Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 3 · Chapter 16
THE XVI. OR XV. CHAP.
That M. Iewell himselfe bringeth such reasons for worshipping breade and wine in the sacrament of the Alter, because he saith; they are the image of Christs bodie and bloude, as may right well serue for the worshipping of all holy images. It is proued by maister Iewells owne words, that the image of an holy thing may be worshipped, with what intent an image it made. Maister Iewell hath filthie and vnhonest images in his owne booke.Sander.
This Chapter conteineth nothing else but a shameles cauilling and quarrelling vppon maister Iewels words,Fulke. with little wit, lesse learning, and least of all of honestie.
The bishoppe writeth thus: The olde fathers in their writings commonly cal the sacrament a representation, a remembrance, a memory, an image, a likenesse, a samplar, a token, a signe, a figure. And in an other place he writeth thus: Neither do we onelyonly adore Christ as verye God, but also worship and reuerence ye sacrament & holy mistery of Christes bodie. Here vppon maister Sander reasoneth thus. If the sacrament being an image, a signe &c, of Christs bodie & not his owne bodie, may be worshipped and reuerenced, therefore it doth follow, that an image of an holy thing being absent, as of Christ or saint Laurence, may be worshipped of the newe Gospellers. Who will say the Papistes lacke learning, that make such wittie arguments? An image or signe instituted by God may be reuerenced, therefore an image forbidden by God may be honoured. That which is vnproperlye called an image may be worshiped, ergo that which is properly called so, may be worshiped. Christ is the image of his father, Christ is God, therfore eueryevery image is God. A signe or sacrament of Christs institution ought to be reuerently esteemed, therefore a stocke or a stone in fashion of an image, ought to be senced, kneeled too, kissed, prayed to &c.
But maister Iewell proceedeth further saying, we worship the worde of God according to this counsell of Anastasius. Dominica verbae attentè audiant & fideliter adorent.
Let them diligently heare and faithfully worship the worde of God. Briefely we worship other thinges in such religious wise vntounto Christ belonging. Of these wordes, Maister Sander argueth thus. But Christs owne image belongeth to him, in a religious wise instructing the eye, the more worthy sence, better then the worde doth the eare, therefore Christs image is to be worshipped by the force of master Iewels doctrine. I deny that your image belongeth to Christ, which he abhorreth, or that faith is to be instructed by the eye, but onelyonly by the hearing of the worde. Rom. 10.
Further maister Iewell saith, doubtlesse it is our duetie to adore the body of Christ in the worde of God, in the Sacrament of baptisme, in the misteries of Christs bodye and bloude, and wheresoeuer we see any steppe or token of it. Hereof maister Sander resoneth thus, a steppe is only a token of the foote, an image of the whole bodilie shape, a step must be adored, ergo, much more an image. I deny that an image is any steppe of the body of Christ, but a false, lying, and deceiptfull counterfet: beside that it is a wise reason that is drawne from a Metaphore, to a proper speach.
Moreouer maister Iewell saith in an other place: the sacraments in this sort are the flesh of Christ, and are so vnderstanded and beleued, and adored. But the whole honor resteth not in them, but is passed ouer from them, to the things that be signified.
Here saith maister Sander, he giueth to the sacraments the honor due to an image, and as he worshipeth the sacrament without daunger of idolatrie, so do we honour holy images without feare of committing idolatrie. A sounde conclusion. The sacramentes are to be reuerenced, as signes ordeined of God to represent the body of Christ without idolatrie, therefore images forbidden by God, may be worshipped without daūger of idolatrie.
And yet againe maister Iewell saith: The very names of the old fathers are worthie of much honour. M. Sander addeth, ye names of ye old godly fathers are attributed to the images. For the images of S. Augustin & S. Hierome are called S. Austen and Ieronime, therefore their images are by M. Iewels owne confession, worthie of much honour. Shal I say a doctor hath framed this argument, or a goose hath hissed it? In effect it is this, the olde doctours names are falsely attributed to images, therfore the images are to be honoured. But (saith he) these names be not giuen them by chaunce, but of purpose. Verily of such purpose, as the Poet Horace saith of the image of Priapus.
Olim truncu… eram ficulnus, inutile lignum,
Cum faber incertus scamnum faceretne, Priapum,
Maluit esse deum.
Sometime I was a stocke of a figtree, an vnprofitable peece of woode, when the carpenter being doubtfull whether hee shoulde make of me a stoole, or Priapus, chose rather that I should be a God.
Againe he saith, these names are not giuen them without cause for the lyknesse of the shape, that is in them. A worthie cause if there were any liknesse in Saint Augustines image more to him, then to any other man.
But leauing maister Iewels wordes, we must come to his deeds. What shall we say, if euen in that reply against Harding touching grauen images, maister Iewell hath oftentimes grauen images, yea besides Gorgons and antiques heades, which are Idolles? There is a filthie image of a desperate naked boye, set forth in such sort, that an honest man woulde go backwarde, and couer it with his cloake. I am sory the printer hath troubled your chaste eyes with such a picture, but why is maister Iewell charged with the printers, or grauers fault? Forsooth you say, hee had the ouersight and correction of his booke, paraduenture you are deceiued. But what if he had, howe proue you that this picture was pressed when that leafe came to correction? for commonly such superfluous vinites (I trowe they call them) bee not set to, vntill they presse the whole leafe.
But what if it were pressed, and he not regarded it? you say if it had beene the picture of the Crucifixe, he would hauehave espied it at the first, and caused the printer to hauehave corrected it. Peraduenture he woulde not hauehave regarded it, perhaps he shoulde not hauehave espied it. But seeing you are such a narrowe vewer of such idle pictures maister Sander, I meruaile you coulde not see a dronkerd bibbing in the first letter of your owne booke of images, nor euen such an impudent naked boye as you speake of in the first letter of your Epistle before your booke of the rocke of the church, and the same againe in the rocke of the church. Nowe see whereto your lewde hipocriticall outcries do tend: O the iudgements of God, is it so heinous a matter in maister Iewell which toke no heede to such toyes, and yet M. Sander so exacte a reformer of all abuses, in images, cannot avoide it in his owne bookes?
Turpe est doctori cum culpa redarguit ipsum.
It is a shame for a teacher when the crime returneth vponupon his owne heade.