c Cap. 4. Sect. 4. What need any iustified man greatly feare the rigorous sentence of a iust Iudge Hence are those most insolent speeches of theirs that good workes are d Rhem. Annot. 2. Tim. 4.8 truly and properly meritorious and fully worthy of euerlasting life that heauen is the due and iust stipend which God by his iustice oweth to the persons working by his grace that we haue a right to heauen and deserue it worthily that it is our owne right bargained for and wrought for and accordingly payed vnto vs as our hire e Ibid. Heb. 6.10 that good workes be so farre meritorious as that God should be vniust if he rendered not heauen for the same Thereupon Tapper sticketh not to say f Ruard Tapper in explic art Louan tom 2 art 9. Absit vt iusti vi tam aeternam expectent sicut pau per eleemosynam Multò namque gloriâ—sius est ipsoâ— quasi victores triumphatores eam possidere tanquam palmaÌ„ suit sudoribus debitam God forbid that the iust should expect eternall life as the poore man doth an almes for it is much more glorious that they should haue it as conquerers and triumphers as the prize due vnto their labours Thus you your selues haue written M. Bishop and do we slaunder you in reporting truly what you haue written No no your speeches are impudent and shamelesse in this behalfe and such as we wonder that your foreheads serue you to auouch Why doth it not suffice you to preach good workes simply as Christ and his Apostles did with commendation of Gods mercy in rewarding the same What need this vaine foolery of merite so improbable so absurd so impossible whereby you do not magnifie God but set vp the righteousnesse of man against the grace of God As for the definition of the Councell of Trent we esteeme it not knowing the same for the most part to haue bene but a conuenticle of base Italianate Machiauels who by equiuocations and sophistications haue deluded the world and by casting the chaffe of some phrases of the Fathers vpon the meeres and puddles of the schoolemen haue laboured to couer and hide the filth and mire thereof and indeed haue left them still to serue by false confidence and trust for gulfes and whirlpools to swallow vp and deuoure the soules of men Although the words of the Councell may beare some good construction according to the auncient fathers meaning of the name of merites yet by them they are deceitfully set downe to leaue open a gappe to the absurd and intollerable presumption of men in aduancing and lifting vp the desert of mens workes as if God were thereby greatly bound and beholding vnto them How farre their meaning extendeth will appeare by M. Bishop who will not haue vs thinke that he will speake any thing but by the authoritie of that Councell And first he telleth vs that they hold that eternall life is a grace which indeed they dare not denie because the Scripture expresly so affirmeth g Rom. 6.23 Eternall life is the grace or gift of God through Iesus Christ our Lord. But he addeth to grace a supply of workes quite contrary to the Scriptures for it is expresly sayd h Chap. 11.6 If it be of grace it is not of works otherwise grace is no grace i August contra Pelag. Celest lib. 2. ca 24. Non enim gratia Dei gratia erit vllo modo nisi fuerit gratuita omni modo Grace saith Saint Austin is not grace in any sort if it be not free in euery sort It is of grace saith M. Bishop and yet it is of workes also But still to make a shew of vpholding grace he telleth vs that though eternall life be by workes yet the first grace out of which those workes do issue is freely bestowed vpon vs. Which he saith only as ashamed to deny grace altogether and not of any conscience that hee maketh faithfully to auouch the same For if the grace whence those workes do issue which is the grace of iustification be freely bestowed vpon vs why doth he before labour to approue that we are iustified by workes Or if we obtaine the grace of iustification by workes how doth he say that the same is freely bestowed vpon vs The plaine truth is that by their works of preparation they make a man at least in some sort as we haue heard before out of Bellarmine to merit and deserue euen the first grace if by the first grace we vnderstand the grace of their first iustification as M. Bishop vsually doth But beside grace it is also a reward due in iustice saith he And how so Marry partly by the promise of God Now if he rested here we would not contend with him For promise is indeed grace and iustice in respect of promise is nothing but truth in the performance thereof neither is here any impeachment of the free gift of God But not contented herewith he addeth that it is due in part also for the dignitie of good workes And thus he confoundeth those things which the Scripture still very precisely distinguisheth aduertising vs that k Rom. 4.14 if they which are of the law that is of workes be heires then is faith made voide and the promise is made of none effect and againe l Gal. 3.18 if the inheritance be of the law that is of workes it is no longer by promise To be inheritors by workes and to be inheritors by promise are things so opposite as that the one wholly excludeth the other neither can they possibly stand together As for that which he saith of infants merite and dignitie it is also the schoolemens fiction and deuice Remission of sinnes is their saluation as it is ours and in them it standeth good which the Apostle saith m Rom. 5 2â— As sinne hath raigned ouer them vnto death so grace also raigneth by righteousnesse that is by imputation of righteousnesse vnto eternall life not by any dignitie in them but through Iesus Christ our Lord. But as touching them that arriue to yeares of discretion he telleth vs that either they must by good vse of grace merite life or for want of such fruite fall into the miserable state of death A very hard sentence for himselfe for if he neuer haue life till he merite and deserue it we can well assure him that he shall go without it And I wonder that his heart did not tremble at the writing hereof but that he hath hardened the same against the truth and writeth but only for maintenance of that occupation and trade that must yeeld maintenance backe againe to him What will he say in the end when he shall lie wrastling with death and readie to resigne his soule into the hands of God Will he then craue for mercie who writeth now so earnestly for merite Let him take heede that God do not then answer him n Luk. 19.22 Out of thine
by faith only In which sence the Apostle S. Tim. 4. Paul sayth to his deare Disciple Timothie For this doing thou shalt saue both thy selfe and them that heare thee And this doth no more diminish the glorie of our Soueraigne Sauiours infinit merits then to say that we are saued by faith only good works no lesse depending if not more aduancing Christs merits then only faith as shall be proued hereafter more as large in the question of merits Now that other good mens merits may stood them who want some of their owne may be deduced out of an hundred places of the Scriptures namely out of those where God saith That for the sake of one of his true seruants he will shew mercy to thousands as is expresly said in the end of the first Commandement In like manner I answer vnto your third instance that for Christ to haue taken away by his blessed Passion the eternall paine due vnto our sinnes and to haue left a temporall to be satisfied by vs is not to make himselfe a false Christ but a most louing kind and withall a most prudent Redeemer Wiping away that by himselfe which passed our forces and reseruing that to vs which by the helpe of his grace we will may and ought to do not onely because it were vnseemely that the parts of the body should be disproportionalle to the head but also because it is reasonable as the Apostle holdeth Rom. 2. that we s ffer here with Christ before we raigne with him in his kingdome In your last instance you say that we make Christ our mediator of intercession to God thinking out of your simplicitie that therein we much magnifie him and sing Osanna vnto him Whereas we hold it for no 〈◊〉 â—â—â—agement vnto his diuine dignitie to make him our Int rcessor 〈…〉 to pray him to pray for vs who is of himselfe right able to helpe in all we can demaund being as well God as Man And albeit one in thought singling out the humanitie of Christ from his diuine nature and person might make it an intercessor for vs Yet that being but a Metaphisicall conceipt to separate the nature from the person since the Arian heresie which held Christ to be inferior to his Father it hath not bene practised by Catholikes who alwayes pray our Sauiour Christ to haue mercy vpon vs neuer to pray for vs. And consequently make him no mediator of intercession but of redemption R. ABBOT The second instance giuen by M. Perkins to proue that the Church of Rome maketh Christ but euen as an Idol giuing him a name without the substance and effect thereof is this that they call him a Sauiour and yet make him a Sauiour onely in vs and by vs not in himselfe or immediatly by himselfe For this is all that they attribute vnto him that he putteth vs in case and state to saue our selues and to become our owne Sauiours The meaning of the instance being plaine M. Bishops question is very idle In whom he should be a Sauiour if not in vs. He should be a Sauiour in himselfe and by that that he doth himselfe and not in vs or by that that we do for our selues But to the matter he telleth vs that it is a phrase vnheard of among Catholikes that any man is his owne sauiour Which we confesse as touching the phrase and word but yet by their doctrine they do in truth make a man his owne Sauiour If they should so say in words they well know that all Christian eares would abhorre them and many that now admire them would spit in their faces and account them accursed and damnable hypocrites who vnder pretence of doing honour vnto Christ do rob him of his honour and bereaue him of the truth of that name wherein the Soueraigntie of his glory doth consist therefore they forbeare the words though that which they teach is the same in effect as if they sayd so It is commonly knowne that the effect is alwayes attributed to that which is the immediate and neerest efficient cause We say in Philosophie Sol homo generant hominem The sunne and a man do beget a man because by the vegetation and influence of the Sunne and heauenly powers it is deemed that a man hath power to beget a man Yet we know that the Sunne or the heauen is not called the father of the child but onely the man by whom the child is begotten So is it therefore in the matter that we haue here in hand M. Bishop saith that God a Of merits sect 1. freely bestoweth his grace vpon vs in Baptisme but all that arriue to the yeares of discretion must by the good vse of the same grace either merit life or for want of such fruit of it fall into the miserable state of death God then giueth vs whereof to doe it but we our selues of that which God giueth must effect and deserue our owne saluation Therefore M. Bishop againe compareth the grace of God to a b Ibid. sect 3. Farme which the father bestoweth vpon his sonne who of the commodities that arise of the good vsage thereof groweth to be able to make a further purchase at his fathers hands euen of any thing that his father will set to sale In which case the father cannot be said to be the purchaser or to make the purchase for the sonne but the sonne is the purchaser for himselfe though by that which his father gaue him through the well ordering of it he became able to make the purchase Seeing then that Christ doth onely giue vs that whereof we our selues are to raise merits to deserue and purchase saluation as they teach it must needes follow by their doctrine that Christ is made the more remote and antecedent cause but we our selues are properly and immediatly the true causes of our owne saluation Howsoeuer therefore they vse not the phrase yet they teach the thing it selfe that Christ is not our Sauiour properly but we our selues by the good vsage of his gifts are the Sauiours of our selues Which absurditie M. Bishop saw that standing to their owne grounds he could by no meanes auoide and therefore is content with Pighius as it seemeth for a present shift to retire into our harbour albeit I verily thinke he vnderstandeth not himselfe nor can tell what meaning to make or that he saith The thing that followeth of the assertion of meritorious works he saith is this that by good workes we apply vnto vs the saluation which is in Christ Iesus as saith he the Protestants auouch they do by faith onely But he should here haue told vs how his meaning is that this saluation is in Christ For if he meane as commonly he doth that it is in Christ because God for Christs sake giueth vs grace whereby to merit and deserue our saluation then he dallieth altogether and mocketh his Reader as if he should say It followeth not of the position of meritorious
to Abraham or afterwards * See hereof after in sect 1â— of a goodly old graue man as this hypocrite speaketh and I abhorre to repeate because he appeared to Daniel also in the forme of a man vnder the name of the Ancient of dayes But they knew not this kinde of learning they tooke the commaundement simply as it was intended and therefore perpetually through all their generations saue onely when they fell away from God they held it vnlawfull to make anie Image vnder any pretence to represent God If they had vnderstood the commandement of God as M. Bishop doth vndoubtedly they would haue left some examples of doing that which he saith may be done But king Agrippa told Caligula the Emperor wheÌ„ he wold haue had his Image set vp in the Temple of Hierusalem c Philo Iud. de legat ad Caium Hoc temptuÌ„ iam indè ab initio nullam vnquam admisit manufactaÌ„ effigiem cùm sit Deo domiâ—ilium pictorum enim atque statuarioruÌ„ opera sunt sensibilium deorum imagines illum autem inuisibileÌ„ pingere aut fingere nefas duxerunt maiores nostri This Temple euen from the beginning neuer admitted any Image made with hands because it is the house of God for the workes of painters and caruers are the Images of sensible Gods but our forefathers haue holden it a thing vnlawfull to paint or carue him that is inuisible Accordingly the Christian Church receiued and practised denying that d Orig. cont Cels lib. 7. Deum incorporeum inuisibilem nulla figura circumscribimus God who is without body and is inuisible may be described by any figure as Origen saith no not to represent any signification of him as I obserued e Supra sect 4. froÌ„ him before Thus Theodoret saith that Moses f Theodoret. in Deut. qu. 1 Instruens eos ne teÌ„tent vnquam diuinam imagineÌ„ effingere cum arcâ—etypi speciem minimè viderint c. vt nullam imaginem construant inuisibilis Dei instructed the Iewes that they should not at any time attempt to frame any Image of God seeing they had seene no likenesse of him that they should not set vp anie Image of the inuisible God In like sort Clemens Alexandrinus setteth it downe for the doctrine of Moses which he saith Numa by him instructed taught the Romanes g Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 1. Numa ex ijs quae à Mâ—se tradita suÌ„t adiuius prohibuit Romanis ne homini aut animali simileÌ„ Dei facerent imaginem c. quòd ad quod est optimuÌ„ non alia ratione quà m sola mente vlli licet attingere that we are not to make any Image of God like to man or any other thing because no man may any otherwise meddle with God who is the soueraigne good but onely by the minde and therefore the same Clement affirmeth as by the words of the Apostle h Jbid lib. 6. Nobis nullum est simulachrum in mundo quoniam in rebus genitis nihil potest Dei referre imagineÌ„ We haue no Image in the world because in the creatures there is nothing that can represent the Image of God Because there is nothing that can represent God therefore they admitted no Image of God at all As for M. Bishops goodly distinction of painting and describing it is no other then the Pagans themselues would well like of for their defence He excepteth no otherwise against making Images of God but onely the first way as the Image should be vnderstood fully and to the quicke to resemble God and in that sort the very heathens denied the resembling of God or making any Image of him as hath bene before said Yea Zeno the Stoicke in that respect condemned the making of Images to their Gods as Clemens Alexandrinus also sheweth i Ibid. li. 5. Dicit Zeno oportere nec templa facere nec imagines nihil enim quod sit compositum esse Dijs dignum because nothing that is compounded is worthy of the gods Now therefore they will say to M. Bishop that he cannot deny but that God hath appeared in the likenesse of a man and therefore that nothing hindereth but that according to that apparition they may paint their gods like men though they know them to be of more excellent nature then can be fully expressed thereby Yea and if they adde any other thing thereto or worship them in any other shapes they do it not as to resemble the nature of the gods but to leade mens vnderstanding by such similitudes into some better knowledge of them They set forth Mars with helmet and â—arget other complements of fight Apollo with a glistering Crowne on his head and bow and arrowes in his left hand Mercurie with wings at his feete and a rod or mace in his right hand Cupid blâ—nd with a dart also in his hand but k Philo de ligat ad Caium Haec gestamina simulachris adduntur vt significent vtilitates ab his Dijs exhibitas humano generi â—uisque cultoribus these badges saith Philo Iudaâ—us are added to the Images to signifie the benefites that these gods yeelded to mankind and to their worshippers or otherwise some speciall properties effects seuerally belonging to euerie of them With the same mind and respect they sometimes worshipped Iupiter in the likenesse of a Swan Aesculapius of a Serpent Mercurie of a Dog Pan of a Goate Apis of an Oxe not thinking them to be like to anie of these but either for that they were said sometimes to haue appeared in such likenesses or for that they wold herby expresse somwhat that was memorable concerning them To be short there was nothing so absurd in their idolatries but they had their Hieroglyphicall and Physicall interpretations to salue the deuice and practise thereof and therefore M. Bishop hath no reason to except against them because they professe to haue bene led by the same reasons by which he seeketh to vphold the idolatrie of his owne part But that he may seeme not altogether without authoritie to say that which he saith he alledgeth vnto vs the second Nicene Councell approouing the drawing of the holy Ghost in forme of a Doue because he is read in the Gospell so to haue appeared Where it seemeth to me that he should haue done much more wisely for himselfe not to haue alledged that record at all because vndoubtedly his Reader must needs thinke that it is a very bad matter that he hath in hand for defence whereof for almost the space of fiue thousand yeares from the beginning of the world there is no example to be found If he had cited nothing it might haply haue bene supposed that he had notwithstanding somewhat to cite but no man will imagine that for his proofe he would haue come downe so lowe as that Councell if he had had anie better authoritie to rest vpon But the mishap is that that Councell also faileth
idolatrie or in perill thereof Take away the feare of superstition and against images or pictures we say nothing If therefore some of the Fathers not fearing or suspecting that heathenish abhomination wold get place in the Church were more secure in this behalfe and doubted not to adorne their Churches or other places with pictures images of Christ and his Apostles of Saints and Martyrs we wonder not thereat but yet how rare a matter this was may appeare by the poore store of examples that M. Bishop bringeth thereof That of Tertullian was onely p Tertul. de pudicitia ProcedaÌ„t picturae Calicum vestrorum si vel in illis perlucebit interpretatio pecudis illius ouis perditae à Domino requisitae humeris eius reuectae a picture vpon the chalice of a shepheard carying his lost sheepe vpon his shoulder as in figure of Christ seeking mankind recouering him to God of which kind of picture no man maketh any question The second example is of the Image that stood in the street at Cesarea Philippi which in the time of Iulian the Apostata was broken in peeces by the Paganes and the Christians q Sozomen hist lib. 5. cap. 20. Christiani cùm eius fragmenta collegissent in Ecclesia posueruÌ„t tooke vp the fragments thereof and set it in the Church Gregorie Nazianzene mentioneth certaine r Gregor Naz. Epist 49. Nequâ— enim si statuae deijciantur hoc nos excruciat c. images in the Church of Diocaesarea but what they were or whose they were it appeareth not but by his words of trimming not the images but Å¿ TempluÌ„ quod exstruximus omneque nostrum in eo exornando studium the Church it appeareth that they were onely for the ornament thereof Basil onely mentioneth an image or picture that did represent the t Basil Orat. de Barlaam Abibo certaminum ac victoriarum Martyris à vobis posita imagine victus c. Video manus ad ignem luctam exactiù◠à vobis descriptam c. burning of the hand of Barlaam the Martyr more liuely set foorth then he could by words declare it of which kind M. Bishop may see many in the stories of our Martyrs Their Pontificall is but a bastard witnesse and of too late yeares to tell vs what Constantine did he must bring vs better proofe or else we beleeue not that which he reporteth by it though to vs it be nothing The last instance out of u Chrysost demonstrat Quòd Christus sit Deuâ— In fronte nostra figuratur sic in sacramensa in sacerdotum ordinationibus sic iterum cum corpore Christi in mysticis caenis fulget Chrysostome and x August de sanct Ser. 49. Cum crucis charactere Altaris sacramenta confistuntur Austin though that out of Austin de Sanctis be a meere forgerie concerneth onely the signe of the Crosse vsed at the Sacrament as before was said not any standing image either of the Crosse or of him that was crucified and therefore is wholy impertinent to the matter here in question Hereby then the Reader may suppose that the vse of Pictures and Images in the Primitiue Church was not great but specially of those standards whereof our question is principally intended and by which idolatrie hath specially bene committed inasmuch as there are so few certaine and pregnant examples thereof to be found But whether it were greater or lesse experience hath since taught vs to misdoubt that which they misdoubted not We haue found it to be true which the author of the booke of Wisedome saith that y Wisd 14.10 images are a snare to the feet of the vnwise and that z Cap. 15.5 the sight of an image stirreth vp the desire of the ignorant so that he is in loue with the forme that hath no life euen of a dead image a August Epist 40. Cum his sedibus honorabili sublimitate locantur vt à precantibus immolantibus attendantur ipsa similitudine animatorum membrorum atque sensuum quam uis insensata exanima affiâ—iunt insumos animos vt viuere ac spirate videantur When they are honorably set vp in places aloft saith S. Austin that they may be beholden of men praying and offering vnto them euen by the very semblance of liuing members and senses albeit they be senslesse and without life they so affect weake minds as that they seeme to be aliue and to take breath b Idem in Psal 113 Ducit infirmo quodam affectu rapit infirma corda mortalium formae similitudo membrorum imitata compago post Quis adorat vel orat intuens simulachrum qui non sic assicitur vt ab eo se exaudiri putet ab eo sibi praestari quod desiderat speret The similitude of the forme saith he againe and imitation of the frame of the members leadeth and draweth by an infirmity of affection the weake hearts of men and who worshippeth or prayeth beholding an image but he is so affected as that he thinketh the same heareth him and hopeth that that which he desireth shall thereby be done for him Hauing then found this by experience to be true we are carefull to shunne all the danger of such superstition and therfore where we find Images subiect to such abuse as in the hands of Popish Recusants we deface and destroy them and otherwise that there may be no occasion of such abuse we eschew and auoide the setting vp of the like as haue bene vsually worshipped amongst theÌ„ chusing rather to garnish our Churches with sentences of Scripture or with such Imagerie as Solomon did the temple wherof there may be no daunger then with glorious standards and images of men which may againe giue occasion of stumbling and falling to the weake minds of simple and ignorant men As for M. Bishops reason why images of holy men should be placed in Churches it standeth vpon so fickle ground as that it must needes fall He alledgeth that the Apostle Heb. 9. maketh the Church to be a resemblance of heauen But that which the Apostle there saith is not of our Churches nor can be drawne thereto but is spoken of the Sancta sanctorum the most holy place of the temple of Hierusalem into which onely the high Priest entred in figure of Iesus Christ once in the yeare wherby saith he c Heb. 9.8 the holy Ghost signified that the way into the holiest of all that is into heauen was not yet opened while as yet the first tabernatle was standing Hence then we argue against M. Bishop out of his owne grounds that seeing in the most holy place of the temple which was indeed the resemblance of heauen there were admitted no images of holy men therefore in our Churches though they be granted to carrie a resemblance of heauen which he cannot proue yet it followeth not that Images should be admitted to haue any place Yea and the
serpent let them also be broken by their lawful superiour if no better remedie may be found But as that very brazen serpent duly worshipped many hundred yeares by the same people before they fell to idolatry as witnesseth S. Augustine * Lib. 3. de Trini cap. 10. where he reckoneth the brazen serpent among those signes which are worthy of religious worship so good Christians may worship all sorts of holy pictures so they think no god to dwell in them nor put any trust in the pictures but vse them onely to stir vp deuotion to keepe their minds from wandering after their domesticall affaires and to conserue the memory of Gods happy seruants R. ABBOT We are desirous to know where the superiours of the Romish Church haue broken any images to which godly honour hath bene giuen That it hath bene giuen to them it is confessed by Polydore Virgil as I haue before shewed acknowledging that a Polyd. Virgil. de inuent rer lib. 6. cap. 13. that part of pietie did litle differ from impiety and that the people did worship images not as figures but so as that they did put more trust in them then in Christ and the Saints to whom they were dedicated These words they deface and blot out with many other following which serue to the laying open of this wicked abuse but of the reforming of any abuse herein cōmitted we can yet vnderstand nothing And seeing Greg. de Val. plainly confesseth that they giue diuine worship to Images as hath bene shewed in the former section we must take this speech of M. Bishop to be vsed but for a shift without any meaning to haue their idols so roughly dealt with as he pretendeth Nay as the Pagans were made beleeue that b Ruffin hist lib. 2. cap 23. Persuaesio dispersa quòd si humana manus simulachrū illud contigisset terra dehiscens illico solueretur in Chaos repentè coelum rueret in praeceps if the image of Serapis were hurt or touched all the world would presently be dissolued so the Romish politicians perswade themselues that their golden world will soone come to nought if once they should offer to lay violent hands vpon their sacred and holy images As for that which he saith of the brasē serpent duly worshipped many hundred yeares it is a most impudēt lie neither is there so much as any shew of any thing whereupon he should so affirme The childrē of Israel had bin accustomed c 2. Kings 18.4 to burne incense to it Ezechias took knowledge of it which it seemeth some other godly kings before him had not done cōdemned it as wicked vnlawful to take away vtterly the occasion of that idolatry he brake the same brazen Serpent in peeces calling it in contempt because of the abuse of it a peece of brasse That it was worshipped then we find and for that cause was destroyed but that it was euer lawfully worshipped there is nothing to be found Yet M. Bishop very leudly seeketh to father this conceit vpon S. Austine d Aug. de Trinit lib. 3 cap. 10. Aliquādo ad hoc fit eadem species vel aliquantulū mansura sicut potuit serpens ille aeneus exaltatus in eremo sicut possunt literae vel peracto ministerio transitura sicut panis ad hoc factus in accipiendo sacramento consumitur sed ista quia hominibus nota sunt quia per homines fiunt honorem tanquā religiosa habere possunt stuporē tanquā mira non possunt As witnesseth Saint Austine saith he where he reckoneth the brazen Serpent among those signes which are worthy of religious worship The thing that S. Austine saith is this that to declare somewhat to vs from God sometimes a forme or kinde of thing is made either to abide for a while as might the brazen Serpent that was lift vp in the wildernesse and as letters or writing may or else to passe away as the seruice is performed as the bread made for that vse in receiuing the sacrament is consumed Hereupon he addeth But these things being knowne to men because they are done by men may haue honour as matters appertaining to religion but wonder as matters of maruell they cannot haue And what is here now whence M. Bishop should affirme that S. Austine accounted the brazen Serpent worthy of religious worship What doth he say more of the brazen serpent then he doth of letters and writing and will M. Bishop say that he will haue letters and writing to be worshipped Things appertaining to the vse of religion are to be honored by decent and seemly vsage as our Churches pulpits vestiments cups books and such like and yet they are not to be worshipped Saint Paul saith e 1. Tim 5.17 The elders that rule well are worthy of double honour and yet we hope M. Bishop will not vpon a good opinion of himselfe take vpon him to be worshipped f August contra ser Arian ca. 23. Honorat omnis qui adorat non autem adorat omnis qui honorat Euery one that worshippeth honoureth saith S. Austine but euery one that honoureth doth not worship Therefore Epiphanius saith of the blessed Virgine g Epiphan haeres 97. Sit in honore Maria Pater Filius Spiritus sanctus adoretur Mariam nemo adoret Deo debetur hoc mysterium c. Sancta est honorata at non ad adorationem Let Mary be in honour let the Father Sonne and holy Ghost be worshipped Let no man worship Mary this mystery belongeth vnto God She is holy and honorable but is not to be worshipped The brazen serpent then might be honored by being carefully kept as Manna was for the remembrance of the benefite thereby receiued but thereupon to assigne to it religious worship is a collectiō somwhat strange Seeing therefore the brazen serpent was neuer lawfully worshipped M. Bishop hath no argument from thence to prooue that good Christians may worship all sorts of holy pictures but M. Perkins argument standeth good that sith the brazen serpent erected by the commaundement of God himselfe yet when it was worshipped was therefore destroyed and abolished therefore much more all other images being erected onely of humane curiositie without commandement from God are to be defaced and destroyed when religious worship or seruice is done vnto them As for M. Bishops vses of his images to stirre vp deuotion to keepe the mind from wandering to conserue the memory of Gods happie seruants they are as I haue before shewed the vaine pretences of Idolaters neither is there any good effect to be expected from them to say nothing that these things are nothing to the point in hand which is the worshipping of them 13. W. BISHOP Now to the third argument which is iolly and worthy the wilde wit of a mad minister Christ would not so much as bow his knee vnto the diuell although he would haue giuen him the whole world for