is considerable variety on different days.

Thus was our excellent Liturgy compiled by martyrs and confessors, together with divers other learned bishops and divines; and being revised and approved by the archbishops, bishops, and clergy of both the provinces of Canterbury and York, was then confirmed by the King and the three Estates in Parliament, in the year 1548, who gave it this just encomium, namely, "which at this time BY THE AID OF THE HOLY GHOST with uniform agreement is of them concluded, set forth, &c." This Common Prayer Book is frequently called the first Book of Edward the Sixth; or the Book of the second year of Edward the Sixth.

But about the end of the year 1550, or the beginning of 1551, some exceptions were taken at some things in this book, which were thought to savour too much of superstition. To remove these objections therefore, Archbishop Cranmer proposed to review it and to this end called in the assistance of Martin Bucer, and Peter Martyr, two foreigners, whom he had invited over from the troubles in Germany: who, not understanding the English tongue, had Latin❘ versions prepared for them: one Allesse, a Scotch divine, translating it on purpose for the use of Bucer; and Martyr being furnished with the version of Sir John Cheke, who had also formerly translated it into Latin. The following were the most considerable additions and alterations that were then made; some of which must be allowed to be good namely, the addition of the Sentences, Exhortation, Confession, and Absolution, at the beginning of the morning and evening services, which in the first Common Prayer Book began with the Lord's Prayer. The other changes were the removing of some rites and ceremonies retained in the former book; such as the use of "oil în baptism;" the "unction of the sick;" "prayers for souls departed," both in the Communion office and in that for the Burial of the Dead; the leaving out of the "invocation of the Holy Ghost" in the consecration of the eucha

used to follow it; the omitting of the rubric, that ordered "water" to be mixed with wine, with several other less material variations. The "habits" also, that were prescribed by the former book, were ordered by this to be laid aside; and, lastly, a rubric was added at the end of the Communion office to explain the reason of "kneeling," at the Sacrament. The book thus revised and altered was again confirmed in Parliament in the year 1551. It is frequently called the second Book of Edward the Sixth, or the Book of the fifth year of Edward the Sixth; and is very near the same with that which we now But both this, and the former Act made in 1548, were repealed in the first year of Queen Mary, as not being agreeable to the Romish superstition, which she was resolved to restore.

use.

When we consider the purity and excellence of this Liturgy, and its favourable reception, we are naturally led, to reflect upon the satisfaction and pleasure, with. which its venerable authors must have contemplated the successful issue of their labours; and to indulge a secret wish that they had been permitted to enjoy upon earth a protracted sense of so sublime a gratification.-But scarce was this salutary work completed, when the premature death of Edward made way for the elevation of Mary to the thorne, and the re-establishment of po pery in this kingdom.

Though we must lament the fate of such men, as Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer, and execrate the memory of Mary for bringing to the stake, prelates, to whom the reformation is so essentially indebted, yet we have reason to rejoice, that her reign was not of sufficient duration to destroy the fruits of their pious industry, and to restore the superstition, and tyranny of the church of Rome, which were now so justly dreaded and abhorred.

But upon the accession of Queen Elizabeth, the Act of repeal was reversed; and, in order to the restoring of the English service, several learned divines were appointed

Liturgies, and to frame from them both a book for the use of the Church of England. The names of those who, Mr. Cambden says, were employed, are these that follow: Dr. Matthew Parker, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury.

Ely.

Dr. May.

Dr. Bill.

delivery of the Sacrament were these, "the body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee;" or "the blood of our Lord

Sir Thomas Smith.

Mr. David Whitehead.

Mr. Edmund Grindall, afterwards Bishop of London, and then Archbishop of Canterbury.

To these, Mr. Strype says, were added Dr. Edwin Sandys, afterwards Bishop of Worcester, and Mr. Edward Guest, a very learned man, who was afterwards Archdeacon of Canterbury, Almoner to the Queen, and Bishop of Rochester, and afterwards of Salisbury. And this last person, Mr. Strype thinks, had the main care of the whole business; being as he supposes, recommended by Parker to supply his absence. It was debated at first, which of the two books of King Edward should be received; and Secretary Cecil sent several queries to Guest, concerning the reception of some particulars in the first book; as prayers for the dead, the prayer of consecration, the delivery of the sacrament into the mouth of the communicant, &c. But however, the second book of King Edward was pitched upon as the book to be proposed to the Parliament to be established, who accordingly passed and commanded it to be used, "with one alteration or addition of certain lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year, and the form of the Litany altered and corrected, and two sentences added in the delivery of the sacrament to the communicants, and none other, or otherwise."

The alteration in the Litany here mentioned was the leaving out of a rough expression, namely, " From the tyranny of the

serve thy body and soul to everlasting life :" which were taken out of King Edward's first book, and were the whole forms then used: whereas in the second book of that King, these sentences were left out, and in the room of them were used, "take, eat," or "drink" this, with what follows; but now in Queen Elizabeth's book both these forms were united.

Though, besides these here mentioned, there are some other variations in this book from the second of King Edward: namely, the first rubric, concerning the situation of the chancel and the proper place of reading divine service, was altered; the habits enjoined by the first book of King Edward, and forbid by the second, were now restored. At the end of the Litany was added a prayer for the Queen, and another for the Clergy. And lastly, the rubric that was added at the end of the Communion office, in the second book of King Edward VI, against the notion of our Lord's "real" and "essential " presence in the holy Sacrament, was left out of this. For it being the Queen's design to unite the nation in one faith, it was recommended to the divines to see that there should be no definition made against the aforesaid notion, but that it should remain as a speculative opinion, in which every one was left to the freedom of his own mind.

And in this state the Liturgy continued without any farther alterations, till the first year of King James I; when the Puritans, who were now a numerous body, having petitioned for a reform of what they termed abuses, the King appointed a conference to

So little reason had the nation at large to be satisfied with that novel form of government, to which it was subjected by the regicides, that upon the decease of the Protector, the presbyterians themselves were willing to accede to the re-establishment of the ancient monarchy.

When the restoration of Charles II. began to be concerted, he published at Breda a declaration concerning liberty of conscience in matters of religion. This was done with a view to soften the animosities that existed between the contending parties, and more especially to conciliate the presbyterians. The committce of nobles and commons appointed afterwards to wait upon the king at the Hague, was accompanied by eight or ten of the most eminent divines of the presbyterian communion. In a private conference with Charles, "they declared themselves no enemies to a moderate episcopacy." The king in return "assured them, that he had no intention to impose hard conditions, or embarrass their consciences: that he would refer the settling of the matters they mentioned to the two Houses of Parliament, who were the best judges of what indulgence or toleration was necessary for the repose of the kingdom."

At a subsequent private audience they ⚫ represented to Charles, that "as the Common Prayer had been discontinued in England for several years, it might be impolitic for his majesty to revive the use of it in his own chapel immediately on his return. The people, they pretended, would be less shocked if some part of it only were used with other prayers." The king, with some degree of resentment, observed, that by the liberty he granted them, they were not authorised to infringe upon his. He hoped, he said, "to find the Liturgy regularly received in many places, and, that in his own chapel, he would suffer no other form of worship." The ministers, though disappointed by the king's firmness, proceeded to importune, "that his majesty's chaplains might discontinue the surplice, because the sight of the habit would give offence to the

people." The king sala, "the surplice nad always been reckoned a decent habit; that though for the present he might be obliged to connive at disorder, he would never abet irregularity by his own practice, nor discountenance the ancient and laudable customs of the church, in which he had been educated."

At the return of the king, the church re vived with the monarchy: but its revival was not effected without some struggle and opposition. For more than fourteen years had the hierarchy been broken down, and the Liturgy laid aside. A very different form of ecclesiastical government, and of public worship, now prevailed. Various other circumstances concurred to form a prospect extremely favourable to the presbyterians. The nine bishops, however, that survived the usurpation, were speedily reinstated, six others were soon after consecrated, and in a short time all the sees were filled.

On the 25th of October, 1660, came forth the king's Declaration respecting ecclesiastical affairs, in which a promise was made, that the Liturgy should be reviewed by an equal number of divines of both persuasions. And on the 25th of March following, 42 commissioners, that is, 21 episcopalians, and 21 presbyterians, including the assistants on both sides, were constituted by letters patent. The commissioners were enjoined "to meet at the Master's lodging in the Savoy, and to take into consideration the several directions, rules, forms of prayer, and things in the Common Prayer contained, to review the same, comparing them with the most ancient Liturgies: to advise upon the exceptions and objections that might be made, and if occasion should require, to make such reasonable corrections and amendments as they might judge useful and expedient for giving satisfaction to tender consciences and restoring unity; but avoiding all unnecessary abbreviations of the forms and Liturgy, so long received in the Church of England."

The names of the commissioners are as follows:

On the Episcopalian side.

PRINCIPALS.

Dr. Fruen, Archb. of York.

On the Presbyterian side.

PRINCIPALS.

Dr. Reynolds, Bishop of Nor.

Dr. Sheldon, Bishop of Lond. Dr. Tuckney.
Dr. Cosin, Bishop of Durham. Dr. Conant.
Dr. Warner, Bp. of Roches. Dr. Spurstow.
Dr. King, Bp. of Chichester. Dr. Wallis.
Dr. Henchman, Bp. of Sarum. Dr. Manton.
Dr. Morley, Bp. of Worcester. Mr. Calamy,
Dr. Sanderson, Bp. of Lincoln. Mr. Baxter.
Dr Laney, Bp. of Peterboro. Mr. Jackson.
Dr. Walton, Bp. of Chester. Mr. Case.
Dr. Stern, Bishop of Carlisle. Mr. Clark.
Dr. Gauden, Bishop of Exeter. Mr. Newcomen.

These commissioners had several meetings at the Savoy, but all to very little purpose; the Presbyterians heaped together all the old scruples that the Puritans had for above a hundred years been raising against the Liturgy, and, as if they were not enough, swelling the number of them with many new ones of their own. To these, one and all, they demanded compliance on the Church side, and would hear of no contradiction even in the minutest circumstances. But the completest piece of assurance was the behaviour of Baxter, who (though the King's commission gave them no farther power, than "to compare the Common Prayer Book with the most ancient Liturgies that had been used in the Church, in the most primitive and purest times;" requiring them "to avoid, as much as possible, all unnecessary alterations of the Forms and Liturgy, wherewith the people were altogether acquainted, and had so long received in the Church of England") would not so much as allow that our Liturgy was capable of amendment, but confidently pretended to compose a new one of his own, without any regard to any other Liturgy whatsoever, either modern or ancient; which, together with the rest of the Commissioners on the Presbyterian side, he offered to the bishops, to be received and established in the room

of the Liturgy. Such usage as this, we may reasonably think, must draw the disdain and contempt of all that were concerned for the Church. So that the conference broke up, without any thing done, except that some particular alterations were proposed by the Episcopal divines, which, the May following, were considered and agreed to by the whole Clergy in Convocation. The principal of them were, that several Lessons in the Calendar were changed for others more proper for the days; the "prayers for particular occasions" were disjoined from the Litany; and the two prayers to be used in the Ember-weeks, the prayer for the parliament, and that for "all conditions of men," and the "general thanksgiving," were added several of the Collects were altered; the Epistles and Gospels were taken out of the last translation of the Bible, being read before according to the old translation: th office for "Baptism of those of riper years the two psalms prefixed to the lessons in tl Burial Service, and the " Forms of Prayer t be used at Sea," for "the Martyrdom of King Charles the First," and for "the Restoration of the Royal Family," were all added. There were also several other less material add tions and through the whole service, am' guities were removed, and various impro ments were made; for a more particular count of which the reader is referred to Preface to the Common Prayer Book. In a word, the whole Liturgy was then brought to that state in which it now stands; and was unanimously subscribed by both houses of Convocation, of both provinces, on Friday the 20th of December, 1661. And being brought to the House of Lords the March following, both Houses very readily passed an Act for its establishment; and the Earl of Clarendon, then High Chancellor of England, was ordered to return the thanks of the Lords to the Bishops and Clergy of both provinces, for the great care and industry shown in the review of it. Shepherd, Wheatly, Dr. Nicholls, Bp. Tomline.

To the foregoing historical account of