Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 3 · Chapter 9
THE IX. OR VIII. CHAP.
That it is no idolatrie to giuegive conuenient worship to some creatures, & whether images be creatures or no. Also in one argument of M. Iewels 4. great faultes are found, that a creature may be set vp to be honoured. That an image is rather a workemanship then a creature. That the Kinges garment on his backe is honoured.Sander.
M. Harding had confessed, that images by a consequent might be worshipped, The Bish. of Sarum said,Fulk. An image is a creature and no God. And to honour a creature in that sorte (as it is set vp to the end to be worshipped although not specially to that end) is idolatrie, therefore by Maister Hardings owne confession, images are set vp to be vsed to idolatrie. This is the argument, that hath foure as great faultes in it, as there be knots in a rush. The first fault is, that he putteth Idolum in steede of Imago. The second that he putteth Doulia in steede of L…triae. The thirde faulte is, that he presupposeth, that we may set vp no creature to the intent that it may be any wayes honoured. The last faulte, that he affirmeth an image to be a creature. The first and seconde faultes are falsly found, for he nameth neither Idolu…, nor Latria, but this compound worde idolatrie, and maketh this proposition. To honour a creature in that forte, &c. is idolatrie. Meaning whether the creature be an image, or no image, As to worship the Sunne, or ye Moone is idolatrie which be creatures, and so tearmed by all learned men, and euen by the Papistes themselues, which call the worshipping of an vnconsecrated host, idolatrie. The third fault is also a forged quarrell, for he doeth not presuppose, that we may set vp no creature to be worshipped, but he saith, to honour a creature in that sorte, that is, with religious worship as it is set vp to be worshipped is idolatrie. And therefore M. Sanders imagination of a king set vp in his throne, to be honoured, of certeine men that had rebelled against him, is foolishe and ridiculous. For the Bishop in his proposition, speaketh of religious worship which is proper onelyonly to God, and not of ciuill honour. The fourth fault also, is a fonde quarrelling, or rather an vngodly denying of an image to be a creature. For by this meanes, he maketh a thirde thing existent in ye world. that is neither God the creator, nor a creature, but he saith it is a manufacture, and not a creature, like as he said before, that their worshipping of Images is not idolatrie but image douly, that is seruing of images, whiche is all one as if a man would say, a horse is a beast, therefore it is not a substance. So he may deny a man to be a creature because he is a geniture, that is a thing begotten. But perhaps he will allowe all thinges made of God or nature to be creatures, but nothing made of man, so yt a table, or chaire, a sword, &c. are no creatures, because they are made with mens handes. What then wil he cal a tree, that is graffed with mens handes, and groweth by nature also? Those he highe pointes of Diuinitie I promise you.
But to ye purpose, there is neither substance nor forme of any thing in the worlde but it is a creature, therefore both in respect of the matter and fashion, an Image is a creature, except you will say with the Master of the sentences. Lib. 3. dist. 37. that the forme of an Image in that it is set vp to be worshipped, is no creature, but a peruersion of a creature, as all sinne is. And least you shoulde take exceptions to my trāslating of Idolum for an Image, he speaketh of the forme of a man in Idolo, which is no faigned thing, but a thing of trueth.
But to cut of all this vaine babling, that an Image is no creature, the Apostle S. Paule speaking of the Images of the Gentiles, by which they turned the glory of God into the similitude of ye Image of a mortal man &c. calleth Images creaturs, And they serued the creature more then the Creator, which is to be blessed for euer. Rom. 1. vers. 23. & 25.
But hee faineth an obiection of M. Iewelles, that an Image is lesse then a creature, and therefore it deserueth lesse honour then a creature: Whereas M. Iewell said, an Image is a creature. But he answereth his owne obiection, that because an Image is able to stir vsus vp to a vertuous and good remembraunce, and to prouoke vsus to vertue, it is worthie of greater honour then a creature. As though we ought not by any immediate creature of god, to be stirred vp to good remembraunces, and prouoked to vertue, rather then by an vnprofitable, dead, and dumbe Image. And who will graunt him, that an Image is able to stirre vsus vp to goodnesse, or to prouoke vsus to vertue, whē an Image, (as the scripture saith) is good for nothing. Abacuc. 2. But admitte that men by the sight of an Image, take occasion of good remembraunce, the Image in this case is no agent, and therefore worthie of no honour. A man seeinge the gallowes, which is a signe of execution of Iustice, is mooued to remember Iustice, which is a good remembraunce, and is thereby prouoked to absteine from vice and to liue vertuously, is the gallowes therefore worthie of honour? I thinke not, because the gallowes is no agent or doer in those good things, but onelyonly the minde of man that taketh occasion of that he seeth. No more doeth an image, and therefore no more worthy of honor. But Augustine saith, De verb. Dom. Ser. 58 Si quis nostrum, &c. If anye of vsus should finde the kings purple or crowne lying a side, woulde he go about to worship them? But when the king hath them on him, he runneth in danger of death, if any man contemne to worship them together with the king. So saieth M.S. the Image is to be honored in respect of the truth, whose similitude it beareth. A wise similitude. First he compareth ciuil worship with religious worshippe, as he doeth eueryevery where. Secondly that which is reuerenced necessarily, because it is annexed with an honourable thinge, with yt which is not annexed, for God may be worshipped without images, the king cānot be worshipped with out his robes reseruing humane & naturall honestye. Thirdly, that which is accidentally worshipped, as the kings crowne, his purple, &c. Because the king wearinge them is worshipped, is alledged to prooue that a proper worship is due to images, distinct from the worship due to the paterne or sampler. But of religious worship, Augustine saith: Nihil omnino colendum est, totum que abijciendum quicquid mortalibus …culis cernitur, quicquid vllus sensus attingit. Nothing is to be worshipped at all, and all that is to be cast away, whatsoeuer is seene with mortall eyes, what soeuer any sense doth atteine. And to take away all cauilling, he addeth in his Retractatiōs, quicquid mortalis corporis vllus sensus attingit▪ est enim sensus & mensis. Whatsoeuer any sense of the mortall body doth atteine, for there is a sense of the minde, lib. Retr. 1. cap. I. Likewise that the signes are to bee worshipped, for that they signifie, he saith it is a madnesse, in ps. 101. Talis est enim dementia hominum quasi adorandum aliquid dicatur, cum decitur, Sol-Christum significa…. Adora ergo & petram quia Christum significat. Such is the madnesse of men, as though it were saide that any such thinge were to be worshipped when it is saide: The sunne signifieth Christ, then worshippe a rocke also because the rocke signifieth Christ. Last of all, M. Sander …aith, supposinge an image to be lesse then a creature, the baser it is, the lesse daunger there is that it shoulde bee worshipped as God, as Chrysostome saith, therefore men are called in scripture the sonnes and Images of God, and not Angels, because there is lesse daunger in worshipping men for their basenes, thā Angels for their excellency. But he might conclude, the base… Images are, the more horrible sinne is the worshippinge of them. For the basenesse of men hath not kept them from being worshipped with religious honour, neither hath the vilenesse of Images defended them from being honoured with Gods honour. For the corruption and inclination of mans nature vntounto Idolatrie is so great, that nothing is so vile or ridiculous, but it hath bene honoured as God. And therefore Augustine truely sayth in ps. 113, Ducit enim & affectu quodam infirmo rapit infirma corda mortalium formae similitudo, et membrorum imitata compago. For the similitude of shape, and the counterfetted composition of lymmes, doeth leade, and with a certaine weake and sicke affection doeth rauishe the weake heartes of mortall men. Againe, Quis autem ador…, vel orat intuen… …imulachrum, qui non sic afficitur vt ab eo se exandiri putet, ac ab eo sibi praestari quod desiderat speret? For who doeth worshippe or praye, beholdinge an Image, whiche is not so affected, that hee thinketh he is hearde of it, and hopeth that shall be performed by it whiche hee desireth. Examine your popishe worshippinge of Images by this sayinge of Augustine: Maister Sander, and either saye hee speaketh vntruely, or confesse that your Image-Douly is no better then Idolatrie. But Augustine proceedeth, aunsweringe the obiection, that they are turned to bee deade stockes, without sense. Plus valent simulachra ad curnandam infelicen… an…mam, quod as habent, quod oculos habent, nar…s habent, manus habent, pedes habent, quam ad corrigandam, qood non loquentur, non videbunt, non audient, non …dorabunt, non contrectabunt, non ambulabunt. Images preuayle more to bowe downe or make crooked the vnhappie soule, because they hauehave a mouthe, they hauehave eyes, they hauehave a nose, they hauehave handes, and they hauehave feete: then to refourme it, or make it streight, that they shall not speake, they shall not see, they shall not heare, they shall not smell, they shall not handle, they shall not walke. Go your wayes nowe M. Sander, and say that there is no daunger, lest Images should be abused to robbe God of his honour, because of the basenes of their forme which is lesse then a creature, and they be as it pleaseth you to call them manufactures.