Thursday, March 24, 2022

Martin Chemnitz Addressing Various Patristic Issues and the Veneration of Images

  

7 And lest the papalists try to escape by means of the objection that they do not ascribe any power to the matter or form of the statues, they do not worship and honor the devil, as the heathen do, but in the images honor either God Himself or the saints who live with God and who live merited well of the church, so that the honor shown the images is referred back to the prototype, that is, to those who are signified and represented through the images or statues, we shall show clearly from the histories of the heathen that they themselves referred the honors and worship which they showed to statues or pictures, not principally to the material or form of the statues, but either to the highest God or to those whose spirit they thought lived with God and who could help mortals much with God as mediators or intercessors, as those who in life had merited well of the human race. . . . .the superstition of the common people among the heathen, even as among the papalists, was more grossly attached to the statues, which knowledgeable persons disguised rather than approved. Thus according to Augustine, De civitate Dei, Bk. 4, ch. 27, the high priest Scaevola considers it expedient that the cities should be deceived in the matter of religion. And Varro says, ch. 31, that many things are true which are not only not useful for the common people to know, but even if they are false, it is expedient that the people should think otherwise, and that for this reason the Greeks had hidden the mysteries behind silence and walls. And Seneca, Bk. 6, ch. 10, ridicules the superstition of the common people thus: “They consecrate the holy, immortal, inviolable gods in a most lowly and immovable matter, they put on them the qualities of men, of wild animals, and of fish; some indeed they give bodies differing according to sex and call them deities. If these should suddenly receive life and one would meet them, they would be considered monsters.” And afterward he says: “A wise man will observe all these things as matters commanded by law, but not as pleasing to the gods.” Likewise: “All this ignoble crowd of gods, which long superstition during a long time gathered together, she shall adore in such a way that we remember that their worship belongs more to custom than to the thing itself.”

 

The wise among the heathen did not think that the gods per se had such forms as were indicated by the statues, but added skillful interpretations, as Augustine says, Epistle 49. Such interpretations are also found with Eusebius, De praeparat., Bks. 3 and 4, and with others, namely that they had at one time appeared to men in forms of this kind, or that the invisible nature or peculiarity of the gods might in this way be placed before the eyes, or that through forms of this kind the merits and devices with which they at one time helped the human race, or the benefits to be asked of them, might be signified. Arnobius writes, Bk. 6, that the heathen taught that statues are to be adored, not because brass, gold, silver, and similar materials of statues are gods, but because the presence of the gods, who are otherwise invisible, can be shown through the images, and because either gods or divine virtues dwell in the, or because through them the invisible gods are honored and worshiped, because the images are dedicated to them. He writes likewise that the heathen invoked in temples in front of statues than then they were adored under the bare heavens and the vault of the sky.

 

According to Athanasius, in his oration Contra idola, the philosophers say that the statues are not to be considered gods, but likenesses of the gods, that the gods might, under these images, answer and reveal themselves, seeing that they are otherwise invisible and cannot be known in any other way. Others, philosophizing more sharply, say that these things were instituted in order that the gods might be invoked through them, and that the coming of angels and other powers might be brought about for the conferring of benefits. They add that it is for the rudiments of learning, that men may thus learn to acknowledge the invisible God. So says Athanasius.

 

Eusebius, De praeparat., Bk. 3, quotes form Porphyry that the more unlearned regard only the wood and stone in the statues, but that the wise wanted to signify or reveal God and the powers of God to our sense through images which are familiar to us, picturing or expressing the invisible things of God through visible pictures for those who are accustomed to read or father knowledge or instruction about the gods from images as though from books. And in Bk. 4 he treats and refutes the argument of the heathen by which they defend and strengthen the cult of idols on the basis of miracles of healing and from punishments, proved b the experience for despisers of idols. And according to Augustine, De civitate Dei, Bk. 7, ch. 5, Varro says: “As through the human body the soul which is in the body is known, so through images, which have human form, the immortal spirits of the gods are signified,” etc.

 

Although by interpretations of this kind the wise among the heathen embroidered the superstitions of the common people, it nevertheless remained true what Augustine writes, Epistle 49: “Does anyone doubt that idols lack all sensation? Nevertheless, when they are placed in such locations at an honorable height, in order that they may be looked upon by those who pray and offer sacrifice, they affect the weak minds by the very resemblance of living members and senses, so that they appear to live and breathe, although they are without feeling and lifeless-especially when there is added the veneration of the multitude by which so great a worship of God is devoted to them. Likewise, then people address prayers to them as being present, or pay vows, they are altogether affected in such a way that they do not dare to think that they lack sensation.”

 

These things which we have noted until now about the images of the heathen will have their use later,  when we come to the papalist veneration of images, for a similar cult of statues is also embroidered with similar interpretations among the papalists. (Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, 4 vols. [trans. Fred Kramer; St. Louis, Miss.: Concordia Publishing House, 2021], 4:64-66)

 

 

. . . whenever in true histories there are found any more in churchly assemblies and in the exercise of divine worship, no mention is made of images, likenesses, and statues being used, either of God or of the saints. But since the idolatry of the heathen consisted in the worship and adoration of images, likenesses, and statues, which worship they nevertheless referred to what was typified by the images, as we have shown, the Christians simply abhorred images and condemned as heretics those who wanted to worship and adore either the statues of others or also Christ Himself in statues or through images.

 

Theodoret, Haeret. fab. comp., Bk. 1, and Augustine, De haeresibus, write that Simon Magus taught his followers that his own and his harlot Selene’s image should be worshiped and adored; it is also written that his disciples burned incense to it. Irenaeus writes, Bk. 1, ch. 23, that the followers of Basilides used images and invocations. And in ch. 24 he relates that the Carpocratians, who called themselves Gnostics, had certain images, either depicted in colors, or made of another material, and said that it was the form of Christ, made by Pilate at the time when Christ was with men. These images, he says, they set up together with images of the philosophers of the world, crowned them, and made other observances around them the way the heathen do.

 

Epiphanius, Tom. 2, Bk. 1, Heresy 27, says that Carpocrates secretly made images of Christ, of Paul, etc., and burned incense to them and adored them. Augustine, De haeresibus, writes that Marcellina, a member of the sect of Carpocrates, worshiped images of Jesus and Paul, of Homer and Pythagoras, adoring them and offering incense.

 

3 Among the difference between the worship of the heathen and that of the Christians this was not the smallest one, that the heathen worshiped their gods in likenesses, through images, and before statues, while the Christians worshiped and adored the true God without images, “in spirit and truth” [John 4:24], according to the prescription of the Word. And in order to cut off every occasion for idolatry, in order that the Christian religion might have no affinity with paganism, which consisted in the worship of images, and lest the seeds of heathen superstition should through the occasion of images either creep into the church or remain in the minds of converts, the primitive church did not want to receive even the images of Christ and of the saints into the places of worship. And among the points of accusation the heathen threw also this up to the Christians, that they had a religion without images.

 

Clement of Alexandria, who lived around A.D. 200, says, Stromat., Bk. 6: “We have not a single image in the world, because among things that are born noting is able to reflect the image of God.” And in the Paraeneticum he writes: “We are openly forbidden to exercise the deceitful art, for it is written: ‘You shall not make the likeness of anything.,’” etc. Likewise: “We have no perceivable image of tangible matter, btu one which is perceived by the mind for God, who along is the true God, is perceived by the intellect, not by the senses.”

 

Also in the books Recognitiones, which are ascribed, although incorrectly to Clement of Rome, there is, Bk. 5, a general disputation against images, and the chief argument of the heathen, with which also the papalists cloak the worship of their images, is refuted. He says: “The serpent is accustomed to say words of this kind through the heathen: ‘We adore visible images in honor of the invisible God.’” Clement answers: “This is most certainly false.” Yet he does not substitute other images, either painted or fabricated, either of Christ or of saints, but says: “if you truly wanted to worship the image of God you would, by doing good to man, worship the true image of God in him. If therefore you truly want to honor the image of God in him. If therefore you truly want to honor the image of God, we shall show you what is true, that you should do good to man, who is made in the image of God. For these things result in honor of God’s image to such an extent that anyone who does not do them is considered to have offered an insult to the divine image. What honor of God is it, therefore, to run to forms of stone and wood, to empty and lifeless figures, honoring them as deities, and to despite man, who is the true image of God?” So says this Clement. (Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, 4 vols. [trans. Fred Kramer; St. Louis, Miss.: Concordia Publishing House, 2021], 4:83-84)

 


8 Only and solely in Tertullian, who flourished around A.D. 200, I noticed that the story of the Shepherd calling and seeking the straying sheep was in some places depicted and inscribed on the sacred chalices. For when arguing in the book, De pudicitia, according to the teachings of Montanus, that the parable in Luke 15:3-7 must be understood, not of lapsed Christians but of heathen who have not yet been converted, he says: “Let the very pictures on your chalices come forward, if at least in these the interpretation of this sheep will shine forth clearly, whether it aims at the restitution of a Christian or of a heathen sinner.” Thus says Tertullian. But this picture was not put forth for worship; and how hostile the other writers of those times were toward images we have already shown. (Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, 4 vols. [trans. Fred Kramer; St. Louis, Miss.: Concordia Publishing House, 2021], 4:89)