second on-set on the Chappell grounded upon another falsification of the Doctors words Of mother Chappels The Royall Chappell how it may be said to interpret Rubricks The Minister of Linc quarels with Queene Elizabeths Chappell and for that purpose falsifieth both his forraine Authors and domesticke evidences Not keeping but adoring images enquired into in the first yeare of Q. Eliz. That by the Queenes Injunctions Orders and Advertisements the Table was to stand where the Altar did The idle answer of the Minister of Linc. to the Doctors argument Altars and Pigeon-houses all alike with the Linc. Minister The Minister of Linc false and faulty argument drawn from the perusers of the Liturgy the troubles at Frankfort and Miles Huggards testimony Of standing at the North-side of the Table The Minister of Linc produceth the Pontificall against himselfe His idle cavils with the Doctor touching the Latine translation of the Common prayer Book The Parliament determined nothing concerning taking down of Altars The meaning and intention of that Rubrick The Minister of Linc palters with his Majesties Declaration about S. Gregories A copy of the Declaration The summe and substance of the Declaration Regall decisions in particular cases of what power and efficacy CHAP. III. Of the Episcopall authority in points of Ceremonie the piety of the times and good worke in hand and of the Evidence produced from the Acts and Monuments The Minister of Linc arts and aymes in the present businesse Dangerous grounds laid by the Minister of Linc for over-throwing the Episcopall and Regall power He misreports the meaning of the Councell of Nice to satisfie his private spleene The Minister of Linc overthrows his owne former grounds by new superstructures protesteth in a thing against his conscience Chargeth the Doctor with such things as he findes not in him Denyeth that any 〈◊〉 tâ—ing may have two knowne and proper names therefore that the Communion table may not be called an Altar also and for the proofe thereof doth faâ—sifie his owne authorities The Doctor falsified againe about the Canons of the yeare 1571. The Minister beholding to some Arch-deacons for his observations Their curtalling of the Bishops power in moving or removing the Communion table to advance their owne The piety of the times anâ— the good worke in hand declared and defended against the impious and profane derision of the Minister of Linc. The testimonies of Fryth and Lambert taken out of the Acts and Monuments cleared from the cavils of the Minister of Linc. The Minister of Linc. cuts off the words of Lambert Fox Philpot and Bishop Latimer and falsifieth most foulely the Acts and Monuments Corrects the Statute and the Writ about the Sacrament of the Altar Pleads poorely for the Bishop of Lincolne and Deane of Westminster in the matter of Oyster-boards and Dressers and falls impertineâ—â—ly foule on the Bishop of Norwich CHAP. IV. Of taking downe Altars in K. Edw. time altering the Liturgie first made and of the 82. Canon The Doctor leaves the Minister of Lincolns Method for this Chapter to keep close to England Altars not generally taken down in the 4. of K. Edw. 6. The Minister of Linc. falsifieth the Bishops letter to the Vicar palters with a passage in the Acts and Mon. to make them serve his turne about the taking downe of Altars A most notorious peece of non-sence in the new Edition of the letter The Altars in the Church of England beaten down in Germany Altars not beaten down de facto by the common people but taken downe by order and in faire proceeding Matters of fact may be made doctrinall sometimes and on some occasions The Order of the King but a kinde of law The Minister of Linc. takes great pains to free Calvin from haâ—ing any hand in altering the Liturgie Land marks and bounds laid down for the right understanding of the story Calvin excepts against the Liturgie practiseth with the D. of Somerset both when he was Protector and after His correspondence here with Bp. Hooper and ill affection to the ceremonies then by Law established The plot for altering the Liturgie so strongly layed that it went forward notwithstanding the Dukes attainder The shamefull ignorance and most apparant falshoods of the Minister of Linc. in all this businesse Calvin attempts the King the Counsell and Archb. Cranmer The date of his Letter to the Archb. cleared from the cavils of the Minister of Linc. the testimony giuen the first Liturgie by K. Edw. 6. asserted from the false construction of the Minister of Linc. as also that given to it by the Parliament Archb. Bancroft and Io. Fox what they say thereof The standing of the Table after the alteration of the Liturgie and that the name of Altar may be used in a Church reformed SECTION II. CHAP. V. What was the ancient Doctrine of the Church concerning Sacrifices Priests and Altars and what the Doctrine of this Church in those particulars That Sacrifices Priestâ— and Altars were from the beginning by the light of nature and that not onely amongst the Patriarchs but amongst the Gentiles That in the Christian Church there is a Sacrifice Priests and Altars and those both instituted and expressed in the holy Gospell The like delivered by Dionysius Ignatius Iustin Martyr and in the Canons of the Apostles As also by Tertullian Irenaeus Origen and S. Cyprian How the Apologeticks of those times are to be interpreted in their denyall of Altars in the Christian Church Minutius Foelix falsified by the Minister of Linc. What were the Sacrifices which the said Apologeticks did deny to be in the Church of Christ. The difference betweene mysticall and spirituall sacrifices S. Ambrose falsified by the Minister of Linc. in the point of Sacrifice The Doctrine of the Sacrifice delivered by Eusebius The Doctrine of the following Fathers of Sacrifices Priests and Altars What is the Doctrine of this Church touching the Priesthood and the Sacrifice The judgement in these points and in that of Altars of B. Andrews K. Iames B. Montague and B. Morton CHAP. VI. An Answer to the â—avils of the Minister of Linc. against the points delivered in the former Chapter Nothing delivered in the 31 Article against the being of a Sacrifice in the Church of Christ nor in the Homilies A pious Bull obtruded on the Doctor by the Minister of Linc. The Reading-Pew the Pulpit and the poor-mans Box made Altars by the Minister of Linc. And huddle of impertinencies brought in concerning sacrifice Commemorative Commemoration of a sacrifice and materiall Altars The Sacrifice of the Altar known by that name unto the Fathers Arnobius falsified The Minister of Linc. questions S. Pauls discretion in his Habemus Altare Heb. 13. 10. and falsifieth S. Ambrose The meaning of that Text according unto B. Andrews B. Montague the Bishop and the Minister of Linc. The same expounded by the old Writers both Greek and Latine The Altars in the â—postles Canons made Panteries and Larders and Iudas his bag an Altar by
both Writ and Statute will hold good against all your Cavills and the poore Doctor may be Lawyer good enough to defend the Writ although there were no Precedents thereof in the booke of Entries You saw the weaknesse of this plea and thereupon you adventure on a further hazard You tell the Doctor elsewhere of his great presumption in offering to correct Magnificat and that being never in such grace as to be made Lord Keeper of the great seale of England he should presume to give a man a call to be a Iudge who died but an Apprentise in the lawes Yet now you fall on both those errours of which you have already pronounced him guilty For you must needs correct the Statute which the whole Parliament wiser I take it than your selfe hath thought fit to stand and tell us of the Writ which yet my Lord B p of Lincoln when he was Lord Keeper had no power to alter that it ought to be issued contra formam Statuti concernentis sacrosanctum Sacramentum corporis sanguinis Dominici whereas the Statute gives no warrant for any such Writ to be issued from the Court of Chancery Had you authority of making either Writs or Statutes I doubt not but your first Statute should be this that it should be lawfull for any man wheresoever or whensoever he saw the holy Table placed Altar-wise to call it a dresser and then a Writ to be awarded against all those that should speak unreverently of your said service of the dresser At least it should and might be lawfull for the rude people so to call it and none so bold as to controule them On them indeed you have trans-ferred it in your new edition of the letter to excuse the Bishop but then you never tell us as you might have done as well in the same Edition how sorely they were reprehended by the Bishop for it Here very unseasonably and by some Susenbrotus figure you have brought it in and seeme exceeding angry as I think you are that it should be so Prynned and pinned on the Bishops sleeve But be not so extreamly angry though mass Prynne may furnish you with as good a note as that when occasion serves and recompence you for the use of your Dresser by some trick of law But where you say that if one Bishop of Lincoln and one Deane of Westminster shall speake irreverently of the Protestants table I thought assuredly it had been the Lords Table calling it oyster-table and oyster-boorde by this new figure of the Doctors all Bishops and Deanes of those two places must till the end of the world be supposed to doe so you make a strange non sequitur which the Doctor meant not Hee knowes there have beene many Bishops and Deanes of either of such a noted piety as no man can suppose it of them All you can thence conclude is this that as there was a Bishop of Lincoln and a Deane of Westminster that called the Lords table standing Table-wise or in the middle of the Chauncell by the name of oyster-boorde so to cry quitts with them there is as you have now discovered him one Bishop of Lincoln and Deane of Westminster that calls it standing Altar-wise by the name of Dresser As for Iohn Fox his marginall notes of the blasphemous mouth of D r Weston the Deane of Westminster calling the Lords table an oyster-boorde pag. 85. and Bishop White then Bishop of Lincoln blasphemously calleth the boorde of the Lords Supper an oyster-table those you may either take or leave as your stomack serves you And sure it serves you very well you had not falne else on the B p of Norwich with so good an appetite and furnished some of your good friends out of the Index of your Author with an excellent note against the next Edition of the Newes from Ipswich But this is not the onely thing wherein H. B. and you have imparted notes to one another as may most manifestly be discerned in that generall Parallel which I have elsewhere drawne betweene you At this time I shall onely note how much you are beholding unto your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the back-doors of your books your Indexes Here we are furnished with a note out of the Index of Iohn Fox touching a Bishop of Norwich his sending forth letters of persecution Pag. 129. you certifie us from the authority of the same learned Index that Bishop Ridley ordered the Communion Table to be placed not Altar-wise but as a Table Nor could you enter into the Fathers but by this back-doore and there you found by chance such good luck you have that Sacrificium Altaris was foysted into the Index of S. Austin by the Divines of Lovaine as into others of the Fathers by the Priests and Iesuites We now perceive what helps you had to clog your margin with such a numerous and impertinent body of quotations as serve for very little purpose but to make a shew a generall muster as it were of your mighty reading CHAP. IV. Of taking down Altarâ— in K. Edw. time altering the Liturgie first made and of the 82. Canon The Doctor leaves the Minister of Lincolns Method for this Chapter to keepe close to England Altars not generally taken downe in the fourth of K. Edw. 6. The Minister of Linc. falsifieth the Bishops letter to the Vicar and palters with a passage in the Acts and Mon. to make them serve his turne about the taking downe of Altars A most notorious peece of non-sense in the new Edition of the letter The Altars in the Church of England beaten downe in Germany Altars not beaten downe de facto by the common people but taken downe by order and in faâ—re procâ—eding Matters of fact may be made doctrinall sometimes and on some occasions The Order of the King but a kind of Law The Minister of Linc. takes great paines to free Calvin from having any hand in altering the Liturgie Land markâ—s and bounds 〈◊〉 downe for the right understanding of the 〈◊〉 Calvin excepts against the Liturgy practâ—seth with the D. of 〈◊〉 both when he was Protector and after His correspondence herâ— with 〈◊〉 Hooper and ill affâ—ction to the ceremoniâ—s then by Law â—stablished The plot for altering the Liturgie so strongly laied that it want forward notwithstanding the Dukes attainder The 〈◊〉 ignorance and most apparent falshoods of the Minister of Linc in all this businesse Calvin attâ—mptâ— the King the Counsell and Archb. Cranmen The date of his Letter to the Archb. cleered 〈…〉 given the first Liturgie by K. Edw. 6. asserted from the false construction of the Minister of Linc. as also that given to it by the Parliament Archb. Bancroft and Io. Fox what they say thereof The standing of the Table after the alteration of the Liturgie and that the name of Altar may be used in a Church reformed HItherto we have followed you up and downe according as you pleased to leade the
is so in his Majesties Chappell where the ancient Orders of the Church of England have beene best preserved and without which perhaps we had before this beene at a losse amongst our selves for the whole forme and fashion of divine service The Chappell of the King being the best Interpreter of the law which himself enacted wherein the Communion Table hath so stood as now it doth sithence the beginning of Qu. Elizabeth what time that Rubrick in the Common-prayer-booke was confirmed and ratified Thus you report the Doctors words and with shame enough The Doctor saith not any where exclusively of the Cathedralls as you vouch him here that the ancient Orders of the Church of England have beene best preserved in his Majesties Chappell without the which perhaps we had been at a losse c. These are your words and not the Doctors The Doctors words are these For certainly the ancient orders of the Church of England have beene best preserved in the Chappels of the Kings Majesty and the Cathedrals of this Kingdome good Sir marke you that without the which perhaps we had before this beene at a losse amongst our selves for the whole forme and fashion of divine service Here you leave out most wilfully to say no worse and the Cathedrals of this Kingdome not so much to belye the Doctor as to devise some quarrell with his Majesties Chappell which you cast many an evill eye at And thereupon conclude most gravely To what use serve our grave and worthy Metropolitans our Bishops our Convocation house our Parliaments our Liturgies hedged in and compassed in with so many Lawes Rubricks Proclamations and Conferences if we had been long before this at a losse in England for the whole form and fashion of divine service but for one Deane and so many Gentlemen of the Kings Chappell Lord what a grosse of words is here drawne together to fight with nothing but a poore fancy of your own at most with one poore Deane and a few simple gentlemen of that contemptible place the Kings Chappell Royall Lesse strength and fewer weapons would have beene sufficient to drive this silly troope before you whom you might easily have scattered with your very breath and made them waite upon your triumph at the first words speaking Dicite Io Paean Io bis dicite Paean Never did any story tell of such a conquering combatant since King William the Conquerour As little truth you use in citing of the other passage from the Doctors text and far lesse modesty in your second onset on his Majesties Chappell You make the Doctor say The Chappell of the King being 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 c. and then flie out upon him without all pitty Where did the man ever heare of any Chappell in the Christian world that gave forme and fashion of divine service to whole Provinces Good Sir have patience but a little I will pay you all And tell me I beseech you first where did the Doctor ever say they should The former place you guelded in the very middle and this you cut off in the end Take the whole passage as it lieth together you will finde it thus For if wee looke into the former practise either of the Chappels of the King the best Interpreter of the law which himselfe enacted c. as before we had it or of Collegiate and Cathedrall Churches the best observers of the forme and order of Gods publike service the Vicar had good warrant for what he did Here you leave out again the Cathedrall and Collegiate Churches to pick a second quarrell with his Majesties Chappell the Doctor saying no where as you make him say that the Parochiall Churches are to precedent themselves expresly and exclusively by the Chappell Royall though had he said so you would hardly make your part against him but that they are to precedent themselves by the mother Churches Finding such store of Spanish French Italian Greeke and Latin cited in your Margin onely out of a poore ambition to shew your store I need not doubt but you can understand a peece of English Reade me this therefore which occurres in the 6. Paragraph of the second Section immediately upon these words Without the which perhaps we had before this beene at a losse amongst our selves for the whole forme and fashion of divine service For there it followeth And therefore if it bee so in the Chappels and Cathedrall Churches as the Epistoler doth acknowledge it is a pregnant argument that so it ought to be in the Parochials which herein ought to precedent and conform themselves according to the patterne of the Mother Churches The Mother Churches note you that not the Mother Chappels So that you might aswell have saved your needlesse disputation about the inward and the outward motion of the Princes minde as those most triviall and indeed undutifull inferences which you make upon it I have heard often of a mother Church but now behold a mother Chappell p. 42. and worse than that Teach not the daughter therefore against all antiquity to jet it out before the mother p. 37. you might have also spared you severall observations of publishing the new Missall by Pope Pius Quintus not at the sacred Chappell but S. Peters Church the merry case or as you should have called it the ridiculous case of S. Martins hood the distinct service in the Chappels of Salamanca from those that are in Parish Churches the severall uses of singing service in this Church the ancient courses in some others All these are onely toyes to take up the time with and conclude nothing to the purpose which we have in hand as they confute not any thing that the Doctor saith Yet since you speake so despicably of his Majesties Chappell and the use thereof as one that never heard till now the use of the Chappell I trust you will not say that the Kings Chappell is set out in a contrary way to that required in a law of the Kings owne making or that the constant usage of the Chappels in this particular since the first making of that law may not be thought to be a good Interpreter of the law it selfe You know the old saying well enough that praxis sanctorum est interpres praeceptorum And therefore being it hath beene still as now it is in K. Edwards Chappell whom the judicious divine M r. Hooker calleth Edward the Saint and Queene Elizabeths and of K. Iames and of his Majestie now living whom God long preserve whom your self have honoured with the style of Saint We may conclude that the Kings Chappell in this kinde or the Kings practise in his Chappell may be and is the best Interpreter of those Rubricks Lawes and Canons which you elsewhere speake of Nor could you preach a worse though perhaps no more welcome doctrine to
which handling of your Author you venture on an affirmation that you have no ground for nay I am sure you know the contrary to what there you say You cite us elsewhere in your booke the third Sermon of B p. Hooper upon Ionah preached before K. Edw. An. 1550. say you An. 1551. saith M r. Prynne whose account I follow And in that Sermon It were well then saith he that it might please the Magistrates to turne the Altars into Tables according to the first institution of Christ to take away the false perswasion of the people they have of sacrifices to be done upon the Altars For as long as the Altars remaine both the ignorant people and the ignorant and evill perswaded Priest will dreame alwaies of sacrifice By which it is apparent that whatsoever had beene done by â— p. Ridley all other dioceses aswell as that of London did not agree on putting downe of Altars and setting up of Tables as you rashly say Nor is it likely that the Altars generally were taken downe throughout the Kingdome untill the second Liturgie was confirmed by Parliament which was not till the yeere 1552 as you say your selfe Next for the manner how they were taken downe you tell us in the Bishops letter that the people being scandalized herewith i. e. with Altars in Country Churches first beats them downe de facto then the Supreme Magistrate by a kind of Law puts them downe de jure Your Copie stilo novo relates it thus as viz. that the people being scandalized herewith in Country Churches first it seemes beat them downe de facto then the Supreme Magistrate as here the King by the advice of Archb. Cranmer and the rest of his Counsell did An. 1550. by a kind of Law put them downe de jure 4. Ed. 6. Nov. 24. This alteration you have made to shift the scene a little and carry this tumultuous breaking downe of Altars which you here describe from hence to Germany For you perceive by this that he relates in the first place to the reformation of Altars beyond the seas because he speakes of Supreme Magistrates which the people began by way of fact before the Magistrates established the same by way of Law And this you say Luther complaines of against Carolostadius that he chose rather to hew down than dispute downe Altars No question but the Angels which removed our Ladies chamber from her house in Bethlem l unto her Chappell at Loretto assisted you in the performance of this miracle It could not possibly be the worke of a mortall man to shift so suddenly a businesse of this weight from England to the parts beyond sea Nec vox hominem sonat Happy man be your dole that are so highly in the favour of your friends and followers that whatsoever you say unto them is received as Gospell You had not else adventured on so fine a Legend but that you can command beleefe even from very Infidels Tam facilis in mendaciis fides ut etiam crediderint alia monstrosa miracula But tell me betweene you and me I will keepe your counsell how can this businesse relate unto those of Germany because say you he speakes of Supreme Magistrates Why man Your owne edition hath it Magistrate not Magistrates and will you flie off from your owne Besides you tell us in the words immediatly before that in K. Edwards Liturgie of 1549. it is almost every where but in that of 1552. it is no where called an Altar but the Lords boord Then you go on and aske why so and presently returne this answer because the people being scandalized herewith in Country Churches first it seemes beat them downe de facto and then the supreme Magistrate c. Kind-hearted Germanes that liking not of Altars in K. Edwards Liturgie would beat them downe at home in their owne Countries because the people which they never heard of were scandalized herewith in England Faith tell mee doe you not thinke them very honest fellowes and that a dozen of Grantham Ale were well bestowed upon them by the Alderman there for doing such an excellent piece of service to promote the cause I need not tell you more of this trim invention which made you falsifie the letter with a long Parenthesis as here the King c. to bring in this Pageant Onely I shall advise you as a speciall friend to take a care you see it entred in the next edition of the Acts and Monuments which every time it comes into the world growes bigger by such hands as yours and will no doubt in time grow great and be Livius ingens Well then the Altars in the Church of England being thus beaten downe by the high-Germanes what did the English doe themselves No doubt but they did beat them downe too and so they did the one in your imagination onely that dainty forge of new devices the other in very deed de facto And then the King came after with his bottle and bag to learne of such good teachers what he was to doe in the case de jure First beaten downe de facto then put downe de jure first by the people after by the King who as the Doctor told you in his Coale from the Altar could not but come too late to carry any stroake at all in so great businesse which they had done before he came I warrant you the King being young could not containe himselfe within doores but must needs runne to see the sport when hee heard them at it and being come thanked his good people for their paines and so sent them home But that your thoughts were taken up amongst the Germans you should have told your storie thus viz. That first the people beat down some de facto and then the King much taken with the example put downe the rest de jure and by publick order Yet had you told it thus the Doctor possibly might have questioned you for the relation desiring you as formerly to tell where you find it either that they were beaten downe or beaten downe de facto by the common people That they were taken downe in the most part of the Churches of this Realme the Kings letters tell us but taking downe implies an orderly proceeding beating downe hath none And the Kings letters say withall that they were taken downe on good and godly considerations which as the Doctor thinks implyes some order and authority from them that had a power to doe it some secret Order possibly from the Lord Protectour or those that after signed the letter who meant to try this way how the thing would relish before they would appeare in it or be seene to act it Or put the case some Bishops now should on some grounds to them best knowne give way unto the Clergie of their severall Diocesses to place the Table Altar-wise and then the King should signifie to the Bishop of Lincoln that it
for all his cunning For if wee looke into the Act of Parliament wee shall easily finde that not the language onely but the order forme and fabrick of the divine Service before established is said to bee agreeable to the Word of God and the Primitive Church which I desire you to observe as it is here presented to you Whereas saith the Act there hath beene a very godly order set forth by authority of Parliament for Common prayer and administration of the Sacraments to be used in the mother tongue within this Church of England agreeable unto the Word of God and the Primitive Church very comfortable to all good people desiring to live in christian Conversation and most profitable to the estate of this Realme c. What thinke you on your second thoughts is that so much commended by the Parliament either the very Order it selfe of Common prayer and administration of the Sacraments or the being of it in the English tongue It could not be the being of it in the English tongue For then the Romish Missall had it beene translated word for word without more alteration than the language onely might have beene also said to be agreeable to the Word of God and the Primitive Church which I am sure you will not say And therefore it must be the whole forme and order that godly order as they call it of common prayer and administration of the Sacraments to be used in the English tongue take them both together which they so commended Compare this testimony of the Parliament with that before given of it by the King and see if they affirme it of the language or of the order of the service The King affirmed that it was brought unto that use as Christ left it the Apostles used it and the holy Fathers delivered it the Parliament that it was agreeable to the Word of God including Christ and the Apostles and to the Primitive Church including the holy Fathers Nor did the Parliament alone vouchsafe this testimonie of the first Liturgie Archbishop Bancroft speaking of it in his Sermon preached at S. Pauls Crosse An. 1588. affirmes that it was published first with such approbation as that it was accounted the worke of God Besides Iohn Fox whose testimony I am sure you will not refuse though you corrupt him too if hee come in your way hath told us of the Compilers of that Liturgie first that they were commanded by the King to have as well an eye and respect unto the most sincere and pure Christian religion taught by the holy Scriptures as also to the usages of the Primitive Church and to draw up one convenient and meet order rite and fashion of Common prayer and Administration of the Sacraments to be had and used within the Realme of England and the Dominions of the fame And then hee addes de proprio as his own opinion that through the ayde of the holy Ghost and with one uniforme agreement they did conclude set forth and deliver to the King a booke in English entituled A booke of the Common prayer c. This as it shewes his judgement of the aforesaid Liturgie so doth it very fully explaine the meaning of the Act of Parliament and that it did not as you say relate unto the language onely but the whole order rite and fashion of the Common prayer booke Thus have we seene the aâ—teration of the Liturgie and by that alteration a change of Altars into Tables for the holy Sacrament The next inquiry to be made is how the Table stood and how they called it and that aswell upon the taking down of Altars An. 1550 in some places by the Kings owne Order as on the generall removall of them by the second Liturgie First for the placing of the Table your owne Author tels you that on occasion of taking downe the Altars here arose a great diversity about the forme of the Lords bâ—ard some using it after the forme of a Table and some of an Altar But finally it was so ordered by the Bishop of London Ridley that he appointed the forme of a right Table to be used in all his Diocesse himselfe incouraging them unto it by breaking downe the wall standing then by the high Altar side in the Cathedrall of S. Paul But that it was so ordered in all other Dioceses the Doctor findes not any where but in the new Edition of the Bishops letter which you have falsified of purpose to make it say so as before was noted Nor did the old Edition say that they the other Dioceses agreed at all upon the forme and fashion of their Tables though they agreed as you would have it on the thing it self And therefore you have now put in these words so soone which tells another tale than before was told as if all Dioceses having agreed as well as London on receiving Tables did agree too but not so soone upon the fashion of their Tables For that it was not thus in all other places your owne Miles Huggard tells you and to him I send you to observe it But this diversity say you was setled by the Rubrick confirmed by law What universally There is no question but you meane it or to what purpose doe you say so Yet in another place you tell us that notwithstanding the said Rubrick the Tables stood like Altars in Cathedrall Churches in some of them at least which had no priviledge I am sure more than others had For thus say you In some of the Cathedralls where the steps were not transposed in tertio of the Queene and the wall on the back-side of the Altar untaken downe the Table might stand all along as the Altar did If it did stand in some it might stand in all and if in the Cathedralls then also in Parochiall Churches unlesse you shew us by what meanes they procured that might which could not be attained unto by any others Wee finde it also in the letter that onely to make use of their covers fronts and other ornaments the Tables might be placed in some of the Chappels and Cathedrals of the same length and fashion that the Altars were of Why might not then the same be done in the Parish-Churches which were provided at that time of covers fronts and other ornaments of that nature Your selfe concludes it for a foolish dreame that the State should cast away those rich furnitures of the Chappell provided for the former Altars and sure it is as much a dreame that they should cast away their ornaments of the selfe same nature out of Country Churches And this I am the rather induced to thinke because that in the Statute 1 Elizab. wherein the Common-prayer booke now in force was confirmed and ratified it was enacted That all such ornaments of the Church shall be retained and be in use as was in the Church of England by the authority of Parliament in the 2. of King Edw. 6.
and so reckoned in the time of Bede and therefore not so late an Vpstart as some men have made it Last of all for your strong conclusion that it is utterly impossible that no Church of the English nation should imitate herein her first Metropolis when you have proved that the said Church there mentioned was the first Metropolis wee will tell you more Meane time the most that you have got besides the sport that you have made is that the Altar in a private Monasterie did stand in medio pene sui almost in the middest thereof which possible might be because the Church not being finished when S. Austin died was not compleatly finished neither when Bede wrot the story However it is there related as a particular and extraordinarie case and extraordinarie cases make no generall usage unlesse it bee with such a disputant as you who like a drowning man are fainâ— to lay hold on every thing Now from the evidence that you brought us touching the Antient standing of the Altars in the Church of England in point of practise wee must proceed to see what is determined of and for it now in point of Law For if the present Law be contrary to the antient practise the antient practise must give way and the Law shall carry it Now for our better understanding how the Law hath ordered it the Bishops letter to the Vicar of Gr. referr's us to the Rubrick and the Canon we will look on both And first beginning with the Rubrick it is ordered thus that the Table at Communion time having a faire white linnen cloath upon it shall stand in the body of the Church or in the Chancell where morning and evening prayer be appointed to be said So saith the Rubrick and for the former part thereof there is not any thing that can serve for your present purpose The Table in Communion time doth stand in the Chancell though it stand Altar-wise close along the wall and in the Chancell too i. e. in the most eminent part of it The writer of the letter saw this well enough and to avoyd the consequence could finde no better shift upon the sudden than to corrupt the Rubrick which was done accordingly For in the letter to the Vicar instead of in the body of the Church or in the Chancell we had it in the body of the Church or of the Chancell as if the Rubrick did appoint that in those places where the Communion was administred in the Chancell the Table should bee placed at that time in the body of the Chancell It 's true your new Edition reads it in the Chancell but then it is as true that in your book you fall upon the former fault and read it in the body of the Church or Chancell p. 44. and so you do againe fitting the Canon to the Letter of the old the writer of the letter would bee no good Canonist but rathâ—r a directive Canon to guide us as occasion is and as may bee convenient for the Communicants Now where you fall upon the Doctor for saying it is a matter of permission rather than command because say you the Reverend house of Convocation is not convened to make permissions that men may doe what they list but to make strong and binding Canons to be obeyed by all the subjects and pursued by all the Ordinaries of the Kingdome In saying this you doe not onely thwart your Bishop but confute your King For if it be to be pursued by all the Ordinaries in the Kingdome ill did the Bishop state the Question in saying the Table might stand Altar wise at the upper end of the Quire or Chancell in caâ—e the Minister may be seen and heard of all the Congregation And on the other side you both confute the King and your selfe to boote The King in that he hath determined that placing of the Table in Church or Chancell as both the Rubricke and the Canon have resolved therein is to be construed only a thing of libertie And being a thing of libertie is left unto the Judgement of the Ordinarie both for the thing it selfe and for the time when and how long as he may finde cause Your selfe in that you have selected that particular passage for your Euge tuum and honoured that alone with your mentis aureae verba bracteata as before was noted Besides you may observe in the Declaration that those who pleaded for the Appellants in S. Gregories case urged not the Canon or the Rubrick for strong and binding lawes as you please to call them but onely urged them to this purpose that they did give permission to place the Table where it might stand with most fitnesse and convenience So that you see the Canon and the Rubrick are permissions onely and not commands which is but what the Doctor said and which you see confirmed by your Lord the Ordinarie the Advocates in the plea aforesaid the King qui tot imperat legionibus and which is most of all Your selfe Quod si nec â—ratris nec te mea gratia tangit At Coeli miserere tui Besides the Canon being generall was so to be drawn up as it might meet with all particular cases of what sort soever Now you know well enough that in some Churches there are no Chancels and most especially in those of a latter building and some such you mâ—y finde in London if you please to look So that in case the Canon had named onely Chancels it might have left some Churches without Communions because they had no Chancels in the which to celebrate and so by consequence there had been no remedie in and by the Canon if the Communion should not bee duely ministred by the Priest or not so frequently received by the people as it ought to be CHAP. VIII An answer to the Minister of Lincolns Arguments against the standing of the Lords Table at the upper end of the Quire The Minisâ—er of Lincoln forsakes his Bishop about the placing of the Altar in the body of the Church The Altar in Eusâ—bius Panegyrick not in the middle of the Church The Ministers confidence and ignorance in placing the Altâ—r of incense close unto the vaâ—le Tostatuâ— falsified by the Minister of Lâ—ncoln 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the fift Councell of Constantinople and the meaning of it The Minister of Lincoln at a losse in his Criticall learning both Greek and Latin Varro corrupted by the Minister of Lincoln Saint Austin what he meant by mensa illa in medio constituta Albaspinus falsified Durandus sets the Altar at the upder end of the Quire The testimony of Sâ—crates and Nicephorus asserted to the Doctor from the Ministers Cavils The Altars how now placed in the Greâ—k Churches The weak authorities produced by the Minister of Lincoln for placing of the Table distant from the wall and some of them corrupted also The generall Precâ—dents of the Minister for placing of the holy