Hey on Article XXV: Of the Sacraments

1. We have now before us seven Articles upon the subject of Sacraments ; this twenty-fifth treats of Sacraments in general, and of those which we reject. It is always difficult to make general ob- servations before those particular ones of which they consist; in the analytical method the parti- culars would come first, but it is most usual to give reasonings to the world in a synthetic form.— The consequence, however, of treating first of Sacraments in general will be, that several parts of our present Article may be passed over, without either history, explanation, or proof; I mean those which, though expressed in general terms, relate only to Baptism, or the Lord’s Supper.

2. Our History, according to this, need only be of the seven Romish Sacraments, collectively, and of the five, taken separately, which we reject.

I seem to have a general idea of the manner in which the seven Romish Sacraments might acquire and lose their celebrity. Men of religious cha- raters begin with obeying the injunctions of Christ, and following the example of his Apostles and their immediate successors; a sacred regard for every observance grows stronger and stronger ; new particulars shew themselves, in which zeal may be manifested and exerted; one pious man tries to go a step beyond another; a third is determined to surpass them both ; ordinances, at first simple, get to be clogged with a muititude of ceremonies, and adorned with splendor* and magnificence.— Reason makes no opposition, or when it makes any is disregarded, or contemned ;—and thus, what was originally rational and plain, runs into excess

and folly..—Some at length see this with the eyes | of

Something of this sort is described in Mosheim, Cent. 13. Part 2, Chap. 4. Sect. 1. page 107, 8vo. Vol. 3.

N 2

= La pag on

of common sense, and labour to impose restraints and contrive regulations; others encourage them- selves in disgust and love of novelty, and, either through passion or affectation, throw the whole aside.

But to be more particular.

We are told, that Justin Martyr and Tertullian speak of no more“ sacraments than two,—The same is said of Ambrose®, who wrote concerning Sacraments, — Theodoret speaks of some Christians who were“ called Enchite, because they were for Prayer without Sacraments: and of some, who

conceived fo highly of the spiritual nature of Chris- tianity, that they would allow of no matter or element whatsoever. They had the name of A/co- drutæ, Aoxodeerar, and they are the more worthy of our notice, as their notion seems to be the same with that of our modern Quafters; though the Quakers are said, by Mosheim, to have had their rise about the middle of the seventeenth Century.

The etymology of Ascodrutæ is not well under- stood: even Theodoret (Hzret. Fab. lib. 1. cap. 10.) seems at a loss about them ; and I have con-

suIted

Veneer on the Article, page 641.

© By Bp. Bramhall; quoted by Puller, page 274.

ucharist, in the account of them; they were great Enthufiafts : They were tried, and, I think, banished, by Flavian Bishop of Antioch; and written against chiefly, by Amphilochivs, —One Helvetic Confession, Chap. 19. refers to these Messaliani, under Sacraments in general: and we see from that passage, that the ideas of our Quakers were in being at the time of the Reforma- tion. Syntagma, page 67, of Part 1. ‘The Reformers seem to

have liked to refer recent errors to old times—See Synt. part 2, page 13. Donatists. |

BOOK IV, ART. xxv. SECT. 11. 197

suIted a number of books about the name, without obtaining any satisfaction. They seem to have made this their fundamental principle, that inv le things are not to be completed by visble. Of course they baptized not; but moreover they had no del Augen, no divine mysteries, This I under- stood as a general expression, though the Sacra- ment of the Lord’s Supper has sometimes the name of the mysteries. Theodoret next speaks of some called Archontici, Agxovrixes, with whom a knowledge of God, of the mystic fort, seems to have been all in all: these went fo far as to anathe- matize To urge, Kt T1 TW Hh nei Hf “,’: Baptism, and the receiving of the holy Mysteries. —The word æarοανονe i,, which is translated re- demptio, means only, a mode of Baptizing; and so Wall seems to have pnderstood it. On Infant Baptism, 2. 5. 1. | Augustin 1s said, by the Rhemists on Gal. iv. 3. to have spoken of the seven sacraments which are. held by the Romanists; and passages are quoted from different parts of his works in order to shew this; but Fulke seems to me to answer the Rhe- mists completely. — The opening for dispute in this matter, is, that we find Sacramentum used in different senses. It seems to be used for any em- blematical action of a sacred import; or, accordin to the expression of our Homily*®, for “anything whereby an holy thing is signified.” —Washing of feet has been accounted a sacrament; and in the Greek Church there was a Festival called Nurruę (and probably is at this day) in which the Patri- arch, or Abbot, or whoever was the head person at the place, personated our Saviour, and washed

the

On Common Prayer and Sacraments, page 276, 8vo. See Cave’s Lit, Dist Nirxnę.

“I

198 BOOK IV. ART, Xxxv. SsECT. II.

the feet of twelve poor persons, who personated - the twelve Apostles: in Monasteries these were poor Monks; and the Steward, or Bursar, took the part of St. Peter, and acted his reluctance; and the Porter was Judas Iscariot, and underwent much ridicule and many insults.

In ancient times there was also a Sacrament® of Catechumens, in which /alt was given them as an emblem of purity and incorruption, with reference, probably, to Matt. v. 13. and Mark ix. 50.—In this extended sense, all the typical acts of the Jews were sacraments ; and accordingly, circumcision, eat- ing the paschal Lamb, &c. have been called Sacra- ments of the o/d Law. In this extended sense of the word sacrament, it has been disputed, amongst Chris- tians, whether there were not ?hirteen © Sacraments; and, as Images, of Christ, Virgin Mary, &c. mean something beyond the visible figure, it has been asked whether they might not be considered as Sacraments, |

I will give you the passage of Augustin’s Letter to Januarius*, as it is made the beginning of King Edward’s Article. It is translated in our

Homily, and in Fulke’s answer to the Rhemists on Gal. iv. 3.

Archbishop

s Bingham, 10. 2. 16. * Forbes, g. 3. 2.

i See Forbes, 9. 1. 26. The Trent Catechism, Part 2. Sect. x. proyes that such a question has been asked, by answering it in the negative, |

[…]

poris et sanguinis ipsius, et si quid aliud in scripturis canonicis commendatur, &c, RO OT TIM

BOOK IV. 11. 199

ArchbishopBramhall says* concifely, * Our church receives not the septenary number of Sacraments, being never so much as mentioned in any Scrip- ture, or Council, or Creed, or Father, or ancient author; first divided by Peter Lombard in 1439 ; first decreed by Eugenius the Fourth 1 528; first confirmed 1n the Provincial Council of Senes 1457; and after in the Council of Trent.“ Here the number mentioning the time of Peter Lombard, must be wrongly printed; Cave places him in 1141 ;- suppose the number belonging to Evge- mus is put to Peter“ Lombard; and fo on.

Forbes says, that Hugo de Santo Victore, (Hugh of St. Victor) whom he places in 1130, and Cave in 1120, seems to him to have first mentioned seven facraments, though Peter Lom- bard agrees with him.—The Abbot of St. Victor at Paris probably knew Peter Lombard, who lived there, though not as Bishop of Paris till after Hugo’s death. However, it is still more pro- bable that Peter knew the person and wrinings of Hugo.—At the Council of Florence, in 1438-9, it seems to have been debated between the Greek and Latin Churches whether the seven Sacraments were to be observed © secundùmꝰ x/itatom in Eccle- ha Romana formam.” Whoever fifft fixed on the

number

Quoted by Puller, page 275. A Counsellor to the French King, Mr. de la Militiere, wrote to Charles II. King of Eng- land, before the Restoration, inviting him to profeis Popery, as a likely means to get restored: Bramhall answers him, in the Address from which this passage is taken : Bramhall was then abroad, 1 think, as well as King Charles; but fee his * the Life of Archbishop Bramhall, in the Biographia

itannica. |

= This conjecture is right; in Bramhall’s Letter the three years are put in the margin, all together.

» Forbes, q. 3. 1.

N 4

200 BOOK IV. 11.

number seven, was probably an happy man; so powerful and mystical a number“ as it is! - The Trent Catechism dwells upon it, | The number seven was not one of the thin first changed at the Reformation; indeed the five ordinances which the Romanists call Sacraments and we do not, are fairly to be distinguisted from all others which have been called sacraments in the extended sense, in respect of their importance, if we take extreme unction for visitation of the sick. A icklisfe did not reject them; but then his defi- nition of a sacrament was only, © a visible token of something invisible .” In the Necessary Doctrine, &c. which bears fo hard upon some Romish abuses, seven sacraments are explained, calmly and prac- tically ; not in any way of controversy. In the time of Edward VI. If fick persons desired to be anointed, there was a provision*© for compliance in some degree.” — Heylin tells * us, that four of the five sacraments which we now reject, were © re- tamed under the name of Sacramentals in our pub- lick Liturgie, extreme unction being changed into visitation of the fick. But not rejecting the five, might, with our Reformers, amount to little more than not making a separate class of our 2700. The Romans are very tenacious of the number seven. In the seventh Session of the Council of Trent, Canon the first, we are anathematized if we make either more or fewer than seven : We must not make thirteen any more; nor take in the Nirrnę of | the

P See Cruden’s Concordance under the word sever.

1 Part 2. Sect. xvii. about Sacraments in general, page 13 h

r Wickliffe’s Doctrines may be found in Collier’s Eccles. Hist. but I am not sure where I saw this definition,

5 Yet many things in these explanations, differ from the Romish doctrine.

© Neal, 1, page 37. in 1548.

n Life of Laud, Introd. Sect. x1.

BOOK IV. 11. 201

the Greeks, or some which the Fathers took in, when they used the word Sacrament in its large sense: neither must we say, that the five are Sacra- ments in some lower sense than the other two; they are all seven to be allowed were et proprie Sacra- menta,—We must not say, that sacraments are only constituted to “ confirm“ our Faith;” this may aim at our Article. We must not deny, that sacraments give grace ** ex opere“ opernato;” trans- lated in the Articles of 1552, of | the work wrought.” — John Fox blames the Romanists for laying, that Sacraments give Grace, and not only do /ignifie, but allo ** containe and exhibite that which they signifie, to wit, Grace and Salvation*.” > The Trent Catechism says, “they have in them an admirable and sure virtue to cure our* fouls.” _

The Romanists say, that three sacraments, Bap- tum, Confirmation and Orders, impress a mark or charatter (xexxr1p) upon the soul, and allo give an outward distinction; that this mark or impression, or sealing, external and internal, is indelible; and therefore, these sacraments cannot be reiterated ;— (See Trent Catech. Part 2. on Sacraments in gene- ral, Sect. 29, &c.)

This seems only to mean, that a person once baptized, confirmed, ordained, 1s a/ways baptized, confirmed, ordained : — which is against re-bap- tizing, re-confirming, and re-ordaining : that is, supposing a man really once baptized, &c.—bur re-baptizing, &c. have always proceeded on the

supposition,

• Canon 5. — John Fox says, Sacraments are to excite our Faith :” Vol. 1. page 36. excitare is the word of our Article. Canon 8.—This will be mentioned under Art. xx ix. Vol. 1. page 36. Acts and Monuments, or Martyrologie. * Page 145. or last Sect 32. of Patt 2. on Sacraments in

general. Sect. 10. is mentioned in the ninth Section of this Ar tide, |

(

202 BOOK IV. 11. supposition, that a man’s first baptism, &c. were

’ improperly called such. — (Like our Divorces a vinculo matrimonii).

If priesthood be indelible, a Church can never withdraw its Commission from a Priest: can never degrade him.

The Rhemifts soften nothing, but“ maintain the seven facraments in the fullest and strictest manner. I have already referred to Gal. iv. 3. where, I think, the arguments on both fides are sufficiently displayed, by them and their answerer Dr. Fulke; but other places may easily be found.

Even Dr. Dupin© © insists, that the fve Romith facraments be acknowledged as such, whether in- stituted immediately by Curt, or not.“ — In the Acts of the Council of Trent, Canon first of Sess. 7. we are told, that it is wrong to fay,—

[…]

The author of * Principles and Practices of Methodifts*,” mentions as a popish doctrine, © that the ule of facraments, accompanied only with an imperfect sorrow, fo finishes and completes these _— acts, that they will be sufficient to justify

— Sacramental justification is the term used by Divines: The Trent Catechism mentions this ©.

Those whom we call the Se&aries have, several of them run into an opposite extreme to that of the Romanists. The Reformatio Legum, in the part de Hwzrefibus, speaks against the fame persons

with

This question about the efficacy of Sacraments, was much agitated between the Romanists and the Reformers. Limborch calls it Acris quæstio, Theol. 5. 66, 21 & 22, page 604. |

© Mesheim’s Appendix, page 131, 8vo. Vol. 6.

• First Letter from Academicus, to Mr. Berridge, page 73. — This author is supposed to have been Bishap Green, Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge.

© Page 142. or Sect. 16, Part 2, on Sacraments in general.

BOOK IV. 11. 203

with our Article, who would have the Sacraments to be taken pro mudis siguis, et externis tantùm […] quibus, tanquam hi, hominum Christianorum religio possit a ceteris internosci — But in a separate Title, De Sacramentis, we have first a definition of Sacraments, and an account of their efficacy; then the marks of a Sacrament, and a declaration, that those marks are only found in Baptism and the Eucharist. After an account of these two, we have something concerning Ordina- nation, Matrimony, Confirmation, . and visiting the Sick. In other titles we have something con- cerning ecclesiastical punishments, and excommu- nication. —But I see no names of any Ses men- tioned.

Abroad, the followers of Swenkfeldt are said to have set aside all external ordinances, | in favour®* of internal revelations; which is like what the Qua- lers have done since the time of Oliver Crom- well”: the pretext used was, that Sacraments are Fudaical.

Mr. Gloster Ridley, in his Life of Bishop Ridley}, tells us something of the Sects alluded to. The Anabapti/s and others, through abhor- renee of the Romish worship of the Hofia, and

the Lutheran high notions of the Sacrament, ran

so far into the opposite extreme, as to use low and scurrilous expressions concerning it; and to fix u Bills, or papers, against the door of St. Paul’s Cathedral, containing such yon. |

We

f Reform. Leg. de Hzrehbus, cap. 17.—See also in Syn-

tagma confessionum, the Confessions, or Articles, of Augsburg, and Scotland, and Switzerland, page 61. 96. 153. And in the second Part, page 15. See Rogers on the Article, page 153. b Moshcim, Index, 2uakers. — Bennet’s Confutation of Qua- kerism.— Barclay’s Apology, Prop. 11. Sect. 2. Life of Bilhop Ridley, page 216.

204 BOOK IV. ART. xxv. SECT. 111.

We have, in Strype’s* Life of Archbishop Whitgift, a paper signed by one Anthony Randall, Minister of Lydford, of the Family of Love, dated May 31, 1581, containing the assertion for which he was deprived by the Bishop of Exeter: amongst other things it is said, © He never thought the Lord’s Supper and Baptism to be Sacraments, be- cause he had not read the word Sacrament in the Holy Scripture. He alloweth the Administration of Sacraments because the Magistrate hath esta- blished it.“

I will conclude this History of Sacraments in general with mentioning, that the Socinians allow but one ceremonial preceptum of Christ, to break bread :—how this is to be obeyed, will best appear hereafter. |

111. Having finished our History of the Sacra- ments taken collectively, we come to make some historical remarks on those five, taken separately, which we reject. These five still remain interest- ing to us, though we reje& them as Sacraments, because they are changed into offices which we esteem to be of great importance. Confirmation, Absolution. Ordination, Matrimony, and Visitation of the Sick: a right knowledge of these has a great tendency to make the pastoral duties useful to the “x Ta as well as comfortable, or pleasing, to the

astor himself.

First of Confirmation. In the primitive age of Christianity it appeared to the generality of thinking Christians, that Baptism included ideas both of water and the Holy Spirit. John iii. 5. Titus itt. 5. of which more hereafter. Persons of inferior

rank

k Strype’s Whitgift, Appendix, page 93.

1 44.4 Catechism a. 143. En

m Cave’s Hist, Lit. T. 1. page 131. 2. Anon. de Baptismo non iterando, A. D. 253.

BOOK IV. 111. 20;

rank in the ministry, were competent to baptize with water, but it was observable that those of the highest* rank made ule of prayer and imposition of hands for the obtaining of the Holy Ghost; and it was granted to their petitions. Ir shewed itself at first in some supernatural effects, otherwise the grant might have been incredible; but the Comforter was to be sent to Christians in all ages; to guide them into all truth, to reprove* and inspire them, to work in them both to will* and to do: yet he was to be asked* for; what more natural mode of call- ing down the Holy Spirit could be adopted, when his gifts became ordinary, than one which was some imitation of the mode used by authority when they were extraordinary ?—It suits this account, when Ferom calls what has now the name of confirmation, by the terms imprecatio, and invocatio spiritùs sancti. Non abnuo hanc esse Ecclesiarum consuetu- dinem, ut ad eos qui longè in minoribus urbibus per presbyteros et Diaconos baptizati sunt, Episcopus, ad iuvocationem {anti Spiritus manum impositurus, excurrat.” Dial. contra Lucifer. cap. 4.—And a little after, Alioquin, fi Episcopi tantùm impre- catione, Spiritus Sanctus defluit, lugendi sunt qui in villulis, aut in Castellis, aut in remotioribus locis, per Presbyteros aut Diaconos bapt izati, ante

dormierunt

a The authorities seem well collected in Fheatly on Common Prayer, Confirmation — beginning, page 397, 398.—— In Cor-

nelius’s case, Acts x. 47. The Holy Ghost precedes Baptism, and 15 the cause of baptizing,

„John xvi. 8. 13. Þ Phil. ii. 13.

1 Lnke xi. 13.— See also 2 Cor. i. 21, and parallels.— And 1 John ji. 27. might be considered,

© Whatever is in Scripture must be in an age of Miracles; but according to our reasoning about the difference between a first ministry and an established one, we might conclude with regard to any particular ordinance. — See Art, xx iii. Sect. xxv.

206 BOOK IV. ART, XXV. SECT. 111.

dormierunt, quam ab n The latter passage refers to cafes of necessity

When Churches increased, a ceremony would be wanted. Union would readily occur, as suited to notions of Jews*, and Gentiles, and to many cli- mates where Christianity was professed. How soon it was used in what we call Confirmation, 1s not agreed: some learned men think very soon; but Bingham ® does not allow any proof of it before the time of Tertullian : however, we may look upon this ceremony as arbitrary, arising from par- ticular circumstances, and therefore as one, which may be omitted, though enjoined by the Council of Laodicea, in the year 367.

Some scholastic writers own, that confirmation as a Sacrament, was not instituted by Christ, or used by the Apostles; but that it was made a Sacrament at the concihum Meldense“: Cave mentions two; one in 845, the other in 1201;=— but he says nothing of Confirmation in his account of either.

One of the Scholastic writers was the famous Alexander Hales, the Doctor Irrefragabilis of our own country; called in Latin Alexander? Alensis. The matter and form were distinctly expressed by Pope Eugenius IV. in the Council of Florence, in the year 1438.

It would seem very doubtful how soon Con-

firmat ion should follow Baptism. In the Mow

These passages are quoted by Bingham, 12. 1. 1.

© Exod, xxx. 22,—Psalm Cxxxiii. 2. —1 John ii. 20. 27.— See also Pearson on Creed, Art. 2. beginning, &c. page 80. 93- And for Gentiles, page 99, folio,

v Bingham’s Antiquities, 12. 3. 2.

• Consilium Meldense was the Council of Meaux. — See Bingham’s Index of Councils. Ant. Vol. 2. page 519.

7 Forbes, 9. 4+ 4. and Cave calls him Alexander de Hales.

BOOK IV, 111. 207

of Adults the sooner the better; delay would only be owing to the necessary avocations of those supe- riot ministers, who were to confirm; that is of Bishops .—In case of Infant-baptism there would be more difficulty; those who thought that the Eucharist should be administered to Infants, would be for having Confirmation follow Baptism imme- diately ; but others would wish to have Confirma- tion deferred till any one was fit to have been baptized as an Adult. This distinction between adults and infants, 1s not marked out fo plainly as might be wished. In cases of infant-baptism it is probable, that the necessity of confirmation must have appeared particularly strong, as obviating ob- jections incident to a conttact, in which a con- tracting party had not perfect understanding *.

The name of confirmation was not common in ancient times. Cyprian? uses consummation, or the verb consummate, but not as a technical term, The Greeks had different names; but I will speak of the Greeks separately. |

The Greek Christians use unction in confirming : the 61ntment 15 made by the Patriarch or Bishop alone, on the Thursday in Passion-week, of pre- cious ingredients, and with a sacred apparatus; it is used for {ome other purpoles, but chiefly for confirmation; which always, 1n the Greek Church, follows Baptism immediately. It has the names of XoeTpece, unction 3 XI, imposition of hands 5 and oÞgayis, the sign or seal of the Lord. In the Evyoneyzov, or Greek ritual, there is an Office, - called the Office of the Holy ointment, or Axaazhe

See authorities from the Ancients, Bingham, 12. 1. 1.

However, see Bingham, 12. 1. 2.

d This is confirmed by Limborch, 5. 77. 3.

© Cave’s Dissertation under wvgor says, that Cyprian uses the word Consummation nen semel. |

208 BOOK IV. 111.

Ts «ys pes, Where are the ceremonies and prayers, and the mode of preparation. The vessel in which this ointment is contained, has the name of «yy Ts {Ys wes, But the Greeks do not call confir- mation a sacrament ordained by Christ“.

The Romisk notion of Confirmation is eafil collected from the acts of the Council of Trent, and the Catechism composed by order of that Council. In the seventh Session of the Council there seem only to be three Canons on the subject, without any argumentation: the first declares Con- firmation to be a proper Sacrament, and not a mere ceremony, or catechetical examination. The second condemns those who allow no virtue to the Chrism. The third says, that not every Priest, but only a Bishop, can confirm; ordinarily. In addition, we find in the Catechism, the form of words made use of; “I sign thee with the sign of the Cross, and confirm thee with the Chrijin of Salvation. In the name of,” &c. It is allo affirmed, contrary to the Schoolmen here mentioned, that Christ was the author” of this Sacrament, and “ appointed the Rite of CArisim, and the words which the Holy Church uses,” &c. The autho- rity for this assertion is not Scripture, but the second Epistle of S. Fabian“, Bishop of Rome: which is sufficient to those that believe Confirmation to be a Sacrament, because all sacraments are mysteries, * above the reach of human nature, nor can they be instituted by any but by God himself.” As curious an instance of reasoning in a circle, as you shall meet with. This Catechism proceeds to in- form us, that the matter of this sacrament is Chrism;

the 4 This is chiefly from Cave’s Dissertation, under Mager: see also Bingham, 12. 1. 1.

© Cave mentions no such Eceles. writer. Lad vocat places him in 236,

BOOK IV. 111. 209 the Form was given before; that one confirmed ought to have a Godfather, as a Monitor,“ a Captain, a © fencing-master;” for he has now put on the whole armour of God; but that there must be no Marriage with this fencing-master : that confirmation 1s not to be given till young persons have * the use of Reason,” and 7herefore it must be deferred till they are eleven years old, or however till they are* fix: that Confirmation gives spiri- tual frength, as appeared from the conduct of St. Peter, who deserted his cause before the descent of the Holy Ghost on the great day of Pentecost, but after it suffered with constancy. oo

The Catechism lays down, that Confirmation is one of those Sacraments which imprint a 4apaxThe, as before-mentioned, and concludes with explaining the parts of the Romish ceremony ; the unction why on the forehead; the sign of the Cross, the blow struck by the Bishop on the breasts, the giving of the Pax*, The taking of Whit- suntide for a festival or season of Confirmation, may be understood from what was just now said of St, Peter. |

I should imagine that Presbyteriaus have no con- firmation, (though they have Penance, Ordina- tion, Matrimony, and Visitation of the fick) as I see nothing relating to it in their Directory, or in

| their

The Bishop of Lincoln, at his Visitation, 1791, desired

that none might be brought to be confirmed under fourteen years of age; which, 1 think, agrees with Archbithop Secker,

. See his Sermon at the end of his Lectures on the Catechism.

[…]

” A Paten which serves for the top of a Chalice, which is given by the administering Priest to the assistant Priest to kiss, just before the offering; so I understand the French Dictionary of the Academy,

oo — U¼ —

210 BOOK IV. 111.

their Form of Church-Government’; and as it 1s rejected in the Helvetic confession: — yet the ob- jections made by the Puritans, as described by Neal*, do not seem sufficient to justify a total abolition; being only, that children might come too young to the Eucharist, and that an expres- sion in our Bishop’s Prayer has an appearance of ascribing a sacramental effect to the Institution.— Yet Puritans used infant-baptism.

[…]

The Church of Eugland retains the office of Confirmation; and confines it to the Bissop; it closely imitates the Apostles in using no Chrism, only prayer and imposition of hands. — It defers the ordinance till young persons are arrived at years of discretion, that they may themselves ratify their baptismal covenants, It does not consider con- firmation as a Sacrament; the realon will best come into our Proof. In Theory it utes a Godfather, as a Witness ; but not in prafice.

The Baptisis are said to be much divided on the use of Confirmation’: Infomuch that those who have held confirmation to be a neceflary qualifica- tion for the Lord’s Supper, have separated them-

selves,

Published in Append. to Neal’s History of Puritans.

& Vol. 1. page 159, quarto.

• Wheatly speaks on this subje&; see his Work on the Com- mon Prayer, page 406. Also Wall on Infant Baptism, page 447, quarto; or 2. 8.6.15, I do not perceive that the Con- session of Augsburg declares anything concerning it.

BOOK Iv. ART. XXV, SECT. 111. 211

selves, in celebrating that ordinance, from those who have held the opposite opinion.

An incident mentioned 1n the accounts of the Hampton-Court conference, may lead us to what may, in fact, have been the principal difficulty relating to Confirmation. That difficulty might be thus expressed; © If confirmation be necessary, is not Baptism imperfet® King James the First, who might be prejudiced, as a Scotchman, in favour of the Scotch Church, expressed a scruple of this sort, but Archbishop Bancroft, „on his knees replied, that the Church did not hold Bap- tism imperfect without Confirmation” that * it was of Apostolical institution, Heb. vi. 2. where it is called the doctrine of the /aying® on of hands.” Indeed in that place (taking in the preceding yerse) it seems described as one of the fundamental principles of Christianity, and as following Baptism. With regard to the difficulty, it is of a fort which often occurs amidst the imperfections of human transactions. King James might have re- collected, that the accession of a King is completed by Coronation : I suppose that if a King purpolely neglected or refused to take the coronation-oaths, his negle& might shake his title to the Crown; but it, without any culpable neglect, it happened, that he was not crowned till he had begotten a son, and was to die, such posthumous fon would pro- bably inherit as if the accession was complete.

Baptism then may be complete without con- firmation, if confirmation is not to be had; and yet confirmation may be requisite when 1t can be had.—This seems to agree with the two sentences lately quoted from Jerom,

IV. But

m Neal, Vol. 1. quarto, page 412. O 2

212 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT, Iv.

IV. But we must now proceed to the second Romish Sacrament which we reject, viz. Penance. A good deal was said on the efficacy of Repent- ance under the sixteenth Article“; I will endeavour not to run into repetition. It seems as if we could not stir a step without distinguishing private repentance from penance considered as a part of ecclesiastical discipline; though the Latin word. penitentia may stand for both. Peter Lombard peaks, as do others, of pœnitentia exterior as op- posed? to interior. His idea might be the same with ours: private repentance is visible only to God; whereas penance is visible to the Church, and may be considered as some evil undergone in order to avoid excommunication: yet though these two ought to be kept distinct in the mind, they sometimes

run into one another. A private man may be guided in his repentance by a minister of the Church, as it might, without some regulation, be too light or too desperate; and a person under ecclesiastical censure, or penance, may inwardly repent; and his penance may be, and is meant to be, the occasion of his repentance. Allo a private penitent may impose penance upon. himself, or even apply to the Church to impose it upon him; independent of any restitution or compen- sation which he may think it right to make. Whatever relates to Penance, properly fo called, should be deferred till we treat of the thirty-third Article: the Romish Sacrament seems to me to relate to private repentance, as conducted and re- gulated by a Minister of the Church; but let us proceed in order, 5

Before we come to the Romish Church, let us

just take notice of the Greek Meravias. It was a „

F ²˙ A . — 6 Sv — —

e / — CD rw SE

AA ————W—. ” CT RT , r ey 37 IIS as

n Art. XVI, Sect. 1. 11. III. XVIII. XXXII. XXXIII. * Sce Forbes, 9. 5. 19. |

— , EI In een ene

gm

part of the Evxoncyiev before mentioned, and itself consisted of many parts; amongst others we find the following mentioned in? Cave.

1. Euxy ens jperavorrrur, A Prayer over the peni- tents;

2. Axoelic vv ££0p.0ACYvjprvin, an Office for those who confess.

[…]

A. Axoxelhic eg Auouv &Popiopy he, A service sor dissolving the excommunication of the Priest; con- taining, as I understand, many prayers.

From the Greek Church we* are told, that the first penitentiary formularies were brought into the Latin, by one of the name of Theodorus, who was of Tarsus, a Monk, and afterwards, in the year 668, an inhabitant of England, and Archbishop of Canterbury.

That the Romish Sacrament of Penance is most properly an authoritative regulation of private re- pentance, will appear from dividing it into its constituent parts. These are Contrition, Confession, Satisfaction, Absolution.— But the whole is sometimes called by the name of a part. Our Homily*® on Common Prayer and Sacraments, seems to mean the whole by the word Ab/o/utron ; and that word is used in the same sense in the Necessary DoQrine*, and in the works of Duns Scotus*, And the Form of the Sacrament 1s, according to the Trent Cate- chism, „ abfolve thee; — though indeed the matter is {aid to be Contrition and Confession, and Satisfaction v.

© Contritios

? Hist, Lit. Dissert. page 31, 4 Cave, 1.593,

7 Homilies, 8vo. page 276. | Nec. Dor. is not paged: near the begin. of Penance,

• See Forbes, 9. 5. 26.

Trent Catech. on Penance, Sect. 17. 19. page 245, Engl.

214 BOOK Iv. iv.

&« Contrition is the grief of the soul, and a detes.- tation of sin committed, with a purpose to sin no more for the time* to come.” —Its place is some. times supplied by what is called Altrition, which is sometimes defined imperfect contrition ; the dit- ference seems to be, that Contrition 1s grief for fin as iu; or moral sorrow and abhorrence : attri- tion is grief for fin as producing bad consequences ; one might call it prudential sorrow and abhorrence; however, if this latter turns the 2e:// from fin, it is deemed efficacious.

Attrition is called by its ame in the fourteenth Session of the Council of Trent, Chap. 4. but the naming of it seems sometimes to be avoided; it is well and art fully described in the fifth Canon of the same Session, but not named; neither do I see it named in the Trent Catechism, though it is de- {cried in Sect. 37. by

The next part of the Romish Sacrament of Penance, 1s Confession : the word auricular 1s gene- rally added to Confession, 1n order to distinguish it from public and general confession, such as we open our Service with (after a short sentence or two and an Exhortation to confess ;) and becaule it is made in the ear of an invisible Priest?,

Bishop

• TL1d. Sect. 30, or page 250.

The French Dictionary of the Academy says, the confes- honal is commonly /4t ; and that two penitents kneel at one time on different sides; these penitents cannot be supposed to communicate with each other: and J have understood, that the Priest is not seen during Confession: or not always. To con- felis, in French, often means to confess a Penitent; that is, to receive his confession: consequently the Priest, who confesses petitents, is a Confessor: but in English to confess, always means to confess fs; so that the penitent would be the con- feslor in English, keeping up the analogy; but we rightly com- ply with Popish expressions in Popith buliness, xe

Bishop Porteus* says, as to © private confession in all cases, it was never thought of as a command of God, for goo years after Christ ; nor determined to be such till after 1200 :” whereas the Council of Trent * say, * a sanctissimis et antiquissimis Patribus,

magno unanimique consensu, secreta Confessio sacra- mentalis, qua ab initio Ecclesia sancta usa est, et modo etiam utitur, |fuerit] semper commendata.”

The opposition here seems strong; yet Bingham does a good deal towards reconciling the contend- ing parties, by observing, that though there were, in ancient times, several sorts of confession in some sense private, and though there was such an Office as that of penitentiary Priest, yet private negot1a-, tions had always relation to public discipline, and made a part of it; notwithstanding some things might be occasionally concealed, for fear of scan- dalizing weak brethren.

J have already observed, that the private peni- tent might be desirous to submit his offence to the Church, in order that he should be properly punished, in this life; neither too slightly nor too severely : and this seems no unwise plan to gain latisfaction and peace of mind : now this was the very business in which Penitentiary Priests were employed. And we may fee, that such a plan would make private penitence and church-disci- pline coincide; or at least would form an intimate connexion between them. In the whole affair of Penitence, the great difference between ancient and modern times seems to lie in this; that in ancient

times

Brief Confutation, page 47.— See also Comber’s Advice, page 16. © Sell. 14. Cap. 5.

» Bingham, 18. 3. 11,—-Sce also Wheatly on the Common Prayer, page 459.

• \

f

(

times private repentance was more intimately con- nected with church-discipline, than in modern.

The e«foponoynoys of the ancients (taken from James v. 16.) Bingham shews to mean the whole of public confession and Penance, considered as ecclesiastical discipline,

Daille has written a very good Book on auri- cular Confession; the contents of which may be found in Bingham, 18. 3. 4. which are well worth reading; but I would wish any one not by any means to excuse himself, if he is seriously study- ing the subject of Confession, from reading the conclusion of the third chapter of Bingham’s eighteenth Book.

In the Romish church, young persons are called upon to confess. The Trent Catechism mentions this, and describes the very humble“ posture in which Confession is made ; it also mentions, that confession must be wpreserved; of evil thoughts, words and actions; or of offences against the 7ent/ commandment, as well as against the other nine, It sets forth the provisions which are made for the security of the Penitent who opens“ his heart: yet Comber shews, that © some cases have dispensation for divulging secrets : as when a fault concerns the Church : this must give great latitude,

It seems strange that so much stress should be laid upon confession, and yet that | it should be in- sisted on by the Church only once a yeer : could any one make a confession of all the sins, in thought, word and deed, which he had committed during a whole year?

Whatever

Page 261, Sect. 56. —See also Dict. Acad. Confessional.

4 Sect. 64, and 74. e Advice, page 37.

Trent Catechism, Sect. 59.—French Pray er-book page 16. Les commandemens de Þ Eglise.““

Whatever good some kinds of private confes- fion might do, yet the Romish is said to have been in fact productive of much evil. This is described by Sir Edwin Sandyss: Comber® and Benson* speak of the evil resulting from the Clergy knowing the thoughts of men’s hearts.—Indeed if we consider, that among such a numerous body as the Clergy some may he expected to be vicious and corrupt, we shall be shocked at the thoughts of their being intrusted with secrets capable of being turned to bad purposes. Vet the Romanists seem {till to value private confession as much as any part of their religion ©.

To me it seems, that private confession, under ecclesiastical Lats, is bad even in theory ; that is, mischievous not through mere abuse; at least not through any abuse but such as must be expected. —Why not confess to God himself? to lean on inferior confidences, to be tried by narrow-minded judges, must tend to lower and debase the religious sentiments; as was said of worshipping Saints and Angels; and must hinder a man from looking up to his heavenly Judge. And what can be expected from reducing indeterminate duties to determi- nate laws, but a mechanical religion, coldness and evasion? What man pays with generous fervour what he is obliged to pay by law? What can be expected from requiring towards strangers, or per- tons of bad character, that confidence, those effu- sions of sincerity and contrition, which every delicate mind reserves for a few intimate friends, but hypo-

crisy

s Speculum Europæ, page 10. | |

b Advice, page 37. 5 On James v. 16.

• I collect this from what I heard an eminent English Lawyer of the Romish Church say, when he was solliciting an Act of

Parliament for those, who have since been called proięsting Catholic so | | |

218 BOOK IV. Iv.

crisy or self-deceit! but our present business 1 E History.

The church of England may seem, from some things, to approach towards Romish Confession: KRepentance,“ says Bishop Sparrow’, © consists of three parts, as the Church teaches in the Commi- nation; 1. Contrition, or lamenting of our sinful lives ; 2. Knowledging or confesing our fins; 3. An endeavour to bring forth fruits worthy of Penance, which the ancients call satigfaction:“ thus Bishop Sparrow; and, of the fourth thing abso/ution, the Church of England affords several instances.

Confession, in some sort private, is often com- mended” by our Divines, and even in our Liturgy: we may instance in the first Exhortation to the Communion, and in the Visitation of the“ Sick. — But, in the first place, let me observe, that J look upon it as always a mark of good sense, when men are avoiding anything, not to do it rashly, and through mere disgust; but to take every good they can find, though mixed with evil which they disapprove In avoiding one extreme, it snews rational moderation, not to run precipitately into another. — And with regard to particular regula- tions, there is a great difference between requiring a constant, ordinary confession of all sins: and re- commending it to an unhappy man, who wants much to unburthen his mind, in one or two ex- traordinary situations, and to have his difficulties solved; to apply to one, who must of course be better informed than himself, and may be supposed free from religious melancholy. The ordinary lan- guage of our Church 1s, “ confess yourselves to Almighty God,” and it is found even in -

r

Rationale, page 17. m Bingham, 18. 3. — Bishop Porteus, page 46, n See Wheatly, page 400.

arst exhortation to the Communion; but when the mind is tormented with scruples, or debilitated b sickness,” advice is wanted: and the weak should be © moved” to get over their reserve, and solicit spiritual “comfort or counsel.”

The real purpose of our Church, in quittin che laws of auricular confession, and at the same time recommending some confidential intercourse between a Minister and thole troubled in con— {cience, was, probably, to throw off a yoke hard to be born; to give liberty where the {sensible and delicate mind most longs sor it; to substitute affectionate exhortation in the room of peral laws, and mechanical observances; and thereby prevent hypocrisy and evasion ; without dissolving the pas- toral connexion and relation, or weakening the mutual confidence and mutual kindness between Minister and people. |

The next part of the Romish Sacrament of Penance, after confession, is Satisfaction. The Church of Rome seems desirous to have the Peni- tent suffer something in consequence of his offences; seeing, probably, that some suffering would be good for him, and might be made profitable to the Church: But how to manage, is the difficulty; for the system gives complete forgiveness to the penitent, even of mortal fins, without such suffer- ing. It is therefore said, that God is sometimes {spoken of as forgiving fins, when thole who are forgiven, have some partial, temporary puni/hment continued; and that, in a Christian, even after penance and absolution, there are some Embers, as it were of sin, some remains of vicious habits, from which danger is to be apprehended : both, then, for the continuance of some punishment, and for the counteracting of these remains of evil in the mind, it is judged proper to set some kind of zasks to

the

the Penitent, to be performed aster his Absolution. — To this it is added, that when the Church has been witness to a man’s offending, it should be able, for its satisfaction, to see some sufferings sub- mitted to as marks of amendment : and that such marks will serve as a warning to others, and make them cautious of offending. Lastly, it is laid down, that such actions as are prescribed as fsatis- factions, ought never to be intermitted.— The satisfactions enjoined by the Confeffors, are to be Prayer, Alms, and Fasting; these having a respect to God, our neighbour, and ourselves. Burt it is also held, that if God is pleased to inflict punish- ment hinself, those will be the fame in effect as {atisfactions enjoined by the Priest.—The quantum of Alins, &c. is to depend on circumstances ; as on the fortune of the offender, &c. like damages given by a Jury: this is trusting a good deal to Confessors. 3 It is held also, that * one can satisfy for another,” on account of the communion of Saints; with some limitation, which I do not understand® : indeed the whole of this satisfying by proxy is to me obscure; —it answers some purpose, no doubt: indeed one can see that it tends to promote a circulation of wealth in the Church: but the moral good of it does not strike me at present. Acts of mortifica- tion and self-denial, undertaken in order to break and extirpate vicious habits, are right and reason- able ; but here they appear to disadvantage by being cramped up 1n a bad system. | The last part of the Romish Sacrament of Penance, is ab/olution.—lIn order to have an idea even of the historical part of the subject, one must attend to the distinction between ministerial and Judicial: o It means, I believe, that if a person satisfies for another, the benefit arising usually to the ind of the penitent, is lost.

BOOK IV. iv. 221

judicial: a person gives ministerial absolution, when he acts as a Minister or Agent, under God as a principal; judicial, when he acts in the capacity of a Judge, from whom lies no appeal. Nor can we proceed rightly without remarking here, that all judicial absolution must consist in releasing offenders from punishments inflicted by religious society amongst men, or from Church censures: and that all anticipation of the day of Judgment, in absolving, must be ministerial; its end, to warm and comfort; though every decision of a minister or agent will undoubtedly be ratified, if the Agent acts in his proper“ character, and is rightly informed; which he cannot be, except the repentance, in any case before him, be sincere: and as he can only pro- nounce absolution on supposition of sincerity in his

nitent, his absoluticn must be, in some sort, conditional. This premised, we proceed with our History.

All Absolution given in the Christian Church to Christians as individuals was at first ministerial* : there was not for many centuries any mention of the Church claiming to forgive as God. —Though, in cases of judicial ablolution from church cen- sures, prayers were offered that God would forgive the offender, as the Church had done. The forms of absolution which have been in use, are four: the precatory, the optative, the indicative, and the decla- rative; they differ as do the following expressions — O God forgive this penitent;’—* may God pardon and deliver you from all your sins;’ —““ J absolve thee from all thy fins ;?—* God pardoneth all them that truly repent; wherefore, as I pre- sume, your repentance is sincere, I advise you to be

of

p Art. xXx11. Sect. xvII.

See Bingham, 19. 1, 1. &c, and Wheatly on the Common Prayer, page 465, &c.

222 BOOK 1V. 1v.

of good comfort, and not to distrust the divine mercy.” The most ancient of these forms was, I believe, the precatory; the optative is precatory as to its meaning: the indicative was not used till about the middle of the twelfth Century*; within a Century after that, the Priest’s indicative abso- lution was looked upon as equivalent to the for- giveness of God.

There is one exception to ancient forms being precatory, which comes fo near the case of our absolution in the Visitation of the Sick, that it seems worth mentioning. Even in the primitive Church, we are told that the clinical ablolution®, or absolution given to persons on a fiek-bed, was in the indicative form : only certain religious exer- cises were enjoined in case of recovery, which, when the absolution was given, it was taken for granted would be faithfully performed. Perhaps it might be thought, that as persons on a sickbed are ant to be dejected, and their dejection is apt to increase their disorder, that form suited them best, which was calculated to inspire the greatest confidence:.

The Romish notions of absolution are to be found, as before, in the Ads of the Council of Trent, and in the Trent Catechism. The Rhe— mish Testament might carry us into too great length.— It was in the fourteenth Seshon, that the subject was treated : we find it mentioned in the sixth chapter and the ninth Canon: the with of the Council seems to be, to declare even. pri- vate ablolution judicial; but the difficulties are fo

striking, r Wheatly, page 467. x See Dr. Marshall’s penitential Discipline, page 104, quoted by Wheatly, Pag ;e 468. t Ca th Is subject we find recommended, Archbishop Ur”

Answer to the Jesuit? s challenge; and Dr. WMor/halPs Nadel Discipline, |

| BOOK Iv. IV, 223

friking; that they are obliged to soften the ex- pressions. However, in the Canon the matter stands thus; any one is to be anathematized if he says, ** Absolutionem sacramentalem sacerdotis, non esse actum judicialem, sed nudum ministerium pro- nunciandi et declarandi remissa esse peccata,” &c. Where I can conceive some evasion to be de- rivable from the word sacramentalem; for any man who believes there is such a thing as sacramental ab- solution, will believe it to be judicial; and what is affirmed 1s affirmed of no other. — But in the Chapter, we have still greater caution; the abso- lution of the Priest is owned to be, alien? beneficit dispensatio; it is called, ad ar actus judicialis. In the“ Catechism, made for the instruction of the People, we find, that when the Priest uses the words, Ego te absolvo, he pronounces that the sinner has obtained from God the Pardon of his Sins.— Nay this is said of a penitent who has not con- fessed, but only has had the i of Confession; though by the ninth canon any one is anathema- tized who shall say, non requiri Confessionem Peni- tentis, ut Sacerdos cum absolvere possit. In some cases, still farther relaxation 1s allowed : for the Priest is directed to absolve his penitents, if he only finds, that diligence in reckoning up fins, and grief in detesting them, have not been “ alto- gether wanting.”

We come, in the last place, to Absolution as it

is practised in the Church of England. - Our Church uses three of the four forms already men- tioned ; the declaratory near the beginning of the service; the optative, which is in sense precatory, in the communion; and the indicative in the visi- tation of the sick. But Bishop Sparrow rightly

observes, On Penance, SeR, x 1x. page 246.

observes*, that © these several Forms, in sence and virtue are the same;” and illustrates his obser- vation by the instance of a Prince commissioning an Officer to set at liberty all well-disposed Pri- soners : it seems immaterial which form of words he uses. The indicative form was once, by the Rubric in the office of visiting the sick, directed to be used in all” private fare Nr when men had scruples of conscience; but now, in the first ex- hortation to the Communion, though absolution is promised to the scrupulous, the form of it seems to be left to the Priest, only it is shewn to be minis- terial; and to be built, not so much on private judgment, as on © God’s holy word.”

I will close this account of Absolution, with observing, that though our expression in absolvin the fick, I absolve thee from all thy fins,” sounds as if the absolution were purely indicative ; yet, if we take all the expressions of the form at once into our minds, we must perceive, that the abso- lution is expressly called ministerial; and that it is also declarative, and optative; and therefore, that the concluding expression cannot be rightly un- derstood but as consistent with those. forms to which no member of the Church of England objects. 5 |

Having now gone through the four parts, we may conclude by taking notice, that in the Ro- milh Sacrament of Penance, the matter is, the part of the Peuitent, (Contrition, Confession, Satis- faction; the Form is, the part of the Prigst; Ego te absolvo. |

In the Directory of the Presbyterians I do not fee Absolution mentioned; but the Minister is to

comfort

• Rationale, page 19.

See King Edward’s first Liturgy, Rubric in the Visitation of the Sick. Or Wheatly on Common Prayer, page 469.

BOOK Iv. ART. XXV, SECT. V. 225

comfort the sick, to declare God’s mercy to peni- - tents, to hinder the indisposed from being too much cast down, &c.—and in case of scruple, „in- structions and resolutions shall be given to satisfy - and settle him.”

v. The next Romish Sacrament, after Penance, which we reject, is Orders: but on this we need not dwell very long.” Indeed our principal con- cern is with the Romish Church, as we have already, under the twenty-third Article, given some account of church-ministers in general; and as we shall have occasion to speak of the English Ordinations in particular under the thirty-sixth Article. — However, if any particulars occur, which have not been mentioned before, and which throw any light upon the Romish Orders, they may be admitted.

Bingham gives“ an account of several forts of Ministers in the ancient churches, which in our church are not used. As Deaconesses, that is, elderly widows, attending on Baptism and other offices relating to females. Subdearons, vnngeras, assistants to Deacons, &c. in the ceremonies of the Church; a sort of agents or messengers, and at the same time Pupils, to the Bishops. —Acolythisis, (or Acolyths, or Acolytes) attend- ants for lighting candles, and providing wine for the Eucharists.—Exorcifs, whose business it was to attend the Evegyzpeve;, or Demoniacs, or possessed, and pray with them. This office of Exorcists seems strange to us, nor do I perfectly know the nature of the disorders under which the Energumens laboured, and were conceived to labour: religious fervours have frequently difordered the intellects, especially in a new religion, when opposed by

| friends 2 Bingham, 3. 3. VOL, Iv. 5

gumens*. — As to the Exorcist’s driving away the

226 BOOK Iv. v.

friends who could raise the affections, and occasion great agitation in the mind: in the plans of ancient churches we see, that two sides of the cloysters of the outward court were occupied by these ener-

unclean spirit at Baptism, that might be partly em- blematical; and partly owing to the notions of men not free from superstitious weakness, concern- ing the nature and end of that Institution. There were allo, in the ancient churches, Rea- ders, who read the scriptures aloud in some ele- vated place or reading desk : all these were probably in training for higher offices. Even the Oftarii, or doorkeepers, had a kind of ordination from the Bishop, as far as that name could be applied to a ceremony of solemnly delivering to them the Key; of all the sacred things with which they were to be entrustedꝰ. — Besides these, there were Catechists, and several inferior clerical Officers; but I need not describe any more: indeed there is no end of the different modes in which men may worship God; and scarcely any of the different officers who may be employed in very large religious assemblies, where the ceremonies are complicated and con- ducted with a magnificence calculated to strike the eye and warm the imagination. Cave, in the alphabetical Dissertation before- mentioned, has an article X#gorevz, or office for ordaining different clerical ministers. He informs us, that the Oftarius, Exorcist *, and Acolythift, are not

2 Frontispiece to Wheatly on the Common Prayer. I have been concerned with several persons who would have occupied a place in one of these Cloysters. While the Gospel was spread- ing, most, or many mad people would take a religious turn.

The O/tiarii were not considered as Laymen.

© When the disordered in mind were not supposed to want

prayer, & c. one who had the care of them would only be like a keeyer

BOOK IV. ART. xxv. SECT. v. 227

not now held clerical in the Greek Church : but that there are rituals in the Euchologion for ordain- ing Bishop, Priest, Deacon, Subdeacon, Reader, &c, He mentions Morinus as a learned writer on such subjects.

The Romish church try to keep up a connec- tion between the ideas of Priesthood and Sacrifice, with a view to their mass. They have five orders below that of Deacons ; which are enumerated in the twenty-third Session of the Council“ of Trent; Subdeacons, Acolythists, Exorcists, Readers, and Door-keepers. These are the same names which we have found 1a ancient churches ; but we are informed, even by Cardinal Bona, that, in reality, the ancient offices had ceased in his time; and that the persons called by these names, were chiefly boys, and men hired, but initiated by no* kind of Ordination. |

In the acts of the same Council, Order is de- dared to be a proper Sacrament, instituted by Christ; but the unction, though declared requisite, does not seem to be expressly called the matter of the Sacrament ; imposition of hands is mentioned, and the Grace of God; but only from the Epistle to Timothy : and no {scriptural Form of words 1s produced. Order is said to be one of those sacra- ments? which impress an indelible yzeaxrne.

In the Trent Catechism the proof that Order is a proper sacrament, seems very lame: it informs us, however, that by the having of the crown, an entrance is opened into the Sacrament of Order,

and

a keeper of a mad-house: he need not have any spiritual or clerical character. .

4 Cap. 2.

: 1. 25, 18, Bona, Rer. Liturg.— Quoted by Bingham, 3. 3. en

f Sec. Xl. | 8 Sect. xx. P 2

— AA […] —

and that the shaven circle grows with ecclesiastical dignity. It also sets forth © the dignity of door- keepers®;” gives us the usual forms, by which they and other inferior Clerks are ordained, or ap- pointed: and mentions, that Bastards and persons deformed, are disqualified for Ordination.

It seems reasonable that there should be a num- ber of ecclesiastical officers in any place, proper- tioned to the greatness of the congregations in that place, and to the number and grandeur of the ceremonies. In our Cathedrals we have Precentors, &c. which we have not in our inferior churches ; not to mention Vergers.

vI. We now come to the Romi Sacrament of Matrimony; but of this some History has already been given under the twenty-third Article: We need only speak of Romish Matrimony and our own.

The Council of Trent declares* Matrimony to be a sacrament instituted by Christ -himself, but mentions neither matter nor form; nor uses any argument, that I should call such, besides that passage of the Vulgate, erunt duo in carne una. Sacramentum hoc magnum est.—It seems“ there have been great disputes amongst the Romanists whether a// marriages could come under the notion of a Sacrament.— The Church of Rome is not only against Polygamy but Divorces. As Matri- mony is with them a Sacrament, it is indissoluble; not that it is one of those which stamp a xn, because, though inditloluble for life, it may be dissolved by death: nor is it inconsistent with /eþa-

| ration, hk Set xxxi. Margin. i Art. XX111, Sect. X11.

• Session 24.

| Eph. v. 31, 32. See Sec. 11. of this Article, about Sacra-

mentum.

2 See Limborch’s Theology, 5. 775. end.

BOOK iv. VI, 229

ration, a mensa. et toro; but only with divorces strictly so called; a vinculo matrimonii. Yet any marriage not consummated, is dissoluble by one of the parries going into a Convent or Monastery, or entering into any religious order. The prohibi- tions and disqualifications, from consanguinity, &c. are numerous ; more fo than those in Leviticus ; and the Romith Church claims a power of adding; but ease is to be procured by means of Dispensa- tions, Now the greater strictness there is, the more frequently must dispensations be sued for. —1 will only oblerve farther, on Romish Matrimony, a seeming singularity; I mean, that an institution should be deemed a sacrament only by those, who most commend abstaining from it to commend abstinence from a sacrament, would appear to us somewhat strange.

It is natural here to take some notice of our own customs concerning the institution of Matri- mony.

We seem to go on this principle, that a society formed in order to bring up youth in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, ought to be formed with some folemnities of a religious fort. And whatever inspires religious sentiments, will refine the sexual appetites, and hinder them from dege- nerating into gross brutality : will tend to melio- rate love by a mixture with friendship; and sensual desire, by esteem of moral perfections.

It is of course that we reject unlimited inter- course of the sexes; but moreover, we reject con- cubinage ; not only in the modern sense of the word, but that kind of unequal marriage between master and slave, or servant, which uled to be called concubinage 1n very ancient times. We place the husband and wife in one rank, and make their reciprocal claims on each other’s person and

73 property

230 BOOK IV. ART. xxv. SECT. VI. property to be equal We reject also Polygamy

entirely.

We adopt the prohibitions and impediments, in respect of consanguinity, &c. which are mentioned in the Mosaic law: but, it may be, they are such as would result from the moral principles of Incest, applied to the prevailing customs of the part of the world which we inhabit®.

We look upon Adultery® as diffolving the mar- riage contract, and therefore, on proof of it, allow of divorce; but we take all methods to encourage honouring the wife as the weaker vessel; and we inculcate not only gentleness and courtesy, but patience: of which our Homily is a respectable proof: the composition of some one who well knew, not only scripture, but human life.

In our Service, the Union between Christ and his Church, is set in the right light; and becomes, instead of a foolish argument Pr a Sacrament, a rational and affecting inducement, both to Christian piety, and conjugal love,

One objection to this account, with respect to the equality of husband and wife, is striking ; the wife contracts to obey; which the husband does not. And it is true, that no society can be carried on without authority lodged somewhere; but such

authority

n See Wheatly, page 425. Lev. xviii—The table was drawn up by Archbishop Parker ; who infers from one sex to the other. The Romanists had too many impediments from consanguinity, &c. we wanted to lessen their number; what way more unex- ceptionable, or less likely to be excepted to, than for us to take the Levizical impediments ? Extending them to both sexes made them seem more numerous; and therefore nearer to the Popish; but the Jews must have extended them in like manner, by parity of reasoning. |

This docs not mean the Law of England, as it stands; that allows zo divorce, ({ce Blackstone, Index, Divorce) ; we mean those principles on which a new Law may at any time be made; and on which new Statutes are framed occasionally.

BOOK Iv. ART. xxv. SECT. vi. 231

authority as is lodged with the husband, is only for the sake of unity; in order that education, &c. may not absolutely stop: conjugal authority would be abused, according to our principles of marriage, if it gave any honour, privileges, accommoda- tions, to the husband, above the wife : the wife of a Duke 1s a Duchess, of a Peer a Peeress, and so on; though in ancient times some sorts of wives were little better than slaves; having little or no claim on the person or property of the husband.

It may be said, why could not conjugal au- thorty be divided, and given to the husband in some things, to the wife in others? It seems probable, that if that had been done, the wife would not have had an influence so great, or so suited to her powers, as she now has: the conjugal society is formed so much upon fenti- ment, that the exercise of its authority may be left more indeterminate than that of other socie- ties. The Magistrate ought indeed to have a power of protecting a wife from personal danger, or from what, in her rank, would be called indi- gence; but to make general laws that the wite in all tamilies (and only general laws could be made) thould have so much conjugal authority, and no more, might be probably, in effect, preventing the husband and wife from governing tacitly ac- cording to their respective powers of governing to good purpole.

The American Liturgy omits our expression, « with my Body I thee wor/hip;” the omission makes the form appear to me very blank: tvor/hip is an old word for honour® or respect ; and by the formu- lary used in our Liturgy upon putting on the ring, the husband engages to treat his wife as an equal;

in

P Art. xxII. Sect. 1x. P 4

232 BOOK IV. ART, xxv. SECT, VII.

in person and property; that is, not as a concubine, such as Hagar was to Abraham. Now to change a form which does this, so as to make it only engage for respectful and honourable treatment in regard to property, is surely to cut off a material part; espe- cially if we consider what St. Paul says, 1 Cor. vii. 4. I do not say that American husbands do not treat their wives with personal respect; I speak only of the propriety of a verbal Form. Yet I think the English Liturgy was formed by a wisdom superior to that which dictated the American.

The Presbyterians seem only to simplify the rite of Marriage; whether with good effect, I should much doubt. The account of the marriage- ceremony ordained in the Directory, as given in the preface to Grey’s Hudibras, might not be too long for me to read to you, |

vii. We come, lastly, to the History of the Romish sacrament of Extreme Un&ion.

The primitive anointing of the sick has been generally accounted the gift of healing; though Papists must maintain also a sacramental unction. — In the seventh Century, we are told, Christians practised unction with a view of curing their bodily diseases. This was not merely a medicinal appli- cation of oil; it was religious, or rather supersti- tous: superstitious people, in different ages and countries, have run into a kind of religious“ quackery. —But in the tweltth Century the bodily cures failed so often, that it was thought best to hold the anointing to be beneficial to the Sor, rather than the Body; and to the Body, only when bodily health would do the ou! no harm. — When

__ this

q See injunctions of King Edward VI. in Sparrow’s Col- lection, page 9.—Fulke on the Rhemists, fol. 433, mentions a custom of carrying home water, after it had been used for bap- tizing, in order to apply it to bodily sores.

BOOK IV. ART. xxv. SECT. VII. 233

this came to be the notion, those parts of the body were anointed which are considered as instruments of n.

Cave gives us an account of an Office or ritual used in the Greek Church, and called Evyzazzev, or prayers for the ceremony of extreme unction; it is part of the Exchologion, and is titled more fully, The Service of the Holy Oil, to be sung by even Priests, collected in the Church or House : that is, the sick man was to be brought to Church to be anointed if he was strong enough to bear it; but if he was very weak indeed, ** graviter afflictus et profiratus,” the seven Priests were then to sing this service at his house: many mystical reasons are given why the number should be leven; and there- fore we may suppose that it was never less, — Extreme unction, though practised in the Greek Church, is not there reckoned a Sacrament : nor was it of old, by Chrysostom; or indeed in the Latin Church by the venerable* Bede.

In the fourteenth Session of the Council of Trent, we find three chapters and four Canons upon extreme unction. It is called, in the chap- ters, a proper Sacrament, intimated (in/inuatums®) by Christ in St. Mark’s Gospel, and recommended and published by. St. James. From a 7radition concerning the passage of St. James, Chap. v. 14, &c. the Church has learnt what that Apostle reaches; namely, that the matter of this Sacra- ment is Oil, the Form, these words, „Per i/tam unctionem, &c.—the effeft, to wipe off sins, and to

| promote 7 This from Wheatly, page 475, &c. |

5 Hist. Lit. Diff. page 28.

t See Fulke against the Rhemists on James v.

u This word insiuuatum was a correction in the council: a thing might be intimated in one place, and instituted in another;

but, in that case, the Institution would be the thing men- tioned.

234 BOOK IV. ART, xxv. SECT. vii.

promote the health of the Body, when that is ex- pedient for the Soul. — The Elders mentioned by St. James, mean Pries. This Sacrament is to be administered to persons who seem to be“ in exitr vitæ; from which it is sometimes called Sacra- mentum exeuntium.” —The Canons are not content with saying, that this Sacrament was © in/inuatum” 2 Christo; they fay it was a Christo Domino e nostro isitutum.” In other things they only repeat what was said in the Chapters, annexing Anathemas.

The Trent Catechism tells us moreover at length what is the Form of this Sacrament; © God in- dulge” (or pardon) * thee by this holy unction, whatever offence thou hast done through the fault of thy eyes, or nastrils, or touch :”—And says, that the Institution * came from Christ,” and after- wards was published by St. James : it was rather to heal the Soul than the Body. This Sacrament is to be administered to such as are * grievor/ly sic k,“ but before they lose their senses.— Besides the parts of the Body mentioned in the Form, some others are to be anointed : the ears, the month, the hand, the feet, and lastly the reins, (only in men, not in“ women,) © being the feat, as it were, of plea- sore and lust.” And the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist, are to be received as a prepa- ration for that extreme unction.— This Sacrament is said to require great Tft, and to be sometimes less effectual than it might be, through want of Faith in him who receives it.

The Necessary Doctrine says, that extreme 3 (which it calls a Sacrament) is to be ene to

uch

• J do not fee this FOR in the Catechism, but it is mentioned in Limborch. 777 21. where the account of the Romish notions is 4 H, seems accurate,

BOOK IV. vii. 23%

such as require it; that it is called extreme, or /af,, because it comes after other un#ions : it may be ad- ministered more than once, and ought to be, “in the entrie of sickness;” and the Eucharist ought to be received after it. | | h

King Edward VI. retained? the custom of anointing for some time, as a temporary indulgence. to the prejudices of those, who had been brought up in Popery : but in his second“ Liturgy it was omitted. Wheatly gives us the form, out of King Edward’s first Liturgy, in which the Priest addressed the sick person, when he anointed him, “upon the forehead and breast only.” He also observes, that this unction might be considered as the remains, not of the primitive, but partly of the ancient, and partly of the Popish unction.

In our Liturgy, as it has stood ever since the publication of the second Book of Edward VI. we have no unction; but we have a Visitation of the Sick. Of this I may be expected to say some- thing; but my observations have been anticipated, either under the subject of Confession, or under that of Absolution. I seem now only to have to read to you the sixty-seventh Canon, which leaves the whole method of instructing and comforting the sick to the discretion of the Minister, if he be a licenced preacher : if he be not one, he is then e infliruft and comfort” the fick © in their dis- tress, according to the order of the Communion» Bot.“ .

P.S. In

Mentioned Sect. 11. * See Neal, page 37, Vol. 1. 4to. and Wheatly on Common Prayer, page 471. 477- | See the Canons of 1603; and Wheatly, Introd. to Visit. Sick.—He says, it may be gue/tioned whether ** by the Act sor 2 of publick prayers, we be not restrained from private orm. |

P. S. In Wall’s Infant Baptism it is said®, that the English Baptisis use extreme unction, though rarely, and in hopes of recovery.

VIII. At length we have finished the Hi/ory of this twenty-fifth Article, and we come now, 1n course, to the Explanation.

Our present Article has that for the first para- graph which was the last in the Article of 1552; and has that for the last, which was the first, atter a sentence © from an Epistle of Augustin to Janu- arius: in the middle it has a rejection of five popish sacraments, which in King Edward’s Article were not mentioned. It has omitted one sentence of the former Article, concerning the effect of the Sacraments being ** ex opere operata” —1n the English, © of the work wrovght :” retaining the sense, in the rest, but dropping the phraje, with the remark upon 1t.

The first paragraph of our Article contains a definition of a Sacrament; which it is no very easy matter to give: we have one in our short Cate- chism; to those who find one of these intelli- gible, the other will be fo too.—It seems to me a good way to get at the meaning of our Church, to consider what opinions she wishes to avoid. — With regard to the nature of a sacrament, she wishes first to avoid the notion, that it is a mere badge, by which Christians are distinguished from Heathens; and next the notion, that it acts mechanically upon the Soul, as a powerful medicine does upon the Body. If the inquirer finds any space between these two notions, the Church of England seems willing that he should range im it freely. We must suppose some outward /n, and some inward meaning; this meaning must imply

5 os | ome

d Parts. Chap. viii, Sect. 11. page 446, quarto. © Sect. 11.

some good affecting our minds, and the future hap- piness of our Souls; and appropriated to ourselves by our own voluntary acts; and then other parti- culars, if any there be, may be left unascertained. —My own 1dea of a Sacrament 1s, a ceremony, which expresses by vi/ble words (as Augustin“ calls them) some great Benefit bestowed by God on Man; which may de some beneficial fate or con- dition, leading to great good: a ceremony imme- diately injoined by divine authority :—It is called an outward . sign of an inward and spiritual grate,” or favour; but inward, is only opposed to outward; and means, the benefit shadowed out by the cere- mony : and any benefit (or grace, or favour) may be called spiritual, which relates to the future hap- piness of our Soul or Spirit, or to the improvement of the mind: spiritual is opposed to the material sign; and its sense best got by taking it so.—If it appears to any Christian, that God’s Holy Spirit must be concerned in a sacrament, he may satis himself thus. When we come to consider attentively how great and wonderful a thing it 1s, that God should institute a ceremony for us: and how grate- ful we ought to be for the benefit which it shadows out, and how diligent we ought to be in securing and rightly applying that benefit, we - must feel very great moral improvement*: and all such im- provement it is our duty to refer to the assistance of the Holy Spirit, The nature and manner of such reference belongs to the tenth Article. This moral improvement, this dispelling of our weaknefles, this warming of our sentiments, and confirming of our good principles, is called, with respect to the Lord’s Supper, the frengthening and refreshing

4 Contra Faustum, 19. 16. cited by Forbes, 9. 1. 32.

P. S. I think our Reformers had much the same idea: See Reform. Legum, de Hæresibus, cap. 17.

of our souls.” I should think, that this might serve as an Explanation of the first paragraph: to me it makes that paragraph intelligible.

The second paragraph needs no explanation.

In the third some expressions may be noticed.

« Those five commonly called sacraments” —we should not express ourselves so now, but the five were very commonly called sacraments when the Articles were made.“ Sacraments of the Gospel;” ——this is opposed to Sacraments in the large sense, as meaning any emblematical actions of a sacred nature.

In the remaining part pf the Article we have several instances of the plural number being used when only one single thing is meant.—The Puri. tans* objected to this, at the Hampton Court Con- ference ; making confirmation to be included in both expressions corrupt […] al- lowed” —at least that is the best sense that I can make of the objection. Corrupt imitation ® of the Apostles, may relate to confirmation, orders, And extreme unction, or it may mean only the last ; but gates of Life allowed in the Scriptures,” seems to mean Matrimony alone: our Homily* says, © godly Rates of life,” meaning the same thing. […] are not “ to be gazed pon, &c. is applicable to the Lord’s supper only: % duly v/e them,” may indeed include Baptism, be- cause consecrated water used to be carried home and given to the diseased. But St. Paul’s * passage

about

f See Neal, Vol. r, quarto, page 415.

2 Art. 1x. ** following of Adam.” Sect. xv1t,

n Page 277, octavo.

i Fulke on Rhemists, fol. 433, top: As in Sect. vir,

k 1 Cor. xi. 29.— Vet Augustin treats of the efficacy of Baptism as depending on the worthiness of the receiver. — Forbes, 10. 1. 20.— 10. 2. 14.

BOOK IV, AR r. xxv. SECT, IX. 239

about unworthy receiving, relates to no Sacrament but the Lord’s Supper.

In excuse for this using plural where only one thing is meant’, we may say, let any one try to use the singular number, and yet keep to the sub- ject of Sacraments in general. Several other little things may be said. […] is sometimes used, when the meaning only is, to keep the expression general, and not determine whether He or SIe or several, be meant. They whom I shall employ in this business, will do it well, You may depend upon it:“ a person who said this might employ one man, or one woman; as well as several. — We affirm concerning anything in the plural when we are speaking of it as being some species, or class. —Your Voltaires are dangerous people. —F#orbes® says, Patres aliquando, de uno Sacramento lo- quentes, utuntur vocabulo numer! pluralis.” And in the Epistle to the Hebrews we find something which seems to be of the same nature *; * subdued […] predicated of a few parti- cular men; Gedeon, Barach, &c. every one of whom did not perform a the exploits there mentioned; though they were performed by the persons named,

Me cannot well say more in the way of Ex- planation without incroaching on some of the sub- {sequent Articles.

ix. Our Proof must be directed solely against the ue Popish sacraments which we reject; all the rest belongs to other places. In disputing whether different things can be called by the same name, we are apt to run into trifling propositions, by using that name in different senses; but here we

| seem

! Archbishop Usher keeps this mode of expression in his Irish

Articles. * Forbes,g. 5. 6. ® Heb. xi. 33.

240 BOOK 1V. IX,

seem secure from that snare; for the Romish Church defines a Sacrament much as ours does; and without that, it would be enough if we proved, that the Romish five, are not sacraments 1 in the same sense with Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

In the Trent“ Catechism a sacrament is defined, « a thing subject to sense which, by God’s appoint- ment, has vertue both to /fjzxnifie and to work holi- ness and righteousness. * God’s appointment” cannot signity the course of nature or providence, for all Sacraments are held by the Romanists” to be appointed by Christ. In this definition there are four parts corresponding to the four parts of ours.—1. An external part.—2. An appointment of Christ.— 3. A signifying, or sign, or pledge.— 4. An invisible efficacy. This settled, we may briefly remark on the Romish five.

Confirmation seems sufficiently authorized as an holy ceremony, but it has no external rite ap- pe by Christ. Imposition of hands is not peculiar to it, and Chrism is of human invention.

Penance, or penitence, public or private, 1s an important thing; but it has no tolerable preten- sions to 0 of Christ as a visible cere- mony. The confession mentioned James v. 16. is, in some way, mutual. And the effects of Popish penance may be expected to prove such as are de- tcribed, Ezek. xiii. 10.

Ordination, or Orders, 1s very well authorized; but Chri/t never ordained with any visible sign, nor ever instituted any for his Apostles : they used im- position of hands, but not for ordaining only.

Matrimony was not instituted by Christ, in any sense ; he confirmed it as a contract, but not even as a sacred contract: nor did he appoint any =

or

„ Page 131, or SeR. x. of Sacraments in general. Trent Sell. vii, Canon 1.

BOOK 1V. x. 241

for the execution of the contract. And it is one in which the Supreme Being is no Party. As to Eph. v. 32. — the marriage of Christ and his Church is certainly a my/tery, wv5ngwo, which in Latin is rendered sacramentum; but the meaning only is, that Christ is not /iterally married to his Church, but only metaphorically, or mystically.— This is only an argument in one language; translate it, and it vanishes into nothing.

Extreme unction, if enjoined at all, was enjoined not by Christ, but after his Death. — Mark vi. 13. relates cures merely of a bodily sort ; and even in bodily cures oil was not always used by Christ. — James v. 14, &c. seems to me to mean nothing beyond the compass of ordinary practical piety and benevolence; as I will endeavour to shew more at large.

Our Homily* on Common Prayer and Sacra- ments shews these five to be no Sacraments in about one page.

How different are they from those two which we retain | instituted for the most important situ- ations; for a change of lite on entrance into the Christian covenant ; for a prospe& of eternal hap- piness, to be attained by the Christian sacrifice : confined to no rank or order of Christians ; in- stituted, both as to their external rites and their influence on the heart, with a plainness wholly in- controvertible*!

x. As the Romish Sacrament of Extreme Unction is founded on one single passage of Scrip- ture, James v. 14, 15. I think ourend will be best answered if I give you my idea of that passage.

I tound 4 Page 276, 277, octavo. r St. Paul seems to me to make quite a separate class of Ordi- nances, of our two Sacraments, in 1 Cor. xii.: 3. Sce Locke’s Paraphrase.— The Rhemists take no notice of it.

VOL. Iv. *

n

. xp *

”>

• CY -

242 BOOK Iv. ART. xxv. SECT. x.

J found I had not a satisfactory notion of it, and therefore I set myself to consider it without con- sulting commentators. It appeared to me to have the following meaning.—* I] am giving you (St, James is supposed to speak, or write) miscellane- ous moral and religious directions, as is usual at the close of an Epistle; let me direct what is to be done in cases of fiekness : Is any one indisposed amongst you? he will of course take all Auman“ means of recovery : that need not be advised; but let him not neglect religion: ficknels is favourable to piety, and should always be considered, though with due modesty and diffidence, as the vi/tation ot God. And it is He who must give a Zlessing to the best judged medicine, before it can be effectual. (Pialm cxxvii.) Let then the sick man act as is most likely to promote piety in himself, and to draw down the blessing of Almighty God upon his endeavours. Man was not made to be alone; as little 1n sickness, and as little in Religion, as in any thing elle; let the fick man then invite some grave elderly Christians, amongst whom will naturally be some of sacred characters; and let them form a little domestic religious society. As a society cannot proceed without some ceremony; let fome one of theie respectable persons, as by commission from them all, make some application of something usually esteemed mild and lenient, to the Body of the indisposed: this is to be done religiously, or „ in the name of the Lord:” and the ceremony

will dispose the company properly for what is the

principal thing, domestic prayer, and Iutercession.— * O how amiable” must such devotion be! how improving to the minds of al!! how likely to draw

| down

• See in Sparrow’s Rationale, page zoo, a decree, that

Physicians shall direct their patients to send for Divines. The. same in Wheatly, | h

BOOK IV. ART XXV. SECT. x. 243

down the blessing of the Lord!” Surely he will hear the prayers of his faithful servants; surely there is ground for confidence, that he will raise up the dejected!—and as our Lord joined forgiveness of sins with bodily healing, the whole of one of his blessed cures will be accomplished ! Perhaps the indisposed may be troubled in mind ; O, let mutual confidence, in all such cases, open the heart, to so venerable a fraternity | that must needs give new strength to intercession. Think not that I direct you thus without reason and example; I have just now mentioned the “ patience of ob;” let me, in like manner, suggest to you the successful Inter- cessions of Elijah.”

As this interpretation is not the same with that given by Commentators, they generally taking St. James’s unction either for a sacrament, or for an exercise of the miraculous gift* of healing, it may be proper to offer some reasons for my own opinion.

1. The word afev# does not seem to denote any grievous or dangerous sicknels ; nothing which could give occasion to the name of extreme unction, or re- quire the help of a miracle: the sick man is supposed well enough to invite the Elders.

2. It seemed to me, that Elders might mean elderly Christians, whether in orders or not: the Apostles ordain Elders; but that does not seem to prove that elderly Laymen, or elderly men as such, were never called weeoEurign.—In Fulke’s answer to the Rhemists on James v. I since find, that Bede, rendered werobvreger, *f the elder fort :” and [ find other remarks in support of the interpre- tation,—Dr, Powell says?, that it is not known exactly, * 1 Cor. xii. 9. 28. 30. |

Lex. Steph. quotes Cyrop. Lib. 8. * A.D. 701; Lardner, Page 364. Thesis,

Q_2

244 BOOK iv. x.

exactly, what was the nature of the Presbyters in the Apostolic age.

3. The use of Oil seems to prove nothing, as to any cure being miraculous : it is used Mark vi. 13, in miraculous cures; but it was only as the clay and -spiztle which Christ used in curing the blind. Sometimes imposition of hands was used, and sometimes all externals were omitted. Oil may be used in any emblematical ceremony, as well as imposition of hands in Ordination; it was fo used in early times of the Christian Church, as we saw under Confirmation.

4. It is not the Oil, but the Prayer which is said to save (owgew) him who labours under infir- mity. (xapvorre.) |

5. The expression * all fave the sick,“ looks at first as if a miraculors cure was meant; but © Mall fave,” cannot be taken literally; because somethin is spoken of which is to be done to al! sick Chil tians, and if fall save,” was to be taken lite- rally, or the cure was miraculous, none would die. — Why, in that case, should the example of Elias be brought as an argument, or as a persuasive? Besides, 1s prayer never unsuccessful? the instance could only prove that prayer may save.

6. The Lord’s raising up the fick man, implies nothing miraculous ; in the language of Piety, the Lord raises up every one who recovers.

7. As to forgiveness of sin, it is in so many places joined with healing, some of which have nothing* miraculous in them, that J look upon it

as

2 Sect. 111.

• See Psalm ciii. 3. with Bishop Lowth’s note on Isaiah xxxiii 24. and lui. 4.,—See also Matt. ix. 5. (with proverb in Whitby’s note) and its parallels, Mark ii. 9. — Luke v. 23. — Matt. viii. 17,— Hammond cites more texts, and mentions the case of Hezekiah.— In the Old Italic version bn: is even tran/lated ut remittatur vobis. (Michaelis, Introd. Let. _

ects

BOOK iv. ART. XXV., SECT. x. 245 as a kind of Jewish phrase to express a cre, — Under the tenth and seventeenth Articles we men- tioned, that. the phraseology of the Jews refers all sorts of events to God. And on a footing of natu- ral religion we may say, that all evil is punishment ; though God may in this life punish men collec» tively : sufferings may fall upon mankind for the faults or negligence of mankind, Were it easily ad- mitted that all evil is punishment, it must follow, that the removal of evil, is forgiveness.

8. In order to have the example of Elias, we must see that the fifteenth and sixteenth verses are on the same subje&t. This appears sufficiently from the word fre: but in two? good MSS. the word wv shews allo a connexion.—eAAnaus, and vreg an, may mean, in turns; that is, when any one is sick, let him open his mind, and let his pious friends intercede for him. If this was made a custom, each Christian, (in case of recovery) would be sometimes the visited, sometimes the comforter and intercessor. First it is said, if any one is sick, the Elders should, if invited, pray by him. The inference is more extensive; open len Foun hearts to one another, when by turns you abour under sickness; and pray mutually for sick neighbours.” wo

All these remarks occur in reading the passage itself; others arise from some extraneous eircum- stances. c | .

1. There is no probability, that a custom of miraculous healing, or a sacrament of perpetual obligation, should be instituted at the ann, Sect. 62.) Our church, in the Office for the Visitation of the

Sick, speaks of sickness as certainly God’s visitation; and as mY may be sent to correct and amend what is offensive to

First New Coll. and first Steph. Q 3

246 BOOK Iv. x.

of an Epistle, in the midst of moral directions, with every thing ordinary and natural, with nothing similar before or after it. I should imagine, there might not be found an instance of anything but moral directions at the close of an Epistle. Nor can we conceive, that anything supernatural could be instituted in so few words, without any mention having been made of 1t by Christ; or by St. Paul when treating of miraculous gifts. Had Baprism and the Lord’s Supper been founded on only one text each, I should think they rested on weak foundations.

2. Those who have attended to the conduct of St. James, will not think it like his usual pro dence to institute supernatural observances in the flight and sudden manner here supposed. I] refer chiefly to what is called the Council“ of Jerusa- lem. —Adcts xv. 13.

3. The ceremony supposed in my interpretation, does not seem an unlikely one to take place, nor contrary to the customs of early Christians. Their throwing a/ies on the head of a Christian on Ash-

Wednesday, was of a similar nature“.

4. We must not be understood to say, that no Elder, when St. James wrote, had that Gift ff healing, which is repeatedly mentioned by St. Paul. In the cafe before us, wbatever might be the efficacy of the religious act, it should be ascribed to prayer.

5. Without determining the nature of St. James’s injunction, we might inquire, how far it admitted of change in after times. — lt seems as if the Oil, on any supposition, must be change- able; for miraculous cures were not always per- formed with Oil; and in mere ceremonies, oil was

accidental,

c Art. xxl. Se. 1. See also Art. v1. Sect. xxiv. 4 Bishop Bramhall, cited by Puller, page 275.

BOOK Iv. 247

accidental, depending upon local customs or the

reduce of the earth. Oil seems to have been an established*, mild remedy in surgery; as appears from the application of it by the good Samaritan ; and therefore any other established mild remedy might be* substituted for it. Nor does the opinion, that St. James’s unction was miraculous, make much difference; since a natural practice of an ordinary sort, has been shewn, in several instancess, to follow a similar extraordinary supernatural one, without interruption.

xi. Such is our direct proof; if we aimed at any indirect, we might answer the weak objection of Anthony Randall, that Sacrament is not a“ scrip- tural term: it is in the Latin, and in the Latin only; it could not be in the original. But it is not necessary that when Scripture institutes a ing, it should also give it an authentic name; and yet when Christians have occasion to speak frequently of that thing, they must give it some name, as they do to other things: and they are most strongly induced to do so when there ate several observances which want a common name.

The word pu5neov is more confined in its mean- ing than Sacramentum. Every emblematical action has an outward meaning and an inward one ; Sacramentum includes both; but wv5ngio expresies only the inward meaning.— Hence Sacramentum is not a good translation of pvyngor; more espe- cially as Aug n never, in Scripture, is used about

external

• What say Hippocrates and Galen, of Oil?

The Oil would be called a Tradition, in Art. xxxiv. ? In Ordination, Art, xX111, Set. xxv. in Confirmation, Sect. 111. of this Article. The Quakers think this argument worth adopting : see Bar- _ Clay’s Apology, Prop. 12. sect. 2. beginning. : Limborch, 5. 66. 10. For mysteries in the Church, see Bing-

ham, Index, mentioned beginning of Sect. 11. of this Article.

248 BOOK iv. ART, xxv. SECT. XII,

external rites. The Church got to call several things mysteries, |

X11. In the way of Application much need not be said. 2

If Dr. Dupin would not give up the five as Sacra- ments, would he (or his successors) agree to make two classes of Sacraments; and let us use Sacra- mentum for any sacred emblematical act, as the ancient Fathers did, without determining whether it was of divine or human appointment? — the Romanists themselves make a difference between their Sacraments in point of rank. — Still extreme unction would remain unsettled. Might we adopt some ceremony, in the visitation of the sick, ana- logous to that mentioned by St. James, according to the idea of it here given“?

For my own part, I know not whether such an alteration would not seem to me an Improve- ment. A fomentation, or something of that fort, might be substituted for unction: some tasks, penances, exercises, might be imposed in case of recovery, after the manner of the ancient cli- nic! absolution; any good resolutions recorded in the presence of respectable witnesses“, would be the more likely to be kept on that ac- count. Surely a meeting of pious, discreet, el- derly neighbours, some clergy amongst them, forming a domestic religious assembly, praying together, under due regulation, in the house of a sick man, if it became generally customary, and was held at different houses interchangeably, might be the means of promoting mutual bene-

| volence;

k Sect. x. beginning and end.

i Wheatly, page 468.

m Wheatly seems to favour the idea of Witnesses, page

BOOK Iv. ART, XXV. SECT. xiI. 249

volence; and might in time produce a great increase of Piety and Virtue®.

» For the reasons mentioned in former instances, I again mention, that those who took notes during the Lectures, will not find every thing in their notes, which they find here. Want of time obliged me to omit the tenth Section entirely, and the greatest part of the eleventh,

Notes

• See Rogers on the Art. he refers to no part of Theodoret’s works. Euchitæ (Evyxira:) occur Hæret Fab. Lib. 4. cap. 11. — They were sometimes called Messaliani, M:o0 aMiav0, and sometimes Erfgo;u50: they said, that Baptism was no more useful than a Razor; it cut off fin, but did not extirpate it; Sin you again; so they were for Prayer: I see P pool the
• Cave Hist, Lit, Tom. 2. page 233.