Exclusive: Laudians are ... Baptists?

Last week on Twitter I saw this question from a US commentator:

Does anyone who's never been a Baptist call it the Lord's Supper?

My immediate response was to point to Cranmer ('The Order for the Administration of the Lord's Supper, or Holy Communion'), Article 28 (De Coena Domini), and the Catechism ('the Supper of the Lord').  

That, however, was too easy.

What about the avant-garde and the Laudians?  Did they act like Baptists and called the Sacrament 'the Lord's Supper'?

Yes, they certainly did.

First, let us consider Lancelot Andrewes.  Here he is preaching on Isaiah 6:6:

there is such an Analogie and proportion, between the Altar and the Lords Table, between the burning Cole and Bread and Wine, offered and received in the Lords Supper ... So the element of bread and wine is a dead thing in it selfe, but through the grace of Gods spirit infused into it hath a power to heate our Soules: for the elements in the Supper have an earthly and a heavenly part ... wee have not only the Cole that touched the Altar, but the Altar it selfe, even the Sacrifice of Christs death represented in the Supper, by partaking whereof our sins are taken away.

In his 1626 Articles to be Enquired of Churchwardens in the Diocese of Winchester, Andrewes examined the liturgical conformity of parish clergy:

Whether doth he observe the Orders, Bites, and Ceremonies prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer, in reading Public Prayers and the Litany, in administering the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, in solemnizing Matrimony, in visiting the Sick, burying the Dead, Churching of women, in such manner and form as in the said book enjoined, without omission or addition?

In his Pattern of Catechistical Doctrine, Andrewes similarly employed the term:

So Christ took water, bread, and wine; and He took them to destinate them to a holy use:  and we take water, bread, and wine, to apply them to that use whereunto they were destinated; the water in baptism, and the bread and wine in the supper of the Lord ... In sanctifying any thing ... there is a separation of it to a holy use, as of water for baptism, of bread and wine for the Lord's supper.

What of the leading Laudian John Cosin? Cosin opened his The history of Popish transubstantiation with this assertion:

The Real, that is, true and not imaginary Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is proved by Scripture.

In the same work, he defended the eucharistic teaching of Berengarius:

the Orthodox and ancient Doctrine of the Lord's Supper which he maintained.

His 1662 Visitation Articles demonstrated how a Laudian concern for a decent order in the administration of the sacraments was not somehow inconsistent with the use of 'Supper':

Is there a Font of marble, or other stone, decently wrought and covered, set up at the lower part of your Church, for the administration of the Sacrament of Baptism? Is there a partition between your Church and your Chancel, a comely fair Table there, placed at the upper part of it, for the administration of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper?

Finally, there is probably the most influential of the Laudians, Jeremy Taylor.  In The Great Exemplar he refers to "the bread and chalice of the holy supper" and entitles Discourse XIX "Of The Institution and Reception of the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper":

this supper [the Passover] Jesus being to celebrate, changed the forms of benediction, turned the ceremony into mystery, and gave his body and blood in sacrament and religious configuration; so instituting the venerable sacrament, which, from the time of its institution, is called the Lord's supper.

His Worthy Communicant commences by exploring  "the Nature, Excellencies, Uses, and Intention of the Holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper":

I shall only here add the names and appellatives which the Scripture gives to these Mysteries, and place it as a part of the foundation of the following doctrines; It is by the Spirit of God called, The bread that is broken, and the cup of blessing, the breaking of bread; the body and blood of the Lord; the communication of his body, and the communication of his blood; the feast of charity or love; the Lords Table, and the Supper of the Lord.

In The real presence and spirituall of Christ in the blessed sacrament proved against the doctrine of transubstantiation, Taylor - after quoting the Catechism "The body and blood of Christ, which are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lords Supper" - declares:

We believe that after consecration, and blessing, it is really Christ's body, which is verily and indeed taken of the faithful in the Lord's supper; And upon this account, we shall find that many, very many of the authorities of the Fathers commonly alleged by the Roman Doctors in this question will come to nothing. For we speak their sense, and in their own words, the Church of England expressing this mysterie frequently in the same formes of words; and we are so certain that to eat Christ's body Spiritually is to eat him really, that there is no other way for him to be eaten really, then by Spiritual manducation.

We might also note that his Communion Office (compiled during the Protectorate, when use of the Book of Common Prayer was illegal) was entitled "An Order for the Administration of the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper", while in Holy Living the section addressing preparation for reception of the Sacrament is headed "Of Preparation to, and the Manner how to receive the holy Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper".

So, be a Laudian: call the Holy Sacrament the Lord's Supper.