Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 3—The Church of the Restoration [part 1]Stoughton, John
History
Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 3—The Church of the Restoration [part 1]
Stoughton, John
Great Britain -- Church history
Upon the 4th of May the exceptions were presented. The principal
persons employed in drawing them up were Calamy, Newcomen, Bates,
Clarke, Wallis, and Jacomb, and--which will surprise many readers--Dr.
Reynolds; so that the Bishop of Norwich must be regarded as sharing
in the responsibility of preparing these Presbyterian objections to
the Prayer Book.[214] Baxter, though not at first assisting in this
division of labour, afterwards helped in the work. His objections
were more minute than his brethren approved, but he wished them to
understand he did not, like some, charge the Common Prayer with
idolatry or false worship, he only took its faults to be "disorder and
defectivenesss;" this, he thought, was the mind of all the Presbyterian
Commissioners except one. They pleaded in their paper that as the
first Reformers composed the Liturgy with a view to win over Papists,
the Liturgy ought now to be revised so as to gain upon the judgments
and affections of all substantial Protestants. They suggested that
repetitions, responses, and an alternate reading of psalms and hymns,
which "cause a confused murmur in the congregation," should be omitted;
that the Litany, a great part of which was uttered only by the people,
should be formed into one prayer, to be offered by the minister, who
according to Scripture is the mouth of the people to God--a very
remarkable objection, it may be noticed by the way, coming as it did
from men who professed to hold unpriestly views of worship. They
further requested that neither Lent nor saints' days should be any
longer observed; that free prayer should be allowed; that it should be
permissible for the minister to omit part of the Liturgy as occasion
might require; that King James' translation should alone be used at
Church; that only the Old and New Testament might be read in the daily
lessons; that no part of the Communion Service should take place at the
communion table, except at the administration of the Lord's Supper;
that the word "minister" should be employed instead of "priest," and
the "Lord's Day" instead of "Sunday;" that the version of the psalter
should be amended; that obsolete words should be altered into others
generally received; and that phrases presuming the congregation to
be regenerated and in a state of grace should be revised. These
Commissioners further said, that the Liturgy was defective in praise
and thanksgiving; that the confession and catechism were imperfect; and
that the surplice, the signing of the cross, and kneeling at the Lord's
Supper, were unwarrantable. The objectors took special exception to
certain expressions in the daily service, and to the rubrics. But their
objections related mainly to the forms for the ordinance of baptism;
the celebration of matrimony; the visitation of the sick; and the
burial of the dead.[215]
[Sidenote: 1661.]
Parallels may be noticed between the exceptions taken on this occasion,
and those taken in William's Committee of 1641.[216]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account