Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Church Triumphant, Book II: On the Relics and Images of the Saints
Chapter 10: That Images Are Useful Even outside a History
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Ecclesia quae Triumphat in Coelis, the fourth general controversy. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Chapter 10. That Images Are Useful Even outside a History
Calvin's last saying, that images without the representing of a history are not useful, is plainly false. For he does not prove by any argument that they are not useful, and we can prove that they are useful in several ways. First, because God ordered images of cherubim to be made in his temple without any representing of a history, Exodus 25; and surely not without cause.
Second, because Christians have always had images, even single ones and outside histories, though the first Christians were not led by delight alone. In the time of Christ three images are read to have been made. The first is that which Christ himself made by putting a linen cloth to his face, and sent to King Abgar. For Evagrius reports this, book 4, chapter 26, and Metaphrastes in the Life of Constantine the Great, and Damascene, book 1 On Images; and that this is not a fable a great miracle done at Edessa through this image testifies, as Evagrius writes in the same place. The feast day testifies too, which was kept at Constantinople on the day of the translation of this image from Edessa to Constantinople.
The second is that which the woman freed from the issue of blood set up to Christ at Paneas. Eusebius is witness, book 7 of the History, chapter 14, who asserts that he saw it. Sozomen mentions the same, book 5, chapter 20; Damascene, book 1 On Images; and Theophylact on chapter 9 of Matthew.
The third is that which Nicodemus is said to have made, and which, crucified by the Jews in mockery, shone with countless miracles. Athanasius reports this in the little book On the Passion of the Image of the Lord, chapter 4. And although it may be doubted whether this is a work of the great Athanasius, yet it is certain that it is of a very ancient author, since it is cited as a most ancient history in the seventh synod, action 4.
Besides these images of Christ there are also images of the Blessed Virgin which blessed Luke is said to have painted; which are mentioned by Theodore the Lector, who flourished a thousand years ago, book 1 of the Collections; by Nicephorus, book 14 of the History, chapter 2; and by Simeon Metaphrastes in the Life of St. Luke. Tertullian, in the book On Modesty, mentions the image of Christ in the form of a shepherd carrying a sheep on his shoulders, painted on the sacred chalices, as we said above. Aelius Lampridius, in the Life of Alexander Severus, reports that the Emperor Alexander had images of Christ and of Abraham in his shrine; and surely it is credible that he learned from the Christians how Christ should be painted. Eusebius, book 7 of the History, chapter 14, says that images of the apostles were wont to be painted everywhere, and that he saw many very ancient ones. Ambrose, in the letter on the finding of Saints Gervasius and Protasius, which is found in Surius, says that he knew that he who had appeared to him was blessed Paul from a painted image which he had with him.
Chrysostom, in the oration on St. Meletius, says that the images of Meletius were so famous that they were seen even on rings, on cups, on bowls, on the walls of bedchambers, and everywhere else. Likewise Theodoret, in the Religious History, in the Life of Simeon Stylites, says that at Rome images of St. Simeon were wont to hang before the doors in all the workshops.
That in Augustine's time images were very frequent is gathered from book 1 On the Agreement of the Evangelists, chapter 10, where he says that images of Christ painted between Peter and Paul are found everywhere. Many other testimonies of Athanasius, Basil, Nazianzen, Nyssen, Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, Cyril of Alexandria and many other Fathers see in the seventh synod, action 4, and in book 3 of Damascene's Apology, at the end. Add besides these all those things which we brought a little before to prove that there were images in the churches in the first five hundred years.
Third, it is proved from their uses. The first is instruction and teaching. For a picture sometimes teaches better than writing; which use St. Gregory of Nyssa mentions in the oration on Theodore, and St. Gregory the pope, book 7, letter 109, and book 9, letter 9.
You will say: Painted histories indeed instruct, but not single images. I answer that even single images, as they are painted by Christians, always contain some history as it were in brief. For when Christ is painted, he is always painted either in the form of a child in his mother's lap, or of a man bound to the pillar, or hanging on the cross, or rising from the tomb, or ascending into heaven, and so on. So too the saints are always painted with a mark of their virtue, or their passion, or their power: Peter with the keys, Lawrence with the gridiron, Andrew with the cross, and so on; all the martyrs with the palm, all the saints with the halo. From which signs or instruments we are taught as it were in brief what those whom we venerate did or suffered.
Second, images, even single ones, are useful for nourishing and increasing charity toward God and the saints. For he who loves gladly looks at the image of an absent friend, and by looking his love grows. Hence Severus Sulpicius, who most warmly loved St. Paulinus and could not have him always with him, asked him by letter to send him his portrait drawn from life; to whom, excusing himself most modestly, Paulinus answered, letter 8 to Severus, that he did not yet have the perfect image of the second Adam, but still bore the likeness of the old Adam, and so would not send it. [The top of page 485 is merged across columns in the scan; this paragraph is rendered from what reads.] Gregory too, book 7, letter 53, sending Secundinus an image of the Saviour, says that he knew he desired the image so as to grow warm again in the love of the Lord himself.
The third use is stirring up to imitation. This use is explained at length in the seventh synod, action 6, at the end; Basil speaks of the same in the oration on the forty martyrs. It is well known from Terence, in the Eunuch, how a certain young man, at the sight of a picture in which Jupiter was painted pouring down on Danae for her ruin, was vehemently provoked to commit a like crime. But on the contrary Nazianzen, in the poem on virtue, which is cited in the seventh synod, action 4, says that an immodest woman, when she was summoned and came to a certain man, saw in the very doorway the image of Polemon, a most continent man, and thereupon fled confused, and, moved by penance, went back home.
Fourth, images are useful because they keep in us the memory of Christ and of the saints, and at the same time teach us in our straits that we have patrons whom we may invoke. Hence Theodoret, in the Life of Simeon Stylites, says that there were very many images of St. Simeon at Rome, so that by that means men might win for themselves protection and defence.
The fifth use is the confession of faith. For while we love and honour the images of the saints, we testify that their faith and teaching and holy ways please us, and at the same time that we detest all impiety and idolatry, against which they fought even to death. And now especially we testify that the novelties of the Lutherans and Calvinists do not please us, while we religiously venerate what they sacrilegiously destroy.
The sixth is the honour of God and of the saints. For no one has ever doubted that to set up statues or images to great men belongs to their honour. Surely Eusebius, book 7 of the History, chapter 14, shows that this was the chief cause why Christians began to desire images of the saints.
Nor does it stand in the way that he says this arose from the custom of the heathens. For he does not speak of any superstition of the heathens, but of a natural and so good custom, by which they were wont to set up statues to those whom they judged worthy of honour; although in this they afterwards erred, that they set them up even to wicked men and false gods.
Chapter 11. The Question of the Cult of Images Is Set Out, with the Arguments of the Adversaries
We have shown so far that images of Christ and of the saints can be made and had, and placed in churches and other places. There follows now the controversy on cult, namely whether images of this kind are to be followed with some kind of cult.
Of which controversy Damascene, in the book On Heresies, near the end, brings two extreme errors. One of those who said that divine honours are owed to images, heretics whom he calls Christianocategors, that is, accusers of the Christians, because because of them the Christians were accused as worshippers of idols. In the same way it is certain that Alexander Severus worshipped the images of Christ and of Abraham together with his other idols, on the witness of Aelius Lampridius. This heresy is refuted by all the testimonies of Scripture which forbid us to give to a creature the cult proper to God.
The other error, contrary to the former, is of those who allow no honour at all to be paid to the images of the saints. Damascene reports this error in the book On Heresies, at the end; and it is the error of all those whom we reviewed in the second chapter of the disputation, who contend that images are not to be honoured in any way, because of these arguments.
First, because the Scriptures of both Testaments sternly forbid the cult of simulacra, Exodus 20, Deuteronomy 4, Romans 1 and so on. And because the Catholics answer that the Scriptures reject the cult which is given to simulacra as gods, Calvin, book 1 of the Institutes, chapter 11, sections 9 and 10, tries to show that the Jews and heathens too did not hold the simulacra for gods, but worshipped the true God in the simulacra; and yet were rebuked, because God does not allow his cult to be shared in any way with images. And surely if God ought not to be worshipped in an image, in the same way the saints, even if they were to be honoured, would yet not be honoured in images.
That the Jews did not hold the simulacra for gods, but worshipped the true God in the idol, Calvin proves because in Exodus 32 the people said of the golden calf: “These are thy gods, O Israel, that have brought thee out of the land of Egypt.” Where they admit that in the calf they worship that God by whom they had been freed from Egypt. And in the same place Aaron, about to proclaim a feast day in honour of the golden calf, ordered it to be said by the voice of a crier: “Tomorrow is the solemnity of the Lord”; where in the Hebrew that “of the Lord” is la-YHWH. And in Judges 17 a certain woman says: “I have consecrated and vowed this silver to the Lord, that my son may make a graven and a molten god.” Where too for “to the Lord” is the proper name of the true God, YHWH.
And that the heathens worshipped the true God in idols is proved, first, from Augustine on Psalm 113, who reports that the heathens, when they were accused of idolatry, were wont to answer that they did not worship the idols themselves, but the divinity which was signified by the idol. Likewise from this, that the heathens changed simulacra at will, and yet did not change gods. Likewise because they set up many simulacra to one god; for they said there was one Jupiter, and yet dedicated countless simulacra to him. Lastly, because they consecrated new idols daily, and yet did not say that they made new gods.
Second, they bring forward three councils: one of Constantinople under Leo the Iconoclast, on the witness of Paul the Deacon, book 21; likewise another of Constantinople, of 338 bishops, under Constantine Copronymus, on the witness of Paul the Deacon, book 22 of the Roman History; each of which decreed that images were to be abolished. The Centuriators report the acts of both at length, Century 8, chapter 9. The third was the Council of Frankfurt, in which the seventh synod was rejected, which had judged that images were to be kept. So report Ado in the chronicle of the year 795, the Abbot of Ursperg in the chronicle of the year 793, Hincmar of Reims in the book against the bishop of Laon, chapter 20, John Aventinus in the History or Annals of the Bavarians, book 4, Aimoin, book 4, and Regino, book 2.
Further, the Magdeburgers, Century 8, chapter 9, at the end, bring from that council ten arguments against images, and undo forty-four arguments of the Nicene synod, and answer eleven testimonies of the Fathers which had been brought for images by the Nicene synod. But both the arguments and the answers are mere trifles; for such a Nicene synod never existed, as we will say below in its place.
Third, they bring forward the four books of Charlemagne against images, from which Calvin, book 1 of the Institutes, chapter 11, draws two things. First, that the Nicene council was at once refuted by an orthodox prince. Second, that in that Nicene council a manifest impiety was defined. For, as is plain from the book of Charles, it was defined in that council that the honour of sacrifices is owed to images, and that cult which is given to the life-giving Trinity. That book came out in the year 1549. The Centuriators add, Century 8, chapter 9, column [645?], that there is another book still sharper against images, by Louis the Pious, if indeed it is worth believing.
Fourth, they bring forward the Fathers. For Irenaeus, book 1, chapter 24, puts among the heresies of Carpocrates that he worshipped an image of Christ and of Paul. Epiphanius, heresy 79, says that those are heretics who carry about and worship an image of the Blessed Virgin. Ambrose, On the Death of Theodosius: “Helena found the cross of the Lord,” he says; “she adored the King, not the wood surely, for this is the error of the heathens, but she adored him who hung on the wood.” Jerome on chapter 3 of Daniel: “The worshippers of God,” he says, “ought not to adore images.” Augustine, On the Morals of the Church, chapter [34?]: “I know,” he says, “adorers of pictures.” Gregory, book 7, letters 34 and 109, and book [9?], letter 9, says that images are not to be adored. Certain other testimonies are brought by the Iconoclasts in the seventh synod, action 6, and are refuted in the same place; but they are easy.
Fifth, they bring forward the example of Ezechias, 4 Kings 18, who broke the bronze serpent because it had now begun to be worshipped.
Sixth, Calvin brings forward experience, which teaches that little by little superstition and error creep into the cult of images, by which divinity is thought to be bound to the image. For why otherwise is one image of Christ or of Mary more frequented than another? Why do those about to pray go to images? Why do some go on pilgrimage with great labour to some image, when they have perhaps better and more beautiful ones at home?
Seventh, they bring forward some little reasons. For an image, they say, is not capable of honour, since it is a lifeless thing, without sense and reason. Likewise an image is not holy by reason of the wood, or iron, or marble, or any other matter, nor by reason of the lines or colours or any other thing that is in it; why then is it honoured? Lastly, man is the image of God, and yet is not wont to be adored; how much less then will wood and stones be adored, though they represent the image of God or of the saints.
And these are their chief supports, which will be answered below in chapter 13. For I gladly pass over the other trifles of the Magdeburgers; for they are unworthy to be answered. Christ, they say, died for men, not for images; therefore images are not to be honoured. Excellent, indeed. Likewise, if images had necessarily to be honoured, only the rich would be saved, who can buy them. Likewise, Christ did not say, He that receiveth images, but, He that receiveth you, receiveth me; therefore the honour of the image is not referred to the exemplar. Which indeed is not to argue, but to play.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT X.
Imagincs uliles esse eliaiii exlra
historiani.
Postremum Calvini diclam, quod imagines sinc
notalione hisloriae, non sinl uiiles, est manifeste
falsum; nam ipse non probal ullo argumenlo non
esse uliles, el nos probare possumus esse uliles
pluribus modis. Primo, quia Deus in lemplo suo
jussit lieri imagines cherubin, sine uUa hisloriae
nolalione, Es:od. 25. el cerie non sine caussa.
Sccundo,quiasemper Chrisliani habuerunt ima-
gines, eliam solilarias. el extra hislorias, cum la-
mcn primi Chrisliani non ducerentur sola delecta-
lione. Tempoie Clirisli Ires iinagines laclne le-
guntur. Prima esl, quam Christus ipse Imteo faci-
ei suae admolo fecil, el regi Abagaro misil. Id e-
nim refcrl Evagrius lib. 4. cap. 26. et Metaphra-
sles in vila Conslanlini Magni, el Damascenus lib.
i. de imaginibus: el hanc non esse fabulam, tesla-
lur ingens miraculum facluin Edessae per hanc
imaginem, ul ibidem scribil Evagrius. Teslalur e-
liain dies feslus, qui agebatur Constanlinopoli, in
die Iranslalionis hujus imaginis ex Edessa Con-
stanlinopolim.
Secunda est, quam apud Paneadem mulierlibe-
rata a fluxu sanguinis Chrislo erexil: teslis est Eu-
sebius lib. 7. hist. cap. 14. qui eam se vidisse as-
serit. Meiuinit ejusdera Sozomenus lib. 5. cap.
20. Damascenus lib. I.de imaginibus, et Thco-
phylactus in cap. 9. Matth.
Tcrlia csl, quam dicitur Nicodemus fecisse. et
quae a Judaeis per ludibrium cruci(ixa,innumera-
bilibus miraculis claruit. Relerl hoc Athanasius iii
libello (le passionc imaginis Domini, cap. 4. Et
quamquam dubium esse possit, au sil hoc opus
Magni Alhanasii, tamen cerlum esl o.ssc anliquis-
simi aucloris; (piandoquidem cilalnr tamquam an-
liquissima hisloria in VII. synodo, act. 4.
Praeler has Chrisli imagines exslanl eliam bea-
tae Virginis, quas b. Lucas pinxisse dicitur, qua-
rum meminil Theodorus Lc(;tor,qui a'ile mille an-
nos floruil, lib. 1. CoIIeclnncorum. INicephorus
lib. 14. histor. cap. 2. et Simcon .Metaphrastes in
vila s. Lucae. Terlullianns iibro de pudicilia, me-
minit imiiginis Christi in forina pasloris, ovem fe-
reiitis in hnmeris suis depictae in sacris calicibus,
ul supra diximus. Aelius Lampridius in vila Ale-
xandri Severi reCerl Alexamlrum impeialorem in
suo larario imagines Chrisli et Abrahae habuissii.
At certe crcdibile esl, eum a Christianis didicis-
se, quemadmodum Chrislus pingi deberet. Euse-
bius lib. 7. hisloriae, cap. 14. dicit, passim con-
suevissc pingi imagines aposlolorum, et se multas
anliquissimas vidisse. Ambrosius in epislola de
inventione sanclorum Gervasii et Protasii, quae
apud Surium exslat, dicil se cognovisse eum, qni
sibi apparueral, fuisse b. Paulum, ex imagine pi-
cla quam apud sc habebal.
Chrysoslomus oratione in s. Melelium.dicit Me-
letii imagines adeo celebres fuisse, ut eliam in an-
nulis, in poculis, in phialis.in Ihalami parielibus,
alque ubique alibi conspicereniur. Similiter The-
odorelus in hisloria religiosa.in vila Simeonis Sty-
litae dicit,Piomae in omnibus oflioinis pro foribus
pcndere consuevisse imngincs s. Simeonis.
Augustini tempore frequenlissimas imagines
fuisse, colligilur ex lib. 1. de consensu evangeli-
slarum, c. 10. ubi dicil, passim inveniri imagines
Chrisli inter Pelrura elPauIum depicli. .Mulla alia
tesUmonia Alhanasii, Basilii, Nazianzeni, Nysseni ,
Chrysostomi, Cyrilli hierosolymitani et Cyrilh a-
lexandrini, elaliorum raultorum Palrum , vide in
VII. synodo , act. 4. et lib. 3. Damasceni apologe-
tico in fme. Addes eliam praeter ista, omnia illa
quae paulo anle nos attulimus, ad probandum, i-
magines fuisse in lemplis primis quingenlis annis.
Terlio, probalur ab ulilitalibus.Prima esl instru-
clio el erudiiio. Mclius enim interdum docet pictu-
ra, quam Scriptura; cujus ulilitatis meminil s.Gre-
gorius nyssenus,oralione in Theodorum, et s.Gre-
gorius papa lib. 7. epist. 109. et iib. 9. epist. 9.
Dices: Hisloriae quidera depictae instruunt , at
non imagines solitariae. Respondeo etiam solita-
rias imagines, nl a Christianis pingunlur, semper
conlinere quasi per compendiura aliquam histo-
riara. Nam cum pingilur Christus, semper pingitur
vel in forma pueri in sinu matris, vel in forma viri
alligali ad colnmnam , vel in cruce pendentis, vel
resurgenlis e tumulo, vel ascendenlis in coelum
etc. Sic etiam sancti semper cum insignl virtutis,
vel passionis, vel poleslalis pinguntur, Pelrus cum
clavibus, Laurenlius cum cralicula, Andreas cum
cruce elc marlyres omnes cum palma , sancti o-
mnes cum diademale.Ex quibus signis seu instru-
menlis doceraur quasi per compendium, quid illi
quos veneramur egerint, quidve passi sunt.
Secundo, uliles suut iraagines, quamvis solita-
riae, ad charitatera erga Deura, et sanctos foven-
dam et augendam. Qui enim diligil, libcnler in-
MllLll SLClMil S
Kpicll iin;i^iii<!Mi iihsciitis iimicJ, (>l ins|)irii>ii<loiiiii-
^is iiiiiitltJScU. ilmc S<'v<'iiis Siil|»iliiis, i|iiiii vclir-
iiiciilissiiiKi saiicliiiii i'.)iiliiiiiiii ilili^<'l);il , ur.v (•)-
iiM'11 poliMiil apiiil iiiiii si-iii|i<'i' Kss<;, lo^iivil <miiii
pur lil(M'iis,iit iiiin^'iii()iii sniiiii lul viviiin cxiircsMiiin
11(1 sc iiiilliMcl; (Mii liiixlcsllssiiiK^ S(> CXCIIs.lllS, IC-
spondil l'iiiiliiiiis c.pi^l. H. iiil Scvcriiiii, si^ iioiulnin
liiilxtro ptnlcctiiin iniiiKiiiniii .S(muiii<Ii Adinni , kimI
^Mn'iM'(; iiilluK'/ iniiiii Adiinii clli^Mciii , cl idco iiolli;
iiiiiliMi^ (irc^Miriiis (|iKi(|ni^ lili. 7. cpisl. .'iil.iinllcns
Socniitlino iinii;;ineiii Siilvtiloris.dicil.s^! srirc (miiii
iiiiii^iniMn oii|KM'c,nt in iiinorc ipsins (loiniiii rccii-
lcsccrct.
'{'(Mliii ntilitas o.sl o.xcitiitio lul iniilinuinin. V.\-
pliciitur proli\(^ liacc iitilitiis in VII. syiuxlo, nct.
(►. oxlr^Miiii, (l(i ciulcin l(i(|iiiliir I5ii.-.iliiis oiiilioiu^ iti
(piiKlr.i^inlii inarlyrcs. INoUiiii csl iipiul Tcrciiliiiiii
iii Knnuclio.ipiiini vcluMnciitiM- jnv(Micin (|nc!uliiiii
conspcc-tii liilicllii. iii (piii pictiis criit .liipilcr, slii-
prniii inforiMis Piimiic, iul siinilc n:i^,'iliiiiii p(M'p('.-
Iriiiulnin provociiril. (loiilr.i vcro Nir/.iiin/.cniis iii
ciinnino (lo virtulc, (inoii citaliir iii Ml. syiiodo,
flot. i.dicit iinpndiciiiu ninli(M'ciii,cnin ad ipKMKliiin
ovociitii vcnirct, iii ip'^o liiiiinc coiispcxis.sc iniii;;i-
iiciii Poloinoiiis conlincntissiini lioniiiiis , ol iiidn
coiirnsiiin oriilmisso, ol pocnitonlia ductain rediis-
so dumimi siiiim.
Quiirto . nlilcs sniil iniaj^inos . quia coiisorvant
in iiobis inonioriam Clirisli, ol sanctoruin, clsimnl
in an^nstiis (locont . nos liabcro palronos , (pios
invocoinus.llino riioodorolns in vita Simconis Sty-
litac, dicil lUnnao fro^iuonlissinias fuisso imaj^MUPs
sniicli SinuMmis, ul oa ralione sibi tulolam el prac-
sidimn iiuilti pariiront.
Quinta nlililas csl conrossio fidoi.dum cnim dili-
gimns ct bonoranuis ima^inos sanclorum,lcstaniur
nobis placcro oornm fidoin, ol doclrinam . ol san-
ctos morcs: ol simnl nos deteslari omncm impic-
latem el idololalriain. conlra qnam ipsi usquc ad
mortiMU pniinavorniit.El niinc praecipuc tcslamur,
nobis non pliicero novilales Lnlhcranorum cl Cal-
vinistarum, dnm id rcligiose vcneramur, quod illi
sacrilcgc dcsUunnt.
Sexta est honor Dci el sanctorum ; nemo cnim
unquara dubitavil, quin origcro staluas, vel imagi-
nes inagnis viris, ad bonorem eorum perlincal.
Cerlc Euscbiuslib. 7.historiae,cap. li.hanc prac-
cipnam fuissc caussam indicat, cur Christiani coe-
perinlsanclorum imagiucs desidcrare.
INeque obslal.quod ail boc ex genliliura consue-
ludine nalum: non cnim loquitur de aliqua genli-
liuiu suporsUlionc, sed de nalurali,el proinde bo-
na consueludine, qiia solili eranl statuas erigere
iis, quos hoiioro dignos judicabant, quamqnam in
eo posloa crrarenl. quod sceleraUs eUam bomini-
Lus et falsis Piis cas erigebant.
CAPUT XI.
Proponiiur quacstio de cuUu iniaginum,
cnm argumentis adversariorum.
Deraonslravimns hactenus imagines Chrisli, et
sanctorum ficri atque haberi. et in templis, aliis-
Bellarmi.m VoI. II.
<pi(^ fiiKTis lociH rolloctiri |ios)(c: f(r>(|uiliir iiiini)
c.onlrovorsiii (lc rnltii , iilniin vl^lclirct (■jnniii(i<li
iiii:il^iii('s :ilii|uo t.'<Mi<T<! r.iillm (ironc^piciKlac miiI.
l)r. <pi:i coiitrovci t.i lianiiisciiiiis iii lihro dc liiin-
rosilins circii lliirni, diins ('xtmiiiis Unvrf.nf* od-
diicit. rMiiiii (Minitii, (|iii (lK'oli:iiil, iliiii^dlilbllH dc'
bc.ri di\ilios lionoic.s. (pios liii(;r«MitO'i ^uciil (ihrl-
sliiiiioo:ilo^'oros. idcsl, Clirisliiinonim iiccusiilurcs,
(piiii proplcr (M)s iic( iisiib.iiiliir (ilirisli.iiii l:irii(|iiaiii
idoloriiiii (:iillorcs.l'!od(Mn iiiodo ('ortiiin csl .\l<-\iiii-
driiiii Scvcruiii coliiisso liiiin^iiios Chri.sli cl Abr.i-
liac, oum ('ii(!lcris snis idolis, lcstc Aclio I.nmpri-
dio. lliKM-, hiicrc^is r^-ridliliir oninibiis Scripturac
lcstiiiiotiiis, <pia«'. prdliiliciit ii<; cnltuni lico pro
priiitn Iribniiimis crcatiirac.
Altcr orror piiori coiiliiiriiis osl c.ornm. rpii niil-
liim oiiiiiiiio lioiiorciii ini:i;;iiiil)iis s:ini:toniiii dc-
fcrri p.iliniilnr. Ilofiirt liniic (MT(jrcin Diimasccriua
in libro do hiicrcsibus in linc , cl c.st conim o-
iniiiiim, (|iK)s roconsnimus iii sociiiKh) capilc di-
sputalionis, (pii (piidoin coiitonduiit, iion cs.sc nllo
inodo colcndas iniiigiiios,pro|)lcr bacc ar^'unicnta.
1'rimo, (piiii ScripliiriK! utriii.S(|iic Tostiimonlj
sov(M'o inl<;rdicuiil cultiiin simnlacroruin , K.vodi
2(K Doulcnin. i. Kom. 1. clc. Et qiiia catliolici re*
spondonl, S(!riplur!is ropi(;Ii(;iidorc oiillum , (pii
tiibnilur simuliKris tiimqmim Dii.s : Calviniis lib.
\. Inslilul. cap. 11. § *.). et 10. coiiatur oslcndcre
ctiam .ludaeos ct Ccntilcs non biihnissc sinmlacm
l)ro Diis, sed in simul;icris Douin vcniiii cfduisso :
cl lanioii roiirohcndi, quia Dous non piilitur cul-
tiim snum ullo niodo communicari cum imagini-
bus: clcorte si Dcus non ti(;I)ol coli in iniagine ,
eodcm inodo sancti, licct colcndi csscnt, non es-
senl tamcn colcndi imaginibus. Quod Judaei non
habucrint simulacra pro Diis, sed Dcura verum in
idolo coluorinl, probal Cnlvinus, quia Exod. .32.
populns diccbat de vitulo aiireo: hli sunl Dii lui
Israd, qui tc eduxcrunl dc tcrra Acgypli. Ubi
fatcnlur sc in vilulo colcre eum Deum , a quo fue-
ranl liberali dc Acgyplo, ct ibidem Aaron indiclu-
rus dicm feslum in honorem viluli aurei , jussit
pracconis vocedici: Cras solemnitas Doiiiini csl,
ubi in bebraco illud. Domini, esl niH^ El Jud.
17. mulicr quaedam ail: Sanctificavi, cl vovi Do-
mino mille et ccntum argcnteos, ut faciam scul-
plilc alquc conflatile. Ubi etiam pro, Z)ommo, est
nomen proprium Dei veri «Tnv
Quod autem genliles coluerint Deum verum in
idoIis,probalurprimo ex Augustino in psalra. 113.
qui refert genUles respondere solitos, cum accu-
sabantur idololatriae, se non colere ipsa idola.sed
numen quod per idolumsigDificabolur.Ilcm e\ co;
quod gcntiles mulabant simulacra pro arbilrio.nec
tamcn Deos mutabanl.Dem quia uni Deo plura si-
raulacraerigebanl:nam unum Jovem esse dicebnut,
el laraen innuraerabilia illi simulacra dicabant.De-
nique, quia nova icJola quotidie sacrabant, nec la-
meu dicebanl, sc novos Deos facere.
Secundo, adducuntconcilia Iria constanlinopoli-
lanura, sub Leone Iconoraacho, teste Pauio diaco-
nolib. 21. Ilem aliud constanlinopolitanum epi-
scoporum 338. sub Conslantino Copronymo. teste
Paulo diacono lib. 22. rerum romanarum , ulrura-
C»
486
DE I31AGINIBUS SAI\CTORLM
que do.finivit imagines abolendas. Utriiisque acla
prolixc refcriint Ccnluriatores, Cenluria 8. cap. 9,
Tertium ('iiit concilium francofordiensc , in quo
reprobala fuit Yll. synodus, qunc imagines reli-
iieudas censueral. Ita rcfcrunl Ado in chronico an-
ni 795. Atjbas urspcrgcnsis in chronico anni 793.
llincnmrus Ucmcnsis lib.contra episeopum jandu-
nensem, cap. 20. et Joannes Avcnlinus in historia
seu amiabbus Bojorum lib. 4. Annonius lib.4.Rhc-
gino lib. 2.
Porro Magdeburgonses Centur. 8.cap.9. in Cne,
ex isto concilio adducunl argumenta 10. contra
imagines, el solvunl argumcnla 44. nicaenae sy-
nodi, ct respondent nd 1 1. leslinionia Patru]n,quac
idlala fueranl pro imaginibus a nicaena synodo.
Scd tam argumcnta, (luam solutiones sunl mcrae
nugae; numquam cnim ea nicaena synodus exsli-
tit, ut infra suo loco dicemus.
Tertio, adducunl libros quatuor Caroli Magni
conlra imagines. ex quibus Calvinus lib. 1. Insti-
lulionum, cap. 11. duo deducit. Primo: Nicaenum
concilium fuisse stalim refutatum ab orthodoxo
principe. Secundo: lu concilio illo nicaeno mani-
lestam impictatem detinitam. Nam, ut ex libro Ca-
roli palel, in eo concilio definitum e:st, imaginibus
dcberi honorem sacrificiorum, et eum cullum, qui
tribuilur vivificae Trinitali. Prodiit iste liberanno
\^)'id. addunl Conturinlores Centur. 8. cap. 9. col.
(>4o. cxslare alium lib.adhuc acriorcm contra ima-
gines, Ludovici Pii, si lamen credcrc dignum est.
Quarto, adducunt Patres; nam Irenaeus lib. 1,
cap. 24. ponil inter haerescs Carpocratis, quod
colcrct iinnginem Clirisli et Pauli.Epiphanius hae-
res. 79. dicit, haereticos esse, qui imaginerabea-
tae Virginis circumferunt ct colunt. Ambrosius dc
obitu Tlicodosii: InveniGt, inquit, IMcna crucem
DoniLni, rcgcm adoravil , non lignum utique ,
quia hic genlilis cst error, sed adoravil illum ,
qui pcpendil in ligno. Ilicronymus in cap. 3. Da-
nielis: CuUorcs,\nqu\[,Deiimagincs adorare non
debent. Augustinus de moribus Ecclesiae,cap. 36.
Novi, inquil, picturarum adoratores. Grcgor. lib.
7. episl. 34. el 109. el lib. 8. epist. 9. dicit imagi-
nes adorandas non esso. Alia quaedam leslimonia
adducuntur ab Iconomachis, in VII. synodo, act.
6. et ibidem relellunlur; sed facilia sunt.
Quinto, adducunl excmplum Ezechiae. 4. Reg.
18. qui confregit serpcntem aeneum,quia coli jam
coeperat.
Sexto, adducit Calvinus experienliam, quae do-
cet, paulatim in cullu imaginuui irrcpere supersti-
tionem et errorcm, quo pulalur imagini alligata
divinitas. Nam cur alioqui una imago Chrisli vel
Mariae.mngis frequentalur,quam aliaVcur prccaluri
ad imagines accedunl?cur peregrinantur aliqui ma-
gno labore ad aliquam imaginem, cum habeard do-
rni suae furte meliores el pulchriores ?
Septimo, adducunt aliquot ratiunculas; nam i-
mago, in^iuiunt, non esl capax honoris, cum sit
res iuaniraa, el sensus ac rationis, expers. Item i-
mago non esl sancta ratione ligni, aul ferri, aut
marmoris, aut allerius cujusvis materiae, sed ncc
ralione lineamentorum, aul colorum, aut alterius
rci, quae in ipsa sit, cur igitur colitur? Denique
homo esl imago Dei, el lamen non solel adorari:
quanto minus igitur ligna et lapides adorandi e-
runt. licct imaginem Dei, aut sanctorum referant.
Atquc haec sunt illorum praecipua firmamenta,
quibus respondebilur infra cap. 13. nam caeteras
nugasMagdcbui-gcnsiumlibenlcr omillamindignae
sunt cniui quibus respondcalur.Chrislus,inquiunt,
morluus est pro hominibus, non pro imaginibus,
ergo imagines non sunt colendae. Egregie scilicet.
Itcm si imagines nccessario colendae essent, soli
diviles salvarentur, qui eas emere possunt. Item
Cristus non dixit, qui imagines recipit, sed qui
vos recepit, me recipil; ergo honor imaginis non
refertur ad exemplar. Quod quideui nou arguraeu -
lari, sed luderc est.