Could it have been certain that these forced ordinations were conferred only on good men, such proceedings would by no means have been so bad as the more com- mon act of ordaining men of nnc[uestioned vileness of character, who by intrigue or simony secured clerical offices, and consequently the so-calle(l sacrament of or- ders, and '■ the indelible mark" by which the pretended apostolical (?) succession was to be handed down to re- mote generations.
When under ecclesiastical sanction the attempt was fully inaugurated to improve on the simplicity of the apostolical customs as to ordination by the multiplica- tion of materialistic ceremonies, it was not likely soon to stop. So, in fact, between bishops emulous of cere- monial splendor and the enactments of rival councils, the process of adding ritual forms went forward in steps par- allel to increasing corruptions of doctrine until a culmi- nation was reached in the fully developed —
IV. Sacerdotal System of the Roman Catholic Church. — That system, as practiced from about the 10th century and fully restated by the Council of Trent, as well as in the formularies of tlie Roman ixmtitical, has the follow- ing with other less objectionable characteristics:
1. It affirms that clerical orders constitute a sacra- ment, the sixth of the seven enumerated by that Church.
2. It enumerates seven clerical orders exclusive of seven grades of bishops, of which the pope is supreme in authority. The seven orders are those of priest, deacon, snbdeacon, acolyth, exorcist, reader, and porter.
3. It affirms that bishops only are competent to con- fer ordination.
4. That the effect of ordination is to impress on the recipient an indelible mark or character, so that he who has once been a priest cannot again become a layman.
5. That ordination to the priesthood confers the pow- er of offering sacrifice in the Church for the living and for the dead.
The above positions are sufficiently supported by the following extracts from the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent:
On the Sacrament of Orders. — "Canon I. If any one shall say that there is not in the New Testament a visible and external priesthood, or that there is not any power of consecrating and ottering the true body and blood of the Lord, and of remitting and retaining sin, but only an ofiice and bare ministry of preaching the Gospel, or that those who do not preach are not priests at all : let him be anathema.
" Canon II. If any one shall say that, besides the priest- hood, there are not in the Catholic Church otiier orders, both greater and lesser, by which, as by certain steps, advance is made iuto the priesthood: let him be an- athema.
"Canon III. If any one shall say that orders or sacred ordination is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted bj' Christ the Lord ; or that it is a certain human tigment devised by men unskilled in ecclesiastical matters, or that it is only a certain kind for choosing ministers of the Word of God and the sacraments: let him \>e anathema.
"Canon IV. If any one shall say that by sacred ordina- tion the Holy Ghostis not given ; and that the bishops do therefore vainly say. Receive ye the Holy Ghost ; or that a characler is not thereby given ; or that he who has once been a priest can agaiu become a layman : let Inm be anathema."
ToHchinij the Sacrifice of the Mass. — "Canon III. If any one shall say that the sacrifice of the mass is only a sac- rifice of praise and thanksgiving ; or that it is a bare com- memoratiou of the sacrifice oflered on the cross, but not a propitiatory sacrifice ; or that it avails him only that receiveth, and that it ought not to be offered for the liv- ing and the dead for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities: let him be anathema."
It is true that Roman Catholic theologians have dif- fered not a little in their discussions of some of these topics, as, for instance, in reference to the number of the sacraments and the matter and form of the sacrament of orders; but in the main they have acquiesced in the points stated above, and in the sequences inseparable from them. It may be added that the formula of or- daining a priest corresponds to the last-quoted canon. It is this : " Receive poorer to offer sacrifice to God, and to celebrate masses as \c ell for the licing as for the dead, in the name of the Lord. Amen."
The principal features of the above-stated theory of ordination were developed before the separation of the Greek and Roman churches, and the ceremonies with which the rite was administered differed in the two churches only in unimportant particulars, such as that of anointing tlie ordained person with oil, which the Roman Church practiced and the (ireek Church did not. In the Roman Church, in particular, great stress is laid upon the presentation of sacred utensils and symbols as a part of the ceremony of ordinaticm. To the priest is presented a chalice and paten (a small plate used to liold the host or consecrated wafer) ; to the bishop a ring, a crosier, and a pallium (q.v.) are given; and to the cardinal a hat, as symbolical of their functions and obligations. While, therefore, both churches propa- gated in its essentially erroneous features a common theory as to ordinations, it was the Romish Church which carried out the greatest extreme of ceremonies, and made the worst uses of the theory in connection with the dogma and assumptions of papal supremacy — a system of sacerdotalism that embodied blasphemous pretensions, and that was often prostituted to the most wicked and selfish purposes. Examination shows that this very theory of the Roman Church as to orders and sacraments lies at the centre of the system referred to,