nificant acts, in the celebration, rather excite impiety than piety; that masses in which the priest alone communicates are unlawful and to be abrogated; and that using a low voice in consecrating is to be condemned, or that the mass should be celebrated in the vulgar tongue, or that a mixture of water with the wine is not to be used, as contrary to the institution of Christ.

A decree follows of what is to be observed and what avoided in the celebration of the mass.

The decree of Reformation contains eight chapters. They are mostly ecclesiastical regulations, either obvious or of inferior importance. The sixth, directing that last wills are to be altered circumspectly, announces an authority trenching upon the civil. There is an additional decree concerning the petition for the concession of the cup, deferring the determination upon it.

The next session was announced, as to take place on the 12th of November following, when the subject for enactment would be, the sacraments, of order, of matrimony, &c. The session, however, was prorogued to the 15th of July, 1563.

Although the decrees proposed were carried, there was no small number of dissentients. On the mass, the archbishop of Granada maintained the objections which he had formerly made, and added, that the assertion of Christ's offering himself in the supper was exceptionable, since the holy doctors declare, that he did this once. The protest of the bishop of Segovia is remarkable, not only for its good reasoning, but for adducing a passage as forming a part of the decree, which does not appear in the present copies of it. 'Likewise what is affirmed in the doctrine, that by this most holy offering, and unbloody sacrifice, of the altar, all the sa

crifices of nature and the law are perfected and consummated, is disapproved, as well because it derogates much 'from the bloody sacrifice of the cross, which was the fulfilment ' of all that was figured, and of which that venerable sacrifice

6

of the altar is commemorative, and from which alone it ' derives its force; and also, because neither scripture nor ⚫ legitimate tradition affirms this *.' Several other prelates followed, expressing sentiments in different ways similar. On the decree of the concession of the cup, there was likewise a considerable degree of dissatisfaction, either absolutely or in particular respects. The names are given in detail. Nothing passed unanimously but the appointment of the next day of session.

The usual persons, and about the usual number were present. Of the most efficient class, the prelates, there were, according to both Servantio and Le Plat, 162. Visconti, in a letter of the date of the session, is exhilarated at the manner in which it terminated. He expresses his thanks to God, that the canons and decrees were approved with less contradiction, and greater satisfaction and joy than could well be believed. He reckons the number of prelates present at 180. He adds, (which discovers his authority in the council,) that when the printing of the decrees was in contemplation, he intimated to the legates that they should not be printed. He mentions it as a report, that the cardinal of Lorraine, when he makes his appearance, will require the use of the cup for France, and likewise the removal of images. He was also informed, that the bishop of the Five Churches, on the day before, assembled the ambassadors of France, Portugal, and Switzerland, and endeavoured to persuade them to insist upon the matter of reform, and to postpone doctrine; which was of no use, he continues, since the incredulous and obstinate would not be induced to make any change, and the catholics had

* Item quod in doctrina dicitur per hanc altaris hostiam sacrosanctam, et sacrificium incruentum omnia sacrificia naturæ et legis perfici et consummari; tum quia derogat multum sacrificio crucis cruento, cujus omne [quod omnis?] quod figuratur complementum fuit, et cujus istud venerabile altaris sacrificium rememorativum est, et a quo solo habet vim suam; tum quia non est scriptura, neque legitima traditio quæ hoc affirmet.

no need of further instruction. The same counsel had been suggested at an early period in the preparation for this session*.

To enter at any length into an examination of the doctrine and reformation established at the session would require considerable space, and is not at all the professed or necessary undertaking of the present work. It only requires to be remarked, that if the epithets applied to the sacrifice of the mass, or the sacrament of the Lord's supper, mean anything, they express a palpable falsehood; for sacrifice, in a true and proper sense, it is none at all. The very additional epithet, unbloody, is a perfect and decisive demonstration of this; for it is of the essence of a sacrifice that it should be bloody, that it should be made a sacrifice by the loss of blood, or of life. If the epithets mean only, or allow to be meant, that the sacrifice is a figurative or improper one simply, this is to say, that it is neither a true nor a proper one; that is, in one word, that the whole parade of conciliar definition is a fallacy, a deception.

SESSION XXIII.

PREPARATIONS-SESSION.

Doctrine: Order-Reformation: Residence, Ecclesiastical Regulations. THE session to which we are now approaching is eminently memorable for the contentions and hazards by which it was signalized. For, what never had occurred before, it was prorogued eight times, it was agitated for ten months with unceasing disputes, it lost two of its illustrious legates by death, and other events of importance followed.

After the close of the former session, the legates imme

*See Letter of the 6th of August.

+ This exordium of the auditor, in some degree, reminds us of the sentence with which Tacitus opens his Histories. Opus aggredior opimum casibus, atrox præliis, discors seditionibus, ipsâ pace sævum. Quatuor principes ferro interempti, &c. Hist. i., ii.

R

diately employed suitable persons, among whom was the auditor, to collect the subjects proper for consideration by the council. They accordingly put forth certain articles on the subject of the sacrament of order, to be examined by the theologians. It was with a design, which will evidently appear, that these articles were heretical ones to be condemned, not, as was frequently the case, simple questions to be discussed.

These articles, contractedly, were, that order is not a sacrament, but a right; that it is rather a human figment; that the inferior degrees of order do not partake of the nature of a sacrament; that an ecclesiastical hierarchy is a nullity, and that all Christians are likewise priests; that no visible priesthood is discoverable in the New Testament, and that none are priests who do not preach; that unction is of no value, and that the holy spirit is not imparted by ordination; finally, that bishops are not superior to priests.

Regulations were then issued to be observed by the theologians in examining the articles of the sacraments of order and of matrimony. Among these, as before, the principal one was, that the speeches should be limited to half an hour. The theologians were divided into three classes, and their names are specified.

In the course of these preparations, the French ambassadors announced the apprehension of their sovereign, that as the adversaries, on whose account principally the council was convened, were not present at the past discussions, it might be said, that the council was fighting with a shadow, and that it was easy to settle matters without an opponent. He therefore desired, that, as far as doctrine was concerned, decision should be deferred. The legates answered, that as to manners they had no objection; but as to doctrine they could not comply, since the adversaries, so long expected, had pertinaciously refused their attendance at the synod. The imperial ambassador expressed a wish, nearly similar to that of the French, on the part of his Majesty, which was met by the council in the same manner.

The disputations had begun among the theologians on the subject of order, when some of the Spanish prelates complained grievously to Seripando, that among the articles proposed on this subject was omitted that which had been presented to the theologians in the council under Julius III, and in which it was contained, that episcopacy is of divine right, and bishops superior to presbyters. Seripando answered, that in that point there was no controversy with the heretics; it was therefore justly omitted. They rejoined, that Luther denied bishops to be of divine right. Seripando showed, that Luther admitted the institution of episcopacy to be of divine right; but asserted that the rites attached to it were human inventions. They were not satisfied, and expressed their fear, that if this article were omitted, a question would arise whether residence were of divine right. In which, says the historian, they were not much deceived, since the legates wished to deprive the fathers of all opportunity of discussing residence; indeed, when the theologians happened to touch upon the subject, as they often did, they were authoritatively reminded to keep to the matter before them*.

The congregations now commenced; and Seripando, in the absence of Mantua, addressing the fathers in a suitable speech, directed them to digest canons of doctrine, while the legates turned their attention to the subject of reformation.

The legates, however, felt the delicacy and difficulty of their situation, and resolved to do nothing without consulting his holiness. They therefore, without loss of time, despatched a letter to him, informing him of the state of things in the council, and particularly of the urgency of the fathers to bring on, in the first instance, the controversy concerning residence. They suggested, that either nothing new should be decreed upon the subject, since the decree published under Paul III was sufficient; or the whole should be

* In quo sane non admodum illi fallebantur, omnem siquidem disceptandi de residentia occasionem patribus ademptam legati voluerunt, imo cum theologi, &c.