band, to let them know, that they must not only avoid Idolatry it self, but all the least appearances and fufpitions of it by Heathen Compliances. Now if we compare this antient Idolatry of the Jews, with that of late charged by some mer. upon all Christians of the Roman Communion, I know not which will appear greatest, the Malice or the Folly of the Charge. It confifts of these three Heads. I. The Worship of Images. H. Adoration of the Hoft. III. Invocation.of Saints. All which are represented to the People as Crimes of the same Nature with the old Egyptian Idolatry. But as to the first, the Use of Images in the Worship of God, I cannot but admire at the Confidence of these Men, to make so bold a. Charge against them in general, when the Images of the Cherubim were commanded by God himself. They were the most solemn and facred part of the Jewish Religion; and therefore, tho Images, fo far from Idolatry, that God made them the Seat of his Prefence, and from between them de R livered 125 Dr. St. of livered his Oracles; so that fomething more is re quired to make Idolatry, than the use of Images. This Instance is so plain and obvious to every Reader, there being nothing more remarkable in all the old Testament, than the Honour done to the Cherubim, that 'tis a much greater wonder to me, that those Men, who advance the Objection of Idolatry so groundlefly, can so flightly rid them selves of so pregnant a Proof against it. It is objected, I remember, by a learned Adthe Idolatry versary, to the great Founder of this, and all other of the Church Anticatholique, and Antichristian, and uncharitable of Rome. Principles among us; but he turns it off fo carelefly, as if it were not worth his Notice. First, That they only directed their Worship towards the Images. Yea, they did so, as the Symbols of God's Prefence, and that is to Worship God by: Images, or to give the fame Signs of Reverence to his Representations, as to Himself. And therefore when David exhorts the People to give Honour to the Ark, he fays, emmin, bow down to, or wor shiphis Footstool, for It, or He, is boly And if fo much outward Worship may be gi ven to to Images, as Symbols of the Divine prefence, it is enough to justifie it. But however the thing stands, the cafe of all Images is the fame, and a Roman Catholique may make the fame Plea for his Church, as this Author does for the Jews; and if he accept it in one Cafe, he cannot 5 A re refuse it in another; or if he does, he will give but little proof of his Integrity. At least God was not fo nice and metaphyfical in enacting his Laws, by diftinguishing between bowing to, and towards; or if these Gentlemen fay, he was, they must shew us where: But what Authority do these Men affume to themselves, when by the precarious ufe of these two little Particles, they think to make the fame Act the Whiteft, and the Blackest thing in the World, towards an Image, 'tis innocent ; to it, Idolatry? But let them take which the please (for they are their own Carvers in all their own Controverfies) If it be no Idolatry to Worship towards an Image, after all their Frights, they fairly give up the Caufe to the Church of Rome, that requires no more. But the second Reply is much more curious and metaphyfical, That the Cherubims were not feen by the People, and adored but once a year by the High Prieft: Here then we diftinguish between the Idolatry of the Sight and the Mind; an Image seen is Idolatry, but if covered, 'tis none. So that to adore the Hoft exposed, is Idolatry; but in a Pix, 'tis none. What Rubbish is here to stuff out fo weighty an Argument! But if they did not fee their Images in the Ark, they knew them to be there, and of what Form they were, being described to them by God him felf in their Law. Upon these Terms it feems a R 2 Blind Blind Man can never be an Idolater; and if all the Romanists would shut their Eyes at convenient Times, they would quit themselves of this black Accusation. But the High Prieft used this Solemnity only once a year. If it were Idolatry, it was as unlawful once a year, as if done every day; and if lawfully done but once a year, it was no Idolatry: Its being seldom or frequent, makes no difference; it is either always Idolatry, or it is never fo. And yet these little Pretences are the last Result of this great Argument; and when we have loaded the greatest part of Christendom with the foulest Crime in the World, we think to make good the Accusation by such shameless Shifts and Pretences as these; for in these Trifles, the Difpute as to the Cherubim Images, ended; and yet the Clamour of Idolatry is kept up as high as ever to this very day. But what Images do the Roman Catholiques worship? Do they worship any Image or Symbols of False Gods, as the Supreme Deities ? If they do not, then they are innocent of the worst part of Idolatry. Or do they attempt to make a Similitude of the true God, or uncreated Divine Nature ? That is the other part of Idolatry, and the Scripture knows no more; therefore however superstitious they may be in their use of Images, yet they cannot be guilty of Idolatry, but upon one of these two Accounts, which no Man was ever yet so hardy as to charge upon that Church. cannot Till therefore it be proved that they worship Images of falfe Gods as the Supreme Deities, or that they worship the true God by Corporeal Images and Representations of his Divine Nature, there is no Footing for Idolatry in Christendom. As for the Adoration of the Host, till they can prove 'tis given to it either as a Symbol of a falfe God, or the Picture of the true one, howsoever faulty it may be otherwise, it can be no Idolatry. And as for the Invocation of Saints, unless they worship them as the Supreme God, the Charge of Idolatry is an idle Word, and the Adoration it self that is given to them as Saints, is a direct Protestation against Idolatry, because it supposes a Superior Deity, and that Supposition cuts off the very being Idolatry. But to give an Account of their precarious Notions of Idolatry, and their more precarious ways of proving it, would swell to Volumes ; and therefore at present I shall dismiss the Argument, and shall only observe what a Barbarous Thing it is to make the Lives, Fortunes and Liberties of the English Nobility and Gentry to depend upon such Trifles and Crudities, by remarking the unheard of and unparallel'd Penalties that are annexed to so slender a Law, viz.. That : 129 : |