СНАР. The cere these of fices justify insti tuted ceremonies. : § 11. If this be true, the discharging of instituted ceremonies will be a defection from God's Church. If confirmamonies of tion, ordination, and penance, be offices, in which the Church is indebted to God and to His Church; if the effect of them be of such consequence, that they have been always solemnized with the imposition of hands that ceremony shall be enough to make them sacraments at this rate; and yet no nearer to baptism and to the eucharist, than that reason of the difference which I have settled will allow. Nay, let the prayers of the Church for the recovery of the sick, who submit to the keys of the Church, be solemnized with anointing (a thing fit enough to be done, may but the ground upon which, and the intent to which, it is done, appear), and that shall be a sacrament; and yet the want of it no more prejudice to salvation, than the disusing of the "kiss of peace," which comes (without peradventure) from the apostlesh. As for marriage, the solemnity of the blessing, the ring, the sacrament of the eucharist, which according to the custom of the whole Church it ought to be ministered with; will easily make it a sacrament: though imposition of hands, which is said still to be used in some eastern Churches, be not used at all in the west. So the effect and consequence of these offices will oblige the Church always to keep them in use, though the Church of Rome makes them sacraments. But that sense, in which the ancient Church makes them sacraments, serves only to justify the power of instituting ceremonies in the Church. [1 Peter v. 14.] See Epilogue, ibid. § 16, notes o, p; and Bucer there quoted. h See Rt. of Ch. in Chr. St., c. iv. § 30; Epilogue, Bk. I. Of the Pr. of Chr. Tr., c. x. § 32-34. See Tertullian, as quoted in Epilogue, Bk. III. Of the Laws of the Ch., c. xxx. § 19, note z; and Review of Serv. of God at Rel. Ass., c. viii. $ 12. See Epilogue, ibid.; Rt. of Ch. in Chr. St., c. i. § 26: and Selden, Ux. Ebraica, lib. ii. c. 24; Op. tom. ii. p. 659. СНАР. 125 CHAPTER XIX. THE WORSHIP OF THE HOST IN THE PAPACY IS NOT IDOLATRY. CHRISTIANITY IMAGES IN CHURCHES IS NOT IDOLATRY. OF HONOURING IMAGES, AND OF not idola THEY, who give the honour proper to God to His creature, The worship of the are idolaters. They, that worship the host, give the honour host in the due to God to His creature. This is taken for a demonstra- papacy is tion, that the worship of the host is idolatryk. But will any try. papist acknowledge, that he honours the elements of the eucharist, or, as he thinks, the accidents of them, for God? Will common reason charge him to honour that, which he believeth not to be there? A pagan, that honours the sun for God, believes him to be God; and therefore another pagan may as well believe another creature to be God. Both idolaters, for thinking the Godhead to be in one or more creatures but those, greater idolaters, who thought, that the Godhead, to which they took men (whether living or dead) or other creatures to be advanced, was enclosed in their images consecrated to the worship of them. He, that worships the host, believes our Lord Christ to be the only true God, hypostatically united to our flesh and blood: Which being present in the eucharist in such a manner as It is not 126 present everywhere, there is due occasion to give It that worship in the cucharist, which the Godhead in our manhood is to be worshipped with upon all due occasions. Thus, we say, He was worshipped in the ancient Church, that believed the elements to be present'. And they were no idolaters. They, that worship the host, do not believe that they remain. Nay, they say they must be flat idolaters, if they be there". Zeal to their opinion makes them say more than they should say. See Epilogue, Bk. III. Of the Laws of the Ch., c. xxxi. § 1-10: and Bradshaw as quoted above in Rt. of Ch. in Chr. St., c. v. § 8. note r: and above, c. i. § 5, and Baxter's papers THORNDIKE. P as quoted in the note there. See Epilogue, ibid. § 5, notes o-z. XIX. CHAP. But if they were there, they would not take them for God, and therefore they would not honour them for God; and that is it (not saying that they should be idolaters if the elements did remain), that must make them idolaters. Christi anity would sanctify kneeling at the eucharist, though it were. What second ment forbiddeth. § 2. They, that believe not transubstantiation, have cause to forbear the ceremony. But forbear kneeling at receiving the eucharist in an age that is taught already to sit at their prayers"; and who will warrant, that all the prayers of the Church shall not come in a short time to hearing the minister exercise his gift, and censuring him for it? Were worshipping the host idolatry; Christianity, using the gesture of kneeling to signify the worship of Christ, were enough to sanctify it to God's service. And this they must grant, who serve God in churches which the mass hath been used in; taking the mass for idolatry, as they do. In fine, Jews and Mahumetaus are bound to take the worship of the host for idolatry. For they will needs take the worship of the Holy Trinity for no less. But they, who know, that the Godhead of Christ is the reason, for which His Flesh and Blood is worshipped in the eucharist, cannot take that worship for idolatry, because His Flesh and Blood is not present in the eucharist, as they who worship It there think It is. For they know, that the Flesh and Blood of Christ is no idol to Christians, wheresoever It is worshipped. § 3. Whether or no having images in churches be a breach images the of the second commandment, can be no more [a] question, command than whether or no to have any images be a breach of ito. For it must forbid images in churches, because it forbids all images. If it be interpreted to forbid only idols, that is, images of false gods; it must be proved, that all images in churches are idols, before it be proved, that they are forbidden by it. It is far more reasonable to say, that the cherubims, the brazen serpent, the bulls and other images in Solo- 127 mon's temple, were no breaches of it, than to say, that God did dispense with His own precept in those cases; having no appearance of any dispensation in the Scripture, in which See the tract printed below, entitled The Reformation of the Church of England better than that of the Counc. of Trent, c. xli. Laws of the Ch., c. xxvi. § 14; c. xxxi. § 36-38. P See ibid., c. xxvi. § 11—14; c. xxxi. • See Epilogue, Bk. III. Of the $ 36. XIX. the precept and the seeming breach are both recorded. But CHAP. it is manifest, that the Jews allow some kind of imagery; and I doubt not but the Mahumetans do the like. And it is manifest, that the public authority of that nation or religion could never dispense in that which God's law had prohibited. But it is manifest on the contrary, that it did and might restrain that, which God's law had licensed; to set a hedge about the law, and keep the people further from breaking it. Now their restraints tie not Christians, but Jews. And therefore it is manifest, that the Church is tied no further than there can appear danger of idolatry; which, if it be so heightened beyond appearance as to involve the Church in the crime of it, chargeth the schism, that may come by that means, upon those that so enhance it. not idola § 4. Now, granting that Epiphanius' and the council of ReveElviras did hold all images in churches dangerous for idolatry rencing of images in (of which there is appearance), it is manifest, that they were churches is afterwards admitted all over. And there might be jealousy of try. offence in having images in churches before idolatry was quite rooted out, of which afterwards there might be no appearance. But no manner of appearance, that images in history should occasion idolatry to those images in them, that hold them the images of God's creatures; such as are those images, which represent histories of the saints out of the Scriptures, or other relations of unquestionable credit. The second council of Nicæa seems to have brought in or authorized addresses to solitary images of saints, placed upon pillars to that purpose: whereof there is much mention in the records of itt. But to the images of saints there can be no idolatry, so long as men take them for saints, that is, God's creatures. Much less to the images of our Lord. Lord, and not of His image. their false gods to dwell in made them idols), must needs See Epilogue, ibid., c. xxxi. § 36, note d. See ibid. § 40, note i. See e. g. the passage quoted in the For it is the honour of our Whereas they, who thought their images (which thought honour them with the honour CHAP. proper to God; though in so doing they honoured indeed though it acknowledge, that the image itself is honoured by 128 Of honour- § 5. For in deed and in truth it is not the image, but the See Epilogue. Bk. III. Of the w See ibid. § 53-56. See ibid. See ibid., c. xxvi. § 8, note r. 2 See above, c. xviii. § 5, 6. |