Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A53984
|
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.
|
Pelling, Edward, d. 1718.
|
1687
(1687)
|
Wing P1105; ESTC R1303
|
22,843
|
37
|
a Word a fine Notion a pretty Entertainment but no concern of Religion or Conscience 2. That Respect which is given to things Sacred consists in a Decent regard of them and in using them after a different manner from other things But Worship is quite another thing viz. A professing our subjection to the Object of our adoration upon the score of his Dominion and Power over us as our Superior and when either the Nature of such adoration or the Circumstances of it argue it to be Religious it is then Religious or Divine Worship peculiarly belonging to God because it is a Token of our Absolute Subjection to him as having Supream and Absolute Soveraignity over all The greatest men in the Church of Rome have had this Notion of Divine-Worship and had this wonderful Discourser understood or consider'd it he could not have been so very Indifferent about this matter because the Dispute is not about Words but Things and things of very great Concernment viz. Whether such actions and gestures as are due to God and by the Divine Law are appropriated to God and in the opinion of mankind are Testifications of Gods Supream and Absolute Dominion may be perform'd to and before a dumb Image Now this is that which we charge upon the Church of Rome that there are hardly any external acts of Religious Worship but what She performs to God and to Images in Common and that according to Her doctrine Images are truly and properly to be Worshipped with Worship taken in a strict Sense and as it is distinguish't from and signifies a great deal more than bare Honour or Respect or Reverence For the clearing of this because it is a great Controversie between my angry Adversary and Me I shall at present trouble him only with some ready observations out of my good Friend and when he has answer'd them I promise faithfully to furnish him with more These observations are 1. Concerning the Worship given by the Church of Rome to Images in General 2. Concerning the Worship given to the Cross of Christ in Particular 1. The Worship given by the Church of Rome to Images in general is True and Real Worship Worship that is a great deal higher than Respect or Reverence Worship in a proper and strict Sense Worship that doth consist not only in the External Acts of Divine Adoration but also in an inward affection which implies submission as Cardinal Lugo doth confess This my Learned Author shews to have been the thing intended both by the Second Council at Nice and by the men at Trent who appealed to that Council that the most eminent Divines in the Church of Rome thought so and accordingly maintain'd it as an Article of Faith wherein all Catholicks agree that true and proper Worship is to be given not only to the Exemplars represented by Images but also to the very Images themselves as Suarez Bellarmine Tannerus Ysambertus and others do positively affirm And lest this should be thought to be the Sense of a few private men only he further shews that some great Divines who were at the Council of Trent and could not but understand the Sense of that Council say the same thing For so Dominicus Soto determines that Images are not intended by the Church only for helps to memory but for Worship And whereas our Discourser would make us believe that this Worship is no more but that Respect which is shewn to the Bible c. Soto doth utterly Reject this for saith he We do not Worship the Scriptures or Names of Saints which call them to our minds but as to Images we ought to think otherwise for they do not only raise our minds to worship those who are represented by them sed easdem ipsas debemus adorare but we ought to worship the Images themselves So likewise Naclantus another great Man at Trent tells the World that 't is a needless caution for any to say that they worship before the Image sed adorare imaginem sine quo volueris scrupulo but men may say it roundly and without any scruple that they worship the Image With these Ambrosius Catharinus agrees too that True and Real worship is required to be given to Images and concludes that Images are not meerly for instruction or memory exciting devotion but that they are set up properly for worship Therefore if any man asks another are Images to be worshipped let him saith he answer without any fear They are because Images being set apart by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost for such a Sacred use do obtain such a degree of Sanctification that whoever violates them is guilty of Sacriledge and Treason against the Divine Majesty because God himself is most truly believed to be present in them after a particular manner and he shews his power and presence by them using them often for Oracles c. If this be not enough to convince my Adversary of the vanity of his pretences there is one observation more which deserves his consideration viz. That whereas some of the Roman Church as Durandus Holkot and others taught that Images ought not to be worshipped with the same worship with the thing represented but were said to be worshipped improperly and abusively because at their presence men did call to mind the objects represented by them which are worshipped before the Images but not properly the Images themselves this opinion was lookt upon as Heretical and therefore Suarez and many other eminent men disputed hotly against that opinion as being contrary to the Catholick Faith of the Roman Church which is that an Image is not only the occasion or sign exciting men to worship the thing represented but even the material Object to which the act of Worship and the Intention of the worshipper is to be directed and carried and which ought to be worshipped with the same worship with the Exemplar it self And certainly Ariaga was in the right when urging this to be the sense of the Church he used this strong Argument to prove it because it is not credible that if this had been all the Councils had determined viz. That Images are not the objects of Worship but only the occasions and means exciting men to worship the Exemplars they should never think of such an easie way to satisfie Dissenters as the declaring of this would have been But saith he the Controversie lay in another Point namely that Images did not deserve immediate worship and then he concludes that when the Fathers condemned those for Hereticks who denied that worship they did not determine that Images might be used as a condition of worship but that True and Real worship was to be given to them 2. Concerning that worship which is given to the Cross of Christ in particular 't is notorious that according to the common received Doctrine of the Romanists not only Inferiour Religious Worship but that which they call Latria meaning Supream Divine Soveraign Worship properly due to God
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-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