A brief reply to a late answer to Dr. Henry More his Antidote against idolatry Shewing that there is nothing in the said answer that does any ways weaken his proofs of idolatry against the Church of Rome, and therefore all are bound to take heed how they enter into, or continue in the communion of that church as they tender their own salvation.

The Reply.

To the first I Reply, That it is a witty fetch to require of me an Instance of connivence at a fault which, as soon as it is known, is no interest of them that are to punish it to connive any longer at it. For those smiling, lowring and eye-rowling Images, so soon as they are deprehended to be such by Art and not by Miracle, they loose the effect they are intended for, which is to bring more plenteous Oblations to the Church. But for as much as these tricks of the Images cannot but be known to the wise of the Clergy, the Bi∣shop and others under him, to be tricks and not Miracles, and they suffering them till open disco∣very or complaint, why may they not be said to connive at them? or why was I bound to bring an Instance of their connivence in so short a

Treatise, more than my Adv••rsary of any sharp Cen∣sure of their Church against these Impostures? which he being deficient in••, I will help him with one Instance here in our own Nation in the time of Popery.

In the Abbey Church at Boxley there were two famous Images, one of St. Rumwald, a stone sta∣tue of the bigness of a little boy, the other was called the Ro••d of Grace. There was no admission here but upon a treble Oblation, one to the Con∣fessor, the other to St. Rumwald the touch-stone of clean life, and the last to the Rood of Grace. Now to those that offered frankly to St. Rumwald it was most easie to lif•• him; but on the contrary (by reason of a pin which the keepers could put in and take out at their pleasure) to those that offered faintly, it was immovable. So that it was a plea∣sant spectacle to the by-standers, to see a great lubber not able to lift that which a boy or a girle had taken up before. But he was made heavy to those whose Offerings were light, and light to those whose Offerings were more weighty. But they having passed this tryal of clean life, they then were admitted to the Rood of Grace. In which Image stood a man inclosed, and with many wyres made the Image goggle with the eyes, and nod the head, move and shake the jaws, according to the value of the gi••t that was offered. If it was a small piece of silver he would hang the lip. If it were a piece of gold then would his jaws go right merrily. Thus were the people abused and begui∣led for a certain time.

I but you will say, certainly some of the Pre∣lates, so soon as it was discovered, severely punished the Imposture. Nay I will tell you more, One of the Prelates discovered it, namely Arch∣bishop Cranmer, and the Image with all its engins was openly shewed at Pauls Cross, and torn in pieces by the people. Did not I tell you so? will my Adversary reply; But in the mean time let me tell him again, that it is well known how incli∣nable then Archbishop Cranmer was to Protestant∣ism, if not a Protestant in his judgement. But we speak of the Connivence of the Popish Clergy in this point, and desire one Instance of any such discovery of Imposture by them, that could any longer have been concealed. And if not, where is the Calumny of Connivence?

And for the Prayer to the Veronica, be it no part of any Ecclesiastick Office, yet it is in your approved Devotion-books, such as Hortulus Ani∣mae; and this Veronica is showd solemnly once a year to the people to spend their devotion on; and lastly Pope Iohn the 22d. is said to have granted a thousand years indulgence to them that repeat the whole Prayer, of which I have set down but a third part.

And in the last place, For that he says, The praying before the Ark to God Almighty (which Ark and the things in it and about it are wood) may as well be said to be talking with stocks and stones as the praying before the Image of a Saint and the Cross in such formes as are used to them, is a most sensless and absurd speech, to

say no worse. For the disparity is manifest. For did the Jews ever say, O Ark hear me, or, O Cherubims hear me. But here is plainly speaking to the Cross, which is but a piece of wood, (in this form) Hail O Cross our onely Hope, increase righteousness to the righteous, and pardon our sins. Besides, neither Ark nor Cherubim was in their sight to speak to, But the Image of St. Peter, or the Blessed Virgin is before their eyes, and they bear the names of these Saints, (as the Image of Christ does his; of which one Johannes in the Nicene Council declares, if any one call it or inscribe upon it, This is Christ, he does nothing amiss therein) and are as it were these very Saints represented to us in Figure and Person; and therefore when we speak to these wooden Personages, saying, O blessed Virgin, O holy St. Peter, &c. is not this infinitely more like talking to stocks and stones, then when the Jews having their faces toward the Ark, which yet was vailed from them, mentioned God alone? nor was there any wood-work, nor stone-work there, that was called God or Jeho∣vah. But what will not they say, that are in a bad Cause, to make a show to desend them∣selves?

But for O Crux ave spes Vnica, he would excuse the gross absurdity of it, (For none can excuse the Idolatry, when they yield Latria to the true Cross and contend what kind of Religious Worship is due to the Type of it) by saying that by Crux here is not meant the Cross but Christ crucified on the Cross. So that it is but a figurative speech,

The Cross for Christ upon the Cross, Metonymis subject••; as it is used, 1 Cor. 1. 18. For the preaching of the Cross is to them that perish foolishness, that is, says he, Christ crucified on the Cross. But it is immediately in the former verse, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, left the Cross of Christ be made of none effect, Then immediately follows, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is plainly an Ellipsis, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is to be understood 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, And so the whole is, For the preaching of the Cross of Christ, &c. As it is taken, Gal. 6. 24. God forbid that I should glory in any thing saving in the Cross of our Lord Iesus Christ, whereby the world is crucified to me, and I unto the world. This is that which is foolish∣ness to them that perish, but the Power of God to them that are saved. So that there is no ground for a Metony••nia Subjecti, when an Ellipsis is so naturally understood, which will not at all serve his purpose. And the Metonymy indeed very poorly.

For it does not follow, because by a figurative speech the Subject may be put for the Adjunct; or the Symbol for the Person it is compared to in speech, that therefore we may (and yet seem to be in our wits) make Prayers or speeches to these Subjects or Symbols. The Cherubims are the seat of the Divine Presence; should the Jews therefore have said by a Metonymy, O golden Cherubims come and help us? And because men talk of the infallible chair at Rome, meaning the Popes, would any but a mad man propound questi∣ons to the chair, and not to the Pope himself,

to be resolved? And our Saviour Christ says, Apoc. 22. I am the bright morning Star, which is a figurative speech; Can therefore any one with eyes and hands lift up to the morning Star, say unto it, O bright morning Star illuminate my un∣derstanding, increase righteousness to the righte∣ous, and pardon our sins, but he will be lookt upon as an Idolater and Star-worshipper? and to say he means Christ the morning Star will not ex∣cuse him from mere madness and delirancy, if it could from Idolatry. And how much better, I pray, is it to speak to a piece of wood? nay, to the figure of another piece of wood? For Christ was not crucified on the wood they speak to. But by speaking to this piece of wood, they would be understood to speak to another piece of wood on which Christ was crucified at Ierusalem; nor yet to that piece of wood neither, but to Christ hanging on the wood, and that now at such a time as he is off of the wood, and is in Heaven to be spoke to himself as a gracious Intercessor, that we may not call on this stock or that stone, but make our immediate addresses to him in word and heart, that he would be graciously pleased to intercede with his Father for us.

To all which you may add, That comparing this passage of the Prayer with that which goes before, Arbor decora & fulgida, Electa digno stipite Tam sancta membra tangere; Beata cujus brachiis secli pependit pretium, and how within a line or two after follows, O Crux ave spes Vnica, &c. it is demonstratively plain, that it is the Cross it

it self, not Christ meant in this passage; unless you will make Christ his own Cross to hang upon, and make him distinct from his own Body and members. Whence the Absurdity and Ido∣latry of this devotion is most clearly manifest, and that it is no Calumny to charge them with it. The rest of this Section is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 if you will, and I will leave my Anta∣gonist to injoy himself in the reek and perfume thereof.