golden Candlesticks they are not apply'd nominatim to the seven particular Churches in Asia that are said to be writ to it is an Invitation to the thinking of a more released sense and that some other seven Churches in another kinde of meaning as well as they if not rather then they may be aimed at this ought to be no prejudice to the other Arguments in the same Chapter that are so cogent but rather those other to afford strength to this which is added as an easy Probability not a convictive Demonstration and therefore is not considerable but in conjunction with the rest as is intimated in the very place And I will onely adde here That if there were no other sense then the Literal to be look'd after that in all likelihood for sureness to keep men from Errour and from doing wrong to any Church by a false Interpretation the Spirit of God would have expresly said that the seven Candlesticks were the seven Churches of Asia that were there writ to and that the seven Stars were the seven Bishops of those very Churches I must confess in my own judgement I think there is some such thing hinted at as I have declared which made me not omit it But I am also as sensible that it can signifie little to those that are averse and are given to cavill who are prone to dwell on what seems weak that they may ease their minds of what is more strong and stringent Which is a fault that is punishment enough to him that commits it he usually losing Truth by thus indulging to his own ill humour 5. I know not whether thou mayst mistake me also in the Allusion I memtion of Ephesus to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if it sounded like Aphesus which I would warrant from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of the Matres lectionis before the use of Points standing for both A and E whence I would argue the affinity of those two sounds when as thou maist object that Martinius expresly speaking of these three Matres lectionis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith that the first stands for A the second for E and I and the third for O and U. But in Hebrew Writings without Points there is nothing more familiar then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 standing for E as in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the like And in the Greek tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are frequently changed into one another according to diversity of Dialect so that there can be no difficulty touching this thing 6. Thirdly It may haply be objected against our interpreting the Ten days of Affliction predicted to the Church in Smyrna of the Ten famous Persecutions that some reckon more then ten adding an eleventh under Constantius the Arian a twelfth under Julian the Apostate and a thirteenth under the Arian Emperour Valens But Prophecy being an anticipatorie History it is sufficient that it speak according to the usual language of Historians whose reports run up on these Ten so famously and distinctly taken notice of And there are no more then ten in the Intervall we set for the Church of Smyrna After which conspicuously comes in the Scene of Pergamus Christianity having got the conquest over the old persecuting Paganism And Julian reigned not two years and his Attempts were most-what of another kinde and none considerable so as to break this number Besides that it happened in an Intervall notoriously of another nature and denomination and therefore is not to be taken notice of it bearing no proportion at all to the contrary Affairs of that Period Indeed the Arrian Persecutions are very considerable but they are of another nature from these Ten. The Church being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 became proud as well as exalted out of the dust and contentious as well as proud according to that of the wise man Prov. 13. 10. Onely by pride cometh contention but with the well-advised is wisedome Christ was therefore faithfull in his promise to the Church in Smyrna and procured them the Crown of life and Safety from the Pagan Cruelty and Persecution But that the Church afterwards in Pergamus fell out amongst themselves was their own fault none of his that taught them expresly That by this shall all men know ye are my Disciples if ye love one another 7. Fourthly It may perhaps seem hard to thee that I interpret the eating of things offered to Idols of communicating with the Church of Rome in their Idolatrous Masse For how can that consecrated Bread be said to be offered to an Idol It is true he that they pretend to offer it to is no Idol but the true God But by their Idolatrous practices communicating Divine Worship to what is not God they debase the nature of the true God so far as that they seem to lose the true Notion of him and in stead of him to worship an Idol of their own brain For the true God is not so mean a Being that any others can partake in his Worship And therefore according to the cutting and searching strain of the Prophetick style those that mingle Idolatry with the Worship of the true God are represented as having no true Knowledge of him and therefore whatever religious Worship they doe they being devoid of the knowledge of the true God they must necessarily be conceived to doe it to some Idol According to which sense is that of Amos O ye house of Israel have ye offered to me victimes and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wildernesse yea ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch c. Where the true God by reason of their Idolatry in worshipping other Objects denies they at any time worshipped him though questionless they thought they did offer Victimes and Sacrifices unto him This is express and direct to the Scruple propounded But in our Exposition it is onely insinuated that there is a Propheticall Diorism or a Synecdoche whereby Idolatry in the general is signify'd by that particular species thereof the eating things offered unto Idols Which is used here with the greater fitness and elegancy because that the Idolatry is committed in that part of their Religion that is performed in the eating of what is consecrated And if we do but consider that the Lord's Supper is a Feast upon a Sacrifice according to that of S. Paul Christ our Passeover is sacrificed for us therefore let us keep the Feast which Notion is made out with abundant evidence by a late learned and judicious Writer on that Subject we once supposing the eating of this Sacrifice contaminated with Idolatry what can be a more natural and apposite reproach to it then to parallel it to the Feasts upon the Pagan Idolothyta the eating of things offered unto Idols Wherefore there is not the least harshnesse imaginable in this Interpretation 8. Fifthly That it may be no
the permanent substance of our Souls on which all the general Precepts of Morality are ingraven as innate Notions of our Duty And therefore it is hereby intimated that the Precepts of the Decalogue are just and fitting not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not onely by an externall Law but engraffed in our very Nature and Reason and that the root and ground of them will easily be fetch'd from thence To which you may adde That it were a very immethodicall and heterogeneous Botch unworthy of the Wisedome of God and of his Servant Moses whenas all the rest of the Decalogue is Moral to phansy one or two of the Commandments of another nature This is so rash and gross a Reproach to the Divine Wisedome as truly in my judgement seems unexcusable But besides this The Morality of the Decalogue is also acknowledged by the Church it making part of their Liturgie every-where and we begging an ability of obeying the Second Commandment as well as the rest and Christ also referrs to the Decalogue for eternall life And lastly It seems as it were singled from all the rest of Moses Laws as a lasting and permanent Law to the Church of God whence it is entred into our very Catechisms never to be abolished or rather vigorously to be kept in force for the Second Commandment's sake particularly that it might strongly bear against those Invitations to Idolatry that may seem to offer themselves in the nature of our Religion or reclaim the Church from it when they were fallen into it as well as it was to keep back the Jews from joyning in Worship with their Idolatrous neighbors round about them Wherefore all manner of Idolatry being cautioned against by the Moral Decalogue given to the Jews there are no kinds thereof that ought to be entertained or allow'd of by any Christians 4. The third Conclusion That what-ever was Idolatry in the Heathen the same is Idolatry in us if we commit it The reason of which Assertion is this Because the Heathen had not so express a Declaration from God against all manner of Idolatry as the Jews and Christians have and therefore where-ever they are guilty of Idolatry the Jew and Christian if they doe the like things are much more The fourth Conclusion The Idolatry of the Pagans consisted in this viz. in that they either took something to be the supreme God that was not and worshipped it for such or else worshipped the supreme God in an Image or gave religious Worship that is to say erected Altars Temples and Images offered Sacrifice made Vows to and invoked such as they themselves knew not to be the supreme God but either the Souls of men departed or other Daemons or else particular Appearances or Powers of Nature The fifth That both Divine Daeclaration and the common Consent of Christendome do avouch to us that all the aforesaid Pagan Modes of Idolatry practised by them were in those Pagans practices of Idolatry And therefore by the third Conclusion they must be much more so in either the Jew or Christian. 5. The sixth That giving religious Worship that is to say erecting Temples building Altars Invoking making Vows and the like to what is not the supreme God though not as to him but as to some inferiour helpfull Being is manifest Idolatry This is plain out of the precedent Conclusion and may be farther confirmed from this Consideration That Idolatry was very rare amongst the Nations especially the Romans if this Mode of Idolatry be not truly Idolatry And scarce any thing will be found Idolatry amongst them but taking that to be the supreme God which is not and worshipping it for such But if any Being on this side the supreme God may be worshipped with religious Worship void of Idolatry all things may though some more non-sensically and ridiculously then others Wherefore to use any of the abovesaid Modes of Worship to what is inferiour to the supreme Being though not as to the supreme Being must be Idolatry or else the Roman Paganism it self is very rarely if at all chargeable therewith they having a Notion accurate enough of the supreme God and distinct enough from their other Deities so that unlesse they chance to worship him in an Image they will seldome be found Idolaters or rather never according to the opinion of some who say none that have the knowledge of the one true God can be capable of Idolatry 6. The seventh That to sacrifice burn Incense or make any religious Obeisance or Incurvation to an Image in any wise as to an Object of this Worship is Idolatry by Divine Declaration This is manifest out of the second Conclusion and the first as may appear at first sight For it is plainly declared in the second Precept of the Decalogue touching Images Thou shalt not bow to them nor worship them Of which undoubtedly the sense is They shall not be in any wise the Object of that Worship which thou performest in a religious way whether by Bowing down to them or by what other way soever For the second Commandment certainly is a Declaration of the mind of God touching religious Worship let the Ceremonies be what they will The eighth That to erect Temples Altars Images or to burn Incense to Saints or Angels to invoke them or make Vows to them and the like is plain Idolatry This is apparent chiefly out of the third fourth fifth and sixth Conclusions of this Chapter For the Pagans Daemons exquisitely answer to the Christians Saints and Angels in this point saving that this spiritual Fornication is a Rape upon our Saints and Angels but simple Fornication in the Heathen with their impure Daemons The ninth Religious Incurvation towards a Crucifix or the Host or any Image as to an Object and not a mere unconsidered accidental Circumstance is Idolatry This is manifest out of the seventh and eighth Conclusions But the Worship of Latria exhibited to the Host upon the opinion of Transubstantiation is Idolatry by the third and fourth 7. Conclusion the tenth To use on set purpose in religious Worship any Figure or Image onely circumstantially not objectively but so as to bow towards it or to be upon a man's knees before it with Eyes and Hands devoutly lifted up towards it but with an intention of making it in no sense any Object of this religious Worship yet if this were in a Country where men usually and professedly do it were notwithstanding for all this intention a grosse piece of Idolatry But if the whole Countrey should conspire to make this more plausible sense of those Incurvations and Postures admit we might hope it were not Idolatry yet it would be certainly a most impious and wicked Mocking of God and eluding his minde in the second Commandment that naturally implies the forbidding any Worship or Incurvation toward Images in a way of Religion and a crime as scandalous and near to Idolatry as the going into bed to
world with infinite bold examples of the grossest Idolatry and therefore all our practices upon this Principle must be Idolatrous and Treasonable against the Divine Majesty Consider well the fifteenth Conclusion 12. The last Conclusion That this pretended Consideration that where Christ is corporeally present Divine Worship is not done to his Humanity but to his Divinity and that therefore though the Bread should not prove transubstantiated the Divine Worship will still be done to the same Object as before viz. to the Divinity which is every-where and therefore in the Bread this will not excuse the Adoration of the Host from palpable Idolatry For first That part of the Pretense that supposes Divine Worship in no sense due or to be done to Christ's Humanity is false For it is no greater presumption to say that in some sense Divine Worship is communicable to the Humanity of Christ then that the Divinity is communicated thereto In such sense then as the Divinity is communicated to the Humanity which are one by hypostaticall Union may Divine Worship also be communicated to it namely as an acknowledgement that the Divinity with all its adorable Attributes is hypostatically vitally and transplendently residing in this Humanity of Christ. Which is a kinde of Divine Worship of Christ's Humanity and peculiar to him alone and due to him I mean to his Humanity though it be not God essentially but onely hypostatically united with him that is and does as naturally partake of Religious or Divine Worship in our Addresses to the Divinity as the body of an eminently-vertuous holy and wise man does of that great Reverence and civil Honour done to him for those Excellencies that are more immediately lodged in his Soul Which Honour indistinctly passes upon the whole man And as the very bodily Presence of this vertuous person receives the civil Honour so in an easie Analogy doth the Humanity of Christ receive the Divine but both as partial Objects of what they do receive and with signification of the state of the whole case viz. that they are united the one with the Divinity the other with so vertuous a Soul Hence they both become due Objects of that entire externall Worship done towards them to the one civil to the other Divine And therefore in the second place it is plain that there is not one and the same due Object capable of Religious Worship in either Supposition as well in that which supposes the Bread transubstantiated as in that which supposes it not transubstantiated For in the former it is the true and living corporeall Presence of Christ whose whole Suppositum is as has been declared capable of Divine Honour but in the latter there is onely at the most but his symbolicall Presence whose Adoration is Idolatry by the nineteenth twentieth and twenty-first Conclusions And lastly The pretending that though the Bread be not transubstantiated yet the Divinity of Christ is there and so we do not misse of the due Object of our Worship this is so laxe an Excuse that it will plead for the warrantableness of the Laplanders worshipping their Red cloth or the Americans the Devil let them but pretend they worship God in them For God is also in that Red cloth and in the Devil in that Notion that he is said to be every-where Nay there is not any Object in which the ancient Pagans were mistaken in taking the Divine Attributes to be lodged there whether Sun Heaven or any other Creature but by this Sophistry the worshipping thereof may be excused from Idolatry For the Divine Attributes as God himself are every-where To direct our Adoration toward a supernatural and unimitable Transplendency of the Divine Presence or to any visible corporeall nature that is hypostatically united with the Divinity most assuredly is not that sunk and sottish that dull and dotardly sin of Idolatry For as touching this latter to what-ever the Divinity is hypostatically united or to avoid all cavill about terms so specially and mysteriously communicated as it is to Christ the Right of Divine Worship is proportionably communicated therewith as I have already intimated And as for the former That through which the Divine Transplendency appears is no more the Object of our Adoration then the diaphanous Air is through which the visible Humanity of Christ appears when he is worshipped But the Eucharistick Bread being neither hypostatically united with the Divinity nor being the Medium through which any such supernatural Transplendency of the Divine Presence appears to us Adoration directed toward it cannot fail of being palpable Idolatry For the Eucharistick Bread will receive this Adoration as the Object thereof by Conclusion the nineteenth and twentieth But the Adoration or any Divine Worship of an Object in which the Divine Attributes do not personally reside in such a sense as is intimated in those words of S. John And the Word was made flesh but onely locally as I may so speak this according to sound reason and the sense of the Christian Church must be downright Idolatry CHAP. III. That the Romanists worship the Host with the highest kinde of Worship even that of Latria according to the Injunction of the Council of Trent and that it is most grosse Idolatry so to doe 1. AND having thus clearly and distinctly evinced and declared what is or ought to be held Idolatry amongst Christians let us at length take more full notice of some Particulars wherein according to these Determinations the Church of Rome will be manifestly found guilty of Idolatry and that according to the very Definitions of their own Council of Trent As first in the Point of the Adoration of the Host touching which the very words of the Council are Latriae cultum qui vero Deo debetur huic sanctissimo Sacramento in veneratione esse adhibendum and again Siquis dixerit in sancto Eucharistiae Sacramento Christum non esse cultu Latriae etiam externo adorandum soleâ—â—iter circumgestandum populâ—que proponendum publicè ut adoretur Anathema sit 2. This confident Injunction of grosse Idolatry as it is certainly such is built upon their confidence of the truth of their Doctrine of Transubstantiation For the Chapter of the Adoration of the Host succeeds that of Transubstantiation as a natural or rather necessary Inference therefrom Nullus itaque dubitandi locus relinquitur c. That is to say The Doctrine of Transubstantiation being established there is no Scruple left touching the Adoration of the Host or giving Divine Worship to the Sacrament or Christ as it is there called when it is carried about and exposed publickly in Prócessions to the view of the people But the Doctrine of Transubstantiation being false it must needs follow that the giving of Divine Worship to the Host is as grosse a piece of Idolatry as ever was committed by any of the Heathens For then their Divine Worship even their Cultus Latriae which is onely due to the onely-true God is exhibited to
a mere Creature and that a very sorry one too and therefore must be gross Idolatry by the twenty-first and twenty-second Conclusions of the second Chapter 3. But now that their Doctrine of Transubstantiation is false after we have proposed it in the very words of the Council we shall evince by undeniable Demonstration Per consecrationem Panis Vini conversionem fieri totius substantiae Panis in substantiam Corporis Christi totius substantiae Vini in substantiam Sanguinis ejus quae conversio convenienter propriè à Sancta Catholica Ecclesia Transubstantiatio est appellata And a little before cap. 3. Si quis negaverit in venerabili Sacramento Eucharistiae sub unaquaque specie sub singulis cujusque speciei partibus separatione factâ totum Christum contineri Anathema sit In which passages it is plainly affirmed that not onely the Bread is turned into the whole Body of Christ and the Wine into his Bloud but that each of them are turned into the whole Body of Christ and every part of each as often as division or separation is made is also turned into his whole Body Which is such a contradictious Figment that there is nothing so repugnant to the Faculties of the humane Soul 4. For thus the Body of Christ will be in God knows how many thousand places at once and how many thousand miles distant one from another Whenas Amphitruo rightly expostulates with his Servant Sosia and rates him for a Mad-man or Impostour that he would go about to make him believe that he was at home though but a little way off while yet he was with him at that distance from home Quo id malúm pacto potest fieri nunc utî tu hîc sis domi And a little before in the same Colloquie with his Servant Nemo unquam homo vidit saith he nec potest fieri tempore uno homo idem duobus locis ut simul sit Wherein Amphitruo speaks but according to the common sense and apprehension of all men even of the meanest Idiots 5. But now let us examine it according to the Principles of the learned and of all their Arts and Sciences Physicks Metaphysicks Mathematicks and Logick It is a Principle in Physicks That that internall space that a Body occupies at one time is equal to the Body that occupies it Now let us suppose one and the same body occupy two such internall places or spaces at once This Body is therefore equal to those two spaces which are double to one single space wherefore the body is double to that body in one single space and therefore one and the same body double to it self Which is an enormous Contradiction Again in Metaphysicks The Body of Christ is acknowledged one and that as much as any one body else in the world Now the Metaphysicall Notion of one is to be indivisum à se both quo ad partes and quo ad totum as well as divisum à quolibet alio But the Body of Christ being both in Heaven and without any continuance of that body here upon Earth also the whole body is divided from the whole body and therefore is entirely both unum and multa which is a perfect Contradiction 6. Thirdly in Mathematicks The Council saying that in the separation of the parts of the Species that which bears the outward show of Bread or Wine that from this Division there is a parting of the whole divided into so many entire Bodies of Christ the Body of Christ being always at the same time equal to it self it follows that a part of the Division is equal to the whole against that common Notion in Euclide That the Whole is bigger then the Part. And lastly in Logick it is a Maxime That the Parts agree indeed with the Whole but disagree one with another But in the abovesaid Division of the Host or Sacrament the Parts do so well agree that they are entirely the very same individuall thing And whereas any Division whether Logicall or Physicall is the Division of some one into many this is but the Division of one into one and itself like him that for brevity sake divided his Text into one Part. To all which you may adde that unlesse we will admit of two Sosia's and two Amphitruo's in that sense that the mirth is made with it in Plautus his Comedy neither the Bread nor the Wine can be transubstantiated into the intire Body of Christ. For this implies that the same thing is and is not at the same time For that individual thing that can be and is to be made of any thing is not Now the individual Body of Christ is to be made of the Wafer consecrated for it is turned into his individual Body But his individual Body was before this Consecration Wherefore it was and it was not at the same time Which is against that fundamental Principle in Logick and Metaphysicks That both parts of a Contradiction cannot be true or That the same thing cannot both be and not be at once Thus fully and intirely contradictious and repugnant to all Sense and Reason to all indubitable Principles of all Art and Science is this Figment of Transubstantiation and therefore most certainly false Reade the ten first Conclusions of the brief Discourse of the true Grounds of Faith added to the Divine Dialogues 7. And from Scripture it has not the least support All is Hoc est corpus meum when Christ held the Bread in his hand and after put part into his own mouth as well as distributed it to his Disciples in doing whereof he swallow'd his whole Body down his throat at once according to the Doctrine of this Council or at least might have done so if he would And so all the Body of Christ Flesh Bones Mouth Teeth Hair Head Heels Thighs Arms Shoulders Belly Back and all went through his Mouth into his Stomach and thus all were in his Stomach though all his Body intirely his Stomach excepted was still without it Which let any one judge whether it be more likely then that this saying of Christ This is my Body is to be understood figuratively the using the Verb substantive in this sense being not unusual in Scripture as in I am the Vine The seven lean Kine are the seven years of Famine and the like and more particularly since our Saviour speaking elsewhere of eating his flesh and drinking his bloud says plainly that the words he spake they were spirit and they were truth that is to say a spiritual or aenigmaticall truth not carnally and literally to be understood And for the trusting of the judgement of the Roman Church herein that makes it self so sacrosanct infallible the Pride Worldliness Policy multifarious Impostures of that Church so often and so shamelesly repeated and practised must needs make their Authority seem nothing in a Point that is so much for their own Interest especially set against the
whereby they would support their Determination in this Point viz. the Authority of the second Council of Nice held about the year 780 to omit that long before this time the Church had become asymmetral which yet is a very substantial Consideration I shall onely return this brief answer The God of Israel which is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ has given this expresse command to his Church for ever Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image thou shalt not bow down to it nor worship it But the second Council of Nice says Thou mayst and shalt bow down to the Image of Christ of the blessed Virgin and of the rest of the Saints Now whether it be fit to believe and obey God or men judge ye I might adde farther men so silly and frivolous in the defense of their Opinion so false and fabulous in the Allegation of their Authorities and the recitall of miraculous Stories as Chemnitius has proved at large in his Examen of the Council of Trent 2. I will give an Instance or two No man lighteth a candle and putteth it under a bushell therefore the Images of the Saints are to be placed on the Altars and Wax-candles lighted up before them in due honour to them Again Psalm 16. But to the Saints that are on the Earth But the Saints are in Heaven say they therefore their Images ought to be on the Earth c. As for the Miracles done by Images as their Speaking the Healing of the sick the Revenging of the wrong done to them the Distilling of rorid drops of balsame to heal the wounded sick or lame their Recovering water into a dry Well and the like it were too tedious to recite these Figments But that of the Image of the Virgin to whom her Devotionist spake when he took leave of her and was to take a long Journey intreating her to look to her Candle which he had lighted up for her till his return I cannot conceal For the Story says the same Candle was burning six months after at the return of her Devoto An example of the most miraculous Prolonger that ever I met withall before in all my days Such an Image of the Virgin would save poor Students a great deal in the expense of Candles if the thing were but lawfull and feasible 3. From these small hints a man may easily discover of what Authority this second Council of Nice ought to be though they had not concluded so point-blank against the Word of God But because that Clause in this Paragraph of the Council I have recited Id quod Conciliorum praesertim verò secundae Nicaenae Synodi c. may as well aim at the determination of what these Fathers mean by that debitus honor reverentia which they declare to be due to the Images of Christ and the Saints as confirm their own Conclusion by the Authority of that Nicene Council we will take notice also what a kinde of Honour and Reverence to Images the Nicene Council did declare for and in short it is this That they are to be worshipped and adored and to be honoured with Wax-candles and by the smoaking of Incense or Perfumes and the like Which smells rankly enough in all conscience of Idolatry as Grotius himself upon the Decalogue cannot but acknowledge But this is not all The Invocation of Saints their Mediation and propitiating God for us for adoring their Images healing of Diseases and other Aids and Helps besides Ora pro nobis are manifestly involved in the Worship of these Images according to that Nicene Council 4. And truly according to the Collections of Photius in Justellus one would think that they meant the Cultus Latriae to the Image of Christ they using the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if that Worship which was done to the Image passed through to Christ himself which would not be sutable to him if it were not Divine Worship And where that word is not used yet the sense makes hugely for it As in this Paragraph touching the second Council of Nice according to Photius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This seventh Synod saith he that is to say the second of Nice with joint suffrages hath established and ratify'd the worshipping of the Image of Christ for the honour and reverence of him that is expressed by it this Worship and Honour being done in such manner as when we approach the holy Symbols or Types of our most holy and Divine Worship for the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For we do not stop at them nor restrain our Worship and Devotion to them nor are we divided toward heterogeneous and different Scopes or Objects but by that Service and Worship of them that appears divided are we carried up devoutly and undividedly unto the one and indivisible Deity Whereby it is plainly declared that that very Worship which passes to the Deity is done towards the Image of Christ first or jointly as being one and the same undivided Worship in truth and reality as also that this Worship is that Worship which is called Latria and is due to the highest God onely 5. But that religious Worship is done to the Images of all the Saints seems imply'd in what comes afterwards where it is said that this second Council of Nice which Photius calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That this Council has not onely established and appointed that the Image of Christ should be honoured and worshipped but the holy Images of the Virgin Mary and of all the Saints according to the excellency and venerability of their Prototypes For even by these are we carried up into a certain unitive and conjunctive vision and thereby are vouchsafed that divine and supernatural conjunction or contact with the highest of all desirables that is God himself 6. Can any thing more inflame the Souls of men with that mysticall lust after Idols then the Doctrines of this Nicene Synod For as for the Image of Christ the same Devotion and Worship is done to that which is done to God himself And for the Images of the Virgin Mary and the rest of the Saints though that Worship is allotted them onely that is proportionable to their Prototypes yet they are worshipped such a way as that thereby while we adhere to their Images or Statues we are declared to be made fit for and to be vouchsafed a tactual Union with God himself What Philtrum more effectual to raise up that Idolomania that being mad and love-sick after Images and Idols then this What can inrage their Affections more towards Idolatry then to phansie that while they worship Idols and cling about dead Statues that very individual act and therefore it cannot be too intense is that wherewith they are united to and lie in the very Embraces of the ever-living and true God 7. The sense of the Synod is according to the representation of Photius that we worship and unite our selves with God as well in the worshipping