that Prayer must be offered unto none but God and by no other Intercessor but our Saviour Christ Sect. 1. And this Assertion they prove 1. Because God only can be called good 2. Because he only can answer our Petitions ibid. 2. They do affirm That by addressing a Petition to a Saint or Angel we become guilty of distraction from God and of deserting our Lord Jesus Christ Sect. 2. 3. That to pray unto a Creature or to that which is no God is to worship it as God or give that honour to it which is due to God alone Sect. 3. 4. They hence infer that Christ is God and that the Holy Ghost is God because we put up our Petitions to them Sect. 4. 5. Because the invocation of the inferior Heathen Daemons was by the Fathers censured as Idolatry And there is no desparity betwixt the invocation of those Daemons and that invocation of the blessed Martyrs which is now practised in the Church of Rome sufficient to acquit the Papist from that Guilt if it be duly charged on the Heathens by reason of their Supplications tendred to inferior Daemons Sect. 5. 6. The Fathers dispute against the Heathens with such Arguments as perfectly destroy this practise and confute this Doctrine Sect. 6. 7. Because the ancient Fathers prayed for all the Saints without exception of Martyrs or Apostles or the blessed Virgin 8. Because the Fathers gave no Rules touching the Canonizing of the Saints departed ibid. TO what we have discoursed from the holy Scriptures and from the Principles of Reason we shall now add the suffrage of those ancient Fathers who flourished in the first and purest Ages of the Church Who do not only say expresly that our Prayers should only be directed to God asserting this without those limitations and distinctions which are now used by the Church of Rome but also do it upon the very same enducements and motives which Protestants are wont to use for confirmation of this truth Moreover in their conflicts with the Arrians and other Adversaries of the Church of Christ they use those very weapons wherewith we fight against the Church of Rome and do pronounce that Doctrine and Practice which that Church contends for to be the giving to the Creature what is due to God And first the Fathers do assert that prayer must be offered unto none but God and by no other Intercessor but our Saviour Christ When Celsus had pronounced that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 8. p. 394. Heathen Daemons did belong to God and thence inferred we should entreat their favour Origen replys two things 1. That those Daemons being wicked Spirits could not belong to God 2. That this advice of †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origen contra Cels lib. 8. p. 395. Celsus to put up our Petitions to them was to be utterly rejected and by no means allowed by Christians Because God only was to be made the object of our prayer nor were we to sollicite any other than our great High Priest to offer and present them to the Father And hence in two Catena's both published by the Doctors of the Church of ‖ Nicet Caten in Psal 5. Rome we have this free confession of an antient Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We Christians pray to God alone And upon this account they tell us the Psalmist uttered this expression Attend unto the voice of my petition my King and my God For unto thee will I pray because (a) Oraâ—io enim soâ— Deo â—ffâ—rtur Aurea Catena in 50. Psal edit Venâ—t Anno 1569. Pag. 53. Petitions were to be offered unto God alone according to that Question of St. Austin (b) Cui alteri praeter te clamabo Aug. Confess lib. 1. cap 5. to whom else shall I cry but unto thee and that expression of (c) L. de Creatione Dracontius esse nihil prorsus se praeter ubique rogandum that nothing besides God should be invoked And this assert on they do not barely offer but also they confirm it by many pregnant Arguments as first He only must be prayed unto because he only can be called Good (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alexand Strom. l. 7. p. 721. since God alone is good saith Clemens it is reasonable we should sollicite him alone for the Donation and Continuance of good things 2. because God only is present in all places and so at hand to hear and help us wherever we address our prayers to him It is an absurdity saith (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. contra Celsum lib. 5. pag. 239. Origen having that God with us and nigh at hand who filleth Heaven and Earth to go about to pray to that which is not omnipresent This I confess is spoken to demonstrate that intercessions were not to be made unto the Sun and Moon and Stars but then it must be noted that this Father held both Sun and Moon and Stars to be intelligible Creatures and in this very place asserts that (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id pag. 238. they do offer up their Prayer to God and from this very Argument concludes we must not pray to them because they pray to him Whence it will follow that he conceived them as fit and able to be our Intercessors as the Saints departed and that it was absurd to pray to any who themselves properly did pray for us And 2. he adds (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Id ib. if any Christian be not sufficient immediately to direct his Prayers to God let him address them to the Word of God making no mention of an address to be preferred either to Saint or Angel or to the B. Virgin in this Case 3. He adds that put the (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. p. 239. Case that Sun Moon and Stars were heavenly Angels and Messengers of God yet were they not to be adored for this but he whose Messengers and Angels they were Where by the way observe that he insensibly slides from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pray to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to adore Whence we may certainly conclude that in the Judgment of this Father it was the same to pray to any person and to adore that person and that nothing may be invocated which may not be adored Lastly it is evident his reason will hold good as well against addresses made to Saints as to the Sun and Moon they being neither of them omnipresent 3. They say he only must be prayed unto who seeth and heareth every where Let us consider saith (i) De Orat. c. 1. Sect. 8. Tertullian the Heavenly Wisdom of our Lord in his Injunction to pray in secret whereby he both requires the Faith of Man confiding that God omnipotent both hears and sees under our Roofs and in our secret Places and also that our Faith be modest so that we offer our Religion unto him alone whom we are confident doth
from page 478 to page 496. Where also you may find them teaching that the Dominion of the blessed Virgin is equal to the Dominion of her Son that all power in Heaven and Earth was given to her that she is constituted over every Creature and whosoever boweth his knee unto Jesus doth fall down also and supplicate unto his Mother so that the glory of the Son may be judged not so much to be common with the Mother Ibid. as to be the very same That the mighty God did as far as he might make his Mother partner of his Divine Majesty and power giving unto her of old the Soveraignty both of Coelestial things and Mortal p. 478. That in the redundance of effusion of Grace upon the Creatures the Lords power and will is so accommodated unto her that she may seem to be the first in that both Diadem and Tribunal p. 481. And that all things are subject to the command of the Virgin even God himself p. 482. They also teach that by sinning after Baptisme men seem to have contemned and despised the Passion of Christ That so no Sinner doth deserve that Christ should any more make Intercession for him to the Father without whose Intercession none can be delivered either from Eternal Punishment or the temporal nor from the fault which he hath voluntarily committed And therefore that it was necessary that Christ should constitute his well-beloved Mother a Mediatrix betwixt us and him And so in this our Pilgrimage there is no other refuge left unto us in our tribulations and adversities but to have recourse unto the Virgin Mary our Mediatrix that she would appease the wrath of her Son Ibid. That as he is ascended into Heaven to appear in the sight of God for men Heb. 9.24 So she ought to ascend thither to appear in the sight of her Son for sinners that so mankind might have alwayes before the face of God a help like unto Christ for the procuring of his Salvation And that she is that throne of Grace p. 484. whereof the Apostle specketh Heb. 4.16 Let us go boldly unto the Throne of Grace that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in the time of need That she comes before the Throne of Grace not entreating but commanding p. 486. In the Psalter of our Lady we have these Addresses Blessed are they whose hearts do love thee Ps 31. O Virgin Mary their sinns by thee shall be mercifully washed away Have mercy upon me O Lady Ps 50. who art called the Mother of Mercy and according to the bowels of thy Mercies cleanse me from all mine Iniquities Save me Lady by thy name Ps 53. Ps 71. and deliver me from mine unrighteousness Give the King thy judgement O God and thy mercy to the Queen his Mother Oh come let us sing unto our Lady Ps .. 94. Cant ad Virg. M. post Psal Let us make a joyful noise to Mary our Queen that brings Salvation Oh our Omnipotent Lady thou art my Salvation thou hast freed me condemned to death thou art the beginning and the finisher of my Salvation There you may find them teaching that by her Ps 118. Ps 41. Ps 136. De Arcan Ca. thol verit l. 7. c. 10. White p. 357. Sinns are purged by her true satisfaction is made for sinns the Death and Passion of Christ and of the blessed Virgin saith Petrus Galatinus conduced to the redemption of Mankind The Stellarium Coronae beatae Mariae saith she bought us and as Christ Redeemed Mankind by his Flesh and Blood so she redeemed the same with her Soul These Doctrines and many other of the same Blasphemous stamp are taught and held by many Doctors of the Roman Church these books and doctrines are written and licensed by that Church and so have Catholick permission no censure ever passed upon them no Expurgatory Index hath cleansed them from these horrid Blasphemies but it is still left free for any of the Doctors of that Communion to maintain and propagate them and for any of the members of that Church to practise sutably to these conceptions To ascribe all this power and Authority to the Blessed Virgin and all this vertue to her Death to give her the praises of it and accordingly to trust in her to pray unto her for the blessings she hath purchased and for the distribution of those Favours which naturally do result from this advancement and when they address themselves unto her to use the most extravagant expressions contained in the Ladys Psalter and in other books of the like nature with it Whence it will follow 1 That any person who acts according to these Doctrines and puts up these Petitions doth not deviate from that Tradition which the Catholick conceives to be his only rule of Faith id est a person may be guilty of horrid Blasphemy and Idolatry and notwithstanding be a good Roman Catholick 2. It follows that no man ought to be condemned for writing or asserting any of these Tenets or for using any of the formes contained in those books for Oral Tradition cannot be conceived to condemn what is allowed and practised without censure in the Church of Rome 3. Hence evident it is that private Catholicks may unavoidably be subject to these evil practises for seeing in these matters they cannot have the judgement of the Church and must not be permitted to act according to their private judgements what remains but that they follow the judgement of their Priest which as we have seen is often impious and Blasphemous 4. Hence evident it is that neither these opinions nor practises can ever be condemned by the Church of Rome for to make the contrary Tenets pass into Tradition or to make them Articles of Faith is to empower the Church to coyn new Articles and to pretend Tradition where it is not to be had So that all these Blesphemous and Idolatrous Devotions must be as lasting as the Church of Rome Secondly I have observed this method in my whole discourse 1. To confirm the propositions which I have laid down by Scripture and by reason and then to introduce the Judgement of the Fathers Whereas T. G. is very sparing both as to Scripture and Reason and doth endeavor to supply his want of Reason and of Scripture by some impertinent citations from the Fathers This I conceive to be a very weak and disingenious way of arguing for if the Testimonies of some few Fathers be not sufficient to confirm an Article of Faith and to give us the true sense of any text of Scripture he must confess that what he thus discourseth is weak and infufficient to prove what he hath undertaken to demonstrate but if he shall assert this method to be good and cogent then it will clearly follow 1. That the Doctrine of the Trent Council must be false for they have certainly decreed that Doctrine which was asserted by Pope
viz. The three branches are three days The seven Kine and seven ears of Corn are seven years The four great Beasts are four Kingdoms Thou art that Golden head The Seed is the word the Field is the World the Reapers are the Angels the Harvest is the end of the World the Rock is Christ c. Should we omit I say all these and many other instances of this familiar Trope it would be easie to produce many expressions of the like import with them For doth not the Scripture say of that same hair which by Ezekiel was burnt 5 Ezek. 5. and cut and bound up in his skirt this is Jerusalem And of that water which the three mighty men procured for David 2 Sam. 23. â—7 this is the Blood of the men that went in Jeopardy of their lives Have we not clear and pregnant instances of Sacramental Tropes in Scripture and in Jewish Writers doth not our Saviour call the Paschal-lamb the Passover doth not he say the Cup is the New Testament and was it not familiar with the Jewes to say of their unleavened Bread this is that Bread of affliction which our Fathers did eat and of the Lamb that it was Corpus Paschatis or the memorial of the Passover Buxt de Caena Dom §. 25. And is it therefore any absurdity to think Christ should affirm of Sacramental Bread designed to signifie and represent his Body broken for us and to conveigh the blessings he had purchased by the oblation of it on the Cross This is my Body Fifthly This Answer will render us unable to confute the Marcionites the Valentinians and the Manichaeans who thought Christs Body to be only the appearance of a Body and so denied the Article of his Incarnation and his real Passion This fond imagination the ancient Fathers did confute by Mediums which overthrows this answer and the whole Doctrine of Transubstantiation nor can it be sufficiently confuted by men of T. G's Principles 1 The ancient Fathers did confute it from this principle that we must certainly believe the evidence of Sence and that to doubt the certainty of what our sences apprehend is to endanger all Religion Tertullian discourseth thus a Non licet nobis in dubium sensesistos revorate ne in Ghristo de fide corum deliberetur Ne forte dicatur quod salso patris vocem audierit de ipso testificatum Recita Johannis testa ionem quod vidimus inquit quod audivimus quod manibus nostris palpavimus c. falsa utique testatlo si oculorum aurium manuum sensus natura mentitur de anima Cap. 17. B. C it is not lawful to doubt of our Sences least the same doubt be made concerning Christ least peradventure it should be said he was deceived when he heard the voice of his Father testifying concerning him Recite the Testimony of St. John what we have heard with our Ears and our Eyes have seen and our Hands have handled of the word of Life that declare we to you The Testimony verily is false if nature do deceive us in the Testimony of our Eyes and Ears and Hands And in his Book de Carne Christi he speaks thus b Sed qui carnem Christi putativam introduxit aeque potuit nativitatem quoque phantasma configere ut conceptus praegnatus partus Virginis Ipsrus exindeinfantis ordo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haberentur eosdem oculos eosdemque sensus fefellissent quos carnis opinio elusit cap. 1. He that doth introduce the Tenet of the Imaginary Flesh of Christ hath equal reason to introduce an imaginary Nativity and to assert the Conception Pregnance and the Virgins Birth and the whole Order of the Infant was Phantastical for they would only have deceived the same Eyes and Sences which were deceived by the opinion of his Flesh 2. They argue thus that if Christ had no real Flesh and if he did not suffer really the Sacrament cannot duely be stiled the Image Figure Symbol Type Similitude Memorial or Representation of his real Flesh c Acceptum panem distributum Discipulis corpus illum suum secit hoc est corpus meum dicendo id est figura Corporis mei Figura autem non suisset nisi veritatis esset Corpus Caeterum vacua res quod est phantasma figuram capere non possit Quid tune voluerit significasse panem satis declaravit corpus suum vocans panem Tertul. contra Marcionem l. 4. c. 40. Christ saith Tertullian said This is my Body i. e. the figure of my Body but it had been no figure unless the Body had been true for a Phantasme can have no figure But what he would have Bread to signifie he hath sufficiently declared calling Bread his Body and therefore thus he sums up his discourse d Panis calicis Sacrimento jam in Evangelio probavimus corporis sanguinis Dominici veritatem adversus phantasma Marcionis l. 5. c 8 against the Phantasme of Marcion We have proved the verity of Christs Body and Blood by the Sacrament of Bread and Wine And Maximus who flourished Anno Dom. 190. discourseth thus e Apud Orig. Dial. 3. part 2. If Christ as these Men say were without Body and Blood of what kind of Elesh or of what Body or of what kind of Blood did he give the Bread and Cup to be Images of when he commanded his Disciples by them to make a Commemoration of him Theodoret against the Eutichians disputeth thus f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. p. 84 85. That the Flesh of Christ was not transformed into the nature of the Godhead because that Christians do participate of the Signs of his Body Now had this been the Doctrine of the Church of Christ that this blessed Sacrament contained his very Flesh and Blood they had much weakned their argument by those expressions for what is more convincing then this inference if Christians in the Sacrament do eat Christs real Flesh and Blood then must his Flesh and Blood be real if they do eat Christs real Body he had a real Body Secondly Why do they so absurdly and untruly set the Sacrament in opposition to Christs real Body as the Figure stands opposed to the Truth Thirdly why do they all expresly say the Bread and Wine are Types and Symbols and Remembrances of his Body and Blood and that of them he said This is my Body and my Blood seeing such Speeches cannot properly be true but must admit a Figure But Secondly These Hereticks can never be confuted by Men of T. G's Principles for hath the Roman Catholick one Text of Scripture to build his Dream upon so hath the Marcionite that passage of St. Paul which tells us that as in the Eucharist we have the shape of bread and yet no real bread so Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the shape of Man and yet no Man as we have
see them But we have great reason to suspect that they also are cited more Romano i.e. with great impertinence and falshood And I am certainly informed from Oxford that what is cited as from Vrsin is really the words of Vrsins Adversary Such ingenuity we meet with in the Citations of the Roman party Having produced these Testimonies of the Fathers which I have proved to be impertinent or spurious and these confessions of the Protestants which are insignificant or false or only such as do assert that Cyprian de Caena Domini Eusebius Emissenus and such spurious pieces seem to speak in favour of this Idle Dream He thus concludes that to deny what is confirmed by the Testimony of so many Ancient Fathers P. 308 309 and strengthned by the confession of our Brethren is most unreasonable But alas this flourish doth most assuredly confound the Church of Rome and evidently confutes that Doctrine it was intended to confirm For First it is confessed by many Doctors of the the Church of Rome that Transubstantiation is no ancient Doctrine viz. Peter Lombard Scotus Biel Erasmus and Peroon And Secondly a In Primitiva Ecclesia non erat de fide substantiam panis in co pus Christi converti Job Yribarn in 4 Sent. Dist 11. Q. 3. Disp 42. Sect. 1. That in the Primitive Church it was not any Article of Faith Thirdly b Scotus in 4 Distinct 11. Qâ—aest 3. s 1 â— Aâ—â—â—m That were it not for the authority and Determination of the Roman Church the words of Christ might more simply plainly and truly be understood and expounded Fourthly the Cardinal of c Distinct 4. Qu. 6. A. 2. Cambray adds that the opinion which holds the substance of bread not to remain doth not evidently follow of the Scripture nor to his seeming of the Churches determination Fifthly Your Secular d Discourse Modest p. 13. Priests affirm that it was concluded among the Fathers of the Society and what Catholick would not believe them that the Fathers have not so much as touched the point of Transubstantiation Sixthly It is no wonder saith e Antequam quaestio illa de Transubstantiatione in Ecclesia palam agitaretur minimè mirum est si unus aut alter aut etiam aliqui ex veteribus minus consideratè Rectè hâc de re senserint scripserint de Transub l. 2. c. 7. Gregory de Valentia if one or two or more of the Ancients have thought or written of this matter not so considerately and rightly And f Hinc discimus non essemirandum si Augustinus Theodoretus alii Veteres quaedam dixerint quae in specitem videntur favere haereticis L. 2. Euch. c. 25 p. 649. B. Bellarmin confesseth it is not to be wondred at if St. Austin Theodoret and other of the Ancients speak something which in show seems to favour the Hereticks The sayings of the ancient Fathers which interpret the words of Christ This is my Body in a figurative sence as much as any Protestant can do and which forced these Confessions from so many Cardinals Bishops Schoolmen Priests and Jesuites are these g Pane corpus suum representat l. 1. adv Marcion c. 14. by Bread Christ represents his Body saith Tertullian and again h Panem corpus suum appellat ut hinc jam eum intelligas corporis sui figuram pani dedisse L. 3. c. 19. Christ hath called Bread his Body that thereby thou mayest understand that he hath given to Bread the Figure of his Body And again i L. 4. c. 4 c. This is my Body that is the Figure of my Body St. k Ep. 63. §. 6. p. 175. Cyprian noteth That it was Wine even the Fruit of the Vine which the Lord saith was his Blood Our Lord saith St. l Paedag. l. 1. c. 6. p. 100 106. Clemens did bless Wine when he said Take drink this is my Blood and that it was Wine which was blessed be sheweth again saying I will no more drink of the Fruit of the Vine 2. Paedag. l. 1. c. 6. p. 100. 106. Our Lord in the Gospel of St. John doth otherwise expound Meat by Symbols when he saith Eat my Flesh and Drink my Blood an evident Symbol of Faith and the promises And again there is a donable Blood of the Lord Paed. l. 2. c. 2. one Carnal by which we are redeemed froim destruction and another Spiritual by which we are Anointed Origen speaks thus m Nec materia panis sed super illum dictus sermo est qui prodest non indigne Domino comedenti illum haee quidem de typico Symbolicoque corpore Orig. in Mat. 15. p. 17. Col. 1. B. It is not the matter of bread but the word spoken which profiteth him that doth not unworthily eat thereof and these things I speak of the Typical and Symbolical Body To the Fathers of the first three hundred years we will add the Testimonies of those that flourished in the 4th the first whereof shall be n Euseb l. 8. c. 1. Eusebius who saith ' That our Saviour delivered to his Disciples the Symbols of his Divine Dispensation commanding them to make the Image of his own Body and appointing them to use bread for the Symbol of his body And that o Euseb Demonst l. 1. c. 10 p. 27. we still celebrate upon the Lords Table the memory of his Sacrifice by the Symbols of his Body and Blood according to the Ordinances of the New Testament And lastly p Demoâ—ist l. 5. c. 3. p. 141. Our Saviour and Lord first and then all the Priests that have followed in all Nations celebrating the Spiritual Divine Service according to the Ordinances of the Church signifie unto us by the bread and wine the Mysteries of his body and blood q Serm. in illud quiounque dixerit verbum p. 979. Athanasius faith ' That Christ distinguished the Spirit from the Flesh that we might learn that the things he spake were not Carnal but Spiritual For how many men might his body have sufficed that it might be the food of the whole world it is as if he should have said that which is given for the world shall be given for meat that it may be Spiritually given to all In the Church saith r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Macar Aegypt Hom 27 p. 164. Marcarius is offered bread and wine the Type of his Flesh and Blood and they which are partakers of the visible bread do Spiritually eat the Flesh of our Lord. Now we shall be partakers of the Passeover saith Å¿ Orat. 2 de Pasch To. 1. p. 692. Gregory Nazianzen but as yet in a Figure though more clear then in the Old Law For the Passover of the Law I will be bold to say it was but a more obscure figure of a figure Elsewhere he calls the Symbols the t In Epita Gorgon p. 187. Antitypes of the
can we know what is the present judgment of the Church of Rome but by our eyes and ears since therefore one of her determinations is that all our senses in the Eucharist do actually deceive us how can we be infallibly assured of her judgment by what she hath declared to be fallacious CHAP. V. The CONTENTS The Host was not worshipped with Latria in in the primitive Church 1. Becâ—use we have no command in Scripture for this worship § 1. 2ly Because the Holy Scripture and the Fathers have spoken things extremely contradictory to this worship § 2. Thirdly Because the Antient Fathers have not informed us of this Worship § 3. Fourthly Because they have both said and practised many things which are very inconsistent with this Opinion that it ought thus to be Worshipped § 4. An Objection Answered § 5. The Instances produced by T. G. to prove this practise are considered § 6. THe Doctrine of Transubstantiation being overthrown Sect 1. the Adoration of the Host must fall together with it p 222. But since T. G. affirms That it was Vniversally practised and recommended by the Fathers of the primitive Church both Greek and Latine whereas it was not practised or commended by any single person for Eight hundred years after the coming of our Saviour We shall proceed to evidence the vanity and the absurdness of this practise and the unconscionable falshood of this bold assertion And 1. The commandment to Worship God alone is so express saith Bishop Taylor the distance betwixt God and what our senses represent as bread of Transubst p. 338. so vast the danger of Worshipping that which is not God or of not Worshipping that which is God is so formidable that it is infinitely to be presumed that if it had been intended that we should have Worshipped the Holy Sacrament the Holy Scripture would have call'd it God or Jesus Christ or have bidden us in express terms to have Adored it that either by the first as by a reason indicative or by the second as by a reason imperative we might have had sufficient warrant direct or consequent to have paid Divine Worship to it To strengthen and confirm this Argument it may deserve to be considered 1. That the Evangelists and the Apostle Paul are very punctual in the Relation of what our Saviour did or enjoyned in this Institution they all inform us that Christ commanded them to eat the Bread and drink the Cup which he had given to them and had he given them to be adored would they who mention things so obvious forget to tell us that either Christ intended they should be Adored or that they were Adored by them that which induced St. Paul to mention this Institution and to assert that he received it from our Lord was the irreverence of those that did participate 1 Cor. 11 18 28. and their want of preparation to receive those Holy Mysteries To cure this disease he tells them that the Holy Sacrament was Christs own Institution the charge he left behind him that very night in which he was beirayed and that the Institution was intended for the Commemoration of our Saviours death all which is proper to beget within us a greater Reverence and care in celebration of these holy mysteries but yet it cannot be denyed that this consideration viz. That what they thus irreverently treated was that very Son of God which suffered for them and that it was that Host which they and all good people did Worship for their God I say this one consideration would have been infinitely more proper and effectual to aggravate the sin of those who slighted it and irreverently behaved themselves at the participation of this Sacrament This therefore was omitted by St. Paul upon no other score but the absurdity and falshood of the thing Secondly consider with what expreseness the Scripture doth inform us that Christ is God true God God blessed for evermore and yet because his conversation in the World was in the habit and likeness of a Man and his Divinity was hid under the veil of humane flesh and because this Jesus was made subject to an ignominious and accursed death the Scripture thinks it not sufficient to ascribe unto him in 100 places the nature proprieties of God and to leave us upon Record a Mat. 2.11 8 2 9 18 15 25 20 20 28 9 17. examples of his Adoration by the wise Men of the East and by his own Disciples and by divers others I say the Scriptures think it not sufficient to have done all this and therefore they inform us that this is the decree of Heaven that to the name of Jesus every knee should bow Phil 2 10 Joh 5.23.1 Heb. 6. and that all should honour the Son even as they honour the Father and that when this first born came into the World Gods Angels were commanded to Adore him now it is evident the humane nature did not so much conceal the Deity as do the accidents of Bread for God sometimes did appear unto his Prophets in a human shape but never in the shape of Bread and Wine Christ while encompassed with our flesh gave signal demonstrations of his Divine perfections by Miracles and by declaring that he knew the thoughts of those with whom he did converse but in the Sacrament Christ giveth not the least appearance or demonstration of his presence He doth not rescue his most Sacred body from the Mouse or Rat or from the Sacriligious hands of Theives and Sorcerers Here then was greater reason to have told us as often that the Sacrament was God and was to be adored as they have told us Christ was God and was to be adored Since therefore we have no precept or example in the Holy Scripture for adoration of the Sacrament nor any information that the nature and properties of God do belong unto it seeing it is asserted of the Rock 1 Cor. 10.4 6 15.1 Pet. 2.4 and of the Church that they are Christ and of the Saints that they are made Partakers of the Divine nature but it is not once asserted of the Sacrament that it is Christ or that it partakes of his Divinity but only that it his body we have just reason to conclude that it neither was adored by Christs Disciples nor was intended so to be If that which Romanists adore were truly Christ Arg. 2. § 2. Brevint p. 72 one might safely aver what even to think were Blasphemy That neither Prophets nor Holy Fathers in their Speeches against Heathenish Gods either considered well what they said or ever thought well of their Saviour And First to begin with their Original when the Prophet Isaiah inveighs against them who worship Gods made by a Carpenter of a Tree which the worshipers had Planted and after hewen into pieces whereof one was to heat an Oven and the other to make a God Can any rational Man think that the Holy Ghost did foresee That
ensuing Propositions Prop. 1. When we ascribe unto the Creature that honour and respect or pay unto it that Love Praise Confidence and Homage which is due only to the Great Creator we become guilty of Idolatry as is apparent 1. From the evidence of Scripture When Saul had knowingly transgressed the Command of God Samuel thus represents the greatness of his sin Rebellion is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sin of Magick 1 Sam. 15.23 and to resist is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 double Idolatry for both those words do signifie Idola and Teraphim is often used for Idolatry Ponitur pro ipso cultu Idololatrico sen ipsa Idololatria Kircher concâ—â—d p. 2307. This then is the clear import of the words He that doth contumaciously resist and wilfully refuse to do what God particularly enjoyns is virtually guilty of the sin of Magick and Idolatry for as by consulting the Magician or using of that wicked Art we do ascribe that knowledge of things had and future to the Creature which agrees to God alone And as by worshipping of Idols we put the Creature in the place of the Creator and do impart his honour to the Idol even so by this rebellion and obstinate resistance of the will of Heaven and by preferring of our wills before it we virtually say our wisdom ought to be preferred before his counsel our pleasure ought to be esteemed above his will and so we do advance our selves into the place of God and give unto our selves that honour which is due to him alone and do ascribe unto our selves the highest wisdom And this we have acknowledge by the learned Estius They sin saith he In Sentent l 3 distinct 33. §. 5. p. 129 against his precept Thou shalt have no other Gods but me who will not yield subjection to God but contemn his precept or Authority of which sin Samuel pronounceth thus To Rebel is as the sin of witchcraft and not to acquiess is as the wickedness of Idolatry 2. St. Paul expresly saith Col. 3.5 Eph. 5.5 That covetousness is Idolatry and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i.e. the covetous man is an Idolater and of the glutton he pronounceth That his belly is his God Phil. 3.19 not that they properly esteem it so but that they chiefly are solicitous to make provisions for it and direct all their care and study to that end Id enim pro Deo habemus cujus causâ omnia facimus saith Grotius In locum And this is manifest from what the Romanists do comment on the first Commandment For seeing by this precept saith the learned Estius we are commanded to acknowledge God is our hope and confidence Loco citato they must by necessary consequence offend against t is precept who do not place their utmost confidence in God but in the flesh i. e. in health or riches strength or friends or any temporal concern And since this precept doth enjoyn us to love God with the highest love he that by any act proceeding directly from the will demonstrates an equal or a greater love unto himself or any other creature them he shews unto God whom he standt bound to love and to prefer before all other things he must offeâ—d against this precept and so be guilty of Idolatry by having other Gods besides him 3. The Prophet Habakkuk câ—mplains of some who sacrificed to their net Hab. 1.16 and burned incense to their drags i. e. they ascribed all their victories to their own strength saith Grotius They attributed that to their own vertue strength and industry which should have been ascribed to God So Vatablus They attributed to themselves what properly belongs to God viz. the good success of their affaris This is the Comment of the Hebrews saith the learned Drusius And now by ascribing to themselves that properly belonged to God they must be guilty of Idolatry because they do ascribe that honour to the Creature which is due to the Creator only And hence this sin is represented as the oblation of sacrifice and incense to a Creature which is confessed to be Idolatry And that these actions do partake of the true nature of Idolatry we have confirmed both from the evidence of Scripture the judgment of the learned Fathers the voice of reason and the confession of our Adversaries For when our Saviour saith Mat. 6.24 that God and Mammon cannot both be served because we cannot serve two Lords he clearly intimates that by sollicitude for worldly things they become Gods and Lords unto us and so we violate the precept of not having other Gods besides him The Fathers do expresly say the like Let us not think saith (a) Hom. 2. in Judic Origen because we do not worship Images that those things do not appertain to us for that is God to any person which he prefers admires and loves beyond all other things One makes his mammon saith St. (b) In Rom. c. 3. He. 6. p. 43. Chrysostom a second his lust a third his belly to be his God I know thou dost not sacrifice thy Oxen to them as the Gentiles do but what is far more pestilent thou offerest up thy soul unto them thou dost not bend thy knee nor worship them but thou art more obedient to what thy belly and thy gold commands than to the will of Heaven Now even reason shews that love hope trust obedience are parts of that internal worship which we own to God in the most excellent degrees and which he more regards than building Temples and erecting Altars than bending of the knee or body or any other act of outward vvorship and therefore in these acts doth more especially consist Gods vvorship And therefore he that doth confer them upon any Creature must do vvhat is more distastful to him than if those outward Ceremonies should be imparted to that Creature The Scripture therefore doth esteem the covetous person to be a vvorshipper of Idols because as Heathens place their confidence in Idols even so the avaritious man doth place his confidence in gold and silver vvhich are the matter of the Idols he chiefly doth persue them and for their sakes only doth other matters And therefore vvhat the Pagan doth unto his Idol that doth the avaritious person to his glod saith (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Rom. c. 3. To. 6. p 43. Chrysostom and this vve have confessed by (d) Forcasse rectius cum S. Thoma dixeâ—imus idâ—irco avaritium vocari cultum Idolorum quia sicut Paganus in Idolo sic avarus in Idoll materia quae est auâ—um argentum suam fiduciam collocat ejusque gratia omme facit Est. in loc Estius Aquinas and others of the Roman Church Secondly This Proposition may also be confirmed 1. From the definition of Idolatry for if Idolatry consists in giving of that worship which is due to God to that which is not God by giving it to any Creature we must be
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
possibly receive it from another This therefore could not be the apprehension of the Jews and Heathens touching their Images and Calves and yet I say the Scripture doth expresly say the Jews asked counsel of their stocks Hos 4.12 Jer. 2.27 Acts 7.41 and said unto the stock thou art my Father and to a stone thou hast brought me forth and that they sacrificed unto the very Idolor Image of a Calf which they had made and of the Heathens it affirms without distinction Esa 44.15 17. That they fell down and prayed to the very Image they had made because the homage they performed to these Images upon presumption of a Deity presiding in them that being an absurd and false imagination was really performed to stocks and stones an therefore on the same account this knowledge of the heart of all that in all places pray unto them being ascribed to Saints and Angels upon as vain presumptions of such a revelation which God vouchsafes not to them must be deem'd to be the same as if they did conceive this knowledge to arise form the perfection of their natures and upon that account did put up their petitions to them Those outward acts of worship Prop. 4. § 4. which by consent of nations or by common use and custome of mankind do signifie that honour they ascribe to God alone and by the exercise of which they alwayes did intend to give him the glory due unto his name are to be reckoned acts of worship proper to God and he that doth perform those acts of worship to a Creature which by consent of nations have obtained to signifie the worship due to the Creator and which in such a place or country are only used to that intent is by so doing an Idolater For by doing of the same which they conceive an act of worship proper to the Deity he must be vertually conceived to will the same and consequently to will the giving of that worship to the Creature which alone is due to the Creator For seeing all such actions have their import form custome and institution by whom soever they are exercised and whatsover private apprehensions he may have that worshippeth they must be thought to signifie according to that import which institution and custome gives them If any man should use those words which naturally import according to the common use and acceptation of the words that hope and confidence that love and duty which we owe to God alone whatever private sense or meaning he may put upon them in his inward thoughts he must be deemed to ascribe unto that object to which he useth such expressions the honor due to God For this being the immediate use of words to signifie the thoughts and apprehensions of our hearts he must be judged to use them in that sense which custome hath imposed upon them because they will not otherwise declare the apprehensions of the mind Since therefore outward rites ceremonies have their signification from the same original from which our words derive it or else do naturally import as much what reason can be given why the use of words which do import Gods Worship should be thought to signifie it yet the use of Rites should not be thought to do the same And hence S. Augustine saith Aquinas gives this reason why we must nor sacrifice unto inferior Daemons quia exterior a sacrificia it a signa sunt interiorum 2ª 2a q. 96. Art 2. sicut verba sonantia signa sunt rerum because exterior sacrifices are signs of the interior even as words are signs indications of the things they signifie now since all outward acts of Worship are also signs of the interior respect and veneration of the soul and are performed to express the same it follows that no act of outward Worship which doth by nature custome or institution signifie the honour due to God can be assigned to any other without ascribing to it that inward veneration which alone is due unto him and if this vvere not so those vviser heathens of vvhom St. * De. Civ Dei l. 6. c. 10. Austin speaks who understood that vvhat the vulgar people vvorshipped vvere no Gods and yet complyed vvith the common practice could not be guilty of Idolatry and they vvho understood them to be cheats and devils and yet for fear of punishment did offer sacrifice or incense to them must be excused from that crime because they did perform indeed the outward action but not vvith an intent to pay the inward homage vvhich vvas due to God but only to comply vvith the opinion of the Vulgar or to preserve themselves from the unhappy fate of Socrates and yet St. Augustine doth pronounce those vvise men guilty in an †Colebat quod reprehendebat quod culpabat adorabat â—o damnabilius quo illa quae mendaciter ogebat sic ageret ut eum populus veraciter agere existimaret Aug. de Civ Dei l. 6. c. 10. higher nature than they vvere vvho thought them to be Gods and | 2ª 2ª qu. 96. Art 2. Thomas gives this clear and pregnant reason vvhy such a sentence should be passed upon them viz. Because this outvvard Worship vvas a sign of the interior As therefore he that doth affirm by vvords the contrary to vvhat his heart conceiveth must be esteemed guilty of a pernicious lye So also he that doth exterior Worship to that vvhich he conceiveth in his mind is no due object of that Worship is guilty of the like pernicious falsity vvhich sure he could not be if that exterior action did not import that invvard Worship of vvhich it is by institution and by common custome made the sign and hence in Scripture those actions which in their nature do not at all import religious Worship yet being tendred to that object vvhich by those actions was used to be vvorshipped as God I say such actions are in Scripture mentioned as indications of Idolatry viz. to kiss the hand unto the Sun to eat of what is sacrificed to false Gods to feast and play before them to bow the knee to Baal Moreover to bow the body or to use prostration to the wicked Haman was that which Mordecai refused and of this action he gives this account Esth 13.14 Thou knowest Lord that it was neither in contempt nor pride 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that I refused to worship Haman but I did this that I might not prefer the glory of man above the glory of God nor will I worship any besides thee O God Sith then we find this outward worship was refused as being due to God alone we must confess that it was due unto him either because God hath enjoyned it should be given unto him alone and then the Papists must confess they have Gods precept and injunction against their prostrations made to Saints or to the Images of Saints or else because this practice was in those Persian Countries used as a testification of
2ae qu. 89. Act. 2. something that doth signifie the inward Sacrifice and suffereth a real change Now all these things can only be asserted of the outward Sacrifice that therefore in the judgment of the Roman Catholick is properly Latria or that Worship which is due to God alone Which I will further prove 1. Aug. de Civ Dei l. 10. c. 19. From Aquinas and St. Austin who do argue thus the outward Sacrifice doth signifie the inward and spiritual Sacrifice and therefore seeing the inward and spiritual Sacrifice must be presented only to the highest God the outward also must be offered only to him 2. I ask if this external Sacrifice be not the worship proper to God whether or no it be Idolatry to offer it to Saints and Angels or to Heathen Emperors and Daemons if it be not why did the ancient Christians refuse to do it upon this account Why was it alwayes deemed Idolatry even to cast a little (g) Non est tanâ—um in eo servitus Idoli si quis dumbus dâ—gieulis thura in bustum arae jaciat Hieron ep ad Heliodorum Incense upon the Altar of an Heathen Deity but if it be Idolatry to give this outward worship to a Creature it must be only due to the Creator as is apparent from what we have discoursed touching the nature and definition of Idolatry To vow to Angels or to Saints departed Corol. 2. §. 6. is to ascribe unto them the honour due to the Creator For before this Superstition of the Church of Rome obtained whoever offered up a vow to an invisible Being but he conceived or feigned it to be God Wherefore this worship when it began to be thus used by the Roman party was by the common practise and consent of Nations made to signifie the worship only due to God and so their practise who do ascribe this worship to the Saints departed must be deemed Idolatry because it is the giving of that worship to them which is due to God and this in Thesi is confessed by the Roman Catholick to (h) Vovere est propriè actus Latriae Aquin 2ª 2ª q 88. Art 5. vow is to perform the worship of Latria say the Schoolmen They put God into the (i) Est igitur votum promissio deliberata boni cujuspiam melioris Deo facta per hoc quod additum est Deo facta distinguitur votum â— promissione quae fit homini Estius in sent l. 4. dist 38. §. 1. p. 206.207 definition of a Vow and tell us that it is a (k) Votum est quaedam promissio Deo facta ibid. promise made to God and that it (l) Votum soli Deo fit sed promissio etiam potest fieri homini id only differs from a promise made to man in this respect that it is made to God It is confessed by Bellarmine that in the holy Scriptures we have no instance of a Vow that was not made to God alone Aquinas * ibid. proves a Vow to be the worship of Latria because the Prophet †ch 19.21 Esa saith of the Aegyptians they shall do sacrifice and oblation yea they shall vow a Vow unto the Lord and perform it for to worship God saith he to wit with Sacrifice and Oblation is Latria therefore to vow unto him must be so and this concession of our Adversaries may farther be confirmed by Reason and Authority For we do virtually ascribe unto those persons to whom our Vows are made the knowledge of those Vows and of the disposition of the heart whence they proceed for otherwise we must suppose them equally inclined to assist the hypocritical and the sincerest Votary and if we do suppose them ignorant of what we vow our worship must be vain and fruitless now hence it follows that we must pay this worship to him only who understandeth what we vow and is acquainted with the inward motions of the soul which only God who is the searcher of the heart doth know Besides the Romanist doth often vow that his (m) I humbly beg of thee oh Mother of all Clemency that thou wouldst vouchsafe to admit me into the number of those who have devoted themselves to thee to be thy perpetual servants Reflect on the Devotion of the Romish Church p. 420. whole life shall be devoted to the blessed Virgin or some other Saint Now in the judgment of St. Austin thus to (n) Vt sacra faciemus sacrificemus vel aliqua nostra sive nos ipsos religionis ritubus consecremus hic est Divinitati vel si expressuis dicendum est Deitati debitus cultus Aug. de Civ Dei l. 10. c. 1. consecrate our selves by a religious rite to any thing is to perform unto it the worship proper to a Deity Prayer offered and put up in any time and place to an invisible Cor. 3. §. 7. and not corporeally present being is the oblation of that worship to it which is due to God For this before the Superstition of the Romish Church prevailed was alwayes used as an indication of Divinity and a thing proper to the Deity Thus Dio tells us that Caligula was worshipped as a God because they offered to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prayers and supplications The consecration of an Image was deemed by some Heathens to fix within it some invisible and powerful being and then by supplication to the consecrated Image it was made a God according unto that of Martial Qui fingit sacros auro vel marmore vultus Non facit ille Deos L. 8. Ep. 24 qui Rogat ille facit 'T is not the carved Gold or Marble stone That makes the God but Supplication It is adorned saith * Ecce ornatur consecratur oratur tum postremo Deus est p. 26. Luk. 11.2 Minutius and consecrated and lastly it is prayed unto and then it is a God This may be farther proved from Scripture Reason and Authority From Scripture thus He only ought to be the object of our Prayer who is our Heavenly Father for thus the Precept runs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when or as often as you pray say Our Father c. which Precept must not be supposed to enjoyn all Christians to use these words whensoever they do pray for we do never find in any of the prayers which the Apostles made that they did so it therefore doth enjoyn us when we pray for any thing which in this Prayer is mentioned or contained to pray unto our heavenly Father for it 2. Obs This form of Prayer must be supposed to contain all things which are the matter of a true and grateful Prayer according unto that of Austin †Dicendum quod oratio Dominica perfectissima est quia sicut Angustinus dicit ad Probum si rectè congruenenter oramus nihil aliud dicere possumus quam quod in ista oratione Dominica positum est Aquinas 2ª 2a q. 83. Art 8. Ep. 121.
declare this was the duty of the Christian and to reveal their Supplications to departed Christians 3. What a ridiculous office do they impose upon the God of Heaven by this fond opinion for when they pray to Apollonia for the tooth-ach God must not only tell her that such a person supplicates but also that his teeth do ake and therefore he particularly imploreth her assistance when they address themselves to any Saint in this odd language * Cum ad Imaginem Sancti alicujus quis Dominicam orationem pronuntiat ita tum sentiat se ab illo petere ut secum oret sibique postulet ea quae Dominicae orationis formulâ continentur Catech. Rom. part 4 c. 6. s 4. p. 586. Our Father which art in heaven c. which they familiarly do as is acknowledged by the Roman Catechism God must inform this Saint both of the person praying and his prayer and his intention by so doing to oblige him to use those words in his behalf †O praeco accelera piae matri◠praecare viscera Propr Fest F. 2. When they desire any Saint or Angel to go unto the Blessed Virgin this Saint must be informed first of the matter of the Prayer then must he post unto the blessed Virgin and she must go unto her Son and he unto his Father to present that request which he revealed And are not these men very bold with God to put such offices upon him and make him Nuntio to all his Creatures 2. The Saints departed do not know the hearts and the petitions of their Supplicants by vertue of the beatifick Vision This vain presumption depends on this that seeing God they must in him behold those things which in Idea are contained in him or which his knowledge doth perceive and so the refutation of this dream will be sufficient confutation of it And 1. That which the holy Spirit only knows these blessed Spirits do not know but the things of God i.e. his purposes and counsels c. knoweth no man but the Spirit of God 1 Cor. 2.11 Ergo. If then the blessed Spirits notwithstanding the beatifick Vision do not see the mind and counsel of God without his revelation why should we think that by beholding of God they also do behold the supplications we put up unto them De vita Contemp. l. 5. c. 4. Those words of Prosper That nothing is so secret as that the knowledge of it should be denied to the perfectly blessed And that of Gregory L. 12. Moral c. 13. That they who see that God who seeth all things must themselves see all things I say those words do as much prove that blessed Spirits do know the secrets of Gods counsel as that they see the supplications we put up unto them To strengthen and confirm this Argument let us consider 1. That the Fathers do from this place conclude the holy Spirit to be God because he is the searcher of the things of God which Argument would be invalid if this could truly be asserted of the blessed Spirits 2. 1 Cor. 2.12 Observe that the Apostle argues thus That as no man knows the secrets of the heart of man besides the Spirit of man within him so none can know the secrets of the God of Heaven but the Spirit of God Now if the blessed Spirits do know the secrets of the heart of man the Argument would be invalid for the Romanist might give the baffle to St. Paul and tell him That as the secrets of the heart of man are known not only to the Spirit of man but also to myriads of blessed Saints and Angels so may the secrets of God be known not only to the holy Spirit but to many others 2. The Scripture doth assure us That those blessed Angels which always did behold the face of God had not the knowledge of those things which are revealed to us by the Gospel and that the curious Wisdom which contrived that dispensation was made known unto them by the Church Eph. 3.10 1 Pet. 1.12 and therefore Peter represents them as stooping down to view this new discovery which is a signal indication of the falshood of this fond conceit That blessed Spirits seeing him who knoweth all things must have the knowledge of those things he sees and therefore of the prayers that are put up unto him they being seen and known to God 3. That we may pray in faith we must be certain that the blessed Spirits are acquainted with the desires of our hearts for he that doth command us to pray in faith and without doubting cannot be wanting to give us certain motives of this faith and therefore God who never is deficient in what is necessary would certainly have given both to Jews and Christians sufficient revelation of his will in this particular had he intended that they should pay this homage to the Saints departed whereas we have no certain evidence that they enjoy this knowledge either from Revelation or from Vision And 1. We are not certain that they behold our supplications in the beatifick Vision for many of the Church of Rome do hold the contrary and it is free for all her members so to do and so this matter cannot be held as any Article of faith or certain definition of the Church 2. It is not certain that these blessed Spirits by vertue of this Vision do behold what is contingent for this is generally denied by the Romish Doctors and yet these things are seen of God as clearly as are the secrets of the heart 2. We cannot possibly be certain that God doth reveal them for we cannot certainly conclude it from his Attributes nor have we any certain revelation that he doth reveal our minds and thoughts unto them for if we can certainly conclude it from his Attributes then God would not be God did he not thus reveal our supplications to the Saints departed And Secondly Then to deny this Revelation would be to sin against the light of nature and then not only Protestants but the prevailing part of Roman Catholicks must sin against the light of nature by holding they obtain this knowledge not by Revelation but from the Vision of that God who knoweth all things but if by vertue of some Revelation we are assured that our petitions are revealed to the Saints why do they not produce it Why doth T. G. confess that Austin and others of the ancient Fathers were uncertain what to determine in this case Why do the greater part of Roman Catholicks deny what they have certain Revelation for 3. Where is this Revelation to be found In Scripture No they confess that this is wholly silent in this matter and give us many Reasons why it was not mentioned in holy Writ Have we this Revelation from Tradition Why then do the prevailing part of Roman Catholicks reject it Sith then we have no certainty of what this practice doth suppose either from Revelation or from the beatifick
Angel they pray thus * Huc eustos igitur pervigil advola Avertens patria de tibi credita Tam morbos animi quam requiescere Quicquid non sinit incolas Brev. R. Reform Off. Angeli Cust Thou watchful Guardian hither therefore fly And from that Country where thy charge does lie Divert what ere may prove their Minds Disease And what disturbs the peoples quiet peace And again * Tu es spes mea Gloriose Angele altissimus te posuit mihi dedit refugium tuum Non accedat igitur ad me malum flagellum non appropinquet tabernaculo meo Mi custos Gloriose me consigna servis Dei aggrega Gloriosis Apprehende arma scutum exurge Angele in adjutorium mihi dic animae meae salus tua ego sum Missa in honorem proprii Angeli Thou art my Hope most glorious Angel the most High hath given and appointed thee to be my Refuge Let then no Evil come unto me Let not the Scourge come nigh my Tabernacle Mark me and gather me unto Gods glorious Servants take hold of Shield and Buckler and stand up to help me say unto my Soul I am thy Salvation The old Roman Missal f. 52. had a Prayer to this Effect * Omnis homo omni die Gabrielis Mariae Poscat beneficia Ex his manet fons virtutis Dulcor vitae spes salutis Et diffusa Gratia Let every Man on every day To Gabriel and to Mary pray These are the spring whence vertue flows apace Heavens hope life's sweetness and diffused grace Whence we observe §. 2. that according to the Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome Angels when absent and invisible should be invocated for this they daily practise and endeavour to confirm from the Example and by the words of Jacob. 2. Observe that we must pray unto them not only to obtain deliverance and protection for us by their Prayer Intercedite pro me mihi succurrite but to perform it by their power for what they do conceive to be the Office of those Angels viz. to keep us to avert those dangers that are imminent and to remove a present evil must they not think it proper to request If God hath placed a Guardian Angel for their refuge may they not ask him to do the office of a Guardian as well as any other thing and to preserve them in their wayes that so no Evil may befall them this upon supposition that they do always hear our Prayers is very Rational When therefore T. G. doth insinuate that they only do desire these Blessed Spirits to offer up our Prayers P. 361. or to pray for us as we desire the Prayers of just Men upon Earth he doth insinuate a most apparent falshood for besides that signal difference betwixt requesting of our Brother to pray for us and their Petitions directed to the holy Angels to preserve them from the assaults of Satan and to * Tu Gloriose Angele qui stas ante Dominum preces meas offer Altissimo veni tribue mihi desideriorum meorum abundantiam Missa in honoâ—em proprii Angeli in Missali Rom. Ed. Antuerp 1577. confer upon them the greatest Blessings we can ask I say besides all this 1. We never do by word of Mouth request an absent Person nor do put up any Mental Prayers to our surviving Brethren both which are tendred to the Holy Angels by the Roman Catholicks 3. It is apparent from what we we have discoursed that it is in vain to put up these Petitions to the Blessed Angels unless we do ascribe unto them the knowledge of the Hearts of those that supplicate and unless we do suppose them either present with us or able to help us being absent and that they do accept this service when we pay it to them that so as they are deemed to be able they may assuredly be willing to relieve and help us Now to ascribe this Knowledge to them and upon this account to Worship and invoke them is to be guilty of Idolatry This we endeavour to demonstrate 1. From the Reason of those Addresses which we make to God viz. that we believe him to be the searcher of all Hearts one that doth see the inward Motions of the Soul and is acquainted with our most secret thoughts and actions Now this we have already proved to be an excellency so proper to the God of Heaven that it is not ordinarily communicated unto Saints and Angels and therefore to ascribe this Knowledge to them is to ascribe unto them what is Gods propriety and consequently to be guilty of Idolatry by Prop. 1. And as a farther evidence that no such Knowledge is Communicated to the Blessed Angels either by Revelation or by the beatifick Vision consider that from this supposed Communication it would follow as it is well suggested by the Learned * Addamus Angelos ne quidem supernaturaliter de facto cognoscere quaslibet cordium cogitationes quasi hoc eis competat communi lege Beatudinis nam si ita esset nondum absolutam haberent veritatem generales sententiae soli Deo tribuentes notitiam occultarum cogitationum quandoquidem beneficio beatudinis id esset multis communicatum sed intelligendae essent cum limitatione hac aut simili solus Deus naturaliter novit c. quam utique limitationem nusquam insiauant addendam esset ut sicut absolute verum maneat solum Deum de facto nosse quaelibet futura contingentia non obstante eo quod quaedam seis amicis revela ita etiam absolute verum maneat solum de facto nosse passim quaelibet occulta Cordium quoniam ut dictum est Authoritates de â—troque loquuntur eodem modo in senten l. 2. distinc 7. § 12. p. 80 Esthius that all those sentences of Scripture and the Holy Fathers which attribute this Knowledge of our secret thoughts and of the inward Motions of the Heart to God alone would not be absolutely true but without this limitation viz. God only naturally knows them or some like exception they would be absolutely false And yet this Limitation the Scriptures and the holy Fathers never do insinuate so that as it is absolutely true that unto God alone belongs the knowledge of contingent Beings although he sometimes did reveal some matters of that nature to his Priests and Prophets nor do we notwithstanding think that such a Knowledge doth belong to Saints and Angels so is it absolutely true that unto God alone belongs the Knowledge of the inward Thoughts and Secrets of the Hearts nor have we any reason to conceive that such a Knowledge ordinarily belongs to Saints and Angels § 4. 2. To worship any Creature with the Mind is to be guilty of Idolatry This was the Antient and undoubted Doctrine of the whole Church of Christ for this St. Austin witnesseth that * Divinè singulariter in Ecclesla Catholica
traditur nullam creaturam colendam esse animae libentius enim lâ—quor his verbis quibus mihi haec insinuâ—ta sunt sed ipsum tantummodo rerum quae sunt omnium Creatorem August l. de quant animae p. 34. in the Catholick Church it is divinely and singularly delivered that us Creature is to be Worshipped by the Soul but he only who is the Creator of all things But Roman Catholicks do and upon supposition that they have the Knowledge of the Hearts and do by seeing God p. 418. perceive the Secrets of it And as T. G. asserts do know both our Necessities and Prayers Concerns and Actions I say upon this supposition they ought to worship Saints and Angels not only with the Body but the Soul for seeing mental Prayers Vows and Thanksgivings are by all confessed to be parts of that Religious Worship which our Souls perform to God to make such Vows and put up such Petitions and Thanksgivings to the Saints and Angels must be to Worship Saints and Angels with the Soul Besides all inward Fear and Reverence must be the Worship of the Soul And yet if we may Vow and Pray and tender our Thanksgivings to them upon presumption that they know the inward Motions of our Hearts we may well be affraid to do these actions Hypocritically and remisly upon the same account We may well dread to think or vow or pray amiss and fear their Anger and their just Displeasure if we do so thus to deter us from our secret Sins the Stoicks tell us not only God but our good Doemon is in secret with us And when St. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To. 1. p. 741. A. Basil had asserted that these Angels did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 behold us every where he adds that upon this account the Virgin that was devoted to God ought to reverence those blessed Spirits And surely then by parity of Reason if their Knowledge reach unto the Heart and inward Motions of the Soul we ought to have that Fear and Reverence of them upon us in reference to all those motions 3. This may be strongly argued from two Considerations § 5. 1. That the Jewish Church had no such practice 2. That they abstained from this practice because they did not think this honour to be due to Angels but to God alone And 1. I say the Jewish Church had no such practice for run over all their Sacred Records the Law the Prophets and the Psalms Look into their most antient Writers Philo Judaeus and Josephus into their Litanies or forms of Prayer their Misnah or Traditions and in all these Records you shall not find one Precept or Example of any Invocation directed to the Saints departed consider all the Motives which have induced the Church of Rome to use this practice and you will find that they are chiefly taken from the Jewish Records and from those sayings of the Psalms of David which tell us that the Angels of the Lord do pitch their tehts about them that fear him to deliver them 34 Psal 7. And that he gives his Angels charge concerning them that they dash not their foot against a stone 91 Psal 11. Or from those Doctrines which were received by that Church Besides they had great evidence and manifold Examples that God did Minister his Blessings to them by the holy Angels an Angel lead them out of Aegypt through the Wilderness into the Land of Canaan the Law was given to them by the hand of Angels they often did appear unto them in an humane shape and God himself when he appeared was still attended with an Host of Angels and by them they were oft preserved from their Enemies Sith therefore notwithstanding all these Motives they never put up one Petition to an absent Angel We have just Reason to believe that in the judgment of the Jews they had no knowledge of the Heart or the desires of the Soul especially when absent from us and that this honour was not to be given to them but was intirely to be reserved for the God of Heaven Add to this that they do frequently entreat of God that he would cause those Angels to preserve them and annoy their Enemies Psal 35 5 6 7. Let them be as Chaff before the wind saith David and let the Angel of the Lord chase them Let their way be dark and slippery and let the Angel of the Lord persecute them Why therefore do they never use the Language of the Church of Rome Horae Sec. Us Rom. Manual of Godly prayers 1610. with license Horae Sec. Us Sarum Why do they never pray to Michael the Captain of Gods Host the vanquisher of evil Spirits to be their refuge and defence against the Power of the Enemy to drive away their foes and overthrow their Machinations Why do they never call upon their Guardian Angel to take hold of Sword and Buckler and rise up to help them Or to their valiant Champion Gabriel to rise up to help them against the Malignants and to be with them against all their Adversaries 3. According to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome when they appeared the Jews did sometimes put up their Petitions to them Why therefore did they not invoke them when absent and invisible if they had held as doth the Chuch of Rome that being absent they were as able to perceive their supplications and obtain the Blessings they did want and that their aid was such an excellent and present help against the violent assaults of a Temptation and all those Floods of Evils we are continually exposed to With us consent the Antient Fathers in this matter * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. l. 5. p. 234. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 235. none that observes the Law of Moses doth worship Angels For so to do is not a Jewish Custom but a transgression of their Customes saith the Learned Origen * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orat. 4. cont Arrian Jacob and David did request deliverance of none but God saith Athanasius And whereas T. G. and the Roman Catechism Object § 6. produce those words of Jacob the Angel that redeemed me from all evil bless the Lads as an example of this Invocation and a proof that it was practised by the Antient Jews If we consider what the Fathers have delivered upon this Text and how expresly they assert these words must certainly be understood of Christ We may admire that any Roman Doctor who stands obliged by his Oath * Nec eam unquam nisi juxta unanimen consensum patrum accipiam Interpretabor Bulla pii 4. super forma juramenti professionis fidei not to Interpret Scripture but according to the unanimous consent of the Holy Fathers should make so little Conscience of that Oath as to Interpret this and many other Scriptures in opposition to the prevailing Judgment of those Fathers 2. It is admirable to consider with what incredible
body that sustains that loss will tell us where this lost Cloak is If God doth either from the Law of Friendship or for our profit reveal the secrets of mens hearts unto them and inform both Saints and Angels of our Prayers and our Necessities why should we not conceive that he is as ready to inform them of those hidden and contingent things which it as much concerneth us to be informed of as to receive an Answer to our Prayers v. g. if he informed the twenty Martyrs of Florentius his Petition that his Cloak might be given to him T. G. p. 423 424. why should he not inform them where it was or if those blessed Spirits do by virtue of the beatifick Vision see our Prayers and Wants why should they not be thought to view our Losses and our future state in the same beatifick Vision If that could represent unto the twenty Martyrs Florentius's Prayer why not his Cloak and where it was They who see God see all things in him which belong unto him say the Roman Doctors therefore they see the Prayers directed to him for they objectively must be in God they that see God saith the Magitian see all things in him and therefore they must see things future and concealed for they objectively must be in God and with what shew of reason can any man reject the latter inference who doth allow the former for to be the Searcher of the Heart is not less proper to God then is the Knowledge of what is future and contingent Nay Holy Scripture seemes more clearly to appropriate to God the Knowledge of the Heart then of things future and contingent for it expresly saith thou only knowest the Hearts of men but doth not so expresly say thou only knowest what is to come Moreover the secret motions of our Heart do equally depend upon our will which is uncertain and very subject unto change if therefore it be truly said that what is future and contingent cannot be known by any creature because it doth depend on what is mutable and therefore to expect this knowledge from a Creature or to ascribe it to him is to be Guilty of Idolatry the like must be affirmed of the thoughts and inward motions of the Heart which equally depending on the free motions of the will must be obnoxious to the same uncertaintyes CHAP. XI The CONTENTS The Canon of the Councel of Laodicea de iis qui Angelos Colunt is laid down and the Judgment of Theodoret and Photius upon it Sect. 1. And it is proved 1. That it contains the Sentence and belief of the whole Church of Christ Sect. 2. That it forbids the Invocation and Worship of Angels Sect. 3. That the Angels whose Invocation and Worship it forbids were blessed Spirits and not evil Angels Sect. 4. That it forbids what is the Practice of the Church of Rome Sect. 5. That it pronounceth the Worship and Invocation of the holy Angels to be Idolatry Sect. 6. That in the Judgment of the Fathers this was the Worship which St. Paul condemned 2 Coloss Sect. 7. The evasions of T. G. confuted ibid. And all the other Answers of the Romanists Sect. 8. THat what we have thus confirmed from Scripture and the voice of Reason § 1. hath also the consent and the concurrent suffrage of Antiquity we shall demonstrate not from the words of any single Father but from the clear decision of the whole Church of God which is delivered to us in these words viz. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Codex Canonum Eccles Univers Can. 139. That Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and depart a side and invocate Angels and make meetings which are things forbidden If any man therefore be found to give himself to this privy Idolatry let him be accursed Because he hath forsaken our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God and betaken himself to Idolatry In the Epitomy of Canons collected by Dionisius Exiguus and which Pope Adrian delivered to Charles the great this Decree is thus entitled (a) Jusâ—el Cod. Can Eccles p. 106. Canon de his qui Angelos colunt a Decree concerning those that worship Angels (b) Brev. Canon 90. Crisconius hath the like Theodoret who lived in the next Century upon those words of the Apostle Let no man defraud you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshiping of Angels writes that (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. in Coloss c. 2. They who were zealous for the Law perswaded men to worship Angels because say they the Law was given by them This did they councel to be done pretending himility and saying that the God of all things was invisible and inaccessible and incomprehensible and that it was fit we should procure Gods favor by the means of Angels And again (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. in Col. 2. Because they commanded men to worship Angels saith Theoderet he enjoyneth the contrary that they should adorn their words and deeds with the Commemoration of our Lord Christ and send up thanksgiving to God and the Father by him and not by the Angels The Synod of Laodicea also following this Rule and desiring to heal that old disease made a Law that they should not pray to Angels nor forsake our Lord Jesus Christ And lastly (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. in Col. 2. This vice saith he continued in Phrygia and Pisidia for a long time For which cause also the Synod assembled in Laodicea the chief City of Phrygia forbad them by a Law to pray to Angels and even to this day among them and their Borderers there are Oratories of St. Michael to be Seen The like hath Oecumenius upon the same place saying that (b) Oecumen MS. in Coloss 2. apud Hoechelium in Origenem contra Celfum In libris editis desideratur this Custom continued in Phrygia insomuch that the Councel of Laodicea did by a Law forbid to come to Angels and to pray unto them From whence it is also that there be many Churches of Michael the Cheif Captain of Gods Host among them This Canon of the Laodicean Fathers Photius doth note to have been made against the (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phot. Nomocanon tit 12. c. 9. Angelites or the Angelicks rather For so St. (a) Angelici in Angelorum cultum inclinati Aug. de haeres c. 39. Augustin names those Hereticks that were inclined to the worship of Angles being from thence called (b) Angelici vocati quia Angelos colunt Isidor Orig. l. 8. c. 5. Angelici as Isidorus noteth because they did worship Angels Now that the strength of what we argue from this Canon And that the vanity of what the Romanists except against it may appear 1. Let it be noted that the forementioned Canon containeth the Sentence and Belief of the whole Church of Christ 5 2. for it is a Canon of that Code which the whole Christian World did use