CHAP. X. kneeling at the sacrament, which had been in King Edward's Liturgy, but was left out in Elizabeth's time, should be again set, where it had once been. The Papists were highly offended when they saw such an express declaration made against the real presence; and the Duke told me that when he asked Sheldon how they came to declare against a doctrine which, he had been instructed, was the doctrine of the Church, Sheldon answered, Ask Gauden about it, who is a Bishop of your own making; for the King had ordered his promotion for the service he had done."-Burnet's History of his own Times, p. 315, Oxf. vol. i. 1823.

CHAP. XI.

REVISIONS OF THE PRAYER BOOK.

SECT. I.-REVISIONS EFFECTED BY AUTHORITY.

VISION.

I.-IN consequence of the animadversions of Calvin, Bucer, FIRST RBand other continental Reformers, and the growing intelligence of Cranmer, Ridley, and others on the Episcopal Bench, the revision of 1552 was brought about.* The Romanizing Bishops gave considerable opposition, but their views were overborne by the Reformers. The King informed Sir John Check that if the Bishops would not consent to a further Reformation, he himself would exercise the Royal prerogative in carrying it into effect.† This revision affected doctrinal points, and rejected the corporal presence in the Eucharist, the notion of sacrifice in the same, prayers to and for the dead, and many Romish practices and observances. The particulars appear throughout this work, in which the points of difference between the first and second Prayer Book are pointed out.

The following is an outline of the leading changes and additions :

1. The service was to be said where the people could best Leading hear.

2. The sentences, exhortation, confession, and absolution were added, and the principle recognised of general and public confession, with general and public absolution.

3. The Litany was placed next to the Morning and Evening Prayer, and its use enjoined for Sundays as well as on Wednesdays and Saturdays.

4. Collects for times of dearth, famine, war, plague, and sickness were added.

5. Introits were omitted.

6. Double communion at Christmas and Easter was left out. 7. The hymn for Easter was to be sung instead of the venite; the hallelujah, versicles, and collects at the end being omitted.

8. The feast of Mary Magdalene was omitted.

altera

tions.

CHAP. XI.

SECT. I.

9. The expression "the Mass" was omitted.

10. The word Altar as applicable to the table was omitted. 11. The Commandments and responses were added to the Communion Service.

12. A new exhortation to the negligent was added.

13. The mixing of water with the wine was omitted.
14. Common bread, not wafer, was prescribed.

15. The invocation of the Holy Ghost upon the elements was omitted.

16. The words in the consecration prayer, "that they may be unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved Son," were changed to the present form.

17. The sign of the cross was omitted in the consecration of the elements, matrimony, and elsewhere.

18. The prayer of oblation was placed after the consumption of the elements to discountenance the notion of a sacrifice of the same.

19. A rubric was added allowing the communion table to stand in the middle of the church.

20. The allusion to the ministry of the angels as bearing up our prayers to the heavenly tabernacle was omitted.

21. Prayer for the dead was left out, and the word "militant" added to the prayer for "the whole state of Christ's Church."

22. The address to communicants-"Take and eat this," &c. "Drink this," &c. was introduced, and the former address left out.

23. The option as to auricular confession was omitted, and the principle introduced that "by the ministry of God's holy word the benefit of absolution" is to be received.

24. The reservation of the elements for the sick was left out, and a rubric added directing them to be consecrated in the room of the sick.

25. The rubric, as to the reception of the sacrament in the mouth, was omitted.

26. The rubric directing the use of the cope, vestment, albe, tunicle, &c. was omitted.

27. The rubric as to the changing of the baptismal water was omitted.

AND OTHER

28. The service for the benediction of the water was omitted. SECOND 29. Chrism, chrisom, and exorcism, and trine immersion REVISIONS. were omitted in baptism.

30. The rubric, in the visitation of the sick, directing the priest to absolve "after this form," was changed to "this sort."

31. Extreme unction was omitted.

32. Prayer for the dead was omitted in the burial service. 33. "The celebration of the holy communion when there is a burial of the dead" was omitted.

34. The chrisom* in the Churching Service was omitted. 35. The post-communion declaration against the ubiquitarian doctrine and the corporal presence was added.

Many other important alterations were made.

The second Book received the sanction of Parliament, but it does not appear that the approval of Convocation was sought.

II. On the accession of Elizabeth, the subject of revision was not brought before Convocation, which was Romanistic; but certain Reformers, amongst whom were Grindal, Parker, Cox, and Pilkington, were appointed to review the book of Common Prayer, and to report the result to her Majesty. The particulars of this review have been already given.† The two The alteramost important alterations were the insertion of the rubric relating to ornaments of the Church and Minister, subsequently limited by the Royal advertisements and Canon Law, and the removal of the post-communion declaration. The particulars of this review have been already discussed.‡

tions.

Revision.

III. The revision of 1604 resulted from the Hampton Court The Third Conference. The alterations effected have been referred to before,§ and were of little importance. It is remarkable that this book which was not laid before Convocation, rested on the Royal authority and its acceptance by the Church.

IV. The revision of 1661 did not alter the doctrines of the Church, which remained intact since 1552. The Royal Commission, appointed in 1661, consisting of an equal number of Episcopal and Presbyterian divines, broke up without coming to any agreement. Convocation now undertook the matter,

* The white garment presented with a view to the baptism of the child.

† Chap. VI.

+ Chap. VI.

§ Chap. IX. Authorities, No. 2.

CHAP. XI. and effected the revision. It is commonly supposed that the SECT. I. changes made on this occasion were of a retrogressive character, but this was not so. Many of them were decidedly Protestant, and of those which appear to have been directed by an anti-Puritan impulse, there is perhaps only one which is fairly open to the charge. Several changes, refused by the Episcopal Commissioners, were effected by Convocation. Of those which were in accordance with the suggestions of the Presbyterians, instances have been already given.*

The following are generally supposed to be of a retrogressive character.

1. The substitution of the word Priest for Ministers before the absolution, but this amounts to nothing as hereafter proved. In some instances the word Minister has been substituted in the same review for the word Priest.‡

2. The addition of the words "sanctify this water to the mystical washing away of sin" to the prayer preceding baptism, but the Presbyterians of Scotland were directed to use nearly the same words for the same purpose. "The collections and observations methodized" of the Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) appointed prayer "to be joyned with the words of institution for sanctifying the water to this spiritual use."§

3. The thanksgiving for the blessed dead, but Bucer, at whose instance prayer for the dead was removed, had recommended this, and the same form already existed in the burial service and bidding prayer.

4. The side rubrics to the prayer of consecration, directing the Minister to break the bread, &c., but Baxter and his Puritan friends recommended this.

5. The placing of the alms on the table by the Minister, but Baxter and his friends suggested this also.

6. The substitution of "Bishops, Priests, and Deacons in the

† See Sec. on Absolution.

⚫ See p. 143. See as before. § P. 127. Edinburgh, 1709. No new principle was added, for the old books, including that of 1552, contained the words in the first prayer :-" Thou didst sanctify the flood Jordan and all other waters to this mystical washing away of sin." Even Wheatly says:-" Now by this is meant not that the water contracts any new quality in its nature or essence by such consecration, but only that it is sanctified or made holy in its use, and separated from common to sacred purposes.” -Illustration, p. 339. London, 1842.

Sce observations on this prayer in loco.