to others besides God The quest is about Religious worship and therefore notes it as a double mistake of the Protestants to infer from this place that worship and service are only due to God pa. 5. c. It seems he was bound to make up his tale or number of mistakes he does so causelesly fasten them upon the Protestants for he knows they do not argue from this place that all kinds of worship or service are to be given to God only but that kind of worship which according to his own expression pag. 8. is performed by an act of Religion i. e. religious worship or as S. Aug. gives us the limitation of that Word Worship and indeed the determination of the question that if we add Religion to that word Aug. de Civ l. 10. c. 1. then it speaks that worship which is due to God only This Author knew well enough that Protestants confine their dispute here to a Religious worship and he speaks it pa. 11. that this place Mat. 4.10 must according to Protestants be understood to forbid only religious worship to any save God and therefore applies himself under his second pretended mistake to the consideration of it endeavouring to finde out such a worship given to Creatures as may be call'd Religious All that he brings we shall see very far short of the purpose altogether insufficient to excuse their practice or answer what we charge them with for their encroachments upon the Worship and Service due to God in the way of Religion The first thing we need take notice of is his premising the distinction of Worship The Acts of Worship inward and outward into Interior Exterior as subservient to his purpose pa. 1.2 telling us pa. 13. The External deportment as prostration may be the very same when we worship God or Saint or Angel Bishop Apostle King Magistrate Father Mother yet they become different kinds of Worship according to the different humiliations intentions and acknowledgments which he who worships desires to express by those outward deportments of the body It is true that the inward intent makes a difference in the worship given when the outward act is the same though not alwaies so different a kinde of worship as he would have the worship of Saints and Angels to be in regard of the Civil worship and honour as we shall see below But here note for there will be use of it hereafter that in all this discourse of worship he only insists in such outward expressions Some Acts of worship proper to God as properly fall under the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as bowing kneeling prostration which are indeed common to the worship of God and Creatures but there are other which both in Scripture and in the nature of the thing appear proper to God and the worship due to him Altars burning incense oblations nuncupation of Vows upon which score we may finde the Church of Rome faulty as in doctrine so much more in practice The * Bel. de Beat. sanctorum l. 1. c 12. Cardinal having said the external acts are common to all worship makes his exception of sacrifices and those †Greg. de Val. in Tho. 2.2 Disp 6. qu. 5. de virt Riligionis puncto 2. things which have relation to them And Greg. de Val. acknowledges it of Prayer Oblations Sacrifices c. that they immediately belong to Religion and do peculiarly contain a certain subjection of the creature to God The second thing we are to take notice of Excellency Dignity how the Reason of Honour and Worship is that to lay some ground-work for raising such a worship on as they give to Saints and Angels he sets himself to shew that besides the Civil and Divine dignities or excellencies there is a third sort neither infinite as the Divine nor humane as the Civil but Spiritual and Supernatural and would make his Readers believe that all the difficulty in this matter consists in shewing there are three worths or excellencies to be acknowledged and honoured by an act of worship pag. 14. Whereas we grant such supernatural excellencies in Angels and Men and that there ought to be an acknowledgment and honour in the mind commensurate to such a worth or excellency and that to be expressed by such acts as are fitting and we believe that the Romanists have not such an acknowledgment in their minds when they worship Saint or Angel as they have when they worship God Almighty but whether that acknowledgment they have be commensurate to created Excellencies and no more they know best We cannot but say the expressions they make of it in the several particulars of their Religious Worship do too plainly shew they yield them more devotion of soul then is due to meer Creatures entrenching far upon the religious worship and service due to God The third thing we take notice of is that albeit he said Of the words Religion and Reliigous worship All the difficulty consisted in clearing the third sort of worth or excellency to be acknowledged and honoured yet he knew well enough the difficulty stood not in that but in the acknowledging and honouring them with acts of Religious worship And therefore pa. 20 21. he sets himself to distinguish of the words Religion and Religious that among all the acceptions of those words mentioned in Scripture he might finde some according to which the worship of Saints and Angels may be called Religious Religion saith he pa. 20. may be taken either in a strict sense for the vertue of Religion So when the School Doctors dispute about the nature of infused graces or largely for the whole belief or profession of those that esteem themselves to have the true way of serving God so when we say the Religion of the Christians or of the Jews having thus distinguished he determins pa. 22. It will be sufficient for the defense of the Cathol Roman faith in this point to affirm that when the Doctors say that any thing created may be or is worshipped with religious worship it is religious in the larger sense i. e. vertuous pious Christian as belonging and proper to our Religion and tending finally to the acknowledgment of God and our Saviours honour as Author of our faith and religion and pa. 23. instances in Levit. 7.6 where the giving of the brest and shoulder of the sacrifice to the Priest is call'd a perpetual religion in their generations and then in Ia. 1. ult where a work of mercy done to the poor to a Creature is called Religion i. e. proceeding from and belonging to Religion But this together with all the instances be can give of Religion or Religious in such a sense comes not home either to the thing in question Religious worship or to defence of his Catholick Roman Church attributing more to Saints and Angels then he can bring out of Scripture or Fathers either either to parallel or excuse it For upon
Saints with God in their vows as at entrance into some religious orders I vow to God and the blessed Virgin in their Praises that Psalm or Hymn venite adoremus Psal 99. is in some of their books thrice broken by Ave Maries inserted Bellar. and Valentia close some of their books thus Laus Deo Beatae Virgini praise to God and the blessed Virgin and as I remember in the Lyons Edition Bellarm. closes his book de cultu Sanctorum thus Laus Deo Virginique Mariae Jesu item Christo praise be to God and to the blessed Virgin Mary also to Jesus Christ the Eternal Son of God the like is done by Valentia at the end of some of his books Now what is this but to set her if not in equal rank with God yet surely as high as the Collyridians did And what can this import but religion in the first sense A presumptuous entrenching on what is due to God Fourthly when they divide worship into Latria and Dulia it is not a Division of the word worship at large as when it is divided into religious and civil but it is a division of religious worship given by them with this distinction to God and the creature in the way and exercise of their religion also the word service implied in Dulia being not a civil service with them necessarily implies a religious service such as God forbids to be given to creatures also when they affirm the same worship given to the Image of Christ as to Christ is it not religious in the high sense The defenders of this take ground from their known Church Hymn Hail O Cross our only hope c. as the * Bel. l. de Imag. c. 19. fundamenâ— Cardinal acknowledges and would shift it off by many figures in the speech Lastly when they pray to God which they grant is the exercise of religion in the strict sense they acknowledge they do it by the mediation of Saints and Angels prayed unto for that purpose and what is this else but a performing of the creature-creature-worship out of the virtue of religion and in way of religious offices or devotions in and together with and in order to a worshipping of God at the same time begging of God the gift of mercy and begging the Saints mediation for presenting that prayer or joyning his intercession with it As for his large and lax sense of religious for that which proceeds from and belongs to religion Religious in their large sense not excuse their creature-worship it is so general that it brings in all the duties of the second table as that act of mercy he instanced in out of Ja. 1. ult And here by that and his other instance out of Lev. 7.6 we might expect if he will have this creature-creature-worship any way belong to religion he should have showen it commanded by God as those two particulars were which he brought as instances but it is the profession of this Author in the name of his Church that it is not commanded but commended as good and profitable i. e. as invented and taken up of themselves and pertaining to and proceeding from religion i. e. the religion of the Romish Church far from being Catholick in this point indeed if we speak of a worship due to Saints and Angels that is an acknowledgement and honour we owe them answerable to the worth and excellency in them it is a duty or thing commanded and so religious in that large sense by the fifth commandment yea and tends finally to Gods honour as the Author of all gifts and excellencies in the creature And we are ready to express this inward acknowledgment or honour and do it sufficiently by celebrating their memories by thanksgiving to God for them by proposing their vertuous examples for imitation but as for the worship they perform and plead for whatever inward acknowledgment they pretend to have commensurate to the worth of those glorious creatures yet such are the acts they express it by as do plainly shew it a worship neither commanded nor commended nor consistent with that worship which we finde commanded those acts and acknowledgments of honour and subjection which God requires in his worship Lastly the examples he brings out of Scripture for countenancing his worship who sees not how far they fall short of what he should prove They are of Lots bowing to the Angels that came unto him and of the Shunamite worshipping Elisha and the Captain of fifty Elias p. 25. and this he will have religious worship because of their Authorities derived and acknowledged only from faith and religion Be it so and that they had a motive for that worship more then meerly â—ivil we need not fear if it be call'd religious in so large and remiss a sense viz. such a religious worship or reverence as is given to holy men living But I would ask this Author if it would not be held abominable in the Church of Rome to give unto any holy men living the worship and service they do to Saints departed as to erect Altars Temples to them fall down before their Images burn incense to them make vows and prayers to them at any distance and in the same forms and in the same place and time where and when they do to God Well leaving this for him to think of Mr. Spencers mincing of the matter hear how he concludes this discourse pag. 27. where to the praise of his ingenuity but prejudice of his undertaking he saith If any wilfully deny all kind of religious worship in how large a sense soever to be lawfully exhibited to any save God alone so long as he yields the thing it self that is to exhibit reverence and worship to persons and things in acknowledgment of the supernatural gifts and graces and blessings of God wherewith they are enriched let him call that worship Christian or pious or an extraordinary rank of civil worship I shall not contend about the name when the thing is done This is fair if he deal plainly and do not expect by seeming to be content with the thing we yield such a thing as they make of this worship for we are ready to yield the thing that is due that is a reverence and honour commensurate to their excellency as much or more then was given to holy men living and to do it by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a bowing or prostration where it can be done to an Angel if visibly appearing to us as to Lot And as for the Saints departed they are not by reason of their absence capable of that which was given to holy men living but we are willing to express the honour we owe them as we can by commemorating and praising their vertues propounding their examples for imitation And if we must properly speak what the worship is which they exhibit to the Saints departed Superstition it must be call'd superstition which as the notation of the word shews is a
against those that joyned the observation of legal ordinances with the profession of Christ and therefore it is very probable he condemns such worshipers of Angels as did it upon that account because the law was given by the disposition of Angels * In Colos c. 2. Theodoret who is shuffed in among the rest of the Fathers cited by this Author speaks directly to this purpose that these worshippers of Angels were such Christians as joyned the observation of the law with the Gospel and therefore used them as mediatours because the law was given by their ministry The other Fathers cited by him speak of strange phansies of some Hereticks about Angels but without such reference to this place of the Apostle as Theodoret doth who comments upon the Text and cites the canon of the Synod of Laodicea a place not far from Coloss forbidding any to pray to Angels Oecumenius also upon the text agrees with Theodoret touching these Angel-worshippers and out of Chrysostome for he borrows it from him shews the pretence they made of humility in this their going to God by Angels saying * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chryst Oecum in locum It was more then belonged to us to go to God by Christ which excludes Mr. Spencers pretence above that these were such as made Angels equal or superiour to Christ when its plain they in humility applyed to them as of inferiour rank As for his reason from the Apostles adding not holding the head that proves not that they placed the Angels in Christs stead or destroyed his soveraign headship directly as the phansie of those Hereticks he would have here to be meant did for he may be said not to hold the head that holds it not in that manner he ought or because this worshipping of Angels was the way to let go the head as in the Church of Rome their worshipping of Angels and Saints and their Images draws off the people much from Christ And albeit the Church of Rome does not retain the observation of the law as these did and so has not the same cause of their worshipping Angels as they had yet let the cause or motive be what it will for the same deslexion from truth and duty has not alwayes the same motive they of the Church of Rome have the same pretence of humility in their coming to God by the mediation of Angels and do place the Angels where they should not intruding into things they have not seen and not holding the head the one mediatour between God and man as they ought Again he will have us mistaken * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Religion of Angels in rendring the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a worshipping when it should be translated a religion of Angels and thereupon declaims against Protestants as having a design in it pa. 45.46 But this is needless for the word religion had been more advantageous to us in as much as we yield a worship to creatures but when religion is added to it we mean it a worship due to God as St. Aug. also said above Indeed if we look into the Church of Rome and well consider their exercises of devotion how they are directed how frequented there will appear a very religion of Saints and Angels And as in this point the Romanists are too like these half Christians whom the Apostle blames for their worship or religion of Angels so will they appear not much unlike to the Heathen Platonicks in their worship or religion of their Daemons and Hero's whom they placed and worshipped as celestial messengers and mediatours between men and the supream God Of which below * in the consent of Antiquity But to make up his number of mistakes he must needs repeat here also pa. 49. how worship was given to Angels by Lot and Joshua and that it may be call'd religious by Ja. 1.26 27. not remembring how much he is mistaken in giving us still for the worship we blame in them examples only of the worship we allow the bowing of the body to Angels when they appeared whereas we charge them with the worship which the Laodic Synod forbad which the Apostle here blames the praying to them and making them mediators nor will he remember how he is mistaken in telling us still St. James calls a work of mercy religion as if this were any thing to the religious worship they give to Saints and Angels which is the exercise or performance of their religion and devotion as religion belongs to the first table in a stricter sense whereas that work of mercy as all duties of the second table because commanded and proceeding from religion may in that general sense be call'd religious works not religious worship But indeed this Romish worship cannot truly be call'd religion in the larger sense or in any sense for it is not commanded it proceeds not from religion not dictated by that devotion and religion we owe to God it pertains not therefore to religion unless it be to the Romish Of all this more largely above CHAP. II. Of Prayer and Invocation NOw we are come to a special act of worship given to Saints and Angels the places of Scripture here examined are Come unto me Mat. 11.28 Ask the Father in my name Jo. 16.21 When ye pray say Our Father One mediatour 1 Tim. 2.5 We have an advocate 1 Jo. 2.1 The Protestants inference therefore we must come to God by no other Name Mediatour Advocate he will have inconsequent Indeed such arguments from the affirming of one to the denying all others are not for the most part concluding and valid yet in the point of Gods worship they are of good force if we allow the truth of the rule which S. Aug. de consensu Evang. l. 1. c. 18. Aug. saith that Socrates allowed God is so to be worshiped as he has commanded himself to be worshiped A general Rule for worship So that it must be a bold presumption in man when the Lord has in so many places prescribed the way to add thereunto by admitting and using other Mediators though inferiour to Christ What he saith to the Lords Prayer comes to this The form of the Lords prayer that Protestants by like argument might prove We are only to pray to God the Father and that one Christian living may not pray for another pa. 57. But this is not alike for we have command and direction to come and pray unto the other persons of the Trinity and also for one another living And we may call any of the Persons Father for all the works of the Trinity ad extra towards the Creature as giving life and being nourishing and preserving Fatherly acts toward us are as the School saith undivided common to all the persons but because we can also call God the Father our Father upon special relation by and through his only Son therefore this forme implies we ought to come in prayer to God the Father only
which they would confound 2. Note that he fixes the whole notion of his Idol in the false representation as we saw above whereas the notion and reason of an Idol if we will speak of it as Scripture intends and forbids it stands chiefly in the worship unduly given to it for that makes the representation forbidden else if we set aside the consideration of undue worship all Chimaera's and monstrous phansies of mans brain expressed by the painter would be Idols forbidden in the Commandment 3. Whereas according to that restrained notion of an Idol as he usually expresses it to be a representation made to represent any thing as God which is not so he would vindicate the Images of the blessed Saints from being made Idols because they represent them as they are pa. 83. This is a lame defence For first any representation made to worship the true God by may be nay is an Idol such were Labans Images Gen. 31. and Micha's Teraphin Jud. 17. and such was the golden calfe Exod. 32. and it is apparent that the likeness or representation forbidden Isa 40.18 19. refers to the true God and so by Deut. 4.15 that to make them an image or representation of the true God was a corrupting of themselves so by Exod. 20.22.23 Ye shall not make with me Gods of silver the worshipping of the graven image * Bell. de Imaginib c. 24. Idololatria est non solum cum adoratur idolum relicto Deo sed etiam cum adoratur simul cum Deo ut Exod. 20.22 23. True difference of Image and Idol with God is forbidden Secondly the images of the Saints although representing them as they are yet become idols by undue worship given them this Author is forced to acknowledge pa. 81. and that the same material representation may in divers respects be an image and an idol the image being made an idol by attributing to it any thing proper to God pa. 82 83. so then the distinction of idol and image comes to this first it is an image or representation whether painted or graven then made an idol in the use of it Qui colit ille facit he that worships makes the idol so little does their distinction of idol and image serve the turn As for the word Temounah in Exod. 20. albeit in Scripture-use it signifies any kind of likeness The likeness of any sorbidden in the Commandment natural artificial or spiritual yet here he will have it of no larger extent then the other word Pesel as he restrained it to signifie an idol or representation of any thing as God pa. 84. and concludes pa. 86. line 3. No other representation picture or likeness of any creature is here forbidden but such as are intended to represent them by way of idolatry as Gods and Deities which they neither are nor can be so he But this is not demonstrated as he boasts from the places of Scripture which he brought for these words For though it be true that idols and the gross idols of the Heathen are forbidden Exod. 20. and that in those places he brings the words do import such idols yet can it not be concluded from those instances either that such idols only i.e. the representations of false Gods or of any taken for a God which is not as he usually and cunningly renders the notion of an idol are here forbidden or that the col Temounah any likeness of things in heaven or earth should be restrained to such idolatry for who shall restrain a Cōmandment of God so generally expressed without warrant from the same God to tell us some likeness or images of things in Heaven or earth may be worshipped so they be not counted for Gods or worshipped as Gods Tertul. Tertul de Idol l. 5. Situ eundem Deum observas c. gives a good caution to this purpose If thou observest the same God thou hast his law that thou adore nothing besides God and if thou lookest at the precept that came after touching the Ark imitate thou the prophet and do not adore any images unless God command thee Not that he commanded any where to adore images but did command to make them viz. the Cherubin This slender evasion that only such idols as he has described are here forbidden The worship forbidden will the better be seen through when we have looked upon the words following not bow down nor worship for whether the representation be pesel a graven image or Temounah the likeness of anything it is no idol till the using of it by bowing down and worshipping of it or the like do come Here therefore he makes the like restraint of worship forbidden by the Commandment it must be saith he proportionate to the thing those idols represented a God and so a Divine worship pa. 86. and then he heaps up places of Scripture noting the grossest of Heathen idolatry esteeming the material picture as a God to hear prayers to be able to help and therefore they bowed down to it prayed to it and put hope in it that it may appear how far the Church of Rome in her fubtil and refined worships of creatures is from the idolatry of the Heathen here forbidden But I fear the gross fort of Papists fall down to their stocks and images much like as those gross idolaters did to theirs some honest Romish writers have complaints to that purpose and as for the understanding and learned Heathens they were almost as subtilin their conceits and distinctions of their worship as the more knowing Papists are as will appear below in the Trial of Antiquity But a great complaint he makes of our translation rendering in the Commandment nor worship them Of our translating worship for serve which should be nor serve them by which word he will have a Divine worship only forbidden for the word serve shews an homage done to those Idols as to things capable of such offices and endued with knowledge power and divinity so he pa. 88.89 We answer Though service be more and may perform more then worship to persons endowed with understanding and power to give commands yet in regard of inanimate statues Images and likenesses serving them stands only in acts of worship and therefore the one may in that case be indifferently put for the other and both of them are put as indifferent expressions of the same thing Deut. 4.19 to worship them and serve them so Jos 23.16 serve and bow down as equal expressions Only serving may imply a frequenting of those acts of worship in an order and way of Religion towards those objects of worship and so the Romish worshiping of Images and Saints may be call'd a serving of them And unless he will exempt those Heathens before spoken of from the serving of graven Images which they worshiped it may appear that the importance of that word serve them does not infer such a divine worship or homage given to such as they esteem endued with
hear what St. Aug. saith of this matter he tells us from Apulcius and other Platonicks what they held their Daemons to be Aug. de Civ dei l 8. c. 22. Medios inter Deos homines tanquam interpretes internuncios qui Ideoque cultum eorum à supernorum Deorum religione non separant and what respect and worship they had for them They held them spiritual or airie substances but denyed them to be Gods set in a middle condition or place between Gods and men as interpreters and messengers that may carry from hence our petitions or prayers and bring back from thence the helps and supplies of the Gods and therefore they do not separate the worship of these from the religion of the supream Gods let the Romanists consider well what they finde like to this in their angel-Angel-worship how they do not separate the worship of Saints and Angels from the religion and service of God Mald. in Mat. 5.34 Impitus error Lutheran nullum nisi Deo religionis honorem trib is shewen above cap. 1. num 5. and Maldonat could conclude it is a silly error of the Lutherans and Calvinists yielding no honour of religion but to God only It may saith he to the creature in reference to God and proves it by that which our Saviour there reproves their swearing by Heaven St. Aug. in the same book above cited speaks of their resorting to the memories of Martyrs Aug. de Civ Dei l. 8. c. 27. Martyres de functos non habemus Deos. and of that which was done there and this in answer to the worship of Martyrs objected by the Heathen We hold not the dead Martyrs for our Gods no more do we say the Romanists hold the Saints and Angels when we worship them and no more did the heathen Platonicks hold their Daemons and Heroes to be Gods as above said So then the Romanists say nothing when they so excuse their worship and S. Augustine had said nothing if he had said no more to the objection then this we hold them not to be as Gods therefore he goes on to shew what honour they afford the Martyrs and what the heathens falsly charged them with as by them given to the Martyrs because done at their Tombs or memories But saith he * Sed eorum Deum Colimus eorum memorias honoramus ad Dei honorem cultumque apud eorum memori as offeratur Deo ad imitationem ex eorum memoriae renovatione we worship their God and honour their memories then for what they did there that the Altar over the body of the buried Martyr was erected there for Gods honour and worship that the prayers and sacrifices there were offered to God that they gave praise there to God for the victories of the Martyrs and by making a remembrance still of them exhorted one another to imitation of the Martyrs God being prayed to for help and assistance To Faustus objecting they had but made a change from many heathen deities to their Martyrs * Aug. cont Faust l. 20. cap. 21. Non coli similib votis He first denies that they are worshipped with like vows and applications then how they worship or honour the Saints departed we worship and honour Martyrs †Eo cultu dilectionis et societatis quo in hac vita coluntur sancti homines with that sort of worship as we do holy men living which he there calls the worship of good will and fellowship and conformable to what he said above he adds here what is offered there is offered to God but therefore offered at the memories of Martyrs that * Ex ipsorunt locorum admonition◠by the admonition or remembrance which the very places may give us a stronger affection may arise to inflame our charity both towards those whom we may imitate that is the martyrs and towards him by whose assistance we may be inabled to do it Memorias Martyrum religiosa solennitate concelebr at ibid. But there is something here that the Romanists take hold of for he saith in the same place Christian people by such religious solennity celebrate or honour the memories of Martyrs That religious solennity is all the †Bel. de Beat. Sanctor c. 12. Cardinal could oppose out of S. Aug. against the many places of the same Father denying religious worship to the Saints Whereas he might have seen that S. Aug. calls it religious solemnity not for worship given to the Martyr but for the religious acts there performed to God But it follows in the Father * Et ad excitandam Imitationem et ut meritis eorum consocietur orationibus adjuvetur Aug. ut supra both to the exciting of Imitation of the Martyrs and that the Christian people might come to a fellowship of their merits and be helped by their prayers the meaning of which is that by imitating the Martyrs they may come to obtain what they have obtained which is the usual acception of merit with the Ancients or that by their merits that is by that favour they have with God and by their intercessions which we acknowledge the Saints make and the Church below has benefit by there might be help found and received from God No more then this can be wrung out of this saying of S. August considering what he saith so often against such worship and invocation as we see in this sect and shall below sect II. And unto Maximus the Grammarian Aug. ep 43. 44. Bust a Martyrum stulte frequentant Scias à Catholicis Christianis nullum coli mortuorum objecting that the Christians did foolishly frequent the tombs of their Martyrs neglecting the Ghosts of their Ancestors He Answers as he did in his book of true Religion above cited know thou that none of the dead are worshiped by Catholick Christians And elsewhere speaking against Heathen worship that they worshiped Devils They saith he * Aug in ex pos Ps 69. seek divine honour to be given them but all good Angels will that God alone be worshiped So in his book of true Religion chap. 55. after he had said Our Religion stands not in the Worshipping of the Dead he adds * Quid st pie vixerunt non quaerunt Sed illum à nobis coli volunt For if they lived holily they seek not such honors but would we should worship him So in the same place having said our Religion stands not in the Worship of Angels he affirms of them †Hoc ipsos velle ut unum cum ipsis colamus Deum Euseb Hist l. 4 c. 15. This they would have that we with them worship one God When the Jewes reproached the Christians that they would leave their Christ and worship Polycarp because of the great affection they shewed to that Martyr their Answer was as Eusebius relates it that they * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would worship none else but Christ As for
examination and for reasons following it will appear plainly that the worship as by them allowed and performed to Saints and Angels must be call'd Religious according to his first and stricter sense of Religion and so by his own confession undue to Creatures But before we come to our reasons let us hear how Greg. Val. in Tho. 2. 2ae disp 6. qu. 1. punct 2. de Val. expresses this matter a little more clearly He speaking of the Acts of the vertue of Religion as the School calls it tells us some of them pertain to it remotè imperativè remotely and only as commanded by it this with Mr. Spencer is religious in the larger sense some pertain to it proximè elicitive immediately and more inwardly proceeding from it and declaring a subjection due to God such acts are prayers oblations sacrifices vows c. This is religious in Mr. Spencers first and stricter sense accordingly the Schoolmen treat of those particulars as Acts or immediate exercises of the vertue of religion Now albeit Valentia and Mr. Spencer and all of them affirm that religious worship according to this sense is due only to God which is a great truth and do deny that the worship they give to any creature is to be called religious so or that it pertains to religion in that stricter sense which is also true as to many things they do to Saints and Angels being not so much as remotè and imperativè by way of command from true religion yet as used and exercised by them those acts of their worship are interpretativè acts of religion according to the first sense so to be interpreted and accounted of as to them and their performance as all undue and misapplied worship given to the Creature in way and exercise of religion yea given to a false God is to be accounted of This will appear in the reasons following The first reason shall be that which Azorius one of the same Society gives How the Romish creature-creature-worship must be accounted religious Azor. Instit Mor. part 1. l. 9. c. 10. qu. 2. because the virtue of religion is not of two kindes one which gives God his worship and another which gives worship to Saints their Images and Reliques And they saith he that think religion is not of one kind are moved by the reason of the several kindes of dignities and excellencies in things this was Mr. Spencers reason of his several sorts of worship as above nu 3. and so it is Bellarmines reason but religion saith Azor is not a virtue which generally gives to any one worship for the excellency but which gives Divine worship and honour to God and * Non igitur religio quicquid excellit honorat colit sed â—â—icquid divinum est et quâ ratione divinum est quemadmodum ergò unus Deus est fic una quoque specie religâ—o est Azonâ— ibid. therefore the virtue of religion does not honour and worship whatsoever excels but whatsoever is Divine and as it is Divine wherefore as God is but one so religion is but one in kinde Now this is very true and rational and concludes all religious worship to be Divine and only due to God and that albeit there be an honour due to such excellencies an honour commensurate to them yet not a religious worship But what will Azorius then say to the religious worship given to Saints and their Images in the Church of Rome It is the objection immediately following and he answers not by mincing the matter as most of his fellowes do by saying it is religious in a remote or a large sense such a sense as considering what they do and allow in that Church speaks nothing to the purpose or by saying it is an act of special observance as Greg. de Val. would lessen it to no purpose as see below num 8. or by other frivolous distinctions used by them in this point of worship No. He seemed to consider what is done and allowed in their Church and that all such excuses help not therefore * Sanctos honoramus non solum co cultu quo homines virtute dignitate praestantes sed etiam divino cultu qui est actus religionis Sed divinos cultus honores non damâ—s sanctis propter seâ—psos sed propter deum qui eos sanctos effecit Azor. ibid. qu. 5. he saith down right and saith it often in this chapt that it is Divine which in Mr. Spencers strict sense is religious honour and worship which is given to Saints in erecting Altars Offering making vowes to them invoking of them c. and excuses it from Idolatry by saying it is given them not for themselves but for Gods sake that made them such But there is enough in Greg. de Val. and Bell. and other Romish writers to shew that divine honour given to the creature though with such reference to God cannot be defended which is a great truth so then between these truths the Church of Rome must be in a great strait it gives and allowes according to what Azorius proved a divine and religious worship to creatures and according to the truth that the other deliver it cannot be defended in it Second reason What does religion in Mr. Spencers strict sense sound but that virtue and devotion of the heart which sends out such expressions of subjection and worship in the exercises of religion and what is the Romish worship but the exercise of that devotion or religion which is in the heart of any Romanist so desiring to express it self and how is it expressed and performed but by their addresses to God Saints Angels by the former acts of Religion Prayers Praises Vows Offerings Look into their offices private publick observe what is done at their Altars Shrines Images what prayers offerings vows made there see their incense burned before an Image which is a consumptive oblation and as much as was done to the brazen Serpent and as for Prayer one of the Acts of religion under it * Val. disp 6. qu. 2. de oratione â—unct 10. Valentia puts their dayly recital of the office which contains prayers to Saints and Angels and therefore this worship by prayers vows to Saints in their way of religion must belong to religion in the first sense as immediate exercises thereof Thirdly they do not only use those immediate acts of religion prayers praises vows giving them to Saints in their exercise of religion but in these religious acts joyn the Saints with God Athan Orat 4. contra Arianos which Athanasius makes an Argument of the unity of the Son with the Father else he could not be joyned with him in prayers in praying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to joyn the Son to the Father which he denies to all creatures so when St. Paul prayes 1 Thess 3.11 Now God himself and our Lord Jesus direct c. Now see how in the Church of Rome they joyn the
worship of the dead exhibited to them by those that overlive them or remain after them or as Lactantius tells us they are call'd * Superstiriosi sunt qui superstitem memoriam defunctorum colunt eorumque Imagines celebrant Instit l. 4. c. 28. superstitious who worship or religiously honour the remaining memory of the dead and celebrate or honour with religious service their Images And now let this Author if he can defend his Catholick Roman Church in her pretended religious worship from this charge of superstition and then consider if she be not also so far chargeable with Idolatrous practice as those applications to Saints and Angels those expressions of worship which they make by vows oblations prayers and adorations shall be found to yield to the creature any thing proper to God To conclude we have seen how the worship which they religiously The honour due to Saints and Angels of what sort iâ— it but unduly give to Saints and Angels stands charged now if for the perfecting of this discourse it be enquired to what sort of worship that honour which we acknowledge due to Saints and Angels the thing which he said we yield may indeed be reduced we have two sorts of worship apparent and unquestionable Divine and Civil the divine is due to God by reason of his supereminent majesty and by reason of his dominion over the whole man and contains all the religious worship and service all the obedience man can give him according to any of his commands all the honour he can return him upon any due occasion The civil is due to man upon that dominion he has over others according to the outward man and affairs of this life and contains the honour subjection and obedience due to Magistrate Masters Parents Between these two the Cardinal whom this Author follows every where fixes the worship or honour due to a finite supernatural excellency such as is in Saints and Angels And it is true that if we give the creature no more then is commensurate or due unto it the honour given will not be a Divine or Religious nor yet a Civil worship properly because given without respect to dominion or subjection But there is a worship or honour due to persons to whom we owe not subjection as they are endowed with qualities and excellencies though not supernatural as Wisdome Learning Justice and other Vertues which worship is not Divine or Civil properly but as some call it the worship or honour of Moral reverence due to all moral vertuous endowments or as others Cultus officiosus officious or out of courtesy So likewise the honour due to gracious and supernatural gifts and qualities may though in a higher degree be call'd the honour of moral reverence making but one kinde of both because the motive or ground of both is a thing of moral perswasion arising from the worth and excellency of gifts and endowments without the reason of dominion Greg. de Val. Val. in Thom. 2.2 disput 6. qu. 11. punct 5. has a phrase for it not much differing telling us the worship due to Saints is not an act of religion immediately but singularis observantiae of a singular observance or respect to saints that it is not religion immediately which procures them that esteem commensurate to excellent Creatures but peculiaris observantia i.e. that special observance reverence w ch such excellencies deserve Now this is to speak what is due to saints not what the Romanists allow them or suffer their people to give them w ch often falls into the way and acts of Religion by their vows prayers raise oblations to Saints That this worship or honour which may be call'd an act of moral reverence or of officiousness or of special observance if they please is of a differing kind from the religious or divine and may be differenced from the civil or humane cannot be denied but if asked to which of the two it is reducible or analogical we say to the civil For gifts and virtues which for their principle and Original are supernatural are for their use civil i. e. for the good of the concives fellow Citizens members of the same society of the Church yea Saints and Angels are concives fellow Citizens with us Eph. 2.19 So that civil worship might be divided into that humane civil according to the Polity of the world and this of moral reverence which is analogically civil according to the Polity of the Church society But they must reduce it to Religious worship which they divided into Latria and Dulia as above ehre its made medius cultus a middle worship between Divine and Civil as the Card inal and they all do Bel. de Beat. Sanctor l 1. c. 12. to bring it nearer to the Divine and then to make it intrench upon the divine or religious worship by such applications and expressions as we heard above As for their usual starting hole to which they commonly retire in this point of worshipping of Saints Angels Images to say they have no such acknowledgment of them as of Gods or infinit excellencies it will not secure them so long as they yeild them some acknowledgment not commensurate to them and express it by such acts and exercises of religious worship as above said We shall find the Heathens made the like excuses for the worship they gave to the inferior Deities and to their Images Nor could the people have such a conceit of Moses's dead body or carcass as of an Infinite and divine excellency which yet God hid from them least they should make an Idol of it as the Cardinal saith * Bel. Apol. pro respons sua ad Reg. Jacob. cap 8. Sect. jam vero that is least they should do to it and give it such acts of worship as the Church of Rome doth to Angels to Saints and to their Reliques Now least there should be made some pretenceâ— of plea from what the Author said of supernatural worship and excellency Of the Authority and Rule that Saints and Angels are said to have over us which he seemed to raise not only upon supernatural gifts and graces but also upon that dignity and authority which is more then humane or Civil and truly by him call'd Ecclesiastical such as was in Prophets and Apostles and withall mentioned several places of Scripture to imply the dignity and authority in the Saints and Angels as 1 Cor. 6.2 that they shall judge the world Rev. 5.19 that they shall reign upon the earth And that the Angels were Promulgators of the Law Act. 7.53 Captains of the Armies of God Jos. 5.14 Controlers of Kingdomes Dan. 10.12 So he pa. 17.18 I say least by this Authority which he seems to ascribe to them he should imply for he does not plainly infer a subjection to them and upon that account a duty of worship therefore to exclude all pretences It may be said 1. That in Prophets and Apostles there was a dignity
of authority as well as excellency of grace and holiness and still there is such Authority in the Bishops and Pastors of the Church and that Authority not Civil properly but Ecclesiastical and upon that Authority a subjection due to them Heb. 13.17 in things pertaining to Religion and Conscience and the honour or worship thereupon due to them as it may in his large sense be called Religious which we every where grant without prejudice to our or advantage to his Cause so may it better be call'd the Civil Ecclesiastical worship because as in the world so in the Church there is a policy or government for the Church below as a City and society within it self and does also with that above make up the whole City of God Therefore are we call'd by the Apostle Concives fellow Citizens Eph. 2. But 2ly Albeit Saints and Angels belong to the higher part of this City the triumphant and as to the state they enjoy are of higher dignity and glory then any in the militant or part below yet being not capable of that conduct of souls as the Governours and Pastors in the lower city are they cannot challenge that subjection from us nor the worship that arises upon it Nor can they by reason of their distance receive from us those tenders of worship and honour which are applied to holy men living * Eo cultu dilectionis societatis qu in hâ—c vita Sancti homines contra Faust l. 20. l. 21. S. Aug. determins it thus We honor the Martyrs with that worship of love and fellowship wherewith Holy men in this life are worshiped Of fellowship with reference to the Apostles fellow-citizens and of holy men living with reference to supernatural gifts and graces and the honour thence arising such as we give to men upon the account of holiness and such graces though they have no authority over us and let the Saints departed have all such honour inward or outward that they are capable of Lastly If this Author will drive those places of Scripture he cited for authority of Saints and Angels so far as to prove the worship due which they give unto them as his Mr. the Cardinal endeavoured by the like places to defend the invoking of them He may take answer from S. Aug. determining what manner of worship is due unto them as above the worship of love and fellowship and * Charitatis non servitutis Aug. de vera Relig. c. 55. elswhere the worship of charity not subjection or service or from S. Paul Eph. 2. saying we are fellow-Citizens or from the Angel Rev. I am thy fellow-servant And if they will still make use of such places as this Author alleaged it will be easie to shew how inconsequent the argument is from such places of Scripture how insufficient to prove such a worship as is allowed by the Church of Rome To conclude This Author will not say we are mistaken Recapitul of the premises when we affirm that all worship properly religious and according to his first and stricter sense is due to God and not to be exhibited to any Creature Nor can he say we are mistaken in proving that truth by this Scripture Thou shalt worship the Lord c. unless he will deny this Scripture speaks of worship properly religious It remains then that our mistake if any must be in concluding by this Scripture their creature-creature-worship to be unlawful That we are not herein mistaken appears by what has been said already First by that which is said above to shew the worship they exhibit by Oblations Incense Invocation Vows adoration of Images belongs and must be reduced to that sort of worship which is proper to Religion in the first and stricter sense Not only the effect of Religion but part of it I mean as performed and misapplyed by them and I would it were not the greater part of their Religion Secondly by the insufficiency of what this Author has said to the contrary in putting off the imputation from themselves and fastning the mistake on us As first his pretence from the immediate signification or bare importance of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the text which speaks a bowing or prostration of the body and is common to the religious and the civil worship to the worship of God and the Creature and accordingly all the instances and examples he brought speak no more then that outward reverence and worship shewen in bowing the body Whereas this comes not home to our charge laid upon their worship and cautioned against by this Scripture viz. their worship exhibited to creatures by the above said acts and exercises of religion and devotion Secondly his pretence of religious in his larger sense as sufficient which is as short of the purpose as the former for so all the duties of the second Table as we saw above may be called religious i. e. pertaining to and commanded by Religion but here we speak of the acts of worship proper to religion or exhibited in the way and exercises of Religion and Devotion which in their worship are such as are proper to the worship of God the same by which our religion and devotion to God is exercised as Vows Invocation c. or such as are proper to the Heathen worship in the exercise of their religion and devotion to their greater or lesser deities as adoration of their Images whom they pretend to worship All this will farther appear by the next part of this Scripture and him only shalt thou serve Him only shalt thou serve Mat. 4.10 Here he would fasten a mistake upon us Of Latria or service properly due to God by a misunderstanding of the word Serve pa. 28. why so because having examined all the places of Scripture where this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is here translated serve he findes it signifies that religious worship which is exhibited to God never used for a religious service done to a Creature as to a Creature pa. 31. Again that word is never used but for the serving either of the true or of a false God when it is referred to worship belonging to religion And he provokes any Protestant to prove the contrary pa. 32. But how did he conceive we understood the word when we affirm the same thing which to find out he bestowed as he saith some days study by examining all the places of scripture where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used we say it is very true that in all the scripture neither that word nor any other is ever used to express religious service done to a creature as to a creature that is as due to it Again we affirm that this word when it is referred to worship belonging to Religion is never used but for serving either the true or a false God and therefore it is easily seen whether the Romanists be mistaken in their Inference therefore there is another religious service which may be
given to some Creature which is altogether inconsequent unless they can shew some other word in Scripture that imports such a Religious service or whether the Protestants be mistaken in their inference therefore there is no religious service or as he expresses it no worship belonging to Religion save what is due to God So that whereas he provokes any Protestant to shew that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports any religious service save Divine the Protestant provokes him to shew any word in Scripture that signifies a religious worship or service save that which is divine or due to God and therefore duly infers from scripture that a religious worship or service is due only to God No Roman Catholick teaches saith he that divine service due to God only is to be given to any Creature pa. 33. But seeing the scripture teaches no other religious worship but what is given to God you teaching there is another teach besides the book broach your own invention and consequently give to the Creature something of that which is due to God Whatever you reserve for God this is plain your devoting your selves to such or such Saints doth very much express the notion of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a slave or mancipated servant and the frequency of your performing outward acts of religion and devotion to them in Pilgrimages Vows Oblations c. speaks a plain serving of them and takes up I fear the greater part of your religious service Nor can this Author excuse his Roman Catholicks Insufficient excuse of their worship by saying this word alwayes implyes the serving of the true or a false god but their serving of Saint or Angel is not such a service as is given to God or a false god for they do not think them to be Gods or serve them as Gods and this I suppose was the Authors meaning and designe in adding a false god that he might ly safe as he thought under that covert But this will not serve his turn for if by a false god he means that they which worship must think it to be God or apply the worship and service to it as to a God then it is not true that this word always signifies the serving of a true or false God but this is true that the word when it is as he said referred to worship belonging to religion alwayes signifies a service due to God whether given to him or misapplied to any other thing although that thing be not held a God by him that worships or the worship not given to it as to a God For this obliquity of worship or religious service it is not necessary that the thing worshiped be * Greg. de Val. in Tho. Disp vi qu. punct 3. de Idolatria thought to be a God is acknowledged by their own Authors It is plain in scripture the worship given the Golden Calfe Exod. 32. was Latria misapplied yet that not thought a God nor given to it as to a God but only as to a visible representation to be used in the worship of the true God that brought them out of Egypt Of which more below in the question of Image-worship So the worship given to the brazen Serpent was a misapplied Latria yet given to it not as to a God but as to a holy thing that had been instrument of such saving operations So the Apostle Rom. 1.25 speaks of them that served the Creature the word is Latria there more then or besides the Creator but together with him yet not serving the Creature as God but reserving something more for God as S. Ambr. in locum Quasi aliquid plus sit quod Deo reservetur Ambrose notes their vain excuse And therefore the limitation which the Trent Council gives here that they invocate and worship the Saints not as Gods which this Author made use of pa. 3. and for that as it seems added here a false God is a poor and emptie excuse for the Heathen were not so gross in their worship or the defence of it but that they could plead this and other excuses which the Romanists make for their creature-worship as we shall see * In Survey of antiquity cap. 1. below But he goes on in his bold assertions From this ground saith he proceeds the ordinary distinction of religious worship into Latria and Dulia A distinction this that as the Romanists use it has neither ground in Scripture nor yet in St. August who first used it but to another purpose as we shall see First for Scripture Impertinent distinction of Latria and Dulia in the Romish use as he said of Latria that when it is referred to worship belonging to religion it signifies the serving of God or some false God which he makes the ground of this distinction so we say of Dulia when this word is referred to worship belonging to religion or to religious worship it always imports the service of God that is due to God and given to him or misapplied to other things and so this distinction has not ground in Scripture the places are infinite wherein this word as well as Latria is used in expressing the service and worship of God and of other false Gods take one just parallel to this text of Mat. 4. and that is 1 Sam. 7.3 serve him only where it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So is this distinction against St. Augustinu's mind as appears by the * Contra Faust l. 20. 21. de Civi Dei l. 10. c. 1. Qu. in Genesin l. 1. de Trinit c. 6. several places where he uses it For he finding the word serve applied in Scripture to God and man thought the first service might be called Latria and the other Dulia not making it a distinction of religious worship or service into several sorts but a severing of the divine from the civil by these words putting nothing of religious service in the Dulia but placing it in the Latria as wholly due to God and this he confirms often as in opposition to their design in their Dulia so to their whole endeavour of having religious service or worship given to the creature as we shall see by several places of that Father cited below in the tryal of Antiquity Lastly as we see this distinction has no ground in Scripture as to the use of the words Latria and Dulia both being used there indifferently to express the religious service given to God so likewise as to the thing it self intended by the Romanists viz. a sort of religious worship due to the creature besides that which is given to God it is so far from having ground in Scripture that it is against the strain and severity of Scripture which is very strict in securing Gods worship and it serves finely to evacuate the force of the Apostles argument Heb. 1.6 who proving the Deity of our Saviour by that of Psal 97.7 Let all the
by his mediation by and in whom we can call him Father and for his other part of reply then one Christian living may not pray for another who sees not the disparity between praying for and praying to or invocating and that at such distance as they do Saints and Angels but of this of the living to pray for one another more conveniently * Nu. 6. below In the other places 1 Tim. 2.5 1 Jo. 2. 1. He will have the protestant mistaken The office of Mediator and Advocate in excluding thereby all Mediators or Advocates of Intercession the Text speaking only of a Mediator of Redemption because it follows in one place who gave himself a ransom and in the other He is the propitiation for our sins Secondly that the Text speaks of such a Mediator or Advocate that deserves to be heard for his own worth and merits pa. 69. That we may better discover this usual but ungrounded evasion Note First others besides Christ may be said to Intercede for us Intercession of Saints as the blessed Saints no question do but that makes them not Mediators or Advocates of Intercession for they do it without our Invocating of or application by prayer to them out of that charity and propension which all the members of Christ have to one another also they do it in general in such desires as make for the accomplishment of that body of which they are members Out of which propensity we pray also for them i.e. for their consummation and glorious resurrection c. yet this renders us not their mediators Secondly Note that to state them in the condition of Mediators and Advocates they must be enabled to receive our particular requests and prayers and so to present them unto God yea as the word Advocate significantly implies they must be admitted in that Court to plead their cause for whom they appear This being made manifest that they are no way enabled thereunto it will easily be seen whether the Protestants are mistaken in excluding them from this office or the Romanists in admitting them to it without or rather against scripture For this Author was wont in his imputed mistakes to shew the word or thing in which he placed the mistake otherwise taken and applied to others in scripture and it s but reason that he who will enlarge to others what the scripture seems to restrain should be bound to make it appear by scripture and not do it by limitations and distinctions of his own invention as it fares with all Romanists in this point and that of Image-worship That which this Author makes the pretence of his distinction or limiting to Christ only such a kind of mediation viz. of redemption from the words following viz. ransom and propitiation overthrows his distinction and shews the whole office belongs to Christ only for it shews that his mediation of Intercession or Advocateship and his fitness thereunto is grounded on his bloodshed or ransom or making God thereby propitious which the Apostle through the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks most evidently shewing our high priest is entred to appear for us Heb. 9.24 i. e. to be our Advocate or Mediator of Intercession and that he entred with blood This also shews the distinction is not good Distinction of Mediator of Redemption and Intercession for one member of it is grounded upon the other in the Intercession of our Mediator and Advocate upon his redemption for that tells us none can come under one member of it to interceed as an Advocate with God to whom the other belongs not too So for his other exception or limitation That Christ is the only Mediator or Advocate that can intercede by his own worth and merits comes to the same purpose for he that can do so must be a Redeemer too It is a great Truth but that it should not exclude as they pretend the Saints and Angels from being Mediators in and by the merits of Christ is only a saying of their own without all proof or warrant of scripture and a bold saying it is For when scripture saith there is one Mediator and tells us of no other points us out our Advocate and tells us of no other directs us by whom and in whose name we must come to God and shews us no other how can we without great presumption take upon us to appoint others though in order to him that is appointed For our coming to or praying to God is a worship of God an immediate serving of him and therefore binds us to go the way he prescribes as the rule * Nu. 1. above directs us and reason also perswades it for else there would be no thing fixed and certain in religion and worship For if in this point we may invent new wayes and new distinctions that have no ground in Gods word then that One God in the same verse would be obnoxious to mans conceit in framing other gods of lower rank as that one Mediator is to this distinction of the Romanists Again Here especially in a point of Gods worship Reasons against their Invocation that of the Apostle takes place What is not of Faith is Sin Rom. 14. ult For how can it be of faith to come unto God by Mediators whom they cannot believe to be appointed of God to stand between himself and us or between our Mediator Christ and us whom they cannot believe to hear or know our requests and desires having no warrant from God to assure their people that he will reveal or make known their desires to the Saints they invocate Furthermore it may be another reason against this presumption because it is God himself that prepares the heart to pray and inspires it what boldnesse then is it for any Creature as Mediator to present our prayers or as the Apostle Rom. 8.26 In our prayers according to Gods will the spirit makes intercession therefore prayers to Saints are not of the spirit not according to Gods will or else the spirit then maketh intercession by the Saints Lastly it is a senseless perverting of the order God has set us for our prayers at least mental must as the Romanists acknowledge Saints how said to know mens prayers be known to the Saints by revelation from God so our prayers must first come to God then by him to the Saints so by them to Christ to be presented to God The best account which the * Bel. l. de Beat. Sanctor c. 20. Cardinal can give us of their knowing prayers made to them is this First he rejects wholly that way which some have conceited that the Saints know prayers of the living by the report of Angels Of the two other wayes that they know by seeing in God as in a glass from the beginning of their beatitude those things that do any way belong to them or that they know by revelation from God when the prayers are made Of the former of these he saith it is
probable then comparing it with the latter he saith it is more probable then it yet the latter is more fit for convincing the Hereticks Where note that their best way is but probable and the Hereticks must be convinced in this point by that way which is less then probable So uncertain is this Article of their faith so unlikely to convince Hereticks however they perswade their people to it This Author saith nothing to their knowing of prayers he had indeed no reason to give himself the trouble of disputing that which their Church cannot agree on Beside all that has been said to it methinks reason should tell them how improbable it is that a finite Creature should admit and take care of ten thousand suits put up to it at once or that it should be consistent with the state of bliss for those glorified souls to be taken up or avocated by the care of earthly affairs yea such as for the most part are of a dolorous nature If God reveal unto them the conversion of a sinner as Luk. 15.7 which sometimes is made an argument by them its a matter of joy and answerable to their general votes and intercession for the accomplishing of the Church and consistent with their state of bliss Now come we to the prayers of men living one for another Prayers of men living for others no argument for praying to Saints departed often urged by this and other their Authors who having no permission or appointment from Gods word for making the Saints departed their Mediators and Advocates in the Court of Heaven seek pretence from this duty of the living Therefore to a Protestant asking how dare they admit of any other Mediator or Advocate then Christ this Author rejoynds How dare Protestants permit their children to pray them to pray to God for them for what is this but to be Mediators and Advocates pa. 61. And of Protestants usually commending themselves to the prayers of others This saith he is the very same intercession we put among the Saints and Angels pa. 62. Thus they are fain some times to mince it But a great disparity there is between the desiring of the prayers of the living and their invocating of Saints or Angels also between the prayers or interceding of men living for others and that Mediation or Advocateship they put upon Saints departed First We have warrant for the one and not for the other we therefore dare desire the prayers of the living because we are commanded to pray one for another and diverse reasons there are for it which hold not in the other case The mutual exercise of charity among those that converse together on earth and much need that bond as the Apostle calls it to hold them together Eph. 4.3 Col. 3.14 also the benefit we receive by being made sensible of others wants and sufferings Heb. c. 13 3. we our selves being also in the body as the Apostle tells us Lastly in this there is no peril of superstition as there must needs be in their religious addresses to the dead Secondly our praying others to pray for us is not Invocation or a Religious worship as theirs is to the Saints departed they placing a great part of their offices of Religion both publick and private in such Invocations Thirdly As the living when they are desired to pray for us are capable of this charitable duty knowing our necessities which Saints departed do not so their praying for us doth not make them Mediators and Advocates for us that is of a middle order between us and God Almighty as they make their Mediatours of intercession but as Comprecatores fellow-suiters of the same rank condition and distance with us from God in the mutual exercise of this charitable duty they praying for us at our intreaty and we for them at theirs St. Aug. speaks home to this purpose in two instances from Scripture Aug. contra Epist Parmen l 2. c. 8. Non se facit mediatorem inter Deum populum sed rogat pro se orent invicem si Paulus mediator esset non ei constaret ratio qua dixerat unus mediator St. Paul makes not himself a Mediator between God and the people but intreats they should pray one for the other so the living praying for one another are not therefore Mediatours nay doing it upon mutual entreaty and intimation are therefore not mediatours If St. Paul should be their Mediatour it would not consist with what he had said there is one Mediatour which proves the former consequence that the mediation they give to Saints will not stand with that one Mediatour His other instance is from St. Johns we have an advocate 1 Ep. c. 2. from which he infers the Apostle could not make himself a Mediatour and so makes it conclude against Parmenian who placed the Bishop a Mediator between God and the people we shall examine the Cardinals answer by which he would shift this off when we come to tryal of Antiquity But This Author misreports St. Aug. when he saith pa 63. The Texts admit only one Mediatour and advocate of redemption and salvation but more then one of praying to Almighty God with us and for us by way of charity and society as St. Aug. saith citing contra Faust l. 22.21 I suppose it should be l. 20. for in the place cited he speaks of no such matter but in the l. 20.21 where St. Aug. speaks of our honouring them by way of charity and society as we honour holy men living which this Author misreports as if said they pray for us which is truth but his adding with us supposes they pray for us when we pray upon knowledge of our particular necessities and requests which is false He closes up this point with the proof of pretended Scripture Their Invocation destitute of Scripture-proof If any desire to have the Invocation of Saints and Angels proved by Scripture he may please to examine Job 5.1 Gen. 48.16 1 Sam. c. 28. Pitiful proofs in the first Eliphaz tells Job if he take it thus impatiently he cannot expect relief or comfort from God or Angels whose ministry in those dayes was frequent in the second place Jacob prayes to God for his blessing upon the lads and wishes the ministry of Angels for them as it had pleased God to use it in blessing and delivering him in all his troubles or we may say as Athanasius and other Fathers do that the Angel there was Christ In the third he produces Saul worshipping and invoking Samuel which many wayes fails of proving Invocation of Saints both in the truth of the thing and the consequence Proofs these fitting for such Articles of Faith CHAP. III. Of Images THe Council of Trent as we see by the Decree touching Images Pretended care for the people would seem very careful that the people be taught how they may safely conceive of and worship Images and that all superstition and filthy lucre be
Vnum quid as it were one and the same thing †Valen disput 6. in 3. Tho. punct 1. Sect. 19. Christum illa accidentia in Eucharistia vere proprie formaliter inter se uniri Greg. de Val. proves Christ and those Accidents to be truly properly formally united From hence as I said many inconveniences follow for what happens to the species must also to the body and blood of Christ Thirdly if we consider this with reference to the Sacrament we may well put the question how can Accidents of bread and wine be in the Sacrament without their proper subject how can they supply the purposes of the Sacrament as to the outward part of it without the substances of bread and wine or if the body and blood of Christ under the species must supply the defect of their proper subject or substances as his answering by the personality of our Saviour must imply then must the body and blood of Christ supply the place and property of the outward part of the Sacrament which is most absurd By this of the Personality of our Saviour he serves himself in answering the eight question and the three last But the disparity is evident for the personality of the divine nature may supply the defect of it in the humane by reason of the hypostatical union which joyns the humane nature to the divine But the body and blood of Christ can neither be united to the species of bread and wine in such a manner as to make it supply the defect of their proper subject neither is apt to supply the properties of that subject or outward element of the Sacrament as we noted above yet does Mr. Spencer by his answer suppose the body and blood of our Saviour to supply all and the Romish writers by that strict union which they suppose to be between his body and the Species make it subject to many inconveniences To the question how can the same body be in several places at once Same body in several places he returns this question as satisfactory how can the Soul or an Angel or God be at the same time in many places But any one may see the disparity between the properties and condition of a Body and of a Spirit and consequently the unsatisfactoriness of his Answer Nor is it true which he here must suppose that a Soul can be in several bodies distant one from other or an Angel in distant places at once therefore they are forced to take in Gods property of being present in many places l 3. c 4. de Enchar quomdo Deus est in Loco Mr. Spencer learnt it of the Cardinal affirming the body of Christ to be in place as God is To that of Penetration of parts if our Saviours body should be contained in the least part or crumb of the host Penetration of Dimensions he answers by our Saviours body passing through the doors and through his mothers womb both being shut But it s no where said they remained absolutely shut * in 4. sent dist in 44. qu. 6. Durand shews how with more reason it may be said our Saviour came in the doors opening to him unperceived by his Disciples for it is not said saith he that he came in per januas clausas but januis clausis not through the shut doors but the doors being shut And for his passage through his Mothers womb it being shut the Scripture puts him among the first born that opened the womb and though the Fathers often speak of the womb being shut yet is it only to deny such an opening of the womb as is injurious to her Virginity and much to this purpose Durand shews in the place above cited may be said of our Saviours coming out of the womb citing Saint Aug. Ambr. Greg. Another objection p. 308. If our Saviours flesh and blood be really in the Sacrament Our Saviours body exposed to indignities then may Catts and Rats eat it This objection is not carefully expressed for such inconveniences do not follow upon a Real presence but such a Presence as the Romanists fancy which binds his body and blood to the species and so makes it liable to all the indignities which happen to them But see how he would answer it by the like as he supposes If the flesh and blood of Christ saith he were really in the Passion then might dogs eat his blood that was shed As if it were alike what was done to his passible body appointed then to suffer and done now to his glorious body All the disgraces and indignities that were done or could happen unto him then were agreeable to the work he came about viz. to redeem us by suffering and whatever became of that precious blood that was shed it had notwithstanding its due effect for our Redemption but now to expose his glorious body to such indignities as they do by uniting it so to the species does not beseem Christians The next objection or question If there were so many miracles as you must hold wrought in the Sacrament Multiplying of miracles need lessy Why are none of them seen He answers by another question If there be so many miracles wrought in the incarnation of our Saviour why were none of them seen p. 309. But great disparity here for albeit the miraculous Incarnation of our Saviour was secret and unseen in the working of it yet seen and apparent enough in the effect wrought Again the nature of that mystery required it should be secret in the working but for our believing it the word doth sufficiently attest it and the thing or work wrought was sufficiently evident therefore S. Jo. saith c. 1.14 The word was made flesh and dwelt among us and we saw his glory c. Nothing like in the sacrament notwithstanding that the nature of sacraments requires all be done to the sense for confirmation and as nothing appears of all the supposed miracles so nor does the word of God plainly attest any of them so destitute is their way of Transubstantiation of any just proof or evidence CHAP. VIII Against Communion in one kinde THe Doctrine of the Church of Rome delivered in the Council of Trent and here prefixed by Mr. Spencer carries its Condemnation in the forehead The boldness of the Church of Rome in this point acknowledging that our Saviour instituted and administred in both kinds and that the use of both kinds was frequent might have said Constant in the beginning of Christian Religion might have said for 1200. years after the beginning of Christian Religion yet is not ashamed to approve the contrary practice and to plead for it an authority in the Church about the Sacraments to make a change Salvâ substantia that is the substance being preserved entire where again it speaks its own condemnation for how can the substance be preserved when half of that which our Saviour made the Sacrament is denied to the people He calls
also drinks his blood shed so it did till the Sacrament was instituted and so it still doth extra Sacramentum out of the Sacrament but if we apply this to the receiving of Christ in the Sacrament then drinking is as necessary both to answer the whole act of Faith and the whole purpose of the Sacrament in participating his blood shed and receiving a full Refection And therefore though eating only be expressed in that v. 57. yet he could not but see that our Saviour when he spoke in the singular number mentions and enjoyns them both v. 34 36. His instancing in the command about the Passover enjoyning to kill rost sprinkle and eat but not binding every one to perform all but some one thing some another p. 361. proves as all his former impertinent for the concernment here is in the reception or partaking of the Sacrament of the Passover by eating of the Eucharist by eating and drinking and I hope he will not deny but all and every one of the Israelites were bound to eat the Passover and to eat it as the Lord enjoyned it under pain of being cut off Exod. 12. Indeed if we take in all the actions to be done in and about the Sacrament of the Eucharist those that concern the consecration and administration as well as the reception of it every one is not bound to perform all but that which concerns the Reception belongs to all not to do all that our Saviour did but all that the Disciples then did belongs to all to do because they then represented the whole company of the faithful He closes up this point and his whole discourse with some passion against Protestants charging them with an unworthy and base esteem of the most sacred body and blood of our Saviour not thinking that either of them as they are in this Sacrament is fit to confer saving grace to such as devoutly receive them p. 363. Thus where Argument and Reason is wanting there Passion must make it out But as to the worth and power of our Saviours body and blood we acknowledge it * See N◠3. 5. above and the fitness of either to confer sufficient grace and how it does when in case of necessity the one is devoutly received but we question how they that wilfully refuse one of them the blood shed can be said devoutly to receive or can expect that sufficient grace which is given in the Sacrament to them that receive it according to our Saviours Institution It is not any derogating from the worth of our Saviours body and blood but a due regard to his Will and Command that causes us to stand upon receiving both What he adds runs still upon that Assertion that there is not any express command given in Scripture to all particular Christians to receive both pag. 365. which we shewed above to be false by our Saviours commands in his Institution of this Sacrament Drink ye all and Do this by what he severely denounced Joh. 6.53 by what S. Paul delivers as received from our Saviour 1 Cor. 11. That which this Author immediately subjoyns and the custome of the Primitive Ancient and Modern Church is evidently to the contrary will appear to be far from Truth as to the Primitive and Ancient Church when we come to the survey of Antiquity in this point To conclude I could wish that Mr. Spencer who pretends he undertook this work for no other end then to inform the misled spirits of this age as he tels us in the close of his book would have a conscionable regard to an open and apparent Truth which he contends against as in this so other points of Romish doctrine and that he would think of reducing those misled spirits which he has drawn out of the way by such deceiving assertions as he has delivered in this Treatise and bent all his wits to render them plausible to the Vulgar A Brief Survey of Antiquity for the trial of the former points Whether they can as held by the Church of Rome pass for Catholick Doctrine SECT I. Introduction VIncentius Lirinensis gives us a safe Rule for trial of Points of faith and Catholick doctrine Duplici modo munire fidem suam debet Primo divina legis authoritate deinde Ecclesiae Cath. Traditione cap. 1. If any saith he would continue safe and sound in a sound faith he ought two wayes to fortify his belief First by the Authority of Gods word or Scripture then by the Tradition of the Catholick Church bringing down from age to age the known sense of that word Then for the Tradition of the Church it must be universal to prove it Catholick Doctrine That is properly Catholick which was received or believed Quod semper ubique creditum c. 3. every where through all the Churches and alwayes through every Age. According to this Rule we ought to direct the Tryal and may justly expect that the Church of Rome imposing these and many other points upon the World for Catholick faith should give us them clearly proved by this Rule whereas we finde them in these points pittifully destitute of Scripture which is the first and main ground-work of faith Yet because Scripture is Scripture and by all Christians received for the word of God and challenges the first place in the Rule of Faith therefore they think themselves concerned to bring Scripture for every point such as their best wits have found out any way capable of being wrested to their purpose far from that clearness and force of proof which those places of Scripture have that hold out unto us matters of Faith SECT I. Of worshiping Angels and Saints HOw forsaken the Romanists are of Scripture here may appear Romanists here destitute of Scripture proof by what could be alledged by Mr. Spencer in defence of it as we saw above Cap. 1. from the reverence given to the Angels by Lot and others or to men living as to Elias and Elisha which proved impertinent and fell short of that worship which the Church of Rome allows and practises It is also confessed by some of them * Salmeron in 1 Tim. 2. disp 8. Sect. postremò that this business of worshiping and Invocating Saints or Angels is not expressed in the New Testament and reason given for it because it would seem hard to the Jews and give occasion to the Gentiles to think new Gods put upon them As little help have they from the Tradition of the Catholick Church or witness of Antiquity which here runs with a full stream against them And now for the Trial we will first speak to the General Religious worship as incompetent to a Creature though most excellent such as are Saints and Angels the particulars of this worship by Invocation and image-Image-worship we shall examine below Our first evidence of Antiquity shall be from the force of the word Religion The force of the word Religion whereby the Fathers did prove and
conclude all Religious worship or service due to God The name of Religion saith * Lactan. l. 4. Inst c. 28. quòd hominem sibi Deus relegaverit Lactantius is deduced from the bond of piety because God has bound man to himself S. Aug. is copious to this purpose who in one place deduces Religion from another word but to the same effect from religendo choosing God again whom we had lost and serving him only Hunc eligentes vel potius religentes nam amiseramus negligentes c. Civit. Dei l. 10. c. 4. * Aug de vera Relig. c. 55. Non est nobis Religio c. Elsewhere Our Religion stands not in the worship of the Dead or Saints departed They are to be honoured for imitation not to be adored for Religions sake and so having denied the worship of other creatures even Angels too he concluds according to the force of the Word Religion given above by Lactantius * Religet ergò Religio uni omnipotenti Deo Let therefore Religion bind us to Almighty God alone And speaking of worship †Aug. de Civ Dei l. 10. c. 1. Cultus saith he the word worship if we say no more agrees to many things but if we adde to it the name of Religion it distinguishes it from all other and speaks that worship which is due to God Our second evidence is from the Argument which the Fathers made for the Godhead of our Saviour The Fathers argument against the Arrians and of his consubstantiality with the Father against the Arrian Heresy proving the Deity of the Son by worship to be given unto him according to the Apostles argument Heb. 1.6 worship him all the Angels and challenging the Arrians for allowing him to be worshiped and invocated yet denying him to be God which might have been evaded by the Arrians if the Romish answer and distinction had been known doctrine then for they might according to that have said they allowed him to be religiously worshiped not as God but as the most excellent Creature and in high favour with God Here Athanasius * Athan. 2. orat contr Arr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 charging the Arrian Heresie with this absurdity consequential to it Now that the worship of the Creature was done away viz. the Heathen worship taken away by Constantine again to worship and serve a Creature and that which was made so they accounted Christ to be Also in the same oration he argues against that saying of the Arrians that our Saviour began then to be worshiped when he was exalted of God but more fully against this in his next oration citing that of the Apostle Heb. 1.6 Let all the Angels worship him for a disproving of that Arrian tenet and a proof of our Saviours Deity and he goes on there to take away as it seems the Arrian limitation of worship something like the aforesaid evasion of the Romanists That he was worshiped by the Angels as higher then they in glory Athan. 3. orat contr Arrian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exalted above them This the Father denies and adds If he was adored as higher in glory then ought every inferior worship him that is so but so it ought not to be for saith he A creature doth not worship a creature citing S. Peter and the Angel who refused worship Act. 10. and Rev. 19. then concludes Therefore it belongs only to God to be worshiped And this saith he the Angels know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who albeit excelling one another in glory yet being all of them Creatures they are not in the number or rank of those that are to be worshiped but of those that do worship The like argument from adoration he * Athan. in libr. de Trinitate ad Serapionem elsewhere uses and so does Hilary in his books of the Trinity more then once so does S. Aug. use it to prove the Deity of the holy Ghost in his first book of the Trinity and sixt chapter So Nazianzen Nazen orat 37. de spiritu sancto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the Holy Ghost is not to be worshiped how doth he deify or sanctify us in baptisme but if he must be adored then worshiped if worshiped how then is he not God for the one cleaves to or follows the other as a Golden Chain Thus the Fathers generally proved the Deity of the Son and holy Ghost because to be worshiped Our next evidence that the ancient Church knew no such Religious worship The Fathers answer to the Heathens denying such worship is taken from the answers given to Heathens who observing that Christians did acknowledge the ministery of Angels and resort to the memories of the Martyrs objected to the Christians that they held and worshiped Angels and Martyrs like as they themselves did their Daemons and Heroes that is as mediators between men and the Supreme God Origen had to do with Celsus upon this argument Orig. l. 5. contrà Celsum omnia Vota interpellationes c. and acknowledges Angels to be ministring spirits but all our Vowes Interpellations put up to God the Lord of all by our high Priest then shews that our applying to Angels without our better knowing of them that is their nature and offices is not agreeable to reason wherein he seems to relate to the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 2.18 an intruding or searching into those things a man has not seen or known as those worshipers of Angels did who could not see or know that the Angels had any such place or office appointed to them But more below out of this place of Origen when we come to the point of Invocation Elsewhere Celsus objecting that the worship or honour given to those Orig. l. 8. contr Cel sum that the supreme God would have honoured was a thing acceptable to him so is their worshiping of Daemons and Hero's for an honouring of his subjects cannot offend him and that this was apparent in Kings and their subjects and officers and that it was seditious to say otherwayes This discourse of Celsus is not much unlike what the Romanists plead for their worshiping and honouring of Saints and Angels But Origen by way of answer Nostra ratio potior est adducens nos ad serviendum uni Deo per filium Quisquis habet Deum propitium insinuates it is not so with God as amongst men and that our reason is more forcible inducing us to serve God only by his Son and a little after saith he God alone is to be worshiped and prayed to by his Son and whosoever has God propitious by his Son the Angel of the great Counsel let him be content he cannot want the protection of Angels and more to this purpose So may we say Our Reason is more forcible which induceth us Protestants to refuse their way of worship and to serve God only by his son our only high Priest and mediatour Now
his Disciples and Imitaters they †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Loved them worthily which was the Cultus dilectionis as St. Augustine stiled it above Unto Julian reproaching the Christians that they worshipped miserable Men Cyr. l. 6. contra Julianum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so he called the Martyrs St. Cyril answers We do not worship them with any divine or Religious Worship but with that of affection observance and honour or as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies an honour convenient and proper for them And by his following discourse it appears wherein that honour stood viz. in a Reverend respect they had to their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Repositories where their bones or remainder of their bodies was laid and celebrating their praise and Vertues We * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. crown them saith he with the greatest honours as those that have fought valiantly and obtained the victory he adds the example of the Grecians who every year celebrated the fame of those that valiantly fought against the Persians So this perpetual memory of the martyrs is afforded them as a reward due to their fortitude Add to these what Epiphanius saith being put to express himself in this point Epiph. Haer. 74. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the Heresie of the Collyridians The Blessed Virgin saith he is to be Honoured but she is not given to us for worship Amb. in Ro. 1. ver 21. 25. Relicto Domino conservos adorant quasi plus sit quod Deo reservetur and afterward Let Mary be had in honour but let the Lord be worshipped Also it is observable what St. Ambrose saith upon the Pretence of the Heathen Worship which he cals Miseram excusationem a miserable excuse Leaving the Lord they adore their fellow-servants and then their pretence or excuse is that they reserve more or an higher sort of worship for God himself wherein we may read the Romish excuse And what St. Honorem Dei Creaturae deferre ibid. Aug. l. 10. c. 4. Multa de cultu Divino usurpata honoribus deferri humanis sive humilitate nimiâ sive perniciosa adulatione ità tamen ut iâ—s quibus deferunruntur homines habeantur qui dicuntur colendi venerandi si anâ—em multum iâ—s additur adorandi Ambrose saith there of their yeelding the honour of God to the Creature St. August more larely unfolds the matter in his Book of the City of God where speaking of worship and several sorts of it Many things used in and belonging to Divine worship are yeelded up to the honouring of men whether out of too much humility or pernicious flattery yet so as they to whom such honours are yeelded are still held to be men as Romanists say they acknowledge them as Creatures do not worship them as Gods who are said to be honoured reverenced and when much is yeelded to them adored Lastly St. Hierom being put to it by Vigilantius Hier. ad Riparium Nos non dico Reliquias Martyrum sed nec Angelos Archangelos colimus adoramuâ— Honoramus Reliquias Martyrum ut cum cujus sunt Martyres adoremus Honoramus servos ut honor servorum redundet ad Dominum who found fault with the honor given to the Reliques of Martyrs spoke contemptuously of them answers thus We do not worship or adore the Reliques of Martyrs no nor Angels or Archangels we honour their Reliques that we may adore him whose Martyrs they are We honour the servants that the honour of servants may redound to their Lord. Now it will not serve to say here which is the usual evasion of the Romanists that St. Hierom denies them Divine honour for Vigilantius could not think such was given to them by the ancient Christians As these Testimonies conclude against Religious Worship given to a Creature What manner of honour allowed to the Saints and exclude the pretences and limitations used by the Romanists so do they afford us true and allowable distinctions and limitations of Worship or Honour as of the Blessed Virgin she is to be honoured not adored or to have religious worship So Epiph. above So St. August above of the Martyrs They are to be honoured not adored and that honouring of them to be for imitations sake not for Religion and again an honour of charity not service or subjection Lastly the worship or honour of love and fellowship wherewith we worship also holy men living and that the honour of the Martyrs stands in Celebrating their Victories and praise in giving God thanks for them and in propounding their examples for Imitation These out of the Fathers above cited especially out of St. Augustine To these we may add St. Greg. Nyssen in his praise of the Martyr Theodorus speaking to the Martyr he saith Nyss Orat. de Theod. Martyre 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We hold this assembly for thee but how or to what purpose to adore our Common Lord and make full commemoration of thy victorious combates Bas Orat in 40 Mar◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So his brother St. Basil in that very Oration of the 40 Martyrs wherein the Romanists think they have a fit testimony for Invocation we shall examine it in the next Section gives such reasons why they celebrate the memory of Martyrs 1. Because the honour given to the best of our fellow servants is the sign and demonstration of our good will and respect towards our Common Lord. Where we have two words fellow servants and Common Lord that excludes the Romish religious worship given to Saints and Angels as we saw it by those words excluded in the Testimonies of St. Aug. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. above cited 2 because that by remembring the vertue of the Martyr we stir up to imitation does not say we stir up to invoke or worship them Again to the Martyrs praise and our imitation he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. Think and call the Martyr blessed where the Latine Translation hath Venerare Martyrem which though it may be allowed in a good sense yet was it to be translated otherwise and mark the end of such celebrating of the Martyrs praise and vertue That thou mayst so become a Martyr in resolution and preparation of mind fitted as it were for it by often thinking and speaking him happy Now let us examine the Testimonies which the * Bel. l. 1. de beat Sanct. c. 13. Cardinal brings out of Antiquity for Religious worship of Saints and Angels In these as also in those which he alledges for the next point of Invocation Romanists unfaithful in their allegations out of Antiquity there is great cause to challenge his honesty or his diligence For first these Testimonies for the most part are too general They speak an honour given to Saints and Angels but short of that which the Church of Rome allows and defends Some of them speak honour done to
whether the book be forged or no and the story of Justina true or false yet Nazienzen approves the fact or practise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We answer that he tels us she betook her self to God for help and to Christ that she strengthened her self with the Examples of Susanna Daniel c. then follows having considered these things she also supplicated the Virgin Mary that she would help a Virgin now in danger and so he leaves the story neither commendig this practise nor reproving it We have seen what Testi monies the Romanists alledge out of the Fathers and how faithfully it is done especially by the Cardinal One Argument remains which all of them make from the success they found who applyed themselves to the Martyrs whereby it is evident that God did approve the practise But this is a fallacious Argument à non Causa making their invocation of the Martyr to be the Cause or motive of Gods hearing and granting success It is certain in History that many were heard who resorted to the monuments of Martyrs and prayed to God there yea many that prayed there to God with reference to the Intercession which the Martyr and all other Saints made for the Church below but if some were heard that did directly invocate or pray to the Martyr of which Examples cannot certainly be given we may say God overlooked the Excess or the voluntaries of their mouth as St. August Aug. Confess l. 9. c. 13. Voluntaria oris mei call'd his Excesses or breakings out in his praying for his mother whom he believed to be in bliss hoping that God would pardon the extravagance And as the same Father insinuates God overlooked and pardoned the infirmities of the Midwives not speaking altogether according to truth Aug. Qu. 12 in Exod. non potuit ad laudem sed ad Veniam pertinere and rewarded their good will Exod. 1.20 Their untruth could not deserve praise might obtain pardon So when the Romanists urge the miracles which Augustine sent hither by Greg. the first is said to work as Gods witness to the Truth of all the Doctrines he brought from Rome we say those Miracles supposing them to be wrought were Gods witnesses to the Catholick Faith which Austin preached and planted here not to all that he taught God in mercy overlooking those lesser errors and vanities when he was pleased and saw it fit to give testimony by those Miracles to the Faith of Christ But this may suffice for the former Argument If therefore we be asked why we do not conform in this practise to the Ancient Church it may be answered Because we see what the more Ancient Church held and practised and we find by St. Aug. conFaust l. 20. c. 21. Alind est quod docemus aliud quod sustinemusEt donec emendemus to lerare compellimur Aug. that many things were done at the Martyrs Tombs but not by the better sort of Christians as we noted above Sect. 1. nu 6. and that in his answer to Faustus about the worship or honour given to Martyrs he concludes thus It is one thing that we teach another thing which we bear with and we are compelled to tolerate it till we can amend it Therefore because we saw much deflexion in the Romish practise from the Primitive Verity when we had opportunity and power to amend it the thing St. Aug. desired we did it and with good Reason allowing in this point what may consist with Catholick Doctrine such we count the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wish of having benefit by those prayers which the Saints above make for the members of the Church militant and labouring below yea such we may account the indirect Invocation which begs of God that benefit or effect of those Prayers but we cannot account the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or direct Invocation to consist with Catholick Doctrine when it is made to Saints and that by way of Religious address as the Church of Rome practiseth it in her offices which practise none of the Ancients knew SECT III. Of Image-worship HOw the Romanists labour in this point to stand against Scripture which so forcibly encounters them Romanists altogether forsaken here of Scripture and Antiquity we saw above Chap. III. and there was answered what they bring from Ps 99.5 to worship his footstool and the Images of the Cherubins upon the Ark This is the best and only plea they can make from Scripture yet so weak and ungrounded that their own Authors give it over as impertinent and raised upon a false supposal that the Jewish Church had any Images for worship as abovesaid Ch. 3. nu 10. Now let us see how they strive to bear up against the universal consent of Antiquity which with a strong Current for 700 years runs contrary unto them Our first evidence against this image-Image-worship The first Evidence Had there been any such thing amongst Christians those Ancient Apologists and Defenders of Christian Religion against Heathens Justin Clemens Tertullian Minutius Lactantius Arnobius Eusebius would have mentioned it when they give account of the worship used in their assemblies Nay they could not have declined it when they set themselves to refute the Heathen Image-worship And therefore Tertul. Tert. Apol. c. 12. Igitur si statuas imagines frigidas mortuorum suorum simillimas non adoramus quas milvi araneae intelligunt nonne laudem in his Apologetick professes and defends their not worshiping of Images If therefore saith he we do not worship Statues and cold Images like indeed to the Dead whom they represent and which Birds and Spiders understand well enough it deserves praise rather then punishment See how he not only denies the worship but vilifies them as unfit for worship cold and like the Dead and that the Birds understand them and therefore fear not to dung upon them Minutius Faelix answering Cecilius a Heathen that objected against the Christians their having no Temples no Images gives reasons wherefore they had not or not used them in worship Clemens Alexandr as he denies the Jewish Church had any Images to worship saying * Clem. strom 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moses set no statue or figure in the Temple to be worshiped so is he very severe against Images among Christians insomuch that he scarce allowes the Art of painting or of making Images as we may see in his Protreptic Origen had to do with Celsus about worship and Invocation and to answer why the Christians gave it not to Angels whom they acknowledged to be ministring Spirits sent of God as they the Heathen gave it to their Daemons of which in the two former Sections But he was also put to satisfie Celsus why the Christians did not use Images and for which he compares them to Scythians Barbarians that had no Temples and Images because they knew not what the Gods or Heroes were How does Origen answer by saying as a Romanist
what St. Aug. Aug. de Morib Ecclesiae c. 34. Sâ—pulâ—hrorum picturarum Adoratores Iurbas Imperitorum saith in several places in his Book of the manners or Customs of the Church he notes some to be Worshipers of pictures and sepulchres and puts them among the companies of ignorant and indiscreet men and saith the Church owns not allows not such custome or practise The Cardinal replies Peradventure St. Aug. Bell. de Imag l. 2. cap. 16. Forte speaks of the Idols of the Gentiles Peradventure of those that did superstitiously without all peradventure St. Aug. speaks not of Heathen Idols but of the irregular honour given by some to the Martyrs and without any peradventure they did superstitiously worship and honour them for that necessarily follows upon Religious worship given to a Creature and cannot be declined in the Church of Rome But after two peradventures the Cardinal is resolved to say St. Aug. was then newly converted when he wrote that Book and so * Offensum quibusdam ritibus Ecclesiae offended with some customs of the Church it seems the Cardinal took that practise which St. Aug. blames to have been a Custom or usage of the Church but after being better instructed he could excuse them But where did St August ever excuse such practise or shew himself reconciled to Image-worship We do not finde he recall'd it in his Retractations but we finde * Aug. contra Adimant c. 13. Velle videri se favere simulachris ut vesanae sectae Paganorum concilient benevol him blaming the Manichees in that they would seem to favour Images for gaining the good will of the Pagans to their mad sect Aug. contra Acad. l. 1. c. 1. Nihil omnino colendum esse totâ—â—que abjiciendum quicquid oculis cernitur quiâ—quid ullus sensus attingit Again we finde him in his first book against the Academicks pronouncing in general Nothing is at all to be worshiped but to be cast away what ever is seen with mortal eyes and what ever any sense can reach This Book indeed he wrote when he was newly converted but when he wrote his Retractations Retract l. 1. c. 1. Est enâ—m sensus Mentis he was an aged Christian there he repeats this sentence not retracting it but only explaining the word Sense by saying he meant the senses of the body not of the minde Also we finde the very same Father in his Book of true Religion Aug. de vera Relig. c. 55. Non est nobis Religio humanorum operum cultus meliores enim sunt iâ—si Artifices denying it and saying as we saw above Sect 1. Worship of Dead Men or of Angels is no part of our Religion So likewise denies he there that the worship of the works of mens hands is any part of Christian Religion and adds Reason for it because the workmen themselves are better then their works We finde him also upon occasion of the Heathen-worship asking this question Aug. in Ps 113. Quir adorat vel orat intuâ—â— simulaâ—h um qui non sic afficitur â—t ab eo se coeâ—â—â—rt puteâ— Who is he that adores or prayes beholding an Image and is not so affected as to think he is heard by it Where he not only condemns the practice but shews the danger of it in withdrawing the minde from that which is to be adored and prayed to Nor is this so easily to be turn'd off as the Cardinal would do it by saying St. Aug. speaks of Images with supposal of the Heathen error as if he should say Bell l. 2. de Imag. c. 9. Loqui de simulachris supposito errore Gentilium quando quis putet simulachrum esse Deum accedit ut adoret when any thinking the Image to be God as the Heathens did comes to adore and pray As if there were no danger of withdrawing the minde so but in them that think the Image to be God But all Heathens did not think so as we shall see below and St. Aug. puts his question generally of all and subjoyns the example of those that could not think the Image to be the thing it represented but might see them different and distant one from the other at the same time as the Sun it self and the Image of it Aug. ibid. Homines talibus superstitionibus obligati ad ipsum solem plerumque dorsum ponentes preces fundunt statuae They saith he that are engaged to such superstitions do often turn their backs to the Sun it self and pour out their prayers to the statue or Image of it and then St. August tels us the danger of it which is common to Heathen or Christians Contra hunc affectum quo humana infirmitas facile capi potest cantat Scriptura Aug. ibid. that will binde themselves to such superstition Against this affection arising from the use of the Image wherewith humane infirmity may be easily taken the Scripture cryes out telling them often They are the works of mens hands And a little after upon the same Psalm shews the danger that arises Valet in affectibus miserorum similis vivenâ—â— forma Aug. ibid. by reason of the similitude The likeness saith he which the Image hath to One living much prevails upon the affections of silly miserable men And thus much out of St. Aug. against the worship of Images and to shew the danger of using them in holy worship Let us hear what St. Gregory Bishop of Rome saith In his time which was about 600 years after Christ they were gotten into Churches for the historical use that might be made of them but not yet obtained any worship Serenus Bishop of Marscilles had caused some Images to be broken because he saw the people inclined to give them worship Greg. Epist l. 9. Ep 9. Gregory Bishop of Rome writes to him commending him in that he forbad them to be worshiped but not praising him for breaking them Bel. de Imag l. 2. c. 16. Vsum superstitiosum quo Imagines coluntur ut Dii The Cardinal answers with their usual limitation of worship That their Bishop forbad only the superstitious use of worshiping Images as Gods when as its plain to him that reads the Epistle he simply forbids the worship by such sayings Adorare omnibus modis devita by all waies possble avoid the adoring of them and all the use he allows of them is historical as appears by many passages in that Epistle that speak that use the only reason of having and retaining them as for example Aliud est adorare aliud per Picturae historiam quid sit adorandum addiscere Greg ibid. It is one thing saith he to adore another thing to learn by the history of the Picture what is to be adored Again They were not placed in the Church ad adorandum for worship but ad instruendas solummodo only for Instructing of the minds of the simple After this he