The Court of the Gentiles Part 3, Book 2 · Chapter 2 · Section 2

The Court of the Gentiles Part 3 · Book 2 · Chapter 2 · Section 2

p. 163SECT. II. A general Account of Antichriſt's Canonic Theologie and foreign, with its Traduction from the Philoſophers foreign.

ANother great Pillar of Antichriſt's Throne is Canonic Theologie; §. 1. 3. Canonic Antichriſtianiſme from Pagan Philoſophie.the main deſigne whereof has been to defend Antichriſt's Authoritie and Diſcipline by Eccleſiaſtic Canons. For look as the Monkes by their pretended Sanctitie and Myſtic Theologie, and the Scholemen by their Eriſtic Theologie; ſo in like manner the Canoniſts by their Canonic Theologie have endeavored to their utmoſt to maintain and propagate Antichriſts Soveraintie and Diſcipline. The chief Head of theſe Canoniſts was Gratian, who reduced the Eccleſiaſtic Canons to a bodie called the Canon-Law; the ſcope whereof chiefly is to ſupport the Diſcipline of the Pope, under a pretenſion of the Catholic Church, and its Autoritie. For as the Scholemens foreign, or taske was to defend the Pope's Power and Doctrine by Diſputation and ſtrength of argument; ſo the work of theſe Canoniſts was to maintain Antichriſt's Soveraintie and Diſcipline by producing the Canons and Authoritie of the Catholic Church. They pretend not to Scholaſtic Reaſon or Argument; for that (ſay they) does but diminiſh the Authoritie of a Law; but their great Diana is the Churches Authoritie, which they urge as the fountain of al their Eccleſiaſtic Canons and Impoſitions. But to run up this Canonic Theologie to its origine or ſpring head, we no way dout but to make it very evident, that the main, if not the whole of Antichriſt's Eccleſiaſtic Canons and Diſcipline owes its origine to Pythagorean, or ſome other Philoſophic Inſtitutes. This we ſhal make good both by Divine and Human Autoritie. And the great hinge on which this our Demonſtration ſhal turne, p. 164is that eminent Prophetic image or character of Antichriſt, 1 Tim. 4.1, 2, 3. compared with Col. 2.8, 9, 10, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. And to give a general key to theſe and ſuch Prophetic deſcriptions of Antichriſt; we are to know, that though they might have ſome typic and initial fulfilling in the Gnoſtic Heretics, which ſtarted up in the Apoſtles times, and were fore-runners of Antichriſt, as has been once and agian obſerved, Ch 1. §. 7. Yet their main ſcope is to characteriſe and delineate Antitichrist his foreign, ſuperſtition and tyrannic Impoſitions. For it is uſual with the Spirit of God in Scripture to paint forth and decipher the great and famoſe Apoſtaſie under Antichriſt, by leſſer and more particular Uſurpations and Apoſtaſies of perſons in thoſe times wherein the Propheſie was delivered. So in the Old Teſtament, what is Hiſtorically ſpoken of Egypt, Babylon, Antiochus, &c. is in the New Teſtament applied to Antichriſt and his Kingdome; in like manner as David and Solomon are made Types of Chriſt. So here, we denie not but that theſe Prophetic Characters of Antichriſt, laid down by Paul, and John might have ſome foundation in, and regard unto thoſe Gnoſtic Antichriſts of their time, of whom Simon Magus was the Head; but to confine al theſe great Prophetic deſcriptions of Antichriſt to Simon Magus, or ſome Heretic of thoſe times, as Grotius and his Sectators ſeem to do, ſavors too much of an Antichriſtian ſpirit. No, it is our ſafeſt courſe to interpret Scripture in its largeſt ſenſe: for as it has been wel obſerved by Sir Francis Bacon, in his Advancement of Learning, Prophetic Scriptures have their fulfilling over and again in diverſe Periods and Ages: ſo that al theſe Scriptures which we have before made uſe of to characteriſe and deſcribe the Gnoſtics and their Philoſophic Infuſions, who were the Forerunners of Antichriſt, may much more truely and fully be applied to Antichriſt, the great Antitype; who though laſt in Execution, yet was firſt in Intention, as we need no way dout. Having given this key, we ſhal procede to demonſtrate, That Antichriſts Canonic Theologie, or Eccleſiaſtic Canons, were Derivations from, and Imitamens of Philoſophic, and principally Pythagoric Inſtitutes. And herein we ſhal follow our wonted method, reducing the whole of our Demonſtration to the Forme and Mater of Canonic Theologie.

§. 2. As for the Forme of Antichriſts Canon Law, it received its Conſtitution from its formal Object, anſwerably to al other p. 165Laws.The forme of Antichriſts Canon Law from the Churches Autoritie, taken up in imitation of the Pythagorean Dogmes or Canons. 1 Theſ. 2.13.1 Thess 2:13 For the formal Object of any Law is the Autoritie of the Law-giver, which is the principal foundation, or proper motive on which it dependes. Whence the formal Object of this Antichriſtian Canon-Law is the pretended Autoritie of the Church, on which al their Eccleſiaſtic Canons are founded, as on their principal ground and proper motive. For look as Chriſts Divine Law has for its formal Object his Divine Autoritie reveled in Scripture, according to 1 Theſ. 2.13. As the word of God. This As is reduplicative, not ſpecificative only, (as quatenus is uſed in the Scholes) i. e. they received the Word of God under this reduplication, As the word of God, or as clothed with Divine Autoritie: ſo parallel hereto Antichriſt's Canon-Law has for its formal Object the pretended Churches Autoritic; whence reſultes its formal conſtitution, or obligatorie ſpirit and force. Now that this formal conſtitution of Antichriſt's Canonic Theologie exactly anſwers to, and, as we may preſume, was taken up in imitation of the Pythagorean mode of dogmatiſing, or impoſing Inſtitutes, ſeems evident from what intimations we find hereof in the forementioned Scriptures. So 1 Tim. 4.1. foreign,1 Tim. 4.1. foreign.1 Tim 4:1 Doctrines of Demons. foreign, as uſed in the Pythagorean Schole, ſignifies the ſame with foreign, a Dogme, Decree, Inſtitute, Canon: ſo alſo it ſeems to be uſed, Col. 2.22. foreign. Where foreign being appendent to foreign, ſignifies the Inſtitutes and Dogmes of the Philoſophers, (as Grotius) anſwering to foreign, v. 20. of which hereafter, Sect. 4. §. 3. Thus Mat. 15.9. as alſo S. 4. S. 3. So that by foreign, Doctrines of Demons here we may underſtand thoſe Dogmes, Inſtitutes, and Canons, which Antichriſt by his pretended Eccleſiaſtic Autoritie and Traditions, ſhould impoſe upon the Churches of Chriſt, in imitation of thoſe Pythagorean Dogmes, Inſtitutes, and Canons impoſed by Pythagoras on his Scholars, in reference to their foreign, Demon-worſhip. For the Explication whereof we may remember, that amongſt Pythagoras's Scholars foreign, ipſe dixit, HE SAID IT, i. e. Pythagoras, had the ſame weight and autoritie, as any Law or Canon in human Polities. They diſputed not but obeyed their Maſters Canons and Inſtitutes, with as great reverence as the Sons of Antichriſt do his Eccleſiaſtic Canons: ſo that a Dogme or Doctrine in his Schole had the ſul force and obligation of a Law, ſpecially in maters of Diſcipline and Demon-worſhip. In imitation whereof our Apoſtle p. 166here tels us, that Antichriſt ſhould introduce his Demon-Dogmes, or Canons, under a pretext of Church-autoritie or tradition. And this notion of foreign, as it implies a Dogme or Canon, ſuits wel with our Apoſtles ſenſe: for Antichriſts Saints, couched here under the notion of Demons, take up a good part of his Canon-Law; yea the whole of their Saintſhip and Mediatory Office owes its origine to ſome Popiſh Canon; whence we find ſo frequent mention in their Canonic Theologie of the Canoniſation of Saints, and Canoniſed Saints, &c. anſwerably to the Demon foreign, Deification. So that it's evident, this foreign, which Antichriſt was to introduce, comprehendes his Eccleſiaſtic Canons, at leaſt ſuch as refer to his foreign, Saint-worſhip. This ſuites with v. 3 foreign, which implies a Canonic prohibition againſt Mariage, of which we find many branches in Antichriſts Canon-Law; and with ver. 7. where we find mention of old wives fables, which indeed is a good character of al Antichriſts Canons, notwithſtanding their pretenſion to Church-Autoritie and Tradition. To which our Apoſtle oppoſeth v. 9. a Divine Chriſtian Cabala, Canon, or Tradition: This is (ſaies he) a faithful ſaying and worthy of al acceptation; foreign, i.e. (as Paulus Fagius) this is the true Chriſtian Cabala, or Tradition, in oppoſition to al theſe Pythagoric, Jewiſh, Antichriſtian Cabala's, as before, Book 1. Chap. 4. §. 1. But we find Antichriſts Eccleſiaſtic Canons, and their origine from Pythagorean Dogmes more fully laid open to us,Col. 2.8.Col 2:8 Col. 2.8, &c. where he gives them (1) a ſtrict charge, that no one ſpoil them. foreign, i. e. plunder them of their Chriſtian libertie, or lead them captive: which exactly ſuites with Antichriſt, his plundering Chriſtians of their Libertie, and captivating their Conſciences, or bringing them under the yoke of his Eccleſiaſtic Canons. Of which ſee what precedes, C. 1. §. 1. We find the like caution, Gal. 5.1.Gal. 5.1.Gal 5:1 Stand faſt therefore in your libertie, &c. Where, ſaies Grotius, he cals foreign, the yoke of bondage, not only that which the Hebrews cal foreign, the yoke of the Law; but alſo thoſe Opinions or Rites, whereby the Gentiles bound themſelves. foreign ſignifies to be bound, or to be brought under an obligation. foreign properly ſignifies to urge, to enſnare, to take al occaſions of hurting others, as Heſychius and Euſtathius: ſo Mar. 6.19 Thence foreign primarily ſignifies, to be enſnared, to be entangled, to be held bound. Thus theſe Galatians had p. 167their Conſciences entangled in the yoke of Judaic Ceremonies. It ſeems to allude to Oxen, whoſe heads are entangled in their Harneſſe, or the cords of their yoke. Which exactly deſcribes to us that obligation and bondage, which the Conſcience is brought under by ſubjection to the yoke of Antichriſts Eccleſiaſtic Canons. (2) Our Apoſtle, Col. 2.8.Col. 2.8.Col 2:8 laies down the medium or means by which Antichriſt leads captive the Conſciences of men, and brings them under his Canonic yoke; that is, foreign, by Philoſophie and vain deceit. Here is, ſaies Grotius, foreign, as if he had ſaid, by the vain deceit of Philoſophie. By Philoſophie here Grotius and Hammond underſtand the Pythagorean; which was ſtuffed with Dogmes, Inſtitutes, Traditions, and Canons, which al who were of Pythagoras's Church or College ſubmitted unto, as their Canon-Law or Rule of Diſcipline; wherein they were followed by Antichriſt and his Church: (as wel as the Primitive Gnoſties:) ſo it follows foreign, according to the tradition of men. This Grotius applies alſo to the Pythagorean Philoſophie, and its Human Traditions and Canons impoſed on al thoſe of that Sect; who have been herein followed foreign (not only by the Gnoſtics, but alſo) by Antichriſt; for what are al his Eccleſiaſtic Traditions and Canons, but corrupt Imitamens of Pythagorean and Talmudic Traditions and Canons? It's true, he pretendes unto a Church-Autoritie as the fountain of al; and ſo did the Phariſees for al their Talmudic Traditions, or Oral Canon-Law; and yet notwithſtanding both one and t'other were but Traditions of men, yea of blind Pythagoreans. Thence it follows, foreign in Philoſophie ſignifies a firſt Principe, Dogme, Inſtitute or Canon: and he addes, of this world; becauſe they flowed from Pythagorean Human Inſtitution, not from Chriſt. We find the like, Gal. 4.3, 9. where foreign is evidently uſed to ſignifie Injunctions or Canons. And are not Antichriſts Eccleſiaſtic Canons here characteriſed to the life? which though they claim kindred with Heavenly Tradition, yet it's a thing moſt plain, that they were al of terrene extract, rudiments of this world, or, as Gal. 4.9. Beggerly elements, deſcended from Tradition, not from Chriſt, as it follows: foreign, and not according to Chriſt; i.e. ſaies Grotius, not ſuch rudiments or canons as Chriſt brought from Heaven. It's true, Antichriſts Canons have Chriſt and his Churches name affixt to them, as the Jewiſh Talmud or p. 168Oral Law paſſeth under the name of Divine Traditions; but in truth both one and t'other owe their origine to Pythagorean Inſtitutes, Traditions, and Canons, not to Chriſt his Royal Canon Law. Col. 2.14.Col 2:14This is farther illuſtrated v. 14. Blotting out the handwriting of Ordinances. foreign ſignifies a Bill or Bond under a mans hand, whereby he binds himſelf to ſome payment of money or dutie: Thence Heſychius interprets it by foreign, i.e. ſuch a Schedule or obligation under a mans own hand, whereby he acknowledgeth a debt, and promiſeth the payment, according to the day appointed. So the Legal Sacrifices, Oblations, Purifications, and Ceremonies were a bond or handwriting, whereby the Jews teſtified and acknowledged their debt to Divine Juſtice. This Bond, ſaies our Apoſtle, Chriſt has cancelled, by nailing it to his Croſſe, (this being one way of cancelling a Bond by ſtriking a nail thorough it:) beware therefore how you ſuffer your ſelves to be brought under any freſh obligation by any Antichriſtian Canons or Injunctions. That this is applicable to Antichriſts Eccleſiaſtic Canons, is evident by the foreign appendant thereto. It is wel known that foreign is a Philoſophic notion, ſignifying an Inſtitute, Injunction or Canon, impoſed on their Diſciples, ſpecially in the Pythagorean Schole: and it was uſed in the ſame notion in the Greek Churches, for a Decree or Canon. So Luk. 2.1. Caeſar's Decree is called foreign, whence this hand-writing of Ordinances is ſtiled, Epheſ. 2.15. foreign, the Law of Commandments in Ordinances; i. e. the Jewiſh Canon-Law conſiſting of many Ordinances, which Antichriſt has ſince revived, mixing therewith many Pythagorean Dogmes or Canons. So it follows, v. 16. Let no man therefore judge you in meat and drink, Col. 2.16. foreign.Col 2:16&c. foreign, judge, is a Law-notion, and as here applied to meat and drink, ſuppoſeth ſome Eccleſiaſtic Canons or Traditions, concerning the ſame. Grotius makes it the ſame with foreign, as Rom. 2.1. and underſtandes it of thoſe Pythagoriſing Maſters, who impoſed theſe their Ordinances under pain of damnation. Which indeed is of none more true than of Antichriſt, who enjoyns the Obſervance of his Eccleſiaſtic Canons and Ordinances under pain of damnation, Purgatorie, Ver. 18.&c. The like he addes, v. 18. foreign, Let no man plunder you of your reward. By reward (ſaies Grotius) he underſtands in this place the libertie vouchſafed by Chriſt. Now what has more abreged this Chriſtian p. 169libertie, than Antichriſts Eccleſiaſtic Canons? which we find more fully deſcribed v. 20. foreign,Col. 2.20.Col 2:20 from the rudiments of the world. He repetes here what he had before mentioned v. 8. foreign (ſaies Grotius) ſignifies al Inſtitutions. They are called the Rudiments of this world, becauſe they were commun to the Gentiles with the Jews; yea they ſeem rather to be traduced from the Gentiles to the Jews, than to procede from the Jews to the Gentiles. So that we ſee what was the fountain whence Antichriſt derived his Eccleſiaſtic Inſtitutes, namely ſome human, and principally Pythagorean Inſtitution or Canon; which the Apoſtle gives a ſtrict caution againſt in what follows, Why, as though living in the world, are ye ſubject to Ordinances? foreign, i. e. why do ye ſuffer your ſelves to be impoſed upon by thoſe Antichriſtian Pythagorean Dogmes? foreign, as has been before obſerved, ſignifies to impoſe a Dogme, Inſtitute, or Canon, anſwerably to foreign, to impoſe a Law. And look as the Pythagoreans had their Dogmes, Inſtitutes or Canons, which they impoſed on their Diſciples; ſo Antichriſt his Eccleſiaſtic Canons or Laws, which for the moſt part were of Pythagorean extract, as v. 21. of which hereafter. Thence it follows,Ver. 22. v. 22. foreign, according to the Commandements and doctrines of men. This relates to the foreign, v. 20. as if he had ſaid, Al theſe Pythagorean Injunctions, Dogmes, or Canons, which theſe Gnoſtics have already aſſumed, and Antichriſt wil hereafter re-aſſume, they are but human ſigments or Traditions, not of Divine ſtampe and inſtitution. Whence he addes, v. 23. Which things indeed have a ſhew of wiſdome. Ver. 23.foreign, an apparence of Divine, Canonic inſtitution. As al Antichriſts Canons have a ſhew of Church-Autoritie, or Divine Canonic Inſtitution, though they are indeed but Human, Pythagorean, and Jewiſh Traditions, founded on Wil-worſhip: as it follows, foreign, ſaies Grotius, ſignifies Rites or Ceremonies; which had its origine from the Thracians, as Plutarch teacheth us. Whence foreign ſignifies Rites and Obſervations taken up of our own accord; which the Hebrews cal foreign, and the Greeks foreign. Such indeed are al Antichriſts Inſtitutes and Canons, no other than the Injunctions of his own Antichriſtian Pleaſure, taken up in imitation of Pythagorean Dogmes, mixed with ſome Jewiſh Ordinances, and framed into a Canon-Law, for the conſervation of his tyrannic Wil-worſhip, which p. 170he impoſeth on al his ſlaves, under the uſurped pretenſion of Church-autoritie, and Apoſtolic Tradition. Thus we have ſhewen what foundation Antichriſts Canonic Theologie, as to its formal conſtitution, had in the Pythagorean Philoſophie.

§. 3.2. The Mater of Antichriſts Canon-Law from Pagan Philoſophie. As Antichriſt derived the Forme, ſo in like manner the Mater of his Eccleſiaſtic Canons from Pagan Philoſophie; the Demonſtration whereof wil appear evident from an enumeration of Particulars. Indeed the whole bodie of Antichriſts Canon-Law ſeems to be but a reviving of the old Pagan foreign, Demon-worſhip, according to Pauls Prophetic deſcription of that Man of Sin, 1 Tim. 4.1. foreign, &c. We ſhal inſiſt only on ſuch of his Canons as are manifeſtly Derivations from, and Imitamens of the Philoſophers Demon-worſhip. And the main ſeat of this Diſcourſe ſhal be that great character of Antichriſts Diſcipline, 1 Tim. 4.1, 2, 3.1 Tim. 4 1, 2, 3.1 Tim 4:11 Tim 4:21 Tim 4:3 Doctrines of Demons, &c. Before we enter upon the examen of Particulars, we are to make our way plain by removing thoſe Antichriſtian Gloſſes, which are given by Grotius, and his Adherents, on this and ſuch-like characters of Antichriſt. Grotius reſtraines theſe words to Apollonius Tyanaeus, that Pythagorean Sorcerer, and Hammond ſeems to limit them to Simon Magus, and other Gnoſtic Heretics; which ſo far as they were Forerunners of Antichriſt, we have before admitted. But yet that the main ſcope of this Prophetic Character is to delineate Antichriſt, and his Demon-worſhip introduced by his Eccleſiaſtic Canons, is excellently wel proved to our hands by Mede, on 2 Pet. 2.1. (Diatr. 3. pag. 532). In theſe Propheſies (ſaies he) of a general defection and Apoſtaſie of the later times, 2 Theſ. 2. 1 Tim. 4.1, &c. if St. Paul ſhould mean no other but the Errors of particular men, and their trouble from the Church, they ſhould make no Propheſie at al, or a needleſſe one. For who knows not, that in St. Paul's, St. John's, and the Apoſtles times were diverſe Hereſies and Heretics here and there diſperſed: of al theſe they could not mean, when as (1) the known bodie of the viſible Church diſclaimed them. (2) They foretel of a corruption to come in after times, or as 1 Tim. 4.1. In the later times: for no man uſeth to foretel of things which are already, as if they were to come. — The corruption and defection therefore ſo much propheſied of, was another manner of one; ſuch a kind of one as had neither been before in the Church, nor was to be; namely ſuch an one as ſhould not be p. 171diſclaimed by the bodie of the Church, but ſhould ſurpriſe and overwhelme the viſible Church itſelf.

We now procede to the particulars of Antichriſt's foreign, or Canonic Demon-worſhip, according to 1 Tim. 4.1.1 Tim. 4.1. foreign, Doctrines of Demons what.1 Tim 4:1 foreign. 1. That foreign here ſignifies not a mere Speculative Doctrine, but an Inſtitute or Canon, as Col. 2.22. anſwerably to the notion of foreign, Col. 2.14, 20. we have proved §. 2. To which we may adde, that this alſo ſuites with the notion of foreign, which, according to Pagan and Scripture-phraſeologie, ſignifies not a mere Doctor and Teacher, but alſo an Inſtitutor or Preceptor, who has Autoritie to impoſe his Dogmes and Canons; whence the proper title given to Chriſt is foreign, anſwerably to the Hebrew foreign, Rabbi. So that by foreign, we muſt underſtand thoſe Eccleſiaſtic Inſtitutes or Canons, which Antichriſt was to frame, for the introducing the Philoſophic foreign, or Demon-worſhip. And that this is the proper notion of foreign in this place, namely to ſignifie Demons, (not Devils as Grotius wil have it) is evident from thoſe parallel places, Act. 17.22. foreign, Rev. 9.20. foreign, 1 Cor. 10.21, foreign, &c. Of which more in what follows. Now theſe Demon-Dogmes or Canons framed by Antichriſt, in imitation of the old Grecian foreign, (framed by the Philoſophers, and made a chief part of their foreign, Natural Theologie) comprehend ſeveral branches parallel to the Pagan Demon-Canons.

1. As the Philoſophers had their Deified Demons,1. Antichriſt's Canoniſed Saints in imitation of Pagan Demons. which took up a good part of their Natural Theologie, ſo alſo Antichriſt has his Canoniſed Saints, who fil up a great part of his Canon-Law, as 1 Tim. 4.1. foreign, Demons. Mede, in his excellent Diſcourſe of the Apoſtaſie of the later times, opens this Text at large, and ſhews, That the Primitive Chriſtians Canoniſed Saints, and honored their Reliques in imitation of the Gentiles, their Demon worſhip, thereby to allure them; which laid the foundation of Antichriſt's foreign, and Idolatric Apoſtaſie. We ſhal diſcourſe a little more diſtinctly and particularly touching theſe Antichriſtian Saints, and their derivation from the Pagan Demons. As for the origine of the Philoſophers Demons we have once and again diſcourſed thereof, as Part 2. Bock 2. Chap. 8. §. 11. and P. 3. B. 2. C. 1. §. 1. alſo Philoſoph. General. P. 1. L. 3. C. 4. §. 4. We ſhal adde thereto what account we p. 172find hereof in Auguſtin and Ludovicus Vives thereon. Auguſt. de Civit. Dei, lib. 8. cap. 18. tels us, That Apuleius (and whoever are of the ſame opinion) does in vain defer or beſtow this honor on thoſe Demons, whom he placeth as midling Gods in the Air, as thoſe who muſt tranſport the prayers of men to the Gods, and thence the commands of the Gods to men. For they who believed theſe things thought it unworthy for men to mingle with the Gods, or the Gods with men; but that it was meet for theſe Demons to mingle with men and the Gods. Where Ludovicus Vives gives this whole Myſterie more fully to us: This is the opinion of Plato in his Convivium, and attributed to Socrates, who asking Diotima what Love was? ſhe made anſwer, foreign, A great Demon, O Socrates: for every Demon is a middle betwixt God and Mortal. Socrates not yet underſtanding, demands what this Demon's power and nature was? then Diotima anſwers, to interpret and conveigh human affaires to the Gods, and Divine affaires to us: i. e. prayers and ſacrifices from men to the Gods, and precepts and rewards from the Gods to men. Wherefore Demons being placed in the middle, they fil up that place, that ſo the univerſe may be wel diſpoſed and conjoined. Hence flows Prophetes, and al Sacerdotal art, and whatever belongs to Sacrifices, and Incantations. To theſe ſhe addes, what Auguſtin cites, foreign, &c. God mingleth not with man; but al commerce betwixt men and God is by Demons. Theſe Apuleius cals Adminiſters and Salvation-bringers. They are called by Capella, Angels, i.e. Meſſengers. Now that the Popiſh Saints were taken up, and brought into the Church in imitation of theſe Pagan Demons ſeems very evident, and that according to the general conſent both of ancient and moderne Writers. Indeed there was a great foundation laid for theſe Antichriſtian Demons or Saints in the fourth Centurie, as ſoon as the Church began to have any relaxation from Pagan perſecution. This I gather out of Auguſtin, de Civit. Dei, lib. 8. cap. 26. But that Egyptian Triſmegiſtus ſeems to grieve, that the Commemorations of our Martyrs ſhould ſuccede the Temples and Commemorations of their Demons; ſo that he who ſhal read theſe things with a mind perverſe and averſe from us, may think, that as the Pagans worſhipped their Gods in their Temples, ſo we worſhip p. 173our dead Martyrs at their Graves, &c. By which it is evident, that in Auguſtin's time the Chriſtians performed many Commemorations and other ſolemnities at the Graves of the Martyrs and Saints, al which had a very great reſſemblance with the Pagan foreign, Demon worſhip; though as yet it was not arrived to foreign, a Saint-worſhip. For Auguſtin, in his following Chapter endeavors to vindicate this reſpect which ſome gave to the Martyrs and Saints from the imputation of Saint-worſhip; though it is moſt certain, that it laid a very great foundation for the ſame, as it may appear by Auguſtin's own words, and the obſervations of learned Papiſts thereon. Auguſt. de civit. Dei, lib. 8. cap. 27. ſpeakes thus, Neither do we notwithſtanding conſtitute Temples, Prieſthoods, Sacreds, and Sacrifices to theſe Martyrs; becauſe they are not our God, but their God is ours. — Where-ever therefore there be performed Religioſe Obſequies, in the places where Martyrs ſuffered, they are only Ornaments for Memorial, not Sacreds, or Sacrifices of the Dead, as if they were Gods. Whoever alſo carrie their Banquets thither, which truely is not performed by the better ſort of Chriſtians, and in many Countries there is no ſuch cuſtome; yet whoever they be who do this, (which Banquets when they have ſet down at the Martyrs Sepulchre, they pray and carrie them away, that they may feſte thereon, or that they may beſtow them upon the poor amongſt them) they wil that their Banquets be ſanctified there, by the merits of the Martyrs, in the name of the God of the Martyrs. But yet he who acknowledgeth one true God does not acknowlege theſe to be Sacrifices of the Martyrs. We therefore worſhip not our Martyrs with Divine honors, as they worſhip their Demon Gods. Thus Auguſtin. By which, though he endeavors to vindicate the Chriſtians of his age from foreign, Demon-worſhip performed to the Saints; yet it is evident by his own confeſſion, that ſome ſuperſtitioſe Chriſtians were too much inclined thereto: for he ſaies, That they carried their Banquets to the Sepulchres of the Martyrs, and there prayed, and ſo carried them away again, ſuppoſing them to be ſanctified by the merits of the Martyrs. Yea, Auguſtin, Lib. 6. of his Confeſſions, relateth of his own Mother, That ſhe brought to Milan, for a Commemoration of the Saints, Bread, and Fruments, and Wine, and gave them to the dore-keeper: But theſe things were prohibited p. 174by Ambroſe, to avoid occaſion of rioting, and becauſe theſe kind of Parentals were moſt like to the Gentiles ſuperſtition. This alſo is taken notice of by Caſſander, that learned and moderate Papiſt, Conſultat. Art. 21. de Venerat. Reliqu. Moreover, in the times of Ambroſe and Auguſtin this cuſtome prevailed, that the people brought Banquets for the Commemoration of the Martyrs, which that it was not done by the better Chriſtians, but prohibited by Ambroſe at Milan, Auguſtin teſtifies, Confeſſ. l. 6. c. 2. And that theſe and ſuch-like Imitamens of the Pagan foreign, Demon-worſhip, gave a great and effectual entrance to the Popiſh Canoniſed Saints, and their foreign is confeſſed by ſome ingenuous Papiſts. So Ludovicus Vives, on theſe words of Auguſtin, de Civit. Dei, l. 8. c. 27. But theſe are not the ſacrifices of Martyrs. Many Chriſtians, ſaies he, often offend in a good mater, in that they worſhip their He-and-She-Saints as God: neither can I diſcerne any difference in many things between this their opinion of Saints, and that which the Gentiles had of their Gods. Which is indeed a great and moſt true Confeſſion, and is taken notice of by ſeveral of our Writers: as by Reignolds in his Conference with Hart, where he tels, That Ludovicus Vives ſaith in his Comment on Auguſtin, l. 8. c. 27. that Saints are eſtimed and worſhipped by many as were the Gods amongſt the Gentiles. The like Confeſſion I find in Caſſander, that moderate Papiſt, in his Conſultation, Art. 21. where quoting this place of Auguſtin, he ſaith, That the ignorance of the commun people hath attributed Divine honor to the Saints; as when Temples, Altars, Sacrifices, Prieſthoods, Vows, Feſtivals are conceived to be conſecrated not only to the memorie, as the Ancients ſpeak, but to the honor and worſhip of the Saints. Which Error Auguſtin now and then refutes: We, ſaies he, build not Temples to the Martyrs, as to Gods, but memorials for them as dead men. Where Grotius obſerves wel, That we ſhould take diligent heed, leſt under too favorable inclinations in this mater, the Pagan cuſtomes be reduced into Chriſtianiſme.

Thus we ſee how Antichriſts Canoniſed Saints were but Imitamens or Apes of the Gentile-Demons. The Origine of Popiſh Saints the ſame with that of the Pagan Demons.And to make the parallel yet more exact and clear, we ſhal ſhew how theſe Popiſh Saints had the very ſame origine amongſt Chriſtians, as the Deified Demons had amongſt the Pagans. We have already, C. 1. §. 3. treated p. 157of the Origine of thoſe Demons out of Plato, who tels us, That they were certain noble Heroes belonging to the Golden-Age, who having been exceding famoſe for their Wiſdome, Virtues, or ſome wonderful atchievements and warlike exploits, were after their death, according to the appointment of the Divine Oracle, Deified and worſhipped as Gods. We find the like account in Heſiod, (whom Plato cites to the ſame purpoſe) who ſaies, That the men of the Golden-Age being dead became, foreign, Demons and Conſervators of mortal men. By men of the Golden Age, we need no way dout but Heſiod and Plato meant the firſt Patriarches and Heads of mankind; who having gained a great eſtime with their Poſteritie, for ſome conceived excellence of Wiſdome, Virtue, or Warlike exploits, were, by the Devils inveiglement, Idoliſed by Superſtitioſe ſpirits, as Demons, or Deiſied Mediators. This is wel obſerved by Mede, on Gen. 3.13-15. (Diatrib. 2. p. 428) Here I obſerve, (ſaies he) that over-much dotage upon a conceived excellence, whether of Wiſdome, or whatſoever elſe, without a ſpecial eye to Gods Commandement, hath ever been the occaſion of greateſt Errors in the World; and the Devil under this maske, uſeth to bleer our eyes, and with this bait to enveigle our hearts, that he may ſecurely bring us to his lure. The admired Wiſdome of the long-living Fathers of the elder World, having been for ſo many Ages as Oracles to their off-ſpring growen even to a People and Nation while they lived, was the ground of the ancient Idolatrie of mankind, whileſt they ſuppoſed, that thoſe to whom for Wiſdome they had recourſe being living, could not but help them when they were dead. This we may learne out of Heſiod, who ſaith, The men of the Golden Age being dead, became Demons, or Godlings and Patrons of mortal men. So the opinion of the bleſſed Martyrs ſuperlative Glorie in Heaven, was made the occaſion of the New-found Idolatrie of the Chriſtian-Churches, wherewith they are for the greateſt part yet overwhelmed. And the eſtime which Peter had above the reſt of the Apoſtles, in regard of Chieſdome, even in the Apoſtles times, was abuſed by the old Deceiver, to inſtal the man of ſin. This made St. Paul to ſay, 2 Theſ. 2.7. The myſterie of iniquitie was then working, &c. Thus we ſee how the Popiſh foreign, Saint-worſhip, had the very ſame origine or foundation as the Pagan foreign, viz. p. 176ſome conceived excellence, pretended merit, or wonder-working power.

§. 4. We have given ſome account of the origine of this foreign, in the Primitive Churches of the third and fourth Centurie, we ſhal procede to treat more particularly of it as reduced by Antichriſt unto his ſyſteme or bodie of Canonic Theologie in the following Centuries, with endeavors to demonſtrate its exact ſymboliſation with the Pagan foreign. And in this procedure we ſhal diſcourſe more particularly (1) of the origine of theſe Canoniſed Saints; (2) of their formal Canoniſation; (3) of their Mediatory office; and al in imitation of the Pagan Demons, their origine, &c.

1.1. The Origine of Canoniſed Saints anſwerable to that of Demons from a fond conceit of ſome great excellence in them. As to the origine of theſe Canoniſed Saints, it was, as it has been hinted, the very ſame with that of the Pagan Demons, namely from a ſuperſtitioſe conceit of ſome Divine Wiſdome, Power, and Excellence in their Anceſtors. For look as in the old World, its infant-ſtate, God vouchſafed ſeveral glorioſe Manifeſtations of a miraculoſe Power and Providence with his Church and People, thereby to confirme their Faith and amaze their Enemies; which the Devil in following Ages endeavoring to imitate by his fabuloſe Apparitions, and lying wonders, allured the credulous Superſtitioſe World into a fond admiration of their Demon-Gods, their Miraculoſe Apparations and Power: ſo in like manner in the Primitive Churches, Chriſt vouchſafing a Miraculoſe Power and Providence to the firſt Planters of the Chriſtian Faith; Antichriſt in following Ages affected the like wonder-working Power, and aſcribed the ſame to his Canoniſed Saints. 1 Tim. 4.2. foreign.1 Tim 4:2Al this ſeems fully implied in that 1 Tim. 4.2. where having made mention, v. 1. of Antichriſt's Doctrines of Demons, which he ſhould introduce into the Church under his Canoniſed Saints, he addes v. 2. foreign, &c. Speaking lies in hypocriſie, or through the hypocriſie of liers. Theſe lies which Antichriſt ſpeakes are called, 2 Theſ. 2.9. Lying wonders, or lying miracles; which he pretendes to worke in and by his Demons, or Canoniſed Saints; and theſe he is ſaid to ſpeak, foreign, in hypocriſie. The primitive notion of foreign, is the ſame with foreign, a perſonation, or imitation: ſo in Plato, foreign, an hypocrite, is the ſame with foreign, an Imitator, or one that perſonates another. foreign ſignifies, (1) to ſimulate, feigne, or counterfeit either a perſon or thing.Luk. 20.20.Luke 20:20 So Luk. 20.20. foreign, who p. 177feigned themſelves righteous. Thence (2) to act the part of another, to imitate, perſonate, or repreſent another. As foreign, to repreſent Neſtor. Whence foreign, ſignifies among the ancient Grecians, Hiſtrio, or Mimus, one that perſonates or imitates another. Thence alſo foreign, from foreign, ſignifies an Hiſtrionic Art, the repreſentation or imitation of another perſon, the fiction of a perſon on the Theatre or Stage. And this ſeems the proper import of it here, 1 Tim. 4.2. Where the particle foreign notes the cauſe and manner of the action, and therefore it is rendred by Beza and Schmidius, per, through the hypocriſie of liers. Which Mede underſtandes Tranſitively, and ſo to be repeted foreign, as applicable to al the following branches; namely, that through the hypocriſie, ſimulation, or imitation of liers, of men of ſcared Conſciences, of thoſe that forbid Mariage and Meats, &c. al thoſe Demon-Doctrines ſhould be introduced by Antichriſt and his Sectators. So that foreign, may be very properly render'd here, in or through Imitation, or Hypocriſie, as Schmidius and Beza. By which is ſignified, that they ſhould act the part of Stage-players, or Mimes, that imitate ſome other perſon; and by their Hiſtrionic or Hypocritic Imitation introduce al the old Pagan Demon-Doctrines and Superſtitions. And ſo the ſenſe is this: that Antichriſt's Canoniſed Saints ſhould be introduced into the Church of Chriſt, in imitation of the Pagan Demons, by lying wonders, &c. This began about the fifth Centurie, after the death of Julian the Apoſtate; though theſe Saints came not to be formally Canoniſed 'til about the middle of the ninth Centurie. We have the whole of this Myſterie of Iniquitie excellently unfolded to us, by Mede on this, 1 Tim. 4.2. Touching the Apoſtaſie of the later times, Edit. 2. pag. 120. The Deifying and invocating of Saints, and adoring reliques, is the moſt ancient for time of al the reſt of the Demon Popiſh Idolatrie, and began to appear in the Church preſently after the death of Julian the Apoſtate: the grounds and occaſions whereof were moſt ſtrange reports of wonders ſhewed upon thoſe, who approched the Shrines of Martyrs, and prayed at their Memories and Sepulchres; Devils charmed, diſeaſes cured, &c. which the Doctors of thoſe times avouched to be done by the power and prayers of glorified Martyrs, and by the notice they took of mens devotions at their Sepulchres; though at the beginning ſuch devotions were directed to God alone; and thoſe places p. 178only choſen for the ſtirring up zele and fervor, by the memorie of thoſe bleſſed and glorioſe champions of Chriſt. But while the world ſtood in admiration, and the moſt eſtimed of theſe Wonders, as of the glorioſe beams of the triumph of Chriſt, they were ſoon perſuaded to cal upon them as Patrons and Mediators; whoſe power with God and notice of things done upon earth, they thought that theſe ſignes and miracles approved. And then he addes, pag. 121,-123. But here is the wonder of wonders, that none of theſe miraculoſe ſignes were ever heard of in the Church for the firſt three hundred years after Chriſt. — But in this alſo the Idolatrie of Saint-worſhip was a true counterfeit of the Gentiles Idolatrie of Demons. Did not Demon-worſhip enter after the very ſame manner? was it not firſt inſinuated, and after eſtabliſhed by ſignes and wonders of the very ſelf-ſame kind? Whence he addes, pag. 125, &c. The ſecond particular of foreign, was fabuloſe Legends of the Acts of Saints and Martyrs. This was alſo another means to advance the Doctrines of Demons. For the true acts and ſtories of Martyrs being extinguiſhed for the moſt part, by the bloodie Edict of Diocleſian, they now begin to ſupplie again that loſſe, by collecting ſuch tales as were then current of them, and adding ſuch Miracles as were fabled after their death, faſhioned al to the beſt advantage of what they meant to promote in the Church, and was already on foot in the ſame. Revel. 13.15.Rev 13:15Hence Revel. 13.15. it's ſaid, that Antichriſt, by his lying wonders and hypocritic aſſuming of a Vicarious power from Chriſt, had power to give life to the Image of the Beſte. foreign, to the image, i.e. to forme an Antichriſtian Church, Worſhip, Ceremonies, and Inſtitutes exactly conformable to the Demon-worſhip, Inſtitutes and Ceremonies of the Pagan Beſte. By al which it is moſt evident, that, as face anſwers to face in the glaſſe, ſo theſe Canoniſed Saints, their origine from lying Wonders and fabuloſe Legends exactly anſwers to the Pagan Demons, their origine from lying wonders, and Poetic fables. So that we may ſafely conclude, according to 1 Tim. 4.2. that the origine of theſe Popiſh Saints,The Canoniſation of Saints an Imitamen of the Demon-foreign. &c. was but foreign, through the perſonation or imitation of thoſe liers, who by their lying wonders, &c. introduced thoſe Gentile Demons and their worſhip.

2. Having given the original grounds and occaſion of Antichriſts p. 179Canoniſed Saints, exactly parallel to that of the Gentile Demons, we now procede to their formal Canoniſation, to demonſtrate how this alſo was according to 1 Tim. 4.2. foreign, in imitation of that fabuloſe, lying, Pagan foreign, or Deification of their Demons. And for the clearing hereof we muſt remember, that though Antichriſt's Demons or Saints had their vital and principal parts formed betimes, even aſſoon as he himſelf received his Spirit, Head, and Power, namely about the fifth Centurie, as has been proved; yet they came not to be Canoniſed Saints, or complete Mediators, til about the middle of the ninth Centurie. For we muſt know, that this foreign, or Demon worſhip, introduced by Antichriſt, was oppoſed in the Eaſterne and Greek Churches by diverſe Emperors, Nobles, Biſhops, and People, from the year 720 til after the year 840. Yea ſome denied the title of Saints unto Martyrs: neither could any of the Popes before Adrian, about the year 880 obtain a fixed Canon for the Canoniſing of Saints, and eſtabliſhing their foreign. This has been wel obſerved by a French Author, Traitè des anciennes Ceremonies, pag. 67. In the year 880, Pope Adrian was the firſt who reſolved to Canoniſe the Saints, imitating therein the Apotheoſes of the Romans under Paganiſme. And that this Canoniſation of Saints was indeed the very ſame with the Pagan foreign, Apotheoſis or Deification of Demons, appears from the very confeſſion of their own Canoniſts, quoted by learned Bochart, in his Diſcourſe againſt Veron, p. 815. The Roman Church has other Gods, the Pope, the Maſſe-God, the Virgin Marie; to whom Leo the tenth gives the title of Goddeſſe; the Angels and al the Saints, who are Gods by participation, according to the Doctrine of Cajetan: whence it is that the Director of the Inquiſitors cals the Canoniſation of Saints, Apotheoſis, i.e. Deification. Wherein note, that Cajetan's Gods by participation, are the very ſame, both name and thing, with Plato's foreign, made-Gods, which is the title he gives his Demons. And that this Popiſh Canoniſation of Saints is but foreign, a perſonation and imitation of the Pagan foreign, Apotheoſis, is farther evident from the ſameneſſe of Rites and Modes uſed both in one and t'other. As for the Demon-Apotheoſis we have it mentioned in Plato, Rep. 5. pag. 469. We conſult the Divine Oracle in what rank thoſe bleſſed divine men are to be had, and with what enſignes they are to be honored; and we p. 180performe unto them the ſame honors which he preſcribeth, and for the future we ſerve and worſhip them as Demons. And do not the ſons of Antichriſt take the very ſame courſe in the Canoniſation of their Saints? do they not firſt conſult the Pope their great Oracle, and then according to his Preſcript or Canon, worſhip their Saints? yea, to demonſtrate this yet more fully, it is obſervable, that the Papiſts give unto their Canoniſed Saints the very ſame Rites, Ceremonies, and Enſignes, which the Pagans gave to their Demon-Gods. Thus Bochart againſt Veron, part. 3. cap. 25. pag. 888. They have transferred to their Saints al the Equipage of the Pagan Gods: to St. Wolfang the Hatchet, or Hook of Saturne; to Moſes the Hornes of Jupiter Hammon; to St. Peter the keyes of Janus. In brief, they have chaſſed away al the Gods out of the Pantheon at Rome, to place in their room al the Saints: Whoſe Images they worſhip with like devotion, as thoſe of the Pagan Gods ſometimes were. They dreſſe them up in apparel, they crown them with garlands of flowers, they carrie them on their ſhoulders, they bow before them, they addreſſe their prayers to them, they make them deſcend from Heaven, they attribute to them miraculoſe virtues, &c. By which it's manifeſt, that theſe Popiſh Canoniſed Saints were introduced by Antichriſt foreign, as 1 Tim. 4.2. in an hypocritic lying imitation of the Pagan Deified Demons.

5.3. The Saints Mediatorie Office in imitation of the Pagan Demon-Mediators. As Antichriſt's Canoniſed Saints are parallel to the Pagan Demons as to their origine and formal Canoniſation, ſo in like manner in point of Office, as Mediators betwixt God and men. This alſo is implied in 1 Tim. 4.2. foreign. i.e. teaching lying falſe Saint-mediators, in imitation of the Pagan-Demon-mediators. We have before Chap. 1. §. 3 proved out of Plato and others, that the great office of the Pagan Demons was to be as Mediators betwixt the ſupreme God or Gods, and men; becauſe as Plato affirmes, foreign, the ſupreme God mingles not with men, but by the mediation of theſe Demons. And more particularly, he tels us, that theſe Demons were appointed (1) foreign, to interpret and tranſport the prayers and ſacrifices of men to God, and the commands and rewards of God to men. (2) That foreign, al Divination was from theſe Demons. (3) foreign, al communion with God was by virtue of theſe Demons. (4) To which adde, that of p. 181Heſiod, foreign, Demons are patrons of mortal men. So Diogenes Laertius, in the Life of Zeno, ſaies, that the Stoics held ſuch Demons, foreign, &c. who had compaſſion of men, and a very great care of human affaires. Now do not the Popiſh Canonic Saints exactly anſwer to theſe Pagan Demons in al theſe points? Are they not made Interpreters of mens deſires to God, and conveighers of Gods gifts to men? do not theſe ſons of Antichriſt, by virtue of their Saints work Miracles, divine, &c? Have they not al their Tutelar Saints, or Demons? Laſtly, is not al communion betwixt God and men in the Roman Church tranſacted by their Canoniſed Saints or Demons? We have a good reflexion hereon made by judicioſe and holy Deering, on Heb. 4 15. The Papiſts have learned to make the Saints their Mediators from the Heathens. The Gods of the Gentiles, which were Devils, had this worſhip amongſt them: the Devils amongſt themſelves, they who were reputed of a lower ſort were made as means to come unto the higher; whereof they were called Dii Medioxumi, i.e. Gods only for interceſſion. The Gentiles Books are ful of Exemples, how theſe things were practiſed: as if Neptune would ſpeak to Jupiter, he made Mercurie his interceſſor. — And what elſe do the Papiſts but teach al their poſteritie in chuſing many Mediators, to have conſidence in none, no boldneſſe unto God, &c? Yea Cardinal Perron obſerving this reſſemblance betwixt the Grecian Demons and their Canoniſed, Saints makes uſe of the former to prove the later. So Bochart contre Veron, pag. 883. The Sieur du Perron cites Plato to prove, that the Dead have care of things here below. Theſe Canoniſed Saints are alſo exactly parallel with the Phenician Baalim (which were the ſame with the Grecian Demons) brought into the Jewiſh Church by Jezebel, and ſet up as Mediators in the room of the true Meſſias, of which we find a good account in Mede on 2 Pet. 2.1. Diatrib. 3. pag. 548. The ſecond main Apoſtaſie is called the way of Ahab; not becauſe he was the firſt bringer in, but the chief eſtabliſher thereof, — which was to worſhip Baal-Gods, or Baalim; ſuppoſing either by theſe to have eaſier acceſſe to the Lord of Hoſts the Soverain God; or that theſe he might have reſort unto at al times for al maters; as being near at hand, and not ſo high in dignitie, &c. when therefore Chriſtians do worſhip or invocate Saints or Angels, whether p. 182with Images or without, to be as under-Mediators with God for them, or of themſelves to beſtow ſome favor upon them, thoſe who do this are fallen into the Apoſtaſie of Ahab. — Here note, that whereſoever you read in Scripture of the Idolatrie of Jeroboam's Calves, and of Ahab's Baalim, thinke of what I have told you, and know that whatſoever God ſpeakes againſt thoſe things here, the ſame he ſpeakes of the Apoſtate Chriſtians under Rome, whoſe caſe is in al points the ſame, &c. Theſe Baalim or Demon-Mediators ſeem pointed at by Paul, 1 Cor. 8.5.1 Cor. 8.5. foreign.1 Cor 8:5 Lords many. foreign anſwers to the Phenician foreign, Baalim. They derive foreign from foreign, Cyrus, Perſ. foreign Coreſch; which among the Perſians was one of the greateſt Titles of honor, ſignifying Lord; whereby they called, (1) The Sun, their ſupreme Lord: So Plutarch in Artoxerxe, informes us, That the Perſians called the Sun, foreign, Cyrus: and ſo it agrees with the Hebraic foreign Cheres, which ſignifies the Sun. (2) Cyrus their great Emperor, who was dignified with the ſame title of Honor, as their ſupreme Lord on earth, and after his death worſhipped by them as a Demon, or one of their Baalim, Mediatorie Lords. Hence the Exploits of Cyrus being moſt famoſe among the Grecians, or elſe from the Suns Dominion, foreign, ſignified among the Grecians ſupreme Dominion, and foreign ſupreme Lord, the ſame with foreign Baal. So that foreign here being of the ſame import with foreign Baalim, plainly indigitates the Philoſophers Demons, or Mediatorie Lords, which were the original Exemplars of Antichriſt's Mediatorie Saints. But more expreſly Col. 2.8, 9, 10, &c. v. 8. our Apoſtle gives us an account of the means by which the Gnoſtics of that Age, and Antichriſt after them, ſhould introduce theſe Demon-Mediators, and that is vain Pythagorean Philoſophie; to which v. 9. he oppoſeth Chriſt, in whom dwels al the fulneſſe of the Godhead bodily. Col. 2.9, 10, 18, 19Col 2:9Col 2:10Col 2:18Col 2:19foreign, i. e. really, eſſentially, and perfectly, in oppoſition to thoſe Demons or Idol-Gods. Whence he addes, v. 10. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of al principalitie and power. i.e. Chriſt is your complete Mediator, who is Head or Soverain of al Angels and men, and therefore infinitely above al tho2e Pythagorean Demons, Gnoſtic Aeones, and Popiſh Canoniſed Saints, be they what they wil. Thence he ſubjoines ver. 18. Let no man beguile you of your reward, in a voluntarie humilitie and worſhipping of Angels. Which the Gnoſtics then, and Antichriſt ſince introduced, p. 183placing Angels as Mediators in the room of Chriſt. So it follows, ver. 19. Not holding the head. i.e. They who are guilty of this Angel-worſhip do thereby diſclaim Chriſt, who is the only Mediator and Interceſſor to the Father. By which Prophetic diſcoverie the Spirit of God doth fully ſtrike thorough al thoſe Demon-Saint-Mediators, which Antichriſt by his Eccleſiaſtic Canons has introduced and placed on Chriſt's Throne. It would be an endleſſe thing to enumerate al thoſe Canoniſed Saints, which Antichriſt has by his creative power erected as Mediators, in imitation of the Pagan Demons: I ſhal yet mention one or two of the chiefeſt. The ſupreme and head of al Antichriſt's Canonic Saints is the Virgin Marie, who paſſeth amongſt his Sons for a Deeſſe or Godeſſe, yea they ſeem to lay more ſtreſſe upon her Mediation and Interceſſion than upon Chriſt's. This our bleſſed Lord foreſeeing ſeems to give a tacite check unto, in not admitting her to be an Interceſſor here on Earth, in a ſmal and trivial caſe. So Joh. 2.4.Joh. 2 4.John 2:4 What have I to do with thee, O woman, &c.? Chriſt denies her Mediation and Interceſſion in a trifle, thereby to rebuke thoſe fond conceits, which he foreſaw Antichriſt would in following times inſinuate touching her prevalence and Interceſſion with himſelf. Another great Saint-Mediator is Peter; to whom they give the Keys of Heaven. But we find Paul to put a ſtop to this Idoliſing humor, as much depreſſing him as Antichriſt exalts him. Yea indeed nothing is more injurioſe to thoſe bleſſed Spirits than to attribute to them a Mediatorie Office. Whence the Spirit, of God cals this, blaſphemie againſt thoſe heavenly inhabitants, Revel. 13.6.Rev 13:6Rev. 13.6. And them that dwelt in heaven; i. e. ſaies Mede, (in his Clav. Apocalyp.) againſt Angels and men, by Demon-worſhip. And indeed what greater contumelie or blaſphemie can there be caſt forth againſt thoſe glorified Spirits, than to place them in the room of Pagan Demons, to occupie and poſſeſſe the Mediatorie Throne of their deareſt Lord, whoſe glorie is ſo dear unto them? Certainly Antichriſt wil never receive thankes from them for this pretended favor, but real blaſphemie againſt them.