much as the least syllable which reflecteth this. way, or meddleth at all with the Book of Articles."

Now, from these concessions, the conclusion appears to be undeniable, that the famous forty-two Articles of the re ligion of this reign can neither be accounted synodal nor parliamentary. Not synodal, because it was not thought expedient, or even safe, to have them discussed and decided by a suspicious convocation. Not parliamentary, because the Parliament never meddled at all with the Book of Articles.

In fine, if it is supposable that_King Edward's Articles of Religion contained the common Principles of the Christian Faith, may it not then be allowable to ask, if it was justifiable in Queen Elizabeth, and who gave her authority to chop and change the said principles, to curtail their number, and to reduce them from forty-two to thirty-nine?

8.-Some Account of a new Liturgy or Common Prayerbook, published by King Edward... Reflections on the Act of Parliament by which it was authorised

"+Now the time draws on for the putting forth the New Liturgy, which differed little in the main (no, not so much as in the Canon of the Mass) from the Latin service."

The main difference, however, seems to have consisted in the communion's being appointed, by Act of Parliament, to be administered to the people in both kinds, in direct contradiction to the second of King Henry's famous six Articles, which strenuously asserts and maintains, that communion in both kinds is not necessary, by the law of God, to all people. But so fluctuating and unsteady was the state of religion in those unhappy days of disorder and confusion, that what appeared necessary in one reign, was voted to be quite the reverse in the next. Nor were the reformers, perhaps, in any one thing more inconsistent with themselves, than in their putting forth the new Liturgy.

Now, in order to clear the way for the introduction of it, it was thought expedient previously to prohibit, abolish, and extinguish for ever, all the ancient Liturgic Offices of all de

+ Heylin's Hist. Ref. p. 72.

nominations all which are particularly specified in the for lowing Act of Parliament.

Whereas in the former Service Book are things corrupt, untrue, vain, and superstitious, be it therefore enacted, that all books called Antiphoners, Missales, Grailes, Processionales, Manueles, Legendes, Pies, Portuasses, Primers in Latin and English, Couchers, Journalles, Ordinalles, or other books or wrytings whatsoever, heretofore used for the service of the Church, wryten or printed in the English or Latin tongue, other than such as are or shall be set forth by the King's Majesty, shall be, by authority of this present Act, clearly and utterly abolished, extinguished, and forbidden for ever, to be used or kept in this realm, or elsewhere, within any of the King's dominions.'-Vid. Stat. 3 and 4. E. 6. c. 10.

Thus the old Service-Books, as soon as condemned, were ordered immediately for execution, which was every where to be ushered in with the subsequent formalities. The condemned criminals were commanded to be delivered into safe custody of the mayor, bailiffs, constables, or churchwardens, in their respective townships, who (within three months after they came into their hands) were to surrender them to the Archbishop, Bishop, Chancellor, or Commissary of the Diocese, in order to be either openly burnt, or otherwise defaced and destroyed; and that, in case any of the persons abovementioned reserved or secreted any of the condemned books, and did not bring them in to the Archbi shop, Bishop, &c. they were, for the first offence, to forfeit ten shillings; four pounds for the second; and for the third, to suffer imprisonment at the King's pleasure. And if the Archbishop, Bishops, &c. failed to execute the Act, and did not burn, deface, and destroy the said books within forty days after they received them, then were they to forfeit forty pounds; half of which sum was for the King, and the other moiety for the informer.

""Tis almost a pity," says Mr. Collier, "there was not a clause in this Act to allow the Bishops the liberty of reserving a copy of all these censured books, and lodging them in their cathedral libraries. Thus the form and distinction of the old offices might have been better known, and some valuable curiosities remain'd.". -But since the old officesare irretrievably lost, we shall endeavour to entertain our

Collier's Eccl. Hist. Vol. II. Book iv. p. 307.

reader with a detail of such ancient Customs and Ceremo nies as were retained in the first English Common PrayerBook.

In officiating this New Liturgy, the Bishops were directed by the Rubrics to perform the Divine Service in their Crosses, the Priests in White Albs, with a Vestment or Cope, the Deacons in Albs with Tunicles. The Introits and Gloria in excelsis were said in English, as also the Nicene Creed; excepting that, in the ninth Article, (but for what reason I can't imagine) the word koly is omitted. The Prefaces (proper and common), Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and the Pater noster, were to be recited in English. The Rubric also directs and enjoins the putting a little pure and clean water to the wine in the Chalice; and the bread was ordered to be unleavened, and round as formerly, but without any print upon it. See the Appendix No. XVIII.

Prayer for the Dead was likewise kept up in this Liturgy, as appears from the following words of a prayer in the Communion-Office: We commend unto thy mercy, O Lord, all thy servants which are departed hence from us with the sign of faith, and now do rest in the sleep of peace. Grant unto them, we beseech thee, mercy and everlasting peace.

Auricular Confession was permitted to such as chose it; and the use of Chrism and Extreme Unction was, as yet, retained, though with this difference from the Catholic practice, that the sick person was to be anointed with the Sign of the Cross on the forehead or breast only. The form of prayer made use of upon this occasion (which, for brevity's sake, we omit) may be seen in Mr. Collier's Eccl. Hist. Vol. II. p. 257.

Conclude we this section with a reflection or two upon the Act of Parliament by which this first Liturgy of Edward VI. is authorised and recommended to the use of the Pub. lic. And,

First," By the Act of Parliament which confirmed the same, it was declared to have been done by the special aid of the Holy Ghost. But Calvin was resolved to think otherwise of it. In his letter to Cranmer he is more particular, and tells him in plain terms, That in the language of this Church, as then it stood, there remained a whole mass of Popery, which did not only blemish, but almost destroy God's publick worship.' § Not content with this, he writes a very

Heylin's Hist. Presb. pp. 237, 238.

§ Idem, p. 72.

long letter to the Protector, in which he descends more particularly to the English Liturgy; in the canvassing whereof he excepted against Commemoration of the Dead, as also against Chrism and Extreme Unction. And then he makes it his advice, That all these ceremonies should be abrogated.'"And thus did Calvin most unmercifully censure and condemn the English Liturgy, notwithstanding the boasted assistance of the H. Ghost in the compiling of it.

Secondly, in the same Act of Parliament, the New Litur– gy is said to have been drawn up according to the usages of the Primitive Church. And, perhaps, it may be admitted to be, at least, so far conformable to the usage of the Primitive Church, as it retains a likeness or affinity with the Latin Service, from whence it was purloined, and which, at its first appearance in the world, it very much resembled. But this resemblance is in great danger of being obliterated by length of time. For King Edward's first essay of a Liturgy in English, has undergone so many reformations and refinements (and is still threatened with more) that it would be no great wonder, if it should abate something of the primitiveness of its lustre in almost every edition, and as visibly depart from the ancient form of worship established and used in the Primitive Church.

$9.-Calvin procures a second Edition of King Edward's Liturgy or Common Prayer-Book, and censures it with a great deal of Freedom.

"ONE of the main matters which was now brought into consideration, was, the reviewing of the Liturgy; for the removing of such offences as had been taken by Calvin and his followers, at some parts thereof, and so far prevailed in the two first years, that in the convocation which was begun in the former year, the first debate amongst the Prelates was of such doubts as had arisen about some things contained in the Common Prayer-Book. Upon this debate, there was a new Book of Common-Prayer set forth.

"§ And thereupon we may conclude, that the first Li

Heylin's Hist, Ref. p. 107.

His History of the Presbyterians, pp. 239, 240.

turgy was discontinued, and the second superinduced upon it, after this review, to give satisfaction to Calvin's cavils."

The Act of Parliament which authorised this new edition, is somewhat too remarkable to be omitted. It addresses the Public as follows:

'Whereas there hath been a very godly order set forth by the authority of Parliament, for the Common-Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, agreeable to the Word of God and the Primitive Church, very comfortable to all good people, and most profitable to the estate of the realm, &c. And yet this notwithstanding, a great number of people do wilfully and damnably, before Almighty God, abstain and refuse to come to their parish churches, where Common-Prayer, &c. is used upon Sundays, &c. And therefore the King's most excellent Majesty, with the assent of the Lords and Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, hath caused the aforesaid Order of Common-Prayer, intitled, The Book of Common-Prayer, to be faithfully and godly perused, and made fully perfect, &c.'-See Stat. 5 and 6. E. 6.

"Upon the setting forth this book, there appeared no small alterations in the outward solemnities of the divine service, to which the people had been formerly so long accustomed. For by the rubrick of the Book, no Copes or other Vestments were required, but the Surplice only. The Bishops were necessitated to forbear their Crosses, &c." And here it may not be improper to take notice, that even this second edition of King Edward's Common PrayerBook, with no small alterations, was still unpleasing and unpalatable to the grand Reformer of Geneva; as appears from the freedom of his censure, and the haughty manner of expressing his disapprobation of it.

In Liturgia Anglicana, qualem mihi describitis, multas video tolerabiles ineptias-I cannot but observe many to-lerable fooleries in the English Liturgy, such as you describe it to me.' And then he goes on complaining, 'That it wanted much of that purity which was to be desired in it; and that it contained many relicks of the dregs of Popery; and finally, that it behoved the learned, godly, and grave ministers of Christ, to set forth something more refined from filth and rustiness.'- "This answer," continues our Historian, so prevailed upon all his followers, that they

+ Heylin's Hist. Ref. p. 121.

Heylin's Hist. of the Presb, p. 240.