stile it in this very Book Ergo prayer ought not to be offered to a Creature and now it is not easy to declare whether the folly or the falshood the confidence or the weakness of this accusation were the geater but I am not willing to expose him farther in this matter I pray God he may repent of this Iniquity and make due satisfaction to God and the World and Dr. Stillingfleet and so I pass on to some fresh discoveries of the same In his reply to the first Answer of the Dr. he affirms § 8. that Austin himself held formal Invocations a part of the Worship due to Saints This he confirms p. 25. first from that passage of St. Austin let blessed Cyprian help us with his Prayers and for a farther confirmation of it p. 26. viz. that Austin held this Invocation to be a part of Worship due to Saints We have saith he the ingenious confession of Calvin himself Instit lib. 3. Ch. 20. n. 22. where speaking of the Third Council of Carthage in which St. Austin was present he acknowledged it was the Custom at that time to say Holy Mary or Holy Peter pray for us p. 174. To this the Doctor answers thus I cannot but wonder if he saw the words in Calvin that he would produce them for Calvin doth there say that the Council of Carthage did forbid praying to Saints least the publick prayers should be corrupted by such kind of adresses holy Peter pray for us To this T. G. replies have not I more reason to wonder at his wonder p. 444. for why I pray was such a Decree made and why did the Fathers of that Council fear lest the publick prayers should be corrupted by such kind of addresses if there were no such Custome at that time either the Doctor corrupts the words of his dear Master Calvin or it is manifest they imply it was the Custome at that time to say Holy Peter pray for us Answ The Dr. doth confess that there was such a Custom condemned by Councils and Fathers as was that Custom of those times of Banquetting at the Sepulchres of Martyrs and that which is condemned by the same Council in these words It pleaseth us that the Altars which are commonly erected in the Fields and Roads as the Memorials of the Martyrs in which it is not evident that the body or any reliques of the Martyrs are preserved should be demolished by the Bishops if that can be done but if the popular tumults will not suffer it then let the people be admonished that they do not frequent these places Can. 3. so that T. G. discourseth thus that which was condemned by the Councils and Fathers was the Custom of those times but direct prayer and invocation was condemned by the Counsel and the Fathers Ergo it was the Custom of those times and if this be a good Argument this Doctrine was condemned by the Church of Christ Ergo this was the Custome of the Church of Christ Then all the Heresies that ever were condemned by Councils and by Fathers must be acknowledged to have been the Customes of the Church of Christ But T. G. will set down the words of Calvin and make it thence appear that there was such a Custom Answ By all this what the Dr. doth confess viz. That some people condemned by the Council used this Custome shall appear but what T. G. had undertaken to make good from this Citation p. 445. That St. Austin held that formal Invocation was a part of the worship due to Saints This shall disappear But then again who seeth not saith T. G. that for fear the Reader should see this the Dr. most conveniently left out of his Citation those words of Calvin which were most material to the present purpose viz. That the Decree was made to forbid direct praying to Saints at the Altar and the reason in his opinion why those Fathers made that Decree was to restrain the force of an evil Custom which they could not totally repress for had these words been put down the thing had been too clear to be denied viz. that Calvin acknowledged there was such a Custome at that time where first the Dr is introduced as one denying that Calvin did acknowledge that there was such a Custome at that time whereas he manifestly confesseth what T. G. doth affirm that he denies p. 174 for he expresly saith from Calvin that the Council did condemn and forbid those prayers which were in use by some of the people Secondly whereas he doth accuse the Dr. for leaving out the words of Calvin which were most material to the present purpose This also is a loud untruth as will appear by setting down the Doctors words and by comparing of them with the words of Calvin as they are represented in T. G. and they are these That the Council of Carthage did forbid praying to Saints lest the publick Prayers should he corrupted by such kind of Addresses Holy Peter pray for us And again the Council did condemn and forbid those Prayers which were in use by some of the People And now what is there is the words of Calvin Translated by T. G. which is not contained in the words of Dr. Stillingfleet These things I have collected not that I take delight in the discovery of this unchristian spirit of Calumny I can assure T. G. it is no small Grief to me to find a Dr. of Divinity so prone to wound his Conscience and expose his credit to the censure of discerning Men. I am afflicted that the Atheist should have such great Temptations to suspect that we are guilty of the like insincerity in managing of the Christian cause against him or that the people should have such reason to cry out behold the falshood of our Priests see here what little reason we can have to credit any thing they say since what they confidently avouch in the face of the World is so unconscionably false and full of Calumny But I intreat them to consider we have great reason to suspect t is the unhappy principles of the Roman party which do betray them to this evil practice They think it lawful to equivocate and lye to those they are pleased to call Hereticks and to promote the Cause of Holy Church by such unchristian Arts. This I in charity believe because I would not think them guilty of what this practice must import if it were used by Protestants A second Art whereby T. G. endeavors to evade this charge § 9. and bring a disrepute upon the Doctors Person and Performance is a false and disingenious representation of the Question betwixt us and the Church of Rome and an undeavour to possess the Reader with an apprehension that the Dr. waved it and durst not speak unto it Thus p. 334 That the Reader my see what a prodigious stock of Wit is râ—â—â—isâ—e to make it out that Invocation of Saints is Idolatry I will
can we know what is the present judgment of the Church of Rome but by our eyes and ears since therefore one of her determinations is that all our senses in the Eucharist do actually deceive us how can we be infallibly assured of her judgment by what she hath declared to be fallacious CHAP. V. The CONTENTS The Host was not worshipped with Latria in in the primitive Church 1. Becâ—use we have no command in Scripture for this worship § 1. 2ly Because the Holy Scripture and the Fathers have spoken things extremely contradictory to this worship § 2. Thirdly Because the Antient Fathers have not informed us of this Worship § 3. Fourthly Because they have both said and practised many things which are very inconsistent with this Opinion that it ought thus to be Worshipped § 4. An Objection Answered § 5. The Instances produced by T. G. to prove this practise are considered § 6. THe Doctrine of Transubstantiation being overthrown Sect 1. the Adoration of the Host must fall together with it p 222. But since T. G. affirms That it was Vniversally practised and recommended by the Fathers of the primitive Church both Greek and Latine whereas it was not practised or commended by any single person for Eight hundred years after the coming of our Saviour We shall proceed to evidence the vanity and the absurdness of this practise and the unconscionable falshood of this bold assertion And 1. The commandment to Worship God alone is so express saith Bishop Taylor the distance betwixt God and what our senses represent as bread of Transubst p. 338. so vast the danger of Worshipping that which is not God or of not Worshipping that which is God is so formidable that it is infinitely to be presumed that if it had been intended that we should have Worshipped the Holy Sacrament the Holy Scripture would have call'd it God or Jesus Christ or have bidden us in express terms to have Adored it that either by the first as by a reason indicative or by the second as by a reason imperative we might have had sufficient warrant direct or consequent to have paid Divine Worship to it To strengthen and confirm this Argument it may deserve to be considered 1. That the Evangelists and the Apostle Paul are very punctual in the Relation of what our Saviour did or enjoyned in this Institution they all inform us that Christ commanded them to eat the Bread and drink the Cup which he had given to them and had he given them to be adored would they who mention things so obvious forget to tell us that either Christ intended they should be Adored or that they were Adored by them that which induced St. Paul to mention this Institution and to assert that he received it from our Lord was the irreverence of those that did participate 1 Cor. 11 18 28. and their want of preparation to receive those Holy Mysteries To cure this disease he tells them that the Holy Sacrament was Christs own Institution the charge he left behind him that very night in which he was beirayed and that the Institution was intended for the Commemoration of our Saviours death all which is proper to beget within us a greater Reverence and care in celebration of these holy mysteries but yet it cannot be denyed that this consideration viz. That what they thus irreverently treated was that very Son of God which suffered for them and that it was that Host which they and all good people did Worship for their God I say this one consideration would have been infinitely more proper and effectual to aggravate the sin of those who slighted it and irreverently behaved themselves at the participation of this Sacrament This therefore was omitted by St. Paul upon no other score but the absurdity and falshood of the thing Secondly consider with what expreseness the Scripture doth inform us that Christ is God true God God blessed for evermore and yet because his conversation in the World was in the habit and likeness of a Man and his Divinity was hid under the veil of humane flesh and because this Jesus was made subject to an ignominious and accursed death the Scripture thinks it not sufficient to ascribe unto him in 100 places the nature proprieties of God and to leave us upon Record a Mat. 2.11 8 2 9 18 15 25 20 20 28 9 17. examples of his Adoration by the wise Men of the East and by his own Disciples and by divers others I say the Scriptures think it not sufficient to have done all this and therefore they inform us that this is the decree of Heaven that to the name of Jesus every knee should bow Phil 2 10 Joh 5.23.1 Heb. 6. and that all should honour the Son even as they honour the Father and that when this first born came into the World Gods Angels were commanded to Adore him now it is evident the humane nature did not so much conceal the Deity as do the accidents of Bread for God sometimes did appear unto his Prophets in a human shape but never in the shape of Bread and Wine Christ while encompassed with our flesh gave signal demonstrations of his Divine perfections by Miracles and by declaring that he knew the thoughts of those with whom he did converse but in the Sacrament Christ giveth not the least appearance or demonstration of his presence He doth not rescue his most Sacred body from the Mouse or Rat or from the Sacriligious hands of Theives and Sorcerers Here then was greater reason to have told us as often that the Sacrament was God and was to be adored as they have told us Christ was God and was to be adored Since therefore we have no precept or example in the Holy Scripture for adoration of the Sacrament nor any information that the nature and properties of God do belong unto it seeing it is asserted of the Rock 1 Cor. 10.4 6 15.1 Pet. 2.4 and of the Church that they are Christ and of the Saints that they are made Partakers of the Divine nature but it is not once asserted of the Sacrament that it is Christ or that it partakes of his Divinity but only that it his body we have just reason to conclude that it neither was adored by Christs Disciples nor was intended so to be If that which Romanists adore were truly Christ Arg. 2. § 2. Brevint p. 72 one might safely aver what even to think were Blasphemy That neither Prophets nor Holy Fathers in their Speeches against Heathenish Gods either considered well what they said or ever thought well of their Saviour And First to begin with their Original when the Prophet Isaiah inveighs against them who worship Gods made by a Carpenter of a Tree which the worshipers had Planted and after hewen into pieces whereof one was to heat an Oven and the other to make a God Can any rational Man think that the Holy Ghost did foresee That
little Beasts cannot drink so little but they drink him whole and have him in their little Guts the Priest must by all means swallow down these Flies and Spiders if he can do it without the endangering of his Life or fear of Vomiting Once was the time that Aegypt was made ashamed of their chief God Theod. Hist Eccles l 5. c. 22. when they saw Mice creeping out of his Belly what would they have said if they had seen their God creeping down as the Mass God doth into the Belly of those Mice or Flyes God doth in Scripture often threaten a wicked Church or Nation that he would spue them out of his Mouth And were this Doctrine true the Wicked of the Church of Rome might do the like to him nay they might not only vomit up their God but cause him to be burnt witness the constitution of the Mass De desect circa Miss Occurrent p. 38. That if the Priest do vomit up the Eucharist and find the Species whole he should then reverently eat the Vomit but if the Species appear not he should burn it Thirdly If T. G. rightly had asserted that this was the continual practise of the ancient Church the ancient Fathers of the three first Centuries would not have quite neglected to inform us of it some time or other it is like they would have styled it God or Jesus Christ or have declared that it was or ought to have been Worshipped by them For the absurdness of the thing to sense and reason is so great and obvious that it seems plainly to require more Apologyes than they bestowed to vindicate and to wipe of the scandal of the Cross At least it would have been remembred by Justin Martyr or Tertullian who undertake to give us an account of what the Christians practised in this case and yet neither the Romanists themselves nor their new Champion T. G. do cite one passage from them to confirm this practise In the Fourth Century it was the chief concern of all the Fathers to oppose the Arians and all their under-Sects and their chief Argument was this that h communis est illa S. Patrum argumentatio qua verum a qualem Patridcum esse probant filium quod summo illo genere adorationis quam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocant afficiatur Petavius Theol. Deg. l. 2. c. 12.55 Christ according to the precept of the Holy Scriptures and the practise of all Christians was adored and therefore could not be a Creature Now had the Adoration of the Host been the continual practise of that Age they lived in how could they all forget and wave an Argument so plain and obvious and so convincing as this practise doth afford it being natural thus to conclude Christ in the Sacrament is Worshipped with Latria and this Adoration is there tendered upon presumption of his Deity and therefore he is God Since then the Fathers of those times did newer use this Argument certain it is the practise of the Church did give them no occasion so to do Thirdly the Marcionites and Valentinians denyed that Christ did take upon him real flesh and the great objection which forced them thus to slight the senses of all those that saw him and * P. 97. 98. Apol. c. 39. all the evidence of reason in this case was this that they conceived it i Turpe hoc deo indignum hoc dei filio stultum Tertul. de carne Christi c. 4. D. improper for the Son of God to be conceived in the Womb or come forth of it The Manichees were also startled with the same objection 't is an unworthy thing saith k August contra Faustum Man l. 3. cap. 6. Faustus ex utero credere Deum Deum Christianorum to think that God and especially the God of Christians should issue from a Womb. The Synod held at Ephesus amongst the impious speeches of Nestorius takes special notice of this one that he could not l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Ephes Acts 3. Extr in Ep. Syn ad Cler CP p. 335. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ib Acts 1 p 265 endure to Worship one that was two moneths old or nourished by Milk And yet amongst all these and many other Hereticks who were so highly scandalized at the humiliation of our Saviour and at his sufferings on the Cross we find not one that ever did except against this Adoration of him in the Sacrament against the cating of their God the mixing of him with their spittle or with the ferment of the most depraved Stomach During Eight hundred years we have not one complaint or scruple that the Christians God was pittiful immured and shut up in the shape of Bread and Wine deprived of the use of all his faculties and exposed to the Teeth of Vermin which gives just reason to believe that what the Christians of those times did practise gave no occasion to them to discourse these things or to be scandalized with them Besides in answer unto these exceptions we do not find that any of the Fathers urged this practise or undertook by saying that Christians did Adore him in the shape of Bread did lodge him in their Stomachs and the like to shew that he might properly be God and regularly Worshipped although he lay concealed in the Womb and was subjected unto the like infirmities with other children Since then no other instance had been more proper to oppose to these objections then this Adoration of the Host yet the Fathers constantly declined it we may be certain that they had no such practise and that they did not hold that Doctrin from whence this practise took its rise Fourthly If this had been the judgment of the Ancient Church why did they m Hoc quod reliquum est de carnibus panibus in igne incendi praecepit quod nunc videmus in Ecclesia sensibiliter fieri ignique tradi quacunque remanere contigerit inconsumpta Hesyck l. 2. in Lev. c. 8. burn the Host For can we possibly imagine any thing more hainous then is the burning of that God we Worship To prove that Calvinists do offer the most vile affronts to holy Saints and Martyrs the * Bellarm. de Reliq storum l. 2. c. 1. To. 1. controv 7. Roman Doctors hold it sufficient to affirm they burn their bodies and reliques and cast their ashes into Rivers And is it not a greater evidence of the abominable contempt these Fathers offered to our blessed Lord that they did burn and bury that most sacred body which was united to the Divinity To shew the great stupidity of Heathens in thinking that which they had made was God the Prophet Esay tells them that part of the same Wood which makes the Image is burned in the Fire and the Prophet †Baruch c. 6. v. 55. Jeremiah layes down this strong conviction that the Heathen Idols ought not to be esteemed Gods because when Fire fell
Christs humanity is as to the substance and the nature of it changed into the Deity and that the accidents form and figure of it only remain unchanged that is he grants all that the Heretick asserts and he endeavoured to refure For thus the Heretick dispuâ—es As the Symbols of the body and blood of Christ are other things before the invocation of the Priest but after the invocation they are changed and made other so the body of Christ after the assumption is changed into the divine substance and thus the Orthodox doth answer thou art caught in thy own Net for the mystical signs after Sanctification do not recede from their own natures Again the Orthodox puts this question are not the mysteries Ibid. vid. p. 57. the signs of the body which truly is this being granted by the Heretick he makes this inference If the divine mysteries do truly represent the body then the body of our Lord now is and is not changed into the Deity but only filled with his Glory When therefore is it affirmed by Theodoret that this Sacrament is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a venerable Type And that the Symbols are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Symbols which are Worshiped This phrase can signifie no more then this That they are venerable Types and Symbols such as deserve a reverence or honorary Worship from all Christians which is a very common acceptation of the word for thus Christian Temples are stiled by the Ancients a Concal sub Menna act 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Venerable Temples the Apostles Throat b Epist Leonis 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Venerable Throne and Baptism c Justinian Novil 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Venerable Baptism The same uncenscionable dealing we meet with in that passage of St. Austin for no Man eats Christs flesh 〈◊〉 be have siâ—sâ— adored for in that very place he tells us That * In â—â—sâ—l 98. p 241. â— G. H the Jews interpreted the eating of Christs Flesh like Fools for they interpreted it carnally whereas Christ did instrâ—â— his own Disciples and say unto them understand Spiritually what I say unto you you shall not eat the Body which you see and drink the Blood which they will shed that Crucifie me I have commended unto you a Sacrament that Spiritually being understood will quicken you So that St. Austin in this very place asserts the contradictory to what the Church of Rome believes touching the presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament and calls them Fools that think Christ did intend what they imagine he hath said Therefore it is manifest that St. Austin in this place speaks nothing of the adoration of Christs Flesh under the accidents of Bread but only of the adoration of hs Flesh considered as united to the Godhead and placed at the Right Hand of God I astly to that of Ambrose De spir Saâ—cto l 3. c. 12. By the Footstool is understood the Earth and by the Earth the flesh of Christ which we Adore in the mysteries at this day and which the Apostles adored in our Lord Jesus I answer that he saith no more than this that in these mysteries we Worship Christ and câ—nâ—â—quently the flesh of Christ as being not divided from him â—u he doth not say that in adoring the mysteries we adore Christ or that we do adore the mysteries which are Christ 1. Therefore let it be observed that St. Ambrose doth not say that we adore Christ only in this mysteries but in mysteriis or in the Celebration of the Sacraments which it was the custome of Antiquity to do because they held these mysteriâ—s to be instituted by him to convey unto us those blessings he had purchased by his blood and did conceive he * in Job 9 6.7 Cyril words it doth invisibly swim in the waters of Baptism And therefore in the Celebration of that rite they eall upon us as * Paulinus Epist 4. Chrysost To. 6. in illud simile est regnum czlorum Captives to fall down before our King and with hands lifted up to Heaven to adore him and mutually to exhort our selves and say come let us Worship before the Lord who made us And yet I hope T. G. will not infer that Element of Water to be transmuted into Christs Body and therefore Worshiped by the Christians of those times Secondly observe that Christs Sacred Flesh being united to his Godhead and adored with it the Worship which at the celebration of those Mysteries was directed to him as sitting in the Heavens must be the Worship of his Flesh and this assuredly must be the meaning of St. Ambrose who in his exposition of these words seek those things which are above serm 58. c. speaketh thus we ought not now to seek our Saviour upon the Earth or according to the Flesh it we would find and touch him but according to the Glory of his Divine Majesty that we may say with the Apostle Paul but now we know not Christ according to the Flesh And therefore Blessed Stephen by his Faith did not seek Christ upon the Earth but did acknowledge him standing at the Right Hand of God where with the devotion of the mind he sought him Now this no Protestant denies that Christ even in the celebration of the Eucharist is to be Worshiped where he is and where he is to be sought after by such as do desire to sind him i.e. at the right hand of God CHAP. VI. The Contents Prop. 1. When we ascribe unto the Creature the Homage due to the Creator we become guilty of Idolatry Prop. 2. To know the secrets of the hearts of persons praying at all times and in all places of the World is a divine and incommunicated excellency Prop. 3. That to ascribe this knowledge to any Creature to whom God doth not thus discover the secrets of the heart and to pay that honour to it which doth suppose that knowledge is Idolatry Prop. 4. Those outward Acts of Worship which by consent of Nations or by common Use do signifie the honour due to the Creator are Idolatrical when given to a Creature Corol 1. That to offer Sacrifice is to perform that Worship which is proper only to God 2. That to vow to Angels or to Saints departed is to ascribe unto them the honour due to the Creator 3. Prayer offered and put up in any time and place to an invisible and not corporeally present Being is the oblation of that Worship to it which is due to God alone Objections Answered §. 1. HAving thus endeavoured to confirm and justifie the Judgment of the Church of England touching the Worshipping of the Host I now proceed to shew the Equity and Justice of her Censure of the Roman practice in reference unto the Invocation and Adoration of Holy Angels and of Saints departed And what we have to say in this particular as the foundation of this Charge shall be contained in these
guilty of idolatry it being the most clear and most unquestionable truth that the most excellent Creature is not God 2. Whatever doth import and signifie the honour due to the Ceator doth also signifie that excellency which is only due unto him We cannot then perform that act of honour which imports this excellency to the best of Creatures but we must honour it as our Creator nor can we honour it as our Creator but we must worship it as God and by so ding we must be guilty of what the Romanists confess to by paying honor to a Creature But we can pay no greater honor to the most excellent of Creatures than by ascribing to it that honor which is due to God alone and therefore by ascribing of that honor to it we must be guilty of idolatry 4. By giving of that honor to God which doth import that excellence and perfection which agrees to God alone we exercise that act of Worship which we call Latria for since Dulia doth import only the worship proper to the Creature it cannot signifie that worship which is due to him whose dignity is infinitely greater than what the best of Creatures doth enjoy if then we exercise that act of worship to the Creature we give Latria to it and in the judgment of our most rigid Adversaries to give Latria to a Creature is to be guilty of Idolatry To know the secrets of the hearts of persons praying Prop. 2. §. 2. is a divine and uncommunicated excellency This is apparent 1. from express Scripture testimony 1 Kings 8.39 2 Chron. 6.29 30. What prayer or what supplication soever shall be made by any man or by all thy people Israel when every one shall know his own sore and his own grief and shall spread forth his hands in this house hear thou from heaven thy dwelling place and forgive and render unto every man according to all his wayes whose heart thou knowest for thou even thou only knowest the hearts of the children of men where first observe That there it is asserted as a thing proper to God not only that he knows the hearts of all men collectively taken but distributively i. e. that he alone doth know the heart of any man for this is given as a reason why when supplications are made by any man God should render to him according to his wayes because he only knows his heart i. e. he only knows the heart of any single person 2. Observe this knowledge of the heart is thus appropriated to God in reference to whatsoever prayer and supplication shall be made by any man Whence we infer that whatsoever prayer and supplication shall be made by any man God only knows the heart and the conceptions of the Supplicant and therefore that this knowledge is not communicated to Saints or Angels 3. Observe that to affirm this knowledge is ascribed to God alone because he only hath this knowledge from the perfection of his nature whereas it is communicated to the Saints and Angels only by way of revelation or by the vision of that God who knoweth all things Is 1. without all ground to limit what is universally pronounced in the case of prayer 2. It we admit this limitation to say God only knows the secret of the heart of him that prayeth hath no more of truth than if I should assert God only hath a being he only acts he only knows that Christ is come into the world because he only acts and hath his being from himself our beings and our power of action is derived from him and by his revelation only we do know that Christ is come into the world 3. We may on like accounts assert That even when the general hath paid his Souldiers he alone hath money because what money and of his Souldiers have was given by him and that the Master only of the School of Westminster knows Greek and Latine because his Scholars have derived that knowledge from him 4. If we admit of such a limitation then the exclusive term will not refer to what is spoken but to that which is not mentioned not to the predicate viz. the knowledge of the hearts of men which is expressed but only to the manner of that knowledge of which the Text is wholly silent Now this inter pretation gives such a forced and strained sense as in a matter of this nature ought not to be admitted without the greatest evidence Whereas the sence we plead for is the most plain and natural import of the words For it is natural to conceive the sense of this expression should be this thou and no other knowest the hearts of men whereas if we do paraphrase it thus that many myriads of Saints and Aâ—gels have this knowledge of the heart but thou alone dost naturally know what they receive from revelation this Proposition taken as it is expresed viz. God only knows the hearts of men will be both absolutely false and uncouth and what is contradictory to it viz. God only doth not know the hearts of them that pray will be absolutely true 2. If such a knowledge of the heart was not an uncommunicated excellency if it was only that which did agree to many thousands of blessed Saints and Angels then could it be no proof of the divinity of Christ and of the holy Spirit for what is answered to the Protestant by those who do ascribe this knowledge to the Saints in glory might be with equal probability alledged to baffle and evade this evidence of Christs divinity which is so often and so triumphantly suggested by the holy Fathers And hence it is confessed by the great (f) Quod argumentum nullum esset omnino si non Dei proprium id foret cogitationes intimas corda cognoscere Theol. dogm Tom. 3. l. 1. c. 7. p. 39. §. 3. Petavius that if this knowledge were not proper to God their argument would certainly be weak and groundless And yet the Fathers in his Argument are so exceeding full and copious that it were endless to collect what they deliver Our Lord saith (g) in Lucam l. 5. c. 3. Ambrose demonstrateth himself to be God by knowing of the secrets of the heart Take saith (h) Serm. 50. Chrysologus these indications of our Lords divinity hear how he penetrates the secret of thy heart see how he dives into thy hidden thoughts See saith St. (i) p. 2. Com. in Joh. p. 144. Cyril how he is that God who is the (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril Alex. Com. in Joh. l. 2. p. 133. E. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ib. p. 144. searcher of all hearts For to none other is it given to know the mind of man as is apparent from that passage of the Psalmist God is the searcher of the heart and reins for there the Psalmist mentions it as a peculiar thing which only doth agree to the Divine nature and to nothing else if it be proper unto God
have these words †Confiteer Dâ—â— omnipotenti Beatae Mariae sâ—mper Virgini Beato Michaeli Archangelo Beato Joanni Baptistae Sanctis Apostolis Petro Paulo ominibus Sanctis vâ—bis Fâ—atres quâ—â—â— peccavi nimis cogicatione v rbo opere Ideo precor Beatam Mariam semper Virginem Beatum Michaelem Archangelum Beatum Joannem Baptistam Sanctos Apostelos Petrum Paulum omnes Sanctes vos Fratres crareprome ad Dominum Deum n sirum Ordinarium Missae p. 217. Ed. Antuerp F. 1605. I confess to God Almighty and to the ever Blessed Virgin to Blessed Michael Archangel to Blessed John Baptist to the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul to all the Saints and to you Brethren that I have sinned in thought word and deed And therefore I entreat the Blessed Virgin the Archangel Michael St. John the Baptist St. Peter and St. Paul and all the Saints and you my Brethren to pray for me to our Lord God This is the doctrine and practice of the Church of Rome and it contains these seven particulars 1. That it is good and profitable for every faithful man and exiled Son of Eve to pray unto the Blessed Virgin and the Saints departed 2. That it is good and profitable thus to intercede not only for the good and welfare of the Church in general but for every single person 3. August Ser. 37. de Sanctis Ser. 3. de pluribus Mart. In Com. plurium Mart. extra tempus Pasch Lect. 4. Whereas the ancient Church spake thus As often as we celebrate the solemnities of holy Martyrs let us so expect by their intercession to obtain from the Lord temporal benefits that by imitating the Martyrs themselves we may deserve to receive eternal which words are still retained in the Roman Breviary we are now taught to pray unto them for all the blessings necessary to eternal life nay we are told that * Gunde mater miserorum quia pater saeculorum dabit te colentibus Congruentem hâ—c mercedem faelicem polisedem Regnis in caelestibus Prosa de Beata Maria f. 30. apud Missale Rom. Ed. Aâ—tuerp 1577. God will give eternal life to those that do adore the Blessed Virgin 4. It is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome that Saints departed may and should be invocated as well by mental as by vocal Prayer This was decreed at Trent this Pastors are enjoyned to teach their People and lastly this we have confirmed by their practice in these words With the desires of our hearts we pray unto you regard the ready service of our minds 5. These Practices and these Petitions are many of them built upon this supposition that the Blessed Saints do hear our prayers and are acquainted with our hopes and with the praises which we offer to them and consequently the Church of Rome in whose solemnities these prayers are used must be deemed to ascribe this knowledge to them For what more foolish and absurd than constantly to call upon them to bear behold and to receive to regard favour and promote our prayers when we complain to pity and consider them that pray to be their Advocates and plead their causes if these addresses be not understood by those Blessed Spirits to whom they are particularly directed Who knows not that to be our Advocate is to commend our cause to God and to entreat that our desires may be granted And who knows not that our cause cannot be thus commended or our disires represented till they first be understood Moreover seeing they do request these Blessed Spirits to receive their vows and to take care that they be paid to God to hear and to receive their praises seeing they do consess their sins unto them and therefore do entreat them to intercede with God in their behalf seeing they do endeavour to move them to commiserate their state by saying that they place their hopes and only confidence upon their intercession they mast acknowledge that these Blessed Spirits are acquainted with their confessions and their vows their hopes and praises and therefore albeit this consequence should be denied T. G. p. We pray unto the Saints departed therefore they do hear us yet this can never be denied We pray unto them to hear and to receive our prayers and praises vows and confessions and therefore we believe they do 6. Hence it is manifest that Papists do not only pray unto them to intercede with God for blessings but do desire that the Blessed Spirits would themselves confer them Thus they entreat St. Peter by the power given to him to unty the bonds of their iniquity and the Apostles to absolve them from their sins by their command and to their Guardian Angel they speak thus Take hold of sword and buckler and rise up to help me say unto my soul I am thy salvation And therefore that they only do entreat them to pray for and with us is a great untruth 7. Seeing the Church of Rome allows of mental Prayers addressed to the Saints seeing their Lyturgy speak thus With the desires of our hearts we pray unto you receive the ready service of our minds seeing they do instruct us in all places and upon all occasions to fly unto their help and succour seeing they do ascribe unto them the knowledge not only of their vows and praises but of their inward hopes they consequently do ascribe unto them the knowledge of the heart and the internal motions of every supplicant as far as these petitions and other actions do require it This is that Doctrine of the Church of Rome which we think justly charged with Idolatry For 1. To ascribe unto the Saints departed by way of worship that excellency which is proper to God is Idolatry but to ascribe unto them by an act of worship the knowledge of the hearts of them that pray unto them is to ascribe unto them that excellency which is proper to God by Propos 2. Ergo. 2. Prayer offered and put up in any time or place to an invisible and incorporeal Being is the oblation of that worship to it which is due to God by Prop. 4. Corol. 3. but this devotion of the Roman Church is prayer offered up in any time or place to an invisible and incorporeal Being and therefore must be the oblation of that worship which is due to God and being offered to those Blessed Spirits which are confessedly Creatures it must be the oblation of that worship which is due to God unto the Creature which we have proved to be Idolatry 3. To vow to Saints departed is to ascribe unto them the honour due to the Creator by Prop 4. Corol. 2. but Papist vow unto the Saints departed therefore they do ascribe unto them the honour due to the Creator The Answer Bellarmine returns unto the Major of this Argument is this That to vow in sign of gratitude to the first and chiefest Good and in recognition of a benefit received from him as the first Author
of it is the worship due to God but we may vow to Saints in sign of gratitude to them considered as Mediators and Intercessors by whom we do receive Gods blessings But this distinction hath no foundation to depend upon and with like reason we may distinguish thus of Sacrifice and of whatever else is proper to God and say That to offer Sacrifice to any thing under the notion of the first and chiefest Good is to ascribe unto it the worship due to God alone but notwithstanding we may offer Sacrifice to Saints in sign of gratitude to them considered as Mediators and Intercessors by whom we do obtain Gods blessings * Dicendu nâ—quod vetum sâ—lt â—eâ—sâ— sed promissâ—â— pâ—â—si etiam fâ—cri homini per hunc medum intelliâ—â—â—dum est â—vâ—â—â—n quâ— quis v â— t aliquid Sanctis vel Praelâ—râ—is ut ipsâ— promissio facta Sanctis vel Praelatis cadat sub voâ—◠〈◊〉 riaâ—â—er in quintum scilicit home vâ—vet Peoâ— se impleturum quid Sanctis vel Praelatis promiâ—tit Aquin. 2a 2ae qu. 88. Art 5. Aquinas doth distinguish thus That in a vow we have two things 1. The matter of it and that is the promise 2. The form or essence viz. the direction of that promise to God the matter of the vow saith he i.e. the promise we indeed make to Saints and only vow to God we will be faithful to this promise which we make to them This Answer Bellarmine rejects as being false and contradictory to what they practise For saith he ‖ Vota quae faunc Sanctis terminâ—niu etiam ad ipsâ—â— Sanctâ—s itaâ— wâ—revera ipsis vâ—ta fiant L. 3. de cultu Sanctorum c. 9. The Vows we make to Saints are terminated on the Saints so that we really do vow unto them And again †Vo inomen est general quad conventâ— Dâ—â— Sancta aliaâ—â— name di core audent vâ—eâ— Deo Bâ—â—â—aâ— Maria â—iam si◠〈◊〉 vâ— Beata Mariae Ibid. The name of Vow is general and agrees both to God and Saints for otherwise men would not dare to say I vow to God and to the Blessed Virgin and simply I vow unto the Blessed Virgin And certainly no reason can be given why I vow to God should be a formal Vow and I Vow unto the Blessed Virgin should not be so 3. They by this promise do ascribe unto the Saints the knowledge of our hearts and of our promises whence they desire them to hear and to receive their vows and so they do ascribe unto them Gods uncommunicated excellency 4. To put up Hymns unto the blessed Angels and the Saints deceased is to be guilty of Idolatry But Papists put up Hymns unto the Blessed Angels and the Saints departed Ergo The minor is apparent both from the Roman Missal and the Breviary where we find many Hymns directed to those Blessed Spirits the major may be thus confirmed To pay that honor to these Blessed Spirits which is due to God alone is to be guilty of Idolatry To offer Hymns unto them is to pay that honor to these Blessed Spirits which is due to God alone Ergo. The major is apparent from Chap. 6. Prop. 1. The minor I prove thus To pay that honor to these Blessed Spirits which Christians paid to God alone is to pay that honor to them which alone is due to God for why should the whole Church of Christ which if we may believe the Romanist received so great advantage by their addresses to these Blessed Spirits refuse to pay unto them those Hymns and Praises which were due unto them and which on this account are offered to them by the Church of Rome but to offer Hymns unto them is to give that honor to them which Christians paid to God alone For Origen doth in the name of all his fellow Christians say * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ita Origcontr Cels l 8. p. 422. We offer up our Hymns only to God and his Son Jesus Christ 5. To ascribe to all the Saints departed and the holy Angels the knowledge of the confession of our sins and upon that account to beg that they would intercede for pardon of them is to be guilty of Idolatry Ord. Missae p. 217. But the Romanist doth in the Service of the Missal ascribe to all the Blessed Spirits the knowledge of the sins they do confess and upon that account do beg that they would intercede for pardon of them Ergo The major may be thus confirmed To ascribe to all these Blessed Spirits now in Heaven the knowledge of those confessions which we make on Earth and those petitions we put up unto them is to be guilty of Idolatry by Prop 2. Chap. 6. and Prop. 4. Corol. 3. of the same Chapter But to ascribe unto them the knowledge of the confession of our sins and upon that account to beg that they would intercede for pardon of them is to ascribe unto them the knowledge of those petitions and confessions which we make on Earth For this is to suppose that albeit these Blessed Spirits are as distant from us as is Earth from Heaven yet are they as assuredly acquainted with our confessions and petitions as if they had been present with us for who would move another to intercede in his behalf by reason of that confession he hath made unto him who did not think he knew both his confessions and petitions 6 This may be strongly argued from two considerations 1. That the Apostles did not invoke the Saints departed or give us any Precept or Example so to do 2. That they abstained from this pra lise because they did not think this honor to be due to Saints departed but to God alone And first Thâ—â— the postles did not invoke the Saints departed that they did put up no petitions to the Patriarchs and Prophets or to the B. Virgin or to the Proto-Martyr Stephen or to James the brother of our Lord is evident from an impartial view or all their Writings and Epistles for those Epistles Acts and Gospels were written to promote the cause of Piety and to instruct us in the means and helps which they conceived most proper to preserve us from the assaults and temptations of Sin Satan and the World Joh. 20.31 they do assure us That these things were written that we might believe and believing might have life eternal and so to give us those directions which were chiefly instrumental to obtain that end whence it doth follow that if they had conceived this practise to be so highly instrumental to the promotion of our eternal happiness as doth the Church of Rome and the enjoyment of all those spiritual favours which they expect and beg from those blessed Spirits they would not wholly have omitted what so highly did conduce to the obtaining of those blessings The Church of Rome commands her Bishops Syn. Trid. Sess 25. Priests and Curates diligently to instruct the Flock committed to
August ibid. they gave not divine worship to them 2. That Reverence and honour which they oppose to this Latria or divine worship and which they acknowledg to be due and given by them to Saints departed they comprize in the forementioned particulars or in such other matters as are and do include no formal prayers and no elicite actions of Religion whence we may rationally conceive that neither Prayers nor Vows nor any actions which were properly religious were then tendred to them and that they did not think them parts of that Dulia which was due to Saints Contra Faustum lib. 20. c. 21. but rather parts of that Latria which was due to God alone This is apparent from St. Austin's Answer unto Faustus viz. the worship therefore which we give the Martyrs is that worship of Society and Love which we afford unto those holy men whom in this life we worship but with that worship which is called Latria we worship God alone Where 1. observe that he ascribes unto the Martyrs only that worship which in this life we give unto our fellow Saints Now is it any part of that affection or society we bear unto the living to put up our petitions to them when at great distance from us and invisible 2. Unto this worship of Society and love which doth not comprehend addresses made by way of Prayer to persons absent and invisible St. Austin doth oppose Latria the worship proper to God Whence we infer that worship which could not be included in these expressions of Society and Love viz. all mental prayers and supplications made by Speech to persons at great distance and invisible must in St. Austins judgment be Latria or the worship proper unto God alone The like we may observe in Cyril for having said We neither do affirm the Martyrs to be Gods nor do we worship them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Latria but with the worship of honour and affection He gives three instances of their honour †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril adv Jul. l. 6. p. 204. We give them all Veneration we honour their Sepulchers and we remember their resplendent Vertues Moreover the honour given to them seems therefore to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or relative Because as Basil notes the honor given to the best of our fellow Servants is the sign and demonstration of our good will and respect towards our common Lord. Whence that of St. Gregory Nyssen speaking to the Martyr Theodorus Orat. de Theod. Martyre We hold this assembly for thee to adore our common Lord and make full commemorations of thy Victories So then these Answers and Objections which T. G. reckons a confirmation of this practice of invocation of the Saints departed are rather a just prejudice against it it being never mentioned by them upon these occasions as any portion of that honour they bestowed upon these blessed Spirits nor yet contained in what they mention Secondly §. 10. Observe it was the custom of those times to put up their Petitions at the Martyrs Tombs and this they did for these considerations viz. 1. From a presumption that when the Christians came unto these Tombs the blessed Martyrs joyned their Supplications with them and by so doing helped to speed them Whence Basil in his Oration on the 40 Martyrs saith Together with these Martyrs let us pour forth our Prayers for here are 40 sending up one Prayer and if where two or three be gathered together God is present who doubts his presence where forty are 2. That their Devotions might be enlivened and their affections raised by the place Thus Austin tells us that * Quod offertur offertur Deo qui Martyres coronavit apud memoriam corum quos coronavit ut ex ipsorum locorum admonitione major affectus exurgat â—d acuendam Charitatem in illos quos imtrari pâ—ssumus in illum quo adâ—â—â—nte pâ—ssuâ—us Contra Faustum Man l. 20. c. 21. What was offered to God was offered at the memories of the Martyrs that by the admonition or remembrance which the very places give us a stronger affection may arise to inflame our charity both toward those whom we imitate and him by whose assistance we may be enabled to do it Another custome of these Ancients was to †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril Catech Mystag 5. p. 241. Ideo ad ipsam mensammon sic cos commemoramus quemadmodum alios qui in pace requiâ—scunt ut etiam pro iis o emus sed magis ut ipsi prò nobis orent August Tract 84. in Joh. pray unto God §. 11. that for the intercession of those Saints and Martyrs he would grant them their requests just as the Israelites did desire kindness for the sake of Abraham and David And this saith Austin haply may be conceiv'd that ‖ De cura pro Mortuis cap. 16. they in general making addresses unto God as we do for the Dead although we know not where they are or what they do for all the wants of such as come to these assemblies God may be moved by their Prayers to grant what he sees needful for them as haply he is moved by the fervent Prayers of some Relations distant from us to vouchsafe us blessings and by the addresses of some Churches to grant deliverance from Persecution unto others This observation is a sufficient Answer to many of those passages which T.G. cites to prove it was the custome of the ancient Church to invocate the Saints departed as V. G. Ruffinus doth relate of Theodosius * Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 33. That he went to all the places of Prayer and lying prostrate before the Martyrs and Apostles Tombs he asked succors by intercession of the Saints which upon supposition that they prayed with him and did continually intercede for all that put up their petitions there or for the whole Church militant he might well do but then it is not intimated that he beg'd these succors by invocation of the Saints We also hope for benefit and succour from the intercessions of our pious friends and of the whole Church militant and may entreat God to help us for the sake of their petitions yet is not this a warrant to put up supplications to our pious Relatives or to the universal Church St. Basil in his Oration on the forty Martyrs saith * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas Hom. 20 in XL. Mart. p. 459. He that is pressed with affliction flyeth to them and he that is glad runneth to them the one that he may be freed from his affliction the other that he may continue in that joyful state But then to fly and run unto them is only to fly and run unto the Tombs and Churches where they were interred as is apparent from the following words Here it is that a woman praying for her Son is heard And from the Exhortation following Wherefore together with these Martyrs let us pour forth our
dilectam commendat recordantis precantis affectus Ibid F. That when the mind doth cast about where the body of a dear friend may be buried and straight a place occurreth to his mind renowned for the name of some Martyr the affection of him who thus remembreth and prayeth forthwith commends the beloved soul to the same Martyr viz. that affection which induced the surviving person to think of placing his beloved friend by the memorial of that Martyr and made him choose that as the place where he would commend the soul of his beloved friend to God For that the prayer was directed to God though put up at the Martyrs Tomb is evident from the following words ‖ Plurimum intersit ubi ponat corpus mortui sui qui pro Spiritu ejus Deo N. B supplicat quia precedens affectus locum elegit sanctum illic corpore posito recordatus locus sanctus eum qui praecesserat renovat auget offectum Cap. 5. H. It may very much concern any where he should place the body of his deceased who prayeth for his Spirit unto God because both the preceding affection hath chosen an holy place and the body being placed there the remembrance of that holy place renews and augments the affection That this is the true import of the place and that the benefit St. Austin speaks of was to be expected not from any prayers put up unto the Saints but partly from the desire of burying the deceased by the Martyrs shrine upon presumption of some advantage he might receive by being there interred and partly from the increase of the affection of him that prayeth in that place to God is admirably evident from that which follows viz. * Cum ergo fide lis mater fidelis filii defuncti corpus desideravit in Basilicam Martyris poni siquidem credidu ejus animam meritis Martyrts adjuvari hoc quod ita credidit supplicatio quaed im fuit haec profuit siquid profuit quod ad idem sepnichrum recurrit anime filium precibus magis magisque commendat adjuvat defuncti Spirtum non mortui corporis locus sed ex loci memoria vivus martyris affectus Ibid G. When therefore a believing Mother desireth that the body of her Son may be buried in the Martyrs Temple as believing that his soul may be advantaged by the merits of the Martyr this very thing that she believeth thus is a kind of prayer and if any thing profiteth it is this Since therefore nothing else doth in St. Austin's judgment profit certain it is he doth not speak of prayer directed to the Martyrs for if so he could not have confessed that the fore-mentioned faith did only profit much less could he affirm it to be that supplication to the Martyr which alone did profit Lastly It is confessed that Basil Nazianzen and Nyssen do in their Panegyrical Orations seem to invocate the Holy Martyrs But then it is apparent 1. That they doubted whether these Martyrs had any sense or apprehension of the Requests put up unto them and therefore prefaced their addresses with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If you have any sense 2. They do ingeniously confess that though they knew them to be absent yet they were moved to speak unto them as if they had been present and could hear them 3. They make the like addresses to insensate Creatures of whom they were assured that they could not hear them which makes it reasonable to interpret their Addresses rather as Wishes and Rhetorical Apostrophes than direct Invocations and Petitions tendred to them especially if we consider that all those Fathers when they discourse of Prayer define it to be a Colloquy with God and therefore did not think that those addresses made unto the blessed Martyrs had the true nature of a Prayer Moreover it is certain that they never offer'd any mental Prayer to Saint or Angel And 2. That they conceived the Martyrs present in those places where they offer'd these devotions and therefore were not guilty of those Doctrines and unwarrantable practices for which especially we do condemn the Roman Church CHAP. X. The CONTENTS The Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome touching the Invocation of the Blessed Angels delivered from their own Catechism and Rituals Sect. 1. The Question stated Sect. 2. The Idolatry of this Practice proved 1. This practice doth ascribe unto them by way of Worship what is proper to God viz. The Knowledge of the Secrets of the Heart Sect. 3. 2. Because it is the Worship of the Mind Sect. 4. 3. From the silence of the Old Testament Sect. 5. An objection answered Sect. 6. The Reasons of this silence which are alleged by the Romanist Refuted Sect. 7. And from the silence of the New Testament Sect. 8. 4. From the Consideration of those principles whereby the Romanists condemn White Magick as a practice guilty of Idolatry Sect. 9. THe Catechism of the Church of Rome §. 1. Published by the Decree of the Trent Council gives us the Doctrine of that Church touching the Invocation of the Holy Angels in these words * Extant divinae scriptuae testimonia hujus invocationis Jacob enim ab Angelo quicum luctatus fuerat petit ut sibi benedicat immo cogit se enim non dimissurum illum profitetur nisi benedictione accepta neque solum sibi ab eo tribui quem intuebatur sed ab eo etiam quem minimè videbat tum cum dixit Angelus qui eruit me de cunctis malis benedicat pueris istis Catechis Rom. Part 3. cap. 2. See 10. concerning this Invocation we have the Testimonies of the Scripture extant For Jacob requested of the Angel with whom he wrestled that he would bless him and he compels him so to do for he professeth that he would not let him go without his Blessing nor doth he only put up his Petition unto the Angel whom he saw but also unto him whom he saw not when he thus said the Angel who delivered me from all evil bless the Lads Agreeable unto this Doctrine is the continual practice of that Church in her Authentick Lyturgies For to St Michael they pray thus * Sancte Michael Archangele defende nos in praelio ut non percamus in tremendo judicio Miss festo Appar Sancti Mich. Maii. 8. Defend us in our Warfare we thee pray Least we should perish in the dreadful day In the Roman Ritual a Dying person is taught to pray with his Heart when he cannot do it with his Mouth thus * Hortetur praeterea ut co modo quo potest saltem ex Corde ita per intervalla precetur Maria Mater Gratiae Mater Mifericordiae tu nos ab hoste protege hora mortis suscipe Omnes Sancti Angeli omnes Sancti intercedite prome mihi succurrite Rituale Ed. Antuerp 1617. All ye Holy Angels intercede for me and succour me To the Guardian
Angel they pray thus * Huc eustos igitur pervigil advola Avertens patria de tibi credita Tam morbos animi quam requiescere Quicquid non sinit incolas Brev. R. Reform Off. Angeli Cust Thou watchful Guardian hither therefore fly And from that Country where thy charge does lie Divert what ere may prove their Minds Disease And what disturbs the peoples quiet peace And again * Tu es spes mea Gloriose Angele altissimus te posuit mihi dedit refugium tuum Non accedat igitur ad me malum flagellum non appropinquet tabernaculo meo Mi custos Gloriose me consigna servis Dei aggrega Gloriosis Apprehende arma scutum exurge Angele in adjutorium mihi dic animae meae salus tua ego sum Missa in honorem proprii Angeli Thou art my Hope most glorious Angel the most High hath given and appointed thee to be my Refuge Let then no Evil come unto me Let not the Scourge come nigh my Tabernacle Mark me and gather me unto Gods glorious Servants take hold of Shield and Buckler and stand up to help me say unto my Soul I am thy Salvation The old Roman Missal f. 52. had a Prayer to this Effect * Omnis homo omni die Gabrielis Mariae Poscat beneficia Ex his manet fons virtutis Dulcor vitae spes salutis Et diffusa Gratia Let every Man on every day To Gabriel and to Mary pray These are the spring whence vertue flows apace Heavens hope life's sweetness and diffused grace Whence we observe §. 2. that according to the Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome Angels when absent and invisible should be invocated for this they daily practise and endeavour to confirm from the Example and by the words of Jacob. 2. Observe that we must pray unto them not only to obtain deliverance and protection for us by their Prayer Intercedite pro me mihi succurrite but to perform it by their power for what they do conceive to be the Office of those Angels viz. to keep us to avert those dangers that are imminent and to remove a present evil must they not think it proper to request If God hath placed a Guardian Angel for their refuge may they not ask him to do the office of a Guardian as well as any other thing and to preserve them in their wayes that so no Evil may befall them this upon supposition that they do always hear our Prayers is very Rational When therefore T. G. doth insinuate that they only do desire these Blessed Spirits to offer up our Prayers P. 361. or to pray for us as we desire the Prayers of just Men upon Earth he doth insinuate a most apparent falshood for besides that signal difference betwixt requesting of our Brother to pray for us and their Petitions directed to the holy Angels to preserve them from the assaults of Satan and to * Tu Gloriose Angele qui stas ante Dominum preces meas offer Altissimo veni tribue mihi desideriorum meorum abundantiam Missa in honoâ—em proprii Angeli in Missali Rom. Ed. Antuerp 1577. confer upon them the greatest Blessings we can ask I say besides all this 1. We never do by word of Mouth request an absent Person nor do put up any Mental Prayers to our surviving Brethren both which are tendred to the Holy Angels by the Roman Catholicks 3. It is apparent from what we we have discoursed that it is in vain to put up these Petitions to the Blessed Angels unless we do ascribe unto them the knowledge of the Hearts of those that supplicate and unless we do suppose them either present with us or able to help us being absent and that they do accept this service when we pay it to them that so as they are deemed to be able they may assuredly be willing to relieve and help us Now to ascribe this Knowledge to them and upon this account to Worship and invoke them is to be guilty of Idolatry This we endeavour to demonstrate 1. From the Reason of those Addresses which we make to God viz. that we believe him to be the searcher of all Hearts one that doth see the inward Motions of the Soul and is acquainted with our most secret thoughts and actions Now this we have already proved to be an excellency so proper to the God of Heaven that it is not ordinarily communicated unto Saints and Angels and therefore to ascribe this Knowledge to them is to ascribe unto them what is Gods propriety and consequently to be guilty of Idolatry by Prop. 1. And as a farther evidence that no such Knowledge is Communicated to the Blessed Angels either by Revelation or by the beatifick Vision consider that from this supposed Communication it would follow as it is well suggested by the Learned * Addamus Angelos ne quidem supernaturaliter de facto cognoscere quaslibet cordium cogitationes quasi hoc eis competat communi lege Beatudinis nam si ita esset nondum absolutam haberent veritatem generales sententiae soli Deo tribuentes notitiam occultarum cogitationum quandoquidem beneficio beatudinis id esset multis communicatum sed intelligendae essent cum limitatione hac aut simili solus Deus naturaliter novit c. quam utique limitationem nusquam insiauant addendam esset ut sicut absolute verum maneat solum Deum de facto nosse quaelibet futura contingentia non obstante eo quod quaedam seis amicis revela ita etiam absolute verum maneat solum de facto nosse passim quaelibet occulta Cordium quoniam ut dictum est Authoritates de â—troque loquuntur eodem modo in senten l. 2. distinc 7. § 12. p. 80 Esthius that all those sentences of Scripture and the Holy Fathers which attribute this Knowledge of our secret thoughts and of the inward Motions of the Heart to God alone would not be absolutely true but without this limitation viz. God only naturally knows them or some like exception they would be absolutely false And yet this Limitation the Scriptures and the holy Fathers never do insinuate so that as it is absolutely true that unto God alone belongs the knowledge of contingent Beings although he sometimes did reveal some matters of that nature to his Priests and Prophets nor do we notwithstanding think that such a Knowledge doth belong to Saints and Angels so is it absolutely true that unto God alone belongs the Knowledge of the inward Thoughts and Secrets of the Hearts nor have we any reason to conceive that such a Knowledge ordinarily belongs to Saints and Angels § 4. 2. To worship any Creature with the Mind is to be guilty of Idolatry This was the Antient and undoubted Doctrine of the whole Church of Christ for this St. Austin witnesseth that * Divinè singulariter in Ecclesla Catholica
commend unto us some way or other that Invocation which they themselves approved and if the Church of Rome doth not deceive us did know to be exceeding profitable for the Church of Christ For 1. We cannot without Blasphemy conceive that Christ or his Apostles wanted the knowledge of that great advantage which Christians might receive by vertue of this supplication it is no derogation I conceive from T. G. or his Partisans to say that Christ and his Apostles knew as well as they what were the proper motives to this practise and what were the benefits it could bring to the Christian supplicant nor yet to say that they as heartily desired the Welfare of the Church as doth T. G. or the Compiler of the Roman Catechism if then they had conceived as they do they would undoubtedly have been as exact and punctual in this injunction it being in it self so highly prositable and the more necessary to be mentioned because omitted in the Law of Moses and never practised by the Jews especially if we consider that nothing could have been more properly suggested for the consolation of all Christians under those fiery tryals they endured then this consideration that they might pray in Faith as doth the Roman Missal Oh most glorious Angel the most high hath given thee to be my Refuge let then no evil come unto me Moreover the Church of Rome doth offer this as a present help in trouble unto this refuge she exhorts us all to fly * Quoties gravissima cernitaer urgere tentatio tribulatio veheme ns imminere invoca custodem tuum ductorem tuum adjutorem tuum in opportunitatibus in tribulatione inclama eum dic domine salva nos perimus Brev. in Festo Ang. Cust lec 6. ex Bern. in ps 90. P. 190. when any violent temptation doth assault and press thee when any vehement tribulation threatens thee call thou upon thy Guardian Angel thy Leader and thy helper in due season in tribulation call upon him and say Lord save us we perish So the Roman Breviary and this is their continual practice Whereas our Heavenly Father doth instruct us thus call upon me in the day of trouble 50 Psal 15. and I will deliver thee c. The Apostles and Evangelists are very copious and frequent in suggesting consolations and encouragements to bear with joy and patience those cruel persecutions with which the Primitive professors of Christianity were still infested and perplexed they have delivered many excellent discourses touching the Comforter the presence of their Saviour with them the Example of his Sufferings and of that Cloud of Witnesses which laboured under the same fiery tryals and lastly that exceeding weight of Glory which they should purchase by those Sufferings but not one hint have they vouchsafed us of this Comfort which is administred by the Church of Rome They frequently inform us that God is able and willing to preserve us from sustain us under and give an happy issue to our trouble they bid us arm our selves against Temptations by Faith and Patience and assiduity of Prayer but never tell us that we should pray to any Angel for this end St. Paul when buffeted by Satans Messenger hath thrice recourse unto our Saviour but never unto Raphael or Michael who by the Church of Rome are stiled tentatorum firma propugnacula the sure Defenders of the tempted 2 Cor 1.9 10 11. Elsewhere he tells us that being pressed above pleasure and above strength insomuch that he despaired even of Life he was delivered by that God who raiseth the Dead in whom saith he we trust that he will yet deliver us you also helping together by Prayer for us this he expresly tells us were his hopes from the petition of Surviving Saints But then he never gives us the least hint of the like expectation from the Prayers of Holy Angels nor doth he once direct a Prayer to them Is any sick saith the Church of Rome Rituale Rom. p. 117. Ed. Antue 1617. let him say to his Guardian Angel O Holy Angel of God assist me as my Keeper To all the Saints and Holy Angels let him say O all ye Holy Angels and all ye Saints intercede for me and succor me Is any sick 5 Jam. 14.15 saith the Apostle James let him send for the Elders of the Church and let them pray over him and the prayer of Faith shall save the sick Had he believed that practice of the Church of Rome had been the more prevailing means for their recovery had he conceived it proper and beneficial to the dying person should we have had no mention of it no Rubrick to direct those Elders to mind those dying Christians of this thing The same Apostle doth command all Christians to confess their faults to one another v. 15.16 and pray for one another that they may be healed and gives this reason of that precept that the effectual fervent prayer of any righteous Man availeth much why doth he not exhort them to confess their Sins to all the Holy Angels as doth the Church of Rome why doth he never send them to the Medicinal Angel Raphael who as they do inform us Animarum corporisque optimas Medicator Her Sec. us Sarum f. 92. 1. Pet. 1.21 10. Rom. 14. 1 Jam. 5. is the best Physitian both of Soul and Body add to this that these Apostles have not been only silent in this matter but they have delivered many things which seem to be repugnant to it they do expresly teach us that our Faith should be in God and ask how we can call upon him in whom we have not believed They say if any Man want wisdom to direct him how to bear the Cross let him ask of God that giveth to all Men liberally and upbraideth not and it shall be given him What therefore we are taught by them to seek from our Petitions made to holy Angels St. James directs us immediately to ask of God as being most able and most kind and therefore prone to help us Whence it is easie to collect that it seems very vain and idle to go to them who are less able and less willing so to do St. Jude concludes his General Epistle with these words to him that is able to keep you from falling v. 24 25. and to present you faultless to the only wise God our Saviour be Glory and Majesty Dominion and Power To him alone he doth ascribe this Power to him alone he gives the Glory of all our preservations nay they assure us that Christ hath not subjected the Christian state unto the Angels 2 Heb. 5. as the Jewish was that they are now our fellow-Servants and therefore must not be adored And that we must be cautious lest any do obtrude upon us the worship of those blessed Spirits 22 Rev. 9. 2 Coloss 18. this they deliver without the least suggestion of any of those limitations and distinctions which are
amounting to this only That they forbid only that supplication which was tendred to them as to Gods or as to primary and only Mediators But 1. the Canon speaks of Christians now to suppose that they whose Fundamental Principle it is to own one only God should also worship Angels as God is the extremity of folly 2. Theodoret and Jerom declare Epist ad Algasiam quest 10. that they who did abet this Doctrine were Jews or persons zealous of the Law Now these Men knew that Angels were but the Instruments and Creatures of God and therefore could not worship them as Gods 3. They chose these Angels as fit persons to introduce them to God and used their Meditation upon this pretence that such mean persons should not go directly to him and therefore could not look upon them as partakers of the nature to God In a word § 8. what can be more incredible then that St. Paul being assisted by the Holy Spirit and the whole Church of Christ should daily practice this worship and Invocation of the Holy Angels and teach all Christians so to do and yet affirm these things without any limitation or distinction which if we may interpret them according to the plain and obvious meaning of the words do manifestly condemn that which they did daily practice and lay upon Saint Paul and the whole Church of Christ on supposition of this practice the imputation of Idolatry and of deserting our Blessed Lord and should deliver and approve these things as the Doctrines of the Christian Faith which all Men stood obliged to believe Nothing can be more contrary unto the worship and Invocation of these blessed Spirits then an express command that we should neither worship nor Invoke them can it then enter into the heart of any sober person to believe that the whole Church of Christ even when they taught and practised both should make receive and in their Universal Synods should solemnly confirm a Law without distinction or exception forbidding both the worship and Invocation of them and requiring all good Christians to avoid this practice as being the deserting of their Saviour and the giving of Gods worship to those Spirits Since this Devotion hath obtained in the Church of Rome who ever heard of any Romanist who roundly and without distinction would assert that to invoke an Angel was Idolatry or that this Invocation was forbidden by the Church of Christ as doth Theodoret and Photius and the Laodicean Council who of them ever cautioned all Christian people as St. Paul hath done that no Man should seduce them to the worship of those Blessed Spirits What Council ever did decree that they should not be worshipped or invoked or own such Doctrine as any part of Christian Faith And yet we find this done both by Saint Paul and by the Laodicean Council by Origen Theodoret and Photius and the whole Church of Christ viz. what they confirmed by their daily practice they not only did forbid but they pronounced it to be Idolatry and the deserting of their Saviour what they had thus decreed in opposition to their own daily practice that they obtruded as a dictate of the Holy Ghost and as the matter of their Faith but against the worshiping of Angels with Divine Worship or as sole or primary Mediators which if we may believe the Church of Rome was the only thing in which they did offend we have no mention in the least That there were in the world such Hereticks as said it was beyond us or was too great an arrogance to go directly to the Son of God and that God was Inaccessible and therefore we must go to Angels this Synod I suppose must know as well as Chrysostom and Theodoret why therefore do they never mention as do the latter Comments on this Canon what they alone designed to prevent Why do they not recall these Hereticks unto that invocation of these Blessed Angels which had obtained in the Church of Christ and tell them that they need not to desert the Church or gather private conventicles in order to the Invocation of these Angels Why do not they or or any other person that flourished in the fourth or fifth Ages of the Church when this injunction was in force distinguish between the Invocation of the Holy Angels which the Church did practise and that which was forbidden by this Canon Why doth S. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 5. contra Celsum p. 236. Origen conclude that Celsus had not read that passage of St. Paul to the Colossians because he said the Worship of the Holy Angels was no transgression of their Law For what is this but to suggest that this text of Scripture is so plain against the worship of them that he that reads it cannot think that they who own it can admit that Worship Why doth Theodoret affirm that because Hereticks commanded men to worship Angels S. Paul enjoyned the contrary for what is contrary to a command to worship Angels but an injunction not to Worship Angels Why doth he say that the Apostle doth command us to send up our Thanksgivings by Christ and not by the Angels for by whom we may send up our Petitions why may we not send up Thanksgiving too Why doth both he and Photius inform us that the Laodicean Synod being desirous to heal this old disease enjoyned Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to pray to Angels For is not this a shrewd suspition that this Idololatrical disease was only that of praying to Angels or else that both Theodoret and Photius were such intolerable dolts as to represent the very practise of the Christians as the disease of the Idolaters and the desertors of our Blessed Lord Why is it lastly that St. Chrysostom informes us that for a cure of this disease St. Paul enjoyned all Christians to invoke the name of Christ and not to bring in Angels suggesting this unto us that the Invocation of Angels was not consistent with that of Christ and that by saying do all things in the name of Christ he hath commanded us to pray unto him and call upon him as our helper and not upon the holy Angels Who knows not that a sentence against any person ought in some words or other to specify the crime that it condemns and that an act so framed as to condemn a person as guilty of the highest crimes and worthy of the severest punishments for doing what in the plain and literal meaning of the words all they that framed the act and they that owned it as a Law did dayly practise is an absurdity that Humane Nature cannot possibly be guilty of When therefore I can find an Act of Parliament intending only to condemn Incestuous conversation framed thus whosoever shall marry any Woman let him be severely punished or a decree of any Council intending only to forbid us to go to the Assembly of Hereticks thus worded Whosoever shall go to Church let him be
and that of the Catholicks 2. The reasonableness of the practice of making addresses to one particular Saint rather than another But 1. were both these things as true as Gospel yet are they horribly impertinent to what the Doctor urged viz. that Origen had he conceived the invocation of any holy Angels or of Saints departed proper to obtain deliverance from the diseases of the body he would have mentioned their names in opposition to the names of those Aegyptian presidents or Daemons whom Celsus did advise us to invoke on that account Which argument is more convincing because he doth oppose unto them the holy name of Jesus as that which was invoked by all true Christians to that end Now unto this consideration nothing is more impertinent and more ridiculously opposed than these two things For what if the Aegyptians did conceive their Gnat and Sicat to be Gods why should not Origen reply that we expect assistance rather from our Saints and Angels than your Gods And if the practice of making such addresses to particular Saints had been conceived so reasonable by this learned Father he had the greater reason upon so fair an opportunity to have made mention of these Saints T. G. saw this and knew that if the Doctors Argument had been propounded thus he could have nothing to object against it And therefore that he might be able to frame some colour of an Answer he makes the Doctor speak as if he did affirm there was no difference between the Aegyptian Daemons or Aethereal Gods p. 362. and the Saints deceased but in the names or between the Aegyptians addresses to these Devils and those of the Catholicks to the holy Saints and Angels but in the language and that there needed no more but to correct the names as you would do faults in Printing viz. for Chnumen to read Raphael for Chnaachnumen Apollonia for Gnat Sebastian c. Whereas this affirmation is plainly inconsistent with the Doctors words p. 150. who introduceth one of the Church of Rome affirming that the thing was rational which he said only they were out in their names For instead of Chnumen Chnaachumen Cnat Syâ—at Biu Eru c. they should have chosen Raphael for traveling and against diseases Apollonia against the tooth-ach Now it is sure no Roman Doctor ever taught the very name of Raphael and Appollonia would cure diseases but that the Souls or persons called by those names could do it And 2. No Romanist can be presumed to confess according to the principles of his profession that it was either rational to pray to evil Spirits or to bare words and names and therefore when he brings him in asserting that the thing was rational which Celsus said only the names were to be changed he cannot be conceived to mean it otherwise than thus it is rational we should pray for health provided that we do not do it to these evil Spirits which are called by the names of Cnat and Sicat but to those blessed Spirits which in our Lyturgies are called Raphael Apollonia Sebastian and Roach 2 Of these two things the second viz. the reasonableness of this practice the Doctor was so far from mocking at or making it the subject of his mirth as doth Arnobius that it is barely mentioned by the Doctor without the least reflection on it that unless to mention be to expose this practice to derision the Doctor cannot without the greatest falshood be accused of it and if it be so this guilt falls heavy on T. G. who spends so many pages to justify what is exposed if it be only mentioned T. G. p. 368 362 363. The difference he puts betwixt the Aegyptian Daemons and his Saints and Angels is 1. that the Aegyptians believed their Daemons to be Gods p. 363. But this is either manifestly false or else intended only to delude the Reader for Celsus calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Earthly Daemons apud Orig l. 8. p. 417. and adds that wise men taught their power was limited that they could only heal mens bodyes and foretell future things to private Men and Cities and had the power to do such things as did concern the actions of Mortal Men and therefore bids us to beware lest we be guilty of excess in paying Homage to them and so forget that service which we owe unto their Betters Whence it is evident that Celsus did not speak of them as Gods in the most famous sense as it imports the great Creator of the World but in that sense in which St. Austin saith whether you call them Angels de C. D. l. 9 c. ult Gods or Daemons the difference is only in the name Hence in this very place Celsus first calls them Daemons and then by way of Paraphrase aethereal Gods 2. Saith he Ibid. the Invocation which Celsus here contended for was votiva illis sacrificia reddere to offer Sacrifice to them which is due to God alone and that upon account that they had power to heal the Diseases of the parts proper to themselves Answ 1. this is that disingenious art of adding to the words of Origen which T. G. is so unconscionable guilty of For doth Celsus say that if we sacrifice unto them they will heal us No he expresly saith invocati sanant they do it being called upon doth he say that what he called Invocation was a Sacrifice No Doth he move us to sacrifice unto them because they heal No but only doth infer p. 416. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why may we not endeavor to procure their favour doth Origen reply that though he mentioned Invocation he intended Sacrifice No but only thus Celsus would have us to believe the Daemons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and pay them Reverence if Celsus did contend for sacrificia votiva Origen answered not one word to that which he contended for Did the Aegyptian Magi procure these blessings from them by Sacrifice No Origen tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Aegyptian Magitians did this by Invocation of their Daemons p. 417. did he imagine that Celsus so conceived No he expresly saith that he had given us a Catalogue of Aegyptian Names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which being called upon Ibid. healed the distempers of their parts Hath then T. G. no colour for this Interpretation Answ For saying that by Invocation Celsus intended votiva sacrificia he hath no pretence For mentioning votiva sacrificia he hath only this viz. that Celsus before he came to mention the Aegyptian Daemons speaking of other Daemons he contends 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Sacrifices of thanksgiving must be due unto them p. 415 416. which T. G. very fairly turns into votiva sacrificia or petitory sacrifices that so he might have something to pretend by way of Answer though it be contradictory to Origen and Celsus and to the practice of those Aegyptians he mentions Origen acknowledgeth Object p. 361. §
saith he set down the Doctrine of the Church as it stands Recorded in the Council of Trent What that Council teacheth is that it is good and profitable for Christians humbly to Invocate the Saints and to have recourse to their prayers aid assistance whereby to obtain benefits of God by his Son our Lord Jesus Christ who is our only Redeemer and Saviour These are the very words of the Council and any Man but of common reason would think it were as easy to prove Snow to be black as so innocent a practice to be Idolatry even Heathen Idolatry Answ That the Reader may see what disingenuity is here insinuated it is sufficient only to advertise him that we do not accuse the Church of Rome as guilty of Idolatry for holding what she delivers in the words now cited but for holding what she insinuates in the words which follow and which T. G. thought most convenient to conceal viz. That every person may pray unto them and that not only with vocal but with mental prayer and for enjoyning the sick to pray with his heart when he cannot do it with his mouth O all ye Saints intercede for me and succour me What we teach saith he and do in this matter is to desire the Saints in Heaven to pray for us as we desire the Prayers of one another upon Earth and must we for this be compared to Heathens Do we not profess to all the World that we look upon the Saints not as Gods but as the friends and Servants of God that is as just Men whose prayers therefore are available with him where then lies the Heathenism where lies the Idolatry Answ it lies in praying to them with mental prayer and in praying to their when they are as distant as is Earth from Heaven p. 353. But saith T. G. the Question at present between Dr. Stillingfleet and the Church of of Rome p. 353. is not whether Divine Worship be to be given to the Saints but whether an inferiour worship of the like kind with that which is given to holy Men upon Earth for their holiness and near relation to God may not be lawfully given to them p. 389. now they are in Heaven And again we pray no otherwise to them than we do to holy Men upon Earth though more devoutly upon the account of their unchangeable estate of bliss Answ This he doth frequently affirm but till he can produce some instance of this practice of praying only with mental prayer to any Man alive or of petitions vocal directed unto living persons at so great a distance his affirmation can be no better than a manifest untruth but this is a peculiar Topick of which all those who vainly do endeavor to excuse this Idol worship of the Church of Rome are forced to make use of viz. to affirm her Doctrine and practice not to be what certainly it is and thence conclude her not to be guilty of that crime which could not be denied without this Artifice Again the Question between us § 10. p. 173. saith the Dr. is not how far such wishes rather then prayers were thought allowable being uttered occasionally as St. Austin doth this in St. Cyprian but whether solemn Invocation of Saints in the Duties of Religious worship as it is now practised in the Roman Church p. 44◠were ever practised in St. Austins time Here T. G. represents him as a very Shuffler and most Rhetorically cries out alass that so many Learned Men should all this while have been mistaken in the Question that they should have spent so much oyl and sweat to no purpose The Question hitherto controverted between Catholicks and Protestants was held to be whether it be lawful to invocate the Saints to pray for us and whether this were agreeable to the practice of the primitive times But now like a mischievous Card that will spoil the hand this is dropt under the Table and all the show aboveboard is whether it may be clone in the Duties as the calls them of religious worship Thus T. G. as if all persons that ever writ before them must have spoken nothing to the purpose if this had been the Question between T. G. and him or that this could not be the Question if what he mentions were another or that it were impossible that Men disputing whether this were agreeable to the practice of the Primitive times should also dispute whether it were the practice of St. Austins time Who knows not that one medium to prove this practice to be lawful is that it was the practice of the primitive times and that St. Austins times are instanced in as a sufficient Confirmation of that grand assertion This is the very method of T. G. and these are his formal word This was the Doctrine and practice of Christian people in St. Austins time p. 25. this he endeavors to confirm from that of Cyprian and unto this the Dr. returns this Answer and yet this must not be the Question betwixt T. G. and him § 11. Lastly the Dr. sayth he undertakes to shew out of the Primitive Fathers that it was the property of the Christian Religion to give Divine Worship to none but God and in this strain he runs on for no less than ten leaves together and without ever proving that Catholicks do give Divine Worship to holy Angels and Saints he most triumphantly concludes them to be Idolaters Answ The falshood of this passage is so exceedingly notorious that there is nothing requisite besides the use of reason to discern it for p. 146 159. We have this triumphant Argument Upon the same account that the Heathen did give Divine honor to their inferior Deityes those of the Roman Church do so to Saints and Angels And how unhappy T. G. was in his attempts upon this Argument I have abundantly evinced Again the Doctor Argues thus The Fathers do expresly deny that Invocation or Prayer is to be made to Angels for so Origen p. 158. and theodoret speak expresly that men are not to pray to Angels and any one that reads St. Austin will find that he makes solemn Invocation to be as proper to God as Sacrifice is 2. On what account should it be unlawful to Sacrifice to Saints and Angels if it be lawful to Invocate them May not one be relative and transient as well as the other can any man in his senses think that a meer outward Sacrifice is more acceptable to God than the Devotion of our heart is Thus the learned Doctor and there needs nothing to convince us of the strength and pertinency of this discourse but to reflect upon the vanity and weakness of what T. G. hath ventured to oppose against it See Ch. 6. Prop. 4. Corol. 3. besides in vindication of the Testimonies of Irenxus Origen Theodoret St. Austin Hilary the Deacon and of the Council of Laodicea I have clearly manifested that all these Fathers cited by the learned