Defense of Perkins Book Called a Reformed Catholic, Point 9 · Section 2

Defense of Perkins Book Called a Reformed Catholic · Point 9 · Section 2

p. 553Arguments of the Papists.

speaker W. P. The reasons which they vse to defend their opinions are these. I. In Salomons temple were erected Cherubines, which were images of angels, on the Mercieseat where God was worshipped: and thereby was resembled the Maiestie of God, therefore it is lawful to make images to resemble God. Answ. They were erected by special commandement from God, who prescribed the verie forme of them, and the place where they must be set: and thereby Moses had a warrant to make them; otherwise hee had sinned: let them shew the like warrant for their images if they can. Secondly the Cherubins were placed in the holie of holies in the most inwarde place of the Temple, and consequently were remoued from the sight of the people, who onelyonly hearde of them: and none but the high Priest saw them, and that but once a yeere. And the Cherubins without the vaile, p. 554though they were to be seen, yet were they not to be worshipped. Exod. 20. 4. Therefore they serue nothing at all to iustifie the images of the Church of Rome.

Obiect. II. God appeared in the forme of a man to Abraham, Gen. 18. 1. 13. and to Daniel, who sawe the ancient of daies sitting on a throne, Dan. 9. Now as God appeared, so may he be resembled: therefore (say they) it is lawfull to resemble God in the forme of a man, or any like image, in which he shewed himselfe to men. Answ. In this reason the proposition is false: for God may appeare in whatsoeuer forme it pleaseth his maiestie; yet doth it not follow; that man should therefore resemble God in those formes; man hauing no libertie to resemble him in any forme at all: vnlesse he bee commaunded so to doe. Againe, when God appeared in the forme of a man, that forme was a signe of Gods presence onelyonly for the time when God appeared, and no longer; as the bread and wine in the sacrament are signes of Christs bodie and blood, not for euer, but for the time of administration: for afterward they become againe, as common bread and wine. And when the holy Ghost appeared in the likenesse of a doue, that likenesse was a signe of his presence no longer then the holy Ghost so appeared. And therefore hee that would in these formes represent the Trinitie, doth greately dishonour God, and doe that for which hee hath no warrant.

speaker D. B. P. Hauing confuted the Protestants arguments against the making of You ouerweene your selfe. You should shew why. Genes. 18.Gen 18Images, to represent some property or action of God; I now come vntounto the Catholike proofe of them. The first reason set dovvne by M. Perkins I reserue to the next point: the second is; God appeared in the forme of a man to Abraham and to Daniel, VVho savv the auncient of daies sitting p. 555on a throne. Now as God hath appeared, so may he bee purtraied Dan 9.Dan 9and dravvne: M. Perkins his ansvvere is, not so, vnlesse it be expressel… commanded by God.

Reply, This first is flat against his ovvne second conclusion, where he holdeth it lawfull to present to the eye in Pictures, any histories of the Bible in priuate pla…es, both the foresaid apparitions be in the Old Testament, and therefore may be painted in priuate places, which cannot be truly done without you do represent God in the same liknes, as there he appeared. And what reason leadeth in words to represent those actions of God, the same serueth to expresse them in liuely colours: Not so saith M. Perkins, because when God appeared in the forme of man, it was a signe of Gods presence, for that time only, and for no longer: be it so, it might notwithstanding be recorded in writing, that the memory of such maiestie ioyned with louing kindnesse might endure longer. And if it pleased God, that this short presence of his should be written to be perpetually remembred, euen so the same might be ingrauen in brasle, to recommend it to vsus so much the more effectually: For as the famous Poet doth by the light of nature sing.

Segnius irritant animos demissa per aures,

Quam quae sunt oculis subiecta fidelibus.Such worthy acts as by the eares are to the mind conueide, Do moue vsus lesse then that which is by faithfull eye descride.

speaker A. W. It is your aduantage that Master Perkins is not aliue to answere you, who was better able to expresse his own meaning, than any otherman can be. But, in my opinion, it was his purpose, in that second conclusion, to graunt the pourtraying of those histories onelyonly, which had nothing to bee painted that was forbidden, as he alwaies tooke the resembling of God to be. That was generall, as rules of Grammar are; exceptions are not contradictions, but rather parts of those rules.

If you speake of that reason, which moued God to inspire Moses for the writing of that storie, we grant that hee might to the same end hauehave also enioyned the painting or engrauing of it. But since it pleased him not so to doe, wee answere, that your argument prooues nothing: There is the same reason (say you) for painting that, and such stories; therefore they may as well be painted, as written. The consequence is false: For the one was inspired, as I said, and the other not. VponUpon the writing, because it is Gods word, wee may looke for a blessing from him. Not so vponupon our owne deuices, accompanied p. 556with danger of Idolatrie. For my part (sauing other mens better iudgement) I perswade my selfe, that God, who commanded the Israelites to write the words of the law about their houses, and in other places for instruction and remembrance, would hauehave enioyned the painting of his especiall miracles and workes in their fauour, if he had not seene it to bee dangerous, in respect of Idolatrie that might ensue. For questionlesse, a picture or an Image is of great force, chiefly if the word be added for exposition of it; as we see in Emblems and Impresas. But this helpe, in the most wise iudgement of God, was not thought so much worth, that for it the danger of Idolatrie, to which all men are so prone by nature, should be aduentured. Therefore we must not be led in this case by the shew of humane reason, but assure our selues it was not for nothing, that God, when he taught the Iewes by signes and shadowes, appointed not the vse of painting diuine histories, for instruction, memorie, or deuotion.

Concerning mmHorat. de arte poetic. ad Pison.Horaces testimonie, if you had seene as farre into the meaning of it, as you imagine he did into the vse of Pictures, you would neuer hauehave alleaged it to such purpose, as now you doe. For you might easily hauehave perceiued, that the Poet grounds not his precept vponupon any light of nature, but vponupon experience of mens affections; and (which is the principall thing) that he speakes not at all of any dumbe pictures, but of the liuely gestures of Players vponupon the stage. Some things (saith he) are acted on the stage, some are onelyonly reported there, and supposed to be done in some other place. Now betwixt these is this comparison made, that those things doe more affect which we see done, than those that we onelyonly heare reported; what is this to pictures? your Poetrie failes you, as well as your Diuinitie.

speaker D. B. P. This argument may be confirmed by the Pictures of Angels, of Vertues, and other such like of spirituall or accidentall nature: for if such things as hauehave no bodily proportion or shape, may notwithstanding be counterfeit and resembled in some qualities, why may not some propertie or action of God be in like manner represented?

speaker A. W. But some qualities of Angels (say you) which are spirituall p. 557substances, and the qualities of Angels and men, which we call vertues (and which, by your leaue, hauehave as true a being as other creatures, though they neuer be of themselues, but adioyned to some spirituall subiect) may be counterfeited and resembled. Therefore why may not some propertie or action of God be in like manner reputed? First, I thinke, you are hardly able to prooue your antecedent, that such things may be resembled in outward formes for Gods seruice. Secondly, though that be graunted, yet your consequence is naught. For there is a commaundement of God against the later, as we heard out of Clement, least his Maiesty should by such resemblances grow into contempt; to which I adde, least Idolatry should ensue vponupon it.

speaker D. B. P. That thou mayest (Reader) vnderstand the better what we meanee obserue that Pictures represent after three sorts. Some expresse to the quicke, the very shape, proportion and colour of the patterne; as the liuely Picture of man, or of any such corporall thing: others represent things as they did appeare and were acted, as if the Painter should expresse the meeting of God with Abraham and his entertainement, he must then resemble God in the same likenes of a man in which he shewed himselfe to Abraham.

speaker A. W. Thirdly, an Image of a spirituall thing, may be dravvne not to resemble the nature of it, but to lead our vnderstanding by such a similitude, into some better knovvledge of that thing: so are Angels painted like goodly young men vvith vvings, to teach vsus that they be of an excellent pure nature, euer flourishing and most ready to dispatch vvith all expedition any imployment to vvhichwhich God sends them; and so may God the Father be pourtraied, as a goodly old graue man, sitting in his throne of maiestie, attended vponupon by millions of Angels, (as he is described in Daniel 9.) to instruct vsus how he is eternall, insinit, wise, and of most redoubtable maiestie: in either of these two latter sorts, we hold that God In the idolatrous second Councill at Nice.may be represented, and so in the seauenth generall Councell, the drawing of the holy Ghost, in forme of a Doue, as he appeared. Mat. 3. is approued.

Your discourse of the diuers representations intended by pictures, I passe ouer, as nothing to purpose. For the reason of our denying images, is not only because God can not be resembled, as being a spirit and infinit, but principally, because he himselfe hath forbidden it, as a certaine occasion of Idolatry.

This painting of Angels like faire yong men with wings, page missing

p. 560of deniall from the Tabernacle built by Moses, wherein you will not remember that the patterne shewed to Moses, was a direction for Salomon, and a warrant in all things that were agreeable to Moses worke. But Master Perkins might hauehave had enough to say, though he had answered directly, viz. that Salomon was a Prophet, and had also direction for his building from the kingly Prophet Dauid his father. And therfore it doth not follow, that because Salomon made such Cherubins, eueryevery man that builds any Church may set vp the like. Or, to speake indeede directly according to his consequent, it is not lawfull for vsus to make images to resemble God, because Salomon adorned the Temple with Cherubins.

speaker D. B. P. Moses indeed had an expresse precept for the making of them, as he had for the Curteines and Curteine-rods, and eueryevery particular belonging to the Tabernacle. But Salomon vvithout any speciall commaundement For it vvas a patterne appointed by God for his house.out of his high and holy vvisdome, vnderstood that he might most lavvfully and laudably imitate that heauenly patterne of Moses: And as the building vvas farre more sumptuous and stately: so in the number and quantity of Pictures exceeded, which is a sufficient instruction and vvarrant for all men after his daies to make and set Images in the Church. And this finally M. Perkins seemes to graunt, vvhen he saith, that these Cherubs vvithout the veile, were there to be seene, but not to be vvorshipped: so that vve hauehave gotten one step further; that Images may not only be made, but also set vp in the Churches.

speaker A. W. Now to your Enthymem. In Salomons temple there were Cherubins within the holy of Holyes, and without vponupon the walls and dores. Therefore all holy pictures may be placed in Churches. First concerning your Antecedent, it must be remembred, that those Cherubins were not in the vtter court, where the people vsed to come and pray, but in the holy place where the Altar of Incense stood, and where nnLuke 1. 9. 10 Leuit. 16. 17.Luke 1:9Luke 1:10Lev 16:17none came but the Priests, and in the holie of holies, into ooExod 30. 20 Leuit. 16. 2. Heb. 9. 7.Exod 30:20Lev 16:2Heb 9:7which the high Priest only might enter, and that but once a yeare, where the Ark was. So that these images were remoued out of the peoples sight, and that by Salomons propheticall wisdome. Secondly there was no vse of these images to any purpose of religion, but they serued only for ornament and state, as the other worke of the temple did, except the two Cherubins vponupon the mercy seate. Ere I answere to your consequence, p. 561I may not forget to note, that in your cōsequent or conclusion you call Images holy, as if by I know not what holynes, they had some right to be placed in Churches, as also you speake afterward, where should holy pictures of holy men be more properly bestowed then in holy places? Nothing is to be counted holy, but that which either hath a qualitie of holines in it, as all that are sanctified hauehave, or else is belonging to the seruice of God. And whatsoeuer is of this later kind is rather hallowed then holy, and hath no holines in it, but by being consecrated to such a vse. Neither is this consecration, as that of the Ceremoniall lawe was, whereby a thing was made indeed holy ceremonially, as nothing with vsus can be, the ceremonies being abrogated. So that such things are no longer nor farther holy, then they are employed in that seruice; and therefore the water with which we baptise, and the bread and wine with which we celebrate the Supper of the Lord, after those actions are past, are no more holy then any other matter, bread, or wine. Images therefore can no way be holy more then any other worke in Churches: therfore setting apart this bare title of holines, I denie the consequence of your Enthymem: Salomon adorned the inner parts of the Temple where the people came not with pictures of Cherubins, Therefore it is lawfull to set vp images in Churches where the people ordinarily come. Who seeth not great difference betweene the Antecedent and the Consequent? To omit that which I answered before on Master Perkins behalfe, concerning Salomons warrant for his so doing, his father and himselfe being Prophets.

speaker D. B. P. Which is fortified by the testimony of Tertullian, in the place cited before: where he saith, that our Sauiour was Pictured vponupon holy Chalices, which were vsed at the Altars: and of Sozomenus, vvho vvitnesseth that our Sauiours Picture vvas taken into the Church.

speaker A. W. The authoritie of other mens doings is of lesse waight. Tertullian saith, Christ was pictured like a Shepheard vponupon the chalices: Nazianzen trimmed vp Images: Basil allowed of the Martyr Barlaams picture in the Churches: Damasus saith Constantine set vp a siluer image of our Sauiour: Chrysostome p. 562and Austin say, that the Crosse was on the holy tables, Therefore it is lawfull to set vp Images in Churches. Of the Antecedent by and by, in the meane while I deny the consequence. They allow of Images, therefore they are lawfull. If your Church thinke it possible for these men to erre, as I am sure it doth, then may it not be takē for lawfull because they approue it.

But to the Antecedent, what doth ppTertull. de pudicit. lib. 1Tertullian but tell vsus what the Chalice-maker had done in likelyhood, for the setting forth of his worke? both this, and that of qqSozom. hist. lib. 5. cap. 20.Sozomens report is answered before: it is not proued there euer was any such Image of our Sauiour.

speaker A. W. S. Gregorie Nazianzen maketh mention of Images in the Church of D. B. P. Epist. 49. Orat. in Barlaam.Neocaesarea, trimmed vp by himselfe.

Saint Basil, pointeth to that holy mans Picture, standing in the Church.

rrNazianzen. epist. 49. ad Olympium.Nazianzen and ssBasil. orat. in Barlaam Martyr.Basil speake not of images to any vse of Religion, whereof only our question is, but either for ornament, as the former saith, ttNazianzen. omne nostrum in eo exornando studium.All our labour and care in the beautifying of it; or for honor to the martyr, which was ciuill, not religious, and yet scarce iustifiable.

Damasus **In vita Silu.shevveth hovv Constantine in the Church of S. Iohn Lateran erected a siluer Image vntounto our Sauiour.

speaker A. W. S. Chrysostome … demonst. quod Christ. sit Deus: And S. Augustine **Serm. 19. de sanct.do teach, that the Crosse was on the holy Tables, and vsed at all holy functions.

This uuDa…us in vita Syluestri.report of Constantines erecting a siluer image, seemeth to depend vponupon the tale of his being baptised at Rome by Syluester, whereas it is apparant by xxEuseb. le vita Const. lib. 4. cap. 62.Eusebius and yyTheodoret. hist. Eccles. lib. 1 cap 32.Theodoret that he was not baptised till the very end of his life, and in Asia, many hundred miles from that Church of Saint Iohn Lateran in Rome, in Nicomedia, now called by the Turke who possesseth it, Nichor, a towne of Bythinia.

zzChrysost. in demonst. quòd Christus sit Deus.Chrysostome speaketh of the generall vse of the crosse in all places, not for any holines of the signe, but as a marke of profession. The crosse (saith he) is in the purple robes, in the Crownes; the crosse is at our prayers, the crosse is in our armor, the crosse is vponupon the holy table, the crosse is ouer all the world, p. 563yea, the crosse glisters aboue the sunne. If this crosse were an Image, aaOptat. lib. 3.Optatus (as we heard before) counts the presence of it a defiling of the Altar.

That place of bbAug. ser. 19. de Sanct. if it be Augustines.Austin intreates of the crosse, both for the signe, and image of it most superstitiously: ascribing strange effects to it, which no moderate or reasonable man can defend, except he will expound it as I shewed before, of an outward ceremonie vsed in prayer, to which purpose wee may applie that speech of his in the end of that discourse, Looke what the presence of Christs body did vponupon the earth, that doth the famous memory of the victorious crosse, with a faithfull calling vponupon the name of Christ. Otherwise it is wonderfull strange that Austin should so highly esteeme of the crosse, whereas Optatus a worthie Bishop of the same countrey, in ccAnno 380.the beginning of Austins time accounts so meanely of it.

speaker D. B. P. And the reason why Images should principally be set in Churches, is very pregnant. For where should holy Pictures of holy men be more properly bestovved, than in holy places? And the Church being a resemblance of heauen (as S. Paul teacheth,) is most conueniently decked vp Hebr. 9. They are representations of them, as they were earthly creatures.Heb 9vvith Images, the representations of heauenly creatures: that men entring into that holy place, may by the vievv and consideration of such a heauenly shew, retire their minds from worldly busines, and lift them vp vntounto the soueraigne Monarch of both heauen and earth.

speaker A. W. The ddHebr. 9. 23.Heb 9:23Apostle saith no such thing of any Church now, but affirmes, that the Tabernacle of the Iewes was ceremonially a shadow of heauenly things. And yet it would be remembred, that the Tabernacle and Temple had no Images, but in the holie places, where the people came not. We hold it very conuenient to hauehave our Churches modestly adorned, rather than sumptuously, and with such kinde of ornaments, as may not carrie away the minde by the outward sense, either to a vaine imagination, or to some superstitious conceit.

speaker D. B. P. Now let vsus come to those tvvo obiectione of M. Perkins, vvhichwhich see me to be against the erection of Images in Churches. The first is out of the Councell of Eliberis cap. 36. which commandeth, that nothing should be painted on the walles of the Church, that was adored of the people.

Ans. That if the Councell speake of the Image of God (in vvhichwhich sense. M. Perkins citeth it, and the word (adored) doth insinuate) then p. 564it may be said, that the Councill inhibiteth that sort of Gods Images, vvhichwhich are made to expresse the diuine nature. If it be extended vntounto all sorts of Images: I answere, that they were then forbidden to be drawen vponupon the Church vvalles, but not to be set in Tables vponupon the Altar, or in any other place. The reason is, because that Councell vvas holden in time of persecution, as appeareth by the twenty fiue Canon of it: and then, if the persecutor had found out the place of their assembly, as they often did: those Pictures must needs either hauehave been defaced by themselues, or left vntounto the derision and despight of the Heathens; And Pictures also painted vponupon such poore walles as they had then to their Churches, vvould either by the moysture of the vvalles, or other incommoditie, hauehave bin quickly disfigured: wherefore, to the greater honor of such sacred things, those graue Fathers thought it not meete to hauehave them dravven vponupon the Church vvalles, there being many more meete places for them in the Churches.

speaker A. W. You eeConcil. Eliber. cap. 36.come backe now to those two allegations, which should, and might hauehave been answered as fitly in their due place. Your first answere hath no shew of reason in it. For it is absurd to imagine, that any Christians, to whom onelyonly the Councill speakes, would thinke the diuine nature, which is spirituall and infinite, could be exprest by any picture. But if it be possible for the people to be so blind, yet the Bishops and Ministers, who had the charge of such places, must needs know it to bee vnlawfull, and vnpossible. Besides, if they meant to forbid such Images onelyonly, why doe they not call them Idols after your distinction? why doe not they expresse their meaning more plainly, but speake so dangerously, to make all Images thought vnlawfull?

As the word (Adored) was (in your opinion) a warrant for Master Perkins to applie that Canon to the Images of God; so by the same reason is the other word (worshipped) which the Councill hath, a sufficient authoritie to stretch the decree to all Images that may bee worshipped. Your coniectures are meere shifts, refuted by the very words of the Councill. It is decreed (saith the Councill) that there may be no Images in the Church: what will become then of your Images vponupon Altars, vnlesse you will remoue your Altars out of the Church? That which followeth, doth not respect the walles, more than any other part of the Church; but names them specially, vponupon which Images most commonly were p. 565painted. But what a toy is it, that you talke of persecutors finding out the place of their assemblie, when they could hold a Councill, and had Churches to repaire to? Could their Churches be vnknowne? Further, if their care had bin to prouide, that the moysture of the walles might not disfigure the Images, they would hauehave said plainly, We will hauehave no Images on Church walles, least that which is adored and worshipped, come to some disgrace: and this would also hauehave included the other reason of the persecutors despight. But it is manifest, that the meaning of the decree is this, that they will not suffer any Images in Churches, because that which is worshipped and adored, may not bee resembled by pictures. The decree indeede speakes onelyonly of the Images of God, to whom only religious adoration and worship is due, and may lawfully be performed.

speaker D. B. P. The second obiection is out of a post-script of Epiphanius letter, vntounto Iohn Patriarke of Ierusalem, in which is written, as M. Perkins falsely reporteth: that it is against the authority of Scripture, to see the Pictures of Christ, or of any Saint to hang in the Church.

Ans. It is there only, to see the Picture of a man. Novv that he should It is expr… said.meane of Christ or of some Saint is only gathered, yet M. Perkins makes no bones to thrust them both into the Text: euen so do we thinke that some old enemy of Images added that post-script vntounto Epiphanius letter. Our reasons are, because it hath no coherence with the former letter or st…e. Againe, in the seauenth Councell, when all that could be found out of antiquity, vvas cited against Images: no tidings there of this place, which if it had bin true, might hauehave bin one of the principall. Thirdlie, in the same Councell, other tvvo places brought, as it were out of Epiphanius … 6.vvorkes, vvere found to be none of his: And for Images vvas alleadged, that Epiphanius ovvne disciples erected an Image to their Master, and set it in the Church; vvhichwhich they would neuer hauehave done, if he had taught them to be against the Scripture so to doe.

speaker A. W. Master Perkins doth not vndertake to report Epiphanius words, but his matter, which hee performes truly. I found (saith ffEpiphan. … ad …an. … osol.Epiphanius, speaking of a Church at Anablatha, in his trauell to Bethel) in the Church doore a vaile hanging, stained and painted, and hauing the Image as it were of Christ, or some Saint: for I remember not well whose image it was. When I saw this, that against the authoritie of the Scripture, the image of a man hung in the Church of Christ, I rent it. These are Epiphanius p. 566words; whereout I obserue, first, that it is against the authoritie of the Scripture, and therfore against Gods Commandement, that the image of a man should hang in Christs Church. But the Images of al your Saints are such, & those of the Trinitie too, except that Doue for the holie Ghost. Secondly, I adde, that it is rightly gathered by necessarie consequence (which is as good eueryevery whit, as plaine words) that it is against Scripture to hauehave the picture of Christ, or any Saint in the Church. For he saith expresly, that the Image he saw, was the image of Christ, or some Saint; and that it was vnlawfull to hauehave any Image of a man there.

There is no reason to call it a post-script; vnlesse euerie last point of any letter not depending vponupon the former, be a post-script. ggHieronym. …n illa epist.Hierome, that translated the Epistle out of Greeke into Latin, found no such diuersitie of stile in it; neither indeed is it to be found: and this latter part is brought in according to the course of writing in the former. Epiphanius cleeres himselfe to Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem, for hauing ordered a Deacon in his Diocesse, he begins his excuse thus: I hauehave heard &c. In the latter part he defends himselfe concerning the renting of the vaile, and begins that also in the like sort, I hauehave heard. This was written, and translated three hundred yeeres before that Idolatrous Councill, though perhaps they thought it no wisedome to take knowledge of it. The other places, brought in that Councill, were for Images, and so allowed of by that Councill, and hauehave since been discerned to be counterfeit; as that is of his Disciples, no thankes to that counterfeit Synod: which dealeth in the same sort also with Basil (you afterward alleage the place for Images) with Cyrill, Ambrose, Athanasius, Chrysostome, Gregorie, and the Apostles themselues, as I shewed before.

speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins obserues a special reason in Epiphanius other counterfeit testimony: That Images must not be suffered in the common house, because vve must carry God in our minds. To vvhichwhich vve ansvvere, that Images must be suffred in all places, that vve may the better carry-God in our harts, being by the sight of them, both often put in mind of him, and much moued to honor and louelove him.

speaker A. W. In steed of answering the other testimonie out of Epiphanius, p. 567you go about vnderunder hand to strike at him thorough Master Perkins sides; but there is no great force in your blow. For (as I said erewhile) there is more daunger of Idolatrie in the suffering of Images, especially in any place where God is to bee worshipped, than hope of instruction or deuotion by the sight of them. And (as hhEpiphan. cont. Encratit. citat. in Concil. Constantinop. 7.Epiphanius saith in this place) It is not meete that a Christian should be exercised by the eyes, but by the meditation of the minde: For such sight (as iiClemens Strom. lib. 6.Clement taught vsus before) abaseth the Maiestie of God, and begets in vsus erroneous opinions.

speaker W. P. Obiect. III. Man is the image of God, but it is lawfull to paint a man, and therefore to make the image of God. Ans. A very cauill: for first a man cannot be painted, as he is the image of God, which stands in the spiritual gifts of righteousnesse and true holinesse. Againe, the image of a man may be painted for ciuill or historicall vse, but to paint any man for this ende to represent God, or in the way of religion, that wee may the better remember and worship God, it is vnlawfull. Other reasons which they vse, are of small moment, and therefore I omit them.

Differ. II. They teach and maintaine, that images of God and of Saints my be worshipped with religious worship, specially the crucifixe. For **Summ. part. 3. quaest. 25. art. 3.Thomas of Watering saith, Seeing the crosse doth represent Christ, who died vponupon a crosse, and is to bee worshipped with diuine honour: it followeth that the crosse is to be worshipped so too. We on the contrary, hold they may not. Our principall ground is the second commaundement, which containeth two partes: the first, forbiddeth the making of Images to resemble the true God, the second forbids the worshipping of them, p. 568or God in them, in these wordes, Thou shalt not bow downe to them. Now, there can be no worship done to any thing lesse then the bending of the knee.

speaker D. B. P. Novv I come vntounto a third point, which M. Perkins maketh the second of our difference: That Images may be not only made and set in Churches, but also vvorshipped.

M. Perkins holds the contrarie: and his principall ground is the second commandement; vvhichwhich containes, saith he, tvvo parts. The first, forbids the making of Images to resemble God; the second, the vvorshipping of them or God in them, in these vvords: Thou shalt not bovv dovvne to them.

Ans. If it be only forbidden to make the Image of God, and to adore it: then the making and worshipping of the Image of Christ, or of any other creature, is not there prohibited: And so this second commandement more than thrise alleadged, vvill not serue the turne against any other Image but God only. And in plaine reason, according also to Master Perkins his ovvne confession, the Commandements of the first Table, touch only our duty tovvards God, that vve giuegive him all his due honor, and do not giuegive any part therof vntounto any thing else whatsoeuer: Wherfore diuine and godly worship is only there spoken of, and not such worship as we giuegive vntounto any creature, or to the picture of it: and consequently, there is nothing there against the vvorshipping of our holy Images.

speaker A. W. It is not onelyonly forbidden to make the Image of God, and to worship it, but (as Master Perkins said before) to make an Image of any thing in the way of Religion, to worship God, much more to worship the creature thereby. Therefore the Assumption, that should be added to that proposition of yours, if it be only forbidden, &c. namely; but it is only forbidden to make the image of God, and to adore it, is false, and so the second Commandement is against all Images for Gods seruice.

The Commandements of the first table touch onelyonly our dutie to God. True; and it is an especial part of our dutie to him, that we giuegive no religious honour to any thing whatsoeuer, but to him onelyonly. For as Religion is a dutie of the creature to the Creator, and not any bond betwixt creature and creature: so is religious honour due onelyonly to him, to whom religion is appropriated. Therefore the Heathen were neuer so sottish, as to worship any man or thing with religious worship, whereto they did not first ascribe some kinde of p. 569diuinitie, according to which they proportioned their worship thereto.

speaker D. B. P. Obserue that there is a soueraigne vvorshippe due to God, as to the Creator and gouernour of all the vvorld, and to giuegive this to any creature, is Idolatrie. Another honor by infinit degrees inferiour, yet absolute in itself, is ascribed vntounto Angels, and men as creatures endued with reason, and made after the likenesse of God; and to exhibitth is to whom it is due, is ciuilitie and not Idolatrie. This honor may be diuided into two parts, because these creatures are like to God, asvvell in their naturall povvers and qualities, as in their supernaturall: And that honour vvhichwhich is giuen to man or Angell (in respect of any naturall quality, may be called morall or ciuil; But that vvhichwhich is attributed vntounto them, in regard of their supernaturall gifts may vvell be called religious and spirituall, because it is due vntounto them only for their spirituall and religious qualities.

There is a third kind of worship, yet meaner then the other; which is a kind of dependant and respectiue worship; as vvhen a seruant is honoured or cherished, not for his ovvne, but for his masters sake. And this is that worship which vve allovv vntounto Images, vvhichwhich for the Saints sake whom it doth represent, vve do either reuerently regard, or take off our hat, or bovv our knee vntounto it. This third kind of worship, being all we allow He is altogether an idolater that so worshippeth any Image.vntounto Pictures, were he not that vnderstands it, more than half franticke, that should thinke it a great disparagement vntounto the incomprehensible vvorship of God, that to one of his seruants Pictures, I should yeeld some such pettie reuerence; or that God should forbid this in the fore-front of his ten Commaundements? nothing lesse.

speaker A. W. This discourse, to colour your Idolattie by a distinction of worship, hath more craft than truth. For first, if you meane plainly, why doe you not tell vsus what that soueraigne worship is, which you acknowledge due to the Creator onelyonly, that we may consider whether you giuegive it to any creature or no? Secondly, what is the meaning of those words, that the honor ascribed to men and Angels, is absolute in it selfe, and to what purpose is it here alleaged? Thirdly, the chiefe reason of worshipping God, is our dependance vponupon him, as kk…. d… …. lib. 1.the Heathen acknowledge, and experience shewes, in that ciuill worship we giuegive to Princes & Magistrates. And howsoeuer Epicurus denying the prouidence of God, and his gouerning of the world, thought to auoide some blame in allowing worship to the Gods, as you do, in regard of their excellent and blessed nature; yet neither was that accounted p. 570sufficient by the statesmen or learned, and in truth it procures generally rather a reuerend opinion, than any true worship. Lastly, I pray you remember, that the worship, which afterward you diuide into ciuill and religious, is here in the generall nature made ciuill, yea euen that to Angels.

That which the creatures lacke in waight, it seemes you will make vp by number. They may not hauehave (say you) the soueraigne worship due to God. But to make thē amends, you allow them two kinds of worship: ciuill, in regard of their naturall resemblance of God, and religious, in respect of their supernaturall likenesse to him. Whereas God, hauing nothing in him supernaturall, must hauehave but one of the two only, and that as it may seeme by proportioning the worship to creatures, not Ciuil, but Religious. For why should God hauehave religious honor for those properties, aboue all degrees, and creatures for the same, hauehave but ciuill in their degrees? since in your iudgment they are capable of that honor also, which is religious? Besides, is this difference of honor in respect of the gifts, or of the manner of giuing? if the latter, it is God, who must then hauehave this diuers worship, according to his diuers manner of working, and not man in whom he workes. So shall ciuill honor belong to God for the natural gifts he bestoweth vponupon men. If you regard the excellencie of the gifts, why shuld they not be accounted of proportionably in the Image, which is man, as they are in the substāce and patterne, which is God? But in him those properties, the resemblance wherof you call naturall in man, are of as great excellencie as the other, which in man you tearme supernaturall; yea, which is more; though in God, his nature and his properties be all one, yet in man the naturall qualities are the more principall, & the other as it were but adiuncts therunto. The natural parts of the soule, that I may so speak, are the vnderstanding and the wil; all gifts and graces whatsoeuer, are but qualities belonging to these two, which are the verie substance of the soule. Further, there is no reason why any religious worship should be performed to man, by reason of these qualities, because none was due to him p. 571before his fall, when he had these: else should Adam hauehave bin worshipped by Eue, with religious worship, and she by him; For each of them had the Image of God, according to the nature of such creatures, entire and perfect; and if we beleeue your Popish doctrine, they had those qualities by an especiall grace of God aboue nature. Moreouer what reason can you giuegive, why Angels shuld not performe religious worship to the Saints departed, and both they and the same Saints to those men liuing here on the earth, who hauehave receiued those supernatural qualities from God, for which religious worship is due to them, on whom they are bestowed? Therfore this distinction of religious and ciuill worship, is a meere deuise, without any ground of true reason; and all religious worship is due to God, ciuill worshippe only belongs to men.

That respectiue worship is no other but ciuill; as it may easily appeare, because it may be, and must be giuen euen to profane and reprobat men, if any such be imployed by God in gouernment ouer vsus. For howsoeuer the outward manner of the honor we giuegive to Princes, and Magistrates, depends vponupon the Lawes and Customes of the Countries, wherin we liue; yet the duty of honoring them, lies vponupon vsus in conscience to be performed, because they are Gods Lieutenants and Stewards.

This worship if you accounted it ciuill, you might giuegive to whom you thought good, and should not be condemned of vsus for Idolatry, but for follie, though you gaue it to Images. Yet such follie, as the Gentiles are not guiltie of, who neuer vsed such reuerence to the statues of any famous men, but where first they had an opinion of some diuine nature.

I maruell how you could perswade your selfe to write so vntruly, that the honor you giuegive to Images, is meaner then the former; and that you would craftilie deceiue the ignorant, as if taking off your hat, and bowing your knee were al the honor you giuegive them. Why did you not then refute Thomas, whom M. Perkins brings in speaking thus. llThom. 3. q. 25. art. 3.Seeing the Crosse doth represent Christ, who died vponupon the Crosse, and is to p. 572be worshipped with diuine honor; it followeth that the Crosse is to be worshipped so too. Did you neuer read that of Bellarmine, let this (saith he) mmBell… … … …mp. …. …. …. ….be one preposition, that the Images of Christ and the Saints are to be worshipped not only by accident and vnproperly (this is your dependent and respectiue worshippe which you say is all you allow vntounto Images) but also properly, so that the nnA…o.worship rest in the Image, not only as ooVt …eem ge… ex…mp…s.it is insteed of the party; whose Image it is?

Will you heare a third speake yet more plainly? It is the constant opinion of Diuines (saith ppAzorius Inst. lib. 9. cap 6.Azorius) that the Image is to be worshipped with the same worship and honor, with which he is worshipped whose Image it is. Belike you are no diuine, or else you would acknowledge another manner of worship due to Images.

Let vsus heare another Iesuite. The old Schoole-men (saith qqGabr. Vasq. de ador. lib. 2. disp. 8. cap. 3. & cap. 8.Vasquez) absolutly affirme that the Images of Christ are to be worshipped with diuine worship. Now for the particular worship, rrConcil. Trid. …elf. 25. de venerat.the Councell of Trent, as craftie and warie as it was, saith more then you do, that you fall downe before Images, and kisse them. But who knoweth not, that you performe all outward worship to them; you perfume them with incense, though they cannot smell; you set vp lights before them, though they cannot see. (and yet it is hard to say whether you or they be the blinder.) You kisse them, you kneele downe to them, you lye prostrate on the ground before them, you pray, sing, and say your speciall seruices before them; How could you do more outward worship to our Sauiour Iesus Christ, then you doe to these babies, and puppets?

Was it not more then need thinke you, that the Lord of heauen and earth, should in the very heate of his iealousie, make a law against such abhominations? we may well see it was not for nothing, that hee threatens so long a continuance of his heauie wrath vponupon the breakers of the second Commaundement.

speaker W. P. Againe, the brasen serpent was a type or image of Christ crucified, Ioh. 3. 14. appointed by God himselfe: p. 573yet when the people burned incense to it, 2. King. 18. 4. Hezekias brake it in pieces, and is therefore commended. And when the diuell bad our Sauiour Christ, but to bow downe the knee vntounto him, and he would giuegive him the whole world: Christ reiects his offer, saying, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him onelyonly shalt thou serue. Matth. 4. 10. Againe, it is lawfull for one man to worship another with ciuill worship, but to worship man with religious honor is vnlawfull. For all religious worship is prescribed in the first table: and the honour due to man is onelyonly prescribed in the second table and the first commaundement therof, Honor thy father, which honour is therefore ciuill and not religious. Now the meanest man that can bee, is a more excellent image of God then all the images of God or of Saints that are deuised by men.

speaker D. B. P. But let vsus go on vvith M. Perkins his argument: His second is; the brasen Serpent was an Image of Christ crucified, appointed by God: yet vvhen the children of Israell burned incense vntounto it, Ezechias brake it in 4. Reg. 18.peeces.

Ans. So when Christians generally giuegive godly honour to Images, as those Israelits did to the Serpent, let them also be broken by their lavvfull superiour, if no better remedie may be found: But as that very brasen Serpent duly vvorshipped many hundred yeeres by the same people before they fell to Idolatrie (as witnesseth S. Augustine, vvhere he reckoneth the brazen Serpent, among those signes vvhichwhich are vvorthie of religious vvorship) so good Christians, may worship all sorts of holy Pictures, so they thinke no God to dwell in them, nor put any trust in the Pictures, but vse them only to stirre vp deuotion, to keepe their minds from wandering after their domesticall affaires, and to conserue the memory of Gods happy seruants.

speaker A. W. By godly honor English men vnderstand, not that which is proper to God, but that which is agreeable to the will of God. If to burne Incense to the brazen Serpent, were to giuegive it diuine honour, your Images are ordinarily worshipped with diuine honor. Besides ssIoh. 3. 14. 1….John 3:14John 3:1this brazen Serpent was an p. 574Image of Christ crucified, and therefore by your Diuinitie, might and ought to be worshipped with diuine honour, as Christ himselfe. Yet Hezekiah brake it downe; that is the Magistrate: it is pittie he lacked you to hauehave aduised him of some better remedie. But ttAug. de ciuit. Dei lib. 10 c. 8.Augustine commends him for it, as uuReligiosa potestate Deo …e…iens, cum magna pieta tis laude contr…t.hauing in it done a speciall seruice to God, with great commendation of piety. But what speake I of Augustine? doth not the xx2. Reg. 18. 3. 4.2 Kgs 18:32 Kgs 18:4holy Ghost reckon it amongst the actions of his vpright walking in the sight of God, according to all that Dauid his Father had done? Doth he not ioyne it with taking away the high places, breaking the Images, and cutting downe the groues, actions precisely commaunded by God himselfe?

The brazen Serpent was neuer worshipped by the people, but Idolatrously, namely with Incense burned to it. VntoUnto those daies (saith the yy2. Reg. 18. ….2 Kgs 18holy Ghost, speaking of Hezechiahs time) the children of Israel did burne Incense to it; As for zzAug. lib. 3. de Trinit. c. 10Augustine, he giueth no suspition of any such thing. All he saith is this, that such things as God hath appointed to signifie some action of his person, aaHonorem habere possunt vt religiosa.may hauehave honor, as things vsed to religion. What honor is this, but a reuerend estimation according to the vse, to which they are applied by the commaundement of God? which may appeare, because he ioynes with the brazen Serpent, bbSicut & literaethe writings that God ordeined to the like purpose: viz. the Scriptures, which are inded to be reuerently accounted of, but cannot be worshipped without Idolatrie.

The common sort of Papists do put as great trust in their Idols, as euer the Heathen did in theirs. Doe you not teach them to pray to the Crosse, ccO crux aue spes vnica.All haile our only hope? To entreate of the Crosse, that it ddAuge pijs iustitiam, reis que dona veniam.would encrease righteousnes in the godly, and giuegive pardon to the guilty? Neither may it be shifted off, with saying that this belongeth to Christs Passion, and not to the Crosse. For eeThom. 3. q. 5. art. 4.Thomas Aquinas proueth by that Hymne of the Church, that the very Crosse is to be worshipped with diuine worship, and hope of saluation to be placed in it. Thus he reasoneth; we must giuegive diuine worship to that, in p. 575which we place the hope of our saluation. But we place the hope of our saluation in the Crosse. This Assumption he proueth by the authority of that Hymne: whereupon he infers his conclusion. Therefore the Crosse of Christ is to be adored with diuine worship: Is not the chiefe vse of your Images, to please God, and to do seruice to them, whose Images they are, by worshipping of them? Did I not shew a little before out of Bellarmine and other, that the Image must hauehave the honour due to the partie, whose Image it is? yea that ^f Ita vt te… net… ano… tio in … D. B. P. … the Seas to Rome and Rhemes hauehave wild wits. O …harit…e P…t!the honour must rest in the Image?

speaker A. W. Novv to the third argument, vvhichwhich is iolly and vvorthy the vvild-wit of a mad-minister. Christ vvould not so much as bovv his knee vntounto the diuell, although he vvould hauehave giuen him the vvhole vvorld for doing of it. Therfore we must not adore Images; true, if the Image were Master Bezas ensigne, or of their Master the diuell, or any of his hel-hounds.

Our Sauiours refusing to bow his knee to the Diuell, is not brought to proue the vnlawfulnes of worshipping Images, (and yet some of your saincts are not much better then Thomas Becket) but to shew that bowing the knee is a worship, how light soeuer you accompt of it, forbidden by God himselfe vnderunder the name of worship to be giuen to any but himselfe.

speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins his fourth reason: A man (saith he) may be vvorshipped vvith ciuill honor; not vvith religious, which is vvholy prescribed in the first Table, and yet the meanest man is a more excellent Image of God, than any painted one.

Ans. A man may be worshipped vvith religious honor, in respect of his supernaturall gifts asvvell as vvith ciuill honour of his naturall properties, as hath bin before declared: and no other religious honor is either And before consu…ed.prescribed or proscribed in the first Table, then such only as is proper to God.

speaker A. W. You should hauehave answered his proofe as well as you denie his proposition. Master Perkins holds, that all religious worship is proper to God, and therefore conteined in the first Table: you answere, that no religious honor is prescribed, or proscribed (was it you that found fault with Master Perkins ryming?) in the first table, but such only as is proper to God. Your aduersarie graunteth as much, and addes, that all religious honor is proper to him.Part. 3. qu. 2… …. 3.

speaker D. B. P. But (saith he) Thomas of VVatering holds, that the Crucifixe is to be p. 576adored vvith the same honor that Christ is. Leauing Thomas of VVatering and of VVapping to them that deserue it: I ansvvere to the place of To Trayterous Jesuits and such other Papists.S. Thomas of Aquine, that he speaketh (like a most learned Philosopher and diuine) very profoundly; that the Image may be considered in it selfe, and so he saith, it is not to be vvorshipped at all: or as it doth conuey our mind vntounto that vvhichwhich it doth represent: and so because there is but one and the same motion of our vnderstanding and vvill towards Christ and the Crucifixe: vve doe adore them both at once with the same act of adoration, but in a farre different degree: for Christ vve adore properly as the true God, but the Crucifixe accidentally as a thing ioyned with Christ. Euen as (saith he expounding himselfe) art. 4. when one doth his homage vntounto the King, he vvorshippeth vvithall his purple garment, not that any worship is due to the robe, but the whole is giuen vntounto the person, which cannot be separated from that which is so closely ioyned to the person: Euen so the diuine person of Christ is properly adored, but improperly all things conceiued together vvith it, are said also by that deep Doctor to be adored. He that hath care of hearing, let him heare: for our purpose it sufficeth to knovv, that he assignes very small vvorship to themselues.

speaker A. W. Thomas of waterings is the old english name of Thomas de Aquino; the place may so be called, because of some Chappell or religious house built there in honor of him. It was not Master Perkins intent nor his veine to disgrace Thomas by that name, though he do not acknowledge any such sainctship belonging to him.

In your answere, first you graunt, that ggTho. 3. q. 25. art. 3.Thomas saith, We must worship the crosse of Christ with diuine worship. Therefore you graunt as much as Master Perkins affirmes, and thereby prooue that to be false, which before you deliuered, that the worship you giuegive to Images, is very small: for you worship some of them by your owne confession, with diuine worship. It appeareth also by this answere, that your Images are not only to stirre vp deuotion &c. but to be worshipt too. Secondly I would faine know how this doctrine of Thomas can agree with that of Bellarmine, who will hauehave the honor to rest in the Image, and not to be only accidentall, and vnproper? Thirdly, this distinction doth in no sort satisfie vsus, who denie that an Image may be worshipped in any respect whatsoeuer. To the proofe out of hhArist. de memor. & reminise.Aristotle I answer more particularly, that Thomas presupposeth that which we deny, p. 577that it is lawfull to hauehave such an Image to such purposes. Besides, if all he say be graunted him, he doth not prooue that it is lawfull to intend worship to the Image, but that the worship performed to the partie whose Image it is, by occasion of the Image, is also giuen to the Image, though to the one principally, to the other but accidentally. Lastly to the similitude I say, it is not true that he which doth his homage to the king doth worship his purple garment, because it is no part of him; neither should he that had worshipt Christ hanging on the Crosse at the time of his passion, hauehave worshipped the Crosse together with Christ, no more then he that worships the king being on horseback, worships the horse on which he rides. Indeede he that worships Christ, worships him God and man (though the worship be done to him only in respect of his Godhead) but the reason is, that Chrst is as well man as God. There is no such coniunction betwixt the Image, and the partie whose image it is, and therefore for our purpose it sufficeth to know, that how small honor soeuer he or you assigne to the Images themselues, if it be religious it is Idolatrous, if ciuill, ridiculous.

But what should I spend time in refuting this distinction of Thomas, when as one of your owne Schoolemen hath done it iiAnno 1350.long ago: our Countreyman kkRobert. Ho… cot in lib Sapient. l…ct. 7.Holcot hauing propounded the question, whether it be lawfull for Christians to adore any Images, and hauing proued it vnlawfull, as by other reasons, so by the second Commaundement, obiects against himselfe out of Thomas in this sort. To this question (saith he) Thomas answereth, That an Image may be considered two waies, either as it is an Image, and so no honor is due vntounto it, as none is due to wood or stone: otherwise it may be considered, as there is the same motion to the Image, and to that, whose Image it is, and so the same honor is due to the Image, and to him, whose Image it is. But against this answere (saith Holcot) I obiect, first thus, Diuine honor is due to God only, But no Image is God, Therefore such honor is due to no Image. Therefore it implies a contradiction, to say, that diuine honor is due to God only, and yet that it is due to the Image of Christ, and to Christ. p. 578Beside, if the same honour be due to the image of Christ, and to Christ, the same honor is due also to a stone and to Christ, and by consequence, the same honour is due to Christ, and to a creature, which is not to be beleeued. Againe, he that worships any thing with diuine honour, confesseth it to be God. Therefore if any man might lawfully giuegive diuine honor to the image of Christ, he might lawfully protest, and confesse something that is not God, to be God. Therefore (saith Holcot in his conclusion) It may otherwise be said. That no adoration is due to an Image, and that it is not lawfull to adore any Image. For true adoration is in spirit and deuotion, and in the highest degree of louelove; and this we may not direct to any creature.

speaker W. P. Augustine, and long after him Gregorie, in plaine tearmes denieth Images to be adored.

speaker D. B. P. Lastly M. P. …ins saith, without quoting any place that Augustine and Gregorie in plainetearmes deny Images to be adored; and so do we too, taking adoring as they do for the vvorship that is proper to God.

speaker A. W. The places alleaged being vnknowne to you, your answere must needes bee made by gesse; and indeede agrees not with either of them, which Master Perkins quotes: for llEdit. 1598.he quotes both particularly, though you denie it. mmAugust. de morib. eccles. cap. 35.Austin speakes of the Idols of the Gentiles; and I hope you will not allow them any kinde of worship, not onelyonly not adoration. Master Perkins truly holding all your Images that you worship to be Idols also, condemnes the adoring of them by that place of Austin, though it be intended specially against the Idols of the Heathen.

nnGregor. lib. …. epist. 9.Gregories testimonie, in the place quoted by Master Perkins, allowes no further vse of any Images, than to bee Lay mens books. They are not set vp in the Churches (saith he) to be adored, but onelyonly to instruct the mindes of the ignorant. If they were set vp to be worshipped with any kinde of worship, how is this speech of Gregories true? But indeede there was no religious worship but adoration knowne in Gregories time, and that was proper to God, as religion it selfe is.

speaker W. P. The Papists defend their opinions by these reasons, I. Psalm. 99. 5. Cast downe your selues before his p. 579footestoole. Answ. The wordes are thus to bee read, Bowe at his footestoole: that is, at the Arke and Mercieseat, for there hee hath made a promise of his presence: the words therefore say not, bow to the Arke, but to God at the Arke.

The first reason by him proposed is this Psalme 98. Cast dovvne your selues before his sootes…oole, vvhichwhich vvas the Arke: novv if the Arke vvere to be vvorshipped, because it represented Gods foot-stoole, much more may the Image be vvorshipped. M. Perkins ansvvereth, that the vvords must be englished thus, Bo… at or before the Arke, notto the Arke, but to God before the Arke.

Reply. If it were so, yet must they admit that wee must kneele, at or before Images, so we kneele to honour or pray to God: against which, some of their Preachers do crielike mad-men: but the Hebre… phrase carryeth, that wee must kneele to the arke, as they who be sk…lfull in the language do know, and that the arke was worshipped of the Israelites is otherwise very euident: for first none but the high Priest might come into the place where it was: and it was carried before the campewith great solemnitie **1. Reg, 4. Cap. 6.to search out a reasting place for the whole host. And when they were to sight against the Philistins, * they had great confidence in the presence of the arke: and cap. 6,50000. of the Bethsamites were slaine for seeing the arke; and **1. Reg. 2.1 Kgs 2Oza vvas by God smitten to death for touching the arke. Doth not all this conuince in vvhat reuerence the arke vvas had, euen by Gods owne testimonie?

speaker A. W. Your first reason to prooue the worshipping of Images is this:

If the Arke were to be worshipped, because it represented Gods footstoole; much more may the Image be worshipped.

But the Arke was therefore to be worshipped:

Therefore much more may the Image be worshipped.

I denie your whole Antecedent: first the consequence of your proposition: For it doth not follow, that we may worship Images deuised by men to represent God, because we may worship the Arke, where God himselfe promised his presence, and which he did appoint as an assurance of his presence. If you can shew vsus the like promise to your Images, you say somewhat; else nothing.

Your Assumption also is false; The Arke was not to be worshipped. To your proofe Master Perkins answers truly, p. 580that the Psalme doth not commaund worshipping of the Arke, but worship before the Arke. You replie first, that therefore it is lawfull to kneele before Images. I answere, your consequence is false, because your Images are your owne wicked deuices, and hauehave no promise of Gods presence: therefore it is senselesnes to kneele before them, not madnes to crie out against such follie.

Your second replie is, that the Hebrew phrase carrieth it, that we must kneele to the Arke, as the skilfull in that language know. First remember, that these are Authors in the ayre, as you answered about that place of Daniel. Secondly know, that they that are skilfull say otherwise. What say you to the ooChaldae. Paraphrast. ad Psal. 99. 5.Ps 99:5Chaldee Paraphrast, who expounds it; Worship in the house of his Sanctuarie; and yet he keepes ppforeignthe proposition that is in the Hebrew. So doth the Latin translation in the same Psalme, where the same proposition is vsed, qqVers. 9. Adorate in monte sancto eius.worship in his holy mountaine: the rrChaldae. Paraphrast. ad vers. 9.Chaldee hath, in the mountaine of the house of his Sanctuarie: the ssGraec. 70. foreign.Greeke, not much vnlike, In, or toward his holy hill. The same seemes to hauehave been ttTheodor. in Psal. 98.Ps 98Theodorets iudgement of the place in question: His footstoole was sometimes thought to be the Temple at Ierusalem; but now the Churches, which are ouer all the earth, and Sea, wherein wee worship the most holy God. Of the same opinion is uuVatablus ad Scabellum.Vatablus: Cast downe your selues before his footstoole, that is (as hee expounds himselfe in his note there) In the Temple, or before the Arke, in which God exhibited his presence. So doth xxLyra ad Psal. 99.Ps 99Lyra interpret it, who was a Iew borne, and a Christian by profession, worship his footstole, that is, before his footstoole. The yyGlosla ordin. & interlin. ibi.ordinarie, and Interlinear glosses expound it out of zzChrysost. de Trinit. Ambros de spirit. sanct. lib. 3. Aug. in Psal. 98.Ps 98the Fathers, of Christs manhood to be worshipped, by reason of the hypostatical vnion of it with the Godhead; what is that to the worshipping of Images? For the further auowing of that translation, we hauehave also aaR. Dauid Kimchis ibid.R. Dauid Kimchis authoritie.

Lastly, you bring diuers proofes, that the Arke was had in great reuerence; all needlesse: for who denies it? Was there not great reason to esteeme highly of that, whereby p. 581God was extraordinarily present with the Iewes, as with no people, nor in any place of the world beside? What then? was it therefore worshipped by the Priest, when he went in once a yeere where it was? Did the people worship it, when it was carried before them? As bb1. Sam. …. …for that confidence the Iewes put in it, they got little by it, because they superstitiously abused it, against Gods commandement, putting trust in the presence of it abroad, when it should hauehave been in the Tabernacle where God had promised his presence with it. Was this worship to the Arke, which the Lord deliuered into the hands of the Philistins? cc1. Sam. 6. ….1 Sam 6Neither were those 50070. Bethsamites slaine for not worshipping it, but for presuming to looke into it; and dd2. Sam. 6. …2 Sam 6Vzzah for touching it, not because he did not worship it.

speaker D. B. P. To this may be added the authoritie of S. Ierom, **Epist. 17. …ap. ….vvho doth teach that it vvas the more vvorshipped for the Cherubines and pictures of angels that vvere erected at the endes of it▪ vvhereby he declareth that he thought Images vvorthie of religious vvorship.

speaker A. W. Of Ieroms 17. Epistle, alleaged by Master Perkins to proue that Rome is Babylon, you answere thus: Good sir, if S. Ierome had meant, that that Epistle should hauehave had his authoritie, he would hauehave set it out in his owne name: which seeing he thought it not expedient, set the authoritie of it aside, and vrge his reasons, if you thinke it worth your labour, and you shall be answered. These your owne words shall serne in steed of answere. But for the satisfying of all men I will set downe Ieromes words, that they may see with what care and truth you cite the testimonies of the ancient writers. The Iewes (saith Ierome) in former times eeVenerabantur sancta sanctorum.worshipped the Holy of Holies, because there were the Cherubins, and the Propitiatorie, and the Arke of the Testament, Manna, Aarons Rod, and the golden Altar. Doth Ierome teach in these words, that the Arke was the more worshipped, for the Cherubins and pictures of Angels, that were erected at the end of it? First, he makes no mention of any pictures of Angels, but onelyonly of the Cherubins. Secondly, he speakes not of worshipping the Arke, but the Holy of Holies, because of the things that were in it. Thirdly, he makes the Propitiatorie, Manna, Aarons Rod, p. 582and the golden Altar, causes of that worship, as well as the Cherubins. Lastly, in the words following, he counts the Sepulchre of our Lord ffVenerabilius.more worthie of worship. But to answere plainly to your false allegation of Ieromes authoritie; what an indignitie were it to the Maiestie of God, that the assurance of his presence should be the more worshipped, because of the Cherubins and pictures of Angels, that were erected at the ends of it; which also, with the Arke it selfe, were hid from all mens sight, in the Holie of Holies? Ierome meaneth, that those things made the people conceiue more reuerently of that Holie of Holies, and strooke them with a kind of awe.

speaker D. B. P. To this vve may ioyne that of S. Paul, **Hebr. 11.Heb 11that Jacob by faith adored the top of his sonne Iosephs rod: so doth the Greeke text of S. Paul say, as Erasmus also translateth it: The Protestants mangle the text pitifully, to auoyde the place: see the Annotations of Rhemes Testament.

speaker A. W. ggHeb. 11. 21.Heb 11:21The text in the Greeke is according to your owne editions, hhforeign.worship vponupon the top of his owne staffe. So doth your iiInterlin. bibl. ibi.Interlinear read it. So kkArias Montan. ibi.Arias Montanus. llErasmus, Ad.Erasmus notes the error of your old translator in leauing out the preposition ^☐ which hee himselfe interpreteth, ad, as it were to ward the top. The mmSyriac. inter. Pagnin. ibi.Syriak translateth as we do, vponupon the top of his staffe. nnVatablus ibi.Pagnine thus, he worshipped leaning vponupon his staffe. ooAd summum …aculi.Vatablus keepeth the words of the old translation, but he expoundeth them in this sort, Adored, that is (saith Vatablus) giuegive thankes: The top of his staffe, … toward the top of his staffe, that is, qqInnixus baculo suo, prae senecture.Leaning vponupon his staffe for age. rrTheodor. ibi.Theodoret maketh the adoration ciuill, to figure out the kingdome of Israel in the tribe of Ephraim Iacobs younger sonne. Your ssGlossa interlin.Glosse saith, he worshipped Christ by whom he had domination, and a scepter of authoritie in Aegypt: or the kingdome of Christ, which in that was sigured to be, and to come among the Gentiles. ttGlossa ordin.Another glosse saith directly, he worshipped God, presently vponupon his sonne Ioseph swearing. uuLyra. ibi.Lyra layeth out the matter more largely, and plainly after this manner: Iacob (saith Lyra) beleeued that Christ should be buried, and rise againe in the Land of promise: therefore he made Ioseph sweare, that he would cause his body to be carried thither. After he had sworne, he worshipped p. 583God with thankes, turning himselfe towards the beds head, according to the translation of S. Ierome; as it appeareth Genes. 47. The 70. translate as it is in this place, and both are true. For he worshipped towards the beds head, which stood west; toward which part the Iewes doe worship; and because he was old, he had a staffe, vponupon the top whereof he leaned, when he gaue thankes to God. Therefore we must not conceiue, that he worshipped the top of the Scepter or staffe, but he worshipped God, leaning vponupon the staffe. So doth xxTheoph ib…Theophylact expound it, Leaning and resting vponupon his staffe for age. Though he doth also follow the exposition of yyChrysost. in Hebr. hom. 26.Chrysostome concerning the kingdome of Israel in the Tribe of Ephraim. The same exposition bringeth Occumenius the Greeke Scholiast, out of zzPhotius apud OecumeniumPhotius, vponupon the top of his staffe, that is, aaforeignbeing now old, the same bring bbLombard, Thomas. Caietan. ibi.Lombard, Thomas and Caietan.

It is strange, that a man professing knowledge, should speak so vntruly. Do we mangle the text pittifully? or rather do not you slaunder vsus shamefully? we neither take away, nor alter any word, syllable, letter, or accent in the text: but leauing that whole, onlie adde two words in a different letter, to make the meaning more plaine; and that by ccAug qq. in Gen. q 162.Augustines authority, as your ddRhem. Test. ad Heb. 11. 2….Heb 11:2Rhemists confesse, and as I hauehave shewed with the allowance of your best Interpreters, for both the words. I will conclude with that of Ierome; in this place (saith eeHieron. in quaest. Hebr. in Genes.he) some faine without cause, that Iacob worshipped the top of Iosephs Scepter, because forsooth, honouring his son, he honoured his power. But in the Hebrew, it is farre otherwise. And Israel worshipped (saith the Hebrew) toward his beds head: namely, because after his sonne had sworne to him, being assured of the thing he had requested, he worshipped God, ffContra caput.ouer against his beds head.

speaker W. P. Obiect. II. Exod. 3. 5. God said to Moses, Stand a farre off, and put off thy shooes: for the place is holy. Now if holy places must bee reuerenced, then much more holy images, as the crosse of Christ, and such like. Ans. God commanded the ceremonie of putting p. 584off the shooes, that hee might thereby strike Moses with a religious reuerence, not of the place, but of his owne Maiestie, whose presence made the place holy. Let them shew the like warrant for images.

speaker D. B. P. The second reason is taken out of Exodus 3. Where God said to Moses, Put off thy shoes, for the place where thou standest is holy. Novv if places be holy and to be reuerenced by reason of the presence of Angels: vvhy not, asvv…ll the Image that representeth an Angell or some Saint, vvhichwhich is equall to Angels? Master Perkins his ansvvere rather confirmeth than solueth this argument: for he saith, that the Ceremonie of putting off his shoes, vvas commaunded to strike Moses vvith a religious reuerence; not of the place but of the person there present, vvhichwhich vvas not God but an Angell, as the text there expresseth. **Exod. 3.Exod 3The place then being holy, required the reuerend respect of putting off his shoes, and that reuerence done to the place; stroke Moses vvith a religious reuerence of the Angelspeaking in the person of God: euen so holy pictures being first duely reuerenced, doe strike men vvith a religious regard of the Saint represented.

speaker A. W. Your second reason is thus framed.

If places be holy, and to be reuerenced by reason of the presence of Angels, why not aswell the Image, that represents an Angell or some Saint, which is equall to an Angell?

But places are holy and to be reuerenced by reason of the presence of Angels.

Therefore the Image that represents an Angell or some Saint, equall to an Angell, is holie and to be reuerenced.

I deny your whole Antecedent; and first the consequence of your proposition. Because although we should grant that some place were holy, because of the presence of the Angels; yet would it not follow that therfore Images are holy, where there is no presence of an Angell. For all your consecrating and coniuring of Images cannot make any Angel, or Saint to afford his presence in them. Your assumption is false. There is no holines in places, because of the presence of Angels; as may appeare by the Scriptures, where their apparitions are described, no action of reuerence at all being performed to the places of their presence. In particular to your proofe M. Perkins answereth, that this was done, not p. 585because the place where Angels appeare is holy, but vponupon an especiall commandement of God, to strike Moses with a reuerence of Gods Maiestie, who was there present.

You reply, first that God was not present there, but an Angell; I answere that God was there present, as it is plaine, because the Angell was lehouah. ggExod 3. 2.Exod 3:2And lehouah saw that he turned to see. And hhVers. 7.lehouah said. Yea the whole discourse sheweth, that God himselfe was the Angell, namely the second person in Trinitie, who is called iiMalac. 3. 1.Mal 3:1the Angell of the Conenant, because he was sent for the saluation of Gods elect. So kkAct. 7. 31. 33.Acts 7:31Acts 7:33Stephen though he call him an Angell, calleth him asse the Lord. And indeed who but God could say, I am that I am, llExod. 3. 14.Exod 3:14as the Angell there doth?

Secondly, you say the Answere rather confirmes than solues the Argument: Because as that astion strucke Moses with a reuerence of the Angell, so holy Pictures duly reuerenced, strike men with a religious regard of the Saint represented. What is this but to beg the question? you take it as graunted, that there may be Images, and that religious reuerence may be giuen to them: but these are the verie doubts, we dispute of. Inded if it were true, that there may be such Images, and that religious honour is to be yeelded to creatures, there were somewhat in your Similitude to the purpose: and yet similitudes doe not proue but illustrate. The sorce of your reason is, that Moses was commanded by god to put off his shoes, that he might be striken thereby with reuerence of God: Therefore we must worship Images, that we may be striken with reuerence of Angels and Saints. The consequence is naught. Gods particular charge to Moses at that time, warranteth not men to enioyne worship to Images, that Angels may be worshipped by them.

speaker D. B. P. To this, let vsus annexe that dayes be truely called holy and vvorshipped, as the first and last daies be truely called holy and vvorshipfull, as the first and last daies of the feast of Easter be. **Exod. 12. 1….Exod 12:1And the vestments of Priests **Exod. 28. 5.Exod 28:5, because they are dedicated and employed to holy vses: euen so Images vvhichwhich are made in honour of God and his Saints, and erected to mooue and teach vsus to embrace heauenly courses.

speaker A. W. Adde it if you will that dayes appointed by God are called p. 586holy: for of worshipfull dayes I thinke no man euer heard, though your Latine translation say, mmEadem festiuitate venerabilis.The seauenth day shall be venerable, with the same festiuitie, that is, shall be kept with like solemnitie to the first. The words in the Hebrew are all one, in the former and later part of the verse, and therefore so should the translation be; Now in the former your translation is, the first day shall be holy and solemne. The Hebrew as nnArias Mon. ad Exod. 12.Exod 12Montanus translateth it, on the first day (shall be) a conuocation of holines, and on the seauenth day shall be a conuocation of holines; that is (as ooVatab. ibi.Vatablus truly expounds the Hebrew phrase) An holy Conuocation. So doth ppPagnin. ibi.Pagnine also translate it. But this holines which you rightly expound to be a dedication or employment to Gods seruice, neither doth require, nor will admit any worshipping of the dayes or garments: but Images are not holy, for they are neither commaunded of God, nor allowed.

speaker W. P. Obiect. III. It is lawfull to kneele downe to a chaire of estate in the absence of the king or Queene: therefore much more to the images of God, and of Saintes in heauen glorified, being absent from vsus. Answ. To kneele to the chaire of estate, is no more but a ciuill testimonie, or signe of ciuill reuerence, by which all good subiects when occasion is offered, shew their loyaltie and subiection to their lawfull Prince. And this kneeling being on this manner, and to no other ende, hath sufficient warrant in the word of God. But kneeling to the image of any Saint departed, is religious, and consequently more then ciuill worship, as the Papists themselues confesse. The argument then prooueth nothing, vnlesse they will keepe themselues to one and the same kind of worship.

speaker D. B. P. He proposeth our argument to the halfes, or else this answere had been preuented. For thus runneth our reason: As the chaire of estate is to bee worshipped with ciuill reuerence, in respect of the temporall p. 587Prince, whom it representeth: euen so the Images of holy personages that raigne now in heauen, are to bee worshipped with a holy and religious kinde of curtesie: for as Temporall honour is due vntounto a Temporal Prince, so religious and spirituall honour, is due vntounto spirituall and most holy personages: And as a good subiect testifyeth his loyaltie and good affection towardes his Prince, by honouring his regall throne: So doth a good Christian giuegive testimonie of his dutiful, both estimation & deuotion toward those heauenly creatures, by giuing honour vntounto their Images. At leastwise, why do not the Protestants exhibit ciuill reuerence aswell vntounto the representations of Gods Saintes, as to the shaddowes of the secular maiestie? vnlesse it be because they are fallen out with the Saintes of God, and are become adorers of sinfull men.

speaker A. W. Master Perkins drew your argument from a comparison of quantitie, as the Logicians call it, from the greater to the lesse; you fetch it from a comparison of qualitie by way of Similitude, which, as I answered before, serues to make a thing more plaine, not to prooue it true, as the other comparison doth, if it be rightly made.

You report his answere by halues, for he denies the consequence of the argument which he propounded; adding this reason of his deniall, that the ciuill worship hath warrant sufficient in the word of God, but your religious worship hath not: so that either you must make your worshipping of Images ciuill, or else your comparison holds not.

His answere is sufficient to ouerthrow your reason, as you propound it, for it denies that the things are alike, adding farther against your proofe, that no religious honour is due to any but God only: if you can shew warrant for it in the word, he yeelds. But alas you cannot, your chiefe Champion Thomas of Aquine hauing made an obiection against worshipping of the image of Christ with diuine worship, because there is no tradition to be found in Scripture for the adoring of Images, is faine for answere to flee to vnwritten traditions. We must answere (saith qqThom. 3. q. 25. Act. 3 ad 4.Acts 3Thomas) that the Apostles by the familiar instinct of the holy ghost, deliuered certaine things to the Churches to be obserued, which they hauehave not left in writing, but only in the obseruation of the Church by the succession of the faithfull. And surely he that will take paines to consider the allegations of the seauenth Council, the s…d p. 588at Nice, which was called of purpose to establish the worshipping of Images, shall finde very pittifull proofe out of Scripture. Therefore hauing warrant and charge to performe all ciuill honor to princes, we do accordingly; hauing neither for any deuotion or religious reuerence to Angels or men departed, though Saincts in heauen, we dare not worship their images: which also we know to be particularly forbidden in Scripture.

And that is the reason why we giuegive no reuerence to any idolatrous representations of holy men now in heauen, deuised by men to a purpose, that hath no warrant by commaundement, or example in scripture. As for ciuill reuerence, it is due to them only with whom we hauehave some dealing in worldly matters, and so cannot belong to any in heauen, and much lesse to their pictures, without any liking of themselues.

speaker W. P. Differ. III. The Papists also teach, that God may be lawfully worshipped in images, in which he hath appeared vntounto men: as the Father, in the image of an old man: the Sonne, in the image of a man crucified: and the holy Ghost in the liknes of a doue, &c. But we hold it vnlawfull to worship God, in, by, or at any image: for this is the thing which (as I hauehave prooued before) the second commandement forbiddeth.

speaker D. B. P. Master perkins makes a third point of difference, that wee may not worship God in any such Image, in which bee hath appeared vntounto men. In this we do not differ, vnlesse he takes it otherwise then he deliuereth it. Those Images wee hold more reuerend than any others, as representations neerer approching vntounto the diuinitie, yet because they doe not expresse the deitie, God is not directly apprehended not worshipped in them, but onelyonly by collection: as for example. The forme of a …raue old man, in Daniel, doth not represent Gods person, but wee gather by that ancient forme Gods eternity, whereby wee a…se to a more perfect conceit of God, whom wee adore: now other Images of Christ and his Saintes, doe carry ou… mindes directly vponupon their proper persons, whom in their Images we adore and worship after their degrees. But wee worship Images with farre meaner reuerence than any of the Saintes, in p. 589regard onelyonly, that they doe represent such presonages, and do induce vsus more to louelove and honour them, and do stirre vp our dulnesse more often and ardently to honour God in the Saints, and the Saints in their degrees: as also to imitate their holy example as hath bin said more than All religious honour is Godsonce, that all may vnderstand how far off we are from giuing Gods honour vntounto either Saint or Image.

speaker A. W. Do you not differ from Master Perkins in worshipping God in the images in which he hath appeared? First, he saith, that it is vnlawfull to worship God, in, by, or at an Image, those are his words in this very place. Secondly, do you only hold those Images more reuerend then other? Do you not giuegive them diuine honour, euen the same honor that is due to God himselfe, though accidentally, as you hold against Bellarmine? Is not Thomas his reason for worshipping the Image and Crosse of Christ with diuine honour, as strong for the image of God the Father, and of God the holy ghost? But what should I goe about to prooue so plaine a matter. I would your being ashamed to defend so grosse Idolatry, would make you forsake it. Do you not graunt that you worship God in these Images, though, as you say here, not directly? How do you then agree with Master Perkins, who deliuers his meaning plainely, that in such images God may not be at all worshipped, no not by them, nor at them? and yet for very shame you would not be thought to speake against so manifest a truth, though without shame you make shew of agreement where there is none, and against all equall dealing accuse Master Perkins of seeming to take the matter otherwise then he deliuers it.

By person you meane one property of God common to all three persons, or else the nature of the Godhead. But I pray you tell me, by what warrant of scripture you paint God the Father like this old man in Daniell, if you do it not by the authoritie of this place. If it be the end of this picture to signifie Gods eternitie, surely he that appropriates this image to the Father, makes the Father only eternall. This is that more perfect conceipt of God that you come to by this image, namely, to denie the Eternitie, and so the Godhead of the Sonne, and the Holy Ghost. Further, giuegive me p. 590leaue to vnderstand you if I can. What can you possibly know concerning Gods eternitie, by the sight of this graue old man? If you did not beleeue that God is eternall, before you looked vponupon that image, it is not possible you should learne it, or giuegive credit to it, by seeing the picture, especially if it represent not as you speake the person of God. But indeede the gazing on such Idols is more likely to draw men into a conceipt, that God growes old, and so his eternitie is wearing away, then to teach them that he neuer had beginning, and neuer shall hauehave end. You will replie, that Daniell doth so describe him. True, as the scripture eueryevery where doth for our capacitie, applying affections, parts, and actions of men to God. The Lord, who of his infinite wisdome appointed the penning of these things for our instruction, hath promised a blessing to eueryevery part of his word, that it may be read & heard without danger; but Idols are accursed by him, euen such pictures of old men, because whatsoeuer the pretence of making them be, they fill ignorant people with error and superstition.

What Images meane you? sure not all, for you worship the image of the Father, of Christ, of the holy ghost, yea, the rrThom. 3. q. …5. art. 4. Bellarm. de Imag. lib. 2. cap. 27.wood of the crosse on which he died, and eueryevery part and peece of it, though neuer so little a scrap, with diuine honor. To other Images (as I shewed before, out of your owne writers) you giuegive the same honour that you do to the Saincts themselues, because Thomas teacheth you out of Aristotle, that there is but one motion of our vnderstanding and will, towards the Sainct, and the image of the Sainct.

speaker W. P. And the fact of the Israelites, Exod. 32. in worshipping the golden calfe, is condemned as flat idolatrie; albeit they worshipped not the calfe, but God in the calfe: for vers. 5. Aaron saith, To morrow shall be the solemnitie of Iehouah: whereby he doth giuegive vsus to vnderstand, that the calfe was but a signe of …ehouah whom they worshipped. Obiect. It seemes the Israelites worshipped the calfe. For Aaron saith, verse 4. p. 591These be thy Gods (O Israel) that brought thee out of Egypt. Answ. Aarons meaning is nothing else, but that the golden calfe, was a signe of the presence of the true God. And the name of the thing signified is giuen to the signe, as vponupon a stage hee is called a King that represents the King. And Augustine saith, that images are wont to be called by the names of things whereof Ad Simpli…. … 2. q. 3.they are images, as the counterfeit of Samuel is called Samuel. And wee must not esteeme them all as mad men to think that a calfe made of their earings, being but one or two daies old should bee the God that brought them out of Egypt with a mighty hand many daies before.

And these are the pointes of difference touching Images, wherein wee must stand at variance for euer with the Church of Rome. For they erre in the foundation of religion, making indeede an Idoll of the true God, and worshipping an other Christ then we doe, vnderunder new termes, maintayning the idolatry of the heathen. And therefore hauehave wee departed from them: and so must wee still doe, because they are idolaters: as I hauehave proued.

speaker D. B. P. But this poynt of difference is made to bring in a common ar…ument of theirs, to wit, that the worshipping of the golden Calfe is condemned as flat Idolatrie: **Exod. 3….Exod 3and yet the Israelits worshipped not the Calfe, but God in the Calfe, to which we say, they did not worship the true God in the Calfe, but the God of the Egyptians, which was taken by them to hauehave the shape of a blacke Calfe, with white spots. See S. Augustine. **Lib. 18. de ciui…. cap. 5.And therefore making the golden calfe to represent this false god, and att…ibuting their deliuerance, vntounto that supposed god, and not vntounto the God of Israel, committed idolatry, which the text prooueth most manifest, De nat. deo…, Vers. 4.these be thy gods that brought thee out of Egypt. M. Perkins answereth, that the meaning is nothing else, but that the golden Calfe was a signe of the presence of the true God: such glosses without any authority of the auncient fathers is …idiculous, being against the plaine text: but sayth he, we must not think… them so …adde, as to take a Calfe made with p. 592their care-rings to be their God, no: but we may well thinke them so vngratefull vntounto the true God their deliuerer, that they did ascribe their deliu…rance not to him, but vntounto that God, which the Aegyptians serued, whose purtraiture was that Calfe.

speaker A. W. This point of difference is brought in, not to auow any argument of ours, but to answere a distinction of yours, who being dri…n to shifts, thinke to help the matter by telling vsus that the Iewes worshipped the golden Calfe, and therefore were condemned. To which we replie, that the Iewes did worship Iehouah in or by the Calfe, which we prooue by the text it selfe. ^s Exod. 32. 4.Exod 32:4These be thy Gods that brought thee out of the lād of Egypt. But it was the true God that brought them out of Egypt, euen ^t Exod. 3. 14.Exod 3:14Iehouah. You answere, that they attributed their deliuerance to that false God of the Egyptians. Then did they thinke the Egyptian God to be Iehouah; for to Iehouah do they consecrate the day of dedicating the Calfe. ^u Exod. 32. 5.Exod 32:5Tomorrow shall be the holy day to Iehouah. But how ridiculous a conceipt is this, to faine, that the Iewes should imagin that the Egyptians God was their deliuerer, whereas they knew, that the great wise men of Egypt, the chiefe worshippers of that God, had striuen against Moses, and their deliuerance, by all meanes possible, xxExod. 8. 19.Exod 8:19till at last they and the power of their God were ouercome? So that indeede, it was impossible they should be so sottish as to dreame, that the Egyptian God had deliuered them. And if this had bin their fault, being a thing so monstrous and sensles, God would certainely hauehave charged it vponupon them, when he laid out their sinne to Moses. But he rather accuseth them for breaking his commaundement by making a molten Calfe, affirming to it, and proclaiming, yyExod. 3. 8.Exod 3:8These are thy Gods that brought thee out of Egypt. This is farther confirmed by those two calues, which in imitation of this, zz1. Reg. 11. 281 Kgs 11:28Ieroboam set vp to worship the true God by, and so continued euen by aa2. Reg. 10. 16. 29.2 Kgs 10:162 Kgs 10:29Iehu, who destroyed the heathen Idols.

The text prooues nothing for you, These be thy Gods that brought thee out of Egypt. For the Egyptians had no such Calfe to their God, though the Oxe or Calfe called Apis (as bbAugust. de ciuit. Dei lib. 18. cap. 5.Austin …aith in the place alleaged) was consecrated to p. 593their chiefe God Serapis. If we brought nothing for our exposition but authoritie, you might stop our months with the contrary iudgement of the auncient writers, but against reason authoritie is of small force, and yet you bring none for your selfe, nor answere Master Perkins, shewing that Images are called by the names of the things they re… …, and so that calfe, made to be a token of Iehouahs presence, that brought them out of Egypt, is said to be the God, that brought them out of the land of Egypt.

speaker D. B. P. But now before we end this question, I must let you …erstand what worthy men they were that fi…st began to wage batte… … …ages: they were the …evves in their …alm…. Ord. 2. tra… …. a… … …od …. Act. 5. A ba…ba…ous Persian Xenias, as … N… … ▪ 16 cap. 27. Then Ma…met the great god of the Turkes. Al… … 15. & 17. vvith such like infidels, …o…ers, and the skumme of the earth.

See Cardinall Bella…mme de Jmag. lib. 2. cap. 6.

speaker A. W. If these be the auncientest Authors you can bring, that hauehave waged against Images, I can goe beyond you many hundred yeeres. What say you to ccGen. 35. …Gen 35Iacob, who made all his houshold giuegive him their Images, which he buried vnderunder an Oake, that was by Shechim, about the yeere of the world 2270? The commandement of God giuen on Mount Synah, the preaching of the Prophets, & the zeale of many worthy Kings of Iuda, were long before the Iewes Talmud, ddTalmud begun to be gathered 300. yeeres after Christ.which was begunne to be gathered, and written more then 300. yeeres after Christ, and was not eeFinished about the yeere 506.finished till about the yeere 506. long before which time, as I hauehave shewed, Origen and Clement did not only speake against the Heathen Idols, but defend the Christians, for refusing to hauehave any Images, and proue that the vse of them was vnlawfull and vnfit.

I ffIn my answere to t…e Epis…le Dedicatory.shewed before about this matter of Xenaias, who at soonest was aboue 400. yeeres after Christ, that Images were withstood as vnlawfull, euen in the beginning of preaching the Gospel. This Nicephorus wrot not much more then 300. yeeres since.

As for Blasphemous Mahomet, who patched vp his abhominable Alcoran, with peeces of all kinds of professions, though his intent was damnable, and his writing most sottish, yet hath he many things agreeable to the truth, taken p. 594out of the bookes of Moses; and in this point of Images, his acknowledging of the truth, shall make the more to your condemnation.

What should we do looking in Bellarmine? if there were any thing for your aduantage, more then that which you hauehave alleadged, you might and would hauehave made bould with it, as you do generally in all your answeres. Bellarmine there tels vsus a storie of the mislikers of Images, but he neither begins where …e should, and dissents without any sufficient reason, from Alphonsus a Castro, and maketh that seauenth Councell his chiefest bulwarke.

speaker D. B. P. I vvill vvith one or tvvo testimonies of the auncientest Father…, finish this controuersie I …ctant. I… car. de pass. Christ. Kne…le downe and adore the venerable w…od of th… Crosse.

H…rome, … vita Paulae: She adored prostrate before the Crosse, as if shee had se…e Christ hanging on it.

Basil agai…st J…lian cited, Act. 2. Synod. 7. I honour the historie of the Images, and doe properly worship them.

Finally, in the 7. general Councell holden 900. yeeres past, they are condemned of heresie, that denie the vse and vvorshipping of holy Images.

speaker A. W. Lactantius, though he were an ancient Christian, was not diuine; and in these verses (if they be his) he sheweth himselfe liker a light Poet then a graue writer; whose authority should be taken in so great a matter.

Ierom reporteth what Paula did in Ierusalem. For which he that well considereth what it was, may find more cause to commend her zeale, then to like of her actions. She went into the Sepulcher, and kist the stone of his resurrection, which the Angell had remoued from the doore of the Tombe; The place of his bodie, where the Lord had lien, as if she had thirsted for the desired waters, she lickt with her faithfull tongue. who sees not more zeale then knowledge, in this behauiour? Neither P… ter, nor Iohn, nor any of the Disciples, are reported to hauehave done any such thing, though they came to the graue by and by after our Sauiours resurrection. Was she more deuout? no, but more ignorant, and passionat.

This testimony of Basil is no where to be found, but in this Councell, which was packed for the nonst to confirme Idolatrous Image worshippers. I shewed the like practise of p. 595the Councell before, concerning other writers.

Now for a conclusion of this point, I will briefly note the beginning of Images among the Christians, and speake a little of that seauenth Councell so often alleadged against vsus. The first vse of any Images, after our Sauiours ascension, was brought in by Simon the Sorcerer, who was also the first, and principall Heretik. Of whom ggTheodore…. haerer. lib. … princip.Theodoret and hhAugust. d… haeres. cap. 1.Austin write, that he gaue his owne, and his strumpet Selenes Images to his followers, to be worshipped by them. After him, one iiAugust. ibid. cap. 7.Marcellina, of the sect (as it is said) of the Carpocratians, worshipped the Images of Iesus, Paul, Homer, and Pythagoras. The Gnosticks presently after her, worshipped the Images of Christ, and are condemned for it by kkIrenae. lib. 1. cap. 23. 24.Irenaeus. They hauehave painted Images (saith llEpipha. lib. …. …om. 2. haeres. 27.Epiphanius of Carpocrates, and the Gnosticks) which they say are the Images of Iesus, and that they were made vnderunder Pontius Pilate, while our Sauiour liued: but they keepe these Images secret yet (as he obserueth) they worshipped those Images. Amongst true Christians the beginning of Images may wel be thought to hauehave bin such, as mmEuseb. hist. lib. 7. cap. 17.Eusebius guesseth it was, namely an imitation of the Gentiles, who vsed to make and keepe the Images of them, by whom they had receiued any speciall good. Yea the Gentiles, being newly conuerted, could not by and by be weaned from all vse of Images, more then from other superstitions. It was necessary (saith nnTertull. d… …oro. militis.Tertullian) in former times, to yeeld many things to the Christians, who (for the most part) were conuerted from Paganisme to religion, when they were old, and so could hardlie leaue those things, to which all their life time they had bin accustomed, But as yet they had no Churches, nor vse of Images, in their assemblies. That seemes to hauehave growen by the ooBasil. in orat. de Ba…laam Ma…yre.painting of the histories of Martyrs in tables, and setting them vp in Churches. Which aduantage the Deuill, that alwaies watcheth his oportunitie, to bring in Idolatry by little and little, greedilie apprehended and followed, and at the last brought to such a height, that the ppLeo 3. Isau… cus.Emperour Leo, the third surnamed Isaurius, was faine to call a qqConcil. Constantinop. anno 729.Councell at Constantinople, about the yeere 729. wherein it was decreed, that the Images should be pulled downe. This Gregorie p. 596the second Bishop of Rome, who some 13. yeeres before had caused Images to be allowed in a rrConcil. Roman. sub Cregor. 2.Councell at Rome, tooke very hainously; and so much the rather because the Emperour had required obedience of the Latin Church, to the decrees past in that Councell at Constantinople. But the Bishop was so farre from yeelding obedience, that he tooke this commandement of the Emperour, as an occasion to withdraw his allegeance from his Soueraigne, and seized into his hands all the authoritie, that was yet remaining to the Empire in Italie. This contention, after the death of Leo, grew more hot; in so much that his sonne Constantine Copronymus, to make some good end of the matter, assembled another ssConcil. Constantinop. sep…imum sub Constantino Coprony mo.Councell at Constantinople, about the yeere 755. which he calleth the seauenth general Councel, where there were present 308. Bishops, and wherein Images were again condemned.

About some 34. yeeres after, ttJrene; widow to the Emperour Leo 4.Irene daughter to a King of the Tartars, and widow to the Emperour Leo the 4. (a Pagan by birth, and little better in religion) during the nonage of her sonne Constantine, called a Councell at Constantinople, wherein a great number of Bishops maintained by the word of God, that Images ought to bee abolished. Which the Empresse perceiuing, found meanes to break vp the Councill; and afterwards appointed another again the next yeere at uuConcil. se…nd. Nicen. … …rene.Nice in Bythinia: wherein it was decreed, that Images should bee worshipped, and that Councill of Nice should be counted the seuenth generall Councell, and not the other, which had been held before at Constantinople against Images. This is that seauenth Councell which our Papists so magnifie; and it passeth vnderunder the name of that famous Councell of Nice, wherein Arius was condemned, eueryevery man not knowing, that this was a second Councell betwixt three and foure hundred yeere after the former. But that all men may be the better able to iudge of this foresaid Councell, let me propound the speeches of some of the Bishops on the behalfe of Images. xxCarol. Magnus de imag. lib. 3. cap. 17.I receiue and embrace honorablie (saith Constantine Bishop of Constans in Cyprus) holy and reuerend Images, according to the seruice of p. 597adoration, which I performe to the Consubstantiall and life giuing Trinitie: And them that do not so thinke, nor glorifie them, I separate from the Catholike and Apostolicall Church, and lay them vnderunder the Cursse, and ioyne them with such as hauehave denied the Incarnation of Christ our God, for our saluation. yyIoan. Oriental. legatus in Concil. Nicen. 2. Act. 4.Acts 4The holy Father hath said plainly, that the Image of the King is called the King, and yet there are not two Kings: so that it is cleere that he which shall adore the Image, and say it is Christ, sinnes not. The most holy Patriarke, zzTharasius i… cod. Concil. Act. 3.Acts 3Tharasius said, let vsus obserue that the old Scripture …ad signes, and that out of it the new hathtaken Cherubins of glorie, shaddowing the propitiatory. The holie Synode answered very well Sir, so is the truth. The most holy Patriarke said; if the old Scripture had Cherubins shadowing the Propitiatorie, we also will hauehave the Images of Iesus Christ, and of the holy mother of God, and of the Saints shadowing our Altars. aaTheodosius apud. Carol. Magn. lib. 2. cap. 6.Theodosius Bishop of Ancyra said, whatsoeuer things are written, are written for our learning; therfore the holy Images and Pictures grauen, and painted, are painted and set vp for our learning, zeale, and example. bbElias apud Carol. vbi supra.Elias the most holy Bishop of Creet, said, According to the most reuerend letters of Adrian, most holy Pope of old Rome, I confesse and hold Images to be holy and worthy of worship, neuer laying them away, but adoring them perfectly; them that confesse otherwise, I accursse. The othet most holy Bishops and venerable Monkes cried out; ccConcil. Ni… cen. 2. Act. 3.Acts 3And we all together receiue, and embrace, and adore Images, with very great honour. ddConcil. eod. Act. 2.Acts 2Stauratius Bishop of Chalcedon said, I receiue, embrace, and honour Images, as being the pledges of my saluation. eeIbid.Peter Bishop of Nichor said, I receiue venerable Images, and adore them, and will alwaies teach the doctrine, that I may one day giuegive account to God our Iudge, in the world to come. ffAct. 4.Acts 4Iohn the most religious Priest, Lieue-tenant of the Apostolike thrones said. Therefore an Image is greater then prayer. And this is come to passe by the prouidence of God, for ignorant mens sakes. ggAct. 1.Acts 1The same man counteth the denying of worship to Images, the worst of all heresies, as that which ouerthrowes the gouernment of our Sauiours house. I forbeare to set downe their reasons which are taken from Tradition, miracles, and some places of Scripture so ridiculously p. 598applied, that it is little better then blasphemie to make the holy Ghost president of so Idolatrous and sottish a Councell. hhBergomensis lib. 10. Centur. 8. cap. 9. col. 629.Constantine hauing subscribed to this Councell by his mothers perswasion and example in his none-age; after he came to yeeres of discretion, and his owne gouernment, by the aduise of diuers learned men, repealed the decrees of it concerning Images; and ere long after tooke the whole sway of the Empire from his mother (who had vsurped it as protectrix) into his owne hands, which dealing of his did incense the ambitious, and idolatrous woman, iiZonar. tom. 3. Paul Diacon. lib. 23. Sigebert. Anno 798.that shee caused certaine traitours, first to plucke out his eyes; and afterward to murder him: yea so great was her malice and feare, that shee ceased not, till shee had made his sonnes her grand-childrens, or neuewes eyes to be pulled out also: such an author, and patrones had that Idolatrous and wicked Councell; the chiefe foundation of Popish Images. Such as it was notwithstanding, the decrees of it were sent by Pope Adrian the first to the Emperour Charlemaine, that he might allow of them: But he held another kkConcil. Francofor. sub Carolo Magn.Councell at Franckfort; wherin it was concluded, that the second Councell of Nice, whereof we hauehave spoken, should not be held either for generall, or for the seauenth, or for a thing of any worth. The decrees of that Councell condemning Images, were by this repealed, and a book written by expresse commandement of the Councell of Franckfort, and published in the name of Charlemaine, in which, as the Councell of Constantinople is reproued, for taking away all vse of Images, euen for history and memory: so that second Councell of Nice is particularly confuted and condemned. The like entertainment found the decrees of that Councell, amongst our countri-men here in England, as you shall see by the testimony of a Monke, that writ 300. yeeres agoe. The llAnno 795. Mathae. Westmonast.same yeere (saith Mathew of Westminster) Charles King of the French-men sent into Britaine mmLibrum Synodalem.a booke of decrees, wherin many things were found contrary to the true faith, and that especially, that it was determined by the ioynt consent of almost all the Doctors of the East, That Images are to be adored, which the Catholike Church vtterly detests. Against this, Albinus writ p. 599an Epistle wonderfully endited, according to the authority of the holy Scriptures …d carried together with that booke of decrees to the King of Fr…ce in the name of the Bishops and Nobles.

Yet was not this Councell of Franckfort, nor the Epistle written by Albinus, nor the booke set out in Charlemaines name of sufficient strength to stop the course of Idolatry, so violent it is where it finds any way made for it, whereupon nnClaudius Taurinens. Episc.Claudius Bishop of Turin hauing bin brought vp and preferred by Charlemaine, opposed himselfe by writing afresh against it, and (as ooIonas Aurelianens. Epist.Ionas Bishop of Orleans saith, who writ against him) proceeded farther to cast them out of all the Churches of his dioces. This opinion and fact of his, Ionas writ against, yet so, as that he wholy agreed with him about the vnlawfulnes of adoring Images against the second Councell of Nice. But in the East the quarrels about Images were more hot and dangerous, ppSynod. Parisiens. pag. 8.which mooued the Emperours Michaell and Theophilus, to send their Embassadors into France to the Emperour Lewis qqLe debon naire.the curteous, sonne of Charlemaine about the yeare 823, to signifie to him, that the superstitious abuse of Images in their dominions, had made them assemble a Councell about the matter, in which it was decreed, that they should not be worshipped with incense, lights, kneeling prayers, songs and seruice before them, all which notwithstanding, that some of their clergy refusing to yeeld obedience, had withdrawne themselues to the Pope of old Rome, complaining to him, and slandering the East Church, that they therefore had sent their Ambassadors both to him, and to the Pope, for the clearing of themselues of all such false imputations, and that they might vnderstand what the iudgement of their Churches was in those points. Hereupon Lewis the Emperour called a nationall Councel at Paris the rrAnno 824.yere following 824. wherein the conclusion was (as in the Councell of Franckfort) against both pulling downe, and worshipping of Images, as appeareth by an Epistle sent from the said Synode to Lewis and Lotharius, by two Bishops, Italitgarius, and Flamarius, and according thereunto answere was returned to the Emperours Michaell, and Theophilus. Thus much I thought good to set downe, as briefely as I could, hee that would p. 600reade of these matters more at large, may finde enough to content him in that excellent treatise of the ssPlessy of the Masse. lib. 2. cap. 2. 3. 4.Lord Plessy against the Masse, in the second booke, the second, third, and fourth Chapters. The iudgement of all these matters I leaue to all men whatsoeuer, that will vouchsafe to waigh things by the Ballance of the Sanctuary, with the hand of true reason. Others, that had rather beleeue what is told them, then try that they beleeue, I commit and commend to the mercy of God. Whom I beseech, according to his good pleasure, to enlighten our hearts, and incline our affections eueryevery day more and more, that we may discerne and acknowledge his most holy truth, to his glory, the good of his Church, and our owne euerlasting saluation, through his Sonne Iesus Christ. To whom with the Father, and holy Spirit, one God, immortall, inuisible, and only wise, be all glorie, power, obedience, and thanksgiuing for euer and euer,

Amen.

FINIS.