Billeder på siden

should recollect that this Church is (in England) afraid so openly to command it as formerly. Let him apply to his God for instruction through the medium of his own word; and ere he treat with contempt the most contemptible Legend of his Church, let him assure himself that his every: day worship is derived from a purer source. Are not the devotions to the Virgin Mary—the festivals of her nativity, assumption, &c. &c. &c.—are not these all founded on the fabulous Legends we have already noticed? If they be not, where are they to be found in the Scriptures? We have Legends of the birth, parentage, &c. &c. of the Virgin Mary, among scores of others, now lying before us, as quoted by Jurieu, from Bartholomew of Pisa, Bernardin de Bustis, Pelbart de Temeswar, &c. &c. &c. What would Christians think of the impious Fable of Salome (we appeal to those who have read it), when she would satisfy herself of the Resurrection of the Virgin Mary, as related in the Protoevangelium (asserted to be written by St. James?!), were it to be published in their vulgar tongue?—Papists who are curious on this point we must refer to their priests--the tale is too gross for any persons but the clergy of that Church to repeat which could approve of their writing such Legends.

We close the subject of miracles by asking our Roman Catholic brethren, if their Church has not ever been most fruitful in her performance of them, when she had the least cause to be so; we mean, when in the height of her own power, in the very darkest ages of Christianity; and when a cruel death awaited the wretch who disputed it ?-But when humbled to the earth-when her Infallible Pontiff obsequiously bowed his neck to his “dearest son in Christ," as he called Bonaparte, who had invaded his territory_by whom he was immured in a prisonthen, when this “ Church' sunk at the feet of him who thus had spurned her, not one miracle could she accomplish to save herself from despair ! Is not this an evidence worth the consideration even of an 6. implicit,” whose stake on the infallibility of his doctrine is his own immortal soul? Let Papists also recollect, that the miracles wrought by our Lord and his Apostles were to effect great objects ; not one of which was performed for the mere purpose of astonishing or gratifying the vulgar.


What is your doctrine as to images ?

We hold that the images or pictures of Christ, of his blessed Mother ever a Virgin, and of other saints, are to be had and retained

and that due honour and veneration is to be given them. si

Do you not worship images ?

No, by no means, if by worship you mean divine honour; for this we don't give to the highest angel or saint, nor even to the Virgin !" Mary, much less to images.

Do you not pray to images?

No, we don't: because, as both our catechism and common sense teach us, They can neither see, nor hear nor help us.-Doway Catechism.

Why then do you pray before an image or crucifix ? :

Because the sight of a good picture or image, for example, of Christ upon the cross, helps to enkindle devotion in our hearts towards him that has loved us to that excess, as to lay down his life for the love

of us,

[ocr errors]

Are you taught to put your trust and confidence in images, as the heathens did in their idols; as if there were a certain virtue, power, or divinity residing in them!

No, we are expressly taught the contrary by the council of Trent, Session 25.

How do you prove that it is lawful to make or keep the images of Christ and his saints ?

Because God himself commanded Moses, Exod. xxv. 18, 19, 20, 21, to make two cherubims of beaten gold, and place them at the two ends of the mercy-seat over the ark of the covenant in the very sanctuary. “ And there,” says he, ver. 22, “ will I meet thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy-seat from between the two cherubims which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.” God also commanded, Numb. xxi. 8, 9, a serpent of brass to be made, for the healing of those who were bit by the fiery serpents; which serpent was an emblem of Christ, John iii. 14, 15.

But is it not forbidden, Exod. xx. 4, to make the likeness of any thing in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth 2"


[ocr errors]


hoangIt is forbidden 4 to make to ourselves " any such image or like

nessa that is to say, to make it our god, or put our trust in it, and give it the honour which belongs to God: which is explained by the following words, “ Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them,” (that is,

them," for so both the Septuagint and Vulgate translate it) nor serve them.” Otherwise, if all likenesses, 8 ? Were forbid by this commandment, we should be obliged to fling f; our sign posts, and deface the king's coin.

3,70 #29 What kind of honour do Catholics give to the images of Christ and his saints ?

-!;!", I! jpt? A relative honour.

(15 What do you mean by a relative honour?

By a relative honour, I mean an honour which is given thing, or not for any intrinsic excellence or dignity in the thing itself, but 9.1 barely for the relation it has to something else ;' as when the coure bou

tiers bow to the chair of state, or christians to the name of which is an image or remembrance of our Saviour to the ear, as

court It crucifix is to the eye. Of 3

Have you any instances of this relative honour allowed by Pro

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

en to a thine?

-* testants


[ocr errors]

m. for

Yes: in the honour they give to the name of Jesus, to their churches, to the altar, to the Bible, to the symbols of bread and wine 10 in the sacrament. Such also was the honour which the Jews gave to e the ark and cherubims, and which Moses and Joshua gave to the

land on which they stood as being holy ground,” Exod. iii. 5. 1959 Jos. v. 15, &c.

How do you prove, that there is a relative honour due to the images or pictures of Christ and his saints N From the dictates of common sense and reason, as well as of piety and religion, which teach us to express our love and esteem

the persons whom we honour, by setting a value upon all things that b belong to them, or have any relation to them: thus a loyal subject, 9 a dutiful child, a loving friend, value the pictures of their king,

father, or friend; and those who make no scruple of abusing the i image of Christ, would severely punish the man that would abuse the image of his king. Dal Does your church allow of images of God the Father, or of the blessed Trinity

711 --221 Our profession of faith makes no mention of such images as these ai yet we don't think them unlawful, provided that

under96 stood to bear

any likeness or resemblance of the divinity, which cange not be expressed in colours, or represented by any human workmanslı

ship, For, as protestants make no difficulty of painting the Holy b Ghost under the figure of a dove, because he appeared so when Christ e 10 JI

005 Ova

і : : 13.3 i uuj biz9:

[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

-se was baptized, Matt. iii. 16, 'so" we make no difficulty of painting God 1. the Father under the figure of a venerable old man, because he ap***.peared in that manner to the prophet Daniel vii. 9.

9v tuli brA saving " ifis again summoned by the Pope to support his logical, or, if not, anything but scriptural, reasonings ; however, the worship of, and praying to, images is positively denied. In the first place, we beg to ask any Romish Priest, what it is intended should be understood by coram hac Imagine? We suppose it to mean, before this Image? and in Papal consecrations of the images of their Saints, it is said, that the boon sought is to be obtained by the worship of the Saint addressed, in the above terms; and to which objeet the image is blessed and sanctified. Prayers are to be offered before particular images in particular places for particular purposes. Why otherwise are, or were, pilgrimages made to Loretto, &c., for the purpose of addressing an image, or praying before that image, when fifty similar statues stood silently upon their pedestals, equally sensitive as to the degree of “ veneration " paid to them, at home? - The Pope, we think, need not have referred his admirers to the Council of Trent (at which he presided). Not one in a hundred of them know the “ Grounds of their Faithnow before them, as he has written it for their edification ; but if Papists are not.“ as the heathens” to trust in their images, as if there were a certain power or virtuein them, how is it to be understood that by consecration they become a means of grace ? The idolatry of the heathen never led him to suppose that the image he bowed to was the original which it representedthe heathens were not so foolish as to imagine any such thing; they paid a “veneration ” to, and worshipped before, their images ; "and when we see the Papists kneeling to, and kissng logs of wood and blocks of stone chiselled into particular shapes, in what other way can it be understood. The precise difference (if any exist) between a Dedication of the one, and a Consecration of the other, we do not think it of sufficient importance to inquire into.

II. When God told Moses tó" place the two Cherubim over the Ark, is it intended to imply that these were to be worshipped or venerated more than the table of Shittinwood, the candlestick, or any other ornament or furniture it was to contain ? Certainly not ; this is one of the most lame of miserable excuses made by Popery for offering her devotions to stocks and stones, which are alone due to the Almighty God. We admit that the “Grounds of Faith "before us says, it is recorded in the 25th Session of the Council of Trent, that the doctrine of the Papist and the Pagan are different, as regards their image-worship. Without disputing this point, we must positively assert that we have witnessed, in Popish chapels, all the external signs of worship that humanity can evince, shown towards their statues ;-we have seen them kissed, knelt to, embraced, wept over, and have heard them called “ Blessed,” &c. Nor shall we say more on this part of our subject, than if this worship (which 'we have often witnessed) was not from the heart—even towards a mistaken object-little can be said for the sincerity of the ado

Sure we are that, if Romanists had read the Scriptures, many of the Pope's extracts had not been made-the Brazen Serpent, alluded to by Pius, is one of these.

Christ says of himself, in the text referred to, that as Moses lifted


the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the son of man be

It is true that God commanded this Brazen Serpent to be made which He, in his mercy, appointed a means of grace for accomplishing miraculous cures to the penitent in the wilderness; but let us see how far these means of grace, appointed by God himself, will justify those things, impiously, we think, made, and so called by Popery. According to the Jewish chronology, the Brazen Serpent was made about A. M. 2552; but in the days of the good king Hezekiah, between 700 and 800 years afterwards, about A.m.3294, the people paid it an idolatrous worship. The children of Israel did burn incense to it (2 Kings xviii. 4), when the king broke it to pieces, calling it-since the people had made it


lifted up

« ForrigeFortsæt »