THE Communion-Table must not The Commu­nion Table must not have superfluous and supersti­tious furni­ture, but such only as is prescribed by the Church of England, not such as Bishop Neal with his Chapleins brought into Durham, and polluted the same with su­perstition and idolatry. have superfluous and superstitious ornaments, not allowed by the Book of Common Prayer, Injunctions and Canons, in which whatsoever Ceremony is not bidden, it is for­bidden, it is unlawfull it is supersti­tious. As the Canonists teach, Su­perstitio est, relictis Rubricis & di­rectorio Ecclesiae, alias Ceremonias adhibere pro sua devotione. Leaving the Rubricks and direction of the Church, to use other ceremonies for devotions sake, that is superstition.

The Rubrick and Canon command, that the Communion-Ta­ble shall stand in the body of the Church or Chancell, where Mor­ning and Evening Prayer are appointed to be said: and it must stand covered with a carpet of silk, or other decent stuffe, with a faire linnen cloth at the time of the Administration. And therein Cathedrall and Parish Churches must be alike, they must be uni­forme, saith the Act of Vniformity.

Therefore the Table (not Altar) must not be removed to the East end of the Quire or Chancell, as farre as can be from the con­gregation: It must not have a costly Velvet cloth with gold fringe and imbroydered with images: much lesse may it have B. Neales precious golden Pall to cover the Altar, having upon it the false story of the Assumption of our Lady, then which a more abomi­nable Idoll all Popery cannot shew.

Neither must it be a sumptuous Altar of Stone, gilded, painted and polished bravely, fastned to the ground, having crosses, cruci­fixes, corporasses, basons, tapers, or candlesticks set upon it; which by name are forbidden in the 23. Injunction. And never can I find them allowed in any well-reformed Church: sure I am, they were never in Durham Church till Bishop Neale came to that Bi­shoprick, 1617.

B. Halls ex­cellent les­sons against Innovations and affected bravery in the worship of God, and consequently against Dur­ham Innova­tors, with their sumptuous altar, organs, copes, et caet. It is a dangerous presumption, saith a learned Father of our Church, D. Hall now Bishop of Exceter, to make innovations, it but in the circumstances of Gods worship.

These humane additions which would seem to grace the insti­tution of God, deprave it.

That infinite Wisdome knoweth best what will please it selfe, and prescribeth accordingly.

The foolishnesse of God is wiser then the wisdome of men. Ido­latry and falshood is commonly more gawdy and plausible the [...] truth. That heart which can for out ward homelinesse despise the Ordinance of God, is already alienated from true religion, and lies open to the greatest superstition.

Never any Prince was so fouly idolatrous, as that he wanted a Priest to second him. An Vriah is fit to humour an Ahaz.

Greatnesse could never command any thing which some servile wits were not ready to applaud and justifie.

Thus much saith D. Hall, whose excellent lessons if the new­fangled innovators and corrupters of our Durham Church would have learned and followed, no Sermon need to have been preached against superstitious vanities: with superfluity of which it is ex­ceedingly pestred at this day by our idolatrous altar-building Priests, without any direction or approbation of our religious Kings and Princes, who in their Lawes forbid both altars and images, and all other superstitious rites and ceremonies.

For they (Bishop Neales Chaplains) have taught the people in their Sermons, that too much cost cannot be bestowed upon Christ, that is, the Church, and Church-ornaments, brave Altars, rich Al­tar-furniture, gorgeous Vestments, Sumptuous Organs, glorious glasse-windowes, painted, gilded and garnished images, and other excessive bravery, vaine and unnecessary, which hath cost the Church of Durham above 2000. pound, wring'd out of poore mens purses, to the utter undoing of many poore tenants.

Bernard cri­eth out a­gainst the ex­cessive vanity of sumptu­ously adorned Churches, and the neglect of poor Christi­ans, the tem­ples of the Holy Ghost, which is worse now in Durham, then in the time of Popery. What would Bernard say, if he were now alive, and saw the glory of our Abby-Church (as it is called) the superfluous orna­ments of which have cost more then would build a faire Church: who thus writeth AdGul. Abbatem, to Abbot William, making this exclamation: O vanitas vanitatum, sed non vanior, quàm insa­nior: fulget Ecelesia in parietibus, sed in pauperibus eget. O vani­ty of all vanities, but whether more vaine, or more mad, I know not; the Church shineth in trimly decked walls, but in the poore [Page 3] members of Christ, it is naked and needy. And who dare with­stand their vaine and mad courses? who dare gainsay them, or mislike their doings? if any do so, let him look for no better then to be persecuted to death: for they teach the people, that such are very Iudasses, Counting all to be wast, that is bestowed upon Christ; as if Christ were in walls, Altars, and Images, more then in the temples of the Holy Ghost, the bodies and soules of poore Christians: whereby the people learne to contemne their own parish-Churches, because they are plaine and simple, after the old fashion, handsome enough and decent, though not so proud and stately, not brave and magnificent, as this Cathedrall Abby; as now it is adorned passing gaily with paintings and gildings.

B. Morton out of Ierom upon Mala­chy calleth it a festred su­perstition of the Iewes, to esteeme a brave Altar and orna­ments of gold and silver better then the godly minds of them that bring oblations. This soule errour, and superstitious folly is thus refuted by D. Morton now Bishop of Lichfield in his Appeale: If any haply shall contemne the worship of God because it is not sumptuous, he shall but renew an old infestred superstition of the Iewes, who esteemed an Altar built of unhewen stones, to be but a prophane and polluted thing: As Ierome hath observed upon the first of Malachy. Reversus de Babylone populus, Altare tantùm impolitis lapidibus extruxerat; the people of Israel, returning home from the Captivity of Babylon, built an Altar of rough stones unpo­lished, before there was a Temple, or walls of a City: Esdr. 1. and they esteemed their religion contemptible, because the orna­ments of the Temple were wanting: to whom God speaketh by the Prophet Malachy.

You thinke that mine Altar is polluted, the sacrifices also laid on the Altar, and the fire that consumes the sacrifice you count to be unhallowed and defiled. Neither understand ye that Almighty God, regards not, nor lookes for either gold or preci­ous stones, or a multitude of sacrifices, but the willing minds of them that bring their oblations.

The Church of England in the Booke of Homilies, and Hemin­gius shew what are true and false or­naments of Gods Church acceptable to God, and pro­fitable to men. Agreeable to this is the doctrine of the Church of England, in the Homilies against the perill of Idolatry, and superfluous deck­ing of Churches; which utterly disalloweth our abominable or­naments, Altars and Images, and teacheth wherewith Gods house is truely adorned; which are these.

The Word of God ought to be read, taught and heard: the Lords holy name ought to be called upon by publike prayer, and thanksgiving: his holy Sacraments ought duly and reverently to [Page 4] be administred (not gawdily, flauntingly, theatrically) due reve­rence is stirred up in the hearts of the godly, by the consideration of these true ornaments of the house of God, and not by any out­ward ceremonies, and costly and glorious decking of the said house or Temple of the Lord.

Pratendunt ornatum, saith Hemingius, si illi ornatui adjunctum sit ullum periculum, sit maledictus. They pretend that Altars and Images are set up in Churches for ornament, but cursed be such ornaments, to which the perill of Idolatry is joyned.

And again; Spiritus Sanctus, saith Ezechiel, Ch. 20. vocat Ido­la abominationes oculorum, sed pulvis & cinis ea vocat ornamenta oculorum. The Holy Ghost cals Images and Altars, (all such as God appointed not) the abominations of the eyes, but man that is but dust and ashes, cals them ornaments of the eyes.

And then he concludeth, Verus ornatus templorum, utilis, & Deo gratus, est concio, cantio, oratio, communio, & non haec quae vel impediunt, vel vitiant: The true ornaments of Churches, profi­table to men, and acceptable to God, is the preaching of Gods Word, the singing of Psalmes, the administration of the Sacraments and prayer, and not such things as do hinder and defile the same.

This is the doctrine which the Church of England teacheth in sundry places in the book of Homilies, in the Articles and Injun­ctions, that Images and Altars, superstitious ceremonies and super­fluous ornaments, piping and singing, beautifying of temples be­yond all meane and measure, pollute and defile the house of God: and none but rotten members of our Church can say the contrary.

Bernard, Au­gustine, Ie­rome, &c. re­prehend the too too great magnificence of temples, es­p [...]cially when they are made theaters, ra­ther to de­light the peo­ples ears and ey [...] with me­lodio is tunes, and pompous spect [...]cles, then oratories to pray and praise God, and be edifi­ed by preach­ing. Bernard also reprehended in his time excessive heights, and im­moderate lengths of Churches, because he misliked worldly mag­nificence in the spirituall service of God, who dwels not in Tem­ples made with hands.

So likewise doth Augustine, Ierome, Iustin Martyr and others, they condemne gay ornaments and pompous spectacles of glitter­ing pictures, with melodious tunes of pipers, and singers in the spirituall service of God, especially at the administration of the holy Communion and Baptisme; because they hinder godly me­ditations upon our Saviour Christ his bitter death and passion, and our regeneration represented unto us in those mystical Sacraments. For thus writeth Bernard in his Apologie against the superfluous ornaments of Churches: I let passe the great statelinesse of tem­ples, their immoderate lengths, their vaine breadths, their sum­ptuous [Page 5] polishings, their curious paintings, which while they draw the sight of them that pray unto them, they hinder their affection, and they seem to me to resemble the old custome of the Jewes. Mark this, saith a learned writer in his Commentary on Iude, how Bernard saith, that those things which now adayes the defenders of superstitious vanities, in Popery say, were ordained to help de­votion; as gilded images and costly ornaments, curious and sum­ptuous paintings, and polishings of Altars and Temples; they are so far from helping, that they hinder devotion, they withdraw, saith Bernard, not only the sight of them that pray, but their affe­ction also, and they smell rather of Judaisme then Christianisme.

The Iews had but one tem­ple in the whole world, and that was beautified with all man­ner of sum­ptuous orna­ments, altars and vest­ments, for the Priests to of­fer sacrifices, which could be done no where els, it had singers also and mu­sicall instru­ments. But the synagogues (which are answerable to Churches) where the law of God was read and expounded e­very Sabbath day, had none of those orna­ments, neither Priests, nor priestly vest­ments, nor al­tars, nor s [...] ­crifices, nor musick, either instrumentall or vocall, nei­ther should our Church have the like, because they are syna­gogues rather then temples. Synagoga, a congregation, an assembly. And Ierome in his Epistle to Nepotian, concerning the life and conversation of the Clergy, saith: Iewrie had a rich temple, and all things then made of gold: then those things were allowed of the Lord. Then, that is, they are not now allowed of the Lord.

And where were they allowed of the Lord? Not in the Syn­agogues, which the Jewes had in all cities of the countrey, where they assembled to heare the Law and the Prophets read and ex­pounded every Sabboth day: they had not there either Altars, bloody sacrifice or incense, golden vessels, or Priestly vestments, musicall instruments or singers, but only in the Temple of Jerusa­lem, as David the King and Prophet, by the instinct of Gods Spirit, ordained there to be used only when solemne sacrifice was offered. For thus writeth Arias Montanus: Fuit in templo sug­gestum, inter sacerdotes & populum, atrium constitutum, in quo Levitae musicis instrumentis solennium & quotidianorum sacrificio­rum tempore canerent. There was a pulpit, gallery or scaffold ere­cted in a great roome or court betwixt the Priests and the people, where the Levites might sing and play upon their musicall instru­ments, when the solemne sacrifices were daily offered. Daily, saith he: but Flavius Iosephus the Jew, being himself both Priest and Levite, knew better what was done: he in his seventh book of Antiquities saith: David, that renowned Prophet of God, devised many instruments of musick, and he taught the Levites to sing and play hymnes to the Lord, per Sabbathorum dies aliásque sol [...]nnitates: at the solemnities of Festivall dayes and Sabbaths. Therefore not every day in the week, nor thrice every day: they did not turn the houres of prayer into solemne services, with pi­ping and chanting, morning, and evening, and mid-day, as our new-fangled ceremony-mongers of late most audaciously attemp­ted [Page 6] to do in this Church of Durham, and did so indeed the space of two years without authority, contrary to the Injunctions, sta­tutes and customes of our Church, which they were sworne to observe.

Vitalianus himselfe was not so impudently presumptuous, who was the first Pope that brought Organs into Churches, not into his own Chappell at Rome, (for there they are not yet, nor ever were, saith Cardinall Cajetan) not to be used but onely upon Ho­ly-Dayes: and this he did about the yeare of our Lord 660. about 60. years after Gregory the great, who would never have allowed such excesse of piping and chanting. Of this Vitalianus borne at Signium a town in Italy, thus writeth Mantuan.

The singing of Psalm [...]s commended and practised by Ambrose, Constantine the great, Ba­sil, and the whole Primi­tive Church: but organs and prick­song were ne­ver heard of in the Church till Pope Vitalian brought them in. Athanasius that great pillar of the Church, which he supported against Arrianisme, Canendi usum in Ecclesiis interdixit, vanitates fugitans: In detestation of superstitious vanities, he utterly forbad the use of chanting in Churches: but he forbade not the singing of Psalms in a plaine tune, by the whole congregation, which was then allowed, and highly commended by Ambrose and Gelasius, and practised by the Emperour himselfe, as Eusebius witnesseth in the fourth Book of the life of Constantine the great: Cantare primus incepit, unà oravit, conciones stans reverenter audiit, adeò ut rogatus ut consideret, responderit, fas non esse dogmata de Deo re­misse & segniter audire: This most famous Christian Emperour that ever the Church of Christ had, he first began to sing the Psalme, he joyned with the people in prayer to God; standing up reverently, he heard Sermons, insomuch as being intreated to sit downe, he answered, it is not lawfull to heare the doctrine of God slothfully and carelesly.

So that he used not the gesture of standing superstitiously, as a ceremony more holy then sitting or kneeling, as our upstart refor­mers do in this Church of Durham, compelling all the people to stand, looking about them like fooles and noddies all the time that the Nicene Creed is sung with the Organ, &c. which Creed Why Con­stantine stood to heare. they can neither say by heart, nor understand one word when it is sung. But onely that religious Prince stood upon his feet, that he might the more attentively heare the Word of God preached.

Neither is it likely the Emperour, on whose shoulders lay the mannaging of the weighty affaires of so mighty an Empire, had leisure to learn prick-song: but in a plaine tune he sung Psalmes to God with the whole congregation. Which singing of Psalmes in the vulgar tunes within these five yeares (now fifteen yeares) hath Since the yeare 1627. quite been banished out of Durham Church, contrary to the pra­ctice and custome both of this and all other Cathedrall Churches in the Realme of England, the Primitive Church also, &c. For thus saith Basil, if the Sea be faire, how is not the congregation assembled much more faire, in which a joyned found of men, wo­men and children (as it were of the waves beating on the shore) is sent forth to God? And the Book of Homilies report out of Dionisius, that hymnes were sung by the whole multitude of peo­ple in the Administration of the Communion.

But Pope Vitalian being a skilfull musician, and a lusty couragi­ous chanter himselfe, (saith a reverend Father of our Church) first brought into the Church prick-song, descant, and all kind of sweet and pleasant melody. And because nothing should want to delight the vaine, foolish, and idle eares of fond and phantasticall men and women, he joyned Organs to his curious musick.

Thus was Pauls preaching and Peters praying (saith he) tur­ned into vaine singing and childish playing, to the great losse of time, and to the utter undoing of Christian mens soules, which live not by singing and piping, but by every word that comes out of the mouth of God.

The Christi­ans of the Primitive Church met together to sing Psalms, but they had no musicall instruments, saith Iustin Martyr. Such were left to wanton chil­dren and dan­cers. Neither must David be imitated in piping and dancing in the Church, which David never did. The Christians of the Primitive Church met together in secret caves and corners, for feare of persecutors, and there they sung ante-lucanos hymnos, as witnesseth Pliny, hymnes to the praise of God, in the morning before day, all the people sung together with­out any musicall instruments: of which Iustin Martyr speaketh in his 170. Question: Canere est pueris conveniens, non simplici­ter, sed cum inanimis instrumentis canere, & cum saltatione, & crepitaculis. To sing is a thing very agreeable to the nature of wan­ton children, which are not content with simple singing, but they will pipe also and dance, playing with their hands upon timbrels and tabers. But saith he, In Ecclesiis sublatus est ex carminibus, talium instrumentorum, & aliorum pueris convenientium, & reli­ctum est canere simpliciter, i. simplex cantio manet. Out of the songs of Christian Churches the use of such instruments is quite taken away, and such like childish toyes, and there is left onely simple singing in plaine tunes.

Neither may we imitate the Prophet David, in bringing musi­call instruments into our Churches, ha [...]ps, lutes trumpets and cym­balls; for that was a part of the Leviticall service; in the taberna­cle, and Temple, of which God himself was the author, not the idle braine of man. David bids that Gods name should be praised in the dance, and that praises should be sung unto him on the ta­bret and harp: Psal. 149. And in the 68 Psalme he saith: It is well seen (O God how thou goest, how thou my God and King goest in thy sanctuary: the singers goe before, the minstrells follow after, in the middest are the damosels playing on the timbrells.

We may not be so absurd, as (understanding literally this mysticall song of the Prophet) to bring into this quire, even to the Communion table, or Altar, as they called it, our Sanctuary, or Sanctum Sanctorum as they make it, minstrells, and dancers, boyes, and girls playing on timbrells, and tabrets; if we doe, then may we also admit to the administration of the holy Commu­nion, instead of decent Copes, ridiculous pie-bald vestments, used a long time by the youth of this towne, in their sports and may­games: which I my self have seen with great griefe of heart, and many more besides mee, have oftentimes seene a party­coloured fooles-coat (which cost 3. shillings 4. pence, worne even there, at the Communion-table; Macula indelebilis hujus Ecclesiae, & opprobrium sempiternum authoribus tantae maculae [...] B. Neale, Burgoin, Morecroft, the first introducers of altars, images, tapers, candlesticks, with paultry copes.

Innovators in Durham have so changed services and Sacraments, as if they would have nothing done to edification, contrary to the doctrine of S. Paul and our Church, by inclosing it within railes, and separa­ting it from the Church and Chancell The book of common Prayer, the Articles of religion, Injun­ctions and Homilies, which containe the Doctrine of the Church of England; the denyers and oppugners of which doctrine are not sound, but rotten members of our Church: those books I say, ap­point, and command, all the service to be said and sung so as the people may understand all, and be edified therby. But our new fangled reformers of Durham, Cosin himselfe, &c. have within these five years brought into this Church such a strange change of Services, nay such a confusion of the fore-noone Liturgie, that the greater part thereof, can no better be understood, then if it were in Hebrew or Irish. Nay the Sacrament it selfe of the holy Eucharist, is turned rather into a theatricall stage-play, then a re­presentation of our Saviour Christ his passion; At the administra­tion of which so many pictures are exhibited to be seene, with o­ther ceremoniall toyes and Popish trinkets, forbidden by the Act [Page 9] of uniformity, and injunctions; And againe, so strange, ridiculous, and idolatrous gestures, with excessive noise of Musicall harmony, both instrumentall and vocall, at the same time, as the like was ne­ver used before, either in this, or any other Cathedrall Church, not onely of England, but of Spaine, Italy, France, and Germany, as travellers report.

Not only the holy Commu­nion, but the Sacrament of Baptism also hath beene horribly pro­faned, as well with images on the Font, as also with immoderate piping and chanting, con­trary to the doctrine of our Church in the Homi­lies. Blaxton and Cosin. Neither rest they contented with the horrible prophanati­on of the Lords Supper, with immoderate chaunting, and Organ­playing, and with other superstitious vanities; but the Sacrament of Baptisme also, they will not suffer it to be administred, without an heideous noise of musick, both of voyces and instruments.

As appeares on Sunday the seventh of September 1628. when a child borne in the Colledge was baptized in the Cathedrall Church at Evening prayer, after the second Lesson as the Rubrick directs.

In the meane time while one of the Prebendaries baptized the child (which is a principall part of Divine Service) two Preben­daries remaining in the Quire, commanded the Organist to play, and the Quire-men, and boyes to sing the rest of the Service, at the same instant that the Sacrament was administred, with such a noise, that they could not heare one another at the Font, to the great offence of many, and of Mr. Deane himselfe standing at the Font, who grievously complained of that insolent fact of two ir­regular Canons, disturbing most audaciously Divine Service, the like to which was never seene nor heard in any Church in Chri­stendome.

Such immoderate piping and chanting, with setting up of Ima­ges and Altars, have beene even in the beginning of Reformation disallowed, and banished out of the Church of England.

For in the second part of the Homily, of the place and time of prayer, we are taught to praise God, that our Church is rid of the like piping and chanting, and playing on the Organs (they are the very words of the Homily) that was used in Popery, and that our Church is delivered from those things which displeased God so sore, and filthily defiled his holy house, and place of prayer.

And againe, in the same Homily wee read, they have provoked the displeasure and indignation of Almightie God, because they have prophaned and defiled the Churches with Heathenish and Jewish abuses, with Images, Idols and Altars, too too superstiti­ously and intolerably abused, with grosse corrupting the Lords ho­ly [Page 10] Supper, the blessed Sacrament of his body and blood, with an infinite number of toyes, and trifles of their owne devising, to make a goodly outward shew, and to deface the homely, simple, and sincere Religion of Jesus Christ.

But now we ought greatly to praise God, for that such super­stitious and Idolatrous manners, as were naught, and defaced Gods glory, are utterly abolished, as they deserved,

They that dis­allow the do­ctrine of the Homilies, which is the doctrine of our Church, against such profanation of Sacra­ments, what can they be but the whore of Babylons bastardly brood? they are no true children of the Church of England. This is the doctrine of our mother the Church of England, in her Booke of Homilies; which whosoever, borne and bred in the same Church, rejecteth, he can be no other then a bastardly brat of the Whore of Babylon, the Church of Rome, unlesse he repent, and renounce his foule errors, and returne with teares to the bo­some of his gracious Mother, whom he hath most ungraciously abused and offended, by setting up Altars and Images, and propha­ning the Sacraments, &c.

For to speake plainly, me thinks these words of the Homily, point out in lively colours this our Cathedrall Church of Durham, as now it is changed, from that it was lately in our former Bi­shops time, in which these filthy Jewish and Heathenish abomi­nations, and intolerable abuses, which in time of Popery provoked the displeasure and indignation of Almighty God, and prophaned the Lords Supper, the blessed Sacrament of his body and blood, be­ing long since abolished, are now almost on a suddaine, restored a­gaine with great advantage.

As appeareth by the immoderate piping, and chanting at that very time when the Sacraments are administred.

By having an excessive number of wax candles, whereof sixty on and about the Altar burning at one time.

By gilding and painting Images, and Angels, set up aloft round about the Quire.

By erecting a most sumptuous Altar, with brave furniture be­longing thereunto, amongst which I have seene abominable and [...] Copes, used a long time at Masse and May games.

By bowing downe, and worshipping the same Altars, so often, and so lowly, as never was seene the like in the Idolatrous Church of Rome.

Bowing to the Altar is an idolatrous Ceremony, brought in and practised by B. N [...]ale and his Chap­lains, Cosin, Linsell, Bur­goin, corrupt­ers of our Church with superstitious Innovations. But say, they, we worship not the Altar, but God; wee bow the knee toward the Altar, not to the Altar, but to Christ supreame Lord, to whom all religious and divine adoration is due.

Whose death and passion are there represented at the admini­stration [Page 11] of that Sacrament; Is this true? then are the Papists more excusable, which beleeving the reall presence, of the true and naturall body of Christ, by transubstantiation, they worship his body with divine worship, and the Altar in respect of his body and blood offered thereon in the sacrifice of the Masse.

But our Altar-worshippers, never bow the knee to Christs body and blood, but to the Altar onely, to the naked Altar, and that continually and daily, whether there bee a Communion or not, turning their backs to the Preacher in the Pulpit, and Ministers saying service, to the whole Congregation also, and the Bible it selfe, to which they never vouchsafe to make one leg; as if there were more holinesse in an Altar stone, then in the sacred Scriptures, the Booke of life.

These their doings are directly against the second Commande­ment, Thou shalt not bow downe to them, nor worship them; for, either their worship is Religious or Civill; if it be Civill, they are absurd Ideots, in shewing more civility to a stock or a stone, then to a poore man or woman, much better then any Al­tar-stone, if he be a true Christian, to whom none of them will bow their bodies so reverently.

If it be Religious, they are abominable Idolaters in exhibiting Divine worship, due to God alone, to such contemptible creatures, as is an Altar of wood or stone.

Again, either they bow to the Altar in respect of God, or to God in respect of the Altar, both which respects, joyning together God and the Altar, being religious, not civill, make their bowing Idolatrous, and themselves Altar-worshippers, (as Bishop Buckeridge Roch. saith, Nec aliud pro illo, nec aliud cum illo: We may neither adore another thing instead of God, nor another thing with God, for he is sole a God.

Moreover, every Image when it is worshipped, is an Idol, and seeing the Altar is not truly and properly an Altar, but simula­chrum, or similitudo, an Image or likenesse thereof, therefore the bowing downe of bodies to it, or before it, in regard of some sup­posed holinesse therein; I say that religious, not civill adoration, or prostration, makes it an Idoll, and they that use such comely gestures (as they call them in their Articles) are [...], down­right Altar-worshippers.

Surely such comely gestures, neither we, nor our predecessours, since the reformation of Religion, ever saw in this Church; no nor [Page 12] the name of an Altar; for the Communion Table was heard a­mongst us (as you may well remember) till very lately a company of innovators, Bishop Neales Chapleines and favourites began to corrupt and confound our old services, Sacraments, and Ceremo­nies.

Comely ge­stures to the Altar, not to the [...]ont, or ought els in the Church Al­tar cringers may as well be termed Altar-wor­shippers, as the Israelites Calf-wor­shippers Worshippers of God make n [...]t legs to God, but fal­ling down, kneeling, or standing, they lift up their hearts, hands and eyes to heaven, as we are taught to pra [...], Our father which art in heaven. When friends p [...]rt one from ano [...]h [...]r, they mutually make legs, ta­king their leave When B. Lawd or D. Cosin go­ing out, turn back to make l [...]gs, do they take their leave of God? do they de­part from God? They call them comely gestures, which are indeed Fryar­like, most ridiculous, and phantasticall, and (as they are used in a principall part of Gods service) they are not onely histrionicall, and mimicall, but impious and Idolatrous.

Why are not the like comely gestures used at the Altar of the Font, when the Sacrament of Baptisme is administred? Is not Baptisme as comely a Ceremony, because so many legs, and cur­ches, no not one at all is made to the Font; Is not comelinesse fit for all times and places in the house of God? Must the Altar at the East end of the Church be so duckt unto, and worshipped with comely gestures, and the West-Altar want all comelinesse of gestures?

But it offends them, that they should be called Altar-worship­pers, so it would have done the Idolatrous Israelites, if one had called them Calf-worshippers; for they professed themselves to be worshippers of God which brought them out of the land of E­gypt, which they knew their golden Calfe did not.

Therefore Aaron built an Altar before it, and made proclama­tion, saying, Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord; Then the people shouted, and sang, and danced about the Altar, and the Calfe with great devotion, Exod. 3 [...]. and perhaps made low legs and curches, beholding so goodly an object, a Calfe of gold whith religious ad­miration; as some of us doe to our gay gilded Altar.

For every man and woman which makes a leg or curchee, they do it to some visible object directly before them; as Abraham and Let did to the Angels that came unto them in the likenesse of men, and to the people of the land before whom they bowed themselves, with civill reverence, as Iacob also did, when he met his brother Esau, hee bowed his body thrice to the ground to appease his wrath.

But when they, or any else did worship God, they did pro­strate themselves upon their faces, or fell downe on their knees, lifting up their hearts, with hands and eyes to heaven, they used not to make legs to God above in heaven.

And this the very Heathen knew by the light of nature, for the Poet speaking of Cassandra, King Pryamus his daughter, which [Page 13] was taken prisoner, at the burning of Troy, writeth thus in 2. Aeneid.

She implored the help of God above, in her distresse, lookind upward, she made not a low curchie to God in Heaven, whom she saw not: so it is said of S. Stephen in the seventh of the Acts, That he looked up to heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Iesus standing at the right hand of God, and said, Behold I see the heavens open, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God.

It had beene an absurd thing in Stephen, to have made legs to God the Father, and his Son Christ, whom he saw above his head in heaven; as our leg-makers say they doe to God and Christ, at the Altar before them.

For although God be every where, round about us, as well at the Font, in the West end of the Church, as at the Communion Table in the East: and although heaven be round about the world, yet every man wheresoever he be, even our Antipodes, are taught by the light of nature to apprehend the glorious majesty of God, to be above his head in heaven.

There to be worshipped, with lifting up of heart, hands, and eyes, and not in those parts of heaven which are before, behinde, on the right hand, on the left, or under our feete (as it seemeth) on the other side of the world. Christ teacheth us to say, Our Father which art in heaven.

Indeed the Gentiles which worshipped visible Deities in their Images or annexed to them, bowed downe their bodies before the same Idols, as that Roman Q. Catulus did, of whom Cicero re­porteth these verses,

So that he bowed his knee reverently to the Sun before his face, not above his head, no higher appearing above the Horizon, then the height of Roscius standing on his feet.

In like manner our Altar-worshippers, bow their bodies downe to the ground to the Altar standing on the earth, directly before [Page 14] their faces, yet they say they make legs to God, and to Christ, not to the Altar, then which what can be more absurd?

When they have done their prayers upon their knees, then to stand up and to make a low leg to God, and going out of the Quire doore, to turne about, and looking on the Altar, make a leg againe to God, taking as it were his leave of God, and farewell, departing from God, as one man doth of another, they take their leaves, bid one another farewell, when they part company, shake hands, and mutually make legs.

To teach the Coristers going up to the Altar, to make legs to God, when they light the Tapers and when they have done them, to goe backwards with their faces to the East▪ and looking on the Altar, make legs againe to God; at every approaching neere it, and every departing from it, at the taking up or setting downe of any thing upon the Altar, ever and anon to make a low curtsie, to make a profound leg to God, especially going out of the Church, as it were taking his leave and departing from God, which is a phrase of speech, as absurd as the action it selfe is vaine, superstiti­ous, and Idolatrous.

D Co [...]n dis­honoured and reviled Chri­stian people in the Church, yet he made low legs to the Altar, so low, that his breech was higher then his head, as vvas proved before the Lords in Parliament. Again, are they not absurd Ideots, or rather incarnate devils, who in ti [...]e of Divine Service, will take poore men standing qui­etly in the Church, and thrust them out by their heads and shoul­ders, calling them Pagans; Why stand you here you Pagans, if you will not observe the Ceremonies of our Church, get you out of the Church.

Who will say to others, even Gentlewomen of the best rank, sitting in their pues; Can ye not stand you lazie sows? taking them by their armes, and tearing their sleeves to raise them up, when the Nicene Creed is sung; thus Doct. Cosin did.

Who going up to the Altar in a Cope, will say in his pride and contempt of poore people, stand out of my way ye dirty whor [...]s, dishonouring the Image of God in them and immediatly make a low leg, downe to the ground, before his Idol the Altar, honouring it, being a stock or a stone, having unchristianly, and uncivilly, dis­graced, and abused his Christian brethren & sisters at the same time. Durham high Altar the greatest idoll that ever vvas in the world.

But the holy Altar, say they▪ is not a stock or stone, neither may it be called an Idoll: Not an Idoll? I doe not thinke that any Idoll in the world was ever so worshipped, as our Durham Altar hath beene.

Not the Image of Iupitur Olympius, or the Philistims Dagon, or [Page 15] the Babilonians Bell, or the Trojans Palladium; not Apis or Anu­bis, Oxe or Crocadill, Dog or Cat, qualia demens Aegyptus portenta colit? or any other monstrous Deity of the blinde Ae­gyptians, that forlorne and miserable Nation, before the comming of Christ, who enlightned them with the knowledge of the Go­spell, was ever so worshipped, or had so much cost bestowed on them. When they once fell down on their faces before those Idols, they had done for that time; but every accesse, and every regresse, and every turning, and every rising up; and every sitting, and knee­ling down of the Priest and others about the Altar, whether there be a Communion or no, hath a low leg to the Altar.

Neither are they common curtsies, ordinary legs, such as ser­vants and petitioners use to make to their Lords and Masters, but they are wonderfull solemne, very profound incurvations, before the venerable Altar, so low, that they seeme sometimes to touch the ground with their noses and beards.

The Com­munion table was never so vvorshipped vvith bovving down before it. And it is a forbidden ceremony both by the Word of God in the second Com­mandement, and the Church of England. Our Saviour Christ living on earth was never so vvorshipped. When it was a Table standing in the midst of the Quire; it was as good, and as holy as now it is being turned to an Altar, at the East end of the Church, yet no man or woman, bowed his, or her body to it then, as now they do in a prodigious manner.

Which superstitious ceremony of bowing to that Idoll, was ge­nerally received, and practised amongst us; but within these foure or five yeares, by the example, perswasion, and compulsion of our new fangled Popish Arminians, without any warrant of Gods Word, or direction of the Church, in the Book of Common-pray­er, Canons or Injunctions. Nay, it is contrary to the second Com­mandment, and forbidden by the Act of Vniformity, and the 12. Canon, and consequently punishable both in the commanders and obeyers.

Our Saviour Christ, when he lived upon earth was bowed unto and worshipped, by them that acknowledged him to be the Son of God. The Magi Wisemen of the East fell on their faces, and wor­shipped him; they did it once, neither they, nor the Shepheards, nor the blessed Virgin his Mother, nor Ioseph her husband, danced round about him lying in the cratch or manger, ever and anon making low legs before him, behinde him, on his right hand, on his left, now one after another, now all at once; as daylie is done at our high Altar, in Durham; sometimes far off, sometimes close by it, now at the South end, now at the North end, now at the West side, sometimes going forwa [...]d towards it; sometimes going backward [Page 16] from it, still nodding their heads, and making legs and curtsies: At which time a delicate noise is heard of Organs, Pipers, and Singers, filling the peoples eares with heavenly harmony, as was done when Nabuchadonozers golden Image was consecrated and wor­shipped.

Our Durham Innovators, Cosin and his fellow [...]s, which have obtruded to the Church such strange alterations of services and ceremonies, set up altars and images, and bow down before them, may they not [...]ightly be termed super­stitious Cere­mony-m [...]n­gers and ido­laters? They that lately have brought into our Cathedrall Church such fanaticall fopperies, such unlawfull rites and abuses, whereby it is defiled, the service disordered, and the Sacraments prophaned, as the Homily teacheth: They that without authority, and against authority, even the soveraigne authority of our religious Kings and Princes and Parliaments which established the whole forme of our Liturgy and Ceremonies, in decent and comely manner.

They that with an high hand, and great violence, durst pre­sumptuously adventure to innovate all things in our Liturgy, to overthwart the well setled state of the Church, to put us out of the possession of our Religion, and forme of Service which was left unto us by our Ancestors, and we had quietly possessed above sixty yeares.

They that not onely observe themselves, but compell others to observe and approve, their before mentioned ridiculous fooleries, superstitious vanities, abominations, and Idolatries, contrary to the custome and practise of this Church, contrary to the example of o­ther Cathedrals of this Realme, contrary to Laws, which straitly forbid under great penalties, all Rites and Ceremonies not appoin­ted, & prescribed by the Book of Common Prayer & Injunctions.

May not such rightly be termed new-fangled Ceremony-mon­gers, Idolatrous Altar-worshippers, seditious Innovators, schis­maticall, factious, and turbulent breakers of the peace, and con­temners of governours? nay rotten members, and rebellious sons of this our Mother the Church of England, whose doctrine and dis­cipline they renounce, they corrupt and contemne it, they shoulder it out with Popish cashiered antiquities, and outlandish Arminian novelties.

May not the people be ex­horted to communicate in their owne Parish Chur­ches where the Sacrament is rightly ad­ministred, and so beare to re [...]e [...]ve it in our Cathe­drall polluted with idolatry, least we re­ceive our own damnati­on, as the Church of England teacheth in the Homilies? Now I pray you, you I say, the people of this City have you not Churches at home in your own Parishes, not yet polluted with Idols, and Communion-tables not changed into Altars, where you may receive with comfort the holy Communion, in plaine and simple manner, as our Saviour ordained, and the primitive Church practised, and the Church of England prescribeth.

But you must needs come hither, and wilfully make your selves [Page 17] partakers of our sins, and superstitious vanities, when you need not, seeing that the holy Sacrament is not rightly administred in this Chruch of Durham as it was in our former Bishops time.

And where it is not lawfully ministred, there it cannot safely be received without the danger of damnation. Take heed to your selves, I warned you before, even this time two yeares, and now I preach to you the same doctrine againe, that I may discharge mine owne conscience, and save both mine owne soule and yours, if you wil heare & obey the voyce of God in this place out of my mouth, as I am charged to speake, and so do, in Ezek. 3. 17.

For thus the Church of England teacheth us in the Homily of the worthy receiving the Communion in the first part thereof.

We must addresse our selves, to frequent the same Sacrament, in reverent and comely manner, left as physick provided for the body, being misused, more hurteth then profiteth; so this comfortable medicine of the soule, undecently received, tendeth to our greater harme and sorrow.

But above all things, this we must be sure of especially, (saith the Homily) that this Supper be in such wise ministred, as our Lord and Saviour did and commanded to be done, as his holy A­postle used it, and the good Fathers of the primitive Church fre­quented it. For, as that worthy father Ambrose saith, He is un­worthy of the Lord, that otherwise doth celebrate that mysterie, then it was delivered by him, neither can he be devout, that other­wise doth presume to receive it, then it was given by the Author.

Now who knoweth not what strange alterations have beene brought into this Church, within these few yeares, how the Mi­nisters of this Sacrament have presumed lately to change in many things the administration thereof, not onely from the practise of the primitive Church, and the institution of the author Christ; but also from the Rubricks, and Canons of the Church, and the anci­ent usuall custome of this place.

For it is turned rather into a theatricall Stage-play, where mens eares are filled with pleasant tunes of musicall instruments, and voyces of not communicating singers, and their eyes fed with pompous spectacles of glittering pictures, and histrionicall gestures of men arrayed in massing and pibald, not decent robes.

And other unlawfull, superstitious and vaine rites, and ridiculous ceremonies are used, with which that holy action is defiled and disgraced: Therefore I did well, and according to my duty and vo­cation, [Page] in admonishing that Congregation then assembled, to re­ceive as they were wont to doe, in their owne parish Churches, as our Church commandeth, and to forbeare from communicating in this Cathedrall Church, till things were amended, which lately were mar'd; le [...]t receiving the body and blood of Christ, in un­comely and unlawfull manner, it should tend to their greater harme and sorrow, as the Homily teacheth.

Augustine saith upon Psal. 21. Tempus lugendi est, cum passio Domini celebratur, tempus gemendi est, tempus flendi, tempus confi­tendi, 19 The celebra­tion of the Lords supper, is the memo­riall of his death and passion, cau­sed by our sins: therfore it is a time of lamentation and weeping, not of rejoy­cing, not of pompous and g [...]o [...]ous ce­remonies, not of musick and melody. & deprecandi; When the Passion of the Lord is celebrated in the holy Communion, by the breaking of his body, which is the bread of life, and powring out his blood, which is the true aqua vi­tae; the refreshing, the comforting, the quickning wine and water of life to languishing and dying soules.

That is a time of mourning, a time of sighing, a time of weeping and lamenting, a time of confessing, and begging pardon, it is not a time of piping and singing, of wearing and beholding brave cloathes and pictures. And Cyprian saith, In the presence of the Lord, teares doe never beg pardon in vaine, and the sacrifice of a contrite heart never receives repulse. And againe, he saith, in trea­ting of the Lords Supper, and the receiving thereof, As often as I see thee sighing in the presence of the Lord, I doubt not but the Holy Ghost is breathing upon thee: Cùm intueor flentem, sentio ignoscentem, So often as I see thee weeping, I perceive God par­doning. And who comes to crave pardon of an angry King, and terrible Judge, whom he grievously offended, with many haynons crimes deserving death, who, I say, dare come into his presence, Pompaticè, & glori [...]se, saith Cyprian, pompously and gloriously, in slanting apparell, in goodly Babylonish robes, imbroidered with Images of silver, gold and pearle, and with an excellent consort of Musitians singing merrily, piping and playing joyfully and jollily.

And D. Buckeridge the late Bishop of Rochester, now of Ely, saith very well, in his Book of kneeling at the Communion; What hath musick to do with mourning? or a song of mirth, with a day of the greatest sorrow, which is the Passion of Christ, when the seeds of contrition and repentance must be sowed with teares, that the harvest in Heaven may be reaped with joy.

And againe, we must come weeping before him, that offered up supplications, and prayers, with strong cries and teares to redeeme us, Heb. 5. 7. Wee must prostrate our selves humbly before our [Page] Judge that is offended by us, and weepe before him whom wee would pacifie with our teares and compunction; So then, saith he, since we come to the Lords house, and table to pacifie him, let our caraiage be such, that we stir him not to more anger; we must shut up our senses that they wander not; our eyes must see Gods beauty, not gad after vanities, and send teares as Embassadors: Our eares must attend the word of truth, not delicious tunes of musicall me­lody.

Such gaudy ornaments and paultry furniture as are used in Du [...]ham Ca­thedrall at the Commu­nion, with or­gans & other musick, hinder godly medi­tations, there­fore K. Iames when he re­ceived the Communion at Durham on Easter Day 1617. com­manded all things to be done plainly without mu­sick or other bravery. Why then are set before us so many objects of vanity, so ma­ny allurements of our outward senses, our eyes & eares, & conse­quently our minds from the meditation of Christs death & passion, and our sins which were the only cause of all our miseries, & his la­mentable sufferings. Can such paltry toyes bring to our memory Christ and his blood-shedding? Crosses, Crucifixes, Tapers, Candle­sticks, gilded Angels, painted Images, golden Copes, gorgious Al­tars, sumptuous Organs, with Sackbuts and Cornets piping so loud at the Communion table, that they may be heard halfe a mile from the Church? Bernard saith, no. Orantium in se retorquent aspe­ctum, impediunt affectum: Such glorious spectacles, draw away from God the minds of them that pray, they further not, but hin­der entire affections, and godly meditations.

The consideration of which impediments of devotion, moved our most learned and religious King Iames, when he received the holy Communion in this Cathedrall Church, upon Easter-day, 1617. to give charge, or at least in his name charge was given (upon my knowledge I speake it, and in my hearing, in mine own house) that the Communion should be administred in plain māne [...]; & it was ex­presly commanded, that no chaunting should be used by the Quire­men, nor playing on the Organs or other Instruments: Which my selfe being treasurer of this Church at that time, and receiving the Communion with his Majesty (as my office required) I did see, & take order, should be performed, according to the Kings pleasure & direction; at which time there were no Images, or other gay and gaudy monuments of superstition and Idolatry to be seene.

Two Copes indeed were worne, both decent, as the Canons pre­scribe, not party-coloured nor pibald, like ours at Durham, but plaine without any picture, or other imbroidring of Crosses, or Images, which the doctrine of the Church of England, in the book of Homilies, and Injunctions, straightly forbids in our Churches to be used at any part of Gods service, especially at the Communi­on [Page] table, or in windowes ab [...] it▪ And shall we [...]ffect so exces­sive and extraordinary bravery, such a deale and so great variety of delicious musick at the receiving of the holy Communion, an acti­on of the greatest humiliation and mourning, which the religiou [...] wisedome of so learned a Prince forbad, and refused.

When we come to Gods [...] ­ble we must endeavour to pacifie his an­ger with our humiliation and mourn­ing, and not provoke him against us with our proud beha­viour, merri­ment and flaunting! bravery. When: we come to Gods house, and sacred table to pacifie him▪ (saith the Bishop of Rochester, in his Book of kneeling at the Communion, pag. 19.) our carriage must be such, that we stir him not to more anger; and how can lie but be angry, when we turne our mourning into merriment, our fasting and prayer into stage­playing, saith he? And again, in the same book, we must weep be­fore him, to wash away our [...]ins, and deplore and prevent our pre­sent and future misery: The depth of sin; saith he, pierced not on­ly his hands and feet, but his heart also; in which he offered up prayers and supplications, with strong cryes and teares, that he might overcome the clamour of our crying sins.

And if our Saviour wept for us, the Redeemer for the redeemed, we have much more reason to weepe for our selves, and let none be found so prophane amongst us, that when the son of God wept and suffered for our redemption, we should laugh, and make merry, pipe and sing at our condemnation, as if we were senselesse of our owne confusion. We may not presume to eate the bread of Hea­ven, and forget the duty of sinfull, and earthly men that are but dust and ashes.

Reverend and dreadfull mysteries must have receivers that come with reverence and dread; and such as our action is, such must be our affection, that is, to receive that with feare and trembling, (and not with piping and singing) which is so fearefull and dreadfull in it selfe.

And then he concludeth, with this admonition; Behold thou sinner how great reproaches Christ suffers at thy hands, who by thy wilfull impieties, doest crucifie againe to thy selfe the Lord of life.

And then resolve, that as Christs hands, and feet, and head, and every poare and passage of his body, was a fountaine of mercy that runs in his blood: so thine heart must be as a spring of sighs and groanes, and thine eyes must be as fountaines of teares, to wash with Magdalen, not so much Christs feet, as thine owne soule.