power, and the avarice of the Popes, had introduced and kept up. In the Catholic church, the old doctrine of penance, was minutely explained, by the Council of Trent, and the departures from it laid under anathema. Among the Catholics, there was afterwards controversy, respecting the nature of penance, and of attritio and contritio. In the Lutheran church, the question was brought up, and decided in the Formula of Concord, whether penance was a legal transaction, or also an evangelical one. The United Brethren retained the chief features of the Protestant theology, respecting penance, and the whole dispensation of divine grace; yet they annexed some peculiarities of their own. The more recent Protestant divines have endeavored, to examine more accurately the sources of repentance, or of a change of mind ; and the characteristics of that sorrow for sin, which is connected with it; and they have also greatly lowered down, those high views of the power of the keys.

Notices. Petri Molinaei, De poenitentia et clavibus, Liber; Sedan 1652. 8vo.-Jo. Musaei, Tractatus theologicus de conversione hominis peccatoris ad Deum; Jenae 1661. 4to.-Jo. Launoii, Liber de inente concilii Tridentini circa contritionem et attritionem in sacramento poenitentiae; Paris 1653. 8vo. --J. F. Cotta, Ecclesiae Romanae de attritione et contritione contentio, ex historia dogmatum delineata; Gotting. 1739. 4to. and, in Gerhardi Locis Theolog. T. VI.-Penance and faith; (German,) in J. G. Toellner's Theolog. Inquiries. vol. I. P. II.

SEC. 198. The sacraments.

After the year 1519, Luther directed his attention to reforming the doctrine of the sacraments; and he would allow nothing to be a sacrament, to which there was not an express promise annexed, for faith to rest upon. In the subsequent years, he declared himself more fully on this subject. He contested the idea, that the administration of the sacraments, in itself, and without the exercise of faith, produced salutary effects; and he rejected

the sacraments of Confirmation, Marriage, priestly Orders, and extreme Unction. In regard to marriage, in particular, he censured the numerous impediments to it, introduced by the church; and also the prohibition of marriage to priests. Afterwards, the Protestants admitted but two sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper; while the Council of Trent established the seven sacraments. The Catholic doctrine concerning the power of the sacraments, ex opere operato, was explained by the Protestants, in a worse sense, than the Catholic church understood it. In the sacraments, the Lutheran divines discovered the medium by which grace operates; the Reformed, the sign and pledge of grace; and the Socinians, an external rite, by which a man professed himself a member of the christian church; and here the modern theologians of Germany follow the Socinians. Concerning the sacraments of the Old Testament, various investigations were occasionally made, and especially by the Cocceian school. The Mystics and Fanatics attributed little or no value to the sacraments.

Notices. Martini Lutheri, Liber de captivitate Babylonica; Wittenb. 1520.--Aegid. Hunnius, De sacramentis Vet. et Novi Test. praecipue de baptismo et coena Domini; Francf. 1595. 8vo.-Jo. Maldonatus, De septem sacra.. mentis ecclesiae Romanae; Ludg. 1614. 4to.-J. Dav. Heilmanni, Diss. finiendae justae sacramenti notioni; in his Opusc. Tom. I. p. 4.

SEC. 199. Baptism.

Luther was of opinion, that the doctrine concerning Baptism, had been preserved in the church, more free from corruption, than those of the other sacraments; and he censured, only the limitation of its efficacy, by the many satisfactions devised for sins after baptism; and that its efficacy should be ascribed to the external act, and not be placed solely in faith on the divine promises. After the commencement of the reformation, the Protestants had occasion, to evince the correctness of infant

baptism, against the Baptists, who spread themselves in several countries. The Socinians would not discard infant baptism; yet they denied its Apostolic origin; and they doubted, whether baptism was required of all christians. The Quakers rejected water-baptism, altogether; on the ground, that Christ instituted only spiritual baptism. Between the Lutherans and the Reformed, various points were debated; relative to the efficacy of baptism,— whether it imparted regeneration and forgiveness of sin, or only exhibited and assured us of them;-also relative to the necessity of baptism, and the state of unbaptized infants; and likewise, the faith of children, and the exorcism, which was long retained in the Lutheran church. -Of late, many Lutheran divines have either given up the decisions of their forefathers, or interpreted them in a milder manner. The theologians of both confessions, have begun to limit themselves, by holding, that infant baptism is not clearly founded in the New Testament, yet, that it is not inconsistent with the christian religion; and some have uttered the opinion, that baptism is no institution of Christ; or at least, that it was intended, only for the Jews and Pagans of former times, who embraced christianity.

Notices. In addition to the works mentioned sec. 99 and 100: see Gerh. J. Vossius, Dissertatt. xx. de Baptismo; in his Opp. T. VI.-Fausti Socini, Disp. de Baptismo aquae; Racov. 1613. and in his Opp. T. I. p. 707.Antonii van Dule, Historia baptismorum, cum Judaicorum tum Christianorum: annexed to his Diss. super Aristea de LXX. interpretibus; Amst. 1705.-Christian Baptism an estimable rite, but no divine institution; (in German-by Reiche,) Berl. 1774. 8vo.-Joh. El. Troschel, The water-baptism of Christians, an institution of Christ, and not an arbitrary rite; (in German,) Berl. 1774. 8vo.--On baptism; a candid investigation, occasioned by the progress of the age; (in German,) Lips. 1802. 8vo.-C. F. Eisenlohr, Historical observations on Baptism (in German,) Tub. 1804. 8vo.-Reiche, De baptismi origine et necessitate; Gotting. 1816.

SEC. 200. Common doctrine of the Protestant churches, respecting the Lord's Supper.

The reformers declared, with one voice, that it was precisely in the doctrine of the Eucharist, that the greatest and most corrupt falsification had been introduced; and from which, that institution must be purged. Hence, they contested the doctrine of transubstantiation, as unscriptural, and unknown to christian antiquity; and they rejected all the consequences derived from it, especially the adoration of the elements. They looked, with abhorrence, on the Mass, the private Masses, and the Masses for the dead; considered as religious consecrations. They introduced the use of the vernacular languages, in the celebration of the Eucharist; and they discarded, some more, and some fewer of the ceremonies, which before accompanied it. They moreover, declared it an unsufferable abuse, that the cup should be withheld from the laity; contrary to the ordinance of Christ, and the usage of the whole ancient church.. On the other hand, the Council of Trent established the old doctrines; and condemned the dissenting views of the Protestants. They asserted, that the church has a right, according as it shall see fit, to concede or to deny, the use of the cup to the laity; maintained, that it is not necessary, for children, to partake of the communion; and disapproved and forbid some abuses, which had crept into the Mass. On all these points, the contest between the theologians of the two coinmunities, was carried on with the greatest bit'terness; and with arguments which they derived from the Bible, from history, and from philosophy.

Notices. Philippi Mornaei, de sacra Eucharistia, Libri IV; Francf. et Hanov. 1605. Fol.-Claud. Espencaei, dé Eucharistia et ejus adoratione, Libri V; Paris 1573. 8vo.

-Jac. Dav. du Perron, Traité du saint sacrament de l'eucharistie; Paris 1622.--Jo. la Placette, Traité de l'autorité des sens contre la transubstantiation; Amst. 1700.--See also the polemic works, mentioned sec. 102, and 142,

SEC. 201. Dissension among Protestants, during Luther's life.

While Luther rejected the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, he believed, that the real presence of the body and blood of Christ, in the eucharist, was not to be given up. As he was assailed on this point, by Andreas Carlstadt; so Zwingle also found occasion, first in a private letter, and then in his Commentarius de vera et falsa religione, to state his views; which were, that the bread and wine are symbols of Christ's body. John Oecolampadius coincided with him, except in one unimportant particular; and became involved in controversy, on the subject, with some Suabian preachers. Soon after, Luther and Zwingle, themselves got into controversy; which was waged with considerable warmth, and which involved an enquiry into the omnipresence of Christ's body. The Landgrave Philip of Hesse, in vain, attempted to effect a union of the two reformers, by means of the Conference of Marpurg A. D. 1529. In the Augsburg Confession, the real presence of the body of Christ, was asserted; dissent was disapproved; and the cities of upper Germany, which believed with Zwingle, were excluded from subscribing. Yet, at length, the Wittenberg Concord, of 1536, was concluded, between the theologians of upper Germany and those of Saxony; and so much was effected, that the sacramental contest was, for a long time, at rest. It was indeed renewed by Luther, not long before his death; but the other Lutheran divines took no part in it. During the controversy between the Swiss and the Saxon reformers, John Caspar Schwenckfeld of Ossingk, deviated from the tenets of the latter.

Notices. Andr. Carlstadt, Exposition of the words of Christ: This is my body; (in German.) Basil 1525. 4to.—Luther, Against the heavenly Prophets; (in German,) 1525. 410.-Zwinglii, Ep. ad Matth. Alberum; 1524.-Ejusd. Commentarius de vera et falsa religione; Tiguri 1525.Ejusd. Subsidium de Eucharistia; 1525.-Jo. Oecolampadii, De genuina verborum Domini, Hoc est corpus me