instruct the People to teach them diligently That the Images of Christ the Mother of God and other Saints are especially to be had and retained in Temples and that due Honour and Veneration is to be given to them because the Honour tendred to them is referr'd to the Prototype so that by the Images which they kiss before which they uncover their Heads and prostrate themselves they worship Christ and venerate the Saints whose Similitudes they are And this say they is done (p) Jâ—xta Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae usum à primaevis Christianae Religionis temporibus receptum Sanctorumque Patrum consensionem Sess 25. according to the custom of the Catholick and Apostolick Church received from the first Age of the Christian Faith and the consent of the Holy Fathers § 2. On the other hand the Council of Constantinople consisting of 338 Bishops assembled in the Year 754 declares That (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Nic. 2. p. 452. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 508. this evil invention of Images neither hath its being from the Tradition of Christ or his Apostles nor of the Holy Fathers And having forbidden all Christians to worship any or to place an Image in the Church or in their private Houses they conclude unanimously thus (r) Ibid. p. 532. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this is the Faith of the Apostles this is the Faith of the Fathers this is the Faith of the Orthodox The Council of Frankford consisting of 300 Bishops assembled by Charles the Great out of Italy Germany and France A. D. 794. declares That the (s) Quia ut hoc facerent ab Apostolis sibi traditum mentiebantur Lib. Carol. l. 2. c. 25 27. second Nicene Council had offended in two things 1. in decreeing that Images should be worshipped And 2. in saying falsly that this was delivered to them from the Apostles They add That (t) Relictis priscorum patrum traditionibus qui imagines non colere sanxerunt novas conari insolitas Ecclesiae consuetudines inferre Praesat in lib. 1. leaving the Traditions of the Ancient Fathers who decreed That Images should not be worshipped they endeavoured to bring into the Church new and unusual Customs That they endeavoured to bring into Christian Religion the new Adoration of Images (u) Absque Sanctorum Patrum doctrina consacerdotum per diversas mundi partes consensu L. 4. c. 21. without the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers and the consent of their fellow Priests throughout the World. That this of Image-Worship was (w) Praefat. p. 10. impudentissima traditio a most impudent Tradition And that this pretended Tradition was (x) Neque in Evangeliorum tonitruis neque in Apostolorum dogmatibus vel quorumlibet Orthodoxorum Patrum doctrinis uspiam reperimus insertam L. 4. c. 13. neither to be found in the Oracles of the Prophets nor in the Writings of the Gospels nor in the Doctrines of the Apostles nor in the Relations of the former Holy Synods nor in the Doctrines of the Orthodox Fathers That it was instituted by them nullo Antiquitatis documento vel exemplo without all Instruction or Example from Antiquity A Synod held at Paris under Ludovicus Pius and Lotharius Anno Dom. 824 saith That the (y) Contra Authoritatem divinam sanctorum Patrum dicta P. 23. second Nicene Council declared for Image-worship against the Divine Authority and the Sayings of the Holy Fathers And that (z) Ed. Pith. p. 25 26. they determined against the Worship of them according to Divine Authority and juxta sententias sanctorum Patrum according to the Judgments of the Holy Fathers Agobardus Bishop of Lions having declared against all Image-worship saith (a) L. de Imag. §. 30. p. 263. This is sincere Religion is Mos Catholicus haec Antiqua Patrum Traditio this is the Catholick Custom this is the Ancient Tradition of the Fathers as is easily proved even out of the Book of Sacraments which the Roman Church useth And again (b) Nullus Antiquorum Catholicorum unquam eas colendas vel adorandas fore existimavit P. 265. None of the Ancient Catholicks did ever think that Images were to be worshipped or adored Hincmarus Arch bishop of Rhemes informs us That (c) Secundum Scripturarum tramitem traditionémque Majorum Opusc 55. cap. 20. this Nicene Synod was condemned and evacuated by a General Synod call'd by the Emperor Charles the Great according to the way of the Scripture and the Tradition of the Ancients (d) De Gestis Franc. Lib. 5. cap. 28. Aimoinus also complains of them That they had decreed touching the Adoration of Images alitèr quà m Orthodoxi Patres antea definierunt otherwise than the Orthodox Fathers had before defined In that Synod saith (e) In èa Synodo confirmatum st Imagines adorari debere quod omnino Ecclesia Dei execratur Annal. Part. 1. ad An. 791. Roger Hoveden it was confirmed that Images should be adored which the Church of God doth wholly execrate Now in this Matter let the Truth lie where you please 't is sure no little Prejudice against receiving any thing as a Tradition upon the evidence of a few single Fathers in Matters of meer Speculation as some Traditionary Doctrines of the Church of Rome most surely are that in a thing of this Nature which must be either daily practised or omitted by the Church whole Councils of 300 Bishops at the least in the same Age maintain such contradictory Assertions one saying frequently and expresly That this was the Doctrine of the Apostles and all the Ancient Fathers the others as expresly That it never was the Doctrine of either of them One That this was the practice of all faithful Christians the other That they never found it practised by any of the Orthodox Professors But though such contradictory Assertions in another Case might cause a wary Person to suspend his assent to either of them yet I am confident that whosoever is unprejudiced must in this case give in his Verdict against the Doctrine and Assertions of the Trent and of the second Nicene Council § 3. For notwithstanding all the confident Assertions of these Councils the Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers are so full and clear against that Honour and Veneration of Images which by these Councils is imposed upon all Christians with an Anathema to them who do assert or even think the contrary that he who doth impartially read them and doth not conclude that the whole Church of Christ did for 500 Years and more condemn this practice and in plain terms or by just consequence assert they had no such Tradition cannot sustain much loss if he quite want the use of Reason For 1. the Fathers do expresly say The Church of Christ hath no such Custom or Tradition (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud 2 Nic. Concil Act. 6. p. 492. We Christians saith Theodotus have no Tradition to form the Images of Saints
have practis'd or to declare as doth the second Nicene Council that this Commandment only forbad the worshipping of Idols or of Images as Gods or to give any other satisfaction to the Jews in this particular The Apostles and the Fathers do jointly labour to remove the Scandal of the Cross and to convince the Jew that it was reasonable to worship him who was crucified upon it but they say nothing to remove that which was a greater Scandal to them as the confession of the Jew now mentioned doth assure us viz. the worship of the Cross and of an Image which was the Work of their own Hands They tell the Gentiles That no Man had reason to condemn them for not observing the New Moons and Jewish Sabbaths but give them not one Item that they had no reason to condemn them for making and adoring Images The whole New Testament which takes especial notice Rom. 2.22 that the Jews abhorred Idols gives not the least distinction betwixt an Image and an Idol nor the least hint of any of those Evasions and Limitations by which the Church of Rome now finds it necessary to reconcile her Practice to the second Commandment nor of those Expositions or Retortions used in the second Nicene Council to refute the Clamours of the Jews Which is a full conviction that the Ancient Church had no such Doctrine or Practice which could make it necessary for them to fly unto these Romish Shifts and Subtilties § 3. To conclude The Suffrage of Antiquity is so very clear the Testimonies of it are so numerous and so convincing that they have forced many Learned Persons of the Church of Rome ingenuously to confess either that in the Primitive Church they had no Images did not regard them or that they paid no veneration to them but rather disapproved and condemned it The Vniversal Church saith (o) Statuit olim Universa Ecclesia ut nullae in Templis Imagines ponerentur Lib. de Nov. Celebrit p. 151. Nicholaus de Clemangis being moved by a lawful Cause viz. on the account of them who were converted from Heathenism to the Christian Faith commanded That no Images should be placed in Churches (p) Quem non modo nostrae Religionis expertes sed teste Hieron omnes fermè veteres sancti Patres damnabant ob metum Idololatriae De Invent. Rerum L. 6. c. 13. The Worship of Images not only they who were not of our Religion but as St. Jerom testisieth almost all the Ancient Holy Fathers condemned for fear of Idolatry saith Polydore Virgil where the opposition of these Holy Fathers to others not of our Religion and the mention of Pope Gregory among them shews the vanity of what the (q) Apud White p. 249. Jesuit Fisher saith That Polydore speaks this of the Fathers of the Old Testament not of the New. (r) Nos dico Christianos ut aliquando Romanos fuisse sine Imaginibus in primitiva quae vocatur Ecclesia Syntagm L. 1. p. 14. This surely I cannot omit saith Giraldus that as the Ancient Romans so we Christians were without Images in that Church which is called Primitive (s) Saevissimis his temporibus de Sanctorum imaginibus ne cogitârint Episcopi abstinebant ad tempus De Concil Eliber l. 3. c. 5. The Bishops in these times of Persecution saith Mendoza little thought of Images of Saints they abstained from them for a while least the Heathens should deride them and should conceive that Christians worshipped them as Gods. All these are Witnesses against the second Nicene Council that the Practice was not Apostolical Vniversal and Primitive What Opinion the Fathers had of this Practice these following Persons will inform you Petrus Crinitus saith That (t) De Hon. Disciplin l. 9. c. 9. Lactantius Tertullian and very many others with too much boldness did affirm That it belonged not to Religion to worship any Image (u) Erasm vol. 5. Symbol Catech p. 989. Even to the days of Jerom who died in the fifth Century Men of approved Religion saith Erasmus would not suffer any painted or graven or woven Image no not of Christ himself (w) Certum est initio praedicati Evangelii aliquanto tempore inter Christianos praesertim in Ecclesiis Imaginum usum non fuisse Consult cap. de Imag. p. 163. It is certain saith Cassander that when the Gospel was first preached there was no use of Images for sometime among the Christians as is evident from Clemens of Alexandria who flourished at the close of the second and from Arnobius who flourished at the beginning of the fourth Century And again (x) Quantum veteres initio Ecclesiae ab omni veneratione Imaginum abhorruerunt unus Origenes declarat p. 168. How much the Ancients in the beginning of the Church abhorr'd all veneration of Images Origen alone in his Book against Celsus shews And a third time (y) Sane ex Augustino constat ejus aetate simulacrorum usum in Ecclesiis non fuisse p. 165. Truly it is manifest from the Discourse of St. Austin on the 113th Psalm that in his Age the use of carved Images or Statues was not come into the Church Lastly he adds That in the Days of Gregory the Great that is in the sixth Century (z) Quae fuerit mens sententia R. Ecclesiae adhuc aetate Gregorii satis ex ejus Scriptis manifestum est viz. ideo haberi Picturas non quidem ut colantur adorentur c. p. 170. Consuetudo R. Ecclesiae pariter consractionem adoratiouem improbat p. 17◠this was the Mind and Doctrine of the Romish Church That Images should be retained not to be adored or worshipped but that the Ignorant should by them be admonished of what was done and be provoked to piety That the Roman Church did equally condemn the adoration and the breaking of Images That the second Nicene Council Graeca illa Synodus qua Parte Imaginēs adorandas censebat damnata fuit ut quae consuetudini R. Ecclesiae adversaretur p. 172. as far as it determined for the Adoration of Images was by the general consent of the Fathers of the Council of Frankford condemned and rejected as being a Determination which was repugnant not only to the Holy Scriptures and the Ancient Tradition of the Fathers but also to the Custom of the Roman Church And in a word Fortasse optandum esset ut Majores nostri huc usque in prisca illa Majorum suorum sententia integrè perstitissent p. 175 179 180. That it were to be wished perhaps that our Predecessors viz. those of the Church of Rome had continued in that old Doctrine of their Ancestors to wit that Images neither should be broken nor adored (z) De Van. Scient cap. de Imag. The corrupt Custom and false Religion of the Heathens saith Cornelius Agrippa hath infected our Religion and hath introduced into our Church Images and Idols and many barren pompous
to St. James in pilgrimage adding that St. James had no foot to come against them no hand to welcom them neither tong to speak to them so reproving the worship of Images I have openly said Alize Higuel Feb. 5. 1490. That Images of Saints be not to be worshipped that when devout Christian People of their Devotion be wont to offer their Candles burning to the Image of St. Leonard I have for their devotion called them Fools furthermore shewing in this wise when St. Leonard woll ete a Candle and blow out an oder then I will offer him a Candle else woll not Also when I have seen Cobwebs hanging before the Face of the Image of our Lady I have said and reputed them Fools that offereth to that Image but if she would blow away the same Cobwebs from her Face I have affirmed Robert Makam June 17. 1506. and said That the Crucifix and other Images in the Church made of Stocks and Stones are but Idols and ought not to be worshipped adding and saying that Ball the Carpenter or Pyke the Mason could make as good as the Crucifix for it is but a crooked Stick I have said John Bennet Feb. 7. 1507. That no manner of Image ought to be worshipped for that they can neither smell speak nor hear Sometimes their Confessions and Abjurations run after this manner viz. I have said Isabel Dort July 19. 1491. That it were better to give a poor blind or lame Man a Penny than to bestow their Mony in Pilgrimages and worshipping the Images of Saints for Man is the very Image of God which ought all only to be worshipped and no Stocks ne Stones I used to say Thomas Stochin March 22. 1498. We should rather worship the Image that God hath made that is to say the poor Man than the Image that Man hath made and painted the which standeth in the Church All these things they renounce as contrary to the common Doctrine and Determination of the Vniversal Church of Christ and as false Doctrines contrary to the Christian Faith as great Heresies and false Opinions reproved and damned by all Holy Church and against the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles And yet these Sayings thus condemned by the Second Nicene Council and thus renounced as great Heresies in all parts where the Power of the Church of Rome prevailed in these latter Ages are either the express Sayings and Doctrines of the Ancient Fathers or little different from them in sense whence any Man may easily discern how great an opposition there must be betwixt the Doctrine of the Ancient and of the present Church of Rome the true Catholick Church of Christ in the Primitive Ages and that which now usurps the name of Catholick CHAP. III. That the Ancients did not bow down to or venerate Images is farther proved 1. Because they never were concerned as are the Romanists to Answer the seeming repugnancy of this practice to the Second Commandment or to use any of the Distinctions so frequent in the second Nicene Council to that effect § 1. 2ly Because they answer all the Objections urged by the Nicene Council against the Protestant sense of this Precept viz. the instance of the Cherubims and of the Brazen Serpent c. § 2. 3ly Because many of them declare that this Precept rendred the very Art of making Images unlawful to the Christians § 3. 4ly Because they generally declare that by this Precept the Christian is forbid to give any outward Worship to Images or to bow down to them § 4. 5ly Because they reject and confute all the Distinctions used by the second Nicene Council and by the Romanists to reconcile this Precept to their Practice asserting 1. That this Command is moral and perpetual and obligatory to all Christians 2. That this Precept doth not only forbid the Worship of Images with Latria but all outward Adoration of them 3. That this is the Second Commandment and not a part of the first only 4. That not only Idols but Images are by this Precept forbid to be adored § 5. § 1. THat the Ancients knew nothing of this pretended Tradition will be still more evident from their Discourses touching that Commandment which so expresly saith Thou shalt not make unto thy self an Idol nor the similitude of any thing in Heaven or Earth For had they generally practised had they received a Tradition touching the Veneration of the Images of Christ his Blessed Mother and the Saints and Martyrs is it not wonderful that none of all the Fathers ever did that which all Christians who entertained the Worship of them ever did viz. That they should never offer any Answer to the obvious Objection from this Commandment against it or in the least attempt to reconcile this Precept with their Practice or to propose any of those Distinctions Limitations or Excuses which are so frequent in the Writings of the Romish Doctors and which they judg so necessary to prevent Idolatry and to inform aright the Minds of them who venerate their Images and to satisfy the importunity of those who scruple at it and do suspect it is a breach of this Commandment The Matter of this Image-worship looks so ill it seems so manifestly repugnant to the Command forbidding us to worship any similitude of any thing in Heaven or Earth it is at least in appearance so like to that very practice which they derided in the Heathens that it was highly reasonable if this had been the Doctrine and Practice of their Times that these Primitive Fathers should at least have considered and stated the Question How far and in what sense it was lawful and with what Intention and in what Degree and with what Cautions and Distinctions this might lawfully be done The present Doctors of the Church of Rome are not so careless now adays as were the Fathers in this Matter When they write Catechisms for the Instruction of the People sometimes they (a) Vid. Dall de Imag. p. 77. wholly leave out this Commandment sometimes they do abbreviate it and make it only say Thou shalt not worship Idols Or if they be so daring as to present the whole Commandment to the view of Roman Catholicks they carefully expound and clog it with many Limitations and Distinctions that their Proselytes may not be tempted to think the words do mean what in their plain and obvious sense they do import Thus was it also with the Bishops of the Second Nicene Council who introduced this Image-worship into the Eastern Church Constantinus Bishop of Constantia in Cyprus seems to insinuate That the Reason which moved God to make this Injunction was not the Evil of Image-worship but the propenseness of the Jews unto Idolatry For saith he (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 4. p. 200. vid. Act. 6. p. 468. when the People were moved to commit Idolatry then God spake thus to Moses Thou shalt make no similitude to serve them In
Imaginem scidi illud magis dedi consilium custodibus ejus loci ut pauperem mortuum eo obvolverent efferrent illique contra murmurantes dixerunt si scindere voluerat justum erat ut aliud daret velum atque mutaret quod cum audiissem me daturum esse pollicitus sum illico esse missurum Nunc autem misi quod potui reperire precor ut jubeas Presbyteros ejusdem loci suscipere velum à latore deinceps praecipere in Ecclesia Christi istiusmodi vela quae contra Religionem nostram veniunt non appendi Decet enim honestatem tuam hanc magis habere sollicitudinem ut scrupulositatem tollat quae indigna est Ecclesia Christi populis qui tibi crediti sunt Apud Hierom. Epist To. 2. F. 58. Epiphanius to John Bishop of Jerusalem where he saith When I was come into the Village called Anablatha and entring into the Church to pray found there a Veil dyed and painted and having the Image as it were of Christ or of some Saint for I do not well remember whose Image it was But seeing this that contrary to the Authority of Scriptures the Image of a Man was hanged up in the Church of Christ I rent it and gave counsel to the keepers of the Place that they should rather wrap up and bury some dead Body in it They murmuring said That having rent this he should send them another Which saith he I promised and have now sent and I desire you to bid the Presbyters of the Place receive it of the Bearer and henceforth to command them That such Veils as these which are repugnant to our Religion should not be hung up in the Church of Christ for it becomes you to be the more careful for the taking away that Scrupulosity which is unworthy of the Church of Christ and of the People committed to your charge This Epistle is extant in the Works of (m) Ep. To. p. 58. Jerom both Manuscript printed It is owned as genuine by (n) In Concil Narbon p. 616. Sirmondus and Petavius It was long since cited against Image-worship by the Councils of (o) Lib. Car. l. 4. c. 25. Frankford and (p) Synod Paris c. 6. Paris and so the Truth of it cannot be reasonably disputed This being thus premised I observe 1. That he declares it contrary to the Authority of Scripture to hang up in the Church of Christ the Image of a Man He doth not say the Image of a wicked Man but simply and without all distinction Imaginem Hominis the Image of a Man. 2. He clearly doth insinuate That for any thing he knew to the contrary the Image which he rent was the Image of Christ or of some Saint for whether it was so or no saith he I do not well remember Whence evident it is that had it been the Image of Christ or any of his Saints he would have rent it He therefore did not think that to destroy those Images which were erected for his Worship was to offer a most vile Affront unto his Saviour as afterwards the second Nicene Council did and now the Papists do conceive 3. He positively declares That all such Veils so hung up in the Church were contrary to the Religion of the Christians 4. He desires the Bishop of Jerusalem to charge his Presbyters that they should suffer no such thing hereafter to be done i. e. no painted Images to be hung up in the Church of Christ and that because it was unworthy of the Church of Christ the People committed to his charge to be scrupulous or concerned about such Trifles 5. Observe That when he rent this Veil and counselled the Men of Anablatha to wrap and bury some poor Body in it they did not say for ought appears and he did not regard it if they said so that this was to prophane the Sacred Image or that he offered an Affront to Christ or to his Saints by rending of it but they say only this That having rent that he should provide another Whence it is evident that they had then no Custom or Doctrine of the Church which could maintain the hanging up or could condemn the rending of this Veil § 4. The Aversation which all good Christians had to Images was so well known to the Enemies of the Church that they made their advantage of it to withdraw her Subjects from Communion with her For the Donatists well knowing how detestable a thing it was unto the Christians of that Time to see an Image set up in the Church and more especially upon the Altar they framed this Calumny the more effectually to draw them off from her Communion (q) Dicebatur illo tempore venturum esse Paulum Macarium qui interessent Sacrificio ut cum Altaria solent niter aptarentur proferren illi Imaginem quam primo in Altari ponerent Sic Sacrificium offerretur hoc cum acciperent aures animi perculsi sunt ut omnis qui haec audierat diceret qui inde gustat de Sacro gustat Optat. l. 3. p. 75. That the Catholicks Paulus and Macarius would bring an Image and place it on the Altar whilst the Sacrifice was offered This Rumor startled the Faithful for when the fame of it was spread abroad the Ears and Minds of all Men saith Optatus were much troubled at it and all that heard it began thus to speak Whosoever tasts of any thing from thence doth tast of a forbidden thing Whence we with (r) Masius in Josh Cap. 8. v. 31. Masius a Learned Romanist observe how much the Ancient Christians did detest the sight of any Image on the Altar that is how much they did detest the present practice of the whole Church of Rome 2ly Observe the Answer of the Christians of those Times unto this Calumny They do not say true it is we do set Pictures upon our Altars and that not only for Ornament and Memory but for Veneration also And we do well to do so and suitably to the Tradition of the Church of Christ so that you ought not to be troubled at it or frighted from our Communion by it which is the only Answer the Church of Rome can make to this Objection and which the Fathers ofthat they should be made § 4. But 2ly these Fathers do with one Voice declare That by this Precept the Christian is forbidden to worship to bow down or to give that Age would have made had they then practised as the Church of Rome doth now but they do utterly deny the Thing rejecting it with detestation and abhorrence Optatus doth confess That (s) Et rectè dictum erat si talem famam similis veritas sequeretur at ubi ventum est à supradictis nihil tale visum est nihil viderunt oculi Christiani quod horrerent visa est puritas ritu solito solennis consuetudo perspecta est cum viderent divinis Sacrificiis nec
other places they affirm That God doth only here forbid (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 7. p. 556 584. the worship of them with Latria the worshipping of Images (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 5. p. 355 376 412. as Gods but not the worship of them with Doulia and often do observe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 7. p. 584. Act. 4. p. 248. outward Worship by saluting or bowing of the Body is not appropriated to God but is an Honour oft given to the Creatures and therefore is such Worship as may be given to S. Images And sure it may be charitably presumed that the Fathers of the Primitive Church were as heartily concerned for the Instruction of their Flocks and were as able to perceive as Roman Catholicks that seeming opposition which the Veneration of Images bears to this Commandment and yet we do not find in all their Writings for five hundred Years one Caution to inform the People that this Law concerned not that Image-worship they are supposed to have practised and derived down unto Posterity Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Tertullian and other Writers of the Ancient Church make frequent mention of this Precept especially when they discourse against that Image-worship which the Heathens practised but they afford not one Iota to distinguish that Worship they condemned in the Heathens from that which they are said to have then given to the Images of Christ and of his Saints or to except them from the Censure they so generally pass upon all Image-worship or to inform us that the worship of such Images is well consistent with the Second Commandment § 2. To make this Argument yet more convincing let it be considered That these very Fathers thought themselves concerned to answer those Objections which Papists now and other worshippers of Images before them made against that sense of the Commandment which Protestants embrace viz. That God by it forbids all outward Worship or Veneration to be paid to Images For whereas they object the (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodorus Patr. Hieros 2. Concil Nicen. Act. 3. p. 185. vid. Act. 4. p. 197 236. Act. 6. p. 468. Act. 2. p. 107 115 Cherubims placed in the Jewish Temple Tertullian answers That when God forbad the making the likeness of any thing in Heaven or Earth in the next words Thou shalt not worship them he shewed the Cause of that Prohibition was the removal of Idolatry and therefore saith he the (g) Sic Cherubim Seraphim-certe simplex Ornamentum longe diversas habendo causas ab Idololatriae conditione ob quam similitudo prohibetur contr Marc. l. 2. c. 22. Cherubims seem not here forbidden because they were not made for Worship but for Ornament Clemens of Alexandria to the same Instance answers That (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strom. l. 5. c. 564. the Cherubims were the Symbols of Angels glorified not the Images of Saints for he who had advised them to make no graven Idol would not himself have made the Image of Saints or Holy Things 2ly The framing of the Brazen Serpent by Moses is also pleaded in favour of Image-worship in the Second (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 5. p. 356 357. Act. 2. p. 108 109. Nicene Council Now to this Tertullian answers That this was done by (k) Non in Idololatriae titulum sed in figuram Remedii Contr. Marc. l. 2. c. 22. Non ad derogatioē Legis sed ad exemplarium causae suae L. de Idol c. 5. Moses not as an Image of Idolatry but as a Figure of their Remedy that it was done not in derogation to the Law but as a Figure of the Cross (l) Just M. Dial cum Tryph. p. 321 322. Justin Martyr in like manner saith That it was a Figure of the blessed Jesus who was to save us from the bitings of the old Serpent for otherwise saith he How can we reconcile it with the Command of the same God to make no kind of Image Tertullian speaks thus to the Christian (m) Ne facias adversus legem simulacrum aliquod niti tibi Deus jusserit De Idol cap. 5. If thou observest the same God thou hast his Law make no Smilitude if thou respectest the Precept of the Similitude that afterwards was made imitate thou Moses make no Image against the Law unless God also do command thee 3ly To the Objection made by (n) De fide Orth. cap. 93. Damascen and before him by Celsus That God made Man after his own Image Origen replies That (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 7. p. 376. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. vid. l. 8. p. 389. it is one thing to be an Image of God another thing to be made after his Image And that this Image of God is preserved in the Rational Soul made like in Vertue to to him not in the Lineaments of the Body These are the Exceptions made against this Law which the Ancient Fathers diligently take notice of and shew not to be Breaches of or Contradictions to this Precept Whereas had then the Christians been accustomed to worship or bow down before the Images of Christ and of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints departed this Practice would have ministred more weighty Scruples to imploy their Pens And therefore we have reason to conclude their practice gave them no occasion to answer those Objections which Romanists are so industrious to solve and they who were concerned about lesser Matters never mention § 3. But then if we consider That these Fathers who are so profoundly silent in the Particulars now mentioned so unconcerned to shew that any Veneration of any Images whatsoever was any ways consistent with this Precept are very loud and frequent in declaring as many of them do That this Commandment rendred the very Art of making Images unlawful to the Christian that with one Voice they say That it forbad all outward Veneration and bowing down to any Images whatsoever and that they do as fully contradict and overthrow all the Distinctions Shifts and Excuses of the Romanists whereby they do endeavour to avoid the Condemnation of this Law I say when we consider this we cannot have the least suspicion left that they should practise in their Actions or in Mind approve what they in words so fully have condemned And 1. We find that many of them have declared expresly That God by this Commandment forbad the very making of an Image and rendred the very Art of Painting and engraving Images unlawful to the Christian Clemens of Alexandria stiles it (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 41 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an evil Art and adds That we Christians plainly are forbidden to exercise this deceitful Art the Prophet having said Thou shalt not make the similitude of any thing in Heaven or in Earth Origen declares That (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
the words of this Commandment I conceive it cannot be reasonably thought to be forbidden in any other Precept there being only this which speaks of Image-worship and if it were forbidden in no Precept of the Moral Law it necessarily will follow that it was lawfully performed by the Heathens 4ly Do they pretend that Idols only are forbidden to be adored in this Precept but not Images this indeed is the conceit of Romish Doctors and of the second Nicene Council but this also is plainly opposite unto the general Tradition of all the Fathers of the Church who constantly observe what is as evident in the Commandment as words can be viz. That it forbids not only Idols to be worshipped but also the similitude of any thing whatsoever As besides the express Testimonies of Clemens of Alexandria Theophilus Tertullian Origen Athanasius Epiphanius St. Austin and Fulgentius produced already is farther evident from the express Assertions of (l) P. 321 322. Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho Of (m) C. 59. Cyprian in his third Book to Quirinus Of (n) P. 39. Julius Firmicus in his Treatise of Prophane Religion Of (o) Carm. p. 99. Nazianzen in his Verses Of the (p) P. 554. Pseud-Ambrosius upon the 6th Chapter to the Ephesians Of (q) Qu. 38. Theodoret in his Questions upon Exodus and of innumerable other Authors To all which add that of Tertullian That (r) Omnis forma vel formula Idolum De Idol c. 3. every Form or little Representation is an Idol and all Service performed about it is Idolatry That of the Council of Frankford (s) Sed ne Idola nuncupentur adorare eas colere Recusamus Lib. Car. l. 4. c. 18. We do not call the Images placed in Churches Idols but we refuse to worship and adore them lest they should be called Idols That of Agobardus That (t) Puto quod videretur eis non tam Idola reliquisse quam simulacra mutasse De Imag. p. 248. if they who have left the Worship of Daemons should be commanded to venerate the Images of Saints I think they would seem to others not so much to have left Idols as to have changed their Resemblances Add lastly the Complaint of all the Fathers against the Arians That by introducing the Adoration of a Creature they brought in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Idol-making Heresy under the pretext of Christianity they secretly introduced the Worship of Idols and transgressed that Precept which forbad the Adoration of an Idol or of any Similitude clearly insinuating That by worshipping any Creature it was made an Idol Since then the Fathers of the second Nicene Council and the Romish Doctors do with such diligence and industry inculcate these Distinctions and Limitations of this Precept seeing they were so much concerned to blanch and colour over the seeming opposition of their practice to it And since the Fathers must have had the like Occasions Reasons and inducements so to do if they had practised the same custom of making and adoring the Images of Christ and of his Saints and yet they never in the least concern themselves about this Matter never use any of these Limitations or Distinctions nor any other of like Nature in their own defence but do as manifestly reject condemn and overthrow them all as any Protestant could do Since 2ly they thought themselves obliged to shew that which comparatively concerned them little viz. That the making of the Cherubims and of the Brazen Serpent by Moses and the making Man after his Image by God himself did no way thwart this Precept but yet were wholly unconcerned to add That the making and adoring of the Images of Christ and of his Saints was also well consistent with it since they do often say That notwithstanding this Command it might be lawful for the Jew to make an Image where there was no peril of worshipping or bowing down to it and it was also lawful for the Christians to have (u) August in Psalm 113. their Cups and Dishes for the Sacramental Bread and Wine and other Vtensils and that such things were not condemned by this Commandment or to be ranked with what was here forbidden but yet they never go about to prove That it was lawful notwithstanding this Command to have or worship Images of Christ or any of his Saints since even in the following Ages when Images began to be received into Churches they still declare they did not violate this Precept because they had them not for Adoration but only for commemoration and that this Precept forbad them not to make though it by all means forbad them to adore an Image 3ly Since many of them have declared expresly That God by this Command forbad the very making of an Image and rendred the very Art of Painting and Ingraving unlawful to the Christian and they more generally do assert That He by it forbad even all outward adoration of them and consequently expresly must declare themselves transgressors of it and practicers of wicked Worship if they both made and gave external Adoration to the Images of Saints And 4ly since they plainly argue against all honorary Worship of them thus That if the Workmanship of God's Hands is not to be adored no not in honour of that God that made it much less may we adore the Workmanship of Man in honour of those Persons whose Images they are said to be Declaring This should it be done by Christians would rather look like changing than leaving of their Idols And lastly since they solemnly profess That by Reason of this Precept they had rather die than worship any graven Image with many other-like Expressions it is upon all these accounts extreamly evident that then they had no Images of Saints erected or painted in the House of God and that when they were once admitted they neither paid to them any outward Worship nor did they think it lawful so to do CHAP. IV. The Fathers forbid Christians to make or worship Images and Pictures § 1. 2ly Some of them represent it as a vain thing to desire them § 2. 3ly When they saw them in Churches they tore and pull'd them down as being contrary to Scripture and Religion § 3. 4ly When it was objected to them by the Donatists That some of them placed Images on the Altar they reject the Calumny with great abhorrence § 4. 5ly When the worship of Images was objected to them by the Manichaeans they say This was done only by some rude People by the Church condemned § 5. From the 8th to the 15th Century the veneration of Images was rejected by the most eminent Persons of the Western Church § 6. § 1. AND suitably to these Declarations we find the Fathers as occasion served either forbidding of the People to make or at the least to worship Images and shewing of their Zeal against them that did so both in Word and Action Epiphanius speaks thus to the Christians