example in its favour occurs in the history of the apostles. On the contrary, one apostle who fell down to worship an angel was forbid to do it.The second reason is founded on Mr. Calderbank's notion of the communion of Saints. This communion, however, is held by Protestants as strenuously as by Papists, but we can never admit that it warrants a practice which violates the divine law. This communion subsisted between the apostle John, and the angel in the Apocalypse, whom he was about to worship, for the angel says, "I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren "the prophets."* The conduct of the angel is therefore quite subversive of the inference which Papists draw from the communion of Saints.

Hitherto I have confined myself to the refutation of the general arguments produced by Mr. Calderbank in defence of the Idolatrous practices of his Church. I shall now consider those passages of Scripture by which he pretends to support the worship of saints and angels.

The first text quoted for this, purpose is that which contains the words of Jacob in blessing the

*Rev. xxii. 9.
G

Sons of Joseph. "And he blessed Joseph and "said, God before whom my fathers Abraham and "Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my "life, long unto this day. The angel which re"deemed me from all evil bless the lads."* On this text it is said that, "the invocation of those "blessed spirits who surround the throne of God, "is established very clearly on scriptural grounds."+

When I read the above passage, I own I was struck with surprise at the gross ignorance of the Scriptures which it displays. If Mr. Calderbank, will refer to Malach. chap. iii. 1. he will see that "the Lord who shall suddenly come to his temple, that is our Lord Jesus Christ, is there styled "the Angel of the Covenant."-The Angel who redeemed Jacob from all evil is the same Angel of the Covenant, our Lord Jesus Christ, God over all, blessed for ever. His peculiar work is to redeem from evil, and on this account, He is pointed at as the Redeemer in Jacob's blessing. The above is not the only place where our Lord, is called an Angel, or the Angel of the Lord, but it is enough for my purpose, and Mr. Calderbank may hence learn, the futility of

*Gen. xlviii, 15. 16,

+ Letters p. 130.

his reasoning, from Gen. xlviii. 15, 16, in support of the worship of created angels.

The second passage which Mr. Calderbank brings forward, to justify the worship of Saints, is Job vi. 1. "Call now if any will answer thee, "and to which of the Saints wilt thou turn ?"From these words, it is inferred that Job bore testimony to the lawfulness of invocating dead Saints. These however, are not the words of Job, but of Eliphaz, one of the friends of Job, whose conduct the Lord himself condemned in a subsequent part of this book.*—Besides not any thing is here said of the worship of saints, nor does it appear that dead saints are intended in the passage.-If the Papists would prove from the example of Job, that the worship of Saints is lawful, they must show that he actually worshipped them.-A practice so contrary to the whole tenor of Scripture, cannot be established, by wresting one or two ob. scure texts, and pressing out of them such a meaning, as contradicts the plain letter and spirit of the commandments of God.

A third text of Scripture, is quoted by Mr.

* Job xlii. 7,

66

Calderbank to support the Romish Idolatry, it is the falling down of the twenty-four Elders, before the Lamb, in Rev. v. 8. "having every one "of them harps, and golden vials, which are the prayers of Saints."-Now it does not appear in this passage, that the Elders were dead saints, or that the prayers here offered were addressed to the twenty-four Elders, by the Saints upon earth. -These Elders were probably figurative, or symbolical personages, representing the whole body of the Church, or perhaps the Ministers of the Church, whose office it is to lead its devotions and present them unto Christ.-From this text, therefore, nothing whatever can be deduced in favour of the worship of dead Saints.

The above are the only passages of the Holy Scriptures by which Mr. Calderbank has attempted to justify the practice which forms the subject of the present discussion.-His other arguments are founded either upon the authority of his own church, or upon the alleged example of the Fathers. It cannot but be remarked, that no Scripture precept is stated to exist, directly authorising the worship of saints, and no text in favour of it is produced, either from the Gospels, the Acts, or the Epistles, nor is it alleged that any

traces of such a practice are to be discovered in the above parts of the sacred writings. Now, I would demand of the Papist how he can reconcile this silence of the writers of the New Testament with the idea that such a thing as the invocation of saints actually existed in the apostolic age?—For surely if it had existed, some traces of it must have remained in those writings which laid down the doc. trines and recorded the instructions of our Lord and his apostles.

Feeling his want of scriptural support, Mr. Calderbank endeavours to prop up the idolatry of his church, by the authority of the fathers in favour of the invocation of saints. It is observable, that in this part of his argument he confounds the worship and invocation of the saints, with acts of veneration for their memories," by which term in P. 137, he actually designates the present practices of the Romish Church. But we will not permit the use of this misnomer. The acts of that church are acts, not of veneration for the memories of the saints, but of direct invocation and worship to the saints, in other words, acts of idolatry.

In answer to all arguments in support of such