A P P E IV D I X 897 Mr. N. fays, fame ofthe collebts were a little altered ; but this writer Vindic. p. fays, there were none altered ; exprefly contrary to bifhop Burnet, h/lory Hl. punt. ofthe reformation, Vol. II. p. 39o. p. 42. Dr. Gueft bifop of Rochefter, writ againfl the ceremonies to fecretary Vindic. p. Cecil, for this Mr. N. quotes bis MS. but this letter isfòfàrfrom being H1. Punt againfl the liturgy, that it was defzgnedly wrote in vindication of it. I be-p, 124, feech the reader to compare Mr. N: s abflraft with this valuable letter in Strype's annals, Vol. I. appendix, p. 38. which exactly correfpondsStrype's with the manufcript ; and if I am not mifinformed, was copied from it Ánnendix,I. with his own hand. The bifhop was defined by the fecretary to corn- p 3S pare both king EDWARD'S communion-books together, and amend and N. XIV. alter, add, and take away, according to his judgment, and fo to frame a book for the ufe of the church, which he did, and conveyed it to the fecretary, with the reafons for his amendments and alterations. In this letter he anfwers, among others, the following queftions of the fecretary. (LI. Whether ceremonies once taken away, as ill ufed, may be refumed ? 4. They fhould not be taken again (or refumed), though they be not evil of themfelves, but might be well ufetí, and this for four reafons, which follow, and are mentioned in the hifìory of the puritans. QII. Whether the image of the crof may not be retained ? A Epiphanies cut in pieces a cloth in the church, whereon was painted the image of Chrift, or fome faint, becaufe it was contrary to the fcriptures; and coun- felled the bifhops to command, that no cloths with images fhould be fet up in the church, calling it a fuperftition. QIV. Whether in the celebrationofthe communion, prig fhould not efe a COPE befides a SUR- PL ICE ? If. No, becaufe if we fhould ufe another garment, it fhould feem to teach that higher, and better things were given by it, than be given by the other fervices of prayer, baptifm, or hearing the word. QVIII. Whether the prayer of confecration in the firfi còmmunion-book [ofking EDWARD] fhould be continued? A. It is tobe difliked. QX. Whether the facrament were to be received STANDING or KNEELING ? A. It appears that in the primitive church Chrift's body was received flànding ; but though this was the old ufage of the church, he appre- hends it fhould be left indifferent to every one's choice to receive either ftanding or kneeling. It is evident from, hence, that bifhop Gue/l was for further amendments to both king EDWARD'S liturgies. He was againft the ufe of the cope, &c. and thought one garment (the furplice} fufficient for all church-adminiftrations. He difliked the crof, and all images in churches, and was for leaving the pofture of the communion" indifferent. Is,not this writing againft the impofition of thefe ceremo- nies, though it did not pleafe the queen and parliament to agree to his amendments ?
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=