To this conftant and celebrated Heathen Cuftom, we meet with frequent Allusions in the Poets. As in * Martial : Nunc mihi dic quis erit cui te Calatiffe Deorum Et bene vos, bene tu Patria Optime Cæfar And it appears from § Horace that this was their ordinary Practice at their Meals, and particularly at Second Course. Hinc ad Vina redit låtus, & alteris Te multa prece, te profequitur mero This drinking of the Emperor's Health, as we find by the Quotations, was for the moft Part their way of making him a Deity, and paying him Divine Honours, i. e. in the general Practice of the Heathen, it was an Idolatrous Action; And if fo what should hinder it from being fo ftill? What should make it of an Idolatrous Nature in an Heathen, and not in a Chriftian? If any one * Lib. 9. Epig. 95. † Faft. lib.2. § Lib. 4 Ode 5. F 2 Answers Answers, That the Heathen drank an Health to the Emperor by way of doing Divine Honour and in fo doing fuppofed him a Deity; But I drink to the Health of my King by way of a Civil Honour, and at the fame time know him to be only a Man. I Anfwer, That there are Three forts of Idolatry; If One pays an Honour of a Purely civil Nature in it felf to a Meer Mau; and yet perfocms it by way of Divine Honour, or as to a Deity, 'tis Idolatry in Refpect of the Perfon who doth that Honour. If he pays what is in it self a Religious Worship to a King or an Emperor, thô not as to a Deity, it is fo likewise in Refpect of the Action. Laftly, if he pays what is in it's own Nature a Religious Worship,and not to the true God,then it is ftrictly what the Schools call Formal Idolatry.What we are now difcourfing of is to be referr'd to the Middle Kind; and therefore the Objection proceeds upon an intire Miftake of the Question, which is not with what Defign or Purpose of their Mind Men perform that Action of Drinking for the Health of a King or Emperor; but whether the Action it felf carry any thing in it more than a purely Civil Respect? Whether it imply a Religious Worship in any Degree? Degree? Or whether it hath the Semblance of a Divine Honour, paid either to the Perfon for whose Health they Drink; or to any Deity in their Behalf. Now that this doth in its Own Nature carry in it more than a Purely civil Respect, and hath at least a Semblance of Divine Honour is undeniable; because, as we have feen, the conftant Practice of the Heathen World hath affixed this Notion to it; and stamped upon it such a Mark of a Divine Honour as no Time can erase. So that thô a Man may, in his own Mind, Separate this Notion from Drinking to the Health of a King or an Emperor, yet will it outwardly ever carry that Implication with it in the Judgment of all who know it to have been the daily Custom of Heathen Worshippers. This you will immediately fee only by the naming fome Other Inftances of Heathen Idolatry, which have Not been retained among Christians as this Hath; fuch as Mens Burning Incense either in their own Houses, or before the Statue of the Emperor for his Health or Profperity, or in Honour of him, as we find from Pliny the Heathen did; Or that of their Pouring out fome of their Liquor upon the Ground or Table in their own Houses, or at the Foot of the Altar for the fame Purpofes, &c. Should a Man now perform any thing of this Nature in Honour of a King or Emperor, he who made the Grand Objection would call him an Heathenifh Idolater; and all that I defire is that the Objector would fet his Head to work for any Reason for that Cenfure which will not equally hold against that of Drinking for their Health and Profperity, this being but another way among the Heathen of paying the Emperor More than a Civil Honour; or elfe of Offering up a Sacrifice to their Deities in his Behalf. That very Burning of Incenfe or Perfume which was part of the Heathen Worfhip, GoD appointed an Inftance of Divine Worfhip under the Law; Now thô that Difpenfation is abolished, would it not be an Idolatrous Act in any Perfon now to do Honour to his Governour by Fumigation? And for this Reason, because it having been once the customary way of Divine Worship, it will ever fo far retain that Character,that it will be ever efteemed Idolatry to perform it to a meer Man. Whether this be allowed or no, yet furely it would have been Idolatry in any of the Jews to have performed it in Honour of King Solomon while living, tho' the Founder of their Temple. If fo, then let me ask whether now that Drinking in an honourable Remembrance of CHRIST our KING is made an Instance of Divine Worship by the Gospel, it hath not something of a very Parallel Cafe to apply this to any worldly King or Emperor? 'Tis plain there is no other Difparity in thofe Actions but that one is performed to a Perfon abfent in Heaven, the other to a Perfon upon Earth. There is at least a great Likeness in the Actions, and if fo, then confider the Moral Import of that Text before quoted relating to the Perfume made for the Ufe of the Sanctuary,and a Type of our Euchariftical Oblation, Exod. xxx. 38. Whofoever, fhall make like unto that to smell thereto, shall even be cut off from his People. And here to Obviate at once all Objections which may be made against the Application of this Text, I shall only ask this Question. Why might not the Faithful and Loyal Subjects of King Solomon, who was fo great a Benefactor to them, have done Honour to him, at least while he was living, by Smelling to a Perfume in their own Houfes only of a LIKE Compofition with that appointed for the Worship of God in the Sanctuary? F 4 Τα |