Xame of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.”

If we are to be loyal to our Church we must strenuously resist those who would altogether deprive us of the great help to the spiritual life which special private Confession and Absolution affords. The Church of England does not set forth such special Confession as necessary to salvation, or of necessity obligatory upon all her members, but as voluntary, and to be used by her

children as they feel their need ; 1 at the same time, however, it is obvious that God has given us means of grace in His Church that we may duly use them. Private Confession is therefore dis¬ tinctly recommended for such as feel scruples about coming to Communion on account of a disquieted conscience,2 and is en¬ joined upon a sick person whose conscience is troubled with any weighty matter.3

That our Church, since the Reformation, intends to retain the practice of private Confession is also clear from the words of Canon 113 (1604): —

“ Provided always, that if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the Minister, for the unburdening of his conscience, and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him ; we do not any way bind the said Minister by this our Constitution, but do straiglitly charge and admonish him, that he do not at any time reveal and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy (except they be such crimes as by the laws of this realm his own life may be called into question for concealing the same), under pain of irregularity.”

It should be noted that Confession is not the main subject of this Canon, which deals with the matter of presentation of crimes, &c., to the ordinary, and is entitled “ Ministers may present ” ; but the manner in which Confession is incidentally alluded to •

1 The Clmrcli of England in this differs from the Church of Rome, which re¬ gards Penance as a true and proper Sacrament in the narrow sense of the term, and necessary to salvation. Cf. the following Canons of Session XIY. of the Council of Trent

I. “ Si quis dixerit, in Catholica Ecclesia, Poenitentiam non esse vere et proprie Sacramentum pro fidelibus, quoties post baptismum in peccata labuntur, ipsi Deo reconciliandis, a Christo Domino nostro institutum ; anathema sit.”

VI. “Si quis negaverit, Confessionem Sacramentalem vel institutam, vel ad salutem necessariam esse jure divino ; aut dixerit, modum secrete confitendi soli sacerdoti, quem Ecclesia Catholica ab initio semper observavit et observat, alienum esse ab institutione et mandato Christi, et inventum esse humanum ; anathema sit.”

VII. “ Si quis dixerit, in Sacramento Poenitentiae, ad remissionem peccatorum necessarium non esse jure divino, confiteri omnia et singula peccata mor- talia … aut demum, non licere confiteri peccata venalia ; anathema sit.”

VIII. “ Si quis dixerit, confessionem omnium peccatorum, qualem Ecclesia servat, esse impossibilem, et traditionem humanam, a piis abolendam ; aut ad earn non teneri omnes et singulos utriusque sexus Christi fideles, juxta magni Concilii Lateranensis constitutionem, semel in anno, et ob id suadendum esse Christi fidelibus, ut non confiteantur tempore Quadragesimae ; ana¬ thema sit.”

2 See the Exhortation in the Communion Service quoted above.

See the passage quoted above from the Order for the Visitation of the Sick.

affords conclusive testimony to the fact that Confession of “ secret aud hidden sin ” to the Minister was assumed by the clergy of that day (1604) as quite a regular and normal thing in the Church of England.

The formularies of the Lutheran or Protestant Reformers retain the practice of private Confession and Absolution, with certain safeguards and stipulations : —

Augsburg Confession, Part II. Art. IY. :

“Confessio in ecclesiis apud nos non est abolita… . Sed de confessione docent quod enumeratio delictorum non sit necessaria, nee sint onerandae conscientiae cura enumerandi omnia deli eta, quia impossibile est omnia delicta recitare.”

Saxon Confession, Art. XYI. :

“De confessione privata facienda pastoribus, adfirmamus ritum privatae absolutionis in Ecclesia retinendum esse ; et eonstanter retinemus, propter multas graves causas. Sed simul docemus, non praecipiendam esse, nee postulandam enumerationein delictorum in illo privato colloquio.”

WURTEMBURG CONFESSION, Art. XIY. :

“ Etsi autem sentimus, enumerationem peccatorum coram sacer- dote non esse necessariam ad salutem, nec esse aliquod meritum remissionis peccatorum, tamen damus operam, ut generalis con¬ fessio peccatorum quantum fieri potest et licet, in Ecclesiis nostris conservetur, idque duabus de causis. Una est, ut hoc privato colloquio rudiores de rebus necessariis admoneantur et erudiantur. Altera, ut hac occasione privatim audiatur Evangelion Christi, de remissione peccatorum, quod Evangelion est vera clavis regni coelorum, et absolutio a peccatis, et ut per auditum Evangclii, seu absolutionis, tides vel concipiatur, vel confirmetur.”

The formularies influenced or drawn up by theologians of the Swiss school for the most part speak strongly against the reten¬ tion of private confession to a priest ; e.g. : —

Tetrapolitan Confession, Art. XX. :

“ Ham innumeras animas ilia de peccatis sacerdoti confitendis constitutio, in gravem desperationem adegit, totque aliis vitiis obnoxia est, ut pridem abrogari debuerit.”

Second Helvetic Confession, Art. XIY. :

“ Credimus autem hanc confessionem ingenuam, quae soli Deo fit, vel privatim inter Deuin et peccatorem, vel palam in templo, ubi generalis ilia peccatorum confessio recitatur, sutficere, nec necessarium esse ad remissionem peccatorum consequendam, ut

2 B

quis peccata sua confiteatur sacerdoti, susurrando in aures ipsius, ut vicissim cum impositione manuum ejus audiat ab ipso absolu- tionem : quod ejus rei nec praeceptum ullum, nec exemplum exstet in scripturis sacris… . Rite itaque et efficaciter ministri absolvunt, dum evangelium Christi, et in hoc remissionem pecca- torum, quae singulis promittitur fidelibus, sicuti et singuli sunt baptizati, praedicant, et ad singulos peculiariter pertinere testantur. Nec putamus absolutionem hanc efficacioreni fieri, per hoc, quod in aurem alicui, aut super caput alicujus singulariter inmurmuratur.”

(C.) Orders.

The outward sign is the laying on of hands (see Acts vi. 6, xiii. 3; I Tim. iv. 14; 2 Tim. i. 6); the inward grace is a special gift of the Holy G-host for the work of the Ministry. See the passages in 1 and 2 Tim. referred to, which clearly imply that a spiritual gift passed to Timothy through, and simultaneously with, the imposition of hands.

Cf. the Ordinal : —

“When this Prayer is done, the Bishop with the Priests pre¬ sent shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth the Order of Priesthood ; the Receivers humbly kneeling upon their knees, and the Bishop saying,

“Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Priest in the Church of God, now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our hands. …”

The words thus recited in the act of Ordination are a prayer, but a prayer which the Church is assured it is God’s will to grant ; they are spoken, therefore, in sure confidence that the gift accompanies the outward sign.1

[On the subject of “ Orders ” see further the notes on Articles XXIII. and XXXVI.]

(D.) Matrimony.

See Eph. v. 31, 32, in the Vulgate: —

“Propter hoc relinquet homo patrem, et matrem suam, et adhaerebit uxori suae ; et erunt duo in carne una. Sacramentum hoc magnum est.”

1 Calvin was willing to give the name of “ Sacrament ” to “ Orders.” See, e.g ., Institutes, IY. xix. 28

“Quantum ad verum presbyterii munus attinet, quod ore Christi nobis est commendatum, libentur eo loco (scil. Sacramenti) habeo. Illic enim cere- monia est, primum ex Scripturis sumpta, deinde quam non esse inanem nec supervacuam, sed fidele spiritualis gratiae symbolum, testatur Paulus,”

Holy Scripture dwells upon —

(a) The Divine Institution of Matrimony (S. Matt. xix. 4—6 ; Eph. v. 31).

Cf. the opening address in the Marriage Service, where Holy Matrimony is spoken of as “ an honourable estate, instituted of God in the time of man’s innocency.”

(b) The deep mystery of the union of man and wife in mar¬ riage (Eph. v. 32).1

The paramount sacredness of marriage is, as all history shows, “ a mystery,” i.e ., a secret of God’s law, fully revealed in Christ. In heathen thought marriage has ever been a contract far less sacred than the indissoluble tie of blood, and wherever Christian principle is renounced or obscured that idea recurs in modern times.

(c) The high dignity of Matrimony as “ signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and His Church ” (see Exhortation at the commencement of the Marriage Service, and cf Eph. v. 23 et seqq.).

(d) The indissolubility of the Marriage tie.

This is distinctly affirmed by our Lord (S. Matt. xix. 4—6 ; S. Mark x. 6—9), and emphasised in the most striking manner in that part of the Marriage Service where it is directed —

{ ‘ Then shall the Priest join their right hands together, and say,

“Those whom God hath joined together let no man put asunder.”

Cf. also the Betrothal portion of the Service, where each of the contracting parties plights troth to the other —

“till death us do part.”

The indissoluble character of the Marriage bond is again affirmed in the third Collect of the Post-Matrimonial part of the Service : —

“0 God, who … knitting them together, didst teach that it should never be lawful to put asunder those whom thou by Matrimony hast made one.”

Divorce, therefore, is altogether inconsistent with the Divine Institution of Matrimony. It is true that it was allowed by the

1 It cannot be doubted that in Eph. v. 32 the word /xva-Tripiov ( = Sacramentum) applies to the type (the mutual relation of husband and wife) as well as to the Antitype (the mutual relation of Christ and His Church).

Jewish Law, but the legislation of Moses was in this respect imperfect, because of the imperfection of those for whose sake it was given (S. Matt. xix. 7, 8). Separation a mensa et thoro , for the grave cause of adultery, is of course allowed, in accordance with our Lord’s special exception (S. Matt. v. 3 2, xix. 9) ; but the vinculum matrimonii is in no way dissolved by such separa¬ tion, nor may either of those so living apart from one another, even though the innocent party, marry again before the other’s death (cf. Rom. vii. 2, 3 ; 1 Cor. vii. 39). Re-marriage of one party before the death of the other is (according to the original Divine Institution, upon which Christ has re-established Matri¬ mony) nothing else than adultery (S. Matt. xix. 9 ; S. Mark x. 11, 12 ; S. Luke xvi. 18 ; Rom. vii. 3).1

(E.) Extreme Unction.

See S. Mark vi. 13 ; S. Jas. v. 14, 15.

In the former passage the anointing of the sick with oil is connected with bodily healing ; in the latter, solemn anointing with prayer is connected with bodily healing and with forgiveness of sins.

Unction with oil, of a Sacramental character, has certainly been in use in the Church from the very -earliest times. A solemn anointing of the sick is still practised in the Eastern Church, professedly as a means of healing ; it is called “ Holy Oil,” or “ Prayer-Oil ” (To ev^e’Xaiov), and is administered by a number of priests conjointly (varying from three to seven).2

1 The mind of our Church is shown in Canon 107 (of 1604) : —

“ In all sentences for Divorce, Bond to be taken for not marrying during each other’s Life.”

Cf Council of Trent, Session XXIV. Canon vii.

“Si quis dixerit, Ecclesiam errare, cum docuit, et docet, juxta Evangeiicam et Apostolicam doctrinam, propter adulterium alterius conjugum matrimonii vinculum non posse dissolvi ; et utrumque, vel etiam innocentem, qui causam adulterio non dedit, non posse, altero conjuge vivente, aliud matrimonium contrahere ; moecharique eum, qui dimissa adultera aliam duxerit, et earn, quae dimisso adultero alii nupserit ; anathema sit.”

The authorities of the Greek Church allow divorce on ground of adultery, and also allow re-marriage to the innocent party. The Protestant and Reformed Confessions do not treat of this matter fully, hut the Continental Reformers were inclined to allow re-marriage to the innocent divorced party. Cf., e.g., SAXON Confession, Art. XVIII.

“Personae innocenti, cum re cognita pronunciatur esse libera, non pro- hibetur conjugium.”

[…]

Cf. the “ Holy Catechism ” (Orthodox Eastern Church) by Bernadaces : —

“ Q. What is the seventh Mystery, and what is its operation?

“A. The seventh Mystery is the Prayer-Oil, in which the sick man is anointed with oil, and the priest invokes the Divine Grace, which heals the weaknesses of soul and body” (p. 28).

In the West a new theory grew up with Scholasticism. It was seen that bodily healing did not always follow upon the anointing of the sick, and the operation of the accompanying grace of Unction was therefore transferred from the physical to the spiritual sphere. In the twelfth century the term “ Extreme Unction ” came into use, and the Council of Trent limited the solemn anointing to those who are near death : —

“Declaratur etiam, esse hanc Unctionem infirmis adhibendam, illis vcro praesertim, qui tam periculose decumbunt, ut in exitu vitae constituti videantur : unde et Sacramentum exeuntium nun- cupatur” (Session XI Y. Cap. iii.).

In the Prayer Book of 1549 the Anointing of the sick was retained, and an attempt made to restore its primitive aspect : —

“If the sicke person desyre to be annoynted, then shal the prieste annoynte him upon the forehead or breast only, makyng the signe of the crosse, saying thus,

“ As with this visible oyle thy body outwardly is annoynted : so our heauenly father, almyglitye God, graunte of his infinite goodnesse, that thy soule inwardly may be annoynted with the holy gost, who is the spirite of al strength, coumforte, reliefe, and gladnesse. And vouchesafe for his great mercy (yf it be his blessed will) to restore unto thee thy bodely helth, and strength, to serue him, and sende thee release of al thy paines, troubles, and diseases, both in body and minde. And howsoeuer his good¬ nesse (by his diuyne and unsearchable prouidece) shall dispose of thee : we, his unworthy ministers and seruauts, humbly beseclie the eternall majestie, to doe with thee according to the multitude of his innumerable mercies, and to pardon thee all thy sinnes and offences, committed by all thy bodily senses, passions, and carnall affeccions : who also vouchsafe mercifully to graut unto thee gostely stregth, by his holy spirite, to withstad and ouercome al temptacions and assaultes of thine aduersarye, that in no wise he preuaile against thee, but that thou mayest haue perfit victory and triumph against the deuil, sinne, and death, through Christ our Lord : Who by his death hath ouercomed the Prince of death, and with the father, and the holy gost euermore liveth and reigneth God, worlde without ende. Amen.”

In the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI. (1552) that part of the Visitation Office which referred to the Anointing was dropped, and it has not since been restored. Thus a practice undoubtedly Scriptural has ceased to be enjoined in the Church of England, and there has been lost an Apostolic ordinance, whereby, with the assurance of an outward and visible sign, the faithful were prayed over, for the forgiveness of their sins, and their restoration to health, or spiritual support in their sickness.

The Continental Reformers not only denied to Unction the dignity and title of a Sacrament, but for the most part urged the discontinuation of its observance : —

Calvin’s Institutes, IV. xix. 1 8 :

[…]

Saxon Confession, Art. XIX. :

“ Praeterea unctio, quae nunc extrema nominatin’, fuit olim medicatio ; ut ex J acobi epistola perspicuum est. Nunc specta- culum est plenum superstitionis. Dicunt r«emitti peccata, per istas unctiones ; et addunt invocationem mortuorum, quam etiam necesse est improbare. Ideo hi ritus non servantur in nostris ecclesiis, nec ante haec tempora Ecclesia sensit esse necessarios.”

WuRTEMBURG CONFESSION, Art. XXII. :

“ Fatemur Apostolos unxisse aegros oleo, qui et corporalem sanitatem consecuti sunt. Fatemur etiam Epistolam, quae in- scribitur Iacobo, jubere Presbyteros Ecclesiae ad aegrotos vocari, ut ungant eos oleo, et orent pro ipsis, ad consequendam sanitatem. Sed haec turn utiliter exercebantur cum ministri Ecclesiae adhuc ornati erant dono aegrotos corporaliter et admirabiliter sanandi. Postquam autern hoc donum, confirmato Evangelio in Ecclesia, defuit, res ipsa testatur, hanc unctionis ceremoniam otiose nunc et inutiliter usurpari.”

Second Helvetic Confession, Art. XXV. :

“Papisticam visitationem cum sua ilia unctione extrema, diximus superius, nos non approbare, quod absurda habeat, et a Scriptura canonica non approbetur.”

Before we pass on to consider the concluding paragraph of Article XXV., we must note that in dealing with the five Sacra-

mental Ordinances the Article says that they are “such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in Scripture. ’’ The use of the word “ partly ” here would seem to imply that all five ordinances must fall into one or other of the two classes named. This, however, can scarcely be the sense intended, because, according to the principles of our leading Reformers, as expressed elsewhere, and according to the Prayer Book and Homilies, Confirmation, Penance, and Orders would not belong to either class. The words “ have grown of the corrupt following of the Apostles ” probably refer especially to Extreme Unction,1 while the words “ states of life allowed in Scripture ” doubtless refer to Matrimony.

(4.) The Sacraments are to be used duly, and to be received

The Sacraments2 were not ordained of Christ to he gazed upon, or to be carried about : but that we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same, they have a wholesome effect or operation ; but they that receive them un¬ worthily, purchase to themselves damnation, as S. Paul saith.

No one would think of supposing that the Sacraments

1 The words may, however, have been intended, with a wider application, to refer to some of the other ordinances named, for we must remember that the writers of the Article had in view these ordinances as celebrated in the Western Church in the times immediately preceding the Reformation, when superstitious ceremonies, not traceable to their primitive and Apostolic institution, had been added to them.

2 From its contents we should conclude that this last paragraph refers to the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist only. The expressions “ gazed upon,” “ canned about” can only refer to this one Sacrament, and the passage of Scripture quoted has reference to it alone. How is it, then, that “ Sacraments ” are spoken of in the plural ? Most likely the plural is used with reference to the two out¬ ward signs in this one Sacrament.

Cf. Second Exhortation in the Communion Service in the Prayer Book of 1559 : —

“ Dearly beloved, forasmuch as our duty is to render to Almighty God our Heavenly Father, most hearty thanks for that he hath given his son our Saviour Jesus Christ, not only to die for us, but also to be our spiritual food and sustenance, as it is declared unto us, as well by God’s word, as by the holy Sacraments of his blessed Body and Blood.”

Queen Elizabeth’s Injunctions, 1559

“ It is ordered for the more reverence to be given to these holy mysteries, being the Sacraments of the Body and Blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ.” …

So also the Greek word “mysteries” (corresponding to the Latin “sacra- menta ”) is used to denote the Eucharist alone : —

“We who have duly received these holy mysteries” (Post-Communion Thanksgiving).

were ordained by Christ merely for exhibition, as a spectacle to onlookers ; the end and object of their institution is the personal participation of the faithful. In order to such participation two conditions must be fulfilled : —

(a) The Sacraments must be duly (rite) used ; i.e., they must be “ duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same ” (Article XIX.) ; 1 there must be the matter, the form, and the minister (see notes, p. 1 3 1 ).

( b ) They must be worthily (digne) received by us after due self-examination and fitting preparation.

Those who do not participate rite cannot be truly said to re¬ ceive the Sacrament at all. Those who do not participate digne receive to themselves damnationem (cf. 1 Cor. xi. 29).

See further the notes on Article XXIX.

“But before all other things, this vve must be sure of specially, that this Supper be in such wise done and ministered as our Lord and Saviour did and commanded to be done, as His holy Apostles used it, and the good fathers in the Primitive Church frequented it” (pp. 473, 474 ; ed. S.P.C.K.).

Notes

• This special reference to “Penance” in the Article of 1563 was probably clue to the fact that some had been inclined to class that ordinance as a third “Sacrament of the Gospel.” The X. Articles (1536) had treated of three Sacraments — (1) “ The Sacrament of Baptism;” (2) “ The Sacrament of Penance;” (3) “The Sacrament of the Altar.” The Lutheran Reformers also gave an honourable place in their system to Confession and Absolution. Melanclithon, in the “Apology” for the Augsburg Confession, writes (p. 167) : —
• We may illustrate tlie meaning of the expression from Cranmer’s “Answer to Gardiner” (Works, vol. iii. p. 38) : —
• This is the usual name in the Eastern Church at the present day ; cf. “ Orthodox Confession” (p. 161) : —
• Cf. the Homily of the worthy receiving, &c., of the Sacrament