worship to inferiour Deities or does not this Law forbid the worship of those Gods whom the Heathens worshipped as inferiour Daemons but only the worship of those Gods whom they accounted Supreme and Soveraign If this Law forbids the worship of all Heathen Gods and it is certain that they worshipped a great many Gods whom they did not account Supreme then there can be no place for this distinction here for such an inferiour worship as makes an inferiour God is as well forbid as supreme and soveraign worship The Law says Thou shalt have none other Gods before me or besides me which as I observed before does not exclude the worship of the supreme God but forbids the worship of any other Beeing together with him The meaning is not Thou shalt not renounce my worship for the worship of any other Gods but thou shalt worship me and no other God besides me now I would only ask this question whither a Jew who worshipped the God of Israel who declared himself to be the Supreme God could give supreme worship to any other God this is contrary to the sense of all mankind to worship him as Supreme whom they do not believe to be Supreme And therefore when God forbad them to joyn the worship of any other Gods with the worship of himself he must forbid all kinds and degrees of worship even the most inferiour worship which the Heathens paid to their inferiour Deities If you say that God did indeed forbid all kinds and degrees of worship to be paid to the Heathen Gods which were impure and wicked spirits but still it is lawful to pay inferiour worship to Saints and Angels who are the friends of God I answer the Law makes no distinction between the worship of good and bad Spirits and therefore as far as this Law is concerned we must either deny this inferiour degrees of Worship to all or grant it to all If this Law does not forbid giving inferiour degrees of worship to other Beeings then it does not forbid the inferiour worship of Heathen Gods that may be faulty upon other accounts but is no breach of this law and then the Heathens were not guilty of Idolatry in worshipping their inferiour Dâ—â—mons with an inferiour worship If this Law does forbid even this inferiour degree of worship then it forbids the worship of good Spirits too though with an inferiour worship which transforms true Saints and Angels into false and fictitious Deities But I have another argument to prove that this Law can have no respect to the different degrees of worship The Roman Doctors themselves grant that the difference between supreme and subordinate or inferiour worship does not consist in the outward Act that all or most of the external Acts of worship may belong to both kinds they except indeed Sacrifice but contrary to the sense of all men for the Heathens offered Sacrifice to their inferiour Deities as well as to the supreme and there is no imaginable reason to be assigned why Sacrifice as well as Prayer may not be an act of inferiour as well as of supreme worship The difference then between supreme and inferiour worship is only in the intention and devotion of the worshippers and no man can by the external act know whither this be supreme or inferiour worship Now from hence I thus argue if the worship forbidden by this Law be such as can be known by the external act then this Law can have no regard to the degrees of worship for the degrees of worship are not in the external acts but in the mind of the worshipper which cannot be known by external acts Now that the Law did forbid the external acts of worship without any regard to the intention of the worshipper appears in this that this Idolatrous worship was to be punished with death and therefore it must be such external Idolatry as falls under the cognizance of humane Judicatures Had there been Deutr. 13. 6 7. c. any regard to the degrees of worship no man could have been convicted of Idolatry by the external act and could not have been liable to punishment unless he had confessed his intention of giving supreme worship to a false God and so this Law of putting such Idolaters to death had signified nothing because it had been impossible for them to convict any man of Idolatry but by his own confession but when the external act which is visible to all men is sufficient to convict any man of Idolatry it is next to a demonstration that the Law had no respect to the degrees but to the acts of worship And that our Saviour in that Law thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve had no regard to the different degrees of worship I have already proved at large for allowing that distinction he had not given a good answer to the Devils temptation Thus as for their distinction between absolute and relative worship that though we must not worship any Creature the most excellent Saints and Angels for themselves yet we may worship them upon account of that relation they have to God that is we may worship them for Gods sake though not for their own I find no intimation of any such distinction in the Law We are there commanded to have no other Gods to worship God and him only which excludes Saints and Angels from being the object of our worship as well as Devils 2. But possibly it may be said that though the Law takes no notice of such distinctions yet the Scripture in the explication of this Law may make allowances for it Now in answer to this I only desire to know where the Scripture has made any such distinction between worshipping good and evil Spirits the enemies and Rivals or the Friends of God between supreme and subordinate absolute or relative worshâ—p I can find no such distinctions in Scripture and I have a material reason to believe no such can be found viz because there was no occasion for them The Scripture no where allows us to give any kind of worship to any Creature and therefore there was no need to distinguish between the kind and degrees of worship The most material thing that can be said in this cause is this that when the Scripture mentions this Law of worshipping One God it opposes it to the worship of the false Gods of the Heathens from whence some may conclude that God Deut 6. 13. 14 Deut 13. 7. forbade the worship only of these false Gods But we must consider that the Law is conceived in such general terms as to exclude the worship of all Beeings besides the Supreme God but it could not be thought that God should at that time immediately apply this Law against the worship of any other Beeings but those which were at that time worshipped in the world If God gives a Law which forbids the worship of any Beeings besides himself and particularly applies this Law to
Testament expresly told what this Idolatry is which supposes that we must learn what it is from some antecedent Laws and there were no such Laws in being but the Laws of Moses The only thing that can be said in this case is that the Apostle refers them not to any written Law but to the natural notions of Idolatry but with what reason this is said will soon appear if we consider to whom the Apostle writes and they were but Jewish and Heathen Converts As for the Heathens they had corrupted all their natural notions of Idolatry and had no sense at all of this sin till they were converted to Christianity and therefore they were not likely to understand the true notion of Idolatry without being taught it and it is not probable the Apostles would leave them to guess what Idolatry is As for the Jews God would not from the beginning trust to their natural notions but gave them express Laws about Idolatry which though they are the same Laws which natural reason dictates to us as most agreeable to the nature and worship of God yet since the experience of the world which was over-run by Idolatrous worship sufficiently prove that all men do not use their reason aright in these matters God would not trust to the use of their reason in the weighty concernments of his own worship and glory but gives them an express positive Law about it and Christ and his Apostles having done nothing to repeal this Law they leave them under the authority of it and when they warn them against Idols and Idolatry without giving them any new Laws about it must in all reason be presumed to refer them to those Laws which they already had SECT V. 4. AS a farther proof of this I observe that Christ and his Apostles did not abrogate but only complete and perfect the Mosaical Laws Our Saviour with great zeal and earnestness disowns any such intention or design Think not that I am come to destroy the Law and the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfil plerosai to fill it up by fulfilling the types and prophecies 5. Mat. 17. of it by exchanging a ceremonial for a real righteousness or by perfecting its moral precepts with new instances and degrees of vertue And therefore he adds For verily I say unto you Till heaven and earth pass one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled And St. Paul who was lookt on by the believing Jews as a great enemy to the Law of Moses does renounce all such pretences Do we then make void the Acts 21. 21. 22. Rom 3. 31. Law through Faith God forbid yea we establish the Law Indeed had Christ or his Apostles attempted to have given any new Laws contrary to the Laws of Moses it had justified the Jews in their unbelief for God by his Prophet Isaiah had given this express rule to examine all new Doctrines by To the law and the testimony if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them and that Isai 8. 20. Christ himself is not excepted from this rule appears in this that this is joyned with the prophecie of the Messias both before and after as you may see in Isai 8 13. 14. and Ch. 9. 6. 7. and therefore Christ his Apostles alwayes make their appeals to the writings of the Old Testament and St. Paul in all his disputes with the Jews urges them with no other authority but the Scriptures and thö the Miracles which were wrought by the Apostles did move the Jews to hearken to them and greatly dispose them to believe their Doctrine yet it was the authority of the Scriptures whereon their Faith was founded As S. Peter tels those to whom he wrote that though they preach'd nothing to them concerning the coming of Christ but what they were eye-witnesses of and though God had given testimony to him by a voice from Heaven which they heard when they were with him in the holy Mount yet he adds We have also a more sure word of prophecie whereunto ye do well that ye take heed as to a light Pet. 1. 16. 7. 18. 19. that shineth in a dark place untill the day dawn and the day-star arise in your hearts That is the Scriptures of the Old Testament and therefore the Jews of Berea are greatly commended for their diligence in searching the Scriptures and examining St. Pauls Doctrine by them and this is assigned Acts 17. 10. 11. as the reasons why many of them believed To apply this then to our present purpose I observe 1. That if Christ did not make any new Laws in contradiction to the Law of Moses then he could make no alteration in the object of Religious Worship He could not introduce the worship of Saints and Angels without contradicting that Law which commands us to worship no other Beeing but the one Supreme God For the worship of Saints and Angels together with the Supreme God is a direct contradiction to that Law which commands us to worship God alone though we should suppose that in the nature of the thing the worship of Saints and Angels were consistent with the worship of the Supreme God yet it is not consistent with that Law which commands us to worship none but God So that let this be a natural or positive Law or whatever men please to call it it is a very plain and express Law and Christ never did contradict any express Law of God It is true that Typical and Ceremonial Worship which God commanded the Jews to observe is now out of date under the Gospel and does no longer oblidge Christians but the reason of that is because it has received its accomplishment and perfection in Christ Christ has perfected the Jewish Sacrifices and put an end to them by offering a more perfect and meritorious sacrifice even the sacrifice of himself The Circumcision washings Purifications of the Law are perfected by the Laws of internal purity The external Ceremonies of the Law cease but they are perfected by an Evangelical righteousness But this I say that Christ never repealed any Mosaical Law but by fulfilling and perfecting it He came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil Now methinks I need not prove that the worship of Sainâ—s and Angels is not a fulfilling but a destroying that Law which commands us to worship none but God And it is not enough to say that these are positive Laws given to the Jews though that be said without any reason for let them shew me any positive Law relating to the worship of GOD which Christ has wholly abrogated without fulfilling it 2. Yet as a farther proof that Christ has made no alteration in the object of our worship that he has not introduced the worship of Saints or Angels or Images into the Christian Church which was so expresly forbid by the Jewish Law I observe
that according to our Saviours own rule that he came not to destroy the Law and the Prophets but to fulfil these Laws of worshipping one God and none besides him were not lyable to any change and alteration because there was nothing to be perfected or fulfilled in them He made no change or alteration but by way of perfecting and fulfilling and therefore those Laws which had nothing to be fulfilled must remain as they were without any change To perfect or fulfil a law must either signifie to accomplish what was prefigured by it and thus Christ fulfilled all the types and prophecies of the Law which related to his Person or his undertaking as the Jewish Priesthood and Sacrifices c. or to prescribe that real righteousness which was signified and represented by the outward ceremony and so Christ fulfilled the Laws of circumcision Washing Purifications Sabbaths c. by commanding the Circumcision of the heart and the purity of mind and spirit or by supplying what was defective and thus he fulfilled the moral Law by new instances of vertue by requiring something more perfect of us then what the letter of the Mosaical Law enjoyned These are all the wayes that I know of and all that we have any instances of in Scripture of fulfilling Laws Now I suppose no man will say that the first Commandment which forbids â—he worship of any other Gods besides the Lord Jehovah is a Typical Law for pray what is it a Type of nor can any pretend that the first Commandment is a ceremonial Law for it prescribes no rite of worship at all but onlâ— determines the object of worship As for the third way of fulfilling Laws by perfecting them with some new instances and degrees of vertue it can have no place here for this Law is as perfect as it can be For it is a Negative Law Thou shalt have none other GOD. Now that which is forbid without any reserve oâ— limitation is perfectly and absolutely forbid There are no degrees of nothing though there are several degrees of perfection in things which have beeing and therefore though there are degrees in affirmative Laws for some Laws may require greater attainments then other and one man may do better then another and yet both do that which is good yet there are no degrees in not doing a thing and no Law can do more then forbid that which the Law-giver will not have done And besides â—his way of fulfilling Laws does not abrogate any command but adds to it it may restrain those liberties which were formerly indulged but it does not forbid any thing which was formerly our duty to do for when GOD requires greater degrees of vertue from us he does not forbid the less And therefore in this way Christ might forbid more then was forbid by the Law of Moses but we cannot suppose that he gave liberty to do that which the law forbids which is not to perfect but to abrogate a Law But to put an end to this dispute if Christ have perfected these Laws by indulging the worship of Saints and Angels under the Gospel which was so expreslly forbidden by the Law then it seems the worship of Saints and Angels is a more perfect state of Religion then the worship of the one supreme God alone If this be true then though the Heathens might mistake in the object of their worship was yet the manner of their worship was more perfect and excellent then what God himself prescribed the Jews For they worshiped a great many inferiour Deities as well as the supreme God and if this be the most perfect and excellent worship it is wonderful to me that God should forbid it in the worship of himself that he should prescribe a more imperfect worship to his own people then the Heathens paid to their Gods For to say that God forbade the worship of any Beeing besides himself because this liberty had been abused by the Heathens to Idolatry is no reason at all For though we should suppose that the Heathens worshiped evil spirits for Gods this had been easily prevented had God told them what Saints and Angels they should have made their addresses to and this had been a more likely way to cure them of Idolatry then to have forbid the worship of all inferiours Deities for when they had such numerous Dieties of their own to have made their application to they would have been more easily weaned from the Gods of other Countries And we have reason to believe so it would have been had GOD been pleased with this way of worship for he would not reject any part of religious worship meerly because it had been abused by Idolaters The Heathens sacrificed to Idols and yet he commands the Jews to offer Sacrifices to himself and so no doubt he would have commanded the worship of Saints and Angels had he been as well pleased with this as he was with Sacrifices had it been a more perfect state of Religion then to worship God only and without any Image When God chose the people Israel and separated them from the rest of the world to his own peculiar worship and service we cannot suppose that he did intend to forbid any acts of worship which were a real honour to the Divine Nature much less to forbid the most excellent and perfect acts of worship for he who is so jealous of his glory will no more part with it himself then he will give it to another and therefore excepting the Typical nature of that dispensation the whole intention of the Mosaical Law was to correct those abuses which the rest of the world was guilty of in their Religious Worship which either respected the object or the acts of worship that they worship'd that for God which was not God or that they thought to honour God by such acts as were so far from being an honour that they were a reproach to the Divine Nature And whatever is forbid in the worship of God unless there be some Mystical and Typical reasons for it must be reduced to one of those causes This account God himself gives why he forbids the worship of any Beeing besides himself or the worship of graven Images I am the Lord that is my Name and my glory will I not give to Isa 42. 8. another nor my praise to graven Images Whatever is his true glory he reserves to himself and therefore never did forbid any act of worship which was truly so but he will not give his glory to another and for that reason forbids the worship of graven Images or any thing besides himself and if this was not his glory then much less the most perfect and excellent part of worship I know not how it should come to be his glory now unless the Divine Nature changes and alters too So that God having forbid by the Law of Moses the worship of any other Beeing besides himself is a very strong presumption that the worship of Saints
prohibite the worship of all those Gods which were then worshipped in the world will any one in theirs wits hence conclude that if the folly and superstition of men should set up a new race and generation of Gods in after ages that the worship of these new Gods is not as well forbidden by this general Law as the worship of those gods which were worship'd at that time when this Law was given If this were true possibly Pagan Rome it self was not guilty of Idolatry for most if not all of their Gods might be of a later date then the giving the Law 3. Now since no such distinctions as these appear in Scripture it is impossible they should justifie the worship of Saints and Angels which is so expresly forbidden by the Law if we will acknowledge them to be distinct Beeings from the Supreme God for if they are not the Supreme GOD we must not worship them for we must worship none but God No distinctions can justifie us in this case but such as GOD himself makes for otherwise it were easie to distinguish away any Law of God Humane Laws will admit of no distinctions but such as they make themselves for a distinction does either confine and streighten or enlarge the Law and he who has power to distinguish upon a Law has so far power to make it If the Law says that we shall worship no other Beeing besides God and we have power if we have but wit enough to invent some new distinctions between the worship of good and bad spirits between Supreme and Subordinate absolute and relative worship this makes a new Law of it for it is one thing to say thou shalt worship GOD only and quite contrary to say thou shalt worship God only and good Spirits God with a supreme and absolute good Spirits with a subordinate and relative worship This I think is sufficient to shew that we must admit of no distinctions upon a Divine Law but what the Scripture it self owns and therefore since those distinctions with which the Church of Rome justifies her worship of Saints and Angels are no where to be found in Scripture they have no authority against an express Law 3. The next course the Papists take to justifie their Creature-worship in contradiction to that Law which expresly commands us to worship none but God is an appeal to such authorities as they think sufficient to decide this matter Now I shall not say much to this for I believe all Mankind will acknowledge that no Authority less then Divine can repeal a Divine Law and therefore unless God himself or such persons as act by a Divine Authority have repealed this Law no other Authority can do it That Christ and his Apostles have not repealed this Law I have already proved that the whole Church in after Ages had any Authority to repeal this Law I desire them to prove For the authority of the Church as to the essentials of Faith and Worship is not the authority of Law-givers but of Witnesses The Church never pretended in former Ages to make or to repeal any Divine Laws but to declare and testifie what the belief and practice of the Primitive and Apostolick Churches was and it is unreasonable to think that they should have any such Authority for then Christ and his Apostles preached the Gospel to little purpose if it were in the power of the Church to make a new Gospel of it when they pleased But indeed could it appear that the Apostles did teach the Christians of that Age and the Church in those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles did practise the worship of Saints and Angels we should have reason to suspect that we and not they are mistaken in the sense of that Law which commands us to worship none but God But then none can be admitted as competent witnesses of this matter but those who did immediately succeed the Apostles or conversed with Apostolical men and Churches And thanks be to God there is no appearance of creature-worship in those Ages we dare appeal to the testimony of Fathers and Councils for above three hundred years and those who come after come a little too late to be witnesses of what was done in the Apostolick Churches especially when all the intermediate Ages knew nothing of it I shall not fill up this discourse with particular â—itations which learned men know where to find since the Roman Doctors can find nothing in the Writings of the first Fathers to justifie the worship of Saints and Angels and the Protestant Writeâ—s find a great deal in those Ages against it Indeed at the latter end of the fourth Century some of the Fathers used some Rhetorical Apostrophes to the Saints and Martyrs in in their Orations which the Church of Rome interprets to be Prayers to them but though other See Bishops Ushers Answer to the Jesuits Challenge Learned men have vindicated those passages so far as to shew the vast difference between them and solemn and formal Invocation which is not my business at this time yet there are several things very well worth our observation towards the true stating of this matter As 1. That these Fathers came too late to be witnesses of the Apostolical practice which they could know no otherwise then we might know it if there had been any such thing viz. by the testimony and practice of the Church from the Apostles till that time This was no where pretended by them that the Invocation of Saints had been the practice of the Catholick Church in all ages and they could have no proof of this unless they had better Records of former times then we have at this day and such as contradicted all the Records which we now have of the Apostolick and Primitive Churches and I believe few men will be so hardy as to assert this and me thinks there should be as few who are so credulous as to believe it and I am sure there is no man living who is able to prove it 2. Nay the particular sayings of these Fathers by which the Romanists prove the Invocation of Saints do not prove that it was the Judgement and practice of the Church of that age They no where say that it was and it does not appear to be so by any other Records Let them shew me any Council before or in those times when these Fathers lived that is in the fourth Century which decreed the worship of Saints and Angels Let them produce any publick offices of Religion in in those dayes which allows this worship and if no such thing appears those men must be very well prepared to believe this who will without any other evidence judge of the practice of the Church only from some extravagant slights of Poets and Orators and if even in those dayes the worship of Saints was not received into the publick offices of the Church methinks we may as well live without it still and they must either grant
miraculous signs of their Apostolical Office And if they had not had such Assurance themselves and could not have given proof to others of their mission there would have been a defect in the first promulgation of the Gospel and such as could not afterwards have been amended That which at first had been delivered with uncertainty would with greater uncertainty have been conveighed down to after Ages and Men who in process of time graft error upon certain Truth would much more have grafted error upon uncertain Opinion Ever since the Apostles times there has been True Faith and the Profession of it in the Catholick Church And it will be so till Faith shall expire and Men shall see him on whom they before believ'd For a Church cannot subsist without the Fundamentals of Christianity And Christ hath Sealed this Truth with his promise that there shall be a Church as long as this World continues * S. Mat. 28. 20. I mean by a Church a visible Society of Christians both Ministers and People for publick Worship on Earth cannot be invisible But the True Faith and the Profession of it is not fixed to any place or to any succession of Men in it God's Providence has written the contrary in the very Ashes of the Seven Churches of the lesser Asia Neither is any particular Church though so far infallible in Fundamentals as to be preserved from actual error an infallible Rule to all other Christians If they follow the Doctrine of it they erre not because it is true but if they follow that Church as an unerring Guide or Canon they mistake in the Rule and Motive of their Faith For that particular Church which Teacheth Truth might possibly have err'd and the Church which erres might have shined with the True Light But the whole Church cannot erre in any Age for then the very being of a Church would cease Neither doth it hence follow that the Faith of the Roman Church when Luther arose was the only true and certain Doctrine For that Church was not then the only visible Church on Earth The Greek Church for instance sake was then more visible than now it is and more Orthodox The Rich Papacy having much prevailed upon the necessities of it by Arguments guilded with Interest That Church did not erre in Fundamental Points the Article of the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father by the Son which the Romans accuse of Heresie being easily acquitted of it if Men agreeing in the sense forbear contention about the Phrases Besides if our Fore-Fathers under the Papacy embraced the True Faith we have it still the Faith not being removed but the Corruption Their Question therefore Where was your Religion before Luther is not more pertinent amongst Disputers than this amongst Husbandmen Where was the Corn before it was weeded We have seen that necessary Faith is perpetual and it is as Prop. II manifest that wheresoever God requireth the belief of it he vouchsafeth sufficient means for information and unerring Assent Of all he does not require this belief for to all the Gospel is not preached and where it is preached there are Infants and Persons of Age so distempered in Mind as to remain unavoidably Children in understanding And though thâ— same sum of Doctrines is generally necessary to Salvation yet the Creed of all men is not of equal length seing they have unequal capacities But wheresoever there is a particular Society of Men who call themselves a Church yet erre actually in the necessary Articles of the Faith it is certain they were not forced into that error for want of external means For the Just Judge of the World would never have required Unity in the Faith upon pain of his Eternal displeasure if he had not given to Men Power sufficient for such Unity No Tyranâ— on Earth has been guilty of such undisguised injustice as that is which maketh a Law for the punishment of the Blind because they miss their way The Articles of Christian Religion come not to the Mind by natural reason but by Faith and Faith comes by hearing or reading and where these means are not offered a Man is rather an Ignorant Person then an Unbeliever Wherefore our Saviour told the perverse Jews * Joh. 15. 22 23. that if the Messiah had never been revealed to them they had not been answerable for the Sin of Infidelity But that since he was come to them and by them despised their Infidelity was blackned with great aggravation The means then are sufficient wheresoever the end Prop. III. is absolutely required but whatsoever those means are the Act of Assent is to be utlimately resolved into each Mans Personal reason For no Man can believe or assent but upon some ground or motive which appears credible to him He could not believe unless he had some reason or other why he believed When all is done said Mr. Thorndike * To the Reader of the Dis of Govern of Churches Men must and will be Judges for themselves I do not quote the saying because it is extraordinary but because that Learned Man said it who was careful to pay to Authority its minutest dues If a man believe upon Authority he hath a farther reason for the believing of it He is not willing to take Pains in examining that which is proposed to him or he thinks himself of less Ability in understanding then those from whom he borrows his Light If he desireth another to judge for him his choice is determined by the Opinion he hath conceived of him Every Man has his reason though it be a weak one and such as cannot justify it self or him Something at last turns the Ballance though it be but a Feather This the Romanists own as well as the Reformed till it toucheth them in the case of a new Convert To induce a Man of another particular Church to embrace their Communion they submit these weighty points to his private Judgement What is a True Church and which are the marks of it What is the Roman Church And whither the marks of the True Church do only belong unto the Roman What Men or what Books spâ—â—k the sense of that Church They tell us †R. H. Guide in Controv. in Pref. p. 3. That the Light of a Man 's own reason first serves him so far as to the discovery of a Guide Also that in this discovery the Divine Providence hath left it so clear and evident that a sincere and unbyassed quest cannot miscarry But when once this Guide is found ouâ— the Man is afterwards for all other things that are prescribed by this Guide to subject and resign his reason As if it were not as difficult to judge of such a Guide as of his direction It seems the Roman Church is like a Cave into which a Man has Light enough to enter but when once he is entred he is in thick Darkness But how subservient soever our reason may be
they are sure they are great Truths by vertue of Infallibility which is one of the Miracles of Rome which can change the nature of things Fowlis hist Preface p. 1. which may be true in England and the quite contrary at Rome as Father Cotton and other Jesuites affirmed at Paris For it 's plain to all impartial judgements that their Doctrine of Purgatory Transubstantiation and the like are not to be found in the Scriptures are utterly unknown to the truely ancient Fathers and the eldest and purest times of Christianity and contrary to the reason of mankind They may as well tell us that the City of Rome was never sackt and spoil'd because some Flatterers humour'd her Pride and arrogance calling her Vrbs aeterna immobile saxum Grot in Apoc. c. 17. the immortal city and impregnable Rock as that these gross errors never invaded and ruin'd the Christian faith because of the fine name of Infallibility which they arrogate to themselves And may as well put out our eyes and then bid us see if we can discover any errours in the Romish Church And St. Peter's being at Rome proves no more that he left Infallibility behind him then consecrated clouts sent from Rome that the Infant that wears them shall ever after be a firm defender of the Romish Faith 4. This Question will serve any Heresies or errours that have got some Antiquity on their side against a Reformation If it be true in this case 't is so in all others and then what a shelter have they provided for all Heresies if they chance to live long to be safe and secure in and escape correction And there are many errours contemporary with Christianity it self in its first plantation in the World at least followed it very close at the heels such were the Ancient Gnosticks the Carpocrations or Ebionites the spawn of Magus and others who can plead great Antiquity on their side and as properly ask any Reformer of their Heresies Where was his Religion before such a time as the inconstant World began to favour his new Faith and Innovation And so Errours once superinduced upon the Truth will become by Age Truth it self and are never to be mended for fear of this pert Question and charge of Innovation And it 's plain that new and old are but uncertain Characters to judge of Truth and Falshood by there being sometimes a new Truth that is lately discovered to be so but really old and an old errour kept up a long time by force or art and walking in the garb of Truth but truly new having come in after the Truth it vies with Time like a River many times bringing down Straw and Trash leaving weightier things behind which when they come to be retriev'd are called new Fashions and Inventions When Abraham restored the true Worship of GOD and stript it of Idolatry and Superstition the Chaldean Priests whose Power and Interest was shaken by it were very brisk and ready to charge this pious and mighty Man from the East with Novelty and Singularity in his Religion the false service of GOD in Isaiah 41. 2. these Countries being then ancient and almost universal though the Patriarchs Religion did derive it self from a very ancient stock that of Adams in Paradise kept up by an Enoch and a Noah in single Families when all Flesh had corrupted their wayes and now delivered unto Abraham and now all the Gen. 6. 11. sticklers for a false Religion began to upbraid the Sons and Followers of Abraham's Faith with Novelty and askt them Where was your Religion before the times of Abraham who set up his but yesterday and scorns and uncharitably damns all his Forefathers who of old liv'd beyond the River in our Religion The same Objection might have been cast in the teeth of Moses when he was settlling a Religion delivered to him by GOD in opposition to the Idolatries and false Devotions of the World and to serve his farther designs of providence that he affected Novelty and Singularity that all the World stood against him in this and one of his Disciples afterward was inhumane and uncharitable in praying Psalm 79. 6. GOD to pour out his indignation upon the Heathen who had not known his Laws And his Successor Joshua might have met Josb 24. 15. with the same fare when he bids his People choose whom they will serve either the Gods beyond the Floud and in Egypt or the Gods of the Amorites Old and great Nations who might have had this Objection in its full strength on their side or the GOD of Abraham and stoutly tells them Let that plausible Argument weigh withthem what it will as for my self and his Family they would serve the LORD And as this Religion might degenerate in descending Ages so any Restorer of it might be set upon by the same frivolous Objection and so it hapned to our Messias and his fore-runner who was to restore all things who when he began to reform the false glosses and corrupt senses which the Scribes and Pharisees had put upon the Law of Moses and cry down their Traditions which made the Commands of GOD of none effect was look'd upon as an Enemy to Moses a Blasphemer of the Law a Prophaner of the Temple and a Changer of all their Religion whose Design was onely to fill up their Law and restore it to its Natural Beauty and Perfection and before Abraham was I am not only in his Divine Nature and designation to his Office but in his Religion also which now he was going to to teach the jew and Gentiâ—e too And Heb. 9. 10. now the times of a general Reformation being come and the Apostles were Preaching this excellent Religion unto all the World Jew and Gentile conspire together in the same Language and call them setters forth of strange Gods and new Acts 24. 14. Acts 28. 22 Heresies Heads and Contrivers of new Sects and Wayes and are whipt for Vagrants and Impostors who would cheat the World out of their old paternal Religions that were entail'd upon them teach them to speak ill of the Gods of their Fathers and Predecessors and to think they all dyed in a false Religion and to embrace a new-fangled Faith of a few illiterate and rambling fellows who had turn'd the World upside down And had this Argument prevail'd then as much as the Romanists do desire it should new we should have had no Christianity among us the Idol-Gods of our Ancestors in this Island their Woodens and Twisters would have prescribed against Christ himself 3. To turn the Question upon them and ask them some others of the like nature Men that are insolent and ever boasting of the Antiquity of their Family and upbraiding others with their obscure Birth and Extraction do many times meet with some cross Questions about the Head and Fountain of their Families which many times proves onely to be a Shepheard or meaner Original made
first 600. years 1. By Usurpation upon the Rights of other Churches every degree of Exaltation gained being the depression and diminution of them till all power was in a manner swallowed up by the Papal ambition and none left to any oâ—her which was not dependent hereupon in its Original and altogether precarious in its administration So that here alone it must be immediately derived from Christ but to all others by commission from Him Thus in the choice of the chief Governours of the Church all must await his consent and confirmation where he does not alone forcibly obtrude them and must pay for it a round sum for an acknowledgement at their entrance and an after Tributary Pension out of their income and take a formal Oath of subjection at their admittance and own their own Authority from his Delegation and be lyable to have their sentences reversed at his pleasure and flee as far as his Judicatory and stand to the tryal of it when he is pleased to call any cause to himself Nay if a controversie arise between him and any Prince or State the whole Kindom or Nation shall lie at once under his Interdict the Clergy be with-held from the exercise of their Function and the People from the benefit of publick Divine Worship and Sacraments Of these and such like effects of the plenitude of Apostolick Power so much talkt of lately they would do well to shew us any thing like a Plea from Scripture or Antiquity within the bounds forementioned or for some Ages after in the greater part certainly so great a change could not be effected without some notice and complaints struglings and contentions of which Church History is fâ—ll Their early Faith spoken of throughout the world in St. Pauls time The eminent Zeal of the first Bishops of that Church most of whom if we may credit the account generally received of them sealed to the former with their bloud Their continued constancy in the Orthodox Profession thereof amidst the corruptions or defections of so many others particularly in the time of the Arrian Persecution The concurrent opinion of the Foundation of their Church being laid by the two chief Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul and the honour of the Imperial Seat wherein they were placed c. gave them great repute and advantagious recommendation in those first Ages None will much contend with them about priority of Order or Precedence But when the preheminence of the first Bishop came to be improved into a Patriarchate and that swelled into the Title of the Universal Bishop which a S. Greg. l. 4 Reg. Ep. 32. Absit à cordibus Christianornm nomen islud blasphemiae in quod omnium Sacerdotum honor adimitur dum ab uno sibi demenâ—er arrogatur c. Et alibi in Epist passim St. Gregory so severely condemned in the Bishop of Constantinople and that at last grew into the stile of the sole Vicar of Christ and Soveraign Monarch of the whole Church when the interposition of a Friendly and Brotherly Arbitration which all persons in distress or under the apprehensions of injury are apt to flee unto and amplifie made way by degrees for the challenge of an ordinary Jurisdiction and that at first from the pretence of Canonical priviledge to that Divine Right and Sanction and then to prevent all scruple about its determinations these must be back'd with the vindication of an infallible conduct When instead of that charitable support they at first readily bestowed on other Churches in their distress they now made use of this power to rob them of what was left taking the advantage of the poverty and oppression of some under the common Enemy or the confusion of others through Domestick distractions to raise themselves out of their spoils then no wonder if other Churches complain and strugle under the yoke which they could not presently or easily throw off Indeed had not this claim of the Church and Bishop of Roâ—e risen to such an extravagant height in the arrogance of its pretended Title and been strained to that excess in the exercise of its assumed Authority so as not to leave it in the power of other churches to take all due and necessary care of their own members or provide for them all needful supplies these might more easily have born their usurpation of more power then ever they could prove belonged to them They that have learnt the Humility of Christs School and who are more concern'd to perform their Duty then vindicate their Priviledge and know how much safer it is to obey then command and easier to be Governed then to Govern will not be much moved at what others fondly assume knowing still that the more difficult account awaits them But then this power became most intolerable when it was made use of to purposes so much worse then it self which were beside the former 2. The weakning of the power of Temporal Princes and disturbing the Civil Rights of men a Cracanthorp's defence of Constantine and against the Popes temporal Monarchy Although our blessed Saviour assured Pilate his Kingdom was not of this world yet his pretended Vicar here on earth can hardly say so for beside the Temporal Dominions unto which he hath entitled himself a Soveraign Prince there are few other Kingdoms or States on this side of the world in which he hath not or had not almost as great a share of the Government as their immediate Princes at least so far as to prescribe bounds to their Administrations and subject in great measure all Laws and Persons to his Foreign Courts Jurisdiction and Decrees yea their Purses to his Exactions and upon the least dispute hath withdrawn so great a number of his immediate dependants who scarce own any other Governours and raised so many disturbances that great Princes and States have been forced at last to yield Not to mention the Arrogance it at length grew up unto in dethroning Princes giving their Kingdoms to others authorizing their Subjects to rebel against them or all wayes to oppose them and what oft follows if not expressed to murder them as in their late Sentence against some of our Neighbour Princes But before much of this may be seen in the long contentions between some of the Western Emperours particularly Henry the Third and Fourth and the Popes as we have them discribed in their own Authors b Sigonius de regno Italiae Also to go no farther their various contests with several of our Kings especially Henry the second and the almost continual complaints in all our Parliaments before the Reformation of the encroachments made by them upon the Civil Rights of Prince and Subject by vexatious and chargeable suits and appeals as far as Rome by Insolencies and diverse Rapines committed under the shelter of their protection and defended from due punishment and by their extravagant Extortions c. abundantly prove Now though these Usurpations grew by degrees and were practised
first General Councils are received with great Veneration and a particular a In libro canonum in Synodo Londinensi an 1571. titulo de concionatoribus Imprimis videbunt ne quid unquam doceant pro concione quod a populoreligiose teneri credi velint 〈◊〉 quod consentaneum sit doctrinae Veteris Novi Testamenti quodquo ex illa ipsa doctrina catholici Patres Veteres Episcopi collegerint Injunction was laid upon its Ministers to press upon none the necessary belief of any Doctrine but what may be proved from Scripture and the generall current of the Expositions of the Fathers thereupon So carefull it hath been in all points to keep within the bounds of catholick Principles in those first instilled into its young Disciples in the catechisms and in those delivered in its Articles to be subscribed by such to whom it entrusts any Office that the positive part of them will hardly be disowned by our very Adversaries and can scarce appear otherwise to any then the common Faith of all christians of Orthodox repute in all Ages And for other determinations in the Negative she only declares thereby how little concerned she is to receive or own the false or corrupt additions to the first unalterable Rule No church hath professed and evidenced a more awful and tender regard to Antiquity next to the express Word of GOD. Both which she oft appeals to desires to be ruled by and where their footsteps are not sufficiently clear chooses not to impose upon her own Children nor censure her Neighbours keeps within the most safe and modest boundaries is not forward in determining nice and intricate disputes which have perplexed and confounded many in their hasty and bold Positions particularly about the Divine Decrees and such like sublime Points In which few understand where the main stress of the Controversie lies It may be none can comprehend the depth of the matters upon which the Decision ought to grounded But alas how many have been forward to lay down and fiercely contend for on each side their private opinions herein as the first Rudiments of Theology to be placed in their very Creeds or Catechisms and so a foundation must be laid for endless Contests and Divisions But most cautious hath our Church been in not laying such occasions to fall in the way of any So that both sorts of Adversaries have made their complaints against her for not being positive and particularly in such Declarations though none can charge her justly with defect in any point of Faith so owned in the best Ages of the Church 2. As clear and unexceptionable hath been her proceeding in Church Government preserving that form which from all Testimonies of Antiquity hath continued in the Church from the very Apostles under the conduct and happy Influence of which Christianity hath been propagated and continued throughout the World whatever different measures some other Reformed Churches have taken whither forc'd by necessity or swayed by particular inclination or prejudice The Church of England kept up the universally received distinct prime Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons not desiring to censure others who can best answer for themselves but endeavouring to confine her self to what was most Canonical and Regular and to shew how little affected she was to alteration from any establishment except in notorious corruptions and abuses And how necessary she thought due Order and Subordination in the Church to prevent Schisms and Heresies and to give the greater Authority and advantage to her Ministrations and finally to free her self from all suspicion of irregularity in her Succession derived down from Christ and his Apostles which she as much as any Church in the World may pretend unto And though some intermediate Ages have been blemished with much degeneracy yet she was concerned only to separate this but retain and convey down to others whatsoever good and wholsome provision she received from those before Farther to evince this particular care was taken by express Law a See the Statute 25 of Henry the 8. cap. 19. Sect. 7 expresly revived 1 Eliz c. 1. sect 6. to confirm the Rules of Government or Canon Law before received in the Church till some better provision could be made so far as it contradicts not the Law of the Land or the Word of GOD making as few changes in the outward face of the Church as was possible and sensibly proving it her design properly not to destroy but build nor yet therein to erect a new but reform an old Church 3. Alike Canonical and orderly hath been her Constitution in matters of Worship Her Forms of Prayer and Praise with the whole order of her Liturgy are composed with the greatest temper and expressed in the most plain and comprehensive terms to help forward uniform devotion pious Affection the most Orthodox Profession and catholick communion So that I think it may be universally affirmed that there is not any thing required in her publick Service necessary to those who communicate with her which any that own the name of christians or are owned for such by the general body of them can almost scruple unless because it is a Form by one sort and because it is ours by another sort But how unreasonable herein are both So careful she hath been to lay the ground of most catholick Unity and to remove whatever might obstruct it This our Adversaries the Romanists confirmed by their own practice when for several years as we have been told a Camdeni Eliz. an 1570 in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign they frequented our churches joyn'd in our Prayers and Praises attended on our Sermons and other Instructions and received as some add our Sacraments according to the order for substance the same as now and had it is like done so still having nothing to object against them but from the after-prohibition of the Pope who had reason to fear they who were so well provided of all needfull supply and defence at home might thus by degrees be withdrawn from subjection to his Authority abroad that darling point never to be dispensed or parted with whatever else might have been yielded b Camd. Eliz. an 1560. Our Reformers who composed our Liturgy carefuly collected the remainders of true Primitive Devotion a camdeni Eliz an 1560. then in use and separated from them all those corrupt additions which ignorance superstition and crafty policy had mixed therewith Therefore it is so far from being an objection that any part of our Liturgy was translated from the Roman Offices that while nothing is retained contrary to wholsome Doctrine and sound Piety it is a convincing argument of her impartial Sincerity and desire to preserve Uniformity as much as possible with all christians abroad as well as at home in her own Members securing all the Substantials of Worship according to the plain sense of Scripture and the pattern of the Primitive church And as to Circumstantials
The sum is this If it be more for the glory of God to have all Religious Worship appropriated to himself then to have only a part of it and it may be the least share and part too then the worship of Saints and Angels cannot be for Gods glory But besides this the worship of Saints and Angels together with God does mightily obsâ—ure and lessen the Divine perfections and therefore it cannot be for his glory It represents him indeed like a great Temporal Monarch but it does not represent him like a God That which we ignorantly think a piece of state and greatness in earthly Monarchs to administer the great affairs of their Kingdoms to receive Petitions and Addresses to bestow Favours to administer justice by other hands to have some great Ministers and Favourites to interpose between them and their Subject is nothing else but want of power to do otherwise He would be a much greater Prince more beloved and reverenced who could do all this himself but no Prince can be present in all parts of his Kingdom nor know every particular subject much less their particular cases and conditions deserts and merits and therefore is forc'd to divide this care into many hands and in so doing shares his power and honour with his Subjects But whoever imagines any such thing of God denies his omnipresence his omnipotence his omniscience and his particular care and providence over his Creatures God indeed does not alwayes govern the world by an immediate power but makes use both of the Ministry of Angels and Men but he governs all things by his immediate direction or at least by his immediate inspection He overlooks every thing himself while all Creatures either obey his commands or submit to his power If this be the true notion of Gods governing the world that he has the concernments of the whole Creation under his eye and keeps the disposal of all things in his own hands so that nothing can be done but either by his order or permission then the most perfect and glorious Angels the greatest Ministers of the Divine Providence can challenge no share in Religious Worship cannot be the objects of our trust or hope because they are only Ministers of the Divine Will can do nothing from themselves as civil Ministers of State and Officers of great trust can in Temporal Kingdoms but are alwayes under the eye and alwayes move at the command of God In such a state of things all the peculiar rights of Soveraign Power and Dominion God reserves wholly to himself as any wise Prince would among which the receiving the Prayers and Petitions of his Creatures is none of the least to hear Prayers is made the peculiar attribute of God in Scripture Thou art a God that hearest prayers therefore unto thee shall all flesh come And reason tells us that it is the most eminent part of Soveraignity and Majesty and the reason why Temporal Princes do not reserve this wholly to themselves is because they cannot do it but God can and he challenges it to himself and will not allow any Creature to do it and there is no temptation to pray to any creature when we know that they cannot help us that they must receive their orders and commands from God and do not act by their own will and inclinations Thus Princes have their Favourites to whom they express a very partial fondness and respect to whom they will deny nothing that they ask nor hardly shew any grace or favour to their Subjects without them and this forces Subjects to address themselves to their Prince by them but it is a reproach to the Divine goodness and universal Providence to conceive any such thing of God which yet is the foundation of the worship of Patron Saints and Angels as persons so dear to God that he cannot deny their requests will not grant our Petitions without them or at least that is the most certain and effectual way to obtain what we desire to offer up our Prayers and Petitions to God by their hands No doubt but all good men on earth much more Blessed Saints and Angels in Heaven as being more perfect and excellent Creatures are very dear to God but yet God is not fond and partial in his kindness as earthly Princes are but has an equal regard to all his Creatures and delights in doing good to them and needs not to be importuned by any powerful Favourites to hear their cryes and prayers he will as soon attend to the Prayers of an humble penitent sinner as of the most glorious saint and is more ready to grant then they are to ask A Mediator of Redemption is very consistent with the perfections of the Divine Nature and does mightily recommend both the goodness and wisdom of God to the world When Mankind had transgressed the Laws of their creation they forfeited their natural â—ight and interest in the care and goodness of their Maker The Divine Justice and the wisdom of God in the government of the world required an atonement and expiation for sin and it was an amazing demonstration of the Divine goodness to sinners that he found one himself that he gave his Son to be a propitiation for our sins When men by sin had forfeit their original innocence and happiness together they could expect nothing from God but by way of convenant and promise and every covenant between contending parties must be transacted in the hands of a Mediator and none so fit to be our Mediator as he who is our ransome too And a Mediator must be invested with power and authority to see the terms of this covenant performed and this is his Mediatory Intercession He interceeds not meerly as a powerful Favourite but as the Author and Surety of the covenant not meerly by intreaties and prayers but in vertue of his blood which sealed the covenant and made atonement and expiation for sin Thus Christ is our Mediator of redemption who hath redeemed us by his blood and we must offer up all our prayers to God in his name and powerful intercession because we can expect no blessings from God but by vertue of that covenant which he purchast and sealed with his blood But now a Mediator of pure intercession without regard to any atonement made for sin or any covenant of redemption such as Saints and Angels and the blessed Virgin are made by the church of Rome is a mighty reproach to the Divine Nature and perfections It cloaths God with the passions and infirmities of earthly Princes represents him as extreamly fond of some of his Creatures and very regardless of others as if his kindness to some favourite Saint were a more powerful motive to him to do good then his own love to goodness as if he knew not when nor to whom to shew mercy with out their direction or counsel or would not do it without their importunity as if some of his Creatures had as much the ascendant
they be truly I think it a very vain thing either for God or men to make any Laws For 1. I desire to know what these Gentlemen would prove by such kiâ—â— of arguments as these Suppose we should grant them that the Saints are received into Heaven before the Resurrection and are actually possest of all that Glory and Hapiness which they say they are suppose we should grant them that by some means unknown to us Saints and Angels are acquainted with all that we do and suffer in this world heaâ— all oâ—r vocal or mental prayers which we offer to GOD or to themselves and that they do actually pray and interceed for us what follows from hence Therefore we may pray to Saints not I hope if there can be an express Law against it These arguments aâ— most can onely prove that in the nature of the thing it might be fitting and reasonable to pray to Saints if God thought fit to allow it noâ— that we must pray to Saints though God has forbid it For those are powerful reasons indeed which can justifie Saint-worship against the express Law and declared Will of God Could they first prove one of these three things Either 1. that there is no such Law against the worship of any other Beeing besides God Or 2. that this is not the sense of the Law that they must not pray to Saints or Angels that the Law which forbids us to worship any Beeing but God does not forbid the worship of Saints Or 3. that though there was such a Law and this were the sense of it and this Law were never formally repealed by God yet it disappears of it self and oblidges no longer since the discovery such reasons as these for the worship of Saints and Angels I say could they prove any thing of this in the first place then there would be as much reason for the worship of Saints as there is strength and validity in their Arguments but no reason can take place against an express Law till it be as expresly repealed For 2. If an express Law may be disobeyed as often as men fancy they see reason to do what the Law forbids this overthrows the whole authority of making Laws and makes every Subject a Judge whither the Laws of a Soveraign Prince shall be obeyed or not At this rate he has the greatest authority who has the best reason and since every man believes his own reason to be best every man is the Soveraign Lord of his own actions It is to be presumed that no Prince makes a Law but what he apprehends some reason for and to oppose any mans private reason against a Law is to set up a private mans reason against the publick reason of government and yet it is much worse to oppose our reason against a Divine Law which is to oppose the reason of Creatures against the reason of God unless we will say that GOD makes Laws without reason and those who can believe that may as easily imagine that God will expect that those Laws he makes without reason should be obeyed without reason also and then to be sure all their reasons cannot repeal a Law nor justifie them in the breach of it It becomes every Creature to believe the will of God to be the â—ighest reason and therefore when God has declared his will by an express Law while this Law continues in force as it must do till it be as expresly repealed it is an impudent thing to urge our reasons against the obligations of it So that since God has expresly forbid us to worship any Beeing besides himself unless we can prove that God has repealed this Law it will never justifie the worship of Saints and Angels though we could by the plainest and easiest arguments prove to the conviction of all Mankind that Saints and Angels are very fit objects of our Religious Worship and that it is no diminution to the glory of God to pay some degree of Religious worship to them 3. Especially when the matter of the Law is such that whatever reasons may be pretended on one side or the other it most still be acknowledged to be wholly at the will and pleasure of the Law-giver whâ—ch fide he will choose As for instance suppose there were no natural and necessary reason against the worship of Saints and Angels yet there is no natural and necessary reason for it neither and therefore God may either allow or forbid it as he himself pleases without assigning any reason why he does either And when it appears that God might forbid it if he pleases and that he has actually forbid it by an express Law it is time to leave off reasoning about it natural reason can give us no assurance of any thing which it cannot prove to be necessary whatever in the nature and reason of things may be or may not be can never be proved either to be or not to be by meer reason for it is a contradiction to say that there is no necessary reason why such a thing should be and yet that I can prove by reason that it must be which supposes that there is a necessary reason why it should be for I cannot prove that it must be unless I can prove that it most necessarily be that is that there is a necessary reason why it should be To apply this then to our present Case The Law expresly forbids us to worship any other Beeing besides the supreme God the Church of Rome prays to Saints and Angels and Images which is an essential part of Divine Worship and without ever attempting to prove this Law to be repealed she justifies her worship by such reasons and consequences as I have now cited from their most celebrated Doctors and some of which are the principles whereon the Council of Trent founds their praying to Saints and Angels I ask then whither these arguments whereby they endeavour to justifie the worship of Saints and Angels prove that we must worship them that such worship is their natural right and our duty No this the Church of Rome will not own the most the Council of Trent sayes is that it is bonum utile good profitable to do it but say I if they do not prove it to be necessary they prove nothing for if Saints and Angels have not a natural right to our worship though we should suppose them to be very fit objects of some degrees of worship yet it is at Gods choice whither he will allow it or not and they can challenge no worship and we must give none if God forbids it and therefore since God has forbid the worship of any Beeing but himself and therefore of the most excellent Saints and Angels by an express Law and it no where appears where or when or in what manner this Law was repealed a hundred such arguments as these cannot prove it lawful to worship Saints and Angels against an express Law not to do it
and promulged this Law this reason can never repeal it nor dissolve the obligation of it Thus if the Saints and Angels being in Heaven be a good reason why they should be worshipped this was as good a reason at the giving of of the Law as it is now for thö we should suppose with the Church of Rome that Saints departed were not in Heaven then yet certainly the Angels were and if their being in Heaven made them fit objects of our worship why did God so expresly forbid it and if he forbad it then when there was as much reason to allow the worship of of those heavenly Inhabitants as there is now this argument cannot prove but that God forbids it still The same may be said of the Intercession of Saints and Angels The Papists suppose that the Saints and Angels pray and intercede for us in Heaven and obtain for and convey many blessings to us and therefore it is good and profitable to pray to them and to flie to their patronage now though indeed they date the Intercession of Saints as they do their admission into heaven from the Resurrection of our Saviour yet there is as much evidence for the aids and intercessions of Angels before and under the Law as there is now nay I think somewhat more for the government of the world was much more under the administration of Angels in the time of the Law then it is now and yet notwithstanding this God did by an express law forbid the worship of any being but himself and therefore of these Angelical powers who are somewhat superiour to Saints in Heaven and if this were no good reason against making this law it can be no good reason to prove the abrogation of it â— The next way they take to evade the obligation of this law of worshipping God only is by distinctions As to name the chief of them They tell us that this law is only opposed to the worship of false Gods such Gods as the Heathens worshipped not to the worship of Saints and Angels who are the Friends and Favourites of God And then they distinguish about the nature of worship they confess there is a worship which is peculiar to God Supreme and Soveraign worship which is peculiar to the Supreme Beeing and this for what reason I know not they call Latria but then there is an inferiour degree of worship which they call Dulia which may be given to excellent Creatures to Saints and Angels who reign with Christ in Heaven They farther distinguish between absolute and relative worship Absolute worship is when we worship a Beeing for its self and thus God only is to be worshipped but relative worship is when we worship one Beeing out of respect to another and thus we may worship Saints and Angels upon account of their relation to God Now I shall have occasion to examine these distinctions more particularly hereafter my business at present is to examine how far these distinctions can justifie the worship of Saints and Angels against an express Law which commands us to worship God only And I have three things to say on this argument 1. That the letter of the law will admit of no such distinctions as these 2. That the Scripture no where allows any such distinctions And 3. That no distinctions can justifie our acting against the letter of a law which have not the same authority which the Law has 1. The letter of the Law will admit of no such distinctions Exod. 20 as these The Law is Thou shalt have none other Gods before ME. The explication of this Law is Deut. 10 20. Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God him shalt thou serve and to him shalt thou cleave and swear by his name Or as Matth 4 10 our Saviour expounds it Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Now these words do plainly exclude the worship of all other Beeings besides the Supreme God They exclude indeed the worship of all the Heathen Gods which were at that time worshipped in the world but they are not confined to the worship of the Heathen Gods nor meerly to the worship of those Gods who were at that time worshipped but should any new Gods start up in after Ages whither among Jews or Christians the words extend to all that are and all that ever shall be worshipped Thou shalt have noe other Gods before Me signifies that we must worship no other Beeing but the Supreme God for to have a God is to give religious worship to some Beeing as appears from that exposition which both Moses and our Saviour Christ gives of it Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve For it is impossible to have any God besides the Supreme God in any other sense then as we worship some other Beeing besides the Supreme God with Divine honours and whatever being we so worship become our God and therefore this Law forbids the worship of any Beeing which is not God be it Saint or Angel or the Virgin Mary how excellent and perfect Creatures soever they be they are not our God and therefore must not be worshipped If we must worship and serve God only as our Saviour expresly tells us that we must worship no creature whatever it be the worship of saints and Angels is as expresly forbid by this Law as the worship of the Heathen Gods for that Law which commands us to worship GOD onely excludes the worship of all Creatures whatever they be But may not the meaning of this Law be onely this That we must not give supreme and soveraign worship to any other â—eeing but the supreme GOD but we may give an inferiour degree of worship to some excellent spirits who under God have the care of us And is not this plainly signified in the very letter of the Law when it sayes Thou shalt have none other Gods before me For no other worship makes any Beeing a God but that which is supreme and soveraign peculiar and appropriate to the One supreme God and therefore not to have any other Beeing for our God is not to give Supreme and Soveraign Worship to it Now what that worship is which is peculiar and appropriate to the Supreme God I shall discourse particularly in the second part our present inquiry is whither this Law makes any such distinction The Laws says Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve Here is no distinction between supreme and subordinate worship whatever is an Act of worshâ—p must be given to God onely But the Law sayes Thou shalt have no other Gods before me and therefore it must signifie supreme and soveraign worship for no other degree of worship makes a God Did the Heathens then worship no inferiour gods did those who worshipped so many several gods look â—pon them all as supreme and absolute or were they so senseless as to give supreme and soveraign
not any Provision made or so much as a supposition of such Monastries or religious Houses or publick places of Retirement for devout People as they are called being again ever setled among us For tho' we are not so rash as utterly to abhor and throw away every thing that at any time had been abused to superstition yet we are very well contented that Monastries should never be rebuilt among us For we do not look on the Life of Monks as any great help to Devotion or an instance of true Religion prevailing where they are found much less that they are necessary in the Christian Church For it is evident that the first and purest Ages of the Church did not know any thing of them Almost three Centuries passed without any mention of them in Ecclesiastical History Antony and Paul in the Dioclesian Persecution being taken notice of as the first of that Way We read indeed of some that did lead a more then ordinary severe Course and denied themselves much of the perhaps lawful Pleasures of this Life in respect to Religion and the other Life but these were not Monks or the modern Asceticks tho' it hath been the way of the Church of Rome in more instances then this to impose some new thing on the World upon the Reputation of some good and reverend Old Name For the Lives of the ancient Asteâ—icks or mortified Men differed much from the present Monks of the Church of Rome We find not that they engaged themselves in a solemn vow distinct from or above that of their Baptism For whatever their general Course of Life was they would take the Liberty to break their Rule sometimes in order to extraordinary Charity or when an occasion offered it self of doing more good as is recorded particularly concerning Spiridion a Bishop in Cyprus Nor do we find that they always continued in the same State of Life but took such a severe course on themselves at some particular times and on some special occasions as the Nazarites of old did to humble and bring their Bodies under and as St. Paul adviseth the married but not to continue always so lest Satan should tempt them and they reckoned it in an higher degree praise worthy for every Act of Mortification to be voluntary then that they should once for all force themselves to it And therefore still retained a Power to themselves and did vary from this Method sometimes and on occasion would indulge themselves a greater tho' still a lawful Liberty They took not on them the Vow of Poverty nor placed Perfection in Beggery but reckoned every Creature of God to be good and even the outward good things of this Life to be the Gift and Grace of God if they be well imployed according to 1 Pet. 4. 10. And remembred that Saying of our Blessed Saviour Acts 20. 35. It is more blessed to give then to receive Nor did they vow what the Church of Rome now calls Chastity but reckoned themselves as chaste in Wedlock and as for Obedience the third part of the Monks Vow they thought it sufficient to obey the Commands of God and knew not of any other Obedience due from them but only to their Governours in Church and State whose lawful Commands they reckoned themselves obliged to in order to the more regular Administration of Affairs and the more peaceable Government of the World much less had they any distinct Rules to be set up in Competition with the Laws of God and urged as necessary to Salvation making even the Commandments of God of none effect as many of the Monks Rules apparently do as might be easily made to appear Such religious Men as these there were in the first Ages who practised a stricter Devotion then others that God's Name might be the more hallowed by them the more it was profaned by the rest of the World and who were more then ordinary instant and constant in Prayers for a Blessing on the Church and State of which they were Members and by the Strictness and Severity of their Lives made some amends for the Negligence and Viciousness of the Age in which they lived And many such as these we doubt not are now among us who yet utterly dislike the Popish Monkery And if by the Monastick Life all this were done and nothing else designed It were justly to be commended For let Men deny themselves as much as they will and use their Christian Liberty to the Restraint of themselves by a voluntary Self denial and Mortification to keep their bodies under and thereby get a better Temper of Mind But all this will not suffice in the Church of Rome For it is not enough for a man to live so strict and holy a Life unless he enter into a Vow particularlie to this purpose Nay though a man do take on him all these Vowâ— of Chastity Poverty and Obedience and tho' they be made to his Bishop or Confesâ—or who one would think were the properest persons in the Case yet still it is not sufficient he cannot be said to be in this religions State unless he vow Obedience to another kind of Spiritual Jurisdiction So that it is neither the living so strictly nor vowing to live strictlie as the most severe Monks but it is their being of a particular Order and living under such and such Rule that is so meritorious so that by Monkery indeed Monkerie is encouraged and some politick and Secular Designs answered but the Advancement of Piety and Devotion is not principally designed or intended But to discourse more distinctly of it In a Monastick Life these three things are especiallie remarkable First The secluded and perhaps Eremetical way of living which they lead Secondly The Constancy and Regularity of Devotions practised there Thirdly The severity of their Rules and Austerity of their Lives But I must needs say that there is little of true Devotion that I can discover in any of these First Their being shut up from the World or living in Desarts is no very proper Instance of their Devotion or agreeable to the Design of Christianity For a man should converse in the World else he cannot so well understand it what is amiss or wanting in it nor how even to apply and place the Emphasis of his Prayers A man that lives in a Wilderness or shut up alwayes in a Monastery it is possible that he may keep himself free from the Difilements of the World but yet it must be looked on as much more noble and commendable to converse in the World and yet to avoid the Pollution of it And tho' by such a secluded Life he may escape one kind of Temptation yet still he will be at least as liable to the two others that arise from the Devil or his own Flesh and Temper as ever And if he avoid some Sins yet still he will be more subject to others Sowerness Moroseness Melancholly Censoriousness spiritual pride and other sins of as high a Nature
is to all the ends and purposes of a Miracle as if it were not and can be no testimony or proof of any thing because it self stands in need of another Miracle to give testimony to it and to prove that it was wrought And neither in scripture nor in profane Authours nor in common use of speech is any thing call'd a Miracle but what falls under the notice of our senses A Miracle being nothing else but a supernatural effect evident to sense the great end and design whereof is to be a sensible proof and conviction to us of something that we do not see And for want of this Condition Transubstantiation if it were true would be no miracle It would indeed be very supernatural but for all that it would not be a Sign or Miracle For a Sign or Miracle is alwayes a thing sensible otherwise iâ— could be no Sign Now that such a change as is pretended in Transubstantiation should really be wrought and yet there should be no sign and appearance of it is a thing very wonderfull but not to sense for our senses perceive no change the bread and wine in the sacrament to all our senses remaining just as they were before And that a thing should remain to all appearance just as it was hath nothing at all of wonder in it we wonder indeed when we see a strange thing done but no man wonders when he sees nothing done So that Transubstantiation if they will needs have it a Miracle is such a Miracle as any man may work that hath but the confidence to face men down that he works it and the fortune to be believed And though the Church of Rome may magnify their Priests upon account of this Miracle which they say they can work every day and every hour yet I cannot understand â—he reason of it for when this great work as they call it is done there is nothing more appears to be done then it there were no Miracle Now such a Miracle as to all appearance is no miracle I see no reason why a Protestant Minister as well as a Popâ—sh Priest may not work as often as he pleases or if he can buâ— have the patience to let it alone it will work it self For surely nothing in the world is easier then to let a thing be as it is and by speaking a few words over it to make it just what was before Every Man every day may work ten thousand such Mâ—racles And thus I have dispatch'd the First part of my Discourse which was to consider the pretended grounds and Reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine and to shew the weakness and insufficiency of them I come in the SECOND place to produce our Objections against II. it Which will be of so much the greater force because I have already shewn this Doctrine to be destitute of all Divine warrant and authority of any other sort of Ground sufficient in reason to justifie it So that I do not now object against a Doctrine which hath a fair probability of Divine Revelation on its side for that would weigh down all objections which did not plainly overthrow the probability and credit of its Divine Revelation But I object against a Doctrine by the mere will and Tyranny of men impos'd upon the belief of Christians without any evidence of Scripture and against all the evidence of Reason and Sense The Objections I shall reduce to these two Heads First the infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And Secondly the monstrous and insupportable absurdity of it First The infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And that upon these four accounts 1. Of the stupidity of this Doctrine 2. The real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine 3. Of the cruel and bloudy consequences of it 4. Of the danger of Idolatry which they are certainly guilty of if this Doctrine be not true 1. Upon account of the stupidity of this Doctrine I remember that Tully who was a man of very good sense instanceth in the conceit of eating God as the extremity of madness and so stupid an apprehension as he thought no man was ever guilty of * De Nat. Deorum l. 3. When we call sayes he the fruits of the earth Ceres and wine Bacchus we use but the common language but do you think any man so mad as to believe that which be eats to be God It seems he could not believe that so extravagant a folly had ever entered into the mind of man It is a very severe saying of Averroes the Arabian Philosopher who lived after this Doctrine was entertained among Christians and ought to make the Church of Rome blush if she can * Dionys Carthus in 4. dist 10. art 1. I have travell'd sayes he over the World and have found divers Sects but so sottish a Sect or Law I never found as is the Sect. of the Christians because with their own teeth they devour their God whom they worship It was great stupidity in the People of Israel to say Come let us make us Gods but it was civilly said of them Let us make Gods that may go before us in comparison of the Church of Rome who say Let us make a God that we may eat him So that upon the whole matter I cannot but wonder that they should chuse thus to expose Faith to the contempt of all that are endued with Reason And to speak the plain truth the Christian Religion was never so horribly exposed to the scorn of Atheists and Infidels as it hath been by this most absurd and senseless Doctrine But thus it was foretold that †2 Thess 2. 10. the Man of Sin should come with power and Signs and Lying Miracles and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness with all the Legerdemain and jugling tricks of falsehood and imposture amongst which this of Transubstantiation which they call a Miracle and we a Cheat is one of the chief And in all probability those common jugling words of hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus by way of ridiculous imitation of the Church of Rome in their trick of Transubstantiation Into such contempt by this foolish Doctrine and pretended Miracle of theirs have they brought the mosâ— sacred and venerable Mystery of our Religion 2. It is very scandalous likewise upon account of the real Barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine Literally to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud St. Austine as I have shewed before declares to be a great Impiety And the impiety and barbarousness of the thing is not in truth extenuated but only the appearance of it by its being done under the species of bread and Wine For the thing they acknowledge is really done and they believe that they