IMAGE IDOLATRY.

The Church of Rome worships God by I­mages, and is therefore guilty of Idolatry by giving to the Creature the worship due only to the Creator. For God having forbidden any such sort of worshiping him by his own law and com­mandments given by Moses, wherein he forbids his people to make day kind of image, pesel the­munah eikon glyp [...]on, sculptile, any thing represented either by carving tool or pensil, can­not own that worship, nor can any such worship terminate upon God. And the reason of that law of Moses is unchangeable, which is that God's infinite and incomprehensible Deity cannot be represent [...]d For which reason the wisest of Heathen both particular Men and Nations judged all such representations of the invisible [Page 13]Godhead to be incongruous and unbecoming his glory; And if this were inconsistent with Gods nature and will in the old Law much more in the new, where we are taught to worship God in spirit and truth, and to have no low unworthy thought of God. It might therefore seem more rational to worship God in the Sun, and Moon, which have more of God in them, and to say our prayers to the Sun and Moon them to any image or shadow; the same argument which excuses the one will justifie the other much more. For this reason St. Paul teaches that the Godhead is not like to gold or silver or stone, and blames those who change the glory of the incorruptible God into the image of corruptible man. And the Heathens in doing this did ill: although the wiser sort among them testifie that they did not hold their statues to be Gods, but that they wor­shipped God in them. And yet some antient Fa­thers disputed notwithstanding against that hea­then practice, and counted it idolatry. Where­fore Germanus Patriark of Constantinople says expresly that Christians make no represen­tation of the invisible Deity; and Damascene that it is madness to go about it. Wherefore the Synode of Constantinople and that of Frankford pleaded hard against the making of any images amongst Christians however the se­cond Council of Nice vainly went about to de­fend them as innocent and useful helps. Finally, [Page 14]Moses himself explicates by his deeds the mean­ing of his own Law when he was so highly dis­pleased with Aaron for the golden Calf he had made the people in his absence. And yet Aaron did not make it to bring the people into heathen idolatry, but to give them only a Symbole of the Angel who was to go before the people: As also the two Calves set up by Jeroboam in Dan and Be­thel were set up only to keep the people from go­ing up to Jerusalem, and not to bring them to the idolatry of heathens. And therefore Pri­mitive Christians never used any images, as the learned of the Church of Rome acknowledge.

§ 1. This is the sum of the Doctors discourse in this his first Chapter. And he cannot but expect his Reader should have a mighty con­ceit of either his most high or most deep Divinity, who hath converst so much with the learned sort of the Church of Rome, the graver sort of Philosophers, and wiser sort of Heathens. Nothing does he here deliver, that was so much as thought of by the common sort, the vulgar sort, the or­dinary sort of Mankind. And O what plea­sure and content of heart will it be unto him, if he could meet with an adversary of his learned sort too, who viewing his airy subtilties should oppose him seriously, as if he were serious himself; and then distin­guish as if he were dealing with some solid [Page 15]Divine; and then ply him with proofs and testimonies, refell him by shorter enthymems and longer syllogismes; subtilly search in what Mood and Figure he speaks; and then tell him how his consequence flaggs, or ante­cedent is ambiguous, till he have learnedly consumed a hundred pages in refutation of a trifle. Then surely will the Doctour be judged by all parties to be as he would be thought to be, an able man.

§ 2. The Catholick Church uses indeed both in their publick and private oratories, some pious representations of our holy Lord, either in his passion, or birth, resurrection, or ascention, or miraculous working of some divine miracle: And these holy figures of his are accompanied commonly with some others of his blessed Virgin Mother, the re­nowned Apostles, valorous Martyrs, holy Confessors, chast Virgins, or other happy followers of our Lord, who through many tribulations and a constant exercise of Chri­stian vertues have passed hence to a blessed life. All which do mightily avail, unto our retiredness and recollection; when we en­ter into the house of prayer, a holy place se­parated and sanctified for Gods service, from our own houses or the streets. And the re­spect or esteem we have for such figures, is nothing but what we bear either unto the sa­cred [Page 16]histories recorded of the same Persons, or to those good rules of life and promises of Gospel, which those Worthies have im­braced, for the incouragement and imitation of us, who are now strugling in that wicked world, which they overcame before us. For example, as we reverence the history of Christs incarnation, sounding in our ear; so do we look upon the figure of it r [...]esented to our eye: As we love the story of St. Ma­ry Magdalens conversion; so do we like her Picture. As we honour St. Pauls life and Martyrdome; so do we respect his Image. And St. Lawrences most cruel passion upon the hot burning Gridiron, when it is repre­sented to us in a Pict [...]re, we are in the self same manner affected towards it, as we are to the invincible vertue and patience there shown for the Love and honour of Jesus our Lord, whose steps he followed. So that, what authentick history records to us in words, of the vertue and valour of any of our Christi­an Ancestors; or what holy Gospel tells us, of the glory and crown to be rendred un­to the good works of sobriety, charity, cha­stity, purity, patience, and the like: the same is without words painted unto us by these compendious hieroglyphicks, serving more speedily than words can do, to fasten us unto a strict recollection in our Prayers [Page 17]by one short glance about us; and to a fear and awfulness of Gods presence in that place where we are met together for his Service, ac­companied with the sigures of so many of our pious Ancestours who are gone to Heaven before us; and also to a dissipation of any worldly thoughts, that may, as they are apt enough to do, at that time come along with us there unto our hinderance. All this bene­fit we have by our Pictures, when we have haply no book to look upon, or know not by our ignorance to read, or cannot by darkness or other lettance attend unto that labour. And this is all the whole business of Images, as to Religion. In the Road of Philosophy trodden by School-Divines, where thousands of conclusions over and above faith are ad­vanced and opposed by one another unto the sharpning of their wits, many things are said about every thing, as the creation, resurrecti­on, and the like, which faith in the same things is silent of; Nor are we in our defence of faith concerned at all in them. And it may be easily discerned by our Catholick practice what use we make of our Images, when of a hundred people entring into a Church, nor one of them ever casts his eye wistly upon them, but contented with a general glance, compose themselves presently unto their prayers and meditations they keep silently in [Page 18]spirit towards God. And when our Pictures are so sullied and spoiled, that they will no more serve our use, we put them into the fire, as we would do also a page of sacred Scrip­tures uttterly obliterated and fouled.

§ 3. Indeed all the whole business of the use of Images at all, is but a matter of disci­pline and government, for the help of people in the great work of recollection and prayer; as is the use of Churches, and the musick used in them, with the Harp, Viol, & other Instru­ments, the Use of Beads and Prayer-books. All which our Religion could spare, and yet be not at all impaired, as to any its essential or substantial parts. Nay there be inconve­niences in any one of these things. Nor do I know any good thing in this world without some inconvenience or other. It is enough for us, that the conveniences and benefits of any good we have or use, are more and grea­ter than the inconveniences be. Many wor­thy Prelates in Christianity have at times ex­cepted very strongly against Organs, as some hindrance of the great work of sp [...]ritual con­templation which Christian people meet to practice together in their holy Assemblies, the great paramount work of Christianity, espe­cially at Mass. But these men, although mo­ved unto that their exception by a Zeal not evil, yet were they fain to yield at last unto [Page 19]the prevaling reasons of other Prelates which over bore their lesser ones. Some other of our Catholick Doctors and Prelates would have had us to have used no Pictures; that Jews and Pagans might not catch at that pre­tence to cavil against our Christianity as they did. But all these submitted at last, unto the prevailing part; by whom they were made to understand that the inconveniences they ur­ged were but imaginary and small, the conve­niences great and real. There have been not a few who have excepted against much vocal Prayer; because it took up too much of the time which would be better employed in the more principal work of prayer in spirit. But yet could they not carry it, although their rea­sons were very plausible and good; because that high and Angelical prayer in spirit, agreed not equally to all men, or to any one consist­ing of flesh and blood equally at all times and places, as vocal prayer does. Some have dis­liked even our material Temples, built up so sumptuously as they are; because God im­mense and incomprehensible, dwells not in buildings made by mans hands; Heaven is his Seat, and Earth his Footstool; Yet could they not obtain▪ that our Churches should be there­fore pulled down, or not built up. Prayer­books were nothing at all in use amongst Christians in primitive times; when they pray­ed [Page 20]almost altogether in spirit, and used no o­ther vocal prayer but that our Lord taught us. And yet this hinders us not, either to make such books, or use them in following times. Instead of our beads in wood or mettal, they used in ancient times a bag of little stones, by the emptying whereof they knew that they had said over our Lords prayer a hundred or perhaps three hundred times, according as any one in his devotion had prefixed to him­self every day of his life to do for Gods glory and service. And there might be inconveni­ences pretended against our present heads, especially those of gold and pearl. But they will not be thrown away for that. Our Church-musick has been more than once op­posed, and that by Prelates most holy and re­nowned men, who deemed it an unsufferable lettance to the spiritual recollection which Christians ought above all things to a tend unto, that they may have our Lords good Spirit, and his holy operations in them, espe­cially when they meet together at their holy Synaxis. But Church-musick is kept up to this day, notwithstanding their reason against it, which is very good, for other reasons no less good and great than it; specified and ur­ged by the far greater number of pious Pre­lates for it. And yet if all or the greater part of Catholick Prelates meeting together [Page 21]should take away all these outward helps from us, beads and books, singing and Church-mu­sick, pictures, and Churches, and all, finding the inconveniences to be now greater than they have been, and weightier than any con­venience we have by them: though the thing would seem very strange to us, yet ought we I think to obey them resignedly, and attend wholly unto our spiritual meditations, either alone, or in our Eucharistian meetings, and to the other good works commanded orcoun­selled us in Gospel, in expectation of our fu­ture bliss and eternal happiness in God, which can never be taken from us: though all things of discipline or helps in government be alte­rable.

§ 4. And now it is time to turn back and view the subject of this Chapter; that we may see if any one period in it be true and pertinent. He tells us first, that Papists wor­ship God by Images, which logically is not true; Then that a representation of the invisi­ble Deity cannot be made; which is imperti­nent; Then that the worship given to God by an Image does not terminate upon God: which is neither pertinent nor true. And so he pro­ceeds on to the very end of his Chapter, with sounds either empty or false, or both; neither heeding or caring what he says, so he do but mention learned Papists, and wiser Heathens, [Page 22]which may help to butterress up his reputa­tion. I cannot but remember here, the sha­dow or Ghost in Virgil which Juno made of Aeneas, to draw her beloved Turnus out of the field; It seemed to fight and threaten, and press on, and give back. But nothing at all was done really.

And such a shadow of controversie is all this present Chapter, and his whole book also: a foming face and feeble force: big, but empty words: rumbling, and yet insignificant sounds: qu [...]ck profers, and no progress: a daring sha­dow or armed Ghost, without either body or bones. And yet such a thing as defies the whole Catholick Church; steps out from the rest of his Camp, and defies them all alone; defies them both in letters syllables & words. And this is all. For he touches no body. Be­cause Cathol [...]cks by the advice and allowance [Page 23]of their Prelates do keep amongst them the representation of the divine Founder of their Religion, who appeared amongst us by his unspeakable Love in form of a Man; and of some of his holy followers in the way he chal­ked out for us; therefore he talks of Moloch and Milcom, Osiris and Isis, Chemosh and Astaroth, Baal Peor and Rimmon, golden Bulls and Remphan, the Calves of Dan and Bethel. And what is all this for? Wy to over-run Papists, and beat us down; How can it do that? These Idols were set up by Heathens, in opposition to the true God, and in the very place of God, as darkness in the night time is in the place of light. This is true, What then? and therefore I must not forsooth keep the figure of Jesus Christ, or of S. Paul, or other domestick of my own religion for my own incouragement therein. What likness, what consequence is there in all this? Which is Remphan, and where is Mo­loch? Which is the Calf, and where is the Bull? Nay, and here it is worth our obser­ving too, that Protestant Gentlement and La­dies of England, Ministers and Bishops too, have all pictures in their Chambers as well as Catholicks; even those of our holy Apost [...]es and Martyrs, as well as others. And there they are good and lawful figures, but in our Chambers they are Bulls of Basan, and Calves [Page 24]of Bethel among us. Catholick Pictures are against Moses his Law; but theirs are not so; Although they be representations both in Heaven above and Earth below, and Waters under earth, expresly by the same Law forbid­den; for example, Moon and Stars Dogs and Cats, Whales and Dolphins. The Picture of Martin Luther in their Chamber is the lawful effigies of a man. But Saint Stephen in our Closet is a Calf. Can any man who talks at this rate, be thought to be one that has con­versed either with the learned sort of Papists or the wiser sort of Heathens: or one ra­ther that had never any conversation at all ei­ther with reason or men, O but Catholicks worship God by their Images, which Protestants do not. I marry, this is a huge fault indeed, that Catholicks take thereby occasion to think of God and his manifold mercies, and bless his name, and trust in him. For they no other way worship God by Images: This is the mortal sin which Catholicks commit. And if that illogical speech of the Doctor, Catho­licks worship God by Images, be drawn into any kind of sence, it can be no other than this, that Catholicks take occasion by the pious fa­ces of their Martyrs to think of Gods mani­fold graces and mercies towards them, and thereupon trust in him afresh and bless his name: which great errour the Doctor, it [Page 25]seems, does carefully avoid. The ancient de­vout Christians thought of God and worship­ped him by any thing any good thing they en­joyed; the verdant fields and sweet flowers, comfortable air, and pleasing light, moun­tains, valleys and liquid streams; Plumbs, Pears, Apples, and chearful Grapes; by the vertue, charity and devotion of men, the mi­nistry of Angels, &c. But now we must take heed of that. We may taste a Plumb or a Cherry, we may eat a Venison Pasty and drink good Wine if we can get it; nay we may have fine Pictures in our Chambers, even the Pi­cture of Jesus Christ crucified, or any of his followers: we may have all this, if we be such good Protestants as Mr. Stillingfleet, and never think of God, or worship God by it. But if we worship God by it, if we think of God by it, then it is all poison to us. All is suddenly turned to Moloch, to Remphan, to B [...]al Peor, to Ashtaroth, to Aarons golden Steer and the Calves of Bethel. If we do but eat a custard thinking of God, or worshipping God by it, pre­sently it becomes a Ramphan or Chiun, the Idol of the Arabians. Walking upon Ham­stead hill, as people use innocently enough to do, if casting our eyes about the prospect we think of God by it, as Catholicks are wont, the hill before innocent is now become a Baal Peor the Idol of the Moabites. A Citiz [...]n [Page 26]walking to the Tower, may look harmlesly enough upon the Crown and royal Robes there. But he must take heed then, that he fall not into a meditation of Heaven, or the glory of its great King, to worship him in his heart by it, For then it becomes to him an Adramelech, the idol of Sepharva [...]m. And he must beware of the like abuse when he sees the Chamber and Table where his Majesty sits in Council with his Peers, lest it become a Moloch to him, the idol of the Moabites. The very Flags and Banners often seen in London-streets, make some simple soul to think of Je­rusalem above, the peace and happy company there, and the God of all: but then O how suddenly is the Streamer metamorphosed and t [...]rned into Nesroch, the idol of Senacherib. Some are so bold, when they either see or hear of any corrupted by the French-pox and lec [...]e [...]y, to thank God who has preserved them, and worship God by it. And thereby sin no less grievously than Maacham the Mother of Asa King of Judah in worshipping her idol Priap or Nimphleseth A Gentleman cal­led upon God not in words onely but very hea [...]t [...]ly when a troublesome Fly got into his Eve, and much affl [...]cted him: but he little thought that by that piety of his he had sin­ned as deeply as they that worship Baalzebub the idol of Acaron. Nothing is more ordi­nary [Page 27]with Country Gentlemen, when walking abroad they behold a goodly fair Flock of Sheep in pasture of their own, than to thank God and worship God by it; but little do they think good men, they are guilty of idolatry thereby, as much guilty as they that worship­ped Ashtaroth, the idol of the Philistins. Nay a very Cow or Calf in the Meadows, if we take occasion by it to thank God for his bene­fits, or to worship God by it, is the same thing then, as Aarons Moulten heifer, or Jeroboams Calves set up in Dan and Bethel. And as it is for substance, so for the figures of things. St. Paul's picture so long as we do not think of God by it, is a lawful picture. But if we come once to think of God, to worship God by it, O then that is a Calf too, Aarons Calf, one of Jeroboams Calves, &c. This think­ing of God, this worshipping of God by any thing, this is the pestilential blast, that spoils all. It turns sweet into bitter, lawful into unlawful, things innocent into sin, and good things to death. The representation of our blessed Lord crucified for us, so long as we think not of him may pass for a good innocent or at least indifferent thing; but if we once think seriously of him, if we worship God by it, then, O Mr. Stillingfleet, what is it then? And yet answer me not. For I will not have those blasphemous words here repeated. [Page 28]Speak them to a Jew in order to Jesus Christ and he will embrace and love you. But a Chri­stian cannot endu [...]e to hear them.

§ 5. Papists saith he worship God by images, and so are guilty of idolatry, Catholicks may hear this, but can never understand what he means. They are never taught in any of their Catechisms to worship God by Images. None of their spiritual books wherein all religious Duties are importunately urged and pressed upon them ever mention it: and their practice does not infer it. For if it did, they would easiliest understand it who best know what themselves do. They are taught, and do in their practice endeavour to worship God in their heart and soul, and ardent affections streaming forth thence towards him. They worship him with bended knees, lips & voice, hearts and eyes lifted up unto him. They worship him with the assistance of Gods good Spirit, the Priests Sacrifice, and help of mu­tual Prayers. They worship him by mortify­ing their sensuality and carnal appetites, by giving alms and relieving the poor and needy for his Love, by observing his Laws and Counsels, by resigning to his good will and plea [...]ure in all things, especially in time of afflicting persecutions, when they suffer all manner of reproach, lies and calumnies, loss of goods and sometimes life it sell for his [Page 29]name sake patiently. They worship him in Closets, in Church-assemblies, in the fields, as they are walking, on Land or Sea, where they have oppportunity to do it. Thus doth their religion teach them to worship God, as with the right causes and instruments; as by the true effects and operations; as in the times and places seasonable for worship and devo­tion. But how they should worship God by images, or (as he speaketh oftner in the con­text of his discourse) in images; this they do not easily understand. When he lays any thing to Catholicks charge, he ought to speak I should think as Catholicks do, and then he will be understood by them. It is not to be conceived how any one can worship God by images, and in images, but either for the real presence there; or ideal imitation; or some sort of occasion of worsh [...]p arising thence. And so God must be worshipped by them and in them, either presentially, ideally, or occa­sionally. And it cannot be presentially. For so God is no otherwise present in a picture than in the wall it hangs upon: nor yet ideally; for the picture for example of St. Mary Mag­dalen or St. Paul, is no idea of that invisible and glorious Godhead; nor yet is any other, as the Crucifix for example or Christ our Lord in his Birth or Resurrection; for all these fi­gures are representations of his humanity, and [Page 30]no idea's of his Deity at all. And Mr. Stil­lingfleet must needs mean one of these two ways. For otherwise he could not charge them with idolatry for it. And therefore I say that his charge is false and slanderous. But if he mean that they worship God by images & in their images, occasionally; which is a mo­ral interpretation, and the only true one: Then is such a work so far from Idolatry, that it is a sublime piety. For what can they better do, then to give God thanks for so great graces, mercies, helps, and comforts bestowed in Je­sus our Lord upon his Apostles. Martyrs, Confessors, and Virgins, when they look up­on their Figures and Pictures either in their contemplations, or patience of Martyrdome, or conversion of the world, subduing and bringing flesh, Satan and the World under their seet: especially if Catholicks conceive thereby some pious resolution, as well they may, of doing something the more and pati­ently suffering for God, in imitation of those pious Heroes our Predecessours in Religion, and yet naturally but flesh and blood as we our selves are. I say all this is signal piety, and our Christian duty. And according to this morall meaning Catholicks if they do worship God by their Images, and in their Images; do well, and like good Christians. But the Doctor will not charge them I sup­pose [Page 31]with a matter of so much truth and great piety as this is, although his words cannot make out any other sence that is true, but only this morall one. And the more logical sence of worshipping God by images, and in images; ideally or presentially is false. Let him even take wh [...]ch sence he pleases, either what justifies Catholicks or what falsifies his own assertion; It is all one to me, whether we stand, or he fall.

§ 6. He adds, That the worship of God by Images does not terminate upon God; because God has forbid it, and so gives Gods honor to the Creature. This is strange gibberish. An act that tends to nothing is no act. If it be some act, it tends and has already tended to something; and it terminates upon that thing unto which it tends, and whose act it is de­nominated. This is clear enough even to a young sophomore, or one who indeed never yet came into the Air of Philosophy, if he do but understand the terms and words here used. For example, I cannot see a man in the street, except my vision terminate upon him; nor can my vision terminate upon him, but I must see him. And it is all one whether I see him close by me, or by my Window, or in a Looking-glass at home. For I cannot see him any way, but my sight must terminate upon him, and if it do not, I see him not. And [Page 32]this course of nature is not hindred, nor yet altered at all, because that Person may haply have forbidden me to look up­on him, either this way or that. For our acts or actions are accomplished within our selves, independently of any acceptance or disacceptance of them. Acceptance or d [...]sacceptance, commanding or forbidding is another thing, extrinsecal and quite differ­ing from the substance of the act or action. For they specifie onely, either the motive or event which may make the act either good or evil, either grateful or displeasing, but not make it an act or no act, or not to tend where it has tended. And so must my act of wor­shipping God by images, terminate upon God, or else it is no act of worshipping God by them; however God may have either com­manded or forbid it. God has forbidden blasphemy; and yet the act terminates upon him, otherwise it could not be a sin against him. And if Gods worship by Images do not terminate on God, whither on Gods name does it tend; and how is God worship­ed by them? This he does not tell us here, unless he insinuate it in those following words o [...] his, but gives the honour due to God unto the Creature. But how can that be? If God should have forbid us by his law to see a star through a tube; should we not therefore see it [Page 33]but the tube only, or should not our sight then be terminated upon the Star. So it seems by this Doctors philosophy, who hath conversed with the learneder sort of Papists, and the wiser sort of heathens, but very little with himself. Holy Fathers and Doctors have often said, that the honour of an Image re­dounds to the Prototype: but never thought or said, that the honour of the Prototype re­dounds to the Image, as it is here affirmed against both art and experience. But let us hear him proceed in his discourse. He will surely let fall some sence or truth ere long.

§ 7. Gods infinite and incomprehensible Dei­ty, saith he, cannot be represented. O here it is. This is very true. What a comfortable thing it is to meet with a draught of truth sometimes, when a man is dry and thirsts af­ter it. But to what purpose is this spoken here? Catholicks have no representations of that invisible Deity, nor none they look after. Figures they have of our Lord Christ, born as man amongst us and made flesh, and crucified, and ascending into Heaven. Fi­gures also of his holy Followers and Mar­tyrs: but representations of the invisible De­ify they never yet saw nor heard nor thought of. On then. The wisest of Heathens judged any such representations of the Divine nature incongruous and unbecoming his glory, Indeed [Page 34]they were wise heathens, and their judgment very right and good. Nor did I ever hear of any Christian wise or unwise any otherwise minded: O how would this Doctor prevail, if this wise Discourse of his, were as perti­nent as it is true. But he trusts and hopes well, that his good fate will so accompany his Reader, that he shall not doubt at all that eve­ry word that is true in his book is also to some purpose. And to some purpose indeed it is: namely to have it thought, that he is victorious in his main design: although in­deed and truth it belong nothing at all to it. But let me not stop his carreere. If any such figure of the Deity were inconsistent in the old Law much more in the new where we are commanded to worship God in spirit and truth. O uncontroulable consequence, arising from premisses most true. No man can or dare deny all this. Methinks I love him here for his reason, and cannot but grieve it should be all spilt in vain; so pure it is and precious. A little more of this, while he is in a good mood. It seems more rational to worship God in the Sun and Moon which have more of God in them than a Picture has, and to say our prayers to the Sun and Moon than to any Image. Seems so Sir? It is certainly more rational: what should we doubt of? And what a pitty is it, there should be none to be found, who wor­ship [Page 35]God in a Picture either ideally or presen­tially; none who say their prayers to a picture that this great blow of his might not beat the Aire to the indangering of his elbows. Saint Paul testifies that the Godhead is not like either to gold or silver or stone. Good St. Paul always said well; and his testimony is good at all times; and especially now, when it hits so pat with the wiser Heathens. There be many Churches now in England which have since our reformation, the Tetragram name of God written upon the walls within side in golden letters. Unto those men who did this, it would not seem altogether imperti­nent, to tell them, that the Godhead is not like to gold, silver or stone. But to such as use only the effigies of our Lord according to his hu­manity, and his holy Apostles and Martyrs, what a pitty it is it should be impertinent and wholly lost. Let him speak on some more of his truths. Germanus Patriark of Con­stantinople says expresly that Christians make no representation of the invisible Deity: and St. Damascene affirms it madness to go about it. Marry, God have mercy o'their souls for this their express saying, Catholicks would de­sire no better a testimony for themselves if they wanted any, then this of those two great Catholick Doctors; that no such re­pre [...]entation entation they have, and none they go [Page 36]about to have. O but he hopes, that all this being true will make strongly against the Church of Rome. And will it so? I have heard say, there be a thousand Churches in Rome, which are all Churches of Rome equally. Which of them all are concerned in this talk, that their walls may confute him? But he means Catholick people perhaps, oh, O, then all is well, they are safe enough and unhurt by all this, which is but their own do­ctrine, and faith. At least he has by these fair shreds of truth farced up a dozen pages in his book; And he hopes that his prote­stant reader will believe it all to be most per­tinent and apposite discourse against papishes, though it be nothing less. And if they do so think, he has his end, a happy Man no doubt.

§ 8. Moses forbad saith he, the making of any graven thing, and the word which Moses uses in that his law for a graven thing is gene­ral and signifies not an idol only as Papists say, but any picture, likeness, image or representati­on, as Moses himself speaks, either in heaven a­bove or in earth below or waters under the earth, pesel, themurah, eikon glypton, sculptile, any kind of thing that may be exprest either with the pencil or graving tool. Believe me Sir if this be true it will undo all our Painters, who come flocking hither into England as the only thri­ving [Page 37]place for them out of Holland, Ger­many, France and Italy too; and here fill the Land with pesels, themunahs, eikons, g [...]yp­tons, sculptile's, and any things they can ex­press with their pencils for our delight; Dol­phins, whales and other fish of the Sea; bi [...]ds of the Aire, Beasts, Flowers, Woods, gallant men and fair women, all that ever Moses forbad to be exprest. Nay, I have seen my self in a Protestant Church Moses himself painted on the walls with glittering hornes on his head, and a pair of law tables in his hand. But it may be Law-makers do ex­emp themselves: at least some Protestants may interpret as they seem to do, that Moses for­bad to make the figure of Jesus Christ but not his own. No man in England scruples to have any of these eikons, no not the Doctor himself, notwithstanding this law of Moses so expresly contrary to them all; no man doubts to set any painter or graver on work. And yet must still this Law be cast in the teeth of Catholicks as transgressors of it. For Gods sake why is St. Mary Magdalen in her penitential weeds upon her knees, with beads in her hand, and eyes all blubbered and swoln with tears, more against the law of Moses; than one of our delicate Paragons of beauty, in her shining dress, lips of coral and spark­ling eyes, O but Catholicks worship them. S [...]r [Page 38]this word in the sense and meaning of pro­testants is as great a falshood as was ever ut­tered by man. For Catholicks neither have nor can have any other relative esteem of any Picture, than what they have to the peni­tential works they represent, or to the worth and piety of the Persons. And an absolute esteem of the Picture, this is measured out only by the Materials, and artifice of the Painter; according to which one Picture shall be worth five hundred pounds, and ano­ther representing the same thing, not worth five shillings. And can we believe that our Protestant young Gentlemen have no vene­ration at all to our beauties set thus in their Majesty, nor no kind of affections rising in their hearts towards them? Yea ten to one more of ill affections, and god wot greater, then any good ones we can have to our cru­cisied Jesus in our way of piety. And the difference indeed is only this, that our reve­rence and affection is towards holy persons, and unto an imitation of their piety, hope, patience, constancy, and charity: Their's to a concupiscence of flesh and eyes. This and nothing but this if truth may be spoken, makes them so wrathful and furious against our Catholick pictures. Satan hates Jesus Christ, and therefore inflames them to tear down his memories and representations: but he loves pride of life; and those portractures [Page 39]must stand that advance this. He is pleased with that which feeds concupiscence of eyes: and concupiscence of flesh brings him in the disciples which Jesus Christ loses.

Moses did forbid Jews who were travelling with him towards Palestine and idolatrous Na­tion, to make to themselves, that is to say on their own heads, without warrant of the Sy­nagogue, or in imitation of the Pagan rites, any of the idolatrous images there and else­where to be met withal, or any similitude at all, least seduced thereby, they leave their own God and religion to cleave unto false gods and idolatry. This law of Moses and purpose of the law is so clear, that he must be obstinate­ly blind who sees it not. And what does this concern our holy Catholick figures of St. Paul for example or Christ crucified, more than Protestant sigures of young Lords and fine Ladies; save that the one moves us to the love of moritification, prayer, patience, cha­stity, the other allures us from it; the one confirms Religion, the other weakens it. Be­sides our holy Pictures are allowed by the Church, the others forbidden And this in­deed is the only aim of Moses, when he for­bids the people to make to themselves any gra­ven images whatsoever; to themselves, that is on their own fancies, and upon their own authority: For such only were unlawful, and [Page 40]not those they were commanded by just au­thority and allowed to make. See, saith God by Moses, I have called and named Besaleel, and I have filled him with the spirit of wisdom and understanding, and all knowledge of all amnner of workmanship, to devise cunning works to work in gold and silver and brass, and in cutting of stones and in graving of wood, to work all manner of workmanship. And I have appointed Aholiab with him; and in the hearts of all the wise I have put wisdom, that they make all that I have com­manded. And by virtue whereof the said men and others after them move and graved pomgranets and lilies, and placed Cherubs up­on the Propitiatory, between which graven Cherubims God himself gave out his Oracles to Moses: as he did a [...]so heal the people by the figure of a Serpent which Moses comman­ded to be set up. So that here is a vast diffe­rence betwixt figures graven and set up by au­thority, and those which People make to themselves. The one is commanded, the other forbidden. Aaron's Calf of gold de­stroyed the people, but Moses his Serpent of brass healed them. These things are not now said afresh. They have been told to Ministers over and again, but they are never the better for it. Indeed they love not to hear of it, be­cause it spoils their sport.

I add yet withal, over and above what is yet said, that neither that law of Moses, nor any of his Ten Commandments, nor any other of his Precepts, either ceremonial, judicial or moral, does any way oblige Christians at all, as it comes from Moses, who is not our Law­maker or master, but ruler and leader of the Jews. Nor do we Christians believe that theft, adultery, homicide or blasphemy, is a sin, because Moses for bad it, but because we have receiv'd from Jesus our own Leg slator who justified Moses law and ratified it in all the said particulars, that so it is. And it is here to be observed that one of the most so­lemn laws contained in those two tables, that I mean, which ordains the seventh day to be kept holy day, unto which Moses adjoyns an irrefragable and unchangeable reason, namely because God rested that day when he made this visible world, beginning his work saith Moses on the Sunday wherin he created light, and the Friday following finishing the whole; even this law of his most solemn and impor­tunely urged by Moses, is annulled and abro­ga [...]ed amongst all Christians even from the beginning of Christianity, for want of ratifi­cation of it from our Lord and Master Jesus who is our Law-maker and Prince. And the same thing do I say of this his present Law about figures, images and representations of [Page 42]things by sculpture or pencil, which was only of temporal concernment to the then present Jews, against the danger of idols, which then filled the earth, and as meer a ceremonial law as the other, and equally concerning a cere­mony of worship. If our own Prelates whom Christ our Lord instituted to oversee his flock should for reasons best known to themselves take from us those little small helps we have by the Images of some of our Ancestors, Martyrs, Apostles, Virgins, Confessors, then would we be without them, and yet not think our selves to lose one jot of our Religion for that. But we will not forfeit them for any Law made by Moses, except it be established and ratified by our own Law-maker or his Pre­lates watching over us under our Lord unto our good, if Moses should have made any law against them, which indeed he did not, but only against Heathen-Idols. And if any one should endeavour to have or Christian repre­sentations to be abolished, because he thinks and believes that Moses forbad them, then is that Man say I, bound to observe all the whole law of Moses, as it is literally express [...]d by him, even to the least apex or iota thereo [...]. For the authority of a Legislator being the same in all his whole law, must oblige equally in all its parts: and the distinction then be­tween jadicial, moral, and ceremonial law, sig­nifies [Page 43]nothing; seeing that Moses his com­mands are equally peremp [...]ory, and press as strongly in the one as in the other. This is no imaginary Opinion of mine own, but what reason and the Spirit of God moved St. Paul to aver as stoutly in the case of circumci­sion, which is another of Moses Laws, as I do here. I testifie to every Man, saith he, who is circumcised, that he is bound to keep the whole Law. And this must needs be true, most certainly true for by observing circumci­sion, because it was commanded by Moses he subjects himself to the Law and Authority of Moses as his Prince and Legislator; and con­sequently is bound to observe him equally in all things which he commands with the same authority and will to be obeyed, which is no less then all his whole law. And cursed is eve­ry one, saith the same Apostle, who is under the law, and continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to fulfil them. Although then it should be granted that Moses by his law prohibited all kind of figures and representations, even those used by Christians, which he did not, yet if our Lord ratified it not, it does not touch us at all. And that he did not renew or ratifie it, is sufficiently clear to Protestants, because no such law of his is found among the Evange­lists: and unto Catholicks no less, because [Page 44]there is neither Gospel nor Tradition for it. And if all men would separate themselves from prejudice, which blinds and hardens them in their conceits, they might easily be­lieve that neither Christs immediate Disciples nor any Christians that succeeded them after our Lords departure, would have either fear­ed or hated the figure of our Lords counte­nance, if by chance they would have met with it. But if any one notwithstanding, fully perswaded that Moses made a law against all sort of Images and representations, should upon that authority of his abolish ours, he is bound also upon the same authority to sacri­fice an Ox, and observe all the whole law in all and every particular, under the penalty of sin.

Since therefore by the order of God and Moses many graven things were made; repre­sentations and similitudes both in Heaven and Earth, notwithstanding the said law; as the Serpent of brass (which must either be made by melting or graving) pomegranates, lilies, and various such-like things both graven in stone and interwoven in silks. Cherubins or Angels in the Propitiatory, even in Moses time, and afterwards more fully and plentifully in Solomon's Temple; it is not rationally to be doubted, but that this law of his was intended only to keep those People close and constant [Page 45]to their own God and to their own Religion, which was inconsistent with the idols of the Nations; and not for any purpose of keep­ing Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, either out of their chamber hangings or ours. I know the Jews do urge this Precept of Moses very ea­gerly against Christians ever since Jesus Christ our Lord was rejected by them, whose image and figure they cannot abide to see. But we must have patience with all men.

§ 9. Moses saith he, grounded this law of his upon a reason unchangable, namely that Gods infinite and incomprehensible. Deity cannot be re­presented. O profound invention! This is such a law and ground of a law, as was never before thought of. The ground and reason of making a law must be this, an impossibili­ty of breaking it. They must not make any representations of God, because God cannot be represented. And the same motive or rea­son will be equally proper for all the rest of the Commandments: They must keep the se­venth day of the week a holy day. The reason and motive; because there is not an eighth day to keep holy and sanctifie. They must ho­nour their Parents. The ground and reason of this; because none of the whole Camp had any Fathers or Mothers alive to dishonour. They must not kill. The motive and reason is: because they were all shot-free, and so firmly [Page 46]inchanted that none could hurt them. They must not commit adultery. The ground and reason is; because there was never a Woman in the Camp, which any man though provok'd with the highest lust could possibly come near or touch with a pair of tongues. They must not steal. The great cause thereof is, that there is nothing at all in the Camp for any man to take away. Thus the Doctor imagines Mo­ses to forbid any representations of God be­cause God cannot be represented. And such another discreet Mounsieur was he who so­lemnly commanded his Bowyer not to make him any shafts at all of a Piggs tail: and he gravely gave him the reason for it, because quoth he of a piggs tail no shaft can be made. Truth is, Moses never thought of any such Law, nor any such reason of it much less; but provided for the security of the He­brews Religion, that it might remain un­changable and firm in the mids of those ma­ny Nations round about them who worship­ed false Gods and idols: as Moses very fre­quently interprets himself and all the Pro­phets after him. Therefore saith God by Moses, thou shalt have no other Gods but me, thou shalt not make to thy self any fi­gures, as the Gentiles do, nor worship them. For I am a jealous God, and will have no in­termingling of devillish idolatry with my [Page 47]service; And all the reason given by Moses is gods jealousie not induring any divine wor­ship but his own. This is the very truth and all the truth of this business, which this Do­ctor would turn another way, thereby to make Moses seem as simple a man as himself. And those idols forbidden by Moses did so involve an opposition to the true God and his divine worship, that People could not possibly betake themselves to one, but they must leave the other. Therefore did Moses forbid both other Gods besides their own one God, and all idols together: which was by antient Christians very rationally and wisely reckoned all one and the same Com­mandement: whereof no less a Man, then St. Austin himself is witness. But the me­mories of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob could bring no such danger with them. And that is our care, for we are not in danger of loosing the faith of Jesus Christ by keeping the Image of him our crucified Lord among us; or forsaking the communion of Saints by re­taining their portraictures before our eyes. We should ipso facto renounce our Lord and all his whole Religion, should we set up Moses his forbidden Idols, and make it our religion to worship them as heathens did. But we are heartened, incouraged and con­firmed in our Christian Religion by looking [Page 48]on the faces of so many our glorious Mar­tyrs, holy Anchorets, and Hermits, pious Virgins and Confessors, who profest this our Religion before us, bravely triumphing by the power of Christs love and divine faith, over sins allurements, and deaths ugliest ter­rours; though incompassed themselves with the like passions and infirmities we are our selves invironed round about. And when we are entred into a Church amongst so many of our worthy Predecessors, we compose our selves more heartily to our devotion then otherwise we should do, in imitation of them; remembring now that we are come up to Mount Sion, to the City of our li­ving God, to celestial Jerusalem, and society of Angels, to the Church of Primitive Chri­stians conscript in the Heavens, to God the Judge of all, to the Spirits of just men per­fected, to Jesus the Mediator of a new Testa­ment, and to the aspersion of blood speaking better things than Abel.

§ 10. The Heathens, saith he, did ill in their idol worship, and yet the wiser sort among them testifie that they did not hold them to be Gods but worshipped God in them. Our acute di­vine having now by his fine wit so clarified Moses law, that it might not so much con­cern Idolaters as our vulgar Painters; he now begins so to purifie idolaters practice [Page 49]too, that they may seem but in the same con­dition with our Catholick and best Christi­ans. And who would not give his penny to hear him act and speak. The heathens all in general are so excused in their idolatry. Aaron in his act of apostacy, and Jeroboam in his great sin; that they are all and each of them no otherwise faulty then the Church of Rome in his books. Thus doth Mr. Stilling­fleet convert idolatrous Nations, while he sits dreaming in his Closet. Here he dimi­nishes and there he exaggerates, here he blacks with his Pen, and there he whitens; and then he cries out all is one, all of the same measure, all of the same colour. And truly I believe the great Gyant Goliah and little David might thus be made equal, if the Gyant were beheaded and cut off by the knees, on one side; and David on the other side, set upon a high pair of stilts. While Catho [...]icks are made to do what they do not, and Heathens not to do what they do, on a supposal that all this is true, there can be no great difference. Let us then hear him what he tells us of Heathens in general. The wiser sort among them testifie quoth he, that they worshiped not the idols as gods, but worshiped God in them. O very good? Thus the wiser sort among the Heathens say. But first who are these wiser sort? It behooved him to let [Page 50]us know this. But yet for his own procket-rea­sons he does not. But 2ly what says he himself to it? O that is needless: for his Reader will understand well enough what he ought to think, when such a Doctor as Stillingfleet tells him what the wiser sort have thought. No body would think with fools, but with the wi­ser sort always. And his whole discourse pro­ceeds on this supposed knowledge of the wi­ser sort, and according to it concludes. we cannot therefore doubt of his mind. But have we no wise sort of antient believers who li­ved among the Heathens, to testifie unto us what the heathens did? Have we no Apostles and Prophets to hearken to, no renowned and infallible persons to inform us? Surely we have, and those so many, that we need not have recourse either unto persons unknown amongst the heathens for their testimony, or to Mr. Stillingfleet the ingenious trifler. He tells us, that the Heathens did not worship their Idols as Gods, but worshiped God in them. But our Apostles and Prophets tell us contrary things. Hear Moses speak, who lived among the thickest of the Heathens; To whom did they sacrifice, O Moses, whom did the Hea­thens worship? Immolaverunt Demoniis & non Deo, Deut. 32. They worshiped not God but de­vils, they sacrificed to devils saith he, and not to God. The Nations change their gods, and [Page 51]indeed they are no Gods, saith Jeremy ch 2. but my people have changed their glory unto an Idol. Baruch another Prophet brings in his testimony, chap. 4. You have provoked him who made you, saith he, even the eternal God, sacrificing to Devils and not to God. The ho­ly Psalmist he tells us no less peremptorily. That they immolated their Sons and Daugh­ters to Devils, and sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, Ps. 105. and that all the gods of the Heathens are Devils, Ps. 95. Saint Paul our own Christian Doctor is bold, and expresly, te­stifies both against Stillingfleet and his wiser heathens; That the things which Gentiles immolated, they sacrificed to Devils and not to God, 1 Cor. 10. And yet after all this our Doctor is not ashamed to justifie those his clyents the heathens. They did not worship their Idols, saith he, for Gods, but worshiped God in them. And whom shall we here believe? Moses, Jeremy, Baruch, david, St. Paul and all our Christian Doctors, or Stillingfleet rather and his wiser Heathens unknown to himself? They sacrificed to Devils and not to God: they changed their glory into an Idol: they irritated the eternal God, im­molating to devils and not to God; they sacri­ficed their sons and daughters to devils not to God. Thus speak our Prophets and Apostles. But Mr. Stillingfleet affirms, they sacrificed to [Page 52]God, they imolated to God, they worshiped God and not devils, they worshiped not the Idols but God in them. But I discern well enough the cause of his mistake. Because they abstracted the general notion of God, and applyed it, each one to his own idols; therefore he thinks he may say they worship­ed God in them. But this is a gross mistake. For to worship God in a thing, and to wor­ship a thing for God who is no God, are two very differing cases Christians worship God in Christ, and they do well; Heathens who worshiped their Idols for God did ill. Crom­well our late Usurper after he had murdered our good King, and set the Crown upon his own head, would have taken it well, if his Ar­my had told him they honoured him for their King, but not, if they had said they worship­ed the King in him. The first word had soun­ded in his ears as a grateful flattery, the other as treason to himself. To abstract the Deity and apply it to another subject unto whom it does not belong, is as far as we are able to behead the true God and set his Crown upon the shoulders of usurping devils. And be­cause the true real Deity cannot be removed, either by the pleasure of the Usurper or wor­shiper, therefore are these idols devils and false Gods. God cannot be worshiped in them, because he is not in them; and if they [Page 53]be worshiped as Gods it is Idolatry; or else there is no such thing as idolatry upon Earth.

Aaron, saith he, made the golden Calf, not to reduce the People unto heathen idolatry, but for an embleme of the good Angel who was to go before them. Here is another excuse of Aaron his small fault; which drove Moses his brother and Prince into as great a passion of wrath as perhaps he ever felt; even so prevalent a grief and anger, that it dashed in pieces the very tables of the Law he had in his hands; though he was by the testimony of holy writ the mildest of men: and all this it seems for an embleme: And why that emblem? since they had such an emblem be­fore in the pillar of cloud by day and sire by night; which was a more significant emblem of the angel who went before them, then any Calf of gold could be. The holy Prophets testifie of those People and Aaron, that in Moses absence this figure was melted and founded by them to be set up in place of the God, who had hitherto conducted them with Moses now as they thought vanished, out of Egypt into Arabia; and to lead them on the rest of their way, as their supream conduct after the manner of Egyptian Dei­ties. They made a calf in Horeb and adored the figure, they changed their glory into the [Page 54]likeness of a Calf eating hay and forgot their God, Psal. 125. Now if they forgat their own God, and slighted him, and cast him from them, and changed his glory into a Calf, and worshiped the very figure: then must that sculptil or statue be now accepted for their God. The like testimony gives St. Stephen, Act. 7. They made saith he, a Calf in those days, and offered sacrifice unto the Idol, and made themselves merry in the works of their own hands. What can this import, but that they had now altered their religion, renoun­ced their former God, and made to them­selves a new one after the manner of Egypt. It is pitty Mr. Stillingfleet had not been with Aaron; his confidence would have pleaded for him a little more handsomly then he did for himself. But the excuse perhaps being hypocritical and false would have more offen­ded Moses, than his former fault. Aaron knew well enough what he had done. And although he somewhat minced his fault, yet would he not tell a lye. I cast a little mettal into the fire, saith he to Moses, and there came out this Calf. The Doctor adds two pretty reasons, why neither he nor the people, could ever think of declining then to any heathen idolatry, First because they had no pre­tence of doing so. As though the very absence of Moses, whom they had long expected and [Page 55]now thought lost, were not pretence enough, unto some leading men in the Camp to raise a sedition and thereby force Aaron to make them such idols, as they were acquainted with in Egypt. It is well enough known, that by the contagion of those leading men, the Camp was ever and anon in such like tumult and ready disposition to apostacy. His second reason is, because no intimation is made that they fell into heathen idolatry. What intima­tion is given thereof by the Prophet and St. Stephen he takes it seems for no inti­mation at all. When they fell, saith he, into heathen idolatry, mention is made of their Gods, as Baal Peor, Moloch, Remphan; but here Aaron is said to make a feast to the Lord: As though there were not Egyptian idols as well as Syrian; and Osiris and Isis, as well as Mo­loch and Remphan. And a feast made in ho­nour of this their new God and Religion, might well be said a feast to the Lord. It was a policy in Aaron, thus to speak, that the common people might not suddainly discern the alteration. And we may easily believe that the leading men, who brought him by perswasion and force unto this apostacy, sug­gested the said stratagem; first to get the people more universally on their side without commotion: and then to put something into their mouths for to say to Moses, if he should [Page 56]chance to come upon them suddainly and take them beyond expectation in the fact. For that it was a meer pretence of policy is evi­dent by this; that they gave to Moses no such account of any feast made unto their antient true God; and secondly because their princi­pal Leaders had no purpose to make any, for they had now forgot and put away their own true God and cast him out of their mind, as holy text speaks, obliti sunt Dei sui.

The Calves set up by Jeroboam in Dan and Bethel, were only to keep the People from going up to Jerusalem, and not to bring them to any idolatry of the hearthens. Here is another ex­cuse for Jeroboam and his peccadillo. Who would not take Mr. Stillingfleet to be a very charitable man, who can cover such a multi­tude of sins? and yet is it all no other but a secret prodigious malice against Catholicks, who must bear the more and hear the worse for it. Jeroboam saith he did not alter the di­vine worship, or give any occasion of idolatry; No, no. He only kept the People, saith he from going up to Jerusalem, whither they used once a year to resort. And this could be no such great matter; since they had the same service, the same sacrifice and adorati­on at home. But why then is Jeroboam char­ged with idolatry in holy Scripture, as one that had done evil above all that went before [Page 57]him, and made him other gods and molten images to provoke God to anger, and to cast his own God behind his back, 1 Reg. 14. O, ho, thence we conclude saith our Doctor that an image set up for Gods honor is idolatry; as it is among Papists. And is not this a pretty nimble leigerdemaine of a slight man. First who taught him that Papists set up images for Gods honour? I have learned amongst them that they are set up for our incouragement and imitation, and for an honourable memo­ry of their holy Martyrs and Apostles. But what honour can one of those images be to God? none at all I think, except indirectly, because God is the blessed author of all good, whence the said Apostles and Martyrs receiv'd their strength and grace. Secondly where does this confident man find, that Jeroboam set up his images for Gods honour? Even no where at all. His own boldness is so strong in him, that he says what he l [...]st; without any ground or oc­casion at all any where, either among sacred writers or prophane. Thirdly whence doth he gather his negative word, that Jeroboam acted none of the heathen idolatry, nor brought the People to it? Even from his own confident brain whence he has the other, expresly con­trary to the testimony of holy Writ which speaks, as it were passionatly and very empha­tically of his notorious idolatry, wherein he [Page 58]did evil above all that were before him, wherein he made him other gods and molten Images, to provoke God to anger, and cast his own God behind his back. Can he be justly charged with all this, only because he kept the Israelites from going up to Jerusa­lem, and made them do those devotions at home which they were wont to do in that mother Citty. Can only change of place suffice for the criminous imputation of idola­try, where is the same adoration, same rites, same sacrifice, same Priests, and same God. Is it possible that the same service and Com­mon-prayer-book read by Ministers of the same kind of London and Highgate, be Gods service in one place, and idolatry in the other, all other things agreing but only the circum­stance of place? No indeed, it is not possible it should be so. But it is very possible it should be said so. Mr. Stillingfleet here speaks it, and speaks it stoutly, on his own head, even against all Divine authority and upright reason. People may sin against eccle­siastical obedience indeed, by not coming up to their parochial Church when they are commanded. But they cannot, only upon that ground, be charged with idolatry, or making strange gods, or casting their own God b [...] ­hind their back. He must be a very passiona [...]e Prelate, and extreamly unjust and sinfully in­jurious, [Page 59]who lays that imputation upon peo­ple, upon no other ground or motive then that one circumstantial neglect of place. And yet holy Scripture several times thus charges Jeroboam; and puts such a blot upon his scutcheon both for his own idolatry, and that into which he induced all the people, that he is seldom or never mentioned without his black sirname; Jeroboam who made Israel to sin. If it were true at least, as Mr. Stilling­fleet here speaks, that Jeroboam and Israels sin were only a circumstance of place, and that they and he did in their own tribes but what was done in Jerusalem, then must it needs fol­low, that there were in the Temple of Jeru­salem such like representations, as those Calves set up by Jeroboam in Dan and Be­thel, and indeed the very same with them. And thence we may gather for our learning, if this be all true, an axiom of great truth and concernment; namely, that one and the same piece of worship which pleases God in the Catholick Church, is an abomination to him in the ways of heresie and schisme. The very same thing which in Jerusalem and the tribe of Judah were called Cheru­bims; in Samaria and all the rest of Isra­el apostatiled from them, was but a Calf.

§ 11. Charles the Great a noble Emperor caused Books to be set forth against the Coun­cil of Nice where images had been established, called Carolin Books, and assembled also a Coun­cil at Frankford, wherein both the said Nicen Council was condemned, and all their reasons for images confuted, &c. That there were both in the Council of Frankford and Nice too, some Catholick Prelates who propounded difficulties against images cannot be denied. For when ever any Council meets together about any affair, they dispute pro and con, both for and against it; that the Prelates having all things set before their Eyes that can be said on both sides, might be the better in­abled to determine. So doubtless it was done by the Apostles themselves in their great Council held in Jerusalem about Circumcisi­on, where inquisitio magna facta est, great in­quisition, disputation, and examination was made about it. All this is certain enough. But yet, that either in Frankford or any where else, were made after this their dispute any final or conclusive declaration against the [...]se of images amongst Christians; or that Charles the Emperor should either write Books or cause any to be written, either a­gainst images or the Council of Nice where­in they had been then established; or sum­mon that Council of Frankford to withstand [Page 61]that other of Nice unanimously concluded by the Prelates, and confirmed by the general Pastour; this is a thing so apparently false and fictitious, that there needs no more but the knowledge of those very Persons and times to prove it so. Charles the Great was one that adored the Roman Church where­of he was himself a member, above all Empe­rours that ever was before or since his time. The Council of Frankford, wherein were little less then three hundred Catholick Pre­lates, was peaceably concluded, and no com­motion followed upon it; which must needs have risen, if they had condemned another Council lately celebrated and confirmed by all pastoral authority. Nor was that Frank­ford Council ever annulled or any way cen­sured either by P. Adrian or any after him. Add to this, that the said Council was both begun and finished under the same Pope A­drian, and his Legates Theophilact and Ste­phanus, who had presided lately in the said Nicen Council, where the lawful use of ima­ges was established. It cannot possibly be imagined that the same Pope and Presidents should conclude in Frankford quite contrary to what they ordered in Nice but seven or eight years before. It is also certain, that the said Council of Frankford, was summon­ed and assembled, not about images only as [Page 62]the Doctor imagines, but about the question of our Lord Christ his filiation, as all antient histories testifie, against Foelix and Elipand two Spanish Bishops, and Claudius Taurinen­sis, who teaching that our Lord is rather to be called an adoptive than natural Son of God raised much commotion in Spain and France: and this novelty of theirs was first condemned at Ratisbone, and afterwards at Frankford. For Foelix after his first condemnation, repai­red to the Emperour Charles his Court who then wintered at Rheginum; and there sub­mitting to the Prelates, was sent thence to the presence of Pope Adrian, where in the Ca­thedral of St. Peter, he revok'd his Errour. Elipand hearing of his submission grew more violent, and by his books both regained Foelix again, and disturbed all Germany, as he had France and Spain before. And now to pre­vent the infection, the Pope and Charles the Emperour agreed to bring together a conci­liar Assembly of Prelates in Frankford, wher­in presided Theophylact and Stephanus, who had lately concluded the second Council of Nice. Whence it clearly appears that Do­ctor Stillingfleet quite mistakes the busi­nesse. Now if the same Pope and his very self-same Legates presided first in the Nicen Council, and then in Frankford, as the Doctor acknowledges, we may rationally [Page 63]enough conclude, that the Nicen decrees a­bout images, lately finished in the East, were made known to the West by their acceptation and promulgation at Frankford, where the bu­siness of filiation was decided: For this is indeed very true. But no way can we think that the same Presidents would now undo, what they had done a little before. And that this is indeed the whole truth in this business, may be yet confirmed by the authority of the Council of Senon kept not long after, which in their 14. decree thus speaks, Carolus mag­nus Francorum Rex Christianissimus in Franco­rum furdensi conventu ejusdem erroris iconoma­chorum suppressit insaniam quam infelicissimus quidam Faelix in Gallias & Germanias invexe­rit. By this testimony it appears, that Felix over and above his capital errour about Christ our Lords adoption, was an iconoma­chus too or adversary of images, and suffer­ed at Frankford for both his errours: which is not unlikely by the testimony of Platina and Paulus Emilius: For Platina in the life of Pope Adrian, Bienni [...] post, saith he, Theo­phylactus & Stephanus Episcopi insignes Adri­ani nomine, Francorum & German [...]rum Syn [...] ­dum habuerunt, in qua & Synodus quam septi­mam Graeci appellabant, & haeresis Feliciana de tollendis imaginibus abrogata est. And P. Emilius [Page 64]in his second book de gestis Francorum speak­ing of that Council of Frankford, Et ima­ginibus, saith he, suus honor restitutus est. The like may be proved out of Blondus, Sabelli­cus and other historians. So that all these things rightly considered and put together, will sufficiently convince his relation of the Frankford Council to be fictitious and groundless. If the Council were assembled by the agreement of the Pope and Empe­rour, then not of the Emperour against the Pope. If to suppress Elipand, Claudius, and Felix; then not the Nicen Prelates. If un­der the same Pope and Presidents which pre­sided lately in Nice, then not against any thing determined and concluded in Nice. If upon the motive of Elipands errour against our Lord's filiation; then was not an image the principal occasion of it. If Felix were there condemned for his opposition to ima­ges, then were not images condemned. If Charles the Great, one of the devourest to the Roman Church that ever raigned, so much swayed in that Council, then would he not suffer the Roman Church to be there affronted and censured. If an upright Ca­tholick, he would not in spiritual affairs gain­say the Prince of Prelates, who had so lately set his hand and seal to Nicen definitions. In a word, if Charles the Great called that [Page 65]Council at Frankford, as the Doctor affirms, then without all doubt was that ratified there, which was established at Nice a little before. For Charles was as much a Roman Catholick as either Stephen and Theophilact, or the Pope himself, and knew as well as any man, what obedience is due to the definitions of a Council rightly consummated and confirmed, as that of Nice was, Binius the great Col­lector of the Councils proves at large, that all this story of the Carolin books and Frank­ford Synod assembled against that of Nice, is a groundless fiction. And so do Alanus, Surius, Vasquez, and several other Doctors. And they are all amazed, whence the rumour should arise, and by whom, and in what age or time. But I cannot wonder much at it, since I heard lately of a French Gentleman, who affirms and shows in a Book of his, that the English never conquered France, nor ever gave them any one overthrow in battle. And when he was told by a neighbour, of this his notorious falshood; O, quoth he, my book two hundred years hence may pass for an authority as good as any that speak other­wise. And so I think there may possibly be such impious men, who out of their present malice may furnish out a lie to insect posteri­ty, in after times. But he must be an uncon­scionable wicked man who can do such a deed.

§ 12. Primitive Christians never used any Images, as the learned of the Church of Rome acknowledge. He had done well to let us know who are these learned of the Church of Rome. But he will not do us that favour. And we must still take his word for the judg­ment of the learned sort always. Nay, we must believe too, that he is ever on the lear­ned sorts side. It is indeed unlikely that fi­gures of those holy Persons, who first spread our Christianity in the World, and made it good both by their lives and death, should be frequent in primitive times. First, because those same figures, although they be honour­able memories both of their persons and pie­ties, unto whose zeal and goodness we are so much indebted; yet are they not so necessa­rily requisite unto any such purpose, but that the Church can be without them.Secondly, because primitive Christians had not amongst them any such plenty of Artists, as we have now a days to make them.Thirdly, because Pagans would have mis-interpreted the end and meaning of such figures, as this our Do­ctor does in the midst of day light. But that in those primitive times there was never any Christian so ill affected towards those pious representations as is Mr. Still. appears suffici­ently by the testimony of those ancient Do­ctors, who mention incidentally the customs [Page 67]of those primitive times; especially about the figure of the Cross, which they made conti­nually on their fore-head and breasts, as a preservative against evil, and kept it all over their houses, particularly in their Bed cham­bers and closets, either framed in wood or stone, or painted in colours. There be, not­withstanding the deluge of time which swal­lows up all things, some monuments yet left among us of the respect which those Christi­ans then bore both to the reliques and figures of their Saints. The very Chair of St. James the Apostle and first Bishop of Jerusalem, Eu­sebius in the seventh book of his history at­tests, that it was had in great esteem and ve­neration in all times, even to his own days. Accordingly S. Clement in his sixth book of apostolical constitutions gives this general testimony of that kind of piety in those pri­mitive Christians, [...] The very relicks, saith he, of Saints now living with God are not without their veneration. Some remainds there be al­so of an apostolical Council at Antioch, ga­thered out of S. Pamphilus and Origen, wherein caution is given both against the Jews malice and Gentile idols, by opposing the Images of Jesus and his holy Followers against them both: [...]. [Page 68]Ignatius also that worthy apostolical Prelate, the third from St. Peter the Apostle in the Chair at Antioch, thus signally speaks of the sign of the Cross in his Epistle to Philadel­phia, [...] &c. The Prince of this World, saith he, rejoyces when any one denies the Cross: for he knows the con­fession of the Cross to be his own ruin: this is the Standard against his power, which so often as he either sees or hears it spoken of, he shakes and trembles: thus speaks that glorious Prelate. The above-named Euse­bius testifies also in the same book of his history, that he saw even in his time the brazen Statue of our Lord Jesus, which was set up in Paneada in Palestin, unto his ho­nour by the woman cured by him of the bloody flix; so notable for miracles, that they were spoke of all the World over. This Statue of our Lord when Julian the apostate caused it to be thrown down, and his own to be set up in place thereof, a strange sodain fire from Heaven consumed the Statue of Julian, as Zozomenus in his fist book witnesses. And of the same bra­zen Statue of Christ our Lord write also [Page 69]Theophilact, Damascenus and several others. And here we may take notice by the way, that charity and devotion set up statues to our Lord, but apostasy & malice pulls them down. And whether Doctor Stillingfleet, who busies himself so much to cast down the Images of Jesus our Lord and his holy followers, would refuse to have his own set up for his great pains, either in Guildhall or Cheapside, he knows best himself. Truly if that were done, I do not believe that any of his neigh­bours or Countreymen would take him then for a Calf of Bethel. Of the Images of the Virgin Mary made by St. Luke, there is much fame amongst the antient writers, in parti­cular Theodorus, Simeon Metaphrastes and Nicephorus: The last of which does also attest in his second book, that the said pre­cious Relick was carried up and down the whole habitable World of Christians, who looked upon it with a most greedy and un­satisfied devotion. The same Nicephorus adds moreover, how Constantius the Son of Constantine translated the Relicks of St. Luke from Thebes, of St. Andrew from A­chaia, and of St. Timothy from Ephesus, unto Constantinople, with a vast concourse and joy of Christian People: and there with all honour and reverential respect in­shrined them in a Cathedral Church dedica­ted [Page 70]to the Apostles. Of the Image also of Christ our Lord imprinted by himself in a Handkercher applyed to his own face, and sent to King Abagarus who requested his Picture, write Evagrius, Metaphrastes and ot [...]ers. Of another Image of Jesus Christ made by Nicodemus, which being ignomini­ously crucified by the Jews wrought many wonderous miracles, we have a solemn testi­mony of Athanasius cited in the fourth action of the seventh great Synod. And all this testifies that Christians in primitive times were affected towards holy Pictures and Relicks as Catholicks are at this day: at least not such haters and vilifiers of them as is Dr. Stillingfleet. Nor can I conceive how any of the learned in the Church of Rome should be ignorant of these things. Nay, the very Church of England, which this Doctor pretends to defend, hath lately put the Images of the Apostles and Primi­tive Saints into their Common-prayer-book and Primers printed by authority. So that if the Doctor had opened his eyes he might have seen clear enough, that all this talk of his is now unseasonable, however it might have passed well enough in the beginning of the furio [...]s reformation: when they pulled down all sacred figures, and suffered none to be set up either sacred or common. [Page 71]When Husbands broke their Wives pictures, and Wives their Husbands, least they should give ill example to St. Peter and Paul, or in­courage any of the twelve Apostles to creep up again upon their Walls. When children in obedience and duty to their parents, spit­ting upon their effigies, said as they were taught to say, I renounce the Devil and all his works. When all the People flocked together in all places to tear down Churches and Chappels, and private Oratories in Houses, with a Now boys, we are free men, let us eat, drink and play, for to morrow we shall dye. No more duty of any our daily Prayers, no more fasting, no more vows, no more troublesome adoration upon our Knees, no more pining meditations, no more pennance, no more restitution, no more Priest, no more Altar, no more Cross or holy Rood, no more Peter and Paul to be seen, no more languishing memories of Saints, no more obedience to the erring Church, no more self-examination, no more conscience scruples, &c. Those times indeed were mad enough. But now People, as newly awaked from Wine, begin to be wiser and look more soberly about them. Even Denmark and Holland consider now in cold blood the many sad mischiefs they acted in hot: nor is our own Countrey wholly [Page 72]ignorant of the irreparable ruins of those mad times. However, our Doctor will not have his sport spoiled, nor yet his game stopt. Punchienella, though Bartholmew fair be ended, may be acted still either in Lincolns-Inn-fields or Chairing cross or any where else, both now and then and seven Years hence. It will be still new to some body. But Sir, you are to take notice, that nothing being so opposite to Jesus our Lord, or his holy law; or even to common reason, then Idolatry; the Doctor has craftily placed it, in the very front of his forlorn hope, therby surely to affright silly Catholicks from their old station, and to deter all others from Communion with them, as Persons grievously guilty of abominable, Pagan, even worse than Pagan Idolatry; ve­rily Sir Mandevils Gyant in the enchanted Val­ley of Python, cannot be more terrifying to a Night-Walker; nor Sir Hudibras his Squire, mounted on the out-side of his soft-footed steed, to the diffiding Fidler; then this Sir Do­ctors Monstrous Idol, to one who claims part with Christ in God. True it is, some of the prime Reformers, and others who since have thrived in the World therby, through a bitter­ness of spirit, against the zealous Prelates of the Catholick Church, who opposed their Ambition, or Lust, or both, did cast this scan­dalous Assertion of Idolatry upon Us, for our [Page 73]Veneration of Images; heedless, as the old Pagans they imitate were, what Accusations they charge against us, or by what sleevless arguments they prove them; so they may thereby make their Apostacy from our holy Church, somewhat colourable amongst Vul­gar Spirits; who still, like the men of Athens, are intent upon Novelties, ignorant of the Nature, motive and design of divine Wor­ship, a mistaking wherein only, can beget a just imputation of Idolatry on the Worship­per; surely his Doctorship may not be igno­rant hereof, and therefore, his charging us therewith upon those his soft grounds of a Termination of our Worship on Pictures, obscurely and fraudulently worded argues an unexcusable Malice, passion or dulness. Did he ever read, a Divine Worship ultimately terminated upon figures, to be allowed by any Canon of the Roman Church? Did any of our Catholick Doctors or Schoolmen, whom he seems to have swallowed by shoals, ever assert that termination? Did he learn that Doctrin from any professor of the Catholick faith? I am sure he did not. But we must give the Doctor leave to walk in his own Maze, and to think, and speak, and write too, what he pleases; Worship of its self, is of a great latitude, therefore to speak to the pur­pose, he should set down what he means by [Page 74]Divine Worship, as distinct from other infe­rior Worships, Religious and Civil, wherby it becomes proper to God; then, he should appoint the formal End to which that Wor­ship tends, according to the nature of the act, and the duty of him that gives it; but thus concealing, what alone would have cleared Us from his grand calumny, he endeavours to puzzle and delude his greedy Readers, into a belief of our Idolatry, and to a great Vene­ration of his Reverend and Worshipful Do­ctorhood; knowing them to be weathercock-like, easily whirl'd about with every grave blast of his, if it blows but in the teeth of Popery. He again discovers his own real or wilful Ignorance, of what Relative Worship is, and whether it tends; every termination of a Latreutical affection or action, wherwith we honour God, as the Authour of life and death, signified by the sacrifices of the Old Law, makes not that Worship relative, other­wise the Worship of God immediatly in spi­rit, would be Relative too Relative Wor­ship imports a reference of one object to a­nother in our Worship, which therfore looks not upon the former, either as the motive, nor yet as the ultimate term of its tendency, but only as it does occasionally awaken our spirits confined to sensible obj [...]cts in their first mo­tion, and oft distracted about them, to think [Page 75]on God, by reason of some connatural, or ar­bitrary connexion they have, according to the common esteem of mankind, with Him; and consequently terminates not our Worship, without an indispensable reference to God, the latter object, whence our Divine worship takes its first Rise, and whereupon it finally rests; And thus, not only Divine Relative Worship, but other Religious, and civil too, are, and ought to be allowed in any Church or State, which hath any thing Worshipful in it. Thus the good Saint Paul, will have us bow at the Holy Name of JESƲS, and why not at the Name of GOD or JEHO­VAH; and that, whether it be imagined, spoken, printed or painted? sith God is e­qually ineffable by any of them; and what One represents to the Mind, the other to the Ear, the latter does to the Eye. Their Ru­bricks too requires a Worship of their figu­rative Bread, and their graver Clergy will stil bow to, and be uncovered before, their Com­munion Board; and who not, when the Par­son prays? I have seen Images of the Saints, even of Christ at the right hand of his Fa­ther, bound up in their Common-prayer-Books, and Used by Protestants, without fear of Idolatry; and K. James a wise and learned Prince, in the Year 1617. ordred pi­ctures of our Saints to be set up in his Chap­pel [Page 76]of Haly-Rudd House in Edinburgh, as Spoteswood tells us. Thus good Subjects, for the love they bear their gracious Prince, will ever be uncovered before his Throne; and had the High and Mighties paid their Rela­tive Homage to his Majesties Ships, by stick­ing their Flag, and lowring their Top-Sails, they had not deserved to be cancel'd the Roll of Free-States; nor, though they hate Pa­pists and their Images, did they ever plead that Recognizance, to be Idolatry; had they, I believe, it had made them yet more Ridicu­lous than they are, even in our own courts. All this Dr. Still, might have considered, But his tongue is hot, and he must speak al­though it be against himself, and the very Church he justifies, as much as it is against the Church he arraigns. Indeed his whole Discourse is so frivolously subtile and subtile­ly frivolous, that no Church needs much to heed what he says. This I know and am cer­tain of, that although he should be confuted at large, and confounded for ever by any Catholick Writer, yet shall we be never the nearer to any quietness and peace. For the next Man that wants a rich Benefice, will if he have but this Man's Confidence, Collect another Book of Popish Idolatry out of this Book of Doctor Stillingfleet, as he ga [...]er'd this of his out of Henry More, Je­remy [Page 77]Tailor, and sundry others his Predeces­sors; not heeding at all any answer that has been given by former Catholicks to the talk, any more than Dr. Stillingfleet does here. They will ever write [...] one out of another, and never regard what has been said to any one of them in defence of that which they oppose, abecedarian Scriblers. Nor can there be any end, so [...]ong as there is a bishop­rick or fat benefice to hope for: and Catho­lick hands so tied up, that they can print no­thing unto their own justification without insuperable difficulties and hazard.

I have read in London the Defiances of one Fencer to another, both of them in Print. Who accordingly do meet in Bear-Garden without any controul there to baste one ano­ther lustily for the Peoples pleasure And it would be a pastime I think equally delightful, not less profitable, and somewhat more civil, to see two Men reason down one another. We poor men should esteem it a great favour to us, if our adversary might read his charge and we our defence, even in Bear-garden. Since neither in Churches. Halls, Universi­ties, or Schools are we permitted to speak; or Print any thing to speak for us. And Doctor Stillingfleet who hath made his De­fiance already, may, which he hath not yet [Page 78]done, appoint the Day. Not men and fen­cers onely, but bulls and bears, cocks and dogs, all are permitted to defend themselves when they are invaded, but onely we poor old Christians, whose Religion hath blessed our Land Fifteen-hundred Years. As if it were agreed on all hands that we should ne­ver be rightly understood.

Mr. H. Thorndike a grave Divine and learned Doctor in our present English Church both affirms and strongly proves in his Book called Just Weights and Measures, that Roman Catholicks are Idolaters no way: Adding also, That they who separate from the Church of Rome as Idolaters, are thereby Schismaticks before God. Thus speaks that learned Man, the Phaenix of di­vines, who only dares to be honest. And the meer authority of this eminent Prote­stant may suffice to evacuate all the sophistry of this whole Chapter of this Doctors book: as also of that which follows in the next place about our holy Host and Saints.

Now Sir, I must bid you farewel. And that you may not think me either idle or neg­lective of my duty and respects to you, pray give me leave to tell you, that what you see here printed but now, was written and ready [Page 79]for the Press in August last. And before October ended I had finished all my work up­on Dr. Stilling fleet's Book, such-like familiar Commentaries, as these upon his first chapter be. But in all these Six Moneths I could get no more Printed for You either at home or abroad, than this poor Fifth Part of the whole, after my many travels, vexations, expences and dangers. Such obstructions are made about the Presses, and so many vio­lences offered here continually, far above any used since we were born, that I can see no possibility for any whole Book of ours to shoot that gulf, be our cause never so inno­cent and good. Nay, they will here Print our Catholick Books themselves, as if they were their own, as Thomas a Kempis, Gra­nada, Parsons Resolutions, Drexelsius, and the like. But if we be taken Printing them, the PRESS is broken, PRINTER punished, and we, if we be found, in danger of our Lives. And therefore I beseech you, Sir, be content with thus much, or rather this little. The rest you shall have in written hand. In the mean time let Dr. Still. triumph and crow as he pleases. He is made and has made him­self sure enough. Although he hath defied the whole Catholick world, and all that know of it, having something to say, are both wil­ling [Page 80]and ready, yet will no Man come forth into the open field against him, because they cannot. He thinks himself wise no doubt; wiser than millions of men: and may do so still. For my part, Sir, I find him as wise as one man; and no more. Farewel.

Host-Idolatry and Saint-Idolatry.

The adoration of the Host is a grand piece of Idolatry in the Roman Church: Nor will it suffice them here to plead, that they believe Christ [Page 8]to be in the Eucharist on the same divine motives they believe Christ to be God, and that they may therefore worship him there: for if there were a revelation of his presence there, yet is there not the same command of worshipping him there, as is of his person. Let all the Angels of God adore, and again, all must honour the Son as they do the Father, but no news of worshipping the Host. But secondly, there are not the same grounds to believe Christs presence here, as that Christ is God; and if that presence be not, then is it idolatry without excuse. It is here granted, that the person of Christ visibly appearing to us in any place, may be worshipped: but there is not the same reason of believing and seeing. And if any reply, blessed is he who hath not seen and believed, he may know, that that word is here impertinent, relating not to this matter, but to the Resurrection. It is also granted, that in the celebration of the Eucharist, we are to give a spiritual worship to Christ, as well as to the Father; performing that Religious Act with a due veneration of his majesty and power; with a thankfulness for his goodness, a trust in his pro­mises, and a subjection to his supreme authority. We grant also, that external reverence may be shewn in the time of receiving the Eucharist, in signification of our humble and thankful ac­knowledgement of his benefits. But we deny, first, that Divine worship is to be given to the [Page 9]Elements on the account of a real presence, or that the same adoration is to be given out of Com­munion as in it: And this is the only Contro­versie. For how can one be sure, that the ob­ject is such in it self as deserves worship, sine it seems Bread still? The Scripture that sayes This is my Body, may be otherwayes interpreted; and then the words will not make it out: and the sence of them given by Fathers is hard to seek, and harder to find, the world being full of disputes about it. The sence of the present Church can stand in no stead; For is it enough that the Pope say so? No. If he define it? No. If a General Council concurre with him? No; unless they proceed in a right way: and who knows that? Besides, how can we tell that he who consecrates is a Priest, or hath any intention to do it? And as we cannot be sure of the ob­ject of worship there; so neither that we have yet sufficient reason to worship. For Divines are not resolved, whether the humanity of Christ, taken abstractively from the Divinity, be capa­ble of Divine worship: so that if the humanity be present with the Divinity, it is uncertain whether I may worship it; and as distinct from the Divinity, it is certain I cannot: And though out of the Sacrament we may worship Christ safely enough, yet not so in the Sacrament, where his corporal presence is the cause of our adora­tion, and perhaps without the Divinity at all [Page 10]which is unto no purpose of Christs institution. But suppose Christs Divinity be present, yet this gives not ground enough of worshipping the thing wherein he is present: For how and why should it be? Here are their Doctors puzled mightily, to shew how their worship is terminated in this case, and how God is united to the Sacrament more then to the Sun and Moon; and whether there be any hypostatical union in one place more then another: What can they urge for any suffi­cient authority of this their worship? The autho­rity of the Roman Church? That is nothing worth. Catholick Tradition? Let them shew it. Scripture? That cannot do it alone, without Council and Fathers, as some of their own learned men acknowledge. For the words, This is my Body, may stand with a Metaphorical, as well as a real sence. But if they chance to be mistaken in the belief of this Doctrine, then can they not certainly be excused from Idolatry, as their own men, Bishop Fisher, and others do acknowledge; no more then the Manichees and some others, who said Christ was the Sun, and therefore worshipped it. Veneration and Invocation of Saints is another piece of Ido­latry, &c.

§. 1. The Author having prosecuted in one long Chapter the first piece of our Catholick Idolatry, he bestows upon us another here as long as it, about two other our Idolatrous par­cels, [Page 11]the Eucharistian Host, and Saints. For Idolatry is such a rumbling sound, that he thinks not fit to confine it to one Chapter, as the other three subjects, Indevotion, Fanati­cisme and Division; but we must hear of it on both sides our head, unto our double confusi­on. But it is here to be noted, that he chan­ges now the mode of his Sophistry in to a new kind, I suppose for his Readers refreshment; Before he cast beams, now he throws motes into our Eyes. Our Images he confounds by the Loggs of Heathen Idols; but our Eucha­rist by the dust of Philosophical curiosities; which he so spreads abroad that he loseth his own eye-sight.

§. 2. And as he changes his Logick, so does he alter his phrase also. And he has a reason for that too. In his first Chapter he charged us with worshiping God by Images, and in Images: now he does not say in the like phrase, that we worship God in the Host, or by the Host. And of this his sudden change of phrase, I believe every Reader does not take notice, or perceive a reason, though the Author have one, and that a good one for it, and I think a couple. For first a waggish wit must so provide, that he impose upon his ad­versary, not that which is true, or sounds true, but what is, or sounds false. To worship God in Images sounds false: but to worship God [Page 12] in the Host sounds true: and therefore he im­poses that upon Catholicks, but not this. Se­condly, This his diversity of phrase brings him in all the materials of that his first and this pre­sent Chapter, which he could never by any force have haled into his paper, unless he had carefully so placed his words, as here he does. The charge of worshipping God in Images, gave him occasion to talk how such a worship cannot terminate upon God; how that the invisi­ble Deity cannot be represented; how the Hea­thens worshipped God in their Idols; how that Aaron and Jeroboams sin was no other, &c. which materials till up his first Chapter; and had all failed him, had he spoke singly of the respect which Catholicks bear to their holy Apostles and Martyrs, represented either to their ear or eye: which is all they do. On the other side, his charge of worshipping the Host, and not God in the Host, opens him a passage for all the talk of this his second Chapter: how that we have no command in Scripture of worship­ping the Host, though we be commanded to wor­ship Christ: how that we have no ground to wor­ship the Elements; how that we cannot be sure that the Host is an object of worship: how School­men are puzled to declare the union with the Ele­ments and Symbols; &c. which are his mate­rials against this second parcel of our Idolatry: and had all failed him too; had he fairly im­posed [Page 13]upon Catholicks a worship of God in the Host, as before he did a worship of God in Images. For these two great reasons he wa­rily imposes upon them in choice phrases of his own; that people may hear and read in both places, not what Catholicks do, but what they do not: and yet so confidently charged upon them, as if it were their right. And thus he makes sport for himself but marrs none; very careful, not to obstruct, but set open a way for his prattle; which is a pretty piece of wit, if it had a little honesty to make it rellish.

§. 3. I do not perceive the Author to be so jolly in this his second Chapter, as in his first. Nor does he argue so positively against this great work of Christian Religion, no less solid and certain then Christianity it self; as he did before against the ceremonious use of an Image; which Catholicks heed no other­ways then ornaments of their Religion, fruit­ful in so many sweet fragrant Roses and Lil­lies of their Martyrs and other blessed Saints. And therefore Dr. St. winks himself, that his reader may think here is no truth to be seen. Full of doubts he is, that Catholicks may be thought doubtful. What can they show, what can they urge for this their worship? The authori­ty of the Roman Church? that is little worth. A speedy, quick and dextrous dispatch. Catholick [Page 14]tradition? where is it? why do they not shew it? who ever heard of it? Poor man, he can­not see wood for trees, nor London perhaps in the midst of Cheapside, except some body point at it. The numerous volumns that have set forth this Catholick tradition, as eminent, as clear, as universal as Christianity it self, he now remembers them not; no not any one of them can he now call to mind, to lead him out of the maze he is in. Will they pretend Scri­pture? all that is disputed, that is otherwise in­térpreted. If he continue in this his perplexi­ty, he will turn Atheist by and by. For there is no one Article of Christian faith, or Scri­pture that speaks it, but has been disputed, denied and otherwise interpreted. What can Scripture, saith he, do without Councils? and what are Councils but fallible mistaking bu­sinesses? A sad plight the man is in: but it is on his own accord and free will; that his rea­der may imagine Catholicks who are all the world over in a peaceable possession of this their faith, to be in the same pickle too. He simply conceits Catholicks to have their faith to pick up some where; and he cannot possi­bly tell where they should glean it, with any assurance or quiet: at least he would have it thought they cannot. Bellarmin, saith he, declares by convincing arguments, that Christ is God and to be worshipped: but what Church, [Page 15]what tradition, what Counsel, what Fathers tell us any such thing of the Host? Alas poor dark man! we must not then ever think to pick our Religion out of Bellarmin it seems. And so must needs be in the same case with those Christians who lived before Bellarmins time; that is to say, either to have our Reli­gion already without Bellarmins help, or to seek it. But where had Bellarmin yet a Child, where had he his Faith before he wrote any thing? surely not out of Bellarmins books. It is a wonder the Dr. thinks not of this, to help him a little to his sound sences. But he is in his extasie, and will be in it still; And he tells us in this his rapture, that Bellarmin proved by convincing arguments, that Christ is God, and to be wor­shiped; but who ever said the like of the Host? We know, and remember well enough that the same Bellarmin, who proves so labori­ously that Christ is God, declares also no less effectually in a whole treatise of the same vo­lume of controversies, both our Lords Di­vine presence in the Eucharist, and our su­pream veneration, love and honour there due unto him. This we know; and this the Dr. did himself know also, before he drave himself into these his fained Apoplexies; wherein he has indeed some imperfect glimpses of it, even now, that we may give [Page 16]him his due; but the whole treatise in Bellar­min seems to him now at this his distance, but as a small black mote, such as an Eagle may happly appear to us flying in the Clouds five miles high above our heads; an atome, a little on this side nothing; and therefore not worth speaking of. And by this means he goes on glibly in his extacies, and excla­mations unto the end. What ground have Papists, what ground have they for this their worship? Scripture? Tradition? Councels? Fathers? Church? Reason? where are they? what are they worth? who ever saw them? why are they not shown? Thus the good man raves. Although all people be­fore this last and worst age, who ever in any place bore the name of Christians, both La­tin and Greek Bishopricks, who filled up Europe; and all the rest every where; Ar­menians, Habassins, Maronites, Jacobites, Muscovites, Melthites, had all of them this one solemn adoration of God in the Eucha­rist, as the great work of Christianity; al­though antient Fathers, especially the Greci­ans have left more record of it, than any o­ther parcel of Christian belief and practice; although many great, laborious, and learned volumnes have been set forth in this last age, both in France, Germany, and England, whereby that Catholick piety is so demon­strated, [Page 17]that none who considers things in earnest, can refrain to acknowledg it; yet does Dr. St. in his deep extasy forget all this, and cryes out, who ever said it? who ever proved it? who ever profest it? And he hopes his Reader, who is seldom wiser than his book, will answer to his question, and say, No body, No body Sir, you are in the right; and Papists are meer Fools and Block­heads.

§ 4. The drift of this Chapter is to shew that we can neither believe our Lords pre­sence in the Eucharist, nor do any homage to God in him, there figured according to his own solemn Institution, as Crucified among us unto our reconciliation and peace. And truly his discourse here tending thereunto, is all of it so extraordinary slight, that one can­not tell whether himself be serious, or that he do indeed take us all for Mushromes, so soft and foolish, that we will be carryed away at his pleasure by any thing, or indeed by no­thing. Suppose, saith he, we have the same Divine Revelation of Christs presence in the Eucharist as of the Divinity of his Person; yet can we not possibly worship here as there; be­cause there it is said, let all the Angels adore him, but we have no command to worship the Host. As though one and the same com­mand, Let all the Angels adore him, would [Page 18]not serve indifferently both in Heaven and Earth, both for Angels and men, where ever he is present. The Divine revelation of his presence needs no further command to in­gage our worship; nor is that said com­mand, Let all men honour the Son, as the Fa­ther, and let all the Angels worship him, de­termined to any one place, or to any one mode of his presence. St. Paul worshipped our Lord in the fields of Damascus, where he met him after his Resurrection. And yet he had never any command to worship him in those plains, either of Damascus or Libanus. The particular Revelation of his presence there, was a Monitor sufficient of his duty. The person of Christ, saith he, visibly appear­ing to us in any place, may be worshipped; but there is not the same reason of believing and see­ing. All other good Christians before Dr. Stillingfleet, judged revelation and believing to be a surer testimony in matters of Faith and Religion, than our seeing is. Let us hear one of our Christian Doctors speak, whose testimony will serve for all the rest. We have not declared unto you, saith St. Peter, the vertue and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, in any fabulous mythology; but as we have seen with our eyes his own Majesty. For he re­ceived from God the Father, honour and glory, by a v [...]yce conveighed unto him from that glori­ous [Page 19]magnificence, saying thus, This is my well beloved Son, in whom is my sole content. And this voyce we our selves heard derived from Heaven, when we were together with him in the holy Mount. And yet have we more firm Prophetical words, unto which while you attend as to a light shining in an obscure place, ye shall do well, until the d [...]y dawn, and the morning Star arise in your hearts. Thus speaks St. Pe­ter, our Lords great Apostle, who, though he beheld our Lords Glory in the Mount, and heard there a voyce from Heaven unto his honour, yet he prefers before both these private testimonies, the one general Autho­rity of Divine Revelation, as firmer and more authentical than either, or yet both of them put together, as the sole standing un­extinguishable general light, set up in the ob­scurity of this our dark life, for the assured guidance of all men. As if he had plainly told us, that our private sences may be de­ceived, especially in matters of Apparitions and transitory Visions, imparted unto some one or other apart. But prophetick speech and revelation, this is general and the same to all; this is unerring and firm; this stands for ever. Here have we plainly good St. Pe­ters mind in this affair. But our Doctor re­solves otherwise. Divine revelation, although we have it, will not serve his turn. But if he [Page 20]could see Christ appearing to him any where, he could worship him then, and would per­haps do it. There is not the same reason with him, in believing and seeing, and that is indeed true, St. Peter sayes so like wise. But St. Peter says, that believing is firmer than seeing: Dr. Stillingfleet avers, that seeing is firmer than believing. He would be afraid to act that upon meer Divine Revelation, which he will not fear to do upon sight. Could he see Christ appear to him, he would worship him; but he cannot by any means worship him, where Gospel testifies his presence, and he sees it not. Nay, he avers a little after­ward, that he can kneel down and worship Christ any where, excepting only in the Eu­charist, where his corporeal presence is the cause of adoration. He can do it where no cause obliges him to it, no peculiar cause ex­acting it. But in no wise will he be brought to it, where his presence known by Revelati­on stands to claim it. Gospel & the custome of Christianity quite spoiles his Devotion, and keeps him from doing that homage to our Lord in the Church, which he could free­ly give him in a Market-place. And if any should reply, quoth he, that blessed is he who hath not seen, and yet believed; he may know that this saying of his is impertinent to this present pur­pose, because it relates only unto the Resurrecti­on. [Page 21]This he speaks, not considering that the said assertion of our Lord, Blessed is he who sees not, and yet believes, is indefinite and con­sequently general, equally appliable unto all things our Lord ever acted or taught us ei­ther to believe or hope for. And as our Lord used it to his Disciples in the business of the Resurrection, so must it hold good equally in that of his Incarnation, Ascention, or any thing else he either spoke or acted for us. And though it be applyed unto one thing, it doth not therefore follow that it relates to nothing else, nor is pertinent to any other mystery but that. We may well and proper­ly say, according to Dr. Stillingfleet, Blessed is he who hath not seen, and yet believed the Resurrection. But we must not say, Blessed is he that hath not seen, and yet believed the Incarnation, Ascention, Christs miracles in curing the Deaf, Dumb, Lame, and Blind; in raising the dead, and preaching eternal happiness to his followers. Unto all this, that saying is impertinent with him, it relates to nothing at all but the Resurrection. And have we not here a solemn and peculiar wit, and one that may well challenge the whole world to come forth into the open field a­gainst him? But we must note here, that the Doctor does not grant any such Divine Re­velation, which may either clearly speak our [Page 22]Lords presence in the Eucharist, or justifie our worship in it, only he permits it to pass for disputation sake; and avers, that if there were any such Revelation, yet would it not suffice to free us from Idolatry: and this he does to give us an experiment of his wit. And that experiment we have had, and must be content with it till more come.

§ 5. It is here granted, saith he, that in the celebration of the Eucha [...]ist, we are to give a spi­ritual worship unto Christ, as well as to the Fa­ther; performing that religious Act with a due veneration of his Majesty and power, with a thankfulness for his goodness, a trust in his pro­mises, and a subjection to his supreme Autho­rity. We grant also, that external reverence may be shown in the time of receiving the Eu­charist, in signification of our humble and thank­ful acknowledgment for his benefits. Here be a great many good things granted us here, and I take them thankfully. In his first Chap­ter he was so Zealously hot, that he would grant us nothing, no not so much as to hang up such pictures in our Chambers as he has himself looking upon him in his own; but can we get this grant of his ratified and sealed by all the Protestants in England? If it were, the Church of England would look the better for it. Nay, will not be himself, what he has granted us to day, revoke again to morrow? [Page 23]The Doctor should do well to read over now and then his own grants and denyals. For he is not so fixed in them, that one dare take his word, as I could easily specifie both in this and other particulars; But I refrain from that work now, as needless Sir to you; at least we have as much here granted, as ado­ration requires. But I cannot perceive he will have any of it relate to ought subsisting in the Eucharist; but only to the Author of it, who is in Heaven, upon a consideration of his benefits, which is some part of Catholick truth, though not intire.

§ 6. But we deny, saith he, that Divine worship is to be given to the Elements, upon the account of a [...]l presence. This denial also, as the words [...]and, is good enough. For none that I know worship Elements. Second­ly, We deny that the same adoration is to be given out of Communion as in it; and this is the only Controversy. I had thought he said before, that he could worship Christ any where but only in the Eucharist, where the corporeal presence determins a worship. Now he seems to say, that he can worship him in Communion, and not out of it, and this the only controversie. But we must take his grants and danyals sing­ly, and not stand to tye them one to another, lest we anger our Benefactor. What he gives, we must take thankfully, and not look [Page 24]a gift horse in the month; and what he de­nyes in one page, he may grant us in another, if we can but have patience.

§ 7. They cannot be sure, saith he, that the object deserves worship, appearing still bread; Scripture, that saies, This is my Body, may be otherwise interpreted, the sence of the Fathers is hard to find; the present Church stands in no stead. For is it enough, the Pope says it? No. If he define it? No. If a General Coun­cil concur? No. Ʋnless they proceed in a right way; and who can be sure of that? Now he throws about his Philosophy-dust, to per­swade us we can be sure of nothing: It still appears bread. So it does. Even Christ our Lord appeared a meer man, but the eye of Faith apprehended him the Son of the Living God; a Child newly baptized appears, but the same it was, and yet is believed to be now regenerate and born again; all that is in man, appears mortal, but is not believed so. Mul [...]a videntur quae non sunt. This divine Majesty hath words of life and power, and call, the things which are not, as those that are; and by his naming them, makes them to be what he says they are. And in those words of life do Ca [...]holicks believe and trust; when taking bread he solemnly and seriously said, at his last hour, (instituting then an Oblation and Sacrament, most soveraigne and venera­ble [Page 25]to remain in his Church for ever) This is my Body: and all Christians hitherto have lived and dyed in this Faith. Scripture, that says, This is my Body, may be otherwise inter­preted. Considering they were the last words of our Loving Lord departing from us, and his final Legacy bequeathed his believers, they cannot be rightly interpreted, but as they sound. And any other interpretation, that has been yet given by any against our Ca­tholick Faith, amounts only unto thus much, This is not my Body, which is a strange mad interpretation. The sence of the Fathers is hard to seek, saith he. But who seeks after it? writers of controversies may take pains to cull it out, and demonstrate it to unbelie­vers for their Conversion. But Catholicks have their Faith already, wherein they are e­ducated and bred up from their youth, united to their immediate Pastors, as these are to the rest of the Catholick Body. The present Church stands in no stead, why so? that is all in all, as the body is to the finger, hands, and other members, in which they all move: Is it enough, the Pope says it? No, &c. This man here imagins, first, that Catholicks have their Faith to seek, which is his feeble imagi­nation. Secondly, That Scripture cannot help them for his reason above specified, as feeble as it: And Thirdly, That the present [Page 26]Church can availe as little, because the Popes word is not assured, as though the Popes word were the present Church. And is not all this a strange raving talk? All men know, I think Sir all men, excepting only this spiritual H [...]ctor, that as Catholicks have their Faith and Religion by Tradition, from one Generation to another; so in it they have ever lived unanimously under their immedi­ate Priests and Pastors united altogether in the great Catholick Body, the present Church, and never look further. Nor is there any need at all, either of the Popes word or Coun­cels, unless some great sedition or scanda­lous Apostacy arise in some one or other par­ticular Diocess. For then the Bishop of the place calls for help of his fellow Bishops, and the supreme Pastor in particular, and concili­ar Assemblies, as Governours extraordinary in a tempest which may indanger the ship. And Catholicks thus keeping close together in one body, united with their Pastors whom the Holy Ghost hath set over them for their safety and peace, cannot but remain steady and immoveable, by the assistance and blessing of that Lord who hath promised ever to be with them, even to the worlds consummation. Nor do they ever seek for their Faith any where; for they have it sufficiently already; and all their [...]are is to conform their lives to [Page 27]it as they ought, that they may get Gods good Spirit, and his holy operations in themselves, which is the end of their Religion, and all they do in it. And what a pretty peice of ig­norance is it in Dr. Stillingfleet, to perswade us that they cannot be certain of their Faith, who are certain, and know themselves cer­tain, and declare so much before the face of the Sun, and all the eyes of Heaven, by their stability, fixedness, and immovability in Faith, even this particular Faith of our Lords pre­sence in the Eucharist, so many ages toge­ther, and such vast distant places, not only a­gainst the dictamen of their own sences, but even against all the violence and subtilty of mankind, conspiring to shake all the very nerves and bones of their holy Faith out of joynt. Dr. Stilling fleet has more need to consider in Gods fear, how Catholicks do ar­rive to this strange assurance, rather than emptily to tell us they cannot be sure.

§ 8. Their own School-men puzle, and are unresolved how the whole Humanity can be pre­sent, how united, how terminate a worship, &c. Here is another handful of his dust, his curiosity-dust, to lessen our assurance. If our School-men puzle, and are puzled, we must needs be thought unresolved. But what do these School-men puzle, what are they unresolved in? Not in their Faith, which [Page 28]says that our Lord is present with us in his holy Eucharist; but in the Philosophical Quomodo, or how this thing, or that thing is. And as they cannot disagree in Faith, which they received all alike one and the ve­ry same; so can they not agree in Philoso­phy, which they invent and contrive very di­vers, every one to himself, according to his genious and capacity. And what is all this un­to us believers, or to one and another among themselves as they are all Christians? even just nothing. I say just nothing can the assu­rance of our Faith be prejudiced, by any su­pervening curiosities of men disputing after­ward in their maturer age about the Quomo­do of it, or the possibility of the contrary to it, or the ways of Gods working in it or con­clusions deduced from it, or a hundred such like things introduced by learned and subtile School-men, for the sharpning of wits, and advancement of learning. The Doctor dreams I think, that what ever Catholick wri­ters speak, is Catholick Faith: and conse­quently, that they puzle, and are unresolved in Faith, where ever they are unresolved: which although it be a pittiful piece of Child­ishness to think, yet is not he the only man that rides upon this Hobby-Horse. Taylor, Poole, Moore, Hammond, Pierse, Whitby, Owen, all of them mount upon the same [Page 29]Steed, and one cannot tell which of them is the wisest. Faith is before and antecedent: Faith is the Revelation of Jesus Christ con­veyed unto us by his Church, uninterrupted­ly succeeding from generation to generation: Faith is plain and single, and equally common to all. But School-learning is ambiguous, doubtful, various, intricate, invented by men, divers and contradictory, and a meer stran­ger in our Christianity, which is a thousand years older than it, and may in all probabili­ty subsist yet a thousand years more, after that School-learning is quite vanisht out of the world. Are all our Anti-catholick adver­saries so blind, that they cannot see this? It is strange to me, that they should not consi­der, that all the said Popish Doctors and their Disciples remain peaceably together, in the same profession of Faith all the world over, notwithstanding these their clashing Philoso­phies. For how could they otherwise call them all Popish Doctors. Faith is one thing, and the declarations of it may be many. One single truth revealed to us by our Lord and his Church from him, may give Philosophi­cal wits occasion to raise up a hundred questi­ons about the modes, circumstances, and infe­rences of it. And these various conclusions of men, both those which declare Faith, and those which superadd other new things over [Page 30]and beyond it, are Philosophies commonly called theology, exposed in the Schools unto the tryal of wits; where they are so sure to suffer opposition, that not one conclusion in a hundred escapes it. So that their puzling about curiosities of their own, doth nothing at all concern either faith or faithful men. Those that love it, let them take their pastime in that puzling work: but they do not think to be saved by it. And they who never know or hear of it, may haply be the better Christians for that, but never the worse? I believe Jesus our Lord to be present in the Eucharist, and worship him there, and offer up unto Almighty God all my necessities with Jesus my Lord, there figured by his own in­stitution, as crucified before us; all this my Faith teaches me; and all this I do, and can do well enough, though I never either con­ceive or consider, how his humanity is united, how it is present, how it terminates our wor­ship; all which concerns me nothing. Let the curious speculate such like things, and be never the wiser, but only in a few uncouth words. I am satisfied, if I do my duty in simplicity and innocency; that duty that is before all these speculations one and the same, and remains the same after them. By a vulgar and familiar example, I may haply be better understood. The Doctor both [Page 31]sees, and walks, and sleeps; and so do I my self. And yet our School-men are puzled, and mightily unresolved about all these things, how they are done, and cannot possi­bly agree. They cannot conclude, whether our seeing be wrought by introreception or extramission of raies; some say the one way, some the other, some both. They can­not tell assuredly, whether vision be effected in the crystaline humour or nerves; they a­gree not what thing this sight or vision is, nor how it is conveighed or lodged within for future dreams, &c. They are unre­solved how we think or how the world with­out us gets so strangely within us, or how it lyes there couched, or how it circles so won­derfully in our spirits, or what physical thing our thinking is, whether appearances or only motion, and what, and where those appea­rances, and what the moover: They cannot with any uniformity declare how we walk, how the various strings lye for this motion; where they are knit together; what com­mand, impulse, or impression sets the mem­bers to move; and how that impulse is con­ve [...]ghed, and whence it comes; and where sits the director paramount, whose beck is so uncontroulable, that each member does sud­dainly his duty according to command. They could never yet agree in the ways of sleep, [Page 32]whence it comes, and where it resides; what is that thing which so strangely silences all the sences? where those spirits retire, who keep daily Centinal in those Cinque-Ports; and which are their Bed-Chambers? what do they when they thus retire; and how they rest; how they issue next morning each to his own place, without any director, &c. Here School-men puzle, here they are unre­solved, here they dispute and differ. But what then? Cannot I therefore see, nor walk, nor think, nor sleep? No, it seems, till the School-men resolve: say you so? Let them never resolve them, and I will try whe­ther I can sleep at my time, and walk, and think, and look about me. Even just so it is here, for the dictates and axioms of Faith were before School-mens doubts and resolu­tions, and will be ever the same, what ever they resolve or doubt of.

§ 9. The sence of those words, This is my Body, is doubted of, and interpreted now ano­ther way, and several disputes arise. What have Papists to rely upon, sith the Fathers are themselves as fallible as other men; neither are they assured that they have any Priests amongst them for to consecrate, &c. If we can now but save our eyes, we are well. For we have but two or three motes more to trouble us. All is doubtful he says; doubtful, whether [Page 33]we have any Priests or no; doubtful, whe­ther we have any certain sence to our words; doubtful whether we have any men to make sence of them: doubtful whether we have a­ny trust and assurance upon those men. And what shall we do now? Surely he would have us either do, or not do somthing or o­ther, but I know not what. We cannot heed holy Fathers, for they are fallible and doubt­ed men. We cannot believe Protestants, for they are doubtful men, and divided, and unsettled in their opinions of this point. We cannot regard Dr. Still. for he is a doubt-making man, and blunders and settles upon nothing, and not certain himself, according to what he speaks here of Priests out of Chil­lingworth, whether he be a Minister or no, or a Clark, or a Christian, or so much as a Stillingfleet. I think we had best keep our selves where we are, who doubt nothing at all, and leave the Doctor to play at his Blind­man-buff all alone. If Infidelities and Cavils of men, disputes and difficulties, surmised doubts, and vain sophismes must annul our Faith; then can we not possibly in this world either keep or receive any Faith in God at all. And Christ our Lord must needs then have appeared among us on this our Earth in vain. For both himself, and all the whole truth he delivered us, was in his [Page 34]time, and all following ages contradicted round about, and opposed, and rendred thereby doubtful by Jews and Pagans; and no less by those people, who Apostatized from that Catholick Society, than any other their outward and forrein Adversaries. And I suppose the Giantly witts of former ages a­mongst the Rabbies and Philosophers, did with somwhat a more stronger shot from s [...]nce and reason, invade our Christian assu­rance, than any is here discharged out of his Elder potgun by our doubt-making Doctor. This is uncertain, Church is slighted, Fathers are otherwise interpreted, there are now who deny it, &c. What news in all this can trou­ble me, who could not but foresee, if I did but use my common reason, that all these things would happen. It is not to be ex­pected, that all men should believe at once. And he that believes not, will both conceive doubt [...], and urge them▪ both hare a believer and persecute him too, perhaps to death, without any doubt at all. These doubts and oppositions, and [...] raised against Faith, can have no other effect in a true believer, but to strengthen, and spread the roots of it more wide and deeper in his heart. There was a notable Prophe [...]ie of our Lord uttered by St. Si [...]on, a worthy great Personage at his birth, [...] [Page 37]This Jesus is set both for the fall and rising of ma­ny in Israel, and for a sign to be contradict­ed. Both Christ and his whole Faith deli­vered by him is [...] a Signe and eminent Trophy, set up in the eyes of the whole world, by all grumbling unbelievers to be enviously glanced at, malitiously tra­duced, and all possible ways opposed and persecuted. O but what if this Faith of Pa­pists should prove to be false, saith he, then can­not Papists be excused from Idolatry, as their own learned men acknowledg. This is even wondrous true, whether our own learned men, who are still brought in by him for the imbellishment of his own Clarkship, do ac­knowledg it, or no. And so, if Jesus Christ himself should prove not to be what he is be­lieved by Catholicks, then would the Doctor also, who is ready to worship him upon the account of that our Faith, declared and main­tained by the Catholick Councel of Nice, be an Idolator too. A false consequence may easily flow from a false and impossible sup­position. But wise men, are more apt to con­sider their own danger, than other mens. And the Doctor, if he were indeed in earnest, and heeded rather his own Salvation then vain glory, should rather ask his own soul, I should think, what if this Catholick Faith [Page 36]should be true? Catholicks have for it clear Gospel, universal tradition, all Christian Churches in the world believing it; and that in all ages the Doctor has nothing but his own sence, and John Calvin who fell from that Church, to plead for him. Were not the Manichees censured as Idolaters, for worship­ing the Sun in the Firmament, believing it to be God. They well deserved to be censured. For that was a fancy of their own, grounded upon that word, he hath set his Tabernacle in the Sun, drawn unto a fond sence by their private interpretation, contrary to the Au­thority of the Church and Pastors, whom they would not obey, when they checked and reproved them for it. Even as now our pre­sent Protestants do put their various fanciful interpretations of signe and figure upon the words of Gospel, This is my Body, which the whole Church of God, out of which they fell, ever loved and reverenced, as the most clear evidence of a Heavenly Legacy, the truest and reallest that was ever made to man, and of highest concernment to him. Only the Ma [...]chees judged by their erring, surmise that our Lords Body was really there, where the Church taught them it was not. Pro­testants think it not really there, where the same Church teaches them it is. And thus have we passed through those handful of [Page 37]doubts which the Dr. casts before our eyes to perswade us we are not sure, where he knows we are immoveable. And we may worship our Lord in the Eucharist still, as we did before, for Stillingfleet.

§ 10. The residue of this Chapter be­wraies our third Catholick Idol. Saints namely, and their invocation. There be but three or four words in it of substance (if a falshood may be said indeed to subsist at all) dilated so by his pretty rhetorick, as if he had a mind to teach young Lawyers how to plead in a false cause. The Heathens, saith he, were not blamed by Christian Doctors, for their ill choice of worship, Venus for example, or Vulcan, who were wretches; but for giving divine honour to any but the true God, as Pa­pists do. Here are two untruths, and both notorious ones. For neither do Catholicks give divine honour to Saints, their fellow Servants and Domesticks of Faith; neither is it true, that antient Christian Doctors did not blame the Heathens for their ill choyce of worship; as monuments yet extant, various and weighty monuments do witness, both in St. Austins Civitate Dei, and elsewhere. Wise Heathens worshiped one God supreme, heeding the rest as inferiour powers under him, as Papists do their Saints. These be two more falshoods, as is already declared in part. [Page 38]For neither are Saints, any inferiour powers to help us from themselves, as the Sun, Moon, or Mercury; but friends of God in Hea­ven, and welwishers to their Brethren on Earth, ready as Onias, Job, Abraham, and Daniel, and all the good Angels, both to de­sire and rejoyce at their conversion and peace. Neither did the wise Heathens wor­ship one God supreme, as St. Paul expresly testifies in his Epistle to the Christians at Rome; where he tells them, that even the Pagan Philosophers whom Dr. Stilling fleet calls the wiser Heathens, held the truth in in­justice, that they did not glorifie nor worship the supreme God; that they became as vain in their thoughts and deeds, as any, even the un­wiser sort of them, that pretending to be wise, or wiser Heathens, they became starke Noddies; that they transformed Gods truth, discerned e­ven by his works of Creation into a lye; and that they worshiped and served the Creature [...] and not the Creator. I know well enough that Varro, with some others of the Heathens about Rome, where all sorts of Idols were brought together for the renown and pomp of that conquering City, began to plead thus, and excuse their Idolatry, as the Doctor has learned by him here to do. But did St. Austin admit that plea? or was there ever any Christian, who opposed it not, to­gether [Page 39]with all our holy Prophets and A­postles? What subordination was there a­mongst the Egyptian, Cyrian, and Chaldean Idols; or what Country ever was there a­mong the Heathens, who looked not upon their own Idol-God as Supreme? Papists build Churches to Saints, offer Sacrifice to Saints, as Heathens to those dieties. Two more falsities. Papists do neither of these. And the Doctor might be ashamed to talk thus. Have not Protestants, St. Pauls Church, St Peters Church, St. Dunstan, St. Steven, St. Johns Church, and the like, even as Catholicks have? And did ever any Catholick in the world, say, or write, or profess to offer Sacrifice to Saints? They use a formal invocation of them. One more: For­mal invocation, is only an invocation of the cause, who is to give the blessing, grace, or favour petitioned, and from whom all good things do flow, and not of him who requests it. Popish Hymns and Anthems in honour of Saints, are not only Rhetorical Apostrophees, used by some of the Greek Fathers, or poetical flourishes, as those of Damascus, Prudentius, Paulinus, Ambrosius, or only general wishes, that Saints would pray for us, of which are some instances in good Authors, or any devout Assemblies, at the Monuments of Martyrs, which were usual in antient times. They are [Page 40]indeed not only this, because they are also and principally formal invocations of the most glorious God, as any one may perceive, who will please to read over our Catholick Hymns, for Apostles, Martyrs, Confessors, Virgins, in the Breviary, as the Doctor (more shame for him thus to talk) hath done him­self. St. Austins example when he says, Blessed St. Cyprian help us in our Prayers, availes not Papists at all; for that of St. Au­stin was but a p [...]ous Apostrophee. It availes as much as we need; call it Apostrophe, or what you please: Nor does it availe Papists, that Faustus, the Manichean Calumniates Ca­tholicks living in St. Austins time, with their honouring the memories and shrines of Mar­tyrs, and turning the old Idols into Martyrs, which those Catholicks worshipped with like Vows; for St. Austin's excuse of that fact does not agree with the Papists that are now a­dayes. It so well agrees with them, and justi­fies so punctually all that ever they do in this affair, that they need not either to change or add one word to it. I will only se [...] down that excuse of St. Austin, as Mr. Still. has been pleased here in his book to give it us, without addition, or change of any word. All the worship, saith St. Austin, which we give to Saints, is that of love and society; which is the same kind with that we give to ho­ly [Page 41]men of this life, who are ready to suffer for truth of Gospel. Sacrifice is not only refused to Saints and Angels, but any other Religious honour which is due to God; as the Angel forbad St. John to fall down and worship him; The Heathens indeed built Temples, erected Altars, appointed Priests, and offered Sacri­fice to their Idols. But we erect no Temples to Martyrs, as to Gods, but memories as to dead men, whose Spirits live with God. We raise no Altars, on which to Sacrifice to our Martyrs; but unto our one God only, the God of Martyrs as well as ours; at which, They as men of God, who have overcome the world by confessing him, are named in their place and or­der, but are not invocated by the P [...]iest who Sa­crifices. Whatever Christians do at the me­mories of Martyrs, is for Ornament to those memories, and not as any sacred rites and sa­crifices belonging to the dead as Gods: Nor do we worship our Martyrs with divine ho­nours, nor with the faults of men, as the Gen­tiles did their Gods. Thus speaks St. Austin to Faustus for the Catholicks then living, as Dr. Still. himself reports. And the Catho­licks now alive need no more to be said for them. And thus his Idolatry. Romance, which fill up two of his Chapters, is now happily ended. And me-thinks Sir, that he hath be­haved himself herein somwhat like our [Page 42]Country Gypsies, who meeting with people in the way, under pretence of telling them their Fortunes, ask them many odd uncouth Questions about things past, not easily to be remembred, and speak unintelligable ambi­guous words, which put them into so deep a muse, that the Gypsies get thereby a fair op­portunity to pick their pockets.

Hinderances of a good Life and Devotion.

§. 1. Their Sacrament of Penance with con­trition, saith he, is sufficient in the Church of [Page 3]Rome for Salvation, without any more ado: No mortyfying of passions, no forsaking of sin is re­quisite; who would not be of this fine easie way, where all the precepts of holiness are insignifi­cant? But what one Catholick man upon the face of the earth, ever thought or said this, which he imposes here upon them all, as their religion and faith? Holy Gospel, and all our spiritual books, wherein our substantial religion is contained, both those of antient times, and of our later writers, as Granada, Thomas a Kempis, S. Bonaventure, Parsons Resolutions, Bishop Sales, Drexellius, Stel­la, and others, do all of them press and urge this Catholick duty of interiour renovation, sanctification, and conformity to our Lord Jesus as the main end of his appearance a­mongst men. And Catholicks themselves know, that it is their onely care and fear, their desire and study so to do; such men to live, and such to die, as our Lord would have us. For this end we say our daily pray­ers, with our hymns and canticles, for this end we meditate; for this end we fast and chastise our bodies, for this we do penance, make restitution, give alms, frequent sacra­ments, and all that we endeavour according to our poor abilities, Gods good counsels and holy grace assisting us. He who shall please onely to peruse the writings of Dr. [Page 4] Eckius, and his fellow Catholicks, who oppo­sed Martin Luther and his Protestant-refor­mation, when it first rose up; may there clearly see that this interiour sanctity and re­novation and holiness of life, is the one great Catholick point, stoutly maintained against those wild and dissolute Reformers, who began now to corrupt the world with that cursed opinion of theirs, that faith alone is sufficient to salvation. And what a strange man is this Dr. Stillingfleet! If any one in­deed of our men, had objected to Prote­stants; that in their reformation-way, nei­ther penance, nor contrition, nor satisfacti­on, nor renovation of life is needful, ac­cording to the first Masters of the Reforma­tion, who taught and maintained openly, and in the eyes of this very Sun, that nothing is necessary to salvation, but onely to believe, and by that naked faith to apply Christs me­rits to themselves, all interiour sanctification being both impossible and needless; he had said no more than truth, and what he might easily have proved out of the first Reformers principles; however I hope not maintained now by many of our wiser Protestants in England, who notwithstanding remain still in that reformation which was chalked out for them by such wicked Leaders. But now to lay upon Catholicks that wicked doctrine [Page 5]of Reformers, opposed now a whole hun­dred years by our Catholick Divines, is a desperate confidence, befitting none but men wholly unconscionable. Let them keep their own dirt to themselves, and not throw it into our faces, however they begin now to be weary and ashamed of it. The pre­cepts of holiness, sobriety, and justice, are insignificant to them, who have hitherto even from the very cradles of this unlucky re­formation publickly defended them to be in­significant; and not to us, who have still maintained, that they are the very all in all of Christianity. I have troubled my self some while to think, what should move Dr. Still▪ to invent this slander. Some word or other he must pervert; but I cannot conclude what it should be. Perhaps he may take oc­casion from hence: that whereas there be se­veral things concurring to our purification after sin, as Gods grace, and our dislike of our own ill deeds, fear of Gods wrath and punishment, grief for his love and favour forfeited, an humble confession, purpose of amendment, and renovation of life; some Schoolmen have amongst their other curio­sities, considered into which of these many things may our justification be principally attributed, as the principal virtue and cause of it under God. For God who created us [Page 6]without our selves, will not redeem us with­out our selves. And if any one in his philo­sophy have said, that confession and sorrow have the chiefest influence on our fide, that may be enough for Dr. Still to say as here he does, that we make confession and contrition all in all, and renovation of life nothing. Or perhaps because Catholick Doctors have taught, that confession, together with con­trition, may sometimes be so great and cor­dial at the last hour, that evil men may there­by find mercy with God, as the good thief did, although they have no further leasure to mend and renew their lives; therefore does this man conclude, that with us confession with contrition is sufficient, without any more ado. Whence soever he concludes or gathers it, he knows best himself. But this I know, that it is an abominable slander. And if all his readers were as skilful in our Catholick religion as we our selves who pro­fess it, he would not have dared to speak these things, despairing then of finding any credit either with man, woman, or child.

§. 2. They of the Church of Rome need little to heed a good life, who can have their sins ex­piated in Purgatory by the prayers of the living, which is a doctrine very pleasing to rich men, but uncomfortable to the poor. Pretty stuff! And [Page 7]need not then any man heed either to have patience in afflictions, or do his duty, because another prays to God either that he may do so, or find mercy if he have done otherwise? Or must he needs be negligent of himself to day, because he hopes good people will pray for him to morrow, when he cannot help himself? Souls departed are by our Christia­nity believed to be now out of the place and way of merit: for there is neither art, nor industry, nor any good work to be done in the grave, whether we all hasten. And if friends on earth, where Gods favour may by our dutiful compliance be obtained, do com­mend their dead to Gods mercy and good­ness; this surely cannot make those friends careless of themselves while they remain here living. All men know that it is not enough for our entrance into heaven to cry, Lord, Lord; which is the voice of those who think that onely faith saves; but the will of God who is in heaven is to be fulfilled by every one that shall enter there. And yet it is good and pleasing, and profitable notwithstanding to cry and supplicate unto our Lord God, with all earnestness of heart, both for our selves and friends. But the poor are then in a sad condition, and the rich man may easilier en­ter into the kingdom of heaven, than a camel through a needles eye, by procuring Masses for [Page 8]their Souls. Who told this man, that the Souls of the poor are not prayed for in the Catholick Church? He onely thinks so. And he thinks amiss therein, as he loves to do. Whence doth he gather that the rich go to heaven so easily in our esteem by Masses? This he thinks too: Perhaps he does: For I am much deceived, if he do not utter many a falshood which he knows to be such, before he utters it. At least none of ours ever told him the one nor the other: and what we believe or do our selves he may easily mi­stake, and we have had already sufficient ex­perience of his ignorance therein, or some worser misdemeanor. Prayer or whatever good work of Christianity, although it may do some good; ye [...] does it not therefore do all: and what does not all good, must not therefore be denied to do some. Poor La­zarus's may by their cold, hunger, and na­kedness, here on earth patiently endured, satisfie for their humane frailties so far with God here, that after this life, having no ut­most farthing to account for, they may chance not to need any farther help. But the rich men of the world will not easily be brought unto those many voluntary penances and mortifications, which their sensualities exact, unto their expiation and peace with God. It were a happy thing, if they would [Page 9]be perswaded in their life-time, to distribute part of their goods unto the poor of God, the orphans and widows, their lame, old, de­cayed, feeble neighbours, as they used to do formerly in Catholick times. But if infect­ed by the contagion of sin and sinners, they will not be moved to this: yet a charitable distribution at their death, though it be a late offering, it is better than none at all. And several prayers poured forth to God for them after they are departed hence, though they may not perhaps equal their condition to the Soul of a poor believing Lazarus, yet will alms-deeds plead their cause before God, and prayers will not be in vain. Make your selves friends, saith our Lord, of the mammon of iniquity, that when you fail, they may receive you into eternal taber­nacles. And although it be surer, and a more certain way to make those friends be­times, and continually, all our whole life time; yet are not they excluded from some benefit thereof, who make them late, and at their last hour. For they who receive tem­poral good things out of charity in God, are obliged now in the same charity to repay spi­ritual; and all other spiritual recompence is now out of season, save onely prayer and hearty good wishes, which are never in vain before God. And it were much to be wish­ed [Page 10]that Mr. Still. would cease at length to make jests of sacred Gospel, and apply it se­riously to his own heart and soul, as it is in­tended by our holy Lord. Perhaps he would not then endeavour any more to inrich him­self, or court promotion by this wicked trade of defaming his innocent neighbours, Gods ancient and renowned servants: It is neither impossible to God that a camel or cable rope should pass through a needles eye, nor yet that a rich man should be saved, if he will bend himself to his duty.

§. 3. Prayers in an unknown tongue hinder all sincerity of devotion among Papists. Here the Author wriggles and winds himself, like a snake in a bush; speaking sometimes as if people knew not what their Priest says; and sometimes again, as if they knew not what themselves pray, confounding all things that he may more freely sport himself. It is bet­ter, faith he, to know what we pray, than not. Christian prayers are not to be used like charms. God understands more than one language. The more people understand, the better they pray. Why some pray and not others, if some under­stand and not others? Why should any pray, but he that understands? All this is very true, but what and whom does it concern? People may as well pray at the chiming of Bells, as at [Page 11]the jargon of Priests words. What does he mean by praying at the jargon of words, and how at them? Is not this a merry conceited man? And what harm is it if a Christian do pray at the chiming of Bells? Hundreds of good Catholicks pray at the striking of the clock daily: and what then? what harm is this? But his chiming jargon put together makes the merriment. If a Catholick priest appearing among the Christian flock met to­gether to pray and meditate, and offer them­selves and all their friends to God, joyn him­self with them, and place himself between them and God, to offer to him his own and their necessities, to sacrifice for their peace, as our Lord in his last supper appointed, to meditate and pray with them for himself, and all the people, placed in their humble and si­lent posture in the Church, what chimes or jargon is there here? But when a man speaks against he knows not what, he must needs say he knows not what against it. For Ca­tholicks, whose devotion he here derides, pray and meditate both privately all alone in their own closets or oratories, and publickly in their Synaxis or assembly at Liturgy. Their private devotions take them up an hour or two every day in the week, wherein they keep peculiar prayers and meditations, about the creation, and Gods providence, the in­carnation, [Page 12]passion, mysteries of grace, the duties of life, vice and vertues, Gods mercies and judgments, mans misery and weakness, punishments and rewards eternal: And all these prayers made either in their own tongue or no words at all, cannot be con­cern'd in any of this our doctors talk. And their conventual converse with God in their Synaxis or Mass, is no otherwise. For there met all together, they do but meditate and pray as they did before, but now in a com­munity, either without any words, as was most familiar in antient times, or with words, as now is more usual; understanding well enough, both the thoughts and aspirations of their own hearts, and the words of their lips, if they utter any. Onely there is re­quired here, a little more instruction; that they may conceive both what the Priest does with them and for them: and also how to comply and joyn their hearts with his; that they may all unanimously endeavour in this their silent, and yet busie and earnest com­merce with God, to offer up themselves with the div [...]ne sacrifice, unto their own re­conciliation and peace. For the Priests great work there, is rather visible actions than au­dible words: and whether he speak english or latin, it is all one to them who can seldom hear him, and attend not so much to his [Page 13]words, as deeds, whenever they cast their eyes that way. And that this is the capital devotion of all antient Christians in their Sy­naxis, and not any few prayers read in our ears by a Minister in a Pew, has been amply demonstrated by Catholick Doctors, in all the languages of Europe at this day. Their Synaxis was never any hearing or fitting bu­siness; but such a posture of humiliation, where every heart submits, every tongue confesses, and every knee bows to God in Je­sus our onely hope and refuge. And if the doctour is ignorant of all this, let him turn Catholick that he may understand it better.

§. 4. The efficacy of sacraments in the Church of Rome, depending upon bare admini­stration without any preparation of mind, is another great enemy to Piety. For their Sacra­ments confer grace ex opere operato, as the Council of Trent has defined. This being so, what need is there of any preparation of mind, by the exercise of faith, prayer, repentance, any strict examination, or endeavour of raising our selves unto any worthy use of Sacraments. De­votion will never be more easily banished out of the world, than by a perswasion that grace and its comfortable effects may be had without it, without prayer, without endeavour of a holy life, without mortification, and watchfulness after [Page 14]the benefits which Christs life and death obtained for us. This is a goodly and very plausible harrangue, if it had any foundation or truth in it. D [...]d ever any Council, or Doctor, or Catholick man, either say or believe that our Lords Sacraments do confer grace unto the receiver, without any of their preparation, or disposition of heart towards them? Ne­ver any one. But all the whole world of Catholicks prepare themselves for them, with all their whole utmost care and endeavour, believing all they can possibly do, is yet too little; unless Gods mercy and goodness in­terposing accept freely their poor pitiful en­deavours. And of the multitude of their Priests in the Catholick world, there is hard­ly one of a thousand so desperate, but he spends one hour in prayer, recollection, and examination of himself, before he dare ap­proach the Altar. And that one, if any such there be, who shall neglect this his due pre­paration, so that he communicate unworthi­ly, if by timely and serious repentance he do not recover himself, will harden by degrees, and be lost irrevocably. Thus some do fall away, either openly or occultly; and these occult apostates are easily known by this, that they are wholly taken up in worldly af­fairs and sensual pleasures, not rellishing now any spiritual employments in their closet. [Page 15]Thus affairs stand with Catholicks in this business. And what can we then think of this Doctor, who tells the world such a no­torious untruth against them. But is it not de­fined that the Sacraments of the new law confer grace ex opere operato? This is very true, indeed it is so defined. But what is the eng­lish of these latin words, ex opere operato: not surely this, without disposition, without any pre­paration, or examination, or devotion. This is not the english of that latin: but this, By the very work done; which gives us quite ano­ther s [...]nce and meaning. That thing avails by the very work done, which carries with it self a power and virtue, if the work be done, to avail and profit us. Our corporeal meat sustains our bodies ex opere operato, or by the very work of eating, done, and completed in all its operations: we all know this. And yet none of us think, that we need not there­fore have any appetite or disposition in our bodies, when we eat; or that we need not keep our bodies clean, or sound, or health­ful, that our food may be unto us the savour of life unto life, and good nouriture and strength. And the Doctor if he had not stu­died rather to misconstrue all things, than interpret any thing right, might easily have discerned the true and connatural meaning of the words, by their very place and posture in [Page 16]the canon cited by himself out of the Tri­dentine Council. For there it is defined and openly declared against the Protestant Re­formers, who exalted faith, onely and soli­tary faith, unto the exclusion of all other good works and use of sacraments; that our Lords sacraments instituted for our san­ctification and comfort, are both profitable and necessary unto that end of conveighing grace and sanctity into us, and that by a vir­tue conferred upon them by the divine Au­thor and Institutor of them. This the Council there defines; opposing the virtue of sacraments, shewing it self, and streaming into the heart of the worthy receiver, in the very thing done, unto the bare and naked faith of those lewd reformers: even as the sad Council still up and down in all their Sessions did maintain the necessity of prayer, alms­deeds, mortification, penance, justice, truth, satisfaction, sobriety, continence, purity of life, meekness, and all Christian virtues, against that wicked Solifidian heresie, which they with all their force endeavoured utterly to root out Siquis dixerit, saith the Coun­cil there, per ipsa novae legis sacramenta ex opere operato non conferri gratiam, sed fidem solam divinae promissionis ad gratiam conse­quendam sufficere, anathema sit. Who can be so blind as not to see here plainly declared, [Page 17]that our Lords sacraments have a sanctifying power either in them or with them, and therefore not to be contemned or neglected, under any pretence of faith, which although it be good and lively with the concurrence of other good works and graces, yet is it without them unprofitable and dead: And amongst those good helps and quickners of our faith, are the sacraments by our Lord himself instituted, none of the least or mean­est; and therefore to be received with all love and reverence, as the very conduits of divine grace ex opere operato derived into our souls from thence. Here then we cannot prudently imagine, that our Catholick Pre­lates in the Council exclude our devotion, disposition of mind exercise of faith, prayer and repentance, strict examination, endea­vour of a holy life, mortification and watch­fulness, all which they had elsewhere esta­blished; but to suppose rather and include them all: because all these are opposed unto faith alone, as necessary preparatives for the receiving of that virtue which sacraments confer. And the Council rather chose to express themselves, when they would speak of the powerful operation of sacraments, ra­ther in this general way, ex opere operato, than any other more particular manner, that they might declare themselves in words acknow­ledged [Page 18]and indifferent unto both the great schools in the Catholick world, whereof though both of them agree that grace is con­ferred by the thing done, yet one teaches that the said grace or virtue is inherent and in­trinsecal, the other that it is extrinsecal one­ly and assistant to the sacraments: And therefore would not the Council say, that sa­craments contain grace, but that they cause it ex opere operato, by their sacramental appli­cation unto the faithful and worthy recei­ver.

It is a long received opinion among school­men, saith the doctor, that sacraments of the old law in conferring grace, depend upon opus operantis, the faith and devotion of the receiver; but those of the new confer grace ex opere opera­to, without any disposition, internal motion, or preparation of mind. O shameless ignorance! very fain would this man be thought a deep schoolman, who never penetrated any one schoolman in his life, as it appears sufficient­ly by his simple talk, nor yet understands them, either what they say, or who they are. Insomuch that I am half perswaded that he takes Lillies Grammar for one of the school­men. Is that an opinion, a long received opinion among schoolmen? How long for Gods sake? and among how many of them? All of them for certain. Nay name ten: [Page 19]for there are many hundreds of schoomen, and all masters, although not all institutors or sounders of the chair; and as simply as I sit here, I have been a piece of one my self: which I now speak, Sir, that this doctor, if he come by any chance to hear of this my lit­tle postil, might not fear that he has got some petty abecedarian Commentator, who largely explaining his easier texts, should pass by his more grave and harder ones, untouch­ed. Nay let him name onely one, and it shall suffice. The margent of his book over against this his school-assertion, was bare, and able to hold one mans name at least: and yet he leaves it quite empty. He does not quote so much as any one schooman, for the justification of this his assertion most uncon­scionably false. And although it nothing concerns us in our defence of faith, what opinion is amongst schoolmen, who have raised an art of their own, an art of talking, defending and proving things never revealed unto us, or any ways edifying to our salva­tion; yet if there had been any such opinion among schoolmen, then had not Dr. Still. been unconscionable, however he had been impertinent. Schoolmen do indeed agree unanimously, that the sacraments of the law of Moses conferred no grace at all. So the whole four schools of S. Thomas, and Sco­tus. [Page 20]Aureolus and Darandus: and all the many Doctors of them teach; however some of them speak otherwise of circumcision, which was from the fathers. But this sim­ple talk, that sacraments of the old law confer­red grace by the disposition of the receiver, the new without it: as I never heard it before, so does not he know where to find it, except it be in some writings of Mr. Farnaby a late Schoolmaster in London.

Schoolmen are much puzled, and cannot a­gree how sacraments confer grace, whether as a moral or physical cause, whether as inherent or assistant, whether as an instrument or a sign, &c. I care not if I help the Doctor a little, not in the schoolmens puzling, but his own. The schools of St. Thomas, and all the Do­ctors of it, in declaring the efficacy of Sa­craments (which all Christians equally be­lieve) teach, that they work grace as a phy­sical cause, and as inherent, and as an instru­ment of it under God. The whole school of Scotus teaches, that they work it as a sign onely, as assistant, and moral cause. And if the Doctor please either to dispute for St. Thomas his way in Scotus his school, or for Scotus his way in the school of St. Thomas; he will find that they do not fumble, or puzle, or stand unresolved what to say; but that they struggle stoutly, and maintain in­cessantly, [Page 21]and defend invinceably, both of them their own proper ways and opinions, without ever yielding one inch of ground to the opposer. And though the matter be of small importance, yet the glory or shame of overcoming or being overcome, is thought by them all to be no small matter. Never did Aeneas and Turnus rush with a more vio­lent shock and and resolution, than some­times they do; Rumpuntur nescia vinci Pecto­ra; and all for an opinion amongst them­selves, affirmed by one, and gainsaid as reso­lutely by the other. Dr. Still. utterly unac­quainted in these affairs, may say as he plea­ses, that they fumble, and puzzle, and are wholly unresolved. But all this signifies no more, but that he is wholly ignorant of what he speaks. Cassander and Arnoldus, both Ca­tholicks, do hold it to be a Catholick doctrine, that Sacraments do no good without the devo­tion of the receiver, and condemn the other opi­nion of some amongst them, as wicked. Here the man names us two of our Doctors who hold it to be a Catholick doctrine, that Sacra­ments do no good without the devotion [...]f the receiver; which we all believe. But he names us not any one, who ever said it was a Catholick doctrine, that they do all their good without any disposition or devotion of the receiver; which is the opinion he has [Page 22]put upon us all this while, without any fear or wit. Did Cassander and Arnoldus hold right or wrong? Were they with us or a­gainst us? If against us in faith, then were they not Catholicks themselves: if with us, then is all Dr. Still's discourse against us here, both impertinent and false. But I perceive well enough he neither knows what faith means, nor what it is to be a Catholick. A most certain truth it is, that Sacraments do no good to the receiver without a congruous disposition and devotion in him. And all food, whether spiritual or corporal, if it do no good, must needs do some harm. And this is something more than he tells to be said by Arnoldus and Cassander.

§. 5. Another enemy to piety is their pro­hibition of Scripture, and keeping from people Gods holy word, which might direct and com­fort them. This charge bears something more of colour and appearance, than any or all the other four. And yet, things rightly understood, it is nothing else but a meer co­lour and appearance. For all the whole fourteen hundred years before PRINT­ING was found out, in all which time those sacred writings were so rare, that not one of a thousand could get them, it was the labour and obligation of a Priest still night [Page 23]and day to read and study those books, and not for himself one [...]y, and his own edificati­on, but to gather out thence such holy words as might direct, encourage, and com­fort people in the many occurrences of life. For which reason the Bible was then called Liber Sacerd [...]tis, the Priests book: but espe­cially and above all, to collect from thence what he thought might best conduce unto devotion and piety towards God. And this was not hard for them to do, after they had once by their united industry gathered out of the said Bible a complete Breviary for them­selves. For this lying now by them, easily could they turn unto any thing they should have need of on any occasion. Thus they did before PRINTING was found out. But no such thing is ever done by Ministers, who leave their people both to buy themselves a book, and use it when they have it as they please. And now since the Invention of PRINTING, peoples hands are so filled with holy gospels, psalms, hymns, canticles, holy histories, prayers meditations, manuels and the like contents of holy scrip [...]ure, drawn out more amply for them in spiritual books; that no [...]hing at all is there in faith or good manners, wherewith they are not as fully ac­quainted as their Clergy. And all this, as it is nothing else but Gods word, so is Gods [Page 24]word nothing else but this. Therefore is not Gods word prohibited or kept from peo­ple in the Church of Rome, as the doctor af­firms. Indeed the whole letter of scripture as it lies, is permitted to none, but such as have abilities to use it. But what then? Even our ordinary people have more now, than they had in the best ages of Christianity, who digesting well, what they had, saved their souls by it, and that is enough. And the little they had, was all that is to be had for that purpose. I have, Sir, often had occasion to speak of this subject: and must be fain now in this my speedy haste, to borrow some help from my words elsewhere delivered, whose sence, though it be perfect enough in my mind, yet if I do not help my self thence, I shall spend time which I cannot now spare, in thinking how to word and express it to you. Thus then it is written of this business in one place Catholicks have the sum of scripture both for history and dogm, deliver­ed them in their own language, so much as may make for their salvation, disintangled from the tropes and schemes. and ambiguous phrases, wherein it was first written, good orders being set and instituted for their pro­ficiency therein; the sum of all divine truths belonging to Christianity, and the whole counsel of God for their direction and com­fort; [Page 25]this have Catholicks full and clearly de­livered them out of holy writ, and all their whole duty both towards God and their neighbour, in their own language. Nor are they ignorant of any thing that may apper­tain either to sobriety, justice or piety. The whole sacred story of our Lords incarnation, passion and ascension, all his sacraments, all the whole counsels and precepts of God, which may concern salvation, all his promises and threats, they have them all made known unto them, clear and disintangled from the various tropes and schemes of rhetorick or logick, so interwoven in the sacred authors writings, that it puzzles the greatest clerk with all his literature and science to under­stand the connexions, transitions of discourse, objections, amb [...]guous phrases, hebraisms, and grecisms, and such-like obscurities that occur; or to find out the drift and purpose and meaning of places: which things do and have too too often caused mistakes and here­sies in the world. And all the sacred truths which it concerns them to practise, the peo­ple have still been put in mind of by their priests both in private and publick, to their daily edification. Nor was it ever the fashion in Christianity to throw the bible among people, and so leave them to themselves, as the Reformers have done. Most certain it [Page 26]is, that the word and will and counsel of God, consists not in letters and syllables, much less in the tropes and modes of rhetorick and lo­gick, which do variously obscure the sacred writ above all books that have ever been pen­ned by man; but in the sence and meaning, which, is easily and securely conveighed. It is no hard matter, for example, to understand, that all men, both Jews and Gentiles, who have ever come to the knowledge of Christ, were beholding to Gods mercy, meerly to Gods mercy for that their conversion and the life of grace they had by it; which is the scope of S. Pauls epistle to the Romans: al­though to give an account how S. Paul dedu­ces and proves this truth in that his epistle, what arguments he doth either establish or refute, what modes and figures he uses, what tropes and rhetorical schemes be in his ex­pressions, how he passes from one thing to another in his discourse, and by what art of ratiocination the context of his whole letter is knit together, this is neither easie to under­stand, nor necessary to any mans salvation to discern. And yet the epistle without all this knowledge cannot be understood, or rightly apprehended. And if it be conceived falsly, mistakes and heresies will rise. The will and mind and word of God, this all people are to know, what he hath commanded, what coun­selled, [Page 27]what threatned, what promised, what our Lord did and suffered for us, and what we are to suffer and do for him, that we may be partakers of his glory. But the humanity and philosophy that lies couched in holy writ, vulgar people neither can nor have need to dive into it. Nor was the holy scripture ever penned or intended for the people immedi­ately, but for the bishops and priests of God, who are to watch over them for their good; and from their lips they are to receive know­ledge. Christians were ever fed like pigeons, by the mouth, until they were so fledg, that they could now fly & feed themselves. Once come to maturity, they may read what they please on Gods name, and the more they at­tend to lection of holy scriptures, the better it is, so they apply all unto action and sancti­fication of their lives. And again, in an epistle of mine its written thus: I have heard many great protestant divines ingeniously acknowledge that divine comfort and sancti­ty of life requisite to salvation, which religion onely aims at, may with more perfection and less inconvenience be attained by the customs of the Roman Church, which gives the sense life and meaning of Gods word unto people, without the husk of the formal letter; than by the way of Protestants, which exhibits it to people hidden under the hard shell, able to [Page 28]break peoples teeth Religion consists not in reading but doing; to be had by heart, and not in the lips: that way is tedious and bar­ren, this fruitful and easie Christ our Lord drew a compendium of all divine duties into two words, the great apostle into one: and both of them made all to consist in practice. If the several gospels for every day in the year which are or may be in the hands of all Catholicks, the chief particles of divine epi­stles, those I mean which are of general con­cernment, books of sacred instructions and meditations upon the mysteries of salvation, and spiritual treatises for all occasions and uses which be numberless, adjoyned to the rites of examination of conscience; continual and daily use of prayer and fasting, and an orderly commemoration of the things our Lord hath wrought for us throughout the year, which all men by law are tied to ob­serve, may not give sufficient acquaintance of what concerns salvation, and enough to pro­mote people towards it, I am to seek what it is that can. Sure I am that the world was first converted without any books at all, and many millions of good Christians both lived piously and died happily, who never saw the Bible. What further good may it do to read the letter of S. Pauls epistle to the Romans for example, or Corinthians, wherein are trea­ted [Page 29]questions and cases that are now quite va­nished out of the world, and other theologi­cal discourses, which vulgar people can nei­ther understand, nor are at all concerned to know. What more of good can accrew to any by the translated letter of a book, where­of nine parts in ten concern not my par­ticular either to practise, or so much as heat of, than by the meer substance of Gods will and my own duty once well understood, and daily applied unto action & answerable good deeds? What is there now in England when the said scripture letter is set open unto every eye, any more of peace or charity, piety or justice, than in former Catholick times when the substance of Gods word and will was given people in short, and the obser­vance of their duty prolixly prest upon them? What did they do in those antient Catholick times? They flock'd every day to their Chur­ches, there to pay, meditate, and renew their good purposes: they sung psalms, hymns, and canticles day & night all over the land; they built all our churches which we have remain­ing at this day amongst us, and as many more now razed & pulled down; they founded and endowed our Universities, establish'd our laws, set out tithes & glebe land for the cler­gy, built hospitals, erected corporations; and in a word did all the good things which [Page 30]we find done by our forefathers for our good in this our native kingdom. But what do we now? what have we still been doing since the reformation? quid agitur in Angliâ? con­sulitur de religione. Continually are we ma­king and unmaking our religious rites, still building and pulling down our opinions. Former Catholick Christians practised, and we dispute. They had a religion fixt, we are still seeking one. They exercised themselves in good works by the guidance of their ho­ly faith, which led them towards them, and pressed their duty; all these works we by our new way evacuate. They had the sub­stance of religion in their hearts, we the text in our lips. They had nothing to do but con­form their lives to Gods will; all our en­deavour is to apply Gods word to our own faction. Let there be no longer a mistake: the question is not, whether people are to have Gods word or no; but whether that word consist in the letter left to the peoples disposal, or in the substance and meaning of it, urgently imposed upon people for their practice. And we must still and ever remem­ber, that it is not Gods will or word, but the letter of scripture onely, which makes here-ticks: this may be depraved by men unto their own destruction, that cannot.

So that when we come to a conclusion of [Page 31]these things; there is no such Catholick do­ctrine, faith, or religion amongst us, which prescribes any of these thing put here in his third chapter upon the Roman Church. For first, our Catholick way is so far from keep­ing Gods word from the people, that it has been the only great endeavour of our Church and pastors in all times and places, to derive Gods word and will in such a manner unto people, that they may observe and keep it: however they will not permit the letter pro­miscuously unto all hands without a know­ledge of their ability and stayedness; even as they do not suffer all sorts of men to come to holy communion without a license and assu­rance of their lives and persons. Secondly, that our efficacy of sacraments depends upon meer administration without any preparation of mind, is so false, that every Catholick boy and girl, arrived to years of discretion, will hiss at it. Thirdly, that we pray in an un­known tongue, and know not what we say, is a calumny onely proper for the wise men of Gotam. Fourthly, that prayers for one ano­ther after this life ended, do hinder our own holiness and devotion in this present life, is a paradox fit onely for discourse in a tavern or coffee-house over cups. Fifthly, that our sacrament of penance with interiour contri­tion sufficeth us without any amendment of [Page 32]life, or purpose towards it, is a slander which the doctor could not have vented with ap­plause on any other ground but Billingsgate. He took it seems more pleasure to shew an evil wit, than a good candid nature, which is a perfection more becoming him, and if I be not mistaken by too much charity, more ap­parent in his courteous conversation with his neighbours, than in his written Roman­ces, or books made against the Church of Rome; which are so false and injurious, that they cannot but hurt as well our Protestant neighbours who read and believe them, as poor innocent Catholicks, who dislike and suffer them. And now, dear Sir, I bid you farwel the second time.

St. Francis his Rule.

Chap. 1. THe rule and life of Fryar mi­nours is this; To observe the holy Gospel of Jesus Christ our Lord; living in obedience, with­out property of goods, and in chastity. Bro­ther Francis doth promise obedience and re­verence unto Bishop Honorius his Lord, and to his Successors Canonically installed, and to the Roman Church. And be other Fryars bound to obey Brother Francis and his Suc­cessors.

Ch. 2. If any shall be willing to take this [Page 35]life, and shall therefore present themselves to our Brothers, let them be sent to the Pro­vincial Ministers, who may only, and none besides them, have power to admit them. The Ministers must be diligent to examine them about Catholick Religion and Church Sacraments. And if they believe these things, and will faithfully confess them, and firmly observe them to the end, and either have no Wives, or those Wives if any they have, are entered into Monasteries, or by the authori­ty of the Bishop of the Diocesse are dismist, a vow of continence now solemnly made, and their said Wives be of that age, that there can arise no suspicion of them: let the Mini­sters then speak unto them the word of holy Gospel, that they go and sell all their goods, and bestow them upon the Poor. Which thing if they cannot be able to do, their good will in this part may suffice: And let the Brothers beware, and their Ministers too; that they be not solicitous about the tempo­ral goods of these men: that they may freely dispose those things of their own as our Lord shall inspire them. And if Counsel be re­quired the Ministers have leave to send them unto some men fearing God, by whose ad­vice they may bestow their goods upon the Poor. After this they may grant them their vest of probation; namely two tunicks with­out [Page 36]a capuce, and a girdle and drawers, and a caparoon down to the girdle; unless the Ministers shall otherwise think fit according to God. After the year of probation is ended, let them be received unto obedience, promising ever to observe this life and rule. And in no wise shall it be lawful for them to go out of this religion, according to the command of my Lord our chief Bishop: be­cause according to Gospel, no man putting his hand unto the Plough, if he look back is fit for the Kingdom of God. And those who now have promised obedience, let them have one tunick with a capuce, and another without a capuce, such as will have it. And those who are urged by necessity may wear shooes. But let all our Fryars be cloathed with course Garments, and they may mend them with Sack-cloath, or other pieces on Gods blessing. All whom I do exhort and admonish, that they neither despise nor judge men, whom they shall see cloathed in soft and coloured raiments, to use finer meats and drinks, but let every one of them judge and despise himself.

Ch. 3. The Clarks must say the divine Office according to the course of Roman Church, the Psalter onely excepted, out of which they may have Breviaries. But Laimen are to say four and twenty times, Our Fa­ther, [Page 37]&c. for their Matins, for Lauds five; for prime, tierce, sext & none, for each of those hours seven; for Vespers twelve: for Com­pline seven: and pray for the dead. And all are to fast from the Feast of all Saints unto Christmas day. But as for the holy Lent, which begins from Epiphany unto fourty days after it, which our Lord by his own holy fast hath consecrated, those who voluntarily will fast it, Gods blessing be upon them: and they who will not, let them not be tied to it. But the other Lent, from Ashwednesday un­to Easter day, let them all fast that. O­ther times, excepting Fryday, they need not fast. And in times of manifest necessity, let no brother be tied to corporal fast [...]ng. And I counsel admonish and exhort my brothers in our Lord Jesus Christ, that when they chance to walk through the world, they do not wrangle nor contend with words, nor censure other men; but be meek, peaceable, modest, gentle and humble, civilly speaking unto all men, as becomes them. And they ought not to ride, but in a manifest necessity and urgent weakness. In what ever house they enter, let them first say, Peace to this house: and let them according to holy Go­spel eat what is set before them.

Ch. 4. I do firmly command all my bro­thers, that in no wise they receive Money or [Page 38]Coin, either by themselves immediately, or by another person interposed. And for the necessities of the sick, or the cloathing of brothers, the Ministers only and the Contro­lers may by their Spiritual friends take spe­cial care, according to places and times and coldness of countries, as they shall find ex­pedient for their need: this still provided, that as it is already said, they receive no mo­ney nor coin.

Ch. 5. Those brothers whom our Lord hath given the gift and strength to work, let them labour faithfully and devoutly; yet so, that idleness our souls enemy being kept out, they extinguish not the spirit of holy prayer and devotion, unto which all other tempo­ral things ought to be still subservient. And for reward of their work, they may take the necessaries of body, both for themselves and brothers, besides coin or money, and that humbly, as becomes the servants of God, and followers of most holy poverty.

Ch. 6. Our brothers may appropriate no­thing to themselves, not house, not place, not any thing, but as strangers and pilgrims in this world, in poverty and humility serving our Lord; let them confidently go for Alms. Nor must they be ashamed, for our Lord for us hath made himself poor in this world. This, this is the high towring spire of our [Page 39]sublime poverty; which hath installed you my dearest brothers, heirs and Kings of that Kingdom of the Heavens. It hath made you poor in pelf; but in vertues it hath raised you up on high. Let this be your portion, even this poverty which will conduct you un­to the land of the living, unto which my dearest brothers remaining close and wholly fixt, no other thing for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may you wish to have un­der Heaven for ever. And where ever my brothers are, or meet with one another, let them show themselves towards one another as domesticks: and let each one open to the other his necessity freely. For if a mother nourishes and caresses her carnal child: how much more carefully ought each one to sup­port and love his spiritual brother. And if any of them fall into sickness, other brothers ought to serve him, as they would be served themselves.

Ch. 7. If any of our brothers by the insti­gation of Satan shall sin unto death, for such sins as it has been appointed among our bro­thers that recourse should be had only to our Provintial Ministers, let the said brother be bound to have recourse unto them, as soon as possibly he may, without delay. And the said Ministers if they be Priests must enjoyn him a pennance with mercy: if they be not Priests, [Page 40]let them cause it to be enjoyned by other Priests of the Order, as they shall according to God think fittest; and they must take heed they fall not into wrath, and trouble for the sin of another; for anger and disturbance in ones self and others hinder charity.

Ch. 8. All our Fryars universally must still have one of the brothers of this religion for the Minister general, and servant of the whole brotherhood: and him they must con­stantly obey; and when he goes out of office, an election of a successor must be made by the Provincial Ministers and Controllors, in the Pentecost Chapter; wherein the Provincial ministers are bound to meet, where ever it is by the minister general appointed: and this once in three years, or in some other term of time either greater or lesser, as by the said Minister it shall be ordained. And if at any time it should appear to the univer­sality of the ministers Provincial and Con­trollers, that the said general elect is insuffi­cient to the service and common good of the brothers, the said brothers, unto whom the election does belong, may in the name of our Lord choose themselves another for a custos; and after the Pentecost Chapter, the Minister and Controllors may all, if they please, and it seem good unto them, in the same year convocate their brothers unto a Chapter in their custodies.

Ch. 9. Let not our brothers preach in the Diocess of any Bishop, where it is forbidden them by him. And let no brother presume at all to preach unto people unless he be first examined and approved by the Minister ge­neral of this Fraternity, and have by him that office of preaching deputed to him. I do also admonish and exhort all our brothers, that in any preachings they make, their ex­pressions be well examined and chast, unto the profit and edification of people, denoun­cing to them vice and vertue, punishment and glory, with brevity of speech, for an ab­breviated word hath our Lord made upon earth.

Ch. 10. Those brothers, who are Mini­sters and servants of their other brothers, must visite and admonish their other bro­thers, and charitably reprove them; not commanding them any thing, that may be contrary to their own soul and our rule; and the brothers who are subjects, must remember that for God they have denied their own wills; and therefore do I strongly command them that they do obey their Ministers in all things, which they have promised our Lord to observe, and are not contrary to their own soul and our rule. And where ever our brothers be, who shall perceive and know, that they are not able to observe the rule [Page 42]punctually; unto their Ministers ought they and may they have recourse, and the Ministers must charitably and chearfully receive them, and show so great familiarity towards them, that they may speak to them, and act as Maisters to their servants; for so it ought to be, that ministers be the servants of all the brothers. And now I admonish and exhort in our Lord Jesus Christ, that our brothers beware of all pride, vain glory, envy, cove­tousness, care and solicitude of this world, & of detraction also and murmuring. And let not the illiterate care to learn letters, but let them heed, what they ought to desire above all things, to have the spirit of our Lord and his holy operation in them, to pray always unto God with a pure heart, and to have hu­mility and patience in persecutions and sick­ness, and to love those who persecute us, for our Lord saith, Love your enemies, pray for such as persecute and slander you; blessed are they who suffer persecution for justice: for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven, and he who persevers to the end shall be safe.

Ch. 11. I do strongly command all our brothers, that they keep no suspicious com­pany or talk with women: and that they en­ter not into the Monasteries of Nuns, ex­cepting onely such unto whom a special li­cence is allowed by the See Apostolick: nor [Page 43]that they be Godfathers to men or women, least by this occasion any scandal arise, either of the brothers or amongst them.

Ch. 12. What brother soever by Gods inspiration shall have a will to go amongst the Sarazens and other infidels, let him de­mand licence of his Minister Provincial. And let not the Ministers give licence to any, but such as they shall see fit to be sent. Moreover I do enjoyn the Ministers by obedience, that they ask of my Lord our Pape, a Cardinal of the Roman Church who may be governour, protectour and correctour of the Brother­hood: that always subject to the feet of the same holy Roman Church, we may stable in Catholick faith, observe poverty, humility, and the holy Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, which we have firmly promised.

This is the rule of St. Francis, and his gray Fryars, wherein are apparently all the per­fect lineaments of a good sound Catholick Christian; but of fanaticisme nothing at all. Nor can I possibly tell, why he should ascribe fanaticisme to persons wholly Evange­lical, resigned, humble, meek, spiritual men; unless perhaps because some one vision or o­ther is written, to have happened to one or other of them in their life. And this may seem strange and incredible indeed to carnal men, who do never really and heartily con­verse [Page 44]with God: but to others who are as much spiritual as they are carnal, it is no such great a novelty; witness our holy Apostles and Prophets, who had them frequently. I cannot tell whether our English fanaticks, such I mean as are called so, do ever pretend any of these visions; if they do, they are not fanaticks because of their visions, but because they are pretended only and false, and Dr. Still. does neither say nor go about to prove that these visions were false, or so much as that they were frequent and familiar in their life. And if one or other such peculiar vi­site from God, either by vision or revelation may conclude a man to be fanatical, farewel all religion, both Hebrew and Christian; for the sounders and teachers of both were fami­liarly absort in God, which Dr. Still. derides here in St. Francis, and visited by him in ap­paritions, revelations, and visions conti­nually.

§. 12. Let me, Sir, in this paragraf ac­quaint you; that when I first at your request undertook this work, not much pleasing to my hand, which uses a pen with much d [...]ffi­culty, my m [...]nd and thoughts were in a man­ner wholly then taken up, with this one Chap­ter of the Doctors book, wherein I intended to be most copious; not thinking to meet [Page 45]with such a multitude of impertinences and falsehoods, as have now stopped me at every turn, I must therefore be shorter then I in­tended; and do like Whittingtons cat, which set down in a house swarming with mice and rats, could do no more then crush the heads now of one, and then of another, all day long, for want of leisure to eat up any. Some things I thought to say of these religious founders; and some of the orders founded by them. Concerning the founders, I meant first to set down the miraculous lives of these Saints, their profound humility, patience, continence, and poverty, their contempt of this vain transitory world, consisting not­withstanding with a most cordial affection, respect and love, which they bore to all man­kind, their continual converse with the God of spirits; their strange joy in contumelies and other injuries, which is a perfection very few can arrive unto in this life; their carnest aspirations after the fight of Jesus and his Heavenly Kingdom; with their glorious triumph [...]ng death. Of all which we have as clear and certain tradition, as if they had lived but yesterday. And Dr. Still. hath been picking, as it seems, amongst those fragrant relicks, not with any spirit of a Christian, ei­ther to love or imitate them; but to fill up, like an adder, the venom of his own breast, [Page 46]and then to disgorge himself into a book.

2. I had it then in my heart, to discover at large the various growth of Saints; nei­ther uniformly answerable to one another, nor yet to themselves in the several ages of their life: and yet all of them friends of God, and acceptable to him in the course and con­summation of their lives. Nor is to be ex­pected, that men incompassed with the like infirmities we be our selves, should in all the parts either of their whole life, or any one year or month therein be still alike, either devout, or joyous, or indisturbed. What is born of flesh is flesh, inclining to sensual things, and unwilling to be restrained, sub­ject to cold, hunger, and several infirmities; and therefore averst from kneeling, fasting, contemplation, especially if it be long and frequent, and still leaning towards its own delight and satisfaction. On the other side, what is born of spirit, is spirit; still flying upwards towards the God of spirits, in whom is most permanent and solid blisse. And these two must be allowed sometimes in us, to struggle and get the mastery, at least to come to such equitable conditions, that the ballance may hang straight. No man is sud­denly made naught: neither is holiness the work of a day; there appears in Corn first a slender green sprig like grass, then a stron­ger [Page 47]blade, then an ear promising grain, which comes up at length, if it be helped and not hurt, cherished by sweet showers and the the Suns vital warmth, and not blasted with mildew, nor lodged by winds, nor trod down by beasts. And what is good Corn in the fields, the same thing are Saints in the Church: though not one of a thousand of them is put in the Calender. When any one of them is a child, he speaks like a child, and thinks like a child, and does like a child; and his main perfection then, is obedience, fear and observance of his parents, who if they be careful of their children after baptism, as an­cient Christians were, might set them in the right way of a blessed life without much trouble. In their youth, they have various properties; some blameable, and others in­nocent, some imitable, and some to be cor­rected. St. Austin was perverse in his ways, St. Francis gallant in his conversation, St. Lawrence charitable, St. Bennet pious, St. Romwall fearful, St. Bruno pensative, St. Do. minick rigorous, St. Martin devout, St. Gre­gory studious, St. Nicholas addicted to absti­nence, St. Hilary bent against heresies, St. Anthony inclined to desarts, St. Thomas to reading, St. Vincent to preaching and the like, with infinite variety. And all of them by light of Gospel, and rule of life drawn out [Page 48]thence, and accommodated to their occasions, went on still mending, pruning and perfe­cting themselves, for Gods favour and fur­ther presence, even in their mortal bodies as a Temple upon earth, proceeding still from vertue to vertue, till they all met united at length, in one contemplation, one spirit, one peace and joy in God for eyer. And he who thus persevers unto the end is safe; and no saint, till his voyage be wholly ended. Nor is any imperfection in their life, to be attri­buted unto other original, then their earthly tabernacles, as all ours are. Some of them also, which I must not here omit to speak are fanciful, fearful and scrupulous; as probably was St. Romwall in his youth, and very many good women, amongst whom I may well reckon St. Bridget, Gertrude, Joan of the Cross, and Catherine of Sena, not as if their whole life were so, but because they were once in their life taken notice of, for a nota­ble working of their imagination, about the conception. Those religious women that were governed by Franciscans, fancied Sco­tus his way truest, the other a D [...]minican Nan, saw St. Thomas his school was in the right. Whereas indeed they saw perhaps nothing at all in it, nor understood where the difference lay. And all of them were equally then lest to themselves in punishment [Page 49]of their business about affairs, that did no­thing at all concern them; it was not per­haps their own fault so much, as those mens, who put these impertinent things into their heads, though not perhaps unto any offence to God, yet unto some disturbance, neither useful to themselves nor others. And if those Divines and Doctors, who went about to have the visions and revelations of the said good women approved, had been truly wise, they might have easily understood, that Gods good Spirit, which inspires, inlightens and strengthens us in the ways and will of Christ our great Lord, never interposes in subtil curiosities of men. I will send you my Spirit, saith our Lord; and when he comes he will put you in mind of all things which I have told you. We are then of that good spirit to learn, not what Scotus, Aureolus, Aqui­nas, or Durandus have imagined, but what our souls Lord and maister the eternal Wis­dom hath revealed, and no more; but men are not usually so earnest and zealous for God, as they are for their own fancies: they talk and think and contend more now adays, about the thin imperceptible curiosities which they learned in schools, then Gods sa­ving wisdom; however, be those school­men and school-women who they will, even the best that any one can make of them; sure [Page 48] [...] [Page 49] [...] [Page 50]I am that all actions of saints are not saintly action. Those men and women were not dropt out of the Stars, but flesh and blood as we are, and [...]able to our infirmities; yet are we to admire▪ and love our saints tenderly, because they struggled so bravely through all the many encounters and oppositions of this mortal life, till they came to enjoy the God of Gods in Sion. And what was good or perfect in them, is recorded for our imitati­on: what was imperfect, they washed away by pennance, Divine contemplation and au­sterities; and some also by their precious blood, freely and plentifully shed, for the sake of Jesus, whom they loved unto the end, Gods grace still assisting them in all their ways of holiness and truth.

3. It was then in my thoughts to show in an ample manner, how all the men renowned for sanctity in the world, Elias, Elisha, saint John Baptist, and all the Prophets, our own twelve Apostles and the first preachers of Christ upon earth, were no others then such men as St. Bennet, Romwall, Bruno, Francis, Dominick, even in those very things, whence Still. concludes them all to be fanaticks and fools. Saint Paul saw in a vision the secrets of God, which he could never express by hu­mane words; which thing is derided here in St. Bennet, who is said to have known the [Page 51]secrets of the Divinity. St. Peter had a visi­on of a sheet let down from Heaven by the four corners of it: and such a vision was that of St. Francis and Dominick supporting the Lateran Church. St. Paul was buffeted by an Angel of Satan, which is mockt at as fa­natical in saint Romwall bruised by evil an­gels. Saint Peter discovered Ananias, that he was not what he pretended, dispropriated of his goods: which is markt as fanatical in St. Bennet, discovering the dissimulation of Rig­go, who appeared before him as a King, and was not. Saint Paul melted so much with the love of Jesus, that he no more lived now, but Jesus lived in him; which is laughed at here in saint Francis, said to melt away at the fight of the Crucifix. The same Apostle was abused all manner of ways, nay even scourged and whipt by the Jews his own country-men; which is noted here as a sign of fanaticism in saint Francis, when the people derided, and threw dirt at him. Jacob saw a Ladder let down from Heaven: flouted here in saint Romwall; who saw Monks ascending upon such a thing. Eliseus discerned the secrets contrived in the King of Syria's chamber: which is here vilified in saint Bennet, said to perceive his Monks when they drunk or eat out of his sight. Abraham and Daniel, saint John Evangelist and others, had frequent [Page 52]revelations and visions of good and bad An­gels; the least part whereof is here esteemed ridiculous in saint Romwall and saint Ben­net; nay our holy Lord and Saviour tells us many of his own visions, of Nathanael for example seen under his figtree; of Dives and Laz [...]rus perceived in distant places and con­ditions; of the Angels falling from Heaven like lightning. And we are here to observe, that whatever grace or vertue our Lord had himself, should be dispersed among those who follow him, with a true and upright heart, for of his fulness we all receive, even grace for grace. Whence we may well conclude that saint Francis, Bennet, Romwall, Bruno, and Dominick, were Jesus Christs true ser­vants, by the graces and visions they had like himself; and not that they were fools and fanaticks: except we intend that others, more forward men should by the same topick con­clude the like of Jesus Christ himself: and what I pray you Sir, would a prophane Rhe­torick what sport would it make upon seve­ral words of the Gospel concerning our Lord; for example, Marc. 3. where it is said of him [...], that he was beside himself. Is not this in our Doctors english to be a fa­natick? saint Francis with the rest slighted the world left their patrimonies, went poor­ly attired, beaten, reviled, scoft at by the [Page 53]world. Were not all the Apostles such men? in a mind piously disposed these things would seem glorious, and transcending the power of flesh and blood, either to do or suffer con­stantly, through our whole life, without some special assistance from Heaven. But where God once inhabits, he raises above earthly things those holy tabernacles of his, now wholly conversant in Heaven. And so much indeed as any man hath of God, so much is he he like to saint Francis and Bennet, to the Prophets and Aposties of our Lord, however these may appear to carnal eys contemptuous and vile. Flesh and blood left alone seeks ease, wealth, fulness, honour, and whatsoe­ver is gustful to our outward sences or more interiour imagination, reduced into concu­piscence of flesh, concupiscence of eyes and pride of life. And he that laughs at the lives of St. Bennet or St. Francis, and the rest like unto them, can have but little of Gods Spi­rit in him, if any thing at all. The stile of the holy Ghost concerning such men is Dia­metrically opposite unto the jeering phrase of Dr. Stilling fleet. By faith, saith holy Writ, Abraham as soon as he was called obeyed, to march forth into a place he should inhabite, not knowing whither he went. By faith he removed towards a land promised him, into a strange country, and dwelt in tabernacles, [Page 54]and so did Isaac and Jacob heirs with him of the same promise. For he looked for a City having a foundation, whose builder and ma­ker is God. Thus speaks the holy Scripture, and is not this St. Bennets case as well as A­brahams. Did not he thus march forth out of his father house, thus dwell in the taber­nacles of rocks and caves, looking after a City built above in Heaven: and both St. Bennet and Abraham did both of them dye in that their faith, and never returned again from whence they came. Again, by faith, saith holy Scripture Moses, when he was great, refused to be called the son of Pharaos daughter, choosing rather to suffer adversity with the people of God, then to injoy the pleasures of sin for a season; preferring re­bukes and taunts, before the treasures of Egypt. Thus did Moses, and is it not the same thing which St. Francis did? St. Fran­cis preferred rebukes and taunts for Christs sake whom he loved, before the pleasure of his fathers house; nay to suffer adversity with Gods peculiar people for that name, he rejoyced to be disinherited by his own fa­ther. Moses then and St. Francis were both of them either wise and holy men, or a couple of fools. Holy Scripture goes on thus; others were tortured and racked: others mocked and scourged, bound and imprison­ed; [Page 55]stoned and murdered; cast out from amongst men and banished; walking up and down in Sheeps skins and Goats skins, in need and want, in tribulation and affliction, wan­dering in wildernesses, in mountains, dens and caves of the earth: of whom the world was not worthy, and all these men through faith obtained a good report. Thus speaks holy Writ; but Dr. Stilling fleet has no good report for them; they are all in his phrase and judgment, madmen and fanaticks, and un­worthy of the world, whom the holy Ghost, judges beloved and divine Heroes, of whom, the world is not worthy. And our great Lord at the sight of these exulted in Spirit and said. I confess to thee O Father, Lord of Heaven and earth; for that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and revealed them to babes. So O Father, be­cause it so seemed good before thee.

4. Another thing also did then much run in my thoughts, and it is this, that all the whole History of our Lords incarnation passion, ascention, is liable to the same kind of derision here used by this Doctour. Nay the whole Gospel, and all the precepts and counsels of Christianity, together with all its threats and promises, are as meer a folly unto a carnal man, that will presume [...]o sport himself with them, as any thing here derided. [Page 56]Few of those who live in this present age are ignorant of this. Our ears are beaten with such talk familiarly in all places. And the bearer does generally but laugh, and applaud the wit of this prophane orator. For this reason St. Paul to prevent the cavil, acknow­ledges himself a fool aforehand. Ye do wil­lingly bear with fools, saith he to the inha­bitants of Corinth, and take me, if you please, for such another. We are all fools in Christ. And if any one doth seem to be wise among you, let him become a fool too, that he may be wise indeed. I know, saith he again, that the word of the cross is but folly unto despe­rate forlorn men. But Gods folly is wiser than mans wit. The foolish things of the world these hath God chosen, that he may confound the wise: and so hath that holy one ordered his ways and counsels, that by folly he might save the world, which carnal wisdom had undone. These and other things to this purpose speaks that holy man. And what, I pray you, Sir, is greater folly with carnal men, than to pass by injuries insensi­bly, and suffer our selves to be abused in pa­tience; to divide our goods among poor people, neither of kin to us, nor perhaps known; to disdain this present life; to fly with all caution the delights and pleasures of it; to pant and breath after our last hour; [Page 57]so to mannage all our affaires, as if our Soul were but a pilgrim in our mortal body, to meditate daily on our latter end; still to ab­stract our mind from visible and corporeal things ready to fly hence out of this prison unto our God invisible, our bodies either slen­derly regarded or wholly neglected, or per­haps chastised and curbed; that liveing here we may express our Lords death, and dying obtain part of his resurrection and glory, which yet our eye never saw, nor ear heard, nor can our heart conceive what it is. All this which is but evangelical rules and coun­sels, acted by good Catholicks unto each ones ability, and preached and talked of somtimes by Protestants themselves, are derided now by witts of this age as folly and madness. And if Dr. Still. do well, they must do well too

Fifthly my purpose then was to prove, that St. Bennet, St. Francis, and the rest here derided for fools, were all of them profound judicious men, as any perhaps ever was: and this too, whether they be weighed in the bal­lance of the Sanctuary, wherin for certain they will carry it; or whether they be com­pared to the great heroes of the world, who wrought so many great things both at home and abroad, in war and peace, without read­ing any books of pedan [...]ick men, looked up­on [Page 58]on by those worthies as things far below them. All the books of the world will never make a fool wise, nor will a wise man want any thing by the loss of them, besides a little pastime. Substantial wisdom is implanted in the spirit of man by his first Creatour; and this alone in its great latitude of degrees dis­cerns mens excellences. And what comes by reading of books is but like the outward co­louring of a wall, which will never make it sound, if it be rotten before. The holy Go­spell indeed is needfull to the world; becaus it turns the faces of poor misled mankind from false unto true and permanent felicity. But this also, if it be used only as other books are, to quote places in latin, greek or hebrew, or repeat sentences without book, or main­tain dispute and talk, makes no man truly ei­ther wiser or better any one jot, then he was before. Gospell so far polishes, so far san­ctifies, so far makes us wise, so far happy, as we put it in practice and no farther. Hu­man learning, that is philosophy and langua­ges, which is all that can be understood by it, this might these Saints both neglect them­selvs and disswade it also with all their endea­vour unto Christians, who looking after a world to come, ought no more in true wis­dom to intangle themselvs in this, then any other vanities of this transitory life. And [Page 59]St. Paul himself who understood true wis­dom well enough, inveighes as strongly a­gainst it, as any of these above named Saints, calling it a windy puffing business, [...], the first ruin of mankind, who was therfore carefully forbidden the insipid tree of knowledg, whose fruit fills us up only with wind and sin. And this old mystical precept, St. Paul renews in plain words, when he counsels us, to beware of vain, philosophy, that we be not led away and deceived by it, according to the constitutions of men and e­lements of this world; such as is the philo­sophy of Aristo [...]le for example, of Plato, De­mocritu [...], Pithagoras and such like men, now crept god wot into our Christian Schools, and there dominereing unto our much loss of time, hinderance of devotion, and prejudice of mutual charity. I know they do some good unto the sharpening of our wits, if men could be content with that. But many will not rest here but even wear out their lives in those empty shadows, that have nothing at all in them either of solidity or substance, nor tend to any thing but discours. There is other learning for Christians, more solid and edi­fying, more comfortable and useful, more il­luminating our hearts, then all this vain lite­rature, which puffs us up, as if we were some great ones, and yet God knows has neither [Page 60]savour in it nor sustinence. And that other was the learning and wisdom of these holy men, who knew how to act and speak like Angels of God. And truly so much judg­ment had St. Francis the veriest simplician of all the five, that men of those times would rather acquiesce to his opinion in any weigh­ty affair or matter of conscience, then any now either to subtil Scotus, or any other of our Schoolmen. His very rule though it seem austere, is nothing but the very subli­mity of Christian prudence. And some o­ther monuments which he left behind him, kept yet amongst his children, although brief and few, are so solid and judicious as well as sweet and pious, that if he were a fool, I know not where to find a wise man upon earth amongst Christians. But it must needs add, I think, to his heavenly glory, what made him so much exult as yet a mortal on this earth, to be contemned, reviled and con­tumeliously treated here by Dr. Stillingfleet. And so let him live with joy in God for ever.

St. Paul distinguishes a double sort of wis­dom; one carnal, which is an enemy to God; another spiritual, which is at variance with the world. And both of these have a vast latitude of degrees in several men. Some are so carnal, that they have nothing of Gods [Page 61]spirit in them: and some again so spiritual as if they had no body to look after. These are rare, and those frequent in this world. Others again have some part of both the one and the other: and this in a vast unspeakable variety. But he that hath nothing of Gods spirit here, shall never see God hereafter. Who sowes by flesh, of flesh shall reap cor­ruption: and he who sowes in spirit, of the spirit shall reap eternal life. Carnal wisdom is conversant in carnal things, and spiritual wisdom in things spiritual. And according as one walks in spirit, so he neglects the things of the flesh; on the other side, as he walks in fleshly desires, so he contemns and vilifies the spiritual. For flesh covets against the spirit, and spirit against the flesh: and these two are adversaries one to the other. The works of the flesh are adultery, forni­cation, uncleanness, wanton dalliance, idola­try, witchcraft, enmities, scolding, emulati­ons, wrath, sedition, sects, envy, murder, drunkennes, bankettings, and the like. The works of the spirit, Charity, joy, peace gen­tlenes, bounty, goodnes, faith, meeknes, tem­perance, and such like. And accordingly we see men carnally wise, to be crafty, covetous, injurious, leacherous, malitious, envious, con­tentious, detractours, supplanters of their in­nocent neighbours, proud, contumelious, un­heedful [Page 62]of their pacts and promises, uncha­ritable, unmerciful, bold, impious, contem­ners of Gods Law, and fearless of him. But the spiritually wise are silent, peaceable, pa­tient, no contrivers of ill to any, ever think­ing of God and their last end, charitable to­wards all men, suspitious of worldly prospe­rity, zealous and fervent in prayer, making friends daily of their outward mammon, still breathing after God and his heavenly King­dom, neglecters of their own bodies, nor ma­king provision for the lusts of it, haters of worldly excess [...]s, still examining and refle­cting on their waies, that they be not unjust or evil, ever pruning their passions, and re­ctifying what they find amisse, humble mind­ed and dying by little and little unto all sen­suality, that they may live with God for ever. This is the wisdom of Saints, whom crafty worldly men looking upon as fanaticks and fools make their prey of them, and eat them up as sheep prepared for their table. So that as this true and spiritual wisdom conforming us to our Lord Jesus Christ receives somtimes peculiar visits and priviledges from God; so is it likly to meet with contempt, hunger, na­kednes, scourges, and persecutions in this world. And these are the things which Dr. Stillingfleet h [...]re derides in these five Catho­lick Saints: which be either the genuin works [Page 63]of spiritual wisdom: or secondly some pecu­liar priviledges conferred from heaven upon it; or thirdly some afflictions that do annoy it, either from evil Angels or men. That they fled from their Fathers hous, mortified their flesh and carnal concupiscence, retired to rocks and caves, wept at their devotions, neglected human literature; that they were swallowed up in God, melted at the sight of the crucifix, tender hearted towards the poor, covering them sometimes with their own cloaths, those texts of holy Gospel for the rule of their life; these and such like things are but the connatural operations of divine wisdom and Gods good spirit in them. Se­condly, that they perceived angels or drove them away by the sign of the cross; that they seemed to be besides themselves after they had conversed with God in prayer, and unlike unto other men; that they pierced their hearers hearts when they preached and exhorted them; that they discerned the dissi­mulation and fraud of people who appeared before them, and somtimes the evil deeds and counsels of men out of their sight; that di­vine visions were made either to themselves, or to other men concerning them and their peculiar friendship with God; all such things as these are but peculiar priviledges of hea­ven graunted unto some special friends and [Page 64]lovers who are wise to God. Thirdly, that they were taken for beasts, derided, scoft, pelted with dirt or stones, whipt, renounced by their parents, buffeted and bruised by an­gels of Satan, walking in extream hunger and dirty attire, reviled and contumeliously trea­ted; these are but afflictions falling upon them by evil angells and men: and all of them either voluntarily undertaken or volun­tarily accepted and entertained, when they fell upon them, for his love and respect, who so suffered and so entered into glory. And the doctour if he were honest and truly wife, would never dare to lay fanaticisme unto Saints, becaus some men here in England, who are according to his own definition fa­naticks indeed, pretend some of those things, for which antient Saints were much renown­ed. He might and ought to remember that these good things bear no part at all in the definition of fanaticisme, but are the very li­neaments of evangelical perfection; nor is all evil, which such men do. It is neither wisdom nor honesty, nor so much as a manly behaviour, to deride good or innocent things even in those men, we may by custome and education dislike, Papists, Quaker, or how ever they be called. By these proceedings atheisme spreads its roots in the hearts of those who read such flouts and contumelies, [Page 65]perhaps further than the gibeing author of the libell himself intended. If the doctour, who by his little parcels of story endeavours to render these five great persons contemp­tible, do believe those relations of them to be true; then must he needs believe also, that the Patriarchs and Prophets, Apostles, Mar­tyrs, and all the Saints of God so esteemed hitherto, were all mad men and fanaticks. If he believe them not, but judg them false relations, then is he a mad man himself, to conclude them fanaticks by that which never was. So that be the stories true or false, the doctour will be thought either unwise or im­pious, which he pleases,

These worthy Sir are the five thoughts, wherewith my mind was then wholly taken up, before I put my Pen to paper: which now, too much tired already with his many impertinencies and falshoods, I can but only mention. And I wish with all my heart, that the doctour had so moderated and guided his words, that neither his own Prelates, nor o­ther grave People of the Land, who cannot but fore-see the dismal event of such wild talk as his is, might not take offence or be scandalized thereat. All our Bishops mouths are now stopt against fanaticks, if the said enthusiasts do derive their pedigree from re­nowned [Page 66]Saints who by the Bishops authority are put every Year into the Calendar.

§ 13. The things I had to say concerning the Orders and families of these Saints, were yet more and greater, than any I could speak of the men themselves, who lived but a short time in this world. And all this I must also now omit. Only I wish with all my heart, that my countrimen would first think in their mind, what a comely and blessed Land this was, when it was inamelled up and down with so many beauteous tabernacles of religious men, in their several rites and habits chant­ing the praises of God night and day, with Hymns, Psalms and Canticles perpetually, li­ving in common, chastly and obediently all their days; After this, if they please to con­sider, the hourly imployments of all these families throughout the day, while they now worked, now prayed, now subdued their bo­dies with hard disciplines, now wrote out books for the use of posterity, now chanted out Gods praises, met all together seven hours a day in the Quire, and thus ended their lives in the arms of one another, they cannot but applaud that happy society of men thus dedicated to God, and think the Country wherein they live the happier for them. All the many books both greek, la­tin [Page 67]and hebrew, historians, oratours, and works of antient Fathers, had never possibly been deduced unto our times, had they not been renewed age by age still in several king­doms by the labour of these religious men, before Printing was invented. Nor had Eng­land seen any of these goodly Churches that remain in it to this day, nor yet enjoied those wise and equitable laws, by which this land is still governed, contrived all of them by Catholick Princes, Monks and Bishops. Nor is Catholick religion against the law, as some now think, but with the law and the law with it and for it, and by it, however some super­additional statutes have been contrived of late against that holy antient faith, since the reformation. Thirdly they may consider if [...]ey pleas the wondrous convenience of these general granaries in a land, religious founda­tions I mean, not only in spiritual things, wherin we have good helps and examples all the land over at our own doors; but even in our temporals also. For no sooner was a child born to any man, but he had choice of occasions to provide for him, without any further cost or charges both for his soul and body: which is a benefit so wanted now, that neither high nor low know well now adaies how to dispose of their children. Fourthly, they may call to mind and admire the great [Page 68]love and respect the Christian world ever had for those holy orders and their founders, unto whose company they flocked continu­ally with exulting hearts. And happy he who could be thought worthy to be admited into their society, even of all ages, states and conditions of men, wherein they profitted some of them unto admirable sanctity and glory: and even the worst and veriest tru­ant among them was yet better, than the wide world would have made him. The one or­der of St. Bennet received into it twenty Em­perours and ten Empresses, forty seven Kings and above fifty Queens, twenty Sons of Em­perours, and forty eight Sons of Kings, about a hundred young Ladies daughters to Kings and Emperours, a hundred other Princes and Princesses, Dukes and Dutchesses; Marquesses Earls and Countesses well near two hundred, fifteen Bishops who left their Miters to live in that happy retired life; and others of the inferiour Gentry innumerable. And thus hath this holy order continued, thus lived and flourished now a thousand Years in the Christian world, the resting place of the rich and refuge of the poor. So that all people who lived in those good daies and beheld religious orders, had a contrary judgment of them unto Dr. Stillingfleet who was born but yesterday, and never saw any. Fifthly, the [Page 69]eminence of learning in all these orders, and the books of all sorts and kinds, that have is­sued from them, who is able to recount them? No sort of knowledg, no kind of literature has escaped them. The one order of St. Bennet has brought forth fifteen thousand seven hundred. Monks, eminent writers and compilers of books. The Academies were all antiently in their Monasteries. At one Abbey in France called Fleury were brought up at once four thousand Students. Their Rabanus set up the School of Germany. Their Alcuinus founded the University of Paris. Their Bede advanced our Oxford University, first renewed by Theodore and Adrian benedictin Monks also. Their Dio­nysius Exiguus perfected the Ecclesiastical computation. Their Guido made the scale of Musick. Their Silverster invented the Or­gan. Theirs were Anselmus, Ildephonsus, Bernardus and Rupertus, the four Marian Doctours: and what not? Sixthly, if we please to consider the multitudes of glorious men in these five orders, who had received a double portion of their Fathers spirit, as E­lizeus is said to have got of Elias above o­ther Sons of the Prophets; who wi [...]l then be able to recount the eminent Saints, Con­fessours, Martyrs, Aposties and Converters of Countries, that have issued out of these [Page 70]divine Sanctuaries. The one order of St. Bennet has brought forth forty thousand blessed Confessours, above three thousand Martyrs; Missioners and Apostles, so many and powerful, that they have converted no less than thirty Provinces unto Christian faith. St. Bennet himself converted Campa­nia, which had remained Pagan even to his daies; St. Leander part of Spain; St. Boni­face and his companions much of Germany and Hassia; St. Amand, Willebrord, Wil­fred, Switbert, with their fellow Monks, Bel­gium, Holland, Friseland and South Saxony: St. Willehade, Dacia, Gothland and Groon­land: St. Kilian and Lambert, the Taxan­drians and other Germans: St Lugdurus, Adalbertus and other Monks out of the Mo­nastery of Corbey, Pannonia, Sarmatia, Po­land and Muscovy. St. Steven Suec [...]a, St. Bruno Lituania, St. Albo Gascony, another St. Boniface Sclavonia, St. Otho Pomerania, St. Winkelin Wandalia, and St. Austin with his good Monks sent hither by St. Gregory made all our England Christian, wherein we now l [...]ve. For though our learned and re­verend Antiquary Mr. Broughton doth think that St. Austin and his holy Monks brought hither with them the rule of St. Gregory, distinct from that of St. Bennet, yet that is of small concernment to my purpose now in [Page 71]hand; especially since that rule and all the former rules in our Britany, did unite at last in St. Bennets rule, as lesser lights in the bo­dy of the Sun. And should I mention the holy Confessors, learned Writers, valiant Martyrs, and vigorous Apostles, all those glorious men in the orders of St. Francis, St. Dominick, St. Bruno, and other such like founders, bright stars now out of our sight, yet shining in a higher heaven the day would fall me. My voyage is now bent another way. And therefore great Servants of God, spirits inkindled from heaven, brave vertuous hearts raised up even in your mortal pilgri­mage above mortality it self, let it suffice I love you. Time will bring forth a better Pen to recount your names in a character more worthy of you than mine is. I must go hence.

By this little Sir we may discern, if the God of this world hath not utterly blinded our eyes, that these holy orders were found­ed in the wisdom of God and power of God, and not in Stillingfleetisme. For counsels of men come to nought; but what is of God is lasting: as wise Gamaliel discoursed in a councel of the Jewes The order of St. Dominick, St. Bruno, Romwall and St. Fran­cis have been six hundred years in the Chri­stian world; St. Bennet almost twice as long; [Page 72]and yet live. What is of God is powerful of it self, without any worldly helps of force or subtilty. What is of God is servent and vi­gorous. What is of God, however it may seem distastful at the first, becomes dayly more delectable, attractive, and pleasing. What is of God is zealous of God, loves and bends towards God, thinks nothing hard, no­thing tedious, nothing heavy, that is under­taken for Gods cause. All time is well spent in his service, all difficulties easy, all labour pleasant, all mortification comfortable, all our members too few for his imployment, all the blood in our vains too little to shed for his love. And all this fervour and constancy, love of God and amiableness to men, zeal and vigour, purity and perseverance were looked upon and approved and imitated to their po­wer by such as lived here in England in the days of holy Catholick religion with all hea­venly comfort: however now out of sight it be all out of mind too; so much out of mind, that Dr. Stillingfleet calling it fanaticisme expects an applause for his labour. The grand Turk a great enemy of Christians, when he looked upon poor humble St. Fran­cis (who having come a long journey unto his conversion, made his way unto him by the very majesty of his countenance and po­wer of GOD that went along with him, [Page 73]through all his Guard and Nobility about him) the grand Seigneur had so great a re­verence for the man, that dismissing all that were about him, he took him into his closet and there converst with him many hours in private several times. And thence at last he dismist him with so much peace and ho­nour, as if he had been not a man but an Angel of God rather, appearing upon earth. And this thing was never done to any in that Court, either before that time or since. But the doctour never saw either St. Francis, or St. Dominick, St. Bruno, or St. Bennet, or any of their orders: and therfore speaks of things utterly unknown to him according to the malice of his own heart, be the truth what it will. It was once a Christian lesson in England, that we should speak of the dead nothing but good; and of the living no­thing but truth. But he does neither.

§ 14. From hence the author proceeds to a new argument fit as he thinks to prove the Church of Romes fanaticisme, which indeed so exalts her honour, that it proves her the only powerful Judg that does suppress it. He tells us then a long and punctual story of some disturbances and heresies that rose about three hundred Years ago in the Christian world, who were the chief authors, when and where [Page 74]they first appeared, how far they spread, what tumults they caused, what Catholick Doctours opposed them, and what Pope at last censured and silenced them. And this was the heresy of the Fratricelli, Begwini, and such like others. And he is so exact in his narration, that he spends almost forty pages in it, thereby to daz'e the Reader, and lead him on so far that he may not reflect upon the impertinence of it. For heresies will rise, and the first up­rise of them must needs be amongst some who lived thitherto in the Catholick Church. And if they will not hear and be quiet as the rest are, they will be censured in the end; And this was all the business here. But the Doctour twits at the Pope, for that he delayed his censure so long, still favouring the Fryars, amongst whom there were some great sticklers in that madness. Surely Sir it is a part not of prudence only but justice too in any judg, to hear all parties speak, and to defer an ex­treme sentence, till he see where it is most due. And sometimes the commotion is so disorderly, wild or amb [...]guous that true pru­dence will doubt, wh [...]ther punishment be to be infl [...]cted on this or th [...]t side, or perhaps on either; until a [...] least it appear so season­able, that it may do good. But thus I say; If the [...]e men [...]ere named, Almarious, Par­ma, Oliva, Peter John, Geraldus, Sagarellus, [Page 75]Dulcinus, Hermanus, and other Fratricelli were fanaticks, or their opinions fanaticisme; then did the Church justly and prudently so to silence them, that they are now no more extant in the world. If they were not fana­ticks; then all the Doctours narration is but a tale of Tom Thumb. I can tell the Do­ctour of another fanaticisme far greater and of more dismal consequence than this, which rose up in the Catholick Church, but one hundred Years ago, begun, promoted and spread over half Europe, by Martin Luther an Augustin Fryar, John Calvin a Priest, and as I think a Cannon too, Swing ins who I am sure was both, Carolstade an arch-dea­con in Wittenburg, Bucer a Dominican Fry­ar, Lismanin a franciscan, Richerius a Car­melite. Alciat and David George from Tran­silvania, Valentin Gentile from Italy, Casta­lio from France; Peter Martyr and Ochyn from Florence, Alasco from Po [...]and, B [...]za from Burgundy, Servetus from Spain, Me­lanchton from Germany as if the whole earth had conspired to cast forth her dead, unto the infection and ruin of mankind. These had been all Catholick hitherto, and Catho­lick Priests too; And what d [...]d they now hold forth, and what did they pretend and teach? a perfect fanaticisme, here described by the Doctour; and both the waies of it: [Page 76]both a new enthusiastick way of Religion; and a resisting of authority under pretence of it. They would have now no more obe­dience to their Prelates; which is the very essence of fanaticisme; no obligation to the religious duties, wherein they had hicherto been trained, no respect to Church laws, or rules of discipline, fasts, or other observan­ces. The best works were sins. Restitution superfluous. Monasteries and religious retire­ment superstitious. Gods law impossible to be kept. No oblation, no altar, no priest­hood any more: And such negatives innu­merable. This was their new religion; the maddest that ever was broched upon earth, and far short even of Pagan honesty. And how did they go on? Even with point of pen and force of arms; defying and defaming all Superiority upon earth. They razed and threw to the ground hundreds of fair Mona­steries and Churches, filled all Germany, where the fanaticisme began, with ruins, per­verted England, Ireland, Denmark, Sweth­land, and all the Islands here abouts; and pillaged the whole Kingdoms. This fana­tick heresy was opposed by all the learned Catholicks in Christendom, and censured, not by the Pope only, but by a general councel of Bishops gathered together round about, to apply their helping hands; and stop the [Page 77]ruin. And yet has this one dangerous infe­ction been yet too strong for all indeavour. Other lesser fanaticismes have yielded to the incessant care and vigilance of Catholick Prelates. But this of Prot [...]stants holds out as yet, and so will still, till the temptation be removed by the hand of heaven, which turns all mens hearts, when the Hour is fittest for it.

§ 15. After this, the Doctour gives us the story of St. Ignace Founder of the Society. So contumeliously related; that his conversion to a stricter life, by reading the lives of for­mer Saints; his backwardness to human li­terature, his patient sufferings, and travels to and fro, as his pious purposes led him, his fasting and meditations, the examinations made of his rigorous course of life, and va­rious oppositions, his gathering Disciples and indeavour to have his rule confirmed by the Supreme Bishop, are all made to sound conformably either to Don Quixots Ro­mance, or the esteemed madnesses of Qua­kers, who are, saith he, at least Grand-chil­dren to the founder of the Jesuits. Truly these Quakers either are, or must it seems be thought, an odd kind of people. They are Benedictins, Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesu­its; and all within the compass of one Cha­pter. [Page 78]And yet they profess none of all this, nor know nothing of it. But here Sir, you may perceive at least, how easy it is to make a pious and serious matter to sound ridicu­lous or wild by the meer manner of relating it; which is a great and necessary caution a­gainst the poison of slanderous tongues. What M [...]ffeius, Ribbadanira, and Orlandius learned Jesuits write seriously of that holy man, if not all to his honour, yet no part of it to his disparagement, this by prophane i­rony is travested into mockery. Thus do Jewes tell the story of our Christianity and its [...]oly founder unto their Ch [...]ldren, in such a Stilling fleetian way, that they are made to hate and scorn it all their life after. But Je­suits have too much gravity and wisdom in them, to be la [...]ght out of countenance by a trifl [...]ng prevaricator. Let St. Ignace be as great a fool as St. Francis, or yet as great as t [...]is Author can speak him, yet can he not deny but he has wise and grave and learned children, whose books have helped him ma­ny a t [...]me to make up his Sermon. When King Saul began to p [...]ophesy, the people wondred at it, and asked one another, Is Saul also among the Prophets? unto whom another replyed, How came he there, Quis est pater cjus, who is his father? giving the rest ther­by to understand, that his prophesy was not [Page 79]genuin, nor likely to be fixt and constant, becaus he was not a Prophet of prophets nor had his spirit from them. So may we con­trariwise think of this worthy society of Je­suits, that such a stable gravity and fixed wis­dom, as is in them all, must needs be derived unto them from the spirit and statutes of their founder. That is I think a true moral physiognomy which is given us by the Lyrick poet, especially in a continual succession of men. Fortes creantur fortibus & bonis. Est in juvencis, est in equis patrum Virtus, nec im­belles ferocem Progenerant aquilam columbae. But let St. Ignace be never so simple, yet did he ever submit unto his Superiours and Pa­stours, walking all his daies in Catholick re­ligion, and had his rule of life confirmed by his Prelate; and therfore could be no fana­tick, according to the Doctours definition of it. He neither invented any new way of religion, nor yet resisted authority under pre­tence of it. But I think the doctour gave us that definition of fanaticisme, in the begin­ing of this his Chapter, only to keep his dis­course far enough off, and never to touch it.

§ 16. The Doctour proceeds now to declare how the very Catholick way of devotion doth pro­mote enthusiasme. And what think you Sir, doth he speak of here? not one word of our [Page 80]daily psalms, hymns, canticles, anthems, sa­cred lessons, doxologies, our Lords prayer or any other devotion prescribed by the Church, and almost hourly in the hands and eyes of Catholick people: not a word of our examination of our selves upon our knees, penitential petitions, or other our obsecrati­ons, thanksgivings deprecations or interpel­lations for our selves and all other good Christian people, for Kings and prelates and all constituted in authority over us, that we may live a peaceable and quiet life with all piety and decent behaviour. No mention of all this, which he knows as I perceive by his talking of our Manuels and Breviaries, to be our Catholick devotion; no not one word. What is it then he calls the Catholick way of devotion? Only one spiritual book set forth by Mr. Cressy about twenty Years ago out of Father Baxers works, wherin the Doctour finds some uncouth hard words which he can­not understand: this is that which he calls Catholick devotion: and this is all the way he shows that Catholick devotion promotes enthusiasme. Have not I reason Sir to be weary in following after such a butterfly?

§ 17. He tells us at last, That Papists are guilty of resisting authority under pretence of religion, which he proves first by the principles [Page 81]of the Jesuitical party which are destructive to government, and Secondly by this that the said party are most countenanced in the Court of Rome. But he never tells us what are these principles of the Jesuitical party, nor what this Jesuitical party is. He only names Ma­riana and one or two others who should say that a Prince excommunicated loses his Soveraignty; For which boldness they suffered worthily both by their own body and others. Now how this discourse of our Doctour agrees with his purpose all this while pretended here I cannot see. For it has not so much as the colour which appeared in some sort hitherto. His book is intitled A Discourse of the idola­trous fanaticisme of the Church of Rome: but now he tells us of a Jesuitical party and the Court of Rome. The Society of Jesuits, a religious grave prudent family in the Catho­lick Church of God, this I have heard of: and the Church of Rome, or Catholick Church I know. But what is this Jesuitical party, and what this Court of Rome I under­stand not at all. The Doctour pretended to speak of the Church and her religion, though indeed he hath never come neer it yet. But now he speaks that which hath not so much as the sound of it. A Jesuitical party and a Court, what are these to our purpose now in hand? There be parties and as many de­signs, [Page 82]signs, as there be men in this world, although they should be all of one religion; and not all of them, nay not perhaps one in a thou­sand directed according to Gospel or right reason at all times, but for avarice rather, solicitude of this world, or sensuality. Who can mend this? Or whose part is it to justify such things? No man that defends a religion, can conceive how they may concern him; and he that opposes a religion, if he were wise or honest, would never object them. And as for the Court of Rome, I know no more of it then I do of the Court of France, Spain or Constantinople. I have long since been told, that the designs of Courts and Courtiers, are politick, high, ambitious, and close. And I have heard again that they are of one and the same opinion all over the face of the earth, a high elevated secret mysteri­ous way, unknown to us peasants who are born in sin, although it go under the name still of that rurall religion which is counte­nanced in their respective Kingdoms. How true these things be, and what this way of theirs is I know not, nor do I love to speak of them at all. One part of our duty I think and respect towards our Superiours is silence, and not to speak at all of them. For we may conclude that God subjected all other Creatures un [...]o man, becaus he created them [Page 83]dumb. And certainly enough may we ima­gine that the opinions of Courts and Cour­tiers are very high, since one can hardly meet any ordinary man, who would not have the whole earth under his command and power, if he could get it: It is not long since we had here threescore thousand of our own Protestant Countrymen armed in the field who held all of them an opinion that the Kings Crown was at their disposal. So they wrote, so they talked, and so they acted. And it is hard to say in what head are the most presumptuous, ambitious, and lofty opinions. And our Doctour himself who so contemp­tuously treats King Pepin, Charlemaign, and other renowned Kings of the earth, nay all the Catholicks in the world at once, cannot be one of the humblest and modestest of men. Court of Rome, and Jesuitical party, sounds in my ears like a thorough Bass, and treble Violyn playing together; the one strikeing three long humming Notes about the double Gamut; the other descanting theron in short and quicker graces. The Court of Rome I something perceive me­thinks what it should be, but not what it is: But the Jesuitical party with all its graces, I neither know what it is, nor what it should be. That worthy Society of Jesuits may be considered either according to their religion, [Page 84]or Schools, or personal designs. According to their religion they are as other Catholicks be, in the same worship, same Sacraments, same Altar, same Priesthood, same faith, same hope to come. As to their Schools, although they have I believe five hundred Readers of the Chair, and perhaps as many publick de­fensions in every three years space: yet did I never hear of any such thing either taught or defended in their Schools, which is here put upon the Jesuitical party: And yet it is nothing to our purpose if it were. But as to the personal designs of them or any others we can no more dive into them, then into the several wandering thoughts and purposes of men, museing daily in London-streets a­bout their affairs. And one man or other thus museing amiss amongst the Jesuits, can no more be called the Jesuitical party, then such a one here in England be termed the English party. Mariana I am sure has been soundly checkt amongst them and other Ca­tholicks for his fault here spoken of. And if the Court or Courtiers of Rome have any fancy, that they are higher than Kings, and by their excommunication can render them Kings no more, as this Doctour here speaks, this may argue indeed that they are a high minded people. But Courtiers do not walk so exactly according to our Christian [Page 85]religion, that this can prove that vanity of theirs, to be any part of it. Catholick Kings who have been here in England well nigh twenty since the Conquest, more among the Saxons, and others not a few amongst our antient Brittains; and the present Catholick Kings of France, Spain, the Emperour, Ger­man Princes and others have and do all know well enough, that such a fancy is no part of our Catholick religion. Nor did our King Henry the Eighth who first left it off, express any such cause or reason for it: The times would be very good and happy if all the words and actions of every particular man were answerable to his holy faith. But this is not to be expected in this evil world. And to call that religion which is done or spoken contrary unto it, is a very great injury and injustice. Our holy religion teaches us to observe and obey our Kings and Superiours, as Gods Vicegerents upon earth, though they be Infidels and Pagans, and rather to lay down our lives for them, then suffer them to be hurt. And this is nothing but the very law of Nature antecedent to any religion what­soever; and holds good although there were neither heaven nor hell, nor any reward or punishment to come. And what power can any man upon earth have to take that away which he never gave, nor ever had. He that [Page 86]creates can only annihilate. So long as kings are Catholicks, the Pope prays for them. And if they cease to be so, he is nothing to them any more. And yet are they the same they were, in all their royalty and power un­controulably. If the King of France should receive the Garter from our King of Eng­land, he is thought to be so long his friend, as he is pleased to wear it. But if he throw it off, he is King of France still, as much as e­ver he was. I know not what the Court or Courtiers of Rome may think or say in this business: For what the Doctour here tells us about the Irish remonstrance, is a perso­nal business, and not so circumstanced that one can draw any general conclusion or po­sition from it. But if they be only so much as said either to have conceived or counte­nanced any such opinion looked upon by all Catholicks and good Christians upon earth, as ungrounded, fals and impious, it behoves them I should think, both for the publick good, honour of Catholick religion and their own credit to see it censured with all speed, that the progress of Christianity be not stopped by it. For no Pagan King will venture at a promise of everlasting felicity with the hazard of his Crown at the plea­sure of one man whom he never saw nor knows. Sure I am if any such opinion had [Page 87]been heard of when Christianity was first planted in Kingdoms it had never found footing in this world. And if it be now countenanced, the progress of Christianity is at an end.

I doubt not, but that a Cotholick writer may in his controversy about religion, if so he pleas, defend an opinion also of any one or other who has professed the Catholick re­ligion which he maintains. But this is more then any one needs to do. For religion is quite another thing, derived from another, authour and original, established in another manner, no less differing from an opinion, then a fixed star in the firmament from the mist or fog ariseing from the earth. Fai [...]h is one known thing, but opinions are innu­merable and endless. If the various opinions, entertained in mens minds but one only day in any City of England were all faithfully re­corded at night, they would exhibite to a Reader a most prodigious spectacle. Opini­ons are infinitly various, infinitly changable, infinitely contradictory and absurd in the world. Nor may we doubt but that thou­sands of them are contrary both to religion and law. Angry rageing men and wanton women, unfaithful servants, and di obedient children, theevs and murderers, cheats and li­ars, can we think when they act according to [Page 88]their own disordered passions, that they hold not then an opinion, that in such circumstan­ces it is expedient for them so to do? Wick­ed sinners hold wicked opinions, be the reli­gion what it will. Gainsay and blame them in their heat; and it will soon appear, that they are stiff and resolved in that their opi­nion by the very fury of their wrath. And what will not sycophants and flatterers ei­ther say or write, to pleas the mind of those on whom they depend, even against their own. Rules of law and religion are fixt and stable and ever the same. But opinions are moveable as water: and never right but when conformable to a right rule of some good law: and how far they are conforma­ble, so far are they right and no more. And therfore it is a madness in any one who un­dertakes to write against the standard of a religion, to object instead of that, opinions of men. For first one man may have an o­pinion to day and write it also in a book; and yet few years after, nay perhaps very few days, change his mind. Secondly the opini­on of one man may be gain-said by a thou­sand as wise as he, who live under the same law and religion. Thirdly an opinion in a book is indeed nothing at all in the world, but a meer p [...]atonick idea, till it be reduced to some reall existence by circumstances [Page 89]which actuate it and make the action really to be: and some opinions are worse then nothing. For which reason all the multitude of opinions which sill up the books of lear­ned Casuists may be exercises of wit indeed; but no guids can they be unto action. The direction of a liveing Oracle and Counsel­lour who can penetrate all present circum­stances, and prescribe by his wisdom on which side is then most of good and least of evil; which is the only rule that directs a wise counsellour what to determin, this only is our guide in doubts. Wherfore the great Princes of the earth recurre not to books in their difficulties, but use the wisdom of their counsel, wise and grave men who must hear all things that can be said on both sides, hic & nunc, and ponder them deeply before a judgment can result. And it often happens amongst them, that they will determin in one year that action to be rejected, which was in another time expedient and good, only upon change of circumstances. It is in my mind a vain labour to write long discourses about probable opinions as some do. For if we speak of an opinion in a strict sence, an opi­nion tending to action, and yet separated or abstracted from all circumstances of person, time, place, means, motives, events, and con­nexions with ill or welfare, which no writer [Page 90]of a book can see; such an opinion is no­thing at all in the world but a meer fantosme, more apt to mislead then secure any action of life. And he that goes to a book to learn there, how he is to act in any business he is about, goes like one blind man to another blind guide to lead him. For this reason all antient good Christians ever had their con­sciences g [...]ided by living Oracles of men; who laying the general rule of religion be­fore them, still gave that for safest counsel, which all circumstances considered came nearest to the intent and scope of Gospel. Truly I cannot but grieve to see men talk so much as they do now adaies, about opinions. For we are to hold nothing but Gospell and our holy Christian tradition, and no opini­ons at all in religious affaires. And if opini­ons do rise therin, as needs they must some­times, by variation of circumstances, that is still to be rejected, which most swarves from the intent of holy Gospel, or, (which is all one) hath least in it of good and most of ill. Let not only three men but three millions of men hold any thing to the breach of this rule, it is not to be heeded. They who write books of moral actions and conscience, can know nothing either of the person actually concerned, or of the various circumstances which must bring this action into a just ex­istence [Page 91](let them in their abstracted aery pro­blems say what they please) nor innumerable events therof; although there be some opi­nions that no circumstance can justify. Nor do Catholick Kings and Princes ever heed at all, what people talk in their Schools and A­cademies, unless it proceed to action. If any do act well, he has peace: and if any do ill, death is at his door, however opinions go. But of this enough. Doctor Still. threatens us here with a more accurate examination of these things from the authour who wrote a­gainst the Apology for Catholicks. I know not who that Authour is. But I can tell him thus much, that the right honourable Authour of that charitable Apology stands now actually ready with his Pen in hand to entertain him as he hath once already done. And that Protestant writer will find him still a main strong Castle not to be blown down, or so much as shaken by his impertinent waves. All after ages shall make honourable mention of that noble man, when his adversary shall be swallowed up in the deep of oblivion Not only Catholicks but many worthy Gentle­men even amongst our Protestant country­men have grieved in their hearts to see us lie open to so many grievous defama [...]ions of men. But this noble Person ventured to speak and write an Apology for us. And if [Page 90] [...] [Page 91] [...] [Page 92]no man should be valorous, truth [...]ow kept under lock and key for a whole hundred years, would never appear, as it is, and in its own shape.

§ 18. Sir one mistake of mine commit­ted in my first packet, wherin I told you that this piece of Fanaticisme was Doctour Stil­lingfleet's own proper invention, I must here revoke. For it is not so. I wondred indeed, that in his arguments against the Church of Rome, set down in the begining of his book, wherin is mention made of that Churches I­dolatry, hinderances of a good life, and di­visions, there was not there any one word of Fanaticisme which here fills up a whole cha­pter in his book, compiled as himself speaks in defence of those arguments. But I was inlighten'd in this my doubt by a meer chance. For meeting with a Protestant Stationer, I asked him if he ever heard of an Authour called Foolis or Foulis, who is quoted once or twice by Doctour Stillingfleet. O quoth he presently, Foolis is an asse; he printed last year an ecclesiastical history, wherein he says that Papish Saints were fanaticks. I had the book, but threw it out of my shop: It is sold now up and down the streets for wast paper. I con­sidered then with my self, that the Doctour's arguments were made as himself speaks, two [Page 93]Years ago: this his book in defence of them is but now printed, and Foolis his book a Year ago came forth. My riddle is now out. The Doctour never dreamed of fanaticisme, till he learned it of Foolis. And yet does he not quote this Foulis in all his Chapter of Fanaticisme, though he does in another; ambitious it seems to have the honour of the invention ascribed to himself alone. Nor is it hard, since Foolis his book is become wast paper, to find out, not the Master only from whom our Doctour learned his lesson of fa­naticisme, but the very chair also wheron he sat, when first he learned it; fith bookish men are very apt to peruse the wast paper they are then to use. But it was a lucky chance for Doctour Stillingfleet. He ap­plied therefore his wast paper; and saying in his heart, Here is a gallant matter for a whole new Chapter in my book, he rose and tied up his breeches.