AN ACCOUNT OF Dr. Still's late BOOK AGAINST The Church of ROME. Together With a short Postil upon His TEXT.  Non omnia sunt quae videntur, nec videntur omnia quae sunt. 
1672.   

ΤΩ ΚΑΘΟΛΙΚΩ Stillingfleeton.  
THe Book, Sir, which taken up with better affairs, you sent unto me, that I might, after I had read it over, draw an Abridgement of it for you, with my own thoughts superadded in the close, by way of a short Comment thereon, is the second production, as it seems, of Doctor Stillingfleet against Popery. Less displeasing it is I think to a Reader, and nothing so tiresome, as some other Books which have issued forth on that Side against the ways of Catholic Religion. For there is some Truth in his Citations, a seasoning of Salt and comical Wittiness sprinkled all over; and no such thick gross venom of maliciousness, wherewith other Books of that kind are overcharged, appearing, though much of it lie ●id, throughout his Book. Indeed he perverts all things by his various subtlety: But that is no more, but what his own same and interest, here principally aimed at, would require. And we must give him leave to de●ide also, and play and sport himself in his Book, as a Leviathan in his own waters. It ●s his pastime and pleasure, and a sweetness qsteemed perhaps necessary to his life. And who would be so ill-natured as to envy it him? Besides, it is a pretty piece of Rhetoric, both fit and very efficacious to create in his Protestant Readers an opinion of his unerring confidence, which is the one great end of his Labours. And if we be thus kind, he will in recompense of that our civility, give leave I suppose to Catholics, who see him so jocund and supinely careless in his errors, thence to conclude the strange inconsiderate security of the merry man.  
But we must know, Sir, that this his elaborate Book against the Church of Rome, as he speaks, although it be his second, yet is it not intended to be his last: For, If Cathoicks have any thing to say, quoth he, either against our Church, or in defence of their own, let them come into the open Field, from when●● they have of late so wisely withdrawn themselves finding so little success in it. Thus he spea●● in his Preface, threatening (if I understan●●●● him right) another Knocker, as stout a o●●● as this can be, if any one dare to appear ●gainst him, or say so much as Boo to a Goo●● And these words of his, import I think a Challenge, called commonly a Defiance; which Catholics as soon as they had read, thought it as much their duty, as it sounded to be the Doctor's desire, to fit their Slings unto their Arms, and meet him. But the thing proved alas to be but a Copy of the Doctor's Countenance, quite differing from his heart. For the Presses, guarded enough before against Catholics, was presently within a month after his Book came forth, so stoutly beset, so frequently invaded, so violently searched night and day, especially by the industry of one of them, who entering into the Printing-houses, cried out aloud, And what! have ye here any thing against the Doctor Stillingfleet? hah! that what before was difficil, and extremely dangerous, was now become impossible. So that I believe not Catholic in England can do him the favour which the Doctor thirsts after so earnestly in his Lips. He challenged the Papists for his Credit, and stopped up their way for his Security: He would first make the world believe they cannot answer him, and then provides that they shall not. This seems to be his mind.  
And yet I think, Sir, there be few Protestant Gentlemen in England who desire not as earnestly as any Catholic, to see some Reply to his Book: So little do they think themselves concerned in a Scroll which neither defends their Religion, nor hurts or touches ours; wherein nothing is said, but what might as well be spoken by a Mahometan, Jew, or Pagan; and the most part of that which is put to disable Catholic Religion, diminishes Christianity itself. Some of them offered themselves to print a Reply for us: But they offered but words. For they found that the Bishop durst not give a Licence to any of our Catholic Books, only so far as to secure the Printer from danger; although the Doctor be a Foe to their Rank and Order, and Catholic Religion a Friend. This is, truly Sir, a very sad case, that they can freely give one a Licence to defame men, and yet dare not give others a Licence to clear themselves. Doctor Cousins when he was in Paris, spoke up and down so freely against Catholic Religion, that their Clergy hearing of it, came to him, and told him plainly, That if he had aught to say against their Religion, they would both get him a Licence from the Bishop to print his Book▪ and themselves pay th● whole charges, and then answer him when they had done, for his satisfaction. But we poor Creatures can obtaint no favour in our own Country, no leave to speak or justify ourselves, no Licence to print a Book for our defence, when we are both scurrilously libelled, and falsely slandered, and imperiously challenged to answer: Nor is there any open field for our poor men to come forth into, that I know of, but Tyburn; and that is perhaps the Doctor's meaning. It does mightily amaze our Catholics all over the Land, to have their ears thus beaten with slanders, which are both of a high nature, and still notoriously false, year by year, without any end; thereby to make us odious to our Neighbours, and them to God. Our blessed Lord have pity on us; and either open, if it may be thy will, our Magistrates hearts towards us, or stop the Ministers mouths against us; that our good Name and Peace may return unto thy great Glory. We are, if we be silent, proclaimed guilty; and if we speak, insolent. What can we do, Sir, here, but still commend ourselves unto our heavenly Lord, who miraculously preserves us. We do either subsist after this life, or not. Our Protestant Countrymen must needs believe one of these two things: Either some Religion is true, or it is all a fiction. If it be all a fiction, and there is no life to come, then are they as guilty as we; nay something more; for they have taken away our Churches from us, for themselves to dissemble in. If there be a life to come, and this everlasting, then can there certainly be nothing of greater importance in this world, than to know, when many ways are pretended to it, which of them is the most authentic and truest, wherein we may be both happy and safe for ever. Why then are we, who are the first, not permitted to speak, while all others are permitted to blaspheme us? If we prove to go amiss, the danger is our own: and if we be in the right, it cannot be any danger unto them to know it. All the positive things of Religion which any of them do keep, they have them all from us, we borrow nothing from them. And the negative points which separate them from us, seem to us as false and impious, as they can possibly appear true to them. They have as many Articles to believe as we, only some of them which made the separation are affirmative to us, and negative to them: And one Affirmers word is to be taken in Judgement before ten Deniers. And yet will they neither read our Books, nor suffer us to print any, when we are falsified, and misinterpreted, and challenged and obliged to do it, for fear I think our Religion should prove true. All rejoice when a Book is written against Popery: but no man seeks to be informed. They will have it by all means to be esteemed false, be it in itself what it will or can be. And in that strange prejudice men venture to die, only for the pleasure of a Minister and his Wife and Children, who must needs have it so.  
The occasion of this his present book, entitled, A Discourse concerning the Idolatry, etc. was, it seems, a question or two propunded unto Mr. Stillingfleet, by I know not what Gentlewoman, who having heard the Doctor say, That Protestants if they turned Roman Catholics, would lose their Salvation; told him, That if Protestants say so, then are they full as uncharitable as Papists themselves, who aver the like of Protestants: She therefore consults some Catholic Gentleman in the business; I do not know whom neither. But he, it seems, put into her hand two questions, to show to Doctor Still. in her next encounter. First was, Whether the same motives which secured one born and bred in the Catholic Church to continue in it, might not also serve to secure a Protestant, who convinced by those motives should embrace it. The second was, Whether it suffice to be a Christian in genere, or it be also necessary to adjoin to some Church of Christians in particular? These be the two questions.  
The second of these two questions the Doctor resolves affirmatively; I affirm, saith he, that a Christian by virtue of his being so, is bound to join to the Communion of some Church or Congregation in particular. Thus he resolves it, and speaks not a word more of that business. Yet here we may take notice that the said Resolution of his, is quite contrary both to a book of his called Irenicon, written in the times of our late Anarchy, and also to his first work written more lately against Popery. For all the whole scope of both these books, is to show that a Christian by virtue of his being so, is not bound to join in the Communion of any one Church in particular, or any Organical Body, as he calls it. And that because every such body, either that is or has been in the world, is liable to error, falsehood, and corruptions. And what necessity indeed can there be in me to join in any Communion, which may go astray and misled me, since I cannot do worse if I remain free and all alone, and may perhaps do better? But these contradictions are small matters. So long as the Doctor opposes the Catholic Church, out of which they are all fallen, he is a Protestant good enough, whatever he hold in particular, either contrary to himself or any others.  
The first question, which is the occasion and subject of this his present book: he resolves negatively; averring, that the same motives which might secure one born and bred in the Catholic Church to continue in it, cannot secure a Protestant, convinced by them to embrace it. And this his Assertion he discourses at large, and confirms by various Syllogisms; because invincible hindrance may perhaps excuse the one, but not the other; because the Protestant is safe in his own Church, and therefore has no necessity to leave it: because there is imminent danger in the Roman Church; where there is so much Idolatry, so many hindrances of good life and devotion, so much divisions; so much uncertainty of faith in it. Unto these resolutions and argumentations of his, the Catholic Proposer adjoined presently his own reply, a very rational me thinks and good one. Hereupon the Doctor wrote and set forth this his present book, called A Discourse against the Idolatry, etc. both to enlarge his own arguments, and to disable the Catholic Gentlemen Reply. And this was the occasion, purpose, and subject of the book you put in my hand to peruse, and write to you the substance of it with some few brief thoughts of my own upon it,  
Indeed the whole book is a kind of Academic Act or Commencement: such a one as we have once a year in our famous Oxford & Cambridge, written and printed for people's delight and pastime; and if so it please the Stars, for his own honour and preferment by our Doctor. And it came forth very seasonably about a fortnight before the Oxford; Act, to save the wits living here abouts, the great charges and some kind of pains of a Journey thither, being now furnished well enough aforehand with as subtle and good an Act, as that may haply be, at our own Doors, and which may please the women somewhat better, in our mother tongue.  
The conclusions defended in this Holborn Act are these three. 

1. Popery is idolatrous. And this is accomplished in two of his positions which he calls Chapters.  
2. Popery is a hindrance to a good life and devotion. And this is dispatched at one other breathing, named his third Chapter.  
3. Popery is divided and disunited in itself.   And this puft out in his fifth Chapter, which concludes his book, And in midst of this great Act, rises up a prevaricating Tripos, to refresh our wearisomeness, and make a little sport. And he takes up the whole Scene of his fourth Chapter. And his Theme is, Fanatiscime: the Church of Rome's Fanatiscisme; or the Fanaticism of the Roman Church. And upon my word, it has made many people merry, not the softer sex only, but the rougher and more serious mankind. And all do so clap and commend the man, that one may well believe he has received his reward; Idolatry, ill life and divisions of the Roman Church, which are his three less wild conclusions, we have in part already heard of; even as we have heard talk of Europe, Asia and Africa. But Fanaticisme, his merriment is, I think, the proper and peculair discovery of Dr. Stillingfleet himself: And he may deserve either to give or take a surname from it; as Scipio Africanus took from Africa, and Vesputius Americus gave to America his new found Land. What is it, that wit and industry cannot bring to light, if they be jointly bend both of them upon the search? And a new discovery especially of a rich pleasant Country full of curiosities is so pleasant to the Discoverer himself, so naturally pleasant that I cannot but think that Doctor Stillingfleet, at his invention of Fanaticisme, wherewith he hoped to make many others merry, laughed hearty himself.  
He gins his Book with the Roman Idolatry: and he does wisely in it. For Idolatry is such a terrible thundering charge; that in all Readers judgements that Church is half condemned already, which hath that crime so much as laid upon it. Men therefore choose rather to be accounted Atheists than Idolaters. For the first argues wit, the other stupidity. Nor will one man of a hundred trouble himself to read over a book written on any purpose of clearing from that enormous crime either himself or religion professed by the Author of it. Be the imputation never so false, yet is it still a blasting imputation; which kills and overthrows, not so much by proving as by naming it. He must needs be impious who is an Idolater; and he must be an Idolater who is called so. Be it never so unjust, it is still a witty trick to cry out against him as an Idolater, whose honour and livelihood we would here in England undermine. Sad experience has proved this to be true too too often. And the Great God of Heaven's anger lies I fear heavily upon us for it. This thus far. Now forward,  

IMAGE-IDOLATRY.  
The Church of Rome worships God by Images, and is therefore guilty of Idolatry by giving to the Creature the worship due only to the Creator. For God having forbidden any such sort of worshipping him by his own law and commandments given by Moses, wherein he forbids his people to make any kind of image, pesel themunah, eikon glypton, sculptile, any thing represented either by carving tool or pencil, ca●● not own that worship, nor can any such worsh●● terminate upon God. And the reason of th●● law of Moses is unchangeable, which is th●● God's infinite and incomprehensible Deity cann●● be represented. For which reason the wisest 〈◊〉 Heathen both particular men and Natio●● judged all such representations of the invision Godhead to be incongruous and unbecoming his glory; And if this were inconsistent with God's nature and will in the old Law much more in the new, where we are taught to worship God in spirit and truth, and to have no low unworthy thought of God. It might therefore seem more rational to worship God in the Sun and Moon which have more of God in them, and to say our prayers to the Sun and Moon then to any image or shadow; the same argument which excuses the one will justify the other much more. For this reason St. Paul teaches that the Godhead is not like to gold or silver or stone, and blames those who change the glory of the incorruptible God into the image of corruptible man. And the Heathens in doing this did ill: although the wiser sort among them testify that they did not hold their statues to be Gods, but that they worshipped God in them. And yet some ancient Fathers disputed notwithstanding against that heathen practice and counted it idolatry. Wherefore Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople says expressly that Christians make no representation of the invisible Deity; and Damascene that it is madness to go about it. Wherefore the Synod of Constantinople and that of Frankford pleaded hard against the making of any images amongst Christians however the second Council of Nice vainly went about to defend them as innocent and useful helps. Finally, Moses himself explicates by his deeds the meaning of his own Law when he was so highly displeased with Aaron for the golden Calf he had made the people in his absence. And yet Aaron did not make it to bring the people into heathen idolatry, but to give them only a Symbol of the Angel who was to go before the people: As also the two calves set up by Jeroboam in Dan and Bethel were set up only to keep the people from going up to Jerusalem, and not to bring them to the idolatry of heathens. And therefore Primitive Christians never used any images, as the learned of the Church of Rome acknowledge.  
§ 1. This is the sum of the Doctor's Discourse in this his first Chapter. And he cannot but expect his Reader should have a mighty conceit of either his most high or most deep Divinity, who hath conversed so much with the learned fort of the Church of Rome, the graver sort of Philosophers, and wiser sort of Heathens. Nothing does he here deliver, that was so much as thought of by the common sort, the vulgar sort, the ordinary sort of Mankind. And O what pleasure and content of heart will it be unto him, if he could meet with an adversary of his learned sort too, who viewing his airy subtleties should oppose him seriously, as if he were serious himself; and then distinguish as if he were dealing with some solid Divine; and then ply him with proofs and testimonies, refel him by shorter enthymems and longer syllogisms; subtly search in what Mood and figure he speaks; and then tell him how his consequence flags, or antecedent is ambiguous, till he have learendly consumed a hundred pages in refutation of a trifle. Then surely will the Doctor be judged by all parties to be as he would be thought to be, an able man.  
§ 2. The Catholic Church uses indeed both in their public and private oratory's, some pious representations of our holy Lord, either in his passion, or birth, resurrection, or ascension, or miraculous working of some divine miracle: And these holy figures of his are accompanied commonly with some others of his blessed Virgin Mother, the renowned Apostles, valorous Martyrs, holy Confessors, chaste Virgins, or other happy followers of our Lord, who through many tribulations and a constant exercise of Christian virtues have passed hence to a blessed life. All which do mightily avail, unto our retiredness and recollection; when we enter into the house of prayer, a holy place separated and sanctified for God's service, from our own houses or the streets. And the respect or esteem we have for such figures, is nothing but what we bear either unto the sacred histories recorded of the same persons or to those good rules of life and promises of Gospel, which those Worthies have embraced, for the encouragement and imitation of us, who are now struggling in that wicked world, which they overcame before us. For example, as we reverence the history of Christ's incarnation, sounding in our ear; so do we look upon the figure of it represented to our eye: As we love the story of St. Mary magdalen's conversion; so do we like her picture. As we honour St. Paul's life and martyrdom; so do we respect his image. And St. Lawrences most cruel passion upon the hot burning Gridiron, when it is represented to us in a picture, we are in the self same manner affected towards it, as we are to the invincible virtue and patience there shown for the Love and honour of Jesus our Lord, whose steps he followed. So that, what authentic history records to us in words, of the virtue and valour of any of our Christian Ancestors; or what holy Gospel tells us, of the glory and crown to be rendered unto the good works of sobriety, charity, chastity, purity, patience, and the like: the same is without words painted unto us by these compendious hieroglyphics, serving more speedily than words can do, to fasten us unto a strict recollection in our prayers by one short glance about us; and to a fea● and awfulness of God's presence in that place where we are met together for his Service, accompanied with the figures of so many of our pious Ancestors who are gone to Heaven before us; and also to a dissipation of any worldly thoughts, that may, as they are apt enough to do, at that time come along with us there unto our hindrance. All this benefit we have by our Pictures, when we have haply no book to look upon, or know not by our ignorance to read, or cannot by darkness or other lettance attend unto that labour. And this is all the whole business of Images, as to Religion. In the Road of Philosophy trodden by School-Divines, where thousands of conclusions over and above faith are advanced and opposed by one another unto the sharpening of their wits, many things are said about every thing, as the creation, resurrection, and thè like, which faith in the same things is silent of; Nor are we in our defence of faith concerned at all in them. And it may be essily discerned by our Catholic practice. what use we make of our Images, when of a hundred people entering into a Church, not one of them ever casts his eye wistly upon them, but contented with a general glance, compose themselves presently unto their prayers and meditations they keep silently in spirit towards God. And when our pictures are so sullied and spoiled, that they will no more serve our use, we put them into the fire, as we would do also a page of sacred Scriptures utterly obliterated and fouled.  
§. 3. Indeed all the whole business of the use of Images at all, is but a matter of discipline and government, for the help of people in the great work of recollection and prayer; as is the use of Churches, and the music used in them, with the harp, viol, and other instruments, the use of beads and prayer-books. All which our Religion could spare, and yet be not at all impaired, as to any its essential or substantial parts. Nay there inconveniences in any one of these things. Nor do I know any good thing in this world without some inconvenience or other. It is enough for us that the conveniences and benefits of any good we have or use, are more and greater than the inconveniences be. Many worthy Prelates in Christianity have at times excepted very strongly against Organs, as some hindrance of the great work of spiritual contemplation which Christian people meet to, practice together in their holy assemblies, the great paramount work of Christianity, especially at Mass. But these men, although moved unto that their exception by a Zeal not evil, yet were they fain to yield at last unto the prevailing reasons of other Prelates which overbore their lesser ones. Some other of our Catholic Doctors and Prelates would have had us to have used no pictures; that Jews and Pagans might not catch at that pretence to cavil against our Christianity as they did. But all these submitted at last, unto the prevailing part; by whom they were made to understand that the inconveniences they urged were but imaginary and small, the conveniences great and real. There have been not a few who have excepted against much vocal prayer; because it took up too much of the time which would be better employed in the more principal work of prayer in spirit. But yet could they not carry it, although their reasons were very plausible and good; because that high and Angelical prayer in spirit, agreed not equally to all men, or to any one consisting of flesh and blood equally at all times and places, as vocal prayer does. Some have disliked even our material Temples, built up so sumptuously as they are; because God immense and incomprehensible, dwells not in buildings made by man's hands; Heaven is his Seat, and Earth his Footstool; Yet could they not obtain, that our Churches should be therefore pulled down, or not built up. Prayer-books were nothing at all in use amongst Christians in primitive times; when they prayed almost altogether in spirit, and used no other vocal prayer but that our Lord taught us. And yet this hinders us not, either to make such books or use them in following times. Instead of our beads in wood or metal, they used in ancient times a bag of little stones, by the emptying whereof they knew that they had said over our Lord's prayer a hundred or perhaps three hundred times, according as any one in his devotion had prefixed to himself every day of his life to do for God's glory and service. And there might be inconveniences pretended against our present beads, especially those of gold and pearl. But they will not be thrown away for that. Our Church-music has been more than once opposed, and that by Prelates most holy and renowned men, who deemed it an unsufferable lettance to the spiritual recollection which Christians ought above all things to attend unto, that they may have our Lords good Spirit, and his holy operations in them, especially when they meet together at their holy Synaxis. But Church-music is kept up to this day, notwithstanding their reason against it, which is very good, for other reasons no. less good and great than it; specified and urged by the far greater number of pious Prelates for it. And yet if all or the greater part of Catholic Prelates meeting together should take away all these outward helps from us, beads and books, singing and Church-music, pictures, and Churches, and all, finding the inconveniences to be now greater than they have been, and weightier than any convenience we have by them: though the thing would seem very strange to us, yet ought we I think to obey them resignedly, and attend wholly unto our spiritual mediations, either alone, or in our Eucharistian meetings, and to the other good works commanded or counselled us in Gospel in expectation of our future bliss and eternal happiness in God, which can never be taken from us: though all things of discipline or helps in government be alterable.  
§ 4. And now it is time to turn back and view the subject of this Chapter; that we may see if any one period in it be true and pertinent. He tells us first, that Papists worship God by Images, which logically is not true; Then that a representation of the invisible Deity cannot be made; which is impertinent; Then that the worship given to God by an image does not terminate upon God: which is neither pertinent nor true. And so he proceeds on to the very end of his Chapter, with sounds either empty or false, or both; neither heeding or caring what he says, so he do but mention learned papists, and wiser heathens, which may help to butterress up his reputation. I cannot but remember here, the shadow or Ghost in Virgil which Juno made of Aeneas, to draw her beloved Turnus out of the field; It seemed to fight and threaten, and press on and give back. But nothing at all was done really.  
Tum dea nube cauâ tenuem sine viribus umbram.  
In faciem Aeneae, visu mirabile monstrum,  
Dardaniis ornat telis, clypeumque jubasque  
Divini assimilat capitis, dat inania verba.  
Dat sine ment sonum gressusque effingit euntis  
Morte obitâ quales fama est volitare figuras  
Aut quae sopitos deludunt somnia sensûs.  
Ac primas laeta ante acies exultat imago  
Irritatque virum telis ac voce lacessit.  
And such a shadow of controversy is all this present Chapter, and his whole book also: a foaming face and feeble force: big but empty words: rumbling and yet insignificant sounds: quick proffers, and no progress: a daring shadow or armed Ghost, without either body or bones. And yet such a thing as defies the whole Catholic Church; steps out from the rest of his Camp and defies them all alone defies them both in letters syllables and words▪ And this is all. For he touches no body. Because Catholics by the advice and allowance of their Prelates do keep amongst them the representation of the divine Founder of their Religion, who appeared amongst us by his unspeakable Love in form of a Man; and of some of his holy followers in the way he chalked out for us; therefore he talks of Moloch and Milcom, Osiris and Isis, Chemosh and Astaroth, Baal Peor and Rimmon, golden Bulls and Remphan, the calves of Dan and Bethel. And what is all this for? Why to overrun Papists, and beat us down; How can it do that? These idols were set up by heathens in opposition to the true God, and in the very place of God, as darkness in the night time is in the place of light. This is true, what then? and therefore I must not forsooth keep the figure of Jesus Christ or of St. Paul or other domestic of my own religion for my own encouragement therein. What likeness, what consequence is there in all this? Which is Remphan and where is Moloch? Which is the Calf and where is the Bull? Nay and here it is worth our observing too, that Protestant Gentlemen and Ladies of England, Ministers and Bishops too, have all pictures in their Chambers as well as Catholics; even those of our holy Apostles and Martyrs as well as others. And there they are good and lawful figures; but in our Chambers they are Bulls of Basan, and Calves of Bethel among us. Catholic pictures are against Moses his Law; but theirs are not so; Although they be representations both in Heaven above and Earth below, and Waters under earth, expressy by the same Law forbidden; for example Moon and Stars, Dogs and Cats, Whales and Dolphins. The picture of Martin Luther in their Chamber is the lawful effigies of a man. But Saint Stephen in our Closet is a Calf. Can any man who talks at this rate, be thought to be one that has conversed either with the learned sort of Papists or the wiser sort of Heathens: or one rather that had never any conversation at all either with reason or men. O but Catholics worship God by their images, which Protestants do not. I marry, this is a huge fault indeed, that Catholics take thereby occasion to think of God and his manifold mercies, and bless his name, and trust in him. For they no other way worship God by Images: This is the mortal sin which Catholics commit. And if that illogical speech of the Doctor, Catholics worship God by Images, be drawn into any kind of sense, it can be no other than th●s, that Catholics take occasion by the pious faces of their Martyrs to think of God's manifold graces and mercies towards them, and thereupon trust in him afresh, and bless his name: which great error the Doctor, it seems, does carefully avoid. The ancient devout Christians thought of God and worshipped him by any thing, any good thing they enjoyed; the verdant fields and sweet flowers, comfortable air, and pleasing light, mountains, valleys and liquid streams; Plumbs, Pears, Apples, and cheerful Grapes; by the virtue, charity and devotion of men, the ministry of Angels, etc. But now we must take heed of that. We may taste a Plumb or a Cherry, we may eat a venison Pastry and drink good wine if we can get it; nay we may have fine pictures in our Chambers, even the picture of Jesus Christ crucified, or any of his followers: we may have all this, if we be such good Protestants as Mr. Stillingfleet, and never think of God, or worship God by it. But if we worship God by it, if we think of God by it, than it is all poison to us. All is suddenly turned to Moloch, to Remphan, to Baal Peor, to Ashtaroth, to Aaron's golden Steer and the Calves of Bethel. If we do but eat a custard thinking of God, or worshipping God by it, presently it becomes a Remphan or Chiun, the idol of the Arabians. Walking upon Hamstead-hill, as people use innocently enough to do, if casting our eyes about the prospect we think of G●d by it, as Catholics are wont, the hill before innocent is now become a Baal Peor the idol of the Moabites. A Citizen walking to the Tower, may look harmlessly enough upon the Crown and royal. Robes there. But he must take heed then, that he fall not into a meditation of Heaven, or the glory of its great King, to worship him in his heart by it. For than it becomes to him an Adramelech, the idol of Sepharvaim. And he must beware of the like abuse when he sees the Chamber and Table where his Majesty sits in Council with his Peers, lest it become a Moloch to him, the idol of the Moabites. The very Flags and Banners often seen in London-streets, make some simple soul to think of Jerusalem above, the peace and happy company there, and the God of all: but then O how suddenly is the Streamer metamorphosed and turned into Nesroch, the idol of Senacherib. Some are so bold, when they either see or hear of any corrupted by the French-pox and lechery, to thank God who has preserved them, and worship God by it. And thereby sin no less grievously than Maacham the Mo●her of Asa King of Judah in worshipping her idol Priap or Nimphleseth. A gentleman called upon God not in words only, but very hearty, when a troublesome Fly got into his Eye, and much afflicted him: but he little thought that by that piety of his he had sinned as deeply as they that worship Baalzebu● the idol of Acaron. Nothing is more ordinary with Country Gentlemen, when walking abroad they behold a goodly fair flock of sheep in pasture of their own, than to thank God and worship God by it; but little do they think good men, they are guilty of Idolatry thereby, as much guilty as they that worshipped Ashtaroth, the idol of the Philistines. Nay a very cow or calf in the meadows, if we take occasion by it to thank God for his benefits, or to worship God by it, is the same thing then, as Aaron's Moulten heifer or Jeroboams calves set up in Dan and Bethel. And as it is for substance, so for the figures of things. St. Paul's picture so long as we do not think of God by it, is a lawful picture. But if we come once to think of God, to worship God by it, O then that is a Calf too, Aaron's Calf, one of Jeroboams Calves, etc. This thinking of God, this worshipping of God by any thing, this is the pestilential blast, that spoils all. It turns sweet into bitter, lawful into unlawful, things innocent into sin, and good things to death. The representation of our blessed Lord crucified for us, so long as we think not of him may pass for a good innocent or at least indifferent thing; but if we once think seriously of him, if we worship God by it, then, O Mr. Stillingfleet, what is it then? And yet answer me not. For I will not have those blasphemous words here repeated. Speak them to a Jew in order to Jesus Christ and he will embrace and love you. But a Christian cannot endure to hear them.  
§ 5. Papists saith he worship God by images, and so are guilty of idolatry, Catholics may hear this, but can never understand what he means. They are never taught in any of their Catechisms to worship God by Images. None of their spiritual books wherein all religious Duties are importunately urged and pressed upon them ever mention it: and their practice does not infer it. For if it did, they would easiliest understand it who best know what themselves do. They are taught, and do in their practice endeavour to worship God in their heart and soul; and ardent affections streaming forth thence towards him. They worship him with bended knees, lips and voice, hearts and eyes l●fted up unto him. They worship him with the assistance of God's good Spirit, the Priest's Sacrifice, and help of mutual prayers. They worship him by mortifying their sensuality and carnal appetites, by giving alms and relieving the poor and needy for his Love, by observing his Laws and Counsels, by resigning to his good will and pleasure in all things, especially in time of afflicting persecutions, when they suffer all manner of reproach, lies and calumnies, loss of goods and sometimes life itself for his name sake patiently. They worship him in Closets, in Church-assemblies, in the fields, as they are walling, on Land or Sea, where they have opportunity to do it. Thus doth their religion teach them to worship God, as with the right causes and instruments; as by the true effects and operations; as in the times and places seasonable for worship and devotion. But how they should worship God by images, or (as he speaketh oftener in the context of his discourse) in images; this they do not easily understand. When he lays any thing to Catholics charge, he ought to speak I should think as Catholics do, and then he will be understood by them. It is not to be conceived how any one can worship God by images, and in images, but either for the real presence there; or ideal imitation; or some sort of occasion of worship arising thence. And so God must be worshipped by them and in them, either presentially, ideally, or occasionally. And it cannot be presentially. For so God is no otherwise present in a picture than in the wall it hangs upon: nor yet ideally; for the picture for example of St. Mary Magdalen or St. Paul, is no idea of that invisible and glorious Godhead; nor yet is any other, as the Crucifix for example or Christ our Lord in his Birth or Resurrection; for all these figures are representations of his humanity, and no ideas of his Deity at all. And Mr. Stillingfleet must needs mean one of these two ways. For otherwise he could not charge them with idolatry for it. And therefore I say that his charge is false and slanderous. But if he mean that they worship God by images and in their images, occasionally; which is a moral interpretation and the only true one: Then is such a work so far from Idolatry, that it is a sublime piety. For what can they better do, then to give God thanks for so great graces, mercies, helps, and comforts bestowed in Jesus our Lord upon his Apostles. Martyrs, Confessors, and Virgins, when they look upon their figures and pictures either in their contemplations, or patience of Martyrdom, or conversion of the world, subduing and bringing flesh, Satan and the world under their feet: especially if Catholics conceive thereby some pious resolution, as well they may, of doing something the more and patiently suffering for God, in imitation of those pious Heroes our Predecessors in religion, and yet naturally but flesh and blood as we ourselves are. I say all this is signal piety, and our Christian duty. And according to, this moral meaning Catholics if they do worship God by their images and in their images; do well and like good Christians. But the Doctor will not charge them I suppose with a matter of so much truth and great piety as this is, although his words cannot make out any other sense that is true, but only this moral one. And the more logical sense of worshipping God by images and in images; ideally or presentially is false. Let him even take which sense he pleases, either what justifies Catholics or what salsifies his own assertion; It is all one to me, whether we stand, or he fall.  
§ 6. He adds, that the worship of God by images does not terminate upon God; because God has forbid it and so gives God's honour to the Creature. This is strange gibberish. An act that tends to nothing is no act. If it be some act, it tends and has already tended to something; and it terminates upon that thing unto which it tends, and whose act it is denominated. This is clear enough even to a young sophomore, or one who indeed never yet came into the air of Philosophy, if he do but understand the terms and words here used. For example I cannot see a man in the street, except my vision terminate upon him; nor can my vision terminate upon him, but I must see him. And it is all one whether I see him close by me, or by my window or in a looking glass at home. For I cannot see him any way but my sight must terminate upon him, and if it do not, I see him not. And this course of nature is not hindered, not yet altered at all, because that person may haply have forbidden me to look upon him either this way or that. For our acts or actions are accomplished within ourselves, independently of any acceptance or disacceptance of them. Acceptance or disacceptance, commanding or forbidding is another thing,  and quite differing from the substance of the act or action. For they specify only, either the motive or event which may make the act either good or evil, either grateful or displeasing, but not make it an act or no act, or not to tend where it has tended. And so must my act of worshipping God by images, terminate upon God, or else it is no act of worshipping God by them; however God may have either commanded or forbidden it. God has forbidden blasphemy; and yet the act terminates upon him, otherwise it could not be a sin against him. And if God's worship by images do not terminate on God, whither on God's name does it tend; and how is God worshipped by them? This he does not tell us here, unless he insinuate it is those following words of his, but gives the honour due to God unto the Creature. But how can that be? If God should have forbid us by his law to see a star through a tube; should we not therefore see it but the tube only, or should not our sight then be terminated upon the Sar. So it seems by this Doctor's philosophy, who hath conversed with the learneder sort of Papists, and the wiser sort of heathens, but very little with himself. Holy fathers and Doctors have often said, that the honour of an Image redounds to the Prototype: but never thought or said, that the honour of the Prototype redounds to the image, as it is here affirmed against both art and experience. But let us hear him proceed in his discourse. He will surely let fall some sense or truth ere long.  
§ 7. God's infinite and incomprehensible Deity saith he, cannot be represented. O here it is. This is very true. What a comfortable thing it is to meet with a draught of truth sometimes, when a man is dry and thirsts after it. But to what purpose is this spoken here? Catholics have no representations of that invisible Deity, nor none they look after. Figures they have of our Lord Christ. born as man amongst us, and made flesh, and crucified, and ascending into Heaven. Figures also of his holy followers and Martyrs: but representations of the invisible Deity they never yet saw nor heard nor thought of. On then. The wisest of heathens judged any such representations of the Divine nature incongruous and unbecoming his glory. Indeed they were wise heathens, and their judgement very right and good. Nor did I ever hear of any Christian wise or unwise any otherwise minded. O how would this Doctor prevail, if this wise Discourse of his, were as pertinent as it is true. But he trusts and hopes well, that his good fate will so accompany his reader. that he shall not doubt at all that every word that is true in his book is also to some purpose. And to some purpose indeed it is: namely to have it thought, that he is victorious in his main design: although indeed and truth it belong nothing at all to it. But let me not stop his career. If any such figure of the Deity were inconsistent in the old Law, much more in the new where we are commanded to worship God in spirit and truth. O uncontrollable consequence, arising from remisses most true. No man can or dare deny a●l this. Me thinks I love him here for his reason, and cannot but grieve it should be all spilt in vain; so pure it is and precious. A little more of this, while he is in a good mood. It seems more rational to worship God in the Sun and Moon which have more of God in them then a picture has, and to say our prayers to the Sun and Moon then to any Image. Seems so Sir? It is certainly more rational: what should we doubt of? And what a pity is it, there should be none to be found, who worship God in a picture either ideally or presentially none who say their prayers to a picture that this great blow of his might not beat the air to the endangering of his elbows. Saint Paul testifies that the Godhead is not like either to gold or silver or stone. Good St. Paul always said well; and his testimony is good at all times; and especially now, when it hits so pat with the wiser heathens. There be many Churches now in England which have since our reformation, the Tetragram name of God written upon the walls within side in golden letters. Unto those men who did this, it would not seem altogether impertinent, to tell them, that the Godhead is not like to gold, silver or stone. But to such as use only the effigies of our Lord according to his humanity, and his holy Apostles and Martyrs, what a pity it is it should be impertinent and wholly lost. Let him speak on some more of his truths. Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople says expressly that Christians make no representation of the invisible Deity: and St. Damascene affirms it madness to go about it. Marry, God have mercy o'their souls for this their express saying. Catholics would desire no better a testimony for themselves if they wanted any, than this of those two great Catholic Doctors; that no such representation they have, and none they go about to have. O but he hopes, that all this being true will make strongly against the Church of Rome. And will it so? I have heard say, there be a thousand Churches in Rome, which are all Churches of Rome equally. Which of them all are concerned in this talk, that their walls may confute him? But he means Catholic people perhaps, oh, O, than all is well, they are safe enough and unhurt by all this, which is but their own doctrine, and faith. At least he has by these fair shreds of truth farced up a dozen pages in his book; And he hopes that his protestant reader will believe it all to be most pertinent and apposite discourse against papishes, though it be nothing less. And if they do so think, he has his end, a happy man no doubt.  
§ 8. Moses forbade saith he, the making of any graven thing, and the word which Moses uses in that his law for a graven thing is general and signifies not an idol only as papists say, but any picture, likeness, image or representation, as Moses himself speaks, either in heaven above or in earth below or waters under the earth, pesel, themurah, eikon glypton, sculptile, any kind of thing that may be expressed either with the pencil or graving tool. Believe me Sir if this be true it will undo all our Painters, who come flocking hither into England as the only thriving place for them out of Holland, Germany, France and Italy too; and here fill the Land with pesels, themunahs, eikons, glyptons, sculptiles, and any things they can express with their pencils for our delight; Dolphins, whales, and other fish of the sea; birds of the Air, beasts, flowers, woods gallant men and fair women, all that ever Moses forbade to be expressed. Nay I have seen myself in a protestant Church Moses himself painted on the walls with glittering horns on his head and a pair of law tables in his hand. But it may be Law makers do exemp themselves: at least some Protestants may interpret as they seem to do, that Moses forbade to make the figure of Jesus Christ but not his own. No man in England scruples to have any of these eikons, no not the Doctor himself, notwithstanding this law of Moses so expressly contrary to them all; no man doubts to set any painter or graver on work. And yet must still this law be cast in the teeth of Catholics as transgressors of it. For God's sake why is St. Mary Magdalen in her penitential weeds upon her knees, with beads in her hand, and eyes all blubbered and swollen with tears, more against the law of Moses; than one of our delicate Paragons of beauty, in her shining dress, lips of coral and sparkling eyes. O but Catholics worship them. Sir this word in the sense and meaning of protestants is as great a falsehood as was ever uttered by man. For Catholics neither have nor can have any other relative esteem of any picture, than what they have to the penitential works they represent, or to the worth and piety of the persons. And an absolute esteem of the picture, this is measured out only by the Materials, and artifice of the painter; according to which one picture shall be worth five hundred pounds, and another representing the same thing, not worth five shillings. And can we believe that our protestant young Gentlemen have no veneration at all to our beauties set thus in their Majesty, nor no kind of affections rising in their hearts towards them? Yea ten to one more of ill affections, and, god wots greater, than any good ones we can have to our crucified Je●us in our way of piety. And the difference indeed is only this, that our reverence and affection is towards holy persons, and unto an imitation of their piety, hope, patience, constancy, and charity: Their's to a concupiscence of flesh and eyes. This and nothing but this if truth may be spoken, makes them so wrathful and furious against our Catholic pictures. Satan hates Jesus Christ and therefore inflames them to tear down his memories and representations: but he loves pride of life; and those portraitures must stand that advance this. He is pleased with that which feeds concupiscence of eyes: and concupiscence of flesh brings him in the disciples which Jesus Christ loses.  
Moses did forbid Jews who were travelling with him towards Palestine an idolatrous Nation, to make to themselves, that is to say on their own heads, without warrant of the Synagogue, or in imitation of the pagan rites, any of the idolatrous images there and elsewhere to be met withal, or any similitude at all, lest seduced thereby, they leave their own God and religion to cleave unto false gods and idolatry. This law of Moses and purpose of the law is so clear, that he must be obstinately blind who sees it not. And what does this concern our holy Catholic figures of St. Paul for example or Christ crucified, more than Protestant figures of young Lords and fine Ladies; save that the one moves us to the love of mortification, prayer, patience, chastity, the other allures us from it; the one confirms Religion, the other weakens it. Besides our holy pictures are allowed by the Church, the others forbidden. And this indeed is the only aim of Moses, when he forbids the people to make to themselves any graven images whatsoever; to themselves, that is on their own fancies and upon their own authority: For such only were unlawful, and not those they were commanded by just authority and allowed to make. See, saith God by Moses, I have called and named Besaleel, and I have filled h●m with the spirit of wisdom and understanding and all knowledge of all manner of workmanship, to devise cunning works to work in gold and silver and brass, and in cutting of stones and in graving of wood, to work all manner of workmanship. And I have appointed Aholiab with him; and in the hearts of all the wise I have put wisdom, that they make all that I have commanded. And by virtue whereof the said men and others after them wove and graved pomgranets and lilies, and placed Cherubs upon the Propitiatory, between which graven Cherubims God himself gave out his Oracles to Moses: as he did also heal the people by the figure of a Serpent which Moses commanded to be set up. So that here is a vast difference betwixt figures graven and set up by authority, and those which people make to themselves. The one is commanded, the other forbidden. Aaron's Calf of gold destroyed the people, but Moses his Serpent of brass healed them. These things are not now said afresh. They have been told to Ministers over and again, but they are never the better for it. Indeed they love not to hear of it, because it spoils their sport.  
I add yet withal, over and above what is yet said, that neither that law of Moses, nor any of his Ten Commandments, nor any other of his precepts either ceremonial judicial or moral, does any way oblige Christians at all, as it comes from Moses, who is not our Lawmaker or master, but ruler and leader of the Jews. Nor do we Christians believe that theft, adultery, homicide or blasphemy, is a sin because Moses forbade it, but because we have received from Jesus our own Legislator who justified Moses law and ratified it in all the said particulars, that so it is. And it is here to be observed that one of the most solemn laws contained in those two tables, that I mean, which ordains the seventh day to be kept holy day, unto which Moses adjoins an irrefragable and unchangeable reason, namely because God rested that day when he made this visible world, beginning his work saith Moses on the sunday wherein he created light, and the friday following finishing the whole; even this law of his most solemn and importunely urged by Moses, is annulled and abrogated amongst all Christians even from the beginning of Christianity, for want of ratification of it from our Lord and Master Jesus who is our Lawmaker and Prince. And the same thing do I say of this his present law about figures, images and representations of things by sculpture or pencil, which was only of temporal concernment to the then present Jews against the danger of idols which then filled the earth, and as mere a ceremonial law as the other, and equally concerning a ceremony of worship. If our own Prelates whom Christ our Lord instituted to oversee his flock should for reasons best known to themselves take from us those little small helps we have by the images of some of our Ancestors, Martyrs, Apostles, Virgins, Confessors, than would we be without them, and yet not think ourselves to lose one jot of our Religion for that. But we will not forfeit them for any law made by Moses, except it be established and ratified by our own lawmaker or his Prelates watching over us under our Lord unto our good, if Moses should have made any law against them, which indeed he did not, but only against heathen Idols. And if any one should endeavour to have our Christian representations to be abolished because he thinks and believes that Moses forbade them, than is that man say I, bound to observe all the whole Law of Moses, as it is literally expressed by him, even to the least apex or iota thereof. For the authority of a Legislator being the same in all h●s whole law, must oblige equally in all its parts: and the distinction then between judicial, moral, and ceremonial law, signifies nothing; seeing that Moses his commands are equally peremptory, and press as strongly in the one as in the other. This is no imaginary opinion of mine own, but what reason and the Spirit of God moved St. Paul to aver as stoutly in the case of circumcision, which is another of Moses Laws, as I do here. I testify to every man, saith he, who is circumcised, that he is bound to keep the whole law. And this must needs be true, most certainly true: for by observing circumcision because it was commanded by Moses, he subjects himself to the law and authority of Moses as his Prince and Legislator; and consequently is bound to observe him equally in all things which he commands with the same authority and will to be obeyed, which is no less than all his whole law. And cursed is every one, saith the same Apostle, who is under the law and continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to fulfil them. Although then it should be granted that Moses by his law prohibited all kind of figures and representations, even those used by Christians, which he did not, yet if our Lord ratified it not, it does not touch us at all. And that he did not renew or ratify it, is sufficiently clear to Protestants, because no such law of his is found among the Evangelists: and unto Catholics not less, because there is neither Gospel nor Tradition for it. And if all men would separate themselves from prejudice, which blinds and hardens them in their conceits, they might easily believe that neither Christ's immediate Disciples nor any Christians that succeeded them after our Lord's departure, would have either feared or hated the figure of our Lord's countenance, if by chance they would have met with it. But if any one notwithstanding, fully persuaded that Moses made a law against all sort of images and representations, should upon that authority of his abolish ours, he is bound also upon the same authority to sacrifice an Ox, and observe all the whole law in all and every particular, under the penalty of sin.  
Since therefore by the order of God and Moses many graven things were made; representations and similitudes both in Heaven and Earth notwithstanding the said law; as the Serpent of brass (which must either be made by melting or graving) pomegranates, lilies and various suchlike things both graven in stone and interwoven in silks, Cherubins or Angels in the Propitiatory, even in Moses time and afterwards more fully and plentifully in Solomon's Temple; it is not rationally to be doubted, but that this law of his was intended only to keep those people close and constant to their own God and to their own Religion, which was inconsistent with the idols of the Nations; and not for any purpose of keeping Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, either out of their chamber hang or ours. I know the Jews do urge this Precept of Moses very eagerly against Christians ever since Jesus Christ our Lord was rejected by them, whose image and figure they cannot abide to see. But we must have patience with all men.  
§ 9 Moses saith he, grounded this law of his upon a reason unchangeable, namely that Gods infinite and incomprehensible Deity cannot be represented. O profound invention! This is such a law and ground of a law, as was never before thought of. The ground and reason of making a law must be this, an impossibility of breaking it. They must not make any representations of God, because God cannot be represented. And the same motive or reason will be equally proper for all the rest of the Commandments: They must keep the seventh day of the week a holy day. The reason and motive; because there is not an eighth day to keep holy and sanctify. They must honour their Parents. The ground and reason of this; because none of the whole Camp had any Fathers or Mother's alive to dishonour. They must not kill. The motive and reason is; because they were all shot-free, and so firmly enchanted that none could hurt them. They must not commit adultery. The ground and reason is; because there was never a woman in the camp, which any man though provoked with the highest lust could pessibly come near or touch with a pair of tongues. They must not steal. The great cause thereof is, that there is nothing at all in the Camp for any man to take away. Thus the Doctor imagines Moses to forbid any representations of God because God cannot be represented. And such another discreet monsieur was he who solemnly commanded his bowyer not to make him any shafts at all of a pigs ta●le: and he gravel● gave him the reason for it, because quoth he of a pigs tail no shaft can be made. Truth is, Moses never thought of any such law, nor any such reason of it much less; but provided for the security of the Hebrews religion, that it might remain unchangeable and firm in the mids of those many Nations round about them who worshipped false Gods and idols: as Moses very frequently interprets himself and all the Prophets after him. Therefore saith God by Moses, thou sh●lt have no other Gods but me, thou shalt not make to thyself any figures, as the Gentills do, nor worship them. For I am a jealous God and will have no intermingling of devilish idolatry with my service; And all the reason given by Moses is gods jealousy not enduring any divine worship but his own. This is the very truth and all the truth of this business, which this Doctor would turn another way, thereby to make Moses seem as simple a ma● as himself. And those idols forbidden by Moses did so involve an opposition to the true God and his divine worship, that people could not possibly betake themselves to one, but they must leave the other. Therefore did Moses forbid both other Gods besides their own one God, and all idols together: which was by ancient Christians very rationally and wisely reckoned all one and the same commandment: whereof no less a man, than St. Austin himself is witness. But the memories of Abraham Isaac and J●cob could bring no such danger with them. And that is our care, for we are not in danger of losing the faith of Jesus Christ by keeping the image of him our crucified Lord among us; or forsaking the communion of Saints, by retaining their portraitures before our eyes. We should ipso sacto renounce our Lord and all his whole Religion, should we set up Moses his forbidden idols and make it our religion to worship them as heathens did. But we are heartened encouraged and confirmed in our Christian Religion by looking on the faces of so many our glorious Martyrs, holy Anchorets, and Hermits, pious Virgins and Confessors, who professed this our Religion before us, bravely triumphing by the power of Christ's love and divine faith, over sins allurements, and death's ugliest terrors; though encompassed themselves with the like passions and infirmities we are our s●lves environed round about. And when we are entered into a Church amongst so many of our worthy predecessors, we compose ourselves more hearty to our devotion then otherwise we should do, in imitation of them; remembering now that we are come up to Mount Zion, to the City of our living God, to celestial Jerusalem, and society of Angels, to the Church of Primitive Christians conscript in the Heavens. to God the Judge of all, to the Spirits of just men perfected, to Jesus the mediator of a new Testament, and to the aspersion of blood speaking better things than Abel.  
§ 10. The Heathens, saith he did ill in their idol worship, and yet the wiser sort among them testify that they did not hold them to be Gods but worshipped God in them. Our acute div●ne having now by his fine wit so clarified Moses law, that it might not so much concern Idolaters as our vulgar painters; he now gins so to purify idolaters practise too, that they may seem but in the same condition with our Catholic and best Christians. And who would not give his penny to hear him act and speak. The heathens all in general are so excused in their idolatry, Aaron in his act of apostasy, and Jeroboam in his great sin; that they are all and each of them no otherwise faulty than the Church of Rome in his books. Thus doth Mr. Stillingfleet convert idolatrous Nations, while he sits dreaming in his closet. Here he diminishes and there he exaggerates, here he blacks with his pen and there he whitens; and then he cries out all is one, all of the same measure, all of the same colour. And truly I believe the great Giant Goliath and little David might thus be made equal, if the Giant were beheaded and cut off by the knees, on one side; and David on the other s●de, set upon a high pair of stilts. While Catholics are made to do what they do not, and heathens not to do what they do, on a supposal that all this is true, there can be no great difference Let us then hear him what he tells us of Heathens in general. The wiser sort among them, testify quoth he, that they worshipped not the idols as gods but worshipped God in them. O very good? Thus the wiser sort among the heathens say. But first who are these wiser sort? It behoved him to let us know this. But yet for his own pocket-reasons he does not. But 2ly what says he himself to it? O that is needless: for his reader will understand well enough what he ought to think, when such a Doctor as Stillingfleet tells him what the wiser sort have thought. No body would think with fools, but with the wiser sort always. And his whole discourse proceeds on this supposed knowledge of the wiser sort and according to it concludes. We cannot therefore doubt of his mind. But have we no wise sort of ancient believers who lived among the heathens, to testify unto us what the heathens did? Have we no Apostles and Prophets to hearken to, no renowned and infallible persons to inform us? Surely we have, and those so many, that we need not have recourse either unto persons unknown amongst the heathens for their testimony, or to Mr. Sillingfleet the ingenious trifler. He tells us that the heathens did not worship their Idols as Gods, but worshipped God in them. But our Apostles and Prophets tell us contrary things. Hear Moses speak, who lived among the thickest of the Heathens, To whom did they sacrifice, O Moses, whom did the heathens worship? Imm●laverunt Demoniis & non Deo, Deut. 32. They worshipped not God but devils, they sacrificed to devils saith he, and not to God. The Nations change their gods, and indeed they are no Gods, saith Jeremy ch. 2. but my people have changed their glory unto an Idol. Baruch another Prophet brings in his testimony chap. 4. You have provoked him who made you, saith he, even the eternal God, sacrificing to Devils and not to God. The holy Psalmist he tells us no less peremptorily, That they immolated their Sons and Daughters to Devils, and sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, Ps. 105. and that all the gods of the Heathens are Devils, Ps. 95. Saint Paul our own Christian Doctor is bold, and expressly, testifies both against Stillingfleet and his wiser heathens; That the things which Centiles immolated they sacrificed to Devils and not to God, 1 Cor. 10. And yet after all this our Doctor is not ashamed to justify those his clients the heathens. They did not worship their idols saith he, for Gods, but worshipped God in them. And whom shall we here believe? Moses, Jeremy, Baruch, David, St. Paul and all our Christian Doctors, or Stillingfleet rather and his wifer heathens unknown to himself? They sacrificed to devils and not to God; they changed their glory into an Idol: they irritated the eternal God, immolating to devils and not to God; they sacrificed their sons and daughters to devils, not to God. Thus speak our Prophets and Apostles. But Mr. Sillingfleet affirms, they sacrificed to God, they imolated to God, they worshipped god and not devils, they worshipped not the idols but God in them. But I discern well enough the cause of his mistake. Because they abstracted the general notion of God, and applied it, each one to his own idols; therefore he thinks he may say they worshipped God in them. But this is a gross mistake. For to worship God in a thing and to worship a thing for God who is no God, are two very differing cases. Christians worship God in Christ, and they do well; heathens who worshipped their Idols for God did ill. Cromwell our late Usurper after he had murd●re● our good King and set the Crown upon his own head, would have taken it well, if his Army had to●d him they honoured him for their King; but not, if they had said they worshipped the King in him. The first word had sounded in his ears as a grateful slattery, the other as treason to himself. To abstract the Deity and apply it to another subject unto whom it does not belong, is as far as we are able to behead the true God and set h●s Crown upon the shoulders of usurping devils. And because the true real Deity cannot be removed, either by the pleasure of the Usurper or worshipper, therefore are these idols devi●s and false Gods. God cannot be worshipped in them because he is not in them; and if they be worshipped as Gods it is Idolatry; or else there is no such thing as idolatry upon earth  
Aaron, saith he, made the golden calf, not to reduce the people unto heathen idolatry, but for an emblem of the good Angel who was to go before them. Here is another excuse of Aaron his small fault; which drove Moses his brother and Prince into a great a passion of wrath as perhaps he ever felt: even so prevalent a grief and anger, that it dashed in pieces the very rabbles of the Law he had in his hands; though he was by the testimony of holy writ the mildest of men: and all this it seems for an emblem: And why that emblem? since they had such an emblem before in the pillar of cloud by day and fire by night; which was a more significant emblem of the angel who went before them, than any calf of gold could be. The holy Prophets testify of those people and Aaron, that in Moses absence this figure was melted and founded by them to be set up in place of the God, who had hitherto conducted them w●th Moses now as they thought vanished, out of Egypt into Arabia; and to lead them on the rest of their way, as their supreme conduct, after the manner of Egyptian Deities. They made a ca●f in Horeb and adored the figure, they changed their glory into the likeness of a Calf eating nay and forgot their God, Psal. 125. Now if they forgot their own God, and slighted him, and cast him from them, and changed his glory into a calf, and worshipped the very figure: then must that sculptil or statue be now accepted for their God. The like testimony gives St. Sephen, Act. 7. They made saith he, a calf in those days and offered sacrifice unto the Idol, and made themselves merry in the works of their own hands. What can this import, but that they had now altered their religion, renounced their former God, and made to themselves a new one after the manner of Egypt. It is pity Mr. Stillingfleet had not been with Aaron; his confidence would have pleaded for him a little more handsomely than he did for himself. But the excuse perhaps being hypocritical and false would have more offended Moses, than his former fault. Aaron knew well enough what he had done. And although he somewhat minced his fault, yet would he not tell a lie. I cast a little metal into the fire, saith he to Moses, and there came out this calf, The Doctor adds two pretty reasons, why neither he nor the people, could ever think of declining then to any heathen idolatry, First because they had no pretence of doing so. As though the very absence of Moses, whom they had long expected and now thought lost, were not pretence enough, unto some leading men in the Camp to raise a sedition and thereby force Aaron to make them such idols, as they were acquainted with in Egypt. It is well enough known, that by the contagion of those leading men, the Camp was ever and anon in such like tumult and ready disposition to apostasy. His second reason is, because no intimation is made that they sell into heathen idolatry. What intimation is given thereof by the Prophet and St. Stephen he takes it seems for no intimation at all. When they fell, saith he, into heathen idolatry, mention is made of their Gods, as Baal Peor, Moloch, Remphan; but here Aaron is said to make a feast to the Lord: As though there were not Egyptian idols as well as Syrian; and Osiris and Isis, as well as Moloch and Remphan. And a feast made in honour of this their new God and religion, might well be said a feast to the Lord. It was a policy in Aaron, thus to speak, that the common people might not suddenly discern the alteration. And we may easily believe that the leading men, who brought him by persuasion and force unto this apostasy, suggested the said stratagem; first to get the people more universally on their side without commotion: and then to put something into their mouths for to say to Moses, if he should chance to come upon them suddenly and take them beyond expectation in the fact. For that it was a mere pretence of policy is evident by this; that they gave to Moses no such account of any feast made unto their ancient true God; and secondly because their principal Leaders had no purpose to make any, for they had now forgot and put away their own true God and cast him out of their mind, as holy text speaks, obliti sunt Dei sui.  
The Calves set up by Jeroboam in Dan and Bethel, were only to keep the people from going up to Jerusalem and not to bring them to any idolatry of the heathens. Here is another excuse for Jeroboam and his peccadillo. Who would not take Mr. Stillingfleet to be a very charitable man, who can cover such a multitude of sins? and yet is it all no other but a secret prodigious malice against Catholics, who must bear the more and hear the worse for it. Jeroboam saith he did not alter the divine worship, or give any occasion of idolatry: No, no. He only kept the people, saith he from going up to Jerusalem, whither they used once a year to resort. And this could be no such great matter; since they had the same service, the same sacrifice and adoration at home. But why then is Jeroboam charged with idolatry in holy Scripture, as one that had done evil above all that went before him, and made h●m other gods and molten images to provoke God to anger, and to cast his own God behind his back, 1 Reg. 14 O, ho, thence we conclude saith our Doctor that an image set up for god's honour is idolatry; as it is amongst papists. And is not this a pretty nimble leiger demaine of a slight man. First who taught him that Papists set up images for God's honour? I have learned amongst them that they are set up for our encouragement and imitation, and for an honourable memory of their holy Martyrs and Apostles. But what ho●our can one of those images be to God? none at all I think, except indirectly, because God is the blessed author of all good, whence the said Apostles & Martyrs received their strength and grace. Secondly where does this confident man find, that Jeroboam set up his images for God's honour? Even no where at all. His own boldness is so strong in him, that he says what he lists without any ground or occasion at all any where, either among sacred writers or profane. Thirdly whence doth he gather his negative word, that Jeroboam acted none of the heathen idolatry, nor brought the people to it? Even from his own confident brain whence he has the other, expressly contrary to the testimony of holy writ which speaks, as it were passionately and very emphatically of his notorious idolatry, wherein he did evil above all that were before him, wherein he made him other gods and molten images, to provoke God to anger, and cast his own God behind his back. Can he be Justly charged with all this, only because he kept the Israelites from going up to Jerusalem, and made them do those devotions at home which they were wont to do in that mother City. Can only change of place suffice for the criminous imputation of idolatry, where is the same adoration, same rites, same sacrifice, same Priests, and same God. Is it possible that the same service and Common prayer-book read by Ministers of the same kind in London and Highgate, be God's service in one place, and idolatry in the other, all other things agreeing but only the circumstance of place? No indeed, it is not possible it should be so. But it is very possible it should be said so. Mr. Stillingfleet here speaks it, and speaks it stoutly, on his own head, even against all Divine authority and upright reason. People may sin against ecclesiastical obedience indeed, by not coming up to their parochial Church when they are commanded. But they cannot, only upon that ground, be charged with idolatry, or making strange gods, or casting their own God behind their back. He must be a very passionate Prelate, and extremely unjust and sinfully injurious, who lays that imputation upon people, upon no other ground or motive then that one circumstantial neglect of place. And yet holy Scripture several times thus charges Jeroboam; and puts such a blot upon his scutcheon both for his own idolatry, and that into which he induced all the people, that he is seldom or never mentioned without his black surname; Jeroboam who made Israel to sin. If it were true at least, as Mr. Stilling-fleet here speaks, that Jeroboam and Israel's sin were only a circumstance of place, and that they and he did in their own tribes but what was done in Jerusalem, then must it needs follow, that there were in the Temple of Jerusalem such like representations, as those calves set up by Jeroboam in Dan and Bethel, and indeed the very same with them. And thence we may gather for our learning, if this be all true, an axiom of great truth and concernment; namely, that one and the same piece of worship which pleases God in the Catholic Church, is an abomination to him in the ways of heresy and schism. The very same thing which in Jerusalem and the tribe of Judah were called Cherubims; in Samaria and all the rest of Israel apostatised from them, was but a calf.  
§ 11. Charles the great a noble Emperor caused Books to be set forth against the Council of Nice where images had been established, called Carolin Books, and assembled also a Council at Frankford▪ wherein both the said Nicen Council was condemned, and all their reasons for images confuted, etc. That there were both in the Council of Frankford and Nice too, some Catholic Prelates who propounded difficulties against images cannot be denied. For when ever any Council meets together about any affair, they dispute pro and con, ●oth for and against it; that the Prelates having all things set before their Eyes that can be said on both sides, might be the better enabled to determine. So doubtless it was done by the Apostles themselves in their great Council held in Jerusalem about Circumcision, where inquisitio magna facta est, great inquisition, disputation, and examination was made about it. All this is certain enough. But yet, that either in Frankford or any where else, were made after this their dispute any final or conclusive declaration against the use of images amongst Christians; or that Charles the Emperor should either write books or cause any to be written, either against images or the Council o● Nice wherein they had been then established; or summon that Council of Frankford to withstand that other of Nice unanimously concluded by the Prelate's and confirmed by the general Pastor; this is a thing so apparently false and fictitious, that there needs no more but the knowledge of those very persons and times to prove it so. Charles the Great was one that adored the Roman Church whereof he was himself a Member, above all Emperors that ever was before or since his time. The Council of Frankford, wherein were little less than three hundred Catholic Prelates, was peaceably concluded, and no commotion followed upon it; which must needs have risen, if they had condemned another Council lately celebrated and confirmed by all pastoral authority. Nor was that Frankford Council ever annulled or any way censured either by P. Adrian or any after him. Add to this, that the said Council was both begun and finished under the same Po●e Adrian, and his Legates Theophilact and Steph●nus, who had presided lately in the said Nicen Council, where the lawful use of images was established. It cannot possibly be imagined that the same Pope and Presidenes should conclude in Frankford quite contrary to what they ordered in Nice but seven or eight years before. It is also certain, that the said Council of Frankford, was summoned and assembled, not about images only as the Doctor imagines, but about the question of our Lord Christ his filiation, as all ancient histories testify, against Foelix and Elipand two Spanish Bishops, and Claudius Taurinensis, who teaching that our Lord is rather to be called an adoptive than natural Son of God, raised much commotion in Spain and France: and this novelty of theirs was first condemned at Ratisbone, and afterwards at Frankford. For Foelix after his first condemnation, repaired to the Emperor Charles his Court who then wintered at Rheginum; and there submitting to the Prelates, was sent thence to the presence of Pope Adrian, where in the Cathedral of St. Peter he revoked his Error. Elipand hearing of his submission grew more violent, and by his books both regained Foelix again, and disturbed all Germany, as he had France and Spain before. And now to prevent the infection, the Pope and Charles the Emperor agreed to bring together a conciliar Assembly of Prelates in Frankford, wherein presided Theophylact and Stephanus, who had lately concluded the second Council of Nice. Whence it clearly appears that Doctor Stillingfleet quite mistakes the business. Now if the same Pope and his very selfsame Legates presided first in the Nicen Council, and then in Frankford, as the Doctor acknowledges, we may rationally enough conclude, that the Nicen decrees about images, lately finished in the East, were made known to the West by their acceptation and promulgation at Frankford, where the business of filiation was decided: For this is indeed very true. But no way can we think that the same Precedents would now undo, what they had done a little before. And that this is indeed the whole truth in this business, may be yet confirmed by the authority of the Council of Senon kept not long after, which in their 14. decree thus speaks, Carolus magnus Francorum Rex Christianissimus in Francorum furdensi conventu ejusdem erroris iconomachorum suppressit insaniam quam inselicissimus quidam Fae'ix in Gallias & Germanias' invexerit. By this testimony it appears, that Felix over and above his capital error about Christ our Lord's adoption, was an iconomachus too or adversary of images, and suffered at Frankford for both his errors: which is not unlikely by the testimony of Platina ●nd Paulus Emilius: For Platina in the life of Pope Adrian, Biennio post, saith he, Theophylactus & Stephanus Episcopi insignes Adriani nomine, Francorum & Germanorum Synodum habuerunt, in qua & Synodus quam septimam Graeci appellabant, & haeresis Feliciana de tollendis imaginibus abrogata est. And P. Emilius in his second book de gestis Francorum speaking of that Council of Frankford, Et imaginibus, saith he sun's honour restitutus est. The like may be proved out of Blondus, Sabellicus and other historians. So that all these things rightly considered and put together, will sufficiently convince his relation of the Frankford Council to be fictitious and groundiess. If the Council were assembled by the Agreement of the Pope and Emperor, than not of the Emperor against the Pope. If to suppress Elipand, Claudius, and Felix; than not the Nicen Prelates. If under the same Pope and Precedents which presided lately in Nice, than not against any thing determined and concluded in Nice. If upon the motive of Elipands' error against our Lord's filiation; then was not an image the principal occasion of it. If Felix were there condemned for his opposition to images than were not images condemned. If Charles the great, one of the devoutest to the Roman Church that ever reigned, so much swayed in that Council, then would he not suffer the Roman Church to be there affronted and censured. If an upright Catholic, he would not in spiritual affairs gainsay the Prince of Prelates, who had so lately set his hand and seal to Nicen defiinitions. In a word if Charles the Great called that Council at Frankford, as the Doctor affirms, then without all doubt was that ratified there, which was established at Nice a little before. For Charles was as much a Roman Catholic as either Stephen and Theophilact, or the Pope himself, and knew as well as any man, what obedience is due to the definitions of a Council rightly consummated and confirmed, as that of Nice was. Binius the great Collector of the Councils proves at large, that all this story of the Carolin books and Frankford Synod assembled against that of Nice, is a groundless fiction. And so do Alanus, Surius, Vasquez, and several other Doctors. And they are all amazed, whence the rumour should arise, and by whom, and in what age or time. But I cannot wonder much at it, since I heard lately of a French Gentleman, who affirms and shows in a Book of his, that the English never conquered France, nor ever gave them any one overthrow in battle. And when he was told by a neighbour, of this his notorious falsehood; O, quoth he, my book two hundred years hence, may pass for an authority as good as any that speak otherwise. And so I think there may possibly be such impious men, who out of their present malice may furnish out a lie to infect posterity, in after times. But he must be an unconscionable wicked man who can do such a deed.  
§. 12. Primitive Christians never used any images, as the learned of the Church of Rome acknowledge. He had done well to let us kn●w who are these learned of the Church of Rome. But he will not do us that favour. And ●e must still take his word for the judgement of the learned sort always. Nay we must bel●eve too, that he is ever on the learned sorts side. It is indeed unlikely that figures of those holy persons, who first spread our Christianity in the world, and made it good both by their lives and death, should be frequent in primitive times. First, because those same figures, although they be honourable memories both of their persons and pieties, unto whose zeal and goodness we are so much indebted; yet are they not so necessarily requisite unto any such perpose, but that the Church can be without them. Secondly, because primitive Christians had not amongst them any such plenty of Artists, as we have now a days to make them. Thirdly, because Pagans would have misinterpreted the end and meaning of such figures, as this our Doctor does in the midst of daylight. But that in those primitive times there was never any Christian so ill affected towards those pious representations as is Mr. Still. appears sufficiently by the testimony of those ancient Doctors, who mention incidentally the custom's so those primitive times; especially about the figure of the Cross, which they made continually on the●r forehead and breasts, as a preservative against evil, and kept it all over their houses, particularly in their Bedchambers and closerts, either framed in wood or stone, or painted in colours. There be notwithstanding the deluge of time which swallows up all things, some monuments yet left among us of the respect which those Christians than bore both to the relics and figures of their Saints. The very chair of St. James the Apostle and first Bishop of Jerusalem, Eusebius in the seventh book of his history attests, that it was had in great esteem and veneration in all times, even to his own days. Accordingly S. Clement in his six●h book of apostolical constitutions gives this general testimony of that kind of piety in those primitive Christians, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The very relics, saith he, of Saints now living with God are not without their veneration. Some remainds there be also of an apostolical Council at Antioch, gathered out of S. Pamphilus and Origen, wherein caution is given both against the Jews malice and Gentle idols, by opposing the images of Jesus and his holy follower's against them both: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ignati●s also that worthy apostolical Prelate, the third from St. Peter the Apostle in the chair at Antioch, thus signally speaks of the sign of the cross in his epistle to Philadelphia, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc. The Prince of this world, saith he, rejoices when any one denies the Cross: for he knows the confession of the cross to be his own ruin: this is the Standard against his power, which so often as he either sees or hears it spoken of. he shakes and trembles: thus speaks that glorious Prelate. The above named Eusebius testifies also in the same book of his history, that he saw even in his time the brazen Statue of our Lord Jesus, which was set up in Paneada in Palestin, unto his honour by the woman cured by him of the blood flix; so notable for miracles, that they were spoke of all the world over. This statue o● our Lord when Julian the apostate caused it to be thrown down, and his own to be set up in place thereof, a strange sudden fire from heaven consumed the statue of Julian, as Zozomenus in his fist book witnesses. And of the same bra●en statue of Christ our Lord write also Theophilact, Damascenus and several others. And here we may take notice by the way, that charity & devotion set up statues to our Lord, but apostasy & malice pulls them down. And whether Dr. Stillingfleet, who busies himself so much to cast down the images of Jesus our Lord and his holy followers, would refuse to have his own set up for his great pains, either in Guildhall or Cheapside, he knows best himself. Truly if that were done, I do not believe that any of his neighbours or Countrymen would take him then for a calf of Bethel. Of the Images of the virgin Mary made by St. Luke there is much fame amongst the ancient writers, in particular Theodorus, Simeon Metaphrastes and Nicephorus: The last of which does also attest in his second book, that the said precious relic was carried up and down the whole habitable world of Christians, who looked upon it with a most greedy and unsatisfied devotion. The same Nicephorus adds moreover, how Constantius the Son of Constantine translated the rel●cks of St. Luke from Thebes, of St Andrew from Achaia, and of St. Timothy from Ephesus, unto Constantinople, with a vast concourse and joy of Christian people: and there with all honour and reverential respect enshrined them in a cathedral Church dedicated to the Apostles. Of the image also of Christ our Lord imprinted by himself in a handkerchief applied to his own face and sent to King Abagarus who requested his picture, writ Evagrius, Metaphrastes and others. Of another image of Jesus Christ made by Nicodemus, which being ignominiously crucified by the Jews wrought many wondrous miracles, we have a solemn testimony of Athanasius cited in the fo●rth action of the seventh great Synod. And all this testifies that Christians in primitive times were affected towards holy pictures and relics as Catholics are at this day: at least not such haters and vilifiers of them as is Dr. Stillingfleet. Nor can I conceive how any of the learned in the Church of Rome should be ignorant of these things. Nay the very Church of England, which this Doctor pretends to defend, hath lately put the images of the Apostles and Primitive Saints into their common-prayer-book and Primers printed by authority. So that if the Doctor had opened his eyes, he might have seen clear enough, that all this talk of his is now unseasonable, however it might have passed well enough in the beginning of the furious reformation: when they pulled down all sacred figures, and suffered none to be set up either sacred or common. When husbands broke their wife's pictures, and wives their husbands, lest they should give ill example to St. Peter and Paul, or encourage any of the twelve Apostles to creep up again upon their walls. When children in obedience and duty to their parents, spitting upon their effigies, said as they were taught to say, I renounce the devil and all his works. When all the people fl●cked together in all places to tear down Churches and Chapels, and private oratory's in houses, with a Now boys, we are free men, let us eat, drink and play, for to morrow we shall die. No more duty of any our daily prayers, no more fasting, no more vows, no more troublesome adoration upon our knees, no more pining meditations, no more penance, no more restitution, no more priest, no more altar, no more cross or holy rood, no more Peter and Paul to be seen, no more languishing memories of Saints, no more obedience to the erring Church, no more self-examination, no more conscience scruples, etc. Those times indeed were mad enough. But now people, as newly awaked from wine, begin to be wiser and look more soberly about them. Even Denmark and Holland consider now in cold blood the many sad mischiefs they acted in hot: nor is our own Country wholly ignorant of the irreparable ruins of those mad times. However, our Doctor will not have his sport spoiled, nor yet his game stopped. Punchienella, though Bartholomew fair be ended, may be acted still either in Lincoln's Infields or Chairing cross or any where else, both now and then and seven years hence. It will be still new to some body. He may also know that King James a wise and learned Prince in the year 1617. gave order that the pictures of Saints should be set up in his Chapel of Holy-wood house in Edinborough, as Spotswood attests in his history of the Church of Scotland. And he cannot be ignorant that several times order and command has been given to Protestant people by our English Bishops, that they bow and do reverence at the name of Jesus, when it's spoken or read in the C●u●ch. Now the name of Jesus and figure of Jesus is all one thing; the one of them representing to the ear, what the other does to the eye. All this he might have considered. But his tongue is hot, and he must speak although it be against himself, and the very Church he justifies, as much as it is against the Church he arraings. Indeed his whole discourse is so frivously subtle and subtilely frivolous, that no Church needs much to heed what he says. This I know and am c●●tain of, that although he should be confuted at large and confounded for ever by any Catholic Writer, yet shall we be never the nearer to any quietness and peace. For the next man that wants a rich benefice, will if he have but this man's confidence, collect another book of popish idolatry out of this book of Dr. Still. as he gathered this of his out of Henry Moor, Jeremy Ta●lor and sundry others his Predecessors; not heeding at all any answer that has been given by former Catholics to the talk, any more than Dr. Stillingfleet does here. They will ever write, one out of another, and never regard what has been said to any one of them in defence of that which they oppose, abecedarian scribblers. Nor can there be any end, so long as there is a bishopric or fat benefice to hope for: and Catholic hands so tied up, that they can print nothing unto their own justification without insuperable difficulties and hazard.  
I have read in London the Defiances of one Fencer to another, both of them in print. Who accordingly do meet in Bear-garden without any control, there to baste one another lustily for the people's pleasure. And it would be a pastime I think equally delightful, not less profitable, and somewhat more civil, to see two men reason down one another. We poor men should esteem it a great favour to us, if our adversary might read his charge and we our defence, even in Bear-garden. Since neither in Churches, Halls, Universities, or Schools are we permitted to speak; or print any thing to speak for us. And Doctor Stillingfleet who hath made his defiance already, may which he hath not yet done, appoint the day. Not men and fencers only, but bulls and bears, cocks and dogs, all are permitted to defend themselves when they are invaded, but only we poor old Christians whose Religion hath blessed our Land fifteen hundred years. As if it were agreed on all hands that we should never be rightly understood.  
Mr. H. Thorndike a grave Divine and and learned Doctor in our present English Church both affirms and strongly proves in his book called Just weights and measures, that Roman Catholics are idolaters no way: adding also, That they who separate from the Church of Rome as Idolaters, are thereby schismatics before God. Thus speaks that learned man, the Phoenix of divines, who only dares to be honest. And the mere authority of this eminent Protestant may suffice to evacuate all the sophistry of this whole chapter of this Doctor's book: as also of that which follows in the next place about our holy Host and Saints.  
Now Sir, I must bid you farewel. And that you may not think me either idle or neglective of my duty and respects to you, pray give me leave to tell you, that what you see here printed but now, was written and ready for the Pre●s in August last. And before October ended I had finished all my work upon Dr. Stillingfleets Book, suchlike familiar Commentaries, as these upon his first chapter be. But in all these six months I could get no more printed for you either at home or abroad, than this poor fifth part of the whole, after my many travels, vexations, expenses and dangers. Such obstructions are made about the Presses, and so many violences offered here continually, far above any used since we were born, that I can see no possibility for any whole book of ours to shoot that gulf, be our cause never so innocent and good. Nay, they will here print our catholic books themselves, as if they were their own, as Thomas a Kempis, Granada, Parson's Resolutions, Drexellius, and the like. But if we be taken printing them, the PRESS is broken, PRINTER punished, and we, if we be found, in danger of our lives. And therefore I beseech you, Sir, be content with thus much, or rather this little▪ The rest you shall have in written hand. In the mean time let Dr. Still. triumph and crow as he pleases. He is made and has made him. self sure enough. Although he hath defied the whole catholic world and all that know of it, having something to say, are both willing and ready, yet will no man come forth into the open field against him, because they cannot. He thinks himself wise no doubt; wiser than millions of men: and may do so still. For my part, Sir, I find him as wise as one man; and no more. Farewell.  
FINIS.