Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A53984
|
A third letter to A person of quality being a vindication of the former, in answer to a late pamphlet intituled A discourse of the use of images, &c.
|
Pelling, Edward, d. 1718.
|
1687
(1687)
|
Wing P1105; ESTC R1303
|
22,843
|
37
|
sense of our Church so he doth rest in this that it contains a godly and wholesome Doctrine necessary for those times meaning the times in which and for which this Homily against Images and the peril of Idolatry was specially made And if He thought it godly wholesome and necessary he could not but think it True. 5. Therefore I shall conclude that this Homily ought to be appealed to in this Controversie with the Discourser as the Homily that contains the deliberate and setled judgment of our Church and such Doctrines as are necessary for these our times as well as for those when it was first written Now in the beginning of the First part of this Homily our Church roundly tells us that the bringing in of Images into the Church in those latter days hath nothing at all profited such as were wise and of understanding but hath greatly hurt the simple and unwise occasioning them thereby to commit most horrible Idolatry Then having noted that the words Idol and Image are of the the same signification in the Scriptures she proves by several Texts out of the Old Testament and the New that Images are neither to be Worshipped nor so much as used or had in Churches for fear and occasion of worshipping them though they be of themselves things indifferent for so she desires to be always understood to speak not only against Idolatry and Worshipping of Images but also against Idols and Images themselves in case men be stirred and provoked by them to Worship them and not as though they were simply forbidden without such occasion and danger as you may see in the beginning of the Third Part of that Homily In the Second part she gives an Historical relation of the rise and progress of Image-Worship in the Christian Church the sum whereof is this That Images and Image-worshipping were in the Primitive Church which was most pure and uncorrupt abhorred and detested as abominable and contrary to true Christian Religion And that when Images began to creep into the Church they were not only spoken and written against by godly and Learned Bishops Doctors and Clerks but also condemned by whole Councils of Bishops and Learned men assembled together yea the said Images by many Christian Emperours and Bishops were defaced broken and destroyed c. And I freely leave to all men of knowledge and integrity to judge whether in that Historical account I sent you there be any thing which is inconsistent either with the Doctrine of our Church as to Images and Image-worship or with the Historical account which our Church her self gives us I think indeed there is an observation which our Church there makes but I did not That the Bishops of Rome being no ordinary Magistrates appointed of God out of their Diocess but Usurpers of Princes Authority contrary to Gods word were the maintainers of Images against Gods word and stirrers up of Sedition and Rebellion and workers of continual Treason against their Soveraign Lords contrary to Gods Law and the ordinances of all humane Laws being not only Enemies to God but also Rebels and Traitors against their Princes These were the first bringers in of Images openly into Churches These were the maintainers of them in the Churches and these were the means whereby they maintain'd them to wit Conspiracy Treason and Rebellion against God and their Princes As I remember I did not observe this at least not so fully but if that be a fault I suppose this Discourser will readily forgive it If not 't is an even lay but some other time I may make him amends In the Third Part of this Homily our Church doth purposely answer those allegations and pleas which are commonly used by the Romanists to excuse and justifie their practice in this point as that their Images are not of any Heathen Idols but of God of Christ and his Saints that the making of Images is a thing in it self indifferent that they exhibit Honour not to the Image but to exemplar represented by it and that Images are lay-mens Books And throughout this long Sermon our Church declares her sense 1. That the Images of God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are unlawful to be made 2. That though the Art of painting and Image making be not wicked of it self and such Images may be suffered as are used for no Religion or Superstition rather she means of none Worshipped nor in danger to be Worshipped of any yet considering the great danger of Idolatry and the strong inclinations of people to it Images are not to be publickly had and suffered in Churches Which danger she shews at large because all Images publickly set up have been worshipped not by the simple sort only but in conclusion by the Learned also and because she conceived it impossible that Images of God Christ or his Saints can be suffered especially any considerable time or space without Worshipping of them 3. She shews that the Saints neither desire nor ought to be Honoured by Images that the distinction of Latria and Dulia is a lewd distinction that the pretence of honouring the Prototype by the Image is an old Heathen shift and that though it be said that the Honour is given to the Prototype yet this is only to palliate the matter for our Church evidently proves that the Papists did Worship the Images themselves not only by shewing their gross and Pagan-like Idolatry in that respect but also by producing the Authority of Jacobus Naclantus an Eminent Divine in the Council of Trent that it is not only to be confest that the faithful in the Church do worship before an Image as some peradventure do warily speak but also do Worship the Image it self without any scruple or doubt at all yea and they Worship the Image with the same kind of Worship wherewith they worship the Prototype wherefore if the Prototype be to be worshipped with Divine Worship the Image is also to be worshipped with the same 4. Having abundantly shew'd the Snares and dangers which Images draw people into and the vast mischiefs and wickednesses they occasion instead of instructing men like Books our Church at last plainly resolves the point That true Religion and pleasing of God standeth not in making setting up painting guilding cloathing and decking of dumb and dead Images nor in kissing of them capping kneeling offering to them incensing of them setting up of Candles hanging up of legs arms or whole bodies of Wax before them or praying and asking of of them or of Saints things belonging only to God to give but that all these things be vain and abominable and most damnable before God. Had my Adversary consider'd all this we might wonder how he could harden his forehead and Conscience so as to pretend to the World that there is an agreement between the Church of Rome and Oijrs as to this point he might as well have pretended to reconcile the most palpable falsehood to the clearest Truth such a
a Word a fine Notion a pretty Entertainment but no concern of Religion or Conscience 2. That Respect which is given to things Sacred consists in a Decent regard of them and in using them after a different manner from other things But Worship is quite another thing viz. A professing our subjection to the Object of our adoration upon the score of his Dominion and Power over us as our Superior and when either the Nature of such adoration or the Circumstances of it argue it to be Religious it is then Religious or Divine Worship peculiarly belonging to God because it is a Token of our Absolute Subjection to him as having Supream and Absolute Soveraignity over all The greatest men in the Church of Rome have had this Notion of Divine-Worship and had this wonderful Discourser understood or consider'd it he could not have been so very Indifferent about this matter because the Dispute is not about Words but Things and things of very great Concernment viz. Whether such actions and gestures as are due to God and by the Divine Law are appropriated to God and in the opinion of mankind are Testifications of Gods Supream and Absolute Dominion may be perform'd to and before a dumb Image Now this is that which we charge upon the Church of Rome that there are hardly any external acts of Religious Worship but what She performs to God and to Images in Common and that according to Her doctrine Images are truly and properly to be Worshipped with Worship taken in a strict Sense and as it is distinguish't from and signifies a great deal more than bare Honour or Respect or Reverence For the clearing of this because it is a great Controversie between my angry Adversary and Me I shall at present trouble him only with some ready observations out of my good Friend and when he has answer'd them I promise faithfully to furnish him with more These observations are 1. Concerning the Worship given by the Church of Rome to Images in General 2. Concerning the Worship given to the Cross of Christ in Particular 1. The Worship given by the Church of Rome to Images in general is True and Real Worship Worship that is a great deal higher than Respect or Reverence Worship in a proper and strict Sense Worship that doth consist not only in the External Acts of Divine Adoration but also in an inward affection which implies submission as Cardinal Lugo doth confess This my Learned Author shews to have been the thing intended both by the Second Council at Nice and by the men at Trent who appealed to that Council that the most eminent Divines in the Church of Rome thought so and accordingly maintain'd it as an Article of Faith wherein all Catholicks agree that true and proper Worship is to be given not only to the Exemplars represented by Images but also to the very Images themselves as Suarez Bellarmine Tannerus Ysambertus and others do positively affirm And lest this should be thought to be the Sense of a few private men only he further shews that some great Divines who were at the Council of Trent and could not but understand the Sense of that Council say the same thing For so Dominicus Soto determines that Images are not intended by the Church only for helps to memory but for Worship And whereas our Discourser would make us believe that this Worship is no more but that Respect which is shewn to the Bible c. Soto doth utterly Reject this for saith he We do not Worship the Scriptures or Names of Saints which call them to our minds but as to Images we ought to think otherwise for they do not only raise our minds to worship those who are represented by them sed easdem ipsas debemus adorare but we ought to worship the Images themselves So likewise Naclantus another great Man at Trent tells the World that 't is a needless caution for any to say that they worship before the Image sed adorare imaginem sine quo volueris scrupulo but men may say it roundly and without any scruple that they worship the Image With these Ambrosius Catharinus agrees too that True and Real worship is required to be given to Images and concludes that Images are not meerly for instruction or memory exciting devotion but that they are set up properly for worship Therefore if any man asks another are Images to be worshipped let him saith he answer without any fear They are because Images being set apart by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost for such a Sacred use do obtain such a degree of Sanctification that whoever violates them is guilty of Sacriledge and Treason against the Divine Majesty because God himself is most truly believed to be present in them after a particular manner and he shews his power and presence by them using them often for Oracles c. If this be not enough to convince my Adversary of the vanity of his pretences there is one observation more which deserves his consideration viz. That whereas some of the Roman Church as Durandus Holkot and others taught that Images ought not to be worshipped with the same worship with the thing represented but were said to be worshipped improperly and abusively because at their presence men did call to mind the objects represented by them which are worshipped before the Images but not properly the Images themselves this opinion was lookt upon as Heretical and therefore Suarez and many other eminent men disputed hotly against that opinion as being contrary to the Catholick Faith of the Roman Church which is that an Image is not only the occasion or sign exciting men to worship the thing represented but even the material Object to which the act of Worship and the Intention of the worshipper is to be directed and carried and which ought to be worshipped with the same worship with the Exemplar it self And certainly Ariaga was in the right when urging this to be the sense of the Church he used this strong Argument to prove it because it is not credible that if this had been all the Councils had determined viz. That Images are not the objects of Worship but only the occasions and means exciting men to worship the Exemplars they should never think of such an easie way to satisfie Dissenters as the declaring of this would have been But saith he the Controversie lay in another Point namely that Images did not deserve immediate worship and then he concludes that when the Fathers condemned those for Hereticks who denied that worship they did not determine that Images might be used as a condition of worship but that True and Real worship was to be given to them 2. Concerning that worship which is given to the Cross of Christ in particular 't is notorious that according to the common received Doctrine of the Romanists not only Inferiour Religious Worship but that which they call Latria meaning Supream Divine Soveraign Worship properly due to God