nor form, which were afterwards appropriated to it by succeeding ages.

In this assumed matter, there are two objectionable parts: (1.) with respect to the chrism or oil. In the warm climates in which the early Christians lived, oil was in general use, whence they may have been led to adopt it in their religious 'rites, which is mentioned by Tertullian and Theophilus. We find also that the word constantly occurs in Scripture. Thus it was prophesied of Christ, that he was " to be anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows." (Ps. xlv. 7.) Again, St. Paul says, "he which esta"blisheth us with you in Christ, and hath "anointed us, is God." (2 Cor. i. 21.) And in 1 John, ii. 20, "ye have an unction from the Holy "one, and ye know all things." But all these phrases must be understood figuratively, for there is no intimation that the Apostles used oil, except in cases of sickness. Now, if the use of oil in the Roman Church were merely a matter of ceremony, we should admit the power of the Church to decree it. But as a sacrament is made of it, and a divine virtue annexed to it, confessedly without any institution from God, we at once reject it.

(2.) With respect to the consecration of the chrism, the Church of Rome has departed from

a

See Theoph. 1. 1. ad Autolyc. Tertull. de Bapt. c. 7, 8. de Resur. car, c. 8. Cyp. Ep. 70.

b

e

the ancient custom. They hold," that the bishop must consecrate the oil, but the presbyters may be suffered to confirm. Now, in the Latin Church Jerome says, that in his time, the bishop alone confirmed. Hilary, however, asserts, that in Egypt the presbyters confirmed in the bishops' absence; a custom which, together with the distinction between the consecration and application of the chrism, became the universal practice of the Greek Church. In France and Spain, owing to the increasing numbers of Christians, and the great extent of dioceses, the same custom prevailed; indeed, in some parts of Spain, the priests ventured even to consecrate the chrism; but this was forbid in one of the councils of Toledo. At Rome, however, the primitive custom of appropriating the whole ceremony of confirmation to the bishop, was observed even in Gregory the Great's time. Thus, we find, that he reproved the clergy of Sardinia, because their priests confirmed, and ordered that this duty should be reserved to the bishop. This order, however, he afterwards remitted, and allowed

e

a See Conc. Araus. c. 1. 2. Cod. Affr, can. 6. Conc. Toled, c. 20. b See Hieron. ad Lucif.

See Hilar. in c. 4. ad Eph.

d The council of Toledo, here alluded to, was held in the year 400, for the purpose of opposing the heresy of the Priscillianists.See Dupin's Eccl. Hist. v. 1. p. 285.

See Greg. Epist. 1. 3. Ep. 9.

the priests to confirm in the bishops' absence, at the same time, expressly stating, that his former order was according to the ancient practice of the Church of Rome. In the ninth century, Pope Nicolas went still further, for when the Bulgarians were converted,a and had been both baptized and confirmed by their own priests, he sent bishops among them, with directions to confirm anew those on whom that ceremony had been thus performed. About this time, the controversy between Rome and Constantinople being at its height, Photius had a decree passed in a synod held at the latter city, that the chrism being hallowed by a bishop, it might be administered by the presbyters; on which Pope Nicolas asserted, that such a practice had never been allowed. Thus it is evident, that the present doctrine of the Roman Church is opposed to that of the early ages, with respect to the mode of confirmation; and this opposition is a sufficient

The Bulgarians were converted in the ninth century by Methodius and Cyril, two monks of the Greek Charch. See Mosheim's Hist. v. ii. cent. ix. p. 1. c. 1.

Photius had been elected patriarch of Constantinople in the room of Ignatius, whom the emperor had banished. The latter prelate appealed to Nicolas I. who excommunicated Photius. Hence arose a violent controversy between the two sees, during which Photius convened the synod alluded to in the text, and drew up a list of heretical doctrines imputed to the Roman Church. One of these was the assertion, that bishops alone were authorized to consecrate the chrism. See Mosheim's Hist. v, ii. cent. ix. p. ii. c. iii. sec. xxvii.

ground for our rejecting it as a sacrament, since, were it a mere ritual observance, the Church might order it as it pleased, but sacraments being means of conveying grace to us, must be continued according to their first institution, since the blessing of God can only be tied to the actions with which it is promised.

In the seventeenth century there were some disputes occasioned in England by this doctrine, for as Pope Eugenius had declared that the bishop was the ordinary minister of this sacrament, it was thence inferred, that a bishop was not absolutely necessary. Accordingly, when a question arose, whether they should have a resident bishop for this purpose, the Jesuits opposed it on the ground we have mentioned; an opposition which was severely condemned by the Gallican Church.

2o. 1. Penance has not the parts necessary to constitute a true sacrament.

Penance or penitence is formed from the Latin translation (pænitentia) of a Greek word (uεTavon) signifying a change of mind. True repentance consists of several parts. The principal of them is humble confession to God, who has in return, promised to "forgive us our sins." (1 John, i. 9.) If we have wronged others, or given public offence to the body or Church to which we belong, we ought likewise confess our faults to them, and, as far as is possible, repair

the injury; and, in case we need advice or consolation, we ought to use private confession with our priest, or any other discreet and learned minister of God's word. Finally, our repentance must be accompanied with prayer and sincerity; and if it be thus steadily pursued, and our evil habits amended, then the clergy of our Church, as heralds of God's mercy, and ministers of his Gospel, pronounce in the daily service (and more particularly, before receiving the holy communion) the pardon offered to us in Christ. Thus far we admit and approve confession as a part of repentance; but there are here no characters of a sacrament. There is no matter; no application of that matter by a peculiar form; no institution, and no peculiar fœderal acts.

2. We shall consider the nature of the parts assigned to penance by the Roman Church.

a

The matter that is assigned in the Church of Rome, are the acts of the penitent; his confession, by his mouth to his priest, the contrition of his heart, and the satisfaction of his work, in doing the enjoined penance. The aggregate of

a It is remarkable, that in the decrees of the councils of Florence and Trent on this subject, contrition, confession, and absolution, are said to be "quasi materia," not absolutely" materia." Since then matter is necessary to a true sacrament, it would follow from this doubtfulness of terms, that penance is only quasi sacramentum."-See Conc. Flor. dec. Unionis, and Conc. Trid. sess. 14. c. 3.