Laurence, Richard, Abp. of Cashel, 390. Laurence, S., 498, 499. Law, William, 342, 391. Le Brun, M., 166, 167.
Leo the Great, S., 60, 186, 513, 514.
Lepin, Dr., 16, 78, 146, 332, 363, 454.
Leslie, Charles, 382, 383. Lessius, 212.
Letter, of Dr. Pusey to Rev. B. Harrison, 415; to Bp. Wilberforce, 415-417; of Bp. Westcott to Rev. Dr. Mortimer, first, 551; second, 552; of Rev. F. E. Brightman to Dr. Mortimer, 553; of Dr. Mortimer to Rev. Dr. Schanz, 556; of Dr. Schanz to Dr. Mortimer, 557 ; of Dr. Mortimer to Rev. Dr. Lepin, first, 560; second, 571; third, 578; of Dr. Lepin to Dr. Mortimer, first, 563; second, 574; third, 581.
Liddon, Canon, 415, 417, 433, 435, 448, 449.
L'Idée du Sacrifice, by Dr. Lepin, 16. Lightfoot, Bp., 162. Liguori, S., 212. Liturgies, quoted by Bright- man in support of Modern view, 109; witness to Eu- charistic Sacrifice, 148; Ro- man, Scotch, Anglican, and American, quoted by Bright- man, 150-152; significance of passages must be determ- ined by the Fathers, 156. Liturgy, the, attempt in cent- ury IX. to find image of the Passion in, 191; exposi- tion of by Bp. Amalarius, 192-196; exposition written by Bp. Nicholas Cabasilas in century XIV., 216; mystical works on, in century XII. : by S. Ivo of Chartres, 269;
treatment of in his sermon Opusculum, 286-307; B. Odo of Cambrai, 269, 279- 285; V. Hildebert of le Mans (or Tours), 269, 286, 303, 307- 309; V. Peter of Cluny, 269; Algerus of Liége, 269, 310- 316; Hugo of S. Victor, 269, 309, 310; Guitmundus Aver- sanus, 269, 278, 279. Luther, Martin, 205.
Macarius of Egypt, S., 500. Macarius, Bp. of Vinnitza, 217, 337, 338, 452.
Mackay, Rev. D. J., 434. Man, as an individual and as a society, must worship GOD, 28. Mansi, G. D., 306. Marcion, 12. Martyrdom,
illustration of sacrificial act, 40; differ- ence between it and sacri- fice examined, 65-68. Mary, B. V., 417.
Mason, Dr., 19, 95, 96. Mason, Francis, Archdeacon of Norfolk, 369. Massarello, 210.
Mede, Joseph, 342, 354-356, 397.
Melanchthon, P., 208.
Melchior Canus, 78, 207, 210,
Methodius, S., 233. Meyer, Dr., 108, 122. Meyrick, Canon, 346. Milligan, Dr., 5-10, 12, 20, 59, 97, 108, 109, 215, 328, 396, 407-409, 459, 491, 522, 531. Ministerial Priesthood, by Dr. Moberly, 18. Moberly, Dr., 18, 515, 524, 534. Modern view, term used in this book, 82; principal accre- tion, stated by Alford, 96, 97; words of Institution, 1 Cor.
Modern view-Continued. xi. 26, interpreted by Bright- man in support of, 108-110; several theories in regard to Sacrifice of Cross, 112, 113; Rev. v. 6, 140, 141; Thalhof- er's argument on this verse, 142-145; no basis for, found in any commentary, nor in any of the Fathers, on He- brews, before century XVI., 147; question as to whether the liturgies support this view, 148; true and valuable element in, 153, 174; result of examination of Thalhof- er's authorities, 260; only passages in support of this view considered in Chapter IX., 270; no support found in Mediæval writers, 316; re-statement of characteris- tics, 318-321; finds no sup- port in Thomassin, 328; no notice of, in Eastern Church, nor among any writers of the Middle Ages, nor of century XVII., 338; Bright- man claims that Anglican divines held this view, 340; writers who favour this view in Tract 81 by Dr. Pusey, 342-362.
Mogila, Peter, 216. Montague, Richard, Bp. of Norwich, 370, 371. Mortimer, Rev. Dr., Letters, 551-581.
Morton, Thomas, Bp. of Dur- ham, 355, 367. Moule, Dr., 538.
Nelson, Robert, 383, 384. Newbolt, Canon, 538. Newman, Rev. J. H., 96, 414. New Testament, passages which refer man's redemp- tion to the Cross, 69-71;
recognizes only one absolute Sacrifice, 145; passages as to use of the word "heaven- ly," 162-164. Nicholson, Bp., 342.
Odo of Cambrai, B., 167, 196, 269, 279-285. Ecumenius, 120, 202. Olier, Jean Jacques, 270, 317, 318, 329-332.
One Offering, The, by Sadler, 18, 546.
Optatus, S., 499. Opusculum, sermon by S. Ivo of Chartres: his treat- ment of the liturgy, 286- 307; no support found for Modern view, 299; teaching of S. Ivo summed up, 307. Opusc. de Ven. Sac. Alta- ris," ascribed to S. Thomas Aquinas, 208; author and source cannot be determ- ined, 209.
Oratory, the, founded by Card. de Berulle, 316.
Origen cited by Thalhofer, 235-246.
Overall, John, Bp. of Norwich, 215.
Overall (Pseudo-), 342-345, 393,
395-397, 400-402, 407, 445, 447, 448, 452, 453. Oxford Conference, Dec. 13 and 14, 1899; report of, 515- 532; Eucharistic Sacrifice incidentally touched upon, 516; conclusion to be drawn from, 534.
155; remembrance of, a force in our lives, 471. Patrick, Simon, Bp. of Ely, 377, 378.
Paulus, Dr., 209. Pearson, Bp., 63. Perpetua, S., 416.
Perrone, Rev. J., S. J., 78. Petavius, 63, 103.
Peter of Cluny, V., 196, 197, 269.
Peter Damian, S., 62, 179. Peter Lombard, S., 194, 196- 198, 202, 364, 375. Peter of Prussia, 309. Philastrius, 158. Philo Judæus, 36.
Philpotts, 342, 353, 393-395,
Plautus, 474.
Plutarch, 475.
Polycarp, S., 233. Potter, John, Abp. of Canter- bury, 389, 390. Priesthood, High-, Christ's, ruling thought of Hebrews, 113; as typified by Day of Atonement, 123-126. Priesthood, Christ's, on earth,
questioned by Milligan, 7, 8; theory as to when it began, by Socinus, 61-63; theo- logians agree it began at the Incarnation, 62; theory of Socinus finds no support in Scripture, and is contrary to the teaching of the Catho- lic Church, 71, 72. Priesthood, necessity of, in sacrificial act, 46. Priests ministers of Christ, 75. Primary Charge, by Dr. Forbes, Bp. of Brechin, 435- 439. Primasius, 120, 162, 232, 265, 268.
Proclus, S., 511, 512.
Propositions in regard to Eu-
charistic Sacrifice contra fidem, 456, 457; not contra fidem, 457; explanation of propositions in their relation to modern theories, 459-467. Protestant view of Eucharistic Sacrifice expressed by Bp. Burnet, 79, 80.
Puller, Father, S.S. J. E., 403, 515-522, 527, 529-532. Pulleyne, Robert, 196, 197. Pusey, Rev. Dr., 74, 96, 340, 345, 395, 415, 419-427, 432, 434, 435, 446.
Rabanus Maurus, 169, 191,
Ratramuus of Corbey, 179, 191, 195.
Reaction exemplified by age of Councils, and Reforma- tion, I, 2.
Real Presence, Eucharistic Sacrifice a consequence of, 75; rejected by Protestants, 82; discussed from century IX. to XVI., 178, 179; at- tacked by Berengarius, 196. Redemption, man's, passages in New Testament which refer it to the Cross, 69-71. Reductio ad absurdum, im- portance of, 2.
Reductio ad impossibile, 253. Reformation, theology of, ob- scures the Incarnation and our LORD'S Intercession, 154; doctrine of the Atone- ment made the foundation of theology at time of, 470. Reichenau, Bernon de, 196. Religion, distinguishes man from other creatures, 24; demands external worship, 27.
Resurrection, theologian of, Charles de Condren, 316– 318.
Revelation v. 6, views of Mod- ern school, 140, 141; Thal- hofer's argument, 142-145. Ridley, Gloucester, 391, 392. Robertson, Dr., 538, 541. Robinson, Canon, 539. Ryle, Dr., 515, 522, 523, 527, 532.
Sacrifice, equivocal use of term, 22, 23; nature of, not determined before century XVI., 22; absence of modern English works on, 23; uni- versal characteristic of relig- ion, 24; origin primæval, 24; institution not necessa- rily divine, 24; meaning pri- marily love, 25, in mediæval theology a sense of sin, 25; purpose of, practical relig- ion, 27; expresses man's re- lation to God, 27; demands external worship, 27; chief act of public or external worship, 28; S. Augustine's definition of the " genus of, 29; his treatment of, 29-31; S. Thomas' treatment of, 31, 32; its character and Authority, 32; God the only Authority in revealed relig- ion, 33; demands external form, 33; propositions in regard to, by Dr. Schanz, 33, 34; idea of destruction not essential, shown by Latin, Greek, and Hebrew terms, 34, 35; S. Irenæus on, 36; definition of, by Dr. Schanz, 36, 37; S. Augustine, 37-41; Alexander of Hales, 41; S. Thomas Aquinas, 41; S. Isi- dore of Seville, 42, 189, 190; De Lugo, 42; Vasquez, 42- 44; Gabriel Biel, 43; Al- phonsus de Castro, 43; Suarez, 45; Dr. Scheeben, 45; recapitulation of ele-
ments, 46; how the Cross fulfils definition of, 47; terms used in Scripture describing our LORD's Death as a Sacri- fice, 48,49; elements of, found in the Cross, 64; New Testa- ment recognizes only one ab- solute Sacrifice, 145; defin- ition of, by William of Au- vergne, 199; by S. Thomas Aquinas, which changed the current of theological thought, 203, 204; this defi- nition became true basis of treatment of Eucharistic Sacrifice, 203; different sens- es in which it is used 233. Sacrifice of Cross, Milligan's treatment of, 6; only absolute Sacrifice, 47; five actions cor- responding to those of Jew- ish Law, 49-54; every rite of Jewish Law fulfilled, 54; our LORD Priest and Victim in His Human Nature only, in His Divine Nature He re- ceives the Sacrifice, 54-56; Socinus' theory as to its be- ing a martyrdom discussed, 56-72; man's redemption ac- complished by it, 68; pas- sages in New Testament which refer man's redemp- tion to the Cross, 69-71; Catholic Church teaches that upon the Cross our LORD offered His perfect Sacrifice, 71; recognized by both Pro- testants and Catholics as the only absolute Sacrifice, 80; Catholic teaching, 112; sev- eral theories of Modern school, 112, 113; examina- tion of passages in Hebrews, 114-126; only absolute Sac- rifice, as shown by Hebrews X., 134-136; all the sacrifices of the Law foreshadowed dif- erent aspects of, 138, 139; Scripture offers no support
Sacrifice of Cross-Continued. for view that it is not a com- pleted Sacrifice, 146; Thal- hofer's view orthodox, 231; his innovation, 231, 232; his authorities examined, 232- 260.
Sacrifice, Eucharistic, diffi-
culties in treatment of, 21; many departments of theo- logy touch on, 23; method of treating the subject, 73; three views given by writ- ers to be traced to cent- ury XVI., 73; support for each view, 74; Bossuet on essence of, 74; CHRIST both consecrates and offers, 74; consequence of the Real Presence, 75; Sacrifice of Cross renewed in, 75; does not take away from suffi- ciency of Sacrifice of Cross but depends entirely upon it, 75, 76; Consecration, essence of, 77; Protestant view of, as taught by Lu- ther, and held by most Protestant bodies, 79, 80; Protestant view a reaction, modified in century XVII., 81; Mede's theory, 81; Dr. Hickes', 82; Waterland's, 82; name discussed, 82; term "Anglican view " mis- leading, 82; term "Modern view" used in this book, 82; Brightman as expon- ent of Modern view, 83-88; his view very like that of Socinus, 89; difference be- tween Catholic teaching and Modern view, 88-92; essen- tial difference between Cath- olic and Modern views, 98, 99; Hebrews the battle- ground of Catholic and Mod- ern views, 110; sketch of purpose and argument of Hebrews, 111, 112; sum-
mary of Scripture teaching, 145; witness of liturgies, 148; no attempt to define it until century XVI., 178, 179; celebration of, re- stricted to bishops and priests, 180; treatment dur- ing middle period of the Church, 188; efficacy of, for souls in Purgatory taught by S. Gregory the Great, 189; frequency of, limited in century VI., increased cent- ury IX., 190; consecration of species, strange theory, 198; definition of, by Wil- líam of Auvergne, 199; by Albert the Great, 199-201; S. Thomas' definition of, became basis of treatment of, 203; view taken by Duns Scotus directly opposed to that of S. Thomas, 204; the- ory popularly held in cent- ury XVI., 206; attributed to Catharinus, 206; he was not its author, 207; divers- ity of opinion at Council of Trent, 209, 210; in centuries XVI. and XVII., theolog- ians who treated of this fall into three groups, 210; has received little attention in England since Reformation, 214; question as to whether the Fathers relate it to Sac- rifice of Cross, 219; witness to Catholic view of, by Greek Fathers, 220: S. Irenæus, 220; S. Cyril of Jerusalem, 220; S. Greg- ory of Nyssa, 221, 224; S. Cyril of Alexandria, 221, 222; S. Chrysostom, 222- 224; Thomassin, 223, 224; witness to Catholic view of, by Latin Fathers, 224: S. Cyprian, 224; S. Ambrose, 224, 225; S. Augustine, 225- 227; Algerus of Liége, 227;
« AnteriorContinuar » |