Englands Face in Israels Glass, Sermon 3
PSAL. 106.19,20.
They made a calfe in Horeb, and worſhipped the molten Image, &c.
OUt of my deſire to ſtabliſh your hearts in the true, ſincere worſhip of God, I thought good to diſcuſſe the queſtion betweene the Church of Rome and us, about the worſhipping of Images. This order I have propounded to my ſelfe.
Firſt to ſhew that the making of all kinde of Images is not forbidden.
Secondly, that the worſhipping of Images is Idolatry.
Thirdly, that the Idolater in worſhipping an Image, turnes his glory to the likeneſſe of that Image.
Fourthly, that the worſhipping of Images, as it is taught and practiſed in the Church of Rome, is flat Idolatry.
Fiftly, I promiſed to ſhew you the uſe of all theſe.
The two firſt points I have handled. Now I come to my third propoſition, and that is this; that
The Idolater, in worſhipping an Image, changeth his glory into that Image.
Marke the words of the Text; They worſhipped the molten Image; and, in doing that, they changed their glory. But I muſt tell you, I finde the words reade two waies; ſometimes, his glory, and ſometimes, their glory: They changed their glory. The Greek Septuagint reades it the firſt way, his glory. If you take it ſo, his glory, that is, the glory of God, then wee muſt diſtinguiſh of the glory of God: Now, the glory of God is two-fold;
There is an Abſolute glory of God.
There is an Relative glory of God.
The abſolute glory of God, is that ſame incomprehenſible, ineffable majeſty of the Deity dwelling in light, that no man can attaine to. This glory it pleaſed God, in ſome meaſure, to communicate to the Creatures, to Angels, and to Men, in ſuch a wiſe omnipotent manner, as is convenient and poſsible for them to be made partakers of: This is the abſolute glory of God; this cannot be changed, no more then God himſelfe can.
But now there is a relative glory of God; that is, that glory that men give to God in worſhipping of him, that glory may be changed: and thus the Gentiles changed it, as the Apoſtle ſaith; They changed the glory of the incorruptible God, to the ſunilitude of corruptible man, Rom. 1.23. And thus the Iſraelites here changed his glory. If you reade the words ſo as the Septuagint doth; They changed his glory: But I like not that reading, the other is better.
They changed their glory; their owne glory: What was that? By their glory, is meant God himſelfe: They changed their glory; that is, they changed their God. You ſhall have a place of Scripture, that will make this plaine to you, Jerem. 2.11. Will any Nation change their God? (ſaith God by his Prophet) yet my people have changed their glory (that is, they have changed mee that am their glory) for that that will not profit. Let me obſerve ſomewhat out of the very words: mee thinkes it is obſervable; God may be called the glory of his people two waies:
Firſt, as hee is the Author of their glory.
And then, as hee is the Matter of their glory.
Thus old Simeon, when hee had Chriſt in his armes, hee called him, the glory of the people Iſrael, Luke 2.32. The Lord is my glory (ſaith David) and the lifter up of my head, Pſal. 3.4. Among many Prerogatives that belonged to the people of the Jewes, the Apoſtle names one, and that was this; To them pertained the glory, Rom. 9.4. What glory was that?
Wee may take it, as ſome do, for the glory of the Covenant; God was their glory by Covenant.
Or elſe you may take it for the glory of Miracles, by which God brought them out of the land of Egypt.
Or elſe you may take it for the glory of Divine viſion and revelation, that God vouchſafed to them.
Or (which I take eſpecially,) by the glory you may meane the Arke, which was the ſigne of Gods preſence. And therefore (by the way) Phineas his Daughter in-law, when ſhee heard that the Arke of God was taken, Now (quoth ſhee) the glory is departed from Iſrael: and ſhee named her ſonne, that was borne at that time, Icabod; that is, Where is glory? For ſhee ſaid it againe, The glory is departed from Iſrael: for the Arke of the Lord is taken.
Wee may talke what wee will of other glories; but the glory of any Nation conſiſts in this, to have God to be their God. The gracious, and glorious preſence of God, in all his holy, and bleſſed Ordinances, according to his Word; that is the glory of any Nation under heaven.
It is our happineſſe, wee have this glory yet among us. The Prophet Ezekiel, in his 9th, 10th, and 11th. Chapters, ſhewes how the glory of God departed from Jeruſalem. It did not depart all at once, but by degrees it went away.
Firſt the glory of the Lord (in that viſion of his) removed from betweene the Cherubims where it was, and removed to the doore of the houſe; and there it ſtayed a while, to ſee if the people would turne unto him by true repentance: It ſtayed a while upon the doore of the houſe, and then the glory of the Lord removed thence: Afterward it removed to the Eaſt-gate of the entrance to Gods houſe; the Eaſt-gate was the furtheſt gate of the houſe, it removed thither, and there it ſtayed a while: Then it removed againe to the midſt of the City: and then from the midſt of the City, it removed to the mountaine upon the Eaſt ſide of the City; that was Mount Olivet: cleane out of the City it was now departed.
Wee have the glory of God yet in our Land; and may it be the good pleaſure of God to continue this glory among us, till Jeſus Chriſt come in glory with all his Saints. But, brethren, doth not this glory of God ſeeme to remove? doth it not ſeeme to fleet a little? O, ſhould God withdraw his word from us, and the profeſsion of it: Should God remove the candleſticke out of his place, ſhould God withdraw this gracious preſence of his in all his Ordinances; then I tell you, Mothers, what you ſhould name your children that are borne next, Icabod, Where is glory? when God is gone from you.
I read of ſome fooliſh Nations that were wont to fetter, and chaine their gods, that they might not depart from them: Surely, our God cannot be chained, nor fettered; but yet there is a way to hold him ſtill, when hee ſeemes to be departing: I gat hold on him (ſaith the Church) and would not let him goe, Cant. 3.4. I will not let thee goe till thou bleſſe mee (ſaith Jacob, Geneſ. 32. v. 26. When our bleſſed Lord ſeemed to the two men that were travelling to Emaus, that hee would leave them, the Scripture ſaith, They conſtrained him to ſtay with them. We may conſtraine our God; there is a holy violence we may offer to our God, by repentant teares, and importunate prayers, by which wee may ſtay our God with us ſtill: and this is, as Tertullian calls it, A holy violence, pleaſing and acceptable to God. But I ſtand no more upon the words: now I come to the thing.
They changed their glory; that is, their God. How may a people change their God? They may change their God two waies:
Firſt, when they forſake him, and ſet up, and worſhip ſome other God in his ſtead; as the people forſook the Lord, and ſerved Baal and Aſhtaroth, Judges 2.13. This is the groſſeſt kind of Idolatry: This is a breach of the firſt Commandement.
Or ſecondly, a people may change their God, when they change the truth of God into a lie, when they repreſent and worſhip God in an Image, when they repreſent God in a corporeall, a viſible, a finite, a circumſcribed Majeſty; this is to change a God: this is againſt the ſecond Commandement. And you muſt know, that thus the people changed their God here at this time; for, wee doe not thinke, that they made this calfe to be their god. Their ſin was bad enough, let not us make it worſe then it was. They had caſt off now all Religion, and the feare of God, let not us thinke they had caſt off ſenſe and reaſon with it. Can wee imagine, that this people were ſuch calves, as to think, that the calf that they themſelves had made yeſterday, was the very God that brought them out of Egyt three months before the calfe was made? Never imagine that; they took not this calfe to be their god. What then? They tooke it to be a figurative ſigne of their god. I know they call it their god; Theſe are the gods that brought thee out of the land of Egypt. Or, as it is in Nehemiah, chap. 9. verſe 18. This is thy God, O Iſrael, that brought thee out of the land of Egypt. But, as this Image is called a calfe in my Text, They made a calfe in Horeb; though it was no calfe, but the Image of a calfe: So they called it their god; but they did not thinke it to be their god; they tooke it as an Image of their god, as a figurative ſigne of their god: therefore Aaron proclaimes, To morrow is an holy day to Jehovah; not to the calfe, but to Jehovah, whom they worſhipped in the calfe.
I pray marke this rule that I ſhall give you: The truth of God is turned to a lie, and God is changed to the Image that is worſhipped; though God himſelfe, and none but hee, be worſhipped in that Image, I ſay, God is changed into that Image that is worſhipped for him, though the true God, and none but he, be worſhipped in that Image.
Here is the reaſon of it: The rule of Divine worſhip is not the will of the worſhipper, but it is the will of him that is worſhipped: Now, it was never Gods will to be worſhipped in an Image. Take a ſimilitude: Suppoſe a ſubject, a vaſſall, ſhould deviſe an honour of his owne braine to his Soveraigne, to his King; and hee ſhould ſet up a toad, and hee will have it in a glaſſe, and come every morning, and bow to that toad; and being asked why hee did ſo, hee ſhould ſay; O, I doe it not to the toad, but to the honour of my Soveraigne and Prince: doe you think this Prince will like well to be reſembled by a toad?
I tell you, brethren, there is a thouſand times a greater diſproportion between Almighty God, and an Image ſet up for him, then there is between a Prince, and a toad. Not to ſpeake of that infinite inequality and diſtance that is between God, and a mortall man; there is a great diſtance even between a toad, and an Idoll, a great difference: For,
The toad is the workmanſhip of God; an Idoll, as is an Idoll, it is the workmanſhip of man.
A toad, it is a living creature, it hath ſenſe and motion; the Image is a ſenſeleſſe block, it hath neither life nor motion.
Therefore heare how it pleaſeth the Spirit of God, in Scripture, to call conſecrated Images; hee calls them ſometimes lies, ſometimes vanities, ſometimes (nay oft) abominations, ſometime Dung-hill-gods, ſometimes Divels; You worſhipped divels: What divels? Idols, the worke of their owne hands, Revel. 9.20. I pray, heare, how the Spirit of God in Scripture ſhewes his deteſtation of all Images in his ſervice. Hearken how hee thunders in the ſecond Commandement; Thou ſhalt not make to thy ſelfe any graven Image; thou ſhalt not bow downe and worſhip it. Hearken what the Prophet Eſay ſaith: Confounded be all they that worſhip Images. Hearken what the Apoſtle ſaith in the New Teſtament; Babes, take heed of Idols, 1 John c. ult. v. ult.
I pray looke over the Bible, and ſee if ever you finde any of Gods children (except at ſuch times as they had corrupted their waies) worſhipping of Images. Enough out of Scripture againſt Images.
Now, becauſe wee are in this controverſie to deale with ſuch men whom the authority of Scripture doth not ſatisfie, ſuch unreaſonable men as are not content with the authority of Scripture; and becauſe they ſay this ſtands upon tradition, the worſhipping of Images in the Church: I pray give mee leave a little, beſides my cuſtome, to ſhew you the teſtimony of the Fathers, the determination of Councels, and the long tradition of the Church againſt Images. Of every one a word, and ſome few of many. There is no point that a man may be ſo copious in as in this.
Firſt, for Fathers: Fieri non poteſt, &c. ſo Origen. It is not poſsible that a man ſhould know God, and be a ſuppliant to an Image. There is no doubt (ſaith Lactantius) but there is no Religion, where there is a worſhipping of Images. It is a moſt indigne thing (ſaith Tertullian) that the Image of a dead man ſhould be worſhipped by man, that is the Image of the living God. We make no figure, or repreſentation of the Saints (ſaith Anthelopius Biſhop of Hiponium. Wee have no need of them (ſaith Ambroſe:) God will not be worſhipped by a ſtone. We worſhip no Image (ſaith Auſtine) but that Image that is the ſame that God himſelfe is; hee meanes Chriſt, the ſubſtantiall Image of the Father. I could goe on: but this is enough.
Come then to Councels: The Councell of Illeberos in Spaine; for, at that time, by the negligence of the Biſhops, Images were crept into the Church: then that Councell decreed, there ſhould be no pictures in the Church. The Conſtantinople Councell condemned all Images in the Church of God: and ſo did the Councell at Frankfort under Charles the Great.
For the Tradition of the Church: For three hundred yeares after Chriſt, it is confeſſed by ſome of our Adverſaries themſelves, that there were no Images in the Churches of God. Three hundred yeares after that, ſix hundred yeares after Chriſt, then began Images in the Churches; then the people began to yield ſome worſhip to them. Gregorie the Great, Biſhop of Rome, condemned the worſhipping of them: Hee allowed them, and hee did ill to allow them to be in the Church, to be provocations to Idolatry; yet, hee condemned the worſhipping of them. Thus it continued ſix hundred yeares after Chriſt. Between ſix and eight hundred yeares, there came a marvelous ſtirre in the Church of God, between the Eaſterne and the Weſterne Churches, about the worſhipping of Images. The Biſhops of the Weſt, under Rome, were all for Images: The good Emperour of the Eaſt was againſt it; a bloudy war there was about it, and thus it continued for above an hundred yeares: Then Minera, the Empreſſe, in the minority of her Sonne, a cruell Idolatrous woman (and marke when you will, Idolatry is cruell) ſhee cauſed the ſecond Nycene Councell to be called; and there was firſt decreed the worſhipping of Images in the Church of God, in the yeare of our Lord 788. Till then, Images were never appointed publikely to be worſhipped in the Church: yea, after that time, the worſhipping of Images got not a peaceable quiet profeſsion in the Church of God. Charles the Great, Emperour in the Weſt, mightily oppoſed it: hee called his Biſhops together at Franckford; they mightily oppoſed the worſhipping of Images.
Yea, I pray marke, that duty that concernes us in our Kingdome: Charles the Great, hee ſent that Act of that ſecond idolatrous Nycene Councell to our Biſhops in England, to know how they liked it: They ſaid, Alas for woe! we finde in thoſe Acts many things againſt Chriſtian Religion, eſpecially this, that the worſhipping of Images is decreed, which the Church of God curſeth. Marke, our Biſhops Fore-fathers in England, about eight hundred yeares ſince, held that a doctrine, which the Church of God curſeth; yea, and that, againſt all the Tables of Gods Law, againſt the preaching of the Prophets, againſt the inſtitution of the Apoſtles, againſt the cuſtome of the old Church, againſt the practice of the primitive Church, againſt the cleare teſtimonies of the Fathers, againſt the determination of Councels, againſt a continued Tradition for almoſt eight hundred yeares together. The beauty of the Church (as one complaines) in defiance of God and Man, is now polluted with the very filth of Paganiſme; and Chriſtian Churches are peſtred, as much as ever the heathen Temples were, with Idols.
I come now to the proof of that; that is the fourth point: viz. That,
The worſhipping of Images, as it is taught, and practiſed in the Church of Rome, is plaine Paganiſme and Idolatry.
The Paganiſh and Popiſh Idolatry is all one. I ſay, the worſhipping of Images, as it is taught and practiſed in the Church of Rome, is plaine heatheniſh Idolatry.
How is it taught? and how is it practiſed? For the doctrine of their Church it is hard for a man to ſet it downe. The determination of the Councell of Trent about it, is a very noſe of wax; you may turne it any way. They tell us of our diviſions among our ſelves: It is a wonder to ſee how they interferre, and ſtrike one on another in the point of worſhipping of Images: It is hard to ſay what they teach. But I will tell you thus much; Iſolius the Jeſuite ſaith, This is the conſtant opinion of the Divines of our Church, that Images are to be worſhipped with the ſame worſhip that is due to him whoſe Image it is. This was the doctrine of Thomas of Aquine, whom they make a Saint. This was the doctrine of all his followers. This was the doctrine of Nauclantus, a Biſhop in Italy, upon Romanes 1. Wee doe not (ſaith hee) worſhip before an Image, as ſome men are wont caſually to ſpeake: but we worſhip the Image it ſelfe, and that with the ſame worſhip that is due to him whoſe Image it is. Peter Precavaria, a great profeſſour of Divinity in Spaine, ſaith, This doctrine is the onelyonly true, and pious doctrine, agreeable to the decrees of the Chriſtian faith. Hee alledgeth nineteene of the ſpeciall School-men that all were of this opinion beſides himſelf. We take this then to be the doctrine of the Church of Rome, that Images are to be worſhipped with the ſame worſhip that is due to him whoſe Image it is.
They that have travelled into foreigne parts have found, that the practiſe of that Church is as bad as theſe Theorems. Confeſſed by ſome of the modeſt ſort of them, that their people were growne to a kinde of piety, that did not differ much from impiety: You will ſay it, if you conſider,
Firſt, the Image it ſelfe.
Then the worſhip that is given to that Image.
And then the rites and ceremonies, in the performance of that worſhip.
Conſider firſt the Images themſelves: What difference can you finde in the Images, between the Popiſh Images, and the Images of the Gentiles?
Look to the matter of them; they are the very ſame. The matter of the Gentiles Images was, ſilver, and gold, and braſſe, and wood, and ſtone; this is the matter of Popiſh Images.
Look to the outward forme of their Images; they are the very ſame. The Gentiles Images were the work of mens hands, they had eyes, and could not ſee; they had eares, and could not heare; they had mouths, and could not ſpeake; they had hands, and could not work; they had feet, and could not walk. Popiſh Images, they ſee no more, they heare no more, they ſpeake no more, they doe no more, they walke no further then the heathens Images. Thus much for the Image it ſelfe.
Then come ſecondly to the acts of devotion performed to theſe Images. The Gentiles were wont to bow to them, ſo doe the Papiſts. The Gentiles were wont to pray to them, ſo doe the Papiſts. The Gentiles were wont to render thanks to them, ſo doe the Papiſts. The Gentiles were wont to dedicate themſelves, and all that they had to their Idols, ſo doe the Papiſts. The Gentiles nuncupated vowes to them ſo doe the Papiſts. The Gentiles were wont to ſweare by them, ſo doe the Papiſts. The Gentiles were wont to ſet up Candles to them, ſo doe the Papiſts. The Gentiles were wont to burne incenſe to them, ſo doe the Papiſts. They yield the ſame acts of devotion to their Images, that the Gentiles did to theirs.
Then come to their rites and ceremonies in yielding theſe acts. I pray reade at your leaſure the ſixth Chapter of Baruch; you will ſay it is an Apocryphall book, and I confeſſe it is ſo; but yet with them it is Canonicall, and ſo is good Scripture againſt them. The authour of that Chapter, ſhewes what the people ſhall ſee when they come to Babylon; ſaith hee, there you ſhall ſee an Image of gold, or of ſilver, or of wood, or braſſe, or ſtone: you ſhall ſee it clad in purple, with a ſcepter in it's hand; or, peradventure, trimmed up gariſhly, as a virgine that loves to goe gay. You ſhall ſee ſuch an Image carried upon mens ſhoulders in a ſolemne proceſsion, and a number of people before, and behind it, adoring and worſhipping it: You ſhall ſee the Prieſts with their ſhaven heads and beards taking off thoſe offerings that are offered to thoſe Images, and beſtowing them upon common harlots. You ſhall ſee (ſaith he) candles lighted to them, you ſhall ſee perfume burned to them, you ſhall heare vowes nuncupated to them, you ſhall ſee oblations and offerings given to them: and all this to ſuch an Image as is no better (ſaith hee) then a ſcare crow in a garden of Cucumbers.
Now thoſe that have ever ſeene the proceſsions that are in Paris, or the Ladie of H…ige at Iquiers in Flanders, or have ever ſeene the worſhip in Italy, or Spaine; they can beare witneſſe that they have ſeene all theſe things done, and a number of fooleries more beſides theſe.
Wee may thinke they have ſomewhat to ſay for themſelves; and, in a word or two, you ſhall heare it.
Firſt, they ſay, they worſhip not the Image, but they worſhip him in that Image whoſe Image it is.
Marke, firſt they have no excuſe for the worſhipping of Images, but the ſame that the heathens had; their worſhip is heatheniſh, and ſo is their excuſe: For, when the Fathers, in the firſt yeares of the Church, challenged the heathen for the worſhipping of Images: What (ſay they) doe you thinke us ſuch blockes, as to worſhip theſe blockes? They have the ſame.
Againe, it is not true that they ſay; for, as I ſaid before, they conclude they worſhip the Image. Bellarmine proves, that the worſhip properly belongs to the Image.
Againe, ſuppoſe they intended not to worſhip the Image, but God in it: Know, that the rule of divine worſhip is not mans intention, but Gods will. Marke it in the example I gave before, of a man honouring his Prince in a toad. Wee inquire not of the will of the worſhipper, but of him that is worſhipped. Let them ſhew that it is Gods will to be worſhipped in an Image, and wee will not charge them with Idolatry.
But, ſay they, doe not wee doe reverence to the chaire of ſtate, in honour to the King, when the King is not there?
Wee doe indeed a civill reverence to it; but who appointed an Image to be the chaire of ſtate to the King of heaven? The reverence wee doe to the chaire of ſtate, is according to the will of the Prince; it is his will it ſhould be done: But where can they tell us it is the will of God that wee ſhould reverence and worſhip him in a baſe inglorious abomination?
Yea, but ſay they, Images in the Church of God, have bcene accounted Lay-mens bookes.
It is true, they have called them ſo; but I ſay that againe, they are books prohibited, they are not bookes that come forth Cum Privilegio: God doth not allow ſuch bookes as theſe. When the Biſhops in their Churches were painfull in their places, and taught the people out of the Word; the people needed not theſe bookes: but when Teachers came to be Idols, then Idols came to be Teachers.
Yea, but ſay they, the worſhip that wee give to Images, wee give it not properly; it is improperly, it is analogicè, repraeſentativè, reductivè: theſe are Bellarmine's words, and many more ſuch diſtinctions.
O, Brethren, theſe are the men that know how to rob God of his glory, and yet they know how to deceive, and delude the world with diſtinctions; there is no place ſo plaine, but they can elude it with diſtinctions. But in the mean time, what wrong is it to Gods people to bring them to horrible groſſe Idolatry, and then to ſeeke to worke and winde them out with ſuch new diſtinctions, as the poore people underſtand not, nor, peradventure, they themſelves?
If any man deſire to be better ſatisfied about the point of worſhipping of Images, I deſire him to reade the third Homilie in our Church, ſet forth by the Church againſt the perill of Idolatry, and hee ſhall finde abundant ſatisfaction.
There is yet one point to be handled, it is the uſe that wee are to make of this, and of the whole hiſtory: but the time is paſt, I muſt leave it for the next day.
FINIS.