A Quench-Coal, Inquiry 1 (2 of 4)

A Quench-Coal · Inquiry 1 (2 of 4)

p. 413. Admitt, that the Communion Table were Christs mercy seate, & Chaire of Estate, (which they take as graunted without any Scripture, ground or reason, which I desire them first to prove, before they lay it downe an undoubted principle) yet the conclusion will not followe, that therefore is must stand at the East end of the Chauncell or Quire Altarwise.

For first, theccGodwyns Iewish Antiquities l. 2. c. 1. mercy seate stood in the end of the Tabernacle, and Temple upon the topp of the Arke, not at the East. Therefore the Table should stand so too were it a mercy seate.

2. Christs Chaire of Estate ought to bee seated there where himselfe hath promised his speciall presence: But that is not in the East end, but in the midst of the Church and people, Math. 18. 20. as I have formerly proved by sundry Scriptures: Therefore it shoulde bee placed in the midst.

4. Whereas these men protend, that the East end of the Chancell or Quire where they nowe raile in the Table Altarwise, is the highest and most worthy place in the Church; and that noe seates must there bee suffered, for feare any shoulde take the wall or upper hand of Christ, and sitt above him, or checkmate with him in his owne Temple. I answeare.

p. 42First, that these are ridiculous Childish fantastique conceites of their owne superstitious braines, grounded on no Scripture or solid reason, and so not to be credited.

2. These reasons make Christ ambitious of place & precedency, & corporally present here an Earth, when as he was; & still is lowly & humble, Matth. 11. 29. forbiddinge men to sitt downe at any Feast in the uppermost place, but in the lowest, and pronouncinge an woe against the Pharisies for lovinge the uppermost seates in Synagogues, and Feasts, Math. 23. 6. Luke 11. 43. therefore were hee nowe on Earth, hee woulde not contend for precedency, and the upper-most place, as these his ambitious-Champions doe for him, because they love precedency themselves, much lesse will hee doe it nowe, he hath taken upp his seate and throne in heaven, & hath left the Earth altogeather in his bodily presence, where these Novellers woulde faine to be still resident in the Church on the Communion Table, as the Papists saye he is upon their Altars, close prisoner in a Pix.

3. It is most false, that the East end of the Quire or Chauncell where they nowe place their Altars and Tables, is the most honourable and prime place of the Church and Quire; For in all Cathedralls that I have seene, & in his Majesties, Chappells, the Arch-Bishops, Bishops, Deanes Thrones and seates, and the Kings Closetts are at the West end of the Quire or Chancell, And the most honorable persons seat, is the West, not the East end of them; the more West any man sits, the higher, the more East the lower, the seates next the West end beinge reputed the highest and honorablest, the seates next the East, the lowest, for the singinge men and Quiresters, & the meaner sort of people. Soe in Parish Churches, where there are any seates in the Chancell or Quire, the seate at the West end is usually esteemed the worthiest and first seate, and the neerer the East end the meaner, and lower are they reputed. The West end therefore of the Quire and Chancell, as these instances, and experience undeniable manifest, is the cheifest, & the place where the most honorable persons have their seates, & chaires of State. If therefore the Communion Table, or their Altars, bee p. 43Christs Chaire of State, and that hee ought to take precedency and place of all men, then it must bee placed in the West end of the Quire in Cathedralls, where the Bishops Throne and seate is scituated, and removed to the West end of the Chancell, where the best man of the Parish sits, not thrust downe to the East end of the Quire or Chancell against the wall, which is in truth the lowest place by their owne practice, and resolution. And here we may behold the desperate so…tishnes, and frenzie of these Popish Innovators, whoe under a vaine pretence of givinge Christ, & the Communion Table the upper hand, that none may sitt above them, will needs thrust them into the varie lowest place even in their owne practice, Iudgements, and Common reputation, where servants or the meaner sort of people only sit, (where there are seates or formes) in most Churches, which yet against their owne Iudgements and knowledge, (out of I knowe not what factious strange superstitions humour) must upon a suddaine be Cried upp for the most honorable place, by these learned Rabbies.

4. Admit the Communion Table Christs Chaire of Estate and mercy seate; and that it ought to be placed in the best and uppermost place of the Church; yet it is only such, and thus to bee scituated when the Sacrament is administred: For howe is it his Chaire of State, his mercy seate, and cheifest place of residence, when there is no Sacramentall breade & wyne upon it to represent his spirituall presence to us? But when the Sacrament is to be administred, the booke of Common prayer, the Queenes Injunctions, Fathers, and forecited Authors informe us, that it must bee placed in the body or midst of the Church, or Chancell. Therefore our Novellers must either deny the East end of the Quire to be the most honorable place, or that it was ever so reputed; or else confesse the invalidity of this their proposition, That the Table ought to stand in the cheife and most honorable place of the Church, unlesse they will Condemne the Fathers, the primitive, yea our owne Church, and all our cheife writers of Error in this particular.

5. Admit, that the East end of the Chancell or Quire bee the p. 44most honorable parte of the Church, and that the Table for this reason ought there to be rayled in: Why are not the Font and Pulpit there placed and rayled in as well as the Table, and the Bible, and readinge pewe too, Are not the Font, the Pulpit, the Bible as honorable as venerable, as worthy to take place and precedency as the Table, both in respect of matter, use, relation to God and Christ, and divine institution? undoubtedly they are; therefore to be all ranked in an equipage as the lavers, Shewbread Tables, and Altar were in Solomons Temple which stood one by the side of the other. 2. Chron. c. 4. & 5.

6. If the East end of the Church or Quire be the most worthy; and fittest for the Tables scituation nowe, why was it not so for the Arke, the Altar, and shewbread Table heretofore? why did those never stand in the East end of the Temple, but in the West; the midst of it, or in the Court, as the premises Manifest? Certainely if the East end of the Temple or Synagogues had no such dignitie, no preheminen…ie or implements in them heretofo…e by divine appointment, our Novellers can have little reason to pleade, that they ought to have any such precedency, honour, or use nowe.

The third reason alleaged for the placinge of Communion Tables. Altarwise at the East end of our Quires and Chancells, is; because they are High Altars: So ggTreatise of the Church or God… house p. 2. 4. 15. 17. 19.Saelford, Reeves, and the Coale from the Altar, and Bishop Mountague in his least Lent Sermon stile them; contrarie to the dialect of our Church, after the Popish language;hhExposition of the Catech. in the Communion booke toward the end. This is the true reason why they are placed Altarwise, to bringe in Altars, Preists, bowinge to Altars, kneelinge, at, and before them, to adore the Hostia (to which wee are already proceeded) and in fine, to sett upp publique, and private Masses, yea the whole body of Poperie againe: For which these are immediate preparatives, of which they are reall parts & and adjuncts: This, and this only is the true undoubted cause,iiPage 6. 14. 15. 18. 32. 38. to 58. (all others meere idle pretences to delude the people) why our Communion Tables are now turned into Altars in many places, & lately rayled in Altarwise in most parishes p. 45against the East wall of the Quire. And that this alone is the true cause in those Prelates, & Churchmen who originally presse it, not only the qualities, doctrines and actions of the parties themselves which every m…ns Conscience, & experience visibly discernes unlesse he be strangely hoodwinckt, but the things themselves compared with the historie of former tymes declare.

For if wee looke into the storie of the Church, wee shall finde, that the first thing that was done upon the beginning of reformation, was the pullinge downe of Altars, and settinge upp of Communion Tables, and the first thinge againe acted upon the restitution of popery was the settinge up of Altars, & turninge Communion Tables into Altars as now our Prelates doe, upon which Masses presently were sayd: Thus we reade: thatkkFox Acts & Monu. p 795. in the yeare of our Lord 1528. upon the Reformation of Religion at Berne Constance, Gene…a, Basill, Stransburge, and other Citties the first thinge they did, was this; they proclaymed that Masses, ALTARS, & Images in all places shoulde bee abolished, and there upon, the Images and Altars, with Ceremonies, and Masses were accordingly removed and abolished in them all. AboutllFox ibid. p. 879. the yeare of our Lord 1556. The Waldoyes in Piemont beinge sommoned & pressed to forsake God and revolt againe to Idolatrie, which they had begun to cast of, agreed togeather to make a solemne protestation, that they woulde utterly forsake the false Religion of the Pope, and live, and die in the maintenance and confession of Gods word and truth. Whereupon they sayd, lett us all goe to morrowe into the Temple to heare the word of God, & after let us cast to the ground all the Idolls, and ALTARS; to which they all agreed; sayinge, let us soe doe; yea, and that the very same houre in the which they have appointed us to bee at the Councill house: Whereupon the next daye after they assembled themselves in the Church of Body, & as soone as they came into the Temple without any further delaye, they beate downe the Images, & cast downe the ALTARS. After Sermon they went to Billers where they beate downe p. 46their Images and ALTARS. Our famous Kinge Edward the 6. about the beginninge of Reformation in his Raigne, gave order to pull downe Altars, and sett upp Communion Tables in most Churches of the Kingdome, And to the ende that all of them might bee totallie abolished.

Bishop Ridley to oppease all diversity about the forme of the Lords board, and to procure one Godlie uniformity, exhorted all his Diocesse, unto that which he thought did best agree with Scripture, with the usage of the Apostles, with the primitive Church, and which might Highly further the Kings most Godly proceedings, in abolishing of divers vaine, and superstitio…s opinions of the Popish Masse, out of the hearts of the simple, which would be more holden in the minds of the people by the forme of an Altar, then of a Table, as the King and Councell in their 1. and 3. reasons had resolved, and to bring them to the right use taught by Holy Scripture, of the Lords Supper; Hereupon (I say) he appointed the forme of a right Table to be used in his Diocesse, (according to the King & Councells instructions and consideration) and in the Church of Paules brake downe the wall standing by the High Altars side. And upon this occasion (as it most probable) he wrote his booke DE CONFRINGENDIS ALTARIBUS, of breaking downe Altars, registred by Bishop B…le among other his workes, though not now extant that I can find. Not long before this, John Hoper Bishop of Gloster, (afterwards a Martyr, as was that worthy Ridley) preaching before King Edward the 6. in his 3. Sermon upon Jonah, printed Anno 1551. Cum Privilegio, tooke occasion thus to Censure Altars, and to move the King utterly to demolish them. If question now be asked, is there then no Sacrifice left to bee done of Christian people? yea truly, but none other then such, as might be done without Altars, and they be of 3. sorts. The first is the Sacrifice of thankgiving, Psal. 51. 17. 19. Amos 4. 5. Hos. 14. 2. Heb. 13. 15. The second is beneficence, and liberality to the poore, Mich. 6. 8. 1. Cor. 16. 1. 2. 2. Cor. 8. 19. Heb. 13. p. 4716. The 3. kind of Sacrifice is, the mortifying of our owne bodies, and to die from sinne. Rom. 12. 1. Math. 12. Luke 14. If we studie not dayly to offer these Sacrifices to God, we be no Christian men, seing Christian men have no other Sacrifices then these which may and ought to be done without Altars. There should among Christians be no Altars, And therfore it was not without the great wisdome and knowledge of God, that Christ, his Apostles, and the Primitive Church lacked Altars, For they knew that the use of them was taken away, It were well then that it might please the Magistrates to turne the Altars into Tables according to the first institution of Christ to take away the false persuation of the people, they have of Sacrifices to be done, upon Altars, For**Note this as long as the Altars remaine, both the ignorant people, and the ignorant, & evill perswaded Preist will dream alway of Sacrifice. Therfore were it best that the Magistrates remove all the Monuments and Tokens of Idolatry and superstition, then should the true Religion of God sooner take place, which he thus seconds, in his 8. Sermon upon Ionah. A great shame it is for a Noble King, Emperour, or Magistrate contrary to Gods word, to deteyne or keep from the devill or his Ministers any of their goods o… Treasure, as the Candles, Images, Crosses, vestiments Altars: For it they be kept in the Church as things indifferent, at length they will be maintayned as things necessary, as now we find true by late wofull experience. And in his 4. Sermon upon Jonah, hee proceeds thus: But this prayer of Jonas is so acceptable, it might be thought of some men, that the place where Jonas prayed in should have be…tered it; as the foolish opinion of the world is at this time, that judgeth the Prayer sayd at the High Altar, to be better then that which is sayd in the Quier; that in the Quier better, then that which is sayd in the body of the Church, that in the body of the Church, better then that which is sayd in the Feild or in a mans Chamber. But our Prophet sayth the Lord hath no respect to the place, but to the heart & faith of him that prayeth. p. 48And that appeareth. For penitent Jonas prayeth out of the whales belly, and miserable Job upon the dung heape, Daniell in the Cave of the Lyons, Hieremie in the claypit, the theife upon the Crosse, S. Stephen under the Stones, wherfore the grace of God is to bee prayed for in every place, and every where as our necessity shall have need, and wanteth solace. Although I commend the prayer made to God in the name of Christ to belike in every place, because that our necessity requireth helpe in every place, yet I doe not condemne the publike place of prayer, whereas Gods word is preached, his holy Sacrament used, and common prayer made unto God, but allow the same, and sory it is no more frequented & haunted, but this I would wish, that the Magistrates would put both the Preist, Minister and the people into**Note. one place, and shut up the partition called the C…auncell, that seperateth the Congregation of Christ one from the other, as though the vayle and partition of the Temple in the old Law, yet should remaine in the Church, where indeed all signes & types are ended in Christ: And in case this were done, it should not only expresse the dignity & grace of the New Testament, but also cause the people the better to understand the things read there by the Minister, and also provoke the sayd Minister to a more study of the things he readeth least he should be found by the Iudgement of the Congregation not worthy neither to read nor Minister in the Church: further that such as would receive the Holy Communion of the body and blood of Christ, might both heare and see playnly what is done, as it was used in the Primative Church, when as the abomination done upon Altars was not knowne, nor the Sacrifice of Christs precious blood so conculcated and troden under feet. Hereupon, as also upon M. Bucers forecited opinion to this purpose, and William Salisburyes Battery of the Popes Batereulx, London 1559. (and not upon M. Calvins Letter, as the late Author of a Coale from the Altar misreports p. 29. 40.)ooFox Acts & monum. p. 1211. 1212. all the Altars in England by the King and his Councells direction were utterly taken p. 49away out of all Cathedrall Collegiate Parish Churches and Chappells, and Tables sett up in their steed in such manner as they stood till now of late, to witt in the middest of the Church or Chauncell, as appeares by that is ppFox Acts & Monu. p. 1404. 1406.storied of Bishop Farrar, by M. Fox concerning the Church of Carmarthen in Wales, where the Archdeacon of Carmarthen in his visitation under this good Bishop, finding an Altar sett up in the body of the Church for Celebration of the Communion, contrary to the King and Councells Ordinance, caused the sayd Altar to be taken away, and a Table TO BE SET IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CHURCH, which the Vicar removing, Bishop Farrar himselfe in the third yeare of King Edwards Raigne; Commaunded the Vicar to sett the Table WITHOUT THE CHANCELL againe, neere the place where it stood before for the ministration of the Communion. After this in the 5. & 6. yeare of King Edwards Raigne, as Altars themselves were quite cashered out of the Church, (according to the qqFox ibid. p. 888.prophesie of William Mauldon; who in th… dayes of King Henry the 8. when the Masse most flourished and the Altars with the Sacrament thereof were in most High veneration so as in mans reason it might seeme unpossible that the glorie & opinion of them soe depely rooted in the hearts of … many could by any meanes possible so soone decay and vanish to naught, yet not withstanding he being under the age of 17. yeares by the spirit (no doubt) of prophesie declared to his Parents that they should see it shortly even come to passe, that both the Sacrament of the Altar and the Altars themselves with all such plantations as the Heavenly Father did not plant should be plucked up by the rootes, &c.) so the veryrrThis the Common prayer Bokes themselves evidence, and the Coale from the Altar confesseth. p. 37. to 42. name of them was wholly expunged out of the Booke of Common Prayer, by the whole Convocation and Parliament, and the name of Gods-boord, Lords-Table, Table, and Holy-Table, inserted and retained both in the Rubricke and Order for the Celebrating of the Communion therein prescribed, & the Table enjoyned therein p. 50at the tyme of Celebrating the Communion to stand in the body of the Church or Chauncell. And in the Homilies then published by the King and Parliaments authority, the name of Altar was wholly omitted in the Homilies concerning the right use of the Church, and of the worthy receiving the Sacrament, and the name of the Lords Table only used and mentioned in them, as he that reades them may discerne. A truth so cleare; that the nameles Author of the Coale from the Altar, p. 39. 40. confesseth; that the former Liturgie, (wherein was the name of Altar) was called in by Parliament 5. and 6. C. 6. 11. and the word Altar left out of the Common-Prayer Booke then established; ye… upon this only ground, not from any scanda… which was taken at the name of Altar by the Common people, but from the dislike taken against the whole Liturgie by Calvin, who was all in all with my Lord Protector &c. A very likely tale, I promise you. As if the whole Parliament and Clergie of England, would be so rash or inconsiderate, as to alter their whole Liturgiess3. and 4. E 6. c. 1. formerly confirmed by Parleament, only to humor M. Calvin, (without any Scripture, reason, or other convincing considerations,) and upon no other groundes. Certainly either this ground of the Alteration is but forged and conjecturall, though positively layd downe; or else the Church of England & Prelates then… more honored ttSee Antiasminianisme p. 58. 59. 64M. Calvin and his judgment, then many of them and of our Clergie doe now; who make it a cheife part of their superstitio… zeale, touuB. White in the Cē sure of D. Vastnicke & other of the B…s. all that time; Normington and others in their late Serm. M. Shelford in his 5. Treatises: with many others. revile and traduce him both in their writings and Sermons, all they may, without any just or lawfull cause; adorning Bellarmine, Baronius, and the Popish Schoolemen with the most magnifying Honorable Tules they can invent, to vilefy him the more, and humor the Catholike faction. And that this is but forgery, will appeare, not by the forementioned xxFox Acts & Monu. p. 121.Letter of King Edward and his Counsell to Bishop Ridly; That the Altars in most part of the Churches of the Realme were already taken downe, (not to please M. Calvin) but upon GOOD AND GODLY CONSIDERATIONS, & so no doubt the name of p. 51Altar exploded out of the Common prayer Booke and Homilies upon the selfe same good and godly Considerations; but likewise by the 1. and 3. Parts of the excellentyyEdit. ult. part. 2. p. 18 44. Homily against the Perill of Idolatrie, wherein Altars are expresly condemned as heathenish, Idolatrous, and Popish; the Homily also shewing at large, that Godly Kings in all ages brake them downe, and Idolatrous Princes and people only set them up; contrary to Gods commaund, who threatens to punish and destroy the people that so sett up or suffer Altars, Images, and Idolls undestroyed; and to breake downe and destroy their Altars and Images: recording. That all Christians in the primitive Church, as Origen against Celsus, Cypriam also, and Arnobius testify, were fore charged and complained on by the Gentiles, that they had no Altars nor Images: From whence it is evident that they tooke them to be unlawfull in the Church or Temple of God, and therfore had none? whence the second part of thezzPag. 1…1. Hom. of the Time and place of Prayer, calls the Images and Altars of Christians in those and our dayes, HEATHENISH & JEWISH ABUSES, which provoke the displeasure and indignation of Almighty God, and prophane and defile their Churches, and grosly abuse, yea filthily defile the Lords holy Supper, with infinite toyes and trifles of mens owne popish devises, to make a goodly shew, and to deface the plaine, simple & syncere Religion of Christ Jesus, yet our Prelates against these Homilies and the Communion Booke, which theyaaCanons 1603. Can. 36. 37. 38. subscribe to, and force others likewise, to subscribe unto; (yeabbSee the Booke of Ordinat. contrary to their Oath and solemne profession when they were ordained Ministers, and consecrated Bishops,) set themselves now tooth and nayle to turne Communion Tables into Altars, & terme them by this name, both in their ccB. Wrens late visit. Articles.visitation Articles,ddBishop Montague in his Sermon before the King, the last Lent. Sermons, and printedeeShelford, Reve, B. White, D. Pocklington, the Coale from the Altar, with others. Bookes, as the Papists and Popish Prelates did in Queen Maryes dayes: who upon the change of Religion & setting up of Popery, made this p. 52their first worke, to remove Communion Tables; to erect Altars every where, without which they could have no Masses, nor Masse-Preists; and to preach against, … scosse at Communion Tables, and extoll Altars, as our Prelates and their Popish instruments now doe, whose Practises (& ends too no doubt) are the same with these in former times; which I shall take a little Liberty to relate, both to informe the Reader, & lay open that Mystery of iniquity now intended, by turning of our Lords Tables into Altars. M. Fox our learned Ecclesiasticall Historian, who not only writes the History of Queen Maries dayes, but lived in those times, records, ffActs & Monum. p. 1282.that in the first yeare of Queen Marye as soone as she came to the Crowne, and before any Law made for that purpose, many men (just as too many Bishops & Ministers are now) were to forward in erecting of Altars and Masses (the inseperable companions of them) in Churches: ThatggIbidem p. 1333. D. Weston pre…ching at Paules Crosse the 20. of October the same yeare to wt: 1553. named the Lords Table, an Oister-borde; to which M. Fox addeth this marginall Note; The blasphemous mouth of D. Weston, calling the Lords Table an Oister-board; That the Archdeacons Officiall visiting at Hynton the 28. of November following, gave in charge to present all such as did disturbe the Queenes proceedings, in letting the setting up of their Altars and saying of Masse, or any part thereof: The 24. of October the same yeare, onehh1. Mariae c. 3. Sess. 2. Act was made to punish such, who should willingly or of purpose, molest lett, disturbe or otherwise trouble any Parson, Vicar, Parish, Preist, or Curate, preparing, saying, singing, ministring or celebrating the Masse, or unlawfully, contemptuously, & maliciously, of their owne power or authority, pull downe, deface, spoile, or otherwise breake any Altar or Altars, or any Crucifix or Crosse that then was, or after that should be in any Church, C…apple or Church-yard; which was seconded by the Queenes Proclamation the 15. day of December following.iiFox ibid. p. 1344. 1345. Upon the 2. of December 155…. Stephen Gardiner Bishop of Winc…ester, and Lord Chaunsellour preached at Pauls Crosse p. 53before King Philip, Cardinall Poole, and other Peeres: where in his Sermon he had this passage. And let us now awake which so long have slept, and in our sleep have done so much naughtines against the Sacraments of Christ, denying the blessed Sacrament of the Altar, and pulled downe the Altars. kkFox ibid. p. 1404. 1406.March 30. 1555. Bishop Farrar was Articled against among other things, for causing an Altar set up in the body of Carmarthen Church, to be taken away, and a Table to be sett up in the middle of the Church, for celebration of the Communion. llFox ibid. p. 1512. 1515.On the 3. of December John Austen a violent Papist came to the Lords Table in M. Blinds Church at Adesham being Churchwarden, and layd both his hands upon it, saying; who set this here againe, it being taken downe the Sunday before: He is a knave that set it here, &c. and if he say any service here againe, I will lay the Table on his face, & in that rage he with other tooke up the Table and layd it on a chest in the Chancell, and set the Tressels by it; And the 26. of November following, he sayd to M. B. and, ye pulled downe the Altar, will ye built it againe, No (quoth he) except I be commaunded, for I was commaunded to do that I did. The next Sunday, this Churchwarden had provided a Preist to say Masse, for which he had gott…a… Altar.mmFox ibid p. 1601. 1604. October 1. 1555. in the last Exam…nation of Bishop Ridley, D. White, Bishop of Lincolne, raged this argument to Ridely out of Cyrill; Altars are erected in Christs name in Britaine & in farre Countries; Ergo Christ is come; But we may use the contrary of that reason; Altars are plucked downe in Britaine. Ergo Christ is not come. Bishop Ridley smilng, answered: your Lordship is not Ignorant that this word Altare, in Scripture, signifieth as well the Altar, whereupon the Jewes were wont to make their burnt Sacrifices, as the Table of the Lords Supper. Cyrillus m…aneth there by this word Altare, not that the Jewish Altar but the Table of the Lord, and by that saying (Aultars are erected in Christs name, Ergo Christ is come) he meaneth that the Communion is ministred in his remembrance, Ergo p. 54he is come &c. As for the taking downe of the Altars, it was done upon**Note. See Fox p. 1211. just consideracions, for that they seemed to come to nigh to the Jewes usage. Neither was the Supper of the Lord at any time more better ministred, more duely received then in these later dayes, when all things were brought to the rites and usage of the Primitive Church. Lincolne. A goodly receiving I promise yow, to set an Oyster Table in steed of an Altar, and to come from puddings at Westminister to receive, and yet when your Table was constituted, yow could never be content, in placing the same now East, now North, now one way, now another, untill it pleased God of his goodnes to place it cleane out of the Church. Ridley; your Lordships unreverent termes doe not elevate the thing &c. To this speech of Bishop White, M. Fox affixeth this marginall Censure. Bishop White blasphemously calleth, the board of the Lords Table, An Oyster Table. Which just Censure the nnPage 20. 21.Coale from the Altar most injuriously turnes upon M. Prynne, for calling the Lords Table, a Drester. A slovenly and scornefull terme, deserving no other Answer, then what the marginall Notes in the Acts & Monuments give in the one place to the Deane of Westminster, or in the other to the Bishop of Lincolne D. White. And truly had the Gentleman in the ooLame Giles his haultings.place pretended, expresly termed the Lords Table a Dresser, as these two nickenamed it, An Oister board, or Oyster Table, I should have passed thus verdict upon him, that he was Nig…o CARBONE notandus; defamedly marked with this blacke Coale. But examining his words, & finding them to be misreported, to lay a causeles blemish on him; I must needs conclude, that the namcelesse Preist or Colier who hath fastned this scandall on him, is as blacke & shameles as his Coale. For he never termes the Lords Table, a Dresser; but only Censures such who against the Rubricke for the Communion, Queen Elizabeths Injunctions, and the Canons An. 1571. (not 1471. as himselfe mistakes whiles he blames him for mistaking) p. 18.(which is no mistake, the English Coppy, which he no question saw and followed, printed the same yeare with the Latine, which is p. 15. p. 55warranting the quotation true both in regard of Page & words,) what ever the Coale either ignorantly or maliciously spatters out to the contrary:) at the administration of the Sacrament, place the Communion Table Altarwise with one side against the wall, more like a Side-Table, Cupbard or Dresser, then a Lords Table to eat and drinke at, Like, or more Like a Dresser or Sideboard then a Table, is all he writes; wherein he is as farre from blasphemie, or calling the Lords Table, a Dresser, as the Scripture itselfe is from blasphemie, or terming Christ a th…fe, when it sayth, Matth. 24. 4…. 1. Thess. 5. 4. 2. Pet. 3. 10. Rev. 3. 3. c. 16. 15. that Christ & the day of the Lord shall come as, or like a Thiefe in the night; the comparisons & similitudes being both apt, the one in regard of the maner of the Tables situation, the other in respect, of the sodaine fearfull unexpectednes of Christs second comming to Judgment; though the name of a Dresser, unfit to be imposed on the Lords Table; & of a theife upon our Saviour. By which slovenly terme M. Prynne is so farre from calling the Communion Table; that he phraseth it, qqLame Giles. p. 37A religious implement of Gods owne appointment. But to returne againe to that from which this false Calumnie in the Coale hath diverted me. This our famous learned Martyr Bishop Ridley, not long after this his Conference to shew how eagerly the Popish Prelates, were bent to remove Communion Tables, & set up Altars in their steeds, & how much he detested this their practise, in his excellent Farwell to his friends in generall, breakes forth into these patheticke words: Othou now wicked and bloody Sea,rrFox ibid. p. 1610. why dost thou now set up againe many Altars of Idolatrie, which by the word of God were justly taken away? Why hast thou overthrowne the Lords Table? Why dost thow dayly delude thy people, masking in thy Masses in steed of the Lords Supper? The Papists in their discourses with our stout & learned Martyr M. John Philpot were as hote as a Coale, for Altars, & the Sacrament of the Altare; ForssFox Acto & Monu. p. 1652. 1653. in his 11. examination on S. Andrewes day 1555. Christopherson who reasoned with him, demaunded whether S. Augustine did not call p. 56the Sacrament, the Sacrament of the Altar? To which M. Philpot replied: That maketh nothing for the probation of your Sacrament. For so he and other ancient writers doe call the Holy Communion of the Supper of the Lord, in respect that it is the Sacrament of the Sacrifice which Christ offred upon the Altar of the Crosse; the with Sacrifice all the Alta…s and Sacrifices done upon the Altars in the old Law did prefigure and shadow; the with pertaineth nothing in your Sacrament, hanging upon your Altars of Lime and Stone. Christopherson. No doth I pray yow, what signifieth Altar? Philpot. Not as yow falsely take it, materially, but for the Sacrifice of the Altar of the Crosse. Christopherson. Where find yow it ever so taken? Philpot. O, yes that I doe in S. Paul to the Heb. 13. where he sayth: We have an Altar of which it is not lawfull for them to eate that serve the Tabernacle. Is not Altar there taken for the Sacrifice of the Altar, and not for the Altar of Lime and Stone? Christopherson. Well God blesse me out of your company, yow are such an o… stinate heretike, that I never heard the like. Philpot. I pray God keep me from such blind Doctors, which when they are not able to prove what they say, then they fall to blaspheming as yow doe, for want of better proofe. In thettFox ibid. p. 1703. Cōference between Archbishop Crammer and D. Martyn, March 155…. Martyn speakes thus to Crammer in defence of Masse & Altars which he couples both togeather. If yow marke the Devills language well, it agreeth with your proceedings most truly; For cast thy selfe downeward, sayd he, and so taught yow to cast all things downe wardes; Downe with the Sacrament, downe with the Masse, downe with the Altars, &c. InuuFox ibid. p. 1781. Cardinall Pooles visitation at Cambridge January 1557. his Deputy Visitors sett forth certaine Statutes, whereby they would have the university hereafter ordered; wherein among other things they prescribed, at how many Masses every man should be day by day and in what sort every man in his entrance into the Church should bow himselfe to the Altar, (a ceremonie, superstition, and p. 57Idolatrie now taken up by many contrary to, or without all Scriptures, Law and Canon, though thus enjoyned by, &, borrowed from the Papists, whose superstitious toyes are now much imitated and adored)xxFox: ibid p. 1786. In Aprill, the same yeare, Cardinall Poole in his ordinary Visitation Articles with in his Diocesse of Canterbury. Article 18. 23. concerning the people, inquired; whether the Altars in the Churches be consecrated, or no? And whether there doe burne a lampe or candle before the Sacrament? And if there doe not, that then it be provided for with expedition? As Altars were thus erected, bowed to, pleaded for, and countenaunced in Queen Maries time, upon the revivall of Popery, & Communion Tables removed & scoffed at; so immediately upon her death, & the discent of the Crowne to Queen Elizabeth, this religious Princes by her **Neere the end.Injunctions, (published in the first yeare of her Raigne) commaunded the Altars in Churches to be removed (which was done in many Churches in sundrie parts of the Realme before such Injunctions upon the alteration of religion) and Tables to be placed for ministration of the Holy Sacrament, according to the FOURME OF THE LAW THERFORE PROVIDED; to witt, the Statute of 1. Eliz. c. 2. rat…fying the Common Prayer Booke, which prescribes the Sacrament to be administred at a Table not at an Altar. (By which it is apparant, that the ministring of it, at an Altar, is against, & not according to the Statute; and so punishable thereby:) And hereupon Mathew Parker Archbishop of Canterbury, in his Metropoliticall Visitation Anno 1560. had this Article of Inquirie among others, yyArtic. 2.Whether they had a comely and decent Table for the Holy Communion, sett in place prescribed by the Queenes Majestyes Injunctions, And whether your Altars be taken downe, according to the Commaundement in that behalfe given? After this, Anno 1561. the Booke of Orders published by the Queenes Commissioners, and Booke of Advertissements published Anno 1565. enjoyned decent Communion Tables standing on a frame, to be made and sett in the place were the steps of the Altar p. 58formerly stood, stiling them alwayes Communion Tables, not once an Altar, and putting them in opposition to Altars, And the Canons made in the Synode at London Anno 1571. (which neither the Epistoler and M. Prynne hath misquoted as the zzPage 20. 21.Coale doth falsely accuse them, it being p. 18. in the English Copy then printed which they followed, though p. 15. in the Latine, which the Colier followed, who it seemes never saw the English:) prescribe, that Churchwardens shall see there be a faire joyned Table which may serve for the administration of the Holy Communion, and a cleane cloth to cover it, & that they shall see, that all Roodelo…ts in which wooden Crosses stood & all other Reliques of superstition be clane taken away, which being executed accordingly, thereuponaaSe Haddon C…nt. … l. 3. s. 271. Hierom Osorius, thebbAnnot. …. 1. Cor. 11. se. 18. & … Heb. …0 sect. 6.1 Cor 11 Rhemists,ccM. Novel his Reprouse of Dormans proose …. 15. 16. 17 Dorman,ddin his Preface before his Replie to B. lewell. Harding,eeReynolds Cons. with … 8. divis 4. Hart and other Papists, complained against Queen Elizabeth and the Church of England in their severall writings, that they had cast downe Images, Churches, Altars, removed them out of their Churches and set up prophane unhallowed Tables to administer the Sacrament on in their steed; which Act of theirsffAnswer to Hardings Preface. Replie to Harding Art. 3. div. 26. Bishop Jewell, ggContr. Osorum l. 3. f. 271.Gualther Haddon, M. Fox,hhReproofe of Dormans Proofe f. 15. 16. 17. 66. M. Deane Nowel,iiHis Catech. vol. 1. f. 484. M. Thomas B…acon,kkAnswer to the Rhemish Test on 1. Cor. 11. sect. 18. on Hebr. 13. sect. 6. Apo… 6 sect. 2.1 Cor 11Heb 13 D. Fulke and M. Carthwright,llSynopsis Papismi Contr. gener. 9. Error 53 54. 55. D. Willet & mmConfer with Hart ēh. 8. sect. 4.D. Reynolds not only justify as lawfull, but as necessary & commendable, affirming that Queen Elizabeth & the Church of England might as lawfully remove and breake, downe Popish Altars, Images and Crucifixes, as Ezekiah and other good Kings of Judah and Israell demolished & brake downe Heathenish groves, Idolls, Images, Altars, by Gods owne speciall commaund and approbation. From all which particular passages we may clearly discerne, That one of the first things which our owne & other reformed Churches did upon the bringing in of Religion p. 59& abolishing of Popery, was the breaking downe and abandoning of Altars, together with their name, and placing of Communion Tables in their steed; that the first thing againe, the Papists did, upon the restitution of Popery, was the erecting of Altars, & casheering Communion Tables. That the setting up of Altars, & turning Communion Tables into Altars, or Altarwise, is to no other end, but to usher Masses & Popery (the inseperable concommitants & followers of Altars which cannot subsist without them) into our Church againe; That our godly Martyrs, Princes, Prelates, writers yea and our Church itselfe, have constantly both in their Iudgments, practise, & disputes, condemned Altars, as Iewish, Heathenish, Popish & unlawfull unto Christians; That they are contrary to the Statute of 1. Eliz. 1. 2. The Booke of Common Prayer, Homilies, Injunctions, Canons, Orders, Advertissements and Articles of the Church of England, & were never yet written or preached for, patronized, enjoyned, or erected but among, and by Papists, & that to receive the Masse & sett up Popery, which fall or stand together with them. And that the Communion Table is no Altar, nor High Altar, as our mmShelford of Gods house: p. 2. 4. 15. 17. The Coale from the Altar Sunday no Sabb. p 15 27 28 29 43 48. 50Novellers dreame and teach. All this being thus premised, I come now to give a particular answer to this 3. reason for placing Communion Tables Altarwise.

First, therfore I deny, that the Communion or Lords Table is either an Altar, or High Altar, that it ought so to be stiled or reputed, or that any Altars ought to be set up in our Churches;

First, because the Scripture never tearmes the Lords Table an Altar, but a Table, 1. Cor. 10. 21. only & prescribes a Table only, not an Altar for the administration of the Sacrament.

2. Because our Common Prayer Booke, Homilies, Articles, Canons, Injunctions, writers doe the like, distinguishing the Communion Table & Altars as opposite contradistinct things, inconsistent one with the other, abandoning not Altars only themselves, but the very name of Altars, as Jewish and Heathenish, 1. Cor. 9. 13. c. 10. 18. 19. being quite expunged, so as it is not to be found in our Booke of Common Prayer, Articles, Injunctions, p. 60Homilies, Canons, which never terme the Lords Table an Altar, either properly or improperly.

3. Because Altars & Lords Tables differ much one from the other.

1. In matter, the one being made of stone, gold, brasse, or earth for the most part, Exod. 20. 24. 25. c. 38. 30. c. 39. 38. 39. c. 40. 5. 16. Jos. 8. 30. 31. the other only of wood.

2. In forme the one almost quite square, Exod. 7. 12. c. 30. 1. 2. 3. 10. c. 37. 26. c. 38. 2. Rev. 9. 13. the other not so broade as long, the one having hornes oft times, to which delinquents fled and layd hold, the other not.

3. In name & appellation, & that in all languages.

4. In use, the one being only to offer Sacrifices, incense & burnt offrings on; Exod. 31. 128. c. 37. 25. c. 38. 1. Lev. l. 7. 9. being therfore called an Altar, Altare & Ara, from the Sacrifices and fires burning on it; as aaOrig. l. 15. 4.Isiodor,bb…n their Di…. … & …. Cilepine, Holicke and others witnes: the other only to eat and drinke at, 1. Cor. 10. 21. c. 11. 20. 21. 2. Sam. 9. 7. Lu. 22. 30.

5. In institution, the one Legall, Iewish, Typicall, & Heathe…sh; the other Euangelicall & Christian, of which anon: the one instituted before and under the Law, the other only under the Gospell.

6. In their appendices, attendants, & circumstances.

For First, Altars were usually, consecrated both among the Jewes and Gentiles, Exod. 40. 10. 11. Numb. 7. 10. as they are this day ccSumma Angelica: …. Altare & Cons…o. Alt. Rhem. Notes on 1. Cor. 11. sect. 18.1 Cor 11among the Papists, with many Jewish and Superstitious Ceremonies, oylings; sprinklings, exorcismes, Reliques of Sancts, orisons, & I know not what other fonde conceites; but Communion Tables were never so consecrated either in the primitive, or Christian Churches of latter times.

2. Altars wee ever accompanied with Preistes, Sacrifices, burnt offrings, peace offringe; &c. Exod. 40. Levit. 1. 1. Cor. 9. 13. c. 10. 18. Hebr. 7. 1. to 15. 1. Kinge 18. 20. to 37. among the Jewes and Gentiles: withddSumma Ang. Tit. Altare & Cons. Alt. D. Rainold … with Hart c. 8. diois. 4. 5. M. Nowels Reproofe of Dormans Proofe. f. 66. Masses, Massepreistes, Pixes, p. 61consecrated Hostiaes, Tapers, Basons, Candelstickes, Crucifixes, Images, Sancts Reliques, Altar-cloathes, Massing, vestiments, to adde gestures, & Fooleries: but Communion Tables only with Ministers and preachers of the Gospell a chalice, plater, bread and wine, without more or other furniture, but a decent cloth to cover them.

7. In their effects; the one tending to maintaine, erect, propagate and usher in Gentilisme, Judaisme, Popery, Masse, Massepreists, Transul stantiation and Superstition among Christians, and to corrupt the doctrine, administration and right use of the Sacrament, the true cause why the Primitive Christians, why all reformed Churches and our owne Church abandoned and cast them out. The other to abandon them, and to restore, preserve, perpetuate the purity and integrity of the Doctrine, use, and administration of the Sacrament, according to its primitive institution; as the so e…ed and subsequent authorities evidence at large; andeeFox Acts & monum… p. 1211. King Edward the 6. with his Councell both in their Letter to Bishop Ridley, and in their 6. reasons why the Lords board should rather be after the forme of a Table then of an Altar, punctually resolve.

8. Because all Altars, Sacrifices, Preist, & the Temple itselfe where the Altar stood (for theffGodwin Moses and Aaron l. 3. c. 2. & l. 2. c. 1. Jewes had no Altars in their Ordinary Synagogues, but only in and about their Temple, to shew that we Christians should have no Altars in our Churches which succeed their Synagogues not the Temple,) were but types and shadowes of Christ the true Altar, Preist, and Temple, Col. 2. 16. 17. Heb. 7. l. to 15. c. 13. 10. as all the Fathers, & generally all Commentators and Christian writers accord, and therfore vanished at his death, as the whole Epistles to the Hebrewes, & Galathians, & Colossions c. 2. prove at large. Hence the Apostle calls Christ himselfe, our Altar, Heb. 13. 10. & Rev. 6. 9. c. 8. 3. 5. c. 9. 13. doe the like, as Expositors old and new, togeather with King James himselfe in his Paraphrase upon the Apocalypse, & our owne Martyrs, writers generally accord.

p. 62Hence ffHom. 17. Sup. Iesum Nave to…. 1 s. 158 f. 6.Origen most pertinently resolves thus: The truth therfore was in the Heavens, but the shadow and example of the truth on earth; and whiles this shadow did continue on earth, there was an heavenly Hierusalem, there was a Temple, there was an Altar, there were High Preists and Preistes; But when as in the comming of God our Saviour descending from heaven, truth sprang out of the earth, the shadowes and examples full to the ground, For Hierusalem fell, the Temple fell, ALTARE SUBLATUM EST, the Altar was taken away, &c. SI ALTARE VIDER IS DESTITUTUM, &c. If thou shalt see the Altar destitute, be not thou sad thereat, If thou find not the High Preist doe not thou despaire. EST IN CAELIS ALTARE, there is an Altar in Heaven, & an High Preists of future good things stands by it chosen of God; according to the order of Melchisedecke.

Hence ggIn L am. Ier. l. 2. zain: Btbl. Patrū tom. 9. part. 1. p. 167. &c.Jer 50:2Paschatius Rhadbertus most pertinently concludes: REPVLIT Dominus ALTARE SVVM DE ECCLESIA, in qua CHRISTVS ALTARE CREDITVR ESSE. Hostia & Sacrificium, Pontifex & Sacerdos. The Lord hath thrust his Altar out of the Church, in which Christ is BELEEVED TO BE THE (only) ALTAR, obligation and Sacrifice, High Preist.

And hhEnarrat in Ps. 118. Oct 3. Tom. 2. p. 422, &c.Ps 118S. Ambrose,iiIn 7 Psal. Poenitent. …. 235, &c Gregory the great,kkExposit. …n Exod. c. 20. to 4. Col. 112. 113.Exod 20 Beda,llComment. in Apoc. c. 47. Bibl. Patr. Tom. 4. p. 526. Andreas the Archbishop of Caesaria,mmIn Festo Omnium Sanctorum Serm. 4. Col. 292, &c. S. Bernard, with divers other Fathers expresly resolve; ALTARE DOMINI CHRISTVS, that Christ himselfe is the Altare of the Lord, the Altar meant both in the Hebrewes and Apocalyps, and that all Altars were but types of him and ceased with him. And though some of the punier Fathers 260. yeares after Christ and since, doe sometimes by a figurative and improper speach, call the Communion Table, (but more commonly only the Sacramentall p. 63bread and wine representing the body and blood of our Saviour) the Altar, in respect of thennPsal. 51. 17. 19. Amos 4… 5. Hos. 14 2. Heb. 13. 15.Ps 51:17Ps 51:19Amos 4:5Hos 14:2Heb 13:15 Sacrifices of prayer and prayse there offred at the receiving of the Sacrament, thence called the Eucharist; of the Collections and Almes there and there given by the Communicants for the releife of the poore, which are called a Sacrifice an oblation, Heb. 13. 16. Math. 6. 8. 1. Cor. 16. 1. 2. 2. Cor. 8. 19. and in as much as Christs body and blood who is the true Altar; are there mistically distributed, not out of any relation to, or analogie between Jewish & Heathen Altars and Tables, or because the Sacrament is in truth a reall Sacrifice as the Papists and our ignorant Popish Innovators fondly dreame, yet they most usually and properly terme it only the Lords Table, or Boord, and the Sacrament administred there at, the Lords Supper, as appeares by sundrie passages inooNazianz. Orat. in laudem Basily & 21 Oratio. Nazianzen,ppDe verbis Domini secundum Joan. Serm. 46. Tom. 10. p. 225. Augustine,qqTheodoret Dial. Atreptus c. 11. Theodoret,rrHom. 18. in 2. Cor. De Pomitentia Hom. 7. Tom. 5. Col. 746. B. Hom. 45. in Ioan. Hom. in Psal. 22 & 216. Hom. 1. deverbus Isaiae vidi Dom.Ps 22 Chrysostome… ssCom. in Natuum c. 1. Tom. 5. p. 137.Hieron,ttTheophylac…t Evar. in 1. Cor. 11.1 Cor 11 Oecumenius,uuOecumenius in 1. Cor. c. 11.1 Cor 11 Theophylact, & otherxxEusebius Eccles. Hist. l. 7. c. 8. Eusebius Caesariensis apud Damascenum Paralel. l. 3. c. 47. Petrus Blesensis Hom. 20. in Litania Ma…ai. Niceph. Eccles. Hist. l. 12. c. 41. Euthymius in Psal. 22. Concil. Nicenum. can …lt. apud Servum Tom. 1. p. 347. Gratianus de consecrat. distinct. 2.Ps 22 Fathers,

All these are cited by Bishop Iewell, Bishop Babington. D. Rainolds, & our writers; they stiling the Crosse whereon Christ suffred & was Sacrificed, the Altar of the Crosse, yea faith, the heart and mind of godly men, an Altar, as frequently as the Communion Table, and in the selfe same figurative and improper sence.

Hence S. Hierom iu Psal. 25. & 31. Tom. 6. p. 30. B. & 46. B. writes thus: Altare fidelium fides est. FAITH IS THE ALTAR OF THE FAITHFVLL. And the same Father Comment. in Marc. 9. Tom. 6. p. 58. 79. & Gregorie the great Homil. 22. Super Ezechiel f. 209. E. F. p. 64averre: Altare Deiest Corbonum, Histia & Sacrificia bona opera fidelium, THE ALTAR OF GOD IS A GOOD HEART, the good workes of the Faithfull are the oblation and Sacrifices. And Origen Contra Celsum l. 8. tom. 4. fol. 101. writes to the same effect: Celsus chargeth us (Christians) that we shunne ALTARS, Images & Idoll Temples, that so they may not be erected &c. whiles that he seeth nothing in the meane time, that we in the meane while have the mind of just men insted of Altars and temples; from which without all doubt the sweet odors of Incense are sent forth, vowes, I say and prayers from a pure conscience. Let whoever will therfore if he please make inquiry of these Altars which I have last mentioned, and compare them with these Altars which Celsus hath brought in, truly he may plainly understand, that they verily are inanimate and in processe of time will become corruptible; but these our Altars shall so long continue in the immortall soule, as long as the reasonable soule shall continue. Now these Fathers thus stiling both the heart itselfe, and the mind and faith which have their cheife residence in the heart, an ALTAR; in respect of the spirituall Sacrifices of prayer and prayse offred by faith on a pure heart as on a spirituall Altar, and they stil… … the Communion Table an AltarppB. Iewel. Replie to Harding Art. 30 divis 26. p. 145. D. Reynold con…rence with Hart p 476. 477 478 M. Nowell his Reprofe of Dormans proufe p. 15. 16. 17. D. Fulke and M. Cartwright Con…ut of the Rhemish Testament on Heb. 13. sect. 16. & 1. Cor. 11. sect 18. Fox Acts & Monuments p. 1211.Heb 131 Cor 11 only in this sence and in a figurative and improper speech, as they call the heart, mind end faith an Altar, their phrasing of it an Altar only in this sence can be no A…gument at all to prove, that it is properly and in truth an Altar, or in that sence as some now presse it.

And these other 3. the heart, mind, and faith, which they terme an Altar, being scituated not in the East part, but in the middest of the temple of the body, are a stonger evidence to prove, that the Table ought to be scituated in the middest of the Church, though it were an Altar, as these 3, termed Altars, are in the middest of the p. 65body; then that the Table is properly an Altar, and therfore ought to stand in the East end of the Quire Altarwise.

5. Because the Scripture expresly condemnes Altars as Iewish & abolished by Christ, putting Altars, Preists, & their waiting on the Altar, as Iewish & Heathenish, in direct opposition to the Lords Tables, Ministers, preaching of the Gospell, consecrating of the Lords Supper at his Table; & distinguishing Christ & his Ministers, from Aaron & the Preists of his order, in this, that one of them was to give attendance at the Altar the other not, as is evident by 3. remarkable Texts of Scripture.

The First of them is the 1. Cor. 9. 13. 14. Do ye not know that they which Minister about Holy things, live of the things of the Temple; and they which waite at the Altare are partakers of the Altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they which preach the Gospell should live of the Gospell; Where Preachers of the Gospell, are directly distinguished from Preists, waiting on the Altar; and preaching of the Gospell in the one, put in opposition, to waiting on the Altar, in the other, The one being Euangelicall, the other only Legall and abolished.

The next Text is that of 1. Cor. 10. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. The Cup of blessing which we blesse, is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ; the bread which we breake, is it not the Communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread & one body, & are all partakers of that one bread. Behold Israell after the flesh, are not they which eate of the Sacrifices partakers of the Altar? what shall I say then, that the Idoll is any thing, or that which is offred in Sacrifice to Idolls is any thing? But I say that the things which the Gentiles Sacrifice, they Sacrifice to Devills and not to God; and I would not that ye should have fellowship with Devills. yee cannot drinke the Cup of the Lord and the Cup of Devills, yee cannot be partakers of the Lords Table and of the Table of Devills; wherein the first part, the Ministers of the Gospell, who blesse, eate, drinke, & participate of the Communion of the body & blood of Christ, & partake of that bread at the Lords p. 66Table; are distinguished from Israell after the flesh, & the Preists of Aaron, who ca…e of the Sacrifices offred upon Altars, and are partakers of Altars; and the Lords Table put in opposition to the Iewish Altars; and in the second part, the Sacrifices, Cup & Table of Devills, and partaking of them, put in opposition and contradistinction to the Cup and Table of the Lord, and the eating and drinking of them.

The 3. Text is that of Heb. 7. 12. 13. 14. where Christ himselfe, his Preisthood and Ministers, are thus purposely distinguished from Aaron and the Leviticall Preists, and Preisthood, that one of them gave attendance at the Altar, the other not: For the Preisthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law: For he of whom these things are spoken partainet… …o another Tribe, OF WHICH NO MAN GAVE ATTENDANCE AT THE ALTAR. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda of which Tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning Preisthood &c.

In which Text (as David Dickson in his short Explanation of the Epistle of Paule to the Hebrewes, with others observe,) the Apostle proveth that Aarons Preisthood is changed & the Ordinance therof, because Psal. 110. speaketh of Christs Preisthood after the order of Melchisedek, that is freed from the service of the Altar; and Christ was borne not of the Tribe of Aaron but of Judah, of which no man gave attendant at the Altar, to witt the materiall Altar commaunded in the Law. To declare, that Altars and giving attendance at Altars properly belonging to the Leviticall Preisthood, were abolished by Christ the true Preist and Sacrifice, of which they were but types; And that as Christ himselfe was borne of the tribe of Judah, of which no man gave attendance at the Altar, so the Ministers of Christ under the Gosple who professe themselves of his Tribe and Stocke, should by his example give no attendance at the Altar, since he never did, nor ought to doe it.

From this remarkable Text, the Church of the forraigners in …nand An. 1550. when John de Alasco, that Noble Polonian p. 67was their cheife Minister and Superintendent, in the Confession of their faith dedicated to King Edward the 6. and printed at London that same yeare, Cum Privilegio, make this the 5. note of Christs Kingdome, **Quod nullum Altarenovit, cum sit ex Tribu Iuda in quo nemo assistit Altari &c. Ibidem.THAT IT KNOWES NO ALTAR, since he is of the tribe of Juda, wherein NO MAN GAVE ATTENDANCE AT THE ALTAR, neither needeth he the furniture of any mysticall vestiments, that he may enter into typicall Sanctuaries or Holy places, all which things are abolished with this their Preisthood, because the truth of those things which they did shadow out is exhibited.

And David Dickson in his short Explanation of the Hebrewes printed at Aberdence 1635. p. 126. 127. inferres from thence.

First, that Christs Preisthood is freed from that Altar which God commaunded in the Law, and all the service thereof.

2. That an other Altar he knoweth not; & Christs Preisthood being declared to be freed from the service of this Altar no Law can tie it to any other.

3. That whosoever will erect another materiall Altar in Christs Preisthood, and tie his Church unto it (as the Papists add, and our New Prelates and Doctors doe now) must looke by what Law they doe it.

4. That negative Conclusions in matters of faith & dueties, follow well from the Scriptutes Silence. It is not warranted from Scripture therfore I am not bound to beleive it? Since the Apostle here reasoneth thus; That none of the tribe of Judah attended the Altar, because Moses speake nothing of that Tribe concerning the Preist-hood (which overturnes all Preists, Altars and attendance at Altars under the Gospell, and the calling of the Lords-Table an Altar, because the Scripture is silent and speakes nothing of them, but against them.)

To which I shall adde a 5. inference. That Christ himselfe never gave any attendance at the Altar, nor yet Melchi…edecke; p. 68or any of Christs Tribe, Therfore none of Christs Ministers ought to doe it; and that those Archbishops, Bishops, Preists and Ministers, who will needs have & set up Altars, plead, write, dispute for Altars, & likewise waite on, serve & give attendance at the Altar, are only Preistes of Aaron or Baal, & of their Tribe; not Ministers of Iesus Christ, nor any of his sacred Tribe, none of which gave any attendance at the Altar; This is the Apostles reason, inference, & the very drife of his argumentation, not mine, let those therfore whom it concernes looke well unto it, and evade, or answer it as they may.

6. Christians have no such sacrifices, incense-offrings, or oblations, which require any materiall Altars to consecrate or offer or sacrifice thereupon, no spirituall service at all that requires an Altar. Therfore they neither have nor ought to have any Altar. All their Sacrifices now (as prayer, prayse, liberality to the poore, mortifying their lusts, & the offring up of their soules and bodyes …living Sacrifice unto God,) are spirituall, requiring neither a Preist, much lesse an Altar to Sacrifice or offer them upon, Psal. 51. 17. 19. Amos 4. 5. H…sea 14. 2. Mich. 6. 8. H…or. 1. 15. 1. Cor. 16. 1. 2. 2. Cor. 8. 19. Rom 12. 1. as aaThird Serm. upon Ionah.Bishop Hooper, andbbFox Acts & …. p. 1211. King Edward the 6. with his Counsell argue: Therfore they neither have nor ought to h…re any materiall Altar, but only Christ their spirituall Altar in heaven, … sacrifice and offer them up to God upon.

7. If the Communion Table were an Altar, then it should be greater and better then the Sacramentall bread or wine, or the Lords Supper itselfe, and a meanes to consecrate them. This reason is fully**See the Rhemish Notes, & M Cartwright on this Text. warranted by our Saviours owne resolution, Math. 23. 18. 19. Woe be unto yow ye blind guides which say, whosoever shall sweare by the Altar it is nothing, but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. Yee fooles and blind, for whether is greather, the gift, or the Altar that sanctifieth the gift? and by Exod. 23. 37. c. 40. 10. where the Altar is called most holy because it sanctified all the Sacrifices offred thereon as more holy then they, even as Christ our p. 69spirituall altar, consecrates and hallowes all our spirituall Sacrifices, Hebr. 13. 10. Math. 16. 23. But no man dare or can truly say, that the Lords Table is better then the bread and wine, or the Lords Supper itselfe, (though those who bow and ringe unto it both when there is no Sacrament on it, and when they have the Sacrament itselfe in their hand, to which they give no such adoration, imply it to be so) or that it consecrates the Sacrament layd upon it; (for what need then any prayer or words of consecration?) therfore it is no Altar.

8. Every Altar was, and ought to be dedicated & solemnly consecrated unto God, with speciall oyntments, sprinkling of blood and solemnities; (specially the Altar of incense and attonement, and those Altars placed in the Temple:) else they were not to be used or reputed Altars. Exod. 24. 4. to 9. c. 29. 36. to 45. c. 30. 1. to 11. 23. to, …0. c. 39. 38. 39. c. 40. 5. 9. 10, &c. Num. 7. 1. 2. Chron. 7. 7. 9. Ezech. 43. 6. to 27. Thus the ddGratian. de Consec. Distinct. … Summa Angelica Tit. de Consecrat. Altaris.Papists use to consecrate and dedicate their Altars, and thus was the Altar of Wolverhamptons Collegiate Church in the Countre of Stafford, upon the 11. day of Octob. 1635. solemnely dedicated after the Popish manner, by M. Iefferies Archdeacon of Salop and others: of which more anon: But our Communion Tables were never thus consecrated, nor solemnely dedicated; sprinkled & enoyled, neither in truth ought they to be by any Law of God, or of our Church and State; Therfore they neither are, nor can be Altars.

9. That which will be a meanes to make ignorant people & superstitious falsehearted Ministers to dream of Sacrifices Masse, and Popish Preists, and to usher Popery, Masse & Masse-Preistes by degrees into our Church againe to the polluting & defiling of Gods house, S…crament & the setting up of grosse Idolatrie, must needs be sinnefull, unlawfull & to be abandoned of us: But the erecting of Altars in our Churches, the calling of Communion Tables, Altars, and turning of them Altarwise, & so reading second service & administring at them, will make ignorant people and superstitious false hearted Ministers still p. 70to dream of Sacrifices, Masse, and Popish Preists, & will usher Popery, Masse and Masse-Preists by degrees into our Church againe, &c. as eeSerm. 3. on Jenah.Bishop Hooper, & others forequoted authorities evidence, and King Edward the 6. and his Councell in their 3. reason against Altars resolve, Fox Acts and Monuments p. 1211. Therfore they must needs be sinfull, unlawfull, & to be abandoned of us now, as they have been heretofore, both in King Edward the 6. & in Queen Elizabeths dayes.

10. That which neither Christ, nor his Apostles, nor the Primitive Church, for above the 250. yeares after him, either had or used in their Churches & administration of the Sacrament, that we (who ought to imitate their example,) 1. Cor. 11. 23. 24. 1. Pet. 2. 21. 1. John 2. 6.) ought not to have erected or suffer in our Churches.

But neither Christ, nor his Apostles, nor the primitive Church in her purest times, for above 250. yeares after Christ, either had or used any Altars in their Churches or administration of the Sacrament but Communion Tables only.

Therfore we ought not to have erect or suffer them among us now. This is the 5. reason used by King Edward the 6. & his Counsell against Altars, Fox Acts and Monuments p. 1211. who propounds it thus: Christ did institute the Sacrament of his body and blood at his last Supper at a Table, and not at an Altar, as it appeareth manifestly by the Euangelists.

And S. Paul calleth the comming to the holy Communion, the comming unto the Lords Supper, and also it is not read that any of the Apostles or the Primitive Church did ever use any Altar in administration of the Holy Communion. Wherfore seeing the forme of a Table is more agreable with Christs institution, and with the usage of the Apostles, and of the Primitive Church, then the forme of an Altar, therfore the forme of a Table is rather to be used, then the forme of an Altar in the administration of the Holy Communion. Now because this truth hath been lately noted with a blacke Coale, and some what blurred & obseured I shall produce some few authorities, to cleare it.

p. 71The third part of our owne incomperable Homily, against the Perill of Idolatrie, (confirmed both by ff1. Elz. c. 12.Statute, theggArt. 35. Articles of our Church, and every MinistershhCan. 36. 37. subscription as Orthodox truth p. 44. assures us: That all Christians in the Primitive Church, asiiContra Cels. l. 4. & 8. Origen against Celsus,kkContra Demetriadem. Cypriam also & llAdvers. Geutes l. 6A…nobius doe testify, were fore charged and complained on, that they had no Altars nor Images: It is evident therfore, that they tooke all Images, (yea all Altars to, by the same reason) to be vnlawfull in the Church of the Temple of God, and therfore had none though the Gentiles therfore were Highly displeased with them, following this rule,mmActs 5.Acts 5 we must obey God rather then men. So the Homily which nnDefence of the Apologie Artic. 3. 26. Divis. p. 145.Bishop Jewell thus seconds.

There have been Altars, sayth M. Harding; even from the Apostles time, and that even as it is used now, farr from the body of the Church, &c.

This man could never utter so many untruthes together without some speciall priviledge.

For first, where he sayth: The Apostles in their time erected Altars, It is well knowen that there was no Christian Church yet built in the Apostles times for the faithfull for feare of the Tyrants were faine to meet together in private houses, in vacant places in woodes and Forests, and in Caves under the ground. And may we thinke that Altars were built before the Church?

VerilyooContra Celsum l. 4 Origen thal lived above 200. yeares after Christ, hath these words against Celsus: Objicit nobis quod non habemus Imagines, aut Aras, aut Templa; Celsus charge…h our religion with this, that we have neither Images, nor Altars, nor Temples.

Likewise saythppArnobius l. 6. Arnobius, that lived somewhat after Origen, writing against the heathens: Accusatis nos, quod nec Templa habeamus …oc Imagines, nec Aras. Yee accuse us for that we have neither Churches, nor Images, nor Altars.

And Volateranus & Vernerius testify, that Sixtus Bishop of p. 72Rome, was the First that caused Altars to be erected. Therfore M. Harding was not well advised so confidently to say; That Altars have ever been, even sithence the Apostles time.

Learned M. Thomas Beacon in his Supplication, in the third Volumme of his workes printed Cum Privilegio, and dedicated to all the Bishops of England by name, and to Queen Elizabeth herselfe, London 1562. f. 16. In his Comparison between the Lords Supper and the Popes Masse f. 102. 103. & Reliques of Rome Tit. of Church Goods f. 322. writes thus: Christ, his Apostles, and the Primitive Church used Tables at the administration of the Holy Communion, The Primitive Church more then 200. yeares after Christs ascension used Tables at the Celebration of the Divine Mysteries. And who so rude or ignorant of Antiquities which knoweth not, that Pope Sixtus the second about the yeare of our Lord 265… brought in the altars first into the Church, utterly forbidding Tables any more to be used from thenceforth at the administration of the Lords-Supper: when notwithstanding from Christs ascention unto that time, the Lords Supper was alway ministred at a Table, according to the practise of Christ, of his Apostles, and of the primitive Church, Pope Sixtus the second ordained first of all that the Supper of the Lord should be celebrated at an Altar, which before was not the use for the Holy mysteries of the Lords body and blood untill that time was ministred upon a Table according to the practise of Christ, of his Apostles and of the primitive Church; & here may all men see from whence the Popish altars come, for the which the stuborne stout Papists doe so stoutly strive (& some now too, that call themselves Protestants) about the yeare of our Lord if stories be true 265. came in the Altars first into the Church; others affirme, that they came in about the yeare of our Lord 594. But I beleive that Altars came not into the Church before the yeare of our Lord 590. when the Popish peevish Private Masse began first to creep in, Volateranus, Durand. Flascit. Mass. Pet. Aequillinus, Joan. Sella. Thus M. Beacon.

p. 73The same is affirmed by learned M. Calshill, in his answer to Marshalls Treatise of the Crosse, printed at London 1565. f. 31. 32. (who proves out of Origen l. 8. Cont. Celsum; that Christians in Origens age had neither Images nor Altars,) by M. Thomas Cartwright in his Confutation of the Rhemish Testament, one the 1. Cor. 11. sect. 18. v. 19. p. 415. with other of our writers.

All these Authorities (to which the Papists could never yee replie) the Coale from the Altar page 45. 46. 47. will blow away at one breath; informing us, that all these our Authors were mistaken in Origens and Arnobius meaning; who must be understood, not that the Christians had no Altars in their Temples, but that they had no Altars for bloody or externall Sacrifices, as the Gentiles had.

For otherwise it is most certaine, that the Church had Altars, both the name and thing, and used both name and thing along time together before the birth of Origen or Arnobius either; which he proves by the Testimonyes of Tertullian, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Ignatius, the Apostles Canons, and Heb. 13. 10.

To which I answer, first, that this namelesse Author, in modesty & good manners, should have rather deemed himselfe mistaken in the meaning of Origen & Arnobius, then our Homilies, and these our learnedest writers, whose judgments & authorities certainely will over ballance his.

2. These Authors tooke their words & meaning aright, what ever is pretended; as appeares.

1. By the Gentiles objection itselfe: The Gentiles charged the Christians, that they had neither Temples, nor Images, nor Altars: Was their meaning then, that they had Temples indeed, but not to sacrifice in, & Images to, but not to adore; or that in truth they simplie had neither Temples nor Images. Certainely the Coale itselfe would blush at the first exposition; & the Papists might else thus pritilie evade these authorities against Images; that the Christians had Images, but not to adore, though the Gentiles p. 74objected they had none, and Lactantius & Minucius Felix too about that age; expresly resolved that they had no Temples nor Images at all.

Their meaning therfore being (as our Homilies, & those very words themselves resolve,) that they had no publicke Temples, no Images at all, for any assemblies, use, or purpose; their meaning likewise must be, that they had no Altars at all for any purpose; (not, no Altars for any bloody & externall Sacrifices as the Gentiles had, but yet they had them to administer the Sacrament on, as he falsely glosseth it:) Since the w…nt of Temples, Images… Altars are all coupled together, & objected to them in the same sence and manner.

Now had the Christians in that age had Temples, but not for Idolls service, Images, but not to adore; Altars, but not to offer bloody and externall Sacrifices on, as the Coale Glosseth it; the Gentiles would then never have objected the want of Temples, Altars, or Images to them, as is probable; since they had them, but their not sacrificing on them, & adoring them as they did, & not making a right use of them who… they had them; as we tax all couetous men, or Nonpreaching Ministers, that are Schollers, not for having no mony or learning, but for not making such use of them as they should.

The very objection therefore cleares it infallibly, that they had no Temples, Images or Altar at all.

2. The Fathers answers to these objections will take of this Cavill quite.

Minucius Felix (flourishing in Tertullians time, 200. yeares after Christ) in his Octavius Oxoniae 1627, p. 104, First mentions this Objection of the Gentiles, & gives this pi…hie reply thereto; But thinke ye that we conceale what we worship, if we have not Images, Temples and Altars? For what Image shall I feine to God, when as if thou rightly judge, man himselfe is Gods Image? what Temple shall I build to him, when as this whole world fabricated by his workemanship can not containe him? And why I being aman remaining more at p. 75large, shall I imprison the power of so great a Majesty with in one little house? Is he not better to be dedicated in our mind? yea is he not to be consecrated in our breast? shall I offer Sacrifice and burnt offrings to God, which he hath brought forth only for my use, that I should cast backe his gift unto him, is an ungratefull thing; when as a good mind, and a pure heart, & a syncere conscience is a Sacrifice fit to be offred to him. Therfore he who embraceth innocency, supplicates to the Lord, he who follow …j…stice, sacrificeth to God; he who absteines from dece…ts, attaineth God… he who delivers aman from danger, slayeth the best oblation: These are our Sacrifices; these are Gods Holy things, thus among us, he is most religious, who is most just &c.

Where this acute Father clearly acknowledgeth, that the Christians had no materiall Temples, Images, Altars or Sacrifices, at all among them, but only spirituall sacrifices, Altars & oblations; and had they then in truth had any reall Temples, Images, Altars; he would no doubt have all aged & confessed, yea proved, that they had them though they knew not of them, & so have stopped their mouthes by falsifying their objection, & shewing the Gentiles the righ…use of them, to free them from any further Cavill of not using them at all, or amisse.

The like Answer aaContra Ce…s. l. 8. Tom. 4. f. 101 Cels. & Aras & simulachra & delubro, nos aut diffugere QVO MINVS FVNDENTVR, &c.Origen gives to Celsus; Celsus (writes he) sayth that we shun the very building both of Altars, and of Images, & of Temples, not suffring them to be erected (an infallible evidence and charge, that they had none at all for any purpose, because they would not so much as suffer them to be built, but shunde the very making of them.) When as he seeth nothing in the meane tyme, how that we have the mind of just men in …eed of, (or for) our Altars and hearthes; out of which without all doubt the sweetest odors, of incense are sent forth, and prayers out of a more pure conscience. Let any man therfore that will examine these Altars, which I have newly mentioned, and if he lift compare them with these Altars which Celsus hath brought in.

p. 76Verily he shall plainely understand, … mate and wilbe corrupted in processe of … or Altars in an immortall soule, shall continue as long, as the reasonable soule, shalbe pleased to dwell therein, &c.

But we truly have Images not made by any impure worke men, but framed and formed in us by the word of God itselfe, to witt the virtues imitating the first borne of every creature, &c. in which I should beleive it fitting, that honor should be ascribed to him who is the exemplar of all Images, to witt the Image of the invisible God, the only begotten God, &c. Which he thus seconds in another place:

bbContra Cels. l. 7. f. 96. 97. l. 4. f. 46. 47.The Christians (sayth Celsus) cannot endure either Temples or Altars, or Images & Statutes to be looked upon, they openly disprayse Images &c.

To which Origen thus replies: The Christians & also the Jewes, when they heare, thou shalt feare the Lord thy God, & him only shalt thou serve; neither shalt thou make to thy selfe any graven Image, nor the likenes of any thing that is in heaven above or in the earth beneath, &c. and for many things not unlike these, doe not only dislike the Temples of the Gods, and Altars, and these Images, but would if there be a necessity rather runne more willingly to death, then out of any sinne or impietie altogether defile what they rightly thinke of God the maker of all things, &c.

Therfore Celsus affirmes, that Images are by noe meanes to be esteemed for God, but dedicated to the Gods; when as it is plainely perspicuous, that to make and affirme such things, is the part of such men as are about the divinity. But we shall not so much as account them as Images of the divine Image, as those who may make no forme as of the invisible, so also of the incorporiall God.

By both which charges and replies, it is cleare, that Christians in those dayes had no materiall Temples, Altars, Images; but only spirituall Temples, Altars and Sacrifices in their hearts, and brests, and that they rejected all materiall Altars, Images and Sacrifices p. 77as unlawfull, and abominable. Origen himselfe not denying the charge to be true, but justifying the Christians for having neither, S. Arnobius in his 6. Booke against the Gentiles, brings them in thus objecting: In this part ye have used to fix the greatest crime of impiety upon us, that we neither build sacred houses for the Offices of worship, that we constitute not the Image or forme of any of the Gods, that we built no Altars, &c. (A plaine charge against the Christians, that they then neither had, nor yet would build any Temples, or set up any Images or Altars, which they could not have objected if they had then any,) that we offer not the blood of slaine beastes, not Frankincense, not salted corne, and that we bring not in liquid wine powred out in bowles.

Which things verily (sayth Arnobius) we doe not therfore give over and forbeare, either to build or doe, as if we caried impious and wicked mindes, or had taken up some contempt against the Gods out of a rash despaire, but because we thinke & beleive the Gods; (if so be they are Gods indeed, and endued with the eminencie of this name?) will either deride these kindes of Honours, if they can laugh, or will take them ill at our hands, if they may be exasperated with the motions of anger.

After which he shewes at large the reasons, why Christians build no Temples, made no Images or Altars, and offred no such Sacrifices at all to God, & why they thought it unlawfull so to doe; not denying the objection but confessing the matter of fact to be true, and defending it from the very fundamentall grounds of Religion; which he would never certainely have done had the Christians then had any materiall Temples, Images or Altars for any divine or spirituall use.

eeInstit. l. 6 De ver… Cultu c. 24.S. Lactantius, his Scholer, meetes with the same objection, and answers it in this manner: Whosoever shall obey all these heavenly precepts, he is a worshipper of the true God, whose Sacrifices are meekn…s of mind, and an innocent life & good actions.

p. 78All which things he who exhibits, sacrificeth so often as he shall doe any good or pions thing. For God desires not a Sacrifice, neither of a male creature, neither of death & blood, but of a man and of life. To which Sacrifice there is no need of Lawrell or sacred leaves to adore the Altar, or rushes or greene turfes which verily are most vaine, but of those things that are brought forth out of a sincere heart.

Therfore upon the Altar of God, which is truly the greatest, and is placed in the heart of man which cannot be defiled with blood, is layd righteousnes, Pretence, faith, innocence, chast…ty, abstinence. What meane Temples; what Altars, what finally Images themselves, which are either the monuments of dead, or absent persons.

After which he eeInstit. l. 2 c. 2. 3. 4. 5. 7 11. 17. 18. 19.disputes excellently against Images shewing why Christians had none, and concludes, that D…lls were the Authors of Images, wherfore without doubt there is no Religion, where ever there is an Image.

From all these Fathers answers, therfore, it is most cleare and evident, that the Christians in their times had neither Images nor Altars; and that they held them both unlawfull, unnecessary, ranking them both together as Paganisme, Iudaisme & Idolatr…; they then using no Altars (no not to consecrate the Sacramention,) for feare of inclining to Gentelisme or Iudaisme, or hardning the Iewes or Gentiles in the use of their abolished idolatrous Sacrifices or Altars.

3. These Histories forecited, which affirme, ddSe Tho… Becons Reliques of Rome. fol. 322. a.that Pope Sixtus the second about th… … 65. or 294, or after, first brought in Altars into the Church, will quite take of this absurd evasion.

For these Altars thus introduced by him, were not for any bloody or externall Sacrifice, such as the Iewes or Gentiles used, but only to consecrate & receive the Sacrament at, as all acknowledge.

If then Altars even to administer the Sacrament at, were then first brought into the Church, and not before, as Historians generally accord; then certaynely the Christians before that time, had no p. 79Altars, …o not for the c…l…brating of the Lords Supper on; and so these authorities of Origen, Arnobius, Minucius Faelix, and Lactantius, must necessarily be intended, as all the forecited writers, and our Homilies interpret them, that Christians had no Altars at all in those times, no not to celebrate the Sacrament on, and then the shift in the eePage 45… 46. 47.Coale, that they had Altars for this purpose, but not for any bloody or externall Sacrifices, must need be fabulous and forged, having no Authority, that I know to backe it in any writer.

Now whereas to justify this apparant falsehood, as I have manifested it, Object.the authority of some Fathers before Origen or Arnobius, stiling the Lord Table, an Altar, is pretended, and so the name, and thing itselfe, used and knowen among Christians before that age.

I answer,Answer. that these authorities in truth, when once examined, will vanish into smoke. To take them according to their Antiquity, not their Order.

The ancient & maine Authority is that of Heb. 13. 10. We have an Altar. But this I shall afterward prove, to be meant only of Christ himselfe, not of the Communion Table, as all the Fathers and ancient expositors, our owne writers, and Martyrs, and all Protestant Divines accord, without dissent, or question. So that this proves nothing.

That of the Apostles Canons (the … in pretended Antiquity) hath been long since disclaimed & branded as ffCookes Censura p. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.counterfeit coyne by all our learned writers, and many Papists themselves, yea as a spurious brat of some later age, many hundred yeares after the Apostles and the puriest of these Fathers.

Neither are Ignatius his Epistles of any better authority, being all forgid & spurious, a… ggCensura p. 59. 60. 61.M. Cooke hath undeniably proved them. But admit them true, yet they made little to the purpose. For that of his 6. Epistle ad Maguesianos, is but this: Runne all together into the Temple of God as to one Altar, to one Jesus Christ, the High Preist of the only begotten God.

That in his 9. Epistle to the Philadelphians but this: There p. 80is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one blood of his shed for us, and one Cup, which is distributed to us for all man, one Altar to all the Church.

And that in his 7. Epistle of Tarsenses but this; Esteeme Widdowes continuing in chastity as the Altar of God.

Neither of these stile the Communion Table, the Altar; the two first of them being meant of Christ, & the Church itselfe, the last and first used figuratively and by way of similitude, only; the first applied to the Church, the other to Widdowes, neither to the Communion Table, the thing in question.

That of Irenaeus, the next auncient, is to as little purpose his words advers. Haereses l. 9. c. 20. being but these; David was a Preist to God, although Saul persecuted him: Omnes justi Sacerdotalem habent ordinem: yea all just men have a Preistly order, or are Preists So all the Apostles of the Lord are Preists, who neither inherit Feiles, nor houses, but alwayes serve God and the Altar, of whom even Moses in Deutr. spake in the benediction of Levie: who sayth to his Father and Mother, I have not knowne thee, &c.

Which Text speakes not of the Communion Table, nor of any proper Preists, or Altars, but only of spirituall & metaphoricall Preists & Altars.