adv Heares l. 1. c. 20. Imaginem quoque Simonis habent factam adfiguram Jovis Helenea in figuram Minervea has adorant ibid Irenaeus tells us did glorifie him as God and had his Image made like to that of Jupiter which they adored all these I say must be excused from Idolatry for they all did it upon this presumption that be vvas the highest God God over all Principalities and Povvers and all other virtues Thirdly If this were so this error in the understanding would equally take off the guilt of other Sins This would excuse the theft of him who robbs his wicked Brother of his goods provided that he think with our Phanatick that all Dominion is founded upon Grace and that avvicked person hath no right to any thing he possesseth for as he that worshipeth the Host upon this false presumption that it is no Creature but the great Creator conceives he worshipeth only God and doth not give his worship unto another So this Phanatick conceives he taketh only what is his by right of grace and what his wicked Brother hath no right unto and so cannot be guilty of that theft which necessarily is the taking of what is anothers and is not mine own Again the Rebel who unsheathed his Sword against his King will not be guilty of Rebellion provided he erroniously conceived as did the Presbyterian That the Kings Majesty was not the highest power but that the power of the Parliament was equal with him and Co-ordinate or if d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Just Dial. cum Tryph. p. 349. c. or if he think as did the Irish Rebels that being excommunicated by the Pope he becomes presently a Tyrant and hath no further right to his Dominions For if the Adorer of the Host provided that it be a Creature must be excused from Idolatry because he therefore only worships it because he â—alâ—ly thinks it to be God why may not both these sorts of Rebels be absolved from such an hainous imputation Since though the King is really the highest power and not withstanding the interdiction of the Pope continues so to be yet they do only fight against him under the notion of a Tyrant or of a power Co-ordinate Fourthly St. Austin speaks of some who worshiped the Sun as thinking it was Jesus Christ or that Christ was in the Sun and yet he sticks not to condemn this worship as a contempt of the Creator To this example urged by Dr. St. to evince that if the Host after the Consecration did continue Bread the Romanist must be guilty of Idolatry in paying of Latria to it as were the Manichees in giving of that worship to the Sun T. G. returns this answer that the disparity is so clear p. 327. that not to see it was in the Dr. a very gross mistake and he appeals unto the Reader for the truth of what he frith viz. That they worshiped the Sun whom they falsly thought to be Christ even as the Papists worship the Sacrament which they falsly think to be Christ i. e. what they had in their minds and purposes to adore was the Sun but the Catholicks do not believe the bread to be Christ or worship the Bread which they believe to be Christ no their mistake if there was any would be that they believed the Bread not to be there at all and therefore what they would have in their minds and purposes to adore would not nor could not be bread but the only true and eternal Son of God Answer even so the Manichees did not conceive the Sun to be a Creature only * Manscheai dicebant se colere Deum Patrem filium ejus Christum sed quia per deum Intelligebant lucem corpoream per Christum solem istum Corporeum nihil habebant Dei Christinâ—â—â— solum nomen Belâ— larm nor did they worship that Sun which they conceived to be a meer Creature nay their mistake if there were any would be this that they believed no Creature to be there at all or else that Christ resided in the Creature what therefore they had in their minds and purposes to adore would not nor could not be a Creature but the true and eternal Son of God but Secondly this senseless pittiful excuse will free the Heathens from this imputation for they did not believe their Jupiter to be an evil Spirit or a Creature but the God of all things they did not worship him whom they believed to be an evil Spirit no when they appeared before his Image and there addressed their worship to him they believed no evil Spirit to be there at all and therefore what they had in their minds and purposes to adore would not nor could not be an evil Spirit but the true and only God T. G. proceeds to say the difference then in the mistakes is this That the Manichees had for the formal Term of their worship an undue object viz. A Creature instead of the Creator but Catholicks in case of a mistake would have no other formal object of Adoration in their minds but the Creator himself Answer 1 What means this ignorant and simple Tattle of the formal term of worship but to amuze the Reader and make him hope that he faith something when he hath nothing but a mess of non-sence to return unto the Doctors argument Divinity and Metaphysicks are wholly strangers to this rude expression in Logick a material term is the word Homo The formal term is what the word doth signifie so then the sense runs thus the Manichees had for the signification of this word worship an undue object admirable non-sense 2 What is the formal object but the reason for which the outward or the material object is Adored This being so is it not clearer than the Sun that they who had this apprehension in their minds that what we call the Sun was also Jesus Christ and for that only reason did Adore it had equally no other formal object as they who had this apprehension that the Host was Christ and therefore did Adore it and if the Host continue Bread must not the Adoration terminated on it be terminated on a Creature must not the formal term of the Latria or worship which is given to it be an undue object If this erroneous conception will excuse the Authors of it from being guilty of Idolatry then first the Israelites could not be rightly stiled Idolaters for worshiping the golden Calf for many of the Roman Doctors assert they did it upon this presumption that the Calf was God and yet the holy Scripture doth expresly say they were Idolaters 1 Cor. 10.7 by doing thus and that they offered Sacrifice unto the Idol which sure is little better than Idolatry 7 Act. 41. To this instance of the golden Calf he answers thus The Israelites believed the golden Calf to be God P. 329. but Catholicks though supposed to be mistaken in their belief would not worship the
see and hear us every where And Chrysostom upon the same Expression finds fault with those that pray aloud and bids us Imitate the Hymnes and Melodies of holy Angels who pray with us although we do not hear them for saith he (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Tom. 2. Homil. in Matt. 19. pag. 137. thou dost not pray to Man but to God omnipresent to him that hears before thou speakest to him that understandeth what the Mind doth not utter 4. Because he only can Answer our Petitions and from him only can we obtain what we desire * Precantes sumus proomnibus Imperatoribus vitam illis prolixam imperium securum domun tutam populum probum orbem quietum quaecunque hominis Caesaris vota sunt Haec ab alio orare non possum quam à quo me scio consequnturum quoniam ipse est qui SOLVS praestat ego sum cui impetrare debetur famulus ejus qui eum Solum observo Tertul. Apol. c. 30. Sect. 2 3. We beg for all our Emperors long life safe Empire valiant Armies a faithful Senate an honest People and a quiet World and whatsoever any man or Emperor could wish So Tertullian And then he adds These things I may not pray for from any other but from him of whom I know I shall obtain them because both it is he who alone is able to give and I am be to whom it appertaineth to obtain that which is requested being his servant who observe him alone From all which sayings it is evident these antient Fathers did not only think as we now do that all our Intercessions should be made to God but also that they did it for these very Reasons we alledg viz. that he alone is omnipresent that he alone discerns the secrets of the Heart that he alone is able to confer the Blessings which we want and pray for 2 The Fathers do affirm that by addressing a petition to a Martyr Saint or Angel we become guilty of distraction from God and of deserting our Lord Jesus Christ (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 15. pag. 135. We cannot be induced saith the Church of Smyrna to forsake Christ or worship any other Person where first it well deserveth to be noted that what is in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the antient Interpreter of the Acts of Polycarp Alteri cuiquam Orationis precem impendere we cannot pray to any other Act. Polyc in Append Ignat Usser p. 27. And what the Jews objected that if the Christians could obtain the Martyrs body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deserting Christ they would begin to worship him is by the Metaphrast thus rendred huic fundenda esset oratio singulorum they would all pray unto him Now seeing this Translation was of such credit in the Western Church that it was read in their assemblies it is most certain that Church did antiently conceive 1. that the Church of Smyrna did deny that any genuine Christian would pray to any Saint departed 2. That to put up a petition to a Martyr was to renounce their Saviour And 3. that to pray to and afford religious worship to a Martyr was the same And 4. that we must only put up our petitions to the Son of God because he only must be worshipped Secondly observe the reason of this assertion of the Church of Smyrna We cannot worship any other delivered in these words For him being the Son of God we worship but the Martyrs as the Disciples and followers of the Lord we highly love for their exceeding great affection to their own King and Master The Church of Rome could have informed them of a better Reason why they should affect them viz. as being Intercessors and Mediators for and Patrons of the Christian Church and the Procurers of all spiritual Blessings for them She could have told them it was ignorantly done to comprehend that Service vvhich was due to the deceased Martyrs in this one expression We love them worthily For if the Veneration and Worship of the Saints departed nay the Worship of their very Ashes hath been the constant Custom of the whole Church of God and if the Invocation of them be that which Holy Scripture teacheth and the Apostles have delivered and which the Church of God hath alwaies practised as is delivered in the * Catechism of the Church of Rome Part. 3. c. 2. Sect. 8. it may be well admired that the Church of Smyrna which daily practised say they this veneration and invocation of the holy Martyrs should without distinction appropriate all worship and adoration to the Son of God in opposition to the Martyrs and comprehend the Service they performed to the blessed Martyrs in a word which doth not in the least import the Veneration which they daily practised 2. Observe the Reason vvhich is given by the Church of Smyrna why they could not worship any other viz. Because they worshipped the Son of God if any worship had been then paid to Martyrs or any other Saints departed by the Church of Christ what could have been more stupid than this Way of reasoning Now that this Doctrine is introduced into the Church of Rome we hear them speaking thus †Tantum abest ut Sanctis invocandis Dei gloria minuacur ut eo maximè augeatur Cat. Rom. part 3. c. 2. Sect. 11. We worship Saints and Martyrs in honour of the Son of God So far do they esteem that honour which they pay to him from being any prejudice unto the Worship of those blessed Spirits 3. Observe the Argument which the Jews urged to move the Proconsul to retain the body viz. That if the Christians could obtain it it might be feared they would leave Christ and worship Polycarp The Jews could not be ignorant of what the Christians practised in this case by reason of those numerous Apostates who daily left the Church and of that liberty they had to come to their Assemblies Had then the Christians worshipped other Martyrs with Christ and had they professed to do it for his sake and honour could this have been objected by the Jews with any sense and reason that they would quit Jesus Christ that they might worship Polycarp Must they not rather have objected that with Christ they would worship Polycarp which since they did not we may well suspect the practice of the Church gave them no reason so to do Athanasius discoursing upon these words of Jacob The Angel that delivered me from all evil defend the Lads which by the Arians were urged to the same purpose as they are used by Roman Catholicks viz. to prove that Invocation was not so proper to God but that it might be used to Creatures and therefore that it was no evidence that Christ was God declares that Jacob did not speak of a created Angel 1. Because he joyns the Angel with God and saith * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
advantage to our cause the Fathers speak upon this Text if we had nothing more to say but what they have delivered on these words yet should we have what is abundantly sufficient to confirm our Faith and justifie that Imputation which we lay upon the Cburch of Rome for first they do expresly say that this Exposition of T. G. and his Infallible Mother is not only false but an heretical exposition * Ac si aliquis Haereticus pertinaciter obluctans adversus veritatem voluerit in his omnibus exemplis proprie Angelum aut intelligere aut intelligendum esse contenderit in hoc quoque viribus veritatis frangatur necesse est de Trin. c. 15. If any heretick saith Novatian who pertinaciously strives against the truth would have us in all these Examples properly to understand the Angel or would contend for such a sense of that expression in this he must assuredly be broken by the force of truth This Exposition of the Papists saith St. Cyril Thesaur p. 115.116 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i.e. the sottish exposition of the Arians The Exposition of the Protestants must therefore be both true and Orthodox 2. They add that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril Alexandr Thesaur p. 116. if the Enemies of Christ did think that Jacob was a Holy Man and one endned with the Prophetick spirit when he spake these words they might be well ashamed to charge him with so gross an error as was the Invocation of an Angel with God This Custom therefore of putting up the same Petition in the same sentence to God and to the Blessed Angel or to God and to the Saints or Angels must be acknowledged to be a thing * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orat. 4 contr Arr. exceedingly repugnant to the Doctrine which then obtained in the Church of Christ and that which they esteemed the †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 B. Cyrill Alexandr Thesau p. 115. grossest error 3. They give us this as a sufficient Evidence that Jacob spake not to a Creature because he saith Orat. 4. contra Arian p. 260. the Angel that delivered me from all evils Hence it is manifest saith Athanasius and St. Cyril that he did not speak of a created Angel but of the Angel of the Covenant and therefore it is manifest that these petitions prescribed in the Church of Rome and often tendred both to Saints and Angels are in the Judgment of these Fathers such as ought not to be tendred to a Creature and so are guilty of Idolatry As therefore Athanasius to the Arians so say I to the Church of Rome * Contr. Arian Ora 2. p. 369. Let them know that never any good Man put up such a Prayer to any thing that was begotten They being taught by Christ to pray to God the Father to be delivered from all Evil. c. 16. v. 8. And by the Son of Syrach to confess that it is he who delivereth from all evil And this Interpretation of the Antient Fathers will manifestly appear to be the truth if we consider who this Angel was for the Angel who delivered him from all Evil must be that very Angel which delivered him from Labans wrath and from the fury of his Brother Esau now the Angel which said unto him I have seen all that Laban doth unto thee 31 Gen. 13.20 28 Gen. 13. return thou therefore into the Land of thy Kindred was the God of Bethel the God to whom he vowed a vow that God who did appear in Haran to him it was the God of his Father Abraham and the fear of Isaack that rebuked Laban and charged him not to do him hurt v. 29.42.32 Gen. 23. 12 Hos 4. The Angel that he wrestled with and with whom he prevailed was the God of Heaven Lastly it was his Prayer to this God that made his Brother Esau melt into expressions of the greatest love 2. I answer this is no Prayer but a Wish thus when St. Paul concludes in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God 2 Cor. 13.14 and the Communion of the holy Ghost be with you all I hope he doth not pray unto the Grace of Christ and the Love of God and the Communication of the holy Ghost so then this passage may be thus Expounded I wish to God that he and that good Angel who under him preserved me from all evils may preserve the Lads Some Roman Catholicks confess that which we now contend for and tell us Vide Vossium de invoc Sanct. disp 2 Th. 18. that although this practice in its self was good and profitable God would not suffer his own people to invoke these blessed spirits least they should worship them as Gods Idolatry being a Vice they were so prone upon the least occasion to commit Answer we find that notwithstanding the proneness of this people to that sin God often did appear in the similitude of Angels to them he used the Ministry of Angels in the delivery of that Law they did so highly reverence he used their Ministry both in conferring of the choicest Blessings on his people and the inflicting of the most remarkable Judgments both on them and on their Enemies And he delivered those things touching the Ministry and custody of holy Angels which Romanists conceive to be sufficient ground and motive for their Invocation Whence we may very well conclude it was not out of fear of any proneness of that people to this Idolatry that he did not enjoyn this practice but only because he is a jealous god and will not give his honour to another Against the Worship of an Image or of the Host of Heaven or any other Gods which by the Heathens were still worshipped under some visible representation we have frequent Cautions and very dreadful threatnings in Moses and the Prophets but against this Idolatry of Worshiping those spirits which in their nature are invisible those writings give us not one Caution or Prohibition though they do often call them Gods of which affair I am not able to conceive a better Reason then this is that it was just matter of suspition that this rude heavy people might be prone to worship what they saw but it was not to be feared that they should worship what was invisible and seldome did appear and hence we find this people continually revolting from the invisible Jehovah to the Sun Moon and Stars and to the Heathen Deities but never do we find them in the least inclined to the worship of these blessed spirits Moreover if we do consider that in the whole New Testament § 8. we have not any precept to enjoyn Example to commend or promise to encourage us unto this Invocation we have a further reason to believe that Christ and his Apostles disapproved of it for can we think that Christ himself and all his Servants and Apostles would have neglected to
Prayers to God and bring down blessings from God to us as he had learned in the School of Plato least any should be tempted to infer from this that we should pray unto these Angels or that it was useful or needful so to do that so these Blessed spirits might be more propicious or helpful to us he doth expresly say that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 233. to invoke them is no reasonable thing and this assertion he confirms by many arguments 1. It is absurd saith he to call upon them because we want the knowledge of their nature nd because it is above the reach of Man And 2. That if we could attain unto this Knowledge that very Knowledge which declares their Nature and their Offce to us would not permit us to pray to any other but unto God the Lord of all who is abundantly sufficient for all by the Son of God 3. He reckons up in the Apostles language all the kinds and sorts of Prayer (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. contra Celsum l. 5. p 233. Petition Deprecation Intercession and Thanksgiving And then he adds all these we must put up to God by that high Priest who doth Transcend all Angels and that this worship in any of the kinds forementioned was therefore not to be conferred upon the Angels because they were not to receive (b) Ibid. the worship due to God 4. He adds that it was sufficient to obtain the favour of the holy Angels and the assistance of their Prayers to labour to have God propitious and to procure his good will by godliness and vertue and by imitation of the Angels Piety And therefore not only in his answer to this objection Lib. 5. p. 233. but elsewhere he tells us me must endeavor to approve our selves to him who is one God over all and we must pray to him for mercy and that if Celsus will yet have us to procure the good will of others after him who is God over all he must consider that as when the body is moved the motion of the shadow thereof doth follow so in like manner having God favourable unto us who is over all it followeth that we shall have all his Friends both Angels and Souls and Spirits loving unto us For they have a fellow feeling with them that are thought worthy to find favour from God To whom they are not only favourable but they pray with them So as we may be bold to say that when Men which with resolution propose unto themselves the best things do pray unto God many thousand of the sacred powers pray together with them unspoken to Moreover when Celsus affirmed Id. l. 8. p. 420. that thanks were to be given to Daemons and that our Prayers and first Fruits were to be offered to them * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 8. p. 396. that so we might obtain their presence with us and their favour to us who have obtained of God to be Dispensers of inferiour things to this it is replyed by Origen 1. That God had given no such Government to Daemons * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ib. p. 400. 2. That first Fruits must be offered to God alone who said let the Earth bring forth Fruit and to him to whom the Christians offered their first Fruits they offered also their petitions 3. He doth acknowledge that office which Celsus had ascribed to wicked Daemons did agree to Angels who upon that account in Scripture were stiled ministring spirits and do encamp about Gods servants for their protection and deliverance But least we should infer with Celsus that we must therefore pray unto them to be thus propicious he adds we shall sufficiently obtain their favour by imitation of their Piety and Invocation of that God to whom they pray For thus he speaks If we have a desire to a multitude whom we would willingly have to be favourable unto us l. 8. p. 400. we learn that thousand thousands stand by him and Millions of Millions minister unto him who beholding them that imitate their Piety towards God as if they were their Kinsfolkes and Friends help forward their Salvation and call upon God and pray sincerely appearing also and thinking that they ought to do service to them and as it were upon one watch-word to set forth for the benefit and salvation of them that pray to God unto whom they themselves also pray Now to all these and all the Arguments that any man can bring T. G. returns this Answer §. 3. p. 360. Viz. That Prayer implies either a total dependance upon God as the Author of all good and so we ought to pray to God alone or an address unto the Members of the Church triumphant for the assistance of their Prayers to him who only can give what we ask and in this sense it is still used by Roman Catholicks when it is applied to Saints and Angels when therefore Origen denies that our Prayers are to be offered to any but to Christ alone he speaks of Prayer in the first sense This is that Catholick answer which upon all occasion he produceth This Origen and all the Fathers mean verily it is this and nothing else Not that the Fathers of the four first Centuries when they so roundly and frequently assert that Prayer is to be offered unto God alone did ever thus distinguish or speak one title of this nature no simple Creatures as they were they absolutely and without all distinction condemned what they daily practised and practised what they had condemned they all spake what was absolutely false and meant only what was true so that no Man could have imagined this to have been their meaning had not T. G. been their Interpreter Thus when Origne expresly saith * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 8. p. 402. It is no reasonable thing to pray unto the Angels †l. 5. p. 258. we must only pray to God and to his Son Christ Jesus He nust affirm what was a plain and absolute contradiction to the Churches Doctrine but then his meaning must be Orthodox and contradictory to what he doth assert When he adds almost by way of Syllogism to whom we Christians offer our first Fruits to him we offer up our Prayers But to God alone we offer up our first Fruits Ergo to him alone we offer up our Prayers When he informs us that the Christians were such as did not pray to Angels but undividedly and inseparably did worship God by Jesus Christ l. 8. p. 382. and came to God by Christ alone and so as to transcend even those blessed spirits which are called Gods He must apparently bely the Christian World according to the plain Interpretation of his words but his intentions must be Orthodox And yet 3. he doth not only deny the Doctrine and the practice of the Church of Rome to be the Doctrine and practice of the time wherein he lived but he destroys
can be more what Freshman knows not that a true Syllogism hath but three terms and cannot possibly admit of more it being built on this foundation that quae conveniunt in aliquo tertio c. But he hath been so liberal as to afford us five of six and give us a conclusion from the premises which never was contained in them Let us put it into to better form and see if it have any strength or evidence thus then what ever is taken by the Roman Catholick for any object of his worship must be offirmed by the Roman Catholick to be But Bread in holy Eucharist is not affirmed by the Roman Catholike to be Ergo Bread in the holy Eucharist is not taken by the Roman Catholick for any object of his worship This Demonstration is so exceedingly convincing that we grant the whole For though we do unanimously judge that Papists in the Eucharist do worship Bread and so are guilty of Idolatry yet no man ever thought that they imagined they did worship Bread or take Bread for the object of that worship which they call Latria to shew the vanity and folly of this pretended Demonstration let us see what service it will do unto the Heathens what ever is taken for an object of Divine worship the understanding must affirm to be so for neither the Aegyptians had made the Sun the object of that worship nor yet the Israelites the Calf if their understanding had not first affirmed them to be so But Heathens do not in their minds affirm an evil Spirit or a Creature to be an object of Divine worship but do conceive the object of their worship to be God therefore the object of the Heathens worship is not an evil Spirit or a Creature but God This is that weighty Demonstration which our Author boasts of Having now fully answered all the exceptions of T. G. I will assume the confidence to say that notwithstanding all his out-cryes of a clear disparity and his malitious imputations of want of Reason and Conscience in the Dr. who asserts the contrary I have made it clearer than the light that he hath not been able to say one word which is not manifestly false or doth not equally excuse the †This conselâ—â—d by Gatherings in these words Audi in hosâ—in com adoratur Christus ad Deus non simplicitur sed ut existens fulâ— his speciebus cum igitur ibi non existat Christus sed Creatura pro Christo invenitur cui exhibetur Latria Idolatria est Idoloatre enim etiam hae errant ratione qui caelum puta aut aliquid aliud adorabant putantes se ibi adorare Deum quem animam mundi dicebant juxta Varronis Theologiam Cathar advers nova dogmain Cajetani T it de veneratione storump 134.135 Heathen and the Roman Catholick and consequently that the discourse of Dr. St. was strong and nervous and such as only Rats can answer and shall content my self with this one corollary that T. G. may be highly confident and boast of Demonstration when he vents nothing besides plain non-sense and apparent folly And now to put an issue to this proposition if men may properly be said to do and equitably may be charged with doing what they did not intend because their action in effect is that which they conceived it not to be as is apparent from a Thousand Scripture instances then may the Papist be equitably charged with Idolatry and properly affirmed to commit it provided the material object of his Latria should be only Bread although he doth not in the least intend to give the highest worship to Bread for since Idolatry is only Latria given to or terminated on the Creature and seeing Bread is most assuredly a Creature Latria terminated upon Bread can be no other than Idolatry but if men must be thought to do only what they intend then every action must be good provided it be well intended and Murther Theft Rebellions Perjuries Equivocations must be sacred actions provided they be done for the promotion of Gods glory and the propagation of the Roman saith which Doctrines thought they are taught and daily practised by the members of the Roman Church yet are they villanies too dangerous to be espoused by the English Papists To attribute by way of honour Prop. 2. §. 2. worship or respect that knowledge to a Creature which for any thing we know unto the contrary is only due to the Creator is to be guilty of Idolatry For first That which is not of Faith is Sin Rom. 14.23 what therefore is a sin because it attributeth to the Creature what may be due to the Creator only must be the sin of giving to the Creature what is due to God and so being an Act of Worship must be the sin of Idol Worship for as the man who doth assert what he conceives to be uncertain for a certain truth is by all Casuists esteemed a Lyar though what he doth assert should prove a truth because he doth assert that for a certain Truth which he conceives may be a Lye And as that Woman who performs the duties of a Wife to any person of whom she doubts that he is not her Husband is to be esteemed an Adulteress although he be indeed her Husband with whom she thus converseth because by doing of this Action whilst the doubt remaineth she doth that Action which for any thing she knows unto the contrary may be plain Adultery So he that performeth that honour to a Creature which he suspecteth only to be due to God must be pronounced guilty of Idolatry however he perform that Worship only which is due unto the Creature because by doing of it whilst any cause of doubt remaineth he shews an inclination to perform it to the Creature though it belonged not to him and in effect doth say I have just reason to suspect this Worship doth belong to God alone yet will I give it to a Creature Suppose the Bread when duely consecrated Prop 3. §. 3. were certainly converted into the Body of our Lord yet since according to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome this consecration often is and may be hindred by many secret defects which do not fall under the Cognisance of him that Worships a man may rationally doubt of every particular Host presented to his adoration that it is only Bread This a Carnettus quidem cum tale quid ab eo quaeretetur respondisse dicitur Merito dubitari de eo posse nec vel se vel alium quenquam teneri temerè credere aut salutem suam credendo in diserimen adducere quod vel ipse seilicet vel alius quis in individuo sacerdos vel hoc vel certo alio consecrationis suae rempore panem Transtubstantiando Christi corpus conficiat Sratui forsitan posse in genere atque indefinitè quod Transubstantiatio sit quod ab aliquo alicubi Sacerdore tale quid aliquando fieripossit Epistopus
that Creature and to be guilty of Idolatry If it be said the practice of the Church of Rome however they by way of worship ascribe that knowledge to the Saints and Angels which only doth agree to God seems yet unduely to be charged with this crime because they do profess this knowledge not to be inherent in them but to be derived from God I Answer If this excuse may be admitted in this case then must we free the Heathens and many others from this crime who always have been branded with it by the Church of God For 1. The prayers and supplications which the Heathens made to their inferior Daemons and the first fruits and offerings which they presented to them were only made upon this false presumption * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Celsus apud Orig l. 8. p. 399. Ed Spenc. That God by them dispensed earthly things and that he had appointed them to rule over a City or a Countrey and ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. adv Celsuns l. 8. p. 381. that it was his pleasure that we should thus pray and offer to them and yet both these first fruits and prayers were looked upon as pieces of Idolatry by Jews and Christians The Nestorians held the Lord Christ to be a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by grace invested with Divinity and if any Arians did ever say that Christ was to be worshipped with divine worship they must esteem this honour to be given to him not from the dignity of his nature but from the pleasure of the Father but notwithstanding they allowed him to be Deus factus they were most constantly condemned by the Church of Christ as worshippers of men and persons guilty of Idolatry Thus also the Magicians pretended to derive their knowledge of what was hidden and contingent from God and yet they also stand condemned by the Church of Christ and by the Roman Doctors as persons guilty of Idolatry And 4. This excuse will say the imputation of falshood and unjust impeachment on the holy Scriptures for nothing is more frequent in those sacred Records than to impute to persons what their action did import however they performed that action upon such presumptions and vain imaginations which if they had been true must have excused them from the imputation The Heathen constantly professed they did not worship stocks or stones but that spiritual Being which by their * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ditit Olympius Sophista Sozom. H. Ecc. l. 7. c. 15. v. Dion Chrysust Sâ—rm 12. consecration they conceived to be present in their Images or which those Images resembled and represented and that prefession we have recorded by the †Hermes Aegyptius quem Trismegisium vocant visibilia contrectabilia simulachra velut corpora Decrum esse asserit Inesse autem his quosdam spiritus invitatos qui valequid sive ad nocendum sive ad desideria corum nonulla complenda à quibus cis divint honores culius obsequia deferuntur Hos ergo siritus invisibliles per aâ—â—â—n quaâ—daâ— viâ—â—â—â—bis reâ—â—s corporalis materiae copulere ut sin quasi animata illis spiritibus dâ—â— ta subdita simulachrâ— hoc esse dâ—ci Deâ—s facere Augustimde Criviâ— P. lib. 6. cap. 23. v. cap 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb praepar l. 4. v. Arnch. l. 6. p. 195. Lactan l. 2. c 2. August in Psal 113. Conc 2. Fathers and yet both the holy Scripture and the ancient Fathers do represent them as worshippers of wood and stone because they vainly did conceive a Spirit to be present when only wood and stone were there Moreover they conceived the objects of their worship to be the great Creator or some good Spirit which he had appointed to act as his Vice-gerent in the world and yet because those Spirits which they conceived to be the Minsters of God were only Satans instruments and most pernicious Creatures the Scripture represents them as worshippers of Devils The Israelites did not conceive the very Image they had made to be the true Jehovah i. e. they did not think that gold thus formed into the Image of a Calf had really its seat in Heaven and did from thence behold the dwellers upon earth they did not really believe it was the great Creator of the VVorld and consequently that it made that very matter of which it was compounded and that it performed all the wonders which their eyes had seen before it had a being they did not all conceive that man could at his pleasure make his Maker or give a being to that God to whom he owes and from whom he receives his being and that they who were not able to preserve themselves could make a being able to preserve the World and to confer upon it whatever blessing could be wanting to future Ages Nor did the Heathens who are accused of the like crime in Scripture entertain such foolish toughts This is a truth self-evident and writ upon the hearts and consciences of all considering men and had I no conviction of the Idolatry committed in the Church of Rome but only this that they are forced to excuse their practice from Idolatry by laying such prodigious imputations not only on the * Perspicuum igitur ex Scripturis est quicquid somniet insanum Calvini caput Judaeos simulachra pro Diis habuisse Greg. de Valentia Jews but the whole †Mendacium est quod Gentiles ea Deos esse non putâ—rint Bellarm de Eccl. Triumph l. 2. c. 13. s 10. rursus causarum quibus movebantur Ethnici ad credendum Idola esse Deos prima est quia id eis dicebatur à Pontificibus suis secunda quia videbant totum ferè mundum is credere Ihid Heathen World and to assert they did continue such incredible portentous Sots for very many Ages this were abundantly sufficient to justifie the Charge For to impute to the whole World for many Ages the belief of many things the least of which no single person can imagine to be true without a miracle of folly is a triumphant demonstration that their case is desperate For should any man be forced in defence of any Tenet to assert that all the World did for some Ages past believe that twice two was six or that every Ass they fed was the Creator of the World I humbly conceive we should have reason to believe he was some mad distempered person and that only the badness of his cause and his own obstinacy and not the evidence of truth constrained him to espouse a Tenet so reproachful to mankind And yet this Tenet hath nothing more apparently repugnant to the sense and apprehensions of mankind than that which is maintained by the Doctors of the Roman Church viz. That all mankind did for two thousand years conceive that was their Maker which they had newly made and that at pleasure they could give a being to him who hath his being from himself and cannot
Vision we must be guilty of Idolatry by our compliance with this practice 3. That this is the concurrent judgment of the Fathers and that they judged all supplications to invisible and absent Beings to attribute Gods Worship to them may be evinced from two Considerations 1. That they look'd upon it not only as a Sacrifice but as the best and greatest Sacrifice By prayer we honour God saith Clemens Strom. l. 7. p. 717. A. Apol. c. 30. p. 27. B. and send up to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the best and the most holy Sacrifice I offer to him a fatter and a better Sacrifice than he himself enjoyned viz. Prayer issuing from a chast body an unspotted soul and inspired by the Holy Ghost so Tertullian And this is verily St. Austin's judgment in that place which Dr. Stillingfleet had cited to this effect and all the tragedies and outeries of T. G. against him upon this occasion are the most false and impudent that ever drop'd from Pen To make this clear it will be needful only to lay before the Reader Austin's words viz. Dâ— C. D. l. 10. c. 19. Qui autem putant haec visibilia Sacrificia Diis aliis congruere illi vero tanquam invisibili invisibilia majori majora meliorique meliora qualia sunt pâ—ra mentis bona voluntatis officia profecto nesciunt haec ita esse signa illorum sicut verba signantia vel sonantia sunt rerum quocirca sicut orantes atque landantes ad cum dirigimus significantes voces cun res ipsas in corde quas significamus offerimus it a sacrificantes non alteri visibile Sacrificium offerendum esse noverimus quam illi cujus invisibile Sacrificium nos ipsi esse debemus i.e. They that conceive these visible Sacrifices may agree to lesser Gods but that to him who is invisible the greater and the better God invisible greater and better Sacrifices do agree viz. the duties of a pure mind and a good will these persons know not that these outward Sacrifices are the signs of them viz. of the invisible the greater and the better Sacrifices as our words spoken are the signs of things as therefore when we pray or we give thanks we direct our speech to him N. B. to whom we offer the conceptions of the heart they signifie so when we sacrifice we know the outward Sacrifice ought to be offered unto him alone to whom we ought to yield our selves a Sacrifice in visible Where 1. Doth not St. Austin say That the invisible Sacrifices are greater and better than the outward Sacrifice for what is it illorum can refer to besides majorum and meliorum Doth not he say The duties of a pure mind and a good will are to be deemed invisible and better Sacrifices And is not Prayer the duty of a pure mind and a good will And must he not then say that Prayer is a greater and a better offering than any outward Sacrifice And 2. To put the matter beyond all dispute Qui ergo Divinitatem sibi arrogant Spiritus non cujuslibet corporis fumo sed supplicantis animo delectantuâ— doth not St. Austin add That these inferior Spirits who usurp Divinity require Sacrifices not that they are delighted with the smoak and vapour but with the mind of him that prayeth clearly concluding that to be the better and the higher service Doth not he intimate that they usurp Divinity more by requiring Prayer than Sacrifice And lastly Doth not he affirm That they who offer outward Sacrifice to him alone to whom their inward ought to be appropriated do also when i.e. as often as they pray or render thanks direct their words not to a Saint or Angel but to him to whom they offer the things conceived in the heart Which doth not only prove That Prayer was by him likened to Sacrifice and that mental Prayer which the Trent Council will not permit us to deny to Saints is an invisible and higher Worship than the outward Sacrifice but also that the Christians of his time did pray and render thanks to God alone for else it had been obvious to reply to the similitude St. Austin gives us That as we sometimes offer up our prayers and our thanksgivings to the Saints departed so might we offer up the outward Sacrifice And this will be sufficient to demonstrace That T. G. in his whole Answer to this place hath not one word of truth For 1. p. 391. It is a false suggestion that Auctin's Argument runs thus That external Sacrifice being the highest expression of the highest part of Prayer ought of all others to be reserved as most proper to God For his Argument is clearly this To him only do belong the signs to whom belongeth what is represented by them and therefore seeing we must offer up our selves to God alone that outward Sacrifice which is the sign of this oblation must be appropriated to him That outward Sacrifice is the highest expression of the highest part of Prayer St. Austin doth not say 2. It is a false insinuation that when St. Austin doth deny that Sacrifice is due to any other but the highest God he doth not speak of Sacrifice distinguished from Prayer for he styles it Sacrificium visibile he doth oppose it to the duties of a pure mind as the less unto the greater he represents it as the sign of the invisible and therefore it is plain stupidity to think he did not speak of the external Sacrifice as different from the internal or distinguished from it 3. It is prodigiously false that Dr. St sides with the * Dr. St. is forced to maintain an Argument of the Heathens against Austin T. G. p. 390. Do you not think the Dr. â—sed the utmost of his confidence to maintain for very good an Argument of the Heathens confuted by St. Austin in this very place The Heathen saith Dr. St. argued very well I deny it saith St. Austin T. G. p. 390. Heathens against Austin for what the Dr. pleads for viz. That Prayer was to be deemed an higher act of worship than the outward Sacrifice St. Austin doth expresly grant 4 It is as false that Austin doth confute what Dr. St. approved for Austin only doth confute this Tenet That outward Sacrifice might be imparted to inferior Spirits That which the Doctor doth approve is this That in all reason the duty of Prayer ought to be reserved as more proper to God than any external Sacrifice And lastly it is false that Austin doth deny what Dr. St. asserted for he abundantly confirms it but it is no wonder that persons given up by Gods just judgment to believe a lye should be so prone to tell them 2. The Fathers when they lay down the definition or description of Prayer they alwayes do it with express reference to God whence we may rationally conclude that they conceived this act of Worship did properly belong to him Prayer saith St. Clemens is a
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
Office which the Platonists ascribed to their Daemons They saith * August de C. D. l. 8. c. 18. St. Austin bring the prayers of men unto the Gods and what they beg and do obtain quae poscunt impetrata they bring back to men And again They think them so to intermediate betwixt God and men as that they carry out desires hence illinc referunt impetrata and from thence bring back what they have obtained Hence are they often stiled by them Advocates and Mediators Intercessors and Pararii i. e. the obrainers of our Suits 2. On this account they thought it reasonable to honor them with supplications * Ficinus tradit Platonem universan Deorum Synagogam unico Regi subdere prout vult sengulis imperanti Jubere primum Deum adori propter seipsum sequentes vero qui participes ejus Dii queque dicuntur amari tanquam illi similiores honorari etiam ut Vicarios imo advocari lanquam Conciliatores Plato saith Ficinus subjected the whole number of Gods unto one King who as he pleased did command them all and he commanded that the chief God should be worshiped for himself the other who are also called Gods by participation to be loved as likest to him and to be honoured as his Vicars and to be addressed to as to reconcilers And Plato hath himself determined (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epinom pag. 1010. That they ought to be honoured with our Prayers by reason of their laudable Province which he saith is double 1. (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Symposium p. 1194. To be our Interpreters to God 2. To carry up the Prayers and Sacrifices of men to God and to bring back the commands and answers of God to them (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Celsus apud Origen lib. 8. p. 394. We ought to pray unto them to be propitious to us so Celsus 3. They did not think them to be Gods properly so called but only the ministers and servants of God as I have proved above †Câ—â—cta coelestum voluntate numine autoritate fiunt sed Paer num obsequiâ— opâ—â—a ministerio Apulesus de Daemoâ—â— Socâ—ate p. 45. All things are done saith Apuleius by the will majesty and authority of the heavenly beings but by the ministry work and obsequiqusness of the Daemons Hence do they stile them virtutes ministeria Dei magni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Gods Ministers and Messengers Hence do they rank them in the second and third place from God and put this Office on them quia nullus Deus miscetur homini because no God that is properly so called doth immediately converse with man this is so plain that Austin doth acknowledg that the difference betwixt †Hos si Platonici malunt Deos quam Daemones dicere eisque annumerare quos a summo Deo conditos Deos scribit eorum autor magister Plato dicant quod volunt non enim cum eis de verborum controversia laborandum est rursus Quamvis nominis controversia videatur Aug. de Civ Dei l. 9. cap. 23. Plato's good Daemons which he acknowledged to be made by the highest God and the good Angels was only in the name Having thus drawn the Paralel we are prepared to attend T. G's pretences of a great disparity betwixt this Invocation of the Heathen Daemons which by the ancient Fathers was charged with Idolatry and that Invocation of the Saints departed which is now practised by the Church of Rome which will be quickly done since all his great disparities are only great impertinencies for what is this unto the Doctors Argument concerning Invocation that they do not offer Sacrifice unto the Saints departed which is his fourth disparity Or that the God they worship is the true immortal God who sees the secrets of the hearts which is his first disparity What is it to the purpose to say the persons they address their prayers unto are not Devils or wicked wretches but the blessed Spirits for if the same kind of Invocation be used to both it must be deemed Idolatry in both because in both it is the giving of the worship due to God unto the Creature when this is done unto the best of Creatures then is Idolatry committed when this is not done we may be guilty of Superstition or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in giving of inferior worship or Dulia to the worst of Creatures but cannot be guilty of Idolatry And this cuts of his third disparity 4. pag 351. Their Office is not to inform the supream God of what he knows not saith T. G. but to be joynt Petitioners with us and what is this unto the purpose seeing the Fathers neither did or could condemn them of Idolatry for thinking God did not know our Prayers without Interpreters But for what was consequent upon it viz. the making their addresses to them to present their requests to God and by their prayers to obtain his blessings the first opinion made them sacrilegious in robbing God of what did properly belong unto him and with this we do not charge the Papists in this case The second is Idolatrical in giving of his honor to a Creature of which they are but too much guilty This T. G. saw as well as I and therefore for the same good reason that some unskilful Painters write under their work this is a Dog a Cat Pag 352. c. T.G. at the foot of his performance writeth thus I have spoken home to the Case and then he states it thus whether the practise of Catholicks in honouring and invocating the Saints be the same with that of the Heathens in the worship of their inferior Deities T.G. pag. 440. Thus expiring Candle gathers up its Spirits and forces it self into a blaze before it dies Alass that we should all this while have been mistaken in the question The question hitherto controverted betwixt Dr. St. and him in this particular was concerning the Invocation of Saints as T. G. doth himself confess p. 350. but now like a mischievous Card that will spoil the hand this is dropt under the Table and all the show above board is whether their Invocation of Saints doth differ not from the Invocation but the whole worship of inferior Daemons The business of solemn supplication to them is the Case in debate between us and the Church of Rome saith Dr. St. If ever you would speak home to the case do it upon this point Pag. 145. I beg your pardon saith T. G. I am not free to speak upon that point I know my foot must slip if I should touch upon it and therefore though you press me and call upon me to speak home unto it I am resolved to be reserved nay I am conscious to my self that all that I have spoken is impertinent to that Case I have not nor I cannot shew the least disparity betwixt their Invocation of inferior Daemons and that
Invocation of the Saints vvhich Roman Catholicks do practise but if instead of speaking to this one case of supplication you will let me wander through the vvhole worship of those Daemons then I have three disparities to offer this is the twig the poor man catcheth hold of to save both him and his vvhole Church from sinking but in vain for the disparities which he hath represented betwixt that honour vvhich they give to Saints and vvhat the Heathen do ascribe to their inferior Daemons is not only horribly impertinent but also vain and frivolous as vvill appear by reassuming of his heads of difference as 1. The persons to whom we address our selves for their prayers T. G. pag. 351. are not Devils or wicked Wretches but the Friends and Servants of God Answ 1. St. Austin manifestly doth assert Dec. D. l. 9. c. 23. That either all or at the least the better sort of Platonists Hoc ipsum dicunt quod dicimus did assert the same of their good Daemons which we do of the blessed Angels that there was also no dissention betwixt them and Christians touching these blessed Spirits and that the controversie was but this whether they should be called Daemons as they were wont to stile them or Angels as the Christians called them and therefore it is manifest he did not think the Platonists good Daemons to be Devils or wicked Wretches as T. G. suggests 2. It is apparent from their Writings that other Heathens had the same apprehensions of them which the Papists have of Saints and Angels for they distinguished them into such Spirits as * Verum haec omnis distributio corum Daemonum fait qui quondam in corpore bumano fuere Sunt autem non posteriore numero praestantiori longe dignitate superius aliud angustiusque genus Daemonum qui semper à corporis compedibus nexibus liberi Apuleius l. de Deo Socratis p. 50. were by death delivered from the body and such as never were united to the body And hence that Law of the old Romanists †Divos eos qui coelostes semper habiti colunto ollos quos in coelum merita vocaverunt Cic. de legibus l. 2. Let them be worshipped who have always lived in Heaven and those whose merits have advanced them to that place where we have both the same objects of our worship and the same reason of that worship given viz. their merits or as Trismegistus hath it the vertues of their life And though I grant they were mistaken in their apprehensions yet he that doth so confidently assert That Roman Catholicks would not be guilty of Idolatry provided the material object of their worship should be bread because they apprehend what is bread not to be there but Christ cannot have any reason to quarrel with the Heathens because when they performed their worship to an Image in whom these Spirits were conceived to be present they apprehended no evil Spirit to be there but only pure and holy Souls and blessed Daemons 2. Their office saith he is not to inform the supreme God of what he knows but to be joynt Petitioners with us Answ Admit all this the Fathers do expresly hold they ought not to be worshipped upon that account But 2. Let me crave leave of good St. Augustine to assert That the Platonists did not conceive that God was ignorant of what was done on Earth or that he needed Daemons or any other Spirits to inform him of our words thoughts or actions St. Augustine I confess infers this Doctrine from what they did assert but that they constantly professed and taught the contrary is clearer than the Sun * Theolog. Dogm Tom 1. l. 8. c. 4. Petavius tells us That the tenth Book of Plato is spent in proving that God wants neither power will nor knowledge to make his providence concerned about the least things which are done on Earth and that expresly he declares that the Gods discern know and hear all things and that nothing which our sense or reason can perceive can be concealed from them This saith †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 10. de leg p. 955. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ammonius Comment ad librum Aristotelis de interpretatione Plotinus and Ammonius must be certain that if the Gods are the first causes of all things they cannot possibly be ignorant of any thing which is in any manner done by them Moreover the ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plotinus Enn. 5. l. 9. c. 5 Vid. Petavium T. 1. l. 4. c. 2. Platonists affirmed That God had this knowledge from and by himself and from no other and that nothing was required but his nature to make him understand all things Particularly both Platonists and others held that God was the searcher of the heart and was himself acquainted with the thoughts of men Hence (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Laertius in vit Thaletis p. 24 Nihil Deo clausum est interest animis nostris cogitationibus intervenit Senec Ep. 83. Thales being asked whether the actions of men could be concealed from God he answers No nor yet our thoughts Nothing is hid from God faith Seneca he is both present to our minds and thoughts Whence he exhorts us so to live as in his sight and so to think as having one who looks into our brests (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Xenophon memorab l. 1. The Gods saith Socrates know all things which are spoken done and which in silence we consult (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 M. Antonini l. 12. Sect. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. l. 11. Sect. 13. God sees all minds saith Antoninus devested of those Barks and material Vessels that contain them for with his mind alone he reacheth all those minds which are derived from him and are lodged in them Whence he exhorts us so to be (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epict dissert l. 2. c. 14. affected in our minds as that the Gods may see that nothing doth trouble or disgust us (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plutarch de tarditate divin vindict This we are first to learn saith Epictetus that there is a God whose Providence doth reach to all things and that not only what we do but what we think cannot be hid from him It is more agreeable to God saith Plutarch to perceive the actions of the soul than of the body he therefore knows the dispositions of all men This is but little of that which might be easily produced to confirm this truth but yet it is sufficient to inform the Reader that T. G. was scandalously ignorant if he did not know it or scandalously wicked if knowing this he ventured to declare the contrary 3. We saith T. G. do not procure or buy this favour of them by offering Sacrifice to them Answ True but then you offer up your prayers unto them which in the judgment of the ancient Fathers is the best and highest Sacrifice
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
so frequent in those Writers of the Church of Rome which comment on the places mentioned These blessed Apostles were not so careful to prevent the Errors and Mistakes of Hereticks in this particular as are the Doctors of the Roman Church they do not seem so tender of the Invotion and Worship of those blessed Spirits or so sollicitous we may not loose so great a benefit as are those Roman Doctors which gives us reason to conjecture not that their Knowledg or their Piety was less but that they did not very much aprove that Doctrine which gave the rise unto this Superstition of the Romish Church and so much for the first particular 2. That both the Jews and Christians abstained from this practise because they did not think this honor to be due to Angels but to God alone is evident from what we have discoursed already to confirm this inference the Apostles and Evangelists left us no precept or example to put up our petitions to departed Saints and therefore they conceived it the Worship due to God alone 2 Having removed and taken off those reasons which the Romanist assignes of this neglect it follows that that reason must stand good which we assigne at least till they can find a better With us consent the learned Jews (a) Joseph Albus l. 3. in Icarim c. 18. Idololatriam primam corum fulsse existimans qui Angelos similes creaturas ut sequestres inter se at Deum colluissent ait Deum in Decalogo quando ait Non cruâ—t tibi Dit aâ—ieni ante faciem meam id voluisse ne homines ullos ponerent sequestres aut deprecatores inter se ipsos Vossiu in Maim de Idolol c. 2. Sect. 1. Josephus Albus supposeth this Worship of the Angels as Mediators betwixt God and us to be the most antique Idolatry and (b) Fundamentum Mandati de Idololatria est nequis Serviat Creaturae non Angelo non Sphaeâ—ae non Stellae quanquam autem is qui ca colit sciat illa non esse Deum ac colat Creaturam hanc quomodo coluit Euos illius coaetanei nihilomiâ—us est Idololatria Maim ibid. Maimonides sue definitione non tantum se complecti ait Eos qui creaturis cultum exhibent us Deo verum qui iis supplicant ut ministris Dei Dionys Vossius in locum Maimon adds that the foundation of the precept of Idolatry is this that no man serve or Worship any Angel or created being As the Foundation of our last evidence of that Idolatry which is in this particular committed by the Church of Rome §. 9. we do premise 1. That Magick is that art of Divination which in conversant about the Revelation of things coâ—tingent and concealed as v. g. touching the victory of contending parties the future condition of the Church c. The declaration of our future State Fortune Marriage Death Prosperity Adversity and many other things which it is very useful for Mankind to know Alii dicunt hos esse effectus bonorum Angelorum Delrio disq Mag. l. 2. qu. 2. p. 96. B. 2 I premise that there was amongst the antients an oppinion that by the help of Souls departed or good Angels they might obtain the knowledge of things contingent and concealed and hence that Divination which they exercised who did pretend to know things secret or contingent by their means was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or white Magick in opposition to Divination by evil Spirits which they stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or black Magick it was a very old opinion especially of the Platonists of Jamblick Porphyry Plotinus Proclus and Julian the Apostate that Divination was the effect of holy Angels So (a) Disquis Mag. l. 2. qu. 2. p. 96. B. Delrio (b) Strom. 3. Magicians who observe Angels and Demons are careful to abstain from Wine and Venery and living creatures So St. Clemens And 3. I premise that this white Magick is by the Church of Rome condemned as Idolatry For such is all unlawful Magick saith (c) Tacita Idololatria est omnis Magia prohibita Belrio l. 1. disqu Mag. cap. 1. p. 3. Col. 3. Delrio Whosoever exerciseth the art of Divination or consults them that do it are guilty of having other Gods saith (d) Estius in Sent. 3. dist 4. Sect. 6. p. 130. Estius because they attribute unto the Creature what is Gods propriety viz. The knowledge of things future and which in nature have no certain Causes but which depend upon the will of man or other things which are mutable Valentianus adds That they affront his Majesty by a vain expectation of those things from Creatures which are to be expected only from God for God having said declare to us things future that we may know that ye are Gods the knowledge of things future and contingent must be the knowledge proper unto God alone And again the procuration of the knowledge of things hid or secret belongeth to Divine Worship for these are to be expected only from God by prayer and other lawful means when therefore we expect them vainly from the Creature we do ascribe unto the Creature that Worship which is properly Divine These things premised 4. I add that either this white Magick must be lawful or else the Invocation of Saints and Angels as it is practised in the Church of Rome must be unlawful and guilty of Idolatry either we vainly do expect that they should hear and understand our mental Prayers and know the secrets of our Hearts or the Magicians who do expect the knowledge of things secret or contingent by those blessed Spirits cannot be justly charged with Idolatry For whatsoever the Romanist pretends in vindication of the first doth equally excuse and vindicate the second for if you do conjecture with the Church of Rome that the affection of those blessed Spirits to mankind is so exceeding great that it will prompt them most assuredly to intercede in our behalf for other temporal concerns to be our refuge and Protectors and to Minister to the concernements both of this and of the future life why may we not conceive that the same love should move them to declare those future things which it doth Equally concern us to know both that we may obtain the greatest blessings and may be able to fly and to prevent the greatest perils or may prepare to bear those evils with a Christian courage which we cannot escape When Florentius having lost his Cloak T. G. p. 424. and had not where withall to buy another by praying to the twenty Martyrs caught a Fish with a Gold Ring in t sufficient I suppose to buy another Caniw e doubt but when we lose a Cloak that praying to all Saints and Angels some kind hearted Saint that perhaps in his life time lost his own and so must be supposed according to * Part. 3. cap. 2. Sect. 4. T. G. to be more ready than the rest to pitty any
body that sustains that loss will tell us where this lost Cloak is If God doth either from the Law of Friendship or for our profit reveal the secrets of mens hearts unto them and inform both Saints and Angels of our Prayers and our Necessities why should we not conceive that he is as ready to inform them of those hidden and contingent things which it as much concerneth us to be informed of as to receive an Answer to our Prayers v. g. if he informed the twenty Martyrs of Florentius his Petition that his Cloak might be given to him T. G. p. 423 424. why should he not inform them where it was or if those blessed Spirits do by virtue of the beatifick Vision see our Prayers and Wants why should they not be thought to view our Losses and our future state in the same beatifick Vision If that could represent unto the twenty Martyrs Florentius's Prayer why not his Cloak and where it was They who see God see all things in him which belong unto him say the Roman Doctors therefore they see the Prayers directed to him for they objectively must be in God they that see God saith the Magitian see all things in him and therefore they must see things future and concealed for they objectively must be in God and with what shew of reason can any man reject the latter inference who doth allow the former for to be the Searcher of the Heart is not less proper to God then is the Knowledge of what is future and contingent Nay Holy Scripture seemes more clearly to appropriate to God the Knowledge of the Heart then of things future and contingent for it expresly saith thou only knowest the Hearts of men but doth not so expresly say thou only knowest what is to come Moreover the secret motions of our Heart do equally depend upon our will which is uncertain and very subject unto change if therefore it be truly said that what is future and contingent cannot be known by any creature because it doth depend on what is mutable and therefore to expect this knowledge from a Creature or to ascribe it to him is to be Guilty of Idolatry the like must be affirmed of the thoughts and inward motions of the Heart which equally depending on the free motions of the will must be obnoxious to the same uncertaintyes CHAP. XI The CONTENTS The Canon of the Councel of Laodicea de iis qui Angelos Colunt is laid down and the Judgment of Theodoret and Photius upon it Sect. 1. And it is proved 1. That it contains the Sentence and belief of the whole Church of Christ Sect. 2. That it forbids the Invocation and Worship of Angels Sect. 3. That the Angels whose Invocation and Worship it forbids were blessed Spirits and not evil Angels Sect. 4. That it forbids what is the Practice of the Church of Rome Sect. 5. That it pronounceth the Worship and Invocation of the holy Angels to be Idolatry Sect. 6. That in the Judgment of the Fathers this was the Worship which St. Paul condemned 2 Coloss Sect. 7. The evasions of T. G. confuted ibid. And all the other Answers of the Romanists Sect. 8. THat what we have thus confirmed from Scripture and the voice of Reason § 1. hath also the consent and the concurrent suffrage of Antiquity we shall demonstrate not from the words of any single Father but from the clear decision of the whole Church of God which is delivered to us in these words viz. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Codex Canonum Eccles Univers Can. 139. That Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and depart a side and invocate Angels and make meetings which are things forbidden If any man therefore be found to give himself to this privy Idolatry let him be accursed Because he hath forsaken our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God and betaken himself to Idolatry In the Epitomy of Canons collected by Dionisius Exiguus and which Pope Adrian delivered to Charles the great this Decree is thus entitled (a) Jusâ—el Cod. Can Eccles p. 106. Canon de his qui Angelos colunt a Decree concerning those that worship Angels (b) Brev. Canon 90. Crisconius hath the like Theodoret who lived in the next Century upon those words of the Apostle Let no man defraud you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshiping of Angels writes that (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. in Coloss c. 2. They who were zealous for the Law perswaded men to worship Angels because say they the Law was given by them This did they councel to be done pretending himility and saying that the God of all things was invisible and inaccessible and incomprehensible and that it was fit we should procure Gods favor by the means of Angels And again (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. in Col. 2. Because they commanded men to worship Angels saith Theoderet he enjoyneth the contrary that they should adorn their words and deeds with the Commemoration of our Lord Christ and send up thanksgiving to God and the Father by him and not by the Angels The Synod of Laodicea also following this Rule and desiring to heal that old disease made a Law that they should not pray to Angels nor forsake our Lord Jesus Christ And lastly (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. in Col. 2. This vice saith he continued in Phrygia and Pisidia for a long time For which cause also the Synod assembled in Laodicea the chief City of Phrygia forbad them by a Law to pray to Angels and even to this day among them and their Borderers there are Oratories of St. Michael to be Seen The like hath Oecumenius upon the same place saying that (b) Oecumen MS. in Coloss 2. apud Hoechelium in Origenem contra Celfum In libris editis desideratur this Custom continued in Phrygia insomuch that the Councel of Laodicea did by a Law forbid to come to Angels and to pray unto them From whence it is also that there be many Churches of Michael the Cheif Captain of Gods Host among them This Canon of the Laodicean Fathers Photius doth note to have been made against the (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phot. Nomocanon tit 12. c. 9. Angelites or the Angelicks rather For so St. (a) Angelici in Angelorum cultum inclinati Aug. de haeres c. 39. Augustin names those Hereticks that were inclined to the worship of Angles being from thence called (b) Angelici vocati quia Angelos colunt Isidor Orig. l. 8. c. 5. Angelici as Isidorus noteth because they did worship Angels Now that the strength of what we argue from this Canon And that the vanity of what the Romanists except against it may appear 1. Let it be noted that the forementioned Canon containeth the Sentence and Belief of the whole Church of Christ 5 2. for it is a Canon of that Code which the whole Christian World did use
both in their Councils and Ecclesiastical Judicatures untill the Seventh Century and which is cited both by the Council of Calcedon and of Ephesus as (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex Concil Ephes act 1. p. 2. p. 327. To. 1. Concil General Edit Rom. the order of Canons the series of Ecclesiastical Laws the Ecclesastical constitutions and (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 act 2. p. 400. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 426. v. p. 425. p. 491. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex Concil Calced act 3. p. 241. Tom. 2. Concil the Code It is a Canon of that Code to which the Council of Calcedon gave the force and the Authority of an universal Law in these Expressions (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 act 4. p. 297. vic Justel Cod. Canon p. 6. 12. we think it equal that the Canons made by Holy Fathers in every Synod untill now should be observed Can. 1. 2. Observe that what the Canon thus expresseth § 3. viz. that Christians should not name the Angels is an Anathema directed against those which pray to Angels so Theodoret and Photius who call upon them for help or introduction to God So Zonaras and Aristenus who worshipt them In locum So Theodoret Dionysius Christonius and the Epitome of Canons presented by Pope Adrian to Charles the great who said we must be brought to God by Angels so Aristenus and the Amerbachian Scholiast In locum and that to cure that Disease the Council did command all Christians not to pray unto them so Theodoret and Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And therefore evident it is that Zonaras doth truly say that to name Angels in this Canon was as much as to invoke them whence it will follow that the whole Church of Christ for two whole Centuries and upwards did forbid all Christians to Invoke Angels to worship or to call upon them and did pronounce Anathema's on them that did so 3. Observe that what this Canon doth forbid § 4. was not the Invocation of wicked Daemons or of Damned Spirits but of the Blessed Angels For 1. According to Theodoret and Photius they did condemn the worshipers of Michael the Archangel and those that went unto the Oratories or Churches of St. Michael 2. The Canon doth relate to Christians who surely would not meet to worship Devils nor doth it recall them to good Angels but to Jesus Christ 3. The persons reprehended are said to have took up this Custom of going thus to good Daemons from a pretence of their unworthiness to go to God or Christ immediately and from an appearance of humility So Chrysostome Theodoret and others but to expect the help of Devils to introduce them to God and to pretend humility in doing such an horrid act is to be guilty of the highest madness 4. Theodoret and Photius inform us that they who brought up that forbidden practice were zealous for the Law now that most strictly did forbid the worship of all evil spirits it was delivered not by them but by the Blessed Angels 4. That which is here forbidden § 4. is what the Church of Rome doth daily practice for they do worship Angels saith the Roman Catechism Part 3. p. 434. this is and hath been their perpetual Custom to call upon them and to expect their help and patronage by vertue of those supplications Hence that Expression of the Roman Missal (a) Hos fidenter deprecemur ut ab ipsis adjuvemur apud deum jugiter Prosa ad S. Angelos f. 32. B. To them with confidence let 's pray for Gods assistance every day They do expect Salvation from their intercession in that very sense in which Theophylact asserts the Hereticks expected to be saved by Angels viz 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as persons ministring unto our Introduction to God and Christ Hence their petitions that (b) Hostias tibi Domine laudis offerimus suppliciter deprecantes ut easdem Angelico interveniente suffragio placatus accipta ad salutem nostram provenire concedas Missa votiva de Angelis p. 5.36 Ed. Aut. fol. Gaudium erit tibi Angele dei super me peccatore tuis intercessionibus deum obtinente Missa in honorem proprii Angelif 16. B. Ed. Antuerp So. 1577. Angelorum concio sacra Archangelorum turma inclyta nostra diluant jam peccata praestando superacaeli Gaudia Prosa de omnibus sanctis ibid. f. 33. B. by the intercessions of the blessed Angels they may obtain Gods favour and may be brought to Life Eternal If then that Invocation which is here forbidden be Idolatry the practice of the Church of Rome must be so too 5. This Invocation of the Blessed Angels §. 6. is expresly said to be Idolatry and therefore if it be not truly so this Synod and the Church of Christ must be pronounced false accusers now of this enormity they could not justly be accused for deserting Christ for notwithstanding this they did not look upon those Angels they invoked as Gods but as inferiour Creatures and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or presons instrumental and subservient unto our Introduction to God and therefore thought we should procure Gods favour by the means of Angels because that God himself was not to be approached or apprehended and because Christ was so exalted that they durst not make their immediate addresses to him now to think Christ greater than that we sinful Creatures should make addresses to him maketh some shew of our humility but cannot possibly be charged with Idolatry For should any Man conceive himself unworthy to appear before God or look upon him as unaccessable by one of so defiled a spirit and therefore should entreat the Prayers of his pious Neighbors we might conclude that he was very ignorant and vain in his imaginations but could not thence conclude that he was guilty of Idolatry And so the Reader sees that notwithstanding these mistakes of the Angelicks the Church of Rome hath no wrong done them when we charge their Invocation of the blessed Angels with Idolatry for if the Invocation of them when absent were not guilty of this Crime these by-mistakes could never make it guilty of that imputation Besides the Synod and Theodoret do put a clear distinction betwixt these two particulars which by the Exposition of the Roman Doctors are confounded and made to signify the same viz. desertion of Christ and being guilty of Idolatry by praying to the blessed Angels as is apparent from this expression of Theodoret the Synod of Laodicea made a Law that Christians should not pray to Angels nor forsake the Lord Christ whosoever doth such things say they accursed let him be because he hath deserted Christ and given up himself unto Idolatry Lastly we do not find that they did so reject or desert Christ as to deny his intercession in the Heavens but only upon this account because they did not make immediate addresses to him For as St. Paul asserts
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
a little after that to them it was given to preside over the Earth or to be patrons or Inspectors of such a City or of such a Countrey and upon that account infers we must both pray and offer our thandsgiving and first fruits unto them To all this Origen replies that we must offer up our prayers to God alone and we must pray to him alone to whom we offer our first fruits in both which places if Origen intended only to affirm that prayer was due to God which implies the object of our supplication to be the highest God and the chief Author of all Good it is apparent he doth not in the least deny what Celsus pleaded for viz. such supplication as he conceived due to such Daemons as were commissionated from God and belonged to him 5. This Answer renders the discourses of this learned Father rediculously weak and unconcluding as v. g. 1. We cannot rationally pray to Angels saith this learned Father Because we do not know their natures nor are we capable of the knowledge of them lib. 5. p. 233. Which if we understand it thus We know not what their understanding is or whether they have any knowledge of our hearts when present or of our prayers when absent And therefore do not conceive it rational to pray unto them it is both pertinent and conclusive But if we understand it thus we must not pray unto them as we do to the great God of Heaven because we do not know their Natures Nothing is more absurd and foolish for certainly all Christians knew so much of their nature as to believe they were not Gods Besides we neither know the nature of God nor are we capable of understanding it and yet it will not follow that we we may not pray unto him lib. 5. p. 239. as to the Author of all Good Again it is absurd saith he having God alwayes present with us to pray unto the Son which is not alwayes present now this absurdity doth equally respect Prayer relative and absolute for if the Son can hear our prayers and can obtain Gods blessings when he is not present it cannot be absurd to pray unto him because not present but if he cannot then must it be absurd to put up to him such petitions as the Church of Rome doth tender to the holy Angels Moreover we do not in the least contemne saith he so admirable a work of God but yet we must not pray unto the Creature or this work of God lib. 5. p. 238. because it prayes for us Now here can any man conceive he should intend no more but this you must not look on that as the supremest Deity which I have told you is his Creature No sure had he and all the Christian World prayed daily to them who do pray for us he would have rather said you must not pray unto him as to that God who is the Author of all good because he is a Creature 6. When Origen discourseth of this subject he usually saith that we must put up our petitions unto God by Christ and having once confessed that we may pray directly to Christ whom he conceived to be inferior to the Father he makes that very same distinction which our Author and his party do viz. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 5. p. 233. That prayer may be taken properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in an improper and abusive sense and in this sense alone he doth approve of prayer made to Christ whereas had he allowed of any prayers made to Saints and Angels it is to be presumed having so many provocations and occasions to treat upon and to explain the subject he would have sometimes used this distinction and would not alwayes have denied this practice and condemned that doctrine without distinction or exception elsewhere he saith If any man be not sufficient viz. to go directly to God let him go to the Son of God who is able to heal him Since then he never saith as doth the Church of Rome let him go to Saints and Angels certain it is that he did not approve this practise and this is yet more evident from his reply to Celsus Orig. lib. 8. p. 416. for when Celsus had objected that according to the Doctrine of the Aegyptians every part of a man hath a particular Daemon or Aethereal God and every one of these being invocated heals the diseases of the parts proper to themselves Why then may not the Christians justly invocate the favor both of them and others if they had rather be in health than sickness To this it is replied by Origen 1. That Celsus by advising us to go to Daemons sufficiently declared his distrust of the inseparable and undivided worship of the God of all lib. 8. p. 417. and did imagine that to Worship God alone and honor him was not sufficient to preserve those that did so from diseases and the insidiations of evil spirits which is an evident conviction that he did not think the invocation of the Archangel Gabriel Michael Raphael or of Sebastian Valentinus or any other Roman Saint which they of Rome do daily invocate for their protection from these evil spirits and the diseases which they are subject to was needful for that end or that it could be practised without distrusting of the all-sufficient God 2. He adds It is much better to commit our selves to God the Lord of all things by Jesus Christ and ask of him all help lib. 8. p. 418. and in particular the custody of the holy Angels who may deliver us from these terrestrial Daemons where also it is manifest that he would have us ask the help and custody of Angels not from them as is the manner of the Roman Church but only from the God of Angels Orig. ib. 3. He affirms that health is to be sought either by means of the Physitian which is the ordinary way or by extraordinary means viz. by piety towards God in our addresses to him by which expression it is also manifest that he was ignorant of that way of seeking health which had its rise from after ages and is so common in the Church of Rome for otherwise as it is excellently observed by the learned Doctor p. 150. he must have told him that Christians were not to address themselves to Chnumen Chnaachnumen Cnat Sicat Biu Eru or any other Heathen Daemons to obtain these Blessings but unto Raphael and Appollonia Sebastian and Roach Unto the first and second argument urged by the Doctor and most apparently confounding the doctrine and common practice of the Roman Church T. G. affords us not one word of answer the evidence being too plain and pregnant to admit of a reply but over the third remark he triumphs and undertakes to render it ridiculous to all sober Readers by shewing two things 1. The difference between the Doctrine and Practice of the Aegyptians
Spirits he adds that it is evident St. Austin speaks of the worship which is due to God alone that is of such dedications and consecrations as were performed by the Heathens to their Daemons as Gods And having T. G's word for this you ought not to expect his proof But 1. The words of St. Austin do apparently distinguish betwixt performing Sacred Offices and Consecration of our selves unto them for saith he the Question is * Quomodo Credendi sint velle a nobis religionem pietatemque servari hoc est ut apertius dicam utrum etiam sibiâ—â—an tantum Deo suo qui etiam nosier est placeat eis ut sicra faciamus Et Sacrificemus vel aliqua nostra sen nos ipsos Religionis Ritibus consecre mus Whether it can please those holy Spirits that we should perform Sacred offices and Sacrifices to them or should consecrate our selves or any thing belonging to us by Religious Rites The affirmative is the opinion of the Platonists and of the Church of Rome but that we should not consecrate our selves unto them by any Religious Rite is the opinion of S. Austin 2. St. Austin had in the immediate foregoing Chapter undertaken to evince †Quos autem bonos ideo non solum immortales verum etiam beatos Deorum nomine Sacris Sacrificiis propter vitam bâ—â—tam post mortem adipiscendam colendos putant qualescunque illi sint quolibet vocabulo digni sint non eos velle per tale religionis obsequium nisi unum Deum coli a quo creâ—ti cujus participatione beati sint adjuvante ipso in se uenti libro diligentius disseremus de Civit. Dei l. 9. c. 23. that those blessed spirits would not be worshiped Sacris Sacrificiis id est by Sacred Offices and Sacrifices but that God only was to be worshiped by such rites and though he saith they would not be worshiped Deorum nomine which gave occasion to this Answer of T. G. St. Austin in this very Chapter doth inform us that these Palatonists against whom he disputed did not differ from the Christians in their apprehensions of their Daemons and as if he had intended to exclude this exposition of T. G. he adds that Platonists acknowledged their Daemons to be good Spirits De C D. lib. 9. c. 23. made by God and therefore only called them Gods in such a sence in which the Scripture was wont to Stile the Angels Gods So that it is most certain 1. that Sacra facere was not equivocally translated to perform Sacred Offices And 2. that Austin doth not speak of the worship due to God alone but of the worship due to good Spirits made by God Pag. 390 391. §. 5. We have a fresh attempt to blast the Credit of the Doctor but I have throughly considered it Chap. 6. Prop. 4. Corol 3. and have made it clear beyond all contradiction that it is only a rude heap of false suggestions and desingenious insinuations be pleased Reader to consult the place and disbelieve me if thou canst From p. 390 § 6. to 430. he is more sparing in his accusations but from that Page to the conclusion of his book we have but little besides Prodigious outcries and admirations of the miserable shifts and disingenious arts of Dr. Stilling fleet p. 431. and thus the Charge begins I must desire the Reader to take the pains to peruse attentively the words of S. Austin as they stand cited in the Reply and the Doctors Considerations upon them for himself thought not fit to call them an Answer that by his performance in this point he may see to what miserable shifts and disingenious arts they are put who will shut their Eyes and fight against the light of a Noon-day truth And then he proceeds to charge the Doctor with corrupting the words of Austin li. 22. and with an exposition not only opposit unto the sence of Austin li. 29. but confuted by him And with affirming what if he had not shut his Eyes could not have been affirmed li. 16. and yet all this I have demonstrated to be false Chap. 9. Sect. 11. But then what follows p 432. is that disingenious accusation which deserves for ever to to be branded with a note of Infamy viz. Whereas he saith that I conveniently left out what St. Austin adds p. 432. that not only Sacrifice was refused by Saints and Angels but any other Religious honor which is due to God himself had he not conveniently put in those words any other Religious honor into the Text for they are not in S. Austin he had had nothing to blind his Reader with Whoever looks into the Text will judge he had done much more conveniently for his Cause had he left it out p. 433. Answ This he avoucheth here in the face of the world but as I suppose in confidence that neither his Reader or his Adversary would be so rude as to look into the Text or to suspect the truth of what he doth assert with so much confidence For thus St. Austin speaks Cum autem ad hunc Cultum pertineat oblatio Sacrificii unde Idololatria dicitur eorum qui hoc etiam Idolis exhibent nullo modo tale aliquid offerimus Now let it only be observed that Sacrifice is on all hands confessed to be religious worship lib. 20. contra Faust c 21. and then let Romanists themselves be judge whether nullo modo tale aliquid offerimus do not signify we do not offer ony other religious honor which is due to God himself and which would render us Idolaters so unhappily did he advise us to peruse attentively the words of Austin which do so clearly evidence that it is not the Doctor but T. G. who is forced to fly to miserable shifts and disingenious Arts. The Doctor p. 173. § 7. Speaks thus we do not say that some superstitions did not creep in after the Anniversary meetings at the Sepulchres of the Martyrs grew in request for St. Austin himself saith that what they taught was one thing and what they did bear with was another speaking of the Customs used at those Solemnities Now here T. G. is pleased to represent him as a most unconscionable Cheat and with great wonderment Cryes out Is it possible he could think so great a forb as this could pass for current in the World p. 439. Is it possible he could have courage enough to cite the place where these words are to be found and not fear a Rat Observe I pray What St. Austin condemns is this that some who brought Wine and Meat to the Sepulchres of the Martyrs took so plentifully of them that they made themselves drunk His words are these as for those who make themselves drunk at the Sepulchres of the Martyrs how can they be approved by us whom sound doctrine condemns even when they do it in their own private houses This was