Some Notes on the Recusant Rolls of the Exchequer 1

1958 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 182-198
Author(s):  
Hugh Bowler

Recusancy was the Elizabethan term for the refusal (Lat. recusare) to attend, in one's “parish church, chapel or usual place of common prayer”, the Edwardian services of the Church of England as established by the Act of Uniformity in 1559 (1 Eliz., cap. 2). Among the penalties prescribed by this same Act was a fine of 12d., to be levied by the churchwardens for every Sunday or festival on which a person omitted attendance. These forfeitures were allocated not to the Crown but “to the use of the poor of the parish”; consequently the Exchequer rolls, being concerned only with the revenue of the Crown, bear no record of them.

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-147
Author(s):  
CHRISTOPHER HAIGH

AbstractWhen parliament abolished episcopacy, cathedrals, and the Book of Common Prayer, what was left of the Church of England? Indeed, as contemporaries asked between 1646 and 1660, ‘Where is the Church of England?’ The episcopalian clergy could not agree. Some thought the remaining national framework of parishes and congregations was ‘the Church of England’, though now deformed, and worked within it. Others thought that only those ministers and parish congregations who remained loyal in heart to the church as it had been qualified as ‘the church’: most of them continued to serve a parish church and tried to keep the old practices going. A third category of hard-liners thought ‘the Church of England’ was now restricted to a recusant community that worshipped with the Prayer Book in secret and rejected the new national profession. The fundamental issue was the nature of a church: was it a society of believers, however organized, or a hierarchical institution following rules prescribed by God? The question caused tensions and distrust among the clergy, and the rigorists thought of the rest as time-servers and traitors. Disagreements continued to divide the clergy after the Restoration, and were reflected in attitudes towards concessions to dissenters.


Author(s):  
Charles Hefling

This book surveys the contents and the history of the Book of Common Prayer, a sacred text which has been a foundational document of the Church of England and the other churches in the worldwide community of Anglican Christianity. The Prayer Book is primarily a liturgical text—a set of scripts for enacting events of corporate worship. As such it is at once a standard of theological doctrine and an expression of spirituality. The first part of this survey begins with an examination of one Prayer Book liturgy, known as Divine Service, in some detail. Also discussed are the rites for weddings, ordinations, and funerals and for the sacraments of Baptism and Communion. The second part considers the original version of the Book of Common Prayer in the context of the sixteenth-century Reformation, then as revised and built into the Elizabethan settlement of religion in England. Later chapters discuss the reception, revision, rejection, and restoration of the Prayer Book during its first hundred years. The establishment of the text in its classical form in 1662 was followed by a “golden age” in the eighteenth century, which included the emergence of a modified version in the United States. The narrative concludes with a chapter on the displacement of the Book of Common Prayer as a norm of Anglican identity. Two specialized chapters concentrate on the Prayer Book as a visible artifact and as a text set to music.


1958 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-86
Author(s):  
Geoffrey G. Willis

The preface to the Book of Common Prayer, entitled Concerning the Service of the Church since 1662, but before that simply The Preface, was derived substantially from the preface to the revised Breviary of Quiñones, which was one of the sources for the revised daily offices of the Church of England. It appeals from what it considers the corruptions of the medieval office to the ‘godly and decent order of the ancient Fathers’. This order, it says, was devised for the systematic reading of holy scripture in the offices of the Church, and it was the intention of the compilers of the English Prayer Book to restore such a regular order of reading for the instruction of the people. It represented a revolt against three features of the lessons in the medieval breviary: first, against the frequent interruptions of the reading of scripture in course by the occurrence of feasts with proper lessons; secondly, the lack of completeness and continuity in the lessons themselves; and thirdly, the use of non-biblical material in the lessons. Even if the daily office of the breviary, which is based on the ecclesiastical year, were not interrupted by any immoveable feasts having proper lessons, it would still not provide for the reading of the whole of scripture, as its lessons are too short, and also the variable lessons are confined to the night office.


1999 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 384-395
Author(s):  
R. W. Ambler

In February 1889 Edward King, Bishop of Lincoln, appeared before the court of the Archbishop of Canterbury charged with illegal practices in worship. The immediate occasion for these proceedings was the manner in which he celebrated Holy Communion at the Lincoln parish church of St Peter at Gowts on Sunday 4 December 1887. He was cited on six specific charges: the use of lighted candles on the altar; mixing water with the communion wine; adopting an eastward-facing position with his back to the congregation during the consecration; permitting the Agnus Dei to be sung after the consecration; making the sign of the cross at the absolution and benediction, and taking part in ablution by pouring water and wine into the chalice and paten after communion. Two Sundays later King had repeated some of these acts during a service at Lincoln Cathedral. As well as its intrinsic importance in defining the legality of the acts with which he was charged, the Bishop’s trial raised issues of considerable importance relating to the nature and exercise of authority within the Church of England and its relationship with the state. The acts for which King was tried had a further significance since the ways in which these and other innovations in worship were perceived, as well as the spirit in which they were ventured, also reflected the fundamental shifts which were taking place in the role of the Church of England at parish level in the second half of the nineteenth century. Their study in a local context such as Lincolnshire, part of King’s diocese, provides the opportunity to examine the relationship between changes in worship and developments in parish life in the period.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter W. M. Blayney

Bibliographers have been notoriously 'hesitant to deal with liturgies', and this volume bridges an important gap with its authoritative examination of how the Book of Common Prayer came into being. The first edition of 1549, the first Grafton edition of 1552 and the first quarto edition of 1559 are now correctly identified, while Peter W. M. Blayney shows that the first two editions of 1559 were probably finished on the same day. Through relentless scrutiny of the evidence, he reveals that the contents of the 1549 version continued to evolve both during and after the printing of the first edition, and that changes were still being made to the Elizabethan revision weeks after the Act of Uniformity was passed. His bold reconstruction is transformative for the early Anglican liturgy, and thus for the wider history of the Church of England. This major, revisionist work is a remarkable book about a remarkable book.


Author(s):  
Charles Hefling

This chapter examines the Prayer Book’s self-presentation in its preliminary, nonliturgical prose: the two Acts of Uniformity (1559 and 1662) that define the constitution of the text and regulate its use in the Church of England; and the three prefatory essays, two of which were written by Thomas Cranmer for the original, 1549 Book of Common Prayer, and have been retained ever since. These texts are themselves primary sources that provide a preliminary context in which to understand the origins and purpose of the liturgies they precede. They outline the successive revisions of the Prayer Book, and indicate both the political and the theological dimensions of its contents.


2006 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 282-293
Author(s):  
Colin Haydon

Joseph Arch, the agricultural trade unionist, was born in 1826 at Barford in south Warwickshire. In his autobiography, he recalled, as a boy, witnessing the Eucharist in the village church: First, up walked the squire to the communion rails; the farmers went up next; then up went the tradesmen, the shopkeepers, the wheelwright, and the blacksmith; and then, the very last of all, went the poor agricultural labourers … [N]obody else knelt with them … ‘[N]ever for me!‘,vowed Arch.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
John Harding

This article discusses Griffith Jones (1683–1761) an influential Church of England rector in West Wales from 1711, who is usually described as a precursor of Welsh Methodism and Evangelicalism. It refers to an undated, damaged notebook, in the National Library of Wales, containing sermon notes in Jones's own hand. The article seeks to trace the source of his evangelistic outlook, noting his conformist loyalty to the Church of England's doctrine, order and worship. Contrary to the opinion which attributes his pursuit of evangelism, with its seeking of conversions, to supposed Puritan influences, the article shows that the Book of Common Prayer was its inspiration. Preaching is discussed as the predominant component of worship. Jones's thought as a popular evangelist is examined, with reference to the brief sermon outlines in Welsh. The article discusses Jones's view of the defiance of Christian standards and ignorance of the faith, in Wales. Jones's practice was to summon people to faith. He preached this to those within the 'visible' national Church, which included infants, adding a strong demand for moral conformity. His concept of 'membership' was not postEnlightenment voluntarism, but of a statutory and biblical duty. For Griffith Jones the liturgy was not a disincentive to piety, contrary to some Dissenters' misgivings. His wish was for spiritual and moral renewal, not further reformation of Anglican doctrine or practice. He saw catechizing as a means against schismatical vagaries. His famous Circulating Schools reinforced this policy.


1996 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 465-475
Author(s):  
Martin Dudley

‘Uniformity’, declared Sir John Nicholl, one of the greatest of Anglican ecclesiastical lawyers, ‘is one of the leading and distinguishing principles of the Church of England - nothing is left to the discretion and fancy of the individual.’ At the Reformation the English Church was distinguished not by the decisions of councils, confessional statements, or the writings of particular leaders, but by one uniform liturgy. This liturgy, ‘containing nothing contrary to the Word of God, or to sound Doctrine’ and consonant with the practice of the early Church, was intended to ‘preserve Peace and Unity in the Church’ and to edify the people. It was also opposed to the ‘great diversity in saying and singing in Churches within this Realm’ and, abolishing the liturgical uses of Salisbury, Hereford, Bangor, York, and Lincoln, it established that ‘now from henceforth all the whole Realm shall have but one Use’. This principle of liturgical uniformity was enshrined in the several Acts of Uniformity from that of the second year of King Edward VI to that of the fourteenth year of Charles II, amended, but not abolished, in the reign of Queen Victoria. It was a principle conveyed to the churches in the colonies so that, even if they revised or abandoned the Book of Common Prayer in use in England, as the Americans did in 1789, what was substituted was called ‘The Book of Common Prayer and declared to be ‘the Liturgy of this Church’ to be ‘received as such by all members of the same’. The principle of uniformity was modified during the Anglican Communion’s missionary expansion. The Lambeth Conference of 1920 considered that liturgical uniformity throughout the Churches of the Anglican Communion was not a necessity, but the 1930 Conference held that the Book of Common Prayer, as authorized in the several Churches of the Communion, was the place where faith and order were set forth, and so implied a degree of uniformity maintained by the use of a single book.


2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-152
Author(s):  
Frederick Quinn

ABSTRACTAlthough there is a strong movement within Anglicanism to produce a Covenant, this article argues against such an approach. Postponing dealing with today's problems by leaving them for a vaguely worded future document, instead of trying to clarify and resolve them now, and live in peace with one another, is evasive action that solves nothing. Also, some covenant proposals represent a veiled attempt to limit the role of women and homosexuals in the church.The article's core argument is that covenants were specifically rejected by Anglicans at a time when they swept the Continent in the sixteenth century. The Church of England had specifically rejected the powerful hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church and the legalism of the Puritans in favor of what was later to become the Anglican via media, with its emphasis on an informal, prayerful unity of diverse participants at home and abroad. It further argues the Church contains sufficient doctrinal statements in the Creeds, Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral of 1886, 1888, and the Baptismal Covenant in the American Church's 1979 Book of Common Prayer.Covenant proponents argue their proposed document follows in the tradition of classic Anglicanism, but Quinn demonstrates this is not the case. He presents Richard Hooker and Jeremy Taylor as major voices articulating a distinctly Anglican perspective on church governance, noting Hooker ‘tried to stake out parameters between positions without digging a ditch others could not cross. Hooker placed prudence ahead of doctrinal argument.’ Taylor cited the triadic scripture, tradition and reason so central to Anglicanism and added how religious reasoning differs from mathematical and philosophical reasoning. The author notes that the cherished Reformation gift of religious reasoning is totally unmentioned in the flurry of documents calling for a new Anglican Covenant.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document