SECT. I.

AND first of all he [...]aith in his said Let­ter to the Vicar, That if hee should erect any such Altar, his discreti­on would proove the onely Holo­caust which would bee sacrificed thereon. Why so? Because he had subscribed when he came to his place, that that other oblation which the Papists were wont to offer upon their Altars▪ is a blasphemous [...]ig­ment, and pernicious Imposture, Artic. 31. And here I cannot but observe, that there is little faire dealing to be looked for from this Epistoler, that faulters thus in the beginning: there being no such clause in all that Article. The Article hath nothing in it, either of Papists, Altars, or that other oblation: which is here thrust into the text, onely to make poore men believe, that by the Doctrine of the Church in her publicke Articles, Altars and Papists are meere relatives; that so whoever talkes of Altars, or placing of the Table Altar-wise, may be suspected presently to bee a Papist, or at lea [...]t [...] affected. As for that other oblation which the Papists were wont to offer upon their Al­tars, that's said to be a plasphemous figment, and [Page 8] pernicious Imposture; therefore the onely Holocaust remaining to bee sacrificed, the discretion of the Vicar. What had he sacrificed his discretion onely, and no more then so? The Article goes further sure, for it determineth positively, that The sacri­fices of Masses in the which it was commonly said, that the Priests did offer CHRIST for the quick and the dead, to have remission of paine or guilt, was blas­phemous fables, and pernicious deceipts. And there­fore had the Vicar of Gr. erected or intended to erect an Altar for such a sacrifice, he had not only sacrificed his discretion on it, but also his Religion; and beene no longer worthy to be called a Sonne of the Church of England. [...] [...]hen as sure it is, the Church admits of other sacrifices and oblati­ons, although not of those: as viz. of the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, Heb. 13. 15. as also of the oblation of our whole selves, c [...]r soules and bo­dies, to bee a resonable, holy, and lively sacrifice to Almighty GOD, Rom. 12. 1. both which, she tea­cheth us to offer to him, as our bounden duty and ser­vice is, in the holy Sacrament. [Prayer after the Communion.] And not so onely, but she alloweth of a Commem [...]rative sacrifice, for a perpetuall me­mory of Christ's precious death, of that his full, per­fect, and sufficient sacrific [...], oblation and satisfation for the sinnes of the whole world, to be continued till his comming againe: [Prayer of the Consecrati­on.] When therefore it is said in the First Ho­mily of the Sacrament, alleaged by the Epi­stoler, that wee ought, to take heed lest the [Page 9] Lords Supper (not the Communion, as he laies it down) of a memory to bee made a sacri [...]ce; it reflects not on any of the Sacrifices before al­lowed of. The Church is constant to her selfe, though her Doctors are not: and thus discovers and expounds her owne intentions: W [...] must then take heed (saith the Homily) lest of the memory, it be made a Sacrifice; lest of a Communion, it bee made a private eating; lest of two parts, we have but one; lest applying it for the dead, we lose the fruit that bee alive. By which it is most manifest, that the Sa­crifice rejected in the Homily, is that which is cry­ed downe in the Booke of Articles: which the Epistoler had no reason to suspect, was ever thought on, much lesse aymed at, by the Vicar of Gr. though he desired to have an Altar, i. e. to have the Communion Table placed Altar-wise, at the upper end of his Quire, or used the name of Altar, for the holy Table. For it is granted afterwards by the Epistoler, that the Lords Table anciently was called an Altar, because of the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving: for which hee voucheth Archbishop Cranmer, and others; and cites the Acts and Monum. pag. 1211. which is Part 2. pag. 700. of my Edition.

2 AS for the Canons of the Convocation, Anno 1571. out of which is alleged, that not the Uicar, but the Church wardens are to provide for the Communion; and that not an Altar, but a faire ioyned Table: its plaine [Page 9] they tell us no s [...]ch matter, or not so much unto his purpose, as he would perswade us. All that those Canons say, is this, and that in plaine affir­mative termes, without those Negations; Aeditui curabuntmensam ex asseribus composite junctam, quae administrationi sacro sanct ae Communionis inserviat; & mundum tapetem qui illam contegat: ‘that the Church-wardens shall provide a decent joyned Ta­ble for the Communion, and see that it be orderly covered with an handsome Carpet.’ And there was reason why this Care (for so much as con­cerned the providing of these things) should be imposed on the Church-wardens, rather than upon the Minister; viz. because the Table and the Carpet both, were to be fitted and provided at the Charge of the Parish. But the said Canons doe not tell us, that the Church-wardens shall pro­vide this Table, exclusively of the Vicar, without his counsell; or that they shall appoint either of what fashion it shall be, or whether it shall stand in the body of the Church, or in the Chancell: or whether in the Chancell, it shall be placed at the upper end, like an Altar; or in the middle, like a Table. For any thing those Canons tell us, the Vi­car was to have a greater hand in ordering the said Table, being so provided, then the Church-war­dens were, or ought to have: as one that better understood what was convenient in, and for [...]ods service, than they did or could. Nor did the Vi­car any thing in this case against the Ca [...]on, for hee provided not the Table; nor caused any Altar [Page 11] to be built of new; but only caused the Table, which he found provided by the Church-wardens, to be dis­posed of to a more convenient place, than before it stood in: so that the Allegation was as needlesse, as the reprehension without ground. Onely it pleaseth the Epistoler, to give some countenance to the Vestry-doctrine of these dayes; in which the Churchwar­dens, and other Elders of the Vestry, would gladly challenge to themselves the Supreame disposing of all Ecclesiasticall matters in their severall Parishes: leaving their Minister, (in Townes Corporate especi­ally,) to his Meditations; as if he only were intended for a looker on, a dull Spectator of their active under­takings.

3 FOr, besides what is here ascribed to the Church wardens, and denyed the Vicar, or Incumbent; it followeth in the next place, save one, that Uicars were never enabled to set up Altars, but al­lowed once, with others (i. e. the Churchwardens) to pull them downe. Injunct. 1^• Eliz. for Tables in the Church. Whereas indeed the [...], or the Minister in that Injunction, is the principall man, and the Church-wardens, or one of them, are added for assistance only; perhaps, because they were to beare the Charges of it. For it is ordered that n [...] Altar be taken downe, but by the over-sight of the Curate of the Church, and the Church-wardens, or one of them at the least, wherin no riotous or disordered manner to be vsed▪ N [...]t pulled downe therefore, as the Epistoler hath i [...], which implies [...] or a popular fury; but taken downe in faire and orderly manner: and that [Page 12] not by the Church wardens, as the principall men, but by the Curate chiefly, and any one of the Churchwar| dens, whom he pleased to chuse. It's true indeed, the Bishop of the Diocesse is he to whom the ordering of these things doth of right belong; and in the preface to the Common Prayer Book it is so appointed. For in the said Preface it i [...] said, that for as much as nothing almost can be so plainely set forth but doubts may arise in the vse and practise of the same: to appease all such diversities, (if any arise) and for the resolution of all doubts concerning the manner how to understand, doe, and execute the things contained in this Booke, the Parties that so doubt shall alwaies resort unto the Bishop of the Diocesse, &c. But then, it is as true, or at least, more fit, that he should send his resolutions to the Priest, then to the Parish; the Curate having taken an oath of Canonicall obedience to him, which the people have not. [...] of the Letter, that the Church-wardens [...] other smacke of the said Vestrie-doctrine: and was there placed in front to delight the people, who need, God wot, no such incouragements to contemne their Parsons, being too forward in that kind of their own accord. Paroc pecor stimulis — Labor est inhibere vo| l [...]ntes.

4 FOr the remaining passsage in this first Paragraph, where it is said, that Altars were removed by Law, and Tables placed in their steed, in all, or the most Churches in England; and for [Page 13] the proofe thereof, the Queenes Injunctions cited, as if they did affirme as much: it's plaine, that there is no such thing in the said I [...]junction. The Queenes In­junctions An. 1559. tell us of neither all nor most▪ as it is alleged: but only say, that in many and sundry parts of this Realme, the Altars in the Churches were remoo­ved, and tables placed for the administration of the ho­ly Sacrament, &c. Sundry and many is not all nor most; in my poore conceit. And it is plaine by that which followes, not only that in other places, the Al­tars were not taken downe upon opinion of some further Order to be taken in it by the Queenes Commissioners; but it is ordered, That no Altar shall bee taken downe, without the oversight of the Curat, & one of the Church wardens at the least; and that too with great care and caution, as before is said. Nay the Commissioners were contented well enough, that the Altars former­ly erected might have still continued; declaring, as it doth appeare by the said Injunction, that the [...]emo­ving of the Altars, seemed to bee a matter of no great moment: and so it is acknowledged by this Epistoler, in the following paragraph, where he confesseth it in these words, It seemes the Queenes Commis­s [...]oners were content, that they (the Altars) should stand, as wee may guesse by the Iniunc­tions 1559. In which wee have that great advan­tage which Tullie speakes of, Con [...]itentem reum. The Queenes Commissioners, as they had good autority for what they did; so wee may warrantably thinke, that they were men of speciall note, and able judge­ments. And therefore if they were contented, that [Page 14] the Altars formerly erected should continue stan­ding, (as the Epistoler confesseth;) it is a good Argu­ment, that in the first project of the Reformation, neither the Queene nor her Commissioners disallowed of Altars, or thought them any way unserviceable in a Church Reformed. So that for ought appeares unto the contrary, neither the Article, nor the Homi­ly, nor the Queenes Injunctions, nor the Canons of 1571. have determined any thing: but that as the Lords Supper may be called a Sacrifice, so may the ho­ly Table be called an Altar; and consequently, set up in the place, where the Altar stood.

5 Now as there is alleged no Canon, Ordinance, or Doctrine, which if examined rightly, doe declare against it; so there is much that may be said in defence therof: and of that much we will use no­thing, but that which will agree with the capacitie of the meanest man, and shall be proved by that autho­ritie, which the Epistoler trusts to most; in all this bu­sinesse, even the Acts and Monuments. To which we shall adjoyne, for our more assurance, the Testimony of two Acts of Parliament; one under King Edward the sixth, th'other under Queene Elizabeth. First, for the Acts and Monuments, we find, that not a few of those which suffered death for their opposing of the grosse & carnall Doctrine of Transubstantiation, did not only well enough endure the name of Altar, but without any doubt or scruple, called the Lords Sup­per, sometimes a Sacrifice, and many times the Sacra­ment of the Altar. So speaks Iohn Fryth, Secondly, [Page 15] They examin [...]d me, touching the Sacrament of the Al­tar, Whether it was the very Body of Christ or not. Act; and Monuments, part. 2. pag. 307. Iohn Lambert thus, As concerning th'other six Sacraments, I make you the same Answer, that I have done unto the Sacrament of the Altar, and no other, pag. 401. And in another place, CHRIST being offered up once for all, in his owne proper person, is yet sayd to bee offered up not onely every yeare at Easter, but also every day in the celebra­tion of the Sacrament; because his Oblation once for ever made, is thereby represented, pa. 435. Archbishop Cranmer also, though he opposed the Statute of the Six Articles, particularly that of Transubstantiation, which hee throughly canvast: yet at the phrase or terme of Sacrament of the Altar, hee tooke no of­fence, but useth it as formerly had been accusto­med, pag. 443.

6. NOr was it a new name taken up of late, but such as some of them acknowledge to be de­rived from pure Antiquity; & those too, such as liv'd and suffered, after the name of Altar had bin left out of the Booke of Common Prayer, which was last e­stablished. Iohn Philpott thus, That partly because it is a Sacrament of that lively Sacrifice, which CHRIST offered for our sins upon the Altar of the Crosse; and partly because that Christs body crucified for us, was that bloody Sacrifice, which the blood-shedding of all the beasts offered upon the Altar in the old Law did prefigu­rate, & signifie unto us: the old Writers doe sometimes call the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of CHRIST, [Page 16] amongst other names which they ascribe thereunto, the Sacrament of the Altar, Part. 3. pag. 23. Thus Bishop Latimer plainely granteth, that the Lords Table may be called an Alt [...]r, and that the Doctors call it so in many places, though there be no propitiatory Sacrifice, but onely CHRIST, pag. 85. And lastly, Bishop Ridley do [...]h not only call it, the Sacrament of the Altar, af­firming thus, that in the Sacrament of the Altar, is the naturall body and blood of CHRIST, &c. pag. 492. But in reply unto an Argument of the Bishop of Lin­colnes, taken out of Cyrill, doth resolve it thus, That the Word ALTARE, in the Scripture, signifieth as well the Altar whereupon the Iewes were wont to offer their burnt Sacrifices, as the Table of the Lords Supper: And that S. Cyrill meaneth by this word ALTARE, not the Iewish Altar, but the Table of the Lord: and by that saying, Altars are erected in Christs name, Ergo, CHRIST is come; hee meanes, that the Com­munion is administred in his remembrance▪ Ergo, CHRIST is come, pag. 497. Which being the lan­guage of the Prelates, and other learned men then living, it is no marvell, if in the Parliament, 1. Edw. 6. cap. 1. the same name occurre. The Parliaments in matters which concerned Gods Service, did then use to speake, according as the Church had taught them. Now in that Parliament, however it was re­solved, that the whole Communion should be resto­red, which in effect, was a plaine abolition of the former Masse; yet is that Act which so restores it, entituled, An Act against such persons as shall speake irreverently, against the Sacrament of the Body and [Page 17] Blood of CHRIST, commonly called, The Sacrament of the Altar; and for the receiving thereof under both kinds. And in the body of the Act, there is speciall Order taken for a Writt, to bee directed to the Bi­shop of the Diocesse, on such delinquencies; where it is called expressely, Sacro sanctum Sacramentum Altaris; the holy Sacrament of the Altar. Which being repealed by Queene Mary, in the first Parlia­ment of her reigne, because of the Communion under both kinds, in the same allowed of; was after­wards revived by Queene Elizabeth, both the head and body, and every branch and member of it 1. E­liz. cap. 1. So that we have a Sacrifice, and an Altar▪ and a Sacrament of the Altar, on all sides acknow­ledged; neither the Prince or Prelates, the Priest or people, dissen [...]ing from it: some of those termes, being further justified by the Statute Lawes.

SECT. II.

NExt, for the second point, the standing of the Communion Table, Altar-wise; the said Epistoler thus declares himselfe to the Vicar of Gr. If you meane (saith he) by Altar-wise, that it should stand in that place of the Chancell where the Altar stood▪ I thinke somewhat may be said for [Page 18] because the [...]njunctions 1559. did so place it. And I conceive it to bee the most decent scituation when it is not used, and for use too, where the Quire is mounted up by steps, and open, so that hee that officiates may be seen and heard of all the Congregation. Such an one I heare your Chancell is not. But if you meane by Al­tarwise, that it should stand along close by the wall, so as you be forced to officiate at one end thereof (as you may have observed in great mens Chappels) I doe not believe that ever the Communion Tables were (otherwise than by casualty) so placed in Countrey Churches. This I have laid together, as being but a Preamble to the next Discourse; and rather matter of opinion and hearesay, than of proofe, reason, or authority: For it stands onely on I thinke, and I conceive, and I have heard, and I believe not; which no man can interpret to be Demonstrations. Therefore to looke upon the passage, as it lyeth together, we have a plaine confes­sion, that if by placing of the Table Altarwise, is meant the setting of it in that place where the Altar stood; there is then somewhat, at the least, to be said for that, because the Injunctions did so place it: and next an absolute revocation of the said confession; where it is said, that if by Altarwise is meant, that it should stand along close by the wall, then hee belie­veth not that ever the Communion Table was so placed (unlesse by causualty) in Country Churches. Quo teneam nodo? This is just fast and loo [...]e, and I know not what; the reconciliation of two Contradi­ctions. [Page 19] The Queenes Injunctions were set out for the [...]eiglement and direction of all the Churches in this kingdome, and it is said in them, that the holy Table in every Church shall be decently made, (in case the Al­tars were removed, which they left at liberty) and set in the place where the Altar stood, and there com­monly covered, as thereto belongeth. If in the place where the Altar stood, then certainly it must stand along clo [...]e by the wall, because the Altars alwaies stood so: and that aswell in Countrey Churches, as in great mens Chappels, all being equally regarded in the said Injunctions, as in the Preface to the same doth at full appeare. Wheras in case the Table were to stand with one end toward the East great Window, as is after said; it could not possibly s [...]and in the place where the Altar did, as the Injunctions have appointed: the Altar taking up much roome to the North and South, which the Table placed end­long doth not ta [...]e up; and contrary, the Table taking up much roome to the East and West, which the Al­tar did not. However wee may take what is given us heere by the Epistoler, where hee affirmes, that placing of the Table where the Altar stood, is the most decent scituation when it is not used, and for use too, where the Quire is mounted up by steps and open, so that he that officiates may bee seene and heard of all the Congrega­tion; and such an one, as he [...]ad heard, the Vica [...]s Chancell was not. W [...]ether the Chancell at Gra: was mounted up by st [...]ps, or not, is no great matter. In case it were not so, it might have easily been done, [Page 20] without much charge: and those of Gra: were the more beholding to this Epistoler, for taking so much paines to save their purses. If it were mounted up by steps, and that it were most decent for the Tables to be placed thereon: Why not aswell along the Wall, as with one end thereof to the East great Window?

2. FOr this, there are three Reasons given us, First, because then the Countrey people would suppose them, Dressers, rather than Ta­bles. Secondly, because the Queenes Commis­sioners for Ecclesiasticall matters, directed that the [...]able should stand, not where the Al­tar, but where the steps of the Altar formerly stood▪ Orders 1561. And thirdly, because the Mi­nister appointed to reade the Communion, [...]which hee, the Vicar, out of the Booke of Fast 1^•. of the King, was pleased, as the Epistoler phraseth it, to call Second Service) is directed to reade the Commandements, not at the end, but at the Northside of the Table, which im­plies the End to be placed towards the East great Window. Rubrick before the Communion. And would the people take the Table, if placed Al­tarwise, to be a [...]resser, not a Table? I now per­ceive from whom it was that M^r. Prynne borrowed so unmannerly and prophane a phrase, whereof I thought him formerly to have beene the Author [L [...]me Giles his haltings]: And from whom also he did borrow the quotations in his Appendix, against Bowing at the name of JESUS, the mistakes and all. [Page 21] [...] qq. * 4. Viz. Rubrick for the Communion. Queene Elizab. Injunctions, [Injunc. for Tables in the Church] The Booke of Canons, An. 1471. p. 18. I say, and the mistakes and all: for both with him, and this Epist [...] ­ler, it is p. 18. whereas indeed in the old Book, which was th [...] meant by the Epistoler, it is p. 15. which plainly shewes, out of whose quiver M^r. Prynne did steale those arrowes. Just in that scornfull sort, Do­ctor Weston, the then Deane of Westminster, did in a Conference at Oxford with Bishop Latimer, call the Communion Tables, as in King Edwards reigne they had beene placed in some Churches, by the name of [...]yster-boards, Act. & Mon. Part. 3. p. 85. and so hee called in a Sermon at S^•. Pauls Crosse also, p. 95. The like did Doctor White, the then Bishop of Lincolne, in a Conference with Bishop Ridley, where hee doth charge the Protestants in King Edwards daies, for setting up an Oyster Table in stead of an Altar, p. 497. The Church of England, is in the meane time, but in sorry case. If shee appoint the Lords Board to be placed like a common Table, the Papists they will call it an Oyster-table: If like an Altar, the Puritans, and M^r. Prynne, will call it a Dr [...]sser-beard. A sloven­lie and scornfull terme, as before was said, and such as doth deserve no other Answer, than what the Marginall notes in the Acts and Monuments, give in the one place to the Deane of Westmin [...]ter. viz. The bl [...]s [...]hemous mouth of Doctor W [...]ston, calling the Lords table an Oysterboard, pat. 85. or what they give in th'other place to the Bishop of Lincolne; viz. Bishop White blasphemously called the [...]oord of the Lords Sup­per, [Page 22] [...] Oyster table▪ pag. 497. I would there were no worse notes in the Acts and Monuments.

3. AS for the Orders published by the Queenes Comm [...]ssioners, An^•. 1561. they say in­deed as is alleaged, th [...]t in the place where the steps were, the Communion Table shall stand: but then they say withall, which is not alleaged, that there be fixed on the wall over the Communion board, the tables of Gods Precepts imprinted for the said pur­pose. And in the Booke of Advertiseme [...]ts, entituled, Articles of Advertisement for due order in the publick Administration of Common-praier, and the holy Sacra­ments; and published in An^•. 1565. it is ordered thus: The Parish shall provide a decent Table, standing on a frame, for the Communion Table, which they shall de­cently cover with a Carpet of silke, or other decent cove­ring, and with a white linne [...] cloath in the time of the Administration: And shall set the tea Commandements upon the East wall, over the said Table. Which put together make up this construction, that the Commu­nion Table was to stand above the steps, and under the Commandements: and therefore all along the wall, on which the ten Commandements were appointed to be placed; which was directly where the Altar had stood before. And in this wise wee must inter­pret the said Orders and Advertisements; or else the Orders published 1561, must run quite crosse to the Injunctions published 1559, but two yeares before: which were r [...]diculous to imagine in so grave a State.

[Page 23] 4. NOr doth it helpe the cause undertaken by the Epistoler, that The Minister appointed to reade the Communion, is di­rected to reade the Commandements, not at the end, but at the Northside of the Table: there being no difference in this case betweene the North-end, and the North-side, which come both to one. For in all quadrilaterall, and quadrangular fi­gures, whether they bee a perfect Square, which Geometricians call Quadratum, or a long Square (as commonly our Communion Tables are) which they call Oblongum: it's plaine that if wee speake accor­ding to the rules of Art, (as certainly they did which composed that Rubricke) every part of it is a side; how ever Custome hath prevailed to call the nar­rower sides by the name of ends. When therefore hee that ministreth at the Altar, stands at the North-end of the same, as wee use to call it; hee stands no question at the North-side thereof, as in proprietie of speech wee ought to call it; and so implies not, as it is supposed by the Epistoler, that the end, or nar­rower part thereof, is to bee placed towards the East great Window. And this Interpretation of the Ru­brick, I the rather stand to, because that in the Com­mon Prayer booke done into Latine by command, and authorized by the great Seale of Queene Elizabeth, Ann. 2^•. of her reigne, it is thus translated: Ad cu­jus mensae septentrionalem partem, Minister stans, ora­bit orationem Dominicam. viz. That the Minister standing at the North part of the Table, shall say the [Page 24] [...]

5. FOr the Parenthesis, I might very well have pas­sed it over; as not conducing to this purpose; but that it seemes to cast a scorne on them, by whose direction the Booke of the Fast, in 1^•. of the King was drawne up and published, as if it were a Noveltie or singular devise of theirs, to call the latter part of Di­vine Service, by the name of Second Service: where­as indeed the name is very proper for it, and every way agreeable both to the practise of antiquitie, and the intentions of this Church at that very time, when the Booke of Common Prayer was first established. For if we looke into the Liturgie of our Church, im­mediately after Athanasius Creed, wee shall find it thus: Thus endeth the Order of Morning and Eve­ning Prayer throughout the whole yeare: i. e. the forme of Morning and Evening Prayer for all dayes, equal­ly, aswell the working dayes, as the holy dayes, with­out any difference. Then looke into the first Ru­bricke before the Communion, and wee find it thus: [Page 25] So many as intend to bee partakers of the holy Commu­nion, shall signifie their names unto the Curates over night, or else in the morning before the beginning of Morning Praier, or immediately after. Where cleer­ly it is mean [...], that there should be some reasonable time betweene Morning Praier and the Commu­nion. For otherwise, what leisure could the Curate have, to call before him, open, and notorious [...] Li­vers, or such as have done any wrong unto their neigh­bours by word or deed, and to advertise them, in any wise not to presume to come unto the Lords Table, till they have manifested their repentance, and amended their former na [...]ghty lives, and recompensed the par­ties whom they have done wrong unto? Or what spare time can wee afford him, betweene the Reading Pew, and the Holy Table, to reconcile those men, betwixt▪ whom hee [...] malice and hatred to raigne; and on examination of their dispositions, to admit that party, who is contented [...] [...]rgive, and repell the obstinate; according as by the Rubrick hee is bound to doe. Which, being compared with the first Rubrick, after the Communion, where it is said, that upon the Holi-daies, if there be no Com­munion, shall be said all that is appointed at the Com­munion, untill the end of the Homilie, concluding with the Praier for the whole state of Christs Church militant here on earth, &c. makes it both manifest and undeniable, that the distinction of the First and Second Service, is grounded on the very meaning of holy Church; however the Epistoler doth please to slight it.

[Page 26] 6. THat which next followes, is a Confir­mation onely of what went before: Viz. that The Ministers standing at the North side of the Table, was no new di­rection in the Queenes time onely, but pra­ctised in King Edwards reigne; that in the plot of our Liturgie sent by Knox, and Whitting­ham to Master Calvin, in the latter end of Queene Mary, it is said, that the Minister must stand at the North-side of the Table; (that onely was put in to sh [...]w, that [...]ee had the Booke entituled, The Troubles of Francofurt:) that in King Edwards Liturgies, the Mini­ster standing in the middest of the Altar, (i. e. with his back turned towards the people) 1549, is turned into his standing at the Northside of the Table, 1552. And finally, that this last Liturgy was revived by Parl [...]ament, 1^•. Eliz. This wee acknowledge to be true, but it addes no­thing to the reasons produced before: and so per­haps it is as true, that it was used so, when this Letter was written, in most places of Eng­land; which in this kind had too much deviated from the ancient practise. But where it followeth in the next place, that What is done in Chap­pels, or Cathedrall Churches, is not the poynt in question, but how the Tables are appoynted to be placed in Parish Churches: I thinke that therein the Epistoler hath been much mistaken. For certainly the ancient Orders of the [Page 27] Church of England, have beene best preserved in the Chappells of the Kings Majestie, and the Cathe­dralls of this Kingdome; without the which per­haps, wee had before this beene at a losse amongst our selves, for the whole forme and fashion of Di­vine Service. And therefore if it bee so in the Chap­pells and Cathedrall Churches, as the Epistoler doth acknowledge; it is a pregnant Argument, that so it ought to bee in the Parochiall; which heerein ought to president and conforme themselves, ac­cording to the Patterne of the Mother Churches. And I would faine learne of this doughtie Dispu­tant, why hee should make such difference be­tweene the Chappells, and Cathedrall Churches on the one side, and the Parochialls on the other: as if some things which were not warranted by Law, were used in the one; and such as are allowed by Law, were not permitted to the other. The Lawes and Canons now in force, looke alike on all. And therefore heere must bee some cunning, to make the Chappells and Cathedralls guiltie of some [...]oule transgression, some breach of Law and publick Or­der; the better to expose them to the censure of a race of men, who like them ill enough already.

7. AS for that fancie which comes next, that In some Chappells and Ca­thedralls, the Altars may bee still standing or to make use of their Covers and Ornaments, Tables may bee placed in their roome, of the same length and fashion the Altars were of; [Page 28] [...] dreame, and a poore conjecture. Questionlesse, neither the Chappells Royall, nor any of the Cathedrall Churches▪ have hitherto been so [...] brought, (Gods Name bee praysed) but that they have been able to provide themselves of con­venient Ornaments, without being any way behol­ding to their former Altars. However, if it were lawfull in Cathedrall Churches, either to suffer the old Altars to continue standing, or to set up Tables in their places, of the same length and fashion that the Altars were of, onely in poynt of thrift, to save greater charges: I hope it will bee thought more lawfull, by indifferent men, to place the Table Altar-wise, in Parochiall Churches, in poynt of decencie, and due obedience unto publike Order That Al­tars doe stand still in the Lutheran Churches, (the Doctours and Divines whereof hee doth ac­knowledge afterwards to bee sound Protestants) by the Epistoler is confessed, though it makes against him: as also that the Apology for the Augustan Confession doth allow it. And he confesseth too, not onely that they stood a yeare or two in King Edwards time, as may appeare by the Liturgy printed 1549. but that the Queenes Commis­sioners were content they should stand, as be­fore we noted. What, stood they but a yeare or two in King Edwards time? Yes certainely they stood foure yeares at the least, in that Princes reigne. For in the first yeare of King Edward, being 1547. was passed, that Statute, entituled, An Act against such persons as shall speake ireverently of the Sacrament of [Page 29] the Altar. Anno 1548. The Common prayer Book was confirmed by Parliament, although not publi| shed till the next yeare; wherein the word Altar is oft used, and by the which it seemes the Altars did continue as before there were. Anno. 1540, A Let| ter in the Kings name from the Lords of the Coun| cell, came to Bishop [...]er, for abrogating Private Masses; wehrein it is appoynted, that the Holy bles| sed Communion bee ministred at the High Altar of the Church, and in no other places of the same. Act. and Monum. Part. 2. p. 662. And in the yeare 1550. which was the fourth yeare of his reigne, came out an Order from the Councell, unto Bishop Ridley, for taking downe the Altars in his Diocesse, Pag. 699. So long it seemes they stood without con­tradiction; and longer might have stood perhaps, if Calvin had given way unto it; of which more heereafter.

8. IN the meane time; from matter of Evi­dence and Authoritie, wee must proceed next unto poynt of Reason, and then goe on againe unto matter of Fact; as the way is lead by the E­pistoler, whom we must follow step by step in all his wandrings. And in this way hee tells us. That the Sacrifice of the Altar beeing abolished, these (call them what [...]ou will) are no more Altars, but Tables of Stone or timber, and that it was alleaged so 24. Novemb. 4^•. Edw. 6. And [...] so alleaged, that the Sacrifice of the Al­tar was abolished? I believe it not. It was allea­ged [Page 30] indeed, That the forme of an Altar was ordained for the Sacrifices of the Law; that both the Law, and the Sacrifices thereof doe cease, and therefore that the forme of the Altar ought to cease also. Act▪ and Mo­numents part. 2. pag. 700. The Sacrifice of the Al­tar, and the Sacrifices of the Law, are two different things: it being told us by Saint Paul, that wee (the Christians) have an Altar, whereof they have no right to [...]are, which served the T [...]bernacle, Hebr. 13. 10. That Altar, and that Sacrifice, must continue alwaies. And were it granted, as it need not, that since the Law, and Sacrifices thereof be both abolished, there­fore the forme of the Altar is to be abolished: yet would this rather helpe, than hurt us. For the Com­munion Table standing in the Body of the Church or Chancell, hath indeed more resemblance to Altars, on which the Priests did offer either Sacrifice, or In­cence, under the Law; then if it did stand Altarwise, close along the wall, as did the Altars, after in the Christian Church: the one of them, which was that for Sacrifice, standing in atri [...] Sacerdotum, in the mid­dle of the Priests Court, without the Temple; the other being that of Incense, in Templo exteriori, even in the outward part of the Temple, and not within the Sanctum Sanctorum, as our Altars doe.

9. THat the said Tables of stone, or timber (though placed Altarwise, for so I take it is his mea­ning) may be well used in Kings and Bishops houses where there are no people so voyd of understanding, as to be scandalized, wee are [Page 31] glad to heare of: and if it be not true, would to God it were. However wee may safely say, that a small measure of understanding, is in this kind sufficient to avoid offence: there being none so weak of wit, who may not easily bee perswaded (if at least they will, or that their Leaders will permit them) that the dis­posing of Gods Table, rather to one place than ano­ther, it is not considerable in it selfe, or otherwise materiall in his publick worship, further than it con­duceth unto Order and Vniformitie. If any bee so void of understanding, which wee hardly thinke, and plead their weaknesse in this point, as did the Brethren in the Conference at Hampton Court; wee aske them with his Majestie of happy memory, not whether 45 yeares, but whether 80 yeares be not sufficient for them to gather strength, and get understanding; whe­ther they be not rather head-strong, than not strong e­enough. Confer. at Hampt. Court. pag. 66. For it may very well be thought that it is not any want of under­standing, but an opinion rather that they have of their understandings, which makes some men run crosse to all publick Order, and take off [...]nce at any thing, whereof themselves are not the Authors.

10. THat which next followeth, viz. that on the orders for breaking downe of Al­tars, all Dioceses did agree upon receiving Ta­bles, but not upon the fashion or forme of Ta­bles, is fairer in the flourish, than in the fact. For in the Act. & Mon. p. 1212. which there is cited, being of my Edit. part 2. pag. 700. there is no such matter. [Page 32] It is there said indeed, that on receipt of his Majesties Le [...]ters sent to Bishop Ridley, the Bishop did [...] the right forme of a Table to be used in all his Di [...]cesse: but that it was appointed so in all other Diocesses, as the Epistoler hath affirmed, doth not appeare by any thing in that place remembred. And though hee did appoint it so, yet possibly it may be doubted, whe­ther the people, fully understood his meaning: it being there said, that after the exhortation of the said Bishop Ridley, there grew a great diversity about the forme of the Lords boord, some using it after the forme of a Table, and some of an Altar. So that the dif­ference was not about the having of a Table, wherein it seemes, most men were ready to obey the Kings Command, and the Bishops Order; but in the pla­cing of the same: some men desiring, that it should be placed after the fashion of an Altar, others more willing that it should be used like a Common Table; in which bo [...]h parties followed their owne affections, as in a thing which had not been determined of, but l [...]ft at large.

11. THat which comes after is well said, but not well applyed. It is well said, that In the old Testament one and the same thing is ter­med an Altar and a Table▪ an Altar in respect of what is there offred unto God, and a Table, i [...] regard of what is there participated by men, as for Example by the Priests. By this might better have been applied, and used to justifie the cal­ling of the Communion Table by the name of Altar, [Page 33] in respect of those Oblations made to God: as the Epistoler doth acknowledge afterwards. That of the [...]ophet Malachie, 1. ver. 7. is indeed worth the marking, and doth demonstrate very well that in the old Testament, Gods Altar is the very same with Gods Table, but how it answereth [...] place of the [...]ebrewes, 13. 10. is beyond my reach, the Prophet speaking of that [...] and those Sacrifices, whereof wee have no right to ea [...]e which live under the Gospell; and the Apostle of that Altar, and that Sacrifice, whereof they have no right to eate, which live under the Law. In case, that Pas­sage had been urged by the Vicar of Gr: as the Epi­stoler hath informed us, for wee take his word; a­gainst some of his fellow Ministers, as before him it was by Master Morgan against Peter Mar­tyr, in maintenance of an Altar in the Christian Church: however it might possibly have been an­swered otherwise by the Respondent, sure it had ne­ver been well answered by that text of Malachie.

12. VVHere it is next said, that we have no Altar in regard of Oblation, but wee have an Altar in regard of Participation & Communion granted to us: Were it no other­wi [...]e than it is here said, yet here we are all allowed an Altar, in regard of Participation and Communion; which is enough to justifie both the scituation of the Table Altarwise, and the name of Altar, and that too in the very instant of receiving the Communion. Now for the proofe that wee have an Altar also in [Page 34] regard of Oblation, wee need looke no further than into the latter end of this second Paragraph; where howsoever the Epistoler doth suppose, that the name of Altar crept (hee might aswell have said, it came) into the Church, in a kind of comply­ing in Phrase with the people of the Iewes, as Chemnitius, Gerardus, and other sound Pro­testants were of opinion; (where by the way, we may perceive that some may bee sound Prote­stants, though they like of Altars:) Yet he acknow­ledgeth withall, that it was so called, partly, in re­gard of those Oblations made upon the Com­munion Table, for the use of the Priest and the Poore, whereof we reade in Justine Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and other ancient Writers; and partly, because of the Sacrifice of praise and thanks-giving, as Arch-bishop Cranmer, and others thought, Acts & Monum. pag. 1211. which is Part 2. pag. 700. of my Edition. Whereby it seemes, that besides the complying in Phrase with the Iews (which the Christians of the Primitive times had little care of, when there was not greater reason to perswade them to it:) the Communion Table, was called an Altar, both in regard of the Oblations there made to God, for the use of his Priests, and of his Poore; as also, of the Sacrifice of Praise and Thanks-giving, which was there offred to him by the Con­gregation. And therefore, as before wee found an Altar, in regard of Participation, and Communion; so heere wee have an Altar in respect of Oblation also.

[Page 35] 13. THis, though it be so cleere a Truth, that the Epistoler could not deny it; yet puls hee downe with one hand, what hee was after for­ced to set up with the other. For so it followeth in the Letter: The use of an Altar is to Sacrifice upon, and the use of a Table is to eate upon: And because Communion is an action most proper for a Table, as an Oblation is for an Altar; what then? therefore the Church in her Liturgy and Canons calling the same a Ta­ble onely, doe not you call it an Altar? This is indeed the in [...]erence which is made from the former Principles. But if the Principles be true, as indeed they are not, there being an Altar in the Temple, which was not made to Sacrifice upon, as the Altar of Incense; and a T [...]ble also in the Temple, which was not made to [...]ate upon, as the Table for the She [...]-bread: another, and a worse conclusion would soone follow on it; which is, that men would thinke it necessary to sit at the Communion. For if Commu­nion be an action most proper for a Table, as it is af­firmed, and that the use of a Table to be Eate upon, as is also said: the inference will be very strong, that therefore wee are bound to sit at the Commu­nion, even as wee doe at Common Tables, which wee eate upon. A thing much sought for by some men, as if not onely a great part of their Christian liberty, but that their whole Religion did consist therein; but brought into the Churches first, by the moderne Arians (who stubbornly gain-saying the [Page 36] Divinity of our Lord and Saviour, thought it no rob­bery to be equall with him, and sit down with him at his Table:) and for that cause most justly banished the reformed Church in Poland. For so it was determined there, in a generall Synod, An^•. 1583. Ne sessio sit in u­su ad mensam Domini. The reason was, Nam haec cere­moniea, Ecclesijs christianis & coetibus Evangelicis non est usit [...]ta; tantum (que) propria infidelibus Arianis, domino par [...] solio sese collocantibus: Because it was a thing not used in the Christian Church, but proper to the Arians onely, who thought themselves haile-fellowes with their Lord and Saviour; and to them we leave it.

14. WEe are now come unto the Story of the Change, the change of Altars into Tables, and the reasons of it, which is thus deli­vered: In King Edwards Liturgy of 1549, it is every where; but in that of 1552, it is no where called an Altar, but the Lords Boord. Why? Because the people being scandalized heerewith in Countrey Churches, first beats them downe de facto, then the supreame Ma­gistrate by a kind of Law, puts them downe de jure; and setting Tables in their roomes, tooke from vs the Children of the Church and Common-wealth, both the name and nature of former Altars. What ever may be said of the change in the Publicke Liturgie, the reason here assigned for taking downe of Altars, is both false and dangerous. Nor is it altogether true, that in the Liturgies here remembred, the name of Altar is used onely in the one; though true it be, that that [Page 37] of the L [...]rds Boord, or Table, is used onely in the o­ther. Though the Epistoler had not, perhaps, the lei­su [...]e, to [...]earch the Liturgie of 1549, where it is once called Gods boord, and once his Table, as viz. in the Praier: We doe not presume, &c. and in the Rubricke of the same: yet he could not be ignorant that it was so observed in his owne Author, the Acts and Monu­ments; and in the Page by him often quoted. Where it is said, that ‘The Booke of Common Prayer cal­leth the thing whereupon the Lord's Supper is mi­nistred, indifferently, a Table, an Altar, or the Lord's Board, without prescription of any forme thereof either of a Table, or of an Altar; so that whether the Lord's Board have the forme of an Al­tar, or of a Table, the Booke of Common Prayer calleth it both an Altar and a Table. For as it cal­leth it an Altar, whereupon the Lord's Supper is mi­nistred, a Table, and the Lord's board: so it calleth the Table, whereon the holy Communion is di­stributed with Lauds and Thanksgivings unto the Lord, an Altar: For that there is offered the same Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving. Part. 2. pag. 700.’ And this I have he rather laid downe at large, to shew with what indifferencie these names of Table, Board, and Altar, have beene used before; and may be used for the present: as also in what re­gard the Lord's Table may be called an [...]ltar. And this according unto Master Foxes Marginall note, in the selfe same Page; viz. The Table how it may be cal­led an Altar, and in what respect: which shewes that he allowed it to be called an Altar, though this Epistoler doth not like it.

[Page 38] 15. NOw as the Story of the change is not al­together true, so the reason there assigned, is both [...]al [...]e and dangerous. First, it is false, the Al­teration not being made, because the people were scandalized with Altars in Countrey Chur­ches. The people were so farre from being scanda­lized with having Altars; that in the Countreyes of Devon and Cornwall, they rose up in Armes, because the Masse was taken from them. Act. and Monum. Part. 2. pa. 666. And if we looke into the Story of tho [...]e times, we shall quickly find, that it was no scan­dall taken by the people, which did occasion that or any other c [...]ange in the Common prayer Booke; but and offence conceived by Calvin. It seemes that Bucer had informed him of the condition of this Church, and the publike Li [...]urgie thereof; and thereupon he wrote to the Duke of Sommerset, who was then Pro­tector. Epistola ad Bucer [...]m. In which his Letter to the Duke, hee finds great fault with the Commemo­ration of the dead, which was then used in the Cele­bration of the Lords Supper, though he acknowled­geth the same to bee very ancient; calling it by the name of a piece of Leaven, Quo m [...]ssa integra sanctae coenae quodammodo ace [...]ieret, where with the whole Communion was made sower. Other things in the Liturgie hee found fault withall, and then adviseth, Illa omnia abscindi se [...]el, that they should all at once be cut off for ever. Epist. ad Protectorem Angliae. Nor stayed hee here, but he sollici [...]ed Archbishop Cranmer to the same [...]ffect, [...]. 1551, being the yeare [Page 39] before the Al [...]eration made, (as by the placing of that Letter doth appeare) complaining in the same unto him, [...] That ‘in the Church of England, there was yet remaining a whole masse of Pope­ry, which did not only blemish and obscure, but in a manner overthrow Gods holy worship.’ So that however in his Answer to the Devonshire men, the King had formerly affirmed, that the Lords Supper, as it was then administred, was brought even to the very [...]se, as CHRIST left i [...], as the Apostles used it, and as the holy Fathers delivered it; Act. and Monum. Part. 2. pa. 667: Yet to please Calvin, who was all in all with my Lord Protector, and as it seemes had tooke [...]pon him to wr [...]te [...]to the King about it, Epistol. ad [...] 1551, the Litu [...]gy then established, was cal­led in by Parliament; though in the very act it selfe they could not but acknowledge, that the said Booke of Common prayer was both agreeable to Gods Word, and [...]he Primitive Church. 5. & 6. of Edw. 6. cap. 1. So that the leaving of the word, Altar, out of the Com­mon Prayer booke last established, and other altera­ [...]ions which were therein made, grew not from any s [...]andall which was taken at the name of Altar, by the Countrie people; but from the dislike taken a­gainst the whole Liturgy, by Calvin, as before I said.

16 AS false it is, but far more dangerous, which is next alleaged; viz. that The people be­ing [...]anda [...]ized in countrey Churches, did first [Page 40] de fac [...]o, beat down Altars, and then the Prince, to countenance, no doubt, and confirme their unruly actions, did by a kinde of Law put them do [...]ne de jure. Wher [...] is is said in all the Monuments of our Church, or State, that ever in the former times, the Countrey people tooke upon them to bee reformers of the Church; or that in this particular, they did de facto, beat downe Altars? This is fine doctrine, were it true, for the common people, who question­lesse will hea [...]ken to it with a greedy [...]are; as loving nothing more then to have the soveraigntie in sacred matters: and who being led by a Pre [...]edent, more than they are by the Lawe or Precept, thinke all things lawfull to bee done, which were done be­fore them. But sure the people never did it. For in the Letters sent in the Kings name to Bishop Ridley, it is said, that it was come to the Kings know­ledge, how the Altars within the most part of the Churches of this Realme, being already upon good and godly consideration taken downe, there did re­maine Altars in diverse other Chu [...]ches, Actes and Monument Part. 2. pag. 699. So that the Altars were not generally taken dow [...]e throughou [...] the King­dome: and those which were tooke downe, were taken downe on good and godly consideration; which certainely implyes some Order and Authority from those who had a power to doe it: Not beaten downe, de facto, by the common people, in a po­pular hu [...]our, withou [...] Authoritie or Warrant. And had they all beene beaten downe de [...]act [...], by the common people, that kind [...] of La [...] which af­ter [Page 41] put them downe de jure, had come too late to carry any stroake in so great a businesse: Vnlesse perhaps the King was willing on the post-fact to partake somewhat of the honour; or durst not but confirme the doings of disordered people, by a kind of Law. A kind of Law? And is the Edict and Direction of the King in sacred matters, but a kind of Law? The peoples beating downe the Altars, was, as it seemes, a powerf [...]ll Law, a very Club-Law at the least, against the which was no resistance to be made; the Princes Edict to remove them, but a kind of Law, which no man was obliged unto, nor had re­garded, but that they found it sorted with the peo­ples humour. Just so he dealt before with the Queenes Injunctions. The Queens Injuctions had appoynted that the Holy Table in every Church should be [...]ecently made, and set up in the place where th [...] Alt [...]r stood: and thereupon it is resolved by the Epistoler, that if by placing of the Table Altarwise, is meant the setting of it in that place of the Chancell where the Altar stood, there may be somewhat sayd for that, because the Injunctions did so place it. The Edict of King Edward, but a kind of Law? the Or­der of Qu. Elizabeth▪ but a kind of somewhat? This is no mannerly dealing with Kings and Queenes, my good Brother of BOSTON.

17. YEt such a kind of Law it was, that be­ing seconded by a kind of somewhat, in the Queenes Injunctions 1559, referring to that order of King Edward, it hath taken from us [Page 42] the Children of the Church, and Common-wealth, the name & nature of former Altars. The Children of the Church? And who are they? Those onely which are bounded Intr [...] par­tem Donati, the lot and portion of the Brethren of the Dispersion; those who have kep [...] their children's fore-heads from the signe of the Crosse, their knees from bowing at the blessed name of J [...]SUS, or doing honour to him in his ho [...]y Sacrament; those who have kept their hands from paying their Du­ties to the Priest; their eyes from being defiled with looking on prohibited vestments, such as have for­merly beene abused to idolatrous services. Those doubtlesse ar [...] the Children of the Church here meant, which must not use the name of Altars; as if it were the Shibboleth of their profession. From us the children of the Church? Yes marry Sir. Now judge, if at the least you know a Cat by her claw, if that which I at first suspected, be not come about; For but with halfe an eye one may see by this, of what straine the Episto [...]er is, or else unto what pa [...]i [...] hee applyes him selfe in all this bu [...]iness [...]. As for the Children of the Common-wealth, it's time that Criticisme were forgotten, and that they were the Children of the Kingdome too. Wee live, Wee praise God for it, in a Monarchie, not in a D [...]m [...] ­cracie. And therefore they that goe about to coyne distinctions, betweene the [...] of the King, and the Common-weale; may perhaps passe for subtill So­phister [...], but never shall attaine the honour to bee thought sou [...] S [...]bjects.

[Page 43] 18. BVt it is time we should proceed, and leave these Children of the Church and the Com­mon -wealth to their grand Directors; who, though in other things, they are all for Novelties, new formes of Praier, new Rites and Ceremonies of Religion, if they brooke of any; new offices, in the dispensation of God's Word and Sacrament; must yet affect the name of Table, even for pure antiquitie: the name of the Lord's Table, being told them to be no new name, and therfore none to be ashamed of it. A thing that might have well beene spared, there being none so void of Pietie and understanding, as to bee scandalized at the name of the Lord's Table; as are some men, it seemes, at the name of Altar: sa­ving that somwhat must be said to perswade the peo­ple, that questionlesse such men there are, the better to indeere the matter. Nor is the name of Altar so new a name, that any man should be ashamed therof, as if it were a terme taken up of late, in time of Po­perie. For whereas the Epistoler pleadeth, That Christ himselfe did institute the Sacrament upon a Table, and not upon an Altar, and that the name of Table, is in the Christian Church, 200. yeares more ancient than the name of Al­tar, as is most learnedly proved out of S^t. Paul, Origen, and Arnobius, by Bishop Jewell, against Harding of Private Masse. p. 143: It may bee possible that neither CHRIST our Savours institution will of necessitie infer the use of Tables, (Tables, I meane, placed Table-wise, towards the East great [Page 44] Window, as before was said;) nor Bishop Iewel's proofes come home to the point in hand. Fo [...] how­soever our Saviour instit [...]ted this holy Sacr [...]ent at a Table, not at an Altar▪ yet is the Table, in regard of that i [...]stitution, but an accessorie, and a poin [...] of Circumstance; nothing therein of Substance, nothing which is to be considered as a Principall. For if it were a matter of Substance, that it was instituted at a Table, then must the fashion of that Table, being, as it is conceived, of an ovall forme, be a matter of Substance also; and compassed round about with beds, as then the custome was, for the Communi­cants to rest upon whil'st they doe receive. But here­in is the Table no more considerable, than that it was first instituted after Supper, in an upper chamber, di­stributed amongst twelve only; and those twelve, all men; and those men, all Priests: which, no man is so void of sense, as to imagine to be things considera­ble in the administration of this holy Sacrament. And yet should this be granted too, that in the ha­ving of a Table we must conforme our selves to the LORD's example: yet for the situation of that Ta­ble, I doubt it would be hardly proved by the [...]pi­stoler, that the two ends thereof did stand a [...] and West; or that there was a great Wind [...] in the East end of the Chamber, towards the which the Table was placed endlong, at the Institution; as he would have it now at the Ministration.

[Page 45] 19. AS little comfort can he find in Bis [...]op Ie­well, or in S^•. Paul, Origen, and A [...]nobius, by him alleaged. Of S^t. Paul there is nothing said in all that Sectiō (it is the 26 of the third Article) which concernes this matter: nothing that sets forth the antiquitie of the name of Table. S^t. Paul is cited once onely in that whole Section, and the place cited, then is this; Quomodo dicet Amen ad tuam gratiarum Acti­onem. 1 Cor. 14. So that unlesse this Argument be good, The people cannot say Amen to Prai [...]rs made in a strange tongue, because they know not what is said, Ergo, the name of Table is 200 yeares more ancient than the name of Altar: There is not any thing alleaged from S^t. Paul which can advantage the Epistoler for the Point in hand. Indeed, from Origen, and Arnobius, it is there alleaged, that ge­nerally the Gentiles did object against the Christians of those times, that they had neither Altars, Ima­ges, nor Temples; Obijcit nobis quod non habeam [...] imag [...]nes, aut a [...] as, aut templa; So Origen, contr. Cels. 1. 4. N [...]s accusatis quod nec templa habeamus, ne [...] i [...]a­gines, nec aras. So saith Arnobius, lib. 2. contr. Gentes. But [...]nto this objection wee need no better an [...]wer, than Bishop Iewel's owne in the sel [...]e same Section: viz. That th [...]n the faithfull, for feare of Tyrants, we [...]e faine to meet together in private houses, in vacant places, in Woods and F [...]rrests, and Caves under the ground. But we will fur [...]her [...]ay withall, that t [...]ough the Christians had some Churches, in those peril­lous times, yet were they not so gorgious, nor so [Page 46] richly furnished, as were the Temples of the Gen­tiles. And so both Origen and Arnobius must be un­derstood, no [...] that the Christians in their times, had at all no Temples, or at the least no Altars in them: but th [...]t their Churches were so meane, that they de­served not the name of Temples; & that they had no Altars, for bloudy and external Sacrifices, as the Gen­tiles had.

20 FOr otherwise it is most certaine, that the Church had Altars, both the name and the thing; and used both name and thing a long time to­gether, before the birth of Origen, or Arnobius A­fer. Tertullian, who lived in the same age with Ori­gen, but sometime before; and a full hundred yeares before Arnobius, hath the name of Altar; as a thing used and knowne in the Christian Church: as, Non­ne solemnior erit statio tua, si & ad aram Dei steteris? Li [...] de oratione cap. 14. Will not thy station, (or forme of Devotion then in use) be thought more solemne, if thou dost stand by or before th [...] Altar. And in his booke de Poenitentia, he remembreth geniculatio­nem ad aras; kneeling or bowing of the knee before the Altar. Before him, Origen, or Arnobius, flouri­shed Irenaeus, who proves the Apostles to be Priests, because they did Deo & Altari servire, attend the service of the Lord, and wait upon him at the Altar. Whereof see lib. 4. advers. haereses, cap. 20. And so S^t Cyprian, who lived before Arnobius, though after Origen, doth call it plainely, Altare Dei, Gods Al­tar, Ep. lib. 1. C. 7. ad Epictetum. See the like in the 8. and 9. Epist. of the same booke also. But to goe high­er [Page 47] yet, Ignatius [...]seth it in no lesse than three of his Epistles: [...] ad Magnes. [...], ad Philadelph. One Altar, and one Altar in every Church; and finally in his Epistle ad Tarsens [...] he termes it [...]. Gods altar, as both Tertullian, and S^t Cyprian did after call it. So in the Canon of the Apostles, which though not writ by them, are certainly of good antiquity, the same word [...] doth occurre in the 3▪ 4. and 5. Ca­nons. And above all indeed S^t Paul in his Habemus altare, Heb. 13. 10. In which place, whether he meane the Lords Table, or the Lords Supper, or rather the Sacrifice it selfe, which the Lord once offred; certain it is that he conceaved the name of Altar, neither to bee impertinent, nor improper in the Christian Church. So that for ought appeares in the ancient Writers, the name of Altar is as old as the name of Table; indifferently and promiscuously used without doubt or scruple. Nor doth that reverend Bishop Iewell deny, but that the Lords table anciently was called an Altar, and citeth elsewhere divers of the Fathers, which did call it so: wherin consult his 13. Art. & 6. sect. though now it bee resolved by this E­pistoler, that the name being so many yeares [...] ­bolis [...]ed, it is in his iudgment fitter, that the Altar, (if wee will needs call it so) should ac­cording to the Canon stand tablewise; then that the Vicars table to trouble the poore Town of Gr. should stand Altarwise. Hac est illa Helena. This is indeed the thing most aimed at in all this b [...]sinesse, Popullo ut placerent quas fecisset fabulas, [Page 48] onely she pleasing of the people. It was to please the people, who as it is affirmed in the beginning of this letter, had taken some [...]mbr [...]ges and offence at the pla [...]ing of the table, where the Altar stood; that the Churchwardens were appointed to remove it into the middle of the Chancell. It was to please the people, that the authoritie of the Chur [...]h-war­dens is advanced so high above their Ministers. And now for feare of troubling the poore people, we must not use the name of Altars, or place the table Altar­wise; lest they should take it for a Dresser, and in a pious fury break it all in pieces, as, they are told, their An [...]estors, had done de facto, in King Edwards reigne. Ad populu [...] phaleras.

SECT. III.

WEe are now come to the last part of this Epistle, viz. the fixing of the Altar, or Communion-table at the upper end of the Quire: And unto this it is thus said by the Epi [...]oler, viz. that for the standing of the table in the higher part of the▪ church, he had decla­ [...]ed his as [...]ent already in opinion▪ but t [...]at i [...] should be fixed there, was so farre f [...]m being Canonicall, that it is directly against the Ca­non. [Page 49] It may be neither so, nor so. Not so for cer­taine in the first. For in the Vicars judgement, the Communion [...] table ought to stand like an Alta [...], all a­long the wall; and in the opinion of the Epistoler, al­though hee bee content that it should stand above the steps, yet he would have it placed tablewise, with one end towards the East great Window: which cer­tainly is no assent in, but a diversity of opinion. And for the second, howsoever it bee ordered in the Ru­brick, that the Communion table shall stand in the body of the Church▪ or in the Chancell, (and not, o [...] of the Cha [...]cel, as the Epistoler hath infor­med us); where Morning and Evening prayer are appo [...]nted to bee read: yet his illation ther­upon, that seeing morning and evening prayer bee appoynted to bee read in the body of the Church, (as in most country Churches, hee saith, it is), therfore the Table should stand most Canonically in the body of the Church; is both uncertaine and unsound. For seeing it is ordered in the Booke it selfe, That Morning and Evening pray­er shall bee used in the accustomed place of the Church, Chappell, or Chancell, except it shall bee otherwise de­termined by the Ordinary of the place: hee must first shew us where it was determined by the Ordinary of the place, that Morning and Evening prayer shall be [...]aid onely in the body of the Church, before he venture on such new and [...]trange conclusions. And for the Rubrick, it saith only, that it shall so be pla­ced in Communion time; And that too to bee un­derstood, according as it hath been since interpreted [Page 50] by the best authoritie, not as if ordered upon any dislike of placing the Communion table where the Al­tar stood, but as permitting it to the discretion of the Ordinary, to set, or cause it to bee set in the time of the administration of the Sacrament, so as it might be most convenient for the Communicants; who in the former times, as it is well knowne, had rather been lookers on the Sacrament, than partakers of it.

2 THe like construction is also to be made of the Queenes Iniunction 1559. which is next alleaged, and of the 82. Canon now i [...] force, be­ing a recitall and confirmation of that part of the In­junction, where it is sayd, that In the time of the Communion, the Table shall bee placed in so good sort within the Chancell (the 82 Canon hath it within the Church or Chancell) as there­by the Minister may more conveniently bee heard by the Communicants. Which plainely is a matter of Permission, rather than Command; yea, and a matter of Permission onely in such times and places, where otherwise the Mi­nister cannot conveniently bee heard of the Com­municants. So that in all the lesser Churches, such as our Countrey Churches for the most part are, and in all others where the Minister standing at the Altar, may be heard conveniently: the Table may stand Altar-wise in the time of ministration, with­out breach of Canon. And this in the Episto [...]er's judgement, the ablest Canonist, no doubt, in the Church of England, who hath already freely gran­ted; [Page 51] that placing of the Table Altar-wise, is the most decent situation when it is not used, & for use too, where the Quire is mounted up by steps, and open, (which may so [...]ne be done) so that he which o [...]iciats may be seene and heard of all the Congregation. This was the thing the Vicar aimed at. Of wh [...]m we have no cause to thinke, or reason to conceive, that [...]ee intended so to fixe his Table unto the wall, or to incorporat it into the same, as the Altars were; that there should be no moving or removing it, on just and necessarie causes: but that in correspondence unto former practise, and the Injunction of the Queene, he thought the place where formerly the Altar stood to be fittest for it, at least, out of the time of the ministration: and in that time too, if hee might be heard conveniently of the Con­gregation. And whether hee might or no, no doubt he better knew, than this extravagant Epistoler; and so in that respect might be aswell Master of the peoples eares, as he in Tacitus, whom this Episto­ler hath remembred, was of his owne.

3. I Say according unto former practise, and the Queenes Injunction. For if we looke into the former practise, either of the Chappels of the King, the best interpreter of the Law, which himselfe ena­cted, wherein the Communion Table hath so stood as now it doth, since the beginning of Queene Eliza­beth, what time that Rubrick in the Common Praier booke was confirmed, and ratified: or of Collegiate and Cathedrall Churches, the best observers of the [Page 52] forme and order of God's publick Service; the Vicar had good warrant for what he did. And for the In­junctions, howsoever it bee said in them, that in the time of the Cōmunion, the table shalbe placed in so good sort within the Chancell [...], [...] thereby the Minister may more conveniently be heard; being a matter of Permis­on onely, if occasion be: yet it is ordred in the same, that after the Communion done, from time to time, the same holy Table shall be placed where it stood before, that is, where formerly the Altar stood. So that the next clause of this Epistoler, wherin it is referred to the Vi­car's judgement, Whether this Table, which like Daedalus his Ensignes, moves and removes from place to place, and that by the inward wheeles of the Church Canon, be fitly resem­bled to an Altar, that stirr's not an inch; might have well been spared: as not being likely to be any part of the Vicars meaning. For we may reasonably presume that it was onely his intent to keep the table free from irreverent usage; and by exalting it to the highest place▪ to [...] the [...] reverence to the blessed Sacrament, from the Common people; who if infected with the fancies of these latter daies, are like enough to thrust it down into the Bell-free, or some worser corner. Nor say I so without good rea­son, it being so resolved of in the Altare Damasce­num, that any place, be it what it will, is good enough for the Lords Table, the Communion ended. De lo­co ubi con [...]istat cur solliciti, cum quovis loco vel angulo extra tempus administrationis, collocari possit. pa. 718. ‘What need they be so carefull (say those factious [Page 53] spirits which composed that booke) how to dis­pose or place the Table; seeing that out of the time of the ministration, it may be put in any place or corner whatsoever it be.’ High time assuredly, that such prophanenes should be met with.

4 THere is one only passage more to be conside­red in this letter, for the close of all, and that is this; that If we doe desire to know out of Eu­sebius, Augustin, Durandus, & the fif [...]h Councell of Constantinople, how long Communion tables have stood in the midst of the Church, we should reade Bishop Jewell against Harding, Art. 3. p. 143. and we shalbe satisfied. And read him though we have, yet we are not satisfied. Eusebius tels us of the Church of Tyre, that being finished, and all the [...]eats thereof set up, [...] ▪ The Founder after all, placed the most holy Altar in the midst thereof, and compassed it about with rai [...]es, to hinder the rude multitude from pres­sing neer it. This proves not necessarily, that the Al­tar stood either in the body of the Church, or in the middle of the same, as the Epistoler doth intend when hee saith the middle. The Altar, though it stood a­long the Eastern wall, yet may be well interpreted to be [...], in the middle of the Chancel, in reference to the North and South, as it since hath stood. And were it otherwise, yet this is but a particular case of a Church in Syria, wherein the people being more ming [...]ed wi [...]h the Iewes, than in other places, might possibly place the Altar in the middle of the Church, [Page 54] as was the altar of Incense in the midst of the Temple, the better to conforme unto them. For if, as Bishop Iewell saith in the selfe sam [...] place, The holy Table was called an Altar, onely in allusion to the Altars in the old law, or if as this Epistoler tells us, the name of Altar crept into the Church, by a kind of complying in p [...]rase with the people of the Iewes: [...]

5 THat of the fifth Councel of Constantinople, as it is there called, being indeed the Councell sub Agapeto & Menna against Anthimus & Severus, af­firms as much in sound, as the Epistoler doth intend; but if examined rightly, concludes against him. It is there said, that in the reading of the Diptychs, the peo­ple with great silence [...], ga­thered together about the Altar, and gave eare unto thē. Where, although [...], in it selfe doth [...]ignifie a [Page 55] Circle; yet [...], cannot bee properly in­terpreted, round about the Altar, so as there was no part thereof which was not compassed with the peo­ple: no more than if a man should say, that hee had seene the King sitting in his throne, and all his Noble­men about him, it needs, or could bee thought, that the throne was placed in the very middle of the Pre­sence; as many of the Nobles being behind him, as there was before him. And certainly, if the man of God in the description of God's throne in the king­dome of Heave [...], had any reference or resemblance (as no doubt hee had) unto the thrones of kings on earth; wee have hit right enough upon the meaning of [...] in the aforesaid Councell: it being said in the 4^th chapter of the Revelat [...] on, vers 6. that round about the throne, [...], were foure beasts full of [...]yes; and chap. 7. ver. 11. that all the Angels stood [...], round about the throne. So that for all is said in the fifth Councell of Constantinople, the Altar might and did stand at the end of the Chancel, although the people came together about it to heare the Diptychs; i. e. the Commemoration of those fa­mous Prelates, and other persons of chiefe note, which had departed in the faith. The like mistake there is, if it be lawfull so to say, in the words of S. Austin. That which hath beene alleaged from him, being the 46 Sermon, not the 42, is this, CHRISTVS quotidie pas [...]it. Mensa ipsius est illa in medio constituta. Quid causae est O Audientes, ut mensam videatis, & ad epulas non accedatis. Which B^P. Iewell thus trans [...]la­teth, Christ feedeth us daily, and this is his Table here [Page 56] set in the middest. O my hearers, what is the matter, that ye see the table, and yet come not to the meat. But clearely, Mensa illa in medio constituta, is not to be in­terpreted, The table set here in the middest, as it is tran­slated, but The table which is heere before you: Accor­ding to the usuall meaning of the Latine phrase, affer­re in medium; which is not to be construed thus, to bring a thing precisely into the middle, but to bring it to us, or before us. As for that passage from Duran­dus, where it is said, that he examining the cause, why the Priest turneth himselfe about at the Altar, ye [...]ds this reason for it, In medio Ecclesiae aperui os meum: that proves not that the Altar stood in the middest of the Church, but that the Priests stood at the middest of the Altar. It is well known, that many hundred yeares before hee was borne, the Altars generally stood in the Christian Churches, even as now they doe.

6 NOw that wee may aswell say somewhat in maintenance of the Altars standing in the East part of the Church; as wee have answered those au­torities which were produced by the Epistoler, for planting of it in the middlest wee will alleage one testimonie, and no more but one, but such a one as shall give very good assurance of that generall usage, and in briefe is this: Socrates in his Ecclesiasticall Hi­storie, lib. 5. c. 21. speaking of the different customes in the Christian Church, saith of the Church of An­tioch, the chiefe Citty of Syria, that it was built in dif­ferent manner from all other Churches. How so? [...] ▪ Be­cause [Page 57] the Altar was not placed to the East-ward, but to the Westward. Nicephorus, Hist. lib. 12. cap. 24. observes it generally of all the Altars in that Citty, and note's withall, that they were situate in a diffe­rent manner from all other Altars. And howsoever possibly in some other places which they knew not of, the Altars might stand West-ward, as they did in Antioch, or to some other point of heaven, as the North, or South, if any stood so: yet it is manifest by this, that in the generall practise of the Church, the Altars used to stand to the Eastward onely. So that for ought appeares unto the contrary in this Epistle, the Vicar of Gr. might very safely hold his three Conclusions, at the first remembred. First, that an Altar may be used in the Christian Church; Secondly, that the Table may stand Altar-wise, the Minister of­ficiating at the North-end thereof; And thirdly, that the Table may stand constantly in the upper part of the Chancell, close along the wall, not to bee taken downe, either in the First, or Second Service, especi­ally, if the Mini [...]ter there standing may be seene and heard of al the Congregation. With the which Sum­marie of mine I had concluded this reply, had I not found this Item given unto the Vicar in the close of all, that by that time hee had gained more expe­rience in the cure of Soules, he should find no such Ceremony, as Christian Charity. Where if his meaning be, that Christian Charity is in it selfe more precious than any Ceremony, no doubt it will be easily grante [...]: it being by S^t. [...]aul preferred be­fore Faith and Hope. But if hee meane, that they [Page 58] which have the cure of Soules should rather choose to violate all the Orders of holy Church, and neglect all the Ceremonies of the same; then give offence unto the Brethren, the Children of the Church, as before hee called them: it is like ma­ny other Passages before remembred, onely a trick to please the people, and p [...]t the reines into their hands, who are too forwards in themselves to con­temne all Ceremonie, though in so doing they doe breake in sunder the bonds of Charitie.

7. I Have now ended with the Letter, and for your further satisfaction will lay downe somewhat, touching the ground or reason of the thing required: not in it selfe, for that is touched upon before, but as it either doth relate unto the King, the Metropolitan, or in your case, the Ordi­narie, which requires it from you. For the true ground whereof you may please to know, that in the Statute 1^•. Eliz. cap. 2. whereby the Common Praier booke now in use, was confirmed and esta­blished, it was enacted, That if there shall happen any irreverence or contempt to be used in the Ceremo­nies or Rites of the Church, by misusing the Orders appointed in the same: that then the Queenes Maje­stie, by the advise of her Commissioners for causes Ecclesiasticall, or of the Metropolitan, might ordeine or publish such further Ceremonies or Rites as may bee most for the advancement of Gods glorie, the edifying of his Church, and the due reverence of Christ's holy Mysteries and Sacraments. A power not personall [Page 59] to the Queene onely, when she was alive; but such as was to be continued also unto her successours. So that in case the Common Praier booke had deter­mined positively, that the Table should be placed at all times in the middle of the Church or Chan­cell, which is not determined of; or that the Ordi­narie of his owne autoritie, could not have other­wise appointed, which yet is not so: the Kings most excellent Majestie, on information of the ir­reverent usage of the holy Table by all sorts of peo­ple (as it hath beene accustomed in these latter daies) in sitting on it in time of Sermon, and o­therwise prophanely abusing it, in taking Ac­counts, and making Rates and such like businesses; may by the last clause of the said Statute, for the due reverence of Christ's holy Mysteries and Sacra­ments, with the advice and counsell of his Metro­politan, command it to bee placed where the Altar stood, and to be railed about for the grea­ter decencie. For howsoever in the Act, the Queen be onely named, not her Heires and Successours; yet plainly the autoritie is the same in them, as it was in her; which may be made apparant by ma­nie Arguments drawne from the Common Law, and the Act it selfe. First, from the purpose of that clause, which was to fence the Rites and Cere­remonies of the Church, then used, from all irre­verence and contempt: and for the publishing of such other Rites and Ceremonies, as might in further time be found convenient, for the advancement of Gods glorie, the edifying of his Church, and the pro­curement [Page 60] of due reverence to Christ's holy Sacra­ments. But seeing that the Rites [...]nd Ceremonies of the Church, were not onely subject unto Irreve­rence and contempt in the said Queenes time, but are, and have been sleighted, and irreverently abu­sed in time of her Successors: the Act had ill provided for the Churches safetie, in case, the power of rectifying what was amise, either by ordering of new Rites, or stablishing the old, did not belong aswell to her Successours, as it did to her. Next, fro [...] the verie phrase and stile which is there used. For it is said, the Queene, with the advice of the Metropolitan might ordeine and pub­lish, &c. the Queene indefinitely, and the Metro­politan indefinitely, If then by Queene indefinite­ly be onely meant, the person of the Queene then being, not her Heires and Successours; by Metro­politan indefinitely, wee must also meane the Me­tropolitan then being, and not his Successours: and then the power heere given the Queene, had beene determined with the death of Arch-bishop Parker, which was some 28 yeares before her owne. Thirdly, from another clause in the selfe same Act, where it is said, that If any person being twice convict (of depraving the booke of Com­mon Praier, &c.) shall off end againe the third time, and be thereof lawfully convict, hee shall forfeit for his third offence, to our Soveraign Lady the Queene, all his Goods and Chattels, &c. where, though the Queene be onely named, the penaltie of the Law [...] be, and is most justly taken by her Heires and [Page 61] Successours; or else there were no remedy, at this time, by the Lawes provided, for the third Con­tempt. Fourthly, from the usuall forme of those Acts and Statutes, which were made purposely for the particular and personall profit, safetie, and advantage of the said Queene, which are distingui­shed from others by this note or Character, viz. This Act to continue, during the Queenes Majesties life that now is onely. Such is the Act, against re­bellio [...]s assemblies, 1. Eliz. cap. 16. Those against such as shall rebelliously take, or conspire to tak [...] from the Queenes Majestie any of her Towers, Castles, &c. 14. Eliz. cap. 1. And against such, as shall conspire, or practise the enlargement of any Prisoner committed for High Treason. cap. 2. That against seditious, Word [...] and Rumors uttered against the Queen [...]s most excellent Majestie. 23. Eliz. ca. 2. And finally, that for the safety of the Queenes royal person, and the con­tinuance of the Realme in Peace, An [...]. 27. ca. 1. In the which last, although it bee not said expresly that it shal dure no longer thē her natural life, yet the word, Person, in effect, doth declare as much. Fiftly, from a resolution in the Law, in a case much like: it being determined by that great Lawyer Ploydon, that if a man give Lands to the King by deed inrolled, a Fee [...] simple doth passe, without these words, Suc­cessours and Heires; because in [...]udgement of Law, The King never dieth. Coke on Lit [...]. pag. 9. b. And last of all, it may be argued, that the said clause or any thing therin conteined, is not indeed Intro­ductorie of any new power, which was not in the [Page 62] Crowne before; but rather Declaratorie of an old, which anciently did belong to all Christian Kings (as before any of them to the Kings of Iudah) and among others to ours also: who, with the C [...]un­sell of their Prelate [...], and other Clergie, might, and did induce such Rites and Ceremonies into the Churches of, and in their severall kingdomes, as were thought most convenient for God's pub­lick Service; till at the last, all Ecclesiasticall au­toritie was challenged and usurped by the See of Rome. Which is the answer and determina­tion of Sir Robert Coke, in Cawdries case, being the fifth part of his Reports, entituled, De jure Regis Ecclesiastico; where hee affirmeth, that if the Act of Parliament, 1^•. Eliz. 2. cap. 1. where­by it was enacted, That all Ecclesiasticall power and autoritie, which heretofore had beene, or might lawfully be exercised or used for the visitation of the Ecclesiasticall state, and persons, and for refor­mation of all, and all manner Errours, Heresies, Schismes, Abuses, and Contempts, Offences, and Enormities, should bee for ever united and an­nexed to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme: Was not an Act introductory of a new law, but con­firmative of an old, for that this Act doth not an­nex any jurisdiction to the Crowne, but that which was in truth, or of right ought to bee by the anci­ent Lawes of the Realme, parcell of the Kings Ju­risdiction, and united to the crowne Imperiall. By this Authoritie the Altars were first taken downe in King Edwards reigne, though countenanced and [Page 63] allowed of in the Common-prayer Booke, then by Law established; the better, as the cause is plea­ded by Bishop Ridley, to avoyd superstition, Actes and Monum. Part. 2. pag. 700. and by the same, or by that mentioned, 1 [...]. Eliz. cap. 2. his Majestie now being, might appoynt the Table to bee set up, where formerly the Altar stood, (had it been o­therwise determined in the Rubrick, as indeed it is not) to avoyd prophanenesse.

8. I Will adde one thing more for your satis­faction, which perhaps you know not; And that is, that his sacred Majestie hath hereupon al­ready declared his pleasure, in the Case of Saint Gregories Church neere Saint Pauls in London, and thereby given encouragement to the Metropoli­tans, Bishops, and other Ordinaries, to require the like in all the Churches committed to them. Which resolution of his Majestie, faithfully co­pied out of the Registers of his Councell-Table, I shall present herewith unto you, and so commend my selfe to you, and us all to the grace of God in JESVS CHRIST.