all the liturgies which Messrs. Kirke and Berrington have cited (in their late volume, entitled “The Faith of the Catholies,” Lond. 1830), amounting to eleven, only one is to be found, and that of the Nestorian heretics, containing an invocation to a saint for intercession. Thus showing how wide a distinction is to be drawn between the excited expressions of individual writers, and the authorized practice of the Church. All the other liturgies do no more than the Roman canon of the mass, given above, p. 400, namely, Ist, assume, generally, that the saints departed pray for the saints militant, and 2dly, pray to God to hear their intercessions. This is no more tantamount to an invocation of the saints, than a prayer to God for the assistance of the angels, would be tantamount to a prayer to the angels themselves.

ORIGEN, Contra Celsum, V. § 4, 5.-Edit. Wirceb. ii. p. 8. Πᾶσαν μὲν γὰρ δέησιν, καὶ προσευχὴν, καὶ ἔντευξιν, καὶ εὐχαρι στίαν, ἀναπεμπτέον τῷ ἐπὶ πᾶσι Θεῷ . . . . ̓Αγγέλους γὰρ κατ λέσαι μὴ ἀναλαβόντας τὴν ὑπὲρ ἀνθρώπους περὶ αὐτῶν ἐπιστήμην, οὐκ εὔλογον.

Contra Celsum, viii. § 26. tom. ii. 438.

Μόνῳ γὰρ προσευκτέον τῷ ἐπὶ πᾶσι Θεῷ, καὶ προσευκτέον γε τῷ μονογενεῖ, καὶ πρωτοτόκῳ πάσης κτίσεως, λόγῳ Θεοῦ, καὶ ἀξιωτέον αὐτὸν, ὡς ἀρχιερέα, τὴν ἐπ' αὐτὸν φθάσασαν ἡμῶν εὐχὴν ἀναφέρειν ἐπὶ τὸν Θεὸν αὐτοῦ καὶ Θεὸν ἡμῶν, καὶ πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ πατέρα τῶν βιούντων κατὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ.

Ibid. § 57, p. 496.

Κἂν ἴδωμεν δὲ μὴ δαίμονάς τινας, ἀγγέλους δὲ τεταγμένους ἐπὶ τῶν τῆς γῆς καρπῶν, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς τῶν ζώων γενέσεως, εὐφημοῦμεν αὐτοὺς, καὶ μακαρίζομεν, ἐγχειρισθέντας ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ τὰ χρήσιμα τῷ γένει ἡμῶν· οὐ μὴν τὴν ὀφειλομένην πρὸς Θεὸν τιμὴν τούτοις ἀπονέμομεν.

Ibid. § 67, p. 512.

Ὕμνους γὰρ εἰς μόνον τὸν ἐπὶ πᾶσι λέγομεν Θεὸν, καὶ τὸν μονογενῆ αὐτοῦ Λόγον καὶ Θεόν.

ATHANASIUS. Orat. Cont. Arian. iii. Paris, 1627, i. 394.

Πέτρος μὲν οὖν ὁ ̓Απόστολος προσκυνῆσαι θέλοντα Κορνήλιον κωλεύει, λέγων, ὅτι καγὼ ἄνθρωπος εἰμι. "Αγγελος δὲ θέλοντα προσκυνῆσαι τὸν Ἰωάννην ἐν τῇ ̓Αποκαλύψει, κωλεύει, λέγων "Ορα μὴ, σύνδουλός σου εἰμὶ, καὶ τῶν ἀδελφῶν σου τῶν προφητῶν, καὶ τῶν τηρούντων τοὺς λόγους τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου, τῷ Θεῷ προσκύνησον. οὐκοῦν Θεοῦ ἐστι μόνου τὸ προσκυνεῖσθαι, καὶ τοῦτο ἴσασι καὶ αὐτοὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι, ὅτι κἂν ἀλλήλους δόξαις ὑπερέχωσιν, ἀλλὰ κτίσε ματα πάντα εἰσὶ, καὶ οὐκ εἰσὶ τῶν προσκυνουμένων, ἀλλὰ τῶν προσκυνούντων τὸν δεσπότην.

EPIPHANIUS, Adv. Hæres. lib. iii. tom. ii. Hæres. 59. sive 79. Colyridianos. Edit. Petav. i. 1057.

§ 1. . . . . ἐν ἡμέραις τισὶν ἄρτον προτιθέασι, καὶ ἀναφέρουσιν εἰς ὄνομα τῆς Μαρίας . . . . Θεὸν αἰτησάμενοι, κατὰ τὸ δυνατὸν παραθησόμεθα, ὅπως τῆς εἰδωλοποιοῦ ταύτης αἱρέσεως τὰς ῥίζας ἐκτεμόντες, ἀπὸ τινῶν τὴν τοιαύτην λύσσαν καταλῦσαι ἐν Θεῷ δυνηθώμεν. § 11. ἤτοι γὰρ ὡς αὐτὴν προσκυνοῦντες τὴν Μαρίαν, αὐτῇ προσφέρουσι τὴν κολλυρίδα αἱ αργαὶ αὗται γυναῖκες· ἤτοι ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς προσφέρειν ἐπιχειροῦσι τὴν προειρημένην ταύτην σαθρὰν κάρπωσιν. § 4. ναὶ δὴ παρθένος ἦν ἡ Παρθένος, καὶ τετιμημένη, ἀλλ ̓ οὐκ εἰς προσκύνησιν ἡμῖν δοθεῖσα, ἀλλὰ προσκυνοῦσα τὸν ἐξ αὐτῆς σαρκὶ γεγεννημένον. § 5. ποῖος προφητῶν ἐπέτρεψεν ἄν θρωπον προσκυνεῖσθαι, οὐ μὴν γυναῖκα λέγειν ; ἐξαίρετον μὲν γάρ ἐστι τὸ σκεῦος, ἀλλὰ γυνὴ, καὶ οὐδὲν τὴν φύσιν παρηλλαγμένη . . εἰ γὰρ ̓Αγγέλους προσκυνεῖσθαι οὐ θέλει, πόσῳ μᾶλλον τὴν ἀπὸ *Αννης γεγεννημένην . . . . οὐ μὲν ἑτέρως γεγεννημένην παρὰ τὴν τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσιν, ἀλλὰ καθὼς πάντες ἐκ σπέρματος ἀνδρὸς καὶ μήτρας γυναικός. § 7. ἐν τιμῇ ἔστω Μαρία, ὁ δὲ Πατὴρ, καὶ Υἱὸς, καὶ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα προσκυνείσθω, τὴν Μαρίαν μηδεὶς προσκυνείτω.

The British adherents to the Roman dominion, who, from their intercourse with the members of the English Church, have imbibed some regard for orthodoxy, are eager to disclaim all idea of offering divine honours to the Blessed Virgin. I should be

sorry to doubt their sincerity. Some of their teachers have taken the same line. I do not doubt their wisdom. I should. be sorry to attempt to fasten upon the first anything which they disclaim; nor would I wish, unnecessarily, to go out of my way to expose the inconsistency of the latter. But as it is a question of deep importance, in which, if possible, it is extremely desirable to arrive at the exact truth, I will venture to ask the persons of whom I have last spoken, (and I invite the others to observe the question, and the answer, if any, shall be forthcoming,) whether any competent authority in the Church of Rome has ever reprehended or stamped with any kind of disapproval, the Psalter of the Blessed Virgin, composed by Cardinal Bonaventure, heretofore in general use, and highly approved in the Roman communion, which, for ought that appears to the contrary, it still continues to be? This celebrated work consists of the Psalms of David, which have been altered in some respects. The chief object aimed at throughout, is to make each psalm an occasion of honouring the Virgin, which is effected by substituting Lady for Lord, in every passage which is applicable to our Saviour. Here then it is beyond the possibility of denial, that the selfsame worship is offered to the Virgin, which David, in Spirit, offered to the eternal Son of God. There is not a passage omitted. One might have thought that the text (Psalm cx. 1.) to which our Lord Himself referred the Jews, as an argument of His own divinity, (Matt. xxii, 43), might have staggered the seraphic Doctor, and that he would have shrunk from meddling with it. But no: in every edition which I have seen, there it stands, "The Lord said unto my Lady, sit thou on my right hand." I ask again, has Cardinal Bonaventure's Psalter of our Lady, been ever put in any Index prohibitorum or expurgandorum? It can hardly be expected, when, so late as 1832, we find the present Pope Gregory XVI. in his encyclical Epistle, declaring that the preservation of the Catholic faith rests solely, and Christian hope entirely, upon the Virgin; as thus, "That all may have a successful and happy issue, let us raise our eyes

to the blessed Virgin Mary, who alone destroys heresies; who is our greatest hope, yea, the entire ground of our hope." That the adherents to the Roman schism in England might not lose the benefit of this edifying Christian instruction, it was printed permissu superiorum, in the “Laity's Directory,” from which I have copied it. I further ask, is not the guilt of the Collyridian heresy chargeable, directly, upon Cardinal Bonaventure, and Pope Gregory XVI., and, indirectly, upon the existing authorities of the Roman schism in England?

GREGORY OF Nyssa, Contra Eunomian. Orat. 4. vol. ii. p. 144. Οὐδὲν τῶν διὰ κτίσεως γεγονότων σεβάσμιον εἶναι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ὁ θεῖος ἐνομοθέτησε λόγος.

AUGUSTINE. In Ps. 64. Edit. Benedict. iv. 633.

Ipse sacerdos est, qui nunc ingressus in interiora veli, solus ibi ex his qui carnem gestaverunt interpellat pro nobis.

In Ps. xcvi. iv. Ρ. 1045.

Respondent, non colimus mala dæmonia: angelos quos dicitis, ipsos et nos colimus, virtutes Dei magni, et ministeria Dei magni. Utinam ipsos colere velletis, facilè ab ipsis disceretis non illos colere ; audite angelum doctorem (Rev. xxii. 8.).

Ibid. vi. p. 11.

The thirty-ninth heresy he mentions is that of the "Angelici in Angelorum cultu inclinati."

THEODORET, in Epist. Coloss. ii. 18. Edit. Hal. 1771. iii. p.

490.

Οἱ τῷ νόμῳ συνηγοροῦντες, καὶ τοὺς ἀγγέλους σέβειν αὐτοῖς εἰσηγοῦντο, διὰ τούτων λέγοντες δεδόσθαι τὸν νόμον. ἔμεινε δὲ τοῦτο τὸ πάθος ἐν τῇ Φρυγίᾳ καὶ Πισιδίᾳ μέχρι πολλοῦ. οὗ δὴ χάριν καὶ συνελθοῦσα σύνοδος ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ τῆς Φρυγίας νόμῳ κεκώλυκε τὸ τοῖς ἀγγέλοις προσεύχεσθαι· καὶ μέχρι δὲ τοῦ νῦν εὐκτήρια τοῦ ἁγίου Μιχαὴλ παρ' ἐκείνοις καὶ τοῖς ὁμόροις ἐκείνων ἐστὶν ἰδεῖν.

Ibid. iii. 17, p. 496.

Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἐκεῖνοι τοὺς ἀγγέλους σέβειν ἐκέλευον, αὐτὸς τὸ ἐναντίον παρεγγυᾷ, ὥστε καὶ τοὺς λόγους, καὶ τὰ ἔργα κοσμῆσαι τῇ μνήμῃ τοῦ Δεσπότου Χριστοῦ, καὶ τῷ Θεῷ δὲ καὶ Πατρὶ τὴν εὐχαριστίαν δι' αὐτοῦ, φησιν, ἀναπέμπετε, μὴ διὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων.

PAGE 337. (Not because it is supposed, &c.)

The multiplied cautions and disclaimers which the Council has put forth upon this subject, are unexceptionable witnesses of the infinite hazard to men's souls resulting from the practice of imageworship, under whatever specious names it may be covered. They serve, therefore, in all reason to condemn the rulers of a Church who, unnecessarily, put such a stumbling block in the way of the faithful. It will be seen below, in the Appendix, that the plea by which it is sought to excuse image-worship in the Church of Rome, namely, that the honour paid to the image is referred to the prototype, is the very same that the heathens alleged in defence of their image-worship. Is it possible that pious and well-intentioned persons in the Church of Rome can know these things, and yet feel no misgivings as to the course which their Church has taken?

ON INDULGENCES.

PAGE 339.-(Use of Indulgences.)

This word has a double meaning, and the claim here put forth is true or false, according to the sense in which it is understood. If by indulgences is only meant the power of remitting ecclesiastical censures, no question it has been used in all ages, and must be inherent in the commission to bind and loose. But if it means the power of remitting the fancied pains of purgatory, inflicted by God upon the souls of the departed, it rests, as is clear to all men, upon the fabrication of purgatory; can date no higher than it; and must be rejected together with it, as a fond thing,