TVVO LOOKS OVER LINCOLNE, OR, A view of his Holy Table, name, and thing, discovering his erronious and Popish Tenets and Positions; And under pretence of defending the cause of Religion, shamefully betraying the truth and sincerity thereof. A Petition exhibited in all humility to the judge­ment of the most worthy Defenders of the Truth, the Honorable House of COMMONS in PARLIAMENT, against the said Booke, and especially 51. Tenets therein.

By R. DEY, Minister of the Gospell.

Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an Article of the faith, or be thought requi­site or necessary to salvation.

Artic. 6. of the Convocation at London, 1562.
Acts 24. Verse 14.

So worship I the God of my Fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets.

Acts 26.22.

Having obtained helpe of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things then those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come.

LONDON, Printed in the yeere of Hope, 1641.

TO THE HONOVRABLE. The Knights, Citizens and Burgesses of the Commons House in PARLIAMENT now assembled.

The humble Petition of RICH. DEY, Minister, shewing, that

WHereas there hath beene printed and published a Booke (entitled, The Holy Table, Name, and Thing, &c.) containing certaine Positions and Te­nets, of doctrine, discipline, the worship of God, and the Kings power, and rights in matters Ecclesiasticall; and many of them proved onely by Popish Writers Jesuits, and forged Authours, and some of them barely asserted; which Booke was most probably written, but most certainly approved, allowed, and licensed to be printed and published; (as most Orthodox in Doctrine, and Consonant in Discipline to the Church of England; and to set forth the Kings power and rights in matters Ecclesiasticall truly and judiciously) by Iohn Williams, Bishop of Lincolne.

That your Honours will be pleased to take the said Book, and especially certaine Tenets and Articles thereof, here­unto annexed, into your grave considerations; and that the said Bishop may be put to answer unto the said Booke, and Tenets, according to the Word of God, and the Lawes of this Kingdome; the onely rule and prescript of our Re­ligion, and the Kings right, whether divine, or humane.

And your Petitioner (as in duty bound) shall ever pray, &c.

The Preface for the Readers intelligence.

SECTION I. Of the Letter of the Vicar of Grantham.

WHen as the Prelats were busied, and mightily turmoyled in their braines, to introduce daily some Innovation, or other to set up Popery, and to endeavour a reconcilia­tion to Rome, it hapned that about the yeere 1627. as ap­peares, Holy Table p. 7. that the Vicar of Grantham in the Dioces of Lin­colne, being set on by some in authority, hol. tab. p. 9. perhaps by some of Lauils agents, or else by Dr. Heylin (one of his Majesties Chaplins) began to remove the Communion Table, and to place it altarwise, whereupon Mr. Wheatley an Alderman, and some other townesmen opposed him, as having no law nor warrant so to do, and the con­tention (thus begun) growing hot amongst them, it came at last be­fore the Bishop who somewhat pacified the matter beween the Vi­car and tovvnesmen, and calling the Vicar aside, was over-heard to importune him to declare who were his instigators to those inno­vations which (as was conceived) he did; and the Bishop causing the Vicar with his neighbors to sup there that night, said▪ I have supt already upon that you tell mee; And if all the bookes I have be able to doe it, I will find some satisfaction for my selfe, and you in all these particulars, before I goe this night to bed. And I will provide a letter, as written to you ▪ M. Al­derman, to shew to your Brethren, and some notes to be delivered to the Di­vines, of the lecture at Grantham. And both these (if the fault be not in my servant) shall be ready by seven a clock in the morning. h. tab. p. 9. The Bishop and his Secretary, sitting up most of that night in his study, and his Secretary fetching up the Booke of Martyrs and borrowing from the Parish Church. B Iewels Works. And in the morning (as the Bishop promised over night) between 7 and 8. of the clock, was delivered to the Alderman a letter sealed up. The forme whereof, you may see, ho. tab. p. 10. And at the same time, there was delivered also by the Secretary, a sheet of paper closed up, to be conveyed to the Divines of the Lecture of Grantham upon their next meeting-day, with di­rection from his Secretary, that if they approved of them, to impart them to the Vicar, to give him satisfaction which they did. Now the true copy of these notes or letter, though neither subscribed, nor [Page 3] superscribed (yet, as appeares by the premisses, and the contents thereof▪ indited and framed by the Bishop, though penned by the Se­cretary) is expressed, in Holy Table pag. 12.

SECT. II. Of the Coal from the Altar.

IN answer to this Letter (which belike the Vicar imparted (per­haps in excuse of his desisting his former Innovations, and rest­ing now satisfied with this) to him, who probably was his first inciter to those proceedings; Dr. Heylin, an intimate friend of his, whom the Vicar miserably mistooke for a judicious Divine) there was published a vaporous and smoakie piece of worke called A Coal from the Altar, which, though it was kindled from some Smithfield-faggots in Q. Marys dayes, and tended to the same purpose, if it had found fuell enough to have kept it alive; yet consisting of ignorance, misquotations, and bad wrestings of good Authours, more than of any pure ignean Element, it flamed not as the Colliers intended it.

SECT. III. Of the Holy Table, Name and Thing.

THis Coal was luckily, though unlikely quenched, not by holy water, but with holy wood (a new kind of miracle) for the holy Table, Name and Thing, falling flat and heavie upon it, smothe­red it in it's owne smoake, or rather the Bishop of Lincolnes Crosier, that Episcopall instrument made of an Altar-raile, did so bastinado and batterfang Dr. Heylins coal, that it broke the Coal to cinders, me­tamorphosed the holy Altar, into an holy Table, name and thing in ap­pearance, yet an holy Altar still, in reverence, adoration, place and situation, and (which is yet more miraculous) did not quench the Romish fire of the coal, but rather by a politique dexterity transub­stantiate, or rather pseudangelically, transforme the fire of the coal, into a more modificated fire, though no lesse penetrating, and more spreading, for the Coal, comming in, blustring and sparkling like an old fashioned Divel, with a Romish Altar in the front▪ for all his heat was likely to meet with some gre [...]n wood, which would not admit the fire at first view; but the holy Table comming like a disguised spirit, (though alike Babylonian) under pretence of the holy wood, and sweet fuel, would dry the green logs, and by moderate degrees draw in as much Romish heat, if not more than the former, as appeareth plainly by the subsequents, and so deceived many thousand readers, and also would me, if I had but only once look'd over Lincolne.

SECT. IV. Of Heylins Antidotum Lincolniense.

TO this Holy Table, Doctor Heylin tooke no care to provide holy coverings and furnitures, nor bossed Bookes, guilt▪ Candlestickes, Virgin wax-tapers, Embroydred hangings, carved Rayles, pretious Plate, no, nor so much as a massie Cruci­fix, to pray unto for helpe against this Prelate; but seeing his credit lie at stake, his Coale extinguished, his Altar sore woun­ded, his Learning (though weake) lie a bleeding, and his Re­ligion poysoned; hee thinkes it no time to sit playing at Tables with an idle Bishop, but presently provides a salve for all these sores which hee called Antidotum Lincolniense, but as his Divinitie was gone to travell in strange countreys, and was but newly come home, weary, weake and feeble, when he kindled his Coal to warme it; so his physique lay asleepe in a warme night-cap, (and could not suddenly be awaked) when he composed his Antidote, so that it would neither cure his credit, salve his Altars sores, selve to expell the poyson of his opinion, nor preserve his repute of learning, al­though he graced it with his name in publique, thereby bewraying himselfe to be the author of the Coal.

SECT. V. Of the Author of the Letter, and Holy Table, &c.

THat the Bishop of Lincolne was the Author of the Letter to the Vicar of Grantham, and Divines of that Lecture (though his Secretaries pen might set downe the words) is manifest by the premisses in the first Section; and that hee was likewise the Author of the Holy Table in defence of the Letter against the Coal from the Altar, is not onely probable, but plainly manifest and un­denyable; for although in the Title page, and in the license he call him a Lincolneshire Minister, and pag. 5. a neighbouring Minister, employed in some of the maine passages, and pag. 11. one of the Lectu­rers of Grantham, saying (Wee met accordingly, and perused these Let­ters, &c.) And pag. 21 and 114. one of the Lecturers that approved of the Letter▪ yet all this proves him not a Lecturer, both because he might purposely personate another man whom he was not, and [Page 5] also because that by the same reason, wee may as well thinke him to be a Countrey Joyner; for hee saith, Holy Table pag. 45. I that am but a poore Countrey Ioyner, can set you up a Table, &c. and yet hee could not be a Lecturer and Joyner both; besides, the Lordly stile, the Bishoply phrase, the Prelaticall disdaine of the Doctor the Chaplin, although the Kings, his mocking him with a Bi­shopricke, his slight of a Vicaridge, his disdaine of the Vicar of that Lecture, doe speake him no Lecturer at Grantham, his leasure to reade Histories; besides English, French, Italian and Spanish, un­likely in a Lecturer; his dexteritie in the civill, Common and Ca­non lawes, the Lord Keepers office, Acts of Parliament, Acts of Councell, Prerogative Royall. Episcopall policy, and experience, and many such reasons bewray him to be no Lecturer, his skill in the tongues not usuall in a Lecturer, his Promptitude and rea­dinesse in the Popish Canons, Decrees and Decretals, his skill in so many severall Masse-bookes, and frequent quotation of Masse-mongers, his notorious ignorance in understanding and applying the Scriptures, as appeares, pag. 78. upon Acts 6.2. and his rare quotation of Scriptures, the whole Booke (I thinke) scarce affording five severall Texts among many hundreds of Je­suits Masse-bookes, and other Authors frequently quoted: in all which regards I appeale to any rationall man, whether this can be a Lecturer; but above all this, wee have himselfe confessing, (and one confession of the party accused or suspected, the Law takes hold of, not regarding a hundred denialls) for, saith hee, Holy Table, pag. 206. I dare not determine, being as you say, none of the ablest Canonists in the Church of England, here he takes the words as spoken of himselfe, which in the Coal from the Altar, pag. 50. and quoted, Holy Table, pag. 54. It is manifest that Heylin speakes it, and Lincolne takes it as spoken of the writer of the Letter, so that it cannot be denyed, but that one man was writer of both; and that hee was the Bishop appeares plainly, Holy Table, pag. 58. saying, This Pamphleter, whose whole Booke is but a Libell against a Bishop, &c. Now it is evident that Heylin writ the Coal in answer to the Let­ter, and the Writer thereof; therefore the Writer of both Letter and Booke was the Bishop: And if this plaine confessing can be shifted off with jugling barbara celarent, pag. 64. adieu Grammar and Logicke, Mood and Figure; and Mood and Tense too, and vous avez Doctor Holdsworth, who (they say) corrected it at the Presse, and Master Bourn who had the Manuscript, and also vous avez the Bishop of Lincolne himselfe, who licensed and approved it for Orthodoxal and consonant, and subscribed his Name.

A Preamble to the Tenets.

BEcause the Prelates are so subtile and politique, and so selfe-conceited, and (to use Lincolnes owne words) doe make their owne workes above all humane and equall to the Lawes divine; Holy Table, pag. 4. and such is the partiality of them, that they make their owne case, make their owne evidence, make their owne law, and make their owne authorities and all out of their owne conceits; and endeavour what they can, to give a faire cause a foule face; Holy Tab. pag. 5. so that when wee have that great advantage which Tully speakes of, Confitentem re­um, the guiltie confessing, wee can scarce be sure to tie a knot upon a Bishop, for he is a slipperie youth; as Plaut. in pseudolo.

Quid cum manifesto tenetur? Anguilla est elabitur.
Holy Table pag. 40.
When you thinke sure an Eele is tyed:
Hee'l slip the string, and not abide.

So that a man cannot imagine what evidence to provide, to give satisfaction to so hautie a companion: who,

Iura negat sibi nata, nihil non arrogat armis:
pag. 5.
His native lawes he will deny:
The Prelats power to deify.

And because it is possible a Prelate may propose unto himselfe some peevish, wrangling, waspish humour of his owne, in stead of a Canon; Holy Table, pag. 65. and therefore no Ecclesiasticall Judge whatsoever, is to guide himselfe by his owne sense, pag. 65. although this Prelate would have his courteous Readers▪ (the poore countrey people) to swallow many a Gudgeon, with­out so much as champing or chewing on it, Holy Table, pag. 146. I have therefore proposed before his Tenets, to avoyd cavilla­tions, and Prelaticall evasions, three rules, and one compasse▪ which, if they were mine owne, being reasonable, it were as great reason this Prelates Opinions and Tenets should be ruled and squared by them; as that Heylin and others should be re­gulated by, and compassed within his rules and compasse: But because I would deale with all reason and integritie; the three Rules shall be none but his owne, which in reason hee can­not for shame deny. And the compasse shall be his owne Me­tropolitanes, which by all Prelaticall Lawes, and his owne Oath at his consecration, he is bound to keepe within and to obey.

The Rules are these.

I. That which is in writing before our eyes, is no more by a Disputant indeed to be wrigled and wrested, but to be taken as it is set downe, holy tab. pag. 2:

II. That words should be taken, sensu currenti, for use and custome is the best Expositor, both of lawes and words. If of all lawes and words, then most of all of the words of the lawes. holy tab. pag. 54.

III. That wee must take heed of quillets and distinctions, that may bring us backe againe to the old errour, reformed in the Church▪ holy tab. pag. 102.

The Compasse is this.

That the Church of England grounded her positive Articles up­on the Scripture, and her negative doe refute there where the thing affirmed by the Papists, is not affirmed by Scripture nor directly to be concluded out of it▪ and here not the Church of England onely, but all Protestants agree most truly and most strongly in this; that the Scripture is sufficient to salvation, and containes in it all things necessary to it: The Fathers are plaine▪ the Schoole-men not strangers in it, and have not we reason then to account it as it is, the foundation of our faith? [...] Relation of a Conference. pag. 52. Sect. 15. numb. 1.

Note that the Writer of the Letter to the Vicar of Grantham, and the Writer of the Holy Table, in defence of the Letter, are both one Person, and that one the Bishop of Lincoln as it appears in the Preface.

Lincolnes Tenets.

I. That the Writer of the Letter doth both approve in the Vicar, and imitate in his owne practice▪ the formes and ceremonies of Chappels and Cathedrals, holy tab. pag. 182.

II. That the Writer conceiveth the Communion Table to stand Altar wise, [...]. (in the place where the Altar stood) to be the most decent situation when it is not used; and for use too, where the Quire is mounted up by steps, and open, so as he that officiates, may be seene and heard of all the Congregation, holy tab. p. 14.98.

[Page 8]III. That it was well done, that the Vicar of Grantham did pre­sident himselfe with the formes in is Majesties Chappell, and the Quiers of Cathedrall Churches; These things (I the Writer of the Letter) doe my selfe allow and practise, holy tab. pag. 13.

IV. That, the Writer of the Letter saith clearely, hee likes that fashion of Altar-wise situation of the holy Table, hee allowes it, and so useth it himselfe, ho. tab. pag. 98.20.

Lincolnes owne Rule.

That every word hath that operation in construction of Law, that we may draw our arguments from the words, as from so many topick places, Holy Table, pag. 75.

Considerations upon the Tenets, worthy to be regarded. Vpon the foure first Tenets.

I. Whether it was not his owne authority over the Vicar, who presu­med to alter the Table without his leave, and his owne cause and credit, against Heylin, who provoked him in print, that the Bishop maintained rather than the Cause of Christ, or his Church, or true Religion, whereas hee, not onely shewes himselfe as bad as they, both in judgement and practice, but also yeelds basely, more than they durst require; And so rather be­trayes, than defends the cause.

V. That, the Vicar of Grantham observed (as hee said) that the Table in his Lorships (the Bishop of Lincolnes) private Chappell, to be so (Altarwise) placed, and furnished with Plate, and Or­naments above any hee ever had seene, in this Kingdome, the Chappell Royall onely excepted, holy table pag. 12.

Consid. 1. Whether other Bishops can justly be taxed with Inno­vations, and be spared, whereas it appeares, that be exceeded them all.

VI. That, to call (the Table) Altar, in a metaphoricall and improper sense, you know the Letter doth every where allow, holy table, pag. 141.

Consid. 1. W [...]ther Heylin could desire any more, but to call it so commonly, though metaphorically whereby the people not able to distinguish it, by custome, would take it properly.

VII. That, the Writer would not have blamed the Vicar, if [Page 9] he had in a quotation from the Fathers, or a discourse in the Pul­pit, named it an Altar, in a borrowed sense, holy tab. pag. 75.

Consid. 1. Whether Bishop Williams dislike any thing in the Do­ctor and Vicar, but onely their want of skill to excuse their words, by saying they meant it metaphorically; whereas hee allowes them more, then they durst desire, the Pulpit where the people expect them to speake, truly, plain­ly, and properly.

2. Whether hee defended the true doctrine, who affords them the pul­pit, or rather his owne authority.

VIII. That, throughout all the Dioces, I (the Writer of the Booke) live in (which is Lincolne) being no small part of the king­dome, there is▪ whether the Epistoler like it or no, Railes, and Barricadoes, &c. pag. 136.

Consid. 1. Whether the Bishop did either dislike or seeke to reforme it, whereas his owne practice and example, went beyond all others.

IX. That the Coal, i. (Doctor Heylin) doth faine a Tenet to be maintained, which is opposed in all the Letter, that the Commu­nion Tables should not stand, or be placed towards the East, wher­as the writer of the letter is but too much for it, not allowing the ordinary exceptions of Bellarmine, Suarez, or Walafridus Strabo be­fore them, that it might be otherwise when the conveniencie of the building doth require it, ho. tab. pab. 230.

Consid. 1. Whether hee be not more superstitious then Heylin, where­as hee confesseth himselfe to exceed the archpapists themselves.

X. That the writer of the letter, (had hee any ground given him by his Majesties Lawes to turne him about) seemes unto mee (the writer of the Holy table) fully as forward, and farre more able to defend old Ceremonies then you (Doctor Heylin) are, holy table, pag. 46.

Consid. 1. Whether doth hee not confesse his heart to be as bad as Heylins, and to desire to exceed him, if hee durst for the Lawes.

XI. That the writer of the letter doth cite, and approve, the Appellation of second Service, ho. tab. pag. 3.

Consid. 1. Whether That Appellation of second Service be Ortho­dox, and Consonant to the Church of England, or rather to the Masse-booke.

XII. That, the writer of the letter doth commend, allow and practise bowing at the Name of Iesus, Holy table, pag. 2.13.00.

[Page 10]XIII. That, an accustomed lowly reverence to this blessed Name wee received from all antiquitie, as appeares by the Canons and Injunctions: and good reason wee should entaile it on our Posteritie, Holy tab. pag. 101.

Consid. 1. Whether, that bowing be Orthodox, and grounded upon Scripture, whereas Doctor Fulke, an Orthodox Writer affirmes, that it is neither commanded nor prophesied in Phil. 2.10. and what Scriptures doe prove it?

2. Whether, that Antiquity be any elder than the Papacy.

3. Whether by so much pretence of antiquity the Prelates have not en­tailed [...].

XIV. That (Doctor Heylin) may bow as often as he pleaseth so he do it to this blessed name, Iesus, or to honor him, and him only in his holy Sacrament; this later, although the Canon doth not allow, yet reason, piety▪ and constant practice of antiquity doth, pag. 99.

Consid. 1. Whether Corporall bowing to Jesus in the Sacrament, doe not imply and intimate a corporall and reall presence.

2. Whether Bishop Williams his reason must prescribe Religion and worship to a Church or Kingdome▪ without either Canons, Lawes or Scriptures.

XV: That ▪ if there be any proud Dames that practise all man­ner of courtesies for Maskes and Dances, but none by any meanes for Christ, at their approach to the Holy Table, Lincolns Legacie. take them Donatus for mee, I shall never write them in my Calendar of the children of this Church, ho. tab. pag. 99.

Consid. 1. Whether all that refuse to bow at the Communion Table, be no better than Maskers and Dancers.

2. Whether Christ must he worshipped like Maskers and Dancers, and his worship be patterned like, And grounded upon dancing and masking gestures.

3. Whether those that will not bow to the table, because women bow in dancing, are therefore as Hereticall Donatists, to be excluded out of the Church, and given up to the Divell.

4. Whether none are true Christians, or Children of this Church, ex­cept they be Canonized in Bishop Williams his Calendar.

XVI. That it is not enough to obey a Canon [...]n the matter if we obey it not likewise in the manner; not to make a courtsie, if it be not a lowly courtsie, nor so neither, unlesse it be, as hertofore hath beene accustomed, ho. tab. pag. 100.

Consid. 1. Whether Prelaticall hypocrisie be not spun with a fine threed.

[Page 11]2. Whether a Bishopricke will not serve his turne, without just foure corners in a square Cap. and more adoe than needs.

XVII. That these [...], or adorations, are there (in the Rubrickes of the Greeke Lyturgies) required to be made, and decently, as I thinke, before the Holy Table, but no mention at all in any of those Rubricks of [...], of the Altar, in any good or authenticall copy, pag. 193.

Consid. 1. Whether an Orthodox and judicious Prelate, doe thinke [...]. three [...]inges to the Table in the briers Greeke Musse-booke to be decent­ly done, and consonant to the Church of England.

2. Whether those Greeke Masses, fabled upon the Fathers, are good and authenticall copies.

XVIII. That into this columne (to wit the fourth columne (of notorious and debauched people) in the diptycks, or two-leaved-tables of commemoration of the dead, to be read in time of high Masse) I could be willing, if the Church approve thereof, this railing Doctor might be inserted promising that if ever I heare those diptychs read in the time of the Communion at the holy table, (though laid Altarwise, and all along at the East end wall) yet shall it not deterre mee in my devotions from saying thereunto a hearty Amen, ho, tab. pag. 234.

Consid. 1. Whether Bishop Williams could yet be willing, if the Church of England should approve thereof, to have tables of commemoration of the dead in time of high Musse read at the table laid altarwise.

2. Whether [...] be resolved to keepe his promise when bee shall be Arch­bishop, to say Amen heartily to such Masses at the Altar.

3. Whether he thinke that Heylin, Shelford, Pocklington, or Laud himselfe ever made the Pope and the Iesuites so free and hearty a promise.

4. Whether hee thinke this to be orthodox in doctrine, and consonant in discipline to the Church of England.

XIX. That the forme that Christ left, the Apostles used, and the Fathers delivered the Lords Supper in, is never taken by ju­dicious Divines, in a meere Mathematicall and indivisible point of exactnesse; but in a morall conformitie, which will admit of a la­titude, and receive from time to time degrees of perfection: holy table pag. 150.

Consid. 1. Whether Bishop Williams doe thinke, that judicious Di­vines doe not take the forme that Christ left of administration of the Com­munion to be Mathematically exact and perfect, but that Christs forme [Page 12] left to the Apostles did so admit of a latitude, that the Apostles might mend Christs forme; the Fathers mend the Apostles, the Papists mend the Fathers, Bishop Williams mends the Papists, and Heylin mends Bishop Williams, that so the forme that Christ left imperfect, admitting a lati­tude, may at last be perfect.

2. Whether doth not rather some cranle in his owne braine admit of a latitude, and want some conformity to the forme that Christ left.

3. Whether doth hee not ignorantly speake hee knowes not what; that the forme that Christ left will admit of a latitude and degrees of perfection: and therefore in the next page 151. his second thoughts being better, and grow­ing a little wiser, hee runnes cleane counter to what he said before, and con­futes himselfe, and saith, not the forme that Christ left, but the Service-bookes agreeablenesse to Gods Word, or Christs forme there exprest, admits of degrees of perfection, which is more agreeable to the truth.

XX. That, there is just that difference betweene the shew-bread and the body of Christ in the Sacrament, as there is betweene the shadow and the body, the representation and the verity, the pat­terns of future things, and the things themselves prefigured by those patterns, Holy tab▪ pag. 125.

Consid. 1. Whether this doe not imply a reall presence.

1. Because hee saith not betweene the shew-bread and the body of Christ absolutely, but his body in the Sacrament, as if he should say, betweene the shew-bread and the sacramentall bread.

2. Because it speakes of the body of Christ and the Sacrament, as of one onely indistinct thing, answering to the shew-bread: whereas they are two severall things, and cannot be one, but onely by a reall presence and tran­substantiation.

3. Because the Sacrament it selfe, as well as the shew-bread, is the shadow, the representation, the patterne; and the body of Christ is the body, the verity, the thing it selfe: and therefore the shew-bread must needs be either a representation of a representation alone, or of the body absolutely, both which are contrary to the expresse words, or of both body and Sacrament, as one thing by reall presence which is most likely to be the sense of the words; and so it implyes a reall presence, and so it seemes in the 14. Tenet.

4. Whether the Papists themselves doe not pretend the authority of the Fathers, and some as ancient as S. Jerome for most of their tenets.

XXI. That for our kneeling in the Church of England at our receiving of this blessed Sacrament: now he must have a knee of a c [...]mell, and heart of oake that will not bow himselfe, and after the [Page 13] manner of adoration and worship say Amen, as S. Cyril speakes to so patheticall a prayer and thanksgiving made by the Minister un­to God in his behalfe, pag. 135. see 132.

Consid 1. Whether all men are camels and oaks, beasts, and blocks, that will not bow and make adoration (not to Christ, but) to the Ministers prayer.

XXII. That here in England this worse conclusion of the Doctors to desire to sit at the Communion, is more to be feared from the opposers of our Lyturgie, who brag of their cousinship and coheireship with Christ, then from us who are ready to live and die in defence of the same▪ pag. 149.

Consid. 1. Whether this Orthodox Prelate doe quake for feare lest people sit at the Communion, and yet confesse himselfe that the Apostles used a table gesture: Holy tab. p. 132.

2. Whether the Bishops hold their Miters in tenure of a Service-booke, that they will live and die in defence of the same.

XXIII▪ That it was well done by the reformed Church in Poland, first by monitions, in the yeere 1573, and then by Sanctions, in the yeere 1583. ne in usu sit, that the usuall receiving of the Com­munion in those parts should not be by sitting round about the table▪ pag. 133.136.

Consid 1. Whether Bishop Williams was then a privy Councellor of Poland, to know all their circumstances, whether they did well or ill.

2. Whether he have ground in Scripture to prove that they did well, that did either directly against the institution, or against their owne consciences inforcing weake consciences in a thing at the most but indifferent.

3. Whether they did well to goe beyond Rome it selfe, which as this Bishop confesseth, did not absolutely condemne this Ceremony of sitting, Holy table, p. 133.

XXIV. That it hath beene alwayes, as the practice, so the doctrine of this Kingdome, that both in every part, and in the whole, Lawes doe not make Kings, but Kings Lawes, which they alter and change from time to time, as they see occasion, pag 31.

XXV. That the Kings of England have a power from God him­selfe, not only to make laws, but to alter and change laws from time to time, for the good of themselves and their subjects, ho. tab. p. 41.

Consid. 1. Whether it be not manifest in the holy table, that he speakes this of the Kings power, to make and change lawes absolutely without ex­pressing in or with the Parliament.

[Page 14]2. Whether hee thinkes it needfull for Bils propounded by the King to passe the upper and lower House, or that the Regall power absolute is as sufficient of it selfe to make and change Lawes, or that the pri­viledges of the Houses being necessarily requisite to passing Bils be any encroachment upon the Regall power Jure Divino, or any wrong unto the supreme Majesty.

3. Whom doth hee thinke must be judge what is good for them and their Subjects.

4. Whether hee thinke the honourable House of Commons may not justly take these things into serious consideration, though another man dare not meddle with so stout a Prelate.

XXVI. That the power in matters Ecclesiasticall is such a Fee-simple, as was vested in none but God himselfe before it came (by his, and his onely donation) to be vested, in the King: and being vested in the King, it cannot by any power whatsoever (no, not by his owne) be devested from him, ho. tab. p. 24.

Consid. 1. Whether doth he thinke that the Parliament hath no power at all in matters Ecclesiasticall, but that the same power was in the King absolutely before the Parliament made the Statute of primo Elizab. as it was after, as his former words seeme to affirme: if it was, what needed that or any Act to be passed, but an arbitrary government, if not in all things, yet at least in all matters Ecclesiasticall, which is the onely de­sire of the Prelates, whereby they by flatteries and insinuations may doe what they list.

2. Whether doth not this deny the King himselfe to have power to in­vest his sonne and heire in part, or in whole, of his power, if he please, as some Kings have done, and as David did.

3. Whether doth not this tenet deny the Kings power to be devested from him to his officers for execution of his Lawes, seeing it tyes all so upon his owne person, that it seemes to deny him power to unburthen himselfe.

4. Whether doth not this deny the King to have power to make Acts of Parliament in matters Ecclesiasticall, because in such Acts the King obliges himselfe to that Law; or whether doth not this tenet nullifie all such Lawes, ipso facto, if the Kings power cannot by himselfe be devested from him.

XXVII. That the Kings Declaration is therefore in the let­ter called a kind of Law, because it was neither act of Parliament, nor a meere▪ Act of Councell, but an Act of the King sitting in Councell, which (if not in all things else) without all question in all matters Ecclesiasticall is a kinde of Law: Holy tab. p. 188.

[Page 15]Consid. 1. Whether the Prelates could not wish there were no other kinde of Law, neither Acts of Parliaments, nor Acts of Councell, but meere Declarations, and those onely by their owne directions, as in all things else, so especially in all matters Ecclesiasticall.

2. Whether the Prelates have not laboured to reduce all kindes of Law to an arbitrary government.

XXVIII. That the Kings Majestie may command a greater matter of this nature, then that the holy Table should be placed where the Altar stood, and be railed about for the great decencie, and that although the Statute of primo Eliz. had never beene in re­rum natura, pag. 32.

Consid. 1. Whether the Prelates have not alwayes perswaded that the greatest affaires of Church and State might be mannaged and performed, not onely by meere commands without, but contrary to Acts of Parliament.

2. Whether Bishop Williams doe not prove elsewhere that railes and Altar-wise placing are directly contrary to Lawes and Acts of Par­liament.

3. Whether a subject is not guilty of laesae Majestatis▪ that by flat­tery betrayes the Kings judgement into the manifest breach of the Lawes established.

XXIX. That the Act of primo Eliz. concerning Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction▪ was not a Statute introductory of a new Law, but declaratorie of the old; Parliaments are not called to confirme, but to affirme and declare the Lawes of God. Weake and doubtfull titles are to be confirmed: such cleare and indubitate rights as his Majestie hath to the Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction, are onely averred and declared by Acts of Parliament. And all Declarations of this kind are as the stuffe they are made of to last for ever. pag. 25.

Consid. 1. Whether every part or parcell of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction be perpetuall, because the whole is such, so that Parliaments cannot change them.

2. Whether the High Commission is therefore to last for ever, contrary to the same authoritie that stablished it first.

3. Whether this tenet doe not deny the power and priviledge of Parlia­ments, if all Ecclesiasticall Lawes so once declared, are to last for ever (to please the Prelates) so that the Parliament cannot repeale the Statutes them­selves doe make.

4. Whether doe not Parliaments rather affirme and declare the full con­sent of the King subjects in such points wherein they doubt what the Law of God is.

[Page 16]5. Whether some particulars in Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction, which before were doubtfull whether they ought to be by Gods Law obeyed or no, may not be confirmed by the full consent of the parties whom they most concerne in Acts of Parliament.

XXX. That, whatsoever by the Laws of God, the Prince or the Church is once constituted, is no longer to be mooted upon, but absolutely obeyed by all inferiours. And what God, the King, and Church have directed, is not to be put to deliberation, but exe­cution, Holy Table, pag. 66.67.

Consid. 1. Whether all the Prelates Canons are constituted by God, the Prince, or the Church.

2. Whether it will suffice that it be constituted by God and the Prince, or else by the Church alone without them.

3. Whether by the name of Church here be not meant the worst mem­bers of the Church, the Prelates in Convocation.

4. Whether no deliberation is allowed to know whether God hath con­stituted it or no.

XXXI. That all commands of the King that are not upon the first inference and illation, without any prosyllogismes contrary to a cleare passage in the Word of God, or to an evident sun-beame of the Law of nature, are precisely to be obeyed, pag. 68.

Consid. 1. Whether a command contrary to the word of God upon the second inference, may not be as unlawfull as upon the first.

2. VVhether a command which is truely contrary to an obscure passage in the word of God, may not be as unlawfull in it selfe as to a cleare.

XXXII. That it is not enough to finde a remote and possible inconvenience that may ensue therefrom, which is the ordinary objection against the Booke Lincolnes [...]reations. of Recreations, pag. 68.

Consid. 1. Whether Bishop Williams doe not here allow the Booke of Recreations, because he admits not the ordinary objection against it.

XXXIII. That every good subject is bound in conscience to believe, and rest assured, that his Prince (environed with such a Counsell) will be more able to discover, and as ready to prevent any ill sequele that may come of it, as himselfe possibly can be, Holy Table, pag. 68.

Consid. 1. Whether is a good subject bound to believe and rest assured that the Councell are such as they should be, though they be not, and so be bound in conscience to believe a falshood.

[Page 17]2. VVhether is a good subject bound in conscience to believe and rest as­sured upon other mens goodnesse, for the safetie of his owne conscience.

3. VVhether the Papists doe not so thinke of the Pope and his conclave of Cardinals, be they good or bad.

XXXIV. That the Table (without some new Canon) is not to stand Altarwise, and you at the North end thereof, but table­wise, and you must officiate on the North side of the same by the Lyturgie, Holy Table pag. 20.

Consid. 1. Whether this doe not imply that by a new Canon it may stand Altar-wise, though by the Lyturgie authorised by Parliament it may not.

2. VVhether this doe not preferre a Canon before a Statute, and the Con­vocation before the Parliament.

3. VVhether this did not give the first hint for the new Canons, and lay the first foundation for the late Convocation to make the Canon.

XXXV. That whether the Altars may soone be mounted up by steps, that the Minister may be seene and heard of the Congre­gation, I cannot tell you without new directions. For the orders made, 1561. require plainly, that if in any Chancell the steps be transposed they be not erected againe, and these were high Commissioners, grounded upon the Act of Parliament, who set forth these orders. Which how farre they binde, I dare not deter­mine being▪ as you say, none of the ablest Canonists in the Church of England, Holy Table, pag. 206.

Consid. 1. VVhether this doe not intimate, that by new directions the Bishops may crosse the orders authorised by Parliament.

2. VVhether he doubt how farre orders, grounded on Parliament, may binde, and yet affirme in the next Tenet, that the Convocation maketh strong and binding Canons.

3. VVhether it be not undenyably manifest here, that the writer of the Letter to the Vicar, and the writer of the Holy Table, are both one man, because those words of the ablest Canonists in the Church of England, which here he takes to himselfe. Doctor Heylin spake onely of the writer of the Letter, and so it is plane they are both one man: and Holy Table, pag. 58. he saith this Pamphleters whole Booke is but a libell against a Bishop, but that Booke (as Coal from the Altar) was written onely against the writer of the Letter, therefore both the writer of the Letter, and of the Holy Table, were both one, to wit, the Bishop of Lincolne: for both in the Title page, and in the license, it is said to be written by a Minister of Lincolneshire.

[Page 18]XXXVI. That the reverent house of Convocation is not con­vened or licensed by the King to make permissions that men may doe what they list, but to make, when they are confirmed by the King, strong and binding Canons, to be obeyed by the Subjects, and to be pursued by all the Ordinaries of the Kingome: Holy tab. pag. 205.

Consid. 1. Whether it was not a brave world for Prelates, to make what Lawes they pleased, if they could but get the Kings consent.

2. Whether hee doe not aggravate the strength of Canon, and arbitrary commands, but extenuate the power of Parliaments.

XXXVII. That the Bishop or Ordinary, if he command ac­cording to the Lawes and Canons confirmed (for otherwise he is in his eccentricks, and moves not as hee should doe) why then in such a case as wee had even now, that is a case of diversity, doubt, and ambiguity, hee is punctualy to be obeyed by those of his ju­risdiction, be they of the Clergie or of the Laitie: holy Table: pag. 68.69.

Consid. 1. Whether the Bishop expecting obedience if hee command ac­cording to the Lawes and Canons in cases of doubt and diversity, being lear­ned, and knowing his grounds, may not better shew his grounds and evidence of the lawfulnesse, to satisfie the weake consciences, then to force obedience against their consciences without any ground.

XXXVIII. That in matters of doubting and ambiguity the inferiour shall be approved of God for his dutie and obedience, and never charged as guilty of error for any future inconvenience, holy tab. pag. 69.

Consid. 1. Whether there be any ground in Scripture to warrant the committing of wilfull and presumptuous sinnes.

2. Whether any Scripture teach that men shall be approved of God for sinning against God to please a Bishop, and not rather severely punished.

3. Whether this doth not bewray Bishops, that they seeke more their owne pride and vain-glory, then the glory and service of God.

4. Whether this doctrine be not divellish and Popoish, and cleane con­trary to S. Paul, who saith, that hee that doubteth is damned if hee eate, because he eateth not of faith; For whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Rom. 14.23. and vers. 5. Let every man be fully perswaded in his owne minde.

XXXIX. That Elders are no elder then Calvin and Beza: Holy Table, pag. 79.

[Page 19]Consid. 1. Whether Calvin and Beza were as old as Saint Peter, who was also an Elder, 1 Pet. 5.1.

2. Whether the Bishops translated the Bible false, who translated Pres­byter an Elder.

XL. That a single Priest, qua talis, in that formality and capa­citie onely as hee is a Priest, hath no key given him by God or man, to open the doores of any externall jurisdiction: Holy Table, pag. 73.

Consid. 1. Whether Bishop Williams have knowne any double Priests except one double dealing Priest, who promised the Duke to marry his kins­woman, and so got a Bishopicke, meaning onely to play the Priest.

2. Whether a Priest have not as much power as hee confesseth a Deacon hath, as in Tenet 45.

3. Whether hee ever knew Priest that was not first Deacon, and whe­ther hee loseth his Deaconship in taking Priesthood, and then why doth not a Bishop lose his Priesthood as well in taking a Bishopricke.

4. Whether hee will hold the same position in case a Bishop and a Priest should be both one.

XLI. That hee hath a Consistory within in foro penitentiae, in the Conscience of his Parishioners, and a key given him upon his institution to enter into it. But hee hath no Consistory without in foro causae in meddling with Ecclesiasticall causes, unlesse hee bor­row a key from his Ordinary, holy Table, pag. 73.

XLII. That although they be the same keyes, yet one of them will not open all those wards, the Consistory of outward jurisdicti­on being not to be opened by a key alone, but (as you may observe in some great mens gates) by a key and a staffe, which they usual­ly call a Crosier, holy Table, pag. 73.

Consid. 1. Whether there be any need to tye the keyes of Christ to staves for feare of losing them in corners, as the keyes of great mens gates may be lost.

2. Whether Christ forgot to give the Crosier staffe with the Keyes, and wanted Bishop Williams to put him in minde, as hee saith, pag. 207. of Alfonso the wise, who blasphemously wish'd to have beene at Gods elbow at the creation of the world, to have put him in minde of some things to have made them better.

3. Whether this staffe doe fit well the key hole, and will turne na­turally [Page 20] upon all those words, or rather doth it not properly breake open the dore, as Bishops use to doe by violence.

4. Whether the key given the Priest, and onely without the use, be not given him in meere mockage, being the very same with the Bishops key given him in consecration.

5. Whether Bishop Williams thinke in his conscience, that the Parlia­ment of England, and the Doctors their Chaplaines, who adhere to this doctrine, and allow the Popish Schoolemens double power, or the other pro­fessed Puritanes (as he calls them) who adhere to the onely Word of God, teach the more orthodox doctrine.

XLIII. That it is a thing unreasonable, and altogether illegall, that a Christian man laying open claime to his right in the Sacra­ments, should by the meer discretion of a Curate be debarred from it, Holy Table, pag. 177.

Consid. 1. Whether it be not a thing unreasonable, and altogether il­legall, and illevangelicall too, that a godly and discreet Curate should be forced by the meere discretion (nay bribing) of a Bishops Chancellor, to ad­minister the Sacrament to one that his owne eyes hath seene drunke, his owne eares hath heard sweare, and his owne knowledge hath knowne to be most lewd and damnably wicked, and yet to his owne further damnation will lay open claime to the Sacrament.

2. Whether the Prelates be not unreasonable, and their doings altoge­ther illegall, who will admit into the Ministerie of the Word and Sacra­ments, and to have cure of hundreds of soules, such men as have not discre­tion to put backe a drunken dog, and swearing rogue from the Sacrament, and to admit an honest Christian to the same.

XLIV. That it is against the practice all of antiquitie, that the Priest should offer of his owne head, to keepe off any Christened and believing man from the sacred mysteries, Holy Table pag. 178.

Consid. 1. Whether it be not against the practice of all Antiquitie, that a Bishops Lay Chancellor should force a Minister to deliver the Sa­crament, where he thinkes in his owne conscience it is unworthily received.

2. Whether Bishop Williams his head piece be in right temper, when hee confesseth the Deacon may doe this, and yet the Priest may not, whereas the Deacons power was ever lesse than the Priests, &c.

3. Whether Bishop Williams, for all his wit, have not a bad memory, who forgets that all Priests are now Deacons.

XLV. That it was the Deacon (whose power our Archdeacons [Page 21] now by collation of the Bishop, and prescription of time have incorporated in their jurisdction) that alwayes executed this se­veritie, holy Table, pag. 178.

Consid. 1. Whether it was ever heard of, that Deacons had more power then Priests, when as every greater includes the lesse.

2. Whether Bishop Williams confesse not here, that Archdeacons power is not by Divine right, but by collation of the Bishop and prescripti­on of time.

XLVI. That the Curate is but to present to the Ordinary; and to admonish the offender and that in private onely, pag. 179.

Consid. 1. VVhether the Prelates pride and covetousnesse doe not ap­peare herein, that they will suffer the Curate to doe nothing, and yet will proceed themselves upon his presentment.

2. VVhether they doe not the Divell great service, who seeke to conceale and hide grosse and publique sinnes.

XLVII. That from the time that the Apostles appointed the first Deacons to our present Archdeacons, (in whose office the antient power of the Deacons is united and concentred) incum­bents have beene excluded from meddling with the utensils of the Church or ornaments of the Altar: Holy Table, pag. 79.

Consid. 1. VVhether Bishop Williams wits were not gone a wooll-gathering, when hee would prove out of Acts 6.2. that because the Apostles were not able to preach the VVord, and also to provide for, and dis­pose of the maintenance of all the power of many Nations, both Iewes and Gentiles, the Church daily increasing from three to five thousands, and from five to many thousands ergo, a Parish Priest who may tell all his parishioners in an afternoone, may not meddle with the Communion-Table, and Church utensills.

2. Whether the Altar had such ornaments from the time that the Apostles appointed the first Deacons.

XLVIII. That, so farre were the Antients from making a Parish Priest a stickler in vestry affairs, that a Councel saith clear­ly that the Priest can boast of nothing he hath in generall, but his bate name; not able to execute his very office without the autho­ritie and Ministery of the Deacon, holy Table, pag. 79.

Consid. 1. Whether the Antients were not as farre from making a Bishop a stickler in Parliaments.

2. Whether besides the bare name of Priests, they have not likewise the name, office and power of Deacons, and so have all the power that [Page 22] Bishop Williams for want of good memory denies to the Priests, and gives to the Deacons.

3. Whether the Priests make Deacons, and Deacons make Priests, and whether this be not a brave riddle indeed like,

Mater me genuit, quae eadem mox gignitur ex me.

XLIX. That in old time, as one observes, they were not borne but made Christians, made by long and wearisome steps and de­grees; and forced to creepe on with time and leasure to the bosome of the Chnrch, pag. 117.

Consid. 1. Whether this old time was so old as the Apostles time, when there were converted and baptized three thousand on a day, rather for their faith, than for their long steps and time.

2. Whether Christians are made by long steps and wearisome, rather then by their new birth and faith.

3. Whether unbelievers may not by time and leasure come to the bo­some of the Church, and true believers be kept out for a long time.

4. Whether this doe not savour of Anabaptisme.

L. That the children of this Church be those in the writers stile that will give eare to the voye and Canons of this Church: the children of this Commonwealth are such as obey the whol­some Lawes and reiglement of this State and Kingdome. But base sycophants that sleight the Canons of their Bishops, and undertake to refute the reiglement of their Princes, though they hope by flat­tery to prey upon either, are, as the writer thinkes, no true children of the one or the other: Holy tab. pag. 191.

Consid. 1. Whether an eare to the Canons of Bishops rather then an heart to believe the Gospel, doth make true Children of this Chruch.

2. Whether all are base sycophants, and no true children of the Church, that sleight the Canons of their Bishops.

3. Whether doe any hope by flattery to prey upon Church or Common­wealth, more then Bishops.

LI. That the irregular forwardnesse of the people (in taking downe Altars in King Edward the sixth dayes) the writer of the Let­ter doth no more approve of then I (the writer of the Holy Table) doe of your stickling in this sort for table-altars, upon pretence of the piety of the times, and runing before the declaration of your Prince, and the chiefe Governours of the Church, Holy Table, p. 188.

[Page 23]Consid 1. Whether doth the writer of the Letter disapprove of peoples for­wardnesse to take downe Altars in King Edwards time, or the writer of the holy table approve of the Arminians stickling for table altars; for one it must needs imply?

2. Whether did Bishop Williams expect or advise a declaration of the King and chiefe Governours of the Church for such purposes.

3. Whether did not Bish. Williams in three severall places, viz. tenet 34.35. and in this 51. lay a foundation for the new Canons of the last convocation?

Generall Notes.

1. How well hee defended the cause of Religion.

Now, let any indifferent man judge (that doth well weigh these te­nets, and the authors whence he proves them) whether hee defend the cause of Religion (as he by the title pretends) when as in all things for matter of Idolatrous worship and bowing; for innovations, for Pre­lats power over other Ministers for making new Canons and Decla­rations; for forcing obedience to them; for subtile policies to intro­duce common and frequent new appellations, by metaphoricall excu­ses for teaching them to load all their innovating trumperies upon the Kings power and prerogative; it is manifest, that hee yeelds more than the others did demand; hee tells them that which they did not under­stand; he teaches them the way to effectuate their designes; hee layes the plot for their further proceedings.

For instance, among many things, Heylin desires the table may stand Eastward; the Papists say if the building permit; but Lincolne sayes, yea, though it will not; hee allowes not Bellarmines exception. h. table p. 230. or tenet 9. The Vicar would call it an altar to his parishioners in his ordi­nary talke; the Bishop denyes not, but that the name hath beene long me­taphorically in the Church, and so he'l not blame the Vicar to call it, not on­ly frequent in his talke, but even in the Pulpit, holy table, p. 75. or tenet 7. Heylin cannot ascend to discourse of the altar without bowing; Lincolne sayes, let him bow as often as he pleaseth, so he do it to this blessed name, &c. Nay more, let the very women that refuse to bow, be as Donatists, thrust out of the Calendar of this Churches children &c. Nay more yet their bowing shal not serve the turn, except they make a lowly courtesie; Nay, more than all this, (I hope hee'l have cringing enough at last) such a lowly courtesie as hath beene accustomed. holy table, p. 99.100 and tenet. 16. the Vicar would bow to the name of Jesus, hol. table pag. 13. Lincolne will not only practice bowing himselfe, but also intaile it upon our posteritie, tenet 13. holy table p. 101. The Vicar and Heylin would faine use the appellation of second service, yea, that you may, saith Lincolne, and justifie it too by regall authority, out of the booke of Fast. 1. of the King. holy table pag. 15. ten. 11. [Page 24] Heylin believes, that by vertue of the Statute 1. Elizab. c. 2. the Kings Majestie may command the table to stand altarwise, or any way to please the Doctor, and to be railed about too, holy table p. 23. but Lincolne is a little bolder than Heylin (who durst but onely wrest Lawes, not overthrow fundamentalls) alas man (saith hee) you come short, you write nothing like a (Prelaticall) Divine, you deserve but a simple fee, you are but a bungler, and slubber it up like a base Coal; you animal, I tell thee, the Kings power in matters Ecclesiasticall cannot by any power what­soever, no, not by his owne, be devested from him; you speake most de­rogatorily to his Majesties right and prerogative, that that Statute of 1. Elizab. was a confirmative of the old Law; it was but declarative, and all such declarations (for the good of the Prelates, and upholding the miters) are to last for ever; they are no Ionahs gourds, to serve a turne or two, and so expire (for then Bishops were undone) and therefore Master Coal I shall yeeld, that the Kings Majesty may command a greater matter than that the table should stand where the Altar stood, and be railed about (what though the Statute confirming the Service-booke be flat against it) hee may doe this, and more, though the Statute of pri­mo Eliz. had never beene made; For Stephen Gardiner, an honest Prelate, who burned up the puritanes, whom wee Bishops may follow and belieye, saith, that by their calling King Henry the eighth, the head of the Church (a title of Christ, Col. 1.) their will was to expresse clearely the power pertaining to a prince by that sounding and empha­ticall compellation, holy table, cap. 2. pag. 22. to 26. and 32. Heylin and other Prelaticall persons, hold, that the setting of the table altarwise being exacted by the Ordinary, requires more of mens obedience, then curiositie, and that they are not to demurre upon commands, till they be satisfied in the Grounds and Reasons, holy table, pag. 61. For they take it as granted, that the people should thinke them­selves excusable, if they obey upon command; but Heylin comes short, and wants skill; for Lincolne affirmes, that the inferiours shall not onely be excusable, but more yet, even approved of God for their duty and obedience, and never charged as guiltie of error for any future inconvenience, holy table pag. 69. and this were brave for the Pre­lates, if Lincolne could but shew Gods charter for it, from his owne mouth, if not, we must take the Bishops honest word. And lastly, Heylin having now got an altar, must needs have a sacrifice, and though hee can finde never a one proper for his purpose, yet, ra­ther than faile, any improper parcell of matters (which though they be as weake with the learned, as Claudius Gillius, or lame Giles, p. 172.) yet will serve to plunder the poore ignorant people, who take all things [Page 25] as properly which are spoken commonly, and for this Lincolne helps him out and fits him supererogatorily: I doe grant freely (saith he) that in the Scripture, and the ancient Fathers, wee doe meet wi [...]h not onely these few which you reckon up, but a great many more duties and vertues that are usually termed sacrifices, holy tab. 107. I will likewise allow you (which you forgot to call for) that all these improperly called sacrifices, are not onely stirred up with the medi­tation, but many times sowne and first engendered by the secret operation of this blessed sacrament. Nay, yet further, in contemplation of all these speciall graces of the spirit wrought in our soules by meanes of the Eucharist, you shall not rea­soonably expect any outward expression of reverence and submission to the founder of the feast, which I will not approve of, and bring the ancient Fathers along with me to doe as much, p. 108. and so having furnished Heylin with many sa­crifices and more altars, some halfe a score at least, he concludes▪ Now consider with your selfe, whether it were fitter to make use of these altars for your unproper sacrifices, and have all these Greeke and Latin Fathers to ap­plaud you for the same, rather than to rely upon some miracle of a good worke in hand, or some poore dreame of the piety of the times, ho. tab. p. 107.108.112. And now by these few instances, among many others which might be alledged, it will appeare to any rationall man what manner of Cham­pions for the truth the Prelates are indeed; so that I may well conclude with his owne greeke proverbe, holy tab. p. 227. that as the Fox hath many tricks, but the Hedge-hogge, [...], though but one, yet a great one, to winde up himselfe towards a combat; so that his adversa­ry shall have nothing but prickles to fight against: so Heylin, Shelford, and his old Chaplaine Pocklington had many tricks, like Foxes, to nibble at Popery, but Lincolne, like an Urchin (for so hee compares Bishop Iewel) had but one tricke, but that was a great one, yet not to set his ad­versary the sharp to fight against, but to yeeld up into his hands, Totum quaesitum, all the whole controversie, and more than all too; so that it was not Religion, or the true worship of God, that he defended.

Note.

2. What cause hee did defend.

But though he would not speake a word for the Truth, and true Re­ligion; though he be content to intaile Jesuiticall bowing and holy-table-cringing upon his posterity; though he will uncalendar his chil­dren from the Church that wil not bow; though hee yeeld unto the Doctor that the King may doe any thing, with or without a Parlia­ment; that the inferiours are to obey all things and yet be approved of God▪ that the table may be changed to an altar, in altar-wise situation, so it be not fixed to the wall; and an altar in appellation, so it be meta­phorically excused; and an altar in adoration, so they pretend to ho­nour him, and him only in his holy sacrament; and at this altar a com­memoration of the dead in time of high masse, to which himselfe will say Amen; though he yeeld all this and much more, which the Papists never enjoyned, which Heylin forgot to call for, and I forgot to reckon up; yet there is one thing so stickes in his stomacke, that he will never yeeld▪ no, not an inch, not an haires-breadth▪ come what will, and that is, That Mounsieur the halfe-Vicar, should have a power to remove of his owne head, the Communion table▪ to call that an altar (without his leave) which the rubricke of the service-booke calls not so; and to be enabled to this by the Canons, and to be a Iudge of the conveniencie of the standing thereof, yea, a more competent Iudge than the Bishop and his surrogates, and not to permit the Church-officers to doe what they are injoyned by the Prelate; this is such a piece of policie as (if it were but countenanced) would quickely make an end of all discipline in England. Here is not onely I. C. Iohn Cotton, but T. C. Thomas Cartwright, up and downe, and new England planted in the midst of old, holy table, p. 70. this is Iesuiticall in the highest degree: for, to impaire the power of Bishops is no little sin (which is strange, for no man defends Bishops more then the Jesuits) and therefore (saith he) there were some Priests in France and Ger­many who presumed to erect altars in the absence of their Bishops, about the time of Theodosius the younger, but Leo the great tels them plainly, they had no more power to erect than to consecrate an altar; and not many yeeres after, about Justinians time, Hormisdas made an absolute decree to inhibit Priests to erect any altars under paine of deprivation, p. 72. which (saith he) I presse onely histo­rically, to let you see what severity they would have used eleven hundred yeeres agoe to chastice his insolencie, if such a rumour had beene raised, as this Vicars be­haviour raised in the neighbourhood; and therefore (saith he) I presse this for doctrine, that a single Priest hath no key of any externall jurisdiction given him by God or man; for the consistory of outward jurisdiction is not to be opened by a key alone, but by a key and a staffe, (for Bishops will needs be bang beggers) [Page 27] and this ancient doctrine (of the Pope) is opposed by none, but professed Puri­tanes, p. 73. they say indeed▪ that the Bishops power was the poysonous egge out of which Antichrist was hatched. p. 74. But (though hee cannot confute this, yet before he will yeeld an inch of this authority he would hazard a hundred miters; but for matter of worship or doctrine, popery or Idolatry, he will easily yeeld any thing; and if God will not permit Prelaticall Arminians to hypocritize a little, and pretend to worship him, when they worship an altar (if no man else will speake) let him strike the Churches with thunder, the people with pestilence, the Land with the sword, and the kingdome with all manner of judgements ra­ther than a Bishop should say any thing to offend his Grave metropoli­tane (or miter of policie) and so incurre his displeasure, and breake his oath of consecration, being sworne to obey him.

Note.

3. What Authors hee quotes to prove his opinions and tenets.

And as he denotes his whole forces to be employed in stickling for his own Prelaticall power and authority, and to maintaine his own popish opinions and erroneous tenets; so in nothing doth he more manifestly bewray his corrupt minde than in his few quotations of Scriptures, and his full stuffing both text and margine with the very worst trumpery he can find in all the rabble of Popish forgeries, and that without the least shew of dislike of the matters contained, or any touch of discove­ring of their counterfeit writings, most nefariously betraying the simple minde of the unlearned reader into a favourable opinion of so bad and plainly forged works, as the more judicious sort of Papists themselves doe utterly dislike and disclaime; I speake not by supposition, but my better opinion of him & his judgement in authors, had almost wrested from me a more slender dislike of many his quotations, had I not trackd him in some, for all were too tedious, ex ungue Leonem, and to speake freely, among the more ingenuous Papists, wee may finde much more plaine deading. Well fare old Bellarmine, hee might have made a good English Bishop, in respect of Bishop Williams, for Bellarmine told us ho­nestly, that the Masse attributed to S. Iames, had so much added and aug­mented by the later priests, that it was hard to say which part was S. Iameses, Bellarmine de Script. Eccl. we may say none at all. Bishop Williams would have us thinke just all, for hee quotes him without disclaiming any part once ho. tab. 204. and againe. pag. 234. and lest English readers should mislike it, he calls it not Masse, as the Papists do but Lyturgie, as Prelates use to call English Masse-bookes, and so makes it S. Iames his [Page 28] Lyturgie, as if it were all Gospell, although it be as unlike S. Iames, as Bishop Williams an honest Minister; for he may remember that there­in they pray pro iis qui in monastertis degunt, for those who live in Mona­steries, which prayer sure he will not say S. Iames composed; againe, it saith, commemorationem agamus benedictae Dominae nostrae matris Dei & semper virginis Mariae, let us make comemoration of our blessed Lady the mother of God, and a perpetuall virgin: againe, it calls the sacrament incruentum sacrificium, a bloodlesse sacrifice, and saith, dimitte spiritum sanctissimum, ut efficiat hunc panem corpus sanctum Christi tui, send down thy most holy spirit, that it may make this bread the holy body of thy Christ: and againe, me­mento Domine sanctorum patrum, fratrum & episcoporum, be mindfull O Lord of our holy fathers, Friers & Bishops, Martyrū, confessorū, doctorū, Martyrs, Confessors & Doctors, Ave Maria gratia plena, hail Mary ful of grace, &c. And moreover, it calls the altar supercoeleste, mentale, & spiritale altare suum, his more than heavenly, mentall and spiritall altar. Now, if Bishop Williams have the brow to doe it, let him say all this masse is S. Iames his, or, let him say (which Bellarmine honestly confesseth he cannot) which part of it was made by S. Iames, and yet in an English booke, which both learned and unlearned are to reade, he quotes it twice or thrice, as Saint Iames his Lyturgie, not denying, nor so much as giving the least hint of questioning the antiquity and authority of it. Another of his Masses, which likewise he quotes at least thrice, as in ho. tab. p. 175.214 and 234. is no worse a mans but S. Peters, and this a man would think were good Gospel indeed, for p. 175. in a question of our service he quotes it, say­ing, I will not undertake to make good S. Peters Lyturgie, as if he should imply, that he could do it, and yet it was published by his popish cousin William Lindan Bishop of Gaunt, and if wee will take it upon the honest word of these two Bishops, Lindan and Lincolne, wee must not doubt but that S. Peter himself doth pray, pro patre & patriarcha nostro venerando, N. for our reverend father & patriarch, such a one: and again, gubernare dignare omnes terrarum fines una cum servo tuo papa & patriarcha nostro N. me (que) misero & indigno, vouchsafe to governe all the ends of the earth, together with thy servant the Pope, and our patriarch, N. and me a miserable and un­worthy sinner, Ave Maria gratia plena, &c. hail Mary full of grace, &c. Nay which is yet more sport, wee finde in this Masse Saint Peter reverencing his owne long-dead memory, as memoriam venerantes beatorum Apostolo­rum Petri, Pauli, Andreae, Iacobi, Ioannis, Thomae, Philippi, Bartholomaei, Matthaei, Simonis, Thaddaei, Lini, Cleti, Clementis, Xisti, Corneili, Cypriani, Laurentii, Chrysogoni, Ioannis, & Pauli, Cosmae & Damiani, & omnium sanctorum tuotum, quorum intercessione & precibus concede ut in omnibus tua protectione muniamur, reverencing the memory of the blessed Apostles, Peter, Paul, Andrew, Iames [Page 29] Iohn, Thomas, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon, Thaddeus, Linus, Cletus, Cle­ment, Xistus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Laurence, Chrysogon, Iohn and Paul, Cosmas and Damian, and of all thy Saints, for whose intercession and prayers, grant that in al things we may be guarded by thy protection. See now whe­ther all this good stuffe be not S. Peters, or else say Lincolne twangs: nay, here is still more, such, nobis peccatoribus, &c. portionem aliquam & societatem largiri dignaris cum sanctis Apostolis tuis, & martyribus, cum Ioanne, Stephano, Matthaeo, Barnaba, Ignatio, Alexandro, Marcellino, Petro, Felicitate, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucia, Agnete, Cecilia, Anastasia, Barbara, Iustina, &c. Vouchsafe to give us sinners &c. some portion and fellowship with thy holy Apostles and Martyrs, with Iohn, Stephen, Matthew; Barnabas, Ignatius, Alexander, Marcelli­nus, Peter, Felicitas, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucia, Agnes, Cicely, Anastasy, Barbara, Iu­lian, &c. Now, let Lincolne, if he have the face, say that this is all S. Peters owne Lyturgie. A third of his Masses and which is not once slipt in by chance, but quoted at least twice, as p. 175. & 204. and this he calls Saint Marks Lyturgie or service-booke, and yet he hath not the honesty to tell us (as the Papists ingenuously doe) that edita est a Cardinale Sirleto sub hujus nomine Lyturgia quaedam, there is a certaine Lyturgie under Saint Markes name, set forth by Cardinal Sirlet. And here pax omnibus is reite­rated at least nine or ten times; and S. Marke, if wee may believe Lin­colne, enjoynes them to pray pro Rege, Papa & Episcopo, for the King, the Pope and the Bishop: and againe, he mentions beatissimum pontificem N. reverendissimum episcopū, the most blessed Pope, the most reverend Bishop, and prayes for all Bishops, Priests, Deacons, sub-Deacons, Readers, Singing-men and Laymen, and he calls the Altar, Sanctum coeleste & ra­tionale altare, the holy heavenly and reasonable altar, and enjoynes to pray for the City, saying, prolege civitatem istam propter martyrem & Euan­gelistam Mareum, Protect this City for thy Martyr & Euangelist S. Mark his sake, and these are Saint Marke his owne words, we never question what Lincolne sayes: and againe, the Deacon reads the Diptychs or holy Tables containing a catalogue of the dead, and the Priest bowing prayes for them, saying, Horum omnium animabus dona requiem, dominator Domine Deus noster, give rest O Lord God our governour, to the soules of all these; and againe, animabus patrum & fratrum nostrorum dona requiem memor maiorum nostrorum, patriarcharum, Prophetarum, Apostolorum, martyrum, Confessorum, Episcoporion, sancti iusti, &c. & sancti patris nostri Marci, Aposto­li, & Euangelistae; and give rest to the soules of our fathers and brethren, remembring our forefathers, the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, Mar­tyrs, Confessors, Bishops, Saints, just men, &c. and our holy father Saint Marke, the Apostle and Euangelist, &c. Now, all these must needs be Saint Markes words; for Lincolnes ipse dixit, whose words are all de­monstrations, [Page 30] and therefore never distrust him, but take at it all adven­tures. His fourth Masse is Saint Ambrose Lyturgie, pag. 275. which he saith (and you may believe him) all the world (not an old horse ex­cepted) knowes to be very ancient, tis wonder he derives not its pedi­gree (like Episcopacy) from Adam; but he saith enough, and we must take his word wit [...]out any more adoe: His fifth Masse is Saint Basils Lyturgie, which as the former was of great antiquitie, so this is of as great authority, and must needes be some Gospel-like piece; for he musters it up to defend his cause, no lesse than sixe or seven times, as holy tab. p. 178 193.196.211.214.234. wherein it appeares how ex­actly he conned these masse-bookes, and had them ad unguem, ready even to words and syllables: The sixth Masse hee makes use of, is Saint Chrysostomes Lyturgie (as he calls it) though all the world know that hee was more frequent in the Pulpit than in the reading pew, and more laborious in sermons, then Masse-bookes, as his sweete Sermons yet extant, taken by ready writers from his owne mouth in the pulpit, Socrates Eccles. hist. lib. 6. cap. 5. doe declare him a gold-mouthed preacher, yet Lincolne quotes this Lyturgie, as if it were Chrysostomes indeed (though it make mention of Chrysostome himselfe) no lesse than eight times, as in p. 99.100.174.178.193.196.214.234. His seventh Masse, or Lyturgie, is that of the Patriarch Severus, set forth in siriack and latine, by Guido Fabritius, this he brings in ho. tab. pag. 196. His eighth Lyturgie, is the Aethiopian, which he rouzes up from a dead sleepe to help him twice, h. tab. p. 178.196. His nin [...]h is the Moza­rabick Liturgie likewise twice brought in, to wit, p. 37. and 232. so that these nine masses or Lyturgies, like nine worthies, or invincible Champions, he musters up no lesse than thirtie times, stuffing the mar­gine with such like Authors, thereby bringing an English reader into a good opinion of Masses and Lyturgies, and drawing him to thinke, that if these Apostles & Fathers were not their Authors, such a learned bishop would be ashamed to cite them in their names, but he doth more than that; for when these doe not serve his turne, he makes use of Pope Pius quintus new missall, as p. 35. and if this faile, the maine authority bee relies upon is, the Romane Pontificall, h. tab. p. 220. and p. 197. so that he will never want authors to his purpose, so long as any Friers and Monks of Italy, France and Spaine, who have nought else to doe, can but forge any pamphlet on the Fathers.

Note.

4. How he respecteth popish Writers, and how the Protestants.

And as his principall grounds lye upon Popish Autho­rity, and his chiefe strength consists in Jesuites and School­men, and Masse-bookes, so he cannot but respect those to whom he is so much ingaged; and therfore it is no wonder to heare him call, Lindwood, our learned gl [...]s [...]t▪ holy Table, page 178. and Austin (the blacke Monke of Canterburie) the Apostle of the Saxons, page 223. Gratian the Father of all the Canonists, page 65. other Papists learned Pontifician writers. page 218. Rome and Constantinople the two great Mother Churches of the world, page 224. Nay, that impe of Satans subtilty, Julian the Apostate, he termes a witty Prince, page 157. And those that follow the popish Schoole men, judicious Divines, pag. 74. but contrariwise, those that embrace the onely Word of God, hee calls professed Puritanes▪ pag. 74 and nothing but puritane, pag. 191. and downe-right puritanes, p. 189. and sectarie or puritane, pag. 138. and Knave puritane, pag. 139. and puritanes in France, pag. 77. and these are his generall termes, and hee uses particular persons no better; Calvin is but a polypragmon, or busie-body, pag. 144. and pragmatically zealous, pag. 145. an active man 147. And Beza hopes, or else his heart would burst, pag. 78. Aynsworth and Broughton are derided, pag. 128. Master Cotton is but a foolish Vicar of Boston, pag. 70. and Master Moulin is never termed otherwise, than Mounsieur Moulin, pag. 196. which, though it be his native title in his owne Countrey, yet in English it sounds with as much grace, as if we should call the Bishop of Lincolne, Shon ap Willom, which if hee should never be o­therwise called, would not be much for his credit; and as these persons, so assemblies, hee preferres the Prelaticall Con­vocation before the Parliament, at least twice, pag. 24. and 35. which agrees with what hee sayes of their authorities, tenet 35. and 36. compared, and layes the foundation for the late Con­vocation in three severall places, as appeares, tenet 34. of a new Canon, and 35. of new directions, and 51. of declara­tion of the Prince and chiefe goverenours of the Chrurch, so that it is hereby evident what manner of man hee is; the consideration whereof moved me, though before I respected no [Page 32] Clergie-man in England more than hee, and though neither he nor any of his ever did mee in particular▪ any wrong, to ex­asperate mee against him▪ and though I might rather have pe­titioned (in respect of personall injuries and sufferings for a good cause) against one of Canterburies Chaplaines, who hea­vily afflicted mee in the Universitie, the cause whereof he could not declare, unlesse it were for not cringing to the altar, or against Londons Officers, who have injuriously wronged mee of my living, unto which I was entituled by ordination; yet disgesting mine owne injuries, I have rather become an humble supplicant to the Honourable Court of Parliament in behalfe of the truth and doctrine of Christ▪ beseeching them to defend both it and mee; and if any man make a doubt of what hath beene said, let him seriously (as I have done twice) cast a third looke over Lincolne.

The Nicene Creed or Faith was found to be a true Faith by the Truth it selfe, and plaine testimonies of holy Scripture: Constant. mag. Epist. ad Eccles. Alexand. Socrat. hist. lib. 1. cap. 6.
FINIS.

Errata.

GEntle Reader, to avoyd titubations, correct these errors with a pen, before you reade the Booke: in some bookes for fol. 8. is set downe 4. for fo. 9. there is 5. for fo. 12. there is 8. for fo. 13. there is 9. and for fol. 15. there is none at all. In tenet 22. for p. 139. there is 149. In tenet 23. for 136. see 133. there is 133, 136. In the 19. tenet, Consid. 3. for second thoughts▪ there is counter-thoughts, if any other faults appeare, I desire thy Christian charity.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.