A preservative against the change of religion, or, A just and true idea of the Roman Catholick religion, opposed to the flattering portraictures made thereof, and particularly to that of my Lord of Condom translated out of the French original, by Claudius Gilbert ...

ARTICLE IV. That the Worship forbidden of God, cannot terminate in him.

BEhold the Second Principle of that Union, which my Lord of Condom propounds; it's, That the Religious Worship in the Pag. 17. Church of Rome terminates in God. If the Honour she gives to the Holy Virgin, and the Saints, may be called Religious, it's because it relates necessarily to God. He would conclude thence, That in retaining our Principle, that every Religious Honour is to be related to God, we can, without hurt to our Conscience, partake of the Worship of the Roman Church, seeing that she teaches, That every Religion•• Worship is to be referr'd to God, as to its necessary End.

1. I wish that my Lord of Condom had cited to us some Text of the Council of Trent, which might assure us, That all Religious Worship is terminated in God. I see there, that we must invoke Saints, because they reign with Jesus Christ, and because they intercede for us, &c. I read there no more. I conceive there is a little difference between invoking a Saint for reference to God, and terminate a Religious Worship to God. It's true, that the Roman Chuch invokes Saints by respect to God, that is to say, because they are the Saints of God, because they govern under God, be∣cause they have merited with God▪ because they inter∣cede before God for Men. If those Saints should have no relation to God, no doubt Men would not serve them. But is not this to impose visibly upon the

World, to say, That because of that all Religious Worship is terminated in God? Because that a Favou∣rite hath the Princes Ear, that he disposes of the places of the State, under his Authority, that he ob∣tains of him what he will, he is courted, a thousand Homages are done to him; do those Honours termi∣nate in the Prince because of that? Is he bound to own them and regard them, as if done to himself? A Man that would say such a thing, would not he render himself ridiculous? Who ever heard, that Worship doth not terminate in that Person which is the immediate Object thereof? Those Gentlemen conceive, that they have right to say what they please, and that we are bound to believe them on their Word.

2. But though it should be the Intention of those that invoke Saints to terminate all their Worship in God, would that Intention suffice to effect the thing? If it were so, there would never have been any Ido∣laters, that is to say, Persons that had adored Images or Idols. For there was never any Religion so bru∣tish, as to terminate their Worship upon Brass or Wood, Silver or Gold, whereof the Image is com∣pounded. If any Person have done it, it must not be imputed to the Religion. Those Idolaters referr'd their Worship to the Deity, which was represented by the Idol. The Israelites had not offended God in the Worship of the Golden Calf; for it's as certain, as any thing can be so, that their Adoration was referr'd to that God, who had brought them out of Egypt, whom they had design to adore under the Sign of that Calf. In fine; A Man that should take a Tree, a Dog, a Horse, and should adore him, referring his Worship to God in his Intention, would not be guilty, for his Worship would terminate in God. We must know then, that to the end our Adoration may ter∣minate

in God, it suffices not that it be the Intention of him that adores; but God must accept that Ado∣ration. Nothing terminates in God, but what God is willing to receive. It's useless to have an Intention to serve God by certain Actions, if those Actions be con∣demn'd of God; they are against him, and not for him.

Methinks I have read, in the very Theology of those Gentlemen, That the infinite Baseness of Sin arises from its establishing our last End different from God. So every Sin, so far as in it lies, snatches away God from his Throne, in taking away from him the Title of Ultimate End, to give it the Creature; and that is an infinite Crime. But what shall we say to so many Actions Criminal, that have God's Honour for their Object? Of those Bloody Persecutions which have shed the Blood of the Faithful, with the Thought, That they did therein Service to God? Of so many Superstitions, which have been practised to the Ho∣nour of the Deity? How can those Crimes be accu∣sed of setting up another End, besides God, seing they are done in honour to God? It's nevertheless certain, that those Actions do not terminate in God; and there is no other reason for it, but that he abhors them, and hath forbidden them. They terminate then in the Vanity of their Imaginations, and in the Illu∣sions of the heart of those false Zealots, and of that bad Devotion, and do not reach God. Semblably, the Worship that Men render to the Creatures, with In∣tention of referring it to God, is carried out to the Creatures themselves, because that God suffers it not to reach unto himself.

Here my Lord of Condom makes a Course into Antiquity, and will draw his advantage from thence, in that we acknowledge, That Men began to invocate Saints about the end of the Fourth Century. But that

is a Proof, and not an Explication. I have not ob∣liged my self to follow him through all. I'le only say, That then they did not invocate Saints, as they do at this day. They did not pray to them in the Ordi∣nary Service. They constrained none thereto, they did not build Temples to them, they did not Sacrifice the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ to their honour. Moreover, we profess, that we will only imitate the Apostles and their immediate Successors.