and they have then good reason as they do to put up more frequent Prayers to her than to God or Christ himself And whether they do not believe this and that at this very day let any one judge from these passages in the Contemplations of the Life and Glory of the Holy Mary which is lately published in English Permissu Superiorum There p. 7. he tell us that God hath by a Solemn Covenant pronounced Mary to be the Treasury of Wisdom Grace and Sanctity under Jesus So that whatever Gifts are bestowed upon us by Jesus we receive them by the Mediation of Mary No one being gracious to Jesus who is not devoted to Mary nor hath any one been specially confident of the Patronage of Mary who hath not through her received a special Blessing from Jesus Whence it is one great mark of the Predestination of the Elect to be singularly Devoted to Mary since she hath a full Power as a Mother to obtain of Jesus whatever he can ask of God the Father and is comprehended within the Sphere of man's Predestination to Glory Redemption from Sin and Regeneration by Grace Neither hath any one petitioned Mary who was refused by Jesus nor trusted in Mary and was abandoned by Jesus A little after he directs the Devotes of the Virgin to have a firm and unshaken confidence in her Patronage amidst the greatest of our inward Conflicts with Sensuality and outward Tribulations from the adverse Casualties of this Life through a strong Judgment of her eminent Power within the Empire of Jesus grounded upon the singular Prerogative of her Divine Maternity for by vertue thereof no State of man can be so unhappy through the malice of Satan the heats of our Passions or the Enormity of Sin which exceeds her Love towards the Disciples of Jesus or the efficacy of her Mediation for us unto Jesus So that though the condition of some great Sinners may be so deplorable that all the limited Excellency Merits and Power of all the Saints and Angels cannot effectually bend the Mercies of Jesus to receive them yet such is the acceptableness of the Mother of Jesus to Jesus that whoever is under the Verge of her Protection may confide in her Intercessions to Jesus He denying no Favour to her whereby the Wonders of man's Predestination and Redemption through Jesus may be magnified and promoted So that the Blessed Virgin is more Powerful than all the Saints and Angels in Heaven she has all the Power of Christ all his Grace and Mercy in her hands and can dispense it to such Sinners whom Christ would not pity and relieve without her and therefore is a more powerful Patroness of Sinners than Christ himself is And therefore he might well add in the next place that all these Blessings flow from Jesus to all through Mary and may therefore justly refer them all to her as to the most effectual Instrument Channel and Conveyance of all Now if this be true Representing it is no Mis-representation to say that a Papist believes the Virgin Mary to be much more Powerful in Heaven than Christ not that she has any Power of her own but that she can more powerfully and effectually bend the Mercies of Jesus to relieve Sinners than the mercies of Jesus can bend themselves without her SECT V. IMAGES THAT the Worship of Images as it was practised by the Heathens is Idolatry Monsieur de Meaux and the Representer suppose and therefore their Business is to give such an account of the Worship of Images as practised in the Church of Rome as to distinguish themselves from Heathen Idolaters To this purpose the Bishop tells us The Council of Trent forbids us expresly to believe any Divinity or Virtue in them for which they ought to be reverenced to demand any favour of them or to put any trust in them and ordains That all the Honour which is given to them should be referred to the Saints themselves which are represented by them That the Honour we render Images is grounded upon their exciting in us the remembrance of those they represent That by humbling our selves before the Image of Christ crucified we show what is our submission to our Saviour So that to speak precisely and according to the Ecclesiastical Stile when we honour the Image of an Apostle or Martyr our intention is not so much to honour the Image as to honour the Apostle or Martyr in the presence of the Image Thus the Pontifical tells us and the Council of Trent expresses the same thing when it says The Honour we render to Images has such a reference to those they represent that by the means of those Images which we kiss and before which we kneel we adore Jesus Christ and honour the Saints whose Types they are To the same purpose the Representer speaks and almost in the same words So that the Sum of their Apology is this That they do not believe Images to have any Divinity in them or to be Gods and therefore do not pray to nor put their trust in the Image nor so much honour the Image in those external Expressions of Reverence they pay to it by kissing it and kneeling before it as Christ or the Saint whom the Image represents and the usefulness of Images to excite in us the remembrance of those whom we love and honour is a justifiable Reason of that Honour we pay to them This is a Matter of very great consequence and deserves to be carefully stated and therefore I shall strictly examine Whether this Exposition will justify the worship of Images and sufficiently distinguish the Worship of the Ch. of Rome from that Worship which the Heathens gave to their Images Monsieur de Meaux pretends by his Exposition of the Doctrines of the Church of Rome to cut off Objections and Disputes that is so to state the Matter that there may be no place for those Objections which Protestants commonly urge against worshipping Images But I do not see that he has made any Essay of this Nature in the Point of Image-Worship but has left both all the Disputes among themselves and with Protestants untouched The Objections which Protestants urge against the Worship of Images as taught and practised in the Church of Rome are principally these four 1. That it is expresly forbid by the second Commandment without any limitation or exception 2. That the Heathens are in Scripture charged with Idolatry in the Worship of Images 3. That it is a violation of the Divine Majesty crimen lesse Majestatis to represent God by a material and sensless Image or Picture 4. That a visible Object of Worship though considered only as a Representation is expresly contrary to the Law of Moses and especially to the spiritual Nature of the Christian Worship Now I do not see how the Bishop's Exposition takes off any of these Objections which after all that he hath said are in full force still as I shall particularly
who teach these Doctrines disown for M. Daille himself in the place quoted by the Bishop charges the Opinion of the Lutherans and of the Church of Rome about the manner of Christ's Presence in the Sacrament with inferring the destruction of the Humanity of Jesus Christ and therefore the Bishop concludes too much when he infers It is then a certain Maxime established amongst them that they must not in these cases look upon the Consequences which may be drawn from a Doctrine but purely upon what he proposes and acknowledges who teaches it But the use M. Daille makes of it is only this That when such ill Consequences as mens Doctrines are justly chargeable with have no ill influence upon Worship or as he speaks no poyson in them if they disown such Consequences this ought not to break Christian Communion And therefore though no man ought to be received into the Communion of the Church who denies the Humanity of Jesus Christ yet the National Synod at Charenton admits Lutherans to the Holy Table because whatever might be inferred from their Doctrine yet they expresly owned the Humanity of Christ and this Doctrinal Consequence was a meer Speculative Error which made no change at all in Acts of Worship but when the Consequences are not meerly speculative but practical and do not so much concern what other men believe and think as what we our selves are to do as it is in the Worship of Saints and Images and the Host c. to say that we must have no regard to Consequences if the Church disowns them is to say that we must not consider the nature and tendency of our Actions nor what they are in Gods account but only what the Church thinks of them and therefore though we will not charge the Church of Rome with believing any Consequences which she disowns yet if her Doctrines and Practices corrupt the Christian Faith and Worship it is fit to charge her with such Corruptions and if the Charge be just though she disown it it will justifie our Separation from her Communion SECT III. Religious Worship is terminated in God alone THE account the Bishop gives of that Interior Adoration which is due to God alone is very sound and Orthodox that it consists principally in believing he is the Creator and Lord of all things and in adhering to him with all the powers of our Soul by Faith Hope and Charity as to him alone who can render us happy by the Communication of an infinite Good which is himself But there are two things I except against in this Section as not fairly stated First concerning the exteriour marks of Adoration Secondly concerning the terminating of Religious Worship As for the first he tells us This interiour Adoration which we render unto God in Spirit and in Truth has its exterior marks of which the principal is Sacrifice which cannot be offered to any but to God And with respect to the second he tells us The same Church teaches us that all Religious Worship ought to terminate in God as its necessary End and that if the Honour which she renders to the Blessed Virgin and to the Saints may in some sence be called Religious it is for its necessary relation to God The Bishop very well knew that this is the main Seat of the Controversie between us and had he intended by his Exposition to have put an end to our disputes he should have taken a little more care about this Point for as he has now stated it he has left the matter just as he found it We say that all Religious Worship ought not only to terminate in God as its necessary End but that God is the sole and immediate Object of all Religious Worship and that we must worship none besides him as our Saviour expounds the Law Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Matth. 4. We have always denied any relative Worship to be due to Creatures for to worship Creatures is to make them Gods and it is no honour to the Supreme God to advance his own Creatures to divine Honours to make more though inferiour Gods for God's sake We say all external Acts of Religious Worship are peculiar and appropriate to God as well as Sacrifice for since we must worship none but God whatever can be called Religious Worship must be given to none besides him and the Bishop has not dealt plainly in this matter he says that Sacrifice can be offered to none but God but he has not told us what he thinks of other external Acts of Worship whether they may be paid to some excellent Creatures for since Sacrifice is not a natural but instituted Worship if nothing but Sacrifice is peculiar to God then all external natural Worship is common to God and Creatures and then in the state of nature there could be no external and visible Difference between the worship of God and Creatures nor had there been any under the Gospel neither had not Christ instituted his last Supper which the Church of Rome has transformed into a Sacrifice of his natural Flesh and Blood Thus when he says that all Religious Worship ought to terminate in God as its necessary end this seems to me an ambiguous Expression for Worship properly terminates in the Object to which it is given and in this sense If all Religious Worship must terminate in God then all Religious Worship must be given to God and to none else which is the true Catholick Faith that God is only to be worshipped But then what becomes of that Religious Worship which is given to the Virgin Mary and Saints in relation to God Does not this Worship which is given to them terminate in them and not in God Are not they the immediate and proper Objects of that Worship which is given to them And does not the Object terminate the Worship Is God the Object of that Worship which they give to the Saints and Blessed Virgin Then they either give that inferior Degree of Worship to God which is proper for Creatures which is an affront to his Majesty and Greatness or they give that Worship to Creatures which is proper to God which is Idolatry Which plainly shews that that Worship which is given to Creatures is terminated in those Creatures to which it is given and therefore if any degree of Religious Worship be given to Creatures all Religious Worship does not terminate in God as he said it must and if all Religious Worship must terminate in God then no Religious Worship must be given to Creatures as he grants it may to the Virgin Mary and Saints Yes you will say that Worship which is given to the Saints and Blessed Virgin terminates in God because it is given them upon account of their Relation to God but this is a great mistake their Relation to God can only serve for a Reason why they are worshipped but cannot terminate that worship on God which
is given to them because not God but they themselves are the Object and the ultimate Object of that Worship which is given to them Though we should grant that God is honoured by that Worship which is given to some excellent Creatures who are his Friends and Favourites yet the Honour we do to God in this is of a very different nature from that Worship which we pay to Creatures it does not consist in this that the worship we give to Creatures is terminated on God for it is terminated upon those Creatures whom we worship but the Honour must consist in the Reason of our worship that we worship them for God's sake It is an honour to God by Interpretation and Consequence as we intend it for God's Honour or as God is pleased to think himself honoured by it but it is no act of Worship to God and therefore not terminated on him The Worship can go no further than its proper Object though the Reason of the Worship may For there is a great deal of difference between an Object and a Medium of Worship a Medium of Worship which is only a representative Object receives our Worship but does not terminate it but convey it to that Being it represents because it is worshipped only in the place and stead of another as it is in that Worship which is given to the Images of Christ and the Saints which some Divines of the Church of Rome tell us is not terminated on the Images but on Christ or the Saints represented by those Images but a proper Object of Worship which receives worship in its own proper person for whatsoever reason it is worshipped it terminates the Worship the Worship which is given to it goes not beyond it self though the Reason of the Worship may reach farther and be thought to reflect some Honour upon God and to testifie our Love and Reverence for him by that Worship we pay to those who are dear to him So that if we do give Religious Worship to the Virgin Mary and Saints such Worship is terminated on them and then all Religious Worship is not terminated on God as he says the Church of Rome teaches it must be which yet teaches also the worship of Saints and the Blessed Virgin Methinks he should have taken care to have stated this matter a little plainer For if he cannot reconcile the Doctrine and Practice of the Church together I fear his Exposition will rather increase than end Controversies Thus how doubtfully does he speak If the Honour she renders to the Blessed Virgin and to the Saints may in some sense be called Religious it is for its necessary Relation to God Why does he not tell us plainly whether this Honour the Church of Rome gives to Saints and the Virgin be Religious or not and in what sense it may be called Religious Honour If he undertake to expound the Catholick Faith why does he not do it Why does he speak so cautiously As if he were afraid to own what the Faith of the Church is in this point Which yet is a very material one and very necessary to be truly stated Thus I can understand how the Honour which is given to Creatures may have Relation to God viz. because we honour them for God's Sake and upon account of their Relation to him but I do not understand how this relation to God makes the Honour of Creatures a Religious Honour For though we honour Creatures for God's Sake yet the Honour we give to Creatures must be sutable to their own Natures and therefore not that Religious Honour which is proper to God only As when we honour a man for the sake of our Father or our Prince we do not give him that Honour which is proper to our Father or our Prince though we honour him for their Sakes And therefore if the Church of Rome does give Religious Honour to any Creatures it will not justifie her in giving religious Honour to Creatures that she honours them for God's Sake for Creatures are Creatures still though never so nearly related to God and therefore not capable of Religious Honours So that I do not see how this Explication if it may be so called takes off any Objection that was ever made against the Church of Rome about the Object of Religious Worship For if by all Religious Worship being terminated on God he means that no other Being must be religiously worshipped but only God then this is an invincible Objection against that Religious Worship which the Church of Rome gives to the Blessed Virgin and to Saints and Angels If he means by it that Religious Worship may be given to other Beings besides God so it be all terminated in God then all the other Objections against worshipping any other Being besides God are in full force still notwithstanding his Explication their Relation to God will not justifie the Religious Worship of Creatures and it is contrary to all Sense and Reason to say That the Worship which is given to Creatures is terminated on God SECT IV. Invocation of Saints THere are two great Opinions against that Worship which the Church of Rome gives to Saints departed who now reign with Christ in Heaven as the Council of Trent teaches 1. That it is to give them that Religious Worship which is due only to God 2. That it makes them our Mediators and Intercessors in Heaven which is an Honour peculiar to Christ. Now M. de Meaux and after him the Author of the Character think to remove these Objections only by explaining the Doctrine of their Church about this matter and I shall distinctly consider what they say to each of these 1. As for the first That in praying to Saints they do not give them that Worship which is due only to God they think is evident from hence That the Council of Trent and the Catechism ad Parochos teaches them only to pray to Saints to pray for them The Bishop takes great pains to prove this to be the sense of the Council and therefore that in what terms soever those Prayers which we address to Saints are couched the Intention of the Church and of her Faithful reduces them always to this Form Now I will not dispute this matter at present but refer my Reader to the Answer to a Papist misrepresented But let us suppose that this is all the Church of Rome intends by it that we should only pray to the Saints to pray for us what advantage can they make of this Yes says the Advertisement before the Bishops Exposition p. 12. To pray to Saints only to pray for us is a kind of Prayer which by its own nature is so far from being reserved by an Independent Being to himself it can never be addressed to him That is we must never pray to God to pray for us and therefore such a Prayer is no part of that Worship which is due to God And he adds If this Form of Prayer
Image is terminated on the Image as its own proper and peculiar Worship as Catharinus and Bellarmine and all of this way acknowledg who reject Thomas his Doctrine of worshipping the Image with the worship of the Prototype represented by it because this is not properly the Worship of the Image but of the Prototype and therefore that the Image may be sure to be worshipped they give it an inferior degree of Worship which terminates on it self Now how Christ should be worshipped in that Worship which terminates on his Image that is how that Worship which ends in the Image and goes no farther should pass through the Image and end in Christ as it must do if Christ be worshipped in the Image is past my understanding as all Contradictions are But they refer the Worship of the Image to the Prototype But it is worth enquiring how they do it Do they intend the Worship they give to the Image for Christ that is Do they intend to worship Christ in that Worship they give to his Image No they can't do that because they give only an inferior degree of Worship to the Image which is not worthy of Christ not a Worship proper for him but only for his Image but they worship the Image for the sake of Christ and this they take to be an Honour to Christ to worship his Image but this is not to worship Christ in or by his Image for in this way Christ is not worshipped in that Worship we give to his Image but it is to worship the Image for Christ's sake which is by interpretation an Honour to Christ as any respect we show to the Image of the King argues our Esteem and Honour for our King whose Image it is but these two differ as much as to honour Christ in our Actions and to worship him as to do something which is by interpretation an Honour to Christ and to make our immediate Addresses to offer up our Prayers and Thanksgivings to him Every thing we do for the Honour of Christ is not presently an Act of Worship and therefore though we should grant that we honour Christ in the Worship of his Image it does not follow that therefore we worship him in worshipping his Image when we give no Worship at all to him but only to his Image which plainly shows that in this way they do not worship Christ by his Image but only worship the Image for Christ's sake Which is a plain Argument to me that though this Way has very great and learned Advocates yet it cannot be the meaning of the Council of Trent because it is not reconcileable with the Practice of the Church of Rome which prays every day to Christ and the blessed Virgin to Saints and Martyrs before their Images in such terms as are proper only to be used to themselves which besides the other Faults of it is horrid Non-sense if they do not intend to worship Christ and the Saints in their Images Much less do those worship the Prototypes in their Images who only use Images as helps to Memory and to excite devout Affections in them that at the sight of the Image they may offer up more fervent Prayers to God or Christ for though this practice may and has a great many other Faults in it yet this is neither in the intention of the Worshipper to worship the Image nor the Exemplar by the Image Monsieur de Meaux by some Expressions he uses would perswade his Readers that this is all the Church of Rome intends in the use of Images and yet he owns the Doctrine of the Council of Trent That the Honour of the Image is referred to the Prototype because by the Images which we kiss and before which we uncover our Heads and prostrate our selves we adore Christ and worship the Saints whose Likeness they bear Which plainly signifies that we worship Christ and the Saints in the worship of their Images and therefore though Images may be helps to Memory also yet they must be honoured and worshipped that Christ and his Saints may be worshipped in them and by them which is a very different thing from being bare Signs to help our Memories and quicken-our Devotions There is no need of Consecration for this End and the Church takes no notice of this use of them in her Forms of Consecration These are all the Pretences I have met with for the use of Images in Religious Worship and it is evident from what I have said that there is no other sense wherein God or Christ can be said to be worshipped by an Image but only as the Image receives the Worship due to Christ in his Name and Stead as if it were his legal Proxy and Representative which as I have shewed is the true Interpretation both of the Doctrine of Durandus and Monsieur de Meaux and Thomas in this Matter 2dly I am now to show that it is in this Notion the Scripture forbids the worship of Images as the Representatives of God or any Divine Being to receive our Worship in God's Name and Stead It is true indeed the 2d Commandment which forbids the worship of Images takes no notice of the Distinctions of the Schools in what Notion an Image is worshipped or what kind and degree of Worship is given to it but the words are so large and general as to exclude all use of Images in Religious Worship The Worship which is expresly forbidden in the Commandment to be given to Images is only the External Acts of Worship such as to bow down to them which is the very least that can be done if Men make any use of Images in Religious Worship The Images which are forbidden to be worshipped are all sorts of Images whatever The likeness of any Thing which is in Heaven above or in the Earth beneath or in the Water under the Earth And how extravagant soever Mens Fancies are they cannot well form any Image but must be like to some of these things either in whole or in part But the Commandment takes no notice of Mens different Opinions about Images whether they look upon them as Gods or Representatives of God or helps to Memory and Devotion for since the design of the Commandment is to forbid the use of Images in Religious Worship it was dangerous to leave any room for Distinctions which is to make every Man judg what is an Innocent and what is a sinful use of Images which would utterly evacuate the Law for Men of Wit can find out some Apology or other for the grossest Superstitions As for instance I find a notable Criticism in the Advertisement to Monsieur de Meaux his Exposition p. 14. That the Images forbidden in the second Commandment are those which are forbidden to be made as well as to be worshipped The Consequence of which is That the Worship of such Images as may be lawfully made is not forbidden in this Law and then indeed there is room enough for