"Yet lest the same kneeling might be thought or taken otherwise, we do declare that it is not meant thereby, that any adoration is done, or ought to be done, either unto the sacramental bread or wine there bodily received, or to any real or essential presence there being of Christ's natural flesh and blood." This addition is said, on somewhat uncertain evidence, to have been suggested by John Knox. The most important change, however, was that made in the words to be addressed to the communicant in the act of partaking. In the _First Prayer-Book_ the words were: "When the priest delivereth the sacrament of the Body of Christ, he shall say to every one these words: _'The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given, for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life.'_ And the minister delivering the sacrament of the Blood, and giving every one once to drink and no more, shall say: _'The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life.'_"[490] In the _Second Prayer-Book_ the rubric was altered to: "Then the minister, when he delivereth the bread, shall say: _'Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on Him in thy heart by faith and with thanksgiving.'_ And the minister that delivereth the cup shall say: _'Drink this in remembrance that Christ's blood was shed for thee, and be thankful.'_"[491] The difference represented by the change in these words is between what _might_ be the doctrine of transubstantiation and a sacramental theory distinctly lower than that of Luther or Calvin, and which _might_ be pure Zwinglianism. This _Second Prayer-Book of King Edward_ was enforced by a second _Act of Uniformity_, which for the first time contained penalties against laymen as well as clergymen--against "a great number of people in divers parts of the realm, who did wilfully refuse to come to their parish churches." The penalties themselves show that many of the population refused to be dragged along the path of reformation as fast as the Council wished them to go.[492] Soon after there followed a new creed or statement of the fundamental doctrines received by the Church of England. This was the _Forty-two Articles_, interesting because they formed the basis of the later Elizabethan _Thirty-nine Articles_. They were thrust on the Church of England in a rather disreputable way. It was expressly slated on the title-page that they had been agreed upon by the Bishops and godly divines at the last Convocation in London--a statement which is not correct. They were never presented to Convocation, and were issued on the authority of the King alone, and received his signature on June 12th (1553), scarcely a month before he died.