XXII.

ART. the Christian worship the better. For that humour began to work, and appeared in many instances of other kinds as well as in this.

It was not possible that people could see pictures in their Churches long, without paying some marks of respect to them, which grew in a little time to the downright worship of them. A famous instance we have of this in the sixth century: Serenus, Bishop of Marseilles, finding that he could not restrain his people from the worship of images, broke them in pieces; upon which Greg. Epist. Pope Gregory writ to him, blaming him indeed for break1. ix. Ep. 9. ing the images, but commending him for not allowing them to be worshipped: this he prosecutes in a variety of very plain expressions; It is one thing to worship an image, and another thing to learn by it, what is to be worshipped: he says they were set up not to be worshipped, but to instruct the ignorant, and cites our Saviour's words, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve, to prove that it was not lawful to worship the work of men's hands. We see by a fragment cited in the second Nicene Council, that both Jews and Gentiles took advantages from the worship of images, to reproach the Christians soon after that time. The Jews were scandalized at their worshipping images, as being expressly against the command of God. The Gentiles had also by it great advantages of turning back upon the Christians all that had been written against their images in the former

ages.

At last, in the beginning of the eighth century, the famous controversy about the having or breaking of images grew hot. The Churches of Italy were so set on the worshipping of them, that Pope Gregory the Seconda gives this for the reason of their rebelling against the Emperor, because of his opposition to images. And here in little more than an hundred years the see of Rome changed its doctrine, Pope Gregory the Second being as positive for the worshipping them, as the first of that name had been against it. Violent contentions arose upon this head. The breakers of images were charged with Judaism, Samaritanism, and Manicheism; and the worshippers of them were charged with Gentilism and Idolatry. One General Council at Constantinople, consisting of about three hundred and thirty-eight Bishops, condemned the

This is owned by all the historians of that age, Anastasius, Zonaras, Cedrenus, Glycas, Theophanes, Sigebert, Otho, Fris. Urspergensis, Sigonius, Rubens, and Ciaconius.

XXII.

worshipping them as idolatrous but another at Nice, ART. of three hundred and fifty Bishops, though others say there were only three hundred, asserted the worship of them. Yet as soon as this was known in the West, how active soever the see of Rome was for establishing their worship, a Council of about three hundred Bishops met at Francfurt, under Charles the Great, which condemned the Nicene Council, together with the worship of images. The Gallican Church insisted long upon this matter; books were published in the name of Charles the Great against them. A Council held at Paris under his son did also condemn image-worship as contrary to the honour that is due to God only, and to the commands that he has given us in Scripture. The Nicene Council was rejected here in England, as our historians tell us, because it asserted the adoration of images, which the Church of God abhors. Agobard, Bishop of Lyons, and Claud of Turin, writ against it; the former writ with great vehemence the learned men of that communion do now acknowledge, that what he writ was according to the sense of the Gallican Church in that age: and even Jonas of Orleans, who studied to moderate the matter, and to reconcile the Gallican Bishops to the see of Rome, yet does himself declare against the worship of images.

:

Acta Con.

Nic. 2.

Action 4, 5,

We are not concerned to examine how it came that all this vigorous opposition to image-worship went off so soon. It is enough to us, that it was once made so resolutely; let those who think it so incredible a thing, that Churches should depart from their received traditions, answer this as they can. As for the methods then used, and the arguments that were then brought to infuse this doctrine into the world, he who will read the history and acts of 6, 7. the Nicene Council, will find enough to incline him to a very bad opinion, both of the men and of their doctrine; though he were ever so much inclined to think well of them. After all, though that Council laid the foundation of image-worship, yet the Church of Rome has made great improvements in it since. Those of Nice expressed a detestation of an image made to represent the Deity; they go no higher than the images of Christ and the Saints; whereas since that time the Deity and the Trinity have been represented by images and pictures; and that not only by connivance, but by authority in the Church of Rome. Bellarmine, Suarez, and others, prove the

• Bellarm. de Imag. 1. ii. c. 8. Suarez, M. 3. Ysambert de Mist. Incarn.

ad

XXII.

ART. lawfulness of such images from the general practice of the Church. Others go further, and from the caution given in the decree of the Council of Trent, concerning the images of God, do infer, that they are allowed by that Council, provided they be decently made. Directions are also given concerning the use of the image of the Trinity in public offices among them. In a word, all their late Doctors agree, that they are lawful, and reckon the calling that in question to be not only rashness, but an error; and such as have held it unlawful to make such images, were especially condemned at Rome, December 17, 1690. The varieties of those images, and the boldness of them, are things apt to give horror to modest minds, not accustomed to such attempts. It must be acknowledged, that the old emblematical images of the Egyptians, and the grosser ones now used by the Chineses, are much more instructing, and much less scandalous figures.

Con. Nic.

Act. 6.

Act. 5.

As the Roman Church has gone beyond the Nicene 2. Act. 7. Council in the images that they allow of, so they have also gone beyond them in the degrees of the worship that they offer to them. At Nice the worship of images was very positively decreed, with anathemas against those who did it not a bare honour they reckoned was not enough. They thought it was a very valuable argument, that was Con. Nic. brought from those words of Christ to the Devil, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve; that here service is only appropriated to God, but not worship. Among the acts of worship they reckon the oblation of incense and lights; and the reason given by them for all this is, because the honour of the Image, or Type, passes to the Original, or Prototype: so that plain and direct worship was to terminate on the image itself: and Durandus passed for little less than a heretic, because he thought that images were worshipped only improperly and abusively, because at their presence we call to mind the object represented by them, which we worship before the image, as if the object itself were before us.

Duran. in Senten. 1. 3. dist. 9.

The Council of Nice did plainly assert the direct worship of images, but they did as positively declare, that they meant only that it should be an honorary adoration, and not the true Latria, which was only due to God. And whatever some modern representers and expositors of the Roman doctrine may say, to soften the harshness of the

ad quæst. 25. dis. 3. Vasquez in 3 Aquin. disp. 103. c. 3. Cajetan. in 3 Aquin. quæst. 25. A. 3.

Act. 2.

worship of images, it is very copiously proved, both from ART. the words of the Council of Nice, and from all the emi- XXII. nent writers in that communion, even from the time of Aquinas, and of the modern schoolmen, and writers of Con. Nic. controversy, that direct worship ought to be offered to the image itself: this reserve of the Latria to God, being an evident proof, that all inferior acts of worship were allowed them. But this reserve does no way please the later writers; for Aquinas, and many from him do teach, that the same acts and degrees of worship which are due to the original, are also due to the image; they think an image has such a relation to the original, that both ought to be worshipped by the same act, and that to worship the image with any other sort of acts, is to worship it on its own account, which they think is Idolatry. Whereas others, adhering to the Nicene doctrine, think that the image is to be worshipped with an inferior degree, that otherwise Idolatry must follow. So here the danger of Idolatry is threatened of both sides; and since one of them must be chosen, thus it will follow, that let a man do what he can, he must commit Idolatry, according to the opinion of some very subtile and learned men among them.

The Council of Trent did indeed decline to give a clear Con. Trid. decision in this matter, and only decreed, that due worship Sess. 25. should be given to images; but did not determine what that due worship was. And though it appears by the decree, that there were abuses committed among them in that matter, yet they only appoint some regulations, concerning such images as were to be suffered, and that others were to be removed; but they left the divines to fight out the matter concerning the due worship that ought to be given to images. They were then in haste, See Bishop and intended to offend no party; and as they would not Stillingflect, ut sujustify all that had been said or done concerning the worship of images, so they would condemn no part of it: yet they confirmed the Nicene Council, and in particular made use of that maxim of theirs, that the honour of the Pont. Rom.

pra.

Ordo ad Re

Type goes to the Prototype; and thus they left it as they cip. Imper. found it. So that the dispute goes on still as hot as ever. Rubri. The practice of the Roman Church is express for the Latria to be given to images: and therefore all that write for it do frequently cite that hymn, Crux Ave spes unica,

a

Aquin. 2. p. q. 25. Art. 3. See to the same purpose, Alex. Hales, Bonaventure, Ricardus de Media villa palud. Almans. Biel Summa Angelica, and many more cited by Bishop Stillingfleet's Defence of the Charge of Idolatry, Part II. Chap. 2.

7.

ART. auge piis justitiam, reisque dona veniam. It is expressly said XXII. in the Pontifical, Cruci debetur Latria, and the prayers

used in the consecration of a cross; it is prayeda, that the blessing of that cross, on which Christ hung, may be in it, that it may be a healthful remedy to mankind, a strengthener of faith, an increaser of good works, the redemption of souls, and a comfort, protection, and defence against the cruelty of our enemies. These, with all the other acts of adoration used among them, seem to favour those who are for a Latria to be given to all those images, to the originals of which it is due; and in the like proportion for Dulia and Hyperdulia to other images. It is needless to prosecute this matter further.

It seemed necessary to say so much, to justify our Church, which has in her Homilies laid this charge of Idolatry very severely on the Church of Rome; and this is so high an imputation, that those who think it false, as they cannot, with a good conscience, subscribe, or require others to subscribe the Article concerning the Homilies, so they ought to retract their own subscriptions, and to make solemn reparations in justice and honour, for laying so heavy an imputation unjustly upon that whole communion.

There is nothing that can be brought from Scripture, that has a shew of an argument for supporting imageworship, unless it be that of the Cherubims that were in Heb. ix. 3, the holiest of all; and they, as is supposed, were worshipped, at least by the High-Priest when he went thither, once a year, if not by the whole people. But first there is a great difference to be made between a form of worship immediately prescribed by God, and another form that not only has no warrant for it, but seems to be very expressly forbidden. It is plain, the Cherubims were not seen by the people, and so they could be no visible object of worship to them. They were scarce seen by the HighPriest himself, for the holiest of all was quite dark; no light coming into it, but what came through the veil from the holy place; and even that had very little light. Nor is there a word concerning the High Priest's worship

■ In benedictione novæ Crucis.

Rogamus te Domine, sancte Pater, omnipotens sempiterne Deus, ut digneris benedicere hoc lignum Crucis tuæ, ut sit remedium salutare generi humano, sit soliditas fidei, profectus bonorum operum, redemptio animarum, sit solamen et protectio ac tutela contra sæva jacula Inimicorum. Per Dom. Sanctificetur lignum istud in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritûs Sancti, et benedictio illius ligni in quo membra sancta Salvatoris suspensa sunt sit in isto ligno, ut orantes inclinantesque se propter Deum ante istam crucem inveniant corporis et animæ sanitatem per eundem.