As for the 215 Sermon De Tempore which comes next 't is none of S. Austin's but taken out of a Book written above 200 Years after his Death And yet that which the Cardinal aims at here does him not the least service For though S. James's Text is produced yet 't is to exhort the sick to anoint his own Body with Oil that the Church was to furnish them withal instead of going to Inchanters Wizards Soothsayers and using Devillish arts to recover his Health He must be a cunning Man indeed that can from hence make out either Extreme Vnction for the Soul or a Priest to Administer it But his next step is to the Treatise of the Visitation of the sick And now we are gotten the Lord knows where For Bellarmin himself confesseth That it seems to be falsly attributed to S. Austin only he adds It cannot be denied to be an ancient and good Book That 's hard indeed But yet Erasmus denied it who could judge of an Author as well as another Body and calls (q) Censura in Visit Infirm this Author a prating fellow neither Learned nor Eloquent And in truth 't is such a sensless Book that he had reason to be angry at the impudence or ignorance of those that obtrude such Writings upon us under the name of S. Austin And yet Bellarmin upon second thoughts could not find in his heart to let this Book go for one that seems to be none of S. Augustin's but afterward chose to say (r) De Scriptor Eccles p. 171. Lugd. that he had nothing certain about it For why there is good evidence in it for worshipping Crosses and Images and for Auricular Confession besides the small touch concerning the Spiritual signification of External Unction Such Books as these they give up as unwillingly as a Man parts with a dying Friend and seem to have no regret all the while for sacrificing the reputation of the Fathers to the service of their Cause Bede is mentioned next who in his Notes upon James V. speaking of the Unction there hath these words And we read in the Gospel that the Apostle also did this and now the custom of the Church is that the Sick should be anointed with consecrated Oyl by the Bishops and be healed thereby together with Prayer Nor is it only lawful for Presbyters but as Pope Innocentius writeth for all Christians also to anoint themselves or their friends with it in their need So that Bede makes the Unction of S. James to be the same with that of S. Mark and that of the Church the same with both the recovery of bodily health being the end of all three than which there could not be expected a better Testimony against Etreme Unction But by this time we are so well used to the Cardinals Authorities that we ought to wonder at nothing As for Theophylact in the eleventh Age the Cardinal sends us to his Notes upon S. Mark where indeed he takes occasion also to repeat the place of S. James and from thence to shew the several significations of anointing with Oyl but of Extreme Unction no nor so much as of anointing the Sick he saith not a word Lastly Oecumenius upon the Vth. of S. James tells us That whilest our Lord conversed with Men the Apostles did the same thing anointing the Sick with Oyl and healing them And therefore according to Oecumenius 't is impossible to prove Extreme Vnction from S. James which is not a Rite of healing the Sick but the Sacrament of the Dying Commend me to these Men for doing their work by Authorities of the Fathers and Traditions of the Antients The second sett of Bellarmin's Fathers are those that (s) Ubi supra §. Habemus deinde alios c. expresly number this Vnction amongst the Sacraments that is to say they call the Vnction of the Sick a Sacrament to which I have already said that if every Rite and Ceremony to which Antient Writers have given the name of a Sacrament must go for a Sacrament properly so called the Church of Rome must mend her Councils and Catechisms and multiply Sacraments exceedingly But who are those Fathers The most antient that he names is Alcuinus who lived in the later end of the 8th Age and the beginning of the 9th He was Scholar to Venerable Bede and if in this matter he learned of his Master we are secure enough that his Authority will do us no harm But whether it would or not we shall never learn from that †De divinis Officiis cap. 47.49 Book to which Bellarmin refers us because it was none of his but the work of a much later Writer as Quercetanus has shewn in the Preface to the Edition of Alcuinus But what is worst of all the testimony of this Author whoever he was though it proves Vnction of the Sick to be customary in his days yet proves as clearly that Extreme Unction was not For he distinguishes between the Sick and the Dying shewing that the Sick indeed were anointed but not those that were in extremedanger of Death for which there was very good reason since even in those days Unction was used in order to bodily health but not as a Sacrament to fortifie the Soul in her passage out of this Life For a more particular account of this Authority I refer the Reader to (t) Ubi supra p. 119. c. Mr. Daille's exquisite Discourse upon it Amalarius comes next whose judgment concerning the use and end of that Unction which S. James mentions we have already seen P. 1. § 5. and that in the very * De Offic. Eccl. lib. 1. cap. 12. place to which the Cardinal refers us This Writer does accordingly make the Unction of his time to be a Remedy of sickness and therefore they may as well make Life and Death to be one and the same thing as have the confidence to make the Unction of Amalarius Extreme Unction And now we are brought to the borders of the Twelfth Age for his next Father is Cardinal Damiani who is yet far enough from acknowledging this Sacrament of Extreme Unction For though he ascribes spiritual effects to that Unction mentioned by S. James yet he says health is restored by it and though he calls it a Sacrament yet he makes it to be a †Unde Sancti Patres hanc Unctionem Sacramentum esse sanxerunt Sacrament established by the Fathers i.e. a Rite which the Fathers thought deserved the name of a Sacrament no less than many others which yet were not of Divine Institution or universal and necessary obligation And that this was his meaning cannot I think reasonably be denied by our Adversaries since he makes Vnction of the Sick not to be one of Seven but of Twelve Sacraments which he reckons up in that place But to make sure of some body Bellarmin goes on to S. Bernard Father Hugo de Sancto Victore and Father Lombard who I
the Soul obtains the recovery of his Bodily Health But then as to the Persons who are designed whether to receive or to administer this Sacrament this also is delivered and that not obscurely in the foregoing Words For it is there shewn that the proper Ministers of this Sacrament are the Presbyters of the Church by which Word here we are not to understand the more Aged or Honourable amongst the People but either Bishops or Priests c. It is declared also that this Unction is to be ministred to the Sick but to those especially who are so dangerously ill that they seem to be past Recovery whence it is also called the †Sacramentum excuntium Sacrament of the Dying If the sick Persons recover after having received this Unction they may again be relieved by it when the like danger of Death happens Wherefore they are by no means to be hearkened to who against the manifest and clear Sense of the Apostle James teach either that this Unction is a device of Men or a Rite received from the Fathers that has neither a Divine Command nor a Promise of Grace and who assert that it is of no longer use as having been applied in the Primitive Church to the Gift of Healing only or who say that the Rite and Usage of the Holy Roman Church in the Administration of this Sacrament is repugnant to the Sense of St. James and therefore to be altered Lastly who affirm that this Extreme Unction may without Sin be contemn'd by the Faithful For all these things are most evidently contrary to the perspicuous Words of so great an Apostle c. So that in the Church of Rome Extreme Unction is a Sacrament administred to dying Persons the proper Effect whereof is the cleansing of them from the Remains of Sin by the Grace of the Holy Ghost and as appears by the Form of Words used in the Administration it is applied in order to the forgiveness of all Sins that have been committed by means of any of the Senses That Authority which they pretend for this Sacrament is indeed the highest for they say it was instituted by Christ The proof which they produce for this Institution is that it was insinuated by St. Mark and publish'd by St. James That the Evangelist did insinuate it and the other Apostle publish it we have the Word and Authority of the Council of Trent But I will be bold to say that if Men are not content to rely upon the Authority of the Council but will examine its proofs they may easily be convinced that neither did St. James publish nor St. Mark insinuate any such Doctrine or Practice as it has established And therefore the wisest Passage in the Declaration of the Council concerning this matter is that they are by no means to be hearkened unto who teach otherwise than it teaches For if we can but persuade Men to give us the hearing or the reading we are very confident to make it plain that not our Objections against this pretended Sacrament but their Pleas for it are most evidently contrary to the perspicuous Words both of the Evangelist who is said to insinuate it and of the Apostle who is said to publish it §. 2. That Extreme Unction can by no means be proved from St. James chap. v. 14 15. THE clearest proof they have for this pretended Sacrament are doubtless those Words of St. James ch v. 14 15. Is any sick among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray over him anointing him with Oil in the Name of the Lord And the Prayer of Faith shall save the Sick and the Lord shall raise him up and if he have committed Sins they shall be forgiven him Now supposing that the Institution of a Sacrament were implied in these Words and that the outward Sign thereof were anointing with Oil yet this could not by any means be the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction in the Church of Rome For according to St. James the Sick Person was to be anointed in order to the raising of him up or his Recovery from Sickness But the Sick are anointed in that Church for purging away the remains of their Sins when they seem to be past hopes of Recovery And tho perhaps one or other may recover afterward yet this is meerly accidental and besides the intention of administring their Sacrament which they therefore call the Sacrament of the Dying Nay the Sick Person in St. James was not to be anointed only in order to his Recovery but his Recovery was certainly to follow for 't is said the Prayer of Faith shall save the Sick and the Lord shall raise him up Which one Observation is sufficient to overthrow all the hope they have in this Text. For St. James does indeed advise anointing with Oil but 't is in such a Case when most assuredly the sick Person should not die The Church of Rome also does require the same but 't is when nothing can be well expected but the Death of the Patient Now which way they can gather a Sacrament of Extreme Vnction from an Authority that requires an Vnction which is not Extreme how they can prove a Sacrament which they pretend to be proper for dying Persons from those Words of Scripture that mention a Rite never used upon dying Persons a Man must have a great deal of Wit or rather a good share of the contrary to be able to imagine Which one thing seems to have been so well considered by †Bellar. de Extr. Unct. c. 3. Dico secundo illa verba duo c. Bellarmin and others after him that they found it necessary to interpret these Words The Prayer of Faith shall save the Sick and the Lord shall raise him up not so much of restoring Health to the Body as of cleansing forgiving and quieting the Soul And so they have made St. James to use Expressions in such a Sense as never Man of Understanding did either before or after him till the Cause of the Church of Rome made it necessary for these Men to interpret Words against all Rules of Speaking For according to the perpetual use of Words what is it to save the Sick but to save him from his Sickness What is it to raise up a sick Man but to restore him to Health And who would interpret these Expressions otherwise but they whose Cause is desperate if they be not otherwise interpreted But if it be asked what Grounds they pretend for this Liberty of Interpretation you must know that the Word saving indifferently refers to the healing of the Body or to the restoring of the Soul and the Word raising tho properly used of something that belongs to the Body yet by a Metaphor frequently used in Scripture signifies also to drive away sadness and dulness from the Mind Which is true indeed but nothing to the purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For tho these Words saving and raising may have
Supernatural and cost you nothing and you shall take nothing for the use of it But now (o) Mark vi 7. St. Mark mentions no other Power in the Commission which Jesus gave them but that over unclean Spirits And yet describing what they did in pursuance of their Commission he says (p) Mar. vi 13. They cast out many Devils and anointed with Oil many that were Sick and healed them which Words being compared with what the other Evangelists say are to be interpreted in this manner And as for the Sick which they healed that was done no less by a Divine and Supernatural Power than the casting out of Devils for they used nothing but the known Ceremony betokening an extraordinary work of God in the Cures they wrought that is Anointing with Oil. And thus those Words of St. Mark do plainly enough suppose that Power of healing the Sick to have been in their Commission tho he did not at first express it as the other two Evangelists did Finally it doth not appear that our Saviour enjoined the use of this Ceremony but it is rather probable that he did not since the Apostles healed many Persons without it And therefore if one should say that possibly they took it up of themselves as a Rite very pertinent for them to use upon this occasion and which would easily be understood by all I do not see how he could be confuted Perhaps it may not be unreasonably supposed that they received some general Direction from our Saviour that in exerting the Gift which he had bestowed upon them they might freely use this honourable Ceremony or some other of like signification that was fit to raise the expectation of a miraculous Healing Now this being the only place in the New Testament where anointing with Oil is mentioned besides that of St. James and it being also plain that the Vnction in St. Mark referred to the Gift of Healing surely the Vnction spoken of by St. James must have the same signification or else 't is a place of such obscurity that it will be very hard to find a Sacrament in it or to make any conclusion whatsoever from it For in all appearance the very same case is spoken of in both places The Action is the same viz. Anointing with Oil the Persons anointed are in the same Circumstances for in both they are the Sick And the Event the same for in St. Mark they were Healed and in St. James 't is expresly said The Lord shall raise him up What therefore should hinder but that if Anointing were the Ceremony of miraculous Healing in the one it should have the same signification in the other If there were any Difficulty in the Words of St. James and it were doubtful to what purpose the Vnction by him mentioned was applied one would think the obscurity should wholly disappear before the Light that St. Mark offers to clear that Text. But that in all appearance the same Case should be expressed in both and yet there should be so vast a difference as the Roman Doctrine supposes is for them to believe who make the Scriptures good for nothing till the Church comes to find out a meaning for them For this reason some of our Adversaries have thought fit to prove their pretended Sacrament out of St. Mark well perceiving that without drawing him in for a Witness to their Doctrine as well as they could they must be forced to quit St. James too Thus Maldonate without mincing the matter asks If the Sacrament of Extreme Unction be not here in St. Mark where is it A question put not without Reason I confess from whence I infer that here it is not and therefore 't is no where to be found in the Scripture As for his other Question which he presently adds Why is it not here if it be any where else I answer that if he could have made good proof that he had found it any where else he would never have stretched his Confidence so far as to pretend that he found it here ‖ Maldon Comm. in Evang. Marc. vi In this place says the Jesuit we are to deal not only with Hereticks who obstinately contend that the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction is not here spoken of but also with certain Catholicks who seem to say almost the same thing who are nevertheless excusable in great part since these new Heretics had not yet sprung up in their time And he was so well satisfied that their Sacrament was gone if St. Mark 's Text could not save it that he plainly said that to deny this place to be understood of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction was to make a step towards the taking of it away either maliciously if he were an Heretic that did so or imprudently if he were a Catholic He well knew that the Divines of his Church had generally denied the Unction which the Apostles used in St. Mark to be their Sacramental Unction and that they had laid the stress of their Cause upon St. James but he saw the Inconvenience of it too that the same Unction being indeed spoken of in both places by giving up one they in effect yeilded both and so left their Sacrament without any Testimony of Scripture at all Thus far therefore his Judgment is to be commended that he chose rather to challenge both places which might be done with the same Confidence and the same Pains that would serve to challenge one of them than to be at the Charge of wresting St. James and afterwards to be at a new expence of pains in making St. Mark and St. James to speak of two different Unctions i. e. to shew a Difference where in Truth there was none to be shown But how does this bold Undertaker bring St. Mark 's Text to his Purpose Why he proves that the Apostles did not use Oil as a Medicine as if any either Protestant or Papist was so weak as to say they did And then he concludes that they anointed the Sick not to cure their Bodies so much as their Minds by a Sacrament as if that Unction must needs be a Sacrament or a Medicine He pretends that it could not be used as a Sign of a miraculous Cure because it would have obscured the Miracle and led the Spectators into a belief that the Cure was wrought by the natural force of the Oil. And some other such things he says which are so intolerably trifling that I am very well pleased to be excused from giving them any answer by the Confession of the most and best Divines of the Roman Church that the Unction in St. Mark was not Sacramental or for the healing of the Mind but the Body For this was not taught by Cajetan only but by (q) Tom. iv Disp 8. qu. 1. Gregory de Valentia and by (r) De Extr. Unct. cap. ii Probo igitur c. Bellarmin who recites other great Authors of the same Opinion And that we may be
blind Jesus answered Neither hath this man sinned nor his parents i. e. It was for no sin either of him or his Parents that he was born blind but that the works of God should be made manifest in him In like manner the supposition of the sick Man's having committed sins is to be limited by reference to the Case now discoursed of that is of his Sickness For whether it came in the ordinary and natural course of things or whether God sent it for the trial of his patience and submission the Prayer of Faith should save the sick or if it were inflicted as a punishment and for his Correction God would release him of the punishment and raise him up and his sins should be forgiven It is not perhaps unfit to remember in this place that in the beginning of the Church it pleas'd God to inflict bodily Diseases upon many Christians that had grievously offended in any kind and this not only in pursuance of Church Censures but sometimes without them which was the Case of those in the Church of Corinth who for their unworthy behaviour at their Assemblies for Celebrating the Holy Communion were visited with Gods hand 1 Cor. 11.30 For saith St. Paul For this cause many are weak and sickly among you and many sleep i. e. Many are dead of those Sicknesses which God sent to chastise you for that great fault that reigned amongst you and many of you remain under those Sicknesses still being not yet humbled under the mighty hand of God V. 31. If we would judge our selves we should not be judged i.e. By care to do our duty we should prevent Gods Chastisements but if upon neglecting our selves we are chastned by the Lord V. 32. it is that we should not be condemned with the World For God did not strike them with sudden Death but with some sudden Sickness and gave them time to repent to confess their fault and to satisfy the Church Now altho it was the congruity of this place to the passage in St. James concerning the supposition of having committed sins that led me to interpret the one by the other yet upon farther inquiry I found the notion not to be altogether destitute of Antiquity For Venerable Bede in his Notes upon this Clause applies St. Paul's Text to it in this manner * Bed in loc Tom. 5. Many for sins done by the Soul are punished with the sickness or with the death also of the Body Whence it is that the Apostle saith to the Corinthians who were wont to receive the Lords Body unworthily For this cause many among you are sick and weak and many sleep If therefore the sick are under the guilt of sins and shall confess them to the Presbyters of the Church and shall make it their business to forsake and amend them with a perfect heart they shall be forgiven them And then he goes on shewing That sins of the greater sort had need to be confessed in order to this end ‖ De Eccles Offic. lib. 1. c. 12. Tom. 10. B. P. Amalarius also delivers the very same interpretation in the account he gives of the Unction of the sick in his days as I shall have farther occasion to observe in a more proper place So that besides the reason of the thing we have some Authority too to interpret this place as I have done viz. That those words And if he has committed sins are to be referred to such Cases as that which St. Paul discourses of where the Sickness was inflicted for the punishment of some notable and scandalous fault not excluding those instances of such punishment for sins secretly committed But for whatever sin the sickness was sent it should be forgiven and God would shew that he had received â—he sick person into favour again by taking off his sickness For in this case also the Prayer of Faith should save the sick Thus our Saviour demonstrated the Truth of that saying to the Man sick of the (a) Matt. ix 2 6 7. Palsie Son be of good cheer thy sins be forgiven thee by adding Arise take up thy bed and go unto thy house and by that miraculous Cure that followed Thus after he had healed the diseased Man at the Pool of Bethesda he said unto him (b) Joh. v. 14. Behold thou art made whole sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee plainly intimating that his infirmity was the punishment of some sin that he had been guilty of which was now forgiven because he was made whole and should be dealt with hereafter not according to what he had been but as he should behave himself for the time to come In like manner and with like expression St. James does promise That upon the Prayer of Faith the Gift of Healing should take place even where the Disease was inflicted for the punishment of sins Which construction of the place is so natural and agreeable that I shall pursue the illustration of this passage no longer but leave the Reader to judge of it by what has been said already SECT VI. That our Interpretation of the use of Anointing in St. James and not our Adversaries is favoured by the following passages to the end of his Epistle THE third way of inquiry was to see what light is given to the meaning of St. James's Unction by those following passages that are in connexion with the place under debate 1. The very next words that follow are these Confess your faults one to another and pray one for another that you may be healed But whether by praying one for another in this Verse be meant the Prayer of Faith in the former Verse which referred to the Gift of Healing and was accompanied with a persuasion that God would raise up the sick or only praying that God would raise him up when they had no absolute persuasion that so it would be is what I dare not positively say having no clear reason to determine me one way or other But in which sense soever the words be taken as they must be in one of them they seem to have a very reasonable connexion with what went before and either way this Exhortation is to be referred to that special Case mentioned just before And if he has committed sins they shall be forgiven him If the Prayer of Faith is here meant as I think it is then St. James exhorts the sick person whom God had visited for his sins to humble himself and give glory to God by confessing to the Elders those sins which lay upon his Conscience and likewise intimates that the gift of healing would not otherwise take place in his Case and therefore he was first to confess and then the Elders to pray over him As for Anointing with Oil it was enough that the Apostle mentioned that before it being a Ceremony which or some other of like signification was customarily used in the Church upon Healing by a miraculous Gift The main matters