114 
and the 82nd Canon, stoutly refused. They were consequently 
on the 9th of June, 1635, cited into the Bishop’s Court at Wells, 
before William Hunt, the Bishop’s Surrogate, and Dr. Duck, his 
Chancellor, “‘for that the Communion Table in the chancel at 
Beckington was not placed under the east window of the chancel, 
nor railed in otherwise than with a border about it, and that 
there were seats above the Table.” They were here again 
admonished to repair these defects, to place the Table north and 
south as in the Cathedral, and to certify that they had so done by 
the 6th of October following. Continuing disobedient, they were 
next excommunicated in open Court by the Bishop himself.* 
Safely supported by their fellow parishioners as to the expenses, 
which eventually amounted to £1,800, they now went to London, 
appealed to the Arches Court for relief, and gave in the following 
fourteen Reasons for their refusal to remove the Table from where 
it had stood since the Reformation :— 
1.—We have noe Injunction from his Royall Maiestie. 
2.—Noe statute confirmed by Act of Parliament. 
3.—Noe Canon at all for ye altering of ye Table. 
4,—Noe articles to which we are sworne. 
5,.—Wee expect noe change of Religion, (blessed be God). 
6.—We are to continue ye year of ye Church. 
7.—As we should hereafter be questioned in Parliament we know 
not how to answer it. 
8.—Nor dare we call in question ye manner or forme of Religion 
soe longe hapily established. 
9.—We have nothing to doe to place things in ye chancell. 
10.—We be sworne to have God before our eyes, and not man, 
and to looke to ye suppression of vice and maintenance of 
vertue, and we know noe vice in ye antient standing of ye 
table, nor vertue in ye innovatinge it to a high altar. 
11.—It is prohibited in ye table of degrees, in ye last date of it. 
* Articles against Bishop Pierce, 
EEE 
