« AnteriorContinua »
the Name of Jefus, and to the Chair of State. Chap. 2. For where no Law is, there is no Tranfgreffion, Questio Rom. iv. v. 15.
Scholars therefore know, or may know, that the Difpute concerning the Worship of IMAGES of Chrift and his Saints, is only or chiefly a Question about Words. For if Worhip, or religious Worship be taken in the Proteftant Sense, for fovereign and divine Worfhip we neither worship Images, nor any Creature, but God alone.
But if under the name of religious Worship, you comprehend a relative and inferior Ref pect, which may be given to Creatures on the Motive of Religion: Jofuah, and the Elders of Ifrael, worship'd the Ark, Jof. vii. v. 6; Proteftants worship the Altar, when they bow towards it; they worship the Sacrament, when they fhew a Refpect for it, and receive it kneeling; they worship the Bible, when they kiss it in the Court. And in this Senfe only Catholicks believe, that the Images of Chrift, and of his Saints, may be lawfully worship'd.
Hence Scholars alfo know, or may know, that the Controversy about the worshipping of Relicks is a Difpute about Words.
They know, or may know, that, if the Saints pray for us (which cannot be question'd with any appearance of Reafon) it is both lawful and profitable, to beg of God, that we may partake of their Prayers. And when Catholicks fay, Holy Mary Mother of God, pray for us; S. Peter, pray for us, and the like; Catholick Faith obliges them not to mean any more than this: Ŏ God, may I partake of the Prayers of the B. Virgin Mary: O God, may I H 2 partake
Chap. 2. partake of the Prayers of S. Peter, &c. So that Queftio the Invocation of Saints is alfo chiefly or only
a Question about Words.
They know, or may know, that if Rome is meant by Babylon; what is printed in large Characters Apoc. xvii. v. 5, as if it belong'd to the Church of Rome, was only meant of Heathen Rome, or of PAGANISM at Rome, which the Church of Rome destroy'd. And will ingaging the People make Amends for perverting the Text? If the word of God may be treated with this Freedom; how would this Sentence glare in a Quaker's Bible, CHRIST SENT ME NOT TO BAPTIZE, I. Cor. i. v. 17, and this in an Arian Bible, MY FATHER IS GREATER THAN I, S. Jo. xiv. v. 28? But this is indeed to debase the word of God, to make Truth Subfervient to Falfhood, and to adulterate 'the Text, by making it to be both Text and Comment. A Stratagem, which Error may allow, but Religion cannot.
How is invincible Ignorance to be bad? ANSWER, Tit, is to fly from it'; and to HE the only Way to have
ufe all due Endeavours to know our Duty, and all the Parts and Branches of it. For invincible and involuntary Ignorance is the fame thing.
Or, if the word voluntary, be taken in a more limited Senfe, for that which is only vo
luntary in the Caufe; invincible Ignorance is Chap. 2. that, which is neither affected (that is, exprefs- Questi ly defign'd) nor voluntary.
Hence it appears, first, that thofe, who defire and endeavour to be ignorant of their Duty, cannot poffibly have invincible Ignorance of it. For in these Ignorance is affected, and Diabolical.
Secondly, It is alfo impoffible for those, to have invincible Ignorance, who do not use all neceffary Endeavours to know their Duty. Because, it is manifeft, that this very Neglect makes their Ignorance voluntary.
Thirdly, 'Tis plain, that a Person may read the Scripture daily, and yet may have a voluntary, and criminal Ignorance of many Parts of his Duty. Because he may have false and unjuft PREJUDICES, both against the Sense of the Scripture it self, and against its Orthodox and true Interpreter, the H. Catholick Church. For no true Senfe of Scripture can be contrary to that, in which it is, and has been underftood by her in all Ages fince the Apostles,
THE CATHOLICK COMMUNION is the Communion of thofe, who are known by the Name of CATHOLICKS, and who have had this Name (1) in all Ages.
HIS will Sufficiently appear, by the
Can the Catholick Church be in feparate Communions, as in that of Catholicks, of Proteftants, of Modern Greeks, &c?
HIS our Adverfaries affert : but whether by Inclination, or by Neceffity, I fhall not determine; Tho' I cannot but Sufpect the latter. For, if it be a general Rule, that there is no Salvation out of the Catholick Church, as was prov'd in the firft Chapter; how can a Proteftant be Sav'd? How can he be a Member of the Catholick Church? The Rock is plain. How is it to be avoided?
For this, two Courfes may be affign'd. The frft, by holding, that Proteftants are the WHOLE
(1) See the true Church of Chrift, in Answer to Mr. Lelly, Tom. I. pag. 112, &c.
Catholick Church, the Church of all Nations, Chap. 3. and the Church of all Ages: and that this Queft.1. Church, altho' it be always in Being (for (1) bebold I am with you always, fays Chrift, even to the end of the World) is not always VISIBLE: for in the fifteenth Century, and upwards, there was no known Society of Proteftants on the Earth. The fecond Courfe is, by holding, that the Catholick Church may be, and is, in separate and diffenting Communions, as in that of Catholicks, of Proteftants, of Modern Greeks, &c.
The first of these two Roads was not thought fafe enough, tho' fome bold Sailors have attempted it. And therefore our Adverfaries chufe rather to venture their Salvation on the fecond. Which to me feems equally unfafe, whether we confult the Scripture, the Tradition of all Ages, or common Sense.
II. The Scripture feems very clear. For ift, S. Paul tells us, that (2) without Faith it is impoffible to pleafe God: And, that there is only (3) one Body, and one Spirit, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptifm. So that, as there is only one Lord, and one Baptism; there is only one true Faith. And as the Church of Chrift upon Earth has only one H. Spirit: So fhe is only one Body. From whence these Confequences may be drawn.
First, that Catholicks, Proteftants, and modern Greeks, have not all of them the faving FAITH, without which it is impoffible to please God. For this Faith, according to S. Paul, H 4
(1) S. Mat. xxviii. v. 20. (2) Hebr. xi. v. 6. (3) Eph. iv. v. 4, 5.