網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

SECT. V.

IMAGE S.

HAT the Worship of Images, as it was practifed by the Heathens, is Idolatry, Monfieur de Meaux and the Representer fuppofe; and therefore their Business is, to give fuch an account of the Worship of Images, as practifed in the Church of Rome, as to distinguish themfelves from Heathen Idolaters. To this purpose the Bishop tells us, The Council of Trent forbids us exprefly to believe any Di- Pag. 9. vinity or Virtue in them, for which they ought to be reverenced, to demand any favour of them, or to put any trust in them; and ordains, That all the Honour which is given to them, should be referred to the Saints themselves which are reprefented by them. That the Honour we render Images, is grounded upon their exciting in us the remembrance of thofe they reprefent. That by bumbling our felves before the Image of Christ crucified, we show what is our fubmiffion to our Saviour. So that to Speak precifely, and according to the Ecclefiaftical Stile, when we honour the Image of an Apostle or Martyr, our intention is not fo much to honour the Image, as to honour the Apostle or Martyr in the prefence of the Image. Thus the Pontifical tells us, and the Council of Trent expreffes the fame thing, when it fays, The Honour we render to Images, has fuch a reference to thofe they reprefent, that by the means of thofe Images which we kifs, and before which we kneel, we adore Jefus Chrift, and honour the Saints, whofe Types they To the fame purpose the Representer fpeaks, and almost in the fame words. So that the Sum of their Apology, is this, That they do not believe Images to have any Divinity in them, or to be Gods, and therefore do not pray to, nor put their trust in the Image, nor fo much honour the Image in those external Expreffions of Reverence they pay to it, by kiffing it, and kneeling before it, as Chrift, or the Saint whom the Image reprefents; and the usefulness of Images to excite in us the remembrance of those whom

are.

[blocks in formation]

we love and honour, is a juftifiable Reason of that Honour we pay to them.

This is a Matter of very great confequence, and deferves to be carefully stated; and therefore I fhall strictly examine, Whether this Exposition will justify the worship of Images, and fufficiently diftinguish the Worship of the Ch. of Rome, from that Worship which the Heathens gave to their Images. Monfieur de Meaux pretends, by his Expofition of the Doctrines of the Church of Rome, to cut off Objections and Difputes; that is, fo to ftate the Matter, that there may be no place for thofe Objections which Protestants commonly urge against worshipping Images. But I do not fee, that he has made any Effay of this Nature in the Point of ImageWorship, but has left both all the Disputes among themfelves, and with Proteftants, untouched.

The Objections which Proteftants urge against the Worfhip of Images, as taught and practifed in the Church of Rome, are principally thefe four.

1. That it is exprefly forbid by the second Commandment, without any limitation or exception.

2. That the Heathens are in Scripture charged with Idolatry in the Worship of Images.

3. That it is a violation of the Divine Majesty, crimen. lefæ Majeftatis, to reprefent God by a material and fenflefs Image or Picture.

[ocr errors]

4. That a vifible Object of Worship, though confidered only as a Representation, is expreíly contrary to the Law of Mofes, and fpecially to the fpiritual Nature of the Christi an Worship.

Now I do not fee, how the Bishop's Expofition takes off any of these Objections, which after all that he hath faid, are in full force ftill, as I fhall particularly fhew.

1. Then he tells us, That the Council of Trent forbids us exprefly to believe any Divinity or Virtue in Images, for which they ought to be reverenced. We grant, the Council does forbid this; and he knows that we never charge them with it; though there are fome practices of the Church of Rome, which look very fufpicioully that way but then we fay, the fecond Commandment forbids the worship of all Images,

without

without auy fuch limitation; for there is not any one word in the Commandment to limit the Prohibition of worshipping Images, to fuch Images, as are believ'd to have any Divinity in them. The words of the Commandment are as general as can be, Thou shalt not make to thy felf any Graven Image, nor the likeness of any thing that is in Heaven above,or in the Earth beneath, or in the Water under the Earth; thou shalt not bow down to them, nor worship them. The Commandment takes no notice of any Divinity which is fuppofed to be in thefe Images, but only of the Reprefentation made by them, that they are the Likeness or Representation of things in Heaven, or things on Earth, or things under the Earth, and therefore the whole Difpute between Papifts and Proteftants about the fense of the fecond Commandment, and the strict notion of an Idol, is left untouch'd by this Exposition.

See Dr. Stil

The Roman Doctors indeed tell us, that the Heathens worfhipped their Images as Gods, and did afcribe Divinity to them; upon which account Monfieur de Meaux tells us, All Pag. 9. thefe words of the Council are like fo many Characters to diftinguish us from Idolaters; feeing we are fo far from believing with them any Divinity annexed to the Images, that we do not attribute to lingfleet's Dethem any Virtue, but that of exciting in us the remembrance of fence of the Dif thofe they reprefent. But he knew very well,, that Proteftants courfe of Idoladeny, that the Heathens took their Images for Gods any try, p.466, &c. more than Papists do; their Philofophers defpifed the charge, and made the fame Apologies for themselves, which the Divines of the Church of Rome now do; and we may suppose, that common Heathens had much fuch Apprehenfions about them, as common Papists have: Those who had any fenfe could not believe them to be Gods, and those who have none, may believe any thing: but there is no great regard to be had to fuch Mens Faith, whatever their Religion be, who are void of common Senfe. However this Difpute, whether the Heathens did believe their Images to be Gods,or to have any more Divinity in them, than Papists attribute to their Images, is a Difpute ftill, and Monfieur de Meaux has not faid one word to prevent it; and therefore the Condemnation of the Heathens for worshipping Images is still a good Objection against the worship of Images in the Church of Rome, till he prove

I 2

as

I King..18.27.

as well as affert this difference between them.

[ocr errors]

But indeed, tho I readily grant that the Church of Rome does not believe that there is any Divinity in their Images, and that the Heathens did believe that Confecration brought down the Gods, whom they worshipped by fuch Representations, and tied them by fome invifible Charms to their Image, that they might be always prefent there to receive their Worships yet this makes no material difference in their Notion of Images.

The reason why the Heathens thought it necessary by fome Magical Arts to faften their Gods, or fome Divine Powers to their Images, was not to incorporate them with their Images, but to fecure a Divine Prefence there, to hear their Prayers, and receive their Sacrifices, without which all their Devotions paid to an Image were loft; which was very neceffary, especially in the Worship of their Inferior Demons, whom they did not believe to be present in all places. As Elijah mocked the Priefts of Baal, and faid, Cry aloud; for he is a God: either he is talking, or he is purfuing, or he is in a Journy, or peradventure he fleepeth, and must be awaked. But now, those who believe that God is every where present to fee and hear what we do; and that the Saints, who are not present in their Images, yet do certainly know (by what means foever it be) what Prayers and Homages are offered, to them at their Images, need not call down any Divine Powers constantly to attend their Images, but only to procure their acceptance of thofe Devotions, which are paid to them at their Images. And this is the difference between the Confecration of Heathen and Popish Images: The first is to procure the Prefence of their Gods in their Images, the other to obtain the Favour of Chrift, and the Saints, to accept those Prayers and Oblations, and other Acts of Devotion which are offered to them at their Images; as to give but one Inftance of it in a Prayer ufed at the Confecration of the Grofs. Sanctificetur lignum iftud in nomine Pa--tris Pontif. in Be-Fi- lii, & Spiritus - Sandii, & benedictio illius ligni in quo membra fancta falvatoris fufpenfa funt, fit in ifto ligno, ut o rantes inclinantefq; fe propter Deum ante istam crucem inveniant Corporis & Anima fanitatem. Let this Wood be fanctified in the

ned. nov. cru

cis.

name

:

[ocr errors]

name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; and: let the Bleffing of that Wood, on which the holy Members of ours Saviour hung, be on this Wood; that those, who pray and bow them-`` felves before this Crofs, may obtain Health both of Body and Soul. This peculiar Virtue which Confecration bestows on Images to obtain the Favour of Chrift and his Saints, to those who pray and worship before them, is all that the Heathens intended in calling down their Gods to attend their Images to hear and receive their Prayers and Sacrifices. They did not believe their Images to be Gods, but Silver, or Gold, Wood, or Brafs, or Stone, according to the Materials they were made of, as the Church of Rome does; but they thought their Gods were prefent to hear the Prayers they made before their Images, as the Church of Rome alfo believes, that Chrift and his Saints have a peculiar regard to thofe Prayers which are made before their Images, as is evident from their forms of confecrating Images to fuch an ufe. The Heathens did not put their truft in an Image of Wood and Stone, but in that God, who was reprefented by that Image, and was there prefent to help them. And thus, tho the Church of Rome does not demand any Favour of Images, nor put any Trust. in them, yet fhe expects the Relief and Acceptance of Chrift and the Saints for that Worship fhe pays to their Images; and I would defire any Man to show me the difference between these two, especially when we confider how much greater Vertue is attributed to fome Images of the Bleffed Virgin in the Church of Rome, than there is to others; as to the Image of the Lady of Loretto, &c. which can fignify nothing lefs, than that the Virgin is more pleafed with, and will more graciously accept our Worship before fuch an Image,than any other; or elfe me-thinks the Devotoes of the Virgin fhould not go fo many Miles in Pilgrimage to the Lady of Loretto, as they often do, if they believed the Images of the Virgin which they had at home to be of equal Power :which is as much trufting in Images, and attributing a Divine Virtue to them, as ever the Heathens were guilty of. For me-thinks those who strictly adhere to the Letter of Scripture to prove that the Heathens believed their Images to be Gods, and did put their Trust in them, because the Scrip

ture

« 上一頁繼續 »