THE FALLIBILITY OF THE Roman Church, Demonstrated from the manifest Error OF THE 2d NICENE & TRENT Councils, Which Assert, That the Veneration and Honorary Worship of Images, is a Tradition Primitive and Apostolical.  
IMPRIMATUR.  
Maii 28. 1687.  
Guil. Needham.  
LONDON, Printed by J. D. for Randal Tailor near Stationer's Hall, M.DC.LXXXVII.   

The Preface to the Reader.  
TO that which I have said in the close of this Discourse, touching the Infallibility of the second Nicene Council, and her Authority in proposing Articles of Faith, interpreting of Holy Scripture, and in declaring what was the Tradition of the Church of Christ; I think fit here, by way of Preface, to add these things.  
1. That if she hath a just and an assured Title to these Privileges, then must she be infallible in the interpretation of these following Scriptures.  

(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. Nic. Conc. Can. 15.  Let not a Clergyman, from the time present, be placed in two Churches, this being an Argument of filthy Lucre, and alien from the Ecclesiastical Custom; For we have heard from our Lord's Mouth, That no Man can serve two Masters, for he will either hate the one, and love the other; or he will cleave to the one, and despise the other. Let therefore every one, according to the Apostles Injunction, remain in that Calling wherein he was called, and place himself in one Church only; for those things which are done in Ecclesiastical Affairs for filthy Lucre, are alien from God. Now either those words of St. Paul do really command all Clergymen to abide in that Church in which at first they were placed; and those words of Christ do, in their true and proper sense, forbidden them to have two Benefices with Cure, or two Churches under their care, or they do not so: If they do, then do the Doctors of the Church of Rome continually practise what is forbid by Christ, and as continually neglect what is commanded by St. Paul; we also have, according to the determination of this Council, a full conviction that they are generally addicted to filthy Lucre, and are, above all other Clergy, transgressors of Ecclesiastical Custom. If these Texts do not bear the sense here put upon them, than hath this Council erred in their interpretation of these Scriptures; and if they have so evidently erred in those Interpretations of the Scripture which concern the Manners and Duty of the Christian Clergy, why may they not err also in those things which concern their Faith? Moreover, it being evident and confessed, that the Command to tell the Church, especially concerns Offences against good Manners; and that our Lord's Promise is to be with these Guides, teaching Men to observe those things he hath commanded; surely it must be evident, that these Texts are impertinently alleged for the infallibility of General Councils, in their interpretations of the Holy Scripture, if they do not prove the infallibility of this General Council in their interpretation of these Scriptures.  
2ly, This Council in her second Canon, speaketh thus; 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. Nic. Concil. Can. 2.  Since when we sing, we promise to meditate in the Judgements of the Lord, and not forget his words 
* Psal. 119.16. ; it is most wholesome that all Christians should observe this, but especially the Hierarchy: And therefore we command, that all who are promoted to a Bishopric, should altogether know the Psalter. Now I desire to know of the Romish Doctors, how they will reconcile the sense here given of the Psalmist 's words, with their public singing in an unknown Tongue? For if it be wholesome, that all Christians should observe this, and it be certain that they cannot do it, unless they do entirely know the Psalter: 'tis also certain, that when the Psalter is only sung in Latin, all Christians cannot meditate in these Judgements of the Lord, how wholesome soever it may be to them so to do. Again, if the forementioned Privileges did certainly belong unto this Council, then must she also be infallible in these following Decisions, viz.  
1. In that of Canon the 3d, which runs thus; 
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. Can. 3.  All Elections made by Princes of Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons, shall be void, according to that Rule, which saith, If any Bishop, by using the secular Powers, obtain a Bishopric, let him be deposed; and they who do communicate with him, let them be excommunicated. According to which Canon, all the Elections of French and English Bishops must be void, and all Christian Princes must be deprived of their just Prerogative in this Affair.  
2ly, In their first Canon they confirm all the 
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc.  Canons of the Apostles, and of the six Holy and Ecumenical Synods, and also of the Topical Councils assembled to make such Determinations; and of the Holy Fathers, because all these being enlightened by one and the same Spirit, decreed things expedient, whom therefore they anathematised, deposed, or separated from Communion, we also do anathematise, depose, and separate from Communion. And in particular, they frequently Anathematise and condemn among the List of Heretics 
(e) Viz. Act. 7. p. 556, 588. vid. Act. 3. p. 165, 181. Act. 6. p. 421, 424.  Pope Honorius. Now if all these Canons be not to be received, either as to Matters of Faith, or Manners; then hath this Synod dangerously erred in determining, that they were all to be received, as being made by Men, enlightened by the Holy Ghost in their decisions. If they be to be thus esteemed, to omit at present almost infinite Advantages, which this Concession gives to our Cause, than was the sixth Council in Trullo assisted by the Holy Ghost to determine thus;  
1. 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Syn. Trull. Can. 13.  Because we know that in the Roman Church they have made a Canon, that they who are to be ordained Priests, or Deacons, shall promise no more to accompany with their Wives: We, following the old Canon of Apostolical appointment, will have the conjugal society of Holy Men, according to the Laws still firm and valid, by no means dissolving their conjugal Society with their Wives, nor defrauding them of the enjoyment of each other at times convenient. If therefore any Person be found worthy to be ordained Subdeacon, Deacon, or Priest, let him by no means be hindered from receiving these Orders, because he lives with his lawful Wife; nor shall any Man require him to promise, that after his Ordination he will abstain from conjugal Duties, lest by so doing we become injurious to that Marriage which God ordained, and our Lord blessed with his Presence. The Voice of the Gospel crying out, What God hath joined, let no Man put asunder; and the Apostle teaching, That Marriage is honourable, and the Bed undefiled; and saying, Art thou bound to a Wife, seek not to loosed.  
2. When they determine thus; 
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. Can. 36.  Renewing the Canon made by the General Councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon, We decree, That the Chair of Constantinople shall enjoy equal privileges with that of Rome, and be magnified in Ecclesiastical Matters as that is.  
3. When they decree thus; 
(h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Can. 55.  Since we have understood that in the City of Rome they fast on Saturdays in Lent, against the Tradition of the Church, it seemed good to the Holy Synod, that the Canon which saith, If any Clergyman be found fasting on the Lord's Day, or any Saturday, except one only, let him be deposed; if any Layman, let him be excommunicated, shall be inviolably observed in the Church of Rome also. And,  
4. When in their first Canon they Anathematise Pope Honorius; that is, they by God's Spirit were assisted in the first Decree, to condemn the Practice and Constitutions of the Church of Rome of that Age; and much more the practice of the present Church of Rome, as contrary to the Voice of Christ and his Apostles; In the Second, to decree against the Pope's Supremacy; In the Third, to charge the Church of Rome with walking contrary to the Tradition of the whole Church besides, and give Laws to rectify that Abuse; In the Fourth, to declare, not only that a General Council may be infallible without the Confirmation, or even Concurrence of the Pope, but also may infallibly condemn him for an Heretic.  
Moreover, in this Nicene Council, this pleasant Story is twice related, viz. That a certain Monk being haunted with the Spirit of Fornication, (a Spirit too familiar with such Professors of Continency) who vehemently urged him to uncleanness. The old Man miserably cried out, How long will it be e'er thou let me alone, thou hast been with me even to old Age? Then the Devil visibly appearing, said, Swear to me thou wilt tell no Body what I shall now say to thee, and I will tempt thee no more. Then the Monk swore, by the High God, that he would tell no Man what the Devil should say. Whereupon Satan spoke thus to him; Worship thou no more the Image of the Blessed Virgin with her Son in her Arms, and I will no more molest thee. The Monk hearing this, notwithstanding his Oath, goes the next day to Abbot Theodore, and tells him all that the Devil said. And the Abbot commending him for it, farther told him, That it was better for him to frequent all the Stews in the City, than to deny to worship, by that Image, the Lord and his Holy Mother. And when the Devil comes again, and taxeth the Monk with Perjury, he tells the Devil, that he knew it very well, but rests satisfied in this, That it was only Perjury against his God and Maker. Where note,  
1. That this ridiculous Tale is so acceptable to that Good Synod, that they command it to be read, Act the 4th; 
P. 252. p. 381.  and Act the 5th they make a repetition of it.  
2ly, That they condemn the Monk 's Oath, as being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Ibid. p. 253.  a wicked Oath; and, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a false Oath, and so not binding; and say, That it was better to forswear himself, than to keep an Oath for the destruction of Images; and seem all to be pleased with the decision of Abbot Theodore. Now if this be good Divinity, then is it better to be perjured, and take the Sacred Name of God in vain, than not to worship Images; yea, it is better to commit Fornication, and make the Members of Christ the Members of an Harlot, than not to adore the Works of men's hands.  
Nom every Body knows, that Perjury and Fornication are Sins against the Law of Nature; and that no Law of Nature doth command the Veneration of the Images of Christ, or of his Blessed Mother, that Christ and his Apostles said expressly, Thou shalt not forswear thyself; thou shalt not commit Adultery; but never said, Thou shalt worship Images: Who then can want discretion sufficient to discern, that this Determination made in the Synod, without exception of one Person, must be false?  
It would be endless to reckon all the idle Dreams, and foolish Stories, produced by this Synod, in favour of their Images. But it is also needless, seeing the 
(i) Illi cum errore suo Scripturas Divinas cohaerere minimè posse senserunt, ad Apocryphas quasdam, & risu dignas naenias pedem verterunt. Libr. Carol. l. 3. c. 30.  Council of Frankford hath well observed, That when these Fathers perceived that their Doctrine by no means would accord with Scripture, they turned themselves to Apocryphal and Ridiculous Tales.  
And 
(k) Graeci, qui Imagines defendebant, Daemonum spectris & muliebribus somniis parum verecundè abusi sunt, ut in Nicaena Synodo videre licet. Comment. in 2. ad Tim. p. 155.  Espencaeus doth ingenuonsly confess, That the Greeks defended Images with the Apparitions of Devils, and the Dreams of Women, as is to be seen in the Nicene Council.  
3ly, Observe, That from the Epistle of Germanus Bishop of Constantinople, cited with approbation by this Nicene Synod, we learn not only, That the People then received the Sacrament in both kinds, but also that they received both 
(l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Apud Conc. Nic. 2. Act. 4. p. 314.  according to Christ's own Tradition, for the commemoration of his Death, and of his Resurrection; and that they were divinely moved with an insatiable desire of partaking of his Holy Body and Blood; which shows that then they held our Lord's Tradition, and the Memorial of his Death obliged the common People to receive both Kind's; and that their desire of both, was a desire inspired by God: And then, what Inspiration must that be which moved the Councils of Constance, Basil, and Trent, to hinder them of the enjoyment of the Cup, and even to forbid them to desire it, it is not difficult to determine?  
4ly, Observe, That one Reason which the Fathers of this Council give for the Worship of the Image of Christ, is this, because 
(m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Anastas. apud Syn. Nic. 2. Act. 4. p. 249.  he himself was not sensibly present with us, but only present as to his Divinity; and that he was not to remain with us, 
(n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Epist. Germani Episcopi Constantinop. apud Syn. Nic. 2. Act. 4. p. 305.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, corporeally.  
They therefore could not believe Transubstantiation, or his Corporeal Presence in the Sacrament, for having that still kept upon the Altar, or in the Pyxis or Ciborium, had they believed Christ was corporeally present in it, they must have also thought that he remained still corporeally present with his Disciples, and his Church on Earth, and not denied such a presence with them as they plainly do; and must have owned some other presence of our Saviour with us, than that of his Deity, which yet apparently they do not. Moreover, they pronounce 
(o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Concil. Nic. 2. Act. 7. p. 578.  Anathema against all Persons who do not profess that our Lord was circumscribed as to his Humanity; and therefore they pronounced this Anathema on all who held, That his Humanity was present in the Sacrament, by way of Transubstantiation, since 'tis agreed on all hands, that his Body is not there circumscribed, or present, after the manner of a Body.  
And so much for the Observations which concern the things delivered in the second Nicene Council. What follows from the Doctrine here established, against the Tenets of the Romish Church, and the Assertions of the Guide of Controversies, is as followeth.  
1. Hence it is evident, That in Judges subordinate dissenting, 
R. H. Disc. 2. c. 3. §. 23. p. 100  there is no Universal Practice obliging us to adhere to the Superior, or in those of the same order and dignity to the Major part. For neither could Christians be obliged to adhere to this false decision of the Pope, and second Nicene Council; nor did the Councils of Frankford, Paris, or the Germane, French, or British Churches, think themselves obliged so to do.  
2. Here also it is evident, in the judgement of these Councils and Churches, 
R. H. Disc. 1. c. 3.  That the subordinate Clergy may be a Guide to Christians, when opposing the Superior; for so these Councils and Churches thought themselves, when they opposed the Pope of Rome, and the Decrees of the second Nicene Council; and so undoubtedly they were provided the Decisions of that Council, approved by the the Pope, be false.  
3. Here also is demonstrated the fullness of that Assertion of R. H. That Christians ought to submit to the Decisions of such Church Guides, declaring the Sense of the Fathers; 
Disc. 2. c. 2. §. 19  the sense which was imposed on them by the Nicene Synod, being notoriously false, and by the forementioned Councils, and Churches, declared so to be.  
4. 
R. H. Disc. 3. c. 2. §. 13.  Hence it follows, That if acceptance of a considerable part of Church-Governors absent from any Council, is that, and only that which renders it equivalent to a General Council, The second Nicene Council, for 500 Years after their sitting, could not be General, seeing the greatest part of the Western Church-Governors were absent from it, and for 500 Years did not accept of its Decrees, but reject, condemn, and abhor them; and how it should become, after so long a Period, what for so many Years it was not, I am yet to learn.  
5. 
Disc. 3. c. 3. §. 16.  Hence it must follow, That if according to R. H. all Persons dissenting from, and opposing a known definition of the Church in Matters offaith, be Heretics: Then must that of the second Nicene Council be no Definition of the Church in Matters of Faith; or all the forementioned Councils, and Churches, that so long dissented from, and opposed it, must have been Heretics during that whole time; and consequently the Pope himself, and all that Communicated with them, for five Centuries, must be unchurched also.  
6. Hence we Demonstratively learn, That Councils by the Church of Rome reputed general, may confidently pronounce anathemas, put their Decrees into their Creeds, and call Men Heretics who disown them, as did the second Nicene Council; when yet it is extremely evident, that their Decrees are false, their Anathema's wicked and unjust; and they whom they style Heretics, may be Good and Orthodox professors of Christianity.  
7. 
Disc. 3. c. 10. p. 314.  Hence it appears how absurdly R. H. and other Romanists, assert, That none can be sufficient Judges of the Misarguing of Councils, unless it be some following Councils of the same Authority; and that private Men can by no better way learn what is Tradition, but from the Church speaking by her Councils; and that Apostolical Tradition cannot be known but by the Judgement of the present Church: for sure our Reason was given us for little purpose, if it cannot serve us to discover, that this Nicene Council hath argued amiss, and delivered that as Apostolical Tradition, which was far from being truly such.  
8. Hence also we may learn the vanity of the Objections framed against the use of Reason, in judging of the Truth or Falsehood of Things defined by such Councils, viz. That it is great pride for private Persons to oppose their Judgements to the Definition of a General Council; to think they can see clearly, what so many Persons could not see: With many other things of a like Nature, urged with much Rhetoric, but with more weakness, by the Roman Catholics; for in such Cases as these are, the private Person doth not rely upon his private Judgement, but on his Judgement concurring with the Judgement of all Learned Protestants in this and former Ages, and of the whole Church of Christ for Six Centuries; and with the major part of the Western Church for so many more; and with the Confessions of many learned Persons of the Church of Rome: And what absurdity it is to prefer the Judgement of so many, joined with the clearest evidence of Scripture; what pride to follow the Evidence produced here, let any reasonable Person judge.  
Lastly, Because some Persons take the liberty to say, The Church of Rome, and her Councils, do not require Men to venerate, to worship, or bow down to Images; let them know, that their Trent Council hath decreed, 
Sess. 5.  eye debitum honorem & venerationem impartiendam esse, that due honour and veneration is to be imparted to them, according to the Definition of the second Nicene Council.  
And that the Fathers of that Council generally say, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
(p) Act. 2. p. 130, 132, 133, 135. Act. 3. p. 183, 189, 192.  I worship and adore the Sacred Images, and anathematise those who do not so confess or practise.  
In the 7th Session they declare, We should 
(q) P. 555.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, salute and give them honorary Worship. In the same Session they declare, That it is without doubt acceptable, and wellpleasing to God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to worship and salute the Images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin; of Angels, and all Saints. Adding, That if any one doubt, or be wavering, touching the Worship of Holy Images, 
(r) Act. 7. P. 584. vid. Act. 4. p. 248.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, our Holy Synod, assisted by the Holy Ghost, doth Anathematise him.  
The 
(s) Part. 3. Ch. 2. §. 24.  Roman Catechism enjoins the Parish Priest to declare, That Images of Saints are placed in the Church, ut colantur, that they may be worshipped; and they have forced those who held the contrary, to renounce it as Heresy. When therefore any English or French Papists tell us, That they do not venerate, or bow down to Images; or that the Church of Rome doth not enjoin them so to do, they either know not what their Church doth teach, or wilfully prevaricate; all Roman Catholics being obliged by these Councils, and taught by this Catechism, to pay this Veneration and Worship to them.   

Mendae sic emendandae.  
In Pref. p. v. l. 16. Marg. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
In the Body of the Book, p. 2. l. 12. Marg. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

A DEMONSTRATION, That the Church of ROME, and her Councils, have actually Erred, etc.  

CHAP. I.  
The Fathers of the Nicene and Trent Councils, teach, That Image-Worship is a Tradition of the Apostles, received by all Christians from the beginning. §. 1. The Councils of Constantinople and Frankford, in the same Age, say, It was the Tradition of the Apostles, and the Fathers, that Images were not to be worshipped. §. 2. This last Assertion is proved; 1. From express Testimonies of the Fathers, saying, They had no such Custom or Tradition; That Christ and his Doctrine taught them to reject and abandon Images; and, That they taught all their Converts to contemn them. §. 3. 2ly, That Image-Worship was by them represented as an Heathenish Custom, It being, say they, proper to the Heathens to make and worship them, and proper to Christians to renounce the Worship of them. §. 4. 3ly, When Heathens objected this to Christians, That they had no Images or Statues, yea, that they laughed at those who had them; they own and justify the thing. §. 5. 4ly, They commend the Policy of the Jews for having none, and the Wisdom of those Gentiles who had none; and held it a mark of their own Excellency that they had them not; and that they shut their Eyes when they worshipped, that they might not see any sensible Object. §. 6. 5ly, They answer and reject those very Pleas when used by Heathens, which afterwards were used by the Nicene Council, and the Romish Church, in the behalf of Image-worship. §. 7. 6ly, These Fathers represent the having Images of Christ, and of his Saints, for Worship, as a thing proper to the vilest Heretics. §. 8.  
AMongst the many Evidences that might be easily produced to show, that the pretended General Councils of the Church of Rome, have, with great vanity, and most apparent falsehood, defined, That they received the Doctrines, which they endeavoured to impose upon the Christian World, from Primitive and Apostolical Tradition; one is, The Veneration, or honorary Worship of the Images of Christ, his Virgin Mother, the Martyrs, and the Saints departed: For the second Nicene Council, and the chief Bishops mentioned, or residing in it, do very frequently, but also very falsely say, That the Doctrine and Practice there declared, and required, touching the Adoration of S. Images, is Apostolical from the beginning, and that which hath been always practised by the Church of Christ.  
§. 1. Pope Gregory the Second, having, like a true infallible Interpreter of Scripture, told us, That in that Expression of our Lords, 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Concil. Nic. 2. Con. To. 7. p. 12.  Where the Carcase is, there will the Eagles be gathered together: by the Carcase was to be understood Christ, and by the Eagles, Religious Men, and Lovers of him. He adds, That 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 13.  these Religious Men flew like Eagles to Jerusalem; and having seen our Lord, and James his Brother, and Stephen the first Martyr, they painted them as they had seen them: And that Men no sooner beheld them, but leaving the Worship of the Devil, they fell immediately to worship these Images; not indeed with Latria, but with Relative Worship.  
Pope Hadrian saith, That 
(c) Sicut à primordio traditionem à sanctis Patribus susceperunt. Act. 2. p. 103. Hoc enim traditum est à sanctis Apostolis. p. 110. & p. 99 In universo mundo ubi Christianitas est, ipsae S. Imagines ab omnibus fidelibus honorantur. p. 106.  all Orthodox, and Christian Emperors, all Priests, and religious Servants of God, and the whole company of Christians, observed the veneration of Images and Pictures, for memory of pious compunction, and even till then worshipped them, as they received a Tradition from the beginning from the Holy Fathers to do. That the special Honour, Adoration, and Veneration of them, was delivered by the Holy Apostles. And that throughout the whole World, wherever Christianity was planted, these venerable Images were honoured by all the Faithful.  
Tharasius, Patriarch of Constantinople, declares, That this of the Venerable Images, was 
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 5. p. 348, & 388.  the Tradition of the whole Catholic Church of God from the beginning.  
Gregory Bishop of Possene, citys for it a Synod of the Apostles met at 
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 1. p. 64.  Antioch, commanding Christians no longer to err about Idols, but instead of them, to paint the Image of Christ, God and Man.  
And Leo Bishop of Rhodes, adds, That the Holy and Venerable Images were to be in the Church, 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.  according to the Custom delivered of old Times from the Apostles.  
And at the conclusion of many of their Actions, the Fathers 
(g) Act. 2. p. 132, 133, 136, 152, 153. 3. p. 188. Act. 4. p. 328. 5. 389. 7. 576.  generally affirm, That they embraced and practised the worship of Images, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to the Tradition of the Holy Apostles; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
(h) Act. 2. p. 145.  as they delivered to them, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses of the Word.  
Yea, the whole Synod doth frequently assert, they were taught thus to judge of the 
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 4. p. 321.  Adoration of Images by the Holy Fathers, and by their Doctrine delivered by God. That their Tradition concerning it, was 
(k) Act. 7. p. 553. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Divine Tradition of the Catholic Church. And that in defining and asserting it, 
(l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 556.  they followed the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers taught them by God, and the Tradition of the Catholic Church, and knew this was the Doctrine of that Holy Spirit which dwelled in her. That they 
(m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ibid. item p. 588.  followed in observing this Tradition, St. Paul and the whole Apostolical College; and that thus the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers was confirmed, thus the Tradition of the Catholic Church, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from one end of the Christian World to the other, held and practised. That this was 
(n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 581.  the Doctrine received from the first Founders of the Christian Faith, and their Divine Successors. And lastly, they do often with full Voice 
(o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 7. p. 576. Act. 8. p. 592.  cry out, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, this is the Faith of the Apostles, this is the Faith of the Fathers, this is the Faith of the Orthodox, this is that Faith which establisheth the World.  
And suitable to this is the Language of the Trent Council, which commands all Bishops, and others, whose Office it is, to instruct the People, to teach them diligently, That the Images of Christ, the Mother of God, and other Saints, are especially to be had and retained in Temples; and that due Honour and Veneration is to be given to them, because the Honour tendered to them, is referred to the Prototype; so that by the Images which they kiss, before which they uncover their Heads, and prostrate themselves, they worship Christ, and venerate the Saints, whose Similitudes they are: And this, say they, is done 
(p) J●xta Catholicae & Apostolicae Ecclesiae usum, à primaevis Christianae Religionis temporibus receptum Sanctorumque Patrum consensionem. Sess. 25.  according to the custom of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, received from the first Age of the Christian Faith, and the consent of the Holy Fathers.  
§. 2. On the other hand, the Council of Constantinople, consisting of 338 Bishops, assembled in the Year 754, declares, That 
(q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Concil. Nic. 2. p. 452. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 508.  this evil invention of Images, neither hath its being from the Tradition of Christ, or his Apostles, nor of the Holy Fathers. And having forbidden all Christians to worship any, or to place an Image in the Church, or in their private Houses, they conclude unanimously thus, 
(r) Ibid. p. 532.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, this is the Faith of the Apostles, this is the Faith of the Fathers, this is the Faith of the Orthodox.  
The Council of Frankford, consisting of 300 Bishops, assembled by Charles the Great, out of Italy, Germany, and France, A. D. 794. declares, That the 
(s) Quia ut hoc facerent, ab Apostolis sibi traditum mentiebantur. Lib. Carol. l. 2. c. 25, 27.  second Nicene Council had offended in two things; (1.) in decreeing that Images should be worshipped: And, (2.) in saying falsely, that this was delivered to them from the Apostles. They add, That 
(t) Relictis priscorum patrum traditionibus, qui imagines non colere sanxerunt, novas conari & insolitas Ecclesiae consuetudines infer. Praesat. in lib. 1.  leaving the Traditions of the Ancient Fathers, who decreed, That Images should not be worshipped, they endeavoured to bring into the Church new and unusual Customs. That they endeavoured to bring into Christian Religion the new Adoration of Images, 
(u) Absque Sanctorum Patrum doctrina & consacerdotum per diversas mundi partes consensu. L. 4. c. 21.  without the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers, and the consent of their fellow Priests throughout the World. That this of Image-Worship, was, 
(w) Praefat. p. 10.  impudentissima traditio, a most impudent Tradition. And that this pretended Tradition was 
(x) Neque in Evangeliorum tonitruis, neque in Apostolorum dogmatibus, vel quorumlibet Orthodoxorum Patrum doctrinis uspiam reperimus insertam. L. 4. c. 13.  neither to be found in the Oracles of the Prophets, nor in the Writings of the Gospels, nor in the Doctrines of the Apostles, nor in the Relations of the former Holy Synods, nor in the Doctrines of the Orthodox Fathers. That it was instituted by them, nullo Antiquitatis documento, vel exemplo, without all Instruction, or Example from Antiquity.  
A Synod held at Paris, under Ludovicus Pius, and Lotharius, Anno Dom. 824, saith, That the 
(y) Contra Authoritatem divinam & sanctorum Patrum dicta. P. 23.  second Nicene Council declared for Image-worship against the Divine Authority, and the Say of the Holy Fathers. And that 
(z) Ed. Pith. p. 25, 26.  they determined against the Worship of them according to Divine Authority, and, juxta sententias sanctorum Patrum, according to the Judgements of the Holy Fathers.  
Agobardus, Bishop of Lions, having declared against all Image-worship, saith, 
(a) L. de Imag. §. 30. p. 263.  This is sincere Religion, is Mos Catholicus, haec Antiqua Patrum Traditio, this is the Catholic Custom, this is the Ancient Tradition of the Fathers, as is easily proved even out of the Book of Sacraments which the Roman Church useth. And again, 
(b) Nullus Antiquorum Catholicorum unquam eas colendas, vel adorandas fore existimavit. P. 265.  None of the Ancient Catholics did ever think that Images were to be worshipped or adored.  
Hincmarus, Arch bishop of Rheims, informs us, That 
(c) Secundum Scripturarum tramitem, traditionémque Majorum. Opusc. 55. cap. 20.  this Nicene Synod was condemned and evacuated by a General Synod called by the Emperor Charles the Great, according to the way of the Scripture, and the Tradition of the Ancients. 
(d) De Gestis Franc. Lib. 5. cap. 28.  Aimoinus also complains of them, That they had decreed touching the Adoration of Images, alitèr quàm Orthodoxi Patres antea definierunt, otherwise than the Orthodox Fathers had before defined.  
In that Synod, saith, 
(e) In èa Synodo confirmatum st Imagines adorari debere, quod omnino Ecclesia Dei execratur. Annal. Part. 1. ad An. 791.  Roger Hoveden, it was confirmed, that Images should be adored; which the Church of God doth wholly execrate.  
Now in this Matter let the Truth lie where you please, 'tis sure no little Prejudice against receiving any thing as a Tradition, upon the evidence of a few single Fathers, in Matters of mere Speculation, as some Traditionary Doctrines of the Church of Rome most surely are; that in a thing of this Nature, which must be either daily practised, or omitted by the Church, whole Councils, of 300 Bishops at the least, in the same Age, maintain such contradictory Assertions; one saying, frequently and expressly, That this was the Doctrine of the Apostles, and all the Ancient Fathers; the others as expressly, That it never was the Doctrine of either of them. One, That this was the practice of all faithful Christians; the other, That they never found it practised by any of the Orthodox Professors. But though such contradictory Assertions in another Case, might cause a wary Person to suspend his assent to either of them, yet I am confident, that whosoever is unprejudiced, must in this case give in his Verdict against the Doctrine and Assertions of the Trent and of the second Nicene Council.  
§. 3. For notwithstanding all the confident Assertions of these Councils, the Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers are so full and clear against that Honour and Veneration of Images, which by these Councils is imposed upon all Christians, with an Anathema to them who do assert, or even think the contrary, that he who doth impartially read them, and doth not conclude that the whole Church of Christ did, for 500 Years and more, condemn this practice; and in plain terms, or by just consequence assert, they had no such Tradition, cannot sustain much loss, if he quite want the use of Reason.  
For, (1.) the Fathers do expressly say, The Church of Christ hath no such Custom, or Tradition. 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Apud 2 Nic. Concil. Act. 6. p. 492.  We Christians, saith Theodotus, have no Tradition to form the Images of Saints in material Colours. 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Protrept. p. 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  An Image, saith Clemens of Alexandria, is indeed dead Matter, form by the hand of the Artificer; but we (Christians) have no sensible Image of sensible Matter. St. Ambrose saith, That 
(c) Quae Ecclesia inanes ideas & vanas nescit simulacrorum figuras. De fuga saec. c. 5. p. 246.  Rachel who hide the Images, is, or signifies, the Church. Which Church knows no empty Ideas, or vain Figures of Images, but knoweth the true Substance of the Trinity. 
(d) Nos autem unam veneramur imaginem, etc. in Ezech. c. 16. p. 189. F.  We, saith St. Jerome, have but one Husband, and worship but one Image, to wit, the Image of the Invisible and Omnipotent God. 
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Apud Concil. Nic. 2. Act. 6. p.  We, saith St. Chrysostom, do by their Writings enjoy the presence of the Saints, having the Images, not of their Bodies, but of their Souls. 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. p. 484.  We have no care, saith Amphilochius, to figure by Colours, the bodily Visages of the Saints in Tables. So certain is it that they had no such Custom in the five first Centuries, That,  
2. They plainly tell us, that the first thing they taught their Converts, was the contempt of Images. 
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In Celsum, l. 3. p. 120.  We plainly show forth the gravity, or decorum, of our Principles, and do not hid them, as Celsus doth imagine, seeing even to those who are first entered among us, we teach the contempt of Idols, and of all Images, saith Origen. 
(h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 8. p. 412. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. l. 2. p. 91.  God, saith he, cannot wholly overlook the Christians, because they are the Men who despise Images of humane Art, and endeavour to ascend by Reason unto God himself; they transcended not only Images, but the whole frame of Creatures to ascend to the God of all the World.  
3. They add, that they were taught thus to abandon, and forsake all Images and Statues by the Religion they embraced, and by the Doctrine of the Holy Jesus.  

(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 5. p. 255.  The Christian Doctrine, saith Origen, doth not permit them to be solicitous about Images and Statues, or about the Works of God, but to transcend them, and to lift up the Soul to the Creator. 
(k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 7. p. 359.  They, by the Doctrine of Jesus Christ, saith he, are moved to relinquish all Images and Statues, and to look up, by the Word, unto the Father. Again, 
(l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 7. p. 362.  The Christian, saith He, doth not look upon Images, for he is taught by Christ to seek nothing which is little or sensible, but only those things which art Great, and truly Divine. He adds, That 
(m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the Prophets had foretold of the coming of Christ to cause them to desist from the worship of Idols, and of Images, and of Daemons. 
(n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. L. 7. p. 375.  Other Nations, as the Scythians, Africans, etc. abstain from Images, saith he; but they do it not upon the same account upon which we Jews and Christians are averse from it, for we abstain by reason of the Commandment, which saith, Thou shalt not make to thyself an Idol, nor the similitude of any thing in Heaven or Earth; which things do not only cause us to reject Images, but make us ready to die, rather than we will defile our conception of God with any such Impiety.  
Arnobius saith, That 
(o) Qui ab signis inertibus atque ex vilissimo formatis luto ad Sydera sublevavit & Coelum. Adu. Gent. L. 1. p. 22.  Christ had elevated the Christian from fruitless signs made of vile Earth, to the Stars, and Heaven, and made us to present our Prayers and Supplications to the God of all things.  
§. 4. 4. They say, that it was proper to the Heathens to make and worship Images; and it is frequent among the Fathers, to call them Worshippers of Images, instead of Heathens, and to describe the Christian as one who hath left off, and hath renounced that practice. 
(p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Admon. p. 39 A.  Clemens Alexandrinus speaks to the Heathens thus; Art hath deceived you with its Delusions, leading you to honour Images and Pictures. 
(q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 3. p. 131.  We are not like the Getae, and Cilicians, and other Nations, to which we are compared by Celsus. For they provide Images for their Gods; but we, saith Origen, remove from God all Honour by such things, as judging them more fit for Devils. And again, he represents them as Men, 
(r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 4. p. 177.  who having fallen from the true knowledge of God, under a vain Imagination of Piety, worship Images: And he represents the Christians, as those who by the Conduct of the Word, or Reason, ascended from Wood and Stone, Silver and Gold, and all that was precious in the World, to the Creator of all things. 
(s) Quid enim insigne preferimus nisi primam sapientiam qua frivola humanae manus opera non adoramus: qui vult intelligere qui sunt Christiani istis indiciis utatur necesse est. Ad Nat. l. 1. c. 5.  What Ensign do we bear before us, saith Tertullian, but that first Wisdom, which instructs us not to worship the frivolous Works of men's Hands, that Abstinence whereby we do refrain from the Goods of others, etc. He that will understand who are Christians, must know them by these Marks and Tokens. 
(t) Vos simula ra effingitis ex auro, l. 2. p. 98. Quae quidem nos cessamus facere, l. 6. p. 189.  You are the Men who make Images of Gold, saith Arnobius, which we Christians cease to do. 
(u) Isti qui fragilia colunt. L. 7. c. 26.  This is the Doctrine of the Holy Prophets which we Christians follow; this is our Wisdom, which they who either worship Images, or defend vain Philosophy, deride. 
(x) Eorum qui simulacra venerabantur. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 4. c. 1.  Innumerable of all Nations, saith Origen, are turned to the Christian Faith, not without the great hatred of those who worshipped Images; whereas they who have left all Images and Statues, is his description of the Christians.  
Accordingly we find the Fathers still representing this as an Heathenish Custom. 
(y) Ad Autolyc. l. 1. p. 76.  If you speak of the Greeks, and other Heathens, saith Theophilus, they are the Men who worship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Images of dead Men. 
(z) Hic enim Gentilis est error. Orat. de obit. Theod. p. 61.  Helen, when she had found the Cross, did worship Christ, but not the Wood, because that, saith St. Ambrose, was the Error of the Heathens. 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Hist. Eccles. l. 7. c. 18.  It is no marvel, saith Eusebius, that those of the Heathens, who of old were cured by our Saviour, should do such things, (i.e. erect his Image, as did the Woman cured of her bloody Issue) since we have seen the Images of the Apostles, Paul and Peter, yea, and of Christ himself, kept painted with Colours on Tables, for that of old they were wont imprudently, by an Heathenish Custom, thus to honour them whom they counted their Saviour's, or Benefactors. This therefore was an Heathenish, and not a Christian Custom: For had Christians customarily had such Statues, and Pictures, why doth Eusebius make this a Badge of Heathenism? Why doth he say, It was no marvel that Heathens should do thus? If the Images of Christ, and his Apostles, had been then common in all Christian Oratories, why is it mentioned as so rare a thing that he had seen them? Why, lastly, doth he say that this was done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, according to Valesius, imprudently, and inconsiderately? Adamantius the Manichaean citys those words of the second Commandment, 
Effigies & Imagines. Contra Adam. cap. 13.  See that you make no Effigies, or Images, for I am a jealous God, to reprehend the Zeal of the God of the Old Testament; to which St. Austin answers, That 
(b) Vult ergo videri favere se simulacris, quod propterea faciunt ut miserrim & vesanae suae sectae etiam paganorum concilient benevolentiam. Ibid.  he only quarrels with God's Zeal, because it forbade Images, and so would seem to favour Images, which, saith he, these Men do to conciliate the favour of the Heathens to their mad and miserable Sect, where we learn, not only that Simulacra and Imagines, are with St. Austin the same thing, but also that it was only Heathens who then favoured Images, and those who had a kindness for them. Agobardus in the 9th Century, saith, That 
(c) Ob religionis honorem aut aliquam venerationem more Gentilium. De Imag. p. 248.  to use the Images of the Apostles, or our Lord himself, for the Honour of Religion, or any Veneration, is to use them after the manner of the Heathens, and that if Constantine did adore the Images of St. Peter and Paul, 
(d) Ex consuetudine Idololatriae pestifera. p. 252.  he did it from the pestiferous Custom of Idolatry. So generally and so lately was this esteemed an Heathenish and Idolatrous Custom by the Fathers of the Church.  
§. 5. 5. This thing was so notorious to the Heathens, that they object it to the Christians as their Crime, that they had no Images, that they would not make, would not endure, much less venerate them, and that they laughed at those who did. Celsus objects, saith Origen, That 
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 8. p. 389, 404.  we avoid the making of Images. And again, 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 7. p. 373.  In this, that they will not endure Images, they are like unto the Scythians, etc. and other irreligious and lawless Nations, who dedicate no Image to their Gods, and count them Fools that do so. And a third time; thou laughest at our Images. 
(g) Quod non deorum alicujus simulacrum constituamus aut formam. L. 6. p. 189.  For this cause you lay great Impiety to our charge, saith Arnobius, because we make no Images, or shape of any of the Gods. In a word, When Adrian the Emperor had commanded that 
(h) Christo Templum facere voluit [Severus] quod & Adrianus cogitasse fertur, qui Templa in omnibus civitatibus sine simulacris jusserat fieri. Hist. August. c. 43. Qui consulentes sacra, repererunt omnes Christianos fieri, si id optato evenisset. ibid.  Temples should be made in all Cities without Images, it was by them conjectured that he made them for Christ, saith Lampridius; who adds, That he was forbidden to proceed in this Enterprise, by those who, consulting the Oracles, found that all Men would turn Christians, if this, according to their wishes, should fall out. Whence evident it is that it was not the use of Christians then to have Images in Churches, but that the contrary was according to their wishes.  
6ly, If we consider what the Fathers answered to this Accusation of the Heathens, we shall more fully be convinced, that they did not venerate, but did entirely reject the use of Images, as vain, ridiculous, and inconsistent with the Christian Faith, and the true worship of a Deity. For,  
Whereas the Heathens complained that Christians laughed at their Images. That Origen replies, 
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 8. p. 404.  that they did not laugh at the insensate Statues, but at those who worshipped them. And he justifies this practice of the Christians, by saying, That 
(k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. l. 7. p. 362.  any Man of sound Reason could not but laugh at them who looked upon Images, and by the contemplation of them, thought to ascend from what was seen, and was a Symbol, to what was understood.  
2ly, They answer, by distinguishing betwixt such Images as were the work of an Artificer, saying, That these they did reject; and such as were spiritual, consisting in the resemblance of the Virtues and Persections of their Lord, and these they owned, as acceptable to God, and such as they regarded. 
(l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. L. 8. p. 389.  The Images which are agreeable to God, saith Origen, are not such as are framed by servile Artists, but those Virtues which are form in us by the Word of God, and are the Imitations of the First Born of the Creation, in whom are the Examples of Justice, Temperance, Fortitude, Prudence, and Godliness, and all other Virtues. 
(m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.  In all therefore who are furnished with these Virtues, are the Images with which we think it meet to honour the Prototype of all Images, the Image of the Invisible God, his only Son; and 
(n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.  they who put off the old Man, with his Works, and put on the New, which is renewed in Knowledge according to the Image of him that created him, by receiving this Image of their Creator, make such Images in themselves as God regards, insinuating, that God liked no other. 
(o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  In sum, saith he, all Christians do attempt to make such Images, as we have now related, not such as have no Life or Sense, nor such in which wicked Daemons may reside; that is neither such Images as were in use amongst the Heathens, nor such as are now used by the Church of Rome, for theirs, I suppose, have neither Life nor Sense: 
(p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. p. 390, 391.  Let therefore any Man that will, saith he, compare the Images I have now mentioned, framed in the Souls of pious Persons, with the Images of Phidias, and Polycletus, and the like, and he will manifestly discern that the latter are void of Life, and corrupted by Time: and therefore he concludes, That there is no compare betwixt the Images of Christians, and of Heathens. So that the Images which are obnoxious to the Injuries of Time, and which are void of Life and Sense, were then accounted Heathen Images, the Images of Christians were then only those which are framed in the immortal Souls of Men. According to that of Theodotus Ancyranus, 
(q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Apud Conc. Nic. 2. Conc. To. 7. p. 492.  We have no Tradition to form the Images of Saints in material Colours, but we are taught to express their Virtues, recorded in the Writings concerning them, as their living Images. And that of Amphilochius, 
(r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. p. 484.  We are not concerned to frame the fleshly Persons of the Saints by Colours upon Tables, but to imitate the Virtues of their Conversations.  
3. To the Comparison made by Celsus betwixt them and the Scythians, Moors, and Persians in this Matter, Origen replies, 
(s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 4. p. 374.  That it is true, both they and Christians were averse from Images, but then the Christians rejected them on better Grounds than Heathens did, viz. because they would not violate the Commandment forbidding the use of them, and because they dreaded to debase the Divine Worship, by bringing it down to Matter shaped in such a Manner and Figure. And 
(t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 8. p. 391.  because finding by the Doctrine of Christ the way of Piety towards God, they avoided those things which by appearance of Piety made Men wicked. Which passages assure us, not only that the Christians of those Times abstained from all religious use of Images, but also that they did it in obedience to the Doctrine of Christ, and the Commandment forbidding it, i.e. upon the very Motives which move us to do so.  
4ly, Arnobius in answer to the same Objection of the Heathens, That Christians did contemn the Deities, because they had no Images of any of them, nor did they worship their Effigies; whereas 
(u) Sequitur ut de simulacris dicamus qua multa arte componitis & religiosa observatione curatis. L. 6. p. 194.  the Heathens made, and with religious Observation did regard them; gives this reason why the Christians had them not, viz. 
(x) Honorum hac genera aut risui habere si rideant, aut indignè perpeti. P. 189.  Because, (saith he) we do conceive, that if they certainly be Gods whom we worship, and have that eminence which by that name is signified, they will deride, or be offended with such kind of Honour. 2ly, He tells them, that he is not able to determine, 
(y) Utrumne istud serio & cum proposito faciatis gravi, an ridendo res ipsas. Ibid. p. 194.  whether they themselves do this seriously, or with intention to deride what they pretend to worship: For 
(z) Si enim certum est apud vos Deos esse quos veneremini, atque in summis coeli regionibus degere, quae ratio est, ut simulacra ista fingantur à vobis? p. 195.  if it be certain, saith he, they are Gods whom you worship, and that they have their Habitation in the highest Heavens, what reason can induce you to frame these Images of them? Which Reason doth as much concern the Roman Images, for they are Images of Christ, the Virgin Mother, and of those Saints and Martyrs whom they suppose to live in Heaven. 3ly, He calls upon the Heathens to clear up their Understandings, and consider, That 
(a) Simulacra ista, quae templis in omnibus prostrati, & humiles adoratis, ossa, lapides, aera sunt, etc. p 200.  those Images before which they lie prostrate, and which they humbly adore, are Wood, Stones, Brass, Silver, or Gold; and such are also all the Images of Roman Catholics. And having urged these, and many other Arguments, he concludes, 
(b) Satis demonstratum est quam inaniter fiant simulacra, p. 210.  He had sufficiently demonstrated how vainly Images were made. Whence evident it is, that Christians than esteemed it a vain ridiculous thing, and a dishonour to that Jesus whom they owned as God, to worship him by Images, and that they had no Image of any thing in Heaven. And indeed, the very silence of the Christians, as to the Matter of Images, when they professedly reply to this Impeachment of the Heathens, is a sufficient Argument that they allowed no use of Images in their Religious Worship, and that they paid no Veneration to them: For should any Heathen now object against the Church of Rome, That they had no Images, would they not answer, They had the Images of Christ, his Virgin Mother, and of his Blessed Saints and Martyrs? This therefore should in honesty and reason have been the Answer of the Ancient Christians to the like Objection of the Heathens made against them, had it been suitable to the received Principles and Practice of their Times.  
Moreover the Heathens, as Lactantius informs us, thought an Image so very requisite to the performance of Religious Worship, That 
(c) Nec ullam Religionem putant, ubicunque illa non fulserint. L. 2. c. 6. p. 169. Ed. layed.  they imagined there could be no Religion where there was no Image. And this induced them to conceive, that albeit they knew not of any Images the Christians used, yet had they some concealed amongst them. And hence Caecilius asks the Christians, 
(d) Cur occultare quidquid illud colunt magnopere nituntur? cur nullas aras habent, templa nulla, nulla nota simulacra? P. 10.  Why is it that you hid and conceal the Thing you worship, be it what it will? Why have you no Altars, no Temples, no known Images? not doubting but they had some Images concealed. To this Imagination of the Heathens, Origen thus replies, 
L. 3. p. 120.  We openly declare the venerable Principles of our Religion, and do not hid them as Celsus doth imagine, for we teach our Converts the contempt of Idols, and of all Images. Octavius also takes notice of it in these words; 
(e) Putatis nos occultare quod colimus si delubra & arras non habemus,— quod enim simulacrum Deo fingam cum si rectè existimes sit Dei homo simulacrum? p. 36.  You think we hid what we worship; if we have not Temples with Images and Altars. And then he answers in behalf of Christians, with a free inunuation that they had no such things, and gives these Reasons why they had them not; What Image shall I make of God, since if you rightly do esteem it, Man is the Image of his Maker? What Temple shall I build, when the whole World cannot contain him? What Sacrifices should I offer, since a good Soul and pure Mind is the Offering that he will accept? 
(f) Haec nostra sacrificia, haec Dei Sacra sunt. Ibid.  these (and not Temples, Images, or Victims) are the holy Services which we present unto our God. Whence it is evident that Images were not admitted then amongst the Sacra of the Christians; and that they held it not convenient to make an Image of that Jesus whom they asserted to be God.  
Now briefly to reflect upon these things; Can it be reasonably imagined, that they who so expressly tell us, They had no Tradition to make the Images of Saints, no sensible Image, no Images of their Bodies; and that they knew no vain Figures of Images; that they who declare that they themselves despised, and taught their Converts the contempt of Images; that their Religion, and their Saviour, taught them not to be solicitous about them, but to relinquish, abstain from, and to abandon them; that they who teach that it was proper to the Heathens to honour Images and Pictures; that the Custom was Heathenish and Idolatrous, and only fit for Daemons; and that Christians were to be known by this, that they would not adore the Works of men's Hands; that they had left all Images and Statues, and that this was their wisdom; that they to whom it was continually objected by the Heathens, that they neither had, nor would endure Images; that they avoided the making Statues, and laughed at them who did it: And who in answer to these things, not only do confess the thing, but also justify and glory in it, telling their Adversaries, That Images were vainly made by him, who was the Image of his Maker, and should make no other Images; that they deservedly laughed at them; and that the Heavenly Powers themselves, if they were subject to that Passion, would laugh at such Votaries; I say, Can it be reasonably conceived, That they who say such things, should make it matter of their Faith, that Images were to be worshipped, and in their constant practice should adore the Images of Christ, and of his Saints?  
§ 6. Nor do the Fathers only declare, in their Apologies and Conflicts with the Heathens, they had no Images; but they commend themselves, and others, upon that account, and say, it was a thing to be commended, both in them and others. And,  
On this account they mightily commend the Jewish Polity, because it taught them, not only to transcend all Images, but all created Being's, and to ascend to the Creator of the World, saying, That 
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Orig. adv. Celsum l. 2. p. 91. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 4. p. 181.  he that doth inspect their Laws and Constitutions, will find, that they were Men who had a shadow of the Heavenly Life on Earth, because they had no Image-makers in their Commonwealth.  
As for themselves, they declared, That they on this account 
(h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 4. p. 177.  were Men, or something more excellent than Men, because they did not venerate, but did transcend all Images, and go immediately to God. And 
(i) Nun laudem magis quam poenam merebatur repudium agniti Erroris. Apol. cap. 12.  if we do not worship Statues, and cold Images, like to those dead Men which they represent, do we not deserve praise rather than punishment, saith Tertullian, for the refusal of this ancient Error? Yea, they declare their humble confidence, That 
(k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 8. p. 412. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.  God would not overlook them, but vouchsafe them some manifestation of his Goodness, and give them some Fruit of his Providence, amongst other Reasons for the very Cause, because they, despising Images of Humane Art, endeavoured directly by Reason to ascend to God.  
And lastly, As for those Heathens, who for some time worshipped the Deity without Images, they say, They served God 
(l) Dicit Antiquos Romanos plusquam annos 150, Deos sine simulacro coluisse, quod si adhuc remansisset castius Dii observarentur. Aug. de C. D. l. 4. c. 13. Agob. de Imag. §. 24.  more purely when they had no Images; and that their Religion would have been better had they done so still. But as for those who retained them, and looked upon them when they worshipped, or did esteem them Sacred, they declared, they could not but look upon them 
(m) Orig. l. 7. p. 362, 367.  as Men of a lame and infirm Mind, they could not but laugh at their folly. And they do frequently apply that passage of the Psalmist to them, 
(n) August. & Theodoret. in Psal. 113.  They that make them, are like unto them; as judging it the extremity of Error in them who had the use of Reason, to worship Stocks and Stones. Now sure we cannot reasonably think these Fathers practised themselves what they thus laughed at, and condemned in others: That they admired the Jewish Polity, because it did permit no Images in their Sacred Worship, and yet conceived these things not only well consistent with, but even an advantage to the Christian Polity; or that, at the same time, they could conceive themselves praiseworthy for rejecting, and even despising Images of humane Art; and yet not only have them, but think them worthy of their Veneration, and by them should ascend unto that Jesus whom they owned as their God: We therefore may be well assured from these Say, that the Christians of those times did not look upon Images when they performed their Worship to God the Father, or his Son Christ Jesus. And to assure us yet farther that they did not do it, they inform us, that when they paid their Worship to the due Object of it, they did shut their Eyes, and thought it was their Duty so to do; and that this practice did enable them the better to lift up their Minds to God.  
Origen, in allusion to those words of Christ; I am come into the World, that they who see not, may see; and they who see, may be made blind, saith, That 
(o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 7. p. 358.  the Word makes the Eyes of the Soul to see, but blinds those of the Senses, that the Soul may without distraction behold what it ought: if therefore any Man act after the manner of Christians, the Eye of his Soul is opened, but that of his Sense is shut; and by how much more he openeth his better Eye, and shuts the Eyes of his Senses, by so much more he seethe, and contemplates better God, and his Son, who is the Word and Wisdom. And again, 
(p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 362.  Even the meanest Christian shutting the Eyes of his sense, and opening those of his Soul, transcends all the whole World, and shames the wise Men of the World, who, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, looking upon Images, by contemplation of them, do endeavour to erect their Minds to God. St. Basil saith thus, 
(q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In Psalm. 37. To. 1. p. 208.  I do not confess with my Lips, that I may appear to many so to do, but, shutting my Eyes, inwardly in my Heart, I show my inward groan to him that seethe in secret: They therefore doubtless thought not Images then needful to excite Devotion, or to move compunction in them, though by the 
(r) Act. 2. p. 103.  Second Nicene Council they were afterwards declared useful to these Ends.  
§. 7. And therefore whereas Heathens had many of the same pretences for having, and for using Images in their solemn Worship, which that Nicene Council, and the Church of Rome have since took up, the Say of the Fathers equally confute them both. For,  
1. Whereas the Trent Catechism saith, That the having Images in Churches, and the giving Worship and Respect unto them, tends, maximo Fidelium bono, 
(s) Part. 3. cap. 2. Sect. 24.  to the great benefit of the Faithful. And the Second Nicene Council doth frequently in effect declare the same. Theodotus smartly puts this Question to those who used them in his Time; 
(t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Conc. Nic. p. 492.  Let them say, who do erect such Forms, What profit can redound unto them by so doing? or to what spiritual Contemplation are they led by that remembrance? 
(u) Strom. 7. p. 714.  Clemens of Alexandria expressly saith, That they are, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, vain, and Profane. 
(w) L. 2. §. 5. p. 161.  Lactantius, that they are, insensibilia & vana, vain and insensate things. Origen and St. Austin, That they were dangerous and hurtful to the Christians, and for that cause avoided by them.  
2. Whereas the Heathens said, That they used their Images 
(x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. porphyr. apud Euseb. praepar. Evang. l. 3. c. 7.  only to represent things invisible, by what was visible; and to teach them, as it were, to read the Things concerning the Gods out of these Image-Books; that these Things were as Letters which did instruct them in the Knowledge of God, and by inspection of which they attained unto it: That the Divinity was to be propounded to the Mind, and these Things only to be used, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
(y) Max. Tyr. dissert. 38. p. 370, 377.  to bring God to their remembrance, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and, as it were, a Manuduction, or way to bring him to their Minds. That they were but 
(z) Plutarch. de Iside & Osir. p. 382.  as Glasses whereby to represent God to them; and that they ought to be approved, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who do not worship them, but by them the Godhead. The Father's having mentioned these Notions of the Heathen Wisdom, say, That nothing can be more ridiculous, and greater matter of their shame; and that they are more like to 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Athanas. contr. Gent. p. 21, 23. Euseb. praepar. Evang. l. 3. c. 13. l. 5. c. 14.  writers of Fables, than Divines; that God was not honoured by such Symbols; that they who know the Truth, ought not to think to honour the Divine Virtues by Images made of insensate Matter, but they should openly teach all, not to admire things obvious to Sense, but only the invisible Maker of them, and worship his invisible and incorporeal Virtues, not thinking to honour the Divinity with insensate Statues, which can have nothing wellpleasing to God, nor be the Images of Divine Powers, but with sound Doctrine, and a pure Mind. By all which Sayings, they equally condemn the Symbolical Images of the S. Trinity and God the Father, tacitly allowed by the 
(b) Doceatur populus non propterea divinitatem figurari, quasi corporeis oculis conspici, aut coloribus vel figuris exprimi possit. Sesse. 25. Jam enim receptae sunt fere ubique.  Trent Council in these words, (When 'tis expedient for the unlearned, in Figures, to express the Histories and Narratives of Holy Scripture, they must be taught, That the Divinity is not therefore pictured, as if it could be seen by a corporeal Eye, or expressed by Colours, or by Figures) and 
† Bell. de Rel. Sanct. l. 2. c. 8.  received generally in all Roman Churches.  
And, 2ly, whereas the 
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 1. p. 60.  Nicene Council, and the Roman Church have introduced Images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and the Saints, under the same pretence; as tending, 1. to Instruction, viz. The Images of Christ being framed, say they, that his Incarnation may be made known to all; and the Images of the Apostles, Prophets, Martyrs, to be a short Writing, and Excitation, and teaching of the People, especially the most simple. And, 2ly, for the remembrance of the Prototypes. I say, whereas these are the Romish and the Nicene Pleas, the Fathers do expressly say, 
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Amphil. apud 2. Nic. Concil. Act. 6. p. 484.  They cared not to make any such Images of Saints, because they had no need of them; 
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theodot. ibid. p. 482.  they knew not to what spiritual contemplation they could be erected by such remembrance of them; they had the Writings of the Saints, which were their living Images, and with them were content. St. Austin, speaking of some who said, That our Lord Christ had written Books of Magic, and committed them to St. Peter and Paul; he conjectures, that they therefore made mention 
(f) Credo quod pluribus locis simul cum illo pictos viderunt.  of these two Apostles, because they had in many places, particularly at Rome, seen those two pictured with him. And then he adds, 
(g) Sic omnino errare meruerunt qui Christum & Apostolos ejus non in Sanctis codicibus, sed in pictis parietibus quaesierint. De Cons. Evang. L. 1. c. 10.  So verily deserve they to err, who sought Christ and his Apostles, not in the Holy Bibles, but on painted Walls; an Expression which deserves to be considered by them, who have taken from them those Books in which St. Austin judged it fit to seek Christ and his Apostles, and substituted in their room these Wall Lecturers, which it is evident he approved not of. And much less the Council of Frankford, witness these words; 
(h) Quae vesania est dicere per imaginem ad memoriam veniemus de ejus in terra praesentia. Lib. Carol. l. 4. c. 2.  What madness is it to say, That by a painted Image we may come to the memory of Christ's Presence on Earth. Oh unhappy Memory! which, that it may remember Christ, who never should recede out of the mind of a good Man, needs the beholding of an Image.  
3. The Heathens say, That by beholding of their Images and Statues they ascended to the Prototype; and that their Images were invented for this End, confessing, That if any one was able straight to erect his Soul to Heaven, and go directly to God, 
(i) Max. Tyr. dissert. 38. p 369.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such, in likelihood, could need no Images. The Second 
(k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 4. p. 320. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 7. p. 556.  Nicene Council in like manner saith, That they worship the Images of Christ, his Blessed Mother, and the Saints, That by their Pictures they may be able to ascend, by Memory, unto the Prototype. And because the more they view their Images, the better are they excited to the remembrance and desire of the Prototype, and to give honorary Worship to the Images. Now this, as you have heard, the Fathers have declared to be the very thing for which they laughed at the Philosophers, that by looking upon Images and Symbols, they thought to ascend to what was understood and represented by them, declaring, That Christianity taught them to overlook these things, and to ascend immediately to God, and to his Son; and that the rudest Christian did so, by shutting of his bodily Eyes, and not by looking upon what was sensible. Accordingly the 
(l) Non corporeus nobis visus, sed Spiritualis est necessarius. Lib. Carol. l. 2. c. 21.  Council of Frankford teacheth, That to contemplate Christ, who is the Virtue and Wisdom of God; or to behold the Virtues, which by God were derived upon his Saints, they needed not that corporeal sight which was common to them with unreasonable Creatures, but the Spiritual only.  
4ly, The Fathers of the Second Nicene Council, do not only style these Images Sacred and Holy, but declare, They salute them in hope of being made partakers of Sanctification by them; asserting, That by paying honorary Worship to them, they expect, 
(m) Act. 4. p. 265, 321, 453, 492.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be made partakers of some Holiness; and that they really do, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, derive some Holiness from the Action. And doubtless the Heathens had the same conceit, as is evident from the frequent Assertions of the Fathers against them, and consequently against the Second Nicene Council, That there could be nothing Sacred, nothing Holy in an Image, or in any thing made by an Artificer. Accordingly the 
(n) Nec Sanctae dici debent. L. 3. c. 2.  Council of Frankford saith, They ought not to be called Holy: And the Synod held at 
(o) Qui— Sanctus nuncupari sanxerunt, & sanctimoniam ab eis se adipisci posse professi sunt. p. 20.  Paris, saith, The Second Nicene Council erred not a little, not only in saying, That Images were to be adored, but also in calling them Holy; and saying, That Holiness might be had by them.  
Now can it rationally be supposed, that they who thus declared, That Images were needless; that they knew no advantage could be received by them; that all Men were to be taught not to admire them; that they deserved to err who sought Instruction from them; that as for Christians, even the rudest of them rather chose to shut their Eyes, when they performed their Devotion, than to employ them about sensible Objects, with many other things of a like nature: Can it, I say, be well imagined, that these very Men should judge these very Images fit to instruct, to sanctify, to work compunction in them, yea, to be Objects worthy of their Veneration?  
§. 8. Once more the Fathers represent this as a practice proper to the vilest Heretics: For of the Carpocratian and Gnostick Heretics, it is related by 
(p) Imagines quasdam depictas, quasdam de reliqua materia fabricatas habent, dicentes, formam Christi factam à Pilato, & has coronant, & reliquam observationem circa eas similiter ut Gentes faciunt. Epiph. Haer. 7. p. 108. Iren. l. 1. c. 24.  Epiphanius, That they had many Images, some painted, others framed in Gold and Silver, and other Matter, which they said, were the Representations of Christ made under Pontius Pilate. Carpocratians, saith 
(q) Imagines quasdam depictas, quasdam de reliqua materia fabricatas habent, dicentes, formam Christi factam à Pilato, & has coronant, & reliquam observationem circa eas similiter ut Gentes faciunt. Epiph. Haer. 7. p. 108. Iren. l. 1. c. 24.  Irenaeus, have some painted Images, some also made of other Matter; saying, That their Images of Christ were made by Pilate; and these they crown and place with the Images of Plato, Aristotle, and Pythagoras, and perform other Rites unto them as the Gentiles do; that is, they censed and worshipped them, say 
(r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Anaceph. p. 140.  Epiphanius, and 
(s) Colebat Imagines adorando incensumque ponendo. August. Haer. 7.  St. Austin. Thus of Marcellina, a Carpocratian Heretic, it is related by Epiphanius and St. Austin, That she made the Image of Christ, and Paul, and Homer, and Pythagoras, and did cense, worship, or bow down to them. Besides, St. Austin doth affirm of Carpocrates, That he 
(t) Hic jesum hominem tantummodo putasse prohibetur. Ibid.  was reputed to have held, That Christ was only Man, and so could not intent to give him the Worship due to God. And Bellarmine himself confesseth, That 
(u) Isti cum Christum colerent proculdubio imaginem ejus propter ipsum colebant. De Imagine Sanctorum, c. 24. §. sexta Ratio.  without doubt, they, of whom Irenaeus speaks, did worship the Image for the Relation which it bore to Christ. And thus the Doctors of the Church of Rome allow it worthy of Worship, and so must be condemned by Irenaeus as much as are the Carpocratians. Here then is undeniable conviction that what the Second Nicene Council have decreed to be the Worship due unto the Images of Christ, and all the blessed Spirits; and what the Church of Rome doth daily practise, was deemed, in the purer Ages of the Church, a practice proper to the vilest Heretics. They have these Images, say the Fathers; They offer Incense, and bow down to them; and in this they do like Heathens, and therefore not like Christians: Therefore the Christians of those Ages did not so; for what is more absurd, than to reprove these Heretics for doing that which the best of Christians daily practised?   

CHAP. II.  
The Arguments of the Fathers against the Worship of Heathen Images, conclude equally against those now used by Christians as, v. g. 1. That it was incongruous to worship or bow down to them, because they were made of Earth, insensate Earth, the same with that of which Vessels were made for common uses, and they were sensual Objects, and therefore were not to be adored, but trod upon, contemned, and cast away. §. 1. 2ly, Because they were worse than Beasts, imperfect Infects, and dead Things, which yet it would be a vile and unbecoming thing for Men to bow down to. §. 2. 3ly, Because the Artificer who made them was better, whom yet 'twas shameful to adore, that being the Works of men's Hands, they could not be holy, valuable, acceptable to God, and so not fit to be adored; that the Works of God were not to be adored in honour of him, much less the Works of men's hands in honour of the Saints. §. 3. 4ly, That Man, who was the Image of God, and was made upright, was not to adore the Images of Men, or venerate earthly Things. §. 4. 5ly, Because if what they worshipped were Heavenly Powers, they would laugh at, or be angry with such Worshippers if they were in Heaven; it were better neglecting Images to look up thither; that if Images were made for the commemortion of the Dead, or of the Absent, they were not to be worshipped. §. 5. 6ly, Because Images were dangerous, as tending to debase the Soul, and render the Divine Majesty contemptible. §. 6. 7ly, Because they were the Invention of the Devil. §. 7. That the Fathers could not have spoken these things, which equally conclude against all Image-worship, if they themselves had worshipped Images. §. 8. That had this been their practice, the Heathens must have then retorted these things, as afterwards they did. §. 9 That many of these Say of the Fathers are expressly condemned in the Second Nicene Council. §. 10. That the Church of Rome hath persecuted many for saying the same things, and forced them to renounce them as great Heresies. §. 11.  
THis will be farther evident, if we consider the Objections which the Holy Fathers make against that worship of Images which had obtained in the Heathen World. For they produce such Arguments against it, as equally destroy all Image-worship, whatsoever be the Object represented by the Image; and do as fully prove it is unlawful to worship Images of Christ, and of departed Saints, as to adore the Images of Heathen Deities: so that it must be granted, that either in their days Christians did neither bow to, nor prostrate themselves before the Images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, or the Saints departed; or that they practised that which they themselves most vehemently reproved in the Heathens. Now these Arguments of the Fathers are taken; (1.) From the consideration of Images themselves: And here they argue,  
§. 1. 1. From the Matter of them, thus, That 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Clem. Alex. protrept. p. 38. De simulacris ipsis nihil aliud deprehendo quam materias sorores esse vasculorum instrumentorumque communium. Tertul. Apol. c. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Athanas. contr. Gentes, p. 15. Quis autem non intelligat nefas esse rectum animal curvari ut adoret terram quae idcirco pedibus nostris subjecta est, ut calcanda nobis non adoranda sit, Lact. l. 2. c. 17. p. 228. Non est dubium quin Religio nulla sit ubicunque simulacrum est— Quia nihil potest esse coeleste in ea re quae fit ex terra, Ibid. c. 18. p. 229. Deum cujus sedes illa est, quem oculis non possumus animo contemplemur, quod profectò non facit qui aes, aut lapidem, quae sunt terrena, veneratur, Ibid. cap. 1. p. 140. Stultissimi sunt qui non intelligunt esse mortiferum, relicto Deo vivo, prosternere se, atque adorare terrena, qui nesciunt, & illos aeternam poenam manere qui figmenta insensibilia fuerint venerati, Epit. cap. 1. p. 736. Cum vos terrae submittitis humilioresque facitis, ipsi vos ultro ad Inferos mergitis ad mortemque damnatis. Lact. l. 2. c. 2. p. 148.  the Materials of carved Images were only polished Earth, which Christians were taught to tread upon, and to contemn, and therefore could not, without wickedness, adore, what they did trample under feet; and that to humble themselves to what was as to Matter Earth, was to humble themselves to Hell, and to condemn themselves to death. That they who adore them, consider not that they daily burn, and tread upon the like Matter; that they are made of the same Matter with our Common, and perhaps impurer Vessels. That there can be no Religion where there is an Image, because Religion consists in things Divine and Heavenly, whereas there can be nothing Heavenly which consists of Earth. That certainly he doth not in his Mind contemplate God, who giveth Veneration to an Image.  
That 
(b) Tu ergo adoras insensilem, cum unusquisque habens sensum, nec ea quidem credat adoranda quae à deo facta sunt, & habent sensum. Clemens Recogn. l. 5. §. 16.  this Matter is insensate, and that it is a certain Maxim among Christians, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that they are not to worship that which hath no sense. That it is great folly to adore what is void of sense, when every one that hath sense, knows those things are not to be worshipped which are made by God, and have sense. That they are Fools, and blind, who know not that they shall everlastingly perish, who worship Figments void of sense.  

(c) Nec ponderare secum unamquamque rem potest vulgus indoctum, ut intelligat nihil colendum esse quod oculis mortalibus cernitur, Lact. l. 2. c. 3. p. 149. Origen. l. 7. p. 362. supra August. contra Acad. l. 1. c. 1.  That nothing is to be worshipped, but wholly to be cast away, which is the Object of our Senses, and is seen with mortal Eyes; and that our Saviour came to free God's Worship from these sensual Objects.  
§. 2. 2ly, Comparing these insensate Images with other things, to wit, with Beasts, and with dead Things, they discourse thus;  
That 
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Clem. Alexandr. protrept. p. 33, 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Athanas. contr. Gent. p. 15. Melior est etiam bestia, ut si pudeat adorare bestiam quam fecit Deus videntem, audientem, etc. viderent quam pudendum esset adorare malum & carens vita sensuque simulacrum, August. in Ps. 113. vide Tertul. Apol. l. 12. Minucium p. 26. Arnob. l. 6. p. 202. Theodoret. in Ps. 113. Clem. Rom. recog. l. 5. §. 16. Chrysost. in Es. Hom. 2. p. 1037.  if it be a most vile and unbecoming thing for Men to worship and bow down to Beasts, it is more shameful for them to worship and bow down to Images, they being more dishonourable than any living Creature; A Mouse, a Worm, a Mole, a Serpent being much better than an Image, because they have sense, which Images have not; The Birds of the Air being more honourable, because they have life and motion, which Images have not; they can frame Voices with their Throats, which Images cannot; they judge Images to be things void of Sense, and therefore nest, and make their Habitations in them, and even mute upon them. That they are worse than any dead thing, for that once lived, whereas Images never did enjoy one moment of Life.  
§. 3. 3ly, From the consideration of the Artificer, or the efficient Cause of Images, they argue thus;  
That the 
(e) Melior est qui fecit quam illa quae facta sunt, & tamen factorem ipsum nemo suscipit aut veretur. Lact. l. 2. c. 2. p. 146. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Athanas. contr. Gent. p. 15. item p. 11, & 23. August. in Ps. 113. Artifex melior est eyes, quia ea potuit membrorum motu atque officio fabricare, quem tamen Artificem te utique puder ct adorare. p. 1305.  Artificer who made these Images, must be esteemed better than his own handiwork, because he gave unto it that perfection it enjoys; and 'tis impossible there should be more perfection in the Work, than in the Artificer; that therefore it is much more shameful to adore the Image which he makes, than to adore the Man himself.  
That 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 714, 715. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Orig. contr. Celsum p. 6, 7.  nothing can be Sacred which is the Work of men's hands. That the Works of servile Artists, and Stone-cutters, cannot be Sacred. That it is a thing written by God in the Hearts of Men, that nothing is to be esteemed Sacred, or Holy, or of much value, which is the Work of the Mechanic, or Artificer; That Images made by servile Men, of earthly Matter, must be vain, earthly, and profane.  
That the 
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Orig. in Celsum p. 367.  Heathens had no just reason to quarrel with the Christians, for saying, They were Men of a lame and infirm Mind, who repaired to that which falsely was esteemed Saered, as if it truly were so; and who did not see that nothing could be sacred which was the Work of servile Artists.  
That 
(h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Orig. ibid. Ti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Euseb. praepar. Eu. l. 5. c. 14.  the curiosity of making Statues, hath in it nothing acceptable to God. And that the Heathens ought not to forbid Christians to assert, That they are blind who think that Piety doth appertain to Images, or Statues, made out of Matter by the Art of Man. No, 'twas reserved to a General Council of Christian Bishops to forbid this, and to style those Images which were the Work of the Artificer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Holy, Sacred, Venerable, Adorable Images, a thousand times.  
That 
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justin. M. Dial. 2. p. 66. Vos impii lapides & signa & opera manuum hominum adoratis. Tharacus apud Baron. A. D. 290. §. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Clem. Alex. protrep. p. 29. Non sit nobis Religio humanorum operum cultus. August. de vera Relig. c. 55. vid. Agob. p. 257.  it was an impious and foolish custom to adore the works of men's hands; and that such worship of humane Works, should be no part of the Religion of a Christian.  
That it was 
(k) Summopere pensandum esse, quia si opera manuum Dei non sunt adoranda & colenda, nec in honorem Dei, quanto magis opera manuum hominum non sunt adoranda & colenda, nec in honorem eorum, quorum similitudines esse dicuntur? Agob. §. 28. p. 261. Vid. Clem. R. Recogn. l. 5. §. 16. Claud. Taurin. Bibl. Patr. To. 4. p. 147.  seriously to be thought upon, That if the Works of God's Hands were not to be adored and worshipped, no not in honour of that God who made them, much less were the Works of men's hands to be adored in honour of them whose Similitudes they are said to be.  
§. 4. 4ly, From the Dignity, the Quality, ●●e Posture of the Persons worshipping, they plead thus, viz.  
That 
(l) Est autem perversum & incongruens ut simulacrum hominis à simulacro Dei colatur, colit enim quod est deterius & imbeciliius. Lact. l. 2. c. 17.  Man is the Image of God, whereas the Images of Heathen Deities and Saints are but the Images of Men. Now nothing can be more perverse, or more incongruous, than that the Image of a Man should be adored by him who is the Image of his Maker, because he by so doing worships what is worse and weaker than himself. That if any Image was to be adored or worshipped, it should be 
(m) Si ulla Imago esset adoranda vel colenda, Creatoris potius esset quam Creaturae; nempe hominem fecit Deus ad Imaginem & similitudinem Dei-Certe si adorandi fuissent homines, vivi magis quam picti; id est, ubi similitudinem habent Dei, non ubi pecorum; vel, quod verius est, lapidum, five lignorum, vita, sensu, ratione carentium. Agob. de Imag. §. 28. p. 262.  that of the Creator, rather than the Creature, viz. Man whom God made according to his Image and Similitude. That if Men were to be adored, it should be rather living Men, than painted; that is, when they have the Similitude of God, rather than that of Stones and Wood, void of Life, Sense, and Reason.  
That 
(n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 715.  if Holiness is to be ascribed not to God only, but to that which is framed in honour of him, it may fitly be applied to the Church, which to the Honour of God is made holy by the acknowledgement of him; or to him whom God doth prize and honour, in whom he dwells, in whose just Soul we may perceive the Divine Character, and Sacred Image, and who is an Image dedicated to the Honour of God; but the word Sacred is not to be applied to that which is made by servile Arts, or is adorned by the hand of a Juggler.  
That 
(o) Melior & tu, quamvis ea non feceris, quoniam quae illa non possent, facis. August. in Ps. 113. p. 1305. Nec intelligunt homines ineptissimi, quod si sentire simulacra & moveri possent ultro adoratura homines fuissent à quibus sunt expolita. Lact. l. 2. c. 2. p. 146. Velim autem dicerent mihi hi qui idola colunt, si optant similes fieri his quos colunt: vultne aliquis vestrum sic videre quomodo illi vident, etc. quales ergo dii habendi sunt isti quorum similitudinem habere contumelia est? Clem. R. Recogn. l. 5. §. 15.  Man himself is far more excellent, because he doth what Images cannot; and he hath Sense, and Life, and Reason which they want; and that if Images could move, they would rather adore Men that made them. That Men would think it a reproach and injury to be compared to them, or to be like them in their want of Life, and Sense, and Motion; and that therefore they should blush to worship that which they would not be like, or compared to: and they who made and worshipped them, were, as the Psalmist saith, like unto them, destitute of Manhood, and fallen into such absurdity, that it was just with God to deprive them of sense.  
That 
(p) Quid ante inepta simulacra & figmenta terrena captivum corpus incurvas?— ad coelum atque ad Deum sursum vultus erectus est, illuc intuere, illuc oculos erige, in supernis Deum quaere, ut carere inferis possis. Cypr. Ep. ad Demetr. Ed. Ox. p. 191, 192. Cum nobis sublimis vultus ab Artifice Deo datus sit, apparet istas Religiones Deorum non esse rationis humanae, qui (quae) curvant coeleste animal ad veneranda terrena. Lact. l. 2. c. 1. p. 139. Ipsi ergo sibi renunciant, seque hominum nomine abdicant, qui non sursum aspiciunt sed deorsum. p. 140.  God had made Man upright, with a face looking up to Heaven, and so would have us to look up to Heaven in the Acts of our Religion; that hence it appeared, that those Religions could not be suitable to humane Reason, which caused this Celestial Being to bow down and venerate earthly things; and that he renounced the Being, and the very Name of Man, who did not look upward, but downward in his Religious Service of God.  
That the Heathens served God more purely when they had no Image, 
August. de C. D. l. 4. ubi supra.  and that their Religion would have been better if they had so continued.  
§. 5. 5ly, From the consideration of the Object worshipped by these Images, and in honour of whom by the Heathens they were said to be made, or really were made, they frame these Arguments against the Adoration of them, viz.  
That whatsoever deserveth to be called a God, 
Arnob. l. 6. p. 189.  or placed among the Heavenly Powers, if it be capable of laughter, will deride this kind of Honour; or if prone to anger, will be provoked to Indignation by it.  
That if the Gods be in Heaven, 
Ibid. p. 195. supra.  it is a folly to direct our Eyes to Stones, and Wood, and Walls, when we address ourselves to them; and that we rather ought to direct our Eyes to Heaven where we believe they are. 
(q) Quanto igitur rectius est, omissis insensibilibus & vanis, oculos eo tendere ubi sedes, ubi habitatio est Dei veri? Lact. l. 2. c. 5. p. 161. vid. p. 148.  That it were better, wholly omitting these vain and insensate things, to direct our Eyes thither, where is the Seat and Habitation of the God of Heaven; and that God must be sought in the Heavens, that we may be freed from Hell.  
That 
(r) Docui Religiones Deorum triplici ratione vanas esse: una, quod simulacra ipsa quae coluntur, effigies sunt hominum mortuorum. Lact. l. 2. c. 17. p. 227. Quid sibi volunt ipsa simulacra quae aut mortuorum aut absentium monimenta sunt? nam omnino fingendarum similitudinum ratio iccirco ab hominibus inventa est, ut posset eorum memoria retineri qui vel morte subtracti, vel absentia fuerant separati: Deos igitur in quorum numero reponemus! si in mortuorum, quis tam stultus ut colat? si in absentium, colendi ergo non sunt, si nec vident quae facimus, nec audiunt quae precamur. Lact. l. 2. c. 2.  the Religion of the Heathens is vain, because the Images they worship are the Effigies of dead Men. That Images are either for the commemoration of the Dead, or of the Absent; it being therefore folly to adore either the Dead or Absent, it must be much more folly to adore their Images.  
§. 6. 6ly, From the Form of Images they also gather many Reasons to condemn them; saying,  
That 
(s) Opinio & mens imperitorum artis concinitate decipitur. Minuc. p. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc. Clem. Alex. protrept. p. 39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Strom. 5. p. 559. Species membrorum parit in unoquoque sordidissimum erroris affectum, ut quoniam in illo figmento non invenit vitalem motum, credat numen occultum, effigiem tamen viventi corpori similem; seductus forma, & commotus authoritate quasi sapientum institorum obsequentiumque turbarum, sine vivo aliquo habitatore esse non putat. August. in Psal. 113. p. 1306. Orig. adv. Celsum l. 8. p. 391.  the shape of a carved or painted Image, through the gayness of the Art, tends to debase the Soul, and to expose it to erroneous Opinions of the Deity, to render vile and contemptible the Divine Majesty, and by a show of Piety to make Men wicked; and that therefore they refused to make or use them, and were by Moses forbidden so to do.  
That 
(t) Quis autem adorat vel orat intuens simulacrum, qui non sic afficitur, ut ab eo se exaudiri puter?— Hoc enim facit, & quodammodo extorquet illa figura membrorum, ut animus vivens in sensibus corporis magis arbitretur sentire corpus, quod suo corpori simillimum videt. Illa causa est maxima impietatis insanae, quod plus valet in affectibus miserorum similis viventi forma, quae sibi efficit supplicari, quam quod eam manifestum est non esse viventem, ut debeat à vivente contemni. Plus enim valent simulacra ad curvandam infelicem animam quod os habent, oculos, aures, manus, pedes habent, quam ad corrigendum quod non loquentur, etc. August. in Psal. 113. p. 1307.  Images were rejected by them, because they could not without danger use them; For who, say they, adores or prays, looking upon an Image, who is not so affected as to think to be heard by it; for the Figure of the Members almost extorts this; and this is the greatest cause of this mad Impiety that the form like unto one living, whose likeness makes it to be supplicated to, doth more prevail in the affections of miserable Men, than the evidence that it doth not live at all, doth that it ought to be contemned by him who indeed is living. For Images prevail more to bow down the unhappy Soul, in that they have a Mouth, Eyes, Ears, Nostrils, Hands and Feet, than these Considerations can prevail to correct the Error of it, that they will not speak, see, smell, or walk.  
§. 7. 7ly, As to the  impulsive Cause, or first Inventor of Images, and Image-worship, they declare expressly, That 
(u) 
Artifices Statuarum, & Imaginum, & omnis generis simulacrorum diabolus saeculo intulit. Tertul. de Idol. c. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theodotus Ancyr. apud 2. Nic. Conc. Art 6. p. 492.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Epiph. Haer. 79. interpret Agobardo. Agit hoc nimirum versutus, & callidus humani generis inimicus, ut sub praetextu honoris sanctorum rursus Idola introducat, rursus per diversas effigies adoretur. De Imag. §. 31.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Euseb. praepar. Evang. l. 4. c. 16. p. 161.   the Devil and his Angels were the Inventors and Introducers, both of the Images, and Image-worship of Heathen Gods, and of the Saints. That the Devil brought into the World the Artificers of Images, and Statues: That they were evil Angels who taught Men to make them. That they had clearly proved that the first invention of Images, and Statues, was from the Devil. That it was manifest, that this vain counsel of painting the Visages of the Saints, was one of the Methods of Satan, an Invention of Men acted by the Devil. For which assertions they are frequently Anathematised, and condemned to Hell by the Second Nicene Council.  
In a word, Lactantius not only laughs at them who kiss, and worship, and bow down to these 
(x) Frustra igitur homines auro, ebore, gemmis deos excolunt & exornant. Ergo his judicris, & ornatis, & grandibus pupis, & unguenta, & thura, & odores inferunt, his peplos & indumenta pretiosa. L. 2. c. 4. p. 154, 157.  great Puppets, as he thinks fit to call them, but also at the vanity of such as adorn them with Gold, or Jewels, that cover them with Vails, or precious Garments; that offer Incense, or sweet Odours, or consecrate Gold or Silver to them; and who they are who do these things at present, we are not to learn.  
§. 8. And now let any Man of Reason judge, whether all these Considerations do not as much concern the Images of Saints, and even of our Blessed Lord, as they concerned the Images of Heathen Deities? whether their Images, as well as those of Heathens, be not made of Wood like to that we burn; or of polished Earth like to that we tread upon, and trample under feet, and of which Vessels are oft made for viler uses? whether they be not sensual Objects, things void of sense, and without Life, Motion, or ability to speak? whether they be not made by the Artificer, are not the work of servile Artists, Stone-cutters, Mechanics? whether they be not the Works of men's hands? whether they be not in the Roman Church adored, and reverenced by Men made upright after God's Image, and dedicated to his Honour, and who have what Images have not, and do what Images cannot do? whether any who adore them, desire to be like unto them? whether the Images which Papists reverence, be not the Images of Heavenly Powers, of Being's now in Heaven, the Images of dead or absent Persons, or made for the Commemoration of such Persons? And being so, Whether these Say of the Fathers do not equally concern them both? Or, whether they do not equally condemn the Worship of the Images of Saints, and Heathen Deities? If then these very Fathers had themselves made and worshipped Images subject to all, or any of these Characters, and had received a Tradition from Christ and his Apostles so to do themselves, and teach all Christians so to do, who can imagine that they would have spoken such plain and frequent Contradictions, both to their Practice and their Doctrine, and talked as if they equally intended to condemn, and even ridicule the Christian and the Heathen way of Worship?  
§. 9 Again, suppose the Fathers could have been thus destitute of common sense, and void of foresight, Would not the Heathens have taken this advantage to retort upon them all that they argued against their Image-Worship; and tell them, That which they condemned in them, was only what themselves did daily practise, and taught all Christians to observe? Can Celsus, Porphyry, Hierocles, Eunapius, Julian, and all the other Heathen Wits, have wholly waved and neglected such a plain Advantage? Put case they heard these Fathers daily telling them, that 'twas a wickedness to adore that which was made of Earth; that it was impious and foolish to adore the Works of men's hands, or what was void of sense; that they renounced the Name or being of a Man, who bowed down to venerate earthly things; that they could not but judge them impotent and blind, who called such things Sacred, or deemed it piety to adore them; and that they could not choose but laugh at and upbraid their Folly. Should all the Pagans know, that what they thus objected against their Image-worship, was of equal force against that which themselves did daily practise; that there were Images in every Christian Church, made by men's hands of Earth, as void of sense as any they adored; and that the Christians did esteem, and call them Sacred, adore, bow down to, venerate them; could they abstain from saying, in the words of the Apostle, Thou art inexcusable, O Christian, whoever thou art, that judgest us for doing these things; for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself, for thou that judgest dost the same things?  
When this Corruption began to spread itself through the Eastern Churches, and to be countenanced at Rome; and many had submitted to these superstitious Practices, the Heathens presently began thus smartly to reply upon those Christians who condemned their Image-worship. 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; 2 Nic. Conc. Act. 5. p. 353.  What, have you not also in your Church's Images of Saints; and do not you pay worship to them? What is the practice of you Christians; 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.  do not you represent in Images that which you call a God, viz. your Saviour? 
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Act. 5. p. 373.  Why to refore do you complain of us, who are yourselves more superstitiously addicted to the like practices? The Heathens, saith Tarasius, Patriarch of C. P. and the great Champion of Image-worship, defended their Idols by condemnation of the Martyrs, saying, 
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. p. 376.  Why strive you with us, and refuse our Images, when you have Images of your own? Why is it then, that the more Ancient Pagans, Hierocles, and Lucian, Porphyry and Celsus, Caecilian and Symmacus, Julian, Eunapius, and others, object such things against the Worship of the Christians, as were most evidently false, viz. the Worship of the Sun, an Ass' Head, of the Clouds, and the Priests Genitals; or most apparently impertinent, as the Worship of a crucified Malefactor, b●t never mention this; which if the practice of the Christians had given them occasion so to do, had been so proper, and so obvious, that the most rude and unskilful Adversary could scarce neglect to mention, or avoid taking notice of? These Persons, surely, neither wanted skill nor Wisdom to know what made for their Advantage, and what was proper to retort upon their Adversaries. They had no kindness for the Christians, which might induce them to wave this obvious Reply to these Accusations of the Christians brought against them; nor could they possibly be ignorant of what the Christians practised in this kind, they being some of them Apostates from the Christian Faith, and admitted to their public Worship. 'Tis therefore certain, that the Practice and Doctrine of those purer Ages, gave them no occasion to retort these things.  
§. 10. 3ly, Let us reflect a little upon the Language and Deportment of those who have professedly admitted of the Veneration of the Images of Christ and of his Saints, and see if we find any thing resembling these Say of the Fathers in their Words or Actions. Since that this Image-worship hath obtained amongst the Latins, who ever heard such Language from them?  
What Romanist will say, The Christian Doctrine did not permit them to be solicitous about Images and Statues, but to relinquish them, to reject them; that Christ came to cause them to desist from the worship of them, and to elevate them from earthly Images to Heaven? Who of them will declare, That all the Images of Christ, and of the Blessed Virgin, which they solemnly adore at Rome, were falsely called Images; that they were worse than Mice, and Worms, and Moles? Who of them will pronounce it an insignificant and needless, a ridiculous, shameful, foolish, incongruous, perverse, impious, irreligious, heretical, heathenish, and devilish practice, to adore an Image or a Statue? Where shall we find amongst them these general Axioms, That Christians must not worship that which is a Creature, that which hath no sense; that it is impious and foolish to adore the Work of men's hands; that this should be no part of the Religion of a Christian; that it is folly to adore the Dead, or Absent, and much more folly to adore their Images; that the Devil brought into the World the Artificers of Images and Statues? Since then the Fathers, without distinction, or exception, do frequently assert these things, and many more of a like nature, it is evident they did not worship or bow down to Images, as do the Members of the Church of Rome: For if no Man would thus speak, who meaneth as the Papists do, surely these Fathers were far enough from their Opinions. Is any Man so void of understanding, that being only to declare that Earthly Princes are not to be obeyed and reverenced as Gods, he should continually teach, without all limitation and distinction, That Earthly Princes are not to be obeyed or reverenced? since then the Fathers generally say, That Images are not to be admitted or reverenced by any Christians; and that they ought not to bow down to them, and do not limit these Expressions, it is exceeding clear that they intended not only to declare they were not to be worshipped with Latria, but also that no outward and inferior Worship should be given to them.  
After the introduction of Image-worship into the Eastern and some Western Churches, we find their Language and their Practice as opposite to these Discourses of the Fathers, as is Light to Darkness. For than we never hear, That whatsoever is the Work of an Artificer, is vain, earthy, and profane; that nothing of this Nature can be sacred, valuable, pious; but always speaking of their Images, as in the Second Niceno Council, under the Titles of Sacred, Holy, Venerable, adorable Images. Then they professedly deny, condemn, endeavour to confute the Axioms so frequent in these Holy Fathers. For instance;  
1. Nothing is to be worshipped, say the Fathers, which is made with Hands; it is impious and foolish to adore, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, things made with Hands. This Proposition those good Father's will by no means admit of, without their Restrictions; 
(e) Scripsisti non esse manufacta veneranda. 2 Nic. Conc. p. 10.  Thou hast written, saith P. Hadrian, to the Emperor Leo Isaurus, That things made with hands are not to be venerated. And having called him 
(f) Indoctus, Crassus, arrogans, superbus, Ibid. Manufacta diaboli noxia & execranda dicebat, quâ sunt manufacta ad ministerium & gloriam Dei.  proud, arrogant Dunce, he very learnedly informs him, That this was only true of the Manufacta Diaboli noxia & execranda, hurtful, and execrable manufacta of the Devil, not of things made with Hands for the Ministry and Glory of God. In his Epistle to the Emperors, Constantinus and Irene, approved by the whole Council, he objects thus; 
(g) Sed dices, quia ipse Deus interdixit adorare manufacta. Act. 2. p. 114.  You will say, That God himself forbids us to adore things made with hands; and answers thus, That 
(h) Quid est supra terram quod non sit manufactum, cum à Deo sit factum. Ibid.  every thing upon Earth is made with hands, it being made by God; and then flies to his old distinction, betwixt the Images of Daemons and of Saints. Theodorus, Patriarch of Jerusalem, saith, That 
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 3. p. 185.  some contentious Persons urge, That the Images of Saints ought not to be worshipped, as being made with hands. But let them know, saith he, that the Cherubin, the Ark, the Propitiatory, the Table, were by God's Precept made with hands, and were worshipped; and then he rests in the distinction of Pope Hadrian. Leontius triumphs over this Objection, thus; 
(k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 4. p. 237.  Tell me, thou, who thinkest nothing that is made with hands, and nothing created is to be adored; shalt thou kiss thy wicked Wife, and may not I kiss the Image of the Blessed Virgin?  
These Fathers, many of them clearly say, That Images were the Invention of the Devil: And in that 
(l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 1. p. 57  Council is pronounced an express Anathema upon all that say so; and as I shall hereafter show, they have either expressly, or in effect, denounced their anathemas against all these Fathers, and almost all that they have said.  
§. 11. Moreover, in the late Persecutions, in the days of Henry the 7th, the Papists forced Christians to renounce those very things as Heresies, which are so fully and expressly here asserted by the Fathers. For instance;  
1. The Renunciations of some of them run thus; 
Thomas Taylor, Jan. 22. 1490.  I have kept, and held, by the space of two Years, one suspect Book of Commandments, written in the same, That no Man should worship any thing graven, or made with Man's hands; whereby, after that Doctrine I have believed, that no Man ought to worship Images.  
2. I have misbelieved, and to divers manifestly showed, 
Augustine Steer, Jan. 28. 1490.  That Images of Saints are not to be worshipped, after the Doctrine of a Book of Commandments, which I have had in my keeping, wherein is written, That no Man shall worship any thing made or graven with Man's hands; attending the words of the same literally, and not inclining to the sense of the same.  
3. I have holden and believed, that the Images of the Crucifix, 
Thom. Boughton, May 28. 1499.  of our Blessed Lady, and of other Holy Saints, should not be worshipped; for nothing wrought, or graven with men's hands, aught to be honoured or lowted to, as I have read divers times in an English Book that we call the Commandment Book.  
4. I have believed, and divers times showed, 
William Prior, Jan. 28. 1490.  that Images of Saints be not to be worshipped, saying, and holding, That no such thing is to be worshipped, that is graven and made with Man's hands.  
5. I have spoken against worshipping of Images, 
John Tanner, Jul. 15. 1491.  that we shall worship no Stocks, ne Stones, ne nothing made or graven with Man's hand; no likeness of things in Heaven, in Earth.  
6. I have affirmed, 
Simon Waiver.  That Images made of Stocks and Stones are not to be worshipped, or should not be worshipped, nor nothing made with Man's hands.  
Some of them renounce and confess after this manner; 
Thomas Taylor, Ibid.  I have said them Foolis which goeth to St. James in pilgrimage; adding, that St. James had no foot to come against them, no hand to welcome them, neither tongue to speak to them; so reproving the worship of Images.  
I have openly said, 
Alize Higuel, Feb. 5. 1490.  That Images of Saints be not to be worshipped; that when devout Christian People of their Devotion, be wont to offer their Candles burning to the Image of St. Leonard, I have for their devotion called them Fools: furthermore showing in this wise, when St. Leonard wool eat a Candle, and blow out an oder, than I will offer him a Candle, else wool not: Also, when I have seen Cobwebs hanging before the Face of the Image of our Lady, I have said, and reputed them Fools that offereth to that Image; but if she would blow away the same Cobwebs from her Face—  
I have affirmed, 
Robert Makam, June 17. 1506.  and said, That the Crucifix, and other Images in the Church, made of Stocks and Stones, are but Idols, and ought not to be worshipped; adding, and saying, that Ball the Carpenter, or Pike the Mason, could make as good as the Crucifix, for it is but a crooked Stick.  
I have said, 
John Bennet, Feb. 7. 1507.  That no manner of Image ought to be worshipped, for that they can neither smell, speak, nor hear.  
Sometimes their Confessions, and Abjurations, run after this manner, viz.  
I have said, 
Isabel Dort, July 19 1491.  That it were better to give a poor, blind, or lame Man a Penny, than to bestow their Money in Pilgrimages, and worshipping the Images of Saints; for Man is the very Image of God, which ought all only to be worshipped, and no Stocks, ne Stones.  
I used to say, 
Thomas Stochin, March 22. 1498.  We should rather worship the Image that God hath made, that is to say, the poor Man, than the Image that Man hath made, and painted, the which standeth in the Church.  
All these things they renounce, as contrary to the common Doctrine and Determination of the Universal Church of Christ, and as false Doctrines, contrary to the Christian Faith, as great Heresies, and false Opinions, reproved, and damned by all Holy Church; and against the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles. And yet these Say thus condemned by the Second Nicene Council, and thus renounced as great Heresies, in all parts where the Power of the Church of Rome prevailed in these latter Ages, are either the express Say and Doctrines of the Ancient Fathers, or little different from them in sense; whence any Man may easily discern how great an opposition there must be betwixt the Doctrine of the Ancient, and of the present Church of Rome; the true Catholic Church of Christ in the Primitive Ages, and that which now usurps the name of Catholic.   

CHAP. III.  
That the Ancients did not bow down to, or venerate Images, is farther proved; 1. Because they never were concerned, as are the Romanists, to Answer the seeming repugnancy of this practice to the Second Commandment, or to use any of the Distinctions so frequent in the second Nicene Council to that effect. §. 1. 2ly, Because they answer all the Objections urged by the Nicene Council, against the Protestant sense of this Precept, viz. the instance of the Cherubims, and of the Brazen Serpent, etc. §. 2. 3ly, Because many of them declare, that this Precept rendered the very Art of making Images unlawful to the Christians. §. 3. 4ly, Because they generally declare, that by this Precept the Christian is forbid to give any outward Worship to Images, or to bow down to them. §. 4. 5ly, Because they reject and confute all the Distinctions used by the second Nicene Council, and by the Romanists, to reconcile this Precept to their Practice, asserting; 1. That this Command is moral and perpetual, and obligatory to all Christians. 2. That this Precept doth not only forbid the Worship of Images with Latria, but all outward Adoration of them. 3. That this is the Second Commandment, and not a part of the first only. 4. That not only Idols, but Images, are by this Precept forbidden to be adored. §. 5.  
§. 1. THat the Ancients knew nothing of this pretended Tradition, will be still more evident from their Discourses touching that Commandment, which so expressly saith, Thou shalt not make unto thyself an Idol, nor the similitude of any thing in Heaven or Earth. For had they generally practised, had they received a Tradition touching the Veneration of the Images of Christ, his Blessed Mother, and the Saints and Martyrs, is it not wonderful that none of all the Fathers ever did that which all Christians, who entertained the Worship of them ever did, viz. That they should never offer any Answer to the obvious Objection from this Commandment against it, or in the least attempt to reconcile this Precept with their Practice; or to propose any of those Distinctions, Limitations, or Excuses, which are so frequent in the Writings of the Romish Doctors, and which they judge so necessary to prevent Idolatry, and to inform aright the Minds of them who venerate their Images, and to satisfy the importunity of those who scruple at it, and do suspect it is a breach of this Commandment? The Matter of this Image-worship looks so ill, it seems so manifestly repugnant to the Command, forbidding us to worship any similitude of any thing in Heaven or Earth; it is at least in appearance so like to that very practice which they derided in the Heathens, that it was highly reasonable, if this had been the Doctrine and Practice of their Times, that these Primitive Fathers should at least have considered, and stated the Question, How far, and in what sense it was lawful; and with what Intention, and in what Degree, and with what Cautions and Distinctions this might lawfully be done. The present Doctors of the Church of Rome, are not so careless now adays, as were the Fathers in this Matter. When they writ Catechisms for the Instruction of the People, sometimes they 
(a) Vid. dal. de Imag. p. 77.  wholly leave out this Commandment; sometimes they do abbreviate it, and make it only say, Thou shalt not worship Idols: Or if they be so daring as to present the whole Commandment to the view of Roman Catholics, they carefully expound, and clog it with many Limitations and Distinctions, that their Proselytes may not be tempted to think the words do mean what in their plain and obvious sense they do import.  
Thus was it also with the Bishops of the Second Nicene Council, who introduced this Image-worship into the Eastern Church. Constantinus, Bishop of Constantia in Cyprus, seems to insinuate, That the Reason which moved God to make this Injunction, was not the Evil of Image-worship, but the propenseness of the Jews unto Idolatry; For, saith he, 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 4. p. 200. vid. Act. 6. p. 468.  when the People were moved to commit Idolatry, than God spoke thus to Moses, Thou shalt make no similitude to serve them. In other places they affirm, That God doth only here forbidden 
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 7. p. 556, 584.  the worship of them with Latria; the worshipping of Images 
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 5. p. 355, 376, 412.  as Gods, but not the worship of them with Doulia; and often do observe, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 7. p. 584. Act. 4. p. 248.  outward Worship, by saluting, or bowing of the Body, is not appropriated to God, but is an Honour oft given to the Creatures, and therefore is such Worship as may be given to S. Images. And sure it may be charitably presumed, that the Fathers of the Primitive Church were as hearty concerned for the Instruction of their Flocks, and were as able to perceive as Roman Catholics, that seeming opposition which the Veneration of Images bears to this Commandment; and yet we do not find in all their Writings, for five hundred Years, one Caution to inform the People, that this Law concerned not that Image-worship they are supposed to have practised, and derived down unto Posterity.  
Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Tertullian, and other Writers of the Ancient Church, make frequent mention of this Precept, especially when they discourse against that Image-worship which the Heathens practised; but they afford not one jota to distinguish that Worship they condemned in the Heathens, from that which they are said to have then given to the Images of Christ, and of his Saints; or to except them from the Censure they so generally pass upon all Image-worship; or to inform us, that the worship of such Images is well consistent with the Second Commandment.  
§. 2. To make this Argument yet more convincing, let it be considered, That these very Father's thought themselves concerned to answer those Objections which Papists now, and other worshippers of Images before them, made against that sense of the Commandment which Protestants embrace; viz. That God by it forbids all outward Worship, or Veneration, to be paid to Images.  
For whereas they object the 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theodorus Patr. Hieros. 2. Concil. Nicen. Act. 3. p. 185. vid. Act. 4. p. 197, 236. Act. 6. p. 468. Act. 2. p. 107, 115-  Cherubims placed in the Jewish Temple; Tertullian answers, That when God forbade the making the likeness of any thing in Heaven or Earth; in the next words, Thou shalt not worship them, he shown the Cause of that Prohibition, was the removal of Idolatry; and therefore, saith he, the 
(g) Sic Cherubin & Seraphim-certe simplex, Ornamentum, long diversas habendo causas ab Idololatriae conditione, ob quam similitudo prohibetur. contr. Marc. l. 2. c. 22.  Cherubims seem not here forbidden, because they were not made for Worship, but for Ornament.  
Clemens of Alexandria, to the same Instance answers, That 
(h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Strom. l. 5. c. 564.  the Cherubims were the Symbols of Angels glorified, not the Images of Saints; for he who had advised them to make no graven Idol, would not himself have made the Image of Saints, or Holy Things.  
2ly, The framing of the Brazen Serpent by Moses, is also pleaded in favour of Image-worship in the Second 
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 5. p. 356, 357. Act. 2. p. 108, 109.  Nicene Council. Now to this Tertullian answers, That this was done by 
(k) Non in Idololatriae titulum, sed in figuram Remedii. Contr. Marc. l. 2. c. 22. Non ad derogatioē Legis, sed ad exemplarium causae suae. L. de Idol. c. 5.  Moses, not as an Image of Idolatry, but as a Figure of their Remedy; that it was done, not in derogation to the Law, but as a Figure of the Cross.  

(l) Just. M. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 321, 322.  Justin Martyr in like manner saith, That it was a Figure of the blessed Jesus, who was to save us from the bitings of the old Serpent; for otherwise, saith he, How can we reconcile it with the Command of the same God, to make no kind of Image?  
Tertullian speaks thus to the Christian, 
(m) Ne facias adversus legem simulacrum aliquod, niti & tibi Deus jusserit. De Idol. cap. 5.  If thou observest the same God, thou hast his Law, make no Smilitude; if thou respectest the Precept of the Similitude that afterwards was made, imitate thou Moses; make no Image against the Law, unless God also do command thee.  
3ly, To the Objection made by 
(n) De fide Orth. cap. 93.  Damascen, and before him by Celsus, That God made Man after his own Image, Origen replies, That 
(o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 7. p. 376. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. vid. l. 8. p. 389.  it is one thing to be an Image of God, another thing to be made after his Image. And that this Image of God is preserved in the Rational Soul, made like in Virtue to to him, not in the Lineaments of the Body.  
These are the Exceptions made against this Law, which the Ancient Fathers diligently take notice of, and show not to be Breaches of, or Contradictions to this Precept. Whereas, had then the Christians been accustomed to worship or bow down before the Images of Christ, and of the Blessed Virgin, and the Saints departed, this Practice would have ministered more weighty Scruples to employ their Pens: And therefore we have reason to conclude, their practice gave them no occasion to answer those Objections which Romanists are so industrious to solve, and they, who were concerned about lesser Matters, never mention.  
§. 3. But then if we consider, That these Fathers who are so profoundly silent in the Particulars now mentioned, so unconcerned to show, that any Veneration of any Images whatsoever, was any ways consistent with this Precept, are very loud, and frequent in declaring, as many of them do, That this Commandment rendered the very Art of making Images unlawful to the Christian, that with one Voice they say, That it forbade all outward Veneration, and bowing down to any Images whatsoever; and that they do as fully contradict, and overthrow all the Distinctions, Shifts, and Excuses of the Romanists, whereby they do endeavour to avoid the Condemnation of this Law: I say, when we consider this, we cannot have the least suspicion left, that they should practise in their Actions, or in Mind approve, what they in words so fully have condemned. And,  
1. We find that many of them have declared expressly, That God by this Commandment forbade the very making of an Image, and rendered the very Art of Painting, and engraving Images, unlawful to the Christian.  
Clemens of Alexandria styles it, 
(p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 41  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an evil Art: and adds, That we Christians plainly are forbidden to exercise this deceitful Art, the Prophet having said, Thou shalt not make the similitude of any thing in Heaven or in Earth.  
Origen declares, That 
(q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, l. 4. p. 181. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, l. 6. p. 321.  the Jewish Polity admitted of no Painter or Statuary, the Law ejecting all such out of it. And all these Arts of graving and of painting Images, he also styleth Arts of Wickedness. And again, 
(r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. l. 6. p. 321.  As for Painters, Carvers, Image-makers, we think that they who do respect their Evil Arts, not taking off their Minds from all things visible, and sensible, to fix them upon him who is Light, are yet in Darkness.  
Tertullian saith, 
(s) Jam vero ipsum opus personarum quaero, an Deo placeat qui omnem similitudinem vetat fieri? De Spect. cap. 23. Et conjungens, neque similitudinem, etc. toto mundo ejusmodi artibus interdixit servis Dei. De Idol. c. 4.  Even of the Work of such Persons, I inquire, Whether it can please that God who forbade any likeness to be made, how much more of his Image? The Author of Truth loves not what is false; whatsoever is feigned, is Adultery with him. The Divine Law proclaims, Thou shalt make no Idol; and adding, neither the likeness of any thing in Heaven or Earth; hath, through the World, forbidden the Servants of God to exercise such Arts. And to this Objection of the Image-maker, I have no other Trade to live upon: He answers, What hast thou to do with God, if thou wilt live by thy own Laws? 
(t) Patet Exclesia omnibus, si nulla exceptio est artium, quas Dei disciplina non recipit, c. 5.  The Church permits all Men to labour, but not to labour in those Arts which the Discipline of God receives not.  
Chrysostom saith, I 
(u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; in Matt. Hom. 49. p. 316, 317.  condemn the Arts of making Pictures as no Arts, for they only tend to superfluous Expense; whereas the Name of Arts is only to be given to those Trades which appertain to things necessary, and belonging to the Life of Man. For God for this cause gave us Wisdom, that we might find out Methods by which we might advantage our Life. But tell me, Where is the profit of making little Images, or Animals on Walls or Garments?  
And lastly, The 
(w) Apud Concil. Nic. 2. Act. 6. p. 425. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. p. 505.  Council of Constantinople, consisting of 338 Bishops, calls this, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the unlawful Art of making Pictures. Judge therefore whether the Christians of those five first Centuries, could have any custom received from Tradition, to adore what they declared unlawful for any Christian Man to make, though he did not adore it, Whether they held it necessary that Images should be worshipped, who held it both superfluous and wicked outward Veneration to any Image whatsoever.  
Origen, in that very Homily upon Exodus, which Romanists do cite in favour of their Exposition of the word Idol, to signify a thing that hath no real Being in the World, is very clear in this Particular, declaring, 
(x) Quae nunc fermo Dei universa complectens simul abjurat, & abjicit, & non solum Idolum fieri vetat, sed & similitudinem omnium in terra, etc. Hom. 8. in Exod.  That the Command forbiddeth not only to make an Idol, but also the similitude of all things; so that if any Man, in any Metal of Gold, Silver, Wood, or Stone, makes the resemblance of any fourfooted Beast, Serpent, or Bird, and sets it up to be adored, he maketh not an Idol, but a Similitude; or if he make a Picture to that end, he doth the same: And, that the Word of God comprehending all these things together, casts away, and abjures them; and doth not only forbid an Idol to be made, but also the similitude of all things which are on the Earth, in the Waters, and the Heaven; adding, and saying, Thou shalt not adore nor worship them. 
(y) Aliud est colere, aliud adorare; potest quis & invitus adorare— colere verò est toto his affectu & study mancipari, utrumque ergo resecat sermo divinus ut neque affectu colas, neque specie adores. Ibid.  Now, it is one thing to adore, another thing to worship; for a Man may unwillingly adore, as they who flatter Kings, who are addicted to such things, may seem to adore Idols, when in their Hearts they know an Idol is nothing in the World; but to worship, is to be devoted to them with our whole Affection, and Study; both which the Divine Word cuts off, providing, That thou shouldst neither worship them with thy Affection, nor adore them in appearance, or external show.  
The other Author whom they cite to countenance their Exposition of the Word Idol, is Theodoret; who there declares indeed, That Idols signify things which have no Existence: but then he adds, That Similitudes here signify the Images of things subsistent, as of the Sun, Moon, Stars, and Men; which things, saith he, 
(z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Exod. q. 38.  the Commandment enjoins us neither to worship outwardly, nor with Latria, or with the Worship of the Soul, teaching both these kinds of Worship to be wicked.  
Clemens of Alexandria writing against the Antitactes, who rejected the God of the Old Testament, and acted in opposition to his Commands, tells them, that if they would act suitably to their Principles, 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Strom. l. 3. p. 441.  Seeing God, by Moses, had forbidden to make any graven or molten Images, they should adore them; plainly insinuating, that this Adoration was forbidden by this Precept. I have already showed, that 
(b) L. 7. p. 375.  Origen declares, That Christians abstained from the worship of all Images, by virtue of this Command; and that which saith, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve: And Tertullian, That the Cherubims seem therefore not to be forbidden here, because they were not made for Worship, but for Ornament. Epiphanius saith, That 
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Haer. 69. p. 759.  if the Son of God had been a Creature, God would not have propounded him to be worshipped, he himself having said, Thou shalt not make to thyself any Similitude, and thou shalt not worship it. God, saith Fulgentius, 
(d) Omni creaturae adoratio & servitus vehementissimè prohibetur.— Prorsus interdixit, ne quis auderet creaturam adorare creaturaeque servire. Ad Donat. p. 592, 593.  in the first Precept of the Decalogue, most vehemently forbade all the Faithful to give Adoration or Service to any Creature: and commanding himself to be adored, he wholly forbade that any one should dare to adore or serve a Creature. And therefore in the end of that first Commandment he speaketh thus of all things he created, Thou shalt not worship them, nor serve them.  
In the sixth and seventh Centuries, when the Historical use of Images began to find admittance in the Church, and Christians were permitted to adorn the Walls and Windows of the Church with them; or to engrave and paint them, the better to express or represent the History of Parables recorded in Scripture, they do excuse themselves from being thereby guilty of the breach of this Commandment, or any other of like nature, by this distinction, That they had Pictures only for Remembrance, not for Religious Veneration.  
Thus when Serenus, Bishop of Marseilles, finding his People prone to worship Images, did, after the Example of good Hezekiah, break and remove them from the Church, though Gregory the Great approves not of his breaking of them, yet he commends his 
(e) Et quidem zelum vos ne quid manufactum adorari possit habuisse, laudamus, sed frangere easdem imagines non debuisse judicamus. Tua Fraternitas ab earum adoratu populum prohibere debuit, l. 7. Ep. 110. Convocandi sunt, eisque sacrae scripturae est testimoniis ostendendum, quod omne manufactum adorare non licet, quoniam scriptum est, Dominum tuum adorabis; si quis imagines facere voluerit, minimè prohibe adorare, vero omnibus modis veta. Al. de vita Ep. l. 9 c. 9  Zeal against the adoration of what was made with Hands; declaring it the people's Sin, which was to be forbidden by all means; and bids him, calling them together, show, from the Testimonies of the Scripture, that it is not lawful to adore any thing that was made with hands, because it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. He adds, That he was moved with an inconsiderate Zeal in breaking of them, to prevent their being worshipped, because they were set up in Churches, not to be adored, but only to instruct the Minds of the Simple, and especially the Pagans, which abounded in his Diocese; and that it was one thing to adore a Picture, another, by the History of a Picture, to learn what was to be adored. Where this great Pope, without distinction or limitation, condemns all adoration of an Image, declaring, in opposition to the Fathers of the 
(f) Act. 4. p. 248. 7. 584.  second Nicene Council, That nothing was to be adored which was made with hands: And proving this from that very Testimony of Scripture, which in that Council is twice said to make nothing against the Adoration of them, because the word only is not joined to Adoration, but to the Service of Latria. He also doth command Serenus to forbid the adoration of them, omnibus modis, by all manner of ways opposing to this forbidden Adoration, the having of them 
(g) Frangi non debuit, quod non ad adorandum in Ecclesiis, sed ad instruendas solummodo mentes nescientium collocatum. Ibid.  only for Instruction; which manifestly proves, that the Adoration rejected and condemned by him, as contrary to the Holy Scriptures, was all kind of Adoration, all that is more than using of them for Instruction only.  
To weaken this plain Testimony of so great a Pope, they have since put words into an Epistle writ by him to Secundinus the Monk, in which he is made to speak according to the late Distinctions of the Schools; and to admonish that Monk not to worship the Image of our Saviour, viour, 
(h) Imaginem salvartoris nostri non ideo petis, ut quasi Deum colas. Nos quidam non, quasi ante Divinitatem, ante illum prosternimur. Epist. l. 7. Ep. 54.  as a God; and to inform him, That Christians do not prostrate themselves before it, as before the Divinity; concluding hence, that he elsewhere condemned only the worshipping of Images as Gods: But the gross Forgery is happily detected by the industry of 
(i) Corruption of the true Fathers, p. 75, 76.  Dr. James, who collated this Epistle with seven good Manuscripts; in all which no such words were to be found.  

(k) Apud Gerson. Comp. Theol. Expl. 1. precept. To. 2. F. 25.  No Word of God forbids that Images be made, saith Bede; but it by all means doth forbid that they be made unto this end, viz. that they be worshipped and adored.  
This Command, saith Agobardus, 
(l) Non de solis similitudinibus alienorum Deorum, sed & de coelestibus creaturis. Lib. de Imag. p. 221.  must not be only understood of the Similitude of false Gods, but also of the Heavenly Creatures, or of those things which humane Fancy hath invented for the Honour of God. And from them, and the 4th of Deuteronomy, he saith, 
(m) Quanto magis opera manuum hominum non sunt adoranda & colenda, nec in honore eorum quorum similitudines esse dicuntur? p. 222.  this chief aught to be observed, That if the Workmanship of God's Hand is not to be adored, no not in Honour of that God who made it; much less may we adore the Workmanship of Man in honour of those Persons whose Images they are said to be. And hence, as you have seen already, the Councils of Frankford, and Paris, and the Western Clergy, condemned the Decree of the second Nicene Council, as being, contra Authoritatem Divinam, & Scripturarum tramitem, against Divine Authority, and the course of Scriptures.  
§. 5. Moreover, these Fathers clearly and abundantly confute all the Distinctions used by the Romanists, and by the Second Nicene Council, to reconcile their Practice with this Precept, and all the specious Pleas they have invented for that end; as v. g.  
1. Do they, with Mr. Thorudyke, say, that this Commandment is not 
(n) Num Deus primum per naturalia praecepta, quae ab initio infixa dedit hominibus, admonens eos, id est, per Decalogum, quae si quis non fecerit non habeat salutem, & nihil plus ab eis exquisivit. Iren. l. 4. c. 28. etc. 31. Decalogi quidem verba ipse per semetipsum omnibus similiter Dominus locutus est, & ideo similiter permanent apud nos, extensionem & augmentum, sed non dissolutionem accipientia per carnalem ejus adventum.  perpetual, and moral, and so not obligatory to the Christian?  
The Fathers generally assert against them, That all the Precepts of the Decalogue, excepting only the carnal Observation of the Sabbath, oblige all Christians; that the words of the Decalogue Christ spoke alike to all, and therefore they remain alike with us, receiving their Augmentation and Extension, but not their Dissolution from our Saviour's Advent, they being natural and common to all. That they were not only spoken to the Israelites going out of Egypt, 
(o) Origen Hom. 8. in Exod.  sed multo magis ad te, much more to the Christian. 
(p) Numquid propterea dicturi sumus, non ad nos pertinere quod scriptum est, maximéque ipsum Decalogum, qui duabus illis lapideis tabulis continetur, excepta Sabbati observatione carnali, quae spiritualem sanctificationem quietémque significat? quis enim dicat non debere observare Christianos, 1. ut uni Deo Religionis obsequio serviant, 2. ut Idolum non colatur, 3. ut nomen domini non accipiatur in vanum, 5. ut Parentes honorentur, ne 6. Homicidia, 7. Adulteria, 8. Furta, 9 falsa Testimonia perpetrentur, ne 10. Uxor, ne omnino res ulla concupiscatur aliena? Quis est tam impius, ut dicat ideo se ista legis non custodire praecepta, quia est ipse Christianus, nec sub lege, sed sub gratia constitutus? Contra duas Epist. Pelag. l. 3. c. 4. p. 899.  What shall we say that the Decalogue, excepting the carnal observation of the Sabbath, doth not belong to us? Who is so wicked, saith St. Austin, as to say, That therefore he observeth not those Precepts, because he is a Christian?  
Clemens of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, St. Cyprian, Epiphanius, 
Vide §. 4.  Austin, Fulgentius, do urge this Precept upon Christians; and some of them expressly say, That it concerns not only Jews, but Christians also. And even the Trent Catechism teacheth, That all the Precepts of the Decalogue, except the fourth, are natural and perpetual, and cannot be changed; so that 
(q) Ut quamvis lex Moysis abrogata sit, omnia tamen praecepta quae duobus tabulis continentur, populus Christianus servet. Part. 3. cap. 4. Sect. 4.  although the Law of Moses be abrogated, yet Christian People are to observe all the Commands of the two Tables; not because Moses did command them, but because they are agreeable to Nature, and that constrains them so to do.  
2. Do they say, with the second 
(r) Act. 4. p. 248. Act. 5. p. 356, 376. Act. 7. p. 556, 584.  Nicene Council, That this Precept only forbids the worshipping of Images as Gods, or giving of Latria to them, but not the paying of external honorary Worship, or outward adoration to them? Note the propriety of the words, saith 
(s) In Dan. 3.  Jerom, neither Worship of the Gods, nor Adoration of the Image, is agreeable to the Servants of God. The Command forbids both inward Worship, and external Adoration, say Origen and Theodoret. Thou shalt not worship them with the Veneration of thy Body, nor the Affection of thy Mind, saith Gerson. 
(t) Exhort ad Mart. p. 167.  Origen declares, That they who abjured Christianism in times of Persecution, made the same excuse as doth the second Nicene Council in this Matter, viz. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they gave not Latria, but only outward Worship or Veneration to the Idols. But to this Romish shift he thus replies, viz. That this excuse would also free the Jews from the like Gild in worshipping the Gods of Moab, and the golden Calf; for he observeth, that the Scripture saith, Not of them who went a whoring after the Gods of Moab, 
Num. 25.2, 3.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they gave Latria to their Idols; for it could not be, saith he, after so many Signs and Wonders, which their Eyes had seen, that they should presently be brought, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to think the Idols, with which they fornicated, were indeed Gods. Thus also, saith he, very likely did the Jews, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, outwardly adore the Calf, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not giving Divine Worship to that which they had seen then made. And indeed, evident it is, that the similitude of any thing is not the thing itself; and therefore the command forbidding us to worship the Similitude of any thing in Heaven, or Earth, cannot be reasonably supposed only to forbid us to worship a Similitude of God, as God.  
3ly, Do they, to give some colour to this subterfuge, assert, That what we call the Second Commandment, is indeed part of the First? The Jews, and Christian Fathers, excepting only St. Austin, and Fulgentius, do, with one Voice, declare the contrary. 
(u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Orig. l. 3. c. 4.  The first Commandment, saith Josephus, teacheth, That God is One, and that he only should be worshipped; the second commands us, not to make the Image of any living thing to worship it. 
(w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Libr. de Decal. p. 590.  The first, saith Philo, is about Monarchy; the second about things made with hands, not suffering us to prepare Images, or Statues, as those hurtful Arts of Painting and Engraving do. 
(x) Ad Autolyc. l. 3. p. 23.  Theophilus reckons these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Ten Commandments, thus; 1. Thou shalt have no other Gods but me. 2. Thou shalt not make to thy self an Idol, or the similitude of any thing, 
10. Thou shalt his Wife, etc.  etc. not covet the House of thy Neighbour, nor desire Clemens of Alexandria declares, That 
(y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Strom. l. 6. p. 682.  the first Command shows, That there is one only God Omnipotent, and forbids Idolatry; the second, is against giving of his Name to vain things, which Artificers have made. 
(z) Si ita putetur non complebitur decem numerus mandatorum, & ubi jam erit Decalogi veritas? Hom. 8. in Exod.  Should these two be numbered as one, saith Origen, the number of Ten Commandments would not be complete; but if you reckon them as we do, the Truth of the Decalogue will remain; wherefore the first Commandment is this, Thou shalt have no other Gods but me; the second, thou shalt not make to thyself an Idol, or any Similitude, etc. Of the Ten Commandments, the 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Synops. p. 64.  first, saith Athanasius, is this, I am the Lord thy God; the second, Thou shalt not make unto thyself an Idol, or the similitude of any thing. 
(b) Et in secundo praecepto repromissionem esse sociatam. Eph. 6. F. 104.  St. Jerom reckons four Commandments of the first Table, and saith, a Promise was added to the second of them. To all these may be add 
(c) L. 2. c. 17.  Tertullian against Martion, and against the 
(d) Cap. 2.  Jews. The 
(e) L. 2.36. l. 7.3.  Constitutions under the name of Clement. 
(f) L. 1. p. 93.  Sulpitius Severus, in his Sacred History. 
(g) P. 554.  Pseud-Ambrosius on the 6th Chapter to the Ephesians. The imperfect Work upon 
(h) Hom. 49. p. 175.  St. Matthew passing under the Name of Chrysostom. 
(i) P. 273.  Procopius Gazaeus, upon Exodus. 
(k) To. 1. p. 24.  Zonarus in his Annals; with divers others. And if that which we style the second Commandment, be only a part and explication of that Precept, Thou shalt have no other Gods but me, it only can forbid what is forbidden in that Precept, viz. the giving of that Worship which is due to God, to any Image; whence it will follow, That to bow down, to kiss, offer Incense to the Images of Heathen Deities, or of the very Devil, is not a thing forbidden by this Precept, since by such Actions, say the second Nicene Council, and the Roman Doctors, We do not worship Images as Gods: And if the paying this inferior Worship to the Images of Heathen Deities, be not forbidden in the words of this Commandment, I conceive it cannot be reasonably thought to be forbidden in any other Precept, there being only this which speaks of Image-worship; and if it were forbidden in no Precept of the Moral Law, it necessarily will follow, that it was lawfully performed by the Heathens.  
4ly, Do they pretend that Idols only are forbidden to be adored in this Precept, but not Images; this indeed is the conceit of Romish Doctors, and of the second Nicene Council; but this also is plainly opposite unto the general Tradition of all the Fathers of the Church, who constantly observe, what is as evident in the Commandment as words can be, viz. That it forbids not only Idols to be worshipped, but also the similitude of any thing whatsoever; As besides the express Testimonies of Clemens of Alexandria, Theophilus, Tertullian, Origen, Athanasius, Epiphanius, St. Austin, and Fulgentius, produced already, is farther evident from the express Assertions of 
(l) P. 321, 322.  Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho: Of 
(m) C. 59  Cyprian, in his third Book to Quirinus: Of 
(n) P. 39  Julius Firmicus, in his Treatise of Profane Religion: Of 
(o) Carm. p. 99  Nazianzen, in his Verses: Of the 
(p) P. 554.  Pseud-Ambrosius, upon the 6th Chapter to the Ephesians: Of 
(q) Qu. 38.  Theodoret, in his Questions upon Exodus; and of innumerable other Authors.  
To all which add that of Tertullian, That 
(r) Omnis forma, vel formula Idolum. De Idol. c. 3.  every Form, or little Representation, is an Idol; and all Service performed about it, is Idolatry. That of the Council of Frankford, 
(s) Sed ne Idola nuncupentur, adorare eas & colere Recusamus. Lib. Car. l. 4. c. 18.  We do not call the Images placed in Churches, Idols; but we refuse to worship and adore them, lest they should be called Idols. That of Agobardus, That 
(t) Puto quod videretur eis non tam Idola reliquisse quam simulacra mutasse. De Imag. p. 248.  if they who have left the Worship of Daemons, should be commanded to venerate the Images of Saints, I think they would seem to others, not so much to have left Idols, as to have changed their Resemblances. Add lastly, the Complaint of all the Fathers against the Arians, That by introducing the Adoration of a Creature, they brought in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an Idol-making Heresy; under the pretext of Christianity, they secretly introduced the Worship of Idols, and transgressed that Precept which forbade the Adoration of an Idol, or of any Similitude, clearly insinuating, That by worshipping any Creature, it was made an Idol.  
Since then the Fathers of the second Nicene Council, and the Romish Doctors, do with such diligence and industry inculcate these Distinctions and Limitations of this Precept, seeing they were so much concerned to blanche, and colour over the seeming opposition of their practice to it: And since the Fathers must have had the like Occasions, Reasons, and inducements so to do; if they had practised the same custom, of making and adoring the Images of Christ, and of his Saints, and yet they never in the least concern themselves about this Matter, never use any of these Limitations or Distinctions, nor any other of like Nature in their own defence, but do as manifestly reject, condemn, and overthrow them all, as any Protestant could do.  
Since, 2ly, they thought themselves obliged to show, that which comparatively concerned them little, viz. That the making of the Cherubims, and of the Brazen Serpent by Moses, and the making Man after his Image by God himself, did no way thwart this Precept, but yet were wholly unconcerned, to add, That the making, and adoring of the Images of Christ, and of his Saints, was also well consistent with it, since they do often say, That, notwithstanding this Command, it might be lawful for the Jew to make an Image, where there was no peril of worshipping, or bowing down to it; and it was also lawful for the Christians to have 
(u) August. in Psalm 113.  their Cups, and Dishes, for the Sacramental Bread and Wine, and other Utensils; and that such things were not condemned by this Commandment, or to be ranked with what was here forbidden; but yet they never go about to prove, That it was lawful, notwithstanding this Command, to have, or worship Images of Christ, or any of his Saints, since even in the following Ages, when Images began to be received into Churches, they still declare they did not violate this Precept, because they had them not for Adoration, but only for commemoration; and that this Precept forbade them not to make, though it by all means forbade them to adore an Image.  
3ly, Since many of them have declared expressly, That God by this Command forbade the very making of an Image, and rendered the very Art of Painting and Engraving, unlawful to the Christian; and they more generally do assert, That He by it, forbade even all outward adoration of them, and consequently expressly must declare themselves transgressors of it, and practisers of wicked Worship, if they both made and gave external Adoration to the Images of Saints.  
And, 4ly, since they plainly argue against all honorary Worship of them, thus, That if the Workmanship of God's Hands is not to be adored, no not in honour of that God that made it; much less may we adore the Workmanship of Man, in honour of those Persons whose Images they are said to be. Declaring, This, should it be done by Christians, would rather look like changing, than leaving of their Idols.  
And, lastly, since they solemnly profess, That by Reason of this Precept, they had rather die than worship any graven Image, with many other-like Expressions; it is, upon all these accounts, extremely evident, that then they had no Images of Saints, erected or painted in the House of God; and that when they were once admitted, they neither paid to them any outward Worship, nor did they think it lawful so to do.   

CHAP. IU.  
The Fathers forbidden Christians to make or worship Images and Pictures. §. 1. 2ly, Some of them represent it as a vain thing to desire them. §. 2. 3ly, When they saw them in Churches, they tore and pulled them down, as being contrary to Scripture and Religion. §. 3. 4ly, When it was objected to them by the Donatists, That some of them placed Images on the Altar; they reject the Calumny with great abhorrence. §. 4. 5ly, When the worship of Images was objected to them by the Manichaeans, they say, This was done only by some rude People by the Church condemned. §. 5. From the 8th to the 15th Century, the veneration of Images was rejected by the most eminent Persons of the Western Church. §. 6.  
§. 1. AND suitably to these Declarations, we find the Fathers, as occasion served, either forbidding of the People to make, or at the least to worship Images, and showing of their Zeal against them, that did so both in Word and Action.  
Epiphanius speaks thus to the Christians of his Time; 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. Nic. Conc. Act. 6. p. 473.  Attend to yourselves, and remember that you bring not Images into the Church, or into the Dormitories of the Saints, nor yet into your common Houses, for it is not lawful for a Christian to wander after them with his Eyes. 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Hom. de Diu. & Laz. p. 565.  Picture not Christ, saith Asterius, Bishop of Amasa, but bearing him in thy Soul, carry the incorporeal Word in thy Mind. The Council of Eliberis decrees, 
(c) Placuit in Ecclesiis picturas esse non debere, nè quod colitur & adoratur in parietibus depingatur. Can. 36.  That Pictures should not be in the Church; not because in times of Persecution they may be abused by Heathens, as Baronius; nor because they haply may be defaced by the moisture of the Walls, as others descant on that Canon; but, lest that which is worshipped and adored (by Christians) should be painted upon Walls. This Canon was made by the Orthodox Fathers, saith 
(d) Ob hujusmodi evacuandam superstitionem. De Imag. p. 266.  Agobardus, to evacuate the Superstition of Image-worshippers. And whatsoever is the import of it, it manifestly doth forbid the introduction of any Image into the Church to be adored; for saying, That it is our Pleasure, or our Judgement, that Images ought not to be in Churches, it must by consequence forbidden the giving any adoration to them, since what we must not have, we cannot worship; and what we are forbid to have, to that we are forbid to exercise those Actions which presuppose the having of it. It also doth apparently forbid the introducing the Image of our Blessed Lord and Saviour, and painting that on the Church Walls, for he was surely adored and worshipped by Christians; and that this is indeed the meaning of the Canon, will be very probable, if we consider, that about that time some superstitious People, in imitation of the Heathens, who were accustomed to paint within their 
(e) Bochart de l' Orig. des Images, des Saints. p. 598, 599.  Temples, the Images of those Gods they worshipped, began to paint upon the Walls of Churches, the 
(f) Euseb. de Vit. Const. l. 3. c. 48.  Gospel Parables, viz. our Lord 
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Conc. Nic. 2. p. 121. Concil. Trull. Can. 82.  carrying a Sheep upon his Shoulder, to represent the Parable of the Lost Sheep; the Gospel Histories, as our Lord in the form of a Lamb, with the Forerunner pointing to him. Which Picture was afterwards approved of by the sixth Synod, though the Council of Eliberis, thought it not fit thus to paint what was by Christians worshipped.  
§. 2. And suitable to these Declarations of their Judgement, and these Exhortations, hath been the practice of the most Learned Fathers of the Church. Even to the days of Jerom, saith 
(h) Usque ad atatem Hieronymi erant probatae Religionis viri, qui in templis nullam ferebant Imaginem, ne Christi quidem. Vol. 5. Symbol. Catech. p. 989.  Erasmus, Men of approved Religion, would not suffer any painted, carved, graven Image, no not of Christ himself. And therefore when Constantia, the Sister of the Emperor Constantine, being in Palestine, desired Eusebius to send her the Picture of our Saviour Christ. To this Request 
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Apud 2. Nic. Conc. Act. 6. p. 494, 496.  Eusebius returns this Answer; What Image is it you would have? That of his Divinity. This I suppose you did not ask for, since no Man knows the Father but the Son, and no Man knoweth the Son but the Father; or is it the Image of his Humane Nature, that servile Form, which, for our sakes, he took upon him? This certainly is that whose Image you desire; but we have learned, this is now tempered with the Glory of the Godhead; and that this mortal is swallowed up of Life. And if his Disciples in the Mount were not sufficient to endure the lustre of it, when transfigured, who shall be able to express the splendour of his Glorious Body in dead and senseless Colours and Adumbrations? now that putting off Corruption and Mortality, the similitude of the Form of a Servant, is changed into the Glory of the Lord. Whence it is evident, he judged Christ's Humane Nature was not then to be painted, or represented to the Eye, and therefore knew of no such custom then approved by the Church. For had such Images then been common in all Churches, and all private Oratories; had they then been received by all Christians, from one end of the World to the other, as the second Nicene Council saith, Why did Constantia send as far as Palestine for what was every where to be had? Or, why should Eusebius refuse to satisfy her in a Request so reasonable? Why doth he put her off with an Excuse, which was as opposite to the Opinion of the Church of Christ confirmed, saith that Council, by their daily practice, as it was opposite to her Request?  
Olympiodorus being to build a Church in honour of Christ and of the Martyrs, writes to Nilus, a celebrated Monk, and a Disciple of St. Chrysostom, to know whether he should set up any Images of them in the Choir, or Sanctuary; or any other Images in the House of God, for the gratification of the Eyes of the Beholders. To this Request 
(k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Conc. Nic. 2. Act. 4. p. 228. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.  Nilus returns this Answer, That it was a very childish Business, to cause the Eyes of the Faithful to wander after the aforesaid Things; and that it was the Indication of a strong and manly apprehension, to have in the Sanctuary only one Cross framed, that the Church might be filled indeed with Histories of the Old and New Testament, done by the Hand of an excellent Painter, that they who could not read the Scriptures, might by the sight of these Pictures, have the memory of the courageous Actions of the Servants of God, and might be provoked to an emulation of their glorious Actions. So that he clearly shows, that then no Pictures were allowed in Churches but for Historical uses; that no Images of Christ, or of the Martyrs, were thought fit to be placed in the Choir; that the use of them, to gratify the Eyes, was childish, and not suitable to Men of strong and Manlike Understandings.  
§. 3. Thus Matters stood in the middle of the 5th Century, but in the 4th it was thought opposite to Scripture and Religion to admit Images into the Christian Churches: Witness the Epistle of 
(l) Quando venissem ad Ecclesiam, quae dicitur Anablatha, inveni ibi velum pendens in foribus Ecclesiae tinctum, atque depictum, & habens Imaginem, quasi Christi, vel Sancti cujusdam; non enim satis memini cujus Imago fuerit: cum ergo hoc vidissem in Ecclesia Christi contra autoritatem Scripturarum hominis pendere Imaginem, scidi illud, & magis dedi consilium custodibus ejus loci, ut pauperem mortuum eo obvolverent, & efferrent; illique contra murmurantes, dixerunt, si scindere voluerat, justum erat ut aliud daret velum, atque mutaret; quod cum audiissem, me daturum esse pollicitus sum, & illico esse missurum.— Nunc autem misi quod potui reperire, & precor ut jubeas Presbyteros ejusdem loci suscipere velum à latore,— & deinceps praecipere in Ecclesia Christi istiusmodi vela, quae contra Religionem nostram veniunt, non appendi. Decet enim honestatem tuam hanc magis habere sollicitudinem ut scrupulositatem tollat, quae indigna est Ecclesia Christi, & populis qui tibi crediti sunt. Apud Hierom. Epist. To. 2. F. 58.  Epiphanius to John Bishop of Jerusalem, where he saith; When I was come into the Village called Anablatha, and entering into the Church to pray, found there a Veil, died and painted, and having the Image, as it were, of Christ, or of some Saint, for I do not well remember whose Image it was. But seeing this, that contrary to the Authority of Scriptures, the Image of a Man was hanged up in the Church of Christ, I rend it, and gave counsel to the keepers of the Place, that they should rather wrap up and bury some dead Body in it. They murmuring, said, That having rend this, he should send them another: Which, saith he, I promised, and have now sent; and I desire you to bid the Presbyters of the Place receive it of the Bearer; and henceforth to command them, That such Veils as these, which are repugnant to our Religion, should not be hung up in the Church of Christ; for it becomes you to be the more careful, for the taking away that Scrupulosity which is unworthy of the Church of Christ, and of the People committed to your charge. This Epistle is extant in the Works of 
(m) Ep. To. p. 58.  Jerom, both Manuscript & printed: It is owned as genuine by 
(n) In Concil. Narbon. p. 616.  Sirmondus and Petavius: It was long since cited against Image-worship by the Councils of 
(o) Lib. Car. l. 4. c. 25.  Frankford and 
(p) Synod. Paris. c. 6.  Paris; and so the Truth of it cannot be reasonably disputed. This being thus premised, I observe;  
1. That he declares it contrary to the Authority of Scripture, to hang up in the Church of Christ the Image of a Man: He doth not say the Image of a wicked Man, but simply, and without all distinction, Imaginem Hominis, the Image of a Man.  
2. He clearly doth insinuate, That, for any thing he knew to the contrary, the Image which he rend was the Image of Christ, or of some Saint; for whether it was so or no, saith he, I do not well remember: Whence evident it is, that had it been the Image of Christ, or any of his Saints, he would have rend it. He therefore did not think, that to destroy those Images which were erected for his Worship, was to offer a most vile Affront unto his Saviour, as afterwards the second Nicene Council did, and now the Papists do conceive.  
3. He positively declares, That all such Veils so hung up in the Church, were contrary to the Religion of the Christians.  
4. He desires the Bishop of Jerusalem to charge his Presbyters, that they should suffer no such thing hereafter to be done; i. e. no painted Images to be hung up in the Church of Christ, and that because it was unworthy of the Church of Christ, the People committed to his charge, to be scrupulous or concerned about such Trifles.  
5. Observe; That when he rend this Veil, and counselled the Men of Anablatha, to wrap and bury some poor Body in it; they did not say, for aught appears; and he did not regard it if they said so, that this was to profane the Sacred Image, or that he offered an Affront to Christ, or to his Saints, by rending of it; but they say only this, That having rend that, he should provide another: Whence it is evident, that they had then no Custom or Doctrine of the Church, which could maintain the hanging up, or could condemn the rending of this Veil.  
§. 4. The Aversation which all good Christians had to Images, was so well known to the Enemies of the Church, that they made their advantage of it, to withdraw her Subjects from Communion with her. For the Donatists well knowing how detestable a thing it was unto the Christians of that Time, to see an Image set up in the Church, and more especially upon the Altar, they framed this Calumny, the more effectually to draw them off from her Communion, 
(q) Dicebatur illo tempore venturum esse Paulum & Macarium, qui interessent Sacrificio, ut cum Altaria solent niter aptarentur, proferren illi Imaginem quam primo in Altari ponerent. Sic Sacrificium offerretur, hoc cum acciperent aures & animi perculsi sunt, ut omnis qui haec audierat diceret, qui inde gustat de Sacro gustat. Optat. l. 3. p. 75.  That the Catholics, Paulus and Macarius, would bring an Image, and place it on the Altar whilst the Sacrifice was offered. This Rumour startled the Faithful; for when the fame of it was spread abroad, the Ears and Minds of all Men, saith Optatus, were much troubled at it; and all that heard it, began thus to speak, Whosoever tastes of any thing from thence, doth taste of a forbidden thing.  
Whence we with 
(r) Masius in Josh. Cap. 8. v. 31.  Masius, a Learned Romanist, observe, how much the Ancient Christians did detest the sight of any Image on the Altar; that is, how much they did detest the present practice of the whole Church of Rome.  
2ly, Observe the Answer of the Christians of those Times unto this Calumny. They do not say, true it is, we do set Pictures upon our Altars, and that not only for Ornament and Memory, but for Veneration also: And we do well to do so, and suitably to the Tradition of the Church of Christ, so that you ought not to be troubled at it, or frighted from our Communion by it; which is the only Answer the Church of Rome can make to this Objection, and which the Fathers ofthat they should be made?  
§. 4. But, 2ly, these Fathers do with one Voice declare, That by this Precept the Christian is forbidden to worship, to bow down, or to give that Age would have made, had they then practised as the Church of Rome doth now; but they do utterly deny the Thing, rejecting it with detestation and abhorrence. Optatus doth confess, That 
(s) Et rectè dictum erat, si talem famam similis veritas sequeretur; at ubi ventum est à supradictis nihil tale visum est, nihil viderunt oculi Christiani quod horrerent— visa est puritas, & ritu solito solennis consuetudo perspecta est, cum viderent divinis Sacrificiis nec mutatum quicquam nec additum. Ibid.  had the Thing been true, the Separation of the Donatists would have been just; that this use of Images would have been a pollution of Divine Service, and a thing alien from the Custom of the Church, and which the Eyes of Christians could not have beheld without horror. Clearly condemning, by this Answer, the practice of the Church of Rome, and justifying the separation of Protestants from her Communion, had it been only made on this account.  
You have already seen, from the Testimony of Nilus, That in the East they admitted nothing in the Sanctuary but the Cross, and in particular, no Image. In the West likewise, the placing of an Image on the Altar was forbidden, in the 9th, 10th, and 11th Centuries.  
Regino citys a Constitution of a Council held at Rheims, in which it is commanded, 
(t) Nihilque super eo ponatur, nisi capsae cum Sanctorum Reliquiis, & quatuor Evangelia. De disc. Eccles. l. 1. cap. 60.  That nothing shall be placed upon the Altar, but a Chest, containing the Relics of the Saints, and the four Evangelists. And this Constitution seemeth to forbid the placing Images upon the Altar, saith Baluzius upon that Canon; And this, saith he, seems also to have been the Sentence of the French Council held at Tours, A. D. 567. And therefore in the old form of Synodal Admonitions, which was read in Churches by the Deacon after the Gospel, one Admonition is this, 
(u) Nihil ponatur, nisi capsae & reliquiae aut fortè 4 Evangelia, aut pyxis cum corpore Domini. Adm. Antiq. apud Baluz. ib. p. 603.  That nothing shall be placed on the Altar, but the Chests and Relics, or perhaps the four Gospels, or the Pyx, with the Body of the Lord for the viaticum of the Sick. But in the two new Forms of Admonition published by Baluzius, the last of which is used at present in the Romish Church, the Admonition runs in these words, 
(w) Et desuper nihil ponatur nisi reliquiae, ac res Sacrae, & pro Sacrificio opportunae. Adm. Nou. p. 607, 611.  Let nothing be placed upon the Altar, but Relics, and things Sacred and fit for the Sacrifice. The Introduction of Images upon the Altar, making it necessary to make this Alteration in their Admonition. Even in like manner as the defalcation of the Cup in the 14th and 15th Centuries, made it necessary to change the old form of Admonition, in which they warned all the Faithful 
(x) Omnes fideles ad Communionem Corporis & Sanguinis Domini accedere admonete. Adm. Antiq. p. 605.  to come to the Communion of the Body and the Blood of Christ, on Christmas, Easter, and Whit-sunday, into that now extant in the New, and only inviting them 
(y) Omnes fideles ad communionem Corporis Domini Nostri invitate. Admon. Nou. p. 609. Admonete. p. 613.  to come to the Communion of the Body of Christ. By which, and by an hundred Instances of a like Nature, we may learn how impossible it is for them, who have made that the present practice of their Church, which was forbidden by, and was detestable to their Forefathers to innovate in any Matter, or alter the received Customs of the Church; and what a goodly Argument is brought from the present Customs, Traditions, Doctrines of the People of that Church, to provethey always held the same Doctrines, and practised the same Religious Rites.  
§. 5. Moreover, when Images began to be admitted into Churches, and by some Superstitious People to be adored, the Fathers of the Church, both by their Words and Actions, shown their dislike and their abhorrence of it. It was the custom of some Christians, to pay some outward civil Worship unto the Images of their Christian Emperors, till they themselves forbade it: This Jerom taking notice of, doth plainly, in his Comment on the Prophet Daniel condemn and reprehend, saying, 
(z) Cultores Dei eam adorare non debent; ergo Judices & Principes seculi qui Imperatorum Statuas adorant & Imagines, hoc se facere intelligunt, quod tres pueri facere nolentes placuerunt Deo: Et notanda proprietas, Deos coli, Imaginem adorari dicunt; quod utrumque servis Dei non convenit. In Dan. 3. p. 256.  Whether we call it a Statue, or a Golden Image, the Worshippers of God ought not to adore it; let the Judges and Princes of the Age, who adore the Statues and Images of the Emperors, understand, that they do that which the three Children refusing to do, pleased God. And here the propriety of the Words is to be noted; they say, That Gods are to be worshipped, the Image to be adored; neither of which is to be done by any Servant of God.  
When the Manichees, upon occasion, ministered by some rude and superstitious People, had charged some Christian Churches with Image-worship St. Austin writing of the Manners of the Catholic Church against them, directly severs the Case of those rude Persons, from the approved practice of the Catholics. 
(a) Nolite mihi colligere professores nominis Christiani, nec professionis suae vim aut scientes, aut exhibentes, nolite consectari turbas Imperitorum, qui vel in ipsa vera Religione superstitiosi sunt. De Morib. Eccl. Cath. c. 34.  Do not, saith he, mention to me such Professors of the Name of Christ, as either know not, or keep not the Force of their Profession; nor the companies of rude Men, which either in the true Religion itself are superstitious, or so given to their Lusts, as that they have forgotten what they promised to God. Then as an instance of those superstitious Persons, he adds, That 
(b) 
Novi multos esse Sepulchrorum & Picturarum adoratores. Ibid.  
Nunc vos illud admoneo, ut aliquando Ecclesiae Catholicae maledicere desinatis, vituperando mores hominum, quos & ipsa condemnat, & quos quotidie tanquam mafilios corrigere studet. Ibid.   he himself did know many who were worshippers of Tombs and Pictures; but how vain, how hurtful, how sacrilegious these Men are, I have purposed to show in another Treatise. Now this do I admonish you (Manichaeans), that you cease to speak evil of the Catholic Church, by upbraiding it with the Manners of those Men whom she herself condemneth, and seeketh every day to correct as naughty Children. These things St. Austin speaks of those who were Professors of the Name of Christ, and Children of the Church; they therefore cannot be supposed worshippers of Heathen Idols such heathenish Persons being never owned as Christians by the Church of Christ, but still rejected as her Enemies, and publicly condemned by many of her Canons and Decrees. Nor doth St. Austin say, these Persons worshipped Pictures with Divine Worship, or that they esteem them as Gods: Had he conceived this to have been their Crime, he would not have said, That in the True Religion they were superstitious, but rather that they were mere heathenish Idolaters; the 
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 6. p. ●17.  second Nicene Council having told us, That never any Christian Man did give Latria to an Image. Nor can it reasonably be conceived, that many who professed the Name of Christ should be such Sots, as to believe an Image, made by their own hands, could be the Great Creator of the World, the Maker of the very Man that made it, and of that very Metal which composed it.  
Moreover, St. Austin here requires the Manichees, Not to upbraid the Church of Christ with the practice of these naughty Children, whom he calls worshippers of Pictures, they being only a rude multitude of superstitious People; of such as either did not know, or did not answer their Profession; such as the Church condemned, and still endeavoured to correct. Had then St. Austin, and all good Christians of his Age, been themselves worshippers of Pictures; had he believed that the Doctrine and Tradition of the Church of Christ, required all good Christians to give them honorary Worship; would he so generally, without distinction or exception, have condemned all Worshippers of Pictures as superstitious, rude, and ignorant of what Christianity required? Would he so fully have declared, That the Church of Christ condemned, and did endeavour to correct them for it? Would he have charged the Manichees with great injustice, for imputing Picture-worship to the Church of Christ, and not have given some of those Limitations and Distinctions with which the second Nicene Council, and the Romish Doctors do so much abound, to put a difference betwixt the avowed and constant practice of the Church, and what both he and she condemned in these Worshippers of Pictures? St. Austin therefore must be a very dolt, or else must here demonstrate the Church of Christ did, in his Time, conceive all Picture-worship to be superstitious, and opposite to the Profession of Christianity; and that which she condemned, and did endeavour to correct in those that practised it.  
§. 6. And as those Fathers so expressly declared against the Doctrine of the second Nicene Council, before they had decreed it; so afterwards, from the 8th to the 15th Century, it was expressly contradicted and rejected by the most Eminent Persons of the Western Church.  
In the same Century it was condemned by the Council of Frankford, consisting of three hundred Bishops, 
A. D. 794.  as hath been showed already.  
It was condemned in the same Century, not only by Albinus, or Alcuinus, Tutor to Charles the Great, and Scholar of Venerable Bede who wrote a Book against the second Nicene Council, and that Assertion of it, 
(d) Contra quod scripsit Albinus Epistolam, ex Authoritate Divinarum Scripturarum mirabiliter dictatam, ilamque— in persona Episcoporum & Principum nostrorum, Regi Francorum attulit. Hoved. Ann. part. 1. F. 232. B.  That Images ought to be adored, confuting it from Holy Scripture; but also by the Princes and Bishops of the Church of England, in whose Name that Book was sent to Charles the Great.  
It was condemned in the 9th Century, by the Council held at Paris, A. D. 824. It was in the same Century declared to be 
(e) Pseudosynodus. l. contr. Hincmar. Laudan. c. 20. Chron. ad A. 792. ad An. 794.  falsely called a Synod, because it decreed for Image-worship, by Hincmarus Rhemensis, by Ado Viennensis, and by Regino Abbas Prumiensis.  
It was condemned also by Agobardus, Bishop of Lions, who was made Bishop by the consent of the whole Clergy of that Nation; for in his Book yet extant against this Image-worship, he declares, amongst many other things already cited from him, thus; 
(f) Nemo se fallar,— quicunque aliquam Picturam, vel fusilem, five ductilem adorat Statuam, non exhibet cultum Deo, non honorat Angelos, vel Homines Sanctos, sed simulacra veneratur. Sect. 31.  Let no Man deceive, let no Man seduce, or circumvent himself: Whosoever adores any Picture, any molten or graven Statue, he doth not worship God, or honour Angels or Holy Men, but he venerates Idols. And yet 
(g) Ego crediderim Agobardum scripsisse, quod omnes tum in Gallia, ut etiam à Sirmundo observatum est, sentiehant. Bal. Not. in Agob. p. 88  Baluzius and Sirmond●s, do ingenuously confess, that Agobardus hath writ only that which the whole Church of France did then acknowledge. Papirius Massonus, who abridged him, saith, 
(h) Graecorum Errores de Imaginibus & Picturis manifestissimè detegens, negat eas adorari, quam sententiam omnes Catholici probamus, etc. Praefat.  That he did manifestly detect the Errors of the Greeks, (i.e. the Nicene Councils) concerning Images and Pictures, denying that they were to be adored; which Doctrine all we Catholics approve, and follow the Testimony of Gregory the Great corcerning them; which as you have seen was this, That Images were neither to be broken, nor yet adored  

(i) Ecclesiae Gallicanae & Germanicae in hac sententia, constantissime aliquot seculis perdurarunt. Cap. de Imag. p. 173.  The Germane and French Churches, saith Cassander, after the Council held at Frankford, most constantly continued for some Ages, in that Sentence which they first received from the Church of Rome, viz. That Images were neither to be broken, nor yet to be worshipped. If for some Ages they must assuredly continue in it till the 11th Century; and that they did so, is evident from the Chronicle of Hermannus Contractus, who styles the second Nicene Council a false Synod, on the forementioned account. Chron. ad A. D. 794.  
That the Germans continued of the same mind in the 12th Century, is evident from the plain words of 
(k) Quip apud Alemannos & Armenios' S. Imaginum adoratio aeque interdicta est. L. 2. de Imp. Aug. Angel. p. 199. In qua Synodo de Imaginibus adorandis, aliter quam Orthodoxi Patres antea diffinierant, statuerunt.  Nicetas Coniates, who saith, That then among the Almains and Armenians, the worship of Holy Images was equally forbid.  
That the French Church was still of the same mind, is evident from the Continuator of 
(l) De Gestis Francorum, l. 5. c. 28.  Aimoinus, who plainly saith, That the Fathers of the Nicene Synod otherwise decreed concerning Image-worship, than the Orthodox Doctors had before defined. And from the Collection of Decrees made by Ivo, Bishop of Chartres, who declares the Judgement of the Council of Eliberis to be this, That 
(m) Picturas in Ecclesia non esse adorandas. Decret. Part. 3. c. 40, 41.  Pictures ought not to be worshipped, but that they only ought to be Memorials of what is worshipped; and citys the Passage of Pope Gregory to that effect.  
In the same Century, Simon Dunelmensis, an Oxonian Doctor, and Roger Hoveden their Professor, both assert, That in the second 
(n) In quo, proh dolour! multa inconvenientia & verae Fidei contraria reperiebantur, maxim quod pene omnium Orientalium Doctorum unanimi assertione confirmatum fuerit; Imagines adorari debere, quod omnino Ecclesia Dei execratur. Hoved. Ibid. Dunelm. ad A. 792.  Nicene Synod were many things contained which were inconvenient, and contrary to the true Faith: and that in the said Council was established a Decree, That Images should be worshipped; which thing the Church of God wholly abhors. And here let it be noted, that in these Writers we find not the least hint of a Distinction between due and undue worship of an Holy Image; or betwixt Worship which the Church of Christ allows, and which the Church abhors; but Imagines adorari debere, that Images should be worshipped, is declared to be the Doctrine which God's Church abhorred.  
In the 14th Century, Robert Holcot, Professor in Oxford, most plainly asserts, That 
(o) Ideo aliter potest dict, quod nulla adoratio debetur Imagini, nec licet aliquam imaginem adorare.— Quia autem propter Imaginem Christi excitamur ad adorandum Christum, & coram Imagine adorationem nostram facimus Christo; ergo dicitur large loquendo, N. B. quod Imaginem adoramus. In Ecclus. Lect. 158. c. 13. Vide Reliqua.  no Adoration is to be given to any Image; nor is it lawful for any Man to worship Images. And Matthew of Westminster, condemning the Decree of the second Nicene Council, as Hoveden had done before him, Ad A. D. 793.  
In the 15th Century, 
(p) Omnino prohibentur fieri ad hunc, viz. finem, ut adorentur & colantur; unde sequitur neque adores, neque colas ea; ad adorandum igitur & colendum prohibentur Imagines fieri. Sequitur non adorabis neque coals; inter quae sic distingue, non adorabis, sc. veneratione Corporis, ut inclinando eis vel genuflectendo; neque coals, sc. affectione mentis. Comp. Theol. in Explic. 1. praecepti. Tom. 2. p. 25.  Gerson, Chancellor of Paris, saith, We do not worship Images, and that they are forbidden to be worshipped; that the second Command forbids us to bow the Body, or the Knee to them, or to worship them with the Affection of the Mind.  
And 
(q) Quod vero Christiana Religio Imagines sustinet in Ecclesia, & Oratoriis, non permittit eo fine, ut adorentur ipsae sed ut fidelium mentes per earum inspectiones excitentur ad reverentiam & honorem exhibendum his quorum sunt Imagines, in quorum cognitionem recordativam ducunt. Et hic modus dicendi videtur esse Rob. Holcot, super illud sapientiae infelices sunt— mihi videtur dicendum, quod neque adoro Imaginem Christi quia lignum, nec quia Imago; sed adoro Christum coram Imagine Christi, quia scilicet Imago Christi excitat me ad amandum Christum: hic modus loquendi originem videtur trahere ex dicto quodam B. Gregorii Sereno Episcopo, etc. Et quidem, quia eos adorare vetuisses omnino laudamus, fregisse vero reprehendimus, etc. In Can. Miss. Lect. 49. F. 127.  Gabriel Biel, an Oxonian Doctor, teacheth, That then some of their Doctors held, that any Image is not to be worshipped, either for itself, as it is Wood, or Stone, nor yet considered as a Sign or Image. And that the Christian Faith permits them to be reserved in the Church, not that they may be worshipped, but that the Minds of Men may be excited to give reverence to them whose Images they are; and that this they said according to P. Gregory.  
In the 16th Century, 
(r) Imagines in Ecclesia ideo tolerantur ut admoneant, non ut colantur, alioquin omnino excusari possunt minime. In Act. Apost. cap. 7. p. 94.  Ferus, a Learned Preacher at Mentz, saith, That Images are tolerated in the Church, that they may admonish, not that they may be worshipped, for otherwise they can admit of no excuse.  
Yea, a Council held at 
(s) Can. 14.  Mentz, A. D. 1549, during the Session of the Trent Council, speaks thus, Let our Pastors accurately teach the People, that Images are not propounded to be worshipped or adored, but that by them we may be brought to the remembrance of those things which we ought profitably to call to mind.   

CHAP. V.  
Against this pretended Tradition of the second Nicene Council, it is farther argued, 1. Because the Jews, though zealous for the observance of the Law of Moses, and generally believing that it forbade the having, and much more the bowing to an Image, did never, for the five first Centuries condemn the Christians for this practice, as afterwards when Images began to be received into Churches, and adored, they always did. §. 1. 2ly, Because the Apostles, and succeeding Fathers, who answer all the other Scruples of the Jews against the Christian Faith, speak not one word in Answer to this great Objection, that it allowed of Image-worship in opposition to the second Commandment. §. 2. 3ly, Because the Evidence of Truth hath forced many Learned Writers of the Romish Church to confess, That the Primitive Church had no Images, or did not adore them. §. 3. From this Discourse, these four things are inferred; 1. That the Councils received by the Church of Rome as general, are not infallible Interpreters of Scripture, or infallible Guides in Matters of Faith. §. 4. 2ly, That the second Nicene Coucil hath imposed that on Christians as a Tradition of the Church of Christ, which was not so; and therefore was deceived, and did deceive in Matter of Tradition. §. 5. 3ly, That Roman Catholics do vainly boast of the Consent of Fathers on their side. §. 6. 4ly, That the Doctrine of the Church of England is much safer in this particular than that of Rome. §. 7.  
MOreover, that Image-worship was no Doctrine delivered to the Church of Christ, either by Writing or Tradition from the Apostles, that it was not practised in the first Ages of the Church, will be apparent from the deportment of the Jews towards the Christians, and the consideration of what they thought of the erection of an Image in the place of Worship, and of the adoration of them.  
§. 1. And, 
(1.) Act. 21.20.  we know that even the believing Jews were zealous for the strict observance of the Law of Moses, and were much offended at St. Paul, because they apprehended he had taught the Jews to forsake the Law of Moses, and not to circumcise their Children, or walk after the Customs of their Fathers.  
We also are informed by 
(a) Tum poene omnes Christum Deum sub Legis observatione credebant. Sulp. l. 2. c. 45. Euseb. Chron.  Eusebius and Sulpitius, that this Zeal continued among the Jewish Christians for a considerable time after the death of the Apostles, viz. till the destruction of the City by Hadrian. For till that time the Bishops of Jerusalem were of the Circumcision; and almost all who believed in Christ, did yet observe the Law.  
The Sect of the 
(b) Ep. ad August. & August. contr. Faust. l. 19 c. 18. Orig. contr. Cells. l. 2. p. 56. l. 5. p. 272.  Ebionites and nazarenes, continued till the days of Jerom, they were dispersed throughout the Churches of the East, and were stiff Assertors of the Obligation of the Law of Moses; and held, 
(c) Euseb. Hist. Eccles. l. 3. c. 27.  That Men were to be saved by the observation of it.  
2. We know, that in the Judgement of the Jews, who lived about our Saviour's Time, and after, nothing was more detestable, nothing was more repugnant to the Law of Moses, than the admitting of an Image in the place of Worship, much more the bowing down to it.  
They constantly declared to Pilate, upon occasion of the Roman Eagles, That 
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Joseph. Halos. l. 2. c. 14.  they could not permit any Image to be placed in their City. And that 
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. L. 2. c. 8. l. 18. c. 4. l. 2. c. 17.  their Law was violated by the little Images of Caesar annexed to the Roman Standards; and that they would rather die than endure them there. They tell Petronius, That it could not be permitted to have the Image, either of God or Man, in their most sacred Temple, or elsewhere. They persuade Vitellius not to come thither with them, because it was not suitable to the Laws of their Country to see an Image brought into it.  
And they declared to Herod, Son of Antipater, That 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Archeol. l. 18. c. 7. l. 15. c. 11.  whatsoever they endured, they would not suffer the Images of Men within their City.  
3. Certain it is, that for a long time no Samaritan, or Jew, ever objected to the Christians their violation of the Second Commandment; or at the least, pretended to be scandalised at their defection from this Law of God. No single instance of this Nature can be produced from all Antiquity, till after the fifth Century, when Images began to be admitted into Churches, provided that they were not worshipped. Then was it that the Jews began to call the Christian Churches, upon that account, Batte Aboda Zara, the Houses of Idolatry. And from that time they have not ceased to object to them the violation of this Law, and to profess that they were scandalised at it.  
In the second Nicene Council, Germanus, Patriarch of Constantinople, confesseth, That 
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 4. p. 300. & p. 240.  upon this account the Jews did often cast reproach upon them; and that the Saracens did the same.  
Gregrory, in his Epistle to him, adds, That 
(h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 288.  if any one do accuse this Image-worship of Idolatry, he is one who calumniates after the manner of the Jews.  
In the fifth Action, a Jew is introduced speaking thus; 
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 356, 357, 384, 348.  I believe in a crucified Jesus, who is the Son of God; but I am scandalised at you Christians, because you worship Images, whereas the Scriptures every where command us not to make any graven Image or Similitude.  
The Christians are to be reckoned Idolaters, saith 
(k) Dr. Pocock, Not. Miscell. p. 322.  R. Kimchi, because they bow down and adore the Image of Jesus of Nazareth.  

(l) Catechism. c. 33. p. 68 B.  Fabianus Fiogus, a Jewish Convert, informs us, That the Jews dispute after this manner; God in the Decalogue, writ with his own Finger, hath command that no kind of Image or Similitude, should be made, etc. but Christians make and worship Images, they therefore violate this Precept; this, saith he, is an undoubted thing among them, and therefore they call the Christians Worshippers of Idols.  
Joseph King of Cosri, is said to prefer the Jews before the Christians, 
(m) Buxt. Praesat. ad Cosri.  because the latter bow themselves to the Works of their own hands.  
Had therefore the first Christians received a Tradition from the Apostles to adore Images, and had all Christians practised suitably to this supposed Tradition, both the Believing and the Unbelieving Jews, being such Zealots for the observance of the Law of Moses, and professed Enemies of Images, and of the adoration of them, must have been scandalised at it. We see that they were very much incensed against St. Paul, for teaching, 
Act. 21.20.  That the Gentiles were not obliged to observe their Law; that they would not endure him, unless he also would walk orderly, and keep the Law. If then St. Paul, and Peter, as 
(n) Apud 2. Nic. Conc. p. 101.  P. Hadrian averrs; if the rest of the Apostles, as the second Nicene Council saith, had taught and practised this Image-worship, so flatly opposite to their Law, and therefore execrable to them, this must have stirred up their indignation against St. Paul and Peter much more than their asserting, That the Ceremonial Law did not oblige the Gentiles could have done.  
'Tis surely difficult to conceive, that they who thought their Law so highly violated, by framing the Picture of a Man, or of an Eagle, and would rather die than admit of them, because they held they were forbidden by their Law, should either, being Christians, continue zealous to assert the Obligation of that Law, and yet admit the Doctrine which did enjoin them both to frame and worship Images; or should, continuing unbelieving Jews, never accuse the Christians of a Crime so execrable in their sight, nor dissuade any Christian from complying with this great violation of their Law?  
§. 2. Yea farther, had this Practice, or Tradition, obtained in the days of the Apostles, or the five following Ages, the Apostles, and Primitive Fathers, would likely have endeavoured to remove this Scandal from the Jews, and to return some Answer to an Objection so very obvious, for their prejudice against Image-worship being greater than against any other thing, they had the greatest reason, upon the supposition of such a practice of the Christians, to labour to remove it. And yet we find not that St. Paul in his Epistles writ partly to satisfy the Jews, that Circumcision was not to be imposed upon the Gentiles; and partly, to warn the Gentiles not to bear the Yoke of Jewish Festivals and Ceremonies; or in that purposely designed to teach the Jews, that the Priesthood being changed, the Ceremonial Law must also change together with it; or that St. Peter, or St. James, in their Epistles to the dispersed Jews, take the least notice of so great a Prejudice, or spend one word to reconcile the Jew to this supposed Image-worship.  
Justin Martyr, Origen, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, G. Nyssen, Epiphanius, St. Chrysostom, St. Austin, with many others, have writ on purpose to take off the Objections of the Jews against Christianity; and in these Writings they have been very diligent in taking off the Scandal of the Cross, and proving, That the Jewish Festivals, and Sabbaths, were abolished; and that their Laws concerning Circumcision and Sacrifices were abrogated; but they spend not one word to show that Christians were exempted from that Precept, which forbade the bowing down to any Image, or Similitude; or to excuse that Worship of them they are supposed to have practised, or to declare, as doth the second Nicene Council, that this Commandment only forbade the worshipping of Idols, or of Images as Gods, or to give any other satisfaction to the Jews in this particular.  
The Apostles, and the Fathers, do jointly labour to remove the Scandal of the Cross, and to convince the Jew, that it was reasonable to worship him who was crucified upon it; but they say nothing to remove that which was a greater Scandal to them, as the confession of the Jew now mentioned doth assure us, viz. the worship of the Cross, and of an Image, which was the Work of their own Hands. They tell the Gentiles, That no Man had reason to condemn them for not observing the New Moons, and Jewish Sabbaths, but give them not one Item that they had no reason to condemn them for making and adoring Images.  
The whole New Testament, which takes especial notice, 
Rom. 2.22.  that the Jews abhorred Idols, gives not the least distinction betwixt an Image, and an Idol, nor the least hint of any of those Evasions and Limitations, by which the Church of Rome now finds it necessary to reconcile her Practice to the second Commandment; nor of those Expositions or Retortions used in the second Nicene Council, to refute the Clamours of the Jews. Which is a full conviction, that the Ancient Church had no such Doctrine or Practice, which could make it necessary for them to fly unto these Romish Shifts and Subtleties.  
§. 3. To conclude; The Suffrage of Antiquity is so very clear, the Testimonies of it are so numerous, and so convincing, that they have forced many Learned Persons of the Church of Rome, ingenuously to confess, either that in the Primitive Church they had no Images, did not regard them; or that they paid no veneration to them, but rather disapproved and condemned it.  
The Universal Church, saith 
(o) Statuit olim Universa Ecclesia, ut nullae in Templis Imagines ponerentur. Lib. de Nou. Celebrit. p. 151.  Nicholaus de Clemangis, being moved by a lawful Cause, viz. on the account of them who were converted from Heathenism to the Christian Faith, commanded, That no Images should be placed in Churches.  

(p) Quem, non modo nostrae Religionis expertes, sed teste Hieron. omnes fermè veteres sancti Patres damnabant, ob metum Idololatriae. De Invent. Rerum, L. 6. c. 13.  The Worship of Images, not only they who were not of our Religion; but, as St. Jerom testisieth, almost all the Ancient Holy Fathers condemned for fear of Idolatry, saith Polydore Virgil, where the opposition of these Holy Fathers to others not of our Religion; and the mention of Pope Gregory among them, shows the vanity of what the 
(q) Apud White, p. 249.  Jesuit Fisher saith, That Polydore speaks this of the Fathers of the Old Testament, not of the New.  

(r) Nos dico Christianos, ut aliquando Romanos fuisse sine Imaginibus in primitiva, quae vocatur Ecclesia. Syntagm. L. 1. p. 14.  This surely I cannot omit, saith Giraldus, that as the Ancient Romans so we christian's were without Images in that Church which is called Primitive.  

(s) Saevissimis his temporibus de Sanctorum imaginibus ne cogitârint Episcopi— abstinebant ad tempus. De Concil. Eliber. l. 3. c. 5.  The Bishops in these times of Persecution, saith Mendoza, little thought of Images of Saints; they abstained from them for a while, lest the Heathens should deride them, and should conceive that Christians worshipped them as Gods. All these are Witnesses against the second Nicene Council, that the Practice was not Apostolical, Universal, and Primitive.  
What Opinion the Fathers had of this Practice, these following Persons will inform you.  
Petrus Crinitus saith, That 
(t) De Hon. Discipline. l. 9 c. 9  Lactantius, Tertullian, and very many others, with too much boldness, did affirm, That it belonged not to Religion to worship any Image.  

(u) Erasm. vol. 5. Symbol. Catech. p. 989.  Even to the days of Jerom, who died in the fifth Century, Men of approved Religion, saith Erasmus, would not suffer any painted, or graven, or woven Image, no not of Christ himself.  

(w) Certum est, initio praedicati Evangelii, aliquanto tempore inter Christianos, praesertim in Ecclesiis, Imaginum usum non fuisse. Consult. cap. de Imag. p. 163.  It is certain, saith Cassander, that when the Gospel was first preached, there was no use of Images for sometime, among the Christians, as is evident from Clemens of Alexandria, (who flourished at the close of the second) and from Arnobius, (who flourished at the beginning of the fourth Century.)  
And again; 
(x) Quantum veteres initio Ecclesiae ab omni veneratione Imaginum abhorruerunt, unus Origenes declarat, p. 168.  How much the Ancients, in the beginning of the Church, abhorred all veneration of Images, Origen alone, in his Book against Celsus, shows.  
And a third time; 
(y) Sane ex Augustino constat, ejus aetate simulacrorum usum in Ecclesiis non fuisse. p. 165.  Truly it is manifest, from the Discourse of St. Austin, on the 113th Psalm, that in his Age, the use of carved Images or Statues, was not come into the Church.  
Lastly, he adds, That in the Days of Gregory the Great, (that is, in the sixth Century) 
(z) 
Quae fuerit mens, & sententia R. Ecclesiae adhuc aetate Gregorii, satis ex ejus Scriptis manifestum est, viz. ideo haberi Picturas non quidem ut colantur & adorentur, etc. p. 170.  
Consuetudo R. Ecclesiae pariter consractionem & adoratiovem improbat, p. 17●.   this was the Mind and Doctrine of the Romish Church, That Images should be retained, not to be adored or worshipped; but that the Ignorant should by them be admonished of what was done, and be provoked to piety. That the Roman Church did equally condemn the adoration and the breaking of Images.  
That the second Nicene Council, 
Graeca illa Synodus qua Parte Imaginens adorandas censebat damnata fuit, ut quae— consuetudini R. Ecclesiae adversaretur, p. 172.  as far as it determined for the Adoration of Images, was, by the general consent of the Fathers of the Council of Frankford, condemned, and rejected, as being a Determination which was repugnant, not only to the Holy Scriptures, and the Ancient Tradition of the Fathers, but also to the Custom of the Roman Church. And in a word, 
Fortasse optandum esset, ut Majores nostri huc usque in prisca illa Majorum suorum sententia integrè perstitissent. p. 175, 179, 180.  That it were to be wished, perhaps, that our Predecessors (viz.) those of the Church of Rome) had continued in that old Doctrine of their Ancestors; to wit, that Images neither should be broken nor adored.  

(z) De Van. Scient. cap. de Imag.  The corrupt Custom, and false Religion of the Heathens, saith Cornelius Agrippa, hath infected our Religion, and hath introduced into our Church Images and Idols, and many barren pompous Ceremonies, none of which was found or practised among the Primitive Professors of Christianity.  
And now, from what hath been discoursed in these Chapters, I infer,  
§. 
Inference 1.  4. 1. That the Councils received by the Church of Rome, as the infallible Proposers of their Faith, namely, the second Nicene Council, and that of Trent, have erred, and have imposed a false Interpretation of that Precept which doth command us not to bow down to the similitude of any Thing in Heaven or Earth, and therefore they are falsely said to be infallible in Matters of Faith, or true Interpreters of Holy Scripture.  
And indeed, whosoever seriously will consider of those Scriptures which are produced, either by this whole Council, or by Pope Hadrian; with approbation of this Council, or offerred by some Members present, or contained in some of the Citations produced by them for the having Images in Christian Churches, or for the giving Adoration to them, will find them so apparently perverted, and horribly impertinent, as that he will be forced to question, not only the Infallibility, but even the common Wisdom or Discretion of those Men who had the confidence to use them to these purposes. For,  
1. John, the pretended Vicar of the three Oriental Patriarches, saith, That 
(a) Act. 4. p. 200.  Jacob wrestling with him, saw God Face to Face; which yet can do no Service to the Maker, or Worshipper of Images, but by supposing, with the old Heretics, called Anthropomorphites, that God hath Face or Features like a Man.  
Leontius, Bishop of Neapolis, saith, 
(b) Act. 4. p. 239, 240.  If thou accusest me for worshipping the Wood of the Cross, thou must accuse Jacob for blessing wicked and idolatrous Pharaoh; which instance will be only pertinent, when it is proved that Pharaoh was an Image, and that Blessing is an Act of Adoration.  
Pope Gregory the Second, saith, That 
(c) Cum figuram vellet, aut simulacrum videre, ne force erraret, orabat Deum dicens, ostend mihi teipsum manifesstò, ut te videam. p. 11.  when Moses desired to behold an Image, or Similitude, lest he should be mistaken in the Visien, he said to God, Show me thyself manifestly, that I may see thee; but doth not prove that Moses desired to see an Image, or material Likeness of God, or that God shown him any such Similitude.  
Germanus, Bishops of Constantinople, argues for Images after this manner; 
(d) Act. 4. p. 304.  In the Book of Numbers, the Lord speaks to Moses, saying, Speak unto the Children of Israel, and bid them make themselves Fringes in the borders of their Garments, and put upon the Fringe of the Border a Ribbon of Blue; and it shall be unto you for a Fringe, that you may look upon it, and remember all the Commandments of the Lord, and do them. Now if, saith he, the Israelites were bid to look upon these Fringes, and remember his Commandments; much more ought we, by the inspection of the Images of Holy Men, to view the end of their Conversation. And yet there seems to be some little difference betwixt a Fringe and a graven Image, betwixt remembering God's Commandments to do them, and to break them.  
Pope Hadrian finds in Isaiah, a Prophecy concerning Gospel-Images, as clear as the Nose upon your Face; for, Ecce signum; 
(e) Quemadmodum Esaias propheta vaticinatus est. Act. 2. p. 110.  In that Day there shall be an Altar to the Lord in the midst of the Land of Egypt; and a Pillar at the Border thereof to the Lord, and it shall be for a Sign.  
He also finds the sweet Singer of Israel harping oft upon the same String, and prophesying of Images to be adored in the Gospel-times; saying, 
(f) Magnoperè vultum ejus secundùm humanitatis ipsius dispensationem adorari praemonuit, inquiens, etc. Psal. 4.6.  The Light of thy Countenance, signatum est super nos, is signed upon us.  
And again; 
Psal. 25.8.  Lord, I have loved the Beauty of thy House, and the place of the Tabernacle of thy Glory.  
And a third time; 
Psal. 27.8. Psal. 44.12.  Thy Face, Lord, will I seek.  
And a fourth; Even the Rich among the People shall entreat thy Face.  
And, 
Psal. 96.6.  lastly, in those words, Honour and Majesty are before him; Strength and Beauty are in his Sanctuary.  
And what can be more evident for Image-worship than these Texts, which do so plainly mention the Face and Countenance of God.  
Theodosius proves, That we Christians must have Holy and Venerable Images; because 'tis said, 
(g) Act. 4. p. 213.  Whatsoever things were written, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, aforetime, were written for our Learning; wherefore the venerable Images being written upon Wood, and Stone, 
Rom. 15.4.  and Metal, must be for our Instruction.  
Away with those ignorant Fellows, who can derive the Pictures of Christ and his Apostles, no higher than St. Luke and Nicodemus; this Theodosius finds them among the Writings of the Prophets, as clear as the Noon Day; see, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they were engraven afore-time, even before Christ's Humane Nature, or his Apostles, had a being; and had it not been thus, we Christians had been void of Hope, for these things were written, that we through comfort, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of these Pictures, might have hope.  
They have all found it in the Book of Canticles, or something which makes for it; for there it is most appositely said, 
(h) Act. 6. p. 408. Cant. 2.14. Psal. 48.8.  Show me thy Face, and let me hear thy Voice, for thy Voice is sweet, and thy Countenance is comely. And in that of the Psalmist, As we have heard, so have we seen.  

(i) Act. 4.197.  Ezekie 's Temple was made, say they, with Cherubims, and Palm Trees; so that a Palm Tree was between a Cherub, and a Cherub; and every Cherub had two Faces, so that the Face of a Man was toward a Palm Tree on the one side, and the Face of a young Lion toward the Palm Tree on the other side; and thus it was throughout the House round about. So that it seemeth to them to have been an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or an House of Imagery; and yet should you ask them where this Temple was built, or what Existence had these Cherubims, but in the Vision of the Prophet, it will puzzle their Infallibilities to answer you.  
last; They argue from the Author to the 
(k) Ibid.  Hebrews, thus; Verily, the first Covenant had also Ordinances, and a worldly Sanctuary, there was a Tabernacle made, in which was first the Candlestick, and the Table, and the Shewbread, which is called Holy; and after the second Veil, the Tabernacle, which is called the Holiest of all, which had the Golden Censer, and the Ark of the Covenant, overlaid round about with Gold, wherein was the Golden Pot that had Manna, and Aaron 's Rod that budded, and the Tables of the Covenant, and over it the Cherubims of Glory shadowing the Mercy-Seat. If then, say they, 
(l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 200.  The Old Testament had Cherubims shadowing the Mercy Seat; let us have Images of Christ, and of his Holy Mother, shadowing the Altar; for because the Old Testament had such Things, the New received them. This, say the 
(m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.  Synod, is the truth; This, say the Princes, is the Command of God. But why did they not conclude also for another Ark and Mercy-Seat, another Tabernacle, a Golden Censer, and a Pot of Manna, seeing it was but saying, as in the case of Images they do, because the Old Testament had these things, let us Christians have them too, and it infallibly must be so? And tell me now, Can any one who reads these powerful Demonstrations from, and excellent Expositions of the Holy Scripture, doubt of the Truth of that which is so oft asserted by this Synod, That 
(n) Act. 3. p. 157. Act. 7. p. 580, 581, 585.  they were certainly assisted by the Holy Ghost?  
But to be serious; If all, or any of these places, have any strength to prove that Images should be set up in Churches, or adored by Christians, why do not any of their Writers use them to that end? if they do not, Why may not they be taxed with weakness, who use such Proofs as none but the most undiscerning Persons could produce, and which their best Friends are ashamed of?  
§. 
Inference 2.  5. 2. Hence it is evident, that the second Nicene Council grossly was mistaken in that Determination and Assertion, so frequently repeated in that Council, That Image-worship had been delivered to them by the continual Suffrage and Approbation of the whole Church of Christ; and was the Tradition of the whole Church Catholic, even from the Times of the Apostles.  
And consequently, that this Council hath been actually deceived in Matter of Tradition, as well as in her Interpretations of the Holy Scripture: For whereas it is frequently there said, That this was the constant Doctrine and Tradition of the Holy Fathers of the Catholic Church; the opposition is not greater betwixt Light and Darkness, than betwixt the Assertions of the Fathers, and the Determinations of the Council. For,  
1. The Fathers of that Council do pronounce Anathema 
(o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 1. p. 57.4. p. 317.5. p. 389.7. p. 576.8. p. 592.  against all Persons who take such places of the Holy Scripture which are spoken against Idols, as spoken against Holy Images; i.e. who say the second Commandment forbids the Worship, not of Idols only, but of Holy Images. And so they do pronounce Anathema against Justin Martyr, St. Clemens of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Austin, Theodoret, Fulgentius, Agobardus, the Councils of Constantinople, Frankford, and Paris.  
2ly, The Fathers of the same Council pronounce Anathema 
(p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 1. p. 57  against all Persons who say, That the erection of Images is the Invention of the Devil, and not the Tradition of the Catholic Church; and so they do pronounce Anathema against Clemens of Alexandria, St. Ambrose, Theodotus, Amphilochiùs, St. Jerom, and St. Chrysostom, Agobardus, Hincmarus, and the three forementioned Councils, who all declare, That this was no Tradition of the Catholic Church. And against Clemens of Alexandria, Tertullian, Lactantius, Eusebius, Theodotus, Anoyranus, and the whole Council of Constantinople, who say expressly, That Image-making, or Image-worship, was the Invention of the Devil.  
3ly, These Fathers do pronounce Anathema 
(q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 4. p. 317.5. 389.7. p. 576.  to all who violate, break, or dishonour S. Images; which Epiphanius, Serenus, and all the Fathers of Constantinople did; and upon all that knowingly communicate with them, who contumeliously speak of them, or dishonour them.  
Now seeing all the Christians of the 4th Century did certainly communicate with Epiphanius; of the 6th Century with Serenus; since all the Fathers mentioned in my second Chapter, do in their sense dishonour Images, they in effect pronounce Anathema against them all.  
4ly, They pronounce Anathema 
(r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 4. p. 317.5. p. 389.  against all Persons who detract from, or who speak evil of their S. Images.  
Now since the Fathers have declared concerning Images in general, That they are worse than Mice and Worms; that they are the Invention of the Devil; with many other things of a like nature, mentioned Chapter the second; they must be all obnoxious to this Anathema.  
5ly, They pronounce Anathema 
(s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 4. p. 212.  against all who do not call them Holy and Sacred Images; that is, against St. Clemens of Alexandria Origen, Lactantius, Eusebius, and others, who have declared, That they cannot be Sacred; and that they are Men of impotent Spirits, and lame Minds, who so esteem them.  
6ly, They denounce Anathema 
(t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 1. p. 61.7. p. 584.  against all those who do not worship Images; or who doubt of, or who are disaffected to the worship of them. Now this Anathema, if what is here produced cannot be refuted, must certainly be pronounced against the Blessed Apostles, and all the Christians of the five first Centuries.  
last; Whereas Origen declares, That the first thing which Christians taught their Converts, was, the contempt of all Images; the Fathers of this Synod pronounce Anathema 
(u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 1. p. 61.  to all who do not diligently teach all Christian People to adore the Images of all Good Men from the beginning of the World.  
§. 6. 3ly, Hence also may be seen how vainly and unjustly Roman Catholics do boast of the consent of Fathers on their side, and say, That they expound the Scriptures according to that Sense which they received from the Ancients; it being evident, from what hath been discoursed, that in their Exposition of these words, [Thou shalt not make to thyself the Similitude of any Thing in Heaven or Earth, etc. Thou shalt not bow down to them] they do embrace a Sense which no Father, for the first six Centuries did ever put upon them; and do reject that Sense they generally did impose upon these words.  
§. 7. 4ly, Hence I infer, That the Religion of the Church of England is, in this particular, much safer than is that of Rome. For if Image-worship be not forbid in this Commandment; nevertheless we only do neglect that practice which their best Writers deem 
(x) 
Illud ante constituendum Imagines, ex carum per se genere esse quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nominantur, hoc est quae ad salutem omninò necessaria non sunt, nec ad substantiam ipsam religionis attinent, sed in potestate sunt Ecclesiae ut ea vel adhibeat, vel ableget, pro eo atque satius esse decreverit. Petau. Theol. dogm. To. 5. l. 15. cap. 13. §. 1.  
Ea est hujusce miserrimae dissensionis materia, sine qua, sicut multis videtur, salva per fidem, spem, & charitatem incunctanter, & in hoc seculo, & in futuro salvari potest Ecclesia, quorum sensus, & sententia talis est, quid fidei, spei, & charitati obesse potuisset, si Imago nulla toto orbe terrarum picta, vel ficta fuisset. Epist. Eugenii P. 2 Act. Synod. Paris. P. 130, 134.   indifferent; which not Jew ever did perform to any Patriach or Prophet, nor any Christian for 600 Years to any Apostle, Saint, or Martyr, and which no Scripture hath commanded; and so we only do neglect to do that which neither Example of the Ancients, nor any Precept doth commend to our practice. Whereas if Image-worship should be here forbid to us Christians, which, to speak modestly, seems highly probable, the Church of Rome must practise and enjoin, that Worship which provokes God to jealousy, exhort and force her Members to perform that Worship from which God doth exhort them to abstain, lest they corrupt themselves; She must enjoin that Action upon pain of her Displeasure, and of the Wrath of God, which he commands us to avoid, because he is a jealous God; she must imprison, and cut off by Excommunication, and by the Sword, Christ's Servants, because they will not, by doing that which God so frequently, and so directly hath forbid, incur the hazard of his Wrath, who saith; 
Deut. 4.25, 26.  If ye corrupt yourselves, and make a graven Image of the likeness of any thing, I call Heaven and Earth to Witness this day, that you shall soon utterly perish: And it is easy to determine which we ought most to fear, the Wrath of God or Man.   
FINIS.