another Article of Pope Pius his Roman Catholick Faith to wit worshipping of Images Concerning which it is certain that the Christian Churches for three hundred years after Christ had in them no Images to worship The Temple at Jerusalem had none Philo de Leg. ad Caium To which purpose it is remarkable what Aelius Lampridius * In the Life of Alexander Severus Lib. 7. Epist 109. an Heathen Historian writes When Adrian the Emperour had commanded that Temples should be made in all Cities without Images it was presently conceived that he did prepare those Temples for Christ Secondly That worshipping them came in above six hundred years after Christ for Pope Gregory the Great himself allowed not of worshipping Images as is manifest from his Epistle to Setenus Quia eas adorari vetuisses omnino laudavimus c. Lib. 9. Epist 9. He commends him for forbidding the worshipping them though not his breaking them who broke down Images in some Churches because the People worshipped them Thirdly That a great part of the Writings of the Antient Fathers Tertullian Origen Arnobius Lactantius c. are spent in condemning the worship of Images or using them as helps of Devotion It 's true They speak directly against the Images and Idols of the Heathens but most of their Reasons fight generally against all religious use or worship of Images of what kind soever especially of Images made to represent God himself Let us then hear the Fathers and judge Justin Martyr saith It 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol. 2. p. 44. an injury or contumely to God to make an Image of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of base and unworthy wood or stone pag. 52. That we ought not to worship the work of mens hands Are not Popish Images of the Trinity the work of mens hands made of wood and stone as well as those of the Heathens Origen in Cap. 1. ad Rom. and lib. 3. in Celsum saith the same of whom more by and by Athenagoras in Legat. to the Heathens asking Why the Christians worshipped not Statues Answers because material Statues and God very much differ Not the World or any part of it but it's Maker is to be worshipped Men saith he to the Emperour pass by or through your Palace and above all honour you In your Games they crown not the Harp but the Harpers We submit not an immaterial Spirit i. e. the Soul to worship material and beggerly Elements i. e. Images Doth not this confute submitting our Souls in religious worship to Popish Images are not they material c. Irenaeus testifieth Lib. 1. c. 24. Epiphan Panar Haer. 27. in Anaceph p. 525. c. 20. that the Gnostick or Carpocratian Hereticks the first worshippers of Images we can find amongst Christians crowned the Image of Christ made by Pilate as they said and worshipped it The Simonians followers of Simon Magus worshipped his Image and of Helena his Whore. Ib. Ch. 26. The Basilidian Hereticks used also Images Ib. Ch. 23. Here we see the Primitive Antiquity and first Original of worshipping Images the Authors were then condemned Hereticks but now their Abettors are the only true Catholicks Tertullian saith Apologet c. 12. We Christians worship he speaks generally no Statues or Images which Crows Rats and Spiders understand Do they not as well understand Popish Images They seem to understand them better than Romanists Yea the Antient Fathers so detested Images that they condemned the very Art of Painting and Graving excommunicating such Christians who onely to get a livelihood made them as he sheweth De Idololat c. 4 5 6. In like manner Clemens Alexand. V. p. 46. and Strom. 5. in Protreptico where he farther saith I have learned to tread upon Earth i. e. Images or Statues not to worship them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Protr p. 38. Simiae Imagimbus non decipiuntur vos deteriores Protrept ad gentes p. 39. It would be too tedious to quote all that Origen hath written against worshipping Images in his Books only against Celsus I will mention some few passages Lib. 3. He saith we instil first of all into all young Christians a contempt of all Images and lift up their minds Images then lift not up the mind to God from Veneration of Creatures to God. In the Jewish Commonwealth no maker of Images was suffer'd which turn the mind from God. Lib. 4. Cont. Celsian Pag. 284. Our New Catholicks say they turn the mind to God. In his sixth Book he writeth thus We count them rude and ignorant who are not ashamed to speak to sensless things See Cassander Consult Art. 21. to beg life of the dead although some of them confess they are not Gods as Papists excuse themselves but signs and representations of them onely However they are ignorant in imagining that a vain Smith or Carpenter can make so much as a resemblance of Divinity In the same Book he adds They are blind who regard the fallacious Arts of Painters or Carvers In his 8th Book Celsus the Heathen accuseth the Christians for not having yea not enduring to look on Images See Minutius Foelix Arnobius c. Which saith he none but fools take to be Gods themselves the Heathens were not so foolish but signa signs or Representations of them a not Gods but Daemons Angels To which Origen replieth both for Jews and Christians In regard of those words Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve And thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image c. It cannot be that any one who knoweth God should pray also to Images Do these reasons confute onely Heathen Image-worshippers Did not the Primitive Fathers and Christians understand those Texts as Protestants now do He adds We have also Images of what kind not made by impure Workmen but by the Word of God Temperance Justice and other Virtues So that Origen in the name of the Christians in his days rejects and condemns all material Images in order to religious worship Arnobius brings in the Heathens saying non ipsa timemus simulachra c. we fear not the Images lib. 6. but those whom they represent i. e. Gods who were but dead men Daemons Angels and Heroes Yet he grants that by them they strook the vulgar as Papists do with fear and dread of God. And Lib. 7th he acquaints us that the Original of Images was that men could not conceive what God is and therefore resolved to make him like themselves Lactantius Instit Lib. 1. saith We cannot worship God if we give the same honour to any thing else Part 3. qu. 25. Art. 3. Azor. Instit l. 9. c. 6. B. Vsher's Answer to Malon But the Papists as Aquinas Cajetan Catechismus Rom. Azorius Pedro de Crabrera c. acknowledge and defend they give to the Images of God and Christ latria i. e. the very same Divine Honour they yield to God and Christ
tormented in the fiery flames of Purgatory The same Father in another place hath these words Hom. 5. in Genesin He that in this present life shall not wash away his sins shall find no consolation hereafter this is the time of combating that of crowning I shall onely add what he writeth in his second Homily upon Lazarus quoted by Bellarmin When we are departed hence it is not in our power to repent or to wash away the sins we have committed V. Cyril Alexand in Joan. lib. 12. c. 36. Thus we have seen that the Greek Fathers in the first Ages of the Church were not of the present Roman Faith as to this new Article of Purgatory I might descend lower were it not needless for 't is confess'd by some of the Romish Writers V. Polyd. Virg. de invent rerum lib. 8. c. 1. Alph. de Castro c. 8. p. 572. particularly Roffensis the Pope's Martyr in Henry VIII his days That in the ancient Fathers especially the Greeks there is either none or very rare mention of Purgatory Neither saith he did the Latin Fathers all at once receive it neither does the Greek Church at this day believe it This Concession is true for the Greeks in their printed Confession offer'd to the Council of Basil Jeremy Patriarch of Constantinople Ann. 1438. in his Censure of the Lutheran Confession and Cyril Patriarch of that Church in his Confession of Faith sent by him to Cornelius Hage Ambassadour for the States of Holland at Constantinople An. 1630. deny any purgation of sins after death by fire in Purgatory which say the Greeks in their Apology was condemn'd by the fifth General Council altho it is not now to be found in the late Editions of the Councils From what hath been said I hope it is evident First That there neither is nor ever was any Catholick or universal consent of all Christian Churches as to this new Roman Article of Faith viz. Purgatory Secondly That Bellarmin the Jesuit doth but abuse the World in quoting the Greek Fathers as owning it For is it probable that the Romans should understand their meaning in their Writings better than themselves It 's true some of them as Origen Gregory Nyssen c. mention Purgation of Souls from sin by Fire but it makes nothing for the Popish doctrine of Purgatory For First Origen's Purgatory is universal which all Prophets Apostles Origen in Exod. Hom. 6. the blessed Virgin must pass through not some onely neither very good nor very bad but of a middle sort as Romanists hold Secondly The Purgation Saint Basil Gregory Nyssen and others speak of is not before the Resurrection V. Origen in lib. Regum p. 36. Contra Celsum lib. 5. p. 241. Cyrilli Catech. l. 15. pag. 168. Ego puto quod post resurrectionem ex mortuis indigeamus sacramento nos eluente purgante Origen Hom. 14. in Lucam but at the end of the World by the fire of Conflagration which shall purge as some think the whole Creation so that at last all men even Devils too shall be saved as Origen held who turn'd Hell into Purgatory Such Sentences of the Fathers will not at all be serviceable to our Adversaries purpose So much for the Greek come we now to the Latin Fathers I shall begin with Tertullian who in his Apologetick Cap. 47. mentions onely two places to which Souls go Hell and Paradise In his Book De Testimon Animae Cap. 4. He thus bespeaketh the Soul We affirm thee to remain after death and to expect the day of judgment Expectare diem Judicii proque merito aut cruciatui destinari aut refrigerio utroque sempiterno and according to your behaviour to be destinated to torment or comfort and both eternal As for temporary torments in the fire of Purgatory before the day of Judgment Tertullian takes no notice of them In his fifth Book against Marcion Cap. 6. commenting on that famous place 1 Cor. 3. he rightly understandeth the Gold Silver Hay Stubble not of sins venial or mortal but Doctrines worthy or unworthy of the foundation i. e. Christ or Christian Religion Strom 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with whom agrees Clemens of Alex. in his fourth Book Cap. 34. against Marcion as also De Anima Cap. 35.55 he saith The Souls of all good Christians are in Abraham 's bosom in refrigerio a place of refreshment until the Resurrection as many of the ancient Fathers thought when they shall receive plenitudinem mercedis the fulness of their reward Not as Papists now teach any of them in Purgatorian torments It is farther observable that he there distinguisheth that place from Hell or any part of it as Purgatory is supposed to be And discoursing on those words apply'd by Romanists to Purgatory Thou shalt not come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing He affirmeth that all Souls abide apud inferos till the Resurrection Which utterly overthrows the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory and renders all their Masses Indulgences c vain and unprofitable From the Master let us pass to his Scholar Saint Cyprian who in his Epistle to Demetrian saith that at the ending of this temporal life we are severed into the receptacles either of eternal death or immortality Ad aeternae mortis vel immortalitatis hospitia dividamur p. 166. And in his Book De bono mortalitatis he comforts the Christians generally in a time of raging Pestilence with these considerations That the servants of Christ when they die depart as Simeon desired in peace Enter into Paradise go to Christ begin to reign with Christ that when they are taken out of the storms of this World they gain the haven of Rest and eternal security Securitatis aeternae portum petimus Lastly That after death the righteous are call'd ad refrigerium to refreshment not torment in Purgatory fire whither some are sent by the Romanists and the unrighteous to punishment All which expressions are utterly inconsistent with this new Article of Faith as every man not blinded with prejudice may easily discern To the same purpose in his Epistle to Antonium he adviseth in contradiction to the bitter doctrine of Novatus that pardon and peace should be granted to Penitents in extremis at or a little before their death Because saith he apud inferos exomologesis fieri non posset in Hell or the state of death or in the grave as the word Inferi is sometimes taken there can be no satisfaction made by suffering penance or punishment for sin It 's true in the latter end of the same Epistle he saith It 's one thing to be presently admitted to the reward of Faith or heavenly Glory and another to be purged from sins by being long tormented in fire But this testimony is no good proof of the Roman Purgatory in regard he there speaketh expresly De die judicii of the day of Judgement after the Resurrection whereas our Adversaries
Church condemns them as Hereticks and rejecters of Purgatory Secondly It 's undeniable that he did not hold the Purgation of sins after death no not by the fire of Grief much less material fire to be an undoubted truth or Article of Christian Faith De Purgat lib. 10. cap. ult as Bellarmin in that place affirmeth it to be But in regard the words of Saint Cyprian in his Epistle to Antonian are much urged by some as clearly confirming the Romish Doctrine of Purgatory where he writeth Aliud est statim fidei virtutis mercedem accipere aliud pro peccatis longo dolore cruciatum emendari purgari diu igne It's one thing presently to receive the reward of Faith and Vertue another for one being long tormented with grief for his sins to be cleansed and purged a great while in fire To answer this place we are first of all to observe the occasion of these words Saint Cyprian a little before takes notice of an Objection of the Novatian Hereticks against the receiving the Lapsi such as for fear in time of Persecution like Peter denied Christ They alledged that if such might be admitted to Absolution and the Communion of the Church none would be Martyrs or lay down their lives for the faith of Christ Saint Cyprian answers not so for altho a time of Penance and then Peace is granted to Adulterers yet Virginity and Continency did not languish or decay in the Church Then follow the words above mentioned Aliud est c. It 's evident enough then that the Fire here mentioned is not to be understood of any proper and material Purgatorian fire which Papists plead for but Metaphorical or of the fire of Grief as St. Austin expounds the Fire 1 Cor. 3. which place most probably Saint Cyprian here alludes unto in regard such as fell away in time of Persecution were not to be admitted to the peace of the Church until they had undergone the grief and shame of a publick As Bellarmin grants de Purgat lib. 1. cap. 5. long and severe Penance termed Exomologesis So much Saint Cyprian's own words intimate It 's one thing presently to receive as Martyrs did the reward of their Faith and Vertue a great encouragement to Martyrdom another to be cleansed longo dolore with long grief and which are Paraphrastical of his former words to be long purged with fire To this I shall add that it was the Opinion of many of the Ancient Fathers as Irenaeus Justin Martyr Tertullian Lactantius Biblioth l. 6. annotat 345. Ambrose with others quoted by Sixtus Senensis that none except Martyrs were immediately upon their death admitted admitted to the presence of God ad oscula Domini to receive the Crown of Eternal Glory but were kept in loco invisibili as Irenaeus or in abditis receptaculis in some secret invisible places until the day of Judgment sollicitously expecting then to receive their final Sentence this is pendere in die judicii ad sententiam Domini as Saint Cyprian there phraseth it Thus I hope I have given let the Learned Reader judge a true and fair interpretation of Saint Cyprian's words which do not import any proper fire to purifie Souls before the day of Judgment so that upon the view of what is abovesaid we may conclude that the Romish Doctrine of Purgatory is no part of the Antient Primitive and Apostolick Faith but in the Fifth Century in Saint Austin's days began to be a doubtful and uncertain Opinion only So much at present for Purgatory I should now make some enquiry in the Writings of the Antient Fathers after Indulgences the fuel that feeds this Purgatorian Fire Lib. 80. Tit. Indulgentiae De Indulgentiis pauca dici possunt per certitudinem quia nec Scriptura expressè de iis loquitur Durand l. 4. dist 20. qu. 3. Ambr. Hilar Aug. Hieronym minimè de iis loquuntur Idem ibid. Roffensis assert Luther confut art 18. But I am much discouraged in regard Alphonsus de Castro a learned and earnest Papist who lived near Luther's time and knew what was the first occasion of his opposing the Church of Rome to wit the abominable abuse of these Indulgences by the Pardon-mongers He I say in that very Book which he wrote against Heresies and Luther by name hath informed me Inter omnes est c. that amongst all the Points in dispute betwixt Protestants and Papists there is not one which the Scripture hath less clearly delivered and of which Antient Writers have spoken less than concerning Indulgences The Popes Martyr Roffensis confesseth the use of them was sero receptus in Ecclesia of late received by the Church Of Purgatory he saith there is especially amongst the Greek Writers ferè nulla mentio almost no mention of it Now Indulgences as is granted are grounded on Purgatory they must stand and fall together So long saith he as there was no care or fear of Purgatory no Man sought for Pardons for on it depends all the credit of Pardons Take away Purgatory and what use of Pardons When therefore Purgatory was so lately known and received in the Church who now can marvel at Pardons that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of them Pardon 's therefore began after that they had trembled a while at the pains of Purgatory Thus he Antoninus Sylvester Pierius Ostiensis the Lovain Divines Polydore Virgil Cajetan and others of whom more hereafter say as much so that it will be labour in vain to search for them in the Writings of the antient Authors Here I cannot but wonder our Adversaries do not blush to boast of their present Roman Faith and Church as if they were the same only the same with the antient Primitive and Catholick one and to accuse us Protestants of Novelty Heresie and setting up a new Faith and Church under the Banner of M. Luther whereas they not we are guilty of those Crimes by introducing new Articles of Faith Purgatory and Indulgences amongst the rest which we only protest against Art. 4 Concerning Invocation of Saints I now come to Invocation of Saints and Angels a grand Article of the Roman Faith according to Pope Pius his new Creed Eximium adorationts genus Bellarm. de Beat. Sanct. concerning which I shall in general take the boldness to say that for above three hundred years after Christ there cannot be produced out of the genuine Writings of one antient Father one clear and pertinent testimony for Invocation of Saints or Angels Besides my own little observation I have good Vouchers for this Assertion to wit the most Reverend and learned Primate Usher who read over all the Fathers and Mr. Mountague in his Treatise of Invocation of Saints V. Molinaeum de Novit Papis p. 388. apud Chemnit in Exam. p. 6. 13. Apol. 2. yea Cardinal Perron acknowledgeth this to be truth who as also Cassander never used in private Devotions to pray to
not Christians leaving the Church to run to Angels their Oratories and to hold meetings of abominable Idolatry Where you see running to i. e. as Theodoret understood it praying to and so worshiping Angels at their Oratories is condemned by the Council as no less Crime tho Papists cannot endure to hear it than abominable Idolatry Caranza a Popish Translator of the old Trade ignorantly or wickedly turns 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Angelos Angels Can. 35. into angulos Corners But according to the old saying Veritas non quaerit angulos Truth seeketh not these Corners I had almost forgot the good old Father Epiphanius in all whose Writings Bellarmine it seemeth could find nothing for Invocation of Saints but we can produce what is directly against it Haeres 74. contra Collyrid he condemneth certain fond Women of more zeal than knowledge who like those in Jeremy Jer. 7.18 offer'd up Cakes to the Virgin Mary as the Queen of Heaven a Title the Roman Catholicks have little to her honour put upon her saying If God will not have Angels worshipped how much less the Daughter of Ann born as other Women ergo in Original Sin. What then do we as Romanists calumniate us or Epiphanius deny Mary her due honour No. We say with Epiphanius Let her be in honour but let God alone be adored Let none worship Mary she is to be honoured as we really grant but she is not given us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be bowed to or worshipped So that no religious worship is to be given to her Certainly these foolish Women were not so filly as to take the Holy Virgin for a Goddess or Deity but adored her as the Mother of Christ for then they had been plain Heathens rather than as Epiphanius esteemed them Hereticks Surely if offering up to the Virgin Mary a few Cakes was heretical and unlawful is it not much worse to offer up to her the Evangelical Sacrifices of to say nothing now of their Masses in honour of her Prayers Vows and Thanksgivings which themselves acknowledge to be acts of Latria or Divine Worship Aquin. 2.2 quaest 88. art 5. V. Chemnit Exam. p. 609 610. 580 581. Biel in Can. Missae lect 8. Chemnit supra p. 585.595 See B. Andrews's Answer to Cardinal Perron O faelix Puerpera nostra pians scelera Jure matris impera Redemptori of which their Offices of the Virgin Mary and Books of Devotion are brimful In them they beg of her Grace and Glory Affirm which is sacrilegious blasphemy that God hath made over the Kingdom of his mercy to her They term her the Mother of mercy and fountain of Grace the Queen of Heaven their Life and onely hope In a word they stile her as Cardinal Bembus Deam a Goddess Is not this far to exceed the Collyridian Hereticks Is not this adoring of her gross Idolatry I come now to the learned Cyril Patriarch of Alexandria in his sixth Book against Julian the Apostate who objected that the Christians instead of many Gods worshiped many miserable Men to wit Christ and the Martyrs To which he answereth We worship Christ a man but God as well as man. Where we may observe that the grounds of worshipping the man Christ Jesus is because he was God as well as man not a religious man or Saint only As for the Martyrs we saith Cyril worship them not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with latria or divine Worship but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relatively and honourably that is with honourable respect such saith St. Austin as we yield to Holy men in this life in respect of their piety and godliness Then he sheweth wherein the honour given to Martyrs did consist to wit in a reverend regard to their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tombs or Monuments in crowning them with Praises as Conquerors and concludes we bestow on them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an immortal or never withering memory But no mention at all of any Religious tho the grounds of honouring Martyrs is their Piety and Religion Worship Invocation or Adoration The same Cyril on the 16. Chapter of St. John hath these words No man cometh to the Father but by the Son. Hence he termeth himself the Door and Way who as he is the Son and God bestoweth with the Father all good things on us As our Mediator and High Priest presenteth our Prayers to God and hence concludeth We must therefore pray in the name of our Saviour if we would be heard of God. Saint Ambrose de obitu Theodosii speaketh to the same purpose Thou O Lord art alone to be invocated solus rogandus es art onely to be prayed unto On the Epistle to the Romans c. 1. he hath these remarkable words spoken I confess of Heathens but too justly applicable to Papists who use the very same excuses Being saith he ashamed of their neglect of God the Creator by worshipping Creatures rather than him they use a miserable shift saying by them Rom. 1.25 i. e. Angels and dead Heroes men may go to God as by Counts or Earls or Courtiers we use to go to the King. It is our Adversaries ordinary Similitude What saith St. Ambrose to it Tertul. de Praescr c. 8. saith the same Rev. 22.9 See Chrysost de Paenit Hom. 4. de profectu Evangel Is any man so mad and unmindful of his own safety it being laesa Majestas Treason as to give the honour of the King to a Count and not judge themselves guilty who yield the honour of God to a Creature and adore leaving the Lord their Fellow-servants as if there were any thing more to be given to God. For therefore we go to the King by Lords and Captains because he is a man but to God to whom nothing is hid and who knoweth all mens deserts there is no need of an Intercessour but a devout mind This is plain I go on to Saint Hierom who in his Epitaph on Nepotian acknowledgeth that although the Saints departed possibly pray for us yet do not hear our prayers or Apostrophes to them Ille non audit Examen Concilii Trident Whatsoever I shall say is as if I said nothing for he Nepotian heareth me not It 's also not unworthy of our observation as Chemnitius hath noted that Saint Hierom in his Book against Vigilantius who condemn'd Invocation of Saints censures him not as an Heretick for so doing If it had been then a point of Faith no doubt St. Hierom would not have spared him Yea in his Epistle to Riparius he saith of Angels and dead Saints or Martyrs nec colimus nec adoramus We neither adore them with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor worship them with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an inferiour religious worship although as we Protestants do honoramus we honour them I will end with Saint Austin Nominantur non invocantur in his 22. Book de Civitate Dei Cap. 10. he saith The Saints are at the Communion
named by the Priest but not invocated In the Canon of the Mass Commemorantes memoriam facientes Prayer is directed to God onely In his 8th Book de Civit. Dei cap. 17.22 27. Nos Martyribus non Templa sicut Diis sed Memorias sicut hominibus mortuis fabricamus c. Aug de Civit. Dei lib. 22. c. 10. similiter lib. 8. cap. ultimo Charitate non servitute Ibid. he affirmeth expresly That whatsoever religious Services were performed at the Tombs of the Martyrs as Prayers Sacrifices Thanksgivings were offered not to them but to God. So contra Faust lib. 20. c. 21. Quicquid offertur Deo offertur In his Epistle to Maximus the Grammarian Know saith Saint Austin that of Catholicks true Catholicks not Roman no dead man is worshipped And in his Book of True Religion c. 55. Our Religion stands not in worshipping the dead They seek not such honour This they would have that we with them worship one God according to the Angels admonition Revel 22.9 Martyrs are to be honoured as Origen Cyril Epiphanius granted for imitation not adored for Religion or as he expresseth it Cont. Faustum l. 20. c. 21. colimus Martyres c. we worship or honour Martyrs with a worship of love and fellowship with which the Saints in this life are worshipped Is any religious Worship properly so called to be given to Saints or religious Persons by us in this life Let our Adversaries consider this Lastly in his Book De Cura pro mortuis cap. 10.11 12. He overthroweth the principal grounds and reasons on which Invocation of Saints is built For first He judgeth it very probable at least that the Saints or Martyrs did not really and personally appear to their Friends although it was believed by many Compare Basil M. in Mamantem but in imagination or appearance onely Secondly He proveth which he saith he knew would be ill taken by some that the souls of the departed Saints are in a place where they see or know not what is done by or happens to their nearest Relations from Gods Promise to Josiah 2 Chron. 34.18 That he should not see all the Evil he would bring on his People as also from those words of Esaiah Isai 63.16 Abraham is ignorant of us and Israel knows us not Whence he infers si tanti Patriarchae c. If such great Patriarchs were ignorant of what happened to the People who sprang from them how are the dead interessed or concerned in knowing and helping their Friends He confirmeth his conclusion thus If the dead were interested in the affairs of the living or spake to us in Dreams my dear Mother would no night he absent from me But it 's true as in the Psalm My Father and my Mother have forsaken me c. If our Parents have forsaken us who else among the dead know what we do or suffer Now our Adversaries grant that unless the Saints departed know our particular state and wants it is vain and to no purpose to pray unto them Thirdly He answers an Objection drawn from Dives his desiring Abraham to send to his Brethren on Earth wherefore he knew what they did To this he replieth Dives had such or so great a care of the living although he knew not what they did as we have of the dead although what they do we know not in particular It was onely a general care or well wishing But Abraham knew they had Moses and the Prophets To this he answereth that he might know it by the information of Lazarus Fourthly He enquireth how the Saints come postea afterwards so that this knowledge cometh too late to ground Prayer to Saints in present extremities and sudden dangers He answereth Possunt ab Angelis possunt Deo revelante cognoscere they may know it by Angels who are conversant with us or by Revelation from God they may he saith not positively that they do Fifthly He maketh a difference which Romanists take little notice of between Martyrs and other Saints and denies that because Martyrs per Divinam potentiam miraculously or by special dispensation are sometimes here on Earth in their Temples therefore we are to think the same of all dead Saints generally or that they can come to us quando volunt when they will as Bellarmine determines D. Sanct. Beatit lib. 1. c. 20. But miraculous Dispensations are no safe Rule for ordinary supplications to all Saints promiscuously Lastly supposing it true that the living are helped some way or other by Martyrs prayed unto he saith Whether it be by their being present in so many distant places at the same time where their memories i. e. Monuments or Churches are or which no doubt he could not but think more probable whether they being in some place remote from humane converse are yet generally praying for such as pray not to them but God who might employ Angels in answering their requests as we pray in the general for the dead although we know not where they are or what they do definire non audeo I dare not resolve From all which we may easily discern how uncertain Saint Austin was concerning the presence knowledge and assistance of Saints departed afforded to some not who pray to them but to God from whence we may certainly conclude that Invocation of dead Saints was no part of St. Austin's Creed but at utmost a probable and doubtful Opinion onely as we have seen before from the writings of the Greek Fathers Nazianzen Basil and others I know well our Adversaries urge much Nazianzen's Oration on Cyprian and how a Virgin assaulted by the Devil prayed to the Virgin Mary to help her But Gelasius with the Authority of the Roman Church condemns that Book of the Conversion of Saint Cyprian which Nazianzen supposed to be genuine as false and supposititious neither is it at all probable that Saint Cyprian was ever a Magician of which neither himself in the relation of his conversion Lib 2. Epist 2. nor Pontius in his life nor any more antient creditable Writer maketh any mention They glory also much in those words of Saint Chrysostome Hom. 66. ad Popul Antioch He that is Emperour standeth praying to the Saints to the Tent-maker and Fisherman Peter and Paul to intercede with God for him To which I first oppose Saint Austin's words Epist 42. non Petro sed Deo. De script Eccl. ad ann 398. Hom 39. in 1 Cor. 15. Sixtus Senens The Emperour at the Tomb of Peter prayeth not to Peter but God. Secondly The Homily is supposititious for as Bellarmine himself granteth the true Homilies of Chrysostome ad Popul Antiochen were but 21. Thirdly Chrysostome held that Christian Saints departed are not till the Resurrection admitted to the sight of God and consequently knowledge of our Prayers Of which Opinion were many of the antient Fathers quoted for this Invocation by our Adversaries Art. 5 Concerning Image-worship I come to
Psalm 50. Offer unto God thanksgiving c. and those of Malachy above-mentioned concerning pure Incense i. e. Prayer and a pure Offering i. e. saith he A broken and contrite heart He concludeth in these words We sacrifice and offer Incense sometimes by celebrating the memory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of that great Sacrifice to wit of Christ on the Cross by those sacramental Mysteries which he hath delivered to us giving thanks to God for our Redemption and offering Hymns and Praises to him The same do Protestants otherwise by consecrating and devoting our selves to God and dedicating Soul and Body to his High-Priest the Word Ye see here how many sorts of Christian Sacrifices Eusebius reckons up Prayers Praises consecrating our souls and bodies to God celebrating the memory of his Sacrifice on the Cross but concerning sacrificing of Christ himself in and by the sacramental Mysteries we find nothing Can this now be a point of Catholick Faith of which Eusebius and all the antient Fathers were ignorant Lib. 5. c. 3. The same Eusebius in another place discourseth concerning Christs Priesthood according to the order of Melchizedeck His words are In like manner first our Saviour then the Priests of or from him exercising a spiritual Priesthood by Bread and Wine V. Tertul. cont Judaeos Ambross de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. do obscurely represent the Mysteries of his Body and Bloud This maketh nothing for the Popish Mass-sacrifice For first Melchizedeck as he said a little before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 protulit as the vulgar translation rendreth it brought forth to Abraham Bread and Wine but offered obtulit no corporal Sacrifices The truth is the Mass Priests if Transubstantiation be admitted offer neither Bread nor Wine which they tell us are changed into Christs Body and Bloud which are corporal things But the Christian Priesthood saith Eusebius is spiritual so therefore are their Sacrifices also Secondly All that Eusebtus saith of the Executors of this spiritual Priesthood is that after Christs Example by Bread and Wine which he supposeth to remain in their substance they obscurely represent Christs Body and Bloud Doth this imply that the Bread and Wine are miraculously changed into the body and bloud of Christ or that representing Christs body and bloud in the Holy Sacrament rendreth them a Sacrifice or implieth any offering them up as a propitiatory Victim for the sins both of quick and dead Certainly did this sacrificing Christ by or under Bread and Wine at all appertain to the Christian Priesthood Eusebius no doubt would have it being so eminent and wonderful an action made at least some little mention of it But how could he mention that which it appeareth he was wholly ignorant of to wit the sacrificing Christ by Priests in the Holy Eucharist Athanasius in a few words giveth the Sacrifice of the Mass a deadly blow Orat. 3. in Arian The Sacrifice of our Saviour once offered perfects all and remaineth firm all times Aaron had Successors our Lord had none Saint Chrysostome adv Judaeos Hom. 36. expounds Malachy's Pure Offering of Prayer and Hom. in Psalm 95. reckoning up about ten sorts of Sacrifices in the Christian Church as Martyrdom Prayer Alms c. he taketh no notice of the Sacrifice of all Sacrifices to wit of Christ in the Mass But that noted place Hom. 17. on the Hebrews must not be omitted where having first said Heb. 10.10 that Jesus Christ is both Priest and Sacrifice who offer'd himself to God once for all for us he raiseth an Objection against what he had said from Saint Paul What then do we Priests Do not we daily offer He answereth We do indeed offer but it is making a remembrance of his death V. Basil M. in Cap. 1. Esaiae we do it in commemoration of what is already done we do offer the same Sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rather correcting himself that he might speak more properly and exactly We celebrate or operate the remembrance of a Sacrifice i. e. of Christ on the Cross commemorantes memoriam facientes as the Roman Missal it self speaketh Saint Ambrose in his Comment on the Hebrews saith the very same as if he had translated Saint Chrysostome Cap. 10. Do not we daily offer Yes We offer memoriam facientes making in and by the Eucharist a memorial of his death We offer him Christ magis autem sacrificii recordationem operamur Rather or more properly we make a remembrance of a Sacrifice Lib. 4. de Sacra c. 6. In another place he sets down the antient forms of Consecration Wherefore being mindful of his Passion i. e. V. Canonem Missae Rom. Christ on the Cross we offer to thee this Sacrifice this bread Bread not the very Body of Christ in a carnal and corporeal sense The like words we find in Saint Chrysostomes and the Gregorian Liturgies I will now add Epiphanius who saith as Athanasius above Haer. 55. Christ hath no Successour in his Priesthood that he is both Priest and Sacrifice in regard none can properly sacrifice him but himself which he did once for all on the Cross And Haer. 42. Christ by his Sacrifice hath taken away the use of all Sacrifices i. e. properly so called under thâ—â—ospel In like manner Saint Cyril of Alexandria againâ—â— Julian the Apostate who objected that the Christians had no Sacrifice Lib. 9. cont Julian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For answer he asserts not any external visible and corporeal one but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an intellectual and spiritual Worship for saith he a most immaterial and spiritual Sacrifice becometh God who is in his nature pure and immaterial I will end with Saint Austin who in his 20th Book against â—â—â—stus thus writeth Christians celebrate the memory of this finished Sacrifice to wit Ch. 18. of Christ on the Cross by the Holy Oblation or Sacrament i. e. of Bread and Wine and by participation of the body and bloud of Christ not by immolation but participation of them not by reiteration of Christs Sacrifice which is finished consummatum est but commemoration of it And Chap. 21. he hath these words Lib 20. contr Faust c. 21. The like he hath de fide ad Petrum Diacon c. 19. The flesh and bloud of this Sacrifice of Christ before his Incarnation was promised or represented by the similitude of Levitical Sacrifices In the Passion of Christ it was performed per ipsam veritatem by the very truth of the thing it self After his Ascension it is celebrated per sacramentum memoriae by a Sacrament of memory or commemoration not by a true proper Sacrifice of Christ per ipsam veritatem and immolation of his very body and bloud as Romanists affirm In his Epistle to Boniface he expresseth it more clearly Is not Christ immolated or offer'd up once in semetipso Quod natum est ex Virgine nobis quotidie nascitur crucifigitur Hieron in Psal
c. Fulber Epist ad Adeodatum Epist ad Heribaldum To these may be added Bertram de corpore sanguine Domini to Charles the Great who about seven hundred years ago in a just Treatise impugneth the Doctrine of Transubstantiation to whom you may add Fulbertus Carnoton Berengarius Hincmarus in vita Remigii Rabanus Maurus Purgatory As for Purgatory and its Appendix Indulgences whose most gross abuse defended by the Pope first opened Luther's mouth against him much need not be said in regard as we have seen above Roffensis the Popes Martyr and Alphonsus de Castro to whom I may now add Polydore Virgil confess they are late Novelties of which in the antient Greek Fathers there is little or no mention The modern Greek Church as appeareth peareth from their Confession offer'd to the Council of Basil and since that of Cyril late Patriarch of Constantinople denieth any Purgation of sins after death by Fire Lumbard and Gratian take no notice of Indulgences The later Schoolmen Albertus Al. Halensis Durand Cajetan quoted by Bishop Usher and Dr. Field in his Appendix say that Finalis Gratia c. final Grace abolisheth all remains of sin in Gods Children Answer to the Challenge p. 179. Part. prima summae Tit. 10. c. 3. Opusc 15. c. 1. De Indulg lib. 4. dist 20. qu. 3. Primus in Purgatorium extendit Indulgentias V. Chemnit Exam. de Indulg 742. 100 Gravamina what need then of any Purgatorian fire Antoninus acknowledgeth that concerning Indulgences nihil habemus expressè c. We have nothing expresly or clearly delivered either in Scripture or the antient Fathers This same is affirmed by Cajetan and Durand Agrippa de Vanitate Scient cap. 61. saith that Pope Boniface VIII first extended Indulgences to Purgatory they were opposed before Luther by the University of Paris Wesselus Wickliffe Hus Jerome of Prague Savanorola yea the States of Germany complain to the Pope of them as intolerable burdens cheats and incentives to all manner of wickedness Add Platina in Boniface 9. Urspergensis Chron. p. 322. Art. 4 Image-worship Worshipping of Image was V. Polyd. Virgil. de Invent rerum lib. 6. V. Cassand infra See Vspergensis Rhegino ad Ann. 794. and Matth. Westminst ad Ann. 794. Cassand Consult art de Imagin The work of Mens Hands may not be adored no not in honour of their Prototypes p. 213. De Trad. Part 3. De Imagin as is notorious first Decreed though not with Latria in the second Nicene Council about the year 794 but was opposed and condemned by the General Councils of Constantinople and Frankfort in which last were three hundred Bishops called by the Emperour and Pope whose Legates were there present as the Bishop of Rhemes reports apud Alanum Copum Dial. 4. and Suarez grants it in 3. Part. Thomae qu. 25. disp 54. This worship of Images was confuted also by Albinus or Alcuinus out of the Scriptures as Hoveden relates in continuat Bedae ad ann 794. Moreover by the Book of Charles the Great if it be not the same with the former which is still extant in the Vatican and acknowledged to be genuine by some learned Papists Agobardus Bishop of Lyons wrote against worshipping Pictures or Images So did also Jonas Bishop of Orleans in his Book de Cultu Imaginum cap. 5. allowing them onely for Ornament in Churches but detests the giving them any part of divine Honour as accursed wickedness Peresius saith as much Gerson de defect viror Eccles Holcot de Sapientia Lect. 158. Miraudula Apol. qu. 3. condemn bowing before them Durand de ritib. Eccl. Catharinus de cult Imagin grant that their use is dangerous in regard of the peril of Idolatry See our Churches Homily on the Peril of Idolatry Polydore Virgil saith De Invent. rerum lib. 6. c. 13. De Imag. l. 2. c. 22. all the Fathers condemn'd worshipping Images Bellarmine himself granteth that the worship of Images as defended and practised by the Roman Church i.e. with Latria or the same worship we give to the Prototypes cannot be maintained without such nice distinctions of absolutely and relatively or accidentally univocally or analogically properly or improperly as scarce themselves much less the weak common people can understand or if they do can hardly avoid Error in practising them Peresius more plainly They are a scandal to the weak who cannot understand them but by erring Hence the Cardinal accounteth it not safe to teach their Votaries publickly to give Divine Honour or Latria to the Image of Christ for his sake De Trad. p. 226. V. Biel. in Canon Missae Sect. 49. Part 3. qu. 28. Art. 3. Instit Mor. Tom. 1. l. 9. Suarez Tom. 1. Disp 54. Sect. 4. Vasq in qu. 25. disp 110. c. 2. See Orig. in Cels l. 6. 8. Arnob. lib. 6. Apud Bellar. de Imag. l. 2. c. 8. V. Aug. de fide symb cap. 7. Biblioth Patrtom Tom. 5. pag. 609. Concil Trident. Compare Origen Lib. 7. in Celsum Nevertheless it 's undeniable that this is the professed Doctrine of the Church of Rome declared by their Oracle Aquinas and constans opinio as Azorius speaks the constant Opinion of their Divines defended by Valentia Suarez and that as the sense of the Council of Trent Vasquez the Jesuit to defend this Adoration blushed not to write that it is lawful to worship the Sun yea God bless us the Devil himself so the worship be directed ultimately to God and his Honour whereas it 's notorious that the Heathens might and did in this very manner defend their gross Idolatry The very making of the Images of the Trinity is condemn'd by Abulensis Durand Peresius and others yet defended and practised by the Roman Church Walafridus Strabo called it Superstition and blockishness hebitudinem to worship Images I will end that I be not too tedious with the words of Jonas Bishop of Orleans as an Answer to our Adversaries Reply That they place no Divinity in their Images but worship them onely in honour of God and of him whose Image it is seeing they know there is no Divinity in Images they are the more to be condemned for giving to an infirm and beggerly Image the honour that is due to the Divinity I cannot omit what I find in Agobardus it being so consonant with Jonas as making one sentence De Pict Imag. p. 237. They which answer as our Roman Catholicks now do they think no Divinity to be in the Image they worship but that they worship it in honour of him whose image it is are easily answered because if the Image they worship be not God neither is it to be worshipped in honour of the Saints who use not to arrogate to themselves Divine Honour He adds That the Images of Christ and the Apostles were expressed by the Antients after the custom of the Gentiles V. Euseb supra rather for love and memory than for any religious honour or
Gangrene or Leprosie spreading it self by degrees over it the cutting of this Wen the curing this Gangrene the cleansing and removing this Leprosie our Adversaries most unreasonably and absurdly condemn as destroying the antient Catholick Faith and setting up a new Church under the Banner of Luther which we detest and abhor Contrarily we not they contend earnestly for the antient true Catholick Faith once and once for all delivered to the Saints in opposition to their late subintroduced Novelties of Transubstantiation Image-worship Purgatory c. which as we see by Pope Pius his new Creed they will needs add as Articles of the Antient Primitive and Catholick Faith to the Nicene Creed necessarily to be believed and professed by all Christians under peril of Heresie and Damnation If the Pope and Church of Rome may make as many Articles of Faith as they please surely in time we may have a Creed as large as Aquinas his Sum. I shall only add my earnest Prayer that God would enlighten you with his Holy Spirit that you may see the truth and renouncing all secular ends and private interests cordially embrace it Theodoret de curand Graecor affect Serm. 1. in regard as an Antient Father long since said It becometh not wise Men rashly to give up themselves to their Fathers Customs but to endeavour to find out the Truth Amen Your faithful Friend FINIS Books lately printed for James Adamson I. A Treatise of the Celibacy of the Clergy wherein its Rise and Progress are Historically considered In Quarto II. A Treatise proving Scripture to be the Rule of Faith writ by Reginald Peacock Bishop of Chichester before the Reformation about the Year 1450. III. Doubts concerning the Roman Infallibility 1. Whether the Church of Rome believe it 2. Whether Jesus Christ or his Apostles ever Recommended it 3. Whether the Primitive Church Knew or Used that way of Deciding Controversies IV. The Salvation of Protestants asserted and defended in Opposition to the Rash and Uncharitable Sentence of their Eternal Damnation pronounced against them by the Romish Church by J. H. Dalhusius Inspector of the Churches In the County of Weeden upon the Rhine c. V. The present State of the Controversie between the Church of England and the Church of Rome or an account of the Books written on both sides in a Letter to a Friend In Quarto VI. Two Discourses of Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead In Quarto VII Clementis epistolae duae ad Corinthios Interpretibus Patricio Junio Gothofredo Vendelino Joh. Bapt. Cotelerio Recensuit notarum spicilegium adjecit Paulus Colomesius bibliothecae Lambethanae curator accedit Tho. Brunonis Windsoriensis dissertatio de Therapeutis Philonis His subnexae sunt Epistolae aliquot singulares vel nunc primum editae vel non ita facile obviae In Quarto VIII Pauli Colomesii Observationes sacrae Editio secunda auctior emendatior accedunt ejusdem Paralipomena de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis passio sancti Victoris Massiliensis ab eodem emendata editio quarta ultima longe auctior emendatior Octavo IX The Travels of Monsieur de Thevenot into the Levant in three Parts viz. 1. Into Turky 2. Persia 3. The East-Indies In Folio A brief Historical Account of the Behaviour of the Jesuits and their Faction for the first twenty five Years of Queen Elizabeths Reign with an Epistle of W. Watson a Secular Priest shewing how they were thought of by other Romanists of that time Quarto The Argument of Mr. Peter de la Marteliere Advocate in the Court and Parliament of Paris made in Parliament in the Chambers thereof being assembled An. Dom. 1611. for the Rector and University of Paris Defendants and Opponents against the Jesuits Demandants and requiring the Approbation of the Lectors Patent which they had obtained giving them power to read and to teach publickly in the aforesaid University translated out of the French Copy set forth by publick Authority and printed at London 1612. Quarto