It is well known what Success this Council had in the Eaft, by the great Zeal and powerful Endeavours of the Emprefs Irene; but in a great part of the Weft, its Decrees met not with the like Entertainment, particularly in the Kingdom of the Franks, under Charles the Great. For after the Legates of Pope Adrian brought the Acts of that Council into the Weft, that learned King (for as yet he was not Emperor) called a Synod of all the Bishops of Italy, France, and his other Dominions at Franckfort on the Main, in the Year 794. but feven Years after that fecond Council of Nice, with the confent of Pope Adrian, who fent his Legates thither. In this Council, the fecond Council of Nice and its Decrees for worfhipping Images, were condemned, as our Writers have Thewed you again and again out of the † Opus Capitulare of that Prince; and particularly Dr. John Forbes in the XIth Chapter of the VIIth Book of his learned Work entituled, Inftructiones HiftoricoTheologica, printed at Amfterdam MDCXLV.

IT was alfo condemned and anathematized by a Council at Conftantinople, under the Emperor Leo Armenius, which called it a Pfeudo-Synod, and damned the Adoration of Images in the IXth Century, viz. in the Year 814. It was condemn

+ See a Book in 8vo Entituled, Opus illuftriffimi & excellentiffimi, feu fpe&abilis viri Caroli Magni nutu Dei Regis Francorum, contra Synodum, que in partibus Gracia pro adorandis imaginibus ftolidè, feu arroganter gefta eft.

Item Pauli Aquilienfis adverfus Felicem Vrgelitanum, Eliphandum Toletanum Epifcopos Libellus. Anno falu-tis MDXLIX.

ThisBook and the Synodus Parifienfis cited in the next Page have a Preface written before them with this Title: Caroli M. Imp. Synodi Parifienfis fub Ludovico Pio Caroli M. F. fcripta de Imaginibus edita ad fidem vetuff. exemplarium Johan. Tilii Epif copi Meldenfis & P. Pithai Jurisconfulti Parifienfis.

ed

ed again in the Year 825 by a † Synod at Paris, in the time of Ludovicus Pius Emperor of the Weft, and Michael Balbus Emperor of the Eaft,. who fent fome Divines about that Controverfy to Ludovicus; and not only this fecond Synod of Nice, and its Doctrines of worfhipping Images, were rejected by them, but two Epiftles of Pope Adrian the Firft were condemned by them, as Erroneous, viz. the Epiftle which he wrote to Conftantinus and Irene for the Adoration of Ima-ges, and that which he wrote in defence of the fecond Nicene Council to Charles the Great. And how the Church of England agreed then with the German and Gallican Churches against the Adoration of Images, may be feen from our own Hiftorians, as Arch-Bifhop Usher hath obferved, whofe Words Ifhall here transcribe:

"Synodus illa λnsen, quæ feptima Nomen ufurpavit pro imaginum Cultu ftabiliendo Nicea Coacta, de qua quid Ecclefiæ Britannicæ fenferint, Anglorum Hiftorici Simon Dunelmenfis, Rogerus Hovedenus, Mathaus Florilegus, & Roffenfis Hi• ftoriæ Author hunc in modum referunt. In anno ab Incarnatione Dom. 792. Carolus Rex Franco'rum mifit Synodalem librum ad Britanniam (fibi à Conftantinopoli directum) in quo (libro proh dolor!) multa inconvenientia & vera fidei Contraria reperta funt: Meaimè quòd pene omnium 'Orientalium Do&orum (non minùs quàm trecentorum, vel eo ampliùs Epifcoporum) unanimâ

、

+ Apud Melchiorem Goldaftum in Colle&t. Conftit. Imperialium. Tom. 1. And in a Book entituled, Synodus Parifienfis de Imaginibus habita Anno. Chr. DCCCXXIV. de vetuftiffimo codice defcripta, Francofurti, MDXCVI. in 8vo.

De Chriftianâ Ecclefiarum Succeffione & Statu. Cap. 11. 4. See alfo Hen. Spelman, Concilia. Vol. 1. in Anno 792. p. 395,

&c.

.

affertione Confirmatum eft Imagines adorari debere: quod omnino Ecclefia Dei execratur. Contra quod Jeripfit Alcuinus, & Epiftolam ex auctoritate divinarum Scripturarum mirabiliter affirmatam, illámque cum eodem libro ex perfona Epifcoporum, • & Principum noftrorum Regi Francia attulit.

From which Words, Sir, it is plain, First, That the Fudgment of the English Church or Churches at that time was against the Adoration of Images, which they counted Execrable, Secondly, That Alcuin our Countryman wrote an Epifile, in which he proved from the Holy Scriptures, that it was unlawful. Thirdly, That the Kings and Bishops of England approved that Epiftle, and authorized bim to offer it in their Names to Charles the Great, King of the Franks, who called the Council of Franckfort, and entertained Alcuin to affift him in that Council. Sir, I have fhewed you all this to prove my Affertion above, that the Church of England kept the ancient Faith pure and entire, without [foreign] additions or additional Confeffions to the end of the VIIIth Century, and particularly from the additional Confeffion of the fecond Council of Nice, especially as to the Adoration of Images; and by confequence that the Faith and the Religion of the Church of England now is the fame it was then, or that the Bishops, Kings, and Writers (particularly Alcuin, who was Bede's Scholar) and Churches of England then profeffed our Religion; and I Challenge you to fhew, that they then profefled yours, that is, the Papal part of your Religion, from which we have reformed.

IV. You must give me leave alfo to obferve from the Authorities cited above out of ArchBishop Usher, that the English Church rejected *

In quo libro (proh dolor!) multa inconvenientia & vera Fidei contraria reperta funt

the

the other new Doctrines of the fecond Council of Nice, as the Interceffion and Invocation of Saints, particularly of the bleffed Virgin, and adoring their Relicks; and accordingly the reading of the XLIId. Canon of the Council of Franckfort, in the + MS of Claudius Puteanus's Library is not as in Labbe's and Coffartius's Edition, ut nulli novi Sancti colantur, aut invocentur, &c. but ut nulli nobis Santi colantur, aut invocentur ; after which it follows, nec memoriæ eorum per vias erigantur. Sed hi foli funt venerandi (not colendi aut invocandi) aut memoriæ eorum per vias erigenda, qui electi funt ex authoritate paffionum, & vite merito. The Canon thus read plainly diftinguishes Veneratio from Cultus and Invocatio, and accordingly the Title of the Canon, which is the XLIIId. in the Putean MS. is Quinam Saniti in Ecclefia venerandi funt. For there is a Veneration due to Martyrs and pious Confeffors, which confifts in commemorating their Courage, Conftancy, and Sufferings; in always fpeaking with refpect and reverence of them; in declaring to the World their noble acts of Patience, Charity, and Humility, and Love and Beneficence to their Enemies; and in erecting publick Statues and Monuments, as of other Heroes, in remembrance of them. In this chafte Senfe you know, Sir, Cicero faith, babet venerationem juftam quicquid excellit, and that this is a common Latin Phrafe, memoriam alicujus venerari. This is all the Veneration to this time and fome time longer, that our Anceftors of the English Church fhew'd to Saints, without any Cult, or Invocation, or Adoration of their Images. For in all their rude Pictures we find in their MSS that re

+ Vita, & Opera Alcuint ex edit. Andrea Quercetani Parifiis, 1617. p. 1890.

F 3

main

main among us, there are none that I ever obferved, made for Adoration, except one of our Lord with St. Dunstan proftrate at his Feet, which I have printed in my Saxon Grammar, p. 145; and which the hand of the Infcription proves to have been made about the time of the Conqueft. Had they embraced the Adoration of Images, they would in probability have had better Pictures. But they us'd at least to the Xth Century to speak chaftly of their Saints. Accordingly, in a Harmony of the four Gospels, or rather a Hiftory of FeJus Chrift made out of them all, written about the time of Charles the Great in the Francick Tongue, and extant in the Cottonian Library, Caligula A. VII. I. There are no Appellations or Titles given to the Virgin Mary, but what any Proteftant will allow may be given her, especially in a Poetical Writing, as that Book is. And in a Poetical Calendar written in the Dano-Saxonick Tongue, which I have published in the XXIIId. Chapter of my Anglo-Saxonick Grammar, fhe is plainly called Mary; from whence I think it not unreasonable to infer, that in the Ages in which those Books were written, the Invocation of Saints and Adoration of their Images were either in none, or very little use among the Francs or English-Saxons, and by confequence not yet eftablished by Ecclefiaftical or Regal Authority among either of them. But, Sir, to conclude my Anfwer to your Challenge, I affert that we have the fame Faith and Religion, that Pope Gregory the Great sent to our Ancestors without Addition or Alteration; for what he profeffed was his Faith, we profefs now. I fhall faithfully tranflate his Confeffion, as I find it in Garnerius's Notes upon the 11th Chapter of Liber Diurnus Romanorum Pontificum, published by him at Paris, M. DC. LXX.