where accuse the Arians of Idolatry for Worshipping of Jesus Christ for this very Reason because they owned him not to be God or at least not the Supreme God from whence it plainly appears that they had the same Notions in this Case that we now have That Men may be guilty of Idolatry in giving Divine Worship to what they believe is not God Thirdly The Apostle calls Covetousness Idolatry which tho' it be a figurative Expression yet however denotes to us the thing for which I am now pleading The Covetous Man does not look upon his Money to be his God or intend to give it any of that Worship he thinks due to God I believe no Covetous Man in the World can be justly charged with either of these but because he places his Heart and his Affections upon it which ought to be given to none but God because his Money is the thing in which he puts his trust and his confidence therefore it is that he is said to make an Idol of it and to be guilty of Idolatry And so it is as to the Worshipping of Saints tho' their Worshippers know very well that they are not Gods yet because they give them the Worship of God that outward Adoration and inward Reverence hope trust and dependance which are due only to God they do by that make them Idols and are justly chargeable with Idolatry I now proceed to the Second Point To shew that the Worship which the Church of Rome gives to the Blessed Virgin and other Saints by the Invocation practised among them is Divine Worship such as ought to be given to none but God We are not concern'd at present to enquire into the Doctrine of the Church of Rome but into the Practice that being the thing particularly Censur'd in the Test-Act tho' indeed the Practice of any Church is the best Exposition of Her Doctrine The Council of Trent leaves this Matter in general Terms determines that we must seek the help and aid of the Saints Opem Auxiliumque Sess 25. but does not fix the measures of it However since it does not Censure what was then the Common Practice of that Church we may take it for granted that the meaning of the Council was that we must seek their aid and help in the Methods which were then in use for if they disapproved of what was then commonly Practised it concerned them much to speak out as to set their own People right and to keep them out of dangerous Practices so also to vindicate the Honour of their Church which was then openly charged with Idolatry upon account of those Practices We agree with the Church of Rome in this That we ought to have a great honour and respect for the Saints of God That we ought to love their Memory to endeavour to imitate the good Examples they have left us and to bless God for the Benefits he has bestowed upon the Church by their means And above other Saints we ought to have a great esteem and value for the Blessed Virgin who had the Honour to be the Mother of our Lord and by that to be so nearly concerned in the greatest Blessing that ever was bestowed upon the World But we differ from that Church in this That they Adore the Saints and Pray to them and that not as one Friend would desire another to Pray for him but with all the solemn Ceremonies and Circumstances of Prayer and with the very same with which they pray to God they do it in their Churches Kneeling and with their Eyes lift up to Heaven and with all the signs of Devotion which can be shewed not only from one Creature to another but from a Creature to its Creator They make Vows to them burn Incense to their Images dedicate themselves to their Service make Offerings to them and the like They pray to them directly to bestow Blessings upon them Thus in the Office of the Blessed Virgin She is not only called the Gate of Heaven but she is intreated to loose the bonds of the Gvilty to give light to the Blind and to drive away our Evils and to shew her self to be a Mother They pray to her therein for Purity of Life and a safe Conduct to Heaven She is commonly called the Queen of Heaven the Mother of Mercy and which is most Shameful of all The Psalms of David Composed for the Honour of God and which contain the highest strains of Devotion which a Creature can give to God are by a Saint of that Church Bonaventura turned to the Honour of the Virgin by putting her Name where the Name of God is put by David And this was neither Censured by the Council of Trent nor has been by any Pope that I can hear of to this Day but on the contrary the Author of it has been Canonized and the Book is in Common use which perhaps is one of the blackest pieces of Idolatry that ever was in the VVorld And tho' a Church must not always bear the Guilt of what is publish'd by private Persons in her Communion tho' it do pass without Censure Yet considering how careful that Church has been in many Matters of much less moment especially where her own Authority is concerned and how solicitous they are to keep Books that make against them out of the Hands of their People it looks at least like espousing the Blasphemies and Idolatrous Prayers and Praises of it to let this Book go so freely about without Censure and to incourage it so far as to make the Author of it a Saint These and many other Instances might be given of the Worship they give to the Blessed Virgin and tho' they are somewhat more modest with relation to other Saints yet what I have taken notice of already may sufficiently shew that they give them the VVorship which God has appropriated to himself I would only therefore mention further that in many Instances they pray to them to bestow those Blessings which only God can give such as to open the Gates of Heaven to unty the bonds of their Iniquity to heal their spiritual Maladies and many other of the same Nature of which I shall give them Examples at large if required or if I find it necessary to confirm any thing that I have now said I now proceed to take notice of some of those Reasons we have to prove that this Invocation is part of that Worship which God has appropriated to himself and which consequently cannot be given to any Creature without the Crime of Idolatry 1. I desire it may be considered that the Scripture does every where speak of Prayer as applied to God and to none else and that without the least intimation of any such Distinctions as are made use of in the Church of Rome VVe have in the Old Testament the History of the Church of God for near 4000 Years and in all that time there is not the least instance or intimation of
Fathers they would be as confidently quoted for the Proof of Transubstantiation as any Sayings of the Fathers now are And this shews us how this Doctrine tho' monstrous in it self might under the Covert of such General Expressions without any great stir or bustle insensibly creep into the Church especially in very Ignorant and Superstitions Times tho' after all our Divines have sufficiently traced the footsteps of it and shewed the progress it made and the opposition it met with in the World before it could be Established The next thing to be spoken to is the Idolatry of the Church of Rome In the Sacrfice of the Mass and in the Invocation of the Blessed Virgin and of other Saints as it is practised in that Church Now Idolatry may be of two sorts I. When People worship any thing for the Supreme God which really is not so II. When they give that Worship to any Creature which is due only to God and which he has appropriated to himself As to the first sort of Idolatry that of Worshiping some thing as the Supreme God which realy is not so we do not charge the Church of Rome with it unless perhaps the worshipping of what is but Bread and Wine in the Sacrament instead of Jesus Christ may come under that head I say perhaps here because I would not enter into any thing besides the main cause that may be contested for tho' Jesus Christ be God and they worship some thing as Jesus Christ which is not so yet the mistake being chiefly about his Human Nature I would not positively affirm a thing which may bring on any dispute which is not to our purpose This they do not deny that they give the highest Divine Worship which they call Latria to that Object which they take into their hands and put into their Mouths in receiving this Sacrament which I shall at present call Idolatry but with a promise to recant it whensoever they shall answer the Reasons I have given to prove that what they thus Adore is only Bread and Wine or whenever they shall give me a more proper Name by which I may call that great Sin of giving the highest Divine Worship to a Creature The truth is that such a Worship may not only be called Idolatry but the most absurd and senseless Idolatry that ever the World fell into But this I shall not now insist upon having spoken so much already to that which is the foundation of it the Doctrine of Transubstantiation The other Matter in which we charge them with Idolatry is the Invocation of the Blessed Virgin and other Saints Now in this we do not charge them with owning any of those to be God but only with giving them that Worship and Honour which cannot lawfully be given to any thing which is but a Creature In speaking to this I shall consider these Two Things 1. Whether the giving to a Creature the Worship due only to God may not be properly termed Idolatry tho' at the same time we pay that Worship we own it not to be God but a Creature 2. Whether the Worship given to Saints by the Invocation practised in the Church of Rome be of that sort such as God has appropriated to himself and consequently such as becomes Idolatrous when applied to a Creature 1. As to the first of these Those of the Roman Church cannot deny but it must be a very great Sin to give the Worship of God to Creatures but they deny it to be properly Idolatry We on the other side grant that it is not Idolatry in the highest sense of the Word and in the sense in which they commonly understand it viz. The owning a Creature to be God So that so far we are agreed but then we say that Word may be used in a lower sense to denote what they grant to be a Sin as well as we but will not call it by that Name so that our difference in this Matter is only about the use of a Word Now we think our selves in the right in the use of this Word upon these Accounts 1. Because we have no other Name to express that which is not denied to be a very great Sin The giving God's Worship to Creatures and having no peculiar Name for it we think it not improper to give it the Name of that Sin which is of nearest affinity to it and of the same general kind as is done in many other Cases Thus our Saviour calls looking upon a Woman to lust after her by the name of Adultery and the like The next step to owning a Creature to be God is to give it the Worship due to God and therefore we think it not at all improper to call these two Sins by the same general Name especially having no Word in our Language more proper by which we may express it 2. We think our selves fully justified in the expression because the Scripture does every where charge the Heathen Worship of their Gods and Images in general with the Crime of Idolatry tho nothing can be more apparent than that many of the Heathen owned only one Supreme God and that all of them looked upon many of the Gods whom they Worshipped not as Supreme but as Gods of an Inferior Nature and had much the same Opinion of them as the Romanists have now of Saints and Angels and had the very same pretences and excuses for the Worshipping of them which the Romanists make use of to defend themselves They owned many of their Gods to have been born and to have dyed and it was hardly possible to look upon any such to be the Supreme God In a Word There is nothing more evident than this that they had several Ranks and Orders and Degrees among their Gods and it was impossible to look upon all these to be Supreme And yet the Scripture every where without any distinction charges their whole Worship with Idolatry and so do the Primitive Fathers as well as the Scriptures particularly they thought it to be Idolatry to throw a little Incense into the Fire before the Statues of their Emperors From whence we may plainly inferr these Two Things First That they thought that there might be Idolatry in giving such Worship as was appropriated to God to Creatures tho' they were not pretended to be any thing else but Creatures only Creatures highly exalted and in high Favour with God as Saints and Angels are supposed to be Secondly That they looked upon the offering of Incense to be a part of Worship appropriated to God and that could not be given to a Creature without the Crime of Idolatry which is a Matter the Church of Rome have reason to consider well of who offer it every Day to those who however they may have been better Men are certainly no more Gods than the Heathen Emperors were To conclude this Matter The sense of the Primitive Church in the business of Idolatry is plainly seen in this that they every
any Prayer put up to any Creature It may be it will be said That the Saints were not then in Heaven and so were not in a condition to hear the Prayers that should be put up to them and had not so much Favour with God as they may be supposed to have now since the Resurrection of Christ that he has admitted them so nearly into his Presence Now in Answer to this I shall not at present pretend to determine whether the Saints of the Old Testament were in Heaven before Christ's Resurrection or not nor whether they and other Saints since are there now because a great many Christians of no mean Authority in the Church of God have been of different Opinions in these Matters only I think these two or three Things are very plain 1. That Enoch and Elias were supposed by a great many before our Saviour's time to be in Heaven and they must have been looked upon by them to be very great Favourites of God by being taken out of this World in so strange and wonderful a manner as the Scripture tells us they were and yet we hear as little of praying to them as to any other Person 2. Supposing it not agreed upon then whether Saints were in Heaven yet all agreed that the Angels were And they were altogether as well capacitated to hear and answer Prayers which should have been put up to them then as they are now and yet we find as little of Mens praying to Angels as they did to Saints in those Times 3. Whatever Reason can be assigned for praying to Creatures now would have held as well then whatever necessity or conveniency or advantage or fitness there may be in it were all the same and indeed much greater then than they are now upon these Two Accounts 1. Because the Christian Religion is of it self a State of much greater Perfection than any Dispensation that was before it God has in it revealed himself more clearly and plainly to the World has more evidenced his Love and Tenderness to Mankind has given us greater incouragements to draw near to him He speaks to us in the Gospel as a Father to his Children as a reconciled Father in Jesus Christ and therefore accordingly in that Form of Prayer which our Saviour has left us that is the Appellation which he has taught us to make use of Our Father which art in Heaven Now why should a Child be afraid to approach the Presence of his Father Or what need has he of any body to introduce him Under the Jewish Dispensation when the Law was given with Thunderings and Lightnings when God was called by the terrible Name of the Lord of Hosts there might be more reason to think of some body to introduce them to his Presence which yet we do not find was ever recommended or practised among them How much more may Christians come with boldness to the Throne of Mercy and expect to find Grace to help in time of need But what is more considerable 2. Christians have Christ for their Mediator who is able to save to the uttermost all those that come to God by him He is in Heaven ready to plead their cause and to get their Prayers heard and their Persons accepted and they that have such an Advocate need not fly to any else But it was not so with the Church before Christ and therefore if the thing had been at all lawful they had much more reason to make Saints and Angels their Patrons than Christians have And yet we see that in the Account which we have in the Bible of the Church of God before Christ for near 4000 Years there is not the least hint of any thing of this kind 3. What I have said already that all along in the Old Testament Prayer is appropriated to God and that without any reserve or distinction may be sufficient to shew the Mind of God in that Case But I have this further to add That the same Scripture adds with the same general words condemn as Idolatrous all the Old Heathen Worship Now I have shewed before that much of this Worship was paid to Creatures under the same Notions and Apprehensions that those of the Church of Rome Worship Saints and Angels indeed there was this difference that most of those Worshipped in the Church of Rome were probably good Creatures as most of those whom the Heathens Worshipped were bad ones and it may be Devils But this distinction of good or bad Creatures may make the Worship more or less Impious but not more or less Idolatrous whatever will make it Idolatry in the one Case will make it so in the other The Worship appropriated to God is no more due to a good Creature than it is to a bad one since therefore I have shewed that the Scripture every where condemns the Worship which the Heathen gave to what they owned not to be God and which they did not intend to Worship as the Supreme God I say since this is condemned not only as Impious for choosing ill Creatures but as Idolatrous for giving what belonged only to God this must equally prove all Creature Worship to be Idolatrous 4. This Creature Worship is as litle heard of in the New Testament as it is in the Old Heard of it is indeed but what approbation it met with we may see by considering these particulars The first Instance is that of the Devil desiring our Saviour to worship him upon promise to give him all the Kingdoms of the World But let us see what our Saviour answers he does not put him off with telling him either the Dignity of his own Person or the unfitness of the thing in Worshipping him because he was a Devil but he gives such a Reason as will hold against all Worshipping of Creatures Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve From which words I would observe these Two Things 1. That the Worship which the Devil desires and which our Saviour says must be given only to God was not to offer Sacrifice to him which the Writers of the Church of Rome make the only outward Worship appropriated to God but it was to fall down and adore him from whence we may inferr that to fall down and adore any Creature must be Idolatry which part of Worship its apparent the Church of Rome give to their Saints and Angels 2. I would observe here that the Devil did not pretend to be the Supreme God but plainly the contrary for when he shews our Saviour all the Kingdoms of the World he tells him that all these things were given to him Luke 4.6 in which he plainly professes not a Supreme But a Delegated Power so that had not our Saviour in his Answer condemned the Worship of Creatures tho' owned and acknowledged to be Creatures he had not given a full Answer to the Devil for the Devil did not desire to be Worshipped as the Supreme God Another
Instance we have of this kind is that of St. John in the Revelations falling down to Worship the Angel who we see puts him off it with the same kind of general Words that our Saviour uses in the former Instance See thou do it not I am thy fellow servant Worship God Rev. 22.18.19 Here I would observe as in the former Case that the Worship which the Angel rejects and appropriates to God is falling down at his feet to Adore him And in the next place I would observe that had Adoration been due to an Angel the true Answer to St. John had been that he should have a care not to mistake him to be God who was but an Angel and so give him more than was due to him but we see he throws off the whole without any reserve or distinction and for a Reason that will hold against all Creature Worship that he was his Fellow-servant In a word it had been no great secret for the Angel to tell St. John that God was to be Worshipped or that God only was to be Worshipped with an inward apprehension of his being God neither of these were any great Mystery or to the purpose And therefore his meaning must be that Religious Worship such as that Adoration was ought to be given to none but God I shall name but one more place of Scripture in which this Creature Worship is taken notice of and that is Coloss 2.18 Let no man beguile you of your reward by a voluntary humility and Worshipping of Angels The Apostle in this and the following Verses makes use of Two Arguments against the Worshipping of Angels First that it is a voluntary Humility that is tho' Men may pretend a great deal of Humility that it is not fit for such mean Creatures as they to go directly into the Presence of God but that they ought to apply to the Angels of God to be their Introducers yet all this is Humility of their own inventing such as God has not required at their hands 2. That this Worshipping of Angels is leaving Christ their Head He is the only Mediator betwixt God and Men and therefore applying to any other is leaving him who is the Head of the Church and then no wonder if it beguile us of our reward This Argument is very plain and very strong against the practice of Praying to Saints or Angels and it hath this one thing very observable in it That if this Text proves it unlawful to set up any more Mediators but Jesus Christ it must be understood of Mediators of Intercession for no body could so much as pretend that Angels were Mediators of Redemption as those of the Church of Rome without any ground at all make the distinction I might shew farther the Idolatry of this Practice of praying to Saints and Angels from this that it must suppose Divine Perfections in the Creatures to whom we pray as of Power to be able to supply our Wants especially in those Prayers that are put up to them directly to beg such or such Blessings from them and so of Knowledge because Prayer at least Mental Prayer supposes that the Persons we pray to know our Hearts and the secret thoughts and sincerity or insincerity of all the Men and Women in the World and that they can perfectly attend to them all at the same time which are Perfections that the Scripture never attributes to any but God and in the Nature of the thing it is hardly conceivable of any Creature but I shall content my self to have named these things and shall conclude this whole Matter with just proposing those two short Considerations 1. I desire it may be considered that in the Church of Rome there is no External part of Religion appropriated to God and incommunicable to Creatures but the Sacrifice of the Mass and if in the preceding Discourses I have overthrown the foundation of that there is then nothing at all remaining 2. I desire it may be considered that the Reasons commonly given to justify Prayers to Saints and Angels would if well followed hinder Men from ever praying to God at all as in fact this has much estranged Men from God in those Countries where they have had no Protestants among them to make them ashamed of it and even nearer our selves I believe we may justly say that at least Ten Prayers are put up to Creatures for one that is put up to God Of the Pope's Supremacy I now come to consider the Oath of Supremacy which consists of Two Parts I. A Declaration of the Unlawfulness and Impiety of taking up Arms against the King upon Account of His being Excommunicated or Deprived by the Pope II. A Renunciation of the Pope's pretended Supremacy over the Church of Christ particularly over that part of it in this Kingdom As to the First of these I need not insist upon it becanse if I can prove the Second That the Pope has of right no Spiritual Power here the other must of course fall with it I would only observe before I proceed That if those of the Roman Communion among us do believe that the Pope has a Power from God to Excommunicate and to Deprive Princes of their Kingdoms for Heresy and that therefore they are bound to concur with the Pope as far they can to put his Sentence in Execution this must make them Enemies to all Protestants and consequently they have reason to expect that Protestants should have a care of them But if they do believe that God has not given any such Power to the Pope they have then Reason to have a care of their Guide who is doing what he can under pretence of Authority from God to carry them to Treason and Murther and all the Villanies which must follow an attempt to turn out their King and all his Protestant Subjects that will stand by him But I have in some measure taken notice of these things already and therefore shall not now inlarge upon them but proceed to consider the Grounds of the Popes pretence to Supremacy The Opinion of the Church of Rome with relation to his Supremacy is this That Jesus Christ made Saint Peter the Supreme Governor and Head as of all the rest of the Apostles so also of the whole Church That St. Peter was afterward Bishop of Rome and that by Divine Appointment his Successors the Bishops of Rome are to enjoy the same Supremacy over the Church which he had Their Opinion about the Supremacy of St. Peter is founded chiefly upon those Words of our Saviour Mat. 16.18,19 Vpon this Rock I will build my Church And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven They say our Saviour does by these Words promise to St. Peter to make him Monarch of the whole Church We say that tho' these Words were spoken to St. Peter upon occasion of his speaking to our Saviour immediately before yet that this Promise does as much belong to the rest
of the Apostles as it does to him and that therefore whatever Power may be here promised to him over the Church there is none promised over the rest of the Apostles and that consequently his Successors can claim nothing from hence over the Successors of all the Apostles the other Bishops of the Christian Church But to consider this Matter more particularly we may take notice 1. That the rest of the Apostles did not apprehend that St. Peter had here any peculiar Power promised him above them for we find that not long after they were contending who should be the greatest by which it's plain they did not then apprehend that our Saviour had already determined the Matter And as for our Saviour himself he does not at all endeavour to put them right as it was of great consequence he should do supposing that he designed St. Peter for their Governour but he endeavours to teach them all humility and not to affect Power or Authority over one another And the same instance we have in the Case of Zebedee's Children when their Mother came to desire that the one might sit on his right hand and the other on his left in his Kingdom that is that they might be the Persons of chief Favour and Authority with him their Petition plainly implies that they knew nothing of St. Peter's Prerogatives and our Saviour's Answer which you may see at large Mat. 20. implies as plainly that neither St. Peter nor any body else was to have such Power in the Church as the Bishops of Rome have since pretended to 2. I would observe that these Words of our Saviour to St. Peter do not actually invest him with any Power but are only a Promise to him and therefore the best way to see what was peculiar to him in it above the rest of the Apostles will be to see the fulfilling of the Promise and his being Actually invested in it That this is only a Promise appears from the Words themselves which run in the future tense I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven And I believe they of the Church of Rome will not deny this because they say that the Apostles were not Priests till our Saviour made them so in the Institution of the Lord's Supper Now if we consider the Actual Investiture into this Power there is nothing peculiar to Saint Peter Our Saviour gives them all their Power together in Words much of the same Nature with that Promise before to St. Peter Receive ye the Holy Ghost whose soever sins ye remit they are remitted and whose soever sins ye retain they are retained And as for the Expression Vpon this Rock I will build my Church there is much the same said of all the Apostles The Church is said to be built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief Corner-stone 3. The best way to see whether St. Peter had any such Supremacy will be to see whether he exercised any whether he did any Acts or Offices which belonged to so high a Power There must be constantly so many occasions for the exercise of that Power that if he had any such we could not miss of Instances of it The Times of the Apostles were indeed Times of greater Simplicity than these later Ages and therefore I do not expect they should shew me St. Peter Commanding after the manner of our Modern Popes But if they can shew me any one single Act of Authority over the rest of the Apostles if they can shew me St. Peter of himself making Laws and Orders for the good Government of the Church or so much as presiding in the College of the Apostles if they can shew me any Appeals made to him or Controversies ended by him or among so many Controversies as happened any advice to repair to him or command to obey him I shall not shut my Eyes against the discoveries But to consider this Matter a little more particularly As soon as our Blessed Saviour was Ascended there was an occasion given to exercise this Supremacy in chusing a new Apostle in the room of Judas Acts 1. But we see that the method taken was that the whole Multitude chose Two and then they cast Lots which of the Two should be the Apostle And so as to the choosing of Deacons Acts 7. the whole Multitude chose them and presented them not to Peter but to all the Apostles to be Ordained If we look a little further into the Acts of the Apostles to Ch. 8. We shall find the Apostles not sent by St. Peter up and down to their business as occasion required but St. John and him sent by them to Samaria which was not very mannerly nor very fit had they known him to be their Sovereign Acts 11. we find those of the Circumcision contending with him and forcing him to give an account of his Actions and that without any Ceremony or deference proper for one in so high a Place and we see he patiently submits to it without standing upon his Prerogative of being unaccountable without chiding them for their Insolence or any thing of that kind Acts 15. we find a solemn Meeting of the Apostles and Brethren at Jerusalem where St. Peter speaks indeed as any other Man might have done but does not preside or determine any thing The Appeal was to the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem not to him alone and if any thing in the whole Meeting was done Authoritatively by any single Person it was by St. James for he passes Sentence as you may see Verse 19. If we go to the Epistles we shall find as little evidence of his Authority as we have in the History of the Church in the Acts of the Apostles The first Epistle is that to the Romans not from St. Peter but from St. Paul where there is not the least notice taken either of St. Peter or of the great Prerogatives of that Church which one would think could hardly be avoided if St. Paul had known any thing of them nay he says some things which directly contradict their Pretences which you may see Chap. 11. He tells them there that he speaks to them who were Gentiles as being the Apostle of the Gentiles and if so St. Peter must not have had so near a relation to them because he was the Apostle of the Jews Then he proceeds to advise them to have a care of themselves lest they should fall away and be cut off as you may see ver 20 21. Be not high-minded but fear for if God spared not the natural Branches take heed lest he also spare not thee It 's plain that St. Paul at that time knew nothing of the great Privileges of that Church of its being the Mother and Mistris of all Churches of its being the Center of Church Vnity and of its being Infallibly secured from Error and Apostacy If we go on to the Epistle to the Corinthians we shall sind there a