8uce only on a?xmt of the merit and disposition of him who exe? ciasa ouch an action; and it is called ea? opeye opermt?, because the grace i8 conferred on account of die propor merits, devotion, and virtu* mm acts of the person who ministers or who receives." Of A, r? cosf?rrsd ? tb ?'?cr, muw?, ?x oPsaE oi, sa&TO. is not conferred by' these sacraments of the new law, by their own Power, s$ epere opm-oto, but that f&ith in the divine promise is aU that is neceesazy to obtain grace; let him be accursed."' The catechism esy8: "In the sacraments exists the power o[ the omnipotent, e?ectu- ating that which the natural elements cannot of themselves accomplish," p. 145. It is not easy, to say what is the exact sense of the Council of Trent in the foregoing canon. In the sixth we have it declared that "the sacraments confer the grace which they signify on those who place no obstacles in their way." The seventh canon says that "grace is alway? conferred by these sacraments, and upon all persons, as far as Ged is concerned, if they be rightly received." In the sixth canon the expression is that the sacraments confer grace by their own power, or e? oFfre ope,'e?_. Here it is truly*difficult to say what is properly taught by the Church of Rome on this Point. Yet it is la/d down as an snidt offsirA, it is de fu/e, as their divinsa. say. The va.- ?ous opinions, as well as the warm contentions among the theologians on this Point, show that the council left this article of faith tmde6ned, and couched in a barbarous technical phrase a dogms_ of faith which her wisest sons cannot explain. This is manifest from the various sentiments and discordant views entertained and ranged under a.n,?ther scholastic distinction, found in the words mora?/y andp/ay?. ?ence l?is question divided the doctors of the Church of Rome into two great 8ect? the TAom? and Scof?f?, the former of whom believed that firace was conferred pAya'ie.,?/y by the sacraments, and the latter maintained that they p.ro?**uce this effect 9?nd?y. The Thomists were ,so called after the great I'houms Aquinas, and the $cotists were named t0om thei? router 8cotus. With the ThomisM are to be freaked Dens and others of great name; while the Scothits boast of such names as Bonaventura, Richardus, .Mensis, Ameolus, �asquez, Bailly, Collet, Ferraris, &c. The Thomira maintain that "the sacraments possess a physical causality, as the instruments of the divine omnipotence, and truly and properly concur towani the production of their effects in the mind by 8 supernatural virtue from the principal agent, communicated to it and un?te(i to it in the runner of a transient action: that such a cmm&Lity is more conformable to the declarations of Scripture, and demonstrates more fully the dignity of the. sacrament, and the efficacy of the divine omnipotence and of the merits of Christ. BesMes, they say this is also more conformable to the sentiments of councils and fathem, who, as they explain the causality of the sacraments, use various s' 'umlitude% w?ch undoubtedly designate a causality more than moral." ?he Scotists maintain that "the sacraments do not cause grace phy �9min. 7, can. 6. �ot. I.--13 See Dens, de Sacram., No?. 17, 19.
�
