JJI 



BA< X 



SACHAMKXT.-5. 



HI 



more entirely upon divine assistance ; an he refute* all thece 

 a t note length. (See also Galen, ' Comment.' vi.. in Hip;** r. 

 n..' lib. vi.. t. mi. xvii. B., p. 341, ed. Kuhn.) The other reuon 

 that M given, naim-lv, " tin- magnitude of the disease," U BupjHirted by 

 th<- author of thf ' >.!:! MS. in (iregor. No/ianr. in Rastii Kxi-.-rpti-.' 

 quoted in GaUfurd'* .Suidan : virlt hpiu> irifar TM \iyovai rtaw rf 

 irifurr, ravrif, rift VriAiprTur))r otyuu' itpa Si aSri) nvfHvrtpoy i Ai)f(ij. 

 timfifitrrm murvr ry cajniirtr *rl 1 MO" ri '(*"' "">'" y*M<"nuurrixoa 

 fWurnu aAr#aj. It U aUo indirectly sup|>ort-d by the HHlopHM 

 expression* Ufa* pint 'AAjru^ow (Homer, Ody**.. III., vii.. v. 167), 

 i.fA, lxM (Me Athwueun, < Dejpnosoph .' lil>. vii.. 17-20, pp. 282-4), 

 and especially by the anatomical name ip4x arrow, " on sacrum," of 

 which tliu aeeou to be the most probable interpretation, ('..-lius 

 Aiirrlianui give* the following interpretation* : " AppelUtur Epilejwia 

 ' tarn panto,' aire quod divinitus putfttir inimiaw ; aive quod sacram 

 routaminet animam [which U supported by Apuleius, ' Apolog.,' p. 58, 

 ed. Price] ; live quod in capita fiat, quod multorum philosophomra 

 jiidicio acnim teuipluin et parti* animtc in corpore natre [which is 

 the reaaon given by Theophanen Nonniw, / ril.] ; rive ob magni- 

 tii-linvm piuuinnu, majora enira vulgus tacra vocavit" (' DC Mor'o. 

 Chroii ,' lib. L. cap. 4. p. 'Jill, ed. Amman.) Of all the explim.it ions 

 that have been proposed, perhaps that which derives the term from 

 the diaeaae being supposed to be under the more immediate direction 

 of the gods is the most likely to be the true one, both as being the 

 moat ancient and also as being that which Galen preferred : it is also 

 indirectly confirmed by two popular names mentioned by Leo in hi* 

 ' Synopsis Mcdicin:r, lib. ii., cap. 12 (ap. Krinurins, ' Anecd. Med. Or.,' 

 Lugd. Bat., 8vo., 1840), namely, Sal^aer and eikririaa^t. It this is 

 not the real meaning of the term, it must have been applied " ob 

 maynilitdiarm paaiumii." for none of the other derivations bear the 

 slightest marks of probability. 



K, a Spanish wine of the dry kind ; in French, Yin ter. It is 

 the same wine which is now named Sherry. K alstaff calls it S/ierrit 

 tack, that is. sack from Xeres in Spain. Riteon supposed that the 

 old sack of FalatafTs time was a compound of sherry, cider, and sugar; 

 but he produced no good authority for the assertion. The chief 

 difficulty about sack has arisen from the later importation of sweet 

 wines from Malaga, the Canaries, Ac., which were at first called 

 Malaga, or Canary sacks ; sack being by that time considered as a name 

 applicable to all sweet nines. One of these sweet wines still retains 

 the name of sack. It is little used, but being proverbial for sweetness, 

 it has caused some misunderstanding as to the original dry sack. 



SACK A. MK NTS and TRANSUBSTANTIATION. The Christian 

 Sacraments are not merely certain high forms, but the highest acts of 

 church membership. For the Christian Church being but the 

 outward visible representation of the internal fellowship of the 

 faithful with Christ, and with one another ; this twofold element of 

 the church is most fitly corresponded to by the institution of external 

 risible actions, intended to express an internal spiritual effect or grace. 

 Sin h are the Sacraments, a term used to express "Sacramentum," by 

 which the Greek mi/sla-ion is rendered in the old Italic versions, and 

 also in the Vulgate. 



With regard to the number of the Sacraments, as is well known, 

 two opinions are current among Christian communities, the Greek 

 and Romish Churches holding the number of seven, while all other 

 Catholic bodies limit the number to two. The history of this 

 difference may be briefly stated as follows. The term Sacrament was 

 applied by the Fathers to the mysterious doctrines of religion, as the 

 Trinity, the Incarnation, and, in some instances, to the ordinances of 

 religion in a wide sense. In a certain sense the seven-fold system of 

 .nrch of Rome may be considered as an abatement of the lax 

 terminology of some of the Fathers. The title of sacraments is by her 

 limited to seven actions baptism, or the sign of our spiritual birth ; 

 the eucharut, in which our spiritual life is nourished ; confirmation, 

 for the strengthening of the same ; penance, for the restoration of the 

 lapsed ; extreme unction, as a preparation for death ; matrimony, for 

 maintenance of the race of mankind in general ; and orders, for that of 

 the race, of God's ministers. 



Without entering into the controversy on this subject, it will bo 

 sufficient to observe that the number of seven, as asserted by the 

 Church of Rome, is very far from being sanctioned by the uniform 

 assent of ecclesiastical practice. Antecedently to a very modern 

 (that of Florence) the number of seven had never been positively 

 ... : 



The two sacraments then, to which, in the judgment of all Catholic 

 bodies (save the Greek and Romish communions) the number is 

 y limited, are those of baptism and the Lord's supper. It is 

 asserted that on the basis of two Jewish rites of recognised typical 

 import our Lord established, by direct command, those two sacra- 

 ments, of which alone the authority is unquestionable. An indirect 

 argument in favour of this more restricted view may be drawn from 

 manist statement* respecting the relative value of the several 

 sacraments. For although the authorities of that church are con- 

 Kittently anxious to prove the entire number of seven to be equal in 

 rank, the dignity which they directly attribute to the eucharist, and 

 that which they c.-.nn >t withhold from baptism, may be in some sort 

 alleged as an involuntary a/went to the doctrine of the opposite party. 



The principal feature of the scheme of salvation providentially 



offered to man is faith in the Saviour ; that is, that through Christ a 

 |th U opened to heaven. The eye of this Christian faith in not con- 

 fined exclusively to the doctrine, or the person, or the sutl'ri in 

 death of Christ ; but it comprises within ita range the entire >-\ 

 It consists in a perfect devotion to Jesus ; in an internal union with 

 him, and spiritual imitation of him, in which man appears as a new 

 creature, alike as regards knowledge, iVding, and action. The symbols 

 of this faith, and the acts by which an obligation to it is expressed, are 

 the two Christian sacraments baptism and the Lord's Supper. Baptism 

 will be found fully treated under that head. 



The various opinions respecting the exact import and appropriate 

 benefits of the Lord's Supper are of high antiquity. A history of 

 these will be found in the article COMMUNION. The difficulties con- 

 nected with the question are increased by the general adherence to 

 the words of Scripture, observable in the liturgical formularies. Tim 

 non-existence of a dogmatical theology during the first ages of the 

 Church is well known, which renders it unnecessary to look for 

 scientific definitions throughout that period. But, concurrently with 

 the uniformity of practice, there is to be found a three-fold variety of 

 interpretation, corresponding with the peculiar views of what may tie 

 considered the three principal schools of early Christian theology. 



The Church of Asia Minor, as also some great Origenists in the 

 West, professed views of the holy eucharist which the Church of Komc 

 and the Lutheran have (to a certain extent,) pleaded as the sentiment* 

 of antiquity supporting their own. Such were those of Ignatius, 

 Justin Martyr, Iretuetis, Hilary of Poitiers, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory 

 of Nyssa, Ambrose, Chrysostom, and Theodoret. The common point 

 of agreement among these writers is the communion of the body and 

 blood of Christ in a high spiritual sense yentratty. But a considerable 

 difference of statement regarding details is observable among tin -m. 

 For example, some expressions of Cyril of Jerusalem are directly and 

 strongly opposed to the tenet of trausubstantiation, which Gregory of 

 Nyssa is not unfairly quoted as supporting. 



The views of the Church of North Africa, as expressed by Tertnllian, 

 Cyprian, and Augustine, differed as a whole from those just named. 

 The African doctors may be considered as regarding the eucharist as 

 an active and efficacious symbol. 



A third party, that of the school of Alexandria, applied in some 

 measure its usual allegorising views to this sacrament. But even in 

 the absence of all approach on the part of these Fathers to corporeal 

 views, a leaning to the sentiments of the first-mentioned party is 

 observable in some portions of their writings. 



Each of the many designations by which this sacrament was known 

 until the close of the 4th century, bore some reference to the original 

 object of ita institution. This may be traced throughout the various 

 expressions breaking of bread, communion, Lord's supper, eucharist, 

 oblation, commemoration, and passover. Kcclesiastic.il antiquity can- 

 not be adduced with fairness in support of the literal interpretation 

 applied by a large body of Christians to the words used by our Lord 

 in His institution of the sacrament. John of Damascus, the principal 

 writer of the Eastern Church, maintained (it is true), on the authority 

 of some of the Fathers, a literal change of the bread and wine into the 

 body and blood of Christ. The figurative interpretation put upon the, 

 words of Christ by a council at Constantinople in A.IJ. 754 was denied 

 at the second council of Nice in 787, when it was ruled that the 

 symbols are not figures or images at all, but the real body and blood. 

 Theophylact and Kulhymius Zigabeuus coincide with John of Damas- 

 cus. But it was reserved for the Western Church to carry out into its 

 remote consequences the doctrine of a material change, which, in 

 common with her Eastern sister, she ultimately came to maintain. 

 This doctrine was maintained during the 9th century by Paschasius 

 Radbert more precisely and authoritatively than before. He was 

 1, however, by KaKimis Maurus, and Katramn or Bertram (whose 

 sounder and more scriptural views many centuries later found an echo 

 in our own Kidley), and also by the suspected ingenuity of Scotus 

 Erigena, 



Various instances of opposition to the doctrine of transubstantiation 

 subsequently occurred ; but, supported by authority like that of 

 Sylvester II. (the famous Qerbert), it continued to gain ground. 

 During the 1 1th century it had become an article, to dissent from 

 which was heretical ; although a doctrine substantially the same with 

 that held by the Anglican Church at the present day was preached by 

 doctors such as Alfric, and although an archbishop of Sens, Leutheric, 

 advocated opinions regarding the eocharist similar to those which 

 involved Berengar of Tours in controversy with Lanfranc, and drew 

 upon him the hostility and condemnation of popes and councils. 



Among the numerous controversies connected with the different 

 theories on the subject, the more modern opinions are marked by a 

 tendency to regard the eucharist as a purely symbolical rite. For 

 transubstantiation Luther substituted a corporal local presence, com- 

 monly called consubstantiation. There appears an inconsistency in the 

 obstinacy with which Luther contended for his theory. He had aban- 

 doned the sacrifice of the mass and the theurgic pretensions connected 

 with the real presence which made this dogma of such importance to 

 the Church of Rome. Luther's great object was to preserve this 

 nt from Iteing degraded by the same unspiritual iubj-tic<- views 

 (as he conceived) with which it was menaced by Cnrlstadt and his party. 

 This evil would be best remedied by a bold assertion of the ubjcctirc 



