Selected quad for the lemma: honour_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
honour_n	image_n	worship_n	worship_v	5,699	5	9.5098	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59894	A short summary of the principal controversies between the Church of England, and the church of Rome being a vindication of several Protestant doctrines, in answer to a late pamphlet intituled, Protestancy destitute of Scripture-proofs.	Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.	1687 (1687)	Wing S3365; ESTC R22233	88,436	166

Brazen Serpent which Moses set up in the Wilderness which was neither a God nor the Image of any God neither of the Lord Iehovah nor of any Heathen God and was not at first set up to be worshipped but only to be looked on by those who were stung with fiery Serpents and was preserved as a kind of holy Relique as a lasting memorial of that deliverance God wrought for them by it But when the Children of Israel burnt Incense to it though they could intend to Worship no other God in it but the Lord Iehovah who gave it that miraculous Power and could Worship it only as a memorative Sign of God's mighty Power yet Hezekiah destroyed it with the other Instruments of Idolatry 2 Kings 18. 4. And yet I think I could make a much better Apologie for the Worship of the Brazen Serpent than of the Cross. For that was a Type of Christ crucified a Type of God's own appointment a miraculous and wonder-working Type which I should think should as much deserve to be worshipped as the Picture or Image of the Tree whereon our Saviour died For if a memorative Sign of Christ deserve such Divine Honours let them give me a reason if they can why the Type of a cruoified Saviour ought not as much to be worshipped by the Iews in those days as the Figure of Christ's Cross now Thus the Protestants argue against the worship of Images from the Second Commandment and from the Reasons and Authorities of the Old Testament and as for the New Testament they can find no alteration made in this Law there we are commanded indeed to keep our selves from Idols but the Gospel has given us no new notion of Idolatry and therefore they reasonably conclude that what was Idolatry under the Old Testament is so under the New. And indeed they look upon the Second Commandment as a natural or moral Law and such Laws Christ neither did nor could alter no more than he could alter the Eternal Reasons of things For the Prohibition of Image-worship is founded in the Invisibility Purity Spirituality and immense Glory and Perfections of the Divine Nature which cannot be represented by matter and these Reasons are as unchangeable as God is and the Law must be as unchangeable as the Reasons of it And therefore we find these very Reasons urged by St. Paul in the times of the Gospel Forasmuch as we are the Offspring of God we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto Gold or Silver or Stone graven by Art or man's device Acts 17. 29. Not as if the Heathens fancied that their Gods were like the Images they worshipped for this is not only denied by their Philosophers but the very Nature of the thing shows it for they worshipped such kind of Images as it was impossible for them to conceive should be the likeness of any God not only the Images of Men but unpolished Stones and Trees Birds and Beasts and creeping things which they did not take to be Gods nor the proper likenesses of their Gods but symbolical Representations of them but the Apostles Argument is this That it is a ridiculous thing to make any Image of God when we cannot make any thing like him as foolish a thing as it would be to paint a Sound and that it is an affront to so glorious a Being to represent him by that which is so very unlike him and so infinitely unworthy of his Majesty and Greatness And though this Argument from the Invisibility and Spirituality of the Divine Nature does not conclude against making the Images of Christ and his Apostles who had the shape and figure of men which might be painted or carved no more than it did against many Images of Heathen Gods most of whom were no better than dead Men and Women yet it holds against the worship of any Image for God alone who is a pure and infinite Spirit is the sole Object of our religious Worship and to worship God by an Image is to reproach his Nature and to debase him as low as matter and to worship that which can be painted is to worship a false Object for Christ as God and so only he is the Object of our Worship cannot be painted and to worship any material Image though it be not made for the Supreme God is yet a Reproach to the Divine Nature as it signifies that something which is divine and a fit Object of our Adorations may be represented by material Images and Pictures But the Protestants consider farther that if the Worship of Images was forbid by the Law of Moses it must needs be much more contrary to the Gospel of our Saviour which has less to do with Matter and Sense than the Law had Our Saviour tells us That God is a Spirit and those who worship him must worship him in Spirit and in Truth in opposition to the external and typical and figurative Worship of the Law and if this typical Worship which was allowed when the Worship of Images was forbid be now abrogated as less pure and spiritual they think it very strange that the Worship of Images which is the most gross and material and unmanly Worship that can be invented shall be allowed under the spiritual state of the Gospel And there is one Argument to this purpose which I would desire our Author seriously to consider viz. That there is no material Temple in the Christian Church much less Statues and Images for the understanding of which we must consider what notions the Heathens had of their Temples what notion the Iews had of it and that there is no such Temple in the Christian Church As for the Heathens their Temples were the Houses of their Gods where they dwelt and were confined and shut up by some Magical Spells and Charms as the Images of their Gods were fastned there that they might be always present to attend the Sacrifices and Worship of their Votaries For they did not believe that their Gods were omnipresent and therefore they confined their presence to Temples and Images that they might know where to find them Their Temples were the places where they kept the Statues and Images of their Gods to whom such Temples were dedicated and where they believed such Gods dwelt according to that of Menander 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That a just and righteous God must tarry at home to defend those who placed him there This Origen gives an account of in his third and seventh Book against Celsus and the thing is so known that I need not prove it a Temple and an Image in the Heathen Theology were inseparably united an Image to represent their God a Temple as a House for him to dwell in and where they might be sure to find him Under the Jewish Law God so far condescended to the weakness of that People as to a have visible Presence among them first in the Tabernacle and then in the

but they offer up their prayers to God not in their own name but by the hands of their great High Priest and in the merits of his Sacrifice which is subordinate to the mediation of Christ and as consistent with it as the prayers of the people under the Law were with the Atonement and Expiation made by the Priest who offered the Blood of the Sacrifice and the Incense to God. The work of a Mediator is to present our Prayers and Petitions and to give value and efficacy to them and therefore we must pray our selves we must put up our Petitions to God or our Advocate and Mediator cannot present them but is it injurious to the Office of an Advocate that we draw up a Petition which he is to present to our King So that the prayers of good Men for each other is no encroachment upon the Office of a Mediator for our prayers for others as well as for our selves must be offered to God by the hands of our Mediator And this shows also that to desire the prayers of good Men on Earth is no derogation from the Intercession of Christ for we only desire them to joyn with us in our Petition just as if we should procure some persons of worth and note to subscribe our Petition to our Prince which is no injury to our Advocate who presents it For they are two different things to subscribe a Petition and to present it to our Prince And besides this a prayer though it be the prayer of the best Man in the World is but a prayer still and may be answered or rejected as God sees fit but whatever prayer is presented by our Mediator is always granted For he mediates with authority and power he is able to save to the uttermost all those that come unto God by him seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them Under the Law the atonement and expiation of the Priest was always valid to all the intents and purposes of the Law that is to an external and legal purity much more is the mediation of Christ effectual for if it ever miscarried he could not be the object of our Faith and hope A supplicant may heartily desire our good but our Mediator by vertue of his office obtains all the petitions and prayers he presents and every body sees that these two are very consistent But though to desire the prayers of good Men for us on Earth do not derogate from the Intercession of Christ yet to flie to the aid of Saints in Heaven does For that makes them our Advocates and Intercessors not our fellow Supplicants whereas there is but one Mediator in Heaven who appears in the presence of God for us as under the Law only the High Priest could enter into the Holy of Holies which was a Type of Heaven and did prefigure that great High Priest who was to ascend into Heaven with his own Blood. I am sure the Church of Rome does not look upon the Saints in Heaven to be our fellow supplicants as good Men on Earth are but to be our Advocates and Intercessors and then they are Intercessors in Heaven where none but the High Priest was to intercede and they are Intercessors without a Sacrifice which is contrary to the Analogy both of the Old and New Testament For we have no more Intercessors than Priests and we have but one High Priest who is ascended into Heaven and appears in the presence of God for us And if intercession be annexed to the Priesthood I desire to know how the Virgin Mary comes to be so powerful a Mediatrix and Advocatress for we never heard of any she-High Priest before This is answer enough to what he intimates that desiring the Intercessions of the blessed is not more superstitious and derogatory to our Lord's Mediatorship than intreating the Prayers of holy Men Militant For to pray for one another in this World is as consistent with the mediation of Christ as to pray for our selves but the Intercessions of Saints for us in Heaven is inconsistent with the only Mediatorship of Christ. But praying to Saints in Heaven which he modestly calls Desiring the Intercessions of the blessed is of a different consideration and more injurious to God than to a Mediator considered only as our Mediator For prayer is an act of worship peculiar and appropriate to God and therefore not due to our Mediator himself if he were not God. We must pray to God in the name of our Mediator and present our Petitions to God by him but if our Mediator were not God we must not pray to him and thus they are injurious to our only Mediator when they pray to God in any other name and expect to be heard for the sake and merits of any other Mediator but only Christ as they always do on the Festivals of their Saints but to pray to Saints also is an additional crime it is giving the peculiar worship of God to creatures which I told him was expresly forbid by our Saviour Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve But says our Author I see not how he can deduce from it this last Text any thing to his purpose till it appear that all Prayer is Divine worship or that we pray to Saints just as we do to God. But now methinks till he make the contrary appear it is very much to the purpose For prayer is appropriated to God in Scripture and all Mankind have thought prayer an act of religious worship and have been able to distinguish between a religious prayer and begging an Alms or making any request to our earthly Prince or Parents or Friends and if our Author does not understand this I have directed him in the Margin where he may be better informed XII Honouring the Cross the Reliques and Representations of our Lord and his Saints with that degree of Reverence as we do the Gospels commonly kissed and sworn by Altar and other sacred Utensils is Idolatry This I told him was ill represented for those who charge them with Idolatry in worshipping the Cross and Reliques and Images charge them also with giving more religious Honours and Worship to them than that external respect which we allow to the Gospels and religious Utensils as both the Decrees of their Councils and the visible practice of their Church proves To this our Author replies Our general Councils tell Protestants we pay no other honour to any creature than what than such an external respect as is due to the Bible I never heard before that they made the Bible the object of their worship but I am sure some which they call general Councils have defined the Worship of Images and Reliques witness the second Council of Nice and the Council of Trent It is strange to me that at this time of day he can think to impose upon Protestants with such shams Surely he has never read the Doctrines and Practices of