תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

and imposition of hands: which are not properly three distinct sacraments, but three parts or rites of the same sacrament of baptism, which according to Optatus, were ordered, and shadowed, and completed in the baptism of Christ. Unless we take the word sacrament in this large sense, we shall have three proper sacraments in baptism; which neither Optatus nor any of the Ancients ever thought of, when they speak of the mysteries of baptism; but they allow both unction and imposition of hands to be sacraments, as they are parts or rites of the mystery of baptism. After this manner Pacianus, bishop of Barcelona, makes also three sacraments of the mystery of baptism, viz. the laver or washing of water, the unction of the Spirit, and the hand and mouth of the priest. For he says, the " seed of Christ, that is the Spirit of God, brings forth a new man, by the hands of the priest, out of the womb of the Church, which is the font, faith being the bride-maid to all this.' And without these three sacraments, the laver, the chrism, and the priest, this new birth is not effected. For by the laver sin is purged away; by the chrism the Holy Spirit is poured down upon us; and both these we obtain by the hand and mouth of the priest; and so the whole man is regenerated and renewed in Christ." Here we must of necessity say, either that the laver, the chrism, and words and action of the priest, are three sacraments: or else, that they are but three parts or ceremonies of the same sacrament of baptism. Which is what Pacian plainly intended; for he is speaking of the manner how men are regenerated in baptism, and he makes chrism to be one means of this regeneration; whence it is evident, he had no other notion of it, but as of an integral part of baptism, though not absolutely essential to it. This then is one plain reason, why the Ancients sometimes call the immersion in the water, and the unction of chrism, two sacraments, because they are parts, or rites, or cere

1 Pacian. Serm. de Bapt. Bibl. Patr. tom. iii. p. 77. Christi semen, id est, Dei Spiritus, novum hominem, alvo sacerdotis effundit, fide tamen pronubâ. Hæc autem compleri aliàs nequeunt, nisi lavacri, et chrismatis, et antistitis sacramento. Lavacro enim peccata purgantur, chrismate Sanctus Spiritus superfunditur; utraque verò ista manu et ore antistitis impetramus, atque ita totus homo renascitur et innovatur in Christo.

[ocr errors]

monies of the mystery of baptism. And there is nothing more usual with the Ancients than this way of speaking, to call every sacred rite or ceremony used in the Church, by the name of a sacrament or mystery. As St. Austin calls exorcism a sacrament. And the salt which was given to the catechumens before baptism is called the sacrament of the catechumens, both by St. Austin, and the third Council of Carthage, as has been observed in another place, where I speak particularly of this sacrament of the catechumens. Cyprian speaks of sacraments in the Lord's Prayer. And to insist no longer upon these, it is usual also with the Ancients to divide the proper sacraments, baptism and the eucharist, each of them into two or more, meaning the several parts or rites belonging to them. Thus Isidore speaks of four sacraments in the Church, which are, baptism, chrism, the body of Christ, and the blood of Christ. As therefore the bread and wine are called two sacraments, though they be but two parts of the same eucharist; so the washing and the unction are called two sacraments though they be but two rites of the same sacrament of baptism. The like style is used by Pope Innocent when he calls the bread and wine sacraments in the plural." And Fulbertus Carnotensis is more express, when he says," 7" there are two sacraments of life, the body and blood of Christ." No wonder therefore the same authors should call the immersion in water and the unction of chrism, conveying the Spirit, by the name of the two sacraments of baptism. For nothing can be plainer, than that immersion and chrism are not properly two sacraments of baptism, but only two rites of it: as the bread and wine are not strictly two sacraments of the eucharist, but only different parts of the same communion. It were easy to add abundance more of such expressions out of other authors, many of which the reader may find collected toge

Aug. Hom. lxxxiii. de Diversis. Exorcismi sacramento quasi molebamini. Aug. de Peccator. Meritis. lib. ii. cap. xxvi. 3 Con. Carthag. iii.

can. v. See these cited, book x. chap. ii. s. 16. Dom.p. 142.

Isidor. Origin. lib. vi. c. xix. Sunt autem sacramenta

baptismus, et chrisma; corpus et sanguis Christi.

Decent. cap. v. Non longè portanda sunt sacramenta.

4

Cypr. de Orat.

6 Innoc. Ep. i. ad Fulbert. Ep.

i. Bibl. Patr. tom. iii. p. 434. Duo vitæ sacramenta, id est, Dominici cor. poris et sanguinis. • Fulbert. ibid. p. 436. Requiritur sanè in baptismatis sacramentis aqua propter sepulturam, et Spiritus Sanctus propter vitam æternam.

ther by the learned Daille. I shall only add the words of Haimo Haberstatensis, where he expressly makes confirmation a rite or ceremony of baptism, always accompanying, and administered at the same time with it, as the consummating act and perfection of it: "The gift of the Holy Spirit," says he, "is given in baptism by the imposition of the bishop's hands." So that when the Ancients call confirmation a sacrament, they always mean, that it is a part or ceremony of the sacrament of baptism. In which sense they give the name of sacraments to many other things, which were only parts, or ceremonies, or attendants on it, such as exorcism, and the sign of the cross, which were sacraments in the same sense as confirmation.

SECT. 5.-No, not when it was separate from Baptism, as in the Case of Heretics, who were baptised out of the Church.

But it may be said, that confirmation, imposition of hands, or unction, was many times given to men at some years distance from baptism; as in the case of heretics and schismatics, who were baptised in infancy out of the Church, and were received by imposition of hands, when they returned to the Church afterwards. To which I answer that the imposition of hands, which the Church gave in this case separate from baptism, was what could not be avoided, because the Church had no opportunity of administering it before; and therefore no argument is to be drawn from what she was forced to do upon such an exigence, being only an exception to her ordinary practice. It is owned, that the Church gave imposition of hands to all heretics upon their return to the Church: and this as I have shewed at large in another discourse, was to supply the deficiencies of that outward form of baptism, which could not grant them the graces of the Spirit, whilst they remained in heresy or schism. And there I also observed, that some heretics retained the unction and imposition of hands as well as bap

Dallæ. de Confirm. lib. i. cap. viii. p. 150. It. lib. iii. cap. xiii. p. 386. Haimo in Hebr. xiii. cited by Daille. Donum Spiritûs Sancti datur in baptismate per impositionem manûs episcoporum. Scholast. Hist. of Lay

Baptism, chap. i. sect. xxi.

tism, and administered it to infants together with baptism: which was the practice of the Donatists, and it may be, of several others. But yet the Church, though she neither repeated the outward form of baptism, nor always the unction of chrism; especially in the western parts, where St. Austin, Optatus, Alcimus, and Avitus lived; yet she always gave a new imposition of hands with prayer, to implore the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them. And though this was separating confirmation from baptism, yet it was only in an extraordinary case, when the Church was not capacitated to do otherwise. In other cases she always joined these two ceremonies together, as well in infants as adult persons, as I suppose the allegations and proofs alleged in this chapter, do abundantly shew to any candid reader beyond possibility of contradiction.

SECT. 6.-No Necessity of giving Confirmation to Infants now, any more than the Eucharist, from the Example of the Primitive Church.

But some will be apt to object, that, if this were the case, then all Churches at present, as well Protestant as Popish, differ from the practice of the primitive Church in this particular, that now they never administer confirmation to infants, but only to adult persons, who can confirm their baptismal vow in their own persons. And this difference is readily owned, as to practice. But then if the question be about right, which is the more suitable and agreeable practice? and, whether we ought not to conform in every circumstance to to the practice of the primitive Church? I suppose every Church in this case is best judge for herself, what is most for the edification of her children. And as no Church now thinks herself under any obligation to give the eucharist to infants, because the primitive Church for eight hundred years did so: so neither does any Church judge herself bound to give confirmation to infants from the same example. Though some learned persons have pleaded for both, as Bishop Bedel' among the Protestants for the communion of infants, and Matthew Galen among the Papists for giving them confirmation. Whilst others judge the modern

See Bishop Usher's Letters, Ep. 163. p. 412. ap. Dallæ. de Confirm. lib. i. p. xxi.

Galen. Catechism

practice the more edifying way and think there are no sufficient arguments to engage the Church to make an alteration.

CHAP. II.

Of the Minister of Confirmation.

SECT. 1.-The Consecration of Chrism reserved only to the Office of
Bishops by the Canons.

NEXT to the persons to whom confirmation was given, we are to make inquiry about the ministry of it, and see by whom it was usually given. And here it will be necessary to distinguish the several parts and ceremonies of confirmation, and cases ordinary and extraordinary; as also the consecration of the chrism from the use of it, and the practice and custom of some Churches from others: for one rule was not precisely observed in all these. Confirmation consisted of several acts, as we shall see in the next chapter. There was first the consecration of the chrism, which was always the bishop's act; then there was the unction itself, or the use of it, with consignation or the sign of the cross on the forehead or other parts of the body; then imposition of hands with prayer. There were also cases ordinary, when the bishop was present at baptism; and cases extraordinary when he was absent, and the party in danger of death. There were also different practices according to the rules of the different Churches: and according to these distinctions the answer must be given to this general question. The consecration of the chrism was generally reserved to the bishop in all Churches, and so the use of it was derived from his authority in all cases whatsoever. The second Council of Carthage1 forbids presbyters to have any concern in it, and refers to a former Council, wherein the like prohibition was made before. The third Council of Carthage

1 Con. Carth. i. can. iii. Memini præterito Concilio statutum fuisse, ut chrisma, vel reconciliatio pœnitentium, nec non et puellarum consecratio à presbyteris non fiant.

« הקודםהמשך »