in xiv. cap. Dan.

. .

сар.

to heal all diseases?. Briefly, Nicolaus Lyra saith : In ecclesia Dei populus sæpe Latria, Doulia.

decipitur a sacerdotibus fictis miraculis lucri causa2: “In the church of God the

priests oftentimes deceive the people with feigned miracles for lucre's sake.”
Nicol
. Lyra, Thus the world was borne in hand, that images were not only bare images,

but had also some secret divine power hidden within them, and therefore were
worthy to be honoured.

Here is imagined a great difference in adoration between latria and doulia.
Latria is the honour that belongeth only unto God (as M. Harding saith) in
recognising of the supreme dominion. But of doulia, which is the other part,
and may be Englished “a service," and, as they say, is due unto a creature, he
thought it best to say nothing. Thus, by M. Harding's distinction, we must
honour God and serve images. And therefore this reverence so given may not

be called idololatria, but idolodulia ; that is to say, “not the honouring, but Nicol. Lyra, only the serving or obeying of images.” In like sort Lyra saith : “ One knee

we may bow to any noble personage; but upon both we may kneel only unto
God 3.” And by such a simple distinction it is thought the whole matter is well
salved. But what if the simple people understand no Greek, and cannot so
learnedly discern latria from doulia, but take the one adoration for the other?
Verily, as it now fareth in the church of Rome, they use them both“ universally
without difference. Therefore this distinction, thus applied, seemeth much like
to that the physician's wife sometime said: “Pepper is cold in working, and hot

in operation.” For M. Harding's distinction standeth not in difference of matter, Cic.de Fin.iv. but only in words. Cicero saith: Bonum esse negas: præpositum dicis. An

minuis hoc pacto avaritiam ?6 “ Thou wilt not have worldly wealth called bonum,
but only propositum. But dost thou hereby any thing abate avarice ?” Even
so may we say to M. Harding : Ye will not have your adoration of images called
latria, but only doulia. But, sir, do you by this distinction any thing abate
idolatria ??

Certainly Constantius, the bishop of Constantia, in the second Nicene
In lib. Carol. council, saith : Ego imaginibus cultum honoris exhibeo 8 eundem, qui debetur vivi-

ficce Trinitati ; et, si quis nolit idem facere, eum anathematizo, ut Marcionem et
Manichæumo: “I for my part yield unto images the same adoration of honour
that is due to the holy Trinity; and, if any man refuse to do the same, I

accurse him, as I do the heretics Marcion and Manichee.” And in the same Concil. Nic. council it is determined thus : Non sunt duo adorationes, sed una adoratio, ima

ginis, et primi exemplaris, cujus est imago 10: “There are not two sorts of ado-
ration (the one called latria, the other doulia, as M. Harding divideth them), but
one only adoration, both of the image, and also of the sampler whereof the
image is.

Likewise Thomas Aquine, after long debating of the matter, thus at last
Thom. in iii. ruleth over the case: “ The image and the thing thereby represented must be

worshipped both with one kind of adoration.” And, for example, he saith : “The

Magni.

II. Act. 4.

92

Sentent. Dist. 2.

dictum vi

situm

in Epist. ad

cross or image of Christ must be honoured with latria" (that is, with godly

Latria, honour),“because Christ himself is so honoured;” and “the image of our lady must

Doulia. be honoured with doulia, because that honour," as he saith, “is due unto our ladyll.” This determination of Thomas is reproved by Holcot; and his reason is Holkot in

Libr. Sapient. this : “ Latria, or godly honour, is due only unto God; but the image of God is Lect. 158. not God; therefore latria, or godly honour, is not due unto an image. Otherwise,” saith he, “the Creator and the creature should both be adored with one honour 12." And notwithstanding Henricus de Gandavo, Petrus de Aquila, Johannes de Guiverra, Durandus, and other school-doctors agree with Holcot, and their judgment seem very agreeable unto reason; yet he that wrote Fortalitium Fidei saith: “The common opinion and practice of the church holdeth Auth. Portal. the contrary 13." And one Jacobus Payva, a great stickler of that side, doubteth tionabiliter not to write thus : Non tamen inficiamur, hac nos latriæ adoratione Christi prae- deatur...taclarissimam crucem colere et veneraril4: “Yet we deny not but we do worship and manis copini adore the most noble cross of Christ, even with this godly honour that we call cemet, oppo latria.” And, whereas M. Harding referreth the whole adoration unto the thing Lacobi

. Payva, represented by the image, one Jacobus Nanclantus, the bishop of Clugium in Italy, telleth him, that the image, and the thing represented by the image, must both be worshipped with one kind of adoration. His words be these: Ergo non Jacob. Nanc. solum fatendum est, fideles in ecclesia adorare coram imagine, ut nonnulli ad Rom. cap. i. cautelam forte loquuntur, sed et adorare imaginem, sine quo volueris scrupulo; quin et eo illam renerari cultu, quo et prototypon ejus. Propter quod, si illud habet adorari latria, et illa habet adorari latria 15 : “ Therefore we must confess that the faithful people in the church doth not only worship before the image, as some men use to speak for more assurance; but that they worship the 16 image itself, and that without any manner scruple of conscience whatsoever. Yea, and further they worship the image with the same honour wherewith they worship the thing represented : as, if the thing represented by the image be worshipped with godly honour, then must the image itself likewise be worshipped with godly honour.” If M. Harding will say, these errors be old and long sithence controlled by his church of Rome; it may please him to understand, that Nanclantus was printed in Venice anno 1557, and that Payva was printed in Coleine anno 1564, both well allowed without controlment.

The case standing thus, what then availeth M. Harding's distinction of latria and doulia ? I fear me we may say of him and his fellows as St Augustine sometime said of the heathens: Nemo mihi dicat, Non est numen : non est August. de Deus ... utinam ipsi sic norint, ... quomodo novimus . nos! Sed quid habeant, secund. Matt. pro qua re habeant, quid ibi faciant, ara ... testatur 17: “Let no man say unto me, It is no divine power: it is no God. I would to God they so knew it as we know it. But what they have, and in what sort they have it, and what they do about it, the altar beareth witness.” Marcellina, the heretic, is much reproved by St Augustine, for that, among August. ad

Quodvulta. other images, she offered up incense to the image of Christ 18. And Origen saith: Fieri non potest, ut quis et Deum et simulacrum colat 19 : “ It is not possible orie: contro

Dom.

Serm. 6.

Cels. Lib. iv.

["' Crux est imago Christi crucifixi : sed imago crucifixi Christi est adoranda latria. ergo et crux...... ei (virgini) debetur honor per se...... non potest adorari latria, sed dulia.—Thom. Aquinat. Op. Venet. 1595. In Tert. Sentent. Dist. ix. Quæst. i. Art. 2. Tom. VII. fol. 37.)

[": Ad istam quæstionem respondet S. Thomas . . Sed contra istam responsionem objicio primo sic: Quia latria est honor soli Deo debitus, sed nulla imago est Deus: ergo contradictionem includit dicere, quia latria sit honor soli Deo debitus, et tamen debetur imagini Christi et Christo. Præterea: Si idem honor debetur imagini Christi et Christo, idem honor etiam debetur lapidi et Christo: et per consequens idem honor debetur Christo et creaturæ, quod non est credendum.-Rob. Holkoth in Libr. Sapient. Prælect. 1586, cap. xiii. Lect. clviii. p. 524.]

[13 Fortal. Fid. Nurm. 1494. Lib. II. Consid. iv. Arg. 24. fol. 107; where videatur dictum.]

[14 Jac. Payv. Andrad. Orthod. Explic. Libr. Decem, Col. 1564. Lib. ix. pp. 705, 6.)

[15 Jac. Naclant. Enarr. in Epist. ad Rom. Venet. 1557. cap. i. fol. 42; where venerantur et illa latria si dulia vel hyperdulia et illa pariter ejusmodi cultu adoranda est.]

(16 The worship they, 1611.)

[17 August. Op. Par. 1679 - 1700. De Verb. Evang. Matt. vii. Serm. lxii. 10. Tom. V. col. 361; where sic ipsi.]

[18 Id. Lib. de Hær. ad Quodvultd. 7. Tom. VIII. col. 7.]

[19 ...ού μην δυνατόν έστι και γιγνώσκειν τον θεόν, και τοις αγάλμασιν εύχεσθαι. Orig. Op. Par. 1733-59, Contr. Cels. Lib. iv. 65, Tom. I. p. 740.]

de Invent. Rer. Lib. vi.

cap. xiii.

Ibid.

Latria,

that any man may worship God and an image both together.” And Polydorus Doulia. Virgilius, a man of late years, uttering the great abuse that he saw in the

church in his time, writeth thus : Nunc de simulacrorum cultu ... agamus : quem Pol. Verg.

non modo nostra religionis expertes, sed, teste Hieronymo, omnes fere veteres sancti patres damnabant, ob metum idololatriæ : “Now let us entreat of the worshipping of images; which not only the heathens, that were void of our religion, but also, as St Hierome saith, all the old godly fathers condemned, for fear of idolatry."

And of the abuse and disorder of the church herein in his time, he writeth thus: Eo insanice deventum est, ut hæc pars pietatis parum differat ab impietate? : “ The world is come to such outrage and mere madness herein, that this part of holiness differeth now very little from open wickedness.” To this pass the church of God was brought by M. Harding's distinction of latria and doulia.

The best remedy in this behalf, and most agreeable with God's word, is utterly to abolish the cause of the ill. So the godly king Ezechias took down and brake in pieces the brasen serpent, notwithstanding Moses himself, by God's special commandment, had erected it; notwithstanding it were an express figure of Christ hanging upon the cross; notwithstanding it had continued so

many years; notwithstanding God by it had wrought so many miracles. So Epiph ad the godly bishop Epiphanius rent in sunder the image of Christ painted in a Johan. Episc. cloth, and said it was against God's commandment, a thing superstitious, and

unmeet for the church and people of God3; notwithstanding it were the

image of Christ. So the godly emperor Theodosius made his proclamation Petr. Crinit. over all his dominions in this sort : Signum Servatoris nostri,... quocunque loco lib. ix. cap. reperitur, tolli jubemust: “We straitly command, that the image of our Saviour

be taken down, in what place soever it shall be found;” notwithstanding it were the image of our Saviour. So it is decreed in the late council of Mens, that, when images happen to be abused by the people, they be either notably altered or utterly abolished5. Neither doth God throughout all his holy scriptures any where condemn image-breakers; but expressly and every where he condemneth image-worshippers and image-makers. God saith: “They are snares

to catch the ignorant.” He knoweth the inclination of the heart of man. And Deut. xxvii, therefore he saith: “ Accursed be he that leadeth the blind out of his

and: “ Accursed be he that layeth a stumbling-block to overthrow the blind.”

.

ix

Concil.
Mogunt. de
Imag.

Wisd. xiv.

way;"

Lev. xix,

[ Pol. Verg. De Invent. Rer. Amst. 1671. Lib. VI. cap. xiii. pp. 417, 8; where hic de illorum cultu.)

[? Id. ibid. p. 423; where hæc pietatis pars.]

[ Epiph. Op. Par. 1622. Epist. ad Joan. Episc. Hieros. Hieron. Interp. Tom. II. p. 317.]

[* Petr. Crinit. De Honest. Discipl. Lugd. 1585. Lib. x. cap. ix. p. 279. See before, page 659.)

[ Synod. Prov. Mogunt. cap. 42. in Crabb. Concil. Col. Agrip. 1551. Tom. III. p. 938.]

OF

READING THE SCRIPTURES.

THE FIFTEENTH ARTICLE.

THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY.
Or that the lay-people was then forbidden to read the word of
God in their own tongue.

[OF THE PEOPLE'S READING THE BIBLE IN THEIR OWN TONGUE.

ARTICLE XV. H. A. 1564.)

That the lay-people was then forbidden to read the word of God in their own tongue, I find it not. (204) Neither do I find that the lay-people was then, The two hun.

. or at any other time, commanded to read the word of God in their own tongue, quedaron being vulgar and barbarous. By vulgar and barbarous tongues I understand, as truth. For before, all other beside the three learned and principal tongues, Hebrew, Greek, knoweth the and Latin : which, as they were once native and vulgar to those three peoples, commanded 80 now to none be they native and vulgar, but common to be obtained by learn- Scriptures, ing, for meditation of the scriptures, and other knowledge.

to read

&c,

THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY.

M. Harding fully dischargeth this whole matter in one word. “ I find it not,” saith he, “that the lay-people was then forbidden to read the word of God in their own tongue.” Howbeit, some others of his side thought? sometimes they had surely found it, and were able to allege these words : Nolite sanctum dare canibus : “Give not holy things to dogs;” and thereof necessarily to conclude that the lay-people, whom in respect of themselves they called dogs, might not once touch the holy scriptures. But M. Harding saith plainly, he findeth it not. This short answer touching the demand is sufficient, if he knew what were sufficient. All the rest is made up only in words, as shall appear.

He addeth further: “ Neither do I find that the lay-people was then, or at any other time, commanded to read the word of God in their own tongue, being vulgar and barbarous.” First, this stopple of commanding is whole8 impertinent unto the question. Secondly, all other tongues, three only excepted, are without just cause condemned for barbarous. Thirdly, this exception of the people's reading in their vulgar tongue is only a bare shift and a quarrel without savour. For in what tongue can the vulgar people read and understand any thing, saving only in their own common and vulgar tongue ? But, as the emperor Tiberius used sometimes to send certain of his nobles into his Corn. Tacit. out provinces and far countries, to rule there as viceroys and lieutenants under in Tiberio. him, and yet, that notwithstanding, would not suffer them to go thither, or in any wise to depart from Rome"; even in like sort M. Harding, notwithstanding he would seem to license the lay-people to read God's word, yet he limiteth them either to the Greek, or to the Latin, or to the Hebrew tongue, wherein he is well assured they cannot read it.

(Attained, H. A. 1564. But H, A, 1565, Obtained.]

[Though, 1611.)

[8 Wholly, 1505.)
[° C. Corn. Tacit. Annal. Lib. 1. cap. Ixxx.]

Deut. vi.

de Vanit. Scient.

Johan.

9.

But, that the people was in old times willed to read the scriptures, and that in such tongues as they were able to understand, it is evident, and appeareth many ways. And of infinite testimonies and good proofs only to touch a few, God saith thus unto his people: “ Hearken, O Israel :... let the words that I speak to thee this day rest in thy heart: thou shalt shew them unto thy children: thou shalt think of them sitting in thy house, and walking in thy journey, and when thou goest to rest, and when thou risest: thou shalt bind them as a mark unto thy hand: thou shalt have them as a token before thine eyes : thou shalt write them on the posts of thy doors, and at the entry

of thy gates." Corn. Agrip. As it is noted by a writer of late years, it was decreed in the first council

of Nice, that no christian man should be without the bible in his house! St August. in

Augustine saith unto the people : Nec solum sufficiat, quod in ecclesia divinas cap. Jejunii.

lectiones auditis ; sed etiam in domibus vestris aut ipsi legite, aut alios legentes requirite? : “ Think it not sufficient that ye hear the scriptures in the church;

but also in your houses at home, either read yourselves, or get some other Chrysost. in to read unto you.” St Chrysostom saith unto his people : Admoneo, et rogo,

ut libros comparetis 3 : “I warn you and beseech you to get books.” Again he Chrysost

. in saith: Audite, seculares omnes : comparate vobis biblia, animce pharmaca. Si nihil Epist. ad Coloss. Hom. aliud vultis, vel novum testamentum acquirite, apostolum, evangelia, Acta, con

tinuos et sedulos doctores4 : “Hear me, ye men of the world : get ye the bible, that most wholesome remedy for the soul. If ye will nothing else, yet

at the least get the new testament, St Paul's epistles, and the Acts, that Orig. in Esai. may be your continual and earnest teachers.” Origen saith: Utinam ... . omnes

faceremus illud, quod scriptum est, Scrutamini scripturasb: “I would to God we would all do as it is written, “Search the scriptures.'” St Hierome, speaking

of the company of women that was at Bethleem with Paula, saith thus: Non Epit. Paul.

licebat cuiquam sororum ignorare psalmos, et non de scripturis sanctis quotidie aliquid discere 6 : “ It was not lawful for any one of all the sisters to be ignorant of the psalms, nor to pass over any day without learning some part of the scriptures.” In these examples, notwithstanding some cavil perhaps might be made to the contrary, yet very reason will lead M. Harding to think that

these fathers meant the people should read the scriptures in their own known de Spir. and vulgar tongues. St Basil saith : Quantum ferre potest humana natura, pos

sumus esse similes Deo; similitudo autem illa sine cognitione nulla est; cognitio autem constat ex doctrina; initium autem doctrince sermo est; sermonis autem partes syllabæ et voces 7: “We may become like unto God, as far forth as the weak nature of man

can bear.

But this likeness cannot be without knowledge; neither this knowledge without doctrine. And the beginning of doctrine is speech; and the parts of speech be words and syllables." The resclution hereof is this : The people, without understanding the particular words and syllables, cannot know the speech : not knowing the speech, they cannot attain this doctrine; and without this doctrine they cannot be like unto God.

2.

Hieron. in

Sanct. cap. i.

They that treat of this article, concerning the having of the scriptures in a 1. vulgar tongue for the laity to read, be of three sundry opinions. Some Three sundry

judge it to be utterly unlawful that the bible be translated into any cerning the

opinions con

[' Et Nicena synodus decretis suis cavit, ne quis e numero Christianorum sacris bibliorum libris careret. -Corn. Agrip. De Incert. et Vanit. Scient. Col. 1584. cap. c. fol. Bb. 11.]

[? Perhaps the following is the passage intended: ... non vobis debet sufficere, quod in ecclesia lectiones divinas auditis, sed in domibus lectioni divinæ debetis insistere.- August. Op. Par. 1679-1700. Ad Fratr. in Erem. Serm. lvi. Tom. VI. Append. col. 366. Most of the sermons included under the above title are spurious.]

[* Chrysost. Op. Par. 1718-38. In Joan, Hom. lii. Tom. VIII. p. 314.]

[* Id. in Epist. ad Coloss. cap. iii. Hom. ix. Tom. XI. p. 391.]

[5 Orig. Op. Par. 1733-59. In Isai. Hom. ii. 2. Tom. III. p. 109.]

[ Hieron. Op. Par. 1693-1706. Ad Eustoch. Epist. lxxxvi. Epit. Paul. Tom. IV. Pars II. col. 682; where nec licebat.]

[? Basil. Op. Par. 1721-30. Lib. de Spir. Sanct. cap. i. 2. Tom. III. p. 2.)