Against Symbolizing with Antichrist in Ceremonies, Part · Chapter 1 · Section 31
#Sect. 31. Oppoſits obiection aunſwered, which is, the abuſes of the Croſſe are ſufficiently reformed, becauſe the Altars Shrynes, Images, &c. be vtterly remoued, &c.
WE hauehave waighed in the ballance of the ſanctuary, the two firſt places of the ſigne of the Croſſe: the one extenuating the late abuſe, the other extolling the firſt vſe of it, and hauehave found them both too light, ſo will the third be found likewiſe, which iuſtifieth our preſent vſe as if from the late abuſe to the vſe prime, it were ſufficiently reſtored already. To wit, not onelyonly poſſible is it vntounto vsus, being ſo good ſurgeons as we are, to cure the Croſſe from all abuſe, the Croſſe it ſelfe remaining, but alſo it is done already Gods commandement being ſatisfied by the pulling down of Altars, Shrines, Images, Crucifixes and materiall Croſſes, with which we would content our ſelues (ſay our Oppoſites) if there were any reaſon in vsus, ſith the Idolatry of the Papiſts is by theſe meanes ſufficiently diſgraced. Firſt, know we whom we iuſtifie in this excuſe, and from whoſe ward-rope we hauehave ſtolne it? If this argument doe hold, then did Leontius reaſon well. I cannot be a fauourer of Idols, ſeeing it is knowne I hauehave deſtroyed,aConcil. Nicen. 2. Act. 4. pag. 104. multa Idolorum phana. Againe, we neede not breake downe all Images (ſaith the Papiſts) whē the people doe abuſe them,bDurant. de rit. lib. 1. ca. 4. ſect. 11. their abuſe muſt be corrected; if it cannot, then ſhall it ſuffice to breake downe thatcAlphonſ. de caſt. in verb. imag. adorat. one Image that is abuſed, or ſomedNichol. Saund. de imag. c. 17 one of them for example to the reſt, after the example of King Hezechias in breaking downe the brazen ſerpent, which how dotheD. Fulk ag. Saund. ibid. Ezec. 13.10. Doctor Fulke confound by proofe apparant, that Hezechias brake not downe the ſerpent onelyonly, but all other Idols that were in his time abuſed. Secondly, diſtinctions framed betweene Idols and Idolothites to excuſe any one ſort of them, where the Law diſtinguiſheth not, and where the difference which they import is onelyonly ſecundum magis & minus, is but for one to build vp a wall without the leauell of the word; and for others to daube it ouer with vntempered morter. What that this morter is tempered to our handes at Rome. The Biſhop offA diſcourſe of the confer at. Fountainbleau. Maii. 4. an. 1600. Eurex and hisgPerefius de tradit. Saunders de imag. Durant. de rit. lib. 1. cap. 5. Vazq. de adorat. Mart reply art. 3. fellowes make a difference betweene pictures in tables, and pictures in walles: who doth not laugh at them?hGregor. de Valent. Apolog. de Idololat. 2. cap. 7. Gregorius de Valentia out of Peter misinterpreted, 1. Pet. 4.3. maketh a difference betweene Idols that be abhominable, and Idols that be not abhominable. Who doth not abhorre him?lIoh Reynnold. lib. de Idololat. 2. cap. 7. Bellarmine maketh a difference betweene Images of true things, and Images of falſe things, as if the one were Idols, the other were not.mAdrian. in epiſt. ad Conſtant. & Iren in Concil. Nicen. 2. & Durant. de rit. li. 1. c. 5. ſect. 11. Adrian maketh a difference betweene an Image and foreign, that is, ſtatua abiecti cuiuſuis animalis, as if the latter were onelyonly forbidden, the former not. The GreekenDauid. Chytre. in praelect. chronic. Church maketh a difference betweene Images painted, and Images grauen: who holdeth with them? Now of the ſame linnadge is the difference of our Oppoſits betweene the materiall and myſticall Croſſe; that of the Rood-loft, and this of the Font, the Croſſe, of the Supper, and this of Baptiſme; If hee were not ill, why was he remoued? If this be good, how is he ill? Seeing like the former Images by Papiſts diſtinguiſhed prepoſterouſly, they be of one kind, and differ onelyonly in little and great, to graunt the moſt that can be ſuppoſed. Now this difference excuſeth not in any one commandement, becauſe he that forbiddeth robbery, forbiddeth ſtealing: and he that forbiddeth adultery, forbiddeth fornication: and hee that forbiddeth ſlaying, forbiddeth mayming: Iam. 2.10.nor yet in diuerſe commandements neither, becauſe he that breaketh the leaſt is guilty of the greateſt, for that he diſobeyeth him that gaue them all. Very fit for this purpoſe are the words of Hierome, oHierom. comment. in epiſt. ad tit. cap. 2.Fur non ſolum, &c. A man is iudged a thiefe, not onelyonly in great matters, but alſo in ſmall: for that which is ſtollen commeth not into account: that which is conſidered, is the minde of the ſtealer. As in fornication and adultery, the fornication and adultery is not therfore made diuerſe, becauſe the whore is faire or rich, deformed or poore, but whatſoeuer ſhe be, the fornication and adultery is ſtill one and the ſame. See we not from hence how little ſeruice this our coyned diſtinction doth vsus? For as in the bodily adulterie it is the mind that is reſpected: whether the harlot be faire or foule, rich or poore, it skilleth not: So in the ſpirituall it is the honour that maketh guilty, and not the Idoll, whether he be materiall or aereall, permanent or tranſeunt, painted or grauen, cunningly drawne or botcherly made, poore or bedecked with Iewels. So in the Scripture, the popiſh Idols, whether they be of wood or of gold, they are all one: & the Images of the heathen are throwne all of them into one heap, Apot. 9.12.whether they be of the common ſort, or of exquiſit grauing by the art of man. And in the Fathers, Act. 17.19.pTertul. de Idololat.Omnis forma & formula, Idolum ſe dici expoſcit, be it little or great, and when Ieſuites quarrell about Peſilim & Maſſecoth, which they interpret ſculptile, conflatile, they are aunſwered by vsus,qD. Fulke ag. Gregor. Martin. ca. 3. ſect. 23. that howſoeuer properly they are grauen and caſt Images, yet by a Synecdoche they are taken for Images of what making ſoeuer: the queſtion being not, by what art Images are made, but to what vſe, and how they be vſed, that they may be condemned for vnlawfull. But if there be any oddes betweene the materiall and myſticall Croſſe, it is the myſticell that hath the ſtart. Therefore