An humble petition unto the high and most honourable Courts of Parliament, that they would be pleased to condiseend [sic] to the perusing of these short notes, tending to the refining of the Booke of Common-Prayer, in a few things. / By Theophilus Brabourn. Brabourne, Theophilus, b. 1590. 1661 Approx. 12 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 1 1-bit group-IV TIFF page image. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2009-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). B01762 Wing B4093 ESTC R208011 51784411 ocm 51784411 174833 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. B01762) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 174833) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English Books, 1641-1700 ; 2702:2) An humble petition unto the high and most honourable Courts of Parliament, that they would be pleased to condiseend [sic] to the perusing of these short notes, tending to the refining of the Booke of Common-Prayer, in a few things. / By Theophilus Brabourn. Brabourne, Theophilus, b. 1590. 1 sheet ([1] p.) s.n., [London, 1661?] Place and date of publication taken from Wing (2nd ed.) Reproduction of original in: Bodleian Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Church of England. -- Book of common prayer. -- Psalter. Broadsides -- England -- London -- 17th century 2008-07 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2008-07 SPi Global Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2008-09 Megan Marion Sampled and proofread 2008-09 Megan Marion Text and markup reviewed and edited 2009-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion An Humble PETITION unto the High and most Honourable Courts of Parliament , that they would be pleased to condiscend to the perusing of these short Notes , tending to the refining of the Booke of Common-Prayer , in a few Things . I Do not mislike the holy Prayers of our Church , because some things in or about them may be amended : but I desire an amendment of such things , as do either give scandall , or from which weak conscientious persons do take scandall : that so love , peace , and unity may be preserved in our Church , from which will follow Vniformity and Conformity . For this end , I shall give Instances of something to be Added to the Book of Common-prayer ; of some things to be Altered , and of some things to be Removed . 1. Of some things to be added . I read in the Common-prayer Book of Edward the sixth , printed 1552. In the 10th . Petition of the holy Letany , this prayer : From the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome , and all his detestable Enormities , &c. O good Lord deliver us . But in our Common-prayer Books in these dayes , this Protestant prayer is quite left out : as if it were unlawfull for us to pray against Romish tyranny , and Popish detestable Doctrines . It is meet therefore that this Prayer should be added , and restored to our Books of Common-Prayer , as it was in Edward the sixths time . 2. Of some things to be altered : As 1. As you may see in the Kalender for the first and second Lessons , many Chapters of the Apocrypha Scriptures are appointed to be read , as well as the Canonicall Scriptures . Now it is not meet that Apocrypha Scriptures , which are of a doubtful verity , should be made of equall authority with the Canonicall Scriptures : wherefore it is meet , that there be an alteration , by putting away the Apocrypha Chapters , and putting in their rooms so many Canonical Chapters . 2. After the first and second Lessons for Morning-Prayer , it is ordered , that these Lessons or Chapters shall be sung in a plain Tune . Now is this decent , when a man reads a Chapter , to sing it ? Or is it so edifying , to sing it , as it is to read it in a sober and grave tone of voice ? Like as a Judge on the Bench speaks his Charge , or as the Sheriffe reads the Kings Proclamation , or as a School-Master reads a Lecture to his Schollars . In the Chapters sometimes God threatneth us for our sins , and sometimes that glorious and fearfull name of the Lord our God is read , which we ought to fear , Deut. 28.58 . And is it decent for a Minister to read these things merrily , and with a singing voice ? Is it not meet then , that this singing should be altered ? Besides in Cathedrall Churches , they sing their Prayers , and is it not meet that this also be altered ? 3. The Book of Common-Prayer lacks a good Method : for the Minister is forced in reading of Service , to turn some leaves backward , and then some leaves forward , and cannot read on to the next thing following , as he might , if things were methodically disposed ; now this would be altered . 4. The last thing in the Book of Common-Prayer , is the forme for Consecration of Bishops to their office , which gives them their being , & makes them Bishops . Now as I conceive , this Consecration ought to be in the Kings name : For the King is supream head of the Church , and next under Christ in authority . And therefore Bishops ought to derive their office and authori●y therein from the King , as next under the King : but they are consecrated , not in the name of the King , but in the name of another and higher power , as from Christ , the holy Ghost , and the Metropolitan , and so they make themselves to be next under Christ , and so shoulder out of place the King , and deny his supremacy : Now ought not this Consecration therefore be altered ? 5. The Prayers of the Church ought to be without Tautologies , and unnecessary repetitions : For Christ said , that his Disciples should not be like the heathen in prayer , using vain repetitions , Mat. 6.7 . But our Common-Prayer Book is full of unnecessary Repetitions . For 1. the Lords Prayer is used in an hours time over and over again , as twice in Morning-prayer , and once in the Pulpit in the Ministers former Prayer . 2. Gloria Patri , or Glory be to the Father , is in one hours time appointed to be said and repeated over and over again six or seven times . I could add other prayers also of like kind : Now is it not meet to alter this ? 6. In our Cathedral Churches they say their second Service in the Chancell or on the High Altar , not in the body of the Church , where the other set Service is said . Now the high Altar is no more holy than the body of the Church ; nor is it so convenient for the peoples edification , because they being afar off in the body of the Church , they can hardly hear what is read : And what reason can be rendred , why one part of the Service should be read in the body of the Church , and another part on the High Altar ? And why should it be so in a Cathedral Church , more than in all other Churches ? Is it not meet that this be altered ? 2. It is appointed in the order for the Communion , that the Table shall stand in the body of the Church or Chauncel , where Morning and Evening-Prayers are said : but now in the Cathedral Church , and in many others , the Table is hoisted up , and stands on the High Altar : But this is not the place where Morning and Evening prayers are usually said , but the place for these is the body of the Church , and there used in all common on Churches , and why then should it be otherwise in Cathedrals . 7. As touching Baptisme , the Priest is appointed to take the child in his arms , and to dip it into the water , unless the child be weak : so then strong children must all of them be dipped into the water , as Anabaptists do : but this dipping is out of use in our Church ; Is it not meet then to alter this dipping unto sprinkling of water ? 3. Of some things to be removed out of the Church : As 1. As touching the Epistles and Gospels , these are appointed to be read on Sundays , in Morning and Evening-Prayers , but I see no reason for it ; for on Sundays we have an whole Chapter read for the second Lesson , out of the Epistles , and another out of the Gospels : what necessity is there to read a part of a Chapter out of them ? For we heard the Gospel out of the four Evangelists before , in the second Lesson , and also the Epistle out of the Epistles of St. Paul and others : Is it necessary to read the same matter twice in one hour ? 2. After the whole Chap. of the Gospel and Epistle is read , what need is there to read also a piece , or a part of a Chapter out of the Gospel and the Epistles ? and both the whole Chapter and a piece of one to be read the same day , viz. on Sunday , I see no reason for it . The Epistle and Gospel therefore consisting but of a piece of the chapters read before , to me seems superfluous , and therefore meet to be removed out of the Church . 2. As touching Baptisme , 1. of Godfathers & Godmothers , who promise ( what they perform not ) that the child shall be vertuously brought up and learn the Creed , Lords Prayer , and the ten Commandements . I see no need for these Godfathers , &c. Time was , in days of persecution , when the Christian parents were slaughter'd , and martyr'd , then there was need that other Christians should take care for the Christian education of their Infants left behind : But we have no such persecution , our parents live with their children , & ought to give them godly education , and so there is no need of Godfathers to do it . 2. Of the Crosse in Baptisme , it is confessed by the Bishops , that the Infant is fully baptized before it be crossed : what ●●●d then is there of the crosse ? May not persons of years have a cross on their fore-heads made after the Lords Supper , as well as Infants after Baptisme ? These things being needless , may safely be removed out of the Church . 3. Touching Matrimonie , it is appointed , that 1. the man shall say to the woman , With my body I thee worship . I leave it to consideration , whether these words be fitting or not ; and whether it be meet , that the more honourable person should worship his inferiour . 2. It is ordered that the man shall say , With all my worldly goods I thee endowe . Now the Law doth not allow the woman but her Thirds , but the Priest allows her all . 3. The man must say , With this Ring I thee wed . Now what need of a Ring to testifie the Marriage , when they are fully marryed before , by their solemn and mutuall promises each to other , made before God and the Congregation ? 4. Of our Ceremonies , note , that 1. whilst we labour to preserve in honour , the prayers of our Church , these Ceremonies cast dirt on them , and render them odious : for many do mislike the Common-Prayer Book , because they see where this comes in , it draws after it the Romish Ceremonies . 2. Note , they are Innovations , being not in use in the Primitive Church . 3. Some of them are Jewish , as the Surplice , Cope , high Altar , Organ-pipes , &c. Now the Temple where they were used being down , and the Priesthood who used them , changed ; why should we revive them ? But others are Romish , invented at Rome , or came thence , as the Crosse in Baptisme , kneeling at the Sacrament , holy or Saints dayes , with others . Now being these had no good Original , why should we follow Papists in them ? 4. They have been the cause of silencing many godly and painfull Ministers , and a bone of contention in the Church for many years , and one cause of the late War. But many say , St. Paul commanded Order and Decency , 1 Cor. 14.40 . Answer 1. St. Paul meant it not of our English Ceremonies , for the Primitive Church used none of them ; they worshipped God in their Churches both orderly and decently , without our Ceremonies . 2. Christ forbad them , as Traditions of men , Mar. 7.2 , &c. And St. Paul forewarned us against them , as Traditions which are not according to Christ , Col. 2.8 . Now Christ never appointed any of them : and shall such Ceremonies be called indifferent things ? and matters of Order and Decency ? I wish these may be all removed , the which would tend to an everlasting and well grounded Peace . But I leave all to the wisdome of our most Honourable Parliament . By THEOPHILVS BRABOVRN