of grace or righteousness received by faith, and marks of Christian profession whereby the faithful are distinguish- ed from unbelievers, let him be accursed.
"7. Whosoever shall affirm that grace is not always piven by these sacraments, and upon all persons, as far as God is concerned, if they be rightly received, but that it is oidy bestowed sometimes and "on some persons, let him be accursed.
"S. Whoever shall affirm that grace is not conferred by the sacraments of the new law, "by their own |)ower (ex opere opcrato), hut that faith in the diviue promise is all that is necessary to obtain giace, let him be accursed.
"9. Whoever shall affirm that a character (that is, a certain spiritual and indelible mark) is not impressed upon the s<nil by the three sacraments of baptism, con- firmation, and orders (for which reason they cannot be rei)eated), let him be accursed.
" 10. Whoever shall affirm that all Christians have pow- er to preach the word and administer all the sacrainents, let him be accursed.
"tl. Whoever shall affirm that, when ministers per- form and confer a sacrament, it is not necessary that they should, at least, have the intention to do what the Church does, let him be accursed.
" 12. Whoever shall affirm that a minister who is in a state of mortal sin does not perform or confer a sacra- ment, although he observes everything that is essential to the performance and bestowment thereof, let him be accin-sed.
"13. Whoever shall affirm that the received and ap- proved rites of the Catholic Church, commonly used in the soleniii administration of the sacraments, may he despised or omitted without sin by the minister, at his ])leasure, or that any pastor of a" church may change them for others, let him be accursed."
Refutations of the Romanistic theory of the sacra- ments have been so numerous and detailed in the writ- ings of the Kel'ormers, from the days of Wyclift'e down to the present time, that it seems only necessary' to pre- sent here a brief resume of the standard objections to it: 1. The sacramental theory of the Church of Rome wholly ignores the great scriptural doctrine of salva- tion by faith. 2. It elevates ceremonies above Chris- tian obedience and duty. 3. It is artificial in naming as sacraments several things which Christ did not ap- point as such — e. g. confirmation, penance, orders, ex- treme unction, and matrimony ; which last, instead of being instituted by Jesus Clirist, was, in fact, appointed by God from the creation of man. 4. It is arbitrary in dividing the eucharist and denying the cup to the lai- ty. 5. It unduly exalts the functions of the priesthood, making the gift of divine grace dependent on the in- tention of the administrator of a real or supposed sac- rament. 6. It sanctions immorality in the highest of- fices and most sacred ceremonies of religion by main- taining that wickedness, even to the extent of mortal sin, does not disqualify the celebrant from truly admin- istering the holv sacraments. 7. It gives incentives to bad living, and even to crime, by teaching men tliat the sacraments impress upon the soul an indelible character of grace and spirituality, irrespective of their personal faith or practice.
The doctrine of the Old Catholics (q. v.), as stated in Art. VIII of the Theses agreed upon in the Conference at Bonn in 1874, is thus expressed :
"1. We acknowledge that the number of the sacra- ments was fixed at seven first in the 12th century, and then was received into the general teaching of the Ciiurch, not as a tradition coming down from the apostles or from the earliest times, but as the result of theological specula- tion.
"2. Catholic theologians (i.e. Bellarmine) acknowledge, and we acknowledge with them, that baptism and the eu- charist are ' principalia, prcecipua, eximia salutis nostree sacramenta.' "
IV. Tenets of the Oriental Churches. — The Greek Church, including the Russian, teaches that tliere are seven sacraments ( i^iiKTrlfpia), the same as the R'oman Catholic — namely, baptism, unction with chrism, the eu- charist, penitence, the priesthood, lawful marriage, and extreme unction (Orthodoxa Confessio [A.D. 1643], qu. 98; Dosithei Confessio [A.D. 1672], deer. 15; Lonrjer Catechism [prepared bv Philarct. and approved by the Synod of A.D. 1839]. qii. 285). That Church hold's, in- deed, some peculiarities as to the mode of administer- ing certain of these sacraments; but they nevertheless
SACRAMENT
216
SACRAMENT
strenuoush' maintain the divine character and essential importance of them alL See Grekk Church.
The Armenian and Coptic churches [see each] have substantially the same views upon the subject as the Greek Church. The orthodox Nestorians (q. v), how- ever, including the Christians of St, Thomas, believe, with Protestants, in two sacraments only, namely, bap- tism and the Lord's supper; but the "Chaldaeaii" branch, of course, coincides with the Koman view.
V. Views of the Lutheran Reformers and of later Protestants. — Notwithstanding the formidable combi- nation of influences to popularize and maintain the doctrine of transubstantiation, many minds revolted against the absurdities it involved. Some individuals and sects went to the extreme of rejecting the sacra- raments altogether; others, including most of those known as Reformers before the Reformation, alike ob- jected to the invented and redundant sacraments, and pointed out many errors and abuses connected with the administration of baptism and the eucharist. This op- jjosition, however, was manifested under many restraints and embarrassments, not merely caused by the spirit of persecution that was everywhere so rife, but by those prejudices and habits of mind to which the reformers themselves were subject. Bold and uncompromising as was Luther on most subjects in which Roman errors ■were involved, he nevertheless on the one topic now in question exhibited weaknesses of character and an infirmity of judgment that can only be accounted for by the influence of his education and early habits of thought, pjven after that great man had fully accept- ed the doctrine of salvation by faith, and rejected the greater number of those errors and inventions by which the Roman system had made void the word and truth of God, he remained so tenacious of the doctrine of Christ's real and corporeal presence in the bread and wine of the eucharist as to make a violent and almost fatal issue with his fellow-Reformers on that point. No argument was sufficient to move him from his fixed ad- herence to the literal interpretation of the phrase, " This is my body." Hence, not onlj^ he, but jMelanethon and all those German Reformers who acted with them, while rejecting transubstantiation, rigidly adhered to that slight variation from it known as consuhstantiation (q. v.). The controversies between Luther and Zwingli and their several adherents unhappily put in jeopardy- some of the most important interests of the Reforma- tion, and gave great cause of rejoicing to the partisans of the papac}% But for that unfortunate issue, which, at a very critical period, divided the Reformers and weakened their strength, it cannot be doubted that much more rapid progress would have been made in restoring to the Church the true but long-lost idea of the suijper of the Lord as instituted by him and ap- pointed for the confirmation of faith in his atoning sac- rifice. But, notwithstanding all hindrances, it is from the period of the Reformation that improvements may be noted in those doctrinal views of the sacraments which found expression in the creeds of representative churches. To show the successive steps of progress made as the result of controversy on the subject, quo- tations will now be given from several of the more cel- ebrated creeds put forth during the Itith century.