Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

Rituale

The matter of it is oil-olive bleffed by the Bifhop; the ART. form is the applying it to the five fenfes, with these words, XXV. Per hanc facram unctionem, et fuam piiffimam mifericordiam indulgeat tibi Deus quicquid peccafti, per vifum, auditum, Rom. Con. olfactum, gufium, et tactum. The proper word to every Trid. Seff. fenfe being repeated as the organ of that fenfe is anointed. 14. It is adminiftered by a Prieft, and gives the final pardon, with all neceflary affiftances in the laft agony. Here is then an inftitution, that, if warranted, is matter of great comfort; and if not warranted, is matter of as great prefumption. In the firft ages we find mention is made Conf. Apoft. frequently of perfons that were cured by an anointing. 3. c. 16. with oil: oil was then much used in all their rituals, the. vii. c. 42, Catechumens being anointed with oil before they were Tertul. de baptized, befides the chrifm that was given after it. Oil bapt. c. 10.. grew alfo to be ufed in ordinations, and the dead were Cypr. Ep. anointed in order to their burial: fo that the ordinary ufe Clem. Alex. of oil on other occafions brought it to be very frequently pædag. used in their facred rites; yet how cuftomary foever the. xi. c. 8. practice of anointing grew to be, we find no mention of Areop. de any unction of the fick before the beginning of the fifth Ecclef. century. This plainly fhews that they understood St. hier. c. 7, 8. James's words as relating to a miraculous power, and not

to a function that was to continue in the Church, and to be esteemed a Sacrament.

44.

70.

Dionyf.

Decent.

That earliest mention of it by Pope Innocent the First, Innocent. how much foever it is infifted on, is really an argument Ep. 1. ad that proves against it, and not for it. For not to enlarge on the many idle things that are in that Epiftle, which have made fome think that it could not be genuine, and that do very much fink the credit both of the testimony and of the man; for it feems to be well proved to be his: the paffage relating to this matter is in aniwer to a demand that was made to him by the Bishop of Eugubium, whether the fick might be anointed with the oil of the chrifm? and whether the Bishop might anoint with it? To these he answers, that no doubt is to be made but that St. James's words are to be understood of the faithful that were fick, who may be anointed by the chrifm; which may be ufed not only by the Priefts, but by all Christians, not only in their own neceffities, but in the neceflities of any of their friends: and he adds, that it was a needless doubt that was made, whether a Bishop might do it; for Prefbyters are only mentioned, because the Bishop could not go to all the fick; but certainly he who made the chrifma itself, might anoint with it. A Bishop afking these queftions of another, and the anfwers which the other

ART. gives him, do plainly fhew that this was no Sacrament XXV. practifed from the beginnings of Chriftianity; for no

Bishop could be ignorant of those. It was therefore some newly begun cuftom, in which the world was not yet fufficiently instructed. And fo it was indeed, for the fubject of these questions was not pure oil, fuch as now they make to be the matter of extreme unction; but the oil of chrifm, which was made and kept for other occafions; and it feems very clear, that the miraculous power of healing having ceased, and none being any more anointed in order to that; fome began to get a portion of the oil of chrism, which the Laity, as well as the Priests, applied both to themselves and to their friends, hoping that they might be cured by it. Nothing elfe can be meant by all this, but a fuperftitious ufing the chrifm, which might have arifen out of the memory that remained of those who had been cured by oil, as the ufe of bread in the Eucharift brought in the holy bread, that was fent from one Church to another; and as from the ufe of water in baptifm sprung the use of holy water. This then being the clear meaning of those words, it is plain that they prove quite the contrary of that for which they are brought; and though in that Epistle the Pope calls chrifm a kind of Sacrament, that turns likewife against them; to fhew that he did not think it was a Sacrament, ftrictly speaking. Befides, that the ancients used that word very largely, both for every myfterious doctrine, and for every holy rite that they used. In this very Epiftle, when he gives directions for the carrying about that bread, which they bleffed, and fent about as an emblem of their communion with other Churches; he orders them to be fent about only to the Churches within the city, because he conceived the Sacraments were not to be carried a great way off; fo these loaves are called by him not only a kind of Sacrament, but are fimply reckoned to be Sacraments.

We hear no more of anointing the fick with the chrism, among all the ancients; which fhews, that as that practice was newly begun, fo it did not fpread far, nor continue long. No mention is made of this neither in the first three ages, nor in the fourth age; though the writers, and particularly the Councils of the fourth age are very copious in rules concerning the Sacraments. Nor in all 'their penitentiary canons, when they define what fins are to be forgiven, and what not, when men were in their last extremities, is there fo much as a hint given concerning the last unction. The Conftitutions, and the pretended Dionyfius, fay not a word of it, though they are very full

upon

upon all the rituals of that time in which thofe works ART. were forged, in the fourth or fifth century. In none of XXV. the lives of the Saints before the ninth century, is there any mention made of their having extreme unction, though their deaths are fometimes very particularly related, and their receiving the Eucharift is oft mentioned. Nor was there any question made in all that time concerning the perfons, the time, and the other circumstances relating to this unction; which could not have been omitted, especially when almost all that was thought on, or writ of, in the eighth and ninth century, relates to the Sacraments, and the other rituals of the Church.

gor. Menar

It is true, from the feventh century on to the twelfth, Lib. Sathey began to use an anointing of the fick, according to cram. Grethat mentioned by Pope Innocent, and a peculiar office di Notæ. was made for it; but the prayers that were used in it, fhew plainly that it was all intended only in order to their recovery:

c. 15.

Of this anointing many paffages are found in Bede, and Bede Hift. in the other writers and councils of the eighth and ninth Ang. I. iii. century. But all thefe do clearly exprefs the ufe of it, Euchol. not as a Sacrament for the good of the foul, but as a rite Gra. p. 408. that carried with it health to the body; and fo it is ftill ufed in the Greek Church. No doubt they supported the credit of this with many reports, of which some might be true, of perfons that had been recovered upon ufing it. But because that failed fo often, that the credit of this rite might fuffer much in the esteem of the world, they began in the tenth century to say, that it did good to the foul, even when the body was not healed by it; and they applied it to the feveral parts of the body. This begun from the custom of applying it at firft to the diseased parts. This was carried on in the eleventh century. And then in the twelfth, those prayers that had been formerly made for the fouls of the fick, though only as a part of the office, the pardon of fin being confidered as preparatory to Dec.Eug.in their recovery, came to be confidered as the main and Con. Flor. moft effential part of it: then the Schoolmen brought it into shape, and fo it was decreed to be a Sacrament, by Pope Eugenius, and finally eftablished at Trent.

The argument that they draw from a parity in reason, that because there is a Sacrament for fuch as come into the world, there fhould be alfo one for those that go out of it, is very trifling; for Chrift has either inftituted this to be a Sacrament, or it is not one: if he has not inftituted it, this pretended fitnefs is only an argument that he ought to have done fomewhat, that he has not done.

The

Con. Trid.
Seff. 14

ART. The Eucharift was confidered by the ancients as the only XXV. viaticum of Chriftians, in their laft paffage: with them we give that, and no more.

Thus it appears upon what reafon we reject thofe five Sacraments, though we allow both of Confirmation and Orders as holy functions, derived to us down from the Apoftles; and because there is a vifible action in these, though in ftrictnefs they cannot be called a Sacrament, yet fo the thing be rightly understood, we will not difpute about the extent of a word that is not used in Scripture. Marriage is in no refpect to be called a Sacrament of the Chriftian religion; though it being a state of fuch importance to mankind, we hold it very proper, both for the folemnity of it, and for imploring the bleffing of God upon it, that it be done with prayers and other acts of religious worship: but a great difference is to be made between a pious cuftom begun and continued by public authority, and a Sacrament appointed by Christ. We acknowledge true repentance to be one of the great conditions of the New Covenant; but we fee nothing of the nature of a Sacrament in it: and for extreme unction, we do not pretend to have the gift of healing among us: and therefore we will not deceive the world, by an office that fhall offer at that, which we acknowledge we cannot do nor will we make a Sacrament for the good of the foul, out of that which is mentioned in Scripture, only as a rite that accompanied the curing the diseases of the body.

The laft part of this Article, concerning the ufe of the Sacraments, confifts of two parts: the firft is negative, that they are not ordained to be gazed on, or to be carried about, but to be used: and this is fo exprefs in the Scripture, that little queftion can be made about it. The inftitution of Baptifm is, go preach and baptize: and the inftitution of the Eucharift is, take, eat, and drink ye all of it: which words being fet down before thofe in which the confecrating them is believed to be made, this is my body; and this is my blood; and the confecratory words being delivered as the reafon of the command, take, eat, and drink; nothing can be more clearly expreffed than this, that the Eucharift is confecrated only, that it may be ufed; that it may be eat and drunk.

The fecond part of this period is, that the effect of the Sacraments comes only upon the worthy receiving of them; of this fo much was already faid, upon the first paragraph of this Article, that it is not neceffary to add any more here. The pretending that Sacraments have their

effe&

effect any other way, is the bringing in the doctrine and ART. practice of charms into the Chriftian religion: and it XXV. tends to diffolve all obligations to piety and devotion, to a holiness of life, or a purity of temper, when the being in a paffive and perhaps infenfible ftate, while the Sacraments are applied, is thought a difpofition fufficient to give them their virtue. Sacraments are federal acts, and thofe vifible actions are intended to quicken us, fo that in the use of them we may raise our inward acts to the highest degrees poffible; but not to fupply their defects and imperfections. Our opinion in this point represents them as means to raise our minds, and to kindle our devotion; whereas the doctrine of the Church of Rome reprefents them as fo many charms, which may heighten indeed the authority of him that adminifters them, but do extinguish and deaden all true piety, when fuch helps are offered, by which the worst of men, living and dying in a bad state, may by a few feint acts, and perhaps by none at all of their own, be well enough taken care of and fecured. But as we have not fo learned Chrift, fo neither dare we corrupt his doctrine, in its moft vital and effential parts.

ARTICLE

« ElőzőTovább »