A letter written to a friend concerning Popish idolatrie

SIR,

I Am very sorry to find that the Books I di∣rected you to, do not give you full satis∣faction, but still you press me to say some∣thing of my own; and what can I say that hath not been already said? Really most of the Books that are written in these latter days of the World, are but as the same Cards shufflled and dealt into a new Game. But you tell me, their Discourses are so long, as you cannot carry them in your remem∣brance, the Quotations so numerous, pro and con, as there is no end in searching after them; their Distincti∣ons and way of arguing many times intricate, and seem to you rather subtil Evasions, than solid Answers: in sum, they do not satisfie, nor work much upon your Understanding. In answer whereto, I must consess, I have found by experience, that Mens Heads are like Locks with several Wards, which no Key will open, but one fitted to those very Wards: So Mens Under∣standings must be fitted and opened with such a way of arguing, as suits with their Apprehensions and Fancy; and many times it happens, that weaker Arguments, in a method agreeable unto them; prevail more than the Scholastick pressing form. This gives me some encou∣ragement to set Pen to Paper, with hopes that I may chance to light on that Method, as may give you more agreeable satisfaction, especially you so much desiring it: weak Remedies, strongly fancied for good, have done great Cures, when Learned Physicians have. failed. I shall be as brief as may be, and the rather because

longer labour may have as little success, as the larger Tracts of others have had.

You seem much to applaud and lean on Doctor Thorndick's Judgment, who in his Just Weights, con∣demns those who charge the Papists with Idolatry, and therein both wrongfully accuse them, and also cast a wrong and foul Prejudice on our Church, and by neces∣sary consequence make it no Church: For, if the Papists be Idolaters, their Church is not a true saving Church, it is no Church; Idolatry, as he conceives, being incon∣sistent with a saving Church; 'tis as a deadly poyson, which presently destroys the vitals and brings inevitable death. And then, if the Papal Church be no saving Church, no Church now, they were none when those of the Reformation came out of it, their Church being the same then as 'tis now, and so consequently our Church can be no Church, coming out from theirs which is none. Wherefore Dr. Thorndick is very de∣sirous, that the Papists gross erroneous Worship should be called Superstition rather than Idolatry; for first, this grie∣vous accusation much incenses them, by making them no Church, and makes our Division the wider, and cuts off all hopes of Reconciliation with them; Secondly, it makes by consequence our Church no Church, as he said, we descending from them.

As to the first, I wonder, that this good Man, so know∣ing in Roman Principles, could hope for Reconciliati∣on with them, but by wholly submitting to them; for their Prime Principle being Infallibility, whereon all that Babel is built, the pulling down of any one Pinacle e∣radicates the very Foundation; all being so link'd to∣gether with Infallibility, that one and all falls together. 'Tis therefore bootless to talk of meeting them half∣way, or three quarters and a half, who are so fet∣tered to this Infallible Pillar; you must be chained

to it also, no other way of being one with them.

As to the second, of nullifying their Church by Ido∣latry, and our own also as from them: if they by their Infallible Spirit will declare the consequence against themselves, let it be so; but I fear it not against us. They cannot deny but the Head of their Church Pope Mar∣cellinus, from whom their Popes ever since descended, was an Idolater in the grossest sence, sacrificing to a Heathen Idol in the time of Dioclesian's persecution; if this makes them no Church, let them be no Church: but then we are none: hold there; I am not bound to grant (though I pass) the Antecedent, much less the Consequent. First, 'tis not so easie and quick a thing to determine what nullifies a Church, some things are plain and easie, some not. 'Tis certain, the Jewish Church in our Saviours time, was a Church wherein salvation was to be had; for our Saviour bid the people then hearken to those who sat in Moses Chair, and do what they thence commanded; yet they were guilty of devillish practices & opinions also; but still they believ'd in the only true God, and acknowledged his holy Word, though they notori∣ously swerved from it. And 'tis as certain, that the genera∣lity of the Jewish Church did often fall into Idolatry, yet they continued still a Church to our Saviours days, as I shewed before: so that for my part I dare not presume to draw the exact Circular line of a Church, over which the Transgression makes it cease to be a saving Church: but as I said above, some cases are clear; General Infide∣lity, as to renounce God and his Christ, doubtless makes it cease to be a Church; but Idolatry, though it be as general as in Elijah's days, when he conceived himself only free from Baal-worship, doubtless doth make it not cease to be a Church: For we do not find that the Priests and Levites were consecrated a new after their defecti∣on to Idolatry. And therefore with Dr. Thorndick's

good lieve, though we descend from a Church too too much given to Idolatry, yet our Bishops consecrated by them need no more a new Consecration, than those Jewish Priests who were most certainly polluted with Idolatry; but relinquishing their Idolatry, and with penitential hearts sacrificing to the true God, were re∣conciled again to God, and in mercy accepted by the Divine Goodness. Who then can doubt that those Bi∣shops of this Nation, who with penitent hearts re∣nounc'd the Romish Idolatry, and so zealously embrac'd the truth of the Gospel, and God's sincere Worship in Spirit and in Truth, as to die in defence of it, I say, who can doubt but through the infinite goodness of the same merciful God, our Reformed Bishops were like∣wise accepted by him, and thenceforth acknowledged true and faithful Shepherds of his Church. Wherefore I hope you will be no more terrified with Dr. Thorn∣dick's Bug-bear, the nullifying of our Church, which hath been, and I hope will continue a Church, pro∣fessing One God the Creator of all, one Lord Jesus Christ the Saviour of all, one Faith, one Baptism.

And now I shall set before your eyes no Bug-bear, but a just fear of the Romish Idolatry, which pious Dr. Thorndick, out of a zealous desire of Unity (which is impossible) would willingly cloak under a milder and less hateful name. I am as willing to speak the truth in love as he, yet I must not out of love to Uni∣ty conceal the truth, or palliate falshood, but clearly set forth the Romish gross erroneous practice of Idola∣try, which their Doctors daub over with plausible words, and make this heavy sin appear as light as a feather. I beseech you read and ponder it well, and doubtless your neck and shoulders will tremble at the weight.

The Papists take it very heinously to be called Idola∣ters, because in Scripture the word Idolatry is applied,

as they say, only to Heathens, who denyed the true God and worshipped false Gods. But I desire the Pa∣pists to tell me, whether Solomon was not guilty of I∣dolatry, in worshipping the Gods of his Wives, though he himself believed in the true God. And who doubts but a Christian believing aright in God and Christ may be guilty of Idolatry, as many true believing Christi∣ans were in the horrible persecutions under Heathen Emperors, meerly out of fear sacrificing unto them and their Gods, whom they abhorred in their hearts. And certainly the Papists Idolatry is a degree beyond this, for they worship the Saints both outwardly and inward∣ly with their hearts: and moreover I may truly say, they worship false Gods, as the Heathens did; for though the Papists do not call them Gods in word, yet they make them Gods by deed, by their worship, as you shall see by and by. Idolatry is an act of worship not of belief; error in belief is called Heresie or Infideli∣ty, error in worship is Superstition or Idolatry. And though Idolatry, originally taken, signifieth the wor∣shipping of an Idol, yet 'tis commonly taken in a larger sence, as to give divine Worship to any Creature. Now whether you call this Creature God or not, this matters not, for 'tis not the Name, but the Worship given to it, makes it Idolatry; Covetousness in Scripture is called Idolatry, yet no man believes or calls Money a God, but in effect makes it a God by trusting in it, which is a principal part of our duty to God, to trust in him. And so a man is said to Idolize his Prince by trusting in his favour; and so the Papists are said to Idolize the Saints and Blessed Virgin, by praying and trusting to them in time of trouble, which God requires of us as due to himself; and it were far less sinful (nay not sin∣ful at all in some sence) to call the Saints Gods, than to trust in them and pray to them; for our Saviour him∣self

declared out of Scripture, that 'twas not unlawful to apply the name of God unto men; I said ye are Gods. And the Heathens, who called their Heroes Gods, and sacrificed unto them, did believe them to be men, but of singular Vertue, for which after their death they were taken by the supreme God into Heaven; and on this behalf the people sacrificed to them, gave them di∣vine Worship; just as the Papists do now their Saints, declared to be so by the Roman Consistory. And as the an∣cient Roman Senate Deified many as Heroes in Heaven, who were damned in Hell; 'tis not altogether improbable, I am sure 'tis not impossible, but that some declar'd by the Roman Consistory for Saints in Heaven, may be in the same dismal Dungeon; the hearts of men are known only to God; the holiest out ward Professor may have a Devil's heart: for as the Devil can transform himself into an Angel of Light, so may a devillish man. As for the Popes Infallibility in the case, declaring such a one for a Saint, I will not now enter into that dispute, I will only ask the question, why, if the Pope cannot erre in the Case, doth he put the Inquisitors of the Rota to that excessive trouble, as to make diligent search seve∣ral years together, before he determine the point, as if he himself feared (however others confidently believe) that his pretended holy Spirit may erre in the matter? But I return to my business.

Idolatry then is an Act of wrong Worship, not of wrong Belief; and as Solomon and other right believ∣ing Jews were guilty of Idolatry, by giving divine Wor∣ship to Creatures, so may right believing Papists, if they in like manner give divine Worship to Creatures, though they do not believe them Gods: for he that believes in God a right, that believes him to be the Creator of all things, cannot believe any thing else to be God in this sence, 'tis a flat contradiction; for that thing would be

a Creator and no Creator, being created, a God and no God. Now I pray you observe, he that believes aright in God cannot believe any Creature to be God; if then it were (as the Papists would have it) that 'tis no Ido∣latry to worship the Creatures unless you believe them Gods (which a right believer cannot do) it must needs follow, that a right believer, let him adore Saint or An∣gel, Man or Devil, with all his heart, with all his soul, yet not believing them Gods (which he cannot do) is not, cannot be guilty of Idolatry: was there ever any thing more madly affirmed? 'Tis evident then, as I said before, that Idolatry consists not in wrong Belief, but in wrong Worship; and so, to give divine Worship to a Creature, consists not in worshipping that Creature with belief 'tis a God (which a true believer cannot do) but in worshipping it with such Worship wherewith we wor∣ship God; that is, by kneeling, praying, making vows to it, and the like, which we do, and should do to God only, we having no other Worship to render to his di∣vine Majesty. And this Worship the Papists give to their Saints, and are hereby guilty of gross Idolatry, let their belief be what it will.

When the ancient Christian Fathers accused the Hea∣then Philosophers of Idolatry, for giving divine Wor∣ship to their Heroes, the Philosophers endeavoured to retort it upon the Fathers, accusing them in like man∣ner for worshipping Saints; and I pray you how did the Fathers wipe off that calumny? was it by distinguish∣ing in point of Belief (as the Papists now do) and saying that they did believe in the true God, and did not call the Saints Gods, but the Creatures of God, and so worshipped them as Creatures only? no such matter, the Fathers made no such reply, but absolutely denied the matter of fact, and said, they did not at all wor∣ship the Saints, but God alone, and only honoured the

Saints as holy men and their fellow-servants of God, as you may see most clearly set down by St. Austin in his Eighth and Tenth Books de Civ. Dei; where he parti∣cularly enumerates the parts of Divine Worship; as Sa∣crifice, Invocation, Dedication of Churches and Altars, Oblations and Vows (which the Scripture appropriates to God) all which the Greeks, saith he, comprise in one word, viz. Latreia; but the Latins have not any one word of full signification to express it: and then St. Au∣stin flatly denies that the Christians do give Latreia, that is, any part of this Divine Worship, to the Saints; and there challenges the Heathens to prove the contrary if they can. Whereas 'tis as evident as the Sun at noon-day, that the Papists do give, not one, but all those parts of Divine Worship, called in general La∣treia, unto their Saints, unless it be the sacrificing of Beasts; this they reserve to God alone, and truly he is much beholding to them for it; they will give unto him the flesh of Bulls, Rams, Goats, but unto the Saints their own, their Hearts and Lips; the Saints shall have their living, holy and acceptable Sacrifice, the very Soul of the Sacrifice, and God shall have the dead Body e∣ven stinking in his divine nostrils, which his Soul loaths and abhorrs, as he hath often declared in his holy Word. It was the devout prayer of the heart that sanctified and made acceptable the sacrifice of the Beasts, without which they were an abomination unto God, and are now in the pure times of the Gospel wholly laid aside, and the Calves of our Lips and of our Hearts and Souls, is the sacrifice of Christians, and the principal part of Divine Worship. Now I ask a Papist, was it lawful for the Jews to sacrifice Beasts to Angels or deceased Patri∣archs, the very chiefest of them, Noah, Abraham, Moses, had not this been Idolatry in them, who can deny it? and why had this been Idolatry? Because Sacrifice is a

Divine Worship, and to give Divine Worship to any Creature is Idolatry: Is it not much more Idolatry, to give unto Michael, Gabriel, Abraham, Moses, the purer, the holier, the diviner part of God's Service, the Wor∣ship of Prayer? is not this greater Idolatry, can any man of sence deny it? and yet this more holy part, more di∣vine Sacrifice the Papists give unto their Saints; and in sum, there is not any one thing that true Christians do, or can do to God, but the Papists do the very same to Saints, and transcendently to the Blessed Virgin, to whom the generality of the Papists pay ten times as much de∣votion as to God; and are so far from being reproved for it, as they are encouraged to it by their greatest Doctors.

I cannot but wonder at the grossand ridiculous mistake, or rather abuse in wresting of St. Austin's word Latreia, which he puts as a general word comprising all parts of Divine Worship; but the Papists turn it quite to another sence, and will understand thereby the Belief wherewith they worship, which is not at all to St. Austin's purpose; for there he mentions not any thing of Belief, but Mat∣ter of Fact, viz. what Worship is, and ought to be given to God only; as invocation by Prayer, Dedica∣tion of Churches, Altars, Oblations, Vows; all which in St. Austin's sence is Latreia: and all this the Papists give to the Blessed Virgin and Saints. But (say the Pa∣pists) they do not give this with Latreia, that is, they do not believe them Gods when they worship them, which they cannot do, as I shewed before. And thus they give them Latreia, but not with Latreia, Divine Worship, but not with Divine Worship; a most ridi∣culous juggling foppery. Perchance a Similitude may make this matter plainer; thus, The King makes a Law that it shall be Treason punishable with death, to give King∣ly honours, to a subject, and then declares what he means by Kingly honours; as to set a Crown on his head, to call

him Majesty, to erect for him a Chair of State, to serve him on the Knee, &c. all which the King comprizes in one word Royalty, and, as I said, makes it treason to give Royalty to any Subject. Now the Earl of Kent, to whom the people of that Country are much devoted, comes thither to a Gentlemans House, who the more to magnifie this great Earl, sets a Crown on his head, calls him Majesty, erects him a Chair of State, serves him on the knee, &c. my Gentleman is called in question, accused of Treason for giving Royalty to the Earl; the Gentleman confesses all the Fact, but pleads that he did not believe the Earl to be King, nor did in∣tend to set him up as King, but only to give him all the honour he could; 'tis true he gave him Royalty in every part, but not with Royalty: the King, though full of indignation for such a bold presumption and total breach of his Law, burst out into laughter at the Gen∣tleman's ridiculous Plea, and answers the Gentleman; Well, you gave your honured Earl all the honour due to me, you gave him Royalty, but not with Royalty; so you shall die the death of a Traytor, but not as a Tray∣tor. I suppose we shall at the day of Judgment hear the Papists subtil Doctors make this rare plea and excuse for their Idolatry, and distinguish the point; 'tis true they gave the Saints Latreia, but not with Latreia; and I fear we shall hear their heavy doom for it. Alas, poor wretches! the plain Text of Scripture must then take place, the subtil Distinctions of Aquinas and Scotus will then be ridiculous and eternally deplorable folly, 1 Cor. 1. 20. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wis∣dom of this world? God of his infinite mercy open their eyes to see and bewail this their dangerous folly.

The plain and clear Truth is this: They worship the

Saints and chiefly the Blessed Virgin just as God, or rather more than God; it will be no excuse to say they do not be∣lieve her to be the very God, nor call her God; for, as I shewed before, 'tis not the belief, nor the calling her God, makes it Idolatry, but the giving her the Worship due to God. And for the fuller convicton of the Papists, I pray observe, that though they do not call her in that very ex∣press word, God; yet they give her words and titles fully declaring her a Goddess, as much or more than the Heathens did their Goddesses: all which I cannot doubt but she fully detests, her Humility being as great as her Dignity, and indeed raised her to it, as she expresses in her Magnificat, That God regarded the lowliness of his handmaiden; surely then she cannot but abhorr that they should call her Queen of Heaven and make Ob∣lations to her, so expresly declared Idolatry in Scripture, Jer. 7. 18. They make their supplications and call upon her in time of trouble, and even in the point of death, which God expresly requires to be performed to him∣self, Psal. 50. 15. As God is called the Father of Mercy, so is she called the Mother of Mercy: as Christ is called the Tree of Life, so is she, and a hundred more such di∣vine Attributes they give unto her, as you may read in their printed Books of Litanies and Prayers to her, sufficient to make a man tremble with horror and amaze∣ment to read the wilde, as well as wicked blasphemous Titles their extravagant fancies invent to give her. Let any Christian Soul, who can but read the Scripture and understand common Sence, judge if this be not Idolatry; for the Titles they give her do much more imply a Deity, than the word, God, and so is far greater Idolatry.

There is one thing more, worthy your consideration in this business. All the learned Papists know that the ancient Fathers did urge, as a main Argument to prove the Diety of the Holy Ghost, the Ubiquity of his ope∣ration

in the hearts of the faithful all the world over; a clear evidence of a divine Power which no Creature is capable of: and will not the same Argument hold, to prove the Deity of the Blessed Virgin, if she, as the Papists believe, be able to be helpful to all her de∣voted Supplicants from all the four Quarters of the World at the same time? Upon her great Festival-days, how many millions of Papists do at the same instant say unto her that Hymn, Ave Maris Stella, wherein are con∣teined these words, Thou that art the meekest of all, make us meek and chaste, grant unto us a holy life and safe jour∣ney. These and a hundred the like Expressions they use unto her. Now I pray observe; sure the Papists sup∣pose she can do this which they pray for, otherwise they are ridiculous to pray for it: so then they believe that she can work upon the hearts of her supplicants all the World over, making them meek and chaste, &c. at the same time; which was the Argument to prove the Dei∣ty of the Holy Ghost: doth it not in like manner prove the Deity of the Blessed Virgin? and doth not this their belief and practice make her a Goddess? and doth not this make them Idolaters in full measure? what did the Heathens more? Nay, doth not the praying to her or a∣ny other Saint at so vast a distance, and supposing them to hear, imply a Deity in them? Is not this far be∣yond the sphere of Activity in any Creature? Can any Creature hear their praying voice one quarter of a mile? sure then they must be of a Divine power, to hear so many millions and millions of miles; much more is it a Divine property to see the thoughts of their hearts at that distance, or indeed to see them at all, were they never so nigh; for God alone is the searcher of hearts: yet the Papists often offer up to them the meditation of their hearts, as well as the voice of their mouth, making both mental and vocal Prayer unto them; is not this

apparently to make them Gods? As for that rare excuse, That though the Saints hear not our prayers, much less see our hearts at this distance, yet they see all in God's infinite comprehensive Heart. Hold, I beseech you, whither are we come? to excuse Idolatry, I fear, with horrid Blasphemy; are the Saints then the searchers of God's Heart and know all his secrets? this is Dei∣ty in the highest degree: no, but God of his infi∣nite Goodness discovers this to the Saints: may I be so bold as to ask, who discovered this to the Pa∣pists? why, St. Francis, St. Dominick, St. Ignatius, and many others, in their Seraphical Meditations, have been rapt up into the third Heaven, yea, far high∣er than St. Paul, into the ninth Heaven, and have had this and much more reveiled to them. Pardon me, I humbly conceive, 'tis far more unlawful for these Seraphical Saints to utter these words, than it was for Saint Paul to utter what he heard in the third Heaven.

Sir, I hope neither you nor any rational Man will build his Faith and Salvation upon their vain Legends; well may they twattle these things to Children, not to seri∣ous Men who build their Faith on the infallible Word of God alone, where we find not one word of all this, but much to the contrary. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve; If God only, sure no other. Wherefore St. John in his Revelation tells us, how he was twice severely rebuk'd with a Cave, for his worshipping the Angel, See thou do it not, I am thy fellow-servant, worship God. But the Papists will needs have this to be a Complement only of humility in the Angel, to this great Apostle St. John; truly a very severe form of Complement; See thou do it not; which sounds to me rather a Threat than a Complement, and in the Original, the Greek sounds more a Threat than

our English expresses: and sure we should the rather take it so, because St. Paul doth so expresly forbid the worshipping of Angels, as a Will-worship according to to the Will and Doctrine of men, under pretence of humility, but is indeed out of Pride, vainly puff'd up in their fleshly minds, intruding into those things they have not seen, and obtruding them as saving Doctrines upon their ignorant Proselytes; which thing all that are god∣ly wise according to Scripture, must needs hold foolish and sinful, all being so fully laid out unto us by St. Paul Col. 2. and again, 1 Tim. 2. 5. There is one Mediator be∣tween God and man, the man Christ Jesus. Come unto me all ye that travel and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Call upon me in the time of trouble, and I will hear thee. The Scripture saith their is one Mediator between God and man, the Papists will needs have many, whe∣ther more foolishly or more sinfully 'tis hard to say: for, have they any Mediator more powerful, or more mer∣ciful, or more willing to hear and help them? nay, put the Power, the Love, the Mercy of all Saints and Bles∣sed Virgin together, is it greater, is it equal, is it near in any degree, can it add one degree to the infinite Power and Love and Mercy of Christ God and Man? is it not blasphemy to affirm it? is it not then great sin∣fulness, great madness to seek any other, as if he were not complete? as if he could not, or as if he would not do what he promises to do? Will not his Power, his Promises, his Command oblige these Self-will-wor∣shipping Papists to come to this One Mediotor? no, but they will go to others to their own wilful destruction. As for that poor weak excuse, That we may as well, or rather pray to Saints in Heaven to pray for us, than pray Men on Earth to pray for us, 'tis not worth the answer∣ing, the disparity is so great; for the latter is an act of mutual Charity, to which we are commanded; the for∣mer

an act of Religious worship which we are forbid∣den, as I have shewed. But had some great admirer of St. Francis here on earth then built a Church in his ho∣nour, erected an Altar, set him or his Picture on it, kneel'd down and prayed to him, had not this been gross Ido∣latry? The Idolatry is the same, and the folly greater, now he is in heaven, because there he neither hears nor sees their Devotion. Certainly, Sir, I need say no more in this point, but pass to another part of the Papists I∣dolatry, their worshipping of Images.

A Papist lately had the strange confidence (I will not say impudence) to put out a Pamphlet, wherein he af∣firmed, that they make no other use of Pictures and Sta∣tues, than meerly as Remembrancers of those persons or things they represent; and so when they enter the Churches or other places where they are set up they give them only some glancing looks to this end, far from any Worship; and to assure you of this, he farther adds, that when they are by age or accident decayed, so as not well to represent what they were made for, they cut them in pieces and burn them, as any other common Wood; so little reverence do they afford the Pictures or Statues themselves. What credit can you give such persons who so monstrously prevaricate? who ever yet saw the Papists burn any one ancient Picture, ever so decayed and defaced by Antiquity, but rather reverence it much more; as you may see by the anci∣ent Picture or Statue of the Blessed Virgin, reported to be made by St. Luke, whereof more by and by. Let us now see what passing glances they give to them.

Among the multitude of their various Devotions used on good Friday, this is one; A Crucifix which stands on the Altar, is taken down and laid on a Cushion, at the steps which ascend to the Altar; the Bishop or chief

Priest their present, falls down on his knees at a little distance from it, rising up and advancing a step or two, falls down again; the third time comes to the Cross, and there prostrate along kisses the Crucifix again and again, with all reverence and affection; and so the rest of the Clergy in order, and many other Devotees, as far as the time will permit: the mean while the Quoire chants forth a Hymn, Dulce Lignum, dulces Clavi, &c. Sweet Wood, sweet Nails, &c. Call you these passing glances, to prostrate on the ground and adore them? But I pray farther observe; the Crucifix stood before on the Altar, a place most conspicuous to be seen and put them in remembrance of Christ; were this all, as they falsly pretend, why then take it down? meerly to express their great devotion to it, by humbling them∣selves to the ground to kiss it.

But they will tell you this their Devotion is to Christ, for the honour done to his Image redounds to Christ: I answer, that's false however, that they use Pictures only as remembrances, and give them no Worship; for they confess a Worship to the Picture in relation to Christ, as we forsooth to the Kings Chair of State. What would the Papists have done without this Chair of State? 'tis a main Argument with them, and they are perpetually dunning our ears with it; and I shall in requital now dunn them, and shew their absurdity. First then, did they ever see any, the most observant Courtier (the King himself being personally present in some other part of the room) go up to the Chair of State, make his leg formally to that, or kneel down and kiss it, and if he did, would not all count him ri∣diculous? Yet the Papists do this to their Crucifix, Christ himself being both personally and corporally (as they believe) their present on the Altar in their Host; are not they then as ridiculous? Secondly, Do

men naturally of themselves perform this homage to the Chair of State, or by Court-order? Bring a Country Gentleman ever so rational, ever so civil, to Court; where at the Gate is erected (I will suppose it so for ar∣gument sake) a goodly Statue of the King, then carry him up to the Guard-Chamber where hangs a fair Pi∣cture of the King, then into the Presence-chamber where stands this Chair of State: Let my ceremonious Papist take this civil Gentleman and conduct him along, and say nothing to him of Court-order, but tell him, that's the King's Statue, that's his Picture, that's his Chair of State; if my Gentleman of himself take off his Hat, and make a Leg to the first, second or third, be he ever so devoted to Royalty, then take off my Head: but when he comes into the Presence-chamber, if his Conductor tell him, 'tis the Order of Court to put off the Hat where-ever he sees a Chair of State erected, as repre∣senting the Kings Majesty, no doubt but Reason and Ci∣vility both, will move him to observe Court-orders while he is there. But 'tis probable Reason may prompt this Country Gentleman to ask, why he must not as well put off his Hat to the Statue at the Gate, or Picture, so much more lively representing the King? I believe my Papist Conductor will scarce find any other reason∣able Answer to give him, than that there is a Court∣order for the one, and none for the other. 'Tis evi∣dent then that the Order only makes the Ceremony observed at Court, not the Chair of State: So if my Papist can shew me a Divine Order to kneel down, and prostrate my self to a Crucifix, in honour to Christ, I shall as readily do it as he, adore it, kiss it, hug it, any thing which God tells me is acceptable to his divine Good∣ness: But seing I cannot find any thing from God to this purpose, but much to the contrary, and that which seems to my poor Understanding as full and clear a

Prohibition as can be; Thou shalt not make to thy self a∣ny graven Image to bow down to it or worship it. And therefore the Popish Doctors (as you know Sir) do wisely in their Generation, dash out of their Deca∣logue this Commandment, and supply it by dividing the last of Coveting into two parts; pretending that this Commandment against Images was a meer Cere∣monial Command to the Jews, so prone to Idolatry, that it was not lawful for them so much as to make Pictures, which hath ever been allowed to Christians by all sober moderate persons. And I pray what sober moderate person will say it was unlawful for the Jews to make Pictures, seeing God himself appointed them to make some, but neither appointed nor allowed them to worship any, but absolutely forbad it; and therefore the Brazen Serpent, made by God's own appointment, was broken when worshipped; which clearly confutes Dr. Thorndick's supposal in his Nineteenth Chapter, That the Commandment only forbids the worshipping of I∣dols, that is by his interpretation, Statues set up in ho∣nour of false Gods: for the Brazen Serpent was not an Idol set up in honour of any false God, but in honour of a Mercy conferred by the true God; yet broken down when worshipped, contrary to this Command∣ment. And I pray you observe how this Serpent is ranked with the Images and Groves, and other Idola∣trous things destroyed by good Hezekiah. And what was the Idolatrous Worship given to this Brazen Ser∣pent? They did burn Incense to it, the very same the Papist Priests do to their Images of Christ, the blessed Virgin, and Saints. And ought they not likewise to be broken down as well as the Brazen Serpent set up in ho∣nour of the true God, and which is more, by the spe∣cial Command of the true God, which the Papists have not for their Images? Yet Dr. Thorndick will needs

have it, that there is no fear of Idolatry among Chri∣stians now, though we now see such gross Idolatry com∣mitted by them.

'Tis evident then that this Commandment concerns Christians as well as Jews and all Mankind; for give me lieve to say, that all Mankind always were, and will be, prone to Idolatry, as appeared by the gross Ido∣latrous Worship of the wisest Heathens of old, the Greeks and Romans; the Chineses and Papists now. We are by nature very sensual, much pleased with sen∣sible things, but averse to spiritual. To worship God in Spirit and in Truth is a sublime thing far above Na∣ture; this will always incline men to Idolatry and to worship God by sensible things, by Pictures and Ima∣ges, contrary to his Command. And you may be sure the Devil will be more forward to tempt Christians to it, than ever he was to tempt Jews or Heathens, his malice being more against us, which makes our danger of Idolatry greater than theirs, being as prone by Na∣ture, and more tempted by the Devil. This made St. Austin very averse to Image-worship, and gives the rea∣son in his Tract on, Psal. 113. Plus valent Simulacra ad curvandam infoelicem animam, &c. Images having the appearance of men, with eyes, ears, mouths, hands, and the like, do more deprave the minds of their Worshippers, and more encline them to Idolatry, than they are recti∣fied and kept from Idolatry, in that the Image doth not really see, hear, speak, and the like. 'Tis strange the Papists will allow this holy Father for a Doctor and Saint of the Church, for no man in the World can ar∣gue more against their Image-worship than he doth;' tis true his whole Discourse was intended against the Hea∣thens, because at that time there were no Christians that made use of Images by way of Worship, as now the Pa∣pists do; but his Arguments are as clearly and fully against

the Papists now, as they were against the Heathen then. The Heathens then told St. Austin, that they did not wor∣ship the Idol it self, but the Deity represented by it; just as the Papists say now; and St. Austin in effect replies to both: Let them excuse the matter how they please, yet their practice was abominable; for, saith he, the wor∣shipping of any thing by an Image, doth soon bring the Worshippers to forget the thing represented, and apply their whole Worship to the Statue representing, and come by degrees to be so affected to it, as to believe the very Statue sees, hears, and furnishes them with those things they pray for, The people set up a Statue in honour to the Sun, and at length turn their backs to the Sun, but their faces to the Statue; pray, offer Incense, sacrifice, and perform all their devotions to that. Here you have St. Austin's Opinion of Statue and Picture-worship, how by degrees it draws away the hearts of men from the Persons represented by them, and brings them at length to worship the Statues themselves. And this I∣dolatrous inclination of the people is very much ad∣vanced by the Popish Writers, who in their Legends mention several Statues and Pictures, which have moved and spoken to their Worshippers, and thereby have made the silly people run a madding, and as the Scrip∣ture phrases it, run a whoring after their Idols. So that St. Austin's Opinion is as fully verified among the Papist Christians, as ever it was among Heathens, as you will see by that which follows.

When our late King of blessed memory went into Spain, several of this Nation were Eye-witnesses of what I now relate; At Madrid, upon a Festival-day of the Blessed Virgin, the Bishop, Priests, with hundreds of Monks and Friars, and many thousands of the City, went in solemn Procession, carrying an Image of the Blessed Virgin under a rich Canopy of State, born by

several Noble persons, with innumerable Torches and Wax-candles born by others, the Priests and Religious Orders singing the Litany made to her, the houses and streets all along garnished, and here and there, at the house of some great person, much devoted to her, was erected an Altar most splendidly adorned, upon which the Image was set down to rest, and some Hymn made to her was there sung; mean while the Bishop and Priests putting Incense on Censers, offer it up to her: At length they came to a large place, where was an Altar on the one side, and a Theater on the other, magnifi∣cently set forth; the Image was placed on the Altar, the Bishop, Priests, &c. attending, the Actors come forth on the Theater, and begin a holy Comedy; the peo∣ple eager Spectators, forgetting their duty to their La∣dy on the Altar, flock round about the Theater; the Officers of Misrule with great indignation fall on the people fiercely, and forcing them to give place, make a Lane from the Altar to the Theater, that their Lady might have a full view of the Play; a pleasant Come∣dy indeed, and made all our English Protestants very merry: but some of the discreeter English Papists there present, were much troubled at this, supposing (with good reason) it would be laid home to their charge as gross Idolatry: for, just as Saint Austin saith, by the Papists great Devotion to this Statue, they came to be∣lieve it had seeing Eyes and hearing Ears, and so par∣takes much of this Comical entertainment; and if so, truly the Officers had just cause of indignation, to see the people so rudely rush between their Lady and the Theater. In the word of a Christian I affirm, that one of the discreeter English Papists, there present, told me this passage, and therefore there can be no doubt of the truth.

In the principla Church at Rome, dedicated to the

Blessed Virgin, called Sancta Maria Majore, The great holy Mary, is a most stately high Altar, and a little above it in the Wall is made a hollow place like a Ca∣binet, where is reserved a Picture, reported to be made by St. Luke, which is commonly shut up; but upon the special Feasts of the Blessed Virgin 'tis exposed to view, with store of goodly rich silver Lamps burning before it, the smoak whereof hath black'd and quite defaced the Picture; (is it therefore cast away into the fire? mark) on the Door of this Cabinet is another fresh and excellent Picture, lively representing the Blessed Vir∣gin; yet this is no way reverenced in comparison of the other: for when it is exposed, it is just as if God should visibly come down from Heaven; you may see persons of very good quality as soon as they come with∣in the Church-door fall down on their knees, and so on their knees go creeping towards this Picture, and when they approach near it, prostrate themselves on the Pavement, kiss the ground, then up again, stretch forth their hands towards it, groan and sigh as if they would breath forth and ejaculate their very Hearts unto it. What think you, Sir, of this? Again,

At that famous place Loretto, is reputed to be the ve∣ry House where the Blessed Virgin lived and nursed up our Saviour, transported thither by Angels; (Tur∣selin the Jesuit's History of this is a rare Romamce:) this is now converted into a Chappel, cased about with fine Marble, and stands in the middest of a fair Church built over it; this Chappel of the House hath an Al∣tar at one end divided from the rest, and above over the Altar an Image of the Blessed Virgin with our Sa∣viour in her arms, reported likewise to be made by St. Luke, no doubt of it, an excellent Painter and Sta∣tuarist, as well as Physician; this Image also, with the

continual smoak of Candles and Lamps, Gold and Silver of mighty value, is made as black as any Gypsie; insomuch that the Vulgar believe that she was made so by her abode in aegypt. To this Image they come in pilgrimage thousands of miles, leaving at home Pictures and Statues far more lively representations, but all is nothing to this. When men are in any danger by Sea, they vow some great offering for their deliverance, which hath filled several rooms there with a vast Trea∣sure (the Turks have long been greedy of this Prey:) the Devotion paid to this Image, by Pilgrims at their approach, is of the same stamp and rate, as the before∣mentioned to the Picture. There is at the upper corner of this little Chappel a Door, which lets men into the place railed in for the Altar, over which the Image stands: and to be let into this sanctum sanctorum, the holiest of holies, so near this divine Image (which is seen as well without) is a favour for which you must well reward the Door-keeper; this is the very Para∣dise of Souls, blessed is the man that enters here. And the reason why they pay this mighty veneration to this Image is, because of the gteat Holiness and wonder∣ful Vertue they fancy in it: so holy, as whatsoever touches it, receives wonderful and powerful Virtue from it: wherefore they humbly desire to have their Beads and Medals sanctified thereby, and give them to the Keeper of the Closet, who hangs them on a forked Staff reserved there for that purpose, and rubs them somewhat rudely on our Saviours and Ladies faces, and if he be more than ordinarily fee'd, their Faces also pay doubly for it, brush'd and box'd with the Beads, to extract the more Virtue out of them: If you ask, why so rude to their Faces? the Reason is, the rest is cover∣ed with rich costly Garments, whereof they have great variety, and on the great Festivals most magnifi∣cent;

all being the Oblations of Devotees on several occasions. If you ask again, why our Ladies Garments should not be able to confer Vertue, as well as her Statue? I must leave the Papist Priests to answer you, who reserve this divine Mystery close in their breasts; all that I observe and learn is, how divine a Power they attribute to this Statue, which is able to confer such Vertue to dead Beads, as to give them the same power over Devils, as our Saviour gave his Apostles. For a pair of these Beads put about the neck of any possessed by the Devil, he is not able to endure the Sanctity thereof, but crying and roaring rusheth forth. The Ephesian Image of Diana, which fell from Jupi∣ter, came much short of this; and therefore this much better deserves to be worshipped by the whole World, of Papists at least. And, Sir, never expect to be saved with them, unless you worship with them: though the Priests, to get you to them, will tell you there's no necessity of worshipping Images and praying to Saints, yet you must believe 'tis great Piety and pro∣fitable Devotion to do both. Now he that believes this with them, and yet will not worship with them sure deserves not Salvation, rejecting such helpful means; and if ever he be saved at length, he shall be sure to fry in Purgatory till Doomsday; who will pray for his Soul, who refuses to pray to our Lady, the Queen of Heaven and Earth, of Angels and Saints, &c.

I could go on to relate the like Devotion to seve∣ral other Statues of our Lady. as that of Sicham, Foy, Goodnews, &c. and some of other Saints; but this of Loretto carries the Bell clear away from them all; and I hope I have said enough to keep you far from them all: for by what I have said, you plainly see St. Au∣stin's words verified, of the Papists, as well as of the

Heathens, that the Papists think there is powerful Ver∣tue in the very Statues, and that the Statues furnish them with those things they pray for; why else do they make Vows and Pilgrimages to the Statue of Lo∣retto, more than to any other Statue they have at home? and the Blessed Virgin is as near them at home, as at Loretto: sure they believe the Blessed Virgin also a∣dores her own Statue at Loretto (as he that was ena∣moured of his own Picture in the water) and con∣fers favours on them for that Statues sake, because she is honoured for that Statues sake; 'tis evident, because they will not afford her those rich Oblations elsewhere, but she must go in Pilgrimage also to Loretto to receive them, and thank that Image for them; and so at length, as St. Austin saith, our Lady is set aside, and become the Shadow of her own Statue. God of his infinite mer∣cy open their blind eyes, that they may see the grosness of their Idolatry.

Setting this their Idolatrous Worship aside, I honour the Blessed Virgin with my heart, as much as any of them, and this they shall see, if ever I meet them before her the Blessed Mother of my Saviour, Blessed for ever. Amen.

There remains yet the Third part of Popish Idolatry, committed in adorning the consecrated Host at the Mass, which will require no further proof than the Confession of their prime Doctors; That this their Idolatry is as gross as ever any Heathens were guilty of, if there be no Transubstantiation. Now that there is no Transub∣stantiation in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, there is a large Volume learnedly written by Morton, Lord Bi∣shop of Durham, never yet answered. But you are not for such long Tracts and numerous Quotations; shall we then consider what the Scripture saith in this matter? where you conceive the Papists have more advantage

against us, than in any one point controverted between us. Indeed it were strange if in so many points in dif∣ference, they should not have some colour at least in Scripture for one or two. Let us see what Scripture they have for their Transubstantiation. A very clear one. Our Saviour taking Bread in his hand, said, This is my Body. Sure we believe our Saviour could change Bread into his Body, why then do not we believe that he did change it? I pray you give me lieve to make the like Argument to you. Our Saviour as positively said, I am the bread which came down from hea∣ven. Sure you believe our Saviour could change his Body into Bread, why then do not you believe he did so? Are we not upon equal Terms? If then you deny the latter to me, why may not I deny the former to you? You see how unconscionably they accuse us as a sensual and faithless Generation, that will not believe any thing beyond our Senses; do not we believe the Trinity, our Saviour's Incarnation, the Resurrection, and much more far above all Sense and Reason also? and should as readily believe this, were there any just ground for it in Scripture. But the Papists come upon us again and urge, doth not our Saviour say, Joh. 6. My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed, and much more in that Chapter? I must confess the words in this Chapter are far more pressing upon us than those in Matthew: This is my body, &c. for'tis apparent the words in John made many take them in a literal sence, as if Christ would give his very Flesh and Blood to be eaten and drunk; whereat many of his Disciples were much offended and went from him: but when at supper he said, This is my body, and gave it his Disciples to eat, no man was offended at it, or made any scruple to eat what he gave; which no doubt some one at least would have done, had they apprehended it to be his

very Flem. Thomas, who so hardly believed his Re∣surrection, often declared unto him before hand, and at∣tested to him by all the rest after, and the thing it self so much more easie for him to believe, that the Soul should enter the same Body but two whole days after death, when he had seen Lazarus raised after four dayes; doubtless this slow believing Thomas would have somewhat boggled at believing the bread con∣verted into Christ's Flesh, and to eat it; yet we do not find he or any other was startled at it, but swallowed it down as readily as the former meat; for our Saviour had before informed them, that the words he spake were spirit and life, therefore they ought not to be offended at them: all which makes me confi∣dently believe, they did not believe it to be Christ's very Flesh, but took the words as figuratively spoken, as you and all others do those words, I am the bread, &c. And I do as confidently believe, that had they be∣lieved wrong, our Saviour would have rectified their belief, and would have fully instructed them. But now, I beseech you consider those words in Joh. which are so much more pressing for a literal sence of Christs ve∣ry flesh given; if those by the Papist Doctors are taken in a figurative sence, and will not be endured by them in a literal sence, have you not much more reason to take those in Matthew in a figurative sence? The Papist Doctors dare not take the Words of St. John literally, because they so clearly condemn the taking away the Cup from the Laity, and denying them the Blood of Christ, which our Saviour there so abso∣lutely requires to be drunk by every one that will enter into Life. Now consider into what a strait the Papist Doctors have brought themselves into: if they take the words literally, their taking away the Cup is declared damnable to the Laity; if they

take them figuratively, their Transubstantiation is condemned as a grand Imposture. But, blessed be God, we are free from both, and fully confirmed in the figurative sence by St. Paul, 1 Cor. 11. 23. Where he tells the Corinthians that he delivered to them what he received of the Lord, who said, This Cup is the New Testament in my blood; which words differ much from those spoken by our Saviour, and are as different in the sence also, if taken literally; for they denote a change of the Cup into Christ's Blood, and therefore of necessity must and are taken by all figura∣tively, and then they signifie the same with our Sa∣viour's words: and I hope the Papists will not ac∣cuse St. Paul to have told the Corinthians a false story, and delivered that unto them which he never received of Christ. Sure you will rather stand up for St. Paul, and accuse their Transubstantiation of falsi∣ty. I could dilate on this Subject much more; but I love brevity as well as you, and when you desire more there is enough to be seen in Bishop Morton,. &e. The Conclusion is made by the Papist Doctors, that, there being no Transubstantiation, they are as great Idolaters in adoring the consecrated Hoste, as a∣ny Heathens ever were. God of his infinite mer∣cy preserve you from having any Communion with them.

I shall now end this business, as I began with Dr. Thorndick's Judgement thereon. He, in his Sixteenth Chapter, speaking of the Papists praying to Saints, saith, there was no such thing in use till a good while after Constantine the Emperour, who died Anno Dom. 350. so that, by this Computation, it must be a∣bout 400 years. And can any one in reason think it fit to venture on so dangerous a practice in Religi∣on,

unknown to the Church 400 years, when Faith was purest, Devotion most fervent, Sanctity most e∣minent, and when all helps to Salvation were most eagerly pursued, yet no praying to Saints practised; which is now come to that height, as Dr. Thorndick himself there calls it, A precipice of horrible danger; sor, saith he, they ask the same things of the Saints, and e∣specially of the Blessed Virgin, in the same terms in which they are desired of God, even in the holy Scripture. And this which the Doctor affirms, is most evident in their printed Books of Prayer; wherein though they some∣times mention the Saints Intercession (and this we do to Christ also perfect God) yet other times they pray to the Saints and Blessed Virgin directly for the things. Thus you see they make no distinction between God, Christ, Blessed Virgin and Saints in their form of Prayer or things prayed for. And is not this Ido∣latry, far greater than to sacrifice to them Bulls and Rams, to give them the divinest part of God's Wor∣ship? Is not this to deifie them in the highest degree? Is not this to worship false Gods? They make them Gods as much as ever the Heathens made their Heroes Gods, for the Heathens believed their Heroes to be mortal Men, they knew them living, they saw them dying, but for their great Virtues believed their Souls were carried up into heaven. and therefore worship∣ped God; is not this the very same that the Papists believe and do to their Saints? is their any difference but only this, that the Papists do not call their Saints Gods, which, as I shewed before, matters not? I say then again, that as the Heathens their Heroes, so the Papists make their Saints Gods; and sure they are no true Gods, therefore false Gods, and they wor∣ship these false Gods, are they not then Idolaters, according to Dr. Thorndick himself, and Scripture

also? Nor is this their Idolatry any way abated, but ra∣ther aggravated, in that they know and believe the true God; for the Heathens, who did not know the true God, were far more excusable in sacrificing and communicating the same Worship to several Gods, there being no great disparity between Jupiter, Mars, Apollo, &c. But for those that know one God, the Creator of all things, and that the greatest Angels, or Archangels, Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles or Martyrs, are but his Crea∣tures, of infinite degree inferiour to the Eternal Almigh∣ty God; the poor creeping Worm in the dust, is not so far inferiour to an Emperour of the whole Earth; I say then, for them, who know this infinite Almighty God, to give the divine Worship due unto him, to poor wretched creatures, and also to Pictures and Images, even to Stocks and Stones, is so high and presumptuous Ido∣latry, as Heathens, not knowing the True One God, never were, nor could be guilty of. And yet notwith∣standing all this, Dr. Thorndick would fain excuse them from Idolatry, because the Popish Church hath put forth a Profession of Faith more tolerable than their Practice; just as if the Papists having made some de∣claration of Allegiance to the King, should be acquitted of the Gunpowder-Treason, endeavouring to blow up the King, Queen, Prince, and Chief of the Kingdom at one clap. Truly by this Rule they may sacrifice to Baal, and be excused from Idolatry. I am amazed to find that so rational and sober a person should discourse so irrationally, so wildly: he hath fully verified the old Saying,

—Semel insanivimus omnes

As for your Postscript wherein you ask, why we should so much fear the Growth of Popery, if their Practi∣ces

be so gross and Idolatrous, as to be even ridiculous? I conceive 'tis in part answered already, where I shew∣ed how all Mankind is inclined to Idolatry. For sure no man is so simple as to think, this Vice ran in the Blood of the Jews more than any other Nations, but rather less; for they all came out of the loins of Abraham, the Father of the faithful, and consequently according to Nature should be rather better Believers than others: and therefore it is a very silly supposal, that the Command∣ments against Idolatry were intended more for the Jews than for any other Nation, but only out of God's special favour to them, and Fatherly care to preserve them more from it than other Nations; whom he suffered to run on in their natural blindness and sensual Worship, till the Fulness of Time came for the Conversion of the Gentiles: Then God was pleased to make them equal partakers of the Favours and Graces bestowed on the Jews; then was the Light both of the Law and Gospel manifested to all; and all Laws, not purely Ceremoni∣al (which were abolished in Christ) equally concerned all the Nations of the Earth, and ought to be esteemed as gracious helps to preserve us from things unlawful, not burthensom restraints from things lawful. Where∣fore Idolatry being so grievous a sin, and our Nature so prone to carnal and sensual Worship, Christians, who lie under so much a greater Obligation to serve God, should be so much the more careful to avoid all tem∣ptations to it; as the worshipping of Saints much more sutable to our carnal Nature, and more easily com∣prehended by us, than the spiritual Worship of the in∣comprehensible God; in which the sublimest part of Man, our Rational Faculty, labours hard, as we all find by sad experience, and can scarce keep our thoughts raised up and fixed on it two or three minutes. This makes the Papists so much inclinable to the more easie

Will-worship of their Fellow-creatures, and so expati∣ate in their Devotions to the Saints, as God is at length almost forgotten by them, and all his divine honours conferred on the Creatures. And so in like manner Sta∣tues and Pictures being things very acceptable to our Senses, and, as St. Austin observes, by them work so powerfully on our Minds, as to inveigle our hearts to give them also much of God's Worship, we should be extreme wary in the use of them, or having much con∣verse with those that use them; which made God so se∣verely forbid the Jews matching with other Nations. Evil communication corrupts good manners; very chaste persons, by degrees, become great Whoremongers and Adulterers, Terms in Scripture frequently given to Ido∣laters, to shew the Sympathy our Carnal Nature hath alike to both, and therefore ought to be restrained a∣like from both, and severe Laws to be made against both. The grossness of the Sin will never deterr our gross Nature from it, no nor the folly of it neither; Stultorum plena sunt omnia: a great part of the World consists of silly Women and Children, pleased with Toys, which makes the weaker Sex much incline to the trinketting Ceremonies of the Papists; and a great part of men are as weak as they; and as for the small remaining part of understanding men, their Reason is so deprest by their affection to their Wives and Chil∣dren, as they are content to go to Puppit-plays with the one, and ride Hobby-horses with the other. And when the general Current of mens Devotion runs this filly carnal course, and he thought to have no De∣votion that runs not with them, wise men will soon de∣viate into the same silly course, condemned by them∣selves, but applauded by others, rather than be con∣demned as irreligious by others, though applauded by themselves. If Socrates, the wisest Heathen in the,

World, and Solomon, the wisest Believer in the World, forsook their own Reason to sacrifice with the Vulgar and with Women; who may not be seduced into the like Error? so vain a thing is Man. He that loveth dan∣ger shall perish therein, Ecclus. 3. 26. Thus I have en∣deavoured to satisfie your Scruples, whereof if I have failed, yet sure I have satisfied your desires, requiring it at my hands, which I have obeyed, as,

SIR,

Your humble Servant.