grace, unless we should say that when there is undoubted faith, they confer grace. Twenty-fourth.-All vows, both of religious orders and of good works, should be abolished. Twenty-fifth.It is sufficient for a brother to confess to a brother, for to all Christians that were, has been addressed: "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth." Twenty-sixth.-Bishops have not the right of reserving cases. Twenty-seventh.-A change of life is true satisfaction. Twenty-eighth.-There is no reason why Confirmation should be reckoned among the sacraments. Twenty-ninth.-Matrimony is not a sacrament. Thirtieth.-Impediments of spiritual affinity, of crime, and of order, are but human comments. Thirtyfirst. The Sacrament of Orders was invented by the Pope's Church. Thirty-second.-The Council of Constance erred, and many things were rashly determined on, such as, that the Divine essence neither generates nor is generated, that the soul is the substantial form of the human body. Thirty-third.-All Christians are priests, and have the same power in the words and sacraments. Thirty-fourth.Extreme Unction is not a sacrament; there are only two sacraments, Baptism and the Bread. Thirty-fifth.-The Sacrament of Penance is nothing also, but a way and return to Baptism. Thirty-sixth.Antecedent grace is that movement which is made in us without us, not without our active and vital concurrence (as a stone which is merely passive to physical acts), but without our free and indifferent action. It was thus Luther explained efficacious grace, and on this he founded his system, that the will of a man, both for good and evil, is operated upon by necessity; saying, that by grace a necessity is induced into the will, not by coaction, for the will acts spontaneously, but by necessity; and in another place, he says, that by sin the will has lost its liberty, not that liberty which theologians call a coactione, but a necessitate, it has lost its indifference. 28. In his book on the Sacrifice of the Mass, we may perceive how remorse torments him. "How often," he "How often," he says, "has my heart beat, reprehending me-Are you always wise? Do all others err? Have so many centuries passed in ignorance? How will it be if you are in error, and you lead so many along with you to damnation? But at length Christ (the devil he should have said) confirmed me." 29. In the year 1522, Henry VIII. wrote a book in defence of the Seven Sacraments. Luther, answering him, calls him a fool, says he will trample on the crowned blasphemer, and that his own doctrines are from heaven. In the same year he published his German translation of the New Testament, in which learned Catholics discover a thousand errors; he rejects altogether the Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude, and the Apocalypse; he made many changes after the first edition, no less than thirty-three in the Gospel of St. Matthew alone. In the words of St. Paul, chap. iii. v. 3, "For we account a man to be justified by Faith without the works of the law," he adds the word alone, "by Faith alone." In the Diet of Augsburg, some one said to him, that the Catholics spoke very loudly of this interpretation, when he made that arrogant answer: "If your Papist prattles any more about this word alone, tell him that Doctor Martin Luther wishes it to be so; sic volo, sic jubeo, sit pro ratione voluntas-I wish so, I order so, let my will be sufficient reason for it." 30. In the year 1523 he composed his book, "De Formula Missæ et Communionis;" he abolished the Introits of the Sundays, all the festivals of saints, with the exception of the Purification and Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin; he retained the Kyrie, the Gloria, and one Collect, the Epistle, the Gospel, and the Nicene Creed, but all in the vulgar tongue; he then passed on to the Preface, omitting all the rest; he then says: "Who, the day before he suffered," &c., as in the Catholic Sacrifice of the Mass, but the words of the Consecration are chaunted as loud as the Pater Noster, that they may be heard by the people. After the Consecration, the Sanctus is sung, and the Benedictus qui venit said; the bread and the chalice is elevated immediately after the Pater Noster is said, without any other prayer, then the Pax Domini, &c. The Communion follows, and while that is going on, the Agnus Dei is sung; he approves of the Orationes Domine Jesu, &c., and Corpus D. N. J. C. custodiat, &c. He allows the Communion to be sung, but in place of the last Collect, chaunts the prayer, Quod ore sumpsimus, &c., and instead of the Ita Missa est, says Benedicamus Domine. He gives the chalice to all, permits the use of vestments, but without any blessing, and prohibits private Masses. To prepare for Communion, he says confession may be permitted as useful, but it is not necessary. He allows Matins to be said, with three lessons, the Hours, Vespers, and Complin. 31. In the year 1525, Carlostad attacked the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Sacrament, saying that the word this did not refer to the bread, but to the body of Christ crucified. Luther opposed him in his book, " Contra Prophetas seu Fanaticos;" in this he first speaks of images, and says that in the law of Moses it was images of the Deity alone which were prohibited; he before admitted the images of the saints and the cross. Speaking of the Sacrament he says, by the word hoc, this, the bread is pointed out, and that Christ is truly and carnally in the supper. The bread and the body are united in the bread, and (speaking of the Incarnation) as man is God, so the bread is called his body and the body bread. Thus Luther falsely constitutes a second hypostatic union between the bread and the body of Christ. Hospinian quotes a sermon Luther preached against the Sacramentarians, where, speaking of the peace they wished to have established, if the Lutherans would grant them the liberty to deny the Real Presence, he says: "Cursed be such concord which tears asunder and despises the Church." He then derides their false interpretation of the words, "This is my body." He commences with Zuinglius, who says the word is is the same as signifies. "We have the Scripture," says Luther," which says, This is my body; but is there any place in the Scriptures where it is written, This signifies my body." He then ridicules the interpretation of the others. "Carlostad," he says, "distorts the word this; Ecolampadius tortures the word body; others transpose the word this; and say, my body which shall be delivered for you is this; others say, that which is given for you, this is my body; others maintain the text, this is my body, for my commemoration; and others again say, this is not an article of Faith." Returning, then, on Ecolampadius, who said it was blasphemous to assert that God was kneaded, baked, and made of bread, he retorts: "It would also, I suppose, be blasphemous to say God was made man, that it was most insulting to the Divine Majesty to be crucified by wicked men, and concludes by saying: "The Sacramentarians prepare the way for denial of all the articles of Faith, and they already begin to believe nothing." Speaking of Transubstantiation, he says: "It makes but little dif ference for any one to believe the bread to remain or not to remain in the Eucharist, if he believe in Transubstantiation." In an agree ment made with Bucer, at Wittemberg, in 1526, he granted that the body and blood of Christ remained in the Sacrament only while it was received. SEC. IV.THE DISCIPLES OF LUTHER. 35. John Agricola, Stancaro, and 38. Gaspar 32. Melancthon and his Character. 33. His Faith, and the Augsburg Confession composed by him. 34. Matthias Flaccus, Author of the Centuries. Chief of the Antinomians; Atheists. 36. Andrew Osiander, Francis Andrew Musculus. 37. John Brenzius, Chief of the Ubiquists. Sneckenfield abhorred even by Luther for his Impiety. 39. Martin Chemnitz, the Prince of Protestant Theologians, and Opponent of the Council of Trent. 32. PHILIP MELANCTHON, Luther's chief and best beloved disciple, was a German, born in Britten, in the Palatinate, of a very poor family, in the year 1497. He was a man of profound learning, and, at the age of twenty-four, was appointed one of the professors of Wittemberg by the Duke of Saxony. There he became imbued with Lutheran opinions, but as he was a man of the greatest mildness of manner, and so opposed to strife that he never spoke a harsh word against any one, he was anxious to bring about a union between all the religions of Germany; and on that account in many points smoothened down the harsh doctrines of Luther, and frequently, in writing to his friends, as Bossuet, in his History of the Variations, tells us, he complained that Luther was going too far. He was a man of great genius, but undecided in his opinions, and so fond of indifference that his disciples formed themselves into a sect called Indifferentists, or Adiaphorists. The famous Confession of Augsburg was drawn up by him at the Diet, and his followers were on that account sometimes called Confessionists (1). 33. He divided his Confession into twenty-one articles, and stated his opinions with such moderation, that Luther afterwards complained that Philip, in endeavouring to smoothen down his doctrine, destroyed it (2). He admitted the liberty of human will, rejected the opinion of Luther, that God is the author of sin, and approved of the Mass. All these points were opposed to Luther's system. He was at length so tired with the way matters went on among the Reformers, that he intended to leave them altogether, and retire into Poland, there to wait the decision of the Council, whatever it should be (3). His opinions were very unsteady regarding matters of Faith; thus, he says, man can be justified by Faith alone; and his rival, Osiander, says he changed his mind fourteen times on this one subject. He was selected to arrange a treaty of peace with the Sacramentarians, but notwithstanding all his endeavours he never could succeed (4). Gotti, quoting Cochleus (5), says, that with all his anxiety to smoothen down any harsh points in the system, he only threw oil and not water on the flames. He died in Wittemberg in 1556, according to Van Ranst, or in 1560, according to Gotti, at the age of sixty-one. Many authors relate that, being at the point of death, his mother said to him: My son, I was a Catholic; you have caused me to forsake that Faith; you are now about to appear before God, and tell me truly, I charge you, which is the better Faith, the Catholic or the Lutheran?" He answered: "The Lutheran is an easier religion, but the Catholic is more secure for salvation" (6). Berti relates (7) that he himself composed his own epitaph, as follows: 66 "Iste brevis tumulus miseri tenet ossa Philippi, Qui qualis fuerit nescio, talis erat." These are not the words of Faith, and would imply that he much doubted of his eternal salvation. 34. Matthias Flaccus Illiricus, born in Albona in Istria, had the misfortune to study in Wittemberg, under Luther, and became afterwards the Chief of the Rigid Lutherans. He was the principal of the compilers of the Centuries of Magdeburg, an Ecclesiastical History, published in 1560, and to refute which Cardinal Baronius published his celebrated Annals. Flaccus died in Frankfort, in 1575, at the age of fifty-five. He disagreed in many things with Luther. Striger (8) sustained an erroneous opinion, bordering on Pelagianism, that original sin was but a slight accident, which did not substantially corrupt the whole human race; (1) Nat. Alex. t. 19, a. 11; s. 3, n. 4; Gotti, Ver. Rel. s. 109, sec. 3; Van Ranst, p. 308; Hermant, c. 241. (2) Hermant, loc. cit. (3) Varillas Hist. 20, 2, . 24, p. 363. (4) Varillas, s. 1, l. 8, p. 364. (5) Gotti, loc. cit. n. 2. (6) Floremund. l. 2, c. 9; Van Ranst, & Gotti, loc. cit.; & Nat. Alex. loc. cit. n. 10. (7) Berti, Hist. sec. 16, c. 3. (8) Ap. Spondam. ad an. 1560, n. 32. and Flaccus, on the contrary, renewing the blasphemous errors of the Manicheans, said that original sin was the substance itself of man, which deprived him of free will, and of every good movement, and drove him necessarily on to evil, from which faith in Jesus Christ alone could save him. On that account, he denied the necessity of good works for salvation, and his followers were called Substantialists (9). 35. John Agricola was a townsman of Luther, and was for a time his disciple, but became afterwards the founder of a sect, called Antinomians, or Law Opposers, for he rejected all authority of law, and taught that you may become a sensualist, a thief, a robber, but if you believe you will be saved (10). Varillas says that Luther brought the errors of Agricola before the University of Wittemberg, as subversive of all the value of good works, and, on their condemnation, he retracted them; but after Luther's death he went to Berlin, and again commenced teaching his blasphemies, where he died, without any sign of repentance, at the age of seventy-four (11). Florimundus calls the Antinomians Atheists, who believe in neither God nor the devil. 36. Andrew Osiander was the son of a smith in the Mark of Brandenburg. He taught that Christ was the justifier of mankind, not according to the human, but according to the Divine nature (12); and opposed to him was Francis Stancaro, of Mantua, who taught that Christ saved man by the human nature, not by the Divine nature (13). Thus Osiander taught the errors of Eutyches, and Stancaro those of Nestorius (14). In answer to the first, we have to remark that, although it is God that justifies, still he wishes to avail himself of the humanity of Christ (which was alone capable of suffering and making atonement), as of an instrument for the salvation of mankind. The Passion of Christ, says St. Thomas (15), is the cause of our justification, not, indeed, as a principal agent, but as an instrument, inasmuch as the humanity is the instrument of his Divinity, and hence the Council of Trent has declared (Sess. 6, Cap. 7) the efficient cause of this justification is God-the meritorious cause is Jesus Christ, who, on the wood of the Cross, merited for us justification (16), and satisfied for us to God the Father. In answer to Stancaro, who teaches that Christ saved mankind, as man alone, but not as God, we have but to consider what is already said, because if Christ, according to the flesh, deserved for man the grace of salvation, nevertheless, it was the Divinity, and not (9) Gotti, c. 109, sec. 7, n. 1, 2; Van Ranst, p. 310; Varillas, t. 1, l. 17, p. 122, & t. 2, l. 24, p. 363; Nat. Alex. t. 19, a. 11, sec. 3, n. 10. (10) Nat. Alex. t. 19, a. 11, sec. 3, n. 7; Gotti, c. 109, sec. 5, n. 7; Van Ranst, p. 310. (11) Varillas, t. 1, l. 11, (12) Remund. in Synopsi, l. 2, c. 16. (13) Gotti, loc. cit. sec. 6, n. 1 ad (14) Gotti, sec. 7, n. 8; Van (15) St. Thomas, p. 3, q. 64, ar. 1. p. 512. |