James Wayland Joyce.

England's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic online

. (page 78 of 83)
Online LibraryJames Wayland JoyceEngland's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic → online text (page 78 of 83)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


Vaiiati.H
prcf. x.w



had been said, Dr. Marsh desired that a prolocutor .should be
appointed.

Dr. Neil proio- I'^^G unanimous choice of the clergy fell upon
'^"''"- Dr. Neil, one of the commissioners. That

gentleman upon presentation being accepted and admitted by
Dr. JNIarsh, took upon himself the duties of his new office.

Royal licence This synod subsequently held six sessions ;

to enact canons i • xi i -i " i i- i j i

transmitted to the ^^^ ^^ the mean vvliiie a royal licence, dated
synod. jy|y 23, was issued empowering the prelates

and clergy of the northern province to amend the canons and
constitutions of the Church. This measure was taken in con-
formity with the course pursued in the southern province at
this time, where, as we have seen, the projected reform in the
ecclesiastical law had been carried on with speed ^ and energy.
, . The royal licence was formally read to the

lucsvnodnscs. -,7- ,

1 ork Synod on the ^ 8th of August, from
which day the assembly was prorogued to the 2 1st of Novem-
ber next ensuing.
YFTT n • f ^^6 must here retrace our steps slio-htlv, in

aIII. Review of 1 « ., '

tiie Prayer Book order to obscrvc that duriuo; the sessions of the

l)romoted. it

late parliament, which assembled on May 8,
the House of Commons evinced some ^ irritation, because no
good results had been secured by the collisions in the Savoy
conference (an event, by the way, not to be wondered at) ;
and some consequent impatience was manifested that no ac-
commodation on the subject of a revised liturgy was come to.
By the orders of the house search was made for the Common
Prayer Book of J 552, i.e. the second reformed book; and
eventually a bill for uniformity was, on July 9, sent up to the
House of Lords, with a printed copy of the book of IGOl, i. e.
the fourth reformed book, attached. This enterprise, however,
failed, for the bill sank. Consequently the bishops, after the
rising of the convocations and j)arliament. applied their minds
vigorously to the subject of a revision of the public liturgy.
Some of them were disposed to re-establish the former service-
book entire, while others pressed for such alterations and
additions as might silence scruples and satisfy claims without
marring the substance of the work. However, it seems to
have been agreed on all hands, after the ridiculous exhibitions
at the Savoy conference, that, whichever course was j)ursued.



XV.]



ENGLISH SYNODS.



709



XIV. Provin-
cial synods of at
November, 1661



measures could only hopefully be taken under the sanction of
the provincial synods of England, the authorized arbiters in
such a conflict. With this important business then before
them, being nothing less than a revisal of the national liturgy,
the two provincial synods of England, the last which our
present subject will lead us to consider, were summoned to
meet in November, 1661.

The two synods met at Westminster'^ and
York <= respectively on the day appointed,
November 21, 1661. As the review of the
English liturgy was a matter now requiring expedition, it
seemed desirable to avoid such delays and inconveniences as
would necessarily have arisen if the business had been sepa-
rately transacted in the two provinces. The northern pre-
lates, therefore, together with duly-authorized proxies from
York, attended in the southern synod, that thus a complete
national sanction might be given to the proceedings of the
latter assembly. From this circumstance it will be more con-
venient for the easy prosecution of our subject to consider the
acts of the York Synod first.

On the day above "^ specified, the*^ York
^'^* ' Synod assembled, and from a peculiarity in
the registers'' it would appear that the forms and prayers
above specified at a previous ^ meeting were again observed
and offered up. No business, however, is on record as having
been transacted in this first session ; but the synod was con-
tinued '^ to the SOth of November.

Important com- Before that day arrived some very important
™"officers"of'the Communications were made to the officers of
sy"0'i- the synod. The contents of these documents,

therefore, we will here consider in their chronological order,
and then pass on to the consequent acts of the assembly itself.

Tiie royal li- ^1^ the 22nd of November the' king's licence
tr'\rchbishf ^^^ ^®®'^ directed to the Archbishop of York,
Frewcn. empowering his provincial synod to '' review the

Book of Common Prayer " and " the book of the form and
manner of making and consecrating bishops, priests, and
deacons ;" with a further instruction that the synod should
" make such additions or alterations in the said books respec-
tively as to them shall seem meet and convenient ;"'' and



A.D. 1C61.
K. Chas. II.



'' Cone.
Mair. Brit,
iv. 566.
Svn. Ang.

ii: 83.

"•■ Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 567.



dSess. 1,
Nov. 21,
16(.l.
« Couc.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 567.
Wake's
State,
Append.
No. clviii.
f Trevor,
p. 103.
S Vid. su]).
pp. 706, 707.
'' Cone.
Mas. Brit,
iv. 567.



' ("(inc.
M.ig. Bri
iv. 567.
Wake's
State,
Append.
No. clvii
Trevor,
p. 107.



710



ENGLISH SYNODS.



[chap.



A.D. IGGl.

Aichlips.,

William

Juxon,

Accepted

Fieweii.

J Cone.
M.i^'. Brit,
iv. 568.



k Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 568.
Wake's
State,
Append.
No. clviii.
Trevor,
pp. 107-8.



I Cone.
Miig. Biit.
iv.»i8.
Wake's
State,
Append.
No. clviii.
Ticvor,
p. 108.



"' Conr.
Mag. Biit.
iv. 567.



these were to be presented in writing for his majesty's con-
firmation.

Transmitted to ^^t that time the-" Archbishop of York, with
^'^^^- his three snffragans of Durham, Chester, and

CarUsle, were in London ; when therefore the archbishop re-
ceived the royal Hcence, he took, in conjunction with those
prelates, immediate measures for transmitting the document
to the York Synod, which had been opened on the previous day.
Together with the royal licence the four north-

The northeni ® •'

prelates' letter to em prelates scnt down a letter, directed ^ to
^^^^ ^ ' " the right worshipful Dr. John Neil, prolocutor,

and the rest of his brethren of the convocation assembled for the
province of York." The contents of this letter were to this
effect : the northern prelates took notice of the an.\iety of the
king that the review of the Common Prayer Book should be
carried on with all possible dispatch. They informed the York
Synod that they were sitting in consultation with the bishops
of the southern province on the business ; and that as the
time allotted for the settlement of the matter was brief, the
ordinary course of transmitting the conclusions from Canter-
bury to York for concurrence would entail inconvenient delays.
Under these circumstances they desired the members of the
lower house of the York Synod to appoint proxies, under
their chancellor's seal, who should be empowered on behalf of
that body to assent and consent to the acts of the Canterbury
Synod in relation to the matters under hand. Urging expe-
dition, the northern prelates committed their correspondents to
(irod's protection, and so appended their signatures: — Accept.
Ebor. ; .Jo. Duresme ; llich. Carliol. ; Bri. Cestrien.

Archbishop In addition to his majesty's licence for the

mT Aiilirtiic review of the Prayer Book, and the prelates'
York registrar. letter last mentioned, there ' was also enclosed
a note from Archbishop Frewen, dated November 23, to Mr.
George Aisleby, the regi.strar at York. In tiiis connnunica-
tion a request was made that the business referred to might be
hastened with the greatest dispatch, as being of " great and
general concernment ;" and notice was taken that if delay
should occur, the rights and privileges of the York Synod
might chance to fall into much jeopardy.

Upon the arrival of this despatch at York, it seems that"'



'•]



ENGLISH SYNODS.



711



an intimation was sent to the members of the provincial synod
respecting the important business which would be submitted
to their notice on the next day of meeting, viz. Nov. 30,
to which time it will be remembered that the assembly ^ had
been prorogued °.

Proxies deputed On P that day 1 an earnest debate took place on
\o auend Tn''?he ^^^^ subjects uow Specially brought forward, and
soutbera synod, every care was taken to secure a proper selec-
tion of fit persons to appear as proxies in the southern synod.
After diligent consultation, an ^ instrument of proxy was drawn
up by unanimous consent, deputing the undermentioned gentle-
men for the purpose ; viz. Dr. John Barwick, dean of S. PauFs ;
Dr. John Earles, dean of Westminster ; Dr. Henry Fern,
dean of Ely, prolocutor ; Henry Bridgeman, dean of Chester ;
Robert Hitcli, archdeacon of Leicester ; Matthew Smalwood,
proctor for archdeaconry of Chester and Richmond ; Andrew
Sandiland, proctor for the East Riding ; Humphrey Floyd,
proctor for the York chapter.

The letter of proxy was an instrument conceding very large
powers to the gentlemen above mentioned. During the review
of the Book of Common Prayer, by the Canterbury Synod, they
were all and each empowered to assent and consent, or to
dissent and oppose, on behalf of the lower house at York, in
respect to all propositions which might be made. A general
authority, moreover, was given to them to transact all such
matters of business as might be executed by the members of
the lower house of York if personally present. A formal salvo
was, however, added for the liberties and customs of their pro-
vince, as well as for the dignity and honour of their cathedral
church. In giving this instrument, the house bound itself to
the acts of its proxies, under recognizances reaching to the
value of all their goods and chattels. The chapter seal of the
cathedral church of York having been appended to the docu-
ment, which was dated the last day of November, 1661, this
important business so far came to an end.

Notwithstanding the lower house at York

Six propositions , , . ... , , • -j. vj

introduced into had givcu this ample power to proxies, it did
ioucHnf ti?c Te- "ot therefore consider itself precluded from dis-
view of tiie iia- gugging the revicw of the national litui'gy, a



tional liturgy.



subject so important to the whole Church



A.D. 166].
K. Chas. II.



" Cone.
Mag;. Brit,
iv. 567.

Sup. p.
709.

p Sess. 2,
Nov. 30,
1661.

1 Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 567.

"" Cone.
Mas. Brit.
iv. 568, 569.
Trevor, pp.
109, 110.
Kennett's
Register, p.
565.



712



ENGLISH SYNODS.



[chap.



I A. D. 1661.

j Archbps.,
William
I Juxon,
I Accepted
I Frewen.

* Cone.
Mag. Brit.



Consequently we find, on the occasion of a session held on the
13th of December, about a fortnight after the one we have
just considered, that some^ propositions were exhibited re-
specting any alterations which might be made in the liturgy.
The member who brought them in was Dr. Samwayes, proctor
for the clergy of Chester and Kichmond, and the colleague
of Dr. M. Smalwood, who had been deputed as one of the
proxies to the southern synod. The propositions brought
forward by Dr. Samwayes are reasonable enough, and, more-
over, they are couched in modest language, being put in
the form of queries. The pith of them is as follows. It is
asked, —

1. Whether, in case any alterations in the liturgy should
be decided upon, a public declaration should not be made,
stating that the grounds of such change are different from
those pretended by schi.smatics ? Whether the souls of good
men without any such alteration were not safe in the Church,
and whether wilful schism was not a heinous crime, and con-
sequently whether separatists should not be entreated to re-
pent ; and, further, whether their proceedings were justifiable
because the Church was so compliant as to heed their carping
exceptions ?

2. Whether a canon might not fitly be conceived for the
observance of the ember weeks, and collects framed for implor-
ing the graces of the Spirit on those who should be then
ordained to holy functions ?

3. Whether it were not expedient that the holy oucharist
should be celebrated on all days for which that service is
appointed, and that the communion office at least in cathe-
drals should be said always at the comnmnion table ; for in
this case exceptions would cease against its being read apart
from the morning prayer ; and, moreover, if there should be no
celebration, the fault would then lie at the door of those who
failed to present tliemselves to participate, and could not be
justly charged on the clergyman, who was in a posture for
doing his duty ?

4. Whether a standing position at the psalms and hymns
md the recital of the " Cloria Patri " should not be enjoined
is well as at the rehearsal of the creed ? And whether it
would not tend to allay religious animosity, if men's behaviour



XV.]



ENGLISH SYNODS.



713



were so far restricted that none should use any outward
gestures in the performance of divine offices but such as were
authorized by the canon ?

5. Considering the excesses of violence, injustice, and
spoliation into which men had run out during the rebellion,
though they were discharged from civil processes in that
behalf, yet should not every clergyman, more especially before
the celebration of the eucharist, remind his hearers to repent
of such misbehaviour, and exhort them to consider a civil
pardon for such sins as far short of satisfaction, and so to seek
a higher pardon from the throne of grace, and further, to
reconcile themselves to their neighbours, and, if need be, make
restitution for wrongs done ?

Under this head a query is also started, whether those who
persist in holding possessions unjustly gotten in the late
rebellion can be meet communicants ? And whether a clergy-
man ought to receive such as partakers of the eucharist,
however well satisfied the offenders may be of their own fit-
ness ? And all this is urged, not by way of suggesting any
diminution of his majesty's " act of oblivion,'" but to win
sinners to seek pardon from Him who alone is able to for-
give.

6. Lastly, since some persons involving themselves in cove-
nants, inconsistent with their oaths of supremacy and allegi-
ance, have pleaded in behalf of their conduct that his ma-
jesty's authority and the authority of schismatical so called
ecclesiastical government were co-ordinate, a query is sug-
gested, whether some addition might not be made to the above-
named oaths, excluding such evasions, and asserting his ma-
jesty as supreme, not only in opposition to the external
claims of the Pope, but also to these internal claims of a self-
constituted classis ?

These six propositions exhibited by Dr. Sam-
way es are drawn with much wisdom, and com-
mend themselves to approval. The York Synod
itself seems indeed to have been well satisfied
with them ; for they were fully approved, and
an order * was made " that they should be trans-
mitted to Archbishop Frewen and his suffragans
in London, in order that they might be communicated (if it



The six propo-
sitions approved,
.and it was agreed
that they should
he transmitted to
London in order
to their heing
communicated to
the Canterbury
Synod.



A.D. 166L
K. Chas. IL



* Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 569. Ed.
Tanner
MSS.
» Dec. 13.



714



ENGLISH SYNODS.



[chap.



A.D. 1661.

Archbps.,

William

Juxon,

Accepted

Frcwen.

V Mar. 20,
Ap.3,
May 7,
June 5,
166-2.
" Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 570. 575.
^ Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 556.



y Kcnnett's
Register, p.
566.



'• Kcnnett's

Register, p.

566.

» Kcnnett's

Register, p.

566.



•> Kcnnett's
Register, p.
566, and
vid. Dr.
Nichols on
Com.
I'laver.



<■ Svn. .\n-
ii. }!4.



should so seem fit to the northern prelates) to the Canterbury
Synod then convened at Westminster.

The York Sv- Sundry other sessions " of this provincial
nod rises. svnod Were held ", in which, however, nothing

worthy of remark was transacted, and on the 5th of June,
1662, the assembly was prorogued.

2. Canterbury ^^^ must now retrace our steps in point of time,
^y'^o'^- and return to the date on which the last synod

met, viz. Nov. 21, 1661. For on the same day that important ^
Canterbury Synod assembled ^ to which this nation is indebted
for the Book of Common Prayer now in use.

The measures now taken for the revision of the

Measures taken -n i- i i-

by the synod for Jbughsh liturgy appear to have been as tollow.
Prayer^Book. ^ ^^ Several books y and papers are said to have
Books and MSS. bccn made use of in the prosecution of the busi-

consulted. mi n pi ^ r o

ness. Ihe first of these were some JNIS. notes
written in an interleaved Common Prayer Book belonging to
the Bishop of Durham's library, and which were supposed to
have been extracted from the collections of the learned ]3ishop
Overall. The second^ were some MSS. notes in another
Common Prayer Book, collected by Bishop Cosens himself.
The third ^ were some supplementary Latin notes of the same
prelate, written by his own hand, in an octavo MS., and be-
longing to the Eev. C. Neil, vicar of North Allerton ; and the
fourth^ were MSS. notes of Bishop Andrews, partly taken
from the Bishop of Durham's library, and partly from the col-
lection of Mr. Neil before mentioned.

Method pursued The method pursued by the synod in the im-
thc work^of"re^i'- poi'taut work of revising the liturgy was well cal-
'^'""- culated to connnend itself to general satisfaction.

A committee of bishops" was appointed by the upper house, with
power given to any three of them to proceed in the business.
These prelates'^ were to meet at the Bishop of Ely's house every
day, except Sundays, at 5 p. m., until their work should be com-

' The members of this assembly were the same as of the last Canterbury Synod.
For a detailed list of their names, see Kcnnett's Register, pp. 4H0 — 482. Vid. sup.
p. 701, note.

" John, bishop of Durham ; Matthew, bishop of Ely ; Robert, bishoj) of 0.\-
ford ; John, bishop of Rochester; Humphrey, bishop of Sarum ; George, bishop
of Worcester ; Robert, bishop of Lincoln ; William, bishop of Gloucester. — Syn.
Ang. ii. 84.



XV.]



ENGLISH SYNODS.



715



The calendar.



pleted. It appears that the labours of this committee were
in some measure lightened by aid lent from time to time in
the sessions ^ of the upper house ; and that when portions
of the book were there agreed to, they were delivered ^ to the
prolocutor, with directions that the lower house should re-
vise^ and amends, as should to them^ seem necessary. By
the 29th ^ of November the Prayer Book was so far finished
that the form of ordination was engaging the attention of the
upper house ; and on the 2nd J of December the revision of
the preface, written by Sanderson^, was committed to the
Bishops of Ely, Oxford, Sarum, and S. Asaph, a work • which
they completed within a few days ^\

The reformation*^ of the calendar was the
work of Mr. Pell, assisted by Dr. Sancroft,
afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, so renowned for the
sacrifices he made in defence of honour and conscience.
This Mr. Pell was happily chosen for the revision of the
calendar, as he was a most acute mathematician °, as well as
a person of extensive learning, being acquainted with nine
languages besides his own. His success, however, in acquiring
knowledge was more remarkable than in providing for his
temporal needs, for he was more than once in prison, wanted
the commonest necessaries, even pens and ink, essential, one
would think, to his peculiar pursuits, and was at last buried
by the charity of his friends. His labours, as connected with
the calendar, were finished by the 5th of December p, on
which day the results of his application were introduced i into
the sjnod, and committed for examination to the Bishop of
Carhsle.

Occasional forms The fomi ^ of prayers to be used at sea,
of prayer. emendations ^ in the office for burial at sea *,

and in the commination " and churching " services, were also
introduced on Dec. 9 ; and the upper house on the same day
decided upon'' forms of prayer to be used both before and
after sermons within the province of Canterbury.

Conclusion of ^J the 1 3th of December matters were brought
the work. Jj^^q gQ forvvard a state, that the Prayer Book,

with the amendments proposed, had been duly transcribed,
and was committed '^ for final revision to a committee of both
houses, consisting of the Bishops of Salisbury, S. Asaph, Car-



A.D. 16G1.
K. Chas. II.

'1 Sess."'26—

30.

e Sess. 28.

31. Syn.

Ang. ii. 85.

87.

' Svn. Ang.

ii. 8.5.

K Svn. Ang.

ii. 87, 88.

i> Syn. Ang.

ii. 91 92.

Sess. '41/43.

i Syn. Ang.

ii. 88.

J Syji. Ang.

ii. 88.

'' Lathbury,

p. 301.

' Syn. Ang.

ii. 90.

m Sess. 38.

" Kennclt's

Register,

p. 574.



" Kennett's
Register,
p. 575.



pSess.


37.


q Svn.




ii. 89.




'■ Svn.


Ang.


ii. 89.




Sess.


38.


« Svn.


Ang.


ii. 90.




'Sess


4(».


"Sess


40.


" Sess


40.


"■ Sess


.40.



" S>-n. Ang.
ii. 93. Sess.
44.



716



ENGLISH SYNODS.



[chap,



scnption
pared.



lisle, and Gloucester, associated with Drs. Robert Pory, John
Pearson, and Anthony Sparrow. And thus the last touches
seem now to have been accorded to the work, save some
small emendations >' in the preface, the revision of some new
collects ^, said to have been the work of Sanderson ^^, and the
addition of a general thanksgiving % composed by the Bishop
of Norwich, matters which occupied attention on this'' and
the following day.
Form of sub- ^^ ^^^"^ became necessary to provide " a form
pre- of subscription to the new service book \" The
preparation of this document, being a business

' The chief variations in this revised Prayer Book, as compared with the book
previously in use, are as follow :

1. Alterations. — The new version of the Bible was adopted, except as specified
hereafter. The order for reading the Psalms was simplified, and the " Gloria
Patri" expressly ordered after every division of the llOth Psalm. The version,
however, of " the Great Bible," as contradistinguished from what is called " the
authorized version," was retained in the Psalter as well as in the Ten Command-
ments. Several lessons in the calendar were changed, the Book of Bel and the
Dragon reinserted, typographical errors rectified, and lessons added for the 29th
of February. The sentences, exhortation, confession, and absolution were printed
before the Lord's Prayer in the evening service, which before this review was not
the case. The absolution was directed to be read by the " priest" standing, instead
of " minister." The five last prayers at morning and evening service were intro-
duced from the end of the litany, from which also the occasional prayers were
detached. In the litany "bishops, priests, and deacons" were inserted, instead of
" bishops, pastors, and ministers." " Church " in several places was substituted for
" congregation." The collects for the following days were considerably altered —
S. Stephen, fourth Sunday after Epipliany, fourth Sunday after Easter, the second,
eighth, eleventh, eighteenth, and nineteenth Sundays after Trinity, S. Paul, S. Philip
and S. James, and S. Bartholomew. The genealogy was omitted in the gospel for
the Sunday after Christmas. Instead of using the word " epistle " when a jiortion
of the Old Testament or of the Acts of the Apostles was read in that part of the
office, it was ordered that the exjiression used should be, " the portion of scripture
appointed for the epistle." The two previous exhorbitions to the Lord's supper
were altered, and ordered to be read on the Sunday or holy day preceding the day
of celebration, and not when the pe()i)le were actually assembled to receive. In
the prayer for " the Church niilitant here on eartli " that righteous thanksgiving
was inserted, " We also bless thy holy name for all thy servants departed this life
in thy faith and fear." At the reading of the gospel and recitation of the Nioene
Creed the people were ordered to stand. At the consecration of the eucharistic
elements marginal rubrics were added for the direction of the priest, and provision
made for additional consecration in case of need. Some new rubrical directions
wore placed at the end of the communion office, and others thought unnecessary
omitted. In the office for public baptism there was added the interrogation,
"Wilt thou keep God's holy will and commandments?" &c., together with the
answer, " I will." lu the prayer preceding the act of baptism the words " sanctify



Online LibraryJames Wayland JoyceEngland's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic → online text (page 78 of 83)