C?uP. 1,1 ? m e?&t. 189 �eraliug th&t which was brinefly placed before h'_,m, or his imeution is simply carried toward the present matter."* The foregoing from Dens will give the render an idea of the distinc- tions and arguments to be found in Roman Catholic systems of divinity. This author is very systemtic in his an'angemout and clear in ? style, sad withal comprehends more circumstantially all the points of diminction than alnmot any other writer. From h?m we have given the leading viewa entertained in the Church o/Rome respecting the doctrine of intention. Those who would see more may co, stilt Bafi]y,t Coilet,? Ferraris,? and others. Perhaps it is unneceemu 7 to troqble our reintern with any remarks on the doctrine of intention, 88 they can easily perceive the abanrditiss counected with and growing out of this dogore of the Church of Rome. I VIII. TA? r, ce?sr or ? o/a ?y?rmue?. 1..Their divines make a distinction between the qual?cations neces- ssry for the v?y of a sacrament, and those required in order to enjoy its effsc or/r.r. Children or insane persons are not required to ;nanif'?st any disposi- tions 88 necessary to qualify them for the receptiou of sacraments or the participation of their fruits; hence the question is concerning those who possess reason. ?. In reference to the eucharist, the will is required of. receiving ,hi? sacrament in order to its effect, but not to its validity, because the sacrament exists independendy of. any intention, as it consists in a per- torment thing. But in the other sacraments the internal intention necessary to the validity of the sacraments. TI? ? for ?jmji? tl? fatit of ? ?. If it be the �?crament of the de?d, (b?p?m o? ?n?ce,) a ata? of ?ee ? ? ?r?, ?t eon? ?ce,. But.? ?m who receive, a sac?ment ? ?e h?ng, amm of ?e of i?elf is r?, ? t?t he who ? ? ?m m ?lf of monM m k pre?ously held to confe?i? ? ?er m receive ?e euc?st. The ?e is ? ?e? at le?t p?ti?Hy, of ?e ?her sac?enm.? 2. The ? INTENTION of the receiver ?ms, acco? m ? ?c?ce of ?e Church ? ?me, m ? a 8u?mte for ?e ?don- ment of s? ?d ?e p?ce of ?gh?mness. In bap?sm ?ey m regenerated. By penanee, by' professing good intentions, without for- sailing sin or doing the will of' God, the sinner receives remission of. the past, and proceeds to contract a fresh load to be remitted ss IMf.ore. Thus good intentions me, or ,My ?, put in the place of reformation of life Mid purit? of. most]s, till the sinner becomes an habitual transgreo- sot, and is confirmed in his evil habits by the tolerance and privilege which the church exercises toward him. �Deoo, Trtct de Sacram.*, No. 41. f De Sacram., c. 6, art. iv, tom. iiJ, .?.?: t De Sacrun., ,ec. % do lntentione iv, pp. 41-66. II See a pretty general examinatiou of this point by Oerimrd, d? ?d?v?sm., I?P. SiO, who gives twelve reasons against ? doctrine, trm?# it to its origin. fives opiniouo of the fathers, refutes the popish arguments, and oxamine? the opinions of tbo 0omte? of Trent on thi. point. ? Dram, de ?, N?m. 44, ?. I [?igitized by Goog[�
�
