صور الصفحة



3% 1. ContinuAL controversies within the English Church have

turned upon the comparative merits and authority of the First
and Second Prayer Books of Edward VI. As to their merits,
some regard the first Book as still leavened with Popish doctrines
and practices: to others the second Book appears the work of
foreign influence, and of pertinacious opposition to catholic
antiquity." The question of authority, however it may be histori-
cally decided, can be of little moment to those who now use our
Prayer Book, as successively amended, and as fully authorized by
Parliament and Convocation in 1662.
It may be quite certain that the Convocation “was not per-
mitted to pass its judgment on the Second Service Book put forth
oy authority of Parliament in the reign of Edward VI., and for
Jhis plain reason, that it would have thrown all possible diffi-
>ulties in the way of its publication;” yet this second Book must
De regarded as an English book revised by a selected number of
English bishops and divines. It may be said that foreigners were

consulted about the revisal; and it is true that the opinions of |.

Some strangers were asked : but even in the case of such men as Bucer and Martyr, who from their position would naturally be consulted, and on points where alterations agreed with their expressed opinions, it is not certain that those alterations were made in consequence of their influence. Of all the foreigners who were engaged in the work of reformation, Melancthon and Luther had the greatest influence both in the general reformation of the

* Maskell, Ancient Liturgy, Pref. * Cardwell, Synodalia, vol. 1, p xcvi. Pref. p. x.

Influence of

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

English Church, and in the composition of the English Book of
Common Prayer, where it differed from the Mediaeval Service Books.
2. Melancthon was repeatedly invited into England; and it
seems probable that his opinion, supported by his character and
learning, had great influence on Cranmer's mind. As early as
March 1534, he had been invited more than once;” so that the
attention of Henry VIII. and Cranmer had been turned towards
him, before they proceeded to any doctrinal reformation. The
formularies of faith which were put forth in the reign of Henry,
are supposed to have originated in his advice.” On the death of
Bucer (Feb. 28, 1551), the professorship of Divinity at Cambridge
was offered to Melancthon, and after many letters he was at last
formally appointed” (May 1553). It is perhaps needless to add
that he never came into England; and although his presence had
been so much desired, it does not appear that he had any influence
with regard to the alterations introduced into Edward's Second
Prayer Book. -
3. The first Book was largely indebted to Luther, who had
composed a form of Service in 1533, for the use of Brandenburg
and Nuremberg.” This was taken by Melancthon and Bucer as
their model, when they were invited (1543) by Hermann, Prince
Archbishop of Cologne, to draw up a Scriptural form of doctrine
and worship for his subjects." This book contained ‘directions

1 “Ego jam alteris literis in Angliam vocor.” Melancth. Æðist. No. 1172. Opp. II. 708; ed. Bretschneider. See Hardwick, Reformation, p. 196.

* Laurence, Bampton Lectures, p. 2OO.

8 “Regiis literis vocor in Angliam, quae scriptae sunt mense Maio.” Melancth. Æpist. No. 5447; Opp. VIII.

I 35.
3; Seckendorf. Hist. Autheran.
Part III. § xxv. Add. IV.
5 This excellent man could not
accomplish his purpose of reforma-
tion. He was excommunicated in
1546, and though at first supported
by the Emperor against the Pope for
political purposes, he was deprived
in 1547, and lived in retirement until
his death, Aug. 13, 1552. See Hard-
wick, Reformation, p. 65.
* “Postguam veni Bonnam, intel-

lexi episcopum dedisse mandatum, ut forma doctrinae et rituum proponenda ecclesiis conscribatur, quidem ad exemplum Norimbergensis formae.’ Melancthon, Epist. No. 2706; Opp. v. 112. ‘Scrips; vobis antea Episcopum secuturum esse formam Norimbergensem, erataue ante meum adventum institutus liber ad exemplum Norimbergense scribendus. Retinuit pleraque Osiandri Bucerus; quosdam articulos auxit, ut est copiosus. Mihi, cum omnia relegissem, attribuit articulos tepl rpióv Štrootáoreov, de creatione, de peccato originis, de justitia fidei et operum, de ecclesia, de poenitentia. In his consumpsi tempus hactenus, et legi de •caeremoniis Baptismi et Coenae Domini quae ipse composuit.’ Epist. No. 2707, ibid.


for the public services and administration of the sacraments, with forms of prayer and a litany; and also expositions of several points of faith and duty.” The Litany presents many striking affinities with the amended English Litany of 1544. The exhortations in the Communion Service (1548 and 1549), and portions of the Baptismal Services, are mainly due to this book, through which the influence of Luther may be traced in our Prayer-Book, where additions or considerable changes were made in translating the old Latin Services.” 4. Martin Bucer arrived in England, at Cranmer's invitation, in April 1549, and was appointed King's Professor of Divinity at Cambridge. His opinion of the First Prayer Book, which was then in course of publication, he gives in a letter written to the friends whom he had left at Strasburg, on the day after he reached Lambeth : “The cause of religion, as far as appertains to the establishment of doctrines and the definition of rites, is nearly what could be wished. . . . . We hear that some concessions have been made both to a respect for antiquity, and to the infirmity of the present age. . . . .° Of the use of vestments, candles, commemoration of the dead, and chrism, he says, “They affirm that there is no superstition in these things, and that they are only to be retained for a time. . . . This circumstance greatly refreshed us, that all the services in the churches are read and sung in the vernacular tongue, that the doctrine of Justification is purely and soundly taught, and the Eucharist administered according to Christ’s ordinance.” . . . .” In the following year he was required to state his opinion touching any parts of the Prayer #: Book which seemed to him to need alteration: and he then again - expressed his general satisfaction with it. He prepared, however, a laborious criticism of the whole book, extending to twenty-eight chapters.” Bucer's He objects to the use of the choir for Divine Service, as being o's an antichristian separation of the clergy from the laity, and also #. too. inconvenient for hearing. - Communion He speaks in terms of general approbation of the Communion Office. Service,” and the order that intending communicants should

1 This work was first published

ments, of ceremonies, and the whole in German in 1543, ‘Simplex judi

cure of souls, and other ecclesiastical

cium de Reformatione Ecclesiarum
A:lectoratus Coloniensis.’ A Latin
translation was published at Bonn
in 1545, ‘Simplex ac pia delibera-
tio,’ &c. for clearness and fulness
inferior to the German original.
Fallow, Baptismal Offices Illustrated,
p. 27. An English translation of
the Latin work was printed in 1547,
entitled, “A simple and religious
consultation of us Herman by the
grace of God archbishop of Cologne,
and Prince Elector, &c. by what
means a Christian reformation, and
founded in God’s word, of doctrine,
administration of the divine Sacra-

ministries, may be begun among men
committed to our pastoral charge,
until the Lord grant a better to be
appointed either by a free and Chris-
tian council, general or national, or
else by the states of the Empire of the
nation of Germany, gathered together
in the Holy Ghost.” A second Eng-
lish edition, ‘revised by the trans-
lator thereof, and amended in many
places,’ was printed in 1548.
* See Strype, Cranmer, II. 31;
Memorials Ed. VI. I. 5; Laurence
Bampt. Zect. p. 377.
* Orig. Lett. CCXLVIII.

Influence of

The “Coptsultation' of Aermann, art húishop of Cologne.


His opinion

of English Reformation,

and ceremoretes retained tn 1549,

signify their names to the Curate, and the new directions about the form and substance of the Bread, which he wishes to be made still thicker, so as to resemble real bread. He objects to the use of any part of the Office without proceeding to an actual communion, to the receiving of oblations from persons absent, to the practice of non-communicants remaining in church, and to certain gestures, such as kneeling, crossing, knocking upon the breast, which were practised by many people, and allowed, though not directed by a rubric. He objects to the use of peculiar vestments * at this Service, because they had been abused to superstition, and would lead to disputes; also to the delivery of the Bread into the mouth instead of the hand of the communicant, and to the direction to place upon the holy table so much bread and wine as may be sufficient for the communicants, as implying a superstitious notion of the effect of consecration : he

allows, however, that at a very

1 ‘Equidem cum primum in hoc regnum venissem, quae publice dogmata quique ritus in ecclesia essent recepti, videremdue eo, num, meum possem ministerium his solido consensu adjungere, librum istum Sacrorum per interpretem, quantum potui, cognovi diligenter; quo facto egi gratias Deo, qui dedisset vos has caeremonias eo puritatis reformare; nec enim quicquam in illis deprehendi, quod non sit ex verbo Dei desumptum, aut saltem ei non adversetur commode acceptum. Nam non desunt paucula quaedam, quae si quis non candide interpretetur, videri queant non satis cum verbo Dei congruere.” Buceri Prologus in Censuram.

2 * Censura Martini Buceri super libro Sacrorum, felt ordinationis eccle

early period care was taken to

siae atque ministerii, ecclesiastici in
A'egno Angliae, ad petitionem A^.
Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis, 7% ome
Cranmeri, conscripta.’ Inter Bucert
Scripta Anglicana, fol. Basil. I577.

* “De hac quantas possum ago gratias Deo, qui dedit eam tam puram, tamgue religiose ad verbum Dei exactam, maxime illo jam tempore quo hoc factum est, constitui. Perpaucis enim verbis et signis exceptis nihil omnino in ea conspicio, quod non ex divinis depromptum Scripturis sit; simodo omnia populis Christi digna religione exhiberentur atdue explicarentur.” Ibid. p. 465.

* “Non quod credam in ipsis quicquam esse impii per se, ut piihomines illis non possint pie uti.” Ibid. p. 458.

avoid profanation of the remains of the consecrated elements.
He objects to prayer for the dead, and to the phrase, “sleep of
peace,’ as implying a sleep of the soul; to the ceremonies of
making the sign of the cross, and taking the elements into the
hand in the action of consecration ; to the prayer for such a
consecration that the elements may become to us the Body and
Blood of Christ; and to the mention of the ministry of the holy
angels in carrying our prayers before God. He approves of
homilies, and proposes several additional subjects for new ones.
He allows that a second Communion was anciently administered
on high festivals, when the churches were too small to hold the
congregation; but he dislikes the practice, implying, as it did, that
there would be a larger number of communicants at Christmas and
Easter than at other times, whereas all ought to communicate
every Lord's Day.
He proposes that Baptism should be administered between the
sermon and the communion, because more people were present
than at the morning or evening prayers: and that the office
should be begun at the font, where the congregation can hear,
instead of at the church door. He observes that every scenic
practice ought to be removed from Divine Service, and that what-
ever ancient ceremonies are retained should be few in number, and
should be carefully explained to the people : such ceremonies in
Baptism were, the putting on the white garment, or chrisom, the
anointing with chrism, and the signing with the cross : exorcism
also he considers to be improper, unless all unbaptized persons are
demoniacs, a notion which would destroy many of our Lord's
miracles. The clause which asserts the sanctification of water to
the mystical washing away of sin by the Baptism of Christ he
wishes to be omitted, utterly disliking all benedictions, or conse-
crations of inanimate things. He wishes the phrase to be altered,
that infants “come,” whereas they are brought to Baptism : he
dislikes the mode of addressing the infants, who cannot understand
what is said, both at the time of signing with the cross, and in the
examination which was addressed to the child, although the ques-
tions were answered by the sponsors. He approves of private
Baptism in case of necessity,
He insists upon frequent catechizing, and that all young persons,
whether confirmed or not, should be present, and that none should
be confirmed before they had approved by their manners their
faith, and determination of living unto God. He desires that
marriages should be solemnized only in open day, and before the

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]
« السابقةمتابعة »