nion, there is no medium between the view of infidels who reject everything, and the orthodox doctrine of the Church. Every other view is of itself inconsistent; God has suffered the Protestants to fall into such an inconsistency, in order to facilitate their return to the Romish Church. The figurative interpretation, however, may be admitted in a certain sense (as implied in the real), p. 140: Nevertheless, the truth which the Eucharist contains in its internal aspect, does not prevent its being considered a sign of the external and tangible; but it is a sign of that sort which, so far from excluding the reality, necessarily implies it.

7 Concerning the views of the Jansenists comp. § 228. note 3. On the controversy respecting the Lord's Supper, between Peter Nicole and Anton Arnauld, on the one side, and Claude, a Calvinistic minister, on the other, see Schröckh vii. p. 367. Among the mystics similar opinions obtained to those of the preceding period. Thus Francis of Sales said Introd. ii. 14.: Hoc (sacramentum) religionis christianæ centrum est devotionis cor, pietatis anima, mysterium ineffabile, quodque divinæ charitatis abyssum in se comprehendit, ac per quod se Deus ipse realiter nobis applicans, gratias et dona sua nobis magnifice communicat. Comp. Bonæ tract. ascet. de sacrificio Missæ (Opp. p. 177 ss.) Fénelon, œuvres spirit. i. p. 414.

As regards the other Roman Catholic sacraments (respecting baptism see § 269.), their fundamental principles are considered by Protestant theologians in various parts of their works on systematic theology; thus, Penance is treated of in connection with the economy of redemption, though some of the earlier Lutheran divines placed it after the chapters on Baptism and the Lord's Supper (e. g., Hollaz p. 1141); the sacrament of Holy Orders, in connection with the doctrine concerning the church, that of Matrimony forms a part of ethics and the Canon Law, while some, e. g., Gerhard, still assigned to it a place in doctrinal theology doci theol. Tom. xv.); and lastly, the sacraments of Confirmation (which has nothing in common with the Protestant rite of the same name), and of Extreme Unction, are only considered in a negative aspect, viz., as sacramenta spuria, see Heidegger Loci xxv. c. 23 ss.

As regards Penance, the Roman Catholic Church retained the scholastic division into contritio (different from attritio) cordis, confessio oris and satisfactio operis, while the only distinction made by Protestants was that between contritio and fides. Comp. Concil. Trid. Sess. 14. c. 3., and in defence of the Protestant view Conf. Aug. Art. 12: Constat autem pœnitentia proprie his duabus partibus: Altera est contritio seu terrores incussi conscientiæ agnito peccato. Altera est fides quæ concipitur ex evangelio seu absolutione, et credit propter Christum remitti peccata, et consolatur conscientiam, et ex terroribus liberat. Deinde sequi debent opera bona, quæ sunt fructus pœnitentiæ. Art. Schmalk. p. 321, and the other passages quoted by Winer p. 150. Respecting confession, the two great sections

of the Protestant Church differed in this, that the earlier Lutherans attached importance to private confession, while the Calvinists were always satisfied (as a general rule) with public confession. But neither of them demanded, like Roman Catholics, a special enumeration of all sins, in consequence of which, both rejected auricular confession. It was especially Luther, in his treatise: de Captiv. Babyl. together with the authors of the articles of Schmalkald, who expressed themselves in strong terms against this confessio carnificina. Art. Schmalk. p. 323: Confessio sic instituabatur, ut homines juberentur omnia sua peccata enumerare, (quod factu impossibile est haec ingens carnificina fuit. Et si quis quorundam peccatorum oblitus esset, is eatenus absolvebatur, ut si in memoriam illa recurrerent, ea postea confiteretur, etc. As to the relation between the confessor, and the person who confesses, the Roman Catholics entertained different views from the Protestants; see Winer 1. c. and the passages quoted by him. As regards satisfactio, Protestants from the first not only rejected pilgrimages and similar observances, but also looked on prayers, fastings, and alms, in a very different light. Concerning fasting, see Winer p. 155. The nova obedientia which some would have substituted for the satisfactio operis, is, properly speaking, the same with fides (the second part of penance); nevertheless it is said in the Apol. Conf. p. 165: Si quis volet addere tertiam [partem],videlicet dignos fructus pœnitentiæ, h. e. mutationem totius vitæ ac morum in melius, non refragabimur. The Protestant theologians further distinguished between 1. Pœnitentia prima (magna); 2. Continuata (quotidiana); 3. Iterata (lapsorum); 4. Sera (quæ fit ultimis vitæ momentis.) The question whether the last kind was admissible or not, gave rise to a controversy with the Pietists. Comp. Hase, Hutterus redivivus p. 394. Concerning the sale of indulgences in the Roman Catholic Church, and the various modifications of the theory of indulgences (which had their origin in the opposition made by the Reformers) see Winer, p. 159. Respecting the other sacraments (confirmation, matrimony, extreme unction, holy orders) see ibid. p. 160 ss. The differences of opinion among Protestants and Roman Catholics, as to the validity and dissolubility of matrimony (divortium), prohibited degrees of relationship, the marriage of the clergy, the vow of chastity (in connection with monachism), resulted from differences in fundamental principles. (For the respective passages see Winer 1. c.) Comp. Klee, Dogmengeschichte vol ii.

§ 260.

THE DOCTRINE CONCERNING PURGATORY.

In connection with the doctrine of the mass and its efficacy, the Romish Church maintained the existence of a Purgatory to which the souls of all those pious persons depart who die without having made full satisfaction for their sins, and out of which they may be delivered by means of private masses and indulgences. 2 Not only the Protestants unanimously rejected this unscriptural doctrine, but also the Greek theologians,

though they admitted the notion of an intermediate state of the departed.*

1 Conc. Trid. Sess. 22. cap. 2: Non solum pro fidelium vivorum peccatis, pœnis, satisfactionibus et aliis necessitatibus, sed et pro defunctis et in Christo nondum ad plenum purgatis, rite juxta Apostolorum traditionem, offertur. Comp. c. 9. can. 3: Si quis dixerit, Missæ sacrificium......non pro defunctis offerri debere, anathema sit.

2 Ibid. Sess. 6. can. 30. but especially Sess. 25. Cat. Rom. i. 6.3: Est purgatorius ignis, quo piorum animæ ad definitum tempus cruciatæ expiantur, ut eis in æternam patriam ingressus patere possit, in quam nihil coinquinatum ingreditur. Ac de hujus quidem doctrinæ veritate, quum et scripturarum testimoniis et apostolica traditione confirmatam esse sancta concilia declarant, eo diligentius et sæpius parocho disserendum erit, quod in ea tempora incidimus, quibus homines sanam doctrinam non sustinent. Comp. Bellarmin, de amiss. grat. et statu peccati i. c. 14. p. 116. de justific. v. 4. p. 1084. Bossuet, exposit. 8. p. 72. made but slight mention of purgatory, and bestowed praise upon the Council of Trent on account of the great caution with which it expressed itself concerning this point.

3 Art. Sm. p. 307: Purgatorium et quidquid ei solennitatis, cultus et quæstus adhæret, mera diaboli larva est. Pugnat enim cum primo articulo, qui docet, Christum solum et non hominum opera animas liberare.-Conf. helv. ii. c. 26: Quod quidam tradunt de igne purgatorio, fidei christianæ: credo remissionem peccatorum et vitam æternam, purgationique plenæ per Christum et Christi sententiis adversatur. Conf. Gall. 24: Purgatorium arbitramur figmentum esse ex eadem officina profectum, unde etiam manarunt vita monastica, peregrinationes, interdicta matrimonii et usus ciborum, ceremonialis centorum dierum observatio, confessio auricularis, indulgentiæ ceteræque res omnis ejusmodi, quibus opinantur quidam, se gratiam et salutem mereri.

4 Conf. orth. p 112: Πῶς πρέπει νὰ γροικοῦμεν διὰ τὸ πᾶς τὸ καθαρτήριον; οὐδεμία γραφὴ διαλαμβάνει περὶ αὐτοῦ· νὰ εὑρίσκεται δηλαδὴ κἂν μία πρόσκαιρος κόλασις καθαρτικὴ τῶν ψυχῶν, ὕστερα ἀπὸ τὸν θάνατον. For further particulars see Winer, p. 157. 58.

310

SECOND CLASS.

DOCTRINES IN WHICH PROTESTANTS AND ROMAN CATHOLICS MORE OR LESS AGREED,

(IN OPPOSITION TO THE MINOR SECTS.)

FIRST SECTION.

THEOLOGY PROPER.

§ 261.

THE TRINITARIAN AND ANTITRINITARIAN DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE DEITY.

However much Protestants differed from Roman Catholics in other points, they were in perfect accordance as to the doctrine of the Triune Jehovah, both resting on the decisions of the ancient oecumenical councils. The views of the earlier Unitarians, as well as of the later Socinians, are directly at variance with the Trinitarian doctrine of three persons in one God; it is worthy of observation that they revived former antiTrinitarian errors. Michael Servetus adopted the notions of Sabellius, but with this difference, that (after the example of Photinus) he made a distinction between

the Son of God who has appeared in time, and the eternal Logos (Word).2 Others again bordered upon Arianism.3 Faustus Socinus returned to the (abstract) Unitarianism of the Nazarenes, or the Alogi who, acknowledging the Father only as God, regarded Christ as a mere man who was endowed with extraordinary gifts, and afterwards elevated to heaven, and the Holy Ghost as a Divine energy. The Arminians adhered, on the whole, to the orthodox doctrine, but endeavoured to hold along with it the subordination of both the Son and the Spirit.3

1 Insinuations were, nevertheless, thrown out against the reformers themselves, as if they countenanced antitrinitarian errors. Thus, Calvin was at one time charged with Arianism by Caroli; see Henry, das Leben Joh. Calvins vol. i. p. 181. It is worthy of observation, that the terms Trinity and person were avoided in the confession of Geneva (Henry p. 182.) Melancthon, too, in the first edition of his loci, pronounced the scholastic definitions respecting the nature of the Trinity foreign to Christian theology. And Luther frankly confessed (über die letzten Worte Davids, Wittenberg edit. vol. v. p. 551): “It is not to be wondered at, that when a man reads this mysterious, incomprehensible article, strange thoughts should occur to him, of which one or another is sometimes little appropriate, and gives rise to dangerous expressions. But the foundation of our faith remaining unshaken, such splinters, chips, and straws, will do us no harm. But the basis of our faith is our belief that there are three persons in one God, and every person is the one, perfect God, so that the three persons are neither confounded, nor the divine substance divided, but that the distinction of persons, and unity of nature, go together. This is the great mystery which angels will never cease to contemplate and to admire, and the beholding of which constitutes their blessedness. If they could ever see the end of it, there would also be an end of their blessedness." In accordance with this more practical than specula. tive tendency, Protestants simply appealed to the Nicene and Anathasian Creeds, which, together with the Apostles' Creed,