.s^. ■%'^\*. "V^" & C/j v> m^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiq ues Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Nocos techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. n Coloured covers/ Couvertura de oouieur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pelltcul^e Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre da couleur (i.e. autre que bleue oit noirel Coloured plates and/or Illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Rslii avec d'autres documents D D D Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou da la distorsion ie long dd la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pagas blanches ajouties lors dune restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, cas pages n'ont pas iti filmdes. Additional commants:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires; L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur enemplaire qu'il lui a iii possible de se procurer. Les cidtails de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-itre uniques du point de vue bibliographiqua, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normale de filmage sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. D D n n Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^color^es, tachet^es ou piquees Pages detached/ Pages d^tachees Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Quality inigale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuiilet d'errata, une pelure, etc., c^t it6 fiim^es ^ nouveau de faqon a obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X e dtails 8 du lodifier r une Image rrata o lelure, I a 3 32X Th« copy fiimad hara has baan raproducad thanks to tha g^narosity of: L^islature du Quebec Qudbec Tha imagaa appaaring hara ara tha baat quality possjbia considaring tha condition and lagibiiity of tha original copy and in Icaaping with tha filming contract spacificationa. Original capias in pn'itad papar covara ara filmad baginning with tha front covar and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illustratad I .tpraa- sion, or tha bacit covar whan appropriata. All othar arginal copiaa ara filmad baginning on tha firat paga with a printad or illustratad Impraa- siorj, and anding on tha !aat paga with a printad or illustratad imprasalon. Tha last racordad frama on aach microficha shall contain tha symbol — «»(maaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol V (moaning "END"), whichavar appllaa. Maps, platea. charts, ate. may ba filmad at diffarant raduction ratioa. Thoaa too larga to ba antiraly includad in ona axpoaura ara filmad baginning in tha uppar loft hand cornar, laft to right and top to bottom, aa many fram«.s aa raquirad. Tha following diagrama iiluatrata tha mathod: 1 2 3 L't^^xamplaira film* fut raproduit grfica A la gtnirositA da: L^islature du Quebec Quebec Laa imagaa suivantaa ont M raproduitas avac la plua grand soin. compta tanu da la condition at da la nattat* da I'axampiaira film«, at an conformiti avac laa conditiona du contrat da fllmaga. Lae axamplairaa originaux dont la couvertura en papiar aat imprimte sont filmte an commanpant par la pramiar plat at an tarminant soit par la darniira paga qui comporta una emprainta d'Impraaaion ou d'iiluatration, soit par la second plat, salon la cas. Tous las autras axamplaires origiriaux sont filmte en commandant par la prami^ra paga qui comporta una empreinta d'Impraaaion ou d'lllustration at en tarminant par la darni^ra paga qu: comporta una te«la amprainta. 'Jn daa symboiaa suivants apparaitra sur la damiAra imaga da chaqua microficha, salon la caa: la symbols — ^ signifia "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifia "FIN". Lsa cartaa. planchas. tableaux, etc.. pauvent 4tra filmte i daa taux da reduction diff^rants. Lorsqua la document eat trop grand pour dtre raproduit an un saul clich«. il est fUmi i partir do I'angia sup^riaur gaucha, da gaucha it droita. at dc haut en baa. en prenant le nombra d'Imagaa nicassaira. Las diayrammas suivants illustrant la m^thoda. 1 2 3 4 5 6 I THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER. REVISION A DUTY AND NECESSITY. The Departure FROM THE DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS MADE IN THE REVISIONS nv ELIZABETH AND CHARLES XL ^n Dislorical litqiiirg— |n Ktao feriura DKI.IVERKD IN OTTAWA, TORONTO, PITTSBURGH, BROOKLYN, & NEW YORK. BY REV. MASON GALLAGHEI\^, Presbyter of the Reformed Episcopal Church. NEW YORK: D. A. WOODWORTH, 96 NASSAU STREET. 1874. iiin To (he Rfv. Mason Cam-aohek .- Dkar Sir :— Wc, the undersigned, having liEtened with the great- est interest to the able and exhaustive lectures delivered by you on the I2th and 19th iuHtant, concerning the "Revision " and "Unprotest- antizing " of the Hook of Common Prayer, do most earnestly request that you will, at a very early day, have the same published in pamphlet form for general distribution and perusal. We do feel that the said lectures contain much information of the most valuable nature, which is practically hidden from the general public, and their publication, therefore, cannot but serve a good purpose. OlLiwa, 20/// April, 1874, \ I Ar.KXANDER BURRITT A, ROWE. ^ Chinch Wardens. Thomas H. Kirnv, Ai.KREDj. Parker, Thomas Hement, D. W. Coward, C. E. Anderson, R. A, liRADLEV, W. A. MacAgv, W. H. Tracy, H. Alexander, Z. Wilson. Vestrymen, The Hon. D. Christie, President of the Senate, Dominion of Canada. The Hon. R. R. Dickey, Senator. " Alexander Vidal, Senator. James Johnson, Assistant Commissioner of Customs. I Patf,u:;ox, N. J., May 1st, i874' To Alexander Hurritt, Esq., A. Rowe, Esq., Church Wardens; Thos. H. Kirby, Esq., Alfred J. Parker, Esq., and others. Vestrymen; The Hon. David Christie, President of the Senate, Dominion of Canada; Hon. R. B. Dickey, Hon. Alexander Vidal, Senators; James Johnson, Esq., Assistant Com. of Customs: Gentlemen;— If the pleasure I received in exposing the process by which the work of the Reformers under Edward VI. was deformed and defiled by three ungodly Monarchs and a degenerate Clergy, was shared by my large, intelligent, and earnest audiences, I am abund- antly satisfied. The evils which prevail, and which have driven you to the duty of restoring the work of the Reformers, is owing mainly to the general ignorance which prevails with respect to the manner in which that work was tampered with. How m.iny of the Clergy and of the Laity are aware that the Cate- chism of King Edward, the ripest and choicest work of the Reformers, the "Reprobatus Catechismus " of Mary, published six weeks before the King's death, has been practically suppressed in the Church of England? How many are familiar with the seven changes made by Elizabeth, deliberately, in the direction of Rome, by which she kept her Roman Catholic subjects in the parish churches for over ten years ? How many know that Elizabeth refused to have the Articles, the Protestant section of her Prayer Book, published, until she had broken irrevocably with the Pope ? How many have studied the stealthy and insidious Romish altera- tions by which the unprincipled Commissioners of 1662 sought to gratify their treacherous and profligate King, and thereby to disgust, repel, and drive out from their pulpits, and church, the most accom- plished, dwoted, and enlightened of their clergy ? ^ That vindictive and reckless trio— Sheldon, Gunning, and Morley— who engineered the Five Mile and Conventicle Acts, and the diabolical proceedings of St. Bartholomew's Day, were the successors in the same respect of Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley, as Annas and Caiaphas were of Moses and Aaron. They resembled their illustrious pre- decessors who perished amid Roman flames, in defence of the Protest- antism which they disgraced, as much as the monarch on whom they fawned resembled the pious Edward. The present clamor against the Revision of the Book set forth by these infamous characters, and the removal of the causes of the present tide of Ritualism, Popery, and Priestcraft, which is sweeping over the Episcopal Church, is as senseless as the uproar at 3 •api Ephesus, against the interference i silversmiths. and the trade of the of Paul, with the worship of Diana, There is evidently little desire to know anything that might lead will not bear an investigation. "iswry wnicn The masterly work of Fisher on "Liturgical Purity," which I fir,f met with m your magnificent Parliament Library, puWishedsixten years ago ,s now out of print, and cannot be obtained FrTnki; Rising-s "Romanizing Germs in the Book of Common P aye " one ofthe ablest, and the most timely work written by an Am Sn Episcopal clergyman, has been practically suppressed by the EVa ' el- •cal Episcopal party. It dared to assail the Liturgical Idol, and U doom was thereby sealed. ' '" The present crop of Puseyism, Ritualism, Sacerdotalism, and Sacramentananism which has startled the Protestant Episcopa Church -s the natural, legitimate and necessary result of the use of a iS and offices, intentionally Romanized; and the crop will flourish as long as the seed is sown, even by professedly Protestant hands nlrl K ' '. T^ °^ ^''■°'''" ^^ "* ''»^' '^^^" renewed. One Bishop has been found equal to the occasion. The return to Reforma tion times has commenced. You have had the wisdom, grace Tml courage to engage in the work. May your example be widely fo owed and may the lectures you have so favorably received and have so kindly requested for publication, be instrumental in throwing light on a subject of an importance as vast as the ignorance concerning ili, widespread and lamentable I '^umij, ii is I am, with great respect, Yours, in the defence and confirmation of the Gospel, MASON GALLAGHER, Presbyter of the Reformed Episcopal Church. k^mm^mk ► I PEEFACE. Crossino Fulton Ferry recently, I met one of the most intelli- gent Evangelical Episcopalians of Brooklyn. I asked him, " If the Episcopalian laity were intending much Ioniser to endure the evils which were affecting their Church through the presence of the ' Romanizing Germs' in their Prayer Book. Would the Gen- eral Convention employ the only remedy, i. e., revise the Book?" He said, "He did not think they would move in the matter,— that Episcopal laymen did not generally trouble themselves about Ec- clesiastical matters,— that they minded the'r worldly business, and left the settlement of doctrinal questions to their Ministers or Priests,— that the Convention might handle the Ritualists se- verely to save appearances, but they would do nothing more." The issue to-day is not between the Ritualists and the Re- formed Episcopalians, but it is between the Romanizing tenden- cies of the present Prayer Book and the Reformers. The crushing out of a few prominent Ritualists would be as efifective in removing the spreading evil as lopping off some of the taller stalks would successfully rid a field of Canada thistles. The roofs of error are in the Prayer Book, and Ri'.ualism and kindred errors are the legitimate and necessary outgrowth. These roots must be gtubbed up, and that work the Reformed Episcopal Church has attempted. Revision, thus, became to us a necessity. It is lamentably astonishing to behold the apathy of the laity to an influence which is logically certain to land some of their children in the Church of Rome. They may be roused at the General Convention to attempt Revision, but the superincumbent S.^-wemm^m fetfc-'?»''^^«^^kti ^ PREFACE. weight of the Hierarchical pressure will probably smother all efforts of the kind. Ecclesiastics have never been known in history to yield prerogatives, when once secured, unless, like the British House of Lords, who passed the Reform Hill, after a hint from the Iron Duke, that "if ihey threw out that measure, the people would throw overboard the House of I-ords." If the General Convention can be induced, after repeated re- fusals, to yield Revision, the good result will be mainly due to the establishment of the Reformed Episcopal Church, and then the wisdom, courage and faithfulness of Bishop Cummins in inaugu- rating this grand enterprise will be so far acknowledged. If the boon is again denied, then the duty of every Evangelical Protestant man and woman will be made clear, to abandon an In- stitution unmistakably and hopelessly incapable of amendment or reform. In the words of one of the most venerable and respected of the Episcopal laity: "We must say that, but for Bishop Cummins' brave step, there would be no hope. Now there may be some hope, and we ought to thank him for opening up a place of refuge congenial to our feelings, should we be driven from our Church. .... It api ears to us his reasons are strong, and that to be consistent, in the present state of our Church's laws, all our Evangelical Bishops ought to follow his example." * Thus, in any case, the Reformed Episcopal Church will prove a great blessing, and its founders will receive the encomiums of posterity. The facts presented in these Lectures will be new generally to the laib-, and to many of the clerg)-, as they are not contained in worl-,s .isually accessible, and are not even brought before the minds of the youths in our Theological Seminaries of the High Church persuasion. MASON GALLAGHER. Paterson, September 4th, 1874. * Stewart Brown, Esq. LECTUEE I. HOW THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER HAS BEEN UN PROTESTANTIZED AT ITS SEVERAL REVISIONS. I AM entering on a subject, concerning which I am convinced there exists generally a profound ignorance. I asked an intelligent layman of the Episcopal Church, " Do you suppose that one Episcopalian in fifty is acquainted with the several changes made in the Prayer Book ? the occasions of its several revisions ? the alterations severally effected ?" He re- plied, " I do not believe that one man in a hundred is familiar with them." Bishop Short, who wrote one of the most candid histories of the English Church which has been prepared by an Episcopal writer, states in his Preface that the reason which induced him to undertake the work was, that after he was ordained, while tutor in college, " he discovered that the knowledge of English Eccle- siastical history which he possessed was very deficient. ... He was distressed that his knowledge of the sects among the Philo- sophers of Athens was greater than his information on questions which affect the Church of England." Such is the result of much of the education in our Colleges and Universities. We are about to examine the history of a volume which is the Religious Service Book of twelve and a half millions of people speaking the English language, who possess an amount of edu- cation and intelligence equal to the average of the most enlight- ened people. Fifty-seven millions of Protestants speak the English jffijjraiiiiiii'i • HOW THE BOOK OP COMMON PRAYER CaTholic!: "^'^ *""'""" °' English-speaking people are Roman This Prayer Book has undergone five revisions in Endand besides two in this country. ^"r"'"". because" n;r''1 """ ''Z ''""■°"'' ^'^^ '"^^^ ''"P-^^''^"* f^''^'^ because the w.sdom and moderation of d.e Sovereign and the districts "^^ "'' "°' '''"'''^ ^^ '^' ^'^'^^y ""^ '^'^y of the rural bLotrf' ^^^ "'*""''' ^'^ ^''-'^^•^^^'' ^y ^ combination of Digotry and ignorance. Time will not allow me to dwell on the condition of England a the penod ,n which the original Prayer Book was framed in ^.,t I , P^P"''-^""" numbered three millions, rude and unedu cated. Books were scarce, and beyond the reach of the masses. It to,.k the wages^ of a j ear to purchase a copy of the Bible. The nat on emerged from the darkness and bondage of Rome, much as the Hebrews came out of the servitude of Kgypt Henry VIII. had thrown off the usurped yoke of the Bishop of Rome, so long borne by his predecessors. He rejected no Roman doctrme. He burnt at the stake those who denied the doctrme of transubstantiation. His successor, Edward VI., was educated a Protestant by ArchbKshop Cranmer, who had slowly e.nergcd from the mists of Roma, error. Educated a priest, the efforts of Ridley had con- vmced Cranmer of the absurdity and blasphemy of Transubstan- tiat.on and at last he enjoyed the liberty with which Christ makes his people free. ^* Edward, who died in his 17th year, in 1553, was the most devout monarch who has occupied the throne of England He has been justly compared to Josiah, the youthful reformer of Israel for her Protestantism, England is more indebted to him thin to any other king. Since his death. Protestantism, comparatively has made no general advance in the Church, to which he gave her Book of Common Prayer. If his principles had pervade 1 his Church at the present day, some of you who hear me would not have been compelled, as you have been, for the sake of vour souls, and the safety of your children, to come out of her pale and to endeavor to restore the Church to the condition in which 'the Pious Edward left it ! HAS SEEN UNPROTESTANTIZED. $ The first Prayer Book of F.dwart', that of 1549, was a wonder- ful work, considering that it was composed by men who had most of their lives held and advocated the doctrines A Rome. " During the reign of this pious Prince the Reformers attained what was for them, sedulously trained for years as they had been in Romish error, a glorious measure of Divine Truth. Discover- ing clearly such fundameiifal doctrines as justification by faith they did not at once get rid of Roiaish deceits." A great advance in Sciiptural knowledge and sound 'V-ctrine was made by the Reformers in the next three years, as evidenced by the Second Book of Common Prayer, completed in 155a. In this work the Reformers had called in the aid of Peter Martyr, formerly a monk of I'Morence made by Cranmct, Professor of Divinity at Oxford, and of Martin Bucer of Germany, placed in a similar position at Canterbury. John Knox and Alasco, and other Reformers were consulted in the preparation of this work. It is the best Prayer Book which England has produced ; far better than the one now used in the English Church. The RomisL doctrines and practices 01' the Book of 1549 were expunged from the second Book of 1552. Their First Book, mostly a translation of former Liturgies, principally that of Sarum, and of Hermann of Cologne, " retained many remnants of doctrines and practices not Apostolic, but sanctioned by earlier Church traditions, among which were prayers for the dead, the forms of exorcisim and anointing ; with the prayer for the consecration of the water, the idea of the Sacrifice in the Lord's Supper, the Communion Table being called an Altar ; the mixed Chalice, and Romish Sacerdotal Vestments,'' all these were omitted in the Second Book.* * writes * A. J. Stephens, in his Introduction to the Book of Common Pr.nyer, p. 78, ites : " The most material alterations were the removal of a few ceremonies and usajjes retained in the First Hook, some of which appeared to have been at least superfluous. Such in the office of ]5aptism were the sign of the cross made 0:1 the child's breast; the E.sorcism in the form of Abjuration, command- ing the unclean and cursed spirit to depart; the repetition of Immersion, first dipping the right side, then the left, then the face towards the font ; the putting upon the child his (or her) white vesture, commonly called the Chrism, with the address to the child on the occasion; and the anointing of the child with the prayer for the unction of the Holy Spirit. Such, likewise, were the sign of the cross in Confirmation, extreme uncii m at the Visitation of the sick. In the Churching of women, the part of the last Rubric, concerning the Chrism was omitted, and the former title, Purification of Woman, wns abandoned. Prayers forthe dead, both in the Communion and Burial Offices, were expunged." 10 HOtV TttE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER The Royal Proclamation to the Reformers, November 8th, 1548, was "to stay and quiet themselve? la men content to follow authority, and not enterprising to run before, and so, by thdir rashness, to become the greatest hinderers." THE SECOND BOOK IMPERFECT. The book o: 1552, which has been made less Protestant by every successive revioion, our American revision of 1789 included, was far from being perlect. The office for Infant Baptism is not a Scriptural office. " It begins with the proposition that the subject is dead in sin, the water is sanctified to the mystical washing away of sin, the subject is baptized, and a thanksgiving is offered for the regeneration which has just taken place."* The Fe ,rrr\ers of Edward were never able to divest themselves of the Re .1 error which confounds Baptism with Regeneration. Their m, . study and effort was to arrive at clear views with respect to the Lord's Supper. In this they succeeded. With respect to the doctrine of Baptism they were not so fortunate, as far as their views are presen ed in the Offices for Baptism. It is left for our generation to construct a Baptismal Office in strict accordance with Holy Writ, t Still, some of the Reformers of Edward have presented clear. Scriptural views on this subject. Bishop Hooper, Edward's favorite preacher, and designed by him as the successor to Cranmer '.n the Primacy, teaches, "Although Baptism is a Sacrament to be received, and honorably used by all men, yet it sanctifieth no man. And such as attribute the remis- sion of sins to the external sign do offend." Bishop Latimer, preaching before Edward, said, " Man must have a regeneration, and what is this regeneration ? It is not to be christened in water, as these firebrands expound John iii. 3, and nothing else. . . . Our new birth cometh by the word of the Living God, by the word of God preached and opened." Far different is this teaching from that of some modern bishops, and that put into the hands of our children in the form of devotional books, and widely circulated in this country, in England and in Canada. * Letter of Rev. Marshall B. Smith to Bishop Odenheimer. t This has been done in the recent Council of the Reformed Episcopal Church, as is evident in the Offices of their Revised Book, HAS BEEN UNPROTESTANTIZED. If If Edward had lived three years longer, there would doubtless have been a third, a still more thorough and complete Revision. John Alasco, a Protestant convert from Poland, of noble family, informs us that Edward and his council were anxious to effect a far more thorough and extensive Reformation of the Church of England. He says : " When I was called by that King, and when some laws of the country stood in the way, that it was not possible that the rites of public Divine Worship used under Popery should be immediately purged out, though it was what the King himself desired ; and while I was earnestly standing up for the Churches of the foreigners, at length it was his pleasure that the public rites in the English Churches should be reformed by certain degrees, as far as it could possibly be got done for the laws of the kingdom ; but that strangers, who were not so strictly obliged by the laws of the kingdom in this matter, should have Churches granted them, wherein they might freely perform all things according to apostolic doctrine and observation only, without having regard to the rites of the country ; and that by this means it would come to pass that the English Churches would be excited to embrace Apostoli- cal purity, with the unanimous consent of all the States of the king- dom." (Treatise " de ordinatione ecclesiarum, &c., A.D. 1555.") Thirty-two commissioners were appointed, of whom Alasco was one to draw up this "Reformatio legum Ecclesiasticarum." Alasco ;s described in the Kings patent as " a man greatly celebrated for his integrity, innocence of life and manners, and of uncommon ^ The Protestant character of the Second Book of Edward of i«2 imperfect as the King regarded it, will be made evident from' the ch? ges made in the direction of Rome by those who subsequently revised it. , , u u- • . tvt Edward died in 1553, and ^as succeeded by his sister Mary, who as all know, was a bigoted Roman Catholic. Stimulated by her bishops and priests, who had been restrained by her brother, she fully restored the religion of Rome ; burnt at the stake Cranmer, Latimer, Ridley, Hooper and Farrar, the foremost Protestant bishops, with numerous clergy and laymen, to the number of two hundred, who refused to recant, and drove from the kingdom those whom she was not able to imprison and punish. The old mass-book was restored, and the public services uni- versally performed according to the Roman ritual. ...i*ia««a*»iW#»*5 ta ^fOlV 77 -E BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER distinguished siste. B^ ^ ^^T' :!r '"^ "^"''^ corrupt system under which she had th' ^^Y'"'^'^''^ ^° '^' cated. ''^'' ^'^^ misfortune to be edu- THE ACCESSION OF ELIZABETH estant. But we rerd^hal-LTi ;T'^,S:r's"" """' '^ ^-^- attended confession and mass and ^nf f'^" ''^'^ '"""'^^'•'j' observances of Popery" sTe l^T "°"^°"""> *° ^'1 the ritual Oglethorpe, according to !he "oT":' 'j ''' ^°""'^" ^^'-^'-P which High Mass is a'n essential prtlfterlr'^" '""■''^'^'' °^ throne she continued to pray to the Virgtn M " s?",'" r° ^'''' in the Real presence ; publicly censurecU orelth . ""'"^ against it in her presence and nmiir ^ u ""^^ P'^^^^^'^ its favor. She retLedT^ucmxTht'" k" "'° ^"^"'^^^ '" her own private chapel jrafurasf" 'T was concerned in the Severn! r.fo . ^^ Bi.hop Cox, who > and Ehzabab, decl!; fe lo efgrr^irto""'" ^^"^^' '''''''' saying: « I most humbly su ul 'm ' t" n '''""."'' '" '^' ^"^^P^^^' wet eyes, that ye will Zc^J^^ Z^!";^^/'"''"'''' ^'^'^ move me. that I daro nm • ^ ^ *"^ ^°"siderations which his pious soul ,f he could have seen iLT '"'•''"''"""W t""^ vexed New York, as I behel VheTureuIr''" '" '''^'"''''' ''''''"''• their backs to the people a jiliZ.'^'^r. "''"'"' ^"'""'- ""h lighted candles oi t^^^.^^:^^^" '''''• '-" s =, one pHes. in ,he ac, of adorfuon I ' he e e nl™ '"'" all this in a so-called Protf^stnnf ru u u • ^'^'"ents,— and by a sincere Proteseal, CLL u^f ' h""'"'' *' '""'"'='' '•=" those who were '^•^s^ ^ZZ^^T "^T '7'''"^ series acted in „,her churches fn haf c , 'w h " T't co-.,ecrated altars, attended by false pries," „ , T "'«'' colors, and countenanced by ,hL in autS,.'" "^'^ °' "^^ her'Rott'ut^rir ;r.hi "i ''"r "-"^ ----^'^ '° attended the parChur he J h ttlt; r^r'' '^' '^'' for the first ten years of her rebn ,/'"'•'''"« ""d sacraments, .He Prayer Boo.^o the ^ ^L ^"nSlt'Lt fhunS ! HAS BEEN UNPR07ESTANTIZED. n ministers, who had served under Mary, and conformed to Popery, under Elizabeth all remained at their posts and used the Ritual, with the exception of two hundred. Not one in forty refused to conform. (Burnet, Part ii, p. 720.) As the Prayer Book now is less Protestant than then, we are not surprised that Ritualists and Low Papists can minister in the communion of the Episcopal Churches in England, and in this country. History is simply repeating itself. In what a spiritual condition must England have been with a clergy of such flexible and elastic consciences. Some of these ministers could not sign their names. Some could not read the Liturgy. Some years after, when Elizabeth had imbibed more Protestantism, and when some of the clergy had died or left the country, in the diocese of Bangor there was no preaching what- ever; in that of Norwich there were four hundred and thirty-four parish churches vacant ; two-thirds of the chuiches in the diocese of Ely were not duly served. " So pitiable and to be lamented," said Bishop Cox, " is the face of this diocese ! and if in other places it be so too, most miserable indeed is the condition of the Church of England." (Strype's Parker, pp. 143-4) THE PRAYER BOOK UNPROTESTANTIZED. But how did Elizabeth succeed in making the Prayer Book so acceptable to her Roman Catholic clergy and subjects ? In the first place, as Hume states : " She retained eleven of her sister's councillors ; but in order to balance their authority, she added tight more, who were known to be inclined to the Protestant com- munion. . . . The forms and ceremonies in the English Liturgy^ as they bore some semblance to the ancient Service, tended still further to reconcile the Catholics to the established religion ; and as the Queen permitted no other mode of worship, and at the same time struck out everything that could be offensive to them in the Liturgy, even those who were addicted to the Romish communion, made no scruple of attending the Established Church." Bishop Tomline writes: " Several alterations were made in the Communion service and rubric,to conciliate the Roman Catholics.'' The Rubric referred to is thus spoken of by Hey! in, a High Church historian : " They expunged also a whole Rubric at the end of the Communion service, by which it was declared that «**MfcBw?w»^ , ill 14 ffOlV THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER ..1, , , ^"^ '^ s'g»'fication of the humble eratef.,1 acknowIedg.nc of the benefits of Christ, given theTet\fnto te x::i::;s:;::::r^----^-.:r::;;^ the sacmen^ta, breadTn!? ^^ ^ht^S/ ^e"^^^^^ regard of any rea, and essential presence of^ChS^^^^^^^^ Another alteration in the Communion service was with respect est ChrT ""'"r" '"'''' '^°^'>'- '''°«d of ourTord ''Which 7"''"" '''' ""'''' ^"^ -"' '- everlasting life" Which words," says Bishop Burnet " had h^^n i ft • f" second Liturgy, as favoring tLe corp al p el ^too ^^^^^ 'h instead o, them, these words were ordered to be utdTnh H tnbut.on of that sacrament: ' Ta.e and e^ .^^ ' " ' D w:!" this^ ^'c. 1 hey now joined together these m one Heyhn writes: 'fThen to come up the closer to those of the • Church o, Rome it was ordered by the Queens injunc^ns tha the sacra.ncntal bread (which the Book requTed only to be m.de Lord's Table should ^e place'd^l^hereVlr s'^d ! ^ Z accustomed reverence should be made at the nam^o Tesus Petinon in the "i^ncTt^ 2:::^^^^^ l^t Zt ::L7fTf/''''''^ ''- tyrannyo'f the B^Cof Home o ''B: tic'h' ^"°™'^'^\g-^' I-rd deliver us,' was stricken the nn..!r Uf ^omphance," sajs Heylin, " and the expunging the I ap.sts that for ten years they generally repaired to the pansh churches without doubt or scruple." So much for th! changes made in the Zrfur,y, in the direction of Rome " THE ARTICLES CHANGED. But what other alterations were made ? The Ar/ic/es th^ r.« st.tut,on of the Church, were tampered with in tt 'impon"; .ns ances. Cranmer and his associates, in order to condemn as clearly as possible the error of Sacramental grace, now so wide^ ^iH^sBK^^ P'"'"^^^^^flli HAS BEEN UN PROTESTANTIZED. IS taught in the Protestant Episcopal Church, had inserted in the articles of 1553, Art. xxvi., these words : " Our Lord Jesus Christ gathered his people into a society by sacraments, very few in number, most easy to be kept, and of most excellent signification ; that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. And in such only as worthily receive the same, they have a wholesome effect and operation ; not, as some say, ex opere operato, which terms, as Ihey are strange and utterly unknown to Holy Scripture, so do they yield a sense which savors of little piety and of much superstition." " This statement," writes Nangle, of the Church of Ireland, in Irish Church Advocate, March, 1874, " which demolishes the foundation of Baptismal Regeneration, was expunged from our Prayer Book in the reign ot Elizabeth, and the following, of a totally different aspect, was substituted for it : " Sacraments ordained of Christ are not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be sure, certain witnesses and effectual signs of grace," &c. On this change, Fisher, in his work on Liturgical Purity, p. 207,* remarks : " The same false tenderness towards the corruptions of the old superstitions which had caused, in the year 1559, the admission into the Communion Office of the Romanizing doctrine of the Real Presence, as well as the omission from the Litany of anything like a distinct protest against the errors of the Papacy, occasioned likewise, in 1571, the withdrawal from the Article on Baptism of that specific protest against the ' opus operatum ' so wisely inserted in the earlier Articles of 1553." Nor was this the only alteration in the Articles. " A clause of great clearness and precision of statement, which had been intro- duced into the articles of 1553, in condemnation of the doctrine of the ' Real,' nor of the Real only, but of the ' Bodily' presence of Christ in the Sacniment, was wholly omitted from those of 1562. It has never to tins day been restored." It reads thun: " I'or as much as the truth of man's nature requireth that the body of one and the self-same man cannot be atonedme in divers places, but must needs be in some one certain place, therefore the * This work of Fisher, a layman of the Church of England, is the most candid and thorough on the subject, and should be perused by every intelli- gent Episcopalian who wishes to thoroughly understand the matter under consideration. l6 ffOJV THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER body of Christ cannot be present at one time in many and diverse places. And liecause (as Holy Scripture doth teach) Christ was taken up into Heaven, and there shall continue until the end of the world, a faithful man ought not either to believe or openly to confess the real bodily presence (as they term it) of Christ's flesh and blood in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper." When we con- template these radical changes, this reacdon, this defonnation of the work of Cranmcr and Edward, are we surprised at Hallam's statement ?" Pius IV. dispatched a Nuncio to England with an invitation to .send amb issadors to the Council of Trent, and with power, as it is .said, to confirm the English Liturgy, and to permit double Communion.'' Another writer states : " When a copy of the Prayer Book was sent to the Pope, so well satisfied was he with it, that he offered through his Nuncio P arpalia, to ratify it for England, if the Queen would only own the supremacy of Rome." Are we surprised to find BLshop Jewel, the ablest divine of this reign, writing thus: "Now everything is managed in so slow, cautious and prudent a manner, as if the word of God was not to be received upon its own authority ; so that, as Christ was thrown out by his enemies, he Is now kept out by his friends." Cecil, Elizabeth's eminent Prime Minister, remarked of the Prayer Book: "As for external discipline, I can assure you, our Church is more replenished with ecclesiastical rites than was the Primitive Church in five hundred years after Christ, in so n.uch as the Church of England is by the Germans, French, Scots and others, that cut themselves Reformed, thought to be herein corrujjted, for retaining so much of the rites of the Church of Rome. " A writer already quoted, in an article on "the Anglican Refor- mation," remarks: "Our readers are aware of the controversy as to how the celebrated clause—" The Church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies, and authority in matters of faith"— crept into the twentieth Article of the Church of England, when it occurs neither in the first printed edition of the Articles, nor in the draft of them which were passed by convocation, and which is still in existence, with the autograph signature of the members. It is now the universal belief that Elizabeth inserted this clause." If time would permit, I would be glad to quote the language of the enlightened bishops of that day : Grindal, Cox, Jewel, Home, Parkhurst, and others, expressive of their great dissatisfaction pswiWWIi HAS BEEN UN PROTESTANTIZED. >7 with the work of the Queen, and of their consent to reman m their places, only for the reason that if ihey refused, their places would be filled with men holding unscriptural views I have sau enough, however, to show that the P.ayer Book of ^ -^^eth was far from being the Prayer Book of the Reformers-that . wa a wide and dangerous departure from the views of the martyrs under Edward, with whom Elizabeth had little doctrinal sympathy. When we shall examine the two succeeding Revisions, m which the Book was made to diverge still further from J^e pnnciples of its first compilers, you will be still more surprised, and will be deeply grateful that you have had grace and courag. g. ven you to break away from these Romish traditions, and to plant ourselves upon the basis of the word of God alone. One marked reactionary change made by Ehzabelh, I have omitted. In the articles of Edward, there is a remarkable clause : « The grace of Christ, or the Holy Spirit, who is given through the same, takes away the heart of stone and gives the heart of flesh." Here, grace conveyed by the Spirit, the conv'ers^n of the soul, as distinguished from grace mwrought by th • bacra- nrents, is positively asserted. This strong Protestant statement, so powerful an an'idote to the Sacramental errors of the Liturgy was expunged by this shrewd monarch ; and wherefore, .1 not still further to unprotestantize the Book, and to render U less distaste- ful to her Roman subjects ? RECAPITULATION. Thus have we seen seven of the steps in the direction of Roman Catholicism, the deliberate work of Ei;..abeth and her council, a majority of whom had been councillors to the bigoted ^" The restoration of the Roman vestments, the Alb, the Cope, and other ornaments expressly forbidden in the Rubric of 1552. II. The restoration of the Roman Saints' Days, with their Eves, omitted in the first Prayer Book. III. The removal of the petition in the Liturgy condemnatory of the Bishop of Rome. IV. The omission of the Rubric, with respect to the Real Presence, in the communion service. , , . V. The expunging of the article which condemned^ the doc- t8 HOIV THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER trine of the "Real and Bodily" presence of Christ in the Sacra- mem. VI. The omission of the xxvi. article, which protested against sacramental grace, ex opere operato. VII. The removal of the declaration that Conversion, the new spiritual birth, is the direct work of the Holy Spirit, VIII. To these may be added the publication of Primers con- taining " Prayers for the Dead." ELIZABETH'S UNFITNESS FOR THE WORK OF REFORM. If the views of this distinguished monarch had been thoroughly Protestant and scriptural, her character would have disqualified her for the work of ecclesiastical reform. Her utter unfitness for this work is clear from the accounts left us of her habits of life. Profanity was habitual with her. She is .said to have ex- celled her lather, the bluff Harry, in this accomplishment. We read of the "startling oaths with which she would shock her meek bishops who would undertake to remonstrate with her with respect to some of her ungodly deeds. Said her godson. Sir John Harrington, when speaking of her, within two years of her death : "She swears much at those that cause her griefs in such wise, to the no small discomfiture of all about her." {Nuga Antiquce, i, 319.) When Sir Christopher Hatton, a favorite courtier of Elizabeth had risen high in favor, he coveted a slice of the Bishop of Ely's garden, which consisted of twenty acres on Ilolborn Hill The bishop did not want his See to be despoiled, and resisted the encroachment, though backed by the private orders of the Queen This refusal drew the following brief but pointed letter from her maiden majesty :" Proud prelate! You know what you were before I made you what you are now. If you do not immediately comply with my request, I will unfrock you, by C— . Elizabeth " This letter had the desired effect, (^ueen Elizabeth had the violent temper of her father; and when she let it loo.se, it was terrible. She once boxed JCssex's ears in the Council chamber- she spat on her courtiers; collared her nobles; .struck her ladies- and often swore: "By God's death, all who .served her were truly knaves ;" she stamped with her feet at bad news; walked up and down the privy chamber, and thrust her sword furiously ■•^WM^MS HAS BEEN UN PROTESTANTIZED, «9 thronrrh the tapestry. " Sometimes," writes Harrington, her god- on ''shlv more' than man, and often less than woman.' rate power. She left it among the hrst, .f not the first of Euro c. .o. " (Knt Ouar. Rev , Sept., 1866, p. 274. ) '"•IL' rnizabetU »?! not .rkvcl on Sunday, y«t after lisien- """TnlwJ^e « the noon-day divenisements of the ma.den :Tc7or^.3idanc-,„. ,nns., catds and pa^a^^^^^^^ up the rear of her Sabbath amusements. {StuMarui s J.tJ , '• Wha. we add her cruelty to the Puritans, herbitter opposition v\ ncn we ^^^^ ^^^^ ^ ^^^ of her ':re:"::f:i:e anVr^e Se.,ice Boo. set forth by het "' l" mu,"r'ecc'esiastical qualifications, her treatntent of JeCbisCorindal is in po.nt. Gtinda, »as ^^^^..^^ Bacon "the greatest and gravest prelate of the land. "e Itrrptturand intellectual i,npr„ve,nent. Elizabeth, who residence ""^ P »"7^'' „f Qrindal to her unrighteous :rr is o::of ttnoi :. uUerLces on record, and is worthy of order is "ne o t consciences, and smothered convic •""r ;Lr reCe: rUnstrance .orthy of an apostle he ludes "If it be your majesty's pleasure for this or any other Tau . rem" me'out of 'this place, I will with all humtUty J .w J,;„to and render again to your ma esty that I received ;f th*:r i con'der with myself that it is a fearful tm„g to 90 //Oiy THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER Zh?lT ' '"' ''"' '"'^'"'"^^^ ^° *'- ^'-'-'- of an n- iigntened conscience. While thus alluding to the moral delinquencies of Elizabeth and her consequent unfitness to amend the Prayer Book won M quirenen s. She was, as one says, "In couraee eaual .n l?c;ftmcould^a7crar"^ ^^'"''"^'^"" °^'^'-« '-^^'^ Pono'r'f ''1""T 'i^^'^^^t^' I ^hink history shows, that if the Pope had acknowledged that her mother was the lawful vfe of Henry, and that she was the legitimate sovereign of Eninc she wou have accepted the Papal supremacy, and Engfand n s dav would have been subject to Rome. The Almighfyappca s tohte overruled the .rcpressible pride and arroganct o^ e Tudor^t ^e fanherar.ce of the truth and the welfare of his Church Te Pope refused to acknowledge the claims of Elizabeth, a^d she EngLT ^'"'' '""^' '' '^^ ""^^^ ^' ^^^ Chu'ch of REVISION BY JAMES I. The changes at the next revision, under James I., in ,604, were not nun.erous, but still in the same direction of Sacramentananir and m one respect of immense importance ^ananism, Coleridge in one of his letters, says : " The faith that was com- mon toal theg,eat Reformers, continued to be the faUho t^e Church of England universally till the appearance of a semi Romams-m at the close of the reign of James the First." Colendge should have placed the date somewhat earlier The change among the Clergy was marked in the persons of Laud ad Andrews m the beginning of this reign. Prynne writes : Mn Ju y 1604 Laud proceeded batchelor in divinitie. His supposi ion' when he answered in the divinide schools for his degrees con n" Ind : :f "" °' ^'P'^"^' ^" ^^^^" -^batim out 'of B 1 arm ^ and he then :„auHained there could be no true Church wiS tIAS BEEN UNPROTESTANTIZED. ai diocesan bishops, for which Dr. Holland (then Doctor of the Chaire openly reprehended him in tho schooles for a secht.ous pcrso", who would unchurch th ; Reformed Churches beyond the seas and sow a division between us and them who were brethren by th.s novele Popish doctrine." " This novele I'opish doctrine of th.s sed.Uous person." has. unfortunately, b.come the accepted and controlhng doctrine of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and has been one of the chief causes which has pro.luced the sad state of affairs which has compelled this separation of brethren, and th.s return to the principles of the Reformers. . « n.^^jno There was no unreasonableness in Laud quotmg Bellarm ne. the Rreat Papal champion, in the matter of Baptism ; for the doc- dne of Baptism in the offices of the two churches .s the same This is made clear by the fact that when Slapleton another Roman in.s ma J ^resented a very carefid Exposition otthc controversialist, in ijOs.prescnieu a M^y wv \ ,f Fn„UnH points of dilTerence between his own Church and that of England, among his twenty-two points, he makes no allusion to the subject of Baptism. The Romish doctrine of Baptism is P-ent m he offices of both books of Edward. It was intensified in the book ofElzabeth. and still more distinctly set forth in the Revision o Charles II.. tvs will be hereafter shown. It is retained m the p". Book of the Protestant Episcopal Church. It was e imi- n ed from the Prayer Book of 1785. but afterwards restored through the influence of Bishop Scabury. who derived his orders and principles from the Laudcan nonjurors. Andrew s, with all his immense learning and devoutness, was a Sacerdotalist'in sentiment. A remark ^^ j;!^'^ ^^^^;:^^ ^ 1604 shows the tendency of his views. The so-called 1 nest o he CI S of England pronounces the absolution "standing. Bishop AndrewesLd that posture was proper, because he exe- cutes this office " authoritatively." Here is expressed the clear sacerdotal idea, which has wrought such mischief among us^^ At the revision of 1604, the term «' Remission of Sms was intfoduced after the word "Absolution," to render the service Ire emphatically sacerdotal. The mischief done at this revision • was with the Catechism, in some respects the most important por- don o the whole book; because the part brought into especa crntact with the minds of the children of the Church The p'^es ant portion of the Prayer Book is especially the Articles. wWch Elizabeth only allowed to be published after she had, upon mM&'j£. aa ■WW THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER her excommunication broken with ^u d '-^^^^"" l""«tions, Nowell, who outlived' the r:srdie?in:6t"^'°" '''"'''■ ^^^" prep^ cT ^r""' ' "■"''' '^'^'^^^'^ andSacrrmentarian divine tatechism. These were confined to the matter of the sacra! HAS BEEN U N PROTECT AN Tt ZED. 83 ments. which are treated with far more minuteness than the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, or the Ten Commandments ; am the l;ference is natural from the perusal of this document, that the Church regards this subject as the most important to be brought before the minds of youth. The supremacy of Holy Scripture is not even alluded to. Faith and repentance are mentioned as they arc related to Hapt.sm, but not explained. A distinguished author ( "entham remarks that with the exception of the one " allus.on ' to the len on^- mandments. there is "not a syllable by whuh .n any muKl to which the matter was not made known from oU.or sources so much as a suspicion could be produced, that any such book as the Bible had ever been written." Elizabeth ignored the Catechism of Isdward. So al o did Tames This document is intensely Biblical and Protestant. So Lch"so,that it is the only document of Edward and Cramner which was publicly stigmatized by Mary as worthy of reprobaUon It was styled by her in a public proclamation, the Cattchis- mus Reprobatus ;" and this circumstance is a good reason why, as Protestants, we should look upon it with especial regard, ami we should be grateful that we have this precious memorial of the truth from that noble monarch and his martyred co-laborers Do you wonder, in view of what has been here presented, that so many enlightened Christians in England, in these reigns, re- used to use the Prayer Book, and preferred to sutler (under the opprobrious epithet of "Puritan") various penalties rather than vISate their conscience in submitting to the arbitrary, imperious, ""^S::rl:^)^ed because they adhered to tW«. W of God, apart from traditions, which had corrupted the Book of Common Prayer, were the tru.i Protestants of that era ..^^ serve from all enlightened Christian men admiration and sympathy. The most learned scholars and eminent bishops sym- pathized with these men. the objects of the persecutions of Eliza- Lhand Archbishop Parker; Hallam, an English Churchma^^ writes in his " Constitutional History" : " I conceive the Church of England party, that is the party adverse to any ecclesiastical Chang!, to have been the least numerous of the three, (that is, Puritan Popish, and Anglican,) during this reign still exceptmg as I have said, the neutrals who commonly make a numerical .^■^iia^tmmtm^Km 24 fon- nsBooK- or commom p.ave,, etc. "•> ='1 hands, (and is o,H 1 ' H"?"' ''"J"'- " « "E'eed Ihe 1 lo„so of cL,„™,""" "■^'"'» ■'■»' '"ey prodominafed in port in ,Ke Qnacns c;u„;i, '"^^ j:lri ^^ ''f"'-' ™p. possessed more power ihnn ,„„ „ '-oicesler, wIiq capricious lempc' ,he , „," !?'„ "'; r'""*" ""^ -■■"'=™S "d wick, regarded as he s.ead es, , "■ """'"'K'™ •'•"d War- *e "SO and grave wTk r'Xr.Hr"^"'^""'^'""-^' ham, the experienced Sirllpr . ? sagacious Walsine- 'han had been establil [\n ^ ch 7"''"^ ' ^""^ ^°^^'"P present reforn:;;BZ'r "' ""''^ — -^truction. The dissipate the mists of rr^h^cH:-^ "'" 'T' ""^'^^ ^^^' ^° of England and ,he Prme . F ^''''' ?^^'°P^d ^he Church vance the cause of purTrSn^^'r"^''' ,'-''""'^' ^"^' '^ -d- the cause of the peop e of f ?" "'' '°""^' '^^^^^^ ^^"'J^- It is priesthood, a repL L' P^i cop7e"vvhr'"' '^ r'''^^"^'""^"' word of God by their Traditions "' '"'"^'"^ ™''^^ '^^ We have shown how for the work nf vv u u from the principles of Fdwld r '*'' ^"' " ^''^■J^'''^^"'-^ how the progress of he llr ' S""''^^"- '-^^^ ^heir associates ; or reaction consun::lated'ut;::"h:r T'^ k"^1' '^"^' ^'^^ ^^^ Successor. "^' ^^"^ ^'^^k and pusillanimous than thatof Elizabeth En K u'^T""'' °' '^^ ^''•^^'-^^ ^^^ok to God that you h V beet,"", '''" "'^''' ^° "^''^-''^ fe-^titude tive movement to return toT'""' 'V^'*^ '"" '" the first effec- to organ,, a Churcif^d ^ riTt"^ I^'TT' '"' meet with the full annmK.f r , ^ °°'^ ^'^'^'^ would were „„„ hvin.^arf l' :V?r,:„;;--'' -7;""'' D.v.ne Head of ,he ChurC, ,„e hZZt^:^':!:^ '° '"= LECTUEE TI. THE FINAL REVISION OF THE COMMON PRAYER BOOK OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND IN THE REIGN OF CHARLES IL 1662. OUR subject this evening is the progress of the Revision of the Praver Book after the Conference at Hampton Court in the reign of James 1., 1604. We have seen how widely Elizabeth in her Revision of 15 59 had departed from the principles of Edward and tlranmer. Seven steps at leass of a retrograd : character toward Rome, were taken by tills worldly monarch, to conciliate her Roman Catholic subjects. - . I will refresh your memory by lepeatmg the ca'alogue of im- po tant changes made by Elizabeth. (See p. 17. Ice. I.) We have seen that in the reign of James I. the Sacramentanan principle of the book was intensified by additions to the Ct\.^Q- ch\sm—iwo-t/iirds of the questions being devoted to th<' subject of the Sacraments, while in Edv^ird's lat.r Catechism, die pro- portion was but one-riM. In other words, the later Bo..,k, as we now have it, makes the Sacramental question six tunes moreim- portant than the Prayer Book of Cranmer. We know that the Prayer Book thus tampered with, to satisfy the Romanists, was enforced by legal penalties on all English- men • we know that many Englishmen, for conscience sake, refused to sanction by their presence at the services these un- scriptural changes; we know that these men were grievously persecuted; we know thoy were called " J^urtiuns,' an epithet of reproach then and now, with some Episcopalians, but with the 26 flow THE BOOK OF COMAfON PRAYER vast majority of Protestants now the term is one of honor, and it is fel' that the world owes a deep debt of gratitude to those moral heroes who were willing to suffer for their devotion to the letter and spirit of tlie Word of God. Some of you who are now stigmatized as Schismatics by those who have succeeded to the views of Elizabeth and Parker, be- cause you have embraced the views of the martyred Reformers can in some respects sympathize with the Puritans in the reigns of Elizabetl. and the Stuarts. When James, who had been a Presbyterian in Scotland, as. cended the throne, the Reforming party, who included the more thuroughly Christianized part of the nation, petitioned for several important ecclesiastical changes in the direction of the early Reformers. At a meeting held for the purpose of conference, in 1604, called the Hampton Court Conference, James refused their requests, save in one particular, viz., that none but a lawful minister should administer Baptism. At this meeting a request was made by the most prominent petitioner, the famous Dr. John Rainolds, IVofessor of Divinity at Oxford- regarded as the most learned man in the nation — that a new and amended version of the Bible in English should be prepared. The King assented, and to the Puritans we owe our present stand- ard version, called that of King James. THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. James died, and his son, Charles the First, succeeded him. Laud became Arciibishop of Canterbury. The wife of Charles, the daughter of Henry of l-'rance, was a zealous Romanist— Laud was a Sacerdotalist and Sacramentarian of an extreme type. He endeavored to introduce a semi-Romish Ritual into the English Church. At the same time, Charles began a series of oppressive acts, which were in violation of the fundamental principles of the British Constitution. Together they endeavored to enforce the infamous " Book of Sports,'' which enjoined for the afternoon of the Lord's Day games of various kinds, dancing and general hilarity. (See Appendix A.) 'I'he plainest principles of religious liberty were violated. Good and honest men like Prynne and Bastwick and Leighton, were imprisoned, pilloried, and their noses slit, because their views of the Scripture, and manner ot worship, differed from those of the Primate. '1'h.jy acted accord- HAS BEEN UN PROTESTANTIZED. ^^ the ing to the dictates of an enlightened conscience. Englishmen could not endure this state of affairs with patience. Dr. Vaughan remarks : " That Church would be a superstitious and intolerant one, and she paid the penalty ; that King would be a t} rannical King, and would deal treacherously with his subjects to the last, and the natural consequences followed." The civil war ensued, brought on by Charles and Laud, and they paid the penalty of embroiling the nation in fratricidal strife with their lives. The clergy who had given aid and comfort to the Royalists, suffered with their friends. They were ejected from their livings, but were allowed one-fifth of their stipend for their support. We cannot justify this wholesale sequestration of the clergy; but the persecution that the Puritans had undergone for over eighty years from the Crown and Bishops, had taught them a lesson which they were not slow to learn. The blame must largely rest on their instructors. "Curses, like chickens, come home to roost." For these acts of retaliation, however, the Puritans suffered in their turn. The principles of civil and religious liberty were understood but by few in that age. Puritanism, when allied with the civil power, became oppressive and exacting. Cromwell, the greatest English ruler of that century, with an enlighiened fnrcs^ght, en- deavored to check and allay these tendencies. He urged forbear- ance, telling the parties that if they disregarded his advice, " You will be thrust to the wall. Charles Stuart will come back, and you will be all left to feed upon your liitle crotchets as best you may, and very sorry provender you will find it, I warrant you." THE RESTORATION. You are aware of the sequel. The nation wearied with agita- tion, sought rest in the return of the monarch. The unanimity with which he was welcomed was largely owing to the declaration he made at Breda, in which he promised to grant " liberty to •tender consciences," and pledged his royal word that no mnn should be « disquieted or called in question for differences ol opinion in religious matters." (See Appendix B.) After the King's return, conferences were held by the two an- tagonistic parties, with rcf( rence to the Church qu; stion. The Pu- ritans trusted that an accommodating spirit would b.; manilested w jwi^»i ww * i ii Hrtw fi 'i Hi>^iMf' ' »i!.iiW l a '^^'t3ateflaKfias3-s 28 HO IV THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER by the Episcopal party, and their differences satisfactorily settled upon the principles similar to those proposed by Archbishop Usher the most learned man of the age, a few years previous. Ihe difficulties might have been happily arranged but for the constitutional habit of lying, characteristic of the Stuarts.* But^ there was no thought of concession with respect to Puritan consciences in the minds of Charles and his advisers Their ma:n object appears to have been to change the Prayer Book anee Chth o/e*;! 'a^'^^rS °' ""t ri;:;;™Li\'''rr"'.''\'^='= -^'-^-^=" *•" '^ r h f '' "■''"'■ ""=>• f™"! » b= imposed bv law on te whole nation, are mainly responsible. In 'he word of .'::; 'whr:h"r:are*ri[7:°"H:-^ T'l ""■""-"'" .ives the «rs, Jnst canse^;^.:!:. b^^ X-^^^'Lr ration upon a just cause proeeeding." ^ John Hales, a learned Episcopalian of this age puts this things of doubtful disputation liath been in all ages the erounri nf schism and separation ; and he that scparates'fom fuspecled op.n.,ns IS not the .separatist." Chillingworth also, in hi" mmot tal Work, has most logically elaborated this princi;ie Having thus described the leaders in this work of the final Revi- ZLo vrrr""'^"''^' ^'^^"°^^^ ^h^y '"'-^dein the Prayer Book of Khzabeth and James. ^f'lyer CHANGKS IN THE OFFICES FOR BAPTISM First What did they do with the Offices for Baptism .> ' They restored the words <' sanctify this water to the mystical washW away of sin;" words which, while in the original service book ^ IS49. were carefully excluded from that of 1553. In their present connection the words became a prayer of'Lnsec^atioTSr spcct to the element of water. <' Here we have," says Fisher " the very basis of the. /«..^...,«,«._a remnant, too, L the old tene of 7nznsck,ncuM>on, already repeatedly noticed, and which on borP^ "M"" '"""^^ ^° ''" ^"^'"'^ °^ Transubstantial" l:: ii::; rfi^vr^^ '"''- -' - --^ ^---^ - -p-^^ .om Jncob, ^ jnjii^adnui^ Uc^ r^^j^j^^^ p^ the hand, of every intelligent giscol^^rayman "'^''^'' '"' ^''°""^ ''^ '^ "■^^'WaihJiKi.-.t HAS BEEN UNPROTESTANTIZED. 31 15, says: " The consecration prayer was omitted, on the ground, as we learn from the Scripta Anglkana of Bucer, that it implied a recognition of the superstitious, un<^criptural, and essentially Pagan notion of a magical transmutation {magicas rcrum miita- tiones) of the material element employed in this sacrament. Yet this prayer, as it stands now in our Prayer Book, is worse than the one which appeared in Edward VI. first book. That prayer had, indeed, the words, " who hath ordained the element of water for the regeneration of thy faithful people," but this expression rendered less objectionable by the addition of " the faithful peo- ple," is still further qualified by the concluding words, "that by the power of thy word all those who shall be baptized therein may be spiritually regenerated;" while the prayer now in our I.iturgy says, without any qualifications: "Sanctify this water to the mystical washing away of sin ;" thereby leading us back to the gross superstition attached to Baptism in the fourth and fol- lowing centuries, when prayer was made to God to sanctify the 7vater, and to give it grace and power, &c.; and when, by a number of ceremonies, men were taught that the water was transclemated and ob;ained an inherent power to wash away sin." By this act the Commissioners of 1662 plainly manifested their sympathy with medieval doctrine, and here was a marked step in the direction of Rome. It iias been argued of late by those who have desired to recon- cile the Prayer Book witli the Bible, that the Reformers made their assertion of spiritual regeneration in connection witli baptism on the ground of the answers of the sponsors, and on the fahh of those wlio thus presented the infant. But to decide the question that that was not the doctrine of '.he Prayer Book, the Commis- sioners of Charles (in contradistinction to the action of the Refor- mers) made the positive declaration witti regard to the spiritual regeneration of the child by Baptism, in the office of P.ivate Baptism, where no sponsorial answers are required, but when this emphatic assertion irnn ediately follows the simple act of administering the rite. " When, therefore," says Fisher, "the Church has come in this way to annex, as a necessary adjunct to the performance of Infant Baptism, so positive a declaration of its regenerative efficacy, she has, we submit, pronounced most unmistakeably her own doctrine upon the subject, and excluded every artifice by , $9 HOW THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER which the real meaning of her Baptismal offices might be honestly evaded. " Here we have a second clear, reactionary step towards Rome. '^ Again, a Rubric was added to the office for Infant Baptism, in these words: " It is certain, by God's word, that children ^vhich are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubt- edly saved." Here Baptism is made, undeniably, the ground of the salvation of inf^ints. If it be said that the Church has not pronounced upon the condition of children unbaptized, and therefore does not deny the >..,/,///,, of their salvation, why, then, did the revisers of 1662 append this Rubric to the- Burial Service ? " Here it is to be noted, that the office ensuing is not to be used for any that die unbaptized, or excommunicated, or have laid violent hands upon themselves." If these unbaptized infants are fit for heaven why are the words of the English Burial Service too sacred to be used over their remains ? We thank God that the little ones fall into different hands, in the next world, from the men who pre- pared this so much lauded Book of Common Prayer. Are we surprised that Baxter, who was thought worthy of a bishopric declared : " of the forty sinful terms of communion with the Church party, if thirty-nine were taken away, and only that Rubric, respecting the salvation of infants dying shortly after their baptism, were continued, yet they (/. e. he and his col- leagues) could not conform." Here, then, we have number ihne of the changes in the direc- tion of Rome. 'J'he ['uritans had desired that parents mi-ht be allowed to pre- sent their own children at the font, and to dispense with the intervention of other sponsors. To render the arrangement im- possible, a Rubric was added for the first time, enjoining three god-paients for every child. LESSONS FROM THE APOCRYPHA. Again, it is well known that the severance of the Apocrypha from the Cannon of Scripture, has always been, with the partisans of Rome, a prominent topic of denunciation against the reformers and their work. The especial repugnance of the Puritans to the use of the MAS BEEN UN PROTESTANTIZED. 33 Apocrypha, was manifested by their petition at the Hampton Court conference in 1604. " Down to the present period,' says an author, (Anglican Reformation, p. 46, ) " there were comparatively but little of the Apocrypha used in the Calendar ; and even that little, by an 'admonition' prefixed to the second book of Homilies, in 1564, the officiating clerg\'man was not only authorized to omit and Substitute in its place some more suitable portion of Canonical Scripture, but he was recommended to do so. The Convocation of i66r, however, and the Act of Uniformity, based upon their proceedings, not only introduced other portions of the Apocrypha with the daily Lessons, but rendered it imperative upon every clergyman to read them.'' "The reinsertion," says Fisher, " upon this occasion, of the book of ' Bel and the Dragon,' in the Calendar of Lessons, was intended as a special indignity upon Baxter and his collengues." Here is step number >«r toward Rome, and proof conclusive of the schismatical intentions of these men, as well as the absence of the Holy Spirit from their proceedings. Again, Hallam remarks: "The Puritans having always ob- jected to the number of Saints' Days, the bishops ordered a few more, more than sixty of the mythical and semi-historical heroes of monkish legends." And, adds Isaac Taylor, " for the chari- table purpose of annoying those who objected to all commemora- tions of the kind, the names of 2. few Popes were included in the list." Cranmer had allowed, besides Scriptural worthies, only three names to be commemorated, those of St. Michael, St. Lawrence, and St. George. Here is the ///// evidence of the Romish proclivities of these remarkable Commissioners. The open, scandalous viciousness of the character of Charles H. was most offensive to the religious portion of the nation. Nangle, an Episcopal clergyman of Dublin, remarks : " The thorough sycophancy of Sheldon, Morley and Gunning is suffi- ciently manifested in the fact, that they introduced into our Liturgy the prayer for the Parliament, in which the profligate and hypocritical Papist who then sat upon the throne of England, was designated our most religious and gracious King. We put It to the common sense of our fellow Puritans," he continues, "both in 34 ffOlV THE BOOK' OF COMMON PR A YER England and Ireland, to say, could our Prayer Book have escaped from the manipulation of such filthy hands without defilement ? Kvery honest man must answer the question in the negative, and a scrutiny (,f the changes which they actually made will justify the negation." (Tracts on Revision, p. 13.) It must be remembered, however, that each party, priestly and royal, was playing into the hands of the other-one wanted the Uvmgs, the other tlie Clerical support. It is evident that neiiher had much knowledge of the religion of the Bible, or if they pos- sessed It, It was hidden under a bushel. We see no manifesta- tion of the spirit of the Master in the proceedings connected with this Revision, or in the general conduct of ecclesiastical afflurs. CHAN(;KS with respect to the LORD'S SUl'PER. We must simply allude to the changes in the same Romish direction in the Office for the Lord's Supper. They are not very noticeable- ; and with one who is not very familiar with the Theo- logical tenets of these Carolinian divines, and with the Romish controversy, they would readily escape notice. Elizabeth, how- ever, as we have seen, had so thoroughly tampered with the work of Edward and Cranmer, as to leave but little necessary to be done now 111 the same direction. A High Chruch writer, Alexander Knox, refers to the"/Vm. dtom' manner .11 which the changes were made by these artful ecclesiastics. He says: "The revisers seized the opportunity (contrary to what the public was reckoning on) to make our Ponnuluiies not more Puritanical, but more Catholic They effected this, without doubt, stealthily; and, to all appearances by the minutest alteration; but to compare tiic Communion Service, as it now stands, especially its Rubrics, with the form in which wo find It, previously to that transr.ction, will be to discover that without any change of features which would cause alarm a new spirit was then breathed into our Communion Service." ' ^^ Stealthily:- th;it is the word, which expresses rightly the man- ner in whch the Ritualists are giving our Church now a fresh im- petius toward Rome-such as the allowed use of lights, ineense, altar cioths, colored vestments, bowing to the altar, elevation of the elements, the use of Hynms Ancient and Modern, and the in- troduction of Sunday-school books defending those practises and the doctrines on which they rest ; and bishops sanctioning by HAS nEEN UN PROTESTANTIZED. if their presence and absence of rebuke, all this mixture of Roman- ism and Paganism. Aye, - stealth,!)- r according to the pulse of the people, a silent current bearing the vessel on to the rapids, to be at last hurled over the ;.recipi(:e into the Roman gulf of impenetrable and irretrievable darkness. "Well," says Dr. I'usey, the head of this movement, in his Kirenicon, " the build- ing arises with-ut noise or hammer. Never, I am satisfied, was the work of (lod so wide and deep as now because the leaven which was hidden in the meal has worked secretly." I will briefly notice these stealthy changes. 1 have stated with respect to the Rubric of . 55 2, where, with reference to the posture of kncelhuj, it is declared, no "adoration is done, or ought to be done, either unto the sacramental brea.l and wine then bodily leceivcd, or unto any real or essential presence there being of (Mirist's natural He^h nnd blood," one of Kli/.abeth's Roman- izing steps was to expunge altogether this denial of the " real presence.' tt 1 • What did these shrewd Sacramentarians of Charles 11. do in this connection ? They reinstated the Rubric of Kdward, but changed it in its most important feature, by expunging the words « real and essential," and substituting the word " corporal in its stead, therebv conveying the idea that the Church believes in ih. '■■real ami ascunal" piesence of Christ in the bre.td and vvine. but one which is not -corporal." or "physical," or " sensible. \nd it is on this change in this Rubric that the Ritualists and Sacramentarians have planted themselves, and the.r position can- not be shaken. Siys I)r i'usey. " I have explained the word 'corporal by « carnal ' or ' physical,' because the framers of this Rubric deliber- ately rejected the denial of the words ' real and -.ssential,' which stood in the first Arliclus under Edward VI., and substituted the word 'corporal.' The statement of the English Catechism that the body and blood of Christ ' were verily and indeed taken and received in the Lord's Supper,' taken in connection with the history of this Rubric, settles conclusively what is the doctrine ot .he Church of England on this point." Dr. Jacob remarks, p. 14, « The other Revisior, at the restoration of Charles II., after the Savoy Conference ( 1660), restored the Rubric about the Kneeling of Communicants, with a significant alteration, which md.caleslhe Sacramental leanings of the lime, and made another step m the 3« hOIV THE BOOK' 01' COMMON PKAYEK fwn? rl"°"""''" '""''■ ^"'' •' '^ ^° ''*^ rcmunhcred that these two additions, rcspect.vely inlroducted on these two occasions, proved partly the ground of the defendant in the notable Hcnnet ca e, a,:d thus helped to legalise a new approach to Transubstan- tiat ,.n and Ho.t-worsh p in the Church." The ablest of the Ox- ford Iract-wr„ers, Dr. Newn,an, says of these Formularies: They were drawn up for the j.urpose of inciu.ling Catholics- ?rleTthL!'"' '''" '°' ''" *"'^"" '" "'"'^'^ ''^^'^ -•-" altern.11%"" '"T' '° ^^'^ ''"^'^'^ ^r^^r^^erM- and the only Rev T J ^"y honest, sincere and enlightened I'rotestant, is ■Ke vision or Secession. We have, therefore, in this Act a sixth Romeward ^tep "WhTr ^'''"'""' ''''' '"'"■""' '" '^"^ ""^'''^^^ these' words: Wherefore, .t is our (,uty to render most humble thanks to Al- n.ghty Cod, our Heavenl Father, fur that he hath given hi Sor^ our Saviour, Jesus Chnst, not only to die for us but also to be' bill ' H Z r '' ''' "°'>' '^"^^'"'^"^ «^ '^'■^ '-ly -^' blood Here the Sacrament, as a means of grace, is put on an ^..«/.(>^vv.th the word of (^od, and not .M. if „, /his : te- ment appears not to have suited -hese stealthy Sacramentarians ■ so they s:ruck out all allusion to the word of (]od in this passage s a means of grace, and altered the statem nt to read thus: "but ment ' °"'' '''"''"'' ^°'"' """' '"^^""^"^^ *" '^at floly Sacra- Wcarenotsurprisedat the remark of Fisher, p. 3, , : « We cer tamly hold that however slight the appearance, a more objection-" able alteration-or one mure palpably indicative of the old med i^val notion of .,,mz;««r.- the Revision of Elizabeth, 1559; of James 1 , 1604; of Charles II., 1662; of Bishop Seabury, 1789; which last is the present Book of the Protestant Episcopal Church. The other /c«r .• the Revision of Edward VI., 1552; of Wil- liam III., 1689; of Bishop White, 1785; of Bishop Cummins, 1874. The Revisions of Elizabeth, of James, of Charles, and Ser^ury, have shaped and controlled Protestant Episcopacy through its whole history, from the tine of Elizabeth. The Revision of Edward was in use but one year ; that of Wil- liarn failed to become the law of the 1 .nd through the intolerance, bigotry and ignorance of the rural r.ergy, who were of a class like the Bourbons, forgetting nothing and learning nothing ; the Revision of Bishop White, was in use but four years; the llevision of Bishop Cummins, wliich under God, is destined to be the Revision of the Episcopal Church of the future. There is ground for this confident expectation, because this latest Book has been reconstructed by men fully competent for the purpose, who have profited by all the experience of the past, avoiding the mistakes and errors which have cramped and dwarfed the Ameri- can Protestant Episcopacy into one of the smallest sects of the nation, a sect which has reached its climax, and is destined to be •>w" i,>t!mtm-*o''**~mf,* f |o NOW TJtE noOK OF COAfAfOM PRAYER superseded by the legitimate genuine successor of the Anglican Reformers. 'ihe Reformed Episcopal Church, in the eyes of the Protestant masses of this land, will stand related to the body from which it has emerged, as Christianity stood related to Judaism. It wi'l oppose the same tendencies lo Ritualism, tradition, arrogance, and exclusiveness, which prevaileil in the Jewish Communion of the first century, and which are now reproduced with suclistriliing similarity In the I'rotestant Episcopal budy of the nineteenth cen- tury. 'i'he Reform under Bishop Cummins is a Schism, precisely as was the Reform under Archbishop Cranmer, a cutting loose of men enlightened by the Holy Spirit; an emerging into clearei Gospel light, into higher spiritual freedom. Men intelligent, unprejudiced and free, in accepting Ep'sco- pacy, will not long hesitate in choosing between a new and vigor- ous schism based on the Bible, and Truth in its simplicity and in- tegrity, and the remains of an old and declining sch sm, based on tradition and medievalism, and destined to recede gradually to the hole from which it was dug — between a Prayer Book the fruit of the Evangelical Alliance and one the result of the unchiri- tableness and fraternal discord of the Civil war of the Common- wealth. Christianity was confined at one time to an upper room, " the number of disciples together being about one hundred and twenty." Israel atone time tremb'ed before the Philistine, but the small smooth stone of a brave Hebrew youth, directed by the hand of the Almighty, smote the giant. God was with Israel, therefore Israel triumphed. If the Reformed Prayer Book, where it differs from the one which it materially modifies, presents Truth, the God of Truth, the Living Head of the Church, will ble.ss it. He who controls the hearts of men will draw them to this Body, as the doves crowd to their windows. No weapons for.ned against the Truth can prosper. Bishop Cummins, by a Public proclamation, is declared deposed from the office of a Bishop in the House of God, according to Protestant Episcopal Law — a law based on Roman Catholic Custom, but antagonistic to Protestant principles. The next week a whole con- gregation of Episcopalians, a vigorous and energetic parish, aban- -^1 IfA8 BEEN UNPROTESTANTIZED. St don#hat communion, ani place themselves under the supervision of this vicum of ecclesiastical law. Your pastor is to-night en- couraging those separatists by his presence and counsel. Brethren, take courage ! The skies are bright. Never did an Fxclesia tical movement have such an encoura^jing, hopeful pros- pect before it. You are greatly honored in being permitted to lead the enter- prise in this metropolis of the continent. Let the spirit of the Master characterize your work ! Like the Master go about doing good. Save those thai are ready to perish ! Let your salt have savor! Let your lamp have oil! Let your light shine so as to lead others to Jesus ! And thus you will not only aid in removing detrimental error, which has encrusted the body of Christ, but you will save souls, who will prove your crown of personal rejoicing when the earthly tabernacle,with its rites and ceremonies has given pla.e to the house not made with hands eternal in the heavens. ,,.^, APPENDIX. APPENDIX A. From the " Book of Sports." Jeffreason's ' ■ Book of the Clergy," II. p. 135: « Our pleasure likewise is, that the Bishop of the Diocese take the like straight order with all the Puritans and Precisians within the same, either constraining them to conform themselves or leave the country according to the laws of our kingdom, and Canons of our church, and so to strike equally on both hands against the con- temners of our autho ity, and adversaries of our church. And as for our good people's lawful recreation, our pleasure likewise is, that af:er the end of Divine S:'rvice, our good people be not disturbed, letted or discouraged from any lawful recreation, such as dancing, either men or women, archery for men, leaping, vaulting, or any other harmless recreation; or from having of M.iy games, Whitsun- ales,and moiris dances, and the setting up of May poles, and other sports therewith added, so as the same be had in due and conve- nient time, without impediment or neglect of Divine service, and that the women shall have leave to carry rushes to the church for the decorating of it according to their old custom And we further will, that publication of this our command be made by order from the Bishops, through all the parish churches of their several dioceses respectively." Jeffreason remarks, p. 132: "Charles followed up the affair of the Somersetshire wakes, by republishing at Laud's suggestion, the fatal 'Book of Sports,' whereby his subjects were invite J to show their loyalty to their King, and their contempt of the Puri- tans, by spending their Sunday afternoons in riotous merriment. It is not too much to say that by exasperating the Puritan gentry and commonality against the Bishops, by demonstrating to intelli- gent Englishmen how completely the supreme Head of the Church 54 APPENDIX. was a puppet in the hand of the arrogant and fantastic Primate, and by planting in the minds of simple folks an unreasonable and unjust conviction of their Sovereign's hostility to religion, this untimely republication of an unwise proclamation did more than any other act of Charles' long career of blunders to bring him to the scaffold." Richard Baxter, in his autobiography, writes: "When I heard my own father so reproached, and perceived the drunkards were the foremost in the reproach, 1 perceived it was their malice ; for my father never scrupled Common Prayer nor ceremonies, nor spake against the bishops, not even so much as prayed but bv a book of form, being not even acquainted with any that did other- wise; but only for reading the Scripture and the life to come he was reviled commonly by the name of Puritan, Precisian, and hypo- crite ; and so were the godly and conformable ministers that lived anywhere m the country near us, not only by our neighbors, but by the qommon talk of the valgar rabble of all about us," APPENDIX B. Declaration ok Kinc Ciiari.ks at Breda. "We desiring and ordaining that henceforward all notes of dis- cord, separation, and difference of parties, be utterly abolished among our subjects, whom we invite and conjure to a perfect union among themselves, under our protection, for the resettlement of our just rights and theirs, in a free parliament, by which, upon the word of a king, we will be advised. "And because the passion and uncharitableness of the times have produced several opinions in rehgion, by which men are engaged in parties and animosities against each other, which, when they shall hereafter unite in a freedom of conversation, will be com- posed, or better understood ; we do declare a liberty to tender con- sciences, and that no man shall be discpiieted or called in question for differences of opinion in matters of religion which do not dis- turb the peace of the kingdom ; and that we shall be ready to consent to such an act of parliament as, upon mature deliberation shall be offered to us, for the full granting that indulgence." " Given under our sign manual and privy signet at our Court at Breder, the 14th day of April, 1660, in the twelfth year ot our reign." . • iii i i iii iiiiii Kn ii rj u r i m ia nfa ^ „-.,?, APPENDIX. 55 In October of the same year the king "in a published Declar- ation renewed his promise at Breda for religious toleration." — Stephen's Introduction, p. i66. APPENDIX C. The Demands of the Puritan Party. At the restoration of Charles II., the Puritans urged upon him "the utility of a general religious union, and that it could only be effected by confining the terms of Communion to pomts wliich were deemed essential, each party conceding the rest ; " and they subsequently transmitted their proposals in writing to the King. These proposals commenced by four preliminary requests ; that serious godliness might be countenanced — that a learned and pious minister in each parish should be encouraged— that a personal pub- lic owning of the baptismal covenant should precede the admission to the Lord's Table, and that the Lord's Day should be strictly sanctified. They then intimated that Archbishop Usher's system of Episcopal government should be the groundwork of the accom- modation. This, in general terms, provided that the concerns of the church should be transacted by four Graduated Synods and a National Council. First, a parochial synod ; second, a suffragan synod ; third, a diocesan synod ; fourth, a provincial synod ; fifth, the union of the provincial synods to constitute a National Council. This " scheme was accompanied by proposals in which the dis- senting ministers acquesed in a Liturgy ; but without absolutely rejecting the surplice, the use of the cross in Baptism, the bowing at the name of Jesus, and other ceremonies, they observed that the Church Service was perfect without them ; that they were rejected by most of the Protestant Churches abroad, and that they had been the cause of much disunion and disturbance in England. They requested that none of the r ministers might be ejected from sequestered livings, the incumbents of which were dead ; that no oaths, subscriptions, or renunciation of orders, might be required of them, until there should be a general settlement of the religious concerns of the nation." (See Stephens' Notes on the Book of Common Prayer, Introduction, p. 162-3-4.) The eight following points were objected to by the Non- Con- formists, as contrary to the word of God : HiHii I S6 APPENDIX. 1. That no ministers be admitted to baptise without the pre- scribed use of the transie.it image of the cross 2. That no rninister be;.ermitted to read,or pray, or exercise the other parts of his office, that does not wear a surpL-ce. 3- That none be admitted in communion to the Lord's Supper that does not receive it kneeling; and that all ministers be en- joined to deny it to such. 4. That ministers be forced to pronounce all baptised infants to be regenerate by the Holy Ghost, whether they be the children ot Christians or not. 5. 'l^hat the ministers be forced to deliver the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ unto the unfit, both in their health and sickness; and that with personal application putting it into their hands; and that such are forced to receive it, though against their own wills in the conscience of their impenitency. 6. That ministers be forced to absolve the unfit, and that in absolute expressions. 7. That they are forced to give thanks for all whom they bury as brethren, whom God in mercy hath delivered and tal;en to himself. 8. That none may be a preacher that does not believe that there IS nothing in the Prayer Book, the Book of Ordination, and 30 Articles, that is contrary to the word of God. (Baxter's life bv Sylvester, b. I., pt. II., p. 34X.) ' ^ APPENDIX D. Among modern Episcopal writers who support the views with respect to the origin of Episcopal government presented in these lectures, are Riddle, author of Christian Antiquities, Commema- nes on the Bible and Prayer Book, and a Greek Lexicon ; Dean Goode in his " Rule of Faith," and his work on " Orders; " Litton Professor of History at Oxford, in his work on the "Church of Christ; 'Harrison on the "Church of the Fathers,' which is the most exhaustive work yet written on the subject; Dean Stanley in his account of the " Church of AIe.xandria," in his " Histo.y of the Eastern Church;" Lightfoot, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, in h;s Dissertations " attached to his notes on Philippians ; Jacob in his masterly work on " Ecclesiastical Polity;" Mossman in his History of the Catholic Churcli of Jesus Christ for the first two APPENDIX, 57 Centuries;" Dean Alford, in his Commentaries; and Professor Smith, in liis Bible Dictionary, have presented practically the same view. In this country, we have Dr. Stone's work on the "Church Universal," Vx. Sparrow's sermon on the "Christian Priesthood. ■' Among the laity are Ganatt on the "Constitu- tion of ihe Christian Ciiurch ; " Seely's « Essays on the Church ;" Bowdler on "Apos'.olic Succession," and Dr. Ira Warren's work entitled "The Cause and Cure of Puseyism." The concessions of ihis great body of eminent and learned Episcopalians render all efforts to sustain exclusive views of Epis- copacy futile and hoi eless. APPENDIX E. One remarkable instance on record shows conclusively what were the views held in the reign of Elizabeth wiih respect to Presbyterian orders. It is the license given to John Morrison, a Scotch Presbyterian minister, by Archbishop Grindal, to exercise all the functions of the ministry without reordination. The license says : William Aubrey, Doctor of Laws, legally exercising ihe office of Vicar General in S;.iritual,and of Chief Functionary of the Arclv bishopric of Canlerbury, to our beloved in Christ, John Morrison, M. A., born in the Kingdom of Scotland, eternal health in the Lord. Wh.reas, We have heard on credible testimony that you, the aforesaid John Morrison, about five years past, in the town of Garvet, in ihc couniy of Lothian in the Kingdom of Scotland, was admitted and ordained to Holy Orders and the sacred ministry, by the impo- sition o: hands, according to the laudable ibrm and rite of tlie Re- formed Church of Scotland; and where is the said congregation of that county of Lothian is conformable to the orthodox fai'.h and pure religion now received, and by public authority estab- lished in this realm of England ; we tlierefore approving,' and rat- ifying as iar as in us lies, and by right we may, the form of your or. dination and advancement to tliis function alone in the manner aforesaid, grant and impart to you in the Lord, with ail good will, as fivr as in us lies and by right we may, and with the consent and mandate of the most reverent Father in Christ, pAlnumd, by Divine. Providence Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate ot all England and ^Metropolitan, to us signified, license and faculty in these orders by you taken, to celebrate divine offices, to admin- ister the Sa.ramen's, and purely and sincerely preach the word of 58 APPENDIX. God, either in the Latin or vulgar tongue, according to the talents which God hath given you. In testimony whereof we have caused the seal which we use in like cases to be affixed to these presents. Given the sixth day of April, 1582. The expression, " in cases,'' in this precise legal-like document proves that the custom of thus licensing Presbyterian ministers prevailed at that time. As the Church of Scotland was then Presbyterian, and no bishops Episcopally ordained held office in that country, the case is settled beyond contradiction. On this case of Morrison, Hopkins in his work entitled " The Puritans and Queen Elizabeth," vol.11., p. 112, remarks: "Whether other like licenses were issued or not, one such high official document is sufficient for our purpose ; as deci- sive as fifty. So clear is it taken from the Statute Book, and from the practice of the English Church, that at least till 15C2, the general sentiment of that church ' approved and ratified ' other ountains of priestly virtue than its own, and acknowledged other than the hands of mitred heads as having the ordaining power." This case settles the point, that the dispute concerning Travers and Whittingham of the same reign, was not with regard to the matter of their Presbyterian orders, but on account of irregulari- ties of another sort. These statements are taken from a series of articles in defense of Bishop Cummins' statement, prepared by the writer of these Lec- tures, and signed " Ilistoricus." Entered according to Act of Congress, in tlie year 1874, liy Mason G.aixaghbR, in the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Wosliington. ^i :A' mm>*^mmmmmm^Mi:-