PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN WORSHIP

OR, THE EVIDENCE

OF

HOLY SCRIPTURE AND THE CHURCH, AGAINST THE

INVOCATION OF SAINTS AND ANGELS, AND THEBLESSED VIRGIN MARY. 

 * * * * *

BY

J. ENDELL TYLER, B. D. 

RECTOR OF ST. GILES-IN-THE-FIELDS, AND CANON RESIDENTIARY OF ST. PAUL'S. 

 * * * * *

Speaking the truth in love. --EPH. Iv. 15

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. --1 THESS. V. 21. 

SECOND EDITION

LONDON

Printed for the

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE;SOLD AT THE DEPOSITORY, GREAT QUEEN STREET, LINCOLN'S INN FIELDS, NO. 4, ROYAL EXCHANGE;AND BY ALL BOOKSELLERS. 

 * * * * *

1847. 

TO

THE ONE

HOLY, CATHOLIC, AND APOSTOLIC

CHURCH, AS A TRIBUTE OF VENERATION AND LOVE, THIS WORK IS DEDICATED, BY HER DEVOTED SERVANT AND SON. 

Nov. 25, 1840. 

 * * * * *

PREFACE. 

Members of the Church of Rome, and members of the Church of England, have too long entertained towards each other feelings of hostility. Instead of being drawn together as brethren by the cords of that onefaith which all Catholics hold dear, their sentiments of sympathy andaffection have been absorbed by the abhorrence with which each body hasregarded the characteristic tenets of its adversary; whilst the terms"heretic" on the one side, and "idolater" on the opposite, have renderedany attempt to bring about a free and friendly discussion of eachother's views almost hopeless. 

Every Christian must wish that such animosities, always ill-becoming theservants and children of the God of love, should cease for ever. Truthindeed must never be sacrificed to secure peace; nor must we be temptedby the seductiveness of a liberality, falsely so called, to soften downand make light of those differences which keep the Churches of Englandand Rome asunder. But surely the points at issue may be examined withoutexasperation and rancour; and the results of inquiries carried on with asingleness of mind, in search only for the truth, may be offered on theone side without insult or offence, and should be received and examinedwithout contempt and scorn on the other. 

The writer of this address is not one in whom early associations wouldfoster sentiments of evil will against members of the Church of Rome; orencourage any feeling, incompatible with regard and kindness, towardsthe conscientious defenders of her creed. From his boyhood he has livedon terms of friendly intercourse and intimacy with individuals among herlaity and of her priesthood. In his theological pursuits, he has oftenstudied her ritual, consulted her commentators, and perused the homiliesof her divines; and, withal, he has mourned over her errors andmisdoings, as he would have sighed over the faults of a friend, who, with many good qualities still to endear him, had unhappily swerved fromthe straight path of rectitude and integrity. 

In preparing these pages, the author is not conscious of having beeninfluenced by any motive in the least degree inconsistent withsentiments of charity and respect; at all events, he would hope that nosingle expression may have escaped from his pen tending to hurtunnecessarily the feelings of any sincere Christian. He has beenprompted by a hope that he may perhaps induce some individuals toinvestigate with candour, and freedom, and with a genuine desire ofarriving at the truth, the subjects here discussed; and that whilstsome, even of those who may have hitherto acquiesced in erroneousdoctrines and practices, may be convinced of their departure fromChristian verity; others, if tempted to desert the straight path ofprimitive worship, may be somewhat strengthened and armed by the viewspresented to them here, against the captivating allurements of religiouserror. 

Whether the present work may, by the Divine favour, be made in somedegree instrumental in forwarding these results, or in effecting anygood, the author presumes not to anticipate; but he will hope for thebest. He believes that the honest pursuit of the truth, undertaken withan humble zeal for God's glory, and in dependence on his guidance andlight, is often made successful beyond our own sanguine expectations. 

With these views the following pages are offered, as the result of aninquiry into the doctrine and practice of the Invocation of Saints andAngels, and of the Blessed Virgin Mary. 

To prevent misconception as to the nature of this work, the author wouldobserve, that since the single subject here proposed to be investigatedis, "The Invocation of Saints and Angels and the Blessed Virgin Mary, "he has scrupulously avoided the discussion of many important andinteresting questions usually considered to be connected with it. He hasnot, for example, discussed the practice of praying for the dead; he hasinvestigated no theory relating to the soul's intermediate state betweenour dissolution and the final judgment; he has canvassed no opinion asto any power in the saints and the faithful departed to succour eitherby their prayers or by any other offices, those who are still on earth, and on their way to God. From these and such like topics he hasabstained, not because he thinks lightly of their importance, norbecause his own mind is perplexed by doubts concerning them; but becausethe introduction of such points would tend to distract the thoughts fromthe exclusive contemplation of the one distinct question to beinvestigated. 

He is also induced to apprise the reader, that in his work, as heoriginally prepared it, a far wider field, even on the single subject ofthe present inquiry, was contemplated than this volume now embraces. Hisintention was to present an historical survey of the doctrine andpractice of the invocation of Saints and Angels, and the Virgin, tracingit from the first intimation of any thing of the kind through itsvarious progressive stages, till it had reached its widest prevalence inChristendom. When, however, he had arranged and filled up the results ofthe inquiries which he made into the sentiments and habits of thoselater writers of the Church, whose works he considered it necessary toexamine with this specific object in view, he found that the bulk of thework would be swollen far beyond the limits which he had prescribed tohimself; he felt also that the protracted investigation would materiallyinterfere with the solution of that one independent question which hetrusts now is kept unmixed with any other. He has, consequently, in thepresent address limited the range of his researches on the nature ofPrimitive Christian Worship, to the writers of the Church Catholic wholived before the Nicene Council, or were members of it. 

In one department, however, he has been under the necessity of making, to a certain extent, an exception to this rule. Having found no allusionto the doctrine of the Assumption of the Virgin, on which much of thereligious worship now paid to her seems to be founded, in any workwritten before the middle of the fifth century, he has been induced, inhis examination of the grounds on which that doctrine professes to bebuilt, to cite authors who flourished subsequently to the NiceneCouncil. 

The author would also mention, that although in substance he hasprepared this work for the examination of all Christians equally, andtrusts that it will be found not less interesting or profitable to themembers of his own Church than to any other, yet he has throughoutadopted the form of an address to his Roman Catholic countrymen. Such amode of conveying his sentiments he considered to be less controversial, while the facts and the arguments would remain the same. His object isnot to condemn, but to convince: not to hold up to obloquy those who arein error, but, as far as he may be allowed, to diminish an evil where italready exists, and to check its further prevalence. 

 * * * * *

CONTENTS. 

PART I. --CHAPTER I. 

Introduction--The duty of examining the grounds of our Faith--Principlesof conducting that examination--Errors to be avoided--Proposed plan ofthe present work. 

CHAPTER II. 

§ 1. Evidence of Holy Scripture, how to be ascertained 2. Direct Evidence of the Old Testament 3. Evidence of the Old Testament, continued 4. ------ New Testament

CHAPTER III. 

§ 1. Evidence of Primitive Writers 2. ------ Apostolic Fathers

CHAPTER IV. 

§ 1. Evidence of Justin Martyr See also Appendix 2. Evidence of Irenæus 3. ------ Clement of Alexandria 4. ------ Tertullian ------ Methodius 5. ------ Origen See also Appendix 6. Supplementary Section on Origen See also Appendix 7. Evidence of St. Cyprian See also Appendix 8. Evidence of Lactantius 9. ------ Eusebius See also Appendix 10. Apostolical Canons and Constitutions 11. Evidence of St. Athanasius See also Appendix

PART II. --CHAPTER I. 

State of Worship at the time of the Reformation§ 1. "Hours of the Virgin" 2. Service of Thomas Becket

CHAPTER II. 

Council of Trent See also Appendix

CHAPTER III. 

Present Service in the Church of Rome

PART III. 

WORSHIP OF THE VIRGIN MARY. 

CHAPTER I. 

§ 1. Introductory Remarks 2. Evidence of Holy Scripture

CHAPTER II. 

Evidence of Primitive Writers

CHAPTER III. 

Assumption of the Virgin Mary

CHAPTER IV. 

Councils of Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon

CHAPTER V. 

§ 1. Present authorized Worship of the Virgin 2. Worship of the Virgin, continued 3. Bonaventura 4. Biel, Damianus, Bernardinus de Bustis, Bernardinus Senensis, &c. See also Appendix5. Modern Works of Devotion See also Appendix

CONCLUSION

 * * * * * {1}

PART I. 

CHAPTER I. 

THE DUTY OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 

Fellow Christians, Whilst I invite you to accompany me in a free and full investigation ofone of those tenets and practices which keep asunder the Roman and theAnglican Church, I am conscious in how thankless an undertaking I haveengaged, and how unwelcome to some is the task in which I call upon youto join. Many among the celebrated doctors of the Roman Church havetaught their disciples to acquiesce in a view of their religiousobligation widely different from the laborious and delicate office ofascertaining for themselves the soundness of the principles in whichthey have been brought up. It has been with many accredited teachers afavourite maxim, that individuals will most acceptably fulfil their dutyby abstaining {2} from active and personal inquiries into thefoundations of their faith; and by giving an implicit credence towhatever the Roman Church pronounces to be the truth[1]. Should thisbook fall into the hands of any who have adopted that maxim for the ruleof their own conduct as believers, its pages will of course afford themno help; nor can they take any interest in our pursuit, or its results. Whilst, however, I am aware, that until the previous question (involvingthe grounds on which the Church of Rome builds her claim to be the sole, exclusive, and infallible teacher of Christians in all the doctrines ofreligion, ) shall have been solved, many members of her body would throwaside, as preposterous, any treatise which professed to review thesoundness of her instructions; I have been at the same time assured, that with many of her communion the case is far otherwise; and thatinstead of their being averse to all investigation, a calm, candid, andfriendly, but still a free and unreserved inquiry into the disputedarticles of their creed, is an object of their sincere desire. On thisground I trust some preliminary reflections upon the duty of proving allthings, with a view of holding the more fast {3} and sure what is good, may be considered as neither superfluous nor out of place. 

 [Footnote 1: It is sometimes curious to observe the language in which the teachers and doctors themselves profess their entire, unlimited, and implicit submission of all their doctrines, even in the most minute particulars, to the judgment and will of the authorities of Rome. Instances are of very frequent occurrence. Thus Joannes de Carthagena, a very voluminous writer of homilies, closes different parts of his work in these words, "These and all mine I willingly subject to the judgment of the Catholic Roman Church, ready, if there be written any thing in any way in the very least point contrary to her doctrine, to correct, amend, erase, and utterly abolish it. " Hom. Cath. De Sacris Arcanis Deiparæ et Josephi. Paris, 1615. Page 921. ]

But just as it would belong to another and a separate province toexamine, at such length as its importance demands, the claims of theChurch of Rome to be acknowledged as that universal interpreter of theword and will of God, from whose decisions there is no appeal; so wouldit evidently be incompatible with the nature of the present address, todwell in any way corresponding with the magnitude and delicacy of thesubject, on the duty, the responsibility, and the privilege of privatejudgment; on the dangers to which an unchastened exercise of it mayexpose both an individual, and the cause of Christian truth; or on therules which sound wisdom and the analogy of faith may prescribe to us inthe government of ourselves with respect to it. My remarks, therefore, on this subject will be as few and brief as I believe to be consistentwith an acknowledgment of the principles upon which this work has beenconducted. 

The foundation, then, on which, to be safe and beneficial, the duty ofprivate judgment, as we maintain, must be built, is very far indeedremoved from that common and mischievous notion of it which wouldencourage us to draw immediate and crude deductions from Holy Scripture, subject only to the control and the colouring of our own minds, responsible for nothing further than our own consciousness of an honestintention. Whilst we claim a release from that degrading yoke whichneither are we nor were our fathers able to bear, we deprecate forourselves and for our fellow-believers that licentiousness which indoctrine and practice tempts a man to follow merely what is right in hisown eyes, uninfluenced by the example, the precepts, {4} and theauthority of others, and owning no submissive allegiance to those lawswhich the wise and good have established for the benefit of the wholebody. The freedom which we ask for ourselves, and desire to see impartedto all, is a rational liberty, tending to the good, not operating to thebane of its possessors; ministering to the general welfare, not todisorder and confusion. In the enjoyment of this liberty, or rather inthe discharge of the duties and trusts which this liberty brings withit, we feel ourselves under an obligation to examine the foundations ofour faith, to the very best of our abilities, according to ouropportunities, and with the most faithful use of all the means affordedto us by its divine Author and finisher. Among those means, whilst weregard the Holy Scriptures as paramount and supreme, we appeal to thewitness and mind of the Church as secondary and subsidiary; a witnessnot at all competing with Scripture, never to be balanced against it;but competing with our own less able and less pure apprehension ofScripture. In ascertaining the testimony of this witness, we examine thesentiments and practice of the ancient teachers of the Church; not asinfallible guides, not as uniformly holding all of them the sameopinions, but as most valuable helps in our examination of the evidenceof the Church, who is, after all, our appointed instructor in the truthsof the Gospel, --fallible in her individual members and branches, yet thesure witness and keeper of Holy Writ, and our safest guide on earth tothe mind and will of God. When we have once satisfied ourselves that adoctrine is founded on Scripture, we receive it with implicit faith, andmaintain it as a sacred deposit, entrusted to our keeping, to bedelivered down whole and entire without our adding {5} thereto what tous may seem needful, or taking away what we may think superfluous. 

The state of the Christian thus employed, in acting for himself in awork peculiarly his own, is very far removed from the condition of onewho labours in bondage, without any sense of liberty and responsibility, unconscious of the dignity of a free and accountable agent, andsurrendering himself wholly to the control of a task-master. Equally isit distant from the conduct of one who indignantly casting off allregard for authority, and all deference to the opinions of others, boldly and proudly sets up his own will and pleasure as the onlystandard to which he will submit. For the model which we would adopt, asmembers of the Church, in our pursuit of Christian truth, we find aparallel and analogous case in a well-principled and well-disciplinedson, with his way of life before him, exercising a large and liberaldiscretion in the choice of his pursuits; not fettered by peremptorypaternal mandates, but ever voluntarily referring to those principles ofmoral obligation and of practical wisdom with which his mind has beenimbued; shaping his course with modest diffidence in himself, andhabitual deference to others older and wiser than himself, yet actingwith the firmness and intrepidity of conscious rectitude of principle, and integrity of purpose; and under a constant sense of hisresponsibility, as well for his principles as for his conduct. 

Against the cogency of these maxims various objections have been urgedfrom time to time. We have been told, that the exercise of privatejudgment in matters of religion, tends to foster errors of everydiversity of character, and leads to heresy, scepticism, and infidelity:it is represented as rending the Church of Christ, and totally {6}subverting Christian unity, and snapping asunder at once the bond ofpeace. So also it has been often maintained, that the same cause robsindividual Christians of that freedom from all disquietude andperplexity and anxious responsibility, that peace of mind, satisfaction, and content, which those personally enjoy, who surrender themselvesimplicitly to a guide, whom they believe to be unerring and infallible. 

For a moment let us pause to ascertain the soundness of such objections. And here anticipating, for argument's sake, the worst result, let ussuppose that the exercise of individual inquiry and judgment (such asthe best teachers in the Anglican Church are wont to inculcate) may leadin some cases even to professed infidelity; is it right and wise andjustifiable to be driven by an abuse of God's gifts to denounce thelegitimate and faithful employment of them? What human faculty--whichamong the most precious of the Almighty's blessings is not liable toperversion? What unquestionable moral duty can be found, which has notbeen transformed by man's waywardness into an instrument of evil? Nay, what doctrine of our holy faith has not the wickedness or the folly ofunworthy men employed as a cloke for unrighteousness, and a vehicle forblasphemy? But by a consciousness of this liability in all things human, must we be tempted to suppress the truth? to disparage those moralduties? or to discountenance the cultivation of those gifts andfaculties? Rather would not sound philosophy and Christian wisdomjointly enforce the necessity of improving the gifts zealously, ofdischarging the moral obligation to the full, and of maintaining thedoctrine in all its integrity; but guarding withal, to the utmost of ourpower and watchfulness, against the abuses to which {7} any of thesethings may be exposed? And we may trust in humble but assuredconfidence, that as it is the duty of a rational being, alive to his ownresponsibility, to inquire and judge for himself in things concerningthe soul, with the most faithful exercise of his abilities and means; sothe wise and merciful Ruler of our destinies will provide us with a sureway of escaping from all evils incident to the discharge of that duty, if, in reliance on his blessing, we honestly seek the truth, andperseveringly adhere to that way in which He will be our guide. 

It is a question very generally and very reasonably entertained amongus, whether the implicit submission and unreserved surrender ofourselves to any human authority in matters of faith, (though whilst itlasts, it of course affords an effectual check to open scepticism, ) doesnot ultimately and in very deed prove a far more prolific source ofdisguised infidelity. Doubts repressed as they arise, but not solved, silenced but not satisfied, gradually accumulate in spite of allexternal precaution; and at length (like streams pent back by sometemporary barrier) break forth at once to an utter discarding of allauthority, and an irrecoverable rejection of the Christian faith. Fromunlimited acquiescence in a guide whom our associations have investedwith infallibility, the step is very short, and frequently taken, toentire apostasy and the renunciation of all belief. 

The state of undisturbed tranquillity and repose in one, who hasdivested himself of all responsibility in matters of religious beliefand practice, enjoying an entire immunity from the anxious and painfullabour of trying for himself the purity and soundness of his faith, isoften painted in strong contrast with the {8} lamentable condition ofthose who are driven about by every wind of novelty. The condition ofsuch a man may doubtless be far more enviable than theirs, who have nosettled fixed principles, and who wander from creed to creed, and fromsect to sect, just as their fickle and roving minds suggest sometransitory preference. But the believer must not be driven by the evilsof one extreme to take refuge in the opposite. The whirlpool may be themore perilous, but the Christian mariner must avoid the rock also, or hewill equally make shipwreck of his faith. He must with all his skill, and all his might, keep to the middle course, shunning that presumptuousconfidence which scorns all authority, and boldly constitutes itselfsole judge and legislator; but equally rescuing his mind from thethraldom which prostrates his reason, and paralyzes all the faculties ofhis judgment in a matter of indefeasible and awful responsibility. 

Here, too, it is questioned, and not without cause, whether thesatisfaction and comfort so often represented in warm and fascinatingcolours, be really a spiritual blessing; or whether it be not adeception and fallacy, frequently ending in lamentable perplexity andconfusion; like guarantees in secular concerns, which as long as theymaintain unsuspected credit afford a most pleasing and happy security toany one who depends upon them; but which, when adverse fortune putstheir responsibility to the test, may prove utterly worthless, and betraced only by losses and disappointments. Such a blind reliance onauthority may doubtless be more easy and more free from care, than it isto gird up the loins of our mind, and engage in toilsome spirituallabour. But with a view to our own ultimate safety, wisdom bids us lookto our foundations in time, and assure ourselves {9} of them;admonishing us that if they are unsound, the spiritual edifice rearedupon them, however pleasing to the eye, or abounding in presentenjoyments, will at length fall, and bury our hopes in its ruin. 

On these and similar principles, we maintain that it well becomesChristians, when the soundness of their faith, and the rectitude oftheir acts of worship, are called in question, "to prove all things, andhold fast that which is good. " Thus, when the unbeliever charges us withcredulity in receiving as a divine revelation what he scornfullyrejects, it behoves us all (every one to the extent of his means andopportunities) to possess ourselves of the accumulated evidences of ourholy faith, so that we may be able to give to our own minds, and tothose who ask it of us, a reason for our hope. The result can assuredlybe only the comfort of a still more unshaken conviction. Thus, too, whenthe misbeliever charges us with an undue and an unauthorized ascriptionof the Divine attributes to our Redeemer and to our Sanctifier, which hewould confine to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, exclusively of theEternal Son and the Blessed Spirit, it well becomes every CatholicChristian to assure himself of the evidence borne by the Scriptures tothe divinity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, together with theinseparable doctrines of redemption by the blood of Christ, andsanctification by the Spirit of grace; appealing also in thisinvestigation to the tradition of the Church, and the testimony of herindividual members from the earliest times, as under God his surest andbest guides. In both these cases, I can say for myself that I have actedupon my own principles, and to the very utmost of my faculties havescrutinized the foundations {10} of my faith, and from each of thoseinquiries and researches I have risen with a satisfaction increased farbeyond my first anticipations. What I had taken up in my youth onauthority, I have been long assured of by a moral demonstration, whichnothing can shake; and I cling to it with an affection, which, guardedby God's good providence, nothing in this world can dissolve or weaken. 

It is to engage in a similar investigation that I now most earnestly butaffectionately invite the members of the Church of Rome, in order toascertain for themselves the ground of their faith and practice in amatter of vast moment, and which, with other points, involves theprinciple of separation between the Roman and Anglican branches of theuniversal Church. Were the subjects of minor importance, or what theancient writers were wont to call "things indifferent, " reason andcharity would prescribe that we should bear with each other, allowing afree and large discretion in any body of Christians, and not severingourselves from them because we deemed our views preferable to theirs. Insuch a case we might well walk in the house of God as friends, withoutany interruption of the harmony which should exist between those whoworship the true God with one heart and one mind, ever striving to keepthe unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. But when the points atissue are of so vast moment; when two persons agreeing in the generalprinciples of belief in the Gospel and its chief characteristicdoctrines, yet find it impossible to join conscientiously in the sameprayer, or the same acts of faith and worship, then the necessity isimperative on all who would not be parties to the utter breaking up ofChristian unity, nor assist in propagating error, to make sure of their{11} foundations; and satisfy themselves by an honest inquiry andupright judgment, that the fault does not rest with them. 

Such appear to me both the doctrine and the practice of the INVOCATIONOF SAINTS. I have endeavoured to conjecture in what light this doctrineand this practice would have presented itself to my mind, after a fulland free inquiry into the nature and history and circumstances of thecase, had I been brought up in communion with the Church of Rome; thequestion to be solved being, "Could I continue in her communion?" Andthe result of my inquiry is, that I must have either discarded thatdoctrine at once and for ever, or have joined with my lips and my kneesin a worship which my reason condemned, and from which my heart shrunk. I must have either left the communion of Rome, or have continued tooffer prayers to angels, and the spirits of departed mortals. Unless Ihad resolved at once to shut my eyes upon my own personalresponsibility, and to surrender myself, mind and reason, soul and body, to the sovereign and undisputed control of others, never presuming toinquire into the foundation of what the Church of Rome taught; I musthave sought some purer portion of the Catholic Church, in which hermembers addressed the One Supreme Being exclusively, withoutcontemplating any other in the act of religious invocation. Thedistinction invented in comparatively late years, of the three kinds ofworship; one for God, the second for the Virgin Mary, the third forAngels and Saints;--the distinction, too, between praying to a saint togive us good things, and praying to that saint to procure them for us atGod's hand, (or, as the distinction {12} is sometimes made, into prayerdirect, absolute, final, sovereign, confined to the Supreme Being on theone hand; and prayer oblique, relative, transitory, subordinate, offeredto saints on the other, ) would have appeared to me the ingenious andfinely-drawn inventions of an advocate, not such a sound process ofChristian simplicity as the mind could rest upon, with an undoubtingpersuasion that all was right. 

This, however, involves the very point at issue; and I now invite you, my Christian Brethren, to join with me, step by step, in a review ofthose several positions which have left on my mind the indelibleconviction that I could never have passed my life in communion with thatChurch whose articles of fellowship maintained the duty of invokingsaints and angels; and whose public offices were inseparably interwovenwith addresses in prayer to other beings, than the Holy and undividedTrinity, the one only God. 

In pursuing this inquiry I have thought the most convenient andsatisfactory division of our work would be--

First, to ascertain what inference an unprejudiced study of the revealedwill of God would lead us to make; both in the times of the eldercovenant, when "holy men of old spake as they were moved by the HolyGhost, " and in that "fulness of time" when God spoke to us by his Son. 

Secondly, to examine into the belief and practice of the PrimitiveChurch, beginning with the inspired Apostles of our Lord. 

Thirdly, to compare the results of those inquiries with the tenets andpractice of the Church of Rome, with reference to three periods; thefirst immediately {13} preceding the Reformation; the second comprisingthe Reformation, and the proceedings of the Council of Trent; the thirdembracing the belief and practice of the present day. 

In this investigation, I purpose to reserve the worship of the VirginMary, called by Roman Catholic writers "Hyperdulia, " and for variousreasons the most important and interesting portion of the whole inquiry, for separate and distinct examination; except only so far as our reviewof any of the primitive writers may occasion some incidental departurefrom that rule. 

May God guide us to his truth! {14}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER II. 

SECTION I. --THE EVIDENCE OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 

Here, Christian Brethren, bear with me if I briefly, but freely, recallto our thoughts on this first entrance upon a review of the inspiredvolume, the principles, and tone of mind, the temper and feelings, in aword, the frame both of the understanding and of the heart, with whichwe should study the sacred pages, on whatever subject we would try allthings, and hold fast what should prove itself to be most in accordancewith the will of God. Whether we would regard the two great parts intowhich the Holy Scriptures are divided, as the Old and the New Covenants;or whether we would prefer to call them the Old and the New Testaments, it matters not. Although different ideas and associations are suggestedby those different names, yet, under either view, the same honest andgood heart, the same patience of investigation, the same upright andunprejudiced judgment, the same exercise of our mental faculties, andthe same enlightened conscience, must be brought to the investigation. In the one case we must endeavour to ascertain for ourselves the trueintent and {15} meaning of the inspired word of God, on the very sameprinciples with those on which we would interpret a covenant betweenourselves, and a person who had made it in full and unreserved relianceon our integrity, and on our high sense of equity, justice, and honour. In the other case we must bring the selfsame principles and feelings tobear on our inquiry, as we should apply in the interpretation of thelast will and testament of a kind father, who with implicit confidencein our uprightness and straightforward dealing and affectionate anxietyto fulfil his intentions to the very utmost, had assigned to us thesacred duty of executor or trustee. 

Under the former supposition, our sincere solicitude would be toascertain the true intent and meaning of the contracting parties, not toseek out plausible excuses for departing from it; not to cull out andexaggerate beyond their simple and natural bearing, such expressions inthe deed of agreement, as might seem to justify us in adopting the viewof the contract most agreeable to our present wishes and most favourableto our own interests. Rather it would be our fixed and heartyresolution, at whatever cost of time, or labour, or pecuniary sacrifice, or personal discomfort, to apply to the instrument our unbiassed powersof upright and honest interpretation. 

Or adopting the latter analogy, we should sincerely strive to ascertainthe chief and leading objects of our parent's will; what were hisintentions generally; what ruling principles seemed to pervade his viewsin framing the testament; and in all cases of obscurity and doubt, inevery thing approaching an appearance of inconsistency, we should referto that paramount principle as our test and guide. We should not for amoment {16} suffer ourselves to be tempted to seek for ambiguousexpressions, which ingenuity might interpret so as to countenance ourdeparture from the general drift of our parent's will, in cases where itwas at variance with our own inclination, and where we could have wishedthat he had made another disposition of his property, or given to us adifferent direction, or trusted us with larger discretion. Moreover, inany points of difficulty, we should apply for assistance, in solving ourdoubts, to such persons as were most likely to have the power of judgingcorrectly, and whose judgment would be least biassed by partiality andprejudice;--not to those whose credit was staked on the maintenance ofthose principles which best accorded with our own inclination. Especially if in either case some strong feeling should have been raisedand spread abroad on any point, we should seek the judgment and counselof those who had been familiar with the testator's intentions, or withthe views of the covenanting party, before such points had become matterof discussion. 

Now only let us act upon these principles in the interpretation of THATCOVENANT in which the Almighty has vouchsafed to make Himself one of thecontracting parties, and man, the creature of his hand, is the other:only let us act on these principles in the interpretation of THATTESTAMENT of which the Saviour of the world is the Testator; and withGod's blessing on our labours (a blessing never denied to sincere prayerand faithful exertions) we need not fear the result. Any other principleof interpretation will only confirm us in our prejudices, and involve usmore inextricably in error. {17}

 * * * * *

SECTION II. --DIRECT EVIDENCE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 

The first step in our proposed inquiry is to ascertain what evidence onthe doctrine and practice of the Invocation of Saints and Angels can befairly drawn from the revealed word of God in the Old Testament. 

Now, let us suppose that a person of a cultivated and enlightened mind, and of a sound and clear judgment, but hitherto a stranger torevelation, were required to study the ancient Scriptures with thesingle view of ascertaining what one object more than any other, subordinate to the great end of preparing the world for the advent ofMessiah, seemed to be proposed by the wisdom of the Almighty inimparting to mankind that revelation; could he fix upon any other pointas the one paramount and pervading principle with so much reason, asupon this, the preservation in the world of a practical belief in theperfect unity of God, and the fencing of his worship against theadmixture of any other, of whatever character or form; The announcementthat the Creator and Governor of the universe is the sole Giver of everytemporal and spiritual blessing; the one only Being to whom, hisrational creatures on earth should pay any religious service whatever;the one only Being to whom mortals must seek by prayer and invocationfor the supply of any of their wants? Through the entire volume theinquirer would find that the unity of God is announced in every varietyof expression; and that the exclusive worship {18} of HIM alone isinsisted upon and guarded with the utmost jealousy by assurances, bythreats, and by promises, as the God who heareth prayer, alone to becalled upon, alone to be invoked, alone to be adored. So to speak, hewould find that recourse was had to every expedient for the expresspurpose of protecting God's people from the fatal error of embracing intheir worship any other being or name whatever; not reserving supremeadoration for the Supreme Being, and admitting a sort of secondaryhonour and inferior mode of invocation to his exalted saints andservants; but banishing at once and for ever the most distantapproximation towards religious honour--the veriest shadow of spiritualinvocation to any other Being than Jehovah HIMSELF ALONE. 

In process of time, the heathen began to deify those mortals who hadconferred signal benefits on the human race, or had distinguishedthemselves by their power and skill above their fellow-countrymen. Maleand female divinities were multiplying on every side. Together withJupiter, the fabled father of gods and men, worshipped under differentnames among the various tribes, were associated those "gods many andlords many, " which ignorance and superstition, or policy and craft, hadinvented; and which shared some a greater, some a less portion ofpopular veneration and religious worship. To the people of God, theworshippers of Jehovah, it was again and again most solemnly and awfullydenounced, that no such thing should be. "Thou shalt worship the Lordthy God, and Him only shalt thou serve, " is a mandate repeated in everyvariety of language, and under every diversity of circumstance. In somepassages, indeed, together with the most clear assurances, {19} thatmankind need apply to no other dispenser of good, and can want no otheras Saviour, advocate, or intercessor, that same truth is announced withsuch superabundance of repetition, that in the productions of any humanwriter the style would be chargeable with tautology. In the Bible, thisrepetition only the more forces upon the mind, and fixes there, thatsame principle as an eternal verity never to be questioned; never to bedispensed with; never to be diluted or qualified; never to be invaded byany service, worship, prayer, invocation, or adoration of any otherbeing whatever. Let us take, for example, the forty-fifth chapter ofIsaiah, in which the principle is most strongly and clearly illustrated. "I am the LORD, and there is none else: there is no God beside me; Igirded thee, though thou hast not known me; that they may know from therising of the sun and from the west, that there is none beside me: I amthe Lord, and there is none else. They shall be ashamed, and alsoconfounded, all of them; they shall go to confusion together, that aremakers of idols. But Israel shall be saved in the Lord with aneverlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded worldwithout end: I am the Lord, and there is none else. I said not unto theseed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain. They have no knowledge that set upthe wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save. There is no god beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is nonebeside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; forI am God, and there is none else. "

But it is needless to multiply these passages; and members of the Churchof Rome will say, that they themselves acknowledge, as fully as membersof the Anglican Church can do, that there is but one supreme {20} Godand Lord, to whom alone they intend to offer the worship due to God; andthat the appeals which they offer by way of invocation to saints andangels for their services and intercession, do not militate against thisprinciple. But here let us ask ourselves these few questions:--

First, if it had been intended by the Almighty to forbid any religiousapplication, such as is now professedly the invocation of saints andangels, to any other being than Himself alone, what words could havebeen employed more stringently prohibitory?

Secondly, had such an address to saints and angels, as the Church ofRome now confessedly makes, been contemplated by our heavenly Lawgiveras an exception to the general rule, would not some saving clause, someexpressions indicative of such an intended exception, have beendiscovered in some page or other of his revealed will?

Thirdly, if such an appeal to the angels of heaven, or to the spirits ofthe just in heaven, had been sanctioned under the elder covenant, wouldnot some example, some solitary instance, have been recorded of afaithful servant of Jehovah offering such a prayer with the Divineapprobation?

Lastly, when such strong and repeated declarations and injunctionsinterspersed through the entire volume of the Old Testament, unequivocally show the will of God to be, that no other object ofreligious worship should have place in the heart or on the tongue of hisown true sons and daughters, can it become a faithful child of ourHeavenly Father to be seeking for excuses and palliations, and to inventdistinctions between one kind of worship and another?

God Himself includes all in one universal prohibitory {21} mandate, "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve. " Sofar from according with those general rules for the interpretation ofthe revealed will of God, which we have already stated, and from which, in the abstract, probably few would dissent, an anxiety to force theword of God into at least an acquiescence in the invocation of saintsand angels, indicates a disposition to comply with his injunctions, wherever they seem to clash with our own view, only so far as we cannotavoid compliance; and to seek how we may with any show of proprietyevade the spirit of those commands. Instead of that full, free, andunstinted submission of our own inclinations and propensities to theAlmighty's will wherever we can discover it, which those entertain whomthe Lord seeketh to worship Him; to look for exceptions and to act uponthem, bears upon it the stamp of a reserved and grudging service. Afterso many positive warnings, enactments, and denunciations, againstseeking by prayer the aid of any other being whatever, surely a positivecommand would have been absolutely necessary to justify a mortal man inpreferring any prayer to any being, saint, angel, or archangel, saveonly the Supreme Deity alone. Instead of any such command or evenpermission appearing, not one single word occurs, from the firstsyllable in the Book of Genesis to the last of the prophet Malachi, which could even by implication be brought to countenance the practiceof approaching any created being in prayer. 

But let us now look to the examples on this subject afforded in the OldTestament. Many, very many a prayer is recorded of holy men, of inspiredmen, of men, to whose holiness and integrity and acceptance {22} theHoly Spirit bears witness; yet among these prayers there is not foundone invocation addressed to saint or angel. I will not here anticipatethe observations which it will be necessary to make in consequence ofthe extraordinary argument which has been devised, to account for theabsence of invocations to saints before the resurrection of Christ, namely, that before that event the saints were not admitted into heaven. Although pressed forward with such unhesitating confidence in itsvalidity, that argument is so singular in its nature, and so importantin its consequences, and withal so utterly groundless, as to call for aseparate examination, on which we will shortly enter: meanwhile, we arenow inquiring into the matter of fact. 

The whole Book of Psalms is a manual of devotion, consistingalternately, or rather intermixedly, of prayers and praises, composedsome by Moses, some by other inspired Israelites of less note, but thegreater part by David himself; and what is the force and tendency oftheir example? Words are spoken in collaudation of "Moses and Aaronamong the saints of the Lord, " and of "Samuel among such as called uponhis name;" and mention is made with becoming reverence of the holyangels; but not one word ever falls from the pen of the Psalmist, addressed, by way of invocation, to saint or angel. In the Roman Ritualsupplication is made to Abel and Abraham as well as to Michael and allangels. If it is now lawful, if it is now the duty of the worshippers ofthe true God to seek his aid through the mediation of those holy men, can we avoid asking, Why the inspired patriarchs did not appeal to Abelfor his mediation? Why did not the inspired David invoke the father ofthe faithful to intercede for him with God? If the departed spirits {23}of faithful men may be safely addressed in prayer; if those who in theirlifetime have, to their fellow-mortals, (who can judge only from outwardactions, and cannot penetrate the heart, ) appeared accepted servants andhonoured saints of our Creator, may now be invoked by an act ofreligious supplication either to grant us aid, or to intercede with Godfor aid in our behalf, why did not men whom God declared to be partakersof his Spirit of truth, offer the same supplication to those departedspirits, who, before and after their decease, had this testimony fromOmniscience itself, that they pleased God? Why is no intimation given inthe later books of the Old Testament that such supplications wereoffered to Moses, or Aaron, or Abraham, or Noah? When wrath was gone outfrom the presence of the Lord, and the plague was begun among thepeople, Aaron took a censer in his hand, and stood between the livingand the dead, and the plague was stayed. If the soul of Aaron wastherefore to be regarded as a spirit influential with God, one whoseintercession could avail, one who ought to be approached in prayer, wereit only for his intercession, could a stronger motive be conceived forsuggesting that invocation, than David must have felt, when thepestilence was destroying its thousands around him, and all his gloryand strength, and his very life too, were threatened by its resistlessravages? But no! neither Abel, nor Abraham, nor Moses, nor Aaron, mustbe petitioned to intercede with God, and to pray that God would stay hishand. To God and God alone, for his own mercy's sake, must his afflictedservant turn in supplication. We find among his prayers no "HolyAbraham, pray for us, "--"Holy Abel, pray for us. " His own Psalm ofthanksgiving describes full well the object and the nature of his {24}prayer: "When the waves of death compassed me, the floods of ungodly menmade me afraid, the sorrows of hell compassed me about, the snares ofdeath prevented me; in my distress I called upon the Lord, and cried tomy God; and He did hear my voice out of his temple, and my cry did enterinto his ears. " [2 Sam. (2 Kings Vulg. ) xxii. 5. Or Ps. Xviii. ] Abraham, when on earth, prayed God to spare the offending-people; but he invokedneither Noah, nor Abel, nor any of the faithful departed, to join theirintercessions with his own. Isaac prayed to God for his son Jacob, buthe did not ask the mediation of his father Abraham in his behalf; andwhen Jacob in his turn supplicated an especial blessing upon hisgrandsons Ephraim and Manasseh, though he called with gratitude to hismind, and expressed with his tongue, the devotedness both of Abraham andof Isaac to the Almighty, yet we do not find him appealing to them, orinvoking their intercession with Jehovah. 

When the conscience-struck Israelites felt that they had exposedthemselves to the wrath of Almighty God, whose sovereign power, putforth at the prayer of Samuel, they then witnessed, distrusting theefficacy of their own supplication, and confiding in the intercession ofthat man of God, they implored him to intercede for them; and Samuelemphatically responded to their appeal, with an assurance of hisearnestly undertaking to plead their cause with heaven: "And all thepeople said unto Samuel, Pray for thy servants unto the Lord thy God, that we die not. And Samuel said unto the people, Fear not.... The Lordwill not forsake his people, for his great name's {25} sake.... Moreover, God forbid that I should sin against the Lord in ceasing topray for you. " [1 Sam. (1 Kings Vulg. ) xii. 19. ] Samuel is one whom theHoly Spirit numbers among those "who called upon God's name;" and whenSamuel died, all Israel gathered together to lament and to buryhim, --but we read of no petition being offered to him to carry on thesame intercessory office, when he was once removed from them. As long ashe was entabernacled in the flesh and sojourned on earth with hisbrethren, they besought him to pray for them, to intercede with theirGod and his God for blessings at his hand, (just as among ourselves oneChristian asks another to pray for him, ) but when Samuel's body had beenburied in peace, and his soul had returned to God who gave it, the Biblenever records any further application to him; we no where read, "HolySamuel, pray for us. "

Again, what announcement could God Himself make more expressive of hisacceptance of the persons of any, than He actually and repeatedly madeto Moses with regard to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? How could He moreclearly intimate that if the spirits of the faithful departed couldexercise intercessory or mediatorial influence with Him, those threeholy patriarchs would possess such power above all others who had everlived on the earth? "I am the God of your fathers; the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob: and Moses hid his face, for he wasafraid to look upon God. " "Thus shalt thou say unto the children ofIsrael, The God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you. This is my name for ever, andthis is my memorial throughout all generations. " [Exod. Iii. 6. 15. ] DidMoses in his alarm and dread, when he was afraid {26} to look upon God, call upon those holy and accepted servants to aid him in his perplexity, and intercede for him and his people with the awful Eternal Being onwhose majesty he dared not to look? Did he teach his people to invokeAbraham? That was far from him. When Moses, that saint of the Lord, washimself called hence and was buried, (though no mortal man was allowedto know the place of his sepulture, ) did the surviving faithful pray tohim for his help and intercession with God? He had wrought so many andgreat miracles as never had been before witnessed on earth; whilst inthe tabernacle of the flesh he had talked with God as a man talketh withhis friend; and yet the sacred page records no invocation ever breathedto his departed spirit. The same is the result of our inquirythroughout. 

I will specify only one more example--Hezekiah, who "trusted in the LordGod of Israel, and clave to the Lord, and departed not from followinghim, but kept his commandments, " when he and his people were in greatperil, addressed his prayer only to God. He offered no invocation toholy David to intercede with the Almighty for his own Jerusalem; he madehis supplication directly and exclusively to Jehovah; and, yet, the veryanswer made to that prayer would surely have seemed to justify Hezekiahin seeking holy David's mediation, if prayer for the intercession of anydeparted mortal could ever have been sanctioned by Heaven: "Thus saiththe Lord, the God of David thy father; I have heard thy prayer, I haveseen thy tears; _I_ will heal thee. I will save this city for mine ownsake, and for my servant David's sake. " [2 Kings (Vulg. 4 Kings) xix. 15. And xx. 6. ] Of what saint in the calendar was ever such a thing asthis spoken? {27}

I have already intimated my intention of referring, with somewhat morethan a cursory remark, to the position assumed, and the argument builtupon it by writers in communion with Rome, for the purpose of nullifyingor escaping from the evidence borne by the examples of the Old Testamentagainst the invocation of saints. The writers to whom I refer, withBellarmin at their head, openly confess that the pages of the OldTestament afford no instance of invocation being offered to the spiritsof departed mortals; and the reason which they allege is this, No onecan be invoked who is not admitted to the presence of God in heaven; butbefore Christ went down to hell[2] and released the spirits from prison, no mortal was admitted into heaven; consequently, before theresurrection of Christ the spirit of no mortal was invoked. Thefollowing are the words of Bellarmin at the close of the preface to his"Church Triumphant:"--"The spirits of the patriarchs and prophets beforethe coming of Christ were for this reason not worshipped and invoked, aswe now worship and invoke the Apostles and martyrs, because they wereyet shut up and detained in prisons below[3]. " Again, he says, "Becausebefore {28} the coming of Christ the saints who died did not enterheaven and saw not God, nor could ordinarily know the prayers ofsuppliants, therefore, it was not customary in the Old Testament to say, 'Holy Abraham, pray for me, ' &c. ; but the men of that time prayed to Godonly, and alleged the merits of the saints who had already departed, that their own prayers might be aided by them. "

 [Footnote 2: The word Hell, signifying, in Saxon, a hidden-place, altogether corresponding in its etymology with "hades, " is now used for the place of torment called by the Hebrews "Gehennah;" and we must perhaps regret that the same Saxon word is employed to signify also the unseen region of departed spirits. This circumstance has been the source of much difficulty and confusion. ]

 [Footnote 3: "Nam idcirco ante Christi adventum non ita colebantur neque invocabantur spiritus patriarcharum atque prophetarum, quemadmodum nunc Apostolos et martyres colimus et invocamus, quod illi adhuc infernis carceribus clausi detinebantur. "--Ingolstadii, 1601. Vol. Ii. P. 833. "The last edition, enlarged and corrected by the Author. "]

Now let us inquire into this statement thus broadly made, and ascertainfor ourselves whether the point assumed and the argument built upon itcan stand the test of examination. Is this argument such as ought tosatisfy the mind of one, who would humbly but honestly follow theapostolic rule, "Prove all things: hold fast that which is good?" Isthis such an exposition as that the reason of a cultivated mind, and thefaith of an enlightened Christian, can acquiesce in it? Let it beexamined neither with prejudice in its favour, nor with any unduesuspicion of its soundness, but with candour and impartialitythroughout. 

It is not necessary to dwell at any length on the inconsistencies andperplexities involved in this assumed abstract theory with regard to thesouls of the faithful who died before the resurrection of Christ, andwhich require to be cleared away before its advocates can reasonablyexpect to obtain for it any general acceptance among thinking men. I donot wish to contravene the theory, far less to substitute another in itsstead. On the contrary, I am fully content, in company with some of themost valuable among Roman Catholic writers, following the example ofAugustin [Aug. De Pecc. Orig. C. 23. Tom. Vii. P. 338. --Quoted by DeSacy. 2 Kings (Vulg. 4 Kings) ii. ], to leave the subject where Scripturehas left it. To the arguments {29} alleged, I would wish to replyindependently of any opinion, as a matter of Christian belief, withregard to the place, the condition, and the circumstances of the soulsof the patriarchs and prophets before our blessed Lord's resurrection. It may, nevertheless, materially facilitate an inquiry into thesoundness of the reasons alleged for the total absence of invocation tothose souls, if we briefly contemplate some of the difficulties whichsurround this novel theory. At all events, such a process will inclineus to abstain from bold assumptions on a point upon which the Almightyhas been pleased to throw so little light in his Holy Word, or at leastavoid all severity of condemnation towards those who may differ from ourviews. 

It is very easy to assert, that all the souls of the faithful departedwere kept in the prison-house of Hades, and to allege in its behalf anobscure passage of St. Peter, to which many of the most learned andunprejudiced Christian teachers assign a meaning totally unconnectedwith the subject of departed spirits. But surely the case of Enoch'stranslation from this life to heaven, making, as it has been beautifullyexpressed, but one step from earth to glory, which St. Paul, in hisEpistle to the Hebrews, cites with a most important comment of his own, requires to be well and patiently weighed. He was taken from the earthby an immediate act of Providence, that he should not see death; andbefore his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. Surely the case of Elijah too, when we would ascertain the soundness ofthis theory, must not be dismissed summarily from our thoughts, of whomthe book of eternal truth declares, that Jehovah took him {30} in awhirlwind into heaven; his ascent being made visible to mortal eyes, aswas afterwards the ascension of the blessed Saviour Himself. Indeed theaccounts of Elijah's translation, and of our Lord's ascension, whetherin the Septuagint and Greek Testament, the Vulgate, or our ownauthorized version, present a similarity of expression very striking andremarkable. 

On this subject we are strongly reminded, first, with what care andcandour and patience the language of Holy Scripture should be weighed, which so positively declares, that Moses and Elijah, both in glory, appeared visibly to the Apostles at the transfiguration of our blessedSaviour, and conversed with Him on the holy mount: "And behold theretalked with Him two men, who were Moses and Elias, who appeared in glory(in majesty, as the Vulgate renders the word), and spake of his deceasewhich He should accomplish at Jerusalem;" [Luke ix. 30. ]--and, secondly, how unwise it is to dogmatize on such subjects beyond the plaindeclaration of the sacred narrative. Moreover, how very unsatisfactoryis the theory which we are examining as to the state of the souls of thefaithful who died before Christ, even the words of Jerome himself prove, who, commenting on the transfiguration of the blessed Jesus, isunhappily led to represent the Almighty as having summoned Elijah todescend from heaven, and Moses to ascend from Hades, to meet our Lord inthe Mount[4]. 

 [Footnote 4: "Elia inde descendente quo conscenderat, et Moyse ab inferis resurgente. "--Hieron. In Matt. Xvii. 1. Paris, 1706. Vol. Iv. P. 77. ]

Strange and startling as is this sentiment of Jerome, it is, you willobserve, utterly irreconcileable with the theory, that the reason whythe ancient Church did not {31} pray to the saints departed, was becausethey were not yet in heaven. 

On this point, among Roman Catholic writers themselves, there prevails avery great diversity of opinion, arising probably from the difficultywhich they have experienced in their endeavours to make all facts anddoctrines square with the present tenets and practices of theirChurch[5]. Thus, whilst some maintain that Elijah was translated to theterrestrial paradise in which Adam had been placed, not enjoying theimmediate divine presence; others cite the passage as justifying thebelief that the saints departed pray for us[6]. But not only aredifferent authors at variance with each other on very many points here;the same writer in his zeal is betrayed into great and palpableinconsistency. Bellarmin, anxious to enlist the account given by ourLord of the rich man and Lazarus, to countenance the invocation ofsaints by the example of the rich man appealing to Abraham, maintainsthat section of Holy Writ to be not a parable, but a true history of amatter of fact which took place between two real individuals; and of hisassertion he adduces this proof, that "the Church worships that Lazarusas verily a holy man[7];" and yet he denies that any of the holy menwere in heaven before the {32} death of Christ. Either Abraham was inheaven in the presence of God, or not; if he was in heaven, why did nothis descendants invoke his aid? if he was not in heaven, the wholeargument drawn from the rich man's supplication falls to the ground. 

 [Footnote 5: See De Sacy on 4 Kings i. 1. See also Estius, 1629. P. 168. Pope Gregory's Exposition; Rome, 1553. P. 99. Stephen's Bible in loc. 1557, &c. The Vulgate ed. Antwerp, 1624, cites a note, "Thy prayers are stronger than chariots and horsemen. "]

 [Footnote 6: Gaspar Sanctius, Antwerp, 1624. P. 1360, considers the fable not improbable, that Elijah, living in the terrestrial paradise, wrote there the letters to Joram (mentioned 2 Chron. Xxi. 12), and sent them by angels. ]

 [Footnote 7: Colit Lazarum ilium ut vere sanctum hominem. --Bellarm. De Ecd. Triumph, p. 864. ]

Another very extraordinary inconsistency, arising from the samesolicitude, forces itself upon our notice, when the same author urges apassage in Leviticus [Levit. Xix. 13. ] to prove, that the saints are nowadmitted at once into the enjoyment of the presence of God in heaven, without waiting for the day of final judgment. [Bell vol. Ii. P. 865. ]"God (such are his words) commanded it to be written, 'The work of thehireling shall not remain with thee till the morning;' therefore, unlessGod would appear inconsistent with Himself, He will not keep back thereward of his saints to the end of the world. " How strange, that in thesame treatise [Ibid. P. 833. ] this author should expressly maintain, that the reward of Abel and Abraham, and the holy prophet and lawgiverMoses, the very man who was commanded to write that law in Leviticus, was kept back, --the last for a longer period than a thousand years; thefirst well nigh four thousand years. 

I mention these particulars merely to point out how very unsatisfactoryand unsound is the attempted solution of the difficulties which surroundon every side the theory of those who maintain, that the reason why wehave no instance of the righteous departed being invoked in the times ofthe elder covenant is, that they were not as yet admitted into heaven, but were kept in prison till the resurrection of Christ. I would alsoobserve, even at the risk {33} of repetition, that I am here notmaintaining any opinion as to the appointed abiding-place, thecondition, and circumstances, the powers of consciousness, volition orenjoyment of the departed, before Christ's resurrection; on thecontrary, I am rather urging the consideration of the great and seriouscaution requisite before we espouse, as an article of faith, any opinionwhich rests on so questionable a foundation, and which involves suchinterminable difficulties. 

But while we need not dwell longer on this immediate point, yet thereare two considerations which appear to be altogether decisive as to theevidence borne against the Invocation of Saints by the writers of theOld Testament. If the spirits of the saints departed were not invokedbefore the resurrection of Christ, purely because they were not thenadmitted into heaven; the first consideration I would suggest is this:Why did the faithful and inspired servants of Jehovah not invoke theangels and archangels who were in heaven? The second is this: Why didnot the inspired Apostles and faithful disciples of our Lord invoke thespirits of those saints after his resurrection; that is (according tothe theory before us), after those saints had been taken by Christ withhim into his Father's presence? I wish not to anticipate here ourinquiry into the testimony borne by the writers of the New Testament asto the doctrine and practice of the Roman Church in this particular; andI will only add, that whatever be the cause of the absence from the OldTestament of all worship and invocation of Abel and Abraham, whom theRoman Church now invokes, the alleged reason that it was because theywere not in heaven till after Christ's resurrection, is utterly setaside by the conduct of the Apostles and disciples of our Lord recordedin the New {34} Testament, for more than half a century after his returnto his Father's glory. 

This, however, seems to be the proper place for entertaining the firstconsideration, Why did not the holy men of old, under the eldercovenant, invoke angels and archangels, as the Roman Church now does?Writers, indeed, who have declared themselves the defenders of thatdoctrine and practice, refer us to passages, which they cite, asaffording examples of the worship of angels; and we will not knowinglyallow any one of those sections of Holy Writ to remain unexamined. Wemust first endeavour to ascertain the testimony borne by the books ofthe Old Testament: and that presents to us such a body of evidence asgreatly increases our surprise at the perseverance with which theinvocation of angels has been maintained by any community of menacknowledging the inspiration of the sacred volume. 

The inspired writers of the Old Testament, and those to whom throughtheir mouth and pen the Divine word was addressed, were as fully asourselves acquainted with the existence of angelic beings. They wereaware of the station of those angels in the court of heaven, of theirpower as God's ambassadors, and agents for good. Either their own eyeshad seen the mighty operations of God by the hands of those celestialmessengers; or their ears had heard their fathers tell what HE had doneby their instrumentality in times of old. Why then did not God's chosenpeople offer to the angels the same worship and invocation which theChurch of Rome now addresses to them in common with the patriarchs andprophets of the elder covenant, and with saints and martyrs under thenew? In the condition of the holy angels no one ever suggests that {35}any change, affecting the argument, has taken place since the time whenman was created and made. And as the angels of heaven were in themselvesthe same, equally in the presence of God, and equally able to succourmen through that long space of four thousand years, which intervenedbetween Adam's creation and the birth of HIM who was Son of Adam and Sonof God, so was man in the same dependent state, needing the guidance andprotection of a power above his own. Nay, surely, if there was in manany difference affecting the argument, it would all add weight to thereason against the invocation of angels by Christians. The Israelites ofold had no clear knowledge, as we have, of one great Mediator, who isever making intercession for us; and yet they sought not the mediationand intercession and good offices of those superhuman beings, of whoseexistence and power, and employment in works of blessing to man, theyhad no doubt[8]. This is a point of great importance to our argument, and I will refer to a few passages in support of it. 

 [Footnote 8: A small section indeed of their countrymen in our Saviour's time denied the reality of a future state, and the existence of angels and spirits; but the sect was of then recent origin, and the overwhelming majority believed as their fathers had believed. ]

When David, who had, as we know [1 Chron. Xxi. 16. ], visibledemonstration afforded him of the existence and ministration of theangels, called upon them to unite with his own soul, and with all theworks of creation through all places of God's dominion, in praisingtheir merciful, glorious, and powerful Creator, he thus conveys to usthe exalted ideas with which he had been filled of their nature, theirexcellence, and their ministration. "The Lord hath prepared his thronein the heavens, and his {36} kingdom ruleth over all: Bless the Lord, yehis angels that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkeningunto the voice of his word. Bless ye the Lord, all ye his hosts, yeministers of his that do his pleasure. " [Ps. Ciii. 19-21. ] David knewmoreover that one of the offices, in the execution of which the angelsdo God's pleasure, is that of succouring and defending us on earth. Forexample, in one of the psalms used by the Church of Rome at complin, andwith the rest repeated in the Church of England, and prophetic of theRedeemer, David, to whom this psalm is probably to be ascribed, declaresof the man who had made the Most High his refuge and strength, "Thereshall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thydwelling; for he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee inall thy ways; they shall bear thee up in their hands lest thou dash thyfoot against a stone. " [Ps. Xci. 10-12. ] And again, with exquisitelybeautiful imagery, he represents those same blessed servants of heavenas an army, as a host of God's spiritual soldiers keeping watch and wardover the poorest of the children of men, who would take refuge in hismercy: "The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them[9]. " And yet David, the prophet of the Lord, neveraddresses to these beings, high and glorious though they are, one singleinvocation: he neither asks them to assist him, nor to pray for him, norto pray with him in his behalf. 

 [Footnote 9: Ps. Xxxiv. 7. (Vulg. Xxxiii. 8. ) "Immittet angelus Domini in circuitu timentium eum, et eripiet eos. " In the Vulgate the beauty of the figure is lost; which, however, Roman Catholic writers restore in their comments. Basil makes a beautiful use of the metaphor. See De Sacy in loc. ] {37}

Isaiah was admitted by the Holy Spirit to witness in the fulness of itsglory the court and the throne of heaven; and he heard the voices of theseraphim proclaiming their Maker's praise; he experienced alsopersonally the effect of their ministration, when one of them said, "Lo, this hath touched thy lips, and thine iniquity is taken away, and thysin purged. " [Isaiah vi. 7. ] Still, though Isaiah must have regardedthis angel as his benefactor under God, yet neither to this seraph, norto any of the host of heaven, does he offer one prayer for their goodoffices, even by their intercession. He ever ascribes all to God alone;and never joins any other name with His either in supplication or inpraise. Let us also take the case of Daniel. He acknowledges not onlythat the Lord's omnipotent hand had rescued him from the jaws of thelions, but that the deliverance was brought about by the ministration ofan angel. "My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, that they have not hurt me. " [Dan. Vi. 22. ] Yet when we look throughDaniel's prayers, we find no allusion to any of the highest angels. Hehad seen Gabriel before his prayer; he had heard the voice and felt thehand of that heavenly messenger who was commissioned to reveal to himwhat should be done in the latter end; and immediately after theoffering of his prayer, the same Gabriel announces himself as one whowas come forth to give the prophet skill and understanding. And yetneither towards Gabriel, nor any other of the angels of God, does oneword of invocation fall from the lips of Daniel. In the supplications ofthat holy, intrepid, and blessed servant and child of God, we search invain for any thing approaching in spirit to the invocation, "SancteGabriel, ora pro nobis. " {38}

 * * * * *

SECTION III. --EVIDENCE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT (continued)

We must now briefly refer to those passages, by which Roman Catholicwriters have endeavoured to maintain that religious adoration was paidto angels by the faithful sons of God. The two principal instances citedare, first, the case of Abraham bowing down before three men, whom herecognizes as messengers from heaven; and, secondly, the words of Jacobwhen he gave his benediction to his grandsons. 

With regard to the first instance, how very far the prostration ofAbraham was in itself from implying an act of religious worship, beingas it was the ordinary mode of paying respect to a fellow mortal, isevident from the very words of Scripture. The Hebrew word, which wetranslate by "bowed himself, " and which the Vulgate unhappily renders"adoravit" ("adored"), is, letter for letter, the same in the case ofAbraham saluting his three heavenly visitors, and in the case of Jacobsaluting his brother Esau. The parallelism of the two passages is verystriking. 

GEN. Xviii. 2. GEN. Xxxiii. 1 and 3. 

And he [Abraham] lift up his And Jacob lifted up his eyes, eyes, and lo! three men stood and looked, and behold! Esauby him; and when he saw them, came ... And he passed over, andhe ran to meet them from the _bowed himself to the ground_ seventent door; and _bowed himself_ times until he came near to his_toward the ground_. Brother. {39}

By rendering the Hebrew word[10], which means to "bow or bend oneself, "by the word "adoravit, " which is literally "to pray to, " the LatinVulgate has laid the foundation for much unsound and misleadingcriticism. But suppose the word had meant, what it does not mean, an actof solemn religious worship; and let it be granted (as I am not onlyready to grant, but prepared to maintain) that Abraham paid religiousadoration at that time, what inference can fairly and honestly be drawnfrom that circumstance in favour of the invocation of angels? Theancient writers of the Christian Church, and those whom the Church ofRome habitually holds in great respect, are full and clear inmaintaining that the person whom Abraham then addressed, was no createdbeing, neither angel nor seraph; but the Angel of the Covenant; theWord, the eternal Son of God, Himself God[11]. Before the visible andmiraculous presence of the God of heaven, who for his own glory and incarrying on the work of man's salvation, sometimes deigned so to revealHimself, the patriarchs of old bowed themselves to the earth. Can this, with any shadow of {40} reason, be employed to sanction the invocationof Michael and all the myriads of angels who fill the court of heaven?

 [Footnote 10: Not only is the Hebrew word precisely the same, letter for letter, and point for point, [Hebrew: shahah], but the Septuagint in each case employs the same, [Greek: prosekunaesen]; and the Vulgate in each case renders it by the same word, "adoravit. " The Roman Catholic commentator De Sacy renders it in each case, "se prosternavit, " which corresponds exactly with our English version. The Douay Bible in each case renders it "adored. "]

 [Footnote 11: Many early Christian writers may be cited to the same purpose: it is enough, however, to refer to Justin Martyr and to Athanasius; who are very full and elaborate in maintaining, that the angel here mentioned was no created being, but was the Angel of the Covenant, God, in the fulness of time manifested in the flesh. The passage from Athanasius will be quoted at some length, when we come to examine that father's testimony. For Justin Martyr, see Dial. Cum Tryph. Ch. 56, &c. P. 150, &c. (Paris, 1742. )]

The only other instance to which it will be necessary to call yourattention, occurs in the forty-eighth chapter of Genesis. The passage, however, is so palpably and on the very face of it inapplicable, thatits examination needs not detain us long. "And he [Jacob] blessedJoseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac didwalk, the God who fed me all my life long unto this day, the ANGEL whichredeemed me from all evil, bless the lads. " [Gen. Xlviii. 15. ] Here thepatriarch speaks of God as the Angel, and the Angel as God: being theAngel or Messenger of the Covenant--God manifested to man. He speaks notof Michael or Gabriel, or archangel or seraph, or any created being; butof the Lord Himself, who appeared to him, agreeably to the revelation ofGod Himself recorded in a previous chapter, and thus communicated by thepatriarch to Rachel and Leah: "And the ANGEL of God spake unto me in adream, saying, Jacob; and I said, Here am I. And he said ... _I_ am theGOD of Bethel, where thou anointedst the pillar, and vowedst a vow untome. " [Gen. Xxxi. 11. ] The Angel whose blessing he desired for the ladswas the God[12], to whom he had vowed a vow in Bethel, the Lord Himself. 

 [Footnote 12: It may not be superfluous to add, that this is the interpretation of the passage adopted by primitive writers, Among others see Eusebius Demonstr. Evan. Lib. V. Ch. 10: who declares that the Angel spoken of by Jacob was God the Son. ]

Independently, however, of this conclusive consideration, if the lattermember of this sentence had merely expressed a wish, that an angel mightbe employed as {41} an instrument of good in behalf of Ephraim andManasseh, I could readily offer such a prayer for a blessing on my ownchildren. My prayer would be addressed to the angel neither immediatelynor transitively, but exclusively to God alone, supplicating Himgraciously to employ the service of those ministering spirits for ourgood. Such a prayer every Catholic in communion with the Church ofEngland is taught and directed to offer. Such a prayer is primitive andscriptural; and such is offered in the Church on the anniversary ofSaint Michael and all angels:

"O Everlasting God, who hast ordained and constituted the services ofangels and men in a wonderful order, mercifully grant that as Thy holyangels alway do Thee service in heaven, so by Thy appointment they maysuccour and defend us on earth; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. "

Such is the prayer of the Church Catholic, whether of the Roman or theAnglican branch; it is in spirit and in truth a Christian prayer, fitfor faithful mortals to offer on earth to the Lord of men and of angelsin heaven. Would that the Church of Rome, preserving, as she haspreserved, this prayer in all its original purity, had never beensuccessfully tempted to mingle in the same service, supplications, whichrob the one only God of his exclusive honour and glory, as the God "whoheareth prayer;" and to rob Christ of his exclusive honour and glory, asour only Mediator and Advocate!

Here, though unwilling, by departing from the order of our argument, toanticipate our examination in its place of the Roman ritual, I cannotrefrain from contrasting this prayer, the genuine offspring of Christianfaith, with some forms of invocation contained in {42} the Roman serviceon St. Michael's day, in which I could not join, and the adoption ofwhich I deeply lament. The first is appointed to be said at the part ofthe Mass called "The Secret:" "We offer to Thee, O Lord, the sacrificeof praise, humbly beseeching Thee, That by the intervention of theprayers of the angels for us, Thou, being appeased, mayest both acceptthe same, and make them profitable for our salvation. Through ... " Thesecond is offered at the Post Communion: "Supported [propped up, suffulti] by the intercession of Thy blessed archangel Michael, wehumbly beseech Thee, O Lord, that what with honour we follow[13], we mayobtain also in mind. Through ... "

 [Footnote 13: I do not understand the exact meaning of these words, which however contain no portion of that sentiment, the presence of which in this prayer I deplore. The original is this: "Beati archangeli tui Michaelis intercessione suffulti, supplices te Domine deprecamur, ut quod honore prosequimur, contingamus et in mente. Per ... " Probably the general sense is, that what we reverently seek we may actually realize. ]

Still, though here the Christian seems to be taught to rest on a brokenreed, to support and prop himself up by a staff which must bend andbreak; yet I acknowledge that so much violence is not done to myChristian principles, nor do my feelings, as a believer in God and hisever-blessed Son, meet with so severe a shock by either of theseprayers, as by the invocation addressed to the archangel himself in the"Gradual" on that same day:

"O holy Michael, O archangel, defend us in battle, that we perish not inthe dreadful judgment. "

Christians of the Church of Rome! for one moment meditate, I beseechyou, on this prayer. It is not addressed to God; in it there is nomention made of {43} Christ: having called upon the angels, and on yourown soul in the words of the psalmist, to praise the Lord, you addressyour supplication to Michael himself; not even invoking him for hisintercession, but imploring of him his protection. If it be said, thathis intercession is all that is meant, with most unfeigned sincerity Irequest you to judge for yourselves, whether any prayer from poor sinfulman, putting his whole trust in the Lord and imploring his help, couldbe addressed to our God and Saviour more immediate and direct than this?In the place of the name of his servant Michael, substitute the highestand the holiest name ever uttered in heaven or on earth, and can wordsform a prayer more direct to God? "O Lord God Almighty, O Lord Jesus ouronly Saviour, defend us in battle, that we perish not in the dreadfuljudgment. Hallelujah!"--Can this be right? Were the archangel allowednow, by his Lord and ours, to make his voice heard upon earth byChristians offering to him this prayer, would he utter any other words, than the angel, his fellow-servant and ours, once addressed to SaintJohn, when he fell down to worship before him, "See thou do it not; forI am thy fellow-servant: worship God. "

Such then is the evidence borne by the writers of the Old Testament. Noprayer to angel or beatified spirit occurs from its first to its lastpage. The theory which would have us account for the absence of allprayer to the saints before the advent of Messiah, by reason of theirnot having been then admitted into their everlasting habitations, andthe immediate presence of God proves to be utterly groundless. The holyangels were confessedly in heaven [Matt. Xviii. 10. ], beholding the faceof {44} God; but no invocation was ever addressed to them, by patriarch, or prophet, or people, as mediators or intercessors. God, and God alone, the one eternal Jehovah, is proclaimed by Himself throughout, and isacknowledged throughout to be the only object of any kind of spiritualworship; the only Being who heareth prayer, to whom alone therefore allmankind should approach with the words and with the spirit ofinvocation. It has been argued by some writers, that in the times of theOld Testament, prayer was not offered to God through a mediator at all;and that as the one Mediator was not then revealed in his person and hisoffices, the subsidiary intercessors could not of course act; andtherefore could not be invoked by man. The answer to this remark isconclusive. That Mediator has been revealed in his person and hisoffices; and has been expressly declared to be the one Mediator betweenGod and man: we therefore seek God's covenanted mercies through Him. Those subsidiary intercessors have never been revealed; and therefore wedo not seek their aid. To assure us that it was the mind and will of ourHeavenly Father that we should approach Him by secondary and subsidiarymediators and intercessors, the same clear and unquestionable revelationof their persons and their offices as mediators would have beenrequired, as He has vouchsafed of the mediation of his Son. Had Godwilled that the faithful should approach Him by the intercessions of thesaints and martyrs, is it conceivable that He would not have given someintimation of his will in this respect? If believers in the Gospel wereto have unnumbered mediators of intercession in heaven, as well as theone Mediator of redemption, would not the {45} Gospel itself haveannounced it? Could such declarations as these have remained on recordwithout any qualifying or limiting expression, "He[14] is able also tosave to the uttermost them who come unto God by Him, seeing He everliveth to make intercession for them. " "There is one God, and oneMediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. " But this involvesthe question to which the next section must be devoted. All I wouldanticipate here is, that if the irresistible argument from the OldTestament is sought to be evaded on the ground that no mediator at allwas then revealed, we must require a distinct revelation of theexistence and offices of other mediators and intercessors, before we canbe justified in applying to them for their intervention in our behalf. And the question now is. Are they so revealed?

 [Footnote 14: Heb. Vii. 25. I Tim. Ii. 5. --Unde et salvare in perpetuum potest accedentes per semetipsum ad Deum, semper vivens ad interpellandum pro nobis. --_Vulg. _]

 * * * * *

SECTION IV. --EVIDENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

Though such is the evidence borne against the invocation of saints andangels by the Old Testament, yet it has been said that we are livingneither under the patriarchal, nor the Mosaic dispensation, but underthe Gospel, to whom therefore as Christians neither the precepts nor theexamples of those ancient times are applicable: {46} the injunctionsconsequently given of old to preserve the chosen people from idolatryand paganism, cannot be held to prohibit Christians from seeking the aidof those departed saints who are now reigning with Christ. But, surely, those precepts, and denunciations, and commands, are still most strictlyapplicable, as conveying to us a knowledge of the will of our HeavenlyFather, that his sons and daughters on earth should associate no name, however exalted among the principalities and powers in heavenly places, with his own holy name in prayer, and spiritual invocation. I amthroughout this address supposing myself to be speaking to those whoseheart's desire is to fulfil the will of God in all things; not those whoare contented to depart from the spirit of that will, whenever they candevise plausible arguments to countenance such departure. 

The cases both of precept and example through the Old Testamentaffording so stringent and so universal a rule against the associationof any name with the name of the Almighty in our prayers; before we canconclude that Christians have a liberty denied to believers under theformer dispensations, we must surely produce a declaration to thateffect, clear, unequivocal, and precisely in point. Nothing short of anenactment, rescinding in terms the former prohibitory law, andpositively sanctioning supplications and prayers to saints and angels, seems capable of satisfying any Christian bent on discovering the willof God, and resolved to worship Him agreeably to the spirit of that willas it has been revealed. But let us read the New Testament from itsfirst to its very last word, and we shall find, that the doctrines, theprecepts, and the examples, the pervading reigning spirit of the entire{47} volume, combine in addressing us with voices loud and clear. Prayto God Almighty solely in the name and for the sake of his dear and onlySon Jesus Christ our Lord, and offer no prayer, no supplication, nointreaty, to any other being or power, saint or angel, though it be onlyto ask for their intercession with the great God. But this involves thewhole question, and must be sifted thoroughly. Let us then review theentire volume with close and minute scrutiny, and ask ourselves, Isthere a single passage, interpreted to the best of our skill, with theaid of those on whose integrity and learning we can rely, which directlyand unequivocally sanctions any religious invocation of whatever kind toany being except God alone? And then let us calmly and deliberatelyresolve this point: In a matter of so vital importance, of so immenseinterest, and of so sacred a character as the worship of the SupremeBeing, who declares Himself to be a jealous God, ought we to suffer anyrefinements of casuistry to entice us from the broad, clear light ofrevelation? If it were God's good pleasure to make exceptions to hisrule--a rule so repeatedly, and so positively enacted andenforced--surely the analogy of his gracious dealings with mankind wouldhave taught us to look for an announcement of the exceptions in termsequally forcible and explicit. Instead, however, of this, we find nosingle act, no single word, nothing which even by implication can beforced to sanction any prayer or religious invocation, of whatever kind, to any other being save to God alone. 

Let us first look to the language and conduct of our blessed Lord, whoseprayers to his Father are upon record for our instruction and comfort, and whose precepts and example form the best rule of a Christian's {48}life. So far from repealing the ancient law, he repeats in his ownperson its solemn announcement, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is oneLord. " [Mark xii. 29. ] While the same heavenly Teacher commands us withauthority, "When thou prayest, pray to thy Father which is in secret, and thy Father, who seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly. " [Matt. Vi. 6. ] No allusion in any word of His do we find to any prayer from amortal on this earth to an angel or saint in heaven. And yet occasionswere multiplied on which a reference to the invocation of angels wouldhave been natural, and apparently called for. He again and again placesbeyond all doubt the reality of their good services towards mankind, butit is as God's servants, and at God's bidding; not in answer to anysupplication or invoking of ours. The parable of the rich man andLazarus has been cited [Bellarmin, p. 895. ] to bear contrary evidence;but, in the first place, that parable does not offer a case in point; inthe second place, were it in point, it might be fairly and stronglyurged against the practice of invoking the spirit of any departedmortal, even the father of the faithful himself. For what are thecircumstances of the parabolic representation? A lost spirit in theregions of torment prays to Abraham in the regions of the blessed, andthe spirit of the departed patriarch professes himself to have no powerto grant the request of the departed and condemned spirit. [Luke xvi. 19. ] The practice indeed of our Roman Catholic brethren would have beenexemplified, had our blessed Lord represented the rich man's fivebrethren still on earth as pious men, and as supplicating Abraham inheaven to pray for themselves, or to mitigate {49} their lost brother'spunishment and his woes. But then it would have afforded Christianslittle encouragement to follow their example, when they found Abrahamdeclaring himself unable to aid them in attaining the object of theirprayer, or in any way to assist them at all. Without one singleexception, we find our blessed Lord's example, precepts, and doctrinesto be decidedly against the practice of invoking saint or angel; whilstnot one solitary act or word of His can be cited to countenance orpalliate it. 

Next it follows, that we inquire into the conduct and the writings ofChrist's Apostles and immediate followers, to whom He graciouslypromised that the Holy Spirit should guide them into all truth. In theActs of the Apostles, various instances of prayer attract our notice, but not one ejaculation is found there to any other being save Godalone. Neither angel nor saint is invoked. The Apostles prayed forguidance in the government of Christ's infant Church, but it was, "Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men. " [Acts i. 24. ] They prayed fortheir own acceptance, but it was "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. " [Actsvii. 59. ] They prayed for each other, as in behalf of St. Peter when inprison; but we are expressly told, that the prayer which was madewithout ceasing by the Church for him was addressed to GOD. [Acts xii. 5. ]

To deliver St. Peter from his chains, an angel was sent on an especialmission from heaven; but though St. Peter saw him, and heard his voice, and followed him, and knew of a surety that the Almighty had employedthe ministration of an angel to liberate him from his bonds, yet we donot hear thereafter of {50} Peter having himself prayed to an angel tosecure his good offices, and his intercession with God, nor has he onceindirectly intimated to others that such supplications would be ofavail, or were even allowable. He exhorts his fellow-Christians to pray, "Watch unto prayer, " but it is because "The eyes of the LORD are overthe righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers. " [1 Pet. Iv. 7;iii. 12. ] He Himself prays for them, but it is, that the God of allgrace might make them perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle them. Hesuggests no invocation of saint or angel to intercede with God for them. He bids them cast all their care upon GOD, on the assurance that GodHimself careth for them. 

Precisely the same result issues from a contemplation of the acts andexhortation of St. Paul. He too experienced in his own person thecomfort of an angel's ministration, bidding him cast off all fear whenin the extreme of imminent peril. [Acts xxvii. 23, 24. ] Many a prayer ofthat holy Apostle is upon record; many an earnest exhortation to prayerwas made by him; we find many a declaration relative to his own habitsof prayer. But with him God and God alone is the object of prayerthroughout: by him no saint or angel or archangel is alluded to, as onewhose intercession might be sought by himself or by us. He could speakin glowing language of patriarchs, prophets, and angels, but unto noneof these would he turn. "Be careful for nothing, but in every thing byprayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be madeknown unto God. " [Phil. Iv. 6. ] And let any one receive, in the plainmeaning of his words, his prohibitory monition [Col. Ii. 18. ], and say, could St. Paul have {51} uttered these words without any qualifyingexpression, had he worshipped angels by invocation, even asking themonly to aid him by their prayers. "Let no one beguile you of your rewardin a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels; not holding theHead, " which Head he had in the first chapter (v. 18) declared to be thedear Son of God, "in whom we have redemption through his blood, even theforgiveness of our sins. "

The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews could bring before our mindswith most fervent uplifting eloquence Abel and Abraham and David, --thatgoodly fellowship of the prophets, that holy army of martyrs; he couldspeak as though he were an eye-witness of what he describes, of thegeneral assembly and church of the first-born, whose names are writtenin heaven. And, surely, had the thought of seeking the support orintercession of saint or angel by invocation addressed to them, beenfamiliar to him; had the thought even occurred to his mind withapprobation, he would not have allowed such an occasion to pass by, without even alluding to any benefit that might arise from our invokingsuch friends of God. So far from that allusion, the utmost which he saysat the close of his eulogy is this, "These all, having obtained a goodreport through faith, received not the promise; God having provided somebetter thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect. "[Heb. Xi. 39, 40. ]

The beloved Apostle who could look forward in full assurance of faith tothe day of Christ's second coming, and knew that "when He shall appearwe shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is, " has left us thisrecord of his sentiments concerning prayer: {52} "This is the confidencethat we have in HIM, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, heheareth us; and if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we knowthat we have the petitions that we desired of him. " [1 John v. 14, 15. ]St. John alludes to no intercessor, to no advocate, save only that"Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, who is also thepropitiation for our sins. " [1 John ii. 1. ] St. John never suggests tous the advocacy or intercession of saint or angel; with him God inChrist is all in all. 

I will only refer to one more example, that of St. James: the instanceis equally to the point, and is strongly illustrative of the truth. ThisApostle is anxious to impress on his fellow-Christians a due sense ofthe efficacy of our intercessions: "The effectual fervent prayer of arighteous man availeth much. " [James v. 16. ] He instances its power withGod by the case of Elijah, a man so holy, that the Almighty suffered himnot to pass through the regions of death and the grave, but translatedhim at once from this life to glory: "Elias was a man subject to likepassions as we are, and he prayed that it might not rain; and it rainednot on the earth by the space of three years and six months; and heprayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth herfruit. " [James v. 17, 18. ] And yet St. James is very far from suggestingthe lawfulness or efficacy of any invocation to the hallowed spirit ofthis man, to whose prayer the elements and natural powers of the sky andthe earth had been made obedient. He exhorts all men to pray, but itmust be to God alone, and directly to God, without applying for theintervention of any mediators or intercessors from among angels or men. {53} "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who givethliberally to all men, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him; butlet him ask in faith, nothing wavering. " [James i. 5, 6. ] Like thewriter to the Hebrews, he would have us come ourselves "boldly" anddirectly "to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and findgrace to help in time of need. "

Surely, these Apostles, chosen vessels for conveying the truths ofsalvation throughout the world, knew well how the Almighty could best beapproached by his children on earth; and had the invocation of saint orangel found a place in their creed, they would not have kept soimportant a truth from us. 

Before leaving this part of our inquiry, I would propose the patient andunprejudiced weighing of the import of two passages in the NewTestament, often quoted on this subject; one in the Acts of theApostles, the other in the Apocalypse. 

The holy Apostles Barnabas and Paul, by the performance of a strikingmiracle, had excited feelings of religious reverence and devotion amongthe people of Lystra, who prepared to offer sacrifice to them as two oftheir fabled deities. [Acts xiv. 11-18. ] The indignant zeal with whichthese two holy men rushed forward to prevent such an act of impiety, however admirable and affecting, does not constitute the chief point forwhich reference is here made to this incident. They were men, stillclothed with the tabernacle of the flesh, and the weakness of humannature; and the priests and people were ready to offer to them thewonted victims, the abomination of the heathen. Now, I am fully aware ofthe wide difference, in many {54} particulars, between such an act andthe act of a Christian praying to their spirits after their departurehence, and supplicating them to intercede with the true God in hisbehalf: and on this difference Roman Catholic writers have maintainedthe total inapplicability of this incident to the present state ofthings. But, surely, if any such prayer to departed saints had beenfamiliar to their minds, instead of repelling the religious address ofthe inhabitants of Lystra at once and for ever, they would have alteredthe tone of their remonstrance, and not have suppressed the truth when agood opportunity offered itself for imparting it. And, supposing that itwas part of their commission to announce and explain the invocation ofsaints at all, on what occasion could an explanation of the just andproper invocation of angels and saints departed have been moreappropriate in the Apostles, than when they were denouncing theunjustifiable offering of sacrifice to themselves while living? Butwhether the more appropriate place for such an announcement were atLystra, in Corinth, at Athens, or at Rome, it matters not; nor whetherit would have been more advantageously communicated by their oralteaching, or in their epistles. Doubtless, had the Apostles, by theirexample or teaching, sanctioned the invocation of saints and angels, inthe course of fifty years or more after our blessed Saviour'sresurrection, it would infallibly have appeared in some page or other ofthe New Testament. Instead of this the whole tenor of the Holy Volumebreathes in perfect accordance with the spirit of the apostolicalremonstrance at Lystra, to the fullest and utmost extent of its meaning, "We preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities to serve theliving God. " {55}

Of the other instance, it well becomes every Catholic Christian toponder on the weight and cogency. John, the beloved disciple of ourLord, when admitted to view with his own eyes and hear with his mortalears the things of heaven, rapt in amazement and awe, fell down toworship before the feet of the angel who showed him these things. [Rev. Xxii. 8, 9. ] If the adoration of angels were ever justifiable, surely itwas then; and what a testimony to the end of the world would have beenput upon record, had the adoration of an angel by the blessed John atsuch a moment, when he had the mysteries and the glories of heavenbefore him, been received and sanctioned. But what is the fact? "Thensaith he to me, See thou do it not. I am thy fellow-servant, and of thybrethren the prophets, and of them who keep the sayings of this book. Worship God. " I cannot understand the criticism by which theconclusiveness of this direct renouncement of all religious adorationand worship is attempted to be set aside. To my mind these words, uttered without any qualification at such a time, by such a being, tosuch a man, are conclusive beyond gainsaying. The interpretation putupon this transaction, and the words in which it is recorded, and theinference drawn from them by a series of the best divines, with St. Athanasius at their head, presents so entirely the plain common-senseview of the case to our minds, that all the subtilty of casuists, andall the ingenuity of modern refinements, will never be able tosubstitute any other in its stead. "The angel (such are the words ofthat ancient defender of the true faith), in the Apocalypse, forbidsJohn, when desiring to worship him, saying, 'See thou {56} do it not; Iam thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them whokeep the sayings of this book. Worship God. ' Therefore, to be the objectof worship belongs to God only; and this even the angels themselvesknow: though they surpass others in glory, but they are all creatures, and are not among objects of worship, but among those who worship thesovereign Lord. " [Athan. Orat. 2. Cont. Ar. Vol. I. P. 491. ] To say thatSt. John was too fully illuminated by the Holy Spirit to do, especiallya second time, what was wrong; and thence to infer that what he did wasright, is as untenable as to maintain, that St. Peter could not, especially thrice, have done wrong in denying our Lord. He did wrong, orthe angel would not have chided and warned him. And to say that theangel here forbade John personally to worship him, because he was afellow-servant and one of the prophets; and thus that the prohibitiononly tended to exalt the prophetic character, not to condemn the worshipof angels, is proved to be also a groundless assumption, from theangel's own words, who reckons himself as a fellow-servant with not St. John only, but all those also who keep the words of the book ofGod, --thus equally forbidding every faithful Christian to worship theirfellow-servants the angels. They are almost the last words in the volumeof inspired truth, and to me, together with those last words, they seemwith "the voice of a great multitude, and of many waters, and of mightythunderings, " from the very throne itself of the Most High, to proclaimto every inhabiter of the earth, Fall down before no created being;adore no created being; pray to, invoke, call upon no created being, whether saint or angel: worship {57} and adore God only; pray to Godonly. Trust to his mercy; seek no other mediator or intercessor than hisown only and blessed Son. "He who testifieth these things saith, Surely, I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. The grace of our LordJesus Christ be with you all. Amen. " [Rev. Xxii. 20, 21. ]

Thus the New Testament, so far from mitigating the stringency of theformer law, so far from countenancing any departure from the obligationof that code which limits religious worship to God alone, so far fromsuggesting to us invocation to sainted men, and to angels asintercessors with the eternal Giver of all good, reiterates theinjunction, and declares, that invocation in order to be Christian mustbe addressed to God alone; and that there is one and only one Mediatorbetween God and men, the man Jesus Christ, who is at the right hand ofhis Father, a merciful High Priest sympathizing with us in ourinfirmities, ever making intercession for us, able to save to theuttermost those who come unto God through Him. 

The present seems to be a convenient place for observing, that howeverthe distinction is strongly insisted upon, or rather implicitlyacquiesced in by many, which would admit of a worship or service calleddulia (the Greek [Greek: douleia]) to saints and angels, and would limitthe worship or service called latria ([Greek: latreia]) to the supremeGod only, yet that such distinction has no ground whatever to rest uponbeyond the will and the imagination of those who draw it. The two wordsare used in the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, and in theoriginal Greek of the {58} New promiscuously, without any suchdistinction whatever. The word which this distinction would limit to thesupreme worship of the Most High, is used to express the bodily servicepaid by the vanquished to their conquerors, as well as the religiousservice paid by idolaters to their fabled deities, and by the trueworshippers to the Most High. The word which this distinction wouldreserve for the secondary worship paid to saints and angels, is employedto express not only the service paid by man to man, but also the serviceand worship paid to God alone, even when mentioned in contradistinctionto other worship. It will be necessary to establish this by one or twoinstances; and first as to "latria. " One single chapter in the Book ofDeuteronomy supplies us with instances of the word used in the threesenses, of service to men, service to idols, and service to God, xxviii. 36. 47, 48: "Because thou servedst [Greek: elatreusas] not the Lord thyGod with joyfulness and gladness of heart; Therefore thou shalt serve[Greek: latreuseis] thine enemies which the Lord shall send against theein hunger and in thirst and nakedness. " "The Lord shall bring thee untoa nation which neither thou nor thy fathers have known; and there shaltthou serve [Greek: latreuseis] other gods, wood and stone. " Next as tothe word "dulia. " The First Book of Samuel (called also the First ofKings) alone supplies us with instances of this word being used in eachof the same three senses of service from man to man, from man to idols, and from man to his Maker and God. 1 Sam. Xvii. 9. "Ye shall be ourservants and serve [Greek: douleusite haemin] us. " xii. 24. "Only fearthe Lord, and serve [Greek: douleusate] him in truth with all yourheart. " xxvi. 19. {59} "They have driven me out from the inheritance ofthe Lord, saying, Go, serve[15] other gods. "

 [Footnote 15: [Greek: douleue]. In this case also the Vulgate translates all the three passages alike by the same verb, "servire. "]

It is worthy of remark, that the same word "dulia[16]" is employed, whenthe Lord by his prophet speaks of the most solemn acts of religiousworship; not in general obedience only, but in the offerings andoblations of their holy things. Ezek. Xx. 40. "In mine holy mountain, inthe mountain of the height of Israel, saith the Lord God, there shallall the house of Israel, all of them in the land, serve me [Greek:douleusousi. Vulg: serviet. ]; there will I accept them, and there will Irequire your offerings, and the first-fruits of your oblations, with allyour holy things. " St. Matthew also uses the same word when he recordsthe saying of our blessed Lord, "Ye cannot serve God and mammon. " [Matt. Vi. 24. ; Greek: douleuein. Vulg: servire. ]

 [Footnote 16: It is also remarkable that in all these cases, whether the Septuagint employs the word "dulia, " or "latria, " the word in the Hebrew is precisely the same, [Hebrew: avad]. That in the fifth century the words were synonymous is evident from Theodoret. I. 319. See Edit. Halle. --Index. ]

I will only detain you by one more example, drawn from two passages, which seems the more striking because each of the two words "dulia" and"latria" is used to imply the true worship of God in a person, who waschanged from a state of alienation to a state of holiness. The first isin St. Paul's 1st Epistle to the Thessalonians, i. 9. "How ye turned toGod from idols, to serve [Greek: douleuein theo zonti] the living andtrue God. " The second is in Heb. Ix. 14. "How much more shall the bloodof Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself {60} withoutspot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve[17] theliving God. "

 [Footnote 17: [Greek: latoeuein theo zonti. ] In each of these two cases the Vulgate uses "servire. "]

The word "hyperdulia, " now used to signify the worship proper to theVirgin Mary, as being a worship of a more exalted character than theworship offered to saints and angels, archangels, and cherubim andseraphim, will not require a similar examination. The word was inventedin later times, and has been used chiefly to signify the worship of theVirgin, and is of course found neither in the Scriptures, nor in anyancient classical or ecclesiastical author. {61}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER III. 

SECTION I. --THE EVIDENCE OF PRIMITIVE WRITERS. 

Before we enter upon the next branch of our proposed inquiry, allow meto premise that I am induced to examine into the evidence of Christianantiquity not by any misgiving, lest the testimony of Scripture mightappear defective or doubtful; far less by any unworthy notion that God'sword needs the additional support of the suffrages of man[18]. On thecontrary, the voice of God in his revealed word is clear, certain, andindisputable, commanding the invocation of Himself alone in acts ofreligious worship, and condemning any such departure from thatsingleness of adoration, as they are {62} seduced into, who invokesaints and angels. And it is a fixed principle in our creed, that whereGod's written word is clear and certain, human evidence cannot beweighed against it in the balance of the sanctuary. When the Lord hathspoken, well does it become the whole earth to be silent before him;when the eternal Judge Himself hath decided, the witness of man bears onits very face the stamp of incompetency and presumption. 

 [Footnote 18: While some authors seem to go far towards the substitution of the fathers for the written word of God, others in their abhorrence of that excess have run into the opposite, fancying, as it would seem, that they exalt the Divine oracles just in the same proportion as they disparage the uninspired writers of the Church. The great body of the Church of England adhere to a middle course, and adopt that golden mean, which ascribes to the written Word its paramount authority, from which is no appeal, and yet honours Catholic tradition as the handmaid of the truth. ]

For myself I can say (what I have good hope these pages will ofthemselves evince) that no one can value the testimony of Christiantradition within its own legitimate sphere more sincerely, or morehighly, than the individual who is now soliciting your attention to theconclusions which he has himself drawn from it. When Scripture issilent, or where its meaning is doubtful, Catholic tradition is to me aguide, which I feel myself bound to follow with watchful care andsubmissive reverence. 

Now let it be for the present supposed, that instead of the oracles ofGod having spoken, as we believe them to have spoken, with a voiceclear, strong, and uniform against the doctrine and practice of theinvocation of saints and angels, their voices had been weak, doubtful, and vague; in other words, suppose in this case the question had beenleft by the Holy Scriptures an open question, then what evidence wouldhave been deducible from the writings of the primitive Church? Whattestimony do the first years and the first ages after the canon ofScripture was closed, bear upon this point? And here I would repeat theprinciple of inquiry, proposed above for our adoption in the moreimportant and solemn examination of the Holy Volume itself. --We ought toendeavour to ascertain what may {63} fairly and honestly be regarded asthe real bearing of each author's remains, and not suffer the generaltone and spirit of a writer to be counterbalanced by single expressions, which may be so interpreted as to convey an opposite meaning. Rather weshould endeavour to reconcile with that general spirit and pervadingtendency of a writer's sentiments any casual expressions which may admitof two acceptations. We adopt this principle in our researches into theremains of classical antiquity; we adopt the same principle inestimating the testimony of a living witness. In the latter case, indeed, the ingenuity of the adverse advocate is often exercised inmagnifying the discrepancies between some minor facts or incidentalexpressions with the broad and leading assertions of the witness, with aview to invalidate his testimony altogether, or at least to weaken theimpression made by it. But then a wise and upright judge, assured of thetruth of the evidence in the main, and of the integrity of theindividual, will not suffer unessential, apparent inconsistencies tostifle and bury the body of testimony at large, but will either extractfrom the witness what may account for them, or show them to beimmaterial. Inviting, therefore, your best thoughts to this branch ofour subject, I ask you to ascertain, by a full and candid process ofinduction, this important and interesting point, --Whether we of theAnglican Church, by religiously abstaining from the presentation, inword or in thought, of any thing approaching prayer or supplication, entreaty, request, or any invocation whatever, to any other being exceptGod alone, do or do not tread in the steps of the first Christians, andadhere to the very pattern which they set; and whether members of theChurch of Rome by addressing angel or saint in any form of invocationseeking {64} their aid, either by their intercession or otherwise, havenot unhappily swerved decidedly and far from those same footsteps, anddeparted widely from that pattern?

In one point of view it might perhaps be preferable to enter at onceupon our investigation, without previously stating the conclusions towhich my own inquiries have led; but, on the whole, I think it more fairto make that statement, in order, that having the inferences alreadydrawn placed before the mind, the inquirer may in each case weigh theseveral items of evidence bearing upon them separately, and more justlyestimate its whole weight collectively at the last. 

After then having examined the passages collected by the most celebratedRoman Catholic writers, and after having searched the undisputedoriginal works of the primitive writers of the Greek and Latin Churches, the conclusion to which I came, and in which every day of furtherinquiry and deliberation confirms me more and more in this:--

In the first place, negatively, that the Christian writers, through thefirst three centuries and more, never refer to the invocation of saintsand angels as a practice with which they were familiar: that they havenot recorded or alluded to any forms of invocation of the kind used bythemselves or by the Church in their days; and that no services of theearliest times contain hymns, litanies, or collects to angels, or to thespirits of the faithful departed. 

In the second place, positively, that the principles which theyhabitually maintain and advocate are irreconcileable with such apractice. 

In tracing the history of the worship of saints and angels, we proceed(gradually, indeed, though by no {65} means at all periods, and throughevery stage, with equal rapidity, ) from the earliest custom establishedand practised in the Church, --of addressing prayers to Almighty Godalone for the sake of the merits of his blessed Son, the only Mediatorand Intercessor between God and man, --to the lamentable innovation bothof praying to God for the sake of the merits, and through the mediationof departed mortals, and of invoking those mortals themselves as theactual dispensers of the spiritual blessings which the suppliant seeksfrom above. It is not only a necessary part of our inquiry forascertaining the very truth of the case; it is also curious andpainfully interesting, to trace the several steps, one after another, beginning with the doctrine maintained by various early writers, bothGreek and Latin, that the souls of the saints are not yet reigning withChrist in heaven, and ending with the anathema of the Council of Trent, against all who should maintain that doctrine; beginning with prayer andthanksgiving to Almighty God alone, and ending with daily prayers bothto saints and angels; one deviation from the strict line of religiousduty, and the pure singleness of Christian worship, successively glidinginto another, till at length the whole of Christendom, with a fewremarkable exceptions, was seen to acquiesce in public and privatedevotions, which, if proposed, the whole of Christendom would once withunanimity have rejected. 

Before I offer to you the result of my inquiries as to the progressivestages of degeneracy and innovation in the worship of Almighty God, Iwould premise two considerations:

First, I would observe, that the soundness of my conclusion on thegeneral points at issue does not depend at all on the accuracy of thearrangement of those stages {66} which I have adopted. Should any one, for example, think there is evidence that two or more of thoseprogressive steps, which I have regarded as consecutive, weresimultaneous changes, or that any one which I have ranked as subsequenttook rather the lead in order of time, such an opinion would not tend inthe least to invalidate my argument; the substantial and essential pointat issue being this: Is the invocation of saints and angels, as nowpractised in the Church of Rome, agreeable to the primitive usage of theearliest Christians?

Secondly, I would observe, that the places and occasions most favourablefor witnessing and correctly estimating the changes and gradualinnovations in the worship of those early times, are the tombs of themartyrs, and the Churches in which their remains were deposited; and atthe periods of the annual celebration of their martyrdom, or in someinstances at what was called their translation, --the removal, that is, of their mortal remains from their former resting-place to a church, forthe most part dedicated to their memory. On these occasions the mostextraordinary enthusiasm prevailed; sometimes the ardour of theworshippers, as St. Chrysostom [St. Chrys. Paris, 1718. Vol. Xii. P. 330. ] tells us, approaching madness. But even at times of lessexcitement, by contemplating, immediately after his death, the acts andsufferings of the martyr, and recalling his words, and looks, andstedfast bearing, and exhorting each other to picture to themselves hisholy countenance then fixed on them, his tongue addressing them, hissufferings before their eyes, encouraging all to follow his example, they began habitually to consider him as actually himself one of thefaithful assembled round {67} his tomb. Hence they believed that he waspraying with them as well as for them; that he heard their eulogy on hismerits, and was pleased with the honours paid to his memory: hence theyfelt sure of his goodwill towards them, and his ability, as when onearth, to promote their welfare. Hence they proceeded, by a fatal step, first, to implore him to give them bodily relief from some presentsufferings; then invoking him to plead their cause with God, and tointercede for the supply of their spiritual wants, and the ultimatesalvation of their souls; and, lastly, they prayed to him generally ashimself the dispenser of temporal and spiritual blessings. 

The following then is the order in which the innovations in Christianworship seem to have taken place, being chiefly introduced at the annualcelebrations of the martyrs:--

1st. In the first ages confession and prayer and praise were offered tothe Supreme Being alone, and that for the sake of his Son our onlySaviour and Advocate: when mention was made of saint or martyr, it wasto thank God for the graces bestowed on his departed holy ones when onearth, and to pray to God for grace that we might follow their goodexamples, and attain, through Christ, to the same end and crown of ourearthly struggles. This act of worship was usually accompanied by ahomily setting forth the Christian excellences of the saint, andencouraging the survivors so to follow him, as he followed Christ. 

2nd. The second stage seems to have been a prayer to Almighty God, thatHe would suffer the supplications and intercessions[19] of angels andsaints to prevail {68} with him, and bring down a blessing on theirfellow-petitioners on earth; the idea having spread among enthusiasticworshippers, as I have already observed, that the spirits of the saintswere suffered to be present around their tombs, and to join with thefaithful in their addresses to the throne of grace. 

 [Footnote 19: The Greek word [Greek: presbeia], "embassy, " employed on such occasions, is still used in some eastern Churches in the same sense. ]

3rd. The third stage seems to have owed its origin to orators constantlydwelling upon the excellences of the saints in the panegyrics deliveredover their remains, representing their constancy and Christian virtuesas superhuman and divine, and as having conferred lasting benefits onthe Church. By these benefits at first was meant the comfort andencouragement of their good example, and the honour procured to thereligion of the cross by their bearing witness to its truth even untodeath; but in process of time the habit grew of attaching a sort ofmysterious efficacy to their merits; hence this third gradation inreligious worship, namely, prayers to God that "He would hear hissuppliants, and grant their requests for the sake of his martyredservant, and by the efficacy of that martyr's merits. "

4th. Hitherto, unauthorized and objectionable as the two last forms ofprayer are, still the petitions in each case were directed to God alone. The next step swerved lamentably from that principle of worship, and thepetitioners addressed their requests to angels and sainted men inheaven; at first, however, confining their petitions to the asking fortheir prayers and intercessions with Almighty God. 

5th. The last stage in this progressive degeneracy of Christian worshipwas to petition the saints and angels, directly and immediatelythemselves, at first for the temporal, and afterwards for the spiritualbenefits which the petitioners desired to obtain from heaven. For it{69} is very curious, but not more curious than evident, that theworshippers seem for some time to have petitioned their saints fortemporal and bodily benefits, before they proceeded to ask for spiritualblessings at their hands, or by their prayers. (See Basil. Oral. InMamanta Martyrem. )

Of these several gradations and stages we find traces in the records ofChristian antiquity, after superstition and corruption had spreadthrough Christian worship, and leavened the whole. Of all of them wehave lamentable instances in the present ritual of the Church of Rome, as we shall see somewhat at large when we reach that division of ourinquiry. But from the beginning it was not so. In the earliest ages wefind only the first of these forms of worship exemplified, and it is theonly form now retained in the Anglican Ritual; of which, among otherexamples, the following passage in the prayer for Christ's Churchmilitant on earth supplies a beautiful specimen: "We bless Thy holy namefor all Thy servants departed this life in Thy faith and fear;beseeching Thee to give us grace so to follow their good examples, thatwith them we may be partakers of Thy heavenly kingdom: Grant this, OFather, for Jesus Christ's sake, our only Mediator and Advocate. Amen. "

We now proceed to examine the invaluable remains of Christian antiquity, not for the purpose of testing the accuracy of the above catalogue ofgradations _seriatim_ and in order of time; but to satisfy ourselves onthe question, whether the invocation of saints and angels prevailed fromthe first in the Christian Church; or whether it was an innovationintroduced after pagan superstition had begun to mingle its poisonouscorruptions with the pure worship of {70} Almighty God. And here, Iconceive, few persons will be disposed to doubt, that if the primitivebelievers were taught by the Apostles to address the saints reigning inheaven and the holy angels, and the Virgin Mother of our Lord, withadoration and prayers, the earliest Christian records must havecontained clear and indisputable references to the fact, and thatundesigned allusions to the custom would inevitably be found offeringthemselves to our notice here and there. I do not mean that we shouldexpect to meet with full and explicit statements either of the doctrineor the practice of the primitive Church in this particular; much lesssuch apologies and elaborate defences of the practice as abound to theoverflow in later times. But, what is more satisfactory in proof of thegeneral and established prevalence of any opinions or customs, we shouldsurely find expressions incidentally occurring, which implied anhabitual familiarity with such opinions or customs. In every record, forexample, of primitive antiquity, from the very earliest of all, expressions are constantly meeting us which involve the doctrine of theever-blessed Trinity, the atoning sacrifice of Christ's death, theinfluences of the Holy Spirit; habitual prayer and praise offered to theSaviour of the world, as very and eternal God; the holy Sacraments ofBaptism and the Lord's Supper; with other tenets and practices of theApostolic Church. It is impossible to study the remains of Christianantiquity without being assured beyond the reach of doubt, that suchwere the doctrines and practice of the universal Church from the days ofthe Apostles. Is the invocation of saints and angels and the blessedVirgin to be made an exception to this rule? Can it stand this test? Thegreat anxiety and labour of Roman Catholic {71} writers to press theauthors of every age to bear witness on their side in this behalf, proves that in their judgment no such exception is admissible. It isclearly beyond gainsaying, that if the present doctrine of the Church ofRome, with respect to the worship of angels and saints, as propounded bythe Council of Trent; and if her present practice as set forth in herauthorized liturgies and devotional services, and professed by herpopes, bishops, clergy, and people, had been the doctrine and practiceof the primitive Church, we should have found evident and indisputabletraces of it in the earliest works of primitive antiquity, in theearliest liturgies, and in the forms of prayer and exhortations toprayer with which those works abound. It by no means follows that ifsome such allusions were partially discoverable, therefore the doctrinesand practice must forthwith be pronounced to be apostolical; but if nosuch traces can be found, their absence bears witness that neither didthose doctrines nor that practice exist. If, for example, through theremains of the first three centuries we could have discovered no traceof the doctrine or practice of holy Baptism and the Eucharist, we musthave concluded that the doctrine and the practice were the offspring oflater years. But when we read every where, in those remains, exhortations to approach those holy mysteries with a pure heart andfaith unfeigned; when we find rules prescribed for the more orderlyadministration of the rites; in a word, when we perceive throughout asfamiliar references to these ordinances as could be now made byCatholics either of Rome or of England, while this would not of itselfnecessarily prove their divine origin, we should with equal plausibilityquestion the existence of Jerusalem or Constantinople, or of David orConstantine, as we {72} should doubt the prevalence both of the doctrineand practice of the Church in these particulars, even from the Apostles'days. 

With these principles present to our minds, I now invite you toaccompany me in a review of the testimonies of primitive Christianantiquity with regard to supplications and invocations of saints andangels, and of the blessed Virgin Mary. 

 * * * * *

SECTION II--CENTURY I. --THE EVIDENCE OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 

It will be necessary for the satisfaction of all parties, that weexamine, in the first place, those ancient writings which are ascribedto an Apostle, or to fellow-labourers of the Apostles; familiarly knownas the writings of the Apostolic Fathers. They are five in number, Barnabas, Clement, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp. Many able writers, aswell of the Roman as of the Anglican communion, have discussed at largethe genuineness of these writings; and have come to very differentresults. Some critics are of opposite and extreme opinions, othersranging between them with every degree and shade of variation. Some ofthese works have been considered spurious; others have been pronouncedgenuine; though, even these have been thought to be, in many parts, interpolated. The question, however, of their genuineness, though deeplyinteresting in itself, will not affect their testimony with {73} regardto the subject before us[20]. They were all in existence before theCouncil of Nicæa; and we shall probably not be wrong in assigning to thefirst two a date at the very lowest computation not less remote than themiddle of the second century; somewhere, it may be, at the furthest, about one hundred years after the death of our Lord. (A. D. 130-150. )With all their errors and blemishes and interpolations taken at theworst, after every reasonable deduction for defects in matter, taste, and style, the writings which are ascribed to the Apostolic Fathers aretoo venerable for their antiquity, too often quoted with reverence andaffection by some who have been the brightest ornaments of the ChristianChurch, and possess too copious a store of genuine evangelical truth, sound principle, primitive simplicity, and pious sentiment, to be passedover with neglect by any Catholic Christian. The few extracts {74} madehere will, I am assured, be not unacceptable to any one, who holds dearthe religion of Christ[21]. 

 [Footnote 20: I do not think it suitable in this address to enter upon the difficult field of inquiry, whether all or which of these works were the genuine productions of those whose names they bear; and whether the Barnabas, Clement, and Hermas to which three of them are ascribed, were the Barnabas, Clement, and Hermas of whom express mention is made in the pages of Holy Scripture. I have determined, in conducting my argument, to affix to them in each case the lowest proposed antiquity. The edition of Archbishop Wake, (who maintains the highest antiquity for these works, though I have not here adopted his translation, ) may be consulted with much profit. 

 Did the question before us relate to the genuineness and dates of these works, they could not, with any approach to fairness, be all five placed without distinction under the same category. The evidence for the genuineness of Clement, Ignatius in the shorter copy, and Polycarp, is too valuable to be confounded with that of the others, which are indisputably subject to much greater doubt. But this question has only an incidental bearing on our present inquiry, and will be well spared. ]

 [Footnote 21: The edition of the works of these Apostolic Fathers used here is that of Cotelerius as revised by Le Clerc, Antwerp, 1698. ]

 * * * * *

THE EPISTLE OF ST. BARNABAS. 

In the work entitled The Catholic Epistle of Barnabas, which was writtenprobably by a Jew converted to the Christian faith, about the close ofthe first century, or certainly before the middle of the second[22], Ihave searched in vain for any thing like the faintest trace of theinvocation of saint or angel. The writer gives directions on the subjectof prayer; he speaks of angels as the ministers of God; he speaks of thereward of the righteous at the day of judgment; but he suggests not theshadow of a supposition, that he either held the doctrine himself whichthe Church of Rome now holds, or was aware of its existence amongChristians. In his very beautiful but incomplete summary of Christianduty [Sect. 18, 19. P. 50, 51, 52. ], which he calls "The Way of Light, "we perceive more than one most natural opening for reference to thatdoctrine, had it been familiar to his mind. In the midst indeed of hisbrief precepts of religious and moral obligation, he directs theChristian to seek out every day "the persons of the saints, " but theyare our fellow-believers on earth; those saints or holy ones, foradministering to whose necessities, the Scripture assures us that Godwill not forget our work and labour of love [Heb. Vi. 10. ]: these theauthor bids the Christians {75} search out daily, for the purposes ofreligious intercourse, and of encouragement by the word. 

 [Footnote 22: Archbishop Wake considers this Epistle to have been written by St. Barnabas to the Jews, soon after the destruction of Jerusalem. ]

The following interesting extracts shall conclude our reference to thiswork:--

"There are two ways of doctrine and authority, one of light, the otherof darkness; and the difference between the two ways is great. Over theone are appointed angels of God, conductors of the light; over theother, angels of Satan: and the one (God) is Lord from everlasting toeverlasting; the other (Satan) is ruler of the age of iniquity. The wayof light is this ... Thou shalt love Him that made thee; thou shaltglorify Him that redeemed thee from death. Thou shalt be single inheart, and rich in spirit. Thou shalt not join thyself to those who arewalking in the path of death. Thou shalt hate to do what is displeasingto God; thou shalt hate all hypocrisy. Thou shalt entertain no evilcounsel against thy neighbour. Thou shalt not take away thy hand fromthy son or thy daughter, but shalt teach them the fear of the Lord fromtheir youth. Thou shalt communicate with thy neighbour in all things, and call not things thine own. Thou shalt not be of a froward tongue, for the mouth is the snare of death. To the very utmost of thy powerkeep thy soul chaste. Do not open thine hand to receive, and close itagainst giving. Thou shalt love as the apple of thine eye every one whospeaketh to thee the word of the Lord. Call to remembrance the day ofjudgment, night and day. Thou shalt search out every day the persons ofthe saints [23]; both meditating by the word, {76} and proceeding toexhort them, and anxiously caring to save a soul by the word. Thou shaltpreserve what thou hast received, neither adding thereto, nor takingtherefrom. Thou shalt not come with a bad conscience to thy prayer. "

 [Footnote 23: There is much obscurity in the phraseology of this passage: [Greek: ekzaetaeseis kath hekastaen haemeran ta prosopa ton hagion kai dia logou skopion kai poreuomenos eis to parakalesai, kai meleton eis sosai psuchaen to logo]. In the corresponding exhortation among the Apostolical Constitutions (book vii. Ch. 9), the expression is, "Thou shalt seek the person ([Greek: prosopon]) of the saints, that thou mayest find rest (or find refreshment, or refresh thyself) ([Greek: in epanapanae tois logois auton]) in their words. " The author seems evidently to allude to the reciprocal advantage derived by Christians from religious intercourse. ]

The closing sentences contain this blessing: "Now God, who is the Lordof all the world, give to you wisdom, skill, understanding, knowledge ofhis judgments, with patience. And be ye taught of God; seeking what theLord requires of you, and do it, that ye may be saved in the day ofjudgment.... The Lord of glory and of all grace be with your spirit. Amen. "

 * * * * *

THE SHEPHERD OF HERMAS. 

This work, which derives its title from the circumstance of an angelicteacher being represented as a shepherd, is now considered by many tohave been the production of Hermas, a brother of Pius, Bishop ofRome[24] though others are persuaded that the work is of a much earlierdate[25]. The author speaks of guardian angels and of evil angels, andhe speaks much of prayer; but not the faintest hint shows itselfthroughout the three books, of which the work consists, that he had {77}any idea of prayer being addressed to any created being, whether saintor angel. On the evidence of this writer I will not detain you muchlonger than by the translation of a passage as it is found in the Greekquotation from Hermas, made by Antiochus (Homil. 85), on a point themost nearly, of all that I can find, connected with the immediatesubject of our inquiry. The Latin is found in the second book, ninthmandate. It contains sound spiritual advice, of universal application. 

 [Footnote 24: Ecclesiastical writers refer the appointment of Pius, as Bishop of Rome, to the year 153. ]

 [Footnote 25: Archbishop Wake thinks it not improbable that this book was written by the same Hermas, of whom mention is made by St. Paul. ]

"Let us then remove from us double-heartedness and faint-heartedness, and never at all doubt of supplicating any thing from God; saying withinourselves, 'How can I, who have been guilty of so many sins against Him, ask of the Lord and receive?' But with thine whole heart turn to theLord, and ask of Him without doubting; and thou shalt know his greatmercy, that He will not forsake thee, but will fulfil the desire of thysoul. For God is not as men are, a rememberer of evil, but is Himselfone who remembers not evil, and is moved with compassion towards hiscreature. Do thou, therefore, cleanse thy heart of doubt, and ask ofHim, and thou shalt receive thy request. But when thou doubtest, thoushalt not receive. For they who doubt towards God are thedouble-hearted, and shall receive nothing whatever of their desires. Forthose who are whole in the faith, ask every thing, trusting in the Lord, and they receive because they ask nothing doubting. [See St. James i. 6. ] And if thou shouldest be tardy in receiving, do not doubt in thymind because thou dost not receive soon the request of thy soul. For thecause of the tardiness of thy receiving is some trial, or sometransgression which thou knowest not of. Do thou then {78} not cease tooffer the request of thy soul, and thou shalt receive it. But if thougrow faint in asking, accuse thyself, and not the Giver. Fordouble-heartedness is a daughter of the devil, and works much mischieftowards the servants of God. Do thou, therefore, take to thyself thefaith that is strong. "

In the twelfth section of the ninth Similitude, in the third book, inthe midst of much to the same import, and of much, too, which is strangeand altogether unworthy of the pen from which the previous quotationproceeded, he thus writes, as the Latin records his words, the Greek ofthis passage having been lost. 

"These all are messengers to be reverenced for their dignity. By these, therefore, as it were by a wall, the Lord is girded round. But the gateis the Son of God, who is the only way to God. For no one shall enter into God except by his Son. " [Book iii. Simil. 2. ]

On the subject of prayer, I cannot refrain from referring you to abeautiful similitude, illustrative of the powerful and beneficialeffects of the intercession of Christians for each other. The authorcompares a rich man, abounding in deeds of charity, to a vine full offruit supported by an elm. The elm seems not to bear fruit at all; butby supporting the vine, which, without that support, would bear no fruitto perfection, it may be said to bear fruit itself. So the poor man, whohas nothing to give in return for the rich man's fruits of charity, beyond the support which his prayers and praises ascending to God in hisbehalf will obtain, confers a far more substantial benefit on the richman than the most liberal outpouring of alms from the rich can confer onthe poor. [Ibid. ] Yet the writer, who {79} had formed such strongnotions of the benefits mutually obtained by the prayers of Christiansfor each other, says not a word about the intercession of saints andangels, nor of our invoking them. He will not suffer us to be deterredby any consciousness of our own transgressions from approaching GodHimself, directly and immediately ourselves; but He bids us draw nearourselves to the throne and mercy seat of our heavenly Father. 

 * * * * *

ST. CLEMENT, BISHOP OF ROME. 

It is impossible to read the testimony borne by Eusebius, and other mostancient writers, to the character and circumstances of Clement, withoutfeeling a deep interest in whatever production of his pen may haveescaped the ravages of time. "Third from the Apostles, " says Eusebius, "Clement obtained the bishopric of Rome; one who had seen the Apostlesand conversed with them, and had still the sound of their preaching inhis ears, and their tradition before his eyes;--and not he alone, formany others[26] at that time were still living, who had been taught bythe Apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small schism having arisenamong the brethren in Corinth, the Church in Rome sent a most importantletter to the Corinthians, urging them to return to peace, renewing {80}their faith, and [reminding them of] the tradition which had been solately received from the Apostles. " [Euseb. Eccl. Hist. V. C. 6. ]

 [Footnote 26: See St. Paul to the Philippians, iv. 3. "And I entreat thee also, true yoke-fellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellow-labourers, whose names are in the book of life. "]

Of the many works which have been attributed to Clement, it is nowgenerally agreed, that one, and only one, can be safely received asgenuine, whilst some maintain that even that one is not altogether freefrom interpolations, if not itself spurious[27]. But though we mustbelieve the other works to have been assigned improperly to Clement; yetI have not thought it safe to pass them by unexamined, both because someof them are held in high estimation by writers of the Church of Rome, and especially because whatever pen first composed them, of their verygreat antiquity there can be entertained no reasonable doubt. Indeed, the Apostolical Canons, and the Apostolical Constitutions, both ascribedto Clement as their author, acting under the direction of the ApostolicCouncil, stand first among the records of the Councils received by theChurch of Rome. 

 [Footnote 27: Archbishop Wake concludes that this first Epistle was written shortly after the end of Nero's persecution, and before A. D. 70. ]

To Clement's first Epistle to the Corinthians, now regarded by many asthe only genuine work of that primitive writer, the date of which isconsidered by many to be about A. D. 90, Jerome bears this veryinteresting testimony in his book on illustrious men:

"He, Clement, wrote in the person of the Church of Rome, to the Churchin Corinth, a very useful epistle, which is publicly read in someplaces; in its character agreeing with St. Paul's Epistle to theHebrews, not only in the sense, but even in the words: and indeed theresemblance is very striking in each. " [Catalogus ScriptorumEcclesiasticorum, Jeron. , vol. Iv, part ii. P. 107, edit. Benedict. Paris, 1706. ] {81}

It is impossible to read this Epistle of one of the earliest bishops ofChrist's flock in the proper frame of mind, without spiritualedification. A tone of primitive simplicity pervades it, which is quitedelightful. His witness to the redemption by the atoning sacrifice ofChrist's death, and to the life-giving influences of the Spirit ofgrace, is clear, repeated, and direct. His familiar acquaintance withthe ancient Scriptures is very remarkable; though we might not alwaysacquiesce in the critical accuracy of his application. His reference tothe Epistles written by St. Paul to the same Church at Corinth that hewas then addressing, affords one of those unobtrusive and undesignedcollateral evidences to the Holy Scriptures, which are as abundant inthe primitive writings, as they are invaluable. No one can read thisEpistle of Clement, without acquiescing in the expression of Jerome, that it is "very admirable. "

Perhaps in the present work the Epistle of Clement becomes even moreinteresting from the circumstance of his having been a bishop of theChurch founded by the Apostles themselves in the very place where thatChurch exists, to whose members this inquiry is more especiallyaddressed. In his writings I have searched diligently for everyexpression which might throw light upon the opinions and practice eitherof the author or of the Church in whose name he wrote; of the Churchwhich he addressed, or of the Catholic Church at large to which herefers, on the subject of our inquiry. So far, however, from any wordoccurring, which could be brought to bear in favour of the adoration ofsaints and angels, or of any supplication to them for their succour ortheir prayers, the peculiar turn and character of his Epistle in manyparts seems to supply {82} more than negative evidence against theprevalence of any such belief or practice. Clement speaks of angels; hespeaks of the holy men of old, who pleased God, and were blessed, andwere taken to their reward; he speaks of prayer; he urges to prayer; hespecifies the object of our prayers; he particularizes the subjects ofour prayers; but there is not the most distant allusion to the saintsand angels as persons to whom supplications could be addressed. Pray foryourselves (such are the sentiments of this holy man); pray for yourbrethren who have fallen from their integrity; pray to God Almighty, forthe sake of his Son, and your prayer will be heard and granted. Of anyother intercessor or advocate, angel, saint, or Virgin Mother; of anyother being to whom the invocations of the faithful should be offered, Clement seems to have had no knowledge. Could this have been so, ifthose who received the Gospel from the very fountain-head had beenaccustomed to pray to those holy men who had finished their course onearth, and were gone to their reward in heaven? Clement invites us tocontemplate Enoch, and Abraham, and David, and Elijah, and Job, withmany of their brethren in faith and holiness; he bids us look to themwith reverence and gratitude, but it is only to imitate their goodexamples. He tells us to think of St. Paul and St. Peter and theirbrethren in faith and holiness; but it is in order to listen to theirgodly admonitions, and to follow them in all pious obedience to the willof our heavenly Father, as they followed Christ. I must content myselfwith a very few brief extracts from this Epistle[28]:

 [Footnote 28: I am induced to mention here that two Epistles, ascribed to St. Clement, written in Arabic, and now appended to Wetstein's Greek Testament (Amsterdam, 1751), are believed by many to be genuine, whilst others say they are spurious. At all events they are productions of the earliest times. The manuscript was procured at Constantinople. I have examined the Latin translation carefully, and in some points submitted my doubts to a very learned Syriac scholar. The general subject is the conduct of those who have professed celibacy, whilst of the invocation of saints no trace whatever is to be found. The passages most closely bearing on the point before us are to the following effect:

 The writer urges Christians to be careful to maintain good works, especially in the cause of charity, visiting the sick and afflicted, praying with them, and praying for them, and persevering always in prayer; asking and seeking of God in joy and watchfulness, without hatred or malice. In the Lord's husbandry, he says, it well becomes us to be good workmen, who are like the Apostles, imitating the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, who are ever anxious for the salvation of men. 

 "Therefore (he adds, at the close of the first of these Epistles) let us look to and imitate those faithful ones, that we may behave ourselves as is meet in the Lord. So shall we serve the Lord, and please him, in righteousness and justice without a stain. Finally, farewell in the Lord, and rejoice in the Lord, all ye holy ones. Peace and joy be with you from God the Father, by Jesus Christ our Lord. "] {83}

Ch. 21. "Take heed, beloved, lest the many loving-kindnesses of the Lordprove our condemnation, if we do not live as is worthy of him, nor dowith one accord what is good and well-pleasing in his sight.... Let usconsider how nigh to us he is, and that nothing of our thoughts orreasonings is concealed from him. Justice it is that we should notbecome deserters from his will.... Let us venerate the Lord Jesus, whoseblood was given for us. "

Ch. 29. "Let us then approach him in holiness of soul, lifting up holyand undefiled hands towards him; loving our merciful and tender Fatherwho hath made us a portion of his elect. " {84}

Ch. 36. "This is the way, beloved, in which we find Jesus Christ oursalvation, the chief-priest of our offerings, our protector, and thesuccourer of our weakness. By him let us look stedfastly to the heightsof heaven; by him let us behold his most high and spotless face: by himthe eyes of our heart are opened; by him our ignorant and darkened mindsshoot forth into his marvellous light; by him the Supreme Governorwilled that we should taste immortal knowledge: who, being thebrightness of his magnificence, is so much greater than the angels, ashe hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. "

Ch. 49. "He who hath love in Christ, let him keep the commandments ofChrist. Who can tell of the bond of the love of God? The greatness ofhis goodness who can adequately express?... Love unites us to God.... Bylove the Lord took us; by the love which he had for us Christ our Lordgave his blood for us by the will of God, and his flesh for our flesh, and his life for our lives. "

Ch. 56. "Let us pray for those who are in any transgression, thatmeekness and humility may be granted to them; that they may submit, notto us, but to the will of God; for thus to them will the remembrancetowards God and the saints, with mercies, be fruitful and perfect[29]. "

 [Footnote 29: The original is obscure, and has been variously rendered, [Greek: outos gar estai autois egkarpos kai teleia hae pros ton theon kai tous hagious met oiktirmon mneia. ] The Editor refers his readers to Rom. Xii. 13. "Distributing to the necessity of saints. " The received translation is this, "Sic enim erit ipsis fructuosa et perfecta quæ est apud Deum et sanctos cum misericordia recordatio. "]

Ch. 58. "The all-seeing God, the Sovereign Ruler {85} of spirits, andthe Lord of all flesh, who hath chosen the Lord Jesus, and us throughhim, to be a peculiar people; grant to every soul that calleth on hisglorious and holy name, faith, fear, peace, patience, long-suffering, self-control, purity, and temperance, to the good pleasure of his name, through our high-priest and protector Jesus Christ; through whom to himbe glory and majesty, dominion and honour, now and for ever and ever, world without end. Amen. "

 * * * * *

SAINT IGNATIUS. 

This martyr to the truth as it is in Jesus sealed that truth with hisblood about seventy years after the death of our Lord. From Antioch inSyria, of which place he was bishop, he was sent to the imperial city, Rome; and there he ended his mortal career by a death which he had longexpected, and which he was prepared to meet not only with resignation tothe Divine will, but even with joy and gladness. His Epistles arewritten with much of the florid colouring of Asiatic eloquence; but theyhave all the raciness of originality, and they glow with that Christianfervour and charity which compels us to love him as a father and afriend, a father and friend in Christ. The remains of this apostolicfather I have carefully studied, with the single view of ascertainingwhether any vestige, however faint, might be traced in him of theinvocation of saints and angels; but I can find none. Neither here, norin the case of any of the apostolical fathers, whose remains we areexamining, have I contented myself with merely ascertaining that theybear no direct and palpable evidence; I have always endeavoured to find, and then thoroughly to sift, any expressions which might with {86} theslightest plea of justification be urged in testimony of primitivebelief and practice sanctioning the invocation of saints. I find none. Brethren of the Church of Rome, search diligently for yourselves; "Ispeak as to wise men: Judge ye what I say. "

The remains of Ignatius offer to us many a passage on which a Christianpastor would delight to dwell: but my province here is not to recommendhis works to the notice of Christians; I am only to report the result ofmy inquiries touching the matter in question; and as bearing on thatquestion, the following extracts will not be deemed burdensome in thisplace:--

In his Epistle to the Ephesians, exhorting Christians to united prayer, he says, "For if the prayer of one or two possesses such strength, howmuch more shall the prayer both of the bishop and of the whole Church?"[Page 13. § 5-7. ] "For there is one physician of a corporeal and aspiritual nature, begotten and not begotten; become God in the flesh, true life in death, both from Mary and from God; first liable tosuffering, and then incapable of suffering. " [In the majority of themanuscripts the reading is, "in an immortal true life. "]

Here we must observe that these Epistles of Ignatius have come down tous also in an interpolated form, abounding indeed with substitutions andadditions, but generally resembling paraphrases of the original text. Ofthe general character of that supposititious work, two passagescorresponding with our quotations from the genuine productions ofIgnatius may give a sufficiently accurate idea. The first passage abovequoted is thus paraphrased: "For if the prayer of one or two possesses{87} such strength that Christ stands among them, how much more shallthe prayer both of the bishop and of the whole Church, ascending withone voice to God, induce him to grant all their requests made in JesusChrist?" [Page 47. C. 5. ] The paraphrase of the second is more full:"Our physician is the only true God, ungenerated and unapproachable; theLord of all things, but the Father and Generator of the only-begottenSon. We have also as our physician our Lord God, Jesus Christ, who wasbefore the world, the only-begotten Son and the Word, but alsoafterwards man of the Virgin Mary; 'for the Word was made flesh. ' He whowas incorporeal, now in a body; he who could not suffer, now in a bodycapable of suffering; he who was immortal in a mortal body, life incorruption--in order that he might free our immortal souls from deathand corruption, and heal them, diseased with ungodliness and evildesires as they were. " [Page 48. C. 7. ]

It must here be observed, that though these are indisputably not thegenuine works of Ignatius, but were the productions of a later age, yetno trace is to be found in them of the doctrine, or practice, of theinvocation of saints. In this point of view their testimony is nothingmore nor less than that of an anonymous paraphrast, who certainly hadmany opportunities of referring to that doctrine and practice; but whoby his total silence seems to have been as ignorant of them as theauthor himself whose works he is paraphrasing. 

To return to his genuine works: In his Epistle to the Magnesians we findthese expressions: "For as the Lord did nothing without the Father, being one with {88} him, neither by himself, nor by his Apostles; soneither do ye any thing without the bishop and priests, nor attempt tomake any thing appear reasonable to yourselves individually. But at oneplace be there one prayer, and one supplication, one mind, one hope inlove, in blameless rejoicing: Jesus Christ is one; than which nothing isbetter. All, then, throng as to one temple, as to one altar, as to oneJesus Christ, who proceeded from one Father, and is in one, and returnedto one. " [Page 19. § 7. ] Again he says, "Remember me in your prayers, that I may attain to God. I am in need of your united prayer in God, andof your love. "

In his Epistle to the Trallians, he expresses himself in words to whichno Anglican Catholic would hesitate to respond: "Ye ought to comfort thebishop, to the honour of God, and of Jesus Christ, and of the Apostles. "[Page 25. § 12. ] He speaks in this Epistle with humility and reverenceof the powers and hosts of heaven; but he makes no allusion to anyreligious worship or invocation of them. 

The following extract is from his Epistle to the Philadelphians: "Mybrethren, I am altogether poured forth in love for you; and in exceedingjoy I make you secure; yet not I, but Jesus Christ, bound in whom I amthe more afraid, as being already seized[30]; but your prayer to Godwill perfect me, that I may obtain the lot mercifully assigned to me. Betaking myself to the Gospel as to the flesh of Jesus, and to theApostles as the presbytery of the Church; let us also love the prophets, because they also have proclaimed the Gospel, and hoped in him, andwaited for him; in whom also {89} trusting, they were saved in the unityof Jesus Christ, being holy ones worthy of love and admiration, who havereceived testimony from Jesus Christ, and are numbered together in theGospel of our common hope. " [Page 32. § 5. ]

 [Footnote 30: This clause is very obscure, and perhaps imperfect. ]

I am induced to add the paraphrase on this passage also. "My brethren, Iam very much poured out in loving you, and with exceeding joy I make yousecure; not I, but by me, Jesus Christ, in whom bound I am the moreafraid. For I am yet not perfected, but your prayer to God will perfectme; so that I may obtain that to which I was called, flying to theGospel as the flesh of Jesus Christ, and to the Apostles as thepresbytery of the Church. And the prophets also I love, as persons whoannounce Christ, as partaking of the same spirit with the Apostles. Forjust as the false prophets and false apostles have drawn one and thesame wicked and deceitful and seducing spirit, so also the prophets andthe apostles, one and the same holy spirit, good, leading, true, andinstructing. For one is the God of the Old and the New Testament. One isMediator between God and man, for the production of the creatures enduedwith reason and perception, and for the provision of what is useful, andadapted to them: and one is the Comforter who wrought in Moses and theprophets and the apostles. All the saints therefore were saved inChrist, hoping in him, and waiting for him; and through him theyobtained salvation, being saints worthy of love and of admiration, having obtained a testimony from Jesus Christ in the Gospel of ourcommon hope. " [Page 81. § 5. ]

In his Epistle to the Romans he speaks to them of his own prayer to God, and repeatedly implores them {90} to pray for him. "Pray to Christ forme, that by these instruments [the teeth of the wild beasts] I maybecome a sacrifice of God. I do not, as Peter and Paul, command you:they were Apostles, I am a condemned man. They were free; but I am stilla servant. Yet if I suffer, I shall become the freedman of Jesus Christ, and shall rise again free: and now in my bonds I learn to covetnothing. " [Page 28. § 4. ] Again he says, "Remember the Church in Syriain your prayers. " [Page 30. § 9. ] He prays for his fellow-labourers inthe Lord: he implores them to approach the throne of grace withsupplications for mercy on his own soul. Of prayer to saint or angel hesays nothing. Of any invocation offered to them by himself or hisfellow-believers, Ignatius appears entirely ignorant. 

 * * * * *

SAINT POLYCARP. 

The only remaining name among those, whom the Church has reverenced asapostolical fathers, is the venerable Polycarp. He suffered martyrdom byfire, at a very advanced age, in Smyrna, about one hundred and thirtyyears after his Saviour's death. Of Polycarp, the apostolical bishop ofthe Catholic Church of Smyrna, only one Epistle has survived. It isaddressed to the Philippians. In it he speaks to his brother Christiansof prayer, constant, incessant prayer; but the prayer of which he speaksis supplication addressed only to God [31]. He marks out for ourimitation the good example of St. Paul and the other Apostles; assuringus that they had not run in vain, {91} but were gone to the placeprepared for them by the Lord, as the reward of their labours. But notone word does he utter bearing upon the invocation of saints in prayer;he makes no allusion to the Virgin Mary. 

 [Footnote 31: [Greek: deaesesin aitoumenoi ton pantepoptaen Theon]. Sect. 7. ]

Before we close our examination of the recorded sentiments of theapostolical fathers on the immediate subject of our inquiry, we mustrefer, though briefly, to the Epistle generally received as the genuineletter from the Church of Smyrna to the neighbouring Churches, narratingthe martyrdom of Polycarp. It belongs, perhaps, more strictly to thisplace than to the remains of Eusebius, because, together with thesentiments of his contemporaries who witnessed his death and dictatedthe letter, it purports to contain the very words of the martyr himselfin the last prayer which he ever offered upon earth. With somevariations from the copy generally circulated, this letter is preservedin the works of Eusebius. [Euseb. Paris, 1628, dedicated to theArchbishop by Franciscus Vigerus. ] On the subject of our presentresearch the evidence of this letter is not merely negative. So far fromcountenancing any invocation of saint or martyr, it contains aremarkable and very interesting passage, the plain common-senserendering of which bears decidedly against all exaltation of mortalsinto objects of religious worship. The letter, however, is too wellknown to need any further preliminary remarks; and we must contentourselves with such references and extracts as may appear to bear mostdirectly on our subject. 

"The Church of God, which is in Smyrna, to the Church in Philomela, andto all the branches [Greek: paroikais] {92} of the holy Catholic Churchdwelling in any place, mercy, peace, and love of God the Father, and ourLord Jesus Christ be multiplied. " [Book i. Hist. Iv. C. Xv. P. 163. ]

"The Proconsul, in astonishment, caused it to be proclaimed thrice, Polycarp has confessed himself to be a Christian. On this they allshouted, that the Proconsul should let a lion loose on Polycarp. But thegames were over, and that could not be done: they then with one accordinsisted on his being burnt alive. "

Polycarp, before his death, offered this prayer, or rather perhaps weshould call it this thanksgiving, to God for his mercy in thus deeminghim worthy to suffer death for the truth, "Father of thy beloved andblessed Son Jesus Christ, by whom we have received our knowledgeconcerning thee, the God of angels and power, and of the whole creation, and of the whole family of the just, who live before thee; I bless theebecause thou hast deemed me worthy of this day and this hour to receivemy portion among the number of the martyrs, in the cup of Christ, to theresurrection both of soul and body in the incorruption of the HolyGhost; among whom may I be received before thee this day in a rich andacceptable sacrifice, even as thou, the true God, who canst not lie, foreshowing and fulfilling, hast beforehand prepared. For this, and forall I praise thee, I bless thee; I glorify thee, through the eternalhigh-priest Jesus Christ thy beloved Son, through whom to thee, with himin the Holy Ghost, be glory both now and for future ages. Amen. "

(I cannot help suggesting a comparison between the prayer of thisprimitive martyr bound to the stake, with the prayer of Thomas Becket, of Canterbury, as stated in the ancient services for his day, when hewas murdered in his own cathedral, to which we shall hereafter refer atlength. The comparison will impress us with the difference betweenreligion and superstition, between the purity of primitive Christianworship, and the unhappy corruptions of a degenerate age. "To God andthe Blessed Mary, and Saint Dionysius, and the holy patrons of thisChurch, I commend myself and the Church. ") {93}

After his death, the narrative proceeds, "But the envious adversary ofthe just observed the honour put upon the greatness of his testimony, [or of his martyrdom [Greek: to megethos autou taes marturias], ] and hisblameless life from the first, and knowing that he was now crowned withimmortality, and the prize of undoubted victory, resisted, though manyof us desired to take his body, and have fellowship with his holy flesh. Some then suggested to Nicetes, the father of Herod, and brother ofDalce, to entreat the governor not to give his body, 'Lest, ' said he, 'leaving the crucified One they should begin to worship this man [Greek:sebein];' and this they said at the suggestion and importunity of theJews, who also watched us when we would take the body from the fire. This they did, not knowing that we can never either leave Christ, whosuffered for the salvation of all who will be saved in all the world, orworship any other. " [The Paris translation adds "ut Deum. "] "For himbeing the Son of God we worship [Greek: proskunumen], but the martyrs, as disciples and imitators of our Lord, we worthily love[32], because oftheir pre-eminent [Greek: anuperblaeton] good-will towards their {94}own king and teacher, with whom may we become partakers andfellow-disciples. "

 [Footnote 32: [Greek: axios agapomen]. Ruffinus translates it by "diligimus et veneramur, " and it is so quoted by Bellarmin. ]

"The centurion, seeing the determination of the Jews, placed him in themidst, and burnt him as their manner is. And thus we collecting hisbones, more valuable than precious stones, and more esteemed than gold, we deposited them where it was meet. There, as we are able, collectingourselves together in rejoicing and gladness, the Lord will grant to usto observe the birth-day of his martyrdom, for the remembrance of thosewho have before undergone the conflict, and for exercise and preparationof those who are to come. " [Greek: hos dunaton haemin sunagomenois enagalliasei kai chara parexei ho Kurios epitelein taen tou martyriouautou haemeran genethlion, eis te ton proaethlaekoton mnaemaen, kai tonmellonton askaesin te kai hetoimasian. ]

In this relic of primitive antiquity, we have the prayer of a holymartyr, at his last hour, offered to God alone, through Christ alone. Here we find no allusion to any other intercessor; no commending of thedying Christian's soul to saint or angel. Here also we find an explicitdeclaration, that Christians offered religious worship to no one butChrist, whilst they loved the martyrs, and kept their names in gratefulremembrance, and honoured even their ashes when the spirit had fled. Polycarp pleads no other merits; he seeks no intercession; he prays forno aid, save only his Redeemer's. Here too we find, that the place of amartyr's burial was the place which the early Christians loved tofrequent; but then we are expressly told with what intent they metthere, --not, as in later times, to invoke the departed spirit of themartyr, but to call to mind, in grateful remembrance, the sufferings ofthose who had already endured the awful struggle; and by {95} theirexample to encourage and prepare other soldiers of the cross thereafterto fight the good fight of faith; assured that they would be more thanconquerors through Him who loved them. 

 * * * * *

We have now examined those works which are regarded by us all, whetherof the Roman or Anglican Church, as the remains of apostolicalfathers, --Christians who, at the very lowest calculation, lived closeupon the Apostles' time, and who, according to the firm conviction ofmany, had all of them conversed with the Apostles, and heard the word oftruth from their mouths. I do from my heart rejoice with you, that theseholy men bear direct, clear, and irrefragable testimony to thosefundamental truths which the Church of Rome and the Church of Englandboth hold inviolate--the doctrine of the ever-blessed Trinity, with itsessential and inseparable concomitants, the atonement by the blood of acrucified Redeemer, and the vivifying and sanctifying influences of theHoly Spirit. 

Supposing for a moment no trace of such fundamental doctrines could bediscovered in these writings, would not the absence of such vestige havebeen urged by those who differ from us, as a strong argument that thedoctrine of the ever-blessed Trinity was an innovation of a later date;and would not such an argument have been urged with reason? How, inplain honesty, can we avoid coming to the same conclusion on the subjectof the invocation of saints? If the doctrine and the practice of prayingto saints, or to angels, for their succour, or even their intercession, had been known {96} and recognised, and approved and acted upon by theApostles, and those who were the very disciples of the Apostles, notonly deriving the truth from their written works, but having heard itfrom their own living tongue, --in the nature of things would not someplain, palpable, intelligible, and unequivocal indications of it haveappeared in such writings as these; writings in which much is said ofprayer, of intercessory prayer, of the one object of prayer, of thesubjects of prayer, of the nature of prayer, the time and place ofprayer, the spirit in which we are to offer prayer, and the persons forwhom we ought to pray? Does it accord with common sense, and commonexperience, with what we should expect in other cases, with the analogyof history, and the analogy of faith, that we should find a profound andtotal silence on the subject of any prayer or invocation to saints andangels, if prayer or invocation of saints and angels had beenrecognised, approved, and practised by the primitive Church?

At the risk of repetition, or surplusage, I would beg to call yourattention to one point in this argument. I am far from saying that nopractice is apostolical which cannot be proved from the writings ofthese apostolical fathers: that would be a fallacy of an opposite kind. I ground my inference specifically and directly on the fact, that thesewriters are full, and copious, and explicit, and cogent on the natureand duty of prayer and supplications, as well for public as for privateblessings; and of intercessions by one Christian for another, and forthe whole race of mankind no less than for mercy on himself; and yetthough openings of every kind palpably offered themselves for a naturalintroduction of the subject, there is in no one single instance anyreference or allusion to the {97} invocation of saint or angel, as apractice either approved or even known. 

When indeed I call to mind the general tendency of the natural man tomultiply to himself the objects of religious worship, and to create, bythe help of superstition, and the delusive workings of the imagination, a variety of unearthly beings whose wrath he must appease, or whosefavour he may conciliate; when I reflect how great is the temptation inunenlightened or fraudulent teachers to accommodate the dictates oftruth to the prejudices and desires of those whom they instruct, mywonder is rather that Christianity was so long preserved pure anduncontaminated in this respect, than that corruptions should graduallyand stealthily have mingled themselves with the simplicity of Gospelworship. That tendency is plainly evinced by the history of every nationunder heaven: Greek and Barbarian, Egyptian and Scythian, would havetheir gods many, and their lords many. From one they would look for onegood; on another they would depend for a different benefit, in mind, body, and estate. Some were of the highest grade, and to be worshippedwith supreme honours; others were of a lower rank, to whom an inferiorhomage was addressed; whilst a third class held a sort of middle place, and were approached with reverence as much above the least, as it fellshort of the greatest. In the heathen world you will find exact types ofthe dulia, the hyperdulia, and the latria, with which unhappily thepractical theology of modern Christian Rome is burdened. Indeed, mywonder is, that under the Christian dispensation, when the household andlocal gods, the heathen's tutelary deities, and the genii, had beendislodged by the light of the Gospel, saints and angels had not at amuch {98} earlier period been forced by superstition to occupy theirroom. 

We shall be led to refer to some passages in the earliest Christianwriters, especially in Origen, which bear immediately on this point, representing in strong but true colours the futility of deeming amultitude of inferior divinities necessary for the dispensation ofbenefits throughout the universe, whose good offices we must secure byacts of attention and worship. I anticipate the circumstance in thisplace merely to show that the tendency of the human mind, clinging to avariety of preternatural protectors and benefactors, was among theobstacles with which the first preachers of the Gospel had to struggle. In the proper place I shall beg you to observe how hardly possible itwould have been for those early Christian writers, to whom I havereferred above, to express themselves in so strong, so sweeping, and sounqualified a manner, had the practice of applying by invocation tosaints and angels then been prevalent among the disciples of the Cross. 

We may, I believe, safely conclude, that in these primitive writings, which are called the works of the Apostolical Fathers, there is nointimation that the present belief and practice of the Church of Romewere received, or even known by Christians. The evidence is all theother way. Indeed, Bellarmin, though he appeals to these remains forother purposes, and boldly asserts that "all the fathers, Greek andLatin, with unanimous consent, sanction and teach the adoration ofsaints and angels, " yet does not refer to a single passage in any one ofthese remains for establishing this point. He cites a clause from thespurious work strangely ascribed to Dionysius the Areopagite, which wasthe forged production, as the learned are all {99} agreed, of somecenturies later; and he cites a pious sentiment of Ignatius, expressinghis hope that by martyrdom he might go to Christ, and thence he infersthat Ignatius believed in the immediate transfer of the soul from thislife to glory and happiness in heaven, though Ignatius refers theredistinctly to the resurrection. [Epist. Ad Rom. C. Iv. See above, p. 90. ] But Bellarmin cites no passage whatever from these remains tocountenance the doctrine and practice of the adoration of saints andangels. {100}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER IV. 

SECTION I. --THE EVIDENCE OF JUSTIN MARTYR. 

Justin, who flourished about the year 150, was trained from his earlyyouth in all the learning of Greece and of Egypt. He was born inPalestine, of heathen parents; and after a patient examination of theevidences of Christianity, and a close comparison of them with thesystems of philosophy with which he had long been familiar, he became adisciple of the Cross. In those systems he found nothing solid, orsatisfactory; nothing on which his mind could rest. In the Gospel hegained all that his soul yearned for, as a being destined for immortallife, conscious of that destiny, and longing for its accomplishment. Hisunderstanding was convinced, and his heart was touched; and regardlessof every worldly consideration, and devoted to the cause of truth, heopenly embraced Christianity; and before kings and people, Jews andGentiles, he pleaded the religion of the crucified One with unquenchablezeal and astonishing power. The evidence of such a man on any doctrine{101} connected with our Christian faith must be looked to with greatinterest. 

In the volumes which contain Justin's works we find "Books ofQuestions, " in which many inquiries, doubts, and objections, as well ofJews as of Gentiles, are stated and answered. It is agreed on all sidesthat these are not the genuine productions of Justin, but the work of alater hand. Bellarmin appeals to them, acknowledging at the same timetheir less remote origin. The evidence, indeed, appears very strong, which would lead us to regard them as the composition of a SyrianChristian, and assign to them the date of the fifth century; and asoffering indications of the opinions of Christians at the time of theirbeing put together, they are certainly interesting documents. Whenfairly quoted, the passages alleged in defence of the invocation ofsaints, so far from countenancing the practice, assail irresistibly thatprinciple, which, with other writers, Bellarmin himself confesses to bethe foundation of that doctrine. For these Books of Questions assertthat the souls of the faithful are not yet in glory with God, but arereserved in a separate state, apart from the wicked, awaiting the greatday of final and universal doom. In answer to Question 60, the authordistinctly says:--"Before the resurrection the recompense is not madefor the things done in this life by each individual. " [Quæstiones etResponsiones ad Orthodoxos, p. 464. ]

In reply to the 75th Question, inquiring into the condition of man afterdeath, this very remarkable answer is returned:--

"The same relative condition which souls have with the body now, theyhave not after the departure from the body. For here all thecircumstances of the union {102} are in common to the just and theunjust, and no difference is in them in this respect, --as to be born andto die, to be in health and to be in sickness, to be rich and to bepoor, and the other points of this nature. But after the departure fromthe body, forthwith takes place the distinction of the just and theunjust: for they are conducted by the angels to places correspondingwith their deserts: the souls of the just to paradise, where is thecompany and the sight of angels and archangels, and also, by vision, ofthe Saviour Christ, according to what is said, 'Being absent from thebody, and present with the Lord;' and the souls of the unjust to theplaces in hades, according to what is said of Nebucodonosor king ofBabylon, 'Hades from beneath hath been embittered, meeting thee. '--Andin the places corresponding with their deserts they are kept in wardunto the day of the resurrection and of retribution. " [Page 469. ]

I much regret to observe that Bellarmin omits to quote the latter partof this passage, stopping short with an "&c. " at the words _hades_, or_inferorum loca_, although the whole of the writer's testimony in itturns upon the very last clause. [Bellarmin, c. Iv. P. 851. "Improborumautem ad inferorum loca. "]

The next question (76) runs thus: "If the retribution of our deeds doesnot take place before the resurrection, what advantage accrued to thethief that his soul was introduced into paradise; especially sinceparadise is an object of sense, and the substance of the soul is not anobject of sense?

"Answer. It was an advantage to the thief entering into paradise tolearn by fact the benefits of the faith by which he was deemed worthy ofthe assembly of the {103} saints, in which he is kept till the day ofjudgment and restitution; and he has the perception of paradise by thatwhich is called intellectual perception, by which souls see boththemselves and the things under them, and moreover also the angels anddemons. For a soul doth not perceive or see a soul, nor an angel anangel, nor a demon a demon; except that according to the saidintellectual perception they see both themselves and each other, andmoreover also all corporeal objects. " [Page 470. ]

On this same point I must here subjoin a passage from one of Justin'sown undisputed works. In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, sect. 5, hesays, "Nevertheless I do not say that souls all die; for that were intruth a boon to the wicked. But what? That the souls of the pious remainsomewhere in a better place, and the unjust and wicked in a worse, waiting for the time of judgment, when it shall be: thus the oneappearing worthy of God do not die any more; and the others are punishedas long as God wills them both to exist and to be punished. " [Page 107. ]

Not only so; Justin classes among renouncers of the faith those whomaintain the doctrine which is now acknowledged to be the doctrine ofthe Church of Rome, and to be indispensable as the groundwork of theadoration of saints. In his Trypho, sect. 80, he states his sentimentthus strongly: "If you should meet with any persons called Christians, who confess not this, but dare to blaspheme the God of Abraham, the Godof Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and say there is no resurrection of thedead ([Greek: nekron]), but that their souls, at the very time of theirdeath, are taken up into heaven; do not regard them as Christians. "[Page 178. ] {104}

This, according to Bellarmin's own principle, is fatal evidence: if theredeemed and the saints departed are not in glory with God already, theycannot intercede with him for men. On the subject, however, of worshipand prayer, Justin Martyr has left us some testimonies as to theprimitive practice, full of interest in themselves, independently oftheir bearing on the points at issue. At the same time I am not aware ofa single expression which can be so construed as to imply the doctrineor practice among Christians of invoking the souls of the faithful. Hespeaks of public and private prayer; he offers prayer, but the prayer ofwhich he speaks, and the prayer which he offers are to God alone; and healludes to no advocate or intercessor in heaven, except only the eternalSon of God himself. In his first Apologia (or Defence addressed to theEmperor Antoninus Pius) he thus describes the proceedings at the baptismof a convert:--

"Now, we will explain to you how we dedicate ourselves to God, beingmade new by Christ.... As many as are persuaded, and believe the thingswhich by us are taught and declared to be true, and who promise thatthey can so live, are taught to pray and implore, with fasting, forgiveness of God for their former sins, we ourselves joining with themin fasting and prayer; and then they are taken by us to a place wherethere is water, and by the same manner of regeneration as we ourselveswere regenerated, they are regenerated; for they undergo this washing inthe water in the name of God the Father and Lord of all, and of ourSaviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Ghost. " [Apol. I. Sect 61, page79. ]

The following is his description of the Christian {105} Eucharist, subsequently to the baptism of a convert: "Afterwards we conduct him tothose who are called brethren, where they are assembled together tooffer earnestly our united prayers for ourselves and for the enlightenedone [the newly baptized convert], and for all others every where, thatwe, having learned the truth, may be thought worthy to be found in ourdeeds good livers, and keepers of the commandments, that we may be savedwith the everlasting salvation. Having ceased from prayers, we saluteeach other with a kiss; and then bread is brought to him who presidesover the brethren, and a cup of water and wine; and he taking it, sendsup prayer and praise to the Father of all, through the name of the Sonand the Holy Spirit; and offers much thanksgiving for our being thoughtby him worthy of these things. When he has finished the prayers andthanksgivings, all the people present respond, saying, 'Amen. ' Now, Amenin the Hebrew tongue means, 'So be it. ' And when the presider has giventhanks, and all the people have responded, those who are called Deaconsamong us give to every one present to partake of the bread and wine andwater that has been blessed, and take some away for those who were notpresent. " [Sect. 65. P. 82. ]

The following is Justin's account of their worship on the Lord's day:"In all our oblations we bless the Creator of all things, through hisSon Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Spirit. And upon the day calledSunday, there is an assembly of all who dwell in the several cities orin the country, in one place where the records of the apostles, or thewritings of the prophets are read, as time allows. When the reader hasceased, {106} the presider makes a discourse for the edification of thepeople, and to animate them to the practice of such excellent things [orthe imitation of such excellent persons]. At the conclusion we all riseup together and pray; and, as we have said, when we have ceased fromprayer, the bread and wine and water are brought forward, and thepresider sends up prayer and thanksgiving alike, to the utmost of hispower. And the people respond, saying, Amen. And then is made to eachthe distribution and participation of the consecrated elements ([Greek:eucharistauthenton]). And of those who have the means and will, eachaccording to his disposition gives what he will; and the collected sumis deposited with the presider, and he aids the orphans and widows, andthose who through sickness or other cause are in need, and those inbonds, and strangers; and, in a word, he becomes the reliever of all whoare in want. " [Sect. 67. P. 83. ]

 * * * * *

In Justin Martyr I am unable to find even a single vestige of theinvocation of Saints. With regard to Angels, however, there is a verycelebrated passage, to which Bellarmin and others appeal, as conclusiveevidence that the worship of them prevailed among Christians in histime, and was professed by Justin himself. 

Justin, in his first Apology, having stated that the Christians couldnever be induced to worship the demons, whom the heathen worshipped andinvoked, proceeds thus[33]: "Whence also we are called Atheists, {107}[men without God]; and we confess that with regard to such supposed godswe are atheists, but not so with regard to the most true God, the Fatherof justice and temperance, and of the other virtues without any mixtureof evil. But both HIM and the SON, who came from Him, and taught thesethings to us, and THE HOST OF THE OTHER GOOD ANGELS ACCOMPANYING ANDMADE LIKE, and THE PROPHETIC SPIRIT, we reverence and worship, honouringthem in reason and truth; and without grudging, delivering the doctrineto every one who is willing to learn as we were taught. " [Page 47. ]Governing the words "the host of the other good angels, " as much as thewords "Him" and "His Son, " and "the prophetic Spirit, " by the verbs "wereverence and worship, " Bellarmin and others[34] maintain, that Justinbears testimony in this passage to the worship of angels. That thiscannot be the true interpretation of Justin's words will beacknowledged, I think, by every Catholic, whether Anglican or Roman, when he contemplates it in all its naked plainness; all will revolt fromit as impious and contrary to the principles professed by the mostcelebrated and honoured among Roman Catholic writers. Thisinterpretation of the passage, when analysed, implies the awful thought, that we Christians pay to the host of angels, God's ministers and ourown fellow-servants, the same reverence, worship, and honour which wepay to the supreme Father, and his ever-blessed Son, and the HolySpirit, without any difference or inequality. No principles ofinterpretation can avoid that inference. 

 [Footnote 33: The genuineness of this passage has been doubted. But I see no ground for suspicion that it is spurious. It is found in the manuscripts of Justin's works; of which the most ancient perhaps are in the King's Library in Paris. I examined one there of a remote date. ]

 [Footnote 34: The Benedictine Editor puts this note in the margin, "Justin teaches that angels following the Son are worshipped by Christians. "--Preface, p. Xxi. ] {108}

"Him the most true Father of righteousness we reverence and worship, honouring him in reason and truth. "

"The Son who came from him, and taught us these things, we reverence andworship, honouring him in reason and truth. "

"The army of the other good angels accompanying and assimilated, wereverence and worship, honouring them in reason and truth. "

"The Prophetic Spirit we reverence and worship, honouring him in reasonand truth. "

Is it possible to conceive that any Christian would thus ascribe thesame religious worship to a host of God's creatures, which he wouldascribe to God, as GOD? "We are accused, " said Justin, "of beingatheists, of having no God. How can this be? We do not worship yourfalse gods, but we have our own most true God. We are not without a God. We have the Father, and the Son, and the Good Angels, and the HolySpirit. " If Justin meant that they honoured the good angels, but not asGOD, that would be no answer to those who called the Christiansatheists. The charge was, that "they had no God. " The answer is, "Wehave a God;" and then Justin describes the God of Christians. Can thearmy of angels be included in that description? If they are, then theyare made to share in the adoration, worship, homage, and reverence ofthe one only God Most High; if they are not, then Justin does not answerthe objectors[35]. 

 [Footnote 35: And surely if Justin had intended to represent the holy angels as objects of religious worship, he would not so violently have thrust the mention of them among the Persons of the ever-blessed Trinity, assigning to them a place between the second and third Persons of the eternal hypostatic union. ] {109}

To evade this charge of impiety, some writers (among others, M. Maran, the Benedictine editor of Justin, ) have attempted to draw a distinctionbetween the two verbs in this passage, alleging that the lower degree ofreverence expressed by the latter applies to the angels; whilst theformer verb, implying the higher degree of worship, alone relates to theGodhead. But this distinction rests on a false assumption; the two wordsbeing used equally to convey the idea, of the highest religiousworship[36]. 

 [Footnote 36: For example, the first word ([Greek: sebometha]), "we reverence, " is used to mean the whole of religious worship, as well with regard to the true God, as with reference to Diana [Acts xviii. 7. 13; xix. 27. ]; whilst the second word ([Greek: proskunoumen]), "we worship, " is constantly employed in the same sense of divine worship, throughout the Septuagint [Exod. Xxxiv. 14. Ps. Xciv. (xcv. ) 6. I Sam. (1 Kings) xv. 25. 2 Kings (4 Kings) xvii. 36. Heb. I. 6. ], (with which Justin was most familiar, ) and is used in the Epistle to the Hebrews to signify the worship due from the angels themselves to God, "Let all the angels of God worship him. " The very same word is also soon after employed by Justin himself (sect. Xvi. P. 53) to mean the whole entire worship of the Most High God: "That we ought to worship ([Greek: proskumein]) God alone, Christ thus proves, " &c. Moreover, the word which Justin uses at the close of the sentence, "honouring them" ([Greek: timontes]), is the identical word four times employed by St. John [John v. 23. ], in the same verse, to record our Saviour's saying, "That all men might honour the Son, even as they honour the Father; he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father, who hath sent him. "]

But in determining the true meaning of an obscure passage, grammaticallysusceptible of different acceptations, the author himself is often hisown best interpreter. If he has expressed in another place the sameleading sentiment, yet without the same obscurity, and free from alldoubt, the light borrowed from that passage {110} will frequently fixthe sense of the ambiguous expression, and establish the author'sconsistency. On this acknowledged principle of criticism, I would callyour attention to a passage in the very same treatise of Justin, a fewpages further on, in which he again defends the Christians against thesame charge of being atheists, and on the self-same ground, "that theyworship the Father who is maker of all; secondly, the Son proceedingfrom Him; and thirdly, the Holy Spirit. " In both cases he refers to thesame attributes of the Son as the teacher of Christian truth, and of theHoly Ghost, as the Prophetic Spirit. His language throughout the twopassages is remarkably similar, and in the expressions on the truemeaning of which we have already dwelt, it is most strikingly identical;but by omitting all allusion to the angels after the Son, his own wordsproving that the introduction of them could have no place there, (for hespecifies that the third in order was the Holy Spirit, ) Justin has leftus a comment on the passage under consideration conclusive as to theobject of religious worship in his creed. The whole passage is wellworth the attention of the reader. The following extracts are the onlyparts necessary for our present purpose:--

"Who of sound mind will not confess that we are not Atheists, reverencing as we do the Maker of the Universe.... And Him, who taughtus these things, and who was born for this purpose, Jesus Christ, crucified under Pontius Pilate.... Instructed, as we are, that He is theSon of the True God, and holding Him in the second place; and theProphetic Spirit in the third order, we with reason honour. " [Sect. Xiii. P. 50. ] {111}

The impiety apparently inseparable from Bellarmin's interpretation hasinduced many, even among Roman Catholic writers, to discard thatacceptation altogether, and to substitute others, which, thoughinvolving no grammatical inaccuracy, are still not free fromdifficulty. [37] After weighing the passage with all the means in mypower, and after testing the various interpretations offered by writers, whether of the Church of Rome or not, by the sentiments of Justinhimself, and others of the same early age, I am fully persuaded that thefollowing is the only true rendering of Justin's words:

"Honouring in reason and truth, we reverence and worship HIM, the Fatherof Righteousness, and the Son (who proceeded from Him, and instructed inthese things both ourselves and the host of the other good angelsfollowing Him and being made like unto Him), and the Prophetic Spirit. "

 [Footnote 37: Le Nourry (Apparatus ad Bibliothecam Maximam Veterum Patrum. Paris, 1697. Vol. Ii. P. 305), himself a Benedictine, rejects Bellarmin's and his brother Benedictine Maran's interpretation, and conceives Justin to mean, that the Son of God not only taught us those truths to which he was referring, with regard to the being and attributes of God, but also taught us that there were hosts of spiritual beings, called Angels; good beings, opposed to the demons of paganism. Bishop Kaye, in his excellent work on Justin Martyr, which the reader will do well to consult (p. 53), tells us he was sometimes inclined to think that Justin referred to the host of good angels who should surround the Son of God when he should come to judge the world. The view adopted by myself here was recommended by Grabe and by Langus, called The Interpreter of Justin; whilst Petavius, a Jesuit, though he does not adopt it, yet acknowledges that the Greek admits of our interpretation. Any one who would pursue the subject further may with advantage consult the preface to the Benedictine edition referred to in this work. Lumper Hist. Part ii. P. 225. Augustæ Vindelicorum, 1784. Petavius, Theologicorum Dogmatum tom. Vi. P. 298. Lib. Xv. C. V. S. 5. Antwerp, 1700. 

 The whole passage is thus rendered by Langus (as read in Lumper), "Verum hunc ipsum, et qui ab eo venit, atque ista nos et aliorum obsequentium exæquatorumque ad ejus voluntatem bonorum Angelorum exercitura docuit, Filium, et Spiritum ejus propheticum, colimus et adoramus. "]

This interpretation is strongly confirmed by the professed sentimentsboth of Justin and of his contemporaries, {112} with regard to the Sonof God and the holy angels. 

It was a principle generally received among the early Christians, thatwhatever the Almighty did, either by creation or by the communication ofhis will, on earth or in heaven, was done by the Eternal Word. It wasGod the Son, the Logos, who created the angels[38], as well asourselves; it was He who spoke to Moses, to Abraham, and to Lot; and itwas He who conveyed the Supreme will, and the knowledge of the only trueGod, to the inhabitants of the world of spirits. Agreeably to thisprinciple, in the passage under consideration, Justin affirms (not thatChristians revered and worshipped the angels, but), that God the Son, whom Christians worshipped as the eternal Prophet, Angel, and Apostle, of the Most High, instructed not only us men on earth, but also the hostof heavenly angels[39], in these eternal verities, {113} which embraceGod's nature and the duty of his creatures. [Trypho, § 141. P. 231. ]

 [Footnote 38: Thus Tatian (p. 249 in the same edition of Justin), "Before men were prepared, the Word was the Maker of angels. "]

 [Footnote 39: "The OTHER good angels. " Justin (Apol. I. Sect. Lxiii. P. 81. ) reminds us that Christ, the first-begotten of the Father, Himself God, was also an Angel (or Messenger), and an Apostle; and here Christ, as the Angel of the Covenant and the chief Apostle, is represented as instructing THE OTHER ANGELS in the truths of the economy of grace, just as he instructed his Apostles on earth, --"As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. "]

It is evident that Justin himself considered the host of angels to beequally with ourselves in a state of probation, requiring divineinstruction, and partaking of it. It is also evident that many of hiscontemporaries entertained the same views; among others, Irenæus andOrigen. [Irenæus, book ii. C. 30. P. 163. Origen, Hom. Xxxii. In Joann. § 10. Vol. Iv. P. 430. ] I will not swell this dissertation by quotingthe passages at length; though the passages referred to in the marginwill well repay any one's careful examination. But I cannot refrain fromextracting the words in which each of those writers confirms the viewhere taken of Justin's sentiments. 

Irenæus, for example, says distinctly, "The Son ever, anciently and fromthe beginning co-existing with the Father, always reveals the Fatherboth to angels and archangels, and powers, and excellencies, and to allto whom God wishes to make a revelation[40]. " And not less distinctlydoes Origen assert the same thing, --"Our Saviour therefore teaches, andthe Holy Spirit, {114} who spake in the prophets, teaches not only men, but also angels and invisible excellencies. "

 [Footnote 40: So far did some of the early Christians include the hosts of angels within the covenant of the Gospel, that Ignatius (Epist. Ad Smyrn. § 6. P. 36. ) does not hesitate to pronounce that the angels incur the Divine judgment, if they do not receive the doctrine of the atonement: "Let no one be deceived. The things in heaven, and the glory of angels, and the powers visible and invisible, if they do not believe on the blood of Christ--for them is judgment. " They seem to have founded their opinion on the declaration of St. Paul (Eph. Iii. 10): "That now to the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be made known through the Church the manifold wisdom of God. "]

I will only add one more ancient authority, in confirmation of the viewhere taken of Justin's words. The passage is from Athenagoras[41] andseems to be the exact counterpart of Justin's paragraph. 

 [Footnote 41: Athenagoras presented his defence, in which these words occur, to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, and his son Commodus, in the year 177. ]

"Who would not wonder on hearing us called Atheists? we who call theFather God, and the Son God, and the Holy Ghost, showing both theirpower in the unity, and their distinction in order. Nor does ourtheology rest here; but we say, moreover, that there is a multitude ofangels and ministers whom God, the Maker and Creator of the world, BYTHE WORD PROCEEDING FROM HIM, distributed and appointed, both about theelements, and the heavens, and the world, and the things therein, andthe good order thereof. " [Sect. 10. P. 287. Edit. Just. Mart. ]

I have already stated my inability to discover a single word in JustinMartyr which could be brought to sanction the invocation of saints; buthis testimony is far from being merely negative. He admonishes usstrongly against our looking to any other being for help or assistance, than to God only. Even when speaking of those who confide in their ownstrength, and fortune, and other sources of good, he says, in perfectunison with the pervading principles and associations of his whole mind, as far as we can read them in his works, without any modification or anyexception in favour of saint or angel: "In that Christ {115} said, 'Thouart my God, go not far from me, ' He at the same time taught, that allpersons ought to hope in God, who made all things, and seek for safetyand health from Him alone" [Trypho, § 102, p. 197. ]

 * * * * *

SECTION II. --IRENÆUS. 

Justin sealed his faith by his blood about the year 165; and next tohim, in the noble army of martyrs, we must examine the evidence ofIrenæus, Bishop of Lyons. Of this writer's works a very small proportionsurvives in the original Greek; but that little is such as might wellmake every scholar and divine lament the calamity which theology andliterature have sustained by the loss of the author's own language. Itis not perhaps beyond the range of hope that future researches may yetrecover at least some part of the treasure. Meanwhile we must availourselves with thankfulness of the nervous though inelegant copy of thatoriginal, which the Latin translation affords; imperfect and corrupt inmany parts, as that copy evidently is. This, however, is not the placefor recommending a study of the remains of Irenæus; and every one at allacquainted with the literature of the early Church, knows well howvaluable a store of ancient Christian learning is preserved even in thewreck of his works. 

On the subject of the invocation of saints, an appeal {116} has beenmade only to a few passages in Irenæus. With regard, indeed, to onesection, I would gladly have been spared the duty of commenting upon theunjustifiable mode of citing his evidence adopted by Bellarmin. Itforces upon our notice an example either of such inaccuracy of quotationas would shake our confidence in him as an author, or of suchmisrepresentation as must lower him in our estimation as a man ofintegrity. 

Bellarmin asserts, building upon it as the very foundation-stone of hisargument for the invocation of saints, that the souls of the saints areremoved immediately on their dissolution by death, without waiting forthe day of judgment, into the presence of God, and the enjoyment of HIMin heaven. This point, he says, must first be established; for if theyare not already in the presence of God, they cannot pray for us, andprayer to them would be preposterous. [Bell. Lib. I. C. 4. Vol. Ii. P. 851. ] Among the authorities cited by him to establish this point is theevidence of Irenæus (book i. C. 2). [See Benedictine ed, Paris, 1710. Book i. C. 10. P. 48. ] Bellarmin quotes that passage in these words: "Tothe just and righteous, and to those who keep his commandments, andpersevere in his love, some indeed from the beginning but some fromrepentance, he giving life CONFERS by way of gift incorruption, andCLOTHES them with eternal glory. " To the quotation he appends this note"Mark '_to some_' that is, to those who presently after baptism die, orwho lay down their life for Christ; or finally to the perfect is givenimmediately life and eternal glory; to others not, except afterrepentance, that is, satisfaction made in another world[42]. "

 [Footnote 42: Agreeably to the principles laid down in my preface, I will not here allude to the doctrine of purgatory, on which Bellarmin considers this passage to bear; nor will I say one word on the intermediate state of the soul between death and the resurrection, on which I am now showing that the words of Irenæus cannot at all be made to bear. ] {117}

Here I am compelled to confess that I never found a more palpablemisquotation of an author than this. I will readily grant that Bellarminmay have quoted from memory, or have borrowed from some corrupt versionof the passage; and that he has unintentionally changed the moods of twoverbs from the subjunctive to the indicative, and inadvertently changedthe entire construction and the sense of the passage. But then whatbecomes of his authority as a writer citing testimony?

Irenæus in this passage is speaking not of what our Lord does now, butwhat he will do at the last day; he refers only to the second coming ofChrist to judgment at the final consummation of all things, not using asingle expression which can be made by fair criticism to have anyreference whatever to the condition of souls on their separation fromthe body. I have consulted the old editions, some at least publishedbefore the date of Bellarmin's work; the suggestion offering itself tomy mind, that perhaps the ancient translation was in error, from whichhe might have quoted. But I cannot find that to have been the case. Theold Latin version of this passage agreeing very closely with the Greekstill preserved in Epiphanius, and quoted by Roman Catholic writers asauthentic, conveys this magnificent though brief summary of theChristian faith:

"The Church spread throughout the whole world, even to the ends of theearth, received both from the Apostles and their disciples that faithwhich is in one {118} God omnipotent, who made heaven and earth, thesea, and all things therein, and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, for our salvation made flesh, and in the Holy Ghost, who by the prophetsannounced the dispensations (of God[43]), and the Advent, and the beingborn of a Virgin, and the suffering, and the resurrection from the dead, and the bodily ascension into heaven of the beloved Jesus Christ ourLord, and his coming from heaven in the glory of the Father for theconsummation of all things, and for raising again all flesh of the humanrace, THAT, in order that ([Greek: ina]), to Christ Jesus our Lord andGod, and Saviour and King, according to the good pleasure of theinvisible Father, every knee should bow of things in heaven and inearth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess to Him, and that he should execute just judgment on all: that he should send thespirits of wickedness, and the transgressing and rebel angels, and theimpious and unjust, and wicked and blaspheming men into eternal fire;but to the just and righteous, and to those who keep his commandments, and persevere in his love, --some indeed from the beginning, and somefrom their repentance, --he granting life, by way of gift, SHOULD CONFERincorruption, and SHOULD CLOTHE them with eternal glory. " [Hæres. Xxxi. C. 30. ]

 [Footnote 43: The words "of God" are in the Latin, but not in the Greek. ]

The words, "some from the beginning, " "others from their repentance, "can refer only to the two conditions of believers; some of whom havegrace to keep the commandments, and persevere in the love of God fromthe beginning of their Christian course, whilst others, for a time, transgress and wax cold in love, but by repentance, through God's grace, are renewed and {119} restored to their former state of obedience andlove. On both these classes of Christians, according to the faith ashere summed up by Irenæus, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, when Hecomes in glory for the consummation of all things, and for theresurrection of the dead, will confer glory and immortality. Noingenuity of criticism can extract from this passage any allusion to theintercession of saints, or to their being with God before the end of theworld[44]. But I am not {120} here condemning Bellarmin's untenablecriticism: what I lament is the negligence or the disingenuousness withwhich he misquotes the words of Irenæus, and makes him say what he neverdid say. To extract from an author's words, correctly reported, ameaning which he did not intend to convey, however reprehensible andunworthy a follower of truth, is one act of injustice: to report him, whether wilfully or carelessly, as using words which he never did use, is far worse. 

 [Footnote 44: It will be well to see the words of Bellarmin and those of the translation side by side:

 (Transcriber's note: They are shown here one after the other. )

 _Bellarmin_ lib. I. C. Iv. P. 851. 

 "Quartus Irenæus, lib. I. C. 2. 'Justis, inquit, et æquis, et præcepta ejus servantibus et in dilectione perseverantibus, quibusdam quidem ab initio, quibusdam autem ex poenitentia, vitam donans, incorruptelam loco muneris CONFERT, et claritatem æternam CIRCUMDAT. ' Nota '_quibusdam_, ' id est, iis qui mox a Baptismo moriuntur, vel qui pro Christo vitam ponunt; vel denique perfectis statim donari vitam et claritatem æternam; aliis non nisi post poenitentiam, id est, satisfactionem in futuro sæculo actam. "

 _Latin Translation_. 

 "Et de coelis in gloria Patris adventum ejus ad recapitulanda universa et resuscitandam omnem carnem humani generis, UT Christo Jesu Domino nostro et Deo, et Salvatori, et Regi, secundum placitum Patris invisibilis, 'omne genu curvet coelestium, et terrestrium, et infernorum, et omnis lingua confiteatur ei, ' et judicium justum in omnibus faciat; spiritalia quidem nequitiæ, et angelos transgresses, atque apostatas factos, et impios et injustos et iniquos, et blasphemos homines in æternum ignem mittat;--Justis autem et æquis et præcepta ejus servantibus et in dilectione ejus perseverantibus, quibusdam quidem ab initio, quibusdam autem ex poenitentia, vitam donans, incorruptelam loco muneris CONFERAT, et claritatem æternam CIRCUMDET. "--Irenæi liber i. Cap. X. P. 48. Interpretatio Vetus. ]

Another expression of Irenæus is appealed to by Bellarmin, and continuesto be cited at the present day in defence of the invocation of saints;the precise bearing of which upon the subject I confess myself unable tosee, whilst I am very far from understanding the passage from which itis an extract. Bellarmin cites the passage not to show that the saintsin glory pray for us, --that argument he had dismissed before, --but toprove that they are to be invoked by us. The insulated passage as quotedby him is this: "And as she (Eve) was induced to fly from God, so she(Mary) was persuaded to obey God, that of the Virgin Eve the Virgin Marymight become the advocate. " After the quotation he says, "What can beclearer?" [Benedict, lib. V. Cap. Xix. P. 316. ]

In whatever sense we may suppose Irenæus to have employed the word heretranslated "advocata, " it is difficult to see how the circumstance ofMary becoming the advocate of Eve, who lived so many generations beforeher, can bear upon the question, Is it lawful and right for us, nowdwelling on the earth, to invoke those saints whom we believe to be inheaven? I will not dwell on the argument urged very cogently by somecritics on this passage, that the word "advocata, " found {121} in theLatin version of Irenæus, is the translation of the original word, nowlost [[Greek: paraklaetos]--paraclete], which, by the early writers, wasused for "comforter and consoler, " or "restorer;" because, as I haveabove intimated, whatever may have been the word employed by Irenæus, the passage proves nothing as to the lawfulness of our praying to thesaints. If the angels at God's bidding minister unto the heirs ofsalvation; or further, if they plead our cause with God, that would beno reason why we should invoke them and pray to them. This distinctionbetween what they may do for us, and what we ought to do with regard tothem, is an essential distinction, and must not be lost sight of. Weshall have occasion hereafter to refer to it repeatedly, especially inthe instances of Origen and Cyprian. I will now do no more than copy ina note the entire passage from which the sentence now underconsideration has been extracted, that the reader may judge whether onsuch a passage, the original of which, in whatever words Irenæus mayhave expressed himself, is utterly lost, any reliance can satisfactorilybe placed. 

("Manifeste itaque in sua propria venientem Dominum et sua propria eumbajulantem conditione quæ bajulatur ab ipso, et recapitulationem ejusquæ in ligno fuit inobedientiæ per eam quæ in ligno est obedientiamfacientem, et seductionem illam solutam qua seducta est male illa, quæjam viro destinata erat virgo Eva, per veritatem evangelizata est beneab angelo jam sub viro virgo Maria. Quemadmodum enim illa per angelisermonem seducta est ut effugeret Deum prævaricata verbum ejus, ita ethæc per angelicum sermonem evangelizata est ut portaret Deum obediensejus verbo. Et si ea inobedierat Deo, sed hæc suasa est obedire Deo, utivirginis Evæ virgo Maria fieret advocata. Et quemadmodum astrictum estmorti genus humanum per virginem, salvatur per virginem, æqua lancedisposita virginalis inobedientia per virginalem obedientiam. Adhuc enimprotoplasti peccatum per correptionem primogeniti emendationemaccipiens, et serpentis prudentia devicta in columbæ simplicitate, vinculis autem illis resolutis, per quæ alligati eramus morti. " St. Augustin (Paris, 1690. Vol. X. P. 500. ) refers to the latter part ofthis passage, as implying the doctrine of original sin; but since hisquotation does not embrace any portion of the clause at present underour consideration, no additional light from him is thrown on the meaningof Irenæus. ) {122}

But passages occur in Irenæus, which seem to leave doubt, that neitherin faith nor in practice would he countenance in the very lowest degreethe adoration of saints and angels, or any invocation of them. 

For example, in one part of his works we read, "Nor does it [the Church]do any thing by invocations of angels, nor by incantations, nor otherdepraved and curious means, but with cleanliness, purity, and openness, directing prayers to the Lord who made all things, and calling upon thename of Jesus Christ our Lord, it exercises its powers for the benefit, and not for the seducing, of mankind. " [Benedictine Ed. Lib. Ii. C. 32. § 5. P. 166. ] It has been said that, by angelic invocations, Irenæusmeans the addresses to evil angels and genii, such as the heathensuperstitiously made. Be it so; though that is a mere assumption, notwarranted by the passage or its context. But, surely, had Irenæus knownthat Christians prayed to angels, as well as to their Maker and theirSaviour, he would not have used such an unguarded expression; he wouldhave cautioned his readers against so serious, but so natural, amisapprehension of his meaning. 

With one more reference, we must bring our inquiry into the testimony ofIrenæus to a close. The passage occurs in the fifth book, chapter 31. [Benedict. Lib. V. C. 32. § 2. P, 331. ] The principal and mostimportant, though not the longest, part of {123} the passage is happilystill found in the original Greek, preserved in the "Parallels" ofDamascenus. In its plain, natural, and unforced sense, this passage isso decidedly conclusive on the question at issue, that various attemptshave been made to explain away its meaning, so as not to representIrenæus as believing that the souls of departed saints, between theirdeath and the day of judgment, exist otherwise than in bliss and gloryin heaven. But those attempts have been altogether unsuccessful. Ibelieve the view here presented to us by the plain and obvious sense ofthe words of Irenæus, is the view at present acquiesced in by a largeproportion of our fellow-believers. The Anglican Church has made noarticle of faith whatever on the subject. The clause within brackets isfound both in the Latin and the Greek. 

"Since the Lord[45] in the midst of the shadow of death went where thesouls of the dead were, and then afterwards rose bodily, and after hisresurrection was taken up, it is evident that of his disciples also, forwhom the Lord wrought these things, [the souls go into the unseen[46]place assigned to them by God, and there remain till the resurrection, waiting for the resurrection; afterwards receiving again their bodiesand rising perfectly [[Greek: holoklaeros], perfecte], that is, bodily, even as the Lord also rose again, so will they come into the presence ofGod. ] {124} For no disciple is above his master; but every one that isperfect shall be as his master. As, therefore, our Master did notimmediately flee away and depart, but waited for the time of hisresurrection appointed by his Father (which is evident, even by the caseof Jonah); after the third day, rising again, he was taken up; so we toomust wait for the time of our resurrection appointed by God, andfore-announced by the prophets; and thus rising again, be taken up, asmany as the Lord shall have deemed worthy of this. "

 [Footnote 45: Bellarmin, rather than allow the testimony of Irenæus to weigh at all against the doctrine which he is defending, seems determined to combat and challenge that father himself. "Non ausus est dicere, " "He has not dared to say, that the souls go to the regions below, " &c. ]

 [Footnote 46: There is no word in the Greek copy corresponding with the Latin "invisibilem. "]

 * * * * *

SECTION III. --CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA--ABOUT THE YEAR 180. 

Contemporary with Irenæus, and probably less than twenty years hisjunior, was Clement, the celebrated Christian philosopher of Alexandria. I am not aware that any Roman Catholic writer has appealed to thetestimony of Clement in favour of the invocation of saints, nor have Ifound a single passage which the defenders of that practice would belikely to quote; and yet there are many passages which no one, anxiousto trace the Catholic faith, would willingly neglect. The tendency ofClement's mind to blend with the simplicity of the Gospel of Christ thephilosophy in which he so fully abounded, renders him far less valuableas a Christian teacher; but his evidence as to the matter of fact, iseven rendered more cogent and pointed by this tendency of his mind. Iwould {125} willingly have transferred to these pages whole passages ofClement, but the very nature of my address forbids it. Some sentencesbearing on the subject immediately before us, we must not omit. 

Clement has left on record many of his meditations upon the efficacy, the duty, and the blessed comfort of prayer. When he speaks of God, andof the Christian in prayer, (for prayer he defines to be "communion orintercourse with God, ") his language becomes often exquisitelybeautiful, and sometimes sublime. It is impossible by a few detachedpassages to convey an adequate estimate of the original; and yet a fewsentences may show that Clement is a man whose testimony should not beslighted. 

"Therefore, keeping the whole of our life as a feast every where, and onevery part persuaded that God is present, we praise him as we till ourlands; we sing hymns as we are sailing. The Christian is persuaded thatGod hears every thing; not the voice only, but the thoughts.... Supposeany one should say, that the voice does not reach God, revolving as itdoes in the air below; yet the thoughts of the saints cut not onlythrough the air, but the whole world. And the divine power like thelight is beforehand in seeing through the soul.... He" (the Christianwhom he speaks of throughout as the man of divine knowledge) "prays forthings essentially good. 

"Wherefore it best becomes those to pray who have an adequate knowledgeof God, and possess virtue in accordance with Him--who know what arereal goods, and what we should petition for, and when, and how in eachcase. But it is the extreme of ignorance to ask {126} from those who arenot gods as though they were gods.... Whence since there is one onlygood God, both we ourselves and the angels supplicate from Him alone, that some good things might be given to us, and others might remain withus. In this way he (the Christian) is always in a state of purity fitfor prayer. He prays with angels, as being himself equal with angels;and as one who is never beyond the holy protecting guard. And if he prayalone he has the whole choir of angels with him. " [Stromata, lib. Vii. §7. P. 851, &c. ; Section xii. P. 879. ]

Clement has alluded to instances alleged by the Greeks of the effects ofprayer, and he adds, "Our whole Scripture is full of instances of Godhearing and granting every request according to the prayers of thejust. " [Lib. Vi. § iii. P. 753. ]

Having in the same section referred to the opinion of some Greeks as tothe power of demons over the affairs of mortals, he adds, "But theythink it matters nothing whether we speak of these as gods or as angels, calling the spirits of such 'demons, ' and teaching that they should beworshipped by men, as having, by divine providence, on account of thepurity of their lives, received authority to be conversant about earthlyplaces, in order that they may minister to mortals. " [Lib. Vi. § iii. P. 755. ]

Is it possible to suppose that this teacher in Christ's school had anyidea of a Christian praying to saints or angels? In the last passage, the language in which he quotes the errors of heathen superstition torefute them, so nearly approaches the language of the Church of Romewhen speaking of the powers of saints and angels to assist thesuppliant, that if Clement had entertained {127} any thought whatever ofa Christian praying for aid and intercession to saint or angel, he musthave mentioned it, especially after the previous passage on theabsurdity and gross ignorance of praying for any good at the hands ofany other than the one true God. 

In common with his contemporaries, Clement considered the angels to be, as we mortals are, in a state requiring all the protection and help tobe obtained by prayer; he believed that the angels pray with us, andcarry our prayers to God: but the thought of addressing them byinvocation does not appear to have occurred to his mind. At the close ofhis Pædagogus he has left on record a form of prayer to God alone verypeculiar and interesting. He closes it by an ascription of glory to theblessed Trinity. But there is no allusion to saint, or angel, or virginmother. 

 * * * * *

SECTION IV. --TERTULLIAN. 

Tertullian, of Carthage, was a contemporary of Clement of Alexandria, and so nearly of the same age, that doubts have existed, which of thetwo should take priority in point of time. There is a very widedifference in the character and tone of their works, as there was in theframe and constitution of their minds. The lenient and liberal views ofthe erudite and accomplished master of the school of Alexandria, standout in prominent and broad contrast with the harsh and austere doctrinesof Tertullian. 

Tertullian fell into errors of a very serious kind by joining himself tothe heretic Montanus; still on his {128} mind is discoverable theworking of that spirit which animated the early converts ofChristianity; and his whole soul seems to have been filled with a desireto promote the practical influence of the Gospel. 

Jerome, the oracle on such subjects, from whom the Roman Catholic Churchis unwilling to allow any appeal, expressly tells us that Cyprian[47], who called Tertullian the Master, never passed a single day withoutstudying his works; and that after Tertullian had remained a presbyterof the Church to middle age, he was driven, by the envy and revilings ofthe members of the Roman Church, to fall from its unity, and espouseMontanism. Bellarmin calls him a heretic, and says he is the firstheretic who denied that the saints went at once and forthwith to glory. [Hieron. Edit. 1684. Tom. I. P. 183. ]

 [Footnote 47: The words of Jerome, who refers to the circumstance more than once, are very striking: "I saw one Paulus, who said that he had seen the secretary (notarium) of Cyprian at Rome, who used to tell him that Cyprian never passed a single day without reading Tertullian; and that he often said to him, 'Give me the Master, ' meaning Tertullian. "--Hieron. Vol. Iv. Part ii. P. 115. ]

A decided line of distinction is drawn by Roman Catholic writers betweenthe works of Tertullian written before he espoused the errors ofMontanus, and his works written after that unhappy step. The former theyhold in great estimation, the latter are by many considered of far lessauthority. I do not see how such a distinction ought to affect histestimony on the historical point immediately before us. If indeed hehad held the doctrine of the invocation of saints whilst he continued inthe full communion of the Church, and rejected it afterwards, no honestand sensible writer would quote his later opinions against the practice. But we are only seeking in his works for evidence of the {129} matter offact, --Is there any proof in the works of Tertullian that the invocationof saints formed a part of the doctrine and practice of the CatholicChurch in his time[48]? His works will be found in the note, arrangedunder those two heads, as nearly as I can ascertain the preponderatingsentiments of critics[49]. 

 [Footnote 48: The reader, who may be induced to consult the work of the present Bishop of Lincoln, entitled, "The Ecclesiastical History of the second and third Centuries, illustrated from the writings of Tertullian, " will there find, in the examination and application of Tertullian's remains, the union of sound judgment, diligence in research, clearness of perception, acuteness in discovery, and great erudition mingled with charity. ]

 [Footnote 49: Works of Tertullian before he became a Montanist:--

 Adversus Judæos. The Tract ad Martyres. The two Books ad Nationes. The Apology, and the Tract de Præscriptione Hæreticorum. The Tract de Testimonio Animæ. The Tracts de Patientia, de Oratione, de Baptismo, de Poenitentia. The two books ad Uxorem. 

 Works written after he espoused Montanism:--

 The Tracts de Spectaculis and de Idololatria, though others say these should be ranked among the first class. The Tracts de Corona, and de Fuga in persecutione, Scorpiace, and ad Scapulam. The Tracts de Exhortatione Castitatis, de Monogamia, de Pudicitia, de Jejuniis, de Virginibus Velandis, de Pallio, the five books against Marcion, the Tracts adversus Valentinianos, de Carne Christi, de Resurrectione Carnis, adversus Hermogenem, de Anima, adversus Praxeam, de Cultu Foeminarum. ]

I will detain you only by a very few quotations from this father. 

In his Apology, sect. 30, we read this very remarkable passage, "Weinvoke the eternal God, the true God, the living God, for the safety ofthe emperor.... {130} Thither (heavenward) looking up, with handsextended, because they are innocent; with our head bare, because we arenot ashamed; in fine, without a prompter, because it is from the heart;we Christians pray for all rulers a long life, a secure government, asafe home, brave armies, a faithful senate, a good people, a quietworld.... For these things I cannot ask in prayer from any other exceptHim from whom I know that I shall obtain; because both He is the one whoalone grants, and I am the one whom it behoveth to obtain byprayer;--his servant, who looks to him alone, who for the sake of hisreligion am put to death, who offer to him a rich and a greater victim, which He has commanded; prayer from a chaste frame, from a harmlesssoul, from a holy spirit.... So, let hoofs dig into us, thus stretchedforward to God, let crosses suspend us, let fires embrace us, let swordssever our necks from the body, let beasts rush upon us, --the very frameof mind of a praying Christian is prepared for every torment. This do, ye good presidents; tear ye away the soul that is praying for theemperor. " [Page 27. ]

In the opening of his reflections on the Lord's Prayer, he says, --

"Let us consider therefore, beloved, in the first place, the heavenlywisdom in the precept of praying in secret, by which he required, in aman, faith to believe that both the sight and the hearing of theOmnipotent God is present under our roofs and in our secret places; anddesired the lowliness of faith, that to Him alone, whom he believed tohear and to see every where, he would offer his worship. " [Page 129. ]

The only other reference which I will make, is to {131} the solemndeclaration of Tertullian's Creed; the last clause of which, though inperfect accordance with the sentiments of his contemporaries, seems tohave been regarded with hostile eyes by modern writers of the Church ofRome, because it decidedly bids us look to the day of judgment for thesaints being taken to the enjoyment of heaven; and consequently impliesthat they cannot be properly invoked now. 

"To profess now what we defend: By the rule of our faith we believe thatGod is altogether one, and no other than the Creator of the world, whoproduced all things out of nothing by his Word first of all sent down. That that Word, called his Son, was variously seen by the patriarchs inthe name of God; was always heard in the prophets; at length, borne bythe spirit and power of God the Father into the Virgin Mary, was madeflesh in her womb, was born of her, and was Jesus Christ. Afterwards Hepreached a new law and a new promise of the kingdom of heaven; wroughtmiracles, was crucified, rose again the third day, and, being taken upinto heaven, sat on the right hand of the Father; and He sent in his ownstead the power of the Holy Ghost, to guide believers; that He shallcome with glory to take the saints to the enjoyment of eternal life andthe heavenly promises, and to condemn the impious to eternal fire, making a reviving of both classes with the restoration of the body. " [DePræscriptione Hæreticorum, § 13. P. 206. ]

 * * * * *

Some notice must here be taken of METHODIUS, a pious Christian, of thethird century. A work (Methodius, Gl. Combes. Paris, 1644) {132}formerly attributed to him has been quoted in proof of the earlyinvocation of saints; but the work, among many others, has been long agoallowed by the best Roman Catholic critics to be the production of alater age. (Fabricius, vol. Vii. P. 268, and vol. X. P. 241. ) Manyhomilies, purporting to have been delivered on the festival of ourLord's presentation in the temple, at so early a period, must bereceived as the works of a later age, because that feast began to beobserved in the Church so late as the fifteenth year of Justinian, inthe sixth century. Evidently, moreover, the theological language of thehomily is of a period long subsequent to the date assigned to Methodius. In speaking of our blessed Saviour, for example, he employs expressionsto guard against the Arian heresy, and makes extracts apparently fromthe Nicene creed, "God of himself, and not by grace, " "Very God of veryGod, very light of very light, who for us men and our salvation, &c. "The general opinion indeed seems to be that this, and many otherwritings formerly ascribed to the first Methodius, were written bypersons of a subsequent age, who either were of the same name or assumedhis. Even were the work genuine, it would afford just as strong ademonstration that Methodius believed that the city of Jerusalem couldhear his salutation, as that the saints could hear his prayer; for headdresses the same "Hail" to Mary, Symeon, and the Holy City alike, calling it the "earthly heaven. " [Greek: Chairois hae polis, ho epigeiosouranos. ] {133}

 * * * * *

SECTION V. --THE EVIDENCE OF ORIGEN. 

Jerome informs us that Tertullian, whose remains we have last examined, lived to a very advanced age. Long, therefore, before his deathflourished Origen, one of the most celebrated lights of the primitiveChurch. He was educated a Christian. Indeed his father is said to havesuffered martyrdom about the year 202. Origen was a pupil of Clement ofAlexandria. His virtues and his labours have called forth the admirationof all ages; and though he cannot be implicitly followed as a teacher, what still remains of his works will be delivered down as a richtreasure to succeeding times. He was a most voluminous writer; andJerome asked the members of his church, "Who is there among us that canread as many books as Origen has composed?" [Vol. Iv. Epist. Xli. P. 346. ] A large proportion of his works are lost; and of those whichremain, few are preserved in the original Greek. We are often obliged tostudy Origen through the medium of a translation, the accuracy of whichwe have no means of verifying. A difficult and delicate duty alsodevolves upon the theological student to determine which of the worksattributed to Origen are genuine and which are spurious; and what parts, moreover, of the works received on the whole as genuine came from hispen. Of {134} the spurious works, some are so palpably written in a muchlater age, and by authors of different religious views, that no one, after weighing the evidence, can be at a loss what decision to makeconcerning them; in the case of others, claims and objections may appearto be more evenly balanced. I trust on the one hand to refer to no worksfor Origen's testimony which are not confessedly his, nor on the otherto exclude any passage which is not decidedly spurious; whilst in oneparticular case more immediately connected with our subject, I aminduced to enter further in detail into a critical examination of thegenuineness and value of a passage than the character of this workgenerally requires. The great importance attached to the testimony ofthat passage by some defenders of the worship paid to angels, may beadmitted to justify the fulness of the criticism. Lest, however, itsinsertion in the body of the work might seem inconveniently to interferewith the reader's progress in our argument, I have thought it best toinclude it in a supplementary section at the close of our inquiry intothe evidence of Origen. 

Coccius, in his elaborate work, quotes the two following passages asOrigen's, without expressing any hesitation or doubt respecting theirgenuineness, in which he is followed by writers of the present day. Thepassages are alleged in proof that Origen held and put in practice thedoctrine of the invocation of saints; and they form the first quotationsmade by Coccius under the section headed by this title: "That the saintsare to be invoked, proved by the testimony of the Greek Fathers. "

The first passage is couched in these words: "I will {135} begin tothrow myself upon my knees, and pray to all the saints to come to myaid; for I do not dare, in consequence of my excess of wickedness, tocall upon God. O Saints of God, you I pray with weeping full of grief, that ye would propitiate his mercies for me miserable. Alas me! FatherAbraham, pray for me, that I be not driven from thy bosom, which Igreatly long for, and yet not worthily, because of the greatness of mysins. "

Coccius cites this passage as from "Origen in Lament, " and it has beenrecently appealed to under the title of "Origen on the Lamentations. "Here, however, is a very great mistake. Origen's work on theLamentations, called also "Selecta in Threnos, " and inserted in theBenedictine edition (Vol. Iii. P. 321. ), is entirely a differentproduction from the work which contains the above extract. Thisapocryphal work, on the other hand, does not profess to be the commentof Origen on the Lamentations, but the Lament or Wailing of Origenhimself; or, as it used to be called, the Penitence of Origen. (In theParis edition of 1519 it is called "Planctus, seu Lamentum Origenis. "Pope Gelasius refers to it as "Poenitentia Origenis. ") That this workhas no pretensions whatever to be regarded as Origen's, has been longplaced beyond doubt. Even in the edition of 1545, this treatise isprefaced by Erasmus in these words, "This Lamentation was neitherwritten by Origen nor translated by Jerome, but is the fiction of someunlearned man, who attempted, under colour of this, to throw disgraceupon Origen. " [Basil, 1545. Vol. I. P. 498. ] In the Benedictine edition(Paris, 1733. ) no trace of this work is to be found. They do not admitit among the doubtful, or even the spurious works; they do not so {136}much as give room for it in the appendix; on the contrary, they drop italtogether as utterly unworthy of being any longer preserved. Instead, however, of admitting the work itself, these editors have suppliedabundant reason for its exclusion, by inserting the sentiments ofHuetius, or Huet, the very learned bishop of Avranches. He tells us, that formerly to Origen's work on Principles used to be appended atreatise called, the Lament of Origen, the Latin translation of whichGuido referred to Jerome. After quoting the passage of Erasmus (as abovecited from the edition of 1545) in proof of its having been "neitherwritten by Origen nor translated by Jerome, but the fabrication of someunlearned man, who attempted, under colour of this, to throw disgrace onOrigen, just as they forged a letter in Jerome's name, lamenting that hehad ever thought with Origen, " Huet proceeds thus: "And Gelasius in theRoman Council writes, 'The book which is called The Repentance ofOrigen, apocryphal. ' It is wonderful, therefore, that without any markof its false character, it should be sometimes cited by some theologiansin evidence. Here we may smile at the supineness of a certain heterodoxman of the present age, who thought the 'Lament, ' ascribed to Origen, tobe something different from the Book of Repentance. " [Vol. Iv. Part ii. P. 326. ]

The Decree here referred to of Pope Gelasius, made in the Roman Council, A. D. 494, by that pontiff, in conjunction with seventy bishops, containsthese strong expressions, before enumerating some few of the books thencondemned: "Other works written by heretics and schismatics, theCatholic and Apostolic Church by {137} no means receives; of them wethink it right to subjoin a few which have occurred to our memory, andare to be avoided by Catholics. " [Conc. Labb. Vol. Iv. P. 1265. ] Thenfollows a list of prohibited works, among which we read, "the bookcalled The Repentance of Origen, apocryphal, " the very book which Huetidentifies with the "Lament of Origen, " still cited as evidence even inthe present day. (See Appendix A. )

The second passage cited by Coccius, and also by writers of the presenttime, as Origen's, without any allusion to its spurious and apocryphalcharacter, is from the second book of the work called Origen on Job. Thewords cited run thus: "O blessed Job, who art living for ever with God, and remainest conqueror in the sight of the Lord the King, pray for uswretched, that the mercy of the terrible God may protect us in all ourafflictions, and deliver us from all oppressions of the wicked one; andnumber us with the just, and enrol us among those who are saved, andmake us rest with them in his kingdom, where for ever with the saints wemay magnify him. "

This work, like the former, has no claim whatever to be regarded asOrigen's. It has long been discarded by the learned. Indeed so far backas 1545, Erasmus, in his Censura, proved that it was written long afterthe time of Origen by an Arian. (Basil, 1545. Vol. I. P. 408; and"Censura. ") By the Benedictine editors it is transferred to an appendixas the Commentary of an anonymous writer on Job; and they thus expresstheir judgment as to its being a forgery: "The Commentary of ananonymous writer on Job, in previous editions, is ascribed to Origen;{138} but that it is not his, Huet proves by unconquerable arguments. This translation is assigned to Hilary, the bishop; but although it isclear from various proofs of Jerome, that St. Hilary translated thetracts or homilies of Origen on Job, yet there is no reason why that manwho wrote with the highest praise against the Arians, should beconsidered as the translator of this work, which is infected with thecorruption of Arianism, and which is not Origen's. " [Vol. Ii. P. 894. ]Erasmus calls the prologue to this treatise on Job "the production of asilly talkative man, neither learned nor modest. "

It is impossible not to feel, with regard to these two works, thesentiments which, as we have already seen, the Bishop of Avranches hasso strongly expressed on one. "It is wonderful, that they should besometimes cited in evidence by some theologians, without any mark oftheir being forgeries. "

Proceeding with our examination of the sentiments of Origen, I wouldhere premise, that not the smallest doubt can be entertained that Origenbelieved the angels to be ministering spirits, real, active, zealousworkmen and fellow-labourers with us in the momentous and awful businessof our eternal salvation. He represents the angels as members of thesame family with ourselves, as worshippers of the same God, as servantsof the same master, as children of the same father, as disciples of thesame heavenly teacher, as learners of one and the same heavenlydoctrine. He contemplates them as members of our Christiancongregations, as joining with us in prayer to our heavenly Benefactor, as taking pleasure when they hear in our {139} assemblies what isagreeable to the will of God, and as being present too not onlygenerally in the Christian Church, but also with individual members ofit[50]. But does Origen, therefore, countenance any invocation of them?Let us appeal to himself. 

 [Footnote 50: One or two references will supply abundant proof of this: "I do not doubt that in our congregation angels are present, not only in general to the whole Church, but also individually with those of whom it is said, 'Their angels do always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven. ' A twofold Church is here: one of men, the other of angels. If we say any thing agreeably to reason and the mind of Scripture, the angels rejoice to pray with us. " And a little above, "Our Saviour, therefore, as well as the Holy Spirit, who spoke by the prophets, instructs not only men, but angels and invisible powers. "--Hom, xxiii. In Luc. Vol. Iii. P. 961. 

 "Whoever, therefore, confessing his sins, repents, or confesses Christ before men in persecutions, is applauded by his brethren. For there is joy and gladness to the angels in heaven over one sinner that repenteth. By them, therefore, as by brethren (for both men and angels are sons of the same Creator and Father) they are praised. "--In Genes. Hom. Xvii. P. 110. ]

Celsus accused the Christians of being atheists, godless, men withoutGod, because they would not worship those gods many and lords many, andthose secondary, subordinate, auxiliary, and ministering divinities withwhich the heathen mythology abounded: Origen answers, we are notgodless, we are not without an object of our prayer; we pray to GodAlmighty alone through the mediation only of his Son. 

"We must pray to God alone ([Greek: Mono gar proseukteon to epi pasiTheo]), who is over all things; and we must pray also to theonly-begotten and first-born of every creature, the Word of God; and wemust implore him as our High Priest to carry our prayer, first coming tohim, to his God and our {140} God, to his Father and the Father of thosewho live agreeably to the word of God. " [Cont. Cels. § 8. C. Xxvi. Vol. I. P. 761. ]

But Celsus, in this well representing the weakness and failings of humannature, still urged on the Christian the necessity, or at all events theexpediency, of conciliating those intermediate beings who executed thewill of the Supreme Being, and might haply have much left at their ownwill and discretion to give or to withhold; and therefore thedesirableness of securing their good offices by prayer. To this Origenanswers:

"The one God ([Greek: Hena oun ton epi pasi theon haeminexenmenisteon])--the God who is over all, is to be propitiated by us, and to be appeased by prayer; the God who is rendered favourable bypiety and all virtue. But if he (Celsus) is desirous, after the supremeGod, to propitiate some others also, let him bear in mind, that just asa body in motion is accompanied by the motion of its shadow, so also byrendering the supreme God favourable, it follows that the person has allhis (God's) friends, angels, souls, spirits, favourable also; for theysympathize with those who are worthy of God's favour; and not only dothey become kindly affected towards the worthy, but they also join intheir work with those who desire to worship the supreme God; and theypropitiate him, and they pray with us, and supplicate with us; so thatwe boldly say, that together with men who on principle prefer the betterpart, and pray to God, ten thousands of holy powers join in prayerUNASKED ([Greek: aklaetoi]), " [UNBIDDEN, UNCALLED upon. ] [Cont. Cels. Lib. Viii. § 64. Vol. I. P. 789. ]

What an opportunity was here for Origen to have stated, that thoughChristians do not call upon demons and the subordinate divinities ofheathenism to aid {141} them, yet that they do call upon the ministeringspirits, the true holy angels, messengers and servants of the most HighGod! But whilst speaking of them, and magnifying the blessings derivedto man through their ministry, so far from encouraging us to ask themfor their good offices, his testimony on the contrary is not merelynegative; he positively asserts that when they assist mankind, it iswithout any request or prayer from man. Could this come from one whoinvoked angels?

Another passage, although it adds little to the evidence of the aboveextract, I am unwilling to pass by, because it beautifully illustratesby the doctrine and practice of Origen the prayer, the only one adoptedby the Anglican Church, offered by the Church to God for the succour anddefence of the holy angels. Speaking of the unsatisfactory slippery roadwhich they tread, who either depend upon the agency of demons for good, or are distressed by the fear of evil from them, Origen adds, "How farbetter ([Greek: poso Beltion]) were it to commit oneself to God who isover all, through Him who instructed us in this doctrine, Jesus Christ, and OF HIM to ask for every aid from the holy angels and the just, thatthey may rescue us from the earthly demons. " [Cont. Cels. Lib. Viii. §60. Vol. I. P. 786. ]

In the following passage Origen answers the question of Celsus: "If youChristians admit the existence of angels, tell us what you considertheir nature to be?" [Cont. Cels. Lib. V. § 4. P. 579. ]

"Come, " replies Origen, "let us consider these points. Now weconfessedly say, that the angels are ministering spirits, and sent tominister on account of those who are to be heirs of salvation; that theyascend, bearing with them the supplications of men into the most pure{142} heavenly places of the world; and that they again descend fromthence, bearing to each in proportion to what is appointed by God forthem to minister to the well-doers. And learning that these are, fromtheir work, called angels ([Greek: aggeloi], messengers, ministers sentto execute some commission), we find them, because they are divine, sometimes called even gods in the Holy Scriptures; but not so, as forany injunction to be given to us to worship and adore, instead of God, those who minister, and bring to us the things of God. For every requestand prayer, and supplication and thanksgiving, must be sent up to Himwho is God above all, through the High Priest, who is above all angels, even the living Word of God. And we also make our requests to the Word, and supplicate Him, and moreover offer our prayer to Him; if we canunderstand the difference between the right use and the abuse of prayer. For it is not reasonable for us to call upon angels, without receiving aknowledge concerning them which is above man. But supposing theknowledge concerning them, wonderful and unutterable as it is, had beenreceived; that very knowledge describing their nature, and those to whomthey are respectively assigned, would not give confidence in praying toany other than to Him who is sufficient for every thing, God who isabove all, through our Saviour, the Son of God, who is the word, andwisdom, and the truth, and whatsoever else the writings of the prophetsof God, and the Apostles of Jesus say concerning Him. But for the angelsof God to be favourable to us, and to do all things for us, ourdisposition towards God is sufficient; we copy them to the utmost ofhuman strength, {143} as they copy God. And our conception concerninghis Son, the Word, according to what is come to us, is not opposed tothe more clear conception of the holy angels concerning Him, but isdaily approximating towards it in clearness and perspicuity. "

Again, he thus writes: "But Celsus wishes us to dedicate thefirst-fruits unto the demons; but we to Him who said, Let the earthbring forth grass, &c. But to whom we give the first-fruits, to him wesend up also our prayers; having a great High Priest who is entered intothe heavens, Jesus the Son of God; and this confession we hold fast aslong as we live, having God favourable unto us, and his only-begottenSon being manifested among us, Jesus Christ. But if we wish to have amultitude favourable unto us, we learn that thousand thousands stand byHim, and ten thousand thousands minister unto Him; who, regarding thoseas kinsfolks and friends who imitate their piety to God, work togetherfor the salvation of them who call upon God and pray sincerely;appearing also, and thinking that they ought to listen to them, and asif upon one watchword to go forth for the benefit and salvation of thosewho pray to God, to whom they also pray. " [Cont. Cels. Lib. Viii. § 34. (Benedict, p. 766. )]

After these multiplied declarations of Origen, not only confessing thatChristians did not pray to the angels, but vindicating them from thecharge of impiety brought against them by their enemies for theirneglect of the worship of angels, is it possible to regard him as awitness in favour of prayer to angels?

But it has been said that Origen in another passage (Cont. Cels. Lib. Viii. § 13. P. 751. ) {144} plainly implies, that he would not beunwilling to discuss the question of some worship being due to angelsand archangels, provided the idea of that worship, and the acts of theworshippers, were first cleared of all misapprehension. And I would notthat any Catholic, whether in communion with the Church of England or ofRome, should make any other answer than Origen here gave to Celsus. Letme speak freely on this point. I should not respect the memory of Origenas I do, had he taught differently. The word which he uses is the Greekword "therapeusis, " precisely the same word with that which the learnedin medicine now use to describe the means of healing diseases. It is aword of very wide import. It signifies the care which a physician takesof his patient; the service paid to a master; the attention given to asuperior; the affectionate attendance of a friend; the allegiance of asubject; the worship of the Supreme Being. Origen says, Provided Celsuswill specify what kind of "therapeusis" he would wish to be paid tothose angels and archangels whose existence we acknowledge, I am readyto enter upon the subject with him. This is all he says. And we of theAnglican Church are ready from our hearts to join him. Call it by whatname we may, we are never backward in acknowledging ourselves bound torender it. We pay to the angels and archangels, and all the company ofheaven, the homage of respect, and veneration, and love. They are indeedour fellow-servants; they are, like ourselves, creatures of God's hand;but they are exalted far above us in nature and in office. By the graceof God, we would daily endeavour to become less distant from {145} themin purity, in zeal, in obedience. Origen here speaks not one word ofadoration, of invocation, of prayer. He speaks of a feeling and abehaviour, which the Greeks called "therapeusis, " and which we bestrender by "respect, veneration, and love. " Far from us be the thought oflowering the holy angels in the eyes of our fellow-creatures; equallyfar from us be the thought of invoking them, of asking them even fortheir prayers. They are holy creatures and holy messengers: we willthink and speak of them with reverence, and gratitude, and affection;but they are creatures and messengers still, and when we think or speakof the object of prayer, we think and speak solely and exclusively ofGod. 

With regard to Origen's opinion, as to the invocation of the souls ofsaints departed, a very few words will suffice. He clearly records hisopinion that the faithful are still waiting for us, and that till we allrejoice together, their joy will not be full: he leaves among themysteries not to be solved now the question whether the departed canbenefit the human race at all; and he has added reflections, full ofedifying and solemn admonition, which would dissuade hisfellow-believers from placing their confidence in any virtues, orintercessions, or merits of saints, and in any thing except the meremercy of God, through Jesus Christ, and our own individual labour in thework of the Lord. 

In his seventh homily on Leviticus, in a passage partly quoted byBellarmin, we read[51]--"Not even the Apostles have yet received theirjoy, but even they are waiting, in order that I also may become apartaker of {146} their joy. For the saints departing hence do notimmediately receive all the rewards of their deserts; but they wait evenfor us, though we be delaying and dilatory[52]. For they have notperfect joy as long as they grieve for our errors, and mourn for oursins. " Then, having quoted the Epistle to the Hebrews, heproceeds, --"You see, therefore, that Abraham is yet waiting to obtainthose things that are perfect; so is Isaac and Jacob; and so all theprophets are waiting for us, that they might obtain eternal blessednesswith us. Wherefore, even this mystery is kept, to the last day ofdelayed judgment. "

 [Footnote 51: Vol. Ii. P. 222. Nondum enim receperunt lætitiam suam, ne apostoli quidem, &c. But see Huetius on Origen, lib. Ii. Q. 11. No. 10. ]

 [Footnote 52: He thinks it probable, that the saints departed feel an interest in the welfare of men on earth. See vol. Iv. P. 273. ]

Modern Roman Catholic writers tell us, that we must consider Origen hereas only referring to the reunion of the soul with the body; but hiswords cannot be so interpreted. The cause of the saints still waitingfor their consummation of bliss, is stated to be the will of God, thatall the faithful should enter upon their full enjoyment of blessednesstogether. 

Again: it may be asked, whether the following passage could have comefrom the pen of one who prayed to the saints, as already reigning withChrist in heaven. 

"But now whether the saints who are removed from the body and are withChrist, act at all, and labour for us, like the angels who minister toour salvation; or whether, again, the wicked removed from the body actat all according to the purpose of their own mind, like the bad angels, with whom, it is said by Christ, that they will be sent into eternalfires;--let this too be {147} considered among the secret things of God, mysteries not to be committed to writing. " [Epist. Ad Rom. Lib. Ii. (Benedict. Vol. Iv. P. 479. ) "Jam vero si etiam, " &c. ]

In a passage found in Origen's Comment on Ezekiel's text, "Though Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver neither son nordaughter, they should deliver only their own souls by theirrighteousness, " [Hom. Iii. Vol. Iii. P. 372. ] independently of thetestimony borne to the point before us, we read a very interesting andawakening lesson of general application:--

"First, let us expound the passage agreeably to its plain sense, inconsequence of the ignorance of some who maintain the ideas of their ownmind to be the truth of God, and often say, 'Every one of us will beable by his prayers to snatch whomsoever he will from hell, ' andintroduce iniquity to the Lord; not seeing that the righteousness of therighteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall beupon him; so that each shall die in his own sin, and each live in hisown person. My father being a martyr profits me nothing, if I shall notlive well, and adorn the nobleness of my race, --that is, his testimonyand confession, by which he was glorified in Christ. It profiteth notthe Jews to say, 'We were not born of fornication, we have one father, the Lord;' and, a little after, 'Abraham is our father. ' Whatever theymay say, whatever they will assume, if they have not the faith ofAbraham they make their boast in vain; for they will not be saved onaccount of their being children of Abraham. Since, therefore, some haveformed incorrect notions, we have necessarily brought in the plain senseof the passage as to the letter, saying, Noah, Daniel, and Job will notrescue sons or daughters; they only will be saved. Let no {149} one ofus put his trust in a just father, a holy mother, chaste brethren. Blessed is the man who hath his hope in himself, and in the right way. But to those who place confident trust in the saints, we bring forwardno improper example, --'Cursed is the man whose hope is in man;' andagain, 'Trust ye not in man. ' And this also, 'It is good to trust in theLord rather than in princes[53]. ' If we must hope in some object, leaving all others, let us hope in the Lord, saying, 'Though a host ofmen were set against me, yet shall not my heart be afraid. '"

 [Footnote 53: These observations may perhaps refer more especially to the saints still on earth; but they apply to all helpers, save God alone. ]

He finishes the homily thus: "The righteous see three periods; thepresent, the period of change when the Lord will judge, and that whichwill be after the resurrection, --that is, the eternity of life in heavenin Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. "

Can this confessor of the Christian faith have ever taught hisfellow-believers to plead the merits of the saints, or to pray for theirintercessions? How strongly are the above sentiments contrasted with apassage in the third of the spurious homilies called In Diversos; thefirst clause of which is referred to by Bellarmin, as containingOrigen's approbation of giving honour to the saints[54]. 

 [Footnote 54: I hardly need detain the reader by any proof of the spuriousness of this passage; the whole work from which it is taken is rejected altogether by the Benedictine editors: "Reliqua ejusmodi spuria omittenda censuimus, qualia sunt ... Homiliæ in diversos;" and they have not allowed a single line of it to appear in their volumes, not even in the small character. --Vol. Iv. P. 1. ]

"The memory of these (the Innocents) is always {149} celebrated, as isright, in the Churches. These, therefore, since they were unjustly orimpiously put to death in peace and rest, having suffered much for thename of the Lord, were taken from this world, to remain in the eternalChurch for ever in Christ. But their parents for the merits of theirsuffering will receive a worthy recompense of reward from the just andeternal Lord God. " Here we have strongly marked indeed the differencebetween Origen himself, and the errors fastened upon him by the designor ignorance of subsequent times. 

Were not his testimony a subject of great moment, I should plead guiltyto having detained my readers too long on Origen; and yet I cannotdismiss him without first refreshing our minds with the remembrance ofsome of his beautiful reflections on a Christian's prayer. We need notread them with a controversial eye, and they may be profitable to usall. 

"I think, then, (says this early teacher in Christ's school) that whenproceeding to prayer, a Christian will be more readily disposed, and bein a better tone for the general work of prayer, if he will first tarrya little, and put himself into the right frame, casting off everydistracting and disturbing thought, and with his best endeavourrecalling to mind the vastness of HIM to whom he is drawing near, andhow unholy a thing it is to approach him with a carelessness andindifference, and, as it were, contempt; laying aside also every thingforeign to the subject;--so to come to prayer as one who stretchethforth his soul first, before his hands; and lifts up his mind first, before his eyes, to God; and before he stands up, raising from theground the leading [150} principle of his nature, and lifting that up tothe Lord of all. So far casting away all remembrance of evil towards anyof those who may seem to have injured him, as he wishes God not toremember evil against him, who has himself been guilty, and hastrespassed against many of his neighbours, or in whatever he isconscious to have done contrary to right reason. " [De Oratione, vol. I. § 31. P. 267. ]

"Having divided prayer into its several parts" (he continues), "I maybring my work to a close. There are then four parts of prayer requiringdescription, which I have found scattered in the Scriptures, all ofwhich every one should embody in his prayer:--

"First, we must offer glory (doxologies) to the best of our ability inthe opening and commencement of our prayer, to God through Christ who isglorified with Him in the Holy Spirit, who is praised together. Afterthis each person should offer general thanksgivings both for theblessings granted to all, and for those which he has individuallyobtained from God. After the thanksgiving, it appears to me right, thatbecoming, as it were, a bitter accuser of his own sins to God, he shouldpetition first of all for a remedy to release him from the habit whichimpels him to transgress, and then for remission of the past. And afterthe confession, I think he ought in the fourth place, to add asupplication for great and heavenly things, both individual anduniversal, and for his relations and friends. After all, he should closehis prayer with an ascription of glory to God through Christ in the HolyGhost. " [Sect. 33. P. 271. ] {151}

 * * * * *

SECTION VI. --SUPPLEMENTARY SECTION ON ORIGEN. 

I have above intimated my intention of reserving for a separate sectionour examination of a passage ascribed to Origen, in which he isrepresented as having invoked an angel to come down from heaven, tosuccour him and his fellow-creatures on earth. The passage purports tobe part of Origen's comment on the opening verse of the prophecy ofEzekiel, "The heavens were opened. " After the fullest investigation, andpatient weighing of the whole section, I am fully persuaded, first, thatthe passage is an interpolation, never having come from the pen ofOrigen; and secondly, that, whoever were its author, it can be regardedonly as an instance of those impassioned apostrophes, which are found ingreat variety in the addresses of ancient Christian orators. But sincesome of the most respected writers of the Church of Rome have regardedit as genuine, and deemed it worthy of being cited in evidence, I feelit incumbent to state at length, for those readers who may desire toenter at once fully into the question, the reasons on which my judgmentis founded; whilst others, who may perhaps consider the discussion ofthe several points here as too great an interruption to the generalargument, may for the present pass this section, and reserve it forsubsequent inquiry. 

It will be, in the first place, necessary to quote the whole passageentire, however long; for the mere extract of that portion which iscited as Origen's prayer to an {152} angel, might leave a falseimpression as to the real merits of the case. 

"The heavens are opened. The heavens were closed, and at the coming ofChrist they were opened, IN ORDER THAT THEY BEING LAID OPEN THE HOLYGHOST MIGHT COME UPON HIM in the appearance of a dove. For he could notcome to us unless he had first descended on one who partook of his ownnature. Jesus ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, he receivedgifts for men. He who descended is the same who ascended above allheavens, that he might fill all things; and he gave some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, some as pastors and masters, forthe perfecting of the saints. " [Vol. Iii. P. 358. Hom. I. In Ezek. ]

"[The heavens were opened. It is not enough for one heaven to be opened:very many are opened, that not from one, but from all, angels maydescend to those who are to be saved; angels who ascended and descendedupon the Son of man, and came to him, and ministered to him. Now theangels descended because Christ first descended, fearing to descendbefore the Lord of all powers and things commanded. But when they sawthe chieftain of the army of heaven dwelling in earthly places, thenthey entered through the opened road, following their Lord, and obeyinghis will, who distributes them as guardians of those that believe on hisname. Thou yesterday wast under a devil, to-day thou art under an angel. Do not ye, saith the Lord, despise one of the least of those who are inthe Church? Verily, I say unto you, that their angels through all thingssee the face of the Father who is in heaven. The angels attend on thysalvation; they were granted for the ministry of the Son of God, and{153} they say among themselves, If he descended, and descended into abody, if he is clothed in mortal flesh, and endured the cross, and diedfor man, why are we resting idle? Why do we spare ourselves? Haste away!Let all of us angels descend from heaven! Thus also was there amultitude of the heavenly host praising and blessing God when Christ wasborn. All things are full of angels. COME, ANGEL, take up one who by theword is converted from former error, from the doctrine of demons, frominiquity speaking on high, and taking him up like a good physician, cherish him, and instruct him. He is a little child, to-day he is born, an old man again growing young; and undertake him, granting him thebaptism of the second regeneration; and summon to thyself othercompanions of thy ministry, that you all may together train for thefaith those who have been sometime deceived. For there is greater joy inheaven over one sinner repenting, than over ninety and nine just personswho need no repentance. Every creature exults, rejoices with, and withapplause addresses those who are to be saved; for the expectation of thecreature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. And althoughthose who have interpolated the apostolical writings are unwilling thatsuch passages should be in their books as may prove Christ to be theCreator, yet every creature waiteth for the sons of God when they shallbe freed from sin, when they shall be taken away from the hand ofZabulon[55], when they shall be regenerated by Christ. But now it istime that we touch somewhat on the present place. The Prophet sees not avision, but visions of God. {154} Why did he see not one, but manyvisions? Hear the Lord promising and saying, I have multiplied visions. 8. 'The fifth month. ' This was the fifth year of the captivity of kingJoachim. In the thirtieth year of Ezekiel's age, and the fifth of thecaptivity of Joachim, the prophet is sent to the Jews. The most mercifulFather did not despise the people, nor leave them a long timeunadmonished. It is the fifth year. How much time intervened? Five yearselapsed since they were captives in bondage. ]

(The portion between brackets is what I regard as an interpolation. )

 [Footnote 55: This word is frequently used for "Diabolum. " Thus in a hymn used in the Roman ritual on Michaelmas-day we read, "Michaelem in virtute conterentem Zabulum. "]

"Immediately the Holy Spirit descends. He opened the heavens, that theywho were oppressed by the yoke of bondage might see those things whichwere seen by the prophet. For when he says, The heavens were opened, insome measure they see with the eyes of their heart what he had seen evenwith the eyes of his flesh. "

Now the question is, Can this apostrophe to an angel be admitted asevidence that Origen held, and in his own person acted upon the doctrineof the Invocation of Angels?

The nature of the present work precludes us from entering at length onthe broad question, how far we can with safety regard the severalwritings which now purport to be translations of Origen's compositions, as on the whole the works of that early Christian writer. A multitude ofthose works which, until almost the middle of the sixteenth century, were circulated as Origen's, have long been by common consent excludedfrom the catalogue of his works[56]. On this subject I {155} would referany one, who desires to enter upon the inquiry, to the several prefacesof the Benedictine editors, who point out many sources of information, as well from among their friends as from those with whom they differ. Our inquiry must be limited within far narrower bounds, though I trustour arguments may assist somewhat in establishing the principles onwhich the student may at first guide himself in the wider range ofinvestigation. 

 [Footnote 56: See preface to vol. Iv. Of the Benedictine edition. ]

We will first look to the external evidence bearing on the passage inquestion, and then to the internal character of the passage itself. 

Origen's Commentaries on Ezekiel were divided into no fewer thantwenty-five volumes, which he is said to have begun in Cæsarea ofPalestine, and to have finished in Athens. Of these only one singlefragment remains, namely, part of the twenty-first volume[57]. Jeromesays that he translated fourteen of Origen's homilies on Ezekiel. Ofthese not one passage in the original language of Origen is known to bein existence. We must now, therefore, either receive the existingtranslations generally as Origen's, (whether they are Jerome'stranslations or not, ) or we must consider Origen's homilies on Ezekielas altogether lost to us. But supposing that we receive these works ascontaining, on the whole, traditionary translations of Origen, thegenuineness of any one passage may yet become the subject of faircriticism. And whilst some persons reject whole masses of themaltogether, the history of his works cannot but suggest some veryperplexing points of suspicion and doubt. 

 [Footnote 57: See Benedictine edition, vol. Iii. P. 351. And Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. Lib. Vi. C. 6. There referred to. ] {156}

The great body of his homilies, Origen probably delivered extempore inthe early part of his ministry to the Christians of Cæsarea. Eusebiustells us, that not before Origen had reached his sixtieth year did hesanction the notaries (persons well known to history and correspondingto the short-hand writers[58] of the present day) in publishing any ofhis homilies. [Eccles. Hist. Lib. Vi. C. 36. ] But the Benedictineeditor, De la Rue, conceives that those men might surreptitiously andagainst the preacher's wishes have published some of Origen's homilies. Be this as it may. Suppose that the homilies on Ezekiel were publishedby Origen himself, and were translated by Jerome himself, our doubts arenot removed even by that supposition. The same editor in the samepreface tells us, "It is known to the learned that it was Jerome'shabit, in translating Greek, sometimes to insert some things of hisown[59]. " Not that I for a moment conceive the passage underconsideration to have come in its Latin dress from the pen of Jerome;for my conviction being that it is an interpolation of a much laterdate, I mention the circumstance to show, that even when Jerome, withhis professed accuracy, is the translator, we can in no case feel surethat we are reading the exact and precise sentiments of Origen. 

 [Footnote 58: The Latin word "notarius" (notary) does not come so near as our own English expression, "short-hand writer, " to the Greek word used by Eusebius, --"tachygraphus, " "quick-writer. " The report of Eusebius as to the homilies of Origen having been delivered extempore, and taken down by these "quick-writers, " is confirmed by Pamphilus the martyr, as quoted by Valesius, in the annotations on this passage of Eusebius. --Apol. Orig. Lib. I. ]

 [Footnote 59: Cui in vertendis Græcis sciunt eruditi solemne esse nonnulla interdum de suo inserere. ] {157}

Ruffinus, his celebrated contemporary, accused Jerome of manyinaccuracies in his translations; and yet what were the principles oftranslation adopted by Ruffinus himself, as his own, we are not left toinfer; for we learn it from his own pen. His voluntary acknowledgment inthe peroration which he added to Origen's Comment on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, strongly and painfully exhibits to us how littledependence can safely be placed on such translations whenever theoriginal is lost; how utterly insufficient and unsatisfactory is anyevidence drawn from them, as to the real genuine sentiments andexpressions of the author. Ruffinus informs us, that with regard to manyof the various works of Origen, he changed the preacher's extemporaryaddresses, as delivered in the Church, into a more explanatory form, "adding, supplying, filling up what he thought wanting[60]. "

 [Footnote 60: Dum supplere cupimus ea quæ ab Origene in auditorio Ecclesiæ extempore (non tam explanationis quam ædificationis intentione) perorata sunt.... Si addere quod videar, et explere quæ desunt. --Orig. Vol. Iv. P. 688. ]

Moreover, he proceeds so far as to tell us[61] that his false {158}friends had remonstrated with him for not publishing the works under hisown name, instead of retaining Origen's, his changes having been sogreat; a point, which he was far from unwilling to acknowledge. Thismust appear to every one unsatisfactory in the extreme, and to shakeone's confidence in any evidence drawn from such a source. Indeed, theBenedictine editor, with great cause and candour, laments this course ofproceeding on the part of Ruffinus, as throwing a doubt and uncertainty, and suspicion, over all the works so tampered with. "This one thing(observes that honest editor) would the learned desire, that Ruffinushad spared himself the labour of filling up what he thought deficient. For since the Greek text has perished, it can scarcely with certainty bedistinguished, where Origen himself speaks, or where Ruffinus obtrudeshis own merchandise upon us. " This is more than enough to justify ourremarks. I must, however, refer to the conduct of another editor andtranslator of Origen, of a similar tendency. It unhappily shows thedisposition to sacrifice every thing to the received opinions of theChurch of Rome, rather than place the whole evidence of antiquity beforethe world, and abide by the result. How many works this principle, inworse hands, may have mutilated, or utterly buried in oblivion, and leftto perish, it is impossible to conjecture; that the principle isunworthy the spirit of Christianity will not now be questioned. Thateditor and translator, in his advertisement on the Commentary upon St. John, thus professes the principles which he had adopted: "Know, moreover, that I have found nothing in this book which {159} seemed tobe inconsistent with the decrees of holy Mother Church: for had I foundany, I would not have translated the book, or would have marked thesuspected place. " [Quoted by the Benedictine, vol. Iv. P. Viii. ] TheBenedictine proceeds to say, that the writer had not kept his word, buthad allowed many heterodox passages to escape, whilst he haddeliberately withdrawn others. 

 [Footnote 61: His words, as indicative of his principles of translation, and bearing immediately on the question, as to the degree of authority which should be assigned to the remains of Origen, when the original is lost, deserve a place here: "I am exposed to a new sort of charge at their hands; for thus they address me, --In your writings, since very many parts in them (plurima in eis) are considered to be of your own production, give the title of your own name, and write, for example, The Books of Explanations of Ruffinus on the Epistle to the Romans, --but the whole of this they offer me, not from any love of me, but from hatred to the author. But I, who consult my conscience more than my fame, even if I am seen to add some things, and to fill up what are wanting, or to shorten what are too long, yet I do not think it right to steal the title of him, who laid the foundations of the works, and supplied the materials for the buildings. Yet, in truth, it may be at the option of the reader, when he shall have approved of the work, to ascribe the merits to whom he will. "]

Many works probably, of the earliest ages, have been wholly or in partlost to us from the working of the same principle in its excess. Ratherthan perpetuate any sentiments at variance with the received doctrinesof the Church, it was considered the duty of the faithful to let works, in themselves valuable, but containing such sentiments, altogetherperish, or to exclude the objectionable passages. 

I would now invite you to examine the passage itself, and determinewhether it does not bear within it internal evidence of its having beenaltogether interpolated. 

In the first place, on the words upon which it professes to be acomment, the author had already given his comment, and assigned to themanother meaning. "The heavens were opened, " he says: "Before the time ofChrist the heavens were shut; but at his advent they were opened, THATTHE HOLY SPIRIT MIGHT DESCEND FIRST ON HIM;" quoting also among othersthe passage which speaks of Christ taking captivity captive. And thenafter the passage in question, in which he assigns a totally differentreason for the opening of the heavens; without any allusion to theintervening ideas, he carries on, and concludes the comment which he hadbegun, --in words which fit on well with the close of that comment, butwhich, as they stand now at the close of the intervening passage aboutthe angels, are abrupt and incoherent--"Forthwith the Holy Spirit {160}descended;" recurring also again to the idea which he had beforeintroduced of Christ benefiting those who were in captivity. A passagewhich affixes to the words commented upon, a different interpretationfrom one already given in the same paragraph; and which forces itselfabruptly and incoherently in the middle of a brief comment, must offeritself to our examination under strong grounds of suspicion, that it hasbeen interpolated. But when we examine the substance of the passage, itssentiments, the ideas conveyed, and the associations suggested, and thenthink of the author to whom it is ascribed, few probably will bedisposed to regard it as a faithful mirror in which to contemplate thereal sentiments of Origen. 

How utterly unworthy of the sublime burst of Christian eloquence whichnow delights us in undoubted works of Origen, is this strange anddegrading fiction! The true Origen THERE represents the tens ofthousands of angelic spirits ten thousand times told, as eversurrounding the throne of God, and ministering for the blessing of thosein whose behalf God himself wills them to serve. [Vol. I. P. 767. Contr. Cels. Viii. 34. ] Here he represents the revelation of the holiest ofholies as a throwing open of the various divisions or compartments ofthe celestial kingdom for all the angels to hasten forth together, fromtheir several places of indolence and carelessness and self-indulgence, (for such he represents their state to have been, ) to visit this earth. Surely such a comment would better suit the mythology of the cave anddens of Æolus and his imprisoned winds (velut agmine facto qua dataporta ruunt) than the awfully sublime revelation vouchsafed to theprophet Ezekiel. And how unworthy and degrading is that representationof the {161} heavenly host, resting inactive, and sparing themselvesfrom toil, until they witnessed Christ's descent and humiliation; andthen when chid and put to shame and rebuke, and mutually roused toaction by their fellows, coming down to visit this earth, and rushingthrough the opened portals of heaven. 

Again, we see how incoherent is the whole section which contains thealleged prayer to angels: "Thou wast yesterday under a demon, to-daythou art under an angel: the angels minister to thy salvation; they aregranted for the ministry of the Son of God, &c. All things are full ofangels. Come, Angel, take up one who is converted from his ancienterror, &c. And call to thee other companions of thy ministry, that allof you alike may train up to the faith those who were once deceived. "Indeed the passage seems to carry within itself its own condemnation soentirely, that what we have before alleged, both of internal andexternal evidence, may appear superfluous. Surely the conceit of apreacher of God's word addressing an angel, (which of them he thusindividually addresses does not appear; for he says not "My Angel, " asthough he were appealing to one whom he regarded as his guardian, theview gratuitously suggested in the marginal note of the Benedictineeditor, "the invocation of a guardian angel, ") and bidding some oneangel, as a sort of summoner, to go and call to himself all the angelsof heaven to come in one body, and instruct those who are in error, is, even as a rhetorical apostrophe, as unworthy the mind of a Christianphilosopher, as it is in the light of a prayer totally inconsistent withthe plain sentiments of Origen on the very subject of angelicinvocation. Even had Origen not left us his deliberate opinions in worksof undoubted genuineness, such a {162} strange, incoherent, and childishrhapsody could never be relied upon by sober and upright men as aprecedent sanctioning a Christian's prayer to angels; no one would relyupon such evidence in points of far less moment, even were ituncontradicted by the same witness. 

 * * * * *

SECTION VII. --ST. CYPRIAN. 

In the middle of the third century, Cyprian [Jerom, vol. Iv. P. 342. ], aman of substance and a rhetorician of Carthage, was converted toChristianity. He was then fifty years of age; and his learning, virtues, and devotedness to the cause which he had espoused, very soon raised himto the dignity, the responsibility, and, in those days, the greatdanger, of the Episcopate. (Cyprian is said to have been converted aboutA. D. 246, to have been consecrated A. D. 248, and to have sufferedmartyrdom A. D. 258. ) Many of his writings of undoubted genuineness arepreserved, and they have been appealed to in every age as the works of afaithful son of the Catholic Church. On the subject of prayer he haswritten very powerfully and affectingly; but I find no expression whichcan by possibility imply that he practised or countenanced theinvocation of saints and angels. I have carefully examined everysentence alleged by its most strenuous defenders, and I cannot extractfrom them one single grain of evidence which can bear the test ofinquiry. Even did the passages quoted require to be taken in the senseaffixed to them {163} by those advocates, they prove nothing; they donot bear even remotely upon the subject, whilst I am persuaded that toevery unprejudiced mind a meaning will appear to have been attached tothem which the author did not intend to convey. 

The first quotation to which our attention is called is from the closeof his treatise De Habitu Virginum, which contains some very edifyingreflections. In the last clause of that treatise the advocates for theinvocation of saints represent Cyprian as requesting the virgins toremember him in their prayers at the throne of grace when they shallhave been taken to heaven. "As we have borne the image of Him who is ofthe earth, let us also bear the image of him who is from heaven. Thisimage the virgin-state bears, --integrity bears it, holiness and truthbear it; rules of discipline mindful of God bear it, retaining justicewith religion, firm in the faith, humble in fear, strong to endure allthings, gentle to receive an injury, readily disposed to pity, with onemind and with one heart in brotherly peace. All which ye ought, O goodvirgins, to observe, to love and fulfil; ye who, retired for the serviceof God and Christ, with your greater and better part are going beforetowards the Lord to whom you have devoted yourselves. Let those who areadvanced in age exercise rule over the younger; ye younger, offer toyour equals a stimulus; encourage yourselves by mutual exhortations; byexamples emulous of virtue invite each other to glory; remain firm;conduct yourselves spiritually; gain the end happily. Only remember usthen, when your virgin-state shall begin to be honoured. " [Tantummementote tunc nostri, cum incipiet in vobis virginitas honorari. --Page180. ] {164}

The second instance, from the close of his letter to Cornelius, putsbefore us a beautiful act of friendship and brotherly affection worthyof every Christian brother's and friend's imitation. But how it can beapplied in supporting the cause of the invocation of saints, I cannotsee. The supporters of that doctrine say that Cyprian suggests to hisfriend, still living on earth, that whichever of the two should be firstcalled away, he should continue when in heaven to pray for the survivoron earth. Suppose it to be so. That has not any approximation to ourpraying to one who is already dead and gone to his reward. But Cypriansurely intended to convey a very different meaning, namely this, thatthe two friends should continue to pray, each in his place, mutually foreach other and for their friends, and relieve each other's wants andnecessities whilst both survived; and whenever death should remove theone from earth to happiness, the survivor should not forget their bondof friendship, but should still continue to pray to God for theirbrothers and sisters. The passage translated to the letter, runs thus:"Let us be mutually mindful of each other, with one mind and one heart. On both sides, let us always pray for each other; let us by mutual loverelieve each other's pressures and distresses; and if either of us fromhence, by the speed of the Divine favour, go on before the {165} other, let our love persevere before the Lord; for our brothers and sisterswith the Father's mercy let not prayer cease. My desire, most dearbrother, is that you may always prosper. " [Epist. 57. Benedict, p. 96. --Memores nostri invicem simus concordes atque unanimes: utrobiquepro nobis semper oremus, pressuras et angustias mutua caritaterelevemus, et si quis istinc nostrum prior divinæ dignationis celeritatepræcesserit, perseveret apud Dominum nostra dilectio; pro fratribus etsororibus nostris apud misericordiam Patris non cesset oratio. Opto te, frater carissime, semper bene valere. --This epistle is by some editorsnumbered as the 60th, by others as the 61st, the 7th, and the 69th, &c. ]

Whether the above view of this passage be founded in reason or not, itmatters little to the point at issue. Let both these passages beaccepted in the sense assigned to them by some Roman Catholic writers, yet there is not a shadow of analogy between the language and conduct ofCyprian, and the language and conduct of those who now invoke saintsdeparted. In each case Cyprian, still in the body, was addressingfellow-creatures still sojourning on earth. The very utmost which thesepassages could be forced to countenance would be, that the righteous, when in heaven, may be mindful in their prayers of their friends, whoare still exposed to the dangers from which they have themselves finallyescaped, and who, when both were on earth, requested them to rememberthe survivors in their prayers. But this is a question totally differentfrom our addressing them in supplication and prayer; a difference whichI am most anxious that both myself and my readers should keep in mindthroughout. 

In the extract from Cyprian's letter, a modern author having renderedthe single word "utrobique, " by the words "in this world and the next" Iam induced to add a few further observations on the passage. (The Latinoriginal and the version here referred to, will be placed side by sidein the Appendix. ) It will, I think, appear to most readers on a carefulexamination of the passage, that the expression "utrobique[62]" "on bothsides, " or "on both parts, " whatever be its precise {166} meaning, sofar from referring to "this world and the next, " must evidently beconfined to the condition of both parties now in this life, because itstands in direct contradistinction to what follows, the supposed case ofthe death of either of the two; and because it applies no less to themutual relief of each other's sufferings and afflictions during theirjoint lives, than to their mutual prayers: it cannot mean that all themutual benefits to be derived from their mutual remembrance of eachother, were to come solely through the means of their prayers. They weredoubtless mutually to pray for each other; but, in addition to theirprayers, they were also to relieve each other's pressures anddifficulties with mutual love, and that too before the event afterwardscontemplated, namely, the removal of one of them by death. 

 [Footnote 62: Utrobique is rendered by Facciolati [Greek: hekaterothi]--"in utraque parte, utrimque. "]

Bishop Fell thus comments on the passage: "The sense seems to be, Wheneither of us shall die; whether I, who preside at Carthage, or you, whoare presiding at Rome, shall be the survivor, let the prayer to God ofhim whose lot shall be to remain the longest among the living, persevere, and continue. " "Meanwhile, " continues the Bishop[63], "we byno means doubt that souls admitted into heaven apply to God, the bestand greatest of Beings, that he would have compassion on those who aredwelling on the earth. But it does not thence follow, that prayersshould be offered to the saints. THE MAN WHO PETITIONS THEM MAKES THEMGODS (Deos qui rogat ille facit). " [Oxford, 1682, p. 143. ] Rigaltius, himself {167} a Roman Catholic, doubts whether, when Cyprian wrote thisletter, he had any idea before his mind of saints departed praying forthe living. He translates "utrobique" very much as I have done, "withreciprocal love, with mutual charity. " His last observations on thispassage are very remarkable. After having confessed the sentiments to beworthy of a Christian, that the saints pray for us, and having arguedthat Cyprian could not have thought it necessary to ask a saint toretain his brotherly kindness in heaven, for he could not be a saint ifhe did not continue to love his brethren, he thus concludes: "In truthit is a pious and faithful saying, That of those who having already putoff mortality are made joint-heirs with Christ, and of those whosurviving on earth will hereafter be joint-heirs with Christ, the Churchis one, and is by the Holy Spirit so well joined together as not to betorn asunder by the dissolution of the body. They pray to God for us, and we praise God for them, and thus with mutual affection (utrobique)we always pray for each other. " [Paris, 1666. P. 92. ]

 [Footnote 63: See the note of the Benedictine editors on this passage (p. 467), in which they refer to the sentiments of Rigaltius, Pamelius, and Bishop Fell, whom they call "the most illustrious Bishop of Oxford. "]

I will detain you only by one or two more extracts from Cyprian; oneforming part of the introduction to his Comment on the Lord's Prayer, which is fitted for the edification of Christians in every age; theother closing his treatise on Mortality, one of those beautifulproductions by which, during the plague which raged at Carthage in theyear 252, he comforted and exhorted the Christians, that they might meetdeath without fear or amazement, in sure and certain hope of eternalblessedness in heaven. The sentiments in the latter passage will beresponded to by every good Catholic, whether in communion with theChurch of Rome or {168} with the Church of England; whilst in the formerwe are reminded, that to pray as Cyprian prayed, we must addressourselves to God alone in the name and trusting to the merits only ofhis blessed Son. 

"He who caused us to live, taught us also to pray, with that kindnessevidently by which He deigns to give and confer on us every otherblessing; that when we speak to the Father in the prayer andsupplication which his Son taught, we might the more readily be heard. He had already foretold, that the hour was coming when the trueworshippers should worship the Father in spirit and in truth; and Hefulfilled what He before promised, that we, who have received the spiritand truth from his sanctification, may from his instruction offeradoration truly and spiritually. For what prayer can be more spiritualthan that which is given to us by Christ, by whom even the Holy Spiritis sent to us? What can be a more true prayer with the Father than thatwhich came from the lips of the Son, who is Truth? So that to prayotherwise than He taught, is not only ignorance, but a fault; since Hehas himself laid it down and said, Ye reject the Commandment of God toestablish your own traditions. Let us pray then, most beloved brethren, as our teacher, God, has instructed us. It is a welcome and friendlyprayer to petition God from his own, to mount up to his ears by theprayer of Christ. Let the Father recognize the words of his Son. When weoffer a prayer let Him who dwelleth inwardly in our breast, Himself bein our voice; and since we have Him as our advocate with the Father forour sins, when as sinners we are petitioning for our sins let us putforth the words of our Advocate. " [De Orat. Dom. P. 204. ]

"We must consider, (he says at the close of his {169} treatise on theMortality [Page 236. ], ) most beloved brethren, and frequently reflectthat we have renounced the world, and are meanwhile living here asstrangers and pilgrims. Let us embrace the day which assigns each to hisown home ... Which restores us to paradise and the kingdom of heaven, snatched from hence and liberated from the entanglements of the world. What man, when he is in a foreign country, would not hasten to return tohis native land?... We regard paradise as our country.... We have begunalready to have the patriarchs for our parents. Why do we not hasten andrun that we may see our country, and salute our parents? There a largenumber of dear ones are waiting for us, of parents, brothers, children;a numerous and full crowd are longing for us; already secure of theirown immortality, and still anxious for our safety. To come to the sightand the embrace of these, how great will be the mutual joy to them andto us! What a pleasure of the kingdom of heaven is there without thefear of dying, and with an eternity of living! How consummate andnever-ending a happiness! There is the glorious company of the apostles;there is the assembly of exulting prophets; there is the unnumberedfamily of martyrs crowned for the victory of their struggles andsuffering; there are virgins triumphing, who, by the power of chastity, have subdued the lusts of the flesh and the body; there are the mercifulrecompensed, who with food and bounty to the poor have done the works ofrighteousness, who keeping the Lord's commands have transferred theirearthly inheritance into heavenly treasures. To these, O most dearlybeloved brethren, let us hasten with most eager longing; {170} let usdesire that our lot may be to be with these speedily; to come speedilyto Christ. Let God see this to be our thought; let our Lord Christbehold this to be the purpose of our mind and faith, who will give moreabundant rewards of his glory to them, whose desires for himself havebeen the greater. "

Such is the evidence of St. Cyprian. 

 * * * * *

SECTION VIII. --LACTANTIUS. 

Cyprian suffered martyrdom about the year 260. Towards the close of thiscentury, and at the beginning of the fourth, flourished Lactantius. Hewas deeply imbued with classical learning and philosophy. Before hebecame a writer (as Jerome informs us [Jerom, vol. Iv. Part ii. P. 119. Paris, 1706]) he taught rhetoric at Nicomedia; and afterwards in extremeold age he was the tutor of Cæsar Crispus, son of Constantine, in Gaul. Among many other writings which Jerome enumerates, he specifies thebook, "On the Anger of God, " as a most beautiful work. Bellarmin, however, speaks of him disparagingly, as one who had fallen into manyerrors, and was better versed in Cicero than in the Holy Scriptures. Histestimony is allowed by the supporters of the adoration of spirits andangels to be decidedly against them; they do not refer to a singlepassage likely to aid their cause; and they are chiefly anxious todepreciate his evidence. I will call your attention only to two passagesin his works. The {171} one is in his first book on False Religion: "Godhath created ministers, whom we call messengers (angels);... But neitherare these gods, nor do they wish to be called gods, nor to beworshipped, as being those who do nothing beyond the command and will ofGod. " [Vol. I. P. 31. ]

The other passage is from his work on a Happy Life: "Nor let any onethink that souls are judged immediately after death. For all are kept inone common place of guard, until the time come when the great Judge willinstitute an inquiry into their deserts. Then those whose righteousnessshall be approved, will receive the reward of immortality; and thosewhose sins and crimes are laid open shall not rise again, but shall behidden in the same darkness with the wicked--appointed to fixedpunishments. " [Chap. Xxi. P. 574. ]

This composition is generally believed to have been written about theyear 317. 

 * * * * *

SECTION IX. --EUSEBIUS. 

The evidence of Eusebius, on any subject connected with primitive faithand practice, cannot be looked to without feelings of deep interest. Heflourished about the beginning of the fourth century, and was Bishop ofCaesarea, in Palestine. His testimony has always been appealed to in theCatholic Church, as an authority not likely to be gainsaid. He was avoluminous writer, and his writings were very diversified in theircharacter. {172} Whatever be our previous sentiments we cannot toocarefully examine the remains of this learned man. But in his writings, historical, biographical, controversial, or by whatever name they may becalled, overflowing as they are with learning, philosophical andscriptural, I can find no one single passage which countenances thedecrees of the Council of Trent; not one passage which would encourageme to hope that I prayed as the primitive Church was wont to pray, if byinvocation I requested an angel or a saint to procure me any favour, orto pray for me. The testimony of Eusebius has a directly contrarytendency. 

Among the authorities quoted by the champions of the invocation ofsaints, I can find only three from Eusebius; and I sincerely lament theobservations which truth and justice require me to make here, inconsequence of the manner in which his evidence has been cited. Thefirst passage to which I refer is quoted by Bellarmin from the historyof Eusebius, to prove that the spirit of a holy one goes direct fromearth to heaven. This passage is not from the pen of Eusebius; and if itwere, it would not bear on our inquiry. The second is quoted by the sameauthor, from the Evangelica Præparatio, to prove that the primitiveChristians offered prayers to the saints. Neither is this from the penof Eusebius. The third Extract, from the account of the martyrdom ofPolycarp, is intended to prove that the martyrs were worshipped. Eventhis, one of the most beautiful passages in ancient history, as it isrepresented by Bellarmin and others, is interpolated. 

The first passage, which follows a description of the {173} martyrPotamiæna's sufferings, is thus quoted by Bellarmin: "In this manner theblessed virgin, Potamniæna, emigrated from earth to heaven. " [Hoc modobeata Virgo emigravit e terris ad coelum. Vol. Ii. P. 854. ] And such, doubtless, is the passage in the translation of Eusebius, ascribed toRuffinus [Basil, 1535. P. 134]; but the original is, "And such astruggle was thus accomplished by this celebrated virgin;" ([Greek: kaiho men taes aoidimou koraes toioutos kataegoisisto athlos]; Talecertamen ab hac percelebri et gloriosa virgine confectum fait. ); andsuch is the Parisian translation of 1581. 

The second misquotation is far more serious. Bellarmin thus quotesEusebius: "These things we do daily, who honouring the soldiers of truereligion as the friends of God, approach to their respective monuments, and make OUR PRAYERS TO THEM, as holy men, by whose intercession to God, we profess to be not a little aided. " [Hæc nos, inquit, quotidiefactitamus qui veras pietatis milites ut Dei amicos honorantes, admonumenta quoque eorum accedimus, votaque ipsis facimus tanquam virissanctis quorum intercessione ad Deum non parum juvari profitemur. --p. 902. He quotes it as c. 7. ]

By one who has not by experience become familiar with these things itwould scarcely be believed, that whilst the readers of Bellarmin havebeen taught to regard these as the words of Eusebius, in the originalthere is no mention whatever made of the intercession of the saints;that there is no allusion to prayer to them; that there is no admissioneven of any benefit derived from them at all. This quotation Bellarminmakes from the Latin version, published in Paris in 1581, or from somecommon source: it is word for word the same. We must either allow him tobe ignorant of the truth, or to have designedly preferred error. {174}The copy which I have before me of the "Evangelica Præparatio, " in Greekand Latin, was printed in 1628, and dedicated by Viger Franciscus, apriest of the order of Jesuits, to the Archbishop of Paris. 

Eusebius, marking the resemblance in many points between Plato'sdoctrine and the tenets of Christianity, on the reverence which, according to Plato, ought to be paid to the good departed, makes thisobservation: "And this corresponds with what takes place on the death ofthose lovers of God, whom you would not be wrong in calling the soldiersof the true religion. Whence also it is our custom to proceed to theirtombs, and AT THEM [the tombs] to make our prayers, and to honour theirblessed souls, inasmuch as these things are with reason done by us. "[Greek: kai tauta de armozei epi tae ton theophilon teleutae ousstratiotas taes alaethous eusebeius ouk an hamartois eiponparalambanesthai othen kai epi tas thaekas auton ethos haemin parienaikai tas euchas para tautais poieisthai, timan te tas makarias autonpsychas, os eulogos kai touton uph haemon giguomenon. ] This translationagrees to a certain extent with the Latin of Viger's edition ("Quæquidem in hominum Deo carissimorum obitus egregie conveniunt, quos veræpietatis milites jure appellaris. Nam et eorum sepulchra celebrare etpreces ibi votaque nuncupare et beatas illorum animas venerariconsuevimus, idque a nobis merito fieri statuimus"); though thetranslator there has employed words more favourable to the doctrine ofthe saints' adoration, than he could in strictness justify. 

The celebrated letter from the Church of Smyrna (Euseb. Cantab. 1720. Vol. I. P. 163), relating the martyrdom of Polycarp, one of the mostprecious relics of Christian antiquity, has already been examined by us, when we were inquiring into the recorded {175} sentiments of Polycarp;and to our reflections in that place we have little to add. Theinterpolations to which we have now referred, are intended to take offthe edge of the evidence borne by this passage of Eusebius against theinvocation of saints. First, whereas the Christians of Smyrna arerecorded by Eusebius to have declared, without any limitation orqualification whatever, that they could never worship any fellow-mortalhowever honoured and beloved, the Parisian edition limits and qualifiestheir declaration by interpolating the word "as God, " implying that theywould offer a secondary worship to a saint. Again, whereas Eusebius incontrasting the worship paid to Christ, with the feelings of theChristians towards a martyr, employs only the word "love, " Bellarmin, following Ruffinus, interpolates the word "veneramur" after "diligimus, "a word which may be innocently used with reference to the holy saintsand servants of God, though it is often in ancient writers employed tomean the religious worship of man to God. Still how lamentable is it toattempt by such tampering with ancient documents to maintain a cause, whatever be our feelings with regard to it!

With two more brief quotations we will close our report of Eusebius. They occur in the third chapter of the third book of his DemonstratioEvangelica, and give the same view of the feelings and sentiments of theprimitive Christians towards the holy angels, which we have found Origenand all the other fathers to have acknowledged. 

"In the doctrine of his word we have learned that there exists, afterthe most high God, certain powers, {176} in their nature incorporeal andintellectual, rational and purely virtuous, who ([Greek: choreuousas])keep their station around the sovereign King, --the greater part of whom, by certain dispensations of salvation, are sent at the will of theFather even as far as to men; whom, indeed, we have been taught to knowand to honour, according to the measure of their dignity, rendering toGod alone, the sovereign King, the honour of worship. " ([Greek:gnorizein kai timain kata to metron taes axias edidachthaemen, mono toipambasilei Theoi taen sebasmion timaen aponemontes]) Again: "Knowing thedivine, the serving and ministering powers of the sovereign God, andhonouring them to the extent of propriety; but confessing God alone, andHim alone worshipping. " ([Greek: theias men dynameis hypaeretikas toupambasileos Theou kai leitourgikas eidotes, kai kata to prosaekontimontes monon de Theon homologountes, kai monon ekeinon sebontes])[Demonst. Evang. Paris, 1628. P. 106. ; Præpar. Evang. Lib. Vii. C. 15. P. 237. ]

 * * * * *

SECTION X. --APOSTOLICAL CANONS AND CONSTITUTIONS. 

The works known by the name of the Apostolical Constitutions andApostolical Canons, though confessedly not the genuine productions ofthe Apostles, or of their age, have been always held in much venerationby the Church of Rome. The most learned writers fix their date at aperiod not more remote than the beginning of the fourth century. (SeeCotelerius; vol. I. P. 194 and 424. Beveridge, in the same vol. P. 427. Conc. Gen. Florence, 1759, tom. I. P. 29 and 254. ) I invite the reader{177} to examine both these documents, but especially the Constitutions, and to decide whether they do not contain strong and convincingevidence, that the invocation of saints was not practised or known inthe Church when they were written. Minute rules are given for theconducting of public worship; forms of prayer are prescribed to be usedin the Church, by the bishops and clergy, and by the people; forms ofprayer and of thanksgiving are recommended for the use of the faithfulin private, in the morning, at night, and at their meals; forms, too, there are of creeds and confessions;--but not one single allusion to anyreligious address to angel or saint; whilst occasions most opportune forthe introduction of such doctrine and practice repeatedly occur, and areuniformly passed by. Again and again prayer is directed to be made tothe one only living and true God, exclusively through the mediation andintercession of the one only Saviour Jesus Christ. Honourable mention ismade of the saints of the Old Testament, and the apostles and martyrs ofthe New; directions are also given for the observance of their festivals[Book viii. P. 415]; but not the shadow of a thought appears that theirgood offices could benefit us; much less the most distant intimationthat Christians might invoke them for their prayers and intercessions. There is indeed very much in these early productions of the Christianworld to interest every Catholic Christian; and although a generaladmiration of the principles for the most part pervading them does notinvolve an entire approbation of them all, yet perhaps few would thinkthe time misapplied which they should devote to the examination of thesedocuments. {178}

In book v. C. 6. Of the Constitutions, the martyr is represented as"trusting in the one only true God and Father, through Jesus Christ, thegreat High Priest, the Redeemer of souls, the Dispenser of rewards; towhom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. " [Cotel. Vol. I. P. 304. ]

In the same book and in the following chapter we find an exceedinglyinteresting dissertation on the general resurrection, but not one wordof saint or martyr being beforehand admitted to glory; on the contrary, the declaration is distinct, that not the martyrs only, but all men willrise. Surely such an opportunity would not have been lost of stating thedoctrine of martyrs being now reigning with Christ, had such been thedoctrine of the Church at that early period. 

In the eighth chapter is contained an injunction to honour the martyrsin these words: "We say that they should be in all honour with you, asthe blessed James the bishop and our holy fellow-minister Stephen werehonoured with us. For they are blessed by God and honoured by holy men, pure from all blame, never bent towards sins, never turned away fromgood, --undoubtedly to be praised. Of whom David spake, 'Honourablebefore God is the death of his saints;' and Solomon, 'The memory of thejust is with praise. ' Of whom the prophet also said, 'Just men are takenaway. '" [p. 309. ]

And in book viii. C. 13. We read this exhortation, --"Let us remember theholy martyrs, that we may be counted worthy to be partakers of theirconflict. " [p. 404. ]

Does this sound any thing at all like adoration or invocation? The wordwhich is used in the above {179} passage, _honour_ [[Greek: timê] p. 241], is employed when (book ii. C. 28. ) the respect is prescribed whichthe laity ought to show to the clergy. 

To the very marked silence as to any invocation or honour, to be shownto the Virgin Mary, I shall call your attention in our separatedissertation on the worship now offered to her. 

 * * * * *

SECTION XI. --SAINT ATHANASIUS. 

The renowned and undaunted defender of the Catholic faith against theerrors which in his day threatened to overwhelm Gospel-truth, Athanasius(the last of those ante-Nicene writers into whose testimony we haveinstituted this inquiry), was born about the year 296, and, after havingpresided in the Church as Bishop for more than forty-six years, died in373, on the verge of his eightieth year. It is impossible for any oneinterested in the question of primitive truth to look upon the beliefand practice of this Christian champion with indifference. When I firstread Bellarmin's quotations from Athanasius, in justification of theRoman Catholic worship in the adoration of saints, I was made not alittle anxious to ascertain the accuracy of his allegations. The inquiryamply repaid me for my anxiety and the labour of research; not merely byproving the unsoundness of Bellarmin's representation, but also bydirecting my thoughts more especially, as my acquaintance with his {180}works increased, to the true and scriptural views taken by Athanasius ofthe Christian's hope and confidence in God alone; the glowing fervour ofhis piety centering only in the Lord; his sure and certain hope in lifeand in death anchored only in the mercies of God, through the merits andmediation of Jesus Christ alone. 

Bellarmin, in his appeal to Athanasius as a witness in behalf of theinvocation of saints, cites two passages; the one of which, thoughappearing in the edition of the Benedictines, amongst the works calleddoubtful, has been adjudged by those editors [Vol. Ii. P. 110 and 122]to be not genuine; the other is placed by them among the confessedlyspurious works, and is treated as a forgery. 

The first passage is from a treatise called De Virginitate, and evenwere that work the genuine production of Athanasius, would make againstthe religious worship of the saints rather than in its favour, for itwould show, that the respect which the author intended to be paid tothem, was precisely the same with what he would have us pay to holy menin this life, who might come to visit us. "If a just man enter intothine house, thou shalt meet him with fear and trembling, and shaltworship before his feet to the ground: for thou wilt not worship him, but God who sent him. "

The other passage would have been decisive as to the belief ofAthanasius, had it come from his pen. "Incline thine ear, O Mary, to ourprayers, and forget not thy people. We cry to thee. Remember us, O HolyVirgin. Intercede for us, O mistress, lady, queen, and mother of God. "[Vol. Ii. P. 390-401. ]

Had Bellarmin been the only writer, or the last who cited this passageas the testimony of St. Athanasius, {181} it would have been enough forus to refer to the judgment of the Benedictine editors, who have classedthe homily containing these words among the spurious works ascribed toAthanasius; or rather we might have appealed to Bellarmin himself. Forit is very remarkable, that though in his anxiety to enlist every ablewriter to defend the cause of the invocation of saints, he has citedthis passage in his Church Triumphant as containing the words ofAthanasius, without any allusion to its decided spuriousness, or even toits suspicious character; yet when he is pronouncing his judgment on thedifferent works assigned to Athanasius, declaring the evidence againstthis treatise to be irresistible, he condemns it as a forgery. [Bellarm. De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, Cologne, 1617, vol. Vii. P. 50. ]

Since, however, this passage has been cited in different Roman Catholicwriters of our own time as containing the words of Athanasius, and inevidence of his genuine belief and practice, and that without anallusion even to any thing doubtful and questionable in its character, it becomes necessary to enter more in detail into the circumstancesunder which the passage is offered to our notice. 

The passage is found in a homily called The Annunciation of the Motherof God. How long this homily has been discarded as spurious, or how longits genuineness had been suspected before the time of Baronius, I havenot discovered; but certainly two centuries and a half ago, andrepeatedly since, it has been condemned as totally and indisputablyspurious, and has been excluded from the works of Athanasius as aforgery, not by members of the Reformed Church, but {182} by mostzealous and steady adherents to the Church of Rome, and the moststrenuous defenders of her doctrines and practice. 

The Benedictine editors[64], who published the remains of St. Athanasiusin 1698, class the works contained in the second volume under two heads, the doubtful and the spurious; and the homily under consideration isranked, without hesitation, among the spurious. In the middle of thatvolume they not only declare the work to be unquestionably a forgery, assigning the reasons for their decision, but they fortify theirjudgment by quoting at length the letter written by the celebratedBaronius, more than a century before, to our countryman, Stapleton. Boththese documents are very interesting. 

 [Footnote 64: Here I would observe, that though the Benedictine editors differ widely from each other in talent, and learning, and candour, yet, as a body, they have conferred on Christendom, and on literature, benefits for which every impartial and right-minded man will feel gratitude. In the works of some of these editors, far more than in others, we perceive the same reigning principle--a principle which some will regard as an uncompromising adherence to the faith of the Church; but which others can regard only in the light of a prejudice, and a rooted habit of viewing all things through the eyes of Rome. ]

The Benedictine editors begin their preface thus: "That this discourseis spurious, there is NO LEARNED MAN WHO DOES NOT NOW ADJUDGE ... Thestyle proves itself more clear than the sun, to be different from thatof Athanasius. Besides this, very many trifles show themselves hereunworthy of any sensible man whatever, not to say Athanasius ... And agreat number of expressions unknown to Athanasius ... So that it savoursof inferior Greek. And truly his subtle disputation {183} on thehypostasis of Christ, and on the two natures in Christ, persuades us, that he lived after the councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon; of whichcouncils moreover he uses the identical words, whereas his dissertationon the two wills in Christ seems to argue, that he lived after thespreading of the error of the Monothelites. But (continue theseBenedictine editors) we would add here the dissertation of Baronius onthis subject, sent to us by our brethren from Rome. That illustriousannotator, indeed, having read only the Latin version of Nannius, whichis clearer than the Greek, did not observe the astonishing perplexity ofthe style[65]. "

 [Footnote 65: Even in the Bibliotheca Patrum Concionatoria the homily is declared to be not the work of Athanasius, but to have been written after the sixth general council. "It is evident, " say the editors, "that it is the monument of a very learned man, though he has his own blemishes, on which, for the most part, we have remarked in the margin. " Paris, 1662. P. 336. ]

The dissertation which the Benedictine editors append, was contained ina letter written by Baronius to Stapleton, in consequence of someanimadversions which Stapleton had communicated to Cardinal Allen on thejudgment of Baronius. The letter is dated Rome, November, 1592. Thejudgment of Baronius on the spurious character of this homily had beenpublished to the world some time previously; for after some preliminarywords of kindness and respect to his correspondent, Baronius proceeds tosay, that when he previously published his sentiments on this homily, itwas only cursorily and by the way, his work then being on anothersubject. Nevertheless he conceived, {184} that the little he had thenstated would be sufficient to show, that the homily was not theproduction of Athanasius, and that all persons of learning, WHO WEREDESIROUS OF THE TRUTH, would freely agree with him; nor was he in thisexpectation disappointed; for very many persons expressed theiragreement with him, congratulating him on separating legitimate fromspurious children. He then states the arguments which the Benedictineeditors adopted after him, and which we need not repeat. But he alsourges this fact, that though Cyril had the works of Athanasius in hiscustody, and though both the disputing parties ransacked every place forsentiments of Athanasius countenancing their tenets, yet neither atEphesus nor at Chalcedon was this homily quoted, though it must havealtogether driven Eutyches and Nestorius from the field, so exact areits definitions and statements on the points then at issue. Baroniusthen adds, that so far from reversing the judgment which he had beforepassed against the genuineness of this homily, he was compelled injustice to declare his conviction, that it could not have been writtentill after the heresy of the Monothelites had been spread abroad. Thiswe know would fix its date, at the very earliest, subsequently to thecommencement of the SEVENTH century, three hundred years afterAthanasius attended the Council of Nice. Among the last sentiments ofBaronius in this letter, is one which implies a principle worthy ofChristian wisdom, and which can never be neglected without injury to thecause of truth. "These sentiments concerning Athanasius I do not thinkare affirmed with any detriment to the Church; for the Church does notsuffer a loss on this account; who being the pillar {185} and ground ofthe truth, very far shrinks from seeking, like Æsop's Jackdaw, helps andornaments which are not her own: the bare truth shines more beautiful inher own naked simplicity. " Were this principle acted upon uniformly inour discussions on religious points of faith or practice, controversywould soon be drawn within far narrower limits; and would gradually besoftened into a friendly interchange of sentiments, and would well-nighbe banished from the world. No person does the cause of truth so muchinjury, as one who attempts to support it by arguments which will notbear the test of full and enlightened investigation. And however anunsound principle may be for a while maintained by unsound arguments, the momentary triumph must ultimately end in disappointment. 

Coccius also cites two passages as conveying the evidence of Athanasiuson this same point; one from the spurious letter addressed to Felix, thepope; the other from the treatise to Marcellus, on the interpretation ofthe Psalms. On the former, I need not detain you by any observation; itwould be fighting with a shadow. The latter, which only recognises whatI have never affirmed or denied here, --the interest in our welfare takenby holy souls departed, and their co-operation with us when we areworking out our own salvation, --contains a valuable suggestion on theprinciples of devotion. 

"Let no one, however, set about to adorn these Psalms for the sake ofeffect with words from without, [artificial and secular phrases, ] nortranspose, nor alter the expressions. But let every one inartificiallyread and repeat what is written, that those holy persons who employedthemselves in their production, recognising their own works, may joinwith us in prayer; or {186} rather that the Holy Spirit, who spake inthose holy men, observing the words with which his voice inspired them, may assist us. For just as much as the life of those holy men is morepure than ours, so far are their words preferable to any production ofour own. "

But whilst there is not found a single passage in Athanasius to give thefaintest countenance to the invocation of saints, there are variousarguments and expressions which go far to demonstrate that such a beliefand such practices as are now acknowledged and insisted upon by theChurch of Rome, were neither adopted nor sanctioned by him. Had headopted that belief and practice for his own, he would scarcely havespoken, as he repeatedly has, of the exclusion of angels and men fromany share in the work of man's restoration, without any expressions toqualify it, and to protect his assertions from being misunderstood. Again, he bids us look to the holy men and holy fathers as our examples, in whose footsteps we should tread, if we would be safe; but not a hintescapes him that they are to be invoked. 

I must detain you by rather a long quotation from this father, and will, therefore, now do nothing more than refer you to two passages expressiveof those sentiments to which I have above alluded. In the thirteenthsection of his Treatise on the Incarnation of the Word of God, heargues, that neither could men restore us to the image of God, nor couldangels, but the word of God, Jesus Christ, &c. [Vol. I. Part i. P. 58. ]In his Epistle to Dracontius, he says, "We ought to conduct ourselvesagreeably to the principles of the saints and fathers, and to imitatethem, --assured that if we {187} swerve from them, we become alienatedalso from their communion. " [Vol. I. Part i, p. 265. ]

The passage, however, to which I would invite the reader's patient andimpartial thoughts, occurs in the third oration against the Arians, whenhe is proving the unity of the Father and the Son, from the expressionof St. Paul in the eleventh verse of the third chapter of his firstEpistle to the Thessalonians. 

"Thus then again ([Greek: outo g' oun palin]), when he is praying forthe Thessalonians, and saying, 'Now our God and Father himself and theLord Jesus Christ direct our way to you, ' he preserves the unity of theFather and the Son. For he says not 'may THEY direct ([Greek:kateuthunoien]), ' as though a twofold grace were given from Him AND Him, but 'may HE direct ([Greek: katenthunai]), ' to show that the Fathergiveth this through the Son. For if there was not an unity, and the Wordwas not the proper offspring of the Father's substance, as theeradiation of the light, but the Son was distinct in nature from theFather, --it had sufficed for the Father alone to have made the gift, nogenerated being partaking with the Maker in the gifts. But now such agiving proves the unity of the Father and the Son. Consequently, no onewould pray to receive any thing from God AND the angels, or from anyother created being; nor would any one say 'May God AND the angels giveit thee;' but from the Father and the Son, because of their unity andthe oneness of the gift. For whatever is given, is given through theSon, --nor is there any thing which the Father works except through theSon; for thus the receiver has the gracious favour without fail. But ifthe patriarch Jacob, blessing his descendants Ephraim and Manasseh, said, 'The God who nourished {188} me from my youth unto this day, theAngel who delivered me from all the evils, bless these lads;' he doesnot join one of created beings, and by nature angels, with God whocreated them; nor dismissing Him who nourished him, God, does he ask theblessing for his descendants from an angel, but by saying 'He whodelivered me from all the evils, ' he showed that it was not one ofcreated angels, but the WORD OF GOD; and joining him with the Father, hesupplicated him through whom also God delivers whom he will. For he usedthe expression, knowing him who is called the Messenger of the greatcounsel of the Father to be no other than the very one who blessed anddelivered from evil. For surely he did not aspire to be blessed himselfby God, and was willing for his descendants to be blessed by an angel. But the same whom he addressed, saying, I will not let Thee go, exceptthou bless me (and this was God, as he says, 'I saw God face to face'), Him he prayed to bless the sons of Joseph. The peculiar office of anangel is to minister at the appointment of God; and often he wentonwards to cast out the Amorite, and is sent to guard the people in theway; but these are not the doings of him, but of God, who appointed himand sent him, --whose also it is to deliver whom he will. " [Vol i. P. 561. ]

"For this cause David addressed no other on the subject of deliverancebut God Himself. But if it belongs to no other than God to bless anddeliver, and it was no other who delivered Jacob than the Lord Himself, and the patriarch invoked for his descendants Him who delivered him, itis evident that he connected no one in his prayer except His Word, whomfor this reason he called an angel, because he alone reveals theFather. " {189}

"But this no one would say of beings produced and created; for neitherwhen the Father worketh does any one of the angels, or any other ofcreated beings, work the things; for no one of such beings is aneffective cause, but they themselves belong to things produced. Theangels then, as it is written, are ministering spirits sent to minister;and the gifts given by Him through the Word they announce to those whoreceive them. "

Now if the invocation of angels had been practised by the Church at thattime, can it be for a moment believed, that a man of such a mind as wasthe mind of Athanasius, a mind strong, clear, logical, cultivated withardent zeal for the doctrines of the Church, and fervent piety, wouldhave suffered such passages as these to fall from him, without onesaving clause in favour of the invocation of angels? He tells us in themost unqualified manner, that they act merely as ministers; readyindeed, and rejoicing to be employed on errands of mercy, but not goingone step without the commands of the Lord, or doing one thing beyond hisword. Had the idea been familiar to the mind of Athanasius, of thelawfulness, the duty, the privilege, the benefit of invoking them, wouldhe have avoided the introduction of some words to prevent hisexpressions from being misunderstood and misapplied, as subsequentwriters did long before the time when the denial of the doctrine mightseem to have made such precaution more necessary?

I close then the catalogue of our witnesses before the Council of Nicæawith the testimony of St. Athanasius; whose genuine and acknowledgedworks afford not one jot or tittle in support of the doctrine andpractice of the invocation of angels and saints, as now insisted upon bythe Church of Rome; and the direct {190} tendency of whose evidence isdecidedly hostile both to that doctrine and that practice. 

I have seen it observed by some who are satisfied, that the records ofprimitive antiquity do not contain such references to the invocation ofsaints and angels, as we might have expected to find had the custom thenprevailed, that the earliest Christians kept back the doctrine andconcealed it, though they held it; fearing lest their heathen neighboursshould upbraid them with being as much polytheists as themselves[66]. This is altogether a gratuitous assumption, directly contrary toevidence, and totally inconsistent with their conduct. Had those firstChristians acted upon such a debasing principle, they would have keptback and concealed their worship of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, asexposing them to a similar charge. They were constantly upbraided withworshipping a crucified {191} mortal; but instead of either meeting thatcharge by denying that they worshipped Jesus as their God, or ofconcealing the worship of Him, lest they should expose themselves againto such upbraidings, they publicly professed, that He whom the Jews hadmurdered, they believed in as the Son of God, Himself their God. Theygloried in the doctrine of the ever-blessed Trinity, and did not fearwhat men might do to them, or say of them in consequence. Had theybelieved in the duty of invoking saints and angels, the high principleof Christian integrity would not have suffered them to be ashamed toconfess it, or to practise openly what they believed. 

 [Footnote 66: Bishop Morley, (London, 1683, ) in a letter written whilst he was in exile at Breda, to J. Ulitius, refers to Cardinal Perron, "Réplique à la Resp. Du Roy de la Grande Bret. " p. 1402 and 4, for this sentiment: "The Fathers do not always speak what they think, but conceal their real sentiments, and say that which best serves the cause which they sustain, so as to protect it against the objections of the gentiles. The Fathers, as much as in them lies, and as far as they can, avoid and decline all occasions of speaking about the invocation of saints then practised in the Church, fearing lest to the gentiles there might appear a sort of similarity, although untrue and equivocal, between the worship paid to the saints by the Church, and by the Pagans to their false divinities; and lest the Pagans might thence seize a handle, however unfair, of retorting upon them that custom of the Church. " Had a member of the Anglican Church thus spoken of the Fathers, and thus pleaded in their name guilty of subterfuge and duplicity, he would have been immediately charged with irreverence and wanton insult, and that with good reason. These sentiments of the Cardinal are in p. 982 of the Paris edition of 1620. ] {192}

 * * * * *

PART II. 

CHAPTER I. 

STATE OF WORSHIP AT THE TIME OF THE REFORMATION. 

One of the points proposed for our inquiry was the state of religiousworship, with reference to the invocation of saints, at the timeimmediately preceding the reformation. Very far from entertaining a wishto fasten upon the Church of Rome now, what then deformed religion amongus, in any department where that Church has practically reformed herservices, I would most thankfully have found her ritual in a morepurified state than it is. My more especial object in referring to thisperiod is twofold: first, to show, that consistently with Catholic andprimitive principles, the Catholic Christians of England ought not tohave continued to participate in the worship which at that timeprevailed in our country; and, secondly, by that example both toillustrate the great danger of allowing ourselves to countenance thevery first stages of superstition, and also to impress upon our mindsthe duty of checking in its germ any the least deviation from theprimitive principles of faith and worship; convinced that by the generaltendency of human nature, one wrong step will, though imperceptibly, yetalmost inevitably lead to another; and that only whilst we adhere withuncompromising steadiness {193} to the Scripture as our foundation, andto the primitive Church, under God, as a guide, can we be saved from thedanger of making shipwreck of our faith. 

On this branch of our subject I propose to do no more than to lay beforemy readers the witness borne to the state of religion in England at thattime, by two works, which have been in an especial manner forced upon mynotice. Many other testimonies of a similar tendency might readily beadduced; but these will probably appear sufficient for the purposesabove mentioned; and to dwell longer than is necessary on this pointwould be neither pleasant nor profitable. 

 * * * * *

SECTION I. 

The first book to which I shall refer is called The Hours of the mostblessed Virgin Mary, according to the legitimate use of the Church ofSalisbury. This book was printed in Paris in the year 1526. The prayersin this volume relate chiefly to the Virgin: and I should, under othercircumstances, have reserved all allusion to it for our separate inquiryinto the faith and practice of the Church of Rome with regard to her. But its historical position and general character seemed to recommendour reference to it here. Without anticipating, therefore, the facts orthe arguments, which will hereafter be submitted to the reader'sconsideration on the worship of the Virgin, I refer to this work nowsolely as illustrative of the lamentable state of superstition whichthree centuries ago overran our country. 

The volume abounds with forms of prayer to the Virgin, many of themprefaced by extraordinary notifications of indulgences promised to thosewho duly utter {194} the prayers. These indulgences are granted by Popesand by Bishops; some on their own mere motion, others at the request ofinfluential persons. They guarantee remission of punishment fordifferent spaces of time, varying from forty days to ninety thousandyears; they undertake to secure freedom from hell; they promise pardonfor deadly sins, and for venial sins to the same person for the sameact; they assure to those who comply with their directions a change ofthe pain of eternal damnation into the pain of purgatory, and the painof purgatory into a free and full pardon. 

It may be said that the Church of Rome is not responsible for all thesethings. But we need not tarry here to discuss the question how far itwas then competent for a church or nation to have any service-book ormanual of devotion for the faithful, without first obtaining the papalsanction. For clear it is beyond all question, that such frightfulcorruptions as these, of which we are now to give instances, were spreadthroughout the land; that such was the religion then imposed on thepeople of England; and it was from such dreadful enormities, that ourReformation, to whatever secondary cause that reformation is to beattributed--by the providence of Almighty God rescued us. No one lamentsmore than I do, the extremes into which many opponents of papal Romehave allowed themselves to run; but no one can feel a more anxiousdesire than myself to preserve our Church and people from a return ofsuch spiritual degradation and wretchedness; and to keep far from us themost distant approaches of such lamentable and ensnaring superstitions. In this feeling moreover I am assured that I am joined by many of themost respected and influential members of the Roman Catholic Churchamong us. {195} Still what has been may be; and it is the bounden dutyof all members of Christ's Catholic Church, to whatever branch of itthey belong, to join in guarding his sanctuary against such enemies tothe truth as it is in HIM. 

At the same time it would not be honest and candid in me, were I toabstain from urging those, who, with ourselves, deprecate theseexcesses, to carry their reflections further; and determine whether thespirit of the Gospel does not require a total rejection, even in itsless startling forms, of every departure from the principle of invokingGod alone; and of looking for acceptance with Him solely to themediation of his Son, without the intervention of any other merits. Aswe regard it, it is not a question of degree; it is a question ofprinciple: one degree may be less revolting to our sense of right thananother, but it is not on that account justifiable. 

The following specimens, a few selected from an overabundant supply, will justify the several particulars in the summary which I have abovegiven:

1. "The Right Reverend Father in God, Laurence[67], Bishop of Assaven, hath granted forty days of pardon to all them that devoutly say thisprayer in the worship of our blessed Lady, being penitent, and trulyconfessed of all their sins. Oratio, 'Gaude Virgo, Mater Christi, ' &c. Rejoice, Virgin, Mother of Christ. [Fol. 35. ]

 [Footnote 67: This was Laurence Child, who, by papal provision, was made Bishop of St. Asaph, June 18, 1382. He is called also Penitentiary to the Pope. Le Neve, p. 21. Beatson, vol. I. P. 115. ]

2. "To all them that be in the state of grace, that daily say devoutlythis prayer before our blessed Lady of Pity, she will show them herblessed visage, and warn them the day and the hour of death; and intheir last {196} end the angels of God shall yield their souls toheaven; and[68] he shall obtain five hundred years, and so many Lents ofpardon, granted by five holy fathers, Popes of Rome. [Fol. 38. ]

 [Footnote 68: The language in many of these passages is very imperfect; but I have thought it right to copy them verbatim. ]

3. "This prayer showed our Lady to a devout person, saying, that thisgolden prayer is the most sweetest and acceptablest to me: and in herappearing she had this salutation and prayer written with letters ofgold in her breast, 'Ave Rosa sine spinis'--Hail Rose without thorns. [Fol. 41. ]

4. "Our holy Father, Sixtus the fourth, pope, hath granted to all themthat devoutly say this prayer before the image of our Lady the sum ofXI. M. [eleven thousand] years of pardon. 'Ave Sanctissima Maria, MaterDei, Regina Coeli, ' &c. Hail most holy Mary, Mother of God, Queen ofHeaven. [Fol. 42. ]

5. "Our holy Father, Pope Sixtus, hath granted at the instance of thehighmost and excellent Princess Elizabeth, late Queen of England, andwife to our sovereign liege Lord, King Henry the Seventh, (God havemercy on her sweet soul, and on all Christian souls, ) that every day inthe morning, after three tollings of the Ave bell, say three times thewhole salutation of our Lady Ave Maria gratia; that is to say, at 6 theclock in the morning 3 Ave Maria, at 12 the clock at noon 3 Ave M. , andat 6 the clock at even, for every time so doing is granted of theSPIRITUAL TREASURE OF HOLY CHURCH 300 days of pardon totiens quotiens;and also our holy father, the Archbishop of Canterbury and York, withother nine Bishops of this realm, have {197} granted 3 times in the day40 days of pardon to all them that be in the state of grace able toreceive pardon: the which begun the 26th day of March, Anno MCCCCXCII. Anno Henrici VII. [69] And the sum of the indulgence and pardon for everyAve Maria VIII hondred days an LX totiens quotiens, this prayer shall besaid at the tolling of the Ave Bell, 'Suscipe, ' &c. Receive the word, OVirgin Mary, which was sent to thee from the Lord by an angel. Hail, Mary, full of grace: the Lord with thee, &c. Say this 3 times, &c. [Fol. 42. ]

 [Footnote 69: Henry VII. Began to reign in 1485. ]

6. "This prayer was showed to St. Bernard by the messenger of God, saying, that as gold is the most precious of all other metals, soexceedeth this prayer all other prayers, and who that devoutly sayeth itshall have a singular reward of our blessed Lady, and her sweet SonJesus. 'Ave, ' &c. Hail, Mary, most humble handmaid of the Trinity, &c. Hail, Mary, most prompt Comforter of the living and the dead. Be thouwith me in all my tribulations and distresses with maternal pity, and atthe hour of my death take my soul, and offer it to thy most beloved SonJesus, with all them who have commended themselves to our prayers. [Fol. 46. ]

7. "Our holy father, the Pope Bonifacius, hath granted to all them thatdevoutly say this lamentable contemplation of our blessed Lady, standingunder the Cross weeping, and having compassion with her sweet Son Jesus, 7 years of pardon and forty Lents, and also Pope John the 22 hathgranted three hondred days of pardon. 'Stabat Mater dolorosa. ' [Fol. 47. ]

8. "To all them that before this image of Pity devoutly say 5 Pat. Nos. , and 5 Aves, and a Credo, piteously beholding these arms of Christ'spassion, are {198} granted XXXII. M. VII hondred, and LV (32755) years ofpardon; and Sixtus the 4th, Pope of Rome hath made the 4 and the 5prayer, and hath doubled his aforesaid pardon. [Fol. 54. ]

9. "Our holy Father the Pope John 22 hath granted to all them thatdevoutly say this prayer, after the elevation of our Lord Jesu Christ, 3000 days of pardon for deadly sins. [Fol. 58. ]

10. "This prayer was showed to Saint Augustine by revelation of the HolyGhost, and who that devoutly say this prayer, or hear read, or bearethabout them, shall not perish in fire or water, nother in battle orjudgment, and he shall not die of sudden death, and no venom shallpoison him that day, and what he asketh of God he shall obtain if it beto the salvation of his soul; and when thy soul shall depart from thybody it shall not enter hell. " This prayer ends with three invocationsof the Cross, thus: "O Cross of Christ [cross] save us, O Cross ofChrist [cross] protect us, O Cross of Christ [cross] defend us. In thename of the [cross] Father, [cross] Son, and Holy [cross] Ghost. Amen. "[Fol. 62. ]

11. "Our holy Father Pope Innocent III. Hath granted to all them thatsay these III prayers following devoutly, remission of all their sinsconfessed and contrite. [Fol. 63. ]

12. "These 3 prayers be written in the Chapel of the Holy Cross, inRome, otherwise called Sacellum Sanctæ Crucis septem Romanorum; who thatdevoutly say them shall obtain X. C. M. [ninety thousand] years of pardonfor deadly sins granted of our holy Father, John 22, Pope of Rome. [Fol. 66. ]

13. "Who that devoutly beholdeth these arms of {199} our Lord JesusChrist, shall obtain six thousand years of pardon of our holy FatherSaint Peter, the first pope of Rome, and of XXX [thirty] other popes ofthe Church of Rome, successors after him; and our holy Father, Pope John22, hath granted unto all them very contrite and truly confessed, thatsay these devout prayers following in the commemoration of the bitterpassion of our Lord Jesus Christ, 3000 years of pardon for DEADLY SINS, and other 3000 for venial sins. " [Fol. 68. ]

I will only add one more instance. The following announcementaccompanies a prayer of St. Bernard: "Who that devoutly with a contriteheart daily say this orison, if he be that day in a state of eternaldamnation, then this eternal pain shall be changed him in temporal painof purgatory; then if he hath deserved the pain of purgatory it shall beforgotten and forgiven through the infinite mercy of God. "

It is indeed very melancholy to reflect that our country has witnessedthe time, when the bread of life had been taken from the children, andsuch husks as these substituted in its stead. Accredited ministers ofthe Roman Catholic Church have lately assured us that the pardons andindulgences granted now, relate only to the remission of the penancesimposed by the Church in this life, and presume not to interfere withthe province of the Most High in the rewards and punishments of thenext. But, I repeat it, what has been in former days may be again; andwhenever Christians depart from the doctrine and practice of prayer toGod alone, through Christ alone, a door is opened to superstitions andabuses of every kind; and we cannot too anxiously and too jealouslyguard and fence about, with all our power and skill, the fundamentalprinciple, one God and one Mediator. {200}

 * * * * *

SECTION II. --SERVICE OF THOMAS BECKET, ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF HISMARTYRDOM, DEC. 29. 

The other instance by which I propose to illustrate the state ofreligion in England before the reformation, is the service of ThomasBecket, Archbishop of Canterbury, a canonized saint and martyr of theChurch of Rome. The interest attaching to so remarkable a period inecclesiastical history, and to an event so intimately interwoven withthe former state of our native land, appears to justify the introductionof the entire service, rather than extracts from it, in this place. Whilst it bears throughout immediately on the subject of our presentinquiry, it supplies us at the same time with the strong viewsentertained by the authors of the service, on points which gave rise togreat and repeated discussion, not only in England, but in various partsalso of continental Europe, with regard to the moral and spiritualmerits or demerits of Becket, as a subject of the realm and a Christianminister. It is, moreover, only by becoming familiar in all theirdetails with some such remains of past times, that we can form anyadequate idea of the great and deplorable extent to which the legendshad banished the reading and expounding of Holy Scriptures from ourchurches; and also how much the praises of mortal man had encroachedupon those hours of public worship, which should be devoted tomeditations on our Maker, Redeemer, and Sanctifier; to the exclusivepraises of his holy name; and to supplications {201} to Him alone forblessings at his hand, and for his mercy through Christ. 

There is much obscurity in the few first paragraphs. The historical orbiographical part begins at Lesson the First, and continues throughout, only interspersed with canticles in general referring to the incidentsin the narrative preceding each. 

 * * * * *

THE SERVICE OF THOMAS BECKET[70]. 

 [Footnote 70: The copies which I have chiefly consulted for the purposes of the present inquiry, are two large folio manuscripts, in good preservation, No. 1512 and No. 2785 of the Harleian MSS. In the British Museum. The service commences about the 49th page, B. Of No. 2785. This MS. Is considered to be of a date somewhere about 1430. The first parts of the service are preserved also in a Breviary printed in Paris in 1556, with some variations and omissions. There are various other copies in the British Museum, as well printed as in manuscript. ]

Let them without change of vestments and without tapers in their hands, proceed to the altar of St. Thomas the Martyr, chanting the requiem, thechanter beginning, _Req. _ The grain lies buried beneath the straw; The just man is slain by the spear of the wicked; The guardian of the vine falls in the vineyard, The chieftain in the camp, the husbandman in the threshing-floor. 

Then the prose is said by all who choose, in surplices before the altar. 

 "Let the Shepherd sound his trumpet of horn. "

Let the choir respond to the chant of the prose after every verse, uponthe letter [super litteram]. {202}

 That the vineyard of Christ might be free, Which he assumed under a robe of flesh, He liberated it by the purple cross. The adversary, the erring sheep, Becomes bloodstained by the slaughter of the shepherd. The marble pavements of Christ Are wetted, ruddy with sacred gore; The martyr presented with the laurel of life. Like a grain cleansed from the straw, Is translated to the divine garners. 

But whilst the prose is being sung, let the priest incense the altar, and then the image of the blessed Thomas the Martyr; and afterwardsshall be said with an humble voice: Pray for us, Blessed Thomas. 

_The Prayer[71]. _ O God for whose Church the glorious {203} high-priestand martyr Thomas fell beneath the swords of the wicked, grant, webeseech thee, that all who implore his aid may obtain the salutaryeffect of their petition, through Christ. 

 [Footnote 71: This Collect is still preserved in the Roman ritual, and is offered on the anniversary of Becket's death. In a very ancient pontifical, preserved in the chapter-house of Bangor, and which belonged to Anianus, who was Bishop of that see (1268), among the "Proper Benedictions for the circuit of the year, " are two relating to Thomas Becket; one on the anniversary of his death, the other on the day of his translation. The former is couched in these words: "O God, who hast not without reason mingled the birthday of the glorious high-priest, Thomas, with the joys of thy nativity, by the intervention of his merits" (ipsius mentis intervenientibus), "make these thy servants venerate thy majesty with the reverence of due honour. Amen. And as he, according to the rule of a good shepherd, gave his life for his sheep, so grant thou to thy faithful ones, to fear no tyrannical madness to the prejudice of Catholic truth. Amen. We ask that they, by his example, for obedience to the holy laws, may learn to despise persons, and by suffering manfully to triumph over tyrannical madness. Amen. " The latter runs thus: "May God, by whose pity the bodies of saints rest in the sabbath of peace, turn your hearts to the desire of the resurrection to come. Amen. And may he who orders us to bury with honour due the members of the saints whose death is precious, by the merits of the glorious martyr, Thomas, vouchsafe to raise you from the dust of vanity. Amen. Where at length by the power of his benediction ye may be clothed with doubled festive robes of body and soul. Amen. "]

 The shepherd slain in the midst of the flock, Purchased peace at the price of his blood. O joyous grief, in mournful gladness! The flock breathes when the shepherd is dead; The mother wailing, sings for joy in her son, Because he lives under the sword a conqueror. The solemnities of Thomas the Martyr are come. Let the Virgin Mother, the Church, rejoice; Thomas being raised to the highest priesthood, Is suddenly changed into another man. A monk, under [the garb of?] a clerk, secretly clothed with haircloth, More strong than the flesh subdues the attempts of the flesh; Whilst the tiller of the Lord's field pulls up the thistles, And drives away and banishes the foxes from the vineyard. 

_The First Lesson. _

Dearest Brethren, celebrating now the birth-day of the martyr Thomas, because we have not power to recount his whole life and conversation, let our brief discourse run through the manner and cause of his passion. The blessed Thomas, therefore, as in the office of Chancellor, orArchdeacon, he proved incomparably strenuous {204} in the conduct ofaffairs, so after he had undertaken the office of pastor, he becamedevoted to God beyond man's estimation. For, when consecrated, hesuddenly is changed into another man: he secretly put on the hair shirt, and wore also hair drawers down to the knee. And under the respectableappearance of the clerical garb, concealing the monk's dress, heentirely compelled the flesh to obey the spirit; studying by theexercise of every virtue without intermission to please God. Knowing, therefore, that he was placed a husbandman in the field of the Lord, ashepherd in the fold, he carefully discharged the ministry entrusted tohim. The rights and dignities of the Church, which the public authorityhad usurped, he deemed it right to restore, and to recall to their properstate. Whence a grave question on the ecclesiastical law and the customsof the realm, having arisen between him and the king of the English, acouncil being convened, those customs were proposed which the kingpertinaciously required to be confirmed by the signatures as well of thearchbishop as of his suffragans. The archbishop with constancy refused, asserting that in them was manifest the subversion of the freedom of theChurch. He was in consequence treated with immense insults, oppressedwith severe losses, and provoked with innumerable injuries. At length, being threatened with death, (because the case of the Church had not yetbecome fully known, and the persecution seemed to be personal, ) hedetermined that he ought to give place to malice. Being driven, therefore, into exile, he was honourably received by our lord the popeAlexander[72] at Senon, and recommended {205} with especial care to theMonastery of Pontinea (Pontigny). 

 [Footnote 72: Pope Alexander III. Was at this time residing as a refugee at Sens, having been driven from Italy a few years before by Frederick Barbarossa. ]

 Malice, bent on the punishment of Thomas, Condemns to banishment the race of Thomas. The whole family goes forth together. No order, sex, age, or condition Here enjoys any privilege. 

_Lesson the Second. _

Meanwhile in England all the revenues of the archbishop are confiscated, his estates are laid waste, his possessions are plundered, and by theinvention of a new kind of punishment, the whole kin of Thomas isproscribed together. For all his friends or acquaintance, or whoever wasconnected with him, by whatever title, without distinction of state orfortune, dignity or rank, age or sex, were alike exiled. For as well theold and decrepit, as infants in the cradle and women lying inchildbirth, were driven into banishment; whilst as many as had reachedthe years of discretion were compelled to swear upon the holy[Gospels][73] that immediately on crossing the sea they would presentthemselves to the Archbishop of Canterbury; in order that being sooftentimes pierced even by the sword of sympathy, he would bend hisstrength of mind to the king's pleasure. But the man of God, putting hishand to deeds of fortitude, with constancy bore exile, reproaches, insults, the proscription of parents and friends, for the name ofChrist; he was never, by any injury, at all broken or changed. For sogreat was the firmness of this confessor of Christ, that he seemed toteach all his fellow exiles, that every soil is the brave man's country. 

 [Footnote 73: Tactis sacrosanctis. It may mean reliques, or other sacred things. ] {206}

 Thomas put his hands to deeds of fortitude, He despised losses, he despised reproaches, No injury breaks down Thomas: The firmness of Thomas exclaimed to all, "Every soil is the brave man's country. "

_Third Lesson. _

The king therefore hearing of his immoveable constancy, having directedcommendatory letters by some abbots of the Cistertian order to theGeneral Chapter, caused him to be driven from Pontinea. But the blessedThomas fearing that, by occasion of his right, injury would befal thesaints, retired of his own accord. Yet before he set out from thence hewas comforted by a divine revelation: a declaration being made to himfrom heaven, that he should return to his Church with glory, and by thepalm of martyrdom depart to the Lord. When he was disturbed and sentfrom his retreat at Pontinea, Louis, the most Christian king of theFrench, received him with the greatest honour, and supported him mostcourteously till peace was restored. But even he too was often, thoughin vain, urged not to show any grace of kindness towards a traitor tothe king of England. The hand of fury proceeded further, and a crueltydreadful for pious ears to hear. For whereas the Catholic Church prayseven for heretics, and schismatics, and faithless Jews, it was forbiddenthat any one should assist him by the supplications of prayer. Exiled, then, for six continuous years, afflicted with varied and unnumberedinjuries, and like a living stone squared by various cuttings andpressures for the building of the heavenly edifice, the more he wasthrust at that he might fall, the more firm and immoveable was heenabled to stand. {207} For neither could gold so carefully tried beburned away, nor a house, founded on a firm rock, be torn down. Neitherdoes he suffer the wolves to rage against the lambs, nor the vineyard topass into a garden of herbs. 

 The best of men, holy, and renowned is banished, Lest the dignity of the Church should yield to the unworthy. The estates of the exiled man are the spoil of the malignant, But when placed in the fire, the fire burns him not. 

_Fourth Lesson. _

At length by the exertions, as well of the aforesaid pontiff as of theking of the French, many days were appointed for re-establishing peace:and because the servant of God would not accept of peace, unless withsafety to the honour of God, and the character of the Church, theydeparted in discord from each other. At length the supreme Pontiff, pitying the desolation of the Anglican Church, with difficulty at thelast extorted by threatening measures, that peace should be restored tothe Church. The realms indeed rejoiced, that the King had beenreconciled to the Archbishop, whilst some believed that the affair wascarried on in good faith, and others formed different conjectures. Consequently in the seventh year of his exile the noble pastor returnedinto England, that he might either rescue the sheep of Christ from thejaws of the wolves, or sacrifice himself for the flock intrusted to hiscare. He is received by the clergy and the people with incalculable joy;all shedding tears, and saying, Blessed is he who cometh in the name ofthe Lord. But after a few days he was again afflicted by losses andmiseries beyond measure and number. Whoever offered to him, {208} or toany one connected with him, a cheerful countenance was reckoned a publicenemy. In all these things his mind was unbroken; but his hand was stillstretched out for the liberation of the Church. For this he incessantlysighed; for this he persevered in watchings, fastings, and prayers; toobtain this he ardently desired to sacrifice himself. 

 From the greatest joy of affairs, The greatest wailing is in the Church, For the absence of so great a patron. But when the miracles return, Joy to the people returns. The crowd of sick flock together, And obtain the grace of benefits. 

_Fifth Lesson. _

Now on the fifth day after the birth-day of our Lord, four persons ofthe palace came to Canterbury, men indeed of high birth, but famous fortheir wicked deeds; and having entered, they attack the archbishop withreproachful words, provoke him with insults, and at length assail himwith threats. The man of God modestly answered, to every thing, whateverreason required, adding that many injuries had been inflicted upon himand the Church of God, since the re-establishment of peace, and therewas no one to correct what was wrong; that he neither could nor woulddissemble thereafter, so as not to exercise the duties of his function. The men, foolish in heart, were disturbed by this, and having loudlygiven utterance to their iniquity they forthwith went out. On theirretiring, the prelate proceeded to the Church, to offer the eveningpraises to Christ. The mail-clad satellites of Satan followed him frombehind with drawn swords, a {209} large band of armed men accompanyingthem. On the monks barring the entrance to the Church, the priest ofGod, destined soon to become a victim of Christ, running up re-openedthe door to the enemy; "For, " said he, "a Church must not be barricadedlike a castle. " As they burst in, and some shouted with a voice ofphrenzy, "Where is the traitor?" others, "Where is the Archbishop?" thefearless confessor of Christ went to meet them. When they pressed on tomurder him, he said, "For myself I cheerfully meet death for the Churchof God; but on the part of God I charge you to do no hurt to any ofmine"--imitating Christ in his passion, when he said, "If ye seek me, let these go their way. " Then rush the ravening wolves on the piousshepherd, degenerate sons on their own father, cruel lictors on thevictim of Christ, and with fatal swords cut off the consecrated crown ofhis head; and hurling down to the ground the Christ [the anointed] ofthe Lord, in savage manner, horrible to be said, scattered the brainswith the blood over the pavement. 

 Thus does the straw press down the grain of corn; Thus is slain the guard of the vineyard in the vineyard; Thus the general in the camp, the shepherd in the fold, the husbandman in the threshing-floor. Thus the just, slain by the unjust, has changed his house of clay for a heavenly palace. Rachel, weeping, now cease thou to mourn That the flower of the world is bruised by the world. When the slain Thomas is borne to his funeral, A new Abel succeeds to the old. The voice of blood, the voice of his scattered brains, Fills heaven with a marvellous cry. {210}

_Sixth Lesson. _

But the last words of the martyr, which from the confused clamour couldscarcely be distinguished, according to the testimony of those who stoodnear, were these, --"To God, and the blessed Mary, and Saint Dionysius, and the holy patrons of this Church, I commend myself and the cause ofthe Church[74]. " Moreover, in all the torments which this unvanquishedchampion of God endured, he sent forth no cry, he uttered no groan, heopposed neither his arm nor his garment to the man who struck him, butheld his head, which he had bent towards the swords, unmoved till theconsummation came; prostrated as if for prayer, he fell asleep in theLord. The perpetrators of the crime, returning into the palace of theholy prelate, that they might make the passion of the servant more fullyresemble the passion of his Lord, divided among them his garments, thegold and silver and precious vessels, choice horses, and whatever ofvalue they could find, allotting what each should take. These thingstherefore the soldiers did. Who, without weeping, can relate the rest?So great was the sorrow of all, so great the laments of each, that youwould think the prophecy were a second time fulfilled, "A voice is heardin Rama, lamentation and great mourning. " Nevertheless the divine mercy, when temptation was multiplied, made a way to escape; and by certainvisions, giving as it were a prelude to the future miracles, [declaredthat] the martyr was thereafter to be glorified by wonders, that joywould return after sorrow, {211} and a crowd of sick would obtain thegrace of benefits. 

 [Footnote 74: I have already suggested a comparison between this prayer and the commendatory prayer of the Martyr Polycarp, page 92. ]

 O Christ Jesus[75], BY THE WOUNDS OF THOMAS, Loosen the sins which bind us; Lest the enemy, the world, or the works of the flesh. Bear us captive to hell. By[76] THEE, O Thomas ... Let the right hand of God embrace us. 

 The satellites of Satan rushing into the temple Perpetrate an unexampled, unheard-of, crime. Thomas proceeds to meet their drawn swords: He yields not to threats, to swords, nor even to death. 

 Happy place! Happy Church, In which the memory of Thomas lives! Happy the land which gave the prelate! Happy the land which supported him in exile! Happy Father! succour us miserable, That we may be happy, and joined with those above!

 [Footnote 75:

 Christe Jesu per Thomæ vulnera, Quæ nos ligant relaxa scelera Ne captivos ferant ad infera Hostis, mundus, vel carnis opera. ]

 [Footnote 76:

 Per te, Thoma, post lævæ munera Amplexetur nos Dei dextera. ]

_Seventh Lesson. _

Jesus said unto his disciples, I am the good shepherd. The good shepherdlayeth down his life for the sheep. 

THE HOMILY OF S. GREGORY, POPE. 

Ye have heard, most dear brethren, from the reading of the Gospel, yourinstruction; ye have heard also {212} your danger. For behold! he who isnot from any gift happening to him, but who is essentially good, says, Iam the good shepherd; and he adds the character of the same goodness, which we may imitate, saying, The good shepherd layeth down his life forhis sheep. He did what he taught; he showed what he commanded. The goodshepherd laid down his life for his sheep; that in our sacrament hemight change his body and blood, and satisfy, by the nourishment of hisflesh, the sheep which he had redeemed. Here is shown to us the way, concerning the contempt of death, which we should follow; the characteris placed before us to which we should conform. [In the first place, weshould of our pity sacrifice our external good for his sheep; and atlast, if it be necessary, give up our own life for the same sheep. Fromthat smallest point we proceed to this last and greater. But since thesoul by which we live is incomparably better than the earthly substancewhich we outwardly possess, who would not give for the sheep hissubstance, when he would give his life for them? And there are some who, whilst they love their earthly substance more than the sheep, deservedlylose the name of shepherd: of whom it is immediately added, But thehireling who is not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth thewolf coming, and leaveth the sheep and fleeth. He is called not ashepherd, but a hireling, who feeds the Lord's sheep not for inwardlove, but with a view to temporal wages. He is a mercenary who seeksindeed the place of shepherd, but seeks not the gain of souls. ]

(The sentences between brackets are not in MS. No. 1512. )

 To Thomas all things yield and are obedient: Plagues, diseases, death, and devils, {213} Fire, air, land, and seas. Thomas filled the world with glory. The world offers obeisance to Thomas[77]. 

 [Footnote 77:

 Thomæ cedunt et parent omnia: Pestes, morbi, mors, et dæmonia, Ignis, aer, tellus, et maria. Thomas mundum replevit gloria. Thomæ mundus præstat obsequia. ]

_Eighth Lesson. _

In good truth, the holy Thomas, the precious champion of God, was to beworthily glorified. For if the cause, yea, forasmuch as the cause makesthe martyr, did ever a title of holy martyrs exist more glorious?Contending for the Church, in the Church he suffered; in a holy place, at the holy time of the Lord's nativity, in the midst of hisfellow-priests and the companies of the religious: since in the agony ofthe prelate all the circumstances seemed so to concur, as perpetually toillustrate the title of the sufferer, and reveal the wickedness of hispersecutors, and stain their name with never-ending infamy. But so didthe divine vengeance rage against the persecutors of the martyr, that ina short time, being carried away from the midst, they nowhere appeared. And some, without confession, or the viaticum, were suddenly snatchedaway; others tearing piecemeal their own fingers or tongues; otherspining with hunger, and corrupting in their whole body, and racked withunheard-of tortures before their death, and broken up by paralysis;others bereft of their intellects; others expiring with madness;--leftmanifest proofs that they were suffering the penalty of unjustpersecution and premeditated murder. Let, therefore, the Virgin Mother, the Church, rejoice that the new martyr has borne away the triumph overthe {214} enemies. Let her rejoice that a new Zacharias has been for herfreedom sacrificed in the temple. Let her rejoice that a new Abel'sblood hath cried unto God for her against the men of blood. For thevoice of his blood shed, the-voice of his brain scattered by the swordsof those deadly satellites, hath filled heaven at once and the worldwith its far-famed cry. 

 Thomas shines with new miracles; He adorns with sight those who had lost their eyes; He cleanses those who were stained with the spots of leprosy;

 He looses those that were bound with the bonds of death. 

_Ninth Lesson. _

For at the cry of this blood the earth was moved and trembled. Nay, moreover, the powers of the heavens were moved; so that, as if for theavenging of innocent blood, nation rose against nation, and kingdomagainst kingdom; nay, a kingdom was divided against itself, and terrorsfrom heaven and great signs took place. Yet, from the first period ofhis martyrdom, the martyr began to shine forth with miracles, restoringsight to the blind, walking to the lame, hearing to the deaf, languageto the dumb. Afterwards, cleansing the lepers, making the paralyticsound, healing the dropsy, and all kinds of incurable diseases;restoring the dead to life; in a wonderful manner commanding the devilsand all the elements: he also put forth his hand to unwonted andunheard-of signs of his own power; for persons deprived of their eyesmerited by his merits to obtain new members. But some {215} who presumedto disparage his miracles, struck on a sudden, were compelled to publishthem even unwillingly. At length, against all his enemies the martyr sofar prevailed, that almost every day you might see that to be repeatedin the servant which is read of the Only-begotten: "They who spoke evilof thee shall come unto thee, and adore the traces of thy feet. " Now thecelebrated champion and martyr of God, Thomas, suffered in the year fromthe incarnation of the Lord, according to Dionysius, 1171, on the fourthof the kalends of January, on the third day of the week, about theeleventh hour, that the birth-day of the Lord might be for labour, andhis for rest; to which rest the same our God and Lord Jesus Christvouchsafe to bring us; who with the Father and the Holy Spirit livethand reigneth God, for ever and ever. Amen. 

 O good Jesus, BY THE MERITS OF THOMAS, Forgive us our debts; Visit the house, the gate, the grave; And raise us from the threefold death. What has been lost by act, in mind, or use, Restore with thy wonted pity. Pray for us, O blessed Thomas. 

N. B. This appears to be the end of the first service in honour of ThomasBecket[78]; and at this point {216} another service seems to commence, with a kind of new heading, "In the commemoration of St. Thomas[79]. "

 [Footnote 78: All the Lessons between this passage and "In Lauds, " are wanting in MS. 1512. ]

 [Footnote 79: Another Feast was kept in honour of his translation, on the 7th of July. ]

_The First Lesson. _

When Archbishop Theobald, of happy memory, in a good old age, slept withhis fathers, Thomas, archdeacon of the Church of Canterbury, is solemnlychosen, in the name of the Holy Trinity, to be archbishop and primate ofall England, and afterwards is consecrated. Then pious minds entertainedfirm hope and confidence in the Lord[80]. 

 [Footnote 80: There is much of obscurity in the next paragraph. Reference seems to be made to his twofold character of a regular and a secular clergyman, and to his improved state morally. The Latin is this: "Erat autem piis mentibus spes firma et fiducia in Domino, quod idem consecratus utriusque hominis, habitu mutato moribus melioratus præsideret. Probatissimum siquidem tenebatur sedem illam sedem sanctorum esse sanctam recipere aut facere, vel citius et facile indignum abicere, quod et in beato Thoma Martyre misericorditer impletum est. "]

_Second Lesson. _

Therefore the chosen prelate of God being elected, and anointed with thesanctifying of the sacred oil, immediately obtained a most hallowedthing, and was filled with manifold grace of the Holy Spirit. Forwalking in newness of life, a new man, he was changed into another man, all things belonging to whom were changed for the better; and with sogreat grace did he consecrate the commencement of his bishopric, thatclothing himself with a monk's form secretly, he fulfilled the work andmerit of a monk. {217}

_Third Lesson. _

But he, who after the example of the Baptist, with constancy hadconceived in a perfect heart that the zeal of righteousness should bepurified, studied also to imitate him in the garb of penitence. Forcasting off the fine linen which hitherto he had been accustomed to use, whilst the soft delicacies of kings pleased him, he was clothed on hisnaked body with a most rough hair shirt. He added, moreover, hairdrawers, that he might the more effectually mortify the flesh, and makethe spirit live. But these, as also the other exercises of his spirituallife, very few indeed being aware of it, he removed from the eyes andknowledge of men by superadding other garments, because he sought glorynot from man, but from God. Even then the man of virtue entering uponthe justifications of God, began to be more complete in abstinence, morefrequent in watching, longer in prayer, more anxious in preaching. Thepastoral office intrusted to him by God, he executed with so greatdiligence, as to suffer the rights neither of the clergy nor of theChurch to be in any degree curtailed. 

 * * * * *

There seems here also to be another commencement, for the next lesson iscalled the First. 

_Lesson First. _

So large a grace of compunction was he wont to possess, between thesecrets of prayer or the solemnities of masses, that with eyes trainedto weeping he would be wholly dissolved in tears; and in the office{218} of the altar his appearance was as though he was witnessing theLord's passion in the flesh. Knowing also that mercy softens justice, and that pity hath the promise of the life that now is, and of thatwhich is to come, therefore towards the poor and the afflicted did hebear the bowels of mercy piteously, and was anxious to reach the poor bythe blessings of his alms. 

_Lesson Second. _

The more humble of those whom a character for religion raised high, hemade his acquaintance and intimates; and that he might learn from themto hunger and thirst after righteousness, he enjoyed more frequentlytheir secret conversation. Towards such servants and soldiers of Christthis merciful man preferred to be liberal and abundant in food andraiment, he who determined in himself to be moderate and sparing. Forwhat would he deny to Christ, who for Christ was about to shed hisblood? He who owed his coat or cloak to one who asked it, desired toadd, moreover, his own flesh. For he knew that the man would neverfreely give his own flesh, who showed himself greedy of any temporalthing. 

_Lesson Third. _

Hitherto the merciful Lord, who maketh poor and enricheth, bringeth lowand lifteth up, wished to load his servant with riches, and exalt himwith honours; and afterwards he was pleased to try him with adversity. By trying whether he loved Him, He proved it the more certainly; but Hesupplied grace more abundantly. For with the temptation He made a way toescape, that he might be able to bear it. Therefore, the envious enemy, considering that the new prelate {219} and the new man was flourishingwith so manifold a grace of virtues, devised to send a burning blight oftemptation, which might suffocate the germ of his merits already putforth. Nor was there any delay. He who severs a man from his God, andone friend from his neighbour, sowed irreconcileable quarrels betweenthe king and the archbishop. 

Pray for us, O blessed Thomas. 

_In Lauds. _

 A grain falls and gives birth to an abundance of corn. The alabaster-box is broken, and the odour of the ointment is powerful. The whole world vies in love to the martyr, Whose wonderful signs strike all with astonishment. The water for Thomas five times changing colour, Once was turned into milk, four times into blood. At the shrine[81] of Thomas four times the light came down, And to the glory of the saint kindled the wax-tapers. DO THOU BY THE BLOOD OF THOMAS, WHICH HE[82] SHED FOR THEE; MAKE US, O CHRIST, ASCEND, Whither Thomas has ascended. 

 Extend[83] succour to us, O Thomas, Guide those who stand, {220} Raise up those who fall, Correct our morals, actions, and life;

 And guide us into the way of peace. 

 [Footnote 81: Ad Thomæ memoriam. ]

 [Footnote 82: Tu per Thomæ sanguinem quem pro te impendit, Fac nos, Christe, scandere, quo Thomas ascendit. ]

 [Footnote 83:

 Opem nobis, O Thoma, porrige, Rege stantes, jacentes erige, Mores, actus, et vitam corrige, Et in pacis nos viam dirige. ]

_Final Anthem. _

 Hail, O Thomas, the Rod of Justice;[84] The Brightness of the World; The Strength of the Church; The Love of the People; The Delight of the Clergy. Hail, glorious Guardian of the Flock; Save those who rejoice in thy glory. 

 [Footnote 84: Salve, Thomas, Virga Justitiæ, Mundi Jubar, Robur Ecclesiæ, Plebis Amor, Cleri Delicia. Salve Gregis Tutor egregie, Salva tuæ gaudentes gloriæ. ]

The end of the service of Thomas of Canterbury. 

 * * * * *

Now for a few moments only let us meditate on this service. I havealready referred to the lamentable practice of substituting biographicallegends for the word of God. And what is the tendency of this service?What impression was it likely to make, and to leave on minds of ordinarypowers and instruction? Must it not, of necessity, tend to withdraw themfrom contemplating Christ, and to fix their thoughts on the powers, theglory, the exaltation, the merits of a fellow-sinner? It will be said, that they will look beyond the martyr, and trace the blessings, hereenumerated, to Christ, as their primary cause, and will think of themerits of Thomas as efficacious only through the merits of theirSaviour; that in their invocation of Thomas they will implore him onlyto pray for them. But can this be so? Does not the ascription ofmiracles to him {221} and to his power; does not the very form ofenumerating those miracles tend much to exalt the servant to an equalitywith the Master?

Whilst Thomas by being thus, in words at least, presented to the peopleas working those miracles by his own power, (for there is throughout alamentable absence of immediate ascription of glory to God, ) is raisedto an equality with Christ our Lord; many passages in this service havethe tendency also of withdrawing the minds of the worshippers from animplicit and exclusive dependence on the merits of Christ alone, and oftempting them to admit the merits of Thomas to share at least withChrist in the work of grace and salvation. Let us place some texts ofScripture and some passages of this service side by side. 

[Transcriber's note: They are shown here one after the other. ]

_Scripture. _

But after that the kindness and love of God towards man appeared, not byworks of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy hesaved us. --Titus iii. 4, 5. 

He who spared not his own Son, but gave him up for us all, how shall henot with him also freely give us all things?--Rom. Viii. 32. 

The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin. --1 John i. 7. 

One Mediator. --1 Tim. Ii. 5. 

Who also maketh intercession for us. --Rom. Viii. 34. 

He ever liveth to make intercession for them. --Heb. Vii. 25. 

_Service of Thomas Becket. _

O Christ Jesus, by the wounds of Thomas loosen the sins which bind us. 

O blessed Jesus, BY THE MERITS OF THOMAS, forgive us our debts, raise usfrom the threefold death, and restore what has been lost with thyaccustomed pity. 

Do thou, O Christ, by the blood of Thomas, which he shed for thee, makeus ascend whither Thomas has ascended. 

Holy Thomas, pray for us. 

And if this service thus seems to mingle the merits of Christ, themerits of his blood and of his death, with {222} the merits of a mortalman, the immediate address to that mortal as the giver of good thingstemporal and spiritual, very awfully trespasses on that high, exclusive, and incommunicable prerogative of the one Lord God Omnipotent, which hisSpirit hath proclaimed solemnly and repeatedly, and which he has fencedaround against all invasion with so many warnings and denunciations. 

_Scripture. _ _Service of Becket_

1. O thou that hearest prayer, 1. For they sake, O Thomas, unto thee shall all flesh come. -- let the right hand of God embracePs. Lxv. [vulg. Lxiv. ] 2. Us. 

By prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requestsbe made known unto God. --Phil. Iv. 6. 

2. Lord, be thou my helper. -- 2. Send help to us, O Thomas;Ps. Xxx. [xxix. ] 10. 

3. Thou shalt guide me by thy 3. Guide thou those who stand;counsel. --Ps. Lxxiii. [lxxii. ] 24. 

He, The Holy Spirit, shall guideyou into all truth. --John xvi. 13. 

4. The Lord upholdeth all that 4. Raise up those who fall;fall, and raiseth up all those thatbe bowed down. --Psalm cxlv. [cxliv. ] 14. 

5. Create in me a clean heart, 5. Correct our morals, actionsO God. --Ps. Li. [l. ] 10. And life;

6. The steps of a good man are 6. And guide us into the wayordered by the Lord. Though of peace. He fall, he shall not be utterlycast down, for the Lord upholdethhim. --Ps. Xxxvii. [xxxvi. ]23. 

The day-spring from on highhath visited us, to guide our feetinto the way of peace. --Luke i. 78, 79. 

And then again, in celebrating the praises of a mortal {223} man, recourse is had to language which can fitly be used only in our hymnsand praises to the supreme Lord of our destinies, the eternal Creator, Redeemer, and Comforter, the only wise God our Saviour. 

_Address to Thomas. _ _Language of Scripture. _

1. Hail, Thomas, Rod of Justice! 1. There shall come a rod out of the stem of Jesse. Ye denied the Holy One, and the Just--Isaiah xi. 1. Acts iii. 14. 

2. The brightness of the world. 2. The brightness of his glory. I am the light of the world--Heb. I. 3. John viii. 12. 

3. The strength of the Church. 3. I can do all things through Christ, that strengthened me. Christ loved the Church, and gave himself for it. --Phil. Iv. 13. Eph. V. 25. 

4. The love of the people: the 4. Grace be with all them thatdelight of the Clergy. Love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. Delight thyself in the Lord. --Eph. Vi. 24. Ps. Xxxvii. 4. 

5. Hail, glorious Guardian of 5. Our Lord Jesus, that greatthe Flock. Save those who rejoice Shepherd of the sheep. Give ear, in thy glory. O Shepherd of Israel; come and save us. He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. --Heb. Xiii. 20. Psalm lxxx. [lxxix. ] 1. 1 Cor. I. 31. 

Can that worship become the disciples of the Gospel and the Cross, whichaddresses such prayers and such praises to the spirit of a mortal man?Every prayer, and every form of praise here used in honour of ThomasBecket, it would well become Christians to offer to the Giver of allgood, trusting solely and exclusively to the mediation of Christ Jesusour Lord for acceptance; and pleading-only the merits of his mostprecious blood. {224} And yet I am bound to confess, that in principle, in spirit, and in fact, I can find no substantial difference betweenthis service of Thomas of Canterbury, and the service which all incommunion with the Church of Rome are under an obligation to use even atthe present hour. 

This point remains next for our inquiry, and we will draw from thewell-head. I would, however, first suggest the application of a generaltest for ascertaining the real _bona-fide_ nature of these prayers andpraises. The test I would apply is, to try with the change only of thename, substituting the holiest name ever named in heaven or in earth forthe name of Thomas of Canterbury--whether these prayers and praisesshould not be offered to the Supreme Being alone through the atoningmerits of his Blessed Son; whether they are not exclusively appropriateto HIM. 

To (Thomas/God Almighty) all things bow and are obedient. 

Plagues, diseases, death, and devils, Fire, air, land, and sea. (Thomas/The Almighty) fills the world with glory. 

The world offers obeisance to (Thomas/Almighty God). 

(The Martyr Thomas/Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ) began to shineforth with miracles [John ii. 11]; restoring sight to the blind [Lukevii. 21]; walking to the lame; hearing to the deaf; speech to the dumb;cleansing to the lepers [Matt. Xi. 5]; making the paralytic sound [Matt. Iv. 24]; healing the dropsy [Luke xiv. 4]; and all kinds of incurablediseases [Luke iv. 40]; restoring the dead to {225} life [Luke viii. 43. 55]; in a wonderful manner commanding the devils [Matt. Viii. 16], andall the elements [Luke viii. 25]. He put forth his hand to unwonted andunheard-of signs of his own power [Mark ii. 12. John ix. 30]. 

Do thou, O Lord, by the blood of (Thomas/Christ) cause us to ascendwhither (Thomas/Christ) has ascended. (O Thomas/O God), send help to us. Guide those who stand; raise up those who fall; correct our morals, actions, and life; and guide us into the way of peace. 

Hail, (Thomas!/Jesus!) Rod of Justice, the Brightness of the world, theStrength of the Church, the Love of the people, the Delight of theClergy. Hail, Glorious Guardian of the flock! Save Thou those whodelight in Thy glory. 

 * * * * *

We shall apply this same test to many of the collects and prayers used, and of necessity to be used, because they are authorized and appointed, even at the present day, in the ministrations of the Church of Rome. Theimpiety in many of those instances is not couched in such startlinglanguage; but it is not the less real. God forbid that we should chargeour fellow-creatures with idolatry, who declare that they offer divineworship to the Supreme Being only; or that we should pronounce anyprofessed Christian to have cast off his {226} dependence on the meritsof Christ alone, who assures us that he looks for mercy only throughthose merits. But I know and feel, that according to the standard ofChristian truth, and of the pure worship of Almighty God, which theScriptures and primitive antiquity compel me to adopt, I should stain myown soul with the guilt of idolatry, and with the sin of relying onother merits than Christ's, were I myself to offer those prayers. 

That this service excited much disgust among the early reformers, welearn from various writers[85]. On the merits of the struggle betweenBecket and his king; on the question of Becket's moral and religiousworth, (a question long and often discussed among the exercises of themasters of Paris in the full assembly of the Sorbonne[86], ) or on themotives which influenced Henry the Eighth, I intend not to say one word:those points belong not to our present inquiry. It may not, however, bethought irrelevant here to quote a passage {227} from the ordinance ofthis latter monarch for erasing Becket's service out of the books, andhis name from the calendar of the saints. 

 [Footnote 85: See Mornay "De la Messe, " Saumur, 1604. P. 826. Becon, in his "New Year's Gift, " London, 1564, p. 183, thus speaks: "What saint at any time thought himself so pure, immaculate, and without all spot of sin, that he durst presume to die for us, and to avouch his death to be an oblation and sacrifice for our lives to God the Father, except peradventure we will admit for good payment these and such like blasphemies, which were wont full solemnly to be sung in the temples unto the great ignominy of the glorious name of God, and the dishonour of Christ's most precious blood. " Then quoting the lines from the service of Thomas Becket, on which we have above commented, he adds, "I will let pass many more which are easy to be searched and found out. " Becon preached and wrote in the reign of Henry VIII. And was then persecuted for his religion, as he was afterwards in the reign of Mary. ]

 [Footnote 86: We are told that forty-eight years after his death, the masters of Paris disputed whether Thomas was a condemned sinner, or admitted into heaven. ]

In Henry the Eighth's proclamation, dated Westminster, 16th November, inthe thirtieth year of his reign, printed by Bertholet, is the followingvery curious passage:--

 "ITEM, for as moche as it appereth now clerely, that Thomas Becket, sometyme Archbyshop of Canterburie, stubburnly to withstand the holsome lawes establyshed agaynste the enormities of the clergie, by the kynges highness mooste noble progenitour, kynge HENRY the Seconde, for the common welthe, reste, and tranquillitie of this realme, of his frowarde mynde fledde the realme into Fraunce, and to the bishop of Rome, mayntenour of those enormities, to procure the abrogation of the sayd lawes, whereby arose moch trouble in this said realme, and that his dethe, which they untruely called martyrdome, happened upon a reskewe by him made, and that, as it is written, he gave opprobrious wordes to the gentyllmen, whiche than counsayled hym to leave his stubbernesse, and to avoyde the commocion of the people, rysen up for that rescue. And he not only callyd the one of them bawde, but also toke Tracy by the bosome, and violently shoke and plucked hym in suche maner, that he had almoste overthrowen hym to the pavement of the Churche; so that upon this fray one of their company, perceivynge the same, strake hym, and so in the thronge Becket was slayne. And further that his canonization was made onely by the bysshop of Rome, bycause he had ben a champion of maynteyne his usurped auctoritie, and a bearer of the iniquitie of the clergie, for these and for other great and urgent causes, longe to recyte, the Kynge's {228} Maiestie, by the advyse of his counsayle, hath thought expedient to declare to his lovynge subjectes, that notwithstandynge the sayde canonization, there appereth nothynge in his lyfe and exteriour conversation, wherby he shuld be callyd a sainct, but rather estemed to have ben a rebell and traytour to his prynce. Therefore his Grace strayghtly chargeth and commandeth that from henseforth the sayde Thomas Becket shall not be estemed, named, reputed, nor called a sayncte, but bysshop Becket; and that his ymages and pictures, through the hole realme, shall be putte downe, and avoyded out of all churches, chapelles, and other places; and that from henseforthe, the dayes used to be festivall in his name shall not be observed, nor the service, office, antiphoners, colletes, and prayers, in his name redde, but rased and put out of all the bokes[87]. "

 [Footnote 87: In the Roman Breviary, adapted to England, several biographical lessons are appointed for the Anniversary of "St. Thomas, bishop and martyr, " interspersed with canticles. In one of these we read, "This is truly a martyr, who, for the name of Christ, shed blood; who feared not the threats of judges, nor sought the glory of earthly dignity. But he reached the heavenly kingdom. "--Norwich, 1830. Hiem. P. 251. ] {229}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER II. 

COUNCIL OF TRENT. 

In the process of ascertaining the real state of doctrine and practicein the worship of the Church of Rome at the present day, we must firstgain as clear and accurate a knowledge of the decree of the Council ofTrent, as its words will enable us to form. Into the character of thatCouncil, and of those who constituted it, our present investigation doesnot lead us to inquire. It is now, I believe, generally understood, thatits decrees are binding on all who profess allegiance to the SovereignRoman Pontiff; and that the man would be considered to have renouncedthe Roman Catholic Communion, who should professedly withhold his assentfrom the doctrines there promulgated as vital, or against the oppugnersof which the Council itself pronounced an anathema. 

Ecclesiastical writers[88] assure us, that the wording of the decrees ofthat Council was in many cases on purpose framed ambiguously andvaguely. The latitude, however, of the expressions employed, does not initself {230} of necessity imply any of those sinister and unworthymotives to which it has been usual with many writers to attribute it. Incharity, and without any improbable assumption, it may be referred to anhonest and laudable desire of making the terms of communion as wide asmight be, with a view of comprehending within what was regarded the paleof the Catholic Church, the greatest number of those who professed andcalled themselves Christians. Be this as it may, the vagueness anduncertainty of the terms employed, compel us in many instances to haverecourse to the actual practice of the Church of Rome, as the bestinterpreter of doubtful expressions in the articles of that Council. Thedecree which bears on the subject of this volume is drawn up in thefollowing words:--

 [Footnote 88: See Mosheim, xvi. Cent. C. I. Vol. Iv. P. 196. London, 1811. ]

 "SESSION XXV. [89]

 "On the invocation, veneration, and reliques of saints, and of sacred images. 

 "The Holy Council commands all bishops and others bearing the office and care of instruction, that according to the usage of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, received from the primitive times of the Christian religion, and the consent of holy fathers, and decrees of sacred councils, they in the first place should instruct the faithful concerning the intercession and invocation of saints, the honour of reliques, and the lawful use of images, teaching them, that the SAINTS REIGNING TOGETHER WITH CHRIST, offer their own {231} prayers for men to God: that it is good and profitable SUPPLIANTLY TO INVOKE THEM: and to fly to their PRAYERS, HELP, and ASSISTANCE, for obtaining benefits from God, by his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who is our only Redeemer and Saviour. But that those who deny that the saints, enjoying everlasting happiness in heaven, are to be invoked; or who assert either that they do not pray for us; or that the invocation of them to pray for us even as individuals is idolatry, or is repugnant to the word of God, and is opposed to the honour of the one Mediator of God and man, Jesus Christ; or that it is folly, by voice or mentally, to supplicate those who reign in heaven, hold impious sentiments. 

 "That the bodies also of the holy martyrs and others living with Christ, which were living members of Christ, and a temple of the Holy Ghost to be raised by Him to eternal life, and to be glorified, are to be worshipped by the faithful; by means of which many benefits are conferred on men by God; so that those who affirm that worship and honour are not due to the reliques of the saints, or that they and other sacred monuments are unprofitably honoured by the faithful; and that the shrines of the saints are frequented in vain for the purpose of obtaining their succour, are altogether to be condemned, as the Church has long ago condemned them, and now also condemns them. "

 [Footnote 89: The Latin, which will be found in the Appendix, is a transcript from a printed copy of the Acts of the Council of Trent, preserved in the British Museum, to which are annexed the autograph signatures of the secretaries (notarii), and their seals. ]

An examination of this decree, in comparison with the form and languageof other decrees of the same Council, forces the remark upon us, Thatthe Council does not assert that the practice of invoking saints has anyfoundation in Holy Scripture. The absence of all such declaration is themore striking and important, because in the very decree immediatelypreceding this, {232} which establishes Purgatory as a doctrine of theChurch of Rome, the Council declares that doctrine to be drawn from theHoly Scriptures. In the present instance the Council proceeds no furtherthan to charge with impiety those who maintain the invocation of saintsto be contrary to the word of God. Many a doctrine or practice, notfound in Scripture, may nevertheless be not contrary to the word of God;but here the Council abstains from affirming any thing whatever as tothe scriptural origin of the doctrine and practice which itauthoritatively enforces. In this respect the framers of the decreeacted with far more caution and wisdom than they had shown in wordingthe decree on Purgatory; and with far more caution and wisdom too thanthey exercised in this decree, when they affirmed that the doctrine ofthe invocation of saints was to be taught the people according to theusage of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, received from the primitivetimes of the Christian religion, and the consent of the holy fathers. Ihave good hope that these pages have already proved beyond gainsaying, that the invocation of saints is a manifest departure from the usage ofthe Primitive Church, and contrary to the testimony of "the holyfathers. " However, the fact of the Council not having professed to tracethe doctrine, or its promulgation, to any authority of Holy Scripture, is of very serious import, and deserves to be well weighed in all itsbearings. 

With regard to the condemnatory clauses of this decree, I would formyself observe, that I should never have engaged in preparing thisvolume, had I not believed, "that it was neither good nor profitable toinvoke the saints, or to fly to their prayers, their assistance, andsuccour. " I am bound, with this decree {233} before me, to pronounce, that it is a vain thing to offer supplications, either by the voice orin the mind, to the saints, even if they be reigning in heaven; and thatit is also in vain for Christians to frequent the shrines of the saintsfor the purpose of obtaining their succour. 

I am, moreover, under a deep conviction, that the invocation of them isboth at variance with the word of God, and contrary to the honour of theone Mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ. 

On this last point, indeed, I am aware of an anxious desire prevailingon the part of many Roman Catholics, to establish a distinction betweena mediation of Redemption, and a mediation of Intercession: and thus bylimiting the mediation of the saints and angels to intercession, andreserving the mediation of redemption to Christ only, to avoid thesetting up of another to share the office of Mediator with Him, who isso solemnly declared in Scripture to be the one Mediator between God andman. But this distinction has no foundation in the revealed will of God;on the contrary, it is directly at variance with the words and with thespirit of many portions of the sacred volume. There we find the twooffices of redemption and mediation joined together in Christ. "If anyman sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ theRighteous, and He is the propitiation for our sins. " [1 John ii. 1, 2. Heb. Ix. 12. Vii. 25. ] In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the same Saviourwho is declared "by his own blood to have obtained eternal redemption, "is announced also as the Mediator of Intercession. "Wherefore he is ableto save them to the uttermost who come unto God through him, seeing heever liveth to make intercession for them. " The {234} redemption wroughtby Christ, and the intercession still made in our behalf by Christ, areboth equally declared to us by the most sure warrant of Holy Scripture;of any other intercession by saints in glory, by angels, or Virgin, tobe sought by our suppliant invocations to them, the covenant of Godspeaks not. 

It may be observed, that the enactment of this decree by the Council ofTrent, has been chiefly lamented by some persons on the ground of itspresenting the most formidable barrier against any reconciliationbetween the Church of Rome, and those who hold the unlawfulness of theinvocation of saints. Indeed persons of erudition, judgment, piety, andcharity, in communion with Rome, have not been wanting to express openlytheir regret, that decrees so positive, peremptory, and exclusive, should have been adopted. They would have been better satisfied with theterms of communion in the Church to which they still adhered, hadindividuals been left to their own responsibility on questions ofdisputable origin and doubtful antiquity, involving rather the subtiltyof metaphysical disquisitions, than agreeable to the simplicity ofGospel truth, and essential Christian doctrine. On this point I wouldcontent myself with quoting the sentiments of a Roman Catholic author. Many of the facts alleged in his interesting comments deserve thepatient consideration of every Christian. Here (observes the commentatoron Paoli Sarpi's History of the Council of Trent[90]) the Council makesit a duty to pray to saints, though the ancient Church never regarded itas necessary. The practice cannot be proved to be introduced into publicworship {235} before the sixth century; and it is certain, that in theancient liturgies and sacramentaries no direct invocation is found. Evenin our modern missals, being those of our ecclesiastical books in whichthe ancient form has been longest retained, scarcely is there a collect[those he means in which mention is made of the saints] where theaddress is not offered directly to God, imploring Him to hear theprayers of the saints for us; and this is the ancient form ofinvocation. It is true, that in the Breviaries and other ecclesiasticalbooks, direct prayers to the saints have been subsequently introduced, as in litanies, hymns, and even some collects. But the usage is moremodern, and cannot be evidence for ancient tradition. For this [ancienttradition] only some invocations addressed to saints in public haranguesare alleged, but which ought to be regarded as figures of rhetoric, _apostrophes_, rather than real invocations; though at the same timesome fathers laid the foundation for such a practice by asserting thatone could address himself to the saints, and hope for succour from them. 

 [Footnote 90: Histoire du Conc. De Trent, par Fra. Paoli Sarpi, traduit par Pierre François de Courayer. Amsterdam, note 31. 1751. Vol. Iii. P. 182. ]

We have already alluded to the very great latitude of interpretationwhich the words of this Council admit. The expressions indeed are mostremarkably elastic; capable of being expanded widely enough to justifythose of the Church of Rome who allow themselves in the practice ofasking for aid and assistance, temporal and spiritual, to be expectedfrom the saints themselves; and at the same time, the words of thedecree admit of being so far contracted as not in appearance palpably tocontradict those who allege, that the Church of Rome never addresses asaint with any other petition, than purely and simply that the saintwould by prayer intercede for the worshippers. The words "suppliantly{236} to invoke them, " and "to fly to their prayers, HELP, and SUCCOUR, "are sufficiently comprehensive to cover all kinds of prayer for allkinds of benefits, whilst "the invocation of them to pray for us evenindividually, " will countenance those who would restrict the faithful toan entreaty for their prayers only. 

Whatever may be the advantage of this latitude of interpretation, in onepoint of view it must be a subject of regret. Complaints had long beenmade in Christendom, that other prayers were offered to the saints, besides those which petitioned only for their intercession; and if theCouncil of Trent had intended it to be a rule of universal application, that in whatever words the invocations of the saints might be couched, they should be taken to mean only requests for their prayers, it may belamented, that no declaration to that effect was given. 

The manner in which writers of the Church of Rome have attempted toreconcile the prayers actually offered in her ritual, with the principleof invoking the saints only for their prayers, is indeed mostunsatisfactory. Whilst to some minds the expedient to which thosewriters have had recourse carries with it the stamp of mentalreservation, and spiritual subterfuge, and moral obliquity; others underthe influence of the purest charity will regret in it the absence ofthat simplicity, and direct openness in word and deed, which we regardas characteristic of the religion of the Gospel; and will deprecate itsadoption as tending, in many cases inevitably, to become a mostdangerous snare to the conscience. I will here refer only to theprofession of that principle as made by Bellarmin. Subsequent writersseem to have adopted his sentiments, and to have expressed themselvesvery much in his words. {237}

Bellarmin unreservedly asserts that Christians are to invoke the saintssolely and exclusively for their prayers, and not for any benefits asfrom the saints themselves. But then he seems to paralyse thatdeclaration by this refinement: "It must nevertheless be observed thatwe have not to do with words, but with the meaning of words; for as faras concerns the words, it is lawful to say, 'Saint Peter, have mercy onme! Save me! Open to me the entrance of heaven!' So also, 'Give to mehealth of body, Give me patience, Give me fortitude!' Whilst only weunderstand 'Save me, and have mercy upon me BY PRAYING for me: Give methis and that, BY THY PRAYERS AND MERITS. ' For thus Gregory ofNazianzen, in his Oratio in Cyprianum; and the Universal Church, when inthe hymn to the Virgin she says, Mary, Mother of Grace, Mother of Mercy, Do thou protect us from the enemy, And take us in the hour of death. 

"And in that of the Apostles, 'To whose command is subject' The health and weakness of all: Heal us who are morally diseased; Restore us to virtue. 

"And as the Apostle says of himself 'that I might save some, ' [Rom. Xi. ]and 'that he might save all, ' [I Cor. Ix. ] not as God, but Thy prayerand counsel. "

I wish not to enter upon the question how far this distinction isconsistent with that openness and straightforward undisguised dealingwhich is alone allowable when we are contending for the truth; nor howfar the {238} charge of moral obliquity and double dealing, oftenbrought against it, can be satisfactorily met. But suppose for a momentthat we grant (what is not the case) that in the metaphysicaldisquisitions of the experienced casuist such a distinction might bemaintained, how can we expect it to be recognized, and felt, and actedupon by the large body of Christians? Abstractedly considered, such aninterpretation in a religious act of daily recurrence by the mass ofunlearned believers would, I conceive, appear to reflecting minds mostimprobable, if not utterly impossible. And as to its actual _bona-fide_result in practice, a very brief sojourn in countries where the religionof Rome is dominant, will suffice to convince us, that such subtiltiesof the casuist are neither received nor understood by the great body ofworshippers; and that the large majority of them, when they pray to anindividual saint to deliver them from any evil, or to put them inpossession of some good, do in very deed look to the saint himself forthe fulfilment of their wishes. It is a snare to the conscience only tooevidently successful. 

And I regret to add, that in the errors into which such language oftheir prayers may unhappily betray them, they cannot be otherwise thanconfirmed as well by the recorded sentiments of men in past years, whomthey have been taught to reverence, as by the sentiments which arecirculated through the world now, even by what they are accustomed toregard as the highest authority on earth[91]. 

 [Footnote 91: See in subsequent parts of this work the references to Bonaventura, Bernardin Sen. , Bernardin de Bust. , &c. ; and also the encyclical letter of the present (A. D. 1840) reigning pontiff. ]

To this point, however, we must repeatedly revert {239} hereafter; atpresent, I will only add one further consideration. If, as we are nowrepeatedly told, the utmost sought by the invocation of saints is thatthey would intercede for the supplicants; that no more is meant than weof the Anglican Church mean when we earnestly entreat ourfellow-Christians on earth to pray for us, --why should not the prayersto the saints be confined exclusively to that form of words which wouldconvey the meaning intended? why should other forms of supplicating thembe adopted, whose obvious and direct meaning implies a different thing?If we request a Christian friend to pray for us, that we may bestrengthened and supported under a trial and struggle in our spiritualwarfare, we do not say, "Friend, strengthen me; Friend, support me. "That entreaty would imply our desire to be, that he would visit ushimself, and comfort and strengthen us by his own kind words andcheering offices of consolation and encouragement. To convey ourmeaning, our words would be, "Pray for me; remember me in yoursupplications to the throne of grace. Implore God, of his mercy, to giveme the strength and comfort of his Holy Spirit. " If nothing more is everintended to be conveyed, than a similar request for their prayers, whenthe saints are "suppliantly invoked, " in a case of such delicacy, andwhere there is so much danger of words misleading, why have otherexpressions of every variety been employed in the Roman Liturgies, aswell as in the devotions of individuals, which in words appeal to thesaints, not for their prayers, but for their own immediate exertion inour behalf, their assistance, succour, defence, and comfort, --"Protectus from our enemies--Heal the diseases of our minds--Release us from oursin--Receive us at the hour of death?" {240}

In the present work, however, were it not for the example and warningset us by this still greater departure from Scripture and the primitiveChurch, we need not have dwelt on this immediate point; because wemaintain that any invocation of saint or angel, even if it were confinedto a petitioning for their prayers and intercessions, is contrary bothto God's word and to the faith and practice of the primitive, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. We now proceed to the next portion of our proposedinquiry, --the present state of Roman Catholic worship, with respect tothe invocation of saints and angels. {241}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER III. 

SECTION I. --PRESENT SERVICE IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 

In submitting to the reader's consideration the actual state of RomanCatholic worship at the present hour, I disclaim all desire to fastenupon the Church of Rome any of the follies and extravagancies ofindividual superstition. Probably many English Roman Catholics have beenthemselves shocked and scandalized by the scenes which their own eyeshave witnessed in various parts of continental Europe. It would be noless unfair in us to represent the excesses of superstition there forcedon our notice as the genuine legitimate fruits of the religion of Rome, than it would be in Roman Catholics to affiliate on the Catholics of theAnglican Church the wild theories and revolting tenets of all who assumethe name of opponents to Rome. Well indeed does it become us of bothChurches to watch jealously and adversely as against ourselves theerrors into which our doctrines, if not preserved and guarded in theirpurity and simplicity, might have a tendency to seduce the unwary. Andwhilst I am fully alive to the necessity of us Anglican Catholicsprescribing to ourselves a {242} practical application of the same rulein various points of faith and discipline, I would with all delicacy andrespect invite Roman Catholics to do likewise. Especially would Ientreat them to reflect with more than ordinary scrutiny and solicitudeon the vast evils into which the practice of praying to saints andangels, and of pleading their merits at the throne of grace, has atendency to betray those who are unenlightened and off their guard; andunless my eyes and my ears and my powers of discernment have altogetheroften deceived and failed me, I must add, actually betrays thousands. Often when I have witnessed abroad multitudes of pilgrims prostratebefore an image of the Virgin, their arms extended, their eyes fixed onher countenance, their words in their native language pouring forth herpraises and imploring her aid, I have asked myself, If this be notreligious worship, what is? If I could transport myself into the midstof pagans in some distant part of the world at the present day; or couldI have mingled with the crowd of worshippers surrounding the image ofMinerva in Athens, or of Diana in Ephesus, when the servants of the onlyGod called their fellow-creatures from such vanities, should I have seenor heard more unequivocal proofs that the worshippers were addressingtheir prayers to the idols as representations of their deities? Wouldany difference have appeared in their external worship? When theEphesians worshipped their "great goddess Diana and the image which felldown from Jupiter, " could their attitude, their eyes, or their wordsmore clearly have indicated an assurance in the worshipper, that theSpirit of the Deity was especially present in that image, than theattitude, the eyes, the words of the pilgrims at Einsiedlin for example, are indications of the same {243} belief and assurance with regard tothe statue of the Virgin Mary? These thoughts would force themselvesagain and again on my mind; and though since I first witnessed suchthings many years have intervened, chequered with various events oflife, yet whilst I am writing, the scenes are brought again fresh to myremembrance; the same train of thought is awakened; and the lapse oftime has not in the least diminished the estimate then formed of thedanger, the awful peril, to which the practice of addressing saints andangels in prayer, even in its most modified and mitigated form, exposesthose who are in communion with Rome. I am unwilling to dwell on thispoint longer, or to paint in deeper or more vivid colours the sceneswhich I have witnessed, than the necessity of the case requires. But itwould have been the fruit of a morbid delicacy rather than of brotherlylove, had I disguised, in this part of my address, the full extent ofthe awful dread with which I contemplate any approximation to prayers, of whatever kind, uttered by the lips or mentally conceived, to anyspiritual existence in heaven above, save only to the one Godexclusively. It is indeed a dread suggested by the highest and purestfeelings of which I believe my frame of mind to be susceptible; it issanctioned and enforced by my reason; and it is confirmed andstrengthened more and more by every year's additional reflection andexperience. Ardently as I long and pray for Christian unity, I could notjoin in communion with a Church, one of whose fundamental articlesaccuses of impiety those who deny the lawfulness of the invocations ofsaints. 

But I return from this digression on the peril of idolatry, to which aswell the theory as the practice of {244} the Roman Catholic Churchexposes her members; and willingly repeat my disclaimer of any wish orintention whatever to fasten and filiate upon the Church of Rome thedoctrines or the practice of individuals, or even of different sectionsof her communion. Still, in the same manner as I have referred to theextravagancies which offend us in many parts of Christendom now, I wouldrecall some of the excesses into which renowned and approved authors ofher communion have been betrayed. I seek not to fix on those members ofthe Roman Church who disclaim any participation in such excesses, thefolly or guilt of others; but when we find many of the most celebratedamong her sons tempted into such lamentable departures from primitiveChristian worship, we are naturally led to ascertain whether thedoctrine be not itself the genuine cause and source of themischief;--whether the malady be not the immediate and natural effect ofthe tenet and practice operating generally, and not to be referred tothe idiosyncrasy of the patient. A voice seems to address us from everyside, when such excesses are witnessed, Firmly resist the beginnings ofthe evil; oppose its very commencement; it is not a question of degree, exclude the principle itself from your worship; give utterance to noinvocation; mentally conceive no prayer to any being, save God alone;plead no other merits with Him than the merits of his only Son. Then, and then only, are you safe. Then, and then only, is your prayercatholic, primitive, apostolic, and scriptural. 

The[92] most satisfactory method of conducting this {245} branch of ourinquiry seems to be, that we should examine the Roman Ritual withreference to those several and progressive stages to which I have beforegenerally referred; from the mere rhetorical apostrophe to the directprayer for spiritual blessings petitioned for immediately from theperson addressed. I am neither anxious to establish the progresshistorically, nor do I wish to tie myself down in all cases to the exactorder of those successive stages, in my present citation of testimoniesfrom the Roman Ritual. My anxiety is to give a fair view of what is nowthe real character of Roman Catholic worship, rather than to draw finedistinctions. I shall therefore survey within the same field of view thetwo fatal errors by which, as we believe, the worship of the Church ofRome is rendered unfit for the family of Christ to acknowledge itgenerally as their own: I mean the adoration of saints, and the pleadingof their merits at the throne of grace, instead of trusting to the aloneexclusive merits of the one only Mediator Jesus Christ our Lord, andaddressing God Almighty alone. 

 [Footnote 92: I believe the method best calculated to supply us with the very truth is, as I have before observed, to trace the conduct of Christians at the shrines of the martyrs, and follow them in their successive departures further and further from primitive purity and simplicity, on the anniversaries of those servants of God. What was hailed there first in the full warmth of admiration and zeal for the honour and glory of a national or favourite martyr, crept stealthily, and step by step, into the regular and stated services of the Church. ]

I. In the original form of those prayers in which mention was made ofthe saints departed, Christians addressed the Supreme Being alone, either in praise for the mercies shown to the saints themselves, and tothe Church through their means; or else in supplication, that theworshippers might have grace to follow their example, and profit bytheir instruction. Such, for instance, is the prayer in the Romanritual[93] on St. {246} John's day[94] which is evidently the foundationof the beautiful Collect now used in the Anglican Church, --"MercifulLord, we beseech thee to cast thy bright beams of light upon thy Church, that it being enlightened by the doctrine of thy Apostle and EvangelistSt. John, may so walk in the light of thy truth, that it may at lengthattain to the light of everlasting life, through Jesus our Lord. Amen. "Such too is the close of the Prayer for the whole state of Christ'sChurch militant here on earth, offered in our Anglican service, --"Webless thy holy name for all thy servants departed this life in thy faithand fear, beseeching thee to give us grace so to follow their goodexamples, that with them we may be partakers of thy heavenly kingdom. Grant this, O Father, for the sake of Jesus Christ our only Mediator andAdvocate. Amen. "

 [Footnote 93: The references will generally be given to the Roman Breviary as edited by F. C. Husenbeth, Norwich, 1830. That work consists of four volumes, corresponding with the four quarters of the ecclesiastical year--Winter, Hiem. ; Spring, Vern. ; Summer, _Æstiv_. ; Autumn, Aut. ; and the volumes will be designated by the corresponding initials, H. V. Æ. A. ]

 [Footnote 94: "Ecclesiam, tuam, Domine, benignus illustra, ut beati Johannis Apostoli tui et evangelistæ illuminata doctrinis, ad dona perveniat sempiterna. Per Dominum. "--Husen. H. P. 243. ]

II. The second stage supplies examples of a kind of rhetoricalapostrophe; the speaker addressing one who was departed as though he hadears to hear. Were not this the foundation stone on which the rest ofthe edifice seems to have been built, we might have passed it byunnoticed. Of this we have an instance in the address to the Shepherdson Christmas-day. "Whom have ye seen, ye shepherds? Say ye, tell ye, whohath appeared on the earth? Say ye, what saw ye? Announce to us thenativity of Christ[95]. "

 [Footnote 95: Quem vidistis, Pastores? Dicite, Annunciate nobis. In terris quis apparuit? Dicite quidnam vidistis? Et annunciate Christi nativitatem. --H. 219. ] {247}

Another instance is seen in that beautiful song ascribed to Prudentiusand used on the day of Holy Innocents:

 "Hail! ye flowers of Martyrs. " [Salvete flores martyrum. H. 249. ]

It is of the same character with other songs, said to be from the samepen, in which the town of Bethlehem is addressed, and even the Cross. 

 "O Thou of mighty cities. " [O sola magnarum urbium. H. 306. ] "Bend thy boughs, thou lofty tree.... " [Flecte ramos arbor alta, &c. Aut. 344. ] "Worthy wast thou alone To bear the victim of the world. "

Thus, on the feast of the exaltation of the Cross, this anthem issung, --"O blessed Cross, who wast alone worthy to bear the King of theheavens and the Lord. " [O crux benedicta, quæ sola fuisti digna portareRegem coelorum et Dominum. Alleluia. A. 345. ] Though unhappily, in ananthem on St. Andrew's day, this apostrophe becomes painful anddistressing, in which not only is the cross thus apostrophised, but itis prayed to, as though it had ears to hear, and a mind to understand, and power to act, --"Hail, precious Cross! do thou receive the discipleof Him who hung upon thee, my master, Christ. " [Salve, crux pretiosasuscipe discipulum ejus, qui pependit in te, magister meus Christus. A. 547. ] The Church of Rome, in this instance, gives us a vivid example ofthe ease with which exclamations and apostrophes are made theground-work of invocations. In the legend of the day similar, though notthe same, words form a part of the salutation, which St. Andrew is theresaid to have addressed {248} to the cross of wood prepared for his ownmartyrdom, and then bodily before his eyes. There are many suchaddresses to the Cross, in various parts of the Roman ritual. (See A. 344. )

In such apostrophes the whole of the Song of the Three Children abounds;and we meet with many such in the early writers. 

III. The third stage supplies instances of prayer to God, imploring himto allow the supplication of his saints to be offered for us. Of this wefind examples in the Collects for St. Andrew's Eve and Anniversary, forthe feast of St. Anthony, and various others. 

"We beseech thee, Almighty God, that he whose feast we are about tocelebrate may implore thy aid for us, " &c. [Quæsumus omnipotens Deus, utbeatus Andreas Apostolus cujus prævenimus festivitatem, tuum pro nobisimploret auxilium. A. 545. ]

"That he may be for us a perpetual intercessor. " [Ut apud te sit pronobis perpetuus intercessor. A. 551. ]

"We beseech thee, O Lord, let the intercession of the blessed Anthonythe Abbot commend us, that what we cannot effect by our own merits, wemay obtain by his patronage [Ejus patrocinio assequamur. H. 490. ]:through the Lord. "

These prayers I could not offer in faith. I am taught in the writtenword to look for no other intercessor in heaven, than one who is eternaland divine, therefore I can need no other. Had God, by his revealedword, told me that the intercessions of his servants departed shouldprevail with Him, provided I sought that benefit by prayer, I should, without any misgiving, have implored Him to receive their {249} prayersin my behalf; but I can find no such an intimation in the covenant. Inthat covenant the word of the God of truth and mercy is pledged toreceive those, and to grant the prayers of those who come to him throughhis blessed Son. In that covenant, I am strictly commanded and mostlovingly invited to approach boldly the Supreme Giver of all good thingsmyself, and to ask in faith nothing wavering, with an assurance that Hewho spared not his own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, will, withHim, also freely give us all things. In this assurance I place implicittrust; and as long as I have my being in this earthly tabernacle, Iwill, by his gracious permission and help, pray for whatever is needfulfor the soul and the body; I will pray not for myself only, but for all, individually and collectively, who are near and dear to me, and all whoare far from me; for my friends, and for those who wish me ill; for myfellow Christians, and for those who are walking still in darkness andsin;--I will pray for mercy on all mankind. And I will, as occasionoffers, desire others among the faithful on earth to pray for me; andwill take comfort and encouragement and holy hope from the reflectionthat their prayers are presented to God in my behalf, and that they willcontinue to pray for me when my own strength shall fail and the hour ofmy departure shall draw nigh. But for the acceptance of my own prayersand of theirs I can depend on no other Mediator in the world of spirits, than on HIM, whom his own Word declares to be the one Mediator betweenGod and men, who prayed for me when He was on earth, who is ever makingintercession for me in heaven. I know of no other in the unseen world, by whom I can have access to the Father; I find no other offered to me, I seek no {250} other, I want no other. I trust my cause, --the cause ofmy present life, the cause of my soul's eternal happiness, --to HIM andto his intercession. I thank God for the blessing. I am satisfied; andin the assurance of the omnipotence of his intercession, and the perfectfulness of his mediation, I am happy. 

On this point it were well to compare two prayers both offered to God;the one pleading with Him the intercession of the passion of his onlySon, the other pleading the prayers of a mortal man. The first prayer isa collect in Holy Week, the second is a collect on St. Gregory's Day. 

 We beseech thee, Almighty God, that we who among so many adversities from our own infirmity fail, the passion of thy only begotten Son interceding for us, may revive. V. 243. 

 O God, who hast granted the rewards of eternal blessedness[96] to the soul of thy servant Gregory, mercifully grant that we who are pressed down by the weight of our sins, may, by his prayers with Thee, be raised up. V. 480. 

 [Footnote 96: I can never read this, and such passages as this, without asking myself, can such an assertion be in accordance with the inspired teaching?--"Judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God. " I Cor. Iv. 5. ]

IV. The next form of prayer to which I would invite your seriousattention, is one from which my judgment and my feelings revolt far moredecidedly even than from the last-mentioned; and I have the most cleardenouncement of my conscience, that by offering it I should do a wrongto my Saviour, and ungratefully disparage his inestimable merits, andthe full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice and satisfaction of hisomnipotent {251} atonement: I mean those prayers, still addressed toGod, which supplicate that our present and future good may be advancedby the merits of departed mortals, that by their merits our sins may beforgiven, and our salvation secured; that by their merits our souls maybe made fit for celestial joys, and be finally admitted into heaven. 

Of these prayers the Roman Breviary contains a great variety ofexamples, some exceeding others very much in their apparentforgetfulness and disregard of the merits of the only Saviour, andconsequently far more shocking to the reason and affections of us whohold it a point of conscience to make the merits of Christ alone, all inall, exclusive of any other to be joined with them, the only ground ofour acceptance with God. 

We find an example of this prayer in the collect on the day of St. Saturnine. "O God, who grantest us to enjoy the birth-day of the blessedSaturnine, thy martyr, grant that we may be aided by his merits, throughthe Lord. " [Ejus nos tribue meritis adjuvari per Dominum. A. 544. ]

Another example, in which the supplicants plead for deliverance fromhell, to be obtained by the merits and prayers of the saint together, isthe Collect for December 6th, the day of St. Nicolas. 

"O God, who didst adorn the blessed Pontiff Nicolas with unnumberedmiracles, grant, we beseech Thee, that by his merits and prayers we maybe set free from the fires of hell, through, " &c. [Ut ejus meritis etprecibus à gehennæ incendiis liberemur. H. 436. ]

Another example, in like manner specifying both the merits andintercession of the departed saint, contains {252} expressions veryunacceptable to many of those who are accustomed to make the Bible theirstudy. It is a prayer to Joseph, the espoused husband of the VirginMary. Of him mention is made by name in the Gospel just before and justafter the birth of Christ, as an upright, merciful man, to whom God onthree several occasions made a direct revelation of his will, by themedium of a dream, with reference to the incarnate Saviour. Again, onthe holy family visiting Jerusalem, when our Lord was twelve years ofage, Mary, his mother, in her remonstrance with her Son, speaks to Himof Joseph thus: "Why hast Thou thus dealt with us? Behold thy father andI have sought Thee sorrowing. " Upon which not one word was uttered byour Saviour that would enable us to form an opinion as to his own willwith regard to Joseph. Our Lord seems purposely to have drawn theirthoughts from his earthly connexion with them, and to have raised theirminds to a contemplation of his unearthly, his heavenly, and eternalorigin. "How is it that ye sought me? Wist ye not that I must be aboutmy Father's business?" After this time, though the writings of the HolyBook, either historical, doctrinal, or prophetic, at the lowestcalculation embrace a period of fourscore years, no allusion is made toJoseph as a man still living, or to his memory as one already dead. Andyet he is one of those for the benefit of whose intercession the Churchof Rome teaches her members to pray to God, and from whose merits theyare taught to hope for succour. 

On the 19th of March the following Collect is offered to the Saviour ofthe world:--

"We beseech thee, O Lord, that we may be succoured by the merits of thehusband of thy most holy mother, {253} so that what we cannot obtain byour own power, may be granted to us by his intercession. Who livest, "&c. [V. 486. ]

It is anticipating our instances of the different stages observable inthe invocation of saints, to quote here direct addresses to Josephhimself; still it may be well to bring at once to a close our remarkswith regard to the worship paid to him. We find that in the Litany ofthe Saints, "St. Joseph, pray for us, " is one of the supplications; buton his day (March 19) there are three hymns addressed to Joseph, whichappear to be full of lamentable superstition, assigning, as they do, tohim a share at least in the work of our salvation, and solemnly stating, as a truth, what, whether true or not, depends upon a groundlesstradition, namely, that our blessed Lord and Mary watched by him at hisdeath; ascribing to Joseph also that honour and praise, which the Churchwas wont to offer to God alone. The following are extracts from thosehymns:

First hymn. "Thee, Joseph, let the companies of heaven celebrate; theelet all the choirs of Christian people resound; who, bright in merits, wast joined in chaste covenant with the renowned Virgin. Others theirpious death consecrates after death; and glory awaits those who deservethe palm. Thou alive, equal to those above, enjoyest God, more blessedby wondrous lot. O Trinity, most High, spare us who pray; grant us toreach heaven [to scale the stars] BY THE MERITS OF JOSEPH, that atlength we may perpetually offer to thee a grateful song. " [Te Josephcelebrent agmina coelitum. V. 485. ]

Second hymn. "O, Joseph, the glory of those in heaven, and the sure hopeof our life, and the safeguard {254} of the world, benignly ACCEPT THEPRAISES WHICH WE joyfully sing TO THEE.... Perpetual praise to the mostHigh Trinity, who granting to thee honours on high, give to us, BY THYMERITS, the joys of a blessed life. " [Coelitum, Joseph, Decus. V. 486. ]

Third hymn. "He whom we, the faithful, worship with joy, whose exaltedtriumphs we celebrate, Joseph, on this day obtained by merit the joys ofeternal life. O too happy! O too blessed! at whose last hour Christ andthe Virgin together, with serene countenance, stood watching. Hence, conqueror of hell, freed from the bands of the flesh, he removes inplacid sleep to the everlasting seats, and binds his temples with brightchaplets. Him, therefore, reigning, let us all importune, that he wouldbe present with us, and that he obtaining pardon for our transgressions, would assign to us the rewards of peace on high. Be praises to thee, behonours to thee, O Trine God, who reignest, and assignest golden crownsto thy faithful servant for ever. Amen. " [Iste, quem læti colimusfideles. V. 490. ]

It is painful to remark, that in these last clauses the very same wordis employed when the Church of Rome applies to Joseph to assign to thefaithful the rewards of peace, and when she ascribes glory to God forassigning to his faithful servants crowns of gold. Indeed these hymnscontain many expressions which ought to be addressed to the Saviouralone, whose "glory is in the heavens, " who is "the hope of us onearth, " and "the safeguard of the world. "

 * * * * *

Under this fourth head I will add only one more specimen. Would it werenot to be found in the Roman {255} Liturgies since the Council of Trent:God grant it may ere long be wiped out of the book of Christian worship!It is a collect in which the Church of Rome offers this prayer to Godthe Son:--

"O God, whose right hand raised the blessed Peter when walking on thewaves, that he sank not; and rescued his fellow-apostle Paul, for thethird time suffering shipwreck, from the depth of the sea; mercifullyhear us, and grant that by the merits of both we may obtain the glory ofeternity. " [H. 149. ]

Now suppose for a moment it had been intended in any one prayernegatively to exclude the merits of Christ from the great work of oureternal salvation, and to limit our hopes of everlasting glory to themerits of St. Peter and St. Paul, could that object have been moreeffectually and fully secured than by this prayer? Not one word alludingto the redemption which is in Christ can be found in this prayer. Thesentiment in the first member of the prayer refers us to the powerexercised by the Son of God, and Son of man, when he was intabernacledin our flesh; and the second expression teaches us to contemplate theprovidence of our Almighty Saviour in his deeds of beneficence. But noreference, even by allusion, is here made to the merits of Christ'sdeath--none to his merits as our great Redeemer; none to his merits asour never-ceasing and never-failing Intercessor. We are led to approachthe throne of grace only with the merits of the two Apostles on ourtongue. If those who offer it hope for acceptance through THE MEDIATIONof Jesus Christ, and for the sake of his merits, that hope is neithersuggested nor fostered by this prayer. The truth, as it is in Jesus, would compel us in addressing {256} Him, the Saviour of the world, tothink of the merits of neither Peter nor Paul, of neither angel norspirit. Instead of praying to him that we may obtain the glories ofeternity for their merits, true faith in Christ would bid us throwourselves implicitly on his omnipotent merits alone, and implore sogreat a blessing for his own mercy's sake. If we receive the wholetruth, can it appear otherwise than a disparagement of his perfect andomnipotent merits, to plead with Him the merits of one, whom the Saviourhimself rebuked with as severe a sentence as ever fell from his lips, "Get thee behind me, Satan, thou art an offence to me; for thousavourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men;"[Matt. Xvi. 23. ] and of another who after his conversion, when speakingof the salvation wrought by Christ, in profound humility confesseshimself to be a chief of those sinners for whom the Saviour died, "Thisis a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesuscame into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief?" [1 Tim. I. 15. ] We feel, indeed, a sure and certain hope that these twofellow-creatures, once sinners, but by God's grace afterwards saints, have found mercy with God, and will live with Christ for ever; but topray for the same mercy at his gracious hands for the sake of theirmerits is repugnant to our first principles of Christian faith. When wethink of merits, for which to plead for mercy, we can think of Christ's, and of Christ's alone. 

V. Our thoughts are next invited to that class of prayers which theChurch of Rome authorizes and directs to be addressed immediately to theSaints themselves. {257} Of these there are different kinds, some farmore objectionable than others, though all are directly at variance withthat one single and simple principle, to which, as we believe, adisciple of the cross can alone safely adhere--prayer to God, and onlyto God. The words of the Council of Trent are, as we have alreadyobserved, very comprehensive on this subject. They not only declare itto be a good and useful thing supplicantly to invoke the saints reigningwith Christ: but also for the obtaining of benefits from God, throughJesus Christ our Lord, who is our only Redeemer and Saviour, to fly totheir prayers, HELP, and ASSISTANCE. Whether these last words can beinterpreted as merely words of surplusage, or whether they must beunderstood to mean that the faithful must have recourse to some help andassistance of the saints beyond their intercession, is a question towhich we need not again revert. If it had been intended to embrace otherkinds of beneficial succour, and other help and assistance, perhaps itwould be difficult to find words more expressive of such general aid andsupport as a human being might hope to derive, in answer to prayer fromthe Giver of all good. And certainly they are words employed by theChurch, when addressing prayers directly to God. Be this as it may, thepublic service-books of the Church of Rome unquestionably, by no meansadhere exclusively to such addresses to the saints, as supplicate themto pray for the faithful on earth. Many a prayer is couched in languagewhich can be interpreted only as conveying a petition to themimmediately for their assistance, temporal and spiritual. 

But let us calmly review some of the prayers, supplications, invocations, or by whatever name religious addresses now offered to thesaints may be called; and {258} first, we will examine that class inwhich the petitioners ask merely for the intercession of the saints. 

We have an example of this class in an invocation addressed to St. Ambrose on his day, December 7; the very servant of Christ in whosehymns and prayers no address of prayer or invocation to any saint ormartyr can be found. 

"O thou most excellent teacher, the light of the Holy Church, O blessedAmbrose, thou lover of the divine law, deprecate for us [or intercedefor us with] the Son of God[97]. "

 [Footnote 97: H. 438. "Deprecare pro nobis Filium Dei. " This invocation to Ambrose is instantly followed by this prayer to God: "O God, who didst assign to thy people the blessed Ambrose as a minister of eternal salvation, grant, we beseech Thee, that we may deserve to have him as our intercessor in heaven, whom we had as a teacher of life on earth. "]

The Church of Rome has wisely availed herself of the pious labours ofAmbrose, Bishop of Milan; and has introduced into her public worshipmany of the hymns usually ascribed to him. Would she had followed hisexample, and addressed her invocations to no one but our Creator, ourRedeemer, and our Sanctifier! Could that holy man hear the supplicationsnow offered to him, and could be make his voice heard in return amongthose who now invoke him, that voice, we believe, would only convey aprohibitory monition like that of the Angel to St. John when he felldown before him, See thou do it not; I am thy fellow-servant; worshipGod. 

It is needless to multiply instances of this fifth kind of invocation. In the "Litany of the Saints" more than fifty different saints areenumerated by name, and are invoked to pray and intercede for those whojoin in {259} it. Among the persons invoked are Raphael [Æ. Cxcii. ], Gervasius, Protasius, and Mary Magdalene; whilst in the Litany [Æ. Cxcvi. ] for the recommendation of the soul of the sick and dying, thenames of Abel, and Abraham, are specified. 

Under this head I will call your attention only to one more example. Indeed I scarcely know whether this hymn would more properly be classedunder this head, or reserved for the next; since it appears to partakeof the nature of each. It supplicates the martyr to obtain by hisprayers spiritual blessings, and yet addresses him as the person who isto grant those blessings. It implores him to liberate us by the love ofChrist; but so should we implore the Father of mercies himself. Still, as the more safe course, I would regard it as a prayer to St. Stephenonly to intercede for us. But it may be well to derive from it a lessonon this point; how easily the transition glides from one false step to aworse; how infinitely wiser and safer it is to avoid evil in its verylowest and least noxious appearance:

"Martyr of God [or Unconquered Martyr], who, by following the only Sonof the Father, triumphest over thy conquered enemies, and, as conqueror, enjoyest heavenly things; by the office of thy prayer wash out ourguilt; driving away the contagion of evil; removing the weariness oflife. The bands of thy hallowed body are already loosed; loose thou usfrom the bands of the world, by the love of the Son of God [or by thegift of God Most High]. " [H. 237. ]

In the above hymn the words included within brackets are the readingsadopted in the last English edition of the Roman Breviary; and in thisplace, when we are about to refer to many hymns now in use, it may bewell to observe, that in the present day we find {260} various readingsin the hymns as they are still printed for the use of Roman Catholics indifferent countries. In some instances the changes are curious andstriking. Grancolas, in his historical commentary on the Roman Breviary(Venice, 1734, p. 84), furnishes us with interesting information as tothe chief cause of this diversity. He tells us that Pope Urban VIII. , who filled the papal throne from 1623 to 1644, a man well versed inliterature, especially in Latin poetry, and himself one of thedistinguished poets of his time, took measures for the emendation of thehymns in the Roman Breviary. He was offended by the many defects intheir metrical composition, and it is said that upwards of nine hundredand fifty faults in metre were corrected, which gave to Urban occasionto say that the Fathers had begun rather than completed the hymns. These, as corrected, he caused to be inserted in the Breviary. Grancolasproceeds to tell us that many complained of these changes, alleging thatthe primitive simplicity and piety which breathed in the hymns had beensacrificed to the niceties of poetry. "Accessit Latinitas, et recessitpietas. " The verse was neater, but the thought was chilled. 

VI. But the Roman Church by no means limits herself to this kind ofinvocation; prayers are addressed to saints, imploring them to hear, and, as of themselves, to grant the prayers of the faithful on earth, and to release them from the bands of sin, without any allusion toprayers to be made by those saints. It grieves me to copy out theinvocation made to St. Peter on the 18th of January, called theanniversary of the Chair of St. Peter at Rome; the words of our BlessedLord himself, and of his beloved and inspired Apostle, seem to rise upin judgment against that prayer, and condemn it. It {261} will be wellto place that hymn addressed to St. Peter, side by side with the veryword of God, and then ask, Can this prayer be safe?

1. Now, O good Shepherd, 1. Jesus saith, I am the goodmerciful Peter, Shepherd. John x. 11. 

2. Accept the prayers of us 2. Whatsoever ye shall ask inwho supplicate, my name, that will I do. That whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he may give it you. John xiv. 13; xv. 16. 

3. And loose the bands of our 3. The blood of Jesus Christsins, by the power committed to his Son cleanseth us from all sin. Thee, 1 John i. 7. 

4. By which thou shuttest 4. These things saith he thatheaven against all by a word, is holy, he that is true, he thatand openest it[98]. Openeth and no man shutteth, and shutteth and no man openeth. Rev. Iii. 7. 

 I am he that liveth and was dead, and am alive for evermore, and have the keys of hell and of death. Rev. I. 18. 

 [Footnote 98: This hymn is variously read. In the edition of Mr. Husenbeth (H. 497. ) it is: "O Peter, blessed shepherd, of thy mercy receive the prayers of us who supplicate, and loose by thy word the bands of our sins, thou to whom is given the power of opening heaven to the earth, and of shutting it when open. "--"Beate pastor, Petre, clemens accipe voces precantum, criminumque vincula verbo resolve, cui potestas tradita aperire terris coelum, apertum claudere. " H. 497. ]

Let it not be answered that many a Christian minister is now called agood shepherd. Let it not be said that the very words of our ordinationimply the conveyance of the power of loosing and binding, of opening andshutting the gates of heaven. When prayer is contemplated, we can thinkonly of One, HIM, who has appropriated the title of Good Shepherd to{262} himself. And we must see that Peter cannot, by any latitude ofinterpretation, be reckoned now among those to whom the awful duty isassigned of binding and loosing upon earth. 

The same unsatisfactory associations must be excited in the mind ofevery one who takes a similar view of Christian worship with myself, bythe following supplication to various saints on St. John's day:

 "Let the heaven exult with praises[99], Let the earth resound with joy; {263} The sacred solemnities sing The glory of the Apostles. O ye Just Judges of the age, And true lights of the world, We pray you with the vows of our hearts, Hear the prayers of your suppliants. Ye who shut the heaven by a word, And loose its bars, Loose us by command, we beseech you, From all our sins. Ye to whose word is subject The health and weakness of all, Cure us who are diseased in morals, Restore us to virtues. So that when Christ shall come, The Judge at the end of the world, He may make us partakers Of eternal joy. To God the Father be Glory, And to his only Son, With the Spirit the Comforter, Now and for ever. Amen[100]. "

 [Footnote 99: Having inserted in the text a translation of this hymn from a copy with which I had been long familiar, I think it right to insert here the two forms side by side. They supply an example of the changes to which we have already alluded. 

 _Lille_, 1823. _Norwich_, 1830. 

 OLD VERSION. POPE URBAN'S VERSION. 

 Exultet coelum laudibus, Exultet orbis gaudiis, Resultet terra gaudiis, Coelum resultet laudibus, Apostolorum gloriam Apostolorum gloriam Sacra canunt solemnia. Tellus et astra concinunt. Vos sæcli justi judices Vos sæculorum judices Et vera mundi lamina, Et vera mundi lumina, Votis precamur cordium Votis precamur cordium Audite preces supplicum. Audite voces supplicum. Qui coelum verbo clauditis Qui templa coeli clauditis Serasque ejus solvitis, Serasque verbo solvitis, Nos a peccatis omnibus Nos a reatu noxios Solvite jussu, quæsumus. Solvi jubete quæsumus. Quorum præcepto subditur Præcepta quorum protinus Salus et languor omnium, Languor salusque sentiunt, Sanate ægros moribus, Sanate mentes languidas, Nos reddentes virtutibus. Augete nos virtutibus. Ut cum judex advenerit Ut cum redibit arbiter Christus in fine sæculi, In fine Christus sæculi, Nos sempiterni gaudii Nos sempiterni gaudii Faciat esse compotes. Concedat esse compotes. Deo Patri sit gloria, Jesu, tibi sit gloria Ejusque soli Filio, Qui natus es de virgine, Cum Spiritu paracleto, Cum Patre et Almo Spiritu, Et nunc et in perpetuum. In sempiterna sæcula. 

 Amen. Amen. (H. 243. ) ]

 [Footnote 100: Or as in the present Roman Breviary:--

 Let the world exult with joy, Let the heaven resound with praise; The earth and stars sing together The glory of the Apostles. Ye judges of the ages And true lights of the world, With the prayers of our hearts we implore, Hear the voices of your suppliants. Ye who shut the temples of heaven, And loose its bars by a word, Command ye us, who are guilty, To be released from our sins; we pray. Ye whose commands forthwith Sickness and health feel, Heal our languid minds, Increase us in virtues, That when Christ, the Judge, shall return, In the end of the world, He may grant us to be partakers Of eternal joy. Jesus, to thee be glory, Who wast born of a virgin, With the Father and the Benign Spirit, Through eternal ages. Amen. {264} ]

Many a pious and humble Catholic of the Roman Communion, I have nodoubt, would regard these prayers as little more than an application toPeter and the rest of the Apostles for absolution, and would interpretits several clauses as an acknowledgment only of that power, whichChrist himself delegated to them of binding and loosing sins on earth. But the gulf fixed between these prayers, and the lawful use of thepower given to Christ's ordained ministers on earth, is great indeed. Tosatisfy the mind of this, it is not necessary to enter upon even theconfines of the wide field of controversy, as to what was reallyconveyed by Christ to his Apostles. I would ask only two questions. Could any of us address these same words to one of Christ's ministers onearth? And could we address our blessed Saviour himself in stronger ormore appropriate language, as the Lord of our destinies--the God whoheareth prayer--the Physician of our souls?

Suppose for example we were celebrating the anniversary of Christ'sNativity, of his Resurrection, or his Ascension, what word in this hymn, expressive of {265} power, and honour, and justice, and mercy, would notbe appropriate? What word would not apply to Him, in most perfectaccordance with Scripture language? And can we without offence, withoutdoing wrong to his great Name, address the same to our fellow-servants, even though we may believe them to be with Him in glory?

 Let the heaven exult with praises-- Let the earth resound with joy; The sacred solemnities sing The glory of the Lord. O Thou just Judge of the age, And true light of the world, We pray Thee with the supplications of our hearts Hear the prayers of Thy suppliants, Thou who shuttest the heavens by a word, And loosest its bars. Loose us by command, we beseech Thee, From all our sins. Thou to whose word is subject The health and weakness of all, Cure us who are diseased in morals, Restoring us to virtue. So that when Thou shalt come, The Judge at the end of the world, Thou mayest make us partakers Of eternal joy. Glory to Thee, O Lord, Who wast born of a virgin, With the Father and the Holy Spirit, For ever and ever. Amen. 

Only for a moment let us see how peculiarly all these expressions arefitting in a hymn of prayer and praise {266} to our God and Saviour, recalling to our minds the words of inspiration; and then again let usput the question to our conscience, Is this language fit for us to useto a fellow-creature?

Let the heaven exult with praises, Let the heavens rejoice, andLet the earth resound with joy: let the earth be glad ... (exultet is the very word used in the Vulgate translation of the Psalm)--before the Lord, for He cometh to judge the earth. --Ps. Xcvi (xcv). 11. 

The holy solemnities sing Ye shall have a song, as in theThe glory of the Lord. Night when a holy solemnity is kept ... And the Lord shall cause His glorious voice to be heard. Isa. Xxx. 29. Let the heaven and earth praise Him. Ps. Lxix (lxviii). 34. 

Thou just Judge of mankind, All judgment is committedAnd true light of the world, unto the Son. John v. 22. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. John i. 9. 

With the prayers of our hearts we With my whole heart have I pray Thee, sought Thee. Ps. Cxix (cxviii). Hear the prayers of Thy suppliants. 10. Hear my prayer, O God. Ps. Lxi (lx). 1. Whom have I in heaven but Thee? Ps. Lxxiii (lxxii). 25. And this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask any thing according to His will, He heareth us. 1 John v. 14. 

Thou who shuttest heaven by I have the keys of death and of Thy word, hell. These things saith He thatAnd loosest its bars, is holy, He that is true: He that hath the key of David. He that openeth and no man shutteth, and shutteth and no man {267} openeth. I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it. Rev. I. 18; iii. 7, 8

Release us by command, we pray Thy sins be forgiven thee. Thee, Matt. Ix. 22. Bless the Lord, OFrom all our sins. My soul ... Who forgiveth all thine iniquities. Ps. Ciii. 2. This is your blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Matt. Xxvi. 28. Have mercy upon me, O God ... According to the multitude of Thy tender mercies, blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. Ps. Li (l). 

Thou to whose word is subject Bless the Lord, O my soul ... The health and weakness of all, who healeth all thy diseases. Ps. Ciii (cii). 2, 3. 

Do Thou heal us who are morally Create in me a clean heart, Odiseased, God, and renew a right spiritRestoring us to virtue; within me. Ps. Li. 10 (4. )That when Thou, the Judge, shaltappear in the end of the world, Thou mayest grant us to bepartakers of eternal joy. 

This would be a Christian prayer, a primitive prayer, a scripturalprayer, a prayer well fitting mortal man to utter by his tongue and fromhis heart, to the God who heareth prayer; and him who shall in sincerefaith offer such a prayer, Christ will never send empty away. But ifthis prayer, fitted as it seems only to be addressed to God, be offeredto the soul of a departed saint--I will not talk of blasphemy, anddeadly sin, and idolatry, --I will only ask members of the Church of Rometo weigh all these things well, one by one. These are not subjects forcrimination and recrimination. {268}

We have had far too much of those unholy weapons on both sides. Speakingthe truth in love, I should be verily guilty of a sin in my ownconscience were I, with my views of Christian worship, to offer thisprayer to the soul of a man however holy, however blessed, howeverexalted. 

The next part of our work will be given exclusively to the worship ofthe Blessed Virgin Mary. {269}

 * * * * *

PART III. 

CHAPTER I. 

SECTION I. --THE VIRGIN MARY. 

The worship of the blessed Virgin Mary is so highly exalted in theChurch of Rome, as to require the formation of a new name to express itshigh character. Neither could the Latin language provide a word whichwould give an adequate idea of its excellence, nor could any wordpreviously employed by the writers in Greek, meet the casesatisfactorily. The newly invented term Hyperdulia, meaning "a serviceabove others, " seems to place the service of the Virgin on a footingpeculiarly its own, as raised above the worship of the saints departed, and of the angels of God, cherubim and seraphim, with all the hosts ofprincipalities and powers in heavenly places. The service of the VirginMary thus appears not only to justify, but even to require a separateand distinct examination in this volume. The general principles, however, which we have already endeavoured to establish and illustratewith regard as well to the study of the Holy Scriptures as to theevidence of primitive antiquity, are equally applicable here; and withthose principles present to our minds, {270} we will endeavour now toascertain the truth with regard to the worship of the Virgin as nowwitnessed in the Roman Catholic Church. 

Of the Virgin Mary, think not, brethren of the Church of Rome, that atrue member of the Anglican branch of the Catholic Church will speakdisparagingly or irreverently. Were such an one found among us, weshould say of him, he knows not what spirit he is of. Our church, in herLiturgy, her homilies, her articles, in the works too of the best andmost approved among her divines and teachers, ever speaks of Saint Mary, the blessed Virgin, in the language of reverence, affection, andgratitude. 

She was a holy virgin and a holy mother. She was highly favoured, blessed among women. The Lord was with her, and she was the mother ofour only Saviour. She was herself blessed, and blessed was the fruit ofher womb. We delight in the language of our ancestors, in which theywere used to call her "Mary, the Blissful Maid. " Should any one of thosewho profess and call themselves Christians and Catholics, entertain awish to interrupt the testimony of every succeeding age, and tointerpose a check to the fulfilment of her own recorded prophecy, "Allgenerations shall call me blessed, " certainly the Anglican CatholicChurch will never acknowledge that wish to be the genuine desire of oneof her own sons. The Lord hath blessed her; yea, and she shall beblessed. 

But when we are required either to address our supplications to her, orelse to sever ourselves from the communion of a large portion of ourfellow-Christians, we have no room for hesitation; the case offers us noalternative. Our love of unity must yield to our love {271} of truth; wecannot join in that worship which in our conscience we believe to be asin against God. Whether we are right or wrong in this matter, God willhimself judge: and, compared with his acquittal and approval, theseverity of man's judgment cannot turn us aside from our purpose. Butbefore any one pronounces a sentence of condemnation against us, or ofapproval on himself, it well becomes him patiently and dispassionatelyto weigh the evidence; lest his decision may not be consistent withjustice and truth. 

In addition to what has been already said on the general subject ofaddressing our invocation to any created being--to any one among theprincipalities and thrones, dominions, powers, angels, archangels, andall the hosts of heaven, to any one among the saints, martyrs, confessors, and holy men departed hence in the Lord--I would submit tomy brethren of the Roman Catholic Church some considerationsspecifically applicable to the case of the blessed Virgin, and to thepractice of the Church of Rome in the religious worship paid to her. 

First, it will be well for us to possess ourselves afresh of whateverlight is thrown on this subject by the Scriptures themselves. 

 * * * * *

SECTION II. --EVIDENCE OF HOLY SCRIPTURE. 

The first intimation given to us that a woman was in the providence ofGod appointed to be the instrument, or channel by which the Saviour ofmankind should be brought into the world, was made immediately after theFall, and at the very first dawn of the day of salvation. {272} I amfully aware how the various criticisms on the words in which that firstpromise of a Saviour is couched, have been the well-spring of angrycontroversy. I will not enter upon that field. The authorized Englishversion thus renders the passage: "I will put enmity between thee andthe woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. " [Gen. Iii. 15. ] The Roman Vulgate, instead of the word "it, " reads "she. " Surely such a point as thisshould be made a subject of calm and enlightened criticism, withoutwarmth or heart-burnings on either side. But for our present purpose, itmatters little what turn that controversy may take. I believe our own tobe the true rendering: but whether the word dictated here by the HolySpirit to Moses should be so translated as to refer to the seed of thewoman generally, as in our authorized version, or to the male child, thedescendant of the woman, as the Septuagint renders it, or to the word"woman" itself; and if the latter, whether it refer to Eve, the motherof every child of a mortal parent, or to Mary, the immediate mother ofour Saviour: whatever view of that Hebrew word be taken, no Christiancan doubt, that before the foundations of the world were laid, it wasforeordained in the counsels of the Eternal Godhead, that the futureMessiah, the Redeemer of Mankind, should be of the seed of Eve, and inthe fulness of time be born of a Virgin of the name of Mary, and that inthe mystery of that incarnation should the serpent's head be bruised. Iwish not to dwell on this, because it bears but remotely andincidentally on the question at issue. I will, therefore, pass on, quoting {273} only the words of one of the most laborious among RomanCatholic commentators, De Sacy. "The sense is the same in the one and inthe other, though the expression varies. The sense of the Hebrew is, TheSon of the Woman, Jesus Christ, Son of God, and Son of a Virgin, shallbruise thy head, and by establishing the kingdom of God on earth, destroy thine. The sense of the Vulgate is, The woman, by whom thou hastconquered man, shall bruise thy head, not by herself, but by JesusChrist. " [Vol. I. P. 132. ]

The only other passage in which reference appears to be made in the OldTestament to the Mother of our Lord, contains that celebrated prophecyin the seventh chapter of Isaiah, about which I am not aware that anydifference exists between the Anglican and the Roman Churches. "A Virginshall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel. "[Isaiah vii. 4. ]

I find no passage in the Old Testament which can by any inferentialapplication be brought to bear on the question of Mary's being a properobject of invocation. 

 * * * * *

In the New Testament, mention by name is made of the Virgin Mary by St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke, and by St. John in his Gospel, as theMother of our Lord, but not by name; and by no other writer. Neither St. Paul in any one of his many Epistles, though he mentions the names ofmany of our Lord's disciples, nor St. James, nor St. Peter, who mustoften have seen her during our Lord's ministry, nor St. Jude, nor St. John in any of his three Epistles, or in the {274} Revelation (though, as we learn from his own Gospel, she had of especial trust beencommitted to his care)--no one of these either mentions her as living, or alludes to her memory as dead. 

The first occasion on which any reference is made in the New Testamentto the Virgin Mary is the salutation of the Angel, as recorded by St. Luke in the opening chapter of his Gospel. The last occasion is when sheis mentioned by the same Evangelist, as "Mary the Mother of Jesus, " inconjunction with his brethren and with the Apostles and the women allcontinuing in prayer and supplication, immediately after the ascensionof our blessed Lord. Between these two occasions the name of Mary occursunder a variety of circumstances, on every one of which we shall do wellto reflect. 

The first occasion, we have already said, is the salutation of Mary bythe angel, announcing to her that she should be the Mother of the Son ofGod. Surely no daughter of Eve was ever so distinguished among women;and well does it become us to cherish her memory with affectionatereverence. The words addressed to her when on earth by the angel in thatannouncement, with a little variation of expression, are daily addressedto her by the Roman Catholic Church, now that she is no longer seen, butis removed to the invisible world. "Hail, thou that art highlyfavoured!" (or as the Vulgate reads it, "full of grace") "the Lord iswith thee. Blessed art thou among women. " [Luke i. 28. ] On thesubstitution of the expression, "full of grace, " for "highly favoured, "or, as our margin suggests, "graciously accepted, or much graced, " I amnot desirous {275} of troubling you with any lengthened remark. I couldhave wished that since the Greek is different in this passage, and inthe first chapter of St. John, where the words "full of grace" areapplied to our Saviour, a similar distinction had been observed in theRoman translation. But the variation is unessential. The otherexpression, "Blessed art thou among women, " is precisely and identicallythe same with the ascription of blessedness made by an inspired tongue, under the elder covenant, to another daughter of Eve. "Blessed abovewomen, " or (as both the Septuagint and the Vulgate render the word)"Blessed among women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be. "[Judges v. 24. ] We can see no ground in such ascription of blessednessfor any posthumous adoration of the Virgin Mary. 

The same observation applies with at least equal strictness to thataffecting interview between Mary and Elizabeth, when, enlighteneddoubtless by an especial revelation, Elizabeth returned the salutationof her cousin by addressing her as the Mother of her Lord, and hailingher visit as an instance of most welcome and condescending kindness, "Whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come unto me?"[Luke i. 43. ] Members of the Anglican Church are taught to refer to thisevent in Mary's life with feelings of delight and gratitude. On thisoccasion she uttered that beautiful hymn, "The Song of the blessedVirgin Mary, " which our Church has selected for daily use at EveningPrayer. These incidents bring before our minds the image of a spotlessVirgin, humble, pious, obedient, holy: a chosen servant of God--anexalted pattern for her fellow-creatures; but still a fellow-creature, and a fellow-servant: {276} a virgin pronounced by an angel blessed onearth. But further than this we cannot go. We read of no power, noauthority, neither the power and influence of intercession, nor theauthority or right of command being ever, even by implication, committedto her; and we dare not of our own minds venture to take for granted astatement of so vast magnitude, involving associations so awful. Wereverence her memory as a blessed woman, the virgin mother of our Lord. We cannot supplicate any blessing at her hand; we cannot pray to her forher intercession. 

The angel's announcement to Joseph, whether before or after the birth ofChrist, the visit of the Magi, the flight into Egypt, and the returnthence, in the record of all of which events by St. Matthew the name ofMary occurs, however interesting and important in themselves, seem torequire no especial attention with reference to the immediate subject ofour inquiry. To Joseph the angel speaks of the blessed Virgin as "Marythy wife. " [Matt. I. 20. ] In every other instance she is called "Theyoung child's mother, " or "His mother. "

In relating the circumstances of Christ's birth the Evangelist employsno words which seem to invite any particular examination. Joseph went upinto the city of David to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife; andthere she brought forth her first-born son, and wrapped him in swaddlingclothes, and laid him in a manger. And the shepherds found Mary andJoseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. [Luke ii. 19. ]

Between the birth of Christ, and the flight into Egypt, St. Luke recordsan event to have happened by no means unimportant--the presentation ofChrist in {277} the temple. "And when the days of her purificationaccording to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him toJerusalem to present him to the Lord. And he (Simeon) came by the Spiritinto the temple; and when the parents brought in the child Jesus to dofor him after the custom of the law, then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said, Lord, &c. And Joseph and his mother marvelledat those things which were spoken of him. And Simeon blessed them, andsaid unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall andrising again of many in Israel; and for a sign that shall be spokenagainst, (yea, a sword shall pierce through thine own soul also) thatthe thoughts of many hearts may be revealed. " [Luke ii. 28. ] In thisincident it is worthy of remark, that Joseph and Mary are both mentionedby name, that they are both called the parents of the young child; thatboth are equally blessed by Simeon; and that the good old Israelite, illumined by the spirit of prophecy, when he addresses himselfimmediately to Mary, speaks only of her future sorrow, and does not evenmost remotely or faintly allude to any exaltation of her above the otherdaughters of Abraham. "A sword shall pass through thine own soul also, "a prophecy, as St. Augustine interprets it, accomplished when shewitnessed the sufferings and death of her Son. (See De Sacy, vol. Xxxii. P. 138. )

The next occasion on which the name of the Virgin Mary is found inScripture, is the memorable visit of herself, her husband, and her Son, to Jerusalem, when he was twelve years old. And the manner in which thisincident is related by the inspired Evangelist, so far from intimatingthat Mary was destined to be an object of worship to the believers inher Son, affords {278} evidence which exhibits strongly a bearing thedirect contrary. Here again Joseph and Mary are both called his parents:Joseph is once mentioned by name, and so is Mary. If the language hadbeen so framed as on purpose to take away all distinction of preferenceor superiority, it could not more successfully have effected itspurpose. But not only so, of the three addresses recorded as having beenmade by our blessed Lord to his beloved mother (and only three arerecorded in the New Testament), the first occurs during this visit toJerusalem. It was in answer to the remonstrance made by Mary, "Son, whyhast thou thus dealt with us? Behold, thy father and I have sought theesorrowing. " [Luke ii. 48. ] "How is it that ye sought me? Knew ye notthat I must be about my Father's business?"--[or in my Father's house, as some render it. ] He lifts up their minds from earth to heaven, fromhis human to his eternal origin. He makes no distinction here, --"Wist YEnot. " Again, I would appeal to any dispassionate person to pronounce, whether this reproof, couched in these words, countenances the idea thatour blessed Lord intended his human mother to receive such divine honourfrom his followers to the end of time as the Church of Rome now pays?and whether St. Luke, whose pen wrote this account, could have been madecognizant of any such right invested in the Virgin?

The next passage calling for our consideration is that which records thefirst miracle: "And the third day there was a marriage in Cana ofGalilee, and the mother of Jesus was there, and both Jesus was calledand his disciples to the marriage. And when they wanted wine (when thewine failed), the mother of {279} Jesus saith unto him, They have nowine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? minehour is not yet come. " [John ii. 1. ]

I have carefully read the comments on this passage, which differentwriters of the Roman Catholic communion have recommended for theadoption of the faithful, and I desire not to make any remarks uponthem. Let the passage be interpreted in any way which enlightenedcriticism and the analogy of Scripture will sanction, and I would ask, after a careful weighing of this incident, the facts, and the words inall their bearings, would any unprejudiced mind expect that the holy andbeloved person, towards whom the meek and tender and loving Jesusemployed this address, was destined by that omniscient and omnipotentSaviour to be an object of those religious acts with which, as we shallsoon be reminded, the Church of Rome now daily approaches her?

It is pain and grief to me thus to extract and to comment upon thesepassages of Holy Writ. The feelings of affection and of reverenceapproaching awe, with which I hold the memory of that blessed VirginMother of my Lord, raise in me a sincere repugnance against dwelling onthis branch of our subject, beyond what the cause of the truth as it isin Jesus absolutely requires; and very little more of the same irksometask awaits us. You will of course expect me to refer to an incidentrecorded with little variety of expression, and with no essentialdifference, by the first three Evangelists. St. Matthew's is the mostfull account, and is this, --"While he yet talked to the people, beholdhis mother and his brethren stood without desiring to speak with him. Then one said unto him, {280} Behold, thy mother and thy brethren standwithout, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto himthat told him, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? And hestretched forth his hand toward his disciples and said, Behold my motherand my brethren. For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which isin heaven, the same is my brother and sister and mother. " [Matt. Xii. 46. ] Or, as St. Luke expresses it, --"And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these, who hear the word of God and doit. " [Luke viii. 21. ]

Humanly speaking, could a more favourable opportunity have presenteditself to our blessed Lord of referring to his beloved mother, in such amanner as to exalt her above her fellow daughters of Eve, --in such amanner too, as that Christians in after days, when the Saviour's bodilypresence should have been taken away from them, and the extraordinarycommunications of the Spirit of truth should have been withdrawn, mighthave remembered that He had spoken these things, and have beencountenanced by his words in doing her homage? But so far is this fromthe plain and natural tendency of the words of her blessed Son, that, had He of acknowledged purpose (and He has condescended to announce tous, in another place (John xiii. 19, &c. ), the purpose of his words)wished to guard his disciples, whilst the world should last, againstbeing seduced by any reverence and love which they might feel towardsHimself into a belief that they ought to exalt his mother above allother created beings, and pay her holy worship, we know not what wordsHe could have adopted more fitted for that purpose. There was nothing inthe communication which seemed to call for {281} such a remark. A plainmessage announces to Him as a matter of fact one of the most commonoccurrences of daily life. And yet He fixes upon the circumstance as thegroundwork not only of declaring the close union which it was his goodpleasure should exist between obedient and true believers and Himself, but of cautioning all against any superstitious feelings towards thosewho were nearly allied to Him by the ties of his human nature. Withreverence I would say, it is as though He desired to record hisforeknowledge of the errors into which his disciples were likely to beseduced, and warned them beforehand to shun and resist the temptation. The evidence borne by this passage against our offering any religiousworship to the Virgin, on the ground of her having been the mother ofour Lord, seems clear, strong, direct, and inevitable. She was themother of the Redeemer of the world, and blessed is she among women; butthat very Redeemer Himself, with his own lips, assures us that everyfaithful servant of his heavenly Father shall be equally honoured withher, and possess all the privileges which so near and dear arelationship with Himself might be supposed to convey. --Who is mymother? Or, who are my brethren? Behold my mother and my brethren!Whosoever shall do the will of my Father in heaven, the same is mybrother, and my sister, and my mother. 

No less should we be expected in this place to take notice of that mostremarkable passage of Holy Scripture, [Luke xi. 27. ] in which ourblessed Lord is recorded under different circumstances to have expressedthe same sentiments, but in words which will appear to many even morestrongly indicative of his desire to prevent any {282} undue exaltationof his mother. "As he spake these things, a certain woman of the companylifted up her voice and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that barethee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. " On the truth or wisdom ofthat exclamation our Lord makes no remark; He refers not to his motherat all, not even to assure them (as St. Augustine in after-ages taught, see De Sacy, vol. Xxxii. P. 35. ), that however blessed Mary was in hercorporeal conception of the Saviour, yet far more blessed was shebecause she had fully borne Him spiritually in her heart. He alludes notto his mother except for the purpose of instantly drawing the minds ofhis hearers from contemplating any supposed blessedness in her, and offixing them on the sure and greater blessedness of his true, humble, faithful, and obedient disciples, to the end of time. "But he said, Yea, rather [or, as some prefer, yea, verily, and] blessed are they that hearthe word of God, and keep it. " Again, it must be asked, could such anexclamation have been met by such a reply, had our Lord's will been toexalt his mother, as she is now exalted by the Church of Rome? Rather, we would reverently ask, would He have given this turn to such anaddress, had He not desired to check any such feeling towards her?

That most truly affecting and edifying incident recorded by St. John ashaving taken place whilst Jesus was hanging in his agony on the cross, an incident which speaks to every one who has a mind to understand and aheart to feel, presents to us the last occasion on which the name of theVirgin Mother of our Lord occurs in the Gospels. No paraphrase could addforce, or clearness, or beauty to the simple narrative of theEvangelist; no exposition could bring out its parts more prominently or{283} affectingly. The calmness and authority of our blessed Lord, histenderness and affection, his filial love in the very midst of hisagony, it is impossible to describe with more heart-stirring andheart-soothing pathos than is conveyed in the simple language of himwhom the Saviour at that awful hour addressed, as He committed hismother to him of especial trust. But not one syllable falls from thelips of Christ, or from the pen of the beloved disciple, who recordsthis act of his blessed Master's filial piety, which can by possibilitybe construed to imply, that our blessed Lord intended Mary to be held insuch honour by his disciples, as would be shown in the offering ofprayer and praise to her after her dissolution. He who could by a word, rather by the mere motion of his will, have bidden the whole course ofnature and of providence, so to proceed as that all its operationsshould provide for the health and safety, the support and comfort of hismother--He, when He was on the cross, and when He was on the point ofcommitting his soul into the hands of his Father, leaves her to the careof one whom He loved, and whose sincerity and devotedness to Him He had, humanly speaking, long experienced. He bids him treat Mary as his ownmother, He bids Mary look to John as to her own son for support andsolace: "Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and hismother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. WhenJesus, therefore, saw his mother and the disciple standing by whom heloved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son; then saith he tothe disciple, Behold thy mother. " [John xix. 25. ] And He added no more. If Christ willed that his beloved mother should end her days in peace, removed equally {284} from want and the desolation of widowhood on theone hand, and from splendour and notoriety on the other, nothing couldbe more natural than such conduct in such a Being at such a time. But ifhis purpose was to exalt her into an object of religious adoration, thatnations should kneel before her, and all people do her homage, then thewords and the conduct of our Lord at this hour seem altogetherunaccountable: and so would the words of the Evangelist also be, "Andfrom that hour that disciple took her unto his own home. "

After this not another word falls from the pen of St. John which can bemade to bear on the station, the character, the person, or circumstancesof Mary. After his resurrection our Saviour remained on earth forty daysbefore He finally ascended into heaven. Many of his interviews andconversations with his disciples during that interval are recorded inthe Gospel. Every one of the four Evangelists relates some act or somesaying of our Lord on one or more of those occasions. Mention is made byname of Mary Magdalene, of Mary [the mother] of Joses, of Mary [themother] of James, of Salome, of Joanna, of Peter, of Cleophas, of thedisciple whom Jesus loved, at whose house the mother of our Lord thenwas; of Thomas, of Nathanael. The eleven also are mentioned generally. But by no one of the Evangelists is reference made at all to Mary themother of our Lord, as having been present at any one of thoseinterviews; her name is not alluded to throughout. 

On one solitary occasion subsequently to the ascension of Christ, mention is made of Mary his mother, in company with many others, andwithout any further distinction to separate her from the rest: "And when{285} they were come in (from having witnessed the ascension of ourSaviour), they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, andJames, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew andMatthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas thebrother of James. These all continued with one accord in prayer andsupplication with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with hisbrethren. " [Acts i. 13. ] Not one word is said of Mary having beenpresent to witness even the ascension of her blessed Son; we read nocommand of our Lord, no wish expressed, no distant intimation to hisdisciples that they should even show to her marks of respect and honour;not an allusion is there made to any superiority or distinction andpreeminence. Sixty years at the least are generally considered to becomprehended within the subsequent history of the New Testament beforethe Apocalypse was written; but neither in the narrative, nor in theEpistles, nor yet in the prophetic part of the Holy Book, is there themost distant allusion to Mary. Of him to whose loving care our dyingLord committed his beloved mother of especial trust, we hear much. John, we find, putting forth the miraculous power of Christ at the BeautifulGate of the Temple; we find him imprisoned and arraigned before theJewish authorities; but not one word is mentioned as to what meanwhilebecame of Mary. We find John confirming the Church in Samaria; we findhim an exile in the island of Patmos; but no mention is made of Mary. Nay, though we have three of his epistles, and the second of themaddressed to one "whom he loved in the truth, " we find neither from thetongue nor from the pen of St. John, one single allusion to the motherof our Lord alive or dead. And then, whatever may have been the matter{286} of fact as to St. Paul, neither the many letters of that Apostle, nor the numerous biographical incidents recorded of him, intimate in themost remote degree that he knew any thing whatever concerning herindividually. St. Paul does indeed refer to the human nature of Christderived from his human mother, and had he been taught by his Lord toentertain towards her such sentiments as the Roman Church now professesto entertain, he could not have had a more inviting occasion to giveutterance to them. But instead of thus speaking of the Virgin Mary, hedoes not even mention her name or state at all, but refers only in themost general way to her nature and her sex as a daughter of Adam: "Butwhen the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, MADE OF AWOMAN, made under the law; to redeem them that were under the Law, thatwe might receive the adoption of sons. " [Gal. Iv. 4. ] From a timecertainly within a few days of our Saviour's ascension the Scripturesare totally silent throughout as to Mary, whether in life or in death. 

Here we might well proceed to contrast this view which the Scriptures ofeternal truth give of the blessed Virgin Mary with the authorized andappointed worship of that branch of the Christian Church which is incommunion with Rome. We must first, however, here also examine thetreasures of Christian antiquity, and ascertain what witness theearliest uninspired records bear on this immediate point. {287}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER II. --EVIDENCE OF PRIMITIVE WRITERS. 

Closing the inspired volume, and seeking at the fountain-head for theevidence of Christian antiquity, what do we find? For upwards of threecenturies and a half (the limit put to our present inquiry) we discoverin no author, Christian or heathen, any trace whatever of the invocationof the Virgin Mary by Catholic Christians. I have examined every passagewhich I have found adduced by writers of the Church of Rome, and havesearched for any other passages which might appear to deserveconsideration as bearing favourably on their view of the subject; andthe worship of the Virgin, such as is now insisted upon by the Councilof Trent, prescribed by the Roman ritual, and practised in the Church ofRome, is proved by such an examination to have had neither name, norplace, nor existence among the early Christians. Forgive my importunityif I again and again urge you to join us in weighing these facts well;and to take your view of them from no advocate on the one side or theother. Search the Scriptures for yourselves, search the earliest writersfor yourselves, and for yourselves search with all diligence into theauthentic and authorized liturgies of your own Church, your missals, andbreviaries, and formularies. Hearsay evidence, testimony {288} taken atsecond or third hand, vague rumours and surmises will probably exposeus, on either side, to error. Let well-sifted genuine evidence bebrought by an upright and an enlightened mind to bear on the point atissue, and let the issue joined be this, Is the practice of praying tothe Virgin, and praising her, in the language of the prayers and praisesnow used in the prescribed formularies of the Roman Church, primitive. Catholic, Apostolical?

I am aware that among those who adhere to the Tridentine Confession offaith, there are many on whom this investigation will not be allowed toexercise any influence. 

The sentiments of Huet, wherever they are adopted, would operate to thetotal rejection of such inquiries as we are instituting in this work. His words on the immaculate conception of the Virgin are of far widerapplication than the immediate occasion on which he used them, "That theblessed Mary never conceived any sin in herself is in the present day anestablished principle of the Church, and confirmed by the Council ofTrent. In which it is our duty to acquiesce, rather than in the dicta ofthe ancients, if any seem to think otherwise, among whom must benumbered Origen. " [Origen's Works, vol. Iv. Part 2, p. 156. ]

In this address, however, we take for granted that the reader is open toconviction, desirous of arriving at the truth, and, with that view, ready to examine and sift the evidence of primitive antiquity. 

In that investigation our attention is very soon called to theremarkable fact, that, whereas in the case of the invocation of saintsand angels, the defenders of that doctrine and practice bring forward agreat variety of passages, in which mention is supposed to be made of{289} those beings as objects of honour and reverential and gratefulremembrance, the passages quoted with a similar view, as regards theVirgin Mary, are very few indeed: whilst the passages which intimatethat the early Christians paid her no extraordinary honour (certainlynot more than we of the Anglican Church do now) are innumerable. 

I have thought that it might be satisfactory here to refer to eachseparately of those earliest writers, whose testimony we have alreadyexamined on the general question of the invocation of saints and angels, and, as nearly as may be, in the same order. 

In the former department of our investigation we first endeavoured toascertain the evidence of those five primitive writers, who are calledthe Apostolical Fathers; and, with regard to the subject now before us, the result of our inquiry into the same works is this:

1. In the Epistle ascribed to BARNABAS we find no allusion to Mary. 

2. The same must be affirmed of the book called The Shepherd of HERMAS. 

3. In CLEMENT of Rome, who speaks of the Lord Jesus having descendedfrom Abraham according to the flesh, no mention is made of that daughterof Abraham of whom he was born. 

4. IGNATIUS in a passage already quoted (Ad Eph. Vii. P. 13 and 16)speaks of Christ both in his divine and human nature as Son of God andman, and he mentions the name of Mary, but it is without any adjunct orobservation whatever, "both of Mary and of God. " In another place hespeaks of her virgin state, and the fruit of her womb; and of her havingborne our God Jesus the Christ; but he adds no {290} more; not evencalling her "The blessed, " or "The Virgin. " In the interpolated Epistleto the Ephesians, the former passage adds "the Virgin" after "Mary, " butnothing more. 

5. In the Epistle of POLYCARP we find an admonition to virgins (Page186), how they ought to walk with a spotless and chaste conscience, butthere is no allusion to the Virgin Mary. 

JUSTIN MARTYR. In this writer I do not find any passage so much in pointas the following, in which we discover no epithet expressive of honour, or dignity, or exaltation, though it refers to Mary in her capacity ofthe Virgin mother of our Lord:--"He therefore calls Himself the Son ofMan, either from his birth of a virgin, who was of the race of David, and Jacob, and Isaac, and Abraham, or because Abraham himself was thefather of those persons enumerated, from whom Mary drew her origin. "[Trypho, § 100. P. 195. ] And a little below he adds, "For Eve being avirgin and incorrupt, having received the word from the serpent, broughtforth transgression and death; but Mary the Virgin having received faithand joy (on the angel Gabriel announcing to her the glad tidings, thatthe Spirit of the Lord should come upon her, and the power of theHighest overshadow her) answered, Be it unto me according to thy word. And of her was born He of whom we have shown that so many Scriptureshave been spoken; He by whom God destroys the serpent, and angels andmen resembling [the serpent]; but works a rescue from death for such asrepent of evil and believe in Him. " One more passage will suffice, "Andaccording to the command of God, Joseph, taking Him with Mary, went intoEgypt. " [Trypho, § 102. P. 196. ] {291}

Among those "Questions" to which we have referred under the head ofJustin Martyr's works, but which are confessedly of a much less remotedate, probably of the fifth century, an inquiry is made, How couldChrist be free from blame, who so often set at nought his parent? Theanswer is, that He did not set her at nought; that He honoured her indeed, and would not have hurt her by his words;--but then the respondentadds, that Christ chiefly honoured Mary in that view of her maternalcharacter, under which all who heard the word of God and kept it, werehis brothers and sisters and mother; and that she surpassed all women invirtue. [Qu. 136. P. 500. ]

IRENÆUS. To the confused passage relied upon by Bellarmin, in whichIrenæus is supposed to represent Mary as the advocate of Eve, we havealready fully referred (page 120 of this work). In that passage there isno allusion to any honour paid, or to be paid to her, nor to anyinvocation of her. In every passage to which my attention has beendrawn, Irenæus speaks of the mother of our Lord as Mary, or the Virgin, without any adjunct, or term of reverence. 

CLEMENT of Alexandria speaks of the Virgin, and refers to an opinionrelative to her virgin-state, but without one word of honour. [Stromat. Vii. 16. P. 889. ]

TERTULLIAN[101]. The passages in which this ancient writer refers to themother of our Lord are very far from countenancing the religious worshipnow paid to her by Roman Catholics: "The brothers of the Lord had notbelieved on him, as it is contained in the Gospel published {292} beforeMarcion. His mother likewise is not shown to have adhered to him;whereas others, Marys and Marthas, were frequently in his company. " (SeeTert. De carne Christi, c. 7. (p. 364. De Sacy, 29. 439. )) And he tellsus that Christ was brought forth by a virgin, who was also about to bemarried once after the birth, that the two titles of sanctity might beunited in Christ by a mother who was both a virgin and also oncemarried[102]. 

 [Footnote 101: Paris, 1675. De carne Christi, vii. P. 315. De Monogamia, vii. P. 529. N. B. Both these treatises were probably written after he became a Montanist. ]

 [Footnote 102: On the works once ascribed to Methodius, but now pronounced to be spurious, see above, p. 131. ]

ORIGEN thus speaks: "Announcing to Zacharias the birth of John, and toMary the advent of our Saviour among men. " [Comment on John, § 24. Vol. Iv. P. 82. ] In his eighth homily on Leviticus, he refers to Mary as apure Virgin. [Vol. Ii. P. 228. ] In the forged work of later times, thewriter, speaking of our Saviour, says, "He had on earth an immaculateand chaste mother, this much blessed Virgin Mary. " [Hom. Iii. InDiversos. ]

In CYPRIAN we do not find one word expressive of honour or reverencetowards the Virgin Mary. Nor is her name mentioned in the letter of hiscorrespondent Firmilian, Bishop of Cappadocia. 

LACTANTIUS speaks of "a holy virgin" [Vol. I. P. 299. ] chosen for thework of Christ but not one other word of honour, or tending toadoration; though whilst dwelling on the incarnation of the Son of God, had he or his fellow-believers paid religious honour to her, he couldscarcely have avoided all allusion to it. 

EUSEBIUS speaks of the Virgin Mary, but is altogether silent as to anyreligious honour of any kind being due to her. In the Oration of theEmperor Constantine (as it is recorded by Eusebius), direct mention ismade of the "chaste virginity, " and of the maid who was mother {293} ofGod, and yet remained a virgin. But the object present to the author'smind was so exclusively God manifest in the flesh, that he does notthroughout even mention the name of Mary, or allude to any honour paidor due to her. [Cantab. 1720. § 11. P. 689. And § 19. P. 703. ]

ATHANASIUS, bent ever on establishing the perfect divinity and humanityof Christ, thus speaks: "The general scope of Holy Scripture is to makea twofold announcement concerning the Saviour, that He was always God, and is a Son; being the Word and the brightness and wisdom of theFather, and that He afterwards became man for us, taking flesh of theVirgin Mary, who bare God ([Greek: taes theotokou]). " [Athan. Orat. Iii. Cont. Arian. P. 579. ]

The work which we have already examined, called The ApostolicalConstitutions, compiled probably about the commencement of the fourthcentury, cannot be read without leaving an impression clear and powerfulon the mind, that no religious honour was paid to the Virgin Mary at thetime when they were written; certainly not more than is now cheerfullypaid to her memory by us of the Anglican Church. Take, for example, theprayer prescribed to be used on the appointment of a Deaconess; theinference from it must be, that others with whom the Lord's Spirit haddwelt, were at least held in equal honour with Mary: "O Eternal God, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Maker of male and female, who didstfill with thy Spirit Miriam, and Hannah, and Holda, and didst notdisdain that thy Son should be born of a woman, " &c. [Book viii. C. 20. ]Thus, {294} too, in another passage, Mary is spoken of just as otherwomen who had the gift of prophecy; and of her equally and inconjunction with the others it is said, that they were not elated by thegift, nor lifted themselves up against the men. "But even have womenprophesied; in ancient times Miriam, the sister of Aaron and Moses;after her Deborah; and afterwards Huldah and Judith; one under Josiah, the other under Darius; and the mother of the Lord also prophesied, andElizabeth her kinswoman; and Anna; and in our day the daughters ofPhilip; yet they were not lifted up against the men, but observed theirown measure. Therefore among you also should any man or woman have sucha grace, let them be humble, that God may take pleasure in them. " [Bookviii. C. 2. ]

In the Apostolical Canons I find no reference to Mary; nor indeed anypassage bearing on our present inquiry, except the last clause of all, containing the benediction. In this passage not only is the prayer forspiritual blessings addressed to God alone, but it is offeredexclusively through the mediation of Christ alone, without alluding tointercessions of angels saints, or the Virgin: "Now may God, the onlyunproduced Being, the Creator of all things, unite you all by peace inthe Holy Ghost; make you perfect unto every good work, not to be turnedaside, unblameable, not deserving reproof; and may He deem you worthy ofeternal life with us, by the mediation of his beloved Son Jesus Christour God and Saviour: with whom be glory to Him the Sovereign God andFather, in the Holy Ghost the Comforter, now and ever, world withoutend. Amen. " [Vol. I. P. 450. ]

I have not intentionally omitted any ancient author {295} falling withinthe limits of our present inquiry, nor have I neglected any one passagewhich I could find bearing testimony to any honour paid to the Virgin. The result of my research is, that I have not discovered one solitaryexpression which implies that religious invocation and honour, such asis now offered to Mary by the Church of Rome, was addressed to her bythe members of the primitive Catholic Church. {296}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER III. --THE ASSUMPTION OF THE VIRGIN MARY. 

By the Church of England, two festivals are observed in gratefulcommemoration of two events relating to Mary as the mother of ourLord:--the announcement of the Saviour's birth by the message of anangel, called, "The Annunciation of the blessed Virgin Mary, " and "ThePresentation of Christ in the Temple, " called also, "The Purification ofSaint Mary the Virgin. " In the service for the first of thesesolemnities, we are taught to pray that, as we have known theincarnation of the Son of God by the message of an angel, so by hisCross and Passion we may be brought to the glory of his resurrection. Inthe second, we humbly beseech the Divine Majesty that, as hisonly-begotten Son was presented in the Temple in the substance of ourflesh, so we may be presented unto Him with pure and clean hearts by thesame, his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. These days are observed tocommemorate events declared to us on the most sure warrant of HolyScripture; and these prayers are primitive and evangelical. They prayonly to God for spiritual blessings through his Son. The second prayerwas used in the Church {297} from very early times, and is stillretained in the Roman Breviary (Hus. Brev. Rom. H. 536. ); whereas, instead of the first[103], we find there unhappily a prayer nowsupplicating that those who offer it, "believing Mary to be truly theMother of God, might be aided by her intercessions with Him. " [V. 496. ]

 [Footnote 103: This collect also is found in the Roman Missal, as a Prayer at the Post Communion; though it does not appear in the Breviarium Romanum. ]

In the Roman Catholic Church, on the other hand, feasts are observed tothe honour of the Virgin Mary, in which the Anglican Church cannot join;such as the Nativity of the Virgin Mary, and the immaculate conceptionof her by her mother. On the origin and nature of these feasts it is notmy intention to dwell. I can only express my regret, that by appointinga service and a collect commemorative of the Conception of theVirgin[104] in her mother's womb, and praying that the observance ofthat solemnity may procure the votaries an increase of peace, the Churchof Rome has given countenance to a superstition, against which at itscommencement, so late as the 12th century, St. Bernard stronglyremonstrated, in an epistle to the monks of Lyons; a superstition whichhas been supported and explained by discussions in no way profitable tothe head or the heart. [Epist. 174. Paris, 1632, p. 1538. ]

 [Footnote 104: Ut quibus beatæ Virginis partus exstitit salutis exordium, conceptionis ejus votiva solemnitas pacis tribuat incrementum. H. 445. ]

Of all these institutions however in honour of the Virgin, the Feast ofthe ASSUMPTION appears to be as it were the crown and theconsummation[105]. This festival {298} is kept to celebrate themiraculous taking up (assumptio) of the Virgin Mary into heaven. And itscelebration, in Roman Catholic countries, is observed in a manner worthya cause to which our judgment would give deliberately its sanction; inwhich our feelings would safely and with satisfaction rest on thefirmness of our faith; from joining in which a truly pious mind wouldhave no ground for inward misgiving, nor for the aspiration, Would itwere founded in truth!

 [Footnote 105: "The Assumption of the Virgin Mary is the greatest of all the festivals which the Church celebrates in her honour. It is the consummation of all the other great mysteries by which her life was rendered most wonderful. It is the birthday of her true greatness and glory, and the crown of all the virtues of her whole life, which we admire single in her other festivals. " Alban Butler, vol. Viii. P. 175. ]

Before such a solemn office of praise and worship were ever admittedamong the institutions of the religion of truth, its originators andcompilers should have built upon sure grounds; careful too should theyalso be who now join in the service, and so lend it the countenance oftheir example; more especially should those sift the evidence well, who, by their doctrine and writings, uphold, and defend, and advance it; lestthey prove at the last to love Rome rather than the truth as it is inJesus. So solemn, so marked, a religious service in the temples and atthe altar of HIM who is the truth, a service so exalted above hisfellows, ought beyond question to be founded on the most sure warrant ofHoly Scripture, or at the least on undisputed historical evidence, as tothe alleged matter of fact on which it is built, --the certain, acknowledged, uninterrupted, and universal testimony of the ChurchCatholic from the very time. They incur a momentous responsibility whoaid in propagating for religious truths the inventions of men[106]. 

 [Footnote 106: Very different opinions are held by Roman Catholic writers as to the antiquity of this feast. All, indeed, maintain that it is of very ancient introduction; but whilst some, with Lambecius (lib. Viii. P. 286), maintain the antiquity of the festival to be so remote, that its origin cannot be traced; and thence infer that it was instituted by a silent and unrecorded act of the Apostles themselves; others (among whom Kollarius, the learned annotator on the opinion of Lambecius) acknowledged, that it was introduced by an ordinance of the Church, though not at the same time in all countries of Christendom. That annotator assigns its introduction at Rome to the fourth century; at Constantinople to the sixth; in Germany and France to the ninth. ] {299}

But what is the real state of the case with regard to the fact of theAssumption of the Virgin Mary? It rests (as we shall soon see) on noauthentic history; it is supported by no primitive tradition. I professmy surprise to have been great, when I found the most celebrateddefenders of the Roman Catholic cause, instead of citing such evidenceas would bear with it even the appearance of probability, appealing tohistories written more than a thousand years after the alleged event, toforged documents and vague rumours. I was willing to doubt thesufficiency of my research; till I found its defenders, instead ofalleging and establishing by evidence what God was by them said to havedone, contenting themselves with asserting his omnipotence, in proofthat the doctrine implied no impossibility; dwelling on the fitness andreasonableness of his working such a miracle in the honour of her whowas chosen to be the mother of his eternal Son; and whilst they took thefact as granted, substituting for argument glowing and ferventdescriptions of what might have been the joy in heaven, and what oughtto be the feelings of mortals on earth. 

At every step of the inquiry into the merits of this case, the principlerecurs to the mind, that, as men really and in earnest looking onward toa life after this, our duty is to ascertain to the utmost of our {300}power, not what God could do, not what we or others might pronounce itfit that God should do, but what He has done; not what would beagreeable to our feelings, were it true, but what, whether agreeably oradversely to our feelings or wishes, is proved to be true. The verymoment a Christian writer refers me from evidence to possibilities, Ifeel that he knows not the nature of Christianity; he throws me backfrom the sure and certain hope of the Gospel to the "beautiful fable" ofSocrates, --"It were better to be there than here, IF THESE THINGS ARETRUE. "

But let us inquire into the facts of the case. 

First, I would observe that it is by no means agreed among all who havewritten upon the subject, what was the place, or what was the time ofthe Virgin's death. Whilst some have maintained that she breathed herlast at Ephesus, the large majority assert that her departure from thisworld took place at Jerusalem. And as to the time of her death, somehave assigned it to the year 48 of the Christian era, about the time atwhich Paul and Barnabas (as we read in Holy Scripture) returned toAntioch; whilst others refer it to a later date. I am not, however, aware of any supposition which fixes it at a period subsequent to thatat which the canon of Scripture closes. Epiphanius indeed, towards theclose of the fourth century, reminding us that Scripture is totally andpurely silent on the subject as well of Mary's death and burial, as ofher having accompanied St. John in his travels or not, without alludingto any tradition as to her assumption, thus sums up his sentiments: "Idare to say nothing; but considering it, I observe silence. " [Epiph. Vol. I. P. 1043. ] {301}

Should any of my readers have deliberately adopted as the rule of theirfaith the present practice of the Church of Rome, I cannot hope thatthey will take any interest in the following inquiry; but I have beenassured, by most sensible and well-informed members of that Church, thatthere is a very general desire entertained to have this and otherquestions connected with our subject examined without prejudice, andcalmly placed before them. To such persons I trust this chapter may notappear altogether unworthy of their consideration. Those who would turnfrom it on the principle to which we have here alluded, will findthemselves very closely responding to the sentiments professed by St. Bernard, "Exalt her who is exalted above the choirs of angels to theheavenly kingdom. These things the Church sings to me of her, and hastaught me to sing the same to others. For my part, what I have receivedfrom it, I am secure in holding and delivering; which also, I confess, Iam not OVER-SCRUPULOUS in admitting. (Quod non scrupulosius fateoradmiserim. ) I have received in truth from the Church that that day is tobe observed with the highest veneration on which she was TAKEN up(assumpta) from this wicked world, and carrying with her into heavenfeasts of the most celebrated joys[107]. "

 [Footnote 107: See Lambecius, book viii. P. 286. The letter of St. Bernard is addressed to the Canons of Lyons on the Conception of the holy Mary. Paris, 1632, p. 1538. His observations in that letter, with a view of discountenancing the rising superstition, in juxtaposition with these sentiments, are well deserving the serious consideration of every one. ]

Let us then, with the authorized and enjoined service of the Church ofRome for the 15th of August before us, examine the evidence on whichthat religious {302} service, the most solemn consummation of all therest, is founded. 

In the service of the Assumption, more than twice seven times is itreiterated in a very brief space, and with slight variations ofexpression, that Mary was taken up into heaven; and that, not on anygeneral and indefinite idea of her beatific and glorified state, butwith reference to one specific single act of divine favour, performed ata fixed time, effecting her assumption, as it is called, "to-day. " [Æs. 595. ] "To-day Mary the Virgin ascended the heavens. Rejoice, because sheis reigning with Christ for ever. " "Mary the Virgin is taken up intoheaven, to the ethereal chamber in which the King of kings sits on hisstarry throne. " "The holy mother of God hath been exalted above thechoirs of angels to the heavenly realms. " "Come, let us worship the Kingof kings, to whose ethereal heaven the Virgin Mother was taken upto-day. " And that it is her bodily ascension, her corporeal assumptioninto heaven, and not merely the transit of her soul[108] from mortallife to eternal bliss, which the Roman Church maintains and propagatesby this service, is put beyond doubt by the service itself. In thefourth and sixth reading[109], or lesson, for example, we find these{303} sentences:--"She returned not into the earth but is seated in theheavenly tabernacles. " "How could death devour, how could those belowreceive, how could corruption invade, THAT BODY, in which life wasreceived? For it a direct, plain, and easy path to heaven was prepared. "

 [Footnote 108: Lambecius, indeed (book viii. P. 306), distinctly affirms, that one object which the Church had in view was to condemn the HERESY of those who maintain that the reception of the Virgin into heaven, was the reception of her soul only, and not also of her body. "Ut damnet eorum hæresin qui sanctissimæ Dei genetricis rcceptionem in coelum ad animam ipsius tantum, non vero simul etiam ad corpus pertinere existimant. "]

 [Footnote 109: Non reversa est in terram, sed ... In coelestibus tabernaculis collocatum. Quomodo mois devoraret, quomodo inferi susciperent, quomodo corruptio invaderit CORPUS ILLUD in quo vita suscepta est? Huic recta plana et facilis ad coelum parata est via. Æs. 603, 604. ]

Now, on what authority does this doctrine rest? On what foundation stoneis this religious worship built? The holy Scriptures are totally andprofoundly silent, as to the time, the place, the manner of Mary'sdeath. Once after the ascension of our Lord, and that within eight days, we find mentioned the name of Mary promiscuously with others; afterthat, no allusion is made to her in life or in death; and no account, asfar as I can find, places her death too late for mention to have beenmade of it in the Acts of the Apostles. The historian, NicephorusCallistus, refers it to the 5th year of Claudius, that is about A. D. 47:after which period, events through more than fifteen years are recordedin that book of sacred Scripture. 

But closing the holy volume, what light does primitive antiquity enableus to throw on this subject?

The earliest testimony quoted by the defenders of the doctrine, thatMary was at her death taken up bodily into heaven, is a supposed entryin the Chronicon of Eusebius, opposite the year of our Lord 48. This iscited by Coccius without any remark; and even Baronius rests the date ofMary's assumption upon this testimony. [Vol. I. 403. ] The words referredto are these, --"Mary the Virgin, the mother of Jesus, was taken up intoheaven; as some write that it had been revealed to them. " {304}

Now, suppose for one moment that this came from the pen of Eusebiushimself, to what does it amount? A chronologist in the fourth centuryrecords that some persons, whom he does not name, not even stating whenthey lived, had written down, not what they had heard as matter of fact, or received by tradition, but that a revelation had been made to them ofa fact alleged to have taken place nearly three centuries before thetime of that writer. But instead of this passage deserving the name ofEusebius as its author, it is now on all sides acknowledged to bealtogether a palpable interpolation. Suspicions, one would suppose, musthave been at a very remote date suggested as to the genuineness of thissentence. Many manuscripts, especially the seven in the Vatican, wereknown to contain nothing of the kind; and the Roman Catholic editor ofthe Chronicon at Bordeaux, A. D. 1604, tells us that he was restrainedfrom expunging it, only because nothing certain as to the assumption ofthe Virgin could be substituted in its stead. [P. 566. ] Its spuriousnesshowever can no longer be a question of dispute or doubt; it is excludedfrom the Milan edition of 1818, by Angelo Maio and John Zohrab; and notrace of it is to be found in the Armenian[110] version, published bythe monks of the Armenian convent at Venice, in 1818. 

 [Footnote 110: The author visited that convent whilst this edition of the Chronicon of Eusebius was going through the press, and can testify to the apparent anxiety of the monks to make it worthy of the patronage of Christians. ]

The next authority, to which we are referred, is a letter[111] said tohave been written by Sophronius the {305} presbyter, about thecommencement of the fifth century. The letter used to be ascribed toJerome; Erasmus referred it to Sophronius; but Baronius says it waswritten "by an egregious forger of lies, " ("egregius mendaciorumconcinnator, ") who lived after the heresies of Nestorius and Eutycheshad been condemned. I am not at all anxious to enter upon that point ofcriticism; that the letter is of very ancient origin cannot be doubted. This document would lead us to conclude, that so far from the traditionregarding the Virgin's assumption being general in the Church, it was apoint of grave doubt and discussion among the faithful, many of whomthought it an act of pious forbearance to abstain altogether frompronouncing any opinion on the subject. Whoever penned the letter, andwhether we look to the sensible and pious sentiments contained in it, orto its undisputed antiquity, the following extract cannot fail to beinteresting[112]. 

 [Footnote 111: The letter is entitled "Ad Paulam et Eustochium de Assumptione B. M. Virginis. " It is found in the fifth volume of Jerome's works, p. 82. Edit. Jo. Martian. ]

 [Footnote 112: Baronius shows great anxiety (Cologne, 1609, vol. I. P. 408) to detract from the value of this author's testimony, whoever he was; sharply criticising him because he asserts, that the faithful in his time still expressed doubts as to the matter of fact of Mary's assumption. By assigning, however, to the letter a still later date than the works of Sophronius, Baronius adds strength to the arguments for the comparatively recent origin of the tradition of her assumption. See Fabricius (Hamburgh, 1804), vol. Ix. P. 160. ]

"Many of our people doubt whether Mary was taken up together with herbody, or went away, leaving the body. But how, or at what time, or bywhat persons her most holy body was taken hence, or whither removed, orwhether it rose again, is not known; although some will maintain thatshe is already revived, and is clothed with a blessed immortality withChrist in heavenly places, which very many affirm also of the blessed{306} John, the Evangelist, his servant, to whom being a virgin, thevirgin was intrusted by Christ, because in his sepulchre, as it isreported, nothing is found but manna, which also is seen to flow forth. Nevertheless which of these opinions should be thought the more true wedoubt. Yet it is better to commit all to God, to whom nothing isimpossible, than to wish to define rashly[113] by our own authority anything, which we do not approve of.... Because nothing is impossible withGod, we do not deny that something of the kind was done with regard tothe blessed Virgin Mary; although for caution's sake (salva fide)preserving our faith, we ought rather with pious desire to think, thaninconsiderately to define, what without danger may remain unknown. " Thisletter, at the earliest, was not written until the beginning of thefifth century. 

 [Footnote 113: These last words, stamping the author's own opinion, "Which we do not approve of, " are left out in the quotation of Coccius. ]

Subsequent writers were not wanting to fill up what this letter declaresto have been at its own date unknown, as to the manner and time ofMary's assumption, and the persons employed in effecting it. The firstauthority appealed to in defence of the tradition relating to theassumption of the Virgin[114], is usually cited as a well-known workwritten by Euthymius, who was contemporary with Juvenal, Archbishop ofJerusalem. And the testimony simply quoted as his, offers to us thefollowing account of the miraculous transaction[115]:--

 [Footnote 114: Coccius heads the extract merely with these words: "Euthumius Eremita Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ, lib. Iii. C. 40;" assigning the date A. D. 549. ]

 [Footnote 115: This version by Coccius differs in some points from the original. Jo. Dam. Vol. Ii. P. 879. ]

"It has been above said, that the holy Pulcheria {307} built manychurches to Christ at Constantinople. Of these, however, there is onewhich was built in Blachernæ, in the beginning of Marcian I's _reign_ ofdivine memory. These, therefore, namely, Marcian and Pulcheria, whenthey had built a venerable temple to the greatly to be celebrated andmost holy mother of God and ever Virgin Mary, and had decked it with allornaments, sought her most holy body, which had conceived God. Andhaving sent for Juvenal, Archbishop of Jerusalem, and the bishops ofPalestine, who were living in the royal city on account of the synodthen held at Chalcedon, they say to them, 'We hear that there is inJerusalem the first and famous Church of Mary, mother of God and everVirgin, in the garden called Gethsemane, where her body which bore theLife was deposited in a coffin. We wish, therefore, her relics to bebrought here for the protection of this royal city. But Juvenalanswered, 'In the holy and divinely inspired Scripture, indeed, nothingis recorded of the departure of holy Mary, mother of God. But from anancient and most true tradition we have received, that at the time ofher glorious falling asleep, all the holy Apostles who were goingthrough the world for the salvation of the nations, in a moment of timeborne aloft, came together at Jerusalem. And when they were near her, they had a vision of angels, and divine melody of the highest powers washeard: and thus with divine and more than heavenly glory, she deliveredher holy soul into the hands of God in an unspeakable manner. But thatwhich had conceived God being borne with angelic and apostolic psalmody, with funeral rites, was deposited in a coffin in Gethsemane. In thisplace the chorus and singing of the angels continued for three wholedays. But {308} after three days, on the angelic music ceasing, sinceone of the Apostles had been absent, and came after the third day, andwished to adore the body which had conceived God, the Apostles, who werepresent, opened the coffin; but the body, pure and every way to bepraised, they could not at all find. And when they found only thosethings in which it had been laid out and placed there, and were filledwith an ineffable fragrancy proceeding from those things, they shut thecoffin. Being astounded at the miraculous mystery, they could form noother thought, but that He, who in his own person had vouchsafed to beclothed with flesh, and to be made man of the most holy Virgin, and tobe born in the flesh, God the Word, and Lord of Glory, and who afterbirth had preserved her virginity immaculate, had seen it good after shehad departed from among the living, to honour her uncontaminated andunpolluted body by a translation before the common and universalresurrection. "

Such is the passage offered to us in its insulated form, as an extractfrom Euthymius. To be enabled, however, to estimate its worth, theinquirer must submit to the labour of considerable research. He will nothave pursued his investigation far, before he will find, that a thickcloud of uncertainty and doubt hangs over this page of ecclesiasticalhistory. Not that the evidence alleged in support of the reputed miraclecan leave us in doubt as to the credibility of the tradition; for thattradition can scarcely be now countenanced by the most zealous anduncompromising maintainers of the assumption of the Virgin. What I wouldsay is, that the question as to the genuineness and authenticity of theworks by which the tradition is said to have been preserved, is far moredifficult and complicated, than {309} those writers must have believed, who appeal to such testimony without any doubt or qualification. Theresult of my own inquiries I submit to your candid acceptance. 

The earliest author in whose reputed writings I have found thetradition, is John Damascenus, a monk of Jerusalem, who flourishedsomewhat before the middle of the eighth century. The passage is foundin the second of three homilies on the "Sleep of the Virgin, " a termgenerally used by the Greeks as an equivalent for the Latin word"Assumptio. " The original publication of these homilies in Greek andLatin is comparatively of a late date. Lambecius, whose work is dated1665, says he was not aware that any one had so published them beforehis time[116]. But not to raise the question of their genuineness, thepreacher's introduction of this passage into his homily is preceded by avery remarkable section, affording a striking example of the manner inwhich Christian orators used to indulge in addresses and appeals notonly to the spirits of departed men, but even to things which never hadlife. The speaker here in his sermon addresses the tomb of Mary, asthough it had ears to hear, and an understanding to comprehend; and thenrepresents the tomb as having a tongue to answer, and as calling forthfrom the preacher and his congregation an address of admiration andreverence. Such apostrophes as these cannot be too steadily borne inmind, or too carefully weighed, when any argument is sought to be drawnfrom similar salutations offered by ancient Christian orators to saint, or angel, or the Virgin. 

 [Footnote 116: Vol. Viii. P. 281. Le Quien, who published them in 1712, refers to earlier homilies on the Dormitio Virginis. Jo. Damas. Paris, 1712. Vol. Ii. P. 857. ] {310}

The following are among the expressions in which the preacher, in thepassage under consideration, addresses the Virgin's tomb: "Thou, O Tomb, of holy things most holy (for I will address thee as a living being), where is the much desired and much beloved body of the mother of God?"[Vol. Ii. P. 875. ] The answer of the tomb begins thus, "Why seek ye herin a tomb, who has been taken up on high to the heavenly tabernacles?"In reply to this, the preacher first deliberating with his hearers whatanswer he should make, thus addresses the tomb: "Thy grace indeed isnever-failing and eternal, " &c. [P. 881. ] By the maintainers of theinvocation of saints, many a passage far less unequivocal and lesscogent than this has been adduced to show, that saints and martyrs wereinvoked by primitive worshippers. 

We find John Damascenus thus introducing the passage of Euthymius, "Yesee, beloved fathers and brethren, what answer the all-glorious tombmakes to us; and that these things are so, in the EUTHYMIAC HISTORY, thethird book and fortieth chapter, is thus written word for word. " [P. 877. ]

Lambecius maintains, that the history here quoted by John Damascenus wasnot an ecclesiastical history, written by Euthymius, who died in A. D. 472, but a biographical history concerning Euthymius himself, written byan ecclesiastic, whom he supposes to be Cyril, the monk, who died inA. D. 531. This opinion of Lambecius is combated by Cotelerius; thediscussion only adding to the denseness of the cloud which involves thewhole tradition. But whether the work quoted had Euthymius for itsauthor or its subject, the work itself is lost; and an epitome only ofsuch a work has come down to {311} our time. In that abridgment thepassage quoted by Damascenus is not found. 

The editor of John Damascenus, Le Quien, in his annotations on thisportion of his work, offers to us some very interesting remarks, whichbear immediately on the agitated question as to the first observance ofthe feast of the Assumption, as well as on the tradition itself. LeQuien infers, from the words of Modestus, patriarch of Jerusalem, thatscarcely any preachers before him had addressed their congregations onthe departure of the Virgin out of this life; he thinks, moreover, thatthe Feast of the Assumption was at the commencement of the seventhcentury only recently instituted. Though all later writers affirm thatthe Virgin was buried in the valley of Jehoshaphat, in the garden ofGethsemane, the same editor says, that this could not have been known toJerome, who passed a great part of his life in Bethlehem, and yetobserves a total silence on the subject; though in his "Epitaph onPaula, " [Jerome, Paris, 1706. Vol. Iv. P. 670-688, ep. 86. ] heenumerates all the places in Palestine consecrated by any remarkableevent. Neither, he adds, could it have been known to Epiphanius, who, though he lived long in Palestine, yet declares that nothing was knownas to the death or burial of the Virgin. [Vol. Ii, p. 858. ]

Again, in his remarks upon the writings falsely attributed to Melito, the same editor says, that since this Pseudo-Melito speaks many jejunethings of the Virgin Mary, (such for example as at the approach of deathher exceeding fear of being exposed to the wiles of Satan, ) heconcludes, from that circumstance, that the work was written before theCouncil of Ephesus; alleging this very remarkable reason, that "afterthat {312} time there BEGAN TO BE ENTERTAINED, as was right, not only inthe East, but also in the West, a far better estimate of the parent ofGod. " [P. 880. ]

Many of the remarks of this editor would appear to savour of prejudicehad they come from the pen of one who denied the reality of theassumption, or oppugned the honour and worship now paid by members ofthe Church of Rome to the Virgin. Nor could the suspicion of suchprejudice be otherwise than increased by the insinuation which the sameeditor throws out against the honesty of Archbishop Juvenal, and on thepossibility of his having invented the whole story, and so for sinisterpurposes deceived Marcian and Pulcheria; just as he fabricated thewritings which he forged for the purpose of securing the primacy ofPalestine; a crime laid to the charge of Juvenal by Leo the Great, inhis letter to Maximus, Bishop of Antioch. [P. 879. See Leo. Vol. I. P. 1215. Epist. Cxix. ]

It is moreover much to be regretted that in making the extract from JohnDamascenus those who employ it as evidence of primitive belief, have notpresented it to their readers whole and entire. In the present case thesystem of quoting garbled extracts is particularly to be lamented, because the paragraphs omitted in the quotation carry in themselvesclear proof that Juvenal's answer, as it now appears in John Damascenus, could not have been made by Juvenal to Marcian and Pulcheria. For in itis quoted from Dionysius the Areopagite by name, a passage still foundin the works ascribed to him; whereas by the judgment of the mostlearned Roman Catholic writers, those spurious works did not make theirappearance in Christendom till the beginning of the sixth century, fiftyyears after the Council of Chalcedon, to assist at which {313} Juvenalis said to have been present in Constantinople when the emperor andempress held the alleged conversation with him. 

The remainder of the passage from the history of Euthymius, rehearsed inthis oration of John Damascenus, is as follows: "There were present withthe Apostles at that time both the most honoured Timothy the Apostle, and first bishop of the Ephesians, and Dionysius the Areopagite, himself, as the great Dionysius testifies in the laboured wordsconcerning the blessed Hierotheus, himself also then being present, tothe above-named apostle Timothy, saying thus, Since with the inspiredhierarchs themselves, when we also as thou knowest, and yourself, andmany of our holy brethren had come together to the sight of the bodywhich gave the principle of life; and there was present too James thebrother of the Lord ([Greek: adelphotheos]), and Peter the chief and themost revered head of the apostles ([Greek: theologon]); then it seemedright, after the spectacle, that all the hierarchs (as each was able)should sing of the boundless goodness of the divine power. After theapostles, as you know, he surpassed all the other sacred persons, whollycarried away, and altogether in an ecstasy, and feeling an entiresympathy with what was sung; and by all by whom he was heard, and seen, and known (and he[117] knew it not), he was considered to be an inspiredand divine hymnologist. And why should I speak to you about the thingsthere divinely said, for unless I have even forgotten myself, I knowthat I have often heard from you some portions also of those inspiredcanticles? And the royal personages having heard this, requested ofJuvenal the archbishop, that the holy coffin, with the {314} clothes ofthe glorious and all-holy Mary, mother of God, sealed up, might be sentto them. And this, when sent, they deposited in the venerable temple ofthe Mother of God, built in Blachernae; and these things were so. "

 [Footnote 117: This seems confused in the original ([Greek: kai eginosketo, kai ouk eginoske]). The whole passage is involved in great obscurity. ]

It is a fact no less lamentable than remarkable, that out of the lessonsappointed by the Church of Rome for the feast of the Assumption, to beread to believers assembled in God's house of prayer, three of thoselessons are selected and taken entirely from this very oration of JohnDamascenus[118]. 

 [Footnote 118:

 The Fourth Lesson begins "Hodie sacra et animata arca. " The Fifth " " "Hodie virgo immaculata. " The Sixth " " "Eva quæ serpentis, " &c. --Æ. 603. 

 These contain the passages to which we have before referred as fixing the belief of the Church of Rome to be in the CORPOREAL assumption of Mary. "Quomodo corruptio invaderet CORPUS ILLUD in quo vita suscepta est? [Greek: pos diaphthora tou zoodochon katatolmaeseie somatos. ]"]

This, then, is the account nearest to the time of the supposed event;and yet can any thing be more vague, and by way of testimony, moreworthless? A writer near the middle of the sixth century refers to aconversation, said to have taken place in the middle of the fifthcentury; in this reported conversation at Constantinople, the Bishop ofJerusalem is represented to have informed the Emperor and Empress of anancient tradition, which was believed, concerning a miraculous event, said to have taken place nearly four hundred years before, that the bodywas taken out of a coffin without the knowledge of those who haddeposited it there: Whilst the primitive and inspired account, recordingmost minutely the journeys and proceedings of some of those verypersons, and the letters of others, makes no mention at all of anytransaction of the kind; and of {315} all the intermediate historiansand ecclesiastical writers not one gives the slightest intimation thatany rumour of it had reached them[119]. 

 [Footnote 119: Baronius appears not to have referred to this history of Euthymius, but he refers to Nicephorus, and also to a work ascribed to Melito, c. 4, 5. Nicephorus, Paris, 1630. Vol. I. P. 168. Lib. Ii. C. 21. Baronius also refers to lib. 15. C. 14. This Nicephorus was Patriarch of Constantinople. He lived during the reign of our Edward the First, or Edward the Second, and cannot, therefore, be cited in any sense of the word as an ancient author writing on the events of the primitive ages; though the manner in which his testimony is appealed to would imply, that he was a man to whose authority on early ecclesiastical affairs we were now expected to defer. ]

Another authority to which the writers on the assumption of the Virginappeal, is that of Nicephorus Callistus, who, at the end of thethirteenth or the beginning of the fourteenth century, dedicated hiswork to Andronicus Palæologus. The account given by Nicephorus is this:

In the fifth year of Claudius, the Virgin at the age of fifty-nine, wasmade acquainted with her approaching death. Christ himself thendescended from heaven with a countless multitude of angels, to take upthe soul of his mother; He summoned his disciples by thunder and stormfrom all parts of the world. The Virgin then bade Peter first, andafterwards the rest of the Apostles, to come with burning torches[120]. The Apostles surrounded her bed, and "an outpouring of miracles flowedforth. " The blind beheld the sun, the deaf heard, the lame walked, andevery disease fled away. The Apostles and others sang, as the coffin wasborne from Sion to Gethsemane, angels preceding, surrounding, andfollowing it. {316} A wonderful thing then took place. The Jews wereindignant and enraged, and one more desperately bold than the restrushed forward, intending to throw down the holy corpse to the ground. Vengeance was not tardy; for his hands were cut off from his arms[121]. The procession stopped; and at the command of Peter, on the man sheddingtears of penitence, his hands were joined on again and restored whole. At Gethsemane she was put into a tomb, but her Son transferred her tothe divine habitation. 

 [Footnote 120: This author here quotes the forged work ascribed to Dionysius the Areopagite, to which we have before referred. ]

 [Footnote 121: This tradition seems to have been much referred to at a time just preceding our Reformation. In a volume called "The Hours of the most blessed Mary, according to the legitimate rite of the Church of Salisbury, " printed in Paris in 1526, from which we have made many extracts in the second part of this work, the frontispiece gives an exact representation of the story at the moment of the Jew's hands being cut off. They are severed at the wrist, and are lying on the coffin, on which his arms also are resting. In the sky the Virgin appears between the Father and the Son, the Holy Dove being seen above her. The same print occurs also in another part of the volume. ]

Nicephorus then refers to Juvenal, Archbishop of Jerusalem, as theauthority on which the tradition was received, that the Apostles openedthe coffin to enable St. Thomas (the one stated to have been absent) toembrace the body; and then he proceeds to describe the personalappearance of the Virgin. [Vol. I. P. 171. ]

I am unwilling to trespass upon the patience of my readers by anycomment upon such evidence as this. Is it within the verge ofcredibility that had such an event as Mary's assumption taken placeunder the extraordinary circumstances which now invest the tradition, orunder any circumstances whatever, there would have been a total silencerespecting it in the Holy Scriptures? {317} That the writers of thefirst four centuries should never have referred to such a fact? That thefirst writer who alludes to it, should have lived in the middle of thefifth century, or later; and that he should have declared in a letter tohis contemporaries that the subject was one on which many doubted; andthat he himself would not deny it, not because it rested upon probableevidence, but because nothing was impossible with God; and that nothingwas known as to the time, the manner, or the persons concerned, even hadthe assumption taken place? Can we place any confidence in the relationof a writer in the middle of the sixth century, as to a tradition ofwhat an archbishop of Jerusalem attending the council of Chalcedon, hadtold the sovereigns at Constantinople of a tradition, as to what wassaid to have happened nearly four hundred years before, whilst in the"Acts" of that Council, not the faintest trace is found of any allusionto the supposed fact or the alleged tradition, though the transactionsof that Council in many of its most minute circumstances are recorded, and though the discussions of that Council brought the name andcircumstances of the Virgin Mary continually before the minds of all whoattended it?

This, however, is a point of too great importance to be dismissedsummarily; and seems to require us to examine, however briefly, into thecircumstances of that Council. {318}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER IV. --COUNCILS OF CONSTANTINOPLE, EPHESUS, AND THE GENERALCOUNCIL OF CHALCEDON

The legend on which the doctrine of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary isfounded professes to trace the tradition to Juvenal, Archbishop ofJerusalem, when he was sojourning in Constantinople for the purpose ofattending the General Council of Chalcedon. To the Emperor and Empress, who presided at that council, Juvenal is said to have communicated thetradition, as received in Palestine, of the miraculous taking up ofMary's body into heaven. This circumstance seems, as we have alreadyintimated, of itself, to require us to examine the records of thatCouncil, with the view of ascertaining whether any traces may be foundconfirmatory of the tradition, or otherwise; and since that Councilcannot be regarded as an insulated assembly, but as a continuationrather or resumption of the preceding minor Councils of Constantinopleand Ephesus, we must briefly refer to the occasion and nature generallyof that succession of Christian synods. I am not aware that in theprevious Councils any thing had transpired {319} which could be broughtas evidence on the subject of our inquiry. The questions which haddisturbed the peace of Christendom, and which were agitated in theseCouncils, inseparable from a repeated mention of the Virgin Mary's name, afforded an opportunity at every turn for an expression of thesentiments of those who composed the Councils, and of all connected withthem, including the Bishop of Rome himself, towards her. It would bealtogether foreign from the purpose of this address to enter in any wayat large upon the character and history of those or the precedingCouncils, yet a few words seem necessary, to enable us to judge of thenature and weight of the evidence borne by them on the questionimmediately before us. 

The source of all the disputes which then rent the Church of HIM who hadbequeathed peace as his last and best gift to his followers, was theanxiety to define and explain the nature of the great Christian mystery, the Incarnation of the Son of God; a point on which it were well for allChristians to follow only so far as the Holy Scriptures lead them by thehand. All parties appealed to the Nicene Council; though there seems tohave been, to say the least, much misunderstanding and unnecessaryviolence and party spirit on all sides. The celebrated Eutyches ofConstantinople was charged with having espoused heterodox doctrine, bymaintaining that in Christ was only one nature, the incarnate Word. Onthis charge he was accused before a Council held at Constantinople inA. D. 448. His doctrine was considered to involve a denial of the humannature of the Son of God. The Council condemned him of heresy, deposed, and excommunicated him. From this proceeding Eutyches appealed to aGeneral Council. A council (the authority of which, however, {320} hasbeen solemnly, but with what adequate reason we need not stop toexamine, repudiated), was convened at Ephesus in the following year, bythe Emperor Theodosius. The proceedings of this assembly wereaccompanied by lamentable unfairness and violence. Eutyches wasacquitted, and restored by this council[122]; and his accusers werecondemned and persecuted; Flavianus, Archbishop of Constantinople, whohad summoned the preceding council, being even scourged and exiled. Inhis distress that patriarch sought the good offices of Leo, Bishop ofRome, who espoused his cause, but who failed nevertheless of inducingTheodosius to convene a General Council. His successor Marcian, however, consented; and in the year 451 the Council of Chalcedon was convened, first meeting at Nice, and by adjournment being removed to Chalcedon. Inthis council all the proceedings as well of the Council ofConstantinople as of Ephesus, were rehearsed at length; and from a closeexamination of the proceedings of those three councils, only oneinference seems deducible, namely, that the invocation and worship ofsaints and of the Virgin Mary had not then obtained that place in theChristian {321} Church, which the Church of Rome now assigns to it; aplace, however, which the Church of England, among other branches of theCatholic Church, maintains that it has usurped, and cannot, without asacrifice of the only sound principle of religious worship, be sufferedto retain. 

 [Footnote 122: The sentiments of Eutyches, even as they are recorded by the party who charged him with heresy, seem to imply so much of soundness in his principles, and of moderation in his maintenance of those principles, that one must feel sorrow on finding such a man maintaining error at any time. The following is among the records of transactions rehearsed at Chalcedon: "He, Eutyches, professed that he followed the expositions of the holy and blessed Fathers who formed the Councils of Nicæa and Ephesus, and was ready to subscribe to them. But if any where it might chance, as he said, that our fathers were deceived and led astray, that as for himself he neither accepted nor accused those things, but he only on such points investigated the divine Scriptures as more to be depended upon [Greek: os bebaioteras]. "]

The grand question then agitated with too much asperity, and too littlecharity, was, whether by the incarnation our blessed Saviour becamepossessed of two natures, the divine and human. Subordinate to this, andnecessary for its decision, was involved the question, What part of hisnature, if any, Christ derived from the Virgin Mary? Again and againdoes this question bring the name, the office, the circumstances, andthe nature of that holy and blessed mother of our Lord before theseCouncils. The name of Mary is continually in the mouth of the accusers, the accused, the judges, and the witnesses; and had Christian pastorsthen entertained the same feelings of devotion towards her; had theyprofessed the same belief as to her assumption into heaven, and herinfluence and authority in directing the destinies of man, and inprotecting the Church on earth; had they habitually appealed to her withthe same prayers for her intercession and good offices, and placed thesame confidence in her as we find now exhibited in the authorizedservices of the Roman Ritual, it is impossible to conceive that nosigns, no intimation of such views and feelings, would, either directlyor incidentally, have shown themselves, somewhere or other, among themanifold and protracted proceedings of these Councils. I have searcheddiligently, but I can find no expression as to her nature and office, oras to our feelings and conduct towards Mary, in which, as a {322}Catholic of the Anglican Church, I should not heartily acquiesce. I canfind no sentiment implying invocation, or religious worship of any kind, or in any degree; I find no allusion to her Assumption. 

Pope Leo, who is frequently in these documents [Vol. V. P. 1418. ] calledArchbishop of Rome, in a letter to Julianus, Bishop of Cos, speaks ofChrist as born of "A Virgin, " "The blessed Virgin, " "The pure, undefiledVirgin;" and in a letter to the empress Pulcheria, he calls Mary simply"The Virgin Mary. " In his celebrated letter to Flavianus, not one iotaof which (according to the decree of the Roman council under PopeGelasius) was to be questioned by any man on pain of incurring ananathema, Pope Leo says that Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost inthe womb of the Virgin Mary his mother, who brought him forth with thesame virgin purity as she had conceived him. Flavianus, Archbishop ofConstantinople, in his Declaration of faith to the Emperor Theodosius, affirms, that Christ was born "of Mary, the Virgin--of the samesubstance with the Father according to his Godhead--of the samesubstance with his mother according to his manhood. " [Vol. Vi. P. 539. ]He speaks of her afterwards as "The holy Virgin. "

There is, indeed, one word used in a quotation from Cyril of Alexandria, and adopted in these transactions, which requires a few words ofespecial observation. The word is _theotocos_[123], which the Latinswere accustomed {323} to transfer into their works, substituting onlyRoman instead of Greek characters, but which afterwards the authors ofthe Church of Rome translated by Deipara, and in more recent ages by DeiMater, Dei Genetrix, Creatoris Genetrix, &c. Employing those terms notin explanation of the twofold nature of Christ's person, as was the casein these Councils, but in exaltation of Mary, his Virgin mother. Thisword was adopted by Christians in much earlier times than the Council ofChalcedon; but it was employed only to express more strongly theCatholic belief in the union of the divine and human nature in Him whowas Son both of God and man; and by no means for the purpose of raisingMary into an object of religious adoration. The sense in which it wasused was explained in the seventh Act of the Council of Constantinople, (repeated at Chalcedon) as given by Cyril of Alexandria. "According tothis sense of an unconfused union, we confess the holy Virgin to betheotocos, because that God the Word was made flesh, and became man, andfrom that very conception united with himself the temple received fromher. "

 [Footnote 123: [Greek: Theotokos]. To those who would depend upon this word _theotocos_ as a proof of the exalted honour in which the early Christians held the Virgin, and not as indicative of an anxiety to preserve whole and entire the doctrine of the union of perfect God and perfect man in Christ, deriving his manhood through her, I would suggest the necessity of weighing well that argument with this fact before them; that to the Apostle James, called in Scripture the Lord's brother, was assigned the name of Adelphotheos, or God's brother. This name was given to James, not to exalt him above his fellow-apostles, but to declare the faith of those who gave it him in the union of the divine and human nature of Christ. --See Joan. Damascenus, Hom. Ii. C. 18. In Dormit. Virg. Vol. Ii. P. 881. Le Quien, Paris, 1712. The Latin translation renders it Domini frater. ]

Nothing in our present inquiry turns upon the real {324} meaning of thatword _theotocos_. Some who have been among the brightest ornaments ofthe Anglican Church have adopted the translation "mother of God, " whilstmany others among us believe that the original sense would be morecorrectly conveyed by the expression "mother of Him who was God. "

I am induced here to lay side by side, with the second Article of ourAnglican Church, the Confession of Faith from Cyril, first recited atConstantinople, then repeated at Ephesus, and afterwards again rehearsedat Chalcedon; in its last clause the expression occurs which gave riseto these remarks. 

 _Ancient Confession. _

 We confess that our Lord Jesus, the Christ, the only begotten Son of God, perfect God and perfect man, from a reasonable soul and body, begotten from everlasting of the Father according to his Godhead, and in these last days, He the same for us and for our salvation [was born] of Mary, the Virgin, according to his manhood--of the same substance with the Father according to his Godhead, of the same substance with us according to his manhood. For of two natures there became an union. Wherefore we confess one Christ, one Lord. According to this sense of the unconfused union, we confess the holy Virgin to be theotocos, because that God the Word was made flesh, and became man, and from that very conception united with himself the temple received from her. 

 [Vol. Vi. P. 736. ]

 _Second Article of Anglican Church. _

 The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, and of one substance with the Father, took man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin, of her substance: so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in one Person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God, and very man; who truly suffered, was crucified, dead and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men. {325}

But there are other points in the course of these important proceedingsto which I would solicit your especial attention, with the view ofcomparing the sentiments of the Bishop of Rome at that day, and also theexpressions employed by other Chief Pastors of Christ's flock, with thelanguage of the appointed authorized services of the Roman Church now, and the sentiments of her reigning Pontiff, and of his accreditedministers. 

The circumstances of the Church Catholic, as represented in Leo's letterin the fifth century, and the circumstances of the Church of Rome, aslamented by the present Pope in 1832[124], are in many respects verysimilar. The end desired by Leo and Flavianus, his brother pastor andcontemporary, Bishop of Constantinople, and by Gregory, now Bishop ofRome, is one and the same, namely, the suppression of heresy, theprevalence of the truth, and the unity of the Christian Church. But howwidely and how strikingly different are the foundations on which theyrespectively build their hopes for the attainment of that end!

 [Footnote 124: "The encyclical letter of our most holy Father, Pope Gregory, by divine providence, the sixteenth of that name, to all patriarchs, primates, archbishops, and bishops. "]

The present Roman Pontiff's hopes, and desires, and exhortations arethus expressed[125]:--

 [Footnote 125: This is the translation circulated in the Roman Catholic Annual, p. 15, called, The Laity's Directory for the year 1833; on the title page of which is this notice: "The Directory for the Church Service, printed by Messrs. Keating and Brown, is the only one which is published with the authority of the Vicars Apostolic in England. --London, Nov. 12, 1829. " Signed "James, Bishop of Usula, Vic. Ap. Lond. "]

"That all may have a successful and happy issue, let us raise our eyesto the most blessed Virgin Mary, {326} WHO ALONE DESTROYS HERESIES, whois our GREATEST HOPE, yea, the ENTIRE GROUND OF OUR HOPE[126]. May sheexert her patronage to draw down an efficacious blessing on our desires, our plans, and proceedings in the present straitened condition of theLord's flock. We will also implore, in humble prayer, from Peter, theprince of the Apostles, and from his fellow-Apostle Paul, that you mayall stand as a wall to prevent any other foundation than what hath beenlaid; and supported by this cheering hope, we have confidence that theauthor and finisher of faith, Jesus Christ, will at last console us allin the tribulations which have found us exceedingly. "

 [Footnote 126: On this word there is a note of reference to S. Bern. Serm. De Nat. B. M. V. 7. ]

"To you, venerable brethren, and the flocks committed to your care, wemost lovingly impart, as auspicious of celestial help, the ApostolicBenediction. Given at Rome from St. Mary Major's, August 15th, theFestival of the Assumption of the same blessed Virgin Mary, the year ofour Lord 1832, of our Pontificate the Second. "

How deplorable a change, how melancholy a degeneracy is here evincedfrom the faith, and hopes, and sentiments of Christian bishops in daysof old! In the expressed hopes of Leo and Flavianus, you will seek invain for any reference or allusion "to the blessed Virgin Mary, as thedestroyer of heresies, the greatest hope, the entire ground of aChristian's hope;" you will in vain seek for any exhortation for thefaithful "to raise their eyes to her in order to obtain a merciful andhappy issue. " Equally vain would be your search for any "imploring inhumble prayer, " of Peter and Paul, or any even distant allusion to helpfrom them. {327} To God and God alone are the faithful exhorted to pray;on God and God alone do those Christians express that their hopes rely;God alone they regard as the destroyer of heresy, the restorer of peace, and the protector of the Church's unity. "Their greatest hope, yea, theentire ground of their hope, " the Being to be "implored in humbleprayer, " is not Mary, nor Peter, nor Paul, but God alone, the Creator, the Redeemer, the Sanctifier of Mary, and of Peter, and of Paul. 

Thus Flavian writing to Leo says, "Wherefore (in consequence of thoseerrors, and heresies, and distractions, which he had deplored) we mustbe sober and watch unto prayer, and draw nigh to God. " [Vol. V. 1330. ]And again, "Thus will the heresy which has arisen, and the consequentcommotion, be easily destroyed by your holy letters with the assistanceof God. " [Vol. V. 1355. ] Thus Leo in his turn writing to Julian, Bishopof Cos, utters this truly Christian sentiment. "May the mercy of God, aswe trust, grant that without the loss of any soul, against the darts ofthe devil the sound parts may be entirely preserved, and the woundedparts may be healed. May God preserve you safe and sound, most honouredbrother!" [Vol. V. 1423. ] Thus the same Bishop of Rome writing toFlavian, expresses his hopes in these words: "Confidently trusting thatthe help of God will be present, so that one who has been misled, condemning the vanity of his own thoughts, may be saved. May Godpreserve you in health and strength, most beloved brother!" [Vol. V. 1390. ]

I will detain you by only one more reference to these most interestingdocuments. The whole Council of Chalcedon, at the conclusion of all, andwhen the {328} triumph was considered to have been secured overEutyches, and their gratitude was expressed that the heresies had beendestroyed--instead of referring to Mary as the "sole destroyer ofheresies, " shout, as if with the voice of one man, from every side, "Itis God alone who hath done this!" [Vol. Vii. P. 174. ] Neitherantecedently did their chief pastors exhort them to raise their eyes toMary, and promise to "implore" the blessing they needed, "in humbleprayer from Peter and Paul. " Neither "in the straitened condition of theLord's flock" did they invoke any other than God. And when truthprevailed, and the victory was won, whilst they were lavish of theirgrateful thanks to the emperor and his queen, who were present and hadsuccoured them; of help from the invisible world they make no mention, save only of the Lord's; they had implored neither angel, nor saints, nor Virgin to be their protector and patron; no angel, nor saint, norvirgin, shared their praises;--God alone was exalted in that day. 

And, let not the answer, ever at hand when reference is thus made to theprayers or professions of individuals, whether popes or canonizedsaints, seduce any now from a pursuit of the very truth. These, it issaid, "are the prayers and professions of individuals, it is unfair thento make the Church responsible for them; we appeal from them to theChurch. " But in this case the words of the Sovereign Pontiff are in goodfaith the words of the Church of Rome; not because I at all wouldidentify the words of a Pope with the Church, but because the prayers ofthe Church of Rome in her authorized solemn services and acts of worshipjustify {329} Pope Gregory in every sentiment he utters, and everyexpression he employs. Does Gregory bid the faithful lift up their eyesto Mary the sole destroyer of heresies? The Roman ritual in the LesserOffice of the holy Virgin thus addresses her, "Rejoice, O Mary Virgin;thou alone hast destroyed all heresies in the whole world:" And again:"Under thy protection we take refuge, holy parent of God; despise notthou our prayers in our necessities, but from all dangers ever deliverus, O glorious and blessed Virgin. " Does Gregory assure the faithfulthat he will implore in humble prayer of Peter and Paul? in doing so heis only treading in the very footsteps of the Roman Church itself. In anaddress, which we have already quoted (see p. 262), Peter is thusinvoked. "Now O good shepherd, merciful Peter, accept the prayers of uswho supplicate, and loose the bands of our sins, by the power committedto thee, by which thou shuttest heaven against all by a word, andopenest it. "

These things are now; but from the beginning it was not so. {330}

 * * * * *

CHAPTER V. 

SECTION I. --PRESENT WORSHIP OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN IN THE AUTHORIZED ANDENJOINED SERVICES OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 

When from examining the evidence of antiquity we turn to the presentenjoined services of the Church of Rome, it is impossible not to bestruck by the fact repeatedly forced upon our notice, that whereas theinvocation of the Virgin seems to have been introduced at a period muchlater than those addresses to the martyrs which have already invited ourattention, her worship now assumes so much higher a place, and claims solarge a share in the public worship of the Roman Catholic portions ofChristendom above martyrs, saints, and angels. The offices of the Virginpresent instances of all those various and progressive stages of divineworship, which we have already exemplified in the case of the martyrs, from the first primitive and Christian practice of making theanniversary of the Saint a day either of especial praise and prayer toGod for the mercies of redemption generally, or of returning thanks toGod for the graces manifested in his holy servants now in peace, withprayers for light and strength to enable the worshippers to follow them, as they followed Christ--down to the last and worst stage, theconsummation {331} of all, namely, prayer directly to saints and angelsfor protection, succour, and spiritual benefits at their hands. 

I. Of the first class is the following collect, retained almost word forword in our Anglican service. 

_On the day of the Purification. _

"Almighty and everlasting God, we humbly beseech thy majesty, that asthy only begotten Son was this day presented in the temple in substanceof our flesh, so Thou wouldest cause us to be presented unto Thee withpurified minds. Through the same. "

(Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, majestatem tuam supplices exoramus, utsicut unigenitus Filius tuus hodierna die cum nostræ carnis substantiaest præsentatus, ita nos facias purificatis tibi mentibus præsentari. Per eundem Dominum. --H. 536. )

Such a prayer is founded on the facts of revelation, and is primitive, catholic, apostolic, and evangelical. 

II. Of the second progressive stage towards the adoration of the saints, the offices of the Virgin supply us with various instances; the case, namely, of the Christian orator being led by the flow of his eloquenceto apostrophize the spirit of the Saint, and address him as though hewere present, witnessing the celebration of his day, hearing thepanegyrics uttered for his honour, and partaking with the congregationin their religious acts of worship. 

"O holy and spotless virginhood; with what praises to extol thee I knownot: because Him, whom the heavens could not contain, thou didst bear inthy bosom. {332} Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruitof thy womb. Thou art blessed, O Virgin Mary, who didst carry the Lord, the Creator of the world. Thou didst give birth to Him who made thee, and remainest a virgin for ever. [Beata es Virgo Maria, quæ Dominumportasti Creatorem mundi: genuisti qui te fecit, et in æternum permanesvirgo. --Vern. Clxii. ] Hail, holy parent, who didst in child-birth bringforth the King who ruleth heaven and earth for ever and ever. Amen. "[Salve sacra parens enixa puerpera regem, qui coelum terramque regit insæcula sæculorum. Amen. --Introit. At the mass on the Nativity of theVirgin. ]

In apostrophes like these, the members of the Anglican Church seenothing in itself harmful, so long as they are kept within due bounds. Many of the passages cited from the ancient writers in proof of theirhaving espoused the doctrine, and exemplified in themselves the practiceof invoking saints, are nothing more than these glowing addresses. Theyhave been responded to by one of the brightest ornaments, and sweetestminstrels of the Anglican Church, whose apostrophe at the same time byits own words would guard us against the abuses and excesses in which inthe Roman Catholic Church this practice, followed without restraint andindulged in with less and less of caution and soberness, unhappilyended; abuses against which also we cannot ourselves now be tooconstantly and carefully on our guard. 

 "Ave Maria! Blessed maid, Lily of Eden's fragrant shade, Who can express the love, That nurtured thee so pure and sweet; Making thy heart a shelter meet For Jesus' holy Dove? {333} Ave Maria! mother blest, To whom, caressing and caress'd, Clings the Eternal Child! Favour'd beyond archangel's dream, When first on thee with tenderest gleam The newborn Saviour smiled. Ave Maria! thou whose name, ALL BUT ADORING love may claim, Yet may we reach thy shrine; For HE, thy Son and Saviour, vows, To crown all lowly lofty brows With love and joy like thine. Bless'd is the womb that bare Him, --bless'd The bosom where his lips were press'd; But rather bless'd are they Who hear his word and keep it well, The living homes where Christ shall dwell, And never pass away. "

 J. Keble's Christian Year. "The Annunciation. "

Would that no branch of the Church Catholic had ever passed the boundaryline drawn here so exquisitely by this Anglican Catholic, from whoselips or pen no syllable could ever fall in disparagement of the holyVirgin, as blessed among women, and the holy mother of our Lord. Tobring about the re-union of Christians would in that case have been afar more hopeful task than it is now. 

III. In the third stage, a prayer was offered to God, that He wouldpermit the intercessions of the saints to help us; or the prayercontained the expression of a wish, --a desire not addressed either toGod or to the saint, merely words expressive of the hope of theindividual. The following are some of the many instances now containedin the Roman Breviary: {334}

"May the Virgin of virgins herself intercede for us to the Lord. Amen. "[Ipsa Virgo virginum intercedat pro nobis ad Dominum. Amen. --Vern. Cxlviii. ]

In the Post-communion, on the day of the Assumption, this prayer isoffered:--"Partakers of the heavenly table, we implore thy clemency, OLord our God, that we who celebrate the Assumption of the mother of God, may, by her intercession, be freed from all impending evils. Through, "&c. [Mensæ coelestis participes effecti imploramus clementiam tuam, Domine Deus noster, ut qui Assumptionem Dei Genetricis colimus, acunctis malis imminentibus ejus intercessione liberemur. Per. --Miss. Rom. ]

"We beseech Thee, O Lord, let the glorious intercession of the blessedand glorious ever Virgin Mary protect us and bring us to life eternal. "[Beatæ et gloriosæ semper Virginia Mariæ, quæsumus, Domine, intercessiogloriosa nos protegat, et ad vitam producat æternam. --Vern. Clv. ]

"Pardon, we beseech Thee, O Lord, the offences of thy servants, that we, who cannot please Thee of our own act, may be saved by the intercessionof the mother of thy Son, our Lord, who liveth with Thee. " [Famulorumtuorum quæsumus, Domine, delictis ignosce, ut qui tibi placere denostris actibus non valemus, Genetricis Filii tui, Domini nostri, intercessione salvemur, qui tecum vivit. --Vern. Clxix. ]

On the vigil of the Epiphany, this prayer is offered in thePost-communion at the mass, --"Let this communion, O Lord, purge us fromguilt, and by the intercession of the blessed Virgin, mother of God, letit make us partakers of the heavenly cure. Through the same. " [Hæc noscommunio, Domine, purget a crimine, et intercedente beata Virgine Deigenetrice coelestis remedii faciat esse consortes. Per eundem. --Miss. Rom. ]

"Grant, we beseech Thee, O Lord God, that we thy {335} servants mayenjoy perpetual health of body and mind, and be freed from presentsorrow, and enjoy eternal gladness, by the glorious intercession of theblessed Mary, ever Virgin. Through. " [Concede nos famulos tuos, quæsumus, Domine Deus, perpetua mentis et corporis sanitate gaudere, etgloriosa beatæ Mariæ semper Virginis intercessione a præsenti liberaritristitia, et æterna perfrui lætitia. Per Dominum. --Vern. Cxlvi. ]

On the second Sunday after Easter, we find a further and more saddeparture from the simplicity of Christian worship, in which the Churchof Rome declares that the offerings made to God at the Lord's Supperwere made for the honour of the Virgin. --"Having received, O Lord, thehelps of our salvation, grant, we beseech Thee, that by the patronage ofMary, ever Virgin, we may be every where protected; in veneration ofwhom we make these offerings to thy Majesty. " [Sumptis, Domine, salutisnostræ subsidiis, da, quæsumus, beatæ Mariæ semper Virginis patrociniisubique protegi, _in cujus veneratione_ hæc tuæ obtulimusMajestati. --Post Commun. Mis. Rom. ]

On the octave of Easter, at the celebration of mass, in the Secret, theintercession of the Virgin is made to appear as essential a cause of ourpeace and blessedness as the propitiation of Christ; or rather, the twoare represented as joint concurrent causes; as though the office of theSaviour was confined to propitiation, exclusive altogether ofintercession, whilst the office of intercession was assigned to theVirgin. --"By thy propitiation, O Lord, and by the intercession of theblessed Mary, ever Virgin, may this offering be profitable to us forperpetual and present prosperity and peace. " [Tua, Domine, propitiationeet beatæ Marisæ semper Virginis intercessione ad perpetuam atqueprsesentem hæc oblatio nobis profecerit prosperitatem et pacem. ] {336}

IV. A fourth station in this lamentable progress was evidenced whenChristians at the tombs of martyrs implored, yet still in prayer to God, that He would, for the sake of the martyrs, and by their merits and goodoffices, grant to the petitioner some benefit temporal or spiritual. Ofthat practice, we have an example in this prayer: "O God, who didstdeign to choose the blessed Virgin's womb in which to dwell, vouchsafe, we beseech thee, to make us, defended by her protection, to takepleasure in her commemoration. " [Deus qui virginalem aulam beatæ Mariæin qua habitares eligerere dignatus es, da, quæsumus, ut sua nosdefensione munitos jucundos facias suæ interesse commemorationi. --Æst. Clvi. ]

"By the Virgin mother, may the Lord grant us health and peace. Amen. "[Per Virginem Matrem concedat nobis Dominus salutem et pacem. Amen. --Vern. Cxliii. ]

"By the prayers and merits of the blessed Mary, ever Virgin, and of allsaints, may the Lord bring us to the kingdom of heaven. " [Precibus etmeritis beatæ Mariæ Virginis et omnium sanctorum perducat nos Dominus adregna coelorum. --Vern. Cxlvii. ]

"May the Virgin Mary bless us, together with a pious offspring. " [Noscum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria. --Vern. Cxlvii. ]

V. The fifth grade involves a still more melancholy departure fromChristian truth and primitive simplicity, when the prayer is no longeraddressed to God, but is offered to the Virgin, imploring her tointercede with God for the supplicants, yet still asking nothing but herprayers. 

"Blessed mother, Virgin undefiled, glorious Queen of the world, intercede for us with the Lord. " [Beata Mater, et intacta Virgo, gloriosa regina mundi, intercede pro nobis ad Dominum. --Aut. Cxliv. ]{337}

"Blessed mother of God, Mary, perpetual Virgin, the temple of the Lord, the holy place of the holy Spirit, thou alone without example hastpleased our Lord Jesus Christ: Pray for the people, mediate for theclergy, intercede for the female sex who are under a vow. " [Beata DeiGenitrix, Maria Virgo perpetua, templum Domini, sacrarium SpiritusSancti, sola sine exemplo placuisti Domino nostro Jesu Christo; ora propopulo, interveni pro clero, intercede pro devoto femineo sexu. --Vern. Clxiii. ]

 "Holy Mary, pray for us! Holy mother of God, pray for us! Holy Virgin of virgins, pray for us!"

In the form of prayer called Litaniæ Lauretanæ, between the most solemnaddresses to the ever blessed Trinity, and to the Lamb of God thattaketh away the sins of the world, are inserted more than fortyaddresses to the Virgin, invoking her under as many varieties of title. She is appealed to as--The Mirror of Justice, The Cause of our Joy, Themystical Rose, The Tower of David, The Tower of Ivory, The House ofGold, The Arc of the Covenant, The Gate of Heaven, The Refuge ofSinners, The Queen of Angels, the Queen of all Saints. [Vern. Ccxxxix. ]

In examining the case of the invocation of saints, we placed under thishead, as the safer course, a kind of invocation which seemed tovacillate between this appeal to them merely for intercession, and thelast consummation of all, direct prayer to them for blessings. Weexemplified it by the hymn to St. Stephen. The following seems very muchof the same character, addressed to the Virgin:--

 "Hail, O Queen, Mother of mercy, our life, sweetness, and hope, Hail! To thee we cry, banished sons {338} of Eve. To thee we sigh, groaning and weeping in this valley of tears. Come then, our Advocate, turn those compassionate eyes of thine on us, and after this exile show to us Jesus, the blessed fruit of thy womb. O merciful! O pious! O sweet Virgin Mary! [Salve, Regina, Mater Misericordiæ, vita, dulcedo, et spes nostra, salve. Ad te clamamus exules filii Evæ. Ad te suspiramus gementes et flentes in hac lachrymarum valle. Eja ergo Advocata nostra, illos tuos misericordes oculos ad nos converte, et Jesum benedictum fructum ventris tui nobis post hoc exilium ostende. O clemens! O pia! O dulcis Virgo Maria!]

 "Pray for us, O holy Mother of God, that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ. " [Ora pro nobis, Sancta Dei Genetrix, ut digni efficiamur promissionibus Christi. --Æst. 151. ]

VI. Unhappily, in the appointed religious services of the Roman ritual, we have too many examples of prayer for benefits spiritual and temporal, addressed directly to the Virgin. It is in vain to say that all that ismeant is to ask her intercession; the people will not, cannot, do not, regard it in that light. It is affirmed that when the Church of Romeguides and directs her sons and daughters to pray for specific benefitsat the hands of the Virgin mother, without any mention of her prayers, without specifying that her petitions are all that they ask; yet theyare taught only to ask for her intercession, and are not encouraged tolook for the blessings as her gift and at her hands. But, can this beright and safe? In an act of all human acts the most solemn and holy, can recourse be had to such refinements without great danger?

Among many others of a similar kind this invocation frequently recurs, "Deem me worthy to praise thee, {339} O sacred Virgin; give to mestrength against thy enemies. " [Dignare me laudare te, Virgo sacrata. Damihi virtutem contra hostes tuos. --Æst. Clvi. ]

The following seems to be among the most favourite addresses to theVirgin:--"Hail, Star of the Sea, kind Mother of God, and ever Virgin!Happy Gate of Heaven, taking that 'Hail!' from the mouth of Gabriel, establish us in peace, --changing the name of Eve. For the guilty, loosetheir bonds; bring forth light for the blind; drive away our evils;demand for us all good things. SHOW THAT THOU ART A MOTHER. Let Him whoendured for us to be thy Son, through thee receive our prayers. Oexcellent Virgin, meek among all, us, FREED FROM FAULT, MAKE MEEK ANDCHASTE; make our life pure; prepare a safe journey; that, beholdingJesus, we may always rejoice. Praise be to God the Father, glory toChrist most high, and to the Holy Spirit; one honour to the three. Amen. "

 [Ave Man's Stella, Dei Mater alma, Atque semper Virgo! Felix coeli porta, Sumens illud Ave Gabrielis ore, Funda nos in pace, Mutans Evæ nomen. Solve vincla reis, Profer lumen cæcis, Mala nostra pelle, Bona cuncta posce. MONSTRA TE ESSE MATREM; Sumat per te preces, Qui pro nobis natus Tulit esse tuus. Virgo singularis, Inter omnes mitis, Nos culpa solutos, Mites fac et castos, Vitam præsta puram, Iter para tutum, Ut videntes Jesum Semper collætemur. 

 Sit laus Deo Patri, summo Christo decus, Spiritui Sancto, tribus honor unus. Amen. --Æst. 597. ]

In the body of this hymn, there is undoubtedly reference to anapplication to be made to the Son, &c. ; but can it be fitting that suchlanguage as is here suggested to the Virgin, for her to use, should beaddressed by a {340} mortal to God? can such a call upon her to show herpower and influence over the eternal Son of the eternal Father befitting--"Show that thou art a mother?" I confess that against what ishere implied, my understanding and my heart entirely revolt. [127]

 [Footnote 127: At the present day some versions, contrary to the whole drift and plain sense and meaning of the passage, have translated it, as though the prayer was, that Mary would, by her maternal good offices in our behalf, prove to us that she was our mother. An instance of what I mean occurs in a work called "Nouveau Recueil de Cantiques, " p. 353. 

 "Monstra te esse Matrem: Faites voir que vous êtes véritablement notre mère. " In an English manual, first printed in 1688, and then called "The Prince of Wales's Manual, " the lines are thus rendered--

 Shew us a Mother's care, To Him convey our prayer, Who for our sake put on The title of thy Son. 

 I rejoice to see an indication of a feeling of impropriety in the sentiment in its plain, obvious meaning; still the change is inadmissible. She is addressed above, in the second line, as the mother of God; Jesus is immediately mentioned, in the very next line, and through the entire stanza, as her Son; and the prayer is, that through her that Being who endured to be her Son would hear the prayers of the worshippers. 

 Since I first prepared this note for the press, I have found a proof, that the obvious grammatical and logical meaning, "show thyself to be His mother, " is the sense in which it was received and interpreted before the Reformation. In a work dedicated to the "Youth of England studious of good morals, " and entitled "Expositio Sequentiarum, " the only interpretation given to this passage is thus expressed: "Show thyself to be a MOTHER, namely BY APPEASING THY SON, and let thy Son take our prayers through thee, who (namely, the Son born of the Virgin Mary, ) for us miserable sinners endured to be thy Son. " "Monstra te esse MATREM (sc. ) placando TILIUM TUUM, et filius tuus sumat precem, id est, deprecationes nostras per te qui (sc. ) filius natus ex Virgine Maria pro nobis (sc. ) miseris peccatoribus tulit, id est, sustinuit esse tuus filius. " It must be observed, that this work was expressly written for the purpose of explaining these parts of the ritual according to the use of Sarum. It was printed by the famous W. De Worde, at the sign of the Sun in Fleet-street, 1508. The passage occurs in p. 33. B. This is by no means the only book of the kind. I have before me one printed at Basil, in 1504, and another at Cologne the same year. They are evidently all drawn from some common source, but are not reprints all of the same work, for there are in each some variations. The Cologne edition tells us, that it was the reprint of a familiar commentary long ago (jamdudum) published on the hymns. All these join in construing the passage so as to represent the prayer to the Virgin to be, that she would show and prove that she was mother by appeasing her Son, and causing him to hear our prayers. Nor can any other meaning be attached to the translation of the words as given by Cardinal Du Perron (Replique à la Rep. Du Roy de la G. Bretagne. Paris, 1620, p. 970). "Et pourtant quand l'Eglise dit à la saincte Vierge, 'Defends nous de l'ennemy, et nous reçoy à l'heure delamort, ' elle n'entend pas prier la Vierge qu'elle nous reçoive par sa propre virtu, mais par impetration de la grace de son Fils, comme l'Eglise le temoigne en ces mots: 'Monstre que tu es mère, reçoive par toy nos prieres celuy, qui né pour nous a eu agreeable d'être tien!'" This novel interpretation I have not found in any one book of former days. ] {341}

Another prayer runs thus: "Under thy protection we take refuge, HolyMother of God. Despise not our supplications in our necessities; butfrom all dangers ever deliver us, O glorious and Blessed Virgin. " [Subtuum præsidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genetrix; nostras deprecationes nedespicias in necessitatibus, sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper, Virgo gloriosa et benedicta. --Æst. Cxlvi. ]

Let us suppose the object of these addresses to be changed; and insteadof the Virgin let us substitute the name of the ever-blessed God andFather of us all. The very words here addressed to the Virgin areoffered to Him, and spoken of Him in some of the most affecting prayersand praises recorded in the Bible[128]. 

 [Footnote 128: The identity of the prayers offered to the Virgin with those offered in the Book of inspiration, or in the Roman Ritual to the Almighty, becomes very striking, if we lay side by side the authorized language of the Roman Liturgy, and the only translation of the Scriptures authorized by the Roman Church. 

 _Roman Ritual in addressing the _Roman Ritual, or Translation Virgin_ of the Bible, in addressing the Almighty_. 

 Sub tuum præsidium confugimus. Dominus, firmamentum meum et refugium meum. Ad te confugi. --Ps. Xvii. 1; cxlii. 11. 

 Nostras deprecationes ne despicias Ne despexeris deprecationem in necessitatibus. Meam. --Ps. Liv. 1. 

 Sed a periculis cunctis libera nos. Libera, Domine, animam servi tui ab omnibus periculis inferni. Hiem. Ccvi. 

 Libera nos a malo. Orat. Dom. 

 A periculo mortis libera nos, Domine. --Hiem. Cciv. 

 Tu nos ab hoste protege. Eripe me de inimicis meis, Domine. --Ps. Cxlii. 11. 

 Et hora mortis SUSPICE. _Suscipe_, Domine, servum tuum. --Hiem. Ccvi. {342} ]

But another hymn in the office of the Virgin, addressed in part to theblessed Saviour himself, and partly to the Virgin Mary, is still morerevolting to all my feelings with regard to religious worship. TheRedeemer is only asked to remember his mortal birth; no blessing is heresupplicated for at his hands; his protection is not sought; nodeliverance of our souls at the hour of death is implored from Him;these blessings, and these heavenly benefits, and these divine mercies, are sought for exclusively at the hands of the Virgin alone. Can such amingled prayer, can such a contrast in prayer, be the genuine fruit ofthat Gospel which bids us ask for all we need in prayer to God in thename and for the sake of his blessed Son?

 "Author of our salvation, remember that once, by {343} being born of a spotless virgin, thou didst take the form of our body! Mary, mother of grace, mother of mercy, do thou protect us from the enemy, and receive us at the hour of death. Glory to thee, O Lord, who wast born of a Virgin, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, through eternal ages. Amen[129]. "

 [Footnote 129:

 Memento, Salutis Auctor, Tu nos ab hoste protege, Quod nostri quondam corporis, Et hora mortis suscipe. Ex illibata Virgine, Gloria tibi, Domine, Nascendo formam sumpseris. Qui natus es de Virgine, Maria mater gratiæ, Cum Patre et Sancto Spiritu, Mater misericordiæ, In sempiterna sæcula. Amen. 

 In the new version, (referred to in page 260 of the present work, ) this hymn stands thus:--

 Memento, rerum Conctitor, Maria mater gratiæ, Nostri quod olim corporis, Dulcis parens clementiæ, Sacrata ab alvo Virginis, Tu nos ab hoste protege, Nascendo forrnam sumpseris. In mortis hora suscipe, &c. 

 Æst. Clv. ]

Could the beloved John, to whose kind and tender care our blessed Lordgave his mother of especial trust, have offered to her such a prayer asthis? To God alone surely would he have prayed for deliverance from allevil and mischief. To God alone would he have prayed:--"In the hour ofdeath, good Lord, deliver us, and all for Jesus Christ's sake, our onlySaviour and Mediator. "

To one other example of the practice of the Church of Rome I must refer. The rubric in our Book of Common Prayer directs that "at the end ofevery Psalm throughout the year, shall be repeated, Glory be to theFather, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost: As it was in thebeginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. " In theRoman Breviary also we find this rubric: "This verse, _Gloria_, isalways said in the end of all psalms, EXCEPT IT BE OTHERWISE {344}NOTED. " [Æst. 3. ] Such notifications occur at the end of various psalms. On the Feast of the Assumption [Æst. 595. ], fourteen psalms areappointed to be used. At the close of every one of these psalms, withouthowever any note that the Gloria is not to be said, there is appended ananthem to the Virgin. In some cases, so intimately is the antheminterwoven with the closing words of the psalm, as that under othercircumstances it would induce us to infer that the Gloria was intendedto be left out, especially as in the Parvum Officium of the Virgin [Æst. Clv. ], though to the various psalms anthems in the same manner have beenannexed, yet the words "Gloria Patri et Filio" are inserted in each casebetween the psalm and the anthem. Be this as it may, the annexation ofthe anthem has a lamentable tendency to withdraw the thoughts of theworshippers from the truths contained in the inspired psalm, and to fixthem upon Mary and her Assumption; changing the Church's address fromthe Eternal Being, alone invoked by the Psalmist, to one, who though avirgin blessed among women, is a creature of God's hand. Thus, at theconclusion of the 8th psalm; "O Lord, our Lord, how excellent is thyname in all the world, " we find immediately annexed these two anthems, "The holy mother of God is exalted above the choirs of angels to theheavenly realms. The gates of paradise are opened to us by thee, [bythee, O Virgin [Quæ gloriosa]] who glorious triumphest with the angels. "Thus again, an anthem is attached to the last verse of the 95th (in theHebrew and English versions the 96th). "He shall judge the earth inequity, and the people with his truth. Rejoice, {345} O Virgin Mary;thou alone hast destroyed all heresies in the whole world. Deem meworthy to praise thee, hallowed Virgin: Give me strength against thyenemies. " To the 96th (97th), the latter clause of that address isrepeated, with the addition of the following: "After the birth thoudidst remain a virgin inviolate. Mother of God, intercede for us. "

An instance of the anthem being so intimately interwoven with the psalm, as to render the insertion of the "Gloria, " between the two, to say theleast, forced and unnatural, occurs at the close of the 86th (87th)psalm. The vulgate translation of the last verse, differing entirelyfrom the English, is this: "As the habitation of all who rejoice is inthee. " This sentence of the Psalmist is thus taken up in the RomanRitual: "As the habitation of all us who rejoice is in THEE, Holy Motherof God. "

The object proposed by the Church from of old in concluding each psalmby an ascription of glory to the eternal Trinity, was to lead theworshipper to apply the sentiments of the psalm to the work of oursalvation accomplished by the three Persons of the Godhead. Theanalogous end of these anthems in the present service of the Church ofRome is to fix the thoughts of the worshipper upon Mary. This practiceunhappily sanctions the excesses into which Bonaventura and others haverun in their departures from the purity and integrity of primitiveworship. 

Cardinal du Perron informs us, that at the altar in the office of themass, prayer is not made directly to any saint, but only obliquely, theaddress being always made to God. But if prayers are offered in otherparts of the service directly to them, it is difficult to see what isgained by that announcement. Surely it is trifling {346} to make suchimmaterial distinctions. If as a priest I could address the followingprayer to the Virgin in preparing for offering mass, why should I notoffer a prayer to the same being during its celebration?

"O mother of pity and mercy, blessed Virgin Mary, I a miserable andunworthy sinner, flee to thee with my whole heart and affection, and Ipray thy most sweet pity, that as thou didst stand by thy most sweet Sonhanging upon the cross, so thou wouldest vouchsafe mercifully to standby me a miserable priest, and by all priests who here and in all theholy Church offer Him this day, that, aided by thy grace, we may beenabled to offer a worthy and acceptable victim in the sight of the mosthigh and undivided Trinity. Amen. " [O Mater pietatis et misericordiæ, beatissima Virgo Maria, ego miser et indignus peccator ad te confugiototo corde et affectu. Et precor dulcissimam pietatem tuam, ut sicutdulcissimo Filio tuo in cruce pendenti astitisti, ita et mihi miserosacerdoti et sacerdotibus omnibus hic et in tota sancta ecclesia ipsumhodie offerentibus, clementer assistere digneris, ut tua gratia adjutidignam et acceptabilem hostiam in conspectu summæ et individuæTrinitatis offerre valeamus. Amen. --Rom. Brev. Hus. Hiem. P. Ccxxxiii. ]

This is called, in the Roman Breviary, "A PRAYER to the blessed Virginbefore the celebration of the mass, " and is immediately followed byanother prayer directed to be offered to any saint, male or female, whose feast is on that day celebrated. "O Holy N. Behold I, a miserablesinner, DERIVING CONFIDENCE FROM THY MERITS, now offer the most holysacrament of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, FOR THY HONOURAND GLORY. I humbly and devotedly pray thee that thou wouldest deign tointercede for me to-day, that I may be enabled to offer so great asacrifice {347} worthily and acceptably, and to praise Him eternallywith thee and with all his elect, and that I may live with Him forever. " [O sancte N. Ecce ego miser peccator de tuis mentis confisus, offero nunc sacratissimura sacramentum corporis et sanguinis Domininostri Jesu Christ! PRO TUO HONORE ET GLORIA; precor te humiliter etdevote ut pro me hodie intercedere digneris, ut tantum sacrificium digneet acceptabiliter offerre valeam, ut Eum tecum et cum omnibus electisejus æternaliter laudare et cum eo semper regnare valeam. --Hiem. Ccxxxiii. ]

 * * * * *

Such, Christian brethren, is the result of our inquiries into the realpractice of the Church of Rome with regard to the worship of the VirginMary at the present day, in every part of the world where allegiance tothat Church is acknowledged. Can we wonder that individuals, high inhonour with that Church, have carried out the same worship to fargreater lengths? I have ever present to my mind the principle of fixingupon the Church of Rome herself that only which is to be found in hercanons, acknowledged decrees, and formularies. And unhappily of thatwhich directly contravenes the Gospel-rule and primitive practice, farmore than enough is found in her authorized rituals to compel all whohold to the Gospel and the integrity of primitive times, to withdrawtheir assent and consent from her worship. But with this principlebefore us, surely common justice and common prudence require that weshould see for ourselves the practical workings of the system. "By theirfruits ye shall know them, " is a principle no less sanctioned by theGospel than suggested by common sense and experience And, indeed, theshocking lengths to which priests, bishops, cardinals, and canonizedpersons have gone in this particular of the worship of the Virgin, mightwell {348} cause every upright and enlightened Roman Catholic to lookanxiously to the foundation; to determine honestly, though with tendercaution and pious care, for himself, whether the corruption be not inthe well-head, whether the stream do not flow impregnated with thepoison from the very fountain itself; whether the prayers authorized anddirected by the Church of Rome to be offered to the Virgin be not inthemselves at variance with the first principles of the Gospel--Faith inone God, the giver of every good, and in one Mediator and Intercessorbetween God and men, the man Christ Jesus, whose blood cleanseth fromall sin: in a word, to see whether all the aberrations of her childrenin this department of religious duty have not their prototype in thelaws and ordinances, the rules and injunctions, the example and practiceof their mother herself. 

Indeed I am compelled here to say, that, however revolting to us asbelievers in Jesus, and as worshippers of the one true God, are thoseextravagant excesses into which the votaries of the Virgin Mary haverun, I have found few of their most unequivocal ascriptions of divineworship to her, for a justification of which they cannot with reasonappeal to the authorized ritual of the Church of Rome. 

In leaving this point of our inquiry, I would suggest twoconsiderations: 1st, If it was intended that the invocation of theVirgin should be exclusively confined to requests, praying her to prayand intercede by prayer for the petitioners, why should language beaddressed to her which in its plain, obvious, grammatical, and commonsense interpretation conveys the form of direct prayers to her forbenefits believed to be at her disposal? And, 2ndly, If the Church had{349} intended that her members, when they suppliantly invoked theVirgin Mary, and had recourse to her aid, should have offered to herdirect and immediate prayers that she would grant temporal and spiritualbenefits, to be dispensed at her own will, and by her own authority andpower, in that case, what words could the Church have put into the mouthof the petitioners which would more explicitly and unequivocally haveconveyed that idea?

 * * * * *

SECTION II. --WORSHIP OF THE VIRGIN, CONTINUED. 

I have no intention of dwelling at any length on the extraordinaryexcesses to which the adoration of the Virgin Mary has been carried inthe Church of Rome, I do not mean by obscure and illiterate or fanaticalindividuals, but by her celebrated prelates, doctors, and saints. Myresearches have brought to my knowledge such a mass of error andcorruption in the worship of Christians as I never before had anyconception of; and rather than bring it all forward, and exhibit it toothers, I would turn my own eyes from it altogether. Still many reasonsrender it absolutely necessary that we should not pass over the subjectentirely in silence. Few in England, I believe, are aware of the realfacts of the case; and it well becomes us to guard ourselves and othersagainst such melancholy results as would appear to be inseparable fromthe invocation and worship of the Virgin. If indeed we could bejustified in regarding such palpable instances of her worship in itsmost objectionable form as the {350} marks of former and lessenlightened times, most gladly would I draw a veil over them, and hidethem from our sight for ever. But when I find the solemn addresses ofthe present chief authorities in the Church, nay, the epistles of thepresent sovereign Pontiff himself, cherishing, countenancing, andencouraging the selfsame evil departures from primitive truth andworship, it becomes a matter not of choice, but of necessity, to giveexamples at least of the deplorable excesses into which the highest andmost honoured in that communion have been betrayed. On the presentPope's encyclical letter [A. D. 1840] we have already observed; and inthis place I propose to examine only one more of those many excessesmeeting us on every side, which characterize the public worship of theVirgin. The instance to which I refer seems to take a sort of middlestation between the authorized enjoined services of the Church of Rome, and the devotions of individuals and family worship. It partakes on theone hand far too much of a public character to be considered in thelight of private religious exercises; and on the other it wants thatauthority which would rank it among the appointed services of theChurch. The devotional parts of the services are found neither in theMissals nor the Breviaries, and the adoption and celebration of theservice seems to be left to the option and care of individuals. But theservice is performed in the Churches, --a Priest presides, --the Host ispresented to the adorations of the people, --and a sermon is preached byan appointed minister. The service to which I am referring is performedevery evening through the entire month of May, and is celebratedexpressly in honour of the Virgin Mary. {351}

The month of May is dedicated to her, and is called Mary's month. Temporary altars are raised to her honour, surrounded by flowers andadorned with garlands and drapery; her image usually standing before thealtar. Societies are formed chiefly for the celebration of the Virgin'spraises, and in some Churches the effect, both to the eye and to theear, corresponds with the preparation. One thing only is wanting--theproper object of worship. I have now before me a book of hymns publishedprofessedly for the religious fraternities in Paris, and used in theChurches there. [Nouveau Recueil de Cantiques à l'usage des confrériesdes Paroisses de Paris. Paris, 1839. ] Many of these hymns are addressedto the Virgin alone; some without any reference to the Son of God andMan, the only Saviour, and without any allusion to the God ofChristians; indeed, an address to a heathen Goddess more entirelydestitute of Christianity can scarcely be conceived. I copy one hymnentire. 

 "Around the altars of Mary Let us, her children, press; To that mother so endeared Let us address the sweetest prayers. Let a lively and holy mirth Animate us in this holy day: There exists no sadness For a heart full of her love. Let us adorn this sanctuary with flowers; Let us deck her revered altar; Let us redouble our efforts to please her. Be this month consecrated to her; Let the perfume of these crowns Form a delicious incense, {352} Which ascending even to her throne May carry to her both our hearts and our prayers. Let the holy name of Mary Be for us a name of salvation! Let our softened soul Ever pay to her a sweet tribute of love. Let us join the choirs of angels The more to celebrate her beauty; And may our songs of praise Resound in eternity. O holy Virgin! O our mother! Watch over us from fhe height of heaven; And when from this sojourning of misery, We present our prayers to you; O sweet, O divine Mary! Lend an ear to our sighs, And after this life Make us to taste of immortal pleasures. "

 [Autour des autels de Marie Nous ses enfants, empressons-nous; A cette Mère si chérie, Adressons les voeux les plus doux. Qu'une vive et sainte allégresse Nous anime dans ce saint jour; Il n'existe point de tristesse Pour un coeur plein de son amour. Ornons des fleurs ce sanctuaire, Parons son autel révéré, Redoublons d'efforts pour lui plaire. Que ce mois lui soi, consacré; Que le parfume de ces couronnes Forme un encens délicieux, Qui s'élevant jusqu'à son trône, Lui porte et nos coeurs et nos voeux. Que le nom sacré de Marie Soit pour nous un nom de salut; Que toujours notre âme attendrie, D'amour lui paie un doux tribut. Unissons-nous aux choeurs des anges, Pour mieux célébrer sa beauté. Et puissent nos chants de louanges Retentir dans l'éternité. O Vierge sainte! ô notre Mère! Veillez sur nous du haut des cieux; Et de ce séjour de misère, Quand nous vous présentons nos voeux, O douce, ô divine Marie! Prêtez l'oreille à nos soupirs;-- Et faites qu'après cette vie, Nous goûtions d'immortels plaisirs. 

 --"Cantiques à l'usage des Confréries. " Paris, 1839, p. 175. ]

In the course of the present work I have already suggested the proprietyof trying the real import, {353} the true intent, and meaning and forceof an address to a Saint, by substituting the holiest name ever utteredon earth, for the name of the Saint to whom such address is offered; andif the same words, without any change, form a prayer fit to be offeredby us sinners to the Saviour of the world, then to ask ourselves, Canthis be right? I would earnestly recommend the application of the sametest here; and in many other of the prayers now offered (for many suchthere are now offered) by Roman Catholics to the Virgin. Suppose, instead of offering these songs of praise and prayer, and self-devotionto Mary in the month of May, we were to offer them, on the day of hisnativity, to our blessed Lord, would they not form an act of faith inHim as our Saviour and our God?

 "Around the altar of Jesus, Let us, his children, press; To that Saviour so endeared Let us address the sweetest prayers. {354} Let a lively and holy mirth Animate us in this holy day: There exists no sadness For a heart full of his love. Let the holy name of Jesus Be for us a name of salvation! Let our softened soul Ever pay to HIM a sweet tribute of love. O holy Jesus! O our Saviour! Watch over us from the height of heaven; And when from this sojourning of misery, We present our prayers to Thee; O sweet, O divine Redeemer, Lend an ear to our sighs; and after this life, Make Thou us to taste of immortal pleasures. "

 * * * * *

SECTION III. --BONAVENTURA. 

I will now briefly call your attention to the devotional works of thecelebrated Bonaventura. He is no ordinary man; and the circumstancesunder which his works were commended to the world are indeed remarkable. I know not how a Church can give the impress of its own name andapproval in a more full or unequivocal manner to the works of any humanbeing, than the Church of Rome has stamped her authority on the works ofthis her saint. 

In the "Acta Sanctorum", [Antwerp, 1723, July 14, p. 811-823. ] it isstated, that this celebrated man was born in 1221, and died in 1274. Hepassed through all degrees of ecclesiastical dignities, {355} short onlyof the pontifical throne itself. He was of the order of St. Francis, andrefused the archbishopric of York, when it was offered to him by PopeClement the Fourth, in 1265; whose successor, Gregory the Tenth, elevated him to the dignity of cardinal bishop. His biographer expresseshis astonishment, that such a man's memory should have been so longburied with his body; but adds, that the tardiness of his honours wascompensated by their splendour. 

More than two centuries after his death, his claims to canonization wereurged upon Sixtus the Fourth; and that Pope raised him to the dignity ofsaint; the diploma of his canonization bearing date 18 kalends of May, 1482, the eleventh year of that pope's reign. 

Before a saint is canonized by the Pope, it is usually required, thatmiracles wrought by him, or upon him, or at his tomb, be proved to thesatisfaction of the Roman court[130]. We need not dwell on the nature ofan inquiry into a matter-of-fact, alleged to have been done by anindividual two hundred years before; and whose memory is said to havelain buried with his corpse. Among the miracles specified, it isrecorded, that on one occasion, when he was filled with solemn awe andfear at the celebration of the Lord's Supper, God, by an angel, took aparticle of the consecrated host from the hands of the priest, andgently placed it in the holy man's mouth. But, with these transactions, I am not anxious to interfere, except so far as to ascertain the degreeof authority with which any pious Roman Catholic must be induced toinvest Bonaventura as a teacher and instructor in the doctrines ofChristianity, authorized and appointed by his Church. The case standsthus:--Pope Sixtus IV. States in his {356} diploma, that the proctor ofthe order of Minors, proved by a dissertation on the passage of St. John, "There are three that bear record in heaven, " that the blessedTrinity had borne testimony to the fact of Bonaventura being a saint inheaven: the Father proving it by the attested miracles; the Son, in theWISDOM OF HIS DOCTRINE; the Holy Spirit, by the goodness of his life. The pontiff then adds, in his own words, "He so wrote on divinesubjects, THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT SEEMS TO HAVE SPOKEN IN HIM. " [Page 831. "Ea de divinis rebus scripsit, ut in eo Spiritus Sanctus locutusvideatur. "] A testimony referred to by Pope Sixtus the Fifth. 

 [Footnote 130: See the canonization of St. Bonaventura in the Acta Sanctorum. ]

This latter pontiff was crowned May 1, 1585, more than a century afterthe canonization of Bonaventura, and more than three centuries after hisdeath. By his order, the works of Bonaventura were "most carefullyemendated. " The decretal letters, A. D. 1588, pronounced him to be anacknowledged doctor of Holy Church, directing his authority to be citedand employed in all places of education, and in all ecclesiasticaldiscussions and studies. The same act offers plenary indulgence to allwho assist at the mass on his feast, in certain specified places, withother minor immunities on the conditions annexed. [Page 837. ]

In these documents Bonaventura[131] is called the Seraphic Doctor; and Irepeat my doubt, whether it is possible for any human authority to givea more full, entire, and unreserved sanction to the works of any humanbeing than the Church of Rome has given to {357} the writings ofBonaventura. And what do those works present to us, on the subject ofthe Invocation and worship of the Virgin Mary?

 [Footnote 131: The edition of his works which I have used was published at Mentz in 1609; and the passages referred to are in vol. Vi. Between pp. 400 and 500. ]

Taking every one of the one hundred and fifty psalms[132], Bonaventuraso changes the commencement of each, as to address them not as theinspired Psalmist did, to the Lord Jehovah, the One only Lord GodAlmighty, but to the Virgin Mary; inserting much of his own composition, and then adding the Gloria Patri to each. It is very painful to refer tothese prostitutions of any part of the Holy Book of revealed truth; butwe must not be deterred from looking this evil in the face. A fewexamples, however, will suffice. 

 [Footnote 132: It is curious to find the Cardinal Du Perron, in his answer to our King James, declaring that he had never seen nor met with this Psalter in his life, and he was sure it was never written by Bonaventura; alleging that it was not mentioned by Trithemius or Gesner. The Vatican editors, however, have set that question at rest. They assure us that they have thrown into the appendix all the works about the genuineness of which there was any doubt, and that Bonaventura wrote many works not mentioned by Trithemius, which they have published from the Vatican press. Of this Psalter there is no doubt. See Cardinal Du Perron, Replique à la Rep. Du Roi de Grand Bretagne. Paris, 1620, p. 974. ]

In the 30th psalm. "In thee, O Lord, have I trusted; let me not beconfounded for ever, " &c. , the Psalter of the Virgin substitutes thesewords: [In te, Domina, speravi; non confundar in æternum, &c. &c. Inmanus tuas, Domina, commendo spiritum meum, totam vitam meam, et diemultimum meum. --P. 480. ]

"In thee, O Lady, have I trusted; let me not be confounded for ever: inthy grace take me. 

"Thou art my fortitude and my refuge; my consolation and my protection. {358}

"To thee, O Lady, have I cried, while my heart was in heaviness; andthou didst hear me from the top of the eternal hills. 

"Bring thou me out of the snare which they have hid for me; for thou artmy succour. 

"Into thy hands, O Lady, I commend my spirit, my whole life, and my lastday. --Gloria Patri, " &c. 

In the 31st psalm we read, "Blessed are they whose hearts love thee, OVirgin Mary; their sins shall be mercifully blotted out BY THEE.... "[Beati quorum corda te diligunt, Virgo Maria; peccata ipsorum A TEmisericorditer diluentur. --P. 481. ]

In the 35th, v. 2. "Incline thou the countenance of God upon us; COMPELHIM to have mercy upon sinners. O Lady, thy mercy is in the heaven, andthy grace is spread over the whole earth. " [Inclina vultum Dei supernos. COGE illum peccatoribus misereri; Domina, in coelo misericordiatua, et gratia diffusa est super terram. ]

In the 67th, instead of, "Let God arise, and let his enemies bescattered, " the Psalter of the Virgin has, "Let Mary arise, and let her enemies be scattered. " [Exurgat Maria, etdissipentur inimici ejus. --P. 483. ]

In the opening of the 93rd psalm there is a most extraordinary, rather, as it sounds to me, a most impious and blasphemous comparison of theSupreme God with the Virgin Mary, in reference to the very Attribute, which shines first, last, and brightest in HIM, --His eternal mercy. Nay, it draws the contrast in favour of the Virgin, and against God. Mostglad should I be, to find that I had misunderstood this passage; andthat it admits of another acceptation[133]. But I fear its real meaningis beyond controversy. 

 [Footnote 133: A similar idea indeed pervades some addresses to the Virgin of the present day, representing the great and only potentate as her heavenly husband, in himself full of rage, but softened into tenderness towards her votaries by her influence. See a hymn, in the Paris collection already referred to, p. 353, &c. Of this work (Nouveau Recueil de Cantiques, p. 183). 

 Daignez, Marie, en ce jour Vouchsafe, Mary, on this day Ecouter nos soupirs, To hear our sighs, Et seconder nos désirs. And to second our desires. Daignez, Marie, en ce jour Vouchsafe, Mary, on this day Recevoir notre encens, notre amour. To receive our incense, our love. Du céleste époux Calm the rage Calmez le courroux, Of thy heavenly husband, Qu'il se montre doux Let HIM show himself kind A tous qui sont à vous. To all those who are thine. Du céleste époux Of thy heavenly husband Calmez le courroux, Calm the rage, Que son coeur s'attendrisse sur nous. Let his heart be softened towards us. {359} ]

"The Lord is a God of vengeance; but thou, O Mother of Mercy, bendest tobe merciful. " [Deus ultionum Dominus; sed tu, Mater Misericordiæ, admiserandum inflectis. --P. 485. ]

The well known and dearly valued penitentiary psalm (129th) "Deprofundis, " is thus addressed to Mary:--

"Out of the depths have I called to thee, O Lady:

"O Lady, hear my voice. Let thine ears be attent to the voice of thypraise and glorifying: deliver me from the hand of my enemies: confoundtheir imaginations and attempts against me. Rescue me in the evil day;and, in the day of death, forget not my soul. Carry me into the haven ofsafety: let my name be enrolled among the just. " [De profundis clamaviad te, Domina: Domina, exaudi vocem meam. Fiant aures tuæ intendentes invocem laudis et glorificationis tuæ. Libera me de manu adversariorummeorum: confunde ingenia et conatus eorum contra me. Erue me in diemala: et in die mortis ne obliviscaris animæ meæ. Deduc me ad portumsalutis: inter justos scribatur nomen meum. --P. 489. ] {360}

But, as the penitential psalms are thus turned, from Him to whom thePsalmist addressed them, so his hymns of praise to Jehovah, are made toflow through the same channel to the Virgin. And all nature in the sea, on the earth, in the heavens, and heaven of heavens, is called upon topraise and glorify Mary. Thus, in the 148th psalm, we read, --

"Praise our Lady of heaven, glorify her in the highest. Praise her, allye men and cattle, ye birds of the heaven, and fishes of the sea. Praiseher, sun and moon; ye stars and circles of the planets. Praise her, cherubim and seraphim, thrones and dominions, and powers. Praise her, all ye legions of angels. Praise her, all ye orders of spirits above. "[Laudate Dominam nostram de coelis: glorificate eam in excelsis. Laudateeam omnes homines et jumenta: volucres coeli et pisces maris. Laudateeam sol et luna: stellæ, et circuli planetarum. Laudate eam cherubim etseraphim: throni et dominationes, et potestates. Laudate eam omneslegiones angelorum. Laudate eam omnes ordines spirituum supernorum. --P. 491. ]

The last sentence of the psalms is thus rendered, --"Let every spirit[_or_ every thing that hath breath] praise our Lady. "

To this Psalter are added many hymns changed in the same manner. One, entitled, "A Canticle, like that of Habakkuk iii. " presents to us anaddress to the Virgin Mary, of the very words which our blessed Saviourmost solemnly addressed to his heavenly Father. 

O Lord, I have heard thy O Lady, I have heard thy report, speech, and was afraid, &c. &c. And was astonished; I considered thy works, O Lady, and I was afraid at thy work. In the midst of the years thou hast revived it. {361}

 I will confess to thee, O Lady, because thou hast hid these things from the wise, and hast revealed them to babes. 

 Thy glory hath covered the heavens, and the earth is full of thy mercy. 

 Thou, O Virgin, wentest forth for the salvation of thy people, for salvation with thy Christ [thy anointed]. 

 O thou Blessed, our salvation rests in thy hands. Remember our poverty, O thou pious One. 

 WHOM THOU WILLEST, HE SHALL BE SAVED; AND HE FROM WHOM THOU TURNEST AWAY THY COUNTENANCE, GOETH INTO DESTRUCTION. 

[Domina, audivi auditionem tuam, et obstupui: consideravi opera tua, etexpavi, Domina, opus tuum: circa medium annorum vivificasti illud. 

Confitebor tibi, Domina: quia abscondisti hæc a sapientibus: etrevelasti ea parvulis. Operuit coelos gloria tua, et misericordia tuaplena est terra. 

Egressa es, Virgo, in salutem populi tui: in salutem cum Christo tuo. OBenedicta, in manibus tuis est reposita nostra salus; recordare, pia, paupertatis nostræ. 

Quem vis, ipse salvus erit, et a quo avertis vultum tuum, vadit ininteritum. --G. P. , &c. ]

The song of the Three Children is altered in the same manner. In it aswell as in the Canticle of Zacharias, these prayers are introduced;

"O Mother of Mercy, have mercy upon us miserable sinners; who neglect torepent of our past sins, and commit every day many to be repented of. "[Miserere, misericordiæ Mater, nobis miseris peccatoribus, qui retroactapeccata poenitere negligimus, ac multa quotidie poenitenda committimus. ]{362}

The Te Deum is thus lamentably perverted:

"We praise thee, Mother of God; we acknowledge thee, Mary the Virgin. [Te Matrem Dei laudamus; Te Mariam Virginem profitemur. ]

"All the earth doth worship thee, spouse of the eternal Father. 

"To thee all Angels and Archangels, Thrones and Principalities, faithfully do service.... 

"To thee the whole angelic creation with incessant voice proclaim, "Holy! Holy! Holy! Mary, parent, mother of God, and virgin!... 

"... Thou with thy Son sittest at the right hand of the Father.... 

"O Lady, SAVE THY PEOPLE, that we may partake of the inheritance of thySon. 

"And rule us and guard us for ever.... 

"Day by day we salute thee, O pious One; and we desire to praise thee inmind and voice even for ever. 

"Vouchsafe, O sweet Mary, now and for ever, to keep us without sin. 

"Have mercy upon us, O pious One; have mercy upon us. 

"Let thy great mercy be with us, because we put our trust in thee, OVirgin Mary. 

"In thee, sweet Mary, do we hope, defend thou us eternally. {363}

"Praise becomes thee, empire becomes thee; to thee be virtue and gloryfor ever and ever. Amen. "

[SALVUM FAC POPULUM tuum, Domina, ut simus participes hæreditatis Filiitui, Et rege nos et custodi nos in æternum. 

Dignare, Dulcis Maria, mine et semper nos sine delicto conservare. Miserere, Pia, nobis! miserere nobis! Fiat misericordia tua magnanobiscum, quia in te, Virgo Maria, confidimus. In te, Dulcis Maria, speramus, nos defendas in æternum. Te decet laus, te decet imperium, tibi virtus et gloria in sæcula sæculorum, Amen. ]

Can this by any the most subtle refinement be understood to be a mererequest to her to pray for us?

The Athanasian Creed is employed in the same manner; and it is veryremarkable that the Assumption itself of the Virgin into heaven is therespecified as one of the points to be believed on pain of losing allhopes of salvation. 

"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he holdfirm the faith concerning the Virgin Mary: which except a man keep wholeand undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.... [Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat de Mariafirmam fidem. ]

"Whom at length He took up (assumpsit) unto heaven, and she sitteth atthe right hand of her Son, not ceasing to pray to her Son for us. [Quamdemum ipse in coelum assumpsit, et sedit ad dexteram Filii, non cessanspro nobis Filium exorare. ]

"This is the faith concerning Mary the Virgin, which except every onebelieve faithfully and firmly he cannot be saved. " [Hæc est fides deMaria Virgine: quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit. ]

In the Litany addressed to her, these sentences are found. 

"Holy Mary, whom all things praise and venerate, pray for us, --bepropitious, --spare us, O Lady. 

"From all evil deliver us, O Lady. 

"In the devastating hour of death, deliver us, O Lady. 

"From the horrible torments of hell, deliver us, O Lady. 

"We sinners do beseech thee to hear us. 

"That thou wouldest vouchsafe to give eternal rest {364} to all thefaithful departed, we beseech thee to hear us. &c. &c. "

 [Sancta Maria, quam omnia laudant Et venerantur, ora pro nobis. Propitia esto. Parce nobis, Domina. Ab omni malo libera nos, Domina. In hora mortis devastante libera nos, Domina. Ab inferni horribili cruciamine libera nos, Domina. Peccatores te rogamus, audi nos. Ut cunctis fidelibus defunctis requiem Æternam donare digneris, te rogamus, audi nos. ]

I will add to this catalogue of prayers and praises to the Virgin, onlythe translation of one prayer more from the same canonized Saint; itcontains a passage often referred to, but the existence of which hasbeen denied. It stands, however, in his works, vol. Vi. Page 466. 

"Therefore, O Empress, and our most benign Lady, by THY RIGHT OF MOTHERCOMMAND thy most beloved Son [JURE MATRIS IMPERA tuo dilectissimoFilio], our Lord, Jesus Christ, that He vouchsafe to raise our mindsfrom the love of earthly things to heavenly desires, who liveth andreigneth. "

 * * * * *

Now let any man of common understanding and straightforward principlessay, whether any, the most ingenious refinement can interpret all thisto mean merely that Bonaventura invoked the Virgin Mary to pray for him, or for his fellow-creatures. It looks as though he were resolved on setpurpose to exalt her to an equality with the Almighty, when we find himnot once, not casually, not in the fervent rapture of momentaryexcitement, but deliberately, through one hundred and fifty Psalms, applying to Mary the very words dictated by the Holy Spirit to thePsalmist, and consecrated {365} to the worship of the one supreme God;and then selecting the most solemn expressions by which the ChristianChurch approaches the Lord of heaven and earth, our Father, our Saviour, our Sanctifier: employing too the very words of her most solemn form ofbelief in the ever-blessed Trinity, and substituting Mary's name for theGod of Christians. On the words, "By thy right of mother command thySon, " beyond the assertion of the fact that there they are to this day, I wish to add nothing, because the very denial of their existence oftenrepeated shows, that many Roman Catholics themselves regard them asobjectionable. 

But, if such a man as Bonaventura, one of the most learned andcelebrated men of his age, could be tempted by the views cherished bythe Church of Rome, to indulge in such language, what can be fairlyexpected of the large mass of persons who find that language publishedto the world with the highest sanction which their religion can give, asthe work of a man whom the Almighty declared when on earth, by miracles, to be a chosen vessel, and to be under the guidance of the Holy Spirit;and of whom they are taught by the infallible testimony[134] of hiscanonization, that he is now reigning with Christ in heaven, and ishimself the lawful and appointed object of religious invocation. Iprofess to you that I see no way by which Christians can hold andencourage this doctrine of the Invocation of Saints, without at the sametime countenancing and cherishing what, were I to join in suchinvocation, would stain my soul with the guilt of idolatry. If thedoctrine were confessedly Scriptural, come what would come, our dutywould be to maintain it at all hazards, {366} and to brave every dangerrather than from fear of consequences to renounce what we believe tohave come from God; securing the doctrine at all events, and thenputting forth our very best to guard against its perversion and abuse. But surely, it well becomes our brethren of the Church of Rome, toexamine with most rigid and unsparing scrutiny into the very foundationof such a doctrine as this; a doctrine which in its mildest and mostguarded form is considered by a very large number of their fellowChristians, as a dishonouring of God and of his Son, our Saviour; andwhich in its excess, an excess witnessed in the books of learned andsainted authors, and in the every day practice of worshippers, seems tobe in no wise distinguishable from the practices of acknowledgedpolytheism, and pagan worship. If that foundation, after honest andpersevering examination, approves itself as based sure and deep on theword of God, and the faith and practice of the apostles and the Churchfounded by them from the first, I have not another word to say, beyond afervent prayer that the God in whom we trust would pour the bright beamsof his Gospel abundantly into the hearts of all who receive that Gospelas the word of life. But were they my dying words to my dearest friendwho had espoused that doctrine, I would say to him, Look well yourselfto the foundation, because I am, after long examination, convinced, beyond a shadow of doubt that the doctrine and practice of theInvocation of Saints and Angels is as contrary to the doctrine andpractice of the primitive Church, as it is in direct opposition to theexpress words of Scripture, and totally abhorrent from the spirit whichpervades the whole of the Old, and the whole of the New Testament ofGod's eternal truth. 

 [Footnote 134: Bellarmin, in his Church Triumphant, maintains that in the act of Canonization, the Church is infallible. Vol. Ii. P. 871. ] {367}

 * * * * *

SECTION IV. --BIEL, DAMIANUS, BERNARDINUS DE BUSTIS, BERNARDINUSSENENSIS, &c. 

Unhappily these excesses in the worship of the Virgin Mary are notconfined to Bonaventura, or to his age. We have too many examples of thesame extravagant exaltation of her as an object of adoration and praisein men, whose station and abilities seemed to hold them forth to theworld as burning and shining lights. Again, let me repeat, that in thussoliciting your attention to the doctrines and expressed feelings of afew from among the host of the Virgin's worshippers, I am far frombelieving that the enlightened Roman Catholics in England now are readyto respond to such sentiments. My desire is that all persons should bemade aware of the excesses into which even celebrated teachers have beentempted to run, when they once admitted the least inroad to be made uponthe integrity of God's worship; and I am anxious also, without offence, but with all openness, to caution my countrymen against encouraging thatrevival of the worship of the Virgin in England, to promote which thehighest authorities in the Church of Rome have lately expressed theirsolicitude, intimating, at the same time, their regret that the worshipof the Virgin at the present time has, in England, degenerated from itsexaltation in former ages, and that England is now far behind hercontinental neighbours in her worship. Though these excessive departuresfrom Gospel truth and the primitive worship of one God by one Mediatormay not be the doctrines of all who belong to the Church of Rome, yetthey are the tenets of some of her most {368} celebrated doctors, of menwho were raised to her highest dignities in their lifetime, and solemnlyenrolled by her among the saints of glory after their death. Their wordsand their actions are appealed to now in support of similar tenets anddoctrines, though few, in this country at least, are found to put themforth in all their magnitude and fulness. But even in their mildest andleast startling form these doctrines are awfully dangerous. 

The fact is, that the direct tendency of the worship of the Virgin, aspractically illustrated in the Church of Rome, is to make GOD himself anobject of FEAR, and the VIRGIN an object of LOVE; to invest Him, who isthe Father of mercy and God of all comfort, with awfulness, and majesty, and with the terrors of eternal justice, and in direct and strikingcontrast to array the Virgin mother with mercy and benignity, andcompassionate tenderness. Christians cannot be too constantly and toocarefully on their guard against doing this wrong to our heavenlyFather. His own inspired word invites us to regard Him not only as theGod of love, but as Love itself. "God is love;" [1 John iv. 8. ] and sofar from terrifying us by representations of his tremendous majesty, andby declarations that we cannot ourselves draw nigh to God; so far frombidding us to approach Him with our suits and supplications throughmediators whom we should regard as having, more than our blessedRedeemer, a fellow-feeling with us, and at the same time resistlessinfluence with Him; his own invitation and assurance is, "Come unto me, and I will give you rest:" [Matt. Xi. 28. ] "No one cometh unto theFather but by me:" [John xiv. 6. ] "Him that cometh to me I will {369} inno wise cast out:" [John vi. 37. ] "Let us come boldly unto the throne ofgrace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time ofneed. " [Heb. Iv. 16. ]

How entirely opposed to such passages as these, breathing the spiritthat pervades the whole Bible, are those doctrines which represent theVirgin Mary as the Mediatrix by whom we must sue for the divineclemency; as the dispenser of all God's mercies and graces; as thesharer of God's kingdom, as the fountain of pity, as the moderator ofGod's justice, and the appeaser of his wrath. "Show thyself a mother. ""Compel thy Son to have pity. " "By thy right of mother command thy Son. ""God is a God of vengeance; but thou, Mary, dost incline to mercy;" suchexpressions convey sentiments and associations shocking to our feelings, and from which our reason turns away, when we think of God'sperfections, and the full atonement and omnipotent intercession of hisSon Christ our Redeemer. But it must not be disguised, that these arethe very sentiments in which the most celebrated defenders of theworship of the Virgin, in the Church of Rome, teach their disciples toacquiesce, and in which they must have themselves fully acquiesced, ifthey practised what they taught. It is very painful to make suchextracts as leave us no alternative in forming our opinions on thispoint; but it is necessary to do so, otherwise we may injure the causeof truth by suppressing the reality; a reality over which there seems tobe a strong disposition, in the present day, in part at least, to draw aveil; an expedient which can only increase the danger. 

The first author, whose sentiments I would request you to weigh, isGabriel Biel, a schoolman of great celebrity[135]. {370} In histhirty-second lecture, on the Canon of the Mass, he thus expresseshimself, referring to a sermon of St. Bernard, "The will of God was, that we should have all through Mary.... You were afraid to approach theFather, frightened by only hearing of Him.... He gave you Jesus for aMediator. What could not such a Son obtain with such a Father? He willsurely be heard for his own reverence-sake; for the Father loveth theSon. But, are you afraid to approach even Him? He is your brother andyour flesh; tempted through all, that He might become merciful. THISBROTHER MARY GAVE TO YOU. But, perhaps, even in Him you fear the divineMajesty, because, although He was made man, yet He remained God. Youwish to have an advocate even to Him. Betake yourself to Mary. For, inMary is pure humanity, not only pure from all contamination, but purealso by the singleness of her nature[136]. Nor should I, with any doubtsay, she too will be heard for her own reverence-sake. The Son, surely, will hear the Mother, and the Father will hear the Son. "

 [Footnote 135: Tubingen, 1499. Gabriel Biel, born at Spires about A. D. 1425, was in A. D. 1484 appointed the first Professor of Theology in the then newly founded University of Tubingen. He afterwards retired to a monastery, and died A. D. 1495. ]

 [Footnote 136: This is a very favourite argument in the present day, often heard in the pulpits on the Continent. ]

In his 80th lecture, the same author comments on this prayer, which isstill offered in the service of the Mass:

"Deliver us, we beseech thee, O Lord, from all evils past, present, andfuture; and by the intercession of the blessed and glorious ever-virginmother of God, Mary, with thy blessed apostles, Peter and Paul, andAndrew, and all saints, mercifully grant peace in our days, that, aidedby the help of thy mercy, we may be both ever {371} free from sin, andfree from all disquietude. Through the same our Lord, &c. "

On this prayer Biel observes, "Again we ask, in this prayer, the defenceof peace; and since we cannot, nor do we presume to obtain this by ourown merit, ... Therefore, in order to obtain this, we have recourse, inthe second part of this prayer, to the suffrages of all his saints, whomHe hath constituted, in the court of his kingdom, as our mediators, mostacceptable to himself, whose prayers his love does not reject. But, ofthem, we fly, in the first place, to the most blessed Virgin, the Queenof Heaven, to whom the King of kings, the heavenly Father, has given thehalf of his kingdom; which was signified in Hester, the queen, to whom, when she approached to appease king Asuerus, the king said to her, Evenif thou shalt ask the half of my kingdom, it shall be given thee. So theheavenly Father, inasmuch as He has justice and mercy as the more valuedpossessions of his kingdom, RETAINING JUSTICE TO HIMSELF, GRANTED MERCYto the Virgin Mother. We, therefore, ask for peace, by the intercessionof the blessed and glorious Virgin. " [Cum habeat justitiam etmisericordiam tanquam potiora regni sui bona, justitia sibi retenta, misericordiam Matri Virgini concessit. ]

The very same partition of the kingdom of heaven, is declared to havebeen made between God himself and the Virgin by one who was dignified bythe name of the "venerable and most Christian Doctor, " John Gerson[137], who died in 1429; excepting that, instead of justice and mercy, Gersonmentions power and mercy as the two parts of which God's kingdomconsists, and that, whilst power remained with the Lord, the part ofmercy ceded "to the mother of Christ, and the reigning {372} spouse;hence, by the whole Church, she is saluted as Queen of Mercy. "

 [Footnote 137: Paris, 1606. Tract iv. Super "Magnificat, " part iii. P. 754. See Fabricius, vol. Iii. P. 49. Patav. 1754. ]

I would next refer to a writer who lived four centuries before Biel, butwhose works received the papal sanction so late as the commencement ofthe seventeenth century, Petrus Damianus, Cardinal and Bishop. His workswere published at the command of Pope Clement VIII. , who died A. D. 1604, and were dedicated to his successor, Paul V. , who gave the copyright forfifteen years to the Editor, Constantine Cajetan, A. D. 1606. I willquote only one passage from this author. It is found in his sermon onthe nativity of the Virgin, whom he thus addresses: "Nothing isimpossible with thee, with whom it is possible to restore those indespair to the hope of blessedness. For how could that authority, whichderived its flesh from thy flesh, oppose thy power? For thou approachestbefore that golden altar of human reconciliation not only asking, butcommanding; a mistress, not a handmaid. " [Accedis enim ante illud aureumhumanæ reconciliationis altare, non solum rogans, sed imperans; Domina, non ancilla. Paris, 1743. Vol. Ii. P. 107. Serm. 44. ]

I must now solicit your attention to the sentiments of two writers, whose partial identity of name has naturally led, in some instances, tothe one being mistaken for the other, Bernardinus de Bustis, andBernardinus Senensis. Bernardinus de Bustis, [Fabricius, vol. I. 215. ]in the country of Milan, was the celebrated author of the "Office of theImmaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, " which was confirmed by thebull of Sixtus the Fourth, and has since been celebrated on the 8th ofDecember. 

He composed different works in honour of the Virgin, {373} to one ofwhich he gave the title "Mariale. " In this work, with a great variety ofsentiments of a similar tendency, he thus expresses himself:--

"Of so great authority in the heavenly palace is that empress, that, omitting all other intermediate saints, we may appeal to her from everygrievance.... With confidence, then, let every one appeal to her, whether he be aggrieved by the devil, or by any tyrant, or by his ownbody, or by divine justice;" [Cologne, 1607. Part iii. Serm. Ii. P. 176. ] and then, having specified and illustrated the three other sourcesof grievance, he thus proceeds: "In the fourth place, he may APPEAL TOHER, if any one feels himself AGGRIEVED BY THE JUSTICE OF GOD [Licet adipsam appellare, si quis a Dei justitia se gravari sentit. ] ... Thatempress, therefore, Hester, was a figure of this empress of the heavens, with whom God divided his kingdom. For, whereas God has justice andmercy, He retained justice to himself to be exercised in this world, andgranted mercy to his mother; and thus, if any one feels himself to beaggrieved in the court of God's justice, let him appeal to the court ofmercy of his mother. " [Ideo si quis sentit se gravari in foro justitiæDei, appellet ad forum misericordiæ matris ejus. ]

For one moment, let us calmly weigh the import of these words:--Is itany thing short of robbing the Eternal Father of the brightest jewel inhis crown, and sharing his glory with another? Is it not encouraging usto turn our eyes from the God of mercy as a stern and ruthless judge, and habitually to fix them upon Mary as the dispenser of all we want forthe comfort and happiness of our souls?

In another place, this same author thus exalts Mary:

"Since the Virgin Mary is mother of God, and God is her Son; and everyson is naturally inferior to his {374} mother, and subject to her; andthe mother is preferred above, and is superior to her son, it followsthat the blessed Virgin is herself superior to God, and God himself isher subject, by reason of the humanity derived from her;" [Part ix. Serm. Ii. P. 605. ] and again. "O the unspeakable dignity of Mary, whowas worthy to command the Commander of all. " [Part xii. Serm, ii. P. 816. ]

I will detain you by only one more quotation from this famed Doctor. Itappears to rob God of his justice and power, as well as of his mercy;and to turn our eyes to Mary for the enjoyment of all we can desire, andfor safety from all we can dread. Would that Bernardine stood alone inthe propagation of such doctrines. "We may say, that the blessed Virginis chancellor in the court of heaven. For we see, that in the chanceryof our lord the pope, three kinds of letters are granted: some are ofsimple justice, others are of pure grace, and the third mixed, containing justice and grace.... The third chancellor is he to whom itappertains to give letters of pure grace and mercy. And this office haththe blessed Virgin; and therefore she is called the mother of grace andmercy: but those letters of mercy she gives only in the present life. For, to some souls, as they are departing, she gives letters of puregrace; to others, of simple justice; and to others, mixed, namely, ofjustice and grace. For some were very much devoted to her, and to themshe gives letters of pure grace, by which she COMMANDS, that glory begiven to them without any pain of purgatory: others were miserablesinners, and not devoted to her, and to them she gives letters of simplejustice, by which she COMMANDS that condign vengeance be done upon them;others were lukewarm and remiss in devotion, and to them she givesletters of justice and grace, by which {375} she COMMANDS that grace begiven to them, and yet, on account of their negligence and sloth, somepain of purgatory be also inflicted on them. " [Part xii. Serm. Ii. Onthe twenty-second excellence, p. 825. ]

The only remaining author, to whom I will at present refer you, is acanonized saint, Bernardinus Senensis. A full account of his life, hismiracles, and his enrolment among the saints in heaven, is found in theActa Sanctorum, vol. V. Under the 20th of May, the day especiallydedicated to his honour. Eugenius IV. Died before the canonization ofBernardine could be completed: the next pope, Nicholas V. On Whitsunday1450, in full conclave, enrolled him among the saints, to the joy, weare told, of all Italy. In 1461, Pius the Second said that Bernardinewas taken for a saint even in his lifetime; and, in 1472, Sixtus IV. Issued a bull, in which he extols the saint, and authorizes thetranslation of his body into a new church, dedicated, as others hadbeen, to his honour. 

This Bernardine is equally explicit with others, in maintaining, thatall the blessings which Christians can receive on earth are dispensed byMary; that her princedom equals the princedom of the Eternal Father;that all are her servants and subjects, who are the subjects andservants of the Most High; that all who adore the Son of God shouldadore his virgin-mother, and that the Virgin has repaid the Almighty forall that He has done for the human race. Some of these doctrines were tome quite startling; I was not prepared for them; but I have been assuredthey find an echo in the pulpits in many parts of the continent. Veryfew quotations will suffice. [Opera, per John de la Haye. Paris, 1636. Five volumes bound in two. ] {376}

"As many creatures do service to the glorious Mary, as do service to theTrinity.... For he who is the Son of God, and of the blessed Virgin, wishing (so to speak) to make, in a manner, the princedom of his motherequal to the princedom of his father, he who was God, served his motheron earth. Moreover, this is true, all things, even the Virgin, areservants of the divine empire; and again, this is true, all things, evenGod, are servants of the empire of the Virgin. " [Vol. Iv. Serm. V. C. Vi. P. 118. ]

"Therefore, all the angelic spirits are the ministers and servants ofthis glorious Virgin. " [Serm. Iii. C. Iii. P. 104. ]

"To comprise all in a brief sentence, I do not doubt that God made allthe liberations and pardons in the Old Testament on account of thereverence and love of this blessed maid, by which God preordained frometernity, that she should be, by predestination, honoured above all hisworks. On account of the immense love of the Virgin, as well Christhimself, as the whole most blessed Trinity, frequently grants pardon tothe most wicked sinners. " [Serm. V. C. Ii. P. 116. ]

"By the law of succession, and the right of inheritance, the primacy andkingdom of the whole universe is due to the blessed Virgin. Nay, whenher only Son died on the cross, since He had no one on earth to succeedHim of right, his mother, by the laws of all, succeeded, and by thisacquired the principality of all. [Serm. V. C. Vii. P. 118. ] ... But, ofthe monarchy of the universe, Christ never made any testamentarybequest, because that could never be done without prejudice to hismother. Moreover, HE KNEW THAT A MOTHER CAN ANNUL THE {377} WILL OF HERSON, IF IT BE MADE TO THE PREJUDICE OF HERSELF. " [Insuper noverat quodpotest mater irritare Filii testamentum si in sui præjudicium sitconfectum. --P. 118. ]

"The Virgin Mother[138], from the time she conceived God, obtained acertain jurisdiction and authority in every temporal procession of theHoly Spirit, so that no creature could obtain any grace of virtue fromGod except according to the dispensation of his Virgin mother[139]. Asthrough the neck the vital breathings descend from the head into thebody, so the vital graces are transfused from the head Christ into hismystical body, through the Virgin. I fear not to say, that this Virginhas a certain jurisdiction over the flowing of all graces. And, becauseshe is the mother of such a Son of God, who produces the Holy Spirit;THEREFORE, ALL THE GIFTS, VIRTUES, AND GRACES OF THE HOLY SPIRIT AREADMINISTERED BY THE HANDS OF HERSELF, TO WHOM SHE WILL, WHEN SHE WILL, HOW SHE WILL, AND IN WHAT QUANTITY SHE WILL. " [Serm. V. P. 119. ]

 [Footnote 138: Serm. V. C. Viii. And Serm. Vi. C. Ii. P. 120 and 122. There is an omission (probably by an error of the press) in the first passage, which the second enables us to supply. ]

 [Footnote 139: This writer is constantly referring to St. Bernard's doctrine, "No grace comes from heaven upon the earth, but what passes through the hands of Mary. "]

"She is the queen of mercy, the temple of God, the habitation of theHoly Spirit, always sitting at the right hand of Christ in eternalglory. Therefore she is to be venerated, to be saluted, and to be adoredwith the adoration of hyperdulia. And therefore she sits at the righthand of the King, that as often as you adore Christ the king you mayadore also the mother of Christ. " [Serm. Vi. P. 121. ]

"The blessed Virgin Mary alone has done more for {378} God; or as much(so to speak) as God hath done for the whole human race. For I verilybelieve that God will grant me indulgence if I now speak for the Virgin. Let us gather together into one what things God hath done for man, andlet us consider what satisfaction the Virgin Mary hath rendered to theLord. " Bernardine here enumerates many particulars, placing one againstthe other, which for many reasons I cannot induce myself to transferinto these pages, and then he sums up the whole thus: "Therefore, setting each individual thing one against another, namely, what thingsGod had done for man, and what things the blessed Virgin has done forGod, you will see that Mary has done more for God, than God has for man;so that thus, on account of the blessed Virgin, (whom, nevertheless, Hehimself made, ) God is in a certain manner under greater obligations tous than we are to Him. " [Serm. Vi. P. 120. ]

The whole treatise he finishes with this address to the Virgin:--

"Truly by mere babbling are we uttering these thy praises andexcellences; but we suppliantly pray thy immense sweetness. Do thou, bythy benignity, supply our insufficiencies, that we may worthily praisethee through the endless ages of ages. Amen. "

In closing these brief extracts I would observe, that by almost everywriter in support of the worship of the Virgin, an appeal is made to St. Bernard[140] as their chief authority. Especially is the followingpassage quoted by many, either whole or in part, at almost every turn oftheir argument:--

 [Footnote 140: The present Pope, in the same manner, refers to him in his Encyclical Letter. --A. D. 1840. ]

"If thou art disturbed by the heinousness of thy crimes, and confoundedby the foulness of thy conscience, {379} if terrified by the horror ofjudgment thou begin to be swallowed up in the gulf of despair, think ofMary, invoke Mary; let her not depart from thy heart, let her not departfrom thy mouth. For whilst thinking of her, thou dost not err; imploringher, thou dost not despair; following her, thou dost not lose thy way;whilst she holds thee, thou dost not fall; whilst she protects thee, thou dost not fear; whilst she is thy leader, thou art not wearied;whilst she is favourable, thou reachest thy end[141]. "

 [Footnote 141: See Bern. Sen. Vol. Iv. P. 124. The passage is found in Bernard, Paris, 1640. P. 25. ]

If the Virgin Mary is thus regarded as the source and well-head of allsafety and blessing, we cannot wonder, that glory and praise areascribed in the selfsame terms to her as to the Almighty. CardinalBellarmin closes the several portions of his writings with "Praise toGod and the blessed Virgin Mary[142]. " It is painful to reflect, thateither the highest glory, due to that God who will not share his glorywith another, is here ascribed to one of the creatures of his hand(however highly favoured and full of grace), or else that to the mosthigh God is ascribed an inferior glory and praise, such as it is lawfulfor us to address to an exalted fellow-creature. Surely the onlyascription fitting the lips and the heart of those who have beenenlightened by the bright beams of Gospel truth, is Glory to God alonethrough Christ his Son. 

 [Footnote 142: Such ascriptions are very common. Joannes de Carthagena, a most voluminous writer of homilies, adopts this as the close of his sections: "Praise and glory to the Triune God, to the Humanity of Christ, to the Blessed Virgin Mary his mother, and to St. Joseph her dearest spouse. "--Catholic Homilies on the Sacred Secrets of the Mother of God, and Joseph, p. 921. Paris, 1615. ] {380}

 * * * * *

SECTION V. --MODERN WORKS OF DEVOTION AMONG ROMAN CATHOLICS. 

It may perhaps be surmised, that the authors referred to in the lastsection lived many years ago, and that the sentiments of the faithfulmembers of the Church of Rome have undergone material changes on thesepoints. Assurances are given on every side, that the invocation of thesaints and of the Virgin is nothing more than a request, that they wouldintercede with God, and implore his mercy for the suppliants. Butwhatever implicit reliance we may place on the good faith with whichthese declarations are made, we can discover no new key by which tointerpret the forms of prayer and praise satisfactorily. Confessedlythere are no changes in the authorized services. We discover no tracesof change in the worship of private devotion. The Breviary and Missalcontain the same offices of the Virgin Mary as in former days. The samesentiments are expressed towards her in public; the same forms ofdevotion[143], both in prayer and praise, are prepared for the use ofindividuals in their daily exercises. Whatever meaning is to be attachedto the expressions employed, the prevailing expressions themselvesremain the same as we found them to have been in past ages. 

 [Footnote 143: Works of this character abound in every place, where Catholic books may be purchased. ]

Since I made these extracts from the learned and celebrated doctors andcanonized saints of former ages, my attention has been invited to thelanguage now {381} used in forms of devotion, the spirit of whichimplies similar views of the power and love of the Virgin Mary, as thefountain of mercies to mankind, and the dispenser of every heavenlyblessing. 

At the head of these modern works, I was led to read over again theencyclical letter of the present sovereign pontiff, from the closingsentences of which I have already made extracts. And referring his wordsto a test which we have more than once applied in a similar case--thatof changing the name of the person, and substituting the name of God, orhis blessed Son, I cannot see how the spirit of his sentiments falls inthe least below the highest degree of religious worship. His words, inthe third paragraph of his letter, as they appear in the Laity'sDirectory for 1833, are these:--

"But having at length taken possession of our see in the Lateran Basilicaccording to the custom and institution of our predecessors, we turn toyou without delay, venerable brethren, and in testimony of our feelingstowards you, we select for the date of our letter this most joyful dayon which we celebrate the solemn festival of the most blessed Virgin'striumphant assumption into heaven, that she who has been through everygreat calamity our patroness and protectress, may WATCH OVER US WRITINGTO YOU, AND LEAD OUR MIND BY HER HEAVENLY INFLUENCE to those counselswhich may prove most salutary to Christ's flock. "

Let us substitute for the name of Mary, the holiest of all, The EternalSpirit of Jehovah Himself; and will not these words be a proper vehicleof the sentiments of a Christian pastor? Let us fix upon Christmas-day, or Easter, or Holy Thursday, and what word expressive {382} of gratitudefor past mercies to the supreme Giver of all good things, or of hope andtrust in the guidance of the Spirit of counsel, and wisdom, andstrength--of the most High God, who alone can order the wills and waysof men--might not a bishop of Christ's flock take from this declarationof the Sovereign Pontiff, and use in its first and natural sense, whenspeaking of the Lord Jehovah Himself? "We select for the date of ourletter this most joyful day on which we celebrate the solemn festival ofthe most blessed Redeemer's nativity, (or glorious resurrection, orascension, ) that He who has been through every great calamity our patronand protector, may watch over us writing to you, and lead our mind byhis heavenly influence to those counsels which may prove most salutaryto Christ's flock. "

In these sentiments of the present Pope there is no allusion (as thereis in the other clause) to Mary's prayers and intercessions. Looking toand weighing the words employed, and as far as words can be relied uponas interpreters of the thoughts, looking to the spirit of hisprofession, only one inference can be fairly drawn. However direct andimmediate the prayers of the suppliants may be to the Virgin for herprotection and defence from all dangers, spiritual and bodily, and forthe guidance of the inmost thoughts in the right way, (blessings whichwe of the Anglican Catholic Church, following the footsteps of theprimitive flock of Christ, have always looked for at the hand of GodAlmighty only, to be granted by Him for the sake of his blessed Son, )such petitioners to Mary would be sanctioned to the utmost by theprinciples and example of the present Roman Pontiff. 

We have already, when examining the records of {383} the Council ofChalcedon, compared the closing words of this encyclical letter with themore holy and primitive aspirations of the Bishops of Rome andConstantinople in those earlier days; and the comparison is strikingbetween the sentiments now expressed in the opening parts of the sameletter, and the spirit of the collects which were adopted for the use ofthe faithful, before the invocation of saints and of the Virgin hadgained its present strong hold in the Church of Rome. For example, acollect at Vespers teaches us to pray to God as the source from whom allholy desires and all good counsels proceed [Hiem. 149. ]; and on thefifth Sunday after Easter this prayer is offered: "O God, from whom allgood things do come, grant, we pray Thee, that by thy inspiration we maythink those things that be good; and by thy guidance may perform thesame;" whilst on the fifth Sunday after the Epiphany, in a collect, thespirit of which is strongly contrasted with the sentiments in both partsof this encyclical letter, God is thus addressed: "We beseech thee, OLord, with thy continual pity, guard thy family, that, leaning on thesole hope of heavenly grace, it may ever be defended by thy protection. "[Ut quæ in _sola_ spe gratiæ coelestis innititur, tua semper protectionemuniatur. --Hiem, 364. "Let us raise our eyes to the Blessed Virgin, whois our greatest hope, yea, the entire ground of our hope. "]

Similar materials are abundant. A whole volume, indeed, might readily becomposed consisting solely of rules and instructions, confessions andforms of prayer, appertaining to the Virgin and the Saints, published byauthority at the present day, both in our country and on the Continent, for the use of our Roman Catholic {384} brethren; but to which the wordof God, and the doctrine and practice of the primitive Church, are inour estimation as much opposed as to the prayers of Bonaventura, or tothe doctrine of either of the Bernardins. It would, however, beunprofitable to dwell on this subject at any great length. I will, therefore, only briefly refer to two publications of this sort, to whichmy own attention has been accidentally drawn: "The Imitation of theBlessed Virgin, "[144] and "The Little Testament of the HolyVirgin. "[145]

 [Footnote 144: "The Imitation of the Blessed Virgin, composed on the plan of the Imitation of Christ. London, 1816. Approved by T. R. Asselini, Doctor of Sorbonne, last Bishop of Boulogne. From the French. "]

 [Footnote 145: "The Little Testament of the Holy Virgin, translated from the French, and revised by a Catholic Priest. Third Edition. Dublin, 1836. "]

The first professes to be "composed on the plan of the 'Imitation ofChrist. '" This is, in itself, highly objectionable; its tendency is toexalt Mary, by association, to the same place in our hearts and minds, which Thomas à Kempis had laboured, in his "Imitation of Christ, " tosecure for the Saviour; and it reminds us of the proceedings ofBonaventura, who wrote psalms to the honour of the Virgin after themanner which David used in his hymns to the Lord of Glory. In this workwe read the following prayer to the Virgin, which seems to be stainedwith the error, the existence of which elsewhere we have alreadynoticed, of contrasting the justice and the stern dealings even of theSaviour, with the mercy, and loving-kindness, and fellow-feeling ofMary; making God an object of fear, Mary an object of love. 

"Mother of my Redeemer, O Mary, in the last moments {385} of my life, Iimplore thy assistance with more earnestness than ever. I find myself, as it were, placed between heaven and hell. Alas! what will become ofme, if thou do not exert, in my behalf, thy powerful influence withJesus?... I die with SUBMISSION since JESUS has ORDAINED it; butnotwithstanding the natural horror which I have of death, I die withPLEASURE, because I die under THY protection. " [Chap. Xiii. P. 344. ]

In the fourteenth chapter the following passage occurs: "It is giving tothe blessed Virgin a testimony of love particularly dear and precious toher, to make her holy spouse Joseph the first object of our devotion, next to that which consecrates us to her service.... The name of Josephis invoked with singular devotion by all the true faithful. Theyfrequently join it with the sacred names of Jesus and Mary. Whilst Jesusand Mary lived at Nazareth, if we had wished to obtain some favour fromthem, could we have employed a more powerful protector than St. Joseph?Will he now have less power and credit? GO THEREFORE TO JOSEPH, (Gen. Xli. 55. ) that he may intercede for you. Whatever favour you ask, Godwill grant it you at his request.... Go to Joseph in all yournecessities; but especially to obtain the grace of a happy death. Thegeneral opinion that he died in the arms of Jesus and Mary has inspiredthe faithful with great confidence, that, through his intercession, theywill have an end as happy and consoling as his. In effect, it has beenremarked, that it is particularly at the hour of death that those whohave been during their life careful to honour this great saint, reap thefruit of their devotion. " [P. 347. ]

In this passage the unworthy idea, itself formed on a groundlesstradition, is introduced of paying reverence {386} to one saint, inorder to gratify and conciliate another. Joseph must be especiallyhonoured in order to do what is most acceptable to Mary. Surely thistends to withdraw the mind from that habitual reference of all ouractions immediately to God, which the primitive teachers were so anxiousto cultivate in all Christians. 

In the "Little Testament of the Holy Virgin, " the following (p. 46) iscalled, "A Prayer to the blessed Virgin. " Can any words place more on anentire level with each other, the eternal Son of God and the Virgin?"Jesus and Mary?!"

"O Mary! what would be our poverty and misery if the Father of Mercieshad not drawn you from his treasury to give you to earth! Oh! my Lifeand Consolation, I trust and confide in your holy name. My heart wishesto love you; my mouth to praise you; my mind to contemplate you; my soulsighs to be yours. Receive me, defend me, preserve me; I cannot perishin your hands. Let the demons tremble when I pronounce your holy name, since you have ruined their empire; but we shall say with Saint Anselm, that he does not know God, who has not an idea sufficiently high of yourgreatness and glory. We shall esteem it the greatest honour to be of thenumber of your servants. Let your glory, blessed Mother, be equal to theextent of your name; reign, after God, over all that is beneath God;but, above all, reign in my heart; you will be my consolation insuffering, my strength in weakness, my counsel in doubt. At the name ofMary my hope shall be enlightened, my love inflamed. Oh! that I coulddeeply engrave the dear name on every heart, suggest it to every tongue, and make all celebrate it with me. Mary! sacred name, under which no one{387} should despair. Mary! sacred name, often assaulted, but alwaysvictorious. Mary! it shall be my life, my strength, my comfort! Everyday shall I envoke IT AND THE DIVINE NAME OF JESUS. The Son will awakethe recollection of the mother, and the mother that of the Son. JESUSAND MARY! this is what my heart shall say at the last hour, if my tonguecannot; I shall hear them on my death bed, --they shall be wafted on myexpiring breath, and I with them, to see THEM, know THEM, bless and loveTHEM for eternity. Amen. "

There may, perhaps, be a reasonable ground for our hoping that these arenot the sentiments entertained by the enlightened Roman Catholics of ourcountry and age. Any one has a full right to say, "These are productionsof individuals for which we and the Church to which we belong are notresponsible, any more than the Church of England is responsible for alldoctrines and sentiments expressed by writers in her communion! Even thesentiments above referred to of the present reigning pope, you have noright to allege as the doctrines of the Church!" But I would againventure to suggest to every one, who would thus speak, the duty ofascertaining for himself, whether the sentiments of those who at presentfill the highest places, and which fully justify these devotionalexercises and prayers to the Virgin and the Saints, be not themselvesfully justified by the authorized ritual of the Roman Church. On thispoint are supplied, even in this volume, materials sufficientlydiversified and abundant in quantity to enable any one to form a correctjudgment. 

By two brief extracts I will now bring this branch of our inquiry to aclose. The first is from the concluding paragraphs of a discourse latelydelivered and {388} published. In principle, the sentiments hereprofessed apparently admit not only of being identified with those ofthe authorized services of the Church of Rome, but also, though not sonaked and revolting in appearance as the doctrines of Bonaventura, Biel, and the two Bernardins, yet in reality they equally depart from thesimplicity of the Gospel, and are equally at direct variance with that, its first and its last principle, ONE GOD AND ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GODAND MEN, THE MAN CHRIST JESUS. 

"Remember that this day you have put yourselves and your families underthe protection of the ever-blessed Mother of God, and Her chaste Spouse, St. Joseph; of those who were chosen of God to protect the infancy ofJesus from the danger by a persecuting world. ENTREAT THEM TO PROTECTYOU AND YOURS FROM THE PERILS of a seducing and ensnaring world; toplead your interests in heaven, and secure by their intercession youreverlasting crown. Loudly proclaim the praises of your heavenly Queen, but at the same time turn Her power to your everlasting advantage byyour earnest supplications to HER. " (See Appendix. )

The other extract, which sanctions to the full whatever offerings ofpraise and ascriptions of glory we have found individuals making to theVirgin and to Saints, is from an announcement in, I believe, the lastEnglish edition of the Roman Breviary published, in its present form, under the sanction of the Pope himself. 

"To those who devoutly recite the following prayer after the office, Pope Leo the Tenth hath granted pardon (indulsit) for the defects andfaults in celebrating it, contracted by human frailty. 

"To the most holy and undivided Trinity; to the manhood {389} of ourcrucified Lord Jesus Christ; to the fruitful spotlessness of the mostblessed and most glorious and ever-Virgin Mary; and to the entire bodyof all the Saints, be eternal praise, honour, virtue, and glory, fromevery creature, and to us remission of all sins, through endless ages ofages. Amen. " [Norwich, 1830. Æst. ]

On the indulgence for pardon given by Pope Leo the Tenth, more than 300years ago, for such defects and faults in celebrating a religiousservice as may be contracted by human frailty; and on the fact of thenotification of that indulgence being retained, and set forth soprominently in the service books at the present day, I will say nothing. Whatever associations may be raised in our minds by these circumstances, the subject does not fall within our present field of inquiry. But tojoin the Holy Trinity with the Virgin Mother, and all the Saints in oneand the same ascription of ETERNAL PRAISE, HONOUR, and GLORY, is asutterly subversive of the integrity of primitive Christian Worship, asit is repugnant to the plainest sense of holy Scripture, and derogatoryto the dignity of that Supreme Being, who declares Himself to be ajealous God. 

It has, indeed, been maintained that such ascriptions of glory andpraise jointly to God and his Saints, is sanctioned by the language ofour blessed Saviour Himself when He speaks of his having given his gloryto his disciples [John xvii. 22. ], and of his second advent, when Heshall come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of the holyangels. [Luke ix. 26. ] But between the two cases there is no analogywhatever; the inference is utterly fallacious. We know that the Lord ofHosts is the King of glory, and that his eternal Son shared the glory ofhis Father before the foundations {390} of the world were laid. We know, too, that the Almighty has been pleased to create beings of variousdegrees and orders, differing from each other in kind or in excellenceaccording to his supreme will. Among those creatures of his hand are theangels whom we reverence and love, as his faithful servants and hisministers to us for good. But when we speak and think of religiousadoration; of giving thanks; and ascribing eternal glory and honour, wehave only one object in our minds, --the supreme Sovereign Lord of all. 

With regard to the gracious words of our Saviour in his prayer to theFather, on the eve of his death, St. Peter's acts and words supply uswith a plain and conclusive comment. He was himself one of those to whomChrist had declared that He had given the glory which his Father hadgiven to Him; and yet when Cornelius fell down at his feet to worshiphim, he took him up, saying, "Stand up; I myself also am a man. " [Actsx. 26. ] The Saviour was pleased to impart his glory to his Apostles, dividing to them his heavenly gifts severally as He willed. We praiseHim for those graces which shone so brightly in them, and we pray to Himto enable us by his grace to follow them, as they followed his blessedsteps. We reverence their memory, but we give God alone the praise. 

As to the other instance, the words of our Lord (assuring us that theangels should accompany Him at his second advent in their glory, theglory which He assigned to them in the order of creation, ) no moreauthorize us to ascribe praise and glory by a religious act to them, when we praise the God of angels and men, than would {391} the assuranceof an inspired apostle, that "there is one glory of the sun, anotherglory of the moon, and another glory of the stars, " sanction us injoining those luminaries in the same ascription of glory with theirAlmighty Creator and ours. Just as reasonably would a pagan justify hisworship of the sun, the moon, and the stars, by this passage ofScripture, as our Roman Catholic brethren would justify themselves bythe former passage in their ascription of praise and glory to the holyangels, and saints, and the blessed Virgin. We honour the holy angels, we praise God for the glory which He has imparted to them, and for theshare which He has been pleased to assign to them in executing hisdecrees of mercy in the heavenly work of our salvation; and we pray toHIM to grant that they may by his appointment succour and defend us onearth, through Jesus Christ our Lord. But we address no invocation tothem; we ascribe no glory to them as an act of religious worship. Byoffering thanks and praise to God He declares that we honour HIM; byoffering thanks and praise, and by ascribing glory and honour to angel, saint, or virgin, we make them gods. {392}

 * * * * *

CONCLUSION. 

We have now, my fellow Christians, arrived at the conclusion of the taskwhich I proposed to undertake. I have laid before you, to the utmost ofmy abilities and means, the result of my inquiry into the evidence ofholy Scripture and primitive antiquity, on the invocation of saints andangels, and the blessed Virgin Mary. In this inquiry, excepting so faras was necessary to elucidate the origin and history of the RomanCatholic tenet of the Assumption of the Virgin, we have limited ourresearches to the writers who lived before the Nicene Council. ThatCouncil has always been considered a cardinal point, --a sort ofclimacteric in the history of the early Church. It was the first Councilto which all the bishops of Christendom were summoned; and the influenceof its decrees is felt beneficially in the Catholic Church to this veryday. In fixing upon this Council as our present boundary line, I wasinfluenced by a conviction, that the large body of Christians, whetherof the Roman, the Anglican, or any other branch of the Church Catholic, would consent to this as an indisputable axiom, --that what the ChurchCatholic did not believe or practise up to {393} that date of herexistence upon earth, cannot be regarded as either Catholic orprimitive, or apostolical. Ending with St. Athanasius, (who, though hewas present at that Council, yet brings his testimony down throughalmost another half century, his death not having taken place till A. D. 873, on the verge of his eightieth year, ) we have examined the remainsof Christian antiquity, reckoning forward to that Council from the timesof the Apostles. We have searched diligently into the writings, thesentiments, and the conduct of those first disciples of our Lord. Wehave contemplated the words of our blessed Saviour himself, and theinspired narrative of his life and teaching. With the same object inview we have studied the prophets of the Old Testament, and the works ofMoses; and we have endeavoured, at the fountainhead, to ascertain whatis the mind and will of God, as revealed to the world from the day whenHe made man, on the question of our invoking the angels and saints tointercede with Him in our behalf, or to assist and succour us on theearth. And the result is this:--From first to last, the voice of GodHimself, and the voices of the inspired messengers of heaven, whetherunder the patriarchal, the Mosaic, or the Christian dispensations, thevoices too of those maintainers of our common faith in Christ, whoprayed, and taught, in the Church, before the corruptions of adegenerate world had mingled themselves with the purity of Christianworship, combine all, in publishing, throughout the earth, one and theself-same principle, "Pray only to God; draw nigh to Him alone; invokeno other; seek no other in the world of spirits, neither angel, norbeatified saint; seek Him, and He will favourably, with mercy, hear yourprayers. " To this one {394} principle, when the Gospel announced thewhole counsel of God in the salvation of man, our Lord himself, hisApostles, and his Church, unite in adding another principle of eternalobligation, --There is one Mediator between God and men, the man ChristJesus; whatsoever the faithful shall ask the Father in the name of thatMediator, He will grant it to them: He is ever living to makeintercession for those who believe in Him: Invoke we no otherintercessor, apply we neither to saint nor angel, plead we the merits ofno other. Let us lift up our hearts to God Almighty himself, and makeour requests known to Him in the name, and through the mediation ofChrist, and He will fulfil our desires and petitions as may be mostexpedient for us; He will grant to us, in this world, a knowledge of histruth, and in the world to come life everlasting!

Watching the tide of evidence through its whole progress, we find it toflow all in this one direction. Here and there indeed attempts have beenmade to raise some mounds and barriers of human structure, in order toarrest its progress, and turn it from its straight course, but in vain;unchecked by any such endeavours, it rolls on in one full, steady, strong, and resistless current. Until we have long passed the NiceneCouncil, we find no one writer of the Christian Church, whose remainstell us, that he either himself invoked saints and angels, and theVirgin Mary, or was at all aware of any such practice prevailing inChristendom. Suppose, for one moment, that our doctrine is right; andthen we find the whole tenour of the Old and New Testaments, and theancient writers, in their plain meaning, agreeably to the interpretationof the most learned and unbiassed critics, fully coinciding in everyrespect with our view of God being the sole object of invocation, {395}and of the exclusive character of Christ's intercession, mediation, andadvocacy. Suppose, for another moment, the Roman Catholic theory to becorrect, then the whole general tenour and drift of Scripture must beevaded; the clearest statements and announcements must be explained awayby subtle distinctions, gratuitous definitions, and casuisticalrefinements, altogether foreign from the broad and simple truths ofRevelation; then, too, in ascertaining the sentiments of an author, nothis general and pervading principles, evidenced throughout his writings, must be appealed to; but casual and insulated expressions must becontracted or expanded as may best seem to counteract the impressionmade by the testimony of those principles. We may safely ask, Is theresuch evidence, that the primitive Church offered invocations to saintsand angels, and the Virgin, as would satisfy us in the case of anysecular dispute with regard to ancient usage? On the contrary, is notthe evidence clear to a moral demonstration, that the offering of suchaddresses is an innovation of later days, unknown to the primitiveChristians till after the middle of the fourth century, and neverpronounced to be an article of faith, until the Council of Trent, morethan a thousand years after its first appearance in Christendom, sodecreed it. 

The tendency, indeed, of some Roman Catholic writings, especially oflate years, is to draw off our minds on these points from the writtenword of God, and the testimony of the earliest Church, and to dwell uponthe possibility, the reasonableness of the doctrines of the Church ofRome in this respect, their accordance with our natural feelings, andtheir charitableness. But in points of such vast moment, in thingsconcerning the soul's salvation, we can depend with satisfaction and{396} without misgiving, only on the sure word of promise; nothing shortof God's own pledge of his own eternal truth can assure us, that all issafe. Such substitution of what may appear to us reasonable, andagreeable to our natural sentiments, and desirable if true, in place ofthe assurances of God's revealed Will, may correspond with the argumentsof a heathen philosopher unacquainted with the truth as it is in Jesus, but cannot satisfy disciples of Him who brought life and immortality tolight by his Gospel. Such questions as these, "Is there any thingunreasonable in this? Would not this be a welcome tenet, if true?" wellbecame the lips of Socrates in his defence before his judges, but are inthe strict sense of the word preposterous in a Christian. With theChristian the first question is, What is the truth? What is revealed?What has God promised? What has He taught man to hope for? What has Hecommanded man to do? By his own words, by the words and by the exampleof his inspired messengers, by the doctrine and practice of his Church, the witness and interpreter of the truth, how has He directed us to suefor his mercy and all its blessings? On what foundation, sure andcertain, can we build our hopes that "He will favourably with mercy hearour prayers?" For in this matter, a matter of spiritual life and death, we can anchor our hope on no other rock than his sure word of promise. 

That sure word of promise, if I am a faithful believer, I have; but itis exclusive of any invocation by me of saint, or angel, or virgin. Thepledge of heaven is most solemnly and repeatedly given; God, who cannotlie, has, in language so plain, that he may run who readeth it, assuredme that if I come to HIMSELF by HIS SON, my prayer shall not be castout, my suit shall {397} not be denied, I shall not be sent empty away. In every variety of form which language can assume, this assurance isratified and confirmed. His own revealed will directs me to pray for myfellow-creatures, and to expect a beneficial effect from the prayers ofthe faithful upon earth in my behalf. To pray for them, therefore, andto seek their prayers, and to wait patiently for an answer to both, areacts of faith and of duty. And were it also appointed by God's will tobe an act of faith and duty in a Christian to seek the prayers, and aid, and assistance, of saints and angels by supplicatingly invoking them, surely the same word of truth would have revealed that also. Whereas thereverse shows itself under every diversified state of things, from theopening of the sacred book to its very last page. The subtle distinctionof religious worship into latria, dulia, and hyperdulia, the refinedclassification of prayer under the two heads of direct, absolute, final, sovereign, on the one hand, and of oblique, relative, transitory, subaltern, on the other, swell indeed many elaborate works of casuistry, but are not discoverable in the remains of primitive Christians, nor inthe writings of God's word have they any place. I cannot find in theinspired Apostles any reference to the necessity, the duty, thelawfulness, the expediency of our seeking by prayer the good offices ofthe holy dead, or of the angels of light. In their successors theearliest inspired teachers and pastors of Christ's fold, I seek in vainfor any precept, or example, or suggestion, or incidental allusionlooking that way. Why then should a Christian wish to add to that whichGod has been pleased to appoint and to reveal? Why should I attempt toenter heaven through any other gate than {398} that gate which the Lordof heaven has opened for me? or why should I seek to reach that gate byany other way than the way which He has made for me; which He hasHimself plainly prescribed to me; in which He has promised that his wordshall be a lantern unto my feet; and along which those saints andservants of his, who received the truth from his own lips, and sealed itby their blood, have gone before?

Whenever a maintainer of the doctrine and practice of invoking theSaints asks me, as we have lately been asked in these words, "May I notreasonably hope that their prayers will be more efficacious than my ownand those of my friends? And, under this persuasion, I say to them, as Ijust now said to you, holy Mary, holy Peter, holy Paul, pray for me. What is there in reason or revelation to forbid me to do so?" To thisand similar questions and suggestions, I answer at once, God hassolemnly covenanted to grant the petitions of those who ask HIM for hismercy, in the name and for the sake of his Son; and in his holy wordhas, both by precept and example, taught us in this life to pray foreach other, and to ask each other's prayers [James v. 16; I Tim. Ii. 1. ]; but that He will favourably answer the prayers which we supplicateangels to offer, or which we offer to Himself through the merits and bythe intercession of departed mortals, is no where in the covenant. Moreover, when God invites me and commands me to approach Him myself, inthe name of his Son, and trusting to his merits, it is not Christianhumility, rather it savours of presumption, and intruding into thosethings which we have not seen [Coloss. Ii. 18. ], to seek to prevail withHim by {399} pleading other merits, and petitioning creatures, howeverglorious, to interest themselves with Him in our behalf, angels andsaints, of whose power even to hear us we have no evidence. When JesusHimself, who knows both the deep counsels of the Eternal Spirit, andman's wants and weaknesses and unworthiness, and who loveth his own tothe end, pledges his never-failing word, that whatsoever we ask theFather in his name, He will give it us, can it be less than an unworthydistrust of his truth and faithfulness to ask the Father for the meritsand by the intercession of another? and as though in fear lest Godshould fail of his promise, or be unmindful of us Himself, to invokeangels and the good departed to make our wants known unto HIM, andprevail with HIM to relieve us?

Surely it were wiser and safer to adhere religiously to that one waywhich cannot fail, than to adopt for ourselves methods and systems, forthe success of which we have no guarantee; which may be unacceptable inhis sight; and the tendency of which may be to bring down a curse andnot a blessing. 

May the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls pour down upon his Church theabundance of his mercy, preserving those in the truth who now possessit, restoring it to those by whom it has been lost, and imparting it toall who are yet in darkness. And, whilst we speak the truth in love, andendeavour to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, may HE, for his own glory, and for the safety and comfort of his people, shedthis truth abroad in our hearts, and enlighten us to receive it in allits fulness and integrity, and in the very sense in which the HolySpirit, when He guided {400} the pen of St. Paul, willed the Church tointerpret it, "There is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. "

 * * * * *

O everlasting God, who hast ordained and constituted the services ofAngels and men in a wonderful order; Mercifully grant, that as thy holyAngels alway do Thee service in heaven, so by thy appointment they maysuccour and defend us on earth, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. 

O Almighty God, who hast built thy Church upon the foundation of theApostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the head corner-stone;Grant us so to be joined together in unity of spirit by their doctrine, that we may be made an holy temple, acceptable unto Thee, through JesusChrist our Lord. Amen. 

O Almighty God, who hast knit together thine elect in one communion andfellowship, in the mystical body of thy Son Christ our Lord; Grant usgrace, so to follow thy blessed Saints in all virtuous and godly living, that we may come to those unspeakable joys, which Thou hast prepared forthem that unfeignedly love Thee; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. {401}

 * * * * *

APPENDIX. 

 * * * * *

Note. --Pages 107 and 110. 

The following is the original of the passages discussed in the text. Justin Martyr, Apol. I. P. 47. § vi. Benedictine Edition by P. Maran. Paris, A. D. 1742. 

[Greek: Enthende kai atheoi keklaemetha; kai homologoumen ton toioutonnomizomenon theon atheoi einai, all' ouchi tou alaethestatou, kai patrosdikaiosunaes kai sophrosunaes, kai ton allon areton, anepimiktou tekakias Theou; all' ekeinon te, kai ton par' autou huion elthonta kaididaxanta haemas tauta, kai ton ton allon hepomenon kai exomoioumenonagathon angelon straton, pneuma te to prophaetikon sebometha, kaiproskunoumen, logoi kai alaetheiai timontes, kai panti boulomenoimathein, hos edidachthaemen, aphthonos paradidontes. ]

Ibid. Page 50, 51. Sect. Xiii. --[Greek: 'Atheoi men oun hos ouk esmen, ton daemiourgon toude tou pantos sebomenoi, ... Ton didaskalon te toutongenomenon haemin, kai eis touto genaethenta Iaesoun Christon tonstaurothenta epi Pontiou Pilatou, tou genomenou en Ioudaiai epi chronoisTiberiou Kaisaros epitropou, huion autou tou ontos Theou mathontes, kaien deuterai chorai echontes, pneuma te prophaetikon en tritaei taxei, hoti meta logou timomen, apodeixomen.... ]

Note. --Page 134. 

In the text it has been observed, that "Coccius in his elaborate workquotes the two following passages as Origen's, without expressing {402}any hesitation or doubt respecting their genuineness; in which he isfollowed by writers of the present day. "

The modern works, to which reference is here made, are chiefly theLectures delivered by Dr. Wiseman, in the Roman Catholic Chapel inMoorfields in the year 1836, and the compilation of Messrs. Beringtonand Kirk [Berington and Kirk. London, 1830, p. 403. ], from which Dr. Wiseman in his preface to his Lectures (p. Ix. ) informs us, that ingeneral he had drawn his quotations of the Fathers. In citing thetestimony of Origen in support of the invocation of saints, it isevident that Dr. Wiseman has drawn from that source; for whereas the twoconfessedly spurious passages, from the Lament, and from the Book onJob, are in that compilation quoted in the same page, Dr. Wiseman citesonly the passage from the Lament, as from a work on the Lamentations, but gives his reference to the Book on Job. His words are these:--"Againhe (Origen) thus writes on the Lamentations: 'I will fall down on myknees, and not presuming, on account of my crimes, to present my prayerto God, I will invoke all the saints to my assistance. O ye saints ofheaven, I beseech you with a sorrow full of sighs and tears; fall at thefeet of the Lord of mercies for me, a miserable sinner, '--Lib. Ii. DeJob. " [Lectures on the Principal Doctrines and Practices of the CatholicChurch, by Nicholas Wiseman, D. D. London, 1836. Vol. I. Preface, p. Ix. And vol. Ii. P. 107. ]

When we find such passages as these, which have been so long ago and sorepeatedly pronounced to be utterly spurious, yet cited in evidence atthe present time, and represented as conveying the genuine testimony ofOrigen, we shall be pardoned for repeating the sentiments expressed somany years ago by the learned Bishop of Avranches with regard to thevery work here cited, "It is wonderful that, WITHOUT ANY MARK OF THEIRBEING FORGERIES, they should be sometimes cited in evidence by sometheologians. "

Note. --Page 151. 

The whole passage cited as Origen's comment on the words of Ezekiel, "The heavens are opened, " is in the Latin version as follows. The Greekoriginal, if it ever existed, is lost. The portion between brackets isthe part suspected of being an interpolation. 

6. _Et aperti sunt coeli_. Clausi erant coeli, et ad adventum Christiaperti sunt, ut reseratis illis veniret super eum Spiritus Sanctus inspecie columbæ. Neque enirn poterat ad nos commeare nisi primum {403} adsuæ naturæ consortem descendisset. _Ascendit Jesus in altum, captivamduxit captivitatem, accepit dona in hominibus. Qui descendit, ipse estqui ascendit super omnes coelos ut impleret omnia. Et ipse dedit aliosapostolos, alios prophetas, alios evangelistas, alios pastores etmagistros in perfectionem sanctorum_. 

[7. _Aperti sunt coeli_. Non sufficit unum coelum aperiri: aperiunturplurimi, ut descendant non ab uno, sed ab omnibus coelis angeli ad eosqui salvandi sunt. Angeli qui ascendebant et descendebant super Filiumhominis, et accesserunt as eum, et ministrabant ei. Descenderunt autemangeli, quia prior descenderat Christus, metuentes descendere priusquamDominus virtutum omnium rerumque præciperet. Quando autem videruntprincipem militiæ coelestis in terrestribus locis commorari, tunc perapertam viam ingressi sunt sequentes Dominum suum, et parentes voluntatiejus qui distribuit eos custodes credentium nomini suo. Tu heri subdæmonio eras, hodie sub angelo. _Nolite_, inquit Dominus, _contemnereunum de minimis istis_ qui sunt in ecclesia. _Amen enim dico vobis, quiaangeli eorum per omnia vident faciem Patris qui est in coelis_. Obsequuntur saluti tuæ angeli, concessi sunt ad ministerium Filii Dei, et dicuntinter se: si ille descendit, et descendit in corpus; si mortaliindutus est carne, et sustinuit crucem, et pro hominibus mortuus est, quit nos quiescimus? quid parcimus nobis? Eja omnes angeli descendamus ecoelo. Ideo et multitudo militiæ coelestis erat laudantium etglorificantium Deum, quando natus est Christus. Omnia angelis plenasunt: veni, angeli, suscipe sermone conversum ab errore pristino, adoctrina dæmoniorum, ab iniquitate in altum loquente: et suscipiens eumquasi medicus bonus confove atque institue, parvulus est, hodie nascitursenex repuerascens: et suscipe tribuens ei baptismum secundæregenerationis, et advoca tibi alios socios ministerii tui, ut conctipariter eos qui aliquando decepti sunt, erudiatis ad fidem. _Gaudiumenim est majus in coelis super unum peccatorem poenitentiam agentem, quam supra nonaginta novem justos quibus non opus est poenitentia_. Exultat omnis creatura, collætatur et applaudit his qui salvandi sunt. Nam _expectatio creaturæ revelationem filiorum Dei expectat_. Et licetnolint ii qui scripturas apostolicas interpolaverunt istiusmodi sermonesinesse libris eorum quibus possit Creator Christus approbari, expectattamen omnis creatura filios Dei, quando liberentur a delicto, quandoauferentur de Zabuli manu, quando regenerentur a Christo. Verum jamtempus est, ut de præsenti loco aliqua tangamus. Vidit Propheta nonvisionem, sed visiones Dei. {404} Quare non vidat unam, sed plurimasvisiones? Audi Dominum pollicentem atque dicentem: _Ego visionesmultiplicavi_. 8. _Quinta mensis_. Hic annus quinta captivitatis regisJoachim. Trigesimo anno ætatis Ezekielis, et quinto captivitatisJoachim, Propheta mittiur ad Judæos. Non despexit clementissimus pater, nec longo tempore incommonitum populum dereliquit. Quintus est annus. Quantum temporis intercessit? Quinque anni interfluxerunt ex quo captiviserviunt. ]

Statim descendit Spiritus Sanctus, --aperuit coelos, ut hi quicaptivitatis jugo premebantur, viderent ea quæ videbantur a Propheta. Dicente quippe eo, _Et aperti sunt coeli_, quodam modo et ipsiintuebantur oculis cordis quæ ille etiam oculis carnis aspexerat. --Vol. Iii. P. 358. 

Note. --Page 165. 

In a note on the Epistle of St. Cyprian to his brother, reference wasmade to the Appendix for a closer comparison of Cyprian's originalletter with the modern translation of the passage under consideration. By placing the two versions in parallel columns side by side, we shallimmediately see, that the mode of citing the testimony of St. Cyprianadopted in Dr. Wiseman's Lectures, from the compilation of Messrs. Berington and Kirk, is rather to substitute his own comment andinference, than to allow the witness to speak for himself in his ownwords. The whole paragraph, as it appears in Dr. Wiseman's Lectures, isthis:--

"St. Cyprian in the same century: 'Let us be mindful of one another inour prayers; with one mind and with one heart, in this world and in thenext, let us always pray with mutual charity relieving our sufferingsand afflictions. And may the charity of him, who, by the divine favour, shall first depart hence, still persevere before the Lord; may hisprayer, for our brethren and sisters, not cease. ' Therefore, afterhaving departed this life, the same offices of charity are to continue, by praying for those who remain on earth. " [Lect. Xiii. Vol. Ii. P. 107, and Berington and Kirk, p. 430. ]

_St. Cyprian's words_. _Epist. _ lvii. _p. _ 96. 

_Translation adopted by Dr. Wiseman from Berington and Kirk. _

1. Memories nostri invicem simus, 1. Let us be mindful of oneanother IN OUR PRAYERS; {405}

2. Concordes atque unanimes, 2. With one mind and with one heart. 

3. Utrobique. 3. In this world and in the next, 4. PRO NOBIS semper oremus, 4. Let us always pray, 5. Pressuras et angustias mutua 5. With mutual charity RELIEVING outcaritate relevemus, sufferings and afflictions. 

6. Et si quis istinc nostrum 6. And may the CHARITY OF HIM, prior divinæ dignationis celeritate who, by the divine facour, shallpræcesserit, perseveret apud Dominum first depart hence, still persevereNOSTRA DILECTIO, before the Lord;

7. Pro fratribus et sororibus 7. May HIS prayer, for our brethrennostris apud misericordiam patris and sisters, not cease. Non cesset oratio. 

In this translation, by inserting the words, _in our prayers_, which arenot in the original in the first clause; by rendering the adverb_utrobique_, IN THIS WORLD AND IN THE NEXT, in the third clause; byomitting the words _pro nobis, for each other_, which are in theoriginal, in the fourth clause; by changing in the fifth the verb_relevemus, let us relieve_, implying another branch of their mutualkindness, into the participle _relieving_, which may imply, that therelief alluded to was also to be conveyed by the medium of theirprayers; by substituting _the charity of him_, in place of _nostradilectio, our charity_, in the sixth; and by inserting the word _his_, which is not in the original, before _prayer_, where the grammar of thesentence requires _our_, in the seventh clause;--by these means thetranslator makes Cyprian express a sentiment far removed from what thewords of Cyprian, in their plain and natural sense, convey. It must, however, be borne in mind, as we have shown in our examination of thepassage, that the sentiment of Cyprian, even as it is thus undulyextracted from his words, would not in the remotest degree countenancethe invocation of saints. It would do no more than imply his belief, that the faithful departed may take an interest in the welfare of theirsurviving friends on earth, and promote that welfare by their prayers; apoint which, in the preface, is mentioned as one of those topics, thediscussion of which would be avoided in this inquiry, as quite distinctfrom the invocation of saints. {406}

Note. --Page 176. 

An extract from Eusebius, unnoticed in the text of this work, hasrecently been cited as conveying his testimony in favour of theinvocation of saints. I have judged it better to defer the considerationof it to the appendix. It has been cited in these terms: "In the fourthcentury Eusebius of Cæsarea thus writes: 'May we be found worthy by theprayers and intercessions of all the saints. '" [Dr. Wiseman's Lectures, vol. Ii. P. 107. Lect. Xiii. Berington and Kirk, p. 431. ] To form a justestimate of this alleged testimony, it is requisite that we have beforeus not only that incomplete clause, but the whole passage purporting tocontain, in these words, the closing sentences of a commentary onIsaiah: [Tom. Ii. P. 593, ed. Paris, 1707. Dr. Wiseman's reference is"Com. In Isai. Tom. Ii. P. 593, ed. Paris, 1706. "]

"'And they shall be for a spectacle to all flesh. ' To what flesh?Altogether to that which shall be somewhere punished? Nay, to that whichshall of the heavenly vision be deemed worthy, concerning which it wassaid before, All flesh shall come to worship before me, of which may wealso be deemed worthy by the prayers and intercessions of all thesaints. Amen. "

In examining this passage I am willing for the present that all itsclauses should be accepted as the genuine words of Eusebius, andaccepted too in the meaning attached to them by those who have citedthem. And to what do they amount? If these are indeed his expressions, Eusebius believed that the saints departed can forward our spiritualwelfare by their prayers and ministering offices; and he uttered hisdesire that we might thus be benefited. Now whether we agree with him ornot in that belief; whether we consider the faithful departed as able totake an interest in our welfare and to promote it, or regard such anopinion as without foundation in the word of God and in primitivedoctrine; the belief implied and the wish expressed here by Eusebius, are widely indeed removed from the act of suppliantly invoking thesaints departed, and resorting to them with entreaties for their prayersand intercessions in our behalf. These two things, although oftenconfounded, are far from being equivalent; and by all who wouldinvestigate with fairness the subject of our inquiry, they must becarefully kept distinct. The invocation of saints being the single pointin question, our business is to ascertain, not what opinions Eusebiusmay have {407} entertained as to the condition, and power, and officesof the saints departed, but whether he invoked them; whether he hadrecourse to them with supplications for their prayers, or aid andsuccour. And keeping this closely in view, even if we admit this passageto be genuine, and interpret it as those who have cited it wish it to beinterpreted, we find in it no authority for the invocation of saints. AChristian would be no more countenanced by this language of Eusebius insuppliantly invoking departed saints, than he would in praying to theangels for their help and mediation be countenanced by the terms of theprayer in regard to them, addressed by the Anglican Church to God, "Oeverlasting God, who hast ordained and constituted the services ofangels and men in a wonderful order; Mercifully grant, that as thy holyangels alway do Thee service in heaven, so by THY appointment they maysuccour and defend us on earth; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. "Whoever petitions them, makes them Gods--Deos qui rogat ille facit. 

But whilst, for the sake of the argument, I have admitted this passageto be genuine, and correctly translated, and have shown that whethergenuine or not, and even if it be thus correctly translated, it affectsnot in the least the issue of our inquiry, I do not feel at liberty towithhold the acknowledgment of my persuasion that in this concession Igrant too much. For, in the first place, I am assured, that if thepassage came from the pen of Eusebius, no one is justified in confiningthe desire and wish contained in it to the intercessions and prayers ofthe saints in heaven; and, secondly, I see reasons for inferring thatthe last clause was framed and attached to this work, not by Eusebiushimself, but by some editor or scribe. 

In support of my first persuasion, I would observe that the verylanguage of the writer of these comments on Isaiah and the Psalmsprecludes us from regarding the Saints departed as exclusivelyconstituting those "holy ones" by whose intercessions and prayers heexpresses his desire that our spiritual welfare may be promoted. In thisvery comment on Isaiah (ch. Vi. 2. P. 376), when he is speaking of theheavenly inhabitants, and illustrates his views by God's dealingstowards the children of men in this world, he employs this expression:"For as among men the Saints of God partake of more excellent graces. "On the 67th (68th) Ps. V. 34, having interpreted the words, "hisstrength is in the clouds, " as referring to the {408} prophets andteachers of divine wisdom, under the guidance of the Spirit, pouringheavenly truths upon the souls of men as the clouds drop rain on fertilelands, he proceeds thus to comment on the expression, "God is wonderfulamong his Saints. " [Vol. I. P. 364. The English translation refers theword "holy" to places, not persons. ] "These Saints are different fromthose before called Apostles and prophets. And who can they be, exceptthose who out of all nations are deemed worthy of purity and holiness, among whom God is wonderful, giving to them power and strength?" Thus inperfect accordance with the language of this writer, the Saints, fromwhose prayers and intercessions he desires to derive spiritual benefits, may be the Saints of God on earth--in the same state with those saintsstill living in the flesh, whose prayers St. Paul desired to be offeredup for himself, that by them a door of utterance to speak the mystery ofChrist might be opened unto him [Coloss. I. 2; iv. 2, 3. ]--and withthose saints to whom the same Apostle wrote at Philippi: "To all thesaints in Christ Jesus:" and to whom he sent the greetings of the saintswho then surrounded him: "ALL the SAINTS salute you. " [Phil i. 1; iv. 22. ]

But before the closing words of this paragraph, whatever be its meaning, be acknowledged as the genuine and undoubted production of Eusebius, Iwould suggest the careful weighing of some considerations, which appearto me to involve serious difficulties. 

1. First, through all the voluminous works of Eusebius, I have found inno single passage any allusion to the prayers of saints departed, or totheir ministering offices in our behalf, though numberless openings showthemselves for the natural introduction of such a subject. 

2. Secondly, among all the various works and treatises of Eusebius, Ihave not found one which is closed by any termination of the kind; onthe contrary, they all end with remarkable suddenness and abruptness, precisely as this comment would end, were the sentence underconsideration removed. Each, indeed, of the books of his EcclesiasticalHistory, is followed by a notice of the close of the book, in some casestoo that notice involving a religious sentiment: for example, at theclose of the 10th book we read: "With the help of God, the end of thetenth book. " But that these are appendages made by an editor or scribeis evident in itself, and moreover {409} in many instances is shown bysuch sentences as these, "And this we have found in a certain copy inthe 8th volume:" "This is in some copies, as if omitted from the 8thbook. " I find no one instance of Eusebius bringing a chapter or atreatise to its close by any religious sentiment, or any termination ofthe nature here contemplated. 

It is also difficult to conceive that any author, having the flow andconnexion of the whole passage present to his mind, would himself haveappended this ejaculation as we now find it. We know that editors andscribes often attached a sentiment of their own to the closing words ofan author. And it seems far more probable, that a scribe not having thefull drift of the argument mainly before him, but catching theexpression, "heavenly vision, " appended such an ejaculation. That thewriter himself should introduce such a sentence by the connecting linkof a relative pronoun feminine, which must of necessity be referred, notas the grammatical construction would suggest to the feminine nounpreceding it, --not to any word expressed or understood in theintervening clause preceding it, --not to the last word in the sentenceeven before that intervening clause, nor yet to the principal andleading subject immediately under discussion and thrice repeated, --butto a noun incidentally introduced, seems, to say the least, strange andunnatural. "And they shall be for a spectacle to all flesh. To whatflesh? Altogether to that which shall be somewhere punished? Nay, tothat which shall of the heavenly vision be deemed worthy, concerningWHICH it was said before, All FLESH shall come to worship before me, ofwhich may we also be deemed worthy by the prayers and intercessions ofall the saints. Amen. " But the classical reader will appreciate theseremarks more satisfactorily by examining them with reference to thepassage in the original language. 

[Greek: Kai esontai eis orasin pasaei sarki. Poiai de sarki; ae pantospou taei kolasthaesomenaei; taes de epouraniou theas kataxiothaesomenaeiperi HAES anotero elegeto aexei pasa sarx tou proskunaesai enopion mou, HAES kai haemeis axiotheiaemen euchais kai presbeiais panton ton hagion, amaen. ]

Note. --Page 181. 

ATHANASIUS. 

In the text I observed that some Roman Catholic writers of the presentday had cited the homily there shown to be utterly spurious, {410} asthe genuine work of St. Athanasius, and as recording his testimony indefence of the invocation of Saints. The passage there referred to Dr. Wiseman thus introduces, and comments upon. 

"St. Athanasius, the most zealous and strenuous supporter that theChurch ever possessed of the divinity of Jesus Christ, and consequentlyof his infinite superiority over all the saints, thus enthusiasticallyaddresses his ever-blessed Mother: 'Hear now, O daughter of David;incline thine ear to our prayers. We raise our cry to thee. Remember us, O most holy Virgin, and for the feeble eulogiums we give thee, grant usgreat gifts from the treasures of thy graces, thou who art full ofgrace. Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Queen andmother of God, intercede for us. ' Mark well, " continues Dr. Wiseman, "these words; 'grant us great gifts, from the treasures of thy graces;'as if he hoped directly to receive them from her. Do Catholics usestronger words than these? Or did St. Athanasius think or speak with us, or with Protestants?"

In answer to these questions I reply with sure and certain confidence, first, that the genuine words of St. Athanasius himself prove him tohave spoken and thought with the Anglican Church, and not with the RomanChurch on the invocation of saints and angels, and the blessed VirginMary; and secondly, that whatever words Roman Catholics use, whetherstronger or not than these, these words on which the above questions areput, never came forth from the pen of St. Athanasius. Their spuriousnessis not a question of doubt or difficulty. It has been shown in the textthat the whole homily has been for ages utterly repudiated, as a workfalsely attributed to St. Athanasius. It is indeed very disheartening tothose, whose object is the discovery and the establishment of the truth, to find works cited in evidence as the genuine productions of primitiveChristian teachers, which have been so long ago, and so repeatedly, andthat not by members of another communion, but by the most learned men ofthe Church of Rome, adjudged to be spurious. I do not mean that I thinkit not fully competent for a writer of the present day to call inquestion, and overrule and set aside the decisions of former editors, asto the genuine or the spurious character of any work. On the contrary Iam persuaded that a field is open in that department of theology, whichwould richly repay all the time and labour and expense, which personswell qualified for the task could bestow upon its culture. What I lamentis this, that after a work has been deliberately condemned asunquestionably {411} spurious, by competent and accredited judges fortwo centuries and a half at the least, that very work should be nowcited as genuine and conclusive evidence, without any the most distantallusion to the judgment which had condemned it, or even to anysuspicion of its being a forgery. In this instance, also, Dr. Wisemanhas implicitly followed the compilation of Messrs. Berington and Kirk. This is evident, because the extract, as it stands word for word thesame in his Lectures and their compilation, is not found as one passagein the spurious homily, but is made up of sentences selected fromdifferent clauses, and put together so as to make one paragraph. It isworthy of notice, that in quoting their authority, both Dr. Wiseman, andthose whom he follows, refer us to the very volume in which theBenedictine editors declare that there was no learned man, who did notpronounce the work to be spurious; and in which also they quote atlength the letter of Baronius which had proved it to be a forgery. [Dr. Wiseman's Lectures, vol. Ii. P. 108, from Berington and Kirk, p. 430, 431. ]

Note. --Page 231. (Decree of the Council of Trent. ) [Canones et DecretaSacros. OEcumen. Et Genera. Concilii Tridentini, &c. Rom. Fol. A. D. 1564. ]

Mandat sancta Synodus omnibus Episcopis, et ceteris docendi munuscuramque sustinentibus, ut juxta Catholicæ, et Apostolicæ Ecclesiæ usum, a primævis Christianæ religionis temporibus receptum, sanctorumquePatrum consensionem, et sacrorum Conciliorum decreta, inprimis deSanctorum intercessione, invocatione, Reliquiarum honore, et legitimoimaginum usu, fideles diligenter instruant, docentes eos, Sanctos, unacum Christo regnantes, orationes suas pro hominibus Deo offerre; bonumatque utile esse suppliciter eos invocare; et ob beneficia impetranda aDeo per Filium ejus Jesum Christum, Dominum nostrum, qui solus nosterRedemptor et Salvator est, ad eorum orationes, opem, auxiliumqueconfugere: illos vero, qui negant sanctos æternâ felicitate in coelofruentes, invocandos esse; aut qui asserunt, vel illos pro hominibus nonorare, vel eorum, ut pro nobis etiam singulis orent, invocationem esseidololatriam, vel pugnare cum verbo Dei, adversarique honori uniusMediatoris Dei et hominum, Jesu Christi, vel stultum esse, in coeloregnantibus voce, vel mente supplicare, impie sentire. Sanctorum quoqueMartyrum, et aliorum cum Christo viventium Sancta corpora, {412} quæviva membra fuerunt Christi, et templum Spiritus Sancti, ab ipso adæternam vitam suscitanda et glorificanda, a fidelibus veneranda esse;per quæ multa beneficia a Deo hominibus præstantur: ita ut affirmantes, Sanctorum Reliquiis venerationem, atque honorem non deberi; vel eas, aliaque sacra monumenta a fidelibus inutiliter honorari; atque eorumopis impetrandæ causa sanctorum memorias frustra frequentari; omninodamnandos esse, prout jampridem eos damnavit, et nunc etiam damnatEcclesia. [De Invocatione, Veneratione, et Reliquiis Sanctorum, etSacris Imaginibus, p. 202. ]

Note. --Pages 369 and 390. 

In a prefatory epistle, addressed to the "Chaplains, Wardens, andBrethren of the Holy Catholic Gild, " in Huddersfield, Dr. Wiseman (p. 4)expresses himself thus: "Yesterday I laid the badge of your associationat the feet of the sovereign pontiff, and it was most condescendinglyand graciously received. But this is not all. As I had foretold, I foundHis Holiness fully informed of your establishment and publicmanifestation; and I had the satisfaction of hearing him express hisWISH THAT SIMILAR INSTITUTIONS SHOULD REVIVE ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. "

Towards the close of the sermon, to which this preface is prefixed, andwhich was preached at St. Patrick's Chapel, Huddersfield, Sept. 26th, 1839, and was printed at York in the present year [A. D. 1840], thepreacher draws the comparison, referred to in page 370 of this work, between England and the continent, and between England as it is, andEngland as it once was, and as, in his view, it ought to be again. Afterdescribing the scenes which you may witness in Roman Catholic countries, "where you might see the poor and the afflicted crowding round somealtar, where their pious confidence or experience of past favours leadsthem to hope that their prayers will best be heard through theintercession of our dear Lady, " he thus proceeds: "Oh that the time hadcome, when a similar expression of our devout feelings towards hershould publicly be made, and all should unite to show her that honour, that reverence, and love which she deserves from all Christians, andwhich has so long been denied her amongst us. There was a time whenEngland was second to {413} no other country upon earth in the dischargeof this holy duty; and it will be only PART OF THE RESTORATION OF OURGOOD AND GLORIOUS DAYS OF OLD to revive to the utmost this part ofancient piety. Therefore do I feel sincere joy at witnessing theestablishment of this excellent brotherhood, and its publicmanifestation in this town this day, both as a means of encouragingdevotion and virtue, and as a return to one of the venerableinstitutions of our forefathers. Enter then fully into its spirit. "

["A Sermon delivered at St. Patrick's, Huddersfield, Sept. 26th, 1839, on occasion of the Holy Catholic Gild there established, by the Rev. N. Wiseman, D. D. , Professor in the University of Rome. York, 1840, " p. 22, 23. The first quotation made in p. 390, is from this Sermon. ]