This passage of Cyril I have heard several learned Roman Catholic gentlemen call a prayer,

common rights of mankind; which ought to be the just object of universal contempt and abhorrence; whether we consider it as a system of idolatry, impiety, and cruelty; or, as a political scheme, to destroy the liberties, and engross the properties of mankind. Of these things, particularly and largely, in the piece referred to.

Here I have only further to observe, that in the large collections of the Councils, it is not only the eighteen oecumenical the collectors have gathered, but so much of all the councils as they could find, their acts, letters, formularies of faith, and canons, from the first council at Jerusalem, in the year 49, to the last council in the eighteenth century; which was convoked by the archbishop of Ambrun against Jean de Soanem, bishop of Senez. These amount to above 1600 councils. Note, Reader, the condemnation and banishment of old John de Soanem, the most learned and excellent prelate in France, of his time, in the eightieth year of his age, by Firebrand Tartuff, archbishop of Ambrun, and his council, Sept. 21, 1727; was on account of the bishop's admirable pastoral instruction against the execrable constitution unigenitus, and the antichristian formulary of pope Alexander VII., and because he recommended the reading of Pere Quesnel's very pious and fine Reflections Morales.

Pasquier Quesnel, a famous Jansenist, and father of

and affirm it was a proof of the Father's invocation of saints, in the beginning of the fifth century; for St. Cyril succeeded his uncle Theophilus in the see of Alexandria, October 16, 412. But to this it may be answered,

First, That Binius, though a zealous pleader for the catholic cause, as the monks of Rome miscall it, was of another opinion, for he takes no notice of this passage in his notes, in calce part 3, Concil. Ephesini, tom. ii. p. 665, &c. and most certainly, he would not have failed to urge it, if he had considered it as a prayer, and believed it did prove the invocation of saints.

Secondly, Neither does Bellarmine, in his treatise de Sanctorum Beatitudine, Henricus Vicus de Sanctorum Invocatione, Gabriel Vasquez de Adoratione, or Gregorius de Valentia de Oratione, make use of this passage of Cyril, though they do, ex professo, and datâ operâ, diligently quote all the councils and fathers they can, to prove the invocation of saints.

Thirdly, As rhetorical apostrophes, or prosopopæias, are usual in all authors, sacred or civil, this

the oratory, was born in 1636, was the author of many books, some of them very good. He was severely persecuted for many years, and died at last in prison, if I mistake not, a sufferer for religion.

may be one in Cyril, and it seems very plain from the passage, that it was intended for no more. It appears to be a rhetorical figure, and not a prayer; such a figure as the Greek fathers were wont very frequently to use in their orations and poems.

Cyril intending, as appears by the sequel, to answer his own question with a passage in St. John's gospel, makes a long rhetorical apostrophe to the apostle, as if he were there present, then adds, Annon dicentem audimus, Οὐκοῦν ἀκούομεν λέγοντος ? But do we not hear him saying? Or, as Binius has the reading, Ουκοῦν ἀκούομεν λέγοντος, let us hear what St. John saith, audiamus itaque dicentem, as if they had heard John giving his answer, and then concludes with the first verse of the first chapter of his gospel, 'Ev 'Apxñ ãv å Móyos, &c. In the beginning was the word, &c.

It is therefore very plain, that this passage of Cyril is only a part of his homily or sermon, and that in a rhetorical manner, he quotes a text from a gospel written by John about three hundred and thirty years before, in answer to his own question, who the word was? For Cyril to pray to John to tell them what he had told them long before, were senseless and ridiculous; but to desire the apostle to do it in a rhetorical apostrophe, was allowable. It amounts to no more than the figurative expression

in our liturgy, Hear what comfortable words our Saviour saith. Hear what St. Paul saith.

But if Cyril did in this passage truly pray to St. John, that could be no argument for popish invocation of saints; for if an hundred fathers in the beginning of the fourth century, had preached up, and practised invocation of saints, yet that could not make it lawful and right, since we are taught by the scriptures to direct our prayers neither to saint nor angel, but to God only, and in the name and mediation of Jesus Christ only. We are not only positively ordered by the apostles to make all our addresses and prayers to God only, and by the mediation and intercession of Jesus Christ, but are told, that God is omniscient, and so able to hear all our prayers; all sufficient, and therefore able to supply all our necessities; and that his mercies in Jesus Christ are infinite. This makes our way

sure in this particular.

On the contrary, the papists have no precept to pray to saints; nor any promise that they shall be heard; nor any practice of the primitive church, for three hundred years after Christ, to encourage them; and therefore, such popish invocation is a novel, groundless, and impious error.

We are told by St. Peter, that God had exalted the Lord Jesus Christ to be a Prince and Saviour,

that is, an intercessor.* By St. Paul, that Christ is able to save to the uttermost all that come to God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them; that he is gone to heaven, for this very end, to appear in the presence of God for us;‡ that there is no other mediator betwixt God and men but the man Christ Jesus,§ that is, whose prerogative it is to intercede for sinners to the Divine Majesty; being an honour and dignity God hath exalted him unto, after his sufferings, and as a reward thereof: Thus are we informed by the divine oracles, and yet, notwithstanding this, to make prayers and supplications to the Virgin Mary, and a thousand other saints, for aid or help; and to have by their merit and intercession, the gifts and graces they pray for conferred upon them: this is a doctrine of such dangerous consequence, as it is a depriving of Christ Jesus of that grand dignity and prerogative he is now in heaven exalted to, as much as in men lies, that I should have admired how it ever came to be embraced by such as profess Christianity, had not the spirit of God foretold || that some should depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, that is, seducing men, and doc

*Acts, ch. v. v. 31. ↑ Hebrews, ch. vii. v. 25. Ib. ch. ix. v. 24. § 1 Tim. ch. ii. v. 5. || lb. ch. iv. v. 4.