Concerning Idolatry in the Church of Rome, Title page – Preface
A DISCOURSE Concerning the IDOLATRY Practised in the CHURCH OF ROME, AND The danger of Salvation in the Communion of it: in answer to some Papers of a Revolted Protestant. WHEREIN A particular Account is given of the Fanaticism and Divisions of that Church.
By Edward Stillingfleet D. D.
LONDON, Printed by Robert White, for Henry Mortlock at the Sign of the Phoenix in St. Pauls Church-yard, and at the White Hart in Westminster Hall, 1671.
THE PREFACE.
ALthough I see no great effect of the Courtship commonly used towards the Candid and Ingenuous Reader, unless it be in diverting the censure from the Book to the Preface:§. 1. yet in some cases it looks like a breach of the Readers priviledge,The necessity of writing in these Controversies. not to give him an account of the occasion and design of a Book. Especially, when the matter handled therein, hath been thought so often discussed, and is of so general concernment, that every pretender thinks he knows as much already, as is to be known in it. But we really find no greater advantage hath been given to our Adversaries than this, that the things in dispute between us are generally no better understood, by the persons they have their designs upon. For assoon as they have baffled their ignorance and mistakes, these have been ready to yield up themselves and the Cause, imagining nothing more could be said for it, than they could say for themselves. Whereby our Church hath not only suffered in its reputation, as far as that is concerned in the weakness of some of its members; but strange boasts and triumphs have been made by those of the Church of Rome, when such who understood not their own Religion have embraced theirs. While these disputes were fresh in the world, every one thought himself concerned to enquire into them; but since our Church hath been so long established on the principles of the Reformation, and other unhappy controversies have risen up; the most have taken this Cause for granted, and thought it needless to enquire any farther into the Grounds of it.
Which our Adversaries perceiving,§. 2. they have found far greater success in their attempts upon particular persons,The present arts used by our Adversaries to gain Proselyter. than in publick Writings: for these have only provoked others to lay open the palpable weakness of their Cause, whereas in the other by their wayes of Address, and all the arts of Insinuation, they have instilled their principles into the minds of some less judicious persons before they were aware of it. Thence it is easie to observe that the greatest mischief they have done, hath been like the Pestilence by walking in darkness, and spreading their infection by whispers in corners. All their hopes and strength lye in the weakness and credulity of the persons they deal with; but if they meet with any who truly understand the differences between us, they soon give them over as untractable. But to such, whose employments have not given them leave to enquire or whose capacity hath not been great enough to discern their Sophistry; their first work is, to make a false representation both of the Doctrines and practices of their Church, and if they be of such easie faith to believe them, they from thence perswade them into an ill opinion of their Teachers, who possessed them with so bad thoughts of such a Church as theirs. A Church of so great Holiness (as may be seen by the Saint-like lives of their Popes and Converts) a Church of so great Antiquity (bating only the Primitive times) a Church of so admirable Unity (saving the divisions in it) a Church so free from any Fanatick heats (as any one may believe that will.) If this first assault doth not make them yield; but they desire at least time to consider and advise in a matter of so great importance, then they tell them there is not a man of our Church dares give any of them a meeting; if they offer to pu… it to a tryal, they will appoint a day which they foresee will be most inconvenient for the persons they are to meet with. If upon that account, it be declined or deferred, this is spred abroad for a Victory; if it be accepted, then one thing or other happens that they cannot come; either the person goes out of Town unexpectedly, or his Superiours have forbidden him; or such conferences are not safe for them (they are so sorely persecuted) or at last, what good can an hours talk do to satisfie any one in matters of Religion? But if there be no remedy, which they are seldome without; and a conference happen, (which they scarce ever yield to, but when they are sure of the person for whose sake it is;) then whosoever was baffled, they are sure to go away with the triumph; and as an evidence of it, such a person went off from our Church upon it, which was made sure of their side before. If this way takes not, then a sett of Questions is ready to be sent; if another be returned to them to be answered at the same time, this is declined, and complained of as hard dealing, as though they had only the priviledge of putting Questions, and we the duty of answering them. If answers be given to them, after a Pass or two they put an end to the tryal of their skill in that place, and seek for another to shew it in. But if the Papers chance to be slighted, or business hinders a present answer, or there be a reasonable presumption, that the person concerned hath already forsaken our Church, this becomes the occasion of a new triumph, the Papers are accounted unanswerable (as the Spanish Armado was called invincible, which we thank God we found to be otherwise) and it may be are demanded again as Trophies to be preserved for the glory of the Catholick Cause.
All these several wayes I have had experience of in the compass of a few years, since by command I was publickly engaged in the Defence of so excellent a Cause, §. 3.as that of our Church against the Church of Rome. The occasion of this present writing.I confess it seemed somewhat hard to me, to be put to answer so many several Papers which I have received upon their tampering with particular persons of our Church, while my Book it self remained unanswered by them, after so many years of trying their strength about it. (For those two who in some small measure have attempted it, have performed it in the way that Ratts answer Books, by gnawing some of the leaves of them; for the body and design of it remains wholly untouched by them.) But for the satisfaction of any person who desired it, I was not willing to decline any service, which tended to so good an end, as the preserving any member of our Church in the communion of it: Which was the occasion of this present writing. For some time since, the person concerned, after some discourses with her, brought me the two Questions mentioned in the beginning of the Book; to which I returned a speedy answer in the midst of many other employments; not long after, I received the Reply; but hearing for a great while no further of the person for whose sake this Discourse began, and having affairs more than enough to take up my time, I laid aside the Papers, supposing that business at an end. But about Christmass last, they were called for by a near Friend of the party concerned, and a personal Conference being declined, an intimation was given me, that the Papers were thought unanswerable. I began to fear so too, for at first I could not find them; but assoon as I did, I found the great improvement they had made by lying so long, for what at first I looked on as inconsiderable, was in that time thought to be too strong to be meddled with; and I could not tell what they might come to in time, if I let them alone any longer. And I was informed by a worthy person that I. S. the man of confidence and principles, had expressed great wonder I had not answered them; as though we had no cause to wonder that the noble Science of Controversie should be so abandoned by him, and that a man of such mettal should all this while leave his poor demonstrations alone to defend themselves? VponUpon these suggestions I resolved, as fast as other imployments would give leave (for we are not those happy men to have only one thing to mind) to give a full and punctual answer to them. Which I have now made publick, and printed the Papers themselves at large, that my Adversary may not complain of any injury done him by mis-representing his words, or meaning. And besides other reasons, I the rather chose to appear in publick, to draw them from their present way of pickeering and lying under hedges, to take advantage of some stragling members of our Church, not so able to defend themselves; and whom they rather steal from us than conquer, being blinded with their smoke, more than overcome by any strength of argument. If they have any thing to say, either against our Church, or in Defence of their own, let them come into the open Field, from which they have of late so wisely withdrawn themselves, finding so little success in it.
And since these Disputes must be,§. 4. I am very well pleased, that the Adversary I have now to deal with,Of the manner and design of the writing. hath the Character of a Learned and Ingenuous man; and I do not desire he should lose it in the Debate between us; hoping that nothing shall proceed from me, but what becomes a fair and ingenuous Adversary. If I were not fully satisfied that we have truth and reason on our side, I should never have been engaged in these combats; I am so great a friend to the peace of the Christian world, that I could take more pleasure in ending one Controversie, than in being able to handle as many as the most Voluminous Schoolmen have ever done: For however Noble some may think, the Science of Controversie to be, I am not fond of the practice of it, especially being managed with so much heat and passion, such scorn and contempt of Adversaries, so many reproaches and personal reflections, (as they commonly are) as if men forgot to be Christians, when they began to be Disputants. I do not think it such a mighty matter to throw dirt in a mans face, and then to laugh at him, or (rather to take a Metaphor now from dry weather) to raise such a dust as may endanger the eye-sight of weaker persons. I think it no great skill to make things appear either ridiculous or dark, but to give them their due Colours, and set them in the clearest light shewes far more art and ingenuity. And even that smartness of expression, without which Controversie will hardly go down with many, seems but like the throwing Vinegar upon hot Coals, which gives a quick scent for the present, but vanishes immediately into smoke and air. In matters of Truth and Religion, reason and evidence ought to sway men, and not passion and noise; and though men cannot command their judgements, they may and ought to do their expressions. And although this looks as like an Apologie for a dull Book as may be, yet I had much rather it should suffer for want of wit and smartness, than of good nature and Christianity. My design is to represent the matters in difference between us truly, to report faithfully, and to argue closely; and by these to shew, that no person can have any pretence of reason to leave our Church, to embrace the communion of the Church of Rome; because the danger is so much greater there in the nature of their Worship and tendency of their doctrine; and what they object most against us in point of Fanaticism and divisions, will equally hold against them; so that they have no advantages above us, but have many apparent dangers which we have not.
Among the chiefest dangers in the communion of that Church, §. 5.I have insisted on that of Idolatry; Of the charge of Idolatry against the Church of Rome.not to make the breach wider than some others have done, but to let persons first understand the greatness of the danger before they run into it. I wish I could acquit them from so heavy a charge, but I cannot force my judgement: and while I think them guilty, it would be unfaithfulness in me, not to warn those of it, whom it most concerns to understand it. And where other things are subtle and nice, tedious and obscure, this lyes plain to the conscience of every man; if the Church of Rome be guilty of Idolatry, our separation can be no Schism either before God or man, because our communion would be a sin. And although it may be only an excess of charity in some few learned persons, to excuse that Church from Idolatry, (although not all who live in the communion of it:) yet upon the greatest search I can make, I think there is more of charity than judgement in so doing. For the proof of it, I must refer the Reader to the following Discourse, but that I may not be thought in so severe a censure, to contradict the sense of our Church, (which I have so great a regard to) I shall here shew, that this charge of Idolatry hath been managed against the Church of Rome, by the greatest and most learned defenders of it ever since the Reformation.
What greater discovery can be made of the sense of our Church, than by the Book of Homilies not barely allowed, but subscribed to, as containing godly and wholsom doctrine,Articl. 35. and necessary for these times? and nothing can be more plainly delivered therein, than that the Church of Rome is condemned for Idolatry. So the third part of the Sermon against the peril of Idolatry concludes, Homil. part… 2. p. 75.Ye have heard it evidently proved in these Homilies against Idolatry by Gods Word, the Doctors of the Church, Ecclesiastical Histories, reason and experience, that Images have been and be worshipped, and so Idolatry committed to them to the great offence of Gods Majesty, and danger of infinite souls, &c. Who the Author of these Homilies was, is not material to enquire, since their authority depends not on the Writer, but the Churches approbation of them; Dr. Iackson Original of Unbelief, Sect. 4. Ch. 34.but Dr. Jackson not only calls him the worthy and learned Author of the Homilies concerning the peril of Idolatry, but saith, he takes him to be a Reverend Bishop of our Church: and no wonder, since the most eminent Bishops in that time of Queen Elizabeth, (wherein these Homilies were added to the former) did all assert and maintain the same thing. Defence of the Apology, ch. 7. div. 2. p. 552.As Bishop Jewell in his excellent Defence of the Apology of the Church of England, and Answer to Harding, wherein he proves, that to give the honour of God to a creature,Answer to Harding, 8. articl. p. 283. is manifest Idolatry, as the Papists do, saith he, in adoration of the Host,Art. 14. p. 368. p. 382. and the Worship of Images: And his works ought to be looked on with a higher esteem than any other private person being commanded to be placed in Churches to be read by the people. Of all persons of that Age none could be less suspected to be Puritanically inclined, than Archbishop Whitgift; yet in his Learned Defence of the Church of England against T. C. he makes good the same charge in these words; Defence of the Answer to the Admonition, tr. 8. p. 152.I do as much mislike the distinction of the Papists, and the intent of it as any man doth, neither do I go about to excuse them from wicked, and without repentance and Gods singular mercy, damnable Idolatry. There are saith he, three kinds of Idolatry, one is, when the true God is worshipped by other means and wayes, than he hath prescribed, or would be worshipped, i. e. against his express command, which is certainly his meaning: the other is, when the true God is worshipped with false Gods: the third is, when we worship false Gods either in heart, mind, or in external creatures living or dead, and altogether forget the worship of the true God. All these three kinds are detestable, but the first is the least and the last is the worst. The Papists worship God otherwise than his will is, and otherwise than he hath prescribed, almost in all points of their worship, they also give to the creature, that which is due to the Creator, and sin against the first Table; yet are they not for all that I can see or learn in the third kind of Idolatry, and therefore if they repent unfeignedly, they are not to be cast either out of the Church, or out of the Ministry. The Papists have little cause to thank me, or fee me, for any thing I have spoken in their behalf as yet, you see that I place them among wicked and damnable Idolaters. Thus far that Wise and Learned Bishop. After him we may justly reckon Bishop Bilson, than whom none did more learnedly in that time defend the perpetual Government of Christs Church by Bishops, (nor it may be since:) who in a set discourse, at large proves the Church of Rome guilty of Idolatry.Bish. Bilson Dis…. of Christian subjection, part. 4. p. 319. 1. In the Worship of Images; the having of which, he saith, was never Catholick, and the worshipping of them was ever wicked by the judgement of Christs Church: and that, the Worship even of the Image of Christs is Heathenism & Idolatry;p. 321. & to Worship it makes it an Idol, and burning Incense to it is Idolatry: which he there proves at large, and that the Image of God made with hands, is a false God,p. 324. and no likeness of his, but a leud imagination of theirs, set up to feed their eyes with the contempt of his Sacred Will, dishonour of his Holy Name, and open injury to his Divine Nature.p. 530, &c. 2. In the adoration of the Host, of which he treats at large. After these it will be less needful to produce the testimonies of Dr. Fulk,Dr. Fulks confutation of an Idolatrous Treatise of Nicol. Sanders. Dr. Reynolds, Dr. Whitaker, who all asserted and proved the Church of Rome, guilty of Idolatry: and I cannot find one person, who owned himself to be of the Church of England in all Queen Elizabeths reign, Dr. Reynolds de Idolat. Eccles. Rom. Dr. Whitaker c. Duraeum, l. 5. p. 138.who did make any doubt of it. Let us now come to the reign of King James; and here in the first place we ought to set down the judgement of that Learned Prince himself, who so throughly understood the matters in controversie between us and the Church of Rome, as appears by his Premonition to all Christian Princes,K. Iames his Works, p. 303. wherein after speaking of other points, he comes to that of Reliques of Saints: But for the worshipping either of them or Images, I must saith he, account it damnable Idolatry, and after adds, that the Scriptures are so directly, vehemently, and punctually against it, as I wonder what brain of man, or suggestion of Satan durst offer it to Christians: and all must be salved with nice and philosophical distinctions —Let them therefore that maintain this doctrine, answer it to Christ at the latter day, when he shall accuse them of Idolatry: and then I doubt if he will be paid with such nice Sophistical distinctions.Is, Casaub. Ep. ad Cardin. Perron, ad quartam Instant. And when Isaac Casaubon was employed by him to deliver his opinion to Cardinal Perron, mentioning the practices of the Church of Rome in invocation of Saints, he saith, that the Church of England did affirm, that those practices were joyned with great impiety. Bishop Andrews, whom no man suspects of want of learning, or not understanding the doctrine of our Church, was also employed to answer Cardinal Bellarmin who had writ against the King: and doth he decline charging the Church of Rome with Idolatry? No, so far from it, that he not only in plain terms charges them with it, Ad Tort… librum respons. p. 312.but saith, that Bellarmin runs into Heresie, nay, into madness to defend it: and in his answer to Perron he saith, Answer to Perron 20. chapt. p. 58.it is most evident, by their Breviaries, Hours, and Rosaries, that they pray directly, absolutely and finally to Saints; and not meerly to the Saints, to pray to God for them, but to give what they pray for themselves. In the same time of King James,Bish. Abbor against Bishop, Tom. 2. p. 1106. Bishop Abbot writ his Answer to Bishop; in which he saith, that the Church of Rome by the Worship of Images, hath matched all the Idolatries of the Heathens, and brought all their jugling devices into the Church, abusing the ignorance and simplicity of the people as grosly and damnably as ever they did.Whites Reply to Fisher. p. 209. Towards the latter end of his Reign came forth Bishop Whites Reply to Fisher, he calls the worshipping of Images, a Superstitious dotage, a palliate Idolatry, a remainder of Paganism, condemned by Sacred Scripture, censured by Primitive Fathers, and a Seminary of direful contention and mischief in the Church of Christ.Dr. Field of the Church, l. 3. ch. 20. p. 109. Dr. Field chargeth the Invocation of Saints with such Superstition and Idolatry as cannot be excused. We charge the adherents of the Church of Rome with gross Idolatry,Bish. ushers Sermon before the Commons, p. 30. (saith Bishop Usher in his Sermon preached before the Commons A. D. 1620.) because that contrary to Gods express Commandment they are sound to be worshippers of Images. Neither will it avail them here to say, that the Idolatry forbidden in the Scripture is that only which was used by the Jews and Pagans: For as well might one plead, that Jewish or Heathenish fornication was here only reprehended as Jewish or Heathenish Idolatry. But as the one is a foul sin, whether it be committed by Jew, Pagan or Christian: so if such as profess the Name of Christ shall practise that which the Word of God condemneth in Jews or Pagans; for Idolatry, their profession is so far from diminishing, that it augmenteth rather the hainousness of the crime. About the same time came forth Bishop Downams Book of Antichrist,Downam de Antichristo. l. 5. c. 1, 2, &c. wherein he doth at large prove, That to give divine honour to a creature,Davenant. deter. quaest. 18. is Idolatry; and that the Papists do give it in the Worship of Saints,D. Iacksons Original of Unbelief, sect. 4. the Host and Images: which is likewise done nearer our own times by Bishop Davenant and Dr. Jackson.
I shall conclude all, (although I might produce more) with the testimony of Archbishop Laud,Archbish. Lauds Conference, p. 277. who in his Conference, saith the ancient Church knew not the adoration of Images; and the modern Church of Rome is too like to Paganism in the practice of it, and driven to scarce intelligible subtleties in her Servants writings that defend it; & this without any care had of millions of souls, unable to understand her subtleties or shun her practice:Bell. de sanct. beat. l. 1. c. 20. and in his Marginal Notes upon Bellarmin (written with his own hand, now in my possession) where Bellarmin answers the testimony of the Council of Laodicea against the Worship of Angels, by saying, That it doth not condemn all Worship of Images, but only that which is proper to God; he replyes, That Theodoret who produced that testimony of the Council, expresly mentions the praying to Angels; therefore, saith he, the praying to them was that Idolatry which the Council condemns. By this we see, that the most Eminent and Learned Defenders of our Church, of greatest authority in it, and zeal for the Cause of it against enemies of all sorts, have agreed in the charge of Idolatry against the Church of Rome.
And I cannot see why the authority of some very few persons, though of great Learning should bear sway against the constant opinion of our Church ever since the Reformation. Since our Church is not now to be formed according to the singular Fancies of some few (though Learned men;) much less to be modelled by the Caprichio's of Superstitious Fanaticks, who prefer some odd Opinions and wayes of their own, before the received doctrine and practice of the Church they live in. Such as these we rather pity their weakness, than regard their censures, and are only sorry when our Adversaries make such properties of them, as by their means to beget in some a disaffection to our Church. Which I am so far from, (whatever malice and peevishness may suggest to the contrary) that upon the greatest enquiry I can make, I esteem it the best Church of the Christian world; and think my time very well imployed (what ever thanks I meet with for it) in defending its Cause, and preserving persons in the communion of it.