IT is a dangerous thing to make Innovations if but in the Circumstances of Gods Worship those humane Additions which would seem to grace the Institution of God deprave it the foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of men Idolatry and Falshood is commonly more gaudy and plausible than Truth Bishop Hall Contemplat on the Altar of Ahaz lib. 20. p. 1286. Altar-Worship Or BOWING to the Communion Table Considered As to the Novelty Vanity Iniquity Malignity charged upon it In an Antithesis to the Determination of Dr. Eleazar Duncon Lately translated and sent into the world in a Romish Dress with a Cross in the Front and Fine By Z. Crofton Presbyter but proved Enemy to all Fanaticks Levit. 26.1 You shall not set up any Image in your Land to bow down unto it London Printed for J. R. at the Fountain in Goldsmiths-Row in Cheapside 1661. HOdie tepidi sunt qui Christum cum Belial in side Ceremoniis moribus conciliare satagunt qui cum ex Babylone se egressos glorientur bonique evangelici haberi velint exuvias tamen papatus dignitates ordines vestes stolas infulas casulas cruces Imagines Statuas Altaria Cereos Lampades Calices id genus supellectilia Babylonica pro a diaphoris in Templis cultu Dei mordieus tuentur Pareus expos in Apocalyps cap. 3. v. 15. The Epistle to the Reader Christian Reader REligion mans Glory like Moral and Divine Vertues is attended and often enervated by two Extreams Prophanesse and Superstition equally odious unto God incident unto men and too commonly concomitant and that which is strange ordinarily prevalent in the same Subjects sinking Religion by Prophaness the Defect and at the same time subverting it by Superstition the Excess thereof Such is mans propensity to both these that nothing will restrain many until they run themselves on their own Ruine and when the judgments of a Jealous God hath bid a stand to their furious course hedged up their way turned them by weeping Cross and bound them against the same by the sacred Bonds of most Solemn Oaths yet mercy is no sooner returned on them but like backsliding Israel they forget God deal falsly in his Covenant and go a whoring after their own Inventions Of this evil England is become a most sad and sensible Embleme concerning whose present carriage towards Religion we may expostulate as the Ten somtimes on a bare Jealousie did with the Two Tribes of Israel in Josh 22.16 17 18 19. What trespass is this that ye have committed against the God of Israel to turn away this day from following the Lord in that you have builded you an ALTAR that ye might rebell this day against the Lord Is the Iniquity of Peor too little for us from which we are not cleansed this day although there was a Plague in the Congregation of the Lord but that you must turn away this day from following the Lord and it will be seeing ye rebell to day against the Lord to morrow he will be wroth with the whole Congregation of Israel Wherefore rebel not against the Lord nor rebel against us to build you an ALTAR besides the Altar of the Lord. How Gods Sabbaths have been prophaned and his Sanctuary polluted in our Land we cannot forget and how our Kings Princes and People have been visited by a Jealous God our yet bleeding wounds cannot but mind us How his Hand hath brought our Nation under a most Solemn League and Covenant from which no Power Pope Prince or Parliament can absolve us for the Reformation of Religion according to his Word all the Christian world could not but observe yet wretched we not only forget but with a fretting violence cast off yea break through those Sacred bonds returning like Dogs to our Vomit which is wofully witnessed by that Deluge of Prophaness and Superstition which doth overspread our Land unto the again prophane neglect of Gods Sabbath and polluting his Sanctuary by the whole Mass of Humane Inventions and Idolatrous dregs continued among us at our first Reformation or innovated by our late Prelates in their pursued accommodation and Union with Rome that Mother of Whoredoms for which notwithstanding we have sharply smarted yet we find the same Spirit according to its power forward to appear Amongst which Solemn and Religious Bowing to towards or before the Communion-Table is not the least though by many the least regarded This Ceremony for such they would have us account it is afresh taken up by our now-rising Prelates and their old Superstitious Clergy not only in Cathedral but some Parish Churches But as yet hath obtained that I observe few Advocates who openly plead for this irreligious irrational Adoration only one I. D. hath with a daring Impudence and Jesuitick boldness translated Dr. Eleazar Duncon his Determination De Adoratione Dei adversus Altare delivered some years since in Latine at publick Commencement in the University of Cambridge and that as he professeth to make plain the Catholick Paths unto Vulgar Devotion The Epistle Dedicatory to the translation of Dr. Duncon his Determination lest you should mistake the meaning of his Term Catholick he hath affixed to the Front and end of his Book the Crosse that Catholick Mark of the Romish Church on whose Score as his holy Mother-Church I conceive he would be understood he doth presume to cast the Boldnesse of Dedicating this Translation to Doctor John Gauden one of our now active rising Prelates whom he applauds for his Late Signal Endeavours to vindicate her Honour and restore her Glory I cannot but in Charity hope to see the indignation of this Reverend Patron expressed against this Translators Boldness for that his Non-conformity in this Point at his Late Consecration giveth me cause to think his Name is knavishly prefixed to this Book because his Late unhappy works may I wish only so by accident prove serviceable to Englands sinful shameful return to the Holy-Catholick-Mother-Church of Rome to which the coming abroad of this Book in a Popish Form and Dialect seems to be a Praeludium I heard that a Fool of late seeing the now Altar and Crosses over it at Westminster-Abbey and meeting with a Person of Honour saluted him with a foolish embrace and this homely Complement God blesse you my Lord you are reforming Religion to the Purity it was in in Queen Maries daies Fooles and Children do commonly speak truths If ALTARS be erected and adored without nay contrary to Law and that under Honourable countenance and be pleaded for in plain English under our Prelates Patronage we can expect our Reformation to be resolved into no other Mode That England may have a seasonable warning and the Vulgar a timely Antidote to poyson thus prepared I have opposed unto Dr. Duncons Thesis a plain Antithesis and explained and enforced it with those Considerations which run counter to the Arguments of the Doctor and his contemporary Contestors I have chosen this Method for
third Reason is Because the Table is the memory of the everlasting Sacrifice there made and presented to the Trinity So saith Shelford in his Sermon of Gods House p 2.4 19. The Table is a memorative Instrument unto which the assistance of Grace is never wanting either to beget in our mind such thoughts of the death of Christ or to extract from our persons such a worship of him So saith Ironside 7. quest of Sabbath p. 279. On the Table is celebrated that awful and most venerable Sacrifice which our Lord himself did institute of old for the commemoration representation application and exhibition of the most perfect Sacrifice saith Dr. Duncon in his Determination de adoratione adversus Altare p. 22. Whosoever reads this Reason cannot but see we were running very fast and had made good progress towards a reconcilement with Rome having admitted not only Priests and Altars but a Sacrifice an awful most venerable Sacrifice though we yet own it but as a memorable Sacrifice yet it will soon appear nonsence that the Lord of old instituted a Sacrifice the memory of a Sacrifice and will necessitate us to know the nature of a Sacrifice is propitiatory and as such it must next time be acknowledged therefore though these seem to mince the matter another contemporary with them and managing the same contest speaks out and tells us plainly it is a propitiatory Sacrifice to reconcile us unto God offended with our daily sins Widowes his Lawl Kneel Schis Puritan pag. 34 89. And sure then there cannot want a reason for most reverent bowing to the Table 2. Who ever made the Table the memory of the everlasting Sacrifice When did the Lord of old institute it Or how doth it appear that it is a memorative instrument to which the assistance of grace is never wanting I read no more of promise for the one than precept for the other I think the assistance of Grace must be the assurance of God not appointment of Man who cannot presume to dispence it without arrogance and presumption and then worship hereby extracted is so far from being acceptable to God that it is abominable Superstition Though these things might somthing suit the Elements they are absurdly predicated of the Table and bowing to towards or before the one or the other more absurdly concluded for that neither the Jews Christ his Apostles Primitive Churches Fathers or Councils did ever think or teach it a duty to bow and worship before the place where the memory of the everlasting sacrifice is celebrated The fourth Reason for bowing to the Table examined A Fourth Reason urged why we should bow to the Communion Table is this The Table or Altar is the sign of the place where our Saviour was most dishonoured and crucified so reasons Giles Widdowes in the Book and Page before mentioned But by his leave this is notoriously untrue for the Table is no sign of Hierusalem Golgotha the High Priests Hall or of the Cross 2. What Rule directs or reason dictates a bowing to the sign of the place where Christ was despised dishonoured and crucified If there be any they may take bowing enough at every Map of the holy Land or Sign of Hierusalem hanged at many Taverns in many streets of the City and will find a necessity of restoring Crosses and Crucifixes the most proper signs of the Instrument whereon Christ was most dishonoured and crucified The fifth Reason for bowing at the Table examined The Last Reason I shall take notice of and I need but note it is this The like difference may be discerned between your maner of reverence in bowing towards the Alt. for adoration of the Eucharist only ours in bowing as wel when there is no Eucharist on the Table as when there is which is not to the Table of the Lord but the Lord of the Table to testifie the Communion of all the faithful Communicants thereat Thus is Dr. Moreton made to speak in the second Edition of his Learned Institutions of the Sacrament Lib. 6. ca 5. Sect. 15. I say he is made to speak because it was not spoken in his first Edition and is conceived on very confiderable Reasons not to have been spoken by himself being contrary to his known judgemēt unsuitable to his Learning Gravity Acutenesse and Dialect but to have been foysted in by some zealous Altar Adorer that desired the authority of so Learned an Advocate as is at large declared in the Quench-coal p. 289 290 291. But be it as it will it is a reason most vain and carrying in it the least of reason of any yet produced For How can bowing to the Table testifie the Communion of all thè Faithful Cōmunicants at thè Table Who instituted this action unto that end Or what naturall aptitude hath this action to signifie such a thing The joynt receiving of the Lords Supper doth indeed testifie Communion and is appointed thereto But to think that bowing to the Table when there is no Communion should so do is a most ridiculous Fancy to be derided by the very Papists who do more really worship the Lord of thè Table by bowing to their transubstantiated Host and imagined real presence than the Protestants can who deny the Lord to be present really or by his Ordinance and yet bow to the Table on a most groundless senceless imagination Wee see that the nature and quality of the Object doth no way dictate any colourable reason for bowing to towards or before the Communion Table and that how devout soever men seem to be in this act of Religion it is a meer shadow and Vanity is written on this action in characters no less legible than those whereby we read the Novelty thereof And therefore we must needs as yet cōclude it is a devotion foolish and unlawful unbeseeming men of Reason Learning and Piety to practice in themselves or enforce upon others whilst its best bottom is the pleasing of Superiours making Parish Churches conform to the Cathedral and Mother Churches whom we must decline to follow further then they follow Christ SECT V. THough Bowing to the Communion Table be an action new and seemingly vain yet Gods Institution and appointment will make it good and necessary we are not so much to enquire the matter tendred unto God as to observe the stamp that makes it currant the most cōmon and contemptible Elements are most eminent parts of Gods worship when used according to his own appointment But alass herein we are at the greatest loss of all for the divine authority of our adoration to towards or before the Communion Table concerning which we charge it to be an Iniquity and render for it this Reason Solemn and Religious Bowing to towards or before the Communion Table is no were directed in the Word of God and is therefore an iniquity foolish and unlawful Nadab and Abihu bringing fire of their own kindling unto God are made everlasting Monuments of Gods Jealousie preaching
there is a most full conformity to the heathen worship of theâ—r gods by bowing before their Altars placed in the East and prepared according as is here described all which is declared by their own Poets Virgil Eneid lib 4. p. 171 172. lib 5. p. 213. lib 8. p. 279 Ovid Fastor lib. 5. p. 88. Horace Epi. lib. 2. Epist 1. Ovid and Horace by our reformed Divines Dr. Rainold in his Treatise De Idololatria Ecclesiae Romanae lib. 2. cap. 3. sect 46. pag. 432. Bishop Jewell and Bishop Morton and by our own Homilies in the third part of the Homily of the peril of Idolatry as also by the Fathers of old and the plain suggestions of the Scripture coupling together the Altars and Images of the Gentiles in their Erection destruction or Adoration And for the conformity of this practice unto the Papists it is so legible that all may run and read it and I shall only inforce it with that known story witnessing the full agreement of the Papists Priests English Altar worshippers as to this point on Maunday Thursday in the year of our Lord 1636. Mrs. Charnock a gentlewoman of good quality with her daughter and some other friends amongst whom one was a Papist went to see the Kings Chappel where they saw an Altar with Tapers and other furniture on it a Crucifix over it and presently Dr. Brown of Faiths Church one of his Majesties Chaplaines and a Dean in this Church with another Minister after known to be his Curate came into the Chappel Then Dean of Hereford and turning themselves towards the Altar bowed Three Times and then performing some private devotion departed and immediately came Two Seminary Priests and did as the Doctor and his Curate had done before them on which Mrs. Charnock speaking to her friends said I never thought to have seen such a sight in England that our own Ministers and Popish Priests should thus repair into the Kings Chappel use the self same bowings gestures to the Altar crucifix as if they were both agreed whereunto her Papist friend presently replyed There is no such odds or difference between you and us as is conceived And one of the Priests seconded her and said Gentlewoman you need not wonder at our bowing and kneeling to the Altar and crucifix for you see that Ministers of your own Religion do the same Can Idolaters find their foolish superstitions followed by and retained among the professors of Gods true worship and not be obdurated in their vanity folly or can any conscientious Protestants convinced that God requires his people to avoid the Symbol or similitude as well as substance of false worship and not be offended grieved scandalized at this apparent conformity with Pagans and Papists in an action that neither Reason nor ReligioÌ„ more then humane invention superstitious devotion will appoint allow or defend Secondly Solemn and Religious bowing to towards or before the Communion Table is a spring of superstition and fountain of vanity from whence it floweth in great abundance Men do not gather Grapes of Thornes and Figs of Thistles such as is the Tree such must be the fruit such as are the premises must be the conclusion If the Communion Table must be bowed unto with solemn and Religious bowing then it will follow First That holiness of places and instruments expired and abolished by the comming of Christ is yet continued in and to be regarded and reverenced by the Church of God and this is evident in Dr. Duncons notion that the Lords table is the most holy of Gods Houshold-stuff and in that the Assertors of this Table Worship do affect to call the Table the Altar High Altar the names of holy instruments and must not this obdurate the Jewes who know holy places and instruments to be the Types of the Messiah and offend the Christian who knoweth that Christ our Altar is in Heaven and hath laid common all holy places and instruments 2. Then Communion Tables must have holiness stamped upon them and be signally distinguished from other places and instruments above which they must be signified by she solemn special peculiar reverence So we see a necessity of removing the Table out of the Body of the Church into the Chancel the most honourable place and placing it close to the Wall lest any should sit behind it above Jesus Christ saith Shelford railing it in lest common people come nigh and prophane it advancing it by steps that it may be conspicuous at coming into the Church and consecrating it by a solemn and Religious Rite or Order of stamping holiness and of furnishing it with Candlesticks Tapers Crosses and Crucifixes lest we should seem to worship a simple naked Joyners frame if it were left without wealt or guard all which have been made legible by the Writings Preaching and Practise of our Table-cringers as the natural Inferences Brood and Off-spring of solemn and religious Bowing to the Communion Table 3. Then the Lord Jesus Christ one way dispensed to his people doth stamp more holinesse and make the Instruments of such ministration Objects of more Honour and Reverence than the same Christ dispensed another way doth or can do The substance and matter of the Word read preached and sensibly administred is one and the same Christ crucified all is Verbum Dei or Deus Verbum although one be visible and the other audible and yet the Table only not the Desk or Pulpit must have solemn and religious reverence Baptism is a Sacrament an Ordinance of the same nature with the Lords Supper signifying sealing the Blood of Christ crucified and shed as a Sacrifice for sin though in a differeÌ„t administration according to the different capacity of the Subject yet the Table must be bowed unto and not the Font and so different administrations of the same substance do stamp different degrees of holinesse though never designed nor directed of God unto that end 4. Then Relative power is an eminent piece of Religion and Christian Devotion who must not be bound to go to God immediately in their solemn and religious adoration but making him their ultimate Object may direct their Reverence toward an externall Object a Frame Altar or Table related unto God or Christ and to him dedicated as the medium cultus and then how shall we keepe out Images and Crucifixes as likely media cultus as Tables or Altars and charge folly on the Primitive Christians and Protestants and on our own Church who charged papists and Pagans with Idolatry for worshipping God by external media and with relative worship Lastly Then we must circumscribe God and confine Jesus Christ to the Communion Table as well when the Sacrament is not as when it is administred as to his peculiar Pew in every Church Throne Chair of State Mercy-Seat among his people otherwise we bow to the Table in the grossest way and degree of Idolatry as a meer Joyners Frame the work of Mans Hand Many absurdities of this nature do naturally flow from this Act of Table Worship rendring it a most reconciling Engine between England and Rome but on that among other Grounds greatly scandalous to all sincere Worshippers of God and a dangerous stumbling stone for weak and wicked Christians being in it self an Hydra of Superstition and setting open a Doore nay Flood-gate to many horrid Superstitions and the very Sluce of Idolatry and if the Subject of such Malignity I may sure rationally conclude That solemn and Religious Bowing to towards or before the Communion Table is an Action or Gesture foolish and unlawfull and the rather because innovated by humane Invention without Divine Prescription or any considerable Reason FINIS
the Injunctions of Cardinal Pool's Visitors Fox Acts dud Mon. p. 1781. in the Visitation of the University of Cambridge in the time of Queen Mary who amongst other things did order the Schollars how to bow to the Altars And must needs be ignorant of the new Statutes made by Archbishop Laud De Precibus solen Oblationibus in dâ—e Comitiorum Sect. 1. p. 2. the then Chancellor of the University of Oxford printed 1638. and directing all the Schollars in their Order ad mensam Eucharistiae sacram cum debita reverentia oblationes faciant which by words and practises they interpreted to be a lowly bowing to towards or before the Table for omission whereof they were punishable at the pleasure of the Vice-Chancellor and to pay five shillings And must needs be unacquainted with the Visitation-Articles of Bishop Wren Bishop Pierce Bishop Lindsey Bishop Skinner Bishop Mountague and others who among other things caused strict enquiry about every mans reverent behaviour at entring into the Church by bowing towards the Altar But yet I must be bold to say our Church is not the most Catholick or Primitive nor yet the purest Church that bowing to the table was never prescribed by the publick authority of this Church the Convocation in 1640. did only commend it as laudable not command it as necessary but left it at liberty as indifferent it was never universally practised by our Church being chiefly practised in University Chappels and advanced in particular Diocesses according to the affections of single Prelates who enforced it with their personal authority And yet it passed not without suspition and censure of Innovation and Novelty by some of the Bishops as Dr. Wright of Coventry and Litchfield and Dr. Williams Bishop of Lincolne witness his Holy Table Name and Thing And lastly this maketh no antiquity it being the act of this age only and not able to account 60. nay scarce 30 years towards a custom in which time it hath been more than once arrested as an Innovation and as far from appearing the ancient practise of the Primitive Church in the Purest times Nor do we observe the practise of it in the times of Qu. Elizabeth either first or last with any approbation or allowance of the Church though now again with much earnestness it be endeavoured to be revived Against which I think I may be bold to say that we have many just and considerable reasons to believe they cannot produce one honest witness or authentick testimony to prove that the Primitive Church in its purest times did ever practise or prescribe solemn and religious bowing to towards or before the Communion Table the which we shall not fear to produce unto them that they may reprove our censure of their Novelty by better informing our judgments and they are these 1. The zealous assertors of and contestors for this reverence do not produce such testimony however men boast and brag they have good evidence and substantial witness they must be cast in their actions and condemned as guilty if they do not produce them they must be taken for first Inventors and contrivers of mischief who are active in it and cannot produce their author 2. The Fathers and Ecclesiastical Historians by whom all Rites and Ceremonies used in the Primitive Church are most accurately set down do make no mention of solemn or religious bowing to towards or before the Communion-table Centic Magdub 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. c. 6. de ceremoniis ritibus Eccles which of all other had it been a thing of that moment so ancient and laudable a custom and reverent acknowledgment of the Divine Majesty as it is recommended to be would not have been passed over in silence by them Nor is there in all the writings of the Fathers which I have read or men of more reading than my time or affairs will afford me to attain any passage which may so much as seem to palliate this Novelty with the least shew of Antiquity unlesse it be that which Nazianzen mentioneth of his Mother Nazianz. Ora. 8. de funere Patris p. 472. quod venerandae mensae nunquam terga verteret that she never turned her back on the venerable board which cannot any way be understood of bowing to the table but of never withdrawing from the Lords Supper when it was administred and so she turned not her back by neglecting to communicate the Table being put for the Sacrament as it is in many of the Fathers but should we admit what sense can be desired of it yet it is but one single example and one Swallow makes no Summer this one example was not till after the year 370. after Christ and can scarce come within the computation of purest times or Primitive Church Nor yet is it plain for bowing to the Table though it might plead for not turning the back upon it I read indeed that Uladislaus King of Poland after his conversion from Paganism to Christianitie Inter equitandum quoties-cunque turres ecclesiarum inspexit detracto pileo caput inclinavit Deum qui coleretur in Ecclesia veneratus when he rode abroad he pulled of his Hat and bowed his head as oft as he saw the towers of the Church worshipping God who is adored in the Church But this example will very little avail because it was far from the primitive and pure times of the Church and digitates an adoration to the Steeple of not Altars in the Church and that is no way commended nor commanded to us by our Novellers 3. Because the Fathers in the Primitive and Pure times of the Church for more than 400. years after Christ condemn all bowing to towards or before Images or any external Symbal or representation of God and all worshipping God in by through or towards the same affirming and teaching all divine worship to be a thing peculiar to God alone and to be immediately tendred unto himself without any such secondary helps as Images the which is fully cleared in the Homilie of the peril of idolatry 2 Book of Homilies p 21. and by all our Protestant writers and by Dr. Usher in his Answer to the Jesuites Challendge of Images and praying to Saints How therefore they should indulge or allow a worshipping or adoring God in by to towards or before a Table or Joyners frame imagined to be the Symbol or Representation of his Majesty and so of the very same nature with an Idolatrous Image I cannot conceive 4. Because the Christians in the primitive times and many hundred years after Christ did prohibite the bowing the knee Die Dominica jejunium ne fas ducimus vel de jemiculis adorare Tert. de corona militis justin Mar. Quest 115. Gracian de consecr distinct 3. Jerom de ecclesiasticis observationibus c. 29. or kneeling on any Lords day from Easter to Whitsont they forbad kneeling on any day and that in the very act of adoration or prayer much more
in the time of receiving the Lords Supper and that to them it should be a custom and ordinary practice in coming in or going out or passing by the Communion-Table to do reverence to it or bow towards it who would not admit any genuflexion in any the most serious submisse acts of worship I cannot believe 5. Lastly that no kind of authors not so much as the very Papists do make mention of bowing to Tables otherwise than as they were Altars whence it undoubtedly comes to pass that the great sticklers for this Table reverence do affect to call the Table an Altar and contend to have it so called and placed at the East-end of the Church under the wall as an Altar and accordingly furnish it with Vessels Candlesticks Tapers and holy Utensils belonging to an Altar as fancying that they may muster up many testimonies for Altar-worship such as they are but not one for Table-adoration which the Papists so much abhor Fox acts Monuments Ed. ult p. 85. 95. 97. as that they contemptuously and scornfully call our communion-Tables Oyster-boards Prophane Tables and yet this Altar-worship which our Novellers do affect to render synonymous with Table-adoration is so far from being the ancient laudable custom of the primitive Church and purest times Article 35. that the Articles of our Church to the verity of which the Table-Adorers have subscribed do teach us to believe that for more than 250 years after Christ the primitive Christians had no Altars before which to worship The third part of the Homilies against the peril of idolatry confirmed by the statute and by the Articles of our Church doth declare Homily 2. Tom. pag. 41. all Christians in the primitive Church as Origen against Celsus Ciprian also and Arnobius do testifie were sore charged and complained of for that they had no Altars and Images And King Edward the Sixt proposing the primitive Church and purest times for his example in Reformation doth by his Letter to Doctor Ridly Bishop of London direct him to pull down Altars and set up Tables and enforceth his direction with reasons Fox Acts and Mon. Pag. 1211. the fifth whereof is it is not read that any of the Apostles or Primitive Churches did ever use any Altar in the Ministration of the Holy Communion the same is affirm'd by Jewel against Harding Reynolds against Hart Fulke and Cartwright against the Rhemists and all our Protestant writers against the Papists which they could never yet answer or avoid and Tho. Bacon in his Reliques of Rome doth declare his opinion that Altars were not used in the Church before the year of our Lord 590. Fol. 82. Of the ornament of Churches when the Popish Peevish Private Masse began first to creep in and certainly if there were no Altars in the Primitive Church and pure times thereof as good authority assureth us there was not then there was not nor could be any bowing to towards or before Altars And when Altars were brought into the Church there is no probability that they were adored and worshipped as are our Communion-Tables for that they were continued in the middle of the Church not enclosed or placed at the East end of the Church and advanced above other parts thereof for many years after Bishop Jewel in his answer to Hardings Preface doth observe from many good Authors that it is apparent that the Communion-Table in the Apostles times and Primitive Church for more then 1300 years after Christ stood in the middle of the Church And William Thomas testifies in his History of Italy that in the year 1547. The Altar in the Cathedral Church of Rome stood in the time of Masse when the Pope received the Sacrament in the midst of the Quire whereof he reports himself to be an Eye-witnesse and probably the Altar was advanced to its high and holy inclosure before it was adored moreover although we read of many expressions of affection to the Altar as of going up to the Altar Praying and Trembling as the spurious Masse of Sâ— James the Apostle doth direct or of Penitents when absolved Bishops when consecrated and Kings and Emperors when crowned kneeling before the Altar Of Gorgonia her prostration of her self in her sicknesse before or at the Foot of the Altar whereupon she recovered as Nazianzen reports Oratio 25. and of Malefactors pag. 443. flying to the Altar in time of danger and such like carriages which were the beginnings of superstition and not found in the Primitive Church yet we read not of any who mention bowing to or towards the Altar De antiquo ritu Missarum Lib. 3. cap. 30. de Inclinationibus until Honorius Augusto-dunensis who lived in the year 1120 far enough from the Primitive pure times of the Church he is the first undoubted Writer who giveth us any account thereof in respect of which very practice our bowers to the Table are Novellers for the bowing he reports was to the Altar only at entrance into the Church not at every approach to recession from or passing by the Table they bowed East and West to testifie God every where present but our men must bow to the East and to the East only And after this though Odo Bishop of Paris in a Synod about the year 1206 did order summa Reverentia honor maximus sacris Altaribus exhibeatur that Reverence be done to the Altar yet he doth not direct it to be done by bowing to or towards the Altar and the Synod of Akens held 1583. though it decree many things concerning Altars as for their scituation and inclosure furniture with candlesticks altar cloathes and the like yet it decreeth nothing for bowing to the Altar the reserved pix or transubstantiated bread adored by the Papists do plainly plead for them that they worship not the Altar and reflecteth the Table-worship of the Protestants who deny the reservation of Christs body on the Table as a most foolish Novelty ridiculous and unlawful Idolatry worshipping a Joyners frame without any apprehension or acknowledgment of Gods special presence from which they ought to acquit themselves by good and sufficient reasons before they innovate into his Majesties Royal Chappell Our Cathedral and Parish-churches solemn and Religious bowing to towards or before the Communion-Table or can expect any conformity to their new fangled fancy never used in the primitive Church nor in the Reformed Churches nor alowed by the constitutions of the Church of England before the year of our Lord 1640. in which it is recommended with an argument which appeareth to be an apparent fallacy whom we shall leave to search ancient records with pretence to which they make so much noise whilst they enquire into the nature of the object and what reason therein can dictate this action and demeanour honor and incurvation ever charged since first acted to be an innovation SECT IV. OUr second evidence whereby we charge solemn and religious bowing to towards or before