CHAP. V. The second Precept, which concerneth Images.In treating upon this place, it seemeth good to use this method, th

CHAP. V. The second Precept, which concerneth Images.In treating upon this place, it seemeth good to use this method, th

CHAP. V. The second Precept, which concerneth Images.

I n treating upon this place, it seemeth good to use this method, that first we consider as touching the original and beginning of images; afterward of the use of them, whether it be lawful; last of all, if they have any use, whether they ought to be suffered in temples and holy assemblies.

As concerning the name, among the Hebrews, an image is called Temuna, Tselem, and (as some will) Teraphim; of the Greeks, εἰκόνες; of the Latins

Imagines & signa, that is, Images and pictures. Thus much of the words.

But as touching the thing, we must understand, that the thing signified by the image, is no absolute thing; but must be placed in those things, which have relation to another. For every image is the image of something, even as the likeness is called the likeness of another thing. And those things, which be compared either in quantity or quality, have relation one to another. And the things, which be compared together in quantity, be either equal, or greater, or lesser: and in quality they are reckoned like, unlike, and diverse.

Seeing therefore that an image is counted (as I have said) among those things, which have relation one to another; it is among the number of those,

which appertain unto quality: for it expresseth the lineaments, figures, and colors, and such other like of a living creature. And therefore we may thus define the same; An image is a certain similitude, whereby something is represented unto us, which may be discerned with the eyes. And this I therefore say, because we may as well read, as hear many things alike, which properly be not called images. The matter of images is not all one: for sometimes they be made of stone, of wood, metal, plaster, clay, and such other like. And sundry artificers do make them of that matter, which they have in hand: the potter, of clay; the carpenter, of timber; the mason, of stone; the founders, of metal, brass, silver, and gold; the painters also, of their colors.

And we must not pass it over, that idols also are images, whereof Tertullian wrote an elegant book, which he entitled De idololatria; and he examining the word [idol,] derived it from εἶδος, and εἶδος is a likeness, image, or form: whereupon cometh εἴδωλον, which may be called, a little form. The form of images, is the view of a similitude, wherein something is expressed, so as it may be perceived of the beholders. The end whereto images are, seemeth to be delight: for Aristotle in his Rhetoric's, among other things which breed pleasure, reckoneth imitation, where an image seemeth to be a certain emulation of God. For God created all things; wherefor men being unable to create the things themselves, do imitate the production of God, when they make images of those things, which he himself hath brought forth in nature. Images also are made for adorning sake: for they beautify the places where they be put. Furthermore, they have invented them, to the intent they might not suffer the remembrance of them which be absent, or dead, or of things done, to be extinguished. Also they have been devised for honor sake: for if a man had well deserved of the

Common-wealth, images were erected to him. So did Cicero counsel, that there should be an image set up unto Servius Sulpitius, which died in his embassage. And there have been some among them in old time, which would not only have others, but also themselves to be worshipped with images. For Nabuchad-nezar king of the Chaldeans commanded, that within his own kingdom himself should be honored by an image of gold. And among the princes of the Romans, Gaius Caligula would be expressed by images, with this inscription being added; Gaius Caligula Caesar, a god.

And such an image he endeavored to bring into the temple of Jerusalem; whereupon there arose very great troubles, seditions, and tumults in Judea.

The which thing Nero afterward would have to be done, and for that cause the Hebrews revolted from the people of Rome, whereof appeareth, that images were also translated to the service of God. Neither did there want some, which erected images to the affects or appetites wherewith they were corrupted. The drunkards carried about, the banners of Bacchus; the lascivious people, of Venus; the greedy and covetous, of Pluto; the mankillers, of Mars: and to prosecute everyone, it would be too long. Let the reader search for this in Tertullian, in his book De idololatria. But the honester sort of men did frame images of virtue and honor: sometimes also they erected the images of the elders, to the intent that men might be stirred up to imitate their forefathers: of which matter Salust wrote in the prolog of his history of Jugurth.

2. Seeing we have said enough touching the end, it remaineth that we examine the efficient cause of images. Artificers indeed were authors of them, and surly cunning workmen. Wherefore, from them they received their estimation: for the honor of images consisteth not of the matter, seeing they may be made unhandsomely even of gold. Certainly, all their honor is

of the form, that in very deed they may in perfect similitude finely represent that thing, which they betoken. Jupiter Olympius obtained honor and estimation of Phydias, and the picture of Alexander the great by Apelles, even as the well graven pots of Alcimedontes, and the instruments of Solomon's house by Iramus that notable artificer. To these things let us ad, that our forefathers, to bring the more estimation unto their images, feigned them to have fallen from heaven. Wherefore, the image of Pallas of old time was called διοπετές, that is to say, Fallen from Jupiter. Wherefore we read in the 19th of the Acts, that the town clarke of Ephesus said to the people;

Who knoweth not that ye be worshippers of the great goddess Diana, whose image came down from heaven? And it must not be omitted, that seeing the ages in times past were very rude, the images at first were not orderly and perfectly wrought, as afterward they were. For of a long time men had unwrought stones, stocks, and pillars, instead of images. Yea and in Rome, at the first, a spear was the ensign of Mars: afterward, by little and little, there succeeded more cunning artificers, who so greatly prevailed in the perfecting of art, that as the poet wrote, they drew lively countenances out of the marble stone. Wherefore their images in old time were called βρότες, ἀπό τοῦ βροτοῦ, that is, Earthly men; because they seemed to be like unto men. Images were made so fair and beautiful, that there were found, which doted in love towards them, and as it were coupled with them most filthily.

3. Moreover, there might be somewhat spoken of the antiquity of images: but that thing is very obscure, and all be not of one mind touching the same.

Some do call back the beginning of them unto Prometheus, which first shaped a man of clay, and afterward gave life thereunto. The Hebrews ascribe the original of images, unto the nephew of Adam, which was called

Enoch: for it is said, that then began the name of God to be called upon.

Which they interpret, that men of that age began falsely to give the name of God unto images. Tertullian in his book against idolatry, bringeth the testimony of Enoch against images. Whereupon it appeareth, that the same book of Enoch, which is reckoned among the Apocryphal books of scripture, was yet extant, when Tertullian lived. Thence also Jude in his epistle brought a testimony. And this we do easily prove by the holy scriptures, that in the time of Jacob, there were images, or idols: for we do not only read, that Rahel carried away the idols of her father Laban; but that Jacob also warned his family, that they should bring them all unto him, to the end he might bury them in the ground. Yea it is gathered by very probable reasons, that there was worshipping of idols in Chaldea, in the time of Abraham. But if the matter be revoked to Christendom, there were

Gnostics, and Capocratians, which are said to have had the images of Christ with them, which they privily worshipped among themselves, burning incense unto them, whereunto they added the images of Paul, and also of Homer and Pythagoras, and of certain others: as Irenaeus testifieth in his first book, and 24th chapter.

And among the Gnostics, one Marcellina is much celebrated by Epiphanius, who had such manner of images. The very same thing doth

Augustine touch in his book De haeresibus, ad quod vult Deum. Eusebius in the seventh book, and 18th chapter writeth, that there was kept among some, the images of the apostles and martyrs, which they had private at home with them; and he addeth, that he himself saw them: and it is not to be omitted, that he confesseth this custom to be derived from the Ethnics.

Damascene, where he purposely entreateth of this matter, saith, that Christ sent unto Abgarus the picture of his phisnomy, printed in a cloth, to the intent he might comfort himself therewith, when he could not see him

present. They feign also, that Christ going to suffer, delivered the print of his face in a handkerchief, to Veronica, the which they say is kept at Rome: and under that name they honor and reverence a certain picture at this day, with great superstition. Also Eusebius writeth, (and the same is reported by Sozomenus) that in the city of Caesarea, which was afterward called

Apamea, there was an image of Haemoroussa, together with the image of Christ, the which afterward was removed, and thrown down by Julianus the apostate. And there want not some rash men, which affirm, that Luke was a painter, and that he drew very many pictures of the blessed virgins, the which being dispersed abroad among the cities and provinces, they worship at this day with great superstition. Surely, if we shall believe Jerome, Luke did exercise the science of physic. And indeed Paul in his epistle to the Colossians, maketh plain mention of Luke the physician. But whether the same were he that wrote the history of the Gospel, and of the Acts of the apostles; I know not: but that he was a painter, or a drawer of pictures, none of the ancient writers do tell. And thus much touching the beginning of images. Now it resteth that we show some distinction of them.

4. The partition of them must be taken from those things that are represented by them: for such things as are referred to another thing, are wont to be distinguished by their correlatives. Wherefore, images do either represent God the Creator of all things, or else, things created, which be the sundry workmanships of God. And among those things, which be created, we place even Christ himself as touching his humanity. This being set down, it seemeth meet to be determined, that all creatures may be represented by images: yea the very angels themselves, I mean not in respect of their spiritual nature, but in such sort as they have exhibited themselves to be seen of men. Wherefore the godly men, which either be

dead, or yet living, kings, stars, plants, stones, earth, sea, and such like may be represented by pictures. Also we make a distinction of images, that some of them be true, and some of them false. Among the true, those be reckoned, which do represent those things, which either be, or have been, or hereafter shall be. But those are called false, which represent those things, that neither be, have been, nor yet ever shall be: as are the Chymaeras and Centaurs. There be also some images filthy, and some honest, according as those things be, which are expressed by them. Also they may be distinguished, according to the circumstance of the place; because some be set in a holy place, and some in places profane. Again, others there be, which are appointed in respect of worship and religion: but others are erected as ornaments, and only for the remembrance of a thing. Now are we to examine, according to the distinctions set forth, what images be lawful, and what be unlawful.

5. And first I think good to speak of those, which represent God. But before all things, I study with myself, for what cause such images were invented; and I suppose, that men thought, that by a certain law it was laid upon them, that they should worship God, and that they should have him present in their minds. But they saw themselves distracted with many cares, and that they could not do the same continually. Whereupon they gathered, that it should be needful to have admonishers; that they being distracted, might call themselves home again to the worshiping of God: and they judged images fit things, whereby they might be often put in remembrance.

In deed they supposed that which was very true; namely, that men partly through infirmity, and partly by reason of sundry and manifold cares, should have need of admonishers: but therein they erred, because they would procure to themselves such admonishers as were dumb. God of his

own goodness hath abundantly helped this necessity, who hath set forth all his works for men to behold; to the intent that they having thoroughly considered of them, might be admonished of him that wrought them.

Wherefore David very wisely said; The heavens declare the glory of God.

The Patriarchs, when they would sacrifice, went unto high places, where they might behold the tall trees, the heaven, the floods, and the earth lying round about; and thereby lifted themselves up to the knowledge of God the creator. But contrariwise, foolish men would devise images to themselves, and at length fell to that, that they called stocks and stones, gods. Wherefore

Jeremiah, in his second chapter, earnestly reproveth them, which feared not to say unto a stock; Thou art my father; and unto a stone; Thou hast begotten me. And thus, while these men would have such kind of admonishers, they were drawn far away from the true worshiping of God; and finally, they attributed unto images, the purging of sins. They held them also for gods, which did guard the quick and the dead, and every particular man, and likewise the whole city. From thence also they endeavor to wrest oracles, and they make vaunt, that their prayers poured out unto them, are heard: and going yet further, they sacrifice daily before them. This boldness or rashness of men, did exceedingly displease God, and not without cause.

For a prince would take it in ill part, if the honor, which is only due unto himself, should be given unto his servants: wherefore God himself in the prophet Isaiah saith; I will not give mine own honor unto another.

6. But some man will say, that this invention had no ill meaning; but rather a good and right intent (as they call it,) but the same right intent doth oft times mar all. Neither doth it suffice to make men's works righteous, unless those things be added or put to, which we have else-where sufficiently spoken of. Athanasius wrote against idols, and among other

things, he saith; They which lived in times past, made images, to the intent that out of them oracles might be uttered: and for so much as God might not be known, but by visible signs, and therefore they judged that God was to be called upon in images; because they thought heavenly powers were present with them. And Arnobius in his sixth book against the Gentiles reporteth, that the nations said, that they did not worship stones, but the presence of God exhibited about these images. For they thought, that images through certain dedications, were so adorned and purged, that the power of God came fully unto them. And in dedicating of them, they thorough a certain perverse imitation of the old fathers, applied holy unction's (as they called them.) For Jacob also anointed a stone, and Moses was commanded to anoint in a manner all the necessary implements about the Tabernacle. Eusebius also, in his ninth book, the third and 11th chapters, writeth, that thereto did come the enchantments of devils, and incredible sorcery: for so much as there were daily wonders wrought at the images, whereby the silly people were in sundry wise seduced, to the great detriment of the church. He declareth the history of Theotechnus, which was punished for his wickedness. Yea furthermore, Theodoretus in the fifth book, 22nd chapter, saith, that the craftiness of enchanters came hereunto, who erected images against walls, and gave answer through holes bored in them. Wherefore the people were marvelously amazed, when they supposed that the images spake. It can hardly be credited, with how great labor and difficulty men could be brought from the worshipping of images. Eusebius in his third book of Constantine life, saith; When images were subverted, in them there was found the bones of dead men, dry skulls, loathsome clothes, and small bundles of sticks: which things our men in showing to the people said; Behold (I beseech ye) what ye have hitherto worshipped. And he

affirmeth, that by those same shows, very much was brought to pass with the people.

7. Now that the causes be set forth, why men endeavored to express God by images; it seemeth good to dispute, whether it be lawful to represent

God by them. And it must be determined, and that freely without exception, that the same is not lawful. For God commanded the children of Israel, that they should remember they saw no image upon mount Horeb, and therefore forbad, that they should make any such. Howbeit, the place is more large, if it be more diligently examined. For there he commanded that they should not make any images at all, to do any worship unto them. And in the forty chapter of Isaiah he saith; To whom will ye resemble God, or by what similitude will ye express him? And in the 44th chapter he confirmeth the same, saying; Who shall be so hardy to fashion out God, or to make a molten or graven image that is profitable for nothing? I marvel that among the Papists, Dominicus Azotus, upon the epistle to the Romans, the first chapter, durst write, that by that commandment it is not forbidden unto the Christians, to make images resembling the shape of man; seeing the law hath only made mention there, of creeping things, of birds and fishes: whereas nevertheless it is there by express words forbidden, that no images should be made, either of the male, or of the female.

Moreover, it is thus written in the Psalm; Mouths they have, and speak not; feet they have, and walk not; ears they have, and yet hear not; noses they have, and smell not. And although the rest of the members may be understood touching brute beasts, yet that saying, that They have mouths, and cannot speak, belongeth peculiarly unto men, forsomuch as speech was not given unto brute beasts. Wherefore Lucretius called them beasts without mouths. Which interpretation, Augustine brought in the same place.

Furthermore, Isaiah in the 44th chapter, laugheth the Carpenter to scorn, who of the one part of a tree being cut down, maketh an image, of the other part kindleth fire, and therewith dresseth bread and meat. He carveth it

(saith he) and marvelously worketh it, that he may express the similitude of a man. By all these things it appeareth, that even the images of men (which be ordained for divine service) are forbidden. It is proved therefore, that images, which represent God himself, be forbidden by testimonies of the holy scriptures. Whereunto we must add, that by the testimony of them we be taught, that God is a spirit: whereof it followeth, that by lineaments and colors he cannot be expressed.

Further, it is there written; that None hath seen God at any time.

Wherefore, if he be seen of none, and Dwelleth in the light that cannot be attained unto, how can he be set forth in a picture or graven image to be seen? Moreover, he is infinite: but those things, which be painted, graven, or molten, be drawn together and limited; yea rather, they be circumscribed by the workmanship itself. Besides this, images for the most part be made by men, to the intent that they, which be absent, may after a sort be present with us. But God is everywhere, nether is he absent from anything.

Wherefore it is written in the Psalm; If I go up into heaven, thou art there; If I go down into hell, thou art there also. We must not therefore make him present by images, seeing he is present always, and in all things. Hereunto add, that we must in an image express with apt likeness, the thing which should be represented. But when God by any image is represented, things which rather be unlike and contrary, than like and agreeable, are likened unto him. Moreover, God (as all men must of necessity grant) hath no beginning; but all images are invented by crafts-men. Whereunto may be added, that God, what and how great a one soever he be, is continually

moving or doing, and is never idle: whereas images be senseless, and do no manner of thing at all.

Over this, God himself is all wholly knowledge and understanding: but images perceive nothing, and do understand nothing at all. Besides, God not only consisteth of himself, but also maketh all things to consist, and stand by his word: but images are not able to consist of themselves, for they are stayed up of artificers, by props and great posts. Yea and further, God himself hath no end of his nature and life; whereas images wax old, and in the end come to naught. And seeing God is of nature invisible (as hath been confirmed before:) crafts-men, in picturing and painting him out, do follow their own imaginations, and not the divine nature, which they cannot see.

And they be not afraid to ascribe those imaginations and conceits of their minds unto the name of God: but this is altogether wicked and ungodly. So it came to pass, when the Israelites said unto Aaron; Make us gods, which may go before us. And he made them a molten calf, and called it by the name of Jehovah; For tomorrow (saith he) it is the feast of Jehovah.

Jeroboam also, when he made the golden calves, commanded them to be worshipped by the name of Jehovah. Wherefore, it is written in the 14th chapter of the book of Wisdom, that they applied the holy and immutable name of God unto idols. And in the 17th of the Acts, Paul saith; We ought not to think that the Godhead is like to gold, or silver, graven by art and invention of crafts-men. If so be then that the similitude of God be not in images; those which be of this kind must be utterly rejected.

The complaint of Seneca is commonly known, whereof Augustine maketh mention in the sixth book De civitate Dei, and forty chapter, out of the book named De superstitione, which is lost, and is not anywhere to be found at this day. Augustine's words be these: for when he entreated concerning

images; They dedicate (saith he) the holy, immortal, and inviolable gods, in a matter most vile and immovable, giving unto them the habits of men, wild beasts, and fishes: and some indue them with diverse bodies of a mingled kind. They call them gods, which if they should receive life, and suddenly meet one, they would be taken for monsters. But the holy scriptures have laughed to scorn this presumption and foolishness of men; especially Isaiah, in the 44th chapter, as we have already heard before. To these things let us add, that Aristotle in his second book De physico auditu, alledgeth the saying of the philosopher Protarchus, which said, that Those stones be fortunate, whereof images be made: for they be laid upon the altars, and have honor and reverence done unto them by men; whereas others not unlike to them, lie upon the pavement, are trodden upon with their feet, and spit upon. Besides this, let it come to mind, that the very works of God, which be extant in the nature of things, cannot perfectly show him.

Wherefore seeing the workmanships of men be a great deal more imperfect, because art always faileth in comparison of nature: how should we hope that God himself can be expressed by the industry of crafts-men? Neither must it be omitted, that the scripture, when it speaketh of images (to the intent it may drive men from them) it calleth them filthiness, lies, things of nothing, abomination, and affliction. Howbeit, we must grant, that God would have some signs, whereby he would open himself unto men. Such were the ark of the covenant, the tabernacle of Moses, the temple of Solomon, and also the pillar of fire, and of the cloud: but it must be considered, that he devised and ordained these signs for himself. Neither is it lawful for men, to do so much as it is for God.

Augustine De fide & Symbolo, when he expounded the article, wherein is said, that Christ sitteth on the right hand of his father, he saith; We must not

imagine, that God is endued with the shape of a man, that Christ doth bow his knees, and sitteth on the right side of him: it is a wicked thing to have such manner of images. But in the fourth book, the ninth and 31st chapter

De civitate Dei, he hath more manifestly expressed the same, where he commendeth Varro, which wrote in his Theology, that they which first of all others made images unto God, first took away the fear of them from men; namely, because of the vile matter whereof they were formed, and because they moved not of themselves: and they did err more, for so much as in making of images, they did not reform their error, but rather increased the same. Also he praiseth Varro, who alloweth of the ancient people of Rome, because they, for the space of 70 years, worshipped God without images: neither did Varro fear to bring the people of the Jews to be a witness of that thing. And he added also, that whiles the people of Rome worshipped God without images, they honored him more purely, than afterward they did.

And these things be not only recited by Augustine, and Varro; but they be also written by Plutarch in the life of Numa Pompilius, by Dionysius

Halicarnassus, by Clemens Alexandrinus, and also Tertullian, as it is recited by Eusebius. Besides this, Herodotus in his first book, and Strabo in his

15th book, do show, that the Persians in old time made no images. When Tarquinius Priscus, who was endued with the learning of the Greeks and Hetruscans, reigned at Rome, there were images brought into the city.

Which act Augustine doth marvelously mislike of, who most evidently showeth, that it is not lawful to counterfeit God by images. And in his eight book De civitate Dei, 23rd and 24th chapters he sharply reproveth Hermes

Trismegistus, who presumed to say, that Men do well in making of images, that even as God made heavenly gods, so he gave power unto men to make earthly gods.

8. But at this day in Christendom, there be such kind of images suffered, whereby God himself may be represented. For, to express the blessed

Trinity, thou mayest see every-where in the churches, a man painted with three heads. In another place they put a tall old man for God the father; who hath standing before him a young man, that is to say, the son; and between both they place the picture of a dove, and that is instead of the holy Ghost.

Neither do the rulers of the churches take away these things, but allow of them: howbeit, with such fond arguments, as be necessary to repeat, least we should seem to dissemble anything. The seventh Synod, which was held at Nice, in the reign of Constantine and Iren, thus concluded; For it is God, which the image teacheth, but itself is not God; look upon this, but worship with thy mind, that which thou beholdest in the same image. But what is to be judged of this Synod, we shall see in due place. In the meantime, let us hear the objections of the adversaries.

First of all they say, that the holy scriptures have given occasion to form images: for seeing they have attributed unto God the parts of a man; namely, eyes, ears, head, nostrils, feet, &c. There seemeth no cause why, but that the painters and gravers may form the very same unto him. Also it is written in Ose; I am likened by hands of the prophets. And in the seventh of Daniel; The ancient of days was showed unto the prophets, which had the hears of his head white like wool. Also there was showed unto Ezekiel the similitude of a man. Yea and Isaiah saith, that He saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, &c. And Moses also with the elders saw God sitting upon a throne, and upon the mountain he beheld his hinder parts like unto a man going away. Wherefore they say, that seeing those things have been showed, and have been seen by the prophets, why shall it be thought a wicked part, to plant out the self-same things in colors and engravings?

[ 1] Of some it is answered, that the diversity of members, which is attributed unto God in the holy scriptures, did show by a certain mystery, that the divine nature should in time to come take upon it a human nature. [

2] But I let pass this answer for this time; affirming, that we ought here to have regard to the goodness of God, whereby it did so humble itself unto our infirmity, that seeing we cannot understand his nature, he would under the name of members or parts, open, or rather shadow unto us certain of his properties. For by the eye he describeth his providence, by the arm his might, by hands his workmanship, by nostrils his wrath, and the rest of like sort. [ 3] Where it is afterward said, that it is lawful for us to use the same lineaments, colors, and engravings, it followeth not: for there is no law given unto God. All things which he doth rightly and justly, are not lawful for men to do: for God taketh revenge of his enemies; he commanded the father to kill his son, and willed the Hebrews, to take away the goods of the Egyptians, the which nevertheless is wicked for men, either to do, or command: for he appointed laws for men, and not for himself. And for so much as he is the author of the law, he may other whiles except some things from it. Wherefore we must assure our selves, that what he did, he did not without consideration.

[ 4] In deed he expressed himself sometimes by certain apparitions; but in them there was no danger of idolatry: for who is there that worshippeth words either spoken or written; else offereth sacrifices unto them? For words pass away, knowledge also and conceits of the mind are put out of remembrance: but if so be things themselves be painted or engraven outwardly, men will readily adore them, burn incense to them, and pray unto them. [ 5] Further, let us consider, that the prophets, which had such kind of forms in their mind, did never picture them, nor yet made images of

them: for they did know, that God forbad such things to be done. Neither did they dispute with themselves in this manner; God hath thus declared himself unto us, therefore it is lawful so to express him out in images. [ 6]

Besides this, God commanded that there should be a propitiatory upon the ark, as though his seat should be there: but the same was an empty seat, neither was there any image of God therein. [ 7] Moreover, the scriptures which do shadow God many ways, if they be attentively read, will teach us, that God is a spirit, and without a body: and so do they meet with that error, which might arise in our minds. But a picture or image, although we behold the same a thousand times, doth signify none other thing, than that which was showed at the first sight. Wherefore there is neither way the like reason. And it is truly proved, that God is not to be expressed by images.

But they make their moan, and say; What shall we then do? Shall not God be some manner of ways counterfeited, that our minds thereby may be carried or lifted up to the consideration of heavenly things?

We answer, [ 1] that of his images there be enow already extant: for Christ is the lively image of him, let us therefore behold him and his acts, and in him we shall know God abundantly. [ 2] Furthermore, we have in the holy scripture, which most perfectly painteth out God to us, so much as is requisite to the painting out of him. What need have we either of wood, brass, gold, silver, or other sensible matter? [ 3] Again, if it delight us to behold the lively images of him, let us look upon godly men, which now be, and sometime have been in the church: for they undoubtedly were from the beginning created, and afterward were restored to the image of God. [ 4] We have moreover, as it is above declared, all the works of nature, wherein the printed steps of God's power do appear. [ 5] Further, we have the visible sacraments, wherewith the word of God is joined. Surely these things may

suffice, and ought to be enough to lift up men's minds to the beholding of God and his properties. [ 6] But curious and importunate men, besides these things which I have recited, bring yet into the church, marble, brass, and wood; but they which do these things, be reprehended in the holy scriptures, and are most weightily reproved of whoredom, because they be not content with God, to whom all the faithful are married. But call unto themselves other husbands, that is, images and idols, and with them commit most abominable adultery. [ 7] Damascenus, which otherwise defended images many ways, yet in the 4th book and 8th chapter, he writeth, that to endeavor to fashion out God, is both a fond and also a wicked part. Neither doth he allow of the images of God.

9. But seeing the papistical church receiveth in a manner all kind of images, neither excludeth images of the trinity, and of God; it hath flattering sophisters, which wonderfully defend all those things. Cardinal Caietanus writeth, All such images may sometimes be made of purpose; to declare, and affirm, that God hath the form or figure of a body. And they which be of this mind, both do foolishly, and also contend against the holy scriptures, which most plainly teach, that God is a spirit. But if so be that either painters, or image-workers believe not, that God is not endued with a body, and yet paint out those images, whereby God hath declared himself in the scriptures; they are not to be disallowed or hindered, that they should not go through with their works. And again, if they devise unto God a similitude or figure; not because they judge that he is such a one, but because they will by that manner of means stir up men to contemplate higher matters than be expressed in the image of God, they are to be allowed. Wherefore, in the distinctions, which he bringeth in; the first member he disalloweth, and the other he admitteth. But God reasoneth not so sophistically, but he speaketh

plainly and roundly, and commanded that they should make no images for to worship them religiously. Yea and the prophets, being the interpreters of God's law, defied them in every place. And they which will be wiser than

God and his prophets, must not be received. The same author added, that those two sorts of images, which he allowed of, must not absolutely and barely be received; but appareled with some certain circumstances. The first is, that we be sure there be no danger like to ensue, by reason of errors, and that we have sufficient trial, that the church being well instructed, doth believe no such things of God. The second is, that such things be not done after the fancies of men, but that they be as it were expressing's of the doctrine and traditions received by the church.

But I would gladly demand of him, as concerning the church; what church that was, of whom these things were delivered and ordered? Doubtless not the primitive church: for the apostles taught no such matter, nor yet the church that followed; because the good fathers received no such pictures and images of God; as we have proved out of Augustine. It remaineth that the same was the latter church, wherein antichrist, and the devil do now exercise their tyranny. Moreover, how shall they be sure of the right instruction of the simple sort, which be in the church? How can they undoubtedly known, that when they see such images, they will not fall into error? Surely these feigned matters are invented by Sophisters, not for the furthering of the truth, but for the maintenance of abuses. And Thomas

Aquinas is also to be wondered at, who saith, that God forbad the Jews, that they should not make images; because at that time the word had not taken upon it the nature of man. What is this to the purpose; seeing we speak at this present of the images and pictures of the very nature of God, which by art, colors, and lineaments cannot be described? Wherefore there is all one

reason, as well of the old Hebrews, as of the Christians; because that God, by the course and alterations of times, hath not changed his nature, that now at length he should have such a nature, as may be expressed, and then had far otherwise.

But there be others, which use a more subtler kind of sophistication; and say, that God unto his commandment added this reason; Because in the mount ye saw no image. If this be a true and just cause, why should he not afterward be drawn and expressed, when he showed himself by so many shapes? And they prove, (as they think) that he may be pictured and graven by such similitudes, as he in process of time revealed himself. I would that those men should understand, that the commandment was simply and absolutely set forth; namely, that they should not counterfeit God by images. Neither is that, which after is added, the whole cause of the commandment; but as some probable thing added, to persuade that which was commanded. But we find in the prophets, that the chief cause is, for that the divine nature cannot be expressed, but falsely and wickedly: and also, because God forbad it. Justly therefore we must determine, that such images ought not to be suffered.

10. Now, as touching those images, which resemble things created; let us see how they may be suffered, or not suffered. And first of all, Christ cometh very well to remembrance, in that he is man: for in that respect he may be resembled, and painted out. For that is not against the nature of the thing; seeing he was very man; neither against the art of painting, which may imitate bodies. True in deed it is, that in the 7th Synod, which the papists allow not, (being held by Constantine and his son) it was decreed, that Christ should not be painted or fashioned out, no not as touching his human nature. And the reason is set down; because nothing but his

humanity can be expressed by art. Wherefore they, which make such things, seem to embrace the Nestorian heresy, which separated the human nature from the divine. But to say truly, I do not much allow of this reason; which if it were true, it should not be lawful to picture any man, because the soul, which is a spirit, cannot be expressed. And they which describe the human nature of the Lord, do not exclude the divine nature from the understanding; neither do they show or allow, that the humanity of Christ, either was, or is destitute of his godhead. Although Theodosius and Valentinianus seem to have commanded, that Christ's picture should not be set forth in metal, nor in flint stones, nor yet in tables of wood. As we have in the first book and eighth title of the Code. The law standeth in ambiguity, which seemeth to signify, that he should not be expressed in the pavement; least (forsooth) it should be trodden under feet, or spat upon. But Petrus Crinitus saith, that he saw that law written absolutely, whereby is commanded, that the image of Christ should not be made of any matter. But that he cannot be counterfeited, as touching his human nature, there are no firm reasons brought.

11. The angels, as touching their substance and nature, seeing they be spirits, cannot be expressed; yet is it lawful sometimes to picture them in such wise, as they have showed themselves unto men: for they be not, as God is, infinite; but are bounded and limited. Neither doth the commandment of God forbid this, unless their pictures were made, to the intent they should be religiously and devoutly worshipped. Also men may be pictured and counterfeited, seeing the same is not repugnant either to the thing, either to art, or else to the commandment of God. So is it lawful also, to form and picture forth the cross of the Lord, trees, fruits, and other sensible or visible bodies: for the arts of painting and counterfeiting be the

very gifts of God; wherefore they must serve to some use. [ 1] And by this I gather, that they be the gifts of God; because he endued the builders of Moses tabernacle, with his spirit; Bezeleel (I mean) and Aholiab. Neither is it lawful to say, that God doth inspire evil things with his spirit, and such things as be against his law. [ 2] Moreover, the power itself of imitating, seeing it is natural unto man, verily he had the same of God, and not of himself. And it followeth of right, that some use should be thereof: because

God hath bestowed no gifts upon his creatures, especially upon men, which should not be lawful for them sometime to use.

[ 3] Neither doth he take away the use of those gifts; because many do abuse them: and this is easily confirmed by many similitudes. The power of procreation is given unto men, although some do shamefully abuse the same unto lusts. So the sight is granted, which they do perversely use, who for lust sake do behold women, which be none of their own. And so it might be said of the rest. [ 4] Again, we know that Solomon would have images to be made for his royal throne, which should have the forms of young lions: neither was he for that matter reprehended by any prophet. Wherefore in a profane thing it is lawful to have pictures and graven images. [ 5] I am not ignorant, that the ancient fathers, and especially Clement and Tertullian detested the acts of painters and image-makers. But I understand this, in respect that these workmen did profess Christ: and yet they made images and pictures, which might easily be worshipped, and peradventure they divided them among the idolaters, thinking it sufficient to their own salvation, if they themselves did not worship them. But the Turks be of the opinion, that there should be no images made at all: whereupon in their coins they only have letters, which be written in the Arabian tongue: and upon their tapestry they also use to weave certain knots.

The use of images may be good, for the keeping of things in memory, for the garnishing of houses, especially of kings and noble personages, and also to serve for some honest pleasure, wherewith men sometime may both delight and recreate themselves. Howbeit, in such light commodities, there are oftentimes many faults; for false images are sundry times thrust in, instead of true. As if so be a nation or people be described to be overcome by their enemies, which nevertheless was the vanquisher: that must needs be reproved, seeing it doth injury unto others. Also if one be pictured to have done some heinous act, which in very deed he did not. Neither must they be borne with, which do paint false miracles, whereby idolatry may win credit. And doubtless in our time, there have not wanted such, as have endeavored to paint the miracles of Christ's infancy: which things are nowhere found written, and seem to be altogether fabulous. So, some likewise do paint out in many places, Christopher and George rather monstrously than truly. We must therefore take heed, least men be perniciously seduced by false images: I have added, perniciously; because the Gentaures, and other things of like sort, may, for garnishing sake, be expressed without any harm unto them, which are beholders. Others attempt to paint out virtues, which have no bodies, but do belong unto the mind, which is a spirit. Also they painted or fashioned them like to virgins and matrons: and therein I think is no deceit, whereby the beholders can be deceived. Howbeit, this seemeth the safest way of all other, that if things should be painted, the profitable and holy histories should chiefly be painted; whereby the beholders may receive some edifying.

Further, we must beware of lavishing out of money: for there be some, which in procuring of pictures and images, are stark mad. These costs must not be preferred before the necessities of the poor. How greatly herein it

hath been offended, the temples from our forefathers, which be yet extant, do evidently declare. Besides this, we must take very diligent heed, that there be no filthy things painted: for we are otherwise, of our own vileness and corruption of nature, sufficiently kindled unto lust. If it be truly said; that Evil speaking corrupteth good manners: no less do filthy images corrupt the beholders. Tertullian writeth, that the Ethnics painted the image of Christ with asses ears, in despite of our Savior Christ. Wherefore, such an image ought to be accounted blasphemous. Lastly, from them must be removed all religious worship, the which that it be not given them, it must be always provided, that they be not placed in the churches.

12. Seeing therefore it is now declared, what things it is lawful to picture, after this we must diligently examine, whether it may be lawful to use any adoration or worshipping in images. In the disputation whereof, we will first recite what our adversaries have thought, and what kind of worship shall be spoken of. Holy worshipping the Greeks call εὐσεβεία, and the Latins Pietas, that is, Godliness: which nevertheless is extended both unto the parents, and unto the country. But we now talk only of religious worshipping, and inquire, whether the same may be attributed unto images.

Divine worship or honor is expressed of the Hebrew in two words; of the verb Jare, which is, To fear; and Avad, which is, To serve. And undoubtedly, under the name of fear, is comprehended all religion, which is placed in the mind. By Avad, is declared an outward service, which is contained in ceremonies, besides an inward worshipping. Wherefore it is rightly said;

Fear the Lord thy God, and serve him. Moreover, Christ did fight with this place against the devil, saying; Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only thou shalt serve. Whereupon Augustine devised a difference between religious worshipping's, calling that which is only due unto God,

λατρεία, and that which is lawful to do unto creatures, he called δουλεία. In his 49th epistle Ad Deo gratias, and against Faustus, the 20th book, and 21st chapter, he calleth λατρεία, that service which is only done unto the Godhead; and he addeth, that the same cannot in one word be expressed of the Latins. Also in the 20th book De civitate Dei, and first chapter, he wrote very much of this matter. Surely, for my part I have not read of any such distinction in the fathers, before Augustine's time.

And certainly Laurentius Valla upon Matthew, the 4th chapter, affirmeth; that There is no difference, as concerning the words; because the verb λατρεύειν, signifieth as well To serve God as men. And he alledgeth a place out of Xenophon, where a husband saith, that he was ready with his soul, that is, his life; to redeem that his wife should not serve any man: in which place he useth the verb λατρεύειν. And again, the wife saith, that she would redeem with her life, that her husband might not serve: where the verb δουλεύειν is written. And Soudas saith, that λατρεύειν is to serve for reward. And undoubtedly, according to this sense, the holy scriptures do interpret λατρεύειν. For where it is commanded, that there should be no manner of servile work done on the sabbath day; it is written in the Greek text, λάτρην τον. And λάτρις, among the Greeks, signifieth a Handmaid; and λάτρης a Manservant, but λάτρον a Reward. Whereupon in times past,

Latrones were called Mercenary soldiers. Whom some (I know not how well) have thought so to be called, as if one should say Laterones, as they that should guard the persons of kings and princes. In Luke it is written; Ye cannot serve God and Mammon: where, for serving, the verb δουλεύειν is written, as common unto both the services. Paul also calleth himself in many places δοῦλον Christi, The servant of Christ. And in the Acts he saith, that he continued among the Ephesians, δουλεύοντα τῷ θεῷ, Serving God.

And unto the Colossians he saith, δούλευε τῷ θεῷ, that is, Serve God. But Augustine himself seemeth not constantly to have retained that difference: for in the 94th question upon Exodus, he handling these words in the 23rd chapter; If thou serve other gods, they will make thee fall to sin. In this place (saith he) is δουλεύσει, and not λατρεύσει: for δουλεία is due unto

God himself, in respect that he is our Lord, and λατρεία in respect that he is our God.

13. But passing over the words, let us rather deal with the matter itself. It cannot be denied, but that the honor which we attribute unto God, is not that which we give unto men: for that is the highest honor, which is given to one only God: and it chiefly consisteth in these things. First, that we repose in him all the hope of our salvation, that we account him for our chief happiness, by submitting ourselves unto him, without adding of any condition, but even simply and absolutely. But unto princes we must submit ourselves, and all that is ours: yet so, as they command us not to do things repugnant unto the word of God. But unto God we are subject, without any manner of condition or exception. Furthermore, it is necessary, that we believe in him simply and absolutely; and that we declare him to be as the fountain of all good things, in giving him thanks for all the benefits which daily do happen unto us: and we must declare his honor by outward calling upon him. Also, some honor is due unto the excellent creatures, such as be princes, prophets and godly men. Wherefore Augustine De civitate Dei, the 22nd book, and 10th chapter, writeth; that Those are to be honored in the right of charity and society. For we hold them for our fellows and brethren, and therefore we love them; we wish well unto them, and we joy with them in their good hap. Moreover, in his book of true religion 25th chapter, he saith; that We must honor excellent men in respect of imitation, by

following the steps of their good life; when as yet in respect of religion, they must not be worshipped. And of this kind of honor, Paul wrote, saying;

In giving honor, go one before another. Again, as brethren they are to be holpen with mutual good turns.

Further, in the churches the saints are only commended, and the noble gifts, which God bestowed upon them, be celebrated after such a manner, as Christ alloweth of the faithful and diligent servant, which rightly and prudently behaved himself, in ordering of the money which he had received. But and if so be they will use the word δουλεία, in this kind of worshipping; we will, that they may retain it, so that they know, the same distinction to be contained in the holy scriptures. They have invented also the word ὑπερδουλεία, which they would have to be attributed unto the most excellent creatures; namely, unto Marie, and to the human nature of Christ. A difference of honors we disallow not: but those things which appertain only to the high God, we cannot suffer to be attributed unto creatures. Which thing out of doubt they do: for they prostrate themselves before images, they light wax candles to them; and at them they invocate those dead men, which are represented by them. Augustine in many places taketh away from all creatures, churches, priesthoods, sacrifices, and altars.

But that prayers be the sacrifices of Christians, no man doubteth. Yet the Papists have communicated all these things, not only unto men departed this life, but also unto images and pictures: and for the defense of their doing, they use many sophistications, when as God notwithstanding plainly speaketh and forbiddeth, that images should in any wise be made unto religious worshipping. And that, which he hath absolutely spoken, and commanded, must not be cunningly shifted off by man's craftiness.

14. But it is good to hear a little while, with what leaves and green branches they can cover this shame of theirs. First, they affirm, that the cogitation, whereby we are carried to the image, and the thing expressed thereby, is the self-same, and not diverse. Wherefore, that honor, which is given unto an image, is done unto the thing represented by it. And so they conclude, that such and so much honor is due unto the image, as is due unto the thing, which is represented by the image. Whereupon they teach, that the sign of the cross is to be adored with the service of λατρεία, or of divine worshipping; because Christ himself suffered upon the cross. And they say, that if the marble stone, gold, or silver, be considered apart, there is no religious honor due unto them; insomuch as they attain not to the dignity of a reasonable creature. But if they be taken as signs, the same honor is due unto them that is done unto the thing signified. Further, they allege Basil in the 27th chapter De spiritu sancto, who saith, that the honor done unto the sign, is referred to the example itself. To these things, I will repeat that which once or twice I have already said; namely, that God is not satisfied with these kind of distinctions, who said absolutely, that images and pictures must not be worshipped. Also by a new division they make a difference between crosses; that of them, one is true, whereto Christ was fastened. And they contend, that the same must be adored with high kind of reverence; because Christ did sanctify it by his touching; and again, for that it representeth the Lord him-self crucified. But if there be so great consideration had of touching; why do they not judge, that the blessed virgins should be worshipped with divine worship, who bare Christ in her womb nine months, and gave him suck a long time? Especially, seeing that same touching was natural, and the other was violent. But for such touching sake, we should worship the thorns and the spear with divine worship.

Again, these men would also have a cross to be worshipped in other matter; because it representeth the true cross. But that is most absurd: for by that means we ought to worship all hedges, and all thorns, nails, ships, and asses; because they resemble those things which Christ touched. Surely, this argument Claudius the bishop of Tarent used, against the worshipping of images. Wherefore it appeareth, that there have been always some, which have detested images adorned with sacred honors. But the superstitious sort have been superior, both in number, power, and arms; and they not only defend perverse worshipping, but in very deed they attribute unto the cross divine honor. Neither are they ashamed on this manner to sing in the churches; All hail O Cross, our only hope; in this time of passion increase righteousness to the godly; and give pardon unto the offenders. They also sing; Behold the tree of the cross, come let us worship it. Again they say; O

Lord, thy cross do we worship; thy holy resurrection we do glorify. Wherein they attribute much more unto the cross, than to the resurrection.

Also Gregorius of Rome, the patron of superstitions, saith in his prayers; Grant unto us Lord, that they which come to the adoring of thy holy cross, may be delivered from the bonds of their sins. Howbeit, Durand, among the School-divines, allowed not of this opinion; namely, that the cross of the Lord should be worshipped with high adoration: but he is reproved by other sophisters, and that for this reason, that he had attributed too little to the ecclesiastical traditions. Also Peresius seemeth to follow Durand, attributing to the cross, for many reasons another kind of adoration, I know not what. [ 1] First, for that it is falsely said, that the cogitation or knowledge is all one, both of the sign, and of the thing signified; for so much as they be two things, which are distinguished one from another. For first this or that thing is perceived to be a sign; afterward, we behold the

thing which is signified. Indeed, they be together at one time; but yet in nature and reason one of them goeth before another. Further, although a stone, a marble, or metal be made a sign, yet doth it not therefore change his own proper nature; neither doth it pass the bounds of insensible things, neither attaineth it to the dignity of a reasonable creature, nor hath joined with it the thing which it signifieth. Doubtless, we worship a king in his purple robe, the which being severed from an emperor, we would not yield unto it the honor of a king.

Augustine writeth, in his 58th homily, De verbis Domini, that The humanity of Christ must be worshipped with divine honor, because it hath the Godhead joined therewith: which, if it should be sundered from him, as it cannot be, he should not be worshipped with divine honor. How much less therefore must not the cross, (which in very deed is severed from Christ) be worshipped with divine honor? Therefore he rejecteth that doctrine, whereby it is taught, that both the sign, and the thing signified, should be honored with the same manner of worship. And thus he affirmeth, that the highest adoration is due unto the thing signified, that is, unto Christ himself; but to the cross, that honor (howsoever it be called) which is attributed unto such notable things. Peresius saith somewhat well; but yet in this point he erreth, that he attributeth some manner of adoration to the cross. But I marvel at him, that he also used this argument. All men agree that the holy Ghost is present in baptism, and yet is there none, which doth worship baptism with divine honor. Wherefore, much less is that kind of honor to be given unto the cross: for it seemeth, that it cannot be avoided, but that they do evil, which adore the Eucharist, although they perceive

Christ to be present, even as touching his divine nature. [ 2] He addeth further; If so be the very same honor should be due unto images, which is

given unto the thing signified; now should it be lawful to give them churches, sacrifices, and altars; when as Augustine (as it hath been declared) hath taken from them these things. It seemeth, that Peresius had some light: but herein he was entangled in the dark, that he attributed any kind of worshipping at all unto such kind of signs. Erasmus (me thinketh) among other things, hath very wisely written this; namely, that Images may more easily be removed, than a reason and mean of worshipping them can be prescribed. So now, when Peresius endeavored to prescribe a measure, otherwise than had been appointed by the Schoolmen, his labor was vain and fruitless.

15. Wherefore, we confirm by the sentence of the holy scriptures, that there must be no religious honor done unto idols, images, and signs. For (as we have declared) the law of God saith; Thou shalt worship the Lord thy

God, and him only thou shalt serve. Neither helpeth it our adversaries, that in the sixth chapter of Deuteronomy, there is not that particle [Onely;] seeing Christ (as we read in Matthew) being the just and true interpreter of his own law, added the same. And in the same book of Deuteronomy it is written; Thou shalt make no images, nor worship them. And what is to worship images? Even to put a confidence in them, to love them, to call upon them, to crouch and kneel to them, to offer them incense, and to burn candles to them: all which things we see at this day are done unto images.

God, to the intent he might turn men away from so perverse a worshipping, declared himself to be a jealous God, that is, one who will revenge so great wickedness with earnest endeavor. Let these men (if they can) show out of the Old Testament, where the images of patriarchs, prophets, or of godly princes were worshipped and adored by godly men. Yea and Gregory himself the father of superstitions wrote thus to Serenus the bishop of

Massilia, which threw down images; In that thou forbiddest them to be worshipped, we allow it; but whereas thou takest them away, we disallow it.

Wherefore even he would not have images worshipped and adored.

Also Jonah the bishop of Aurelia, writing against Claudius the bishop of Taurinum, of whom I made mention before, saith; that Images must be had, but yet must not be worshipped. Howbeit, at this day they do as well worship them, as adore them. Also for another cause the worshipping of images is to be rejected; to wit, since thereby the charity towards the poor is diminished. For the worshippers of them do deck them most sumptuously with rich ouches, with precious stones, with coverings for the head, vestments and garlands; and they do heap and hang upon them infinite offerings: all which things might with singular piety be bestowed upon the need of Christians. Doubtless, holy and godly men, while they were in the flesh, did live modestly and frugally, and commended that kind of life, as well by their doctrine, as by their example. But now, they which honor their signs, and images, fear not to devise in them superfluity and vain ornaments: which things they did evermore mislike. But they say, that pomp's, and such kind of ornaments, do show unto us the glory, gorgeousness, and dignity, which they now enjoy in heaven. As though the scripture did not sufficiently instruct us in these things. Add here unto, that through these men, the greediness of thieves and church-robbers is stirred up: for the richer that the ornaments be, which are put about them, the more be they inflamed to embezzle them.

Moreover, I would demand of them, wherefore they, leaving their idols at home in their own country, do travel so great journeys to worship others? If they will worship God in his images, why rather do they it not in living men; which (as the holy scriptures put us in mind) be created unto his

image? They answer, that in living men it is not done; least peradventure the minds of the worshippers should be settled upon them, and should not lift up themselves higher, that they might think upon God and Christ. As who should say, their cogitations cannot also be carried unto images; either for the excellency of the workmanship, or else for the richness of their attire, which men have been accustomed with great pleasure to behold.

Verily I have seen, especially at Rome, diverse images, so artificially wrought, that many men, which were skillful of those arts, spent many hours in the diligent beholding of them. God hath set all creatures before men, that they might be certain tokens and signs of his goodness and excellency: neither did he fear, least men would stand still in the beholding of them. Further, he commanded, that everyone should love his neighbor, and be beneficial unto him: neither did he mistrust, least any man, forsaking him, would employ his only endeavor towards his neighbor.

16. Moreover, when we object against them the testimony of John, in the first epistle, and fifth chapter; Keep yourselves from idols, these men say, that their images be not the images of strange gods, but the images of holy men; namely, of the faithful, and of the members of Christ. But they perceive not, no not they, which seem wisest of all men in their own conceit, that if they be the images of men, they ought not to be worshipped nor adored: for men themselves cannot be worshipped with religious worship. If then it be taken from themselves, much less can it be granted unto their images. Augustine Ad Deo gratias saith; that No man, although he be a saint, must be adored. Besides this, they have not always been wicked men, whom these men think to have been strange gods. For excellent men, which well-deserved as touching human things, were oftentimes reputed among the gods. Moreover, do they know, that all those

were in very deed good and godly men, whom they judge to be saints, and do worship them in their images? The sentence of Augustine is well known, that The bodies of many are worshipped upon the earth, whose souls are tormented in hell. The word of God, when it detesteth and forbiddeth the idols of nations, it showeth not of what things the idols were: only it saith;

They be the works of men's hands, they have eyes and see not, &c.

Now let us consider, whether the images of Papists be such. Are not they wrought by the hands of men? Do they not altogether want sense and moving? Seeing therefore all these things be like unto those, they be images condemned by the scriptures. Also Paul, in the first to the Corinthians, the tenth chapter, saith; Fly from idols. And Peter, in the first epistle, the fourth chapter, calleth The worshipping of idols abominable. But here our adversaries trifle fondly again, and endeavor to put a difference between Idolum and simulachrum [both signifying an image] saying, that Idols are forbidden, but not images. Neither perceive they, that there is no other difference between these, but that the one is a Latin word, and the other a Greek. Whereupon Lactantius writeth, that Simulachrum is written of Simulando, which signifieth, Resembling or Counterfeiting. With whose testimony or authority, if they be not satisfied, let them read Pliny, in the 43rd book, and fourth chapter, where he saith; The first image of brass was made unto Ceres, at the proper costs and charges of Spurius Cassius. Here we see, that this writer calleth the idol of Ceres, Simulachrum. Vitruuius, in his second book, and eleventh chapter, where he entreateth of the hewing of stuff, calleth the image of Diana, Simulachrum. The seventy interpreters, where it is in Hebrew Atsabbim, there they translate it in Greek, εἴδωλα: but the Latin text hath Simulachra.

Yea and John, in the place a little before alleged, saith; Defend yourselves from images. We read it in the Latin translation; Fugite simulachra. Jerome upon the eleventh chapter of Isaiah declareth, that Idols be the images of them which be dead. Wherefore it appeareth, that these men devise distinctions, which be fond and ridiculous. Again, it must be considered, that this worshipping of images, which is outwardly of them used, hath been fetched as well from the Hebrews, as also from the Gentiles. For in the tabernacle of Moses, there was the candlestick and the altar, and also the incense; such as these men do set before their images. Albeit Christ is now come, and hath abrogated the ceremonies of Moses. Cicero, in his third book of offices saith; that Perfumes and wax candles were set before images. Wherefore, such rites or ceremonies were derived, as well from the Gentiles, as from the Hebrews. But at the last, the matter came to such pass

(which is more intolerable) as it is now thought of them, which be called Christians, that some divine power is in those images. In which point I see not what they differ from Ethnics.

They undoubtedly did think, that such as used the image of Alexander, were more fortunate than other men. Wherefore Augustus, which had before used the image of the Sphynx, did afterward use the image of Alexander.

Marius was delighted with a silver eagle, the which came afterward to the hands of Cateline, who also worshipped the same himself, and prayed victory of it. Even so do they at this day attribute sundry virtues unto images: they make sacrifice unto them, and do ask many things of them.

Jerome upon the 57th chapter of Isaiah declareth, that in his time at Rome, the image of Tutela was worshipped in the entries of houses, with tapers and lights. But for us (if we be true Christians) it is no decent thing to take rites and ceremonies, either from the Jews, or from other nations: but we

must only use those things, which are commanded us in the word of God.

Whereupon Paul, being desirous to commend the use of the Lord's supper, saith; that He delivered unto the Corinthians, that which he had received of the Lord.

17. Wherefore, seeing we have it manifest out of the word of God, that we must not worship images, we ought to obey, suffering ourselves to be governed by the law of God, and not by the inventions of men. Moreover, we know, that God must be worshipped in spirit and in truth: but no man is ignorant, that images be not spirit and truth, for so much as they be things which may be seen. And Paul saith, that We know Christ no more after the flesh: therefore much less after an image. I beseech you, let us confer the state of the primitive church (where, unto the service of God, images were not used at all) with the latter state, wherein they be allowed; and it will most manifestly appear, that all things are become more corrupt. Moreover,

Augustine in his book De quantitate animae, most wisely wrote; that It behooveth him that is worshipped, to be much better, than he that doth yield the worship: but all men understand that images be not better than men.

Further, if they might be endued with life and reason, they would honor their makers, by whose hands they were made. When men sin in this kind of worshipping, they do nothing else, but (as S. Paul taught the Romans) They change the glory of God into the similitude of a mortal man, of birds, of four-footed beasts, and of serpents. Those which defend and maintain such worshipping's, do draw away men from the true worshipping of God. For, when as Jeroboam went about to draw away the children of Israel from the worshipping of the true God; he erected two images of calves, one in Bethel, and the other in Dan.

Furthermore, in this matter we know the forwardness of men: for whereas Christ hath commanded, that we should bear his cross, we had rather worship the same, and all to becross our head and forehead therewith: which thing he commanded us not. Neither can we but grant, that the Christians (as we may learn by Tertullian) began even at the first to fortify themselves with the sign of the cross. For the devil began forthwith to sow cockle upon the good seed of the church. Also Paul putteth the Corinthians in remembrance, that they were sometime carried away unto dumb images: the which very thing we see done at this day in every place. We read not anywhere in the time of the primitive church, that faithful and godly men did direct their prayers unto pictures and images. But now this is used everywhere, and it is come to that pass, that men give more honor unto images, than they do unto the word of God. For there is not a man found at this day, that doth worship and honor the holy scriptures. Christ, when he was upon the earth, because he was now ready to depart, comforted his apostles, saying, that Unless he departed, the spirit of the Comforter should not be sent unto them. Which the interpreters expound to be said, because that the presence of Christ, as concerning his flesh, would hinder them, that they should not be fit to receive the spirit. Which thing if it be truly said, as touching the flesh of the Lord, how much rather shall it be affirmed of his images and pictures? Neither do we doubt, that Peter would not be worshipped of Cornelius the Centurion, who was not to be thought that he would do divine honor unto him. With what mind, think we, doth he bear, that his images and pictures should now be worshipped among men? But if they will say; We do not honor them with the chiefest honor: let them understand, that neither Cornelius minded so to worship Peter.

18. Neither must we be ignorant, that the angel in the Apocalypse, did twice reprove John, for that he would have worshipped him. Then, if so be that neither angels nor men must be worshipped, much less their images and pictures. And it was not without consideration, that the angel forbad it: for I am (saith he) like unto thee, and unto thy brethren which have the testimony of Jesus Christ: that is, which believe in him. Seeing therefore we be all of one degree, neither that one is more excellent than another, adoration cannot have any place among us. Although the argument be plain, yet is it not void of all difficulty. Because, if the worshipping of angels were not lawful, why were they worshipped in the Old Testament, which revealed themselves unto the saints? Neither do we read, that the fathers of old time were reproved for that cause. To this objection many things may be answered. [

1] For some say, that as then the son of God had not taken upon him the nature of man; wherefore men were placed much lower than angels, and therefore it was lawful, that they should worship and honor them. But now, by reason of a new conjunction of the word with the flesh, there is made a certain equality between men and angels. Wherefore, it is not lawful to interpose an adoring between these natures. The reason that is brought is very weak: for, although Christ be now incarnate, yet are other men much inferior unto angels.

[ 2] But others say, that angels were then worshipped; because the son of God, under the name and title of them, appeared to the fathers. But this reason is not altogether true: for the son of God, under the name of an angel appeared unto the Patriarchs; but not always, nor yet so, but that other angels also did make manifest themselves. For certain it is, that the ancient of days was showed unto Daniel, under the person of God the father, and likewise the son of man, when also there was present an angel, whom

Daniel worshipped. But it may more easily be answered, that the fathers of old time, when they did yield any honor to angels themselves, they kept themselves within the bounds of civil honor; and that they did not give any religious honor unto them. But yet, because that might seem to belong unto religion, therefore were men at the length to be kept under, least they should worship angels with a kind of divine worship. [ 3] And it ought to be sufficient for us, that the matter was at any time found fault withal. But why

God would find fault therewith more at this time, than at that, it is not our part to inquire. Neither must we say, that it is now lawful; which then was borne withal after a sort. The very which reason might be brought of the marriage of many wives, of divorce, and such like; which things were afterward taken away by Christ, when as before that time they were suffered after a sort. Neither are we bound of necessity, to clear the fathers always of all fault.

[ 4] Furthermore, it might be said, that the same worshipping was then borne withal; because, albeit the Hebrews did oftentimes fall into idolatry, yet did they know by the law of God, that the thing, whereto they inclined, was unlawful. But when as the Gospel was to be spread abroad amongst the Gentiles, it behooved, that idolatry, and every kind thereof, wherein the nations were trained up, should be repressed, lest they should think it a thing permitted, and so it might take deeper root. For the like cause Paul did more earnestly labor to persuade the Corinthians, that fornication is sin, than is endeavored in the Old Testament; because the Ethnics did not think it to be sin, but reckoned it for a thing tolerable and lawful. Wherefore it was needful to restrain that mischief with many reasons. Seeing therefore our adversaries say, that the fathers, in worshipping of angels after that sort, either sinned, or else sinned not. If they sinned, why were they not

reproved? If they sinned not, why was John so restrained? I might grant as well the one as the other: first, that they committed some fault; or else, that they offended not: because they did keep themselves within the bounds of civil reverence. But that, because it was a dangerous thing, therefore God would at the length have that custom to be amended; least perhaps they, which were not so well instructed, might be hurt by that example, and be easily led to idolatry.

19. Moreover, in the first epistle, and second chapter of John, it is written; If we sin, we have an advocate with the father, even Jesus Christ. In which place Augustine said; The apostle doth not say, Ye have me to be an advocate; but he putteth himself into the number of them, which have need of an advocate. If then it be not lawful to use the apostles for advocates, how much less the images of them? And we must not pass it over, that Paul reckoneth the worshipping of images among the works of the flesh; and numbereth it among those things, which exclude us from the kingdom of heaven. Wherefore, when the Hebrews began to honor the image of the serpent, the godly king Hezekiah brake it in pieces. But at this day, they fight even to the fire and faggot, for the worshipping of those images, which they themselves have made; not by the commandment of God, as in times past that serpent was made. And undoubtedly, look how many kings were commended for their godliness sake, those did rid away images: but contrariwise, they which be dispraised, did increase the number and worshipping of images. Certainly, if some woman, which having her husband absent, would choose another unto her, and him would embrace; she might not escape the crime of unchastity. And Paul affirmeth, that we

(as a chaste spouse) are joined unto our Christ. Why then do we make pictures and images instead of him, the which we embrace, worship, and

honor instead of him? But they say, that they do this, because these signs and images, by a certain similitude do represent Christ. The very same also might that woman allege for herself, saying, that the man, which she had taken in the place of her husband, did resemble her husband, both in age, in favor of countenance, in manners, and in condition.

They feign also, that they do no sacrifices unto images; as though prayers are not a meet sacrifice of Christians. Doubtless, they be a sacrifice, which is left unto us, now that the old ceremonies be abrogated. Tertullian and Jerome, interpreting the words of Malachi, that The sacrifice of prayer, immediately upon the coming of Christ, is offered unto God, from the rising up of the sun unto the going down of the same. Also, in the epistle to the Colossians, free will worship is condemned, although it be offered unto angels. And I will not omit that, which was spoken by Claudius bishop of Thurine, against those, which did prostrate themselves before the image of the lamb, whom John Baptist showed with his finger; These men (saith he) do worship painted lambs, but devour living lambs. Again; They honor painted lambs, but they do flea and spoil the true lambs of Christ.

Furthermore, the godly, which be departed, are blessed; yet are they not become gods, that they should be worshipped and adored: much less the images of them. But God (say they) adorneth his saints; and therefore so it becometh us to do. True indeed it is, that God indueth his saints with honor, and with incorruptible reward; seeing he giveth them eternal life. Let us do the same in like manner, by speaking well of them, and by setting them forthunto the church to be followed. Let us consider beside, that God doth make his saints honorable, yet doth he not either adore them, or put them forth to be adored. But it is said by Christ; that Whatsoever ye did to the least of mine, that ye have done unto me. But these words must be

understood; as touching the duties of charity; and not as touching worship and adoration. And certainly, what Christ meant, he himself very well expounded, when he said; I was hungry, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink.

Origin, in the eighth book against Celsus, showeth a reason why the Christians should abhor the worshipping of images, and he saith; Images we have indeed, not outward images, which have been made by most vile carpenters; but the minds of the faithful and holy men, from whence proceedeth (as from the altar of God) most sweet savor of prayers, which do reach up even unto heaven. Wherefore, in the revelation of John, the prayers of godly men are called sweet odors. And David sang; Let my prayer be in thy sight as the incense. Afterward he addeth; We abhor the worshipping of images, because they have no sense. This also is wont to be objected; that If upon the death of one emperor, there succeeded another, the images of the first were destroyed throughout all the provinces of the empire, unto which images, honor was done, as unto the emperor, who was not present. This I grant: but that was only a civil honor, whereby they testified themselves to be subject unto him; and they received their new emperor with joyful voices. Also, this must be well considered; that there have been always some men, in every age, which have freely cried out against the worshipping of images. And undoubtedly for that cause many of the Graecian emperors; as namely, the Philippicans, the Constantine's, and the Leos, resisted the Roman bishops; against whom, on the other side, the Roman bishops opposed themselves, of a certain hatred: because they desired earnestly to be rid of their subjection. For which cause, they joined themselves with the French men, and by that means rent in sunder the

Roman empire. Wherefore it is no marvel, if at this day also for images sake, they stir up vain contentions.

Further, they object wonders and marvels, which are wrought before images. And did not Peter (say they) while he was upon the earth, work things of great wonder and admiration? This cannot be denied: and yet did he not suffer himself to be adored. Wherefore, the argument is most feeble, namely; Some miracles be done at signs and images; Ergo they must be worshipped and adored. Antichrist also shall come with many wonders, and yet to follow and honor him, is a heinous wickedness. Also the brazen serpent did heal them, which were hurt in the wilderness; which nevertheless, when it was worshipped, it was abolished by Hezekiah. In like manner the Ethnics showed many signs and miracles, for the establishing of their idols; as we may read in Valerius Maximus, Livius, and other old writers. At the last (when they have nothing else) they say; that This worshipping is the tradition of the church, and therefore must be still retained. Verily, we reject not all the traditions of the church; but those without controversy we retain, which agree with the word of God; and those also, which be not superfluous, nor bring in a new service or worshipping.

But if there be any, which be repugnant to the word of God, or burdensome to the church of God, or do import some new kind of service, we (upon just cause) reject them. Moreover, how is the worshipping of images an apostolical tradition, when as the primitive church used no such things?

Nay rather (as we have before declared) some of the ancient fathers, not only condemned images, but also the makers of them. And most vain is that, which these men have always in their mouth; It is a tradition, inquire not of it. But I on the other part say; It is a tradition, therefore inquire diligently of it, whether it be agreeable to the word of God; or whether it

were in times past allowed of all the ancient fathers. But as concerning miracles, which be objected unto us; we must understand, that the devil doth many times put himself among, who is accustomed to nothing more, than to establish superstitions and idolatry. Again, the miracles which are of that sort, be done by the just judgment of God; because men do cast away from them the love of the truth: as it is in the epistle to the Thessalonians.

20. The devil seeing the sign of the cross, feigneth himself to fly: when nevertheless, by such counterfeiting, he creepeth more and more into us.

The strength and power of the cross consisteth not in the sign, but in the true and sound faith of Christ crucified. The sacrificing priests also do report, that they sanctify in a manner all things with the sign of the cross.

But the scriptures speak far otherwise, which testify, that meats are sanctified by faith, prayers, and by the word of God. Whereunto while we assent, and do pray for the use of things, to the clean all things are made clean. I deny not, but that certain miracles have sometimes been wrought by the sign of the cross, as Augustine reporteth in his 22nd book De civitate

Dei, and eighth chapter. But I have already declared the cause thereof, which seemeth not needful to be repeated: only this I will report, that the devil is marvelously fed and delighted with man's errors. And withal it is to be added, that many of those miracles were forged: for the sacrificing priests and monks seeking after gain, do spread abroad many things altogether false, which were never anywhere done or spoken. But why the elders (as we have above said) signed their forehead with a cross, it is no easy matter to allege the certain cause. But I think that there were two respects: [ 1] first, to testify themselves to be Christians; as though they were not ashamed of the cross of Christ. And this I gather by Augustine De verbis apostoli, the eighth sermon: for the Ethnics triumphed over the

Christians, casting their folly in their teeth, because they worshipped Christ that was nailed on the cross. To whom that father maketh answer; A heart in deed we have, but yet no such as ye have: neither are we ashamed of him that was crucified; but in that part, where the sign of shamefastness is, there have we the sign of his cross.

[ 2] Another cause is, that they would of a certain evil and preposterous zeal, imitate the legal ceremonies: and because it might not be lawful, after the coming of Christ, to sacrifice after the manner of the Hebrews, who were bidden to besprinkle the door-posts of their houses with the blood of the pascal lamb: our Christians in semblance thereof, signed their foreheads with the cross. As Augustine doth testify in the 20th chapter De catechizandis rudibus. [ 3] Moreover, they persuaded themselves (as it is already showed) that the evil spirits were by such a sign chased away. Yea, and Gregorius Romanus also, in his third book of Dialogs writeth; that A Jew entering by night into a temple of an idol, there to take his rest, and being greatly astonished with the sight of very many wicked spirits, which were in that place, armed himself by the sign of the cross. And when the prince of the evil spirits understood that a man was present, he commanded one of the devils, that he should go unto him, and try him what he was.

Who, after he had beheld him, returned and said; Truly I found an empty vessel, but it was marked: and he left the Jew quite and clean without any harm. Which thing he considering with himself, came to the religion of Christ. But Gregory in that book heaped up together many vain and fabulous things, the which not only may move the readers of them unto laughter; but also they are very much against the religion of Christ.

The sign of the cross is worn by princes upon their crowns, without superstition: because by that sign they only testify and profess, that they

honor and maintain the religion of Christ. Further, if it be lawful for a man to bear in arms the badge of his own family; it is also lawful for him, by the sign of the cross, to profess Christian religion. And in times past there appeared in heaven the sign of the cross unto Constantine the great, and an inscription was added; In this sign shalt thou overcome. For God was minded by a miracle to confirm him in the religion of Christ, which he had lately received. Neither may he be condemned, for that he caused that sign to be expressed in the banner which he meant to use. But that he afterward made such a manner of sign in gold, that I allow not; because by the doing thereof he opened no small gap to superstition. Concerning the finding of the Lord's own cross by Helen, wise men marvel that Eusebius

Caesariensis, who was very familiar with Constantine, and set forth his life, wrote nothing of it. But Theodoretus and Sozomenus, indeed write somewhat of that matter. Howbeit, rather of the report of others, than by the certainty of their own knowledge. Yet, in the reading of that history, there is found no mention of worshipping: nevertheless, it is said, that it was placed in the temple. Moreover, what great estimation Helen made of the nails, which the report is that she found, it appeareth; in that it is written, that she put one of them in the bridle of that horse, which her son used, another into his helmet, and the third she cast into the sea, for appeasing of tempests. At this day also they worship and honor at Rome, (with singular adoration) the spear, wherewithal they say the Lord's side was pierced upon the cross.

This is the wiliness of the devil, that he may perpetually drive men forward, till at length they be thrown down headlong into the bottomless gulf of impiety.

21. Our adversaries blame us, as being over hard and bitter: and they say; If one walking by chance, shall espy a fair plant, not only green, but loden

with fruit; and he being inflamed with an earnest affection towards the most bountiful goodness of God, and feeling his mind stirred to worship God the author of so beautiful a work; what should let, but that he may prostrate himself near unto that pleasant tree, and there worship God, and render thanks unto him for his singular benefits bestowed on men? Nothing, as I think. So in like manner, if one shall behold the image of Christ, and is earnestly affected to the benefit of Christ his death; wherefore may he not worship Christ the author of his life near unto the same? Hereunto I answer, that the word of God must always be before our eyes, whereby it is forbidden (for religion sake) to prostrate before a creature. This ought to remain always firm and sure, and to be in force; that neither we prostrate ourselves unto a tree, nor yet unto an image. Neither is it lawful to excuse these things, by saying; that they do not worship the outward matter, neither the figure, nor the lineaments. What then [do they honor?] They say they honor the thing signified. So might the Ethnics likewise have excused their idolatry; that they did not worship stones, wood, and metal, but only the properties which were represented by those signs. Verily Symmachus wrote an epistle to the emperors, that they would at length restore the images of the Romans, and there he useth such and such like arguments very

Rhetorically: but Ambrose most strongly hath confuted them all. The writings on both parts are yet at this day to be seen, in the epistles of Ambrose. God commanded absolutely, that images should not be worshipped; wherefore we must rather obey his words, than the subtle sophistications of men.

Augustine upon the 113th psalm, wrote this argument; By the judgment of Paul it is said; They turned the glory and truth of God into a lie, and they desired rather to worship the creature than the creator. The first part of

Paul's saying condemneth images; because they be lies, which are repugnant unto the truth and glory of God: and the other part taketh away all excuse, that there they worship not God; but creatures. And Claudius the bishop of Thurine said; If thou have pictured upon the wall, Mars, Venus, and Mercury, thou hast no true gods; and when thou hast there, Paul, Peter, and John, thou hast not very men: wherefore the error is not quite taken away, but altered. Paul also said unto the Corinthians; We know that an idol is nothing, but that which the Gentiles do offer, they offer unto devils.

Undoubtedly, if the excuse brought now by our adversaries, were of any weight, the Ethnics would easily have said unto the apostle; Thou hast done us a manifest injury, for our purpose is to offer the sacrifices, which we slay, unto God, and not unto devils. Also we meet with others more foolish, which say, that this precept was given unto the Hebrews, and that it ought to be reckoned among the ceremonical precepts; but that now the ceremonies being abrogated, we are no longer bound by it. [ 1] They consider not, that in the table of the ten commandments, there was nothing commanded, which did appertain unto the ceremonies, only the keeping of the Sabbath day excepted, wherein nevertheless some moral thing presenteth itself unto them, which diligently do behold the same. [ 2] Augustine, in his 119th epistle unto Ianuarius, doth acknowledge the same. I beseech you let these wise men consider, that if this thing should have been reckoned among the ceremonies, the Ethnics had not sinned in the honoring and worshipping of images; because they were not bound unto the ceremonies of the Jews.

Moreover, it is evident, that that ceremonies of the Old Testament were not revoked by the apostle, nor yet the yoke of them laid upon the Gentiles; who nevertheless, in express words commanded, that idols and images should be avoided.

22. Seeing therefore it is plentifully enough confirmed, that images must not be worshipped nor adored; now it resteth, that we examine this, whether it be lawful to set them in holy places, where the congregations of the faithful resort. Some affirm that it is lawful, so the worshipping of them be forbidden. But (in my judgment) it must not be allowed, that they should be had in churches: first, because it is a very dangerous thing. And experience hath taught, whither men at the length, thorough beholding of them, fell, when they saw them placed in the temples: for they worshipped them. The way therefore that leadeth unto idolatry, must be cut off from the faithful.

Augustine writeth very well and religiously of this matter, upon the 113th Psalm; When images (saith he) be set in a high place, or else in some tabernacle, a naughty affection is bred in men's minds, whereby the devil is invited to intermeddle himself. Also in his 49th epistle Ad Deo gratias, he was of the same mind. And surly we perceive, that this thing hath happened.

[ 2] Neither will I pass over the same father, in his sixth sermon upon the Lord's sermon made in the mount; They declare (saith he) in what place and estimation they account the image, when they appoint to erect an altar unto it: for unless they thought, that either it were god, or had some divine power in it, they would not erect an altar thereunto. Wherefore, by this saying of Augustine, almost all the temples of the Papists are condemned, wherein always (in a manner) altars are joined with idols.

[ 3] Besides, it may be proved by the example of Epiphanius, that they ought not to be had in churches. He being in his journey, and happening into a certain town that was called Anablatha, did see (as he passed by) a certain candle burning; and demanding what place the same was, he understood that it was a church, or a place of prayer for the faithful, wherefore he entered in, that he might pray unto God. And he saw a curtain

hang, wherein was painted the image of a man, as if it had been of Christ, or of a holy man; insomuch that when he saw the picture of a man hanged in the church, contrary to the authority of the scriptures, he both plucked down and rent the curtain, and counseled the sextons of the church, that they should carry it forth, and wrap a poor dead man in it. Moreover, he wrote unto John bishop of Jerusalem (unto whom the cure of that place belonged) that from thence forward he should take heed, that such hangings, otherwise than religion would permit, should not be suffered in the church of Christ.

And that epistle seemed unto Jerome to be of such weight, as that he vouchsafed to turn it into Latin: which he would not have done, if he had not been of our mind. [ 4] Also the latter synod of Ephesus condemned images: howbeit, the same synod is not allowed, and that upon just cause; insomuch as it favored the heretics Nestor and Eutyches. Such is the hap not only of human affairs, but many times also of ecclesiastical; that evil things are mingled with good. Whereupon it cometh afterward to pass, that not only evil things, but good things also together are therewithal rejected.

[ 5] So we see it happened unto some of the Graecian emperors, which abolished images: for Philippicus the first, Leo the third, Constantine, and Leo the fourth: because they were Monothelites, that, which on the other side they judged aright of images, was rejected. Which also cometh to pass at this day, when, by reason of the corrupt conversation of them, which profess the Gospel, their sincere doctrine is cast out. [ 6] Also the synod of Eliberinum condemned images; wherein was decreed, that within the walls of the churches there should no image be painted, least such a thing should be pictured out, as might be worshiped. [ 7] Peresius, when he perceived himself to be hardly beset with the sayings of these fathers, he said unadvisedly; that Their mind was not to have all images to be taken away,

but only those, which were made deformedly upon the walls; and not likewise those that were done upon clothes and tables. But afterward, when he perceived that this also was but a vain shift, he calleth to remembrance, that this sort of pictures ought well to be taken away for a time, because men, in those days, worshipped them with the honor due unto God. And in this opinion he is against Gregory, which decreed, that they should not for that cause be taken away; but rather, that men should be warned not to worship them. Peresius also determined, that after the same reason and sort

Epiphanius was to be excused.

23. Whereas afterward our adversaries demand of us, what worthy men we have seen to be destroyers of images? We answer: Hezekiah a most godly king, which brake in pieces the brazen serpent. Moses also, which brake in sunder the molten calf. Other good princes also: and Serenus the bishop of Massilia. Neither have we ever perceived, that the scripture condemned overthrowers of images, but the workers of images. The first perhaps, which painted the church, was Paulinus the bishop of Nola, which yielded this reason for the fact. When the faithful sort met together upon the holy day, to celebrate the memory of Felix the martyr, they were entertained with a religious banquet; and when they were more given to feeding of their body, than reason would, that father devised to paint upon the wall, the histories of the Old Testament and of the New, to the end that the people, by beholding of them, might the more soberly behave themselves in their banquet. But howsoever that holy and godly father meant in other matters, yet in this matter he offended double. For first he should not have banqueted the people in the church, seeing we know, that in the church of the Corinthians there were many things found fault withal by the apostle, concerning those feasts. Moreover he did amiss, in that he thought men

were more instructed by dumb pictures, than by the lively word of God.

Wherefore did he not rather teach them by a lively voice, that they should temperately and soberly spend out the time of the holy feast? This had been the ordinary way and means, and most void of all danger. Prudentius also, which lived in the time of Honorius and Theodosius, singing the passion of Cassianus the martyr, said that The history of him was pictured in the church.

And in the seventh Synod, which was holden under Constantius and Hiren, one Nile a bishop is brought in, which counselleth him that should build a new church, to garnish the walls on every side with images and pictures. But what bishop this was, it is not known: a martyr indeed he is called, in this respect, that he so became for Christ, in the time of Dioclesian. But it cannot be he, because it was not then permitted unto the Christians, to build churches publicly. Further, in that second Synod of Nice, we read many feigned things: and those things which were cited by those fathers, for the most part are not extant in the book of those men, which were of sound judgment. There also it is reported, that Gregorius

Nissenus wept, at such time as he passed by the image of Abraham: but whether that image were in the way, or in the temple, it appeareth not.

There also it is read, that the martyrdom of Euphemia the virgins, was painted out in the temple of the city of Calcedonia: howbeit, so far as I can gather, these pictures were in the church-porch. But that Augustine had no images in his temple, it appeareth hereby, that he expounding those words of the 113th Psalm; The images of the Gentiles be silver and gold, even the works of men's hands, he writeth: The works of men's hands; for they worship that, which they themselves made of gold and of silver. Doubtless, we also have many instruments, and vessels, of such kind of matter or

metal, for the use of celebrating the sacraments: the which vessels being consecrated to the ministry itself, are called holy; in the honor of him, whom hereby we serve for our salvation. And these vessels (I beseech you) are they any other thing, than the works of men's hands? Yet notwithstanding have they a mouth, and speak not? Have they eyes, and yet will not see? Do we pray to them, because through them we make supplications unto God? That is a very mad cause of impiety. Wherefore it is manifest, that images were not there: for otherwise he would have confessed himself inexcusable.

24. Moreover, in the same Synod they cite Basil, in his oration of the forty martyrs. But that which they allege maketh nothing to the matter now in hand. For Basil affirmeth not, that the acts of these martyrs were described in the temple: but in the commending of them, in his oration, he saith, that he would do rightly and orderly, whereby others might again and again be strengthened in faith. For painters, while they paint forth the acts of valiant men, they stir up others unto laudable enterprises. Men began, even at the first, upon a ready good will borne unto Christ, and to his apostles, to have some of their images at home with them. Afterward, being not satisfied with the private use of them, they set them not within the temples, but in the porches. Again, they considered with themselves; What if they should be put in churches, would they not bring such and such things unto our memory? And finally there ensued an adoration. Constantine, with his son

Justinian, at the temple of Sophia, made pictures; the which afterward Philippicus took away: for which cause there followed afterward very fierce contentions. And seeing Paul saith; How agreeth the temple of God with idols? Is it not a shame at this day, that churches should be fraught with images? How the ancient Christians ordered themselves in prayers,

Tertullian expresseth in his Apologetico, the 30th chapter; We (saith he) honor God with our eyes lifted up to the heavens, and not unto pictures.

Lactantius reproving the Ethnics, saith; If ye think that those whom the images do represent, be in heaven, why do you not lift up your eyes unto heaven? Wherefore it is lawful so to say unto our adversaries; If ye think that the saints be in heaven, why do ye not lift up your eyes unto them, which ye turn unto the images in the temples?

Also, we may prove by another argument, that Christians had no images in their temples. For Aelius Lampridius, describing the lives of the thirty tyrants, among other things, saith; that Adrianus the emperor had decreed to appoint churches unto the Christians, but that there was one, which did dissuade him that he should not do it. For he said; If thou do this, the temples and images will be forsaken, and all men will become Christians.

For those churches, which the emperor was minded to give them, he built without images. Insomuch as those churches, which were afterward erected without images, were called the temples of Adrian. Moreover, it must be considered, that those things ought not to be had in the churches, which call men back from the religion of Christ. Undoubtedly, very many, as well of the Turks as Jews, would be content to become Christians, were it not that they be greatly offended at our images. Whereupon Paulus Ricius, a very learned Hebrew, which was christened at Pauia, said; It was very expedient, that images should be removed out of churches; because many of the Hebrews, by the means of them, be called away from the confessing of Christ. And Erasmus, in his catechism, wrote many things to this purpose; and finally determined, that those are not to be accounted heretics, which want images, and will not receive them. And in his book called Ecclesiastes, he alloweth not of those preachers, who, while they deal with the people in

the pulpit, do use pictures and images: for that (as he saith) is not decent for that place.

Paul undoubtedly, in the first to the Corinthians, exhorteth the faithful, and that with many words, that they should beware of offending the weak.

Wherefore, although there be many, which say, that they know that images must not be worshipped; yet let them think this, that everyone doth not sufficiently know it. And surly, the consideration seemeth to be all one of images, and of things dedicated unto idols. Which the wise men of Corinth said they knew what they were. And yet nevertheless, Paul commanded, that they should not eat them: and he said, Buy ye meat in the market, eat at home, and not in places appointed for idols. Even so may we say; If ye will have images, have ye them at home, and not in the temples. Neither do images placed in the temples less harm unto the church, than did the dissembling of Peter. For he, in suffering the ceremonies of the Jews, nourished an evil opinion of them. In like manner is the fall of the weak, and perverse adoration confirmed, when images are suffered to be in churches. We have (say they) a right judgment of them. Why do ye not then remove them? A right faith must be testified by deeds. And when as they be at any time removed out of the temples, I think it good to beware, that they be not kept sound and whole: for if the state change, they may easily be restored again into their places. When Constantine the great was converted unto Christ, he shut up the temples of the idols; but he destroyed them not.

Afterward came Julianus the Apostate, and opened them again. The which, if they had been subverted, they could not so easily have been made anew.

Which thing afterward Theodosius and other Christian princes noting, they either destroyed them utterly, or else granted them to the use of Christians.

25. But we must understand, that it is not the part of private men, to cast down images: therefore it must be done by the public authority of a magistrate. Sozomenus in his fifth book writeth, that under the reign of Julian, when he had opened the temples of the idols, certain Christians threw down images: in so much that emperors officers apprehended some, who were suspected of that crime, and put them under torments, and examination; when they nevertheless were innocent. But when the authors of the fact repented themselves, and sorrowed for the torments of others, they confessed that they did it, and were burned. Of this matter Augustine, in his sixth homily De sermon Domini in monte, wrote very well, where he bringeth the place out of the seventh chapter of Deuteronomy; When the land shall be yours, ye shall subvert the altars and images of them. First

(saith he) it behooved them to possess the land, and to have it in their power, before they could subvert the images thereof. And it is evident, that temples be public places, and not the possessions of private men. Wherefore it is not every man's part there, either to cast out or to destroy anything.

They then, which bear rule, as well in civil as ecclesiastical causes, ought not to suffer those images in churches. Otherwise, the simpler sort, when they perceive them to be suffered, even for that cause they attribute the more unto them: for that they see the princes, bishops, and pastors do not cast them away. And it is very frivolous, that they have always in their mouth; that images are certain visible words of God, which help the faith of them that be ignorant. For Paul testifieth, that Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God: not by pictures or images. If any be desirous to have Christ pictured, let him read the holy scriptures; let him have in his hands the gospels, the apostolical epistles, and the Acts of the apostles: and let him be oftentimes present at godly sermons.

Wherefore Paul unto the Galatians saith, that Christ was painted before their eyes; namely, through the preaching of him and others, whereby they so faithfully cleaved unto Christ, as it seemed unto them, that they beheld him fastened unto the cross. Yet they are wont to say; that If these signs be removed, the minds of them, which be weak, are offended. But they see not, that while they study to shun the less evil, they fall into the greater. For while they suffer images in temples, the weak be offended; and both the ungodly are confirmed in their ungodliness, and the godly are damnified.

Furthermore, it is to be considered, that our adversaries do importunately, and without ceasing, urge, that it is an ecclesiastical tradition, and that therefore it neither may nor ought to be changed. But it is far otherwise; seeing that ecclesiastical traditions may be changed and taken away, if edifying do so require. Wherefore, if they would suffer it to be an ecclesiastical tradition, it should be lawful to change the same. In times past children were baptized with thrice dipping: which custom or tradition (as Gregory writeth unto Leander) was taken away; because of certain heretics, which affirmed, that without those three dipping's, children were not baptized. By the same reason, why are not images cast out of the temples, least we should seem to consent with idolaters? But Peresius saith, that By taking away of images, we be against the sense of human nature, and also against God himself. But we have already answered, that all kinds of images are not taken away by us; but we would not have them worshipped, nor to be in the temples, where adoration might easily be done unto them.

Moreover, if the reason of Peresius were firm, we might prove God to do against himself, who forbad by his law, that men should not prostrate themselves before images. There be others, which say, that the fathers in the primitive church suffered not images; because men were then prone unto

idolatry. But (who I beseech you) is able to know or affirm this? Is not now man's corruption the same that then it was? Are not images in this our age worshipped and honored everywhere?

26. At the last they come unto that, which was the cause that we took in hand this treatise. And they say, that in the time of Moses and Solomon,

God would have Cherubim, and other images, in the tabernacle and temple.

Hereunto some say, that those images were placed in the innermost holy place, where none might see them. It is a weak answer: for there were such also in the court of the priests, where they made the burnt offerings and sacrifices. Also in the engines, which sustained the lavatories, there were

Cherubim, lions, and oxen. Moreover the sea of brass was set upon oxen of brass. Whereupon others answer, that those images were not there, to the intent they should be worshipped; but to be as it were a certain training, and that they might garnish the holy temple. But the Papists would, after the same manner, excuse their images. Wherefore it is more fitly answered, that God gave the law, not to himself, but unto us; so then we must follow the same: neither may we bring him into order, if he other whiles would anything of a special prerogative. He must be suffered to do after his own will; but we must obey the law that is made. Certainly those images had some figurative meaning, but they were not set forth as an example for us to follow. With them was joined the word of God, which the images placed in our churches do want. And seeing they were external things, and had the word added to them; they were (after a sort) sacraments of those times: and it is only God, and not men, which can make sacraments.

And it is to be noted, that Solomon and Moses, which made the Cherubim, durst not make any other: they only made that, which was commended unto them by God. They painted not upon the walls the acts of

Abraham, neither the doings of Adam or Moses, nor of the other fathers.

They are also accustomed sometimes to say; We have the images of Christ, to the intent we may convince the Marcionites and Valentinians, which denied that Christ had a true body. Surely a very plausible and sharp argument! But I would have them answer, wherefore they have the images of other saints. Was there any man that admitted them to have no true bodies? Doubtless there be other reasons to be used for the convincing of heretics; who, if they be not moved by the testimonies of the scriptures, and by the acts which Christ did, surly they will not be confuted by images. And so those things, which be brought by our adversaries, be only pretenses, leaves of fig-trees, and branches; whereby nevertheless they cover not their shame. If they would be seen to fly from Marcion the heretic, why do they not in like manner show themselves to detest idolatry? Neither is this to be let pass, that the image itself of Christ, if it be had in the churches, is far more dangerous than others be; by reason of the worthiness and excellency of the person whom it betokeneth.

27. Also that is frivolous, which they report of Alexander Severus the emperor, that he had images in his privy closet: for he received them not of the Christians. He was an Ethnic, and therefore no marvel if he delighted himself with images. Such examples are not to be sought from him, and such as he was. After these things they object the brazen image, which in times past was placed in the city of Caesarea Philippi. But if they will somewhat more diligently read the history of Eusebius, they shall understand, that the same was not placed in the temple, but before the door of the same woman's house, which had received her health of Christ.

Among the Ethnics there was a custom, that if one had received a great benefit of any man, he would set up an image of him, of whom he had

reaped so great a benefit: so did she behave herself toward Christ.

Moreover, they defend the having of the image of Christ crucified upon the cross, in this respect, that unless those signs be seen in every place, our redemption, that is, the death of the son of God may be forgotten.

Undoubtedly, if it be declared in sermons, and often called to remembrance, the faithful will not be forgetful of the same. For the primitive church had always before their eyes Christ crucified, although it used no idols nor images.

But the writing of Athanasius, concerning the image [of Christ] wounded by the Jews, seemeth to be both fabulous and fond. For there lived at that time many famous and learned bishops, whose works yet at this day are extant among us; who, if so notable a thing had happened at that time, they would surly have made mention thereof in their books and histories.

Eusebius, Sozomenus, and Theodoretus, who wrote many things of Athanasius; yet did they utterly leave out this, which is vainly boasted of by these men. As touching the learning, which they say is to be gathered by these things, we need not stand upon it; seeing God, Christ, and the holy

Ghost speak largely enough unto us in temples, in the holy scriptures, in sermons, and in sacraments: over and besides which, what need should there be to bring in images unto them, which rather call us from the perceiving of them, than help us? It is not the part of Christians, to repair unto the churches, to the intent they may feed their eyes with pictures and images; but to pray, to hear the word of God, to receive the sacraments, to give thanks unto God, and to celebrate the name of his majesty. The Lacedaemonians ordained, that in the Senate house there should be placed no image; to the intent the Senators there might be of ready wit, and most

attentively bend their cogitations upon those matters, which were in counsel among them.

28. Wherefore in vain do our adversaries clatter, that images be the books of lay men; that while they notify the acts of holy men, they teach the rude and unskillful sort. We indeed confess, that something is signified by pictures or images; howbeit very slenderly. But the minds of the unskillful be so rude, as that they have need of the ministry of the word. And it cometh oftentimes to pass, that by images they be rather led into error, than truly taught. Let the idiot or unlearned return as oft as he will unto a picture, it will always tell one thing: and if any doubt happen unto him, while he beholdeth the same, it will never answer anything for resolving thereof. But in the holy scriptures, and in godly sermons, whatsoever shall appear somewhat dark in one place, is plainly enough expounded in another. Verily a picture, if thou shalt once err, it will never amend thee. Howbeit, we grant that images may have a good use; namely, to renew the memory of things which have been done. Which thing, although not everywhere, yet in some places it happeneth conveniently: even as sometimes we speak some things by signs, and dumb men express many things by gestures. But whereas it is lawful to use this at sometime, and somewhere; do we therefore use it always, and in all places?

Shall he be accounted a wise Senator, that in the senate house showeth his judgment by pointing and nodding? And there is no doubt, but we use water for the quenching of thirst; yet if thou set the same before thy guests at a banquet, thou shalt be called a fool and a covetous man: so in like manner images, although elsewhere they have their commodity, yet they must not be suffered in churches, where we may deal with God by far better ways and means; especially seeing they cannot there be had without danger. For

Jeremiah in the tenth chapter saith, that Images do tell lies. And even this doth Abacuk show in the second chapter. And in the 13th and 14th chapters of the book of Wisdom it is written; that Men be deceived by them. And that the matter may appear more evident, we must understand, that then crept into the church a frequented use of images; when as bishops began to give themselves to idleness, when they ceased to teach the church that was committed unto them, and to feed the same with the word and sacraments; then (I say) they did substitute images, to be as it were vicegerents. I beseech you let experience teach us, and let us see since that time, (wherein temples were defiled with images) whether the rude and unlearned sort have been made the better learned by the use of them, and have become the more skillful in divine things by the use of them. Surely Christ, and God, was much less known than before. Was God ignorant of this commodity of images?

29. Assuredly, it could not be hidden from him, who with his eye beholdeth all things, and knoweth all things; if he saw it, and forbad it. He embraceth not us with fatherly good will, who may seem to deny men so great a good. Furthermore the apostles, who omitted nothing which might further the salvation of men, made no mention in any place of that so great a commodity. But by their actions they bewray themselves: for those images, unto the which the foolish people run on pilgrimage by heaps, be covered many times with great devotion, and hidden with great diligence; so that scarcely they be opened to noble men, cardinals, and princes. And the silly ignorant people, for whose sake they will that those images were devised, shall always have those books shut up before them. Neither are we to pass much upon the second Synod of Nice. For if a man do weigh but with mean diligence, the reasons of those bishops, whereby they established

images, he cannot refrain from laughing. Moreover, against that synod we will oppose the synod Eliberina, in the which (as I have before declared,) pictures and images be forbidden. Further it is strange, that these men be not ashamed to object against us the place of Paul, wherein he said; To the clean all things be clean: seeing in that place he entreateth only of mean and indifferent things, and not dangerous and forbidden things. And seeing now we have spoken of the nature and antiquity of images, and have distinguished them by the things which they signify, that some represent

God, others the creatures of God; and have set forth what moved men to endeavor themselves to express God by images, and have showed that it is not lawful to represent God by pictures, partly in respect it cannot be, and partly because he himself hath forbidden it; and have also taught, that there is no let, but that things created may be resembled in images, so that no honor or worship be done unto them; and at the last have proved, that they ought not to be set in holy places: we think now, that we have sufficiently spoken of them.

Of Cherubim.

30. As concerning the name, Ibn-Ezra writeth, that some make the same a general word to all graven and carved things, and to images: yet so nevertheless, as those, which be written of in the law, are said to have had the shape of man. But in Ezekiel, the forms of them be described; namely of a lion, of an ox, and of an eagle; and not of a man's shape only. Yea further, in the same prophet, a king is called Cherub; because he aboundeth with great dignity, glory, and riches. Sometime that word is written at full; to wit, with the letter Vau: but sometime in the place thereof is put, Kibbutz.

Howbeit, Solomon seemeth to have followed Moses: for he also in his tabernacle had two molten Cherubim. Yea and the very inward curtain,

which was instead of the wall of the tabernacle, had Cherubim of needle work. Wherefore it is no marvel, if both Solomon made two graven

Cherubim, and also upon the walls made many set out finely in sealed work. I am not ignorant, that there were many of the ancient Hebrew interpreters, which thought, that the word Cherubim was compounded in such sort, as the first letter Caph, is a note of similitude. Then the verb Rab being added, which signifieth, To nourish, or To grow, whereof is made the noun Rabum and Rabi, which signifieth, Children and Yong men, because they grow and increase in stature. But this hath no likelihood of truth, that the etymology of a Hebrew name should be fetched from the Chaldean tongue. As touching the matter of them, it is evident enough, that those which were in the tabernacle of Moses, were of massy gold: for they stretched forth their wings from on high, on both sides of the mercy seat, with their faces one toward another. And the mercy seat was a table of the same length and breadth, that the ark of covenant was; which consisted of mass and pure gold, and out of that table (as is said) two Cherubim did rise up. The stuff whereof Solomon's Cherubim were made, was wood of the olive, which undoubtedly is very hard. Wherefore in carving or graving the same, artificers do take great pains: but it endureth very long.

31. In this place R. David Kimhi demandeth, how it was lawful for Solomon to cut down olive trees; because they bring forth fruit? And in Deuteronomy it is decreed, that those kind of trees should not be hewn down, no not upon the land of the enemies. By some it is answered, that he cut none down, but such as were withered with age, and were become so barren, as they would bear fruit no longer. But there be some, which think, that he used not the best olive, but the wild olive tree, whereof there is no fruit had. And there be some, which write, that these trees were not felled

within the country of Judea, but were sent thither by Hiram. Howbeit, it might more fitly be said, that these things were done otherwise than order was; and that by the instinct of God, some piece of the law was dispensed with; especially that which rather belonged unto war than unto peace. Also there were some, which denied that this was properly the wood of the olive tree: for (as they say) there be also other kinds of trees, which bring forth a certain oil; as the Cedar, the pine apple, and fir tree: the which, in so much as they bear fatness or gum, may be called trees of oil. They allege a place out of the eighth chap. of Nehemiah's, where it is written, that the feast of tabernacles was celebrated, wherein it was said to the people; Bring ye the leaves of the olive tree, and the leaves of the tree of oil. By which words these things are very manifestly distinguished one from another. Further also, the Schoolmaster of the law commanded not only to wear leaves of the olive tree, but also of the Cedar tree: and the Greek translation hath, the Cypress tree. And in the 41st chapter of Isaiah, (although the place be somewhat dark,) the wood of Cypress seemeth to be expressed under the name hereof. The height of the Cherubim was ten cubits; yet so, as they resembled young age in their face: which thing was sometime done by cunning artificers, in the great images called Colossi. Howbeit, Josephus described these images to be only of five cubits; and he testifieth, that the stuff of them was pure and massy gold. But credit must be given unto the holy scriptures.

32. As touching the site and habit of the Cherubim, this may be said; namely, that R. Solomo wrote, that with the soles of their feet, they stuck unto the floor, and had their countenance turned toward the east; as though they beheld them which went in and out. The one of them, with his wing touched the wall on the southside; the other the wall on the north side,

touching one another with the midst of their wings. They were therefore distant one from another ten cubits. The book of Paralip. affirmeth, that these images had the countenance of young men. On the contrary part

Josephus writeth, that none is able to say what countenance they were of; but that their faces were bent toward the east, and to the holy place. The book of Paralipomenon doth testify, when they were with stretched out wings, the whole wideness of them consisted of ten cubits; and so they occupied the whole breadth of the sanctuary, even twenty cubits. Wherefore in them might be seen the just measure of a man's body, according to the quantity which they say it contains, seeing his height is so much as is equal with him, his hands being stretched out. But thou wilt say; If both the wings consisted of so many cubits, what place shall we allow for the trunk of his body? David Kimhi writeth, that their bodies were under the wings; because the tops of the wings were joined to the chine of the back. So that their bodies appeared in the fore part without the wings, and where they appeared most, the ark of the covenant was set either under or between these two

Cherubim, the which was shadowed with their wings stretched out.

The length of the ark, as it is described in the 25th chapter of Exodus, was of two cubits, and a half: so much also was it in breadth, and the very height thereof was of one cubit and a half. There were bars of gold joined therewith, which were put through rings of gold, and neither from thence were they removed at any time: the length of those bars was four cubits.

Above the ark in the propitiatory, there were two other Cherubim made by Moses. And by this means it came to pass, that in the holiest place of Solomon's temple, there were four Cherubim; to wit, two of Solomon's, and two lesser, made in the time of Moses. But the greater, which Solomon placed, did look toward the sanctuary, and toward the east part. But the

Cherubim of Moses, stood of each side of the propitiatory, and looked one upon the other, as if they had upholden the propitiatory with their hands. In the tabernacle of Moses, the opening of the two wings was of ten cubits, and with their wings they touched the wall; but after another manner than those of Solomon's did. For Moses Cherubim touched the east and the west part; and Solomon's, the north and the south part. But Moses Cherubim being placed in the temple of Solomon, touched not the walls with their wings; because the place was larger than it was in the tabernacle. Howbeit, in Isaiah we read of an order of Cherubim, somewhat differing: for to every one of them was six wings; for with the uppermost, they covered their countenance, and with the lowermost their feet, and sling with the middlemost, they cried; Holy, Holy, Holy.

33. We must not think that Solomon transgressed the law, by placing Cherubim in the innermost places of the temple, for he followed the example of Moses, who was commanded by God so to do. Moreover, when he showed unto David all the form and description of the holy building; there is no doubt, but he showed him also the images of the Cherubim.

Wherefore idolaters must not be led with the example hereof, to have images in their churches. Last of all there remaineth, that I declare so much as shall be thought sufficient, for the signification of these images.

Certainly, they did represent the administering spirits, whereof there is mention made in the first chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews: of which Daniel reckoneth so great a number, as he writeth, that there be ten hundred thousand, (meaning an innumerable multitude:) for he put a certain number for an infinite number. The ministries of them be of diverse sorts.

Sometimes of severity: for when God had driven Adam out of paradise, he placed Cherubim before paradise, with a fiery two-edged sword, to drive

away wretched men from thence. The Egyptians were stricken by the ministry of angels. So was the host of Sennacherib. David also saw an angel approach near Jerusalem with a drawn sword. Also an angel withstood

Balaam in his journey. Neither is there any doubt, but the five cities were destroyed with fire by the ministry of angels. But other whiles angels do serve God in the defending of men. For an angel set himself between the camps of the Egyptians and Israelites, in the same very night, when the Israelites should pass through the red sea. Lot also was preserved, and Peter brought out of prison by the diligence of angels. And angels were present with Christ, when he was tempted by the devil in the wilderness. Moreover, they defend kingdoms and provinces (as it is written in Daniel.) And it is declared, that by the hands of them, the spirit of Lazarus was brought to the bosom of Abraham. And in the Psalm it is sung; He hath given his angels charge of thee, and they shall keep thee in all thy ways. Also they were seen stand for the defense of Elisha against his enemies, as the holy history reporteth and testifieth. Furthermore, God useth them for instructing of men, as we read in Daniel and Zechariah. Marie was instructed by Gabriel, that she should bring forth the fruit of salvation. So was Joseph, concerning the taking of his wife unto him, from whom he was determined to depart: and so was he likewise as touching his flight into Egypt, and returning again. What shall I say more? They be messengers of God for to reveal his will.

34. Yea, and the ministers of the church be called angels, and are represented by them: for they advance the holy word of God amongst men.

Wherefore Ezekiel saw an engine, wherein Cherubim were carried: whereby (as the wise and learned do interpret) are meant the prophets, apostles, and ministers of the church, of whom God, that is, Jesus Christ our

Savior, is carried by his word into all parts of the world: and wheresoever they come, they celebrate the praises of God amongst men, even as did the Seraphim's of Isaiah. Many things, besides these may be brought, whereby the allegory between ministers and angels might be amplified; but with these few we will content ourselves. I return therefore unto the angels themselves, by whole ministry also I affirm, that God governeth natural things. For there is no doubt, but that the celestial spheres, by their labor are turned about, and the marvelous things of nature are brought forth. For which cause it is very elegantly written, that God himself is carried upon the Cherubim. And the scriptures testify these divine spirits to be of such worthiness and excellency, that it setteth them out unto us; not only with wings, but also full of eyes; that is to say, that they execute the office committed to them by God, both wisely and speedily: which two things are most worthily commended in ministers and ambassadors. For then they rightly execute their office, if they join celerity with wisdom. And thus much shall suffice of Cherubim.

35. But now let us see somewhat concerning this word Teraphim. Some will have it, that they were instruments for marking out of times; or else of regions, stations, and degrees of stars, whereby afterward, by the science of Astrology, men might prognosticate of the events to come. But this is not much allowed: for they were rather images, as in the history of David is manifestly seen: when as Michal the daughter of Saul, placed a Teraphim in the bed, and feigned David to be there laid, whom notwithstanding she had privily sent away. But it had been no likely way for the devising of a lie, unless Teraphims had been of human shape. Wherefore it is said by others, that they be images, so made by the observation of the stars, as they be able to make answer, and give out oracles, when they are consulted withal. Of

which opinion, among others, is Ibn-Ezra. But against this opinion, it seemeth that that may be objected, which is pronounced in the psalm concerning idols; A mouth they have, and speak not. But if so be they answer; How shall this take place? In the very same Psalm the question is answered; They speak not in their throat: because in very deed men do speak by a natural power [of life] through an artery proceeding from the lights. But in these kind of images, not the life, but the devil speaketh.

Wherefore the Jews, otherwise overwhelmed or drowned in these kind of superstitions, do show, that the witches did sacrifice some child, whom they knew to be a first born, whose head being cut off, they embalmed with salt and spices, that it may remain uncorrupt, under whose tongue they put a plate of gold, whereon they set the name of an unclean spirit, which they invocate; and setting up lights, they worship this mischievous head, and ask counsel of it, and from thence have answers, the devil moving the tongue thereof.

In Zechariah it is said, that the Teraphims did speak lies. And marvel not that it is written in Hosea, that the people seem to be left without Ephod and Teraphim; as thought it pertained unto God, that Teraphim should be worshipped, even as the Ephod was. For this is not true: for Teraphim, in the holy scriptures, is always taken in the worse part. But there the meaning is, that the people of God should be scattered and afflicted, so as neither they might retain the true worshipping of God, neither should they be at leisure to worship idols. Ephod in that place may be referred to good religion, and Teraphim unto wicked: neither of which two, those that be in captivity and affliction will retain. But I marvel, how some dare be so bold to say, that Laban did not worship such kind of Teraphim or images; when as he plainly saith, that they were his gods. I am of the mind, that he

worshipped together both God and idols. For it is very likely, that he had recourse to the idolatry of the inhabitants of Mesopotamia; and he retained somewhat of those things, which perhaps his father Nachor taught, as touching the true God. Although that Nachor also was an idolater, as it is thought of the Jews not unlike to be true: as was Balaam the soothsayer, which saith, that he was called by Balak out of the very same country. But this only will I say, as touching idolatry, and the endeavor about images and idols, whereby things to come might be known; that these things began of a curiosity. For when men were so immoderately careful to know things to come, they left nothing unattempted for the compassing of the same. And then the devil perceiveth himself most easily to be admitted, when we have such fervent desire of anything. Wherefore he both useth his cunning, and also bestoweth his labor willingly, that we may be deluded and drawn from our true and perfect salvation. But unto Christ are we beholding, that these things are not now so commonly received in the world, as they were before his coming. Although privately they be not altogether taken away; yet is there no city well-ordered with laws, but doth either punish severely, or else note with infamy, such mischievous arts and studies of enchantment. Let

Plutarch and others say what they list, as touching the cause why oracles ceased to be given; seeing we know, that this must be ascribed to our Lord

Jesus Christ.

Of human sacrifices.

36. It appeareth manifestly out of the holy history, that men were brought to that madness, that they endeavored by human sacrifices and offering up of their children, to make God favorable unto them. And from whence this evil sprang, diverse men do diversely imagine. For there be some, which think, that that custom was brought in by a perverse imitation of Abraham.

For men hard, that God required such a sacrifice: and therefore concluded, that it is most acceptable to him: and they thought, that they should be happy, rich, and mighty, like unto Abraham, if they had given such an oblation. Howbeit, it hath no resemblance of truth, that the Ethnics made such account of Abraham, being a private man; that they would so grievously punish themselves by his example. Again, for the imitation of his fact, the preparation of the mind was sufficient; neither behooved it, to perform the thing itself. For God, which commanded that this should be done, did forbid it to be done. So then I cannot ascribe the invention thereof to a more certain author, than to Satan, which hath been a murderer from the beginning: neither delighteth he in anything more, than in slaughters and human blood. Wherefore it is notably said in the Psalm 106. They have offered up their sons unto devils. But this would they not have done, unless they had been certified by their oracles, that they were delighted with this kind of sacrifices. And not only in Palestine, or Syria, was that custom come in ure, but it came even unto foreign nations also.

37. Plutarch, in his parallels, the 66th chapter, writeth, that the Lacedaemonians, what time as they were afflicted with a plague, received answer of Apollo, that the plague should cease, if they would slay some virgins that should be chosen by lot, from among the chiefest nobility. And in the chapter following, he writeth, that the very same happened unto the Pheraei. Moreover, it is often reported of all the poets, that Polyxena, the daughter of Priamus, was offered up to the spirits of Achilles. And Iphigenia, or Iphianassa (for indeed she was called by both the names) being the daughter of Agamemnon, was sacrificed in Aulis: whereupon

Virgil pronounced.

Sanguine placâstis ventos, & virgins caesa;

that is, With blood and with a virgins slain, Ye have appeased the winds [certain.] Yea and Tertullian, in his book entitled Scorpiacus, against the Gnostics, mentioned; that the Scythians sacrificed men to Diana, namely in the region of Taurica; and that the Gauls did the same to their Mercurius; the Africans also unto Saturnus. And lest he should seem to report things out of knowledge, and most ancient, he testifieth, that the same most cruel custom did publicly endure until the proconsulship of Tiberius; who took from among them so great a mischief: and the priests which executed these things, he hung upon the trees, which shadowed the temple of Saturn.

Howbeit he addeth, that from that time were finished those most cruel sacrifices, although not publicly, yet at the least wise privately. Yea and (saith he) in the city itself of the godly Aeneads, the same thing was accustomed to be done, so as human blood was sprinkled unto one [which was called] Jupiter. Neither maketh it any matter, that the same blood was of the Bestiarij, (that is, of those kind of men, which for diverse kinds of great crimes were condemned unto beasts) because, although they were hurtful men, yet nevertheless they were men. This writeth he in his apollogie, affirming that this kind of oblation did fitly agree with Saturn, who, as he spared not his own natural sons, so was he delighted in the slaughter of strangers. This divine power of Saturn (as the Hebrew interpreters affirm) was called among the Jews Moloch; unto whom the idolatrous parents did sacrifice their children. And it is not unknown, that the Romans, in old time, used every year to sacrifice two men, casting them down from the bridge Miluius, into the river Tiber: which ordinance they did afterward mitigate, by throwing out of a basket into the river, not the

men themselves, but the images of them. Livie in his fourth Decad, and fourth book, maketh mention of a holy sacrifice of the spring time, wherein the people of Rome vowed unto sacrifice, all the living creatures, which should be born from the kalends of March, unto the ides of May. And (as Festus hath taught) they therewithal vowed even their children. And in Cyprus they sacrificed a man unto Apollo. For Teucrus, who first did this, delivered the rite by hand unto the posterity; and that ceremony endured unto the time of Adrian the emperor. And Philo, who wrote the history of the Phoenices, wrote, that they in their greatest dangers, accustomed to sacrifice their children. Which thing agreeth well with the narration of the holy history. Moreover, it is known unto all men, that the Decij vowed their own selves for the safety of their own army; and that Curtius threw himself into a huge gap of the earth, that the city might be delivered from the plague, wherewith it was infected.

38. These men indeed are praised by the judgment of the world and the flesh; whereas by the judgment of God and the spirit, they are worthy to be dispraised. Whereupon Christ most prudently admonished us, that those things, which excel before men, are most vile in the sight of God. Therefore

(as I have said) this most cruel kind of sacrifice proceeded of the devil. But let us see, by what reasons men have been allured thereunto. One (I think) was brought to pass by this means; Those things that be most precious, and which do please us most of all, should be offered unto God, especially, when we are afflicted with extreme dangers; But our children be far more excellent than cattle, neither account we anything more deer unto us, than they; Therefore, when we live in the greatest perils, they must be offered up unto God. This is a false argument, [taken] from that which is absolute, to that which is in some respect: because we also do confess, that parents

ought also to offer up their children unto God, by bringing up of them godly and religiously; but not in making a burnt sacrifice of them. Perhaps they are driven by another reason; namely, because they had heard of their ancestors, that is, of the holy Patriarchs, that it would come to pass, that one day God would be well pleased with a human sacrifice. Which as they did peculiarly understand concerning Messias; so the wicked, being taught by the instruction of the devil, understood it of some particular men.

Undoubtedly it was a marvelous blindness of their minds, that they abhorred not to sacrifice their children unto devils: and it was more than a true pretense of religion, which consisted not of the word of the Lord, but of a human and devilish invention.

And certainly, the more fervent that men be in superstitions devised by themselves, the further are they carried headlong into things more absurd.

And if so be that a good intent were at any time to be commended; here should it most of all have taken place. For they, which did sacrifice their own children, did not only seem to mortify human affections; but utterly to despoil them. On this wise do men, when they be carried away of their own will. What else, I beseech you, was this, then to be cruel against their own blood? Wild beasts, which be altogether destitute of reason, would commit no such thing; who do fight for their young ones, and offer themselves to die for the safety of them. Hereby we understand, what miserable gods the idolaters have worshipped; whom they would not have to be merciful unto them, except they had first done them much harm. Under the color of godliness, the earth was polluted with innocent blood, that a more unhappy destruction might come against it. And thus we see that idolatry exacteth more, and far more grievous things of men, than true godliness, and the word of God can obtain. It grieved not those men to kill their sons; but they

that profess the Gospel, will not abide to chasten them, no not lightly. The priests of Baal lanced their bodies so cruelly, as the blood ran on every side out of their bodies: and they which would be called Christians, withdraw not their bodies from hurtful pleasures.

39. But and if we should demand, whether God have at any time delighted in human sacrifice, that will we not deny: for through the death of Christ,

God was well pleased with mankind. And that which in many places of the law is written as touching sacrifices; to wit, that God smelled those things as a sweet savor: that must be referred, not unto the cattle which was sacrificed, but unto the principal type that was shadowed by them, that is, unto Christ, whose death nevertheless did not barely and by itself please

God, but so far forth as it proceeded of a true obedience, perfect mind, and singular charity. And if thou demand, whence that obedience and charity obtained their dignity and excellency? It shall be said, from the divine person, in which the human nature was sustained, while Christ, so far forth as he was man, should suffer the works of our salvation. Also the sacrifices of the holy martyrs, wherein they suffer themselves to be slain for the name of God, is also most deer unto God. Yet is not God cruel, as he that rejoiceth in the blood and death of men: for the deaths and slaughters of martyrs please not God of themselves, and in their own nature; except in that, that they are offered for the testifying of his truth. Again, he hath not so respect unto patient men, as they be mere men, and the children of Adam; but as they belong unto the body of Christ, and are now become his members by regeneration, and (according to the form of Paul's speaking) are called the men of God.

40. In very deed God might, in his own right, have required human sacrifices of men. For seeing he is the Creator of men, he may determine of

them at his own pleasure: which yet is the more lawful for him, when as all the posterity of Adam have been made subject unto death. That therefore, which every hour they owed to God, he might require of them, whensoever he had thought good. For truly, no justice was against it, but that he might use their death, for the fulfilling of his decrees. And in requiring of this kind of oblations, he should have done no injury unto them: for instead of the loss of this transitory and frail life, he would have requited them with a blessed and eternal life; the which should have been counted for an advantage, and that a most manifest advantage. Wherefore those men, that were to be offered in a burnt sacrifice, might have set their minds at quiet, by this sound consolation. But when it was lawful for God thus to do, he would not: nay rather, he forbad that it should be done. First, before the law was given, when as he stayed Abraham from killing of Isaac. Afterward in the very law itself, in two or three places he chargeth, that men should not offer up their sons, and sacrifice them as did the nations of the Chanaanites.

And after the law was made, he oftentimes by the oracles of the prophets rebuked the Israelites, when they committed such things. And in the place of human sacrifice, he appointed the slaughters of beasts; that is, of bulls, of calves, of sheep, of goats, and of birds: which nevertheless he removed afterward, when Jesus Christ had been sacrificed. And why he for a time suffered those kind of sacrifices, Tertullian in his second book against Marcion declareth. First, because he saw the Hebrews incline to the ceremonies of the idolaters, where these beasts were used in sacrifices: wherefore he rather would, that those things should be done unto him, than unto the vain gods of the Gentiles, yea rather unto devils.

Furthermore, with singular diligence and perfect precepts he distinguished the kinds of the sacrifices: also he prescribed in a manner infinite things, as

touching the places, vessels, and rites, to the intent he might exercise those fathers very busily in his service, that they might be constrained to meditate day and night in his law; and that with a true faith: otherwise their sacrifices should have been hated of him, as he spake by the prophet Isaiah; To what end is this multitude of sacrifices offered unto me? Have I required this at your hands, &c? Also, that manner of worshipping was a certain schooling: for the fathers were taught, that the death, which they had procured unto themselves by their sins, was through the bountiful goodness of God translated from themselves unto the sacrifices. And Christ was evidently showed, who took upon himself all our sins and death; and therefore died, that we might be absolved. This was the schooling of the sacrifices of Moses. Howbeit, we must not say, that we are altogether without human sacrifices, which we may offer up to God. For every man may and ought to sacrifice himself, as Paul taught in the twelfth chapter to the Romans, writing; I beseech you, by the mercy of God, that ye give up your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, &c. And David pronounced; A sacrifice to God is a troubled spirit, a broken heart, &c. In like manner may we offer up our children unto God, if they be godly and sincerely instructed, to the honor of the true God: which may not be done according to the inventions of men, but according to the word of God. And this may now suffice as touching human sacrifices.

41. But no less doubt is offered unto us; to wit, that the horrible sacrifice of the king of Moab may seem to have been very profitable unto him: for immediately the siege was dissolved, and the host [of the Israelites] so departing away, there is an occasion given of exercising a perverse rite in time of adversity. What then? Shall we accuse God, which gave such a success? No, not in any wise: for no man may or ought to put a law upon

him. Who shall prescribe unto him, seeing he is the cause of all things? By that reason we will find fault with him, that the sorcerers of Pharaoh resisted Moses, and did show forth many signs and miracles against him.

There also was an occasion given of refusing the word of God. We might also complain of Antichrist, because with miracles and wonders (as it is written to the Thessalonians) he shall drive men to fall from the truth. Also in these latter times, miracles and delusions are done unto images, relics, and sepulchers of saints; whereby superstitions, and idolatrous worshipping's are confirmed. But we are not for these causes to complain justly of God, seeing he is very justice itself, and doth all things justly.

Those verily, which for such occasions are drawn to evil; those I say (as it is written unto the Thessalonians) have not received the love of the truth, and therefore are given up unto errors, and seducements of Antichrist.

Wherefore we are hereby admonished, while we take anything in hand, that the successes and events should not be regarded; since we might be easily deceived. For we should oftentimes see, that godly men are pressed with troubles; and contrariwise, the wicked do flourish, and enjoy at their pleasure, riches and earthly felicity. The will of God is only to be regarded, which he hath revealed unto us in the holy scriptures; according to which we must examine what is to be followed, and what to be eschewed.

The establishing of the second commandment; whether the child shall bear the iniquity of his father.

42. But in this place there is a most weighty and very difficult question; because the child doth seem to bear the iniquity of his father. For it is written in the fifth chapter of Deuteronomy, which also is in Exodus; I will visit the wickedness of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation. And the very same did God repeat to Moses, when he

went forth before him: for among others his titles, the same (Of recompensing the wickedness of fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation) is added. And it seemeth to be a marvel, how that could be rehearsed among the titles of mercy. The Heretics left not this unspoken of; namely, the Marcionits, the Valentinians, and the Carpocratians, which for this cause rejected the Old Testament; and God the author thereof, they affirmed to be evil, as he that would spare the parents which were sinners, and would punish the children being innocents. And that he is so far from mercy, as he cannot forget sin; but keepeth anger in store, even unto the third and fourth generation. Also the Jews took the same in ill part, who in the 18th chapter of Ezekiel said; that The fathers did eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth were set on edge. This was, as if they should say; Jeroboam erected calves; Manasseh set forward idolatry: were it meet that we should suffer punishment for them? But the Lord answereth by the prophet; All souls be mine. Like as the soul of the father is mine, so is the soul of the son mine also. The soul which sinneth, the same shall die: and the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father. These things seem not sufficiently to agree one with another.

43. Some have thought, that there must be used a distinction of evils, and punishments. For they say there be some punishments, which appertain to everlasting damnation, others which are but temporal. And they understand the said place of Ezekiel, to be spoken of the former kind of punishments.

For as concerning everlasting salvation, or damnation; every man shall bear his own burden: and The soul which sinneth, the same shall die. Neither do they otherwise understand the place of Jeremiah, in the 31st chapter. But as touching temporal punishments, (of which sort are sickness, poverty, banishment, death, and such like) they affirm, that it is not contrary to the

justice of God; that the father, together with the son, and the people with the princes, should be wrapped in those punishments. And so they expound that which in the law is said; I will reward the sin of the fathers upon the children; unto the third and fourth generation. Augustine seemeth sometime to have allowed of this distinction: for in the questions upon Joshua, the eighth question; when he disputeth of Achan, which had hidden some of the accursed things, for whose sin all the Israelites were miserably afflicted: and for that, not only Achan was punished, but also his sons and daughters were put to death together. There (I say) Augustine writeth, that those punishments might as well profit, as hurt: the which thing God himself knew, and that therefore they were tempered by him, according to his righteousness. For God doth so moderate them, as both they may afflict the wicked, and not hurt the good. For such is his providence, that those things which seem to be evil he can make good. But as concerning the everlasting punishments, because those do hurt for evermore, every man doth justly suffer them according to his evil desert. No man (saith he) suffereth those punishments for another man's fault. And even this also he writeth in his first book, the 10th chapter, against the adversaries of the law and the prophets; There is no doubt (saith he) but in this life one is afflicted for another.

And against Julian the Pelagian, the sixth book and 12th chap. he distinguisheth the state of the people: and some (he saith) are regenerated in Christ, but that others are not yet regenerated. And of them which be not regenerated, their sins are visited upon the third and fourth generation, to wit, upon all the posterity. And he alludeth unto original sin, which from Adam is spread over all posterity. But thou wilt say; Whie then punisheth he to the third and fourth generation? The same father answereth in the 42nd

question upon Deuteronomy; Because three being joined with the number of four, make the number of seven; which is a complete number. So as by naming the third and fourth generation, it is all one, as if he had said; Unto every generation. Which kind of speech Amos used; For three wickedness's

(saith he) and for four I will not be turned. Augustine therefore understandeth the words of the law (concerning the punishing of the father's iniquity upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation) of them which be not regenerate: for the law (saith he) spake of them, which were under the law. But Ezekiel and Jeremiah spake of men, which were born anew, and of the gift of regeneration, to be given by Christ. But men, which be regenerate, shall be judged everyone after his own merits, and not according to other men's sins. And so the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, but the soul which sinneth, the same shall die. But before regeneration, original sin infecteth, and destroyeth all posterity.

44. This distinction of Augustine I disallow not; yet doubt I, whether it be sufficiently applied unto the sense of Ezekiel and Jeremiah. Both those prophets wrote the self-same words; The fathers did eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth were set on edge: when as nevertheless the one was in Jewry, and the other was led away into Babylon: which is a good argument, that they spake both with one spirit. But Augustine saith, that the exposition of Ezekiel must be taken out of the 31st chapter of Jeremiah. For there it is added, after those words; Behold, the days will come, that I will make a new covenant, &c. Wherefore all that whole place is to be applied to regeneration: so that by these words of Jeremiah, the saying of Ezekiel must be interpreted concerning the regenerate. By this means, that father thinketh, that the question is answered. But I, when I more diligently consider of that chapter of Ezekiel, it seemeth to me, that it speaketh of the

pains and afflictions of this life. For wherefor did the people complain, saying; The fathers did eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth were set on edge? Did they complain of the pains of hell? No verily: but because they were carried away captive into Babylon, and there lived in bondage. They complained, that God did deal over hardly; that whereas their fathers had been idolaters, yet they which had not offended, should be punished.

Concerning those punishments, the people lamented: so as it was needful that the prophet should answer for those things; The soul of the father is mine, and the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, the same shall die. Wherefore these things have respect to the punishments of this life.

Albeit I deny not, but they may be transferred also unto spiritual punishments: but that is not but by the way of arguing A minori ad maius, that is, From the less to the greater; which is after this sort: God hath not altogether laid temporal punishments upon the innocents for others sins;

Therefore much less the spiritual and everlasting pains.

45. Jerome, when he interpreteth Ezekiel, hath a solution, the which afterward Augustine also followed; as we will declare when the place serveth. But the interpreters do vary, because the matter is obscure; and thereof cometh a difficulty, because it cannot be denied, but that God afflicteth some for other men's cause. For whereas Cham had disclosed the shame of his father [Noah] yet was the curse transferred unto Chenaan his son. And when the Sodomites had grievously sinned, the children also together with the fathers were burned. Again, when David had committed adultery, God caused, that the child begotten in that adultery, should die.

Wherefore, in a matter so obscure, Jerome indeed bringeth his own exposition; but yet he showeth what other men thought concerning this question. First he saith, that there were many, which understood that place

of the law; namely, (that God doth persecute the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation) to be allegorically spoken touching every particular soul, or man that sinneth. [ 1] For they be certain rash onsets, impulsions, and forcements unto evil, or (as other say) first motions; [ 2] afterward followeth deliberation, as when one hath determined with himself, that he will do naught; [ 3] thirdly, when this determination is performed; [ 4] fourthly, there followeth a glorying in wickedness, when one doth satisfy and well please himself in sins. So, after a sort, there be reckoned four generations. But God is so merciful, that in the first and second generation; that is, in rash onset and deliberation he is silent, and maketh as though he knew not: but the third and the fourth, (that is, the committing of sin, and the glorying therein) he punisheth: when as both a man doth evil, and glorieth in his sins, and will not repent. Wherefore they say, that God revengeth upon the branches, not upon the roots. For a man

(as they think) if he neither do evil, nor yet boasteth of evil, may be saved; although otherwise, he as well lusteth, as deliberateth to do evil.

Neither do they otherwise interpret Paul to Timothy, when he saith, that A woman shall be saved by procreation of children, if so be she abide firm in the faith, &c. That is; her soul shall be saved, if she work well, although she have naughty motions and cogitations. This interpretation I allow not. First, because it is allegorical; seeing God (especially in the law) speaketh plainly and manifestly. Secondly, for that the words of the Lord, if they should be turned to allegories, will become altogether uncertain. Lastly, because it is not true that is spoken. For those forcements and first motions are sins; because they are against the law of God: and they be condemned by Christ, when he saith in the Gospel; He that looketh upon a woman, to lust after her, he hath already committed fornication with her in his heart. And; He

that is angry with his brother, is worthy of judgment. God doth not so look upon doings, but that he hath much more respect unto the mind. Moses sinned grievously at the waters of strife; and yet, if we examine that history, we shall find no evil act that he outwardly committed: but God saw the incredulity of his mind, and grievously punished him. Wherefore, these motions and deliberations of the mind, not only be sins, but they be also grievously punished by God. Let us then pass over this interpretation, which also Jerome brought as none of his own.

46. But now, to make the matter itself plain; none can be said to suffer that, which he hath not deserved as touching the punishments of this life: because there is none perfect, no not the child, which is but one day old.

There is none but hath deserved, even death itself. Why then do men say; Our fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge: seeing everyone beareth his own burden, whether it be touching this life, or the life to come? But God doth not always bring these temporal evils, as pains and punishments; but oftentimes they have relation to other ends: as Christ in the Gospel of John answered concerning the blind man; Neither did this man sin, nor yet his parents, that he should be born blind, but that the glory of God might be made manifest. Also Peter and Paul, when they were put to death, could not complain that they had not deserved it: although God, when they were slain, did not respect this, to have them punished; but that by their blood, a testimony might be left of his sons

Gospel. Wherefore, seeing the case so standeth, and that we be all guilty of sin, we must not complain, that God dealeth too sharply with us, if for the sins of our parents we be punished. For God can so direct those troubles, as they may belong not only to his own glory, but also to the salvation of the parents. Oftentimes he doth punish the fathers in the children, and the

prince in the people. For the punishment of children no less grieveth their parents, than if they themselves were afflicted. But if so be that the children die for their father's sake, they have no injury done unto them: for death is due unto them also, and otherwise it is certain, that they must die. Now then, if God will use their death in that sort, he may do it lawfully. Which also may be affirmed, as touching other calamities: for if that a child be vexed with sickness, he deserved sickness: if he have lost his money, he hath lost but frail and unstable things; and those he had upon condition, that he might easily forgo them. So then, if with these kind of calamities God will punish the parents in the children, he cannot be accused of injustice.

47. Whereupon Augustine in his questions upon Joshua, the eighth question; We are (saith he) by reason of original sin, debtors of many punishments, the which nevertheless God converteth into certain medicines, and findeth means, that they do very much profit, although they seem evil unto us. For if so be the son had lived, peradventure he would have trodden in his father's evil steps, or else have committed worse things. Wherefore, if God take him away out of this life, he cannot complain that he is ill dealt with: since death, by God's blessing, doth redound to his commodity. For he is suddenly taken away, least wickedness should change his heart. And certainly, we ought to suffer, and endure the less evils, for to obtain greater good things. For so doth the physician with a bitter medicine trouble the mouth, that the sick man may be restored to his former health. In like manner, when we have deserved punishments, yet God doth turn them unto good. And by this means (saith Augustine) a certain discipline is established in the world: for unless it were so, men would perpetually become worse.

Also there is declared a certain conjunction and society of mankind, when as on this sort, one is punished for the fault of another. For they, which

belong all to one kingdom, or city, or province, be as it were one body among themselves: and in the body one member doth suffer for another member. Seeing therefore this is done in the body, it is no absurd thing, that the same do happen in the society of men.

Plutarch, in his little book De sera Numinis vindicta, did very well teach the same; The eye (saith he) is grieved, and the vein of the arm is lanced: even so the father did offend, and the son is punished. The prince behaved himself amiss, and the people are afflicted. And such a natural consent or agreement there is of human things. Justly doth this author accuse the rashness of men, which, so often as these things do happen, complain that God dealeth cruelly. For the father (saith he) is either good or evil. And if perhaps the son of a good father be punished, by and by they exclaim, that God dealeth unjustly; and that it is not meet, that the son should be so miserably handled, who had so good a father. But if so be the father be evil, and the son fall into calamity, there again they cry out, that herein also God is unequal, and that the son ought not to be punished, when the father hath sinned. Wherefore the vulgar sort think, that the son should not in any wise be afflicted. But what if the father be evil, and yet all things chance happily to the son? Here also (as he saith) they complain of the unjust dealing of God: for they deny it to be meet, that the son should live happily, which had so evil a father. These things he spake godly enough, although he were an Ethnic.

48. Moreover, it must be considered, that the children be as it were certain parts of their parents, and have somewhat of theirs in them: wherefore it is not absurd, if God punish that part of the parents in the children. But I come again to Augustine, who saith, that God by this means appointeth a discipline in the world, in a Common-wealth, in a church, and in a family.

Whose saying (in my judgment) cannot be disallowed: for if so be the children do suffer punishment for the sins of their parents, they have not whereof to complain. Undoubtedly they owe this duty unto their parents: for even this, that they are, they had it from them. Wherefore, if they leave their life for their sakes, they have no injury done unto them: for they yield that unto them, which they received of them. If God shall say unto them; I will use your punishment for the safety of your parents, they could by no right refuse the same. John teacheth, that Everyone so ought to love his brother, as he should be ready to yield his life for him. And if so be that life must be yielded for a brother, how much rather for a father? God useth diverse instruments, wherewith he draweth men unto him: why then may he not use either the sickness or the death of children for the chastisement or salvation of parents?

Augustine in his eighth question upon Joshua (which we have oftentimes alleged;) It is meet (saith he) that the lesser part should suffer punishment for the greater: as in that history it came to pass, for the sacrilege, which Achan had committed. A few were slain in the host, and the whole multitude was assoiled. Herby is understood, how great the wrath and vengeance of God had been, if the whole multitude had sinned; when as the sin of one alone was so costly. And Plutarch, in the same book, which I cited a little before, saith; that thus the emperors do in their camps. For if there be any fault generally committed by them all, they take the tenth of the multitude; to the intent that by the punishment of a few, the rest may be assoiled: and so one doth suffer for the fault of another. But (as it hath been said) God doth injury to no man: for he that dieth, was subject to death, and God directeth his death to a good end; namely, that he may help others, that is, that by this means he may call home, either parents, or princes to

repentance; or else to establish discipline. Those things, which we have said, must not be understood concerning spiritual and eternal punishments: for (as touching them) everyone shall be punished for his own fault.

49. Now are we to expound the very words of the law; I (saith he) am a jealous God, and visit the sin of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them, which hate me. These latter words, Jerome, upon the 18th chapter of Ezekiel noted diligently, and Augustine also in the question upon Joshua already alleged; Of them (saith God) which hate me: as if he had said; I will not touch the innocents; but I will be avenged upon the iniquity of them, which imitate evil parents, and hate me. After the like manner he promiseth, that he will do well unto the children, and children's children, even to a thousand generations. But to whom? Even to them (he saith) which love me. Wherefore, if the father were wicked, and the son good, his father's wickedness shall do him no harm. But if the father were good, and the son wicked, his father's godliness shall not avail him. And therefore (saith Jerome) God punisheth the iniquity of the fathers upon the children; not because they had evil parents, but because they did imitate their fathers. The words themselves do sufficiently declare, that the law must not be understood of original sin; but of that sin, which they call actual. For then the son shall bear the iniquity of his father, when he sinneth in like manner as his father did. Also the words of Ezekiel cannot be understood, as touching original sin, as the words, which follow do easily declare. Albeit that, which is said; to wit, The soul which sinneth, the same shall die, may be understood even of original sin; since every man hath in himself a nature corrupt and prone unto evil: wherefor everyone doth bear his own sin. For although that that sin be originally drawn from the parents, yet is it now become our own.

But thou wilt say: Seeing it is said in the law; Of them that hate me, surly since infants do not hate God, therefore it cannot pertain unto them. I answer: indeed they do not hate God in act, but by natural corruption and proneness unto evil. So the wolf that is grown devoureth the sheep, but the wolfs whelp doth not so; not because he hath not the disposition of his dam, but because he is not able to do it. And thus much concerning the words of the law. But for what cause it is said; Unto the third and fourth generation: and not; Unto the fifth and sixth, we have heard what Augustine hath answered. But in my judgment, we might much more fitly say, that the parents may live unto the third and fourth generation. God therefore would so punish the fathers in the third and fourth generation, as some feel of that punishment of the posterity might come to them, while they should be yet living; and that they might see the calamities of their children's children, and the children of them. And for this cause the holy scripture did not make mention beyond those generations. When their posterity is evil, and is punished by God; there is no doubt but the parents be punished in them.

Chrysostom on Genesis, homily 29, interpreting these words; Cursed be Chenaan, &c. But it was not Chenaan (saith he) that sinned, but his father

Cham. He answereth: true indeed it is, but Cham took that curse far more grievously, than if he himself had been afflicted. Such is the natural working and affection in fathers, that they be more disquieted with the afflictions of their children, than with their own. So Cham perceived, that not only his son should be evil, and subject to the curse; but also that he himself should be punished in him.

50. Now remaineth to be declared, why this also; namely, Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, was recited before Moses among the titles of God's mercy; seeing it seemeth to have respect unto the severity

of God. But it is not so: nay rather, if the place be more narrowly sifted, we shall see the same to be a part of his mercy. For so soon as sin is committed,

God, in his own right, might by and by take vengeance: but so good is he, that he will defer it, until the third and fourth generation; in the meantime he calleth home the father to repentance, by the admonitions of the prophets, by preachings, by benefits, and many other means. Last of all, when it is come to the third and fourth generation, and the man nothing the better, he executeth punishment: and even then he useth not affliction, as the uttermost punishment, but rather as a medicine. Who seeth not that all this is a work of great mercy? Justly therefore, and upon good cause, are these words numbered among the titles of God's mercy. And it cannot be denied, but that the prophets, together with the people, were oftentimes afflicted. For Ezekiel and Daniel were led away into captivity, and Jeremiah was cast into prison, and turmoiled many and marvelous ways in time of the siege; and afterward going to Egypt with the Hebrews, was slain. For on this sort God will have the thing to be done; that good men may not only order their own conversation aright, but that also, by patient suffering of grievous things, they may warn and amend the wicked. For with them they live together in one common-wealth and church, and be after a sort, members of one body.

Wherefore good men ought thus to think with themselves; If God have afflicted them, we also shall be vexed together with them, we shall be all wrapped under one punishment. Therefore we must take heed, that we travel for them, by reproving and praying: for their salvation being neglected, it will bring evil also unto us. After this sort must Augustine be understood, when he saith, that God by this means establisheth discipline.

For if the people be afflicted for their kings, and the son for the father; then

it behooveth, that all men labor and be diligent one for another. Yet do not good men in the meantime live without sin, in such sort as God cannot find cause to punish them. Howbeit, the painful things, which happen to the godly, as it hath been said, cannot properly be called punishments: but rather exercises of faith. For by that means God doth thoroughly make trial of their faith; and whatsoever he doth against them, it turneth to their good.

Moreover, he would have them to express in themselves Jesus Christ, their first begotten brother, which bare the sins of others in himself. For even this is a certain portion of Christ his cross, though they be not so innocent as Christ was: neither doth their cross work anything to the redeeming of sins.

Daniel being in captivity thus confessed his sins; We have sinned (saith he) and dealt unjustly, &c. He saith not; They have sinned; but, We. And Isaiah saith; All our righteousness is like unto filthy rags. Indeed in saints there is a certain righteousness, but no such, whereof they may boast before the tribunal seat of God. Wherefore, if they suffer some punishments, they have no just cause to complain.

51. But thou wilt say; Wherefore is God said to revenge on them the sins of other men, when as they themselves also do sin? He should rather be said to punish their sins, than the sins of their parents. I answer: because, when

God had long and many days expected their father's repentance, and yet perceived no amendment; and in the meantime, the third and fourth generation was come, at the length he poureth out his wrath on the children.

Now they are said to suffer for their parents, because, had it not been that the wickedness of their parents had gone before, their punishment might have been delayed longer: but now, since they happened to be in the third or fourth generation, the nature of God's justice suffereth not, that the punishment should be longer deferred. And although themselves deserved

those evils; yet, in that they are corrected in the third and fourth generation, they owe it to their parents. And so God doth terrify the parents, to the end they may stay themselves from wickedness: if not for God's cause, or their own sake; yet at the lest wise for their posterity sake. He maketh also the children afraid, least they should imitate the sins of their parents; that the punishment due unto the parents, might not be renewed upon them. And it is no injustice, that the children suffer somewhat for their parents: for even for their fathers sakes they receive inheritances, and are endued with honor and renown before others. For God not only gave good success unto David, but favored his posterity also for his sake: since the kingdom did continue in his family by the space of four hundred years.

But as touching eternal salvation, neither do the fathers suffer punishment for their children; nor yet the children for their fathers. But many spiritual gifts are by good parents obtained for their children: for Paul said, in the first to the Corinthians, the 7th chapter; Otherwise your children should be unclean, but now they are holy. Wherefore, of godly parents, the children have some holiness, and some spiritual gift; as that place teacheth. On the contrary part, by evil parents many such good things be hindered. Neither are they, being evil and impenitent, heard of God, when they desire spiritual gifts for their children. But it cometh oftentimes to pass, through the providence of God, that of good parents, are born evil children; and of ill parents, good children. As Hezekiah a good king, had the wicked king Ahaz to his father: and contrariwise, the same Hezekiah a very godly prince, begat Manasseh a most wicked and cruel king. The same also I might say of Josiah. This happeneth thus, least wickedness should grow out of measure; if continually evil children should be begotten of evil parents. God worketh therein, who maketh the child, born of an evil father, to become the member

of Christ. And he showeth therewithal, that his goodness cannot be hindered by the parents, though they be evil. Furthermore, evil children be born of good parents, that grace may be confirmed; and least that the good behavior of the children, should be attributed unto the nature which they took from their parents. For God will have it to be acknowledged his gift that we be saved.

52. One only thing is to be added to this question proposed; namely, that indeed it is lawful for God (as we have declared) to punish the sin of the fathers upon the children: but unto men this is not lawful. For in Deuteronomy, the 24th chapter, it is plainly said; Let not the fathers be punished for the children, nor yet the children for the parents. Which must be understood; so that the father consent not unto the son, nor the son unto the father. Wherefore, if Achan had been called into the place of judgment, and unto the tribunal seat, he alone should have perished, by the ordinary course of the law, and not his children together with him. But God hath this law peculiar unto himself, who would have it to be otherwise. Howbeit, he sometime also observeth this order: for in the 16th of Numerie, when Chore had conspired against Moses, he died an evil death: but the children together with their father were not destroyed; nay rather, they were preserved unto the holy ministry, and of their posterity came Samuel. King

Amazias was commended, which put to death the murderers, of whom his father was slain; yet he put not the children of them to death: for he had a consideration unto the law of God. Augustine alledgeth the cause of this prohibition; God (saith he) may punish the son for the father: for though he do afflict him in this world, yet is he able in another world to save him, but this cannot man do. Further, God seeth, that the children be not innocent, but man seeth it not.

And though the civil laws deal in this point more sincerely, and do punish the son for the fathers fault, (as it is in the Digests, and in the Code Ad legem Juliam Majestatis) yet do they not put the son to death for the father, but they deprive him of all his fathers substance, dignities, and honors.

Howbeit, some portion is assigned by them unto the daughters, by a law which was called Falcidia, to the intent they might marry. Otherwise the civil laws agree with the law of God: for in the Code De poenis, in the law

Sancimus, it is commanded, that the punishment should not be laid upon others, which either be of affinity, or blood; but should only bind the author of the offense. And yet, both this law, and the other above, were made by the same emperors; namely, Archadius and Honorius. But why it was so sharply decreed, against such as be guilty of treason; it seemeth to be done, because men might be terrified from that kind of mischievous deed.

Howbeit, the laws of God have decreed no such thing hereof: yet this they command in express words, that the son should not be slain for the father; howbeit concerning the goods, they decree nothing. But our adversaries have transferred this civil law concerning treason, unto heretics: for they do not only punish the father, being a heretic; but they also deprive the children of all his goods: how justly, I will not now declare.

↑ Back to top