At length, such an object graced every church, and thus, while the belief gained ground that in Eucharistic celebrations was offered a propitiatory sacrifice, men were disposed to view this as the doctrine of primitive times from seeing the provision made for administering the Holy Supper. Nor probably could the popular mind have been weaned from this palpable error without great difficulty, so long as these venerated remnants of the former system every where met the eye. Sensible of this, Bishop Ridley determined upon the removal of altars within his diocese, in the early part of the year. Of this change a conspicuous example was set in St. Paul's cathedral, where it was observed by the congregation assembled on the festival of St. Barnabas, that the high altar was removed, the wall behind it taken down, and a communion-table placed in its room ". About the same time Ridley went upon his visitation, and among the injunctions then issued by him was one for the removal of altars. This order gave great offence, and its execution appears, in many places, to have been resisted; for on the 23d of June, Sir John Gates, the sheriff of Essex, was despatched into that county with letters from the court, enjoining him to enforce the

"Yet several of the old wooden altars were retained standing; as Erasmus took notice of a wooden altar in the cathedral of Canterbury, at his being there, dedicated to the Virgin Mary." Staveley's Hist. of Engl. Churches. Lond. 1712, p. 210.

Bishop of London's injunctions respecting altars *. These injunctions were accompanied by the following reasons for issuing them: that a table is better than an altar, because adapted to root out from ignorant minds the notion of a propitiatory sacrifice; that the defence made for altars, upon the ground of their being mentioned in the Book of Common Prayer, is nugatory, because in that book, the terms, altar, table, and Lord's board are indifferently used: that they ought to be removed for the sake of correcting a superstitious belief in their necessity for the due celebration of the Eucharist; that altars were properly used for sacrifices under the ceremonial law; which being abolished, such things as have reference only to it ought to disappear; that Christ instituted the Holy Supper at a table, which example was followed both by the Apostles and the primitive Church; and that doubts as to the interpretation of any clause in the book of Common Prayer are to be referred, according to the preface of that book, to the diocesan. These reasons, however, failed of giving general satisfaction, and altars were resolutely kept up in some places, while in others they were overthrown. Not only was the diocese of London agitated by these contrary proceedings, but the flame spread also to other parts of the kingdom,

* King Edward's Journal. Burnet, Hist. Ref. Records, II. 23. y Foxe, 1211.

and the pulpits every where resounded with the din of controversy upon the sort of convenience proper to be provided for celebrating the Lord's Supper. Among those who took a prominent part in this contention, was Day, Bishop of Chichester, who preached in his diocese against the removal of altars, so soon as he thought their permanence endangered. Some of his clergy followed their diocesan's example, and Sussex was thrown into a considerable state of ferment by the agitation of this question. The council being informed of this fact, on the 7th of October, ordered Dr. Cox, the King's tutor, to go into that county, for the purpose of infusing from the pulpit correct opinions into men's minds upon the matters under discussion ". This measure was followed by a circular letter addressed on the 24th of November from the council to the different prelates, enjoining them to remove altars within their respective dioceses, and to provide for reconciling the people to this alteration by sending discreet preachers to such places as most required their instructions. Upon this question,

2

This prelate, who was once Provost of King's College, in Cambridge," had come over so far as to preach a sermon at court against transubstantiation: in which point, we must suppose, that his conscience was then rightly instructed yet afterwards, in Queen Mary's reign, he was one who signed the commission, by which Ridley, and his fellow-confessors, were condemned to the fire for holding the same doctrine." Life of Bp. Ridley, 329.

however, the Bishop of Chichester had already committed himself in a manner so public and decided, that he could not in decency retrace his steps. He resisted, accordingly, the removal of altars within his diocese, and for this disobedience he was immediately called to account. On the 7th of December, he appeared before the council, at Westminster, and plainly said, that he could not conscientiously adopt the prescribed course; that altars, in his opinion, were of very high antiquity in the Church, were sanctioned by holy fathers, strengthened in their claims to respect by ancient doctors, every where established by immemorial custom, and he thought, even supported by authority of Scripture. Upon these grounds," he added, "it is out of my power to act as your Lordships require; for I would rather lose all that I ever had in the world than condemn my own conscience." The council, finding him immoveable, debated his case at considerable length, and at last determined upon allowing him two days more for re-considering his decision. If he should then be found refractory, it was resolved to sequester his bishopric. The Scriptures alleged by Bishop Day for the use of altars were a passage in Isaiah, and another in the

Proceedings of Privy Council, 27.

66.

"In that day there shall be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt." (Is. xix. 19.) This passage seems to have been truly understood by Bp. Day as prophetic of Egypt's reconciliation to the Christian Church, but the right reverend commentator appears not to have observed, that the Jewish

Epistle to the Hebrews. It was shewn, that

prophets describe the Gospel dispensation in terms properly be longing to that of Moses only. The temple-service was justly considered in ancient Israel as the perfection of religious worship. Among the prophets, accordingly, the termination of Gentile apostacy is prefigured by pictures of the whole Heathen world adopting the rites and ceremonies of Judaism, and even of resorting to Jerusalem for devotional purposes. (Is. ii. 2, 3.) It is surprising, that Romanists in their eagerness to appropriate such texts have not discovered in "the mountain of the Lord's house, to which all nations shall flow," either St. Peter's at Rome, or the Vatican. The text from the 19th of Isaiah, cited by Bp. Day, appears to have been alleged by the second council of Nice as an authority for the worship of images. In the Caroline Books (see Hist. Ref. under King Henry VIII. I. 20.) the passage is thus explained. "This prophecy is fulfilled by means of Christ, who planted faith in this world, ordinarily designated under the name of Egypt; upon the surface of which are offered to the Lord by his faithful people the sacrifices of prayers, and the drink-offerings of holy deeds; and at the border whereof he placed a pillar, that is, the Gospel, or the Apostolical doctrine, by which the minds of his faithful people are informed as to the performance of good works. Hanc prophetiam completam fuisse sentimus per Christum Dominum Dei et hominum mediatorem. Qui videlicet fidem in hoc mundo, qui plerumque Egypti nomine designatur, constituit in cujus soliditate a fidelibus orationum sacrificia, et sanctorum meritorum libamina Domino litantur: juxta cujus terminum titulum posuit, id est, Evangelium, sive Apostolicam doctrinam quibus mentes fidelium ad peragenda bona opera informantur." (Opus Illustris. Caroli Magni contra synodum quæ in partibus Græciæ pro adorandis imaginibus stolide sive arroganter gesta est. 1549, p. 196.) This passage is also interesting, because it furnishes a proof, that in the time of Charlemagne, the Romish notion of propitiatory sacrifices offered in the mass had not arisen. The great Emperor speaks of no other Christian sacrifices, than those of a pious mind and a holy life.

"We have an altar whereof they have no right to eat which