consilii Angelus per incarnationis mysterium venit in mundum stetitqae ante Altare id est in conspectu Ecclesia Dionys Carthus in Apoc. 8. Catholick Doctors c. by this Angel understand Christ who is the Angel of the great Counsel and which by the mystery of his incarnation came into the world and stood upon the Altar of the Cross Blasius (b) Nec vero rectè quidam è recentioribus argumentantur Angelum istum Christum esse non posse quod Christus nunquam Angelus absolute dicitur satis enim est ut ex consequentibus facile intelligi potest Christum esse quae nifi Christe alteri aptè accommodari non possunt Cujus enim alterius est universae Ecclesiae incensa hoc est orationes in Thuribulo aurto tanta Majestatis specie patri offerre Cujus praeterquam Christi fuit de igne quo Thuribulum aureum eaat impletum partem in terras misisse easque divini amoris igne inflammasse c. Apuaret autem Christus sacerdotis personam gerens ut ejus pro nobis apud patrem intercessio atque interpellatio monstretur Vieg in Apoc. 8. Sec. 2. Viegas a Jesuit We may easily perceive that this Angel is Christ because the thing here spoken of him can agree to no other but Christ for who but he can with so great Majesty offer up to God the incense that is the Prayers of the Vniversal Church who besides him is able out of the perfuming pann to send down into the Earth the fiery Coals of Divine Charity and to inflame People with the burning Graces of the holy Spirit With these agree (c) Ambros super Apoc. Vis 3. Cap. 8. Ambrose (d) Primas in Apoc. 8. Biblioth Sanct. Colon. to 9. p. 2. Primasius (e) Ansbert in Apoc. 8. Bibl. Sanct. Col. to 9. p. 393. Authertus (f) Bed 5. super Apoc. lib. 2. Beda (g) Haimo in Apoc. 8. Haimo (h) Hugo Card. Hugo Cardinalis and the Glosses (i) Glossae totum legunt hoc de Christe But if it were granted that this Angel were a created or ministring Spirit it cannot be proved that Angels understand the secret cogitations of mans heart any farther then the same are manifested by signs neither is it consequent that people ought to pray unto them for Priests offer up the Prayers of the Church to God and yet no man doth therefore invocate Priests It is recorded of the Saints enjoying the same blissfull vision with the Angels Object ibid. that they had golden Vials full of odours which are the Prayers of Saints that is of the faithful upon earth 1. Answ The Reverend Dr. Hammond and many other Expositors Ancient and Modern tell us that the four and twenty Elders are not the Members of the Church triumphant as T. G. without proof asserts but the Bishops and the Elders of the Church militant whose office it is to present the Prayers and Praises of the Church to God Here it is more plainly declared saith Beda that the Beasts and the Elders are the Church redeemed by the blood of Christ and gathered from the Nations also he showeth in what Heaven they are saying they shall reign upon earth So Ambrose on the Apcalyps and Haimo 2. Vossius will tell you That here is nothing intended but Eucharistal Prayers not Petitory and that the four and twenty Elders only intimate that the whole Family of Christians in Earth and Heaven did render continual Doxologies to God for the Redemption of the world by his Son The Psalmist saith I will sing unto thee in the sight or presence of the Angels Psal 137.2 Object p. 418. The Angel of the Lord said O Lord of Hosts how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the Cities of Judah against which thou hast had Indignation these threescore and ten years And Michael is a great Prince which standeth for the Children of Gods people Ergo The Angels know the secrets of the heart and are acquainted with the Prayers that men in any place put up unto them To these Objections I answer Ha Ha He Answ Valentianus Fieri ne potest ut homo qui sic ratiocinatur homo sit The Psalmist also saith I will pay my vows in the presence of thy people Ergo All Gods people knew the secrets of the heart c. The Phanatick saith How long Lord wilt thou not remember and have mercy upon the Godly Party who have been under persecution fourteen years Ergo The Phanaticks know the secrets of the heart c. And blessed be God King Charles the Second is a great Prince who standeth for his People against the Whore of Babylon He therefore knows the Prayers and necessities of all his People he is acquainted with the secrets of the heart and we may put up mental Prayers unto him If T. G. have an estate worth begging he may well fear that his performance here and P. 222 223. will rob him of it CHAP. VII The Contents The Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome touching the invocation of the Saints departed delivered from their own Catechism and Liturgies and the decree of the Trent Councel Sect. 1. the Question stated in seven Particulars Sect. 2. The Idolatry of this practice proved 1. Because it doth ascribe unto them the knowledge of the heart and of our confessions 2. Because Prayer to an absent Being is the oblation of that Worship to it which is proper to God And so are Vows and Hymns Sect. 3.3 Because the Apostles gave us no Precept or Example so to do Sect. 4. The sequel of this Argument is confirmed and the Objections answered Sect. 5. And the Argument from Miracles confuted Sect. 6. HAving laid down these Propositions let us now view the Doctrine and Practise of the Church of Rome which the Trent Councel hath delivered in these words viz. * Mandat Sancta Synodus omnibus Episcopis clerieis docendi munuscurámque sustinentibus ut fideles diligenter instruant docentes eos Bonum atque utile esse suppliciter eos invocare ad eorum orationes opem auxiliúmque confugere Illos verò qui negant Sanctos aeterna felicitate in calo fruentes invocandos esse aut qui asserunt eorum ut pro nobis singulis orent invocationem esse Idololatricam vel pugnare cum verbo Dei adversi ique honori unius Mediatoris Dei Hominis Jesu Christi vel stultum esse in coele regantibus voce vel mente suppliâ—are impié sentire St quis autem his Decretis contraria docuerit aut senserit Anath ma sit Sess 25. c. 1. That it is good and profitable humbly to invoke the Saints and fly unto their prayers and help and that whosoever doth deny that Saints who do enjoy eternal happiness in heaven ought to be invoked or do assert that to intreat them to pray for any single person is Idolatry or is
the Creator to the Creature and the like and are sufficiently warded against the force of this assault by being told that Antichrist must be ushered in with Signs and lying Wonders 2 Thess 2.9 Secondly What Austin saith unto the Donatists we also say unto the Church of Rome Shew us your Scriptures for this Invocation haec sunt causae nostrae firmamenta The third Particular contained in this Answer is That the Holy Spirit hath forewarned us that in the latter times this Doctrine of Damons should prevail which Doctrine both the ingenious Mr. Mede and * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adv Antidico marionitas Haer. 78. §. 23. A. Epiphanius do well interpret to be the Doctrine of worshipping the Spirits of dead Men and by the pertinency of this Sense unto St. Austins present subject we have good reason to conjecture that he approved their Opinion St. Austins second Answer to this Objection is as followeth †Porrò si aliquis in Hereticorum memoriis orans exauditur non pro merito loci sed pro merito desiderii sui recipit sive matum sive bonum nonne legimus ab ipso domino Deo nonnullos exauditos in excelsis montium Judaeae quae tamen excelsa ità displicebant Deo ut Reges qui ea non everterent crâ—lparentur qui everterent laudarentur unde intelligitur magis valere peâ—entiâ— assectium â—u â—m petitioâ—is locum ib. p. 116. Col. 2. K. L Moreover if any person praying in the memorials of Hereticks be heard it is not for the merit of the place but of his own desire that he receiveth any good Do we not read that God himself hearkned to many of those Jews who prayed in the high places although those places so displeased him that he rebuked those Kings that suffered them Whence we may understand that the affection of the Supplicant is more prevailing then the place of Prayer And accordingly we say That if any person praying to these Saints was heard it was not for the merit of this prayer considered as directed to the Saints but for the affection of his heart and as it will not follow that it was lawful for the Jew to pray in those high places or for the Christian to pray in the memorials of Hereticks because that they who prayed there were sometimes heard So neither doth it follow that it is lawful to pray unto the Saints departed because of some few instances that they who have thus prayed have received the desired Blessing Thirdly saith St. Austin ‖ De visis autem fallacibus legunt quae scriâ—ta sunt quia ipse Satanas se transfigurat tanquam Angelum lucis quia multos seduxerunt somnia sua Audiant etiam quae narrant pagani de Templis Diis suis mirabiliâ—er vel facta vel visa tamen dii Gentium Baemonia Exaudiuntur ergo multi multis modis non solum Christâ—â—ani Catholici sed Pagant Judaei Haeretici variis errorâ—lus superstiâ—ionibus dediti exaudiuntur autem vel ab spiritibus seductoribus qui tamen nihil faciunt nisi permitâ—antur Deo subliâ—iter aâ—que ineffabiliter judieante quid cuique tribuendum sit sive ab ipso Deo vel ad poenam malitiae vel ad solatium miseriae vel ad monitionem quaerendae salutis aeternae ib f. B. Col. 2. L.M. Let them hear what the Pagans tell of the Wonders done by their Gods and at their Temples and yet the Gods of the Heathens are but Daemons and therefore many not only Catholicks but Pagans Jewes and Hereticks may many wayes be heard either by those seducing Spirits which yet do nothing but with Gods permission or else by God himself either for castigation of their wickedness or comfort of their misery or in admonition of them to pursue eternal safety Which Answer also doth suggest these things 1. That the Argument is vain because it will serve the Paegan as well as it well serve the Donatist or Roman Catholick and proves as much their Invocation of Daemons to be lawful as the invocation of the Saints departed which is now practised in the Church of Rome For as (a) Quibusdam signis miraculis oraculis fidem divinitatis operatur Apol. c. 21. §. 8. Tertullian saith by Signs and Miracles and Oracles they obtained to be reputed Gods (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—om 6. p 375 l. 20. They often by their skill have cured diseases and restored to health those that were sick what should we partake therefore with them in their iniquity God forbid So Chrysostome (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Praepar Evang. l. 5. c. 2. The wicked Daemons saith Eusebius counterfeited by working many Miracles the Souls of them that were deceased and thence they were thought worthy to be celebrated with greater service (d) Frustra tantum arrogas Christo cum saepe alios sciamus scierimus Deos laborantibus plurimis dedisse medicinas multorum hominum morbos valetudiâ—ésque curasse Arnobius l. 1. p. 28. In vain say they you arrogate so much to Christ for we have often known that other Gods have given Medicines to and healed the infirmities of many Moreover these benefits they still pretended to receive by vertue of those Supplications which they offer'd to them (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Orig. l 8. p. 407. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 416. How many saith Celsus being troubled that they had no children have by them enjoyed their wishes How many being maimed in their body's have been healed by them Hence saith (f) Daut cautelam periculi mâ—rbâ—s medelam spem afflictis opeâ—â— mâ—seris sâ—latium calamitatibus laboribus levameâ—um Minur p. 7. Cecilius they give us caution in dangers and medicine in diseases hope to the afflicted help to the miserable comfort in calamities ease from labours 2. This Argument is vain because it serves the Heretick as well as Catholick For what can be more glorious then what Philostorgius records of (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philost Hist Eccl. l 2. §. 8. p. 14. Agapetus one of his fellow Hereticks That he wrought many miracles he raised the dead and healed many that were sick and converted many to the Christian Faith And of Theophilus another of his brother Arrians * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem l. 3. § 4. p. 27. That his wonders were so great and such convincing demonstrations of the Christian Faith as to constrain the obstinacy of the Jews and Silence all their contradictions Lastly Hence we may learn that although Austin should have related some few instances of persons healed by Supplications tendered to the Saints we cannot thence infer as T. G. doth that by so doing he commends them or doth relate them as patterns for our imitation CHAP. VIII The Contents The Judgment of the Fathers proved to be the same with that of Protestants because they do assert
Bread for Christ because their mistake would not be in taking the Bread for God as the Israelites did the Calf but in this that they conceived the Bread not to be there at all but in place thereof the only true and eternal God and so although the object or rather Subject materially there present would in such a case be Bread yet their act of Adoration would not be terminated formally upon that but upon God Answer as if this also were not their mistake who held the Calf to be God that they conceived no Creature to be there at all but in place thereof the only true and eternal God for can it be possible that the Israelites should conceive the Calf to be God and not conceive that when they worshipped him as God they had no Creature to be the object of their worship and so although the object materially present would in such a case be the golden Calf yet the act of Adoration would not be terminated formally on that but upon God 5ly T. G. proceeds to tell us in the words of Dr. Taylor that if they thought Christ were not present P. 329. they are so far from worshiping the Bread in this case that themselves profess it to be Idolatry so to do which is a demonstration that their Soul hath nothing in it which is Idololatrical Answer even so had not the Heathens thought that a good Spirit was present in their Images had not the Manichees and the Egyptians thought that God and Christ were present where we see the Sun had not the Israelites thought that God was present where they saw the Image of a Calf they would have been so far from worshiping the Calf or the material Sun that they themselves would have professed it to be Idololatrical to do so which is a demonstration that their Soul hath nothing in it which is Idololatrical And whereas he proceeds to add from Dr. Taylor P. 330. that before they pass an Act of Aloration they believe the Bread to be annihilated or turned into his substance who may lawfully be worshipped and they who have these thoughts are as much enemies of Idolatry as they who understand better it is manifest this doth as much excuse the Heathen as it doth the Papist for they also before they pass an Act of Adoration do believe that what they worship is the God of Heaven who lawfully may be worshipped and having such conceptions they according to this argument must be esteemed as much enemies of Idolatry as were those Christians and those Prophets which reproved them for it and passed so wicked and unjust a censure on them Baronius tells us that the Collyridians conceived that the blessed Virgin was a real Deity Apparat. 43. and that she had nothing humane in her and so before they ventured to Adore her they believed her humane nature was annihilated or turned into his substance who may lawfully be worshipped and yet if we may credit Epiphanius it was no better than an Idol-making Heresie and they were Diabolical Idolaters So that those passages of that ingenious and learned Prelate serve only to demonstrate that the highest judgment and the most pregnant subtile wit must strangely shuffle and most assuredly miscarry when it endeavours to excuse the Church of Rome from being guilty of Idolatry when the same Reverend Person undertook to shew the vanity and folly of what he had delivered on that Subject to excese the Papist when he proceeds to shew the grourds by which his judgment was established Real presence p. 347. no man could more apparently assert or more convincingly demonstrate what the Roman Catholicks alledged to free them from this Sin 1 b. p. 340.341 342. would free the worst of Heathens For he intreats them to consider first that no man without his own fault can mistake a Creature so far as to suppose him to be God especially not such a Creature as a piece of Bread Secondly That when the Heathens worshipped the Sun and Moon they did it upon their confidence that they were Gods and would not have given to them Divine Honour if they had thought otherwise Thirdly That no man in the world upon these grounds except he that is malicious and spightful can be an Idolater for if he have an ignorance great enough to excuse him he can be no Idolater if he have not he is spightful and malicious and then all the Heathens are also excused as well as they Fourthly That if good intent and ignorance in such cases can take off the crime then the persecutors that killed the Aplstles thinking they did God good service and Saul in blaspheming the Religion and persecuting the Servants of Jesus and the Jewes themselves in Crucifying the Lord of Life who did it ignorantly as did also their Rulers have met with their excuse upon the same account T. G. proceeds to urge from Mr. Thorndike thus P. 332. and truly he hath nothing worth consideration in his whole discourse but what is borrowed either from Dr. Taylor or Mr. Thorndike they who know that the God-head of Christ is the reason for which his Flesh and Blood is worshipped in the Eucharist cannot take that worship for Idolatry because his Flesh and Blood is not present in the Eucharist as they who worship it there think it is For they know that the Flesh and Blood of Christ is no Idol to Chistians wheresoever it is worshipped Answer This argument is so ridiculous and childish that I am tempted to believe this worthy person was deserted in this matter by God because he had deserted the Doctrine of the Church of England for so far are we from knowing that the Flesh and Blood of Christ is made no Idol by the Christian wheresoever it is worshipped that we do know that the whole Church of Christ condemned the Arian Photinian Nestorian and Eunomian as Idol-worshippers because they did Adore his Flesh and Blood this argument therefore is built on that foundation which gives the lie to the whole Christian World Secondly This argument doth as much excuse the Heathens and the Manicheans as it doth the Papist for they that know the Deity of Christ is the reason why he was worshipped in the Sun have as much reason to excuse the Manichees for worshipping the Sun upon this supposition that Christ was there as they have to excuse the Papist for worshipping the Sacrament upon a like false supposition that Christ is there But now comes in a Demonstration P. 329. so full of dazling light that nothing can withstand its evidence and thus it runs what ever is taken for an object of worship the understanding must affirm to be But Catholicks in the belief of Transubstantiation do not in their minds affirm the Bread to be Therefore the object of their worship is not Bread but Christ Answer what T. G. ignorantly stiles a Demonstration is such a miserable Sophism so childish and ridiculous that nothing
Anathema then shall I think this Synod and the whole Church of Christ intending only to forbid such invocation of the Blessed Angels as made them Gods or sole and primary Mediators would make a Law M 〈◊〉 not to pray to Angels and thus decree whosoever shall go and invocate the Angels let him be Anathema When I can find that such determinations and decrees shall pass for current in a Church or Nation without all limitation or restriction for some hundred years though contradictory to what they practise and believe then shall I be induced to believe this Canon could be thus admitted and confirmed as a Law of the whole Church of Christ in contradiction to their Faith and practise CHAP. XII The CONTENTS The Invocation of Angels confuted from the Testimony of Irenaeus and st Augustin c. Sect. 1. From the Testimonies of Origen Sect. 2. The exceptions of T. G. against them largely confuted Sect. 3. The Testimony cited from Origen Hom. in Ezech. considered Sect. 4. TO this so pregnant Testimony of the whole Church of Christ we shall adjoyn such sayings of the antient fathers as do directly overthrow this doctrine or manifestly affirm that no such practise was allowed by the Church of Christ Non est numerum dicere Gratiarum quas per universum Mundum Ecclesia a Deo accipiens in nomine Christi Jesu crucifixi sub Pontio Pilato per singulos dies in opitulationem Gentium perficit neque seducens aliquem nec pecuniam ei auferens nec invocationibus Angelicis faciat i. facit aliquid nec incantationibus nec aliqua prava curiositate sed mundè purè manifestè orationes dirigens ad Dominum qui omnia fecit nomen Domini nostri Jesu Christi invocans virtutes secundum utilitates hominum sed non ad seductionem perfecit Iren. l. 2. c. 57. Thus in the second Century it is declared by Irenaeus that the Church of Christ did nothing by the Invocation of Angels but purely simply and openly addressed her prayers to God and the Lord Jesus Christ To this T. G. Replies that Irenaeus speaks only of such superstitious Invocating of Angels as was used by the Martionites and Carpocratians in their Magical operations and working of false Miracles p. 388. Repl. 1. The words of Irenaeus do absolutely say that Christians did nothing by the Invocation of angels which if T. G. will limit thus he stands obliged in equity and and by the Laws of Disputation to give some reason of that limitation which since he hath not done it is apparent that he hath answered nothing to the Doctors argument But 2. what he replyes as it is absolutely groundless so is it false and inconsistent with the words of Irenaeus For he doth manifestly distinguish betwixt those magical operations and the invocation of holy Angels and affirms that the Church doth nothing by incantations or by Angelick invocations 3. He doth oppose unto this Angelick invocation the invocation and directing of our Prayers purely to God and Christ What therefore he ascribes thus purely unto God and Christ he must be deemed to deny to Angels and consequently must deny that they directed their petitions to them Besides why doth he tell us that the Church addresseth her petitions to that God who made all things if not to shew that this was the true reason of our praying to him alone seeing he only is the maker of all things 4. He manifestly speaks of the miraculous gifts of Christians in curing diseases and casting out of Devils which things not only Irenaeus but * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 3. contra Celsum p. 124. l. 1. p. 7. Origen affirmes to be performed only by the invocation of the name of God and Christ Lactantius tels us that * Ille autem preses Mundi rector Universi qui scit omnia cujus divinis oculis nihil septum est solus habet rerum omnium cum Filio suo potestatem nec in Angelis quicquam nisi parendi nicessitas it que nullum sibi honorem tribui volunt quorum omnis honor in Dao est l. 2. c. 16. the holy Angels will not have any honor bestowed on them because their honor is in God and they have nothing else to do but to obey S. Chrysostome is very copious on this subject For 1. he tels us the Devil brought in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. The Calling upon Angels as is apparent from its opposition to calling upon God and that saith he he doth endeavoring to rob us of this honor of going unto God by Christ alone as is apparent from the words preceding (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do all things by God and introduce not Angels And lastly he concludes in these expressions (c) Hom. 9. in Epist ad Coloss Tom. 4. p. 139. be he Angel or Archangel or Cherubim do not suffer it for neither will these powers receive this honor but reject it when they see their Lord dishonored I have honored thee saith God and have said call upon me and dost thou dishonour him Again * Hom. 3. ad Heb. p. 443. Why gape ye saith he after Angels they are our fellow servants Now from that very name the Fathers argue that they are not to be adored Hence (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Orat. 3. p. 394. Athanasius concludes no Creature ought to adore his fellow Creature though he be an Angel because the Angel said to John see thou do it not I am thy fellow servant And Gregory Nazianzen saith (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianz. Orat. Qudragessim p. 668 669. If I adore the Creature what shall I say to the Idolatrous Heathen since I my self adore my fellow servants For Creatures are all servants though some more excellent than others Of the same judgement was St. Angustin who speaks thus * Quem invenirem qui me reconciliatet tibi an eundum mihi suit ad Angelos qua prece Quibus Aacramentis multi conantes ad te redire neque per seipsos valentes sicut audio tentaveâ—unt haec inciderunt in desiderium curiosarum visionum digni habiti sunt illusionibus Consell l. 10. c. 42. Whom should I find that might reconcile me unto thee should I have gone unto the Angels With what Prayer With what Sacraments many endeavoring to return unto thee and not being not able to do it by themselves as I here have tryed those things and have fallen into the desire of curious visions and were accounted worthy of illusions de C. D. l. 9. c. 23. Elsewhere he tels us those blessed Spirits however they are called are no Mediators to bring miserable mortals to blessedness and immortality where saith the Doctor p. 154. It would be ridiculous to distinguish between Mediators of Redemption and Intercession for all that they attributed to their good Spirits was only Intercession to this T. G. Replyes p. 375 376. that
Innocent the first S. Austin and which was the current Doctrine of the Church of Christ for many hundred years I wave the Opinion of Austin and of Innocent the first saith Maldonate which flourished in the Church six haundred years In Joh. 6. n. 116. viz. that the Eucharist was necessary even for Infants the things is now unfolded by the Church and by the use of many ages and the decree of the Trent Council that it is not only unnecessary for them but that it cannot lawfully be given to them 2. It must be false which is defined by the Council of Florence and is received by the whole Church of Rome that Saints departed before the Resurrection do see the face of God in Glory for we have proved and Sixtus Senensis doth acknowledge that this definition was Bibl. l. 6. An. 345. Repugnant Ingenti numero illustrium Ecclesiae Patrum 3. Hence it will follow that the Trent Catechism and all the Roman Doctors who generally urge that of Jacob The Angel that redeemed me from all evil bless the Lads to prove that Angels may be Invocated embrace that exposition of these words of Scripture which is heretically false as I have proved Chap. 10. Sect. 6. Thirdly I have not entred into that deep dispute betwixt him and the Doctor whether jubere doth signify to command or entreat and whether imperare be to enjoyn or supplicate I Judge it is sufficient advantage to our cause that if Jubere and imperare should not be rendred to entreat and supplicate but to command the Romanists must unavoidably be guilty of Idolatry T. G. indeed informs us that it is not the dead words but the intention of the speaker that makes them to be prayer for otherwise a Parrot might be taught to Pray as well as a Christian and thence he manfully concludes that in these expressions Nos a peccatis omnibus solvite jussu quaesumus Cassand Consult tit de meritis intercess Sanctor p. 971. Jube filio O foelix puerpera jure Matris Impera Redemptori c. They only pray to Saints to pray for us As if a man should call his Prince a Tyrant and his Brother Knave and being brought before the Judge should plead that by a Tyrant he meant only a King and by a Knave a Servant and since it was not the dead words but the intention of the speaker that made them significative for otherwise a Parrot might be hanged for speaking what he did he hoped that he had spoken nothing which might give offence especially seeing he had more Authors ready to produce to justify this sense and acceptation of these words than had the Church of Rome for this interpretation of jubere and imperare if when the Sentence were thus passed upon him Jubemus imperamus hunc suspendi he should plead that it did only signify that they entreated him to be hanged I say should such a plea be made it would be as significant as is this Answer of T. G. And all that any man can say against the Plea of such a trifling Sophister will equally conclude against this pittiful defence which he hath offered Josh 10.12 14. and hath confirmed by a false citation of that place of Joshuah which doth not say that God obeyed as from the Vulgar he translates it but that God hearkened to the Voice of man Fourthly In this discourse I have not waved any thing which had the least appearance of an argument but have returned a full and as I hope a satisfactory Answer to all that hath been offered by T. G. and all that I desire of him is that if be should be pleased to Reply he would not nibble at some few Expressions as is the manner of the Roman party but would return a perfect Answer to the whole and then I do not doubt but he will Suffer me to rest for some convenient Season Thy Friend and Servant D. WHITBY Errata PAg. 4. l. 5. for Surerstition r. superstition p. 11. l. 12. honerem r. honorem p. 33. l. 18. mby r. may p. 40. l 27. from r. for p. 45. l. 5. 〈…〉 r. 〈…〉 p. 55. l. 16. overthrows r. overthrow p. 56. marg configere r. confingere p. 60. l. 23. ef r. of ibid marg creatura r. creaturam p. 78. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 86. l. 23. sguiritual r. spiritual p. 90. Marcarius r. Macarius p. 91. Symbol a r. a Symbol p. 93. po r. do p. 340. Chap. 11. r. Chap. 12. THE IDOLATRY Of the Church of ROME CHAP. I. The CONTENTS That according to the Doctrine of the Church of England the Church of Rome is Guilty of Idolatry 1. In Worshipping the Host § 1. And 2. In Praying to departed Saints § 2. The Method used to Justifie this Charge § 3. The Notion of Idolatry considered Negatively in two Propositions 1. That to render any Person Guilty of Idolatry it is not Requisite that he should Conceive the Object of his Worship to be the Great Creator or the chiefest Good § 4. 2. That Worship may be Guilty of Idolatry which is not Given to a Creature with an Intent to Ascribe unto it that Worship which Agrees to God alone § 5. Idolatry is then Committed when any Honour due to God alone is Attributed to or is Conferd on that which is not God § 6. THe Doctrine of the Church of England as it is Delivered in her Injunctions Canons Orders Ordinances and Constitutions her Liturgies and Publick Homilies commanded to be Read in every Parish Church and to be Subscribed and Received by all that Exercise the Ministerial Function and by them to be acknowledged to contain a Good and Wholesome Doctrine and Needful for the Times in which those Homilies were Published is this That the Church of Rome is Guilty of Idolatry in Worshipping the Host The Rubrick after the Communion speaks thus The Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural Substances and therefore may not be Adored for that were Idolatry to be Abhorred of all faithful Christians The Constitutions and Canons of the Convocation held A. D. 1640. Can. 7. and Published by the Authority of our Royal Martyr Charles the First affirm That at the time of Reforming this Church from that gross Superstition of Popery it was carefuly Provided that all Means should be used to Root out of the Minds of the People both the Inclination thereunto and Memory thereof Especially of the Idolatry committed in the Mass for which cause all Popish Altars were Demolished That the Church of Rome is Guilty of Idolatry by Praying unto Saints Departed §. 2. Thus in the Homily touching the Peril of Idolatry we have these words Terrentius Vorro sheweth That there were 300 Jupiters in his time I think we had no fewer Saints to whom we gave the Honour due to God Then follows this Apostrophe Oh Heaven Earth and Seas what Madness and
That when the Encratitae held it unlawful to drink Wine the Fathers did confute them by this very Argument That Christ himself drank Wine and did appoint it to be received in the Sacrament Wherefore did he not drink Water after his Resurrection but Wine saith Chrysostom that he might pull up by the Roots another wicked Heresie for because there are some who in the Mysteries use Water declaring that when he delivered the Mysteries he delivered Wine and that when he rose and spread a Common Table without the Mysteries he used Wine he saith I will not drink of the fruit of the Vine Now the Vine produceth Wine not Water Chrysost Hom. in Mattheum 12. p. 511. l. 12. Edit Eton. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. Paedag. l. 2. c. 2. p. 158. B. Ed. Paris 1641. Be ye sure saith Clemens to the Encratitae he also did drink Wine for he blessed Wine when he said take drink this is my Blood the Blood of the Vine but that the thing which had been Blessed was Wine he shewed again saying to his Disciples I will not drink of the fruit of this Vine till I drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom h Illud quod lex dicit quia sanguis est anima esse positum dicimus sicut alia multa paenè â—mnia Scripturarum illarum Sacramenta lignis â—guris N. B. plena sunt suthrae pradicationis quae jam per Donm â—â—strum Jesu dâ—clatate est Contr. Adiman Coy 12. Sic est enim sanguis anima quo modo Petta erat Christus sicut dicit Apostolus bibehant enim de spirituali sequence eos Petra Petra autem erat Christus Notum est autem filâ—s Israel Petra percussa bibisse aquam in cremo de quibus loquebatur Apostolus cum haec diceres nec tamen ait Petra significabat Châ—istum â—sed ait Petra erat Christus quz rursus ne Garnaliter accipererur spiritualem illam vocat Ib. Cap. 12. Now had not the Sacramental Cup been truly Wine this Argument would have been frivolous and vain Had not they held as the Church of England their answer must have been a contradiction to the Doctrine of the Church of Christ Secondly The Manichees to prove the contradiction betwixt the Gospel and the Law opposed to that saying of our Saviour that none was able to cause the Soul to perish that of Moses that the Blood was the Soul To this St. Austin answers those words may be expounded thus the Blood is that is it signifies the Soul this he confirms 1. by this general assertion that almost all the Sacraments of those Scriptures are full of signs and figures of the future Preaching which is now declared by Christ and I am apt to think they were such signs and figures as were not properly converted into what they signified Seconly this he illustrates by a double instance †So is Blood the Soul as the Rock was Christ they drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them and that Rock was Christ he said not the Rock signified Christ but the Rock was Christ 2. I may expound it thus saith he * Blood is the Soul that is it signifies the Soul because our Saviour did not doubt to say this is my body when he gave the sign of his body since then as the Rock is Christ and as the signs and figures of the Old Testament are what thâ—â— Typified in the New so is the Bread Christs Boâ—â— It is wonderfully evident that in St. Austin's Judgment it is Christs Body not by conversion into Christs real Body but by signification of it k Nam ex â—o quod sâ—riptum est sanguinem pecoris animam ejus esse possum interpretaâ—i preceptum illud in signo esse positum non enim Dominus dubitavit dicere hoc est corpus meum cum signum daret sui corporis bl yea by such signification as excludes Christs body from being corporally present under the accidents of Bread for else the Manichees might have replyed upon St. Austin and given him the baffle thus as the sign not only signified Christs real Body but contained it too so must the Blood not only signifie but really contain the Soul Therefore it is apparent that in St. Austin's time the words of Christ were so interpreted by the Orthodox as to exclude Transubstantiation and to confirm the exposition of the Protestants Thirdly The Nestorians and Eutichians asserted that Christs humane nature was absorpt and changed into the Deity this some of them affirmed to be done after his Resurrection and Ascension only but others that it was thus changed at his Conception whence they affirm that whilst he lived on Earth he had the form and shape of man but not his proper nature For Illustration and Confirmation of these Heresies they urge †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ΟΡΘ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ΕΡΑ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ΟΡΘ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ΕΡΑ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ΟΡΘ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ΕΡΑ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ΟΡΘ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. To. 4. Dial. 2. p. 84 85. the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and had the Bread and Wine by Consecration lost their natures had they been really changed into Christs Flesh and Blood no greater Confirmation of their Heresie no fitter illustration of their Tenet could be well imagined for thus the similitude would run First That as in the Eucharist there is only the outward shape and form of Bread and not the real substance even so in Christ there was the shape and form of Flesh but not the very nature Secondly Even as in the Eucharist the essential form and material substance of Bread and Wine are swallowed up and converted into the Body and blood of Christ so likewise after Christs ascension the humane nature is absorpt and converted into the Deity What is it therefore that the Fathers answer do they confess the thing and say Transubstantiation was the Tradition of the Church and was the Doctrine of the Scriptures but that no like Tradition nor evidence from Scripture can be produced in favour of the Doctrine of the Eutichians and Nestorians which is the only thing that can be answered by men of T. G's principles No they expresly say and that in words as plain full as any Protestant could use that this similitude doth overthrow the Doctrine it was brought to justisie * Certe imago similitudo corporis sanguinis Christi in actione Mysteriorum celebrantur satis ergo nobis evidenter ostenditur hoc nobis in ipso Christo Domino sentiendum quod in ejus imagine profitemur celebramus sumus Ut sicut in hance scilicet in divinam transeant Sacramenta Sancto Spiritu perficiente substantiam permanentes tamen in suae proprietate-naturae sic illud ipsum mysterium principale cujus nobis effâ—eientiam virtutemque veraciter representant Gelasius de duabus naturis in Christo contra Euthich
Usher Answ to the Jesuits challenge p. 79. Much is betwixt the body Christ suffered in and the body that is hallowed to housel the body truly that Christ suffered in was born of the flesh of Mary with blood and with bone with skin and with sinews in humane limbs with a reasonable soul living and his spiritual body which we call the housel is gathered of many Corns without blood and bone without limb without Soul and therefore nothing is to be understood therein bodily but spiritually This mystery is a pledge and a figure Christs body is truth it self And again Christ hallowed Bread and Wine to housel before his suffering and said this is my body and my blood Yet he had not then suffered but so notwithstanding he turned through invisible vertue the Bread to his own body and that Wine to his blood as he before did in the Wilderness before that he was born to men when he turned that heavenly meat to his flesh and the flowing water from that stone to be his own blood The like matter also was delivered to the Clergy by the Bishops at their Synods out of two or three writings of the same Aefrick in the one one whereof directed to e Impress Lond. cum Homil. Paschali Ms. in Bibl. Bodl. Wulfsine Bishop of Shirburn we read thus That housel is Christs body not bodily but spiritually Not the body which he suffered in but the body of which he spake when he blessed Bread and Wine to housel the night before his suffering and said by the blessed Bread this is my body and again by the holy Wine this is my blood which is shed for many in forgiveness of sins In the other written to Wulfstane Archbishop of York thus The Lord which hallowed housel before his suffering and saith that the Bread was his own body and that the Wine was truly his blood halloweth daily by the hands of the Priest Bread to his body and Wine to his blood in spiritual mystery as we read in books And yet notwithstanding that lively Bread is not bodily so nor the self-same body that Christ suffered in nor that holy Wine is that Saviours blood which was shed for us in bodily thing but in spiritual understanding But now if T. G. should deny all this that is the testimony of almost all the Fathers of the Church and the confessions of so many Cardinals and Schoolmen and of the Fathers of the Society aforesaid to prove that Transubstantiation is a late upstart Doctrine and that the Scripture is to be interpreted according to the mind of Protestants to shew the unreasonableness of this denyal I would propose this case to his consideration and the Readers viz. in supposition that a controversie arise in this present age about the sense of a Law which was made 500 years past and that a considerable number of those who framed the novel exposition should confess that for the last Two hundred years the contrary to what they maintained was generally received in the Kingdom as the sense of the Law and should farther confess that the most eminent Lawyers of the former ages from the first enacting of the Law held the same with the latter Nor had there ever been any disagreement or opposition among them in that point whether it be not a sufficient proof that what they taught to be the sence of the Law was generally received as the sence and meaning of it from the beginning The Testimonies themselves of those antient Lawyers would be conviction enough how much more when strengthned by the confession of the adverse party it self Now if this be so in the delivery of the sense of a human Law where it happens very often that great Lawyers may be and often are of different judgments how much more in the delivery of a Divine Doctrine where the Pastors of the Church are bound to deliver what they received and the succeeding age is still bound to receive what they delivered surely if we add to this the confession of the very Adversaries themselves the proof as St. Ireneus saith must be true and without contradiction for if the Testimony of Ten Fathers and a few false impertinent confessions of our meanest Writers was by T.G. esteemed sufficient cause of this Triumphant flourish the Testimony of so many hundred Fathers of the Church and the confession of so many Cardinals and Schoolmen Jesuits and Fathers of the Roman party must be a demonstration of the truth of our assertion and exposition of the words of Christ sufficient to convince the obstinacy of this vain Apostate wherefore I shall conclude with that most pertinent exhortation of the learned Origen d Haec qui audire nesciâ— detorqueat ortasse avertaâ— auditum secundum illos qui â—â—icebant 〈…〉 bis carnem suam manducare sed vos Si fiâ—â—â— estis Ecclesiae si Evangelicis imbuti mysteriis si verbum caro fastum habitat in vobis agnoscite quia figurae sunt quae in divinis voluminibus scripta sunt ideo tanquam spirituales non tanquam carnales examinate intelligite quae dicuntur Si â—nim tanquam carnales ista suscipitis laedunt vâ—s non alunt-Est in N. Testamento litera quae occidit c. ut supra Orig. in Levit. c. 10. Hom 7. p. 87. If you be Sons of the Church if you are imbued with Gospel Mysteries and if the word made flesh doth dwell within you acknowledge these are figures which are written in the Sacred Volumns and therefore understand ye what is written as spiritual and not as carnal men for if as carnal you receive them they will hurt but will not nourish you There is in the New Testament a letter which killeth him that doth not spiritually understand it for if according to the letter you do follow that which is said except you eat the flesh c. the letter killeth Hence we may see the vanity of this assertion of T. G. That the definition of the present Church of Rome for that is most absurdly called the Church-Catholick p. 252. is ground sufficient to believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation Whereas it is confessed by their most learned Writers that in primitiva Ecclesia non erat de fide i. e. this was not any Article of Faith delivered to her by the antient Church and that the e De Transubstantiatione panis in corpus Christi rara est in antiquis scriptoribusmentio Alphonsus a castro de Haer l 8. v indulgentia thing as well as name of transubstantiation is very rarely mentioned by the antient Fathers Nay they spake nothing of it And it is evident from the clear pregnant Testimonies and the concurrent judgment of many Hundred Fathers that the Church of Christ did generally hold the contrary to what the Church doth now define and held that exposition of our Saviours words was true and Genuine which they have now condemned as Heretical 2. How
Christs humanity is as to the substance and the nature of it changed into the Deity and that the accidents form and figure of it only remain unchanged that is he grants all that the Heretick asserts and he endeavoured to refure For thus the Heretick dispuâ—es As the Symbols of the body and blood of Christ are other things before the invocation of the Priest but after the invocation they are changed and made other so the body of Christ after the assumption is changed into the divine substance and thus the Orthodox doth answer thou art caught in thy own Net for the mystical signs after Sanctification do not recede from their own natures Again the Orthodox puts this question are not the mysteries Ibid. vid. p. 57. the signs of the body which truly is this being granted by the Heretick he makes this inference If the divine mysteries do truly represent the body then the body of our Lord now is and is not changed into the Deity but only filled with his Glory When therefore is it affirmed by Theodoret that this Sacrament is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a venerable Type And that the Symbols are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Symbols which are Worshiped This phrase can signifie no more then this That they are venerable Types and Symbols such as deserve a reverence or honorary Worship from all Christians which is a very common acceptation of the word for thus Christian Temples are stiled by the Ancients a Concal sub Menna act 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Venerable Temples the Apostles Throat b Epist Leonis 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Venerable Throne and Baptism c Justinian Novil 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Venerable Baptism The same uncenscionable dealing we meet with in that passage of St. Austin for no Man eats Christs flesh 〈◊〉 be have siâ—sâ— adored for in that very place he tells us That * In â—â—sâ—l 98. p 241. â— G. H the Jews interpreted the eating of Christs Flesh like Fools for they interpreted it carnally whereas Christ did instrâ—â— his own Disciples and say unto them understand Spiritually what I say unto you you shall not eat the Body which you see and drink the Blood which they will shed that Crucifie me I have commended unto you a Sacrament that Spiritually being understood will quicken you So that St. Austin in this very place asserts the contradictory to what the Church of Rome believes touching the presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament and calls them Fools that think Christ did intend what they imagine he hath said Therefore it is manifest that St. Austin in this place speaks nothing of the adoration of Christs Flesh under the accidents of Bread but only of the adoration of hs Flesh considered as united to the Godhead and placed at the Right Hand of God I astly to that of Ambrose De spir Saâ—cto l 3. c. 12. By the Footstool is understood the Earth and by the Earth the flesh of Christ which we Adore in the mysteries at this day and which the Apostles adored in our Lord Jesus I answer that he saith no more than this that in these mysteries we Worship Christ and câ—nâ—â—quently the flesh of Christ as being not divided from him â—u he doth not say that in adoring the mysteries we adore Christ or that we do adore the mysteries which are Christ 1. Therefore let it be observed that St. Ambrose doth not say that we adore Christ only in this mysteries but in mysteriis or in the Celebration of the Sacraments which it was the custome of Antiquity to do because they held these mysteriâ—s to be instituted by him to convey unto us those blessings he had purchased by his blood and did conceive he * in Job 9 6.7 Cyril words it doth invisibly swim in the waters of Baptism And therefore in the Celebration of that rite they eall upon us as * Paulinus Epist 4. Chrysost To. 6. in illud simile est regnum czlorum Captives to fall down before our King and with hands lifted up to Heaven to adore him and mutually to exhort our selves and say come let us Worship before the Lord who made us And yet I hope T. G. will not infer that Element of Water to be transmuted into Christs Body and therefore Worshiped by the Christians of those times Secondly observe that Christs Sacred Flesh being united to his Godhead and adored with it the Worship which at the celebration of those Mysteries was directed to him as sitting in the Heavens must be the Worship of his Flesh and this assuredly must be the meaning of St. Ambrose who in his exposition of these words seek those things which are above serm 58. c. speaketh thus we ought not now to seek our Saviour upon the Earth or according to the Flesh it we would find and touch him but according to the Glory of his Divine Majesty that we may say with the Apostle Paul but now we know not Christ according to the Flesh And therefore Blessed Stephen by his Faith did not seek Christ upon the Earth but did acknowledge him standing at the Right Hand of God where with the devotion of the mind he sought him Now this no Protestant denies that Christ even in the celebration of the Eucharist is to be Worshiped where he is and where he is to be sought after by such as do desire to sind him i.e. at the right hand of God CHAP. VI. The Contents Prop. 1. When we ascribe unto the Creature the Homage due to the Creator we become guilty of Idolatry Prop. 2. To know the secrets of the hearts of persons praying at all times and in all places of the World is a divine and incommunicated excellency Prop. 3. That to ascribe this knowledge to any Creature to whom God doth not thus discover the secrets of the heart and to pay that honour to it which doth suppose that knowledge is Idolatry Prop. 4. Those outward Acts of Worship which by consent of Nations or by common Use do signifie the honour due to the Creator are Idolatrical when given to a Creature Corol 1. That to offer Sacrifice is to perform that Worship which is proper only to God 2. That to vow to Angels or to Saints departed is to ascribe unto them the honour due to the Creator 3. Prayer offered and put up in any time and place to an invisible and not corporeally present Being is the oblation of that Worship to it which is due to God alone Objections Answered §. 1. HAving thus endeavoured to confirm and justifie the Judgment of the Church of England touching the Worshipping of the Host I now proceed to shew the Equity and Justice of her Censure of the Roman practice in reference unto the Invocation and Adoration of Holy Angels and of Saints departed And what we have to say in this particular as the foundation of this Charge shall be contained in these
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
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 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
unbaptized Infants cannot have it The Words of Innocentius are these (f) Haec enim ejus verba sunt Illud verò quod eos vestra fraternitas asserit praedicare parvulos aeternae vitae praemiis etiam sine Baptismatis Gratia posse donari perfatuum est risi enim manducaverint carnem filii hominis August contr duas Epist Pelag. l. 2. c 4. Whereas your Brotherhood asserts that the Pelagians say that Infants may be saved without Baptism this is a very fond opinion for unless they eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood they have no life in them (g) Hinc constat Inncoentii primi sentententia quae 600 circiter annos in Ecclesia viguit quamque Augusitnus sectatus est Eucharistiam etiam Infantibus neceâ—sarium fuisse Concil Tom. 1. part 4. p. 624. Whence it is evident saith Binius that this was Pope Innocents opinion which also was maintained in the Church 600 years viz. that the participation of the Eucharist was necessary to Infants and what he thus confesseth is made good by * Dalle from the fourth inclusivè to the eleventh Century by the plain pregnant Testimonies of them that lived in those Times Who also doth abundantly consute that vain imagination of Mr. Cressy and Vasquezius that they conceived it necessary that Infants should partake Christs Body and his Blood not Sacramentally but Spiritually by such a participation as may be had in Baptism Lastly they also do affirm this Doctrine to be derived from (h) Optimè Funici Christiani Baptismum ipsum nihil a liud quam salutem Sacramentum Corporis Christi nihil aliud quam viâ—um vocant unde nisi ex Aatiqua ut existimo et Apostolica traditione qua Ecclesiae Christi insitum tenent praeter Baptismum participationem dominicae mensae non solum ad regnum Dei sed we ad salutem vitam aeternam posse quenquam hominum pervenire hoc enim scriptura testatur viz. Tit. 3.5 1 Petr. 3.21 John 6.51 53. si ergo ut tot tanta Divina testimonia concinunt nec salus nec vita aeâ—crna sine Baptâ—â—mâ— Corpore Sanguine Domini cuiquam speranda est frustra â—â—ne his promittitur parvulis Tom. 7. lib. 1. de peccat meritis c. c. 24. p. 144 D. E. Apostolical Tradition and deeply setled in the Churches of Christ as doth most evidently appear from that of Austin From an ancient and as I suppose Apostolical Tradition the Churches of Christ have this deeply setled in them that without Baptism and the participation of the Lords Supper no man can attain to the Kingdom of God nor yet to life eternal If therefore so many Testimonies Divine convince us that everlasting Life is not to be expected without Baptism and the Body and Blood of Christ 't is in vain to promise it to children without them And yet the Church of Rome hath laid aside this practise and determined against this Doctrine thus (i) Concil Trid. Sesi 21. Can. 4. Si quis dixerit Parvulis antequam ad annos discretionis pervenerint necessariam esse Eucharistiae communionem anathema sit Which must be thus interpreted If any Person now doth say what the whole Church of Christ did for 600 years together viz. That it is necessary for Infants to be partakers of the Eucharist let him be accursed I will not quarrel with them as Mr. Dalle doth for their intolerable irreverence to the ancient Fathers or for the Curse they have pronounced on the whole Church of Christ for many Ages but I will take the Boldness to infer that if they may condemn a practice far more ancient than was the Invocation of departed Saints a practice not opposed as that was by many Fathers of the Church upon its first encroachment when about A. D. 360. it began to creep into the Church a practice so deeply setled in all Christian Churches in St. Austins time when that of Invocation of Saints departed was but in the Embryo Lastly a practice proved from clear unanimous and numerous assertions of the learned Fathers Whereas what is produced for the other practice is obscure and contradictory to what in other places they deliver and fairly may admit another sense as you shall see hereafter I say if they may wholly lay aside this practice and may pronounce Anathema's against it I hope we also may refuse to practice this Invocation of the Saints departed provided that it were as ancient as the Times of Nazianzen Basil and St. Austin 2 Observe § 2. That though these Fathers cited by T. G. seem in some places to assert or use this invocation of the Saints departed in others they deny the Doctrine and disapprove the practice of it and this they do in Writings more assuredly Authentick and in words more clear and pregnant than are or can be brought to justifie it This I might easily make good by an induction of the places cited pro and con from all these Father but since T. G. hath singled out St. Austin p 431. as a man so clear and pregnant in this Point that whosoever shall deny St. Austin to have held such formal invocation to be the Worship due to Saints must shut his eyes and fight against the light of a noon-day truth Let any man peruse the places which are cited from that Father and say whether I have not reason to affirm this bold Assertion to be a manifest untruth The passages produced out of the genuine Works of Austin for Invocation are 1. Let Blessed Cyprian help us with his prayers T. G. p. 430. 2. We Christian People do with religious solemnity celebrate the memory of Martyrs both to excite us unto the imitation of them and that we may become partakers of their merits and may be helped by their prayers T. G. p. 433. 3. It is an injury to pray for a Martyr to whose prayers we ought to be commended T. G. p. 434. Against it we produce these Testimonies * Ipse Sacerdos est qui nunc ingressus in interiora Veli solus ibi ex his qui carnem gestaverunt interpellat pro nobis In Psalm 64. p 144. M. 1. Christ is the Priest who being now entred within the Vail only of all that have been made partakers of flesh makes intercession for us there †Si vero ita diceret hoc scripsi vobis ut non peccetis si quis peccaverit Mediatorem me habetis apud Patrem ego exoro pro peccatis vestris sicut Parmenianus quodam loco Mediatorem posuit Episcopum inter Populum Doum quis cum ferret bonorum atque fidelium Christianorum quis sicut Apostolum Christi non sicut Antichristum intueretur Contr. Epistol Parmen l. 2. c. 8. p. 7. L. Tom. septimo 2. If he i. e. St. John had said thus If any man sin you have me a Mediator with the Father I make intercession for your sins
illa de Cypriani Macicâ arte Baroniâ—s A.D. 250. Sect. 5. Baronius himself confesseth this story of the Magick of St. Cyprian to be explodendam fabulam now hence it follows that this Oration is not the genuine work of Nazianzen or else that Nazianzen was a man of very easie Faith one prone to tell the most absurd and foolish sables for truth and therefore one who can deserve no credit in this relation of Justina's prayer unto the blessed Virgin Such thirdly is the passage cited from Theodoret for as ‖ Disp Hist de Invoc Sanct. Th. 8. p. 198. Vossius well argues had that Book been his Nicephorus who gives us the Catalogue of his books would have made mention of it And Photius when he makes mention of the writings of this Author which he had perused would not have lest out this Besides what is here cited from him directly contradicts what he delivers in his undoubted Comment on the second and third Chapters of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians Lastly the same we have just reason to suspect of the two instances related by St. Austin De Civit. Dei l. 22. c. 2. for Ludovicus Vives doth ingenuously declare In hoc capite non dubium quin multa sint addita that many things have without doubt been added to this Chapter The 33. Homily de diversis is one of those which have been lately added to St. Austins Works by the Divines of Lovain and so deserves but little credit 2. Sect. 8. Those places which are cited from the true writings of the Fathers are made to speak what they did not intend and press'd to testify what they do not assert Thus when T.G. objects that passage of St. Austin let B. Cyprian help us with his Prayers I answer May T.G. repâ—nt of his accursed Apostacy from the Church of England This I entirely wish and yet I hope I pray not to T.G. but saith T.G. whoever considereth the motive alledged by him why he add ressed himself to St. Cyprian which was for that in Heaven he saw more clearly the truth of that Question of which himself had formerly doubted and * E. B. Cyprianus â—wdâ—m â—aâ—n câ—â—â—pore quid corrumâ—itur nâ—n aggravante animam nec deprimenâ—e terrâ—na iâ—â—abâ—â—aâ—ione sensun mulâ—â—â—â—gitâ—nteâ— â—eâ—enius perspieiâ— veritatâ—m quam mâ—â—uâ—t adiâ—â—sâ—◠〈◊〉 Châ—i 〈…〉 in istius câ—rnis mâ—â—talitate tanquâ—m in caliginâ—sa nuâ—e lib 〈◊〉 at donante Domino quantum possu â—us bona â—ju â—miâ—emur To. 7. de Bapâ— l. 7. c. 1. B. St. Austin was then treating of and the necessity he had of his prayers as being yet in the mortal Flesh and labouring as in a dark cloud will easily see that it was not a counterfeit but a true and serious address to him for the assistance of his prayers Answ and why not rather an address to God for his assistance by virtue of the prayers of Cyprian 2. Had Austin said let Cyprian help us that we may be enlightened or instructed in this question this Answer might have had some shew of strength but when he only * E. B. Cyprianus â—wdâ—m â—aâ—n câ—â—â—pore quid corrumâ—itur nâ—n aggravante animam nec deprimenâ—e terrâ—na iâ—â—abâ—â—aâ—ione sensun mulâ—â—â—â—gitâ—nteâ— â—eâ—enius perspieiâ— veritatâ—m quam mâ—â—uâ—t adiâ—â—sâ—◠〈◊〉 Châ—i 〈…〉 in istius câ—rnis mâ—â—talitate tanquâ—m in caliginâ—sa nuâ—e lib 〈◊〉 at donante Domino quantum possu â—us bona â—ju â—miâ—emur To. 7. de Bapâ— l. 7. c. 1. B. wiâ—â—â— to be assisted by his prayers that he might imitate his goodness certain it is that not St. Cyprians Knowledg but his charity and his enjoyment of God of which that Knowledg was a consequent was the true motive of St. Austins wish since he desires not to be instructed in the truth but to be confirmed in Goodness it was not the want of Knowledge but of Goodness which he desired might be advantaged by the Prayers of Cyprian Moreover had he desired to receive these things from Cyprian either by converse with him or by some secret influence upon his clouded understanding the circumstances mentioned might be conceived a proper motive to that wish but since he only wishes to receive them donante Domino or from the Gift of God and by the Intercession of St. Cyprian certain it is that the consideration of St. Cyprians Knowledg could be no motive unto that address but only the consideration of his enjoyment of God and his power with him and of his charity by which he had obtained that enjoyment To that of Jerom * Vale O Paula Cultoris tui extremam senâ—ctutem orationâ—bus juva fides cperatua te Christo consociant praesens facilius quâ—d pâ—stulas impâ—trabis Epitaph Paâ—lae Farewell O Paula help the old Age of thine honourer with thy prayers We have sufficiently replied by shewing that it was frequent with the Fathers by an Apostrophe to speak to their deceased Friends as if they did suppose them present although they did not think them so to be and this must necessarily be the sense of Jerom For he declareth that his dear friend Nepotian beinâ— once joyned to the Quire of Saints whatever he should say unto him would be but speaking to the deaf because he would not hear it he therefore must conceive the same of Paula of whom he here affirms this she was present with Christ The better to reply unto some other passage objected by T.G. observe first §. 8. that the antieâ—â— Fathers did yield a threefold Service to the Saâ—râ— departed as first the honour of love and Society Secondly The Recognition and praises of their excellencies Thirdly The Imitation of their vertues and their godly Examples this service the writers of the fourth and fifth Century sometimes call worship and Veneration but the more ancient Fathers styled it honour accounting all religious worship to be due to God alone as is most excellently proved by Dalle Advers Lat. Cult l. 1. c. 5 1. And when the Hereticks and Heathens did object against these latter Fathers the worship of the holy Martyrs they reply two things 1. That they did not worship them as Gods Thus when it was objected by the Apostate Julian that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Cyril l. 6 contr Jul. p. 203. instead of many Gods the Christians worshipped many miserable men St. Cyril answers †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. We do not make them Gods nor do we worship that which by nature is not God And when Faustus had objected against the Christians that they had ‖ Vertistis Idola in mart yres quos votis inquit similibus colitis Apud August contra Faustum Man lib. 20. chap. 21. changed their Martyrs into the Heathen Idols and in like manner paid their Homage to them St. Austin answers that * At illo cultu quae Latria dicitur nec colimus nec colendam docemus nisi unum Deum
August ibid. they gave not divine worship to them 2. That Reverence and honour which they oppose to this Latria or divine worship and which they acknowledg to be due and given by them to Saints departed they comprize in the forementioned particulars or in such other matters as are and do include no formal prayers and no elicite actions of Religion whence we may rationally conceive that neither Prayers nor Vows nor any actions which were properly religious were then tendred to them and that they did not think them parts of that Dulia which was due to Saints Contra Faustum lib. 20. c. 21. but rather parts of that Latria which was due to God alone This is apparent from St. Austin's Answer unto Faustus viz. the worship therefore which we give the Martyrs is that worship of Society and Love which we afford unto those holy men whom in this life we worship but with that worship which is called Latria we worship God alone Where 1. observe that he ascribes unto the Martyrs only that worship which in this life we give unto our fellow Saints Now is it any part of that affection or society we bear unto the living to put up our petitions to them when at great distance from us and invisible 2. Unto this worship of Society and love which doth not comprehend addresses made by way of Prayer to persons absent and invisible St. Austin doth oppose Latria the worship proper to God Whence we infer that worship which could not be included in these expressions of Society and Love viz. all mental prayers and supplications made by Speech to persons at great distance and invisible must in St. Austins judgment be Latria or the worship proper unto God alone The like we may observe in Cyril for having said We neither do affirm the Martyrs to be Gods nor do we worship them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Latria but with the worship of honour and affection He gives three instances of their honour †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril adv Jul. l. 6. p. 204. We give them all Veneration we honour their Sepulchers and we remember their resplendent Vertues Moreover the honour given to them seems therefore to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or relative Because as Basil notes the honor given to the best of our fellow Servants is the sign and demonstration of our good will and respect towards our common Lord. Whence that of St. Gregory Nyssen speaking to the Martyr Theodorus Orat. de Theod. Martyre We hold this assembly for thee to adore our common Lord and make full commemorations of thy Victories So then these Answers and Objections which T. G. reckons a confirmation of this practice of invocation of the Saints departed are rather a just prejudice against it it being never mentioned by them upon these occasions as any portion of that honour they bestowed upon these blessed Spirits nor yet contained in what they mention Secondly §. 10. Observe it was the custom of those times to put up their Petitions at the Martyrs Tombs and this they did for these considerations viz. 1. From a presumption that when the Christians came unto these Tombs the blessed Martyrs joyned their Supplications with them and by so doing helped to speed them Whence Basil in his Oration on the 40 Martyrs saith Together with these Martyrs let us pour forth our Prayers for here are 40 sending up one Prayer and if where two or three be gathered together God is present who doubts his presence where forty are 2. That their Devotions might be enlivened and their affections raised by the place Thus Austin tells us that * Quod offertur offertur Deo qui Martyres coronavit apud memoriam corum quos coronavit ut ex ipsorum locorum admonitione major affectus exurgat â—d acuendam Charitatem in illos quos imtrari pâ—ssumus in illum quo adâ—â—â—nte pâ—ssuâ—us Contra Faustum Man l. 20. c. 21. What was offered to God was offered at the memories of the Martyrs that by the admonition or remembrance which the very places give us a stronger affection may arise to inflame our charity both toward those whom we imitate and him by whose assistance we may be enabled to do it Another custome of these Ancients was to †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril Catech Mystag 5. p. 241. Ideo ad ipsam mensammon sic cos commemoramus quemadmodum alios qui in pace requiâ—scunt ut etiam pro iis o emus sed magis ut ipsi prò nobis orent August Tract 84. in Joh. pray unto God §. 11. that for the intercession of those Saints and Martyrs he would grant them their requests just as the Israelites did desire kindness for the sake of Abraham and David And this saith Austin haply may be conceiv'd that ‖ De cura pro Mortuis cap. 16. they in general making addresses unto God as we do for the Dead although we know not where they are or what they do for all the wants of such as come to these assemblies God may be moved by their Prayers to grant what he sees needful for them as haply he is moved by the fervent Prayers of some Relations distant from us to vouchsafe us blessings and by the addresses of some Churches to grant deliverance from Persecution unto others This observation is a sufficient Answer to many of those passages which T.G. cites to prove it was the custome of the ancient Church to invocate the Saints departed as V. G. Ruffinus doth relate of Theodosius * Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 33. That he went to all the places of Prayer and lying prostrate before the Martyrs and Apostles Tombs he asked succors by intercession of the Saints which upon supposition that they prayed with him and did continually intercede for all that put up their petitions there or for the whole Church militant he might well do but then it is not intimated that he beg'd these succors by invocation of the Saints We also hope for benefit and succour from the intercessions of our pious friends and of the whole Church militant and may entreat God to help us for the sake of their petitions yet is not this a warrant to put up supplications to our pious Relatives or to the universal Church St. Basil in his Oration on the forty Martyrs saith * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas Hom. 20 in XL. Mart. p. 459. He that is pressed with affliction flyeth to them and he that is glad runneth to them the one that he may be freed from his affliction the other that he may continue in that joyful state But then to fly and run unto them is only to fly and run unto the Tombs and Churches where they were interred as is apparent from the following words Here it is that a woman praying for her Son is heard And from the Exhortation following Wherefore together with these Martyrs let us pour forth our
dilectam commendat recordantis precantis affectus Ibid F. That when the mind doth cast about where the body of a dear friend may be buried and straight a place occurreth to his mind renowned for the name of some Martyr the affection of him who thus remembreth and prayeth forthwith commends the beloved soul to the same Martyr viz. that affection which induced the surviving person to think of placing his beloved friend by the memorial of that Martyr and made him choose that as the place where he would commend the soul of his beloved friend to God For that the prayer was directed to God though put up at the Martyrs Tomb is evident from the following words ‖ Plurimum intersit ubi ponat corpus mortui sui qui pro Spiritu ejus Deo N. B supplicat quia precedens affectus locum elegit sanctum illic corpore posito recordatus locus sanctus eum qui praecesserat renovat auget offectum Cap. 5. H. It may very much concern any where he should place the body of his deceased who prayeth for his Spirit unto God because both the preceding affection hath chosen an holy place and the body being placed there the remembrance of that holy place renews and augments the affection That this is the true import of the place and that the benefit St. Austin speaks of was to be expected not from any prayers put up unto the Saints but partly from the desire of burying the deceased by the Martyrs shrine upon presumption of some advantage he might receive by being there interred and partly from the increase of the affection of him that prayeth in that place to God is admirably evident from that which follows viz. * Cum ergo fide lis mater fidelis filii defuncti corpus desideravit in Basilicam Martyris poni siquidem credidu ejus animam meritis Martyrts adjuvari hoc quod ita credidit supplicatio quaed im fuit haec profuit siquid profuit quod ad idem sepnichrum recurrit anime filium precibus magis magisque commendat adjuvat defuncti Spirtum non mortui corporis locus sed ex loci memoria vivus martyris affectus Ibid G. When therefore a believing Mother desireth that the body of her Son may be buried in the Martyrs Temple as believing that his soul may be advantaged by the merits of the Martyr this very thing that she believeth thus is a kind of prayer and if any thing profiteth it is this Since therefore nothing else doth in St. Austin's judgment profit certain it is he doth not speak of prayer directed to the Martyrs for if so he could not have confessed that the fore-mentioned faith did only profit much less could he affirm it to be that supplication to the Martyr which alone did profit Lastly It is confessed that Basil Nazianzen and Nyssen do in their Panegyrical Orations seem to invocate the Holy Martyrs But then it is apparent 1. That they doubted whether these Martyrs had any sense or apprehension of the Requests put up unto them and therefore prefaced their addresses with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If you have any sense 2. They do ingeniously confess that though they knew them to be absent yet they were moved to speak unto them as if they had been present and could hear them 3. They make the like addresses to insensate Creatures of whom they were assured that they could not hear them which makes it reasonable to interpret their Addresses rather as Wishes and Rhetorical Apostrophes than direct Invocations and Petitions tendred to them especially if we consider that all those Fathers when they discourse of Prayer define it to be a Colloquy with God and therefore did not think that those addresses made unto the blessed Martyrs had the true nature of a Prayer Moreover it is certain that they never offer'd any mental Prayer to Saint or Angel And 2. That they conceived the Martyrs present in those places where they offer'd these devotions and therefore were not guilty of those Doctrines and unwarrantable practices for which especially we do condemn the Roman Church CHAP. X. The CONTENTS The Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome touching the Invocation of the Blessed Angels delivered from their own Catechism and Rituals Sect. 1. The Question stated Sect. 2. The Idolatry of this Practice proved 1. This practice doth ascribe unto them by way of Worship what is proper to God viz. The Knowledge of the Secrets of the Heart Sect. 3. 2. Because it is the Worship of the Mind Sect. 4. 3. From the silence of the Old Testament Sect. 5. An objection answered Sect. 6. The Reasons of this silence which are alleged by the Romanist Refuted Sect. 7. And from the silence of the New Testament Sect. 8. 4. From the Consideration of those principles whereby the Romanists condemn White Magick as a practice guilty of Idolatry Sect. 9. THe Catechism of the Church of Rome §. 1. Published by the Decree of the Trent Council gives us the Doctrine of that Church touching the Invocation of the Holy Angels in these words * Extant divinae scriptuae testimonia hujus invocationis Jacob enim ab Angelo quicum luctatus fuerat petit ut sibi benedicat immo cogit se enim non dimissurum illum profitetur nisi benedictione accepta neque solum sibi ab eo tribui quem intuebatur sed ab eo etiam quem minimè videbat tum cum dixit Angelus qui eruit me de cunctis malis benedicat pueris istis Catechis Rom. Part 3. cap. 2. See 10. concerning this Invocation we have the Testimonies of the Scripture extant For Jacob requested of the Angel with whom he wrestled that he would bless him and he compels him so to do for he professeth that he would not let him go without his Blessing nor doth he only put up his Petition unto the Angel whom he saw but also unto him whom he saw not when he thus said the Angel who delivered me from all evil bless the Lads Agreeable unto this Doctrine is the continual practice of that Church in her Authentick Lyturgies For to St Michael they pray thus * Sancte Michael Archangele defende nos in praelio ut non percamus in tremendo judicio Miss festo Appar Sancti Mich. Maii. 8. Defend us in our Warfare we thee pray Least we should perish in the dreadful day In the Roman Ritual a Dying person is taught to pray with his Heart when he cannot do it with his Mouth thus * Hortetur praeterea ut co modo quo potest saltem ex Corde ita per intervalla precetur Maria Mater Gratiae Mater Mifericordiae tu nos ab hoste protege hora mortis suscipe Omnes Sancti Angeli omnes Sancti intercedite prome mihi succurrite Rituale Ed. Antuerp 1617. All ye Holy Angels intercede for me and succour me To the Guardian
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
the very ground and reason of that practice viz. the benefit we may receive by putting up requests unto them and the concernments which ly upon us so to do in order to our preservation from all evil and the obtainment of the greatest blessings for he expresly tels us our care must be to get his favour who alone is God and that if Celsus or the Church of Rome would have us to procure the favor of the inferior beings he must know that all good Spirits Souls and Angels if we do obtain Gods favor when we pray to him they need not be called upon for the assistance of their prayers for they will pray together with us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not being called upon so to do This he doth frequently repeat and indeed it is the common language of those times he lived in witness the like expression of Arnobius * In hoe omne quod colendum est colimus quod adorari convenit adoramus quod obsequium Venerationis exposcit Venerationibus promeremur Cum enim divinitatis ipsius tencamus caput à quo ipsa Divinitas divorum omnium quicunque sunt ducitur supervacuum putamus personas ire per singulas cum ipsi qui sint quae habeant nomina nesciamus cujus sint praeterea numeri neque liquidum neque comprehensum neque exploratum habere possimus Atque ut in terrestribus Regnis necessitate nulla compellimur regalibus in familiis constitutos nominatim cum Principibus adorare sed in Regum ipsorum cultu quicquid illis annexum est tacita se sentit honorificentia comprehendi Non alia ratione quicunque hi Dii sunt quos esse nobis proponitis fi sint progenies Regia principali oriuntur è capite etiam si nullos accipiant nominatim à nobis cultus intelligunt se tamen honorari communiter cum suo Rege atque in illius venerationibus contineri Arnobius contra Gentes lib. 3 p. 101. In worshiping the Father and the Lord of all things we worship all things that are to be worshiped we adore all things that may conveniently be adored we venerate all that calls for veneration For holding to the head from whence these Divi borrow their Divinity we think it needless to go to every Person seeing wee know not what they are what names they have or of what order they may be And as in honoring the King wee honor all that do belong unto him so what ever Gods you do propose unto us if they be of this Kingly progeny and do belong unto this head although they do receive no worship from us they understand that they are worshiped together with their King and are included in that veneration which we pay to him 4. This Answer renders the discourse of Origen impertinent and a perfect declination of the Question betwixt him and Celsus For Celsus thus disputes no God nor any Son of God can possibly descend from Heaven but if you do assert this of the Angels of God these are no other than our Daemons Orig. l. 7. 5. p. 23â— To this St. Origen returns this Answer 1. That to deny that any God descends from Heaven is to deny what was esteemed a thing common by the Heathen World 2. That Christians do indeed confess this is the office of the Angels to come down from and to ascend to Heaven and to offer up the Prayers of men to God but yet saith he we must not worship them as God for all our Prayers must be directed to God and to his Son Christ Jesus who is the living Word and God Which argument if it have any strength at all consists in this that whiâ—h you must not worship and adore as God you must not pray unto but Angels you must not worship and adore as God Ergo Angels you must not pray unto This is that Fathers plea to which T. G. may answer in behalf of Celsus as well as of the Church of Rome that he apparently distinguisheth those Angels both from God and from the Son of God and therefore did not contend that we should pray unto them as to that God who is the Author of all good but only as to the Ministers and Servants of God whom he appointed to preside over such persons Families and Countries And therefore he was contented only that it might be lawful to say unto them as doth the Church of Rome to St. Sebastian Cerne familiam tuam id est behold thy family and to St. Gabriel preserve thy Countrey 2. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Celsus objects that if with God we do adore his Son then may we 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 venerate his Ministers To this St. Origen replies that if †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. Contra Celsum lib. 8. p. 386. Celsus by the Ministers of God had understood Gabriel and Michael and other Angels and Archangels and had contended that they should be venerated perpaps by purifying of the word and of the actions of the venerators we might say something of that matter i.e. Perhaps some actions which in some sense may bear the name of veneration might be performed to those Angels This T. G. thinks a great advantage to his cause and wonders that the Doctor would produce this passage But I conceive it is the clearest confutation of it that we could desire For having granted this and then restraining our petitions unto God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ as he expresly doth he most apparently demonstrates that prayer could be no part of the forementioned service he allowed to Saints 2. In that he thus distinguisheth of veneration and never doth distinguish in the like manner of prayer and supplication or of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est of adoration and worship it follows that although he thought some veneration might be allowed to Angels in some inferior kind yet no petition was to be put up unto them and that no worship and adoration should be given unto them 3. When Origen in answer to this passage saith * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. Ibid. we Christians venerate with supplications only God and his Son Jesus Christ and put up our petitions to God by his only Son If he doth understand only such supplications as are made to him as to the Author of all good he is as vain and impertinent as T. G. in his Answers to the Dr. for Celsus only doth contend for such a worship and consequently for such addresses only as agree unto the Ministers and Servants of God 4. Origen plainly doth inform us that the veneration he allowed to Angels was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. l. 8. p. 416. to speak well of them and pronounce them blessed and imitate to their virtues and what is this to supplication 3. Celsus objects that Daemons do belong to God and therefore must be prayed unto and