Beveridge on Article XXII: Of Purgatory

blood : yet so as that Christ is wholly contained under the form of bread, and wholly under the form of wine; yea, and under every part of the consecrated host and consecrated wine, after separation, the whole Christ is contained ;” both con- ’ trary to art. XXIV.

But it would be an endless thing to reckon up the many errors of the papistical, falsely called general and cecumenical councils. Some of the many errors of the Tridentine council I have written down, art. XIX. Many more, both of that and other councils, I might record here: but these already rehearsed are both great and many enough, from whence to conclude, that general councils may, yea, and have erred.

The Romish doctrine concerning purgatory, pardons, worshipping and adoration, as well of images as of relics, and also invocation of saints, is a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God.

N this article we have several of the Romish inventions

crowded up together. I shall single them out one after another, that so, though I speak but briefly, I may speak clearly to them all.

And first therefore to encounter with that which stands in the forefront of the battle, and that is Purgatory; of which it is here said, that the Romish doctrine concerning it is a fond thing, repugnant to the Word. Now to handle this aright, there are two things to be done; first, to shew what is the Romish doctrine concerning it ; and secondly, to shew what a fond and false thing it is. As for the first, what the Romish doctrine concerning purgatory is, I think it cannot be better explained than by the Romish doctors themselves, who tell us in the council of Trent, 4“ If any one say, that after the grace of justification received, the fault is so pardoned to every peni- tent sinner, and the guilt of eternal punishment is so blotted out, that there remains no guilt of temporal punishment to be

[…]

Arr. XXII. Of Purgatory. 401

done away in this world, or that which is to come in purga- tory, before the passage can be opened into heaven, let him be accursed.” And elsewhere they say, » “ There is a purgatory, and that the souls detained there are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the sacrifices of the accept- able altar.” So that, as Bellarmine saith, ¢“ Purgatory is a certain place, in which, as in a prison, the souls are purged - after this life, which were not fully purged in this life, to wit, that so they may be able to enter into heaven, where no. unclean thing enters in.”

Thus we see in few words what the Romish doctrine con- cerning purgatory is. Now that this doctrine is a fond thing is plain, in that by ¢the confession of some of their own writers there is little or no footing for it in the scriptures ; nay, if we examine it by scripture light, we shall find it so far from being grounded upon scripture, that it is directly contrary to it; for the scriptures say, The dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward ; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished ; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun, Eccles. ix. 5, 6: whereas this doctrine saith quite contrary, that when they are dead they have a part or portion in the prayers of the faithful and the sacrifices of the altar. Again, the scripture makes mention but of a twofold receptacle of souls after death, the one of happiness, the other of misery, 1/Sam. xxv. 29. Matt. vii. 13, 14. viii. 1]. Luke xvi. 22, 23: whereas this doc- trine brings in a third, called Purgatory, betwixt heaven

[…]

¢ Purgatorium est locus quidam, in quo tanquam in carcere post hance vitam purgantur anime, que in hac vita non fuerunt plene purgate, ut nimirum sic in ccelum ingredi va- leant, quo nihil intrabit coinquina- tum. Bellar. de purgat. 1.1. ¢. 1. [vol. IL. p. 699.]

4 Quanquam fortassis unam ali-

quam scripturam, que protervien- tem adigat, ut velit nolit confiteatur purgatorium, in promptu non sit adducere; potest esse nihilominus illic aliqua, tametsi diligentissimos inguisitores hactenus illa latuerit. Roffen. contra Luth. art. 37. [Fis- cher. p. 718.] Minus apertas, minus efficaces esse, et minus probare au- toritates scripturee quee a doctoribus afferuntur, illis itaque non esse uten- dum ad probandum purgatorium.

. Petrus a Soto de instruct. sacerd.

lect. 1. [p. 205. ] pd

402 Of Purgatory. . Arr,

and hell, half happiness and half misery. Again, the serip- ture saith, The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth, or purgeth us from all sin, 1 John i. ‘7; but this doctrine would persuade us, there are some sins which are to be purged away by the prayers and good works of others. ‘To name no more, the scripture saith, He that believeth shall not come into condem- nation, but pass from death to life, John v.24; and therefore St. Paul saith, ¢ [am in a strait between two, having a desire to depart and to be with Christ, Phil. i. 23. So that St. Paul reckoned verily upon it, that so soon as ever he was dead he should be with Christ, no sooner absent from the body but present with the Lord, 2 Cor. v.8. Whereas this Romish doe- trine about. purgatory bids him not to be so hasty, for he might depart,and yet not be with Christ neither ; he might pass from death, and yet not to life ; he might and must be absent from the body a good while before he be present with the Lord; he might go from earth yet not to heaven, but to purgatory, a place St. Paul never dreamed of. So that this doctrine directly contradicts the scripture. The scriptures say, we shall pass from death to life; this doctrine saith we shall not pass from death to life, but to purgatory: the serip- ture, that when we are absent from the body we are present with the Lord; but this doctrme, when we are absent from the body we are not present with the Lord: the scripture; that when we depart we shall be with Christ; this doctrine, that when we depart we shall be in purgatory: the scriptures, that we must go directly from earth to heaven; but this doe- trine, that we must go about by purgatory, first going from life to death, then from death to purgatory, and from purga- tory to heaven.

And as this doctrine herein doth contradict the scriptures, so doth it contradict the Fathers too. For Origen saith, f< We, after the labours and strivings of this present life,

© Christum ledimus cum evoca- tos quosque ab illo quasi miseran- dos non equanimiter accipimus. Cupio, inquit apostolus, recipi et esse cum Christo. Quanto melius ostendit votum Christianorum? Er- go votum, si alios consecutos impa-

[…]

Origen. contra Cels, 1.6, [20. vol. I.]

XXII. Of Purgatory. 403 hope to be in the highest heavens,” not in purgatory. And so St. Chrysostome ; $ “ For those that truly follow virtue, atter they are changed from this life they be truly freed from their sightings, and loosed from their bonds: for death to such as live honestly is a change from worse to better, from this transitory to an immortal and eternal life that hath no end.” And Macarius, speaking of the faithful, […] saith he, “they go out of their bodies, the quires of angels receive their souls into their proper places, to the pure world, and so lead them to the Lord.” Whence Athanasius saith, ’“‘To the righteous it is not death, but only a change; for they are changed from this world to an eternal rest. And as a man would come out of prison, so do the saints go from this troublesome life to the good things prepared for them.” Certainly these Fathers were no Purgatorians, who so unani- mously affirmed the souls of the saints to go directly from earth to heaven, never touching upon purgatory.

To these we may add Gennadius, who assures us, “ That after the ascension of the Lord to heaven, the souls of all the saints are with Christ, and going out of the body go to Christ, expecting the resurrection of their body.” And to name no more in so plain a case, Prosper also tells us, !“‘ According to

[…]

k Post ascensionem Domini ad ceelos, omnium sanctorum anime cum Christo sunt, et exeuntes de corpore ad Christum vadunt, ex- pectantes resurrectionem corporis sui. Gennad. de eccles. dogmat. Cc. 79.

pd2

ART.

404 Of Purgatory.

the language of the holy scriptures, the whole life of man upon earth is a temptation or trial. Then is the temptation to be avoided when the fight is ended ; and then is the fight to be ended, when after this life secure victory succeeds the fight, that all the soldiers of Christ, who, being helped by God, have to the end of this present life unweariedly resisted their enemies, their wearisome travail being ended, they may reign happily in their country.” So that they do not go from one fight here to another in purgatory, but immediately from the church militant on earth to the church triumphant in heaven. From whence we may well conclude, that the Romish doctrine about purgatory is a fond thing, repugnant to scripture, yea, and Fathers too. And therefore I pass from the Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory to that

Concerning Pardons.

And here (and also in the rest of the Romish doctrines spoken of in this article) I shall follow the same method as I did in Purgatory, even to shew, first, what their doctrine is, and then, how repugnant to the scriptures. As for the first, what their doctrine concerning pardons is, it is difficult to determine; they have had so many crotchets about it, that one can scarce tell where to find them. I shall endeavour to explain it in these following propositions :

First, they assert, as ™ Bellarmine saith, “That many holy men have suffered more for God and righteousness’ sake than the guilt of the temporal punishment, which they were ob- noxious to for faults committed by them, could exact.”

Secondly, hence they say, as Johannes de Turrecremata, n“‘That one can satisfy for another, or one can acceptably perform satisfactory punishments for another,” viz. because they suffer more than is due to their own sins; and seeing all sufferings are satisfactory, what they undergo more than is due to their own, is satisfactory for other men’s sins.

m Asserimus non paucos sanctos homines multo plura propter Deum et justitiam esse perpessos, quam exigeret reatus poene temporalis, cui fuerunt obnoxii propter culpas ab ipsis commissas, Bellarm. de in-

dulg. (vol. III. p. 1498.]

[…]

XXII. Of Purgatory. 405

Thirdly, °“ Seeing they who thus undergo satisfactory punishments for others do not appoint the fruit of this their satisfaction to any particular persons, it therefore,” as Roffen- sis saith, “becomes profitable to the whole church in common, so that it is now called the common treasury of the church, to wit, that from thence may be fetched whatsoever any one lacks of due satisfaction.”

Fourthly, p‘This common treasure,” saith Bellarmine, “is the foundation of pardons.” So that, as he saith, 4“ The church hath power to apply this treasure of satisfaction, and by this to grant out pardons.”

By this therefore we may have some sight into this great mystery, and perceive what they mean by pardons. For, as Lamannus the Jesuit saith, ‘A pardon or indulgence is the remission of a temporal punishment due to God without the sacrament, by the application of the satisfaction of Christ and the saints.” Or as Gregorius de Valentia saith, s“An ee- clesiastical pardon or indulgence is a relaxation of a temporal punishment by God’s judgment due to actual sins, after the remission of the fault made without the sacrament (of penance) by the application of the superabundant satisfactions of Christ and the saints by him who hath lawful authority to do it.” But let us hear what a pope himself saith concerning these

pardons. Leo the Xth in his Decretal, ann. 1518, saith,

t«* The pope of Rome may for

© Et quoniam illi suz satisfactio- nis fructum nullis destinarunt per- sonis certis, ideo fit ut in commune cesserit ecclesiz totius emolumen- tum, et communis ecclesic thesau- rus jam dicatur, nimirum ut inde rependatur quicquid ceteris ex justa satisfactione defuerit. [Fischer. e- pise.] Roffens. art.17. [p. 491.]

Pp Extat thesaurus aliquis in ec- clesia qui est fundamentum indul- gentiarum. Bellarm. de indulg. 1. 1. c. 2. [tit.]

a Est in ecclesia potestas appli- candi thesaurum satisfactionum, ac per hoe indulgentias concedendi. Ibid. c. 3. [tit. ] :

[…]

reasonable causes grant to the

[…]

§ Indulgentia ecclesiastica est re- laxatio poene temporalis judicio divino peccatis actualibus post re- missam culpz debite, per applica- tionem superabundantium Christi et sanctorum satisfactionum facta extra sacramentum, ab eo qui legi- timam ad hoc autoritatem habet, Greg. de Valent. de indulg. [init.]

t Romanum pontificem, &c. posse pro rationalibus causis concedere eisdem Christi fidelibus qui charitate jungente membra sunt Christi, sive in hae vita sunt, sive in purgatorio, indulgentias ex superabundantia

406 OF Purgatory. Arr:

same saints of Christ, who, charity uniting them, are members of Christ, whether they be in this life or in purgatory, pardons out of the superabundancy of the merits of Christ and the saints: and that he used, for the living as well as for the dead, by his apostolical power of granting pardons, to dispense or distribute the treasures of the merits of Christ and the saints, to confer the indulgence itself after the manner of an abso- lution, or transfer it after the manner of a suffrage.” So that, as Durandus saith, *““The church can communicate from this treasure to any one, or several persons, for their sins in part or in whole, according as it pleaseth the church to communicate more or less from the treasure.” And hence it is that we find it said in the books of Indulgences or Pardons, *“That Silvester and Gregory, that consecrated the Lateran church, gave so many pardons that none could number them but God, St. Boniface being witness, who said, If men knew the pardons of the Lateran church, they would not need to go by sea to the holy sepulchre. In the chapel of the Saints are twenty-eight stairs, that stood before the house of Pilate in Hierusalem: whosoever shall ascend those stairs with devotion, hath for every sin nine years of pardons; but he that ascends them kneeling, shall free one soul out of purgatory.” So that it seems the pope cannot only give me a pardon for sins past, but to come; yea, and not only give me a pardon for my own sins, but power too to pardon other men’s sins, else I could not redeem a soul from purgatory. —

meritorum Christi et sanctorum ; ac

[…]

rent, dederint tantas imdulgentias

[…]

4 Ecclesia de hoc thesauro potest communicare alicui vel aliquibus pro eorum peccatis in parte vel in toto, secundum quod placet ecclesize, de hoc thesauro plus aut minus communicare. Durand. de indulg.

x Papa Silvester et Gregorius, qui

ut nemo eas possit numerare quam solus Deus: testante Bonifacio, qui dixit : Sihomines scirent indulgentias ecclesize Lateranensis non opus esset ut irent per mare ad s. sepulchrum. In capella sanctorum sunt 28 gradus qui steterunt ante eedes Pilati in Je- rusalem. Quicunque hos gradus ascenderit cum devotione habet pro quolibet peceato novem annos in- dulgentiarum ; qui vero geniculando gradus illos ascendit, is unam ani- mam liberat a purgatorio. Lib. in- dulg. [Vid. Fiseus papalis; transl. by Crashaw, chap. I.]

XXII.

Of Purgatory. 407

I have been the larger in opening this great Romish mystery, because I need do no more than open it: for it being thus opened, shews itself to be a ridiculous and impious doctrine, utterly repugnant to the scriptures: for this doctrine thus explained is grounded upon works of superero- gation ; for it is from the treasury of these good works that the Romish church fetcheth all her pardons. Now this is but a bad foundation, contrary to scripture, reason, and Fathers, as we have seen art. XIV: and if the foundation be rotten, the superstructure cannot be sound. Again, this doctrine supposes one man may and doth satisfy for another ; whereas the scripture holds forth Christ as our only propitiation, 1 Joh. 11. 2, who trod the winepress of his Father’s wrath alone, Isa. xii. 3. Lastly, This doctrine supposes that a pope, a priest, a finite creature, can pardon sins; whereas the scripture holds forth this as the prerogative only of the true God: for who is a God like unto thee, saith the Prophet Micah, that pardoneth iniquities ? Mic. vii. 18. And therefore the scribes and Pharisees, when they said, Who can forgive sins but God alone? Luke v.21, what they said, though wickedly said by them, not acknowledging Christ to be God, and so not to have that power, yet it was truly said in itself: for had not Christ been God, he would have had no more power to forgive sins than the pope.

And whatsoever the doctors of the Romish church now hold, I am sure the Fathers of old constantly affirmed that it was God only could forgive sins. So St. Chrysostome saith ; y“ For none can pardon sins but only God.” Euthymius, z*¢None can truly pardon sins but he alone who beholds the thoughts of men.” St. Gregory, *“ Thou who alone sparest, who alone forgivest sins: for who can forgive sins but God alone?” St. Ambrose, >“ For this cannot be common to any

[…]

eae nullus potest remittere pec- cata, nisi unus qui intuetur cogi- tationes hominum. Euthym. in Mat. c. 13. V. et Druthmar. et

Radbert. et Walafr. Strab. in eun- dem locum.

a Tu qui solus parcis, qui solus peccata dimittis: quis enim potest dimittere peccata nisi solus Deus? Greg. in Psal. 32. 6. seu sec. poeni- tent.

b Solus remanet, quia non potest

ART.

408 Of Purgatory.

man with Christ to forgive sins. This is his gift only who took away the sins of the world.” Certainly the Fathers never thought of the pope’s pardons, when they let such and the like sentences slip from them. Nay, and Athanasius was so confident that it was God only could pardon sin, that he brings this as an argument against the Arians, to prove that Christ was God, because he could pardon sin. ¢ “ But how,” saith he, “if the Word was a creature, could he loose the sentence of God, and pardon sin? It being written by the prophets, that this belongs to God; for who is a God like to thee; pardoning sins, and passing by transaressions? For God said, Thou art earth, and unto earth thou shalt return. So that men are mortal: and how then was it possible that sin should be pardoned or loosed by creatures? Yet Christ loosed and pardoned them.” Certainly, had the pope’s pardons been heard of in that age, this would have been but a weak argu- ment. For Arius might easily have answered, It doth not follow, that because Christ could pardon sin he was therefore God; for the pope is not God, and yet he can pardon sin. But thus we see the Fathers confidently averring, it is God only can pardon sins, and therefore that the pope cannot pardon them by any means whatsoever, unless he be God; (which as yet they do not assert): and so that the Romish doctrine concerning pardons is a fond thing, and repugnant to the scriptures. And so is also their doctrine

Concerning worshipping of Images. Now what the Romish doctrine concerning images is, we have plainly set down by the council of Trent, even, 4“ That

hoc cuiquam hominum cum Christo jj ¢7, Kali eis yay dmedevon of Be

esse commune ut peccata condonet. Solius hoe munus est Christi qui tulit peccatum mundi. Ambros. Epist. [26. ad Ireneum, vol. I. p. 894.] ad Studium.

[…]

Imagines porro Christi, deiparee virginis, et aliorum sanctorum in templis presertim habendas et re- tinendas, eisque debitum honorem et venerationem impertiendam. Con- cil. Trident. sess. 25. [vol. X.]

XXII. Of Purgatory. 409

the images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and other saints, are to be had and retained, especially in churches, and that due honour and worship be given to them.” And presently, ¢ “ Because the honour which is given to the images is referred to the prototypes which they represent ; that by the images which we kiss, and before which we uncover our heads and fall down, we adore Christ, and worship the saints whose likeness they bear.” But Azorius tells us, f“It is the constant opinion of their divines, that the image ought to be honoured and worshipped with the same honour and worship wherewith that is worshipped which it is the image of.” And so Bellarmine saith, &“ That the images of Christ and the saints are to be worshipped, not only by accident and im- properly, but by themselves and properly; so that themselves terminate the worship as they are considered in themselves, and not only as they represent that which they are the image of.” And Petrus de Cabrera to the same purpose ; » “ Images are truly and properly to be worshipped, and from an intention of worshipping them, and not only the samplers represented in them.” Yea, he tells us, 1‘‘ That if images are worshipped only improperly, simply and absolutely they are not worshipped at all, neither are they to be worshipped, which is a manifest heresy.”

Now what doctrine can possibly be invented to cross and contradict the scriptures more plainly than this doth? The scriptures expressly saying, yea, the great God in thunderings

€ Sed quoniam honos qui exhi- betur, refertur ad prototypa que illae representant: ut per imagines quas osculamur, et coram quibus caput aperimus, et procumbimus, Christum adoremus, et. sanctos, quorum ill similitudinem gerunt, veneremur. Ibid.

f Constans est theologorum sen- tentia imaginem eodem honore et cultu honorari et coli, quo colitur id cujus est imago. Atque hec sen- tentia non tantum unius Thome sed communi est theologorum consensu recepta. Azor. 1. 9. instit. c. 6. art.

2 ¢ . . & Imagines Christi et sanctorum venerande sunt, non solum per ac-

cidens vel improprie, sed etiam per se et proprie, ita ut ipse terminent venerationem ut in se considerantur, et non solum ut vicem gerunt ex- emplaris. Bellarm. de imagin. 1. 2. (G> Pe

h Imagines sunt vere et proprie adorandze et ex intentione ipsas a- dorandi, et non tantum exemplaria in ipsis repreesentata, Pet. de Ca- brera in tert. part. Thom. quest. 25. art. 3. disp. 2. num. 32.

i Si imagines improprie tantum adorantur, simpliciter et absolute non adorantur, neque sunt ado- rand, quod est heeresis manifesta. Ibid. num. 34.

410 Of Purgatory. Art’

and lightnings commanding, Thow shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters under the earth : thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor worship or serve them. Exod. xx. 4,5. For what image can possibly be made, and yet not come within the compass of this law? There is nothing in the world but it is either in heaven, or on earth, or under the earth; and so nothing in the world but the image of it is here expressly forbidden to be worshipped. I know the abettors and practisers of this Romish doctrine would persuade us, that the worshipping of heathenish idols is here only forbidden, not the adoration of images. But I could wish such seriously to consider with themselves that it is here said, Thou shalt not make to thyself the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or earth beneath ; 80 that they are things which we are here forbidden to worship the image or likeness of: whereas we know an idol is nothing in the world, 1 Cor. viii. 4: and therefore it is not heathenish idols only that are here forbidden, but Christian idols also; I mean all images whatsoever, unless they will find out images of things that are neither in heaven nor earth, nor under the earth, that is, images of nothing. But we know the images they worship are the images of real things, of Christ, of the Virgin Mary, of saints; all which are somewhere; and therefore their images are expressly forbidden to be worshipped here. And howsoever the subtle doctors of the Romish church may make the ignorant people believe that it is only the heathenish idols that are here intended, I am sure the ancient * Fathers

of the catholic Church looked upon all images whatsoever as here forbidden.

k Que nunc Dei sermo universa complectens simul abjurat et abjicit, et non solum idolum fieri vetat, sed et similitudinem omnium que in terra sunt et im aquis et in ccelo. Origen. in Exod. [vol. II. p. 158.]

fe \ > Tene , A o Ovxt Oeds Hv 6 evrethdpevos dia Mo- TEWS, [NTE cikdva, [NTE Guol@pa, unre TGV €v ovpare diva, pnTE Tav emt ys OAs mornoar: Justin. Dial. cum ym. e A Tryphone [94.] Quomodo enim Moysen et Hiliam cognovisset nisi

[…]

XXII. Of Purgatory. 411

Neither is this doctrine repugnant to scripture only, but even to reason itself. For if images are to be worshipped, it is either the image itself that is to be worshipped, as some of them hold ; or the thing which is represented by the image is to be worshipped in it, as others dream. But first, that the image itself, consisting of wood or stone, or any other materials, is not to be worshipped for itself, is plain; for as so, they are senseless and ! inanimate creatures, and so, much inferior unto man, who is not only animate but sensitive, and not only sensitive but rational too ; by whom these very images are erected, carved, preserved ; who can change, adorn, or destroy them whensoever himself pleaseth. And can it in reason be thought the superior should worship the inferior ? and he that made the work, the work which himself made ? Though all honour be not worship, yet all worship is honour ; and honour is a thing that is not due from superiors to inferiors, but from inferiors to superiors. So that, as Atha- nasius™ said of the heathenish idols, there is more reason that men their carvers should be worshipped by them, than that they should be worshipped by men. And therefore, for mine own part, I cannot see but that the heathens might have as much to say for their worshipping of idols, as the papists can have for their worshipping of images; for the heathens’ idols were most of them images, and so are the papists’ images all idols.

And as images are not to be worshipped simply in them-

[…]

m [IoAA@ ovv paddov dixardtepov qv Tov TeXVITHY AUTOS TPOTKUVELY Hep Ta UT avTov memounpeva’ Ste Kal mpo- imnpxe Tav ex Téxvns Oeav, Kal 6tt @s nBovrnén ovta Kal yeyédvaor. Athanas. contra gentes, [13. vol. I.] To which we may also add that of Lactantius : Nec intelligunt homines ineptissimi, quod si sentire simulacra et moveri possent, ultro adoratura homines fuissent, a quibus sunt ex- polita, quae essent aut incultus et horridus lapis aut materia informis et rudis, nisi fuissent ab homine for- mata. Lactant. de origin. error. (I.

Lcu2. |

ART.

412 Of Purgatory.

selves, so neither ought they to be worshipped relatively, as they represent that which we ought to worship ; for it is im- possible that any thing which we ought to worship should be represented by an image: for, as we shall see presently, there is no person or thing in the world that ought to be religiously worshipped but only God: and it is impossible that God, an infinite Being, should be represented by an image, a finite creature. And seeing he cannot be repre- sented by an image, he ought not to be worshipped in an image; neither, as ” Origen well observed, can he be wor- shipped in images; for they cannot represent any more than a finite being, and therefore the infinite God cannot be wor- shipped in them. So that the worship that is given to God in images is so far from being worship, that it is rather dis- honour ; yea, practical blasphemy, making God of no higher a nature, nay, of a lower nature than ourselves ; even such a one as a senseless block may represent, which it is impossible should represent so much as the soul, or better part of man. And if they will not stand to seripture or reason, let them consult the Fathers, and they will find Origen saying, ° “ We do not honour images, that as much as in us lies we might not fall into the suspicion that those images were other gods.” Yea, Clemens Alexandrinus saith, P “ Moses commanded that no image should be made by man that might represent God artificially.” And Gregory the Great saith plainly, 4“ If any one will make images, do not forbid him, but to worship images by all means avoid.” Nay, Lactantius saith, ’“ Where-

[…]

¥ Quare non est dubium quin re- ligio nulla est ubicunque simulacrum est. Nam si religio ex divinis rebus est, divini autem nihil est nisi in celestibus rebus, carent ergo reli- gione simulacra, quia nihil potest esse celeste in ea re que fit ex terra. Lactant. de orig. error. [1]. II. c. 19.]

*XIL. Of Purgatory. 418

fore there is no doubt but there is no religion wheregoever there is an image. For if religion be of divine things, and yet there is nothing divine but [in] heavenly things; there- fore images want religion, because there can be nothing heavenly in that thing. which is made of the earth.”

Or if they will not stand to the determination of the Fathers, let them refer it to councils, and they will find the Elibertine council determining, s “ That pictures or images ought not to be in the church, lest that which is worshipped and adored should be painted upon the walls.” And a council held at Constantinople, consisting of 338 bishops, anno Dom. 754, determined unanimously, t“ That every image, made of what matter soever by the wicked art of the painter, be thrown out of Christian churches as strange and abominable.” But there being another council held at Nice not many years after, it did as much extol images as the other had destroyed them, as we saw in the foregoing article. But not long after, Charles the Great gathered together the bishops of France, Germany, and Italy, into a council at Franckford, where, as Regino saith, ” “‘ the false synod of the Grecians, which they made for the worshipping of images, was rejected.” I know this synod did condemn the Constantinopolitan council too before spoken of, because they stretched it too far, not only commanding that images should not be worshipped, but that they should not be used so much as for the ornament of the ehurch. But as they condemned the Constantinopolitan council for throwing them quite out of the church, so did they condemn too the second council of Nice, for commanding them to be worshipped in the church. For not only Regino, before quoted, but Hinemarus Remensis expressly saith, x“ Wherefore in the time of the emperor Charles the Great,

s Placuit picturas in ecclesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus depingatur. Concil. Elibert. cap. 36. [Hard. Conc. vol. I.]

t Una voce definimus omnem imaginem, ex quacunque materia improba pictorum arte factam, ab ecclesia Christianorum rejiciendam, veluti alienam et abominabilem.

Act. Concil. Constant. [Id. vol. IV. p. 725.)

u Pseudosynodus Grecorum quam pro adorandis imaginibus fecerunt, rejecta est. Regino in Chron. [vol. I.

31] Rope

[…]

414 Of Purgatory. Arr.

by the command of the apostolical seat, a general council was celebrated in France, the said emperor gathering it to- gether ; and according to the way of the scriptures, and the tradition of the ancients, the false synod of the Grecians was destroyed and utterly cast off.” ‘To which we may add the book, attested by sufficient witnesses to be written by the said Charles the Great against the Nieene council, and wor- shipping of images ; wherein he calls y “the religious worship of images a most insolent, or rather most superstitious and aceursed adoration.” And not only so, but the same renowned emperor sent the determinations of the said council into z Britain, to keep them from that gross idolatry too. And the worshipping of images was condemned again in another council at Constantinople, an. 814: and in another council, held at Paris, an. 824, under Lodovicus, the son and immediate suc- cessor of Charles the Great, it was again determined, as in the council of Franckford, that it was lawful to have images, but unlawful to worship them. So that it is no new thing that our reverend convocation did, when they determined that the worshipping of images is a fond thing, and repugnant to the Word of God. And what is said concerning worshipping of images is said also

Concerning the worshipping of Relics.

What we are to understand by relics in this place Stapleton tells us, 2 “ Even not only every part or particular of a saint’s body, but even his garments, or any thing else which he used.” And Bellarmine tells us, >“ The very cross upon

et secundum scripturarum tramitem

[…]

2 Carolus rex Francorum misit librum synodalem ad Britanniam, in quo vere fidei multa reperta sunt

obviantia, et eo maxime quod pene omnium orientalium doctorum una- nimi assertione est definitum, ima- gines adorari debere, quod omnino ecclesia catholica execratur. Mat. Westmonast. ad an. 793. _ ® Ad reliquias alicujus sancti per- tinet non solum quelibet sui corporis particula, sed etiam vestes, aut ali- quod aliud quo usus fuerat. Staplet. part. 1. Prompt. cath.

Crux illa vera in qua Dominus pependit, propter contactum sacri

».O.4 8 F

Of Purgatory. 415

which the Lord hung, by reason of its touching his sacred body and blood, is to be reckoned amongst the most precious relies; and not only the whole, but every piece of it.” And what the Romish doctrine concerning these relics is, we may see in several of their writers. Jodocus Coccius tells us, ¢“ The relies of the saints are to be religiously preserved and worshipped.” Johannes de Turrecremata, 4 “ That the relies of the cross, nails, spear, garments, and the image of Christ crucified, are to be worshipped with atria,” or the same worship that is proper to the true God, To name no more, the council of Trent declares, ©“ That the holy bodies of the holy martyrs, and others that live with Christ, which were the living members of Christ, and the temples of the Holy Ghost, to be raised up by him to eternal life and glorified, are to be worshipped by the faithful, by which many benefits are performed to men. So that all such as affirm that honour and worship ought not to be given to the relies of the saints, or that they and other monuments are unprofitably honoured by the faithful, and that for the obtaining of their help the memories of the saints are vainly frequented, are to be alto- gether condemned.”

Now, what need we to retort to the upholders of these doc- trines more than what our Saviour did to the Devil, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve? Matt. iv.10. If God be alone to be served and worshipped, what worship can be due to these so venerable relics? What is it less than sacrilege, to give that glory to the creature which is due only to the

corporis et sanguinis, inter preti- osissimas reliquias habenda est, nec solum ipsa integra sed etiam parti- cule ejus. Bellar. de imag. 1. 2. c. 26. [vol. II.]

¢ Sanctorum reliquias religiose servandas et colendas esse. Jod. Coccius, Thes. 1. 5. art. 16. [tit. ]

ad Reliquiz crucis, clavorum, lanceze, vestium Christi, et imago crucifixi sunt latria veneranda. Joh. de Turrec. in festo invent. crucis,

q: 3: e Sanctorum et aliorum cum

uoque martyrum hristo viventium

sancta corpora, que viva membra fuerint Christi, et templa Spiritus Sancti, ab ipso ad zternam vitam suscitanda et glorificanda, a fidelibus veneranda esse, per que multa be- neficia a Deo hominibus prestantur. Ita ut affirmantes sanctorum reliquiis venerationem atque honorem non deberi, vel eas aliaque sacra monu- menta a fidelibus inutiliter honorari, atque eorum opis impetrande causa sanctorum memorias frustra fre- uentari, omnino damnandos esse. oncil. Trident. sess. 25. [vol. X. p. 168. |

Art.

416 Of Purgatory.

Creator? St. Paul reproves the Romish heathens for wor- shipping the creature more than the Creator, Rom. i. 25. Certainly the same reproof may reach to the Romish Christ- ians too. For what is due only to the Creator, they are not ashamed nor afraid to give it to the creature, and so either making God a creature, or the creature a god, by giving no more to God than they give to the creatures, nor less to the creatures than they give to God. They can give no more than religious worship to God, and that they give to the creatures, and so must needs bring either the glory of God down, so as to be no higher than the glory of a creature, or the glory of the creature up, so as to.be no lower than the glory of God, by making God and the creature to be sharers in the same honour.

Let them therefore tell me, are these relics creatures or no? If they will assert and prove them to be no creatures, they may well be worshipped; and if they worship them, they do in that assert them to be no creatures: for certainly f none but God ought to be worshipped; and whatsoever may be truly worshipped is God. If they may be worshipped, they are not creatures; and if they be not creatures, they ought to be worshipped. or no? Are they creatures, did I say? Certainly if they were not, our adversaries would never contend so much that they ought to be worshipped; for we can scarce find any of them spending so much time in proving that Jehovah, the Creator, should be worshipped, as they do in proving that images and relics, and almost any thing besides God, ought to be wor- shipped. But let them at the length bethink themselves, whether in reason their bodies should be worshipped, whose

I say therefore, are these relics creatures:

f And thus we find the Fathers themselves using the argument both ways; sometimes saying such a thing is to be worshipped, and therefore it is God, and such a thing is not God, and therefore it ought not to be worshipped: as, Ei pev yap ov mpookuvytoy, Tas ene Oeot dua tod Banricpatos; ei Sé mpoo- KUINTOV, TAs Ov GeTTOv; et SE werd, m@s ov Oeds; ev Hornra tov évds* Xpvon tis dyT@s Geipa Kal TwTNpLOS.

[…]

XXII. Of Purgatory. 417

souls, for ought they know, may be in hell? or whether in reason any part of that cross should be worshipped upon which Christ was crucified? The cross was the wicked in- strument which the Jews used to put our Saviour to death; what ? and must that be now worshipped by such as profess faith in him that was crucified upon it? And are the nails that fastened his hands and feet to the cross, and the spear that pierced his sides, such honourable things that they must be worshipped too? How comes such honour to be conferred upon these nails and this spear? What? because they were the instruments of our Saviour’s death and greater torments ? Oh most horrid impiety and unparalleled idolatry, that Christians should worship that which tormented and destroyed Christ ! that we should worship that in our life, that brought our Saviour himself to death !

And if they will not believe us, that no relics, but God only is to be worshipped, let them consult the Fathers, and see their opinion in it. And if they will not take the pains to look themselves into the Fathers, I hope they will not be angry if I tell them that Justin Martyr saith, §“* We worship God only; but as to other things we joyfully obey you,” viz. emperors. And Theophilus Antiochenus: } “ The divine law doth not only forbid us to worship idols, but the elements also, sun, moon, and the other stars. So that we must not worship heaven, nor earth, nor the sea, nor fountains, nor rivers; but we ought to worship the true God only, and Maker of all things, in simplicity of heart, and sincerity of mind.” And therefore saith Tatianus also, ‘I will never worship the workmanship that was made for our sakes.” And presently, j ‘I will never be persuaded myself, nor per- suade another, to worship the substance of the elements.”

[…]

reioaysi Tov wAnoiov. Ibid. [36.]

Ee

Arr.

418 Of Purgatory.

Origen also saith plainly, “If we may speak briefly, and all at once, it is the fault of impiety, or it is very wickedness, to worship any one whomsoever, besides Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.” And so Theodoret: !“Of men,” saith he, “ such as excel in virtue we honour as the best of men; but we worship only the God of all, the Father, and his Son, and the Al-holy Ghost.” And so Lactantius saith, ™“‘ There is no religion or veneration to be had of any but of the one God.” I might produce many more, but these witnesses may be enough to prove that it is God only that ought to be worshipped, and no creature whatsoever ; and if no creature, much less ought the relics of creatures to be worshipped, as “Gregory Nazianzen saith :

An impure sacrifice is sin, much more

The relics of a dead man to adore. It is a sin to worship the best of creatures instead of God : and shall it be thought no sin to worship the relies of creatures instead of him? Certainly if there be any doctrines in the world repugnant to the word of God, this and the former are to be reckoned as the principal of them all ; whereby not only creatures, but the very images and relies of creatures, are held to have the worship of the true God due unto them. And so we pass from these to the last of the Romish doctrines here spoken of, and that is

Concerning the invocation of saints.

And to know what the Romish doctrine concerning the invocation of saints is, we need go no further than the council of Trent; who there teach plainly, and command all their

k Ut breviter et omni in unum collecta definitione dicamus, adorare alium quempiam preter Patrem et Filium et Spiritum Sanctum, im- pietatis est crimen. Origen. in Rom. 1-0. | 160. voledVall

[…]

XXII. Of Purgatory. 419

bishops to teach, °“ That the saints reigning with Christ do offer up their prayers for men; that it is good and useful to invocate or pray unto them, and for the obtaining benefits from God by his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who is our only Mediator and Saviour, to fly to their prayers, help, and assist- ance. But such as deny that those that enjoy eternal happi- ness in heayen are to be called upon, or that assert either that they do not pray for men, or that to call upon them to pray for every one of us is idolatry, or to be repugnant to the word of God, and to derogate from the honour of the one Mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ, or that it is a foolish thing to pray to such as reign in heaven with our voice or minds, do think impiously.” Now though we do not here say, that this their doctrine concerning the saints praying for us is so; yet we say, that this their doc- trine concerning our praying to the saints is a fond thing, and repugnant to the scriptures.

And certainly it is so; for what else means that place of scripture, How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed ? Rom. x. 14. That none is to be believed in but God, though others may be believed besides God, I suppose they will not deny; or if they do, I would wish them to cast their eye a little upon the margin, and Pthere they will see

© Sanctos una cum Christo reg- nantes orationes suas pro hominibus offerre, bonum atque utile esse eos invocare, et ob beneficia impetranda a Deo per Filium ejus Jesum Chris- tum, Dominum nostrum, qui solus noster redemptor et salvator est, ad eorum orationes, opem, auxiliumque confugere; illos vero, qui negant zeterna feelicitate in ccelo fruentes invocandos esse, aut qui asserunt vel illos pro hominibus non orare, vel eorum ut pro nobis etiam sin- gulis orent invocationem esse idolo- latriam, vel pugnare cum yerbo Dei, adversarique honori unius mediatoris Dei et hominum Jesu Christi, vel stultum esse in ccelo regnantibus voce vel mente supplicare, impie sentire. Concil. Trident. sess. 25. [vol. X. p. 168. ]

[…]

kal Tepl avrov miotevey. TO pev yap é€ote Oedtntos, TO Se mayTos mpay- paros. Greg. Nazianz. orat. 37. | vol. ep: 661 Sciendum est, quod ecclesiam credere non tamen in ec- clesiam credere debeamus, quia ec- clesia non est Deus, sed domus Dei est. Serm. de tempore [242. Aug. vol. V. App.] Hoc est enim credere in Deum quod utique plus est quam eredere Deo, nam et homini cuilibet plerumque credendum est, quamvis in eum non sit credendum. Aug. in Psal. 77. [8. vol. [V.] Rursus etiam de apostolis ipsius possumus dicere, Credimus Paulo, sed non credimusin Paulum, Credimus Petro, sed non credimus in Petrum. Id. in Joh. tract. 29. [6. vol. III. par. ii.] Hac igitur preepositionis syllaba (in) creator a creaturis secernitur, et divina separantur ab humanis. Ruf-

Ee

ART.

420 Of Purgatory.

several of the Fathers making this distinction betwixt believ- ing in a person, and believing of a person, that the first is proper and peculiar to God only, the other common also unto men. So that I may believe a man, but I am to believe in none. but God. And if so, then from this place it clearly follows, that seeing the saints in heaven are not to be be- lieved in, they are not to be called upon; but that we are to call upon none but God, because we are to believe in none but God. And hence it is, that when the disciples came to our Saviour to direct and instruct them how to pray, he bad them say daily, Our Father which art in heaven, Matt. vi. 9. Luke xi. 2: wherein he directs them not only what they should pray for, but whom to pray to; not to this, or that, or the other saint, but to God, Our Father which art in heaven.

But I need not insist any longer upon this, having proved before that it is God that is the only person in the world that ought to be religiously worshipped : for from thence it plainly follows, that God is only to be prayed to: for invocation is the principal part of religious worship, insomuch that it is sometimes put for the whole: as when the place of God’s worship is called a house of prayer, Isa. lvi. 7; viz. because it is prayer that is the chief worship that is performed in it. And therefore 4 Origen saith, “‘ That to call. upon the name of

fin. in expos. symbol. [p. 26.] Cre- dere et Petro et Paulo jure debemus, in Petrum vero et Paulum credere, id est in servos conferre honorem domini non debemus. Credere illi quilibet potest homini. Credere vero in illum soli te debere noveris majes- tati. Kuseb. Emisen, de symb. hom. 2. [Max. Bibl. patr. vol. VI. p. 630. ]

[…]

Aarpeia, Ibid.

XXII.

Of Purgatory. 421

the Lord or to worship him, is one and the same thing.” So that he alone may be worshipped that is to be called upon; and he alone may be called upon who may be wor- shipped. And so he that may not be worshipped ought not to be called upon; and therefore seeing it is not lawful to worship the saints, it cannot be lawful to call upon them.

And whatsoever our adversaries may boast, yet certainly the Fathers did not hold that the saints departed should be prayed to, as appears from the descriptions which they give of prayer. St. Basil saith, «“ Prayer is the desire of something that is good, made by holy persons to God;” not to the saints, but to God immediately. And so Damascen saith, s “ Prayer is the ascension of the mind to God, or the desire of convenient things from God.” And therefore saith St. Chrysostome, ’“‘ Every one that prays discourseth with God.” u“ When thou readest,” saith Gilbertus, “thou art taught by Christ, but when thou prayest thou talkest familiarly with him.” So that it seems they did not think we should go to any of the courtiers of heaven to speak to the King for us, but that we should speak to him ourselves.

Nay, and Origen saith expressly, ’ “ For we must pray only to the most high God, and we must pray to his only begotten and the firstborn of every creature, even the Word of God, and beseech him as our High Priest to present our prayer, that comes to him, to his God and our God, to his Father and the Father of all those that live according to the word of God.” And elsewhere: * “ Every prayer, and supplication,

[…]

t [las mpooevydpevos tH Oe@ dia- héyera. Chrys. de orat. hom, 2. [init. ] j

u Cum legis, erudiris de Christo, orans vero, familiare cum ipso seris colloquium. Gilbert. i in Cant. serm. 7.

W Move yap TpooevkTEov TO em mace bed, Kal T POO evKTEOY ye TO

[…]

5 [44]

422 Of Purgatory. Art.

and intercession, and giving of thanks, is to be sent up to the God that is above all, by him that is above all angels, even our High Priest, the living Word and God; and let us pray the Word himself, and beseech him, and give thanks to him.” So that it is Christ, not the saints, that is to present our prayers to God. To which we may add that of Gregorius Thaumaturgus: Y “He that rightly calls upon God calls upon him by his Son, and he that comes near to him comes by Christ ; but none can come to the Son but by the Holy Spirit.” Hitherto we may refer that also of Tertullian : z“ These things,” saith he, “I can pray for of none else but him from whom I know I shall obtain them, and it is he that alone performeth for me, and I am such a one to whom it belongs to pray, his servant who observe him alone, who am killed for his discipline.” And this is the argument whereby Athanasius proves against Arius that Christ is God, because he is prayed to: 4“ For none,” saith he, “ would pray to receive any thing from the Father and the angels, or any other creatures :” so that we are to join no creatures with God in our daily prayers. And truly if we are to pray to any creatures in heaven, why not to the angels as well as saints ? yet the council of Laodicea determined long ago, » “ That it is not lawful for Christians to leave the church of God, and name angels, and make congregations, which [things] are forbidden ; and if any one therefore be found to follow this secret idolatry, let him be accursed, because he hath left the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and gone to idolatry.” The occasion of which canon Balsamon saith was, ¢ “ Because that the devil suggested

Y Qui recte invocat Deum, per Filium invocat, et qui prope accedit, per Christum accedit, accedere autem ad filium non potest sine Spiritu Sancto. Greg. Thaum. exp. fid. [p. 98.] % Hee ab alio orare non possum, quam a quo me scio consequuturum, quoniam et ipse est qui solus pra- stat, et ego sum cui impetrare debetur, famulus ejus qui eum solum observo, qui propter disciplinam ejus occidor. Tertull. apol. c. go. [vol. V.]

[…]

© Ad rou TovTo Kal vmrEeBadXE Tore

Notes

• Quia secundum scripturee sacree sermonem, tota humana vita tenta- tio est super terram, tunc est ten- tatio fugienda, quando finitur et pugna: et tunc est finienda pugna, quando post hane vitam succedit pugne secura victoria, ut omnes milites Christi, qui usque in finem vitee preesentis divinitus adjuti, suis hostibus indefatigabiliter restiterint, laboriosa jam peregrinatione trans- acta, regnent felices in patria. Prosp. de vita contempl. 1. 1. c. I.
• Simulacra quidem sensuum do- miciliis induta sunt, operatione vero privantur. Viliora igitur non modo sunt iis qui ipsa finxerunt, sed etiam minimis animantibus, quandoquidem musca et culices, et hisce tenuiores in sensuum sedibus vim habent; vi- dent enim et audiunt, et volant, et ambulant. Theodor. in Psalm. 113. [vol. I. p. 863.]
• Si quis imagines facere voluerit, minime prohibe ; adorare vero ima- gines omnibus modis devita. Greg. Mag. Epist. 1. [XI. ep. 13. vol. I1.]