Church honoured the relics of the saints, we shall find it in a magnificent passage of St. Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians, where, speaking of the bodies of the elect, he says, "It is sown in corruption; it shall rise in incorruption. It is sown in dishonour; it shall rise in glory. It is sown in weakness; it shall rise in power. It is sown a natural body; it shall rise a spiritual body." It (that is to say, the body of the saint) is, according to the Apostle, the same body in this life, and in death, and after the resurrection: its qualities only are changed. It puts off corruption, weakness, inertness; it assumes agility, glory, power, incorruption; but it is the same body all through. Take it in its worst state, when it is yielding to the gradual approach of decomposition, or when it is reduced to a mass of dry bones. It was the temple of God while the soul animated it: Christ came to it and his eternal Father, and they dwelled in it. So it was as to the past; as to its future state, already elected to glory, every particle of matter composing it is destined to be reunited to the soul on the last day, and to live through all eternity in the freshness of immortal life. Is it then to get no honour in its present state? Surely it is superior to the matter surrounding it, in consequence of its certain election to a glorious immortality. Therefore, the primitive disciples of the Redeemer, knowing the doctrine of St. Paul on the subject of the resurrection, were compelled on principle to pay a certain rational amount of religious respect to the relics of their sainted dead, and we would reasonably expect to find them gathering their dust and collecting their shattered bones, and depositing them in holy places near the altar of sacrifice, or at least in the houses of prayer.

§ 4. Relative Worship, the Cross, &c.-Worship may be absolute or relative. The distinction is not a technical or gratuitous one, but it arises from the circumstances of the case, and the grounds of such a distinction are dis

11 Cor. xv. 42-44. ·

cernible in daily usage. Worship may be absolute or relative, because the object worshipped may be good and valuable in itself, or it may be appreciable solely on account of its connection with some other being. There can be no great difficulty in catching the nature of absolute worship and fully understanding the meaning of the term. Examples of absolute worship abound in social and civil life, so numerous, so familiar, as to present a clear idea devoid of all ambiguity. It is only necessary to represent a few of them to ourselves. A man of surpassing genius is revered; his genius, his talents are revered; there is in him the foundation of the reverence he receives, and the object (his genius) to which it is directed. This veneration of him, this civil worship he receives is absolute. A statesman has had every advantage of experience and good training. An immense acquired knowledge grafted upon a rarely energetic and practical disposition, has given him uncommon skill and wisdom in the despatch of public business. The aptitude, the faculty for business, thus acquired is an absolute quality inherent in his soul. It is quite clear that if his skill in public affairs be revered, or if he be reverenced in consequence of it, the civil worship rendered him must be absolute worship. Absolute worship, then, is the reverence paid to a superior quality existing in another, in his soul, his body, his mind, his intelligence; it makes no difference provided it so abides with him, that it may be properly called his own. Relative worship it is not so easy to understand, though of it, too, examples occur in civil life, which are strongly significant and suggestive. In relative worship the veneration rendered does not terminate at the being to whom it is immediately directed, but ascends to another being with whom the first is someway connected. It is, in fact, representative respect, representative reverence. It is addressed to a being animate or inanimate, because it represents another, and brings another to mind, and shows forth some property or quality of another. Its object is not anything existing in the being to whom it is addressed, but existing in another to which the first bears some relation. In truth, it is called relative,

because it is founded on a relation of one thing to another. The relations of things are innumerable; there are the relations of paternity, of friendship, of unity, of authority, of similarity. There are evil relations, which lead to distrust, dislike; good relations, which lead to love, respect. The relations of things become obvious through the senses generally, by the sight, the hearing, the touch. Examples of relative civil worship may be easily adduced. A viceroy represents sovereign authority. If the viceroy be venerated, inasmuch as he represents the King or Queen, the worship rendered to him is relative. A son, in a certain sense, represents his parents. If a son be respected and loved precisely because he is the son of such a father or mother, the civil respect shown him is relative. No doubt both the viceroy and the son may be venerated for their own qualities, irrespective of those whom they represent,-the former for his power and authority, the latter for his faithfulness and industry; but this does not destroy the possibility of making them the channels or "media" through which loyalty and friendship find their way to their proper term.

The distinction of worship into absolute and relative may be applied to spiritual things; and the following will appear to be the result:-1. The worship of God is absolute, inasmuch as the perfections of all other beings are derived from him; the veneration of the firmament, inasmuch as it represents the power of God, is relative. 2. The worship of the sacred humanity of Christ, hypostatically united to the Divinity, is absolute. The veneration of the Cross, the "sacred stairs," the hill of Calvary, inasmuch as they represent the passion, and bring it to mind, is relative. 3. The worship of sanctifying grace or the gifts of glory existing in a saint is absolute. The veneration of the picture of the saint, his girdle, his house, which recall his blameless life, is relative.

With this preface we come to the consideration of the question which presents itself in natural order, after the discussions of the last three sections,-namely, Did relative worship exist in the primitive Church? or could it be

tolerated among the faithful of those days, consistently with the doctrine of the ancient inspired writers, or their own apostles or evangelists?

Relative worship is most certainly not forbidden by the first commandment as announced in the Pentateuch. "Thou shalt not have strange gods before me. Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of anything that is in heaven above or in the earth beneath, or of those things that are in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore them nor serve them."1 This commandment is susceptible of two interpretations. Its meaning might, on a first view, be taken to be: Make not to thyself images for any purpose. Or, it might be: Make them not for the special purpose of sovereign adoration. On a closer examination of the passage, however, aided by common sense, and a little, ever so little, scriptural knowledge, it would be apparent that the first interpretation is perfectly inadmissible. For, in the first place, the text introduces the prohibition of image-making by the words "Thou shalt not have strange gods before me," and dismisses it with the significant remark, "Thou shalt not adore them nor serve them," thereby showing us clearly that the images here denounced and reprobated are they that are used as gods. Secondly, if the formation of images could be supposed to be universally forbidden here, the Sacred Scripture would be scarcely consistent with itself. In this case it would not be lawful to form the likeness of a cherub, because it is in heaven, nor of a serpent, because it is on earth. The words are, "Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth." Yet it was not only lawful, but it was commanded to make a likeness both of a serpent and a cherub, -ordered by God himself. "Thou shalt make also two cherubims of beaten gold on the two sides of the oracle." ? Exodus xxv. 18.

1 Exodus xx. 3, 4, 5.

"And the Lord said to him: Make a brazen serpent, and set it up for a sign: whosoever being struck shall look upon it, shall live." Finally, common sense repudiates such a general prohibition, unless it could be supposed to be a part of the ceremonial law of the Jews, and if it be supposed to be so, it was abrogated on the advent of Christianity.

The first commandment, therefore, prohibiting the formation of idols and their worship only, does not touch the question we have proposed to discuss, namely, Did relative worship exist in the primitive Church, and did the faithful of these early times revere, the pictures and images of departed saints or the mementos of the passion of Christ?

Writers of certain opinions would fain make us believe that there is something so intrinsically absurd in saluting a statue or bowing to the Cross, that sound Christianity in all ages must have recoiled from such practices. "A pretty idea," said an American gentleman, in my hearing, as he stopped to take breath opposite a little picture of St. Francis on the hill-side, as he mounted towards the valley of Chamounix; "pretty, but unmeaning." An English novel-writer of distinction gives us, in his own graphic way, a description of a scene in which an Italian desperado, "at the sound of the angelus turns towards 'a little doll' (an image of the blessed Virgin) fastened to a tree, salutes it, blesses himself, mutters some prayers, and returns to his daily avocation." Such a fund of indignation does the practice of relative worship in Catholic countries excite in the minds of certain travellers that they feel themselves called upon, in the name of Christianity, to sneer at the chains of St. Peter, to scoff at the blood of St. Januarius, to talk out and laugh in ascending the "scala sancta;" and I am sure, if they were not restrained by a salutary fear, they would take a morbid pleasure, on their travels abroad, in overturning the crucifixes which cover French territory, or tearing down the images which adorn the town, houses, and farmsteads of Bavaria.

1 Numbers xxi. 8.