mysteriousness of sacraments and Divine institutions, are disordered and dishonoured: the bishops and priests inventing both the word and the element, institute a kind of sacrament, in great derogation to the supreme prerogative of Christ; and men are taught to go in ways which superstition hath invented, and interest does support.

But there is yet one great instance more of this irreligion. Upon the sacraments themselves they are taught to rely, with so little of moral and virtuous dispositions, that the efficacy of one is made to lessen the necessity of the other; and the sacraments are taught to be so effectual by an inherent virtue, that they are not so much made the instruments of virtue, as the suppletory; not so much to increase, as to make amends for the want of grace; on which we shall not now insist, because it is sufficiently remarked in our reproof of the Roman doctrines, in the matter of repent

ance.

SECTION XI.

AFTER all this, if their doctrines, as they are explicated by their practice, and the commentaries of their greatest doctors, do make their disciples guilty of idolatry, there is not any thing greater to deter men from them, than that danger to their souls which is imminent over them, upon that account.

Their worshipping of images we have already reproved, upon the account of its novelty and innovation in Christian religion. But that it is against good life, a direct breach of the second commandment, an act of idolatry, as much as the heathens themselves were guilty of, in relation to the second commandment, is but too evident by the doctrines of their own leaders.

For if to give Divine honour to a creature be idolatry, then the doctors of the church of Rome teach their people to commit idolatry; for they affirm, that the same worship which is given to the prototype or principal, the same is to be given to the image of it. As we worship the holy Trinity, and Christ, so we may worship the images of the Trinity, and of Christ; that is, with Latria,' or Divine

VOL. X.

R

honour. This is the constant sentence of the divines: "The image is to be worshipped with the same honour and worship, with which we worship those whose image it is," said Azorius, their great master of casuistical theology. And this is the doctrine of their great St. Thomas, of Alexander of Ales, Bonaventure, Albertus, Richardus, Capreolus, Cajetan, Coster, Valentia, Vasquez, the Jesuits of Cologne, Triers, and Mentz, approving Coster's opinion.

Neither can this be eluded by saying, that though the same worship be given to the image of Christ, as to Christ himself, yet it is not done in the same way; for it is terminatively to Christ or God, but relatively to the image, that is, to the image for God's or Christ's sake. For this is that we complain of, that they give the same worship to an image, which is due to God; for what cause soever it be done, it matters not, save only that the excuse makes it, in some sense, the worst for the apology. For, to do a thing which God hath forbidden, and to say it is done for God's sake, is to say, that for his sake we displease him; for his sake we give that to a creature, which is God's own propriety. But besides this, we affirm, and it is of itself evident, that whoever, Christian or heathen, worships the image of any thing, cannot possibly worship that image terminatively, for the very being of an image is relative; and, therefore, if the man understands but common sense, he must suppose and intend that worship to be relative, and a heathen could not worship an image with any other worship: and the second commandment, forbidding to worship the "likeness of any thing in heaven or earth," does only forbid that thing which is in heaven to be worshipped by an image, that is, it forbids only a relative worship: for it is a contradiction to say, this is the image of God, and yet this is God; and, therefore, it must be also a contradiction, to worship an image with Divine worship terminatively; for then it must be, that the image of a thing is that thing whose image it is. And, therefore, these doctors teach the same thing, which they condemn in the heathens.

But they go yet a little further: the image of the cross they worship with Divine honour; and, therefore, although

a Instit. moral. par. 1. lib. ix. c. 6.

this Divine worship is but relative, yet consequently, the cross itself is worshipped terminatively by Divine adoration. For the image of the cross hath it relatively, and for the cross's sake; therefore the cross itself is the proper and full object of the Divine adoration. Now that they do and teach this, we charge upon them by undeniable records: for in the very 'Pontifical,' published by the authority of pope Clement the VIIIth, these words are found, "The legate's cross must be on the right hand, because latria, or Divine honour, is due to it." And if Divine honour relative be due to the legate's cross, which is but the image of Christ's cross, then this Divine worship is terminated on Christ's cross, which is certainly but a mere creature. To this purpose are the words of Almain, "The images of the Trinity, and of the cross, are to be adored with the worship of latria;" that is, Divine.' Now if the image of the cross be the intermedial, then the cross itself, whose image that is, must be the last object of this Divine worship; and if this be not idolatry, it can never be told, what is the notion of the word. But this passes also into other real effects: and well may the cross itself be worshipped by Divine worship, when the church places her hopes of salvation on the cross; for so she does, says Aquinas, and makes one the argument of the other, and proves that the church places her hopes of salvation on the cross, that is, on the instrument of Christ's passion, by a hymn which she uses in her offices; but this thing we have remarked above, upon another occasion. Now although things are brought to a very ill state, when Christians are so probably and apparently charged with idolatry, and that the excuses are too fine to be understood by them that need them; yet no excuse can acquit these things, when the most that is, or can be said, is this, that although that which is God's due, is given to a creature; yet it is given with some difference of intention, and metaphysical abstraction, and separation; especially, since, if there can be idolatry in the worshipping of an image, it is certain, that a relative Divine worship is this idolatry; for no man that worships an image

b Edit. Roman. p. 672.

(in that consideration or formality) can make the image the last object: either, therefore, the heathens were not idolaters in the worshipping of an image, or else these men are. The heathens did indeed infinitely more violate the first commandment; but against the second, precisely and separately from the first, the transgression is alike.

F

are very

The same also is the case in their worshipping the consecrated bread and wine: of which how far they will be excused before God, by their ignorant pretensions and suppositions, we know not; but they hope to save themselves harmless by saying, that they believe the bread to be their Saviour, and that if they did not believe so, they would not do so. We believe that they say true; but we are afraid that this will no more excuse them, than it will excuse those who worship the sun and moon, and the queen of heaven, whom they would not worship, if they did not believe them to have divinity in them: and it may be observed, that they fond of that persuasion, by which they are led into this worship. The error might be some excuse, if it were probable, or if there were much temptation to it: but when they choose this persuasion, and have nothing for it but a tropical expression of Scripture, which rather than not believe in the natural, useless, and impossible sense, they will defy all their own reason, and four of the five operations of their soul, seeing, smelling, tasting, and feeling,—and contradict the plain doctrine of the ancient church, before they can consent to believe this error, that bread is changed into God, and the priest can make his maker: we have too much cause to fear, that the error is too gross to admit an excuse; and it is hard to suppose it invincible and involuntary, because it is so hard, and so untempting, and so unnatural to admit the error. We do desire that God may find an excuse for it, and that they would not. But this we are most sure of, that they might, if they pleased, find many excuses, or rather just causes, for not giving Divine honour to the consecrated elements; because there are so many contingencies in the whole conduct of this affair, and we are so uncertain of the priest's intention, and we can never be made certain, that there is not in the whole order of causes any invalidity in the consecration; and it is so impossible

that any man should be sure that here,' and 'now,' and 'this' bread is transubstantiated, and is really the natural body of Christ; that it were fit to omit the giving God's due to that which they do not know to be any thing but a piece of bread, and it cannot consist with holiness, and our duty to God, certainly to give divine worship to that thing, which though their doctrine were true, they cannot know certainly to have a Divine Being.

SECTION XII.

AND now we shall plainly represent to our charges, how this whole matter stands. The case is this, the religion of a Christian consists in faith and hope, repentance and charity, Divine worship and celebration of the sacraments, and finally in keeping the commandments of God. Now in all these, both in doctrines and practices, the church of Rome does dangerously err, and teaches men so to do.

They do injury to faith, by creating new articles, and enjoining them as of necessity to salvation. They spoil their hope, by placing it upon creatures, and devices of their own. They greatly sin against charity, by damning all that are not of their opinion, in things false or uncertain, right or wrong. They break in pieces the salutary doctrine of repentance, making it to be consistent with a wicked life, and little or no amendment. They worship they know not what, and pray to them that hear them not, and trust on that which helps them not. And as for the commandments, they leave one of them out of their catechisms and manuals; and while they contend earnestly against some opponents for the possibility of keeping them all, they do not insist upon the necessity of keeping any in the course of their lives, till the danger or article of their

c Nemini potest per fidem constare se recepisse vel minimum sacramentum. Estque hoc ita certum ex fide, ac clarum est nos vivere. Nullo est via, qua, citra revelationem, nosse possumus intentionem ministrantis, vel evidenter, vel certò ex fide. Andreas Vega, lib. ix. de justific. c. 17.—

Non potest quis esse certus, certitudine fidei, se percipere verum sacramentum cum sacramentum sine intentione ministri non conficiatur, et intentionem alterius nemo videre potest. Bellar. lib. iii. c. 8. sect. Dicent.