« PoprzedniaDalej »
has hardly attained to attrition, to the gallows as to a martyr's crown ; we are bound not to refuse the Roman clergy the power of offering such explanations of the Tridentine decrees, as may vindicate them from countenancing the opposite, and no less fatal error, which is reported not to be without advocates among them. Let it be observed that the doctrine of works of supererogation forms no part of the authorized doctrines of the Church of Rome, and that from first to last forgiveness of sins is stated to be gratuitous by the divine mercy for the sake of Christ.
Page 208.-(Good works.) The following are some of the passages of the New Testament which treat of good works, and of the light in which they are viewed by God Himself.
“Come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, for I was an hungered and ye gave me meat. Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” Matt. xxv. 34.
“He that hath, to him shall be given." Mark iv. 25.
" Whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily, I say unto you, he shall in nowise lose his reward.” Matt. x. 42.
“ He that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.” Matt. x. 39.
“ Thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." Matt. vi. 4, 6, 18.
“There is no man who hath left house or brethren for my sake and the Gospel's, but he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, and in the world to come eternal life." Mark x. 29, 30.
“Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds. Well, thou good servant, because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities :" or, “Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.” Luke xix. 16, 17. Matt. xxv. 23.
“ They that shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world." Luke xx. 35.
“ Who will render to every man according to his deeds, to them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life.” Rom. ii. 6, 7.
“Let us not be weary of well-doing, for in due season we shall reap if we faint not.” Galat. vi. 9.
“He which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.” 2 Cor. ix. 6.
“ If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.” 1 Cor. iii. 14.
“ This is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.” 1 Peter ii. 19.
“ Whatsoever we ask we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.” 1 John iv. 22.
"Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life.” Rev. xxii. 14.
“ The Scripture cannot be broken." The simple question is, whether the expressions in the Tridentine decrees concerning justification, which are considered most objectionable, do, when fairly weighed and taken with the context, amount to more than these and other texts will warrant. Surely the difference between the "thankworthy" of St. Peter, and the “deservings" of these decrees, is not so great that they should be condemned as Anti-christian for using the latter term instead of the former. It seems to me that they who take most offence at these decrees, forget that the council is not defining the light in which men are to regard their own good works or endeavours to serve God, as though they were cause for boasting or glory, but merely abstractedly, the manner in which the Scriptures speak of them, the light in which God, of His great mercy for His Son's sake, is pleased to view them, when wrought in Christ. At the same time, I will freely own, that I wish the expressions had not been used.
OF THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL.
Page 213, Canon 1.
If the Church of Rome had forborne to define a sacrament, and had left the term as vague and open as it appears to have been in the early Church, no just exception could have been taken to her applying it, in a loose sense, to any and every religious ceremony. But since she has thought fit to define it, as a visible form of invisible grace, ordained of Christ, she stands selfcondemned of schism unless she can prove the truth of that which she has affirmed under anathema, namely, that all the seven rites to which she has given this title answer to her definition of it. It will be shewn in the proper places, that she is, confessedly, unable to do this in respect to the five additional ones. The following extract from Gregory the Great, Bishop of Rome, will show how many sacraments he received. It will be found in the canon law. Decr. ii. pars, c. 1. q. 1. $ 84. Sunt autem sacramenta, baptisma, chrisma, corpus et sanguis Christi, quæ ob id sacramenta dicuntur, quia sub tegumento corporalium rerum virtus Divina secretius salutem eorundem sacramentorum operatur.” Again, “Hoc de corpore et sanguine Domini nostri Jesu Christi, hoc etiam de baptismate et chrismate sentiendum est.” Here are only two sacraments recognized, washing and anointing being as much included under one, as the body and blood are under the other ; confirmation or chrism being no more a sacrament distinct from baptism, than the cup is a sacrament distinct from the bread.
Page 217, Canon 12. This is a monstrous and fearful assertion, which supposes it to be in the power of every inalicious or sceptical priest to deprive
the holiest of God's worshippers of the grace which is sought in the sacraments. There is mention of this notion in Pope Eugenius's letter to the Armenians at the Council of Florence, but this was the first time that a reputed General Council sanctioned it. But the Church of Rome is not content with placing all receivers of sacraments at the mercy of the priest's intention ; and when we know how many avowed infidels there have been found in the ranks of her priesthood, this alone (according to her own theory) opens a fearful door to doubt and hesitation, affecting the validity of the ordinations and administrations within her pale since the Council of Trent; but in the sacrament of the holy Eucharist she has placed the communicants at the mercy of the baker's and vintner's intention, and any malevolent tradesman who supplies the wine and wafers to be used in the Lord's Supper, has it in his power, according to their rubrics, to deprive the communicants of the grace of the sacrament. For, “Si panis non sit triticeus, vel si triticeus, admixtus sit granis alterius generis in tanta quantitate, ut non maneat panis triticeus, vel sit alioqui corruptus : non conficitur sacramentum.” “Si sit confectus de aqua rosacea, vel alterius distillationis, dubium est an conficiatur.” “Si vinum sit factum penitus acetum, vel penitus putridum, vel de uvis acerbis seu non maturis expressum ; vel admixtum tantum aquæ ut vinum sit corruptum, non conficitur sacramentum."---Rubricæ Generales. Lugd. 1827.
Page 219, CANON 4. This is directly in opposition to the decision of the Greek Church, which, in the second canon of the Trullan Council, confirmed St. Cyprian's opinion ; as was observed in the notes to the 4th canon of the 4th Lateran. See above, p. 348.
Page 223, Canon 1.
Two things are wanting to render confirmation a sacrament according to the Roman (which is the same as the English) exposition of one. 1. It cannot be proved to be an ordinance of Christ's institution. 2. It has no visible sign. As to the first, in point of fact, it is admitted by the Roman bishops themselves. In the late Bishop Doyle's Abridgment of Christian Doctrine, Dublin, 1828, in the exposition of confirmation, the question is asked, “When did Christ ordain this sacrament? A. The time is not certain ; but divines most probably hold, it was instituted at Christ's last supper, or between his resurrection and ascension.” But, as if it were not enough to affirm, on pain of anathema, the fact of an institution which they are confessedly unable to prove, the Catechismus ad Parochos, makes it a lie with a circumstance, in order to gain it more credit. “A pastoribus explicandum est Christum Dominum non solum ejus auctorem fuisse ; sed, sancto Fabiano Pontifice teste, chrismatis ritum et verba, quibus in ejus administratione Catholica Ecclesia utitur, præcepisse.” And because this barefaced accumulation of unwarranted statements might stagger the simple priests, who would be at their wit's end to make good their assertion, the Catechism suggests how this may be done ; “ Quod quidem iis facilè probari poterit, qui confirmationem sacramentum esse confitentur: cum sacra omnia mysteria humanæ naturæ vires superent, nec ab alio quam a Deo possint institui." (De Confirmat. Sacram. $ 5. Lugd. 1676, p. 166.) Ordinary mortals would have said, the institution proves the sacrament : no, says the Roman Catechism, the sacrament, (which we assume) proves its own institution, which was the point in dispute. As to the second point, the visible sign, which