Skip to main content

Full text of "The laws and usages of the church and the clergy"

See other formats 


BX  5151   .P656  1855  v. 2 
Pinnock,  W.  H.  1813-1885. 
The  laws  and  usages  of  the 
church  and  the  clergy  . . 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2015 


https://archive.org/details/lawsusagesofchur02pinn 


MINISTERIAL  DUTIES, 

JHanagtnmtt  nf  a  $arii 


THE  LAWS  AND  USAGES 


OF  THE 


Cljttrrl)  an*  tiit  Clptgq. 


THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTER,  AND  THE 
PRELIMINARY  RUBRICS,  &c. 


[Vol.  b.] 


BY  THE  EEV.  W.  H.  PINNOCK,  LL.D. 

of  Cobpui  Curisti  College.  Camiibidge. 

Jvthor  nf  tl.e  Jnuh/\is  of  '  .V,- rtptxTt'  lhit<,,  ii '    '  Krrl(*«tltical  History.' 
'  History  of  the  Reformation,'  4"c. 


SeccmlT  CBttition. 


CAMBRIDGE :— J.  HALL  &  SON; 

LONDON  :— WHITTAKEE  AND  CO.,  AVE  MARIA  LANE; 
BELL  AND  DALDY,  186,  FLEET  STEEET ; 
OXFORD:— J.  H.  PAEKEE. 
i860. 


3.  $all  &  Son, 
printers.  ©ambtiSgc. 


tfjlt  dDifiriatittg  ffirafofer. 


1.  — An  opinion  was  entertained  some  little  time  ago 
by  many  of  our  Clergy,  that  the  -weightier  and  more 
important  functions  of  the  Clerical  Office,  involving 
the  maintenance  of  sound  Christian  doctrine  and  the 
'  bishopric  of  souls,'  had  been  much  intruded  upon  in 
later  years  by  matters  of  comparatively  far  less  signi- 
ficance and  importance ;  and  that  the  time,  thought,  and 
study,  necessary  for  the  true  interests  of  religion,  had 
been  diverted  with  intense  zeal,  and  no  trifling  degree 
of  bitterness,  from  their  proper  pursuit  to  the  con- 
sideration of  obscure  and  obsolete  points  of  Canonical 
discipline,  Ceremonial  order,  and  Rubrical  punctilio. 
This  charge,  not  quite  however  to  the  extent  here 
advanced,  public  notoriety  must  compel  us  to  admit, 
and  we  may  venture  to  trace  it  in  a  great  measure  to 
the  deficiency  of  information  possessed  by  the  Clergy 
generally  with  respect  to  the  Ecclesiastical  and  tem- 
poral Laws  by  which  such  points  may  often  be  simpli- 
fied and  explained,  as  well  as  to  the  decisions  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  Courts  by  which  numerous  cases  have 
been  actually  determined.  At  the  present  day  also,  a 
movement  has  been  set  on  foot  to  abbreviate  the 
Moening  Service,  and  otherwise  reform  the  Litubgy. 
The  various  points  which  have  been  propounded  will, 
however,  be  discussed  in  due  order. 

2.  — In  the  performance  of  the  Ministerial  Duties 
of  our  Church,  it  cannot  be  questioned  that  our  grand 
rule  of  action  should  be  the  Apostolical  injunction, 

"Let  all  things  be  done  unto  edifying:  decently, 

"and  in  order."  (1  Cor.  xiv.  26.  40.).  Yet  this 
'  edification,'  '  decency,'  and  '  order,'  can  never  be 
effected  by  each  individual  Minister  acting  upon  bis 


260 


THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTER. 


own  private  opinions  or  prejudices  with  regard  to 
the  Eites  and  Ceeemonies  to  be  used  in  Public 
Worship ;  but  by  all  Ministers  pursuing  one  uniform 
practice,  prescribed  by  competent  authority,  and  main- 
tained by  efficient  power.  This  is  also  kid  down  in 
our  present  Lituegt  in  the  prefatory  remarks  on 
'  Ceremonies '  in  these  words  : — 

'  Although  the  keeping  or  omitting  as  a  Ceremont,  in  itself 
'considered,  is  but  a  small  thing;  yet  the  wilful  and  contemptu- 
'  ous  transgression  and  breaking  of  a  common  Order  and 
'  Discipline  is  no  small  offence  before  God.  '  Let  all  things  be 
'  done  among  you',  saith  St  Paul, 'in  a  seemly  and  due  order'; 
'  the  appointment  of  the  which  Order  pertaineth  not  to  private 
'  men  ;  therefore  no  man  ought  to  take  in  hand,  nor  presume  to 
'  appoint  or  alter  any  Public  or  Common  Order  in  Christ'3 
'  Church,  except  he  be  lawfully  called  and  authorized  there- 
'  unto.' 

The  necessity  of  this  rule  may  be  inferred  from 
the  notorious  fact,  stated  by  Wheatly  in  his  Preface, 
that — 'even  the  daily  and  ordinary  Service  is  more 
'  than  the  Clergy  themselves  know  how  to  perform  in 
'  any  Church  but  their  own,  before  they  have  been 
'  informed  of  the  particular  custom  of  the  place.' — 
Com.  Prayer,  p.  vii. 

3. — With  the  view  of  securing  so  desirable  an  end 
as  Uniformity  in  the  Public  Services  of  the  Church, 
at  the  period  of  the  Reformation  the  various  Books 
of  Offices  used  in  the  duTerent  Dioceses  in  the  king- 
dom were  collated  and  condensed  into  one  Litubgy 
(a. d.  1549 — 1662),  so  that  'the  whole  realm  should 
'  have  but  one  Use ' ;  Articles  (the  xxxix)  were  also 
drawn  up  (a.  d.  1562 — 71)  '  for  the  avoiding  of  diver- 
'  sities  of  opinion' ;  Constitutions  and  Canons 
agreed  upon  (a.  d.  1603 — 4),*  'for  the  good  and 
'  quiet  of  the  Church,  and  better  government  thereof  ; 


*  Prior  to  a.  d.  17.53,  the  Historical  year  began  on  January  1st, 
the  Legal,  Ecclesiastical,  and  Civil  year  on  March  25th,  whence 
the  intervening  period  has  been  assigned  by  writers  either  to  the 
year  concluding,  or  the  vear  commencing;  aiid  is  variously  written; 
thus,  1603-4,  or  1G0§. 


EITUAL  CONTBOVEEST. 


2G1 


and  Statutes  passed  by  the  Imperial  Parliament 
from  time  to  time  to  give  effect  to  these  measures  by 
enforcing  Conformity  to  the  Liturgy,  and  Uniformity 
in  Public  Worship. 

4. — As  years  rolled  on,  however,  silent  and  aggres- 
sive Custom, — originating,  it  may  be,  partly  in  foreign 
prejudices  introduced  after  the  Marian  persecution, 
partly  in  laxity  of  obedience,  or  in  the  change  of  times 
and  circumstances, —  materially  interfered  with  the 
due  observance  of  the  prescribed  Conformity,  and  in 
many  instances  actually  set  aside  the  requirements  of 
the  Law.  This,  as  might  be  expected,  would  in  course 
of  time  receive  some  violent  check,  and  generate  as  a 
consequence  some  forcible  re-action.  It  has  occurred 
in  our  own  days  to  witness  the  stand  made  against 
these  encroachments  of  Custom,  and  this  gradual  dis- 
turbance of  Ceremonial  Order,  and  Church  discipline  ; 
but  in  what  spirit,  and  with  what  judgment  and 
discretion,  such  objects  have  been  attempted,  may  be 
discerned  from  the  general  proceedings  of  the  Clerical 
body,  and  the  literature  of  the  times :  indeed,  it  has 
been  no  uncommon  remark  that  antiquarian  research, 
patristic  lore,  and  the  study  of  the  older  Canonists 
and  Ritualists,  were  advancing  very  far  towards  sacri- 
ficing the  Theological  to  the  Ecclesiastical,  Doctrine 
to  Discipline,  and  in  extreme  cases  the  actual  sub- 
stance of  Religion  to  its  Forms. 

The  Rev.  Christopher  Benson  remarks  in  his  little  'brochure  ' 
on  "  The  Rubrics  and  Canons  "  : — '  The  warfare  is  between  Popish 
'  tendencies,  clothing  themselves  with  the  name  of  Catholic,  on  the 
'one  hand,  and  Protestant  tendencies,  aiming  to  carry  out  the 
'  Reformation  to  its  full  extent,  on  the  other.  This  is  its  first 
'  characteristic.  Secondly,  it  is  between  that  portion  of  the  Clergy 
'  who  think  the  Ecclesiastical  part  of  the  Church  ought  to  regulate 
'  all  things  relative  to  religious  ordinances,  leaving  to  the  Laity 
'only  the  duty  of  obedience;  and  that  portion  of  the  Laity  who 
'  maintain  that  their  wishes  are  to  be  consulted  and  opinions  re- 
'garded,  and  who  are  averse  to  the  introduction  of  long-disused 
'  ceremonies  and  practices,  to  which  though  the  Clergy  have,  the 
'  Laity  neither  have  expressed  nor  are  required  to  express  an 
'  universal  assent  and  unreserved  conformity.'  (p.  29.) 

e2 


2R2 


EITUAIj  controversy. 


5.  — It  is  to  be  hoped,  however,  that  this  reproach 
is  no  longer  applicable,  and  that  the  fire  of  controversy 
is  by  this  time  well  nigh  expended ;  so  that  the  real 
and  intrinsic  value  of  these  matters  will  in  future  be 
better  understood  by  all  parties,  and  be  considered 
with  calmer  reflection,  and  less  heated  zeal.  '  Let 
'  every  one,'  as  De.  Xicholls  says  in  the  Preface  to 
his  "  Commentary  on  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer," 
'  be  as  ready  to  find  out  expedients  for  composing 
1  differences,  as  many  are  studious  to  find  out  ways  to 
'  disagree  upon  or  to  fix  marks  of  distinction  to  keep 
'  up  their  parties,  which  would  otherwise  dwindle  into 
'  nothing.  Let  them  but  do  this  heartily  and  sincerely, 
'  and  these  two  sorts  of  Church-of-England  men  would 
'soon  be  one  again.  By  this  they  would  lend  the 
'  most  effectual  hand  to  preserve  our  Church,  which 
'by  these  foolish  differences,  and  diverse  methods  of 
'  securing,  they  will  run  a  hard  venture  of  undoing.' — 
(p.  xiii.). 

6.  — To  aid  the  Offictatln g  Mimster  in  forming 
a  just  appreciation  of  these  "  things  indifferent,"  and 
with  the  view  of  assisting  his  judgment  with  regard 
to  the  correct  interpretation  of  the  Rubrics,  and  to 
the  proper  performance  of  the  Public  Services  of  the 
Church,  the  subject  will  now  be  discussed  at  length, 
but  more  as  a  question  of  fact,  and  of  to-day,  than  of 
theory  or  of  antiquity. 

7.  — The  Author  however  feels  bound  at  the  thresh- 
hold  of  his  remarks  to  state  distinctly  that  nothing 
will  be  here  advanced  in  any  party  spirit,  or  with  the 
view  of  inculcating  any  peculiar  personal  preposses- 
sions ;  but  that  he  is  actuated  solely  by  a  sincere 
desire  of  laying  before  the  Eeader,  "fairly  and  im- 
partially, every  available  information,  which  may  help 
to  elucidate  and  explain  the  power  and  position  of  a 
Clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England  with  respect  to 
the  execution  of  his  Public  Ministerial  Duties.  It  may 
by  some,  perhaps,  be  considered  presumptuous  on  his 


SUBMISSION  Or  THE  CLERG5T. 


263 


part  to  enter  upon  so  delicate  and  critical  an  inquiry ; 
he  therefore  trusts  that  he  may  not  expose  himself  to 
the  charge  of  egotism  by  stating,  that  were  it  not  that 
he  has  had  for  some  years  to  contend  with  many  of 


management,  whence  he  gathered  much  experience, — 
were  it  not  also  that  he  has  been  honoured  with  the 
acquaintance  of  many  of  the  most  learned  and  practical 
men,  and  some  holding  the  highest  positions  in  the 
Church,  whose  kind  counsel  and  opinion  were  ever  at 
his  command  ;  as  well  as  been  possessed  of  the  privi- 
leged use  of  that  great  resource  for  authorities  the 
Cambridge  University  Library, —  he  would  doubtlessly 
have  never  undertaken  the  laborious  task  of  arranging 
for  publication  the  rough  materials  which  he  had 
collected  for  his  personal  use.  These  remarks,  the 
Author  trusts,  will  be  sufficiently  explanatory  of  the 
appearance  of  these  volumes  ;  and  with  every  apology 
for  this  digression,  he  will  now  add,  that  the  Statute 
Law,  Constitutions  and  Canons,  and  the  Ecclesiastical 
authorities,  bearing  upon  the  several  questions  of 
Liturgical  Uniformity  will  be  brought  forward  as 
each  case  arises ;  and  the  changes  and  discrepancies 
introduced  by  Custom,  and  now  in  practice,  will  be 
detailed  in  order,  so  as  to  afford,  as  nearly  as 
may  be,  a  complete  summary  of  the  Law  and  Usage 
affecting  Ecclesiastical  and  Rubrical  Conformity. 

8. — For  greater  facility  of  reference  the  arrange- 
ment of  our  present  Liturgy  will  be  adopted  Tet  a 
few  preliminary  observations,  declaratory  of  the  au- 
thority by  which  Ritual  and  Ceremonial  matters  have 
been  propounded  and  directed,  and  the  general  obli- 
gations under  which  the  Clergy  are  bound  to  their 
observance  seem  indispensable. 

First  in  order  may  be  placed  the  proceeding 
known  as  the  "Submission  of  the  Clergy  to  the  Crown," 
by  which  the  Ecclesiastical  power  was  shorn  of  the 
greater  part  of  its  authority  over  the  Clerical  Order, 
and  things  spiritual. 


Parochial 


261 


POWEE  Of  CONVOCATION. 


Submission  of  the  Clergy  to  the  Crown. 

9.  — The  Clergy  of  the  Church  of  England,  as  may 
be  gathered  from  the  words  in  the  preamble  of  the 

Act,  25  Hen.  YIII.  c.  19.  a.  d.  1533,  'not  only 

'acknowledged  according  to  the  truth,  that  the 
'  Convocation  of  the  same  Clergy  is,  always  hath  been, 
'and  ought  to  be,  assembled  only  by  the  King's 
'  writ,  but  also  submitting  themselves  to  the  King's 
'  Majesty,  promised  in  verbo  sacerdotii,  that  they  will 
'never  from  henceforth  presume  to... enact... any  new 
'  Canons,  Constitutions,  ic... without  the  King's  most 
'  Royal  assent  and  licence : '  the  Act  then  proceeds : — 

'  Be  it  therefore  now  enacted  by  authority  of  this  present 
'  Parliament,  according  to  the  said  submission  and  petition  of 
'  the  said  Clergy,  that  they  nor  any  of  them  from  henceforth 
'shall  presume  to  attempt,  allege,  claim,  or  put  in  use  any 
'  Constitutions  or  Ordinances,  Provincial  or  Synodal,  or  any 
'other  Canons;  nor  shall  enact,  promulge,  or  execute  any  such 
'  Canons,  Constitutions,  or  Ordinances  Provincial,  by  whatever 
'  name  or  names  they  may  be  called,  in  their  Convocations  in 
'time  coming,  (which  always  shall  be  assembled  by  authority 
'  of  the  King's  urit),  unless  the  same  Clergy  may  have  the  King's 
'  most  Royal  assent  and  licence  to  make,  promulge,  and  execute 
'  such  Canons,  Constitutions,  and  Ordinances,  Provincial  or 
'  Synodal,  upon  pain  of  every  one  of  the  said  Clergy  doing 
'  contrary  to  this  Act,  and  being  thereof  convict,  to  suffer 
'  imprisonment,  and  make  fine  at  the  King's  will.' — 25  Ben.  VIII. 
c.  19.  s.  1.  Appeals  he  to  the  Court  of  Delegates — ib.  Sect.  4:  but 
thev  are  now  transferred  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Council,  by  2  &  8  Witt.  IV.  c.  92;  3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  41  j  6  &  7  Vict, 
c.  38;  7&8  Vict.  69. 

10.  — Although  the  Clergy  were  by  the  above 
clause  not  allowed  to  assemble  in  Convocation  without 
the  King's  writ ;  nor  when  assembled,  to  frame  any 
new  Canons,  &c.  unless  permitted  by  a  Eoyal  licence ; 
nor  to  put  such  Canons  when  framed  into  execution 
without  the  assent  of  the  Crown;  nor  even  then  to 
enforce  them  if  they  were  contrary  to  the  Laws  and 
Customs  of  the  Bealni,  or  the  King's  prerogative,* 


*  For  further  information  on  this  subject  the  Eeader  is  referred 
to  Cardweix's  Synodalia,  Lathbury's  History  of  Convocation, 
the  Biographia  Britaxkica,  and  to  the  several  works  published 


THE  EOTAL  STTPEEMACY. 


265 


yet  the  Canons,  &c.  already  existing  were  not  made 
void.    (Eogees'  Eccl.  Law,  281.) 

The  pre-existing  Canons,  &c.  not  void.  — '  Such 
'Canons,  Constitutions,  Ordinances,  and  Synodals  Pro- 
'vincial,  being  already  made,*  which  be  not  contrariant  or 
'repugnant  to  the  Laws,  Statutes,  and  Customs  of  this  Realm, 
'nor  to  the  damage  or  hurt  of  the  lung's  prerogative  Royal,  shall 
'  now  still  be  used  and  executed  as  they  were  afore  the  making 
'of  this  Act,  till  such  time  as  they  may  be  viewed,  searched, 
'or  otherwise  ordered  and  determined  by  the  said  two  and 
'  thirty  persons,  &c.'— 25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  19.  s.  7.  (see  Wake's  State 
of  Church,  439.  547;  Heylyn's  Tracts,  6). 

This  Commission  however  was  never  effective, 
although  revived  in  the  succeeding  reign  (by  3  &  4 
Edw.  VI.  c.  11.  1549)  ;  and  '  as  no  such  review  has 
'yet  been  perfected,  upon  this  statute  (25  Men.  VIII.) 
'  now  depends  the  authority  of  the  Canon  Law  in 
'England.' — Blackstone,  1.  Com.  83. 

This  Act  (25  Sen.  VIII.)  was  repealed  by  1  &  2 
Ph.  &  Ma.  c.  8. ;  yet  having  been  revived  by  1  Eliz. 
c.  1.  it  is  now  in  force. 

The  Hoy AL  Supremacy  in  Matters  Spiritual  and 
Ecclesiastical  Established. 

11. — This  is  the  next  subject  for  consideration. 
In  the  year  following  the  Submission  of  the  Clergy, 


during  the  reign  of  William  III,  and  Anne  (1689—1714)  upon  the 
controversies  which  then  disturbed  the  two  Houses.  The  Defenders 
of  the  Royal  prerogative  at  that  period  were,  among  others,  Wake, 
Kennet,  Gibson,  and  Hody;  the  advocates  for  the  independence  of 
Convocation  were  Binkes,  Atthrbury,  Hill,  &c.  The  perusal  of 
the  treatises  of  Wake,  and  of  Atterbury,  at  a  time  like  the  present 
when  the  propriety  of  the  revival  of  the  powers  of  Co?ivocation  is  a 
question  much  discussed,  will  well  repay  the  time  bestowed  upon 
them,  and  put  the  reader  in  possession  of  both  sides  of  the  argument. 

*  In  the  opinion  of  Judge  Coleridge,  as  observed  in  his  decision 
in  Dr.  Hampden's  case,  {Reg.  v.  Canterbury  Abp.,  1848),  this  clause 
refers  to  the  Domestic  Canon  Law  comprising  the  Legatine 
Constitutions  of  Otho,  (1220)  and  Othobon  (1268),  edited  by 
John  de  Athona,  and  the  Provincial  Constitutions  made  in  the 
Convocations  of  Canterbury  from  the  time  of  Langton  (1201)  to 
Chichele  (1443),  and  which  are  collected  by  Lyndwood. 


266 


THE  ROYAL  SUPREMACY. 


the  Eotal  Supremacy  as  well  in  all  Spiritual  or 
Ecclesiastical  things   or  causes,  as  Temporal,  was 
established  by  Act  of  Parliament  in  these  words : — 
'  The  King's  Majesty  justly  and  rightfully  is  and  ought  to  be  the 
'  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  so  is  recognized  by 
'  the  Clergy  of  this  Realm  in  their  Convocations,  yet  nevertheless, 
'  for  corroboration  and  confirmation  thereof,  and  for  increase  of 
'  virtue  in  Christ's  religion  within  this  Realm  of  England  and  to 
'  repress  and  extirp  all  errors,  heresies,  and  other  enormities  and 
'  abuses  heretofore  nsed  in  the  same;  be  it  enacted  by  authority  of 
'  this  present  Parliament  that  the  King  our  sovereign  Lord,  his 
'  heirs  and  successors,  Kings  of  this  Realm,  shall  be  taken, 
'  accepted,  and  refuted,  the  only  Supreme  Bead  in  earth  of  the 

'  Church  of  England,  called  Anglicana  Ecclesia  and  shall  have 

'  full  power  and  authority  from  time  to  time  to  visit,  repress, 
'  redress,  reform,  order,  correct,  restrain,  and  amend  all  such 
'Errors,  Heresies.  Abuses,  Offences,  Contempts,  and  Enormities, 
'  whatsoever  they  be,  which  by  any  manner,  spiritual  authority 
'  or  jurisdiction  ought  or  may  lawfully  be  reformed,  repressed, 
'  ordered,  redressed,  corrected,  restrained,  or  amended,  most  to 
'  the  pleasure  of  Almighty  God,  the  increase  of  virtue  in  Christ's 
'  religion,  and  for  the  conservation  of  the  peace,  unity,  and 
'  tranquillity  of  this  Realm.'— 26  Ben.  VT1I.  c.  1.  A.  v.  1534.'  This 
Act  was  repealed  by  1  &  2  Ph.  <f  Ma.  c.  8;  but  revived  by  1  Eliz. 
c.  1 ;  5  Eliz.  c.  1 ;  and  8  Eliz.  c.  1. 

The  statute  1  Eliz.  c.  L  is  important,  and  we 
perceive  that  by  it  this  Ecclesiastical  Jurisdiction  is 
annexed  to  the  Crown  in  perpetuity.  —  It  is  enacted 
'that  such  jurisdictions, privileges,  superiorities,  and  pre-eminences 
'  Spiritual  and  Ecclesiastical,  as  by  any  Spiritual  or  Ecclesiastical 
'  power  or  authority  hath  heretofore  been,  or  may  lawfully  be 
'  exercised  or  used  for  the  visitation  of  the  Ecclesiastical  state,  and 
'  persons,  and  for  reformation,  order,  and  correction  of  the  same, 
'  and  of  all  manner  of  errors,  heresies,  schisms,  abuses,  offences, 
'  contempts,  and  enormities,  shall  for  ever  by  authority  of  this 
'  present  Parliament  be  united  and  annexed  to  the  Imperial  Crown 
'  of  this  Realm.'— Sect.  17. 

The  18^  Section  establishes  the  'Court  of  High 
Commission '  for  the  execution  of  matters  connected 
with  this  Ecclesiastical  Jurisdiction,  but  the  Court 
was  abolished  by  16  Car.  1.  c.  11.  In  the  19th  Section, 
at  the  request  of  Elizabeth,  her  title  was  changed 
from  '  Supreme  Head  '  to  '  Supreme  Governor  of 
the  Church  of  England:  This  Statute  (1  Eliz.  c.  1.) 
is  now  in  force. 


12. — The  Royal  Supremacy  was  thus  further  defined 
shortly  after  in  the  xxsix  Articles  (1562—71.)— 


THE  BOYAL  SUPREMACY. 


267 


'  The  King's  Majesty  hath  the  chief  power  in  this  Realm  of  England, 
'and  other  his  Dominions,  unto  whom  the  Chief  -Government-of 
'  all  Estates  of  this  Realm,  whether  they  be  Ecclesiastical  or  Civil, 
'in  all  cases  doth  appertain,  and  is  not,  nor  ought  to  be,, subject 
'  to  any  Foreign  Jurisdiction.  Where  we  attribute  to  the  King's 
'Majesty  the  Chief  Government,  by  which  Title,  we  underetsnd 
'the  minds  of  some  slanderous  folks  to  be  offended;  we  give  not 
'to  our  Princes  the  ministering  either  of  God's  word,  or  of  the 
'Sacraments,  the  which  thing  the  '  Injunctions'  also  lately  set 
'forth  by  Elizabeth  our  Queen  do  most  plainly  testify;  but 
'  that  only  prerogative  which  we  see  to  have  been  given  always 
'  to  all  godly  Princes  in  Holy  Scriptures  by  God  Himself:  that  is, 
'  that  they  should  rule  all  states  and  degrees  committed  to  their 
'  charge  by  God,  whether  they  be  Ecclesiastical  or  Temporal,  and 
'  restrain  with  the  Civil  sword  the  stubborn  and  evil  doers.'... — 
Art.  xxxvii. 

13. — The  Royal  Supremacy  was  subsequently 
confirmed  by  the  Canons  (1603 — 4.)— 

As  our  duty  to  the  King's  most  excellent  Majesty  requireth,  we 
'first  decree  and  ordain,  that  the  Archbishop  "of  Canterbury, 
'  (from  time  to  time),  all  Bishops  of  this  province,  all  Deans, 
'  Archdeacons,  Parsons,  Vicars,  and  all  other  Ecclesiastical 
'Persons,  shall  faithfully  keep  and  observe,  and  (as  much  as 
'  in  them  lieth)  shall  cause  to  be  observed  and  kept  of  others, 
'  all  and  singular  Laws  and  Statutes,  made  for  restoring  to  the 
'  Crown  of  this  kingdom  the  ancient  Jurisdiction  over  the  state 
'Ecclesiastical,  and  abolishing  of  all  foreign  Power  repugnant  to 
'  the  same  '  Canon  1. 

Care  was  also  taken  that  Impugners  of  the  Royal 
Supremacy  should  be  Ecclesiastically  censured. — 

'  Whosoever  shall  hereafter  affirm  that  the  King's  Majesty  hath  not 
'  the  same  authority  in  causes  Ecclesiastical,  that  the  godly  Kings 
'  had  amongst  the  jews  and  Christian  Emperors  of  the  primitive 
'  Church;  or  impeach  any  part  of  his  Regal  Supremacy  in  the  said 
'  causes  restored  to  the  Crown  and  by  the  laws  of  this  Realm 
'therein  established;  let  him  be  Excommunicated*  ipso  facto,  and 
'not  restored  but  only  by  the  Archbishop,  after  his  repentance 
'  aud  public  revocation  of  those  his  wicked  errors.' — Canon  2. 

By  the  Canons  also  all  Clergymen  are  bound  to 
acknowledge  the  Royal  Supremacy  by  subscribing  to 
it  in  the  presence  of  the  Bishop  at  their  Ordination, 
both  to  the  Diaconate,  and  to  the  Priesthood :  again 


*  Excommvnicntion  is  now  by  53  Geo.  III.  c.  127.  discontinued, 
and  imprisonment  not  exceeding  six  months  imposed  instead 
{Sect.  3.);  except  when  decreed  as  a  spiritual  censure  for  offences 
of  Ecclesiastical  cognizance.  {Sect.  2.). 


263 


BOOKS  IN  REIGN  OF  HENRY  Till. 


at  every  appointment  to  a  Curacy,  Lectureship,  or 
Readership ;  and  the  pledge  is  repeated  on  admission 
to  an  Ecclesiastical  Living.  The  terms  are  prescribed 
in  the  1st  of  the  Tliree  Articles  in  Canon  36. 
Thus :— 

'That  the  King's  Majesty,  under  God,  is  the  only  Supreme  Governor 
'of  this  Realm,  and  of  all  other  his  Highness's  Dominions  and 
'  Countries,  as  well  in  all  Spiritual  or  Ecclesiastical  things  or 
'  causes,  as  Temporal ;  and  that  no  Foreign  Prince,  Person, 
'  Prelate,  State,  or  Potentate,  hath,  or  ought  to  have,  any 
'jurisdiction,  power,  superiority,  pre-eminence,  or  authority, 
'  Ecclesiastical  or  Spiritual,  within  His  Majesty's  said  Realms, 
'  Dominions,  and  Countries.'  (See  Vol.  a.). 

And  this  Subscription  is  always  made  before  a 
Licence  can  be  obtained  from  the  Bishop,  as  enjoined 
in  Canon  37. 

14.  — Indeed,  so  jealous  is  the  Moyal  Supremacy  of 
the  least  encroachment  that  it  is  also  confirm  i  by 
Oath  at  each  of  the  instances  above  mentioned  where 
Subscription  is  required.  In  the  Oath  of  Abjuration 
the  latter  portion  bears  upon  the  Supremacy  in  these 
words : — 

'  And  I  do  declare  that  no  Foreign  Prince,  Person,  Prelate,  State, 
'  or  Potentate,  hath,  or  ought  to  have,  any  jurisdiction,  power, 
'superiority,  pre-eminence,  or  authority.  Ecclesiastical,  or 
'Spiritual,  within  this  Realm.  So  help  me  God.'  (Enforced  by 
1  Eliz.  c.  1.  quoted  below ;  1  Will.  §  Ma.  c.  8.    See  page  43.) 

15.  — Subsequently  to  26  Hen.  VIII.  Convocation  (in 
1536)  sanctioned  certain  Articles  of  Religion  (ten), 
which  were  enforced  by  a  Royal  Proclamation,  and 
followed  up  by  a  body  of  Injunctions,  and  an 
Ecclesiastical  Visitation.  The  greater  part  of  these 
Articles  were  incorporated  into  the  '  Bishop's  Book,' 
or  '  The  Institution,'  put  forth  shortly  after  (1537),  and 
which  had  been  approved  by  a  preceding  Convocation 
(Collier  ii.  139—143),  if  not  actually  composed  by 
Convocation,  as  Atterbury  affirms  (Wheatly  C.  P.  23). 
Under  the  same  authority  appeared  the  notorious  '  Six 
Articles'  (1539),  which  were  ratified  by  the  Legislature 
(by  31  Hen.  VIII.  c.  14.).  A  few  years  later  (1543) 
under  Royal  sanction  was  published  a  revision  of  '  The 
Institution'  with  the  title  of  'The  King's  Book,'  or 
1  The  Necessary  Doctrine  and  Erudition.'  Whether  it  was 
ever  laid  before  the  Convocation  (Collier  ii.  188—190), 
is  a  matter  of  controversy:  Atterbury  says  it  teas 


FIRST  LITURGY  OF  EDWARD  VI. 


269 


considered  by  that  Ecclesiastical  body.  (Wheatly  C.  P. 
23).  This  was  followed  (in  1545)  by  the  King's  Primer, 
somewhat  similar  to  Marshall's  Primer  of  1535,  and 
Bp.  Hilsay's  of  1539,  but  comprising  in  addition  to  the 


also  11  The  Litany''''  in  English,  published  in  the  year 
preceding  by  Royal  authority,  and  which  is  considered 
to  be  the  progenitor  of  our  present  Litany.  (Burton's 
Three  Prim.)  Nicholls  says  "  The  Litany  "  was  published 
some  time  after  the  King's  Primer.  {Com.  Pr.  Pref.  IV.) 
But  he  is  in  error,  a  smaller  Litany  had  been  in  private 
use  since  1535,  as  may  be  seen  in  Marshall's  Primer  of 
that  date.  (See  Palmer's  Orig.  Lit.  i.  314.  Maskell's 
Hon.  Bit.  i.) 

16.  — Although  the  Bible  had  been  translated,  and 
the  editions  of  1535,  and  1537,  were  now  in  circulation, 
yet  they  were  too  bulky  and  expensive  to  be  procured 
by  the  common  people.  In  1538,  however,  the  Bible 
was  placed  in  the  Churches  so  as  to  be  accessible 
to  such  as  might  desire  to  read  it.  Still,  it  was  to  the 
Primers,  and  Manuals  of  Prayer,  that  the  Beformation 
was  indebted,  under  God,  for  its  rapid  progress  in 
the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  The  King  himself  never 
renounced  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  of  Borne,  only 
the  Supremacy  of  the  Bope. 

THE  FIEST  LITUBGT,  (1549.) 
of  Edward  VI. 

17.  —  We  now  arrive  at  the  reign  of  Edward  VI., 
but  before  proceeding  to  discuss  the  compilation  of 
the  Liturgy,  it  will  be  as  well  to  say  a  few  words 
respecting  the  '  Injunctions  '  issued  at  the  beginning 
of  this  reign  for  the  guidance  of  the  Commissioners 
in  the  Ecclesiastical  Visitation  then  ordered,  and  to 
refer  to  certain  of  the  Statutes  passed  by  the 
Farliament. 


18.— Soon  after  the  accession  of  Edward  {Jan.  28th, 
1546 — 7),  the  Regency  in  the  King's  name— either  by 
virtue  of  the  Royal  Supremacy  acknowledged,  as  we 


Commandments, 


TJie  Injunctions  of  Edward  VI. 


270 


INJtmCTIOTTS  OF  EDWARD  VI. 


have  seen  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII,  by  the  Clergy 
in  Convocation,  and  confirmed  bv  Acts  of  Parliament 
(25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  19;  and  26  Hen.VDl.  c.  1 ;  and  bv  the 
Acts  of  Succession,  28  Hen.  VIII.  c.  7  ;  and  35  Hen.  VIII. 
c.  1.),  or  by  the  authority  of  a  Roval  Proclamation  which 
also  had  the  force  of  law  (by  31  Hen.  VIII.  c.  8.*),  or  by 
direction  of  the  late  King's  will  legally  investing  the 
Council  with  these  powers,  by  the  Acts  of  Succession 
above  mentioned.  (Heylyn's  Ref.  i.  47;  Cardwell's 
Doe.  Ann.  i.  5) — the  Regency  gave  orders  for  a  Visitation' 
to  be  made  through  the  several  Dioceses  of  the  Kingdom 
for  the  settlement  of  religion.  And  with  the  view  of 
assisting  the  Commissioners  in  their  inquiries  a  body  of 
'  Injunctions,'  very  similar  to  those  issued  in  the  last 
reign  (in  1536)  during  the  Vice-gerency  of  Cromwell, 
were  put  forth  by  the  Council  (in  1547).  They  were 
universally  acknowledged,  and  continued  to  be  the  rule 
of  action  in  Ecclesiastical  matters  (see  Cardwell's  Doc. 
Ann.  i.  13.)  until  the  use  of  the  new  Liturgy,  which 
was  enforced  by  the  first  Act  of  Uniformity  passed  at 
the  close  of  the  second  year  of  Edward  VI.,  superseded 
their  authority  with  respect  to  matters  of  Ceremony,  aud 
Worship.   (See  postea). 

19. — The  first  Parliament  of  Edward,  which  met 
Nov.  4th,  1547,  and  was  prorogued  on  the  24th  of  Dec. 
following,  passed  during  its  Session,  amongst  other  Bills, 
one  '  Repealing  several  statutes  concerning  Treason,  and 
granting  liberty  in  Religion'  (1  Edw.  VI.  c.  12);  another, 
'  Against  depraving  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  and  for 
the  Receipt  thereof  in  Both  kinds'  (1  Edw.  VI.  c.  1);  and 
a  third,  for  the  'Appointment  of  Bishops  bv  the  King's 
Letters  Patent'  (1  Edw.  VI.  c.  2.).  To  carry  into  effect 
the  statute,  1  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.,  the  Council  appointed  a 
Commission  of  Divines  to  arrange  a  '  New  Order  o  f 
Communion'  which  was  enforced  by  Royal  Letters  Missive 
(1547—8).  This  'Order'  was  neither  referred  to  the 
Convocation,  nor  ratified  by  the  then  Parliament,  as 
Cakdwell  supposes,  (Doc.  Ann.  i.  60. — See  Heylvn's 


•  The  Enactment,  31  Hen.  VIII.  c  8.,  confirmed  by  34  &  35 
Hen.  VIII.  c.  23.  giving  to  a  Royal  Proclamation,  issued  by  the 
advice  of  the  Privy  Council,  the  force  of  law,  was  repealed  a  few 
months  after  the  "Injunctions"  were  issued,  by  1  Edw.  VI.  c.  12. 
s.  5;  A.  D.  1548.  Collier  doubts  whether  the  Royal  Proclamation 
was  put  forth  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  the  Act.  (ii.  228). 


INJUNCTIONS  OF  EDWARD  VI. 


271 


JRef.  i.  118;  Sparrow's  Coll.  17;  also  "Wilkin's  Cone; 
L'Estrange's  Alliance;  Clay  on  Com.  P.);  although 
Convocation,  prior  to  the  passing  of  1  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.,  had 
declared  in  favour  of  the  '  Communion  in  Both  Kinds,' 
and  probably  suggested  this  enactment.  (Lathbury  H. 
of  Con.  141 ;  Wheatly  C.  P.  24.).  The  First  Book  of 
Homilies  was  also  published  at  this  period  (1547.),  but 
it  had  not  the  sanction  of  Convocation ;  and  likewise  an 
"  Order  of  Matrimony"  (1547—8),  though  not  openly 
authorized ;  as  well  as  "  a  Psalter,"  which  contained  the 
Litany  of  1544. 

20. — The  '  Injunctions,'  as  well  as  the  Visitation 
Articles  based  upon  them  issued  shortly  after  by  Cranmer 
(in  1548),  are  of  very  great  importance  as  exhibiting  to 
us  the  state  of  Religion,  and  the  Ceremonial  practices  of 
that  time ;  but  whether  they  are  of  force  at  the  present 
day  is  a  matter  of  dispute.  Some  affirm  that  they  have 
been  superseded  by  the  subsequent  Acts  of  Uniformity, 
and  other  Statutes,  and  by  the  Canons  of  1603 — 4  ;  all 
which  invest  the  Liturgy,  and  by  consequence  the 
Rubrics  in  the  Liturgy,  with  legal  and  binding  authority 
in  all  matters  of  Ritual  and  Ceremonial  order.  Others, 
while  coinciding  with  this  opinion  as  regards  the 
Liturgy,  per  se,  yet  suppose  that  these  '  Injunctions  ' 
are  comprehended  in  the  first  Rubric  of  the  Liturgy  as 
defining  what  Ritual  matters  were  in  use  in  the  second 
year  of  Edward  VI.,  and  consequently  that  their 
observance  by  the  Clergy  is  equally  imperative  with  the 
Rubrics  ;  whence  many  have  proceeded  to  revive  certain 
of  the  practices  allowed  in  these  '  Injunctions,'  such  as 
having  "  two  lights  upon  the  High  Altar,  eye."*  (See 
Vol.  o.  and  Fox's  Acts  and  Mon.  v.  706 ;  Wheatly  C.  P. 
161;  Wilkin's  Cone;  Sparrow's  Coll.  3;  Cardwell's 
Doc.  Ann.  i.  7.  43.).  This  question  however  will  be 
brought  more  satisfactorily  under  notice  when  we  come 
to  consider  the  First  Rubric.  We  will  therefore  now 
proceed  to  the  compilation  of  the  Liturgy. 


*  This  was  forbidden  in  the  later  Royal  Injunctions  issued 
1549)  shortly  after  the  passing  of  the  Act  of  Uniformity 
Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  63.) :  and  in  the  Articles  of  Inquiry 
put  forth  by  Bishop  Ridley  in  June  1550,  soon  after  his  translation 
to  the  See  of  London  (ib.  i.  80,  81.):  but  the  practice  was  revived 
by  Cardinal  Pole  in  his  legatine  Constitutions  (1555),  and  in  his 
subsequent  Visitation  Articles,  1557.  {ib.  i.  147,  174). 


272 


FIRST  LITURGY  Or  EDWARD  VI. 


The  Compilation,  Sfc.  of  the  Liturgy. 

21. — Soon  after  the  return  of  the  Ecclesiastical 
Visitors  the  Council  of  Eegency  appointed  {September 
21-3.  a  .d.  1548)  a  Commission  of  Divines,  the  same  who 
drew  up  the  '  Order  of  the  Communion,'  to  proceed  to 
the  compilation  of  one  Public  Liturgy  from  the  Brevi- 
aries, Missals,  Eituals,  and  other  Books  of  Offices  at 
that  time  in  use.  These  they  compared  with  the 
ancient  Liturgies,  and  the  writings  of  the  Fathers, 
and  retained  whatever  they  found  consonant  to  the 
doctrine  of  Scripture,  and  to  the  forms  of  Worship  of  the 
early  Christian  Church,  and  rejected  the  numerous 
Eomish  innovations  and  corruptions  of  later  growth. 
To  these  especial  reference  was  made  not  only  in  their 
Preface,  which  appears  in  our  present  Liturgy  in  a 
secondary  position  under  the  title  "  Concerning  the 
Service  of  the  Church,"  but  also  in  the  succeeding 
section  "  Concerning  Ceremonies,"  which  in  the  first 
Liturgy  followed  the  '  Commination  Service.'  The 
result  of  their  labours  is  said  to  have  been  approved 
by  Convocation,  but  this  is  questionable.*  It  certainly 
was  ratified  by  the  Legislature  (by  2  &  3  Edw.  VI. 
c.  1 ;  which  passed  the  House  of  Lords  Jan.  15th,  and 
the  House  of  Commons,  Jan.  21st,  1548-9.).  This 
statute  enjoined  the  use  of  the  new  Liturgy  on  the 
Whitsunday  following  {June  9th,  1549),  requiring  : — 
'  That  all  and  singular  Ministers  in  any  Cathedral  or  Parish 
'  Church,  or  other  place  withiu  the  King's  dominions,  shall 


*  Whether  the  assent  of  the  two  Houses  of  Convocation  was 
actually  given  to  this  first  Liturgy  is  a  matter  of  dispute:  the 
balance  of  testimony  is  in  the  affirmative,  subject  however  to  the 
qualification  that  the  Commissioners  authorized  by  the  King  were 
either,  as  Wheatly  says,  {p.  33),  "  a  Committee  of  the  two 
Houses,"  chosen  by  the  Convocation;  or  that  the  members  of 
Convocation  "  delegated  their  powers  for  the  time  being  to  the 
Royal  Commissioners"  chosen  by  the  Crown — (See  Heylyn  Ref. 
i.  132  ;  Fuller  b.  VTL  386;  Lathbury  H.  of  Conv.  139—142; 
Clay  P.  B.  III.  is;  Wheatly  C.  P.  24.  32.)-  A  Letter  from  the 
Council  to  Bp.  Bonner  (dated  July  23rd,  1510),  enjoining  him  to 
set  forth  the  new  Liturgy,  declares  that  it  had  the  assent  of 
Convocation.  —  Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  67.  See  also  Hook's 
Ch.  Diet.  6th.  Ed.  p.  370. 


FIRST  LITURGY  OF  EDWARD  VI.  273 


'  from  and  after  the  Feast  of  Pentecost  next  coming  (  Whitsunday, 
'June  9th,  1549)  be  bounden  to  say  and  use  the  Mattens, 
'  Evensong,  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  commonly  called  the 
'  Mass,  and  Administration  of  each  of  the  Sacraments,  and  all 
'  their  common  and  open  Prayer  in  such  order  and  form  as  is 

'  mentioned  in  the  same  Book,  and  none  other  or  otherwise  

'And  that  if  any  manner  of  Parson,  Vicar,  or  other  whatso- 

'ever  Minister  refuse  to  use  the  said  Common  Prayers,  or  to 

'minister  the  Sacraments  in  such  Cathedral,  or  Parish  Church, 
'  or  other  places  as  he  should  use  or  minister  the  same,  in  such 
'order  and  form  as  they  be  mentioned  and  set  forth  in  the  said 
'  Book,  or  shall  use,  wilfully  aud  obstinately  in  the  same,  any 
'  Rite,  Ceremony,  Order,  Form,  or  Manner  of  Mass,  openly  or 
'  privily,  or  Mattens,  Evensong,  Administration  of  the  Sacraments, 
'or  other  open  Prayers  (commonly  called  the  Service  of  the 
'Church)  than  is  mentioned  and  set  forth  in  the  said  Book; — 

'  or  shall  preach,  declare,  or  speak  anything  in  the  derogation 

'  or  depraving  of  the  said  Book,  or  any  thing  therein  contained,  or 

'  any  part  thereof,  and  shall  be  thereof  lawfully  convicted:  by 

'verdict  of  twelve  men,  or  by  his  own  confession,  or  by  the 
'  notorious  evidence  of  the  fact,  shall  lose  and  forfeit  for  his  first 
'  offence  one  year's  income  of  one  of  his  Benefices  or  promotions, 
'  and  suffer  six  months'  imprisonment  ,-  for  the  second  offence, 
'  twelve  months'  imprisonment,  and  be  deprived  of  all  his  spiritual 
'promotions;  and  for  the  third  offence,  imprisonment  for  life.' — 
Sect.  1. 

22. — This  is  the  Eirst  Liturgy  of  Edward  VI. 
The  earliest  edition  was  that  printed  March  7th, 
1548-9 ;  and  we  find  that  many  of  the  London 
Churches  began  to  use  the  Book  on  Easter  Day,  1549, 
which  fell  on  April  21st.  The  Enactment  above 
quoted  i3  the  first  Act  of  Uniformity.  The  Act  is 
in  force  at  this  day  (by  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  24. 
See  postea,  and  Burn's  Eccl.  L.  Phill.  III.  411.) ; 
and  likewise  such  Rubrics  of  this  Liturgy  as  direct  the 
'  Ornaments  of  the  Church,  and  of  the  Ministers 
thereof.'  (See  on  the  first  Rubric  posted).  The 
better  to  ensure  the  adoption  of  the  Liturgy  new 
Injunctions  were  issued,  requiring  Ministers  "  to  use 
"  no  other  Ceremonies  than  are  appointed  in  the 
"King's  Book  of  Common  Prayers"  (Cardwell's 
Doc.  Ann.  i.  64)  ;  and  others  again,  December  25th, 
1549.  (ib.  i.  74.).  These  proceedings  were  followed  by 
an  enactment  passed  in  the  Parliament  then  sitting 
(3  &  4  Edw.  VI.  c.  10.  1549)— 

'For  abolishing  and  putting  away  all  Antiphoners,  Missals, 
'  Grailes,  Processionals,  Manuals,  Legends  Pies,  Portuasses,  Primers, 
'  Couchers,  Journals,  Ordinals,  or  other  Books  or  writings  whatso- 
1  ever  heretofore  used  for  service  of  the  Church.' 


274  SECOND  LITURGY  OF  EDWARD  VI. 


23.  — Another  Act  was  passed  (3  &  4  Edw.  VI.  c.  11.) 
empowering  the  King  to  appoint  a  Committee  to  revise  the 
Ecclesiastical  Laws,  Canons,  fyc.  similar  in  its  intention  to 
25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  19:  1534  (renewed  by  27  Hen.  VIII. 
c.  15,  1536  ;  and  35  Hen.  VIII.  c.  16.  1544)  j  but  the  Com- 
mittee was  not  chosen  before  November  11th,  1551.  The 
result  of  their  labours  was  the  '  Reformatio  Legum  Ecclesi- 
asticarum  :'  but  as  Edward  died  before  it  was  presented 
to  him  for  ratification,  it  was  ineffectual.  An  attempt  was 
made  to  renew  this  subject  in  1571,  but  it  fell  to  the 
ground  from  the  want  of  Royal  support.  There  was  one 
other  Statute  bearing  upon  our  subject  passed  in  the  same 
session  (3  &  4  Edw.  VI.  c.  12),  which  authorized  the 
issuing  of  a  Commission  to  prepare  an  'Ordinal,'  and 
enjoined  its  public  use  when  completed.  This  "  Ordinal  " 
appeared  in  March,  1549 — 50,  and  was  adopted  without 
other  authority  till  it  was  introduced  into  the  Second 
Liturgy,  and  acknowledged  by  Parliament  as  a  part 
thereof  by  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  (Heylyn  Ref.  i.  172 ; 
Collier  ii.  288.). 

24.  — The  Bishops  were  anxious  to  see  the  new  Liturgy 
adopted,  and  the  Act  of  Uniformity  obeyed,  in  their  several 
Dioceses,  particularly  Ridley,  who  issued  certain  Visita- 
tion Articles  (in  1550),  in  which  he  inquires  'Whether 
'  any  Minister  useth  wilfully  and  obstinately  any  other 
1  Rite,  Ceremony,  Order,  Form  or  Manner  of  Communion, 
'  Mattens,  or  Evensong,  Ministration  of  Sacraments,  or 
'  open  Prayers,  than  is  set  forth  in  the  Book  of  Common 
'  Prayer.'  These  he  followed  up  in  the  same  year  with 
a  body  of  Injunctions,  wherein  he  directs  among  other 
things — '  That  the  Minister,  in  the  time  of  the  Holy  Com- 
'  munion,  do  use  only  the  Ceremonies,  and  Gestures  ap- 
'  pointed  by  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  none 
'  other.'  (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  79.  80.  82 ;  Wilkin's 
Cone.  IV.  61.).  A  Royal  Commission  was  also  issued  for 
the  like  purpose.  (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  93.). 

THE  SECOND  LITUEGT,  (1552), 

of  Edward  VI. 

25. — Shortly  after  these  proceedings,  at  the  instance, 
it  is  said,  of  Bucer,  and  Martyr,  (AVheatly,  C.  P.  25  ; 
Heylyn  says,  of  Calvin,  {Ref.  i.  226.  see  also  136.), 
Nicholls  says,  of  Calvin  and  Bucer,  (Com.  P.  Pre/,  v.), 


SECOND  LITURGY  OF  EDWARD  VI.  275 


who  thought  the  First  Liturgy  bore  too  near  a 
resemblance  to  the  Romish  Service- Books,  a  few  alter- 
ations were  made  by  the  same  Commissioners  with  the 
view  of  including  all  degrees  of  Reformers  within  the 
pale  of  the  Church,  and  the  '  Ordinal  '  was  now  in- 
serted, and  made  part  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 
(Card well's  Conf.  4.).  This  Revision  appeared  in 
1552,  as  the  '  New  Service,'  or  the  Second  Liturgy 
of  Edward  VI ;  and  at  the  same  time  an  Enactment 
was  passed  (5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  April,  1552),  ratify- 
ing the  alterations  then  made,  and  sanctioning  the 
addition  of  the  '  Ordinal.''  The  late  Act  of  Uni- 
formity (2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.)  was  also  confirmed 
(by  Sect.  5)  ;  and  penalties  were  likewise  enforced  for 
being  present  at  any  '  Divine  Service '  deviating  from 
the  prescribed  Form.    Thus : — 

'  If  any  manner  of  person  or  persons  shall  willingly  and 

'  wittingly  hear  and  be  present  at  any  other  manner  or  form  of 
'  Common  Prayer,  of  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  of 
'Making  of  Ministers  in  the  Churches,  or  of  any  other  Rites  con- 
'  tained  in  the  Book  annexed  to  this  Act,  than  is  mentioned  and 
'set  forth  in  the  said  Book,  or  that  is  contrary  to  the  Form  of 
'sundry  provisions  and  exceptions  contained  in  the  former 
'Statute  (2  &  :}  Edm.  VI.  c.  1),  and  shall  be  thereof  convicted 

'according  to  the  Laws  of  this  Kealrn  shall  for  the  first  offence 

'  suffer,  &c.'— 5  &  G  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  s.  6. 
The  Penalties  are  altered  by  1  Eliz.  c.  2.  ss.  4,  5,  G.  (See  po.itea).  It 
may  be  also  added,  that  persons  attending  the  Forms  of  worship 
adopted  in  the  Meeting -Houses  of  Dissenters  are  exempt  from  the 
amenities  of  these  Statutes  by  the  '  Toleration  Act,'  (1  Will.  &  Ma. 
c.  18.),  and  more  recent  Statutes,  and  3  &  10  Vict.  c.  59. 

26.  — In  the  new  '  Ordinal,'  now  incorporated  into 
the  Prayer  Book,  a  promise  of  Conformity  to  the 
Liturgy  is  solemnly  exacted  by  the  Bishop  from  every 
Candidate  for  the  Priesthood,  in  these  words  : — 

'  Bishop.  Will  you  then  give  your  faithful  diligence  always 
'  so  to  minister  the  Doctrine  and  Sacraments,  and  the  Discipline 
'of  Christ  as  the  Lord  hath  commanded,  and  as  this  Church  and 
'Realm  hath  received  the  same,  according  to  the  commandments 
'of  God;  so  that  you  may  teach  the  people  committed  to  your 
'  Cure  and  Charge,  with  all  diligence  to  keep  and  observe  the 
'  same  ?' 

'  Answer.    /  will  so  do  by  the  help  of  the  Lord.' 

27.  — This  Revision  of  the  Liturgy  does  not  appear 

s 


276  THE  LITURGY  OF  ELIZABETH. 

to  have  been  referred  to  the  Convocation  now  sitting, 
although  this  Ecclesiastical  body  had  been  for  some 
time  considering  the  Forty-two  Articles  of  Religion 
laid  before  them  by  Cranmer,  and  which  they  had  just 
confirmed  and  ratified,  1552.  (Heylyn's  Ref.  i.  257  ; 
LATHBrRT's  Hist,  of  Con.  144;  Strype's  Cranmer, 
i.  590;  Wake's  State  of  Church  597;  Wilkes's 
Cone.  iv.  73.).  The  new  Liturgy  came  into  use  on 
November  1st,  1552.  (See  Caedwell's  Two  Liturgies 
of  Edw.  VI.)  An  Act  was  also  passed  in  the  same 
Session  (5  &  6  Ediv.  VI.  c.  3.  See  postea)  defining 
what  days  were  to  be  kept  as  Holy-days,  and 
Fasting-Bays ;  and  not  long  after  this,  king  Edward 
died,  July  Gth,  1553. 

28.  — Mary,  a  zealous  Romanist,  now  succeeded ; 
and  during  her  reign  all  progress  in  the  Reformation 
was  stayed,  the  Liturgy  was  abolished,  and  the 
Ecclesiastical  Laws  of  Edward  were  repealed.  The 
Reformers  also,  to  secure  personal  safety,  were 
obliged  to  betake  themselves  to  the  Continent.  (See 
the  Proclamation  in  Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  165.). 

THE  THIRD  LITURGY,  (1559), 
or  Liturgy  of  Elizabeth. 

29.  — On  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  (November 
17th,  1558)  the  statutes  of  Henry  VIII,  and 
Edward  VI,  which  had  been  repealed  by  Mary, 
were  revived ;  the  Royal  Supremacy  in  Ecclesiastical 
matters  was  re-established,  and  the  Reformed  religion 
restored  to  the  position  it  occupied  at  the  death  of 
Edward,  by  the  'Act  of  Supremacy, '  1  Eliz.  c.  L  1558. 
(which  was  similar  to  26  Hen.  VIII.  c.  1.  See  supra.)  ; 
except  that  the  Liturgy  was  not  yet  re-introduced. 
This  statute  also  empowered  the  Queen  and  her 
successors  to  appoint  Commissioners,  who  should 
exercise  under  the  Crown  all  Ecclesiastical  jurisdiction 
(Sect.  18).    In  virtue  of  this  clause  the  'High 


T1IE   LITUEGY  OF  ELIZABETH. 


277 


Commission  Court '  -was  established ;  its  tyrannous 
proceedings,  however,  eventually  caused  it  not  only 
to  be  abolished ;  but  it  was  further  enacted  that  no 
similar  Court  should  ever  again  be  erected,*  (by 
16  Car.  I.  c.  11.  nr.  3,  5). 

30. — A  further  Revieio  of  the  Pbayeb  Book  was 
now  made  (1559)  by  a  Committee  of  Divines,  the 
chief  of  whom  was,  probably,  Guest;  and  after 
being  approved  by  the  Queen  it  was  submitted  to 
Parliament,  who  passed  an  Act  of  Uniformity  to 
enforce  its  adoption  from  the  21th  of  June  next 
following  (1  Eliz.  c.  2.  April  23th,  1559).  The 
members  of  Convocation  being  chiefly  Romanists  were 
not  consulted  iu  this  Eeview,t  (Fulleb  ix.  54.) ; 
yet  the  alterations  had  stronger  leaning  towards 
the  First  Liturgy  of  Edward,  than  towards  the  Second 
(Cabdwell's  Conf.  18 — 41).  In  the  Act  occur  the 
following  important  clauses  respecting  Conformity, 
depraving  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  the 
Ornaments,  and  Bites  and  Ceremonies. 

Conformity  enjoined.  — '  If  any  manner  of  Parson, 

'Vicar,  or  other  whatsoever  Minister  refuse  to  use  the  said 

1 Common  Prayers,"  or  to  minister  the  Sacraments  in  such 
'  Cathedral,  or  Parish  Church,  or  other  places  as  he  should  use  to 
*  minister  the  same,  in  such  order  and  form  as  they  be  mentioned 
'  in  the  said  Book ;  or  shall  wilfully  and  obstinately  standing 
'  in  the  same,  use  any  other  Rite,  Ceremony,  Order,  Form,  or 
'Manner  of  Celebrating  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  openly  or  privily, 
'  or  Mattens,  Evensong,  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  or 


*  Its  revival  under  a  new  title  was  attempted  by  James  II; 
but  the  celebrated  'Bill  of  Rights'  at  the  Revolution  denounced 
its  perpetual  condemnation  in  these  words: — '  The  Commission  for 
'  erecting  the  late  Court  of  Commissioners  for  Ecclesiastical  Causes, 
'  and  all  other  Commissions  and  Courts  of  lilie  nature,  are  illegal  and 
'pernicious.'  (1  Will.     Ma.  Sess.  IL  c.  2;  1689.) 

t  The  Bp.  of  Exeter  (Dr.  Phillpotts)  says  in  his  judgment  in  the 
Helston  case,  that  it  was  referred  to  Convocation,  (quoted  in 
Stephens'  Eccl.  Stat.  2049;  and  in  Harrison's  Inquiry,  7.).  Bp. 
Cosins  affirms,  that  Convocation  protested  against  the  passing  of  this 
Act ;  and  that  there  was  not  one  Spiritual  Peer  that  gave  his  assent 
either  to  the  Act  of  Uniformity,  or  to  the  change  of  the  Service  of  the 
Church.— (Additional  Notes  to  Nicholls'  C.  Pr.  6;  Gibson's  Cod. 
268,  305;  D'Ewes  28;  Burn's  Eccl.  L.  Ph.  iii.  414.) 

S2 


278  THE  INJUNCTIONS  OF  ELIZABETH. 


'other  open  Prayers  (commonly  called  the  Service  of  the 

'  Church),  than  is  mentioned  and  set  forth  in  the  said  Book;  

'  or  shall  preach,  declare,  or  speak  any  thing  in  the  derogation  or 
'  depraving  of  the  said  Book,  or  any  thing  therein  contained,  or  of 

'any  part  thereof,  and  shall  be  therefore  lawfully  convicted  

'  by  verdict  of  twelve  men,  or  by  his  own  confession,  or  by  the 

'notorious  evidence  of  the  fact'  he  shall  forfeit  to  the  Queen 

for  the  First  Offence  one  year's  profit  of  his  Benefice,  and  suffer 
six  months'  imprisonment ;  for  the  Second  Offence  he  shall  suffer 
one  year's  imprisonment,  and  be  deprived  ipso  facto;  and  for  the 
Third  Offence,  he  shall  be  deprived  ipso  facto  of  all  his  spiritual 
promotions,  and  be  imprisoned  for  life. — 1  Elk.  c.  2.  ss.  4,  5,  6. 
(See  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  supra ;  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  24.  poslea ; 
and  the  case  of  Rex  v.  Sparks,  3;  Mod.  79;  and  Sanders  v.  Head 
(1841)  3  Curt.  570).  Indictments  upon  these  Statutes  must  be 
preferred  at  the  Assizes  next  after  the  commission  of  the  offence. 
(Burns  Eccl.  L.  Ph.  iii.  428). 

31. — The  following  clause,  on  the  Ornaments  of 
the  Church  and  of  the  Minister,  is  the  original  of 
our  first  Rubric,  and  demands  our  attention. 

Ornaments  to  be  used.  — '  And  be  it  enacted  that  such 

'  Ornaments  of  the  Church,  and  of  the  Ministers  thereof  shall  bo 
'retained  and  be  in  use,  as  was  in  this  Church  of  England  by 
'  authority  of  Parliament,  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  King 
'  Edward  VI.,  until  other  order  shall  be  therein  taken  by  the 
'  authority  of  the  Queen's  Majesty,  with  the  advice  of  her 
'  Commissioners  appointed  and  authorized  under  the  Great  Seal 
'  of  England  for  causes  Ecclesiastical,  or  of  the  Metropolitan  of 
'  this  Realm.'— 1  Eliz.  c.  2.  s.  25. 

32. — Other  Sites  and  Ceremonies.  — '  And  also,  that 

'  if  there  should  happen  any  contempt  or  irreverence  to  be  used 
'  in  the  Ceremonies  or  Rites  of  the  Church,  by  the  mis-using  of 
'  the  Orders  appointed  in  this  Book,  the  Queen's  Majesty  may, 
'  by  the  like  advice  of  the  said  Commissioners  or  Metropolitan, 
'  ordain  and  publish  such  further  Ceremonies  or  Rites,  as  may 
'  be  most  for  the  advancement  of  God's  glory,  the  edifying  of  his 
'  Church  and  the  due  reverence  of  Christ's  holy  mysteries  and 
'  sacraments.'— Sect.  26.  This  Statute  is  still  in  force  by  13  &  14 
Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  24.  See  postea. 


The  Injunctions. 

33. — A  Royal  Visitation  was  instituted  throughout 
the  kingdom,  at  this  period  (1559),  and  for  the  guidance 
of  the  Visiting  Commissioners  in  their  inquiries,  a  body 
of  '  Injunctions  '  was  prepared,  similar  in  many  respects 
to  those  of  Edward  VI.,  and  likewise  a  Booh  of  Visitation 
Articles,  hut  their  authority  haviug  now  expired,  our 
space  will   not   admit  of   further   allusion    to  them. 


THE  THIRTY-NINE  ARTICLES. 


270 


WHEATLT  however  is  of  a  contrary  opinion.  ( C.  P.  162.  n. 
Corrie's  ed.  See  SrARitow's  Coil  65 ;  Cardwell's  Doc. 
Ann.  i.  178;  Heylyn's  lief.  ii.  298;  Wilkin's  '  Cone.  iv. 
182—191.)  A  '  Book  of  Orders '  was  also  subsequently  issued 
(October  10th,  1561)  by  the  Eccl.  Commissioners  for  the  like 
object.  (Heylyn's  Ref.  ii.  360;  British  Mag.  Oct.  1848. 
p.  419.)  Elizabeth's  " Injunctions"  continued  in  force 
throughout  her  reign,  and  were  from  time  to  time 
reprinted.    They  supplied  the  deficiences  of  the  Rubrics. 

The  Articles.  (1562.) 

34. — These  proceedings  were  followed  by  the 
appearance  of  the  xxxix  Articles  (or  strictly, 
xxxvm)*  'agreed  upon  by  the  Archbishops  and 
1  Bishops  of  both  Provinces,  and  the  whole  Clergy 
1  in  the  Convocation  holden  at  London  in  1562,  and 
'  ratified  by  the  Queen.'1  (Heylyn's  Ref.  ii.  392. 
Strype's  Ann.  i.  1.  472.)  Among  them  bearing 
upon  the  subject  of  Bites  and  Ceremonies  are 
two,  which  define  for  the  settlement  of  disputes  the 
power  that  can  decree  Eites  &  Ceremonies ;  viz. — 

TJie  Authority  of  the  Chwrch. 

'The  Church  hath  power  to  decree  Rites  or  Ceremonies,  and 
'  authority  in  controversies  of  Faith  'f  Art.  xx. 

Again. — '  It  is  not  necessary  that  Traditions  and  Ceremonies  be 
'  in  all  places  one  and  utterly  alike ;  for  at  all  times  they  have 
'  beeu  divers,  and  may  be  changed  according  to  the  diversities 
'of  countries,  times,  'and  men's  manners,  so  that  nothing  be 
'  ordained  against  God's  Word.  Whosoever  through  his  private 
'judgment,  willingly  and  purposely,  doth  openly  break  the 


*  These  Articles  were  originally  drawn  up  by  Cranmer, 
Eidley,  and  others,  in  1552,  in  the  reign  of  Edward  VI. 
(Cardwell's  Syn.  i.  1.  61.),  when  they  were  xlii  in  number 
(See  par.  27.  supra);  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  Abp.  Parker  (in 
1562 — :3)  reduced  them  to  xxxvm,  and  at  a  subsequent  revision 
(in  1571),  having  restored  the  29th  Article,  he  brought  the  number 
to  xxxix,  as  they  now  exist. 

t  Respecting  the  authority  of  this  controverted  passage,  as 
having  been  an  interpolation  of  Abp.  Laud's,  although  the  clause  is 
to  be  found  in  printed  copies  bearing  date  1563,  see  Short's 
History  of  the  Church  of  England ;  and  Hardwick's  History  of 
the  Articles. 


280  THE  BOOK  OF  ADVERTISEMENTS. 


'  Traditions  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Church,  which  be  not 
'  repugnant  to  the  Word  of  God,  and  be  ordained  and  approved 
'by  common  authority,  ought  to  be  rebuked  openly,  (that 
'others  may  fear  to  do  the  like),  as  he  that  offendeth  against 
'  the  common  order  of  the  Church,  and  hurteth  the  authority 
'  of  the  magistrate,  and  woundeth  the  consciences  of  the  weak 
'  brethren.  Every  particular  or  National  Church  hath  authority 
'to  ordain,  change,  and  abolish  Ceremonies  or  Rites  of  the 
'  Church  ordained  only  by  man's  authority,  so  that  all  things 
'  be  done  to  edifying.' — Art.  xxxiv. 

There  was  another  Article,  the  xsxvith,  entitled 
'  Of  Consecration  of  Bishops  and  Ministers,'  designed 
to  confirm  the  authority  of  the  '  Oedinal,'  which  will 
he  introduced  in  its  proper  place.  (See  '  Oedination 
Seevices.') 

35.  — These  Aeticles  were  shortly  after  (1571) 
revised,  again  ratified  by  the  Convocation,  and 
confirmed  by  Parliament,  as  will  be  presently  seen ; 
in  the  meantime  we  must  speak  of  the  '  Book  of 
Advertisements,'  which  occasioned  the  first  open 
separation  of  the  Non-Conformists  from  the  Church 
of  England ;  and  which  are  considered  by  many 
authorities  to  be  the  basis  of  our  present  Canons. 
About  this  time,  (1563),  the  Second  Book  of  Homilies 
was  also  published.  It  was  chiefly  from  the  pen  of 
Bp.  Jewel. 

THE  BOOK  OF  ADVERTISEMENTS.  (1564—5). 

36.  — Notwithstanding  the  endeavours  to  establish 
Uniformity,  such  diversity  of  practice  continued  to  prevail 
with  respect  to  Rites  and  Ceremonies,  and  especially 
the  '  Habits,'  that  Elizabeth,  in  accordance  with  the 
statute,  (1  Eliz.  c.  2.  ss.  25,  26),  which  empowered  her 
'  to  take  other  order  therein,'  wrote  a  Letter  to  Abp.  Parker 
(Jan.  25th,  some  say  the  loth,  1564 — 5)  requiring  him 
with  the  assistance  of  the  other  Bishops,  commissioned 
for  Causes  Ecclesiastical,  to  reform,  and  repress  the  same. 
(Strvpe's  Parker  i.  82— 3,  307.  313—19;  App.  B.  n. 
No.  15—28;  Burnet's  Hist.  Ref.  Nares,  iii.  p.  460.)  In 
obedience  to  the  Royal  mandate  Parker  immediately 
prepared  certain  'Injunctions'  (March  1564 — 5);  but  on 
their  being  presented  to  the  Queen,  Her  Majesty,  under 
the  influence  of  the  Court  party,  changed  her  mind,  and 


THE  BOOK  OF  ADVERTISEMENTS.  281 


refused  to  confirm  tliem.  These  '  Injunctions,'  not 
receiving1  as  expected  the  immediate  and  direct  Ratification 
of  Elizabeth,  were  designated  by  the  Commissioners, 
'Advertisements,'  (Libellus  Admonitionum),  instead  of 
Articles,  or  Ordinances,  as  they  otherwise  would  have 
been  termed.  Sparrow's  Coll.  121;  Cardwell's  Doc. 
Ann.  i.  287.)  Whether  however  the  Queen  eventually 
confirmed  them  is  a  question  of  no  trifling  controversy. 
Strype  infers  that  thev  afterwards  (in  1565)  received 
the  Royal  sanction  {Life  of  Parker,  i.  319.  432.):  and  it 
is  known  that  the  "Book  of  Advertisements"  was  soon 
distinguished  as  "Tiie  Queen's  Book;"  but  Dr.  Cardwell 
states,  that  Parker  in  his  Articles  of  inquiry  issued  in 
15C9  assigns  to  them  'public  authority,'  but  clearly  distinct 
from  that  of  the  Crown.  The  Archbishop's  question  is, — 
Whether  the  Ministers  do  '  reade  in  manner  appoynted 
'  the  Quene's  Majesties'  Injunctions  and  Homelies ;  the 
'  Advertisementes  lately  sette  forthe  bypublique  authoritic: 
'  and  whether  the  same  in  all  poyntcs  be  duly  observed  ?' — 
(Doc.  Ann.  i.  288,  321).  Cardwell  himself  says,  '  they 
'  were  not  binding  in  law,  but  they  were  considered 
'  binding,  as  they  certainly  were  approved  by  the  Queen.' 
(Conf.  39).  Archbp.  Ifliityift  also  refers  to  them  in  his 
Visitation  Articles  (of  1584)  as  having  authority;  where 
he  says  — '  That  all  preachers,  and  others  in  Ecclesiastical 
'  Orders,  do  at  all  times  wear  and  use  such  kynde  of 
'  apparel  as  is  prescribed  unto  them  by  the  '  Book  of 
'  Advertisements,'  and  her  Majesty's  '  Injunctions,' 
'  anno  primo.'  —  (ib.  Doc.  Ann.  i.  413.).  The  power 
however  conferred  upon  the  Metropolitan  by  the  same 
sections  of  this  Act  is  not  to  be  lost  sight  of  in  the 
consideration  respecting  the  legal  authority  possessed 
by  these  'Advertisements'  (See  extract  in  par.  31. 
Archdeacon  Harrison,  in  his  Historical  Work  on  the 
Rubrics,  when  speaking  of  the  Dress  of  the  Preacher, 
brings  forward  numerous  authorities  to  prove,  in  opposition 
to  the  majority  of  writers,  that  "there  was  competent 
authority  lor  the  further  order  taken  in  this  Book  of 
Advertisements  in  regard  to  the  Ornaments  of  the 
Minister,  superseding,  though  silently,  that  of  Edward's 
First  Book.... and  (it)  was  universully  recognized  as 
of  absolute  legal  authority."  And  further  on  he  adds, 
"  This  Book  of  Advertisements  finally  went  forth  with  full 
authority,"  [Inquiry  115,  123,  137.) 

37. — Among  the  writers  who  seem  to  support  the 
opinion  that  "The  Book  of  Advertisements"  did 


282  THE  BOOK  OF  ADVERTISEMENTS. 


possess  legal  authority  mav  be  mentioned: — Bp.  Andrewes 
in  App.  to  Nicholl's  Book  of  C.  P.  pp.  38—9 ;  Dr.  Bennett, 
Par.  on  Book  of  C.  P.  p.  5,  also  quoted  in  Maxt's  Book  of 
C.  P.  in  loc ;  Bp.  Burnet,  Hist  ofRef.  Nazes,  m.  p.  460 ; 
1)R.  Cardwell,  Synod.  L  p.  126,  n.  287;  Conf.  p.  39,  n; 
Goode  Aids  to  Cerem.  p.  32 ;  Harrison,  Hist.  Inq.  (as 
above)  pp.  84—145;  Hetlyn,  Ref.  II.  408;  Keble  in 
Hooker,  Pref.  (II.  10.)  I.  p.  175;  QUARTERLY  Rev.  May, 
1843,  p.  264  ;  Robertson,  How  to  Conform  to  L.  pp.  101, 
303;  Rubric  Examined,  8vo.  London,  1737,  p.  8;  Scobell 
on  Church  Matters,  pp.  44 ;  Sharp  oh  Ruhr,  and  Can. 
p.  65 ;  Short's  Hist,  of  the  Church,  p.  267 ;  Sparrow, 
Rationale  (1722)  p.  248;  SlRYPE,  Life  of  Parker,  I.  pp. 
160,  319;  &c. 

Of  tbose  who  apparently  hold  the  contrary  opinion, 
viz. :  —  that  '  the  other  order  (at  least  in  the  method 
prescribed  by  this  Act,  1  Etiz.  c.  2.)  icas  never  made,' 
are — Ayliffe,  Parergon,  Introd.  xxxv ;  Benson,  Ruhr.  S> 
Can.  p.  64;  Burn,  Heel.  L.  Phil.  m.  p.  437;  Collier, 
Heel.  H.  II.  p.  495—6;  Bp.  Cosins  in  App.  to  Kicholls 
Book  of  C.  P.  p.  18;  Gibson,  Codex  t.  xm.  e.  II.  p.  297; 
Johnson,  Vade  Mecum,  I.  p.  23 ;  Nicholls  Com.  on  Book 
of  C.  P.  note  on  Act  of  Unif.  of  Eliz. ;  Stephens  Book  of 
C.  P.  (Eccl.  H.  Soc.)  I.  p.  39 ;  Eccl.  Stat.  I.  p.  370 ;  and 
many  others,  which  space  will  not  admit  of  enumerating. 
(Sec  List  of  Authorities  consulted  in  the  preparation  of 
these  Volumes,  posted). 

38.  — The  "Advertisements"  moreover  are  expressly 
acknowledged  in  Canon  24,  of  those  of  1603 — 4,  which 
are  still  binding  on  the  Clergy.  It  does  not  appear  that 
the  ' Advertisements'  were  published  before  March  28th, 
1566.  (Harrison,  122.)  They  however,  were  very 
objectionable  to  the  Puritans,  who  began  now,  1567, 
for  the  first  time  to  set  up  a  distinct  worship. 
(Collier,  ii.  511.)  Further  reference  will  be  made  to  this 
subject  as  we  proceed. 

39.  — Abp.  Parker  continued  to  urge  conformity  to 
the  Liturgy;  and  from  time  to  time  issued  'Articles  of 
Inquiry.'  A  few  years  later  (in  1569),  prompted  perhaps 
by  a  Letter  from  the  Council,  dated  Nov.  6th,  1569, 
(Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  315.),  he  enquires  in  his 
Visitation  Articles,  among  other  matters,  '  Whether  they 
'  (youre  Prestes,  Curates,  or  Ministers)  do  celebrate  the 
'  same  Divine  Service  in  the  Chauncell  or  in  the  Churche, 
'and  do  use  all  Rites  and  Orders  prescribed  in  the  Boke 


AUTHORITY  OF  THE  XXXIX  AETICLES.  283 


'of  Common  Prayer,  &c.  and  none  other.' — (ib.  i.  321.). 
Grindall,  Abp.  of  York,  issued  similar  'Articles'  for 
the  province  of  York  (May  15th,  1571),  enjoining  the 
Clergy  not  to  '  use  at  the  ministration  of  the  Communion, 
'  any  Gestures,  Kites,  or  Ceremonies,  not  appointed  by  the 
'Book  of  Common  Prayer.' — (ib.  i.  334.).]  The  Bishops, 
generally,  endeavoured  to  correct  irregularities  and 
abuses  in  order  and  discipline  by  occasional  "Articles  of 
Inquiry."  There  were  also  published  about  this  time, 
(1570),  the  three  Catechisms  of  Nowel,  Dean  of  St  Pauls. 
We  come  now  to  the 

The  Authority  of  the  XXXIX  Articles. 

40. — It  may  not  be  out  of  place  to  give  here  in  detail 
the  legal  claim  upon  our  observance  possessed  by  the 
xxxix  Articles.  Subsequently  to  their  publication  in 
1562 — 3,  they  were  reviewed  by  Archbp.  Parker  (in 
1570 — 1);  when  the  29,h  was  added,  which  made  the 
number  amount  to  xxxix ;  and  after  being  again  ratified 
by  Convocation,  they  were  confirmed  bv  the  Legislature, 
13  Eliz.  c.  12.  (1570—1).  This  Statute 'is  in  force  at  the 
present  day,  and  rigidly  demands  our  'unfeigned  assent 
and  consent  to  all  and  everything  they  contain.'  The 
wording,  however,  of  the  first  section  of  the  Act  would 
appear  to  limit  our  Subscription,  as  it  there  states  that 
every  Spiritual  Person  is  to  'declare  his  assent,  and 
'  subscribe  to,  all  the  Articles  of  Religion,  which  only 
'  concern  the  confession  of  the  true  Christian  faith,  and 
'  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  comprised  in  a  Book 
'  imprinted,  intituled  Articles,  whereupon  it  was  agreed 
'  by  the  Archbishops  and  Bishops  of  both  provinces,  and 
'  the  whole  Clergy  in  the  Convocation  held  at  London 
'  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  God,  1562,  &c.'  By  this 
expression,  Br.  Short  observes,— the  19tb,  20th,  35'\  and 
36th,  Articles  are  virtually  excluded  (Hist,  of  Church 
of  England,  p.  326.).  According  to  Gibson,  the  Articles 
which  concern  faith  and  doctrine  are  the  1st,  2nd,  3rd,  4th, 
5th,  — ,  — ,  — ,  9th,  10th,  11th,  12th,  13'h,  14th,  15*  16th,  17th, 
18'h,  —,—,—,  22nd;  and  not  the  others.  (Codex.  321). 
It  should  be  observed,  moreover,  that  the  xxixth  Article 
•was  not  embodied  in  the  ''  Book"  of  Articles  referred 
to  in  the  Statute.  The  Revised  Articles  of  1570—1, 
at  which  date  the  xxixth  Article  was  introduced,  and 
made  up  the  number  to  XXXIX,  were  not  published  on 
June  4th,  1571,  whereas  the  Parliament  was  dissolved  on 


284         AUTHORITY  OF  THE  XXXIX  ARTICLES. 


May  29th.  The  "  Book,"  therefore,  which  the  Act  speaks 
of  is  that  printed  in  1563,  which  contained  but  xxxvin 
Articles,  the  Queen  not  having  confirmed  the  xxixth. 
Consequently,  care  must  be  taken  not  to  advance  the 
Statute,  13  Eliz.,  as  authority  touching  nine  and  thirty 
Articles.  Clergymen,  however,  by  more  recent  Enactments, 
Ecclesiastical,  and  Temporal,  include  the  xxixth  in  their 
'  Subscription '  to  the  xxxix  Articles.   (See  postea). 

41. — The  Clergy  of  the  present  day,  by  the  Canons 
of  1603—4,  and  by  the  last  Act  of  Uniformity,  13  &  14 
Car.  II.  c.  4,  assent  by  their  Subscription  to  all  the 
Articles  without  exception.  (See  Bp.  Lincoln's  '  Charge,' 
1846.  p.  15.) 

The  Statutes,  and  Canons,  by  which  the  Clergy 
are  now  bound  with  respect  to  their  conformity  to  the 
xxxix  Articles  here  follow. 

Impugning  the  said  Articles  incurs  'deprivation.' — 

'  If  any  person  Ecclesiastical  shall  advisedly  maintain  or 

'  affirm  any  doctrine  directly  contrary  or  repugnant  to  any  of 

'  the  said  Articles,  and  shall  persist  therein,  or  not  revoke 

'  his  error  it  shall  be  lawful  to  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese, 

'  or  the  Ordinary,  or  the  said  Commissioners  to  deprive  such 
'  persons.'  13  Elic.  c.  12.  s.  2. 

This  was  confirmed  by  the  Canons  of  1603—4  in 
these  words. — '  Whosoever  sha"ll  hereafter  affirm  that  any  of  the 
'Nine  and  Thirty  Articles  agreed  upon  by  the  Archbishops 
'  and  Bishops  of  both  Provinces,  and  the  whole  Clergy,  in  the 
'  Convocation  holden  at  London  in  1562,  for  avoiding  diversities 
'  of  opinions,  and  for  the  establishing  of  consent  touching  true 
'Religion,  or  in  any  part  superstitious  or  erroneous, or  such  as 
'  he  may  not  with  a  good  conscience  subscribe  unto  ;  let  him 
'  be  excommunicated  ipso  facto,  and  not  restored,  but  only  by  the 
'  Archbishop,  after  his  repentance,  and  public  revocation" of  such 
'  his  wicked  errors.' — Canon  5. 

Assent  to  the  Articles  is  required  on  Admission 

to  a  Living. — '  No  person  shall  hereafter  be  admitted  to  any  Benefice 

'with  cure,  except  he  shall  first  have  subscribed  the  said 

'Articles  in  presence  of  the  Ordinary,  and  publicly  read  the 
'  same  in  the  Parish  Church  of  that  Beuefice  with  declaration 

'  of  his  unfeigned  assent  to  the  same,  and  that  except  within 

'  two  months  after  his  Induction  he  do  publicly  read  the  said 
'Articles  in  the  same  Church  whereof  he  shall  have  cure  in 
'  the  time  of  Common  Prayer  there,  with  Declaration  of  his 

'  unfeigned  assent,  thereunto  he  shall   be  upon  every  such 

'default  :ipso  facto'  immediately  deprived.'— 13  Eliz.  c.  12.  s.  3. 
That  is  to  say,  every  Incumbent  before  Admission  to  a  Living  is  to 
subscribe  the  xxxix  Articles  (now  after  the  manner  directed 
in  Canon  3C)  in  the  presence  of  the  Ordinary,  and  publicly  read 


AUTUOEITY  OF  THE  XXXIX  ARTICLES.  285 


the  said  Articles,  and  his  Declaration  of  assent,  in  the  Parish 
Church  during  (not  after).  Divine  Service  or  Common  Prayer 
and  within  two  {lunar)  months  after  his  Induction  (now  by 
23  Geo.  II.  c.  28.  within  three  months),  and  that  assent  must  be 
'  unfeigned,'  t.  e.  absolute  and  without  any  reservation  :  and  in 
default  he  is  deprived,  i.  e.  the  Church  is  void  without  sentence 
of  deprivation,  or  the  interference  of  the  Ordinary.  {Baker  v .  Brent. 
Cro.  Elk.  680.). 

Assent  is  also  required  before  Ordination. — 
'None  shall  be  made  Minister,  or  admitted  to  Preach,  or  administer 

'  the  Sacraments  unless  he  first  bring  to  the  Bishop  a  testi- 

'monial  of  his  professing  the  doctrine  expressed  in  the  said 

'Articles  (xxxix):  nor  unless  he  be  able  to  answer,  and  render 
'  to  the  Ordinary  an  account  of  his  faith  in  Latin,  according  to 

'the  said  Articles  nor  shall  be  admitted  to  the  order  of 

'  Deacon  or  Ministry,  unless  he  shall  first  subscribe  to  the  said 
'Articles ' — 13  Eliz.  c.  12.  s.  5.  '  All  admissions,  &c.  and  Licences 
'whatsover  to  be  made  to  the  contrary  hereof,  shall  be  merely 
'  void  in  law  as  if  they  never  were.' — ib.  Sect.  7.  (See  also 
Canon  3G.  Vol.  a). 

Also  by  Chancellors,  Commissaries,  and  Officials, 
as  enjoined  in  the  Canons  of  1G03-4.    'No  man  shall  hereafter 
'  be  admitted  a  Chancellor,  Commissary,  or  Official,  to  exercise 

'any  Ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  except  he  shall  subscribe  to 

'  the  Articles  of  Religion  agreed  upon  in  the  Convocation 
'of  1562.'— Canon  127. 

And  by  Heads  of  Colleges ;  this  is  enjoined  in  the 
subsequent  Act  of  Uniformity  (13  &  14  Car.  II.)  in 

these  words: — '  Every  Governor  or  Head  of  any  of  the  said  Colleges 
'  or  Halls,  hereafter  to  be  elected  or  appointed,  within  one  month 
'  next  after  his  election  or  collation,  and  admission  into  the  same 
'  Government  or  Headship,  shall  openly  and  publicly  in  the 
'Church,  Chapel,  or  other  public  place  of  the  same  College 
'  or  Hall,  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Fellows  and  Scholars 
'of  the  same,  or  the  greater  part  of  them  then  resident,  subscribe 
'  unto  the  Nine  and  Thirty  Articles  of  Religion  mentioned  in 

'  the  statute,  13  Eliz.  c.  12  and  declare  his  unfeigned  assent  and 

'  consent  unto,  and  approbation  of,  the  said  Articles  upon 

'  pain  to  lose  and  be  suspended  of  and  from  all  the  benefits  and 
'  profits  belonging  to  the  same  Government  or  Headship,  by  the 
'  space  of  Six  Months,  by  the  Visitor  or  Visitors  of  the  same 
'  College  or  Hall;  and  if  any  Governor  or  Head  of  any  College  or 

'  Hall,  suspended  for  not  subscribing  unto  tne  said  Articles  

'  shall  not  at  or  before  the  end  of  six-months  next  after  such 

'  suspension,  subscribe  unto  the  said  Articles  and  declare 

'  his  consent  thereunto  as  aforesaid  then  such  Government  or 

'  Headship  shall  be  '  ipso  facto'  void.' — 13  &  14  Car.  IX  c.  4.  s.  17. 

And  by  Lecturers,  and  others. — '  No  person  shall  be, 

'or  be  received  as,  a  Lecturer,  or  permitted,  suffered,  or  allowed 
1  to  preach  as  a  Lecturer,  or  to  preach  or  read  any  Sermon  or 
'  Lecture  in  any  Church,  Chapel,  or  other  place  of  Public 
'  Worship  within  this  Realm  of  England,  &c.  unless  he  shall 
'  iu  the  presence  of  the  same  Archbishop,  or  Bishop  read 


2SG         AUTHORITY  OF  THE  XXXIX  ARTICLES. 


'the  Nine  and  Thirty  Articles  of  Religion  mentioned  in  13  Eliz. 
'c.  12.  with  Declaration  of  his  unfeigned  assent  to  the  same.' — 
ib.  Sect.  19. 

The  Suhscription  to  the  xxxix  Aeticles  to  be 
made  by  every  Ecclesiastical  person  is  denned  in  the 
3rd  Article  in  Canon  36,  to  the  effect, — 

'  That  he  alloweth  the  Book  of  Articles  of  Religion 
'  agreed  upon  by  the  Archbishops  and  Bishops  of  both  provinces, 
'and  the  whole  Clergy  in  the  Convocation  holden  at  London  in 
'1562:  and  that  he  acknowUdgtth  all  and  every  the  Articles 
'  therein  contained,  being  in  number  A7«e  and  Thirty,  besides  the 
'  Ratification,  to  be  at/reeable  to  the  word  of  Cud.'— Canon  36. 
(See  Vol.  A.,  and  '  Rkading  in'). 

School  masters  licensed  by  the  Bishop  are  also 
required  to  subscribe  to  the  xxxix  Articles,  and  to  the  Royal 
Supremacy,  after  the  manner  set  forth  in  Canon  36,  just  mentioned. 
— '  No  man  shall  teach  either  in  Public  School  or  Private  House, 
'  but  such  as  shall  be  allowed  by  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  or 

'  Ordinary  of  the  place  and  also  except  he  shall  first  subscribe 

'  to  the  1st,  and  3rd,  Articles  afore-mentioned  simply,  and  to  the 
'  two  first  clauses  of  the  2nd  Article.'— Canon  77.  "As  to  subse- 
'  quent  exemption,  see  postea. 

Article  xxxvi,  On  the  Consecration  of  Bishops 
and  ministers,'  is  by  two  especial  clauses  of  the  'Act  of  Uniformity' 
included  in  all  Subscriptions  to  the  xxxix  Articles; — 'Such 
'Subscriptions  shall  be  construed  and  be  taken  to  extend,  and 
'shall  be  applied  (for  and  touching  the  said  Six  and  Thirtieth 
'Article)  unto  the  Book  (of  Common  Prater)  containing  the 
'  Form  and  Manner  of  making,  Ordaining,  and  Consecrating  of 
'  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  in  this  Act  mentioned,  in  such 
'  sort  and  manner  as  the  same  did  heretofore  extend  nnto  the 
'Book  set  forth  in  the  time  of  King  Edward  VI.,  mentioned  in 
'the  said  Six  and  Thirtieth  Article.'— 13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4. 
ss.  30,  31.    (See  postea.). 

42.— Under  the  Statute  of  13  Eliz.  c.  12,  which 
is  at  this  day  in  force,  a  Clergyman  was  criminally  pro- 
ceeded against  in  1808  for  maintaining  and  affirm- 
ing doctrines  contrary  to  the  Articles,  "especially 
preaching  against  the  divinity  of  our  Saviour:"  and 
sentence  of  Deprivation  was  passed  by  his  Diocesan 
by  reason  of  his  having  virtually  refused  to  revoke  his 
error.  Bishop  v.  Stone  (1  Hagg.  Cons.  433).  Lord 
Stowell  (Sir  Win.  Scott)  in  giving  judgment,  thus 
remarked  : — 

'  It  was  quite  repugnant  to  the  purpose  for  which  the  Articles 
'  were  designed,  and  to  all  rational  interpretation,  to  contend  that 
'  the  construction  of  the  Articles  should  be  left  to  the  private 


AUTHOEITY  OF  THE  XXXIX  AUTICLES.  287 


'  persuasion  of  individuals;  and  that  every  one  should  be  at  liberty 
'  to  preach  doctrines  contrary  to  those  which  the  wisdom  of  the 
'  State,  aided  and  instructed  by  the  wisdom  of  the  Church,  had 
'  adopted.  That  it  was  the  idlest  of  all  conceits  that  this  was  an 
'obsolete  Act;  that  it  was  in  daily  use,  in  viridi  observantid,  and  as 
'much  in  force  as  any  in  the  whole  statute  book;  and  repeatedly 
'recommended  to  our  attention  by  the  injunction  of  almost  every 
'  sovereign  who  had  held  the  sceptre  of  these  realms.  That  as  to 
'preaching,  it  should  be  according  to  those  doctrines  which  the 
'  State  had  adopted,  as  the  rational  expositions  of  the  Christian 
'faith.  That  it  was  of  the  utmost  importance  that  this  system 
'  should  be  maintained;  for  what  would  be  the  state  and  condition 
'  of  Public  Worship  if  every  man  was  at  liberty  to  preach  from  the 
'  Pulpit  of  the  Church  whatever  doctrines  he  might  think  proper  to 
'  hold?  Miserable  would  be  the  condition  of  the  Laity  if  any  such 
'  pretension  could  be  maintained  by  the  Clergy.  That  any  Clergy- 
'  man  could  assume  the  liberty  of  inculcating  his  own  private 
'  opinions,  in  direct  opposition  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Established 
'  Church,  in  a  place  set  apart  for  its  own  public  worship,  was  not 
'  more  contrary  to  the  nature  of  a  National  Church  than  to  all 
'honest  and  rational  conduct.  "At  the  same  time,"  he  says,  "I 
'  think  myself  bound  to  declare,  that  it  is  not  the  duty  nor  inclina- 
'  tion  of  this  Court  to  be  minute  and  rigid  in  applying  proceedings 
'  of  this  nature,  and  that  if  any  Article  is  really  a  subject  of 
'  dubious  interpretation,  it  would  be  highly  improper  that  this 
'  Court  should  fix  on  one  meaning,  and  prosecute  all  those  who 
'  hold  a  contrary  opinion  regarding  its  interpretation.  It  is  a  very 
'  different  thing  where  the  authority  of  the  Articles  is  totally 
'  eluded,  and  the  party  deliberately  declares  the  intention  of  teach- 
'  ing  doctrines  contrary  to  them."  And  after  referring  to  the  par- 
ticular case  before  him,  which  had  been  clearly  proved,  he  says, 
'  The  Court  cannot  refuse  its  authority  to  carry  into  effect  the 
'  Statutes  of  the  land.  It  might  proceed  immediately,  as  suggested 
'  by  the  King's  Advocate,  after  the  persisting  in  those  doctrines 
'  which  we  have  heard  this  day,  to  pronounce  the  sentence  of  the 
'law.  But  the  Court  is  disposed  to  act  with  the  greatest  indul- 
'gence  to  the  party,  and  will  now  content  itself  with  admonishing 
'  him  to  appear  the  next  Court  day  to  revoke  his  errors;  with  an 
'  intimation,  that  if  he  does  not  obey  this  admonition,  the  Court 
'  will  feel  itself  under  the  necessity  of  proceeding  to  inflict  the 
'  particular  penalty  which  the  statute  directs."  Accordingly,  on 
the  next  Court  day,  Mr.  Stone,  the  party  proceeded  against, 
tendered  the  following  paper:  "I,  Francis  Stone,  Rector  of  Cold 
"  Norton,  in  the  County  of  Essex,  do  declare,  that  I  was  not  aware 
"  that  by  preaching  my  Sermon  before  the  Archdeacon,  I  was 
"offending  against  an  Act  of  Parliament  passed  in  the  reign  of 
"Queen  Elizabeth;  and  further,  I  was  persuaded  that  my  solemn 
"  engagements  with  the  Bishop  at  my  Ordination  as  Priest  author- 
"  ized  me  to  preach  as  I  did.  But  as  the  Act  of  Parliament  affirms 
"that  I  should  preach  only  what  is  consistent  with  the  Thirty- 
"nine  Articles,  I  do  promise  not  to  offend  in  like  manner." 
Lord  Stowell,  however,  did  not  feel  himself  at  liberty  to  accept 
this  as  a  revocation;  '  for  that  it  was  in  fact  directly  the  reverse; 
'  that  there  was  no  difficulty  in  framing  what  the  Statute  required; 
'  for  it  was  plainly  an  assurance  that  the  party  who  had  offended 


288      INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  XXXIX  ARTICLES. 


'  against  the  statute  revoked  his  errors.  And,  considering  that 
'  Mr.  Stone  had  not  revoked  his  errors,  or  complied  with  the  requi- 
'  sition  of  the  statute,  he  directed  the  Registrar  to  record  that  the 
'  party  had  not  revoked  his  errors;  and  sentence  of  deprivation  was 
'in  consequence  pronounced  bv  the  Bishop  in  the  usual  manner." 
(1  Hagg.  Cons.  424). 

43. — Again,  in  the  case  of  Hodgson  v.  Oakley  (1 
Robert.  322.  362),  the  defendant  was  proceeded  against 
for  publishing  a  pamphlet,  entitled  "  A  Letter  to  the 
Lord  Bishop  of  London"  in  which  Letter  —  while 
animadverting  upon  the  proceedings  which  had  been 
taken  by  the  University  of  Oxford  against  a 
Mr.  Ward,  who  had  published  a  Tract  to  justify 
the  propriety  of  subscribing  "  the  Articles,"  at 
Ordination  tvith  a  mental  qualification  to  the  effect 
that  no  renunciation  of  the  errors  of  the  Church  of 
Rome  was  involved  in  such  subscription — in  which 
1  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London,'  we  repeat, 
Mr.  Oaklet  declared  inter  alia  'that  he  held  all 
the  doctrines  of  the  Church  of  Eome.'  The  Court 
held  that  such  language  was  a  maintaining  and 
affirming  doctrines  repugnant  to  the  Articles  of 
the  Church  of  England  of  which  he  was  a  Minister. 
His  License  was,  therefore,  revoked;  and  he  was 
inhibited  from  performing  any  ministerial  duty 
whatever  in  the  province  of  Canterbury  until  he 
should  retract  his  error :  this  sentence  was,  in  effect, 
suspension.  He  was  also  condemned  in  the  costs  of 
the  suit.  These  proceedings  having  been  taken  under 
the  general  Ecclesiastical  law,  and  not  under  the 
Statute  law  (13  Eliz.),  the  punishment  was  left  to 
the  discretion  of  the  Court.  (Waddilote's  Digest. 
p.  288.  Crirp's  Law  of  the  Church,  616.).  See  the  more 
recent  cases  of  Ditcher  v.  Denison,  for  teaching 
'  Transubstantiation :'  Bp.  of  London  v.  Poole,  and 
Shaw  v.  West,  for  practising  '  Auricular  Confession,' 
contrary  to  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England. 
A  Bishop,  however,  has  power  under  the  Church 
Discipline  Act,  (3  &  4  Vict.  c.  86.  s.  9.),  where  the 
party  accused  admits  the  truth  of  the  charges 
brought  against  him,  to  pass  sentence  according 
to  the  Ecclesiastical  law.    (See  the  recent  charge  of 


THE  CAN0N3  OF  1571 


289 


heretical  teaching,  Bandall  v.  Bandall,  in  the  Diocese 
of  Chichester.) 

Hie  Canons  of  1571. 

44.— In  the  same  Convocation,  which  reviewed  and 
confirmed  the  xxxix  Articles,  a  set  of  Canons  for  the 
regulation  of  Discipline  was  also  framed,  and  published 
under  the  title  '  Liber  Quorundam  Canonum  Disciplince 
Ecclesice  Anglicance '  (in  Sp arrow's  Coll.  223) ;  but  as 
these  Canons  were  never  submitted  to  the  Lower  House 
of  Convocation,  nor  obtained  the  sanction  of  the  Queen, 
nor  the  ratification  of  Parliament,  they  have  no  claim  to 
legal  authority.  They  appear  to  have  been  subscribed  and 
approved  by  Grindall,  Abp.  of  York,  and  his  suffragans 
(Strype's  Parker  ii.  57 — 62).  Yet  an  attempt  was  at 
this  time  made  to  introduce  the  subject  of  Church  discipline 
in  the  House  of  Commons  by  directing  attention  to  Cran- 
MER's  Book,  the  '  Reformatio  Leyum  JEcclesiasticarum,' 
which  had  been  drawn  up  by  that  Reformer  in  pursuance 
of  the  3  &  4  Edw.  VI.  c.  11.  (1549) ;  but  its  consideration 
then  was  defeated  by  the  early  death  of  the  King.  As  the 
present  proceeding  however  did  not  emanate  from  Eliza- 
beth, she  put  a  stop  to  it  as  an  encroachment  upon  her 
prerogative.  (Short's  Hist  of  the  Ch.  p.  270.)  It  was 
found  necessary  shortly  after  {Oct.  20th,  1573,  to  issue  a 
Royal  Proclamation  for  enforcing  conformity  to  the 
Liturgy,  and  obedience  to  the  Act  of  Uniformity,  which 
were  continually  interrupted  by  the  introduction  of  other 
Rites  and  Ceremonies  in  Public  Worship  than  were  there- 
in allowed  :  — 

'  For  speedy  remedy  whereof,  Her  Majesty  straightly  chargeth 
'  and  commandeth  all  Archbishops,  and  Bishops,  and  all  Justices 
'  of  Assizes,  and  Oyer  and  Terminer,  and  all  Mayors,  Head 
'  Officers  of  Cities  and  Towns  Corporate,  and  all  other  who  have 
'any  authority,  to  put  in  execution  the  Act  for  the  Uniformity  of 
'Common  Prater  &c.' — (Sparrow's  Coll.  169;  Cardwell's 
Doc.  Ann.  i.  350.). 
This  was  strengthened  by  a  Letter  from  the  Council  to  the 
Bishops,  dated  Nov.  7th,  1573,  requiring  them  'to  take  a  more 
'vigilant  eye  to  this  Uniformity.'— (ib.  Doe.  Ann.  i.  352.)  Abp. 
Whitgift  strictly  enforced  the  Liturgy  (1584):  and  in  1585,  and 
1588,  he  enquires  in  his  Visitation  Articles  in  the  Dioceses  of 
Chichester,  and  Salisbury:  —  'Whether  your  Minister  have  used 
'  any  other  Form  or  Manner  of  Public  Prayers,  Administration  of 
'  Sacraments,  or  any  other  Rites,  Ceremonies,  or  Orders,  than  are 
'prescribed  by  the  "Book  of  Common  Prayer;"  or  hath  he 
'  altered  them,  or  any  of  them,  how,  and  in  what  manner?' — 
(ib.  Doc.  Ann.  i.  413;  ii.  3.  6.  13.)] 


290 


THE  LITURGY  OF  JAMES  I. 


THE  FOURTH  LITURGY,  (1604.) 
or  Liturgy  of  James  I. 

45. — The  next  proceeding  affecting  the  "Book 
of  Common  Prayer,"  and  the  maintenance  of 
Uniformity,  with  which  we  are  concerned,  was  a 
review  of  the  Liturgy  immediately  after  the  accession 
of  James  I.,  who  came  to  the  throne  on  the  7th  of 
May,  1603.  A  '  Conference '  was  held  at  Hampton 
Court  {Jan.  14th,  1603-4)  with  the  design  of  meeting 
certain  objections  of  the  Puritan  party  ;  which  resulted 
in  a  few  slight  alterations  being  effected  by  the  Royal 
Commissioners  (Feb.  9th,  1603-4)  ;  but  they  were 
never  submitted  to  the  Convocation,  and  '  possessed  no 
1  legal  authority,  inasmuch  as  they  were  only  sanctioned 
'by  the  Royal  Proclamation  under  which  they  were 
'  published  (March  5th,  1603-4)  *  (Short,  p.  544 ; 
Cardwell's  Conf.  137;  Nicuoll's  Com.  Pr.  Pref. 
vii.)  :  and  of  a  second  Proclamation,  issued  July  \Gth 
of  the  same  year,  requiring  conformity  before  the  last 
day  of  November  next  coming.  (Card-well's  Doc. 
Ann.  ii.  56,  60.)  The  King  proceeded  in  this  measure 
by  virtue  of  1  Eliz.  c.  2.  ss.  25,  26.  (quoted  in  par.  32) ; 
and  he,  and  Whitgift,  both  held  that  the  King  had 
authority  to  make  Alterations  in  the  Liturgy,  although 
such  power  does  not  appear  by  the  Act  to  have  been 
continued  in  precise  terms  to  the  Queen's  heirs  and 
successors.  (Burn's  Ecc.  L.  Ph.  in.  415 ;  Nicholl's 
Com.  P.  in  loco).  The  changes,  however,  were  recog- 
nized in  the  80th  Canon  made  in  the  same  year, 
1603-4.  (Cardwell's  Conf.  143.) ;  and  it  is  to  this 
Prayer  Book,  that  '  Subscription '  is  enjoined  in  Canon 
36.  This  Revision,  of  the  Prayer  Book  however,  has 
been  since  legalized  by  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4. 


*  It  should  be  remembered  that  the  neic  year,  i.  e.  1604,  did  not 
begin  till  March  25th. 


THE  CONSTITUTIONS  AND  CANONS.  291 


The  Constitutions  and  Canons.  (1603—4.) 

46.  — This  Revision  of  the  Liturgy  was  followed 
shortly  after  by  the  appearance  of  a  body  of  Con- 
stitutions and  Canons,  141  in  number,  designed 
to  give  effect  to  the  decisions  of  the  Hampton  Court 
Conference.  Their  compilation  was  the  work  of  Abp. 
Bancroft,  and  after  passing  the  Convocation  of  the 
province  of  Canterbury  (1603-4),  they  were  ratified  by 
the  King,  for  himself,  his  heirs,  and  successors.  In 
the  following  year  they  received  the  sanction  of  the 
Convocation  of  York  (1605-6). 

47.  — In  these  Canons  many  provisions  were  made 
for  enforcing  Conformity  to  the  Liturgy.  Can/)N  4, 
entitled  '  Impugners  of  the  Public  Worship  of  God 
established  in  the  Church  of  England  censured,'  de- 
clares : — '  Whosoever  shall  hereafter  affirm,  that  the 

'  Form  of  God's  Worship  in  the  Church  of  England,  established 
'by  Law,  and  contained  in  the  'Book  of  Common  Prayer  and 
'  Administration  of  Sacraments,'  is  a  corrupt,  superstitious,  or 
'  unlawful  Worship  of  God,  or  containeth  any  thing  in  it  that  is 
'repugnant  to  the  Scriptures;  let  him  be  excommunicated  ipso 
'facto,  and  not  restored,  but  by  the  Bishop  of  the  place,  or  Arch- 
'  bishop,  after  his  repentance  and  public  revocation  of  such  his 
'  wicked  errors.'* — Can.  4.  {Enforced  by  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  l.s.l: 
1  Eliz.  c.  2.  ss.  4,  5.  6 ;  revive  d  by  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  24: 
See  postea.) 

So  again,  'Impugners  of  the  Rites  and  Cebe- 
MONIES  established  in  the  Church  of  England  cen- 
sured.'— 'Whosoever  shall  hereafter  affirm,  that  the 
'Rites  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Church  of  England  by  Law 
'established  are  wicked,  antichristian,  or  superstitious,  or  such 
'as,  being  commanded  by  lawful  authority,  men,  who  are 
'  zealously  and  godly  affected,  may  not  with  any  good  conscience 
'  approve  them,  use  them,  or  as  occasion  requireth,  subscribe 
'unto  them;  let  him  be  excommunicated  ipso  facto,  and  not 
1  restored  until  he  repent,  and  publicly  revoke  such  his  wicked 
'errors.'— Canon  6.  {Enforced  by  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  s.  1; 
1  Eliz.  c.  1.  ss.  4,  5,  G;  revived  by  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  24.) 


*  The  remark  of  Dr.  Burn  must  not  be  here  omitted,  he  says — 
'  the  Liturgy  of  13  &  14  Car.  II.  is  not  the  same  with  that  which 
'  the  aforesaid  Canons  (of  1603-4)  do  refer  to;  so  that  so  far  forth 
'  the  said  Canons  as  to  this  matter  are  not  now  in  force.'— (Eccl. 
Law.  Phil.  iii.  415.  See  postea.)  This  opinion  however  is  much 
questioned. 


292 


THE  CANONS  OF  1603-4. 


48.  — The  :  Book  or  Common  Pbayeb  '  moreover 
is  '  not  to  be  diminished  from,  or  added  to '  ;  or  as  the 
title  of  the  Canon  expresses  it — The  'Prescript 
Form  of  Divine  Service  to  be  used  on  Sundays,  and 
Holy-Days' — 'The  Common  Prayer  shall  be  said  or 

'sung  distinctly,  and  reverently,  upon  such  days  as  are  appointed 
'  to  be  kept  Holy  by  the  '  Book  of  Common  Prayer,'  and  their 
'  Eves,  and  at  convenient  and  usual  times  of  those  days  and  in 
'such  place  of  every  Church  as  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  or 
'  Ecclesiastical  Ordinary  of  the  place,  shall  think  meet  for  the 
'largeness  or  straitness  of  the  same,  so  as  the  people  may  be 
'most  edified.  All  Ministers  likewise  shall  observe  the  Orders, 
'  Rites,  and  Ceremonies  prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common 
'  Prayer,  as  well  in  reading  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  saying  of 
'  Prayers,  as  in  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  without  either 
'diminishing  in  regard  of  Preaching,  or  in  any  other  respect, 
'or  adding  am/  tiling  in  the  matter  or  form.' — Canon  14.  (Con- 
firmed by  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  2.    See  posted). 

In  the  Uniteesities  also  the  '  Book  of  Common 
Prayer'  is  to  be  used  without  omission  or  alteration; 
or,  as  the  title  of  the  Canon  expresses  it, '  Colleges  to 
use  the  Prescript  Form  of  Divine  Service.1 — '  In  the 
'whole  Divine  Service,  and  Administration  of  the  Holy  Com- 
'munion,  in  all  Colleges  and  flails  in  both  Universities,  the  Order, 
'  Form,  and  Ceremonies,  shall  be  duly  observed,  as  they  are  set 
'  down  and  prescribed  in  the  '  Book  of  Common  Prayer'  without 
'  any  omission  or  alteration.'— Canox  16.   (Confirmed  by  13  &  14 
Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  17.). 

49.  — Conformity  to  the  Liturgy  is  also  enjoined  in 
the  Second  Article  in  the  36th  Canon;  the  three 
Articles  of  this  Canon  are  to  be  subscribed  at  the 
time  of  Ordination,  and  the  pledge  renewed  whenever 
a  fresh  '  Cure  of  souls'  is  undertaken,  otherwise  no 
Licence  can  be  granted  by  the  Diocesan — 1  No  person 
'  shall  hereafter  be  received  into  the  Ministry,  nor  cither  by  iustitu- 
'  tion  or  collation  admitted  to  any  Ecclesiastical  Living,  nor  suffered 
•  to  preach,  to  catechize,  or  to  be  a  Lecturer,  or  Reader  of  Divinity, 
•in  either  University,  or  in  any  Cathedral  or  Collegiate  Church, 
'City,  or  Market-town,  Parish  Church,  Chapel,  or  in  any  other 
'  place  within  this  realm,  except  he  be  licensed  either  by  the  Arch- 
'  bishop,  or  by  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  where  he  is  to  be  placed, 
'  under  their  hands  and  seals,  or  by  one  of  the  two  Universities 
'under  their  seal  likewise;  and  except  he  shall  first  subscribe  to 
'  these  three  Articles  following,  in  such  manner  and  sort  as  we 
'  have  here  appointed: — 

I.  (On  the  Rot/al  Supremacy,  quoted  in  par.  13.  See  also 
26  Ben.  VIII.  0,1  j.  1  Eliz.  c.  1.  ss.  19,  22,  25;  8  Elk,  c.  1  ;  and 
Article  xxxvii  ;  also  1  Will.  &  Ma.  c.  8.  s.  12). 


SUBSOBIPTION  TO  THE  LITUEGY.  293 


II.  'That  the  Booh  of  Common  Prayer,  and  of  Ordering 
'of  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  containeth  in  it  nothing  con- 
trary to  the  Word  of  God,  and  that  it  may  lawfully  so  be  used; 
'  and  that  he  himself  will  use  the  form  in  the  said  Book  prescribed 
'  in  Public  Prayer,  and  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  and 
'none  other.'— See  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  s.  1;  1  Eliz.  c.  2.  ss.  4—6; 
13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4. 

III.  (On  the  xxxix  Articles,  quoted  in  par.  41.  See  also, 
13  Eliz.  c.  12.  ss.  1,  2,  3.  5. 7;  and  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c. 4.  ss.  17.  19.) 

(Form  of  Subscription). 

'I,  C***D*mm,  do  willingly  and  from  my  heart  (ex 
'animo)  subscribe  to  the  xxxix  Articles  of  Religion  of  the  United 
'  Church  of  England  and  Ireland,  and  to  the  three  Articles  in 
'  the  thirty-sixth  Canon ;  and  to  all  things  therein  contained." 

(Signature)  <C  «  •  »  D  •  *  •  • 

'  And  if  any  Bishop  shall  ordain,  admit,  or  license  any,  as  is 
'aforesaid,  except  he  first  have  subscribed  in  manner  and  form 
4  as  here  we  have  appointed,  he  shall  be  suspended  from  giving  of 
'  Orders  and  Licences  to  preach  for  the  space  of  twelve  months.' — 
Canon  36. 

This  is  confirmed  by  the  next  Canon,  which  says  : 
— '  None  licensed,  as  is  aforesaid,  to  Preach,  Eead,  Lecture  or 
4  Catechize,  coming  to  reside  in  any  Diocese,  shall  be  permitted 
'there  to  Preach,  Eead,  Lecture,  Catechize,  or  minister  the 
'Sacraments,  or  to  execute  any  other  Ecclesiastical  function, 
'  by  what  authority  soever  he  be  thereunto  admitted,  unless  he 
'  first  consent  and  subscribe  to  the  Three  Articles  before  men- 
tioned, in  the  presence  of  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  wherein 
'he  is  to  Preach,  Eead,  Lecture,  Catechize,  or  administer  the 
'Sacraments,  as  aforesaid.' — Canon  37. 

"  Revolters  after  Subscription  censured." — 'If  any 
'Minister  after  he  hath  once  subscribed  to  the  said  Three 
'  Articles,  shall  omit  to  use  the  Form  of  Prayer,  or  any  of  the 
'  Orders  or  Ceremonies  prescribed  in  the  Communion  Book,  let 
'  him  be  suspended :  and  if  after  a  month  he  do  not  reform  and 
'submit  himself,  let  him  be  excommunicated;  and  then  if  he 
'  shall  not  submit  himself  within  the  space  of  another  month,  let 

.  '  him  be  deposed  from  the  Ministry.' — Canon  38. 

In  the  case  of  Sanders  v.  Head,  (Nov.  14.  1841) 
Sir  Herbert  Jenner  Fust  gave  sentence  of  Suspension 
for  three  years  for  '  depraving  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer'  after  Subscription  made.  (3  Curt.  570). 

There  are  others  of  these  Canons  bearing  upon 
separate  portions  of  the  Liturgy,  which  will  be  brought 
forward  in  their  order. 

t2 


294 


THE  CANONS  OF  1603-4 


Authority  of  the  Canons  of  1603-4. 

50. — As  to  the  binding  Authority  of  these  Canons 
upon  the  Clergy  of  the  present  day,  this  has  been 
conclusively  decided  in  the  judgment  of  Lord  Hard- 
wicke  in  the  case  of  Middleton  v.  Crofts,  a.  d.  1736 ; 
(Blackstoe's  Com.  I.  83;  Bttbn's  Eccl.  L.  Phil, 
p.  xxvii;  Lathbuet's  Hist,  of  Convoc.  p.  212; 
Eogees'  Eccl.  L.  p.  133;  Stephens'  Laws  Eel.  to 
Clergy,  p.  227)  ;  who  says  : — 

'  We  are  all  of  opinion  that  the  Canons  of  1603—4,  not  having 
'  been  confirmed  by  Parliament,  do  not  proprio  vigore  (by  their 

'  own  force  and  authority)  bind  the  Laity.  When,  however, 

they  are  '  declaratory  of  the  ancient  usage,  and  law  of  the  Church 
'of  England  [ante  25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  19.  s.  7;  (quoted  in  par.  10), 

revived  by  1  Elk.  c.  1.]  they  will  bind  the  Laity  '  What  is  new 

'in  them  will  not  bind  the  Laity;  only  the  Clergy.'  Further  on, 
he  adds,  '  It  is  rigidly  said  in  2  Salle.  673,  that  the  King's  con- 
'  sent  to  a  Canon  in  re  Ecclesiastic  amakes  it  a  Law  to  bind  the 
'  Clergy,  but  not  the  Laity.' — Buits'9  Eccl.  Law,  Phil.  I.  p.  xxvii. 

It  is  important  also  to  know  that  this  opinion  has 
regulated  the  decisions  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts 
from  that  day  to  this.  (See  2  Atk.  158,  650 ;  Carth. 
485 ;  1  Lev.  436 ;  1  Salk.  134 ;  2  Salk.  673  ;  Stra. 
1056 ;  6  Ves.  421.).  In  Bird  v.  Smith  (Moor,  Sir  F. 
783),  the  Court  resolved  '  that  the  Canons  of  the 
'  Church,  made  by  the  Convocation  and  King,  bind  in 
1  matters  Ecclesiastical,  as  much  as  an  Act  of  Parlia- 
1  ment.' 

Chief  Justice  Yatjghan  said,  in  Sill  v.  Good 
(Yaugh.  327),—'  A  lawful  Canon  is  the  law  of  the 
'  kingdom,  as  well  as  an  Act  of  Parliament ;  and  what- 
'  ever  is  the  law  of  the  kingdom  is  as  much  the  law  as 
'  any  thing  else  that  is  so ;  for  what  is  law  does  not 
'  suscipere  magis  aut  minus.' 

And,  in  Grove  v.  Elliot,  D.  D.  (2  Ventr.  44.) 
'Canons  in  England  are  the  Laws  which  bind  and 
'govern  in  Ecclesiastical  affairs.'  (Stephens'  Laws 
Relating  to  the  Clergy,  p.  227.). 

And  further,  '  What  is  expressly  required  by  the 
'  Canons  is  not  repealed  by  disuse ;  the  Court  is  to 


ATTTHOBITY  OF  CANONS  OF  1603-4. 


295 


'  see  whether  it  is  necessary  for  the  purposes  of  justice 
'in  the  particular  case.' — (Herbert  v.  Herbert,  Phil, 
ii.  443). 

Lord  Hardwicke,  in  More  v.  More,  said,  '  No  Ecclesiastical 
'  person  can  dispense  with  a  Canon,  for  they  are  obliged  to  pursue 
'  the  directions  in  them  with  the  utmost  exactness,  and  it  is  in  the 
'  power  of  the  Crown  to  do  it  only.'  (2  Atk.  157—8.) 

Lord  Denman,  in  his  judgment  in  Reg.  v.  Chadwiclc  (the  case 
of  Marriage  with  a  deceased  Wife's  Sister.  Nov.  17,  1847),  accords 
with  the  opinion  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  for  he  says: — 'The  first 
'  authority  to  which  I  shall  now  refer  is  the  Canon  of  1603 ; 
'not  that  I  attribute  any  more  legal  force  to  these  Canons 
'  than  Lord  Hardwicke,  and  Lord  Holt,  and  other  great  Judges 
'have  done,  but  they  are  very  important,  as  showing  the  state 
'of  opinion  upon  the  subject,  and  which  ruled  the  Courts  which 

'  had  to  decide  upon  that  matter  they  show  what,  in  point  of 

'fact,  was  the  prevailing  law  upon  this  subject;  from  that  time 

'  to  the  present,  it  is  admitted,  that  all  opinion  and  authority  have 
'  gone  along  with  the  case  of  Hill  v.  Good,  and  that  has  been  the 
'  universal  opinion  since.' — Cripp's  Eccl.  Cases,  p.  40 — 1. 

51.  — As  regards  quasi-ecclesiastical  persons,  such 
as  Chtjechwabdens,  Appaeitoes,  Pboctobs,  Eegis- 
teabs,  &c.  the  binding  force  of  these  Canons  has  not 
been  legally  decided.  'The  Temporal  Courts,'  says 
Burn,  'in  the  adjudications  which  have  been  made  do  proceed 
'  upon  a  supposition  that  these  Canons  are  in  force.'  And  after 
referring  to  Lord  Hardwicke's  judgment,  he  adds  '  that  the  regula- 
tion of  the  Officers  according  to  the  measures  prescribed  by  these 
'  Canons,  is  not  so  much  of  necessity  as  of  convenience;  that 
'  the  Canons  in  these  respects  are  a  good  rule  to  go  by,  bat 
'  not  of  peremptory  obligation ;  and  therefore  that  the  authority 
'  which  the  Court  exerciseth  over  its  Officers  according  to  these 
'  Canons,  is  not  from  the  Canons  themselves,  but  from  that  power 
'  which  every  Court  hath  over  its  own  Officers  by  the  Common 
'  Law,  by  the  ancient  Canon  Law,  and  by  every  Law;  for  without 
'this,  there  could  be  no  Courts  at  all.'— {Eccl.  L.  Phil.  Pre/. 
p.  xxx.) 

52.  — Although  these  Canons  of  1603-4  form  the 
basis  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Law  of  the  present  day  in 
so  far  as  the  Clergy  are  concerned,  and  rule  the 
decisions  of  our  Ecclesiastical  Courts ;  yet  the  practical 
authority  of  the  Canons,  the  necessity,  that  is,  of  their 
being  now  adopted  and  put  in  use  according  to  their 
litera  scripta,  is  a  point  much  disputed. 

53.  — The  Canons  in  many  instances  are  only  de- 
claratory of  the  law  as  to  what  shall  be  its  execution, 


296  AUTHOEITY  OF  CANONS  OF  1603-4. 


and  not  always  introductory  of  the  offence,  as  was 
shown  in  the  case  of  Crompton  v.  Butler  (1  Hagg. 
Con.  464.  note).  And  further,  it  should  be  borne  in 
mind,  that  these  Canons  of  1603  were  originally 
framed  in  Latin,  and  the  English  translation  is  not 
altogether  sufficiently  accurate  to  be  depended  upon ; 
so  that,  in  any  doubtful  case,  reference  should  be 
made  to  the  Latin  Text.  The  ambiguity  in  the  trans- 
lation of  the  last  clause  of  the  106th  Canon  (on 
Divorce)  gave  rise  to  considerable  discussion  in  the 
case  of  Donegal  v.  Donegal  (3  Phil.  594.  2  Add.  189. 
notes). 

Among  many  authorities  upon  this  question  the 
following  may  be  quoted  :— 

Archdeacon  Sharp  observes : — '  I  believe  no  one  will  say  that 
'  we  are  bound  to  pay  obedience  to  them  all  according  to  the  letter 
'  of  them.  For  the  alterations  of  customs,  change  of  habits,  and 
1  other  circumstances  of  time  and  place,  and  the  manner  of  the 
1  Country,  have  made  some  of  them  impracticable ;  I  mean  pru- 
'  dentially  so,  if  not  literal!}'.  Others  of  them  are  useless  and  invalid 
'  of  course,  through  defect  of  proper  officers  and  proper  inquiries 
'to  render  them  of  force  and  effectual:  and  there  are  hardly  any 
'  of  them  but  what  have  been  upon  extraordinary  occasions  dis- 
'pensed  with  by  our  Governors.'  {Rubric  and  Can.  p.  9.)  Further 
on  he  observes,  '  I  think  it  is  agreed  on  all  hands,  and  maintained 
'  by  the  Common  Lawyers  as  well  as  Civilians  that  the  Canons  (at 

'least  with  respect  to  us  of  the  Clergy  )  are  law,  and  binding 

'  under  their  several  penalties,  in  all  cases  whatsoever,  where  they 
'  do  not  contradict  or  interfere  with  the  laws  of  the  State.  And  I 
'think  it  is  agreed  likewise,  that  they,  like  other  Laws,  are  to  be 
'  expounded  in  the  obvious  grammatical  sense  of  the  words  in  which 
'  they  are  expressed,  or  by  the  interpretation  of  the  Ecclesiastical 

'Judges,  before  whom  they  are  pleaded  as  law  (who)  interpret 

'  them  always  according  to  the  letter.  The  immediate  inference 
'  from  which  should  seem  to  be  that  they  ought  likewise  "  »n  all 
"  cases  to  be  literally  conformed  to."  And  yet  if  we  should  lay  this 
'  down  as  an  invariable  or  indispensable  rule  of  practice,  as 
'  matters  now  stand  with  us,  in  all  cases  to  pay  a  literal  obedience 
'  to  the  Canons,  we  should  soon  find  ourselves  so  entangled  and 
'  beset  with  difficulties,  as  would  puzzle  both  professions  of  the 
'  Law  as  well  as  onr  own  to  extricate  us  out  of.'  (t'6.  p.  83.) — 
Charges,  a.d.  1731 — 38. 

The  late  Bishop  of  London  {Dr.  Blomfield)*  follows  very  much 
the  opinion  of  Lord  Hardwicke  above  quoted;  he  says — 'With 


*  The  Author  would  remind  the  Reader,  that  quotations  from 
Episcopal  Charges,  and  other  authorities,  upon  ono  specific  question, 


AUTHOEITY  OF  CANONS  OF  1603-4.  297 


'  respect  to  the  Canons,  as  we,  who  are  Clergymen,  cannot  question 
'  their  Synodicul  authority,  so  we  must  believe,  upon  the  strength 
'of  the  highest  legal  decision,  that  they  are  binding  as  part  of  the 
'  lam  of  the  land  on  the  whole  Clergy  of  the  Realm;  and  although 
1  they  do  not  propria  vigore  bind  the  Laity,  there  are  many  pro- 
'  visions  therein,  declaratory  of  the  ancient  usage  and  laws  of  tho 
'  Church  of  England,  which  in  that  respect  and  by  virtue  of  that 

'authority,  do  bind  the  Laity  also.'  Yet  his  Lordship  further 

observes,  — '  The  Canons  may,  in  certain  cases,  by  competent 

'authority  be  lawfully  dispensed  with  In  some  cases,  it  may 

'  happen,  with  respect  to  botli  Rubrics  and  Canons,  that  a  literal 
'compliance  with  them  is  impracticable;  and  to  such  cases  the 
'  maxim  of  tiecessitas  non  habet  legem  obviously  applies.' — Charge, 
'1842.  p.  41. 

Rev.  C.  Benson  (late  Master  of  the  Temple)  commenting  upon 
these  passages  of  the  Bp.  of  London's  Charge,  inquires — '  Where, 
'  then,  and  in  whom  is  the  authority  competent  to  dispense  with  the 
'  Canons  of  1603,  supposed  to  reside?  Material  as  this  point  is,  we 
'  find  upon  it  no  definite  statement  in  the  Bishop  op  London'9 

'Charge  in  1842  I  apprehend  the  Ordinary  is  the  person 

'  alluded  to,  as  having  this  competent  authority.  If  I  am  right  in 
1  this  conjecture,  the  competency  of  the  authority  may,  I  think, 
'  with  safety  be  denied.  For  it  is  clear,  that  there  is  no  Ecclesiastical 
'  functionary  in  the  English  Church  who  can,  for  a  moment,  claim 
'  the  privilege  of  freeing  men  from  the  duty  of  obedience  to  the 
'  Law  of  the  land ;  except  where  a  discretionary  power  to  do  so  has 
'  been  distinctly  conceded  to  him  by  the  Law  itself.  It  is  also  clear, 
'  that  the  obligation  of  the  Clergy  to  observe  the  Canons  rests  upon 
'  their  being  the  Law  of  the  land  to  them,  and  I  am  not  aware 
'  of  any  dispensing  power  being  entrusted  to  the  Ordinary  by  that 
'  Law.  The  only  authority,  therefore,  which  is  competent  to 
'relieve  the  Established  Clergy  from  the  duty  of  observing  the 
'  Canons  of  1603,  is  that  which  created  it— the  supreme  Legislature 
'  in  Church  aud  State.    An  Ordinary  is  as  incompetent  as  an  over- 

'  seer  to  dispense  with  the  observance  of  legal  Canons  Whether, 

'  therefore,  a  Canon  has  been  '■  long  and  generally  neglected,"  or 
'  carefully  and  uninterruptedly  observed;  whether  it  does  or  does 
'  not  relate  to  "a  matter  of  vital  importance  to  the  Church,"  the 
'  connivance  of  "  those  whose  duty  it  was  to  require  its  observance 
'  if  they  thought  it  necessary,"  can  never  so  sanction  the  neglect  as 
'  to  make  the  Canon  cease  to  be  in  force.  The  obligation  still  re- 
'  mains,  though  not  as  a  point  of  conscience,  yet  as  a  point  of  Law  ; 
'  and  each  Clergyman  must  persevere  in  his  disobedience  at  his 
'  own  peril. . .  .With  the  exception  of  such  as  have  been  modified  or 
'  repealed  by  subsequent  statutes,  the  whole  body  of  those  passed 
'  by  Convocation  in  1003  is  in  force,  and  must  remain  in  force  as 
'  Law,  until  the  supreme  Legislature  may  be  pleased  to  rescind  or 
'  dispense  with  the  observance  of  tho  whole  or  any  part  of  them,  by 


and  which  in  a  work  of  this  kind  must  necessarily  he  as  brief  as 
possible,  will  not  always  convey  the  sentiments  of  those  writers 
upon  the  general  subject ;  he  therefore  deprecates  their  application 
beyond  the  point  they  are  intended  to  elucidate. 


298  AUTHORITY  OF  CANONS   OF  1603-4. 


'the  Ministers  of  the  Established  Church  The  conclusion  of  the 

'  whole  matter  is  that  the  immediate  observance  of  all  the  Canons, 

'  wherein  observance  is  practicable,  is  a  legal  obligation.'  (p.  13 — 

17). — On  Rubrics  and  Canons. 

The  Bishop  of  Exeter  {Dr.  Phillpott),  in  his  '  Charge'  on  the 
judgment  in  the  Appeal  case  of  Escott  v.  Mastin,  speaking  of  the 
Canons,  observes, — 'A  Canon,  purporting  to  extinguish  a  right 
'  created  or  recognized  by  the  Law  of  the  land,  is  not  worth  the 
'paper  on  which  it  is  printed.'  And  again,  in  his  Lordship's  judg- 
ment in  the  Helslon  case  (in  re  Waller  Blunt,  Clerk),  he  declares — 
'  Where  the  reason  for  any  Canon  has  ceased,  and  where,  on  that  or 
'  any  other  account,  it  has  long  been  suffered  by  the  Ecclesiastical 
'  authorities  to  remain  unenforced,  it  is  not  necessarily  to  be  at  once 
'  called  again  into  activity  ;  certainly  not  without  previous  notice.' 
— (quoted  in  Stephens'  Feci.  Stat.  p.  2052). 

De  Hook  remarks  upon  these  Canons,  that  they  'are  the 
'  Laws  of  the  land,  and  by  the  6ame  authority  as  any  other  part 
'  of  the  Law ;  for  being  authorized  by  the  King's  Commission  ac- 
*  cording  to  the  form  of  the  Statute,  25  Hen.  VIII.  (quoted  above, 
'par.  9.),  they  are  warranted  by  Act  of  Parliament;  and  such 
'  Canons  made  and  confirmed,  shall  bind  in  Ecclesiastical  matters 

'  as  much  as  any  Statute  they  are  part  of  the  Laws  of  the  land 

'  for  the  government  of  the  Church,  and  in  such  case  bind  the  Laity 
'  as  well  as  the  Clergy.' — Diet.  Art.  Canons. 

Eev.  W.  Goode,  in  his  work  on  '  Ceremonial,'  and  when  discuss- 
ing the  question  of  a  Prayer  before  the  Sermon,  says : — '  Speaking 
'  legally,  we  are  required  to  use  the  Form  given  in  the  Canon.' 

And  further  on  he  adds,  '  A  code  of  Canons  (of  1603-4)  of 

1  which  the  14th  binds  us  to  the  exclusive  use  of  the  Kites  and 
'  Prayers  of  that  Book,'  (the  Book  of  Com.  Pr.)— Cerem.  of  Church 
of  England,  92,  102. 

At  a  Conference  of  the  Australian  Bishops,*  the  following 
decree  was  passed  with  respect  to  these  Canons  :— '  We  are  of 
'  opinion  that  the  Constitutions  and  Canons,  &c.  (of  a.d.  1603-4), 
'  form  part  of  the  established  constitution  of  our  Church,  and  are 
'generally  binding  upon  ourselves,  and  the  Clergy  of  our  respective 
'  Dioceses.  Where  they  cannot  be  literally  complied  with,  in  conse- 
'  quence  of  the  altered  state  of  circumstances  since  the  enactment 
'  of  the  Canons,  we  are  of  opinion  that  they  must  be,  as  far  at 
'  possible,  complied  with  in  substance.  We  concur  also  in  thinking 
'  that  a  revisal  and  fresh  adaptation  of  the  Canons  to  suit  the 
'  present  condition  of  the  Church  is  much  to  be  desired,  so  soon  as 
'  it  can  be  lawfully  undertaken  by  persons  possessing  due  authority 
'  in  that  behalf.' — See  Eccl.  Gazette,  June,  1851. 


*  This  Conference  of  the  Metropolitan  and  Bishops  of  Australia 
was  held  at  Sydney,  from  October  1st  to  November  1st.  a.d.  1850, 
and  the  Decrees  were  subscribed  by  W.  G.  Sydney  (Broughton) ; 
G.  A.  New  Zealand  (Selu-yn);  F.  R.  Tasmania  (Xixon);  Augustus, 
Adelaide  {Short);  C.  Melbourne  (Perry);  W.  Newcastle  {Tyrrell). 


SCOTCH  LITURGY  OF  1637. 


299 


At  a  Conference  of  the  Bishops  '  of  British  North  America, 
one  of  the  Minutes,  referring  to  the  Canons  of  1603-4,  declares  :— 
'  Athough  it  is  confessedly  impossible  under  existing  circumstances 
'  to  observe  ail  these  Canons,  yet  we  are  of  opinion  that  they  should 
'  be  complied  with  so  Jar  as  is  lawful  and  practicable.  But  inasmuch 
'as  the  retention  of  rules  which  cannot  be  obeyed  is  manifestly 
'  inexpedient,  and  tends  to  lessen  the  respect  due  to  all  laws,  we 
'  hold  that  a  revision  of  the  Canons  is  highly  desirable,  provided  it 
'  be  done  by  competent  authority.' — Eccl.  Gazette,  August,  1852. 

54.  — Nothing  further  of  importance  affecting  the 
Lituegt,  or  Church  discipline,  was  attempted  in  the 
reign  of  James  I ;  and  little  was  done  in  the  troublous 
times  of  his  unfortunate  successor  Chaeles  I;  the 
the  only  proceedings  indeed  in  relation  to  our  subject 
were  the  imposition  of  a  Liturgy  on  Scotland  in 
1637 ;  and  the  passing  of  Laud's  seventeen  Canons  by 
the  Houses  of  Convocation  in  1640. 

The  Scotch  Liturgy,  (1637). 

55.  — This  Liturgy,  differing  but  little  from  the 
English  '  Book  of  Common  Prayer,'  was  drawn  up  by  a 
few  Scotch  Bishops,  who  had  solicited  Charles  I.  to  be 
allowed  the  use  of  a  Formulary  of  their  own  compilation 
rather  than  be  forced  to  adopt  the  English  Liturgy  in  its 
entirety,  as  they  knew  had  been  long  urged  by  Laud. 
Permission  being  granted,  and  their  task  completed,  the 
Book  was  forwarded  to  England,  and  referred  by  Charles 
to  Laud,  Juxon,  and  Wren,  who  made  some  few  alterations 
and  amendments  in  it ;  after  which  the  King  gave  it  his 
approval,  and  by  a  Proclamation  appointed  it  to  be  read 
in  all  the  Churches  of  Scotland,  on  and  after  Easter-Day, 
1637.  But  as  there  were  many  of  the  Scotch  Bishops 
who  had  not  been  consulted  in  its  preparation ;  and  as  it 
had  never  been  submitted  to  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Kirk ;  nor  laid  before  the  Scotch  Privy  Council ;  this 
'  Service  Book '  was  received  with  much  ill-favour ;  the 
opposition  indeed  became  so  tumultuous  and  violent  as  to 


*  This  Conference  of  the  British- American  Bishops  was  held  at 
Quebec  from  September  24th  to  October  1st,  A.  D.  1851;  and  the 
Decrees  were  subscribed  by  G.  J.  Quebec  (Mountain);  John, 
Toronto  (Strachan);  Edward,  Newfoundland  (Field);  John  Fred- 
ericton  (Medley) ;  F.  Montreal  (Ftdford). 


coo 


THE  CANONS  OF  1640. 


threaten  a  rebellion,  the  consequence  of  which  was,  that 
the  King  felt  compelled  to  submit  to  its  immediate  with- 
drawal. 

From  the  circumstance  of  many  passages  in  the  Scotch 
Liturgy  serving  to  elucidate  several  doubtful  points  in  our 
own,  it  was  thought  right  to  give  this  brief  notice  of  its 
origin,  the  more  especially  as  its  Rubrics  will  be  occasionally 
adverted  to  in  these  pages.  We  will  now  speak  of  Laud's 
Canons. 

The  Canons  of  a.  d.  1640. 

56.  — Although  these  Canons  were  ratified  by  the 
King,  yet  they  possess  no  legal  authority,  because  they 
were  framed  in  a  Convocation  which  had  improperly  con- 
tinued its  sittings  after  the  Parliament  had  been  dissolved ; 
and  by  virtue  only  of  an  additional  writ,  which  gave  it 
the  character  of  a  Synod  rather  than  of  a  Convocation. 
The  Canons  at  this  time  passed  were  seventeen  in  number, 
and  became  in  a  short  time  very  unpopular,  particularly 
the  Sixth,  enforcing  the  '  Et  cectera  Oath,' — 'An  Oath,'  as 
its  title  observes,  '  enjoined  for  the  preventing  of  all  Inno- 
'  vations  in  Doctrine  and  Government.'  The  framing  of 
these  Canons  formed  one  of  the  strongest  charges  against 
Abp.  Laud. 

57.  — As  the  Seventh  of  these  Canons,  entitled, 
{  A  Declaration  concerning  some  Rites  and  Ceremonies^ 
which  is  the  ouly  one  on  these  subjects,  has  influenced 
certain  of  the  practices  of  many  of  our  modern  strict 
Rubricians,  it  is  here  quoted  in  full  (from  Spabbow's 
Collection,  p.  361.)  It  relates  especially  to  the  "  Com- 
munion-Table" and  to  "Obeisances"  : — 

'vii.  Because  it  is  generally  to  be  wished,  that  unity  of  Faith 
'were  accompanied  with  uniformity  of  practice,  in  the  outward 
'  worship  and  service  of  God;  chiefly  for  the  avoiding  of  groundless 
'  suspitions  of  those  who  are  weak,  and  the  malitious  aspersions  of 
'  the  professed  Enemies  of  our  Religion;  the  one  fearing  the  Innova- 
'  tions,  the  other  flattering  themselves  with  the  vain  hope  of  our 
'  backslidings  unto  their  "Popish  superstition,  by  reason  of  the 
'  situation  of  the  Communion-Table,  and  the  approaches  thereunto, 
'  the  Synod  declareth  as  followeth :' 

'  That  the  standing  of  the  Communion-Table  side-way  under 
'  the  East-window,  of  every  Chancel  or  Chappel,  is  in  its  own 
'  nature  indilYerent,  neither  commanded  nor  condemned  by  the 
'  Word  of  God,  either  expressly,  or  by  immediate  deduction,  and 
'  therefore  that  no  Religion  is  to  be  placed  therein,  or  scruple  to  be 
'  made  thereon.  And  albeit  at  the  time  of  Reforming  this  Church 
'  from  that  gross  superstition  of  Popery,  it  was  carefully  provided 


THE  CANONS  OF  1640. 


301 


'  that  all  means  should  be  used  to  root  out  of  the  minds  of  the 
'  people,  both  the  inclination  thereunto,  and  memory  thereof ; 
'especially  of  the  Idolatry  committed  in  the  Mass,  for  which  cause 
'  all  Popish  Altars  were  demolished :  yet  notwithstanding  it  was  then 
'  ordered  by  the  Injunctions  and  Advertisements  of  Queen  Elizabeth 
'  of  blessed  memory,  that  the  holy  Tables  should  stand  in  the  place 
'  where  the  Altars  stood,  and  accordingly  have  been  continued  in 
'  the  Koyal  Chappels  of  three  famous  and  pious  Princes,  and 
'  in  most  Cathedral,  and  some  Parochial  Churches,  which  doth 
'  sufficiently  acquit  the  manner  of  placeing  the  said  Tables  from  any 
'  illegality,  or  just  suspition  of  Popish  superstition  or  innovation. 
'And  therefore  we  judge  it  fit  and  convenient  that  all  Churches 
'  and  Chappels  do  conform  themselves  in  this  particular  to  the 
'example  of  the  Cathedral  or  Mother  Churches,  saving  always  the 
'  general  liberty  left  to  the  Bishop  by  law,  during  the  time  of 
'Administration  of  the  Holy  Communion.  And  we  declare  that 
'  this  situation  of  the  holy  Table,  doth  not  imply  that  it  is,  or  ought 
'  to  be  esteemed  a  true  and  proper  Altar,  whereon  Christ  is  again 
'really  sacrificed:  but  it  is,  and  may  be  called  an  Altar  by  us,  in 
'  that  sense  in  which  the  Primitive  Church  called  it  an  Altar,  and  in 
'  no  other.' 

'  And  because  experience  hath  shewed  us,  how  irreverent  the 
'  behaviour  of  many  people  is  in  many  places,  some  leaning,  others 
'  casting  their  hats,  and  some  sitting  upon,  some  standing,  and 
'  others  sitting  under  the  Communion-Table  in  time  of  Divine  Ser- 
'vice:  for  the  avoiding  of  these,  and  the  like  abuses,  it  is  thought 
'  meet  and  convenient  by  this  present  Synod,  that  the  said  Com- 
munion-Table in  all  Chuncds  or  Chappels  be  decently  severed  with 
'  Rails,  to  preserve  them  from  such  or  worse  profanations.' 

'  And  because  the  Administration  of  holy  things  is  to  be  per- 
'  formed  with  all  possible  decency  and  reverence,  therefore  we  judge 
'it  fit  and  convenient,  according  to  the  word  of  the  Service-Book 
•established  by  Act  of  Parliament,  '  Draw  near,  &c.'  that  all 
'  Communicants  with  all  humble  reverence  shall  draw  and  approach 
'  to  the  holy  Table,  there  to  receive  the  Divine  Mysteries,  which 
'have  heretofore  in  some  places  been  unfitly  earned  up  and  down 
'  by  the  Minister,  unless  it  shall  be  otherwise  appointed  in  respect 
'  of  the  incapacity  of  the  place  or  other  inconvenience,  by  the 
'  Bishop  himself  in  his  jurisdiction,  and  other  Ordinaries  respec- 
1  tively  in  theirs.' 

'  And  lastly,  Whereas  the  Church  is  the  house  of  God,  dedicated 
'  to  His  holy  worship,  and  therefore  ought  to  mind  us,  both  of  the 
'greatness  and  goodness  of  His  Divine  Majesty,  certain  it  is  that  the 
'  acknowledgment  thereof,  not  only  inwardly  in  our  hearts,  but  also 
'outwardly  with  our  bodies,  must  needs  be  pious  in  itself,  profitable 
'  unto  us,  and  edifying  unto  others.  We  therefore  think  it  very 
'  meet  and  behoveful,  and  heartily  commend  it  to  all  good  and  well- 
'  affected  people,  members  of  this  Church,  that  they  be  ready  to 
'  tender  unto  the  Lord  the  said  acknowledgment,  by  doing  reverence, 
'  and  obeisance  both  at  their  coming  in,  anil  going  out  of  the  said 
'  Churches,  Chancels  or  Chappels,  according  to  the  most  ancient 
'  custom  of  the  primitive  Church  in  the  purest  times,  and  of  this 
'  Church  also  for  many  years  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth.  The 
'  reviving  therefore  of  this  ancient  and  laudable  Custom,  we  heartily 
'commend  to  the  serious  consideration  of  all  good  people,  not  with 
'  any  intention  to  exhibit  any  Religions  Worship  to  the  Communion- 


302 


THE  CANONS  OF  1640. 


'  Table,  the  East,  or  Church,  or  any  thing  therein  contained  in  so 
'  doing,  or  to  perform  the  said  gesture  in  celebration  of  the  holy 
'  Eucharist,  upon  any  opinion  of  a  corporal  presence  of  the  body  of 
'Jesus  Christ  on  the  holy  Table,  or  in  mystical  Elements,  but  only 
'  for  the  advancement  of  God's  Majesty,  and  to  give  Him  alone  that 
'  honor  and  glory  that  is  due  unto' Him,  and  no  otherwise;  and  in  the 
'practise  or  omission  of  this  Rite,  we  desire  that  the  Rule  of  Charity 
'  prescribed  by  the  Apostle,  may  be  observed,  which  is,  that  they 
'which  use  this  Rite,  despise  not  them  who  use  it  not;  and  that 
'  they  who  use  it  not,  condemn  not  those  that  use  it.' 

58.  — At  the  Restoration  especial  care  was  taken 
by  the  Parliament  of  that  day  that  these  Canons 
should  not  be  confirmed ;  as  may  be  perceived  in  the 
Act,  13  Car.  II.  c.  12.  1661,  which  enacted  :— '  This 

'  Act,  or  anything  therein  contained,  shall  not  extend  or  be  con- 
'  strued  to  extend  to  give  unto  any  Archbishop,  Bishop,  or  any 
'  other  Spiritual  or  Ecclesiastical  judge,  officer,  or  other  person  or 

'  persons  aforesaid,  any  power  or  authority  to  confirm  the 

'  Canons  made  in  the  year  1(540,  nor  any  of  them,  nor  any  other 
'  Ecclesiastical  Laws,  or  Canons,  not  formerly  confirmed,  allowed, 
'or  enacted  by  Parliament,  or  by  the  established  Laws  of  the 
'  Laud  as  they  stood  in  the  year  of  our  Lord,  1639.' — Sect.  5. 

59.  — This  Enactment,  (13  Car.  EL),  decides  their 
illegality  at  the  present  day,  yet  the  late  Bishop  op 
London,  (Dr.  Blomfield),  in  his  '  Charge'  of  1842, 
allows  in  some  degree  their  observance : — 

'  Although,'  he  says,  '  I  do  not  consider  the  Canons  of  1640  to 
'  be  binding  upon  the  Clergy,  I  see  no  very  serions  objection  to  the 
'  custom  therein  commended,  as  having  been  the  ancient  custom  of 
'  the  primitive  Church,  and  of  this  also  for  many  years  In  the  reign 
'  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  of  doing  obeisance  on  entering  and  leaving 
'  Churches  and  Chancels ;  not,  as  the  Canon  expressly  declares, 
"  with  any  intention  to  exhibit  any  religious  worship  to  the  Com- 
"munion-Table,  the  East,  or  Church,  or  any  thing  therein  con- 

"  tained  &c  "  But  that  the  Clergy,  although  they  are  at  liberty 

'  to  use  this  custom,  are  not  obliged  to  do  60.' — (p.  44). 

The  following  opinions  on  this  head  are  worthy  of 
perusal. 

Rev.  C.  Benson  observes  upon  this:  —  'Whether  the  Synod, 
'  thus  constituted,  had  power  legally  to  make  Canons,  was 
'  strongly  contested  at  the  time,  and  it  was  maintained  that  the 
'  statute  prohibiting  the  Clergy  from  "  makiug  Canons  without  the 
'King's  leave"  did  not  imply  any  permission  to  make  them  by  his 
'  leave  alone.  But,  whatever  doubt  might  remain  upon  this  ques- 
'  tion  was  removed,  so  far  as  the  case  now  before  ns  is  concerned, 
'  after  the  Restoration  of  Chap.les  II.  An  Act  was  then  passed 
'  forbidding  all  Ecclesiastical  persons  whatever  from  attempting  to 
'  confirm  the  Canons  of  1640.  "  or  any  of  them."  (13  Car.  IL 
c.  12.  quoted  above)  —  {Ruhr.  &  Can.  p.  9,  10,  11.) 


THE  LITURGY  OF  1(362. 


303 


The  Bishop  oe  Exeter  {Dr.  Phillpott)  in  reply  to  these 
remarks  of  Mr.  Benson,  states:  —  'Now  so  far  is  all  this  from 
'being  in  accordance  with  our  Ecclesiastical  Law,  that  within  a 
'  few  months  after  the  passing  of  the  Act,  Convocation  appointed, 
'  more  than  once,  a  Committee  of  Bishops  to  examine  the 
'  Canons  of  1640,  and  to  declare  which  of  them  were  in  force, 
'  as  being  not  contrary  to  the  Law  of  the  land,  and  which  were 
'  void,  as  being  contrary  to  the  same  (see  Cardwell,  Synod. 
'660.  1.  5  ).  That  the  1th  Canon,  which  permits  these  ' bowings' 
'  is  one  of  those  which  are  void,  never  before  seems  to  have 

'  occurred  to  any  man  No  Canons  of  any  Synod  since  the 

'  Reformation  have  any  of  their  authority  from  any  Act  of  Parlia- 
'ment:  therefore  the  proviso  that  the  13  Car.  II.  c.  12,  should  not 
'  be  construed  to  confirm  the  Canons  of  1640,  left  those  Canons 
'  untouched.' —  (quoted  in  Stephens'  Eccl.  Stat.  p.  2061.  n.) 

Dr.  Hook,  in  speaking  of  these  Canons,  says,  'they  are  not 
'of  force';  and  in  referring  to  the  Act,  13  Car.  II.  c.  12,  he 
states  —  'in  which  Act  there  was  a  proviso  that  it  should  not 
'  confirm  those  Canons  made  in  the  year  1640,  which  clause  or 
'proviso  makes  the  King's  confirmation  void.  And  thus  the  Ec- 
'  clesiastical  Laws  were  left  as  they  were  before  the  year  1639.' — 
Diet.  6th  Ed.  Art.  Canons. 

Rev.  T.  Lathbury  says:  —  'It  is  thought  by  some  that 
'  they  still  possess  Synodical  authority,  and  that  they  were  not 
'  repealed  by  13  Car.  II.  That  they  may  be  regarded  as  the 
'  declared  sense  of  the  Anglican  Church,  is  clear,  since  they  have 
'  not  been  repealed  by  any  subsequent  Convocation.  At  the  same 
'  time,  I  cannot  but  consider  that  they  were  repealed  by  the  Act, 
'13  Car.  W—Hist  of  Convoc.  233.  394.  (Cakdwell's  Synod. 
i.  380—6.). 

Rev.  W.  Goode,  alluding  to  the  custom  of  '  bowing '  on  entering 
the  Church,  remarks  —  'The  Canons  of  1640,  into  which  Laud 
'  introduced  it,  are  of  no  authority.' —  Cerem.  p.  25. 

Mr.  Stephens,  {Barrister-at-Law),  in  his  notes  upon  this 
enactment,  considers  that  in  consequence  of  many  of  these  Canons 
interfering  with  the  temporal  government,  the  Parliament,  '  in 
'  framing  the  present  clause,  guarded  so  diligently  against  the 
'  suspicion  of  giving  credit  or  authority  to  the  Canons  of  1640.' — 
Eccl.  Stat.  p.  566.  n. 

These  opinions,  it  is  trusted,  will  decide  respecting 
the  legal  value  of  the  Canons  of  1640.  We  may  now 
proceed  with 

THE  LAST  REVIEW  OF  THE  LITURGY. 
(1662). 

The  Present  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

60. — Passing  over  the  disturbed  periods  of  the 
Civil  Wars,  the  Commonwealth,  and  the  Protectorate, 


304 


THE  LITUEGY  OF  1662. 


during  which  Episcopacy  was  abolished  to  make  way 
for  an  '  Assembly  of  Divines,'  and  the  '  Booh  of  Com- 
mon Prayer '  set  aside  for  a  '  Directory  for  the  Public 
"Worship  of  God,'*  (1645),  we  arrive  at  the  Restora- 
tion, 1660.  One  of  the  first  proceedings  of  Charles 
II,  and  his  Parliament  was  the  re-establishment  of  the 
Episcopal  Clergy  (by  12  Car.  II.  c.  17 ;  1661),  which 
was  immediately  followed  by  a  Eoyal  Commission, 
composed  of  Episcopal  and  Presbyterian  divines, 
(March  25th,  1661)  for  considering  what  alterations 
could  be  made  in  the  '  Book  of  Common  Pbateb  '  to 
meet  the  objections  of  the  Non-Conformists.  A 
'Conference'  was  held  at  the  Satot  (1661),  but  as 
the  Commissioners  could  arrive  at  no  agreement 
(July  24<A,),  the  King  directed  the  Convocation  to 
proceed  at  once  with  a  Revision  of  the  Liturgy, 
(November  21st,).  The  two  Houses  exercised  great 
despatch  and  equal  zeal,  and  the  result  of  their  labours, 
which  were  finished  December  20th,  having  received 
the  approval  of  the  King,  and  Privy  Council,  ( Feb.  24, 
1661-2),  they  were  transmitted  to  the  House  of  Lords, 
who  minutely  discussed  the  alterations  and  amend- 
ments, and  after  giving  them  their  sanction  sent  the 
revised  Book  to  the  House  of  Commons :  the  good 
opinion  it  met  with  here  was  such  as  to  lead  to  a  Bill 
being  introduced  for  enforcing  its  use  throughout  the 
Kingdom,  from  St  Bartholomew's  Day,  the  24th  of 
August  next  coming  (1662).  (Cardwell's  Conf.  369 
—392).  The  Bill  passed  both  Houses  (July  9th,  1662), 
and  forms  the  Act  of  Uniformity  (13  &  14  Car.  II. 
c.  4.)  by  which  in  Liturgical  matters  we  are  now 
directed  and  controlled :  in  short,  the  "  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  "  thus  reviewed  and  sanctioned  by 
the  two  Houses  of  Convocation,  confirmed  by  the 
King,  and  ratified  by  the  Legislature,  is  at  the  present 
day  the  Law  of  the  Land;  and  it  is  imperatively 
necessary  that  attention  be  paid  to  the  several  euact- 


*  See  Clat's  ' Book  of  Common  Prayer  Illustrated'  Appendix, 
p.  205. 


PRESENT  HOOK  OE  COMMON  PEATEB.  305 


meets  of  this  Act,  since  it  is  of  a  more  stringent 
character  and  wider  range  than  is  generally  supposed. 
(See  case  of  Saunders  v.  Head  (3  Curt.  593.  et  seq.). 

61.  — The  Statute  thus  declares  our  Rule  of  Con- 
fortuity  :—'  Now  in  regard  that  nothing  conduced  more  to  the 
'  settling  of  the  peace  of  this  Nation,  (which  is  desired  of  all  good 
'  men),  nor  to  the  honor  of  our  religion,  and  the  propagation  thereof, 
1  than  an  universal  agreement  in  the  Public  Worship  of  Almighty 
'God;  and  to  the  intent  that  every  person  within  this  realm  may 
'  certainly  know  the  rule  to  which  he  is  to  conform  in  Public  Worship, 
'  and  administration  of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Kites  and  Cere- 
'  monies  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  Manner  how,  and  by 
'  whom,  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  are  and  ought  to  be  made, 

'  ordained,  and  consecrated ;  be  it  enacted  that  all  and  singular 

•  Ministers  in  any  Cathedral,  Collegiate  or  Parish  Church  or 

'Chapel,  or  other  place  of  Public  Worship  within  this  realm  

'  shall  be  bound  to  say  and  use  the  Morning  Prayer,  Evening  Prayer, 
'celebration  and  administration  of  both  the  Sacraments,  and  all 
'other  the  Public  and  Common  Prayer  in  such  order  and  form  as  is 
'mentioned  in  the  said  Book  annexed  and  joined  to  this  present 
'  Act,*  and  entituled  '  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  &c.' — 
13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  2. 

62.  — Every  Sunday  and  Holy  Day,  ')Mobnin&  and 
Evening  Pbayeks  '  are  to  be  read  : — It  is  enacted 

'  that  the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayers  therein  contained  shall, 
1  upon  every  Lord's  Day,  and  upon  all  other  Bays  and  occasions, 
'and  at  the  times  then  in  appointed,  be  openly  and  solemnly  read 
'by  all  and  every  Minister,  or  Curate,  in  every  Church,  Chapel, 
'or  other  place  of  Public  Worship,  within  this  Realm.' — ib. 

63.  — Our  Assent  and  Consent  to  all  and  everything 
contained  in  the  Liturgy'  are  to  be  publicly  declared,—'  Every 

'  person  who  shall  hereafter  be  presented,  or  collated,  or  put  into 

'any  Ecclesiastical  Jleuejiee  or  promotion  within  this  Realm,  

'shall,  in  the  Church,  Chapel,  or  place  of  Public  Worship  be- 
'  longing  to  his  said  Benefice  or  promotion,  within  two  months\ 

'  next  after  that  he  shall  be  in  actual  possession  upon  some 

'  Lord's  Day,  openly,  publicly,  and  solemnly  read  the  Morning 
'  and  Evening  Prayers  appointed  to  be  read  by  and  according  to 


*  The  Original  MS.  Book  referred  to  in  the  Act,  and  deposited 
in  the  Parliament  Office,  has  been  mislaid;  yet  the  'Sealed  Books' 
which  were  collated  and  compared  by  authority  with  that  original 
copy  are  accessible,  and  show  to  us  that  various  alterations  have 
crept  into  the  modern  Editions  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 
These,  when  of  any  moment,  will  be  notified  as  we  proceed.  (See 
Stephens'  "  Book  of  Common  Prayer." — Pec.  Hist.  Soc.) 

t  Three  months  are  now  allowed  where  any  lawful  impediment 
would  interfere ;  by  33  Geo.  II.  c.  28.  (See  supra  Vol.  A..). 


306 


THE  LITURGY  OF  1662. 


'the  said  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  at  the  times  thereby  ap- 
'  pointed ;  and  after  such  reading  thereof  shall  openly  and 
1  publicly,  before  the  Congregation  there  assembled,  declare  his 
'  unfeigned  assent  and  consent  to  the  use  of  all  things  therein  con- 
'  taincd,  and  prescribed,  according  to  the  form  before  appointed.' 
(See  postea).    Neglect  or  refusal  incurs  deprivation. — ib.  Sect.  6. 


The  Form  of  Declaration  prescribed  by  the 
Act  here  follows  : — 

I,  A  *  *  *  B  *  *  *,do  hereby  declare  my  unfeigned  assent,  and 
'consent,  to  all  and  everything  contained  and  prescribed  in  and  by  the 
'Book  intituled  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  Administration 
'  of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Bites  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Church, 
'  according  to  the  use  of  the  Church  of  England  ;  together  with  the 
'  Psalter  or  Psalms  of  David, pointed  as  tliey  are  to  be  sung  or  said 
'  in  Churches  ;  and  the  Form  or  Manner  of  making,  ordaining,  and 
'  consecrating  of  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons'— ib.  Sect.  4. 


The  Declaration  of  Conformity  to  the  Liturgy 
is  to  be  Subscribed  also. 

'  Every  Dean,  Canon,  and  Prebendary  and  all  Masters, 

'  and  other  Heads,  Fellows,  Chaplains,  and  Tutors  of  or  in  any 
'  College,  Hall,  House  of  learning,  or  Hospital,  and  every  public 
'  Professor  and  Reader  in  either  of  the  Universities,  and  in  every 
'  College  elsewhere,  and  every  Parson,  Vicar,  Curate,  Lecturer, 

'  and  every  other  person  in  Holy  orders  shall,  at  or  before 

'  his  or  their  respective  admission  to  be  Incumbent  or  have 
'  possession  of,  &c,  subscribe  the  declaration  or  acknowledgement 
'  following*  : ' — ib.  Sect.  8. 

I,  C  *  *  *  D  *  *  ♦,  Clerk,  B.  A.,  (or  other  degree)  do  declare 
'  that  I  will  conform  to  the  Liturgy  of  the  United  Church  of 
'  England  and  Ireland,  as  it  is  now  by  Law  established.' — 


*  The  first  clause  of  the  original  Declaration,  as  given  in  the 
Act  (13  &  14  Car.  II.),  was  abolished  by  1  Will.  #  Ma.  Sess.  L 
c.  8.  s.  II.;  and  the  concluding  clause  was  taken  away  by  the  12th 
section  of  the  statute  quoted  in  the  text  (13  &  14  Car.  II.);  so 
that  the  intermediate  portion  (as  above)  alone  remained.  A  slight 
alteration  however  was  made  in  the  wording  of  the  Declaration  at 
the  time  of  the  Union  of  the  two  Churches  (40  Geo.  III.  c.  38. 
Article  V.)  —  changing.  'Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England,'  to, 
'  Liturgy  of  the  United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland.' 


Declaration. 


Subscription. 


'C  *  •  *  d  •  • 


THE  DECLARATION,  AND  SUBSCRIPTION.  307 


Before  whom  this  Declaration,  and  Subscription 
are  to  be  made  the  Act  particularly  points  out ;  and 
the  Penalty  for  refusing  is  deprivation. 

Members  of  the  Universities  are  to  make  their  subscription 
'  before  the  Vice-Chancellor  of  the  respective  Universities  for 

'  the  time  being,  or  his  deputy  and  before  the  respective 

'  Archbishop,  Bishop,  or  Ordinary  of  the  Diocese,  by  every  other 

'person  hereby  enjoined  to  subscribe  the  same;  upon  pain  

'  of  being  ipso  facto  deprived.' — ib.  Sect.  10. 

Certificate. 

64. — A  Certificate  of  having  made  such 
Declaration  and  Subscription  is  also  required ;  and  the 
Certificate  and  the  Declaration  both  are  to  be  read 
before  the  Congregation  during  Divine  Service.  It 
is  usually  done  from  the  Desk  between  the  Morning 
Prayers  and  the  Communion  Service. 

'After  such  Subscription  made,  every  such  Parson,  Vicar,  Curate, 
'  and  Lecturer,  shall  procure  a  Certificate  under  the  hand  and 
'  seal  of  the  respective  Archbishop,  Bishop,  or  Ordinary  of  the 
'  Diocese,  (who  are  hereby  enjoined  and  required  upon  demand, 
'to  make  and  deliver  the  same),  and  shall  publicly  and  openly 
'  rend  the  same,  together  with  the  Declaration  or  acknowledgement 
'aforesaid,  upon  some  Lord's  day  within  three  months  then  next 
'following,  in  his  Parish  Church  where  he  is  to  officiate,  in 
'  the  presence  of  the  Congregation  there  assembled,  in  the  time  of 
'  Divine  Service,  upon  pain  that  every  person  failing  therein  shall 
'be  utterly  disabled  and  ipso  facto  deprived.' — ib.  Sect.  11. 

These  proceedings  are  confirmed  by  23  Geo.  II.  c.  28.  s.  1.  (see 

Vol.  A.) 

The  Form  of  the  Certificate  when  made  before 
the  Bishop  is  : — 
'  This  Declaration  was  made,  and  subscribed,  before  Us,  A  *  *  * 

'  by  Divine  Permission  Bishop  of  ,  by  the  said  C  "  *  * 

'  D  *  *  *  previous  to  his  being  licensed  to  in  the  County 

'of   within  our  Diocese  and  Jurisdiction,  this  day 

'  of  in  the  year  of  our  Lord,  one  thousand,  eight  hundred, 

'  and  ,  and  of  our  Consecration  the  .' 

(^Episcopal  Seal.) 

If  before  the  Commissary,  it  is 

'  ?to  all  eCrmStiatl  people  to  whom  these  presents  shall  come, 
'  The  Reverend  A***B***,  Rector  of  ,  greeting.' 

'  l&noto  vt  that  the  above  said  C  *  *  *  D  *  *  *,  previous 

'to  his  being  Licensed  to  the  ,  in  the  County  of  . 

U 


80s 


THE  LITURGT  OF  1662. 


'and  Diocese  of  ,  did,  on  the  Day  of  the  Date  hereof, 

'  personally  appear  before  me  (Commissary  for  this  purpose 
'  specially  appointed  by  the  Eight  Reverend  Father  in  God 

'A  •  •  *,  by  Divine  permission,  Lord  Bishop  of  ),  and 

'  before  he  was  Licensed  thereto,  did  make  and  subscribe  the 
'  Declaration  above  written. 

'En  tlrstimotin  whereof  the  Seal  of  the  said  Lord  Bishop  is 

'  hereunto  affixed,  and  I  have  subscribed  the  same  this  

'day  of  ,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord,  one  thousand,  eight 

'  hundred,  and  fifty  .' 

(■Episcopal  Seal.) 

(Commissary.) 

65.  — Incumbents  having  Curates  must  themselves 
read  the  '  Common  Prayers  '  once  evert/  month  under 
penalty  of  £5.  for  default :  — '  In  all  places  where  the 

'  proper  Incumbent  of  any  Parsonage  or  Vicarage,  or  Benefice 
'  with  cure,  doth  reside  on  his  Living  and  keep  a  Curate,  the 
'  Incumbent  himself  in  person  (not  having  some  lawful 
'  impediment  to  be  allowed  by  the  Ordinary  of  the  place)  shall 
'  once  (at  the  least)  in  every  month  openly  and  publicly  read 
'  the  Common  Prayers  and  Service  in  and  by  the  said  Book 
'  prescribed,  and  (if  there  be  occasion)  administer  each  of  the 
'  Sacraments  and  other  Bites  of  the  Church,  in  the  Parish 
'  Church  or  Chapel  of  or  belonging  to  the  same  Parsonage, 
'  Vicarage,  or  Benefice,  in  such  order,  manner,  and  form,  as  in 
'and  by  the  said  Book  is  appointed;  upon  pain  to  forfeit  £o. 
'  to  the  use  of  the  Poor  of  the  Parish  for  every  offence,  upon 
1  conviction  by  confession,  or  proof  of  two  credible  witnesses, 

'  upon  oath,  before  two  Justices  of  the  Peace  and  in  default 

'  of  payment  within  ten  days,  to  be  levied  by  distress  by 

'  the  warrant  of  the  said  Justices,  by  the  Churchwardens,  or 

'  Overseers  of  the  Poor  of  the  said'  Parish  rendering  the 

'  surplusage  to  the  party.'* — ib.  Sect  7. 

66.  — Lectubers  are  also  required  to  make  a 
Declaration  of  Conformity  to  the  Liturgy,  and 
Subscribe  the  same. 

[The  whole  Law  respecting  Lecturers  having  been 
so  fully  treated  of  in  the  preceding  Volume  (A.),  it  will 
not  be  necessary  to  repeat  the  matter  here  ;  the  Reader  is 
therefore  referred  to  pages  193 — 210  supra,  where  he  will 
find  every  information  on  this  head.]. 


*  See  Bun's  Eccl.  Laic.  Phil.  iii.  429.  and  the  cases  reported  in 
1  Leon.  295;  3  Mod.  79;  2  Roll.  Abr.  222;  5  Rep.  1. 


PEE  SENT  BOOK  01'  COMMON  PEAYEE.  309 


67.  — Heads  of  Colleges  and  Malls  must  conform, 
and  no  other  Form  of  Common  Peayee  is  to  be  used  in 
the  Universities,  and  Colleges  :  — '  No  Form  or  Order 

'  of  Common  Prayers,  Administration  of  Sacraments,  Rites,  or 
'  Ceremonies,  shall  be  openly  used  in  any  Church,  Chapel,  or  other 
'  place  of  or  in  any  College  or  Hall  in  either  of  the  Universities, 
'  the  Colleges  of  Westminster,  Winchester,  or  Eton,  or  any  of 
'  them,  other  than  what  is  prescribed  and  appointed  to  be  used  in 

'  and  by  the  said  Book :  and  every  Governor  or  Head  of  any  of 

'  the  said  Colleges  or  Halls  hereafter  to  be  elected  or  appointed. 
'  within  one  month  next  after  his  election,  or  collation,  and 
'  admission  into  the  same  Government  or  Headship,  shall  openly 
'  and  publicly  in  the  Church,  Chapel,  or  other  public  place  of  the 
'same  College  or  Hall,  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Fellows,  and 
'  Scholars  of  the  same,  or  the  greater  part  of  them  then  resident, 

'  subscribe  unto  the  said  Book,  and  declare  his  unfeigned 

'assent  and  consent  unto,  and  approbation  of.  the  same  Book, 

'  and  to  the  use  of  all  the  Prayers,  Kites,  and  Ceremonies,  Forms, 
'  and  Orders,  in  the  said  Book  prescribed  and  contained,  according 
'to  the  Form  aforesaid:  and  that  all  such  Governors  or  Heads 
'  of  the  said  Colleges,  and  Halls,  or  any  of  them,  as  are  or  shall 
'  be  in  Holy  Orders,  shall  once  (at  least)  in  every  quarter  of 
'the  year,  (not  having  a  lawful  impediment)  openly  and  publicly 
'read  the  Morning  Prayer  and  Service  in  and  by  the  said  Book 
'  appointed  to  be  read  in  the  Church,  Chapel,  or  other  public 
'  place  of  the  same  College  or  Hall;  upon  pain  of  (Suspe?ision  for 

'  six  months  and  if  he)  shall  not  at,  or  before  the  end  of  six 

'  months  next  after  such  Suspension  subscribe  unto  the  said  

'  Book,  and  delare  his  assent  thereunto  as  aforesaid,  or  read  the 
'  Morning  Prayer  and  Service  as  aforesaid,  then  such  Government 
'  or  Headship  shall  be  (ipso  facto)  void.' — ib.  Sect.  17. 

68.  — A  Copy  of  the  '  Book  of  Common  Peatee  ' 
is  to  be  provided  by  the  Parish. — '  A  true  printed 

'  Copy  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  &c  shall  at  the 

'  costs  and  charges  of  the  Parishioners  of  every  Parish  Church, 
'  and  Chapelry,  Cathedral  Church,  College,  and  Hall,  be  attained 
'  and  gotten  upon  pain  of  forfeiture  of  <£3.  by  the  month,  for  so 
'  long  a  time  as  they  shall  be  unprovided  thereof.' — ib.  Sect.  26. 

69. — Previous  Acts  of  TTnieoemity  are  confirmed, — 
'  The  several  good  Laws  and  Statutes  of  this  Realm,  which  have 
'  been  formerly  made,  and  are  now  in  force,  for  the  Uniformity 
'  of  Prayer  and  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  within  this 

'  Realm  shall  stand  in  full  force  and  strength,  to  all  intents 

'  and  purposes  whatsoever  for  the  establishing  and  confirming 
'of  the  said  Book,  intituled  'The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  &c.' 
'hereinbefore  mentioned  to  be  joined  and  annexed  to  this  Act; 
'  and  shall  be  applied,  practised,  and  put  in  use  for  the  punishing 
'of  all  offences  contrary  to  the  said  Laws,  with  relation  to  the 
'  Book  aforesaid,  and  no  other.' — ib.  Sect.  24.  (See  Burn's  Eccl. 
Law,  Ph.  iii.  411.) 

*,*  The  clauses  of  this  Act,  requiring  Tutors,  and  School- 
masters before  exercising  their  profession  to  obtain  a  [Licence 


310 


THE  LITURGY  OF  1662. 


from  the  Bishop,  and  Subscribe  the  '  Declaration' therein  enjoined, 
have  been  repealed  by  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  59.  Dissenters  also  are 
exempted  from  the  operation  of  this  Statute  by  the  'Toleration  Act' 
(1  Will.  <f  Ma.  c.  18:  1688.),  and  other  subsequent  enactments, 
which  will  be  detailed  hereafter. 

70. — This  'Act  of  Uniformity'  is  the  last 
authoritative  proceeding  connected  with  the  Liturgy, 
and  the  Rites  and  Ceremonies  of  our  Church  affecting 
the  Clergy  of  the  present  time.  Attempts  were 
made  at  a  further  revision  of  the  "  Book  of  Common 
Prayer "  in  the  Eeign  of  "William  and  Mary  in 
1689,  (See  Cardwell's  Conf.  393.)  with  a  view  of 
comprehending  the  Non-conformists.  Also  certain 
questions  of  discipline,  and  '  Forms  of  Service '  for 
occasions  not  provided  for  in  the  Liturgy,  were 
brought  before  the  Convocation  in  Anne's  reign  (in 
1710);  and  again  in  the  reign  of  George  I.  (in 
1715) ;  all  which  will  be  noticed  under  their  respective 
heads.  But  the  continued  disputes  between  the 
Upper  and  Lower  Houses  of  Convocation  on  mere 
points  of  privilege ;  and  the  attempts  of  the  latter 
to  establish  their  independence  of  the  Upper  House, 
suffered  nothing  to  be  concluded :  '  they  laboured,' 
says  Kennet,  '  to  find  out  some  other  business  to 
'  divert  them  from  that  for  which  they  were  called 
'  together.'  Ultimately  the  Bangorian  Controversy 
engendered  so  much  bitterness  that  the  Crown 
determined  to  suspend  completely  the  powers  of 
Convocation  (1717)  ;  and  no  Boyal  Licence  has 
since  been  granted  for  the  transaction  of  Synodal 
business.  (See  Cardwell's  Synodalia;  Lathbury's 
Hist,  of  Convocation.).  The  revival  of  its  active 
powers,  however,  is  a  subject  of  much  discussion  at 
the  present  day. 


71. — Thus  have  we  given  a  succinct  account  of  the 
progressive  growth  of  our  present  Liturgy,  and  the 
successive  Convocational  proceedings,  and  Legislative 
enactments,  put  forth  since  the  Reformation  for 
securing  soundness  of  doctrine,  and  uniformity  of 
practice  in  the  Public  Services  of  the  Church.  And 


UNIFORMITY. 


311 


it  is  to  be  hoped  that,  brief  as  this  summary  is,  it 
may  prove  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  Header  that  the 
Book  or  Common  Prayer,  the  xxxix  Articles 
of  Eeligion,  the  Constitutions  and  Canons  (of 
1603 — 4),  and  the  several  Acts  of  Uniformity 
referred  to  (and  the  two  Books  of  Homilies),  are 
the  Rule,  and  the  only  Rule  now  binding  upon  the 
Clergy  with  respect  to  the  Doctrine  and  Ritual  of 
the  Church  of  England ;  and  that  their  obligation  to 
observe  this  Eule  has  been  shown  to  be  absolutely 
imperative. 

72. — "We  may  here  remark,  that  the  testimony  of 
Ecclesiastical  History,  and  its  Documentary  evidences 
clearly  establish  the  fact  that  no  Legislative  Enact- 
ments from  the  dawn  of  the  Eeformation  down  to 
the  present  time  have  been  able  to  effect  a  complete 
and  perfect  Uniformity  in  the  celebration  of  Public 
Worship.  Eoyal  Proclamations,  and  Injunctions — 
Episcopal  Articles,  Letters,  and  Visitations — Acts  of 
Uniformity,  and  Statutes  against  Private  Meetings, 
and  Conventicles,  —  have  all  been  essayed  in  vain. 
A  few  years  only  after  the  passing  of  the  last  Act 
of  Uniformity  we  find  Abp.  Sheldon  writing  to  his 
Officials  [May  7th,  1670)  to  see  the  new  Conventicle 
Act  (22  Car.  II.  c.  1.  1670)  strictly  carried  out 
through  his  province:  and  among  other  points  he 
says — 'Next,  that  you  require  of  them  (Parsons, 
'  Vicars,  and  Curates),  as  they  will  answer  the 
'  contrary,  that  in  their  own  persons  in  their  Churches 
'  they  do  decently  and  solemnly  perform  the  Divine 
'  Service  by  reading  the  Prayers  of  the  Church, 
'  as  they  are  appointed  and  ordered  in  and  by  the 
'  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  without  addition  to  or 
'diminishing  from  the  same,  or  varying,  either  in 
'  substance  or  ceremony  from  the  order  and  method, 
'  which  by  the  said  Book  is  set  down,  wherein  I  hear 
'  and  am  afraid,  too  many  do  offend ;  and  that  in  the 
1  time  of  such  their  officiating,  they  ever  make  use 
'  of,  and  wear  their  priestly  habit,  the  Surplice  and 
'  Hood;  &c.' — (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  ii.  277.).  It 
is  deemed  by  some  almost  Utopian  to  expect  that 


312 


UNIFORMITY. 


strict  and  rigid  Uniformity  in  these  modern  days, 
which  has  been  wanting  not  only  from  the  time  of 
Henry  VIII ;  but  which  has  never  existed  since  the 
days  of  the  Apostles.  Tet  surely  we  may  reasonably 
desire,  and  aim  at  an  approximation  to  one  general 
practice  in  matters  of  Kitual  and  Ceremony.  Xay, 
is  it  not  a  duty?  Bp.  Jewell,  when  refusing  to 
institute  his  friend  Humphrey  to  a  Living  on  account 
of  his  nonconformity  said  "  God  is  not  the  Author  of 
"  confusion  :  diversity  in  Worship  is  deformity,  and 
"a  sufficient  cause  of  deprivation."  (Bbooke's  Lives 
of  the  Puritans,  i.  369.)  Still  we  have  scarcely  just 
grounds  for  complaint  and  reprobation,  if  that  exact 
uniformity  be  wanting  to  our  day,  which  at  no  period 
of  the  Church  has  ever  been  attained. 

Uniformity  is  one  of  the  leading  and  distinguishing 
principles  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  is  among 
the  benefits  derived  from  the  Eeformation,  when  the 
various  'Uses'  of  Sarum,  Bangor,  Hereford,  York,  &c, 
were  amalgamated  into  one  general  "Book  of  Common 
Prayer ;"  and  conformity  to  that  Book  is  enforced  by 
the  several  'Acts  of  Uniformity'  cited  in  the  preceding 
pages ;  besides  which  the  Prayer  Book  has  likewise 
been  incorporated  into,  and  made  a  part  of  the  Statute 
law  of  the  land. 

[Legal  Proceedings  regarding  Conformity,  &c] 

73. — The  law  is  clear  and  explicit  that  no 
Clergyman  is  at  liberty  to  diminish  in  any  respect, 
or  to  add  to,  the  prescribed  Form  of  "Worship ;  and 
proceedings  against  Clerks  in  Holy  Orders  of  the 
United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland,  charged  with 
any  offence  against  the  Laws  Ecclesiastical  in  this 
respect,  or  concerning  whom  there  may  exist  any 
scandal  or  evil  report  are  now  regulated  by  the 
'  Church  Discipline  Act.'  (3  &  4  Vict.  c.  86.) 

Any  person  is  empowered  by  this  Statute  to  lay  a 
complaint  before  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  in  which 
the  offending  party  resides,  or  the  Bishop  of  his  own 


LEGAL  PROCEEDINGS. 


313 


mere  motion  may  enquire  into  the  reports  affecting 
the  character  of  his  Clergy  :  thus 

'  In  every  case  of  any  Clerk  in  Holy  Orders  of  the  United  Church 
'  of  England  and  Ireland  who  may  be  charged  with  any  offence 
'  against  the  Laws  Ecclesiastical,  or  concerning  whom  tliere  may 
'  exist  scandal  or  evil  report,  as  having  offended  against  the  said 
'  Laws,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  within 
'  which  the  offence  is  alleged  or  reported  to  have  been  committed 
'  on  the  application  of  any  parti/  complaining  thereof,  or  if  he  shall 
'  think  fit  of  his  own  mere  motion,  to  issue  a  Commission  under 
'  his  hand  and  seal  to  Jive  persons,  of  whom  one  shall  be  his 
'  Vicar-General,  or  au  Archdeacon,  or  Rural-Dean,  within  the 
'  Diocese,  for  the  purpose  of  making  inquiry  as  to  the  grounds  of 
'  such  Charge  or  Report.— 3  &  4  Vict.  c.  86.  s.  3.  (a.d.  1840.) 

Previous  Notice,  however,  of  the  offence,  and  the 
name,  &c,  likewise  of  the  person  making  the  Charge  must  be 
forwarded  by  the  Bishop  14  days  at  least  beforehand  to  the 
individual  accused,  (s.  3.) 

Notice  of  the  time  and  place  of  Meeting  must  also 
be  given  7  days  previously,  and  Witnesses  may  be  examined  on 
Oath,  in  order  to  ascertain  whether  there  be  sufficient  prima  facie 
ground  for  proceeding  further,  (s.  4.) 

This  preliminary  inquiry  is  to  be  public,  unless  the 
accused  shall  make  especial  application  that  it  may  be  private. 
(3.  4.)  The  Commissioners,  or  any  three  of  them,  must  transmit 
Copies  of  the  Depositions  of  the  witnesses,  and  a  report  of  the 
opinions  on  the  case  the  majority  of  them  have  arrived  at  to  the 
Bishop,  which  Report  is  to  be  filed  in  the  Registry  of  the  Diocese. 
The  accused  may  also  demand  similar  copies  on  payment  of  not 
more  than  two-pence  for  each  folio  of  90  words,  (s.  5.) 

The  Bishop  with  the  consent  of  the  Complainant 
and  Defendant  both,  is  empowered  to  adjudicate  on  the  case, 
and  pass  such  legal  sentence  as  he  may  think  fit.  (s.  6.) 

The  Bishop  may  require  the  accused  party  to 
appear  before  him  personally,  or  by  Agent,  after  the  expiration  of 
the  14  days  notice  to  answer  the  charges  made  against  him:  and  if 
the  said  party  admit  the  truth  of  the  Charges,  the  Bishop  may  in 
person,  or  by  his  Commissary,  pronounce  sentence  according  to  the 
Ecclesiastical  Law.  (s.  9.) 

But  if  the  accused  party  refuse  to  appear,  or  deny 
the  truth  of  the  Articles  brought  against  him,  the  Bishop  is  then, 
with  the  aid  of  three  Assessors,  to  proceed  to  hear  the  cause 
(s.  11.);  or  may  send  the  case  by  Letters  of  Request,  to  the  Court 
of  Appeal  of  the  Province,  (s.  13.) 

The  Bishop  may  inhibit  the  accused  party,  pendente 
lite,  from  performing  any  of  the  Services  of  the  Church,  who  shall 
therefore  nominate  a  'deputy'  to  officiate  the  while  in  his  place;  but 
such  'deputy'  must  be  approved  by  the  Bishop.  14.) 


314 


UNIFOEM1TY,  &C. 


Appeal  will  be  first  to  the  Archbishop,  and  then  to 
the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council.  (».  15.) 

Every  suit  or  proceeding  must  be  commenced 

within  two  years  after  the  commission  of  the  offence:  i.e.  within 
two  years  after  the  notice  to  appear  is  served  (a.  20.):  the  time 
is  not  to  be  calculated  from  the  commission,  the  report,  or  the 
Service  of  the  Articles,  as  was  decided  in  the  recent  case  of 
Ditcher  v.  Denison. 

74.  — All  cases  affecting  the  depraving  of  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  impugning  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles,  or  the  Rites  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Church, 
and  charges  of  heretical  teaching,  by  Clerks  in  Holy 
Orders  come  under  this  Statute.  3  &  4  Vict.  c.  86. 
In  Sanders  v.  Read  proceedings  were  taken  under 
this  Act  for  publishing  in  a  Newspaper  '  The  Western 
Times,'  a  Letter  entitled  — "  A  view  of  the  Duplicity 
"  of  the  present  system  of  Episcopal  ministration,  in 
"  a  Letter  addressed  to  the  Parishioners  of  Feniton, 
"  Devon,  occasioned  by  the  Bp.  of  Exeter's  Circular  on 
"  Confirmation  :  "  wherein  the  Defendant  maintained 
that  the  Catechism,  and  the  Order  of  Confirmation, 
in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  contain  erroneous 
and  strange  doctrine ;  wherein  also  were  openly 
affirmed  other  positions  in  derogation  and  depraving 
of  the  said  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  The  offence 
being  proved,  Me.  Head  was  suspended  from  his 
office  and  ministration  for  three  years,  and  condemned 
in  the  costs  of  the  suit,  and  mouished  to  abstain  from 
such  conduct  in  future.  (3  Curt.  527). — Stephen's 
Laws  of  the  Church,  p.  229. 

75.  — Furthermore,  the  Punishment  by  the  Statutes 
of  Uniformity  for  refusing  to  read  the  Common  Prayer, 
and  to  administer  the  Eites  and  Ceremonies  of  the 
Church  according  to  the  prescript  form  may  be  thus 
gathered. — A  Clerk  in  Holy  Orders  upon  conviction 
thereof,  either  by  verdict  of  twelve  men,  or  by  his 
own  confession,  or  by  notorious  evidence  of  the  fact, 
shall,  (if  the  prosecution  be  under  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.) 
forfeit  for  the  1st  offence,  the  profit  of  such  one  of  his 
spiritual  benefices,  as  it  shall  please  the  King  to 
appoint,  and  also  be  imprisoned  six  months;  and  for 


THE  PEEFACE  OF  THE  PEAYEE  BOOK.  315 

the  2nd  offence,  be  imprisoned  for  a  year  and  be 
deprived  of  all  his  spiritual  promotions :  and  for  the 
3rd  offence,  be  imprisoned  for  life.  If  the  prosecution 
be  under  1  Eliz.  c.  2.,  then,  for  the  1st  offence,  he 
shall  forfeit  to  the  King  the  profit  of  all  his  spiritual 
promotions  for  one  year;  for  the  2nd  offence,  be 
imprisoned  six  months,  as  by  2  &  3  Edw.  VI. ;  and  for 
the  3rd  offence,  be  deprived  of  all  his  spiritual 
promotions  and  be  imprisoned  for  life ;  and  if  he  have 
no  spiritual  promotions  ;  then,  for  the  1st  offence, 
imprisonment  for  a  year,  for  the  2nd  offence, 
imprisonment  for  life.  (See  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c. ; 
5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.;  and  1  Eliz.  c.  2.)  But 
Prosecutions  are  now  usually  under  3  &  4  Vict, 
c.  86. 

76.  — Our  business  in  these  pages  not  being 
with  matters  of  Doctrine,  we  may  now  pass  to  the 
consideration  in  detail  of  the  Ritual  alone.  This 
will  embrace  the  practical  duties  of  the  Officiating 
Ministeb  connected  with  the  performance  of  the 
several  Services  of  the  Littjegy,  involving  the 
directions  of  the  Rubrics,  the  requirements  of  the 
Canons,  the  enactments  of  the  Statute  Law,  and  the 
changes  and  discrepancies  introduced  by  Custom. 

THE  BOOK  OE  COMMON  PEAYEE. 
f.   lTlie  Preface:  (1662.) 

77.  — Haying  seen  that  the  Book  of  Common 
Pbayee  was  established  by  the  combined  authority 
of  the  Ecclesiastical  and  Civil  power,  and  that  every 
Clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England  makes  solemn 
and  repeated  'Declarations'  of  conformity  'to  all 
'  and  every  thing  therein  prescribed,'  '  it  is  certain,' 
(as  says  the  late  Bp.  of  Lincoln  (Dr.  Kaye),  in  his 
Charge  of  1846),  '  that  the  Clergy,  when  they  promise 
'to  conform  to  the  Liturgy,  bind  themselves  to 
'conform  to  it  in  both  its  parts,  not  only  to  use 
'the  Form  of  words,  but  to  use  it  in  the  manner 


316  AUTHOBITY  OF  THE  EUBBICS. 

'prescribed  in  the  .Rubric.'  The  Officiating 
Minister,  therefore,  is  under  the  obligation  to 
take  the  directions  contained  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  as  his  sole  guide  in  the  performance  of  the 
Church  Services  with  respect  to  the  Manner,  the 
Order,  the  Posture,  and  the  specific  Place  in  which 
he  is  to  proceed :  and  these  directions  are  laid  down 
in  what  are  called  the  Rebeics,  a  name  applied  to 
them  from  their  having  been  originally  printed  in 
red  letters.  The  'Preface '  to  the  Liturgy,  however, 
written  by  Bishop  Sandeeson  to  meet  the  objections 
of  the  Puritans,  and  introduced  at  the  last  Review 
(in  1662),  contains  nothing  of  a  directory  character, 
so  that,  after  premising  that  the  Officiating 
Minister  is  properly  ordained,  and  authorized,*  we 
will  at  once  proceed  to  speak  of  the  Authority  of 
the  Rubrics. 

The  Authoeity  of  the  Rubrics. 

78.— By  the  Canons.— The  Canons  (of  1603-4), 
which  enforce  conformity  to  the  Liturgy,  necessarily 
demand  an  adherence  to  the  Rtjbbics  as  parts  of 
the  Litubgy  :  thus — 

'  All  Ministers  shall  observe  the  Orders,  Rites,  and  Cere- 

'  monies  prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  well  in 
'  reading  the  holy  Scriptures,  and  saying  of  Prayers,  as  in 
'  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  without  either  diminishing 
'  in  regard  of  Preaching  or  in  any  other  respect,  or  adding 
'  anything  in  the  matter  or  form  thereof.' — Canon  14. 

A  question  has  been  raised  whether  these  Canons 
of  1603  can  bear  upon  the  Liturgy  of  1602,  the 
present  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  revised  so  many 
years  after  the  promulgation  of  those  Canons  ;  it  has 
been  decided,  however,  in  the  Law  Courts  that  the 
Canons  of  1603  are  binding  upon  the  Clergy  of  the 


•  See  the  Canons,  3G,  37,  38,  48,  49,  and  the  Enactments 
respecting  Scotch,  American,  and  Foreign,  Clergy  Officiating; 
Vol  A. 


AUTHORITY  OF  THE  RUBRICS.  317 


present  day,  as  we  have  already  shewn.  "We  may 
also  refer  to  the  opinion  of  Archdeacon  Sharp  as 
follows:  — 

'The  Service  Book,  or  'prescript  form,'  to  which  they  (the 
'  Canons)  referred,  was  that  which  was  published  with  Amendments 
'  by  King  James  I.,  immediately  after  the  Hampton-Court  Con- 
'  ference,  and  immediately  before  the  publication  of  these  Canons: 
'and  which  continued  in  use  till  it  was  quite  put  down  in  the 
'great  Rebellion.  And  it  was  a  question  even  then  when  these 
'Canons  were  made,  whether  that  form  of  Common  Prayer  to 
'  which  they  referred,  as  it  was  only  authorized  by  the  King's 
'mandate,  was  of  competent  and  sufficient  authority,  to  supersede 
'  and  exclude  the  "  prescript  form  "  established  by  Act  of  Parliament 
'  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign.  For  this  was  disputed  not  only  by 
'  the  Puritans  of  those  days,  but  afterwards  by  some  of  the  greatest 
'  Ritualists.  But  now  this  doubt  and  question,  as  well  as  the 
'  Service-Books  which  were  the  subject  of  it,  being  at  an  end, 
'by  the  revisal  of  the  Liturgy  at  the  Restoration,  and  the 
'parliamentary  establishment  of  "that  revised  form"  for  divine 
'  Service  for  the  future,  our  obedience  to  this  Canon  can  stand 
'  upon  no  other  bottom,  and  is  capable  of  no  other  interpretation, 
'than  this;  that  we  do  answer  the  general  design  and  intention 
'of  it  by  conforming  ourselves  to  the  "  prescript  form"  now  in 
'  use.'  {p.  99). — On  Rubric  and  Canons,  Charge.  A.  n.  1739. 

In  addition  to  Canon  14,  there  are  Canons  4,  6, 
16,  36,  37,  38,  54,  56.  (see  supra) ;  with  some  others 
on  especial  portions  of  the  Services,  which  will  be 
mentioned  in  their  proper  place. 

79. — By  Statute  Law. — The  Acts  of  Unifor- 
mity, which  enjoin  the  use  of  the  Liturgy,  require 
also  strict  obedience  to  the  Eubrics  as  parts  of 
the  Liturgy.  The  statutes  are  —  2  &  3  Edw.  VI. 
c.  1.  s.  1 ;  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  s.  5 ;  1  Eliz.  c.  2. 
ss.  4-6 ;  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4,  (see  supra). 

Sib  John  Nicholl,  in  the  case  of  Kemp  v.  Wickes,  observed:  — 
'  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  therefore  the  Rubric 
'  contained  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  has  been  confirmed 

'  by  Parliament  The  Rubric,  then,  or  the  directions  of  the 

'  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  form  a.  part  of  the  Statute  Law  of 
'  the  land.'— (3  Phil.  26G-8). 

So  in  33rd  of  Eliz.  one  Robert  Caudrey  (Clerk)  was  deprived, 
'for  that  he  had  preached  against  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 
'  as  also  for  that  he  refused  to  celebrate  Divine  Service  according 
'to  the  said  Book'  {Gibs.  268;  5  Co.  Rep.  1.  — Burn's  Ecc.  L. 
Phill.  iii.  430;  Stephens'  L.  Rel.  to  CI.  1081). 

Dr.  PniLLiMORE,  Chancellor  of  Worcester,  in  his  '  Opinion  ' 
respecting  the  "  Offertory,"  remarks, — '  As  the  Book  of  Common 


318  AUTIIOBITY  OF  THE  ETTBEICS. 


'  Prayer  was  appended  to  the  Act  of  Uniformity,  it  follows  that 
'  the  provisions  contained  in  the  Rubrics,  which  form  a  com- 
'  ponent  part  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  have  the  force 
'and  validity  of  Statute  Law.  I  am  therefore  of  opinion  that 
'  the  solution  of  the  question  propounded  is  to  be  sought  for 
'in  the  Rubrics  alone.' — (quoted  in  Sandford's  Parochialia, 
p.  429.) 

Laity  are  bound  by  the  Rubbics. — Loed  Haed- 

wicke,  in  his  judgment  in  the  marriage  case  of  iliddleton  v. 

Croft,  says:  — '  The  Rubric  ordains  the  publication  of  Banns,  and 
'  that  is  confirmed  by  1  Eliz.  c.  2.  s.  16;  and  the  Act  of  Unifor- 
'mity.  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4:  the  consequence  of  which  is,  that 
'  the  Rubric  hinds  the  Laity.' — (Str.  1056.). 

80. — By  Custom. — The  discrepancies  between  the 
various  interpretations  given  to  several  of  the  Bubrics, 
as  well  as  the  long  continued  neglect  of  some,  and 
the  impracticability  of  others,  have  occasioned  much 
diversity  of  practice  in  the  mode  of  performing  the 
Divine  Services  of  the  Church.  It  has  been  usual  for 
Clergymen  to  continue  the  customs  they  found  in  use 
at  the  time  they  first  entered  upon  their  Parochial 
charge;  and  if  induced  to  make  any  alterations,  the 
majority  have  ordinarily  confined  themselves  to  such 
as  could  be  almost  imperceptibly  etfected,  or  would 
meet  with  general  concurrence.  If  any  thing  further 
has  been  attempted  with  the  view  of  assisting  to 
accomplish  so  desirable  an  end  as  general  uniformity, 
the  advances  in  most  cases  have  been  made  so  cau- 
tiously, gradually,  and  progressively,  as  neither  to 
offend  the  Congregations  by  their  novelty,  nor  startle 
them  by  their  precipitancy. 

The  Rev.  C.  Benson  (late ^Master  of  the  Temple')  remarks:— 
'  The  necessity  of  an  immediate  conformity  has  been  doubted  by 
'  many,  and  dispensed  with  by  some.  Changes,  which  time 
'  so  generally  introduces  in  all  human  affairs,  have  operated  to 
'  no  inconsiderable  degree  upon  our  conduct  with  regard  to 
'  Rubrical  regulations.  The  consequent  difficulty  and  incon- 
'  venience  of  bringing  back  abruptly  a  variety  of  observances  which, 
'  having  been  gradually  and  long  laid  aside,  must,  of  course,  when 
'  revived,  assume  the  character  of  novelties,  and  be  liable  to  the 
'  accusation  of  censures  upon  the  practice  of  times  past,  has  been 
'  strongly  felt.  There  are  several  directions  also  which,  if  carried 
'  into  etl'ect  after  so  general  a  disuse,  would  be  regarded  as  unwisely 
'  interrupting  or  needlessly  lengthening  the  ordinary  course  of 
4  congregational  Worship;  others  which,  in  these  days  of  concession 
'  and  approximation  to  Popish  customs  and  opinions,  might  be 
'  thought  calculated  to  lessen  still  further  the  distinguishing  badges 


AUTHORITY  OF  TUE  RUBRICS. 


319 


'  of  the  Protestant  Reformation.  Therefore,  to  avoid  the  oftence 
'  which,  as  we  now  learn  by  experience,  both  clerical  and  laical  zeal 
'  will  be  almost  sure  to  take  at  any  sudden  return  to  a  perfect 
'compliance  with  the  Rubric,  it  has  been  intimated  that  a 
'  discretionary  power  must  be  left  with  the  Clergy  to  fix  both  the 
'  time  and  mode  of  re-establishing  an  entire  conformity  between 
'  Ecclesiastical  practice  and  the  strict  letter  of  the  Liturgical 
'  requirements.  It  is  not  pretended  to  deny  that  this  conformity 
'  is  let/ally  and  really  indispensable.  It  is  only  maintained  that 
1  each  Minister  must  be  influenced  by  circumstances,  and  by 
'  considerations  of  expediency  and  utility,  in  determining  his  own 
'return  to  the  regularly  ordained  manner  of  performing  the  various 
'  Services  of  Public  worship.'  (/>.  7). — The  Rubrics  and  Canons 
Considered. 

Still,  instances  of  the  opposite  course  are  too  well 
known  to  require  especial  mention.  Strict  uniformity, 
however,  cannot  be  expected  so  long  as  the  Rubrics 
themselves  allow,  as  may  be  observed  in  many  cases,  a 
discretionary  power  in  the  Officiating  Minister,  as 
well  a3  admit  of  various  interpretations. 

81.  — Custom,  it  must  be  remembered,  is,  under 
certain  conditions,  as  good  as  Law.  The  Common 
Law  is,  indeed,  nothing  more  than  the  commou  custom 
of  the  country.  According  to  Lord  Coke,  "  Of  every 
"custom  there  be  two  essential  parts,  time  and  usage; 
"  time  out  of  mind,  and  continued  and  peaceable  usage 
"without  interruption."  It  is  commonly  said  that  a 
custom  to  be  valid  in  law  must  have  beeu  used  "  from 
"  time  whereof  the  memory  of  man  runneth  not  to  the 
"  contrary ;  "  i.  e.  no  living  witness  hath  heard  any 
proof  or  had  any  knowledge  to  the  contrary.  The 
memory  of  man  is  taken  legally  to  run  to  the  begin- 
ning of  the  reign  of  Richard  I.  But  a  regular  usage 
for  20  years  unexplained  and  uncontradicted  is  sufficient 
to  warrant  a  jury  in  finding  an  immemorial  custom. 
(Rex  v.  Joliffe  2  B  &  C.  54 :  3  D  &  Ryle.  240 :  2 
Saund.  175  a.  d.).  A  distinction  is  often  made  between 
the  words  custom,  and  prescription.  Custom  is  more  a 
local  right  or  usage,  and  prescription  a  personal  right 
or  usage. 

82.  — Archdeacon  Sharp  in  his  work  •  On  the 
Rubric  and  Canons'  exhibits  this  diversity  by 
arranging  the  Rubrics  under  Jive  general  heads  : — 

I.   '  Such  as  arc  defective,  or  not  sufficiently  clear  and  express. 


.320 


AUTHORITY  OF  THE  RUBRICS. 


II.    'Such  as  are  to  be  understood  with  limitations. 

III.  'Such  as  leave  a  discretionary  power  with  the  Officiating 

'  Minister. 

IV.  '  Such  as  leave  a  discretionary  power  with  the  Ordinary. 
V.    'Such  as  are  plain  and  positive.'  (p.  60.) 

So  that,  this  being  the  case,  to  attempt  to  enforce 
immediately,  abruptly,  and  rigidly,  every  Eubhic  to 
the  very  letter,  whether  opposed  to  long  accustomed 
usage,  or  not,  would  be  at  once  mischievous  and 
impracticable  : — for,  in  the  words  of  Sharp  : — 

'Where  the  Rubrics  are  defective,  or  capable  of  two  senses, 
'or  of  doubtful  interpretation,  there  is  no  stating  a  Minister's 
'obligation  to  observe  them:  nor  is  uniformity  in  practice  to  be 
'  expected ;  because  every  Minister  must  be  allowed  a  liberty  of 
'judgment,  and  consequently  of  practice,  in  cases  not  sufficiently 
'  clear,  or  capable  of  various  constructions,  so  as  he  make  no 
'  breach  upon  those  Rubrics  that  are  plain  and  express.  In 
'  several  of  those  points  that  I  have  mentioned  above,  the  Clergy 
'take  different  ways;  and  they  may  iafely  and  honestly  do  so,  for 
'  there  is  no  room  to  say  that  any  of  them  do  wrong,  since  there 
'is  not  evidence  enough  which  of  those  ways  are  right.  Something 
'may  be  perhaps  pleaded  for  them  all.  But  then,  whatsoever  is 
'pleaded,  as  it  is  only  upon  the  foot  of  private  sentiments,  we 
'  remain  still  at  liberty  to  follow  our  own  judgment  and  discretion 
'in  those  points,  till  they  who  have  authority  do  settle  a  rule 
'  for  us  concerning  them.  And  if,  in  the  mean  time,  any  of  us 
'  have  real  scruples  upon  these  points,  our  proper  recourse  is 
'to  the  Ordinary  of  the  Diocese  for  satisfaction;  because  his 
'  determination  in  all  doubtful  cases  is  authoritative,  safe,  and 
'  legal ;  and  is  granted  us  as  a  supply  for  all  the  deficiences  we 
'  meet  with  in  the  letter  of  the  Rubric' — On  Rubric  and  Canons. 
(p.  64.)  Charge,  A.  D.  1734. 

83. — "We  shall  have  again  to  refer  to  this  learned 
Ritualist,  in  the  mean  time  it  would  be  as  well  to 
direct  attention  to  a  few  of  the  best  authorities,  who 
have  treated  on  Rubrical  conformity ;  whereby  we 
shall  perceive  that  modern  opinions  are  more  'diverse' 
than  the  Rubrics  themselves.  Foremost  of  all,  and 
most  important,  as  being  an  exponent  of  the  opinion 
of  the  present  Bishops  on  this  matter,  must  be 
quoted  the  Official  Circular  dated  March  29th,  1851 ; 
which  bears  the  signatures  of  the  two  Archbishops, 
and  of  the  whole  Episcopal  Bench,  with  the  exception 
of  the  Bishops  of  Bath  and  "Wells,  Exeter,  Manchester, 
and  Hereford.  After  a  few  introductory  remarks  this 
document  thus  proceeds  : — 


AUTHORITY  OF  THE  EUBEICS. 


32  L 


1  The  principal  point  in  dispute  is  this: — Whether,  where 

'  the  letter  of  the  Rubric  seems  to  warrant  a  measure  of  Kitual 
'  observance,  which  yet  by  long,  and  possibly  by  unbroken  practice, 
'  has  not  been  carried  out,  the  Clergy  are  either  in  conscience 
'  required,  or  absolutely  at  liberty,  to  act  each  upon  his  own  view 
'  of  the  letter  of  the  precept,  rather  than  by  the  rule  of  common 
'  practice?  Now  as  to  this  question  we  would  urge  upon  you  the 
'  following  considerations:— First,  that  any  change  of  usages,  with 
'  which  the  religious  feelings  of  a  Congregation  have  become 
'  associated,  is  in  itself  so  likely  to  do  harm,  that  it  is  not  to  be 
'introduced  without  the  greatest  caution. — Secondly,  that,  beyond 
'  this,  any  change  which  makes  it  difficult  for  the  Congregation  at 
'  large  to  join  in  the  Service,  is  still  more  to  be  avoided. — Thirdly, 
'that  any  change  which  suggests  the  fear  of  still  further  alterations, 
'  is  most  injurious:— and  Fourthly,  that,  according  to  the  rule  laid 
'  down  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  where  anything  is  doubted, 
'  or  diversely  taken,  "  concerning  the  manner  how  to  understand, 
'  do,  and  execute,  the  things  contained  in  that  Book,  the  parties 
'  that  so  doubt,  or  diversely  take  anything,  shall  always  resort  to 
'  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  who  by  his  discretion  shall  take  order 
'  for  the  quieting  and  appeasing  of  the  same,  so  that  the  same  order 
'  be  not  contrary  to  anything  contained  in  that  Book."  The  fair 
'  application  of  these  principles,  would,  we  believe,  solve  most  of 
'  the  difficulties  which  have  arisen.  It  would  prevent  all  sudden 
'and  startling  alterations;  and  it  would  facilitate  the  reception  of 
'  any  change  which  was  really  lawful  and  desirable.  We  would 
'  therefore,  first,  urge  upon  our  Reverend  Brethren  with  affectionate 
'  earnestness  the  adoption  of  such  a  rule  of  conduct.  We  would 
'  beseech  all  who,  whether  by  excess  or  defect,  have  broken  in 
'  upon  the  Uniformity,  and  contributed  to  relax  the  authority  of 
'our  Eitual  observances,  to  consider  the  importance  of  unity  and 
'  order,  and  by  common  consent  to  avoid  whatever  might  tend  to 

'violate  them  ' 

It  then  animadverts  upon  the  newly-asserted  principle  that — 
'  Whatever  form,  or  usage,  existed  in  the  Church  before  its 
'  Keformation,  may  now  be  freely  introduced  and  observed,  unless 
'  there  can  be  alleged  against  it  the  distinct  letter  of  some  formal 
'  prohibition. — Now,  against  any  such  inference  from  the  undoubted 
'  identity  of  the  Church  before  and  after  the  Reformation,  we 

'  feel  bound  to  enter  our  clear  and  unhesitating  protest  it 

'  is  manifest  that  a  licence,  such  as  is  contended  for,  is  wholly 
'  incompatible  with  any  uniformity  of  worship  whatsoever,  and  at 
'  variance  with  the  universal  practice  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
'  which  has  never  given  to  the  Officiating  Ministers  of  separate 
'  congregations  any  such  large  discretion  in  the  selection  of  Ritual 

'observances  we  beseech  others  who,  either  by  intentional 

'omission,  or  by  neglect  and  laxity,  may  have  disturbed  the 
'uniformity,  and  weakened  the  authority  of  our  prescribed  Ritual, 
'to  strengthen  the  side  of  order  by  avoiding  all  unnecessary 
'deviations  from  the  Church's  rule.' — See  Eccl.  Gazette.  April,  1851. 

We  will  now  proceed  to  the  more  prominent 
individual  authorities,  commencing  with  a  few  of 


322  AUTHORITY  01"  THE  BUBEICS. 


those  of  an  earlier  date  which  bear  upon  the  point 
at  issue* : — 

Dean  Comber  (oft.  1699)  remarks: — 'We  have  accurately 
'prescribed  forms  for  all  our  Ministrations;  from  which  if  any 
'  private  Minister  might  vary,  and  fallow  hit  oxen  fancy,  it  wonld 

'  breed  infinite  confusion  and  endless  scandals  so  that  for  any 

'  Minister  to  come  short  of  or  go  beyond,  this  perfect  constitution 
'argues  intolerable  pride  and  folly,  and  discovers  such  a 
'presumption  as  admits  of  no  excuse;  especially  after  he  bath 
'  so  solemnly  promised  before  God,  and  many  witnesses,  that  he 
'will  administer  all  things  according  to  the  rules  of  this  Church.' — 
Comp.  to  the  Temple.  A.  D.  1679. 

Dr.  Bennet  {ob.  1T28)  observes  with  respect  to  the  Rubrics:— 
'If  that  practice  which  our  governors  do  openly  and  constantly 
'  permit  and  approve,  be  not  admitted  for  a  good"  interpretation  of 
'Laws,  whether  Ecclesiastical  or  Civil;  I  fear,  it  will  be  impossible 
'  to  clean  our  hands  of  manv  other  repugnances.' — Par.  on  Booh  of 
Com.  Prayer,  {p.  7.)  A.D.  1708. 

Archdeacon  Sharp  {ob.  1792)  further  declares: — 'The  Rubrics 
'and  Canons  are  to  be  the  rule  of  our  ministration  who  are 
'appointed  to  officiate  in  this  Church.'  {p.  12). — 'Our  obligations 
'  to  observe  Rubric,  how  indispensable  soever,  are  subject  to  this 
'  proviso,  viz.  that  the  rule  prescribed  be  a  thing  practicable ; 
'  which  perhaps  cannot  be  said  of  all  Rubrics  in  all  Churches,  or 
'in  all  places  of  the  kingdom.'  (p.  6). — 'We  may  affirm  in  general, 
'  that  we  are  under  higher  obligations  to  observe  Rubric,  than  any 
'other  Ecclesiastical  Law  whatsoever;  that,  excepting  a  very  few 
'  cases,  or  under  some  necessary  limitations  and  reservations,  to  be 
'  hereafter  specified,  we  are  bound  to  adhere  to  it  literally,  punctually, 


*  The  practices  adopted  in  the  period  between  the  Reformation 
and  more  modern  times  have  been  so  ably  and  lucidly  exhibited 
in  Dr.  Cardwell's  'Documentary  Annals'  with  respect  to  those 
prescribed  by  authority;  and  in  a  Volume  entitled  ' Hierurgia 
Anglicana'  and  in  Mr.  Robertson's  work,  entitled,  'Hon  shall 
we  conform  to  the  Liturgy,'  in  regard  to  their  adoption  by 
individuals  among  the  Parochial  Clergy,  that  the  Author  is  saved 
the  task  of  traversing  that  extensive  field,  and  therefore  refers 
his  Readers  to  those  volumes  for  the  information  they  may  require 
on  this  subject,  appertaining  to  that  age.  His  own  design  being 
to  illustrate  merely  the  existing  Law  and  prest-nt  Usage,  such  only 
of  the  older  writers  will  be  adverted  to  as  will  be  necessary  to 
demonstrate  the  value  of  the  general  customs  now  prevalent,  or 
that  have  lately  been  called  in  question.  There  are,  doubtless, 
many  other  authorities  among  modern  writers  than  will  be  found 
quoted  in  these  pages,  but  these  are  the  chief  that  have  come 
across  the  Author's  reading  which  conveyed  any  really  practical 
information:  and  with  respect  to  the  Episcopal  Charges,  he  might 
here  add,  that  he  has  confined  himself  to  such  as  have  been 
published  since  a.  d.  1840. 


AUTHORITY  OF  TUE  JtUBIUCS. 


.323 


1  and  perpetually  :  and  tliat  whosoever  among  the  Clergy  either 
'  adds  to  it,  or  diminishes  from  it,  or  useth  any  other  rule  instead 
'  of  it,  as  lie  is  in  the  eye  of  the  law  so  far  a  Non-conformist, 
'  so  it  behoves  him  to  consider  with  himself,  whether  in  point  of 
'  conscience  lie  be  not  a  breaker  of  his  word  and  trust,  and  an  eluder 
'of  his  engagements  to  the  Church.'  (p.  7)- — 'I  do  not  see  how 
'  any  man  can  with  a  good  conscience  continue  acting  as  a  Minister 

'  of  our  Church,  who  can  allow  himself.  to  depart  from  her  

'Rites  and  Ceremonies  as  prescribed  in  the  Service  Book.'  (p.  13.) 
'  Where  he  (the  Bishop)  doth  not  interpose  his  directions,  it  is  a 
'  good  rule  for  us,  to  observe  the  usual  customs  of  the  Diocese  we  live 
'in,  or  the  particular  Churches  in  which  we  serve.'*  (p.  72). — 
On  the  Rubric  and  Canons,  a.d.  1731—35. 

The  late  Abp.  of  Canterbury  {Dr.  Howley)  remarks: — 'In 
'  the  celebration  of  Divine  Service  the  introduction  of  novelties 
'  is  much  to  be  deprecated :  and  even  the  revival  of  usages, 
'  which,  having  grown  obsolete,  have  the  appearance  of  novelties 
'to  the  ignorant,  may  occasion  dissatisfaction,  dissension,  and 
'controversy.' — Charge,  September  1840,  page  36.  (quoted  by 
Bp.  of  Durham  in  his  Charge  of  1841,  page  13.)  'All  change 
'  in  the  performance  of  Divine  Service,  affecting  the  Doctrine  of 
'  the  Church  by  alteration,  addition,  or  omission,  I  regard  with 
'unqualified  disapprobation.'— (quoted  by  Br.  of  Lincoln  in  bis 
Charge  of  18-16,  p.  20.) 

The  Abp.  of  York  (Dr.  Musgrave),  when  Bishop  of  Hereford, 
alluding  to  the  recent  Changes,  observed: — 'I  would  only  warn 
'  you  against  introducing  novelties  in  faith  or  practice  unknown 
'among  us  from  the  age  of  the  Reformation  down  to  these  times.' 
(p.  id.)- Charge,  1842. 

The  Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blomfield)  says: — 'Every 
'  Clergyman  is  bound,  by  the  plainest  obligations  of  duty,  to  obey 

'  the  directions  of  the  Rubric  We  ought  not  to  be  deterred 

'  from  a  scrupulous  observance  of  the  Kites  and  Customs,  prescribed 
'  or  sanctioned  by  our  Church,  by  a  dread  of  being  thought  too 
'  careful  about  the  externals  of  Religion.  If  we  are  not  to  go 
'beyond  her  Ritual,  at  least  we  ought  not  to  fall  short  of  it,  nor 
'  to  make  her  public  Service  less  frequent,  nor  more  naked  and 

'inexpressive,  than  she  intends  them  to  be  In  my  Charge  to 

'  the  Clergy  of  the  Diocese  of  Chester  in  1825,  I  used  these  words, — 
'  "A  strict  and  punctual  conformity  with  the  Liturgy  and  Articles 
'  of  our  Church  is  a  duty,  to  which  we  have  bound  ourselves  by 
'  a  solemn  promise,  and  which  while  we  continue  in  its  Ministry 


*  The  Archdeacon  however  says  elsewhere  (in  page  26  of  hin 
Work  above  quoted), — We  are  to  '  take  it  always  for  granted  that 
'  there  is  a  reason  for  whatever  is  prescribed  in  Rubric,  and  such  a 
'  one  as  is  not  to  be  contradicted  by  our  private  practice,  or  rejected 
'  for  the  sake  of  any  Modes  or  Customs  brought  in  we  know  not 
'  how.' 

X 


324  AUTHOEITY  OF  THE  BUBBICS. 


'  we  must  scrupulously  fulfil.  Conformity  to  the  Liturgy  implies, 
'of  course,  an  exact  observance  of  the  Rubric.  We  are  no  more 
'  at  liberty  to  vary  the  mode  of  performing  any  part  of  public 
'Worship,  than  we  are,  to  preach  doctrines  at  variance  with 
1  the  Articles  of  Religion.  If  there  be  any  direction  for  the 
'  Public  Service  of  the  Church,  with  which  a  Clergyman  cannot 
'  conscientiously  comply,  he  is  at  liberty  to  withdraw  from  her 
'Ministry;  but  not  to  violate  the  solemn  compact  which  he  has 

'made  with  her"  Far  from  questioning  the  right  of  the  Clergy 

'  to  observe  the  Rubric  in  every  particular,  I  know  it  to  be  their 
'  duty ;  and  the  only  doubt  is,  how  far  are  we  justified  in  not 
'  enforcing  such  observance  in  every  instance  ?  It  may  indeed 
'  call  for  the  exercise  of  a  sound  discretion,  in  certain  cases,  as 
'  to  the  time  and  mode  of  bringing  about  an  entire  conformity 
'of  your  practice,  in  this  respect,  with  the  letter  of  the  Law: 
'  but  I  cannot,  as  it  appears  to  me,  consistently  with  my  duty, 
'  interpose  any  obstacles,  nor  offer  any  objection,  to  its  being 
'clone.'  {pp.  30 —  32.) — 'In  some  cases,  it  may  happen,  with 
'  respect  to  both  Rubrics  and  Canons,  that  a  literal  compliance  with 
'  them  is  impracticable;  and  to  such  cases  the  maxim  of  necessitas 
'  non  habet  legem  obviously  implies.'  {p.  42). — Charge  of  1842. 
With  regard  to  those  receDt  innovations  which  respect  the 
'  Ornaments  of  the  Church  and  of  the  Minister,'  which  the 
Bishop  designates  as  '  histrionic.'  See  his  Lordship's  opinion 
cited  at  page  473  in  Volume  C-  of  this  Work. 

The  Bishop  of  Chester  {Dr.  Graham),  speaking  of  the 
Ceremonial  of  Divine  Service,  says:  — 1  Every  part  of  it  should  be 
'conducted  with  decent  order  and  solemnity;  not  with  any  novel 
'exhibition  of  unmeaning  pageantry;  not  with  any  ill-timed  and 
'precipitate  revival  of  obsolete  practices,  indifferent  in  themselves; 
'but  with  regularity  and  uniformity;  with  a  simplicity  becoming 
'  Evangelical  truth,  and  a  reverence  becoming  Divine  Worship.' 
{p.  16).— Charge,  1849. 

The  Bishop  of  Exeter  {Dr.  Phillpotts)  in  his  Pastoral 
Letter,  dated  Nov.  19,  1844,  when  referring  to  the  Act  of 
Uniformity,  observes: — 'I  do  not  say  that  every  departure  from 
'  any  minute  direction  in  the  Book  of  Com.  Pr.,  enshrined  as  it 
'  is  in  this  fundamental  law,  deserves  to  be  stigmatized  as  a 
'violation  of  the  national  compact;  hut  I  say,  that  the  duty  of 
'  strict  obedience  to  it  cannot  be  too  strongly  felt  by  any — least 
'  of  all,  by  the  Clergy.  To  this  duty  we  pledjed  ourselves  in 
'  our  Ordination  vows.  We  renewed  that  pledge,  as  often  as  we 
'  undertook  the  '  Cure  of  Souls,'  or  were  otherwise  admitted  to 
'serve  in  any  office  in  the  House  of  God.    To  the  strict  fulfilment. 


'  think  it  a  hardship  that  his  Bishop  should  now  recall  him.  He 
'  will  rather  gladly  recognize  the  fitness  of  recurring  to  it,  at  a 
'  time  of  general  doubt  and  difficulty,  as  the  one,  the  only  rule, 
'  by  which  our  practice  in  Public  Prayer  can  be  honestly  or  safely 

'regulated  While  I  urge  you  to  return  to  a  full  observance  of 

'the  Rubric — filtini/  short  of  your  prescribed  part  in  nothing  — 
'  beware  of  exceeding  it.    The  peculiar  dangers  of  the  times,  as 


'therefore,  of  that  duty,  no  faithful 


AUTHOBITY   OF  TUB  ETJBRICS. 


325 


'  well  as  the  prevailing  tone  of  public  opinion,  call  upon  you  most 
'powerfully,  as  you  would  avoid  being  in  the  number  of  'them 
'  through  whom  offences  come,'  to  forbear  all  unnecessary 
'  innovation,  especially,  as  I  have  recently  had  occasion  to  urge, 
'  that  worst  kind  of  innovation,  the  revival  of  obsolete  usages  not 
'  required  by  law,  which  are  associated  in  the  minds  of  the  people 

'  with  the  superstitions  and  corruptions  of  Rome  Should  doubts 

'arise,  the  Preface  to  the  Book  of  Com.  Pr.,  'Concerning  the 
'  Service  of  the  Church,'  tells  you  how  to  act.' —  (quoted  in 
Stephen's  Eccl.  Statutes,  p.  2063—4).  Again,  in  the  Helston  case 
{Oct.  23,  1844.),  the  Bishop,  in  referring  to  his  reply  to  a 
communication  of  Mr.  Blunt's,  observes :  — '  My  direction  to 
'  Mr.  Blunt,  as  cited  by  himself  on  another  point,  was  general, — 
"  Do  nothing  nev),  unless  required  by  the  Church,  which  your 
"  Congregation  will  not  willingly  concur  in." —  But  the  Bishop 
expresses  further  on,  his  firm  determination  so  to  exercise  his 
authority  '  as  shall  on  the  one  hand  preserve  the  Service  of  the 
'  Church  from  being  invaded  by  rash  and  unauthorized  innovation, 
'  and  on  the  other,  protect  the  conscientious  Ministers  of  the  Church 
'  from  being  overborne  in  their  honest  and  faithful  endeavours 
'  to  carry  out  the  requirements  of  the  Book  of  Com.  Pr.  in  all  their 
'  integrity.'— {ib.  p.  2052.  2057—8.) 

The  late  BisHor  of  Lincoln  (Dr.  Kaye)  remarks: — 'It  is  certain 
'  that  the  Clergy,  when  they  promise  to  conform  to  the  Liturgy, 
'  bind  themselves  to  conform  to  it  in  both  its  parts:  not  only  to 
'  use  the  form  of  words,  but  to  use  it  in  the  manner  prescribed 

'  in  the  Rubric  wide  deviations  have  taken  place  in  practice 

'from  the  directions  of  the  Rubric;  and  those  deviations  have 
'  now  continued  for  so  long  a  period,  and  the  Laity  have  become 
'  so  accustomed  to  them,  that  the  attempt  to  return  to  the  letter 
'  of  the  Rubric  is  regarded  and  resented  as  an  innovation.  The 
'  deviation  lias  come  to  be  considered  as  the  rule.  It  is  not  my 
'  intention  to  enter  into  the  discussion  of  any  of  the  Rubrical 

'questions,  &c  It  must  be  rash,  to  use  no  stronger  term,  in 

'  any  man,  especially  in  a  young  man  recently  admitted  into  Holy 
'  Orders,  to  alter  on  his  own  authority  the  practice,  which  he  may 
'  find  existing  in  the  Church  in  which  he  is  appointed  to  officiate, 
'  by  the  substitution  of  one  which  he  may  deem  in  stricter 
'  conformity  to  the  Rubric.  It  is  always  a  matter  of  great  delicacy 
'  to  revive  a  law  which  has  been  allowed  to  fall  into  desuetude; 
'  nor  ought  the  hazard  to  be  run  of  unsettling  the  minds  and 
'  offending  the  feelings,  or,  if  you  please,  the  prejudices,  of  our 
'  Congregations,  unless  some  great  good  is  to  be  achieved  by  the 
'  revival.  (  pp.  18— 30).— Charge  of  1846. 

The  Bishop  of  Ripon  {Dr.  Longley)  remarks :  — '  Various 
'  practices  clearly  sanctioned,  and  even  commanded  by  our  Church, 
'some  of  them  of  a  very  godly  and  edifying  character;  others, 
'perhaps  in  their  nature  more  indifferent,  have  fallen  into  very 
'general  desuetude.  And  with  regard  to  some  of  them,  at  any 
'  rate,  a  judicious  and  well-timed  effort  to  restore  them,  would 

'  merit  every  encouragement  we  shall  surely  think  it  no  light 

'matter  to  disregard  those  injunctions  {Rubrics),  to  curtail  the 
'  Services  which  they  prescribe,  or  to  set  up  an  order  of  our  own 

x2 


326 


AUTHORITY  OF  THE  RUBEICS. 


'  in  any  matter,  in  preference  to  that  which  has  received  so 

'grave  and  deliberate  a  sanction  In  reference  however  to  the 

'general  ijuestion  of  a  literal  obedience  to  the  injunctions  of  the 
'  Rubric,  it  may  be  urged  that  in  some  instances  the  lapse  of 
'  time  and  altered  circumstances  have  rendered  a  compliance  with 
'  it  impossible  —  in  others,  the  practice  enjoined  has  become  so 
'  universally  obsolete  that  the  obligation  to  return  to  it  may  seem 
'  doubtful.  In  the  former  case,  I  need  not  say,  that  necessity 
'  provides  a  sufficient  dispensation.  In  the  latter,  it  would  seem 
'  that  where  a  nsage  enjoined  by  the  Rubric  has  been  in  universal 
'  abeyance  for  many  generations,  and  that  disuse  has  been  allowed 
'  of  the  several   Ordinaries,  the  like  dispensation  may  fairly  be 

'claimed  If  the  whole  body  have  tacitly  consented  to 

'  abandon  the  practice,  the  obligation  to  resume  it  would  not  seem 

'  to  be  very  strong  even  in  cases  where  the  order  is  clear  and 

'  undisputed.  But  where  the  expressions  are  ambiguous,  and  the 
'  authority  doubtful,  it  can  be  still  less  binding  on  the  Clergy  to 
'  resume  antiquated  customs  without  first  referring  the  matter  to 
'the  Ordinary.'  (p.  14  — 18.  Charge,  1841).  —  In  a  subsequent 
'  Charge  the'  Bishop  of  Ripon  commended  the  '  wisdom  of 
'  restoring,  as  soon  as  practicable,  those  Ritual  observances,  which 
'  are  clearly  and  unequivocally  prescribed  by  the  Rubric,  and  of 
■  preparing  the  way  for  their  lestoration.  where  the  state  of  things 
'  may  not  as  vet  admit  of  it.'— Charge  of  1844,  (quoted  in  the 
'Times'). 

The  Bishop  of  Worcester  {Dr.  Pepys),  when  speaking  of 
the  variations  practised  by  the  Clergy  with  respect  to  the 
Rubrics,  states: — 'that  for  such  variations  the  authorities  of  the 

'Church  are  alone  responsible:  And  as  it  is  impossible  to 

'  suppose  that  the  Bishop?  can  be  ignorant  of  such  deviations 

'  from  the  strict  letter  of  the  Rubric,  we  must  consider  them  as 
'having  given  a  tacit  consent  to  them.'  (p.  8.) — 'I  conceive  that 
'  when  you  sign  a  declaration  that  you  will  conform  to  the  Book 
'  of  Com.  Pr.  and  to  everything  "contained  therein,  you  bind 
'  yourselves  to  use  in  general  that  form  in  the  administration 
'  of  the  Church  Services,  rather  than  the  Missal  of  the  Roman 
'  Catholics  on  the  one  hand,  or  the  Directory  of  the  Puritans, 
'on  the  other  hand;  and  not  that  you  will  with  more  than 
'  Chinese  exactness  make  a  point  of  conscience  to  adopt  every 
'  expression,  and  implicitly  follow  every  direction  therein  contained, 
'  notwithstanding  any  changes  which  altered  habits  of  life,  or 
'  altered  modes  of  thinking,  may  have  rendered  expedient.'  (p.  9.)— 
Again,  alter  observing  that  'no  authority  exists,  short  of  an  Act 
of  Parliament,'  which  can  legally  justify  any  omissions,  the  Bishop 
proceeds — 'Under  these  circumstances  it  is  unquestionably  true 
'  that  a  sort  of  general  consent  has  been  allowed  to  take  the  place 
'  of  such  authority,  and  a  licence  assumed  by  the  Clergy,  and 
'  tacitly  permitted  by  their  Diocesans,  to  make  such  slight  changes 
'in  the  letter  of  the  Rubrics  as  seemed  to  be  required  by  the 
'altered  circumstances  of  the  time;  and  while  they  strictly  adhere 
'  to  the  spirit  of  them,  they  need  not  fear  that  in  so  doing  they 
'  are  violating  the  Declarations  which  they  made  at  the  time  when 
'they  accepted  t!:eir  'Cures,'  that  they  would  conform  to  the 
'  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England.  What  is  required  by  such  a 
'  Declaration  is,  an  honest  aud  conscientious  conformity  to  the 


AUTHORITY  OF  THE  RUBRICS. 


327 


' Liturgy  of  our  Church,  in  opposition  to  other  forms  of  Worship: 
'  but  to  accuse  the  Clergy  of  violating  their  Ordination  vows, 
'  because  they  have  adopted  such  slight  deviations  as  I  have 
'  above  noticed,  in  compliance  with  the  general  consent  of  their 
'  Congregations,  and  the  tnrit  permission  of  their  Diocesans,  betrays 
'too  much  that  spirit  of  formality,  which  induced  the  Pharisees 
'of  old,  &c.'  (p.  13.)  Charge ot  ^.-Subsequently,  in  a  "  Charge" 
to  the  Candidates  for  Ordination,  Dec.  22.  1844,  his  Lordship  refers 
to  his  Primary  "Charge"  above  quoted,  and  adds — 'I  have  on 

'  former  occasions  deprecated  that  spirit  of  innovation,  which, 

'  on  the  plea  of  a  more  punctual  observance  of  the  Rubkic,  and  a 
'  respect  for  the  practices  of  the  primitive  Church,  was,  I  felt 
'  convinced,  calculated  to  alienate  the  affections  of  the  Laity  from 
1  the  Clergy,  and  thus  to  give  a  fatal  blow  to  our  beloved  Church.' 
(quoted  in  Stephens'  Eccl.  Statutes,  p.  2065.).  —  Again,  in  his 
Lordships  Charge  of  1845,  after  referring  to  what  he  had  previously 
'said  on  this  subject,  he  adds — 'In  those  few  places  in  the 
'  Diocese  where  the  experiment  of  introducing  novelties  in  the 
'  administration  of  Divine  Service  has  been  tried,  it  has  been,  in 
'  most  cases  followed  by  dissension  and  distrust,  by  the  exhibition 
'of  empty  Churches,  and  full  Meeting- Houses.  Fortified,  therefore, 
'  by  the  experience  which  we  have  thus  obtained.  I  venture  to 
•  repeat  the  caution  which  I  then  gave  you,  not  to  persist  in  the 
1  restoration  of  obsolete  usages,  however  correct  you  may  yourselves 
'consider  them,  when  you  find  them  so  opposed  to  the  feelings, 
'  or  even  the  prejudices,  of  your  people;  that  you  thereby  lose  your 
'  influence  over  them,  and  risk  the  salvation  "of  immortal  souls  for 
'  the  sake  of  a  punctilious  observance  of  some  trifling  ceremonial, 
'  or  the  wearing  of  one  habit  rather  than  another.' —  (quoted  in 
Stephen's  Laws  Rel.  to  the  Clergy,  p.  1097.). 

The  late  Bishop  of  Down  and  Connor,  &c.  {Dr.  Mont) 
remarks: — 'If  between  the  times  of  our  Reformers  and  our  own, 
'  any  intermediate  generations  have  arisen,  less  vigilant  in  their 
'  adherence  to  our  Ritual  as  established  in  the  Book  of  Com.  Pr., 
'  it  is  the  part  of  the  present  generation,  not  to  acquiesce  in 
'an  irregular  precedent,  upon  the  fact  being  made  clear  to  our 
'  apprehensions,  but  to  correct,  amend,  and  renovate  by  our  future 
'care  what  has  been  innovated  by  their  oversight.' — He  then 
proceeds  to  say.  that  so  long  as  the  Act  of  Uniformity  exists,  and 
the  Liturgy  is  imposed  by  lawful  authority;  so  long  as  the  Clergy 
plight  their  faith  at  their  Ordinations,  and  are  repeatedly  and 
legally  required  to  make  solemn  declaration  of  their  conformity 
to  all  and  everything  prescribed  in  the  said  Liturgy;  'so  long,' 
'he  says,  'it  will  be  preposterous  to  allow  any  part  of  that  Book 
'  to  be  obsolete  ;  so  long  shall  we  be  warranted  in  affirming,  that, 
'however  it  may  have  been  partially,  temporarily,  locally,  slighted 
'and  out  of  fashion,  it  is  in  "no  part  worn  out  of  use,"  it  has  in 
'no  part  forfeited  its  original  claim  on  the  reverential  and  dutiful 
'  observance  of  the  Church's  Ministers  and  children;  so  long  should 
'we  be  resolute  and  steadfast  in  maintaining  our  persuasion,  that 
'every  portion  of  the  Liturgy  is  to  be  rightfully  regarded  as  a 
'  living,  an  integral,  a  perpetual,  and  an  inalienable  member  of  that 
'invaluable  Book.'  (p.  65,  66.). — 'Of  some  directions  of  tho 
1  Church  it  lias  been  alleged  that  they  are  impracticable.  If  they 
'be  really  so,  no  one  can  be  bound  to  the  performance  of  them. 


328  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  RUBRICS. 


'  But  impracticability  is  very  different  from  disinclination,  or 
'recklessness,  or  laxity,  or  inconvenience,  or  self-indulgence.' 
(/>.  72.).— Hot.  Lit. 

The  Btshop  of  Calcutta  (Dr.  Wilson)  says:—'  A  strict  and 
'conscientious  observance  of  the  Rubrics,  Canons,  and  Usages  of 
'  our  Church,  should  be  our  delight,  as  it  is  our  interest  and  duty.' 
(p.  73).— Charge,  May,  1845. 

Archdeacon  Harrison  considers — 'any  departure  from  the 
'  appointed  order  of  the  Prayer  Book,  grounded  on  opinions  and 
'  feelings  in  the  individual  at  variance  with  the  principles  and  rules 
'  of  the  Church,  would  convict  such  an  one  of  unfaithfulness  in 
'  his  Ministry,  and  inconsistency  with  his  professions.'  {p.  416). 
Hist.  Inquiry  into  the  Rubrics. 

Archdeacon  Shirley  says: — 'There  never  was  a  time  at 
'  which  it  was  more  manifestly  our  duty  than  at  present  to 
'conform  carefully  to  the  established  Ritual  of  our  Church,  as 
'  interpreted  by  the  universal  practice  of  all  order  among  us.  The 
'  celebrated  rule  of  semper,  ubique,  et  ab  omnibus,  applies  strictly 
'to  such  matters;  and  they  who  in  the  exercise  of  their  private 
'judgment  alter  or  abridge  the  mode  of  ministration  for  their  own 
'  convenience,  or  even  for  the  supposed  edification  of  their  flocks, 
1  incur  a  very  grave  responsibility,  if  we  may  not  rather  say  that 
'  they  commit  a  verv  serious  offence  against  their  Ordination 
'  vows.'—  Charge  of  1843. 

Rev.  C.  Benson  (late  Master  of  the  Temple),  after  discussing 
the  duty  of  a  strict  observance  of  the  Rubrics,  and  Cauons, 
establishes  these  three  conclusions: — '1st.  The  precise  and 
'punctual  observance  of  the  Rubrics  is  bound  upon  the  entire 
'body  of  the  Clergy  both  by  conscience  and  by  law;  whilst  in 
'  point  of  law,  obedience  to  the  Canons  of  1603  is  equally 
'  required.  —  2ndly.  The  various  limitations  which  have  been 
'  brought  forward,  as  authorizing  the  violation  of  the  Rubrics 
'and  Canons  to  a  certain  extent,  are  untenable.  No  one  can 
'justly  prolong  the  time  of  his  beginning  universally  and  literally  to 
'  observe  the  Rubrics,  nor  except  where  obedience  is  impracticable, 
'  can  any  one  be  said  to  be  really  emancipated  from  obedience  to 
'the  Cauons. — 3rdly.  There  are  some  Rubrics,  and  some  Canons, 
'  which  are,  and  for  several  generations  have  been,  systematically 
•  disregarded  by  the  whole  body  of  the  Clergy— Bishops,  Priests, 
'and  Deacons.'  {p.  21).  —  With  respect  to  the  last  point,  in  a 
'  preceding  page  he  observes,  — '  We  shall  also  see,  that  the 
'  Rubrics  at  least  demand  certain  things  of  which  no  one,  who 
'  is  not  strangely  attached  to  the  outward  appearances  of  Popery, 
'  would  wish,  if  it  could  be  avoided,  to  have  the  practice  renewed.' 
(p.  17). — And  he  ultimately  affirms  that  'it  is  impossible  for  the 
'  Clergy  to  go  on  for  the  future  in  an  open  and  conscious  violation  of 

'  their  duty  in  this  respect '  (p.  52)  '  But  for  this  as  well  as  all 

'  other  changes  in  the  Rubrics  there  must  be  a  revision  sanctioned 

'  by  an  Act  of  Parliament  Without  this,  a  strict  conformity  to 

'  the  Rubrics,  which  we  cannot  now  much  longer  conscientiously 
'  avoid,  will  inevitably  involve  us  and  the  Church,  in  harassing 
'  contentions.'  {p.  55.) — On  the  liubrics  and  Canons. 


AUTU0B1TY  OF  THE  HUBEICS. 


329 


Rev.  W.  Goode,  remarking  upon  Ceremonies,  observes, —  that 
'  the  only  sure  guide  we  have  as  to  those  that  are  retained,  consists 
'of  the  positive  directions  to  be  found  in  the  Rubrics  and  other 
'  authoritative  documents  of  our  Church,  as  to  the  Rites,  and 
'  Ceremonies,  and  Gestures  to  be  used  in  the  public  Services 
'of  the  Church.'  (p.  3). — 'The  Minister,  when  engaged  in  the 
'  public  Services  of  the  Church,  is  prohibited  from  adding  any 
'  Ceremonial  observances  to  those  prescribed  in  the  Book  of 
'Com.  Pr.'  (p.  7). — 'It  must  be  admitted,  that  a  Rubric 
'  sanctioned  both  by  Convocation  and  Parliament  in  1662,  cannot 
'  be  invalidated  by  a  Canon  that  had  the  sanction  of  Convocation 
'  only  in  1604.'  (p.  29).— Cerem.  of  Chi  of  England. 

Dr.  Hook  is  of  opinion  in  this  matter  — '  that  they  (the  Clergy) 
'act  in  perfect  consistency  with  their  pledges,  if  they  take  tilings  as 
'  tltey  find  them,  merely  guarding  against  further  innovations  ;  and 
'  if,  as  occasion  oilers,  they  return  more  nearly  to  the  practice  of 
'the  Reformers.'  (p.  38.)  —  Call  to  Union.  'All  the  Clergy  of 
'  England  solemnly  pledge  themselves  to  observe  the  Rubrics.' — 
Ch.  Diet.  art.  Rubric. 

Rf.v.  J.  Jebb,  speaking  of  the  Church  of  England,  says: — '  But 
'as  long  as  her  Clergy  consent  to  her  Book  of  Com.  Pr.,  and 
'  subscribe  to  her  Canons,  and  thus  virtually  bind  themselves  to  a 
'  compliance  with  her  injunctions,  so  long  it  never  can  be  said  that 
'any  thing  contained  in  them  has  become  obsolete  :  and  a  power 
'  superior  to  that  of  any  individual  authority,  speaks  to  their 
'consciences,  reminds  them  of  their  pledge,  and  commands  them,  at 

'  whatever  cost,  to  obey  her  It  is  the  part  of  wisdom,  therefore, 

'  to  endeavour  so  to  ascertain  her  intentions,  that  while  the  line 
'  deBned  by  her  may  never  in  any  particular  be  overstepped,  the 
'growing  spirit  of  enlightened  piety  may  restore  every  prescribed 
'  usaae  that  can  add  due  outward  honor  to  the  public  service  of  God.' 
(p.  8,  9.  see  also  p.  400)— Choral  Service. 

Rev.  J.  C.  Robertson  thinks  — that  'nothing  indeed  can  be 
'  more  untenable  than  the  notion  that  the  Prayer  Book  is  a  com- 
' plete  rule,  which  will  not  admit  of  any  variation,  either  by 
'  exceeding  or  by  falling  short  of  it.'  (/>.  299.). — 'For  us,  who  are 
'no  Bishops,  the  authority  of  those  who  hold  the  Apostolic  office 
'  must  be  a  rule.'  ( p.  334.).—'  My  object  has  been  to  show  that  the 
'  strict  letter  of  the  Prayer  Book  may  be  dispensed  with ;  but 
'  these  are  matters  in  which  I  conceive  that  no  consideration  of 
'  circumstances  ought  to  prevail  with  us  for  any  deviation.'  {p.  335.). 
'  And  it  need  hardly  be  said  that  in  this  age,  when  there  is  a  great 
'movement  for  the  restoration  of  the  full  system  of  the  Prayer 
'  Book,  that  man's  Cliurchmanship  must  be  worse  than  doubtful 
'  rvho  allows  to  drop  any  Church  observance  which  is  already 
'  established.'  (p.  337.)— How  shall  we  Conf.  to  the  Lit. 

Rev.  J.  Sandkord,  speaking  of  the  Ritual,  remarks  —  'how 

'  important  that  it  should  not  be  either  marred  or  mutilated  

'  that  there  should  be  such  uniformity  amongst  the  Clergy,  in  its 
'public  celebration,  as  will  secure  the  minds  of  worshippers  from 
'  being  wounded  or  unsettled.'  (/;.  230,  244.) — Parochiatia. 

Rev.  E.  Scobelx,  after  stating  that  the  Act  of  Uniformity 
(of  16G2)  '  has  been  mainly  obeyed,'  and  that  although  certain 


330 


AUTHORITY  OF  THE  IITJBUICS. 


inaccuracies  may  have  unintentionally  crept  in,  and  individual 

neglect  and  laxities  may  possibly  have  existed,  adds  —  'but  withal 
•there  has  prevailed  within  these  Realms  that  common  and  solid 
'  conformity,  which  has  preserved  the  Liturgy  in  all  its  integral 
'  and  substantial  operation,  with  no  variation'  that  need  be  much 

'  offensive,  even  in  its  forms.'  (  p.  2.)  '  Nevertheless,  Rubric 

'  is  the  mode  which  is  ordered  for  us;  and  as  long  as  it  is  so  ordered, 
'  it  is  binding  ;  and  what  is  more,  every  Kubkic  is,  as  far  as  that 
'  goes,  and  if  the  exact  letter  is  to  decide,  physically  observable  and 

'within  our  practice.'  (p.  3.)  'There  may  be  many  differences 

'  in  Public  Worship,  and  yet  a  real,  substantial,  and  sufficient 

'agreement.'   (p.  17.)  "In  fact,  the  Rubrics  are  practically, 

'and  as  final  measures,  uncompleted.'  {p.  18.) — Thoughts  on  Cli. 
Subjects. 

Mr.  Cmprs  (Barrister-at-Law)  says, — 'that  the  general  order  of 
'  the  Church  Service  according  to  the  directions  of  the  Rubric,  is 
'not  to  be  departed  from  by  the  Minister;  but  the  manner  in 
'  which  that  Church  Service  is  to  be  performed  is  at  the  direction 
'and  discretion  of  the  Officiating  Minister,  subject  of  course, 
'  to  any  directions  from  the  Ordinary ;  and  so  long  as  he  does  not 
'  depart  from  the  directions  of  the  Rubric,  the  Parishioners,  or 
'  Churchwardens,  or  others,  would  have  no  right  to  interfere,' 
{p.  642.)—  The  Laws  rel.  to  the  Ch.  and  the  Clergy.  3rd  edit. 

Sir  J.  Nicholl,  in  his  judgment  in  the  case  of  Newberry  v. 
Goodwin  (1  Phill.  283.)  declares':— '  The  Law  directs  that  a  Clergy- 
'  man  is  not  to  diminish  in  any  respect,  or  add  to,  the  prescribed 
'  form  of  Worship.  Uniformity  in  this  respect  is  one  of  the  leading 
'and  distinguishing  principles  of  the  Church  of  England;  nothing 
'  is  left  to  the  discretion  and  fancy  of  the  individual  :  for  if  every 
'  Minister  were  to  alter,  omit,  or  add,  according  to  his  own  taste, 
'this  Uniformity  would  soon  be  destroyed;  and  though  the  altera- 
'  tion  might  begin  with  little  things,  yet  it  would  soon  extend 
'itself  to  more  important  changes  in  the  Public  Worship  of  the 
'Established  Church;  and  even  in  the  Scriptures  themselves,  the 
'  most  important  passages  might  be  materially  altered  under  the 
'  notion  of  giving  a  more  correct  version,  or  omitted  altogether  as 
'  unauthorized  interpolations.' 

Mr.  Stephens  (Barrister-at-Law)  affirms — that  'No  Custom 
'or  usage— -no  earthly  authority  whatsoever,  except  it  be  the  Legis- 
'lature,  can  repeal  or  qualify  the  positive  enactments  of  the  Statute 
'Law.'  [p.  308). — '  In  the  construction  of  the  Statutes  of  Uniformity, 
'  Judges  are  not  to  presume  the  intentions  of  the  Legislature,  but  to 
'collect  them  from  the  words  of  the  Statutes  themselves,  and  they 
'have  nothing  to  do  with  the  policy  of  the  Law.'  (p.  30 J)  —  'No 
'  Custom,  however  confirmed,  can  supersei/e  the  Statute  Law  :  no 
'  Clergyman  can  transfer  breaches  of  the  Statute  Law  into  the  list 
'  of  approved  practices,  nor  justify  neglects  of  them  by  pleading 
'  the  connivance,  or  the  approbation  of  his  Ecclesiastical  superiors. 
'  It  is  true,  the  Ordinary  may  forbear  to  blame,  and  he  may  neglect 
'  to  reform,  any  customary  deviations  from,  or  any  open  defiance 
'  of,  express  and  positive  Rubrics.  But  as  he  has  no  power  to  alter 
'  them,  or  to  give  his  sanction  to  alterations  made  in  them,  so  he 
'cannot  excuse  or  discharge  his  Clergy  from  their  obligations  to 


AUTHORITY  OF  THE  RUBRICS. 


331 


'  conform  themselves  to  them.  Episcopal  authority  in  the  Rubrics 
'  is  very  limited,  ami  those  rules  which  are  clear  and  plain  must  be 
'  the  directions  of  the  Ordinary  as  well  as  of  the  subordinate 
'  Clergy.  Ami  therefore  it  can  never  be  presumed  that  non-com- 
'  pliancc  with  plain  and  positive  rules,  however  supported  by 
'  example  and  custom,  can  receive  any  warrant  from  Episcopal 
•  permission  or  approbation.  For  the  Clergy  are  antecedently 
'  bound  by  their  own  solemn  Declarations  and  Subscriptions  of 
'conformity  to  observe  the  RUBRICS;  and  if  they  violate  any  of 
'  them  which  arc  clear,  obvious,  and  practicable,  thev  are  puiii.-Jmhlc 
'in  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts.'  (p.  3bl.)—Book  of  Com.  Pr.  E.  H.  S. 

Lokd  Stowki.l,  formerly  Judge  of  the  Consistory  Court  (1787), 
observed:  —  'Uniformity  in  I'ublic  Worship  is  one  of  the  leading 
'  principles  of  the  Church  of  England,  nothing  is  left  to  the  opinion 
'of  individuals;  if  every  Minister  were  to  al/er,  omit,  or  add, 
'  according  to  his  own  taste,  he  might  from  beginning  with  trilling 
'  changes,  extend  his  views  to  alterations  of  even  the  Scriptures 
'  themselves,  under  the  notion  of  giving  a  more  correct  version.' — 
(quoted  in  Roger's  Eccl.  Law.  p.  832.  n.). 

The  Quarterly  Review  '  protests  against  the  error  of  giving 
'  the  Liturgy  and  its  Rubrics  an  interpretation  so  narrow,  so  punc- 
'  tilious,  and,  we  must  add,  so  unsound,  as  would  in  some  instances 
'  defeat  the  very  objects  which  the  interpretation  professes  to 
'  promote,  and  would  abrogate  the  wise  and  wholesome  Usages  by 
'  which,  in  the  majority  of  our  Congregations,  ancient  forms  have 

'  been  happily  adapted  to  modern  circumstances.'  (p.  235.)  'We 

'  have  attained  and  have  hitherto  enjoyed  a  greater  degree  of  Uni- 
'formity  than  could  have  been  preserved,  if  usage  had  not  been 
'  allowed — in  these,  as  in  all  other  human  all'airs— to  supply  defici- 

'  encies,  and  to  decide  doubts.'  (7;.  246)  '  The  safest  way  for  the 

'  Clergy  is  to  continue  to  do  as  they  have,  for  the  most  part,  hitherto 
'dime  —  that  is,  to  follow  the  Rubrics,  and  Canons,  where  their 
'meaning  is  clear  and  indisputable,  and  their  operation  practicable 
'and  consistent:  and  in  all  cases  that  admit  of  doubt,  to  govern 
'  themselves  by  what  we  may  call  the  common-law  of  the  Church — 
'  that  is,  the  long  established  usages  and  customs,  which,  far  from 
'  being,  as  has  been  objected  to  them,  a  relaxation  of  discipline  and 
'  a  violation  of  authority,  are  in  fact  no  other  than  discipline  and 
'  authority,  interpreted,  directed,  and  enforced  by  that  which  is 
'the  ultimate  sanction  of  all  human  ordinances — the  experience 
'and  reason  of  mankind.'  (p.  200) — No.  cxliii.  May,  1843. 

84. — The  above  opinions,  selected  without  prejudice 
or  partiality,  it  is  hoped  will  be  sufficient  to  convey 
a  correct  idea  of  the  necessity  of  exercising  much  care 
and  consideration  in  interpreting  the  Rubrics,  and 
to  urge  extreme  caution  in  questioning  any  prevailing 
Usage.  For  the  solution  of  doubts  with  respect  to 
the  precise  meaning  of  any  of  the  Rubrics  we  are 
referred,  as  we  have  seen  in  the  authorities  above 
quoted,  to  the  directions  on  this  head  prescribed  in 


RUBEICAL  AMBIGUITIES. 


the  Book  of  Common  Phayeb,  which  brings  us  to 
the  consideration  of  the  'Preface'  written  by  the 
original  compilers  of  the  Liturgy,  and  entitled  in 
our  present  Books. 

f .    '  Concerning  the  Service  of  the  Church.'  (1549  to  1G62._).' 

85. — Rubrical  doubts  and  ambiguities  will  occa- 
sionally be  met  with  where  the  Rubric  is  deficient,  or 
not  sufficiently  explicit,  as  well  as  in  those  instances 
where  a  discretionary  power  is  lodged  with  the 
Officiating  Minister.  They  generally  arise  on  a  change 
of  Incumbency,  or  on  entering  a  fresh  '  Charge,'  where 
usages  are  found  prevailing  not  exactly  in  accordance 
with  the  practices  which  have  been  previously  and 
habitually  adopted  by  the  Minister  in  his  preceding 
'  Cure.'  In  some  cases  '  a  doubt  or  ambiguity '  may 
discover  itself  when  attention  is  drawn  to  a  Rubric 
from  a  desire  to  promote  general  uniformity,  or  it  may 
be  from  extreme  views  of  Ceremonial  Worship,  or 
perhaps  from  the  less  worthy  motive, — a  fondness  for 
novelty  and  change.  From  whatever  cause,  however, 
it  may  arise,  if  the  customary  usages  of  the  Church, 
or  the  feelings  of  the  Congregation  do  not  acquiesce 
in  the  introduction  of  what  may  be  considered 
novelties,  and  therefore  the  people  be  indisposed  to 
yield  to  new  interpretations  given  to  the  Rubric  by 
the  Officiating  Minister,  —  and  if,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Minister  will  not  accede  to  continuing  the  ancient 
practices  with  which  the  Congregation  have  been  long 
familiar — an  event  either  way  much  to  be  deprecated, 
then,  to  '  appease  the  diversity,'  recourse  must  be  had 
to  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese ;  if  he  fail  to  reconcile 
the  difference,  application  must  be  made  to  the 
Archbishop  ;  as  thus  directed  ; — 


•  The  prefix  (f )  indicates  that  the  line  or  passage  following  is 
a  Rubric  of  the  Prayer  Book;  and  the  date  annexed  shows  in 
what  Liturgy  it  has  appeared. 


RUBRICAL  AMBIGUITIES. 


333 


%  'And  forasmuch  as  nothing  can  be  so  plainly  set  forth,  but 
'doubts  and  ambiijuities  may  arise  in  the  use  and  practice  of 
'  the  same;  to  appease  all  such  diversity  (if  any  arise),  and  for 
'  the  resolution  of  all  doubts  concerning  the  manner  how  to 
'  understand,  do,  and  execute  the  things  contained  in  this  Book 
'(The  Boole  of  Common  Prayer);  the  parties  that  so  doubt,  or 
'  diversely  take  any  thing,  shall  always  resort  to  the  Bishop 
'  of  the  Diocese,  who  by  his  discretion  shall  take  order  for 
'the  quietness  and  appeasing  of  the  same;  so  that  the  same 
'  order  be  not  contrary  to  any  thing  contained  in  this  Book. 
'  And  if  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  be  in  doubt,  then  he  may 
'  send  for  the  resolution  thereof  to  the  Archbishop.' 

86.  — The  necessity  of  appealing  to  the  Ordinary  in 
such  cases  is  enforced  upon  the  Clergy  by  the  Statutes 
of  Uniformity,  as  well  as  by  their  Oath  of  Conformity 
to  all  and  every  thing  contained  in  the  Liturgy  ;  and 
the  duty  of  compliance  with  the  decision  of  the  Bishop 
is  imposed  upon  them  by  their  Ordination  vows,  and 
by  their  Oath  of  Canonical  obedience ;  yet  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  authority  of  the  Ordinary  being 
limited  to  points  of  doubt  and  uncertainty,  no  appli- 
cation should  be  made  where  the  Rubric  is  decisive. 

Archdeacon  Sharp  observes:  —  'In  all  points  where  the  Ru- 
'  urics  are  plain  and  express  the  Ordinary  has  im  authority  to  release 

'  us  from  that  obedience  though  the  t  irdinary  is  allowed  to  inter- 

'  pret  and  determine  the  sense  of  the  Kubuic  for  us  in  all  doubtful 
'  cases,  yet  it  is  with  this  proviso,  that  he  shall  not  order  or 
'  determine  any  thing  "that  is  contrary  to  what  is  contained  in  the 
'  Service  Book.''  That  is,  in  points  that  are  clearly  expressed,  the 
'  Ordinary  is  as  much  prohibited  from  making  innovations,  as  the 
'meanest  Parochial  Minister  among  us.'  (  p.  55). — Rubr.  cj-  Can. 
See  also  Mast's  Com.  Pr.  p.  xxx.  Goode's  Cer.  p.  15. 

Mr.  Stephens  (Barrister -at -Lair)  expresses  a  similar  opinion, 
observing;  —  'But  the  Bishop  is  subject  to  the  Statute  Law,  and 
'  where  the  Rubrics  are  express,  he  has  no  authority  to  release  any 
'  Minister  from  obedience  to  them,  or  to  determine  any  thing  that 
'is  contrary  to  what  is  contained  in  the  Service  Book.'  (p.  123.) 
—  Com.  Pr.  E.  H.  S. 

87.  — Although  these  Episcopal  decisions  may  often, 
and  for  a  time,  'appease  the  diversity,'  yet  by  reason  of  the 
continual  change  of  Bishops,  and  their  circumscribed 
jurisdiction,  such  dicta  cannot  possess  any  permanent 
character,  nor  be  effectual  beyond  the  limits  of  the 
particular  Diocese.  The  disputes  between  a  Minister 
and  his  Congregation  in  matters  of  Ritual  and  Cere- 
mony are  not  certain  of  being  by  this  means  set 


334  COMMON  PRAYER  IN  ENGLISH. 

definitively  at  rest;  from  this  fact  especially,  that 
although  the  present  Bishop  may  give  his  decision 
on  the  one  side  ;  a  possibility  exists  that  his  successor 
may  prefer,  and  even  recommend  the  adoption  of  the 
other.  Consequently,  in  this  uncertainty  of  law  and 
opinion,  in  this  mutability  of  authority,  and  variety  of 
judgment,  the  hope  of  lasting  and  general  uniformity 
in  Rubrical  matters  cannot  be  entertained;  nor  is  it 
probable  that  any  remedy  can  be  discovered  until 
some  efficient  power,  such  as  an  Act  of  the  Imperial 
Legislature,  binding  upon  both  Clergy  and  Laity, 
shall  have  prescribed  one  undeviating  and  absolute 
rule.  Still,  this  state  of  things,  unsatisfactory  as  it 
may  be,  is  not  without  its  advantages  to  the  inferior 
Clergy ;  the  power  of  appeal  not  only  relieves  them 
from  much  responsibility,  but  in  those  cases  where 
the  Laity  are  a  party  concerned,  this  appellant 
privilege  is  calculated  to  screen  the  Clergy  from 
many  of  the  painful  consequences  that  might  arise 
from  a  decision  adverse  to  the  feelings  of  their  people. 
On  this  account  merely,  if  from  no  higher  motive,  a 
reference  to  the  Bishop  in  all  such  doubtful  and 
intricate  cases  cannot  but  be  strongly  recommended. 
But  it  is  time  we  apply  ourselves  to  the  subject  in 
detail  as  presented  to  us  in  the  Liturgy. 


Common  Prayer  to  be  in  English. 

If   1  All  things  shall  be  rend  and  sung*  in  the  Church  in 

'the  English  Tongue.' — (1549  to  1662). 

88. — Public  Prater  by  the  above  Rubric  is 
directed  to  be  said  in  the  English  Tongue  in  order  to  be 
understood  by  the  people  ;  this  injunction  is  of  course 
binding  from  being  prescribed  in  the  Liturgy  enjoined 
by  the  Acts  of  Uniformity  ;  and  is  not  likely  to  be 
infringed  upon  in  Parish  Churches. 


With  respect  to  Singing,  Music,  &c.  see  postea. 


COMMON  PRAYElt  IN  ENGLISH. 


33S 


In  the  xxxix  Articles  it  will  be  found  similarly 
enforced  :  — '  Tt  is  a  thing  plainly  repugnant  to  the 

'  Word  of  God.  and  the  custom  of  the  Primitive  Church,  to  have 
'  Public  Prayer  in  the  Church,  or  to  minister  the  Sacraments, 
'in  a  tongue  not  understanded  of  the  people.' — Art.  xxiv. 

Exceptions  :  —  The  Universities  of  Oxford  and 
Cambridge,  certain  Public  Schools,  and  the  Convocations 
of  the  Clergy,  are  excepted  by  the  Statute  Law :  — 

'It  shall  be  lawful  for  the  further  encouraging 

'  of  learning  in  the  Tongues  in  the  Universities  of  Cambridge  and 
'  Oxford,  to  use  and  exercise  in  their  common  and  open  Prayer 
'  in'  their  Chnpeh  (being  no  Parish  Churches),  or  other  places 
'  of  Prayer,  the  Mattens,  Evensong;.  Litany,  and  all  other  Prayers, 
'  (the  Holy  Communion,  commonly  called  the  Mass.  excepted) 
'  prescribed  in  the  said  Book,  in  Greek,  Latin,  or  Hebrew.' — 
2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  s.  6. 

Again  —  'It  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  use  the 

'  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,  and  all  other  Prayers  and 
'  Services  prescribed  in  and  by  the  said  Book,  in  the  Chapels  or 
'other  public  places  of  the  respective  Colleges  and  Halls  in  both 
'  the  Universities,  in  the  Colleges  of  Westminster,  Winchester, 
'  and  Eton,  and  in  the  Convocations  of  the  Clergy  of  either 
'  Province,  in  Latin.'— 13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  18. 

*»*  In  Colleges  &c.  where  the  Latin  Prayers  are  used  it  is 
usual  to  have  the  English  Service  also,  but  at  a  different  hour: 
this  is  the  practice  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  The  custom  however 
has  established  itself  of  omitting,  in  the  performance  of  the  Latin 
Sen-ice,  the  Lessons,  and  Canticles,  —  passing  from  the  Psalms 
directly  to  the  Creed:  which  is  evidently  contrary  to  Canon  16, 
(see  page  287.),  and  the  Statutes  above  quoted.  On  Wednesdays, 
and  Fridays,  and  at  Convocations  of  the  Clergy,  the  Litany  in 
Latin  is  alone  read.    (See  Jebu's  Chor.  Ser.  41G.  433.) 

The  Commemoration  Service  generally  used  in  Colleges 
{in  Commendai 'iotitbus  Bniei'aetornm)  is  the  one  composed  in  the 
time  of  Elizabetk*  (1560);  and  is  introduced  into  the  ordinary 
Service.  It  begins  with  the  Lord's  Prayer ;  followed  by  Ps.  144, 
145,  146.;  and  the  Lesson  from  Ecclus.  iv.  Then  succeed  the 
Sermon,  the  Benedictus  (St  Luke  i.  68.),  certain  Versicles,  and  a 
Thanksgiving  (pro  Fuudatore.). 

89.— In  "Wales,  those  Parishes  in  which  the  Welsh 
Language  is  commonly  spoken,  are  required  to  have 
Divine  Service  performed  in  the  vernacular  tongue, 
and  the  Bishops  of  the  Principality  are  to  take  care 


*  It  will  be  found  under  '  Celebratio  Casnat  Domini  in  Fune- 
bribus,  fc'  in  Si-arrow's  Coll.  p.  203. 


33G 


DAILY  SERVICE. 


that  Welsh  translations  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  (by  13  &  14  Car.  EL  c.  4.  s.  27.),  and  of 
the  Bible  {ib.  and  5  Eliz.  c.  28.  ss.  1,  2.),  in  addition 
to  an  English  copy  of  each,  are  provided  by  the 
Churchwardens,  at  the  expence  of  the  Parish. — 
5  Eliz.  c.  28.  s.  3.    (See  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  106.  page  10.). 

IF  'Privately,  they  may  say  the  same  in  any  Language.' — 

(1549  to  1662). 

90.— Privately.— No  one  is  restricted  from 
making  use  in  private  of  the  'Book  of  Common 
Prayer '  in  whatever  language  he  may  think  fit. 

'  It  shall  be  lawful  to  any  man  that  understandeth  the  Greek, 
'Latin,  and  Hebrew  tongue,  or  other  strange  tongue,  to  say 
'and  have  the  said  Prayers  heretofore  specified  of  Mattens  and 
'  Evensong  in  Latin,  or  any  such  other  tongue,  saying  the  same 
'  privately,  as  they  do  understand.'— 2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  s.  5. 


Daily  Service. 


^f.  'And  all  Priests  and  Deacons  are  ('shall  be  bound,' 
'  1552 — 9,  1604.*)  to  sat/  Daily,  the  Morning  and  Evening 
'Prayer  either  privately  or  openly,  not  lieing  let  by 
'sickness,  {'by  preaching,  studying  of  divinity,'  1552 — 9,  1604.) 
'or  some  other  urgent  cawe.'t   (1552,  16G2). 

^f.  '  Ami  the  Curate  that  ministereth  in  every  Parish- Church 
'or  Chapel,  being  at  home,  and  not  being  otherwise  reasonably 
'hindered,  shall  say  the  same  in  the  Parish-Church  or 
'Chapel  where  he  ministereth,  and  shall  cause  a  Bell  to  be 
'  tolled  thereunto  a  cmiveiiient  time  before  he  begin,  that  the  people 
'  ('such  as  be  disposed,'  1552 — 9.)  may  come  to  hear  Gods  word, 
'and  to  pray  with  him.'  (1552,  1662). 

91. — The  above  directions  imperatively  require  the 
Morning  and  Evening  Prayers  of  the  Liturgy  to 
be  said  Daily,  by  every  Clergyman  of  the  Church 


*  The  parenthetical  clauses  point  out  the  'readings 'of  some 
previous  Liturgy,  indicated  by  the  date  annexed,  when  these 
'  readings'  deviate  from  the  present  Prayer  Book. 

t  In  the  {Scotch  Liturgy  (1637)  is  added  here:— 'Of  which  cause, 
'  if  it  be  frequently  pretended,  the}'  are  to  make  the  Bishop  of 
'  the  Diocese,  or  the  Archbishop  of  the  Province,  the  Judge  and 
'Allower.'— Keeling,  Pre/,  xvi. 


DAILY  SERVICE. 


337 


of  England,  publicly  or  privately;  but  by  every 
Minister  having  a  '  Cure  of  Souls '  publicly  in  his 
Church  or  Chapel,  unless  prevented  by  urgent  and 
reasonable  cause.  This  injunction  of  the  Liturgy 
is  law,  but  since  it  does  not  accurately  define 
what  shall  be  accounted  a  sufficiently  'urgent  and 
reasonable  cause,'  beyond  sickness  or  necessary 
absence,  to  excuse  the  performance  of  Public  Daily 
Service,  recourse  must  be  had  to  the  Bishop,  as  in 
other  '  doubts  and  ambiguities,'  to  determine  the 
matter.  If  no  adequate  reason  exists  for  refusing  to 
read  public  Daily  Prayers,  any  of  the  Parishioners 
being  desirous  of  such  Services  can  call  upon  the 
Bishop  to  enforce  their  performance.  Other  directions 
of  the  Liturgy  lead  to  the  inference  that  Daily 
Services  were  contemplated  by  the  original  Compilers* 
of  the  Prayer  Book,  as  we  may  judge  from  the 
following  : — 

If.  '  The  Psalter  shall  be  read  through  once  evert/  month 
'as  it  is  there  appointed.' — Introd.  in  Book  of  Com.  Prayer. 

Tf.  '  To  know  what  Lessons  shall  be  read  every  day,  look  for 
'  the  day  of  the  month  in  the  Calendar.' — ib. 

%  '  The  Collect,  Epistle,  and  Gospel,  appointed  for  the 
'Sunday  shall  serve  all  the  Week  after,  where  it  is  not  in  this 
'  Book  otherwise  ordered.' — ib. 

And  elsewhere  before  many  of  the  Collects,  will  be  found 
' daily  to  be  said'  ' every  day,'  as  we  shall  have  occasion  to  notice. 
The  same  is  implied  in  the  Titles  before  the  preliminary  Rubric, 
as: — 

'  The  Order  for  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  Daily 

TO  BE  SAID  AND  USED  THROUGHOUT  THE  YEAR.' 


•  The  practice  of  the  time  of  Abp.  Laud  may  be  inferred  from 
the  Proceedings  of  the  Committee  appointed  by  the  House  of  Lords 
in  1641  touching  certain  innovations  in  doctrine  and  discipline 
charged  against  the  Archbishop ;  and  where  we  shall  find  this 
inquiry — 'Whether  according  to  that  end  of  the  Preface  before 
'  the  Common  Prayer,  the  Curate  shall  be  bound  to  read  Morning 
'  and  Evening  Prayers  every  day  in  the  Church,  if  he  be  at  home, 
'  and  not  reasonably  letted :  and  why  not  only  on  Wednesday 
'and  Friday  Morning,  and  in  the  Afternoon  on  Saturday,  with 
'  Holy.Day  Eves  ? '—  Cardwell's  Conf.  238.  274. 


DAILY  SERVICE. 


Again,  before  the  First  Rubric, 

%    '  The  Order  for  MORNING  PRAYER,  Daily 

THROUGHOUT  THE  YEAR.' 

Likewise, 

'  The  Order  for  EVENING  PRAYER,  Daily 

THROUGHOUT  THE  YEAR.' 

Daily  Prayer  is  also  implied  in  several  of  the 
Homilies. 

Still,  in  the  first  Liturgy  of  Ediv.  VI.  this 
injunction  seems  only  to  affect  those  who  have 
'  Cure  of  Souls  the  Rubric  of  that  Service  Book  thus 
reads : — 

'  Neither  that  any  man  shaft  he  bound  to  the  sayinq  of  them,  hut 
'  stick  as  from  time  to  time,  in  Cathedral  and  Collegiate  Churches, 
'Parish  Churches,  and  Chapels  to  the  same  annexed,  shall  serve  the 
'  Congregation!  (1559).— Keeling,  p.  xvii. 

92.— But  with  respect  to  the  desirability  or 
expediency  of  having  Daily  Services,  that  must  depend 
on  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  each  case.  Since 
the  time  of  the  Reformation  the  practice  has  never 
indeed  been  general ;  where  however  it  has  prevailed, 
and  a  Congregation  still  shows  its  appreciation  of  its 
importance  by  a  general  attendance,  the  Daily  Prayers 
could  not  justly  be  suspended.  But  to  introduce 
the  system  in  Parishes  that  have  never  witnessed  it 
before,  and  where  no  preparation  has  been  made  to 
ensure  a  Congregation ;  or  even  to  continue  the 
Service,  where  the  assemblage  has  dwindled  down 
to  but  one  or  two  individuals,  or,  it  may  be,  where 
there  is  none  beside  the  Officiating  Minister, — 
these  being  matters  of  opinion,  and  not  of  law, — 
the  Reader  is  referred  to  the  authorities  following, 
selected  from  amongst  many  who  have  expressed 
themselves  upon  the  subject.  Beginning  with  the 
earlier  divines  we  may  quote : — 

Abp.  Whitgift  (in  1585),  who  issued  '  Certain  Orders,'  the  first 
of  which  ran  thus: — 'Imprimis,  The  Order  appointed  in  the  Preface 
'of  the  Common  Book,  concerning  the  Dayly  reading  of  Publique 
'  Prayer,  shall  be  duly  observed  to  the  end  they  may  be  the  better 
'  acquainted  with  the  phrase  and  histories  of  the  Scriptures.' — 
Caudweel's  Doc.  Ann.  ii.  1. 


DAILY  PEAYEKS. 


339 


Abp.  Leioiiton  urges  '  that  the  Daily  Public  Prayer  in 
'Churches,  Morning  and  Evening,  with  reading  of  the  Scriptures, 
'be  used  where  it  can  be  had  conveniently,  and  the  people  be 
'exhorted  to  frequent  them.'—  Charge  of  1662  in  Whole  Works, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  552. 

Abp.  Sanckoft  (in  1688)  calls  upon  the  Bishops  to  see  that 
the  Clergy  '  perform  the  Daily  Office  publicly  (with  all  decency, 
'  affection,  and  gravity)  in  all  Market  and  other  great  Towns, 
'and  even  in  Villages  and  less  populous  places  bring  people  to 
'Public  Prayers  as  frequently  as  may  be,  especially  on  such 
'  days  and  at  such  times  as  the  Rubrics  and  Canons  appoint,  on 
'  Holy-days  and  their  Eves,  on  Ember,  and  Rogation-days,  on 
'  Wednesdays  and  Fridays  in  each  week,  especially  in  Advent  and 
'  Lent.' — Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  ii.  323. 

Bishop  Cosins  (oi.  1672)  remarks  on  this  direction  of  the 
Prayer  Book,— that  it  'requires  an  explanation  (against  them 
'  that  account  themselves  reasonably  letted  by  any  common  and 
'  ordinary  affairs  of  their  own),  whether  any  thing  but  sickness  or 
'  necessary  absence  abroad  shall  be  sufficient  to  excuse  them  from 
'  this  duty.'— Add.  Notes  in  Nicholl's  C.  P.  p.  67. 

Dean  Comber  (oi.  1699)  says, — 'As  we  are  not  excused  by,  so 
'  we  ought  not  fco  be  discouraged  at,  people's  slowness  in  coming 
'  to  Daily  Prayers ;  for  their  presence  is  indeed  a  comfort  to  us, 
'and  an  advantage  to  themselves;  but  their  absence  does  not 
'  hinder  the  success,  nor  should  it  obstruct  the  performance  of  our 
'  Prayers.'— 'Let  our  Congregation  be  great  or  small,  it  is  our  duty  to 
'  read  these  Prayers  daily.'— quoted  in  Bishop  of  London's  Charge, 
1842.  p.  35. 

Dr.  Nicholls  (06.  1712)  states,— that  this  Injunction  requires 
that  '  if  they  could  not  get  a  Congregation  at  Church,  they  should 

'use  the  Public  Forms  at  home  in  Family  Prayer.' — Com.  Pr. 

in  loco;  (also  quoted  in  Mant's  C.  P.).—'  We  are  all  bound,  and  all 
'  Priests  are  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  ilaily  to  repeat  and  say  the 

'  Public  Service  of  the  Church  Here's  a  command  that  binds 

'  us  even/  day  to  say  the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer.' — ib. 
Add.  Notes, p.  6. 

Bishop  Sparrow  (ob.  1685)  observes, — '  Besides  the  daily 
'private  devotions  of  every  pious  soul,  and  the  more  solemn 
'  sacrifices  upon  the  three  great  Feasts  of  the  year,  Almighty 
'  God  requires  a  daily  Public  Worship.'  (  p.  2.) — Rationale  in  loco. 

Wheatly  (oft.  1742)  says,— the  Church  of  England  'hath  taken 
'  care  to  enjoin  that  Public  Prayers  be  read  every  Morning  and 
'  Evening  daily  throughout  the  year ;  that  so  all  her  members 
'  may  have  opportunity  of  joining  in  Public  Worship  tmice  at  least 
'every  day.  But  to  make  the  duty  as  practicable  aud  easy  both  to 
'  the  Minister  and  people  as  possible,  she  has  left  the  determination 
'of  the  particular  hours  to  the  Ministers  that  officiate;  who, 
'  considering  every  one  his  own  and  his  people's  circumstances, 
'may  appoint  such  hours  for  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,  as 

'they  shall  judge  to  be  most  proper  and  convenient  But  if, 

'for  want  of  a  Congregation,  or  on  some  other  account,  he  cannot 

T 


340 


DAILY  PBATEBS. 


'  conveniently  read  them  in  the  Church ;  he  is  then  bound  to 
'to  say  them  in  the  Family  where  he  lives.'  (p.  80.) — Rat.  III.  of 
Com.  Pr. 

From  more  modern  authorities  may  be  quoted 
these  few  opinions  annexed : — 

The  Bishop  of  London  {Dr.  Blomfield)  with  respect  to  this 
Rubric  says :  — '  Of  the  reasonableness  of  the  hindrance,  which  may 
'  excuse  a  Clergyman  from  the  daily  celebration  of  Divine  Service, 
'  he  must  himself  be  the  judge,  subject  always  to  the  authority 
'  of  the  Bishop,  in  case  he  shall  see  fit  to  interpose  it,  and  to 
'  require  such  celebration.  In  many  cases  it  may  be  difficult  for 
'  one  Clergyman  to  perform  all  the  Services  appointed  by  the 
'  Church,  and  that  the  framers  of  the  Rubric  did  not  intend  to  insist 
'  upon  an  uninterrupted  daily  performance  of  Divine  Service, 
'  appears,  I  think,  from  the  direction  given  to  the  Curate,  that 
'  when  it  is  performed  he  shall  cause  a  Bell  to  be  tolled  a  convenient 
'  time  before,  to  give  the  people  notice.  But  it  is  quite  clear,  that 
'any  Clergyman  who  thinks  fit  to  comply  with  the  Rubric  in 
1  this  respect,  and  has  Daily  Prayers  in  his  Church,  is  justified, 
'  and  more  than  justified,  in  doing  so.'  {here  is  quoted  the  passage 
from  Dean  Comber  given  above ;  his  Lordship  then  proceeds).  '  In 
'  my  Primary  Charge  to  the  Clergy  of  this  Diocese,  in  speaking  of 
'  Matins,  I  expressed  a  wish  that  the  experiment  should  be  tried, 
'not  on  Wednesdays  or  Fridays  only,  ou  which  days  the  Litany 
'  might  still  be  used  at  11  o'clock,  but  on  every  day  except  Sunday, 
'  agreeably  to  the  practice  of  the  early  Church,  and  of  our  own 
'in  its  better  ages.  In  expressing  that  wish  I  had  in  view  the 
'  Parish  Churches  in  Toa-ns :  and  where  it  has  been  carried  into 
'  effect,  I  believe  that  a  considerable  number  of  persons  have  been 
'  found  to  profit  by  the  opportunities  so  afforded.  I  kuow  of  no 
'  reason  why  the  same  practice  should  not  be  resorted  to  in  Country 
'Parishes,  where  the  resident  Clergymen  are  desirous  of  giving 
'full  effect  to  the  Church's  intentions;  although  the  employments 
'  and  habits  of  our  rural  population  may  prevent  it,  for  a  time 
'  at  least,  from  producing  much  effect.'  {p.  34 — 36.) — Charge,  1842. 

The  Bishop  of  Kxeteb  {Dr.  Phillpotts)  observes :  — '  That 
'  Liturgy  was  prepared,  those  Rubrics  were  designed,  not  to 
'  regulate  the  Service  of  one  day  only  in  the  week,  but  of  every 

'day.   Whose  fault  is  it,  that  its  use  is  commonly  so  limited?  

'  On  this  matter,  however,  I  do  not  pretend  to  prescribe  to  you 
'  any  rule.    It  must  be  left  to  your  own  judgment,  and  your  own 

'  feeling  In  Country  Parishes  it  may  not  be  easy  to  gather  a 

'  Congregation,  yet  often,  even  there,  the  aged,  the  infirm,  and 
'  some  of  those  whose  station  exempts  them  from  constant 
'  occupation,  might  be  brought  gladly  to  avail  themselves  of  the 
'  more  frequent  ministrations  of  their  Pastor.' — Charge  of  1842. 

The  Bishop  of  Worcester  {Dr.  Pepys)  states:— 'I  must 
'  express  my  doubts,  whether  the  compilers  of  our  Liturgy  ever 
'  contemplated  the  performance  of  a  Daily  Service  generally  in  the 
'  Parochial  Churches  of  the  Kingdom.  Such  a  Service  is,  indeed, 
'  provided  for  in  the  Prayer  Book,  but  then  it  must  be  recollected 
'  that  it  was  necessary  to  provide  in  the  Prayer  Book  for  the 


DAILY  PEAYEE8. 


311 


'  Service  in  Cathedrals,  as  well  as  for  that  in  Parochial  Churches  of 
'the  country.  In  the  former  the  Daily  Service  is  still  performed: 
'  and  as  Cathedrals  are  usually  situated  in  large  Towns,  it  is 
'  probable  that  out  of  a  considerable  population  many  may  be  found 
'to  profit  by  it;  this,  however,  is,  ordinarily,  not  the  case  in  the 
'country,  and  it  maybe  doubted  whether  much  spiritual  benefit 
'  would  be  derived  from  the  performance  of  a  Daily  Service,  where 
'  the  various  occupations  of  the  inhabitants  of  a  Parish  prevented 
'  the  chance  of  a  Congregation.  The  Preface  to  the  Prayer  Book, 
'  indeed  directs  that  all  Priests  and  Deacons  are  to  say,  daily, 
'  the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,  either  privately  or  openly.  It 
'  is  clear,  therefore,  that  the  option  is  afforded  them.  How  far  they 
'  comply  with  this  direction,  by  reading  the  Daily  Service  privately, 

'  is  a  matter  which,  of  course,  can  be  only  known  to  themselves  

'  We  cannot  be  too  much  engaged  in  such  duties,  and  they  may  be 
'  performed,  no  doubt,  with  much  spiritual  advantage  by  such  of 
'  the  Clergy  as  have  the  population  of  large  Towns  committed 
'  to  their  charge ;  but  when  I  consider  the  onerous  duties  which 

'  now  devolve  upon  the  clergy,  &c  I  could  not  bring  myself 

'  to  impose  upon  those,  whose  important  functions  are  already 
'so  ill-requited,  the  additional  burden  of  a  Daily  Service.' 
(p.  14— 17.)— Charge,  1842. 

The  late  Bishop  of  Down  &  Connor,  &c.  (Dr.  Mant) 
remarks :—' Our  people  cannot  be  regarded,  as  so  well  trained  in 
'  the  knowledge  of  God,  and  so  much  inflamed  with  the  love  of 
'His  true  religion,  as  not  to  require  "the  dnihj  hearing  of  Holy 
'  Scripture  read  in  the  Church."  Among  the  many  motives  which 
'might  be  alleged  for  observing  the  Church's  rule  of  Daily  Service, 
'this  is  one:  and  if  any  of  you  be  placed  in  a  situation,  where 


'is  always  so,)  this  may  operate  as  one  inducement  with  you  to  the 
'  practice.'  (  p.  94.) — Hor  Lit. 

Dk.  Hook  observes  in  respect  of  this  Rubric  :  — '  As  this  is 
'  not  only  a  direction  of  the  Church,  but  also  part  of  an  Act  of 
'  Parliament,  any  Parishioners  desirous  of  attending  Daily  Prayers 
'  might  compel  the  Clergyman  to  officiate,  by  bringing  an  action 
'  against  him,  as  well  as  by  complaining  to  the'Bishop.  For  this,  of 
'  course,  there  can  seldom  be  any  necessity,  as  most  of  the  Clergy 
1  would  be  too  happy  to  officiate  if  they  could  secure  the  attendance 
'  of  two  or  three  of  their  Parishioners.  By  the  general  practice 
'of  the  Clergy,  it  seems  to  be  decided  that  they  are  to  say  the 
'  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  in  private,  if  they  cannot  obtain  a 
'  Congregation ;  though  even  under  those  circumstances  the  letter 
'  of  the  Rubric  seems  to  direct  them  to  say  the  Offices  at  Church,  if 
'  possible.' — Ch.  Diet.  Art.  '  Daily  Prayers  ' 

Eev.  J.  Jebb,  speaking  of  Cathedral  Service,  says: — 'As  the 
'  Church  has  enjoined  the  daily  use  of  Morning  and  Evening 
'  Prayer,  and  as  she  has  made  no  material  difference  between  their 
'  Week-dag  and  Holy-day  use,  (except  in  some  particulars,  that 
'  tend  to  edification,  and  such  as  the  greater  solemnity  of  certain 
'  Festivals  may  require,)  so  no  material  difference  should  be  made 
'in  the  principle  of  its  performance,  though  of  course  a  greater 
'  fulness  should  be  given  to  the  Holy-Day  Service  And  though 


'  the 


of  such  Service 


E  2 


342 


DAILY  PHAYKRS. 


'  the  Week-Jay  is  not  as  holy  as  the  Sunday,  yet  to  those  whose 
4  duty  or  privilege  it  is  to  attend  the  Daily  Prayers,  the  Sanctuary 

'  and  the  Service  celehrated  there  are  equally  holy  at  all  times  

'  There  is  a  reason  of  indestructible  obligation  for  the  maintenance 
'  of  the  Daily  Service,  in  all  its  proprieties,  so  far  as  circumstances 
'  will  allow.  In  country  Parishes  this  is  generally  impossible.  But 
'  in  all  endowed  Choirs,  it  was  the  original  intention,  and  it  is  the 
'  general  practice  (the  exceptions  are  of  confessedly  modern  date) 
'  to  perform  the  whole  Matins  and  Evensong  daily.'  (p.  185, 186.)— 
Choral  Service. 

Rev.  E.  Monro,  speaking  of  Daily  Service,  remarks: — 'One 
'  foremost  difficulty  is,  the  unlikelihood  of  attendance,  aDd  the  fact 
'  of  so  many  instances  of  Daily  Prayer  existing  with  very  thin 

'  Congregations  In  very  many  cases  the  hours  are  such  that 

'  the  poor  cannot  attend,  or,  which  is  far  oftener  the  reason,  no 
'attention  has  been  paid  to  them  to  induce  them  to  use  these 

'  means  of  grace  (  p.  67)  Why  in  many  cases  the  numbers  are 

'  very  small,  is,  that  the  hours  chosen  for  it  are  unsuitable  and 
'  inconvenient.'  {p.  68.) — Parochial  Work. 

Rev.  J.  C.  Robertson  observes:  — 'Let  me  state  clearly,  that 
'  I  am  fully  convinced  of  the  desirableness  of  daily  Public  Prayer, 
'  and  rejoice  to  think  that  our  people  are  becoming  prepared  for 
'  it,  and  that  it  is  growing  more  general.  In  what  follows,  I  only 
'  wish  to  establish  ou  historical  evidence  the  principle  that  we  are 
'  at  liberty  to  use  caution  and  consult  expediency  in  striving  after 

'  the  fulfilment  of  our  Church's  intentions  in  this  respect  it 

'  is,  as  I  purpose  to  shew,  a  mere  imagination  to  suppose  that 
'Daily  Service  was  ever  general  in  England  since  the  Reformation; 
'  or  that  in  the  times  of  our  most  revered  divines,  Service  was 

'performed  in  Churches  without  a  Congregation.'  (p.  40,  41.)  

Where  it  does  exist,  however,  he  strongly  objects  to  its  being 
'suffered  to  drop,  adding: — 'If  a  Clergyman  find  in  his  Parish  a 
'  Daily  Service,  or  an  observation  of  Holy-days,  or  Litany-days,  he 
'  will  incur  just  suspicion  and  blame  should  he  substitute  for  these, 
'  Prayers  and  Lecture  on  Tuesday  or  Thursday  Evenings,  or  a 
'  system  of  Household -lecturing,  or  should  he  confine  the  Public 
'  Service  in  his  Church  to  the  Lord's-day.'  (p.  337.)— How  shall  we 
Conform  to  the  Lit. 

Rev.  J.  Sandford  is  of  opinion  that—'  The  revival  of  Daily 
'Public  Praijer  is  a  subject  which  must  be  interesting  to  pious 
'  Churchmen.  And  when  viewed  dispassionately,  and  apart  from 
'  questions  with  which  it  has  been  involved,  its  desirableness  can 

'scarcely  be  disputed.'  (p.  247)  -Many  of  its  advocates  have 

'  enforced  it,  rather  on  the  authority  of  a  Rubric,  than  on  the 
'  ground  of  religious  obligation,  or  of  the  blessings  it  imparts.' 

(p.  248)  '  The  practicability  of  such  a  Service  must,  however, 

'  be  determined  by  circumstances,  and  by  the  hold  which  the 
'  Parochial  Minister  possesses  on  the  minds  of  his  people.  A  hasty 
'  recurrence  to  practices  which,  however  excellent,  have  been  long 

'  discontinued,  is  not  likely  to  do  good  There  are  doubtless, 

'  many  instances  in  which  a  Clergyman,  who  is  faithful  and  affec- 
'  tionato  in  his  public  and  private  Ministrations,  might  judiciously 
'revive  the  Daily  Service.'  (p.  250.) — Paruchialia. 


DAILY  PRAYEBS. 


343 


Rbv.  E.  Scobell  says:—'  Now  taking  the  Act,  and  the  Rubrics, 
'  and  the  Canon  together,  it  is  evident,  that  daily  Morning  and 
'  livening  Prayer  indeed  is  contemplated  throughout  the  year;  but 
'in  different  ways;  publicly  in  tho  Church  on  certain  specified  days, 
'about  thirty  in  number  beside  tho  Sundays,  and  on  all  other  days 
'  privately  at  home :  and  this  latter,  not  in  any  way  laid  as  a  burden 
'  or  a  snare  upon  the  conscience  of  any  one,  but  to  the  Luity 
'  permissively  and  hopefully;  and  although  to  tho  Clergy  more 
'distinctly,  yet  with  every  fair  allowance,  under  varying  circum- 
'  stances,  both  for  their  personal  accommodation  and  prudent 

'judgment  The  Clergy,  whether  in  office  or  not,  are  directed  to 

'say  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  every  day,  privately  on  private 
'days,  openly  in  Church  ou  the  public  ones;  unless  "openly" 
'  further  include  to  them  the  option  of  reading  it  to  their  Families 

'in  their  domestic  oratories;  but  in  each  of  these,  severally, 

'  with  a  proviso,  that  their  health  permit,  and  that  no  other 
'  hindrance,  without  saying  what,  urge  them  to  intermit  it.  An 
'  Officiating  Clergyman  has  a  further  direction,  viz.  that  on  all 
'  common  days  he  is  to  take  the  opportunity  in  saying  his  private 
'  and  personal  Matins  and  Vespers,  of  saying  them  in  the  Parochial 
'  Church  or  Chapel,  at  his  own  hour  from  time  to  time,  and  without 
'any  one  necessarily  being  present  with  him,  his  Prayer  being 
'private  in  its  first  intention:  but  at  the  same  time  it  is  provided, 
'  with  a  kind  and  secondary  purpose,  that  ho  shall  not  begin  these 
'  his  private  Prayers,  without  first  causing  a  Bell,  to  be  rung,  in 
'order  to  apprize  the  people  in  the  Village,  that  he  is  there 
'  present,  and  about  to  be  so  occupied  at  that  time,  so  that,  thus, 
'  those  who  happen  to  reside  within  hearing  and  feel  inclined, 
'  (and  this  may  be  so  from  many  causes;  still,  no  order  is  given,) 
'  may  come  in,  and  pray  with  him.  But  all  this  is  precarious,  they 
'  cannot  depend  on  it;  the  Service  is  not  established;  since  even  to 
'the  Curate  the  rule  is  not  absolute:  if  he  is  from  home  ever  so 
'often,  or  ever  so  long,  it  is  then  quite  contingent,  and  not  binding 
'  upon  him  in  any  way ;  or  if  he  has  any  other  reasonable  cause  to 

•  assign,  and  in  this  way  the  very  smallncss  of  Congregations  may 
'  be  one,  the  habit  is  allowed  to  stand  over, — in  other  words,  it  is 
'  with  a  permission  and  a  direction  to  do  it,  if  it  suits  him ;  but  with 
'  prospective  precaution,  and  laying  no  undue  yoke  or  restraint, 
'either  upon  his  convenience,  or  conscientious  discretion.'  (p. 
28— 30.)— Thoughts  on  Ch.  Sub. 

Mr.  Ckipps  (Barrister-at- Lam),  in  arguing  the  question, 
whether  under  this  Rubric,  the  Bishop  could  enforce  Daily  Service, 
says: — 'There  appears  to  be  little  difficulty  in  arriving  at  the 
'  conclusion  that  he  could  not.  And  that,  however  desirable  it  may 
'be  in  places  where  a  sufficient  Congregation  could  be  collected 
'  that  Daily  Service  should  be  performed,  yet  that  the  only  times  at 
'  which  its  performance  could  legally  be  enforced,  are  such  times 

'  as  are  specified  in  the  Canon  (the  14th)  and  the  Statutes  (see 

'postea). ..  .There  is  no  direction  in  the  Rubric,  nor  can  any 
'  inference  be  drawn  from  it,  that  this  {Common  Prayer)  was  to  be 
'  used  daily  in  every  Church. ..  .The  directions  of  the  Canon  (14th) 
'  may  be  deemed  decisive  of  the  question  No  action  for  damages 

•  will  lie  against  a  Minister  fur  rclusing  to  celebrate  Divine  Service.' 
(  o  Rep.  72  b)— Laws  Rel.  to  Church  and  Clergy,  (p.  598-9). 


344 


DAILY  PEAYEES. 


Mr.  Stephens  {Barrister-at-Law~),  is  of  a  contrary  opinion  to 
the  last  quoted  author:  he  says:...' To  satisfy  the  language  of 
'  the  Rubric,  it  will  not  suffice  for  "  the  Curate  that  ministreth 
'in  any  Church  or  Chapel"  to  say  privately  the  Morning  and 
'  Evening  Prayer  daily — he  is  bound  in  the  eye  of  the  Law  to 
4  say  the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  publicly  in  his  Church  or 
'  Chapel  where  he  ministreth,  except  he  be  prevented  by  occasional 
'  absence  or  other  reasonable  hindrance;— and  if  he  omit  to  comply 
'  with  this  Rubric  he  will  be  guilty  of  a  breach  of  the  Laws 
'  Ecclesiastical.  This  leads  to  the  further  remark,  which  it  may  be 
'  well  for  every  Curate  who  "  ministreth  "  in  any  Parish  Church  or 
'  Chapel  to  consider,  that  if  any  such  Curate  be  requested  by  any 
'two  or  three  of  the  Parishioners  to  say  Morning  and  Evening 
'  Prayers  daily  in  the  Church  or  Chapel,  and  he  refuse  or  neglect 
'  to  comply  with  the  request,  he  will  bring  himself  within  the 
'  Church  Discipline  Act  (3  &  4  Vict.  c.  85*),  and  his  Bishop  on  their 
'  complaint  will  have  no  alternative  but  to  compel  him  to  obey  the 
'Rubric,  it  being  part  of  the  Statute  Law  of  the  land.'  (».  306.) — 
Com.  Pr.  E.  H.  S. 

The  Quarterly  Review,  after  commenting  upon  the  Bishop 
of  London's  Charge  of  1842  (quoted  above)  on  this  head,  adds: — 
J  We  need  not  enter  into  a  detail  of  the  various  causes  that  would 
'  naturally  tend  to  interfere  with  a  regular  attendance  of  any,  but 
'especially  of  a  rural  Congregation,  at  daily  Week-day  Services, 
'The  Canons  (1603,  following  in  this  Queen  Elizabeth's  '  Injunc- 
'tions,'  1559,  §  48.)  seem  not  to  contemplate  a  compliance  with  the 

'Rubric  as  to  Week-day  Services  Indeed  the  whole  tenor  of 

'  this  Canon  (15th),  and  of  the  Injunction  on  which  it  is  founded, 
'  directing  the  Minuiter — "  to  resort  to  the  Church  or  Chapal  on 
'  Wednesdays  and  Fridays  weekly,  though  they  be  not  Holydays," — 
'  seems  quite  inconsistent  with  a  presumed  attendance  there" every 
'  day  in  the  week.... how,  we  ask,  can  it  be  reasonably  supposed 
'that  the  Injunction  intended,  or  that  the  Canon  contemplates, 
'  that  there  should  be  a  full,  regular,  and  invariable  Daily  Service 
'every  Morning  and  Evening  in  the  year  ?  The  Rubric  clearly 
'  directs  that  there  should — the  Canon  as  clearly,  we  think,  infers 

'  that  there  slwuld  not  For  our  own  part  we  confess  that  we 

'  should  gladly  compound  for  a  due  execution  of  the  Canon — that 
'  is,  for  a  Congregation  of  the  immediate  neighbours  to  the  Litany 
'on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays;  and  a  general  assemblage  of  "all 
'  manner  of  persons"  to  the  full  Services  of  the  Parish  Church  on 
'  the  Sundays,  and  greater  Holy-davs.  This,  we  trust,  is  practicable 
'  &c.'  (p.  249— 52.)— No.  cxliii.  May  1843. 

93. — This  diversity  of  opinion  will  not,  it  is  to  be 
feared,  encourage  the  expectation  of  any  general  con- 
formity being  arrived  at  with  respect  to  the  performance 
of '  Daily  Prayers '  in  our  Churches  ;  the  desire  to  make 
the  attempt  must  therefore  develope  itself  with  great 


*  Doubtlessly  this  is  a  misprint  for  '  c.  86.' 


SUNDAY  AND  HOLY-DAT  SEEVICES. 


345 


precaution,  and  ought  not  to  be  undertaken  without 
the  previous  assurance  of  having  a  Congregation,  nor 
without  the  sanction  of  the  Bishop  so  as  to  provide 
against  the  objection  of  dissentients.  In  such  a  pro- 
ceeding, above  every  other  consideration,  the  Apostolic 
rule  must  not  be  forgotten  by  the  Officiating  Minister, 
"  Let  all  things  be  done  unto  edifying."  And  the 
Parishioners  themselves  should  not  have  cause  to  en- 
tertain any  other  idea  than  the  one  inculcated  by 
St  Paul  that,  "  We  do  all  things,  dearly  beloved,  for 
your  edifying."  With  respect  to  the  Sunday,  and 
Holy-day  Services,  however,  we  shall  have  directions 
more  definite. 

The  Sunday  and  Holy-day  Services. 


of  the  Sunday,  as  well  as  the  Divine  Services  of  other 
Holy-days,  are  free  from  that  ambiguity  and  uncer- 
tainty with  which  the  Rubrics  prescribing  public 
Daily  Prayers  are  invested.  The  Sunday,  and  other 
Holy-day  Services,  are  directed  to  be  performed  both 
by  Canon,  and  Statute  Law;  and  the  omission  of 
either  the  Mobning,  or  Evening  Seeyice,  is  not 
permitted  without  the  sanction  of  the  Bishop. 

95. — First,  these  Days  are  appointed  to  be  kept 
holy.  By  the  Canon,  Sundays,  and  other  Holy-days  are 
to  be  religiously  kept. — '  All  manner  of  persons  within  the  Church  of 
'  England  shall  from  henceforth  celebrate  and  keep  the  Lord's 
'Day,  commonly  called  Sunday,  and  other  Holy-Days,  accord- 
'  ing  to  God's  holy  will  and  pleasure,  and  the  Orders  of  the 
'  Church  of  England  prescribed  in  that  behalf;  that  is,  in  hearing 
'  the  Word  of  God  read  and  taught;  in  private  and  public  Prayers; 
'  in  acknowledging  their  offences  to  God,  and  amendment  of  the 
'same;  in  reconciling  themselves  charitably  to  their  neighbours, 
'  where  displeasure  hath  been;  in  oftentimes  receiving  the  Com- 
'munion  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ;  in  visiting  of  the 
'Poor  and  Sick;  using  all  godly  and  sober  conversation.' — 
'Canon  13. 


94. — The  regulati) 


the  Public  Worship 


In  the  next  place,  the  'Divine  Service'  as  pre- 
scribed in  the  Lituegy  is  to  be  used :  and  Com- 
mon Peayee  is  to  be  said  on  Sundays,  other  Holy- 


346  TIIE   SEEVICES  ON  XUE  SUNDAYS, 


days,  and  their  Eves. — '  The  Common  Prayer  shall  be  6aid  or  sung 
'  distinctly  and  reverently  upon  such  days  as  are  appointed 
'  to  be  kept  holy  by  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  their 
'  Eves,  and  at  convenient  and  usual  times  of  those  days,  and  in 
'such  place  of  every  Church  as  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  or 
'  Ecclesiastical  Ordinary  of  the  place,  shall  think  meet  for  the 
'  largeness  or  straitness  of  the  same,  so  as  the  people  may  be 
'most  edified.' — Canon  14. 

No  Beneficed  Clergyman  having  '  Cure  of  Souls,' 
nor  Curate,  Lecturer,  or  Eeader,  is  exempted  from 
reading  the  Common  Prayers  of  the  Church.  By 
every  Ministee  are  the  Morning  and  Evening  Services 
to  be  read,  on  two  several  Sundays  twice  in  every  year 
at  the  least : — '  Every  Minister  being  possessed  of  s 
'  Benefice  that  hath  Cure  and  Charge  of  Souls,  although  he 
'  chiefly  attend  to  Preaching,  and  hath  a  Curate  under  him  to 
'  execute  the  other  Duties  which  are  to  be  performed  for  him  in  the 
'  Church ;  and  likewise  every  other  Stipendiary  Preacher  that 
'  readeth  any  Lecture,  or  Catechizeth,  or  Preacheth  in  any 
'  Church  or  Chapel,  shall  twice  at  the  least  in  every  year  read 
'  himself  the  Divine  Service  upon  two  several  Sundays  publicly, 
'  and  at  the  usual  times,  both  in  the  forenoon  and  afternoon,  in  the 
'  Church  which  he  so  possesscth,  or  where  he  readeth,  catechizeth, 
'  or  preacheth,  as  aforesaid ;  and  shall  likewise  as  often  in  every 
'  year  administer  the  Sacraments  of  Baptism,  if  there  be  any  to 
'  be  baptized,  and  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  such  Manner  and 
'  Form,  and  with  the  observation  of  all  such  Rites  and  Ceremonies 
'  as  are  prescribed  by  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  in  that  behalf; 
'  which  if  he  do  not  accordingly  perform,  then  shall  he  that 
'  is  possessed  of  a  Benefice  (as  before)  be  suspended  ;  and  he  that 
'  is  but  a  Header,  Preacher,  or  Catechizer,  be  removed  from  bis 
'  place  by  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  until  he  or  they  shall  submit 
'themselves  to  perform  all  the  said  Duties,  In  such  manner  and 
'  sort  as  before  is  prescribed.' — Canon  56. 

96. — The  Statute  Law  upon  these  points  is  more 
definite  and  precise,  as  will  now  be  seen — ■ 

Morning,  and  Evening,  Pbayebs  both,  are  to  be 
read  upon  every  Sunday,  and  other  Holy-day,  in  every 

Church,  Sfc. — '  Be  it  enacted  that  the  Morning 

'  and  Evening  Prayers  therein  (in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer) 
'  contained,  shall,  upon  every  Lords  Day,  and  upon  all  other  days 
'  and  occasions,  and  at  the  times  therein  appointed,  be  openly  and 
'  solemnly  read  by  all  and  every  Minister  or  Curate,  in  every 
'  Church,  Chapel,  or  other  place  of  Public  Worship  within  this 
'  Realm  of  England,  and  places  aforesaid.' — 13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4. 
s.  2. 

Necessarily  ly  Besident  Incumbents. — Where  an 
Incumbent  is  assisted  by  one  or  more  Curates,  this 
duty  is  not  allowed  to  be  executed  by  deputy  entirely, 


AND  ON  THE  HOLY-DATS. 


347 


but  the  Incumbent  himself  is  still  bound  to  perform 
the  Divine  Services  once  at  least  in  every  month,  under 
Penalty  of  £5  ;  unless  prevented  by  lawful  impedi- 
ment:—  'In  nil  places  where  the  proper  Incumbent  of  any  Par- 
'  sonage  or  Vicarage,  or  Benefice  with  cure,  doth  reside  on  his 
'  Living,  and  keep  a  Curate,  the  Incumbent  himself  in  person  (not 
'  having  some  lawful  impediment  to  be  allowed  by  the  Ordinary 
'  of  the  place)  shall  once  (at  least)  in  every  month,  openly  and 
'  publicly  read  the  Common  Pbayeiis  and  Service  in  and  by  the 
'  said  Book  prescribed,  and  (if  there  be  occasion),  administereacb. 
'of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  of  the  Church,  in  the  Parish 
'  Church  or  Chapel,  of  or  belonging  to  the  same  Parsonage, 
'  Vicarage,  or  Benefice,  in  such  Order,  Manner,  and  Form,  as  in 
'  and  by  the  said  Book  is  appointed ;  upon  pain  to  forfeit  the  sum 
'  of  £b  to  the  use  of  the  Poor  of  the  Parish  for  every  offence, 
'  upon  conviction  by  confession,  or  proof  of  two  credible  witnesses, 
'  upon  oath  before  two  Justices  of  the  Peace. . .  .and  in  default  of 
'payment  within  10  days,  to  be  levied  by  distress...  by  the 
'  warrant  of  the  said  Justices,  by  the  Churchwardens  or  Over- 

'  seers  of  the  Poor  rendering  the  surplusage  to  the  party.' — 

13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  7. 

97. — By  the  above  Canons,  and  Enactments,  two 
Services  are  required  to  be  performed  upon  every 
Sunday,  and  every  Holy-day  throughout  tbe  year. 
Custom  has  conformed  generally  speaking  to  the 
injunctions  respecting  the  Sunday,  but  in  most 
instances  it  has  intermitted  the  Services  on  the  Holy- 
days :  the  latter  point  will  be  adverted  to  presently. 
The  Clergy,  however,  are  not  at  liberty  to  neglect 
or  relax  in  any  prescribed  Duty  at  their  own  pleasure, 
or  convenience.  It  is  necessary  that  the  sanction  of 
the  Bishop  be  first  procured,  as  was  decided  by  Sir 
Win.  Scott  in  the  case  of  Bennett  v.  Bonaker,  whose 
judgment,  as  follows,  is  quoted  in  several  treatises  on 
Ecclesiastical  Law  (by  Cripps,  Rogers,  Stephens,  and 
others.). 

'  By  the  general  law,  the  Church  Service,  according  to  the 
'  Form  prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  is  to  be 
'  regularly  performed  every  Sunday  in  the  Morning  and  Evening. 
'  If  less  duty  is  required,  any  relaxation  must  be  adopted,  with 
'  the  approbation  of  the  Diocesan,  who  is  to  judge  of  the  degree  to 
'be  allowed;  and  the  Minister  must  strictly  adhere  to  the  terms 
'  prescribed,  and  not  vary  them  for  his  own  convenience. . .  .It  is 
'  not  likely,  nor  would  it  be  proper,  that  the  Parish  should  com- 
'  plain  of  occasional  accidental  omissions.' — (1  Hagg.  Eccl.  25). 

%*  Any  stidtlen  attack  of  illness,  or  other  unexpected  emer- 
gency, must  needs  be  admitted  as  sufficient  excuse  for  the  suspen- 


348  A  THIRD  SEEVICE  ON  SUNDAYS. 


sion  of  a  Morning,  or  Evening  'Duty.'  It  is  to  such  casualties 
probably  that  the  concluding  remark  in  Sir  Wm.  Scott's  judgment 
refers. 

The  Bishop  of  London,  speaking  on  the  subject,  enjoins, — 
1  that  no  Clergyman,  serving  only  one  Church,  omit  either  Morning 
'  or  Evening  Service  on  Sundays.'  {p.  66.) — Charge,  184-'. 

98.  — With  respect  to  the  number  of  Services  to  be 
performed  on  the  Sunday,  this  is  by  Statute  Law 
made  dependent  upon  the  discretion  of  the  Bishop 
of  the  Diocese;  and,  it  may  be  added,  the  Bishop 
can  require  two  full  Services  upon  every  Sunday 
in  every  Parish,  and  Chapelry  of  his  Diocese,  where 
the  Benefice  is  composed  of  two  or  more  Parishes,  &c. 
and  the  value  of  such  Parish,  or  Chapelry,  amounts  to 
£150.  per  annum,  and  the  Population  reaches  to  400 
persons.  Thus : — 

'  It  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Bishop  in  his  discretion,  to  order 
'  that  there  shall  be  two  full  Services,  each  of  such  Services,  if  the 
'  Bishop  shall  so  direct,  to  include  a  Sermon  or  Lecture  on  every 
'  Sunday  throughout  the  year,  or  any  part  thereof,  in  the  Church 
'  or  Chapel  of  every  or  any  Benefice  within  his  Diocese,  whatever 
'may  be  the  annual  value  of  the  population  thereof;  and  also 
'in  the  Church  or  Chapel  of  every  Parish  or  Chapelry,  where  a 
'  Benefice  is  composed  of  two  or  more  Parishes  or  Chapelries,  in 
'  which  there  shall  be  a  Church  or  Chapel,  if  the  annual  value  of 
'  the  Benefice  arising  from  that  Parish  or  Chapelry  shall  amount 
'  to  £150,  and  the  population  of  that  Parish  or  Chapelry  shall 
'  amount  to  400  persons.' — I  &  2  Vict.  c.  106.  s.  80.  (This  statute 
I  &  2  Vict,  repeals  that  of  57  Geo.  III.  c.  99,  which  legislated  on 
this  same  subject.) 

99.  — Also  in  some  cases  a  Third  Service. — Where 
the  Church  room  is  insufficient  for  the  population,  the 
Bishop  may  order  a  Third  Service,  and  require  a 
Curate  to  be  appointed,  who  shall  be  paid  by  the 
Letting  of  the  Pews  for  this  additional  Service,  or 
by  Subscription  :  in  failure  thereof  within  six  months, 
the  Bishop  himself  may  appoint : — 

'  In  any  Parish  or  Extra-Parochial  place  in  which  it  shall 
'  appear  to  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  that  the  Churches  or 
'  Chapels  now  existing,  or  which  may  be  built  or  provided  under 
'  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  do  not  or  will  not  afford 
'  svfficient  accommodation  for  the  Parishioners  or  inhabitants 

'  thereof  to  attend  Divine  Service  and  in  which  such 

'  Bishop  shall  be  of  opinion  that  it  is  expedient  that  additional 
'  accommodation  should  be  provided  for  such  purpose,  and  that 
'  such  purpose  would  be  answered  by  the  celebration  on  Sundays, 
'  and  on  the  great  Festivals,  of  a  third  or  additional  Divine 


A  THIBD  SEEVICE  ON  SUNDAYS.  349 


'Service,  being  either  the  Morning  or  Evening  Service  as 

'  shall  be  directed  bj-  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  with  a  Sermon, 
'  in  the  Churches  or  Chapels  existing  at  the  time  of  passiug'.this 
'  Act,  or  by  the  celebration  of  a  third  or  additional  Service  as 
'aforesaid,  with  a  third  Sermon,  in  any  Church  or  Chapel  which 
1  may  be  built  or  provided  under  any  of  the  provisions  of  this 
'Act,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  such  Bishop  to  require  the  Incumbent 
'  of  everv  such  Parish,  District  Parish,  or  Extra- Parochial  place, 
'  to  nominate  to  him  a  proper  person  to  be  licensed  to  serve  as  a 
'Cokate  in  the  existing  Church  or  Chapels  for  the  performance 
'  of  such  additional  or  third  Service  with  a  Sermon,  or  in  any 
'  Church  or  Chapel  which  may  be  built  or  provided  as  aforesaid, 
'  for  the  performance  of  such  additional  or  third  Service  with  a 
'third  Sermon;  and  such  Incumbent  shall,  within  six  months 
'  after  such  requisition,  nominate  such  Curate  to  the  Bishop  to 
'be  licensed;  and  in  default  of  such  nomination,  such  Bishop  is 
'  hereby  empowered  to  nominate  and  license  a  proper  Curate  for 
'the  purpose  aforesaid;  and  the  said  Bishop  is  hereby  em- 
'  powered  to  require  the  Churchwardens  of  every  such  Church 
'or  Chapel  to  let  for  the  said  additional  Service  such  proportion 
'  of  the  Pews  of  such  Church  or  Chapel,  not  being  a  Pew  held  by 
'faculty  or  prescription,  and  at  such  rates,  as  in  the  opinion  of 
'such  Bishop  shall  be  sufficient  to  afford  a  competent  salary  to 
'  such  Curate  ;  and  such  Churchwardens  are  hereby  empowered 
'  and  required  so  to  let  the  same,  and  to  raise  and  levy,  in  the 
'manner  directed  by  this  Act,  the  rents  from  the  persons  who 
'  may  take  the  Pew's,  reserving  such  number  of  sittings  as  free- 
'  seats  as  to  such  Bishop  shall  appear  expedient,  not  being  less 
'  than  one  fourth  ;  provided  always  that  if,  in  any  Parish,  Dis- 
'  trict-Parish,  or  place  as  aforesaid,  any  number  of  persons  shall 
'  represent  to  such  Bishop  that  they  are  willing  to  provide  by 
'  subscription  such  an  annual  sum  as  may  be  sufficient  to  afford  a 
'competent  salary  to  a  Curate  for  the  performance  of  such 
'  additional  Service  with  a  third  Sermon,  and  if  the  Bishop  shall 
'  be  of  opinion  that  such  mode  of  providing  a  salary  for  such 
'  Curate  is  more  expedient  than  the  raising  of  such  salary  by 
'  Pew  rents,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  such  Bishop,  and  he  is  hereby 
'  empowered,  to  require  the  Incumbent  of  such  Church  or  Chapel 
'  to  nominate  a  Curate  to  him  as  aforesaid,  and  in  default  to 
'appoint  a  Curate  himself:  provided  always,  that  such  Curate 
'  so  nominated  and  licensed  for  the  performance  of  such  third 
'  Service  as  aforesaid,  shall  be  subject  to  all  jurisdiction,  laws, 
'  statutes,  and  provisions,  to  which  Stipendiary  Curates  are 
'  subject,  except  so  far  as  relates  to  the  amount  of  salary,  and 
'  the  mode  of  raising  and  paying  the  same,  which  shall  be  regu- 
'lated  according  to  the  provisions  of  this  act.' — 58  Geo.  III. 
c.  45.  3.  65. 

If  by  Subscription,  the  next  Section  provides  — '  That 
'  in  case  of  such  provision  for  the  performance  of  an  additional 
'or  Third  Service  being  made  by  Subscription,  that  every 
'person  so  subscribing,  being  a  Parishioner,  shall  have  the 
'  option  of  any  Pew  in  such  Church  or  Chapel,  not  being  a  Pew 
'  held  by  faculty  or  prescription,  for  the  time  of  such  additional 
'Service  and  Sermon,  according  to  the  amount  of  his  or  their 
'  respective  subscriptions,  or,  in  case  of  equality  of  the  sums  sub- 


350 


SEIiVINO  ONLY  TWO  BENEFICES. 


'  scribed,  according  to  the  date  of  his  or  their  Subscriptions,  and 
'  shall  coutinue  to  hold  such  Pew  so  long  as  he  or  they  shall  pay 
'such  subscription,  and  no  longer:  provided  also,  that  if  at  any 
'  future  time  the  whole  amount  of  such  subscription  shall  fail 
'  to  produce  such  a  sura  as  shall  be  deemed  by  such  Bishop  a 
'  competent  salary  for  such  Curate,  such  Bishop  shall  and  may 
'  in  such  case  authorize  and  require  the  Churchwardens  to  raise 
'  by  letting  a  proportion  of  the  Pews  as  aforesaid,  such  sum  or 
'  further  sums  as  may  be  sufficient  for  making  up  the  said 
'salary:  provided  always,  that  the  salary  to  be  given  to  such 
'  Curate  for  the  performance  of  the  said  additional  Service  with 
'  Sermon,  shall  in  no  case,  except  when  raised  entirely  by  Sub- 
'  scription,  exceed  the  sum  of  £80.  per  anuum.' —  ib.  Sect.  66. 

100.  — On  this  subject  it  may  be  permitted  to  re- 
mark from  the  results  of  actual  experience,  that  no 
Clergyman  ought  to  attempt  to  undertake  single-hand- 
ed three  full  Services  every  Sunday,  unless  he  possess 
more  than  ordinary  physical  powers,  as  well  as  con- 
siderable readiness  in  composition:  and  even  then, 
he  will  find  that  bodily  indisposition  and  mental 
fatigue,  necessarily  induced  by  his  numerous  daily 
engagements,  and  continued  exercise  of  thought,  will 
produce  an  occasional  interruption  of  his  Ministra- 
tions, and  probably  an  ultimate  and  premature 
breaking  up  of  his  constitution.  A  Clergyman  under 
such  circumstances  possesses  no  authority  habitually 
to  curtail  the  Services,  nor  to  substitute  the  Litany 
for  the  '  Evening  Service,'  unless  he  has  the  previous 
sanction  of  the  Bishop.  It  is  necessary,  therefore, 
for  one  whose  zeal  would  carry  him  beyond  ordinary 
limits,  that  he  well  '  count  the  cost '  before  the 
experiment  be  tried — experiment  indeed  it  must  be — 
for  it  will  be  far  better  not  to  have  made  the  attempt 
at  all,  than  having  made  it,  eventually  to  fail  in  the 
execution,  and  cause  disappointment,  if  not  dissatisfac- 
tion, to  his  people. 

101.  — In  other  respects  the  efforts  of  a  zealous 
mind  are  restrained  within  due  bounds  by  the  law :  a 
Clergyman  is  precluded  by  the  Oanon,  and  Statute 
law  from  serving  more  than  two  Benefices  in  one 
day :  thus — 

Serving  limited.  —  '  No  Curate  or  Minister... shall 
'  serve  more  than  one  Church  or  Chapel  upon  oue  day,  except 
'  that  Chapel  be  a  member  of  the  Parish  Church,  or  united 


DIVINE  WOESHIP  ON  SIUP-BOAED. 


35.1 


1  thereunto;  and  unless  the  said  Church  or  Chapel,  where  such  a 
'  Minister  shall  serve  in  two  places,  be  not  able,  in  the  judgment 
'of  the  Bishop  or  Ordinary,  to  maintain  a  Curate.' — Canon  48. 

Except  in  case  of  Emergency.  —  '  No  spiritual  person 
'  shall  serve  more  than  two  Benefices  in  one  day,  unless  in 
'  case  of  unforeseen  and  pressing  emergency  ;  in  which  case  the 
'  spiritual  person  who  shall  so  have  served  more  than  two  Bene- 
'fices  shall  forthwith  report  the  circumstance  to  the  Bishop  of 
'  the  Diocese.'— 1  &  2  Vict.  c.  106.  s.  106. 

102.  — Again,  as  to  the  Apportionment  of  Duties. — 
If  any  difficulty  arises  with  respect  to  the  due  apportionment 
of  the  Services,  or  other  Duties,  where  two  or  more 
Spiritual  Persons  have  been  instituted,  or  otherwise  ad- 
mitted to  the  '  Cure  of  Souls '  in  one  Benefice,  the  Bishop 
may  issue  a  decree  to  such  Spiritual  Persons,  the  Church 
or  Chapel-wardens,  and  inhabitants,  determining  the  seve- 
ral proportions  to  be  performed  by  each ;  which  decree,  if 
no  cause  be  shown  to  the  contrary,  will  be  confirmed  under 
his  Lordship's  hand  and  seal,  and  be  binding  on  the  parties 
concerned.  An  appeal,  however,  will  lie  to  the  Archbishop 
of  the  Province,  (by  2  &  3  Vict.  c.  30.). 

Divine  Worship  on  Board  Ship. 

103.  — Sunday  is  required  to  be  kept  holy  in  all  the 
Ships  of  the  Eoyal  Navy,  and  Pullic  Worship  to  be 
solemnly  held  according  to  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church 
of  England  by  the  Chaplains  duly  appointed :  thus — 

'  All  Commanders,  Captains  and  Officers  in  or  belonging  to  any 
'  of  his  Majesty's  Ships  or  Vessels  of  War  shall  cause  the  Public 
'  Worship  of  Almighty  God,  according  to  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church 
'  of  Englaud  established  by  law,  to  be  solemnly,  orderly,  and 
'reverently  performed  in  their  respective  Ships;  and  shall  take 
'  care  that  Prayers  and  Preaching  by  the  Chaplains  in  Holy 
'Orders  of  the  respective  Ships  be  performed  diligently;  and  that 
'the  Lord's  Day  be  observed  according  to  law.' — 22  Geo.  II.  c. 
33.  s.  2.  (See  "  Navy  Chaplains"  Vol.  A.) 

We  now  arrive  at  the  distinct  consideration  of  the 
Holy-Day  Services.  An  enumeration  of  the  Festivals, 
and  Fasts,  as  by  law  appointed,  will  follow. 

Holy-Day  Services. 

104.  — The  keeping  of  Holy-Days  is  appointed  in 
Canon  13;  and  the  reading  of  the  Common  Pbayeb  on 


352 


HOLT-DAY  SEEVICES. 


those  days,  and  their  Eves,  is  enjoined  in  Canon  14 ; 
both  of  which  have  been  just  quoted  (See  par.  95.). 
The  Clergy  are  also  required  by  Canon  and  Rubric 
to  announce  to  the  Congregation  on  the  Sunday,  the 
Holy-Days  that  occur,  and  will  be  observed,  in  the 
week  ensuing ;  thus — 

'  Every  Parson,  Vicar,  or  Curate  shall  in  his  several  charge 
'  declare  to  the  people  every  Sunday,  at  the  time  appointed  in  the 
'  Communion  Book,  whether  there  be  any  Holy-Days  or  Fasting- 
'  Days  the  week  following.  And  if  any  do  hereafter  wittingly 
'  offend  herein,  and  being  once  admonished  thereof  by  his  Ordi- 
'  nary,  shall  again  omit  that  duty,  let  him  be  censured  according 
'  to  Law,  until  he  submit  himself  to  the  due  performance  of  it.' — 
Canon  64. 

Also,  the  Ktjbbic  after  the  Nieene  Creed  directs  that, 

'  IT  Then  (after  such  Sermon,  Homily,  or  Exhortation,  1552  to 
'  1604)  the  Curate  shall  declare  unlo  the  people  (whether  there 
'he  any  1552—1604)  what  Holy-Days,  or  Fasting-Bays, 
'are  in  the  week  following  to  be  observed.' — (1662) — Present 
Book  of  Com.  Prayer. 

105 — Notwithstanding  that  the  observance  of 
Holt-Days  is  thus  enjoined  upon  the  Clergy  by  the 
Canons,  (13, 14,  and  64) ;  by  the  Rubric  in  the  Liturgy  ; 
as  well  as  by  the  Statute,  13  &  14  Car.  II.  c.  4.  s.  2. 
(quoted  in  par.  96.) :  yet  Custom  has  in  very  numerous 
instances,  particularly  in  country  parishes,  over-ridden 
both  Canon  and  Statute  Law  in  this  respect.  During 
the  period  of  the  Reformation,  Sundays,  and  other 
Holy-Days,  were  looked  upon  with  equal  reverence ; 
and  in  the  several  Ecclesiastical  and  Civil  enactments 
of  those  days,  the  injunctions  affecting  one,  affected 
also  the  other,  as  may  have  been  observed  in  the 
Canons  and  Statute  Laws  just  quoted.  In  later  times, 
however,  as  the  progress  of  Non-conformity  advanced, 
so  did  a  stricter  observance  of  the  Sunday  than  of 
most  of  the  other  Holy-Days  grow  with  it,  till  at  last 
the  '  Toleration  Acts,'  passed  from  time  to  time,  have 
completely  absolved  all  who  dissent  from  the  Estab- 
lished Church  from  the  necessity  of  conforming  to 
those  Laws  imposing  the  keeping  of  the  other  Holy- 
Days,  two  excepted.  The  wide-spread  example  thus 
set  to  the  people  at  large,  coupled  with  the  acknow- 
ledged proneness  of  the  human  heart  to  cling  to 


LAY  OBSERVANCE  OF   SUNDAYS,   &C.  353 

'  things  temporal  rather  than  to  things  eternal,'  have, 
as  an  almost  necessary  consequence,  weaned  the  affec- 
tions of  our  Congregations  from  those  WeeTc-Day  Ser- 
vices, which  were  so  highly  prized  by  our  fore-fathers. 
And  now,  the  Laiiy  at  large  are  only  bound  by  Statute 
law  to  the  religious  observance  of  the  Sunday,  Christ- 
mas-Day, and  Good-Friday,  and  such  Public  Fast  and 
TJianksgiving-Days  as  may  be  enjoined  by  the  Legis- 
lature. With  regard  however  to  the  duties  of  the 
Clergy  of  the  Church  of  England  in  respect  of  the 
Holy-Bays,  the  remarks  that  have  been  already  made 
upon  the  'Daily  Services,'  and  the  opinions  and 
authorities  there  brought  forward  to  elucidate  the 
degree  of  conformity  required,  will  be  found  in  some 
measure  applicable  to  the  Holy-Day  Services  now 
under  discussion;  since  any  attempt  to  introduce 
them,  regularly  and  systematically,  where  they  have 
not  been  previously  known,  or  to  revive  them  after 
long  continued  disuse,  will  require  equal  care,  and 
caution,  and  preparation.  These  observations  apply 
particularly  to  Saints' -Days,  and  Vigils.  The  Holy- 
Days  commemorative  of  the  chief  events  of  our  Lord's 
Ministry  are  likely  to  be  familiar  to  the  people,  and 
should  by  all  means  be  recognized  and  religiously 
observed.  The  Bishop,  however,  has  authority  to 
enforce  the  performance  of  Divine  Service  on  all  the 
days  appointed  to  be  kept  holy  by  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer. 

106. — It  may  now  be  necessary  to  explain  how  far 
the  Laity  are  hound  by  the  temporal  law  to  observe 
the  Sundays,  and  Holy-Days  ;  to  distinguish  those  of 
the  latter  which  are  prescribed  by  Acts  of  Parliament ; 
and  to  note  the  Penalties  that  are  attached  for  default. 
Tet  in  bringing  forward  these  penal  Enactments,  it 
should  he  understood  that  the  intention  is  more  to 
strengthen  a  Minister's  position  and  authority  by 
making  him  acquainted  with  their  existence,  than  that 
he  should  call  their  severity  into  actual  —  much  less 
repeated  —  exercise  ;  otherwise  he  would  expose  him- 
self to  the  charge  of  persecution,  which  might  be 
injurious  to  the  usefulness  of  his  ministry.    There  are 


354  LAY  OBSERVANCE  OF  SUNDAYS,  &C. 

however  cases  where  Sunday-working  and  Sunday 
trading  have  a  very  demoralizing  effect  upon  the 
artizan  and  labourer,  as  well  as  upon  the  habits 
of  youth  and  children,  against  which  remonstrances 
prove  ineffectual :  in  these  instances  the  law  must 
necessarily  be  appealed  to.  Further,  a  knowledge 
of  these  Statutes  will  also  enable  the  Clergyman 
to  perceive  how  far  the  Law  differs  with  respect  to 
the  observance  of  Sunday,  Christmas-Day,  and  Good- 
Friday  ;  and  at  the  same  time  inform  him  to  what 
a  limited  extent  a  general  suspension  of  secular 
business  and  employments  upon  the  two  latter  days 
can  be  legally  enforced,  if  attempted. 

LAY  OBSERVANCE. 
Of  Sunday,  Christmas-Day,  Good-Friday,  &c. 

107.  — Although  the  Canons  generally  do  not,  as 
we  have  seen, proprio  vigore,  biud  the  Laity,  yet  when 
they  are  explanatory  of  the  Common  Law,  all  persons 
must  submit  to  their  authority  (see  par.  50.)  The 
13//*,  Canon  bears  upon  the  present  subject,  and 
although  its  application  is  circumscribed  by  the 
'  Toleration  Acts,'  yet  it  is  necessary  that  it  be  here 
referred  to.    It  runs  thus : — 

'All  manner  of  Persons  within  the  Church  of  England 
'  shall  from  henceforth  celebrate  and  keep  the  Lord's  Dat, 
'  commonly  called  Sunday,  according  to  God's  holy  will  and 
'  pleasure,  and  the  orders  of  the  Church  of  England  prescribed  in 
'  that  behalf.  '—Canon  13. 

"We  now  pass  to  the  Statute  Law;  and  after 
speaking  of  the  '  exercise  of  the  ordinary  Calling ' 
on  Sundays  in  a  general  way,  as  laid  down  by  the 
Act,  we  will  proceed  to  define  the  Law  applicable 
to  each  particular  case,  and  in  Alphabetical  order. 

108.  — Till  latterly,  Persons  not  going  to  Church,  or 
other  place  of  Public  "Worship,  on  the  Sunday  were 
liable  to  a  fine  of  Is.  (by  1  Eliz.  c.  2.  s.  14.  and 
3  Jac.  1.  c.  4)  :  but  this,  and  most  of  the  other  Statutes, 


LAY   OBSERVANCE  OF  SUNDAYS,  &C.  355 


imposing  penalties  and  disabilities  with  respect  to 
religious  opinions,  have  been  repealed  by  9  &  10  Vict, 
c.  59.  (See  Bubo's  Feci.  L.  Phil.  iii.  405  —  6. 
Stephens'  JEc.  Sfat.  366—8.  n;  Laws  Rel.  to  CI.  464). 
The  following  Statutes,  however,  are  in  force. 

109. — To  Exercise  one's  Ordinary  Calling  on 
Sunday  incurs  a  Penalty  of  os. ;  and  the  Govds  exposed  to  sale 
are  to  be  forfeited  .— 

'  It  is  enacted  that  all  and  every  Person  and  Persons 

'  whatsoever,  shall  on  every  Lords  Day  apply  themselves  to  the 
'  observation  of  the  same,  by  exercising  themselves  thereon  in 
'the  duties  of  piety  and  true  religion,  publicly  and  privately; 
'and  that  no  Tradesman*  Artificer,   Workman,  Labourer,  or 
'  other  person  whatsoever,  shall  do  or  exercise  any  worldly 
'  labour,  business,  or  work,  of  their  ordinary  callings,  upon  the 
.  '  Lord's  Day,  or  any  part  thereof,  (works  of  necessity  and  charity 
'  only  excepted),  and  that  every  Person  being  of  the  age  of  14 
'years  or  upwards,  offending  in  the  premises,  shall,  for  every  such 
'  offence,/(«;/ei<  os.— And  that  no  Person  or  Persons  whatsoever, 
'shall  publicly  cry,  show  forth,  or  expose  to  sale,  any  Wares, 
'  Merchandises,  Fruit,  Herbs,  Goods,  or  Chattels,  whatsoever, 
'  upon  the  Lord's  Day,  or  any  part  thereof,  upon  pain  that  every 
'person  so  offending  shall  forfeit  the  same.' — 29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  s.  i. 
Offences  against  this  Statute  are  to  be  heard  hefore  one  Justice,  be 
proved  by  one  Witness,  or  on  view  of  one  Justice,  or  by  confession 
of  the  party;  and  the  Penalties  be  applied  to  the  use  of  the  Poor  (a 
third  part  may  be  given  to  the  Informer).    Recovery  is  by  Distress; 
and  in  failure  of  Distress  the  Offender  to  be  put  in'the  stocks  for  2 
hours.— ib.  Sect.  2.    But  all  Prosecutions  under  this  Statute  must 
be  tcithin  10  days  after  the  offence  is  committed. — ib.  Sect.  4. 

The  meaning  of  this  Statute  is,  that  Persons  having  an 
•  ordinary  calling,'  must  not  do  any  worldly  labour  or  business,  or 
work,  of  their  'ordinary  calling  on  Sunday;'  {Jus.  Holroyd  in 
Rex  v.  Whitmarsh  (Inhabitants  of)  7  B  &  C.  601;  3  ib.  164):  yet  a 
Farmer  hiring  a  servant  is  not  within  the  Statute;  because  hiring 
servants  may  be  necessary  for  carrying  on  his  ordinary  calling,  but 
it  is  not  a  part  of  that  '  calling.'— (A).  Again,  selling  a  Gentleman's 
Horse  by  private  contract  on  a  Sunday,  by  a  person  keeping  a 
commission  stable  for  selling  Horses  by  public  Auction,  the  sale 
is  not  void,  such  sale  not  being  in  the  ordinary  course  of  his 
business,  which  was  to  sell  by  Auction.  (Jus '  Mansfield  in 
Drury  v.  Defontaine,  1  Taunt.  131.).  But  Horse-Dealers  bringing 
an  action  upon  the  warranty  of  a  Horse,  the  contract  of  sale  and 
warranty  being  made  on  a  Sundav,  the  action  was  held  not  to 
be  maintainable.    (Fennell  v.  Rid'ler,  5  B  &  C.  406).  Further, 


•  Under  the  phrase, '  or  other  person  whatsoever.'  is  comprized 
persons  of  the  same  class  ejusdem  generis,  with  those  previously 
mentioned.  (Sandiman  v.  Breach,  7  B  &  C.  96.) 


35G 


LAY  OBSERVANCE 


although  'Labour,  cjc.  may  be  private,  and  so  not  offend  against 
public  decency;  yet  it  is  equally  labour,  and  equally  interferes 
with  a  man's  religious  duties;'  and  comes  within  the  prohibition  of 
the  Statute.  {Jits.  Bayi.ky,  ib.  5  B  &  C.  436;  Smith  v.  Sparroic, 
4  Bing.  88.)  Only  one  offence  can  be  committed  on  the  same 
Sunday. 

Barges.    See  'Watermen.'' 

110. — Ale  and  Beer-Houses. — No  Beer,  &c.  is  to 

be  sold  on  Sunday,  Chri.itmas-day,  Good-Friday,  or  any  Public 
Fast  or  Thanksgiving-Day  before  £  past  12  o'clock,  or  before  the 
Morning  Service  is  over. 

During  Morning  Service  :— 

'No  Licensed  Victualler,  or  Person  licensed  to  sell  Beer  by 
'Retail  to  be  drunk  on  the  Premises,  or  not  to  be  drunk  on 
'the  Premises,  or  other  Person,  in  any  part  of  Great  Britain  shall 
'  open  his  House  for  the  sale  of  Wine,  Spirits,  Beer,  or  other 
1  fermented  or  distilled  Liquors,  or  sell  the  same  on  Sunday 
'  before  £  past  12  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  or,  where  the  Morning 
'  Divine  Service  in  the  Church,  Chapel,  Kirk,  or  principal  place  of 
'Worship  of  the  Parish  or  Place  shall  not  usually  terminate  by 
'  that  time,  before  the  time  of  the  termination,  of  such  Service, 

'  and  in  England  on  Sundays.  Christmas-Day,  or 

'  Good-Friday,  or  on  any  day  appointed  for  a  Public  Fast  or 
'  Thanksgiving,  before  the  respective  times  aforesaid,  except,  in  all 
1  the  cases  aforesaid,  as  refreshment  for  Travellers ;  Provided 
'always  that  nothing  herein  contained  shall  authorize  the 

'opening  of  any  House  for  the  sale  of  wine,  &c  at  an  earlier 

'  Hour,  or  time  than  is  now  allowed  by  Law.' — 11  &  12  Vict.  c.  49. 
s.  1.) — Section  2,  repeals  3  &  4  Vict.  c.  61.  s.  15.  which  forbids 
Beer  or  Cider  to  be  sold  on  those  days  before  1  o'clock  p.m. — 
Section  3.  forbids  Licensed  Victuallers,  Beer-House  Keepers,  and 
Vintners  of  the  City  of  London,  'to  open  their  Houses  for  the  sale 
of  any  other  Articles  during  the  prohibited  hours.' — Section  4. 
forbids  Houses  or  Places  of  Public  Resort  in  England  or  Scotland  to 
be  opened  for  the  sale  of  fermented  or  distilled  Liquors  during  the 
prohibited  hours. — Section  5.  provides  that  any  Constable  shall  at 
anytime  enter  such  Houses  or  Places  of  Public  Resort;  refusing 
to  admit  such  Constable  is  an  offence  against  the  Act. — Section  6. 
enacts  that  offenders  against  this  statute  shall  be  liable,  upon  a 
summary  conviction  before  any  Justice  of  the  Peace,  to  a  Penalty 
not  exceeding  £5.;  and  every  separate  sale  shall  be  deemed  a 
separate  ofltnce  :  Information  to  be  laid  within  six  calendar  months 
(11  &  12  Vict.  c.  43.  s.  11.);  to  be  recovered  by  distress  (ib.  s.  19.); 
and  in  default  imprisonment  for  not  exceeding  three  calendar 
months  if  not  sooner  paid  (ib.  s.  22). — See  also  3  &  4  Vict.  c.  61. 

During  Afternoon  Service  : — 

By  9  Geo.  IV.  c.  61.  8.  21.  Permitting  or  suffering  any  Beer,  or 
other  exciseable  liquor  to  be  conveyed  from  or  out  of  his  premises, 
during  the  usual  hours  of  the  Afternoon  Divine  Service  in  the 
Church  or  Chapel  of  the  Parish  or  place  in  which  the  house  is 
situated,  on  Sundays,  Christmas-Day.  or  Good-Friday — Penalty 


OF  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLT-DATS,  &C.  357 


for  the  1st  offence  not  exceeding  £5. ;  but  on  proof  of  a  prior 
conviction  within  three  years,  not  exceeding  £10.;  and  if  proof  of 
two  separate  offences  within  three  years,  the  case  to  be  adjourned  to 
next  transfer  day  or  annual  Licensing  meeting:  and  on  conviction 
of  offender  to  forfeit  not  exceeding  £50.  The  conviction  to  be  by 
two  Justices  of  the  Division  where  the  House  is  situated,  (ib.  s.  21.) 
Information  must  be  laid  within  six  calendar  months.  (11  &  12 
Vict.  c.  43.  s.  11).  Recovery  by  distress,  if  insufficient  distress, 
imprisonment  for  not  exceeding  one  calendar  month  if  the  penalty 
is  not  above  £5. :  not  exceeding  three  calendar  months  if  above  £o. 
and  under  £10.;  and  not  exceeding  six  calendar  months  if  above 
£10.,  unless  sooner  paid.  (9  Geo.  IV.  c.  61.  s.  25.). 

During  Aftehnoon,  and  Evening  of  Sundays : — 
By  18  &  19  Vict.  c.  118.  s.  2,  Opening  or  keeping  open  House 
for  sale  of  Beer,  &c.  or  fermented  or  distilled  liquors,  or  selling 
therein  between  the  hours  of  three  and  Jive  o'clock  in  the  A fternoon, 
on  Sundays,  Christmas-Day,  or  Good-Friday,  or  any  Day 
appointed  for  a  Public  Fast  or  Thanksgiving:  or  before  four 
o'clock  in  the  Morning  of  the  Day  following  such  Sunday,  &c. 
except  to  a  Traveller  or  Lodger  therein  (ib.  s.  2.)— As  well  Bouses 
or  places  of  public  resort  as  Ale  and  Beer-Houses  (ib.  s.  3).  And 
refusing  to  admit  or  not  admitting  any  Constable  at  any  time  on 
the  days  aforesaid,  (ib.  s.  4.).  Penalty  not  exceeding  £5.  for  every 
such  offence,  and  every  separate  sale  to  be  deemed  a  separate 
offence  (ib.  s.  5.):  to  be  recovered  by  distress  (11  &  12  Vict.  c.  4. 
s.  19.):  in  default,  imprisonment  for  not  exceeding  three  calendar 
months,  unless  sooner  paid.  (ib.  s.  22.).  Information  to  be  laid 
within  six  calendar  mouths  (ib.  s.  11.):  and  conviction  before  one 
Justice  (18  &  19  Vict.  c.  118.  s.  5.). 

During  Evening  Seevice  : — 

In  Reg  v.  Knapp  it  was  decided  that  the  words  "  the  usual  hours 
of  the  A fternoon  Divine  Service "  had  reference  to  what  are  the 
ordinary  hours  of  the  Morning  and  Afternoon  Divine  Service  as 
distinguished  from  Evening  Service  :  and  where,  therefore,  a 
Publican^  who  had  kept  his  House  open  at  £  past  six  o'clock  in 
the  Evening  of  a  Sunday'  in  a  place  where  Service  from  3  o'clock  to 
5  o'clock  had  been  discontinued,  and  a  Service  commencing  at  (J 
o'clock  had  been  substituted,  had  been  convicted  under  this  clause 
(9  Geo.  IV.  c.  61.  s.  21.),  the  conviction  was  held  bad,  for  the 
Afternoon  Service  is  between  mid-day  and  5  o'clock.  The  18  &  19 
Vict.  c.  118.  meets  the  case  of  an  Afternoon  Service  also,  but  the 
Service  commencing  at  6  o'clock  is  still  unprovided  for.  (22  L.  J. 
(N.  S.)  M.  C.  139:  17  J.  P.  599.).— Oke's  Magisterial  Synopsis. 
a.d.  1858.  6th  Edition,  p.  221. 

Beer-Houses.    See  Ale  and  Beer-Houses,  supra. 

111. — Arrest.  —  (See  '  Serving  Process  '  below). 
With  respect  to  Arresting  Clergymen,  in  Civil  process  they  are 
exempt  from  Arrest  whilst  engaged  in,  or  going  to,  or  returning 
from,  the  performance  of  the  Divine  Services.  Under  this  expression 
is  included  carrving  and  administering  the  Sacrament  to  the  Sick. 

z  2 


358 


LAY  OBSERVANCE 


(Cripp's  L.  of  Ch.  64.)-  A  Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen 
is  also  exempt  from  Arrest  on  final  process  (  Winter  v.  Dibdm 
13  M.  &  W.  25.).  This  privilege  however  does  not  extend  to  a 
criminal  process. — 

'll  any  person  shall  arrest  any  Clergyman  upon  any  civil 
'  process,  while  he  shall  be  performing  Divine  Service,  or  shall, 
'  with  the  knowledge  of  such  person,  be  going  to  perform  the 
'  same,  or  returning  from  the  performance  thereof,  every  such 
'  offender  shall  be  guilty  of  a  Misdemeanour,  and  being  convicted 
'  thereof,  shall  suffer  such  punishment,  bv  fine  or  imprisonment, 
'or  by  both,  as  the  Court  shall  award  '—9  Geo.  IV.  c.  31.  s.  23. 

112.  — Attorneys. — The  profession  of  an  Attorney  is 

not  considered  to  be  included  in  the  definition  of  an  ordinary  Catling, 
the  exercise  of  which  on  a  Sunday  is  forbidden  by  the  statute, 
29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  This  was  decided  in  the  case  of  Peale  v.  Dickens, 
5  Tyrw.  116;  3  Dowl.  P.  C.  171.  (Roger's  Eccl.  L.  589;  Stephens' 
L.  Kel.  to  CI.  1288). 

113.  — Bakers  residing  out  of  London,  and  10  miles 

beyond  the  Royal  Exchange  are  forbidden  to  exercise  their  '  calling ' 
on  Sundays,  after  J  past  1  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  under  Penalit 
of  10*.  for  the  First  offence:  20s.  for  the  Second;  40s.  for  every 
subsequent  Offence,  and  the  expenses  in  each  case: — 

'  No  Master  or  Mistress,  Journeyman,  or  other  person 
'  exercising  or  employed  in  the  Trade  or  Calling  of  a  Baker, 
'  beyond  the  limits  aforesaid,  shall,  on  the  Lokd's-Day.  or  on 
'  any  part  thereof,  make  or  hake  any  Bread,  Rolls,  or  Cakes  of 
'  any  sort  or  kind ;  or  shall,  on  any  other  part  of  the  said  day 
'after  J  past  1  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  sell  or  expose  to  sale, 
'  or  permit  or  suffer  to  be  sold  or  exposed  to  sale,  any  Bread,  Rolls, 
'or  Cakes  of  any  sort  or  kind;  or  bake  or  deliver,  or  permit 
'  or  sutler  to  be"  baked  or  delivered,  any  Meat,  Pudding,  Pie, 
'  Tart,  or  Victuals,  or  in  any  other  manner  exercise  the  Trade  or 
'  Calling  of  a  Baker,  or  be  engaged  and  employed  in  the  business 
'  or  occupation  thereof,  sare  and  except  so  far  as  may  be  necessary 
'  in  setting  and  superintending  the  sponge  to  prepare  the  Bread 

*  or  Dough  for  the  following  day's  baking:  and  every  person 
'  offending  against  the  last  mentioned  regulations,  or  any  one  or 
'  more  of  them,  and  being  thereof  convicted  before  any  Justice 

'  of  the  Peace  within  G  days  from  the  commission  thereof, 

'  either  upon  the  view  of  such  Justice,  or  on  confession  by  the 
'  party,  or  proof  by  one  or  more  credible  witnesses  shall  pav... 

•  for  the  ls(  offence,  10s  ;  for  the  2nd  offence,  20s.;  for  the  3rd, 

'arid  every  subsequent  offence, -10s. ;  and  moreover,  the  costs 

'  and  expences  of  the  Prosecution.'— A  part  of  the  Penalty  at  the 

discretion  of  the  Justice  to  be  paid  to  the  Prosecutor  for  loss  of 
time,  not  exceeding  3s.  per  diem  :  the  residue  to  be  given  to  the 
Overseers  of  the  Poor,  in  aid  of  the  County-Rate:  and  if  not  paid 

within  3  days  to  be  recovered   by  Distress :  In  default  or 

insufficiency  of  such  Distress,  Commitment  to  the  Eonse  of 
Correction,  with  or  without^acrf  labour,  for  the  1st  offence,  7  days ; 
for  the  ind  offence,  14  days;  for  the  3rd,  or  every  subsequent 
offence,  one  'calendar  month,  unless  all  the  Expences  are  sooner 
paid.—'  Provided  nevertheless,  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  every 


OF  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLT-DATS,  &C. 


359 


'  Baker  residing  beyond  the  limits  aforesaid  to  deliver  to  his  or 
'  her  Customers  on  the  Lord's-Day,  any  Bakings,  until  £  past  1 
'o'clock,  without  incurring  or  being  liable  to  any  of  the  Penalties  in 
'  this  Act.'— 6  &  7  Will.  IV.  c  37.  s  14.  (which  repealed  59  Geo.  III. 
c.  36.  s.  12;  and  1  &  2  Geo.  IV.  c.  50.  s.  11.) 

114.  — Bakers  in  London,  and  within  10  miles  of  the 
Royal  Exchange,  Bakers  are  subject  to  the  same  restrictions  and 
Penalties  by  3  Geo.  IV.  c.  106.  s.  16.  The  provisions  of  this 
statute  with  respect  to  Sundag  Trading  are  similar  to  those  of 
li  &  7  Will.  IV.  above  quoted,  except  that  the  time  allowed  to  the 
London  Bakers  is  more  circumscribed.  The  clause  of  3  Geo.  IV., 
after  forbidding  the  exercise  of  this  'Calling '  on  the  Lokd's-Day, 
runs: — 'or  any  part  of  the  said  day  titan  between  the  hours  of  9 
'  o'clock  in  the  forenoon,  and  1  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  on  any 
'pretence  whatsoever,  sell  or  expose  to  sale,  &c.'  Yet  the  section 
concludes  with  the  permission  to  deliver  Bakings  to  customers 
till  J  past  1  o'clock,  as  in  the  statute  of  G  &  7  Will.  IV.  above.  The 
Statute,  3  Geo.  IV.  c.  106.  seems  to  be  an  amendment  of  34  Geo.  III. 
c.  61. 

115.  — Bills  of  Exchange  should  not  be  drawn  and 
accepted  on  the  Sunday  in  the  way  of  a  man's  'ordinary  calling:' 
or  they  come  under  the  prohibition  of  29  Car.  II.  and  cannot 
legally  be  recovered :  yet  a  defendant  is  not  at  liberty  to  plead  his 
own  illegal  act  in  defence.  {Begbie  v.  Levi.  1  C  &  J.  180.).  If 
a  Bill  of  Exchange  become  payable  on  Sunday,  Christmas-Day, 
Good-Friday,  or  on  a  Public  Fast  or  Thanksgiving-Day,  the  Bill 
is  to  be  met  on  the  day  preceding,  but  be  presented  to  the  acceptor 
for  payment  on  the  day  following;  by  6  &  7  Will.  IV.  c.  58.  thus: — 

'  If  the  day  following  the  day  on  which  such  Bill  of  Exchange 
'  shall  become  due  shall  happen  to  be  a  Sunday,  Good-Friday, 
'or  Christmas-Day,  or  a  day  appointed  by  His  Majesty's 
'  Proclamation  for  solemn  Fast  or  of  Thanksgiving,  then  it  shall 
'  not  be  necessary  that  such  Bill  of  Exchange  shall  be  presented 
'  for  payment,  or  be  forwarded  for  such  presentment  for  payment, 
'  to  such  acceptors  or  acceptor  for  honour,  or  referees  or  referee 
'  until  the  day  following  such  Sunday,  &c.' —  Sect.  2.  (See 
Kogkrs'  Eccl.  L.  593). 

Breach  of  the  Peace.    See  '  Serving  Process.' 

116.  — Butchers  following  their  'Calling'  on  Sunday 

by  killing  or  selling  any  victuals,  are  subject  to  a  penalty  of  6s.  8d.; 

the  prosecution  must  be  within  six  months  : — 

'  If  any  Butcher,  by  himself  or  any  other  for  him  by  his 

'  privity  or  consent,  shall,  Kill  or  tell  any  victual  upon  the 

'said  day,  (Sunday)  that  then  every  such  Butcher  shall  forfeit 

'  and  lose  for  every  such  offence  G«.  8</  being  done  in  view  of 

'  any  Justice,  &c,  or  proved  upon  oath  by  two  or  more  witnesses, 

'  or  by  the  confession  of  the  party  to  bo  levied  by  distress  

'  and  be  applied  one  third  to  the  Informer,  and  two  thirds  to 
'the  Poor.  The  Impeachment  to  be  within  six  months  after  the 
•offence  is  committed.'— 3  Car.  I.  c.  1  (2).  s.  1.    As  this  offence 

is  not  against  the  Common  Law,  the  Indictment  must  be  laid 


3(10 


LAY  OBSEBVANCE 


against  the  Form  of  the  above  statute.  (Rex  v.  Brotherion, 
1  Stra.  702;  Marin  v.  Hall,  1  Taunt.  35.)  Butchers  travelling 
on  Sunday  in  the  way  of  their  'calling'  incur  a  Penalty  of  20s. 
See  under  'Drover.' 

117.  — Carriers  travelling  on  Sundays  with  Horse, 
Cart,  Van,  or  Waggon,  are  liable  to  a  penalty  of  20a.— 

'  No  Carrier  with  any  Horse  or  Horses,  nor  Waggon-men 
'  with  any  waggon  or  waggons,  nor  Carman  with  any  cart  or 
'  carts,  nor  Wainman  with  any  wain  or  wains,  nor  Drovers  with 

'any  Cattle,  shall  by  themselves,  or  any  other,  travel  upon 

'  the  said  day  (Sunday),  upon  pain  that  every  person  and 
'  persons  so  otfending  shall  lose  and  forfeit  20s.  for  every  such 
'  offence.'— 3  Car.  L  c.  1  (2).  s.  1 :  continued  by  3  Car.  I.  c.  4  (5).* 
The  conviction  is  to  be  within  six  months  by  one  Justice;  and 
be  proved  on  view,  or  confession,  or  by  two  or  more  witnesses: 
and  recovery  of  Penalty  to  be  by  distress:  and  one  third  given 
to  the  Informer,  and  two-thirds  to  the  Poor.  Drivers  of  Vans 
travelling  on  a  Sunday  are  within  the  meaning  of  the  statute. 
(Ex  parte  Middleton,  3  B  &  C.  164).    Sse  'Drovers.' 

118.  —  Constable. — No  Constable  shall  be  required 

to  prefer  presentments  respecting  Popish  Recusants,  Persons  not 
attending  a  place  of  Public  Worship,  and  other  offences,  by 
7  &  8  Geo.  IV.  c.  38.    See  also  'Serving  Process.' 

119.  — Contracts  in  the  exercise  of  a  man's 
'  ordinary  Calling,'  if  made  on  the  Sunday,  fall  within  the  scope 
of  the  Act,  29  Car.  II.,  and  not  only  subject  the  parties  making 
such  contracts  to  a  Penalty,  but  the  contracts  themselves  are  void. 
(Drury  v.  Defontaine,  1  Taunt.  131.).  The  Contract,  however, 
must  be  completed  on  the  Sunday  to  be  amenable  to  the  statute. 
Nor  will  an  action  lie  on  a  contract  by  an  agent  if  entered  into  on  a 
Sunday.  (Bloxame  v.  Williams,  5  D.  &  K.  82;  3  B  &  C.  232; 
Smith  v.  Sparrow,  4  Bing.  84;  2  C.  &  P.  544;  12  Moore,  272.  See 
Burn's  Eccl.  L.  Phil.  ii.  422;  Roger's  E.  L.  588,  589;  Stephens' 
L.  C.  1283.  1288.) 

120.  — Cooks' -shops,   Sfc.   are   exempt   from  the 

prohibitions  of  29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  by  an  especial  clause,  which  runs 
thus : — 

'  Nothing  in  this  Act  contained  shall  extend  to  the  prohibiting 
'of  Dressing  of  Meat  in  Families,  or  Dressing  or  selling  of  meat 
'  in  Inns,  Coohs'-shops,  or  Victualling-Houses,  for  such  as  otherwise 
'  cannot  be  provided.' — Sect.  3.  (Rex  v.  Cox,  2  Burr.  787.).  This 
however  was  forbidden  in  the  'Injunctions '  of  Edward  VI.,  and  of 
Elizabeth.    (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  50.  194.  214.). 


*  The  Act  3  Car.  c.  1.  has  been  stated  to  be  in  force,  imposing  a 
penalty  of  20s.  on  Carriers,  and  6s.  8<i.  on  Butchers  for  offences  on 
the  Lord's-Day,  but  this  is  not  so:  it  was  "  to  continue  to  the  end 
of  the  first  session  of  the  next  Parliament,"  and  was  not  continued. — 
Okes'  Magisterial  Synopsis.  A.  D.  1858. 


OF  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY-DAYS,  &C. 


361 


121.  — Drovers,  travelling  on  the  Loed's-Day,  are 

subject  to  a  penalty  of  20s.— 

'  No  Drover,  Horse-courser,  Waggoner,  Butcher,  Higgler,  or 
'  any  of  their  servants,  shall  travel  or  come  into  his  or  their 
'  inn  or  lodging  upon  the  Lord's-Day  or  any  part  thereof,  upon 
'  pain  that  each  and  every  such  offender  shall  forfeit  20s.  for 
'  every  such  offence.' —  Proof  on  view,  confession,  or  by  one 
witness,  before  one  Justice;  one  third  of  the  Penalty  to  the 
Informer,  two-thirds  to  the  Poor:  to  be  recovered  by  Distress: 
in  failure  thereof,  the  offender  to  be  put  in  the  stocks  for  2  hours. — 
29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  s.  2. 

122.  — Exposing  to  sale  any  Goods,  &c.  the  Goods 
to  be  forfeited.  See  'Not  to  exercise  one's  Ordinary  Calling!  supra, 
par.  109. 

123.  — Fairs,  and  Markets,  on  Sundays,  and  the 
principal  Feasts  of  the  Church,  and  Good-Friday,  are  prohibited 
showing  any  Goods  or  Merchandizes  (necessary  victuals  excepted) 
on  pain  of  forfeiting  the  same:  thus — 

'All  manner  of  Fairs  and  Markets  on  the  said  principal 
'Feasts,  and  Sundays,  and  Good-Fridays,  shall  clearly  cease 
'  from  all  shewings  of  any  Goods  or  Merchandizes  (necessary 
'victual  only  except)  upon  pain  of  forfeiture  of  all  the  Goods 

'  aforesaid,  so  shewed,  to  the  Lord  of  the  Franchise  or  liberty  

'  (the  four  Sundays  in  Harvest  except).' — 27  Hen.  VI.  c.  5.  s.  1. 

This  statute  does  not  invalidate  the  sale,  although  a  penalty  is 

inflicted  on  the  party  selling.    Gibson's  Codex,  275;  Comyns  v. 

Boyer,  Cro.  Eliz.  48.',.    But  the  later  statute  29  Car.  II.  c.  7. 

makes  the  sale  void.  (1  Tyrw.  130.).— See  10  &  11  Vict.  c.  14. 

Felony.    See  'Serving  Process.' 

124s.-Fish.~By  the  Statute  10  &  11  Will.  III. 
c.  24.  it  is  not  prohibited  to  import  'Anchovies,  Sturgeon,  Botargo,  or 
Cavear, '  nor  to  cry  or  sell  Mackerel  before  or  after  Divine  Service  on 
'  Sundays.' — Sect.  14.  And  Fish- Carriages,  for  the  supply  of  the 
London  Markets,  are  allowed  to  pass  on  Sundays  and  Holy-Days, 
whether  laden  or  returning  empty,  by  2  Geo.  III.  c.  15.  Burn's 
Fee.  L.  Phil.  414.  u. 

125. —  Game. — Any  one  killing  or  taking  Game,  or 
using  any  instrument  for  that  purpose  on  Sunday,  or  Christmas- 
Day,  is  liable  to  a  Penalty  not  exceeding  £5.  and  the  costs  : — 

'  If  any  Person  whatsoever  shall  kill  or  take  any  Game,  or 
'  use  any  Dog,  Gun,  Net,  or  other  engine  or  instrument  for 
'  the  purpose  of  killing  or  taking  any  Game  on  a  Sunday  or 
'  Christmas-Day,  such  person  shall  on  conviction  thereof  before 

'  two  Justices  .forfeit  not  exceeding  £o.  together  with  the  costs 

'  of  the  conviction.'— 1  &  2  Will.  IV.  c.  32.  s.  3.  In  default  of 
payment,  imprisonment  with  or  without  hard  labour,  for  not 
exceeding  two  calendar  months,  (s.  38.).  Information  must  be 
laid  within  three  calendar  months,  (s.  41.).  Half  of  penalty  to 
Informer,  and  half  to  County  Rate.    5  &  6  Will.  IV.  c.  20.  s.  21. 


mi 


LAY  OBSERVANCE 


126.  — Hackney-Coachmen,  £{c.  are  not  only  allowed 

to  ply  tbeir  vehicles  on  the  Sunday,  but  may  be  compelled  to  do 
so: — 

'  It  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  and  for  any  Licensed 
' Hackney-Coachman,  or  his  Driver,  or  any  Chairman,  to  ply  and 
'stand  with  their  Coaches  and  Chairs  and  to  drive  and  carry 
'  the  same  respectively,  on  the  Lord's-Day.' — 9  Anne  c.  23.  s.  20. 
This  Act  is  amended  by  1  &  2  Will.  IV.  c.  22.  which  adds,  that  the 
Proprietors  or  Drivers  of  Hackney-  Carriages  '  shall  be  liable  and 

'compellable  to  do  the  like  work  on  the  Lord's-Day  as  on 

'  any  other  day  of  the  week.' — Sect.  37. 

Harvest  Time  excepted  ;  see  postea. 

Higgler.    See  'Drover.' 

127.  — Houses  of  Entertainment,  Sfc.  opened  on 
Sunday,  to  which  admission  is  by  payment  of  money,  &c,  will  be 
held  to  be  disorderly  Houses,  and  the  Keeper  be  liable  to  a  penalty  of 
£2(10.,  the  Presideiit  or  Chairman  to  a  penalty  of  £100..  and  the 
Door-Keeper  or  servant,  who  receives  the  money  or  tickets,  to  a 
penalty  of  £50  — 

'  Whereas  certain  JTouses,  Rooms,  or  Places  have  of  late 

•  frequently  been  opened  for  public  entertainment  or  amusement 
'upon  the  Evening  of  the  Lord's-Day;  and  at  other  Houses, 

'  Kooms,  or  Places  under  pretence  of  enquiring  into  Religions 

'Doctrines,  and  explaining  Texts  of  Holy  Scripture,  debates 
'have  frequently  been  held  on  the  Evening  of  the  Lord's-Day, 
'  concerning  divers  Texts  of  Holy  Scripture,  by  persons  unlearned 
'  and  incompetent  to  explain  the  same,  to  the  corruption  of  good 

•  morals,  and  to  the  great  encouragement  of  irreligion,  and 

'  profauencss;  be  it  enacted  that  any  House,  Room,  or  other 

'Place,  which  shall  be  opened  or  used  for  public  Entertainment 
'  or  Amusement,  or  for  publicly  debating  on  any  subject 
'  whatsoever,  upou  any  part  of  the"  Lord's-Day,  called  Sunday, 

'  and  to  which  Persons  shall  be  admitted  by  the  payment  of 
'  money,  or  by  tickets  sold  for  money,  shall  be  deemed  a  disorderly 
'  House  or  Place ;  and  the  Keeper  of  such  House,  &c.  shall  forfeit 
'  £200.,  for  every  day  that  such  House,  &c.  shall  be  opened  or 
'  used  as  aforesaid  on  the  Lord's-Day,  to  such  persons  as  will 
'  sue  for  the  same,  and  be  otherwise  punishable  as  the  Law 

•  directs  in  cases  of  disorderly  Houses;  and  the  person  managing 

•  or  conducting  or  acting  as  Master  of  the  Ceremonies  there, 

'  or  as  a  moderator,  president,  or  Chairman  shall  forfeit  £100. 

'  to  such  person  as  will  sue  for  the  same  j  and  every  deor-ktepcr, 
'  servant,  or  other  person,  who  shall  collect  or  receive  money  or 
'  tickets  from  persons  assembling  at  such  House.  &c.  or  who 
'  shall  deliver  out  tickets  for  admitting  persons  to  such  House,  &c. 
'  shall  forfeit  £50.  to  such  person  as  will  sue  for  the  same.' — 
21  Geo.  III.  c.  49.  s.  1.    By  Section  2,  any  person  acting  a* 

Master  or  distress  shall  be  deemed  the  Keeper  of  such  House,  &c. — 
And  any  greater  price  put  upon  the  refreshments  than  what  they 
arc  commonly  charged  at  on  other  days,  shall  be  deemed  as  a 
money  payment  for  admission : — Or  any  number  of  Subscribers  or 
Contributors  to  such  entertainment,  debating,  &c,  who  may  be 
thus  entitled  to  admission  tickets,  such  Houses,  &c.  shall  be  within 


OF  SUNDA.YS  AND  HOLY-DATS,  &C. 


363 


the  meaning  of  the  Act. — By  Section  3,  the  person  advertising  such 
assembling  on  the  Lokd's-Day,  and  those  who  print  or  publish 
such  advertisements  shall  be  liable  to  forfeit  £50.  for  every  offence 
to  the  person  who  will  sue  for  the  same.— By  Section  4,  the 
Penalties  are  recoverable  in  any  Court  at  Westminster  with  full 
costs. — By  Section  5,  the  action  must  be  brought  within  six-months 
next  after  the  offence  is  committed.  See  'Beer  Houses,'  'Caolis' -shops' 

Houses  of  Public  Eesort.  See  'Ale  and  Beer 
Souses.' 

Markets.    See  'Fair.' 

128.  —Milk  may  be  cried  and  sold  on  Sundays 
before  9  o'clock  a.m.  and  after  4  o'clock  p.m.,  which  is  an  exception 
allowed  by  29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  thus : — 

'  Nothing  in  this  Act  contained  shall  extend  to  the  prohibition 

'of.  the  crying  or  selling  of  Milk  before  9  o'clock  in  the 

'  morning  or  after  4  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.' — Sect.  3. 

129.  — Municipal   Elections.  —  The   Elections  of 

Officers  of  Corporations  or  of  Public  Companies  falling  upon  a 
Sunday  are  to  be  held  upon  the  Saturday  preceding,  or  the  Monday 
following. 

'  Every_  Meeting  or  Adjourned  Meeting  of  any  Vestry, 
'  Corporation,  or  Company,  and  every  other  Meeting  of  a  Public 
'  and  Secular  nature,  which,  according  to  any  Act  of  Parliament, 
'  or  according  to  any  Charter,  Grant,  Constitution,  Deed, 
'  Testament,  Law,  Prescription,  or  Usage  whatsoever,  is  or  shall 
1  be  required  to  be  held  on  any  Lord's-Day,  or  on  any  day 
'  which  shall  happen  to  be  on  a  Lord's-Day,  shall  be  held  on 
'  the  Saturday  next  preceding,  or  on  the  Monday  next  ensuing, 

'  at  the  like  hour,  with  the  like  form  and  effect  and  every 

'matter  transacted  at  any  such  Meeting  or  adjourned  Meeting 
'  held  upon  any  Lord's-Day,  shall  be  tdjsohiteli/  r,.id  and  of  none 
'  effect.'— 3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  31.  s.  I. 
The  Election  of  Corporate  Officers  falling  on  a  Sunday  is  to  be 
postponed  to  the  Monday  next  following.  5  &  6  Will.  IV.  c.  76. 

130.  — Pawnbrokers  —  carrying  on  trade  on  a 
Sunday,  Christmas-Day,  Good-Friday,  or  Public  Fast  or 
Thanksgiving- Day;  penalty  not  less  than  40s.,  nor  more  than  £10. 
(39  &  40  Geo.  III.  c.  99.  s.  21.):  to  be  levied  by  distress  (s.  26.)— 
in  default  imprisonment  for  not  exceeding  three  calendar  months 
(11  &  12  Viet.  c.  43.  s.  22.). 

131.  — Police  Offices.  —  Magistrates  are  exempt 
from  attending  at  the  Metropolitan  Police  Offices  on  Sundays, 
Christmas-Day,  Good-Friday,  or  any  Public  Fast,  or 
Thanksgiving- Day,  except  in  certain  cases: — 

'  Provided  always  that  no  such  attendance  shall  be  given  on 
•Sunday,  Christmas-Day,  Good-Friday,  or  any  Day  appointed 
'  for  a  Public  Fast,  or  Thanksgiving,  unless  in  cases  of  urgent 
'  necessity,  or  when  it  shall  be  directed  bv  such  principal 
'  Secretary  of  State.'— 3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  19.  s.  2. 


364 


LAY  OBSERVANCE 


132.  — Public  Houses  in  London  not  to  be  opened 

on  Sundays,  Christmas-Days,  and  Good-Fridays,  before  1  o'clock 

p.m.  except  for  refreshment  for  Traveller?,  under  a  Penalty  not 

exceeding  £5.,  or  one  month's  imprisonment. — 

'  No  Licensed  Victualler  or  other  person  shall  open  his  house 
'  within  the  Metropolitan  Police  District  for  the  sale  of  Wine, 
'  Spirits,  Beer,  or  other  fermented  or  distilled  Liquors  ou 
'  Sundays,  Christmas-Day,  and  Good-Kriday,  before  the  hour 
'  of  1  o'clock  p.  m.,  except  refreshment  for  Travellers. — 2  &  3  Vict, 
c.  47.  s.  42.  Offenders  against  the  Statute  shall  '  be  liable  to  a 
'Penalty  not  more  than  £b.,  or  be  imprisoned  for  any  time  not 
'  more  than  one  calendar   month,'  at  the  discretion  of  the 

Magistrates. — ib.  Sect.  73.    See  'Ale  and  Beer  Houses.' 

Bobbery  on  Sunday.    See  'Travelling? 

Eoute  of  Public  Conveyances  may  be  altered  on 

Sundays.    See  'Stage  Coaches' 

Sale.    See  'Contracts.' 

133.  — Serving  Civil  Process  is  prohibited  on  the 

Sunday';  yet  contrivances  are  sometimes  adopted,  particularly  to 
effect  an  Arrest ;  the  means  employed  however  must  be  legal,  and 
not  through  the  instrumentality  of  a  Criminal  Process.  {Wells  v. 
Gurney ;  8  B  &  C.  769.).  Thus:— 

'  No  person  or  persons  upon  the  Lord's-Day  shall  serve  or 
'execute,  or  cause  to  be  served  or  executed,  any  Writ,  Process, 
'Warrant,  Order,  Judgment,  or  Decree,  (except  in  cases  of 
'  Treason,  Felony,  or  Breach  of  the  Peace);  but  that  the  Service 
'  of  every  such  Writ,  Process,  &c,  shall  be  void,  to  all  intents 
'and  purposes  whatsoever;  and  the  person  or  persons  so  serving 
'  or  executing  the  same  shall  be  as  liable  to  the  suit  of  the  party 
'  grieved,  and  to  answer  damages  to  him  for  doing  thereof,  as  if 
1  he  or  thev  had  done  the  same  without  any  Writ,  Process,  &c.' — 
29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  *.  6. 

In  fact,  Sunday  is  in  law  a  'Dies  Aim,'  so  that  if  a  man  be 
arrested  upon  a  Civil  Suit  on  a  Sunday-,  he  may  be  discharged  out 
of  custody  by  applying  to  the  Courts  of  Law;  but  being  once  in 
lawful  custody,  if  he  escapes  without  the  privity  of  the  Sheriff  he 
may  be  retaken  at  any  time.  Burn's  E.  L.  "Phil.  ii.  420.  See 
'A  rrest' 

 Criminal  Process. — Any  warrant  may,  by 

the  above  Statute,  be  executed  on  the  Sunday  in  respect  of 
Treason,  Felony,  or  a  Breach  of  the  Peace;  and  likewise  Escape 
Warrants,  by  1  Anne  St.  II.  c  6;  and  5  Anne,  c.  9.  A  Magistrate's 
warrant  to  a  Constable  to  take  a  man  in  order  to  his  finding 
sureties  for  his  good  behaviour  and  to  keep  the  peace,  comes  within 
the  exception  allowed  in  29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  and  raav  be  executed  on  a 
Sunday'.  {Johnson  v.  Colston,  Raym.  Sir  T.  250.^  See  'Warrants.' 
The  Statute  of  Anne,  '  For  the  better  preventing  Escapes  out  of  the 
Queen's  Bench  and  Fleet  Prisons,'  enacts  — '  that  it  is  and  shall  be 
'  lawful  to  apprehend  and  take  upon  the  Lord's  Day,  any  person 


OF  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY-DATS,  &C.  365 


'  or  persons  by  virtue  of  any  warrant  or  warrants  granted  in  pur- 
'  snance  of  this  or  of  the  said  former  act,  (1  Anne  St.  II.  c.  6).' — 
5  Anne  c.  9.  s.  3.  (Sir  Wm.  Moore's  case.  2  Raym.  Ld.  1028.).  So  a 
party  who  has  wrongfully  escaped  may  be  retaken  on  the  Sunday 
without  a  warrant  (Atkinson  v.  Jameson.  5.  T.  K.  25.).  Rogers' 
Eccl.  L.  592. 

  Ecclesiastical  Processes,  such  as  Citations, 

and  Excommunications  are  not  affected  by  the  Statute  29  Car.  II. 
c.  7.  Chief  Justice  Holt  says — '  If  the  Ecclesiastical  Law  was  and 
'  had  always  been  to  serve  this  process  on  a  Sunday  (in  which 
'  respect  it  was  different  from  temporal  process,  which  may  be  as 
'  well  served  on  any  other  day),  that  then  it  did  not  seem  to  be  the 
'  intent  of  this  Statute  to  take  away  the  serving  it  in  that  manner, 
'  which  is  only  meant  of  processes  that  may  as  well  be  executed  at 
'  any  other  time.' — (Bukn's  Eccl.  Law.  Phil.  ii.  420.  Gibson's  Cod. 
240;  271;  Alanson  v.  Brookbanh  Carth.  504;  5  Mod.  449;  12. 
ib.  275;  2Salk.  625.). 

134.  — Sports,  Sfe. — Persons  are  not  allowed  to 

assemble  out  of  their  own  Parishes  on  the  Sunday  for  any  Sport, 
Pastime,  Boxing-Match,  &c,  nor  within  their  own  Parishes,  under 
penalty  of  3s.  id.  for  every  offence,  to  be  given  to  the  Poor.  In 
Default,  the  offender  to  be  put  in  the  Stocks  for  3  hours  : — 

'  Be  it  enacted  there  shall  be  no  Meetings,  Assemblies,  or 

'  Concourse  of  People  out  of  their  own  Parishes  on  the  Lord's- 
'  Day,  within  this  Realm  of  England  or  any  of  the  Dominions 
'  thereof,  for  any  Sports  and  Pastimes  whatsoever,  nor  any 
'  Bear-baiting,  Bull-baiting,  Interludes,  Common  Plays,  or  other 
'  unlawful  exercises  and  Pastimes  used  by  any  Person  or  Persons 
'  within  their  own  Parishes  ;  and  that  every  Person  or  Persons 
'  offending  in  any  of  the  premises,  shall  forfeit  for  every  offence 

'3s.  id.  to  the  use  of  the  Poor  upon  view  of  one  Justice,  or 

'  confession  of  the  party,  or  proof  of  one  or  more  witnesses  

'to  be  levied  by  distress:  and  in  default  of  such  distress,  that  the 

'  party  offending  be  set  publicly  in  the  Stocks  for  3  hours  the 

'  Prosecution  to  be  within  one  month  after  the  offence  committed. 

'  The  Ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  not  to  be  abridged  by  this 

'  Act.'— 1  Car.  I.  o.  I.  s.  1.;  (29  Car.  II.  c.  7.). 

135.  — Stage  Coaches,  Omnibuses,  &c.  are  not  within 
the  Statutes  3  Car.  I.  c.  1.  (2);  29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  and  may  therefore 
run  on  Sundays,  and  can  be  compelled  to  take  their  Passengers. 
(Sandiman  v.  Breach,  7  B  &  C.  96.).  But  in  London  to  prevent 
interruption  of  the  performance  of  '  Divine  Service,'  their  Route 
may  be  altered. 

'  On  the  applications  of  the  Minister  or  Churchwardens  of  any 
'  Church,  Chapel,  or  other  place  of  Public  Worship,  to  the  Court 

'of  Aldermen  of  the  City  of  London  ,  or  to  any  two  of  the 

'Justices  of  the  said  Police  Offices,  which  shall  be  in  the 

'  vicinity  of  the  said  Church,  &c  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the 

'  Court  of  Aldermen,  or  for  such  two  Justices,  as  the  case  may  be, 
'  to  make  Rules  or  Orders  for  regulating  the  Route  and  conduct 
'of  Persons  who  shall  drive  any  stage  carriage,  or  who  shall 
'  drive  any  cattle,  sheep,  pigs,  or  other  animals  within  such  Parish 


360  LAY  OBSEBVANCE  OF  SUNDAYS,  &C. 


'or  place  during  the  hours  of  Divine  Service,  ou  Sunday. 
'  Christmas-Day,  Good-Friday,  or  any  other  Day  appointed 
'  for  a  Public  Fast  or  Thanksgiving,  and  to  annex  reasonable 
'  Penalties  for  the  breach  of  such  Rules  or  Orders,  not  exceeding 

'  40»\,  with  costs,  if  ordered,  for  any  such  offence  in  default  of 

'payment  to  be  imprisoned  for  any  term  not  exceeding  one 

'month  and  the  party  offending  may  be  apprehended,  without 

'  any  warrant,  by  any  constable  Provided  that  such  Rules  and 

'  orders  shall   have  been  printed  and  affixed  on  the  Church, 
'Chapel,  or  place  of  Public  Worship  to  which  the  same  shall 
'  refer,  and  in  the  most  conspicuous  places  leading  to,  and  con- 
'  tiguous  thereto,  and  elsewhere,  as  the  said  Court  of  Aldermen, 
'  or  the  said  Justices  shall  direct.'— 3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  19.  s.  26. 
A  similar  power  is  lodged  in  the  Commissioners  of  Police  in  the 
Metropolitan  Police  District  by  2  &  3  Vict.  c.  47.  «.  51.  But 
offenders  against  this  Act  are  liable  to  Penalties  not  exceeding  £o, 
or  imprisonment  for  anv  time  not  more  than  one  Calendar  month. — 
Sect.  73. 

136.  — Travelling. — 'For  the  better  observation  and 

keeping  holy  the  Lord's-Day,  commonly  called  Sunday','  as  the 
statute  of  29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  commences,  it  is  enacted,  among  the 
things  already  mentioned: — 

'  That  if  any  Person  or  Persons  whatsoever  which  shall  travel 
'  upon  the  Lord's-Day,  shall  be  then  robbed,  that  no  Hundred  or 
'  the  inhabitants  thereof,  shall  be  charged  with  or  answerable  for 
'  any  robber;/  so  committed,  but  the  person  or  persons  so  robbed 

'shall  be  barred  from  bringing  an  action  for  the  said  robbery  

'nevertheless,  the  Inhabitants  of  the  Counties  and  Hundreds 
'  (after  notice  of  any  such  robbery  to  them  or  some  of  them 
'  given,  or  after  Hue  and  Cry  for  the  same  to  be  brought) 
'shall  make  or  cause  to  be  made  fresh  suit  and  pursuit  after  the 

'  offenders  upon  pain  of 'forfeiting  as  much  money  as  might 

'have been  recovered  against  the  Hundred  by  the  party  robbed, 
'  if  this  law  had  not  been  made:' — By  Section  5.  A  person  robbed 
on  his  wag  to  Church  does  not  come  under  the  denomination  of  a 
'  person  travelling,'  and  can  therefore  make  claim  upon  the  Hun- 
dred {Tashmaker  v.  Edmonton)  (Hund.  of  1  Com.  Rep.  345.;  Stra. 
405.    See  Waite  v.  Stohe.  Cro.  Jac.  496.)  See  '  Carriers.  'Drovers.' 

Waggoner.    See  under  1  Drover.' 

137.  —  Warrants,  &c. — A  justice  may  grant  or  issue 
a  Warrant  against  any  person  charged  before  him  with  any  Treason 
Felony,  or  indictable  Misdemeanour,  or  any  indictable  Ofl'ence 
whatsoever,  or  any  Search-  Warrant  on  a  Sunday'  'as  well  as  on 
'  any  other  Day.'— 11  &  12  Vict.  c.  42.  s.  4.  (Rogkrs'  Eccl.  L.  593). 
The  ckarge  may,  therefore,  be  preferred,  and  an  information  in 
writing,  and  an  oath  taken  on  that  day.  The  Search-Warrant 
granted  on  a  Sunday  by  the  above  statute  must  be  executed  in  the 
day-time,  if  there  be  probable  suspicion  only;  but  where  there  is 
positive  proof,  it  may  be  executed  in  the  night-time;  and  may,  it 
is  conceived,  be  executed  an  a  Sunday.  It  may  certainly  be  exe- 
cuted on  a  Sunday,  if  it  be  to  apprehend  for  treason,  felony,  or  a 
breach  of  the  peace  (see  21  Car.  II.  c  7.  s.  6);  and  the  words 


THE  FESTIVALS  AND  FASTS. 


367 


"  brench  of  the  peace "  have  been  holden  to  include  all  offences 
which  are  impliedly  against  the  peace,  as  a  warrant  to  find  sureties 
for  good  behaviour"(  Johnson  v.  Colston.  T.  Kayin.  250.),  but  not  to  a 
Warrant  of  commitment  under  a  Justice's"  order  or  conviction. 
(/J.  v.  Myers.  1  T.  R.  2(55).  Ore's  Magisterial  Synopsis.  6th  edit. 
A.  D.  1858.  p.  605.  615.    See  'Serving  Process.' 

138. —  Watermen,  and  Bargemen,  are  not  allowed 
to  exercise  their  '  calling'  on  Sunday,  under  Penalty  of  5s. 

'  No  Person  or  Persons  shall  use,  employ,  or  travel,  upon  the 
'  Lord's-Day  with  any  Boat,  Wherry,  Lighter,  or  Barge,  except 
'  it  be  upon  extraordinary  occasions  to  be  allowed  by  seme 

'  Justice  of  the  Peace  upon  pain  that  every  person  so  ofl'end- 

'ing  shall  forfeit  5s.  for  every  such  offence  upon  view  of  one 

'  Justice,  confession  of  the  party,  or  proof  of  any  one  or  more 

'  witnesses  to  be  levied  by  Distress  in  default  to  be  put  in 

'  the  stocks  for  2  hours.  X  third  part  to  the  Informer,  and  two 
'  thirds  to  the  Poor.'— 29  Car.  II.  c.  7.  s.  2. 

Watermen  on  the  Thames  are  to  a  certain  exetnt  excepted: — 
'  The  Rulers  and  Overseers,  Auditors  and  Assistants  of  the 
'  Society  and  Company  of  Watermen  of  the  River  Thames,  may 
'  appoint  any  number  of  Watermen  not  exceeding  40.  to  ply  and 
'work  on  every  Lord's-Day  between  Vauxhall  and  the  Lime- 
'  house,  for  the'  carrying  of  Passengers  at  Id.  each  person  ;  the 
'  same  to  be  applied  (after  paying  thereout  to  such  persons  for 
'  their  day's  labour  so  much  as  shall  be  agreed  on)  to  the  use  of 
'  the  poor,  aged,  decayed,  and  maimed  Watermen  and  Lightermen 
'  of  the  said  Society  and  their  Widows.'— 11  &  12  Will.  III. 
c.  21.  s.  13. 


Festivals,  and  Fasts. 
The  Festivals. 

139. — The  Holy-Days  are  appointed  by  the 
Statute  5  &  6  fflw.  VI.  c.  3 ;  and  by  the  Rubrical 
'Tables  and  Rules'  following  the  '  Calendar'  in  the 
Liturgy  ;  which  were  revised  and  confirmed  by 
24.  Geo.  II.  c.  23.* :  they  cannot  therefore  be  capriciously 
selected,  nor  only  occasionally  observed,  without 
deviating  from  legally  prescribed  Order.  Canon  13, 
also  enforces  their  due  observance.  Yet  Custom  has 
in  a  great  measure  set  aside  their  general  observance, 
particularly  in  small  country  towns,  and  villages.  In 
these,  Cheistmas-Day  is  perhaps  the  only  Festival 


•  The  24  Cro.  II.  is  -The  Art  for  Rrgvlnli n g  thr  Cowmencetnrnt  of  the  year,  ami 
correcting  thr  t'olcndur  now  in  u»r.'   a.  i».  l&JJ. 


308 


THE  FESTIVALS  AND  FASTS. 


recognized  by  any  religious  service;  and  Ash- 
Wednesday,  and  Good-Feiday,  the  only  known 
and  acknowledged  Fasts.  Of  Saints'  Days,  and  Eves 
or  Vigils,  rural  parishes  are  for  the  most  part  perfectly 
ignorant:  indeed,  the  keeping  of  Vigils  is  scarcely 
known  even  in  our  most  important  Towns,  and  Cities. 
How  far  therefore  it  may  be  desirable  to  revive  their 
observance,  is  a  question  that  demands  the  most 
serious  consideration.  On  this  point  it  would  be  well 
to  peruse  the  various  opinions  respecting  the  'Daily 
Service,'  quoted  in  par.  92,  as  they  touch  also  upon 
these  under  discussion.    (See  also  posted). 

140. — By  Statute  : — By  Section  1  of  the  Statute, 

5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  3., — '  It  is  enacted  that  all  the  Days  hereafter 
'  mentioned  shall  be  kept,  and  commanded  to  be  kept,  Holy- 
'  Days,  and  none  other,  that  is  to  say:' — 

All  Sundays.*  S.  Andrew.  Ap.  (Nov.  30).  E. 

  (S.  Barnabas.  1662)  (June  11.) 

Nativity  of  our  Lord  (Dec.  S.  Bartholomew.  Ap.  (Aug.  24.)  E. 

25).  E.  S.  James.  Ap.  (July  25.)  e. 

Circumcision  of  our  Lord  S.  John.  Ev.  (Dec.  27.) 

(Jan.  1.)  S.  John  Bap.  (June  24.)  e. 

Epiphany.  (Jan.  6.)  S.  Luke.  Ev.  (Oct.  18.) 

Ascension  of  our  Lord  (Mov.)  e.  S.  Mark.  Ev.  (April  25.) 

  S.  Matthew.  Ev.  (Sep.  21.)  E. 

Annunciation  of  Virgin  Mary.  S.  Matthias.  Ap.  (Feb.  24.)  E. 

(Mar.  25.)  E.  S.  Michael,  and  All  Angels. 
Purification  of  Virgin  Mary.  (Sep.  29.) 

(Feb.  2.)  E.  (S.  Paul's  Conversion.  1662.) 

  (Jan.  25.) 

Holy  Innocents.  (Dec.  28).  S.  Peter.  Ap.  (June  29.)  e. 

  S.  Philip,  and  St  James.  Aps. 

SSI  ^K^Ap. 


Monday  )    •    ,m, ,   .„„„,  (Oct.  28.)  I 

Tuesday)    m  >™*«»-«««*-        S.  Stephen.  Mart.  (Dec.  26.) 

S.  Thomas.  Ap.  (Dec.  21.)  E. 

All  Saints.  (Nov.  1.)  E. 

%*  The  names  of  St  Paul,  and  St  Barnabas,  are  omitted  in  the 
Statute,  from  those  holy  men  not  being  considered  in  the  number 
of  the  Twelve  Apostles.  At  the  Last  Review  of  the  Liturgy  (1662), 


*  The  Alphabetical  arrangement,  and  the  annexed  Dates,  are  by 
the  Author.  The  Letter,  e,  indicates  that  the  Evens  preceding  the 
Days  to  which  it  is  annexed  are  Fasts. 


THE  MOVEABLE  FEASTS. 


309 


however,  their  names  were  introduced  in  the  Rubrical  Table 
appointing  the  '  Proper  Lessons  for  Holy-Days,'  and  iu  the  one 
enumerating  the  Feast-Bays,  and  Days  of  Fasting. 

141. — By  Canon:—  Canon  13  thus  enjoins: — 'All  manner  of 
'persons  within  the  Church  of  England  shall  from  henceforth 
'  celebrate  and  keep  the  Lord's-Day,  commonly  called  Sunday,  and 
'  other  Holy-Days,  according  to  God's  holy  will  and  pleasure,  and 
'the  orders  of  the  Church  of  England  prescribed  in  that  behalf; 
'i.  e.  in  hearing  the  Word  of  God  read  and  taught;  in  private  and 
'  public  prayers ;  in  acknowledging  their  offences  to  God,  and 
'amendment  of  the  same;  in  reconciling  themselves  charitably 
'to  their  neighbours,  where  displeasure  hath  been;  in  oftentimes 
'receiving  the  Communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ;  in 
'visiting  of  the  Poor  and  Sick;  using  all  godly  and  sober 
'  conversation.' — Due  celebration  of  Sundays  and  Holy-Days. 


Tli  e    Mo  veable  Feasts. 


142.  — The  Moveable  Feasts  are  dependent  upon 
the  falling  of  Easteb-day.  The  'Tables  and  Rules' 
in  the  Littjbgy  by  which  they  are  determined,  were 
revised  and  enforced  by  24  Geo.  II.  c.  23.  and  are 
consequently  the  law  of  the  land  : — 

'Whereas  a  'Calendar,'  and  also  certain  'Tables  and 
'Rules'  for  the  fixing  the  true  time  of  the  celebration  of  the 
'  said  Feast  of  Easter,  and  the  finding  the  times  of  the  full  moons 
'  on  which  the  same  dependeth,  so  as  the  same  shall  agree  as 
'  nearly  as  may  be  with  the  decree  of  the  said  General  Council 
'  {of  Nice),  and  also  with  the  practice  of  foreign  countries,  have 

'  been  prepared,  and  are  hereunto  annexed  and  after  the  said 

'2nd  day  of  September  (1702),  all  and  every  the  fixed  Feast- 
'  Days,  Holy-Days,  and  Fast-Days,  which  are  now  kept  and 
'  observed  by  the  Church  of  England,  and  also  the  several  solemn 
'  Days  of  Thanksgiving,  and  of  Fasting  and  Humiliation,  which 
'  by  virtue  of  any  Act  of  Parliament  now  in  being,  are  from  time 
'  to  time,  to  be  kept  and  observed,  shall  be  kept  and  observed  on 
'  the  respective  days  marked  for  the  celebration  of  the  same  in 

'  the  said  new  Calendar  The  said  Feast  of  Easter,  and  all 

'other  Moveable  Feasts  thereon  depending,  shall,  from  time  to 
'  time,  be  observed  and  celebrated  according  to  the  said  new 
'Calendar,  Tables,  and  Kules  hereunto  annexed,  in  that 
'part  of  Great  Britain  called  England,  and  in  all  the  dominions 
'  and  countries  aforesaid,  wherein  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of 
'  England  now  is,  or  hereafter  shall  be,  used.'— Sect.  3. 

143.  — In  the  Appendix  to  this  Act  is  the  following 
Table  of  the  ' Moveable  Feasts'  confirmatory  of  the 
one  introduced  into  the  Littjbgt  in  1G62  : — 


370 


THE  FAST  DATS. 


%  Advent  Sunday  is  the  nearest  Sunday  to  St  Andrew's 
Day  (Nov.  30th),  and  always  within  three  davs  before, 
or  after  it. 

Septuagf.sima   Sunday   is  9  weeks 

Sexagesima    is  8  weeks 

Quinquagesima    is  7  weeks 

Quadragesima    is  6  weeks 

Easter-Day  is  always  the  first  Sunday  following  the  Full- 
Moon  which  happens  upon  or  next  after  March  21st;  but  not 
on  the  day  of  the  Full  Moon.  Easter-Day  always  falls 
between  March  21st,  and  April  25th. 

Rogation  Sunday   is   5  weeks 

Ascension-Day  —  is  40  days 

Whitsunday  is   7  weeks 

Trinity  Sunday  is   8  weeks 


■before  Easter. 


after  Easter. 


The  Fast-Days. 


144.  — The  Fast-Days  are  appointed  by  5  &  6 
Edw.  VI.  c.  3.  s.  2 ;  (a.  d.  1552.)  which  enacts  '  that 

'every  Even  or  Day  next  going  before  any  of  the  aforesaid  days  of 

'  the  Feasts  of  the  Nativity  of  Our  Lord,  &c.  (specified  below)  

'  other  than  of  Si  John  the  Evangelist,  and  Philip  and  James, 
'  shall  be  fasted,  and  commanded  to  be  kept  and  observed ;  and 
'  none  other  Even  or  Day  shall  be  commanded  to  be  fasted.' 

This  also  is  confirmed  and  enforced  by  the  Rubri- 
cal Tables  in  the  Litt/egy,  amended  by  24  Geo.  II. 
c.  23.    The  Fast-Days  are  the  following :  — 
Eve  of  Christmas-Day',  Eve  of  S.  James  (Julv  25.) 

(Dec.  25.)    S.  John.  Baptist. 

 Easter-Day.  (June  24.) 

  Ascension-Day.    S.  Matthew  (Sep.  21.) 

  Whitsunday.    S.  Matthias  (Feb.  24.) 

  Annunciation  of    S.  Peter  (June  29.) 

Virgin  Mary  (Mar.  25.)    5.  Simon,  &  5.  Jude 

  Purification  of  (Oct.  2a) 

Virgin  Mary  (Feb.  2.)  5.  Thomas  (Dec.  21.) 

  S.  Andrew  (Nov.  30.)    All  Saints  (Nov.  1.) 

  S.  Bartholomew  (Aug.  24.) 

145.  — These  Eves  or  Vigils  are  not  to  be  kept  on 
Sundays. — 'When  any  of  the  said  Feasts  (the  Evens  whereof  be  by 
'  this  Statute,  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.,  commanded  to  be  observed  and  kept 
'  Fasting-Days)  do  fall  upon  the  Monday,  then  the  Saturday  next 
'  before,  and  not  the  Sunday,  shall  be  commanded  to  be  fasted 
'  for  the  Even  of  any  such  Feast  or  Holy-Day.' — 5  &  6  Edw.  VL 
c.  3.  s.  5  (See  under  the  First  Collect  in  the  '  Evening  Service.' 
postea.) 


THE  FAST  BATS. 


371 


Similarly  in  the  later  Rtjbbic,  which  runs  thus  :— 

1.  'NOTE,  that  if  any  of  these  Feast-Days  fall  upon  a 
'Monday,  then  the  Vigil  or  Fast-Day  shall  le  kept  wpon^ 
'the  Saturday,  and  not  upon  the  Sunday  next  before  it.' 
—(1662). 

*»*  Eves  or  Vigils  omitted.  —  Those  Feast-Days,  which  fall 
during  seasons  of  rejoicing  have  on  that  account  no  Eves  of 
Fasting  assigned  them'  (Ascension  Day  excepted,  the  Eve  of  which 
is  one  of  the  Rogation  Days).    They  are 

Between  Chrintmas,  and  Purification  Between  Eatter  ami  Whittuntide. 

of  Virgin  Mary. 

Circumcision  (Jan.  1.)  S.  Barnabas  (June.  11.) 

Holy  rnnncents  (Dec.  28.)  S.' Marh  (Apr.  25.) 

S.  John,  Ev.  (Dec.  27.)  S.  Philip,  and  S.  James 
S.  Paul's  Conversion  (Jan.  25.)  (May  1.) 

S.  Stephen  (Dec.  26.) 

St  Luke's  Day  (Oct.  18.),  is  also  omitted,  from  having  been 
formerly  preceded  by  a  Feast-Day  (St  Etheldred's)  now  removed. 

St  Michael  and  All  Angels  (Sep.  29),  has  no  Eve  or  Vigil 
prescribed,  from  this  Feast-Day  commemorating  those  created 
beings  who  passed  through  no  previous  life  of  suffering. — 
(Wheatly  Com.  Prayer,  ]  90.) 

146.  — Among  the  Feast  Days  having  no  Vigils 
assigned  to  them  is  the  Circumcision  of  Our  Lord,  on 
January  1st;  the  modern  practice,  therefore,  of  keeping 
the  Vigil  or  Eve  of  '  New  Tear's  Day '  with  Divine 
Service  and  Holy  Communion  is  a  deviation  from 
the  Rubric,  contrary  to  the  Statute  Law  just  quoted, 
(5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  3 ;  24  Geo.  II.  c.  23.),  and  a 
departure  from  long  established  custom.  (See  also 
Canon  72.  and  under  First  Collect  in  Evening 
Pbaxeb,  Vol.  r.  posfea.) 

147.  — Unless  a  distinction  is  admitted  between  a 
Vigil  and  an  Eve  it  would  be  difficult  to  reconcile  the 
growing  usage  of  celebrating  all  Eves  of  Saints'  days. 
Mr.  Pollen  in  his  "  Narrative  of  Five  Years  at  St 
Saviour's,  Leeds,"  writes: — 'The  Parish  Church  of 
'Leeds  celebrated  the  Eucharist  at  midnight  on  the 
*  Eve  of  the  Circumcision,  which  is  "  New  Year's  Day." 
(p.  103.)  So  that  Dr.  Hook,  the  Vicar  of  that  Parish, 
defends  the  usage.  Touching  the  difference  between 
Eves  and  Vigils  which  some  extreme  Ritualists  main- 
tain, we  may  quote  the  following: — 


372  DATS  OF  FASTING  OE  ABSTINENCE. 

The  Rev.  J.  PCBCBAS  writes:  —  'The  day  before  a  Festival,  if 
'fasted  is  called  its  Vigil,  if  vnfasted  its  Eve.  If  a  Festival  which 
'  has  a  Vigil  fall  on  Jionday,  Saturday  is  the  Vigil,  Sunday  the  Eve. 
'  The  Church  never  fasts  on  the  Lord's  Day.  An  Eve  is  not  a  fast.' 
(  p  80). — Directorium  A  nglicanum. 

Oilier  Days  of  Fasting  or  Abstinence. 

148.  — These  are  appointed  in  the  Kubbic,  as 
follows : — 

^f.  1.    '  The  Forty  Days  in  Lent  {Sundays  not  included)* 

2.  '  The  Ember-Days  at  the  four  Seasons,  being  the 

'Frt^    after    i  ^ZtZ?  ^ 

Frulay  V  after  <  SeplembeTlW. 
'Saturday,   j  {December  13th. 

3.  '  The  three  Rogation-Days,  being  the  Monday,  Tuesday. 

'and  Wednesday  before  Ascension-Day  {Holy 
'  Thursday). 

4.  '  All  Fridays  (except  Christmas-Day).— (1662). 

Of  these,  however,  the  general  practice  of  modem 
times,  particularly  among  the  Laity,  has  recognized 
but  the  two  ioWosx'mg  fasts  : — 

Ash-  Wednesday,  Good-Friday, 
and  such  others  as  may  be  appointed  by  authority  to 
be  kept  as  Public  Fast,  and  Thanksgiving  Days. 

149.  — Still,  the  observance  of  the  Feasts,  and 
Fasting-Days,  is  enjoined  not  only  in  the  Eubeic, 
but  Ecclesiastical  censures  are  imposed  for  neglecting 
them  by  the  Statute,  5  &  6  Fdw.  YI.  c.  3.  above 
quoted :  thus — 


•In  the  American  Liturgy,  —  which  is  a  modern  Revision 
of  the  English  '  Book  of  Common  Prayer,'  made  in  a  general  Con- 
vention of  the  Bishops,  Clergy,  and  Laity  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church  of  the  United  States  of  America,  Oct.  Wh,  1789,  soon 
after  the  Declaration  of  Independence  (1776—84),  —  this  '  Table  ' 
is  headed  thus: — 

'A  Table  of  Fasts. 
1  Ash-Wednesday.  |  Good-Friday. 

Other  Days  of  Fasting, 
'  On  which  the  Church  requires  such  a  measure  of  abstinence  as  is 
'  more  especially  suited  to  extraordinary  acts 
'  and  exercises  of  devotion, 
'  I.    The  Forty- Days  of  Lent:  &c.  &c.  &c. 

(On.  Wainwiught's  Edition,  Kne  Totk.  ISIS.) 


DAYS  OF  FASTING  OE  ABSTINENCE.  373 


'It  shall  be  lawful  to  all  Archbishops  and  Bishops  in  their 
'  Dioceses,  and  to  all  other  having  .Ecclesiastical  or  Spiritual 
'jurisdiction,   to  inquire  of  every  person    that  skalt  offend 
'in  the  premises,  and  to  punish  every  such  offender  by  the 
'censures  of  the  Church,  and  to  enjoin  them  such  penance 
'  as  the  spiritual  judge  by  his  discretion  shall   think  meet 
'and  convenient.'  —  Sect.  3.    The  next  Section  (§  4.)  provides 
that  this  Act  shall  not  extend  to  abrogate  abstinence  from 
jiesh  in  Lent,  or  on  Fridays,' and  Saturdays,  or  any  other  day 
appointed  so  to  be  kept  by  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  19.  (but  this 
Act,  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  is  now  expired).    See  also  the  Injunctions 
of  Edward,  and  Elizabeth  (Cakdwf.ll's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  13,  113)  ; 
and  13  &  14  Car.  EL.  c.  4.  s.  2.  page  335. 

Harvest  time,  &c.  excepted.  —  It  is  lawful  to  any 
person  '  upon  the  Holy-Days  aforesaid  in  Harvest,  or  at  any  other 
'  time  of  the  year  when  necessity  shall  require,  to  labour,  ride, 
'fish,  or  work  any  kind  of  work,  at  their  free  wills  and  plea- 
'  sure.'— 5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  3.  s.  6.    The  following  Section  (§  7.) 
allows  the  keeping  of  the  Feast  of  St.  George  on  April  22 — 24.  This 
Act  was  repealed  on  the  accession  of  Mary,  but  revived  in  the  first 
year  of  James  I.  by  (2  (1)  Jas.  I.  c.  25.).    Similar  indulgence  had 
been  permitted  in  certain  'Injunctions'  of  Henry  VIII. j  as  well 
as  by  Convocation  in  1536.    (Bp.  Cosins  in  Add.  Notes  to  Nicholl's 
C.  P.  p.  15.).  Edward,  and  Elizaiseth  also,  in  their  'Injunctions' 
allowed  Harvest  work  to  be  done  on  Holy-Days  after  the 
'  Morning  Prayer.'    (Cardwell's  Hoc.  Ann.  i.  16,  46,  188). 

Term  time  is  also  in  some  cases  excepted.  —  The 
observance  of  the  Holy'-Days  enjoined  by  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  3.  is 
not  required  during  Term  time  in  the  Courts  of  Law,  and  in  the 
several  Offices  in  connection  therewith,  except  Sunday,  Christ- 
mas-Day, and  three  following  days,  and  Easter  Monday,  and 
Tuesday  :  by  3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  42.  s.  43. 

150.  — No  other  Fast-Days  are  allowed  than  such 
as  are  prescribed  by  lawful  authority.  In  cases  of 
Parishes  or  Districts  suffering  under  alarming  visi- 
tations of  Cholera.  Fever,  or  other  calamity,  it  is  not 
in  the  power  of  the  Clergyman  to  institute  a  public 
fast  without  the  sanction  of  the  Bishop ;  as  we  find 
enjoined  in  the  Canon  :  thus, — 

'  No  Minister  shall,  without  the  Licence  and  direction  of  the 
'  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  first  obtained,  and  had,  under  hand  and 
'seal,  appoint  or  keep  any  solemn  Fasts,  either  publicly  or  in 
'  any  private  houses,  other  than  such  as  by  Law  are,  or  by  public 
'authority  shall  be,  appointed,  nor  shall  he  wittingly  be  present 
'at  any  of  them;  under  pain  of  Suspension  for  the  First  fault, 
'of  Excommunication  for  the  Second,  and  of  Deposition  from  the 
'  Ministry  for  the  Third.'— Canon  72. 

151.  — The  great  feature  of  modern  times,  however, 
has  been   rather   a  laxity  in    the   observance  of 

A  A  2 


374  DAI'S  OF  FASTING  OB  ABSTINENCE. 


Holy-Days  than  any  Bupererogant  or  extreme 
attention  to  the  requirements  of  the  Liturgy  in  this 
respect.  In  censure  of  this  negligence  we  may  quote 
the  following  opinions  in  addition  to  what  have  been 
already  advanced  (in  pars.  108 — 138.) 

The  Bishop  of  London  {Dr.  Blomfeld),  on  the  subject  of 
the  Festivals  and  Fasts,  remarks: — 'I  desire  more  particularly 
'  to  call  your  attention  to  the  duty  incumbent  upon  you.  of 
'  celebrating  '  Divine  Service '  upon  each  of  the  days,  on  which 
'  we  commemorate  the  leading  events  in  the  history  of  our  blessed 
'Lord;  not  only  His  Nativity,  Crucifixion,  and  Resurrection;  but 
'  His  Circumcision,  His  Ma7iifestutivn  to  the  Gentiles,  and  His 
'  glorious  Ascension.  It  is  my  wish,  that  in  obedience  to  the 
'  Church's  directions,  you  should  celebrate  Public  Worship  on  all 
'the  Anniversaries  of  those  events;  on  every  day  in  Passion 
'Week,  upon  the  Mondays  and  Tuesdays  after  Easter-Day,  and 
'Whitsunday,  and  upon  Ash-Wednesday.  By  specifying  these 
'  particular  days,  I  do  not  mean  to  insinuate,  that  the  other 


'kept;  but  if  any  distinction  is  made,  those  observances,  which 
'  are  appointed  in  honour  of  our  blessed  Lord  Himself,  and  the 
'  solemn  commencement  of  our  great  penitential  Fast,  are  entitled 
'  to  peculiar  respect.  The  reason  which  is  commonly  assigned 
'  for  the  non-observance  of  some  of  these  Holy-Days,  namely,  that 
'  the  people  will  not  go  to  Church  even  if  we  celebrate  Divine 
'  Service,  I  consider  not  to  be  of  such  weight  as  to  preponderate 
'against  the  plain  requirements  of  the  law.' — The  Bishop  then 
animadverts  upon  the  people's  neglect  in  this  particular,  and 
adds: — 'It  must  needs  take  some  time  to  overcome  that  habit; 
'  but  the  Clergy  must  be  the  first  to  attempt  it,  and  they  are 
'  not  to  be  blamed  for  making  the  attempt.  Let  them  do  tlieir  part 
'  in  carrying  out  the  Church's  intentions,  and  then  none  of  the 
'  Laity  will  have  cause  to  complain  of  being  deprived,  by  their 
'  means,  of  any  of  the  opportunities  and  privileges  to  which  all  her 
'  children  are  entitled.'  (  p.  32.) — Charge,  1842. 

The  Rev.  J.  Sandford  says: — 'Many  of  these  days  have 
'fallen  into  general  neglect,  so  that  though  they  still  retain  their 
'place  in  the  Calendar,  and  special  Services  ifor  them  may  be 
'  found  in  the  Prayer  Book,  in  most  Parishes  they  are  wholly 

'  overlooked  With  what  grace  do  we  ask  our  people  to  meet 

'  us  at  the  Wednesday  or  Thursday  Lecture,  when  we  keep  the 
4  doors  of  the  Sanctuary  shut  on  the  Festivals  appointed  by  the 
'  Rubric.  In  favour  of  the  one  we  can  plead  solely  our  own 
'judgment  and  pleasure;  in  support  of  the  other,  we  have  the 
'  sanction  of  wisdom  and  authority,  which  we  all  profess  to  revere. 
'  It  surely  becomes  us,  without  delay,  to  resume  the  Services, 
'  which  we  have,  many  of  us,  so  long  slightingly  observed,  or  wholly 
'  neglected.'  {p.  254,  256.)— Parochialia. 


Church 


LENT. 


375 


Lent. 

152.  — With  respect  to  the  'Forty  Days  in  Lent,'1 
the  Rubrical  directions  in  the  Litttegy  imposing 
the  religious  Services  of  this  season  are  few  and 
indeterminate.  For  the  '  First  Day  of  Lent]  com- 
monly called  Asu- Wednesday,  thei-e  are  appointed 
'  Proper  Psalms,'  (six  of  the  penitential  Psalms  of 
David,  the  seventh  being  used  in  the  Commination 
Office)  an  especial  Collect,  Epistle  and  Gospel,  and 
the  '  Commutation  Service.'  To  the  Collect  is 
appended  the  following  Rubric : — 

*[[.  '  This  Collect  is  to  be  read  every  day  in  Lent  after  the 
'  Collect  appointed  for  the  Hay.'— (1662.) 

which  has  been  thought  by  some  of  those,  who  deny 
that  'Daily  Service '  is  prescribed  by  the  Liturgy,  that 
it  is  required  at  all  events  during  this  season. 

It  may  be  also  added,  that  for  every  day  of 
Passion-Week  certain  Epistles  and  Gospels  are 
supplied ;  and  particular  '  Lessons  '  directed  for 
the  Wednesday,  Thursday,  Good-Friday,  and  the 
Saturday  {Easter-Even).  '  Proper  Psalms '  and 
Collects  are  also  appointed  for  Good-Friday,  and  a 
specific  Collect,  &c,  for  Easter-Even. 

153.  — These  are  the  only  requirements  of  the 
Prayer  Book :  they  are  legally  binding  upon  the  Clergy ; 
and  although  not  universally  practised,  yet  they  could 
be  authoritatively  enforced  by  the  Bishop  of  the 
Diocese.  In  those  Churches  where  'Daily  Service'' 
is  performed,  the  strict  observance  of  the  Lent  season 
will  necessarily  be  maintained,  and  perhaps  enhanced 
by  some  additional  '  Duty ; '  such  as  an  '  Evening 
Service,'  or  extra  Sermon,  or  weekly,  and  even  in  a 
few  instances  daily,  Communion.  Where  Wednesdays 
and  Fridays  only,  or  some  other  Week-day,  are 
ordinarily  observed,  there  will  also  be  afforded 
probably  some  additional  opportunities  for  Public 
Prayer.  In  the  case  of  Parishes  wherein  Service 
on  the  Week-day  is  not  the  usage,  Public  Worship  is 


376 


LENT. 


generally  performed  on  the  Wednesdays  and  Fridays 
during  Lent,  and  daily  in  Passion-Week.  In  some 
instances  only  Ash-Wednesday,  and  Good-Feiday 
are  observed.  In  others,  only  Good-Feiday.  The 
two  latter  examples  naturally  lead  to  the  inquiry — 
Do  these  practices  fulfil  the  intention  of  the  Liturgy, 
and  come  up  to  the  requirements  of  the  Declaration 
and  Subscription  of  Conformity  ?  This  requires  from 
us  no  comment  after  what  has  been  said  by  the 
Bp.  of  London  in  par.  92. 

154.  — The  fast  of  Lent  from  'Lencten'  or  'Zenuten' 
the  Saxon  for  'spring  time'  and  so  called  from  the  days 
lengthening,  is  of  very  great  antiquity  as  a  preparation 
for  the  solemnities  of  Easter.  It  was  at  first  but 
of  40  hours  duration  commemorative  of  the  crucifixion, 
time  from  Friday  noon  to  the  period  of  Christ's 
resurrection.  In  the  5th  century  other  days  were 
added  till  it  extended  to  six  weeks  minus  the  Sundays. 
In  the  8th  century,  Ash- Wednesday  and  the  three 
next  days  were  annexed  by  Gregory  II.,  when  it 
became  the  Quadragesimal  fast  of  40  days ;  analagous 
to  the  periods  of  fasting  we  read  of  in  Scripture. 
The  season  of  Lent  was  chiefly  occupied  in  preparing 
Catechumens,  and  Penitents,  and  the  Communicants 
for  the  Easter  administration.  (Bingham's  Christian 
Antiq.  xxi.  I.  11 — 13.). 

155.  — With  respect  to  'Fasting,'  no  rule  is,  or  can  be 
laid  down  for  its  regulation  :  the  old  Statutes  enjoining 
it  have  either  expired,  or  been  repealed* ;  so  that  it  is 
now  a  voluntary  act :  yet  the  mention  of  Fasting  in 
the  Lituegy  imposes  on  all  members  of  the  Church 
of  England  a  certain  measure  of  abstinence  from  meats 
and  drinks,  and  a  denial  to  some  extent  of  worldly 
pleasures  and  pursuits,  which  would  naturally  induce 
a  more  ordinary  attention  to  religious  duties.  The 
degree  of  abstinence  and  self  denial,  therefore,  must, 


*  These  are  2  &  3  Edn:  VI.  c.  19;  5  Eliz.  c.  5.  s.  15;  27  Eliz. 
c.  11;  35  Eliz.  c.  7.  «s.  8.  22. 


TIIE  EMBER  DAYS. 


377 


depend  upon  the  individual  sense  entertained  for  these 
Christian  seasons,  and  upon  the  appreciation  of  the 
advantages  resulting  from  such  devotional  exercises. 
"We  can,  however,  give  some  idea  of  what  extreme 
views  require  : — 

The  Rev.  J.  Purchas  says: — 'The  distinction  between 
'  (1)  fasting  and  (2)  abstinence,  requires,  the  first— abstaining 
'from  food,  or  diminishing  the  amount  of  it;  tho  second — laying 
'aside  the  more  nourishing  hinds  of  it,  i.e.  all  flesh  meats.  Lent, 
'  Vigils,  and  Rogation  days,  are  of  tho  former,  Fridays  of  the  latter 
'  class.'  {p.  84.) — Directorium  Anglicanum. 

The  Ruv.  J.  H.  PoiXEN  remarks: — 'For  Lent,  a  dietary  rule 
'  was  established,  and  one  member  of  the  Society  stood  and  read 
'  a  portion  of  the  lives  of  the  saints  while  dinner  was  eaten  in 
'  silence.  After  a  time  a  second  relieved  him,  and  he  ate.  On 
'Sundays,  this  rule  was  dispensed  with  and  talking  allowed;  silence 
'  was  kept  at  breakfast,  except  during  festival  seasons.  Meat 
'  was  allowed  on  Sundays,  Tuesdays,  and  Thursdays  except  during 
'  the  Tloly  week.  Butter  was  allowed  at  tea.  On  Wednesdays  and 
'  Fridays,  a  piece  of  bread  at  breakfast  time  with  cotl'ee  without 
'  milk  or  sugar,  and  tea  at  the  usual  time.  This  rule  did  not  apply 
'to  the  lads  educating  for  Pupil  teachers,  nor  to  those  in  weak 
'  health.  It  was  relaxed,  in  part,  in  subsequent  Lents,  as  being 
'  too  severe.  The  youngest  of  the  Clergy  had  to  be  ordered 
'  afterwards  to  eat  meat  daily,  and  some  for  supper,  but  no  orders 
'  could  induce  him  to  do  this  on  Fridays  or  Fast  days.'  (  p.  82.) — 
Five  years  at  St  Saviour's,  Leeds. 

In  the  Clergyman's  Diary  Rules  for  Fasting  aro  thus  laid 
down : — 

'  1.    Neither  in  abstinence  nor  in  fasting  may  we  eat  flesh-meat. 

'  2.  On  Fast-days,  moreover,  we  should  eat  only  one  full  meal, 
'  and  one  half  meal. 

'  If  persons  find  difficulty  in  observing  these  rules  they  should 
'apply  to  their  Parish  Priest,  or  other  proper  authority;  and  on 
'just  cause  they  may  obtain  a  relaxation. 

'  The  aged,  the  very  young,  the  very  poor,  invalids,  they  who 
'  have  to  labour  very  hard  for  their  daily  bread,  and  travellers,  are 
'  excused  from  fasting,  but  they  should  abstain. 

'  With  fasting  we  should  join  self-deuial  of  all  kinds,  prayer, 
'  alms-giving,  and  other  works  of  mercy.' — Diary  for  1859,  p.  8. 


The  Umber  Bays. 

156. — The  "Wednesday,  Friday,  and  Saturday 
following  the 

1st  Sunday  in  Lent.  September  14th. 

Whitsunday.  December  13th. 

being,  as  before  observed,  the  Ehbeb-Days,  the  Weeks 
in  which  they  occur  are  termed  the  Ember-Weeks,  or 


37b 


THE  EMBER  DATS. 


'Fastsof  the  Four  Seasons,'  (Jejuniaquatuortemporum); 
intended  as  a  solemn  consecration  of  the  four  seasons 
of  the  year  by  prayer  and  fasting  ;  and,  therefore,  fit 
and  opportune  times  for  the  admission  of  Clerks  into 
Holy  Orders  :  not  that  they  were  originally  designed 
for  this  purpose.  Pope  Gelasius  was  the  first  to  choose 
these  occasions,  a.  d.  498  ;  although  some  attribute  it 
to  Gregory  VII.  about  a.  d.  1080.  December  was  at 
first  the  chief  period  for  Ordinations ;  Mid-lent  was 
subsequently  added ;  then  May  by  Pope  Leo  II,;  next 
September  by  Gregory  I. 

157.  — The  Umber-Bays,  therefore,  return  at  the 
quarterly  periods  prescribed  by  Canon  31,  for  the 
Ordination  of  Ministers.  (See  'Obdination  Seetice' 
posted).  Their  observance  is  not  only  implied  by  their 
being  enumerated  in  the  'Table'  of  Fasts;  but  it  is  also 
enjoined  inferentially  in  the  Eubbic  preceding  two  of 
the  '  Occasional  Prayers '  in  the  Liturgy,  which  are 
appointed  to  be  said,  not  on  the  three  Embeb-Days 
alone,  but  daily  throughout  that  week.  The  Etjbbio 
and  its  two  Prayers,  which  are  peculiar  to  the 
English  Eitual  (Palmes' s  Orig.  Lit.  i.  335),  were 
introduced  at  the  last  Eeview  (1662.  Caed well's 
Gonf.  381.)  :  the  second  Prayer,  however,  is  borrowed 
from  the  Scotch  Liturgy.  The  Rubric  directing  when 
they  are  to  be  used  runs  thus  : — 

If.  'In  the  Ember  Weeks,  to  be  said  every  day,  for  those 
'that  are  to  be  admitted  into  Holy  Orders.1*  1662). 

158.  — In  Churches  where  there  are  no  Public 
Daily  Prayers,  the  prescribed  Collects  are  read  in 
the  Wednesday  and  Friday  Services ;  and  where  these 


•  The  Rubric  of  the  Scotch  Liturgy  (1637)  is  more 
explanatory;  thus — 'A  Prayer  to  be  said  in  the  Ember-Weeks 
'  for  those  which  are  then  to  be  admitted  into  Holy  Orders  ;  and  is  to 
■be  read  every  day  of  the  Week,  beginning  on  the  Sunday  before 
'  the  day  of  Ordination.' — Keeling,  p.  52,  58. 

In  the  American  Liturgy,  the  Rubric  preceding  the  two 
Prayers  omits  the  word  'Ember'  altogether,  thus: — 'For  those  who 
'  are  to  be  admitted  into  Eoly  Orders.  To  be  used  in  the  Weeks 
•  preceding  the  stated  times  of  Ordination.' 


THE  EOGATIOK  DATS. 


379 


are  also  wanting,  one  is  read  on  the  Sunday  previous 
to  the  day  of  Ordination,  and  not  on  the  day  itself. 
(Shepherd,  i.  287;  Wheatly,  178.).  The  first 
Collect  is  generally  used  in  the  previous  part  of  the 
week,  and  the  second  in  the  latter  part. 

The  Bishop  of  London  {Dr.  Blomfield)  directs:— ' The  Prayers 
'for  the  Ember-Weeks  should  always  be  used  as  appointed.' 
{p.  65.)— Charge,  1842. 

The  late  Bishop  of  Down  and  Connor,  &c.  {Dr.  Mant) 
says: — 'So  also  should  one  of  the  Prayers  in  the  ''Ember-  Week* 
'  be  devoutly  said:  and  in  my  opinion,  "on  every  day"  in  the  week  I 
'  beginning  with  the  Sunday  before  the  first  Ember-Day,  but  not 
'continued  on  the  Ordination  Day.'  (p.  51.) — Bor.  Lit. 

159.  — The  practice  of  Fasting,  if  exercised,  is 
generally  confined  to  the  Candidates  for  Ordination ; 
and  even  with  these,  the  variable  times  appointed  by 
the  Bishops  for  admission  into  Holy  Orders,  have 
caused  the  Umber  Weeks  and  their  ancient  usages  to 
be  intermitted,  and  in  many  places  to  be  completely 
unnoticed  and  forgotten.  With  respect  to  the  choice 
of  the  'Frayers,'  see  in  loco,  (postea,  Vol.  P.). 

*»*  The  word  'Ember'  is  of  doubtful  origin,  implying  either 
abstinence,  ashes,  circuit  or  course ;  or,  it  may  be,  as  some  think,  a 
corruption  of  tempora,  or  of  hli&pa,  or  of  the  German  quatember, 
(quatuor  tempora)  the  fasts  of  the  four  seasons;  or  from  the  Saxon 
Umbryne  dagas,  meaning  circuitum,  circulum,  curriculum,  decursum, 
(Gibson's  Cod.  287.);  but  the  discussion  of  this  question  does  not 
come  within  the  scope  of  these  'Papers.'  (See  Bingham,  iv.  6.  6; 
xxi.  2.  7.) 

The  Rogation  Days. 

160.  — The  three  Eogation  Days,  or  days  of 
Supplication  (from  rogare,  to  supplicate),  are  the 
Monday,  Tuesday,  and  Wednesday  before  Ascension 
Day  ;  whence  the  Sunday  preceding  (the  fifth  Sunday 
after  Easter)  is  called  'Rogation  Sunday.''  These  Fast 
days  have  no  Service,  Prayer,  nor  Collect  of  any  kind 
assigned  to  them  in  the  Liturgy;  nor  is  their  public 
observation  prescribed  by  any  Rubbic.  They  are 
however  enumerated  among  the  '  Days  of  Fasting '  in 
the  '  Table  '  following  the  Calendar,  and  consequently 
may  be  looked  upon  in  some  degree  as  private  or 


380  PERAMBULATION  OF  PAHISUES. 


voluntary  fasts,  intended  to  prepare  the  mind  for 
the  due  observance  of  Ascension  Dat;  vet  the 
public  consideration  of  these  days  must  doubtlessly 
have  been  contemplated,  although  it  is  not  strictly 
enjoined,  since  we  find  a  Homily  in  four  parts 
especially  appointed,  as  its  title  imports,  "For  the 
Bays  of  Royation  Week.'"  The  lastPar^  is  designated, 
"An  Exhoetation,  to  be  spoken  to  such  Parishes 
where  they  use  their  Peeambllation  in  Rogation 
Week;  for  the  Oversight  of  the  Bounds  and 
Limits  of  their  Town."  This  naturally  leads  us 
to  inquire  into  the  nature  of  these  Per ambulations, 
and  what  necessity  is  imposed  upon  us  in  modern 
times  for  their  continuance.  In  other  respects  the 
Rogation  Days  have  for  the  most  part  been  long 
unobserved. 

[Perambulation  of  Parishes.] 

161. — [The  original  design  of  rerambuluting  Parishes  was  to 
maintain  and  hand  down  to  posterity  the  precise  boundaries  of 
every  'Cure,'  with  the  view  of  determining  the  liabilities  of  each 
Parish,  and  of  defining  the  extent  of  its  spiritual  Charge.  These 
Perambulations  were  formerly  conjoined  with  those  superstitious 
'Processions'  made  at  this  season,  which  had  been  instituted  by 
Mamertus  (or  Mamercus),  a  Gallic  Bishop  of  the  fifth  century  (a.d. 
450.  Palmer  ;  Nicholi.s  says,  A.  n.  570),  and  which  were  abolished  at 
the  Reformation  on  account  of  the  great  abuses  generally  attending 
them.  (Gibson's  Cod.  2o9;  Xichoi.l's  Com.  P.  in  loco:"  Palmer's 
Orig.  Lit.  i.  299,  30:3;  Bingham's  xxi.  2.  8.)  The  Perambulations 
of  Parishes,  however,  answering  a  most  useful  purpose,  were  suffered 
to  continue;  but  the  necessity  of  such  proceedings  now  is  in  a  great 
measure  removed  by  several  modern  Statutes,  such  as  the  Poor 
Laws,  Inclosure.  and  Highway  Acts,  &c,  the  continual  requirements 
of  which  serve  to  define  the  limits  of  Parishes  with  accuracy,  so  as 
to  maintain  them  undisputed. 

In  many  places,  however,  Perambulations  still  continue  to  be 
made;  in  some,  annually;  in  others,  at  more  distant  intervals;  and 
in  many  instances,  only  on  a  change  in  the  Incumbency.  They 
usually  take  place  about  the  time  of  Rogation  Week,  and  generally 
on  Ascension  Day.  The  Minister  in  his  Clerical  robes  (goicn,  and 
bands),  accompanied  by  the  Churchwardens,  Overseers,  Guardians  of 
the  Poor,  and  chief  inhabitants,  with  the  children  of  the  Parish 
Schools  carrying  wands  and  banners,*  walk  in  procession  round 


*  These  Banners,  '  vexilla  pro  Pogationibus,'  according  to 
Winchelsea's  constitution,  are  to  be  found  by  the  Parish.  (See 
this  authority  answered,  Vol.  X>-  p.  801.  postea.) 


PERAMBULATION  OF  PARISHES. 


381 


tlic  Parish  boundaries;  whence  it  is  sometimes  called  'Going 
Processioning ,'  otherwise  '  Going  Pussessioning.'  On  reaching  the 
'boundary  marks,'  these  are  commonly  struck  by  the  children 
with  their  wands,  which  has  given  rise  to  another  appellation  often 
bestowed  upon  this  proceeding,  of  'Beating  the  Bounds'  Numerous 
feats  also,  adapted  to  impress  the  memory  of  the  younger  ones  with 
certain  points  and  localities  in  their  march,  as  well  as  with  the 
object  of  their  making  this  Procession,  are  occasionally  introduced; 
and  on  their  return  home  the  children  are  usually  presented  with 
some  trilling  gratuity. 

The  perambulating  party  in  their  journey  have  the  right, 
sanctioned  by  immemorial  custom,  of  going  over  any  one's  grounds, 
of  removing  any  obstructions  that  may  be  in  the  way,  and  of 
passing  through  any  house  situated  on  the  boundary  line,  without 
dispute  or  interruption,  or  liability  to  an  action  of  trespass:  as 
was  settled  in  the  case  of  Goodday  v.  Michell.  (Cro.  Eliz.  441; 
Co.  Ent.  G51;  Owen.  71.).  This  was  confirmed  by  Lord  Denman 
in  his  judgment  in  Taylor  v.  Dcvey,  where  he  says: — 

'  The  right  to  perambulate  Parochial  boundaries,  to  enter 
'  private  property  for  that  purpose,  and  to  remove  obstructions 
'  that  might  prevent  this  from  being  done,  cannot  be  disputed. 
'It  prevails  as  a  notorious  custom  in  all  parts  of  England,  is 
'recorded  by  all  our  text  writers,  and  has  been  confirmed  by 
'  high  judicial  sanction.'— (7  A.  &  E.  409;  2  N.  &  P.  472.) 

No  Refreshment,  however,  in  these  Perambulations  can  be 
claimed  by  the  Parishioners  as  due  of  right  from  any  house  or 
lands  in  virtue  of  custom.  (Gibson's  Cod.  213;  Willy  v.  Harbert, 
3  Keb.  G09;  2  Roll.  R.  259;  2  Lev.  163.  See  also  Burn's  Eccl.  L, 
Phil.  m.  75;  Roger's  Eccl.  L.  681;  Steer's  Par.  L.  Clive.  5; 
Stephen's  Lam  Rel.  to  CI.  891;  Prideaux's  Chw.  Guide,  189.). 
And  with  regard  to  the  Expenccs,  where  no  specific  fund  exists,  the 
Parish  Officers  are  sometimes  indemnified  out  of  the  Church  Rates; 
and  sometimes  out  of  the  Poor  Rates;  in  the  latter  case,  the  charge 
is  allowed  by  the  Auditor.  The  Minister,  also,  in  some  places, 
is  presented  with  two  or  three  guineas.  But  the  customs  vary 
in  different  neighbourhoods;  and  very  frequently  the  whole  matter 
is  performed  gratuitously.  ] 

1G2. — The  Religious  observances  connected  with  the 
Perambulation  of  Parishes  have  fallen  into  desuetude ; 
and  in  the  present  day  the  proceeding  is  generally 
looked  upon  more  as  a  secular  business,  similar  in 
character  to  the  perambulation  of  Manors.  In  many 
instances,  however,  as  in  towns  where  the  boundaries 
are  not  very  extensive,  the  Churchwardens,  and 
Parishioners,  &c,  attend  the  usual  '  Morning  Service  ' 
for  Ascension-Dai/,  and  immediately  afterwards  proceed 
with  the  Minister  upon  their  circuit.  Wheatly  says 
the  prescribed  Homily  is  theu  read  : — '  the  three  first 
'  (parts  are)  to  be  used  upon  the  Monday,  Tuesday, 


382  WEDNESDAY  AND  FEIDAY  SEETICES. 


'  and  Wednesday ;  and  the  fourth,  upon  the  day  when 
'the  Parish  make  their  Procession.'' — (Coot.  Pr.  230). 
It  appears  from  the  '  Injunctions '  of  Elizabeth 
(1559),  and  the  Book  of  Advertisements '  (1564 — 5), 
that  some  kind  of  Public  Service  was  appointed  for 
these  occasions,  since  they  enjoin  : — 

'  Tbat  the  Curate  in  their  said  common  Perambulations,  used 
'  heretofore  in  the  days  of  Rogations,  at  certain  convenient 
'  places  shall  admonish  the  people  to  give  thanks  to  God,  in 
'  the  beholding  of  God's  benefits,  for  the  increase  and  abundance 
'  of  His  fruits  upon  the  face  of  the  earth,  with  the  saying  of  the 
'  103c?  Psalm,  "Benedic  anima  mea,  4c"   At  which  time  also 
'the  same  Minister  shall  inculcate  these  or  such  sentences: — 
'  "Cursed  be  he  which  translateth  the  bounds  and  dales  of  his 
'  neighbour."    Or  such  other  order  of  Prayers,  as  shall  be 
'hereafter  appointed.'    According  to  the  interpretation  given  to 
these  '  Injunctions'  by  the  Bishops  of  that  day,  the  103d  and  lOith 
Psalms  were  to  be  sung  or  said  during  the  Procession ;  and  on  their 
return  to  the  Church,  the  Litany  and  Suffrages,  and  the  Homily  of 
Thanksgiving,  were  to  be  read.*    (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  187, 
204,  293,  337;  n.  202;  Sparrow's  Coll.  73,  126;  —  Ration.  118; 
Palmer's  Orig.  Lit.  n.  369.).    See  '  Parish,'  postea. 

*»•  In  old  Saxon,  Rogation-Days  are  termed  'Gangdagas :' 
i.e.  days  of  walking,  or  perambulation;  whence  iu  the  north  of 
England,  Rogation- Week  is  called  'Gang-Week,  from  'the  ganging 
or  going  in  procession.' — {Calendar  of  1678.  Brand.) 


Wednesdays,  and  Fridays. 

163. — In  our  present  Liturgy,  Divine  Service  on 
Wednesdays,  and  Fbidays  is  enjoined  only 
incidentally,  and  this  is  in  the  Rubric  preceding 
the  '  Litany,'  which  is  there  appointed 

^f.    '  to  be  sung  or  said   after  Morning  Prayer  upon 

'Sundays,  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays,  fyc?  (1552—1662). 

In  the  Eubric  of  the  First  Liturgy  (1549)  the 
'  Litany '  was  appointed  for  Wednesdays  and  Fridays 


•  In  Abp.  Grindal's  'Injunctions'  (1571), — 'Wearing  any 
surplice,  carrying  of  banners  or  handbells,  or  staying  at  crosses, 
&c.'  were  forbidden.  (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  337.)  By  a 
Constitution  of  Abp.  Winchelsey,  the  Parishioners  were  formerly 
bound  to  find  Banners  for  the  Rogations  at  their  own  charge. — 
Lyndwood,  252. 


WEDNESDAY  AND  FRIDAY   SEEVICES.  383 


only :  (Keeling  41.  229.) :  and  similarly  in  Canon 
15  ;  which  latter  is  now  binding  on  the  Clergy,  and 
runs  thus : — 

'  Upon  Wednesdays  and  Fridays  weekly,  though  they  be 

'not  Holy-Days,  the  Minister,  at  the  accustomed  hours  of  Service, 
'  shall  resort  to  the  Church  or  Chapel,  &c.'  (See  under  'Litany.' 
postea. ) 

With  respect  to  Fridays,  the  'Table'  following 
the  Calendar  especially  mentions  them  among  the 
'Days  of  Fasting  or  Abstinence;'  thus — 

T.  'All  the  Fridays  in  the  year  except  Christmas-Day.' — 
(1662). 

164. — Such  are  the  Canonical  and  Rubrical  injunc- 
tions for  the  religious  observance  of  Wednesdays, 
and  Fridays.  The  general  practice  of  modern  times, 
however,  has  not  been  in  strict  conformity  with  these 
directions ;  in  numerous  instances  the  only  week-day 
Service  has  been  the  performance  of  'Evening  Prayer ' 
with  a  Sermon  or  Lecture  on  Wednesday  only,  or 
in  some  cases  on  Thursday,  or  other  day  ;  which, 
although  departures  from  Rubrical  order,  yet  have 
been  sanctioned  by  custom.  Still,  in  more  recent 
days,  the  Wednesday  and  Friday  Services  in  strict 
accordance  with  the  Liturgy  —  i.  e.  using  tho 
Morning  Prayer,  and  the  Litany  (see  '  Division  of 
Services,'  ■postea)  —  have  been  revived  in  many  of 
our  cities,  and  large  towns,  and  even  in  some  rural 
parishes.  In  many  cases  preference  has  been  given 
to  the  directions  of  the  Canon  (15),  limiting  the 
observance  of  these  days  to  the  use  of  the  'Litany ' 
alone.  By  some  Clergymen  these  two  Week-day 
Services  have  been  adopted  as  an  experiment  with 
the  ulterior  object,  should  they  be  well  received,  of 
introducing  the  practice  of  'Daily  Prayers?  In 
several  instances  the  experiment  has  been  successful ; 
but  the  other  requirement,  that  of  fasting,  has  not, 
so  far  as  we  know,  been  anywhere  attempted  to  be 
carried  out. 

The  Quarterly  Review  remarks  on  this  subject:— 'We 
'think  the  Bishops  have  been  judicious  in  recommending,  and 
'  the  ministering  Clergy  equally  so  in  making  the  introductory 
'  experiment  of  Services  on  the  Wednesdays  and  Fridays ;  nor 


384 


WEDNESDAYS,  AND  FRIDAYS. 


'  should  we  have  disapproved  of  their  having  began  by  the  use  on 
'  those  days  of  the  Litany  alone,  as  prescribed  in  the  Canon. — 

'(p.  252.)  The  Litany  Service  in  the  forenoon  of  Wednesdays 

'  and  Fridays  would,  we  are  satisfied,  be  eminently  successful.' 
{p.  254.) — No.  cxliii.  May,  1843. 

Rev.  E.  Scobell,  when  explaining  the  law  with  respect  to 
the  'Daily  Service,'  says: — 'The  separate  public  saying  of  the 
'  Litany  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  assuming  the  Matins  to 
'  have  been  said  before,  either  in  the  Church  or  at  home,  is  both 
'  by  Canon  and  Rubric,  though  with  a  very  limited  obligation, 
'laid  on  the  people.'  (p.  29.) — Thoughts  on  Church  Subjects. 

165. — *,*  It  may  be  added  here,  that  the  observance  of  Wednesday 
and  Friday,  the  4th  and  6th  days  of  the  week,  as  days  of  Public 
Prayer  and  Fasting,  is  derived  from  the  practice  of  the  primitive 
Church,  and  continued  from  the  time  of  Tertullian,  and  Clemens 
Alexandrinus,  down  to  our  own  age.  The  Jews,  to  lessen  the 
interval  between  their  Sabbaths,  observed  Monday  and  Thursday 
in  memory  of  some  great  calamity  as  periods  of  Public  Worship; 
the  Christians  appointed  Wednesday  and  Friday,  in  commemoration 
of  the  days  on  which  our  Saviour  was  betrayed,  and  crucified. 
Some  authors  have  indeed  assigned  their  origin  to  Apostolical 
institution;  and,  according  to  Bp.  Cosins,  the  observance  of  those 
days  for  public  assemblies  was  universal,  and  the  practice  of  the 
very  oldest  times.  They  were  formerly  called  'Stationary  days' 
(from  the  military  word  statio)  in  consequence  of  the  worshippers 
remaining  at  their  devotions  until  3  o'clock  in  the  afternoon;  and 
further,  as  the  /listing  then  ceased,  instead  of  continuing  as  on 
other  Fasting  days  till  the  evening,  Wednesdays  and  Fridays  were 
termed  half-fasts  (semi-jejunium). — Add.  Notes  to  Xichoix's  C.  P. 
p.  23;  Bingham,  xiii.  9.  2;  xxi.  3.  1;  Wheatly,  165;  209.  (Corries 
Edit.) 

Since  the  Reformation,  Divine  Worship  has  been  publicly 
performed  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays ;  as  Dr.  Cardwell  clearly 
proves  to  us.  In  Edward  Vlth's  'Injunctions'  (1549),  it  is 
ordered — '  that  the  Common  Prayer  upon  Wednesdays  and  Fridays 
•  be  diligently  kept.'—  {Doc.  Ann.  I.  64.) 

In  the  following  year  (1550),  Ridley,  then  Bishop  of  London, 
issued  a  similar  direction,  (z'4.  83.) 

Elizabeth  likewise  in  her  'Injunctions'  (1559)  enjoined — 
'that  weekly  upon  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  not  being  Holy- Days, 
'  the  Curate  at  the  accustomed  hours  of  Service  shall  resort  to  the 
'Church.'  {ib.  196.)— (See  Canon  15  of  1603—4). 

Later,  we  find  Abp.  Whitgift  writing  to  the  Bp.  of  London 
(1596) — '  that  Publique  Prayers,  according  to  the  Book  of  Common 
'  Prayer  in  every  several  Parish  Church,  or  Chappel,  be  on  all 
'  Wednesdaies  and  Frydaies  hereafter  devoutly  used,  aud  diligently 
'  frequented.' — (i4.  ii.  37.) 

Subsequently,  Bp.  Wren  directed  (1636)—'  that  the  Litany  be 
'  never  omitted  on  Sundays,  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays' — (ib.  202.) 


CONCURRENCE  OF  HOLY-DAYS. 


3S5 


Abp.  Sancroft  also  urged  (1688)— '  that  the  Daily  Office  be 
'  publicly  performed  on  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays,  in  each  week.' — 
323.) 

Bp.  Beveridge,  when  complaining  of  the  neglect  of  '  Daily 
Prayers'  in  his  day,  says  '  there  were  very  few  places  in  which  they 
'have  anv  Public  Prayers  on  week-days. except  perhaps  Wednesdays 
'  and  Fridays:  (p.  26.)— Neees.  and  Adv.  of  Pub.  /V.  Ed.  1709. 
(For  other  instances,  see  Mr.  Robertson's  Work  on  the  Liturgy.) 


Concurrence  of  Holy-Bays. 

1C6. — "When  two  Holy-Days  fall  on  the  same 
day,  such  as  a  Saint' 's-Day  upon  a  Sunday,  there  are 
no  directions  either  in  the  Eubrics  or  the  Canons 
to  determine  which  is  to  give  place ;  the  Officiating 
Minister  is  therefore  left  to  his  own  discretion, 
subject  to  the  guidance  of  his  Ordinary.  There  are 
many,  who  set  aside  the  Holy-Day  altogether,  except 
that  they  are  in  some  instances  compelled  to  use  the 
Second  Lessons  assigned  to  it  from  the  fact  of  there 
being  none  appointed  for  the  Sunday.  But  the 
usual  practice,  whenever  there  is  a  Concurrence  of 
Holy-Days,  is  the  following : — 

An  ordinary  Sunday  (i.  e.  a  Sunday  not 
peculiarly  connected  with  our  Lord's  ministry) 
yields  to  a  Sain t's- Day ;  and  a  Lesser  Festival 
gives  way  to  a  Greater. 

Except  that— 1st.  When  any  of  the  Lessons  of  the  Superior 
day  are  appointed  in  the  Apocrypha,  the  Canonical  Scriptures 
directed  for  the  Inferior  day  are  to  be  preferred. 

Indly.  Only  one  Collect,  and  that  the  Collect  of  the  day 
selected,  is  to  be  read  in  Divine  Service  (except  in  those  especial 
instances  where  two  or  more  are  appointed  by  the  Rubric.) 

Srdly.  The  same  Collect  with  its  Epistle  and  Gosi'EL  are  to  be 
read  in  the  '  Communion  Service.' 

167. — With  respect  to  the  distinction  between  the 
Greater  and  the  Lesser  Festivals,  when  such  coincide, 
it  is  very  possible,  since  no  rules  are  prescribed,  that 
there  will  be  found  a  want  of  uniformity  with  respect 
to  the  Services  performed  in  the  various  Churches 
even  of  the  same  neighbourhood.  This  is  one  of 
those  cases  which  call  for  an  appeal  to  the  Diocesan, 


386 


CONCTJfiBENCE  OF  HOLT-DAYS. 


according  to  the  injunctions  given  in  the  prefatory 
remarks  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  in  order 
to  '  appease  the  diversity '  where  any  difference 
prevails. 

As  there  are  no  definitive  instructions  in  the 
Prayer  Book  to  guide  the  Officiating  Minister, 
the  opinions  following  will  tend  to  elucidate  the 
question  more  fully ;  although  the  subject  is  handled 
more  largely  in  Vol.  E.  and  P.  of  this  Work. 

Br.  Overall  (oj.  1619)  remarks:—'  When  the  Feast- Day  falls 
'  upon  a  Sunday,  it  was  ordered  in  the  Service  of  Sarum,  that  the 
'  Sunday  Service  should  (five  way  to  the  proper  Service  ordained 
'  for  the  Festival,  except  some  peculiar  Sunday  only,  and  then 
'  the  one  or  the  other  was  transferred  to  some  day  of  the  week 
'  following.' — Add.  Notes  to  Nicholl's  Com.  Pr.  p.  8. 

Archdeacon  Sharp  says:— 'Know,  for  instance,  to  what 
'  uncertainties  we  are  left  in  the  use  of  the  'Table  for  the  Proper 
'Lessons,'  and  in  the  appointment  of  the  Epistles  and  Gospels 
'when  Sundays  and  Holy-Days  coincide.  The  consequence  is.  that 
'  the  Clergy  differ  in  their  practice,  and  use  the  Service  appropriate 
'  to  that  Festival  to  which  in  their  private  opinion  they  give  the 
'  preference.  Some  there  are  who  choose  to  intermix  them,  using 
'  the  Collects  appointed  to  each,  and  preferring  the  '  First  Lesson  ' 
'  that  is  taken  out  of  a  Canonical  Book,  if  the  other  '  First  Lesson  ' 

'happens  to  be  appointed  in  the  'Apocrypha.'  (p.  61.)  And 

'  whereas  there  are  liberties  too  often  taken  by  some  under  the 
'notion  of  a  discretionary  power,  which  is  not  justifiable;  as 
'  the  adding  to  the  Public  Service  more  than  is  commanded,  in 
'  multiplying  Collects  (for  instance)  in  the  coincidence  of  Festivals ; 
'  or  joining  at  any  time  more  Collects,  as  Collects  for  the  Day,  to 
'  that  which  is  properly  so.  (and  which  is  but  one,  except  it  be  in 
'Advent,  and  Lent,  or  at  other  times  when  special  direction  is  given 
'for  more  Collects  thon  one).'  (p.  71.) — On  Rubric  and  Canons. 
Charge,  a.  d.  1735. 

Shepherd  (oi.  1805)  after  observing:— that  'When  a  Sunday 
'and  a  Saint's-Day  coincide,  we  appear  to  be  left  in  some  degree 
'  of  uncertainty,  whether  the  '  First  Lesson,'  together  with  the 
'Service  for  the  Holy-Day,  or  that  for  the  Sunday  is  to  be  read;' — 
he  proceeds  to  quote  the  first  portion  of  the  above  extract  from 
Archdeacon  Sharp's  Work;  and  then  adds,  after  referring  to  the 
practices  prevailing  before  the  Reformation, — '  Hence  it  would 
'  appear,  that  the  Service  for  the  Saint's-Day,  and  not  thot  for  the 
'Sunday  should  be  used. — And  notwithstanding  there  exists  some 
'  diversity  of  opinion  on  this  subject,  yet  the  most  general  practice 
'seems  to  be  to  read  the  Collect,  Epistle,  and  Gospel,  for  the 
'Saint's-Day  ;  and  it  is  most  consonant  to  that  practice  to  read  also 
'the  'First  Lesson'  appropriated  to  that  day.''    After  speaking  of 


*  Mr.  Shepherd  adds  in  a  note  '  This  remark  I  have  heard 
made  by  Dr.  Porteus  the  late  Lord  Bishop  of  London.' 


CONCURRENCE   OE  HOLT-DATS,  &C.  387 


the  prior  appointment  of  specific  Lessons  for  Holy-Days,  and  long 
before  any  were  prescribed  for  the  Sundays,  he  concludes — '  But 
'  that,  when  a  Sunday  and  a  Suint's-Day  coincide,  the  Sunday 
'Lesson  was  intended  to  supersede  the  Lesson  appertaining  to  the 
'  Saint's-Dav,  I  have  nowhere  been  able  to  discover.' — Elucidation 
of  Book  of  Com.  Pr.  I.  178. 

WHEATLY  (06.  1742)  says: — 'In  relation  to  the  concurrence  of 
'  two  Holy-Days  together,  we  have  no  directions  either  in  the 
'  Rubric  or  elsewhere,  which  must  give  place,  or  which  of  the 

'two  Services  must  be  used  Some  Ministers,  when  a  Holy-Day 

'  happens  upon  a  Sunday,  take  no  notice  of  the  Holy-Day,  (except 
'that  sometimes  they  are  forced  to  use  the  'Second  Lesson'  for 
'  such  Holy-Day,  there  being  a  gap  in  the  column  of  Second  Lessons 
'in  the  Calendar),  but  use  the  Service  appointed  for  the  Sunday; 
'  alleging  that  the  Holy-Day,  which  is  of  human  institution,  should 
'give  way  to  the  Sunday,  which  is  allowed  to  be  of  divine.  But 
'  this  is  an  argument  which  I  think  nut  satisfactory:  for  though  the 
'  observation  of  Sunday  be  of  Divine  institution,  yet  the  Service 

'  we  use  on  it  is  of  human  appointment  I  cannot  but  esteem  the 

'general  practice  to  be  preferable,  which  is  to  make  the  Lesser 
'Holy-Day  (jive  way  to  the  Greater;  as  an  ordinary  Sunday,  for 
'instance,  to  a  Saint's-Dny  ;  a  Saint's- Day  to  one  of  our  Lords 
'  Festivals ;  arid  a  Lesser  Festival  of  our  Lord  to  a  Greater :  except 
'  that  some,  if  the  First  Lesson  for  the  Holy-Day  be  out  of  the 
'  Apocrypha, will  join  the  First  Lesson  of  the  Sunday'to  the  Holy-Day 
'Service:  as  observing  that  the  Church,  by  always  appointing 
'Canonical  Scripture  upon  Sundays,  seems  to  countenance  their 
'use  of  a  Canonical  'Lesson'  even  upon  a  Holy-Day,  that  has  a 
'proper  one  appointed  out  of  the  Apocrypha,  if  that  Holy-Day 
'  should  happen  upon  a  Sunday.  But  what  if  the  Annunciation 
'should  happen  in  Passion-Week ;  or  either  that,  or  St  Mark  upon 
'  Easter-Monday  or  Tuesday?  or  what  if  St  Barnabas  should  fall 
'upon  Whit-Monday  or  Tuesday?  or  what  if  St  Andrew  and 
'Advent-Sunday  both  come  together?  In  any  of  these  concurrences 
'  I  do  not  doubt  but  the  Service  would  be"  differently  performed 
'in  different  Churches.  And  therefore  I  take  this  to  be  a  case, 
'  in  which  the  Bishops  ougld  to  be  consulted,  they  having  a  power 
'vested  in  them  "to  appease  all  diversity,  if  any  arise."  (/>.  187.). 
Respecting  the  Sunday  Collect,  he  remarks  further  on, — '  when  any 
'  Day  falls  that  hath  a  proper  or  peculiar  Collect,  &o.  to  itself:  upon 
'these  (which)  occasions  the  Rubkic*  plainly  supposes,  that  the 
'Collect  for  the  Sunday  shall  be  left  out  and  omitted:  the  Church 
'  never  designing  to  use  the  two  Collects  at  once,  except  within  the 
'  Octaves  01  Christmas,  and  during  Advent,  and  Lent;  when,  for  the 
'  greater  solemnity  of  those  solemn  seasons,  she  particularly  orders 
'  the  Collects  of  the  principal  days  to  be  used  continually  after  the 
'  ordinary  Collects.'  (p.  193.)— Rat.  III.  of  Book  of  Com.  Pr. 


*  The  last  Rubric  in  'The  Order  How  the  Rest  of  Holy  Scripture 
is  appointed  to  be  Read.' 

B  J! 


388  CONCURRENCE  OF  HOLT-DATS,  &C. 


168. — Passing  to  more  modern  Writers,  we  may 
refer  to  the  following : — 

The  Bishop  of  London-  (Dr.  Blomfield)  directs : — '  Where  a 
'Saint's-Day  falls  upon  a  Sunday,  the  Collect  for  the  Saint's-Day.  as 
'  well  as  that  for  the  Sunday,  should  be  rend,  and  the  Epistle  and 
'  Gospel  for  the  Saint's-Day,  but  the  Lessons  for  the  Sunday.' 
(p.  05.)—  Charge,  1842. 

The  late  Bishop  of  Down  and  Connor,  &e.  (Dr.  Mani) 
remarks: — 'In  the  case  of  the  Lord's  Day  concurring  with 
'  a  Saint's-Day,  I  prefer  the  First  Lesson  for  the  latter  (the 
'Saint's-Day),  unless  it  be  from  the  Apocrypha,  when  the  Sunday 
'  Lesson  from  a  Canonical  Book  may  on  the  whole  be  preferable.' 

(p.  45.)  '  When  a  Saint's-Day  coincides  with  the  Lord's  Day,  I 

'  prefer  the  Collect  for  the  former  (the  Saint's-Day)  The  reading 

'  of  both  Collects  is  not  agreeable  to  the  provision  of  the  Church, 
'  who  says,  "  then  shall  follow  three  Collects,  the  first  of  the  day." 
'  On  Good  Friday  there  are  more  than  one  "of  the  day,"  indeed 
'there  are  three;  but  then  they  are  set  forth  as  "the  Collects," 
'  particularized  as  such  in  their  proper  place.'— After  adverting  to 
the  appointed  repetition  of  the  Collects  for  the  First  Sunday  in 
Advent,  for  Christmas-Day,  and  for  Ash-Wednesday,  the  Bishop 
concludes — 'To  use  two  (Collects),  unless  by  these  special  ordinances 
'of  the  Church,  is  at  variance  with  her  law.'  (p.  48). — And  further — 
'  The  same  rule  which  regulates  the  first  Collect  for  Morning 
'Prayer,  should  regulate  that  also  at  the  Cimmuuion.  The  Collect 
'  of  the  Day  should  in  each  case  be  the  same :  and  if  an  additional 
'  Collect,  as  in  Advent,  and  in  Lent,  and  after  Christmas-Day, 
'  follow  in  the  former  case,  it  should  follow  also  in  the  latter. 
The  choice  of  the  Epistle  and  Gospel,  where  a  Sunday  falls  in 
'with  a  Holy-Day,  should  follow  that  of  the  Collect.'  (p.  54.)— 
Hor.  Lit. 

The  Australian  Bishops  in  their  'Conference '  held  at  Sidney 
in  1850  (see  page  293),  decreed  these  'Rules  for  Service  on 
' Saints'-Days  falling  on  Sundays,  Sec' — 'Should  a  Saint's-Day 
'  fall  on  Ash-Wednesday,  Good-Friday,  or  Easter-Eve,  or  on 
'Easter-Sunday,  Ascension-Day,  Whit-Sunday,  or  Trinity- Sunday, 
'or  on  Monday  or  Tuesday  in  Easter  and  Whitsun  Weeks,  the 
'Lessons,  Collect,  Epistle  and  Gospel, for  those  days  are  to  be  used, 
'  When  a  Saint's-Day  shall  fall  on  any  other  Sunday,  the  Lessoru 
'of  the  Saint's-Day  (unless  they  be  from  the  Apocrypha)  are  to 
'  be  used,  and  the  Colled,  Epistle  and  Gospel,  for  the  Saint's-Day, 
'  with  the  Collect  for  the  Sunday.'— Eccl.  Gazette.   June,  1851. 

Rev.  J.  Jebb,  remarking  on  the  'difficulty  which  is  generally 
felt,  as  to  the  adoption  of  any  rule  with  respect  to  the  concurrence 
'of  Sundays  and  Holy-Days,'  adds — 'On  this  point  the  Church  of 
'  England  has  neither  given  any  direction,  nor  recommended  any 
'  principle.'  He  then  adverts  to  the  complicated  rules  of  the  Roman 
Breviary;  after  which  he  thus  proceeds — 'In  order  to  give  some 
'  suggestion  towards  a  consistent  rule,  the  following  arrangement, 
'  liable,  of  course,  to  correction,  is  proposed.  On  the  concurrence 
'  of  all  Holy-Days,  it  is  suggested  that  the  Collect  for  the  Day 
'  of  inferior  observance  should  be  read  in  addition  to  that  of  the  Day. 
'  The  Apocryphal  Lesson  should  in  all  cases  be  postponed  to  that 


CONCUEKENCE  OF  UOLT-DATS,  &C.  389 


'  from  Canonical  Scripture.    In  other  respects,  the  whole  Service 

'  of  the  superior  Festival  should  be  performed.    In  the  following 

"Table'  the  Festivals  which  should  have  the  precedence  are 
'given  in  Roman  letters:  those  with  which  they  can  possibly  concur, 
'  and  which  yield  to  them,  iu  Italics. 

'Have  precedence.  Yield. 

'  Advent  Sunday,  .is  preferred  to  St  Andrew. 

Fourth  Sunday  in  Advent   St  Thomas. 

St  Stephen  ~J 

Innocents'  f  First  Sunday  after  Christmas. 

Circumcision   J 

Epiphany   )  Second  Sunday  after  Christmas, 

Conversion  of  St  Paul   \        and  Sundays  after  Epiphany. 

)  Third  Sundoa  after  Epiphany, 

Purification  V       Septuag.    Sexag.   and  Quinq. 

)  Sunday. 

Septuagesima,  Sexagesima,  and )  Conversion   of    St   Paul,  and 

Quincjuagesima  Sunday  )       St  Matthias. 

Ash-Wednesday    St  Matthias. 

Sundays  in  Lent   St  Matthias. 

Annunciation    Sundays  in  Lent. 

Days  in  Passion  Week   Annunciation. 

SUEastyer  Day .  f^T.'.         )  A  "M™*****  and  St  Ma^- 

First  Sunday  after  Easter   St  Mark,  St  Philip  and  St  James. 

St.  M  u  k,  St  Philip  &  St  James  Sundays  after  Easter. 

Whit-Sunday,     and     Trinity )  „,  D  , 

Sunday  .(  St  Barnabas. 

St  Barnabas,  and  other  Holy] 

Days,  till  AU  Saint's  Day,  >  Sundays  after  Trinity. 

inclusive  J 

Easter-Monday,  and  Tuesday  Annunciation,  and  St  Marh. 

Ascension  Day   St  Philip  and  St  James. 

Whit-Monday,  and  Tuesday  . .  St  Barnabas' 

(On  '  The  Choral  Service.'  p.  405—9.) 

A  Eitualist  of  the  more  extreme  school  thus 
prescribes  : — 

Suntlays  which  take  precedence  of  Holy-Days  ivhich  tahe  precedence 
Saints'-Days.  of  other  Holy-Days. 

First  Sunday  in  Advent  Christmas-Day. 

Fourth  Sunday  iu  Advent  Circumcision. 

First  Sunday  in  Lent  Epiphany. 

Sixth  Sunday  in    Lent,  Palm  The  Annunciation  of  our  Lady. 
Sunday 

Easter-Day  Ash  Wednesday. 

Low  Sunday  All  the  Days  of  Holy  Week. 

Feast  of  Pentecost  Monday  in  Easter  Week. 

Trinity  Sunday  Tuesday  in  Faster  Week. 

In  all  other  cases,  the  Festival  Monday  in  Whitsun  Week. 

should  have  precedence  of  the  Tuesday  in  Whitsun  Week. 

Sunday.  Ascension  Day. 

(Rev.  J.  PrjRCHAs'  Dircctorium  Anglicannm .) 


300  '  HOUR  OF  SERVICE. 


"With  respect  to  the  Collects  to  be  read  on 
Saturday  Evening,  and  on  the  Vigils  or  Eves  of 
Holy-Days  which  fall  on  a  Monday.— See  under 
the  Rubric  of  the  First  Collect  iu  the  '  Evening 
Service,'  postea. 

Hour  of  Service. 

169.  — At  the  period  of  the  Reformation  when  the 
various  Service  Books,  and  Offices,  for  the  different 
hours  of  Prayers,  called  the  'Canonical  Hours'  were 
condensed,  as  we  have  seen,  into  one  Liturgy  ;  at 
the  same  time  Public  Worship  was  reduced  to  two 
Services  in  accordance  with  primitive  usage,  derived 
by  the  early  Christians  from  the  Jews.  These 
Services  were  only  enjoined  to  be  in  the  Morning, 
and  in  the  Evening.  (Palmer's  Orig.  Lit.  i.  204.). 
The  particular  hours  however  at  which  the  two 
Services  were  to  be  performed,  were  left  to  the 
discretion  of  the  Minister,  which  was  afterwards 
confirmed  by  the  Canons  of  1603—4;  thus — 

'  The  Common  Prayer  shall  be  said  or  sung  distinctly  and 
'  reverently  upon  such  Days  as  are  appointed  to  be  kept  holy  by 
'the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  their  Eves,  and  at  convenient 
'  and  usual  times  of  those  days' — Canon  14. 

This  discretionary  power  not  having  been  subse- 
quently rescinded  or  restrained,  either  by  Canon, 
Rubric,  or  Legal  Enactment,  the  practice  exists  at 
the  present  day  of  making  the  appointed  hours  in 
agreement  with  the  custom  of  the  place,  and  suitable 
to  the  convenience  of  the  worshippers. 

170.  — On  the  Sunday  the  more  usual  times  of 
Divine  Service  in  Towns  and  Cities  are  11  o'clcck,  a.m.; 
and  3  o'clock,  p.m.  In  country  Parishes  10i  o'clock, 
a.m.;  and  2|  o'clock,  p.m.  Where  the  'Evening 
Service'  is  repeated,  the  hour  in  this  case  is  generally 
6,  or  6|,  or  7  o'clock,  p.m.  But  there  is  so  considerable 
a  variation  in  this  respect,  that  no  precise  hour  can  be 
set  down  as  the  practice  of  any  town,  or  neighbourhood. 
Besides  this,  it  may  be  observed,  that  there  are  some 


HOUE  OF  SERVICE. 


391 


Parishes,  particularly  those  where  Daily  Prayers,  or 
frequent  Week-Day  Services  are  performed,  in  which 
'  Moening  Peayeh  '  is  solemnized  very  early  in 
the  day,  commencing  at  different  hours,  whether  on 
a  Sunday  or  a  Week-day,  between  7  o'clock,  A.  M., 
and  9  or  10  o'clock,  a.  m.  Then  frequently  will  follow 
at  10  or  11  o'clock,  a.  m.,  or  later,  the  '  Moening 
Seevice  '  again ;  or  the  '  Litany  '  alone ;  or  the 
•  Litany  '  and  '  Communion  Seevice  '  conjoined 
(Hook's  Ch.  Diet.  Art.  '  Lttany  ') :  and  in  the  after 
part  of  the  day  the  '  Evening  Seevice  '  will 
sometimes  be  read,  once,  if  not  twice.*  The  authority 
regulating  such  division  of  the  Services  is  the  Bishop 
of  the  Diocese ;  but  the  discussion  of  this  subject 
w  ill  come  next  in  order. 

*»*  In  Cathedrals  generally  'Morning  Service'  is  at  10 
o'clock,  A.  m.  ;  but  in  those  of  Winchester,  Worcester,  and  Hereford, 
and  in  the  Colleges  of  the  Universities,  it  is  much  earlier,  varying 
from  6  o'clock,  A.  m.  to  9  o'clock,  a.  m.  The  '  Evening  Service  '  in 
Cathedrals  is  usually  at  4  o'clock,  p.m.;  aud  in  the  College  Chapels 
from  5  o'clock,  p.  m.  to  7  o'clock,  p.  m.  (See  Jebb's  Choral  Service, 
p.  226.  415.). 

Formerly,  the  practice  was,  according  to  L'Estrange,  for  the 
'  Morning  Prayer '  to  begin  at  9  o'clock  {A  lliance,  p.  72.) :  yet 
Bp.  Sparrow  says  the  'Communion  Service'  ought  to  begin  at  9 
o'clock.  (Ratinnale.  p.  157.).  In  Dr.  Donne's  time  (a.  d.  1553 — 1631) 
the  Sermon  was  over  at  11  o'clock.  (Works,  ed.  Alfurd.  in.  383.): 
while  with  George  Herbert,  who  flourished  at  the  same  time 
with  Donne  (a. d  1593 — 1G32),  the  Canonical  hours,  as  we  gather 
from  Walton,  were  10  o'clock,  and  4  o'clock.  (Hook's  Eccl.  Biog. 
vi.  6.) 

The  following  extracts  may  elucidate  the  subject 
further  : — 

Abp.  Ladi>  says — '  The  '  Morning  Service'  is  everywhere  to 
'end  by  12  o'clock  at  farthest;  so  the  Vespers  never  begin  before 
'3  o'clock,  and  end  by  5  o'clock.  And  this  I  take  it  is  universal. 
•And  the  reason  of  it,  as  1  conceive,  is,  that  the  Prayers  of  the 
'  Church,  howsoever  different  in  place,  might  be  jointly  put  up 
'to  Cod  in  all  places  at  the  same  time.'  (p.  239.) — Au/ob. 
Oct.  18th,  1639. 

Bishop  Beveridge  (ob.  1707 — 8)  remarks  that, —  'Our  Church 
'  hath  not  appointed  the  hour  when  either  the  Morning  or  Evening 
■■Prayer  shall  begin,  because  the  same  hour  might  not  be  so 


*  The  hours  adopted  in  the  present  day  are  fully  exhibited  in 
'  Masters's  Guide  to  the  Daily  Prayers'  (pp.  18.);  price  6<2. 


392 


HOUR  OF  SERVICE. 


'  convenient  in  all  places.  Only  the  Ministers  onght  to  take  care 
*  in  general  that  Morning  Prayers  be  always  read  before,  and 
'  Evening  after  noon.' — Sermon  on  Public  Prayer.  (Works,  in.  492.) 

Bishop  Cosixs  {ob.  1672),  in  his  comments  upon  the  words 
'Who  has  safely  brought  us  to  the  beginning  of  this  day,'  in  the 
Collect  for  (trace,  remarks: — '  Which  shews  when  the  'Morning 
'  Prayer'  should  regularly  be  said,  at  the  first  hour  of  the  day,  which 
'  is  G  o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  not  towards  high  noon  day,  or 
'afternoon  when  the  morning  is  past.'  (p.  23.). — Again,  when 
quoting  the  old  Rubric  enjoining  the  '  Litany,'  he  says:— 'That 
'after  'Morning  Prayer'  is  done  (which  was  then  done  betimes, 
'  and  while  it  was  yet  morning,  not  put  off  as  since  till  towards 
'  Noon)  the  people.  &'c.'  (fi.,  anil  similarly  in  p.  67.)— Add.  Notes  to 
Nicholl's  Com.  Pr. 

Wheatly  {ob.  1742)  observes  upon  this  subject: — 'To  His 
'  peculiar  people,  the  Jews,  God  Himself  appointed  their  set  times 
'  of  public  devotion:  commanding  them  to  offer  up  two  lambs  daily, 
'one  in  the  Morning  and  the  other  in  the  Even  (Exod.  xxix.  39; 

'Numb,  xxviii.  4;  Acts  iii.  1.),  which  were  at  their  third  and 

'  ninth  hours,  which  answer  to  our  nine  and  three  Accordingly  all 

'Christian  Churches  have  been  used  to  have  their  public  devotions 
'  performed  daily  Morning  or  Evening.  The  Apostles  and  primitive 
'  Christians  continued  to  observe  the  same  hours  of  Prayer  with  the 

'Jews.*  But  the  Church  of  England  cannot  be  so  happy  as  to 

'  appoint  any  set  hours  when  either  Morning  or  Erening  'Prayer 
'shall  be  said:  because  now  people  are  grown  so  cold  and  indifferent 
'  in  their  devotions,  they  would  be  too  apt  to  excuse  their  absenting 
'  from  the  Public  Worship,  from  the  inconveniency  of  the  time:  and 
'  therefore  she  hath  only  taken  care  to  enjoin  that  Public  Prayers 
'be  read  every  Morning  and,  Erening  doily  throughout  the  year; 
'that  so  all  her  members  may  have  opportunity  of  joining  in  Public 
'  Worship  twice  at  least  every  day.  But  to  make  the  duty  as 
'  practicable  and  easy  both  to  the  Minister  and  people  as  possible, 
'she  hath  left  the  determination  of  the  particular  hours  to  the 
'Ministers  that  officiate;  who,  considering  every  one  his  own  and 
'  his  people's  circumstances,  may  appoint  such  hours  for  Morning 
'and  Evening  Prayer,  as  the}-  shall  judge  to  he  most  proper  and 
'  convenient.'  (/).  79.) — Rat.  III.  of  C.  P. 

171. — The  '  Canonical  Hours  '  of  Public  Prayer, 
observed  before  the  Reformation,  were  seven  in 
number.  They  originated  in  the  devout  zeal  of  the 
monks  in  the  time  of  St  Basil  (cir.  a.  d.  37S.),  and 
were  subsequently  established  by  a  decree  of  Pope 
Pelagius  II.  {cir.  a.  d.  578.),  when  Psalms  were 
appointed  for  each  hour.  These  seasons  are  the 
following : — 


*  The  devout  Jews  had  also  a  third  hour  of  praj'er,  answering 
to  12  o'clock.  {Acts  x.  9). 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SEEVICES. 


303 


Matins,  which  comprised  the  two  offices  of  Nocturns,  and  Lauds, 
commenced  at  midnight  with  the  Nocturns  :  followed  at  day-break 
(about  3  o'clock)  by  the  Matin  Lauds. 

Prime  (Prima)  or  the  first  hour,  followed  Lauds,  beginning 
about  G  o'clock  (some  say  7  o'clock.). 

Tierce  (Tertia),  or  the  third  hour,  began  at  9  o'clock. 

Sext  (Sexta),  or  the  sixth  hour,  began  at  12  o'clock,  or  noon. 

Nones  (Nona),  or  the  ninth  hour,  began  about  2  or  3  o'clock,  p.m. 

Vespers  (Vesperas),  or  Evensong,  began  about  4  o'clock,  p.m. 
This  Service  is  spoken  of  by  the  most  ancient  Fathers. 

Complin,  Compline  (Completorium),  or  second  Vespers,  was  the 
last  Service  of  the  day,  and  began  about  7  o'clock,  p.m.  (or  9  o'clock). 

From  these  hours  not  resting  on  any  Divine  command,  there 
has  never  been  any  uniformity  in  the  Christian  Church  with 
respect  to  their  adoption.  The  true  origin  of  these  Canonical 
Hours  however,  may  possibly  be  derived  from  the  practices  of  the 
holy  men  recorded  in  the  Scriptures,  as  illustrated  by  Palmer, 
who  refers  to—'  The  example  of  Daniel,  who  "knelt  on  his  knees 
three  times  in  the  day,  and  prayed,  and  gave  thanks  unto  his  God  " 
(Dan.  vi.  10.);  of  the  Aposties  who  were  "all  with  one  accord 
in  one  place"  at  "the  third  hour  of  the  day"  {Acts  ii.  1.  15.); 
of  St  Peter,  who  at  the  sixth  hour  "  went  up  upon  the  house-top 
to  pray"  (Acts  x.  9.);  of  Peter  and  John,  who  at  the  ninth  hour, 
"being  the  hour  of  prayer,  went  up  together  into  the  Temple" 
(Acts  iii.  1.);  of  Paul  aud  Silas,  who  at  midnight  "prayed  and  sung 
praises  unto  God"  (Acts  xvi.  2.3.);  of  the  Psalmist,  who  "seven 
times  a  day  praised  God"  (Psal.  cxix.  164.);  of  the  Disciples,  who 
after  our  Lord's  ascension, "all  continued  with  one  accord  in  prayer 
and  supplication  "  (Acts  i.  14).' — Orig.  Lit.  i.  207. 

The  same  author  adds, — '  The  Office  of  Matins,  or  "  Morning 
'  Prayer,"  according  to  the  Church  of  England,  is  a  judicious 
1  abridgment  of  her  ancient  Services  for  Matins,  Lauds,  and  Prime  ; 
'  and  the  office  of  Evensong,  or  "  Evening  Prayer,"  in  like 
'  manner,  is  an  abridgment  of  the  ancient  Services  for  Vespers,  and 
'  Compline.' — Orig.  Lit.  i.  p.  213.  (See  also  Maskell's  Mon.  Pit. 
Ec.  Ang.  n.  pref.  v.  8,  9;  and  Bingham's  Ant.  of  Chr.  C'h.  XHI.  9.) 


Tee  Division  of  the  Seevices. 

172. — Upon  this  question  there  is  great  diversity 
of  opinion.  Previous  to  the  last  Review  of  the  Liturgy 
(1662),  there  seems  to  he  little  doubt  but  that 
the  Morning  Peayeb,  Litany,  and  Communion 
Seevice,  were  generally  used,  though  not  always,  as 
three  distinct  Services,  and  at  three  different  times. 
Subsequently  to  that  period,  and  up  to  the  present 
age,  the  usual  practice  has  certainly  been  to  unite 
the  three  Services  into  one;  and  not  till  very  lately 


394 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


has  this  usage  been  questioned,  or  departed  from. 
But  as  the  modern  movement  for  a  separation  of 
the  Services  is  widely  extending,  it  is  incumbent 
upon  us  to  refer  to  the  authorities  that  seem 
to  favour  this  proceeding,  and  especially  to  the 
sources  whence  those  authorities  have  deduced  their 
arguments.  The  '  Litany  '  Service,  forming  a  kind 
of  connecting  link,  will  be  chiefly  involved  in  the 
consideration ;  and  in  discussing  the  question  it  will 
perhaps  be  advantageous  to  proceed  chronologically. — 

1547.  Beginning  at  the  Reformation,  and  before  the  compilation 
of  the  Liturgy,  we  find  that  the  Litany  was  united  to  the 
Communion  Service.  It  was  used  immediately  preceding  High- 
Mass  ('  Communion  Service  '),  thus: — 

(a)—'  Immediately  before  High-Mass  (the  Communion)  the  Priests 
'  with  others  of  the  quire  shall  kneel  in  the  midst  of  the 
'Church,  and  sing  or  say  plainly  and  distinctly  the  Litany, 
'&c.' — Injunctions  of  Edward  VI.  (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann. 
i.  14;  Sparrow's  Coll.  8  ). 

1549.  In  tile  first  Liturgy  (1549),  the  Rubric  at  the  beginning 
of  the  'Communion  Service'  (which  Order  of  Service  was  now 
incorporated  into  the  Liturgy),  direcitng  when  the  names  of 
Communicants  where  to  be  signified  to  the  Curate,  implied  an 
interval  of  time  between  Morning  Prayer  and  Communion;  as 
the  names  were  to  be  given,  says  tne  Rubric, — 

(i) — 'Over  night:  or  else  in  the  Morning  after  the  beginning  of 
'Matins  (Morning  Prayer,  1552 — 9),  or  immediately  after' — 
(Keeling.  167.). 

At  the  end  of  the  Communion  Service  in  this  first  Prayer 
Book  is  placed  the  Litany  with  the  following  Rubric,  which  leads 
to  the  supposition  of  a  union  of  these  two  Services  on  Wednesdays, 
and  Fridays. 

(c)  — '  Upon  Wednesdays  and  Fridays  the  English  Litany 

'shall  be  said  or  sung  in  all  places  after  such  form  as  is 

'appointed  by  the  King's  Majesty's  Injunctions  (a)  And 

'though  there  be  none  to  communicate  u-ith  the  Priest,  yet 
'these  days  {after  the  Litany  ended)  the  Priest  shall  put 
'upon  him  a  plain  Albe,  ^fc,  and  say  iVc,  until  after  the 
'  Offertory.'— (Keeling.  229.). 

At  the  Commination  Service,  the  Rubric  implies  an  interval 
between  Morning  Prayer,  and  the  Litany,  and  that  the  latter 
was  a  distinct  Service,  thus : — 

(d)  — 'After  Matins  ended,  the  people  being  called  together  by 

'  the  ringing  of  a  Sell,  and  assembled  in  the  Church:  the 
'English  Litany  shall  be  said  t$r.'— (Keeling.  347.). 


DIVISION  OF  THE  'SERVICES. 


305 


1552.  In  ttie  Second  Liturgy  of  Edward  VI.  (1552),  the 
Litany  was  transferred  to  the  place  it  now  occupies  in  our  present 
Prayer  Book,  and  its  use  was  then  enjoined  on  the  Sunday  also, 
by  the  following  Rubric: — 

(<?) — 'Here  followelh  the  Litany,  to  he  used  upon  Sundays, 
'Wednesdays,  and  Fridays,  and  at  other  times  when 
'it  shall  be  commanded  by  the  Ordinary.' — (Keeling.  41.). 

The  Rubric  at  the  beginning  of  the  Communion  Service  (6) 
remained  unaltered;  and  likewise  that  at  the  Commination 
Service  (</),  except  that  in  the  latter,  'after  Matins  ended,'  was 
changed  to,  '  after  Morning  Prayer  :'  but  the  Rubric  at  the  end  of 
the  Communion  Service  (c)  was  removed. 

In  the  '■Reformatio  Legum  Ecclesiasticarum,'  drawn  up  at  this 
time  (1552)  by  Cranmer,  Martyr,  and  the  other  Commissioners, 
(and  which  was  revised  by  Abp.  Parker  in  1571,  yet  failed  in 
obtaining  legal  sanction,  although  pressed  upon  the  Parliament 
of  that  day)  a  union  of  these  three  Services  is  prescribed;  thus: — 

(./") — '  Quapropter  antemeridiano  quopiam  convenienti  tempore 

'preces,  quas  appellant  Mntutinas,  recitari  placet,  appositis 
'etiam  illis,  qua;  pro  Commvnionis  officio  prsescriptoe  sunt.  Et 
' intercurrat  in  singulis  diebus  Mercurii  et  Veneris  ilia 
'  solemnis  Supplicatio,  quas  Litania  nominata  est.' — De  Divin. 
Off.  caps.  I.  3.  6.    (See  pages  273,  284.). 

1559.  The  Rubrics  of  the  Liturgy  of  Elizabeth  (1559)  with 
respect  to  these  points  are  the  same  as  those  in  the  Second 
Liturgy  of  Edward  VI.  (1552);  and  the  Injunctions  of  Elizabeth 
are  also  similar  to  those  of  Edward  (a);  the  term  'High-Mass' 
however,  is  altered  to  'Communion  of  the  Sacrament ;'  (Cardwell's 
Doc.  Ann.  i.  187.);  and  there  is  the  additional  'Injunction' 
following,  as  regards  the  Litany  alone,  clearly  proving  it  an 
independent  Service;  and  from  which  our  present  Canon  15,  is 
derived. 

(y)— '  Item,  That  weekly  upon  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  not  being 
'  Holy-Days,  the  Curate  at  the  accustomed  hours  of  Service 
'  shall  resort  to  Church,  and  cause  warning  to  be  given  to  the 
'  people  by  Knolling  of  a  Bell,  and  sav  the  Litany  and 
'  Prayers:— {Doc.  Ann.  I.  196;  Sparrow's  'Coll.  80.). 

15fi0.  In  the  following  year  we  learn  that  it  was  the  practice  of 
Abp.  Parker  in  his  Visitations  to  have  Matins  over  by  8  o'clock, 
and  for  the  Litany  to  be  sung  at  a  later  hour.  (Strype's  Parker, 
ii.  e.  2.— quoted  in  Jebb's  C/ior.  Serv.  432.). 

1571.  A  few  years  later  (in  1571)  we  find  all  three  Services 
united.  Abp.  Grindal,  following  perhaps  the  'Reformatio  Legum,' 
which  was  now  pressed  upon  the  notice  of  the  House  of  Commons 
with  the  view  of  their  giving  to  it  legal  sanction  (see  page  284), 
directed  throughout  the  province  of  York  — '  That  the  Minister 
'was  not  to  pause  or  stay  between  Morning  Prayer,  Litany,  or 
'Communion:  but  to  continue  and  say  Morning  Prayer,  IMany, 
'  and  Communion  (or  the  Service  appointed  to  be  read  when  there  is 
'no  Communion)  together  without  any  intermission ;  to  the  intent 
'  that  the  people  might  continue  together  in  Prayer  and  reading  the 


396 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SEEVICES. 


'  Word  of  God,  and  not  depart  out  of  the  Church  during  all  the 
'  time  of  the  whole  Divine  Service.' — {Life,  u.  2;  Rem.  Parker's  Ed. 
p.  137.  Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  L  336.). 

1604.  The  next  authority,  the  Liturgy  of  James  I.  (1604), 
made  no  alteration  in  the  Rubrics  with  respect  to  the  point  under 
discussion. 

The  Canons,  however  of  (1603—4),  which  are  at  this  day 
binding  upon  the  Clergy,  enjoined  the  use  of  the  Litany  as  a  distinct 
Service  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays;  but  omitted  all  mention  of 
the  Sunday. 

(/<) — '  The  Litany  shall  be  said  or  sung  when,  and  as  it  is  set  down 
'  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  by  the  Parsons,  Vicars,  &c... 
'Upon  Wednesdays  and  Fridays  weekly,  though  they  be 
'not  Holy- Days,  the  Minister,  at  the  accustomed  hours  of 
'Service,  shall  resort  to  the  Church  or  Chapel,  and  warning 
'being  given  to  the  people  by  tolling  of  a  Bell,  shall  say 
'the  Litany  prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer: 
'whereunto  we  wish  every  householder  dwelling  within  half 
'a  mile  of  the  Church  to  come,  or  send  one  at  the  least  of 
'his  household,  fit  to  join  with  the  Minister  in  Prayers.' — 
Canon  15. 

1C37.  We  arrive  now  at  a  very  important  alteration,  which, 
although  made  in  the  Scotch  Liturgy,  yet  inasmuch  as  it  received 
the  sanction  of  Laud,  Juxon,  and  Wren,  not  only  presents  us  with 
the  opinions  of  those  divines  on  the  subject:  but  leads  us  to  suppose 
that  it  gave  rise  to  a  similar  change  being  effected  in  the  subsequent 
Review  of  our  own  Liturgy.  The  'Morning  Service'  in  the 
former  Liturgies  concluded  with  the  'Third  Collect  for  Grace;'  we 
now  have  in  the  Scotch  Liturgy  two  Rubrics  directing  the 
addition  of  the  Litany  to  the  Morning  Service:  the  one  following 
the  '  Collect  for  Grace,'  thus  reads : — 

(i)— 'After  this  Collect  ended,  followeth  the  Litany;  and  if  the 
'Litany  be  not  appointed  to  be  said  or  sung  that  morning. 
'  then  shall  next  be  said  the  'Prayer  for  the  King's  Majesty,' 
'with  the  rest  of  the  Prayers  following  at  the  end  of  the 
'  Litany,  and  the  Benediction?— {Keeling.  24.). 

The  other,  which  is  at  the  beginning  of  the  Litany  in  the  same 
Book  is  the  Rubric  annexed: — 

(k)—'Here  followeth  the  Litany-,  to  be  used  after  the  third 
'  Collect  at  Morning  Prayer,  called  'The  Collect  for  Crrace,' 
'upon  Sundays,  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays,  and  at  other 
'times  when  it  shall  be  commanded  by  the  Ordinary,  and 
'without  omission  of  any  part  of  the  other  Daily  Service 
'of  the  Church  on  those  days.'— (Keeling.  40.). 


1661.  The  next  proceeding  brings  us  to  the  Saroy  Conference 
(1661),  where  we  shall  find  among  the  'Exceptions  of  the  Ministers 
'  against  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.'  one  respecting  the  repeated 
use  of  the  '  Lord's  Prayer.'  The  following  answer  of  the  Bishops 
maintains  the  distinction  of  the  Services  under  consideration, 


thus:— 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


307 


(l)— 'Lord's  Prayer  often  used.— It  is  used  but  twice  in  the  Morning 
'and  twice  in  the  Evening  Service;  and  twice  cannot  be  called 
'often,  much  less  so  often.  For  the  Litany,  Communion, 
'Baptism,  &c,  they  are  Offices  distinct  from  Morning  and 
'Evening  Prayer,  and  it  is' not  fit  that  any  of  them  should 
'want  the  Lord's  "Prayer. ' — (CaBDWEI/I/s  Conf.  861.) 

Now,  among  the  Bishops  at  this  Conference,  and  who  also  assisted 
in  reviewing  the  Liturgy,  was  Cosins,  Bishop  of  Durham,  who  is 
supposed  to  have  made  the  following  suggestion,  which  led  to  the 
introduction  of  ' after  Morning  Prayer'  into  the  Rubric  now 
preceding  the  Litany;  as  well  as  of  the  entire  Rubric  following  the 
'Third  Collect  for  Grace.' — '  There  is  no  appointment  at  what  time 
1  of  the  day,  or  after  what  part  of  the  Service  it  (the  Litany)  ought 
'  to  be  said;  so  that  a  contentious  man  may  take  his  liberty  to  say 
'  it  after  '  Evening  Prayer,'  or  at  any  time  of  the  day  upon  Sundays, 
'  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays,  &c.,  at  his  own  choice,  unless  an  Order 
'be  here  added  to  confine  him.' — Add.  Notes  to  Nicholl's  C.Pr. 
p.  68. 

1662.    After  this,  the  Liturgy  was  reviewed  (lGti2),  and  the 
'  Morning  Service,'  instead  of  concluding  as  in  all  the  preceding 
English  Liturgies,  with  the  'Third  Collect  for  Grace,'  was  extended 
by  the  addition  of  an  'Anthem,'  after  which  follows  this  Rubric: — 
(m)  %  '  Then  these  five  Prayers  following  are  to  be  read  here, 
'  except  when  the  Litany  is  read ;  and  then  only  the  two 
'  last  are  to  be  read,  as  they  are  there  placed.' — (Present 
B.  of  C.  P.). 

And  the  following  alterations  (in  Roman  letters)  were  also  made 
in  the  Old  Rubric  before  the  Litany  : — 

(n)  \.  'Here  followeth  the  Litany,  or  General  Supplication,  to  be 
'{used)  sung  or  said  after  Morning  Prayer  upon  Sundays, 
'  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays,  and  at  other  times,  when  it  shall 
'  be  commanded  by  the  Ordinary.'— (I'resent  B.  of  C.  P.) 

Also  in  the  Rubric  before  the  Communion  Service,  instead 
of  the  words  as  quoted  above  (4)  in  page  377,  we  have, — 
(o)  %  '  at  least  some  time  the  day  before.' — (Present  B.  of  C.  P.) 

And  at  the  COMMUTATION  Service,  instead  of  the  ancient 
Rubric  (d)  will  be  found  the  following: — 

(p)  %.  'After  Morning  Prayer,  the  Litany  ended  according  to  the 
'  accustomed  manner,  the  Priest  shall,  in  the  Reading-Pew 
'  or  Pulpit,  say,'  ^e.*— (Present  B.  of  C.  P.) 


*  In  the  American  Liturgy  (1789),  the  Rubrics  (marked  m.  n. 
above)  are  thus  altered: — 

(m).  'The  following  Prayers  are  to  be  omitted  here,  when  the 

'Litany  is  read.' 
(»).  'The  Litany,  or  General  Supplication,  to  be  used  after 
'  Morning  Service,  on  Sundays,   Wednesdays,  and 
'  Fridays.' 


398 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SEKVICES. 


Bp.  Cosins  («6.  1671)  commenting  upon  the  second  of  these 
Rubrics  (re)  says—'  Though  it  be  not  specified  after  what  part  of 
'  the  Service  it  shall  be  used,  it  seems  they  intended  it  (the  Litany) 
'to  follow  the  'Morning  Prayer:' — but  after  quoting  the  old 
Rubric  before  the  Commination  Service  (of)  he  adds—'  In  those  days 
'  the  custom  was  to  go  home  after  '  Morning  Prayer,'  and  to  come 
'again  to  the  Litany,  not  to  despatch  (as  now  they  do)  all  at 
'  once.' — Add.  Notes  to  Nicholl's  C.  Pi:  p.  23. 

Bp.  Overall's  Chaplain  (cir.  16i4 — 19),  in  his  remarks  npon 
the  ancient  Rubric  before  the  Communion  Service  (4),  made 
previous  to  the  Last  Review,  says: — '  Whereupon,  is  necessarily  to 
'be  inferred  a  certain  distance  of  time  between  Morning  Prayer 
'  and  High-Service.  A  rule  which  is  at  this  time  duly  observed 
'in  York,  and  Chichester;  but  by  negligence  of  Ministers  and 
'  carelessness  of  people,  wholly  omitted  in  other  places.'— Add.  Notes 
to  Nicholl's  C.  I'r.  p.  36. 

Hrylyn  (oi  1602.)  also  observes,  that  the  ancient  practice  of 
the  Church  of  England  was  for  'the  'Morning  Prayer'  or 
•Matins'  to  begin  between  6  &  7;  the  Second  Service,  or  Com- 
'munion  Service,  not  till  3  or  10.'  (p.  61. j — 'In  some  Churches 
'  when  the  Litany  is  saying,  there  is  a  Bell  tolled  to  give  notice 
'unto  the  people  that  the  Communion  Service  is  now  coming  on.' 
— (p.  59.) — Antid.  Line.  c.  X.  s.  3.  p.  59:  (quoted  by  Wheatly). 

Bp.  Sparrow  (<j&.1685),  treating  on  the  'Communion  Service,' 
and  before  the  alterations  of  the  Rubrics  in  1662,  remarks  upon  the 
repetition  of  the  'Prayer  for  the  King': — 'Now  the  Morning 
'  Service,  Litany,  and  the  Communion  Service,  are  three  distinct 
'  Services,  and  therefore  have  each  of  them  such  an  especial  Prayer. 
'  That  they  are  three  distinct  Services  will  appear:  for  they  are  to  be 
'  be  performed  at  distinct  places  and  times.  The  Morning  Service 

'  is  to  be  at  the  beginning  of  the  day  The  Litany  is  also  a 

'  distinct  Service:  for  it  is  no  part  of  the  Morning  Service,  as  you 
'may  see  in  the  Rubric  after  Athanasius  his  Creed;  Here  ends  the 
'  Morning  and  Evening  Sevvice.    Then  follows  the  Litany.    Nor  is 


The  Rubrical  direction  (o)  is  omitted;  but  there  is  added  to  the 
last  Rubric  before  the  Communion  Service,  this  sentence: 

'But  the  Lord's  Prayer  may  be  omitted,  if  Morning 
'Prayer  hath  been  said  immediately  before' 

The  Com m in ation  Service  is  excluded  from  the  American 
Liturgy,  but  the  three  Collects  at  the  close  of  that  Service 
preceding  the  last  one,  and  which  thus  begin — 

'0  Lord,  we  beseech  Thee,  &c. 

'  0  Most  mighty,  &c.' 

'Turn  Thou  us.  &c.' 
are  placed  after  the  Collect  for  Ash-Wednesuay,  and  just  before 
the  Epistle  and  Gospel;  headed  with  this  Rubric: — 

'At  Morning  Prayer,  the  Litany  being  ended,  shall  be  said 
'  the  following  Prayers,  immediately  before  the  General 
'  Thanksgiving.'— (Dr.  Walnwright's  Ed.  New  York,  1845). 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


390 


'it  any  part  of  the  Communion  Service;  for  that  begins  with 
'  Our  Father,'  and  the  Collect '  Almighty  God,  &c.,'  and  is  to  be  said 
'  after  the  Litany.    The  time  and  place  for  this  is  not  appointed  in 

'the  Rubric,  but  is  supposed  to  be  known  by  practice  The 

'  time  of  this  (the  Litany)  is  a  little  before  ,the  time  of  the  Com- 
1  munion  Service  (/«/'.  IS  Eiiz.).    The  Communion  Service  is  to 

'  be  some  good  distance  after  the  Morning  Service  The  usual 

'  hour  for  the  solemnity  of  this  Service  (Communion),  was  anciently 
'  (and  so  should  be  J  nine  if  the  clock,  in  the  Morning  (Cone.  Aurel. 

'3.  Can.  11.).    This  is  the  Canonical  hour  In  case  of  necessity 

'  it  might  be  said  earlier  or  later  (Durant.  tie  Hit.).' — (p.  156). — 
Rationale.  (Edit.  1722). 

173. — From  the  above  remarks  it  may  be  gathered 
tbat  there  has  been,  almost  from  the  first,  great 
difference  of  opinion,  as  well  as  of  practice,  with  respect 
to  the  combination  or  division  of  the  three  Services 
of  Mobning  Prayee,  Litany,  and  Communion  See- 
vice  ;  a  diversity  originating  probably  in  the  laxity 
of  discipline  in  the  early  period  of  the  Reformation, 
which  doubtlessly  gave  rise  to  the  order  for  their 
union  we  find  put  forward  in  Ckanmee's  '  Reformatio 
Legum  '  in  1552.  The  junction  of  these  three  Offices 
was  indeed  approved,  although  not  practised,  by 
Abp.  Paekee  in  1560 ;  and  was  subsequently  en- 
forced, as  we  have  seen,  throughout  the  Province  of 
York  by  Abp.  Geindal  in  1571.  Since  the  last 
Review  of  the  Liturgy  (1662),  and  till  very  lately,  the 
prevailing  custom  has  also  been  to  combine  the  Services, 
where  the  inference  of  such  intention  could  be  drawn 
from  the  Rubric :  but  the  movement  of  the  present  day 
demanding  an  exact  conformity  to  all  and  every  thing 
prescribed  by  Canon,  and  Rubric,  imposes  a  diffi- 
culty, which  is  not  to  be  resolved  by  merely  private 
judgment,  but,  in  accordance  with  the  directions  of  the 
Liturgy,  should  be  submitted  to  Episcopal  determina- 
tion. The  difficulty  lies  here  :  —  The  Canon  (15.) 
directs  the  Litany  alone  to  be  used  on  Wednesdays 
and  Fridays,  and  makes  no  mention  of  '  Morning 
Prayer.'  The  Rubeic  requires  that  the  Litany  shall 
be  preceded  by  '  Morning  Prayer,'  and  be  so  used  on 
Sundays,  as  well  as  Wednesdays  and  Fridays ;  but 
does  not  clearly  define  whether  the  sequence  is  to 
be  immediate,  or  whether  a  lapse  of  time  shall 
interpose. 


400 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SEEYICES. 


174.  — The  consequence  of  this  discrepancy  is,  that 
some  Clergymen  will  follow  strictly  the  Canon,  and 
have  only  the  Litany  on  "Wednesdays  and  Fridays. 
Others  will  consider  they  are  acting  correctly  if  they 
adhere  closely  to  the  Rubric,  which,  according  to  their 
interpretation,  requires  Moening  Peatee  at  some 
early  hour,  followed  by  the  Litant  any  time  before 
noon,  on  the  appointed  days,  viz.  Sundays,  Wednes- 
days, and  Fridays.  While  a  third  party  conceives  it 
to  be  more  in  accordance  with  the  intentions  of  the 
Eubric  to  adopt  the  general  custom  of  not  separating 
the  Litany  from  the  Moening  Peatee  ;  thinking 
that  a  Canon,  sanctioned  only  by  the  King  and 
Convocation,  should  yield  to  the  superior  authority  of 
the  Liturgical  Eubeics,  which  were  ratified  by  the 
Imperial  Parliament,  as  well  as  by  the  Clergy,  and  the 
Crown.  And  there  is  yet  another  section,  who  feel 
themselves  at  liberty,  where  not  restrained  by  Eubric 
or  Canon,  to  adopt  arrangements  of  the  Services, 
unsupported,  so  far  as  the  Editor  has  been  able  to 
ascertain,  by  any  authority  beyond  the  private  views 
of  the  individuals  practising  them.  It  cannot  be 
supposed  that  mere  expediency  unsupported  by  Epis- 
copal sanction  can  be  held  to  be  a  sufficient  plea 
for  over-ruling  established  usages.  Where  circum- 
stances may  require  additional  opportunities  of  Public 
Worship  to  be  provided  in  the  Parish  Church ;  and 
an  alteration,  therefore,  of  the  duration  of  the  usual 
Morning  Prayer  may  be  necessary ;  it  is  essential  that 
the  permission  of  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  be  first 
obtained,  before  effecting  any  separation  of  which 
custom  has  so  long  maintained  to  be  the  constituent 
part  of  "  Moening  Seevice. 

175.  — The  more  general  practice  where  such 
division  is  now  attempted  seems  to  be  for  the  Sunday 
to  transfer  the  1  Litany'  accompanied  by  a  Sermon, 
or  the  Catechizing  of  the  Children  to  the  Afternoon 
or  Evening:  and  for  the  'Communion  Office'  to  be 
employed  as  a  distinct  Service  either  early  in  the 
Morning  (about  8  a.m.),  or  after  the  "  Moening 


DIVISION  OF  TIIE  SERVICES. 


401 


Prater.  At  all  events,  it  is  a  recognized  principle 
that  the  Bishop  has  the  power  to  sanction  and  to 
authorize  these  changes  in  the  order  and  arrangement 
of  the  Divine  Services. 

176. — The  following  is  the  scheme  of  the  Services 
pursued  at  the  Church  of 'St.  Barnabas,'  Pimlico. 


Sunday. 


II. 

Holy  Communion. 

•  9. 

Matins  with  Sermon. 

'  11. 

Litany,  Sermon,  Holy  Communion. 

'  3.  p. 

M. 

Evensong,  Catechizing. 

'  7. 

Evensong,  Sermon. 

Week-Days. 

'   8.  A. 

M. 

Matins. 

'  8.  p. 

M. 

Evensong.    (Wednesdays,  7.) 

Wednesday  and  Friday. 

'  12.  A. 

M. 

Litany;  (on  Festivals,  11.) 

Eestivals. 

'    7.  A. 

M. 

First  Communion. 

'  8. 

Matins. 

'11. 

Holy  Communion  and  Sermon. 

'  8.  p. 

M. 

Evensong. 

'Sermons  on  Friday  Evenings,  and  on  all  Vigils  and  Eves 
'Additional  Sermons  in  Advent  and  Lent.' —  (Extracted  from 
S.  Barnabas'  Par.  Ch.  Guide.  1852.) 

177.  — "With  respect  to  the  discrepancy  between  the 
15th  Canon  and  the  Rubric,  we  will  quote  one  learned 
Ritualist — 

Arciidkacon  Sharp  observes  on  this  point  —  'We  cannot 
'  perform  this  Ollice  (the  Litany),  agreeably  both  to  the  old  Ser- 
'  vice-Book  of  King  James,  and  our  present  restored  Liturgy.  For 
'according  to  the  former  it  is  to  be  a  distinct  office,  and  to  be  used 
'by  itself;  and  what  is  more,  it  hath  those  very  Collects  annexed 
'  to  it,  which  by  our  present  Common  Prayer  Book  are  forbidden 
'  to  be  used  at  the  same  time  when  the  Litany  is.  There  is  no 
'compounding  these  differences,  or  reconciling  these  contrarieties. 
'  But,  when  Canon  and  Rubric  interfere  with  each  other,  we  know 
'  which  of  them  must  take  place.  The  Rubric  is  the  standing  rule 
'  to  which  we  must  conform  ourselves.  But  nevertheless  in  so  doing 
'  we  answer  the  general  intent  and  purport  of  the  Canons  ;  and 
'  that,  in  these  cases,  amply  fulfils  our  obligations  to  them.' — 
(p.  100).    On  the  Rubrics  and,  Canons.— Charge,  A.  D.  1739. 

178.  — As  regards  the  Communion  Service,  Custom 
seems  to  have  regulated  the  time  of  its  performance 
even  in  former  days ;  and  it  is  custom  only  that  has 


402 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SEEVICES. 


sanctioned  its  annexation  in  more  modern  times  to 
the  Mobning  Seevice  and  Litany.  There  is  no 
existing  Rubric,  or  Canon,  ordering  its  junction ; 
nor  can  there  be  found  any  Eubrical  or  Canonical 
direction  in  force  enjoining  its  separation.  We  have 
therefore  some  Clergymen  conforming  to  long  estab- 
lished usage ;  others  pursuing  the  opposite  extreme, 
having  full  Communion  at  one  time  united  with  the 
Moiining  Peayee  and  Litany  ;  at  another  with  the 
Litany  only ;  and  on  a  third  occasion  having  the 
'  Communion  Service '  apart  by  itself.  With  these 
persons  also  the  Lord's  Supper  is  administered  weekly, 
or,  it  may  be,  daily,  and  at  various  hours ;  by  some 
at  the  first  Service  early  in  the  Morning,  by  others 
at  Noon,  and  by  another  section  in  the  Evening. 
There  exists  however  a  Liturgical  authority,  in  the 
Prefatory  remarks  of  the  '  Prayer  Book  '  respecting 
'Ceremonies,  Sfc.',  forbidding  'private  men  to  pre- 
'  sume  to  appoint  or  alter  any  public  or  common 
'  order  ;'  and  there  is  the  Oath  of  '  Canonical  obedi- 
ence,' binding  Clergymen  to  submit  to  their  Bishop  in 
these  matters,  as  one  '  lawfully  called  and  authorized 
'thereunto.'  To  decide  such  questions  therefore, 
when  any  deviation  from  ordinary  usage  is  in  contem- 
plation, it  seems  imperative  upon  us  to  fall  back  upon 
the  Liturgy  for  guidance  ;  and  there  will  be  found  this 
'  good  counsel,  that  '  the  parties  that  so  doubt  or 
'  diversely  take  any  thing  shall  always  resort  to  the 
'  Bishop  of  the  Diocese.' 

179.— It  is  deeply  to  be  regretted  that  the 
information  on  this  question  of  any  authoritative 
character  is  so  meagre  and  unsatisfactory,  probably 
therefore  the  opinions  of  some  of  our  modern 
Rubricians,  which  are  annexed,  although  they  will 
be  found  to  be  of  opposite  tendencies,  may  not  be 
unacceptable  to  the  general  Reader. 

Johnson  (of  Cranbrook)  writes : — '  No  Clergyman  ought  to  think 
'  the  Liturgy  too  long,  tho'  perhaps  he  may  not  have  strength 
'  of  body  to  read  all  that  is  prescribed  to  be  read  every  Sunday 
'  Morning  at  one  breath,  as  is  now  commonly  done,  and  then 
'  preach  a  Sermon,  as  is  required.    If  it  be  necessary  to  ease  himself, 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


403 


'  lie  may  do  it  by  reading  the  three  several  Offices  at  three  several 
'  times,  or  however  at  twice.  I  call  them  three  separate  Offices,  tor 
'  so  they  are :  —  1 .  The  Morninq  Prayer  is  the  first,  and  this,  in 
'  King  Edw.  VI's  time,  ended  with  the  Collect  for  Grace  which  is 
'  properly  to  be  used  at  the  beginning  of  the  day.  The  other 
'  Prayers  have  been  added  since,  and  are  stiil  directed  to  be  omitted, 
'when  the  Litany  is  used.  — 2.  The  Litany  is  of  itself,  a  distinct 
'  Office,  and  an  excellent  one  too.  Dr.  Comber  has  observed,  that  it 
'  is  almost  verbatim  the  same  with  that  used  bv  the  Danish,  and 
'  other  Lutheran  Churches:  {Part  2nd.  p.  307).  "It  is  ordered  to  be 
'  said  after  Morning  Prayer.  What  interval  there  shall  be,  is,  I 
'suppose,  at  the  discretion  of  the  Minister.  The  \5th  Canon  seems 
'  to  direct  the  singing  or  saying  of  that  by  itself  in  the  Church,  on 
'  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays.  —  3.  The  Communion  Office,  is  so 
'distinct  from  the  other  two,  that  it  is  still  commonly  called, 
'  Second  Service ;  and  there  is  no  direction  at  what  time  of  the  day 
'  it  shall  be  used,  only  Custom  has  determined  it  to  be  used  in 
'  the  Forenoon.  In  the  time  of  King  Charles  I.  Dr.  Hey  tin  Hist. 
'  Sab.  Part,  2.  cap.  4.  mentions  two  Services  for  the  Morning,  on 
'  Sundays  and  Holy -days,  the  one  beginning  at  Six  a  clock,  the  other 
'  at  Nine,  though  now  (says  he)  by  reason  of  the  sloth,  and  backward- 
'ness  of  the  people,  in  coming  to  the  House  of  God,  they  are  in 
'  most  places  joined  together.  1  am  well  assured,  that  long  since  the 
'  Restauration  in  the  Mctropolitical  Church  of  Cant,  rbury,  Morning 
'  Prayer  was  read  at  Six  a  clock  every  Sunday  in  Summer,  at  seven 
'  in  the  Winter,  at  ten  they  began  the  Litany,  and  after  a  Voluntary, 
'proceeded  to  the  Communinii-Scrcke,  and  Sermon,  and  so  it  is, 
'  or  lately  was,  at  the  Cathedral  of  Worcester.  So  then  it  appears, 
'  that  the  common  practice  of  reading  all  three  together,  is  an 
'  Innovation,  and  if  an  antient  or  infirm  Clergyman  do  read  them  at 
'  two  or  three  several  times,  he  is  more  strictly  conformable : 
'  However,  this  is  much  better  than  to  omit  any  part  of  the  Liturgy, 
4  or  to  read  all  three  Offices  into  one,  as  is  more  commonly  done 
'without  any  pause  or  distinction.'    (p.  11). —  Vade  Mecum, 

A.  D.  1707. 

Dr.  Bennet  remarks :  —  '  Since  the  Morning  Prayer,  the 
'  Litany,  and  the  Communion  Service,  are  now  generally  used  at 
'  one  and  the  same  time,  in  one  continued  order,  contrary  to  the 
'first  intention  of  our  Church;  'tis  highly  reasonable,  that  a 
'  Psalm  should  be  sung  before  the  Communion  Service  begins 
'  to  relieve  the  Congregation,  who  (if  they  joined  with  due  fervour), 
'may  be  supposed  something  weary.'  (p.  15G.)  —  Paraphrase  on 

B.  of  Qom.  Pr.  Ed.  A.  d.  1708. 

Bp.  Bull,  speaking  of  the  junction  of  the  Morning  Prayer, 
and  the  Communion  Service,  says  —  'I  verily  believe  the  first 
'  intention  of  the  Church  was  that  those  two  Services  should  be 
'read  at  two  several  time3  in  the  Morning;  but  now  Custom  and 
'  the  Rubric  direct  us  to  use  them  both  at  the  same  time.'  He 
then  advocates  the  practice  then  in  use  of  connecting  them  by 
'singing  an  Anthem,  or  a  Psalm.' —  Charge  to  the  Clergy  of 
St  David's.  A.  D.  1708. 

Bp.  Gibson,  remarking  on  the  subject  of  Psalmody,  says: — 'In 
'  the  Church  of  England,  whose  Sunday-Service  is  made  up  of  three 

C  C 


404 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


'  Offices,  which  were  originally  distinct,  and  in  their  natures  are  so, 
'  there  is  the  greater  need  of  the  intervention  of  Psalmody,  that  the 
'  transitions  from  one  Service  to  another  may  not  be  too  sudden 
'  and  abrupt.' — a.d.  1724.  (quoted  in  Clergyman's  Instructor,  3rd  Ed. 
p.  309.). 

L'Estrange,  in  his  observations  upon  the  old  Rubric  (see  (4) 
page  394)  before  the  'Communion  Service,'  supposes  a  short  interval 
of  time  between  the  Morning  Prayer,  and  Communion  — '  The 
'Morning  Prayer  and  Communion  were  not  continued  as  one  entire 
'  Service,  but  abrupt,  broken  off,  and  distinct,  each  office  from  the 

'other  Whether  or  not  the  Congregation  departed  hence  upon 

'  Sundays  and  Holy-Days  after  the  end  of  Morning  Prayer,  and 
'  returned  again  to  the  Communion  Service,  I  will  not  positively 
'  determine ;  I  rather  think  not.' — He  then  speaks  of  the  ringing, 
thus  '  This  Bell  was  usually  rung  in  the  time  of  the  Second  Service, 
'  viz.  the  Litany,  to  give  notice  to  the  people,  not  that  the 
'  Communion  Service,  as  hath  been  supposed,  but  that  the  Sermon 

'  was  coming  on  There  being  then,  so  apparent  and  visible  a 

'  breach  between  the  1st  and  2nd  Service,  the  Morning  Office,  and 
'  the  Litany,  it  is  very  probable,  though  the  Assembly  did  not 
'  dissolve,  yet  was  there  such  a  ceasing  and  rest  from  sacred 
'  employments,  as  might  give  the  Curate  time  in  that  interval,  both 
'  to  receive  the  names  of  such  as  intended  to  communicate,  as  also 
'  to  admonish,  and,  in  case  of  obstinacy,  to  repel  scandalous  persons 
'from  that  ordinance.'— Alliance,  p.  162,  163.  (a.d.  1659.). 

Wheatly  (06.  1742)  remarks  upon  this  question: — 'The 
'particular  time  of  Hie  day  when  it  (the  'Litany')  is  to  be  said 
'  seems  now  different  from  what  it  was  formerly :  in  King  Edwards 
'  and  Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  it  seems  that  it  was  used  as 

'preparatory  to  the  Second  Service.'  (He  here  quotes  the 

" Injunctions"  of  those  Sovereigns  (See  (a.)  (g.)  above),  and  then 

proceeds)  'And  even  long  afterwards  it  was  a  custom  in  several 

'Churches  to  toll  a  Bell  whilst  the  '  Litany'  was  reading,  to  give 
1  notice  to  the  people  that  the  '  Communion  Service '  was  coming 
'  on.  And  indeed  till  the  last  Review  in  1661—2,  the  '  Litany 
'  was  designed  to  be  a  distinct  Service  by  itself,  and  to  be  used  some 
1  time  after  the  '  Morning  Prayer'  was  over;  as  may  be  gathered 
'from  the  Rubric  before  the  '  Commination  '  in  all  the" old  Common 

'Prayer  Books  [((.'.)  above]  This  custom,  as  I  am  informed, 

'  is  still  observed  in  some  Cathedrals  and  Chapels  ('  Worcester 
'  Cathedral,  and  Merton  Coll.  Oxford,  where  '  Morning  Prayer '  is 
'  read  at  6  or  7,  and  the  '  Litany  '  at  10.' — a  note) :  though  now,  for 
'the  most  part,  it  is  made  one  Office  with  the  'Morning  Prayer;' 
'  it  being  ordered  by  the  Rubric  before  the  '  Prayer  for  the  King,' 
'  to  be  read  after  the  '  Third  Collect  for  Grace,'  instead  of  the 
'  intercessional  Prayers  in  the  '  Daily  Service.'  Which  Order  seems 
'to  have  been  formed  from  the  Rubric  before  the  'Litany'  in  the 

'Scotch  Common  Prayer  Book  [(£.)  above]  And  accordingly  we 

'find  that,  as  the  aforementioned  Rubric  before  the  ' Commination 
'Office'  is  now  altered,  both  the  'Morning  Prayer'  and  'Litany' 
'are  there  supposed  to  be  read  at  one  and  the  same  time.'  {p.  166.) — 
Speaking  of  the  alteration  in  the  Rubric  before  the  Commcnios 
Service  (from  (6)  to  (o)  above),  he  adds — '  The  design  of  this 
'  alteration  was  not  that  both  Offices  should  be  united  in  one,  but 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


405 


'  that  the  Curate  might  have  a  more  competent  time  to  enquire  of, 
'  and  consult  with,  those  that  oil'ered  themselves  to  Communicate. 
'  The  Offices  are  still  as  distinct  as  ever,  and  ought  still  to  be  read 
'  at  different  times  '  (  p.  293) :  and  he  concludes  with  the  comments 
of  Bp.  Overall's  Chaplain,  quoted  above.— Rat.  III.  of  Common 
Prayer.  Dr.  Corrie's  Edit. 

Shepherd  (nt.  1805)  says: — 'Morning  Prayer  is  an  office 
'  as  distinct  from  the  Communion,  as  Evening  Prayer  is;  and  since 
1  the  Reformation,  the  length  of  time  between  the  end  of  the 
'  Morning  Prayer  and  the  Communion,  was  more  than  equal  to  the 
'  interval  between  the  ending  of  the  Communion  and  the  beginning 
'  of  Evening  Prayer.  Supposing  that  Morning  Prayer,  which 
'  generally  began  soon  after  6,  was  over  by  8,  and  that  the 
'Communion  Service  commenced  at  11,  there  was  sufficient  time 
'  for  those  that  had  not  over  night  signified  their  names  to  the 
'  Curate  to  do  it  after  Morning  Prayer,  and  before  the  Communion.' 
{Vol.  ii.  p.  152.)— And  when  he  comes  to  the  Prayer  for  the  King, 
he  adds: — 'The  Communion  being  an  Office  distinct  from  them 
'(the  'Morning  Prayer,'  and  'Litany'},  and  originally  performed 
'at  a  different  hour,  it  was  proper  that  a  Prayer  for  the  King 
'  should  be  inserted  here  likewise.'  175.) — Elucid.  of  Booh  of 
Com.  Pr. 

From  many  living  authorities  may  be  quoted  the 
following:  — 

The  Bishop  of  London's  opinion,  advocating  the  use  of  the 
'Litany'  by  itself  has  been  already  given.    (Seepage  328.) 

The  Bishops  of  British  America,  in  their  '  Conference '  held 
at  Quebec  in  1851  (see  Note  page  293),  passed  the  following  decree 
upon  this  question  — '  We  are  of  opinion  that  the  Bishop,  as 
'  Ordinary,  may  authorize  the  division  of  the  'Morning  Service,'  by 
'  the  use  of  the  Morning  Prayer,  Litany,  or  Communion  Service, 
'  separately,  as  may  be  required ;  but  that  no  private  Clergyman 
'has  authority,  at  his  own  discretion,  to  abridge  or  alter  the  Services 
'  or  Offices,  or  to  change  the  '  Lessons 1  of  the  Church.' — Eccl. 
Gazette.  May,  1852. 

The  Metropolitan,  and  Bishops  of  Australia,  in  their 
'Conference'  held  at  Sydney  in  1850  (see  Note  page  293),  decreed 


'  necessity,  to  divide  the  'Morning  Service,'  by  using  either  the 
'  Morning  Prayer,  the  Litany,  or  the  Communion  Service,  separately; 
'  but  that  each  of  the  Services  so  used  be  read  entire.'— Eccl. 
Gazette.  June,  1851. 

The  late  Bishop  of  Down  and  Connor  (Dr.  Mant)  states: — 
'  Originally  it  (the  Litany)  was  intended  for  a  distinct  Service:  to 
'come  after  the  'Morning  Prayer,'  as  the  Rubric  of  our  Liturgy 
1  still  directs,  and  before  the  Office  for  the  '  Communion,'  at  a 
'  proper  distance  of  time  from  each :  of  which  custom,  a  few 
'  Churches  preserve  still,  or  did  lately,  some  remains.  But  in  the 
'  rest,  convenience  or  inclination  hath  prevailed  to  join  them  all 
'three  together;  excepting  that  in  some  places  there  is  a  Psalm 
'  or  Anthem  between  the  first  and  second;  and  between  the  second 


cc  2 


106 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


'and  third,  almost  every  where;  besides  that  the  latter  part  of 
4  the  Morning  Prayer  is,  most  of  it,  ordered  to  be  omitted,  when 
'  the  Litany  is  said  with  it.  But  still  by  this  close  conjunction 
'many  things  may  appear  improper  repetitions:  which,  if  the 

'  Offices  were  separate,  would  not  To  these  (repetitions')  all 

'  persons  would  easily  be  reconciled,  if  an  interval  were  placed, 
'in  their  minds  at  least,  between  the  Services;  and  they  would 
'consider  each,  when  it  begins,  as  a  new  and  independent  one, 
'just  as  if  it  were  a  fresh  time  of  meeting  together.'  (p.  60.) — 
Com.  Prayer. 

The  late  Rev.  J,  J.  Blunt  (Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity,  at 
Cambridge)  says ; — '  The  time  of  day  at  which  the  Offices  of  the  Prayer 
'Book,. ..were  performed,  is  not  easily  determined;  and  peremptorily 
'  as  some  have  asserted  that  our  Morning  Service  for  Sundays 
'  consists  of  three  entire  Services  intended  for  three  several  hours 
'of  Prayer,  and  extravagantly  long,  merely  owing  to  this  clumsy 
'  consolidation  of  them  all,  it  would  not  be  easy  to  prove  that  such 
'  division  did  ever  in  fact  obtain.  Two  Services  probably  are 
'united;  the  Morning  Prayer,  strictly  so  called,  being  one;  the 
'  Litany  and  Communion  the  other;  but  that  the  two  latter  again 
'  were  ever  separated  seems  very  doubtful,  or,  indeed,  that  the  first 
'  continued  for  any  great  while  after  the  Reformation  to  be  severed 
'  from  the  rest.  That  such  was  the  case  originally  there  are  many 
'  reasons  for  believing.  It  naturally  succeeded  to  the  Matins  of  the 
'  Roman  Catholic  Church,  as  the  Litany  and  Communiim  did  to  the 
'  High  Mass ;  and  it  would  therefore  be  very  likely  that  the  hours 

'  in  either  case  would  also  correspond.'  After  adverting  to  the 

old  Rubric  indicating  an  interval  before  the  Communion  Service, 
the  Professor  adds — '  There  are  reasons  still  more  satisfactory  for 
'  thinking  that  the  Litany  was  succeeded  by  the  Communion 

'Service  without  any  pause  whatever  Indeed  the  Communion 

'Service  could  scarcely  fail  of  being  annexed  to  the  Litany,  since 
'  it  soon  came  to  pass  that  the  former  was  seldom  read  throughout, 

'the  Sacrament  ceasing  to  be  administered  weekly  When  there 

'  were  persons  to  communicate  (which  the  Rubric  seems  to  presume 
'  would  always  be  the  case  on  Sundays),  the  Litany  and  Communion 
'Service  went  together;  and  that  when  there  were  none  such, 
'  still  the  Litany  was  immediately  followed  by  the  Communion 
'Service  as  far  as  to  the  end  of  the  "  Prayer  for  the  whole  State  of 

'Christ's  Church  Militant."  But  within  the  first  ceutury 

'  after  the  Reformation  the  Church  seems  to  have  lapsed  into  the 

'  present  practice,  and  to  have  combined  its  Services  into  one  The 

'  length  of  our  Church  Service,  therefore,  of  which  we  now  hear  so 
'  much,  and  the  repetitions  it  contains,  are  evils,  if  evils  they  be, 
'  which  have  been  practically  existing  almost  from  its  first 
'formation;  which  a  Hammond,  a  Sanderson,  and  a  Taylor  could 
'  tolerate  without  a  complaint,  but  too  happy,  (as  were  "then  their 
'  Congregations  also,  for  those  were  not  fastidious  days)  if  they 
'  were  permitted  in  their  secret  assemblies  to  give  utterance  to  these 
'  burning  words  with  which  the  great  Reformers  had  furnished 
'  them.'  (p.  214— 218.)— Sketch  of  the  Ref. 

Archdeacon  Harrison,  speaking  of  the  usage  in  the  time  of 
Elizabeth,  says: — '  The  ordinary  Service  consisted  then,  precisely 
'  as  now,  of  Morning  Prayer,  Litany,  and  Communion, 
'immediately  following  each  other  (p.  2fi2.)  The  only  question, 


DIVISION  Or  THE  SERVICES. 


407 


'in  fact,  is  in  regard  to  the  Morning  Prayer — whether  it  were 
'  performed  at  an  earlier  hour  than  the  Litany  and  Communion  ; 
'  and  the  single  ground  for  the  supposition  that  such  was  the  case, 
'  is  in  the  first  Rubric  before  the  Communion,  as  it  stood  before 

'the  last  Review,  (p.  265.)  The  great  inconvenience  of  such  a 

'  practice  (an  interval  between  Morning  Prayer,  and  Litany  and 
'  Communion)  in  most  places,  in  country  Parishes  in  particular, 
'  would  effectually  stand  in  the  way  of  such  an  arrangement 

'  (p.  267.)  In  rural   Parishes  especially,  and  where  a  large 

'  proportion  perhaps,  of  the  population  have  their  dwellings  at  a 
'  distance  from  the  Church,  the  performance  of  the  several  Offices 
'  at  distinct  times  would  obviously  exclude  the  greater  part  of  the 

'  Congregation  from  attendance  at  the  whole  Service  (p.  268.)  

'  Finally,  the  whole  Sunday  Morning  Service  as  now  performed 
'in  all  our  Parochial  Churches,  consisting  of  Morning  Prayer, 
'  Litany,  Communion  Service,  and  Sermon,  is  really  performed 
'  according  to  the  intention  of  our  Church  and  its  Authorities,  from 
'  the  very  time  of  the  Reformation.'  {p.  273.) — Historical  Inquiry. 

Dr.  Hook  observes: — '  In  the  original  arrangement,  the  Litany 
'  formed  a  distinct  Service,  not  used  at  the  time  of  the  other  Services. 
'  But  by  later  usage  it  has  been  united  with  the  Morning  Prayer, 

'though  still  retaining  its  separate  place  in  the  Prayer  Book'  

(After  quoting  the  old  Rubric  of  1649,  and  Canon  1.5,  he  proceeds)... 
'  The  ordinary  arrangement  was  to  hold  Morning  Prayer  at  8 
'o'clock,  the  Litany  and  the  Communion  at  10.  This  practice  is 
'  still  observed  in  some  of  the  English  Churches.' — Church  Diet. 
6th  Ed.  Art.  Litany. 

Kev.  J.  Jebb  remarks: — 'The  original  custom  of  the  Church, 
'  Eastern  and  Western,  was  to  celebrate  the  Matins  and  the 

'Communion  at  different  hours,  (p-227.)  In  country  Parishes. 

'  where  the  population  is  scattered,  this  division  might  have 
'  the  effect  of  inducing  a  neglect  either  of  the  Morning  or  the 
'  Communion  Service,  since  attendance  on  both  would  often  be 
'  impracticable.  But  in  Towns,  and  in  Cathedral  cities  especially, 
*  this  objection  does  not  exist,  from  the  nearness  of  the  inhabitants 

'to  the  Churches,  {p.  228.)  If  the  Litany  is  to  follow  Matins, 

'  the  custom  of  the  Church  has  not  interpreted  this  to  mean  that 
'  it  is  to  follow  it  without  an  interval  of  time,  but  merely,  that 
'  the  Matin  Service  is  to  be  the  first  in  order,  and  that  it  is  not 

'to  be  omitted  on  Litany  days.  {p.  401.)  It  (the  Litany)  is  to 

'  be  said  after  Morning  Prayer.  That  is,  the  Morning  Prayer  is 
'  to  be  first  in  order  of  time:  but  nothing  warrants  us  to  suppose 
'  that  the  Litany  is  to  be  read  in  immediate  sequence.  On  the 
'  contrary,  the  strongest  authorities  exist  for  the  dissociation  of 

'  the  two  Services,  when  expedient.'  {p.  432.)  After  referring  to 

the  times  of  Abp.  Parker  in  1560;  and  to  the  use  of  the  Litany  as 
a  separate  Service  in  the  Universities,  at  Convocations,  Coronations, 
and  Confirmations,  as  well  as  in  some  Cathedrals,  he  proceeds: — 
'  Nothing  can  be  argued  from  the  practice  of  our  Parish  Churches 
'in  this  respect.  Convenience,  or  what  is  esteemed  such,  in  some 
'  instances,  and  a  love  of  unvaryiug  monotony  in  others,  has 
'  very  generally  caused  the  junction  of  the  Services.  That  their 
'  dissociation  would  be  inconvenient  in  most  country  Parishes, 
'is  evident.    But  the  argument  is  not  against  the  lawfulness  of 


-iOS 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SEBVICES. 


'  combining  the  Services,  but  for  the  lawfulness  of  separating  them.' 
(p.  433.)—  Choral  Service. 

Rev.  T.  Lathbury  saj's: — 'It  is  clear  the  Litany  was  read 
'  alone  on  those  days  (Wednesdays,  and  Fridays),  at  that  time 
'  (at  the  accustomed  hours  of  Service),  as  is  still  the  case  in  some 
'  College  Chapels,  though  such  a  course  is  not  now  authorized 
'  by  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer;  for  since  the  last  Review  it  is 

'appointed  to  be  said  'after  Morning  Prayer.'  (/>.  195.)  It  has 

'  been  argued  that  the  Reformers  intended  the  Communion  Service 
'  to  be  used  at  a  different  time  from  the  '  Daily  Prayers.'  This 
'  assertion  is  often  made  by  those,  who  wish  to  remodel  the  Services 
'of  the  Church;  and  many  who  have  no  such  wish,  take  it  for 
'  granted,  that  the  assertion  is  correct.  It  is,  however,  altogether 
'  erroneous.  The  Services  never  were  separated,  nor  were  they  ever 
'  intended  to  be  so.  From  the  period  of  the  Reformation  the 
'  Communion  Service  has  succeeded  the  '  Daily  Prayers,'  as  is 
'  the  custom  at  present.  Undoubtedly,  some  of  the  Clergy  were 
'accustomed  to  separate  them  in  the  time  of  Queen  Elizabeth; 
'but  the  practice  was  checked  by  an  injunction  of  Abp.  Grindals 

'  (quoted  above, p.  378.)  The  only  Services  which  were  formerly 

'  separated  were  the  '  Daily  Morning  Prayer,'  and  the  Litany. 
'Until  the  last  Review,  the  Litany  was  read  alone  in  some  places; 

'  though  I  cannot  conceive  on  what  authority  There  appears 

'  to  have  been  no  authority  for  the  substitution  of  the  Litany  in 

'the  room  of  the  Morning  Prayers  Whether  the  Litany  was 

'  intended  to  be  said  at  a  different  time  of  the  day  is  another 
'question.'  (p.  395. — Hist,  of  Convocation.)  In  a  more  recent  Work 
this  Author  remarks: — '  Grindal  had  been  concerned  in  all  the 
'  transactions  of  the  Reformation,  and  well  knew  the  intentions  of 
'  the  Reformers.  He  knew  that  a  division  was  contrary  to  custom, 
'  and  the  intentions  of  the  Reformers.  Undoubtedly  the  practice 
'  which  he  enjoined  was  agreeable  to  those  intentions.  Though 
'no  objection  might  be  raised  to  a  division  of  the  Service  by 
'competent  authority,  yet  it  is  not  correct  to  plead  the  example 
'of  the  Reformers  in  its  favour.  In  the  first  Occasional  Form  in 
'  this  reign,  published  iu  1563,  the  Minister  was  directed  to  exhort 
'  the  people  to  spend  a  quarter  of  an  hour,  or  more,  iu  private 
'prayer,  between  the  Morning  Prayer  and  the  Communion.  This 
'  practice,  if  continued  for  any  time,  was  probably  found  inconvenient. 
'At  all  events,  it  was  discontinued.  In  all  subsequent  Occasional 
'  Forms,  the  Morning  Prayer,  Litany,  and  Communion  Service  were 
'  printed  as  one  continuous  office,  to  be  used  without  division  or 
'  intermission.  The  mistake,  which  has  been  so  often  made, 
'  undoubtedly  arose  from  not  considering  the  various  steps  by  which 
'the  reformation  of  the  Offices  was  carried  on.  For  some  time 
'  the  Litany  alone  was  used  in  Churches  as  supplemental  to  the 
'  Romish  Services.  Then  the  order  of  Communion  was  introduced, 
'  to  be  used  with  the  Office  of  the  Mass.  After  more  than  two 
'  years  from  Edward's  accession,  the  whole  Book  of  Common 
'  Prayer,  comprising,  with  the  Morning  and  Evening  Service,  the 
'  Litany  and  the  Communion  Office,  was  put  forth  and  enjoined 
'  to  be  said  in  all  Churches;  but  no  separation,  or  saying  one  part  at 
'one  time  and  another  at  another,  was  even  contemplated.  Not 
'  a  particle  of  evidence  in  support  of  such  a  notiou  can  be  collected 
'  from  the  history  of  the  period.    The  assertion,  however,  has  been 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


4U9 


'  repeated  from  one  to  another  without  inquiry,  till  many  actually 
'suppose  tbat  it  is  a  truth.  In  all  books  previous  to  the  last 
'  Review,  the  Rubric  ordered  that  persons  who  intended  to 
'  communicate  should  give  their  names  to  the  Curate  "  over-night, 
"  or  else  in  the  morning  before  the  beginning  of  Morning  Prayer, 
"  or  immediately  after."  It  has  been  inferred  from  this  Rubric 
'that  the  people  left  the  Church  for  a  time.  Overall  is  quoted 
'by  Wheatly  for  such  a  custom  at  York  and  Chichester;  and 
'  Johnson  of  Cranbrook,  mentions  a  similar  practice  in  another 
'  place.  But  such  instances  were  merely  exceptions  to  the  general 
'  rule,  and  prove  only  that  irregularities  existed.  In  such  a  case, 
'  the  practice  since  the  Reformation  is  the  best  interpreter  of  the 
'Rubric;  and  this  is  ascertained  from  the  Occasional  Forms  from 
'  1563,  and  from  the  Visitation  Articles  of  numerous  Bishops.  Yet 
'  neither  Wheatly  nor  Johnson  resorted  to  this  mode  of  inquiry. 
'On  this  point,  the  evidence  of  the  Forms  and  the  Visitation 
'Articles  is  conclusive.  They  prove  that  the  Reformers  never 
'  intended  a  division ;  that  they  and  their  successors,  down  to  the  last 
'Review  in  1661,  never  understood  the  words  "immediately  after 
'  to  mean  that  the  Communion  Office  should  be  used  as  a  separate 

'service  at  a  different  time  (p.  80.)  Some  Clergymen  were 

'  accustomed  to  abridge  the  Morning  Prayer,  and  even  to  omit 
'  the  Litany,  or  the  usual  portion  of  the  Communion  Office ;  and 
'  hence,  probably,  arose  the  notion  of  three  distinct  forms,  intended 
'  for  use  at  separate  times.    This  irregularity,  however,  was 

'checked  by  the  Bishops,  (p.  83.)  A  division  of  the  Service, 

'  therefore,  would  be  a  deviation  from  the  practice  of  the  Reformers. 
'It  would  involve  the  condemnation  of  their  arrangements;  and 
'  on  this  ground  alone,  apart  from  the  practical  difficulties  which 
'  would  stand  in  the  way  of  such  a  change,  the  subject  should 
'  not  be  entertained  by  Churchmen.  When  it  is  said  that  no  Rubric 
'  prohibits  a  division  in  express  terms,  it  may  be  replied,  that  it 
'  imposes  the  performance  of  the  Service  on  the  Clergy  in  such  a 
'  way  as  to  render  a  division  impossible.'  (p.  81.) — Hist,  of  Book  of 
Com.  Prayer. 

Rev.  J.  C.  MiLLEit  (Rector  of  St  Martin's,  Birmingham),  in 
a  printed  Address  to  his  Parishioners  proposing  changes  in  the 
arrangement  of  the  Sunday  Services  (dated  Dec.  26,  1851),  after 
remarking  '  that  these  alterations  will,  in  some  measure,  break  in 
'  upon  long  established  habit— though  in  no  case  upon  the  order 
'  of  our  Church,'  adds  — '  It  is  a  great  satisfaction  to  me  to  be 
'  permitted  to  inform  you  that  the  proposed  arrangements  have 
'  been  submitted  to  our  respected  Diocesan,  the  Bishop  oj  Worcester, 
'  and  have  his  full  sanction,  as  in  no  respect  violating  the  order 
'  of  the  Church.  His  Lordship  entered  most  kindly  into  my  views, 
'  and,  without  a  moment's  hesitation,  allowed  me  to  state  that  he 
'concurred.    The  Bishop  particularly  approved  of  the  plan  being 

'  regarded  as  an  experiment  Our  ordinary  '  Morning  Service  ' 

'  consists  of  a  combination  of  Services,  which  were  not  originally 
'  intended  to  be  used  together.  And  a  large  number  of  the  Clergy 
'  and  Laity  have,  from  time  to  time,  expressed  a  wish  that  this 
'  Service  might  be  divided,  in  accordance  with  the  original  design  of 
'the  framers  of  the  Prayer  Book.  For  Invalids,  Aged  Persons, 
'  and  for  Children  especially,  it  is  found  too  long.  Another  evil  in 
'  our  present  course  is,  that  a  very  large  number  of  our  present 


410 


DIVISION  OF  THE  8EEVICES. 


'worshippers — Domestic  Servants,  and  others — who  can  only  attend 
'  either  Afternoon,  or  Evening  Service,  are  completely  shut 
'  ont  from  some  of  the  most  important  and  edifying  parts  of  our 
'admirable  Liturgy — for  example,  tue  Litany,  and  the  whole  of 
'  the  Communion  Office,  including  God's  Ten  Commandments.  I 
'  believe  that  among  regular  attendants  at  our  Church,  not  a 
'  few  might  be  found  who  never  join  in  the  Litany,  or  hear  the 
'  Commandments  from  one  year's  end  to  another.  Surely  this  is 
'  an  evil.'   Me.  Miller  then  proposes  as  follows* : — 

'  1.  The  shortening  of  the  present  Morning  Service. — This,  it  is 
'  believed,  will  be  a  great  comfort  to  Invalids,  Aged  Persons,  and 
'  Children.  The  evil  of  our  present  length  of  Service  to  Children 
'  can  hardly  be  exaggerated,  as  Sunday  School  Teacners  well  Know. 

'  2.  The  securing  an  additional  Service  and  Sermon  in  a  Parish 
'  where  the  Church  accommodation  is  so  utterly  inadequate  for  the 
'  population.  It  is  hoped  that  this  will  also  be  a  great  accommodation 
'  in  family  arrangements,  as  facilitating  the  attendance  of  Servants. 


*  The  following  arrangements  formed  the  experiment  put  on 
trial. 

jFirst  Stinlian  in  the  Jflonrh. 

'  9i  o'clock.  ( '  MORNING  PBATEB  and  SEBMON,  without  Litany 

\    '  and  Communion  Service. 
'11  o'clock.  ('  Litany,  Communion  Service,  Sebmon,  and 

1    'Lobd's  Supper. 
'  Zi  o'clock.   Evening  Pbateb  (as  at  present). 
'  6|  o'clock.  Evening  Pbateb  (as  at  present). 

Scconlf  SunSao  in  the  Jllontf). 
'  9i  o'clock.  ( '  Communion  Sebvice  and  Lobd's  Suppek.  No 

\  'Sermon. 

'  11  o'clock.  ( '  Mobning  Pbateb,  Litant,  and  Sebmon, 

\    'without  Communion  Service. 
'  3i  o'clock.  C '  Litant  only,  and  Sebmon  to  Children  and 

i    'Young  Persons. 
6£  o'clock.  Evening  Pbateb  (as  at  present). 

©Jjtrrj  SunUflD  in  il>«  JJlonrh. 
9i  o'clock.  ( '  Mobning  Pbateb  and  Sebmon,  without  Litany 
I    'and  Communion  Service. 

'  11  o'clock.  '  Litant,  Communion  Sebvice,  and  Sebmon. 
'  3i  o'clock.  ( '  Communion  Sebvice,  Sebmon,  and  Lobd's 

I    '  Supper. 
'  6't  o'clock.  Evening  Pbateb  (as  at  present). 

JFoutrh  SuiVoan  in  the  Jllonth. 
'  9i  o'clock.  Communion  Sebvice,  and  Sebmon. 
'11  o'clock.  ('Morning  Prater,  Litant,  and  Sermon, 

I    'without  Communion. 
'  3£  o'clock.  '  Evening  Prater,  and  Sermon  (as  at  present.). 
'  65  o'clock.  '  Litant,  Communion  Service,  and  Sebmon. 
V*  'When  there  are  Five  Sundats  in  the  Month,  the 
'  arrangements  for  the  Fourth  will  be  repeated  on  the  Fifth.' 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SERVICES. 


411 


'  3.  The  bringing  All  our  Services,  as  far  as  possible,  within 
'  the  reach  of  all  classes.  It  is  hoped  that  Servants— many  of  the 
'  Working  Classes— Wives  who  have  the  little  Sunday  dinner  to 
'  attend  to  later  in  the  morning — and  who  are  now  shut  out  from 
'the  lTe  Deurn,'  'The  Litany,'  and  the  'Communion  Office' — will  find 
'their  privileges  greatly  increased,  and  enjoy  in  our  incomparable 
'  Liturgy  much  of  which  they  have  been  practically  deprived. 

'  4.  The  facilitating  the  attendance  of  Servants,  and  of  the 
'  Working  and  Poorer  Classes  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  by  an 
'  Afternoon  administration  of  it  Monthly.  —  It  is  to  be  feared  that 
'  the  sadly  scanty  attendance  of  these  Classes  at  the  Holy  Commu- 
'  nion  is  to  be  traced,  in  some  measure,  to  the  circumstance  that  the 
'  Communion  is  never  administered  in  the  Afternoon.  Such  is 
'  the  opinion  of  many  experienced  Parish  Clergy.' 

The  experiment  was  attempted  during  a  course  of  Six  Months, 
when  we  find  in  a  second  Address  (dated  June  25th,  1852),  a  detail 
of  its  result;  stating  that  —  'All  of  these  (the  propositions  given 
'  above)  have  been  realized,  except  the  second.  The  Early  Service 
'  has  proved  an  entire  failure,  and  will  be  discontinued.  After  a 
'  trial  of  six  months,  it  is  clear  that  it  does  not  fall  in  with  the 
'habits  of  any  class  of  the  Parishioners.'  —  A  new  scheme  is  then 
proposed,  which  introduces  a  Monthly  Evening  Communion,  so  as 
to  '  give  all  classes  an  opportunity  of  coming  to  the  Lord's  Table.' 
The  Address  then  proceeds  to  say,  that  '  entire  uniformity  cannot 
'  be  carried  throughout,  without  sacrificing  much  that  is  essential 
'  to  the  plan.    Certain  Services  must  be  given  in  the  day,  and  certain 

'  Rubrics  observed  as  to  their  order  The  former  plan  was  seriously 

'  objectionable  as  depriving  the  Morning  Congregation,  on  alternate 
'Sundays,  of  the  Psalms  and  Lessons.  This  is  now  remedied; 
'and  I  believe  that  you  will  all  concur  in  the  desirableness  of  letting 
'our  11  o'clock  Service  contain  uniformly,  the  Morning  Prayer. 
'  By  substituting  the  Communion  Service  for  the  Litany  on  the 
'  occasion  of  the  Service  to  Children,  we  avoid  having  a  Service 
'without  a  portion  of  Scripture  in  it;  and,  at  the  same  time,  get  a 
'  Service  better  adapted  for  the  children,  and  containing  in  it  the 

'  Ten  Commandments  Is  not  any  little  breach  of  uniformity  com- 

'  pensated  by  practically  shewing,  and  practically  employing,  an 
'  elasticity  in  our  Prayer  Book,  which  has  hitherto  been  in  abey- 
'ance?  Let  us  distinguish  between  the  great  vital  truths  of 
'  thnt  Prayer  Book  — the  foundations  of  our  "  most  holy  faith"  — 
'  and  the  practical  working  of  our  means  and  machinery.  The 
'  former  are  immutable,  for  they  are  the  truths  of  God,  and  of  His 
'  imperishable  Word.  No  changes  in  our  social  habits  or  condition 
'can  alter  or  modify  these.  But  the  other  —  our  means,  our  ma- 
'  chinery,  the  time  and  arrangement  of  our  Services — we  may 
'  adapt  (and  will  it  not  be  our  wisdom  to  adapt  them  ?)  to  the  wants 

'  and  convenience  of  our  day  '    To  these  remarks  is  annexed 

the  following  arrangements  "of  the  Sunday  Services,  amended  from 
the  original  scheme;  and  which  has  been  found  not  only  to  work 
exceedingly  well,  but  to  have  given  so  much  satisfaction  that  it  has 
continued  to  be  adopted  up  to  the  present  day.  (Priv.  Letter.) 

The  following  is  the  new  arrangement  referred  to  as  still  in 
use: — 


412 


DITISION  OF  THE  SEBVICES. 


.first  Suniar>. 

'  I.   Morning     Prayer,     omitting    Litany,  Communion 
Service,  Sermon.  Lord's  Supper. 

'  II.   Evening  Prayer,  Sermon. 

'III.  Litany,  Communion  Service,  Sermon. 

SeconH  Sun&ap. 

'  I.    Early  Communion.    No  Sermon. 

'  IL   Morning  Prayer,  Litany,  Sermon. 

'  IIL  Communion  Service,  Sermon   to  Young,  or  Cate- 
chizing. 

'  IV.  Evening  Prayer,  Sermon. 

tEfHrt  Stirtrjap. 

'  I.   Morning  Prayer,  Litany,  Sermon. 

'  II.  Communion  Service,  Sermon,  Lord's  Supper. 

'  III.  Evening  Prayer,  Sermon. 

JFourrf)  SuntraD. 

'  I.   Morning  Prayer,  Litany,  Sermon. 

'  II.   Evening  Prayer,  Sermon. 

'  III.  Communion  Service,  Sermon,  Lord's  Supper. 

if ifrfj  SttnUag. 
'  I.   Morning  Prayer,  Litany,  Sermon. 
'  II.  Litany,  Communion  Service  without  Lords  Supper, 

Sermon. 

'III.  Evening  Prayer,  Sermon.' 

Rev.  W.  Palmer  considers  the  Litany  — '  in  three  points  of 

'  view.    First,  as  a  termination  of  the  Office  of  Morning  Prayer  

'  Secondly  as  a  distinct  Service,  said  after  the  Morning  Prayer  

'  Thirdly,  as  an  introduction  to  the  Liturgy  or  Communion  Ser- 
'vice.'  (i.  315.)— Orig.  Lit. 

Rev.  J.  C.  Robertson  says :  —  'As  the  practice  of  uniting  the 
'  Services  began  so  early,  and  has  not  been  censured  or  disconn- 
'  tenanced  by  the  later  Revisers  of  the  Prayer  Book,  we  need  not 
'doubt  that  it  is  sufficiently  sanctioned;  while,  on  the  other  hand, 
'  it  is  evident  that  a  distinctness  was  originally  provided  for,  and 
'  still  remains  lawful.  Whether  the  first  Compilers  of  our  Liturgy 
'contemplated  the  union,  is  not  altogether  clear;  that  they  did  so 
'  is  not  improbable,  as  they  had  before  them  the  fact  that  the  Latin 

'Offices  were  in  practice  consolidated;  It  appears  that  the 

'Litany  and  the  Communion  were  alwavs  used  as  parts  of  the 

'  same  Service  The  Rubric  of  1662,  by  which  it  is  for  the  first 

'time  ordered  that  the  Litany  be  said  'after  Morning-Prayer,' 
'  was  not  intended  to  preclude  a  division  of  these  Offices.'  {p.  129.) 
— How  shall  we  Conf.  to  Lit. 

Rev.  E.  Scobell,  speaking  of  the  Communion,  argues  — '  From 
'  the  first  the  '  Communion  Service '  was  intended  to  be  a  distinct 
'and  separate  Service'  (p.  7.):  —  and,  after  a  discussion  of  the 
'  Offertory'  question,  he  deduces  certain  considerations,  the  first  of 
■which  is  — '  That  by  Church  custom  alone,  which  clearly  therefore 
'  is  held  to  be  of  some  authority,  the  three  distinct  Services, 
'  Morning  Prayer,  the  Litany,  and  the  Communion,  are  compressed 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SEIIVICES. 


413 


'into  one.  {p.  8.)  The  separate  public  saying  of  the  Litany 

'  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  assuming  the  Matins  to  have  been 
'  read  before,  either  in  Church  or  at  home,  is  both  by  Canon  and 
'  Rubric,  though  with  a  very  limited  obligation,  laid  on  the  people.' 
{p.  29.)— Thoughts  on  Ch.  Subjects. 

Dr.  Wordsworth,  commenting  upon  Mason's  Sermon  preached 
at  Norwich  in  a.  d.  1605,  states,  — that  it  'sufficiently  implies  that 
'  ordinarily  at  least  in  those  times,  the  Matins,  Litany,  and 
'  Communion  Office,  were  not  solemnized  as  separate  Services  at 
'  different  times  of  the  day,  but  were  used  as  one  Service  con- 
'  tinuously.'  And  in  a  note  he  adds — '  Notwithstanding  the  common 
'  notion  to  the  contrary,  I  believe  it  would  not  be  difficult  to  prove 
'  satisfactorily,  that  in  Parish  Churches  it  was  never  otherwise  in 
'  England  after  the  Reformation.' — Christian  Institutes  iv.  483. 

Mr.  A.  J.  Stephens  (Barrister-at-law),  writes: — 'The  Morning 
'Service,  Litany,  and  Communion  Service,  are  three  distinct  services; 
'  for  they  are  to  be  performed  at  distinct  places  and  times.  The 
'  Mornint/  Service  is,  as  appears  in  the  third  Collect  for  Grace  to  be 
'  said  at  tin'  hegiimingol'  the  day;  that  is,  according  to  St  Chrysostom, 
'irpioia,  which  is  translated,  St  Matt,  xxvii.  2.,  "in  the  morning," 
'St  John  xviii.  28.,  "  early,"  and  St  Mark  xiii.  35.,  "the  dawning  of 
"  the  day."  The  place  for  it  says  the  Rubric  before  Morning  Prayer, 
'  is  the  accustomed  place  in  the  Chancel  or  Church,  or  where  'the 
'  Ordinary  shall  appoint.  That  the  Litany  is  no  part  of  the  Morning 
'  Service  appears  from  the  Rubric  at  the  end  of  Morning  Prayer. 
'  Nor  is  it  any  part  of  the  Communion  Service;  for  that  begins  with 
'  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  the  Collect,  "Almighty  God,"  &c,  and  is  to 

'  be  said  after  the  Litany  The  time  for  it  is  a  little  before  the 

'time  of  the  Communion  Service.  (Inj.  18  Eliz.).  The  usual  hour 
'  for  the  solemnity  of  the  Communion  Service,  was  anciently  (and  so 
'  should  be)  nine  o'clock  in  the  morning.  {Cone.  Aurel.  3.  can.  11.). 
'  This  is  the  canonical  hour  {De  Consecr.  Dist.  1.  c.  Et  hoc;),  thence 
'  probably  called  the  holy  hour.  {Decret.  Dist.  44.  circa  Jin.).  In 
'  case  of  necessity  it  might  be  said  earlier  or  later  {Durand.  de 
'Ritibus;),  but  this  was  the  usual  and  canonical  hour  for  it.  One 
'  reason  that  has  been  assigned  for  this  is,  that  at  this  hour  began 
'our  Saviour's  Passion  {Mark  xv.  25.),  the  Jews  then  crying  out, 
"Crucify"  &c.  At  this  hour,  therefore,  is  the  Communion  Service 
'  (part  of  which  is  the  commemoration  of  Christ's  Passion)  performed. 
'  Another  reason  given  is,  because  at  this  hour  the  Holy  Ghost 
'  descended  upon  the  Apostles.  {Acts  ii.  15.).  Lastly,  because  it  is 
'  the  most  convenient  hour  for  all  to  meet,  and  dispatch  this  with 
'  other  Offices,  before  Noon.  For  till  the  Service  was  ended,  men 
'fasted;  and  therefore  it  was  thought  fit  to  end  all  the  Service 
'before  Noon,  that  people  might  be  free  to  eat.  {Durand.  lib.  ii. 

'  c.  7.)  The  Offices  are  still  as  distinct  as  ever,  and  ought  still  to 

'  be  read  with  a  considerable  interval  of  time  between  them — a 
'  custom  which  was  observed  in  York  and  Chichester  in  1712 
'  (Nicholl's  on  the  Common  Prayer,  Additional  Notes,  <>G.) ;  and  the 
1  same  practice  prevailed  at  Canterbury  long  after  the  Restoration. 
'  (Wheatly  on  the  Common  Prayer,  252.).  The  Services  are  still 
'  so  divided  at  several  of  our  Cathedrals, — with  this  dilference  among 
'  them,  however, — that  at  some  the  Matins  are  performed  at  7 
'  o'clock  a.m.,  the  Litany  followed  by  the  Communion,  commencing 


414 


DIVISION  OF  THE  SEfiYICES. 


'  at  II  o'clock  a.m.;  while  at  others,  the  Litany  immediately  follows 
'  Matins,  which  being  also  performed  at  7  o'clock,  the  Communion 
'  alone  is  celebrated  at  11  o'clock.'  {p.  1044.) — On  Book  of  Common 
Prayer. 

The  Quarterly  Review,  when  discussing  the  ordinary 
'  Communion  Service,'  (t.  e.  where  there  13  no  Communion),  which 
it  designates  the  iA  Itar-Service,'  declares — that  it  '  is  not  by  any 
'  Rubric  enjoined,  and  was  not  in  fact  designed,  to  form  any  part 
'  of  the  '  Morning  Service,'  to  which  it  has  been  in  modern  times 
'  appended.  There  were  four  Services  established  in  the  Reformed 
'  Church— Morning  and  Eveninn  Service,  in  theory  at  least,  every 
'day — on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  the  Litany — on  ordinary 
'  Sundays  and  Holy-Days  an  Altar-Service — and  on  Communion 
'  days  the  full  Communion  Service.  The  distribution  and  hours  of 
'  these  Services  were,  as  far  as  we  know,  as  follows:— the  Morning 
'  and  Evening  Service,  called  in  King's  Edward's  first  Book, 
'Matins  and  Evensong,  were  the  first  and  last  works  of  the  day; 
'  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  the  Litany  was  said  at  any  time 
'  after  Matins,  and  on  Sundays  at  any  time  before  the  noon  or 
'  Altar-Servioe;  then  on  Sundays  and  Holy-Days  came— after  the 
'  Litany,  and  generally  but  not,  by  Rubric,  necessarily  at  the  same 
'time — the  Communion;  but  when  the  actual  celebration  of  the 
'  Lord's  Supper  was  not  intended,  this  Communion  became  what  we 
'  have  called  the  'Altar- Service'  and  ended  with  the  Prayer  for  the 
''Church  Militant.'  and  the  Benediction.  Now  it  is  remarkable 
'  that  each  of  these  Services,  which  were  originally  distinct,  has 
'  within  itself  the  elements  of  a  complete  Liturgy— and  the  Liturgical 
'  Reformers  of  ten  years  ago.  who  censured  our  ordinary  Liturgical 
'  Service  as  tautologous,  and  the  ultra-Rubricians  of  the  present 
'day,  who  insist  on  a  simultaneous  observance  of  Rubrics  originally 
'  intended  for  three  distinct  Services,  are  equally  unreasonable.  It 
'  is  only  when  the  Services  come  to  be  performed  all  at  one  time 
'  that  their  objections  have  any  plausibility.  There  is  no  Rubric, 
'  and  no  other  reason  than  the  persimal  convenience  of  the  Minister 
'  and  the  Congregation,  why  Matins,  and  the  Litany,  and  the 
'  Altar-Service— each  of*which  is  both  in  matter  and  form 
'  perfectly  distinct — should  be  of  the  Sunday  Mornings  joined 
1  altogether  and  executed  in  immediate  successirn;  the  authors  of 
'  the  Rubric  meant — the  Rubrics  at  least  indicate  that  meaning — 
'  that  they  should  occur  at  intervals.*    In  many  cases  the  practice 


*  '  There  is  indeed  a  notice  at  the  end  of  the  third  Collect 
'  (inserted  in  1661),  by  which  it  might  be  understood  that  the 
'  Litany  7>iust  form  a  part  of  the  Morning  Service  on  Sundays, 
'  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays;  but  though  the  Litany  must  be  used  on 
'  those  days,  and,  if  used  with  the  Morning  Service,  must  come  in 
'  after  the  third  Collect,  we  do  not  see  that  the  junction  of  the  Services 
'  is  imperative,  and  we  ourselves  have  heard  them  disjoined  and 
'  separately  performed  by  very  accurate  Rubricians;  but  there  has 
'  been  a  great  variety  of  practice  in  all  these  matters.  The  early 
'Injunctions  connected  the  Litany  and  the  Communion;  but  were 
'  not  repeated.  Abp.  Grindall,  in  1571,  directed  that  in  York 
'  there  should  be  no  pause  between  Morning  Service,  Litany,  and 
'  Communion  (Stkype's  Life,  p.  168.);  but  how  far  this  extended, 
'  or  how  long  it  lasted,  we  know  not.' — Note  of  the  Qu.  Rev.  in  loco. 


OF  CEREMONIES. 


418 


'  of  intervals  has  survived,  particularly  in  Colleges  and  Cathedrals, 
'where  the  primitive  custom  was  most  likely  to  be  preserved;  we 
'  could,  but  need  not,  quote  particular  instances.  But  very  wisely, 
'  we  think,  has  it  been  generally  arranged  to  unite,  on  Sundays  and 
'Holy-Days,  the  three  earlier  Services  in  one.  We  will  not  enter 
'  into  all  the  reasons  that  may  be  assigned  for  this  union  of  Services. 
'We  are  satisfied  that,  particularly  on  the  Sundays,  and  in  common 
'  Parish  Churches,  it  is  highly  "beneficial,  and  that  it  would  be 
'  seriously  injurious  to  the  religious  interests  of  the  people  if  any 
'ultra-Rubrician  should  insist— as  he  might,  with  as  much  reason 
'  as  can  be  alleged  for  him  in  some  other  particulars— on  performing 
'  all  these  Services  distinctly  and  separately.  Yet  the  union  of  the 
'  Services,  though  on  the  whole  beneficial,  is  not  without  some 

•drawbacks  The  most  remarkable  in  this  case  is  the  tautology — 

'  the  reiteration  of  Prayers  for  the  same  object.  For  instance 
'  (and  which  marks  very  strongly  the  original  distinctness  of  each 
'  formula),  the  Sovereign  is  prayed  for  at  least  four,  and  might 
'\>e  five,  different  times,  whenever  the  united  Service  is  performed: 
'first  in  the  Morning  Prayer— then  in  the  Litany — then  in  the 
'  Collect  of  the  Communion  Service — then  in  the  Prayer  for  the 
'  Church  Militant— and  finally,  a  fifth  time,  if  the  Canon  were  to  be 
' strictly  complied  with,  in  the  'Bidding  Prayer'  from  the  Pulpit; 
'and  the  'Lord's  Prayer'  might  be  repeated  seven  or  eight  times. 
'  This  Prayer  cannot,  we  feel,  be  said  too  often;  it  can  never  weary, 

'  nor  cloy  We  only  notice  the  fact  as  showing  that  we  have 

'  made  a  union  of  Services,  which,  however  advantageous  in  other 
'respects,  retains  some  traces  of  their  original  separation;  and  of 
'  this  the  '  Church  Militant '  Prayer  is  another  example.  That 
'  Prayer  is,  as  we  may  call  it,  the  Litany  of  the  '  Communion 
'  Service:'  and  if  the  Altar-Service  were  (as  it  seems  to  have  been 
'  originally  intended)  performed  as  a  separate  Service,  would  be 
'indispensable;  but  when  the  Services  are  united,  it  is  anticipated 
'in  every  point,  except  one.*  by  the  preceding  Services;  and  the 
'  framers  of  the  Rubric  which  seem  to  direct  its  use,  1  when  there 
'  is  no  Communion,'  could  hardly  have  intended  that  it  should  be 
'used  in  the  same  Service,  and  by  the  same  Congregation  that  had, 
'  half-an-hour  before,  made  the  same  requests  in  the  general 

'  Litany  Is  was  most  probably  not  intended  that  the  Litany  and 

'  the  '  Church  Militant '  Prayer  should  be  said  in  the  same  Service, 
'  unless  there  was  a  Communion.'  (p.  25G— 9.)— No.  cxliii.  May  1843. 


Of  Ceremonies. 


•J.  '  Why  some  be  abolished,  and  some  retained.''— (1549 — 1662). 

180.— Ceremonies  are  the  external  forms  and 
actions    employed    in    religious    worship,   and  in 


*  '  We  bless  Thy  holy  name  for  all  Thy  Servants  departed  this 
'  life  in  Thy  faith  and  fear.' 


416 


OF  CEEEMONIES. 


administering  the  Bites  and  Services  of  the  Church  for 
the  sake  of  decency  and  good  order.  Under  the  term 
'  Cebemony  '  is  comprehended  according  to  Hookeb, 
every  movement,  gesture,  and  position,  to  he  seen  in 
the  conduct  of  Divine  Service  (Ecc.  Pol.  Bk.  III.  xi ; 
Bk.  IV.).  "With  others,  as  Dr.  Nicholls,  it  is  of 
a  more  limited  signification,  and  confined  to  the 
Gross  in  Baptism,  and  the  Marriage  Eing.  {Com.  on 
B.  of  C.  P.  in  loco.).  We  will  here  take  the  medium 
and  more  usual  application,  and  discuss  under 
'  Ceeemonies,'  such  as  may  be  found  enjoined  in  the 
Canons,  and  in  the  Rubeics  of  the  present  Liturgy; 
adverting  also  to  a  few  others  that  have  been  either 
sanctioned  by  long-established  custom,  or  revived  by 
modern  usage.  It  will  be  necessary,  in  bringing 
under  one  view  the  Ecclesiastical  and  Statute  Laws 
bearing  on  this  subject,  to  repeat  in  some  measure 
what  may  have  been  already  advanced  in  preceding 
pages,  which  the  Beader  will  doubtlessly  excuse. 

181.  — First  then,  all  Ceeemonies  we  acknowledge 
to  be  of  human  appointment;  and  in  our  Aeticles  we 
assent  to  the  doctrine  that  they  may  be  prescribed, 
changed,  or  abolished,  by  the  authority  of  the  Church, 
and  by  this  alone ;  thus — 

'  The  Church  hath  power  to  decree  Rites  and  Ceremonies  

'  (not)  contrary  to  God's  word  written  '/....Art.  xx. 

'  Every  particular  or  National  Church  hath  authority 

'to  ordain,  change,  and  abolish  Ceremonies  or  Rites  of  the 
'  Church  ordained  only  by  man's  authority,  so  that  all  things  be 
'  done  to  edifying.' — Art.  xxxiv. 

182.  — Impugners  of  Ceeemonies  thus  ordained 
incur  the  risk  of  Ecclesiastical  censures,  as  is  laid 
down  in  the  6th  Canon  (of  1603 — 4),  which  is  now 
binding  upon  the  Clergy  of  the  Church  of  England : — 

'  Whosoever  shall  hereafter  affirm,  that  the  Rites  and 
'  Ceremonies  of  the  Church  of  England  by  Law  established 
'are  wicked,  antichristian,  or  superstitious,  or  such  as,  being 
'  commanded  by  lawful  authority,  men,  who  are  zealously  and 
'godly  affected",  may  not  with  "any  good  conscience  approve 
'  them,  use  them,  or  as  occasion  requireth,  subscribe  unto 
'  them ;  let  him  be  excommunicated  ipso  facto,  and  not  restored 
'  until  he  repent,  and  publicly  revoke  such  his  wicked  errors.' — 
Canon  6. 


OF  CEREMONIES. 


417 


183.  — And  it  is  important  to  remember,  that  no 
private  person  is  at  liberty  to  add  to  the  prescribed 
Ceeemonies,  or  alter  them,  or  diminish  from  them. 
This  is  enjoined  in  the  Prefatory  remarks  of  the 
Book  of  Common  Peater  under  the  head  we  are 
now  discussing ;  and  which  were  introduced  in 
the  First  Liturgy  of  Edward  VI.  (1549),  after  the 
'  Commiuation  Service : '  thus — 

'Although  the  keeping  or  omitting  of  a  Ceremony,  in 
'itself  considered,  is  but  a  small  thing;  yet  the  wilful  and 
'  contemptuous  transgression  and  breaking  of  a  common  Order 
'  and  Discipline  is  no  small  offence  before  God.  '  Let  all  things 
'  be  done  among  you,'  saith  St  Paul,  '  in  a  seemly  and  due 
'order;'  the  appointment  of  the  which  Order  pertaineth  not  to 
'private  men;  therefore  no  man  ought  to  take  in  hand,  nor 
'presume  to  appoint  or  alter  any  Public  or  Common  Order  in 
'  Christ's  Church,  except  he  be  lawfully  called  and  authorized 
'  thereunto.' 

This  is  confirmed  in  the  Aetioles  : — 

'  Whosoever  through  his  private  judgment,  willingly  and 
'  purposely,  doth  openly  break  the  Traditions  and  Ceremonies 
'  of  the  Church,  which  be  not  repugnant  to  the  Word  of  God, 
'  and  be  ordained  and  approved  by  common  authority,  ought  to 
'  be  rebuked  openly,  (that  others  may  fear  to  do  the  like),  as 
'  he  that  offendeth'  against  the  common  order  of  the  Church, 
'  and  hurteth  the  authority  of  the  magistrate,  aud  woundeth  the 
'  consciences  of  the  weak  brethren  ' — Art  xxxiv. 

The  same  rule  is  found  enforced  in  the  Canons  of 
1603—4:  thus;— 

'  All  ministers  likewise  shall  observe  the  Orders,  Rites,  and 
'  Ceremonies  prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  well 
'  in  reading  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  saying  of  Prayers,  as  in 
'  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  without  either  diminishing 
'  in  regard  of  Preaching,  or  in  any  other  respect,  or  adding  any 
1  thing  in  the  matter  or  form.' — Canon  14. 

184.  — In  the  Universities,  as  well  as  in  Parish 
Churches,  another  Canon  requires  the  prescribed 
Ceeemonies  to  be  adhered  to  ivithont  omission  or 
alteration  :  thus — 

'  In  the  whole  Divine  Service,  and  Administration  of  the  Holy 
'  Communion,  in  all  Colleges  and  Halls  in  both  Universities,  the 
'  Order,  Form,  and  Ceremonies,  shall  be  duly  observed,  as  they 
'  are  set  down  and  prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
'  without  any  omission  or  alteration.' — Canon  16. 

185.  — Moreover,  every  Clergyman  subscribes  to 
the  three  Articles  of  the  36th  Canon  ;  in  the  second  of 


418 


OF  CEREMONIES. 


which  he  pledges  himself  to  the  use  of  the  Ceremonies 
enjoined  in  the  Book  of  Common  Pbayer,  and  to 
'  none  other  : '  engaging — 

'  that  he  himself  will  use  the  form  in  the  said  Book 

'  prescribed   in    Public    Prayer,  and    Administration  of  the 

'  Sacraments,  and  none  other.' — Canon  36. 

And  if  he  fails  to  conform  to  his  Subscription 
thus  made,  he  is,  by  Canon  38,  rendered  liable  to 
Ecclesiastical  penalties  :  thus — 

'  If  any  Minister  after  he  hath  once  subscribed  to  the  said 
'  Three  Articles,  shall  omit  to  use  the  Form  of  Prayer,  or  any 
'  of  the  Orders  or  Ceremonies  prescribed  in  the  Communion 
'  Book,  let  him  be  suspended :  and  if  after  a  month  he  do  not 
'reform  and  submit  himself,  let  him  be  excommunicated; 
'  and  then  if  he  shall  not  submit  himself  within  the  space  of 
'another  month,  let  him  be  deposed  from  the  Ministry.' — 
Canon  38. 

186.  — By  Statute  Law. — We  must  now  pass  to 
the  requirements  of  the  Statute  Law  in  respect  of  the 
use  of  Ceremonies;  and  it  will  be  found  that  those  only 
are  to  be  adopted,  which  are  expressly  pointed  out  in 
the  Rubrics  of  the  Book  of  Common  Pbayeb  (with 
the  exception  already  adverted  to).  In  the  Act  of 
Uniformity  (2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.)  authorizing  the 
First  Litubgt  of  Edward  VI.  (1549),  and  which 
Act  is  still  in  force,  as  will  be  presently  seen ;  it  is 
enacted — 

'  That  all  and  singular  Ministers  in  any  Cathedral  or  Parish 

1  Church,  shall  be  bounden  to  say  and  use  the  Mattens, 

'  Evensong,  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  commonly  called 
'  the  Mass,  and  Administration  of  each  of  the  Sacraments,  and 
'  all  their  common  and  open  Prayer  in  such  order  and  form  as 

Ms  mentioned  in  the  same  Book,  and  none  other  or  otherwise  

'And  that  if  any  whatsoever  Minister  refuse  to  use 

'  the  said  Common  Prayers,  or  to  minister  the  same,  in  such 

'  order  and  form  as  they  be  meutioned  and  set  forth  in  the 
'  said  Book,  or  shall  use,  wilfully  and  obstinately  in  the  same, 
'  any  other  Rite,  Ceremony,  Order,  Form,  or  Manner  of  Mass, 
'openly  or  privily,  or  Mattens,  Evensong,  Administration  of  the 
'  Sacraments,  or  other  open  Prayers  (commonly  called  the 
'  Service  of  the  Church)  than  is  mentioned  and"  set  forth  in 
'the  said    Book;  '  shall  be  punished  as  therein  stated. 

2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  s.  I.  (more  fully  quoted  in  par.  21). 

187.  — On  the  appearance  of  the  Second  Litubgt 
of  Edward  VI.  (1552),  the  above  enactment  was 
confirmed  by  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  1,  which  also  ratified 


OF  CEREMONIES. 


419 


the  alterations  in  the  new  Prayer  Book  (as  stated 
in  par.  25,  supra).  Soon  after  the  accession  of 
Elizabeth,  the  Liturgy  was  again  reviewed  (1559), 
and  another  Act  of  Uniformity  (1  Eliz.  c.  2.) 
passed,  which,  while  enforcing  the  use  of  the 
Bevised  Pbayee-Booe:,  re-iinposed  the  clauses  of 
2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  affecting  Ceremonies ;  thus — 

'  If  any  manner  of  Parson,  Vicar,  or  other  whatsoever 

'Minister  refuse  to  use  the  said  "Common  Prayers,"  or  to 

'  Minister  the  Sacraments  in  such  Cathedral,  or  Parish  Church, 
'or  other  places  as  he  should  use  to  minister  the  same,  in  such 
'  order  and  form  as  they  be  mentioned  in  the  said  Book;  or  shall 
'  wilfully  or  obstinately  standing  in  the  same,  use  any  other  Rite, 
'  Ceremony,  Order,  Form,  or  Manner  of  celebrating  of  the  Lord's 
'  Supper,  openly  or  privily,  or  Mattens,  Evensong,  Administration 
'  of  the  Sacraments,  or  other  open  Prayers  (commonly  called 
'the  Service  of  the  Church),  than  is  mentioned  and  set  forth  in 

'the  said  Book;  ' — shall  be  punished  as  the  Act  directs. — 

1  Eliz.  c.  2,  ss.  4,  5,  6.  (more  fully  quoted  in  page  276).  Elizabeth 
however  by  a  subsequent  clause  {Sect.  26.)  reserved  to  herself  the 
power  of  ordaining  further  Ceremonies,  if  she  thought  fit.  (See 
pars.  30—35.) 

188. — Again,  in  the  last  Act  of  Uniformity  13  &  14 
Car.  II.  c.  4.  (1662),  enforcing  our  reception  of  the 
present  Lituegy,  it  is  there  enacted  with  respect  to 
Forms  and  Ceremonies — 

'  That  all  and  singular  Ministers  in  any  Cathedral, 

'  Collegiate  or  Parish  Church  or  Chapel,  or  other  place  of  Public 

'Worship  within  this  realm  shall  be  bound  to  say  and  use  the 

'  Morning  Prayer,  Evening  Prayer,  celebration  and  administration 
'  of  both  the  Sacraments,  and  all  other  the  Public  and  Common 
1  Praver  in  such  order  and  form  as  is  mentioned  in  the  said 
'  Book.'— Sect.  2. 

And  the  same  Act  imposes  with  respect  to  the 
Univebsities,  that — 

'No  Form  or  Order  of  Common  Prayers,  Administration  of 
'  Sacraments,  Rites,  or  Ceremonies,  shall  be  openly  used  in  any 

'  Church,  Chapel,  or  other  place  of  or  in  any  College,  &c  

'  other  than  what  is  prescribed  and  appointed  to  be  used  in  and 

'  by  the  said  Book ;  and  every  Governor  or  Head  of  any  of 

'  the  said  Colleges  shall  subscribe  unto  the  said  Book,  and 

'declare  his  nnfeigned  assent  and  consent  unto,  and  approbation 

'  of.  the  same  Book,  and  to  the  use  of  all  the  Prayers,  Rites, 

'  and  Ceremonies,  Forms,  and  Orders,  in  the  said  Book  prescribed 
'and  contained;'— under  certain  penalties. — Sect.  17.  (more  fully 
stated  in  pages  303—4.). 

*,*  The  earlier  Acts  of  Uniformity  are  confirmed  by  the  24th 
Section  of  this  Statute  (13  &  14  Car.  it  c.  4.  see  page  304),  and  are 
therefore  binding  upon  the  Clergy  of  the  present  day. 

r>  d 


420 


OF  CEREMONIES. 


189.  — The  authorities  above  quoted  plainly  direct 
us  with  respect  to  the  Cebemonies  to  be  adopted  in 
Public  Worship  to  the  guidance  of  the  Rubric  in 
the  Book  of  Common  Pbateb.  "We  may  mention 
however  the  exception  of  'Bowing  at  the  name  of 
Jesus,'  which  is  authorized  only  in  Canon  18 ;  and 
the  custom  prevalent  in  many  places  of  'Turning  to 
the  East  when  saying  the  Creed,'  which  can  only  be 
defended  by  long-established  usage :  these  will  be 
adverted  to  in  order. 

190.  — The  prefatory  remarks  on  Cebemonies  in 
the  Prayer  Book*  have  been  considered  more  applicable 
to  the  First  Service  Book  of  Edwaed  VI.,  in  which 
they  originally  appeared,  than  to  our  own,  as  being  a 
defence  of  the  Ceremonies  which  that  Book  allowed. 
This  may  be  inferred  from  the  following  Bubric, 
which  has  been  omitted  in  all  future  Envisions  of  the 
Liturgy. 

'As  touching  Kneeling,  Crossing,  Holding  up  of  Hands,  Knocking 
'  upon  the  Breast,  and  other  Gestures,  they  may  be  used  or  left,  as 
'  every  man's  devotion  serveth,  without  blame.'  (1549)— Keeling, 
357. 

De.  Nicholls  also  states,  that  'those  Ceremonies^ 
we  have  nothing  to  do  with  now.'  {Com.  on  B.  of 
C  P.  in  loco).  Yet  in  the  remarks  ascribed  to 
Bp.  Oteeall's  Chaplain  in  respect  of  the  Preface 
on  Ceremonies,  we  read — 

'  The  Preface  then  being  retained,  it  seems  all  the  Ceremonies 
'of  that  Book  are  still  justified  by  our  Church,  though  some  of 


*  This  'Preface'  is  omitted  in  the  American  Liturgy. 

t  These  Ceremonies  are  enumerated  by  Nioholls  as  follows: — 
'  Water  is  enjoined  to  be  mixed  with  the  Wine  in  the  Administration 
'of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  Crossing  in  the  Consecration- Prayer: 
'  the  Bread  was  to  be  unleavened  and  round.  Exorcism  was  used 
'  in  the  Office  of  Baptism,  and  the  Infant  anointed,  after  Dipping 
'  thrice,  and  was  to  have  the  Chrysom  put  upon  him :  the  Bishop 
'  was  to  cross  the  Confirmed  person  in  the  Fore-head.  Bracelets 
'  and  Jewels  were  to  be  given  in  Matrimony,  as  tokens  of  Spousage  : 
'  the  Sick  Person  upon  desire  was  to  be  anointed  on  the  Forehead 
'  and  the  Breast :  the  Priest  was  to  cast  earth  upon  the  Corpse,  and 
'  to  recommend  his  soul  to  God :  the  Churched  Woman  was  to  offer 
'  up  her  Chrysom :  and  Crossing,  Knocking  upon  the  Breast,  and 
'  other  Gestures  were  permitted  to  be  used.' — (in  loco.) 


OF  CEREMONIES. 


421 


'  them,  at  Calvin's  and  Bucer's  instance,  were  omitted  in  the  Heview 
'  of  the  Book,  o  Edw.  VI.  (the  Second  Liturgy),  as  not  accounted 
'  absolutely  necessary.' — Add.  Notes  to  Nicholl's  Com.  Pr.  p.  7. 

191.  — The  Ceremonies  just  spoken  of  have  been 
prohibited  in  all  the  Eoyal  and  Episcopal  Visitation 
Akticles  issued  since  the  First  Liturgy  of 
Edward  VI.,  and  from  these  Articles,  &c,  we  have 
already  had  occasion  to  quote.*  Besides  which,  the 
'Last  Review '  is  the  only  Liturgy  affecting  us  at  the 
present  day,  except  with  regard  to  '  the  Ornaments  of 
the  Church  and  of  the  Ministers  thereof ; '  concerning 
which,  we  are  referred  by  a  specific  Rubric  to  the 
original  Service  Book.  (See  posted). 

192.  — In  confirmation  of  the  rule  that  no  Private 
Person,  suo  motu,  can  introduce,  alter,  or  omit 
any  Ceremony  in  Divine  "Worship,  the  few  opinions 
following  may  be  brought  forward. 

Bishop  Jeremy  Taylor,  (1661)  in  his  Charge  to  his  Clergy, 
directs  among  other  things — '39.  Let  no  Minister  of  a  Parish 
'  introduce  any  Ceremonies,  Rites,  or  Gestures,  though  with  some 
'  seeming  piety  or  devotion,  which  are  not  commanded  by  the 
'Church  and  established  bylaw;  and  let  these  also  be  wisely  and 
'  usefully  explicated  to  the  people,  that  they  may  understand  the 
'  reasons  of  obedience;  but  let  there  be  no  more  introduced,  lest  the 
'  people  be  burdened  unnecessarily,  and  tempted,  or  divided.' — 
Whole  Works,  vol.  iii.  711.  {Three  Vol.  Ed.  1837.) 

Abp.  Sancroft  has  left  a  MS.  (to  be  found  in  Wilkin's  Concilia, 
vol.  iv.  p.  575.),  from  which  Dr.  Cardwell  infers,  that  'a  Canon 
'  had  passed  in  Convocation  on  the  12th  of  May,  1662,  and  had 
'  afterwards  been  confirmed  by  Act  of  Parliament,  enjoining  uniform 
'  reverence,  decency,  and  order,  to  be  observed  by  all  people  in 
'Churches.' — {Doe.  Ann.  ii.  253;  Syn.  672.)  But  this  must  be  an 
error  for  no  such  Act  appears  in  the  Statute  Book.  Abp.  Sancroft 
probably  supplies  the  draft  of  an  Act,  which  was  never  passed. 

Bishop  Stillingflket  (1698)  says  — '  It  is  certain  that  no  late 
'  customs  brought  in  by  such  as  have  no  authority  to  oblige,  can  bind 
'  others  to  follow  them.  For  this  were  to  lay  open  a  gap  to  the 
'introducing  foolish  and  superstitious  customs  into  the  Church, 
'which  would  make  distinctions  without  cause,  and  make  way  for 
'  differences  and  animosities,  which  all  wise  and  good  men  will 
'  avoid  as  much  as  may  be.' — Eccl.  Cases.  266.  ed.  1702. 

Archdeacon  Sharp  follows  in  the  same  strain  — '  The  Rubric 
'  being  the  standard  of  uniformity  of  Worship  in  our  communion. 


•  See  the  extracts  in  pars,  supra. 


422 


OF  CEREMONIES. 


'  the  adding  to  which  tends  towards  opening  a  gap  to  Popish 
'  superstitions,  and  the  increase  of  human  inventions  in  the  service 
'  of  God ;  and  the  subtracting  from  which  tends  towards  paving  a 
'  way  to  a  fanatical  disuse  and  contempt  of  Rites  and  Ceremonies: 
'  therefore  we  are  obliged,  not  only  to  declare  our  ex  animo 
'  approbation,  assent,  and  consent,  to  the  matter  of  the  Rubric, 
'  but  are  laid  under  religious  promises,  that  we  will  in  every 
'  particular  prescribed  in  and  by  it,  conform  ourselves  to  it  as  the 
'rule  of  our  ministration.'  (p.  12.) — On  the  Rubrics  and  Canons. 
Charge,  a.d.  1731. 

But  to  more  modern  authorities  :  — 
The  Bishop  of  London  {Dr.  Tait)  says: — 'As  great  Universities, 
'  where  science  and  literature  are  nourished,  and  beautiful  Cathedrals 
'  where  Christian  worship  is  offered  up  with  splendour,  have  always 
'been  regarded  as  integral  parts  of  our  reformed  national  system; 
'  so  it  is,  of  course,  well  that  the  buildings  and  the  worship  of  our 
'quiet  Parochial  Churches  also,  without  falling  into  any  foolish 
'  mimicry  of  Cathedrals,  should  be  beautiful  of  their  kind,  and  that 
'  their  music  should  be  refined  as  well  as  solemn  and  hearty.  As 
'  the  sermons  which  are  preached  within  them  will  lose  nothing  of 
'  their  heart-stirring  Gospel  force  by  being  well  composed  and  well 
'  spoken,  so  will  our  distinct  acts  of  prayer  and  praise  lose  nothing 
'of  their  spirituality  because  their  adventitious  accompaniments 
'  are  beautiful  as  well  as  grave.  I  shall  not,  then,  be  misunderstood, 
'  as  if  I  were  saying  anything  to  depreciate  that  attention  to  the 
1  outward  aids  of  our  worship,  which  is  a  good  tbiug  in  its  way,  or 
'  as  if  I  were  ungrateful  to  those  who  have  been  the  revivers  of 
'  a  better  ecclesiastical  taste  in  this  age,  when  I  point  out  that  some 
'  amongst  us  do  harm  by  carrying  their  love  of  the  externals  of 

'  worship  to  an  extreme,  (p.  32)  Thus,  if  any  man's  love  of 

'  what  he  deems  the  beautiful  in  worship  leads  him  to  think  more  of 
'  good  singing  than  of  faithful  preaching;  or  if  he  resolutely  insists 
'  on  his  own  views  as  to  the  form  of  worship  in  violation  of  the  plain 
'  Christian  duty  of  obedience  to  those  set  over  him  in  the  Lord;  or 
'  when  it  is  obvious  that  by  so  insisting  he  casts  a  stumbling-block 
'in  his  people's  way,  instead  of  drawing  them  to  Christ;  in  these 
'  cases  we  must  pronounce  that  zeal  for  the  outward  helps  of 

'  religion  is  carried  to  a  dangerous  extreme,  (p.  33)  It  is  a  great 

'  responsibility  which  any  man  incurs,  who  irritates  the  parish  in 
'  which  he  lives  by  an  excessive  ritualism.  We  dare  not,  indeed, 
'  make  the  popular  opinion  the  measure  of  what  is  right  for  us  even 
'  in  such  matters;  but  there  is  a  basis,  at  least, of  truth  in  the  dislike 
'  with  which  the  sound  English  feeling  of  the  middle  and  lower 
'  orders  in  this  country  regards  what  they  perhaps  unreasonably 
'  connect  in  some  way  with  Popery.  I  speak  to  our  younger  clergy 
'  especially  on  this  subject.  Their  consciences  may  quit  them  of 
'  any  hankerings  after  Rome,  though  with  the  experience  of  the 
'  past  secessions  of  many  like  them,  I  am  justified  in  urging  them 
'  to  be  very  scrupulous  and  conscientious  in  taking  themselves 
'  to  task,  before  they  declare  that  they  are  free  from  the  enticements 
'  of  this  subtle  adversary ;  but  still,  whether  they  are  safe  themselves 
'  or  no,  that  love  of  a  showy  and  almost  tawdry  worship,  which 
'  manifests  itself  at  times  amongst  us,  and  which  common  people 
'  invariably  connect  with  Rome,  ought  much  to  be  guarded  against. 


OF  CEBEMONIE3. 


423 


'  Why  should  any  Clergyman  wish  to  make  his  Church  such  that  a 
'  common  man,  placed  suddenly  within  it,  would  not  be  able  to  say 
'  whether  he  was  in  a  Church  of  England,  or  a  Romish  place  of 
'  worship  ?  I  believe  there  is  danger  to  our  souls  in  encouraging 
'  these  tastes,  which  insensibly  break  down  the  barriers  by  which 
'  the  wisdom  of  older  times  has  separated  us  from  a  corrupt  form  of 
'  faith.  I  believe,  also,  there  is  great  danger  to  your  people  in 
'these  unwise  approximations  to  a  bad  system;  and  of  this  I  am 
'  certain  beyond  all  doubt,  that  the  injury  is  great  which  such 
'  Clergymen  as  I  have  spoken  of,  would,  through  their  unwise 
'  innovations,  if  unchecked,  inflict  on  the  national  Church  of  this 
'  country,  by  alienating  from  it  the  affections  of  the  great  mass  of 
'  the  community.  They  may  gain  the  good-will  of  a  few  men,  and 
'still  more  women,  of  eccentric  tastes,  chiefly  amongst  the  upper 
'classes.  Excessive  floral  decorations,  and  continual  bowings  and 
'genuflexions,  and  candles  lighted  in  broad  day,  and  peculiar  scarfs 
'  and  vestments,  and  the  other  mimicry  of  the  outside  of  Rome,  may 
'  be  acceptable  to  a  few  of  the  laity,  but  the  mass  of  religious 
'  persons  amongst  common-sense  Knglishmen  look  upon  such 
'  things  as  folly  at  the  best.  The  great  body  of  the  educated 
'  cannot  endure  them,  because  they  are  trifling  with  holy  worship 
'and  miserable  taste;  while  the  common  sort  of  the  well-disposed 
'  and  religious  are  not  only  irritated  by  them,  but  rendered 
'  suspicious,  not  without  ground,  that  something  really  dangerous 
'  lurks  behind.  I  am  quite  aware  that  the  sensitiveness  of  our 
'  people  on  such  matters  is  at  times  unreasonable,  also  that  good 
'  and  pious  Clergymen  are  at  times  thwarted  by  persons  who, 
'  influenced,  I  fear,  more  by  a  love  of  popularity  than  any  zeal  for 
'  souls,  exaggerate  every  cause  of  offence,  and  take  a  pleasure  iu 
'  the  strife  they  are  raising.'  (p.  34,  35)— Charge,  a.  d.  1858. 

The  Bishop  of  Exeter  (Dr.  Phillpotts),  in  his  elaborate  judg- 
ment in  the  case  of  Parks  Smith  (clerk)  May  28,  1847,  concludes 
with  these  words — '  But  I  have  done.  If  I  have  said  more  than  the 
'  particular  occasion  may  seem  to  demand,  it  is  because  I  feel  the 
'  necessity  of  opposing  myself  openly,  and  firmly,  to  every  unauthor- 
'  ized  innovation,  from  whatever  quarter,  in  our  form  of  Common 
'  Pkayek.'  &c. — (quoted  in  Stephens'  Laws  Rel.  to  CI.  p.  1088.) 

Du.  Blomfield,  (the  late  Bishop  of  London),  remarks — '  Those 
'  Forms  and  Ceremonies  which  are  expressly  enjoined  in  the  Rubric 
'  and  Canons,  and  which,  as  is  said  in  the  18th  Canon,  are  intended 
'  to  "  testify  the  people's  humility,  &c."  I  think  that  upon  the 
'  principle  asserted  by  Bp.  Butler  they  are  clearly  reasonable,  and 
'  that  being  enjoined  by  the  Church,  they  are  obligatory  upon  its 
'  members.  Such  are  the  various  devotional  postures  prescribed  in 
'  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  the  doing  lowly  reverence  when 
'  in  time  of  Divine  Service  the  Lord  Jesus  is  mentioned,  as  directed 

'  by  the  same  Canon,    (p.  43)  Ordinances  and  Ceremonies, 

'  which  cannot  be  shown  to  have  been  instituted  by  the  Apostles, 
'  with  a  direction  for  their  continuance,  are  not  of  perpetual 
'  obligation  upon  the  whole  Church ;  as  for  example,  the  appointment 
'of  an  order  of  Deaconesses,  or  Widows;  the  Anointing  of  the  sick 
'with  oil;  and  some  other  instances;  although  if  we  can  prove 
'  them  to  have  been  used  by  the  Apostles,  or  make  it  appear  highly 
'  probable  that  they  were  so,  they  may  not  be  lightly  laid  aside,  nor 


424 


OF  CEREMONIES. 


'  changed,  even  by  Churches,  and  not  at  all  by  individual  members  of 
'  a  Church.  This  is  the  doctrine  of  our  own  Church,  in  the  Preface 
'to  her  Book  of  Common  Prayer;  and  in  this  respect  every  one,  at 
'  least  every  Clergyman,  is  bound  by  the  laws  of  his  own  Church. 
'  What  they  enjoin  he  is  to  practise  ;  what  they  forbid  he  is  to  abstain 
'from ;  what  they  purposely  omit  he  is  not  to  introduce.  Prayers  for 
'  the  Dead,  Trine  immersion  in  Baptism,  the  Kiss  of  Peace  in  the 
'  Eucharist,  the  raising  of  Water  with  Wine  in  the  Chalice— all 
'  these  were  undoubtedly  ancient  customs,  if  not  all  of  primitive 
'antiquity;  but  they  are  not  recognized  by  our  own  Church,  and 
'  they  are,  therefore,  not  to  be  practised  by  its  Ministers.'  (  p.  50.) — 
Charge,  1842.  In  a  later  Charge  this  Bishop  remarks: — 'It  has 
'  been  a  subject  of  great  uneasiness  to  me  to  see  the  changes,  which 
'  have  been  gradually  introduced  by  a  few  of  the  Clergy,  at  variance, 
'as  I  think,  with  the  spirit  of  the  Church's  directions;  and,  in 
'  some  instances,  with  the  letter.  It  has  been  always  esteemed  au 
'  evidence  of  the  wisdom  and  moderation  of  those  who  framed  our 
'  Common  Prayer,  that  they  retained  "  such  ceremonies  as  tbey 
"  thought  best  to  the  setting  forth  of  God's  honour  and  glory,  and 
"  to  the  reducing  of  the  people  to  a  most  perfect  and  godly  living, 
"without  error  or  superstition,  putting  away  other  things  which 
"  they  perceived  to  be  most  abused,  as  in  men's  ordinances  it  often 
"  cbanceth  diversely  in  divers  countries."  But  this  principle  has 
'  been  lost  sight  of  by  the  persons  to  whom  I  allude;  and  they  have 
'  presumed,  following  their  own  private  judgment,  and  not  the  rules 
'  nor  intention  of  the  Church,  to  introduce,  one  by  one,  those  very 
'  forms  and  observances,  which  the  reformers  of  our  Liturgy  had 
'  purposely  discontinued  and  laid  aside,  but  which  it  is  now  sought 
'  to  revive,  some  of  them  for  the  first  time  since  the  Reformation. 
'  These  innovations  have,  in  some  instances,  been  carried  to  such  a 
'  length  as  to  render  the  Church  service  almost  histrionic.  I  really 
'  cannot  characterize  by  any  gentler  term  the  continual  changes  of 
'  posture,  the  frequent  genuflexions,  the  crossings,  the  peculiarities  of 
'  dress,  and  some  of  the  decorations  of  Churches,  to  which  I  allude. 
'  They  are,  after  all,  a  poor  imitation  of  the  Roman  ceremonial,  and 
'  furnish,  I  have  no  doubt,  to  the  observant  members  of  that 
'Church,  a  subject,  on  the  one  hand,  of  ridicule,  as  being  a  faint 
'  and  meagre  copy  of  their  own  gaudy  ritual,  and,  on  the  other 
'  hand,  of  exultation,  as  preparing  those  who  take  delight  in  them 
'  to  seek  a  further  gratification  of  their  taste  in  the  Roman 
'  communion.  I  am  by  no  means  insensible  to  the  value  of  the 
'  ^Esthetic  principle  in  the  externals  of  religion ;  but  great  caution 
'  is  requisite,  not  to  lay  such  stress  upon  that  which  is  material 
'  and  emblematical,  as  to  detract  from  the  importance  of  that  which 
'is  purely  spiritual;  to  substitute,  in  fact,  the  mere  machinery  of 
'  religion  for  the  effects  which  it  is  intended  to  produce.  I  have 
'  always  contended,  and  still  contend,  that  we  are  bound  to  carry 
'  out  all  the  Church's  directions  for  the  celebration  of  Divine  Service; 
'  but  I  contend,  also,  that  we  offend  against  her  order,  not  less  by 
'  the  admission  of  what  it  forbids,  or  does  not  enjoin,  than  by  the 
'  omission  of  anything  which  it  prescribes.  Suffer  me  to  remind 
'  j'ou  of  the  language  which  I  held  to  you  on  this  subject  eight 
'  years  ago.  "  Such  practices,"  I  observed,  "  which  are  neither 
'•  prescribed,  nor  recommended,  nor  even  noticed  by  our  Church, 
"  nor  sanctioned  by  general  custom,  throw  discredit  upon  these 


OF  CEEEMONIES. 


42-J 


"  decent  ceremonies  and  expressive  forms,  which  are  intended  to 
"  enliven  the  devotion  of  those  who  are  engaged  in  the  service 
"of  God,  and  to  do  honour  to  His  name."  "In  resisting  an 
"  exaggerated  spiritualism,  we  must  be  careful  not  to  incur  the 
"charge  of  materializing  religion;  and,  above  all,  we  must  beware 
"  of  arbitrarily  connecting  the  gifts  of  God  with  ordinances  of 
"  merely  human  appointment,  and  of  teaching  our  people  to  place 
"  the  ceremonies  which  the  Church  has  ordained,  however 
"  significant  and  laudable,  on  the  same  footing  as  the  Sacraments 

"  which  have  been  ordained  by  the  Lord  Jesus  himself."  I  have 

'  been  told  that  /  had  no  authority  to  forbid  anything  which  was 
'not  in  express  terms  forbidden  by  law;  and  that  practices,  which, 
'  though  purposely  laid  aside  by  the  Church,  and  so  by  implication 
'  condemned,  have  not  been  actually  prohibited,  are  therefore 
'  lawful;  and  that  canonical  obedience  to  a  Bishop  is  only  that  which 
'  he  can  enforce  in  a  Court  of  Law:  and  so  the  innovations  which 
'  I  objected  to,  have  been  persisted  in,  with  additional  changes 
'  introduced  from  time  to  time,  with  the  manifest  purpose  of 
'  assimilating  the  services  of  our  Reformed  Church  as  nearly  as 
'  possible  to  those  of  the  Roman.  Once  more  I  declare  my  entire 
'  disapproval  of  sech  practices,  and  my  earnest  wish  that,  while 
'  evert/  direction  of  the  Rubric  and  Canons  is  observed  where  it  is 
'  possible,  no  form  should  be  introduced  into  the  celebration  of 
'  Public  Worship  which  is  not  expressly  prescribed  by  them,  or 
'  sanctioned  by  long-established  usage.'  {'p.  50—4.) — Charge,  1850. 

Rev.  W.  Goode  says: — 'With  these  authorities  before  us,  we 
'may  judge  of  the  reasonableness  of  a  notion  lately  put  forth 
'  among  us,  that  where  no  direct  prohibition  occurs  in  the  Rubric 
'  or  elsewhere,  there  the  Minister  may  introduce  any  of  the  ancient 
'usages  of  the  Church.  I  will  only  say  that  it  is  a  notion  likely  to 
'  cost  a  Clergyman  who  acts  upon  it  dear,  if  any  one  chooses  to 

'put  the  Act  of  Uniformity  in  force  against  him  The  language 

'  of  the  Acts  of  Uniformity,  and  of  the  Canon,  clearly  shews,  that 
'  the  Minister,  when  engaged  in  the  Public  Services  of  the  Church, 
'  is  prohibited  from  adding  any  Ceremonial  observances  to  those 
'  prescribed  by  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  One  great  object  in 
'  view  in  putting  forth  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was  uniformity, 
'  not  merely  in  the  matter  of  the  Services  used,  but  in  the  mode 
'uniform  and  ceremonial  of  Public  Worship;  and  this  would  be 
'  destroyed,  if  the  Minister  had  the  liberty  to  introduce  unauthorized 
'  additions  of  Bowings  and  Crossings,  &c,  which  have  a  tendency 
1  to  give  a  different  character  to  the  Service.  Nor  can  they  be 
'  defended  on  the  ground  of  their  being  things  of  little  moment, 
'  because  they  confessedly  belong  to  that  class  of  usages  of  which 
'many  were  "abolished"  and  "put  away"  at  the  Reformation,  as 

'tending  to  encourage  superstition,  (p.  7.  24.)  It  needs  some 

'  direct  authority,  and  express  sanction,  for  a  Minister  of  our 
'  Church,  when  performing  Public  Service,  to  introduce  such 
'practices.'  (p.  26.)— Cerem.  of  Ch.  of  England. 

Dr.  Chr.  Wordsworth  remarks :  — 'iVo  private  person,  lay  or 
'  clerical,  may  introduce  anything  into  a  Church  on  his  own 
'authority:  it  is  not  his  province,  but  it  is  exclusively  the  office 
'  of  the  particular  Church  to  which  he  belongs  to  decree  the 
'  Ceremonies  to  be  observed  by  its  Members ;  and  whether  such 


120 


BOWING  AT  THE  NAME  OF  JESUS. 


'  additional  Ceremonies  (of  Ancient  and  Foreign  Churches)  be 
'  derived  from  ancient  or  from  modern  practice,  they  are  equally 
'  innovations  and  usurpations  of  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and 
'  their  introduction  equally  irregular  and  presumptuous.  It  is  not 
'  less  an  act  of  pride  and  disobedience  in  an  individual  to  introduce 
'  into  a  Church  what  is  not  ordered  by  lawful  authority,  than  to 
'despise  what  is.'  (p.  336.) — Theoph.  Anglic. 

We  may  now  pass  to  the  consideration  in  detail  of 
the  following  Cebehonies. — 

(a)  Boning  at  the  Name  of  Jesus.     (c)  Cross  in  Baptism,  &c. 

(b)  (  to  the  Altar,  &c.)  (d)  (East,  turning  to  the) 

(e)  Ring  in  Marriage. 

(a) — Bowing  at  the  Name  of  Jesus. 

193.  — The  origin  of  this  custom  is  by  some  writers 
referred  to  the  passage  of  St  Paul  in  Phil.  ii.  10., — 
'That  at  the  Name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow.' 
Exception,  however,  may  be  taken  against  this  opinion, 
as  in  the  original  text  it  is,  Iva  iv  ra>  ovopan,  '  in  the 
name,'  not  'at  the  name;'  implying  rather,  the 
supreme  dignity  of  Jesus,  and  that  He  is  the 
appointed  Mediator,  through  whom  prayers  for 
blessings,  both  in  this  life  and  in  the  next,  were  to 
be  offered  by  all  intelligent  creatures  to  God  the 
Father.  Doubtlessly  the  Apostle  had  in  his  mind, 
Isa.  xlv.  23., — '  Unto  me  every  knee  shall  how,  every 
tongue  shall  swear.'  To  this  passage,  indeed,  he 
refers  in  Bom.  xiv.  11. ;  but  here  we  have  less  to 
do  with  the  theological  question  than  with  the  point 
of  ritual.    (See  postea  under  "  Ceeed  "  Vol.  E.). 

194.  — The  practice  of  boicing  at  the  name  of  Jesus 
is  not  enjoined  by  any  Bubric  of  the  Lituegt,  but  by 
the  18th  Canon  (of  1603—4),  which  is  still  of  force 
and  authority ;  and  which  requires  this  reverence  to 
be  made  whenever  the  name  of  'Jesus'  is  mentioned 
in  Divine  Service ;  but  this  observance  does  not  extend 
to  the  other  appellations  of  our  Lord,  such  as  'Son,' 
'  Christ,'  &c  :  thus  ; — 

'  When  in  time  of  Divine  Service  the  Lord  Jesus  shall 

'  be  mentioned,  due  and  lowly  reverence  shall  be  done  by  all 
'  persons  present,  as  it  hath  been  accustomed ;  testifying  by 


BOWING  AT  THE  If  AMU  OF  JESUS. 


■127 


'  these  outward  Ceremonies  and  Gestures,  their  inward  humility, 
'  Christian  resolution,  and  due  acknowledgment,  that  the  Lord 
'  Jesus  Christ,  the  true  eternal  Son  of  God,  is  the  only  Saviour  of 
'  the  world,  in  whom  alone  all  the  mercies,  graces,  and  promises 
'  of  God  to  mankind  for  this  life,  and  the  life  to  come,  are  fully  and 
'  wholly  comprised  ' — Canon  18. 

Hetlyn  (ob.  1662)  speaking  of  the  usage  enjoined  in  the  Canon, 
and  in  Elizabeth's  Order,  remarks: — 'Though  this  Injunction  was 
'  published  the  first  year  of  the  Queen,  yet  then  this  bowing  at  the 
'  name  of  Jesus  was  lookt  on  as  an  ancient  custom.  And  in  this 
'  case,  and  in  all  others  of  that  nature,  it  is  a  good  and  certain  rule 
'  that  all  such  Rites  as  had  been  practised  in  the  Church  of  Rome 
'  and  not  abolisht  nor  disclaimed  by  any  doctrine,  law,  or  canon  of 
'  the  first  Reformers,  were  to  continue  in  the  same  state  in  which 
'  they  found  them.  But  this  commendable  custom,  together  with 
'  all  other  outward  reverence  in  God's  Service,  being  every  day  more 
'  and  more  discontinued,  it  seemed  good  to  the  Prelates  and  Clergy 
'  assembled  in  Convocation  anno  1G03  to  revive  the  same,  with  some 
'  enlargement  as  to  the  uncovering  of  the  head  in  all  the  acts  and 
'parts  of  public  worship.'  {p.  17.)— Life  of  Laud. 

195. — This  ceremony  seems  to  have  been  first 
canonically  enjoined  by  Gregory  Xth  at  the  Council  of 
Lyons,  a.d.  1274  :  in  the  next  century  at  the  Council  of 
Avignon,  a.  d.  1326,  we  find  that  '  indulgences '  were 
granted  to  all  who  bow  at  the  name  of  Jesus.  A  few 
years  later,  in  a.  d.  1351,  a  Constitution  of  John  de 
Sancto  Paulo,  Abp.  of  Dublin  enacted — 'That  believers 
'  in  Christ,  whenever  they  hear  his  holy  Name 
'  pronounced,  or  the  Gloria  Patri,  shall  devoutly 
'  incline  the  heart  and  head  unto  God :  and  to  all 
'  who  shall  do  so,  we  grant  ten  day's  indulgence.'' 
("Wilkin's  Cone.  iii.  p.  20.).  So  by  the  Council  of 
Beziers  of  this  date  (a.  d.  1351),  ten  day's  pardon 
was  granted  to  all  such  as  low  at  the  name  of 
Jesus  whenever  it  is  mentioned  in  Divine  Service. 
The  Canons  of  many  subsequent  Councils  similarly 
impose  this  ceremony.  In  the  Hereford,  and  Soman, 
Breviaries,  bowing  is  enjoined  in  the  Creed  after  the 
words,  "  Who  for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation  came 
"  down  from  heaven;"  thus — 1  Qui  propter  nos  homines, 
'  et  propter  nostram  salutem  descendit  de  ccelis  (Et 
'fet  genuflexio  dum  dicitur.  JJerf.  Hie  genuflectitur. 
'  Bom.).'  Maskell's  Ancient  Lit.  of  Ch.  of  England, 
p.  51. 


128 


BOWING  AT  THE  NAME  OF  JESUS. 


196. — In  modern  times,  lowing  at  the  name  of 
Jesus  has  been  of  almost  universal  observance  when  it 
occurs  in  the  '  Creeds ; '  generally  also  at  the  end  of  the 
Prayers,  and  Collects ;  but  not  so  frequently  at  other 
times.  Yet  the  Clergy  are,  in  strictness,  bound  to 
do  so  in  every  instance  when  it  occurs  in  Divine 
Service  by  the  18th  Canon  just  quoted.  Among 
the  opinions  which  have  been  expressed  on  this 
subject  are  the  following : — 

In  Cooper's  Admonition  to  the  Parliament,  which  contained  the 
objections  of  the  extreme  Puritans  of  that  day,  there  is  this  remark, 
as  quoted  by  Mr.  Lnthbury  in  his  '  History  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer : ' — "  When  Jesus  is  named,  then  off  goeth  the  cap,  and 
"  downe  goeth  the  knees,  with  such  a  scraping  on  the  gTound  that 
"  they  cannot  heare  a  good  while  after."  Upon  this  our  Author 
thus  comments: — 'Whitgift  charges  the  writer  with  a  slanderous 
'untruth.  If  the  walking  and  talking  occurred,  the  People  were 
'  blameable,  not  the  Prayer  Book.  The  scraping  was  nothing  more 
'  than  the  momentary  noise  of  kneeling  or  rising.  Whitgift  says, 
"  One  reason  that  moved  Christians  in  the  beginning  rather  to  bow 
"  at  the  name  of  Jesus  than  at  any  other  name  of  God,  was  because 
"  this  name  was  most  hated  and  contemned  of  the  wicked  Jews  and 
"  other  persecutors."  Whitgifl's  Defence,  739—742.' — Lathbury's 
Hint,  of  Booh  of  Com.  Prayer,  p.  109.  n. 

197. — This  Canon,  like  many  of  the  others  of 
1603 — 4,  owes  its  origin  to  the  Injunctions  of  Elizabeth 
(1559)  :  in  the  52nd  of  which  we  read — '  Whensoever 

'  the  name  of  Jesus  shall  be  in  any  Lesson,  Sermon,  or  otherwise  in 
'  the  Church  pronounced,  due  reverence  be  made  of  all  persons, 
'  young,  and  old,  with  lowness  of  courtesy,  and  uncovering  of  heads 
'  of  the  menkind,  as  thereunto  doth  necessarily  belong,  and 
'  heretofore  hath  been  accustomed.' — Cardwell's  Doc.  Arm.  I.  199. 

Hooker  (oft.  1G00),  when  speaking  of  the  reading  of  the 
Gospels,  remarks- — '  It  hath  been  the  custom  of  Christian  men  then 
'  especially  in  token  of  the  greater  reverence,  to  stand,  to  utter 
'  certain  words  of  acclamation,  and  at  the  name  of  Jestu  to  bow ; 
'which  harmless  Ceremonies,  as  there  is  no  man  constrained  to 
'  use ;  so  we  know  no  reason  wherefore  any  man  should  yet 
'imagine  it  an  insufferable  evil.'  (Vol.  I.  p.  ol9.) — Eccl.  PoL  V. 
xxx.  3. 

Bishop  Overall's  Chaplain  (cir.  1G14— 19)  observes :—' In 
'  reading  the  Holy  Gospels  (at  the  Communion  Service),  and  never 
'  else,  is  adoration  made  at  the  name  of  Jesus;  for  then  only  is  it  in 
'  its  right  exaltation,  and  then  men  stand  up  in  a  posture  ready 
'  to  make  reverence.' — Add.  Notes  to  Xicholl's  C.  P.p.  30. 

Bishop  Wren,  in  his  '  Injunctions '  issued  in  the  Diocese  of 
Norwich  in  A.  D.  1636,  directs — '  That  due  reverence  be  visibly  done 
'  by  all  persons  present  when  the  blessed  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  is 
'  mentioned.'— Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  n.  203.  (See  ib.  249.). 


BOWING  AT  THE  NAME  OF  JESUS. 


429 


Wheatly  (cb.  1742)  observes:  — 'When  we  come  to  the  second 
'Article  in  this  Creed  (the  Apostle's)  in  which  the  name  of  Jesus  is 
'  mentioned,  the  whole  congregation  makes  obeisance,  which  the 
'Church  expressly  enjoins  iu  her  18th  Canon.'  (p.  145.) — Rat.  III. 
ofB.ofC.Pr. 

Shepherd  (ob.  1805)  says: — 'At  present  it  is  customary  to  do 
'  reverence,  when  the  name  of  Jesus  is  mentioned  in  this  (the 
'Apostle's  CreeiV),  and  in  the  Nicene  Creed.  But  these  are  the  only 
'  instances  in  which  the  directions  of  the  Canon  are  generally 
'  followed.  And  our  practice  varies  from  that  of  the  last  century,  if 
'  the  following  observation,  supposed  to  be  Bishop  Overall's  is 
'  authentic:'  (here  is  quoted  the  passage  given  above  under  Bishop 
Overall's  Chaplain.)— Eluc.  of  B.  of  C.  Pr.  Vol.  I.  p.  250. 

198. — Passing  to  more  modern  times,  we  may- 
quote  the  authorities  annexed. 

The  late  Bishop  of  London's  (Dr.  Blomfteld)  opinion  is  given 
in  pars,  (supra). 

The  Bishop  op  Exeter  (Dr.  Phillpotts),  replying  to  the 
Memorial  of  the  Inhabitants  <f  Falmouth  complaining  amongst 
other  things  of  the  Rector's  '  bowings  to  the  Alter'  (June  30th,  1843), 
says : — '  These  may  be  merely  those  '  bowings '  which  are  commanded 
'  by  the  18th  Canon  of  1603,  which  command,  with  the  annexed 
'  reason,  I  here  subjoin  for  the  edification  of  yourselves,  and  of  the 
1  other  Memorialists :  (here  follows  the  part  of  Canon  18,  quoted 
'  above).  That  the  reverence  here  enjoined  was  indeed  accustomed 
'  is  manifest  from  the  52nd,  of  the  Injunctions  of  Queen  Elizabeth 
'  in  the  first  year  of  her  reign,  which  Injunctions  were  subsequently 
'recognized  in  an  Act  of  Parliament:'  (here  follows  the  52nd 
Injunction  of  Elizabeth  as  quoted  in  the  note  in  p.  403.  See  also 
p.  277).  '  Need  I  remind  you  of  a  higher  authority  than  Kings  and 
'  Queens,  Acts  of  Parliament,  or  Canons  of  Synods,  the  hallowed 
'  usage  of  even  the  word  of  God  itself:  (here  follows  Phil.  ii.  8 — 10.). 
'  Now,  if  such  be  the  'bowings'  of  which  the  Memorialists  complain, 
'as  destroying  the  beautiful  simplicity  and  spiritual  character  of 
'  the  Reformed  Religion,  and  assimilating  our  Services  to  those  of 
'  Rome,  I,  as  their  Bishop,  am  bound  to  deplore  and  to  endeavour  to 
'  remove,  their  unhappy  blindness.' — (quoted  in  Stephen's  Eccl. 
Stat.  p.  2060.) 

Rev.  W.  Goode,  observes: — 'To  the  rule  prescribed  by  the 
'  Prayer  Book  there  is,  I  believe,  but  one  addition  sanctioned  by 
'  authority,  namely,  that  which  was  inserted  in  Queen  Elizabeth's 
'  Injunctions'  issued  in  1559,  shortly  after  the  Prayer  Book  of  that 
'  period,  and  which  is  now  required  by  the  18th  Canon,  namely 
'  that '  When  in  time  of  Divine  Service,  <f-c.'  (quoted  above). — Cer.  of 
Ch.  of  Eng.  p.  25. 

Dr.  Hook  remarks :  — '  We  do  not  bow  when  our  Lord  is  spoken 
'  of  as  Chrut ;  for  when  we  speak  of  him  as  the  Christ,  we  speak  of 
'  his  office,  the  anointed,  the  prophet,  priest,  and  king  of  our  race, 
'  which  implies  his  Divine  nature.  But  Jesus  is  the  name  of  his 
'  humanity,  the  name  he  was  known  by  as  man ;  whenever  therefore 
'  we  pronounce  that  name,  we  bow,  to  signify  that  he  who  for  our 
'  sakos  became  man  is  also  God.' — Ch.  Diet.  Art.  Bowing. 


430 


BOWING  TO  THE  ALT  A  i£  ;    AND  ON 


Rev.  J.  Jebb  says:— 'At  the  name  of  Jesus  in  the  Creed,  the 
'  universal  custom  of  the  Church  has  been  to  bow  the  head.  This, 
'  however,  is  more  than  a  custom.  It  is  a  positive  injunction  of  the 
'  Canons  of  the  Church  of  England,  extending,  however,  to  every 
'  occasion  on  which  that  name  of  our  Blessed  Lord  is  repeated, 
'which  designates  his  human  nature;  the  prescribed  act  of 
'  adoration  thus  marking  the  indissoluble  union  of  that  nature  with 
'the  Divine.  The  same  act  is  not  prescribed  when  the  designation 
'  of  his  office,  Christ,  is  employed.  In  very  many  country  Churches, 
'  the  Congregation  have  been  long  accustomed  to  act  in  obedience 
'  to  this  Canon,  in  all  instances;  and  there  can  be  no  excuse  for 
'  the  neglect  of  the  Clergy  in  its  uniform  observance.'  (j>.  S54.) — 
Choral  Service. 


(£) — Bowing  to  the  Altar;  and  on  Coming  into, 
and  Going  out  of,  Church. 

199. — This  custom  appears  to  have  been  very 
prevalent  in  the  time  of  Laud,  at  whose  instance 
the  Convocation  of  that  day,  while  framing  a  Code  of 
Canons,  introduced  into  one  of  them  a  clause  strongly 
recommendatory  of  the  practice  of  bowing  to  the  Altar 
•whenever  approaching  it ;  and  likewise  on  going  into, 
and  coming  out  of,  the  Church.  It  will  be  found  in 
the  7th  Canon  of  those  of  1640,  and  thus  reads: — 

'  Whereas  the  Church  is  the  House  of  God,  dedicated  to  His 
'  holy  Worship,  and  therefore  ought  to  mind  us,  both  of  the 
'  greatness  and  goodness  of  His  Divine  Majesty,  certain  it  is  that 
'  the  acknowledgment  thereof,  not  only  inwardly  in  our  hearts, 
'  but  also  outwardly  with  our  bodies,  must  needs  be  pious  in  itself, 
'  profitable  unto  us,  and  edifying  unto  others.  We  therefore  think 
'  it  very  meet  and  behoveful,  and  heartily  commend  it  to  all  good 
'  and  well  affected  people,  members  of  this  Church  that  they  be 
'  ready  to  tender  unto  the  Lord  the  said  acknowledgment,  by  doing 
'  reverence,  and  obeisance,  both  at  their  coming  in,  and  going  out  of 
'  the  said  Churches,  Chancels,  or  Chappels,  according  to  the  most 
'  ancient  custom  of  the  primitive  Church  in  the  purest  times,  and 
'  of  this  Church  also  for  many  years  of  the  reign  of  Queen 
'Elizabeth.  The  reviviug  therefore  of  this  ancient  and  laudable 
•  custom,  we  heartily  commend  to  the  serious  consideration  of  all 
'good  people,  not  with  any  intention  to  exhibit  any  Religions 
'  Worship  to  the  Communion-Table,  the  East,  or  Church,  or  any  thing 
'  therein  contained  in  so  doing,  or  to  perform  the  said  gesture  in 
'  the  celebration  of  the  holy  Eucharist,  upon  any  opinion  of  a 
'  corporal  presence  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ  on  "the  holy  Table, 
'  or  in  mystical  Elements,  but  only  for  the  advancement  of  God's 
'  Majesty,  and  to  give  Him  aloue  that  honor  and  glory  that  is 
'  due  unto  Him,  and  no  otherwise;  and  in  the  practice  or  omission  of 
'  this  Rite,  we  desire  that  the  Rule  of  Charity  prescribed  by  the 


ENTERING  AND  LEAVING  CHURCH.  431 


'  Apostle,  may  ba  observed,  which  is,  that  they  which  use  this  Rite, 
'  despise  not  thera  who  use  it  not,  and  that  they  who  use  it  not, 
'  condemn  not  those  that  use  it.' — 7th  Canon,  a.d.  1640. 

200. — As  the  legal  force  of  these  Canons  has 
been  already  fully  discussed  (iu  pars.  56—59),  we  will 
merely  repeat  here,  that  at  the  present  day  the  Canon, 
and  the  practice  it  enjoins,  are  void  of  authority; 
neither  is  the  usage  sanctioned  by  general  custom. 
A  few  additional  opinions  on  the  subject,  however, 
may  not  be  unacceptable. 

It  should  be  stated  that,  according  to  Heylyn,  this  practice  of 
'bowing'  existed  before  the  Reformation;  but  was  abolished  by 
Edward  VI.  Mary  however  revived  it,  and  Elizabeth  sanctioned  its 
continuance.  (Cypr.  Angl.  17,  314—5;  Ref.  E.  H.  S.  II.  315—6,  &c; 
Pepi/s  Mem.  i.  394,  &c.)  During  the  Archi-episcopate  of  Laud 
(1633 — 45)  it  was  very  strongly  advocated;  and  from  that  day  to 
later  times  history  supplies  us  with  the  names  of  many  excellent 
men  who  approved  and  practised  it;  among  whom  may  be 
mentioned— Bishops  Andrewes  (ob.  1626);  Montague  (ob.  1641); 
Morton  (ob.  1659);  Cosin  (ob.  1672);  Wilson  (ob.  1755);  and  by 
Ferrar  {ob.  1637);  and  others,  before  the  eighteenth  century.  (See 
Robertson's  Horn  shall  we  Conform  to  the  Liturgy,  2nd  Ed.  pp. 
13—18;  Hierurgia  Anglicana,  pp.  50—63;  236—253;  Add.  Notes  to 
Nicholl's  C.  Pr. 

Abp.  Williams,  in  his  Visitation  Articles,  when  Bp.  of  Lincoln 
(1641),  enquires: — '  Do  you  know  of  any  Parson,  Vicar,  or  Curate, 
'  that  hath  introduced  any  offensive  Rites  or  Ceremonies  into  the 
'  Church,  not  established  by  the  Laws  of  the  land;  as,  namely,  that 
'  make  three  courtesies  towards  the  Communion  Table;  that  call  the 
'said  Table  an  Altar;  that  enjoin  the  people  at  their  coming  into 
4  Church  to  bow  towards  the  East,  or  towards  the  Communion 
'  Table?'— (quoted  in  Goode's  Cerem.  of  Ch.  of  Eng.  p.  25.) 

The  Committee  of  the  House  of  Lo^ds  also  (in  1611),  in 
their  Proceedings  touching  Innovations  in  the  Doctrine  and 
Discipline  of  the  Church  of  England,  enquire  among  other  matters, 
whether  there  be  any — 'Bowing  towards  it  (the  Altar),  or  towards 
'  the  East,  many  times,  with  three  congees,  but  usually  in  every 
'  motion,  access,  or  recess  in  the  Church?' — Cardwell's  Conf.  272. 

In  later  times  we  have  the  following  opinions. — 

The  Bishop  of  Exeter  (Dr.  PhiUpoits),  continuing  his  reply 
to  the  complaints  of  the  Inhabitants  of  Falmouth  (from  above 
p.  404),  observes:  — 'Again,  "The  bowings  to  the  Altar"  may  be  the 
'  "bowings"  recommended  in  the  seventh  Canon  of  the  Svnod  of 
'  1640,  which  says  that,  "Whereas  the  Church,  &c."  (Seepage  296). 
'Now,  if  the  'bomings  to  the  Altar,'  enumerated  among  your 
'  grievances,  be  of  this  kind,  I  must  decline  issuing  any  directions 
'  to  the  Rector,  which  may  induce  him  to  discontinue  them.  I  do 
'  not  understand  that  he  attempts  to  impose  them  as  duties  on  his 


432  BOWING  TO  THE  ALTAB  ;    AND  ON 


'  people.  He  performs  them,  it  seems,  himself,  thereby  exercising 
'  his  Christian  liberty,  with  which  I  have  no  right  nor  inclination 
'  to  interfere.  I  do  not,  indeed,  practise  this  obeisance  myself,  "  in 
'  coming  in  and  going  out  of  Church,"  but  I  respect  the  freedom  of 
'  others;  and  I  from  my  heart  subscribe  to  the  wise  and  charitable 
'  language  with  which  the  Canon  last  cited  by  me  concludes:  "In 
'  the  practice,  &c."  {quoted  in  p.  290).  I  have  thus  noticed  the 
'only  'bowings  to  the  Altar' of  which  I  have  ever  heard  as  practised 
'  by  any  Minister  or  Member  of  our  Church ;  of  these,  one  (at  the 
'  name  of  Jesus)  it  is  the  duty  of  your  Rector  to  perform,  the  other 
'  is  recommended  to  him  by  one  of  the  Canons.' — (quoted  in 
Stephens'  Eccl.  Slat.  p.  2061). 

Dr.  Blomfield,  (the  late  Bishop  of  London)  has  given  his 
opinion  on  this  subjct  in  the  case  of  the  Churchwarden  (Westerton) 
of  St  Paul's,  Kniyhtsbridge  v.  Hon.  and  Rev.  Robert  Liddell.  It 
appears  that  Mh.  Westerton-  complained,  amongst  other  things, 
that  the  Officiating  Clergy  bowed  to  the  Altar  on  approaching  it. 
and  receding  from  it,  (p.  5.);  and  bowed  also  'when  the  'Gloria 
was  sung,'  (p.  7.);  and  adopted  'other  gestures,  histrionic  postures, 
genuflexions,'  &c.  (p.  18,  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  Dec.  20th, 
1853).  To  this  Mr.  Liddell  replies:— 'The  "  vehement  gesticulations ," 
'"histrionic  displays,"  "theatrical  gestures,"  "incurvations,"  and 
'  "genuflexions,"  before  the  commencement  of  Divine  Service,  resolve 
'  themselves  into  our  kneeling  down  on  our  respective  hassocks, 

'  and  saying  a  short  prayer,  according  to  universal  custom  I 

'  lower  my  head  as  1  pass  within  the  rails  to  the  Credence,  but 
'  I  neither  bow  to  the  Cross,  nor  make  any  formal  obeisance  or 
'  genuflexion  to  the  Altar— either  then,  or  at  any  other  time. 

'  (p.  5.)  At  the  repetition  of  the  Gloria,  I  am  charged  "  with 

"  folding  my  arms  across  my  breast,  thereby  forming  the  sign  or 
"  symbol  of  the  Cross,  and  bowing  my  head  towards  the  Cross  on 
"the  'High  Altar'  with  theatrical  emphasis."    This  I  totally  and 

'emphatically  deny,  as  entirely  unfounded  in  fact.  (p.  6.)  At  the 

'  ascription  of  praise  to  the  Holy  Trinity  in  the  Gloria,  I  do  bou> 
'my  head;  as  at  the  mention  of  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  It 
'  is  the  practice  of  a  large  part  of  my  Congregation,  and,  as  I  think, 
'  a  laudable  and  devout  one:  I  learnt  it  from  them — not  they  from 
'  me.  I  have  never  enjoined  the  practice  upon  others — 1  claim 
'  the  liberty  of  following  it  myself;  and  I  do  not  think  that 
'  Mr.  Westerton  is  justified  in  passing  any  comment  upon  it.  As 
'  to  its  being  Popish,  I  am  not  aware  that  the  custom  prevails 
'in  the  worship  of  the  Roman  Church.'  (p.  7. — Letter  to  the 
Bishop  of  London,  Feb.  27th,  1854.). — The  Bishop  of  London 
thus  answered: — 'With  regard  to  "bowings,"  "genuflexions"  and 
'  "gesticulations,"  Mr.  LidJell  denies  the  truth  of  your  statement... 
'  The  custom  of  bowing  upon  entering  a  Church  or  Chancel,  is  a 
'very  ancient  one  and  very  generally  observed  in  our  Church 
'  till  within  the  last  hundred  years.  I  have  been  told  by  some 
'  old  Clergymen,  that  when  they  were  young  it  was  the  general 
'  practice,  at  least  with  the  Clergy.  J  do  not  observe  it  myself, 
'  but  I  should  be  loth  to  impute  a  superstitious  feeling  to  those 
'  who  do.  The  rule  to  be  followed,  in  this  and  similar  cases,  is, 
'  not  to  use  outward  marks  of  reverence  in  an  ostentatious  or 
'singular  manner,  so  as  to  awaken  suspicion,  and  call  forth 
'  observation.    I  do  not  see  how  it  is  possible  to  lay  down  a  stricter 


ENTERING  AND  LEAVING  CIIUBCH.  433 


'rule  than  this;  or  to  prescribe  an  exact  scale  for  the  bodily 
'  expressions  of  devout  feelings.    I  have  already  expressed  my 

'dislike  to  frequent  genuflexions,  in  my  Charge  of  1850.*  I 

'  cannot,  however,  forbear  from  observing,  that  our  Congregations 
'  are,  for  the  most  part,  far  too  unobservant  of  the  outward 
'  expressions  of  devotion;  and  that  it  may  sometimes  be  desirable 
'  that  the  Clergy  should  set  them  a  good  example  in  this  respect. 
'  With  respect  to  the  particular  one  of  bowing  the  head  when  the 
'  Doxology,  or  ascription  of  praise,  is  pronounced,  I  believe  it  to  be 
'a  novelty  in  our  Church,  and  have  more  than  once  expressed 
'  mv  disapproval  of  it.'  {p.  41.)— Letter  to  Mr.  Westerton,  March 
28th,  1854. 

Rev.  C.  Benson  (late  Master  of  the  Temple),  commenting  on 
the  practice  of  '  doing  reverence  and  obeisance  on  entering 
'  Churches,  and  towards  the  Communion  Tables  in  Chancels,' 
adds: — 'I  believe  it  will  most  frequently  be  found  practised  by 
'  those  who  ascribe  a  peculiar  sanctity  to  the  places  themselves, 
'and  who  look  upon  the  Holy  Table  as  truly  an  Altar,  where  the 
'  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  made  in  some  real,  though  mysterious  and 

'  undefined  sense,  by  the  ministering  Priest  The  doing  reverence 

'  to  Churches  and  Communion  Tables  is  condemned  by  reason, 

'  and  sanctioned  only  by  a  Canon  to  which  a  Statute  of  the  Realm 
'expressly  forbids  us  to  give  authority.'  {p.  812.) — On  Rubrics  and 
Canons. 

Rev.  W.  Goode  says :— '  The  custom  of  1  bowing;  on  entering 
'  the  Church,  towards  the  East,  or  the  Communion  Table,  may 
'  no  doubt  plead  various  precedents  in  its  favour,  but  certainly 
'no  authoritative  sanction;  for  the  Canons  of  1640,  into  which 
'  Laud  introduced  it,  are  of  no  authority.  And  I  think  most 
'  will  be  disposed  to  agree  with  Bp.  Burnet,  that  "  all  bowings 
'to  the  Altar  have  at  least  an  ill  appearance,  and  are  of  no  use," 
{Own  Time,  a.  636;  or  vi.  176.  Oxford  Edit.).  And  in  opposition 
'  to  the  testimony  of  Laud  and  his  party  in  favour  of  the  practice, 
'  we  have  that  of  Abi\  Williams,  an  equally  good  witness,  on 
'the  contrary  side.'  (Here  follows  the  quotation  given  above). — 
Cerem.  of  Church  of  Eng.  p.  25. 


*  A  Manchester  correspondent,  "  to  correct  the  erroneous 
impression  that  may  be  formed  by  the  perusal  of  part  of  the  letter 
of  the  Bishop  of  London,"  requests  us  to  certify  (enclosing  his 
name)  that  it  has  always  been  the  custom  for  the  choristers  of 
the  old  church  (now  the  cathedral)  of  Manchester,  to  turn  to  the 
east  during  the  Gloria.  Other  correspondents  testify  to  the  custom 
in  various  parts  of  the  country.  The  writer  of  this  paragraph 
witnessed  the  custom  for  the  first  time  at  a  chapel  attached  to  a 
union  workhouse.  We  are  likewise  informed  that  the  usage  has 
been  from  time  immemorial  observed  by  the  charity  school  children 
at  their  annual  gathering  in  his  own  Cathedral  of  St  Paul's,  and 
has  no  doubt  been  handed  down  to  the  present  time  from  the 
beginning  of  last  century.  Among  the  clergymen  who  always 
observed  it  may  be  cited  the  late  respected  Vicar  of  St  Giles's, 
the  Rev.  Endell  Tyler,  certainly  no  favourer  of  "  novelties." — 
Guardian,  May  3rd,  1854. 


434 


BOWING  TO  T1IE   ALTAE  ;  &C. 


Dr.  Hook,  states  on  this  subject:— 'A  reverent  custom  still 
•practised  at  Windsor  Chapel,  in  College  Chapels,  and  Cathedrals, 
'  of  which  the  Synod  of  1640  said,' '  We  heartily  commend  it,  &c.' 
(Here  he  concludes  with  a  portion  of  the  7th  Canon  of  1640.) — 
Ch.  Diet.  Art.  '  Bowing.'  (See  p.  296.). 

The  Rev.  T.  Lathbury  writes: — 'The  Canon  enjoins  due  and 
'  lowly  reverence  at  the  Name  of  Jesus,  and  therefore  this  practice 
'  cannot  be  deemed  Popish  by  conscientious  members  of  the  Church 
'  of  England.  But  bowing  to  the  ea.\t  is  neither  enjoined  nor 
'  specified.  Due  reverence,  as  it  was  usually  termed,  was  customary 
'  on  entering  the  Church.  "  For  this  there  was  no  rule  nor  rubric 
"made  by  the  first  Reformers,  and  it  was  necessary  that  there 
"  should,  the  practice  of  God's  people  in  that  kind  being  so 
"  universal."  Bishop  Morton  was  as  far  removed  from  Rome  as 
'  any  man  who  ever  lived,  for  he  was  one  of  her  most  able 
'opponents;  yet  he  reproved  a  young  relative  for  refusing  to 
'  comply  with  the  then  general  practice  of  bowing  on  entering  the 
'  Church.  "  If  this  young  man  be  averse  to  that  posture  of  bowing 
"  himself  towards  the  Lord's  table  he  shall  have  me,  much  his  elder, 
"  altogether  his  enemy."  The  practice  is  frequently  mentioned 
'  in  this  and  the  next  two  reigns,  not  as  enjoined  by  Canon,  but 
'  as  continued  from  the  Reformation.  The  following  passage,  from 
'  a  work  of  a  later  period,  may  be  cited  as  an  illustration  of  the 
'custom:  "Our  custom  is,  when  we  bow  down  and  worship,  to  do 
"  it  towards  the  place  where  the  holy  table  is.  The  quires  where 
"  it  is  most  customary  have  the  entrance  against  the  table,  and 
' '  two  others,  one  of  each  side  over  against  each  other.  Now,  if 
"  a  man  at  his  entrance  at  the  former,  should  think  it  better  to 
"  face  quite  about  and  bow  towards  the  door  he  came  in  at  than 
"  to  bow  right  towards  the  table,  I  believe  he  would  make  himself 
"ridiculous  to  all  the  people."  The  writer  remarks,  that  all 
'  persons  coming  in  at  the  same  time  by  the  two  opposite  doors, 
'  and  inclining  the  head  straight-forward,  would  be  supposed  to 
'  be  bowing  at  each  other;  and  "  something  of  like  nature  would 
"  be  found  in  bowing  any  way  but  that  in  use,  however  the 
"  entrance  into,  or  situation  of,  the  quire  be."  It  will  be  observed, 
'by  the  "entrance  against  the  table"  he  means  the  western  door 
'opposite  the  commuuion-table;  and  it  will  not  fail  to  be  noticed 
'by  the  reader  that  the  objection,  at  the  time  when  this  work 
'  was  published,  was  not  against  bowing  on  entering  the  Church, 
'but  against  bowing  towards  the  communion-table.'  (p.  153.) — 
History  of  the  Book  of  Com.  Prayer. 

In  the  "Clergyman's Diary"  for  1859,  there  are  these  instructions 
on  this  head : — '  To  bow  at  the  name  of  Jesus  whenever  mentioned  in 
'  the  Service,  at  the  names  of  the  several  Persons  of  the  Holy 
'Trinity  in  the  Doxology,  and  towards  the  Altar  on  entering  or 
Heaving  the  Church.'  (p.  8.)— Pub.  by  Masters. 

The  Quarterly  Review,  animadverting  upon  that  portion  of 
the  Bp.  of  London's  Charge  of  1842,  bearing  upon  lights,  and 
flowers  on  the  Altar,  and  bowings  to  the  East,  remarks:  — '  If,  as  we 
'  believe,  the  whole  Episcopal  Bench,  and  the  vast  majority  of 
'  mankind,  are  agreed  that  the  greater  part,  if  not  all,  of  these 
'  deviations  from  the  established  usages  of  the  Church  are  frivolous, 


THE  CROSS,  AND  CROSSINGS. 


435 


'unwarrantable,  and,  in  their  consequences,  dangerous;  let  the 
'  venerated  depositaries  of  authority,  honestly  and  roundly,  and 
'  with  one  voice,  say  so,  and  save,  if  possible,  those  who  heedlessly 
'  practise  them,  from  the  sin— and  the  Church  from  the  peril — both 
'  from  the  shame — of  a  schism  about  trifles  and  toys — nosegays, 
'  curtsies,  and  candlesticks.''  (p.  275.) — No.  csliii.  May,  1843. 

(c) — Cross  in  Baptism; 
and  other  Crossings. 

201.  — The  use  of  the  Cross  in  Baptism  is  directed 
by  a  Rubric  of  the  Prayer  Book,  which  was  first 
introduced  into  the  place  it  now  occupies  in  the 
Second  Liturgy  of  Edward  VI.  (1552).  The  Etjbrio 
followed  the  first  Prayer  in  the  Baptismal  Service 
in  the  original  Liturgy  of  Edward  VI.  (1549),  and 
was  differently  worded.  (Clay  B.  of  C.  P.  III.  132 ; 
Keeling,  239.)  This  ceremony  is  defended  by 
Canon  30  (of  1603—4) :  and  as  it  is  a  practice 
not  disputed  among  Churchmen  of  modern  times,  it 
requires  no  further  comment  here ;  especially  as  we 
shall  advert  to  it  in  its  proper  place  in  the  Office 
for  Baptism.* 

Other  Crossings. 

202.  — These  are  not  permitted  either  by  the  Canon, 
Statute  Law,  or  Rubric;  nor  are  they  sanctioned  by 
custom.  Crossings  were  allowed  in  the  First  Liturgy 
of  Edward  VI.  (1549),  as  the  Rubric  quoted  in 
par.  190,  will  show.  But  this  Rubric  found  no  place 
in  any  subsequent  Liturgy,  and  the  superstitious 


*  In  the  American  Liturgy,  however,  its  use  is  optional.  There 
is  a  Eubric  in  that  Service  Book  following  the  form  of  Eeception — 
"We  receive  this  child,  4c." — which  runs  thus: — 

lIf  those  who  present  the  Infant  shall  desire  the  sign  of  the 
'  Cross  to  be  omitted,  although  the  Church  knows  no  worthy  cause 
'  of  scruple  concerning  the  same ;  yet,  in  that  case,  the  Minister 
'  may  emit  that  part  of  the  above  which  follows  the  Immersion, 
'  or  the  pouring  of  Water  on  the  Infant.' — Dr.  Wainrioht's  Ed. 
New  York,  1845. 

E  E 


430 


CKOSSIMIS. 


Ceremonies  it  sanctioned  were  discontinued ;  nor 
are  they  in  these  times  likely  to  be  revived  in  the 
public  Services  of  the  Church  of  England. 

Bisiior  Parkhurst  (in  1561)  issued  this  Injunction: — 'Item. 
'  That  the}-  neither  suffer  the  Lord's  Table  to  be  hinged  and  decked 
'  like  an  Altar,  neither  use  any  gestures  of  the  Popish  Mass  in  the 
'  time  of  ministration  of  the  Communion,  as  shifting  of  the  Book, 
'  washing,  breathing,  crossing,  or  such  like,' — Inj.  4.  (quoted  in 
Goode's  Cerem.  of  Ch.  of  Eng.  p.  27.) 

Abp.  Grindall  (in  1571),  in  one  of  his  Injunctions,  directs: — 

'  No  Persons  superstitiously  to  make  upon  themselves  the  sign 

'of  the  Cross,  when  they  first  enter  into  any  Church  to  pray.' — 
Card  well's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  337. 

203. — In  the  recent  case  of  Parks  Smith,  (Clerk) 
28th  May,  1847 ;  brought  before  the  Bishop  of 
Exeteb.  (Dr.  Phillpotts),  we  find  his  Lordship  in  giving 
judgment  thus  remarking  upon  this  subject :  — '  The 
'truth  is,  that  however  venerable,  significant,  and  affecting,  the 
'  material  image  of  the  Cross,  in  itself,  is,  the  gross  abuses  which 
'  had  prevailed  respecting  it,  not  only  rendered  the  use  of  it  in 
'  Divine  Service  utterly  intolerable,  but  caused,  as  is  notorious, 
'very  strong  and  lasting  prejudices  to  prevail  against  even  the 
'transient,  image  of  it,  made  in  the  air,  after  the  undisputed  usage 
'of  Christian  antiquity.  And  even  these  prejudices  were  wisely 
'  yielded  to  by  our  Reformers,  so  far  as  could  with  propriety  be 
'  done;  for  they  rejected  the  practice  of  making  the  transient  image 
'  on  every  occasion  but  one — that  of  marking  the  forehead  of  the 
'  newly  baptized  with  the  sign  of  the  cross— an  occasion  on  which 
'it  could  not  be  forborne,  consistently  with  the  duty  of  a  sound 
'  branch  of  the  Catholic  Church.' — (quoted  in  Stephens'  Laws  Ret. 
to  the  CI.  p.  1086.) 

The  Bishop  of  Winchester  {Dr.  C.  R.  Sumner)  says:  — 'The 
'  postures  and  gestures  which  you  see  in  your  ministrations  are 
'matters  of  indifference,  simply  considered."  Yet  hear  one  of  our 
'divines. — "It  was  a  long  and  general  custom  in  the  Church, 
'  upon  all  occasions  and  motions  of  solemnity  or  greater  action, 
1  to  make  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  the  air,  on  the  breast,  or  on  the 
'forehead;  but  he  that  in  England  should  do  so  upon  pretence, 
'because  it  was  a  Catholic  custom,  would  be  ridiculous."  (Taylor. 
'Rule  of  Conscience.  III.  iv.  Bule,  15).  He  would  be  worse  than 
'  ridiculous,  he  would  be  an  object  of  just  jealousy  and  suspicion, 

'and  a  stumbling-block.'  The   Bishop  concludes  with  a 

quotation  from  Becon's  Catechism  (Parker  ed.  p.  298),  and  with 
referring  to  Canon  30.— Charge,  1845. 

Rev.  W.  Goode  observes:—'  On  the  subject  of  crossing  we  have 
i  various  direct  testimonies  to  its  disallowance  by  our  Church, 
,  except  in  Baptism.'  (p.  26.) — Cerem.  of  Ch.  of  Eng. 

See  also  Dr.  Blomfield's  opinion  in  the  Knightsbridge  case, 
page  432. 


TURNING  TO  THE  EAST. 


437 


(e?) — Hast, — Turning  to  the  East  when 
the  Creed  is  said. 

204. — Turning  to  the  Hast  when  the  Creed  is  re- 
peated is  not  enjoined  by  any  Canon,  or  Rubric  ;  but 
owes  its  authority  to  immemorial  custom,  derived  from 
the  practice  of  Catechumens  in  the  primitive  Church 
turning  to  the  East  when  they  made  their  profession 
of  faith,  and  to  the  West  when  they  declared  their 
renunciation  of  the  Devil.  The  practice  has  continued 
to  prevail  in  most  Parish  Churches,  where  indeed 
the  position  of  the  greater  portion  of  our  Congregations 
would  not  admit  of  any  show  of  objection,  did  such 
feeling  even  exist,  the  worshippers  being  usually 
arranged  so  as  to  look  towards  the  East.  But  with 
regard  to  the  Officiating  Clergyman  the  case  is  different. 
If  he  should  be  performing  the  '  Service '  in  a  strange 
Church,  and  when  in  the  '  Eeading-Desk '  looks  west- 
ward facing  his  hearers,  or  it  may  be  southward,  and 
the  practice  of  turning  to  the  East  when  saying  the 
Creed  has  not  been  the  recognized  usage  of  the  Con- 
gregation before  him,  it  is  better  that  he  should  forego 
the  custom,  should  he  have  been  in  the  habit  of  adopt- 
ing it  himself,  rather  than  turn  his  back  on  the 
assembled  people ;  otherwise  the  proceeding  will  take 
them  by  surprize,  and  have  so  abrupt  an  appearance 
as  to  be  likely  to  suspend  for  a  time  those  solemn 
feelings  which  the  beautiful  Services  of  our  Church 
usually  invoke.  These  remarks  do  not  of  course  apply 
to  a  Clergyman  officiating  in  his  own  Church  where 
the  practices  both  of  Minister  and  Congregation  are 
sufficiently  known  to  be  anticipated.  Yet  even  here 
any  attempt  to  introduce  this  custom,  if  it  has  not  been 
before  adopted,  should  be  gradual,  and  not  take  the 
people  unprepared.  However,  when  temporarily  offi- 
ciating in  the  Church  of  another,  it  is  considered 
more  becoming  to  adopt  the  usages  prevailing  there, 
than  designedly  to  introduce  what  may  be  esteemed 
by  the  Congregation,  novel,  and,  possibly,  objectionable. 

EE  2 


438 


TURNING  TO  THE  EAST 


This  ready  compliance  cannot  involve  the  compromise 
of  any  religious  principle,  since  the  custom  is  not 
derived  from  Scriptural  authority,  nor  enjoined  by 
any  Canonical,  or  Eubrical  injunction  of  the  Church. 
That  it  was  an  ancient  usage,  and  has  been  continued 
to  our  times,  may  be  gathered  from  the  observations 
and  opinions  annexed:  — 

The  Committee  of  the  House  of  Lords,  (1641)  in  their 
Proceedings  touching  Innovations  in  the  Doctrine  and  Discipline 
of  the  Church  of  England,  mention  amongst  them — '  The  Minister's 
'  turning  his  back  to  the  West,  and  his  face  to  the  East  when  he 
'  pronounceth  the  Creed,  or  reads  Prayers.'  —  Cardwell's  Conf. 
272. 

Dr.  Bisse  says  — '  It  was  the  custom  of  the  ancient  Church  to 
'turn  to  the  Altar  or  East,  not  only  at  the  confessions  of  faith, 
'  but  in  all  the  Public  Prayers. ..In  rehearsing  our  Creeds,  this 
'  custom  is  still  more  proper  and  significant,  for  we  are  appointed 
'  to  perform  it  '  standing; '  by  this  posture  declaring  our  resolution 
'to  stand  by,  or  defend,  that  faith,  which  we  have  professed:  so 
'  that  all  these  times  we  resemble  not  so  much  an  assembly,  as  an 
'army;  as  then  in  every  well-marshalled  army  all  look  and  move 
'one  wan,  s0  should  we  always  do  in  a  regular  assembly;  but 
'especially  at  the  confessions  of  faith  all  "Christ's  faithful  soldiers" 
1  should  shew,  bv  this  uniformity  of  gesture,  that  they  hold  the  unity 
'  of  the  faith.'— Decency  and  Order  in  Pub.  Wor.  Ed.  1723. 

Dr.  Collis  observes  — '  It  has  always  been  esteemed  a  very 
'  decent  way  of  our  expressing  our  belief  of  a  God,  to  turn  to  the 
'  East,  that  quarter  of  the  heavens,  where  He  is  supposed  to  have 
'  his  peculiar  residence  of  glory.'  —  {p.  46.) —  On  the  Kubrick,  A.  D. 
1737.  (reprinted  iu  Christian  Remembrancer  Nov.  1829  to  June  1830.) 

Wheatly  (ob.  1742)  says — '  When  we  repeat  it  (the  Creed),  it 
'  is  customary  to  turn  towards  the  East,  that  so  whilst  we  are 
'  making  profession  of  our  faith  in  the  blessed  Trinity,  we  may  look 
'  towards  that  quarter  of  the  heavens,  where  God  is  supposed  to 
'  have  his  peculiar  residence  of  glory.'  {p.  145.)  —  Rat.  Tit.  of  Book 
of  C.  P.  Dr.  Corrie's  edition. 

Abp.  Secker  (06.  1768.)  says  — '  Turning  at  the  same  time 
'  towards  the  East  as  many  do,  is  an  ancient  custom:  as  indeed,  in 
'  most  religions,  men  have  directed  their  worship  some  particular 
'  way.  And  this  practice  being  intended  only  to  honour  Christ  the 
'  "  Sun  of  Righteousness,"  who  hath  risen  upon  us,  to  enlighten  us 
'  with  that  doctrine  of  Salvation,  to  which  we  then  declare  our 
'adherence;  it  ought  not  to  be  condemned,  as  superstitious:  and 
'  yet  being  neither  obligatory  in  itself,  nor  commanded  by  authority, 
'  the  omission  of  it  ought  not  to  be  censured,  as  irreverence  or  dis- 
'  obedience.'— (quoted  in  Mant's  Book  of  C.  P. ;  in  Hook's  Ch.  Diet. 
Art.  '  East;'  in  Stephen's  Book  of  C.  P.  E.  H.  S.) 

Shepherd  (06.  1805)  remarks,  —  'In  the  recital  of  the  Creed 
'  it  was  customary  to  turn  towards  the  Chancel  or  Eastern  part  of 


AT  THE  READING  OF  THE  CREED.  4.39 


'  tlie  edifice.  This  ancient  custom,  though  not  enjoined  by  any 
'  Rubric,  or  Direction  of  our  Church,  that  I  at  present  recollect,  is 
'  still  retained  by  many  of  our  Congregations.  For  the  origin 
'of  this  practice  we  must  look  to  the  usage  of  antiquity,  where  the 
'  Ckked  was  first  publicly  used  in  Baptism.  The  renunciation 
'  of  "  the  Devil  and  all  his  works,  the  pomps  &c."  was  made  by 
'  the  Catechumens  with  their  faces  turned  to  the  West ;  but  in  the 
'  Crekd,  and  the  vow  of  obedience,  they  turned  to  the  East.  The 
'  meaning  of  which  symbolical  practice  has  been  thus  explained  — 
•"The  West  is  the  place  of  darkness.  Satan  is  darkness,  and  his 
'  strength  is  in  darkness.  For  this  reason  you  look  to  the  West, 
'  when  you  renounce  the  Prince  of  darkness."  And  Ambrose  says, 
' "  Thou  art  turned  to  the  East.  :  for  he  that  renounces  the  Devil, 
'turns'uuto  Christ;"  iutimating  that  turning  to  the  East,  or  rising 
4  sun,  was  considered  as  a  conversion  from  Satan  unto  Christ  &c. 
(vol.  i.^.  249.) — Eluc.  of  Book  of  C.  Pr. 

Of  later  date  we  may  quote  the  following  : — 
Rev.  W.  Goode,  after  saving  a  word  upon  '  Bowing  at  the  name 
'of  Jesus,' adds — '  Whatever  sanction  maybe  derived  from  prece- 
•  dent  for  other  Ceremonies,  such  as  bowing  to  the  East  or  the 
'  Communion  Table,  and  turning  to  the  East  when  the  Creed  is 
'  recited,  such  Ceremonies  clearly  have  not,  in  Parochial  Churches 
'or  Chapels,  any  legal  foundation  to  rest  upon:  and  the  prohibitory 
'  terms  of  the  Acts  of  Uniformity  and  the  Canon  are  against  their 
'  use.  It  must  be  observed,  however,  that  these  remarks  apply 
'  only  to  Parochial  Churches  and  Chapels.  Cathedral  and  Colle- 
'  giate  bodies  have  peculiar  Statutes  of  their  own,  in  some  of  which 
'certain  usages  of  this  kind  are  prescribed;  and  it  appears  that 
'  from  the  first,  exceptions  were  made  in  some  matters  of  this  kind 
"in  favour  of  Cathedral  and  Collegiate  Churches.'  (p.  8.)...' The 
'  permitted  continuance  of  thece  usages,'  he  goes  on  to  show,  '  natu- 
'  rally  led  to  their  partial  retention  in  some  Parochial  Churches.' 
He  subsequently  adds  —  'These  customs  having  been  apparently 
'allowed  to  be  retained  in  Cathedral  and  Collegiate  Churches  and 
'  Chapels,  (and,  in  some  required  by  Laud's  Statutes),  and  in  a 
'  measure  tolerated  in  many  Parochial  Churches,  there  is  a  species 
'  of  sanction  from  custom,  which  might  be  sufficient  to  protect 
'  their  use  in  Parish  Churches,  in  an  Ecclesiastical  Court.  The 
'  exception,  more  or  le^s  directly  sanctioned  by  authority  in  Queen 
'  Elizabeth's  time,  in  favour  of  the  Royal  Chapels,  and  Cathedral 
'  and  Collegiate  Churches  and  Chapels,  as  well  a*  Private  Chapels, 
'as  to  some  of  these  observances,  laid  the  foundation  for  much  of 
'  the  discordancy  found  in  the  usages  of  Parochial  Churches,  and 
'  was  one  great  argument  of  which  Laud  availed  himself  in  his 
'  directions  respecting  Parish  Churches.'  (p.  26.)  —  Cerem.  vf  Ch. 
of  Eng. 

Rev.  J.  .Ikbb  says  — '  The  custom  of  turning  to  the  East  during 
'  the  Creed,  immemorial  in  many  Parish  Churches,  in  the  country 
'  especially,  and  universal  in  Cathedrals  and  Colleges,  is  as  ancient 
'  as  any  ceremony  of  the  Church.    It  has  been  disputed  whether  it 

'  is  towards  the  East  or  the  Altar  that  we  are  intended  to  turn  

'  The  Christian  Churches  are  generally  placed  with  the  Altar  end 
'  to  the  East,  as  to  the  place  whence  the  Day-spring  from  on  high 


A  -10 


TUKKIN&  TO  THE  EAST. 


'  visited  us.  But  this  is  not  universal:  and  it  is  remarkable  that  in 
'  Churches  which  are  placed  North  and  South,  the  custom  of  turn- 

'  ing  to  the  Altar  during  the  Creed  has  immemorial!}-  prevailed  

'  We  turn  to  the  Altar,  to  express  more  strongly  our  Faith  in 
'  Christ,  whose  death  is  there  specially  commemorated,  and  whence 
'  those  holy  elements  are  dispensed,  which  are  peculiar  means  of 
'  grace,  to  refresh  our  souls,  and  to  strengthen  our  faith.'  (p.  354.) 
—  On  Choral  Service. 

Rev.  T.  Lathbury  observes  — '  Another  practice  may  also  be 
'  mentioned,  which  is  a  thing  of  trivial  consequence  in  itself,  but 
'  which  is  not  authorized  by  the  Church  —  namely,  that  of  turning 
'  to  the  East  when  the  Creed  is  repeated.  The  safer  course  is  to  fol- 
'  low  the  Injunctions  of  the  Church,  without  deviation  on  either 
'  side.  But  it  may  be  questioned  whether  turning  to  the  East, 
'  inasmuch  as  it  is  not  prescribed  by  the  Church,  is  not  actually 
'  prohibited  by  the  following  clause  in  the  Act  of  Uniformity:  [here 
'  is  quoted  the  Section  given  above  in  page  398].  This  clause  in  my 
'  opinion  prohibits  the  use  of  any  Ceremony  not  actually  prescribed ; 
'  and  though  I  view  the  use  of  the  term  Altar,  and  the  practice  of 
'  turning  to  the  East,  as  matters  of  perfect  indifference  in  them- 
'  selves,  and  as  no  more  Popish  than  the  Dissenting  practices  of 
'  sitting  at  what  is  termed  the  Administration  of  the  Ordinance,  and 
'also  in  the  act  of  Singing;  yet  as  neither  is  sanctioned  by  the 
'  Church,  I  cannot  but  conceive,  at  all  events  in  times  like  the  pre- 
'  sent,  that  it  is  more  prudent  to  avoid  them  altogether.'  (p.  395.) 
— Ilist.  of  Convocation. 

Rev.  J.  C.  Robertson  says,  —  'As  practices  less  generally 
'observed,  but  having  much  sanction  of  a  traditional  kind,  may  be 

'  mentioned  the  custom  of  turning  to  the  East  at  the  Creeds.' 

(/>.  299.  n.)—Eow  shall  We  Conform' to  the  Liturgy. 

The  Quarterly  Review  remarks  —  'There  is  however  a 
'  practice  with  the  great  majority  of  Congregations,  and  with 
'  individuals  in  all  Congregations,  which  has  apparently  a  great 
'  affinity  to  this  practice  of  worshipping  towards  the  East — we  mean 
'that  of  turning  towards  the  Communion  Table  while  repeating 
'  the  Creeds,  which  does  not  seem  to  us  liable  to  any  objection, 
•but  on  the  contrary  a  reasonable  usage  which  ought  to  be 
'  universally  followed.  —  1.  It  is  an  ancient  custom,  not  now 
'introduced  with  any  covert  design  2.  It  is  a  becoming  one; 
'  when  a  large  Congregation  is  directed  to  stand  up  and  repeat 
'  with  one  accord  a  certain  solemn  form,  a  variety  of  aspects  and 
'  attitudes  looks  discordant  and  irreverent.  One  direction  (no 
'  matter,  in  this  view,  which)  of  the  Congregational  movement  is 
'desirable.  3.  One  direction  being  desirable,  which  shall  it  be? 
'  No  doubt  towards  —  not  the  East,  but  —  the  Altar;  and  for  these 
'  reasons  —  because  it  is  the  practice  —  because,  from  the  general 
'arrangement  of  Churches,  a  person  naturally  stands  fronting 
'  the  Altar,  and  that  in  any  other  position  half  the  Congregation 
'  must  turn  their  faces  to  the  wall,  or  the  whole  their  backs  to 
'the  Altar  —  because  the  Minister,  whose  voice  we  are  to  follow 
'  (though  in  the  Creed  we  hardly  need  his  leading),  is  usually 
'in  that  direction  —  because,  in  repeating  the  Creeds,  we  stand 
'  as  witnesses,  and  are  giving  solemn  evidence  of  our  faith,  and, 
'as  witnesses  in  a  court  of  justice  turn  to  the  judgment-scat,  we 


WORSHIPPING  TOWARDS  THE  EAST.  411 

'  turn  to  the  Lord's  Table,  not  as  in  itself  in  any  mysterious  abstract 
'  sense  more  holy,  but  as  being  associated  with  rites  of  a  higher 
'  solemnity,  and  therefore  naturally  regarded  with  deeper  habitual 
'  respect  and  reverence  than  any  other  portion  of  the  Church.  It 
1  is,  we  confess,  to  us  a  most  beautiful  and  inspiring  sight  to  see 
'a  whole  Congregation  suddenly  throwing  aside  all  variety  of 
'  aspect  and  posture,  and  turning  themselves  with  one  accord  in  one 
'  reverential  attitude,  and  with  one  voice  repeating  one  profession 
'  of  one  faith,  and  commuuion  and  fellowship  in  one  holy  and 
'  apostolic  Church.  It  is  the  only  occasion  in  the  whole  Service  in 
'  which  the  Congregation  appears  to  do  any  spontaneous  act,  and  it 
'  always  looks  to  us  as  if  it  gave  to  the  prescribed  rite  a  peculiar  air 
'  of  personal  sincerity  and  assent.'  {p.  281.)— No.  cxliii.  May,  1843. 

Connected  with  this  subject  is  the  custom  of 


Worshipping    towards    the  East. 

205. — As  regards  the  position  of  our  Congrega- 
tions, who  are  usually  placed  with  their  faces  eastward 
on  account  of  the  general  structure  of  our  Churches, 
this  is  not  so  much  a  matter  for  consideration ;  but 
when  the  practice  is  assumed  by  the  Officiating 
Minister,  who  in  such  a  case  must  necessarily  turn  his 
back  to  the  assembled  people,  a  custom  so  completely 
at  variance  with  modern  usage,  except  in  the  Romish 
Church,  it  becomes  a  matter  of  no  small  moment  and 
importance  ;  the  more  especially  as  the  practice  will 
not  be  found  recognized  by  any  Canon,  or  Rubric 
of  the  Reformed  Church ;  and  can  only  be  defended 
from  having  originated  with  the  primitive  Christians, 
and  continued  to  a  later  age.  Its  revival  therefore 
in  the  present  temper  of  the  times  by  any  Clergyman 
of  the  Church  of  England  would  be  likely  to  excite 
popular  prejudice,  and  produce  strong  remonstrances 
against  its  adoption  ;  consequently  the  introduction  of 
the  usage  cannot  be  recommended.  The  discussion 
of  this  point  is  naturally  connected  with  the  '  Place 
and  Position  of  the  Minister,'  to  which  we  shall  have 
presently  to  recur:  in  the  mean  while  it  may  be  pro- 
fitable to  peruse  a  few  opinions  upon  the  general 
subject  of  '  Worshipping  towards  the  East,'  as  a 
preliminary  to  that  specific  question. 


442  WOESHIl'PING  TOWAEDS  THE  EAST. 


206. — One  reason  assigned  for  this  usage  was  the 
ancient  idea  that  the  East  was  the  symbol  of  Christ  who 
was  termed  in  Scripture  the  Sun  of  Eighteousness, 
the  Orient,  the  Light.  A  second  reason  was  because 
the  East  was  the  locality  of  Paradise,  whence  a  Canon 
of  St.  Basil  directing,  'Praying  towards  the  East 
'  to  denote  that  we  are  in  quest  of  Eden  that  garden 
'  in  the  East,  from  which  our  first  Parents  were 
'  ejected.'  Can.  92.  a.  x>.  369.  Another  reason  was, 
that  the  East  was  the  source  of  light  and  brightness. 
And  a  fourth,  that  it  was  in  the  East  that  Christ 
came  on  earth,  in  the  East  He  ascended  into  heaven, 
and  in  the  East  He  will  be  seen  at  His  next 
appearance.  From  one,  or  other,  or  all  of  these  reasons 
spring  the  ceremony  among  the  early  Christians  of 
turning  to  the  East  when  entering  into  covenant  with 
Christ  at  Baptism ;  and  the  subsequent  general 
practice   of   Worshipping   towards   the   East.  (See 

Tertull.  p.  402.  —  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Strom,  vii.  or  Bp.  of 
Lincoln  on  Clem.  Alex.  p.  452.  —  St  Aunustin  de  Serm.  Dom.  in 
Monte,  lib.  II.  c.  v.  —  Gregory  Nyssen,  Horn.  v.  de  Orat.  Dom.  — 
Basil  de  Spirit.  Sanct.  c.  xxvii.  —  Apns.  Cons  lib.  II.  c.  57.  —  John 
Gregorie's  Works,  p.  89.  —  Stnveley  on  Churches,  p.  155.  —  Socrates 
Ecc.  Hist.  v.  22.— Bingham's  Ant.  of  Chr.  Ch.  xiii.  viii.  15. 

Strype  in  his  'Annals'  (i.  178)  speaks  of  the  Puritans  at  Frank- 
fort during  the  reign  of  Mary  (1553-58),  complaining  of  other 
exiles  for  turning  eastward.  And  in  his  '  Life  of  Parker'  (152) 
he  mentions  a  Clergyman  near  Booking  being  forbidden  by  the 
Dean  '  to  turn  towards  the  Altar  in  reading  the  Service.'  —  (quoted 
in  Robertson's  How  shall  we  conform  to  the  Liturgy.) 

Bishop  Scot,  the  Romanist  Bishop  of  Chester,  speaking  against 
the  Liturgy  of  Elizabeth,  in  1559,  states  that — '  This  booke  takethe 
'  awaye,  eyther  in  parte,  or  else  clearly,  as  things  not  allowable 
'  (among  others)  prayinge  towardes  the  East'  —  Card- 
well's  Conf.  110. 

Clutterbcck  remarks  — '  The  Christians  from  the  beginning 
'  built  their  Churches,  and  worshipped  towards  the  East,  because 
'  they  expected  our  Saviour,  who  is  called  '  the  Day-Spring  from  on 
1  high,'  to  come  from  thence.  In  that  part  also  the  holy  Table,  or 
,  Altar  is  placed,  where  God  affords  His  most  gracious  and  mysterious 
.  presence.'  (p.  65,  66.) — On  the  Liturgy.  Ed.  1713. 

Dr.  Collis  says  — '  Most  Churches  are  so  contrived  that  the 
'  greater  part  of  the  Congregation  faces  the  East.  The  Jews  iu 
'  their  dispersion  throughout  the  world,  whenever  they  prayed, 
'  turned  their  faces  towards  the  Mercy-seat,  and  Cherubim,  where 


WORSHIPPING  TOAVAEUS   THE  EAST.  443 


•  the  Ark  stood.    (2  Citron,  vi.  36—38).    Daniel  was  found  praying 

•  towards  Jerusalem.  {Dan.  vi.  10.).'— On  the  Rubric,  p.  46.  Ed.  1737. 

Wheatly  (ob.  1742),  speaking  of  the  ancient  Churches, 
observes: — 'The  Chancel  was  peculiar  to  the  Priests,  and  sacred 
'  persons,  and  typified  heaven :  for  which  reason  they  always 
'  stood  at  the  East  end  of  the  Church,  towards  which  part  of  the 
'  world  tbey  paid  a  more  than  ordinary  reverence  in  their  worship; 
'wherein  Clemens  Alexamlrinus  (Strom.  /.  7.  p.  724.  C.)  tells  us, 
'they  had  respect  to  Christ;  for  as  the  East  is  the  birth  and  the 
'  womb  of  the  natural  day,  from  whence  the  Sun  (the  fountain 
'of  all  sensible  light)  does  arise  and  spring;  so  Christ,  the  true 
'  "  Sun  of  Righteousness,"  who  arose  upon  the  world  with  the  light 
'  of  truth,  when  it  sat  in  the  darkness  of  error  and  ignorance,  is 
'in  Scripture  styled  the  'East.'  (Zech.  iii.  8;  vi.  12;  Lukei.  78.). 
'  And  therefore  since  we  must  in  our  Prayers  turn  our  faces 
'towards  some  quarter,  it  is  fittest  it  should  be  towards  the  East; 
'  especially  since  it  is  probable  even  from  Scripture  itself,  that 
'  the  majesty  and  glory  of  God  is  in  a  peculiar  manner  in  that 
'  part  of 'the  heavens,  and  that  the  throne  of  Christ,  and  that  the 
'  splendour  of  His  humanity  has  its  residence  there.'  (p.  67.)— Rat. 
III.  of  Com.  Pr.  Dr.  Corrie's  Ed. 

From  modern  authorities  we  have  the  few 
following — 

The  late  Bishop  of  London.  {Dr.  Blomfteld)  says:— 'With 
'  regard  to  worshipping  towards  the  East,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
'  of  its  having  been  a  very  ancient  practice  of  the  Church;  for  it  is 
'  mentioned  by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  by  Tertullian.  Bishop 
' Stillingjket,  one  of  the  most  learned  of  our  divines,  considers  it 
'  to  be  one  of  those  customs  derived  from  primitive  times,  and 
'  continuing  to  our  own,  which  there  is  no  reason  to  oppose,  but 
'  rather  to  comply  with.  — "And  of  all  customs,"  he  observes,  "  that 
'of  contention  and  singularity,  where  there  is  no  plain  reason 
'  against  them,  doth  the  least  become  the  Church  of  God." 
'  (Eccl.  Cases,  382.)— I  do  not,  however,  consider  it  to  be  the 
'  intention  of  our  Church,  that  the  Officiating  Minister  when 
'  reading  Pravers,  should  turn  to  the  East  with  his  back  to  the 
'Congregation.'  (p.  46,  47.)—  Charge,  1842. 

The  Bishop  of  Durham  (Dr.  Longley),  when  Bishop  of  Bipon 
in  1849 — 50,  denounced  the  usage  practised  at  St  Saviour's,  Leeds, 
of  offering  up  the  Prayers  towards  the  East.  Mr.  Puli.kn  writes: — 
'  Later  in  the  days  of  St  Saviour's,  a  few  parts  of  the  Service  came 
'  under  reproof,  but  at  this  time  they  were  blamed  by  the  Bishop 
'  (Dr.  Longley)  for  two  things;  first,  because  the  Reader  did  not 
'  kneel  with  his  face  southwards,  when  he  said  the  Collects,  but 
'knelt  to  the  East.att  the  Congregation  doing  the  same.  It  may 
'  be  that  this  was  thought  to  teach  "  a  sacerdotal  mediation."  The 
'  Bishop  was  offended  by  it :  he  ordered  that  if  the  Ofiiciator  knelt 
' eastward,  he  should  do  so  "half  way  down  the  Nave."  The  seat 
'of  the  Reader  faced  to  the  East,  and  could  not  be  altered;  he 
'continued  therefore  to  kneel  in  front  of  it.  as  before:  while  the 
'  Psalms  were  chanted  he  stood  looking  southwards.  When  reading 
'  the  Exhortation,  or  Absolution,  or  saying  "  The  Lord  be  with 


444        wousiiirpiNG  towaeds  the  east. 


'you,"  he  turned  towards  the  People.  In  a  word  he  turned  towards 
'the  People  when  speaking  to  them, — away  from  them  when  speaking 
1  to  God.    The  other  complaint  was  that  their  voices  were  not  loud, 

'or  distinct  enough.'  (p.  101.)  In  1850,  Bishop  Longley  again 

remonstrated  with  the  Incumbent,  expressing  his  displeasure  "  that 
"  Mr.  Kooke  says  the  greater  part  of  the  Prayers  with  his  back 
"  turned  to  the  Congregation,  and  in  so  low  anil  muttering  a  tone, 
"  that  the  Congregation  cannot  possibly  understand  what  he  says. 
"  My  directions  have  been  so  distinctly  given  upon  this  point  that  I 
"  am  much  surprised  at  this  inattention  to  the  lawful  orders  of  your 
"superior."  &c.  &c.  {p.  147.) — Five  Years  at  St  Saviour's,  Leeds. 

The  Bishop  of  Worcester  {Dr.  Pepi/s),  alluding  to  this 
question,  says:  — 'This  is  a  practice  unquestionably  very  ancient, 
'  but  it  may  be  doubted  whether  antiquity  can  justify  the 
'  observance  of  it,  when  it  entails  the  inconvenience  of  the 
'  Officiating  Clergyman  turning  his  back  upon  the  greater  part  of 
'  his  Congregation,  while  offering  up  Prayers  in  which  they  are 
'  expected  to  join.  We  have  indeed,  the  less  reason  to  respect 
'this  ancient  mode  of  worshipping  towards  the  East,  when  we 
'  consider  the  fanciful  and  superstitious  reasons  which  are  assigned 
'for  it  by  some  of  the  Fathers.' — After  quoting  from  Lactantius, 
Terlullian,  and  others,  the  Bishop  adds: — 'It  is  evident  that  the 
'  Fathers  themselves  were  at  a  loss  how  to  assign  a  valid  reason 
'  for  a  practice,  which  certainly  could  derive  no  sanction  from 
'  the  authority  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  These,  on  the  contrary, 
'  abound  in  representations  of  the  universality  of  the  Divine 

'  presence  1  am,  indeed,  much  inclined  to  believe  that  this 

'  practice  of  antiquity,  like  many  others,  adopted  by  the  primitive 
'  Church,  owed  its  origin  to  the  too  ready  admission  into  the 
'  Christian  service  of  forms  and  ceremonies  belonging  to  Pagan 

'superstition  In  like  manner,  there  is  every  reason  to  believe, 

'  that  the  practice  of  building  our  Churches  East  and  West,  was 
'  adopted  from  a  similar  practice  having  prevailed  in  the  erection 
'  of  heathen  Temples.' — He  then  concludes  by  stating  that  these 
practices  '  are  not  such  as  should  command  our  respect,  or  be 
'  considered  as  essential  in  our  forms  of  Divine  Worship.' — Charge, 
1845.  (quoted  in  Stephen's  Laws  Rel.  to  Clergy,  p.  1076.) 

Rev.  J.  C.  Robertson,  after  drawing  his  conclusions  that — '  the 
'  Chancel  was  ordinarily  the  place  in  which  the  Service  should  be 
'read,' adds: — 'The  stricter  Churchmen  turned  Eastward ;  which 
'  position,  as  well  as  the  place  of  Service,  the  Puritans  vehemently 
'  objected  to,  as  a  hindrance  to  hearing  and  understanding;  Puritan 
'  Ministers,  perhaps,  sometimes  factiously  affecting  to  be  inaudible, 

'  when  tied  down  to  the  observance  of  the  rule  Although  it  was 

'  held  desirable  that  the  Minister  should  look  Eastward,  this  was 
'  evidently  not  insisted  on  when  it  could  really  interfere  with  the 
'edification  of  the  people.'  (p.  71.) — How  shall  we  Conform  to  the 
Liturgy. 

The  Quarterly  Review,  in  discussing  the  Bishop  of  London's 
arguments  on  this  subject  {given  above),  not  only  expresses  a 
difference  of  opinion,  but  objects  also  to  the  application  made 
by  his  Lordship  of  Bp.  Stillingtleet's  remarks.  It  begins  with 
animadverting  upon  the  practice  of  'worshipping  towards  the  East 


Worship  pin  q  to-wauds  the  east. 


1 15 


which  it  explains  as  '  the  priests'  worshipping— that  is,  performing 
'  the  Service  with  his  face  turned  to  the  East,  irrespectively  of  aU 
•other  circumstances.'  (^.  275.)  The  Reviewer  then  proceeds: — 
'  This  is  no  trifle — on  the  contrary,  it  seems  to  us  a  most  important 
'  and  dangerous  innovation,  and  that  strikes  directly  at  one  of 
'  the  greatest  practical  blessings  introduced  by  the  Reformation — 

'  Common  Pkayer  The  Romish  Priest  stands  at  the  Altar  with 

'  his  face  directed  towards  it — that  is,  towards  the  East,  where  their 
'Altars  are  generally,  though  not  always  placed,  aud  then  performs 
'  his  functions  as  if  he  were  the  single  worshipper.  The  Reformed 
'  Minister,  on  the  contrary,  is  provided  with  a  'Desk'  near  to  the 
'  main  body  of  his  Congregation,  whom  he  invites  to  join  with  him 
'in  the  established  form  of  Common  Prayer;  and  for  this  purpose 
'  it  was  one  of  the  first  Rubrics  of  the  Reformation,  and  has  been 
'  sanctioned  by  an  almost  universal  custom,  that  "  the  Minister  shall 

'  so  turn  him  as  that  the  people  may  best  hear."  {p.  276.)  When 

'  the  true  principles  of  Christianity  freed  themselves  from  the 
'  Pagan  dross — when  we  came  to  know  that  the  one  great  Sacrifice 
'  on  Calvary  rendered,  not  merely  vain,  but  idolatrous,  any  other 
'  pretended  sacrifice — when  we  came  to  acknowledge  no  mediator 
'between  us  and  God  but  our  Saviour  Himself — the  east  end  of 
'  the  Church  became  no  more  than  the  convenient  location  of — not 
'  an  A  Itar  of  sacrifice,  but — a  Table  of  holy  Communion ;  and 
'  the  Minister  became  not  a  sacrificator,  nor  a  hierophant,  but  the 
'  fellow-suppliant  and  leader  of  a  flock  whose  weakness  he  is  to 
'  support,  whose  energies  he  is  to  direct,  whose  devotion  he  is  to 
'  awaken  in  their  hearts  and  to  prompt  to  their  lips.  He  is^ 
'  therefore  not  a  Mediator,  but  a  Medium — he  is  not,  there  and  in 
'  that  character,  so  much  a  worshipper  as  the  organ  of  worship — 
'  employed  on  that  occasion  more  especially  for  their  instruction 

'than  for  his  own  The  practice  therefore  of  any  Minister  who 

'  performs  Common  Prayer  affecting  to  turn  away  from  his 
'  Congregation,  to  seclude  himself  in  some  kind  of  personal 
'  abstraction,  and  to  give  colour  to  a  superstition  that  God  is  more 
'  immediately  present  in  one  part  of  His  Churches  than  another, 
'  seems  to  us  a  most  blameable  misconception  of  his  duty,  and 
'  (however  far  that  may  be  from  his  intention)  a  most  dangerous 

'  recurrence  to  Romanist — nay,  Pagan  practices,   (p.  277.)  If 

'  there  were  an  order  (which  there  is  not)  that  the  people  should  say 
'  their  Prayers  turned  to  the  East,  the  Minister  who  is  to  prompt 
'  the  Prayer  must  turn  himself  East  or  West,  North  or  South, 
'according  to  the  localities— and  so  pronounce  the  Prayer  as  to 
'  be  best  followed  by  the  people.  This  is  common  sense— but  this 
'  is  not  all.  There  is  a  positive  Rubric  which  contradicts  this  new 
'  practice.  In  the  most  holy  of  our  Rites  the  Minister  is  enjoined  to 
'  stand,  read,  and  pray  at  the  north  side  of  the  Communion-Table; 
'  if  in  that  situation,  he  turns  to  the  East,  he  must  read  and  pray 
'  with  his  face  to  the  wall:  and  how  is  he  to  be  in  those  Churches 
'in  which  the  Table  is  not  placed  at  the  East  end? — are  the 
'  Congregation  to  turn  away  from  the  Minister;  or  even  as  might  be 
'  the  case,  to  turn  their  backs  ou  the  Altar,  iu  order  that  they  may 
'  worship  to  the  East  f  Surely  no  dicta  of  Clemens  or  Tertullian, 
'  nor  any  other  ancient  authority,  can  justify  a  practice  so  absurd 
'  in  itself,  and  so  directly  at  variance  with  two  of  the  main 
'  principles  of  the  Reformation—  Common  Prayer,  and  the  denial 


416  BUBYING  TOWABDS  THE  EAST. 


'that  the  Communion-Table  is  an  Altar  of  Sacrifice.'  {p.  278.) 
The  Reviewer  then  endeavours  to  set  aside  the  application  of 
the  Bp.  of  London's  citation  from  Bp.  Stillingfleet,  by  the  following 
quotation  from  the  same  Author: — "Worshipping  towards  the  East 
"  was  a  very  ancient  custom  in  the  Christian  Church.  I  grant 
"that  very  insufficient  reasons  are  given  for  it;  which  Origen 
"  would  not  have  men  too  busy  in  inquiring  into,  but  to  be  content 
"that  it  was  generally  received  as  a  practice  even  in  his  time: 
"so  doth  Clemens  Alexandrians  before  him.  who  thinks  it  relates 
"  to  Christ  as  the  Sun  of  Righteousness.  Tertullian  and  S.  Basil 
"  own  the  custom,  and  give  no  reason."    (£cci.   Cases,  266. 

'  Ed.  1702.)  We  do  not  believe  that  in  any  age  or  any  Church  a 

'Congregation  worshipped  to  the  East  because  it  was  the  East; 
'  they  followed  the  instinct  that  guides  every  assembly  of  men, 
'  whether  collected  for  business,  or  pleasure,  or  prayer,  to  turn 
'  instinctively  towards  the  person  who  is  the  organ  of  the  meeting — 
'  an  audience  to  the  stage — a  court  towards  the  advocate — a  senate 
'  towards  the  orator — a  conventicle  towards  the  Pre  icher.  The 
'  Romanists  turned  not  to  the  East,  but  to  the  Priest— the  Priest, 
'  indeed,  stands  at  the  Altar,  they  therefore  turned  towards  the 
1  Altar — the  Altar  indeed  is  commonly  at  the  East,  therefore  they 

'turn  to  the  East — and  that  is  all!  In  fine,  is  it  worth  while 

'  to  revive  a  custom  for  which  the  principal  authorities  quoted 
'  in  support  of  it  give— some,  no  reason  at  all ;  others,  very  bad 
'reasons;  and  one,  more  candid,  advises  you  not  to  inquire  too 
•deeply  into  its  origin.'  (p.  279— 281.)— No.  CXlin.  May,  1843. 
See  '  The  Place  and  Position  of  the  Minister,'  postea. 


Burying  towards  the  East. 

207. — For  similar  reasons  to  those  assigned  for 
Worshipping  towards  the  East,  the  Officiating  Minister 
standing  at  the  head  of  the  Grave  turns  to  the  East 
while  reading  the  "Burial  Service,"  and  the  Bodies 
of  the  Dead  also  are  usually  deposited  in  the  grave 
with  their  feet  to  the  East. 

Durandus  writes:—'  Debet  autem  quis  sic  sepeliri,  ut,  capite  ad 
'occidentem  posito,  pedes  dirigat  ad  urientem,  in  quo  quasi  ipsa 
'  positione  orat;  et  iunuit  quod  promptus  est,  ut  de  occasu  festinet 
<ad  ortum  de  mundo  ad  seculum.'— Rational,  lvii.  c.  35.  §.  39. 

Wiieatly  says: — 'As  for  the  posture  or  position  of  the  Corpse 
'  in  the  grave,  it  hath  been  always  a  custom  to  bury  them  with 
'  their  feet  Eastward,  and  their  feet  upwards,  that  so  at  the 
'  Resurrection  they  may  be  ready  to  meet  Christ,  who  is  expected 
'  from  the  East,  and  that  they  may  be  in  a  posture  of  prayer  as 
'  soon  as  they  are  raised.'  (p.  5So.)—Jiat.  III.  of  Booh  of  Com.  Pr. 
Dr.  Corrie's  Ed. 

The  Rev.  J.  E.  Riddle  observes  that  — '  The  Corpse  was  laid  in 
'  the  Grave  in  tho  same  position  as  that  which  is  usual  at  the 


POSTURE  IN  CHUECH. 


147 


'  present  day.  Various  reasons  for  this  practice  are  assigned  by 
'  Beda  Venerab.,  Isidorus  Hispal,  and  Durandus,  which  are  thus 
'represented  by  Andr.  Quenstedt  {De  Sepult.  Vet.  p.  133.), 
"Christiani  solent  sepelire.  1,  Supinos,  quia  mors  nostra  proprie 
"  non  est  mors,  sed  brevis  quidam  somnus.  2.  Vultu  ad  calum 
"converso,  quia  solo  in  coelo  spes  nostra  fundata  est.  3.  Versus 
"  orientem,  argumento  sperandae  et  exoptandas  resurrectionis." 
{p.  759.  ».) — Manual  of  Christian  Antiq. 

(e) — The  Ring  in  Marriage. 

208.  — The  use  of  the  King  in  Marriage,  like  the 
Cross  in  Baptism,  is  open  to  no  question,  since  it  is  not 
only  prescribed  in  the  Rubric  of  the  present  Liturgy, 
(a  Rubric  continued  down  to  us  from  the  First  Liturgy 
of  Edwabd  VI.  1549),  but  immemorial  custom  has 
made  it  an  indispensible  part  of  the  Marriage 
Ceremony  in  the  eyes  of  the  people.  The  discussion 
of  its  origin  and  signification,  therefore,  will  be 
deferred  till  we  come  to  treat  upon  the  Rubrics  of 
the  Mabeiage  Seetice,  which  will  save  considerable 
repetition. 

[Kneeling,  Sitting,  Standing.] 

[It  would  not  be  well  perhaps  to  pass  over  without  some  notice 
in  this  place  the  Cekemonies  of  Kneeling,  Sitting,  and  Standing,  as 
regards  their  general  practice  in  the  Services  of  the  Church.  The 
especial  occasions  calling  for  their  observance  will  appear  in  the 
Rubrics  as  we  proceed. 

209.  — I.  Kneeling. — The  posture  of  kneeling  at  prayer  is  derived 
from  Scripture,  where  many  examples  will  present  themselves,  as  in 
Gen.  xvii.  3.  17;  Numb.  xvi.  22;  Josh.  v.  14;  2  Chron.  xx.  18; 
Ps.  xcv.  6;  Luke  xxii.  41:  Acts  vii.  59,  60;  ix.  40;  xxi.  5;  Eph. 
iii.  14.  This  attitude  is  mentioned  by  many  of  the  early  Christian 
writers;  and  was  considered  to  be  expressive  of  man's  humility, 
and  of  his  need  of  God's  grace,  help,  and  compassion :  yet  with  a 
few  exceptions  it  was  indifferently  used  with  standing  in  public 
worship. 

'  It  is  to  be  noticed,  however,  that  the  primitive  Christians, 
'  out  of  a  peculiar  regard  for  the  Lord's  Day,  and  the  joyful 
'  season  between  Easter  and  Whitsuntide,  did  (with  the  exception 
'  of  the  Penitents,  who  were  denied  this  privilege)  then  perform 


448  POSTUBE  DURING  THE  SERVICES. 


'  their  whole  devotions  standing,  instead  of  kneeling ;  and  this 
'custom  was  confirmed  by  the  Council  of  Nice,  for  the  sake  of 
'  uniformity.'— (Dr.  Hook's  Ch.  Diet.  6th  edit.  Art. '  Kxeelixg  '). 
See  Bixgham's  Christian  Antiq.  xm.  8.;  which  thus  reads: — 

'  Because  there  are  some  who  kneel  on  the  Lord's  Day,  and  even 
1  in  the  days  of  Pentecost  (i.  e.  the  fifty  days  from  Easter  to 
'Whitsuntide  inclusively);  that  all  things  may  be  uniformly 
'  performed  in  every  Parish,  it  seems  good  to  the  holv  Svnod, 
'that  Prayers  be  made  to  God  standing.'— Caxox  20.  St  Basil 
in  his  Canons  of  a.  d.  369,  speaks  of  this  practice  as  one  of 
tradition.  And  among  the  Trullan  Canons  of  A.  D.  683.  the  20th 
Canon  of  Nice  above  quoted  is  renewed,  adding — that  '  Christians 
'  pray  standing  from  the  beginning  of  Even-song  on  Saturday,  to 
'  the  beginning  of  Even-song  on  Sunday,  at  which  time  they  are 
'  to  kneel.'— Caxox  90.  Johxsox's  Yad'e  Mecum,  Pt.  II.  p.  57.  220. 
250. 

At  the  present  day  it  is  enjoined  upon  our  Congregations  in 
all  acts  of  Supplication,  Prayer,  Confession,  and  Adoration  by  the 
Rubrics  of  the  Liturgy,  as  well  as  by  the  18th  Caxox  (of  1603 — i). 
The  latter  runs  thus: — 

'  In  the  time  of  Divine  Service,  and  of  every  part  thereof, 

1  all  due  reverence  is  to  be  used  All  manner  of  persons 

'  then  present  shall  reverently  kneel  upon  their  knees,  when 
'the  general  Confession,  Litany,  and  other  Prayers  are  read; 
'and  shall  stand  np  at  the  saying  of  the  Belief,  according  to 
'  the  rules  in  that  behalf  prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common 
'  Prayer.' — Caxox  18. 

210. — When  the  Officiatixg  Mixister  is  engaged  as  a  Worship- 
per he  kneels  likewise;  but  when  he  speaks  ministerially  only,  either 
for  the  people,  or  as  the  ambassador  of  God,  as  in  the  Absolutions, 
or  in  reading  the  Word  of  God,  he  stands.  To  meet  those  cases 
where  the  Rubrics  are  deficient,  Wheatly  gives  two  general 

rules: — 'As  to  the  posture  of  the  People  whenever  the  Priest 

'kneels  they  are  always  to  do  the  same.'  (p.  166.) — And  with 
regard  to  the  Ofeiciatixg  Mixister,  he  says: — 'I  take  it  for 
'  granted,  that  whenever  the  Church  does  not  direct  the  Minister  to 
'kneel,  it  supposes  him  to  stand.'  {p.  352.)— Rat.  III.  of  Book  of 
Com.  Prayer.  Dr.  Corrie's  Ed. 

Bishop  Wrex  in  his  Visitation  through  the  diocese  of  Norwich 
in  1636,  directs:  — '  That  every  one  of  the  people  do  kneel  devoutly 
'  when  the  Confession,  Absolution,  Commandments,  or  any  Collect 
'  or  Prayer  is  read  both  at  the  time  of  the  Common  Service  of 
'  the  Church,  as  also  at  Christenings,  Burials,  Marriages,  &c.' — 
Cardw  ell's  Doc.  Ann.  II.  203. 

Abp.  Secker  (oi.  1768),  speaking  of  the  posture  of  kneeling, 
'says: — 'It  doth  so  strongly  both  express  and  excite  inward 
'  humility,  that  it  should  never  be  omitted  wilfully  or  negligently, 
'  in  favour  of  ease  and  indolence :  considerations,  very  unworthy  of 


POSTURE  DUKINO  THE  SERVICES.  4±9 


'  notice  at  such  a  time.  Still  they,  whose  infirmities  will  not 
'  permit  them  to  be  on  their  kness  without  pain  or  hurt,  may 
'  doubtless  allowably  stand,  or  even  sit ;  for  God  "  will  have  mercy 
'and  not  sacrifice."  {Matt.  ix.  13;  xii.  7.).  And  further;  as  in 
'  many  full  Congregations  this  rule  cannot  be  observed  by  every 
'  one  without  taking  up  more  room  than  can  with  convenience  be 
'  spared ;  certainly  the  superior  rule,  of  doing  "  the  things  wherewith 
'one  may  edify  another"  (Rom.  xiv.  19.),  binds  us  rather  to 
'  be  content  with  standing,  though  a  less  eligible  posture,  than 
'  exclude  numbers  of  our  fellow  Christians  from  being  tolerably 
'accommodated  for  joining  in  worship  with  us.  For  kneeling, 
'though  greatly  preferable,  is  not  prescribed  as  indispensably 
'  necessary.' — (quoted  in  Mant's  Com.  Pr.  p.  7.) 

Rev.  Thos.  Rogers  says :  — '  Undoubtedly  every  reasonable 
'allowance  will  be  made  for  age,  and  bodily  infirmity:  but  a 
'wilful  negligence,  or  a  fashionable  carelessness,  in  this  part  of 
'  our  devotions  must  be  unjustifiable,  and  therefore  inexcusable.' — 
Ltct.  on  Morning  Service,  (ib.) 

Rev.  J.  Jebb,  speaking  of  kneeling  at  Prayers,  remarks: — 
'  During  this  (the  Confession),  aud  all  other  Prayers,  the  lay 
'members  of   most    Choirs   deliberately  sit  down;    a  practice 

'  diligently  followed  by  the  majority  of  the  Congregation  

'  they  ought  to  be  reminded  of  the  Kubric,  as  obligatory  on  them, 

'were  even  all  religious  feeling  wanting  No  excuse  can  be 

'  offered  for  such  irreverence  It  would  be  well  to  recur  to 

'the  ancient  construction  of  the  Stall-desks,  which  were  extremely 
Mow,  so  that  their  occupants  during  the  Prayers  were  obliged 

'  to  kneel  down  The  present  custom  of  boxing  up  the  Stalls  with 

'  high  wainscotted  desks,  encourages  a  half  lolling  posture  between 
'stauding  and  kneeling,  which  is  only  one  degree  less  irreverent 
'  than  sitting.'  (p.  252.) — Choral  Service. 

211.  — II.  Sitti?ig. — The  posture  of  Sitting  is  not  recognized  in 
the  Rubrics,  or  Canons  of  our  Church;  aud  is  only  allowed  in 
Divine  Service  during  the  musical  performance  of  what  is  called 
the  'Voluntary,'  intended  to  afford  Worshippers  opportunity  for 
solemn  reflection;  also  at  the  reading  of  the  'Lessons;'  and  at  the 
Epistle  in  the  Communion  Service;  but  at  no  other  time  except 
during  the  Sermon.  The  introduction  of  this  usage  is  not  only 
a  deviation  from  the  rule  of  the  primitive  Church,  where  the 
people  even  stood  to  hear  the  Sermon,  but  is  a  very  unfitting 
posture  for  praise,  or  prayer.  It  may  not  be  inappropriate  to 
remark  here,  that  the  practice  adopted  by  some  Clergymen  of 
sitting  down,  immediately  after  their  private  prayer  ou  entering 
the  Pulpit,  till  the  Psalmody  is  finished,  is  neither  Rubrical,  nor 
becoming.  (Bexnet,  Bingham,  Bisse,  Collis,  Hook,  Mant, 
Wii  eatly,  and  others.) 

212.  — III.  Standing. — This  posture  is  prescribed  in  the  Rubrics 
to  the  Congregation  whenever  uttering  2»'"ises  to  God,  as  in  the 


450 


POSTURE  DURING  THE  SEEVTCES. 


Psalms,  and  Hymns;  or  proclaiming  their  Belief;  or  when  listening 
to  the  exhortations  of  the  Minister  speaking  as  God's  ambassador. 
The  Officiating  Minister  also  stands,  when  exhorting,  and 
performing  acts  of  authority,  as  in  the  Absolutions,  and  while 
reading  the  Word  of  God.  The  especial  directions  in  the  Liturgy 
will  be  commented  upon,  as  we  proceed ;  and  it  will  be  found,  with 
the  few  exceptions  above  mentioned,  that  in  Divine  Worship 
when  not  kneeling,  the  Congregation  should  be  standing,  sitting  is 
iuadmissible.  (Bennet,  Bingham,  Bisse,  Colus,  Hook,  Mant, 
Nicholls,  Wheatly,  and  others.). 


If.  'The  Order  How  the  Psalter  is  appointed 

'to  be  Read.' 

(See  under  the  Rubric  in  the  'Morning  Prater'  directing 
where  the  Psalms  are  to  follow:  postea.) 

If.  'The  Order  How  the  Rest  of  Holy  Scripture 
'is  appointed  to  be  Read.' 

(See  under  the  Rubrics  in  the  'Morning  Prater'  ordering 
when  the  '  Lessons'  are  to  be  read:  postea.) 

1f.  'TABLES  AND  RULES. 

'  For  the  Moveable  and  Immoveable  Feasts  ; 
'together  with  the  Days  of  Fasting  and  Abstinence, 
'through  the  whole  Year.' 

(Elucidated  in  pages,  supra.) 


ORDER  AND  DECORUM.  451 


ORDER  AND  DECORUM 

IN 

AND  THE  PRESERVATION  OF  THE  SANCTITY  OP 
THE  CHURCH. 

213. — Having  under  the  head  of  'Ceremonies' 
considered  the  form  and  manner  prescribed  by  the 
Canons,  and  Statute  Law,  of  conducting  with  solemnity 
the  Divine  Services,  it  seems  to  be  the  proper  place  here 
to  speak  of  the  Ecclesiastical  and  Civil  enactmentsVhich 
have  for  their  object  the  maintenance  of  Order  and 
Decorum  in  Public  Worship,  and  the  preservation 
of  the  Sanctity  of  the  Church.  These  will  be  found 
as  regards  the  Officiating  Minister  not  only  to  prohibit 
any  omission  or  alteration  in  the  Services ;  but  also 
to  restrain  every  irregularity,  and  whatever  in  his 
demeanour  might  appear  indecorous  and  unseemly. 

The  late  Bishop  of  London,  {Dr.  Blomfield)  says:  — 'You  are 
'  not  to  take  as  your  rule  and  model  in  this  respect  the  early 
'  Church,  nor  the  primitive  Church;  but  the  Church  of  England 
'  as  she  speaks  in  plain  and  obvious  cases  by  her  Rubric  and 
'  Canons,  in  doubtful  and  undecided  ones  by  her  Bishops.  This 
'  is  the  language  of  common  sense,  as  it  is  also  of  the  Canon  Law, 
'laid  down  by  its  able  interpreter  Van  Espen :  "  Singularium 
"  Ecclesiarum  ritus  atque  ca;remonialia,  sive  ritualia,  servanda 
"sunt;  neque  presbyteris,  aliisve  Ecclesise  Ministris,  ritum 
"  pra?scriptum  immutare  licet,  eo  etiam  prsetestu,  quod  contrarius 
"  ritus  pristine  Ecclesia;  discipline  conformior  esset,  videreturque 
"  ad  excitandam  populi  devotiouem,  necnon  ad  explicanda  mysteria, 
"aptior  et  convenientior."  (Pt  n.  s.  1.  tit.  v.  c.  1.  §.  24.  See  also 
'Stillingjket'.i  Eccl.  Cases.).  I  earnestly  wish  that  this  rule  were 
'  kept  in  view  by  all  Clergymen.  We  should  not  then  have  to 
'  complain  of  unwarrantable  omissions  and  alterations  of  the 
'  Church's  Service  on  the  one  hand,  nor  of  unauthorized  additions 
'  to  her  ritual  on  the  other.  I  confess  that  I  view  the  former 
'fault  with  less  complacency  than  the  latter.'  {p.  51.) — Charge, 
1842. 

F  F 


452 


OEDEB  AND  DECOEUM. 


214.  — With  respect  to  the  Congregation,  the 
intention  of  these  enactments  is  to  check  all  noise, 
irreverence,  and  disorder,  whether  arising  from  the  idle 
within,  or  from  the  loiterer  without;  as  well  as  to 
prevent  the  occurrence  of  any  circumstance  calculated 
to  disturb  Divine  Service.  Sie  John  Nicholl  says — 
'  Not  merely  the  Statute  Law,  but  the  general 
'  Ecclesiastical  Law,  protects  the  sanctity  of  Public 
'Wobship,  and  still  more  endeavours  to  prevent 
'  every  circumstance  which  may  lead  to  the  disturbance 
'  of  persons  engaged  in  solemn  acts  of  devotion ;  it 
'  prohibits  all  quarrelling,  chiding,  and  crawling  in 
'  the  Chuech  or  Chuech-Taed,  and  requires  decent 
'and  orderly  behaviour.'  (Newherry  v.  Goodwin, 
1  Phil.  283.).  Nor  is  this  guardianship  of  the 
Chuech  and  Chuech-Taed  limited  to  the  hours  of 
Public  "Worship,  but  extends  also  to  Vestry -Meetings, 
and  to  the  time  when  no  Divine  Services  are  being 
performed. 

215.  — Looking  first  at  the  Canons, — the  binding 
authority  of  which  upon  the  Clergy,  Church- Officers, 
and  Laity,  we  have  already  discussed  (in  par.  50.), 
and  which  in  matters  especially  connected  with  the 
Chuech,  and  Chuech-Taed,  where  not  amended  or 
repealed  by  the  Statute  Law,  cannot  be  disputed, — 
we  shall  find  that  the  Chuechwaedens,  &c.  are 
invested  with  full  power  to  maintain  Order  and 
Decency,  and  to  repress  every  disturbance  and 
interruption.  The  remedy  however  prescribed  by  the 
Canons,  of  '  presenting  offenders  to  the  Ordinary ' 
at  the  annual  Visitations,  has  given  place,  except 
in  some  peculiar  and  extreme  cases,  to  the  more 
summary  process  of  appealing  to  the  civil  Magistrate ; 
as  we  shall  see  when  bringing  forward  the  enactments 
of  the  Statute  Law  upon  this  subject.  Tet  reference 
to  the  Canons  must  not  be  wholly  set  aside,  since 
they  define  the  nature  of  the  duty  in  this  respect 
imposed  upon  the  Churchwardens,  and  explain  also 
what  is  expected  from  the  Laity;  and  a  fortiori, 
what,  and  how  much,  necessarily  devolves  herein 
upon  the  Clergy.    We  will  now  quote  the  Canons 


PROFANATION  OF  CHUECHES,  &C. 


453 


relating  to  these  matters,  taking  them  according  to 
their  subject,  rather  than  their  numerical  order. 

216.  — Continuance  in  Church  during  Service  en- 
joined.— 

'  The  Churchwardens  or  Quest-men  of  every  Parish,  and  

'  Sidesmen  or  Assistants  shall  diligently  see  that  all  the 

'  Parishioners  duly  resort  to  their  Church  upon  all  Sundays 
'and  Holy-Days,  and  their  continue  the  whole  time  of  Divine 
'Service;  aud  none  to  walk,  or  to  stand  idle,  or  talking  in  the 
'  Church,  or  in  the  Church-Yard,  or  in  the  Church-Porch, 
'  during  that  time.  And  all  such  as  shall  be  found  slack  or 
'negligent  in  resorting  to  the  Church  (having  no  great  or  urgent 
'cause  of  absence)  they  shall  earnestly  call  upon  them;  and 
'after  due  monition  (if  they  amend  not)  they  shall  present  them 
'  to  the  Ordinary  of  the  place.'  — Canon  90. 

*»•  The  authority  of  the  Churchwardens  to  enforce  attendance 
at  Church  has  been  repealed  by  later  Statutes,  (which  will  be  found 
in  pars.  107—8.);  and  by  consequence  their  interference  with  regard 
to  the  'slack  and  negligent'  would  not  now  be  justifiable. 

217.  — Disturbers  of  Divine  Service.~~By  another 
Canon  the  Churchwardens,  &c,  are  required  to  check 
the  rude  and  disorderly  ;  thus — 

'  In  all  Visitations  of  Bishops  and  Archdeacons,  the 
'  Churchwardens,  or  Quest-men,  and  Sidesmen,  shall  truly  and 
'personally  present  the  names  of  all  those  which  behave 
'themselves  rudely  and  disorderly  in  the  Church,  or  which 
'by  ultimately  ringing  of  Bells,  by  walking,  talking,  or  other 
'noise,  shall  hinder  the  Minister  or  Preacher.' — Canon  111. 

*»*  This  Canon  is  confirmed  and  amended  by  the  Statute  Law. 
(see  infra). 

218.  — Loiterers. — The  idle  and  the  loiterers  about 
the  Chubch-Yabd,  &c,  are  also  to  be  removed ; 
thus — 

'  The  Churchwardens,  or  Quest-men,  and  their  Assistants, 
'  shall  not  suffer  any  idle  persons  to  abide  either  in  the 
'  Church-Yard,  or  Church-Porch,  during  the  time  of  Divine 
'Service,  or  Preaching;  but  shall  cause  them  either  to  come 
'  in,  or  to  depart.' — Canon  19. 

219.  — Profanation  of  Churches,  &c. — Again,  care 
is  to  be  taken  that  Chubches,  and  Chuech-Yabds, 
are  not  profaned  by  games,  and  sports,  &c. ;  thus — 

'The  Churchwardens,  or  Quest-men,  and  their  Assistants, 
'shall  suffer  no  Plays,  Feasts,  Banquets,  Suppers,  Church-Ales, 
'  Drinkings,  Temporal  Courts,  or  Leets,  Lay -juries,  Musters,  or 
'any  other  profane  usage,  to  be  kept  in  the  Church,  Chapel, 
'  or  Church-Yard  ' — Canon  88. 

FF  2 


154 


BEVERENCE  IN  CHURCHES. 


220.  —  Reverence  and  Attention. — But  reverence  and 
attention  during  Divine  Service  are  strictly  enjoined 
in  another  Canon  ;  in  which  also  the  '  saying  of  the 
Responses '  is  strongly  urged  upon  the  people ;  thus — 

'  In  the  time  of  Divine  Service,  and  of  every  part  thereof,  all 
'  due  reverence  is  to  be  used ;  for  it  is  according  to  the  Apostle's 
'rule  "Let  all  things  be  done  decently  and  according  to  order;" 
'answerably  to  which  decency  and  order,  we  judge  these  our 
'directions  following:  —  No  man  shall  cover  his  head  in  the 
'  Church  or  Chapel  in  the  time  of  Divine  Service,  except  he 
'  have  some  infirmity;  in  which  case  let  him  wear  a  night-cap,  or 
'  coif.  All  manner  of  persons  then  present  shall  reverently  kneel 
'upon  their  knees,  when  the  general  'Confession,'  '  Litany,'  and 
'  other  Prayers  are  read ;  and  shall  stand  up  at  the  saying  of  the 
' '  Belief,'  according  to  the  rules  in  that  behalf  prescribed  in  the 
'Book  of  Common  Prayer:  and  likewise  when  in  time  of 
'  Divine  Service  the  Lord  Jesus  6hall  be  mentioned,  due  and 
'  lowly  reverence  shall  be  done  by  all  persons  present  as  it  hath 

'  been  accustomed  None,  either  man,  woman,  or  child,  of 

'  what  calling  soever,  shall  be  otherwise  at  such  times  busied 
'in  the  Church  than  in  quiet  attendance  to  hear,  mark,  and 
'understand  that  which  is  read,  preached,  or  ministered:  saying 
'in  their  due  places  audibly  with  the  Minister,  the  'Confession,' 
'the  'Lord's  Prayer,'  and  the  'Creed;'  and  making  such  other 
'  answers  to  the  Public  Prayers,  as  are  appointed  in  the  Book  of 
'Common  Prayer;  neither  shall  they  disturb  the  Service,  or 
'  Sermon,  by  walking,  or  talking,  or  any  other  way;  nor  depart 
'out  of  the  Church  during  the  time  of  Service  or  Sermon, 
'  without  some  urgent  or  reasonable  cause.'— Canon  18. 

221.  — "We  will  now  refer  to  the  Statute  Law  ; 
and  it  will  perhaps  prove  more  serviceable  to  arrange 
the  various  disturbing  causes,  and  the  '  cases ' 
brought  before  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts  that  have 
arisen  from  them,  in  the  form  of  an  Alphabetical 
Digest:  applying  as  we  proceed  the  clauses  of  the 
several  enactments  to  each  specific  question.  The 
Enactments  are  the  following : — 

Arresting  a  Clergyman  9  Geo.  IV.  c.  31.  s.  23. 

c^iofc^f  y0MoEt{i  VitS 

Defacing  any  Altar,  Abusing  thel 

Lord's  Supper,  or  molesting  >1  Mar.  Sess.  II.  c.  3. 
the  Minister  J 

}2&3Edtc.  VI.  c.i.  s.  2. 
1  Eliz.  c.  2.  s.  9. 
1  Will,  <f  Ma.  c.  18.  *.  18. 
52  Geo.  III.  c.  155.  s.  12. 

Lord's  Supper,  abusing  }  }  ff£  gj^^  c  x 


ALTERING  THE  SEKVICES. 


155 


Altering  the  Services. 

222.  — Any  alteration  in  the  prescribed  Services  either  in  the 
arrangement,  phraseology,  or  in  the  ceremonial;  any  change  of 
the  Lessons,  or  Collects  appointed  in  the  Calendar  of  the  Liturgy, 
or  by  the  Rubrics ; — and  any  omission  of  Prayers,  Collects,  or  the 
Lessons,  wholly  or  in  part,  or  of  any  portion  of  the  '  Occasional 
Services;' — or  any  addition  to  them  —  are  contrary  to  the 
injunctions  of  the  Canons,  14.  16.  36;  to  the  directions  of  the 
Rubrics ;  and  to  the  ^-lcfs  of  Uniformity  (see  pars.  182 — 186);  and 
expose  the  Clergyman  so  altering,  omitting,  or  adding,  to  a  suit 
in  the  Ecclesiastical  Court;  and  if  proved,  the  party  is  liable  to 
the  'admonition'  of  the  Court;  and  the  payment  of  costs.  We  may 
mention  a  few  practices  out  of  many  under  these  several  heads 
which  are  considered  by  some  to  be  deviations  from  the  letter  of 
the  law;  and  which  will  call  for  especial  notice,  at  the  Rubrics 
where  they  may  possibly  occur. 

223.  — Addition. — Adding  without  authority  extra  Collects,  or 
Prayers,  either  in  the  Service,  or  before  or  after  the  Sermon;  announ- 
cing the  Collect  of  the  Day ;  proclaiming  Women  to  be  Churched ; 
publishing  the  names  of  the  Sick  to  be  prayed  for ;  giving  out  Notices, 
either  illegal  as  to  their  subject  matter;  improperly  with  respect  to 
place,  as  from  the  Reading-Desk,  from  the  Communion-Table,  or  from 
the  Pulpit;  or  incorrectly  with  regard  to  the  person  uttering  them, 
as  the  Parish-Clerk,  Churchwarden,  or  any  person  other  than  the 
Officiating  Minister. 

224.  — A  Iteration.— Under  this  head  are  comprised, 

(1)  Unauthorized  Divisions  of  the  Services  without  the  sanction 
of  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese;  the  capricious  appointment  of  Days, 
and  times  of  the  day,  for  Public  Prayers,  the  Occasional  Services, 
and  the  Administration  of  the  Sacraments ;  a  neglect  of  the  Rubrical 
directions  with  respect  to  the  Offertory  Sentences,  and  the  Prayer 
for  the  Church  Militant,  particularly  when  there  is  no  Sermon; 
reading  the  Communion  Service  sometimes  in  the  Desk,  and  sometimes 
at  the  Communion -Table,  &c. 

(2)  Altering  the  phraseology  by  way  of  explanation,  or  from 
negligence;  as  in  the  last  of  the  Introductory  Sentences  beginning 
Moraine  and  Evening  Prayer,  changing  'He'  to  'God;'  reading  in 
the  Collects  'Go  before'  in  the  place  of  'Prevent;'  altering  in  the 
Litany  '  after  our  Sins,'  and  '  after  our  iniquities,'  to  '  according 
to  our  sins,'  and  '  according  to  our  iniquities  ; '  in  the  Exhortation 
at  the  Communion  Service,  instead  of  'we  eat  and  drink  our  own 
damnation,'  saying  'condemnation,'  '  judgment ;'  announcing  and 
concluding  the  Lessons,  and  the  Epistle,  and  Gospel,  in  language 
different  from  that  prescribed  by  the  Rubrics;  giving  out  the 
Psalms  of  the  Day  according  to  the  common  custom,  and  not  in 
close  agreement  with  the  letter  of  the  Liturgy,  &c. 


15  G 


ALTERING  THE  SEEVICES. 


(3)  In  the  Ceremonial,  a  want  of  conformity  in  bowing  at  the 
Name  of  Jesus;  in  turning  to  the  East  at  the  Creeds;  in  delivering 
the  Elements  at  the  Lord's  Supper;  in  the  method  of  Baptizing 
several  children  at  the  same  time,  and  in  sprinkling  or  dipping; 
in  the  place  and  time  for  Churching  Women,  &c.  &c;  so  in  the 
Congregation  standing  up  or  sitting  during  the  Exhortations,  and  at 
the  Doxology  after  the  Sermon ;  and  their  uncertainty  in  kneeling 
or  standing  in  the  Occasional  Service. 

125.— Change. — Here  vre  may  speak  of  changing  the  Lessons  either 
from  fastidiousness;  or  when  long,  from  idleness;  giving  incorrect 
preference  in  the  choice  of  the  Collects  when  Sundays  and  Holy-Days 
concur;  and  other  things  of  the  like  kind. 

22C— Omission.— This  refers  to  the  omission  of  the  Athanasian 
Creed ;  of  any  of  the  prescribed  Prayers  for  the  Queen,  Royal  Family, 
Parliament,  or  Ember  Days,  in  order  to  abbreviate  the  Service; 
or  of  the  Collects  when  two  are  appointed;  or  of  parts  of  the 
Lessons  from  delicacy,  or  from  being  an  array  of  hard  names,  or  of 
genealogies:  leaving" out  the  Exhortation  in  the  Marriage  Service; 
or  certain  expressions  in  the  Burial  Service  from  scruples  of 
conscience. 

227. — *,*  Snch  are  some  of  the  proceedings  now  matters  of 
controversy,  or  not  sanctioned  by  the  strict  letter  of  the  law; 
several  of  which  however  are  considered  justified  when  practised 
in  accordance  with  the  long  established  custom  of  the  place,  but 
not  when  they  are  innovations,  novelties,  or  changes  from  the 
accustomed  usage  of  the  particular  Church.  We  shall  treat  upon 
them  more  at  large  when  we  arrive  at  the  Rubrics  with  which 
they  are  connected;  but  with  regard  to  the  modern  movement 
for  the  Division  of  the  Services,  see  par.  172,  supra.  In  the  mean 
time  we  will  proceed  with  the  questions  of  Order  and  Decorum 
in  Public  Worship,  first  quoting  the  following  opinion  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  Court  respecting  Alterations  in  the  Services: — 

Sir.  J.  Nicholl,  in  the  case  of  Newberry  v.  Goodwin,  previously 
referred'  to,  lays  it  down  that  — '  the  law  directs  that  a  Clergyman 
'  is  not  to  diminish  in  any  respect,  or  to  add  to,  the  prescribed  form 

'of  Worship  Nothing  is  left  to  the  discretion  and  fancy  of  the 

'  individual.  If  every  Minister  were  to  alter,  omit,  or  add,  according 
'to  his  own  taste,  this  Uniformity  would  soon  be  destroyed;  and 
'  though  the  alteration  might  begin  with  little  things,  yet  it  would 
'  soon  extend  itself  to  more  important  changes  in  the  Public  Worship 
'of  the  established  Church;  and  even  in  the  Scriptures  themselves, 
'  the  most  important  passages  might  be  materially  altered  under  the 
'  notion  of  giving  a  more  correct  version,  or  omitted  altogether  as 
'  unauthorized  interpolations.' 

The  Judge  then  proceeds  to  the  specific  charge  before  him, 
viz.;— 'That  the  defendent  (Goodwin,  the  Officiating  Minister) 
'  frequently  leaves  out  portions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  appointed  to 
'  be  read;  and  often  acknowledges  that  he  has  so  done:  and  declares 

'  that  he  will  do  so  again  That  on  the  preceding  Sunday  he 

'  omitted  part  oj  a  Verse  in  the  "First  Lessox."  if  the  fact  had 


ABBE  ST. 


457 


'happened  simply  (though,  strictly  speaking,  not  legally  justifiable 
'  to  omit  any  part),  vet,  probably,  this  suit  would  not  have  been 
'brought:  but  the  Article  proceeds  to  state  that  after  he  had 
'  omitted  the  verse,  he  looked  round  to  the  pew  of  Francis  Newberry, 
'  and  said,  "  I  have  been  accused  by  some  ill-natured  neighbour  of 
'making  alterations  in  the  Service;  I  have  done  so  now,  and  shall 
'do  so  again,  whenever  I  think  it  necessary;  therefore  mark." — 
'  This  gives  a  very  different  colour  and  complexion  to  the  act;  the 
'omission  seems  to  have  been  made,  not  from  mere  feelings  of 
'  delicacy,  which  though  not  a  legal  justification,  would  greatly 
'extenuate  the  omission;  but  the  omission  seems  to  have  been 
'  selected,  as  affording  a  favourable  opportunity  of  asserting  the 
'  general  right,  and  even  of  reflecting,  in  the  midst  of  the  Service, 
'  upon  those  who  questioned  the  general  right.  The  violation 
'  therefore  of  the  law  was  aggravated  by  circumstances  which 
'render  the  correction  of  the  offence  necessary  and  proper.  If 
'  this  Article  should  be  proved,  it  will  not  only  subject  the 
'party  to  'admonition,'  but  further,  to  the  payment  of  costs' — 
(1  Phil.  282—3.).  Rogers'  Eccl.  Law,  832;  Stephens'  Law  Rel.  to 
CI.  174,  1083.    See  also  Lord  Stowell's  opinion,  page  432. 

*»*  Indictments  upon  the  Statutes  must  be  preferred  at  the 
Assises  next  after  the  commission  of  the  Offence.  Those  tried  and 
punished  by  the  Ordinary  cannot  again  be  tried  for  the  same  by  the 
Justices,  nor  shall  those  tried  by  the  Justices  be  again  tried  for  the 
same  by  the  Ordinary. — Rogers,  833.  (See  'Burial  Service;' 
'  and  Marriage  Service'  infra.) 


Arrest. 


228.— Arresting  a  Clergyman  when  in  the  performance  of  any 
Parochial  duty,  whether  on  Sunday  or  Week-day,  must  necessarily 
be  an  interruption  to  Divine  Service,  and  is  therefore  forbidden 
under  penalty  of  fine  or  imprisonment,  by  9  Geo.  IV.  c.  31.  s.  23. 
(quoted  in  par.  Ill),  such  cases  to  be  tried  at  the  Sessions; 
similarly  in  Ireland  by  10  Geo.  IV.  c.  34.  a.  27. 

This,  however,  is  no  new  exemption.  Mr.  Maskell  tells  us 
that: — 'Clergy,  whilst  carrying  the  Holy  Eucharist  to  the  sick, 
'  were  privileged  from  Arrest;  and  an  infringement  of  this  formed 
'  one  of  the  grounds  of  complaint  of  the  Convocation  of  1399. 
'Foreign  Canonists  have  extended  this  privilege  so  far  as  to  assert 
'  that  persons  might  avail  themselves  of  the  protection  of  such  a 
'  procession  :"  sacerdos  Eucharistiam  deferens  ad  se  confugientibus 
'  asylum  pnestat."  Cf.  Devoti.  Instit.  Canon,  torn.  2.  p.  333.  Ferrarius 
'  Bibliolheca  verb.  "  Immunitas."  Giraldus,  Expos.  Juris,  pontif.  1. 
'  §.  637.'— Mon.  Hit.  iii.  379. 

 any  one.  Clergyman  or  Layman,  on  Sunday  under 

Civil  process  (except  in  certain  cases)  is  forbidden  by  29  Car.  II. 
c.  7.  s.  6.  (quoted  in  par.  133). 


458  ATTENDANCE  AT  DIVINE  SEEVICE. 


Arresting  a  Dead  Body  for  debt  &c,  once  prevailed  (Lind.  278; 
Wood's  Civ.  Law  143);  but  is  now  illegal.  The  authority  of  the 
case  cited  by  Justice  Hyde  in  Quick  v.  Copleton  (1  Levinz,  1C1;  1 
Sid.  242;  1  Keb.  866.),  in  which  a  woman  was  holden  liable  on 
a  promise  to  pay,  in  consideration  of  forbearance  to  arrest  the  dead 
body  of  her  son,  which  she  feared  he  was  about  to  do,  was  thus 
eloquently  contradicted  by  Lord  Elle.nborough  in  Jones  v.'.Ash- 
burnham — '  It  is  contrary  to  every  principle  of  law  and  moral  feeling. 
'Such  an  act  is  revolting  to  humanity,  and  illegal ;  and  therefore 
'  any  promise  extorted  by  the  fear  of  it  could  never  be  valid  in  law. 
'  It  might  as  well  be  said,  that  a  promise  in  consideration  that  one 
'  would  withdraw  a  pistol  from  another's  breast,  could  be  enforced 
'  against  the  party  acting  under  such  unlawful  terror.'  (4  East.  460 
—465).  — Burns'  Eccl.  Law.  Phil.  i.  259;  Cripps.  64;  Steer's 
Par.  Lam.  Clive.  53—4;  Stephens'  L.  Bel  to  CI.  200. 

Aj- son. 

229.  — Setting  fire  to  any  Church  or  Chapel,  or  Dissenting  Chapel, 
or  any  house,  stable,  &c.  is  felony  by  7  Will.  IV.  and  1  Vict, 
c.  89.  i.  3.  To  be  tried  at  the  Assizes  by  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  38. 
Punishment  is  penal  servitude  for  life,  or  15  years,  or  imprisonment 
not  exceeding  3  years,  hard  labour,  solitary  confinement,  and 
whipping.— Ok.es'  Mag.  Synopsis,  p.  706.  6th  Edit.  1858. 

Attendance. 

230.  — Attendance  at  Divine  Service  by  the  Parishioners,  and  con- 
tinuance during  the  whole  time,  are  enjoined  by  Canon  90, 
(quoted  above),  which  is  binding  upon  the  Churchwardens  &c,  but 
upon  the  Laity  generally  only  so  far  as  it  is  explanatory  of  the 
Common  law.  The  authority  of  the  Canons  has  been  already 
discussed  (in  par.  50.),  and  the  requirements  and  exceptions  of  the 
Statute  law  fully  detailed.  The  Statutes  enforcing  Attendance, 
viz.  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  2;  1  Eliz.  c.  2.  ».  14;  3  Jos.  I.  c.  1.  s.  2. 
(5)  have  been  repealed  by  9  &  10  Vict  c.  59.;  as  shown  above  in 
pars.  107—8. 

Belfry. 

231.  — The  Belfry  is  a  part  of  the  Church,  and  comes  within 
the  meaning  of  the  Statute  against  '  Brawling  and  Smiting '  in 
Churches  (5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.) :  and  the  offence  is  also  cognizable 
in  the  Ecclesiastical  Court,  as  was  decided  in  the  case  of  Wen- 
mouth  v.  Collins,  in  which  a  prohibition  was  prayed  to  stay  a  suit 


B  BAWLING. 


■159 


in  the  Ecclesiastical  Court,  for  brawling  in  the  Belfry,  and  striking 
a  man  there,  upon  the  suggestion  of  this  Statute,  and  that  all 
Statutes  arc  construable  by  the  Common  law:  but  the  Court 
denied  the  prohibition,  and  the  case  was  proceeded  with  in  the 
Ecclesiastical  Court.   (2  Lord  Ray  850.)   See  '  Bells,'  postea. 

Brawling. 

232.  — Under  the  term  Brawling  the  Statute  in- 
cludes not  only  noisy  quarrelling  or  chiding  in  the 
Church,  or  Chtjrch-yabd,  but  the  uttering  of  any 
words  during  the  Divine  Services  not  prescribed  by 
the  Liturgy,  nor  authorized  by  the  Ecclesiastical  or 
temporal  law,  —  either  by  the  Officiating  Minister, 
by  one  or  more  of  the  Congregation,  or  by  any  idle 
or  disorderly  persons  in  the  Chubch-yabd.  It 
particularly  applies  to  the  time  of  Moening  and 
Evening  Pbayees,  as  well  as  during  the  performance 
of  the  Occasional  Services.  This  restraining  Statute 
is  often  needed  to  be  called  into  requisition  at  Mar- 
riages, and  at  the  Burial  Service,  as  a  country 
Clergyman  especially  too  well  knows:  but  it  is 
also  applicable  at  any  time,  even  when  no  Service  is 
being  performed,  as  its  object  is  to  preserve  the 
sanctity  of  the  Chtjbch,  and  Chuech-yabd. 

'  If  any  person  shall  by  words  only,  quarrel,  chide,  or 

'  brawl,  in  any  Church,  or  Church-yard,  it  shall  be  lawful 
'  unto  the  Ordinary  of  the  place  where  the  same  shall  be  done, 
1  and  proved  by  two  lawful  witnesses,  to  suspend  every  person  so 
'  offending;  that  is  to  say.  if  he  be  a  Layman,  ab  ingressu 
'  eccleeice  ('from  entering  the  Church');  and  if  he  be  a  Clerk, 
'  from  the  ministration  of  his  Office,  for  so  long  time  as  the  said 
'  Ordinary  shall  bv  his  discretion,  think  meet  and  convenient 
'  according  to  the  fault.'  —  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.  s.  1.  (a.  d.  1552.). 
See  further  under  ' Disturbing:'  'Smiting:'  infra. 

233.  — But  the  suit  against  a  Layman  must  be 
commenced  within  eight  months  after  the  commission 
of  the  offence :  thus — 

'  No  suit  shall  be  commenced  in  any  Ecclesiastical  Court  for 

'  Striking  or  Brawling  in  any  Church  or  Church- yard, 

'  after  the  expiration  of  eight  calendar  months  from  the  time 

'  when  such  offence  shall  have  been  committed  ' — 27  Geo. 

III.  c.  44.  s.  2.  (a.  d.  1787.) 


40) 


BEAWLISTG. 


But  against  Spiritual  persons  the  suit  may  be 
commenced  within  two  years  after  the  commission  of 
the  offence :  thus — 

'  Every  suit  or  proceeding  against  any  such  Clerk  in  Holy 
4  Orders  lor  any  offence  against  the  laws  Ecclesiastical  shall  be 
'  commenced  within  two  years  after  the  commission  of  the 
'  offence,  in  respect  of  which  the  suit  or  proceeding  shall  be 
'  instituted,  and  not  afterwards.'— 3  &  4  Viet.  c.  86.  s.  20.  (a.  d. 
1840.).  'And  be  it  enacted  that  the  Act,  27  Geo.  III.  c.  44. 
'  does  not  and  shall  not  extend  to  the  time  of  the  commencement 
'of  suits  or  proceedings  against  Spiritual  persons  for  any  of  the 
'offences  in  the  said  Act  named.'— ib.  Sect.  21. 

The  object  of  the  Statute  against  Brawling  &c,  (5  &  6 
Edw.  VI.  c.  4.)  is  not  to  protect  the  individual,  but  the  sacredness 
of  the  place;  and  it  will  be  found  that  many  disturbances  in  the 
Church  or  Chui:cii-yard  are  visited  with  punishment,  which 
occurring  elsewhere  would  not  be  punishable  at  all.  {Austen  v. 
Dagger,  3  Phil.  122;  England  v.  Harcourt,  2  Add.  306;  Palmer 
v.  Roffey,  ib.  144.)  And  so,  again,  that  may  be  indecent  and 
censurable  during  Divine  Service,  which  is  not  so  when  Service  is 
at  an  end:  on  the  contrary,  that  may  be  indecent  after  the  Service 
which  would  not  be  so  during  its  continuance,  as  repeating  the 
'responses'  aloud  after  the  Service. —  {Worth  v.  Terrington,  14. 
L.  J.  E.  133.)  This  Statute  however  does  not  abridge  the  Ecclesias- 
tical jurisdiction,  since  the  ofi'ence  existed  by  the  Common  Law 
before  the  passing  of  this  Act;  so  that  a  party  may  proceed  either 
upon  the  Statute,  which  applies  to  other  cases'  than  religious 
differences,  and  gives  additional  punishment  :  or  he  may  proceed 
upon  the  ancient  law.  {Hutchins  v.  Venziloe,  1  Consist.  181; 
Jenhins  v.  Barrett,  1  Hagg.  12:  Taylor  v.  Morley,  1  Curt.  482; 
Wenmonth  v.  Collins,  2  Lord  Kay,  850;  Exp.  Williams,  4  B. 
&  C.  313.) 

234. — We  will  now  quote  a  few  cases  tried  upon 
the  charge  of  Brawling  : — 

Admonishing  in  Church  forbidden.  —  In  Cox  v.  Goodday  it  was 
decided  that  words  spoken  by  an  Officiating  Minister  during 
Divine  Service  by  way  of  admonition  of  a  passionate  tenour,  though 
expressed  without  any  tone  of  passion,  were  within  the  words  of 
the  Statute  (viz.  '  quarrel,  chide,  or  brawl ') ;  and  the  Officiating 
Minister  here  was  suspended  for  a  fortnight.  Yet  Loud  Stowell 
said  that  a  case  might  arise,  which  would  justify  the  Clergyman  in 
addressing  a  Congregation  '  as  far  as  was  necessary  to  remove  an 
'  obstruction  to  the  Public  Service.'  (2  Consist.  138.). 

Chiding  is  also  forbidden.  —  In  Burder  v.  Langley,  the  defen- 
dant was  charged  with  Brawling  :  in  that  while  he  was  in  the 
performance  of  Divine  Offices  in  his  Church  {May  9th,  1841.),  shortly 
before  the  conclusion  of  the  Litany,  after  the  response  immediately 
following  the  Prayer,  beginning""  O  God,  Merciful  Father  4c-," 
he  made  a  short  pause,  and  instead  of  proceeding  with  the  Service, 
being  wholly  regardless  of  the  sacredness  of  the  place,  and  of  his 
owu  duty  in  the  performance  of  the  Divine  Office,  he  in  a  chiding 


BEAWLTNG. 


461 


quarrelsome,  and  brawling  manner,  and  under  much  excitement, 
addressing  the  Congregation  then  and  there  present,  said  —  "You 
'  were,  perhaps,  surprised  at  the  pause  I  made  at  the  end  of  the 
'  Prayer,  but  it  reminded  me  of  my  enemies.  I  have  this  morning 
'  received  a  letter  from  the  Archdeacon,  offering  some  Clergyman 
'  to  do  my  'duty'  for  me:  some  one  in  the  Congregation  has  had 
'  the  audacity  to  write  to  the  Archdeacon  on  the  subject,  &c.  &c." — 
That  he  renewed  his  address  after  the  response  following  the  Ninth 
Commandment;  and  that  by  his  irreverent  and  improper  conduct 
he  gave  great  offence  to  the  Congregation,  and  reflected  scandal 
and  disgrace  upon  his  sacred  profession.  Sir  Herbert  Jenner 
Fust,  in  giving  judgment,  said  the  charge  was  clearly  proved; 
adding,  '  I  pronounce  that  Mr.  Langley  has  incurred  suspension  for 
'  8  Calendar  months  from  the  day  (including  the  day)  when  the 
'  sentence  is  notified.  I  monish  him  to  abstain  from  such  conduct 
'in  future:  and  I  condemn  him  in  the  costs'  (1.  Notes  of  C.  Eccl. 
542.). 

Certificate  not  required.  —  On  the  question  of  a  '  Certificate  of 
'las  good  behaviour  during  suspension'  being  required,  it  was 
decided  that  the  Court  had  not  the  power  to  enforce  it,  inasmuch 
as  the  sentence  precluded  the  opportunity  of  committing  the  same 
offence. 

Expostulations  forbidden.  —  In  Clinton  v.  Batchard  uttering 
expostulations,  remonstrances,  and  giving  a  formal  notice  to  a 
Clergyman  just  about  to  ascend  the  Pulpit,  in  a  Church  of  which  he 
was  the  legally  appointed  Assistant  Curate,  that  another  Clergyman 
who  had  been  elected  to  the  situation  of  Lecturer  by  a  majority  of 
the  Parishioners,  but  to  whose  election  the  Rector  had  not  consent- 
ed, was  in  attendance  and  ready  to  preach,  was  held  to  be  '  brawl- 
ing;' tumult  and  disorder  having  followed;  which  was  considered 
by  the  Court  to  have  been  the  actual,  if  not  the  designed,  cause  of 
the  delivery  of  this  notice.  (1  Add.  96.) 

Omissions  and  reflections. — In  Newberry  v.  Goodwin  (see  above), 
omitting  parts  of  the  '  First  Lesson,'  and  reflecting  in  the  midst 
of  the  Service  on  those  who  questioned  the  Officiating  Minister's 
right  to  do  so,  is  within  this  Statute,  and  was  punished  with  suspen- 
sion for  a  fortnight,  and  costs.  (1  Phil.  282). 

Part  proven  only.  —  In  Taylor  v.  Morley,  where  charges  against 
a  Clergyman  for  quarrelling  and  brawling,  and  for  insulting,  disres- 
pectful, and  disobedient  conduct  in  the  Church,  were  only  in  part 
proved,  the  Court  monished  the  defendant  to  be  more  careful,  and 
condemned  him  in  £75,  nomine  expensarum.   (1  Curt.  480.). 

Reproving.  —  In  Coxy.  Goodclay,  the  defendant  was  charged  in 
that  without  just  cause  he  publicly,  during  Divine  Service,  reproved 
a  person  in  Church.  He  was  admonished,  suspended  for  a  fortnight, 
and  condemned  in  the  costs.— Rogers'  Ec.  L.  268. 

Two  or  more  Defendants. — In  all  cases  where  two  or  more  persons 
are  implicated  in  a  charge  of '  brawling '  in  a  Church,  it  is  immaterial 
which  is  most  to  blame;  each  is  bound  to  abstain:  and  each  failing 
to  abstain,  incurs  a  like  penalty;  and  it  is  also  unimportant  whichi  s 


462 


OEDEK  AT  BUEIjLL  SEEVICE. 


the  first  aggressor.  (Palmer  v.  Roffey,  2  Add.  141).  Nor  is  the 
case  of  one  of  the  two  or  more  defendants  a  case  for  mitigated  costs. 
England  v.  Hurcomb,  2  Add.  306. 

235.  — *,*  In  all  cases  of  'brawling'  the  Charge  must  be  sub- 
stantive and  specific,  so  as  to  afford  the  accused  an  opportunity  of 
defence,  and  the  Judge  of  considering  whether  it  is  a  fit  case  for  the 
promotion  of  his  office.  It  is  not  necessary  that  the  witnesses 
should  depose  that  the  defendant  actually  '  chided,  brawled,  and 
quarrelled;'  it  is  sufficient  if  they  prove  that  words  of ' brawliag' 
were  used.  (Foote  v.  Richards,  1  Lee,  265;  Hulchins  v.  Denziloe, 
1  Consist.  182;  Jarman  v.  Bagster,  3  Hagg.  336;  Lee  v.  Matthews, 
ib.  174). 

Any  person  may  promote  Articles  under  this  statute  for 
'  brawling,  tfc.'  (Suet  v.  Dash,  2  Lee  514.):  but  there  must  be  two 
witnesses;  and  the  punishment  is  'suspension'  and  the  'payment 
of  costs.'  See  '  Privileges  and  Restraints  of  the  Clergy,' 
poslea. 

Burial  Service. 

236.  — Any  iuterruption  to  the  Burial  Service  from  noise,  clamour, 
or  other  disturbance,  is  punishable  under  the  Statute  against 
'Brawling,'  (5  &  6  Edm.  VI.  c.  4.  see  above) ;  or  under  either  of  the 
Statutes  against  'Disturbing  a  Congregation.'  (1  WW.  <f.  Ma.  c.  18. 
s.  18;  or  52  Geo.  III.  c.  155.  s.  12:  see  infra). 

The  Sexton  has  authority  under  the  Churchwardens  to  restrain 
all  such  interruptions. 

237.  — Omitting  any  portion  of  the  'Burial  Service 'from  con- 
scientious scruples,  such  as  the  words  'as  our  hope  is  this  our  brother 
doth,'  incurs  '  suspension '  and  the  '  payment  of  costs,'  by  the  Church 
discipline  Act,  (3  &  4  Vict.  c.  86).  The  Bishop  of  Exeter,  in  his 
judgment  in  re  Todd  (Clerk),  where  the  defendant  omitted  those 
words  upon  the  plea  that  the  person  he  buried  had  died  in  a  state 
of  intoxication,  and  therefore  in  sin, — decided  that  the  defendant  be 
suspended  14  days,  and  be  condemned  in  the  costs  of  the  proceedings, 
(quoted  in  Stephens'  Eccl.  Stat.  p.  2011). 

A  charge  was  brought  against  the  Rev.  J.  Irvine,  Vicar  of 
Leigh,  Manchester,  Nov.  1852,  of  sometimes  mutilating  the  Burial 
Service,  and  other  times,  refusing  to  read  the  Burial  Service  at 
Pauper  Funerals.  The  Bishop  of  Manchester,  (Dr.  Lee), 
in  replying  to  the  Churchwardens  (Dec.  15th,  1852),  states: — 
'  I  have  no  hesitation  in  assuring  you  of  my  full  conviction  that 
'  such  a  practice  is  both  illegal  and  unwarrantable.'— (After  giving 


OEDER  AT  BURIAL  SERVICE. 


463 


a  history  of  the  "  Burial  Service,"  and  referred  to  the  case  of  Todd 
cited  above,  the  Bishop  concludes  in  these  words)  — '  I  will  add  my 
'  earnest  hope  that  Mr.  Irvine  will  refrain,  in  future,  from  the 
'  course  alleged,  which  I  fully  believe  to  be  alike  contrary  to  the 
'Law  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  Spirit  of  the  Church  of 
1  Christ.'  This  case  was  also  laid  by  the  Guardians  of  the  Union, 
before  the  Poor  Law  Board,  who  thus  replied  (as  quoted  in  the 
Leigh  Chronicle,  July,  1853.):— 

'  Poor  Law  Board,  Whitehall,  May  14th,  1853. 
'  Sir,— I  am  directed  by  the  Poor  Law  Board  to  state  with 
'  reference  to  the  communications  from  the  Guardians  of  the  Leigh 
'  Union  in  February  last  on  the  subjects  of  the  difficulties  which 
'  they  have  experienced  in  respect  to  the  burials  of  certain  poor 
'  persons  from  the  Workhouse  in  the  Parish  of  Leigh,  that  they 
'  have  deemed  it  advisable  to  consult  the  Queen's  Advocate  upon 
'  the  points  which  appeared  to  arise  out  of  that  communication. 
'  The  Board  have  now  to  state,  for  the  information  of  the  Guardians, 
'  that  he  has  advised  the  Board  that  the  Minister  of  a  Parish  cannot 
'  legally  refuse  to  bury  the  corpse  of  a  poor  person  dying  in  a 
'  Workhouse  situate  in  that  Parish,  on  the  ground  of  a  want  of 
'proof  that  such  person  had  been  duly  baptized,  where  there  has 
'  been  nothing  to  raise  a  suspicion  of  the  absence  of  baptism.  He 
'  says  that  the  Minister  must  be  prepared  to  prove  the  exception  on 
'  which  he  means  to  rely,  and  that,  in  the  event  of  his  failing  to  do 
'  so,  he  will  be  legally  guilty  of  ecclesiastical  offence.  The  Queen'3 
'  Advocate  has  also  advised  the  Board,  that,  in  his  opinion,  the 
'  Minister  cannot  legally  omit  to  read  any  portion  of  the  Burial 
'  Service  as  set  forth  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  He  adds 
'  that  it  appears  to  him  to  be  a  case  in  which  the  Guardians  or 
'  Minister  may  properly  resort  to  the  Bishop  of  the  diocese, 
'  according  to  the  preface  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 
'  "concerning  the  Service  of  the  Church."  The  Board  perceive 
'  from  the  communication  to  them,  that  an  application  has  been 
'  made  to  the  Bishop  of  Manchester  upon  the  subject,  and  they  have 
'  perused  the  copy  of  the  answer  of  his  Lordship' to  that  application, 
'  which  coincides  with  the  advice  of  the  Queen's  Advocate.  But 
'  as  that  application  was  made  by  the  Churchwardens  of  the  Parish, 
'  while  the  Guardians  of  the  Leigh  Union  were  interested  in  the 
'  particular  question,  it  seems  to  be  proper  that  they  should  make 
'  a  similar  application  to  his  Lordship,  and  it  will  probably  facilitate 
'  the  determination  of  the  matter  if  they  communicate  to  the 
'  Minister,  in  the  first  place,  a  copy  of  their  proposed  application. 

'  I  am,  Sir,  your  obedient  servant, 

'  Courtenay,  Secretary.' 
'John  Hayes,  Esq.,  Clerk  to  the  Guardians 

'  of  the  Leigh  Union.' 

238. — Burying  without  a  certificate  of  Registry,  unless  within  7 
days  after  notice  is  given  to  the  Registrar,  is  liable  to  a  penalty  of  not 
exceeding  £10.,  by  6  &  7  Will.  IV.  c.  86.  s.  27,  to  be  recovered  by 
distress,  or  imprisonment  for  not  more  than  one  calendar  month, 
unless  sooner  paid.  (t'6.  s.  45).  Information  must  bo  laid  within 
three  calendar  months,  before  two  Justices  of  the  Peace.  (7  Will.  IV. 
and  1  Viet  c  22.  .*.  31.) 


464 


CHUECHWAEDENS'  DUTY 


239.  — Disinterring  a  Dead  body  without  a  Magistrate's  Order  is  a 
misdemeanour,  triable  at  the  Sessions,  and  liable  to  a  fine,  or 
imprisonment,  or  both;  R.  v.  Lynn,  2  T.  R.  733:  R.  v.  Gillies, 
R.  &  Ry.  266.  n.— Okes'  Mag.  Synopsis,  p.  722.  6th  Edit.  1858. 

Dr.  Waddilove,  (Advocate  in  Docs.  Corns,  and  Barrister-at-Latc) 
writes: — '  If  a  Churchwarden  {a  fortiori  any  other  person)  were  to 
'  give  orders  to  remove  a  Monument  or  a  Body  without  a  Faculty,  he 
'  would  be  liable  to  be  proceeded  against  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Court. 
1  {Hutchins  v.  Denziloe  and  Loveland,  1  Hagg.  Con.  172.).'— Ecct. 
Digest,  p.  119. 

Cathedrals. 

240.  — Cathedrals  as  well  as  other  Churches  are  within  the 
meaning  of  the  Statute  against  'Brawling  and  Smiting,'  5  &  6  Edw. 
VI.  c.  4. ;  as  was  decided  in  Dethick's  case.  (  Cro.  Eliz.  224. ;  1  Leon. 
248.) 

Churchwardens'  Duty  in  preserving  Order. 

241. — It  is  one  of  the  especial  functions  of  Church- 
wardens, Quest-men,  and  Sidesmen,  imposed  by  the 
Canons  of  1603 — 4,  quoted  in  par.  215,  and  which  are 
still  binding  upon  them,  to  take  care  that  there  is  no 
walking  about,  talking,  or  irreverence  of  any  kind,  in 
the  Ohttech,  or  Chtjbch-Yabd  during  the  performance 
of  the  Divine  Services.  It  is  to  them  only  that  the 
Officiating  Ministee  can  legally  appeal  when  in 
Church  for  the  preservation  of  order  and  decorum  ;  so 
that  if  they  absent  themselves  from  the  Divine  Services 
except  from  necessity,  and  any  case  should  arise  calling 
for  their  interference,  and  they  are  not  present  to 
restrain  the  disturbance,  they  can  be  presented  by  the 
Minister  for  neglect  of  duty,  and  bring  down  upon 
themselves  the  'admonition' of  the  Ecclesiastical  Court, 
and  the  payment  of  the  costs  of  the  suit.  (1  Consist. 
174  ;  1  Hawk.  139  ;  1  Mod.  168.— See  the  Bishop  of 
London's  remarks,  par.  213,  and  infra.) 

Mr.  Baron  Alderson  observes :  — '  In  Hawkins'  Pleas  of  the 
'  Crown  {lib.  7.  c.  63.  s.  29.),  it  is  laid  down  that  Churchwardens, 
'  and  perhaps  private  persons,  may  whip  Boys  for  playing  in  the 
'  Church,  or  pull  off  the  Hats  of  those  who  obstinately  refuse  to  take 
'  them  off  themselves,  or  gently  lay  hands  on  those  who  disturb  the 
'  performance  of  any  part  of  Divine  Service,  and  turn  them  out  of 


TO  PRESERVE  ORDER. 


4G5 


'the  Church.  And  that  for  so  doing,  they  do  not  come  within  the 
'  meaning  of  this  Statute.'  (5  &  G  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.  against  'Brawling 
'and  Smiling.')— Stephens'  Eccl.  Statutes,  in  loco,  338.  n.\  Laws 
Rel.  to  CI.  343.;  Dr.  Prideaux,  12.  (see  also  Williams  v.  Gknister, 
3B&C.  699.;  4D&K.  217.  s.  c.) 

Sir  George  Lee  says: — 'Churchwardens  are  Parochial 
'  Officers  lor  several  purposes,  and  are  to  inspect  the  morals  and 
'  behaviour  of  the  Parishioners,  as  well  as  to  take  care  of  the  goods 
'  and  repairs  of  the  Church.'  (Govs,  of  St  Thomas's  Hosp.  v.  Treliorne, 
1  Lee,  129.)  quoted  in  Blackstone's  Com.  i.  394;  Burns'  Eccl.  L. 
Phil.  i.  398 ;  Stephens'  Laws  Rel.  to  the  CI.  342. 

Dr.  Robert  Piiillimore  states:  — '  Churchwardens  may  and 
'ought  to  repress  all  indecent  interruptions  of  the  Service  by  others, 
'  and  desert  their  duty  if  thev  do  not.'  (2  Consist.  141.)  Burns' 
Eccl.  L.  Phil.  iii.  432 ;  Rogers'  Ec.  L.  255. 

Dr.  Prideaux  says: — '  It  is  laid  down  by  the  early  text  writers, 
'that  a  Churchwarden  must  be  a  resident  inhabitant,  and  not 
'  merely  an  outsetter,  who  occupieth  lands  in  the  Parish  but  doth 
'  not  dwell  therein :  because  by  the  duty  of  his  office  he  is  obliged 
*  to  be  present  at  the  Parish  Church  of  which  he  is  Churchwarden 

'  on  all  Sundays  and  Iloly-Days  to  take  care  that  no  disorder  be 

'  committed  in  the  said  Church,  or  in  the  Church-Yard,  during 
'  Divine  Service  and  Sermon,  but  that  all  things  be  kept  in  order 
'  and  quiet,  which  he  is  incapable  of  duly  performing  as  long  as 
'  he  lives  out  of  the  Parish.'  (p.  5.  9.  60.)— C.  G.  Prideaux's  Chw. 
G.  5.  253;  Gibson's  Cod.  215. 

Lord  Stowell  (formerly  Sir  William  Scott)  remarks: — 'I 
'  conceive  that  originally  the  Duties  of  Churchwardens  were 
'  confined  to  the  care  of  the  Ecclesiastical  property  of  the  Parish, 
'  over  which  they  exercise  a  discretionary  power  for  specific 
'purposes;  in  all  other  respects  it  is  an  office  of  observation  and 
'complaint,  but  not  of  control,  with  respect  to  Divine  Worship; 
'as  it  is  laid  down  in  Ayliffe  (Parergon.  170.)  in  one  of  the  best 
'  Dissertations  on  the  Duties  of  Churchwardens,  and  in  the  Canons 

'of  1571  In  the  Service,  the  Churchwardens  have  nothing  to  do 

'but  collect  the  Alms  at  the  Offertory;  and  they  may  refuse  the 
'  admission  of  strange  Preachers  into  the  pulpit,  which  they  are 
'authorized  to  do  by  the  Canon.  But  how?  When  "Letters  of 
'  Orders"  are  produced,  their  authority  ceases.*  Again,  if  the 
'  Minister  introduces  any  irregularity  into  the  Service,  they  have  no 
'authority  to  interfere;  but  they  may  complain  to  the  Ordinary 
'  of  his  conduct.  I  do  not  say  there  may  not  be  cases  where  they 
'may  be  bound  to  interpose:  in  such  cases  they  may  repress,  and 
'  ought  to  repress,  all  indecent  interruptions  of  the  Service  by 
'  others,  and  are  the  most  proper  persons  to  repress  them,  and  they 
'  desert  their  duty  if  they  do  not.  And  if  a  case  could  be  imagined 
'  in  which  even  a  Preacher  himself  was  guilty  of  any  act  grossly 


•  Mr.  Cripps  adds  in  a  note: — 'Not  altogether;  they  should 
'  keep  an  entry  of  the  Name,  Sec,  and  report  the  same.' 


466 


CHUBCmVABDENS'  DT7TT. 


'  offensive,  either  from  natural  infirmity,  or  from  disorderly  habits, 
'  I  will  not  say  that  the  Churchwardens,  and  even  private  persons, 
'  might  not  interpose  to  preserve  the  decorum  of  Public  Worship. 
'  But  this  is  a  case  of  instant  and  overbearing  necessity  that 
'  supersedes  all  ordinary  rules.  In  cases  which  fall  short  of  such 
'  a  singular  pressure,  and  can  await  the  remedy  of  a  proper  legal 
'  complaint,  that  is  the  only  proper  mode  to  be  pursued  by  a 
'  Churchwarden,  if  private  and  decent  application  to  the  Minister 
'  himself  shall  have  failed  in  preventing  what  he  deems  the 
'  repetition  of  an  irregularity.  At  the  same  time,  it  is  at  his 
'  own  peril  if  he  makes  a  public,  or  even  a  private  complaint,  in 
'  an  offensive  manner,  of  that  which  is  no  irregularity  at  all,  and 
'is  in  truth  nothing  more  than  a  misinterpretation  of  his  own.' 
(Hutchins  v.  Denziloe  and  Loveland,  1  Consist.  173.)— quoted  in 
Burns'  i.  398;  Cripps',  193;  Stephens'  L.  Rel.  to  CI.  344.  See  also 
Steers'  Par.  Law,  Clive.  109;  and  Cox  v.  Goodday,  2  Hagg.  138. 

In  the  case  of  Hawe  v.  Planner  it  was  decided  that 
'Churchwardens  might  interfere  to  preserve  decorum  in  the 
1  Church.  Here  the  Congregation  were  assembling  for  Divine 
'Service,  and  the  Defendants,  in  taking  off  the  Plaintiff's  hat, 
1  only  did  what  was  necessary  to  guard  against  interruption, 
'and  a  most  unseemly  exhibition  during  its  progress;  that  they 
'were  fully  entitled  to  do.'— (I  Saund.  13;  1  Sid.  301.).  See  also 
Cory  and  others  v.  Byron,  2  Curt.  396. 

Clergyman's  conduct. — In  addition  to  the  opinion  of  Lord 
Stowell,  (given  above),  it  is  stated  by  Cripps  : — 'As  to  the  cases 
'  in  which  Churchwardens  would  be  bound  to  present  the 
'  conduct  of  the  Parson,  we  may  give  as  examples, — if  he  should  be 
'irregular  in  the  performance  of  Divine  Service;  or  wilfully  alter 
'or  omit  any  part  thereof;  or  introduce  things  not  sanctioned  by 
'  the  Rubric;  or  refuse  or  neglect  to  perform  any  of  his  Parochial 
'  Duties,  as  Visiting  the  Sick,  Administering  the  Sacraments,  or 
'other  matters  of  like  nature;  also,  if  he  should  be  non-resident, 
'  without  such  licence  or  exemption  as  is  allowed  for  that  purpose, 
'  for  more  than  3  months,  either  together  or  accounted  at  several 
'  times  in  any  one  year  (by  1  &  2  Vict  c.  106.);  or  if  he  should  in 

'  any  manner  be  guilty  of  leading  an  immoral  or  irregular  life  

'  Churchwardens  are  also  to  see  that  Curates  are  duly  licensed 
'  and  approved  of  for  that  office;  and  that  no  strangers  preach  in 
'  the  Church,  unless  they  are  satisfied  that  they  are  in  Holy  Orders, 
'  and  duly  licensed  to  preach  by  the  Bishop.' — Laws  Rel.  to.  Ch.  and 
CI.  (p.  192.).  Canons  28.  48."o0. — But  the  stranger  presenting  his 
'Letters  of  Orders'  their  duty  ceases.    Rogers'  Ec.  L.  254. 

In  Bennett  v.  Bonaker  it  was  decided  that  the  Court  is  bound 
to  admit  Articles  by  a  Churchwarden  against  an  Incumbent 
for  frequent  irregularities  in  the  performance  of  Divine  Service, 
and  of  Parochial  Duties,  and  for  violence  in  the  Church- Yard. 
(2  Hagg.  25.)— Burns'  Eccl.  L.  Phil.  I.  399;  Stephens'  L.  Rel.  to 
CI.  244.    See  Canons  14.  21.  41.  45.  47.  59.  62.  66—69.  75.  122. 

Exceeding  their  Duty.— Although  Churchwarden's  have  power 
and  authority  to  interfere  in  preserving  order  and  decorum  during 
the  time  of  Divine  Service,  and  to  repress  all  indecent  interruption ; 


OHUECHWAEDENS'  DUTY  HEliEIN.  467 


yet  in  the  administration  of  the  Divine  Services,  even  if  the  Minister 
introduce  any  irregularity,  they  have  no  power  whatever  to  interfere. 
This,  (the  administration),  says  CRirps,  is  more  particularly  the 
immediate  province  of  the  Clergyman,  subject  to  the  control  of 
the  Ordinary,  So  that  in  Bute/tins  v.  Denziloe,  proceedings  were 
sustained  against  the  Churchwardens  for  interfering  to  obstruct 
and  prohibit  the  form  of  Singing,  &c,  which  had  been  authorized  by 
the  Officiating  Minister.  This  called  for  the  opinion  of  Lord 
Stowkll  on  the  precise  Duties  of  Churchwardens  given  above, 
and  which  he  prefaced  by  saying: — 'The  first  point  is,  whether 
'  these  Churchwardens  have  a  right  to  interfere  in  the  Service  of  the 
'  Church?  as  if  that  interference  is  legal  in  any  case,  it  is  so  in  the 
'present.  To  ascertain  this,  it  is  proper  to  consider  what  are  their 
'Duties;  and  I  conceive  that  originally,  &c.' — And  it  was  decided 
that  they  cannot  interfere  in  the  administration  of  the  Services, 
their  duty  herein  being  one  of  observation  and  complaint  only. — 
quoted  above,  page  465.  (1  Consist.  170.). 

Hats  removed. — It  was  decided  in  the  case  of  Hall  (or  Hawe)  v. 
Planner,  that  Churchwardens  may  justify  taking  off  the  Hat  of  a 
person  who  refuses,  upon  request,  to  do  it  himself.  And  so  long  as 
it  is  done  quietly  and  without  disturbance,  no  action  of  assault  can 
be  maintained  against  them.  (2  Keb.  124;  1  Lev.  197;  1  Saund.  1. 14; 
1  Sid.  301.  So  in  Glover  v.  Hind,  1  Mod.  168.).  Cripps,  192; 
Stephens'  Laws  Rel.  to  CI.  343;  C.  G.  Prideaux,  257.  In  the 
reign  of  Elizabeth,  and  in  succeeding  reigns,  it  was  by  no  means 
uncommon  for  men  to  sit  covered  during  divine  worship;  and  the 
practice  seems  to  have  increased  as  Puritanism  advanced.  In  a 
Work  of  that  age,  entitled  'Plea  of  the  Innocent;  we  read,  "the 
"custom  of  men's  sitting  uncovered  in  the  Church  is  certainly  very 
"  decent,  but  not  very  ancient."  See  Lathbuiiy's  Hist,  of  Book  of 
Com.  Prayer,  p.  117:  Caldwell's  Doc.  Annals,  ii.  203. 

Neglecting  Duty. — If  the  Churchwardens  omit  to  present,  they 
may  be  forced  to  do  it  by  the  Ordinary  in  his  Visitation,  on  his 
having  notice  of  the  thing;  and  when  "they  are  informed  by  the 
Minister,  or  Parishioners.  And  if  the  Churchwardens  refuse  so 
to  do,  they  may  be  proceeded  against  as  wilful  breakers  of  their 
oath,  or  solemn  declaration  (5  &  6  Will.  IV.  c.  62.  s.  9.),  and  in  the 
interim  be  barred  the  Communion  by  the  Minister  of  the  Parish. 
(Dr.  Prideaux,  3,  4;  C.  G.  Prid.  4th  ed.  273;  Burns'  Eccl.  L. 
Phil.  i.  408.  d.;  Rogers,  253;  Stephens'  Laws  Rel.  to  CI.  346.) 
Canons  26.  117. 

Parish- Clerks  {contending.) — It  was  decided  before  Baron 
Alderson  in  Burton  v.  Henson,  that  Churchwardens  were 
justified  in  preventing  a  person  who  had  been  wrongfully  dismissed 
by  the  Minister  from  the  Office  of  Parish-Clerk,  and  whose  place 
was  filled  by  a  Clerk  de  facto,  from  forcing  his  way  into  the 
Clerk's  seat  immediately  before  the  commencement  of  Divine 
Service;  and  in  turning'him  out  of  the  Church  on  his  persisting 
in  the  attempt.    (10  M.  &  W.  105.) 

In  the  case  of  Worth  v.  Terrington,  the  Plaintiff  wilfully 
and  contemptuously  came  into  the  Church  of  Walsokeu  during 
the  time  that  Divine  Servics  was  being  celebrated  therein,  and 

Q  G 


468  CHUHCHWABDENS'  DUTY  HEREIN. 


disturbed  the  same  and  the  Congregation  there,  by  wrongfully 
getting  into  the  Clerk's  Desk,  and  preventing  the  lawful  Clerk 
from  entering  therein;  and  by  making  loud  noises,  and  by  reading 
and  singing  in  a  loud,  noisy,  and  unbecoming  manner,  and  by 
otherwise  conducting  himself  in  an  indecent  and  irreverent  man- 
ner; whereupon  the  defendant  Terrington,  being  one  of  the 
Churchwardens,  for  the  preserving  of  due  decorum,  decency,  and 
reverence  in  the  Church,  and  for  removing  the  interruption  and 
disturbance  of  the  Congregation,  requested  the  Plaintiff  to  leave 
the  Desk,  and  to  cease  such  disturbance  &c. :  the  Plaintiff  refused. 
Wherefore  Terrington,  as  such  Churchwarden,  with  the  aid  of 
others,  gently  laid  their  hands  on  the  Plaintiff,  forced  him  out  of 
the  Desk,  and  turned  him  out  of  the  Church.  The  Plaintiff 
threatening  to  return  and  renew  the  disturbance,  they  imprisoned 
him,  and  kept  and  detained  him  so  imprisoned  for  a  reasonable 
time ;  to  wit,  2  hours.  Here  however  the  Churchwardens  were 
at  fault  for  detaining  him  in  custody  after  he  had  been  turned 
out.  (13  M.  &  W.  781;  14  L.  J.  Ex.  133.)  —  Stephens'  Laws  Rel. 
to  CI.  343;  C.  G.  Prideaux.  Chw.  Guide,  260.  n.  (See  also 
Williams  v.  Glenister,  3  B.  &.  C.  699;  4  D.  &  R.  217.  S.  C.) 

Seats  Disputed.  —  In  the  case  of  Reynolds  t. 
Monchton  (a.  d.  1841),  two  parties  laid  claim  to  a  Pew  ;  the  one  by 
custom  and  prescription,  the  other  because  it  had  been  assigned  to 
him  by  the  Churchwardens:  and  it  appears  that  on  a  Sunday, 
when  the  Congregation  were  assembling,  and  before  the  Officiating 
Minister  had  entered,  the  first  of  these  claimants  had  taken  his 
seat  in  the  Pew  :  the  Churchwarden  desired  him  to  leave  it;  and 
on  his  refusal,  laid  his  hand  on  him  to  turn  him  out,  but  he  rose 
and  walked  out.  There  was  contradictory  evidence  as  to  the 
amount  of  violence  actually  used:  wherefore  Mr.  Baron  Rolfe, 
in  summing  up,  thus  expressed  himself:  — '  I  think  that  the 
'Churchwardens  have  a  right  to  exercise  a  reasonable  dis- 
'  cretion  in  directing  where  the  Congregation  shall  sit :  and  if 
'the  Defendant  (the  Churchwarden)  used  no  unnecessary  force, 
'  he  had  a  right  to  remove  the  Plaintiff  from  the  Pew  in  question 
'  to  another  Seat.  If,  in  the  exercise  of  a  fair  discretion,  the 
'  Churchwardens  thought  it  more  convenient,  that  the  Pew 
'  should  be  occupied  by  Gaylard's  family,  and  not  by  the  Plaintiff, 
'  and  if  the  removal  could  be  effected  without  public  scandal,  or 
'the  Disturbance  of  Divine  Service,  the  Defendant  was  justified. 
'  You  are  to  say  whether  any  unnecessary  violence  was  used.' — 
The  Jury,  however,  considered  that  unnecessary  violence  had  been 
used,  and  returned  their  verdict  for  the  Plaintiff,  the  party  ejected 
from  the  Pew,  and  who  had  brought  the  action  against  the 
Churchwardens  for  an  assault.  (2  M.  &  R.  384.).  —  Cripps,  192; 
Stephens'  Stat.  338. 

Sidesmen  are  as  liable  as  Churchwardens  for  neg- 
lect of  duty,  or  for  exceeding  their  authority;  as  was  decided  in 
the  case  of  Palmer  v.  Tijou ;  where  the  Defendant  (a  Sidesman) 
was  convicted  of  '  brawling '  in  the  Church.  He  was  in  conse- 
quence suspended,  and  condemned  in  the  sum  of  £50.  no-mine 
expensarum  ;  the  prosecutor  in  this  case  not  being  entitled  to  his 
full  costs.   (2  Add.  196.). 


DISTURBING  THE  SEBVICES. 


4G0 


When  no  Service.  —  'It  is  very  questionable,'  says 
Pkideaux,  '  whether  a  Churchwarden  has  the  right,  by  virtue 
'  of  his  office,  to  turn  a  person  out  of  the  Church  or  Churchyard 
'  for  misconduct,  at  a  time  when  no  Service  of  the  Church  is  going 
'on.  In  a  very  recent  case,  the  Court  of  Exchequer  expressed  an 
'opinion  that  a  Churchwarden  had  no  such  inherent  right,  and 
'that  he  could  only  justify  such  an  act  under  the  Rector  as  free- 
'  holder,  and  after  a  request  to  the  party  to  leave.'  (See  Worth  v. 
Terrington,  14  L.  J.  Ex.  133.)  —  C.  G.  Prideaux  Chw.  Guide, 
260.  n. 

Rogers  says  — 1  It  would  seem,  however,  that  of  their  own 
'  authority,  Churchwardens  might  remove  any  person  in  order 
'to  prevent  him  from  defacing  or  otherwise  damaging  the  Divine 
'  Edifice,  or  the  Ornaments  therein,  or  the  other  property  of  the 
'  Parishioners  there ;  or  if  any  person  were  committing  a  nuisance, 
'  or  interrupting  or  disturbing  any  Service  therein.'  —  Eccl.  Law. 
253.  n. 

Stephens  adds,  in  his  reference  to  the  case  of  Worth  v. 
Terrington,  —  '  It  seemed  to  be  doubted  whether  a  Churchwarden 
'  has  authority,  as  such,  to  turn  out  of  the  Church  a  person  who 
'  commits  a  trespass  therein  upon  a  Week-day,  or  when  Service  is 
'  not  going  on,  or  about  to  commence ;  or  whether  he  ought  not  to 
'justify  under  the  Rector.'— Laws  Rel.  to  CI.  344. 


Constable' s  Authority. 

242. — The  authority  of  the  Constable  does  not  in  a  Church 
or  Church-yard  supersede  that  which  the  Churchwardens  possess. 

Sir  John  Nicholls  says  that  in  their  Church,  the  authority 
of  the  Churchwardens  is  '  paramount  to  the  authority  of  any 
'  Constable ;  and  it  must  be  a  very  strong  case  indeed  which  will 
'justify  a  Constable  in  inverting  this  order  of  authority  by  taking 
•  a  Churchwarden  or  a  Sidesman  into  custody,  although  possible 
'circumstances  may  justify  and  require  such  a  proceeding.'  —  (In 
Palmer  v.  Tijou.  2  Add.  200.) 


Disturbing    the  Services. 

243. — The  Chtjechwaedens  and  Sidesmen,  as 
observed  under  '  Brawling,'  are  bound  by  their  office  to 
attend  the  Church  for  the  purpose  of  preserving  Order 
and  Decorum;  and  in  the  execution  of  this  duty 
they  are  protected  by  the  law.  They  are  to  cause  the 
idle  and  the  disorderly  in  the  Chuecii-yabd,  or 
Chuech-porch,  to  come  in,  or  to  depart.  (Canon  19.). 
They  may  take  off  a  man's  hat  in  Church  ;  and  turn 

G  G  2 


470 


DISTURBING   THE  SEEVICES. 


any  one  out  of  the  Chuech,  and  Chubch-yaed,  who 
disturbs  the  Minister  or  Congregation;  and  if  no 
unnecessary  violence  be  used,  they  are  not  guilty  of 
an  assault.  If  the  Chtjechwabdens  are  not  present, 
or  being  present  do  not  repress  any  indecency,  they 
desert  their  proper  duty.  (Lobd  Stowell,  in  2  Con- 
sist. 141.) — Rogees'  Ec.  L.  837. 

244. — A  Disturber  is  to  be  taken  before  a  Justice 
of  the  Peace,  and  if  the  case  is  proved  against  him  at 
the  Quarter  Sessions  he  incurs  a  penalty  of  £20.  by 
'  the  Toleration  Act '  (1  Will.  Sf  Ma.  c.  18.  s.  18.) ;  and 
£40.  by  52  Geo.  III.  c.  155.  — A  reprimand  from  the 
Bench  of  Magistrates  will  sometimes  be  a  sufficient 
correction  without  taking  the  case  to  the  Quarter 
Sessions ;  as  that  will  mulct  the  offender  in  a  certain 
amount  of  costs. 

'  If  any  person  or  persons  shall  willingly  and  of  purpose 

'  maliciously  or  contemptuously  come  into  any  Cathedral  or 

'  Parish  Church,  Chapel,  or  other  Congregation  and  diiquiet 

'  or  disturb  the  same,  or  misuse  any  Preacher  or  Teacher,  such 
'  person  or  persons,  upon  proof  thereof  before  any  Justice  of 
'  Peace,  by  two  or  more  sufficient  wityiesses,  shall  find  two  sureties 
'  to  be  bound  by  recognizance  in  the  penal  sum  of  £50.,  and  in 
'  default  of  such  sureties  shall  be  committed  to  prison,  there  to 
'remain  till  the  next  General  or  Quarter  Sessions;  and  upon 

'  conviction  of  the  said  offence  shall  suffer  the  pain  and 

'  penalty  of  £20.'— 1  Will.  &  Ma.  c.  18.  i.  18.  A.  D.  1688. 

Mr.  Oke  says:  — '  By  the  Statutes,  1  Will.  &  Ma.  e.  18.  *.  18., 
'and  52  Geo.  III.  c.  155.  s.  12,  on  proof  of  the  offence  committed 
'  either  in  a  Church,  or  a  Dissenting  Chapel,  before  any  Justice 
'  by  two  or  more  credible  witnesses,  the  Offender  is  to  find  two 
'  sureties,  to  be  bound  by  recognizances  in  the  penal  sum  of  £50., 
'  to  answer  for  the  offence,  and  in  default  to  be  committed  to  prison 
'  till  the  next  General  or  Quarter  Sessions.  The  Depositions  should 
'  be  taken  in  the  ordinary  way,  and  transmitted  to  the  Sessions  with 
'  the  prosecutors  recognizances.'  (/>.  717). — Mag.  Synopsis.  6th  Ed. 
1858. 

*,*  An  indictment  upon  this  Statute  may  be  removed  into  the 
Court  of  Queen's  Bench  by  certiorari  before  verdict;  and  upon 
conviction  of  several  defendants,  each  is  liable  to  the  Penalty  of 
£20.;  as  decided  in  the  case  of  Rex  v.  Hube,  and  others  (5  T.  K. 
542;  Stra.  914.).  —  Bukns'  E.  L.  Phil.  IIL  435;  Stephens'  Lawi 
Rel.  to  CI.  1102.  See  also  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  s.  2:  1  Mart,  Sess. 
2.  c.  3.  is.  2,  3 :  1  Etiz.  c.  2.  s.  9. 

The  Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Tait),  in  answer  to  the  Vestry 
Clerk  of  the  Parish  of  St.  George's  in  the  East  requesting  the  Bishop 
to  advise  how  the  continual  disturbances  in  that  Church  during 


DISTURBING  THE  SERVICES. 


171 


the  Litany  afternoon  Service  could  be  put  a  stop  to,  thus  writes: — 
'  You  are  aware  that  two  parties  in  this  dispute  have  invoked 
'  my  aid.  1st.  I  am  informed,  on  the  part  of  the  Rector  (the 
'  Rev.  Bryan  King),  that  the  Parish  Church  is  desecrated  by 
'  disorderly  persons,  the  Public  Worship  of  God  interrupted,  and 
'  the  Rector  or  other  Officiating  Minister,  with  the  Choristers, 
'  habitually  insulted  during  or  after  Divine  Service.  No  language 
'  can  be  too  strong  to  express  the  abhorrence  with  which  all  persons 
'  of  any  true  Christian  feeling  must  regard  such  outrages,  if  they 
'  really  take  place,  as  is  not  denied.  It  is  the  grossest  self-deceit 
'  to  suppose  that  they  can  be  justified  by  any  provocation  which  the 
'  Rector's  Choral  Service  or  unusual  habiliments  may  have  given. 
'  But  what  is  the  legal  remedy  for  these  disturbances  ?  It  is 
'  that  to  which  I  have  had  recourse.  I  have  required  the  Church- 
'  wardens  to  be  present  at  the  Service  in  which  the  riotous 
'  proceedings  complained  of  are  alleged  to  take  place,  and  to 
'  exercise  the  powers  inherent  in  their  Office  for  the  suppression 
'  of  disorder.  These  powers  are  well  defined  by  Statute  1  William 
'&  Mary,  chap.  18.,  sect.  18:'  —  (as  cited  above).  'At  Common 
'  Law  a  person  disturbing  Divine  Service  may  be  removed  by 
'  any  other  person  there  present,  but  the  duty  of  maintaining 
'  order  lies  especially  on  the  Churchwardens.  If  they  are  absent, 
'or  being  present  do  uot  repress  disorder  they  neglect  their  duty. 
'  I  grant  that  the  performance  of  their  duty  in  the  present  instance 
'  is  difficult,  but  the  Law  seems  to  point  out  with  sufficient 
'  distinctness  how  they  ought  to  act.  The  Rector,  as  I  learn 
'  from  the  report  of  '  the  Committee  of  Vestry,  has  formally 
'  intimated  to  the  Churchwardens  that  he  will  hold  them 
'  responsible  to  an  Ecclesiastical  Court  for  the  performance  of 
'  their  duty  above  described,  and  they  are  certainly  so  responsible. 
'  The  Committee  of  Vestry  is  of  opinion  that  they  are  most 
'  assiduous  in  the  performance  of  their  duty,  and  I  shall  be  truly 
'  glad  to  find  that  this  is  so.  This  is  the  strict  Legal  aspect  of 
'  the  case,  as  regards  the  complaint  on  the  Rector's  part  respecting 
'  the  alleged  disturbance  of  Public  Worship,  and  as  regards  the 
'  remedy  which  ought  to  be  applied.'— ...The  Times,  Feb.  7th,  1859. 

245. — Dissenters'  Meeting  Houses  are  also  compre- 
hended in  the  above  Statute  (1  Will  Sf  Ma.  c.  18.),  as 
well  as  in  the  52  Geo.  III.  c.  155.  which  follows  : — 

'  If  any  person  or  persons  do  and  shall  wilfully,  and 

'  maliciously,  or  contemptuously,  disquiet  or  disturb  any  Meeting, 
'  Assembly,  or  Congregation  of  persons  assembled  for  religious 

'  Worship,  or  shall  in  any  way  disturb,  molest,  or  misuse  any 

'  Preacher,  Teacher,  or  person  Officiating  at  such  Meeting, 
'Assembly,  or  Congregation,  or  any  person  or  persons  there 
'  assembled,  such  person  or  persons  so  offending,  upon  proof 
'  thereof  before  any  Justice  of  the  Peace  by  two  or  more  credible 
'  witnesses,  shall  find  two  sureties  to  be  bound  by  recognizances 
'  in  the  penal  sum  of  £50.  to  answer  for  such  offence,  and  in 
'  default  of  such  sureties  shall  be  committed  to  prison,  there  to 
'remain  till  the  next  General  or  Quarter  Sessions,  and  upon 

'  conviction  of  the  said  offence  shall  suffer  the  pain  and 

'penalty  of  £40.'  — 52  Geo.  III.  c.  155.  s.  12.   To  be  levied  by 


472 


IBEEGTJLAEITIES. 


distress,  half  to  the  Informer,  and  half  to  the  Poor  of  the  Parish : 

if  no  distress,  committal  for  any  period  not  exceeding  3  months 
Sect.  15.).  The  penalty  must  be  sued  for  within  6  montlts 
Sect.  17.);  and  the  action  commenced  within  3  months  after  the 

offence  shall  have  been  committed.)    {Sect.  18.). 

*»*  This  provision  of  the  52  Geo.  III.  c.  155.  s.  12.  is  not 

applicable  to  Churches  or  Chapels  of  the  Church  of  England. 

(Carr.  v.  Marsh,  2  Phill.  203;  14  J.  P.  62.) 

246.  — Soman  Catholic  Places  of  Worship  are  simi- 
larly protected,  and  with  the  like  penalty,  bv  31  Geo. 
III.  c.  32.  s.  10.  (Burns'  E.  L.  Phil.  in.  435.) 

247.  — These  Statutes  are  confirmed  by  9  &  10  Vict, 
c.  59.  which  extends  them  to  Jews  and  all  other  lawful 
Congregations :  thus  : — 

'All  laws  against  the  wilfully,  and  maliciously,  or  contemp- 
'  tuously  disquietiny  or  disturbing  any  Meeting,  Assembly,  or 
'  Congregation  of  persons  assembled  for  religious  Worship,  per- 
'  mitted  or  authorized  by  any  former  Act  or  Acts  of  Parliament, 
'  or  the  disturbing,  molesting,  or  misusing  any  Preacher,  Teacher, 
'  or  person  Officiating  at  such  Meeting,  Assembly,  or  Congrega- 
'  tion,  or  any  person  or  persons  there  assembled,  shall  apply 
'  respectively  to  all  Meetings,  Assemblies,  or  Congregations  what- 
'  soever  of  persons  lawfully  assembled  for  religious  Worship,  and 
'the  Preachers,  Teachers,  or  Persons  Officiating  at  such  last 
'mentioned  Meetings,  Assemblies,  or  Congregations,  and  the 
'persons  there  assembled.' — Sect.  4.  (See  also  15  &  16  Vict.  c.  36). 

248.  — If  the  Chtjechwabdens  are  absent,  or  neg- 
lect to  prevent  disturbance,  any  person  by  Common 
Law  is  justified  in  interfering,  and  laying  hands  on  the 
Disturber  to  remove  him.    This  was  decided  in  the 

case  of  Glever  v.  Hynde  (Glover  v.  Bind),  where  it  was  declared 
by  the  Court,  'that  at  Common  law,  a  person  disturbing  Divine 
Service  might  be  removed  by  any  other  person  there  present,  as 
being  all  concerned  in  the  Service  of  God  that  was  then  perform- 
ing; so  that  the  Disturber  was  a  nuisance  to  them  all,  and  might 
be  removed  by  the  same  rule  of  law  that  allows  a  man  to  abate 
a  nuisance.'  (1  Mod.  168.).  An  Officiating  Minister  is  therefore 
justified  in  taking  measures  to  prevent  the  disturbance  of 
the  Congregation  bv  any  one  during  the  time  of  Divine  Service 
(Burns'  Eccl.  L.  Pliil.  iii.  434:  Cripi>s'  Laws  Rel.  to  Ch.  and  CI. 
613;  Rogers'  E.  L  837;  Steers'  Par.  Law.  Clive  43;  184).— 
See  also  Edgcomb.  v.  Rood.  5  East  294;  R.  v.  Wadley.  4  M.  &  S. 
508;  R.  v.  Wroughton  and  others.  3  Burr.  1683. 


Irregularities . 

249. — If  Irregularities  are  introduced  by  the  Offi- 
ciating Ministee  in  the  performance  of  the  Divine 


MOLESTING  OFFICIATING  MINISTER.  473 


Services,  the  Churchwardens  have  no  right  or  authority 
to  interfere,  but  they  are  to  complain  to  the  Ordinary, 
by  presentment.  (Kutchins  v.  Denziloe:  1  Consist. 
170;  Bennet  v.  Bonaker  (or  Boroker)  2  Hagg  25.) 
Any  person  indeed  may  promote  a  suit  in  the  Eccle- 
siastical Court,  and  exhibit  articles  against  a  Clergy- 
man for  criminal  neglect  or  irregularity  or  for  any 
Ecclesiastical  offences.  (2  Lee.  515.  Eogers  269; 
Stephens'  L.  Bel.  to  CI.  344).  See  Churchwardens' 
Duty,  (above,  p.  413.  and  the  Bishop  of  London's 
letter,  par.  244. 

Letters    of  Bequest. 

250. — A  suit  for  '  Brawling'  in  the  Church  brought  before  the 
Commissary  of  the  Bishop  may  be  removed  by  Letters  of  Request 
into  the  court  of  Arches.  {Dawe  v.  Williams  2.  Add.  140;  Exp. 
Williams  4  B.  &  C.  315;  Wenmouth  v.  Collins  2  Lord  Ray.  850.) 
—Rogers  116;  Stephens'  L.  Rel.  to  CI.  480. 

Loiter  er  s. 

251.  — Loiterers  and  Ldlers  are  to  be  removed  by 
the  Churchwardens  from  the  Church-Porch,  and 
Church-yard,  by  Canon  19. — {Seepage  423.) 

Molesting    the    Officiating    Minister . 

252.  — Interrupting  the  Officiating  Minister  in 
the  performance  of  the  Divine  Offices  is  not  only  re- 
strained by  the  Statutes  against  '  Brawling,'  and  '  Dis- 
turbing,' as  given  above,  but  there  are  especial  clauses 
in  other  Enactments  against  Molesting  or  Misusing  a 
Minister  while  exercising  his  Clerical  function. 

253.  — By  the  Act  of  Uniformity  2  &  3  JEdw.  VI.  c. 
1.  (a.  d.  1548.),  which  is  still  in  force,  the  penalty  for 
interrupting  or  molesting  a  Minister  is  £10  for  the 
first  offence ;  £20  for  the  second  offence ;  and  for- 


474  MOLESTING  OFFICIATING  MINISTER. 


feiture  of  goods  and  chattels,  and  imprisonment  for 

life  for  the  third  offence  ; — thus 

'  It  is  ordained  and  enacted  that  if  any  person  or  persons 

'  whatsoever  shall  unlawfully  interrupt  or  let  any  Parson 

'  Vicar,  or  other  Ministers  in  any  Cathedral,  or  Parish  Church, 
'  Chapel,  or  any  other  place,  to  sing  or  say  Common  and  open 
'  Prayer,  or  to  minister  the  Sacraments,  or  any  of  them,  in  any 
'such  manner  and  form  as  is  mentioned  in  the  said  Book;  that 

'  then  every  person  being  thereof  lawfully  convicted  shall 

'forfeit  for  the  first  offence  £10,  for  the  second,  £20;  

'  and  for  his  third  offence  forfeit  all  his  goods  and  chattels, 

'  and  shall  suffer  imprisonment  during  his  life.'  2  &  3  Edw.  VI. 

c.  1.  s.  2. —  If  the  £10  is  not  paid  within  6  weeks,  the  defaulter  is 

to  suffer  3  months  imprisonment ;  if  the  £20  is  not  paid  within 

6  weeks,  6  mouths  imprisonment,  (ib.  Sect.  2). 

254.— A  like  restraint  is  imposed  by  the  Statute,  1 
Mar.  Sess.  n.  c.  3.  (a.  d.  1553) ;  but  the  punishment  is 
3  months  imprisonment  for  offending  herein,  thus  : — 

1  Be  it  enacted  that  if  any  person  or  persons  do  or 

'  shall  willingly  and  of  purpose,  by  open  and  overt  word,  fact, 
'  act,  or  deed,  maliciously  or  contemptuously  molest,  let,  disturb, 
'  vex,  or  trouble,  or  by  any  other  unlawful  ways  or  means  disquiet 

'  or  misuse  any  Preacher  or  Preachers  in  any  of  his  or  their 

'  open  Sermon,  Preaching,  or  Collation,  that  he  or  they  shall 
'make,  declare,  preach,  or  pronounce  in  any  Church,  Chapel, 
4  Churchyard,  or  in  any  other  place  or  places,  used,  frequented, 

!  or  appointed  or  any  Parson,  Vicar,  Parish-Priest,  or  Curate, 

'  or  any  lawful  Priest  preparing,  saying,  doing,  singins,  minis- 
'  tering,  or  celebrating  the  Mass,  or  other  such  (',*)  Divine 

'  Service,  Sacraments,  or   Sacramentals,    &c  every  such 

'offender  and  offenders  in  any  the  premises,  his  or  their  aider, 

'  procurer,  or  abettor  immediately  and  forthwith  or  any 

'  time  or  times  after  shall  be  apprehended  by  any  Constable 

'  Churchwarden  of  the  Parish  or  place  or  by  any 

'  other  person  or  persons  then  being  present  and  carried 

'  to  any  Justice  of  the  Peace,  &c.'   And  if  found  guilty  on  proof 
of  two  witnesses,  or  on  confession,  to  be  imprisoned  for  3  months  ; 
at  the  expiration  of  which  the  offender  is  to  provide  sureties  at 
the  next  Quarter  Sessions  for  his  good  behaviour  in  this  respect 
for  the  future,  {Sects.  2 — 6.)  or  the  offender  may  be  indited. 
And   persons   willingly   and    unlawfully   rescuing  offenders 
apprehended,  or  hindering  them  from  being  apprehended,  is 
subject  to  a  like  imprisonment,  and  further  a  fine  of  £5.  {s.  7.); 
recovered  by  distress  (11  &  12  Vict.  c.  43.  ss.  19.  22.).  Informa- 
tions under  the  Statute  1  Mary  Sess.  2.  must  be  laid  within 
six  calendar  months  (11  &  12  Vict.  c.  43.  s.  11.).    See  Okes' 
Magislr.  Synopsis,  p.  25.  6th  Edit.  A.  D.  1858. 
*t*  By  the  term  '  other  such  Divine  Service '  (in  Sect.  2.  above 
quoted)  it  was  decided  in  Paul  Moons  case  that  it  'extended  to 
'the  Divine  Service  now  established,  and  that  the  word  'such' 
'  hath  not  reference  to  the  manner  or  quality  of  the  Service,  but  to 
'  the  authority  establishing  it.'    {Jon.  {Sir  7\)  159.  see  also  1 
Bank.  140.). 


OBDEB  AT  MABBIAGE  SEBVICE.  475 


By  the  Act  of  Uniformity,  1  Eliz.  c.  2.  (a.d.  1558.), 
the  offender  is  liable  to  a  penalty  of  100  marks,  for 
the  First  offence  ;  400  marks,  for  the  Second  offence ; 
and  the  forfeiture  of  all  his  goods  and  chattels,  and 
imprisonment  for  life,  for  the  Third  offence. — 

'  If  any  person  or  persons  shall  unlawfully  interrupt  or  let 

'any  Parson,  Vicar,  or  other  Minister  in  any  Cathedral,  or  Parish 
'  Church,  Chapel,  or  any  other  place,  to  sing  or  say  Common  and 
'  open  Prayer,  or  to  minister  the  Sacraments,  or  any  of  them, 
'  in  such  manner  and  form  as  is  mentioned  in  the  said  Book;  that 

'then  every  such  person,  being  thereof  lawfully  convicted  

'shall  forfeit  for  the  first  offence,  100  Marks  for  the  second 

'  offence,  400  Marks  for  his  third  offence,  shall  forfeit  to  our 

'Sovereign  Lady  the  Queen,  all  his  goods  and  chattels,  and  shall 
'  suffer  imprison  me n:  duriuy  his  life.' — [Sects.  9, 10,  11.)  In  default 
of  payment  within  6  weeks  the  offender  shall  suffer  6  months 
imprisonment  for  the  first  offence;  and  12  months  imprisonment 
for  the  second  offence.— (Sects.  12, 13.)  See  also  under  '  Brawling,' 
'  Disturbing,'  '  Smiting.' 

Marriage  Service. 

255. — There  are  several  circumstances  connected 
with  the  Marriage  Service  which  are  occasionally  pro- 
ductive of  interruption  to  the  Officiating  Minister, 
and  sometimes  of  disturbance  to  the  Congregation, 
during  the  time  of  Divine  Worship.  We  will  speak 
of  the  cases  that  are  of  more  common  occurrence. 

I.  Forbidding  the  Banns. — Banns  of  Maeeiage 
are  required  by  Act  of  Parliament  (4  Geo.  IV.  c.  76.  s.  2.,  whence 
the  present  form  of  the  Rubric  is  derived)  to  be  published  after  the 
'Second  Lesson'  in  the  Morning  Service  (or  in  the  Evening  Service 
where  there  is  no  Morning  Service)  for  three  successive  Sundays. 
Should  any  one  proclaim  immediately  after  either  publication  '/ 
forbid  the  Banns,'  no  discussion  is  then  to  be  entered  into,  but  the 
Officiating  Minister  is  simply  to  direct  the  party  to  'state  the 
cause  or  impediment  after  Divine  Service,'  and  then  to  proceed  with 
his  'Duty.'  At  the  close  of  the  Service,  the  Minister  will  call  the 
party  into  the  Vestry  Room,  and  require  them  to  certify  in  writing 
the  ground  of  their  prohibition,  which  they  are  to  attest  with  their 
signatures.  Any  altercation  during  Divine  Service  will  expose  the 
party  so  offending  to  the  charge  of  'Brawling,'  or  'Disturbing  Public 
Worship.'  (See  supra.).  It  is  usual,  however,  when  such  a 
proceeding  is  contemplated  to  apprize  the  Officiating  Minister 


476  MAKEIED  IN  MOBNING  SEEVICE 


before  the  Service  commences;  who  will  then  instruct  the  party  in 
the  steps  to  be  taken ;  and  be  prepared  to  receive  the  '  prohibition ' 
without  interruption  to  the  Service,  or  disturbance  of  the 
Congregation.  With  respect  to  the  legality  of  the  objection,  and 
the  proceedings  in  connexion  therewith,  those  will  be  subjects  for 
future  discussion  when  we  come  to  treat  upon  the  Laws  of  the 
Marriage  Service. 

256. — II.  Demanding  to  be  Married  in  the  time  of 
Morning  Service. — It  is  possible  that  the  Officiating  Minister 
may  be  called  upon  to  perform  the  Marriage  Ceremony  immediately 
after  the  third  publication  of  the  Banus,  and  during  the  time  of 
Morning  Service.  To  this  there  may  be  an  objection  on  the  part  of 
the  Minister,  as  well  as  on  the  part  of  the  Congregation ;  yet  the 
law  will  not  admit  of  a  refusal;  in  fact,  the  62nd  Canon  especially 
enjoins  the  solemnization  of  Matrimony  during  the  time  of  Divine 
Service; — and  the  Clergyman  who  resists  the  application  runs  the 
hazard  of  an  action  at  law. — The  Canon  runs  thus: — 

'  Neither  shall  any  Minister,  upon  the  like  pain,  under  any 

'pretence  whatsoever, join  any  persons  so  licensed  in  Marriage  at 
'  any  unseasonable  times,  but  only  between  the  hours  of  8  and  12 
'  in  the  forenoon,  nor  in  any  private  place,  but  either  in  the  said 
'  Churches  or  Chapels  where  one  of  them  dwelleth,  and  likewise 
'  in  the  time  of  Divine  Service  ' — Canon  62. 

%*  It  is  necessary  to  refer  to  the  Latin  Original  of  this  clause 
of  the  Canon  in  order  to  obtain  a  correct  view  of  its  meaning:  and 
perhaps  the  annexed  comments  of  Archdeacon  Sharp  may  serve 
to  elucidate  the  point. — 

Archdeacon  Sharp  observes: — 'Wbereas  it  is  here  said,  that 
'"no  Minister  shall  join  any  persons,  so  licensed,  in  Marriage;" 
'  the  Latin  hath  it,  'Neque  ullus  Minister  inter  quaslibet  personal 
'  (quantumvis  ejusmodifncnltatem  seu  indulgentiam  habentes)  quocunqite 
1  prcetextu  3Iatrimonium  solemnizabit.'  And  the  quantumvis,  with 
'  what  follows  relating  to  a  licence,  is  included  in  a  parenthesis.  So 
'  that  the  plain  meaning  is,  that  he  shall  join  no  persons  whatsoever 
'  in  Marriage,  (notwithstanding  some  of  them  be  licensed),  but  on 

'  the  following  conditions,  one  of  which  conditions  is  that  they 

'  be  solemnized  in  time  of  Divine  Service,  (p.  217.  218.)  'Tempore 

'  precum  publicarum'  says  the  Latin  Canon.  What  shall  we  say  to 
'this?  All  the  Constitutions  are  full  aud  express,  that  Marriage 
'  ought  ever  to  be  performed  in  facie  ecclesice,  in  conspectu  populi, 
'  openly  and  publicly  as  may  be,  for  the  greater  notoriety  and 
'  stronger  testimony  of  the  thing  itself,  as  well  as  for  the  greater 
'  solemnity  of  the  performance  of  the  sacred  rite.  Our  Liturgies 
'  always  presume  it  to  be  so  performed,  and  mention  is  made  in  the 
1  Office,  as  it  stands  both  in  the  old  and  in  the  present  Prayer 
'  Books,  of  a  Sermon,  as  well  as  of  a  Communion,  at  the  time  of 
'  Marriage.  Nay,  what  is  more  remarkable,  the  Licences  do  all 
'  presume  upon  it  too.  (p.  220.)  But  now  if  these  manifold 


MARRIES  IN  MORNING  SERVICE.  477 


'  directions  aro  generally  so  executed,  that  the  Marriage  can  neither 
'  bo  said  to  have  been  done  in  the  face  of  the  Church,  nor  in  the 
'  sight  of  the  Congregation,  nor  in  time  of  Divine  Service,  and 
'  therefore  cannot  properly  be  said  to  be  celebrated,  or  solemnized; 
'  if,  instead  of  being  performed  openly  and  publicly,  it  is  industriously 
'  contrived  to  be  transacted  in  the  most  secret  and  clandestine 
'manner;  and  the  Church  itself,  which  should  be  opened  during 
'  all  Divine  Offices,  is  made  on  these  occasions  the  most  private, 
'guarded,  and  inaccessible  recess,  perhaps,  in  the  whole  Parish; 
'  surely  there  must  appear  a  strange  dissonancy  and  contrariety 
'  between  prescription  and  practice.  Nor  will  it  seem  an  easy 
'matter  to  account  for  so  general  a  deviation  from  rule.  (p.  221.)... 
'  Well  then,  what  have  the  Clergy  to  say  for  themselves  upon 
'  this  Article,  of  not  solemnizing  Marriages  publicly,  and  in  time 
'  of  Divine  Service,  as  the  Canons  enjoin,  and  especially  in  cases 
'of  Licences,  which  enjoin  the  public  solemnization  as  well  as 
'the  Canons?'  {p.  224.)— On  the  Rubrics  and  Canons.  Charge, 
A.D.  1747. 

Wheatly  (ob.  1742),  speaking  of  Marriages,  says: — 'By  the 
'  62nd  Canon  they  are  ordered  to  be  performed  in  time  of  Divine 
'  Service,  but  that  practice  is  now  almost,  by  universal  consent, 
'laid  aside  and  discontinued.'  (p.  391.)— Rat.  III.  of  B.  of  ft  P. 
Archdeacon  Sharp,  in  quoting  this  remark  of  Wheatly's, 
adds: — 'It  would  have  been  more  satisfactory  to  have  given  some 
'  good  reason  why  it  is  so.' — On  Rubrics  and  Canons,  p.  221. 

257.  — Yet,  when  we  find  an  Archbishop  of  our  own 
time  recommending  an  Officiating  Minister  to  refuse  to  perform 
the  Marriage  Ceremony  during  the  Morning  Service  in  which 
Banns  have  been  published  the  third  time,  the  question  becomes 
doubtful  and  perplexing;  although  the  dictum  of  an  Archbishop, 
notwithstanding  it  may  accord  with  the  general  feeling,  or  with 
customary  usage,  cannot  set  aside  the  requirements  of  the  Canons 
of  the  Church,  nor  impose  a  prohibition  not  sanctioned  by  the 
temporal  law.  On  the  authority  of  Mr.  Robertson's  Work  'How 
shall  toe  Conform  to  the  Liturgy'  {p.  255.),  we  quote  the  following 
observation  of  the  late  Abp.  of  Canterbury  {Dr.  Howley). 

'A  Clergyman  is  not  at  liberty  to  marry  a  couple  during 
'  the  same  Service  in  which  the  Banns  are  asked  for  the  third 
'time.'— {Letter  from  the  Abp.  of  Canterbury  to  a  Clergyman  of 
his  Grace's  Diocese,  1841.). 

258.  — It  may  be  added,  that  when  an  Officiating 
Minister  is  called  upon  to  perform  the  Marriage  Office  in  the 
time  of  Morning  Prayer,  intimation  must  be  given  before  the 
commencement  of  Divine  Service;  otherwise  the  demand  made 
immediately  after  the  publication  of  the  Banns  for  the  third  time, 
is  an  offence  under  the  Statutes  against  'Brawling,'  and  'Disturbing 
Public  Worship'  (See  supra);  and  may  then  be  refused.   It  is 


478  LEVITT   AT  MABBIA.GE  SERVICE. 


not  often,  however,  that  such  an  unusual  request  is  made;  and, 
generally  speaking,  when  it  is  preferred,  there  are  imperative 
circumstances  affecting  the  parties  concerned  which  will  most 
probably  prevail  with  the  Officiating  Clergyman  to  depart  from 
the  ordinary  usage,  and  yield  to  the  request. 

259.  — III.  Forbidding  ike  Marriage. — This  is  pro- 
vided for  by  the  Rubric  in  the  'Marriage  Service;'  and  the  injunc- 
tions there  given  should  be  adhered  to  by  the  Officiating  Minister 
with  scrupulous  particularity  in  order  to  his  own  security.  When 
the  Marriage  is  forbidden,  the  Ceremony  should  of  course  be 
immediately  suspended,  as  directed  in  the  Rubric,  which  says: — 
'  the  Solemnization  must  be  deferred  until  such  time  as  the  truth 
be  tried.'  The  allegations  in  prohibition  of  the  Marriage  are  to 
be  taken  down  in  writing  in  proper  form;  in  the  mean  while  no 
'  brawling'  or  quarrelling  is  to  be  permitted  within  the  precincts 
of  the  Church,  or  the  parties  become  amenable  to  the  Statute 
against  'Brawling.'  3  &  4  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.  (See  supra;  and  the 
'  Marriage  Service,'  postea.). 

260.  — IV.  Irreverence,  and  Levity. — It  is  much  to 
be  lamented  that  many  of  the  poorer  classes  are  to  be  found  who  seem 
incapable  of  recognizing  the  'holy  estate  of  Matrimony,'  and  of 
regarding  with  any  degree  of  religious  feeling  the  Marriage  Service 
of  the  Church  of  England.  The  irreverence  and  levity  sometimes 
exhibited  during  the  performance  of  this  Ceremony  by  one  or  other 
of  the  Wedding  party,  or  of  the  Congregation  then  especially 
assembled,  often  call  for  the  after  rebuke  of  the  Officiating 
Minister;  and  there  are  indeed  some  instances  when  he  may  be 
compelled  to  shut  the  Service-Book,  and  defer  marrying  the  couple 
to  a  later  hour,  or  perhaps  to  the  following  day,  in  order  that  they 
may  become  sensible  that  our  Marriage  Service  is  not  a  merely 
secular  matter,  but  Divine  worship;  and  that  therefore  it  requires 
some  seriousness  of  manner,  and  more  steadiness  and  sedateness 
of  demeanour.  The  Clergyman's  legal  remedy  however  is  under 
the  Statutes,  1  Will.  $  Ma.  c.  18;  52  Geo.  III.  c.  155,  against 
'Disturbing  the  Minister  while  performing  Divine  Service:'  yet  the 
postponement  of  the  Solemnization  of  the  Marriage  will  doubtlessly 
be  a  sufficient  correction  to  the  parties  ofl'ending,  as  well  as  prove 
an  adequate  warning  to  others,  without  proceeding  to  the  extremity 
of  the  law:  but  such  delay  cannot  be  insisted  upon  if  the  parties 
oppose  it.  The  Minister  in  such  a  case  must  continue  the  Service, 
or  begin  de  novo  if  the  interruption  occurred  in  the  Ante-Service ; 
and  is  then,  of  course,  left  to  his  remedy  under  the  Statutes  referred 


NOTICES  IN  CHUECH. 


479 


261.  — V.  Omitting  tie  Exhortation—  This  practice, 
too  often  the  offspring  of  negligence,  can  only  be  permitted  when 
there  follows  a  'Sermon  declaring  the  Duties  of  Man  and  Wife!  as  we 
find  laid  down  in  the  Rubric  :  this  exception  necessarily  implies  that 
the  Solemnization  of  Matrimony  may  take  place  in  the  time  of 
'  Morning  Service.'  But  if  there  is  no  Sermon  to  supply  the 
absence  of  the  Exhortation,  its  omission  is  illegal;  and  might  bring 
upon  the  Clergyman  practising  it,  not  only  Ecclesiastical  censures, 
but  the  costs  and  consequences  of  an  action  at  law.  It  is 
recommended  therefore  that  the  'Exhortation'  be  not  habitually 
neglected.  The  omission  of  parts  of  the  Preface  also,  as  being 
offensive  to  delicacy,  is  not  permitted  by  law  or  Rubric.  See 
also  Vol.  E. 

Notices. 

262.  — No  Notices  of  any  kind  are  to  be  proclaimed 
or  published  in  the  Church  during  the  time  of  Divine 
Service,  but  by  the  Ministee;  and  by  him  such 
only  as  are  prescribed  in  the  Rubrics  of  the  Book 
of  "Common  Prayer,  or  are  enjoined  by  Acts  of 
Parliament,  by  the  Queen  (King),  or  by  the  Ordinary 
of  the  place.  Any  departure  from  the  injunctions 
of  the  Eubric,  or  other  legal  authority, — either  with 
respect  to  the  nature  of  the  Notices,  or  to  the 
person  proclaiming,  or  to  the  time  when  they  are 
proclaimed, — is  an  offence  against  the  Statute  of 
'Brawling.'1  (See  supra?)  There  are  only  two  Rubrics 
in  the  Liturgy  furnishing  any  instructions  on  this 
matter ;  one  after  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  the  other 
before  the  Service  for  the  '  Solemnization  of 
Matrimony.'  The  Rubric  following  the  Nicene  Creed 
directs: — 

'  Then  the  Curate  shall  declare  unto  the  people  what 
'Holy-Days  or  Fasting-Days  are  in  the  week  following 
'  to  he  observed.  And  then  also  (if  occasion  be)  shall  notice  be  given 
'  of  the  Communion;  the  Banns  of  Matrimony  published, 
'and  Briefs,  Citations,  and  Excommunications 
'read.  And  nothing  shall  be  proclaimed  or  published,  in  the 
'Church  during  the  time  of  Divine  Service,  but  by  the.  Minister; 
'  nor  by  him  any  thing  but  what  is  prescribed  in  the  Rules  of 
'this  Booh,  or  enjoined  by  the  King,  or  by  the  Ordinary  of  the 
•Place.'— (1662.). 


480 


NOTICES  IN  CHUHCH. 


This  Rubric, — according  to  the  decision  of  Sir 
John  Nicholl  in  Dawe  v.  Williams,  where  the 
defendant  was  charged  with  Braiding  for  reading  a 
Notice  of  a  Vestry  Meeting  during  the  time  of 
Divine  Service  without  authority.  (2  Add.  130 — 8.) — 
'  this  Rubric,'  he  says,  '  as  a  part  of  the  Book  of 
'  Common  Prayer,  is  confirmed  by  Act  of  Parliament 
'and  constitutes  a  part  of  the  Statute  Law  of  the 
'land.'  Tet  the  permission  granted  by  this  Rubric 
was  eventually  extended  by  force  of  custom,  and  in 
some  instances  by  the  Statute  Law,  to  the  publication 
of  various  Notices  connected  with  Parochial,  and  other 
matters ;  such  as  the  appointment  of  Vestry-meetings ; 
the  making  of  Bates;  declarations  of  Outlawry; 
holding  of  Court-Leets,  &c.  &c.  Certain  Acts  of 
Parliament  were  also  formerly  required  to  be  read 
in  the  Church  during,  or  immediately  after,  Divine 
Service.  And  it  was  the  secular  nature  of  many  of 
these  Notices  which  led  in  course  of  time  to  the 
Officiating  Minister  deputing  the  Parish-Clerk  to 
proclaim  them ;  whence  it  ultimately  became  almost 
the  universal  practice  for  the  Lay-Clerk  to  '  give  out,' 
not  only  Notices  of  Vestry-Meetings,  Proclamations, 
&c,  but  likewise  the  appointed  Psalmody,  and  other 
matters  immediately  connected  with  the  Service,  of  the 
Church.  But  this  Rubric,  and  the  unecclesiastical 
practices  introduced  by  law  and  custom,  have  been 
materially  circumscribed  and  restrained  by  subsequent 
Statutes. 

Wheatlt,  speaking  of  this  Rubric,  says: — 'All  this  was 
'  undoubtedly  added,  to  prevent  the  custom  that  still  too  much. 
'  prevails  in  some  country  Churches,  of  publishing  the  most 
'  frivolous,  unbefitting,  and  even  ridiculous  things  in  the  face  of 
« the  Congregation.'  (/>.  312.)— Rat.  III.  of  Book  of  Com.  Prayer. 
Dr.  Corrie's  Ed. 

The  clause  in  the  Rubric,  directing  the  Banns  of 
Matrimony  to  be  published  after  the  Nicene  Creed, 
has  been  expunged  from  the  one  in  our  present 


(26  Geo.  II.  c.  33.)  requiring  Banns  of  Marriage 
to  be  published  after  the  'Second  Lesson;'  to  which 
effect  an  alteration  has  been  also  made  in  the  Rubric 


Prayer 


reason  of   the   Marriage  Act 


NOTICES  IK  CHUECH. 


481 


preceding  the  Service  for  the  ' Solemnization  of 
Matrimony?  which  we  shall  have  occasion  to  note 
in  its  proper  place.  The  reading  also  of  Briefs, 
and  Citations,  &c.  and  all  other  Notices  of  a  purely- 
secular  character,  are  prohibited ;  and  the  functions 
of  the  Parish-Clerk  herein  completely  superseded. 
(See  Vol.  E.) 

263. — In  the  existing  Law  on  the  subject  of  Notices 
(7  Will.  IV.  and  1  Vict.  c.  45.  a.d.  1837.),  we  have 
the  following  injunctions : — 

Citations,  Sfc,  forbidden.— No  Decree  relating  to  a 
'Faculty,  nor  any  other  Decree,  Citation,  or  Proceeding 
'  whatsoever  in  any  Ecclesiastical  Court,  shall  be  read  or 
'  published  in  any  Church  or  Chapel  during  or  immediately 
'  after  Divine  Service.' — (Sect.  4.) 

Church  Notices  are  excepted. — 'Nothing  in  this  Act 
'  shall  extend,  or  be  construed  to  extend,  to  the  publication  of 
'Banns,  nor  to  notice  of  the  celebration  of  Divine  Service,  or 
'  of  Sermons,  nor  to  restrain  the  Curate,  in  pursuance  of  the 
'Rules  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  from  declaring  unto 
'  the  People  what  Holy-Days  or  Fasting-Days  are  in  the  week 
'  following  to  be  observed,  nor  to  restrain  the  Minister  from 
'proclaiming  or  publishing  what  is  prescribed  by  the  Rules  of 
'  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  or  enjoined  by  the  Queen,  or 
'  by  the  Ordinary  of  the  Place.' — (Sect.  5.) 

Other  Notices  are  forbidden. — After  repealing  the 
Statute,  58  Geo.  III.  c.  69.,  appointing  Notices  of  Vestry- Meetings 
to  be  published  in  the  Church  during  or  immediately  after  Divine 
Service;  and  the  Statute,  31  Eliz.  c.  3.,  ordering  declarations  of 
outlawry  to  be  made  at  the  Church-door  at  the  close  of  Divine 
Service;  and  other  Statutes  relating  to  Highways,  Poor-Rates,  &c, 
and  the  custom  of  notifying  the  holding  of  Courts-Leet,  Courts-Baron, 
and  Customary  Courts: — the  Act  proceeds — 'No  Proclamation  or 
'  other  Public  Notice  for  a  Vestry-Meeting  or  any  other  matter, 
'shall  be  made  or  given  in  any  Church  or  Chapel  during  or 
'  after  Divine  Service,  or  at  the  Door  of  any  Church  or  Chapel  at 
'  the  conclusion  of  Divine  Service.' — 7  Will.  IV.  and  1  Vict.  c.  45. 
s.  1. 

Substitution  of  a  Written  Notice. — 'All  Proclamations 
'  or  Notices  which  under  or  by  virtue  of  any  Law  or  Statute, 
'  or  by  custom  or  otherwise,  have  been  heretofore  made  or  given 
'  in  Churches  or  Chapels  during  or  after  Divine  Service,  shall  be 
'reduced  into  writing,  and  Copies  thereof  either  in  writing,  or  in 
'print,  or  partly  in  writing  and  partly  in  print,  shall,  previously 
'  to  the  commencement  of  Divine  Service  on  the  several  days  on 
'  which  such  Proclamations  or  Notices  have  heretofore  been  "made 
'  or  given  in  the  Church  or  Chapel  of  any  Parish  or  Place, 
'  or  at  the  door  of  any  Church  or  Chapel,  be  affixed  on  or  near  to 


482 


NOTICES  IN  CHUECH. 


'the  doors  of  all  the  Churches  or  Chapels  within  such  Parish  or 
'Place;  and  such  Notices  when  so  affixed  shall  be  in  lieu  of  and 
'as  a  substitution  for  the  several  Proclamations  and  Notices 
'  so  heretofore  given  as  aforesaid,  and  shall  be  good,  valid,  and 
'  effectual  to  all  intents  and  purposes  whatsoever, —{Sect.  2.) 

Vestry  Notices,  how  signed. — '  No  such  Notice  of 

'holding  a  Vestry  shall  be  affixed  on  the  principal  door  of  such 
'  Church  or  Chapel,  unless  the  same  shall  previously  have  been 
'signed  by  a  Churchwarden  of  the  Church  or  Chapel,  or  by  the 
'  Rector,  Vicar,  or  Curate  of  such  Parish,  or  by  an  Overseer  of 
'  the  Poor  of  such  Parish;  but  that  every  such  Notice  so  signed 
'  shall  be  affixed  on  or  near  to  the  principal  door  of  such  Church 
'  or  Chapel.'— (Sec*.  3.) 

264.  — From  this  Enactment,  and  the  directions  of 
the  Rubric,  it  may  be  set  down  as  a  point  of  law,  and 
in  the  strictness  of  its  letter,  that — noting  aloud  the 
Collect  of  the  Day;  proclaiming  the  Names  of  the 
Sick  to  be  prayed  for;  announcing  a  Woman  to  be 
Churched;  publishing  Notices  from  the  'Desk'  of 
Missionary,  or  other  Meetings  to  be  held ;  giving 
intimation  of  especial  Services,  or  Sermons,  at  any 
other  time  than  after  the  Nicene  Creed,  unless 
otherwise  ordered  by  competent  authority :  and  a 
Lay-Clerk  'giving  out'  the  Psalmody,  or  any  public 
Notice :  —  are  each  and  all  illegal  acts ;  and  the 
Officiating  Minister,  or  other  person  offending 
herein,  may  be  prosecuted  for  'Brawling  in  the 
Church^  But,  it  must  be  added,  since  many  of 
the  above  practices  have  received  the  sanction  of 
long-established  custom,  which  claims  a  kind  of 
prescriptive  authority,  it  is  not  probable  that  a 
conviction  would  follow;  and,  it  must  be  confessed 
likewise,  that  where  these  usages  have  for  a  series 
of  past  years  prevailed,  they  cannot  with  propriety 
be  hastily  condemned,  and  abruptly  discarded.  The 
several  points,  however,  we  shall  discuss  in  detail 
in  the  order  of  their  occurrence  in  the  Liturgy. 

265.  — It  need  hardly  perhaps  be  observed  that  no 
Clergyman  is  permitted  to  read  any  protest  during 
Divine  Service  against  the  acts  or  proceedings  of  his 
Bishop,  as  was  decided  in  the  case  of  M.  R.  Whist  (Clerk)  in  1846, 
who  ordered  the  Parish-Clerk  to  read  in  Church  a  protest,  denying 
the  authority  of  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol  in  the  Parish 


INJURING  PICTURES. 


483 


of  Bedminister.  But  having  perceived  his  error,  he  voluntarily 
submitted,  and  consented  to  pay  the  costs. 

266. — Other  Persons,  besides  the  Officiating 
Minister  and  the  Parish-Clerk,  are  prohibited  from 
proclaiming  any  Notices  in  the  Church;  and  if 
attempting  to  do  so,  they  may  be  removed  from  the 
Church,  and  be  prosecuted  under  the  Statute  for 
' 'Brawling ;'  but  they  must  not  be  kept  in  confinement 
when  taken  out  of  Church  beyond  the  duration  of 
the  time  of  Service. 

This  was  decided  in  the  case  of  Williams  v.  Glenister,  where 
the  Parish-Clerk  having  refused  to  read  a  Notice  presented  to  him, 
the  party  presenting  it  read  it  himself ;  but  at  a  time  when  no  part 
of  Divine  Service  was  actually  going  on.  It  was  held  that  although 
a  Constable  might  be  justified  in  removing  him  from  the  Church, 
and  detaining  him  until  the  Service  was  over,  yet  he  could  not 
legally  detain  him  afterwards  in  order  to  take  him  before  a 
Magistrate.  Chief  Justice  Abbott  observed: — '  It  appears  to  me 
'  that  the  1  Mar.  St.  IL  c.  3.,  merely  gave  to  the  Common  Law, 
'  cognizance  of  au  offence,  which  was  before  punishable  by  the 
'  Ecclesiastical  Law;  in  order  to  be  within  that  Statute,  the  party 
'must  maliciously,  wilfully,  or  of  purpose,  molest  the  person 
'celebrating  Divine  Service.  Had  the  Notice  been  read  by  the 
'  Plaintiff,  whilst  any  part  of  the  Service  was  actually  going  on, 
'  we  might  have  thought  that  he  had  done  it  on  purpose  to  molest 
'  the  Minister;  but  the  act  having  being  done  during  an  interval, 
'  when  no  part  of  the  Service  was  in  the  course  of  being  performed, 
'  and  the  party  apparently  supposing,  that  he  had  a  right  to  give 
'  such  a  Notice,  I  am  not' prepared  to  say  that  the  1  Mar.  St.  II. 
'  c.  3.  warranted  his  detention,  in  order  that  he  might  be  taken 
'  before  a  Justice  of  the  Peace.  Neither  does  the  case  come  within 
1  the  '  Toleration  Act,'  1  Will.  <f-  Ma.  c.  18.  That  only  applies 
'  where  the  thing  is  done  wilfully,  and  of  purpose  maliciously,  to 
'disturb  the  Congregation,  or  misuse  the  Preacher.  The  detention 
'  of  the  Plaintiff  after  the  time  when  the  Service  was  ended,  was 
'  therefore  illegal,  and  we  ought  not  to  disturb  the  Verdict  which 
'  has  been  found.'  (2  B  &  C.  699.) 

Pictures. 

267.— Occasionally  may  be  seen  at  the  East  end  of  some  of  our 
Churches,  costly  paintings,  illustrative  of  scenes  in  the  life  of 
our  Blessed  Saviour,  or  of  one  of  the  Apostles.  Any  malicious 
injury  to  such  Picture  is  a  misdemeanour  by  8  &  9  Vict.  c.  44.  *.  1., 
to  be  tried  at  Sessions,  and  liable  to  imprisonment  not  exceeding 
6  months,  with  hard  labour,  and  whipping.' — Okes'  Mag.  Synopsis, 
p.  756.  6th  Ed.  1858.  n  h 


4,84 


PEOSECUTOB — PEOYOCA.TION. 


Prosecutor. 

268.  — In  cases  of  Brawling  or  Smiting  in  the 
Church,  or  of  Disturbing  the  Minister,  or  Congregation, 
it  is  at  the  liberty  of  any  person  to  prosecute ;  as  in 
Suet  v.  Dash  (2  Lee,  (Sir  Gr.)  514.).  The  Statute, 
5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.  does  not  particularize  who  is  to 
be  the  Promoter  of  the  suit.  Yet  in  criminal  cases 
the  Court  may  possibly  inquire  into  the  motives  of  the 
Prosecutor ;  whether  they  be  malicious,  or  vindictive ; 
which  will  affect  the  credibility  of  the  witnesses,  and 
influence  the  costs :  but  the  court  will  not  question 
the  propriety  of  the  motives  unless  the  evidence  is 
very  strong  against  the  honesty  of  their  intention  ;  as 
in  Jarman  v.  Wise  (3  Hagg.  362.).  In  the  case  of 
Lee  v.  Matthews,  the  promoter,  a  private  individual, 
was  proceeding  vindictively,  and  had  in  the  Articles 
exaggerated  the  Smiting,  and  suppressed  his  own 
Brawling  expressions  which  provoked  the  smiting; 
so  the  Court  directed  the  matter  to  stand  over  for 
private  arrangement.  (3  Hagg.  169.).  When  the 
Bishop,  says  Sie  Heebeet  Jennee  Fust,  institutes 
proceedings,  he  should  not,  properly  speaking,  be 
himself  the  Promoter  of  the  judge's  office.  Burder  v. 
Langley  (Clerk).    (1  N.  of  Ec.  Ca.  542.) 

Provocation. 

269.  — In  a  Criminal  suit  for  Brawling  in  the 
Church,  or  at  a  Vestry-Meeting  in  the  Church,  it  will 
be  of  no  avail  to  plead  provocation  by  way  of  justification. 
In  the  case  of  North  v.  Dickson,  which  was  for 
Brawling  at  a  Vestry-Meeting,  the  defendant  advanced 
that  plea,  but  it  had  no  weight  with  the  Court ;  and 
he  was  suspended  for  a  fortnight  ab  ingressu  ecclesim, 
and  condemned  in  the  costs.  (1  Hagg.  730.).  Indeed 
no  Provocation  can  exempt  from  the  penalties  of  the 
Law.    And  where  more  than  one  person  is  implicated 


EEPAIBS  OF  CHUBCHES. 


4SG 


in  the  transaction,  which  of  them  so  implicated  is 
most  to  blame,  or  which  began  the  quarrel,  is  no  part 
of  the  inquiry.  Nor  is  it  any  defence  to  shew  that 
the  Promoter  of  the  suit  was  the  aggressor.  (See 
Burder  v.  Langley,  1  N.  of  E.  C.  542 ;  Bluet  v.  Dash, 
2  Lee,  (Sir  G.)  514 ;  Jarman  v.  Bagster,  3  Hagg.  356 ; 
Palmer  v.  Rofey,  2  Add.  144.  306.). 

Rogers  says: — 'If  a  person  is  assaulted  in  the  Church,  or 
'  Church- Yard,  he  may  not  beat  the  other,  or  draw  a  weapon 
'  there  in  his  own  defence,  for  it  is  a  sanctified  place,  and  he 
'  may  be  punished  for  it,  by  the  Statute  5  &  G  Edw.  VI.  c.  4. 
'  (Cro.  Jac.  367;  1  Hawk.  139.).'— Eccl.  Law,  p.  115. 

Repairs. 

270. — "Whenever  a  Church  is  undergoing  Repair, 
or  Restoration,  care  should  be  taken  by  the 
Incumbent  and  the  Churchwardens,  that  there  be 
no  profanation  indulged  in  by  the  Workmen,  either 
from  thoughtlessness,  or  with  design.  To  this  end 
it  would  be  well  to  put  up  in  some  conspicuous 
place,  printed  in  large  type,  a  few  brief  admonitions ; 
urging  the  "Workmen  to  treat  with  proper  reverence 
all  things  and  places  consecrated  to  God :  to  abstain 
also  from  unnecessary  noise  and  clamour;  from 
oaths  and  blasphemous  expressions ;  from  quarrelling 
and  anger ;  from  indecent  ribaldry  and  jesting ;  even 
from  idle  words,  since  the  Saviour  Himself  has 
said  — '  every  idle  word  that  men  shall  speak,  they 
shall  give  account  thereof  in  the  Bay  of  Judgment.' 
(Matt.  xii.  36.) ;  to  forbear  singing  loose  profane 
songs ;  and  whistling  light  and  indecorous  tunes ; 
to  wear  no  hats  within  the  Church,  but  merely 
the  workman's  cap  to  screen  them  from  draughts, 
and  exposure  to  the  weather ;  and  lastly,  to  avoid 
intemperance,  smoking,  and  all  eating  and  drinking, 
while  within  the  walls  of  the  House  of  God.  It 
might  be  made  a  part  of  the  contract  with  the 
Master-builder,  that  any  Workman  misconducting 
himself,  or  behaving  in  a  manner  not  satisfactory  to 
the  Incumbent,  should  be  dismissed  the  instant  it  is 

HH  2 


486 


SACEILEGE. 


desired.  The  Workmen  may  read  with  profit  during 
their  Evenings  at  home, —  Psalms  lxxxiv.  cxxii. 
cxxxiii :  1  Kings  viii.  22—63 ;  Matt.  xxi.  12,  13 : 
John  ii.  13—17  j  1  Cor.  iii.  16,  17 ;  2  Cor.  vi.  16—18 ; 
Heb.  x.  19—26. 

Sacrament,  abusing,  &e.,  see  under  'Communion 
Sebvice,'  postea. 

Sacrilege. 

271. — Connected  with  the  preservation  of  the 
Sanctity  of  tlie  Chusch  is  the  question  of  Sacrilege, 
under  which  term  is  implied  — 'stealing  anything  from 
a  Church  or  Chapel  accompanied  with  a  breaking  of 
such  Church  or  Chapel.'  This  was  formerly  a  capital 
offence  under  the  Statutes,  23  Hen.  VIII.  c.  1 ;  and 
1  Edw.  VI.  c.  12 :  but  these  have  been  repealed  by 
7  &  8  Ceo.  IV.  c  29.  (and  by  9  Geo.  IV.  c.  55.  for 
Ireland),  which  last  Acts  were  amended  by  5  &  6 
Will.  iV.  c.  81.  So  that  now  the  offence  is  punishable 
with  transportation,  or  imprisonment. 

'  If  any  person  shall  break  and  enter  any  Chcrch  or 
'  Chapel,  and  steal  therein  any  Chattel  or  having  stolen  any 
'  Chattel  in  any  Church  or  Chapel,  break  out  of  the  same,  every 
'  such  offender  being  convicted  thereof,  shall  suffer  death  as  a 
'felon.'  7  &  8  Geo.  IV.  c.  29.  s.  10. — But  capital  punishment  is 
taken  away  by  5  &  6  117//.  IV.  c.  81.  which,  after  reciting  the 
clause  of  7  &  8  Geo.  IV.  c.  29.  (above  given),  enacts  '  that  every 
'  person  convicted  of  any  of  the  offences  in  the  said  Act  so 
'  specified,  or  of  aiding,  or  abetting,  counselling,  or  procuring  the 
'commission  thereof,  shall  be  liable  to  be  transported  beyond  the 
'  seas  for  life,  or  for  any  term  not  less  than  7  years,  or  to  be 

'  imprisoned,  with  or  without  hard  labour,  for  any  term  not 

'exceeding  4  years'    This  last  Act,  however,  is  amended  by 
C  &  7  Will.  IV.  c.  4.  which,  after  correcting  a  clerical  error  in 
the  o  &  6  Will.  IV.  c.  81.  proceeds  — '  and  that  all  persons  who  may 
'hereafter  be  duly  convicted  of  any  of  the  offences  mentioned 
'  in  the  said  Act  of  the  last  Session,  shall  and  may  be  sentenced 
'  by  the  Court  or  Judge  by  or  before  whom  such  offenders  may 
'  be  tried  to  transportation  for  life,  or  for  any  terra  of  years  not 
'  less  than  7,  or  to  be  imprisoned  for  any  term  not  exceeding 
'  3  years,  with  or  without  hard  labour,  and  for  any  period  of 
'  solitary  confinement  during  such  imprisonment,  at  the  discretion 
'of  such  Court  or  Judge.'    (But  no  Offender  can  be  kept  in 
solitary  confinement  for  a  longer  period  than  one  month  at  a  time, 
or  than  3  months  in  the  space  of  one  year:  by  1  Vict.  c.  90.  ».  5.). 


SACEILEGE  —  KIOTING. 


4ffl 


272.— Similarly,  in  times  of  Riot,  by  7  &  8  Geo.  IV. 

c.  30.  3.  8,  and  4  &  5  Vict.  c.  56,  amended  with  regard  to  punishment 

by  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  10;  it  is  enacted  that— 

'  If  any  persons  riotously  and  tumultnously  assembled  together 
'to  the  disturbance  of  the  public  peace  should  unlawfully  and 
'  with  force,  demolish,  pull  down,  or  destroy  any  Church  or 
'  Chapel,  or  any  Chapel  for  the  religious  worship  of  persons 
'dissenting  from  the  United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland,  duly 

'  registered  or  recorded  every  such  offender  every  principal 

'  in  the  second  degree,  every  accessory  before  the  fact  being 

'convicted  thereof.  shall  be  liable,  at  the  discretion  of  the 

'  Court,  to  be  transported  beyond  the  seas  for  the  term  of  the 
'natural  life  of  such  person,  or  for  any  term  not  less  than  7 
'years,  or  to  be  imprisoned,  with  or  without  hard  labour,  for 
'  any  time  not  exceeding  3  years'— 6  &  7  Viet.  c.  10.  s.  U 

*,*  The  word  'ChapeV  in  7  &  8  Geo.  IV.  c.  29.  comprises  only 
those  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  not  the  Meeting- Houses  of 
Dissenters,  as  was  decided  by  Mr.  Justice  Gaselee,  and  Mr.  Baron 
Vaughan  in  Rex  v.  Warren,  (6  C.  &  P.  335;  see  also  Rex  v.  Nixon, 
7  ib.  442;  Rex  v.  Richardson.  6  ib.  335.)  In  such  instances  the 
prosecution  must  be  simply  for  the  larceny. 

273. — 'ChutteV  includes  every  species  of  'goods'  in  a  Church  or 
Chapel,  not  a  fixture ;  and  whether  used  for  Divine  Service,  or 
for  cleaning,  or  repairing  the  edifice  and  things  therein.  Stealing 
Fixtures  would  come  under  Section  44  of  this  Act.  {Rex  v.  Nixon, 
7  C.  &  P.  442;  Rex  v.  Rourke,  ib.  845;  R.  &  R.  386.)  In  describing 
property  stolen  from  a  Church  they  must  be  laid  in  the  indictment 
as  the  goods  of  the  Parishioners.    (1  Hawk.  P.  C.  c.  33.  *.  45; 

2  East.  P.  C.  c.  16.  s.  59.)  Money  stolen  from  the  '  Poor-Box '  fixed 
in  a  Church  may  be  laid  in  the  indictment  as  the  property  of  the 
Incumbent  and  Churchwardens.  {Rex  v.  Worthy,  2  C.  &  R.  283.). 
The  'goods'  of  a  Meeting-Uouse  vested  in  Trustees,  must  be  laid 
as  the  property  of  one  of  the  members  of  the  Society  by  name 
"and  others."  {Rex  v.  Boulton,  5  C.  &  P.  537.) 

'Church.' — Under  this  term  is  included  the  Tower,  if  having 
an  internal  communication  with  the  Church.    {Rev  v.  Wheeler, 

3  C.  &  P.  585.) 

274. — Trial  for  Sacrilege  cannot  be  at  any 

Quarter  Sessions,  by  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  38.  s.  I.,  but  must  be  at  the 
Assizes,  similarly  for  riotously  demolishing,  &c.  a  Church,  Chapel, 
&c.  (4&5  Vict'.c.  56.  s.  6.) 


488 


smiting. 


Smiting. 

275.  — Striking,  or  laying  violent  hands  upon  a 
person  in  a  Chtjech  or  Chttbch-Yabd,  constitutes 
what  is  called  'Smiting;'  the  punishment  for  which  is 
excommunication,  now  changed  to  imprisonment :  but 
there  must  be  an  actual  blow  struck  to  establish 
the  offence  of  Smiting  by  the  Statute,  5  &  6  Edw.  VL 
c.  4. :  a  threatening  posture,  or  an  assault  at  Common 
Law,  without  a  blow,  is  not  held  to  be  Smiting 
in  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts.  (Jenkins  v.  Barrett, 
1  Hagg.  14.) 

The  Statute  runs  thus  : — 

'  If  any  person  shall  smite  or  lav  violent  hands  npon  any 
'  other,  either  in  any  Church  or  Church- Yard,  that  then  ipso 
'  facto,  every  person  so  offending,  shall  be  deemed  excommunicate, 
'  and  be  excluded  from  the  fellowship  and  company  of  Christ's 
'  Congregation.' — 5  &  G  Edw.  VL  c.  4.  s.  2. 

With  a  iceapon. — 'If  any  person  shall  maliciously 

'  strike  any  person  nith  any  weapon  in  any  Church  or 
'Church-Yard;  or  shall  draw  any  weapon  in  any  Church 
'  or  Church- Yard,  to  the  intent  to  strike  another  with  the 
'  same  weapon ;  he  shall  on  conviction  by  verdict  of  12  men, 
'  by  his  own  confession,  or  by  2  lawful  "witnesses,  before  the 

'Justices  of  Assize,  &c  or  of  the  Peace,  be  adjudged  

'  to  have  one  of  his  ears  cut  off,  and  if  the  person  so  offending 

'have  none  ears  he  shall  be  marked  and  burned  in  the  cheek 

'  with  a  hot  iron,  having  the  letter  F,  therein,  whereby  he  may 
'be  known  and  taken  for  a  fraymaker  and  fighter;  and  besides, 
'that  he  shall  be  and  stand  ipso  facto  excommunicated  as  is 
■  aforesaid.' — ib.  Sect.  3. 

*»*  Under  this  Statute  the  indictment  should  not  be  laid 
as  merely  'Striking,'  but  it  must  be  '  maliciously  striking.'  {Anon. 
Noy.  171.).  The  charge  must  also  be  specific,  and  not  couched 
in  general  terms  as  — "  other  enormous  Ecclesiastical  offences." 
{Jenkins  v.  Barrett,  1  Hagg.  14;  2  Add.  140):  and  the  proof  must 
be  by  two  witnesses,  and  not  admit  of  a  doubt.  (Hutchins  v. 
Denziloe,  Consist.  182 ;  Scales  v.  Eoile,  3  Hagg.  371.)  Nor  will  it 
be  sufficient  to  shew  the  drawing  of  a  dagger  or  other  weapon, 
but  the  charge  must  prove  that  the  weapon  was  so  drawn  with 
intent  to  strike.  {Penhallo's  case,  Cro.  Eliz.  231.) 

276.  — Again,  taking  up  a  stone  in  a  Church  or 

Church-Yard,  and  offering  to  throw  it  at  another;  or  threatening 


SMITING. 


ISO 


to  strike  another  with  a  hatchet  or  an  axe  in  the  hand,  does  not 
come  within  the  Statute,  for  these  are  not  weapons  which  can 
properly  be  said  to  be  drawn,  as  a  sword  or  dagger.  Watson's 
CI.  L.  34.  350.— (quoted  by  Rogers;  Stephens;  and  others). 

It  will  be  no  justification  to  plead  that  a  person  struck  another, 
or  drew  a  weapon  in  the  Church  or  Church- Yard  in  his  own 
defence.— (Francis  v.  Ley,  Cro.  Jac.  367;  1  Hawk.  139.). 

277.  — The  Punishment  for  'Smiting'  is  by  the 
Statute  'Excommunication;  which  the  Ecclesiastical  Court  is  to 
certify  to  the  Court  of  Chancery,  by  53  Geo.  III.  c.  127.  Section  3, 
of  this  Statute  also  directs  that  the  sentence  of  Excommunication 
be  altered  to  imprisonment,  at  the  discretion  of  the  Court,  and  not 
to  exceed  6  months  (Uoile  v.  Scales,  2  Hagg.  595;  3  ib.  178.). 
When  however  the  'Smiting'  is  with  a  weapon,  the.  punishment 
is  two-fold,  as  shewn  above— one  temporal,  the  loss  of  an  ear  and 
branding  on  the  cheek;  the  other,  the  spiritual  punishment  of 
excommunication.  The  severer  portion  of  the  Sentence  awarded 
by  the  Statute  (5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.),  is  not  likely  to  be  put  in 
execution  in  these  days,  yet  the  law  is  still  in  force.  According 
to  the  Ecclesiastical  Commissioners'  Keport  (03),  'such  an  enactment 
'ought  not  to*  remain  on  the  Statute  Book.'    (Wilson  v.  Greaves, 

1  Burr.  244.) 

278.  — No  suit  can  'be  commenced  in  any 
'  Ecclesiastical  Court  for  striking  or  brawling  in  any  Church  or 
'  Church-Yard,  after  the  expiration  of  8  calendar  months  from  the 
'  time  when  such  offence  shall  have  been  committed.'  —  By 
27  Geo.  III.  c.  44.  s.  2.  The  costs  of  the  action  will  be  borne  by 
the  guilty  party,  yet  the  Court  have  power  to  fix  or  mitigate  the 
amount.    (Austen  v.  Dugger,  3  Phil.  120;   Canning  v.  Sandlin, 

2  ib.  293;  Clinton  v.  Hatchard,  1  Add.  104;  England  v.  Eurcomb, 
2  Add.  306;  Field  v.  Cosens,  3  Hagg.  169;  Palmer  v.  Tijou,  2  Add. 
203;  Palmer  v.  Roffey,  2  ib.  141;  Williams  v.  Goodyer,1  ib.  309.). 
See  Burns'  Ec.  L.  Phil.  i.  392.  a;  Rogers'  E.  L.  285:  Stephens' 
L.  Rel.  to  CI.  182. 

Vestry-Meetings. 

279.  — Brawling  or  Smiting  at  Vestry-Meetings 
held  in  the  Church,  or  in  a  Vestry-Boom  attached  to 
the  Church,  or  in  any  room  or  building  within 
the  Church- Yard,  are,  ratione  loci,  offences  within 


490 


YESTRY  MEETINGS. 


the  Statute,  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.  More  latitude  of 
discussion,  however,  is  allowed  at  such  Meetings,  since 
they  are  held  for  civil  purposes,  and  the  temporal 
business  of  the  Parish  ;  yet  persons  are  not  to  express 
themselves  in  an  indecorous  or  irreverent  manner, 
and  the  Court  would  only  interpose  to  preserve  order 
and  decorum  {Rutchins  v.  Denziloe,  1  Hagg.  185.) 
Indeed,  what  would  be  considered  chiding  and 
brawling  in  a  Church  at  other  times  might  not  be 
so  at  a  Vestry- Meeting :  and  merely  coarse  expressions 
here  could  not  come  within  the  term  of  '  brawling.' 
{Roile  v.  Scales,  2  Hagg.  566.)  The  following 
opinions  will  explain  this  important  question  more 
fully  :— 

Dr.  Lushington  observed,  in  the  case  of  Jarman  v.  Bagster, — 
'  It  is  much  to  be  lamented  that  notwithstanding  the  notoriety  of 
'  the  proceedings  in  cases  of  Brawling,  Parishioners  will  not  be 
'  convinced  that,  whatever  may  be  their  own  private  opinions  as 
'  to  the  matters  under  discussion  in  Vestry,  they  must  not  press 
1  those  opinions  in  an  indecorous  and  irreverent  manner.  It  is 
'  not  rectitude  of  intention,  nor  accuracy  of  judgment,  that  will,  if 
'charges  of  disturbance  arising  from  such  conduct  are  proved, 
1  exempt  them  from  the  penalties  of  the  law.'    (3  Hagg.  358.). 

Sir  John  Nichoix  says,  in  Lee  v.  Matthews,—'  The  object  of 
'  the  law  is  to  preserve  the  sanctity  of  the  place,  and  to  prevent 
'  public  disturbance  therein.  Here,  the  transaction  did  not  occur  in 
'  the  Church,  nor  yet  in  that  part  of  the  Church-Yard  appropriated 
•to  religious  purposes — the  Christian  burial  of  the  dead— but  in 
'  the  Vestry-Room,  where  the  temporal  concerns  of  the  Parish  are 
'transacted;  aud  though  as  the  building  stands  upon  consecrated 
'  ground,  a  long  stream  of  authorities  forbid  the  expression  of  a 
'judicial  doubt  as  to  its  coming  within  the  meaning  of  the  Statute, 
'still  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  sanctity  of  the  place  is  of  an 
'inferior  character.  Again;  the  transaction  was  not  to  the 
'  disturbance  of  Public  Worship,  or  of  any  religious  Service,  when 
'  the  Parishioners  were  met  for  pious  purposes,  or  for  the  Burial 
'  of  the  Dead ;  but  it  occurred  at  a  Vestry,  very  limited  in  numbers, 
'  almost  a  private  meeting  of  Sir  John  Lee  and  the  Parish  Officers. 
'  It  was  then,  in  fact,  almost  as  little  of  an  offence  against  public 
'  decency,  as  if  the  scene  had  been  laid  at  a  neighbouring  ale-house; 
'  and  it  is  merely  ratione  loci,  because  the  Vestry-Room  stands 
'  within  the  precincts  of  the  Church-  Yard,  that  it  becomes  an 
'  offence  at  all  of  which  this  Court  has  cognizance.  The  case, 
'  however,  is  of  as  slight  an  ecclesiastical  character,  as  can  well 
'  be  imagined,  for,  as  an  assault  on  the  individual,  this  Court  has 

'nothing  to  do  with  it  I  shall,  for  the  'Bran-ling,'  suspend  the 

'  defendant  ab  ingressu  ecclesim  for  one  week;  and  for  the  'Smiting, 
'  decree  an  imprisonment  of  24  hours;  and  further,  as  the  defendant 
'  refused  to  abide  by  the  arrangement  of  his  counsel.  I  shall 
'condemn  him  in  the  costs'— (3  Hagg.  169.  176;  and  ii'ilsim  v. 
M'cMath,  3  B.  &  A.  241.). 


YESTBY  MEETINGS. 


491 


280.—*.*  Where  a  Vestry-Room  is  partly  in,  and  partly  out  of  a 
Church- Yard,  it  is  doubtful  whether  a  person  ' Brawling'  therein, 
is  liable  to  the  penalties  of  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.  (See  Williams 
v.  Goodyer,  2  Add.  463.) 

It  is  likewise  questionable,  where  a  Vestry-Room  is  not  on 
consecrated  ground,  and  stands  completely  without  the  Church 
and  Church-Yard,  whether  a  person  grossly  abusing  the  Minister 
presiding  therein,  commits  an  ecclesiastical  offence,  and  is 
punishable  for  the  same  by  the  general  ecclesiastical  law;  for 
in  such  a  case  it  cannot  be  dealt  with  as  a  '  chiding  and 
brawling,'  within  the  Statute,  5  &  6  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.  (ibid.) 

281. — The  Punishment  for  this  offence  is  suspension 

ab  ingressu  ecclesim,  and  the  payment  of  costs. 

In  Jarman  v.  Wise,  the  defendant  was  convicted  of  violent 
conduct  and  great  personal  abuse  at  a  Vestry-Meeting  held  in  a 
room  within  the  Church;  and  was  suspended  from  entering  the 
Church  for  14  days,  and  condemned  iu  mitigated  costs,  £35.  nomine 


282.  — Provocation  is  no  defence  to  a  suit  for 
'  brawling'  in  a  Vestry-Room  under  this  Statute;  as  was  decided  in 
the  case  of  North  v.  Dickson,  where  the  defendant  was  suspended 
from  entering  the  Church  for  14  days,  and  condemned  in  the  costs. 
(1  Hagg.  730.).  Yet  sometimes,  where  the  Prosecutor  has  used 
irritating  words,  the  sentence  is  modified;  as  in  Williams  v.  Hall 
where  the  defendant  was  suspended  from  entering  the  Church  for  a 
week,  and  condemned  in  mitigated  costs.— {\  Curt.  597.). 

283.  — Vestry-Meetings  in  Churches,  however,  and 

of  course  the  opportunities  of  'Brawling,'  may  now  be  prevented 
where  the  Population  of  the  Parish  exceeds  2000  persons,  by  a 
recent  Statute,  13  &  14  Viet.  c.  57.  In  which  it  is  provided  that 
the  Inhabitants  in  Vestry  assembled  may  make  application  through 
the  Churchwardens  to  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners,  who  are 
empowered  to  issue  an  '  Order,'  transferring  such  Meetings  to 
some  Room  or  Building  within  the  Parish,  to  be  hired  or  built 
for  the  purpose.    Thus — 

'  Whereas  the  holding  of  Vestry  or  other  Parochial  Meetings  in 
'  the  Parish  Church  or  Chapel,  or  in  the  Vestry-Room  attached  to 
'  such  Church  or  Chapel,  is  productive  of  scandal  to  Religion,  and 

'  other  great  inconveniences ;  for  remedy  thereof  be  it  enacted  

'  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Commissioners  for  administering 
'  the  Laws  for  Relief  of  the  Poor  in  England,  at  any  time  or  times 
'  after  the  passing  of  this  Act,  upon  Application  in  writing  of  the 
'  Churchwardens,  or,  where  there  are  no  Churchwardens,  of  the 


492 


WOEDS  OF  BRAWLING. 


'  Overseers  of  any  Parish  in  England,  the  Population  whereof 
'  exceeds  2000  person*  according  to  the  then  last  preceding  census, 
'  such  Application  being  made  pursuant  to  a  Resolution  of  the 
'  Vestry  of  such  Parish,  to  make  an  Order  under  their  seal  of 
'  Office,  that  this  Act,  or  any  part  thereof,  shall  be  applied  to 
'  and  be  put  in  force  within  such  Parish ;  and  a  Copy  of  such 
' '  Order  '  shall  be  published  in  such  Newspaper  or  Gazette,  or 
'  both,  as  the  said  Commissioners  may  direct,  and  shall  be  deposited 
'  with  the  Churchwardens,  or  Overseers  (where  there  are  no 
'  Churchwardens)  of  any  such  Parish.'— 13  &  14  Vict.  c.  57.  «.  1. 

The  prohibition  is  embodied  in  the  next  Section  of  this  Act  in 
these  words:  — '  Be  it  enacted  that  from  and  after  the  expiration  of 
'  12  calendar  months  from  the  making  and  publishing  of  any  such 
'  Order,  no  Meeting  of  the  Inhabitants  of  the  Parish  for  the 
'  purpose  of  holding  a  Vestry,  or  for  any  other  purpose  than  that 
'  of  Divine  Worship,  or  some  Ecclesiastical  or  Charitable  object,  or 
'some  other  purpose  approved  by  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  shall 
'be  holden  in  any  Parish  Church  or  Chapel,  or  other  consecrated 
'  Church  or  Chapel,  nor  in  the  Chancel  thereof,  nor,  except  in 
'  case  of  urgency,  and  with  the  previous  approval  of  the  said 
'  Commissioners,  in  the  Vestry-Room  attached  to  such  Church  or 
'  Chapel,  in  any  Parish  or  place  named  in  such  Order,  any  public 
'  or  private  Act  of  Parliament  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding,' — 
ib.  Sect.  2. 

The  next  Section  (§.  3.)  legalizes  the  proceedings  transacted 
iu  the  Room  or  Place  duly  provided  within  the  Parish  where 
such  Vestry-Meetings  shall  hereafter  be  held. — The  4th  Section 
empowers  the  Churchwardens,  with  the  sanction  of  the  Poor  Law 
Commissioners,  and  the  majority  of  the  Vestry,  to  hire  or  build  a 
Room  (according  to  the  provisions  of  8  &  9  Vict.  c.  18.)  for  holding 
such  Parish  Meetings,  and  the  charges  to  be  paid  out  of  the  Poor 
Rates. — The  5th  Section  empowers  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners 
on  the  Application  of  the  Churchwardens  made  in  writing,  and  in 
accordance  with  the  resolution  of  a  Vestry-Meeting  duly  held  for  the 
purpose,  to  grant  an  Order  to  borrow  any  sum  of  money  required 
for  the  purposes  of  this  Act;  which  sum,  and  the  interest  thereof, 
are  to  be  charged  to  the  Poor  Rate,  and  be  repaid  by  equal  annual 
instalments  not  exceeding  ten. 


Words  of  Brawling. 

284.— In  a  suit  for  'Brawling'  under  the  Statute,  5  &  6  Edw.  VI. 
c.  4.  it  is  not  necessary  that  the  Witnesses  should  depose  to  the 
defendant  actually 'chiding,  brawling,  or  quarrelling;'  but  it  will 
be  sufficient  if  they  prove  that  words  of  Brawling  were  used. 
(Foote  v.  Richards,  1  Lee,  (Sir  G.)  265.). 


PLACE  OF  THE  MINISTER. 


193 


OF  THE  MINISTER. 


285.— The  Place  and  Position  of  the  Officiating 
Minister,  when  performing  Divine  Service,  are 
among  the  many  controverted  topics  of  the  day. 
The  subject  presents  two  distinct  questions. — 1st, 
the  'Place'  of  the  Officiating  Minister;  and 
2ndly,  his  'Position '  when  in  such  Place.  And  as  a 
natural  sequence  will  follow  the  consideration  of  the 
Place  and  Position  also  of  the  Assistant  Clergyman. 

With  respect  to  'Place '  we  shall  have  to  inquire 
in  what  part  of  the  Church  should  be  read — (a)  the 
Morning  and  Evening  Prayers ;  (b)  the  Lessons ; 
(c)  the  Litany ;  (d)  certain  parts  of  the  Communion 
Service ;  (e)  and  the  Occasional  Offices. 

As  regards  'Position,''  it  will  be  our  object  to 
ascertain  whether  the  Officiating  Minister  should 
face  the  Congregation,  adopt  a  side-way  position,  or 


words,  the  inquiry  will  be — To  what  point  of  the 
compass  is  the  Clergyman  to  turn  when  performing 
his  various  ministrations  ? 

286. — As  we  are  proceeding  with  the  several 
Rubrics  in  their  order,  each  of  the  questions  above 
enumerated  will  come  more  satisfactorily  under 
discussion  in  their  course,  where  indeed  the  elucidation 
will  be  more  especially  required.  We  will  therefore 
now  confine  ourselves  to  the  general  subject  involved 
in  the  first  Rubric,  which  relates  to  the  Place  and 
Position  of  the  Officiating  Minister  when  reading 
the  Morning  and  Evening  Praters.  It  runs 
thus — 

IT.  'The  Morning  and  Evening  Prater  shall  be  used  in 
'the  accustomed  place  of  the  Church,  Cliapel,  or  Chancel; 


turn  his  back  to  the  assembled 


494 


PLA.CE  AND  POSITION 


'except  it  shall  be  otherwise  determined  by  the  Ordinary  of 
'the  place.  And  the  Chancels  shall  remain  as  they  have  done  in 
'  times  past.—{  1550—1662.) 

There  is  one  other  authority  on  this  question  of 
similar  character;  viz.  the  14th  Canon  (1603 — 4), 
which  is  as  follows : — 

'The  Common  Prayeii  shall  be  said  or  sung  in  such 

'Place  of  every  Church  as  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  or 
'  Ecclesiastical  Ordinary  of  the  Place,  shall  think  meet  for  the 
'  largeness  or  straitness  of  the  same,  so  as  the  people  may  be 
'  most  edified.'— Canon  14. 

These  instructions  are  limited  to  the  Mobning 
and  Evening  Pbayebs,  to  which  also  is  the  authority 
of  the  Bishop  herein  confined ;  yet  the  place  appointed 
in  the  Eubric  is  very  far  from  being  clearly  described 
by  the  word  '  accustomed,  although  in  these  days  we 
cannot  fail  to  understand  this  expression  to  imply  the 
'Reading-Desk',  ordered  by  the  Canon  to  be  set  up  in 
every  Church  at  the  Parish  expence.  The  Canon 
runs  in  these  words — 

'  We  appoint  that  a  convenient  seat  be  made  for  the 

'  Minister  to  read  Service  in  to  be  done  at  the  charge  of  the 

'  Parish.'— Canon  82. 

287. — If  the  Officiating  Minister  therefore  removes 
the  'accustomed  seat,'  and  his  proceeding  engenders 
any  objection  on  the  part  of  the  Congregation,  and 
consequently  doubt  and  diversity,  he  is  required  to 
apply  to  the  Ordinary  to  determine  the  point.  And, 
again,  as  no  direction  is  given  relative  to  the  'Position'' 
which  the  Clergyman  is  to  assume  when  in  the 
'  accustomed  place,'  and  he  departs  from  the  old  usage, 
he  must,  as  in  the  last  instance,  should  dispute  arise, 
have  recourse  to  his  Diocesan.  Doubts  and  objections 
however  are  not  likely  to  occur  so  long  as  the 
established  custom  of  the  particular  Church  is  adhered 
to.  Still  it  is  not  the  Place  that  is  so  much  a  matter 
of  controversy  as  the  Position.  On  this  point  the 
prevailing  practice  has  long  been  for  the  Officiating 
Minister  to  celebrate  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer 
in  the  'Beading-Desk,'  looking  westward,  facing  the 
assembled  "Worshippers :  in  some  few  cases  the  custom 


OF  THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTER.  495 


may  bave  been  for  the  'Prayers '  to  be  said  towards 
the  North  or  South,  and  for  the  'Lessons '  to  be  read 
from  the  '  Desk,'  or  from  a  '  Lectern,'  towards  the 
"West,  the  Minister,  in  accordance  with  the  Rubric, 
'  turning  himself,  as  he  may  best  be  heard.'  It  is  the 
modern  introduction  of  the  latter  practices,  in  so  many- 
instances  where  they  had  not  been  previously  adopted, 
which  has  made  the  subject  a  matter  of  controversy ; 
but  since  the  proper  Position  rests  upon  the  meaning 
to  be  assigned  to  the  term  'accustomed;' — which 
meaning  however,  as  the  Rubric,  and  Canon  imply, 
is  to  be  determined  by  the  Ordinary,  and  not  by  any 
private  individual, — it  will  be  better  that  we  should 
trace  the  question  to  its  source,  particularly  as  the 
adoption  of  the  side-way  Position  at  the  saying  of  the 
Prayers,  and  the  use  of  the  Lectern  for  the  '  Lessons,' 
are  practices  at  the  present  day  extensively  on  the 
increase. 

288.  — The  Minister's  turning  his  back  to  the 
Congregation  being  a  subject  that  will  be  argued  at  the 
Consecration  Prayer  in  the  Communion  Service ;  and 
the  general  Worshipping  towards  the  Mast,  and  turning 
thither  when  repeating  the  Creeds,  having  been  already 
touched  upon  (in  pars.  204,  205),  and  which  should  be 
read  in  connexion  with  these  remarks,  we  will  proceed 
at  once  to  the  elucidation  of  the  epithet  '  accustomed ' 
upon  which  so  much  depends :  leaving  the  question  of 
the  Lectern  till  we  come  to  the  Rubric  introducing 
the  '  Lessons.' 

289.  — Going  back  to  the  first  Liturgy  of 
Edward  VI.  (1549),  we  have  this  Rubric:  — 

1549.    'The  Priest  being  in  the  Quire'  shall  begin  with  a  loud 
'voice,  &c.' — (Clay,  33.  Keeling,  11.) 


*  The  term  Quire  (Quier,  Qivere,  Choir),  when  referring  to 
place,  is  identical  with  Chancel.  The  latter  word  however  is  now 
generally  applied  to  the  eastern  part  of  Parish  Churches,  and  the 
former  to  that  of  Cathedrals.  In  another  sense  the  word  Quire 
{Choir)  implies  a  body  of  men,  Clerics,  and  Laymen,  set  apart  for 
the  performance  of  the  Divine  Services;  and  in  a  more  restricted 
meaning  it  denotes  the  men  and  boys  called  Choristers,  who  perform 
the  Services  to  music. 


496 


PLACE  AND  POSITION 


From  this  it  appears  that  Divine  Service  was  then 

performed  in  the  Chancel,  at  or  near  the  Communion  Table. 

Bp.  Gibson,  explaining  the  phrase  'in  the  Quire,'  says: — 'That 
'  is,  in  his  own  seat  there,  as  the  way  was  all  Edward  Vlth's  time; 
'and  as  is  still  done  in  some  Churches;  but  in  the  beginning  of 
'  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign  Readiny-Desks  began  to  be  set  up  in 
'  the  body  of  the  Church,  and  Diviue  Service  to  be  read  there,  by 
'  appointment  of  the  Ordinaries,  according  to  the  power  vested  in 
'  them  by  the  Rubric  of  5  &  6  Edro.  VI.'— (CW.  297.).  Burns'  Eccl. 
L.  Phil.  in.  436 ;  Stephens'  Laws  Rel.  to  CI.  1092. 

Wheatly  also  observes: — 'Then  it  was  the  custom  for  the 
'Minister  to  perform  Divine  Service  (i.e.  Morning  and  Evening 
'  Prater,  as  well  as  the  Communion  Office)  at  the  upper  end  of 
'the  Choir  near  the  Altar;  towards  which,  whether  standing  or 
•  kneeling,  he  always  turned  his  face  in  the  Prayers;  though  whilst 
'he  was  reading  the  'Lessons'  he  turned  to  the  People.  Against 
'this,  Bucer,  by  the  direction  of  Calvin,  most  grievously 
'declaimed;  urging,  that  "it  was  a  most  antichristian  practice 
'  for  the  Priest  to  say  Prayers  only  in  the  Choir,  as  a  place  peculiar 
'to  the  Clergy;  and  not  in  the  body  of  the  Church  among  the 
'  People,  who  had  as  much  right  to  Divine  Worship  as  the  Clergy 
'  themselves."  (p.  106.)— Rat.  III.  of  Book  of  C.  P. 

The  result  of  this  objection  was  a  revision  of  the 
Rubric,  which  in  the  Second  Liturgy  of  Edward  VI.  (1552),  ran 
thus: — 

1552.  'The  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  shall  be  used  in 
'such  place  of  the  Church,  Chapel  or  Chancel,  and  the 
'Minister  shall  turn  him,  as  the  People  may  best 
'hear.  And  if  tliere  be  any  controversy  therein,  the 
'matter  shall  be  referred  to  the  Ordinary,  and  he  or  his 
'Deputy  shall  appoint  the  place,  and  the  Chancels  shall 
'remain  as  they  have  done  in  times  past.' — (Clay,  30. 
Keeling,  2.) 

This  alteration  of  the  Rubric  did  not  answer  the  end  designed, 
but  was  productive  of  considerable  diversity  and  opposition  which 
lasted  till  the  end  of  the  reign.  (July,  1553.) 

Wheatly  says: — 'This  alteration  oaused  great  contentions, 
'  some  kneeling  one  way,  some  another,  though  still  keeping  in  the 
'  Chancel :  whilst  others  left  the  '  accustomed  place,'  aud  performed 
'  all  the  Service  in  the  body  of  the  Church  amongst  the  People.' 
{p.  106.)— Rat.  III.  of  the  Book  of  Com.  Prayer. 

290.— On    the    accession   of   Elizabeth,  the 

Protestant  Worship  being  again  restored,  the  Rubric  was  once  more 
altered  in  order  to  appease  the  strife  and  diversity  this  matter  had 
occasioned;  and  in  the  Liturgy-  of  1559,  was  introduced  the  Rubric 
we  now  have  in  our  present  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  (quoted 
above, page  493.)    Here,  by  the  expression  '  in  the  accustomed  place,' 


OF  THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTER.  497 


the  ancient  practice  was  revived  which  had  prevailed  before  the 
appearance  of  the  Liturgy  of  1552;  yet  still  a  dispensing  power 
was  left  in  the  Ordinary  to  make  what  alteration  necessity  might 
require.  The  usage  therefore  was  resumed  of  reading  the  Morning 
and  Evening  Prayers  in  the  Chancel ;  by  some  at  the 
Communion-Table;  by  others,  from  the  Priest's  Stall.  In  course 
of  time  however  from  the  difficulty  incurred  by  the  people  in 
hearing  distinctly  what  was  said,  and  which  was  far  greater  where 
the  Priest  directed  his  voice  eastward,  several  of  the  Bishops 
advocated  the  reading  of  the  'Prayers'  in  the  body  of  the  Church. 
The  practice  gradually  extended;  and  ultimately  it  became  so 
universal  that  the  Service  was  eventually  no  where  performed  in 
the  Chancels  of  our  Parish  Churches,  although  it  continued,  and 
has  survived  to  this  day,  to  be  celebrated  in  the  Choirs  of 
Cathedrals. 

In  support  of  what  has  been  asserted,  we  will  now  refer  to  a  few 
authorities,  introducing  them  chronologically: — 

In  15C2,  the  Puritans  requested  Convocation  to  direct — 'that  in 
'all  Parish  Churches  the  Minister  turn  his  face  towards  the  People.' — 
(Strype's  Ann.  i.  337.). 

In  15G4,  Cecil  urges,  that — 'Some  say  the  Service  in  the 
'  Chancel ;  others  in  the  body  of  the  Church ;  some  officiate  in  a 
'Seat;  some  in  the  Pulpit,  with  their  faces  to  the  People.' — 
(Collier's  Eccl.  Hist.  U.  493.) 

Again,  at  Canterbury  Cathedral:  — '  The  Common  Prayer 
'  daily  throughout  the  year,  though  there  be  no  Communion,  is  sung 
'at  the  Communion-Table,  standing  North  and  South,  where  the 
'high  Altar  did  stand;  the  Minister,  when  there  is  no  Communion, 
'  useth  a  Surplice  only,  standing  on  the  East  side  of  the  Table  with 
'  his  face  towards  the  People.' — (Strype's  Parker,  183.). 

In  1564 — 5,  we  find  it  enjoined  in  the  'Boole  of  Advertisements, 
and  which  is  the  progenitor  of  Canon  14: — 'That  the  Common 
'  Prayer  be  said  or  sung  decently  and  distinctly,  in  such  place  as 
'  the  Ordinary  shall  think  meet  for  the  largeness  and  straitness  of 
'the  Church  and  Quire,  so  that  the  People  may  be  most  edified.' — 
(Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  291;  Sparrow's  Col.  124.) 

291. — The  Beading-Desle. — As  a  natural  conse- 
quence this  change  led  to  the  introduction  of  the  Minister's  Seat, 
subsequently  termed  the  Reading-Desk,  or  Pew  (Pue);  in 
respect  of  which  mention  is  first  made  in  the  Visitation  Articles 
of  Parkhurst,  Bp.  of  Norwich,  where  it  is  ordered — 

In  1569. — '  That  in  great  Churches  where  all  the  People  cannot 
'conveniently  hear  the  Minister,  the  Churchwardens  and  others,  to 
'  whom  the  charge  doth  belong,  shall  provide  and  support  a  decent 
'and  convenient  seat  in  the  body  of  the  Church,  where  the  said 


498 


PLACE  AND  POSITION 


'  Minister  may  sit  or  stand,  and  say  the  whole  of  the  Divine  Service, 
'that  all  the  Congregation  may  hear  and  be  edified  therewith;  and 
'  that  in  smaller  Churches,  there  be  some  convenient  teat  outside 
'the  Chancel  door  for  that  purpose.' — (Hook's  Ch.  Diet.  Art. 'Pew.') 
Mr.  Robertson,  however,  quotes  from  the  British  Mag.  (vi.  2G9.) 
two  items  out  of  the  Parish  Accounts  of  Darlington,  charging  for  the 
repairs  of  the  Ministers  seat,  which  bear  an  earlier  date;  viz.  1564, 
and  1566. 

In  1569.  Abp.  Parker  inquires  in  his  Visitation  Articles — 
'  Whether  they  do  celebrate  Divine  Service  in  the  Chancel,  or  in  the 
'  Church?  '— (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann.  i.  321.) 

In  1571.    Grindal,  Abp.  of  York,  thus  directs  his  Clergy : — '  Ye 

'  shall  say  or  sing  the  Common  Prayer  both  in  the  forenoon 

'  and  afternoon,  standing  in  a  Pulpit  or  Seat  appointed  for  that 
'  purpose,  and  so  turning  your  face  towards  the  People,  as  they  may 
'best  hear  the  same.' — Rem.  123.  Park.  S.  Ed.).  And  he  gives 
orders  to  the  Laity  that — '  a  decent  low  Pulpit  bt  erected  and  made 
'in  the  body  of  the  Church  out  of  hand,  wherein  the  Minister  shall 
'  stand  with  his  .face  towards  the  People,  when  he  readeth  the 
'Morning  and  Evening  Prayer;  provided  always  that  where  the 
'Churches  are  very  small,  it  shall  suffice  that  the  Minister  stand 
'  in  his  accustomed  Stall  in  the  Choir  ;  so  that  a  convenient  Desk  or 
'Lectern,  with  a  room  to  turn  his  face  toward*  the  People,  be  there 
'  provided  by  the  said  Churchwardens  at  the  charges  of  the  Parish.' — 
(ib.  133,) 

In  1571.  Scambler,  Bp.  of  Peterborough,  orders  that  at 
Northampton — '  the  Common  Prayer,  accustomed  to  be  said  [in 
'  the  Choir,  be]  brought  down  into  the  body  of  the  Church,  among 
'  the  People,  before  whom  the  same  is  used  according  to  the  Queen's 
'  Book:'  (The  'Book  of  Advertisements'  of  1564 — 5.)— Strype's 
Ann.  II.  133. 

Thomas  Cartwright,  about  the  same  time,  complaining  of  the 
distance  of  place  between  the  People  and  the  Minister,  says  — '  all 

'  the  which  riseth  upon  the  words  '  in  the  accustomed  place.' 

'  For  thereupon  the  Minister  sitteth  in  the  Chancel,  with  his  back 
'  to  the  People.'— (Hooker,  Ed.  Keble  v.  30  .  33.)  In  his  answer  to 
Whitgift,  Cartwright  also  remarks:  — '  He  whiche  readeth  is  not 
'  in  some  place  hearde,  and  in  the  most  places  not  understanded  of 
'  the  People,  through  the  distance  of  place  betweene  the  People  and 
'  the  Minister,  all  the  whyche  ryseth  upon  the  wordes  of  the  Booke 
'of  Service,  which  are  that  the  Minister  should  stande  in  the 
'accustomed  place,  for  thereupon  the  Minister  in  saying  Morning 
'  and  Evening  Prayer,  sytteth  in  the  Chancel  with  hys  backe  to 
'  the  People,  as  though  he  had  some  secret  talke  with  God  whyche 
'  the  People  might  not  heare.  And  hereupon  it  is  likewise,  that 
'after  Morning  Prayer,  for  saying  :mother  number  of  Prayers  he 
'  clymeth  up  to  the  further  end  of  the  Chancel,  and  runneth  as 
'  farre  from  the  People  as  the  wall  wyl  let  him.'  (p.  186.)— Rest  of 
Second  Replie. 

Iu  1576.  Grindal,  then  Abp.  of  Canterbury,  inquires  — 
'  Whether  the  Minister  so  turn  himself,  and  stand  in  such  place 
'of  the  Church  or  Chancel,  as  the  People  may  best  hear.' 
(p.  157.)— Remains. 


OF  THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTEB.  499 


In  1584.  Hooker  himself,  in  his  Church  at  Drayton  Beaucharap, 
used  a  ' Reading- Pew'  with  two  Desks  at  right  angles  to  each 
other;  one  for  the  'Prayers,'  and  the  other  facing  the  People  for 
the  'Lessons.' — {Gloss,  of  Arch.  i.  125;  Wilkes'  Ch.  of  Eng.  Mag. 
m.  144.). 

*»*  Some  of  the  above  authorities  will  also  be  found  in 
Robertson's  How  shall  we  Conform  to  the  Lit. ;  Stephens'  Book  of 
Com.  Pr.  E.  H.  S. ;  Hierurgia  Anglicana,  &c. 

292.  — We  now  arrive  at  the  time  of  James  I.,  when 
there  appears  the  earliest  authoritative  order  for  the 
setting  np  of  Heading-Deshs  in  all  Churches ;  viz.  the 
82nd  Canon  of  1603 — 4,  which  directs  among  other 
matters :  — 

 'That  a  convenient  Seat  be  made  for  the  Minister  to 

'read  Service  in  to  be  done  at  the  charge  of  the  Parish.' — 

Canon  82. 

293.  — The  character  and  construction  of  these 
Reading-Desks,  however,  were  neither  decisive,  nor 
uniform,  the  Canon  merely  requiring  them  to  be 
'convenient:'  whence  we  find  they  call  for  Episcopal 
interference :  thus — 

Bp.  Wren  in  his  Visitation  Articles  in  1636,  directs:— 'That  the 
'  Minister's  Reading- Desk  do  not  stand  with  the  back  towards  the 
'  Chancel,  nor  too  remote  or  far  from  it.' — (Cardwell's  Doc.  Ann. 
ii.  205.) 

Bp.  Montague  in  1638  makes  inquiry: — 'Have  you  a  comely 
'  and  convenient  Pew  of  wainscot  for  your  Minister  to  read  Divine 
'  Service  in,  and  another  to  preach  in  ?  Doth  it  stand  in  the 
f  face  of  the  Congregation  as  much  as  conveniently  may  be,  so 
'  that  they  may  behold,  and  hear,  and  understand  the  Minister 
'in  what  he  readeth,  preacheth,  or  prayeth?' — (Robertson,  68; 
Stephens'  Book  of  Com.  Prayer,  329.) 

L'Estrange  (c/r.  1659)  says: — 'Now  the  Reformers  in  Queen 
'  Elizabeth's  time,  observing  that  in  many  Churches  the  edification 
'  of  the  People  might  be  secured,  and  the  ancient  practice  observed, 
'restored  the  Service  to  its  former  station,  leaving  notwithstanding 
'  an  over-ruling  power  in  the  Ordinary  to  dispose  it  otherwise  if  he 
'  saw  just  cause  so  to  do.  Whereby  it  appeareth  that  the  Bishops 
'lately  enjoining  the  Service  to  be  said  at  the  holy  Table,  or  in  the 
'  the  Chancel,  did  not  innovate,  but  held  to  the  Rubric,  and  that  the 
'  officiating  in  the  Desk  was  a  swerving  from  the  rule,  unless  where 
'  it  was  able  to  show  Episcopal  dispensation  expressly  to  warrant 
'it.'  (p.  103.). ..'As  for  the  Morning  Prayer,  both  it  and  Evening 
'  Prayer  shall  be  used  in  the  accustomed  place  of  the  Church,  Chapel 
'or  Chancel :  So  are  the  very  words  of  the  Rubric.  The  accustomed 
'place  was  then,  without  dispute,  the  Choire ;  for  all  along  Queen 
'  Mary's  days,  nay,  from  her  death,  being  the  27th  of  November  to 
'the  Feast  of  St  John  Baptist  when  this  Common  Prayer  was  to 

I  I 


500 


PLACE  AND  POSITION 


'  commence,  by  the  Statute,  Mattins  and  Mass,  yea,  all  Divine 
'  Offices  were  performed  after  the  Popish  manner,  and  that  was 
'  undoubtedly  in  tho  Choire,  at  the  Iiigh  Altar,  and  consequently  to 
'  that  place  must  the  word  'accustomed'  have  relation  in  this 
'  Rubrick.  True  it  is,  thero  is  exception  against  this  rule,  in  case 
'  the  Ordinary  shall  otherwise  determine :  So  that  till  the  Ordinary 
'  shall  state  it  otherwise,  the  rule  holds  firm,  and  consequently 
'  Morning  Prayer  with  all  its  appendants  (not  otherwise  settled 

'  by  express  order)  is  to  be  said  at  the  Altar.'  {p.  212.)  'At  the 

'  beginning  of  the  Reformation,  and  establishment  of  our  Liturgy 
'there  was  no  such  thing  as  a  Desk  known  in  the  Church;  not 
'a  syllable  of  this  Reading-Pew  in  the  Injunctions  of  either  King 
'Edward  the  sixth  or  Queen  Elizabeth,  none  in  any  Orders  or 
'  Advertisements  set  forth  by  the  supream  authority,  none  in  any 
'  Canons  Ecclesiastical,  and  to  the  best  of  mv  inquirv,  none  in  any 
'  Visitation  Article  until  the  year  16U3,  when  by  the  82nd  Canon,  it 
'  is  ordained,  "  that  a  convenient  seat  be  made  for  the  Minister  to 
'  read  Service  in."  Indeed,  the  Pulpit,  was  at  first  designed  not 
'  only  for  preaching,  but  also  for  other  things  tending  to  the 
'edification  of  the  People:  there,  even  before  our  Liturgy  was 
'  established,  and  while  the  Romish  Mass  stood  intire  in  practice 
'  was  the  Epistle  and  Gospel,  and  one  Chapter  of  the  New  Testament 
'  in  the  forenoon,  and  one  Chapter  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the 
'afternoon,  as  also  the  Pater  Noster,  the  Creed,  and  the  Ten 
'  Commandments,  appointed  to  be  read.  All  these  in  the  time  of 
'  Edward  the  sixth,  and  the  three  last  in  the  time  of  Queen 
'Elizabeth.  This  being  thus,  it  will  be  worth  the  inquiry,  what 
'  it  was,  that  did  first  dictate  to  us  the  necessity  of  the  Heading-desk. 
'  The  satisfying  of  which  doubt,  will  reside  in  reminding  you  of 
'  what  I  discoursed  upon  the  Rubrique  before  Morning  Prater, 
'  viz.  that  the  Service  was  to  be  said  in  the  accustomed  place  of 
'the  Church  or  Chancel.  That  this  place  regularlv,  was  the  Quire 
'  or  Chorus;  now  because  in  some  Churches,  a  balfery  interposing, 
'  or  over  great  distance  impeding  the  voice,  the  People  would  bear 
'  too  slender  a  part  in  those  Orations,  it  was  therefore  in  such 
'  cases  left  to  the  Ordinaries  discretion  to  vary  from  the  former 
'  course,  and  to  assign  such  a  place  as  he  should  think  meet  for 
'the  largeness  and  straightness  of  the  Church  and  Quire  (for  so 
'  are  the  words  of  the  Advertisements.).  Now  this  liberty  was  as 
'  readily  taken  as  freely  indulged.  The  Ordinaries  flexible  at  the 
'  solicitations  of  their  subordinate  Ministers,  allowing  them  in 
'  several  places  to  supersede  their  former  practice,  settling  the 
'  Morning  and  Evening  Service  in  the  Church,  as  a  place  more 
'  edifying,  and  in  order  to  it  tolerating  the  frame  of  a  Reading-desk, 
'  which  dispensation  begun  at  first  by  some  few  Ordinaries,  became 
'  in  process  of  time  to  be  recommended  from  one  to  another,  until  it 
'  amounted  to  a  general  and  universal  practice.'  {p.  328.)— Alliance. 

294. — The  Reading-Desk,  however,  now  became 
the  recognized,  and  'accustomed  place'  for  the  Officiating 
Minister;  and  in  the  last  Review  of  the  Liturgy  (1662),  our 
present  Prayer  Book,  we  have  the  Reading-Pew  for  the  first  time 
noticed,  yet  but  once.  It  was  introduced  before  the  word  'Pulpit ' 
in  the  Rubric  preceding  the  'Commination  Service,'  which  runs 
thus:— 


OF  THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTEK.  501 


1.  'After  Morning  Prayer,  the  Litany  ended  accordiny  to  the 
'accustomed  manner,  the  Priest  shall,  in  the  Reading-Pew  or 
'Pulpit,  say.'— (1662). 

295. — Notwithstanding  the  Place  of  the  Offi- 
ciating Minister  was  now  universally  accorded  to  the  body  of  the 
Church,  there  still  existed  a  want  of  uniformity  with  respect  to 
the  construction  of  the  Reading-Desk,  and  consequently  in  the 
Position  of  the  Minister. 

Herbert  (oi.  1G32),  and  Ferrar  (ob.  1637),  we  learn  from 
Zouch's  Walton, — 'caused  the  Pulpit  and  the  Desk  in  their 
'  Churches  to  be  made  of  the  same  height ;  rather,  however,  two 
'  Desks  than  two  Pulpits,  the  height  of  Herbert's  being  7  ft.  4  in.' 

Heylyn  (oi.  1662)  complains  that — 'Desks  were  all  or  most 
'  part,  of  late  so  placed  that  the  Minister  faced  his  Congregation, 
*  contrary  both  to  the  Church's  order,  and  the  ancient  practice.' — 
Tracts,  159. 

Bisiiop  Cosins  {ob.  1671)  remarks: — 'In  the  First  Book  of 
'  Edward  VI.,  the  Priest  was  appointed  to  say  the  Morning  and 
'  Evening  Pray'er  in  the  Cltoir,  the  People  remaining  in  the 
'  Church,  as  aforetimes  it  had  been  accustomed;  for  the  Choir  was 
'built  for  the  Priests,  and  for  that  purpose  that  Divine  Prayer 

'  might  be  celebrated  and  performed  by  them  in  it  The 

'  'accustomed  place'  was  the  Choir,  as  appears  by  the  first  words  in 
'  the  first  Book,  set  forth  in  the  second  year  of  King  Edward  VI.' 
(After  quoting  the  Rubric  of  that  Book  he  proceeds)  — '  But  since 
'  that  time  at  the  instance  of  the  Parishioners,  many  Ordinaries, 
'  in  most  places,  have  otherwise  determined  and  ordered  it  as  here 
1  they  had  leave  to  do.  And  from  hence  it  was,  somewhat  after  the 
'  beginning  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign,  that  the  Minister  had  a 
'  Desk,  or  smaller  Pulpit,  set  up  for  him,  whereat  to  read  Divine 
'Service,  and  the  Lessons,  in  tho  body  of  the  Parish  Church; 
'  whereas  aforetimes,  he  performed  all  his  Office  at  his  own  seat  in 
'  the  Chancel.  And  so  in  divers  places,  where  the  Ordinary  did 
1  not  alter  it,  he  doth  still,  turning  himself  towards  the  People  (that 

'  be  in  the  body  of  the  Church)  where  he  reads  the  '  Lessons.'  

'  But  note  here  that  their  power  (of  the  Ordinaries)  was  limited 
'  and  restrained  to  the  reading  of  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer 
'  only;  so  that  the  Communion  Service  was  by  this  very  order  and 
'law,  here  reserved  to  the  Chancel;  neither  had  any  Ordinary 
'  liberty  or  power  given  him  to  bring  it,  or  give  leave  to  have  it 
'  brought,  into  the  body  of  the  Church.*  Nor  had  the  Ordinaries 


•  The  Bishop  seems  to  have  forgotten  the  last  of  the  four 
Rubrics  at  the  beginning  of  the  Communion  Service  introduced  in 
the  Liturgy  of  1552,  and  which  says :  — '  The  Table  #c.  shall  stand  in 
'  the  body  of  the  Church,  or  in  the  Chancel,  $c.'  See  the  observations 
of  Wheatly  (infra,  page  502),  and  our  own  arguments  when  we 
arrive  at  that  Office. 

II  2 


502 


PLACE  AND  POSITION 


'  any  power  neither  to  alter  the  accustomed  place  of  Morning  and 
'  Evening  Prayer,  bnt  only  when  there  was  some  controversy 
'about  it;  what  place  was  the  most  convenient  for  the  reading 
'thereof.'  (p.  16.) — Add.  Notes  to  Nicholls'  Com.  Pr. 

Bishop  Sparrow  (ob.  1C85),  says: — 'It  appears  that  immediately 
'before  the  'Lessons'  he  {the  Minister)  looked  another  way  from 
'  the  people,  because  here  (at  the  Lessons)  he  is  directed  to  turn 
'  towards  them.  This  was  the  ancient  custom  of  the  Church  of 
'  England,  that  the  Priest  who  did  officiate,  in  all  those  parts  of 
'  the  Service,  which  were  directed  to  the  People,  turned  himself 

'  towards  them ;  as  in  the  Absolution  so  in  the  Benediction, 

'reading  of  the  Lessons,  and  holy  Commandments;  but  in  those 
'  parts  of  the  office,  which  were  directed  to  God  immediately,  as 
'  Prayers,  Hymns,  Lauds,  Confessions  of  Faith,  or  Sins,  he  turned 
'  from  the  People ;  and  for  that  purpose  in  many  Parish  Churches 
'  of  late,  the  Beading-Pew  had  one  Desk  for  the  Bible,  looking 
'  towards  the  Pecple  to  the  body  of  the  Church,  another  for  the 
'  Prayer  Book  looking  towards  the  East  or  upper  end  of  the  Chancel. 
'And  very  reasonable  was  this  usage;  for  when  the  People  were 
'spoken  to,  it  was  fit  to  look  towards  them;  but  when  God  was 
'spoken  to,  it  was  fit  to  turn  from  the  People.'  (p.  27.)—  Rationale. 
7th  Ed.  a.d.  1722. 

Wheatly  (ob.  1742),  commenting  upon  the  phrase  'in  Vie 
accustomed  place,'  gives  an  historical  summary  of  this  matter  in 
these  words: — '  By  which  for  the  generality  must  be  meant  the 
'  Choir,  or  Chancel,  which  was  the  accustomed  place  before  the 
'  2nd  Common  Prayer  Book  of  king  Edward.  For  it  cannot  be 
'  supposed  that  this  Second  Book,  which  lasted  only  one  year  and  a 
'  half,  (from  All  Saint's  Day,  1552,  to  Nov.  1553),  could  establish  a 
'custom.  However,  a  dispensing  power  was  left  to  the  Ordinary, 
'  who  might  determine  it  otherwise,  if  he  saw  just  cause.  Pursuant 
'  to  this  Rubric,  the  Morning  and  Evening  Service  was  again, 
'  as  formerly,  read  in  the  Chancel  or  Choir.  But  because  in  some 
'  Churches  the  too  great  distance  of  the  Chancel  from  the  body 
'  of  the  Church,  occasioned  sometimes  by  the  interposition  of  a 
'Belfry,  hindered  the  Minister  from  being  heard  distinctly  by  the 
1  People;  therefore  the  Bishops,  at  the  solicitations  of  their  inferior 
'  Clergy,  allowed  them  in  several  places  to  supersede  their  former 
1  practice,  and  to  have  Desks,  or  Readina-Pervs,  in  the  body  of  the 
'  Church,  where  they  might,  with  more  ease  to  themselves,  and 
'  greater  convenience  to  the  People,  perform  the  daily  Morning 
'and  Evening  Service.  Which  dispensation,  begun  at  first  by 
'  some  few  Ordinaries,  and  recommended  by  them  to  others,  grew 
'  by  degrees  to  be  more  general,  till  at  last  it  came  to  be  an 
'universal  practice:  insomuch  that  the  Convocation,  in  the 
'  beginning  of  king  James  Isi's  reign,  (1603 — J),  ordered,  that  in 
'  every  Church  there  should  be  a  convenient  seat  made  for  the 
'  Minister  to  read  Service  in.  (Canon  82).  And  this  being  almost 
'  three-score  years  before  the  restoration  of  king  Charles  II., 
'(1660)— (at  which  time  the  last  Review  of  the  Common  Prayer 
'  was  made,  1661 — 2),  it  is  very  probable,  that  when  they  continued 
'  this  Rubric  they  intended  the  Desk,  or  Reading-Pew,  should  be 
'  understood  by  the  accustomed  place  for  reading  Prayers.  And 
'  what  makes  this  the  more  likely,  is,  a  Rubric  (of  1662)  at  the 


OF  THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTEE.  503 


'beginning  of  the  Communion  (Comminution?),  which  expressly 
'mentions  a  Reading -Pew,  and  seems  to  suppose  one  in  every 
'Church.  It  is  true  indeed,  another  Rubric  at  the  beginningof 
'the  Communion  Office  (which  orders  the  Table,  at  the  Communion 
'  time,  to  stand  in  the  body  of  the  Church,  or  Chancel,  where  Morning 
'  and  Evenina  Prayer  are  appointed,  to  be  said)  seems  to  have  au 
'  eye  to  the  old  practice  of  reading  Prayers  in  the  Choir.  But  this 
'Rubric  being  the  same  that  we  have  in  king  Edward's  second 
'  Common  Prayer  Book,  (of  1552)  may  perhaps  have  slipt  into  the 
'  present  Book  through  the  inadvertency  of  the  Reviewers,  who 
'might  not  probably  just  then  consider.'that  Custom  had  shifted 
'  the  place  for  the  performance  of  the  Daily  Service  into  another 
'  part  of  the  Church.  Though  were  it  certain  that  this  Rubric  was 
'continued  in  the  last  Review,  (](>62)  to  authorize  the  old  way 
'  of  reading  the  Prayers  in  the  Choir,  in  such  places  as  had  still 
'  retained  that  custom ;  yet  since  the  Ordinaries  have  a  dispensing 
'  power,  and  they  have  approved  of  the  alteration  that  has  been 
'made  in  the  introducing  of  Desks;  it  seems  as  regular  now  to 
'perform  Divine  Service  in  them,  as  it  was  formerly  to  do  it  in  the 
'  Chancel  or  Choir.'  (p.  107.)— Rat.  III.  of  Book  of  Com.  Pr. 

Siiepuerd  (ob.  1805),  says: — 'For  some  years  after  the 
'  Reformation,  the  Minister  performed  these  Offices  (Morning  and 
'  Evening  Prayer),  as  well  as  the  Communion  Service  in  the 
'  Choir  or  Chancel,  near  the  Altar.  In  the  Prayers  he  turned 
'  towards  the  Altar;  but  when  he  pronounced  the  Absolution,  and 
'  read  the  Lessons,  he  turned  to  the  People.  In  many  of  our  old 
'  Parish  Churches,  the  Chancels  are  nearly  as  long  as  the  Church; 
'  and  of  course  the  east  end  of  the  Chancel,  where  the  Minister 
'  officiated,  is  at  a  great  distance  from  the  nave  or  body  of  tbe 
'Church.  Again,  in  some  Churches  the  voice  was  so  impeded  by 
'obstructions,  that  the  people  at  the  west  end,  and  at  the  northern 
'  and  southern  extremities,  could  not  hear  distinctly  what  was 
'  read  from  the  Chancel.  For  the  accommodation  of  both  the 
'Minister  and  the  Congregation,  some  of  the  Bishops,  by  virtue 
'  of  the  power  with  which  this  Rubric,  made  in  the  reign  of 
'  Elizabeth,  invests  them,  dispensed  with  the  performance  of  the 
'Morning  and  Evening  Service  at  the  Altar;  and  in  many  places 
1  Reading-Pews  were  erected  in  the  body  of  the  Church  in  which 
'  the  Minister  read  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer.  The  practice 
'  soon  became  general,  though  it  appears  not  to  have  been  universal 
'  in  the  year  1603.  For  the  Canons,  made  that  year,  order  that 
'  "a  convenient  seat  be  provided  &c."  an  Injunction  unnecessary 
'  had  there  already  been  one  in  every  Church.  Many  of  these 
'Reading-Pews  had  two  Desks;  one  for  the  Book  of  Common 
'  Prayer,  and  one  opposite  to  it  for  the  Bible.  When  the  Minister 
'read  the  Prayers  he  necessarily  looked  towards  the  Altar,  but 
'  when  the  Bible  was  read,  by  turning  towards  the  People,  he 
'  would  "  be  best  heard  of  all  such  as  were  present."  (  Vol.  i. 
'p.  134 — 5.).  The  office  of  the  Ilohj  Communion  is  still  expressly 
'appointed  to  be  performed  in  the  Chancel;  and  the  Priest  is 
'  directed  when  he  begins  the  Lord's  Prayer,  Commandments,  &c. 
'  to  "  stand  on  the  north  side  of  the  Table."  Even  when  there 
'  is  no  Communion,  the  parts  of  the  Office  that  are  read  must  be 
'  read  from  the  Chancel  whenever  practicable.'  (i6.  136.).  In 
Edward's  First  Book,  the  Priest  at  the  Communion,  was  directed 


504 


PLACE  AND  POSITION 


to  stand  before  the  midst  of  the  Altar;  i.e.  with  his  face  towards 
the  East  and  his  back  to  the  People;  but  in  the  Second  Book,  at 
the  north  side  of  the  Table,  {p.  lsi.  Introd.)— Eluc.  of  Booh  oj 
Com.  Prarer. 

We  now  come  to  writers  of  the  present  age : — 

The  late  Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blomfield)  says: — 'I  do  not 
'  consider  it  to  be  the  intention  of  our  Church,  that  the  Officiating 
'  Minister  when  reading  Prayers,  should  turn  to  the  East  with  his 
'  back  to  the  Congregation.  Bp.  Sparrow  thinks,  that  anciently 
'  the  Reading-Desk  was  so  placed,  that  the  Minister  looked  to  the 
'  East,  away  from  the  People,  to  whom  he  is  directed  to  turn  in 
'  reading  the  '  Lessons.'  But  the  Reading-Deslc  was  not  known  in 
'  the  early  years  of  the  Reformation.  It  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
'  Injunctions  of  King  Edward  VI.,  nor  in  those  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
1  nor  in  any  Canons  or  Visitation  Articles  before  the  Canon  of  1603. 
4  The  first  Rubric  in  King  Edward's  Common  Prayer  Book,  orders 
'  that  the  Minister  so  turn  him  in  reading  Prayers  as  that  the 
'  People  may  best  hear  him ;  and  as  the  customary  place  for  reading 
'  the  Prayers  was  then  the  Chancel,  at  the  Communion-Table,  it  is 
'  clear  that  he  could  not  have  faced  the  East  (Hammond  V Estrange, 
'Alliance,  p.  328.).  It  appears  however  from  the  proceedings  of 
'  the  Savoy  Conference,  that  it  was  customary  at  that  time  for  the 
'Minister  to  turn  to  the  People  only  when  he  spoke  to  them,  as 
'  in  the  'Lessons,'  'Absolution,'  and  'Benediction;'  "when  he  speaks 
'for  them  to  God,"  it  was  argued  by  the  Bishops,  "it  is  fit  that  they 
'  should  all  turn  another  way,  as  the  ancient  Church  ever  did,  the 
'  reasons  of  which  you  may  see  in  August,  lib.  2.  de  Ser.  Dom.  in 
'Monte."  (Cardwell's  Conf.  353.).  I  myself  approve  of,  as 
'  convenient,  though  not  necessary,  the  arrangement  lately  adopted 
'  in  several  Churches,  where  the  Reading-Desk  is  near  the  East  end 
'  of  the  Church,  by  which  the  Clergyman  looks  towards  the  South  while 
'  reading  Prayers,  and  towards  the  West  while  reading  the  'Lessons' 
{p.  47 .)— Charge,  1842. 

Rev.  W.  Goode  observes :  — 'If  a  question  arises  as  to  the 
'Position  of  the  Minister  in  the  place  assigned  to  him;  i.e.  whether 
'  he  is  to  turn  towards  the  People,  or  towards  the  East ;  the  decision 
'  of  the  question  rests  with  the  Ordinary,  by  the  general  power 
'given  to  him  in  the  Preface.  The  older  Episcopal  Injunctions 
'  however  are  clearly  in  favour  of  his  turning  towards  the  People.' 
■p.  16.—  Cer.  of  Ch.  of  England. 

Rev.  J.  Jebb  says:  — '  In  the  time  of  King  Edward  VI.,  liberty 
'was  given  to  the  Ordinary  to  enjoin  the  performance  of  Matins 
'  and  Evensong  in  the  Xave,  hitherto  celebrated  in  the  Chancel  or 
'  Choir:  to  which  latter  place  the  Rubric  of  the  first  Prayer  Book 
'  confined  these  Parts  of  Divine  Service.  This  was  an  arrangement, 
'  however,  merely  of  convenience  or  necessity,  in  cases  where,  as  in 
'  the  Churches  of  St  Mary's,  Oxford,  or  Stratford-upon-Avon,  the  nse 
'of  the  Chancel  for  the  audible  education  of  the  great  body  of  the 
'  Congregation  was  physically  impossible,  without  the  removal  of 
'  screens,  &c.  The  proper  place  was,  and  still  is,  the  Chancel  ; 
'  where,  from  the  instructions  of  Ai;p.  Grindal,  it  appears  that  the 

'  Incumbent  had  his  Stall.  (;».  187.)  In  small  Churches,  and  in 

'  all  where  the  Chancel  is  not  actually  shut  out  from  the  body  of 


OF  THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTER. 


50-3 


'  the  Church,  nothing  can  be  more  absurd  than  the  erection  of 
'Reading- Desks  in  the  Nave,  No  Church,  however  small,  ought  to 
'be  without  a  regular  Chancel;  its  omission  was  never  known 
'  till  the  last  century.  But  in  Cathedrals  and  Colleges,  the 
'universal  practice,  as  throughout  Christendom,  so  in  England, 
'  with  the  two  exceptions  of  Wolverhampton  and  Manchester,  has 

'been  to  celebrate  Divine  Service  in  the  Choir,  {p.  188.)  The 

'Reading-Desk  is  a  piece  of  furniture  altogether  unknown  to  our 
'  ancient  Choirs.*  In  them,  as  at  St  Paul's  (the  arrangement  of 
'  that  Choir  being  evidently  formed  after  an  ancient  model),  the 
'  Officiating  Priest  merely  read  from  his  Stall,  wherever  that  might 
'  be.  The  Reader  of  Prayers,  in  all  our  Collegiate  Churches, 
'officiates  with  his  face  in  the  position  of  his  Stall;  i.e.  laterally,  if 
'he  occupies  a  lateral  stall;  to  the  East,  if  his  Stall  is  on  either  side 
'  of  the  Choir  door.  Whatever  it  may  have  been  in  some  Parish 
4  Churches,  the  Collegiate  usage  of  the  Church  of  England  never 
'  has  been  to  turn  to  the  East,  except  during  the  Creeds  and  Litany, 

<or  to  the  West,  except  during  the  'Lessons.'  (p.  194)  There 

'  ought  to  be  no  regular  Reading-Desk  :  the  Minor  Canon  or  Vicar 
'  in  course  officiating  from  his  proper  Stall ;  nor  should  the  Reader 
'  be  elevated  above  his  brethren.'  (p.  201.) — Choral  Service. 

Rev.  J.  C.  Robertson  argues: — 'The  present  Rubric  was 
'  originally  understood  to  fix  to  the  Chancel  as  ordinarily  the  place 
'  in  which  the  Service  should  be  read.  In  some  cases,  perhaps,  it 
'  was  said  at  the  holy  Table,  but  it  seems  to  have  been  more 
'generally  said  in  a  lower  part  of  the  Chancel,  where  the  Priest's 

'Stall  was  constructed  The  Canon  of  1G04  gave  a  general  order 

'  for  the  erection  of  Desks,  which  had  before  been  introduced  into 

'  many  Churches  with  the  sanction  of  individual  Ordinaries  

'  On  the  whole,  the  best  plan  for  a  Reading-Pew  appears  to  be  that 
'  approved  by  the  Bp.  of  London  {see  above),  according  to  which 
'  the  Desks  for  the  Bible  and  Prayer  Book  are  at  right  angles  to 
'  each  other,  as  in  the  case  of  Drayton  Beauchamp.  It  is  desirable 
'  that  Prayer-Pulpits  should  be  got  rid  of  at  the  earliest  opportunity.' 
{p.  71.)— How  shall  we  Conform  to  the  Lit. 


Place  of  the  Assistant  Clergyman. 

296. — The  Place  of  the  Clergyman  assisting  the 
Officiating  Minister  in  the  performance  of  any  of 
the  Divine  Offices,  or  as  Preacher,  is  not  prescribed 
by  any  Canon  or  Rubric  of  the  Church,  and  therefore 
depends  on  custom.  It  is  held  to  be  a  general  rule 
that  the  Chancel  is  the  proper  Place  for  the  Assistant 


*  Mr.  Jebb  adds  in  a  note  :  — '  The  Reading-Peto  mentioned  in 

'  the  Commination  Service  means  most  probably  the  Lectern  or 

'Lesson  Desk.' 


50G 


PLACE  AND  POSITION 


Minister;  indeed  for  the  Clergy  always,  says 
Bp.  Cosins  :  and  it  has  also  been  usual  for  him  to 
occupy  the  Chair  or  Seat  on  the  north  side  of  the 
Altar,  when  there  is  no  accommodation  of  Stalls 
(see  Sedilia  postea) :  in  the  latter  case,  when  several 
Ministers  are  present,  each  would  take  his  place 
according  to  seniority  of  rank  or  degree,  and  habited 
in  his  proper  vestments.  In  some  instances  where 
the  Reading-Desk  is  sufficiently  capacious,  it  is  the 
custom  for  the  Assistant  Clergyman  to  take  his  place 
there,  and  officiate  in  those  portions  of  the  Service 
not  exclusively  assigned  to  the  chief  Minister :  he 
would  read  the  Lessons  at  the  Lectern,  if  such 
were  the  custom,  officiate  at  Baptisms,  Churchings, 
or  afternoon  Catechizings ;  and  return  to  his  place 
after  each  office.  The  order  of  procedure  would  be 
the  same,  if  he  occupied  a  place  in  the  Chancel. 
"When  the  Assistant  Clergyman  appears  at  the  north 
side  of  the  Communion  Table,  he  becomes  the 
Officiating  Minister  in  the  Ante-Service  of  the 
Communion  Office;  and  he  who  was  previously  at 
the  Reading-Desk  takes  the  south  side  of  the 
Communion-Table,  where  he  reads  the  Epistle,* 
and  sometimes  he  recites  likewise  the  Nicene  Creed. 
"When,  however,  there  is  an  administration  of  the 
Holy  Communion,  the  Incumbent  properly,  (or  the 
Bishop,  if  present),  should  take  the  Service;  but 
we  shall  speak  further  upon  this  when  we  come  to 
the  Rubrics  of  the  Communion  Office. 

297. — "With  respect  to  the  Preacher,  whether  he  be 
a  stranger,  or  one  of  the  Ministers  connected  with  the 
Church,  it  is  a  common  practice  for  him  during  the 


*  The  reading  of  the  Epistle  was  formerly  assigned  to  the 
Sub-deacon,  and  the  Gospel  to  the  Deacon.  Sometimes  the  Epistle 
and  Gospel  were  both  read  from  a  kind  of  Pulpit  (Ambo)  in  the 
Chancel;  or,  according  to  Durandus  (iv.  24.),  and  Schmid 
(n.  134.),  the  Readers  of  the  Epistle  and  Gospel  stood  between 
the  Altar  and  the  Stalls,  the  Ephtoler  on  the  lower  step,  or  a 
low  stool,  on  the  south  side,  and  the  Gospeller  on  a  higher  step 
or  stool  on  the  north  side.  (See  postea.) 


OF  THE  OFFICIATING  MINISTER.  507 


Prayers  to  occupy  the  Chair  on  the  north  side  of 
the  Communion  Table,  or  a  Stall  in  the  Chancel, 
habited  in  his  surplice,  &c;  but  it  is  equally  common 
for  the  Preacher,  robed  in  his  Gown  and  Bands,  to 
be  seen  as  a  private  worshipper,  in  a  Pew  or  Seat, 
from  which,  at  the  appointed  time,  he  proceeds  to 
the  Pulpit  for  the  delivery  of  his  Sermon.  But,  as 
we  before  observed,  this  question  is  dependent  upon 
the  custom  of  the  place,  or,  it  may  be,  upon  the 
peculiar  views  of  the  Incumbent  of  the  Church. 

Rev.  J.  Jebb,  after  speakiug  of  the  Chancel  as  the  Place  in 
which  Divine  Service  should  be  performed,  adds: — 'Here  the 
'  Clergy,  at  least  those  assistant  to  the  Officiating  Priest,  ought  to 
'  remain,  even  when  the  Prayers,  by  the  direction  of  the  Ordinary, 
'  are  read  in  the  Nave:  here  the  Choir,  or  those  assistant  in  Divine 
'  Service,  ought  always  to  be  placed;  and  here  the  Rector,  or  Curate, 
'  during  the  former  part  of  the  Service  ought  to  appear  in  his 
'  surplice  as  a  Priest,  instead  of  remaining,  like  a  layman,  in  a  Pew. 

'  (p.  188.)  In  the  arrangement  of  the  British  Churches  is  often 

'  found  a  Chair  on  each  side  of  the  Altar,  for  the  use  of  the  two 
'principal  Clergi/man  during  the  intervals  of  duty:  and  also  a  long 
'  Fald  stool  on  each  side  for  the  others,  when  they  come  up  from 
'  the  Choir  to  assist  in  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Communion, 
'  or  to  receive  it.  This  seems  to  be  a  modification  of  the  primitive 
'apsidal  seats  of  the  superior  Clergy.  The  recent  condemnation  of 
'  these  Chai/s  by  some  antiquarians,  seems  somewhat  precipitate. 
'  However,  they  ought  to  be  used  during  the  intervals  of  the 
'  Communion  Service  only,  not  at  Matins  or  Evensong.'  (p.  196.). — 
At  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Communion  in  Cathedrals, 
'as  well  as  Parish  Churches,  the  Author  adds: — 'The  universal 
'  custom  of  the  Church  assigns,  in  Collegiate  Foundations,  the 
'  Office  of  the  Communion  to  the  Senior-Member  present,  that  is, 
'  to  the  Bishop  or  the  Dean;  and  next  to  them,  to  the  first  in  rank 
'  either  by  temporary  office,  as  Vice-Dean  iu  the  Cathedrals  of  new 
'  foundations,  or  by  permanent  place  in  the  Chapter,  as  in  those  of 

'  old  This  Collegiate  rule,  however,  would  seem  to  be  the  proper 

'  one  to  adopt  in  Parish  Churches.  As  it  is,  the  Rectors  or  Vicars 
'  in  those  places,  by  a  very  general,  if  not  universal  custom,  yield  to 
'  their  Bishops  alone  in  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Communion, 
'  taking  upon  themselves  the  performance  of  that  part  of  the  Service 
'  which  follows  the  Sermon.  To  the  Preacher,  however,  whether  a 
1  stranger  or  a  Curate,  is,  by  an  anomalous  courtesy,  assigned  the 
'principal  part  at  the  Ante-Communwn.  To  this  arrangement 
'  there  are  two  objections.  The  first  is,  the  impropriety  of  making 
'the  Sermon  the  standard  by  which  the  distribution  of  the  sacred 

•  Offices  among  the  Ministers  is  to  be  regulated:  the  second  is,  the 
i  effect  it  has  in  breaking  the  unity  of  the  Service.  The  Minister 
i  who  perforins  the  principal  Office  of  the  day,  i.  e.  the  consecration 

•  of  the  Elements,  ought  to  begin  the  Communion  Service  at  its 
i  proper  place.  Besides,  the  Incumbent  of  the  Parish  ought  always 
.  to  take  this  principal  part,  as  the  'Persona  Ecclesia,'  and  it  is  not 


508  POSITION  OF  THE  CONGEEGATION. 


'  seemly  that  he  should  compliment  away  this  station,  assigned  to 
'  him  by  his  Bishop.  The  impropriety  of  suffering  a  Deacon  to  read 
'  the  Ante-Communion  Service  in  the  presence  of  a  Priest,  is  too 
'obvious  to  require  comment.'  {p.  472.) — Choral  Service. 

In  a  Tract  entitled  "A  Few  words  to  Church  Builders,"  we 
read:— 'The  Officiating  Priest  at  Matins  and  Evensong  maybe, 
'  if  he  please,  in  one  of  the  Stalls  of  the  Choir,  only  coming  down  to 
'  the  Lectern  to  read  the  Lessons.  The  other  Priests  will  be  in 
'  the  Stalls,  and  of  course  vested.  In  the  Holy  Communion,  the 
'Celebrant,  Gospeller,  and  Epistler  will  alone  be  at  the  Altar; 
'  occupying  the  three  Stalls  of  the  Sedilia,  or  three  Chairs  placed  on 
'  the  south  side.  If  a  rood-loft  or  Pulpit  be  not  used  the  Gospel 
'  may  be  read  on  the  north  side  of  the  Chancel  Arch,  the  Epistle  on 
'  the  south.'  (p.  27.) — Pub.  by  the  late  Cambridge  Camden  Society. 


POSITION  OF  THE  CONGREGATION. 

298. — "We  shall  not  probably  be  considered  out 
of  order,  if  we  advert  here  to  the  ancient  practice 
of  separating  the  sexes  during  the  time  of  Divine 
"Worship,  especially  as  the  usage  is  found  still  to 
prevail  in  many  of  our  village  Churches.  (See 
Bingham's  Antiq.  of  Ckr.  Ch.  vm.  v.  6.).  In  the 
first  Lituegy  of  Edward  VI.  (1549),  the  following 
Mubric  occurs  after  the  Offertory  Sentences  in  the 
Communion  Service : — 

lThen  so  many  as  shall  be  partakers  of  the  Holy  Communion, 
'  shall  tarry  still  in  the  Quire,  or  in  some  convenient  place  nigh  the 
'  Quire,  the  Men  on  the  one  side,  and  the  Women  on  the  other 
'  side:  (1549.)— Keeling,  185. 

'  Where  it  may  be  remarked,'  says  Whe.vtly,  '  that  the  separating 
'  the  Men  from  the  Women,  and  allotting  to  each  Sex  a  distinct  place, 
'  was  what  was  very  strictly  observed  in  the  primitive  Church.' 
'  Const.  Apost.  I.  2.  c.  57.'— Rat.  III.  of  B.  of  C.  Pr.  p.  282. 

In  1638.  Bp.  Montague  enquires  in  his  Visitation  Articles: — 
'  Do  Men  and  Women  sit  together  in  those  seats  indifferently  and 
'  promiscuously  ?  Or  (as  the  fashion  was  of  old)  do  Men  tit 
'  together  upon  one  side  of  the  Church,  and  Women  upon  the  other  t ' 
{p.  43.)— Camb.  Edit. 

In  1G89.  Wiieler  {Preb.  of  Durham),  in  his  'Account  of  the 
Churches  or  Places  of  Assembly  of  the  Primitive  Christians,' 
writes: — 'In  many  country  Churches  (where  the  Grandees  have 
'  not  deformed  them,  by  making  some  high  and  some  low  to  be 
'  tenements  to  their  whole  families),  is  yet  to  be  seen  not  only 
'dextra  and  sinistra  pars  virorum,  but  also  the  right  and  left 
'hand  seats  for  the  Women.  The  seats  for  the  Men  being  next 
'  to  the  Chancel,  aud  the  seats  for  tho  Women  next,  from  the 
'  middle  Doors  to  the  Belfry.' — (p.  119.). 


CHANCELS. 


509 


The  Rev.  W.  Maskbll  Bays:— 'When,  as  was  very  anciently 
'  the  custom,  the  Men  and  the  Women  were  divided,  the  Gospel 
'  it  would  seem,  was  always  read  towards  the  south  side,  where  the 
'Men  sat.  Amalarius  (De  Off.  1.  iii.  c.  2.)  distinctly  speaks  of  this 
'arrangement:  and  an  old  Ordo  Romanus  takes  it  for  granted  that 
'  on  entering  a  Church  one  would  have  the  Men  upon  the  right  hand 
'  or  south  side,  and  the  Women  on  the  north.  (See  also  Amalarius 
1 Ecloga,  c.  xiii.  Printed  in  Georgius.  Appendix,  torn.  iii.  p.  350.). 
"  Diaconus  vero  stat  versus  ad  meridiem,  ad  quam  partem  viri 
"  solent  confiuere."  The  original  reason  why  the  Men  were 
'  addressed  especially,  appears  natural  enough :  viz.  that  they  are 
'  the  chief  objects  of  the  Church's  teaching  in  her  public  Offices, 
'  and  from  them  the  Women  are  to  learn  at  home ;  as  St  Paul 
'admonishes.'  (/>.  46.  ».) — Ancient  Lit.  of  Church  of  England. 

In  Brewer's  Oxfordshire  (p.  443.)  we  read: — 'The  principal 
'entrance  of  the  Church  (Stanton  Harcourt)  is  by  a  round-he 
'  arch,  on  one  side  of  which  is  a  small  stone  receptacle  for  holy 
'  water.  At  a  small  distance  is  another  door,  used  by  the  Women 
'  only,  as,  from  a  custom  of  immemorial  standing,  they  never  pass 
'  through  the  same  entrance  with  the  Men.' — Bier.  Anglic,  p.  375. 
(The  Women's  Gate  is  spoken  of  by  Bingham  in  his  Antiq.  of 
Christ.  Ch.  II.  xxii.  12.) 

The  Ecclesiologist  says :  — '  It  seems  to  have  been  the 
'  prevailing  custom  for  the  Women  to  sit  on  the  north  side, 
'  the  Men  on  the  south:  although  in  some  parts,  for  example,  in 
'  Northamptonshire,  near  Daventry,  the  Men  occupy  the  upper  or 
'  Eastern  part  of  the  nave,  and  the  Women  the  lower  or  Western 

'  part  We  may  mention  two  new  Churches,  St  John's,  Harlow, 

'  and  S.  Wareside,  where  this  rule  has  been  observed,  with 

'  the  best  results,  ever  since  their  consecrations.'  ( Vol.  v.  p.  43, 
H.)-ib.  p.  375. 


%.  'The  Chancels  shall  remain 

' as  they  have  done  in  times  past' 

299. — This  clause  of  the  Rubric,  like  the  one 
preceding,  owes  its  origin  to  the  objections  of  Bucek, 
who  was  desirous  of  effecting  the  complete  removal 
of  every  thing  in  structure  and  appearance  that 
distinguished  the  Chcmcel  from  the  body  of  the 
Church;  he  even  aimed  at  the  demolition  of  the 
Ohancel  altogether.  The  idea  being  that  retaining 
them  as  in  times  past  encouraged  "the  superstitious 
"opinion  of  the  holiness  of  one  place  above  another." 
But  this  was  met  by  a  strong  opposition,  which  led 
to  the  introduction  of  the  above  order.  The  Eails 
or  Screens,  and  Ornaments,  therefore,  are  by  this 


510 


CHANCELS. 


injunction  to  be  retained:  the  Eaila  or  Screen, 
indeed,  is  that  distinctive  feature  whence  the  term 
Chancel  is  derived. 

'  Chancel,  cancellus,  seemeth  properly  to  be  so  called,  a 
'  cancellis,  from  the  lattice- work  partition  betwixt  the  Quire  and 
'  the  body  of  the  Church,  so  formed  as  to  separate  the  one  from 
'the  other,  but  not  to  intercept  the  sight.' — Burns'  Ecc.  L. 
Phil.  I.  341. 

300. — The  Rectorial  rights  and  duties  connected 
with  the  Chancel  will  be  treated  upon  when  we  come 
to  discuss  the  'Fabric  of  the  Church;"  in  the  mean 
time  we  will  quote  a  passage  or  two  confirmatory  of 
the  cause  assigned  for  the  appearance  of  the  above 
Rubric  in  this  place:  which  Rubric  is  supposed  by 
many  to  authorize  the  restoration  of  our  Chancels  to 
their  condition  previous  to  the  Reformation:  which 
will  explain  the  re-appearance  of  the  Piscina,  the 
Sedilia,  the  Credence-Table,  &c. 

A  Bishop  of  Lincoln  of  the  time  of  William  III.  thus  writes : — 
'  There  is  a  part  of  the  Church  very  convenient  and  proper,  and 
'  generally  fitted  and  prepared  for  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
'  Supper,  which  we  call  the  Chancel.  Here  the  Communion-table 
'  may  be  placed,  and  the  communicants  receive,  with  greater  order, 
'  decency,  and  convenience  for  devotion,  than  in  the  body  of  the 
'  Church  or  the  seats  there.  I  doubt  not  my  brethren  are  sensible 
'  of  this,  and  satisfied  in  it,  finding  great  inconvenience  in 
'  consecrating  in  so  strait  a  place  as  an  ally  of  the  Church,  and 
'  delivering  the  bread  and  wine  in  narrow  seats,  over  the  heads 
'  and  treading  upon  the  feet  of  those  that  kneel ;  when  by  removing 
'  into  the  Chancel  at  the  time  of  that  solemnity,  every  one  may 
'  kneel  without  disturbance,  and  receive  with  easiness,  and  see  the 
'  whole  Office  performed.  This  is  so  proper  and  so  becoming,  that 
'  one  cannot  but  wonder  that  the  Parishioners  in  any  place  should 
'  be  averse  to  receive  the  Sacrament  in  this  order,  and  that  Rectors 
'should  not  take  more  care  to  fit  their  Chancels  for  this  purpose; 
'  but  some  lie  wholly  disused,  in  more  nastie  manner  than  any 
1  cottager  of  the  Parish  would  keep  his  own  house ;  others  are 
'  employed  for  keeping  School,  by  reason  of  which,  the  seats, 
'  pavement,  and  windows,  are  commonly  broken  and  defaced.' 
(p.  22.) — Advice  to  the  Clergy  of  the  Diocese  of  Lincoln. 

Bp.  Cosins  (oft.  1671)  says :  — '  The  Chancel  was  to  be 
'  distinguished  from  the  body  of  the  Church  by  a  frame  of  open 
'  work,  and  furnished  with  a  row  of  chairs  or  stools  on  either 
'side:  and  if  there  were  formerly  any  steps  up  to  the  place 
'  where  the  Altar  or  Table  stood,  they  were  to  be  suffered  to 
'  continue  so  still,  and  not  to  be  taken  down  and  laid  level  with  the 
'  lower  ground,  as  lately  they  have  been  by  violence  and  disorder, 
'contrary  to  law  and  custom.'  (p.  16.) — Add.  Xotes  to  Xicholxs' 
Com.  Prayer. 


CHANCELS. 


511 


Dr.  Burn  remarks  (from  Gibson) :  — '  It  is  here  ordered  that 
"  the  Chancels  shall  remain  as  they  have  done  in  times  past ; " 
'  that  is  to  say,  distinguished  from  the  body  of  the  Church  in 
'  manner  aforesaid:  against  which  distinction  Bucer  (at  the  time 
'  of  the  Reformation)  inveighed  vehemently,  as  tending  only  to 
'magnify  the  priesthood;  but  though  the  King  and  Parliament 
'  yielded  so  far  as  to  allow  the  Daily  Service  to  be  read  in  the 
'  body  of  the  Church,  if  the  Ordinary  thought  fit;  yet  they  would 
'  not  suffer  the  Chancel  itself  to  be  taken  away  or  altered.' 
(Gibs.  Cod.  199.)—Eccl.  L.  Phil.  i.  341. 

Whbatlt  animadverts  upon  Bucer's  conduct  in  respect  of  this 
matter  somewhat  in  the  same  strain,  although  a  little  more  warmly, 
but  adds  nothing  upon  the  subject  itself. — Hat.  III.  of  Book  of  Com. 
Prayer,  p.  108.  {p.  95.  Dr.  Carrie's  Ed.). 

Rev.  J.  Jedb  observes: — 'The  high  Screen,  separating  the  Nave 
'  from  the  Choir,  was  an  innovation,  not  merely  of  the  Monks, 

'  but  of  the  secular  Canons,  in  the  Cathedrals  An  innovation 

1  it  certainly  was,  unknown  to  the  primitive  Church.  It  had  the 
'  effect  of  shutting  out  the  great  body  of  the  Laity  from  the 
'  sight  of  the  Altar  and  Ministers,  and  from  the  distinct  hearing 
'of  Divine  Worship:  a  remedy  for  which  was  subsequently  found, 
'  (a  very  imperfect  one,  however,)  in  the  admission  of  the  Laity 
'  into  the  part  of  the  Church  properly  belonging  to  the  Collegiate 
'  body  only.  The  Rood  Screens  in  our  Parish  Churches  are 
'  comparatively  modern :  but  as  these  are  often  found  of  pierced 
'  lattice  work,  they  do  not  constitute  that  substantial  barrier 
'  presented  by  the  Cathedral  Choir  Screen.'  (p.  192.) — Choral 

The  Rev.  T.  Lathbury  says: — '  The  Rubric,  "and  the  Chancels 
'  shall  remain  as  they  have  done  in  times  past,"  occurs  in  Edward's 
'Second  Book,  and  is  repeated  in  Elizabeth's;  consequently  the 
'  rule  observed  respecting  Chancels  under  the  Book  of  1549  is  still 
'  retained.  In  short,  the  Chancels  were  to  continue  in  the  state 
'  in  which  they  were  left  by  the  Reformers.  There  was  a  disposition 
'  to  pull  down  the  steps  and  level  the  Chancels  with  the  rest  of  the 
'Church;  and  this  Rubric  was  originally  intended  to  check  such 
'  excesses.  The  state  of  the  Chancels  under  Edward's  first  Book  is 
'  well  known.  The  Table  stood,  as  at  present,  under  the  Eastern 
'  wall,  in  the  place  of  the  Altar,  and  the  Morning  and  Evening 
'  Service  were  read  in  the  Chancel.  No  alteration  was  made  in  the 
'second  Book:  on  the  contrary,  the  Chancels  were  to  continue 
'  as  they  had  existed  under  the  Book  of  1549.'  {p.  356.)— History  of 
Book  of  Com.  Prayer. 

Mr.  George  Gilbert  Scott  (the  Architect)  remarks: — 'In 
'  the  earlier  Churches  the  distinction  between  the  Choir,  properly 
'  so  called,  and  the  Nave,  appears  to  have  been  far  less,  while  that 
'between  the  Choir,  and  the  Sanctuary,  or  Sacrarium,  was  far 
'greater  than  at  a  later  period.  The  Cancelli,  in  fact,  of  the 
'  earlier  Church,  in  the  strict  sense,  appear,  as  far  as  position 
'  goes,  to  agree  rather  with  our  Altar-Rails  than  with  our 

'  Chancel-Screens  The  superior  Clergy  usually  sat  around  the 

'Apse  at  the  back  of  the  Altar,  while  the  minor  Orders  occupied 


512 


CHANCELS. 


'  the  Choir,  being  intermediate  between  the  Laity  and  the  superior 
'  Clergy.  The  Choir  was  thus  only  slightly  separated  from  the 
'Nave,  while  the  Sanctuary  was  more  decidedly  separated  from 

1  the  Choir  The  uses  of  these  two  divisions  of  the  Chancel  at 

'the  same  time  underwent  considerable  change;  inasmuch  as  the 
'Seats  for  the  superior  Clergy  were  removed  from  behind  the 
'Altar  into  the  Choir,  no  Clergy  occupying  the  Sanctuary  but 
'  those  who  were  officiating  at  the  Altar,  and  for  whom  the  Sedilia 
'  were  provided  on  the  South  side.  The  Choir  thus  became  the 
'  place  not  of  the  inferior  Orders  of  Clergy  only,  but  for  all  the 
'  Clergy  (excepting  those  who  were  actually  /fficiutiny  at  the  Altar), 
'  and  also  for  those  who,  whether  actually  Clergymen  or  not,  were 

'  officially  engaged  in  the  celebration  of  the  Services.'  (p.  58.)  

'  When  the  united  length  of  the  Nave  and  Chancel  is  proved  to 
'  be  absolutely  incompatible  with  the  audible  performance  of  the 
'  Service,  it  is  certainly  better  to  bring  the  Altar  forward  one  or 
'  two  bays  by  an  advanced  Reredos,  than  to  advance  the  Nave 
'  into  the  Chancel.  This,  however,  should  only  be  resorted  to  in 
'very  extreme  cases.'  {p.  71.)— Faithful  Restoration  of  Ancient 
Churches. 


INDEX 

TO  THE  LAWS  AND  USAGES, 

Affecting 

dbffirinting  fflwtet, 

AND  THE  RITES,  AND  CEREMONIES,  OP  THE 
CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


ABSTINENCE,  Days  of   144-151 

legal  149 

Accustomed  seat  of  the  Minister      ...         ...         ...  287 

Act  of  Uniformity  of  Edward  VI.  (the  first)  ...  ...  21 

(the  second)    ...  26 

Elizabeth    30 

Charles  II.    61 

all  of  force    69 

Adding  to  the  Services  illegal           ...          ...          ...  223 

Advent  Sunday,  when   ...          ...          ...          ...  ...  143 

All  Saints'  Bay  to  be  kept  ...         ...         ...         ...  140 

Altar,  bowing  towards  the        ...         ...         ...  ...  57 

defacing  the           ...         ...         ...         ...  221 

use  of  the  term  ...         ...         ...         ...  ...  57 

 Sails  set  up            ...         ...         ...         ...  57 

Altering  t/ie  Services  illegal        ...          ...          ...  222,224 

American  Liturgy  ...          ...          ...          ...          ...  143 

Annunciation  of  Virgin  Mary,  to  be  kept             ...  ...  140 

Andrew's  St  Day,  to  bo  kept           ...          ...          ...  140 

Appeal  to  Privy  council           ...         ...         ...  ...  9 

Arrest,  Clergy  exempt  from           ...         ...         ...  Ill,  228 

Arresting  on  Sundays  ...         ...         ...         ...  111,133 

illegal'   133 

Articles,  the  Ten      ...        ...        ...        ...  ...  15 

the  Six   15 

the  Forty-two    27, 34 

the  TJdrty-eight            ...         ...         ...  34 


514  INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 

(Articles,)  the  XXXIX    31  . 

authority  of          ...  ...  40 

Declaration  of  assent  to  41,  49 

impugning            ...  ...  41 

Subscription  to            ...  ...  41 

quoted,  XXth  34, 181 

XXIVth  88 

XXXIVth.  34, 181, 183 

XXXVIth.      ...  34,41 

XXXVIIth.  ...  12 

Ascension  Day,  to  be  kept         ...          ...          ...  140,  143 

when       ...         ...  ...  143 

Service  on       ...         ...  ...  160 

Ash-Wednesday     ...          ...          ...          ...  ...  148 

Service  on        ...         ...         ...  152, 153 

Assistant  Clerqu,  place  of  the           ...          ...  ...  296 

Attendance  at  Church,  the  law  of    108,  216,  230 

Attorneys  practising  on  Sunday       ...         ...  ...  112 

Australian  Bishops,  Conference  of         ...         ...  ...  53 


BAKERS,  trading  on  Sundays    113 

Bangorian  Controversy             ...          ...          ...  ...  70 

Banns  of  Marriage,  forbidding         ...          ...  ...  255 

publishing  ...         ...         ...  ...  255 

when           ...  ...  262 

Bargemen  working  on  Sunday   ...          ...          ...  ...  138 

Barnabas'  St  Day  ...          ...          ...          ...  ...  140 

Bartholomeic's  St  Day,  to  be  kept          ...          ...  ...  140 

Beating  the  Bounds            ...          ...          ...  ...  161 

Beer-Rouses  on  Sunday,  &c.      ...          ...          ...  ...  110 

Belfry,  decorum  in  the      ...        ...        ...  ...  231 

Bills  of  Exchange  on  Fast  and  Thanksgiving  Days  ...  115 

on  Sundays         ...         ...  ...  115 

Bishops,  election  of      ...         ...         ...         ...  ...  19 

 Book    15 

Book  of  Advertisements     ...        ...        ...  ...  36 

authority  of       ...  ...  37 

Book  of  Common  Prayer  (See  Litttbgy) 

to  be  provided  by  the  Parish     ...  68 

Booh  of  Orders  (Elizabeth's)           ...          ...  ...  33 

BOWING  at  the  name  of  JESUS  ...          ...          ...  193—198 

on  entering  and  leaving  Church     ...  ...     5",  199 

towards  the  Altar,  or  the  East  ...         ...  57,  199 

Boxing-matches  on  Sunday  ...          ...          ...  ...  134 

Boys,  whipping  in  Church        ...         ...         ...  ...  241 

Brawling  in  Chuech  or  Church- Yard     ...  ...  221,232 

Churchwarden's  duty  in  ...  241 

legal  proceedings  in  ...  232 

prosecutor,  who       ...  ...  268 

provocation  no  excuse  ...  269 

in  Vestry  Meetings  ...         ...         ...  ...  279 

punishment  ...  ...  281 

words  of     ...         ...         ...         ...  ...  284 

British  American  Bishops,  Conference  of      ...  ...  63 


INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b.  515 

Burial  Service  interrupted    232,  236 

omitting  parts  of       ...         ...  ...  236 

Burying  towards  the  East    ...          ...          ...          ...  207 

Butchers  trading  on  Sundays,  &o.           ...          ...  ...  116 

Buying  awl  Selling  on  Sundays,  &C.  ...          ...          ...  109 


CALENDAR,  regulation  of  the   139 

Cancel/us  defined   299 

Canonical  Hours  ...  ...  ...  ...        (169)  171 

 obedience  ...         ...         ...         ...  86 

Canon  Law,  domestic    ...  ...  ...  ...  ...  10 

Canons,  framing  of  ...         ...         ...         ...  9 

force  of  ancient         ...         ...         ...         ...  10 

 of  1571    44 

 of  1603-4    46—49 

authority  of       ...         ...         ...  50 

over  Laity  ...         ...  50 

legal  opinions  on  ...  50 

quoted,  1st.  ...         ...       «...         ...  13 

2nd   13 

4th.   (78)  47 

5th   41 

6th.  (78)  47,182 

13th  95, 107 

14th.       (78,  222)  48,  95, 169,  183,  286 

15th  163,  172 

16th.  ...  (78, 222)  48, 184 

18th   194,  209,  220 

19th.   218 

24th.    38 

31st.   157 

36th.       ...      (41,78,222)  13,49,185 

37th.    (13, 78)  49 

38th   (78)  49, 185 

48th.   101 

54th   78 

56th.    78, 95 

62nd   256 

64th.   104 

72nd   150 

77th.    41 

80th   45 

82nd.    283, 292 

88th   219 

90th.   216 

111th   217 

127th   41 

 of  1640    56,57 

authority  of    ...         ...         ...  58, 59 

Carriers  on  Sundays  ...         ...         ...         ...  117 

Cathedrals,  Brawling  in  ...  ...  ...  ...  240 

Celebratio  Ccen&  Domini     ...  ...  ...  ...  88 

Ceremonies  to  be  observed      ...        ...        ...         (2)  180 

impugners  of  ...         ...         ...  182 

K  K 


516  INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 

(Ceremonies)  by  the  Articles        ...         ...         ...  181 

Canons  ...         ...         ...  ...  183 

Rubrics    183 

Statute  Law    186, 187 

Certificate  of  Declaration  of  Conformity      ...         ...  64 

Chancel,  the  term  defined         ...         ...         ...  ...  299 

Screens    ...         ...         ...         ...         ...  300 

to  remain       ...         ...         ....         ...  ...  299 

Chancellors!  assent  to  the  Articles    ...         ...         ...  41 

Chapel,  the  term  defined         ...         ...         ...  ...  272 

Chaplain  in  Ordinary,  free  from  arrest         ...          ...  Ill 

Charles  II.  events  in  reign  of  ...         ...         ...  ...  CO 

Chattel  defined    273 

Choir,  the  term  defined   289 

Christmas-Day  to  be  kept           ...         ...         ...  105, 140 

Church,  admonishing  in         ...         ...         ...  ...  234 

attendance  at      ...         ...         ...         ...  108,  230 

Brawling  in  232 

continuance  in    ...         ...         ...         ...  216 

Notices,  giving  in       ...         ...         ...  ...  262 

forbidden    263 

exceptions    ...         ...  ...  263 

must  be  in  writing          ...  263 

Order  and  Decorum  in   213 

during  repairs          ...  270 

profanation  of           ...         ...         ...  ...  219 

property  of,  how  defined   ...         ...         ...  273 

Quarreling  in   232 

when  no  Service       ...         ...  241 

room  insufficient,  the  remedy  ...         ...  ...  99 

reverence  in       ...         ...         ...         ...  220 

Churching  of  Women,  announcing        ...        ...  ...  264 

Churchwardens'  authority  in  Church      ...  (216)241 

as  to  the  Minister  ...  ...  241 

as  to  morals  of  the  people  241 

in  Brandings,  &c.  ...  ...  241 

exceeding  duty  ...         ...         ...  241 

must  attend  Church            ...  ...  241 

neglecting  duty  ...         ...         ...  241 

under  the  Canons  of  1603     ...  ...  51 

Church-Yard,  Brawling  in,  &o.     ...         ...         ...  232 

Circumcision  of  our  Lord,  kept  ...          ...          ...  ...  140 

Eve  of,  omitted    145 

Citations  not  to  be  read  iu  Church        ...         ...  ...  263 

Clergy,  conduct  of  in  Church       ...         ...         ...  241 

exempt  from  arrest     ...         ...         ...  Ill,  228 

not  to  take  3  Services       ...         ...         ...  100 

exceptions          ...  ...  101 

submission  of  the ...         ...         ...         ...  11 

Collect  of  the  Day,  announcing  ...        ...        ...  ...  264 

Commemoration  Service          ...        ...        ...  88 

Commination  Service  not  in  American  Liturgy  ...  172 

Commissaries'  assent  to  the  Articles  ...         ...         ...  41 

Common  Prayer  to  be  read  by  all  Ministers     ...  62,95 

Incumbents       ...  65, 96 
on  Sundays  and  Holy-Days  ...  95 


INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b.  517 

(Common  Pbayek)  to  be  read  in  English    88 

exceptions        88, 90 
in  Welsh  ...  89 

Communion,  New  order  of     ...        ...        ...        ...  19 


Sails 

 Service  said  alone      ...  ..           ...  (172)178 

 Table  an  altar    ...         ...  ...         ...  57 

position  of     ...  ...        ...        ...  57 

Compline              ...          ...          ...  ...          ...  171 

'  Concerning  the  Service  of  the  Church'  ...          ...  85 

CONCUEEENCE  OF  HOLT-DATS       ...  ...            ...  166 

Confoemity,  declaration  of     ...  ...         ...         ...  63 

legal  proceedings  as  to  ...         ...  73 

required           ...  ...         ...       26, 30, 49 

rule  of    (77)  61 

subscription  to  ...         ...         ...  63 

Conference  of  British  American  Bishops  ...          ...  53 

Australian  Bishops  ...         ...         ...  53 

Congregation,  disturbing  the           ...  ...         ...     '  244 

position  of  the     ...  ...         ...         ...  298 

Consecration  of  Bishops,  &c.             ...  ...           ...  41 

Constable's  authority  in  Church  ...          ...          ...  242 

as  to  presentments      ...  ...  118 

Constitutions,  framing  of          ...  ...         ...         ...  -  10 

Legatine       ...         ...  ...         ...  io 

Provincial          ...  ...     '    ...    "     ...  io 

Contracts  on  Sundays        ...         ...  ...  119 

Convocation,  power  of         ...  ...    "   ...    "    ...  9 

interrupted           ...  ...         ...     "  9 

suspended          ...  ...         ...  70 

Cook's  Sliops  on  Sundays    ...         ...  ...         ...  120 

Cboss  in  Baptism       ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  201 

material      ...         ...         ...  .  .    '          "'  203 

Ceossings      ...         ...  9/19. 


DAILY  SERVICE    9! 

desirability  of  ...         ...         ...  92 

Date  of  year         ...          ...          ...  ra  3 

Days  of  Abstinence      ...          ...  ...          ...  143 

Fasting     ...          ...          ...  ,       "  144 

Dead  Body,  arresting,  illegal 
Declaeation  OF  CONFOEI! 


ONFOEMITY 

ce: 
fo; 

before  Commissary  64 


'•ertiticate  of      ...         ...  64 

form  of       ...         ...  64 


Decorum  in  Public  Worship 

Depraving  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  ...         ...  "'  74 

Directory  for  Public  Worship,'  The     '  ...          ...  ...  60 

Disabilities,  Religious,  Acts  repealed  ...          ...  108 

Dissenters  exempt  from  Conformity      ...         ...     "  ...  69 

Dissenting  Mieting-lluuses,  disturbing  ...          ...  "  245 

DlSTUEBEES  of  Divine  Worship      ...  ...  ..1(214)243 

not  to  be  detained         ...         ...  ...  241 

to  be  removed         ...  ...         ...  248 

Disturbing  the  Minister            ...          ...          ...     .  (221)  252 


518  INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 

Divine  Service,  alterations  in 
disturbers  of 

punished 
Division  of  ... 
formerly  in  the  Chancel 
interruptions  in 
irregularities  in 
not  to  be  curtailed 
omissions  in 
on  Board  ship 
times  of 

Division  of  the  Services,  considered 

ancient  usage  ... 
modem  usage 

at  St.  Barnabas 
at  Birmingham 
Ecclesiastical  opinions  on 
Doctrine  and  Ritual,  rule  of 
Drovers  working  on  Sundays 
Duties,  Parish,  apportionment  of 


EAST,  Burying  towards  the 

turning  to  at  the  Creed 
worshipping  towards  the 
Easter-Day 
Easter-tide,  to  be  kept 
Ecclesiastical  Laws,  &c.  revision  of  ... 
Edwaed  VI.  events  in  reign  of 
Elections  in  Corporations  &c.  on  Sundays 

Public  Companies 
Elizabeth,  events  in  reign  of 
Embee,  derivation  of 

  Days   

Services  on 
Epiphany,  to  be  kept  holy 
Episcopacy  abolished 
'  Erudition,"£he 
Et  Caitera  Oath 
Et held red's  St  Day,  removed 
Evening  Service  not  to  be  omitted  ... 

repeated 
Eves  of  Holy-Days  to  be  kept  ... 

not  on  Sunday 
enumerated 
omitted 

Excommunication,  commuted 
FAIRS  and  MARKETS  on  Sundays 
Fast  Days 

by  Law 

enumerated 

what  are  illegal 

in  American  Liturgy 
East  and  Thanksgiving  Days,  Public 
Easting,  rule  of 


INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 

Feasts,  Moveable 

Table  of   

observance  of 

Festivals 

Greater  and  Lesser,  distinguished 
Fish,  selling,  &c.  on  Sunday 
Forbidding  Banns  of  marriage  ... 

Marriage 
Friday,  a  fast  day 

Services 


GAME,  taking  or  selling  on  Sunday 
Games  m  Churches  or  Churchyards 
Ganqdayas,  or  Gang-week 
George,  St.  Feast  of  ... 
Good-Friday  to  be  kept  holy 

a  fast  day 

Services  on 
Goods  on  sale  on  Sunday 


HACKNEY  CARRIAGES  plying  on  Sunday 
Hampton  Court  Conference 
Harvest  work  on  Sundays 

on  Holy-Days 
Hats  on  in  Church,  removed 
Heads  of  Colleges  assent  to  the  Articles 

conform  to  the  Liturgy 
Henry  VIII.  events  in  reign  of 
Heretical  Teaching,  punishment  of 
Higglers  trading  on  Sundays 
High  Commission  Court 
Hiring  Servants  on  Sundays 
Holy-Days  enumerated  ... 
to  be  kept 

by  Law 
ancient  usage 
neglected  by  Clergy  ... 
by  Laity 

 Concurrence  of 

precedence  in 
two  Services  required  on 
Homilies,  First  Book  of 

Second  Book  of  ... 
Horse  Dealing  on  Sundays 
Hours  of  Service 

Houses,  fyc-  of  Public  Resort  on  Sunday 
 of  Entertainment  on  Sunday 


INCUMBENTS  must  read  Common  Prayer 
Injunctions  of  Henry  VIII. 

of  Edward  VI. 

authority  of 


520  INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 


Injunctions  of  Elizabeth  ...  ...  ...  ...  83 

Innocents'  Day  to  be  kept  ...         ...         ...  140 

'Institution,'  The        ...         ...         ...         ...         ...  16 


JAMES'S,  St.  Day  to  kept    140 

James  I.  events  in  reign  of     ...         ...         ...  ...  45 

John's  St.  Day  to  be  kept    140 

John  St.  the  Baptist's  Day,  to  be  kept              ...  ...  140 

Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council           ...          ...  9 


KING'S  BOOK  The    15 

Kneeling  in  Church       ...         ...         ...         ...  209 


LABOURING  on  Sundays    109 

Latin  Prayers  in  Convocations      ...         ...         ...  83 

in  Public  Schools    88 

in  Universities        ...         ...         ...  88 

Lauds            ...         ...         ...         ...         ...         ...  171 

Lay  observance  of  Sundays  and  Holy  Days            ...  10" 

Lectern       ...        ...        ...        ...        ...        ...  287 

Lecturers'  assent  to  the  Articles      ...         ...         ...  41 

Legal  Proceedings  as  to  Conformity       ...          ...          ...  78 

Legatine  Constitutions        ...          ...          ...          ...  10 

Lent,  days  of      ...              ...         ...         ...         ...  152 

observance  of        ...         ...         ...         ...  153 

' Lessons '  altering  the           ...         ...         ...         ...  225 

omitting  portions  of     ...         ...         ...  226 

when  read                                   ...         ...  287 

Letters  of  Request             ...          ...          ...          ...  250 

Libellus  Admonitiomm            ...          ...          ...          ...  36 

Liber  Quorundam  Canonum,  &c.     ...          ...          ...  44 

Lights  on  the  Altar             ...         ...         ...         ...  20 

Litany  in  English           ...         ...         ...         ...  16 

used  alone    (163)  170, 173 

Liturgy  of  1549             ...        ...        ...        ...  17 

of  1552    25 

of  1559    29 

of  1603-4    45 

of  1636-7  (Scotch)    55 

of  1662    60 

assent  to             ...         ...         ...  63 

Conformity  to  ...         ...  49,63 

depraving       ...         ...               ...  74 

Original  MS.  of          ...         ...         ...  61 

Sealed  Books  of    ...         ...         ...  61 

and  Canons  of  1603     ...         ...         ...  47 

further  Revisions              ...         ...  70 

American       ...         ...         ...         ...  148 


INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b.  831 

Loiterers  in  Church  and  Church- Yard         ...  (251)218 

Lord's  Supper  abusing          ...         ...  ...         ...  221 

Incumbent  to  officiate  at     ...  ...  296 

Luke's  St  Day,  to  be  kept         ...         ...  ...         ...  140 

Eve  of,  omitted       ...         ...  ...  145 


MARKETS  on  Sundays   123 

Mark's  St.  Da,/,  to  be  kept  ...  ...  ...  ...  140 

Marriage  during  J>hiuc  Service         ...         •■•       250— 2i>k 

forbidden    259 

irreverence  at        ...         ...         ...         •••  260 

Ring   208 

Service  interrupted  ...         ...         ...  232 

punishment  ...         ...  255 

omitting  part  of       ...         ...         ••■  261 

Mary,  events  in  reign  of  ...         ...         ...  28 

Matthew's  St  Day,  to  be  kept    ...         ...         ...         ...  140 

Matthias's  St  Day,  to  be  kept    140 

Matin-Lauds    ...  ...  ...  ...  ...  •••  171 

Matins    171 

Matrimony,   (See  Marriage) 

Meeting-House,  disturbance  in    ...         ...         ...  245 

Goods  of   273 

Men,  place  of,  in  Church     ...  ...  ...  ...  298 

Michael  St  ,\  All  Aw/els'  Day  kept   140 

Eve  of,  omitted  ...  145 

Milk,  selling  on  Sunday  ...         ...         ...         ...  128 

Minister,  molesting  the    ...         ...         ...         ■■•  252 

punishment         ...         ...         253, 254 

  place  of  the    285,290 

Ecclesiastical  Opinions     ...         ...  295 

Morning  &  Evening  Prayer  to  be  read  ...         ...  62 

in  the  Chancel  290 

no  omission  ...  97 

Moveable  Feasts  ...  ...  ...  ...  ...  142 

Municipal  Flections  on  Sunday       ...         ...         ...  129 


NEW  YEAR'S  Day,  Service  on    146 

Eve  of    147 

Nocterns         ...                                   ...          ...          ...  171 

Non-Conformists  begin       ...         ...         ...         ...  35 

Nones   171 

Notices,  publishing  in  Church      ...         ...         ...  262 

by  Parish  Clerk    266 

by  others    266 

must  be  written        ...         ...         ...         ...  263 

of  special  Sermons          ...         ...         ...  264 

of  Vestry  Meetings    ...         ...         ...         ...  263 

Novelties,  introduction  of                                73,  83,  183,  223 


OATH  of  ALLEGIANCE   

Obeisance  on  entering  and  leaving  Church 


14 
199 


522  INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 

Obsebvance  of  Sundays  and  Holy-Days  ...          94, 107 

Obsolete  Practices,  revival  of           ...  ...          ...  83 

Officiating  Ministeb         ...        ...  ...        ...  1 

facing  the  East  ...         ...  204 

irregularities  of  ...  ...         ...  249 

molesting    ...  ...         ...  252 

place  of            ...  ...        285— 1'95 

position  of  ...  ...         ...   28",  288 

Omnibuses  may  run  on  Sundays             ...  ...          ...  135 

Oedek  and  Decobum  in  Public  Worship  ...         ...  213 

Oedinal,  The    23, 25 

Ordinances,  framing  of       ...         ...  ...         ...  9 

Ordinary  Calling,  exercising  on  Sundays  ...         ...  109 

Oenaments  of  the  Chubch       ...  ...        ...  31 


PARISH  CLERKS  contending   241 

giving  out  notices  ...         ...  266 

Passion  Week  Services  ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  153 

Paul's  St  Conversion,  Day  of           ...  ...          ...  140 

Pawnbrokers  trading  on  Sunday  ...          ...          ...  130 

Perambulation  of  Parishes  ...         ...  ...         ...  161 

Services  in     ...  ...         ...         ...  162 

Peter's  St  Day,  to  be  kept  ...         ...  ...         ...  140 

Pews,  disputes  about   ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  241 

let  for  Third  Service            ...  ...          ...  99 

how  to  be  let     ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  99 

Philip's  St  Day,  to  be  kept •  ...          ...  ...          ...  140 

PLACE  of  Assisting  Clerav          ...  ...           ...          ...  2% 

Officiating  Minister          ...  ...  285—295 

Preacher       ...          ...  ...          ...          ...  297 

Places  of  Public  Resort  on  Sunday  ...  ...         ...  110,132 

Police  Offices  on  Sunday          ...  ...         ...         ...  131 

Position  of  Officiating  minister    ...  ...         ...  287,288 

Preacher,  place  of  the    ...          ...  ...          ...          ...  297 

Preface  of  Book  of  Common  Prayer  ...         ...  77 

Priesfs  Seat  in  the  Chancel       ...  ...          ...          ...  295 

Prime    171 

Primer,  The  King's    15 

Prize-Fighting  on  Sunday    ...          ...  ...          ...  134 

Procession  in  Rogation  Week     ...  ...          ...          ...  161 

Pboclamation,  force  of  Royal       ...  ...         ...  18 

Prof anation  of  Churches           ...  ...          ...          ...  219 

Property  in  Church  defined            ...  ...         ...  273 

Meeting  House  denned  ...         ...         ...  273 

Prosecutor  in  cases  of  Brawling       ...  ...         ...  268 

Provocation,  no  excuse  for  Brawling  ...         ...         ...  269 

Peovincial  Constitutions        ...  ...        ...  10 

PUBLIC  Fast  and  Thanksgiving  Days  ...          ...  105,148 

 Houses  open  on  Sundays    ...  ...         ...    110, 132 

 Worship,  impugners  of  ...  ...         ...         ...  47 

on  Board  Ship      ...  ...          ...  103 

to  attend       ...  ...         ...         ...  108 

Purification  of  V.  Mary      ...          ...  ...          ...  140 


INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 


523 


QUADRAGESIMA  SUNDAY,  when    143 

Quarrel ing  in  Church  ...         ...  ...         ...  ...  232 

Queen's  Book,  the          ...        ...        ...        ...  36 

Questmen's  Duty  in  Church       ...  ...          ...  ...  241 

Quinguagesima  Sunday,  when          ...          ...          ...  143 

Quire,  the  term  defined           ...  ...         ...  ...  289 


READING-DESK    291—295 

Reformatio  Legum        ...          ...  ...          ...            23,  45 

Repairing  Church,  order  during       ...  ...          ...  270 

Restoration,  The          ...          ...  ...          ...          ...  60 

Restoring  Churches,  decorum  during  ...          ...  270 

Reverence  in  Church      ...          ...  ...          ...          ...  220 

Ring  in  Marriage   ...         ...         ...  ...         ...  208 

Rites  and  Ceeemonies         ...  ...        ...        ...  2, 32 

impugners  of  ...         ...      47, 74 

in  Canons  of  1640  ...         ...  57 

Ritual  Controversy             ...          ...  ...          ...  4 — 7 

rule  of  ...        ...        ...  ...        ...        ...  71 

Robber v  on  Sundays           ...          ...  ...          ...  132 

Rogation  Sunday,  when            ...  ...          ...          ...  160 

Days  of   160 

Services        ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  162 

Week,  Homily  for    162 

Roman  Catholic  Chun-lies,  disturbing  ...          ...          ...  246 

Romish  Service  Books,  abolished      ...  ...          ...  22 

Rood  Screens    ...          ...          ...  ...          ...          ...  299 

Route  of  Conveyances  on  Sundays    ...  ...          ...  132 

Rotal  Supremacy  by  the  Articles  ...         ...         ...  12 

by  the  Canons  ...  ...         ...  13 

by  Law     ...  ...         ...            11, 29 

Subscription  to  ...         ...  13 

Rubrics        ...         ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  77 

authority  of  the     ...          ...  ...          ...  78 

doubts  and  ambiguities  in  ...  80—82,85—87 

Ecclesiastical  opinions  on    ...  ...         ...  83 

Episcopal  circular,  as  to  ...         ...         ...  83 


L,aity  hound  by  the 
■  and  Canons,  diversity  of 


SACRARIUM,  the    300 

Sacrilege     ...        ...        ...        ...        ...        ...  271 

in  Riots           ...         ...         ...         ...  272 

trial  for    274 

Saints'  Daus  to  be  kept      ...         ...         ...  140,143,144 

Vigils  of   145 

if  falling  on  Sunday     ...         ...  138 

Sanctuary,  the             ...          ...          ...          ...          ...  300 

Savoy  Confeeenoe         ...         ...         ...         ...  60 

Schoolmasters'  assent  to  Articles  and  Liturgy      ...          ...  41 

repealed     ...         ...         ...  69 

Scotch  Liturgy             ...          ...          ...          ...          ...  55 

Sealed  Rooks  of  the  Liturgy           ...         ...         ...  61 


524  INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 

Seats  disputed          ...        ...        ...  ...        ...  241 

of  the  Minister        ...         ...         ...  ...   286, 2% 

Selling  on  Sundays,  illegal          ...          ...  ...          ...  109 

showing  goods  for    ...         ...         ...  ...  109 

Septuagesima  Sunday,  when      ...          ...  ...          ...  148 

Serving  Civil  Process  on  Sunday      ...         ...  ...  133 

Criminal  Process  on  Sunday      ...  ...         ...  133 

Ecclesiastical  Process  on  Sunday      ...  ...  133 

Writs  on  Sunday         ...         ...  ...         ...  133 

Cures  limited         ...          ...          ...  ...  101 

Sexagesima  Sunday,  when         ...          ...  ...          ...  143 

Sexes,  separating  in  Church          ...         ...  ...  298 

Sext   171 

Sexton  to  keep  order  at  Burials     ...         ...  ...  236 

Sick  to  be  prayed  for,  naming    ...          ...  ...          ...  264 

Sidesmen's  Dull/  in  Church             ...          ...  ...  241 

Simon  St  and  St  Jude's  Day,  to  be  kept  ...  ...          ...  140 

Sitting  in  Church  ...         ...         ...         ...  ...  211 

Smiting  in  Chuech  or  Church- Yard  ...  221,275 

proceedings  in           ...  ...  275 

punishment  for    ...  ...         ...  277 

provocation  inexcusable  ...  276 

with  a  weapon     ...  ...         ...  276 

at  Vestry  Meetings    ...  ...  279 

Sports  and  Pastimes  on  Sunday             ...  ...          ...  134 

in  Church-Yards        ...  ...  219 

Stage  Coaches  running  on  Sunday         ...  ...         ...  135 

Standing  in  Church            ...          ...          ...  ...  212 

Statutes  quoted 

27  Hen.  VI.  c.  5.  (Fairs)    123 

23  Ben.  VIII.  c  1.  (Sacrilege)   271 

25  (i'i.)       c.  19-  (Clergv  Submis.)     9,  18,  23,  50 
(ib.)  (Anc.  Const.)   10 

26  {ib.)        c.  1.  (Supremacy)  11, 15,  18,  29,  49 

27  (ib.)      e.  15.  (Eccl.  Law)    23 

28  (ib.)  c  7-  (Succession)  ...  18 
31  (ib-)        c.  8.  (Proclam.)    18 

(ib.)      c.  14.  (Six  Art.)   15 

34  &  35  (ib.)      c.  23.  (Proclam.)    18 

35  (ib.)        c  1.  (Succession)  ...  18 

(ib.)      c.  16.  (Eccl.  Law)    23 

1  Edw.  VI.  c.  1.  (Sacrament)  ...     19,  221 

(ib.)        c.  2.  (Bishops)    19 

(ib.)        c.  2.  (Religion)  ...  18, 19, 271 

2  &  3  (ib.)        c.  1.  (Uniform)  21,  25,  30,  47,  49,  75 
79,  88,  90,  186,  221.  253 
(ib.)      c.  19.  (Abstinence)    ...         149, 155 

3&4(ii)      c.  10.  (Books)    22 

(ti.)      c.  11.  (Eccl.  Com.)    ...  10,23,44 

(ti.)      c.  12.  (Ordinal)   23 

5  &  6  (ib.)        c.  1.  (Uniformity)  23,  25,  75,  79,  1S7 
230 

(ti.)        c.  3.  (Holy-Days)    27, 139,  140,  144, 
145,  146,  149 

(ti.)        c.  4.  (Brawling)     221,  231,  232,  233, 
236,  240,  269.  275,  277,  279,  280,  284 
I  Mary  Sess.  II.  c.  3-  (Ministers)       . .         221,  254 


INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b.  525 

Statutes  quoted  (continued) 

1  &  2  Philip  S-  Mary,  c.  8.  (Supremacy)  ...      10, 11 

1  Eliz.  c.  1.  (Supremacy)    10,  11, 14,  29,  49, 
50 

(ib.)  c.  2.  (Uniformity)  25,  30,  31,  30,  37, 
45,  47,  49,  75,  79,  108,  187,  221,  230,  254 
5  (ib.)  c.  1.  (Supremacy)    ...         ...  11 

(ib.)  c.  5.  (Fasts)      ...  ...  155 

(ib.)  c.  28.  (Books)  ...         ...  89 

8  (ib.)  c.  1.  (Supremacy)  ...  11 

13  (ib.)  c.  12.  (Articles)        ...  40,41,42,49 

27  (ib  )  c.  11.  (Fasts)    155 

31  (ib.)  c.  3.  (Vestry)   263 

35  (ib.)  c.  7.  (Fasts)    155 

1  James  I.  c.  25.  (Fasts)  ...         ...  149 

3  (ib.)      c.  1.  (Brawling)  ...  230 

(ib.)      c.  4.  (Pub.  Worship)  ...  108 

1  Car.  I.  c.  1.  (Lord's  Day)         ...  134 
3  (ib.)  c.  1.  (Lord's  Lay)    ...  110,  117, 135 


(ib.)  c.  4  (Lord's  Day)         ...  117 
16  (ib)  c.  11.  (H.  Com.  Ct.) ...  11,  29 

12  Car.  II.  c.  17-  (Episcopacy) 


13  (ib.)  c.  12.  (Canons) 
13  &  14  (ib.)    c.  4.  (Uniformity)  22,  30,  32,  41,' 45, 
47,  48,  49,  60—69,  79,  88,  89 

21  (ib.)    c.  7-  (Warrants)   137 

22  (ib.)  c.  1.  (Conventicles)  ...  72 
29  (ib.)    c.  7-  (Lord's  Day)  109, 112,  119,  120, 

121,  12:3,  lUS,  !.",:;    [:;•;,  138,  228 

1  Will.  &  Ma.  Sess.  I.  c.  8.  (Oath)   14,  49 

(ib.)  c.  18.  (Toleration)     25,  69,  221,  230, 

244,  245,  260,  200 

1  Will.  Sr  Ma.  Sess.  II.  c.  2.  (Rights)   29 

10  &  11  Will.  III.  c.  24.  (Fish)   124 

11  &  12  (ib.)     c.  21.  (Watermen)         ...  138 
Anne,  St.  II.  c.  0.  (Crim.  Proc.)  ...  ...  133 

5  Anne,  c  9.  (Crim.  Proc.)        ...  133 

9  (ib.)  c.  23.  (Hack.  Car.)   126 

22  Geo.  II.  c  33.  (Navv  Chaplain)     ...  103 

23  (ib.)    c.  28.  (Uniformity)   ...  63,64 

24  (ib.)    e.  23.  (Calendar)      139,  142,  144,  146 

26  (ib.)    c.  33.  (Marriage)   262 

2  Geo.  III.  c.  15.  (Fish)    124 

21  (ib.)    c.  49.  (Houses  of  Ent.)         ...  127 

27  (ib.)     c.  44.  (Suit)       ...         221,  23:!,  278 

31  (ib.)    c.  32.  (Bom.  Cath.)  246 

34  (ib.)    c.  61.  (Bakers)   114 

39  &  40  (ib.)    c.  99.  ( Pawnbrokers)  ...  130 

40  (ib.)    c.  38.  (Union)    ...         ...  63 

52  (ib.)  c  155.  (Dissenters)  221,  230,  241,  215, 

260 

53  (ib.)  c-  127-  (Excommunication)  13,277 

57  (ib.)    c.  99.  (Divine  Service)     ...  98 

58  (ib.)    c.  -15.  (Third  Service)  ...  99 
(ib.)    c.  69.  (Vestry)    ...         ..,  263 

59  (ib.)    c.  36.  (Bakers)   113 


626  INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 

Statutes  quoted  (continued) 

1  &  2  Geo.  IV.  c.  50.  (Bakers)   113 

3(ib.)  c.  106.  (Bakers)   114 

4  (ib.)    c.  76.  (Marriage)  ...  255 

7&8(ib.)    c.  29.  (Sacrilege)      ...         271,  272 

(ib.)    c.  30.  (Riot)    272 

(ib )    c.  38.  (Constable)   118 

9  (ib.)    c.  31.  (Arrest)    ...         111.  221,  228 

(ib.)    c.  55.  (Ir.)  271 

c.  61.  (Beer)    110 

10  (ib.)    c34.(Ir.)  228 

I  &  2  Will.  IV.  c.  22.  (Hack.  Car.)         ...  126 

(ib.)  c.  32.  (Game)          ...  ...  125 

2  &  3  (ib.)  c.  92.  (Appeals)   9 

3&4(iJ.)  c.  19.  (Police)          ...  131,135 

(ib.)  c.  31.  (Municip.)            ...  129 

(iJ.)  e.  41.  (Appeals)    9 

(ib.)  c.  42.  (Terms)    144 

5  &  6  (?:&,)  c.  76.  (Corporations)  ...  129 

(ib.)  c.  20.  (County  Bate)       ...  125 

(ib.)    c.  62.  (Oath)    241 

(ib.)  c.  81.  (Sacrilege)           ...  271 

6  &  7  (ib.)      c.  4.  (Sacrilege)    271 

(ib.)    c.  37-  (Baking)   113 

(ib.)    c.  58.  (Bill  of  Ex.)   115 

(ib.)    c.  86.  (Burring)   237 

7  Will.  IV.,  &  1  Vict.  c.  45-  (Notices)   263 

(ib.)    c.  22.  (Informations)      ...  238 

(ib.)    c.  89-  (Arson)   229 

1  Vict,   c  90.  (Sacrilege)  ...   263,  271 

1  &  2  (-ib.)  c.  106.  (Plural)  89,  98, 101,  241 

2  &  3  (ib.)    c.  30.  (Duties)    102 

(ib.)  c.  47.  (Pub.  Hons.)  ...  132,135 

Z&4(ib.)  c.  61.  (Beer  Hous.)        ...  110 

(ib.)  c.  86.  (Suits)        43,  73,  74,  233,  237 

4&5(i4.)  c.  56.  (Sacrilege)  ...    272,  274 

5  &  6  (ib.)  c.  38.  (Sacrilege)      ...         229,  274 

6  &  7  (ib.)  c.  10.  (Sacrilege)  ...  272 

(ib.)    c  38  (Appeals)    9 

7  &  8  (ib.)    c.  69.  (Appeals)   9 

8  &  9  (ib.)    c.  18.  (Vestry)   283 

(ib.)    c.  44.  (Sacrilege)  ...  266 

9  &  10  (ib.)    c.  59.  (Toleration)      25.  69, 108,  230, 
247 

II  &  12  (ib.)    c.  42.  (Warrants)   137 

(ib.)  c.  43.  (Informations)  110,  130,  254 
(ib.)    c.  49.  (Beer  Hous.)        ...  110 

13  &  14  (ib.)    c.  57.  (Vestry)   283 

18  &  19  (ib.)  c.  118.  (Beer)    110 

Stephen  St  Sag/,  to  be  kept       ...         ...         ...         ...  140 

Strangers  Preaching  ...  ...  ...  ...  241 

Submission  of  the  Clergy  ...  ...  ...  ...  9 

Subscription  to  the  Liturgy         ...         ...         ...  49,63 

Certificate  of         ...         ...  64 

the  XXXIX  A  rticles    41 ,  49 

with  mental  reservation  43 


INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b.  527 

Sunday  to  be  kept  holy     ...        ...        ...  ...  95 

trading  illegal ...         ...         ...  ...         ...  109 

working  illegal      ...         ...         ...  ...  109 

Sunday  Services      ...        ...        ...  ...        ...  94 

Bishop's  power  as  to       ...  ...  97,98 

in  cases  of  illness       ...  ...         ...  101 

two  required      ...         ...  ...  98 

a  Third    99 

Supremacy,  Royal  ...          ...          ...          ...  ...  10 

Synoda/s  Provincial     ...         ...         ...  ...         ...  10 


TERM  TIME,  Religions  Services  in.    149 

Third  Service  provided  by  rem  Rents  ...          ...          ...  99 

Subscription  ...          ...  99 

not  to  be  by  same  Minister  ...         ...  101 

Thirty-Nine  Articles  ...        ...  ...        ...  40—43 

impugning  ...         ...  41,74 

TJiomas's  St  Day,  to  be  kept           ...  ...         ...  140 

Tierce            ...         ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  171 

Time  of  Service  ...        ...        ...  ...        ...  169 

Tower,  part  of  the  Church        ...  ...         ...         ...  273 

Trading  on  Sundays  illegal  ...          ...  ...          ...  109 

Travelling  on  Sunday    ...          ...  ...          ...          ...  136 

Trinity  Sunday,  when         ...          ...  ...          ...  143 


UNIFORMITY    2—4, 72, 73, 85-87 

impugning            ...  ...         ...  61 

Legal  Proceedings  as  to  ...         ...  73 

Union  of  Churches  in  England  and  Ireland  ...          ...  63 

Universities  and  the  Prayer  Book          ...  ...         ...  48 

Usage  or  Custom  ...         ...         ...  ...         ...  80 

diversity  of      ...         ...  ...         ...  85 


VESPERS    171 

Vestry  Meetings,  notice  of         ...          ...          ...  ...  263 

in  Churches  prevented       ...         ...  283 

Smiting  and  Brawling  at         ...  ...  279 

punishment  281 

provocation  no  defence  209,  28-2 

Vestry  Room  on  consecrated  ground            ...         ...  279 

if  otherwise           ...  ...  280 

how  removed   ...         ...  283 

Vigils  of  Saints'  Days,  to  be  kept           ...         ...  105, 144 

enumerated    ...         ...         ...  144 

omitted    ...         ...         ...  145 

Visitations  Eccl.  (Ren.  VIII.)    15 

(Edw.  VI.)    18 

(Eliz.)    33 

WARRANTS,  issuing  on  Sunday          ...          ...  ...  137 

Watermen  working  on  Sunday        ...         ...  138 

Wednesday  Services  ...        ...        ...        ...  ...  164 


52S  INDEX  TO  VOLUME  b. 


Wednesday  Services,  origin  of  ...         ...         ...  165 

Week-Day  Services     ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  164 

ancient  usage  ...         ...         ...  165 

Welsh  Bible   89 

Services      ...         ...  ...         ...         ...  89 

Whitsunday,  when       ...          ...  ...          ...          ...  143 

Whitsuntide  to  be  kept       ...  ...          ...          ...  140 

Women,  place  of  in  Church       ...  ...         ...         ...  298 

Words  of  Brawling  improper  ...          ...          ...  284 

Woeking  on  Sundays  illegal  ...  ...         ...        107, 109 

penalty  ...         ...         ...  109 

Workmen  repairing  Churches    ...  ...          ...          ...  271 

WoESHIP,  OedEE  and  DECOEUM  IN            ...           ...  213 

Divine,  on  Board  Ship  ...          ...          ...  103 

Worshipping  towards  the  East  ...          ...          ...  205 


TEAE,  Date  of    3 


ERRATA. 


Page  305, 1st  line  from  the  bottom,  for  33  Geo.  III.  c.  28.,  read 
23  Geo.  iii.  c.  28. 

Page  315,  line  12,  for  2  &  .3  Edw.  VI.  c. ;  read  2  &  3  Edw.  VI.  c.  1. 
"    357,  "   25,  for  11  &  12  Vict.  c.  4.;  read  11  &  12  Vict.  c.  43. 
"    360,  "  44,  for  3  Car.  c.  1. ;  read  3  Car.  I.  c.  1. 
"    478,  "  17,  for  3  &  4  Edw.  VI.  c.  4.;  read  5  &  6  Edio.  VI. 
c.  4. 


N.B.    Each  Volume  is  an  independent  Work,  and  may  be  had 
separately.    Price,  5.5.  6d. 


Cueate  or  Unbeneficed  Cleek   Vol.  A. 

Officiating  Ministee   Vol.  B. 

Ornaments  of  the  Chuech   Vol.  C. 

Ornaments  of  the  Minister    Vol.  D. 

Order  and  Bitual  of  Public  Worship   Vol.  B. 


J.  HALL  &  SON'S 


LIST  OF  PUBLICATIONS. 


•ese  Books  may  be  obtained  through  any  Bookseller,  but  the  Publishers  mil  be 
happy,  on  receiving  a  post-office  order  for  the  amotint,  to  send  them  to  any 
part  of  the  United  Kingdom. 


a  Easy,  Practical  Hebrew  Grammar ;  with  Exercises  for 
translation  from  Hebrew  into  English,  and  from  English  into  Hebrew:  To 
which  is  attached,  The  Fountains  of  Salvation;  being  a  Translation, 
with  Notes  Critical  and  Explanatory,  of  Isaiah  liii.  Also,  a  KEY  to  the 
EXERCISES,  by  the  Rev.  P.  H.  MASON,  M.A.  Fellow  and  Hebrew 
Lecturer  of  St  John's  College,  Cambridge;  and  the  late  Dr.  HERMANN 
HEDWIG  BERNARD,  Hebrew  Teacher  in  the  University,  Cambridge. 
Price  of  the  complete  Work,  in  2  vols  8vo  bds  28s. 
The  ELEMENTARY  PART  may  be  had  separately.  8vo  bds  5s. 

impendium  Theologicum ;  or  Manual  for  Students  in 
Theology,  Containing  a  Concise  History  of  the  Primitive  and  Mediaeval 
Church, —  the  Reformation, —  the  Church  of  England, —  the  English  Liturgy 
and  Bible,  —  and  the  XXXIX  Articles,  with  Scripture  Proofs  and 
Explanations.  Intended  for  those  preparing  for  Theological  Examination, 
with  Examination  Papers.  By  the  Rev.  O.  Adolphus,  M.  A.  Corpus  Christi 
College,  Cambridge.    Second  Edition,  much  improved,    royal  18mo  bds  5s. 

***  The  above  is  recommended  for  the  Voluntary  Theological  and 
Ordination  Examinations. 


few  Testament  History  ;  an  Analysis  of  (Dedicated  by  permission  to 
the  Begins  Professor  of  Divinity)  Embracing  the  Criticism  and  Interpretation 
of  the  original  Text ;  with  Questions  for  Examination.  Seventh  Edition,  18mo 
bds  4s. 

■Cripture  History  ;  an  Analysis  of,  ( Dedicated,  by  permission,  to  the  Lord 
Bishop  of  Llandaff).  Intended  for  Readers  of  Old  Testament  Histoey  ; 
with  Examination  Questions.    Tenth  Edition,  18mo  bds  3*.  6d. 

iCClesiastical  History  ;  an  Analysis  of,  (Dedicated,  by  permission,  to  the 
late  Norrissian  Professor  of  Divinity).  From  the  Birth  of  Christ,  to  the 
Council  of  Nice,  A.  d.  325.  With  Examination  Questions.  Fifth  Edition, 
I81110  bds  3s.  6d. 

"he  History  of  the  Reformation;  an  Analysis  of,  (Dedicated,  by 
permission,  to  the  Lord  Bishop  of  Ely);  with  the  prior  and  Subsequent 
History  of  the  English  Church  villi  Examination  Questions.  Fourth  Edition, 
18mo  bds  4s.  6rf. 

h  Short  Analysis  of  Old  Testament  History,  or  Scripture 
Facts  ;  with  Questions  for  Schools.    Second  Edition,  18mo  bds  Is.  6d. 

*#*  This  has  been  published  at  the  request  of  several  Heads  of  Schools, 
for  the  Junior  Classes. 


By  the  Rev.  W.  H.  PINNOCK,  LL.D.  Cantab. 


PUBLISHED  BY  J.  HALL  &  SON,  CAMBRIDGE. 


By  the  Rev.  W.  TROLLOPE,  M.A. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  a  Commentary  on,  with  Examination 

Questions,  chiefly  selected  from  Examination  Paper?,  especially  intended  fori 
Candidates  preparing  for  the  B.  A.  Degree.  Fourth  Edition,  with  considerable! 
improvements,   crown  8vo  bds  4*. 

The  Gospel  of  St  Matthew,  Questions  and  Answers  on.  Secona\ 

Edition,  12mo  bds  4s. 

The  Gospel  of  St  XiUke,  a  Commentary  on  ;  with  Examination  Questioni 
accompanied  by  References  to  the  Text  at  the  foot  of  each  page.  Second 
Edition,  12mo  bds  4s. 

XXXIX  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  Questions  anc 
Answers  on  the.   Fourth  Edition,  ISnio  bds  2s.  6d. 


Xiiturg-y  of  the  Church  of  England,  Questions  and  Answers  on  the 

Fifth  Edition,  18mo  bds  2s. 


Justlnl  Phllosophl  et  Itfartyris  Cum  Try  phone  Judaec 
Sialogus,  edited  with  a  correct  Text,  English  Introduction,  Notes,  anc 
Indices.  8vo  bds  6s. 


By  the  Rev.  W.  GORLE,  M.A., 

Sector  of  Whatcote,  Warwickshire. 

Butler's  Analogy,  a  New  Analysis  of,  with  Questions.  i8mo  bds  3*. 

Pearson  on  the  Creed,  an  Analysis  of,  with  Examination  Question 
Third  Edition,  18mo  bds  4s. 

Hooker,  Book  V.,  an  Analysis  Of,  with  Examination  Question. 
18mo  bds  4s. 


The  Gospel  of  St  John,  Annotations  on;  Critical,  Philological,  an' 
Explanatory.  By  L.  S.  D.  Rees,  M.  A.   12mo  bds  3s.  6d. 


Grotius  (Hugo)  on  the  Truth  of  the  Christian  Religion 

translated  by  Dr.  John  Clakke,  with  Notes ;  a  Xew  Edition,  cn.  8vo  bds  & 

Paley's  Evidences  of  Christianity,  comprising  the  Text  of  Palej 

verbatim  ;  Examination  Questions  at  the  foot  of  each  page,  and  a  full  Analysi 
prefixed  to  each  Chapter,  by  the  Rev.  George  Fisk,  LL.B.  Prebendary  < 
Lichfield.    Third  Edition,  crown  8vo  bds  4s.  6d. 

Ordination  Questions,  as  given  at  the  recent  Examinations  for  Deacon 
and  Priests;  with  Instructions  to  Candidates.   18mo  bds  Is. 


fiililf 

1  1012  01187  4^1  d