the fire of her zeal,* and only quibbles with us about the meaning of the term, idolatry.

ber of the Papal communion.) But neither is he impeccable, nor has he an absolute authority in the church over all things both temporal and spiritual-Le pape n'est pas l'Antichrist; a Dieu neplaise; mais il n'est pas impeccable, ni monarque absolu dans l'eglise pour le temporel et pour le spirituel [4eme disc. sur l'hist. ecclesiastique, p. 173. Par. 1747, 12.0]

The pope, he says, is not an absolute monarch in the church over all things temporal and spiritual: That is, he ought not to arrogate to himself the power of an absolute monarch; for that the pope assumes to be such a monarch, and, in fact, exercised this supreme monarchical power in the church, through many ages, the learned and candid writer had indisputably shewn, in the discourse, whence these words are quoted. But now this monarchical sovereignty in all things temporal, as well as spiritual, is certainly one prophetical note or character, by which the person or power, styled antichristian, is distinguished. Let the pope, then, be what he will, we are warranted by M. Fleury himself to conclude, that he hath, at least, this mark of Antichrist.

* In the persecution of heretics; which M. Bossuet regards as so little dishonorable to his communion, that he thinks it a point not to be called in question-calls the use of the sword in matters of religion, an undoubted right-and concludes, that there is no illusion more dangerous than to consider TOLERATION, as a mark of the true churchl'exercise de la puissance du glaive dans les matieres de la religion & de la conscience; chose, que ne peut etre revoquee en doute-le droit est certain-il n'y a point d'illusion plus dangereuse que de donner LA SOUFFRANCE pour un caractere de vraye Eglise. Hist. des Var. l. x. p. 51. Par. 1740, 120.

Thus, this great doctor of the catholic church, towards the close of the last century. And just now, another eminent writer of that communion very roundly defends the murder of the Bohemian martyrs at Constance, and (what is more provoking still) the fraud and ill-faith, through which the pious and tender-hearted Fathers of that

To cut the matter short, then, and to keep clear of those endless debates concerning the worship of Images, of the Cross, and of the Host in the celebration of the Mass; debates, which a dextrous sophist may find means to carry on with a shew of argument, and with some degree of plausibility: To set aside, I say, all these topics, let it be observed, at once, That idolatry, in the scriptural sense of the word, is of two sorts, and consists either, 1, in giving the honour due to the one true God, as Maker and Governor of the world, to any other supposed, though subordinate god; Or, 2, in giving the honour due to Christ, as the sole Mediator between God and man, to any other supposed, though subordinate, mediator. The former, is the idolatry forbidden by the Jewish law, and by the law of nature: The latter, is Christian idolatry, properly so called, and is the abomination, prohibited and condemned, in so severe terms, by the law of the gospel.

Now, whether the former species of idolatry be chargeable on the church of Rome or not; and whether the crime of that species, may not be

council rushed to the perpetration of it. M. Crevier, Hist. de l'Universite de Paris, t. iii.. vi. p. 435, &c. Par. 1761, 120.-Can it be worth while to spend words in fixing this charge of intolerance on the church of Rome, when her ablest advocates, as we see, even in our days, openly triumph in it? But, then, hath she forgotten who it was that the prophet saw, drunken with the blood of the saints, and

incurred by honouring the true object of worship, through the medium of some sensible image: Whatever, I say, be determined on these two points (which, for the present, shall be set aside,) the other species of idolatry is, without all doubt, chargeable on any Christian church that shall adopt or acknowledge, in its religious addresses, another mediator, besides Christ Jesus.

But the church of Rome (I do not say, in the private writings of her divines, but) in the solemn forms of her ritual, publicly professes, and, by her canons and councils, authoritatively enjoins, the worship of saints and angels, under the idea of mediators and intercessors: not indeed in exclusion of Christ, as one, or, if you will, as chief mediator, but in manifest defiance of his claim to be, the sole mediator. This charge is truly and justly brought against that church, as it now stands, and hath stood, for many ages; and cannot, by any subterfuge whatsoever, be evaded.* And therefore, to

with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus-Rev. xvii. 6 ? Alas, no: But she wonders, by what figure of speech heretics are called Saints; and rebel to the pope, martyrs of Jesus.

* See Vitringa Apocalyps. Exp. p. 603, and the authors cited by him; But, above all, see Mr. Mede's exquisite and unanswerable discourse, entitled, The apostacy of the latter times.

'Tis true, the bishop of Meaux is pleased to divert himself with one part of this discourse ; I mean, that part, which contains [ch. xvi. and xvii.] the learned writer's interpretation of Daniel's proph

the other characters of pride and intolerance, which she takes to herself with much complacency, she must, now, be content (whether she will or no) to have that of DEMON-WORSHIP, OF ANTICHRISTIAN IDOLATRY, fastened upon her.

Nor let the followers of that communion think to elude this charge, by saying, That they only request the saints, as we commonly do any good man,

ecy, concerning the Gods Mahuzzim. He finds something pleasant in this idea, or rather in this hard word, which he repeats so often, and in such a way, as if he thought the very sound of Mahuzzim, was enough to expose the comment and commentator to contempt. Hist. des Var. 1. xiii. p. 260, 261. But, after all, the ingenious prelate would have done himself no discredit by being a little more serious in discussing an interpretation, which Sir Isaac Newton adopts without scruple [Obs. on the prophecies of Daniel, &c. p. 192;] and which, in mere respect to the prophet, he should, at least, have condescended to replace by some other and more reasonable interpretation. But it is the infirmity of this lively man, to be jocular out of season. Thus, again, he raillies Luther, for an assertion of his, delivered, it seems, with some assurance, and, in the form, as he pretends, of a prediction, That the Papal power would speedly decline and come to nothing, in consequence of the Reformation. The event, he says, has belied the prophet; the pope still keeps his ground; and then (in an unlucky parenthesis) laughs to think, how many others, besides Luther, will be dashed to pieces against this STONE -bien d'autres, que Luther, se briseront contre cette PIERRE [Var. 1. xiii. p. 244.] Now, if the glory of saying a good thing had not infatuated this Catholic bishop, could he have helped starting at his own comparison of a stone, as applied to Luther and the Reformation, when it might so naturally have put him in mind of that prophetical STONE, which shall one day become a great mountain, and break in pieces a certain IMAGE, and stand for ever [Dan. ii. 35, 44.] ?

to pray for them.* False, and disingenuous! False; because their breviaries and litanies shew, that they supplicate the saints to befriend them by their own inherent power, or to intercede for them to the throne of God by virtue of their own personal merits,† in blasphemous derogation to the all-atoning and incommunicable intercession of Jesus. Disingenuous, too; because they know very well, that the question is concerning unseen and heavenly mediators only, not men like ourselves, such as we live and converse with on earth; whom we only admonish of their duty, and to whom we only do ours, when we call upon them to exert an act of piety and common charity in praying for their fellow Christians. Our meaning is but that which the apostle well expresses, when he would have us consider one another, to provoke unto love and to good works; and not at all to supplicate our Christian brethren as powerful intercessors, in whose meritorious virtues we confide, and to

* L'Eglise, en nous enseignant qu'il est utile de prier les Saints nous enseigne a les prier dans ce meme esprit de charite, et selon cet ordre de societe fraternelle qui nous porte a demander le secours de nos freres vivans sur la terre; et le Catechisme du Concile de Trente conclut de cette doctrine, que si la qualite de Mediateur, que l'ecriture donne a Jesus Christ, recevoit quelque prejudice de l'intercession des Saints qui regnent avec Dieu, elle n'en recevroit pas moins de l'intercession des fideles qui vivent avec nous. M. BOSSUET, Exposition de la doctrine de l'Eglise Catholique, p. 17, 18, Paris, 1671.