Acts and Monuments Volume 2 Part 2, Appendix · Account 4
¶Probations out of the Fathers, Councels, and histories.
FIrst it is manifest, that in the primitiue church images were not commonly vsed in Churches, Oratories, and places of assembly for religion: but they were generally detested and abhorred, in so much, that the want of imagerie was obiected to the christians for a crime.
Origen reporteth that Celsus obiected the lacke of Images, lib. 4. contra Celsum.
Arnobius saith also, that the Ethnikes accused ye christians that they had neither altars nor images.
Zephirus in his Commentarie vponupon the Apologie of Tertullian, gathereth thus of Tertullians wordes: Qui locus persuadendi frigeret penitus, nisi perpetuò illud teneamus: Christianos tunc temporis odisse maximè statuas cum suis ornamentis, &c. That is to say, Which place of persuasion were very cold, and to no purpose at all, except we hold this alwayes, that Christians in those dayes did hate most of all Images with their trimme decking and ornaments.
Irenaeus, lib. 1. cap. 24. reprooueth the heretikes called Gnostici, for that they caried about ye image of Christ made in Pilates tyme after his owne proportion (whiche were much more to be estemed then any that can be made now) vsing also for declaration of their affection towardes it, to set garlands vponupon the head of it.
Lactantius affirmeth plainly: Non est dubium, quin religio nulla sit, vbicun que symulachrum est: lib. Diuin. instit. 2. cap. 19. That is to say: It is not to be doubted yt there is no religion wheresoeuer is any Image. If Christians thē had vsed images, he would not hauehave made his proposition so large.
S. Augustine De ciuitate Dei, lib. 4. cap. 31. commendeth Uarro the Romaine in these wordes. Quum Varro existimauerit castius sine symulachris obseruari religionem, quis non videt, quantum appropinquauerit veritati▪ That is to say, when as Uarro thought religion might bee kepte more purely without Images, who doth not see how neare he came to the truth? So that not onelye by M. Uarroes iudgement, but also by S. Augustines approbation, the most pure and chast obseruation of religion, and nerest the truth, is to be without Images.
The same S. Augustine in Psal. 113. hath these words: Plus valent symulachra ad curuandam infoelicem animam, quā ad docendam. That is to say, Images hauehave more force to bowe downe and crooke the sillie soule, then to teach it.
And vponupon the same Psalme he mooueth this question: Quiuis puer imò quis bestia scit non esse Deum quod vident, cur ergo spiritus sanctus toties mouet cauendum quod omnes sciunt? That is to say, EueryEvery child, yea eueryevery beast knoweth that it is not God which they see, why then doth the holy ghost so oft geue warnyng to beware of that thyng which all do know? S. Augustines answer.
Quoniam quum ponuntur in templis, & semel incipiunt adorari a multitudine, statim nascitur sordidissimus affectus erroris. That is to say: For when they are set in Churches, & begin once to be worshipped of the multitude or common people, straightway springeth vp a most filthy affection of errour.
This place of S. Augustine doth wel open how weak a reason it is to say, Images are a thyng indifferent in chambers and in churches. For the alteration of the place, maner, and other circumstances, doth alter oftentimes the nature of the thyng. It is lawfull to buy and sell in the market, but not so in churches. It is lawfull to eate and drinke but not so in Churches. And therfore sayth Saint Paule, Annon habetis domos ad edendum ac bibendum? An ecclesiam Dei contemnitis? That is to say, HaueHave you not houses to eat and drinke in? Do you contemne the church of God?
Many other actions there bee which are lawfull and honest in priuate place, which are neither comely nor honest, not onelyonly in churches, but also in other assemblies of honest people.
Tertullian sayeth he vsed sometymes to burne frankincen…e in his chamber, which was then vsed of Idolaters, and is yet in the Romish Churches, but hee ioyneth withall: Sed non eodem ritu, nec eodem habitu, nec eodem apparatu, quo agitur apud Idola. That is to say, But not after such a ri…e or ceremonie, nor after such a fashion, nor wyth such preparation or sumptuousnesse, as it is done before the Idols.
So that Images placed in Churches, and set in honorabili sublimitate, that is to say, in an honourable place of estimation, as S. Augustine sayth, and especially ouer the Lordes table, which is done (vsing the words of Tertullian) eodem ritu, & eodem habitu, that is, after the same maner and fashion which the Papists did vse, especially after so long continuance of abuse of Images, and so many beyng blinded with superstitious opinion towardes them, cannot be counted a thing indifferent, but a most certaine ruine of many soules.
Epiphanius in his Epistle to Iohn bishop of Hierusalem (which epistle was translated out of the Greeke by S. Hierome, beyng a likelyhoode that S. Hierome misliked not the doctrine of the same, doth write a facte of hys owne, which doth most clearely declare the iudgement of that notable learned Bishop concernyng the vse of Images, his words are these: Quum venissem ad villam quae dicitur Anablatha, vidissem que ibi praeteriens lucernam ardentem, & interrogassem quis locus esset, didicissem que esse Ecclesiam, & intrassem vt orarem: inueni ibi velum pendens in foribus eiusdem ecclesiae tinctum at que depictum, & habens imaginem quasi Christi vel sancti cuiusdam, non enim satis memini cuius fuit, cum ergo hoc vidissem in Ecclesia Christi contra authoritatem scripturarum, hominis pendere imaginem, scidi illud, &c. Et paulò post. Et praecepi in ecclesia Christi istiusmodivela quae contra religionem nostram veniunt non appendi, &c. That is to saye: When I came to a village called Anablatha, & sawe there as I passed by, a candle burnyng, & enquiring what place it was, and lerning that it was a church, & had entred into the same to pray, I found there a vaile or cloth hanging at the dore of the same church, died and painted, hauing on i… the image of Christ as it were, or of some Saint (for I remember not well whose it was) Then when I sawe this, that in the Church of Christ against the authoritie of the scriptures the image of a mā did hang, I cut it in pieces, &c. And a little after. And commaunded that such maner of vailes or clothes which are contrary to our religion, be not hanged in the church of Christ.
Out of this place of Epiphanius diuers notes are to be obserued.
First, that by the iudgement of this ancient Father, to permit Images in Churches, is against the authoritie of the scriptures, meanyng agaynst the second commaundement, Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Image, &c.
Secondly, that Epiphanius doth reiect not only grauen and molten, but also painted Images: for so much as he cut in pieces the Image painted in a vaile hangyng at the church dore, what would he hauehave done, if he had found it ouer the Lordes table?
Thirdly, that he spareth not the Image of Christ, for no doubt that Image is most perillous in the Churche of all other.
Fourthly, that he bid not onelyonly remooue it, but with a vehemencie of zeale cut it in pieces, followyng the example of the good king Ezechias, who brake the brasen serpent, and burnt it to ashes.
Last of all that Epiphanius thinketh it the duetie of vigilant bishops to be carefull that no such kind of paynted Images be permitted in the church.
Serenus bishop of Massilia, broke downe Images, & destroied them when he did see them begin to be worshipped, Greg. in Regist. epist. 109.
Experience of the tymes since hath declared whether of these two sentences were better. For since Gregories time the Images standyng in the Westchurch, hath bene ouerflowed with Idolatry, notwithstanding his or other mens doctrine. Whereas if Serenus iudgement had vniuersally taken place, no such thyng had happened. For if no Images had bene suffred, none could hauehave bene worshipped, and consequently no idolatry committed by thē.