THE BOOK OF COMMON ORDER.
[Sidenote: At Frankfort.]
This, though in point of time the first composed of the symbolical books
of the Scottish Reformation, was the last to be formally assigned its
honoured place. The title it commonly bore in that age was the Book of
Common Order. In the First Book of Discipline it is called "the Order of
Geneva" and "the Book of our Common Order."[146] In recent times it has
been more generally designated as Knox's Liturgy. It has usually been
deemed sufficient to say that it was drawn up and first privately and
then publicly printed at Geneva, and was directly taken from the liturgy
then used there, as well as approved by Calvin. But this is only
partially true. The first English congregation on the Continent which
invited Knox to be one of its pastors was that formed at Frankfort in
1554, and admitted to hold its services in the same church as the
congregation of French-speaking exiles on condition of using the same
ceremonies and Confession of Faith as the French.[147] The minister and
other office-bearers accordingly signed the Confession of Faith along
with those of the French congregation, and it was ultimately
incorporated into the Book of Common Order as the exposition of the
Apostles' Creed in the baptismal service. The first draft of the Book of
Common Order was drawn up before the end of 1554, and privately
printed,[148] to implement the stipulation for conformity with the
French in ceremonies as well as in Confession of Faith, and it seems to
have been mainly owing to Knox that it was not adopted at once, but that
time was given for circulating and examining it. Unfortunately the
ambitious plan was taken of inviting the English exiles at Strassburg
and Zurich to join with them in their proposed action, which led to
those unfortunate disputes, chronicled at length in the 'Troubles at
Frankfort,' and to the departure of a large number of the English exiles
to Geneva, where through the kindness of Calvin a hospitable reception
was promised them, and the Church of Marie la Neuve was assigned for
their services and those of the Italian exiles, but without any
hampering clause about identity of ceremonies or Confession of Faith.
The congregation which shared with the English exiles the church of "the
white ladies," or Cistercian nuns, at Frankfort, consisted chiefly of
the company of French-speaking exiles which had been originally gathered
at Strassburg by Farel, tended for several years by Calvin, and then by
Poullain, or Pollanus, under whom, when the Interim was imposed on the
city, they had to seek a new home. This they ultimately found in
England, to which Bucer and Martyr from the same city had already been
invited and had gone. Glastonbury Abbey was assigned for their residence
by the king and council, and there they lived in peace and quiet till
the close of the reign of Edward VI. In 1551 Pollanus published the
first edition of his 'Liturgia Sacra seu Ritus ministerii in ecclesia
peregrinorum profugorum propter Evangelium Christi Argentinæ.' No doubt
he had heard that the favour shown to Alasco and his congregations of
French and Flemings in London was intended to help on further
reformation in the Church of England also, and so in a lengthy
dedication to the king he bespeaks his favour not only to his
congregation but also to their book, affirming "ut in cultu Dei externo
ita etiam in disciplina morum nullam esse puriorem aut quæ propius
accedat ad illam quæ fuit temporibus Apostolorum." No doubt it was in a
similar spirit and in similar terms that he pressed the forms of his
book on the acceptance of the English exiles at Frankfort, and to a
great extent with success. Their Book of Common Order is founded on
Farel's and Calvin's services, but is so after these services have
passed through the alembic of Pollanus and been modified and
supplemented by him. This will appear from several of the notes
subjoined, and will be more fully shown in the Appendix.[149]
[Sidenote: Its Authority.]
The exclusive authority of this book--previously drafted but first used
in Knox's congregation at Geneva--was not asserted by the General
Assembly till 1564: nevertheless, even in 1560, the Book of Discipline
indicated a very marked preference for its regulations, speaking not
only of it as the book of _our_ Common Order, already used in some
churches, but specially commended its form for administration of the
Lord's Supper; and in giving directions for the celebration of the
sacraments and marriage, and for the burial of the dead, it followed
closely the regulations of this book. In 1561 Quintine Kennedy, Abbot of
Crossraguel, in his oration against the Protestants, alluded to it in
such a way as implied that it was already well known and in general use
in Scotland.[150] In 1562 the General Assembly enjoined the observance
of a uniform Order in the administration of the sacraments and the
celebration of marriage according to the "Booke of Geneva"--_i.e._, the
Order used by Knox's congregation there;[151] and in 1564 it further
ordained that "everie minister, exhorter, and reader sall have one of
the Psalme Bookes latelie printed in Edinburgh, and use the Order
contained therein [that is, the Order in Knox's Book] in prayers,
marriage, and ministration of the sacraments."[152]
[Sidenote: Early Practice in Scotland.]
There seems sufficient reason to believe that for some years before the
establishment of the Reformed Church, the morning and evening prayers,
along with the lessons from Holy Scripture, as contained in the Second
Prayer Book of Edward VI., were used at least in part of the assemblies
held by the reformed for worship and mutual edification;[153] and
perhaps they may have continued to be so used for a year or two
afterwards, though no formal sanction was ever given by the General
Assembly even to those parts of that book, still less to the other parts
to which Knox's party had always objected. But it is now ascertained
that as early as 1556, or at least 1557, Knox had recommended, and that
soon after some of the more fully organised congregations adopted, a
form of service more simple, and more nearly resembling the Genevan than
the Anglican.[154] It is known that when the treaty of peace between
France, England, and Scotland was being negotiated in July 1560, the
ministers and congregation of Scotland, thinking their own profession
after the order and discipline of Geneva to be more pure than the
Anglican, as containing no other ceremonies than are expressly mentioned
in the Scriptures, "wald not ressave or admitt any uther."[155]
[Sidenote: Knox and the English Liturgy.]
Randolph, the English ambassador, in his letters to his Government, not
only admits that they were "lothe to remytte anie thing of that that
thei _have receaved_,"[156] but also leads us to conclude that the
practice of their leading ministers in public worship at this early date
was not very dissimilar to that of their successors in the next
century. "The Byshop of Athens," he says, "preacheth earnestly, and
prayethe hartely for the Queene's Majestie our Soveraigne, and greatly
extollethe her benefyttes; Mr Wyllocke specially by name prayethe both
for France and Englande; Mr Knox, universally for all Prynces lyvinge in
the feare of God, desyring Him to turne the hartes of other, and to
sende them in the rycht way."[157] About the same period, in one of his
letters to Mrs Lock, Knox links together "Mr Parson's _pattering of his_
CONSTRAINED _prayers_" and "the masse-munging of Mr Vicar and of his
wicked companions," in such a way as shows that he was no great admirer
of the one or the other.[158] In tolerating for a little the use of the
morning and evening services of the Prayer Book of Edward VI., our
reformers can be judged inconsistent only by those who do not know that
in the time of the good King Edward considerably greater latitude was
allowed in the celebration of those services than has ever since been
suffered in the sister church. The minister, for instance, was expressly
permitted to shorten them _according_ to his _discretion_ when a sermon
or other divine ordinance was to follow. He had a sort of sanction for
any neglect of minuter directions as to kneeling, crossing, &c., from a
general rubric which intimated that these things were to be left free
"as every man's devotion serveth." He had also a pretty full indulgence
practically conceded for deviating from the strict injunctions of the
book in regard to surplices and other ecclesiastical vestments,[159]
which were never adopted or tolerated by Knox and his associates, the
rigid enforcement of which in the days of Queen Elizabeth produced great
misery and discontent at the time, and paved the way for more and
greater in the days of James and Charles, her successors. It is by no
means so clear as some have recently asserted it to be, that Knox used
this liturgy habitually when he was in England, acting as one of the
court chaplains and special preachers in the time of Edward VI. The
observance of the liturgy was not enforced in the northern part of the
kingdom when Knox began his labours there. And even at the time when he
removed to the southern province it was not necessary that he should use
the liturgy in the office he held, as the special preachers of that day,
and even the lecturers for long after, often delivered their discourses
in the open air, and used before them only free prayer or a short prayer
similar to that which is still employed by the university preachers at
Oxford and Cambridge. It was not till a considerably later period that
"to gall tender consciences" it was required of all _lecturers_ and
_special preachers_ that they should also personally read the liturgy so
many times every year. Dr Lorimer has proved that Knox used at Berwick a
simpler form of communion service, moulded so far as yet traced on Swiss
and German offices.[160] And it can be established on the best of all
authority--Knox's own testimony--that he neither approved of nor was
willing to conform to the communion office. Then no sooner was he beyond
the restraint of English law than he proposed for adoption in his
congregation, first at Frankfort and then at Geneva, the form ultimately
adopted in Scotland after his return thither.
[Sidenote: A Guide or Moael.]
As has been already mentioned, the exclusive authority of the Book of
Common Order, as a guide and aid to ministers in conducting public
worship and administering the sacraments, was asserted by the General
Assembly in 1564. It continued to hold the place thus given to it down
to 1637, when it was superseded, in so far as the king and his council
were concerned, first, by what is known as Archbishop Laud's Liturgy,
and then by an injunction of the disappointed prelates, which required
that, till further order should be taken, neither the new nor the old
liturgy should be used in the public services, in Edinburgh, but only
those prayers which the ministers had been accustomed to make before and
after their sermons.[161] Thus the bishops themselves were the unwitting
instruments of first setting aside a partially liturgic, and introducing
instead a wholly extemporary, form of worship into Scotland. There is no
reason, however, for maintaining that the Book of Common Order, while it
continued in authority, was regarded as more than a guide or model, at
least to the ordained ministers, or can be so regarded by any one who
studies with care its rubrics and general contents, far less was
observed as a rigid liturgy, every word of which must be repeated
unvaryingly by the officiating minister. It has indeed been maintained,
even in recent times, and by ministers of the National Church, that "the
idea of extemporaneous prayer as an appropriate vehicle of public
devotion was one quite unknown to the Reformation." But this cannot be
made good with respect to any of the Reformed or Calvinistic churches,
and certainly least of all with respect to the National Church of
Scotland at any period of its history. Our reformers laid it down in
their First Book of Discipline as a fixed principle that "it is neither
the clipping of their crownes, the greasing of their fingers,[162] nor
the blowing of the dumb dogges called the bishops, neither the laying on
of their hands, that maketh true ministers of Christ Jesus. But the
Spirit of God, inwardly first moving the heart to seeke to enter in the
holy calling for Christ's glory and the profite of His Kirk, and
thereafter the nomination of the people, the examination of the learned,
and publick admission, ... make men lawfull ministers."[163] They
distinctly taught that no one was to be regarded as a lawful minister of
Christ into whose mouth Christ had not put _some word of exhortation_
or vouchsafed some gift of expounding and preaching the Word of
God,[164] and they expressly encouraged their ministers to look for
their Master's aid and guidance in praying as well as in preaching.
Hence throughout their Book of Common Order they carefully abstained
from imposing the _ipsissima verba_ of particular forms as rigidly
binding, or even from encouraging their ministers to rest contented with
the stated repetition of them.
[Sidenote: Its tolerant Rubrics.]
[Sidenote: Calderwood's Testimony.]
[Sidenote: Row's Opinion.]
"When the congregation is assembled," run its tolerant rubrics, "the
minister useth one of these two confessions, or _like in effect_."[165]
"This done, the people sing a psalme altogether in a plain tune, which
ended, the minister prayeth for the assistance of God's Holie Spirit _as
the same shall move his heart_, and so proceedeth to the sermon. The
minister, after the sermon, useth this prayer following, or _such
like_."[166] "Then the people sing a psalme, which ended, the minister
pronounceth one of these blessings, and so the congregation
departeth."[167] Such are its few and simple directions for the ordinary
form of public worship; and as if even these might fail to beget in the
minds of some of the old priests a sense of their freedom from minute
restrictions and a burdensome ritual, it is added: "It shall not be
necessarie for the minister daylie to repeat all these things before
mentioned; but, beginning with _some maner of confession_, to proceede
to the sermon, which ended, he either useth the prayer for all estates
before mentioned, or else _prayeth as the Spirit of God shall move his
heart_, framing the same according to the time and matter which he hath
entreated of."[168] To the same effect, in the First Book of Discipline,
after recommending that in all the large towns there should every day be
either sermon or common prayers with reading of Scriptures, it is said:
"What day[169] the publick sermon is, we can neither require _nor
greatly approve_ that the common prayers be publickly used, lest that we
should either foster the people in superstition, who come to the prayers
as they come to the masse; or else give them occasion, that they think
them no prayers which be made before and after sermons."[170] Even in
the most solemn of its special services and in the most solemn part of
it, the prayer of thanksgiving and consecration in the communion, the
rubric is: "The minister ... giveth thanks either in these words
following _or like in effect_."[171] The same thing is confirmed by many
of the rubrics of the other occasional services in the Book of Common
Order,[172] and by the express testimony of Calderwood, Row, and others
who officiated as ministers of the church while the book was in use. The
first named of these, though entertaining so strong a regard for its
venerable forms that even on the approval of the Westminster Directory
in 1645 he is said to have opposed the adoption of any Act expressly
abrogating the Book of Common Order, had not hesitated when contrasting
it with the English Liturgy thus to speak of the nature and extent of
the submission expected to be given to it: "Habemus quidem nos etiam in
Ecclesiâ nostra Agendas, et ordinem in sacris celebrandis servandum,
_sed nemo alligatur precibus aut exhortationibus liturgiae nostrae_,
proponuntur tantum ut peradigmata, quibus precum aut exhortationum
materia et forma quoad substantialia indicantur, non ut eisdem verbis
adstringantur ministri. Totos ego tredecim annos, quibus functus sum
ministerio, sive in sacramentis, sive in aliis sacris celebrandis,
exhortationibus aut precibus quae extant in Agendâ nostrâ, _nunquam usus
sum_. Sic etiam alii complures; et omnibus etiam liberum est idem
facere."[173] While in regard to the Liturgy by which it was attempted
in 1637 to supplant the Book of Common Order, Row thus expresses
himself: "Though they amend all those errours, and that in all the
Service Book there were no materiall errour at all, neither masse nor
popish ceremonie; and though they should read nothing but Canonicall
Scripture, yea say that all their prayers and exhortations were merelie
words of Holie Scripture, yit it is not lawfull to introduce a reading
ministrie, and to stint men (gifted of God, who has the spirit of their
calling, able ministers of the gospell who hes the Spirit of adoption
teaching them to pray, Gal. iv. 6; Rom. viii. 26; and to whom God hes
opened a doore of utterance, to speak the gospell with boldness, haveing
touched their lips with a coall from His awin altar) to such a Liturgie
as is to be made the onlie forme of God's publict worship. For though I
confess good use may be made of a formed Liturgie and publict service,
to serve for a rule to other kirks to fall on the like way, finding it
warranted by the Word, and to be as a monument to the posteritie, who
thence may learn what forms have been, are, and ought to be used; and
that it may lead the way, and be a directorie to those that are
beginning in the ministrie; yit certainlie reading of prayers and
exhortations is not the way whereby the Lord in His Word has appoynted
His servants of the ministrie to worship Him, or to convert, edifie, and
comfort, or strengthen soulls; but seing they have receaved gifts for
praying and preaching, they ought to stirre up the gift of God, and putt
the talent to use; and though in their privat studies they may borrow
some help from other men's gifts and labours, yit _neither is it lawfull
for a man to tye himself, or for bishops to tye all ministers, to a
prescript and stinted forme of words in prayer and exhortation_."[174]
Henderson says that while they had their Directory and prescribed Order,
they were "not tyed to set formes and words."[175]
[Sidenote: Practice in other Reformed Churches.]
It is plain, therefore, that the General Assembly, by the sanction it
gave to the Book of Common Order, did not mean to restrict its ordained
ministers to the use of a certain unvarying form of words, but to
provide such a Directory or model as would guide them in "the substance
and right ordering of all the parts of divine worship," as well as guide
the readers and others not fully admitted to the ministry of the Word,
through whose special aid alone they were able, in a time of so great
dearth of qualified ministers, to supply in part the spiritual
destitution of their countrymen. Nor in granting such an amount of
liberty, at least to their ordained ministers, did they follow a course
which was, as has been so confidently asserted, altogether novel, but
rather, as in several other things, carried out more thoroughly and
consistently[176] what others of the Reformed churches had adopted at
least partially. In almost all the Reformed or Calvinistic liturgies the
prayers are left partly free, and in several of them no form is
furnished even as a guide or model for the prayer immediately preceding
the sermon (and the same might be said of some of the earlier Lutheran
_Agend-bücher_). In the churches of Basle, which probably in this
respect only followed the general practice of the churches of East
Switzerland, Hagenbach informs us that there was for fifty years after
the Reformation no form of prayer, before or after sermon, imposed by
public authority, and for fifty years longer only the prayer after
sermon for all estates and conditions of men.[177] What, therefore,
distinguished our reformers from their successors, and from the English
Puritans of the seventeenth century, was not that the former disapproved
of or curtailed free prayer while the latter advocated and encouraged
it, but that the former retained in their Book of Common Order a variety
of forms, not only as models, but also as aids to the officiating
minister, while the latter put their Directory into such a shape that
even the "help and furniture" it provided required the exercise of
thought and care on the part of the minister to adapt it for use. This
certainly was no great divergence, considering how thoroughly both
parties were agreed, on the one hand, as to the liberty which should be
left to ordained ministers, and, on the other, as to the limitations
within which it should be confined.
[Sidenote: Prayers of the Readers.]
From the notices given in his 'Order and Government of the Church of
Scotland,' and from the specimens of Henderson's prayers which accompany
his printed discourses, it is further evident that he, like Calderwood,
habitually used free prayer both before and after sermon. There seems
reason to suppose that in not a few cases the readers also before 1638
took the liberty of varying from the forms in Knox's Book and exercising
their own gifts. The charges made against the character of their
prayers, in what is called the King's Declaration, but what was in
reality the declaration of some of his prelates, is only intelligible on
this supposition.[178] And the Assembly, as I read their deliverance,
rather deny that the prayers of the readers were of the particular
character charged than affirm they were the identical prayers contained
in Knox's Book.[179]
FOOTNOTES:
[146] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 520, 583; Laing's Knox, ii. 186, 239.
[In another passage it is spoken of as "the Booke of the Common Order,
called the Order of Geneva" (Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 548; Laing's
Knox, ii. 210).] The Book of Common Order, which has been frequently
reprinted, is included in vols. iv. and vi. of Dr Laing's edition of
Knox's Works.
[147] The extract from the minutes of the city council embodying these
conditions, which I found in Withof's 'Vertheidigung' and communicated
to Dr Hume Brown, was printed by him in the Appendix to his 'John Knox,'
and is also reprinted here in Appendix D.
[148] "At lenght it was agreed that the Order of Geneua (whiche then was
alreadie printed in Englishe and some copies there amonge them) shulde
take place as an Order moste godly and fardeste off from superstition.
But Maister Knox beinge spoken unto, aswell to put that Order in
practise, as to minister the communion, refused to do ether the one or
the other, affirminge, that for manie considerations he coulde not
consente that the same Order shulde be practised, till the lerned men
off Strausbrough, Zurik, Emden, &c., were made privy" (Brief Discourse
of the Troubles begun at Frankfort in the year 1554, Petheram's reprint,
p. xxvii). We have the following additional entry: "After longe
debatinge to and fro, it was concluded that Maister Knox, Maister
Whittingham, Maister Gilby, Maister Fox and Maister T. Cole shulde drawe
forthe some Order meete for their state and time: whiche thinge was by
them accomplished and offred to the congregation (beinge the same Order
off Geneua whiche is nowe in print). This Order was verie well liked off
many, but suche as were bent to the Booke of Englande coulde not abide
it" (Ibid., pp. xxxvi, xxxvii).
[149] [It is greatly to be regretted that Dr Mitchell does not seem to
have been able to prepare the Appendix to which he here refers; but
after this lecture had left his hands he expressed his "strong
conviction that the words and matter of Knox's Latin Prayer Book of 1556
were derived directly from the Liturgia Sacra of Pollanus." On this
point he entertained "no doubt whatever."]
[150] Laing's Knox, vi. 162.
[151] Booke of the Universall Kirk, i. 30.
[152] Ibid., i. 54.
[153] [The grounds on which this opinion is usually based are given in
Laing's Knox, vi. 277, 278. To these may be added the terms of the
summons raised by Sir James Archebald, Vicar of Lintrathin, against his
parishioners, on the 27th of May 1560, for payment of his teinds, &c.,
on the plea that he "is lauchfullie providit be the lawis and practik of
oure realme, observit in tymes past, of the said vicarage, and hes bene
in possessioun of the samyn thir divers yeris bigane, and hes causit
_the commone prayeris and homilies_ be red owlklie to the parrochinaris
of the said parrochin, and uther wyiss is content to abyde sik
reformatioun as the Lordis of our Secreit Counsale plesis mak
thairintill, and als is adjonit to Goddis congregatioun, and takis part
with the saidis Lordis in setting fordwart the commone caus, to the
gloir of God and commone weill of our realme" (Spalding Miscellany, iv.
120).]
[154] Laing's Knox, iv. 137-139. [Laing gives the 7th of July 1556 as
the correct date of this letter, and says that it is by some oversight
that M'Crie in the later editions of his 'Life of Knox' has dated it 7th
July 1557 (Ibid., iv. 140).]
[155] Lesley's History, p. 292.
[156] Laing's Knox, vi. 119.
[157] Laing's Knox, vi. 118. This evidently shows that they used not the
_ipsissima verba_ of the prayer for all estates, but variant words,
"like in effect." [Randolph's letter is dated 25th August 1560.
Alexander Gordon, Bishop of Galloway, was titular Archbishop of Athens.]
[158] Laing's Knox, vi. 13. [This letter is dated 6th April 1559.]
[159] Liturgies of Edward VI., Parker Society, pp. 157, 158. [The
"certain notes" thus referred to pertain to Edward's First Liturgy.]
[160] Lorimer's Knox and the Church of England, 1875, pp. 29-32.
[161] [On the 29th of July 1637--six days after the riot in St Giles--it
was reported to the Privy Council by Archbishop Spottiswoode, for
himself and in name of the remanent bishops, that it seemed expedient to
them "that there should be a surcease of the service-booke" till the
king signified his pleasure as to the punishment of "that disorderlie
tumult"; and "that a course be sett down for the peaceable exercise
thereof." He also reported that "the saids bishops had appointed and
given order that, in the whole churches of this citie [_i.e._,
Edinburgh], sermon sall be made at the accustomed times, by regular and
obedient ministers, and that a prayer sall be made before and after
sermon, and that neither the old service nor the new established service
be used in this interim." The Council remitted to the bishops "to doe
therein according to the power incumbent unto thame in the dewtie of
thair office" (Peterkin's Records of the Kirk, p. 52).]
[162] [In Knox's version--"the crossing of thair fingaris" (Laing's
Knox, ii. 255).]
[163] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 603.
[164] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 526, 530, 532, 536, 603; Laing's Knox,
ii. 191, 194, 196, 199, 255.
[165] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 417; Laing's Knox, iv. 179; vi. 294.
[166] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 421; Laing's Knox, iv. 182; vi. 297.
[167] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 425; Laing's Knox, iv. 185; vi. 298.
[168] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 426. There is a similar rubric in the
Liturgy of Pollanus: "Minister, nomine Domini invocato, ut Spiritu
Sancto adjutus, possit digna Deo atque salutaria ecclesiae eloqui
recitat textum."
[169] The Liturgy of Pollanus appoints sermons to be preached on the
mornings of Tuesday and Thursday. The service is to begin with a psalm,
which being sung, the minister having invoked the Holy Spirit recites
his text and proceeds with his sermon. He concludes with some shorter
prayer "prout animus tulerit."
[170] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 583; Laing's Knox, ii. 238.
[171] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 450; Laing's Knox, iv. 194.
[172] In the Order of the General Fast it is stated: "The exhortation
and prayers of everie several exercise we have remitted to be gathered
by the discrete ministers, for time preased us so that we culd not frame
them in such order as wes convenient, nether yit thought we it so
expedient to pen prayers unto men, as to teach them with what hart and
affection and for what causes we shuld pray, in this great calamitie"
(Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 695; Laing's Knox, vi. 421). See also
Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 698; Laing's Knox, vi. 470. Even the Order of
Excommunication might be "enlarged or contracted as the wisedome of the
discreit minister shall thinke expedient" (Dunlop's Confessions, ii.
746; Laing's Knox, vi. 470).
[173] Calderwood's Altare Damascenum, 1623, p. 613. In this and the
preceding pages I have made use of materials contributed by me to a
Report anent Innovations in Public Worship, presented to the General
Assembly in 1864. [Elsewhere, Calderwood says: "None are tyed to the
prayers of that book; but the prayers are set down as samplers"
(Calderwood's History, 1678 ed., p. 25). Principal Baillie's evidence is
to the same effect: "The Warner is here also mistaken in his beliefe
that ever the Church of Scotland had any liturgy; they had and have
still some formes for helpe and direction but no tie ever in any of them
by law or practise" (Review of Bramhall's Faire Warning against the
Scots Discipline, 1649, p. 57).]
[174] Row's History, Wodrow Society, pp. 403, 404.
[175] Order and Government of the Church of Scotland, 1641: Address to
the reader.
[176] Certainly not more consistently than Pollanus in the following
rubric: "Hae sunt precationum in liturgiis certae formulae, _quae tamen
sequitur minister_ SUO ARBITRIO ut tempus fert et res postulat. Neque
enim ullâ praescriptione formularum alligandus est Spiritus Dei ad eum
verborum numerum, cui non liceat subjicere vel supponere si meliora
suggerat.... Hae formulae _serviunt tantum rudioribus. Nullius libertati
praescribitur_, tantum ne ab eâ ratione discedatur quam nobis Jesus
Christus praescripsit.... Cumque is (_scilicet_ Spiritus Sanctus) apud
tribunalia subministret quae dicenda sint, non deerit nobis [si] cum
vera fide coram Deo nos sistemus sensu orationis excitati."
[177] "Von vorgeschriebenen Kirchengebeten vor und nach der Predigt
finden wir keine Spur, vielmehr das sichere Gegentheil.... Ums Jahr 1589
finden wir zuerst das sogenannte Lob und Dankopfer und die daran
gehängten Fürbitten für die Obrigkeit, und die übrigen christlichen
Stände.... Erst nach der Mitte des siebzehnten Jahrhunderts ... suchte
man auch im Liturgischen die Willkür der einzelnen in engere Schränken
zuruckzuführen" (Geschichte der ersten Basler-konfession, S. 249-251).
[178] [The charges are in the alleged causes which led James VI.,
immediately after his accession to the English throne, to endeavour to
bring about uniformity in the services of the church throughout the
whole kingdom, and run thus: "That diversitie, nay deformitie, which was
used in Scotland, where no set or publike forme of prayer was used, but
preachers or leaders and ignorant schoolmasters prayed in the church,
sometimes so ignorantly as it was a shame to all religion to have the
Majestie of God so barbarously spoken unto, sometimes so seditiously
that their prayers were plaine libels, girding at soveraigntie and
authoritie; or lyes, being stuffed with all the false reports in the
kingdome" (Large Declaration, 1639, p. 16).]
[179] [The committee appointed by the General Assembly to examine the
Large Declaration describe it as dishonourable to God, to the king, and
to the kirk; and as "stuffed full of lies and calumnies." Concerning
this part in particular they say: "To the great dishonour of this kirk
[it] is affirmed in this Declaration that there is a great deformitie in
our service--no forme of publict prayer, but preachers, readers, and
ignorant schoollemasters, praying in the church, sometymes so
ignorantlie," &c. (Peterkin's Records of the Kirk, pp. 265, 266).]