concealed from the Peoples sight for I believe the World never heard before of worshipping invisible Images The original intention of Images is to have a visible Object of Worship for an invisible Image can affect us no more than an invisible God and if our Author had consulted all the Patrons of Image Worship whether Pagan or Popish he would have found most of the Reasons they alledge for this Worship to depend on sight and therefore whatever he thought are all lost when a man shuts his eyes A man who directs his Worship to an Image may be an Idolater in the dark and with his eyes shut but as blind as Idolaters are there never had been any Image-Worship had their Images been as invisible as their Gods and therefore sight has more to do in this matter than our Author was aware of But it seems the High-Priest once a year did see these Cherubims and adore and worship them But this is another mistake for the Jews did believe that the High-Priest never saw the Cherubims or Mercy-seat even when he went once a Year into the Holy of Holies and they have great reason for what they say since God expresly commanded That when he went into the Holy of Holies he should take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the Lord and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small and bring it within the veil And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy-seat that is upon the testimony that he die not 16 Lev. 12 13. which shews that the Cherubims and Mercy-seat were to be covered with a Cloud of Incense and to become as invisible to the High-Priest within the Veil as to the People without it But suppose the High-Priest did see the Cherubims when he entred within the Veil I have one plain Argument to prove that he did not worship them not only because no act of Worship was commanded him when he went into the Holy Place but because as the Holy of Holies was the figure of Heaven and the Cherubims the types of Angels who stand about the Throne of God so the High-Priest entring into the Holy of Holies was the type of Christ ascending into Heaven with his own Bloud and therefore the High-Priest must do nothing in the Holy of Holies but what was a proper figure and type of what Christ does in Heaven and then he must no more worship the Cherubims which covered the Mercy-seat or the Typical Throne of God than Christ himself when he ascended to Heaven was to worship the Angels who stand about the Throne So that notwithstanding God's command to make two Cherubims and to place them at the two ends of the Mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies all Image-Worship was strictly forbid by the Law of Moses and God has provided the most effectual remedy against it by the Incarnation of his Son Mankind have been always fond of some visible Deity and because God cannot be seen they have gratified their Superstition by making some visible Images and Representations of an invisible God now to take them off from mean corporeal Images and Representations which are both a dishonour to the Divine Nature and debase the minds of men God has given us a visible Image of Himself has cloathed his own eternal Son with Humane Nature who is the brightness of his Father's glory and the express image of his person 1. Hebr. 3. And therefore St. John tells us That the word was made flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory the glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth 1 John 14. And for this reason when Philip was desirous to see the Father Shew us the Father and it sufficeth Christ tells him that the Father is to be seen onely in the Son who is his visible Image and Glory Jesus saith unto him Have I been so long time with you and yet hast thou not seen me Philip He that hath seen me hath seen the Father and how sayest thou then Shew us the Father 14 John 8 9. This was one end of Christ's Incarnation that we might have a visible Deity a God Incarnate to represent the Father to us who is the living and visible Image of God and there could not be a more effectual way to make men despise all dead material Representations of God than to have God visibly represented to us in our own Nature It is true Christ is not visible to us now on Earth but he is visible in Heaven and we know he is the only visible Image of God and that is enough to teach us that we must make and adore no other He is as visible to us in Heaven as the Mercy-Seat in the Holy of Holies was to the Jews and is that true Propitiatory of which the Mercy-Seat was a Type and Figure 3 Rom. 25. Him hath God set forth to be a propitiation through Faith in his blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mercy-seat as that word is used 9 Heb. 5. He is the natural Image of God and his Mercy-Seat or Presence and Throne of Grace he is his visible Image tho' he cannot be seen by us for the Typical Mercy-Seat in the Holy of Holies did prefigure that his residence should be in Heaven and therefore invisible to us on earth but there we may see him by Faith and there he will receive our Prayers and present them to his Father Now then to sum up this Argument since it was one main design of Christ's appearance to root all the remains of Idolatrous Worship out of the World is it credible that the. Worship of Saints and Angels and the Virgin Mary the Worship of Images and Reliques as it is practised in the Church of Rome should be any part of Christian-Worship or allowed by the Gospel of our Saviour If Creature Worship and Image Worship were so offensive to God here is the Worship of Creatures and Images still and therefore all the visible Idolatry that ever was practised in the world before All that they can pretend is that they have better Notions of the Worship of Saints and Angels and Images than the Heathens had but whether they have or no will be hard to prove The Pagan Philosophers made the same Apologies for their Worship of Angels and Daemons and Images which the Learned Papists now make and whether unlearned Papists have not as gross Notions about their Worship of Saints and Images as the unlearned Heathens had is very doubtful and has been very much suspected by learned Romanists themselves But suppose there were some difference upon this account can we think that Christ who came to root out all Idolatrous Worship intended to set up a new kind of Creature-Worship and Image-Worship in greater pomp and glory than ever and only to rectifie mens Opinions about it Suppose the Idolatry of Creature-Worship and
Spirit may be so absurd as to worship him in an Image yet an Image cannot represent a Spirit to him and therefore either he must not think at all of the Image and then methinks he should not look on an Image when he worships God for that is apt to make him think of it or if he does think of the Image while his mind is filled with such gross and sensible representations it is impossible in the same act to address to God as to a pure invisible and infinite Spirit Which shews how unfit and improper Images are in the Worship of God for they must either be wholly useless and such as a man must not so much as look or think on which is very irreconcileable with that Worship which is paid to them in the Church of Rome or while he is intent upon a Picture or Image his mind is diverted from the contemplation of a pure and infinite Spirit and therefore cannot and does not worship God as a Spirit And the same is true of the Images of Saints and the Blessed Virgin for though to make Pictures of Men or Women is no reproach to the Divine Nature since they are not the Pictures or Images of God who is a Spirit but of those Saints whom they are intended to represent yet if all Christian Worship be the Worship of God it is evident that the Worship of Images though they be not the Images of God but of the Saints can be no part of Christian Worship because God must be worshipped as a Spirit and therefore not by any Image whatsoever Now the Church of Rome will not pretend that the Worship of Saints and their Images is a distinct and separate Worship from the Worship of God but to justifie themselves they constantly affirm that they worship God in that Worship which they pay to the Saints and their Images for they know that to do otherwise would be to terminate their Worship upon Creatures which they confess to be Idolatry since all Religious Worship must terminate on God and therefore should they give any Religious Worship to Creatures distinct and separate from that Worship they give to God it were Idolatry upon their own Principles Now if they worship God in the Worship of Saints and their Images then they worship God in the Images of Saints and that I think is to worship him by Images the Worship of a pure infinite and invisible Spirit will admit of no Images whether of God or Creatures as the Objects or Mediums of Worship But it may be said that this is to graft our own Fancies and Imaginations upon Scripture for though Christ does say that God is a Spirit and must be worshipped in Spirit he does not say that to worship God in Spirit is not to worship him by an Image but to worship God in Spirit in our Saviour's Discourse with the Woman of Samaria is not opposed to Image-Worship but to confining the Worship of God to a particular place such as the Temple at Jerusalem and Samaria was as I observed above Now to this I answer 1. To worship God as a Spirit does in the nature of the thing signifie this for to worship God by any material or sensible Representations is not to worship God as a Spirit for an infinite Spirit cannot be represented by Matter nor by any Shape and Figure because it neither is material nor has any figure 2. If God will not have his peculiar Presence confined to any place under the Gospel much less will he be worshipped by Images and Pictures for it is not such a contradiction to the nature of an infinite Spirit to shew himself more peculiarly present in one place than in another as it is to be worshipped by sensible Images and Pictures Though God fills all places there may be wise Reasons why he should confine the Acts of Worship to some peculiar place and such typical Reasons there were for it under the Law but there never can be any Reason why a Spirit should be represented and worshipped by an Image which is such a contradiction and dishonour to the nature of the Spirit and therefore when God confined his symbolical Presence to the Temple at Jerusalem yet he strictly forbad the Worship of Images and much less then will he allow of image-Image-Worship when he will not so much as have a Temple 3. For we must observe farther that what our Saviour here says God is a Spirit and will be worshipped in Spirit is not a particular Direction how to Worship God but a general Rule to which the nature of our Worship must be conformed and therefore it is our Rule as far as the plain reason of it extends Under the Law they were not left to general Rules but God determined the particular Rites and Ceremonies of his Worship himself for under the Law God had not so plainly discovered his own Nature to them as he hath done by his Son in the Gospel For no man hath seen God at any time but the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father he hath declared him And therefore the Nature of God was never made the Rule of Worship before Thô God was as much a Spirit under the Law as he is under the Gospel yet this was never assigned as a reason against Image-Worship that God is a Spirit but either that they saw no Likeness or Similitude in the Mountain when GOD spake to them 4 Deut. 15 16. or that he is so great and glorious a Being that nothing in the World is a fit Representation of him To whom then will ye liken GOD 40 Isa 18 c. or what likeness will ye compare unto him It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth and the inhabitants thereof are as grashoppers that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in c. But that God is a Spirit who has no shape and figure is a much better Argument against image-Image-Worship than all this but this God had not so plainly declared to them and if God forbad the Worship of Images when he thought fit to give no other reason for it But that he had never appeared to them in any Likeness or Similitude or that he was too great to be Represented we our selves may now judge how unfit it is to Worship God by an Image since our Saviour has declared that he is a Spirit who has no Likeness or Figure and that now he expects to be Worshipped by us as a Spirit and therefore without any Image or sensible Representation 4. And yet some learned men think that our Saviour in these Words had as well respect to the Worship of God by Images as to his Worship in the Temple for that he had respect to the Object as well as Place of Worship is evident from what he adds Ye worship ye know not what we know what we worship 4 Joh. 20. for
The Second Part OF THE Preservative AGAINST POPERY Shewing how Contrary POPERY is to the True Ends OF THE Christian Religion Fitted for the INSTRUCTION OF Vnlearned PROTESTANTS By WILLIAM SHERLOCK D. D. Master of the Temple The Second Edition LONDON Printed for William Rogers at the Sun over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleet-street M DC LXXXVIII THE Second Part OF THE PRESERVATIVE AGAINST POPERY Imprimatur Liber cui Titulus The Second Part of the Preservative against Popery May 3. 1688. Guil. Needham R. R. in Christo P. ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiepisc Cant. Ã Sacr. Domest The Second Part OF THE PRESERVATIVE AGAINST POPERY CHAP. IV. Some Directions relating to particular Controversies THose who would understand the particular Disputes between Us and the Church of Rome must of necessity read such Books as give the true State of the Controversie between us and fairly represent the Arguments on both sides and where such Books are to be met with he may learn from a late Letter Entituled The Present State of the Controversie between the Church of England and the Church of Rome Or an Account of Books written on both sides But my present Design is of another nature to give some plain and easie Marks and Characters of true Gospel-Doctrines whereby a man who has any relish of the true Spirit of Christianity may as certainly know Truth from Error in many cases as the Palate can distinguish Tasts There are some things so proper to the Gospel and so primarily intended in it that they may fitly serve for distinguishing marks of true Evangelical Doctrine I shall name some of the chief and examine some Popish Doctrines by them SECT I. Concerning IDOLATRY 1. ONe principal intention of the Gospel was more perfectly to extirpate all Idolatry 1 John 3.8 For this purpose the Son of God was manifested to destroy the works of the devil That is not only all Sin and Wickedness but the very Kingdom of Darkness that Kingdom the Devil had erected in the World the very Foundation of which was laid in Idolatrous Worship To this purpose Christ has expresly taught us that there is but one God and has more perfectly instructed us in the nature of God 1. Joh. 18. For no man hath seen God at any time but the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father he hath declared him Ignorance was the Mother of Pagan Idolatry because they did not know the true God they Worshipped any thing every thing for a God and therefore the most effectual course to cure Idolatry was to make known the true God to the World for those men are inexcusable who know the true God and Worship any thing else Tho' indeed according to some mens Divinity the knowledge of the true God cures Idolatry not by rooting out Idolatrous Worship but by excusing it by making that to be no Idolatry in a Christian who knows God which was Idolatry in a Heathen who did not know him for if as some say none can be guilty of Idolatry who acknowledge one Supreme Being then the Heathens when once they were instructed in the knowledge of the one true God might have Worshipped all their Country Gods which they did before without being guilty of Idolatry which is as if I should say that man is a Rebel who through mistake and ignorance owns any man for his Prince who is not his Prince but he is no Rebel who knows his lawful Prince and pays Homage to another whom he knows not to be his Prince And therefore our Saviour confines all Religious Worship to God alone Mat. 10. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy GOD and him only shalt thou serve It is his Answer to the Devil when he tempted him to fall down and worship him but he gives such an Answer as excludes all Creatures not only bad but good Spirits from any share in Religious Worship Our Saviour does not deny to worship him meerly because he was the Devil tho' that a man may do without the guilt of Idolatry who knows him to be the Devil if those men are in the right who allow nothing to be Idolatry but to worship some Being for the Supreme God who is not Supreme for then you may worship the Devil without the guilt of Idolatry if you do not believe him to be the Supreme God but our Saviour's reason for not worshipping him was because we must worship none but God. Which is as good a reason against the worship of the most glorious Angel as of the Devil himself Nay our Saviour denies to worship him though the Devil made no terms with him about the kind or degrees of Worship He does not require him to offer Sacrifice to him which is the only Act of Worship the Church of Rome appropriates to the Supreme God but only to bow down before him as an expression of Religious Devotion he did not demand that degree of Worship which the Church of Rome calls Latria and appropriates to the Supreme God nay he confesses that he was not the Supreme God for he does not pretend to dispose of the Kingdoms of the World in his own right but says they were given to him and he had power to give them to whom he pleased in which he acknowledges that he had a Superiour and therefore could not in the same breath desire to be owned and worshipped as the Supreme But our Saviour denies to give him this inferiour degree of Worship and thereby teaches us that no degree of Religious Worship must be given to any Being but the Supreme God. And because Mankind were very apt to worship inferiour Daemons as believing them to have the care of this lower World and that it was in their power to do great good to them to answer their Prayers and to mediate for them with the Superiour Deities or with the Supreme God if they believed one Supreme which appears to be a received Notion among them to prevent this kind of Idolatry God advances his own Son to be the universal Mediator and the Supreme and Soveraign Lord of the World that all Mankind should make their Addresses and Applications to him and offer up their Prayers only in his Name that in him they should find acceptance and in no other Name Which was the most effectual way to put an end to the Worship of all inferiour Deities and Creature-Patrons and Advocates for when we are assured that no other Being can mediate for us with effect and power but only Christ it is natural to Worship no other Mediator but him who being the eternal Son of God may be worshipped without danger of Idolatry Thus St. Paul tells us That tho' the Heathen World had Gods many and Lords many 1 Cor. 8.5 6. yet to us there is but one God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ One Supreme and Soveraign Deity and one Mediator between God and Men. Now this being so apparently one end of Christ's coming
into the World to suppress the Idolatry of Creature-worship and to confine all Religious Worship to one Supreme Being in opposition to the many Gods of the Heathens and to teach us to make our Applications to this one God by one Mediator in opposition to the worship of inferiour Deities can any man imagine that the Worship of Saints and Angels and the Virgin Mary can be any part of the Christian Religion For how dear soever they are to God they are but his Creatures and if Soveraign Princes will not receive their greatest Favourites into their Throne much less will God. If God under the Gospel-dispensation has taken care to prevent the Worship of inferiour Beings by appointing his own Son to be our only Mediator and Advocate can we imagine that he ever intended we should offer up our Prayers to other Mediators If he had liked the Mediation of Creatures would he have given his own Son to be our Priest and our Mediator Whatever fair pretences may be made for this it apparently contradicts the Gospel-dispensation for if we must own but one God he alone must be worshipped if we have but one Mediator we must offer up our Prayers only in his Name and Intercession The Religious Worship of Creatures is Idolatry and if God intended to root Idolatry out of the World by the Gospel of Christ he could never intend to set up the Worship of Saints and the Virgin Mary which thô it have not all the aggravations of Pagan Idolatry yet is Creature-worship Thus we know how fond the Heathens were of material Images and Pictures to represent their Gods as visibly present with them and to receive Religious Worship in their stead not that they did believe their Gods to be Corporeal or that their Corporeal Images were proper Likenesses of their Gods in which a late Author places the whole of Idolatry which I confess was agreeable enough to his design to find out such a Notion of Idolatry as it may be no Persons in the World were ever guilty of and then he might excuse whom he pleased from Idolatry But the Heathens were not such great Sots as this account makes them as the Learned Founder of all Anti-Catholick Dr. Stillin Defence of the Discourse concerning Idolatry and Antichristian Principles as this Author is pleased to stile a very great Man whose Name will be Venerable to future Ages has abundantly proved But they wanted some material Representations of their Gods in which they might as it were see them present and offer up their Petitions to them and court them with some visible and sensible Honours Now to cure this Idolatry thô God would not allow any Images or Pictures for Worship yet by the Law of Moses he appoints them to build an House or Temple for himself where he would dwell among them and place the Symbols of his Presence there was the Mercy-seat and the Cherubims covering the Mercy-seat and there God promised Moses to meet with him 25 Exod. 22. and to commune with him from between the two Cherubims which are upon the ark of the testimony Now this was a Symbolical Representation of God's Throne in Heaven where he is surrounded with Angels as we know the Holy of Holies itself was a Figure of Heaven and therefore the Jews when they were absent from the Temple prayed towards it and in the Temple as is thought towards the Mercy-seat as the place of God's peculiar Residence as now when we pray we lift up our eyes and hands to Heaven where God dwells So that under the Law God had a peculiar place for Worship and peculiar Symbols of his Presence but no Images to represent his Person or to be the Objects of Worship I know some Roman Doctors would fain prove the Cherubims to have been the Objects of Worship and which is more wonderful a late Bishop of the Church of England has taken some pains to prove the same and thereby to justifie the Worship of Images in the Church of Rome Reasons for abrogating the Test p. 124 c. and before I proceed I shall briefly Examine what he has said in this Cause One would a little wonder who reads the Second Commandment which so severely forbids the Worship of Images that God himself should set up Images in his own Temple as the Objects of Worship and a modest man would have been a little cautious how he had imputed such a thing to God which is so direct a contradiction to his own Laws That the Cherubims were Statues or Images whatever their particular Form was I agree with our Author and that is the only thing I agree with him in For 1. That they were Sacred Images set up by God himself Ib. p. 127. in the place of his own Worship I deny For the Holy of Holies where the Ark was placed and the Mercy-seat over the Ark and the Cherubims at the two ends spreading their Wings and covering the Mercy seat was not the place of Worship but the place of God's Presence The place of Worship is the place wherein men worship God now it is sufficiently known that none of the Jews were permitted to go into the Holy of Holies nor so much as to look into it and therefore it could not be the place of their Worship the Holy of Holies was the Figure of Heaven and therefore could be no more the place of Worship to the Jews than Heaven now is to us while we dwell on Earth The High-Priest indeed entered in the Holy of Holies once a Year with the Blood of the Sacrifice 9 Heb. 11 12. which was a Type of Christ's entring into Heaven with his own Blood and yet the Priest went thither not to Worship but to make an Atonement which I take to be two very different things however if you will call this Worship it has no relation to any Worship on Earth but to what is done by Christ in Heaven of whom the High-Priest was a Type And this I think is a demonstration that the placing of Cherubims to cover the Mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies does not prove the lawful use of Images in Temples or Churches or in the Worship of God on Earth if it proves any thing it must prove the Worship of God by Images in Heaven of which the Holy of Holies was a Figure and if any man can be so foolish as to imagine that let them make what they please of it so they do but excuse us from worshipping God by Images on Earth 2. That these Cherubims were the most solemn and sacred part of the Jewish Religion that nothing is more remarkable in all the old Testament than the honour done to the Cherubims that an outward worship was given to these Images as Symbols of the Divine presence that the High Priest adored these Cherubims once a year as this Author asserts I utterly deny and he has not given us one word to prove it For the
Cherubims were so far from being the most solemn and sacred part of the Jewish Religion that they were no part at all of it if by Religion he means Worship for there was no regard at all had to the Cherubims in the Jewish Worship and it is so far from being remarkable in the Old Testament that there is not the least footstep or intimation of any honour at all done to the Cherubims There is nothing in Scripture concerning them but the command to make them and place them at the two ends of the Mercy-seat and that God is said to dwell between the Cherubims and to give forth his Oracles and Responses from that place but I desire to learn where the Jews are commanded to direct their Worship to or towards the Cherubims where the High-Priest is commanded to adore the Cherubims once a year or what Protestant grants he did so as this Author insinuates He supposes the Cherubims to have been the Symbols of God's presence and his representations P. 130. and that the Jews directed their Worship to them as such and that is to worship God by Images or to give the same Signs of Reverence to his Representations as to himself but how does it appear that the Cherubims were the Symbols of God's Presence God indeed is said to sit between the Cherubims and he promised Moses to commune with him from between the Cherubims but the Cherubims were no Symbols of God's presence much less a representation of him if any thing was the Symbolical presence of God it was the Mercy-seat which was a kind of Figurative Throne or Chair of State but the Cherubims were only Symbolical representations of those Angels who attend and encompass God's Throne in Heaven and were no more representations of God or Symbols of his presence than some great Ministers of State are of the King as this Author himself acknowledges when he makes the four beasts in the Revelations Rev. 4.6 Pag. 127. 7. which stood round about the Throne to be an allusion to the representation of the immediate Divine Presence in the Ark by the Cherubims if he had said to the Cherubims covering the Mercy-seat which was his Figurative Throne and where he was invisibly present without any visible Figures or Symbols of his presence he had said right for the Cherubims which covered the Mercy-seat were no more Symbols of God's Presence than the four Beasts which stood before the Throne are the presence of God or than some great Courtiers or Ministers of State who attend the King are the presence of the King They attend the King where-ever he is and so may be some sign of his presence but are not a symbolical presence as a Chair of State is But it seems our Author imagined that the Cherubims were such Symbols of God's presence and such representations of him as Images were of the Pagan Gods and therefore might be worshipped with the same signs of reverence as God himself was according to Thomas Aquinas's Rule that the Image must be worshipped with the same Worship which is due to the Proto-type or that Being whose Image it is which is such old Popery as Monsieur De Meaux and the Representer cry shame of well But how does he prove that any Worship was directed to these Cherubims I can find no proof he offers for it but David's Exhortation as he calls it to the People Pag. 130. to honour the Ark he should have said worship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how down to or worship his Footstool for it or he is holy Now suppose this did relate to the Ark what is that to the Cherubims When but four Pages before he tells us that the Ark is called God's Footstool and the Cherubims his Throne How then does David's Exhortation to worship the Ark which is God's Footstool prove that all their Worship must be directed to the Cherubims which are his Throne It is pity that great Wits have but short Memories And yet I fancy our Author would have been much troubled to prove the Ark to be meant by God's Footstool for the Ark was in the Holy of Holies which was a Figure of Heaven and neither the Heaven nor any thing in it but the Earth is in Scripture called God's Footstool and the Psalmist expresly applies it to Zion and to the Holy Hill which I will not prove 99 Psalm 2 9. was not the Ark. And this I suppose is a sufficient confutation of his Exposition of the words To bow down to or worship his footstool for I believe he did not think that Mount Zion or the Holy Hill was the object of Worship or the symbol of God's presence but there God was present and that was reason enough to worship at his footstool and at his holy hill as our English Translation reads it But now suppose the Jews were to direct their Worship towards the Mercy-seat which was covered with the Cherubims where God had promised to be present how are the Cherubims concerned in this Worship The Worship was paid only to God though directed to God as peculiarly present at that place which is no more than to lift up our Eyes and Hands to Heaven where the Throne of God is when we pray to him I grant that bowing to and bowing towards any thing as the Object of Worship is the very same as this Author observes and therefore had the Jews either bowed to or towards the Cherubims as the Objects of their Worship as the Papists bow to or towards their Images they had been equally guilty of Idolatry and the breach of the second Commandment but when bowing To signifies bowing to an Object of Worship and bowing towards signifies bowing to this Object of Worship only towards such a place where he is peculiarly present this makes a great difference and this was all the Jews did at most if they did that they bowed to God towards the Mercy-seat where he dwelt without any regard to the Cherubims or Mercy-seat as the Object of Worship which was as invisible to the Jews then as the Throne of God and the Angels in Heaven are now to us and we may as well say that those who lift up their eyes and their hands to Heaven when they pray to God worship the Angels who incircle his Throne because they know not the Angels are there as say that the Jews worshipped their invisible Cherubims because they knew that the Cherubims were there For is there any necessity that the Jews must worship whatever they knew was in the Holy of Holies because they worshipped God towards that place any more than there is that we must worship whatever we know to be in Heaven when we direct our Worship to God in Heaven Men I grant may worship an unseen Object for so we all worship God whom we do not and cannot see but is a good Argument still that the Cherubims were not intended by God for the Objects of Worship because they were
salvation is of the Jews wherein he informs the Woman that though she inquired only of the place of Worship the Samaritans were guilty of a greater sault than setting up the Temple at Samaria in opposition to the Temple at Jerusalem viz. in a false Object or an Idolatrous manner of Worship they Worshipping a Dove as the Symbol and Representation of God and thus to Worship God in Spirit is expresly opposed to Worshipping God by Images 5ly However this comes much to one for if God being a Spirit his Worship must not be confined to any Place or Symbolical Presence then he must not be Worshipped by an Image for an Image is a Representative Presence of God or of the Saints for the use of Images is to represent that Being whom we Worship as present to us and therefore if men consider what they do they go to Images as to Divine Presences to Worship Images which as set up in Churches and Chappels for the Worship of God or of the Saints are confined to places and make those places as much appropriate and peculiar places of Worship as the Jewish Temple was excepting that the Temple was but one and they are many Heathen Temples were the Houses of their Gods or of their Images which were the Presence of their Gods and if we must not appropriate the Presence of God to any place then we must not Worship him by Images which are of no use but to represent God as sensibly present with the Image or in the place where the Image is If God be better Worshipped before an Image than without one then the Worship of God is more confined to that place where an Image is than to those places which have no Images I cannot see how to avoid this that if God must be Worshipped by Images then there must be appropriate places of Worship viz. where the Image is if there be no appropriate places of Worship under the Gospel like the Temple at Jerusalem then God must not be Worshipped by Images for an Image must be in some place and if God must be Worshipped at or before his Image then that is the proper and peculiar place of Worship where his Image is nay though the Image be not fixt to any place but be carried about with us yet if we must Worship God by Images the Image is not only the Object but makes the place of Worship for there we must Worship God where his Image is if we must Worship him before his Image It is impossible to separate the Notion of Image-Worship from the Notion of a peculiar and appropriate place of Worship for the Image determines the place as the presence of the Object does and as under the Gospel we may Worship God any where because he is an infinite Spirit and fills all places and is equally present with all devout Worshippers where-ever they Worship him So where the Image is Consecrated for a Divine Presence it is not only the Object but the peculiar place of Worship because God is peculiarly present there or more acceptably worshipped there than where there is no Image So that if a peculiar and appropriate place of Worship be contrary to the Notion of an Infinite Spirit the Worship of Images is much more so for besides that they are gross and corporeal representations of a Spirit they are Divine Presences too and appropriate places of Worship Secondly As God must be worshipped under the notion of a Spirit so under the character of a Father as our Saviour expresty tells us The hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and Truth 4 Joh. 23. for the Father seeketh such to worship him and therefore he taught his Disciples to pray Our Father which art in heaven Under the Law God was worshipped as a King and that not so much as the King of the whole World but as in a peculiar manner the King of Israel The Lord reigneth let the people tremble he sitteth between the Cherubims in his Temple at Jerusalem let the earth be moved 99 Ps 1 2. The Lord is great in Zion and he is high above all people But under the Gospel the peculiar character of God is a Father and that not only as he is the maker of all men and so the Father of all but as he is the Father of Christ and in him the Father of all Christians Now this makes a vast difference in our Worship from what is daily practised in the Church of Rome For 1. When we pray to God as our Father we must pray to him as dwelling in Heaven as our Saviour teaches us to say Our Father which art in Heaven For as a Father Heaven is his House and Habitation In my Fathers House are many mansions that is 14 John 2. in in Heaven which is his House as a Father as the Temple at Jerusalem was his Palace considered as the King of Israel and this is one reason our Saviour intimates why the presence of God shall no longer be confined to any particular Place or Temple because he shall be worshipped as the universal Father not as the King of Jury Now when he is to be worshipped as a Father from all Parts of the World he must have such a Throne and Presence to which all the World may equally resort and that can be no other then his Throne in Heaven whither we may send up our Prayers from all Corners of the Earth but had he confined his Presence to any place on Earth as he did to the Temple of Jerusalem the rest of the World must have been without God's peculiar Presence could have had no Temple nor Place of Worship but at such a distance that they could never have come at it for though God fills all places it is a great absurdity to talk of more Symbolical Presences of God than one for a Symbolical Presence confines the unlimited Presence of God to a certain place in order to certain ends as to receive the Worship that is paid him and to answer the Prayers that are made to him and to have more than One such Presence as this is like having more Gods than One. So that all our Worship under the Gospel must be directed to God in Heaven and that is a plain argument that we must not Worship God in Images on Earth for they neither can represent to us the Majesty of God in Heaven nor is God present with the Image to receive our Worship there if God must now be Worshipped as dwelling in Heaven it is certain there can be no Object of our Worship on Earth for though God fill all places with his Presence yet he will be Worshipped only as sitting on his Throne in Heaven and then I am sure he must not be Worshipped in an Image on Earth for that is not his Throne in Heaven This the Mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies was an Emblem of for the Holy of
ANother principal end and intention of the Gospel was to cure the Degeneracy of Mankind and to advance Humane Nature to its utmost Perfection for as Man fell from his original Happiness by falling from the purity and integrity of his Nature so there was no restoring him to his lost Happiness much less no advancing him to a more perfect state of Happiness not to an earthly but to an heavenly Paradise without changing and transforming his Nature and renewing him after the Image of God. And therefore our very entrance into Christianity is a new Birth Except a man be born of water 3 Joh. 5 6. and of the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit And such a man is called a new Creature and a Christian Life is a newness of Life and living after the Spirit 8 Rom. 1. and walking after the Spirit and this new Nature is the Divine Nature the Image of God the new man 4 Eph. 24. 3 Col. 10. which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness which is renewed in knowledge after the Image of him that created him So that there are two things wherein this new Nature consists Knowledge and Righteousness or true Holiness and I doubt it will appear that the Church of Rome is no great Friend to either I. Knowledge Now I suppose neither the Church of Rome nor any one for her will pretend that she is any great Friend to Knowledge She is so horribly afraid of Heresie that she endeavours to nurse men up in Ignorance of their Religion for fear they should prove Hereticks and indeed she has some reason for it for the Church of Rome was never so Triumphant as in the most ignorant and barbarous Ages but as Knowledge broke in upon the World so men turned Hereticks apace If there be any knowing Papists and it would be very hard if there should be none they are not beholding to their Church for it which deprives them of all the means of Knowledge for she will not allow them to believe their Senses which is one way of knowing things and the most certain we have and yet she commands us to believe Transubstantiation which no man can do who believes his Senses and if I must not believe my Senses in so plain a matter as what is Bread and Wine I know no reason I have to believe them in any thing and then there is an end of all Knowledge that depends on Sence as the proof of the Christian Religion itself does for Miracles are a sensible proof and if I must not trust my Senses I cannot rely on Miracles because I cannot know whether there be any such thing as a real Miracle The Church of Rome also forbids men the use of Reason in matters of Religion will not allow men to judge for themselves nor to examine the Reasons of their Faith and what knowledge any man can have without exercising his Reason and Understanding I cannot guess for to know without understanding sounds to me like a contradiction She also denies Christians the use of the Bible which is the only means to know the revealed Will of God and when men must neither believe their Senses nor trust their Reason nor read the Scripture it is easie to guess what knowing and understanding Christians they must needs be But it may be said that notwithstanding this the Church of Rome does Instruct her Children in the true Catholick Faith though she will not venture them to judge for themselves nor to read the Scriptures which is the effect of her great care of them to keep them Orthodox for when men trust to their own fallible Reasons and private Interpretations of Scripture it is a great hazard that they do not fall into one Heresie or other but when men are taught the pure Catholick Faith without any danger of Error and Heresie is not this much better than to suffer them to reason and judge for themselves when it is great odds but they will judge wrong Now this would be something indeed did the Church of Rome take care to Instruct them in all necessary Doctrines and to teach nothing but what is true and could such men who thus tamely receive the dictates of the Church be said to know and to understand their Religion How far the Church of Rome is from doing the first all Christians in the world are sensible but themselves but that is not our present dispute for though the Church of Rome did instruct her people into the true Christian Faith yet such men cannot be said to know and understand their Religion and to secure the Faith by destroying knowledge is a direct contradiction to the design of the Gospel which is to make men wise and understanding Christians For no man understands his Religion who does not in some measure know the reasons of his Faith and judge whether they be sufficient or not who knows not how to distinguish between Truth and Error who has no Rule to go by but must take all upon trust and the credit of his Teachers who believes whatever he is told and learns his Creed as School boys do their Grammar without understanding it This is not an active but a kind of passive knowledge such men receive the impression that is made on them as wax does and understand no more of the matter now will any one call this the knowledge and understanding of a man or the Discipline of a Child But suppose there were some men so dull and stupid that they could never rise higher that they are not capable of inquiring into the reasons of things but must take up their Religion upon trust yet will any man say that this is the utmost perfection of knowledge that any Christian must aim at is this the meaning of the word of God dwelling in us richly in all wisdom 3 Col. 16. is this the way to give an answer to any one who asks a reason of the hope that is in us the perfection of Christian knowledge is a great and glorious attainment to understand the secrets of God's Laws those depths and mysteries of wisdom and goodness in the oeconomy of Mans Salvation to see the Analogy between the Law and the Gospel how the Legal Types and ancient Prophecies received their accomplishment in Christ how far the Gospel has advanced us above the state of Nature and the Law of Moses what an admirable design it was to redeem the world by the Incarnation and Death and Sufferings and Intercession of the Son of God what mysteries of Wisdom and Goodness the Gospel contains the knowledge of which is not only the perfection of our Understandings but raises and ennobles our Minds and transforms us into the Divine Image These things were revealed that they might be known not that they should be concealed from the World or neglected and
despised but this is a knowledge which cannot be attained without diligent and laborious inquiries without using all the reason and understanding we have in searching the Scriptures and all other helps which God has afforded us Now if Christian Knowledge be something more than to be able to repeat our Creed and to believe it upon the authority of our Teachers if the Gospel of our Saviour was intended to advance us to a true manly Knowledge Christ and the Church of Rome seem to have two very different designs our Lord in causing the Gospel to be wrote and publisht to the World the other in concealing it as much as she can and suffering no body to read it without her leave as a dangerous Book which is apt to make men Hereticks for it is hard to conceive that the Gospel was written that it might not be read and then one would guess that He by whose Authority and Inspiration the Gospel was written and those by whose Authority it is forbid to be read are not of a mind in this matter 1. This I think in the first place is an evident proof that to forbid Christian People to read and study and meditate on the Word of God is no Gospel-Doctrine unless not to read the Bible be a better way to improve in all true Christian Knowledge and Wisdom than to read it for that is the Duty of Christians to grow in Grace and in the Knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ this was one great end of publishing the Gospel to the World to enlighten and improve mens Understandings as well as to govern their Lives and though we grant Men may be taught the Principles of Christian Religion as Children are without reading the Bible yet if they will but grant that studying and meditating on the Holy Scriptures is the best and onely way to improve in all true Christian knowledge this shews how contrary this prohibition of reading the Scriptures is to the great design of the Gospel to perfect our knowledge in the mysteries of Christ 2ly This is a mighty presumption also against Transubstantiation that it is no Gospel-Doctrine because it overthrows the very Fundamental Principles of Knowledge which is a direct contradiction to the design of the Gospel to advance Divine Knowledge to the utmost perfection it can attain in this World. Whoever has his eyes in his head must confess that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is contrary to Sence for were our Senses to be Judges of this matter they would pronounce the Bread and Wine after Consecration to be Bread and Wine still and therefore what-ever Reason there may be to believe it not to be Bread and Wine but Flesh and Blood yet it must be confessed that our Faith in this matter contradicts our Sence for even Roman Catholick Eyes and Noses and Hands can see and feel and smell nothing but Bread and Wine and if to our Senses it appears to be nothing but Bread and Wine those who believe it to be the Natural Body and Blood of Christ believe contrary to what they see Thus there is nothing more contrary to the natural notions we have of things than the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for if this Doctrine be true then the same individual body of Christ is in Heaven at the right hand of God and on ten thousand Altars at a great distance from each other on earth at the same time Then a humane Body is contracted into the compass of a Wafer or rather subsists without any dimensions without extension of parts and independant on place Now not to dispute whether this be true or false my only inquiry at present is whether this do not contradict those natural notions all men have of the properties of a humane Body let a man search his own mind and try whether he find any such notion of a Body as can be present at more places than one at the same time a Body that is without Extension nay that has parts without Extension and therefore without any distinction too for the parts of an Organical Body must be distinguished by place and scituation which cannot be if they have no Extension a Body which is present without occupying a place or being in a place if we have no such natural notion of a Body as I am sure I have not and I believe no man else has then let Transubstantiation be true or false it is contrary to the natural notions of our minds which is all I am at present concerned for Thus let any man try if he have any notion of an accident subsisting without any substance of a white and soft and nard nothing of the same body which is extended and not extended which is in a place and not in a place at the same time for in Heaven I suppose they will grant the Body of Christ fills a place and has the just dimensions and proportions of a Humane Body and at the same time in the Host the very same body is present without any extension and independent on place that is the same body at the same time is extended and not extended fills a place and fills no place which I suppose they mean by being Independent on place now is and is not is a contradiction to natural Reason and I have no other natural notion of it but as of a contradiction both parts of which cannot be true Let us then briefly examine whether it be likely that Transubstantiation which contradicts the evidence of sense and the natural notions of our Minds should be a Gospel Doctrine considering the Gospel as the most Divine and excellent Knowledge and most perfective of Humane understandings For 1. This Doctrine of Transubstantiation is so far from perfecting our Knowledge that it destroys the very Principles of all Humane Knowledge All natural knowledge is owing either to Sense or Reason and Transubstantiation contradicts both and whoever believes it must believe contrary to his Senses and Reason which if it be to believe like a Catholick I am sure is not to believe like a man if the perfection of knowledge consist in contradicting our own Faculties Transubstantiation is the most perfect knowledge in the world but however I suppose no man will say that this is the natural perfection of knowledge which overthrows the most natural notions we have of things and yet 2. All supernatural Knowledge must of necessity be grafted upon that which is natural for we are capable of revealed and supernatural Knowledge only as we are by nature reasonable Creatures and destroy Reason and Beasts are as fit to be preached too as Men And yet to contradict the plain and most natural notions of our minds is to destroy Humane Reason and to leave Mankind no Rule or Principle to know and judge by No man can know any thing which contradicts the Principles of Natural Knowledge because he has only these natural Principles to know by and therefore however his Faith may be improved