three First Ages for the worship of Saints Images and Reliques upon supposition that the Doctors towards the close of the Fourth Age were theirs in these Points And then I shall not fear to give the truest Account I can of those Practices at that time which grew afterward into the Superstitions we now complain of Monsieur de Meaux sayes It will not appear very likely that M. Daille should understand the sentiments of the Fathers of the three first Ages better than those who gathered as I may say the Succession of their Doctrine after their deaths These Gentlemen I perceive will content themselves with any pretence to shift off the Tryal of their Doctrines and Practices by the Authority of the three First Ages For whether that be likely or not which M. de Meaux here puts yet I hope we may look into the Writings of the most Primitive Fathers to see how things went in their times And it is very likely that M. Daille might understand the sentiments of the Fathers of the Three first Ages as well as he understood the Sentiments of those of the Fourth And so long as we can have recourse to the undoubted Writings of the three first Ages we may get the Doctrine of those Fathers this way with a little more Assurance then by guessing what their Sentiments were from the Books of their Successors Which every reasonable Man must acknowledge unless it be reasonable to suppose that the Fathers of the Three first Ages did not understoud their own Sentiments so well as the Fathers of the Fourth understood them Now in the first place the profound Silence of the three First Ages and the better half of the Fourth as to the Worship of the B. Virgin and the Saints and their Images and Reliques should be enough to determine the first Point in question And this Silence is not only directly confessed by some of our Adversaries but as effectually confessed by the rest that labor to find some hints of these Practices in these primitive Fathers but by such Interpretations and Consequences that 't is almost as great a shame to consute as to make them Now the Silence of these Fathers ought not to be rejected as an incompetent Proof because it is but a Negative For since we pretend that these Practices are Innovations and were never heard of in the Ancient Church It is not reasonable to demand a better Proof of it than that in their Books some of which give large and particular Accounts of their Worship and of their Doctrines concerning Worship we can no where meet with the least Intimation or Footstep of them Would our Adversaries have us bring express Testimonies out of the Fathers against these things as if they wrote and disputed by the Spirit of Prophecy against those Corruptions that should arise several Ages after they were dead We have as I shall shew other ways of discovering their Sentiments besides this that they make not the least mention of these Services But to demand more than their perpetual Silence in these Cases is unreasonable because no satisfactory Account can be given of it but this That the Worship we speak of was indeed no part of their Religion Had it been some indifferent Rite or Ceremony that we contend about this Argument from the Silence of the Fathers against its Antiquity might with some Colour be rejected because it were unreasonable to expect that they should take notice in their Writings of every Custom of how little moment soever And yet we find that in matters even of this slight nature in comparison they have not been wanting to give us very much Information But it is altogether incredible that so notable and famous a Part of the the Worship of Christians as that which is now given to the B. Virgin and to the Saints should not be mentioned by any one of them if it had been the Custom of those times Justin Martyr Athenagoras Tertullian Minutius Felix all the Apologists or at least one of them would have taken some notice of it especially since this part of their Religion would have needed Exposition and Defence more than all the rest for it would have made them obnoxious to the Recriminations of the Heathens and brought all their own Arguments upon themselves which they had used against the Heathens in Defence of their own Worshipping the one God and him only But perhaps they all agreed toconceal this Saint-Worship from the Heathens for the same Reason why Salmeron thinks the Apostles and Evangelists concealed it at first from both Jews and Gentiles because forsooth it had been hard to require it of the Jews who had been taught to pray to God only Salmer in 1 Tun. 2. Disp 8. and to Worship none but him and by publishing it Occasion had been given to the Gentiles to think that many Gods were now offered them instead of that multitude of Gods which they had forsaken A very likely Reason thus far That if this had been the Doctrine of the Church it was highly necessary to keep it secret till Heathen Idolatry were extinguished and none should be left to upbraid the Christians with removing the old Gods of the Heathens to make way for new ones of their own And without all doubt those that were prevail'd upon in every Persecution by Force and Flattery to revolt from Christianity though they had been false to the rest of their Religion yet were true to this Secret of it and never discovered to the Heathens that whatever the Church pretended they had been taught to say Ave Maries to the B. Virgin and to Worship her and the dead Saints and Martyrs with Prayers and Hymns c. I thank this Jesuit however for confessing so manifest a Truth that this Adoration of Saints was not fit to be exposed to the Gentiles But if Matters were carried thus I think they were not carried with great Sincerity This might be like the Policy of Jesuits but it did not by any means become the Simplicity of Christians And yet I think a Jesuit would hardly have carried a Secret in his Sleeve so dangerous to be discovered and so impossible to be concealed For that the Church should have the good Fortune to conceal it for above 300 Years from the Idolatrous Philosophers and Priests of the Gentiles was of all other things that passed in that long time the most miraculous and requires such a Faith to believe it as believes a thing the more the more incredible it is But though this in the Opinion of all indifferent persons will be a sufficient Prejudice against supposing that the Church kept her Doctrine and Practice from the Knowledge of her Enemies Yet I believe it will be a stronger Prejudice against it amongst those of which number I profess my self to be one that honor the Memories of the Ancient Martyrs and love them for their Constancy to the Death in adhering to our dear Lord and Master Jesus that
and pretend to believe themselves that she is pleased with that Worship which they offer to her But if as we say they yield to her those Services which no Creature is to receive they do by consequence represent her as a Lady that aspires to the Glory of the Most High which is by no means for the Glory of the B. Virgin And if their Saint-Worship be liable to the same charge thus also they represent the other Saints Now thô in opposing their Doctrine and Practice we are principally moved by that Concern we ought to have for the Glory of our Creator and Saviour yet it is some inducement to us so to do that we shall thereby vindicate the B. Virgin also and all the glorified Saints For if she knows what passes amongst Mortals she cannot but be displeased at those Services that have been and still are paid to her by some of her Son's Disciples and if she said any thing at all to 'em she would say to her Votaries but with greater indignation what the Angel said to St. John falling at his feet to worship him Rev. 19.10 See thou do it not I am thy Fellow-Servant Worship God The same I say of the Angels the Apostles the Martyrs and all the Saints whom they honor with the same kind of Worship that they give to the B. Virgin Only the Degree of her Worship and the Frequency of their Addresses to her and the strength of their Confidence in her is so much greater that they have thought fit to invent a word of Art to express it by Hyperdulia they call it a word which our people cannot understand better then by knowing the Practice which it is a name for It is so vast a proportion of Religious Service which they render to her it consists of so many Parts and Diversities that it were a Labour to recount them as particularly as the Case would bear It shall suffice to mention some of the principal Heads They worship her with Religious Prayers and Vows They erect Churches and Oratories for her Service where they worship her very Images and Pictures and pretended Reliques They make Rosaries and compose Hours Psalters and other Forms of Devotion to her They ask things of her that are proper to be asked of God only They burn Incense to her Images and offer their very Sacrifice of the Mass in her Honor. Now as to this and all the rest we cannot but stand amazed that this Service of the B. Virgin should grow to be one of the principal parts of their Religion when the H. Scriptures have not given us the least intimation of Rule or Example for it or of any Doctrine or Practice that leads to it That it should be a main design of their Catechismes to instruct Youth in the Worship of the B. Virgin of their Sermons to excite the People to put Confidence in her and to call upon her for the present occasion of their Books of Devotion to direct them how to pray to her and magnify her in Formal Invocations of their Confessors to injoyn Penitents to say so many Ave Maries in satisfaction for their sins and to make at least as frequent Applications to Mary as to Jesus himself for deliverance from Sins and Dangers When not one word not one Intimation of any thing like to any thing of all this is left upon record in the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles from whom those men pretend to derive their Religion whose Books are large enough for this so famous a Service to have been at least mentioned somewhere or other and who without all doubt would have more then mentioned it if it had been the Religion of those Times This is that we must always wonder at and so much the more because the constant Tenor of the Holy Scriptures bears against such Practices as these agreeably to that Precept of both Testaments Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve And indeed our Reasons to keep at a distance from this worship of the B. Virgin and the Saints are so obvious and commonly known that I shall not make it a Business by it self to represent them But these two things I shall consider as well as I can 1. The plausible Expositions and Colours by which they have tryed of late to â—ustify themselves in these things 2. What were the B ginnings of this kind of Worship amongst Christians and by what steps it is grown to that height in which we now see it I shall consider the former in a narrow compass because much has been said to it already The latter is what I chiefly design §. 2. IN pursuance of the first thing propounded I shall particularly observe how Monsieur de Meaux hath expounded these Matters under the heads of Religious Worship of Invocation of Saints and giving honor to Images and Reliques But I shall begin with the two latter because he expounds these particularly and then I shall consider the general Defence he makes for all the Religious Worship they give to the B. Virgin and to the Saints The Worship of Invocation is the Foundation of a great many other things done in her Service For instance It is this that hath brought forth the Rosary the Psalters the Hours and all other Offices of Devotion to her It is this that hath raised her Shrines and built Oratories and Chappels for her especial Service And indeed if she as well as God is to be worshipped with Prayers and Hymns it is but reasonable that she should have her holy Places for such Services as well as God And yet St. Cont. Maxim Arian lib. 1. c. 11. Austin thought the erecting of Temples to be so proper an act of Divine Worship that if we should do it to the most excellent Angel we should be anathematized from the Church of God Whereas therefore our Churches are known from one another in Cities and populous Towns by the names of several Saints yet we profess that however for distinction sake they are so called they are God's Houses and Oratories and not theirs and it is most manifest that they are used by us for his Worship and not for theirs in whole or in part The Invocation of the B. Virgin and the Saints has run out into some Excesses from which they might have separated it and therefore to these Excesses I shall say but little especially because they defend them very faintly and with great appearances of self-Condemnation It was too much in all reason that the Council of Trent (a) Sess 25. de Invoc S. Bellar. de sanct Beatit lib. 1. c. 20. allowed of Mental as well as Vocal Prayers to be made to the Saints for this ascribes to them the Knowledge of the Secrets of Hearts And 't is a very faint Plea for this which Monsieur de Meaux (b) Exp. p. 8. makes in saying that God did not disdain to discover future things to the Prophets tho
be made of it in comparison to which the Danger of it were nothing at all how comes it to be so severely Prohibited But when we consider for whose sake chiefly they pretend the Profitableness of Image-worship we see how true it is that the Wisdom of Man is but Foolishness when it would mend the provisions of God For Images are by all means to be retain'd and honor'd because they are the Books and Remembrances of the Common People and Helps to their Piety and Devotions who therefore cannot be without them Trid. sess 25. De. Invoc S. But M. de Meaux knows that these are most apt to be led into the worst Superstitions by Images and that it is one of the hardest things in the World to prevent it M. de Meaux tells us their Intention is not so much to honor the Image as the Apostle or Martyr He will say too that 't is the Intention of the Church that none of the People should intend more then this comes to But let him tell me how or where the Church has exprest her self with the least degree of that Zeal which the redressing of such horrible abuses in this matter as are every where known does still require The Superstition of the vulgar in their Communion is notorious and which is still worse the Doctrines leading to the most Superstitious Opinions and Practices in this kind were and are notorious for instance That the same worship is due to the Image which is due to the Prototype And are not these things uncensured by the Church of Rome to this day If indeed we could once see that Church bestir her self against the gross Excess of Image-worship as she does against those that do not worship Images at all we might allow something to this Exposition of their Intentions But as far as we can see they that worship the very Images themselves and put confidence in them go for very good Catholicks while we that dare not worship them at all because God has forbidden it are for our forbearance used as they use Hereticks But setting all this aside what signifies the Intention of the Church if it ran through all the Members of it against an express Prohibition in the Scriptures It is not lawful to do that with a Distinction which is forbidden without a distinction God hath said Thou shalt not bow down to Images nor worship them If indeed he had elsewhere made an Exception to this Rule it had been lawful for us to have made use of his permission it had been necessary for us to have observed his command in the excepted Case But where God hath not excepted or distinguished we ought not to do so unless we will open a door to evacuate all divine Laws whatsoever by arbitrary Distinctions and Reservations In short that Worship which they pretend to give to the Saints by their Images has these two terrible Prejudices against it 1. That the Honor which they give to the Saints by their Images supposing none of it to be lost by the way is not to be given to the Saints themselves as we have shewn already 2. That the Worship of Images let it be explicated with all the Fineness and Arts of Disguise they are Masters of is after all to be utterly excluded out of Religion This being a Worship which God will by no means endure should be given to himself having universally prohibited it Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image nor the likeness of any thing that is c. which is to my understanding as plain a Prohibition of all Image-worship whatsoever as these words would have been an Injunction of it viz. Thou shalt make to thy self such or such Images and Pictures and shalt bow down before them and worship them if this had been said instead of the contrary Now indeed if this had been said it had been extremely necessary to distinguish between Relative Worship and Absolute Worship between Worship terminated upon the Image and Intended to the person represented by the Image between taking it for a God or a Saint and taking it only for some Representation of the one or the other But as in that case such distinctions had been very necessary so as the case stands they are vain and impertinent For if Image-worship had been commanded or permitted still we had been to worship Images but as Images But it being forbidden we are not to worship them at all I say if it had been allowed we must indeed have worshipped them with a Distinction but as it is forbidden we must not worship them tho with a distinction because 't is forbidden without any distinction and as universally as words can express any thing M. de Meaux says that after the same manner we ought to understand the Honor which they pay to Reliques after the Example of the Primitive Church The Example of the Primitive Church shall be considered in its place In the mean time If the Worship of Images and the Worship of Reliques are to stand or fall together we have already seen what will become of this having shewn how unsuccesfully they plead for the other But if M. de Meaux pleads for the Practice of the people or even the Doctrine of his Church in this Point he must pardon us if we do not think fit to take general Apologies for a reasonable Inducement to do those things which he was not willing to name in particular We may say in general says M. de Meaux That if Protestants would but consider how the Affection which we bear to any one propagates it self without being divided to his Children to his Friends and after that by several degrees to the Representation of him to any Remains of him and to any thing which renews in us his Remembrance If they did but conceive that Honor has the like Progression seeing Honor is nothing else but Love mixed with Respect and Fear In fine if they would but consider that all the exterior Worship of the Catholick Church has its Source in God himself and returns back again to him They would never believe that this Worship which he himself alone animates could excite his Jealousie M. de Meaux considered very well that it was much better to put us off with this general Account than to mention the Particulars he goes about to Justifie It seems the Worship of Reliques is intended for the Honor of the Martyrs and the Worship of the Martyrs for the Honor of God But what kind of Superstition might not be defended by such Apologies as these if men's Blood Bones Teeth Hairs Coats Girdles Shoes and such like little things may be incensed if they may be exposed with a Venite ad adorandum to receive the Prostrations of the people Catech. R. de Cultu sanct in the presence of Christ himself whom they suppose to be bodily present upon the Altar if they may be sought unto for great Graces and for miraculous Cures if
the frightful Ideas of his Religion which we have entertained and to represent it in a more agreeable and pleasing Form than we have yet known it by Other Observations of this kind might be made to make it probable that it cost even M. de M. some little trouble to contrive his discourse into this plausible Appearance and to shew that 't is no easie matter at the same time to make a smooth Representation of their Religion and not to change it But I shall now offer my Reasons to shew the Unsatisfactoriness of his Exposition in this cause as he hath formed it 1. Setting aside their Profession of one God which is supposed in the Question concerning his particular Worship I find no outward Mark of the Adoration that is due to God only mentioned but that of Sacrifice which indeed M. de M. sayes is the principal But in a point of this consequence I wish he had been pleased to name he rest But I think I may appeal to the Sincerity of M de Meaux whether by Sacrifice he means any thing more than the Sacrifice of the Mass in which tâ—ey pretend to offer up offer up Jesus Christ the Son of God his natural Body Soul and Divinity as a Propitiation for the Quick and the Dead For my part I cannot find but they give all other outward marks of Adoration to the B. Virgin but this so that the Worship given to God and that to her are distinguished I fear but by one mark And what a rare Account is this of Gods incommunicable Worship if that mark too should prove to be one of their own Inventions if such a sacrifice as that was not appointed by God if indeed it be repugnant to the plain Authority of the Scripture as the exposition of our Doctrine hath irrefragably shewn in a very little Compass This is my first Exâ—eption That all the outward marks of Religious Worship which God hath established they make common to God and the Saints and that which they give to God only they have made themselves 2. Even this very Sacrifice of the Mass is offered up by them in honour of the B. Virgin and the Saints For thus the Oblation runs in their Missals Accept O Holy Trinity this Oblation which we offer to thee in honor of the most glorious Virgin the Mother of God c. Now surely they would not offer God himself in Sacrifice to a Creature But it comes something near it to offer up such a Sacrifice in honor of a Creature For while this is done how can it be said that Sacrifice is reserved to be a Protestation of that Honor which is due to God only 3. They burn Incense to the B. Virgin and the Saints which being done as a Religious Rite in their Honor will hardly avoid being a Sacrifice For though this Rite of burning Incense was no part of the Religion that Jesus or his Apostles taught nor used at all in the Antient Church yet it should seem to be no less a Sacrifice now then it was among the Jews or then it would have been if it had been transferred from the Synagogue into the Church I suppose if the Church of Rome had thought fit to introduce the Oblations of Beasts and Birds into her Religious Worship she could not deny but such Oblations had been properly Sacrifices and were to be made to God only And that though it were Judaism to offer them at all it were yet Idolatry to offer them to any but to God But what should make any such difference between Slaying of Victims and burning of Incense that the former should belong to God only and not the latter I cannot comprehend For the Altar of incense was most holy unto the Lord it was overlaid with Gold which the Altar of Burnt Offerings was not and it was more holy then the Altar of burnt-Offerings as standing in the more Holy place and none but the Seed of Aaron was to come near to offer incense before the Lord. No wonder therefore that Hezekiah brake in pieces the Brasen Serpent when they burned Incense to it for this was no less than offering Sacrifice to it To conclude the Idolatry which the Heathens sought to bring the Christians to was no other then to take a little Incense in their hands and throw it into the Fire of their Altars But yet they burn Incense to the Images and Reliques of the B. Virgin and the Saints And then how can they pretend to sacrifice to God only But 4. Setting all this aside let us consider that they grant Sacrifice is to be offered to God only because it is established to make a publick Acknowledgment and a Solemn Protestation of Gods Soveraignty and of our absolute Dependance Now if this be true then whatsoever is established for the same purpose is holy to the Lord also And therefore Religious Invocation by Prayers for good things by Confessions of Sin by vows of Repentance and Duty and by Thanksgivings for benefits received is to be offered to God only For in truth these are acknowledgments and Protestations of Gods Soveraignty and of our absolute Dependence Nay in truth they are more noble and excellent Sacrifices than those Victims and other more sensible Oblations which God required under the Law or before it and which he does not require now But that which I lay the greatest stress upon is this That those material Sacrifices were so many Rites and Ceremonies of Invocation diversified according to the several ends of Invocation either for confessing of Sin or obtaining a benefit or returning Praises for Benefits received Hence it is that Prayer and Sacrifice are put one for the other in the Holy Scriptures as when it is said The Sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord Pro. but the Prayer of the upright is his delight By which words it is plain that the Sacrifice of the Wicked is his Prayer and the Prayer of the upright is his Sacrifice Now Prayer and Sacrifice strictly so called were both Acts of Worship but Prayer more excellent than Sacrifice because Sacrifice was the Rite of Prayer and a Rite which God required no longer than till that most precious Sacrifice of the Son of God was offered for us the Merit of which alone it is that made the Prayers of good men in all ages acceptable to God And by the way it would be considered by the Gentlemen of the Church of Rome That when those 〈…〉 perfect Sacrifices which prefigured the oblation of 〈…〉 once for all were offered under the Law the 〈…〉 God 's People were then made only to God 〈…〉 now that the Prayers of the Church are sanctified by the accomplishment of the Sacrifice of the Son of God to offer any of them to a Creature is rather a greater Dishonour to God than it would have been before For if the Patriarchs and the Jews were to pray to him only to whom alone they offered
Occasion that if that had been the only design of that Commandement it is very strange that God should note the Worshipping of the Heathen Gods with no other penalty than that which his Jealousie would inflict For to have any other Gods besides him is without all question spiritual Whoredom and had been threatned with Divorce if the Prohibition of so great a Crime had needed the of Sanction of any express Threatning But when he threatens the Worship of Images with the Effects of his Jealousie it seems plain that he means such Image-Worship as is consistent with acknowledging him to be our Only God And yet this is the least of all those Reasons by which it appears to me that he forbids in this Commandment the Worship of all Images whatsoever I deny not therefore but a man may kneel may kiss may incense may prostrate himself and pray before an Image and all this while ascribe no Divinity to it nor take it to be his God So likewise he may Pray and make Vows and offer Thanks and Prayses to the Saints and to the B. Virgin and not take them neither for his Gods But because God is the peerless Majesty of Heaven and Earth he will be served with a peerless Worship he will therefore have no such things as these done in Religion nor Creatures to have Respect shewn them that look so like to the Worship which he requires himself Why do I say so like That which they give to the B.V. and to the Saints is almost the very same But if we do such things as these it will not serve our turn to plead That we still keep the inward Adoration of Spirit and Truth intirely for him though we thus honor his Creatures with Religious Rites and Services any more than it would excuse a Woman that had given all the Favors and Liberty to another Man that could provoke her Husband's Jealousie to say though she could say it with Truth that she remembred all the while who was her Husband and whatever Liberties besides she used that she had still kept his Bed undefiled This Consideration I could not forbear to use and that in Compassion to those whose Prejudices will not let them feel the Sense of those Reasonings by which we prove the Roman Church to be guilty of downright Idolatry For if the fear of God's Jealousie would keep them from giving those Honors to the Saints which look so like Divine Honours if they are not so we should gain our end upon them though not by the force of the best arguing the Case will bear And this is our End That God may not be any more dishonour'd and their Salvation hindred by the unchristian Doctrines and Practices of this sort I have therefore now proceeded upon this Supposition that they are not guilty of perfect Idolatry in tâ—ose things which we complain of and yet shewn what urgent Cause there is upon another Account for a Reformation of them But I conclude this with professing That I have supposed them not guilty of that fearful Crime only to make way for another Argument since all Arguments are to be used in so important a Matter that have a Foundation of Truth but not in distrust of those Arguments which prove them guilty of it §. 7. The second thing I propounded was to shew the beginnings of this strange Worship amongst Christians which they offer in the Church of Rome to the B. Virgin and to the Saints For I must not forget that M. de Meaux pretends that his Church in these things teaches as the Primitive Church taught and that she does what she teaches with all Antiquity But what if nothing of all this was either Taught or done in the Church for 360 years after Christ M. de M. sayes that those of the Pretended Reformation obliged by the strength of Truth begin to acknowledge that the custom of Praying to Saints and honoring their Reliques was Established even in the fourth Age of the Church This he takes all occasions to insinuate and with these colours he serves himself to represent the Reformation as odiously as he can devise Thus he tells us in his Pastoral Letter But above all what horror are they worthy of Past l. p. 29. who cast the Accusation of Idolatry upon the whole Church and also on the Church of the first Ages Where he takes it for granted that the Honour and Innocence of the first Ages must stand or fall with the Cause of the Roman Church and so takes occasion to accuse us of a great and fearful Crime viz. That we cast the accusation of Idolatry upon the whole Church even the Church of the first Ages He had observed but just before that those who bear false and scandalous Witness against an Innocent Person are Condemned to the same punishment which the Crime of which they bear Witness did deserve had it been found true And therefore we deserve before men the Horror which is due to Idolatry and shall receive the just punishment thereof in the sight of God If this Rule be true and we must incur the Penalties of Idolatry if we falsly accuse others of it M. de Meaux ought to reflect upon himself who having accused us of falsly accusing the First Ages in this matter supports his Accusation by taking these two things for granted First that we acknowledge the Illustrious Fourth Age to have requested the Prayers of Martyrs and honored Reliques Ibid. as the pretended Catholicks have done since Secondly that the Fourth Age being granted them the first Three must be theirs in course If M. de Meaux be safe upon these Grounds we have no great cause to apprehend the Horrors and Punishments of false Accusation And if this be all he hath to say 't is but a very slender ground for an Appeal to the Primitive Church and to all Antiquity For neither have the. Reformed acknowledged heretofore Id. p. 8. nor do they now begin to acknowledge that the Customs of the Roman Church in these points were established in the Fourth Age of the Church Nor if they did acknowledge it would this Acacknowledgment give away the Primitive Church and all Antiquity in favour of Praying to Saints and worshipping of Images and Reliques unless the first three Ages were less Antient and Primitive than those that followed That which we acknowledge is not that Saint-Worship was Established in the Fourth Age but this that towards the latter end of the Fourth Age some unhappy occasions were given for the Establishing of that Worship in after Ages which we could wish had never been given and which the Great Men of those Dayes we have reason to believe would have prevented if they had been Prophets as well as holy Men and foreseen the Mischiess into which they were ripened by the Superstition of after-times I shall therefore demonstrate that 't is a vain thing for the pretended Catholicks to presume that they have the Authority of the
years together For we no sooner come to hear of Stories of Reliques in the Church but we find the Pagans at the heels of this Innovation and upbraiding the Christians with the superstition of it Why meet we not with some intimation of laying up Reliques in Churches under the Altar There was room enough for so considerable and necessary a circumstance and the Church of Rome makes more than a circumstance of it in that particular description of the fashion and Ornaments of the Church built by Paulinus Bishop of Tyre Euseb Hist lib. 20. c. 4. Why meet we with no Translations of Bodies from one place to another for their greater honour Perhaps we shall be told of the men from the East that came to Rome and challenged the Bodies of St. Peter and St. Paul as of right belonging to them and of their carrying them two Miles out of Town to a place called Catacumboe and all the other Adventures that Gregory tells upon this business But then there will arise a great question Greg. lib. 3. Ep. 30. Baron A. D. 221. N. 4. whether we are to believe with Gregory that they were Eastern Believers or with Baronius that they were Thievish Greeks or rather it will be no question that the whole Relation is fabulous from one end to the other In short why have we all this time no account of Miracles wrought by Reliques of carrying them about in Processions of exposing them to receive the Adorations of the People of wearing them as a special security against Spiritual and Temporal Evils or of any instance of this kind of Religion I answer It is a fond thing to imagine that the Religion of Worshipping the Reliques of the Saints should be in use amongst them who gave no Religious Worship to the Saints themselves But it is not to be wonder'd at that they who pray to the Souls of the Saints and Martyrs who are so far absent from us that they hear us not should be guilty of another weakness and Worship their Bones and other Reliques which neither hear nor see though they are present This account of the Sentiments of the Three first Ages and indeed of the better half of the Fourth we gather from the Writings of the Fathers and from the undoubted Monuments of those Times Monsieur de Meaux knew that these things had been diligently expounded by those of the Reformation and particularly by M. Daille And what does he oppose to this to save his pretences to All Antiquity harmless Says he Exp. p. 5. Without any farther examination what might be the Sentiments of the Fathers of the Three first Ages I will content my self with what M. Daille is pleased to grant who allows us so many great men who taught the Church in the Fourth Age. Now M. Daille neither made any such allowance nor had he any reason to make it But suppose he had must all that he had written concerning the sence of the Three first Ages about the Object of Worship go for nothing If this example of Writing is sit to be followed I know not why I should give my self any farther trouble and not rather conclude thus Reresius de Tradition par 3. c. That without any farther examination what may be the Sentiments of the Fathers of the following Age I shall content my self with what some great men of the Roman Church are pleased to grant and which is evidently proved against all the rest that deny it viz. That the Fathers of the Three first Ages must be allowed to us And so leave it to the World to judge who has most reason to be content § 9. But having undertaken to give some account of the beginnings of the present Superstitions of the Church of Rome in the matter of Saint-Worship and the Adoration of the Images and Reliques of the Saints And because it is impossible to do this without going beyond the first Ages till we come to the Reign of Julian I must venture beyond him and consider the state of the Church toward the latter end of the Fourth Century with respect to these questions Some of the Romanists pretend that Antiquity to be on their side which I have shewn is with us But as far as I can perceive they all pretend to be very confident they shall carry it thus high at least and Monsieur de Meaux takes it for granted that we begin to allow them those later Fathers I shall endeavour to represent the case as impartially as if I were yet to chuse my Opinion and I am very much mistaken if it will not appear in conclusion though there is a little more colour for their challenging the latter end of the Fourth Age in favour of their Doctrine and Practices in these things than for appealing to higher Antiquity that upon a true consideration of the grounds upon which they challenge these later Fathers as their own it had been more advisable for them to have come down much lower to find Presidents whereby to justifie themselves It had been a very Ancient custom of the Church for Christians to meet at the Coemiteries or Burying-places of the Martyrs and the rest of the Faithful there to celebrate Anniversary Commemorations of the Martyrs Ep. Smyr ubi suprà Thus the Church of Smyrna having intimated that they had buried the Body of St. Polycarp in the usual place they added that in that place God willing they should assemble together to celebrate the Birth-day of his Martyrdom with all the joy they could express And the reason of this Custom they express in this manner Both to Commemorate those who had already undergone the tryal of Martyrdom and to exercise and to prepare those that were to follow for the like Conflicts But they did not meet here to celebrate the Memories of the Martyrs onely but at other times also for the celebration of Divine Service Eusâ—b Hist lib. 7. c. 11. For we find that Valerian and Gallien forbad the Christians to celebrate Assemblies or to meet at those places which they called Coemiteries which passages and the like imply that it was ordinary for them to Assemble there And it is not improbable that they used those places for more privacy when there was danger of persecution and that the prohibition of Assemblies in those Coemiteries was the utmost strictness of prohibiting their Assemblies For it is plain that they had their Churches besides in Cities which they built and repaired according to their ability Id. lib. 8. c. 1. And so in that favourable time between Gallien and Dioclesian we find that they added new Churches in every City to those which they had before But whether they were wont to meet at the Coemiteries at other times besides the Anniversary days of the Martyrs for privacy or perhaps for the Commodiousness of those places when they did not consult privacy as some think or whether it was out of special respect to the
respected even till now as the Doctors of Truth But hold a little if great Names will do the business let us see what we can do in this kind Can you endure my Brethren those who have forsaken the Ireneus's the Justin-Martyrs the Clemens's of Alexandria the Tertullians the Origens the Cyprians the Athanasius's whom all Christians do pretend even now to respect as Doctors of Truth Those my Brethren that were more Ancient than the Ambroses c. and most of whom laid down their lives in a Glorious Martyrdom which none of the other did It is true Brethren p. 29. that some part of the Prophecies was fulfilled when the Empire took the Church into its protection but we do not find it was foretold also that the Christians of that Age would be wiser or better than their Forefathers p. ◠Does not Monsieur de Meaux tell us that Antichrist must come according to the Predictions of the Apostles But when that happens the times are not to be much the better for it It was the admirable goodness of God to Crown the Church at last with Peace and Glory But do not think the Authority of that Age is to be regarded the more because it was Illustrious for the Wealth and Splendor of this World least by the same reason you should undervalue the Authority of the more Ancient Ages which were Illustrious for nothing but Truth and Godliness and Martyrdom which if you should do my Brethren might we not well cry out Oh prodigy unheard of amongst Christians that we should begin to think it a better mark of a pure Church to have it in its power to persecute others than to endure persecution her self after the example of Christ and his Apostles It is an easie matter to requite a Declamation But would not the Bishop of Meaux say to this that the Ireneus's c. do not condemn what is now practised in the Church of Rome So do we say that we are far from charging the Ambroses c. with Idolatry and that the Doctrines and Practises of that Age with respect to the points that we are upon are so vastly different from what we now see in the Church of Rome that if the Church of Rome be Idolatrous it does by no means follow that the Fourth Age was so So that we must come to disputing at last whether we will or not if we talk of these questions to any purpose I have shewn the first steps that were made towards the Invocation of Saints which I confess is an Innovation maintained by the Church of Rome that of all the rest bids the fairest for Antiquity Because there was a certain Address to Martyrs used by many Christians and commended by some of the Fathers towards the latter end of the Fourth Age which looks something like it till you come near to examine the matter throughly But then you may discern so considerable a difference that 't is a vain thing to pretend that the Invocation of Saints as now practised in the Church of Rome was as Ancient as the Conclusion of the Fourth Age. All that we need to grant is this That those beginnings are so Ancient which first did give occasion to it and which with the help of Ignorance and Superstition did at length bring it into the Church § 10. Hitherto the Honour done to the Martyrs was that of Founding Churches upon their Reliques and frequenting them both for the publick Service of God and for private Devotions in which the Martyrs themselves were sometimes called upon as if they were present at their Memories But this was done before their Images came to be set up in the Church so much as for Ornament and long before they were thought of for Worship We have already noted the Act of Epiphanius in tearing the Picture of Christ or some other Saint for he knew not well what it was which he found upon a Veil An act of Indignation so much the more remarkable because the Church where it was done was in the Diocess of John Bishop of Hierusalem Hieron Tom. 2. Ep. 60. v. fin to whom therefore Epiphanius thought fit to give an account of it in that Epistle which is to be seen in St. Hierom's Works And the reason he gives for what he did is as remarkable as the Action was When I saw this in a Church of Christ that the Picture of a man should be hanged up there against the Authority of the Scriptures I tare it c. And again I intreat thee to command the Presbyters of that place to provide for the future that such Veils being contrary to what our Religion allows may not be hanged up in the Church of Christ. But as for the Images of Martyrs and Saints why should I go about to prove that they were not yet brought into Churches when the pretended Catholicks are fain to give reasons why they were hardly to be met with amongst Christians even out of Churches Petavius excuseth the matter thus The Images of Christ and the Saints were not used lest they should be taken by the rude and unskilful people for Idols to which they shad been accustomed And afterward Petav. Dogm Theol. Tom. 4. part 2. c. 13. p. 582 583. Images are not evil of themselves nor forbidden by any Law of God nevertheless that no shadow of Superstition and Idolatry might give offence to the tender and as I may say the unsetled minds of Christians and that the Gentiles might not object to those of our Religion who abhorred Idols and disswaded men from them that themselves also had certain Images of their own is likely they were but sparingly used for about the first Four Ages all which time the abominable Worship of Devils in Idols together with a most cruel vexation of the Christian name went on At length the Fifth Age being come after that the Church had gained her freedom and began boldly to stretch forth her arms Images began to appear in most places and were shewn in Temples and Oratories whereas hitherto though they had been in some use yet they were not to be seen so promiscuously and frequently In good time But if such a man as Petavius could have shewn any use of Images all this while that any Art could draw to his purpose he had not served the Cause with this miserable account of the late setting up of Images With the like to which Salmeron satisfied himself as to the silence of the Scriptures about the Worship of Saints as we have already seen Now to make this appear likely he insists upon it that the Ancients disputed against the Temples and Altars of the Heathens though when peace and liberty was given to the Church the Christians had magnificent Churches and Altars of their own But nothing can be more vain for from the first the Church had its Altars or holy Tables and its holy Places too such as the times would permit And therefore this Instance doth