himself is to be given to the Images of Christs Cross My Adversary is horribly netled and upbraids me with an hard Forehead in charging him with a notion of Invocating Images when he says he has no such word or hint I suppose he means in his Nubes Testium What notions he may have of this or what he does in his private Oratory I cannot tell nor did I charge Him in particular with Invocating Images But this I do charge upon the Church of Rome in general that She doth formally Invocate and pray to the Images of Christs Cross and that the worship of Latria is according to the Doctrine of her greatest Divines to be given to them He cannot but know that this form of Prayer is used by that Church and that it is directed to the Wood of the Cross O crux ave spes unica auge piis justitiam reisque dona veniam Hail O Cross our only Hope increase Righteousness to such as are pious and give pardon to such as are guilty For this Practise of the Roman Church was the true Ground and Reason of that opinion that Latria is due to the Image of the Cross This my good Friend hath shewed long ago that it was one of the grounds which Aquinas went upon when he determined Latria to be due to the Cross because the Church in praying to the Cross speaks to it as if it were Christ himself O crux ave spes unica c. And more Authors there are which say the same thing as Marsilius ab Ingen who asserts that the Cross as a sign representing the object of Worship and as a Medium of it is to be adored with Latria and the reason he fetcheth from the practice of the Church O crux ave spes unica auge c. So Catharinus saith That the opinion of those who say Images are not truly and properly to be worshipped but God to be worshipped before an Image is repugnant to the Practice of the Church because we direct our gestures our words and signs of adoration to the Images to which likewise we burn Incense and we worship the Cross saying O crux ave spes unica c. So likewise Dominicus Soto we ought to worship the Images themselves for the Church doth not say we worship thee O Christ but thy Cross and O crux ave spes unica c. In like manner Phil. Gamachaeus a Doctor of the Sorbon saith that the Cross and Image of Christ as they represent him ought to be worshipped with the Supream worship of Latria because Christ himself is the reason of the adoration and because the Church doth so worship the Cross O crux ave spes unica c Besides all this we are told a remarkable Story of one John Egidius Canon of Sevil that he was forced to make a publick Recantation for denying the adoration of the Cross because it was contrary to the practice of the Church when it saith O crux ave spes unica auge piis justitiam reisque dona veniam And after all this let this wonderful Discourser tell us whether these things be not True And whether these things be not acts of Latria And whether abundance of Divines more both before and since the Council of Trent have not maintained this Latria to be due to the Image of the Cross And whether this Latria be not much more than common Respect and Reverence And whether any Church of England man or any Protestant ever pretended to give such a sort of Respect to the Communion-Table or to the Sacramant or to the Name of Jesus or to the Bible so as upon his knees to pray to it Spes unica auge piis justitiam reisque dona veniam Either the man understands not that which he calls the doctrines of Catholicks so well as We Protestants do or else he is guilty of shameful disingenuity for disguising and dissembling things thus out of a sinister design and then for flying upon Me as if I had done the Innocent Papists wrong by making more noise and raising more dust about their Worshipping of Images then there ought to be 2 Since he hath so palpably misrepresented the sense of his own Church 't is madness to conceive that he would rightly represent the sense of Ours which I shall now in the next place consider to satisfie you that I have done our Church no wrong which is another thing he lays to my charge Alas good man how careful is he that the Church of England may not be injured For the clearing of this too I shall refer you to our Book of Homilies because without all question it contains the publick sense of the Church of England which he may be sure we well know as blind combatants as we are and which we will with all our Zeal and Abilities defend what Triflers soever he takes us to be The particular Homily I intend is that against peril of Idolatry consisting of three parts And because I am willing to prevent an objection which may be made by this Discourser out of our Learned Mountague viz. that he admitted the Book of Homilies as containing godly and wholesome exhortations but not as the publick dogmatical resolutions confirmed of the Church of England therefore I shall offer these Five things briefly to your consideration 1. That the former Book of Homilies in the time of K. Edward the Sixth was set out as the Homilies of the Church of England and as godly and wholesome Sermons containing Doctrine to be received of all men doctrinam ab omnibus amplectendam as appears by the Article concerning it Anno 1552. 2. That the Second Book of Homilies wherein this against peril of Idolatry is one was also judged to contain godly and wholesome Doctrine as well as the former Book and therefore was appointed to be read as the former was in all Churches diligently and distinctly Which plainly argues that it was set out also in the name of the Church of England and as containing Doctrine to be received of all as the other was judged to contain 3. This particular Homily whereof I now speak was upon a point of National concernment and in the judgment of our Church about a most important case of Conscience Besides it was conceiv'd and penn'd upon the greatest consideration and judgment as we find by that variety of choice Learning in it beyond what is to be found in all the Homilies beside And 't is remarkable too that 't was intended not only for the information of the people but also for the instruction of Curates themselves and men of good understanding as appears by the Title of the Third Part of it So that if any other may yet this Homily cannot be thought a meer popular Sermon for it is not so popular but rather the Decisive and dogmatical resolution of our Church in this Case about Images 4. As the Learned Mountague doth not deny but that this Homily contains the publick
A THIRD LETTER TO A Person of Quality Being a Vindication of the former IN ANSWER TO A LATE PAMPHLET INTITULED A DISCOURSE Of the Use of IMAGES c. LICENSED August the 2 d. 1687. LONDON Printed for Ben. Griffin and are to be Sold by Randal Taylor near Stationers Hall 1687. AN ANSWER To a late Pamphlet Intituled a DISCOURSE Of the Use of Images c. SIR SINCE I sent you my Last one of the Roman Communion has been Tampering with it as you may perceive by a late Pamphlet under this Title A Discourse of the use of Images in relation to the Church of England and the Church of Rome in Vindication of Nubes Testium against a Pamphlet entituled the Antiquity of the Protestant Religion concerning Images Assoon as I saw the Title Page I fancied the Discourser had been tumbling over a great many old Books to discover if he could some flaw in the Historical Account I sent you in that Pamphlet because that is the whole substance of it nor can any man pretend to Answer it but by taking that course But when I read it I found some reason to mistrust that Church-History is a thing quite out of the Discoursers way and that he durst not venture upon it lest he should Err which would unbecome one that is Member of a Church which pretends to be Infallible When he thought of writing against me he should have Examin'd whether the little History I had written were True or False as to matter of Fact That if it were False he might have told the World where my mistakes lay or if it be True that he might have found out some Artifice and Shift to clear his own Church from the guilt of Innovation For the Point is whether the Veneration of Images as it is done in the Roman Church be of Primitive Practice I undertook to shew the Negative against the Author of Nubes Testium and in order to it I proved that in the first Ages of Christianity the Christian Church had no Images at all that it was for about the space of 400 years before any Images were so much as Vsed that though in after Times they came to be used yet it was a long time before they were used in Churches that though at last they were set up in some Churches yet they were set up for History or Ornament sake only and that it was after St. Gregory's time that is above 600 years after Christ before any Veneration or Worship was allowed to be given to Images For the making of all this to appear I thought a more speedy and effectual course could not be taken then to prove it from those Controversies which were of old first between Christians and Heathens and then between Christians themselves about the business of Images And this I did with so much faithfulness and you see with so much Caution that this Discourser has not one word to say against me as to that I am sure he has not offer'd any thing against me in this his Discourse nor is it a little pleasure to me that he hath not medled with it at all 'T is a sign his Conscience told him the Knot was too strong for him when he durst not go about to untie it For as to the Evidence I produced on my side the good man says nothing in Contradiction to it no not a word of that in all his six penny-worth of Infallibility Instead of that he has used all his Wits to give me great store of hard words and to set me at odds with the Church whereof I am a Member as if I had not only given my self a blow over the face but had struck the Church of England in the face too like a blind Combatant and with a Have at all as he is pleased to express his thoughts Truly I am so blind that I cannot see this As for my own face I thank God it doth not smart nor do I so much as feel one of my Cheeks burn And as for the Church of England if I have given Her the least blow I will make Her all possible Satisfaction when She shall complain At present by what I hear from Her I do not find that She thinks I have hurt Her in the least or that She colours at all and by and by I hope to satisfie the Discourser too that instead of Injuring I have done her Right in the mean time I must thank him for his singular Care and Tenderness of our Church I confess upon my first Perusal of his Discourse I did not think my self obliged to take any Publick notice of it because he doth not so much as endeavour to baffle any of my Evidence nor denies matter of Fact as I have related it but manifestly declines the main Point under debate and flies off to other matter like a Wise Combatant that strikes not at all but at nothing at all and wholly misseth the Mark and what could any man have done more that gives up the Cause But upon second thoughts I was of another mind not because provoked to it by his Rudeness which I am ready to forgive him but because I am concern'd for Truth and the Honour of our Church For the man has the confidence to tell the World that our Church doth agree with the Church of Rome in the lawfulness of placing Images in Churches and that an Honour or Reverence or even Worship in its kind is necessarily due to them Pag. 19. And that if I had examin'd the Doctrine of my own Church and understood what Catholicks teach I would have soon discovered the vanity of my Engagement for saith he Pag. 20. his own Church is for an Image-Worship too This is a notorious Falshood and looks like a malicious Insinuation as if our Church would presently shake hands with His did not some blind Combatants keep them a sunder The Discourser might think that this would do something especially in this juncture by creating in our Dissenters as ill an opinion of the Church of England as we have of the Church of Rome and he seems to follow the humour of some of his brethren not considering so much whether what he says be True as whether it will serve a Turn and do them some good by doing Us mischief though I hope our Dissenters will be so wise as to consider how deeply They are concern'd as well as We to beware of Trap. For this reason I shall bestow upon this Discourse a little time which otherwise would be lost and thrown away And first I observe how he treats me with Reproaches that I have the misfortune to be of a Factious and Unchristian Temper a multiplier of needless Contentions a blind Combatant one that 't is uncertain what Church I am of this being the only thing certain that I am no Papist a Trifler a Furious one a singular Illuminate whose admirable Talent is in Buffoonry and a great deal more of such language as doth
Diametrical and manifest opposition there is between the two Churches the one allowing not only the setting up of Images but the Honouring Reverencing and Worshipping of them too and that sometimes with the highest and supreme Worship and the other professing solemnly that they are so far from being Worshipped Adored or Honoured that in regard of the horrible dangers and sins they lead men into are to be pulled down and destroyed rather 3. Let us now consider a little the proofs he brings of this pretended agreement 1. He tells us of some Figures in the Church at the Savoy and of some emblematical representations in the New Church at St. James's and especially of some Pictures in some of our New Common-Prayer Books He means I suppose not the large Liturgies on our reading Desks but some little Prayer-books in some private hands A stout argument as if what is done by connivance and by some particular persons upon their own private Heads ought to be look't upon as the publick act of our whole Church or as if there were the same danger of Idolatry in every age which hath been in some or as if all They who are for Decency and Ornament were agreed with all others who are for the most intollerable Superstition 2. Then he tells us of an injunction given by K. Edward the Sixth to the Clergy when the Reformation by the way was green that they should instruct the people that Images serve for Remembrance c. But here the man plays a double Trick first he renders the place wrong for the words are admonishing their Parishoners that Images serve for no other purpose but to be a Remembrance And besides he conceals a most material passage which goes immediately before and after in the same Injunction and it is this That such Images as they the Clergy know in any of their Cures to be or to have been abused with Pilgrimage or offering of any thing made thereunto or shall be hereafter censed unto they and none other private persons shall for the avoiding of that most detestable offence of Idolatry forthwith take down or cause to be taken down and destroy the same and shall suffer from henceforth no Torches nor Candles Tapers or Images of Wax to be set afore any Image or Picture but only two Lights upon the high Altar before the Sacrament which for the signification that Christ is the very true Light of the World they shall suffer to remain still admonishing their Parishoners that Images serve for no other purpose but to be a Remembrance whereby men may be admonished of the holy Lives and Conversations of them that the said Images do represent which Images if they do abuse for any other intent they commit Idolatry in the same to the great danger of their Souls And now is not here an admirable agreement between our Church and the Church of Rome 3. As to the main point in Controversie between us viz. concerning the Honour and Veneration given to Images Kissing of them Kneeling Praying before them and in one word Worshipping of them which I have shew'd to be the practice of the Romanists my Adversary has the strange confidence to say pag. 14. that the Church of England seems to concur with the Church of Rome in all this point For proof of this most important matter he cites 1. The 30th of King James his constitutions about the Sign of the Cross and and not to repeat the words at length any man may see the meaning of that place to be this that though the Jews hated the name of the Cross yet the inspir'd Apostles honour'd it so far as that they used the word equivocally signifying thereby sometimes Christ himself together with the effects and merits of his Passion and that the name of the Cross was so honourable that even in the Apostles days Christians had an honourable esteem of the Sign of the Cross And what of all this Can this possibly argue any kind opinion in the Church of England of Venerating Kissing Incensing Bowing down to Images Doth it justifie so much as the superstitious use of the Sign of the Cross it self Doth not our Church confess plainly a little after in the very same Canon That in process of time the sign of the Cross was grievously abused in the Roman Church especially after the stain and corruption of Popery had spread it self over it What mean what miserable stuff is this especially for such a discerning such a substantial Combatant as my Adversary would be thought to offer unto the World for an Argument 2. But then mistrusting the weakness of all this he lays his chief stress upon a passage in our learned Montague where he says there is a Respect due unto and Honour given relatively to the Pictures of Christ the blessed Virgin and Saints and speaking in the Plural Number he says we give it too meaning as well as the Papists And what then doth he speak of any Publick respect to Pictures in Churches Or of any other respect then what the Preserving of them amounts to where there is no danger of Idolatry If my Adversary be so senseless as to imagine this I will refer him to the beginning of that Chapter which he cites for there Mr. Montague tells his Enemies Appeal c. 21. the Informers that though they would make men believe that he intended a Religious respect and Pious honour to be due to Pictures and so to draw on unto a downright worship of them yet this was not his meaning no he was in that case as jealous of Gods Honour as any gloyting Puritan in the Pack My Adversary may observe that Mr. Montague doth here distinguish as I do Respect from Religious respect and Honour from Pious Honour and then distinguishes both from Image-Worship And though he is pleased to call this Cant in Me yet Mr. Montague to whom he appeals gives it another name he calls it Idolatry I do not saith he I cannot I will not deny that Idolatry is grosly committed in the Church of Rome Cap. 19. The ruder sort at least are not excusable who go to it with downright Idolatry without any Relative adoration worshipping that which they beheld with their eyes the Image of the blessed Virgin S. Peter S. Paul the Crucifix as if Christ Jesus were present This Idolatry is ancient in their Schools Thomas Aquinas doth directly vouch it that the same reverence is to be given to the Image of Christ and to Christ himself whereas therefore Christ is adored with the worship of Latria it follows that his Image is to be adored with the worship of Latria too which is now an Article of Faith in the Roman Church and the opposite Doctrine flat Heresie For so Cabrera upon that place of Thomas writeth who alledgeth for his purpose and opinion many Old and Later Divines of their School And Azorius the Jesuit tells us it is the Constant opinion of Divines that an Image is
express that Respect after a lewd manner making this her defence and plea 'T is true my dear Husband I had an interiour Respect and Affection for such a man 't is true I did express and shew my Affection to him but I did this because he is your Friend he is your picture he is like you for all the World What I did therefore was out of true Respects to you I kist him and hugg'd him and the like but 't was out of honour and affection to you all the Kindness and Love I shew'd him passed to the Prototype and 't was for your sake I hope you will not call this Adultery because I did it out of Respect to you no 't is not Adultery 't is only Honour and Veneration to your Image What if a fellow in the Neighbourhood calls this Adultery He is a man not to be believed though he urgeth such a Commandment in the Bible He is one of a Factious Temper a multiplier of needless Contentions a blind Combatant a Trifler a furious One a singular Illuminate one that 't is uncertain what Church he is of and the only thing certain is that he is no Papist he is no Papist Husband but a Canting man that disputes about a word Adultery he calls it but 't is not so 't is Respect and Honour and Affection to you But he is no Papist if he were he would be of another mind because it was for your sake and out of Interiour Respect to you that this was done Supposing this I say I will leave it to my Adversary to consider seriously with himself whether he would accept of this as a fair and reasonable Excuse desiring him to apply it and to remember that Idolatry is compared in Scripture to Adultery and Fornication if he has not quite forgotten the Book among so many Legends He taxeth me for treating the Second Nicene Council with abusive Language because I said they were a pack of Greeks that were neither the Wisest nor the Honestest men in the World. Had I said this without sufficient grounds or could this Discourser prove I had Mis-represented them I were to blame But whoever shall impartially consider the proceedings of that Council I believe will soon be of my opinion for the thing proves it self If my Language doth not please him it is not half so much as the Three Hundred Fathers at Frankford bestowed upon them as he may see by the Caroline Books out of which the Church of England calls them an Arrogant Foolish and ungodly Council If I say they establisht Image-worship it is no more then what Second Part of the Homily against peril of Idolatry all the World knows and Hinemarus said the same thing who lived near that time and knew enough of the matter And if they be Ridiculous my Adversary may thank Them for it they made Themselves so Some of their Arguments I industriously conceal'd because they are so very ridiculous that I fancied my Relating of them would not be Believed He pretends pag. 31. That the reason why Images were not used in the Primitive Ages was because it was Inexpedient and Vnseasonable Christians then living among Pagans and Jews But if he pleaseth to consult Clemens Alexandrinus Origen and other of the Primitive Writers who knew their own reasons best he will find that they insisted not upon the Vnseasonableness but upon the unlawfulness of having Images because they thought it contrary to Gods Commandments I wonder the man should so much as pretend not to understand pag. 34. how Pope Gregory the Second contradicted Gregory the First But now I think on 't he is not apt to believe his Senses For the thing is as clear as the Sun to any one that can Read and will trust his Eyes that Gregory the First wrote against Image-worship and the Second of that name wrote for it And though the Latter endeavour'd to excuse himself and his party with this pretence That they did not worship Images as Gods yet my Adversary knows that the old Heathens said the same thing and therefore this could no more acquit this Pope than it could the Pagans from the charge of Idolatry He pretends I am kind to the Heathens as if my meaning was to excuse them from Idolatry so the better to fix this crime upon the Papists and hereupon he makes a long Harangue The very truth is I never intended to excuse either or take off the Load from one to lay it upon the other But this I say and the thing is manifest that upon the same grounds that the Romanists justifie Their worshipping of Images the old Heathens justified Theirs And lest I should be thought a singular Illuminate should I make a comparison between both as to that I say further that the Church of England her self hath long ago done a great deal more of that kind then I am willing to do at this time of day In the Third part of the Homily I mention'd before She hath at large compared the Idolatry of the one with the Idolatry of the other both as to the Images themselves and as to the manner of worshipping them I refer you to the place beseeching you to read it not for your Information only but for your diversion and pleasure too After this it is insinuated pag. 37. That I have destroyed not only the Credit but the very Being of our Church in a manner our Ordination our Succession our Authority of Preaching and all this by my writing a poor Pamphlet against Image-worship A man of Sense would wonder at the consequence but the Reason it seems is because our Church was once in Communion with the Church of Rome so that if the one be Idolatrous the other must Cease But my Adversary knows our principle to be this That the Church of Rome is really a Church as to the Essentials of a Church though a very Vnsound and Corrupt one as to Her additions and how our Communion with that Church could bring such a Contagion as can Un-Church us is a thing which we cannot understand But this among some other mean considerations which are now objected against Me have been objected formerly against my good Friend and have been abundantly answer'd at the end of his Excellent Defence and because I am not willing this Pamphlet should swell with things said over again I refer you to that piece where you will find this and some other cavils fully answer'd which are scatteringly thrown by this Discourser about bowing towards the Altar and at the name of Jesus c. Next follows which I believe was the Principal thing intended by my Adversary a sly and artificial Application to our Dissenters as if they had the same reason to depart from our Church as we had to depart from the Church of Rome Now the reason of our departure was because we could not possibly continue any longer in the Communion of that Church without being knowingly guilty of many damnable Errours and Sins If this be the case between 〈◊〉 and our dissenting Brethren I will depart from the Church of England to morrow though not to the Church of Rome But God be thanked all reasonable men are convinced that the case is not the same And my Adversary is malicious and vain in saying pag. 38. That Since the greatest part of those things upon which the dissent is founded are such as have been instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome why should the Dissenters receive them from the Church of England whilst these same Church-Guides who press the observance take so much pains to prove those from whom they receiv'd them to be Idolaters What Did the Church of Rome Institute those things whereon the Dissent is founded I think they may be Idolaters to the Worlds end and yet our Constitutions remain unspotted Was the Episcopal Government Instituted by the Church of Rome Was our Liturgy compiled by the Church of Rome Was the Sign of the Cross and a few more of our observances Instituted by the Church of Rome This is a vanity to be despised and upon this Point I will Engage in a Controversie with this Discourser when he pleases or dares In the mean time I take the Liberty to tell him that his Trick will not Take all of Us are sensible what the meaning of this is and who they are that stand behind the Curtain to inflame us to set us at further variance with one another to drive on a Third interest and at last to laugh at our folly if we can be made to serve it In the Conclusion of all my Adversary gives me a gentle lick for reflecting upon Me and the Letter I sent you he says the Author is to be excused the whole is nothing more then a Letter and every body knows that a Letter however proper it may be to the person to whom 't is directed is many times very absur'd when 't is divulg'd and made Common we 'll Excuse therefore the Writer but really he is to blame that Publish't it To this I answer in a few words that if this Discourser and his Party will forgive me the writing of that Letter I know you will forgive him that Publisht it and I believe all considerate and honest men will forgive us Both and as for this Discourser whatever his Sin is he knows I suppose where to have a pardon too if he has but Money I am Sir Your Most Faithful and Obedient Servant July 26th 1687. FINIS