Nice ordains in these words the worship of images. "Those who say, I bow down to images, but I do not worship them, shall be condemned as heretics by the holy fathers." In the synodal epistle of this council we find, "We believe, beyond a doubt, that it is necessary to bow down to and worship images; whomsoever hath not this opinion, but is in doubt, or in pain, on the subject of the worship of images, our holy council will hold accursed." The same council says, "There is no difference, whatever, between the worship of the image and the homage offered to the person whom it represents." Constantine, bishop of Constance, says, in presence of this council, without meeting with the least reproof, "For my own part, I offer to images the same homage as to the Holy Trinity." The council of Constantinople, in 754, which was attended by 338 bishops, condemned the use of images, ordering them to be removed from the churches. And the council at Nice, in 786, which was attended by 350 bishops, decreed in direct opposition to the decree of the council of Constantinople; thus there were 338 bishops against, and 350 in favour of worshipping them. A few years afterwards another council was held at Frankfort, attended by 300 bishops, and these reversed again the decree of the council of Nice, declaring that, although images might be suffered in the church, yet they must not be worshipped such was the unsettled state of this practice in the eighth century.*

* Couard in his Sermons on the Life of Christians during the three first centuries of the Church.' (Berlin, 1841,) Sermon XII. remarks. Clement of Alexandria, speaking against the use of images among the heathen, says "We must not cleave to that which belongs to the heathen, but raise ourselves to the spiritual; the habitual viewing of it desecrates the dignity of the heavenly, and he who wishes to honour the spiritual nature by means of earthly material, does the same as if he wished to dishonour it by sensuality." The christians, therefore, were far from preparing and setting up images of Christ. The image of Christ dwelt in them, and shone forth from them in works of righteousness and

1

1 Clement A. Pædagog. iii.

9. Indulgences. They were unknown in the primitive church, and were not introduced for some 1200

love; these with them were the chief things, and with us they must be so too. Christ in us is the highest ornament of the soul, and if Christians enter the Church thus adorned, they impart to it the most glorious ornament.'

The same writer, speaking of the sensuous representation of the sign of the cross, says But unhappily men proceeded to reverence the sign more than Him to whom it pointed, and even in the third century we find traces of their attributing to it a supernatural, sanctifying, and preserving power-an error which has often been repeated, and even in our days frequently recurs in the Romish church, where men make a sinful misuse of consecrated images, rosaries, and the like. But our evangelical church attributes to such like external things, absolutely no value, my brethren. She especially insists on an inward, spiritual worship of God, whereby our faith may be preserved through our own lives, and holds external things as having no merit whatever of their own. And let us continue, my brethren, to look on them in the same way, and pray the Lord to keep us in his truth, that we may worship him as he wills to be worshipped, and look only to this, how Christ may be magnified in and through us; for in his sight nothing else except his own image, has any

worth. Amen.'

It is true that the Council of Trent-(to the decrees of which every Popish priest is, in the present day, bound by solemn oath in all respects to conform,) at its' twenty-fifth session, resolved on this canon :-"That the images of Christ, and of the Virgin, and mother of God, and other saints, are to be kept and reserved, especially in churches, and due honour and veneration to be given to them; not that any virtue or divinity is believed to be in them, for which they are to be worshipped, or that anything is to be asked of them, or any confidence to be placed in them, as was formerly done by the heathen, who put their trust in idols ; but because the honour which is rendered to images is referred to the prototypes which they represent; so that by the images which we kiss, and before which we prostrate and uncover ourselves, we adore Christ, and venerate the saints, whom the images represent."

By this the Romanist when charged with idolatry in worshipping images may endeavour to defend his practice of venerating them, and doubtless different minds would be affected in different ways by this service, according to the degree of spiritual darkness which was in them. The service itself, however, is unworthy of those who should worship God in spirit and in truth. And its natural and real effect in leading men to ascribe virtue to the image itself, may be seen from what has been, even in the case of those who may be regarded as men of education. Well might the decree of the council, noticed above, prove this? Matthew Poole, author of the "Synopsis Criticorum "-in his " Dialogue between a Popish priest and an English Protestant;" (Printed by Religious Tract Society, price 1s. 6d.) shewing that the Romanist cannot prove himself to be no idolater, because he professes to look beyond the image to him whom it represent, says, " The heathen also excused their idolatry

1 Clem. A. Pædagog. iii.

2 Written at Berlin. 3 See Meek on the Errors of the Church of Rome, p. 354.

years after Christ. Durandus says, "Little can be said of indulgences or pardons with certainty, or as undoubtedly true; for the scriptures speak not expressly about them, neither do the fathers, as Augustine, Hillary, Ambrose, Jerome." The practice of giving indulgences commenced during the dark ages. The monies required for the building of St. Peter's, at Rome, and the anxiety of many persons to avoid going to the crusades, contributed greatly to their increase, in the twelfth and following centuries. It was the indecent sale of them that first aroused the spirit of

by this very pretence. So Celsus and others said, as the ancient Fathers tell us, We do not worship the images of gold and brass, &c., as believing them to be gods; but we worship the gods in them and by them."1

A poor converted South African has told me, that the more enlightened among the heathens among whom he had lived, felt that there was a higher power above when they bowed before their idols. Again, Poole writes It matters not much to this point for what reason you worship images; the only question is, whether you do worship images; for the very doing of this, whatsoever pretences it may have, is idolatry. Besides, if you worshipped God alone, and not the images, your excuse would have some colour; but it is most evident that you worship not only God, but the image too. I am told that your Bellarmine expressly disputes for this, that " images are not only to be worshipped as they are examples, but also properly and by themselves, so as the worship may be terminated in them." If the learned speak thus, what must we naturally expect to be the state of mind of the great mass of the less instructed Roman Catholic population.

There is no excuse for bowing down before an image or representation of Christ. How then must God regard the veneration thus given to the creature? What is this but direct idolatry? And if so, how awful is the end thereof! See 1 Cor. vi. 9. Gal. v. 19-21. Rev. xiv. 8; xxi. 8. The expressions in 1 Cor. x. 14. 1 John v. 21; are indeed needful to be observed. See also Ps. xcvii. 7. Acts xvii. 29. John iv. 24.

It is salutary to take away the vail and shew some of the idolatry of Rome. Besides worshipping the wafer as God, they adore the wood of the cross, bowing down to it, worshipping it, and praying to it. They thus address it-"Hail, O Cross, our only hope." They pray to it, saying, "Increase righteousness to the pious, and grant pardon to the guilty." Again-"O cross, save this present multitude assembled to-day in thy praise." This petition is offered on the 14th of September, the day set apart for the worship of the holy cross.-See Protestant Catechism, by Rev. B. Richings, p. 19, Third Ed.

Lib. 7, Contra Celsum Arnobius, lib. 6. Lactantius, lib. 2, c. 2. Eusebius de Paratione Evangelicâ lib. 3, and lib. 4, in Præfat.

De imag: lib. 2, c. 21, Prop.

Luther, and led to the reformation of religion in the sixteenth century. It was not, however, till the council of Trent, that indulgences were formally introduced into the Roman belief. The fathers of that council decreed the monstrous untruth, that "Christ left indulgences to the church, and that in ancient times the church did use the power thus granted;" and concluded by anathematizing all who should deny this statement. This was in 1545, and from this council the article has been inserted in the new creed, in 1564.* 10. Supremacy of the Pope. That the popes of

* Romanists teach that the works of saints which have been more than sufficient for themselves, are put into a treasury mixed with the merits and satisfaction of our Saviour. Of this treasury the Pope has the key, and he can grant to men release from purgatory. This is not like the thought and conduct of the wise virgins in the parable, who, when asked, "Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out," said, "Not so, lest there be not enough for us and you but go to them that sell, and buy for yourselves." They were however too late to find admission. The time for seeking grace was past -the gate of forgiveness closed; it was too late to knock. What dishonor is thus paid, moreover, to Christ whose "blood cleanseth from all sin." 1 John i. 7.-See also Rev. v. 9. Ephes. i. 7.

This is well explained in an useful work for the poor, "A Protestant's Resolution: shewing his reason why he will not be a Papist." Twentythird edition. Printed by the "Book Society for Promoting Religious Knowledge," instituted 1750. Depository, 19, Paternoster Row. Price 3d. It must needs be said that the venality of the Romish church is too plainly seen in the sale of indulgences, and saying masses for the dead. The Rev. R. Meek, in his, Errors of the Church of Rome," quotes a passage from "The Protestant," a work which, he says, contains much valuable and curious information on the subject of Popery. In this are contained receipts for sums paid for masses said for the soul of a person: one of which is: Dublin, Oct. 31, 1809. Received from Mrs. Mahon, three pounds eight and three-pence, for sixty masses, offered up in St. James's Chapel, for the repose of the soul of Mrs. Monaghan, £3. 8s. 3d. Jas. Jos. Callan."

And it is added: "The Apostle Peter is one of the great idols of the Church of Rome; but if their practice is right, the Apostle was wrong when he reproved Simon Magus for supposing that the gift of God could be purchased with money. In the Church of Rome there is no gift at all; every thing is matter of purchase: and nothing is to be had without money. The gospel, indeed, declares pardon and peace to the soul of every believer, as the free gift of God by Jesus Christ.-"The Protestant," Vol. ii. p. 125, 126. It has been well argued; if a Romish Priest really believed that the souls of believers were suffering torments in their supposed purgatorial fire, and that his prayers would obtain their release, would he, if he had charity, wait for money?

Rome advanced the claim to supremacy at a very early period is very certain, and it is equally certain that it was steadily opposed. In the time of Gregory I., before noticed, at the close of the sixteenth century, the patriarch of Constantinople laid claim to this supremacy. Gregory resisted this assumption, but the title was conferred on his successor, Boniface III., by the emperor Phocas. The general council of Constance, in 1414, and the council of Basil a few years afterwards, declared the pope to be under the authority of a council; upon which the pope called another council at Lateran, proclaiming that a council was under the authority of the pope. The divines of the church of Rome are yet divided on this important subject. The council of Trent having decreed for the supremacy of Peter and the authority of the Romish church, this article was inserted in the new creed. St. Clement, bishop of Rome, who died in 81, says, "Jesus Christ dwelleth with the humble; he is not present with those who raise themselves above his flock. Jesus Christ, our only Lord, notwithstanding his power, came not into this world with pride and vain glory."*

*The passage which the Romanists lay great stress on, in endeavouring to establish their claim to the Supremacy, is Matt. xvi. 18, 19. St. Hilary, Chrysostom, and Augustine, comment on this passage as regarding the allusion of the Lord to be to Peter's confession of faith-as that on which he would build his church. But even supposing that it were on Peter himself, as others have thought, what more is implied than that he should be instrumental in the first founding of it. In every body of men, one or more take the lead for a season, by reason of greater energy, or ability for any work in hand. What was there strange in the Lord saying, "To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven" -figuratively giving to him after his true confession of faith, the privilege of opening the kingdom of heaven to the Jews, on the day of Pentecost, Acts ii. 14-41; and to the Gentiles in his baptizing Cornelius, who is regarded as the first Gentile convert? Acts x. But what more is there in scripture of Peter being pre-eminent. The Lord retains the keys, Rev. iii. 7. The same powers entrusted to Peter are shared by the apostles in common with him; see Matt. xviii. 18. John xx. 22, 23. The Lord is the head of his Church, Eph. i. 20-23. He also is the foundation -the corner-stone. Isa. xxviii. 16. 1 Cor. iii. 11. Eph. ii. 20. So Peter himself also says, 1 Peter ii. 6. And where the apostles are spoken of as the foundation, as establishing the gospel by their ministrations, the