A key to the key of Scripture: or An exposition with notes, vpon the Epistle to the Romanes; the three first chapters begun at Walsall in Staffordshire, continued at Pitmister in Somerset. By William Sclater Batchelar in Diuinitie, and minister of the Word of God at Pitmister in Somerset.

Verse 25. Which turned the truth of God vnto a lie, and worshipped and serued the creature, for∣saking the Creator, which is blessed for euer. Amen.

IN this verse, and those that fol∣low, is set downe a repitition of the Gentiles sinne, with the ampli∣fication thereof; as also of the pu∣nishment with like amplification.

The sinne is repeated in this 25. verse in words something dif∣ferent; for what before he called the turning of the in∣corruptible God into the similitude of an image: hee here cals the turning of Gods truth into a lie. The in∣crease of their sinne is that they worshipped the crea∣ture passing by the Creator; where is annexed a short, but pithie confutation of that fact, by a description of God; who is blessed for euer.

Touching the meaning of the words, there is some difference amongst interpreters; for my part I thinke with Martyr and others, that by the truth of God, we are here to vnderstand the same, that before hee called the glory of God, that is, the true essence of God; or the Deitie, as it is in truth: by the lie or falshoode no∣thing else, but the images made to represent him: so called often in the Prophets, because they represent God falsely, and otherwise then he is in the truth of his nature. Confer Ier. 10.10.14.

So is euery image of God falshood, [Obser.] and no better then a lying representation of the Deitie.* 1.1 Therefore cal∣led falshood. Ier. 10.14. and lying. Isay 44.10. Neither will it suffice to say that the Prophets speake of hea∣thenish

images, made to represent false Gods: for both the places shew that they speake of Images that were made to represent the true God▪* 1.2 and reason euinceth it from the qualitie and quantitie of Diuine essence: being a spirit inuisible, neuer seene by the eye of man, and o•• an infinite, vnme••surable, and incomprehen∣sible maiestie. I ay 40.12.18.

Whence it will ea••ily follow, that it is altogether vn∣lawfull, to purtrey God in an image; and let Pap••sts say what they will, in defence of their audacious pra∣ctise in this kinde ••et seeing the commandement of God,* 1.3 backt with such reasons as haue now been men∣tioned, stands still in force▪ they shall neuer be able to free themselues of that crime of violating the Di∣uine maiestie; so iustly in this regard imputed vnto them. Many prety shifts they haue deuised to keepe off from themselues this imputation, and reasons to iustifie their practise, but how vaine they are all, will appeare if we a little take view of them.

As first that the scripture condemnes such images of God onely, as are made to expresse the perfect si∣militude of the Diuine essence and nature; not such as are deu••sed analogically onely, and by misticall sig∣ni••••cat on. Ans. But it is appa••ant, that the Lord vtter∣ly for••ids all images, and likenesses, whether of per∣fect, or analogicall representation: for marke the rea∣son. D ut. 4.15 16. Y••u 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••o image in the day when God ••••••ke vnto y••u in the m••unt: no image eyther of perfect, or analogicall signification: therefore you shall make no image at all: and who can thinke that the calfe made by the Israelites, was any otherwise deuised, but as mystically to represent some action, benefit, or propertie of God▪ and yet are they condemned as well for making, as for worshipping the golden image.

But let vs consider briefely their reasons. First, they

say Angels that are spirits also and inuisible, yet were lawfully pictured in the olde Testament. Ans. First, there was an expresse warrant giuen to Moses, and Sa∣lomon, whereas they were expressely forbidden to make any image or representation of the Lord: Se∣condly, graunt that there may be some libertie taken herein (as what dare not Painters, and Poets?) yet how vnequall this reason is, appeares by that great inequali∣tie, and disproportion betwixt Angels that are finite creatures, and God which is of infinite and incompre∣hensible maiestie.

And whereas they alleadge, that the Lord hath ap∣peared in visible shapes. Ans. First, that they vvere not shapes of his essence, but pledges of his presence; neither was it Gods purpose thereby to teach the peo∣ple what an one hee was in his nature or properties; but onely to testifie, and euidence that he was now pre∣sent with them: Secondly, besides that, how will they proue that it is lawfull for vs to picture God in those images and shapes wherein hee hath appeared vnto men?

Neither is their third reason though more plausi∣ble, yet any whit more forcible: The scripture they say attributes vnto God all the members of mans bo∣die: And why may we not resemble him in a picture, as God hath as it were painted out himselfe in the scrip∣ture? Ans. Though other answeres be giuen by ma∣ny; yet this is that I take surest to rest in; Gods will to the contrarie, and his flat prohibition, and that is an∣swere sufficient to all such plausible why nots? made by the wisedome of flesh. What though the Lord descending to our capacitie thus please to speake? shall we therefore presume thus to picture? hauing so ex∣presse prohibition, with a reason; the voice was heard but no shape seene. Deut. 4.5.16.

Their fourth reason is this; that man may be pictured, and his image drawne; therefore God also whose i∣mage man is; for the image of the image, is the image of the exemplar, and first patterne. Ans. That man as he is the image of God cannot be pictured; for wher∣in is man an image of God? in the lineaments of his bodie? Let Papists leaue that dreame to the condem∣ned Anthropomorphites. But he is the image of God, in regard hee pertakes analogically in holinesse,* 1.4 and true righteousnesse, which though it spread it selfe ouer body and soule, yet cannot be seene otherwise then by effects in eyther.

The last reason artificiall is drawne, from the many profits that such images serue for: as instruction, re∣membrance, deuotion, restraining of wandering ima∣ginations. Ans. Where marke the quicknesse of an I∣dolaters sent,* 1.5 that hath smelt out so many great be∣nefits of those things, that the Lord thought, and taught to be vtterly vnprofitable.

But for more particular answere to this argument, how will they euer be able to proue this, which must be the proposition of their syllogisme: that whatsoeuer may be a meane of instruction, admonition, deuotion, &c. may be vsed as helpes to these ends: when as God hath tyed vs to those meanes onely which himselfe hath sanctified to this end: and hath giuen Christ to be the onely doctour of the Church, and hath proui∣ded vs sufficiently of meanes to these ends by the great booke of the creatures, booke of the scriptures, visible word of the sacraments, inward teaching of his spirit: secondly, how was it that when these were such excellent meanes of teaching, the Lord denied them to the Iewes? and how fals it, that the people set to schoole to these teachers are found most ignorant of Gods nature and will? thirdly, what teach they, but

lying, and falshood? as lamentable experience sheweth: what grosse conceipts of the Deitie these doctours haue filled our peoples mindes withall. And lest they say this hath come to passe by defect of other teaching by their ministers. Ans. That may well be in part; but yet such grosenesse comes principally from the image; and this also their inexpiable sinne, that haue giuen them teachers no better then images; ha∣uing no more of true pastors, then their images haue of the Deitie. But enough of this popish deuise.

Secondly, come to ourselues, [Ʋse.] and let vs be admo∣nished to take heede how in our very mindes we con∣ceiue any likenesse, or image of God. It is true of this Law also, that it is spirituall, as Rom. 7.14. and forbids not onely corporall, but euen mentall resemblances, or similitudes of the Godhead, conceiued by the mind;* 1.6 we may not so much as thinke God like to any thing that we see or can conceiue.

And the best way to conceiue God, is as an Anci∣ent Diuine well teacheth, viâ negationis, by way of ne∣gation. And he that can most abstract God from like∣nesses, hath best learnt to conceiue GOD, such as he is.

Proceed we now vnto the encrease of the Gentiles sinne. And worshipped and serued the creature, &c. This, though I know it may be verified of the Gentils in respect of their idolatrous worship of the Sunne, Moone, &c. and other visible creatures; yet I take it, is here to be vnderstood of the worship giuen by them to their images.

To make way to the doctrine, this question shall be propounded; whether the Gentiles gaue vnto their Images Diuine worship? or whether their vvor∣ship had the terme in the images without reference to the prototypa, the things which their images repre∣sented.

Papists gladly lay hold on the affirmatiue part, that they may put difference betwixt theirs and hea∣thenish Idolatry committed with images. And this, they say is that worshipping of an image, which the second commandement condemnes, namely the wor∣shipping it as God.

Now for answere, know we that if wee speake of the rude multitude, whom God had principally blinded, no doubt, but they many of them intended their wor∣ship to the images, wherein they thought some Dei∣tie, and diuine power to dwell, and what maruell, that men should grow so sottish, when God giues vp to blindnesse? Isay 44 18.19.20. But for the learneder, and wiser sort of them, they knew well enough that they were no Gods, neither did their worship stay in the image, but was referred to the thing thereby re∣presented, as Augustine, Lactantius, Ambrose, & others shew; and as Plutarch, de Iside & Osir. and other of the heathen professed. August. in Psal. 96. thus brings in an heathen, speaking for himselfe: I do not worship that stone, or that image which is without sense, but I adore that which I see, and serue him whom I see not, who is that? The inuisible diuine power that is president of the Image. Many such testimonies might be produced.

Now if it be replyed, that the scripture imputes vnto them this grossenesse: Ans. The scripture speaks generally, not of their intention, but of the euent, as amongst other places that one. 1 Cor. 10.20. suffici∣ently euinceth. The things which the Gentiles offered, they offered not to God. but to diuels; not that they intended their sacrifices to the honour of diuels, but be∣cause this was indeed, in the euent, an honouring of Sa∣than▪ whose suggestions they rather followed then the will of God. So Psal. 107.19. the Israelites are said to haue worshipped the molten image, not that their

intention rested in the Image, as Exodus 32.5. but because all this worship intended to be conueied vn∣to God by the image, fell backe vpon the image; God vtterly reiecting such a worship from acceptance, which he had so oft forbidden by his precept.

Now this sense standing (as I see not how it disa∣grees from the rule of faith, or is impertinent to the Text) affords this obseruation.

That the worship intended to God by an image, [Observ.] is not the worship of God, but of the image. That indeed is honoured. but God dishonoured, whose will is here∣by altered, and his precept violated. Confer 1 Cor. 10.20. Exod. 32.4 5. vnderstand this, as before, not of the intention of the worshipper, but of the euent. [Vse.]

Here then are the Papists iustly charged vvith as grosse Idolatry, as euer the heathen practised; that worship images of God, and Saints, though not inten∣tionally, yet in the euent with the worship due to God alone.

Many large disputes, and queries they haue concer∣ning the kinde, and degree of worship that is due to holy images: some of them resoluing foole wisely, that images are to be worshipped with the same worship that is due to the president; others, thinking that some thing to grosse, concluding, that this is to be vn∣derstood vnproperly, by way of concomitance onely. It were long to reckon vp all their fooleries in this kinde. Alas, that such wits should be so occupied? and that there were not some good Iosiah amongst them, by axes and hammers to put end to such heathenish reasonings. Read Isay 30.22. and thou shalt see vvhat honour is due to such trash. Their common excuse is sufficiently remoued by that which hath beene said in the former question.

Now for their worship of Images they haue these

reasons; first, that they are signes of holy things, and are for their relation to God to be worshipped. Ans. But I demaund, by whose institution come they to be signes of holy things, and what is the foundati∣on of this reuelation? if by humane appointment onely, they will neuer be able to proue that man can giue to any thing such a reuelation, or or∣daine a signe, thus to signifie a holy thing, or to binde vs to such reuerence of signes by man ordayned. And for diuine institution, which alone hath power to con∣secrate signes to such holy significations, when they shall shew it vs out of the scriptures, we will entertaine their images with that reuerent esteeme, and regard∣fulnesse in vsing, as is due to such ordinances, but yet will euer be far from religious adoration of them.

Secondly, they affirme that God by images hath wrought miracles, therby to procure honor vnto them. Ans. Whether God wrought miracles to procure them honour, or the diuell maruels to delude Idolaters, is hard for Papists to determine.

But first we answere that they were mira non miracu∣la, maruels not miracles many of them, that God per∣mitted to be wrought, at or by them: strange things perhaps many, that filled the poore people with won∣derment, whilst they knew not the cunning and power of Sathan.

Secondly if miracles, yet not to procure them ho∣nour, but to proue our obedience, did the Lord permit them. See Deut. 13.1.2.3. miracles are not alwayes seales of truth; but sometimes trials of loyaltie.

Thirdly, they reason a pari, or simili: man is worthy of veneration because he is the image of God; therfore other images also because they are images of Christ, or Saints, &c. Ans. To this I answere; that images made by man to represent God, or his Christ, are but equi∣uocally

called images of God and Christ. Indeed we honour man as the image of God with ciuill honour, because God hath so commanded vs: secondly, and hath giuen to men venerable gifts of holinesse, and righteousnes, that make them honourable; and when they can shew eyther GOD to command worship of their images, or demonstrate such charecters of Di∣uine excellencies in them as GOD hath placed in man, wee will also giue them their due reuerence.

Their fourth argument is, à paribus in contrarijs. Images are capable of infamie, and reproach, therefore also of honour, and worship; which argument some vtter thus, the contempt done to the image of GOD and his Christ redounds to God, and Christ: Ergo, the honour done to their images is done to them. Ans. Our Diuines fitly answere that it followes not: nei∣ther are those contraries paria: for it sufficeth to the dishonouring of God that there be an euill affection, or intention; but a good intention is not sufficient to the honouring of God, except the meanes as well as the meaning be prescribed of God.

Their other arguments are friuolous, and not worth the naming: for what is it to prescribe in errour? And what though euill men haue oppugned images, and good men reuerenced them? for neither did the one oppugne, as they were euill; neither were the other good so farre as ••hey defended them. That last argu∣ment from the infortunate end of those that haue op∣posed, and the happinesse of those that haue maintai∣ned them, hath an apparent mistaking of no cause for a cause; for neither were these plagued for opposing, nor those blessed for maintaining images.

Now I conclude this whole place with that saying of Lactantius de origin: error. lib. 2. cap. 2. where hauing at large disputed against the folly of Image-making, and

worship, he concludes: Foolish men as they are, they consider not nor vnderstand, that if their images had sense, or motion, they would of their owne accord worship men by whom they were polished; which, had they not beene fashioned and brought into shape by man, had still been ey∣ther incult and horride stones, or vnshapen and rude matter.

[Obser.] One other thing onely will I obserue in this text and so proceed to that that followeth: And that is the ordinarie connexion of these two sinnes, the making, and worshipping of an image. See Psal. 106.19. &c. partly through that bewitching which is in them when they are clad as it were with Diuine representations: partly through Gods iust iudgement, giuing men ouer to blind dotage, because of their first declining from his will.

[Ʋse.] And it iustifieth the practise of Christian Magi∣strates, that to preuent occasions of Idolatrie, haue remoued them out of our Temples; I hope, neuer a∣gaine to be restored: many exclamations, and bitter inuectiues they haue heard from Idolatrous mouthes; but who knowes not but the Lord hath done them good for that euill? And how vnmeete such contu∣melies are for them that cry out of vs, for lacke of loue to Christ, because wee cannot indure the Idola∣trous abuse of his image, when themselues are drun∣ken with the bloud of Saints, Gods liuely images, eue∣rie man may iudge. Loue to Christ is best euidenced, by loue to his ordinances, and his Saints, and by ha∣tred of those things which God professeth to hate, a∣mongst which are especially lying images.

But shall wee heare their reasons why they must be placed in our temples; forsooth Salomon erected Cherubims in the temple. Ans. Yet placed he them out of the sight of the people, in the holy of holies: second∣ly, had Gods speciall warrant.

Secondly, they reason from conueniencie; vvhat meeter places for holy images, then holy places? be∣sides that, they are an ornament to the Temple, and withall a meane to keepe our mindes from vaine by-thoughts, and wandering imaginations. Ans.

To the first: if they were indeed holy by Gods or∣dinance it were somewhat: But now being but as they are mens deuises, and found in-experience to be occasions of Idolatrie, what more vnmeet place then the Temple for an Image? whereas the very re∣uerence of the place wins it too much esteeme with su∣perstitious mindes.

To the second: that Temples should be decently kept, and moderately adorned, wee deny not; but hold such trash the vnmeetest deckings: and as for i∣mages abused to idolatrie, wee iustly count them ra∣ther blemishes then ornaments to our Churches; and may truely say of them, as Hezekias of the like to the Leuites; carrie forth this filthinesse out of the San∣ctuarie. 2 Par. 29.5.

To the third: that they are meanes rather to occasi∣on, then to preuent wanderings: the occupying of the outward sense, is in experience the abalienation of the minde; which made the Lacedemonians permit no picture in their Senate house, least by beholding there∣of, the mindes of their Counsailors should be distra∣cted from the present consultations. And I wish men for preuenting of wandering in prayers, first to labour for feeling of wants, which they would haue sup∣plyed. 1 Reg. 8.38. Secondly, duely to consider in whose presence they stand. Acts 10.33. these they shall finde better stayes from wandering, then all other selfe deuised meanes whatsoeuer. I haue dwelt something long in these controuersies; but now pro∣ceed to that that followeth.

Which is God blessed for euer, Amen.] These words, are diuersly construed with the former; some thus conceiue them, as importing the disappointing of that inconuenience, to which the nature of these Idola∣trous actes tended: as if hee should say, notwith∣standing, all this sacriledge committed by these Ido∣latrous Gentiles, yet continued the Lord in his blessed and happie estate: and so it is a truth; that no impietie of man can really robbe GOD of his honour, or impeach his blessednesse: And if any shall say, why doth hee then complaine. Ans. Be∣cause hee measures impietie according to the inten∣tion of the doer, and nature of the fact, not after the euent, which by his power he disappoints.

Some thus vnderstand them as a speech of Paules zealous affection, occasioned by mention of that dishonour the Gentiles laboured to fasten on the maiestie of God.

I rather thinke that they are a short reprehension of the Gentiles Idolatry, as if hee should say, they worshipped the creature, passing by the Creator: to whom alone all praises, and honour by iust right ap∣pertaineth, so Iunius interprets out of the Syri••ke: it would be too long, and perhaps impertinent, to in∣sist on that common place; this onely I wish, that here∣to we may all heartily subscribe, and say Amen, both in affection, and practise.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Ier. 10.14.
• * 1.2

  Iohn 4.24. 1 Tim. 6.16.
• * 1.3

  Deut. 4.15.16.17.
• * 1.4

  Ephes. 4 24.
• * 1.5

  Hab. 2.18. Isay 44.9.
• * 1.6

  Acts 17.29.