Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

his error, and observes it to have been customary long before ; and the instance I have given in Paulinus sufficiently confirms his observation. Theodorus Lector 6 speaks of the same honour done to Macedonius, bishop of Constantinople, in the remark that he makes upon Timotheus, his successor ; that whatever church he went into, he would never begin divine service till the images of Macedonius were first pulled down.' Suidas 7 takes notice of the picture of Gennadius, patriarch of Constantinople, being joined with that of Christ, and Christ speaking to him in these words, ' Destroy this temple, and in thy successor's days I will raise it up again.' Damascen®, a great advocate for images, pretends to carry this practice as high as Constantine, telling us, from Socrates, that Constantine ordered his own images to be set up in temples ; but, as Mr. Spanheim 9 has observed, there is something of fraud in the relation : for Socrates 10 speaks not of Christian churches, but of Heathen temples, in which, having demolished their idols, he caused his own images to be placed in their room. But admitting it had been as Damascen pretends, it makes

:

masse, eas imagines Acacio positas ιστορίας Σωκράτους, βιβλίου πρώτου, fuisse, dum esset patriarcha; sed κεφαλ. ιη. περί του αυτου βασιλέως. Baronium refellunt verba Malchi Μετά ταύτα δε ο βασιλεύς Κωνστανapud Suidam, qui ecclesiam illarm τινος, επιμελέστερος ων περί τα Χριjuxta navale, in qua imago erat Aca- ctiavôv, [al. tà tepi xprotiavio uoù) ci, tesselato opere fabricatam, [leg. απεστράφη της Ελληνικάς θρησκείας, fabricata] sub Gennadio patriarcha και παύει [μεν] τα μονομάχια εικόνας absolutam esse testatur: nec verum δε τάς ιδίας εν τοις ναοίς απέθετο. est, quod idem Baronius illic obser- 9 Hist. Imagin. s. 1. p. 14. (Oper, vat, primum ex patriarchis Acacium t. 2. [Miscell. Sacr. Antiq. 1.6.c.6.] liunc honorem affectasse. Nam ex p.715. 23.). ... Pessina intelligitur Suidæ loco a nobis allato aperte fides auctoris Orationis 3. de Imaconvincitur, eum morem Gennadii ginibus tributæ Damasceno, probatemporibus jam invaluisse.

turi erectionem culturnque sacrarum 6 L. 2. (v. 3. P. 578. 3.) "Otrov do imaginum etiam tempore Constanäv mote cion dev ev [rn] ¢kkinoią tini M. ex his Socratis, 1. 1. c. 18, Τιμόθεος, ει μη πρότερον τας εικόνας Εικόνας δε τάς ιδίας έν τους ναούς απέΜακεδονίου κατέσπασε, της λειτουρ- θετο. Ρlanum enim est, loqui Soγίας ουκ ήρχετο.

cratem de gentilium templis ac deo7 Voce 'Akários. (t. 1. p. 118 a. 10.) rum delubris, in quibus, sublatis Του γάρ έργου παντός επί Γενναδίου idolis, suas imagines substituit imτελεσθέντος, εις τον επιφανή τόπον perator. Nihil de imaginibus sacris EETÚTwoav avrov Toù véw kai ue- Christi, Virginis, Sanctorumve. Niταξύ τούδε τον Σωτήρα λέγοντα το hil etiam de imaginibus ad cultum Γενναδίω, Λύσαν τον ναόν τούτον, και aut adorationem erectis. επί του μετά σε έγερω αυτόν.

10 L. 1. C. 18. juxt. Ed. Cantabr. 8 Orat. 3. de Iinagin. p. 789. (t. 1720. p.47. See the preceding note. Ι. p. 37o b.) 'Εκ της εκκλησιαστικής

nothing to the purpose for which he alleges it, which was to prove the worship of images in churches.

9. For now, I presume, no one will suspect that the pictures But neither of bishops and kings were set up in churches to be worshipped, pictures of while they were living among other men, but only designed to or dead debe an ornament to the church, or a civil honour to the persons. worship.

signed for And the same must be concluded of the pictures of the dead, since the first introducers of them intermixed their own pictures with them. But it must be owned that this superstition presently followed upon the setting up of pictures in churches; yet it was never approved, till the second Council of Nice, anno 787, made a decree in favour of it. Serenus, bishop of Marseilles, ordered all images to be defaced, and cast out of all the churches of his diocese ; and though Gregory the Great 11 blamed him for this, and defended the use of pictures in churches as innocent, and useful for instruction of the vulgar, yet he equally condemns the worship and adoration of them. And when the Council of Nice had established it, in opposition to the Council of Constantinople of three hundred and thirty-eight bishops, held anno 754, who had before condemned it, the decrees of Nice were rejected by all the Western world, the Popes of Rome only excepted.

The Council of Frankfort in Germany, the Council of Paris in France, and some other Councils in Britain, agreed unanimously to condemn them, and, for some hundred years after, the worship of images was not received in any of the three foresaid nations.

But it is as much beyond my design to pursue this history

11 L.9. Ep. 9. (CC. t. 5. p. 1434 e.) ens, easdem ecclesiæ imagines conPerlatum siquidem ad nos fuerat, fregit atque projecit. Et quidem quod, inconsiderato zelo succensus, zelum vos, ne quid manufactum sanctorum imagines, sub hac quasi adorari possit, habuisse laudamus ; excusatione, ne adorari debuissent, sed frangere easdem imagines non confregeris. Et quidem quia eas debuisse, judicamus. Idcirco enim adorari vetuisses, omnino laudavi- pictura in ecclesiis adhibetur, ut hi, mus; fregisse vero reprehendimus. qui literas nesciunt, saltem in parie.... Frangi non debuit, quod non tibus videndo legant, quæ legere in ad adorandum in ecclesiis, sed ad codicibus non valent. instruendas solummodo mentes fuit fraternitas et illas servare, et ab eanescientium collocatum.-L. 7. Ep. rum adoratu populum prohibere de110. (ibid. p. 1370 e. ult. lin.) Præ- buit, quatenus et literarum nescii terea indico, dudum ad nos perve- haberent, unde scientiam historiæ nisse, quod fraternitas vestra, quos- colligerent, et populus in picturæ dam imaginum adoratores aspici- adoratione minime peccaret.

Tua ergo

us.

any further, as it is needless, there being so many excellent
discourses on this particular subject, especially those of Mr.
Daille 12, Bp. Stillingfleet 13, and Spanheim 14, who have omitted
nothing on this head that was necessary to answer the cavils
of their Romish antagonists, or give satisfaction to a curious

reader.
No images 10. All I shall add further therefore upon this subject is
of God or
the Trinity only two observations, which Petavius himself 15 has made for
allowed in The first is that the Ancients never allowed any pictures
churches
till after of God the Father or of the Trinity to be set up in their
the second churches. For this he produces the testimonies of Origen 16,

St. Ambrose 17, and St. Austin 18, who particularly pronounces
it to be an impious thing for any Christian to set up any such
image in the church, and much more to do it in his heart.
Nay, Pope Gregory II. who was otherwise a great stickler for
images, in that very Epistle 19 which he wrote to the Emperor
Leo, to defend the worship of them, denies it to be lawful to
make any image of the divine nature. And the second Council
of Nice itself was against it, as is evident from the Epistles of
Germanus, bishop of Constantinople 20, and John, bishop of

Council.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

12 De Imagin. (Lugd. Bat. 1642. θειότητος φανταζόμενοι είναι, απαί-
8vo.)

δευτοί είσι, και ανδράποδα.
13 Defence of the Discourse of 17 In Ps. 118. Octon. 12. [corrige,
Idolatry, &c. (vol. 5. pp. 263, seqq. Octon. 10.] (t. 1. p. 1095 e. n. 25.)
[See Answer to a Book intituled, Gentiles lignum adorant, quia Dei
Catholicks no Idolaters.]

imaginem putant; sed invisibilis
14 Hist. Imagin.(Lugd. Bat. 1686. Dei imago non in eo est quod vide-
8vo.)

tur, sed in eo utique quod non vi.
15' De Incarnat. 1. 15. C. 14. n. 1.

detur.
(t. 5. p. 238.) In imaginum usu non 18 De Fid. et Symbol. c. 7. (t. 6.
nihil variare Catholicorum senten- p. 157 d.) Tale enim simulachrum
tias animadvertimus : ac bifariam nefas est Christiano in templo col-
potissimum. Primum, quod pleri- locare, multo magis in corde nefa-
que veterum corporis expertium re- rium est, &c.
rum imagines damnandas judica- 19 Ep. i. ad Leont. in C. Nicæn.
runt: solas vero Incarnati Verbi, II. (CC. t. 7. p. 13 b.) Auà Tòv
ac Sanctorum licitas esse, et omnino Πατέρα του Κυρίου Ιησού Χριστού
corpore preditorum ; atque haec ουκ ιστορούμεν, και ζωγραφούμεν ;
opinio, etiam post ortum Iconocla- 'Επειδή ουκ οίδαμεν τις έστιν και
starum haeresis, apud acerrimos de- θεού φύσιν αδύνατον ιστορήσαι, και
fensores religionis illius percrebuit. ζωγραφήσαι και εί εθεασάμεθα, και

16 Cont. Cels. 1. 6. (t. Ι. p. 64ο b.) εγνωρίσαμεν, καθώς τον Υιόν αυτού,
Kάν τινες δε μή ταυτά φασιν είναι κακείνον αν είχομεν ίστορήσαι και ζω-
τους θεούς, αλλά μιμημάτων αληθινών γραφήσαι.
[lege μιμήματα των αληθινών] κακεί- 20 Ép. 1. in Act. 4. C. Nicæn. II.
νων σύμβολα' ουδεν ήττον και ούτοι, (CC. ibid. p. 292 b.) Ουδε γαρ της
εν βαναυσων χερσί τα μιμήματα της αοράτου θειότητος εικόνα, ή ομοίωμα,

Thessalonica, which are recited with approbation in the Acts of that Council. And Damascen, following the doctrine of the same Council, says 21, ' It is as great impiety, as it is folly, to make any image of the Divine Nature, which is invisible, incorporeal, incircumscriptible, and not to be figured by the art of man. And therefore in all ancient history we never meet with any one instance of picturing God the Father, because it was supposed he never appeared in any visible shape, but only by a voice from heaven. Upon this account Paulinus, where he describes a symbolical representation of the three Divine Persons, made in the painting of a church, makes a lamb to be the symbol of Christ, and a dove the symbol of the Holy Ghost, but for God the Father 22 nothing but a voice from heaven. And this they did in compliance with that text in Deut. 4, 12, “ The Lord spake unto you out of the midst

“ of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice.” By which we see how much the present Church of Rome has outgone the first patrons even of image-worship itself, by allowing pictures of the Deity commonly in their temples, which the Ancients reckoned to be impious and absurd, and is acknowledged to be an abuse fit to be corrected by Cassander 23, though Petavius after all his concessions and acknowledgments of the novelty of the thing, and its contrariety to ancient custom, endeavours to find out some colour for the present practice.

11. His other acknowledgment of a difference between the Nor usually

statues or

ή σχήμα, ή μορφήν τινα αποτυπούμεν" (ibid. p. 333. b.) θεού μεν γάρ του ήν ουδε αυτών των αγίων αγγέλων αι ασωμάτου, και αοράτου, και άλλου, υπερέχουσαι τάξεις ούτε κατανοείν, και μήτε σχήμα, μήτε περιγραφήν, ούτε εξιχνιάσαι, όλως ισχύουσιν. μήτε κατάληψιν έχοντος, αδύνατον

21 De Fid. Orthodox. 1. 4. c. 17. ToLeiv elkova. [al. 16.] (t. 1. p. 280 c.) IIpòs 22 Ep. 12. ad Sever. (p. 150.) τούτοις, του αοράτου, και ασωμάτου, Pleno coruscat Trinitas mysterio; και απεριγράπτου, και άσχηματίστου Stat Christus agno; Vox Patris colo θεού, τίς δύναται ποιήσασθαι μίμημα;

tonat : παραφροσύνης τοίνυν άκρας και ασε- Et per columbam Spiritus Sanctus βείας το σχηματίζειν το θείον.-Οrat. fluit. i. (s. 8.] p. 703. (ibid. p. 310 d.) 23 Consultat. sect. de Imagin. p. Πώς εικονισθήσεται το αόρατον και πώς 179. (p. 98ο. lin. 12.) Illud quoque eixagoņoetal Áveikaotov; trôs ypa- inter abusus ponendum est, quod φήσεται το άπoσον και αμέγεθες και etiam Divinitati in Trinitatis deforαόριστον; πως ποιωσθήσεται το ανεί- matione simulachrum effingitur, δεον; πως χρωματουργηθήσεται το quod veteres absurdum et nefarium dospatov ;-Orat. 2. (s. 7.) p. 732. judicassent.

[ocr errors]

maesy practice of the ancient church, and that of his own at this day, images, but

is, that the Ancients did not approve of massy images, or staonly paintings and tues of wood, or metal, or stone, but only pictures or paintings pictures,

to be used in churches. This he proves from the testimonies symbolical of Germanus, bishop of Constantinople, and Stephanus Bostrenrather than any other. sis, both alleged in the Acts of the second Council of Vice 24:

which shews, that massy images or statues were thought to look too much like idols even by that worst of Councils. But some plead the authority of Gregory Nazianzen 25 for statues in churches, to whom Petavius 26 answers, ó that he speaks not of statues in temples, but of profane statues in other places;' which is a very just and true observation. For it is most certain, from the writings of St. Austin and Optatus 2%, that there were no statues in that age in their churches, or upon their altars, because they reckon both those to be mere heathenish customs: and Cassander 29 observes the same out of the writ

26

24 German. Ep. ad Thom. Claudi- ει ανδριάντες κατεινεχθήσονται, τούτο opol. in Act. 4. ut supr. (CC. t. 7. p. δεινόν, ει και άλλως δεινόν μηδε περί 316 e.) Ου τούτο δε λέγομεν ημείς, τούτων νομίσης ημιν είναι τον λόγον, ώστε τας εκ χαλκού στήλας επιτηδεύ- οίς περί τα κρείττονα η σπουδή. ειν ημάς, αλλ' ή μόνον δηλώσαι, ότι [Petav. l. 15. de Incarnat. c. 14. και το κατ' εθνικής συνήθειαν μη απο- S. 3. p. 325. (t. 5. p. 238. col. dextr.) ποιησομένου του Κυρίου, αλλ' ευδοκή- Sed perspicuum est, profanas illic σαντος εν αυτώ επιδείκνυσθαι εφ' ίκανόν statuas intelligi, que ad magnarum χρόνον την αυτού αγαθότητος την θαυ- urbium Ornamentum in locis publiματουργίαν, το παρ' ημίν ευαγέστερόν Cis collocari solebant. Quod et ipsa πως κρατησαν έθος κακίζειν ουχ όσιον. verba Gregorii palam ostendunt : -Steph. Bostrens. ibid. Act. 2. (ap. quibus negat, se de templo et ejus Hadrian. Epist. ibid. p. 112 e.) Oi- ornatu omni solicitum esse; de staτινες δη περί των εικόνων των αγίων tuis vero nihil admodum ; eo quod ομολογούμεν, ότι παν έργον, το γινό- longe praestantiore studio detineaμενον εν ονόματι του θεού, αγαθόν tur. Ιtaque sibi ipse contradiceret, έστι και άγιον άλλο γάρ έστιν εικών, si de sacris imaginibus Ioqueretur : και άλλο άγαλμα, τουτέστι ζώδιον. ac de quibus solicitum se "Οτι γάρ ο θεός τον Αδάμ έπλασε, dixit, τηox negaret se esse solicitum. τουτέστι εδημιούργησεν, έλεγε, Ποι- Grischor.]

,

.] ήσωμεν άνθρωπον κατ' εικόνα και καθ' 27 In Ps. 113. Concio, al. Serm. ομοίωσιν ημών και εποίησεν άνθρω- 2. (t. 4. p. 1259 f.).... Quia invisiπον εν είκόνι θεούτί γάρ; ότι είκών bilem colimus Deum, qui nullorum θεού έστιν άνθρωπος, άγαλμά εστι, corporis oculis, cordibus autem pauτουτέστιν ειδωλολατρεία, και ασέβεια; corum mundissimis notus est: &c. μηδαμώς γένοιτο.

28 L. 2. (p. 53.) Nam et prioribus Ep. 49, (t. 1. p. 810 c.) Tiungov sæculis ut templa fabricarentur et δε την ημετέραν πολιάν οις δεινόν, εί- idola fierent, quid vestro populo diποτε την μεγάλην πόλιν έχοντες, νυν abolus potuit amplius facere? μηδε πόλιν έχοιμεν και θηρίων οικη

29 Consultat. sect. de Imagin. p. τήριον γένοιτο μετά την σην αρχήν, ό, 165. (p. 974.) Ea quibus apparet, τε ναός, ον ηγείραμεν τω θεώ, και η Christum magis in typum agni, περί τούτον ημιν φίλοκαλία: ουδε γαρ quarm efigie humana depingi con

esse

25

« ForrigeFortsett »