IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) V.A 1.0 I.I 1.25 hi|2£ 12.5 U£ 2.0 1.8 U i 1.6 /I 7 '/ >^ €^ «^ :\ \ «» * v^^ '^^ <^ u ;\ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibiiographiques 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, o7 which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checiced below. D D D D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou peilicul6e □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes g6ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (I.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bieue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparalssent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires; L'Inttitut a microf iimi le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a M possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m6thode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ n Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommag6es Pages restored and/oi Pages restaur6es et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxe( Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piqu6es Pages detached/ Pages ddtach^es Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality indgale de I'impression Includes supplementary materii Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponibie I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ r~| Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ r~7| Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ 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 feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6x6 film6es 6 nouveau de fapon 6 obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est fiimd au ^aux de reduction indlqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X ^ ^ 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia University L'exemplaire fllm6 fut reproduit grAce A la g6n6rosit6 de: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia University The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Les images 3uivantes ont 6ti reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettotd de l'exemplaire filmi, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimie sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commengant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par (a dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole —^^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds S des taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir de Tangle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 TO THE READER. Remember that this History of the Prayer Book is a re- print of Bishop Mants' great work. Examine carefully the progress of the work, the number of changes, by whom made, and under what circumstances and dates. Study minutely the whole work, and particularly the Address to the Members of the Church of England, every line of which is most important, which goes to shew how necessarj- it is that another revision should be made, especially in and for Canada, omitting obsolete Kubricks, ambiguities and superfluitieSi but keeping the Liturgy as it is, "and does agree with the Thirty- nine Articles. Do let us have some degree of consistency, and wipe out all cause of discord. The First Rubric was condemned in part by our Provincial Synod, in 1868. by a unanimous resolution ; but it is not known outside the Synod walls, and so long as we neglect to re-print our Prayer Book with that resolution to take the place of the First Rubric, so long will be confusion and conflicting interests tolerated. The Rubric at the beginning of the Catechism reads thus : " The Curate of every Parish shall dilligently, upon Sundays and Holy-days, after the second Lesson at Evening Prayer, openly in the Church, instruct and examine so many children of his Parish sent unto him, as he shall think convenient, in some part of this Catechism.'''' Again, the order for the use of the Pra}er Book is headed thus : The Order for Morning PRAviiR Daily Throughout the Year. Now it is well known that these Rubrics are obsolete in this country, and very properly so, but why require our clergy to promise to obey such orders "i and why have them there if they cannot be obeyed ? The word Priest is introduced without any authority from the New Testament, Our Saviour gave no titles or n;unes to those he sent to preach, except the twelve whom He called Apostles, Luke 6 ri ; in the Epistles, we have Elders. Acts 14, 23, and 15, 6 ; Bishops and Deacons, ist Timothy 3, i and 8 verses, IMiilippians 1 1 ; Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers, Eph. 4, II ; Ministers, Romans 13, 6 ; i Cor. 3, 5 ; Preachers, i Tim. 2, 7 ; and all (the whole nation) are called a Royal Priesthood, ist Peter 2, 9. The above are all the various names used by the Apostles, as far as ascertained, but no mention of a Priest, except that Our Saviour is the everlasting High Priest for us Why then use the word ? and in the Rubrics so continually prefix it to sentences, which are read by the Deacons if they are presfent Let consis- tency speak out. and correct errors, or even one if it is proven to be such. Should Revision take place, it will be the most con- servative work ever attempted, because tiothing is intended beyond the correction of a few of the Rubrics which should be removed^ as the late Bishop Fulford said himself. AMICUS. J T i'7^ ISr } • s AN AUTHENTIC HISTORY OF THE PRAYER BOOK, >^ \ ,FIVE REVISIONS, A N D TH E PERIODS AT WHICH THKV WERE MADE: SHOWING FROM WHKNCK KACIl OK CUE PRESK.XT CONFLICTING I^AKIIKS IN rilF, CHURCH I'RKSrMK TO DERIVE IHKIR ArniORITIES. BY AM ICUS, IlnoUilcbnc is -Strength. MONTREAL: "*" "^ J. STARKK .t CO.. PRINTERS, 54 ST. FRANCOIS XAVIER STREET, 1874. t .AtnS < A, ( j I AN AUTHENTIC HISTORY THE PRAYER BOOK, ITS FIVE REVISIONS, A N D T H E PERIODS AT WHICH THEY WERE MADE; SHOWING FROM WHENCE EACH OF THE PRESENT CONFLICTING PARTIES IN THE CHURCH PRESUME TO DERIVE THEIR AUTHORITIES. BY AMICUS "llnotulcfigc is c^trcngth." MONTREAL: J. STARKE & CO., PRINTERS, S4 ST. FRANCOIS XAVIER STREET. 1874. i.i .1 '\ . PEEFACE. The Compiler of this little work desires to acknowledge the fact that the History of the Prayer Book here presented to the Members of the Church of England, is a re-print of the Introduction to the Book of " Common Prayer," edited by Richard Mant, D.D., Bishop of Killaloe, published at Oxford, London, A.D. 1820, wherein he quotes from Wheatley, Dr. Nicholls, and Bishop Tomline, also Jeremy Taylor, with many other high authorities of the Church ; consequently, it is but reasonable to hope that this work will be read with great confidence and satisfaction, as it gives a most perfect account of how the labour of compiling the Book was begun and continued through its various stages, from the Latin (or Roman works) A.D. 1537 to A.D. 1661. The present object is to put within the reach of those who take an interest in the struggle going on, an authoritative and intelligent history of what was done at the time of the Reformation, especially while efforts are now being made in various countries, including Canada, for another Revision, with a view to harmonize that Book with the Gospels and Writings of the Apostles, and to unite, as much as possible, all true Christian desciples of our blessed Lord and vSaviour Jesus Christ, as common brethren. There is, also, added several other items of great interest bearing on the various subjects of controversy, which are of equal authority with the first part of the work. As it is generally admitted that *^ knowledge is strength" so may this little re-print prove a tower of strength, and enlighten all Churchmen as to facts, and point out their duty, to be followed up by actions of no uncertain sound, is the earnest prayer of the Compiler. AMICUS. Montreal, 1874. 57v-^f VERBATIM REPRINT OF THE HISTORY OF THE PRAYER BOOK. The Original of " The Book of Common Prayer," and the SEVERAL alterations WHICH WERE AFTERWARDS MADE IN IT. Befoue the Reformation the Liturgy was only in Latin, bein- a collection of prayers, made up partly of some ancient iorms nsed in the primitive Church, and partly of some others of a later original, accommodated to the superstitions which had by various means crept by degrees into the Church of Rome, and were from thence derived to other Churches m comnmnion with it ; like what we may see in the present lioman Breviary and Missal. And these being estabUshed by the law of the land, and the canons of the Church, no other could publickly be made use of; so that those of the laity, who had not the advantage of a learned education, could not join with them, or be any otherwise edified by them. And' besides, they being mixed with addresses to the samts, adoration of the host, images, &c., a great part of the worship was in itself idolatrous and profane. But when the nation in King Henry VIIL's time was disposed to a reformation, it was thought necessary to coiTCct and amend these offices ; and not only have the services of the Church in the English or vulgar tongue, (that men imght -pray, not with the spirit only, but with the understanding also;" and "that he, who occupied the room of the unlearned, mird'it understand that unto which he was to say Amen;" ncn'eoably to the precept of St. Paul-L Cor. xiv., 15, 16,) but also to abolish and take away all that was idolatrous and 6 superstitious, in order to restore the service of the Church to its primitive purity. For it was not the design of our Eeformers (nor indeed ought it to have been) to introduce a new fomi of worship into the Church, but to correct and amend the old one ; and to purge it from those gross corrup- tions which had gradually crept into it ; and so to render the divine service more agreeable to the Scriptures, and to the doctrine and practice of the primitive Church in the best and purest ages of Cliristianity. In which reformation they pro- ceeded gradually, according as they were able. And first, the Convocation appointed a committee in tlie year of our Lord 1537, to compose a book, which was called " The godly and pious institution of a Christian man ;" con- taining a declaration of the Lord's Prayer, the Ave Maria, the Creed, the Ten Commandments, and the Seven Sacraments, &c., wliich book was again published in the year 1540, and 1543, with corrections and alterations, under the title of " A necessary doctrine and erudition for any Christian man;" and, ; f as it is expressed in that preface, was "set furthe by the \ King, with the advyse of his Clergy, the Lords bothe spirituall ' and temporal!, with the nether house of Parliament, having bothe sene and liked it very well." Also in the year 1540, a committee of bishops and divines was appointed by King Henry VIII., at the petition of the Convocation, to reform the rituals and offices of the Churcli. And what was done by this Committee for reform- ing the Offices was reconsidered by the Convocation itself two or three years afterwards, namely in February 1542 3. And in the next year the King and his Clergy ordered the • prayers for processions, and litanies, to be put into English, and to be publickly used. And finally, in the year 1545 the King's Primer came forth, wherein were contained, amongst other things, the Lord's Prayer, Creed, Ten Commandments, Venite, Te Deum, and other hymns and collects in English ; and several of them in the same version in which we now use tliem. And this is all that appears to have been 1 done in relation to liturgical matters in the reij'n of Kin^^ Henry VIII. In the year 1547, the first of King Edward VI., Decem- ber the second, the Convocation declared the opinion, " nidlo reclamante," that the Communion ought to be administered to aU persons under " both kinds." Whereupon an Act of Parliament was made, ordering the Communion to be so administered. And then a committee of bishops, and other learned divines, was appointed to compose "an uniform order of communion, according to the rules of Scripture, and the use of the primitive Church." In order to do this, the Com- mittee repaired to Windsor Castle, and in that retirement, within a few days, drew up that form which is printed in Bishop Sparrow's collection. And this being immediately brought into use, the next year the same persons, being impowered by a New Commission, prepared themselves to enter upon a yet nobler work ; and in a few months time finished the whole Liturgy, by drawing up pubHc offices not only for Sundays and HoHdays, but for Baptism, Con- firmation, Matrimony, Burial of the Dead, and other special occasions; in which the forementioned office for the holy Communion was inserted, with many alterations and amend- ments. And the whole book being so framed, was set forth ''by the common agreement and full assent both of the ParHament and Convocations Provincial ;" that is, the two Convocations of the Provinces of Canterbury and York. The Committee appointed to compose this Liturgy were Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury. Thomas Goodrich, Bishop of Ely. Henry Holbech, aUas Eandes, Bishop of Lincoln. George Day, Bishop of Chichester. John Skip, Bishop of Hereford. Thomas Thirlby, Bishop of Westminster. Nicholas Ridley, Bishop of Rochester. Dr. William May, Dean of St. Paul's, London. Dr. John Taylor, Dean of Lincoln. I I \ 8 ti TJii. Simon Heynes, Dean of Exeter. Dr. John Eedmayne, Master of Trinity College, Cam- bridge, Dr. Richard Cox, Dean of Christ Clmrch, Oxford. Mr. Thomas Robertson, Archdeacon of Leicester. Thus was our excellent Liturgy comjiiled by Martyrs and Confessors, together with divers other learned bishops and divines ; and being revised and approved by the archbishops, bishops and clergy of both Provinces of Canterbury and York, was then confirmed by the King and the three Estates in Parliament, in the year 1548, who gave it this just enconium namely, " which at this time By the Aid of the Holy Ghost with uniform agreement is of them concluded, set forth, &c." This Common Prayer Book is frequently called the first l^ook of Edward the Sixth, or the Book of the second year of Edward the Sixth. But about the end of the year 1550, or the beginning of 1551, some exceptions were taken at some things in tliis book, which were thought to savour too much of superstition. To remove these objections, therefore. Archbishop Cranmer pro- posed to review it : and to this end called in the assistance of Martin Bucer, and Peter Martyr, two foreigners, whom he had invited over from the troubles in Germany ; who, not understanding the English tongue, had Latin versions pre- pared for them : one Alesse, a Scotch divine, translating it on purpose for the use of Bucer; and Martyr being furnished with the version of Sir John Cheke, who liad also formerly translated it into Latin. The following were the most con- siderable additions and alterations that were then made ; some of which must be allowed to be good : namely, the addition of the Sentences, Exhortation, Confession, and Absolution, at the beginning of the Morning and Evening Services, which in the first Common Prayer Book began with the Lord's Prayer. The other changes were the removing of some rites and ceremonies retained in the former book ; such as the use of " Oil in Baptism ; " the " unction of the sick ; " " prayers i c, Gain- ed, sr. tyrs anil ops and ibishops, nd York, ;tates in nconium .Y Ghost •rth, &c." rst ]^ook :* Edward inning of ;his book, bion. To mer pro- istance of tvhoni he who, not ions pre- ting it on furnished formerly most con- ,de ; some ; addition )lution, at ;es, which he Lord's some rites as the use " prayers for s(juls departed," both in tlie Comnuniion Oftice, anO in that for the Burial of the Dead ; the leaving out of the " invo- (lation of the Holy Clhost" in the consecration of the eucharist, and the prayer of " Oblation " that was used to follow it ; the (tmitting of the rubrick, that ordered " water " to be mixed with wine, with several other lest material variations. The " habits " also, that were prescribed by the former book, were ordered l)y this to be laid aside ; and, lastly, a rubrick was added at the end of the Communion office to explain the reason of " kneeling" at the Sacrament. The book thus revised and altered was again confirmed in Parliament in the year 1551. It is frequently called the second Book of Edward the Sixth, or the Book of the fifth year of Edward the Sixth ; and is very near the same with that which we now use. But both tliis, and the former Act made in 1548, were repealed in the first year of Queen Mary, as not being agreeable to the Komish superstition, which she was resolved to restore. But upon the accession of Queen Elizabeth, the Act of repeal was reversed ; and, in order to the restoring of the English service, several learned divines were appointed to take another review of King Edward's Liturgies, and to frame from them both a book for the use of the Church of England. The names of those who, Mr. Cambden says, were employed, are these that follow : Dii Matthew Parker, afterwards Archbishop of Can- terbury. Dr. Piciiard Cox, afterwards Bishop of Ely. Dr. May. Dr. Bill. Dr. James Pilkington, afterwards Bishop of Durham. Sir Thomas Smith. Mr. David Whitehead. Mr. Edmund Grindall, afterwards ^^Bishop of London, and then Archbishop of Canterbury. To these Mr. Strype says, were added : Dr. Edwin Sandys, afterwards Bishop of Worcester ; and 9 10 Mr. Edwakd (Utest, a very learned man, wlio was after- wards Archdeacon of Canterl )ury, Almoner to the Cjneen, and liishop of Eocl) ester and afterwards of Salishury. And this last person, ]Mr. Strype thinks, had the main care of the whole bnsiness ; being, as he supposes, recommended by Parker to supply his absence. It was debated at first which of the two books of King Edward should be received ; and Secretary Cecil sent several queries to Guest, concerning the reception of some particulars in the first book ; as prayers for the dead, the ])rayer of consecration, the delivery of the Sacraments into tlic mouth of the communicant, &c. But, however, the second book of King Edward was pitched upon as the book to be proposed to the Pirliament to be established, who accordingly passed and commanded it to be used, " with one alteration or addition of certain lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year, and the form of the Litany altered and corrected, and two sentences added in the delivery of the Sacrament to the communicants, and none other, or otherwise." The alterat. in the Litany here mentioned was the leaving out of a rough expression, namely, " From the tyranny of the bishop of Home, and all his detestable enormities," which was a part of the last deprecation in both the books of King Edward ; and tlio adding of those words to the first petition for the (Jueen, " Strengthen in the true worshipping of Thee, in righteousness and holiness of life," which were not in before. The two sentences added in the delivery of the Sacrament were these, " the body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee ; " or, " the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee ; preserve thy body and soul to everlasting life;" which were taken out of King Edward's first book, and Avere the whole forma then used : whereas in the second book of that King, tliose sentences were left out, and in the room of them were used, " take, eat," or " drink " this, with what follows ; but now in Queen Elizabeth's book both these forms were united. Though, besides these here mentioned, there are some 11 ho was after- 3 Queen, and T. And this of the whole by Parker to h of the two rid Secretary ;he reception for the dead, jraments into 3r, the second e book to be D accordingly alteration or iinday in the iorrected, and •anient to the ned was the 1 the tyranny lities," which ooks of King first petition ng of Thee, in ot in before, cranient were ch was given Christ, which everlasting 's first book, n the second it, and in tlie k:" this, with 3k both these 3re are some other variations in this book from the second of King Edward : namely, the first rubrick, concerning the situation of the chancel and the proper place of reading divine srrvice, was altered ; the habits enjoined by tlie first book of King Edward, and forbid by the second, were now restored. At the end of the Litany was added a prayer for the (^ueen, and another for the Clergy. And, lastly, the rubrick that was added at the end of the Communion office, in tlie second Ijook of King Edward VI., against the notion that our Lord's " real " and " essential " presence in the holy Sacrament, was left out of this. For it being the Queen's design to unite the nation in one faith, it was therefore recommended to the divines to see that there should be no definition made against the aforesaid notion, but that it should remain as a speculative opinion not determined, in which every one was left to tlie freedom of his own mind. And in this state the Liturgy continued without any further alteration, till the first year of King James I. ; when the Puritans, who were now a numerous body, having peti- tioned for a reform of what they termed abuses, the King appointed a conference to be held at Hampton Court, between a select number of bishops and divines of the Estiiblished Church on the one side, and the principal leaders among the dissenters on the other, before himself as president, to hear what could be alleged for their nonconformity, and to judge whether an accommodation between the parties W(juld be practicable. The demands of the Puritans were far too unreasonable to be granted, and very soon set aside the hope of agreement : but their objections may have coiitril)uted to produce some of the following improvements, which were soon afterwards made in the Liturgy. In the Morning and Evening Prayers a collect, and in the Litany a particular intercession, were appointed for the royal family ; the forms of thanksgiving upon several occasions were then added : the questions and answers concerning the Sacraments were sub- joined to the Catechism, which before that time ended witli I -i-r 12 I I 3 ^ the answer to the question immediately following the Lord's Prpyer : and the admini'itratiou of private baptism was by the rubrick expressly confined to a " lawful minister," to prevent mid wives or laymen from presuming to baptize. These and some other small additions and improvements were made by the authority of King James I., and universally adopted, although they were not ratified by Parliament. There was little done in the English Common Pravcr Book in King Charles the First's time : but it may be noticed in passing that in the Scotch Common Prayer Book tliere were several improvements made, some of which were taken into the last review, and more might have been so, but that the nation was not disposed to receive them, the distempers of the late times having prejudiced many against it. Some of the most remarkable alterations in this book are : the word " priest," in the rubricks is changed into " presbyter ; " the Epistles and Gospels are set down according to the New Translations, as are also the Hymns and Psalms ; " Glory be to thee O Lord," is ordered to be said before the Gospel, and " Thanks be to thee O Lord," after it. But to proceed with the account of the English Liturgy ; which continued in the state that has been described, to the time of King Charles II., who immediately after his restoration, at the requjBst of several of the Presbyterian Ministers, was willing to comply to another rev'.ew, and therefore issued out a commis- sion, dated March 25., 1661, to impower twelve of the Bishops, and twelve of the Presbyterian divines, to consider the objec- tions raised against the Liturgy, and to make such reasonable and necessary alterations as they should jointly agree upon : nine assistants on each side being added to supply the place of any of the twelve principals who should happen to be absent. These Commissioners had^several meetings at Savoy, but all to very little purpose ; the Presbyterians heaped together all the old scruples that the Puritans had for above a hundred years been raising against the Liturgy, and, as if they were '-.. Ll SBSB I 13 ng the Lord's ini was by the r," to prevent }. These and .vere made by ally adopted, aimon Prayer ay be noticed r Book tliere h were taken 1 so, but that le distempers ist it. Some re : the word sbyter;" the to the New 1 ; " Glory be ! Gospel, and [ish Liturgy ; d, to the time )ration, at the as willing to it a commis- the Bishops, er the objec- h reasonable agree upon : )ly the place ippen to be t Savoy, but )ed together e a hundred r they were not enough, swelling the number of them with many new ones of tlieir own. To tliese, one and all, they demanded compliance, on the Church side, and would hear of no contra- diction even in the minutest circumstances. But the com- pletest piece of assurance was the behaviour of Mr. Baxter, {Frcsbytcrian) who (though the King's Commission gave them no farther power, than " to compare the Common I'rayer " Book with the most ancient Liturgies that had been used in " the Church, in the most primitive and purest times ; " requiring them " to avoid as much as possible, all unnecessary " alterations of the Forms and Liturgy, wherewith the people " were altogether acquainted, and had so long received in the " Church of England,") would not so much as allow that our Liturgy was capable of amendment, but confidently pretended to compose a new one of his own, without any regard to any other Liturgy whatsoever, either modern or ancient ; which, together with the rest of the Commissioners on the Presby- terian side, he offered to the bishops, to be received and estab- lished in the room of the Liturgy. Such usage as this, we may reasonably think, must draw the disdain and contempt of all that were concerned for the Church. So that the con- ference broke up, without any thing done, except that some particular alterations were proposed by the Episcopal divines, which the May following, were considered and agreed to by the wliole Clergy in Convocation. The principal of them were, that several Lessons in the Calendar were changed for others more proper for the days ; the " prayers for particular occasions " were disjointed from the Litany ; and the two prayers to be used in the Ember-weeks, the prayer for the Parliament, and that for "all conditions of men," and the "gene- ral thanksgiving," were added : several of the Collects were altered ; the Epistles and Gospels were taken out of the last translation of the Bible, being read before according to the old translation : the ofldce for " Baptism of those of Riper Years," the two psalms prefixed to the lesson in the Burial Service, and the " Forms of Prayer to be used at Sea," for " the r ' E I t 1 14 Martyrdom of King Charles the First," and for " the Restora- tion of the Royal Family," were ,'dl added. There were also several otli(.r less material additions : and tlirough the whole service ambiguities were removed, and various improvements were made ; for a more particular account of which, the reader is referred to the Preface to the Common Prayer Book. In' a word, the whole Liturgy was then brought to that state in which it now stands ; and wf^p unanimously subscribad by both Houses of Convocation, of both provinces, on Friday, the 20th December, 1G61. And being brought to the House of Lords the March following, both Houses very readily passed Act for its establishment ; and the Earl of Clarendon, then High Chancellor of England, was ordered to return tlie thanks of the Lords to the Bishops and Clergy of both provinces, for the great care and industry shewn in the review of it. — Wlieatley, Dr. Nicliolls, Bp. Tomline. RESUME BY COMPILER. It thus appears that the ]3ook of Conmion Prayer is the result of several revisions and additions, beginning with the Reformation under King Henry the Eighth, who authorized portions of the Roman Book, which was then in Latin only, to be translated in part into English. In 1540 a Committee was appointed to do the work ; in 1542-3 a portion of the work done, and in 1st. 1545 the King's I'rimer came forth, amongst other things the Lord's Prayer, Creed, Ten Commandments, Venite, Te Deum and other Hymns and Collects were printed in English, this appears to be all that was done in Liturgical matters in this Reign. 2ncl. In 1547, the 1.st year of King Edward the Sixth, the actual practical work of Revision began, and what they ' did was confirmed by Parliament in 1548, and was called the first Book of Edward tlie Sixth. 15 :he Restora- re were also 1 the whole iprovements 1, the reader Book. Ill a hat state in bscribad by Friday, the he House of idily passed endon, then 1 the thanks rovinces, for ew of it. — *rayer is the ng with the ) authorized itin only, to mmittee was of the work longst other ints, Venite, printed in 1 Liturgical d the Sixth, 1 what they IS called the 3rd. In 15b0 51, some excei)tions being taken at some things in tlie Bo^^k so set forth, this led to another Eevision, whicli was sanctioned by Act of Parliament in the year 1551, and was called tlie Second liook of Edward the Sixth. But this and the former Act were repealed in 1557-58, by Queen ]\Iary when she came to the Throne, she being a Romanist was determined to upset 1'rote.iauitism. 4th. In 1558, when (,)uecn Elizabeth succeeded to Mary, the Act of repeal was reversed and another revision (No. 4) was undertaken, when several additions, &c., &c., to the 2nd Book of Edward the Sixth were adopted and sanctioned by Act of Parliament. In 1603 King James the First began to reign, and the Puritans petitioned for certain reforms. During liis reign some additions to the Liturgy were made and immediately adopted by the King and others, although not ratified by Parliament. There' was little done in the English Prayer Book in King Charles the First's time. 5th. In 1661 Revision (No. 5) took place under King Charles the Second, and confirmed by Act of Parliament in 1662. In this Book were many additions made to the Liturgy, and is the same as we now have it. Be it remembered that the Book of the Second Year of Edward the Sixth (or his first book) had in it many of the rites of the Roman Church, and some of these were considered so very superstitious, (such for instance as the use of "Oil in Bap- tism, unction of the sick, prayers for souls departed, invocation of the Holy Ghost, Oblation, Water to be mixed with wine, and the habits or dress," (Romish) that they were omitted in the Second Book of Edward the Sixth ; 15lit in our present version* the first Rubrick revives all these superstitions, which are con- trary to the Resolution passed by Our Provincial Synod in September, 1868, (for copies of which see below,) contrary to The Rev. Canon Balch's amendment was then put, and carried tmani' moiisly in the following form : — Whereas, the elevation of the elements in the celebration of the Holy I 1 T 16 the usages of the Churcli for the laiit three centuries, (juntraiy to the sph'it of our Articles of Religion, whicli are Vrottnstant, and contrary to what can bo proved by the New Testanient, as requisite and necessary to be followed and believed by Christ- ians. Therefore Revision is again necessary ; and as there is no State Church in Canada, the work also hitherto done in compiling the Book of Common Prayer being so done by Divines, Laymen, Martyrs and Reformers, all human beings like ourselves, surely there can be no reasonable objection to again revise, cori'ect and harmonize the same Book, so that the Rubricks, Liturgy, Articles of Religion and the admitted prac- tices of the Church as may be proved from the New Testament only, may be accepted by all. ECCLESIASTICAL WRITERS Prefixed to Wheatley's Illustration of the Conmion T'rayer Book, with the years they flourished : A.D. 65. Clemens of Rome. 101. Ignatius. 108. Polycarp. " 140. Justin Martyr. Communion, the use of incense during Divine Service, and the mixiii^L,' with water the sacramental wine, are illegal, it is resolved by this .Synod that the above-mentioned practices are hereby forbidden in the Church of this Province ; and, whereas, the Rubric at the end of the Communion Office enacts that the bread shall be " such as is usual to be eaten," the use of wafer bread is hereby fcjrbiddcn. This Synod would express their disapprobation of the use of lights on tlic Lord's Tal)Ie, and vestments, except the surplice, stole or scarf, and hood, in I saying the public prayers, or ministering the sacraments or other rites of the Cluuch, and their determination to prevent, by every lawful means, their intro- duction into the Churches in this Province. When the Rev. Cation BalcKs resolution was put to the vote, a demand was made that it should be taken by orders, and while the names were being called it zvas found that with but tivo or three exceptions, all were voting yea. So it was decided by all that it be recorded as having passed unanimously. The above note of facts is by a Delegate present when the voting took place. 17 . A.D. 167. lienacuH. lies, (;untrury ■e l*^()tt^stallt, (( 168. Thoophilu.s Antiocheii. <« 172. Tatian. L'cstaiuent, as 3d by Christ- aud as there 177. Athenagoras. 192. Clemens of Alexandria. .( 192. Tertullian. lerto done in <( 220. Municius Felix. ; so done by uman beinj^s 3 objection to (1 230. Origen. 248. Cyprian. 251. Pontius Diaconus. k, so that the imitted prac- 254. Dionysius of Alexandria. 303. Aruobius. 3W Testament (( 303. Lactantius. << 315. Eusebius. .1 <( 326. Athanasius. 5 l( 350. Cyril of Jerusalem. union Trayer « 362. Dionysius, falsely called the Areopagite i< 368. Epiphanius, and Optatus Melevitanus. :' <( 370. Basil the Great. :: (( 370. Gregory Nazianzen. ;./ (( 370. Gregory Nyssen. -.ii <( 374. Ambrose. « 378. Hierom, or Jerom. the mixing with (< 390. Ruffinus. Synod thai the (i 396. Augustin. of tliis Province ; i enacts that the (( 398. Chrysostom. r bread is hereby (( 410. Synesius. (( 412. Isidore Peleusiota. >e of lights on the U 420. Paulinus. ■arf, and hood, in )ther rites of the It 423. Theodoret. neans, their intro- 1( 434. Proclus. <( 438. Codex Theodosianus. e vote, a demand it 439. Socrates. names 7aere being ' I hi u 20 and fair hearing before conclusions." Indeed, cavtion and moderation are no less conspicuous in them, than a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures, and of the early opinions and practices of Christians." " These thirty-nine Articles are arranged with great judg- ment and perspecuity, and may be considered under four general divisions : '.he first five contain the'Christian doctrines concerning the Father, the Sor and the Holy Ghost ; in the sixth, seventh, and eighth, the rule of faith is established, the ten next relate to Christians as individuals ; and the remain- ing twenty-one relate to them as they are members of a religi- ous society. But as all confessions of faith have had a reference to existing heresies, we shall here find, not only the positive doctrines of the Gospel asserted, but also the principal errors and corruptions of the Church of Eome, and most of the extravagancies into which certain Protestant sects fell at the time of the Reformation, rejected and condenmed." — [Notes by Bishop Tomline.] {Extracts from His Majesty's Declaration.) " That the Articles of the Church of England (which have " been allowed and authorized heretofore, and which our Clergy " generally have subscribed unto) do contain the true Doctrine " of the Church of England ageeable to God's Word: which " We do therefore ratify and confirm, requiring all our loving " Subjects to continue in the uniform Profession thereof, and " prohibiting the least diflerence from the said Articles ; " which to that end We command to be new printed, and " this Our Declaration to be published therewith." Note. — " The Articles were again ratified by King James the First, in these words, which are commonly prefixed to them. It appears, however, from papers, ascertaining the reign and the time in which the Declaration before the thirty-nine Articles was first publislied, subjoined to Dr. Winchester's Dissertation on the seventeenth Article, that the Declaration was prefixed, First, not by King James, but by King Charles tl King 21 cartion and 11 a thorough opinions and ,h great judg- under four ian doctrines ■host ; in the tablished, the i the remain- srs of a religi- id a reference T the positive incipal errors most of the cts fell at the d,r— [Notes by 'on.) id (which have ich our Clergy true Doctrine Word: which all oar loving n thereof, and said Articles; V printed, and ith." Note.— !S the First, in to them. It reign and the '^-nine Articles ■'s Dissertation I was prefixed, i First. King James ratified the Articles, but it was by ratifying the Canons made in 1603. Mit." Article XIX declares " The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexan- dria, and Antioch have erred, so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of Ceremo- nies, but also in matters of Faith." TJiis Article declares tvhat is a Church, " a Congregation of faithful men, &c., and that the Church of Rome hath erred loth in Ceremonies and matters of Faith. Article XX. — " The Church hath power to decree Eites or Ceremonies and authority in Controversies of Faith : and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of Salvation." Here again the authority of the Church is limited to what cayi he proved from Holy Writ, and heing under a New Dispen- sation must he also limited to the New Testament. Article XXVIII.—" The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of love that Christians ought to have among tHeinselves one to another ; but rather is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death : insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ." " Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scrip- ture, overthroweth tlie nature of a Sacrament, and hath given J. \ i n 00 occasion to many superstitions. The Body of Christ is given, taken and eaten, in the Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner, and the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith." " The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper WAS NOT by Christ's ORDINANCE RESERVED, CARRIED ABOUT, LIFTED UP, OR WOR- SHIPPED." At the end of the Communion Services the following a2)])ears : " Whereas it is ordained in this oftice for the Adminis- ' tration of the Lord's Supper, that the Communicants should ' receive the same kneeling (which order is well meant, for a ' signification of our humble and grateful acknowledgment of ' the benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy Eeceivers, ' and for tlie avoiding of such profanation and disorder in the ' Holy Connnunion, as might otherwise ensue) ; yet, lest the ' same kneeling should by any persons, either out of igno- ' ranee and infirmity, or 'out of malice and obstinacy, be ' misconstrued and depraved : It is hereby declared. That ' thereby no adoration is intended, or ought to be done, either ' unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, ' or unto any Corporal Presence of Christ's natural Flesh and ' Blood. For the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still ' in their very natural substances, and therefore may not be ' adorned ; (for that were idolatry to be abhorred of all faith- ' ful Christians) ; and the natural Body and Blood of Our ' SaviomfChrist are in Heaven, and not here ; it being against ' tlie truth of Christ's natural Body to be at one time in ' more places tl)an one." ^■^-T- 23 hrist is given, heavenly and ocly of Christ 3T BY CiIKIST'S UP, OR WOR- the foUoivin/j the Adminis- iiicants should LI meant, for a )wledgment of thy Eeceivers, Jisorder in the ; yet, lest the jr out of igno- obstinacy, be leclared. That be done, either odily received, iiral Flesh and le remain still >re may not be ed of all faith- Blood of Our t being against b one time in ADDRESS TO THE MEM15EKS or THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. »• » Under a deep sense of responsil)ility to (lotl, we feel con- strained to address yon on the present peculiar circumstances of our Clmrcli and our country. We believe it to be an indisputable fact tliat the Church of England as a system, and a large proportion of the English people, are becoming gradually and rapidly unprokstantizcd. Some may doubt ; we tlicrefore (piote a few Ijrief statements, and give facts in support of those statements. Some forty years ago a movement was originated at Ox- ford, the object of winch was to destroy the work of the Eefor- mation, and the results of which may be seen by the following quotations. The Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, in a I'ccent charge to liis clergy, says : * " Catholic truth, tliey uryed {i.e. the Ritualists, must now not only be preached, but seen and felt. The*eye must influence the soul ; the outward nuist suffgcst the reality of the inward ; tlie trade of scepticism must be con- trasted with the tangible realities of a material worshij) ; the negative and tlic novel must, for the very truth's sake, be contrasted with tlie affirmative and the traditional. Hence, almost step Ijy step, ^as doubt and suspended belief liaii advanced, Ritualism and Ceremonialism— he feared lie might even say, super- stition — had advanced in exactly tlie opposite direction. What they had, therefore, to deal with \\'as not a sort of fanciful and prelusive Ritualism, but a settled materialistic form of worship, which on the one hand claimed to be con- sidered a [iractical protest against the lawlessness of modern thought, and, on the other hand, the symbol of that longed-for union which had •''ways been a ruling principle of the Ritualistic movement. And wliat w \v the final issue? Why, obviously, direct antagonism to that earlier re. movement which cither modified or abolished those usagss — our English Relormation. It * London Times, Oct. 24, 1873. ii 24 ! i S 1867, p. 397. i Id. p. 410. § Id. p. 384. II The Church and the World, by Mr. Blcnkinsopp. 25 , had been, called reformation move- rs and perfected in ision. Such were ;!hurcli of England a distinct anti- b to undo the ies the Union attempt on the md laymen, to ill standard of plead for her )f England, she 1 upon it, it is ngland can be to the Church cannot be very )rogress of the have so leav- ^ )orate capacity, and say, ' Let hundred years il has been to overian period, e the following I i. is a melanc- lumber (clergy) have, since the year 1842, openly joined the Komish Com- munion." * In 1865 one Imndred and ninety-eight clergymen wrote to Cardinal Patrizzi, Prefect of the Sacred College at Eome, requesting to be admitted into the Communion of the Church of Ptome, and were refused on the ground that they were not prepare^' to acknowledge the place and prerogatives claimed by the Pope. Eleven hundred clergymen recently petitioned for union between the Church of England and the Church of Eome ; and four hundred and eighty lately petitioned the House of Convocation for the establishment of a priestly confessional. Our Protestant worship is gradually losing its spiritual character, and, in the Ptitualistic churches, is becoming more and more assimilated to that of the Church of Eome. Such churches have vastly increased, and are still increasing in number, and "^om them there is a continual stream of converts drifting towards Eomanism. -j- According to the report of the Protestant Educational Institute, the number of Eoman Catholic Priests in England and Scotland have increased since the year 1829 from 447 to 1824 ; of Chapels, from 449 to 1227, and of Convents and Monasteries, from 16 to 295. Dr. Pusey says in his Eirenicon : — " The building arises without noise or hammer. Never, I am satisfied, was the work of God so wide and deep as now, . . . because the leaven which was hidden in the meal has worked secretly." The Eev. H., Wagner, of Brighton, says : — Protestantism as a religion, is on its death bed. . . . It is fast falling, and, by God's favour, will soon be at an end."— See Rock, Nov. 20, 18G8. * The Recent Charge of the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Oxford consid- ered in a Letter to a Friend, by Henry Barne, M.A., Vicar of Farringdon, Berks, &c. London, Nisbet & Co., p. ii. + "From every Ritualistic congregation in London there is a cout.nuv[i stream of converts drifting towards us. — Catholic Register, 4 I ' 1 V ' 1 j : il 1 '! 26 If asked, how are we to account for the fact that Komaii- ism, which is losing power and influence in every country of Europe, is thus spreading in England, we are compelled to confess, and we do so with great pain, that we believe it is in great measure, attributctble to our present Prayer Booh as the prime source and cause. The subject demands calm and impartial examination. Let us then glance at the history of the Prayer Book, and look at its contents. The facts ought to be known by all, especially by members of the Church in Canada. We have had five revisions of the Prayer Book. The First and Second in the reign of Edward VI., the Third in the reign of Elizabeth, the Fourth in that of James I., the Fifth in that of Charles II., and a Sixth in the reign of William III., which was never adopted. The First Prayer Book of Edward VI. (a.d. 1549,) con- tained many remnants of Eomish doctrines, and authorized the use of the Romish sacerdotal vestments. In the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI., adopted three years afterwards, (a.d. 1552,) the work of reformation was con- tinued, the use of the Romish vestments was forbidden, and the sacerdotal and sacramental superstitions were boldly dealt with, and in a great measure removed. The Tliird Prayer Book was drawn up in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, when a Commission was appointed, and " directed to favour the First Prayer Book of Edward VI., and so take some backward steps in the direction of Rome ; and the book thus revised by the Commissioners, was, in opposition to their recommendations, stiU further altered in the same direction by the Queen in Council " * The use of the Romish vestments was restored, the Rubric against the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament was wholly expunged, a part of the 26th Article, which denies the " opus operatum " of the Sacraments, and " which cuts up by the * TJie Revision of the Prayer Book, by the Rev, G- A. Jacobs, D.D. Hodges & Co., p. n. 27 lat Koinaii- country of )mpelled to elieve it is Booh as the 111 illation, 'rayer Book, nown by all, Book. The Third in the [., the Fifth WiUiamllL, I. 1549,) con- uthorized the adopted three ,tion was con- Drbidden, and e boldly dealt the reign of )pointed, and ward VI., and f Rome; and , in opposition in the same 3f the Eomisli ) presence of t was wholly les the "opus its lip by the A. Jacobs, D.D. root baptismal regeneration, was entirely omitted" * and in that state it was imposed upon tlie nation. The object of the Queen was to make the Prayer Book as lit;tle offensive to the Roman Catholics as possible, and to introduce a certain amount of Romanism, " softened down, indeed, and diluted, so as not to shock and alienate her Protestant subjects, but still sufficient to conciliate the great bulk of the Romanist population." "|* Thus the Prayer Book was corrupted to please the Roman Catholics, and the Queen's object was so far attained, that " for ten years," as Heylin remarks, " the Roman Catholics repaired to the Parish Churches without doubt or scruple." Two more revisions were made in the 17th century, " which rendered matters rather worse than they had been before." + The Third Prayer Book of Elizabetli was further Roman- ized in 1604 under James I., when, by injunction of the King, and without the authority of Parliament, the words, " verily and indeed, taken and received," deri^'ed from the Romish formulary, were introduced into the Catechism in connexion with " the Body and Blood of Christ " in the Lord's Supper. § That part of the Catechism which dogmatically teaches bap- tismal regeneration was also still further strengthened by the changes made in other formularies. || The Fourth Prayer Book thus corrupted was still more * Burnet's History Rjf,, vol. ii. p. 627, and Three Tracts on Revision by Rev. E. Nangle. t Rev. Dr. G. A.Jacob, p. 13. "There was great care taken, writes the learned Ileylin, "for expunging all such passages in it as might give any scandal or offence to the Popish party, or be used by them in excuse for their not coming to church. t Rev. Dr. G. A, Jacob, p. 14. § This little sentence, unwarrantably introduced into our Prayer Book 50 years after its compilation, has been pregnant with most mischevious results. By it, we, who deny the "real bodily presence," are condemned as heretics, and by it the Ritualists maintain that the Mass is secure in the Church of Eng- land. It has been expunged from the American Prayer Book. 1; See Call for Revision, by the Rev. J. N. Griffin, D.D. K' ' 7 i < f: 28 Romanized in 1661, under Charles II., when a further step was taken in the anti-Reformation road. In this edition, the word "^ncs^ " was substituted for ^'pastor," and "deacon" for " minister." These last revisers did their best to make the service [of baptism] inculcate a baptismal regeneration of the grossest form," * The Sanctification of the element of water in baptism was introduced, (compare offices of infant and adult baptism,) In the reign of William III., tlie Prayer Book was again revised by a Commission. The Commission was composed of ten bishojjs and twenty divines, " men eminent for their piety and learning, whose names shone out as bright lights." "^ By them was proposed a thorough revision which would, it was thought, have brought into the Church at least two-thirds of the Dissenters. This Prayer Book, revised by Evangelical Protestants, was approved by the King, but as a large num- ber of the clergy were against it, it was never proposed to Convocation, Thus the Protestant Prayer Book, the second of Edward VI., has been altered again and again, as a matter of State policy, in the direction of Eome, Some would liave us regard the present Prayer Book as a sacred relic of antiquity, framed by men of God, according to a Scriptural standard, and sup- ported by Apostolic authority, whilst, in reality, we are 'n the humiliating position of having it imposed upon us as it has been corrupted, for an unholy purpose, by the imperious Elizabeth, by the vain and frivolous James, and, finally, by the Romish and profligate Charles. It is remarkable that during the damaging changes of the Formularies, in the reign of Elizabeth, no alteration was made in the Articles, but, after all attempts by her to effect a recon- ciliation with the Pope, the Articles were framed as we now have them. Some new articles, of a decidedly Protestant character, were introduced — the alterations in Formularies remaining unchanged — and thence has arisen tlie contradic- Rev. Dr, Jacob, p, 14. tDr. Griffin's Call, p. 251. 1 1 29 i further step is edition, the ind "deacon" best to make egeneraticjii of the element of ices of infant ook was again ,s composed of ; for their piety lights." t By would, it was i two-thirds of by Evangelical a large num- 3r proposed to ond of Edward matter of State I have us regard itiquity, framed idard, and sup- ity, we are 'u d upon us as it ' the imperious and, finally, by g changes of the ?ation was made jO effect a recon- iied as we now Bdly Protestant in Formularies the contradic- P.2SI. tions between them and tlie Articles with all the manifest evils arising therefrom. These Articles are Evangelical in their character. They acknowledge and establish the great Protestant principle — the primo authority of the Word of God, '' so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation." By these repeated corruptions of the Prayer Book, we are brought into a strange and, we must acknowledge, a painful dilemma. We have a Prayer Book, which is a combination of truth and error, of light and darkness, of Protestantism and essential Eomanism. We have Protestant Articles as a stand- ard of our faith, and llomish formularies which rule tmr prac- tice. And we are a divided house, composed of several parties. We have right and left, and extreme right and extreme left ; and each side or party has its zealous supporters. On the one aide, it is said, we must liave a thorough revision of the for- mularies ; on the other, we must get rid of the Articles. On the one side, we will carry out the principles of the Eeforni- ers ; on the other, " We have nothing to do with their prin- ciples — we will have nothing to do with such a set." * Each party is equally decided and determined. There can be no compromise in matters of principle, without the extinction of conscience and all sense of responsibility to God to maintain what each holds as true. (3n various occasions the great question, whether certain formularies of the Church of England are to be understood in an Evangelical or Romanistic sense, has been brought before the legal tribunals, and decisions have been obtained, -some- * " What has the Church of Englahd to do with the spirit and principles of the Reformers, except to get rid of them as quickly as pqssible ? We will have nothing to do with such a set." — Church News, Feb. 19, 1868. "The Articles," it is commonly observed, " must be got rid of as Protestant and heretical." — Keiimiy for Romanism in the Church of England^ by the Rev. Henry Fry, D.D., p. 25. 30 times favourable to one side, and sometimes to the other. The most grave decision, perhaps, is that in a recent case, in- asmuch ns it is looked upon qb final, and as it bears upon the chief doctrines and ordinances of the sacerdotal and sacra- mental system. In that case a clergyman was charged with holding and teaching — (I.) The Real Presence of the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ in the consecrated bread and wine on the altar ; (2.) That in the Holy Communion there is a sacrifice of our Lord by the priest, in which the mediation of our Lord ascends from the altar to plead for the sins of men ; and (3.) That adoration is due to Christ present on the altar, in the Sacra- ment, under the form of bread and wine ; and this teaching, according to that decision, is not condemned and forbidden. These doctrines, utterly inconsistent as they are with our Articles and other portions of our formularies, may now be preached without let or hindrance, and enforced as authoritatively as any truth of the Word of God. * Thus we enter a new era in the history of the Church of England, In the face of these facts, it is puerile to deny that cer- tain forms of the Prayer Book inculcate Romanism. To deny * The Times says : — "It is now established that a clergyman of the Church of England may teach any doctrines within limits which only extreme subtlety can distinguish from Roman Catholicism on the one side, from Calvan- ism on another side, and from Deism on a third." The Echo says : — " Except the recognition of the authority of the Pope, what is there left to distinguish that Church from the Church of Rome, or a Protestant from a Romanist ? " The IVestmhtster Gazette, the reputed organ of Archbishop Manning, says : — " That the effect of recent legal judgments is to allow the most contra- dictory doctrines to be publicly held and taught in the Anglican Church." Again, "Anglo-Catholics . . . may continue now without fear of penal consequences, to leaven the immense .mass of Protestantism with Catholic truths. The adoration of the Eucharist, the sacrifice of the Mass, the sacra- mental character of penance and confession, the invocation of the Mother of God and of the Saints, prayers and masses for the dead, are Christian verities which are not now denounced as idle fables or blasphemous inventions, but are permitted to be taught in the Protestant Church." 31 it would expose ourselves to the suspicion of either insincerity or imbecility.* " We appeal," writes the Union Ecvicw, " to the Rubrics and forniuhp of our present Book of Common Prayer, in proof that the Church of England retains the same doctrines and usages since the Reformation as before." "f* Speaking of some of the formularies. Dr. Newman writes, " They were drawn up with the purpose of including Catho- lics," and again, " We are using them for the purpose for which their autliors framed them." The Ritualists affirm that they " are bound by their ordi- nation vows to observe the ordinances of the Prayer Book, and tliftt these ordinances prescribe the sacramental services of the Roman Church." j "Their priesthood," they maitain, " is the same in office and authority as that of tin Church of Rome, seeing that their ordination is in the same form as that of the Church of Rome." The Divine authority of the Church of Rome, they main- tain, is acknowledged by the Church of England, seeing that the validity of its priesthood and their right to enter into the ministry and benefices of the Anglican Church witliout being re-ordained, is formally acknowledged, whilst the ministers of tlie Nonconformist Churches are treated as schismatical lay- men. • " Now with these facts before us," writes Dr. Griffin, " what is the use of attempting to deny them ? What is the use of stultifying ourselves by flying in the face of history ? Its testimony cannot be ignored. It is far better at once to admit the truth, and instead of meeting the statements of modern Ritu- alists with a stupid negative, that has neither reason nor argbment in it, to say we cannot deny that the revision under Elizabeth was a compromise, one which was intended to comprehend the doctrine of the real and essential presence of the body of Christ in the sacrament. To this position they hold, and it is vain to attempt to dislodge them." — A Call for Revision, by J. N. Griffin, D.D,, p. 109. + 1867, p. 384. % The Real Cause of Romanism in the Church of England, by the Rev. Henry Fry, D.D. Johnson, London, p. i. 32 Thus, by an appeal to Lho I'layer liook, the. liitualists intrench themselves in their present position, and we cannot (lishxlge them. We charge them with dishonesty and unfaith- fidne.ss ; they retort, in like manner, upon ourselves. " Wiiich," writes Dr. Pusey, "is the most faithful to the Church of P^ngland; we, priests and laity, who take solei.in words of hers in their literal meaning, or they who do not ? " —Letter to the Timc», Nov. 29, 18G6. " Surely the people of England," writes the Rev. F, Mur- ray, " will consider him to be the most honest man, who believes the words of the Ordination Service, and acts as a Priest, rather than the man who, in fact, calls the Prayer Book a lie and a sham, and denies the very title which, by his own consent, he permitted to be openly, solemnly, distinctly given to him." — Letter to the Times, Oct. 25, 1866. Thus we are charged with inconsistency, and we cannot dispute it. We have sanctioned the Romish leaven, and now we complain that it is leavening the lump. We deny that under the gospel dispensation there is any office of priesthood, except as all Christians are thus regarded, and assert that he who assumes the title of Priest in a sacer- dotal or sacrificial sense, thereby identifies himself with the great Apostacy ; and yet we train up a distinct order of " Priests," and we profess to endow them with the mysterious gift of the Holy Ghost, using words of which an English Bishop observed, "if they are not solemn truth, they are blasphemous frivolity." We say, with Dr. Daly, the late venerable Bishop of Cashel : — " In the whole New Tstament there is not a text asserting the existence of the priesthood, and consequently absolution by a priest," * and yet we ordain men for this very office of priest. We protest against the confessional (in the words of the late Canon StoAvell) as " a slaughter-house of freedom and purity," and yet we invite members of the Church to use it. * A Short Criticism, &c. Herbert, Dublin, p. 6, ' f 33 We reproach the minister wlio ado}>ts it, tVjr presuming to imagine that lie can remit or retain sin.s as lie may judge fit, and yet, until lately, we instructed him to assume this power and to say, " By His (^Christ's) authority conmiitted to mc, / absolve thee from all thy sins." , And now, we appeal to you, whether the evidence which i we have brought forward does not indisi)utably prove, that the Romish element has been largely introduced into our Prayer Book, for the very purpose of winning over thelioman Catho- lics, and including them in the Church ? We appeal to you, also, whether this compromise has not been the source and spring of an extensive defection from the Vrotestant faith? Aiul, moreover, we submit, if this Iiomish element was intro- duced, not l)y the Ileformers, not by I'rotestant lUshops, not by Convocation, but by the Crown, as a matter of State policy, why should there be a moment's hesitation in remov- ing it ? If it be now decided by the supreme legal tribunal, that the Prayer Book permits what is barely distinguishalde from that which the Articles condenui as " blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits " — if it be now indisputable that the Prayer Book is used for the purpose of propagating thatnioral rinder- pest which plagues our land, is there a friend of evangelical truth who will not demand its (horouijh revision ? ^ If he who mixes poison with the food of a child, would be liable to the extreme penalty of the law, what penalty would not they deserve who would mix poison with the spiritual food of hundreds of thousands of the children of the Church for generations to come ? Protestants of Canada, we are brought into an anomalous position. That organization which we have been accustomed to regard as the Church of the lieformation, is now being used, not for the diffusion of its principles, but for their extermi- nation ! And where is our consistency — where our sense of honour ! We unsparingly condemn the Ritualists as traitors 5 M to the Protestant religion, whilst we are actually accompUces with them, by leaving with them the very weapon which they use for its destruction ! Is it not intolerable that we should be subjected to the taunt that our Church is " a nursery for Eomanism," and that we should be unable truthfully and indignantly to repel it ? Pardon us, then, if we address you with unwonted bold- ness. You might well doubt our sincerity if we did not use great plainness of speech. The occasion calls for vigorous and immediate action. Let every member of our Church, then, use his utmost influence for the establishment of the truth. Let electors of Synodsmen vote only for those who are in favour of revision upon three points : — (1.) Baptismal regeneration ; (2.) The doctrine of the Ileal Presence of Christ in the Sacrament; and (3.) The Ordinal, Confession and Priestly Absolution. And let them petition the General Synod praying that the revision may be thorough. It is the sacred duty of every lover of truth to avow his principles at the present juncture. The question is, w^hether germs of Romish error shall be perpetuated in our Prayer Book or not. We cannot be neutral in this matter. To do nothing is practically to encourage the evil. To be silent is to consent. If we acquiesce, though we may profess to be Protestants, we belie our profession. And, in furtherance of this cause, we appeal, not to you only, but to all true Protestants. It is not a question of mere sectional or local interest. It is a national question. It affects the Protee^r^nts of the whole British Empire. A large number of our nobility and gentry have already been ensnared. Tens of thousands of our people have been led over to Rome. Others are on the way. Inroads are being made every day on our common faith. Active measures are imperatively demanded. To carry them on large resources are required. Who will have the honour of taking the lead in this holy cause ? We have two objects in view — to purge our Prayer Book B^fW 35 \y of error, and to present to the world a pure Evangelical Epis- . copal Church, and then, in the strength of victory, to aid our brethren in England, where redoubled exertions are needed to withstand the unceasing efforts of that powerful combination which is labouring avowedly to unprotestantize both our Church and our nation. " England," (says Dr. Manning) " is the fortress of heresy. If we can strike down heresy in Eng- land, it will be struck down throughout the world, and the world will be at the feet of the -Pope." This question has a most solemn aspect. It has relation- ship to God. We are engaged in the reconstruction of that which professes to be His House, and we cannot conceal from ourselves the responsibility that attaches to that office. Wliat is to be our standard — what our guide ? Are we to follow the traditions of men, or the Word of God ? Are we at liberty to order God's House without seeking to be subject to God's Word ? If the curse of God is pronounced upon those who would corrupt the Gospel, (see Gal. i.,) shall we join in per- petuating some of the worst principles of the Apostacy, as if antiquity could sanctify liersey and convert error into truth ? Let those do so, who will and who dare : as for ourselves, we declare, before God and our country, we will not. T. H. T. JV. B. — Copies of this Reprint can be had on application to the Publisher, and at Messrs. Dawson^ s and F. E. Grafton^ s. Booksellers.