equivalent for the sins of men, though he admitted, that God accepted them as equivalent.

SEC. 136. Of faith and good works.

Faith and good works were generally considered, as the means of obtaining a participation in divine blessings. John Damascenus discriminates two kinds of faith, the reception of the christian doctrines, and a firm reliance on the promises of God; of which, the former depends on ourselves, and the latter is the gift of God. The Scholastics adopted the ideas of Augustine. They understood by faith, approbation given to the divine doctrines; considered it as a gift of God; and brought forward many divisions of it (Fides quae et quá creditur, informis et formata, explicita, implicita). Value was ascribed to faith, only when connected with love and hope, and followed by good works; nay, it was itself regarded as the first of virtues. Good works originate, partly from grace, and partly from free-will, when it is made sound by grace and such works are meritorious. Lombard pronounced all works, done without faith, to be bad. The hypothesis, formed in the preceding period, respecting works of supererogation, was held and enlarged in this. Thomas describes unbelief, as the greatest of all sins and he held it to be right, to compel heretics and apostates, though not also Jews and Pagans, to believe. In treating on these subjects, the Scholastic doctors interwove extensively, statements in moral or practical theology.

SEC. 137. Adoration of saints and of Mary.

Praying to the saints, had become customary, in the preceding period; and the mother of God, was looked upon as the queen of heaven; yet it was deemed necessary, to guard against the danger and the reproach of idolatry. Hence, the distinction of worship, among the Greeks, into λατρεία and προσκύνησις, Mansi, XII. 377. Theodorus Stud. Opp. p. 521,) and among the Latins, into latria, dulia, and hyperdulia (Lombard III. 9. Thom. P. III.

qu. 25). The worship of images, which commenced at an earlier period, produced in the eighth century, most violent contests. It was zealously defended by John Damascenus; forbidden by a Council, A. D. 754; again established by another, at Nice (A. D. 787); disapproved by Charlemagne, and the French Bishops; yet taken under protection by the Romish Popes; and at last, it became fully established in the Greek and Romish churches. Religious veneration was also paid to the cross, and to relics; and Thomas assigns to the former even latria.

Notice. Jo. Dallaei adversus Latinorum de cultus religiosi objecto traditionem disputatio; Genev. 1665. 4to. Nat. Alexandri Hist. Eccles. N. T. Secul. V. Diss. XXV.

.

SEC. 138. The Sacraments in general.

The definitions given of the sacraments, were diverse and ambiguous. Among the Greeks, John Damascenus makes mention of only baptism and the Lord's supper; and Theodorus Studita, after the example of the pseudoDionysius Areopagita, enumerates six sacraments. The Latins took Augustine's idea for their first principle: Sacramentum est signum rei sacrae, s. invisibilis gratiae visibilis forma (a sacrament is a sign of a holy thing, or, the visible form of invisible grace). Yet respecting the number of the sacraments, they were not agreed. Rabanus Maurus, and Paschasius Radbert, name four of them; St. Bernard adds the washing of feet; Hugo of St. Victor, includes among them holy water, and the consecration of clocks, &c. Peter Damian, (Opp. T. II. p. 167–169,) even makes twelve sacraments of the church. Otto Bishop of Bamberg, was the first that, A. D. 1124, enumerated seven sacraments; baptism, confirmation, anointing the sick, the Lord's supper, penance, marriage, and ordination; and through the influence of Peter Lombard, and of Gratian, who introduced the same sentiments into his Decretum, the admission of this number became general among the doctors, and received the approbation of Pope Eugene IV.

at the Council of Florence, A. D. 1439. (Mansi Concil. T. XXXI. p. 1054.) Various reasons likewise were assigned, why just this number of sacraments should be admitted and yet it should be noticed, that equal sanctity, and equal importance, were, by no means, attributed to all the sacraments. According to Thomas Aquinas, who is the most full on the nature of them, a sacrament is an institution, in which God, by visible signs, imparts his invisible grace, and applies the effects of Christ's merits to men. For, although God is not confined to the use of such means, yet it is necessary for men, to be recovered by means of sensible objects, since it was by such objects they were led to the apostacy. Sacraments were not necessary, in the state of innocence, but only since the fall of man. All the sacraments of the New Testament, were instituted by Christ, as God; and they derive their efficacy from the sufferings of Christ: they produce the graces, which the sacraments of the Old Testament only prefigured. The efficacy of a sacrament, does not depend on the faith and the uprightness of the clergymen, who administer it; and yet it is necessary, that he should have the intention of administering that sacrament. From some of the positions of Thomas, other doctors departed. Alexander Hales believed, that only two sacraments were instituted by Christ himself, the others being introduced by his ministers; and in particular, that the sacrament of confirmation, was not instituted by either Christ or the apostles, but by the Council of Meaux. Hugo of St. Victor, Scotus, and Occam, differed from Thomas, in their explanation of the sacraments. The Thomists also contended with the Scotists, whether the gracious operative power (virtus instrumentalis et effectiva) were in the sacraments themselves, by divine establishment; or whether it rested on the promise of God, that he would impart his grace, so often as a sacrament was administered. The opinion of Thomas, that the sacraments of the Old Testament, only prefigured grace, but did not impart it, was rejected by John

Bonaventura and Scotus; and previously, Beda had taught the contrary; but it was established, by Eugene IV, at the Council of Florence, A.D. 1439. (Mansi Concil. XXXI. p. 1054.) The Scholastics, moreover, believed in a two-fold operation of the sacraments, ex opere operantis, et ex opere operato. The dissenting parties from the general church, that arose during this period, either attached little value to the sacraments, as the Brethren of the free Spirit; or they rejected some of them, or at least, the views the church entertained of them, as the Waldensians, the Wicklifiites and the Hussites.

SEC. 139. Of Baptism.

The doctrine of baptism, was perfected by St. Thomas, according to the principles of Peter Lombard. The effect of baptism is (justificatio) justification. A person obtains, by baptism, forgiveness of the debt of sin, and sanctification. An infant receives remission of the guilt of hereditary sin; the adult, forgiveness not only of hereditary sin, but also of his preceding actual sins. Although there was difference of opinion, whether, in baptism, only forgiveness of sin, or also the grace that sanctifies, were imparted; yet Clement V. at the Council of Vienne, A. D. 1311, declared the latter supposition most probable. (Mansi, Concil. XXV. 411.) Yet the innate evil lust, (concupiscentia,) remained, after baptism; though not as guilt or sin, but only an incentive to sin; against which a person has occasion for conflict. When a person receives merely the semblance of baptism, or baptism only in appearance, this will have no beneficial effects. Every baptism is valid, which is performed in the name of the Trinity; and, as it impresses an indelible character, it must not be repeated. When any person desires to be baptized, but is prevented, without his fault, it is as good as if he were actually baptized; and the Spirit of God sanctifies him :-so taught Lombard and Thomas and St. Bernard, in opposition to some other doctors, as e. g. Rabanus Maurus. The

right to baptize, belongs to the priests; yet in cases of necessity, it is lawful for the deacons, and even for the laity, to baptize. Baptism produces a spiritual relation; and it is to be preceded by an exorcism, and in the case of adults, by catechetical instruction. The faith which is lacking in infant baptism, is supplied by the faith of the sponsors, or of the church. Immersion in the water, was customary, until the thirteenth century; when it was exchanged by the Latins for sprinkling, though still retained by the Greeks. The church moreover, had to contend with the Cathari, and particularly the Petrobrusians, who denied the efficacy of baptism generally, and rejected infant baptism; these, it was, Moneta (adv. Cath. et Waldenses, p. 277.) undertook to confute.

Notice. Petitorium exhortatorium pro resolutione super grossis quibusdam dubietatibus-circa Sacramentumbaptissniper fratrem Wilhelmum de Stuttgardia (Guliel. Holderum); Tubing. 1594. See, New Gotting. historical Magazine (in German) by Meiners and Spittler, voll. III. p. 228-272.

SEC. 140. Of confirmation.

The Latin church gradually adopted the principle, derived from the Greek church, that the anointing of baptized persons with consecrated oil, was to be performed only by a bishop. A consequence of this was, that this transaction was separated from baptism. Lombard and Thomas declared themselves at full length, on this subject. By this unction, they supposed that, power was imparted to the spiritual life, which commenced at baptism, to increase its strength, and to contend against spiritual foes; and that the person became a partaker of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. This sacrament imparts an indelible character; and therefore must not be repeated: nor can any baptized person refuse it. And finally, there must be present at it, some witnesses, by whom the confirmed child is to be brought up. Nearly all