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. 2â— 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 〈…〉 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 1â— 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 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 meanâ— 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 naâ—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 〈◊〉 â—â—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 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 shâ—w that â—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 Parlâ—ament 1â— 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 Church of England have beene best preserved in the Chappell 's 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 Chappell 's 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 Chappell 's 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 Chappell 's and Cathedralls guiltie of some â—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 Chappell 's 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 〈…〉 dreame and a poore conjecture Questionlesse neither the Chappell 's 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
PErlegi librum hunc cuititulus est A Coale from the Altar or An Answer to a Letter c. in quo nihil reperio quò minùs cum utilitate publicâ imprimatur Modò intra tres menses proximè sequentes typis mandetur Sa Baker R. P. D. Episc Londin Sacellanus Domest Maij 5o. 1636. A COALE FROM THE ALTAR OR AN ANSVVER TO A Letter not long since written to the Vicar of GR. against the placing of the Communion Table at the East end of the Chancell and now of late dispersed abroad to the disturbance of the Church First sent by a Iudicious and Learned Divine for the satisfaction of his private Friend and by him commended to the Presse for the benefit of others HEB. 13. 10. Wee have an Altar whereof they have no right to eate which serve the Tabernacle LONDON Printed for ROBERT MILBOVRNE at the signe of the Vnicorne neere Fleet-bridge 1636. THE PRINTER TO THE READER I Am to advertise thee good Reader of some certaine things for thy better understanding of this Treatise First that whereas thou shalt find here three severall Characters Thou wouldst take notice that the Roman is the words of the Author the Italiâ—k matter of Distinction partly but principally of Quotation by him used and that the English letter doth exhibit to thee the words and periods of the Epistle or Discourse which is here confuted Secondly that howsoever the Letter by him here replyed unto be scattered up and downe and in divers hands Yet because possiblie the Copie of the same hath not hitherto been seene of all who may chance cast their eyes upon this Treatise and partly that the world may see that hee hath dealt trulie with the Epistoler and not omitted any Argument or Autority by him produced The very Letter it selfe is herewith Printed and bound together with it though it bee Apocrypha Last of all I must let thee know that whereas the Acts and Monuments otherwise called the Booke of Martyrs being a Booke which the Epistoler makes much use of is of a different Edition in the reply from that which is so often cited in the Letter and that there have beene many Editions of the same That which the Author deales in is the last Edition Printed at LONDON in three volumes Anno 1631. I have no more to say unto thee but wish thee good luck in the name of the Lord And so adieu A COALE FROM THE ALTAR OR An Answer to a Letter not long since written to the Vicar of GR. against the placing of the Communion-Table at the Eastâ— end of the Chancell c. SIR The Introduction I Have read your Letter and cannot but extreamely wonder that you should be so easilie over-weighed as I see you are You say that you were willing once of your owne accord to have removed your Cammunion Table unto the East end of your Chancell according as it is in his Majesties Chappell and generally in all Collegiate and Cathedrall Churches and that you had intended so to doe had you not mett with a Discourse written in way of Letter to the Vicar of GR. and as you have taken it upon common report by a Reverend Prelate of this Church whose Arguments have so prevailed with you that you are almost taken off from that resolution though it be now exacted of you by your Ordinarie It seemes you are not rightly ballanced when you can be so easily induced to change your purposes especially as the Case now is which requires more of your obedience than your Curiositie And should wee all be so affected as to demurre on the Commands of our Superiours in matters of exterior Order and publicke Government till wee are satisfied in the Grounds and Reasons of their Commandments or should we flie off from our duty at sight of every new devise that is offered to us we should soone find a speedie dissolution both of Church and State You know who said it well enough Si ubi jubeantur quaerere singulis liceat pereunte obsequio imperium etiam intercidit Tacit. Hist. lib. 1. Yet notwithstanding since you desire that I would give you satisfaction in the present point by telling you both what I thinke of the Discourse which hath so swayed you and what may be replyed against it in maintenance of the Order now commended unto you I will adventure on the second if you will excuse me in the first You say and probably believe so too that it was written by a Reverend Prelate and indeed by some Passages therein it may so bee thought for it is written as from a Diocesan unto a private Parish Priest in his Jurisdiction and then I hope you cannot justly be offended if I forbeare to passe my censure upon my betters Yet so far I dare give you my opinion of it that I am confident it can bee none of his who is pretended for the Author nor indeed any ones worthy to be advanced I will not say unto so high a dignity in the Church but to so poore a Vicarige as his was to whom the Letter was first written Nay to speake freely to you I should least thinke it his whom you entitle to it on uncertaine heare-sayes of all mens else in that he hath beene generally reported to bee of extraordinary parts in poynt of learning and of most sincere affections unto the Orders of the Church no shew or footstep of the which or either of them is to be found in all that Letter And I dare boldly say that when it comes unto his knowledge what a poore trifling peece of Worke some men the better to indeere the Cause by so great a name haue thus pinned upon him hee will not rest till hee have traced this Fame to the first originall and having found the Authors of it will conne them little thankes for so great an injurie For my part I should rather thinke that it was writ by Mr. Cotton of Boston who meaning one day to take Sanctuary in New England was willing to doe some great Act before his going that hee might be the better welcome when hee came amongst them or by some other neighbouring Zelote whose wishes to the cause were of morestrength then his performance and after spread abroad of purpose the better to diâ—coâ—nâ—enance that Vniforâ—â—â—y of publicke Order to which the piety of these times is so well inclined Further than this I shall not satisfie you in your first desire but hope that you will satisfie your selfe with this refusall For the next part of your request that I should let you see if at least I can what may be said in Answer unto that Discourse which hath so suddainly overswayed you I shall therein endeavour your satisfaction though my Discretion for so doing may perhaps proove the second Holocaust that shall be sacrificed on those Altars which are there opposed And this I shal the rather do because you say that the Discourse or Letter is now much sought after and
〈…〉 place of the â—ebrewes 13. 10. is beyond my reach the Prophet speaking of that 〈◊〉 and those Sacrifices whereof wee have no right to eaâ—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 otherwiâ—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 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 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 inâ—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 Tâ—ble also in the Temple which was not made to â—ate upon as the Table for the Sheâ—-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 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 â— 1583. Ne sessio sit in usu ad mensam Domini The reason was Nam haec ceremoniea Ecclesijs christianis coetibus Evangelicis non est usitâ—ta tantumque propria infidelibus Arianis domino parâ— 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 of the Lâ—rds Boord or Table is used onely in the other Though the Epistoler had not perhaps the leisuâ—e to â—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 â—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 15. NOw as the Story of the change is not altogether true so the reason there assigned is both â—alâ—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 thoâ—e times we shall quickly find that it was no scandall taken by the people which did occasion that or any other câ—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 Liâ—urgie thereof and thereupon he wrote to the Duke of Sommerset who was then Protector Epistola ad Bucerâ—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 mâ—ssa integra sanctae coenae quodammodo aceâ—ieret where with the whole Communion was made sower Other things in the Liturgie hee found fault withall and then adviseth Illa omnia abscindi seâ—el that they should all at once be cut off for ever Epist. ad Protectorem Angliae Nor stayed hee here but he solliciâ—ed Archbishop Cranmer to the same â—ffect 〈◊〉 1551 being the yeare before the Alâ—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 â—se as CHRIST left iâ— 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 â—pon him to wrâ—te â—â—to the King about it Epistol ad 〈◊〉 1551 the Lituâ—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 â—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 alteraâ—ions which were therein made grew not from any sâ—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 â—â—andaâ—ized in countrey Churches did first de facâ—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 doâ—ne de jure Wherâ— 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 heaâ—ken to it with a greedy â—are as loving nothing more then to have the soveraigntie in sacred matters and who being led by a Preâ—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 Chuâ—ches Actes and Monument Part. 2. pag. 699. So that the Altars were not generally taken dowâ—e throughouâ— 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 huâ—our withouâ— Authoritie or Warrant And had they all beene beaten downe de â—actâ— by the common people that kindâ— of Laâ— which after 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 powerfâ—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 â—ecently made and set up in the place where thâ— Altâ—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 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 Intrâ— partem Donati the lot and portion of the Brethren of the Dispersion those who have kepâ— their children's fore-heads from the signe of the Crosse
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 St 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 yet Ignatiusâ—seth â—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 Tarsensâ— he termes it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gods altar as both Tertullian and St 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 St 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 â—bolisâ—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 bâ—sinesse Popullo ut placerent quas fecisset fabulas 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 â—mbrâ—ges and offence at the plaâ—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 Churâ—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 Altar-wise lest they should take it for a Dresser and in a pious fury break it all in pieces as they are told their Anâ—estors had done de facto in King Edwards reigne Ad populuâ— 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 Epiâ—â—oler viz. that for the standing of the table in the higher part of the church he had declaâ—ed his asâ—ent already in opinion but tâ—at iâ— should be fixed there was so farre fâ—â—m being Canonicall that it is directly against the Canon It may be neither so nor so Not so for certaine in the first For in the Vicars judgement the Communionâ— table ought to stand like an Altaâ— 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 oâ— of the Chaâ—cel as the Epistoler hath informed us where Morning and Evening prayer are appoâ—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 â—aid onely in the body of the Church before he venture on such new and â—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 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 iâ— 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 Epistoâ—er's judgement the ablest Canonist no doubt in the Church of England who hath already freely granted 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 soâ—ne be done so that he which oâ—â—iciats may be seene and heard of all the Congregation This was the thing the Vicar aimed at Of whâ—m we have no cause to thinke or reason to conceive that â—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 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 CoÌ„munion the table shal be 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 conâ—istat cur solliciti cum quovis loco vel angulo extra tempus administrationis collocari possit pa. 718. What need they be so carefull say those factious 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 fifâ—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 shal be 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 â—eats thereof set up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Founder after all placed the most holy Altar in the midst thereof and compassed it about with raiâ—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 mingâ—ed wiâ—h the Iewes than in other places might possibly place the Altar in the middle of the Church 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 samâ— 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 pâ—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 theÌ„ Where although 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in it selfe doth â—ignifie a 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 Heaveâ— 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 4th chapter of the Revelatâ— on vers 6. that round about the throne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were foure beasts full of â—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 pasâ—it Mensa ipsius est illa in medio constituta Quid causae est O Audientes ut mensam videatis ad epulas non accedatis Which BP. Iewell thus transâ—lateth Christ feedeth us daily and this is his Table here 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 yeâ—â—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 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 Miniâ—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 granteâ— it being by St. â—aul preferred before Faith and Hope But if hee meane that they 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 pâ—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 1â— 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 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 of due reverence to Christ's holy Sacraments But seeing that the Ritesâ—nd â—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 froâ— 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 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 rebellioâ—s assemblies 1. Eliz. cap. 16. Those against such as shall rebelliously take or conspire to takâ— 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 Wordâ— and Rumors uttered against the Queenâ—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 â— 27. ca. 1. In the which last although it bee not said expresly that it shal dure no longer theÌ„ 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 Feeâ— simple doth passe without these words Successours and Heires because in â—udgement of Law The King never dieth Coke on Litâ— 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 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 Câ—unsell of their Prelateâ— 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 1â— 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 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 â— 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 At Whitehall the third of November 1633. Present the KINGS most excellent Majestie Lo Archbish. of Cant. Lo Keeper Lo Archbish. of Yorke Lo Treasurer Lo Privie Seale Lo Duke of Leâ—nox Lo High Chamberlain Ear. Marshall Lo Chamberlaine Ear of Bridgewater Ear of Carlile Lo Cottington Mr. Treasurer Mr. Comptroller Mr. Secretary Cooke Mr. Secret Windebanke THis day was debated before his Majestie sitting in Coâ—nsell the Question and Difference which grew about the Removing of the Communion Table in Saint Gregories Church neere the Cathedrall Church of Saint Paul from the middle of the Chancell to the upper end and there placed Altar-wiâ—e in such manner as it standeth in the sayd Cathedralls and Mother Church as also in all other Cathedralls and in his Majesties owne Chappell and as is consonant to the practise of approoved Antiquitie Which removall and placing of it in that sort was done by Order of the Deane and Chapter of St. Pauls who are Ordinaries thereof as was avowed before his Majestie by Doctor King and Doctor Montfort two of the Prebends there Yet some few of the Parishioners being but five in number did complaine of this Act by Appeale to the Court of Arches pretending that the Booke of Commâ—n-prayer and the 82. Canon doe give permiâ—sion to place the Communion Table where it may stand with most fitnesse and convenience Now his Majestie having heard a particular relation made by the Counsaile of both parties of all the carriage and proceedings in this cause was pleased to declare his dislike of all Innovation receeding from ancient Constitutions grounded upon just and warâ—antable reasons especially in matters concerning Eccleâ—iasticall Orders and Government knowing how easily men are drawne to affect Novelties and how soone weake judgements in such cases may bee overtaken and abused And he was also pleased to observe that if those few Parishioners might have their wills the difference thereby 〈…〉 of the neereneâ—s of St. Gregories standing close to the wall thereof And likewise for so much as concernes the liberty given by the said Common