Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 3 · Chapter 11
THE XI. or X. CHAP.
That by the lawe of nature, honour is due to the images and monuments of honourable personages. And by what meanes that may be knowen. Also that the law of nature standeth always immutable, how the law of nature may be known. Seuen causes of honoring artificial images. God preferred images before only sounds of words. The art of making images is good. All nations honored Images that were worthie of honour. The image breakers are ashamed to confesse that they breake Christes images. The doctrine of the Catholikes concerning Images. Maister Iewels contrarie doctrine to the same.Sander.
The holie Ghoste by Saint Paule,Fulk. hath well giuen vsus warning: saying: Take heede that no man spoyle you through philosophie, and vaine deceipt, according to the tradition of men, and not according to Iesus Christ. Col. 2. ver. 8. and by the same sentence he hath also taught vsus, how we should esteeme all that doctrine that is commended vntounto vsus without the worde of God, vnderunder what glorious and plausible title so euer, namely for vaine deceitfulnesse. By which rule when we examine this Chapter of Maister Sanders booke, swelling with suche a proude title, of the Lawe of nature, we doe plainely perceiue, that it is nothing else but a deceiptful vanitie: with vaine sounde of wordes and friuolous reasons, to goe about to make vsus thinke, that God hath written one law in nature, and a cleane contrarie to that, in his worde and holie scriptures.
The honouring of images in case of religion, beeing expressely forbidden by the lawe of God written, and the same an hundreth times repeated by the Prophetes and Apostles, is the eternall wil of God, and hath nothing in nature vncorrupted, which is the ordinaunce of God contrarie vntounto it. And therefore I maruell what nature is, in Maister Sanders iudgement, whose lawe he defendeth to be neuer changed, although God hath ruled his people in diuers manners, sometime by inspiration, somtime by outward voice, custome and tradition, sometime by written letter of the Lawe, last of all by writing his own lawe of grace and spirite in their hearts. I passe ouer that he calleth the last, Gods owne lawe, as though the rest were but borrowed, but what is that vnchaungeable law of nature, but Gods eternall lawe: if that be not changed by the lawe written in letters, then surely the lawe of nature abhorreth worshipping of images in religion, which the lawe written forbiddeth. Thus his first exposition ouerthroweth all the purpose of his Chapter. Now to the second. He hath two speciall grounds to helpe vsus to finde out what the lawe of nature is in any case. The one is the iudgement of right and sound reason, the other is ye practise of all nations. But where shall we finde sound reason in any natural man? When the light shineth in darknesse and the darkenesse comprehendeth it not Ioan. 1. and the natural man vnderstandeth not those things that be of the spirite of God. 1. Cor. 2. ver. 14. and where shal we finde the practise of all nations according to the lawe of nature, when they hauehave all declined and gone astray, there is not one that doth good, no not one. Ro. 3. Psal. 13. Wherefore there are other two most certeine infallible rules, wherby the law of nature in any case may be found out and knowen, namely the word of God, and the spirite of God, whiche giuegive mutuall testimonie one to the other, the worde and spirite of God beeing contrarie to the worshipping of Images: The Lord saying in the first table of religion, Thou shalt not fall downe to them nor worship them: it is manifest, that worshipping of images, is contrarie to the Lawe of nature. So that you see the foundation of this building already subuerted, by which you may coniecture, how long it is possible for the house to stande after it.
For what soeuer he iangleth of the internall conceptions of the minde, vnproperly and metaphorically called images, and comparing artificiall images vntounto them, it is nothing els, but vain deceiptfulnesse to be contemned and hissed out, not onelyonly of all Christian Churches of eueryevery faithfull man, but also out of all schooles of Diuinitie, by all them that are learned as well in the scriptures of God, as in humaine phylosophie. But that you may see what soundnesse there is in his doctrine, thus he weaueth his copwebbe. One telleth him that Christ died onelyonly to saue man from euerlastinge paines: he hearing and beleeuing this, straight conceiueth Christ dying for him, and is mooued to louelove him. Secondly he is much delighted with the Image which he conceiued in his minde of Christ dying for him, and loueth that also. Thirdly, he loueth and honoureth him that tolde him this matter, as a bringer of good tydinges. So here bee three kindes of honour, the cheefe to Christe the thinge it selfe, the second to the inward conception or Image of him in his minde, the last is to the reporter.
And here you hauehave a paterne of popishe prophane diuinitie, for here is no louelove nor honour due to the spirite of God, who onelyonly must open his heart, to receiue suche tydings profitably: nor to the worde of God, which must be the warrant of this tydinges to be true: nor to fayth, which applying these tydinges to his owne saluation, is the roote of all vertuous obedience, louelove, honour and thankefulnesse in him. But euen as he considereth of any prophane report, so doeth he consider of this glad tydings of the gospell and not otherwise. But to proceede of this wise distribution of three fold honour, hee inferreth seuen causes of honouring artificiall Images. The first is, that it beareth the office of a reporter, and therefore it must needes hauehave a rewarde of honour. A slowe messenger, & a dumbe reporter, which can neither go of this errande, nor tell his tale. But what skilleth it (saieth Master Sander) whether I learne by hearing or by seeing? For Basill sayeth, yt both eloquent orators and cunninge paynters, the one with their tongue, the other with thei… pensil, hauehave set forth valiant acts done in warre, and stirred vp many to fortitude. Hom. in 40. martyr. But it skilleth vsus to learne by hearing of Gods word, because faith cōmeth by hearing, Rom. 10. vers. 17. and they are blessed which beleeue without seeing, Ioh. 20. vers. 29. Howsoeuer it skilleth papists, & howsoeuer all other things except religiō & faith may be learned. As for ye reporter of the glad tydings of ye gospel, he is in deed worthy of honor, if he do his message truly, willingly & diligētly, but it is honor of the second table & not of the first, that perteineth to him. And except there be in him louelove to God & his neighbor, he is worthy of no honor, althogh he do the message. Therefore if the Image were as a reporter▪ he could hauehave but honor of the second table, which is of charity & not of religion. But seeing there is in an image neither louelove, will, diligence, truth, for which causes a reporter is loued & cherished, neither is an image cause of anye thinge, there is no louelove honour or worshippe due …nto it.
The second cause of honoring artificial images is, for that it doth speedily, and most cōueniently informe our inward imagination, and therefore is more to be honored, thē any orator. For the eye being the principal sense, is most ready to instruct the minde, and therfore a painted image is a more easie and liuely way to enstruct vsus, then any orator. In deed if faith were a register of visible things, as it is of inuisible thinges, Heb. 11. vers. 1.7. the sense of seing, were a more easie, speedy & cōuenient way of instructing, then by hearing, but yet images were no more to be honored, then the sound of words is nowe to be worshipped, when we heare the gospell preached. But God (saith he) hath ioyned visible signes to his worde, as in the proclaiming of the lawe, yea sir, but God shewed not there the image of any thing, to teach them thereby, but expressely forbad the vse of them, in his religion and seruice. But if God gaue visible wordes, as he doeth his sacramentes, it is not therefore lawfull for men to make images, as visible teachers, which God hath forefended. There is therefore hitherto no naturall cause of the honouring of images.
The thirde cause of honouring of Images, is, because they be naturally knit and ioyned to the trueth, concerning their shape and representation: as the reporter, if he be an Ethnike or Iewe, he is ioyned to Christ in morall honestie and naturall louelove of trueth: if he be baptized, much more as a member of Christ: if he be a bishop, &c. as a minister of Gods worde: if he be a Prophete, by a more special grace: if an Apostle, as one nerest to Christ: if it be Christ himselfe, as the chiefe and God himselfe. So Images as they be neerer to Christ, they are more to be honoured, and Christs Image most of all, which speaketh alwayes (and yet saith neuer a worde) to them that hauehave spirituall eares of vnderstanding: Nay carnall eyes of blinded and hardened heartes. But this difference he maketh, the former reporters deserue honour, beeing reasonable creatures, freely and voluntarily reportinge the trueth, but letters and Images deserue no honour, and yet it is due to them, whiche is a straunge matter: a due without desert, yea necessarily due to them in respect of that whose image it beareth. But admitte that the image were a true reporter, as he is nothing but a false & dumb stocke without any action, yet seeinge he compareth an image to the written letters of the gospell, which be figures of that trueth which is represented and learned by them, I pray you what honour is due to the written letters of the Byble, more then to the written letters of any other booke, and yet they are necessary for the preseruation of the doctrine thereof, yea they are true & natural figures of the sense that is contained in the booke, if no man be so madde, as to put of his cap to those letters, or to that booke, or to set it vp to kneele to it, to sense it, &c?
What monstruous madnesse is it, to defende the worshippinge of Images, which if they were graunted to be lawfull meanes to bring men to spirituall knowledge, yet were they nothing comparable to the written letter and sillables of the scriptures?
The fourth cause of honouring of Images is, that all nations hauehave honoured them in respect of their vertue whose Images they are.
I hauehave shewed before in a worde, that this prooueth it not to be a lawe of nature, that Images are to be honoured, because all nations hauehave bene ignorant of God, hauehave committed Idolatrie, hauehave committed whoredome, &c. And although the art of making of Images be good, yet it prooueth not that all Images may be made, or anye worshipped. The art of making swordes is good, yet it neither proueth that all swordes are well vsed, nor that any is to be worshipped. But Master Sander saith, seeinge that all nations hauehave made and worshipped Images, it is against the lawe of all nations, and of nature, to forbid the worshippe of them. For he would better like of that lawe, which forbadde Images of Christ to be made, then of that which forbiddeth them to be worshipped, which he calleth a filthie decree, and yet it was a decree of Pope Gregorie the first to the bishoppe of Massilia, as we hauehave shewed before.
But concerning the example of all nations, thus I answere briefely, what Images they made out of religion, and how they worshipped them, it toucheth our controuersie nothing in the worlde. But such as they made and worshipped in religion were abhominable Idoles, and contrarie to the lawe of nature. For Sainte Paule in the first to the Romaines, and in the 17. of the Actes, reproueth the Gentiles for making and worshipping of Images by the lawe of nature.
But whereas he saith the Iewes worshipped the Images of the Cherubins which Salomon had made to garnish the walles of the temple, with the figures of palme trees, and other flowers, quoting, 3. Reg. 6. & 2. Par. 3. he is a most impudēt & shameful liar. For there is no word in those chapters, nor in all the Bible sounding that way.
Neither doth Hieronyme ad Marcellam say, they worshipped the holy place, but they reuerenced it in respecte of the great mysterie thereof, as they did the temple it selfe. For all reuerent estimation of a thing, is not honouring or worshipping of it, as Master Sander alwayes dreameth.
Of the image in Pauende, made (as he sayeth (by the woman, and preserued by Christians vntill the dayes of Iulian, wee hauehave sayed ynough in the Chapter nexte before this. Hitherto the wicked custome of all nations, contrarie to the worde of God, proueth not the worshipping of images to bee necessarily good by the lawe of nature.
The fifth cause is, that the relation of honour is so necessarily betweene the image and the thing meant to bee honoured by it, that if the image be not honoured, the thing cannot be honoured thereby. Nay by your leaue Master Sander, the relation of honour is between them that meant to giuegive honour, and the thing meant to bee honoured, inter honorantem & honoran… and not between the image and the thing meant to bee honoured by an image, so that if the image be not honoured, his foolish meaning is disapointed, that meant to honour a thing by an image. But admit it were as you say, what inconuenience is in the conclusion? If the image be not honoured, the thing cannot bee honoured by the image. For if the thing be worthie honour, it needeth not the vaine honour of an image. But you saye, it is the lawe of nature and right reason, that if an image be made of an honourable personage, it may also be honoured, that is, honourably regarded and esteemed, according to the vertue of the man more or lesse. As if it be the image of Cato, you thinke his worldly wisedome well worthie of an image, but you wil not think it to be an holie image, as you thinke the image of Christ or his mother to bee, But if you thinke the image of a holie person to bee a holie image, why do you not by the same reason thinke the image of Cato a wise man to be a wise image? and the image of Socrates a vertuous man to bee a vertuous image, and the image of Cicero an eloquent man to bee an eloquent image, if the images of these men bee not wise, vertuous, nor eloquent, no more be the images of Christ, his mother, or his Apostles, diuine, holy or honorable. And if it be the lawe of nature that the image of an honourable person shoulde be made and honoured as his vertue is more or lesse, then by the contrary, the image of a wicked man shoulde be made and dishonoured as his wickednesse is more or lesse. So that as we must hauehave a religion of images of good men made and honored to stirre vsus vntounto vertue, so wee must hauehave a religion of making and dishonouring the images of wicked men to diswade vsus from wickednes. If this later be a fond immagination: so vndoubtedly is the former.
The sixt cause is because the name of Christ is communicated to his image, for it is called Christ, so the honour due to his name is in the same degree to be communicated to his image also. For the name of God is to be blessed, and the name of his sainctes shall liue in honour for euer. Yea sir, but as ye name of Christ is falsely, wickedly, and blasphemously communicated to a deade image, so is his honour falsely, wickedly and blasphemously communicated to the same.
And where as hee saith, wee are ashamed to confesse that we breake the images of Christ, he lyeth falsely & impudently. For if we sawe the true images of the countenance of Christ abused to idolatrie, wee woulde no more doubt or feare to breake them, then Ezechias did to breake the Brasen serpent, which was a figure of Christe, and commaunded by God himselfe to be made. But as for their ridiculous images, which are no more the images of Christ, then of Iudas Iscarioth, but that it please…h them to call them so, wee may iustly denye them to bee the images of Christ, which hauehave no proper resemblance vntounto his bodie, more then to any other man.
The last reason is, that if it be a contumelye to the Prince to hauehave his image broken, and an honour to hauehave it regarded, the like must needes come to passe in Christ. And here M. Iewell is bidden to breake if he dare the Image of the Queenes maiestie, or the armes of the realm, or any noble mans banner. But if the prince had as precisely forbidden any image of her to be made, and commaunded the same to bee broken if it were made, as Christ hath forbiddē images to be made & honoured in any religious worship, and commaunded such as were so made and worshipped to be broken, Maister Iewell durst execute his princes commandement. And maister Sander sheweth himselfe a wise man to compare a thing permitted, with a thing forbidden, a thing of one nature that is ciuil, with a thing of an other nature that is religious. And these be the seuen wise reasons of one man, not so wise as the seuen wise men of Greece. But yet to knitte vp the matter, we must hauehave a comparison of the doctrine of the Catholikes with maister Iewels doctrine cō cerning images.
1 Christ is as worthy to hauehave an image as any noble man.
To this maister Iewell must aunswere, this is no good faith, therefore this is his doctrine, Christ is lesse honorable then Iulius Caesar. A wittie conclusion, Christe refuseth a vaine heathenish honour & forbidden by God, therefore hee is lesse honourable then Iulius Caesar: Nay maister Sander the honour of Christe and Iulius Cęsar are not meete to bee matched together, the one the sonne of GOD, the other a dampned spirite.
2 Christes image, is set vp in the Church that wee might remember him, louelove him, and followe him. This ende being good maketh the acte of setting vp the Image good. Maister Iewell must say it is not well done to set vp such remembrance and to honour it. And so I warrant you he sayeth because God hath forbidden it, for if your reason be good, the good ende maketh the acte to be good, the acte of them that killed the Apostles was good, because they thought to do God good seruice therein, as our sauiour Christe him selfe witnesseth, Ioan. 16. vers. 2.
Sander.3 Item, wee adore Christe so perfectly, that wee suffer not so much as his image to be vnhonoured: Master Iewell must saye, Christe is not worthie of so much honour, that for his sake his image should be honoured of vsus, but in deede he would say, as Saint Augustine sayth to them which affirmed they honoured the Angels for Gods sake. I would you woulde honour Christe as hee hath appointed you, then should you learne not to honour images for his sake, which he abhorreth.
Sander.4 Item, wee beleeue it to bee a contumely done to Christ, if his image be broken: Master Iewel must saye: It is well done to breake Christs images. Yea, such images as are worshipped to the contumely of Christ, & in contempt of his lawe.
5 Item, it is a contumely to a Prince, to breake his image.Sander. Master Iewell must say, it is no contumely to a Prince to hauehave his image broken. But why must hee say so? what hath he to doe with Princes images, or armes, which are matters of ciuile honour? If you make the comparison to Christes image, it is a foolish tautologie, for you sayed the same immediatly before, and the comparison is vnfit betweene God and man, where the one forbidding, the other allowing: betweene diuine, religious, spirituall, and true worship, and ciuile, worldly, vaine, and transitorie honour. Therefore, though Princes armes and images may be set vp to the aduauncement of their worldly honour, yet the glorie of Christe and his worship requireth no such thinges, but vtterly forbiddeth them.