Parliament, which had been adjourned in July, reassembled in November.
Charles, on the 20th of that month, attired in crimson velvet, the
crown on his head, the sceptre in his hand, sat upon the throne of his
fathers, attended by a good number of Earls and Barons, occupying their
benches. It was a proud day for the Church of England; for then, the
first time after a lapse of twenty years, the Spiritual Fathers, in
their scarlet robes, as Peers of the realm, filled their ancient seats;
and His Majesty, it seems, came to the House partly in honour of their
re-instatement. "My Lords and Gentlemen of the House of Commons," he
remarked; "I know the visit I make you this day is not necessary--is
not of course--yet, if there were no more in it, it would not be
strange that I come to see what you and I have so long desired to see,
the Lords, Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons of England met
together."
[Sidenote: 1661.]
The greater part of the speech from the Throne related to the crying
debts which every day he heard; but before the King ended he said:
"Those [things] which concern matters of religion, I confess to you,
are too hard for me, and therefore I do commend them to your care and
deliberation which can best provide for them."[274] He was no polemic
like his grandfather; but he had himself, in the autumn of 1660,
undertaken to manage the Church question; a year's experience, however,
had taught him a little wisdom, and no wonder that the subject which
had been more than Charles V. could manage in Germany, had proved much
too hard for Charles II. in England.
The Lord Chancellor delivered a message to the House of Peers on the
19th of December, to the effect that, besides the apprehensions and
fears then generally prevalent, His Majesty had received alarming
letters from several parts of the kingdom; and also that from
intercepted letters, it appeared there were many discontented persons
troubling the nation's peace; in consequence of which he sought the
assistance of Parliament.[275] The contents of some of these letters
we know. The object of informers, and of the people who rifled the
post, was to make it appear that Nonconformists were disaffected,
that Dissent was treason; and that measures ought to be adopted for
the utter extinction of the growing evil. Yet the accusers, in many
cases, were forced to acknowledge, that the accused were quiet when let
alone. The letters prove that the nation felt dissatisfied,[276] that
multitudes murmured against the Government, that Republican officers
were unsettled, and that some were watching for a good opportunity to
take up arms. A few fanatics entertained rebellious designs; but that
Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists, or Quakers, either generally
or in large numbers, were covering political plots under a veil of
religious worship--the point sought to be established--is an unfounded
surmise, indeed a pure invention.
[Sidenote: PRETENDED PLOTS.]
An example of the method employed to criminate innocent persons may be
adduced, and it will furnish an illustration of some of the evidence to
which Clarendon alluded.
William Kiffin was a rich London merchant, and a famous Baptist
preacher. Whilst held in honour by his fellow-citizens for commercial
integrity, and by his fellow-religionists for fervent zeal, he was the
object of relentless persecution to the party now in the ascendant,
and his steps were tracked by informers with lynx-eyed vigilance, and
wolfish ferocity. When other methods had failed to bring him within the
reach of the law, one of the most abominable schemes which cunning and
malignity ever contrived, was adopted with a view to compass his ruin.
A letter was posted at Taunton bearing the signature of Colonel Basset
of that town, and directed to one Nathaniel Crabb, Silk-thrower, in
London, "residing at his house in Gravel Lane." The letter is preserved
in the State Paper Office. It is written in a spirit of fanaticism,
expressing a desire for the destruction of the sons and daughters of
Belial, and declaring that there were thousands of "dear saints" who
were ready to "lay down their lives to do the work of God." "We do
desire you," it is said, "to be careful to get into your hands powder
and arms; as many as you can between this and Easter, and we will do
what we can to perfect the work." The name of Kiffin is introduced,
together with the names of Jesse and Griffin, as conspirators in
the design. At first sight the letter appears genuine. Nothing is
indicated to the contrary in the _Calendar of State Papers_. When I
read it at first, it startled me; yet this letter is a fabrication.
An autobiography, written by Kiffin, is at hand to expose the fraud.
He was summoned before the Council. The letter was read to him. He
replied that he knew nothing of the matters to which it referred; and
afterwards, before the Chief Justice, by whom he was examined, he
proceeded to show, from certain anachronisms in the document, that
it must be a forgery. His Lordship expressed his satisfaction with
Kiffin's defence, assuring him that the author of the letter, if
discovered, should be punished.[277]
[Sidenote: 1661.]
A Committee of Lords and Commons having been appointed to report
respecting plots, Mr. Waller, on the re-assembling of Parliament, after
the Christmas recess, stated that not less than 160 of the old Army
officers were suspected of being implicated in treasonable schemes.
Some of the regicides, he alleged, were being entertained in France,
Holland, and Germany; arms were being bought by them to accomplish
these designs; many pretended Quakers were riding about at night to the
terror of peaceable subjects, and seditious preachers were plying their
mischievous trade.[278] This report, in some parts obviously absurd,
was followed by no confirmatory evidence, although further information
was promised.
[Sidenote: CONVOCATION.]
The day after the re-assembling of Parliament, in the month of
November, the Houses of Convocation resumed their deliberations. To
facilitate the despatch of business in reference to the Prayer Book,
the Convocation of the province of York agreed to unite with the
Convocation of the province of Canterbury, by means of proxies, binding
themselves to submit to the decisions thus obtained.[279] So earnest
was the Northern Archbishop, that he wrote to the Prolocutor of his
Lower House to send up proxies by the next post, and told the Registrar
of his diocese, "if we have not all from you by the end of next week
we are lost."[280] Several clergymen came from the North to town, to
act on behalf of their brethren. The two provinces thus co-operating,
the business of revising the Prayer Book rapidly proceeded. Upon the
10th of October, the King had written to the Archbishop of Canterbury,
directing His Grace, with the other Bishops and clergy, to discharge
that duty;[281] and, probably, before Convocation met in November,
the Bishops had begun to prepare for the task, although there were
differences of opinion amongst them; for, whilst some pressed for
alterations such as might "silence scruples and satisfy claims," others
were for adopting the Prayer Book as it stood.
[Sidenote: 1661.]
Before describing the alterations which were now made, it is proper
to give, at least, a slight sketch of the history of the volume. The
Middle Ages had no Act of Uniformity. There were several rituals,
called _Uses_, of York, Hereford, Exeter, Lincoln, and other dioceses.
These Uses, which did not materially differ from each other, gave place
after the eleventh century, especially in the South of England, to that
of Sarum; Osmund, Bishop of Salisbury, having about the year 1085,
bestowed great pains upon the revision of the ecclesiastical offices in
his Church. The Missal and Breviary contained in Osmund's revision of
the English mediæval formularies, constitute the basis and, indeed, the
substance of the Book of Common Prayer.[282] The first reformed Liturgy
for the use of the Protestant Church in England was set forth under
Edward VI., in the year 1549. A second, which showed a further advance
on the side of the Reformation, appeared in 1552. A primer, or book of
private prayer, containing the catechism, with collects and other forms
of secret devotions, was published in 1553. Elizabeth's Book of Common
Prayer belongs to the year 1559; and afterwards, at different times,
came particular forms of devotion, prepared for particular seasons
and circumstances. The Prayer Book of 1559 underwent some alterations
at the commencement of the reign of James I., after the Hampton
Court Conference, but they were very slight, and were simply called
_Explanations_. The Book prepared in the reign of Elizabeth, thus
altered, was that which the Convocation of 1661-2 had to revise.
[Sidenote: CONVOCATION.]
Perhaps I shall best succeed in giving with brevity some idea of
the origin of the Common Prayer, and other offices of the Church of
England, if I take the Morning Service, the Communion, and the Order
for performing Baptism, as they were found in the Book used before
the revision under Charles II., and point out, in a general way, the
sources from which those forms were derived.
Morning prayer is in the main drawn from the Matins, Lauds,
and Prime of the Sarum Breviary. That which may be called the
introduction--extending from the opening sentence to the end of the
Absolution--was a new feature in the Prayer Book of 1552. The materials
of it may be found in mediæval Lent services, the old Office for the
Visitation of the Sick, and certain portions of a homily by Pope
Leo. Some have supposed that some hints for this introduction were
gathered from the reformed Strasburg Liturgy, published by Pollanus
(or Pullain).[283] The idea embodied was that of substituting public
confession, awakened by the reading of Holy Scripture, for private
confession made to a priest; and, on the same principle, the using of
a public form of absolution for a secret one. The object was to make
that congregational and common which had previously been individual or
monastic.
[Sidenote: 1661.]
The second portion or main substance of the Morning Service, from
the Lord's Prayer to the three collects, is derived obviously from
different sources. The Versicles are taken from the Sarum Use, and
other old offices. The version of the Psalter is that of Cranmer's
Bible, 1539. The Lessons were substituted for the numerous, but brief
Scripture sections of the Breviary, the Apocrypha being occasionally
used. The Te Deum is an old canticle of Gallic origin;[284] the
Benedicite is the Song of the Three Children, a Greek addition to
the third chapter of Daniel; the Apostles' Creed is taken from the
Anglo-Saxon office of Prime; and, as to the other creeds, we may
add, that the Nicene was sung at Mass, after the Gallican Use; the
Athanasian was sung in the Matin offices.[285]
The Litany may be regarded as a distinct service. It is a very old form
of devotion, differing somewhat in different countries. The Invocation
of Saints was removed by the Reformers; and in the compilation of its
numerous sentences, along with the Sarum ritual, the _Consultation_ of
Hermann, the reforming Archbishop of Cologne (1543), was extensively
employed.[286] The collects and short prayers come from various
sources; many of them from the _Sacramentary_ of Gregory, and some
from that of Gelasius; others were drawn from ancient models, but much
altered; several were new. The few Occasional Prayers in the books
of 1552 and 1559 were, like those added in the revision of 1661-2, new
compositions arising out of existing circumstances.
[Sidenote: CONVOCATION.]
The Communion Service, or Liturgy proper, was derived from the Missal,
expurgated of course. The second Prayer Book of Edward, in that
respect, was a decided improvement on the first. It omits even an
implied _oblation of the consecrated elements_, and simply expresses
the _oblation of the worshippers_--the difference of oblation being
one grand difference between the Romish and Protestant Eucharist. The
second Book also omits the commemoration of "the most blessed Virgin
Mary," with the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, and Martyrs, contained
in the first. Other alterations were made of a decidedly Protestant
character in the time of Edward. The Prayer Book of 1559 indicates
certain retrograde changes. The omission of the thoroughly Protestant
declaration respecting the Lord's Supper in the Book of 1552, is
very significant. It may be added, however, that Bishops Grindal and
Horn, when writing to Bullinger and Gaulter, assured them that the
declaration "continued to be most diligently declared, published and
impressed upon the people."[287]
The Baptismal Service was founded upon formularies, priestly and
pontificial, in the Sarum offices. Certain idle ceremonies were
omitted, but the order of making catechumens, the blessing of the
font, and the form of baptizing, as constituted in the mediæval Church,
were adopted by the Reformers. There are also in the service plain
traces of the influence of Bucer and Melancthon, through Hermann's
_Consultation_. The first prayer was originally composed by Luther.
The thanksgiving after the rite is a much stronger expression of the
doctrine of baptismal regeneration, than the ancient Gallic form of
words from which it seems to be derived.[288]
[Sidenote: 1661.]
These imperfect notices show how carefully the Reformers retained what
they considered most precious in the ancient records of Christian
devotion; how reverently they looked on words which had been vehicles
for ages, of the service of song and the offering of prayer. This
conservative element--connected with a prudential policy lest offence
should be given to semi-Protestants, when it could by any means be
avoided--appears to many an admirer of the Liturgy in the present day
to have been a snare, betraying the compilers into the retention of
some things which marred the beauty of their work, and really caused it
to narrow "the Communion of Saints" in the kingdom of England. Others
think far otherwise. For my own part I would say that as the sources
whence the Book was compiled are so numerous and so ancient, belonging
to Christendom in the remotest times--as there is in it so little that
is really original, so little that belongs to the Reformed Episcopal
Church in England, any more than to other Churches constrained by
conscience to separate from Rome--the bulk of what the Book contains,
including all that is most beautiful and noble, like hymns which,
by whomsoever written, are sung in Churches of every name, ought to
be regarded as the rightful inheritance of any who believe in the
essential unity of Christ's Catholic Church, and can sympathize in the
devotions of a Chrysostom, a Hilary, and an Ambrose.
[Sidenote: CONVOCATION.]
Such was the Book which Convocation had now to examine and revise,
in connection with necessities which had been felt ever since the
Reformation, and which had greatly increased during the seventeenth
century.
The Upper House appointed on the 21st of November, a Committee
consisting of the Bishops of Durham, Ely, Oxford, Rochester, Sarum,
Worcester, Lincoln, and Gloucester, most of whom had been Commissioners
at the Savoy, to meet in the palace of the Bishop of Ely in Hatton
Garden, at five o'clock in the afternoon of every day, except Sunday,
until their work was finished. But when they had taken their walk
as the evening drew in, they really found little to do. Their work
had been anticipated; materials were ready to hand, The Prayer Book
had been carefully studied and revised for a long time, by eminent
Anglicans. MS. notes existed of great value, made or collected by
Bishop Overall, Bishop Andrewes, and Bishop Cosin.[289] Those by the
last, as we shall see, were largely used.
That the Bishops when they met had much of what they needed provided
for them may be concluded from the fact that, on the 23rd of November,
only the second day after the appointment of the Committee, a portion
of the corrected copy was delivered to the Prolocutor of the Lower
House.[290] Previous labours had almost superseded a discharge of the
duties laid upon the newly-appointed Committee.[291] From day to day
progress was made, until, within a month, the work was completed.
[Sidenote: 1661.]
Forms of prayer which had been adopted by Convocation in the summer,
were now inserted in the volume. So also were the General Thanksgiving,
drawn up by Dr. Reynolds, and the Prayer for all sorts and conditions
of men, composed by Dr. Gunning.[292] New collects were introduced,
with occasional prayers in the visitation of the sick.[293] About
600 alterations were made in the body of the volume. Some of these
were in accordance with suggestions made by the Puritans at the Savoy
Conference, but they did not amount to important concessions. Others
of them were adapted to render the Prayer Book more distasteful to
that party than before. The word _Priest_ was substituted for the
word _Minister_ in the Absolution; instead of _Bishops, Pastors, and
Ministers_, were introduced _Bishops, Priests, and Deacons_; and
the words _rebellion and schism_ were added to the petition against
_sedition_; but many of the alterations are unconnected with any
theological or ecclesiastical controversy. There is a volume amongst
the Tennison MSS., Lambeth, which contains _The Differences of the Old
Common Prayer Book and the New_, being a copy of the edition, printed
in 1663, with the variations written upon the margins and upon the
paper interleaved; at the beginning, are the words, "This is the
publique Liturgy revised and rectified. A^o 1662." The notes which had
been collected or composed by Cosin seem to have been largely used
throughout the revision.[294]
[Sidenote: CONVOCATION.]
The Bishops came to an unanimous vote in favour of a form of prayer
before and after sermon; thus cutting off all liberty to introduce
extempore devotion, and extinguishing one of the last hopes of
the Puritan party: but this design was afterwards dropped "upon
prudential reasons."[295] Pell,[296] assisted by Sancroft, revised
the Calendar, and with the Calendar was connected the arrangement of
daily lessons. Should the Apocrypha be read as before in the Church
Service? The Puritans deemed it a profanation to read uninspired and,
in some respects, superstitious books, as if they formed part of Holy
Scripture. A severe battle seems to have been fought on this vital
question. One can imagine how feelings would be excited to the highest
pitch, how the question would be canvassed in different circles, how
people would watch for tidings of the debate, how the History of
Susanna and the Elders would be like a standard wrestled for in the tug
of war; and very probable is Andrew Marvell's story of a jolly doctor,
coming out with a face full of joy, shouting "We have carried it for
Bel and the Dragon!"[297]
[Sidenote: 1661.]
We learn that during the later Sessions of the Convocation, Herbert
Thorndike "constantly attended and had a hand more than ordinary in
the business"--a piece of information which rests upon the authority
of Sancroft. Both Sancroft and his friend were in favour of such
alterations as have been sometimes called _Laudian_, and they were
anxious (especially the latter of these Divines) to proceed further
in that direction. Thorndike, there is reason to believe, regarded as
imperfections the omission of all intercession for departed souls, and
of the prayer for the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the elements
used at the communion.[298] Perhaps some others sympathized with these
eminent persons in this respect, but they found their tendencies
checked by the decided Protestantism of the larger portion of the
clergy, and by a regard to expediency in some who had no decided
convictions on the subject.
Upon the 19th of December--a day on which complaints were made to the
House of Lords to the effect that many disaffected persons, both on
political and ecclesiastical grounds, existed in the realm--the Upper
House committed the preparing of a form of subscription to Cosin and
Henchman, Bishops of Durham and Salisbury, who, in the discharge of
this duty, were to receive assistance from Drs. Chaworth and Burrett.
This small Committee met the same afternoon, when they came to an
agreement respecting the mode of expressing approval of the revised
formularies of the Church of England.[299]
[Sidenote: CONVOCATION.]
Convocation has been charged with indecent haste in the management
of this whole business. I do not wonder at such a charge, since a
similar accusation had been brought against the Presbyterians at the
Savoy, especially in reference to Baxter's Prayer Book: and so far as
the _adoption_ of alterations, proposed to the Houses by individuals
or committees, is concerned, there is ground for the complaint. Six
hundred alterations could never have been properly considered by two
large bodies of men in the short time actually devoted to them; and
looking at the matter as one so much affecting their own consciences,
and the consciences of all clergymen in future time, we must regard so
hasty a decision on the part of Convocation as unjustifiable. But, as
it regards _preparing_ the alterations, I see no ground on which to
charge with want of care the persons who performed that duty.[300]
There does not appear to have been any discussion in Convocation
touching the Thirty-nine Articles. No alterations in them were
proposed by the Anglican party, although the Articles have always
been considered as presenting the more thoroughly Protestant or
_Evangelical_ side of the Church formularies.
The two Houses of Convocation adopted and subscribed the Book of Common
Prayer on the 20th of December. As the Act of Uniformity had not then
been passed, as this subscription was intended to prepare for it, and
as no Act of Parliament existed at the time requiring subscription,
it may be instructive and useful to notice the grounds on which this
subscription took place.
[Sidenote: 1661.]
This fact is curious that, although the practice of subscribing to a
creed began so early as the Council of Nicæa, neither the clergy of
the Roman Catholic Church, nor the clergy of the Greek Church have
ever been required, or are now required, by any of their laws, so
to express their belief as to doctrine and their resolution as to
practice. The enforcement of subscription upon Protestant ministers
commenced soon after the Reformation; and, in some cases, the extent
of belief which it was intended to cover seems wide indeed; for in
the Duchy of Brunswick, Duke Julius required from clergymen, from
professors, and from magistrates, "a subscription to all and everything
contained in the Confession of Augsburg, in the apology for the
Confession, in the Smalcaldic Articles, in all the works of Luther,
and in all the works of Chemnitz."[301] The Articles of the Church
of England were not subscribed generally until the twelfth year of
the reign of Queen Elizabeth, when subscription was ordered for the
special purpose of checking the admission of Papists into the English
Church, and also the admission of those who had taken orders in the
foreign Reformed Churches. The assent required was confined to those
Articles "which only concern the Confession of the true Christian
faith and the doctrine of the Sacraments."[302] The Earl of Leicester
introduced to the University of Oxford, in 1581, subscription to the
Articles, without any precise form of words to be required from all
undergraduates upon matriculation, and from all who took degrees. The
extending of the act of subscription to the entire Liturgy was a step
not taken until 1603, when, by the canons of Convocation of that year,
this form of assent came to be required of all the clergy. Hence it
appears to have been in compliance with a canon law enacted by their
predecessors, and not in compliance with any statute law, that the
members of Convocation, in the year 1661, signed the declaration of
assent and consent to the contents of the Prayer Book.[303]
[Sidenote: CONVOCATION.]
After the Revision had been completed, a copy of the Bill then pending
in Parliament was read and examined in the Upper House of Convocation
upon the 29th of January. Upon the 18th of February, Dr. Barwick was
chosen Prolocutor in the room of Dr. Ferne, promoted to the see of
Chester. The Bishops deputed their brethren of St. Asaph, Carlisle,
and Chester, on the 5th of March, with the concurrence of the Lower
House, to revise alterations in the Book during its progress through
Parliament--a resolution which seems to have had a prospective
reference to alterations anticipated as possible, but which do not
appear to have been ever attempted; for it is known, as will be
hereafter seen, that none were made by the Commons, and it may be
inferred that none were made by the Lords.[304] Upon the 8th of March
Convocation directed Sancroft, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury,
to superintend the printing of the Book; and Mr. Scattergood and Mr.
Dillingham to correct the proofs. Upon the 22nd of the same month the
subject of a special form for the consecration of churches came under
discussion.[305]
[Sidenote: 1661.]
Convocation accomplished no alterations in the canons, though it took
up the subject repeatedly; nor did it determine anything with regard
to Church discipline. The whole of this question had remained in an
unsettled state ever since the Reformation. In the reign of Henry
VIII. (1534), a Commission had been appointed by statute to revise
the ecclesiastical laws; and enactments respecting them nearly up to
the time of the death of that monarch were repealed. In the reign
of Edward VI. (1551), a renewed Commission for the same purpose was
statutably instituted; and the labours of the Commissioners issued in
the well-known book, entitled _Reformatio legum Ecclesiasticarum_, a
code strongly imbued with the intolerance of the age.[306] But it never
received the Royal sanction; it never became legally binding. Another
abortive attempt was made in Convocation (1603), when James I. occupied
the throne; and canons were passed declaring the doctrine of passive
obedience, and denouncing a series of opposite opinions.[307] Happily
for the credit of the Church and the peace of the realm, this, like the
previous scheme of ecclesiastical law, failed to obtain constitutional
sanction. The last endeavour at making canons (1640) hastened
the crisis of the Civil Wars. There was little then to encourage
Convocation to proceed with the business of Church discipline, and,
therefore, notwithstanding the earnestness of Thorndike in promoting
it, the subject was allowed to drop.[308]
[Sidenote: BISHOPS.]
The month of December, which saw the revisionary labours of Convocation
completed, also witnessed within the walls of Westminster Abbey two
remarkable solemnities connected with the revival of Episcopacy. Upon
the 12th of December, Sharp, Archbishop of St. Andrew's, Fairfull,
Archbishop of Glasgow, Leighton, Bishop of Dunblaine, and Hamilton,
Bishop of Galloway, were consecrated by the Bishops of London and
Worcester;[309] and upon the 20th, the day when the Prayer Book was
being subscribed by the members of the two Houses of Convocation, the
Bishop of Hereford, brother to the Duke of Albemarle, was buried,--a
silver mitre, with his Episcopal robes, being borne by the Herald
before the hearse, which was followed by the Duke, by several noblemen,
and by all the Bishops.[310]
[Sidenote: 1661.]
The Bishops, this year, had other business besides that of Convocation
to occupy time, and to create anxiety. Prior to the passing of the
Act of Uniformity, their dioceses could not but be in a state of
confusion. Many clergymen who were disaffected to the restored system
and its Episcopal administrators, retained incumbencies, and gave
considerable trouble to the ecclesiastical superiors. It was as if,
after the suppression of a long-continued and successful mutiny, and
the re-instatement of old officers in command, a number of soldiers in
the ranks, or of sailors on board ship, should still remain opposed
to the colonel or the captain.[311]