veneration of relics had settled down into the grave forms of a long-established usage, and had gathered to itself the venerable recommendations of antiquity, and had been sobered, as all religious observances are in course of time, by a perfunctory dulness -then, perhaps, the epithet fond' might seem in some degree less exact. But how well does it picture to the very life-the eager, wistful, wild infatuations of the people of the Nicene age, who, in the constantly stimulated expectation of miraculous aids, were crowding around every shrine, and there, with a stormy impatience, were calling upon their new gods to help them! A peculiar feature of the martyr-worship of the Nicene church was (must we not say it?) the erotic fervours with which the shrines were besieged by women. And was not this Primitive and Catholic' 'invocation of Saints, and veneration of Reliques' a 'fond thing,' when mothers, prostrate on the pavement before a martyr's coffer, vociferated their demands Dear friend of Christ, save me'-' Most glorious friend of God, have pity upon me?' Was not this worship a fond thing,' when young ladies, thrusting their heads within sacred enclosures, had their faces stroked by the smooth hand of an invisible martyr? Was it not a fond thing,' when every prurient fancy was inflamed-inflamed by the language of the gravest doctors, to expect bright nocturnal visitations of roseate and perfumed deacons ?

One might imagine that, as if to justify by anticipation the very language of the article, Chrysostom-the golden-mouthed, had composed that passage, already cited, in which, with a flowing fervour, he incites his too ready hearers to court the martyrs from the skies to embrace their shrines with a fiery affection-to entreat their graces-to wait for their smiles, and to hope for the favours of heaven through their intercession!

Even if it could be said that the Romish invocation of saints and veneration of reliques' is not a fond thing,' the Nicene assuredly was such, and is thus far reprobated by the articlea fortiori.

--VAINLY INVENTED.—

Here again, and most decisively, the terms in which the reprobated doctrine and practice are described, if they be applicable to the Romish observances, are so only in a secondary or derivative

sense; while, in an absolute sense, they can be applied only to the Nicene worship; or to a worship still more ancient.

Except so far as the Romish church added divinities to her Calendar, and legends to her Acta Sanctorum, she did not invent, whether wisely or vainly, this polytheism. She inherited the whole of it-in principle-in spirit, and in its details, from the Nicene church. We might indeed, in a sense, exempt even the ancient church from the charge of inventing that which, in fact, she did but adopt and re-edit. The inventors, strictly, were the

originators of the obsolete paganism.

Too much reason is there to believe that a fatal ambition, on the part of the bishops of the third century, had given the first impulse to this infatuation.-Men like Gregory of Neo-Cæsarea, too eager to grasp the people, on any terms, within the arms of the church, allowed a yet pagan populace to cling to their inveterate habits, under the thin disguise of new appellations. The church had been used fondly' to pray for the dead :—these nominal converts, might they not therefore be allowed to pray to them?—and then to celebrate their Parentalia, and other ancient rites, with every customary excess! Such, as it seems, was the origin of the invocation of saints, and veneration of relics; and how 'vain,' how pernicious, how presumptuous an invention let all history declare! *

I now ask whether the descriptive phrase-' vainly invented,' can be attributed to the Romish doctrine of the invocation of saints, and veneration of relics, in any sense which does not fully apply, and even with more exactness to the Nicene? It is a

"After the Decian persecution, during which many in this region had died as martyrs, he (Gregory) appointed a general festival in honour of the martyrs, and suffered the rugged multitude to celebrate this with the same sort of feasts as those which were usual at the heathen commemorations of the dead (Parentalia) and other heathen festivals. He thought that thus one obstacle to conversion would be removed, and that if they had once become members of the Christian Church, they would by degrees voluntarily renounce sensuous indulgences, after their minds should have become spiritualized through Christianity. But he forgot what an intermixture of heathen and christian views, and rites, might arise from this acquiescence in heathen customs, as really did happen afterwards, and how difficult it is for Christianity to penetrate properly into the life, when it is debased from the beginning with such an admixture."-Neander, by Rose, vol. ii. p. 412.

circumstance not unimportant to note in this connexion, that the very words-inventio, and Eupeos, so perpetually occurring in the ecclesiastical writers, whenever new old bones were brought to light, give a literal fitness to the phrase employed by the framers of the article, and seem so to mark the thing intended as must preclude all evasion of their meaning.

-GROUNDED UPON NO WARRANTY OF SCRIPTURE.

That so enormous an impiety as that of offering prayer to Dead Men, and of opening temples where they might be supplicated, should have prevailed among communities possessed of the Scriptures; and that this blasphemy, accompanied as it too often was, with the most offensive excesses of pagan debauchery, should have been, not only witnessed, but promoted by men well acquainted with the inspired writings, may justly be regarded as one of the most singular as well as melancholy facts in the sad history of human infatuations. The uninitiated modern reader will be apt to suppose that men like Chrysostom--the two Gregories-Basil-Ambrose, and Augustine, must have had in their view-how much soever misinterpreted, some texts which might seem to give a colour to this impiety. What were these texts? What was that 'warranty of Scripture' on which it was grounded? The reader will hardly believe that, in the festival orations of the Nicene divines, perpetual changes are rung upon such as these 'Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints''The heavens declare the glory of God'-' Day unto day uttereth speech!' Such, and so ample, was that warranty of Scripture' which sustained the religious observances of the fourth century! We may be sure that every text apparently available for the purpose, has been culled by the diligence of modern Romanists, when labouring to defend their church against the imputation of idolatry. Peter Dens, under the title of the Worship and Invocation of the Saints,' &c., appeals, in this behalf, to the instances of the revcrence paid to angels by the patriarchs-to the authority of Tobit -to that of the Second Book of Maccabees-to the fact that good offices are rendered to us by the angels-and that Moses was a mediator between God and the people!

Was then the Nicene worship of the saints sustained by any other, or by any better warranty of Scripture' than that which is

adduced in behalf of the Romish? If not, then the TWENTYSECOND Article condemns, by the clearest implication, the Nicene, when it condemns the Romish doctrine, as destitute of Scripture

warrant.

-BUT RATHER REPUGNANT TO THE Word of God.

What is God's Holy Word, but a solemn testimony-an awful caution, uttered from age to age, against that inveterate infatuation of our fallen nature which has impelled mankind, from the earliest periods to the present-to pay religious honours to subordinate powers, and to worship the creature rather, and instead of, the Creator? What were the Jewish prophets, but stern reprovers of this very propensity to seek help from the divinities vainly worshipped by the nations ?-That the Nicene divines, with the Scriptures in their hands, and with the corruptions of polytheism actually before their eyes, should not have discerned this first characteristic of revealed religion, is indeed amazing. spectacle, when men of intelligence, men able to quote Prophets and Apostles so copiously, are seen driving a fanatical mob before them, up to this or that gaudy pagoda, there to prostrate themselves before a silver box of bones, and to cry-' Holy martyr, save us !' In no instance comparable to this, has the Awful Majesty of Heaven been so insulted by men to whom the Scriptures have been granted.

Sad

Yet it is this very impiety-it is the 'primitive' and 'respectably supported' doctrine of the invocation of saints, and veneration of relics, which the writers of the Tracts for the Times now reserve to themselves, as not having been condemned, like the Romish, by the church under whose auspices they minister, and whose emoluments they enjoy!

On a view of the case then, I ask—

Does not the TWENTY-SECOND ARTICLE, which every clergyman subscribes-does it not, when it condemns the Romish doctrine on the points before us, because a fond thing' and 'vainly invented' and 'not founded on warranty of Scripture-but rather contrary thereto' does it not, a fortiori, condemn the Nicene doctrine, of which the Romish is but a repetition?

If it be said-'We approve only of that invocation of the saints,

and veneration of relics which is really primitive and catholic; and we are not to be understood as assenting to what may have been the irregular practices of particular churches, even in the fourth century'

We then ask-Where are the records of that primitive and catholic doctrine to be found?-We do not find them at all until we find them in the writings of the very men whom it has been the laboured endeavour of the Tract writers, through a course of years, to hoist into the place of absolute authority! What becomes of the toil of so many years employed in preparing the way for a return of the church from the guidance of the Reformers to that of the Nicene Fathers, if, after all, in so material and so serious a matter, the authority of these Fathers must be rejected, and would, if submitted to, plunge us into the abominations of idolatry?

But if in fact the supposed record of the more ancient-the 'primitive and truly catholic doctrine of invocation,' &c. could be produced, so that we might, without ambiguity, fall back upon it, severed from the corruptions of the fourth century, would it— could it appear to be any better sustained by warranty of Scripture,' than is that of the Nicene church? The Thirty-nine Articles specify the books admitted as canonical, and which are collectively styled 'Holy Scripture.' These books are in our hands.Do they then encourage any sort of invocation of saints, or any veneration of relics? - If not, then those who subscribe the Articles could be no more at liberty to adopt the earlier, than they are to admit the later form of this worship.

Again. It is well known that those who framed the 'Articles of Religion' condemned and rejected these impieties on broad grounds; and for reasons applicable not less to the Nicene, than to the Romish form of it :-if indeed the two might be distinguished. The Homilies, and the other writings of these great, good, and honest men, abundantly show what their mind was in this instance.

But to this it is replied-' We of this day are not bound by any induction of the private and personal opinions of the men who drew up, or who set forth the formularies of the church; but only by the bare letter of them-if even by that.'—