ART.

or utensils. But upon the occasion of Nestorius's denying XXII. her to be the mother of God, and by carrying the opposition to that too far, a superstition for her was set on foot; it made a progress sufficient to balance the slowness of its beginning; the whole world was then filled with very extravagant devotions for her.

Ap. Cyr.

lib. 10. con.Julian.

Eunap. in

vita Edess.

The great noise we find concerning relics in the end of the fourth century, has all the characters of novelty possible in it; for those who speak of it, do not derive it from former times. One circumstance in this is very remarkable, that neither Trypho, Celsus, Lucian, nor Cecilius, do object to the Christians of their time their fondness for dead bodies, or praying about their tombs, which they might well have alleged in opposition to what the Christians charged them with, if there had been any occasion for it. Whereas this custom was no sooner begun, than both Julian and Eunapius reproach the Christians for it. Julian, it is true, speaks only of their calling on God over sepulchres: Eunapius writ after him; and it seems, in his time, that which Julian sets forth as a calling upon God, was advanced to an invocation of them. He says, they heaped together the bones and skulls of men that had been punished for many crimes (it was natural enough for a spiteful heathen to give this representation of their martyrdom), holding them for gods: and after some scurrilous invectives against them, he adds, they are called martyrs, and made the ministers and messengers of prayer to the gods. This seems to be a very evident proof of the novelty of this matter. As for the adoring them, when Vigilantius asked, Why dost thou kiss and adore a little dust put up in fine linen? St. Jerome, though excessively fond of them, denies this very positively, and that in very injurious terms, being offended at the injustice of the reproach. Yet as long as the bodies of the martyrs were let lie quietly in their memories, the fond opinion of their being present, and hearing what was said to them, made the invocating thern look like one man's desiring the assistance of another good man's prayers; so that this step seemed to have a fair colour. But when their bodies were pulled asunder, and carried up and down, so that it was believed miracles abounded every where about them; and when their bones and relics grew to increase and multiply, so that they had more bones and limbs than God and nature had given them; then new hypotheses were to be found out to justify the calling upon them every where, as their relics were spread. St. Jerome, in his careless way, says, they followed adv. Vigi- the Lamb whithersoever he went, and seems to make no doubt lant. Aug. of their being, if not every where, yet in several places at

Hieron.

cura pro

mortuis,

c. 16.

once. But St. Austin, who could follow a consequence much further in his thoughts, though he doubted not but that men were much the better for the prayers of the martyrs, yet he confesses that it passed the strength of his understanding to

determine, whether they heard those who called upon them at ART. their memories, or wheresoever else they were believed to XXII. have appeared, or not. But the devotions that are spoken of by all of that age, are related as having been offered at their memories; so that this seems to have been the general opinion, as well as it was the common practice of that age, though it is no wonder if this conceit once giving some colour and credit to the invocating them, that did quickly increase itself to a general invocation of them every where. And thus a fondness for their relics, joined with the opinion of their relation and nearness to them, did in a short time grow up to a direct worshipping of them; and, by the fruitfulness that always follows superstition, did spread itself further, to their clothes, utensils, and every thing else that had any relation to them.

nach.c.28.

There was cause given in St. Austin's time to suspect that Aug. de many of the bones which were carried about by monks, were opere monone of their bones, but impostures, which very much shakes the credit of the miracles wrought by them, since we have no reason to think that God would support such impostures with miracles; as, on the other hand, there is no reason to think that false relics would have passed upon the world, if miracles had been believed to accompany true ones, unless they had their miracles likewise to attest their value: so let this matter be turned which way it may, the credit both of relics, and of the miracles wrought by them, is not a little shaken by it. But in the following ages we have more than presumptions, that there was much of this false coin that went abroad in the world. It was not possible to distinguish the false from the true. The freshness of colour and smell, so often boasted, might have been easily managed by art; the varieties of those relics, the different methods of discovering them, the shinings that were said to be about their tombs, with the smells that broke out of them, the many apparitions that accompanied them, and the signal cures that were wrought by them, as they grew to fill the world with many volumes of legends, many more lying yet in the manuscripts in many churches, than have been published: all these, I say, carry in them such characters of fraud and imposture on the one hand, and of cruelty and superstition on the other; so much craft, and so much folly, that they had their full effect upon the world, even in contradiction to the clearest evidence possible; the same saints having more bodies and heads than one, in different places, and yet all equally celebrated with miracles. A great profusion of wealth and pomp was laid out in honouring them, new devotions were still invented for them: and though these things are too palpably false to be put upon us now, in ages of more light, where every thing will not go down because it is confidently affirmed; yet as we know how great a part of the devotion of the Latin church this continued to be for many ages before the Reformation, so the same trade is still

Y

ART. carried on, where the same ignorance, and the same superstiXXII. tion, does still continue.

Exod.

xxxii. 32.

I come now to consider the last head of this Article, which is the invocation of saints,* of which much has been already said by an anticipation: for there is that connection between the worship of relics and the invocation of saints, that the treating of the one does very naturally carry one to say somewhat of the other. It is very evident that saints were not invocated in the Old Testament. God being called so oft the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, seems to give a much better warrant for it, than any thing that can be alleged from the New Testament. Moses was their lawgiver, and their mediator and intercessor with God; and his intercession, as it had been very effectual for them, so it had shewed itself in a very extraordinary instance of his desiring that his name might be 'blotted out of the book which he had written,' rather than the people should perish; when God had offered to him, that he would raise up a new nation to himself, out of his posterity God had also made promises to that nation by him: so that it might be natural enough, considering the genius of superstition, for the Jews to have called to him in their miseries, to obtain the performance of those promises made by him to them. We may upon this refer the matter to every man's judgment, whether Abraham and Moses might not have been much more reasonably invocated by the Jews according to what we find in the Old Testament, than any saint can be under the New: yet we are sure they were not prayed to. Elijah's going up to heaven in so miraculous a manner, might also have been thought a good reason for any to have prayed to him but nothing of that kind was then practised. They understood prayer to be a part of that worship which they owed to God only: so that the praying to any other, had been to a certain degree the having another God before, or besides the true Jehovah. They never prayed to any other, they called upon him, and made mention of no other: the Psal. 1. 15. rule was without exception, Call upon me in the time of trouble; I will hear thee, and thou shalt glorify me.' Upon this point there is no dispute.

The council of Trent thus decreed in the matter of saint-worship :- Mandat sancta synodus omnibus episcopis, et cæteris docendi munus curamque sustinentibus, ut, juxta catholicæ et apostolicæ ecclesiæ usum, a primævis Christianæ religionis temporibus receptum, sanctorumque patrum consensionem, et sacrorum conciliorum decreta, in primis de sanctorum intercessione, invocatione, reliquiarum honore, et legitimo imaginum usu, fideles diligenter instruant, docentes eos, sanctos, una cum Christo regnantes, orationes suas pro hominibus Deo offerre, bonum atque utile esse suppliciter eos invocare; et ob beneficia impetranda a Deo per Filium ejus Jesum Christum, Dominum nostrum qui solus noster redemptor et salvator est, ad eorum orationes, opem, auxilium confugere: illos vero qui negant sanctos æterna felicitate in cœlo fruentes, invocandos esse; aut qui asserunt, vel illos pro hominibus non orare, vel eorum, ut pro nobis etiam singulis orent, invocationem esse idololatriam ; vel pugnare cum verbo Dei, adversarique honori unius mediatoris Dei et hominum Jesu Christi; vel stultum esse, in cœlo regnantibus voce vel mente supplicare; impie sentire.' Sessio xxv.-[ED.]

In the New Testament we see the same method followed, ART. with this only exception, that Jesus Christ is proposed as our XXII. Mediator; and that not only in the point of redemption, which is not denied by those of the church of Rome, but even in the point of intercession; for when St. Paul is treating concerning the prayers and supplications that are to be offered 'for all men,' he concludes that direction in these words: 'For there is one God and one Mediator between God and 1 Tim. ii. 5. man, the man Christ Jesus.' We think the silence of the New Testament might be a sufficient argument for this: but these words go further, and imply a prohibition to address our prayers to God by any other mediator. All the directions that are given us of trusting in God, and praying to him, are upon the matter prohibitions of trusting to any other, or of calling on any other. Invocation and faith are joined together: How shall they call on him in whom they have not Rom.x.14. believed? So that we ought only to pray to God, and to Christ, according to those words, Ye believe in God, believe John xiv.1. also in me.' We do also know that it was a part of heathenish idolatry to invocate either demons or departed men, whom they considered as good beings subordinate to the Divine Essence, and employed by God in the government of the world; and they had almost the same speculations about them, that have been since introduced into the church, concerning angels and saints. In the condemning all idolatry, no reserve is made in scripture for this, as being faulty, only because it was applied wrong; or that it might be set right when directed better. On the contrary, when some men, under the pretence of humility and of will-worship,' did, Col. ii. 18. according to the Platonic notions, offer to bring in the worship of angels' into the church of Colosse, pretending, as is probable, that those spirits who were employed by God in the ministry of the gospel, ought, in gratitude for that service, and out of respect to their dignity, to be worshipped: St. Paul condemns all this, without any reserves made for lower degrees of worship; he charges the Christians to beware of Ver. 8, 9, that vain philosophy,' and not to be deceived by those shows of humility, or the speculations of men, who pretended to explain that which they did not know, as intruding into things which they had not seen, vainly puffed up by their fleshly mind.' If any degrees of invocating saints or angels had been consistent with the Christian religion, this was the proper place of declaring them: but the condemning that matter so absolutely, looks as a very express prohibition of all sort of worship to angels. And when St. John fell down to worship the angel, that had made him such glorious discoveries upon two several occasions, the answer he had was, See thou do it not worship God: I am thy fellow-servant.' Rev. xix. It is probable enough that St. John might imagine, that the angel, who had made such discoveries to him, was Jesus 9.

10.

10.

Rev. xxii.

XXII

Christ: but the answer plainly shews, that no sort of worship ought to be offered to angels, nor to any but God. The reason given excludes all sorts of worship, for that cannot be among fellow-servants.

As angels are thus forbid to be worshipped, so no mention is made of worshipping or invocating any saints that had died for the faith, such as St. Stephen and St. James. In the Heb.xi.7. Epistle to the Hebrews, they are required to remember them which had the rule over them, and to follow their faith;' but not a word of praying to them. So that if either the silence of the scriptures on this head, or if plain declarations to the contrary, could decide this matter, the controversy would soon be at an end. Christ is always proposed to us as the only person by whom we come unto God: and when St. Paul speaks against the worshipping of angels, he sets Christ out in his glory in opposition to it. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; and ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power;' pursuing that reason in a great many particulars.

Col. ii. 9, 10.

From the scriptures, if we go to the first ages of Christianity, we find nothing that favours this, but a great deal to the contrary. Irenæus disclaims the invocation of angels. The memorable passage of the church of Smyrna, formerly cited, is a full proof of their sense in this matter. Clemens AlexanProtrep. drinus and Tertullian do often mention the worship that was given to God only by prayer: and so far were they at that Apol.c.17. time from praying to saints, that they prayed for them, as was

Clem.

c. 10.

Tertul.

formerly explained: they thought they were not yet in the presence of God, so they could not pray to them as long as that opinion continued. That form of praying for them is in the Apostolical Constitutions. In all that collection, which seems to be a work of the fourth or fifth century, there is not a word that intimates their praying to saints. In the council of Laodicea,* there is an express condemnation of those who invocated angels ;† this is called a secret idolatry, and a forsaking of our Lord Jesus Christ. The first apologists for Christianity do arraign the worship of demons, and of such as had once lived on earth, in a style that shewed they did not apprehend that the argument could be turned against them, for their worshipping either angels or departed saints. When the Arian controversy arose, the invocation of Christ is urged by Athanasius, Basil, Cyril, and other fathers, as an evident

Con. Laod. c. 35. Just. Mart. Apol. 2. Iren. 1. 2. c. 35. Orig. con. Cels. 1. 8. Tert. de Orat. c. 1. Athanas. ad adelph. frat. et confess. cont. Arian. epist. Greg. Nazianz. in sanct. Lumin. Orat. orat. 30. Grog. Niss. in Basil. cont. Eunap. Basil. Hom. in sanct. Christ. generat. cont. Eunom. 1. 4. Epiph. Hæres. 64, 69, 78, 79. Theod. de Hær. Fabul. 1. 5. c. 3. Chrysost. de Trinit.

+ Council of Laodicea, c. 25. s. 24. decreed, That we ought not to forsake the church of God, and depart aside, and invocate angels (Ayysous voμas), and make meetings, which are things forbidden: if any man therefore be found to give himself to this privy idolatry, let him be accursed, because he hath forsaken our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, and betaken himself to idolatry.'-[ED.]