Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacraments in General · Book II: On the Effect, Number, and Ceremonies of the Sacraments
Chapter 24: The Catholic truth of the sevenfold number of the Sacraments is proved from the Scriptures and the Fathers
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramentis in Genere, Book II: On the Effect, Number, and Ceremonies of the Sacraments. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
As to the second, the opinion of the Catholics is one, and always was, that there are seven Sacraments properly so called; which is to be proved in three ways. First, from the testimonies of Scripture and the Fathers, which indeed do not number the Sacraments, yet in fact testify that all these seven are true and proper Sacraments. Second, from other testimonies of Councils and Doctors, which precisely set down that sevenfold number. Third, by reasons or certain congruities. As to the first kind of testimonies, three things are to be noted. First, that the adversaries ought not to demand that we show in Scripture or the Fathers the name of the sevenfold number of the Sacraments. For neither can they show the name of two, or three, or four; for Scripture and the Fathers did not write a Catechism, as we now do on account of the multitude of heresies, but only hand down the things themselves in various places. Nor is this proper to the Sacraments, but common to many other things. For Scripture reports the miracles of Christ, and never numbers how many they are; it hands down the articles of faith, and nowhere says how many they are. The Apostles afterward, for certain causes, published the Creed of twelve articles. So also from Scripture it cannot be known how many the Canonical books are; but the Councils afterward published the Canon, and a certain number, which they had learned from tradition. Second, it is to be noted that the adversaries ought not to demand that we show in the Scriptures the name of Sacrament attributed to Confession, or Ordination, and the like. For we do not dispute of the name, but of the thing; and neither will they show this name attributed to Baptism or the Eucharist, but only to Matrimony, which yet almost all heretics deny to be a true Sacrament. And on the contrary we find the name of Sacrament attributed in the Scriptures to many things which by the consent of all are not Sacraments of the kind we now treat: as Ephesians 1 the purpose of calling the Gentiles to the faith is called the Sacrament of the will of God; and 1 Timothy 3 the Incarnation of the Word is called the Sacrament of godliness; and Apocalypse 17 a certain sign imprinted on the forehead of the woman who represented Babylon is called the Sacrament of the woman. Third, it is to be noted that it altogether suffices if we show from the Scriptures and the Fathers that the definition of a Sacrament agrees with rites neither fewer nor more than seven. And although we do not agree in explaining the definition of a Sacrament (as we showed at length above, in book 1 in the second controversy), yet we agree in a certain general definition, namely that the Sacraments are rites, or external and sensible signs, which from divine institution have annexed the promise of justifying grace. These things noted, let us come to the proof.
That Baptism is a Sacrament. And first, of Baptism there is no question. For there is the express rite: The laver of water in the word of life, Ephesians 5; and the institution and command, John 3: Unless a man be born again; and Matthew last: Baptizing them; and the promise of grace, Mark last: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; and Titus 3: He saved us by the laver. The same teach all the Fathers cited above in the question on the effect of the Sacraments.
That the Eucharist is a Sacrament. Of the Eucharist too there is no question; for there is the rite, Matthew 26 and 1 Corinthians 11: He took bread, giving thanks, brake, etc.; and the institution and command in the same place: Do this; and John 6: Unless you eat, etc.; and the promise of grace, John 6: He that eateth this bread shall live for ever. The same the Fathers too teach, Augustine epistle 118 chapter 1, where, when he had said that Christ instituted Sacraments fewest in number, most excellent in signification, easiest in observance, he sets down for an example Baptism and the Eucharist.
That Confirmation is a Sacrament. Of Confirmation we have the external rite, the imposition of hands, Acts 8 and 19. We have the effect of grace in the same place. For through the hands of the Apostles the Holy Spirit was given, in the same phrase in which it was said, Titus 3, of Baptism: By the laver of regeneration he saved us. The institution and command is not had expressly in Scripture; yet it is evidently gathered from the places cited. For the Apostles would never so confidently and ordinarily have imposed hands to communicate the grace of the Holy Spirit, unless the Lord had commanded it. For they were not ignorant that no man can institute a ceremony upon which the grace of the Holy Spirit follows. For even Kemnitz in the second part of the Examen page 13, and the Apology of the Augsburg Confession article 13, and Calvin book 4 of the Institutes chapter 19 section 2, affirm that no man can effect that an external symbol contain a certain promise of grace. And accordingly either the Apostles were rash, which no one would say, or they had the command of Christ. And that that ceremony was ordinary and necessary, and that it was not enough to pray to God for the coming of the Holy Spirit, is gathered from this, that the chief Apostles Peter and John undertook so much labor and journey to go from Jerusalem to Samaria, to impose hands on those whom Philip the Deacon had baptized. For they could have prayed for them remaining at Jerusalem. But it is to be noted that the imposition of hands was joined with the anointing and the sign of the cross; for these are done together, while the sign of the cross is painted with Chrism on the forehead of those to be confirmed, and that by the ministry of the Episcopal hand. Whence Dionysius, in the book On the ecclesiastical hierarchy chapter 2 part 3 and chapter 4 part 3, plainly mentions the Chrism in this Sacrament. And Tertullian in the book On the resurrection of the flesh, where he sets Confirmation in the same order with Baptism and the Eucharist: “The flesh is washed,” he says, “that the soul may be cleansed; the flesh is anointed, that the soul may be consecrated,” etc. And in the book On the prescriptions of heretics, teaching that the devil imitates the Christian Sacraments, he sets an example in these two: “He too dips certain persons, namely his own believers and faithful; he signs there on the forehead his soldiers.” And in the book On Baptism: “Thereafter,” he says, “the hand is imposed through blessing, calling and inviting the Holy Spirit.” Where you see Tertullian, a most ancient author, set down all three: the anointing, the sign of the cross on the forehead, and the imposition of hands. Likewise Cyprian book 1 epistle 12 and book 2 epistle 1, now calls it the anointing, now the imposition of hands, and besides plainly calls it a Sacrament. For thus he says, book 2 epistle 1, speaking of Baptism and Confirmation: “Then can they be fully sanctified, and be the sons of God, if they be born of both Sacraments.” Augustine book 2 against the letters of Petilian chapter 104: “The Sacrament of Chrism,” he says, “in the kind of visible signs, is most holy, as Baptism itself.”
Of Penance. John 20: Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose you shall retain, they are retained. Here we have, first, the rite, namely the external and judicial absolution, which is a sign of the interior absolution which is made by God through the external word as an instrument. Second, we have the promise of grace: They are forgiven them. Third, we have the command in the same place: As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. Whence the Apostle 2 Corinthians 5: He hath given to us, he says, the ministry of reconciliation. And below: For Christ we are ambassadors. Ambrose book 1 On Penance chapter 7: “What difference is there whether by Penance or by the laver the priests claim this right given them? In each there is one ministry. But thou wilt say, because in the laver the grace of the mysteries works. What in Penance? Does not the name of God work?” Cyril book 12 on John chapter 56 compares the reconciliation of penitents with Baptism. Augustine book 5 On Baptism chapter 20 numbers, with Baptism, the Eucharist, and Confirmation, also Reconciliation through the imposition of hands; and on Psalm 146, on that, Who bindeth up their bruises, in express words calls the reconciliation of penitents a Sacrament: “What are these bindings?” he says. “Temporal Sacraments. They are the medicinal bindings of our contrition. Temporal Sacraments meanwhile, by which we have consolation.” And below he says that these Sacraments are the Eucharist and the imposition of the Prelate's hand in Penance, which will not be in heaven.
Of Extreme Unction. James 5 we have the rite: Let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. Likewise the promise: And the Lord shall raise him up; and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him. Finally the command is evidently gathered from this, that the Apostle would not so absolutely promise so great an effect, unless he had received it from the Lord, as we showed above also by the testimony of the Apology, of Calvin, and of Kemnitz. From the Fathers, Innocent I in epistle 1 to Decentius chapter 8, speaking of the holy oil of the sick: “On penitents this cannot be poured, because it is a kind of Sacrament. For to those to whom the other Sacraments are denied, how is one kind thought able to be granted?” Bernard, in the life of St. Malachy, writes that he was called to anoint a woman about to die, but while the anointing was delayed she expired; and that Malachy grieved vehemently that she had died without the grace of this Sacrament, and so prayed and wept so long until he recalled her from the dead, and then at last anointed her, and she wholly recovered: “He anointed her,” he says, “knowing that in this Sacrament sins are remitted.”
Of the Sacrament of Order. We have the external rite, the imposition of hands, 1 Timothy 4. Likewise the promise of grace in the same place: Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the imposition of the hands of the priesthood. And 2 Timothy 1: I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands. Finally the institution and command, Ephesians 4: He gave some indeed Apostles, and some Evangelists, and others Pastors and Doctors, etc. And besides, whence did the Apostle know that grace was given to Timothy by the imposition of hands, if he had not learned from God that grace is conferred by that sign? Augustine book 2 against the epistle of Parmenian chapter 13, speaking of Baptism and Ordination: “Each,” he says, “is a Sacrament, and each is given to a man by a certain consecration — the one when he is baptized, the other when he is ordained. And so in the Catholic Church it is not lawful to reiterate either.” Like things he has book 1 On Baptism chapter 4.
Of Matrimony. We have the very name of Sacrament, Ephesians 5: This is a great sacrament. Likewise the external rite, that is, the visible contract between man and woman; for of this the Apostle says that it is a great Sacrament, as Chrysostom and Jerome expound on this place, who also cites Nazianzen, and all the rest. We have also the divine institution, Matthew 19: What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. Finally the annexed grace we gather from this very place of Paul. For the conjunction of man and woman signifies the conjunction of Christ with the Church. But that conjunction is twofold: one through the conformity of nature, which was made in the Incarnation, and this joins Christ not only with the Church, but also with the whole human race; the other is through grace and charity, and this is with the Church alone; and by reason of this Christ is called the spouse, and the Church the spouse, according to that of 2 Corinthians 11: I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you a chaste virgin to Christ. Therefore the Matrimony of man and woman, that it may be able to signify each union of Christ with the Church, must have not only between the spouses a certain natural and carnal union, such as is found even among the Gentiles, but also a spiritual union proceeding from grace and charity. And accordingly this Sacrament confers that grace, that the signification may be perfect. Wherefore Paul Ephesians 5 often admonishes husbands to love their wives as Christ the Church, and admonishes women to be subject to their husbands as the Church is subject to Christ; and renders the reason, because this their conjunction is a Sacrament of Christ and the Church. Now from the Fathers, Augustine everywhere teaches this, in the book On the good of marriage chapter 18: “In our marriages,” he says, “the holiness of the Sacrament avails more than the fruitfulness of the womb.” And chapter 24: “The good of marriage through all nations and all men is in the cause of generating, and in the fidelity of chastity; but as to the people of God, also in the holiness of the Sacrament, whereby it is utterly wicked, even with divorce intervening, to marry another.” And let these suffice in this place; for in the disputation on the several Sacraments we shall bring forward more.
That the washing of feet is not a Sacrament. Now it remains to demonstrate that there are not more Sacraments than the seven aforesaid. And indeed many things are called Sacraments by the ancients, besides these seven. For Pope Alexander I in epistle 1 calls blessed water a Sacrament. Augustine book 19 against Faustus chapter 14, and on Psalm 141, calls the sign of the cross a Sacrament; and on Psalm 65, and book 4 On the Creed chapter 1, calls Sacraments the ceremonies which are done before Baptism, as the exorcisms and the like; and book 2 On the merits and remission of sins chapter 26 calls a Sacrament a certain blessed bread which was given to catechumens. Finally Ambrose book 3 On the Sacraments chapter 1, and Cyprian in the sermon On the washing of feet, and Bernard in the sermon On the Lord's supper, contend that the washing of feet, which the Lord instituted, John 13, is a Sacrament. But of all these there is nothing which has difficulty except the last. For, in the first place, neither blessed water, nor the sign of the cross, nor blessed bread, nor the exorcisms, and other ceremonies preceding Baptism, are found in the Scriptures; and accordingly the adversaries cannot hold them for Sacraments. Then all these are given even before Baptism, as is plain from those same places of Augustine; but Baptism, by the consent of all, is the first of all the Sacraments, and, as it were, the door. Finally none of them has the promise of sanctifying grace, nor is it established whether they were instituted by Christ or by the Apostles, whereas true Sacraments could be instituted by Christ alone.
Of the washing of feet there seems greater difficulty. For we have John 13 the external rite, the washing of the feet itself; likewise the promise of grace: If I wash thee not, thou shalt have no part with me; likewise the command of God: I have given you an example; likewise: And you also ought to wash one another's feet; likewise that it is a mystery, those words indicate: What I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter. Finally those testimonies of the Fathers, Ambrose, Cyprian, Bernard; whose testimony Kemnitz adduces, page 32, to prove that there are more Sacraments than seven, if we must stand by the testimonies of the Fathers. Yet I answer that that washing of feet had nothing in common with the Sacraments properly so called, and can only be called a Sacrament in a broad manner, in the way that all things which have a mystical sense, and are figures and types of other things, are called Sacraments. For that washing was really a sign of Christ's humility and charity. Likewise it was a sign of the purity with which men ought to approach the Eucharist; for therefore immediately before the institution of the Eucharist Christ did this. Finally it was also a sign and a certain figure of the purgation which we were to have through the Passion of Christ, as Cyril in this place expounds. But that it was not a Sacrament properly so called is plain, first, because we have not the promise of justifying grace; for that, If I wash thee not, thou shalt have no part with me, to the letter does not promise grace, but threatens a penalty for disobedience, as Chrysostom and Cyril expound in this place, and Basil book 1 On Baptism chapter 2. For if Peter had obstinately refused that washing, he would have perished eternally — not because he lacked the washing of feet, but because he had sinned against Christ, and lacked obedience. Yet mystically it can signify, as Augustine in this place expounds, that even the just need Christ to wash them daily from venial sins, which are, as it were, the filth that adheres to the feet on account of human converse. But this does not suffice to make a Sacrament, because here is treated the washing of venial sins, which does not need a new sanctifying grace. Whence the Lord says: He that is washed needeth not but to wash his feet, but is clean wholly — that is, he is clean simply and absolutely, since he is just; yet he still needs the washing from venial sins. And besides, we have not from this place that the washing of feet itself really takes away venial sins — otherwise we should have to wash our feet daily — but only that that one washing, by which the Lord washed the feet of the disciples, was a figure of the internal washing which we receive from Christ. Not, therefore, is the washing of feet itself a Sacrament properly so called.
Second, we have not the command, or institution, of frequenting this rite, which is required in every Sacrament; otherwise almost all men would sin who do not use that ceremony. And although this ceremony was formerly in use in certain Churches immediately after Baptism, yet it was never received by all, nor by the Roman Church itself, as Ambrose testifies in the place cited. Nor does that command stand in the way: I have given you an example; likewise, And you also ought to wash one another's feet; and, What I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter. For this command enjoins humility and charity, as Chrysostom and Cyril expound, not the material washing of feet itself, as is plain from the practice of the Church; for the Christians never thought they had a special command about the washing of feet. To those places of the Fathers it is easy to answer. For Ambrose calls it a Sacrament and mystery because in his Church it was kept as a sacred ceremony and as something sacramental; yet he himself did not think this washing a Sacrament properly so called, as is plain both from this, that he confesses that mortal sins are not remitted by that washing, but certain remnants of original sin; and also because he says that he does not reprehend the Roman Church, where this ceremony was not in use; which certainly he would not say if he thought it a true Sacrament. Now Cyprian and Bernard, if they be read attentively, do not say that the material washing of feet itself is a Sacrament by which men are sanctified; but only say that that one washing of the Apostles' feet made by Christ was a Sacrament, because by it was signified something sacred which ought to be done in us daily, that is, the expiation of venial sins, which is done in us daily by Christ through prayer, fasting, humility, and the exercises of piety toward our neighbors, in which we are engaged. And indeed, if they thought the washing of feet a Sacrament, we should, according to their opinion, have to wash one another's feet daily; for they say that this Sacrament is the expiation of daily faults.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXIV. Ex Scripturis , et Patribus probatur veritas Catholica de numero septenario Sacramento¬ rum. Quantum ad Secundum, sententia Catho¬ licorum una est, ac semper fuit, septem esse proprie dicta Sacramenta, quae probanda est tripliciter. Primo, ex testimoniis Scripturae, et Patrum, quae quidem non numerant Sa¬ cramenta, tamen reipsa omnia ista septem Sacramenta vera et propria esse testantur. Secundo, ex testimoniis aliis Conciliorum et Doctorum , quae praecise numerum istum septenarium ponunt. Tertio, rationibus seu congruentiis quibusdam. Quantum ad Primum genus testimonio¬ rum, notanda sunt tria. Primo, non debere adversarios petere, ut ostendamus in Scrip¬ turis, aut Patribus nomen septenarii numeri Sacramentorum. Nam nec ipsi ostendere possunt nomen binarii, vel ternarii, vel qua¬ ternarii ; Scriptura enim, et Patres non scripserunt Catechismum, ut modo facimus propter heeresum multitudinem, sed tantum Tom. III. tradunt res ipsas variis in locis. Neque est hoc proprium Sacramentis, sed commune aliis multis rebus. Nam Scriptura refert Christi miracula, et numquam numerat quot sint: tradit articulos fidei, et nusquam dicit, quot sint. Apostoli postea ediderunt symbo¬ lum duodecim articulorum certis de causis. Sic etiam exScriptura non potest sciri, quot sint libri Canonici : sed Concilia postea edi¬ derunt Canonem, et certum numerum, quem ex traditione didicerant. Secundo notandum, non debere etiam ad¬ versarios petere, ut ostendamus in Scriptu¬ ris nomen Sacramenti attributum Confes¬ sioni, aut Ordinationi, et similibus. Nam non disputamus de nomine, sed de re : et nec ipsi ostendent hoc nomen tributum Bap¬ tismo, aut Eucharistiae, sed soli Matrimonio, quod tamen fere omnes haeretici negant esse verum Sacramentum. Et contra invenimus nomen Sacramenti in Scripturis tribui mul¬ tis rebus, quae omnium consensu non sunt Sacramenta, de qualibus nunc agimus; ut Ephes. I propositum vocandi Gentiles ad fi¬ dem, dicitur Sacramentum voluntatis Dei. Et I. Timoth. III, Sacramentum pietatis di¬ citur incarnatio Verbi. Et Apocalyp. XVII dicitur', Sacramentum mulieris , signum quoddam impressum in fronte mulieris, quae Babyloniam repraesentabat. Tertio notandum, id omnino sufficere, si ostendamus ex Scripturis, et Patribus, defi¬ nitionem Sacramenti convenire ritibus non paucioribus, nec pluribus, quam septem. Licet autem non conveniamus in explicanda definitione Sacramenti (ut supra fuse osten¬ dimus lib. I in secunda controversia), tamen convenimus in definitione quadam generali, nimirum quod Sacramenta sint ritus, seu signa externa et sensibilia, quae ex divina institutione annexam habeant promissionem gratiae justificantis. His notatis accedamus ad probationem. Quod Baptismus sit Sacramentum. Ac primum de Baptismo nulla quajstio est. Est enim ritus expressus : Lavacrum aqua ? in verbo vitee , Ephes. V, et institutio, ac mandatum, Joan. III : Nisi quis renatus. EtMatth. ult. : Baptizantes eos. Et promissio gratiae, Mare. ult. : Qui creiderit, et bapti- zatus fuerit , salvus erit. Et Tit. III : Salvos 31 482 LIBER II. nos fecit per lavacrum (1). Idem docent om¬ nes Patres supra citati in quaestione de ef¬ fectu Sacramentorum. Quod Eucharistia sit Sacramentum. De Eucharistia etiam nulla quaestio est ; habetur enim r:tus, Matth. XXVI et I. Cor. XI : Accepit panem, gratias agens, fregit , etc. Et institutio, ac mandatum ibidem : Hoc fa¬ cite, et Joan. VI : Nisi manducaveritis etc. Et promissio gratise, Joan. VI : Qui mandu¬ cat hunc panem, vivet in aeternum (2). Idem etiam Patres docent, Augustinus epist. 118. cap. 1. ubi cum dixisset, Christum instituisse Sacramenta numero paucissima, significa¬ tione proestantissima, observatione facilli¬ ma, ponit loco exempli Baptismum et Eu¬ charistiam. Quod Confirmatio sit Sacramentum. De confirmatione habemus ritum exter¬ num, manuum impositionem, Actor. VIII et XIX. Habemus effectum gratiae ibidem. Nam per manus Apostolorum dabatur Spiritus sanctus, eadem phrasi qua dictum est, Tit. III, de Baptismo : Per lavacrum regeneratio¬ nis salvos nos fecit (3). Institutio et mandar- tum non habetur expresse in Scriptura; ta¬ men colligitur evidenter ex locis citatis. Numquam enim Apostoli ita confidenter et ordinarie imposuissent manus ad gratiam Spiritus sancti communicandam, nisi Domi¬ nus id praecepisset. Non enim ignorabant non posse ullum hominem instituere caere¬ moniam, ad quam sequeretur gratia Spiri¬ tus sancti. Nam etiam Kemnitius in 2. part. Exam. pag. 13. et ApologiaConfessionisAu- gustanae art. 13. et Calvinus lib. IV Institut. cap. 19. §.2. affirmant, non posse ullum ho¬ minem efficere, ut externum symbolum con¬ tineat certam promissionem gratiae. Proinde oportet vel Apostolos fuisse temerarios, quod nemo diceret, vel habuisse Christi manda¬ tum. Fuisse autem caeremoniam illam ordi¬ nariam et necessariam, et non satis fuisse orare Deum pro adventu Spiritus sancti, ex eo colligitur, quod Apostoli primarii Petrus etJoannes tantum laboris et itineris susce¬ perunt, ut irent ex Hierosolyma Samariam, ad imponendas manus iis, quos Philippus Diaconus baptizaverat. Nam orare poterant pro illis manentes llierosolymae. Est autem Notandum, impositionem ma¬ nuum conjunctam fuisse cum unctione et signo crucis ; simul enim haec fiunt, dum crucis signum Chrismate pingitur in fronte confirmandorum, idque ministerio manus Episcopalis. Unde Dionysius lib. de Eccle- siast. hierarch. cap. 2. part. 3. et cap. 4. part. 3. meminit aperte Chrismatis in hoc Sacramento. Et Tertullianus lib. de resur- rect. carnis, ubi ponit Confirmationem in eodem ordine cum Baptismo et Eucharistia: « Caro abluitur, inquit, ut anima emacule¬ tur; caro ungitur, ut anima consecretur, etc. » Et de praiscriptionibus haereticorum, docens diabolum imitari Sacramenta Chris¬ tiana, ponit exemplum in his duobus: «Tin¬ git, inquit, et ipse quosdam utique creden¬ tes, et fideles suos; signat illic in fronte mi¬ lites suos, i» Et in lib. de Baptismo : « De¬ hinc, inquit, manus imponitur per benedic¬ tionem , provocans et invitans Spiritum sanctum.» Ubi vides Tertullianum antiquis¬ simum auctorem omnia tria ponere, unctio¬ nem, signum crucis in fronte, et manus im¬ positionem. Item Cyprianus lib. I. epist. 12. et lib. II. epist. I. modo vocat unctionem, modo ma¬ nus impositionem, et praeterea vocat aperte Sacramentum. Nam sic ait lib. II. epist. I. de Baptismo,, et Confirmatione loquens : « Tuno plene sanctificari, et esse Filii Dei possunt, si Sacramento utroque nascantur.» Augustinus lib. II. contra litteras Petiliani cap. 104: « Sacramentum, inquit, Chrisma¬ tis in genere visibilium signaculorum sacro¬ sanctum est, sicut ipse Baptismus. » De Poenitentia. Joan. XX: Quomm remiseritis peccata , re¬ mittuntur eis, et quorum retinueritis, retenta sunt. Hic habemus , Primo ritum, nimirum externum, et judicialem absolutionem, quae est signum interioris, quae fit a Deo per ver¬ bum externum , tamquam instrumentum. (1) Eph. V, 26; Joan. III, 3; Matth. XXVII, 19; Mare. XVI, 16; Tit. III, 5, — (2) Matth. XXVI, 26; I. Cor. XI, 23 et 24 ; Joan. VI, 54 et 55. — (3) Tit. III, 5. CAPUT XXIV. 483 Secundo habemus promissionem gratiae : Remittuntur eis. Tertio habemus mandatum ibidem : Sicut misit me Pater , et ego mitto vos (I). Unde Apostolus Il.Corinth. V : Reus, inquit, dedit nobis ministerium reconciliationis. Et infra : Pro Christo legatione fungimur (2). Ambrosius lib. I de Poenitentia cnp. 7 : « Quid interest utrum per Poenitentiam , an per lavacrum hoc jus sibi datum Sacerdotes vendicent? unum in utroque ministerium est Sed dices, quia in lavacro operatur my¬ steriorum gratia. Quid in Poenitentia? nonne Dei nomen operatur? » Cyrillus lib. XII in Joannem cap.56. com¬ parat reconciliationem poenitentium cum Baptismo. Augustinus lib. V de Baptismo c. 20. nu¬ merat cum Baptismo , Eucharistia , et Con¬ firmatione , etiam Reconciliationem , per manus impositionem , et in Psalm. CXLVI. in illud : Qui alligat contritiones eorum (‘6), disertis verbis Sacramentum appellat recon¬ ciliationem poenitentium : «Qua; sunt, in¬ quit, ista alligamenta? temporalia Sacra¬ menta. Alligamenta medicinalia sunt contri¬ tionis nostrae. Sacramenta interim tempora¬ lia, quibus habemus consolationem. » Et in¬ fra : Haec Sacramenta esse dicit Eucharis¬ tiam , et manus impositionem Praepositi in Poenitentiam, quae in coelo non erunt. De Extrema unctione. JacobiV. habemus ritum: Orent super eum , ungentes eum oleo in nomine Domini. Item pro¬ missionem : Et alleviabit eum Dominus , et si in peccatis fuerit , dimittentur ei (4). Denique mandatum colligitur evidenter ex eo , quod Apostolus non auderet ita absolute promit¬ tere tantum effectum, nisi a Domino id acce¬ pisset, ut supra ostendimus etiam testimonio Apologiae, Calvini, et Kemnitii. Ex Patribus, Innocentius I. in epist. 1. ad Decentium cap. 8. loquens de oleo sancto in¬ firmorum : « Poenitentibus, inquit, istud in¬ fundi non potest, quia genus est Sacramen¬ ti. Nam quibus reliqua Sacramenta negan¬ tur, quomodo unum genus putatur posse con¬ cedi? » Bernardus in vita S. Malachia;, scribit eum vocatum, ut feminam morituram inungeret, sed dum differtur unctio, illam expirasse; Malachiam autem vehementer deluisse, quod sine gratia Sacramenti hujus obiisset; ita¬ que tandiu orasse, ac flevisse , donec eam a mortuis revocavit , et tum demum eam un¬ xisse, et eam omnino convaluisse : « Unxit eam, inqui^ sciens in -hoc Sacramento remitti peccata. » De ordinis Sacramento. Habemus ritum externum, manus imposi¬ tionem, I. Timoth. IV. Item promissionem gratiae ibidem : Noli negligere gratiam , quce in te est , quce data est tibi per prophetiam , cum impositione manuum presbyterii. Et II. Timoth. I : Admoneo te , ut resuscites gratiam Dei , quce est in te per impositionem manuum mearum. Denique institutio , et mandatum^ Ephes. IV : Ipse dedit quosdam quidem Apos¬ tolos, alios Euangelistas, alios Pastores, et Doc- torcs etc. (o) Et praeterea, unde sciebat Apo¬ stolus datam esse Timotheo gratiam per im¬ positionem manuum, si a Deo non didicerat, eo signo conferri gratiam? Augustinus lib. II cont. epist. Parmeniani cap. 13. loquens de Baptismo, et Ordinatio¬ ne : « Utrumque, inquit, Sacramentum est, et quadam consecratione utrumque homini datur, illud cum baptizatur, istud cum ordi¬ natur. Itaque in Catholica Ecclesia, utrum¬ que non licet reiterare, o Similia habet lib. I de Baptismo cap. 4. De Matrimonio. Habemus nomen ipsum Sacramenti, Ephes. V : Sacramentum hoc magnum est. Item ritum externum, id est, contractum visibilem inter virum et feminam : de hoc enim Apostolus dicit, quod sit magnum Sacramentum , ut exponit Chrysostomus , et Hieronymus in hunc locum , qui etiam Nazianzenum citat, et omnes alii. Habemus etiam institutionem divinam, Matth. XIX : Quod Deus conjunxit, homo non separet. Denique gratiam annexam colligimus ex hoc ipso loco Pauli. Nam con¬ junctio viri, et feminae , significat conjunc- (1) Joan. XX, 23 et 21. — (2) II. Cor. V, 18. — (3) Psal. CXLVI, 3. — (4) Jac. V, 14 et 15. — (5) I. Tim. IV, 14; II. Tim. I. 6; Ep!.. IV, 11. 484 LIBER II. tionem Christi cum Ecclesia. Illa autem con¬ junctio duplex est; una per naturae confor- mitatem, quae facta est in incarnatione, et haec Christum conjugit non solum cum Ec¬ clesia, sed etiam cum toto genere humano : altera est per gratiam, et charitatem,et haec est, cum sola Ecclesia; et ratione hujus di¬ citur Christus sponsus , et Ecclesia sponsa, juxta illud II. Cor. XI : Des/jondi vos uni viro virginem castam exhibere Christo (1). Igitur Matrimonium viri, et feminae, ut possit sig¬ nificare utramque unionem Christi cum Ec¬ clesia, oportet ut non solum sit inter conju¬ ges unio qua;dam naturalis, et carnalis, qua¬ lis etiam inter Gentiles reperitur, sed etiam unio spiritualis ex gratia , et charitate pro¬ veniens. Proinde Sacramentum hoc gratiam istam confert, ut significatio sit perfecta. Quare Paulus Ephes. V, saepe monet viros, ut diligant uxores, sicut Christus Ecclesiam, et feminas monet, ut viris subjectae sint, si¬ cut Ecclesia subjecta est Christo : et ratio¬ nem reddit, quia licec eorum conjunctio, Sa¬ cramentum est Christi, et Ecclesiae. Jam ex Patribus, Augustinus passim hoc docet, lib. de bono conjugali, cap. 18 : « In nostrorum, inquit, nuptiis plus valet sancti¬ tas Sacramenti , quam fecunditas uteri. « Et cap. 24 : « Bonum nuptiarum per omnes gentes, et oriines homines in causa generan¬ di est, et in tide castitatis : quod autem ad populum Dei attinet, etiam in sanctitate Sa¬ cramenti, perquam nefas est etiam interce¬ dente repudio alteri nubere. » Atque hoc lo¬ co sufficiant : nam in disputatione de singu¬ lis Sacramentis plura adferemus. Lotionem pedum non esse Sacramentum. Nunc superest demonstrare, non esse plu¬ ra Sacramenta, quam septem praedicta. Et quidem multa ita dicuntur a veteribus Sa¬ cramenta, praeter ista septem. Nam Alexan¬ der I Papa in epist. I. vocat aquam benedic- N tara Sacramentum. Augustinus lib. XIX con¬ tra Faustum cap. 14. et in Psal. CXLI. sig¬ num crucis vocat Sacramentum, et in Psal. LXV. ac lib. IV de symbolo cap. 1. vocat Sacramenta caeremonias , quae iiunt ante Baptismum, utexorcismos, et similia, et lib. II dc peccatorum meritis, et remiss. cap.2G. vocat Sacramentum panem quemdam bene¬ dictum, qui dabatur Catechumenis. Denique Ambrosius lib. III de Sacramentis cap. 1. et Cyprianus in serra, de ablutione pedum, et Bernardus in serni.de crena Domini conten¬ dunt ablutionem pedum, quam Dominus in¬ stituit, Joan. XIII, Sacramentum esse. Sed cx his omnibus nihil est, quod habeat diffi¬ cultatem, praeter ultimum. Nam in primis nec aqua benedicta, nec signum crucis, nec panis benedictus, nec exorcismi, et aliae cai- remoniae Baptismum praecedentes in Scrip¬ turis inveniuntur : proinde non possunt ad¬ versarii ea pro Sacramentis habere. Deinde illa omnia dantur etiam ante Baptismum, ut ex iisdem locis Augustini constat; AtBaptis- mus omnium consensu est omnium Sacra¬ mentorum primum, et quasi janua. Deni¬ que nihil eorum habet promissionem gratiae gratum facientis, neque constat an a Chris¬ to instituta sint , an ab Apostolis , cum ta¬ men vera Sacramenta a solo Christo institui potuerint. De lotione pedum videtur major difficul¬ tas. Nam habemus Joan. XIII. ritum exter¬ num, ipsam pedum lotionem : item promis¬ sionem gratiae : Si non lavero te , non habe¬ bis partem mecum. Item mandatum Dei .Exem¬ plum dedi vobis. Item : Et vos debetis alter alterius lavare pedes. Item esse mvsterium, indicant illa verba : Quod ego facio , tu nescis modo , scies autem postea (2). Denique testi¬ monia illa Patrum, Ambrosii, Cypriani, Ber- nardi; cujus testimonium adducit Kemnitius pag. 32. ad probandum Sacramenta esse plura, quam septem, si testimoniis Patrum standum sit. Respondeo tamen, lotionem illam pedum, nihil habuisse commune cum Sacramentis proprie dictis, et solum posse dici Sacramen¬ tum largo modo, quemadmodum Sacramen¬ ta dicuntur omnia , quee mysticum sensum habent, et figura; sunt, ac typi aliarum re¬ rum. Nam fuit i’evera lotio illa signum Chri¬ sti humilitatis , et charitatis. Item fuit sig¬ num puritatis , qua debent homines ad Eu¬ charistiam accedere : ideo enim immediate ante Eucharistia; institutionem Christus hoc fecit. Denique fuit etiam signum , et figura quaedam purgationis, quam eramus habituri per Christi passionem , ut Cyrillus hoc loco exponit. Non fuisse autem Sacramentum proprie (1) Eph. V. 32: Matth. XIX, 6; II. Cor. XI, 2. — (2) Joan. XIII, 8. 15, 14 et 7. dictum, patet Primo, quia non habemus pro¬ missionem gratiae justificantis ; illud enim : J\tsi lavero te, non habebis partem mecum , ad litteram non promfttil gratiam, sed minatur poenam ob inobedientiam , ut exponunt hoc loco Clirysosfomus, et Cyrillus , et Basibus lib. I de Baptismo cap. 2. Si enim Petrus obstinate recusasset illam loLionem , periis- sct in aeternum : non quia illi deerat lotio pedum, sed quia peccaverat contra Christum, et deerat illi obedientia. Mystice tamen sig¬ nificare potest, ut exponit hoc loco Augusti¬ nus, etiam justos indigere , ut Christus eos quotidie lavet a peccatis venialibus , quae suntveluti sordes, quae pedibus adhaerent ob humanam conservationem. Sed hoc non suf¬ ficit ad Sacramentum efficiendum, quia hic agitur de lotione peccatorum venialium, quae non eget nova gratia gratum faciente. Unde Dominus ait : Qui lotus est, non eget, nisi ut pedes lavet, sed est mundus totus ( 1 ) , id est, mundus est simpliciter, et absolute, cum sit justus : tamen adhuc eget lotione a peccatis venialibus. Et praeterea non habemus ex hoc loco ipsam lotionem pedum reipsa tollere peccata venialia , alioqui deberemus quoti¬ die lavare pedes : sed solum lotionem illam unam , qua Dominus pedes lavit discipulo¬ rum fuisse figuram internae lotionis , quam accepimus a Christo. Non igitur ipsa pedum lotio est Sacramentum proprie dictum. Secundo non habemus mandatum , seu institutionem hujus ritus frequentandi, quod requiritur in omni Sacramento : alioqui peccarent fere omnes homines , qui non utuntur ista caeremonia. Et licet fuerit haec caei'emonia usitata olim in quibusdam Ec¬ clesiis statim post Baptismum , tamen non fuit unquam ab omnibus recepta, nec ab ip¬ sa Romana Ecclesia, ut testatur Ambrosius loco citato. Neque obstat illud mandatum : Exemplum dedi vobis. Item : Et vos debetis alter alterius lavare pedes. Et : Quod ego facio, tu nescis modo , scies autem postea. Nam hoc mandatum praecipit humilitatem, et charita- tem, ut exponunt Chrysostomus, et Cyrillus, non autem ipsam materialem lotionem pe¬ dum, ut patet ex praxi Ecclesiae; numquam enim Christiani putarunt se habere speciale mandatum de lotione pedum. Ad loca illa Patrum facile est respondere. Nam Ambrosius vocat Sacramentum, et my¬ sterium , quia in ipsius Ecclesia servabatur. ut sacra caeremonia, et ut aliquid Sacramen- tale : tamen non putabat ipse esse hanc lo¬ tionem proprie dictum Sacramentum, ut pa¬ tet tum ex eo, quod fatetur non remitti pec¬ cata lethaliaper eam lotionem, sed quasdam reliquias peccati originalis : tum etiam quia dicit se non reprehendere Ecclesiam Roma¬ nam, ubi ha;c caeremonia non erat in usu; quod certe non diceret, si putaret esse ve¬ rum Sacramentum. Poito Cyprianus, et Ber- nardus, si attente legantur, non dicunt ip¬ sam lotionem pedum materialem , esse Sa¬ cramentum, quo homines sanctificentur: sed solum dicunt illam unicam lotionem pedum Apostolorum a Christo factam, fuisse Sacra¬ mentum; quia per eam significabatur ali¬ quid sacrum, quod in nobis quotidie fieri de¬ bet, id est, expiatio peccatorum venialium, quae fit in nobis quotidie a Christo per ora¬ tionem , jejunia, humilitatem, et exercitia pietatis erga proximos, quibus vacamus. Et sane si putarent lotionem pedum esse Sacra¬ mentum , oporteret nos quotidie ex eorum sententia lavare invicem pedes : id enim ipsi dicunt , hoc Sacramentum esse quotidiana¬ rum culparum expiationem.