together with the supreme God, is a direct contradiction to that law which commands us to worship God alone; though we should suppose, that in the nature of the thing, the worship of saints and angels were consistent with the worship of the supreme God, yet it is not consistent with that law, which commands us to worship none but God. So that let this be a natural or positive law, or whatever men please to call it, it is a very plain and express law, and Christ never did contradict any express law of God.

It is true, that typical and ceremonial worship, which God commanded the Jews to observe, is now out of date under the Gospel, and does no longer oblige Christians; but the reason of that is, because it has received its accomplishment and perfection in Christ. Christ has perfected the Jewish sacrifices, and put an end to them by offering a more perfect and meritorious sacrifice, even the sacrifice of himself. The circumcision, washings, purifications of the law, are perfected by the laws of internal purity. The external ceremonies of the law cease, but they are perfected by an evangelical righteousness. But this I say, that Christ never repealed any Mosaical law, but by fulfilling and perfecting it: "He came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil." Now methinks I need not prove, that the worship of saints and angels is not a fulfilling but a destroying that law, which commands us to worship none but God. And it is not enough to say, that these are positive laws given to the Jews (though that be said without any reason), for let them shew me any positive law relating to the worship of God, which Christ has wholly abrogated without fulfilling it.

2. Yet as a farther proof, that Christ has made no alteration in the object of our worship, that he has not introduced the worship of saints, or angels, or images, into the Christian Church, which was so expressly forbid by the Jewish law, I observe, that according to our Saviour's own rule, that "he came not to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfil;" these laws of worshipping one God, and none besides him, were not liable to any change and alteration; because there was nothing to be perfected or fulfilled in them. He made no change or alteration but by way of perfecting and fulfilling; and therefore those laws which had nothing to be fulfilled, must remain as they were without any change..

To perfect or fulfil a law, must either signify to accomplish what was prefigured by it, and thus Christ fulfilled all the

types and prophecies of the law, which related to his person, or his undertaking, as the Jewish priesthood and sacrifices, &c. or to prescribe that real righteousness which was signified and represented by the outward ceremony, and so Christ fulfilled the laws of circumcision, washings, purifications, sabbaths, &c. by commanding the circumcision of the heart, and the purity of mind and spirit, or by supplying what was defective: and thus he fulfilled the moral law by new instances of virtue, by requiring something more perfect of us than what the letter of the Mosaical law enjoined. These are all the ways that I know of, and all that we have any instances of in Scripture of fulfilling laws.

Now I suppose, no man will say, that the first commandment, which forbids the worship of any other gods besides the Lord Jehovah, is a typical law, for pray what is it a type of? Nor can any pretend that the first commandment is a ceremonial law, for it prescribes no rite of worship at all, but only determines the object of worship.

As for the third way of fulfilling laws, by perfecting them with some new instances and degrees of virtue, it can have no place here, for this law is as perfect as it can be. For it is a negative law, "Thou shalt have none other God." Now that which is forbid without any reserve or limitation, is perfectly and absolutely forbid. There are no degrees of nothing, though there are several degrees of perfection in things which have a being; and therefore though there are degrees in affirmative laws (for some laws may require greater attainments than others, and one man may do better than another, and yet both do that which is good), yet there are no degrees in not doing a thing, and no law can do more than forbid that which the lawgiver will not have done.

And besides, this way of fulfilling laws does not abrogate any command, but adds to it; it may restrain those liberties which were formerly indulged, but it does not forbid anything which was formerly our duty to do; for when God requires greater degrees of virtue from us, he does not forbid the less. And therefore in this way, Christ might forbid more than was forbid by the law of Moses, but we cannot suppose that he gave liberty to do that which the law forbids, which is not to perfect but to abrogate a law.

But to put an end to this dispute; if Christ have perfected these laws, by indulging the worshipping of saints and angels under the Gospel, which was so expressly forbidden by the

law, then it seems the worship of saints and angels is a more perfect state of religion, than the worship of the one supreme God alone.

If this be true, then though the heathens might mistake in the object of their worship, yet the manner of their worship was more perfect and excellent than what God himself prescribed the Jews. For they worshipped a great many inferior deities, as well as the supreme God; and if this be the most perfect and excellent worship, it is wonderful to me that God should forbid it in the worship of himself; that he should prescribe a more imperfect worship to his own people, than the heathens paid to their gods.

For to say that God forbade the worship of any being besides himself, because this liberty had been abused by the heathens to idolatry, is no reason at all. For though we should suppose that the heathens worshipped evil spirits for gods, this had been easily prevented, had God told them what saints and angels they should have made their addresses to; and this had been a more likely way to cure them of idolatry, than to have forbade the worship of all inferior deities; for when they had such numerous deities of their own to have made application to, they would have been more easily weaned from the gods of other countries.

And we have reason to believe, so it would have been, had God been pleased with this way of worship, for he would not reject any part of religious worship merely because it had been abused by idolaters. The heathens sacrificed to idols, and yet he commands the Jews to offer sacrifices to himself, and so no doubt he would have commanded the worship of saints and angels, had he been as well pleased with this as he was with sacrifices; had it been a more perfect state of religion than to worship God only, and without any image.

When God chose the people of Israel, and separated them from the rest of the world, to his own peculiar worship and service, we cannot suppose that he did intend to forbid any acts of worship which were a real honour to the Divine nature, much less to forbid the most excellent and perfect acts of worship; for he who is so jealous of his glory, will no more part with it himself, than he will give it to another; and therefore, excepting the typical nature of that dispensation, the whole intention of the Mosaical law, was to correct those abuses which the rest of the world was guilty of in their religious worship, which either respected the object or the

acts of worship; that they worshipped that for God, which was not God; or that they thought to honour God by such acts as were so far from being an honour, that they were a reproach to the Divine nature. And whatever is forbid in the worship of God, unless there be some mystical and typical reasons for it, must be reduced to one of those causes. This account God himself gives, why he forbids the worship of any being besides himself, or the worship of graven images: "I am the Lord, that is my name, and my glory will I not give to another, nor my praise to graven images," Isa. xlii. 8. Whatever is his true glory, he reserves to himself, and therefore never did forbid any act of worship which was truly so; but he will not give his glory to another, and for that reason forbids the worship of graven images, or any thing besides himself; and if this was not his glory then, much less the most perfect and excellent part of worship, I know not how it should come to be his glory now, unless the Divine Nature changes and alters too.

So that God's having forbid, by the law of Moses, the worship of any other being besides himself, is a very strong presumption, that the worship of saints and angels (whatever fine excuses and apologies may be made for it, yet at least) is not a more perfect state of religion, than to worship God alone. For though God may not always think fit to command the highest degrees of perfection, yet there can never be any reason to forbid it. But let us now consider the nature and reason of the thing, whether it be a more perfect state of religion to worship God alone, or, to worship saints and angels, &c. together with the supreme God, Now the perfection of any acts of religion must either respect God or ourselves; that they signify some greater perfections in God, or more perfect attainments in us, and a nearer union and conjunction with the Deity. Let us then briefly examine the worship of saints and angels, both with respect to God and ourselves, and see whether we can discover any greater perfection in this way of worship, than in the worship of the supreme Being alone, without any rival or partner in worship; and if it appears, that it is neither for the glory of God, nor for the happiness and perfection of those who worship, we may certainly conclude, that our Saviour has made an alteration in the object of our worship, for he made no alteration for the worse, but for the better; he fulfils and perfects laws, which, I sup

pose, does not signify making them less perfect than they were before.

SECT. VI.

1. THEN let us consider, whether the worship of saints and angels be more for the glory of God, than to pay all religious worship to God alone. Now, if religious worship be for the glory of God, then all religious worship is more for God's glory than a part of it; unless men will venture to say, that a part is as great as the whole. And yet whoever worships saints and angels, though he be never so devout a worshipper of God also, yet he gives part of religious worship to creatures, and therefore God cannot have the whole, unless they can divide their worship between God and creatures, and yet give the whole to God.

If it be objected, that those who worship saints and angels, do not give that worship to them, which is peculiar and appropriate to the supreme God, and therefore they reserve that worship which is due to God wholly to himself, though they pay an inferior degree of religious worship to saints and angels: I answer, What that worship is, which is peculiar to the supreme God, I shall consider more hereafter; but for the present, supposing that they give only an inferior degree of worship to creatures: is this religious worship, or is it not? If it be, is a degree of worship a part of worship? If it be, then God has not the whole, and therefore is not so much honoured, as if he had the whole; as to shew this in a plain instance.

Those who pray to saints and angels, though they do not pray to them as to the supreme God, but as to mediators and intercessors for them with the supreme God, yet they place an inferior degree of hope, and trust, and affiance in them, or else it is nonsense to pray to them at all; so that though God may be the supreme object of their reliance and hope, yet he is not the only object; he has part, and the greatest part, but not the whole, for they divide their hope and trust between God and creatures; and if it be a greater glory to God to trust wholly in him, than to trust in him in part, then it is a greater glory to God to pray to him only, than to pray also to saints and angels.

Nay it is more than probable, that those who pray to saints and angels, as trusting in their merits and intercessions for