as is Idolatrous i. e. says he which is paid to Images in and for themselves and by which the Image is worshipped as if some God or Divinity were contained in it But for that Divine Worship which is paid to the Images of the Holy Trinity of our Saviour Christ and the Holy Cross upon the account of the things represented by them and as they are in that respect one and the same with the thing which they represent and ascribes not any Divinity to the Images there never was nor can be any dispute of it Monsieur de Meaux may please to consider whether this be not sufficiently contrary to the Doctrine Expounded by Him and how we are to reconcile the Controversies of the Cardinal Capisucchi with the Letter and Approbation of the * So he was when he wrote to Monsieur de Meaux Master of the Sacred Palace In the mean time I will beg leave to add one instance more that is nigher home and I think still at this time depending and which the particular interest Monsieur de Meaux has more ways than one had in it will I suppose undoubtedly satisfie him that notwithstanding the Assembly of the Clergy have recommended so much both his Book and his Method all nevertheless at this day are not very well satisfied even in France it self either with the one or other Monsieur †The whole of this is taken out of the Factum which he printed of his Case Imbert Priest and Doctor of Divinity in the Province of Bourdeaux was not long since accus'd that upon Good Friday before he proceeded to the solemn service of that day which consists chiefly in the Adoration of the Cross He turned to the People and taking occasion from the rashness of some of the Fathers of the Mission whom he had with grief heard maintain That the Cross was to be adored after the very same manner as Jesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist profess'd to them that he could not enter on the service of that day without declaring truly to them what the real Doctrine of the Church as to this point was That the Church designed not that we should adore the Cross which we see but that we should adore Jesus Christ whom we do not see That there was a great difference between the Cross and the Holy Sacrament That in this our Saviour Christ was really present whereas that was only a simple figure or representation of him This was his Accusation and he confessed that his Opinion was That the Church adored not the Cross and that the contrary Opinion was not only false but Idolatrous That not only the Protestants made their advantage of those who maintain'd such Errours but that he himself was scandalized to converse every day with the Missionaries and others whom he had openly heard preach a hundred times ' That we ought to adore the Cross with Jesus Christ as the Humane nature of our Saviour with the Divine Being accused for this he defended himself with all the strength of Argument that he was able yet being still accounted a Heretick for it he finally alledged in his defence ' That the Exposition of Monsieur de Meaux defended the very same that he went upon his principles whose book was approved by the Pope and several Cardinals in Italy by the Bishops and Clergy of France and others of the greatest note in the Church of Rome Nevertheless he was suspended in a manner grievous and extraordinary He wrote to Monsieur de Meaux himself about it who presently sent to the Archbishop of Bourdeaux in his behalf He addressed himself besides to many other the most considerable Persons of the Kingdom to Monsieur the Chancellour Monsieur de Chatteau-neuf to the Intendant of the Province only that he might have justice in a cause which according to Monsieur de Meaux's principles was certainly very favourable But I do not hear that he has yet had any other Effect of all his supplications and the interest of those Honourable persons in his behalf than that they still draw more and severer menaces from his Judges and threats either of perpetual Imprisonment or even death it self for his Offence After this clear conviction I may reasonably hope it will appear no improbable matter to Monsieur de Meaux himself either that one Papist should have written against his Book or that many others should have expressed themselves to be of a mind very different from the principles and opinions of it Had it pleased him to have gratified the World with the sight of Cardinal Buillon's and Monsieur l'Abbé de Dangeau 's letters to Cardinal Bona and Cardinal Chigi as well as of their answers to them they would perhaps have shewn that not only the Protestants pretended such oppositions of his own party to his Book but that Monsieur de Meaux himself was not altogether unsensible of it No sooner was the first Impression of the Exposition which was permitted to pass abroad See the Advertisement finish'd but presently a Copy was dispatch'd to Rome with Letters and recommendations to prepare the way for its reception in that Court Cardinal Bona's Letter V. E. mi accenna che alcuni to Accusano de qual che mancamento And a little after Ne mi maraviglio che gli habbino trovato â dire perche turte le Opere grande e che Sormontano l'Ordinario sempre hanno Contradittori Answer to Cardinal Buillon and provide against those faults which some it seems accused it of if the Contradictors which opposed it at home should think fit to pursue it thither It is not to be supposed that either the dignity of the Cardinal who sent the Book or of him to whom it was address'd would have permitted them in such a manner to take notice of the faults and the Contradictors which their Letters speak of had they not been both things and Persons worthy their consideration But much less would Monsieur l'Abbé de Dangeau have used his interest with Cardinal Chigi to gain the favour of the Master of the Sacred Palace See the Answer of Cardinal Chigi to Monsieur L'Abbé de Dangaeau Parlai al Padre Maestro di S. Palazzo al. Secretario della congregatione dell'Indice e connobbi Veramente che non vi era stato chi havesse a questi padri parlato in disfavore del medesimo and of the Congregation del Indice if any one had or should speak against it had there been no cause to apprehend that any one would attempt either What other particular persons were employ'd upon the like Offices is a secret too close for us to be able to penetrate Only the Advertisement it self gives us cause to believe that great interest was made even by the French Ambassador himself to his Holiness about it See Advertisement c. and that the few Letters we see set out with so much Industry both in the Originals
us in maters more considerable than this not to have too high a Value for Nor can we suppose any thing else than that the fear of a further Correction kept it from being any more submitted to their Censure and that the Author would rather pass without the Honour of their Approbation than run the hazzard of a second Refusal But for this because we cannot speak any thing certain we will not pursue our Conjectures Certain it is that whatever the judgment of the Sorbonne would now have been of it many of the Church of Rome were still dissatisfied with it * See his Advertisement And how improbable soever Monsieur de Meaux would have us think that one of his Answerers affirms that a Papist should have written against him Yet not only the confessed sincerity of Monsieur Conrart who often declared that he had seen it but the undoubted integrity of some others by whom I have been assured that they had it in their hands obliges me to joyn in the assertion that Monsieur M one of the Roman Communion had finish'd an Answer to it before any of the Protestants were published however upon some certain Considerations it was thought fit to suppress it It will perhaps be looked upon that this confirmation of that Manuscript Answer deserves as little assent as Monsieur de Meaux has thought fit to give to Monsieur de la B 's first Assertion of it And therefore to shew that it is not impossible nor indeed very improbable that Papists should write one against another and that the Method of the Exposition how plausible soever to deceive Protestants has nevertheless offended the sincere and Vndesigning of the other Communion I will beg leave to produce two or three undenyable Witnesses upon some of the first and chiefest Points of it and which though not written purposely against it yet I am perswaded Monsieur de Meaux himself will be so just as to confess that he cannot be altogether unconcerned in them For his first Point The Invocation of Saints The great moderation of the Exposition tells us only That it is useful to pray to them and that we ought to do it in the same Spirit of Charity and in the same Order of Brotherly Society with which we intreat our Friends on Earth to pray for us that all the Prayers of the Church howsoever they may be worded yet must still be understood to be reduced to this form PRAY FOR US Now what Monsieur de Meaux here says in general concerning the Invocation of Saints another Tract Printed about the same time at Cologne and intituled Salutary Advertisements of the Blessed Virgin Avis salutaires de la bien heureuse Vierge à ses Devots indiscrets This Tract was publish'd first at Gand in Latin by Monsieur Widenfelt a German Intendant of the Affairs of the Prince of Suarzembergh afterwards Translated into French to her indiscreet Adorers particularly applied to that Service which with so much superstition is paid in the Church of Rome to the Mother of Christ The Book is every where full of Expressions of Honour and Respect for her and only speaks against that Worship which Monsieur de Meaux here declares in the name of the Council of Trent to be none of theirs It was sent abroad into the World with all the Advantage imaginable It had the Approbation of the Bishop of Mysia Suffragan to the Archbishop of Cologne of the Vicar General of the place of the Censure of Gant of the Canons and Divines of Malines of the Vniversity of Louvain and Lastly of Monsieur the Bishop of Tournay who recommended it as a Treatise full of solid Piety and very fit and necessary to draw people out of those Errours and Abuses into which their Superstition had led them Yet notwithstanding all this Applause if we enquire what success this Book had with others Father Crasset the Jesuit who wrote purposely against it * See his Book entituled La veritable devotion envers La St. Vierge 4o. his Book Printed at Paris 1679 Licensed by the Provincial approved by the three Fathers of the Society appointed to examine it and Lastly authorized by the King's Permission tells us †La Preface p. 1 2. That for fear of giving Scandal to Hereticks he had given a very great one to those he calls Catholicks That the Learned Men of all Nations had written against him that the Holy See had condemn'd him Spain had banish'd him out of its Dominions and forbid to Read or Print his Book as containing Propositions suspected of Errour and Impiety that abused the Holy Scripture and imposed upon Catholicks by taking them off from the Piety and Devotion due to the Mother of God In a word from the general Invocation of Saints and Worship of Images I shall not need to say how far the Fathers Zeal carries him in the Answer it self It is evident that what Monsieur de Meaux tells us is only Useful Pag. 31. c. the Jesuit declares to be absolutely Necessary That we are indispensably obliged to pray to her That it is the intention of God that we should obtain both Grace and Glory by her That all Men should be saved by the Merits of the Son and the Intercession of the Mother and that forasmuch therefore as God has resolved not to give any Grace but what passes through the Hands of Mary as we cannot be saved without Grace so it must be confessed that we cannot be saved without her This is I presume somewhat more than what Monsieur de Meaux expounds to us and I shall leave it to any one to judge whether this Father who has shew'd himself so zealous against the Author of the Blessed Virgins Salutary Advertisements could have been very well pleased with Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition The next Point which the Exposition advances is concerning The Worship of Images Monsieur de Meaux in the Edition suppressed See the Collection at the end of the Preface affirmed That the Church of Rome does not so much honour the Image of the Apostle or Martyr as the Apostle or Martyr in presence of the Image And though the Censure passed upon this new fancy obliged him to speak a little more plainly yet is it only thus even now ' that when the Church pays an Honour to the Image of an Apostle or Martyr her intention is not so much to honour the Image as to honour the Apostle or Martyr in presence of the Image Concerning which the Reader may please to observe that Cardinal Capisucchi one of the Approvers of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition has lately set forth a Volume of Controversies at Rome with all the most solemn Permissions and Approbations that can be desired in which he formally contradicts the Doctrine of the same Exposition in this Point and concludes Art 8. p. 647. That the Church in the Councils of Nice and Trent forbids only such a Divine Honour to Images
which we give to the Saints as our Adversaries do because it is Religious that on the contrary it ought to be blamed if it were not Religious There can be nothing more plain than that Monsieur de Meaux's Opinion when he wrote this was That the Honour which the Church of Rome pays to the Blessed Virgin and Saints departed is a Religious Honour nay would deserve to be blamed if it were not Religious This was by others thought a little too ingenuous and what would give too great an advantage to our objections against it And therefore instead of that free honest Confession That the Church of Rome gives religious Honour to the Blessed Virgin and Saints departed he now puts a doubt that insinuates the direct contrary The same Church teaches us that all religious Worship ought to terminate in God as its necessary End and if the Honour which she rendereth to the Blessed Virgin and to the Saints may in some sense be called Religious it is for its necessary relation to God So that really then the Honour they give their Saints in Monsieur de Meaux's opinion is Religious but 't is not fit that we should know it III. Monsieur Daillé some years since wrote a Volume of the Tradition of the Primitive Church concerning the Object of Religious Worship in which he clearly shews that the first 300 years knew nothing of the Invocation of Saints the Worship of Images Crosses and Reliques of the Adoration of the Host c. Monsieur de Meaux in his first Exposition granted the whole in these words since struck out For Monsieur Daillé says he he thinks fit to confine himself to the first three Centuries in which it is certain that the Church more exercised in suffering than in writing has left many things to be cleared afterwards both in its Doctrine and in its Practice 1 Edit p. 9. Now it being evident notwithstanding this new thought that the sufferings of the first 300 years have not hindred but that we have very large accounts of its Doctrine and Practice from the Writings of those Fathers who lived in them To confess that it is certain that the Tradition of the Church of Rome fails in many things both in Doctrine and Practice for the first 300 years is doubtless as fair a yielding up the Cause as to the matter of Tradition as we could desire and therefore however known by Monsieur de Meaux to be most certainly true was yet thought too much by others to be confessed to the World by a person of so great Learning and Eminence in their Church IV. As to the point of the Invocation of Saints Monsieur de Meaux still shews us that he knows not what account to give of the grounds of it He proposes several ways how the Saints may possibly know our Prayers but cannot well tell us by which it is they do so But in the first Edition he shew'd yet more doubt Not only which way the Saints hear them but whether they hear them at all or no Not only whether they joyn with them in their Prayers as they desire them to do but whether it is not rather by some other means yet more unknown to them and not by their Intercession that they receive the benefit of them The Church says he contents her self to teach with all Antiquity these prayers to be very profitable to such who make them Whether it be the Saints know them by the Ministry and Communication of Angels who according to the Testimony of Scripture know what passes amongst us being established by Gods order as administring spirits to co-operate with us in the work of our salvation Whether it be that God makes known to them our desires by a particular revelation Or whether it be that he discovers the secret to them in his Divine Essence in which all truth is compriz'd And that in the manner and according to the measure which he pleases or whether lastly by some other way yet more impenetrable and more unknown he causes us to receive the Fruit of those Prayers which we address to those blessed Souls 1 Ed. p. 23. So that in effect whether the Saints hear us or no whether they joyn with us in our requests or no according to Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition their Church knows not which is sure a sufficient prejudice against their Invocation and was it seems thought so by those who therefore caused all the latter part of this paragraph to be struck out for fear of the advantage we might reasonably make of it V. But if Monsieur de Meaux in his first Exposition freely confess'd how uncertain the grounds of this Invocation were he no less freely left it to our choice whether we would practise it or not He assured us there was no manner of obligation at all upon us so to do And that the Church would not condemn us if we did it not provided we refused it not out of contempt or with a Spirit of dissension and Revolt Furthermore says he there is nothing so unjust as to accuse the Church of placing all her piety in these devotions to the Saints since on the contrary she lays no obligation at all on particular persons to joyn in this Practice By which it appears clearly that the Church condemns only those who refuse it out of contempt and by a Spirit of dissension and revolt 1 Ed. p. 33 34. This was Monsieur de Meaux's first Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church in this point But such as his Correctors it seems would not admit of Who therefore obliged him wholly to strike out that passage That the Church imposes no obligation at all upon particular persons to practise this Invocation And instead of condemning only those that refuse it out of contempt or a Spirit of dissension and revolt which had freed us wholly from their Anathema to expound it now more severely That she condemns those who refuse this practice whether out of disrespect or Error Which will be sure to bring us under it VI. In the article of Images Monsieur de Meaux having first laid down this foundation That the Church of Rome does not attribute to them any other virtue than that of exciting in us the remembrance of those whom they represent added in his first Exposition which was suppressed 'T is in this consists the use and advantage of Images 1 Edit p. 25. And to assure us yet further how little Honour they had for them concluded thus So that to speak properly and according to the Ecclesiastical style we do not so much honour the Image of an Apostle or Martyr as we do honour the Apostle or Martyr in presence of the Image 1 Edit p. 26. Now though we do not doubt but that this is the real opinion of Monsieur de Meaux and all which he himself does yet to say that the Church of Rome does neither require nor practise nor intend any more was to presume