Is It Custom For Parishes To Collect Money During First Communion Service

1st Anglican liturgical book

Title page of the 1549 Book of Mutual Prayer

The 1549 Book of Mutual Prayer (BCP) is the original version of the Book of Common Prayer, variations of which are still in utilise every bit the official liturgical volume of the Church of England and other Anglican churches. Written during the English Reformation, the prayer volume was largely the work of Thomas Cranmer, who borrowed from a large number of other sources. Testify of Cranmer's Protestant theology tin be seen throughout the book; yet, the services maintain the traditional forms and sacramental linguistic communication inherited from medieval Catholic liturgies. Criticised by Protestants for existence too traditional, it was replaced past the significantly revised 1552 Book of Mutual Prayer.

Championship [edit]

The complete title was The Book of the Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church building afterwards the Use of the Church building of England. The prayer volume's title refers to three categories of services; "common prayer" meant morn and evening prayer.^[ane]

Groundwork [edit]

The forms of parish worship in the late medieval church in England followed the Roman Rite. The priest said or sung the liturgy in Latin, but the liturgy itself varied according to local practice. By far the most common class, or "use", found in Southern England was that of Sarum (Salisbury). There was no single book; the services that would be provided past the Book of Common Prayer were to exist found in the Missal (the Mass), the Breviary (daily offices), the Manual (the occasional services of baptism, marriage, burying etc.), and the Pontifical (services conducted by a bishop—confirmation, ordination).^[2] The chant (plainsong or plainchant) for worship was contained in the Roman Gradual for the Mass, the Antiphonale for the offices, and the Processionale for the litanies.^[three]

The liturgical year followed the Roman calendar for the universal feast days, merely it besides included local feasts too. The liturgical calendar determined what was to exist read at the daily offices and the Mass. By the 1500s, the calendar had become complicated and difficult to use. Furthermore, almost of the readings appointed for each mean solar day were not drawn from the Bible but were mainly legends about saints' lives. When scripture was assigned, simply brief passages were read earlier moving on to an entirely unlike chapter. Equally a result, in that location was no continuity in scriptural readings throughout the year.^[iv]

The Volume of Common Prayer was a product of the English Reformation. In England, the Reformation began in the 1530s when Henry Viii separated the Church building of England from the Roman Catholic Church and the authority of the pope. For the liturgy, Protestant reformers advocated replacing Latin with English, greater lay participation, more Bible reading and sermons, and conforming the liturgy to Protestant theology.^[5] Henry 8, yet, was religiously conservative, and Protestants had limited success in reforming the liturgy during his reign.^[six]

The work of producing a liturgy in the English language was largely washed past Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, starting cautiously in the reign of Henry VIII and then more than radically under his son Edward VI. In his early days Cranmer was a conservative humanist and admirer of Erasmus. After 1531, Cranmer's contacts with Protestant reformers from continental Europe helped to change his outlook.^[7] By the late 1530s, Cranmer had adopted Lutheran views. By the fourth dimension the first prayer book was published, Cranmer shared more in common with Reformed theologians like Martin Bucer and Heinrich Bullinger.^[8]

Theology [edit]

Thomas Cranmer (1489–1556), editor and co-writer of the 1549 Volume of Common Prayer

Compared to the liturgies produced past the continental Reformed churches in the same period, the Book of Mutual Prayer seems relatively bourgeois. For England, however, information technology represented a "major theological shift" toward Protestantism.^[1] The preface, which contained Cranmer's explanation as to why a new prayer volume was necessary, began: "At that place was never any affair by the wit of human and then well devised, or so sure established, which in continuance of time hath non been corrupted."^[9]

Cranmer agreed with Reformed Protestant theology,^[8] and his doctrinal concerns can be seen in the systematic amendment of source material to remove whatever idea that homo merit contributed to an individual'southward salvation.^[ten] The doctrines of justification by faith alone and predestination are central to Cranmer's theology. In justification, God grants the individual religion by which the righteousness of Christ is claimed and the sinner is forgiven. This doctrine is implicit throughout the prayer book, and it had of import implications for his understanding of the sacraments. For Cranmer, a sacrament is a "sign of an holy thing" that signifies what it represents simply is non identical to information technology. With this agreement, Cranmer believed that someone who is non 1 of God's elect receives only the outward form of the sacrament (washing in baptism or eating breadstuff in communion) but does not receive actual grace. Just the elect receive the sacramental sign and the grace. This is because faith—which is a souvenir only the elect are given—unites the outward sign and the in grace and makes the sacrament effective. This position was in understanding with the Reformed churches but was opposed to the Roman Cosmic and Lutheran views.^[11]

Protestants were particularly hostile to the Catholic Church'due south teaching that each Mass was the cede of Jesus for the redemption of the globe. To the reformers, to believe that the Mass is a propitiatory offering that forgives sins is to rely on man activity instead of having faith in the efficacy of Christ's death. This was incompatible with justification by organized religion.^[12] Protestants taught that the Eucharist was a remembrance and representation of Christ'due south sacrifice, merely non the sacrifice itself. Protestants also rejected the Cosmic doctrine of transubstantiation. According to this doctrine when the priest said the words of institution, the sacramental breadstuff and wine ceased being bread and vino and became the flesh and blood of Christ without changing their appearance. To Protestants, transubstantiation seemed too much like magic, and they rejected it as an explanation for what occurred in the Eucharist.^[13]

Protestants opposed the sacrament of penance for two reasons. The first reason was private or auricular confession of sin, which parishioners were supposed to undertake at least in one case a year. For Protestants, individual confession was a trouble because it placed a priest between people and God. For Protestants, forgiveness should be sought directly from God. The 2d reason was that the sacrament of penance demanded some good work as a sign of contrition.^[fourteen]

Protestants believed that when a person died he or she would receive either eternal life or eternal damnation depending on whether they had placed their faith in Christ or rejected him. Thus, Protestants denied the Catholic conventionalities in purgatory, a state in which souls are punished for venial or minor sins and those sins that were never confessed. The Cosmic Church also taught that the living could take action to reduce the length of time souls spent in purgatory. These included expert works such every bit giving alms, praying to saints and specially the Virgin Mary, and prayer for the dead, especially as part of the Mass.^[15] The idea of purgatory was non found in the BCP.^[sixteen] Cranmer's theology also led him to remove all instances of prayer to the saints in the liturgy. The literary scholar Alan Jacobs explains this attribute of the prayer book as follows:

In the world of the prayer book, then, the individual Christian stands completely naked before God in a paradoxical setting of public intimacy. There are no powerful rites conducted past sacerdotal figures while people stand some distance abroad fingering prayer beads or gazing on images of saints whose intercession they crave. Instead, people gather in the church to speak to God, and to be spoken to past Him, in soberly straightforward (though oft very beautiful) English. Again and again they are reminded that there is only one Mediator betwixt God and man, Jesus Christ. None other matters; so none other is called upon. The one relevant fact is His verdict upon us, and it is past faith in Him alone that nosotros gain mercy at the fourth dimension of judgment. All who stand up in the church are naked before Him together, exposed in public sight. And so they say, using the showtime-person singular but using information technology together, O God, make speed to save me; O Lord, brand haste to help me.^[17]

Cranmer and his Protestant allies were forced to compromise with Catholic bishops who still held ability in the Business firm of Lords. The last form the BCP took was non what either the Protestants nor the Catholics wanted. Historian Albert Pollard wrote that it was "neither Roman nor Zwinglian; still less was it Calvinistic, and for this reason mainly it has been described as Lutheran."^[18]

[edit]

The compilers of the first Volume of Common Prayer in Anthony Sparrow's A Rationale, or Practical Exposition of the Volume of Common-Prayer

While Henry was male monarch, the English language was gradually introduced into services alongside Latin. The English language-language Corking Bible was authorised for use in 1538. Priests were required to read from it during services.^[19] The earliest English-language service of the Church of England was the Exhortation and Litany. Published in 1544, it was no mere translation from the Latin. Its Protestant character is made clear by the drastic reduction in the invocation of saints, compressing what had been the major office into 3 petitions.^[20] The litany was included in the offset Volume of Common Prayer.^[21]

Only afterward the death of Henry VIII and the accession of Edward VI in 1547 could revision proceed faster. The Sacrament Act of 1547 introduced the first major reform of the Mass. In 1548, pursuant to the act, a liturgical text was published in the form of a booklet titled, The Society of the Communion. ^[22] This English language text was to be added to the Latin Mass.^[23] It allowed for lay people to receive communion under both kinds, a departure from the Cosmic Church's practice since the 13th century of giving the laity bread just.^[24] The Guild of the Communion was incorporated into the new prayer book largely unchanged.^[25]

While the English language people were becoming accepted to the new Communion service, Cranmer and his colleagues were working on a complete English-language prayer book.^[26] Cranmer is "credited [with] the overall chore of editorship and the overarching structure of the volume";^[27] though, he borrowed and adapted material from other sources.^[28] He relied heavily on the Sarum rite^[29] and the traditional service books (Missal, Manual, Pontifical and Breviary) likewise as from the English language primers used by the laity. Other Christian liturgical traditions too influenced Cranmer, including Greek Orthodox and Mozarabic texts. These latter rites had the advantage of being catholic simply non Roman Catholic. Primal Quiñones' revision of the daily office was also a resources.^[viii] He borrowed much from German sources, peculiarly from work deputed by Hermann von Wied, Archbishop of Cologne; and also from Andreas Osiander (to whom he was related by spousal relationship).^[29] The Church building Order of Brandenburg and Nuremberg was partly the work of the latter. Many phrases are characteristic of the German reformer Martin Bucer, the Italian Peter Martyr (who was staying with Cranmer at the fourth dimension he was finalising drafts) or of his chaplain, Thomas Becon.^[27]

Early in the draft process, bishops and theologians completed questionnaires on liturgical theology.^[i] In September 1548, bishops and senior clergy met at Chertsey Abbey and then afterwards at Windsor and agreed that "the service of the church ought to be in the mother tongue."^[30] These meetings were likely the final steps in a longer process of composition and revision.^[1] At that place is no bear witness that the book was e'er approved by the Convocations of Canterbury and York. In December 1548, the traditionalist and Protestant bishops debated the prayer volume's eucharistic theology in the Firm of Lords.^[31] Despite bourgeois opposition, Parliament passed the Human activity of Uniformity on 21 January 1549, and the newly authorised Volume of Common Prayer was required to be in utilise by Whitsunday, nine June.^[26]

Content [edit]

The BCP replaced the several regional Latin liturgical uses (such as the Use of Sarum, the Employ of York and the Utilise of Hereford) with an English-language liturgy.^[32] It was far less complicated than the older system, which required multiple books.^[16] The prayer book had provisions for the daily offices, scripture readings for Sundays and holy days, and services for communion, public baptism, confirmation, matrimony, visitation of the sick, burial, purification of women and Ash Wednesday. An ordinal for ordination services was added in 1550.^{[33] [one]} There was also a calendar and lectionary, which meant a Bible and a Psalter were the only other books required by a priest.^[1]

Liturgical agenda [edit]

The prayer book preserved the seasonal or temporale calendar of the traditional church building yr almost unchanged. The church year started with Appearance and was followed past Christmas and the Epiphany season. Ash Wed began the flavor of Lent and was followed past Holy Week, the Easter season, Ascensiontide, Whitsun, and Trinity Sunday.^[34] Before the Reformation, Wednesdays and Fridays were station days. In the prayer book, the 1544 Litany was used and Holy Communion celebrated on these days.^[35]

The prayer book likewise included the sanctorale or calendar of saints with collects and scripture readings advisable for the day.^[34] Still, it was reduced from 181 to 25 days. Only New Testament saints were commemorated, with the exception of All Saints' Day.^{[16] [36]} Other feasts, such as the Assumption and Corpus Christi, were removed.^{[37] [38]} Cranmer opposed praying to saints in hopes they might intercede for the living, merely he did believe the saints were office models.^[17] For this reason, collects that invoked saints were replaced past new ones that only honored them.^[39] The following saints were commemorated:^[twoscore]

• Circumcision of Christ, Epiphany and conversion of St. Paul in Jan
• Purification of the Virgin Mary and St. Matthias in February
• Annunciation in March
• St. Mark the Evangelist in Apr
• St. Philip and St. James in May
• St. Barnabas, the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, and St. Peter in June
• St. Mary Magdalene and St. James the Apostle in July
• St. Bartholomew the Campaigner in August
• St. Matthew and Michael and All Angels in September
• St. Luke the Evangelist and St. Simon and St. Jude in October
• All Saints' 24-hour interval and St. Andrew the Apostle in Nov
• St. Thomas the Apostle, St. Stephen, St. John the Evangelist, and Holy Innocents Solar day in December

The calendar included what is at present chosen the lectionary, which specified the parts of the Bible to be read at each service. For Cranmer, the principal purpose of the liturgy was to familiarise people with the Bible. He wanted a congregation to read through the whole Bible in a year.^[41] The scripture readings for the daily function followed lectio continua. For Morning and Evening Prayer, the lessons did not change if it was a saints' day. The readings for Holy Communion did change if it was a feast day. This became a problem when a moveable feast brutal on the same day every bit a stock-still feast, but the prayer book provided no instructions for determining which feast to celebrate. Directions for solving this issue were not added to the BCP until the 1662 prayer volume.^[42]

Morning time and evening prayer [edit]

Cranmer's work of simplification and revision was also applied to the daily offices, which were reduced to Morning and Evening Prayer. Cranmer hoped these would also serve as a daily class of prayer to exist used by the laity, thus replacing both the tardily medieval lay observation of the Latin Hours of the Virgin and its English language equivalent, the Primer. This simplification was anticipated past the work of Cardinal Quiñones, a Spanish Franciscan, in his abortive revision of the Roman Breviary published in 1537.^[43] Cranmer took up Quiñones's principle that everything should be sacrificed to secure continuity in singing the Psalter and reading the Bible. His first typhoon, produced during Henry'south reign, retained the traditional 7 distinct canonical hours of Function prayer. His 2d draft, produced during Edward's reign, reduced the offices to only 2, simply Latin was retained for everything except the Lord'south Prayer and the lessons.^[44]

The 1549 book established a rigorously biblical bike of readings for Morning and Evening Prayer and a Psalter to be read consecutively throughout each month. A chapter from the Old Testament and the New Testament were read at each service. Both offices had a canticle after each reading. For Morning Prayer, the Te Deum or Benedicite followed the Old Attestation reading and the Benedictus followed the New Testament reading. At Evening Prayer, the Magnificat and Nunc dimittis were sung. On Sundays, Wednesdays and Fridays, Cranmer's litany was to follow Morning Prayer.^[45]

Clergy were required to say both Morning and Evening Prayer daily. If this requirement was followed, a clergyman would take read the unabridged Sometime Testament one time a twelvemonth. He would have read the New Testament iii times a year.^[46]

Holy Communion [edit]

Medieval Mass [edit]

Before the Reformation, the Eucharist was called the Mass. The Roman Catholic Church building believed the Mass was a sacrifice—the same cede of Christ on the cross—and a means of grace in which forgiveness, salvation and healing were obtained. Information technology was believed that the benefits of Christ's sacrifice were applied not simply to those who received communion only also to those who witnessed the Mass and those who were prayed for during the service.^[47]

The entire service was said in Latin. The priest offered and consecrated breadstuff and wine on a stone altar while reciting a long prayer known as the catechism of the Mass. When the priest said the words of institution, the bread and wine miraculously became the body and blood of Christ according to the doctrine of transubstantiation (see also real presence of Christ in the Eucharist). The priest then elevated the sacramental bread (called the host) so that the congregation could run into and admire it equally Christ's body. In the name of the congregation, the priest and then offered the consecrated bread and vino to God, praying that God would accept the sacrifice for the living worshippers and the faithful expressionless. The priest and so consumed the offering.^[48]

Since laypeople only received communion once a twelvemonth at Easter, they were mainly spectators performing eucharistic admiration.^[12] For most of the Mass, congregants prayed privately, often with rosaries, a book of hours, or at side altars dedicated to particular saints.^{[49] [50]} Before receiving communion, laypeople were supposed to fast and confess their sins to a priest who assigned penance and and then pronounced absolution. When receiving the sacrament, a communicant knelt while the priest placed the host directly into their mouth, so their hands would not touch information technology. By custom, laypeople were only given the host to eat; only clergy received communion under both kinds.^[51]

Reformed service [edit]

The new service was titled "The Supper of the Lord and the Holy Communion, usually called the Mass" as a compromise with conservatives.^[52] As well the proper name, information technology also preserved much of the medieval structure of the Mass (rock altars, vestments, etc.).^[45] All the same, the BCP liturgy was a "radical" departure from traditional worship in that information technology "eliminated almost everything that had till then been key to lay Eucharistic piety".^[53] The sacrifice of the Mass was replaced with a Protestant service of thanksgiving and spiritual communion with Christ.^[8] The notions of transubstantiation and eucharistic adoration were suppressed.^[52] In the new liturgy, the priest faced the congregation instead of turning his back to them.^[54] The service was to at present exist in English, and laypeople were to be encouraged to participate by receiving communion under both kinds frequently.^[22]

The showtime role of the service was known equally dues-Communion.^[55] Information technology progressed as follows:^[45]

• Lord's Prayer
• Collect for Purity
• the day'south introit psalm sung past clerks
• Kyrie sung past clerks
• Gloria sung past clerks
• collect of the twenty-four hours
• collect for the rex
• Epistle and Gospel readings assigned for the twenty-four hours
• Nicene Creed sung
• sermon or reading from the First Volume of Homilies

The second part of the service began with two exhortations. These exhortations draw the torso and claret of Christ as a pledge and remembrance of Christ's honey. Those who worthily receive the sacrament spiritually feed on Christ and are united with him as children of God. Worthy reception ways having sorrow for sins, charity toward the world, and repentance. Those who receive unworthily are warned that they eat and drinkable their own damnation.^[56] The teaching that communicants "spiritually eat the flesh of Christ" was a direct attack on the doctrine of real presence.^[57]

The offertory then follows. In the medieval rite, the offertory was when the priest offered the bread and wine to be consecrated as the torso and claret of Christ. In the BCP, the offertory was a collection of scriptures about generosity and almsgiving, such equally Matthew six:19–20, to exist said or sung while members of the congregation moved to the choir or chancel to identify monetary donations in a "poor men's box".^[58] At this indicate, the service could but continue if at that place were people nowadays willing to receive communion with the priest. If no 1 was willing, the service ended without communion.^{[notation 1]} The Reformers hoped to institute the practice of weekly congregational communion, but laypeople were reluctant to participate that often. Those receiving communion remained in the chancel near the altar for the rest of the service.^[lx] If there were communicants, the priest laid on the altar enough breadstuff and vino. According to Anglican theologian Charles Hefling, whether the priest actually offered the breadstuff and vino "is debatable. Analogy with the Mass would suggest that he does, simply zero in the prayers or rubrics says and so." Hefling goes on to say the offertory sentences refer to almsgiving and "cannot, without special pleading, be referred directly to the staff of life and wine."^[61]

After the offertory comes the sacramental prayer. It began with the preface and Sanctus. The priest then turned to the altar to say or sing a long prayer that was based on the Sarum rite'south canon of the Mass.^[62] The canon was divided into three parts: intercession, consecration, and memorial/oblation. Part ane was a behest prayer for the male monarch, clergy, and people (including the expressionless).^{[note 2]} Cheers was as well given for the saints in heaven.^{[note 3]} This replaced the traditional "bidding of the bedes" that had occurred after the sermon.^[60]

Function 2 of the canon was the consecration. It began with a recitation of Christ's death on the cantankerous and the Last Supper. In order to redeem sinners, God gave his son, Jesus Christ, to be crucified. Christ'due south self-sacrifice was powerful enough to brand satisfaction for all of humanity'southward sins. Earlier he died, Christ established the Lord'southward Supper as a perpetual memorial of his death.^{[64] [annotation iv]} The priest and then made the sign of the cantankerous over the breadstuff and vino while petitioning God to practice the following:

Hear us (O merciful Male parent) we beseech thee; and with thy Holy Spirit and Give-and-take vouchsafe to bl+ess and sanc+tify these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be unto usa the Trunk and Blood of thy nigh dearly love Son Jesus Christ (emphasis added)^[63]

This petition was non meant to imply that a transformation occurred in the elements. For Cranmer to bless something meant simply to gear up information technology apart for a holy purpose. In maxim "unto u.s.a.", Cranmer meant the staff of life and wine would stand for the trunk and claret, which can only be received spiritually.^[threescore] Afterward the petition, the words of institution were spoken, simply the rubric immediately subsequently forbade whatsoever height of the sacrament. For Reformers, elevation was unacceptable because it implied that the elements changed afterwards consecration and invited congregants to engage in eucharistic adoration.^[32] While the sacramental bread and wine were consecrated for a holy purpose, they were not to be objects of worship.^[65]

The third function of the canon is the memorial and oblation.^[65] The priest prays, "we thy apprehensive servants do celebrate and brand... the memorial which thy Son hath willed us to make; having in remembrance his blessed passion, mighty resurrection, and glorious ascension".^[63] The memorial is described as a "cede of praise" for the benefits of Christ's expiry and resurrection, specially forgiveness of sins. The priest then, in the name of the congregation, prays:

And hither we offer and present unto thee (O Lord) ourself, our souls and bodies, to exist a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice unto thee; humbly beseeching thee, that whosoever shall be partakers of this holy Communion may worthily receive the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son Jesus Christ; and be fulfilled with thy grace and heavenly benediction, and made one trunk with thy Son Jesu Christ, that he may dwell in them, and they in him.^[63]

The canon closes with an acknowledgment of the congregation'southward unworthiness to offer any sacrifice to God; nevertheless, God is asked to accept it as their duty and service. This sacrifice is not Christ nor his body and blood considering, in the words of Charles Hefling, "Christ has been offered already, by Christ himself."^[66] Historian Diarmaid MacCulloch argues that for Thomas Cranmer "there is really nothing which humanity tin offer God, except itself."^[29] Hefling elaborates on this bespeak:

Why there is no admiration or oblation of the sacramental bread and wine is explained, by implication, in the rite itself. It consistently expresses the relation betwixt the Christian and Christ in terms of spiritual communion, non agile confrontation, whether material or physical or sensible. If Christ is present, his presence does not make him the object of annihilation that anyone does. Priest and people cannot be said to offer, present, touch, or behold him. What they practice is receive; what they give is thank you; and what they offer is themselves. To exercise so is their "bounden duty"—almost the showtime words of the canon, and well-nigh the last.^[67]

The canon was followed by the Lord'due south Prayer. Private confession prior to the service was now optional. Instead, the priest made a general confession of sin on behalf of the whole congregation and pronounced absolution. Following the absolution, the priest said what are known as the "comfortable words", scripture passages which give assurance of Christ'due south mercy (taken from Matthew 11:28, John 3:sixteen, 1 Timothy 1:15 and 1 John 2:i–2).^[68] The priest then knelt at the chantry and prayed in the name of all the communicants the Prayer of Humble Admission.^[69]

When administering the sacrament, the priest said "The Trunk of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life" and "The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life",^[63] for the breadstuff and vino respectively. Cranmer deliberately made these words ambiguous. Traditionalists would understood them every bit identifying the staff of life and wine with the body and blood of Christ, simply Protestants would sympathize them as a prayer that the communicant might spiritually receive the body and claret of Christ by faith.^[threescore]

The service concluded as follows:^[58]

• Agnus Dei sung past the clerks
• postcommunion sentences sung by the clerks
• prayer of thanksgiving

Baptism [edit]

In the Middle Ages, the church taught that children were born with original sin and that only baptism could remove it.^[70] Baptism was, therefore, essential to salvation.^[71] It was feared that children who died without baptism faced eternal damnation or limbo.^[72] A priest would perform an babe baptism before long after nascency on any solar day of the week, but in cases of emergency, a midwife could baptise a child at nascency. The traditional baptism service was long and repetitive. It was also spoken in Latin. The priest only spoke English when exhorting the godparents.^[71]

To Cranmer, baptism and the Eucharist were the only dominical sacraments (sacraments instituted by Christ himself) and of equal importance.^[71] Cranmer did not believe that baptism was admittedly necessary for salvation, but he did believe it was ordinarily necessary and to pass up baptism would exist a rejection of God's grace. In agreement with Reformed theology, nonetheless, Cranmer believed that salvation was determined past God'south unconditional ballot, which was predestined. If an infant was 1 of the elect, dying unbaptised would not affect the child's salvation.^[71] The prayer book made public baptism the norm, so a congregation could observe and exist reminded of their own baptism. In cases of emergency, a private baptism could be performed at home.^[71]

Largely based on Martin Luther's baptism service, which simplified the medieval rite,^[71] the prayer book's service of public baptism maintained a traditional form and sacramental character.^[73] It also preserved some of the symbolic deportment and repetitive prayers found in the medieval rite.^[71] Information technology began at the church door with these words:

Beloved beloved, forasmuch as all men be conceived and born in sin, and that no man born in sin, tin can enter into the kingdom of God (except he be regenerate, and born afresh of h2o, and the holy ghost) I beseech you to call upon God the male parent through our Lord Jesus Christ, that of his bounteous mercy he will grant to these children that affair, which by nature they cannot have, that is to say, they may be baptized with the holy ghost, and received into Christ's holy Church, and be made lively members of the aforementioned.^[74]

The priest then said a prayer, originally composed by Luther, based on Noah'southward deliverance from the alluvion:^[75]

Almighty and everlasting God, which of thy justice didst destroy by floods of water the whole world for sin, except eight persons, whom of thy mercy (the same time) thou didst relieve in the Ark: And when chiliad didst drown in the red sea wicked king Pharaoh with all his regular army, yet (at the aforementioned fourth dimension) thou didst lead thy people the children of Israel safely through the midst thereof: whereby yard didst effigy the washing of thy holy Baptism: and past the Baptism of thy well beloved son Jesus Christ, g didst sanctify the flood Jordan, and all other waters to this mystical washing away of sin: We beseech thee (for thy infinite mercies) that thou wilt mercifully look upon these children, and sanctify them with thy holy ghost, that past this wholesome laver of regeneration, whatsoever sin is in them, may be washed clean away, that they, being delivered from thy wrath, may be received into the ark of Christ's church, and then saved from perishing: and being fervent in spirit, steadfast in faith, joyful through promise, rooted in charity, may always serve thee: And finally attain to everlasting life, with all thy holy and chosen people. This grant us we beseech the, for Jesus Christ's sake our Lord. Amen.^[76]

The priest then made the sign of the cross on the babe's brow and chest every bit a token of religion and obedience to Christ.^[71] The congregation and so prayed "Receive [these infants] (o Lord) as thou hast promised by thy well beloved son,... that these infants may savour the everlasting benediction of thy heavenly washing, and may come up to the eternal kingdom which g hast promised, past Christ our Lord."^[76] The priest and so performed a minor exorcism (Cranmer reduced the multiple exorcisms in the medieval rite to only one) maxim, "I command thee, unclean spirit, in the name of the father, of the son, and of the holy ghost, that grand come out, and depart from these infants."^{[77] [71]}

The theme of God receiving the child continued with the gospel reading (Mark 10) and the minister's exhortation, which was probably intended to repudiate Anabaptist teachings confronting infant baptism. The congregation and so recited the Lord'south Prayer and the Apostles' Creed.^[71] The medieval service made reference to the infant's personal organized religion — a relic of aboriginal times when adult converts were routinely baptised. Cranmer replaced these with an emphasis on the religion of the congregation:^[71] "Almighty and everlasting God, heavenly begetter, we give thee apprehensive thanks, that chiliad hast vouchsafed to call us to knowledge of thy grace, and faith in thee: Increment and confirm this faith in the states evermore".^[76]

At this point, the service moved within the church near the baptismal font. Baptismal vows were fabricated past the godparents on behalf of the child.^[73] The devil, the world and the flesh were forsaken. Then the godparents affirmed conventionalities in the Apostles' Creed.^[71] After this, the child was baptised by triple immersion and dressed in traditional white baptismal vesture,^[73] with the priest saying:

Take this white vesture for a token of the innocence, which past God's grace in this holy sacrament of Baptism, is given unto thee: and for a sign whereby thou art admonished, and then long equally yard livest, to requite thyself to innocence of living, that, after this transitory life, thou mayest exist partaker of the life everlasting. Amen.^[76]

The priest and then anointed the child with chrism oil,^[73] saying:

Almighty God the father of our lord Jesus Christ, who hath regenerate thee by h2o and the holy ghost, and hath given unto thee remission of all thy sins: he vouchsafe to anoint thee with the unction of his holy spirit, and bring thee to the inheritance of everlasting life. Amen.^[76]

The rite concluded with an exhortation to the godparents on their duties toward the child.^[71] The prayer book also included a monthly rite of irresolute and blessing the water in the baptismal font. This sequence of prayers derives from the Mozarabic Rite,^[75] and it begins with:

O most merciful god our saviour Jesu Christ, who hast ordained the chemical element of water for the regeneration of thy faithful people, upon whom, beingness baptised in the river of Jordan, the holy ghost came downward in the likeness of a pigeon: Send downward we beseech thee the aforementioned thy holy spirit to assist us, and to be present at this our invocation of thy holy proper noun: Sanctify + this fountain of baptism, thou that fine art the sanctifier of all things, that past the power of thy word, all those that shall he baptized therein, may exist spiritually regenerated, and made the children of everlasting adoption. Amen.^[76]

Confirmation and catechism [edit]

The Book of Common Prayer also included a service for confirmation and a catechism. In Catholicism, confirmation was a sacrament believed to requite grace for the Christian life subsequently baptism and was always performed past a bishop.^[78]

Cranmer saw confirmation as an opportunity for children who had been baptised as infants to personally assert their religion.^[78] At confirmation, children would have for themselves the baptismal vows made by godparents on their behalf. Before being confirmed, children would exist taught the catechism in church before evening prayer on Lord's day. The catechism included the Apostles' Creed, the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, and a discussion of the individual'due south duty to God and neighbor. Everyone was required to know these in society to receive Communion.^[79]

The confirmation service followed the Sarum rite.^[73] The bishop prayed that the confirmand would exist strengthened with the "in unction of thy Holy Ghost". Afterwards, the bishop fabricated the sign of the cross on the child's brow and laid his easily on the head. The only significant change to the traditional rite was that the confirmand was not anointed with chrism oil.^[79]

Wedlock [edit]

The marriage service was largely a translation of the Sarum rite.^[80] The starting time part of the service took identify in the nave of the church building and included an opening pastoral discourse, a time to declare objections or impediments to the spousal relationship, and the marriage vows. The couple so moved to the chancel for prayers and to receive Holy Communion.^[79]

The prayer book rejected the idea that marriage was a sacrament^[79] while also repudiating the common medieval conventionalities that celibacy was holier than married life. The prayer book called marriage a "holy estate" that "Christ adorned and beautified with his presence, and first miracle that he wrought in Cana of Galilee."^[81] Sacerdotal elements in the rite were removed, and the emphasis was on the groom and helpmate every bit the truthful ministers of the wedding. The hymeneals ring was retained, but it was not blessed. Cranmer believed that blessings applied to people not things, and then the couple was blest.^[79]

The Sarum rite stated at that place were two purposes for union: procreation of children and avoidance of fornication. Cranmer added a third purpose: "for the mutual society, help, and comfort, that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and arduousness."^[80] In the Sarum rite, the husband vowed "to accept and to hold from this day forrad, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness, and in health, till death us depart." Cranmer added the words "to love and to cherish" (for the wife "to love, cherish, and obey").^[eighty]

Visitation of the sick [edit]

The office for the visitation of the sick was a shortened version of the Sarum rite. It featured prayers for healing, a long exhortation by the priest and a reminder that the sick person needed to examine their conscience and apologize of sin while in that location was yet time. The rite had a penitential tone, which was reinforced by the option to make private confession to the priest who would then grant absolution. This was the only class for absolving individuals provided in the prayer book and was to be used for all other private confessions. The visitation rite as well included anointing of the sick, merely a distinction was made between the visible oil and the inward anointing of the Holy Spirit.^{[79] [17]}

Communion of the sick was also provided for in the prayer book. While the Catholic do of reserving the sacrament was forbidden, the priest could gloat a shortened Communion service at the ill person'south business firm or the sacrament could be brought directly from a Communion service at the parish church to be administered to the sick.^[79]

In the medieval rite, there were prayers to saints asking for their intercession on behalf of the sick. These prayers were non included in the prayer volume liturgy.^[82] Other changes made included the removal of symbolic gestures and sacramentals. For example, the prayer volume rite fabricated anointing of the sick optional with only i anointing on the forehead or chest. In the old rite, the eyes, ears, lips, limbs and heart were anointed to symbolise, in the words of historian Eamon Duffy, "absolution and give up of all the sick person'southward senses and faculties every bit death approached".^[83]

Burying [edit]

The Order for the Burial of the Dead was focused on the resurrection of Jesus as a pledge and guarantee of the resurrection and glorification of all believers.^[84] Information technology included a procession through the church building g, the burying, a service in church building and Holy Communion.^[85] In that location were remnants of prayer for the expressionless and the Requiem Mass, such equally the provision for jubilant Communion at a funeral.^[38] At the same time, much of the traditional funeral rites were removed. For instance, the service in the business firm and all other processions were eliminated.^[85]

Ordinal and vestments [edit]

When commencement published, the prayer book lacked an ordinal, the book containing the rites for the ordination of deacons and priests and the consecration of bishops. This was added to the BCP in 1550. The ordinal adopted the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura and has ordination candidates affirm they are "persuaded that the holy scriptures contain sufficiently all doctrine required of necessity for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ".^[46] The ordinal was based on work by Martin Bucer.^[1]

The services were besides simplified. For Cranmer and other reformers, the essential part of ordination was the laying on hands with prayer. In the traditional service, the ordination candidate would exist anointed, put on Mass vestments and receive the eucharistic vessels to symbolise his new role. In the prayer volume, however, the but thing the candidate was given was a Bible from which he would teach.^[86]

Priests notwithstanding wore vestments. For Holy Communion, they wore a white alb and cope.^{[73] [63]} For the services of morning and evening prayer, baptism and burial, priests wore the surplice. Bishops wore a rochet, surplice or alb, and a cope.^[87] When being consecrated, bishops were to wear a black chimere over a white rochet. This requirement offended John Hooper, who initially refused to wear the offensive garments to become bishop of Gloucester. His refusal launched the beginning vestments controversy in the Church of England.^[88]

Music [edit]

The Latin Mass and daily role traditionally used monophonic chant for music. While Lutheran churches in Germany continued to use chant in their services, other Protestant churches in Europe were replacing chant with exclusive psalmody. The English reformers followed the Lutheran example by retaining chant for their new colloquial services. There was, however, a demand to brand dirge less elaborate so that the liturgical text could exist heard conspicuously. This had been a common concern for humanists such equally Erasmus.^[3] Cranmer preferred simple plainsong that was "functional, comprehensible to and fifty-fifty performable by any persevering fellow member of a congregation".^[89]

The English litany was published along with simple plainsong based on the chant used in the Sarum rite.^[three] When the BCP was published, there was initially no music because it would accept time to supervene upon the church building's body of Latin music.^[38] Theologian Gordon Jeanes writes that "Musically the greatest loss was of hymnody, reflecting Cranmer's ain acknowledged lack of compositional skill."^[eight]

John Merbecke'due south Book of Common Prayer noted, published in 1550, too used simple plainsong musical settings.^[xc] Merbecke'south work was intended to be sung by the "singing men" of cathedrals and collegiate churches, not by the congregation. In smaller parish churches, every part of the liturgy would take been spoken. Merbecke'due south musical settings experienced a revival in popularity during the 19th century, when his settings were revised to exist sung by congregations.^[91] Some of those settings accept remained in use into the 20th century.^[90]

Reception [edit]

The 1549 Volume of Common Prayer was a temporary compromise betwixt reformers and conservatives.^[92] Information technology provided Protestants with a service free from what they considered superstition, while maintaining the traditional structure of the Mass.^[93]

It was criticised by Protestants for being too susceptible to Roman Catholic re-interpretation. Conservative clergy took reward of loopholes in the 1549 prayer volume to make the new liturgy as much like the old Latin Mass equally possible, including elevating the Eucharist.^[94] The conservative Bishop Gardiner endorsed the prayer volume while in prison house,^[93] and historian Eamon Duffy notes that many lay people treated the prayer book "as an English language missal".^[95] Nevertheless, it was unpopular in the parishes of Devon and Cornwall where, along with severe social issues, its introduction was one of the causes of the Prayer Book Rebellion in the summer of that year, partly because many Cornish people lacked sufficient English to empathise it.^{[96] [97]}

Protestants considered the volume as well traditional. Martin Bucer identified 60 problems with the prayer book, and the Italian Peter Martyr Vermigli provided his own complaints. Shifts in Eucharistic theology between 1548 and 1552 likewise made the prayer book unsatisfactory—during that time English language Protestants achieved a consensus rejecting any real bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Some influential Protestants such as Vermigli defended Zwingli'due south symbolic view of the Eucharist. Less radical Protestants such as Bucer and Cranmer advocated for a spiritual presence in the sacrament.^[98] Cranmer himself had already adopted receptionist views on the Lord's Supper.^{[note five]} In April 1552, a new Deed of Uniformity authorised a revised Book of Common Prayer to be used in worship by ane November.^[99]

Centuries afterwards, the 1549 prayer book would become popular among Anglo-Catholics. Nevertheless, Cranmer biographer Diarmaid MacCulloch comments that this would have "surprised and probably distressed Cranmer".^[52]

See also [edit]

• Anglican doctrine

Notes [edit]

1. ^ Weekly communion was uncommon in the Church building of England until the Victorian Era.^[59]
2. ^ "Nosotros commend unto thy mercy (O Lord) all other thy servants which are departed hence from united states of america with the sign of faith, and now practise rest in the sleep of peace: grant unto them, nosotros beseech thee, they mercy and everlasting peace; and that, at the day of the full general resurrection, nosotros and all they which be of the mystical body of thy Son, may altogether be assail his correct hand, and hear that his most joyful voice: Come unto me, O ye that be blessed of my Male parent, and possess the kingdom, which is prepared for yous from the beginning of the world."^[63]
3. ^ "And here do we give unto thee almost high praise, and hearty cheers, for the wonderful grace and virtue declared in all thy saints, from the beginning of the world; and chiefly in the glorious and nigh blessed Virgin Mary, mother of thy Son Jesu Christ our Lord and God; and in the holy Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, and Martyrs, whose examples (O Lord) and stedfastness in thy religion, and keeping thy holy commandments, grant us to follow."^[63]
4. ^ "O GOD, heavenly Father, which of thy tender mercy diddest give thine only Son Jesu Christ to suffer death upon the cross for our redemption; who made there (by his 1 oblation one time offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole earth; and did institute, and in his holy Gospel control us to celebrate a perpetual retention of that his precious decease, until his coming again".^[63]
5. ^ MacCulloch (1996, pp. 461, 492) quotes Cranmer as explaining "And therefore in the book of the holy communion, nosotros do not pray that the creatures of bread and wine may be the trunk and blood of Christ; but that they may be to us the body and claret of Christ" and also "I do as plain speak as I tin, that Christ's body and blood exist given to us in human action, yet non corporally and carnally, but spiritually and effectually."

References [edit]

1. ^ ^{a b c d eastward f yard} Jeanes 2006, p. 26.
2. ^ Harrison & Sansom 1982, p. 29.
3. ^ ^{a b c} Leaver 2006, p. 39.
4. ^ Strout 2018, pp. 309–312.
5. ^ Moorman 1983, pp. twenty–21.
6. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. ten.
7. ^ MacCulloch 1996, p. threescore.
8. ^ ^{a b c d e} Jeanes 2006, p. 28.
9. ^ Procter & Frere 1965, p. 45.
10. ^ MacCulloch 1996, p. 418.
11. ^ Jeanes 2006, p. 30.
12. ^ ^{a b} Hefling 2021, p. 98.
13. ^ Moorman 1983, pp. 24–25.
14. ^ Moorman 1983, pp. 23–24.
15. ^ Moorman 1983, p. 22.
16. ^ ^{a b c} Moorman 1983, p. 26.
17. ^ ^{a b c} Jacobs 2013, p. 38.
18. ^ Pollard (1905, p. 220) quoted in Strout (2018, p. 315).
19. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 13.
20. ^ Procter & Frere 1965, p. 31.
21. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 4.
22. ^ ^{a b} Hefling 2021, p. 102.
23. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 17.
24. ^ Moorman 1983, p. 25.
25. ^ MacCulloch 1996, p. 385.
26. ^ ^{a b} Jeanes 2006, p. 23.
27. ^ ^{a b} MacCulloch 1996, p. 417.
28. ^ Jeanes 2006, p. 27.
29. ^ ^{a b c} MacCulloch 1996, p. 414.
30. ^ Procter & Frere 1965, p. 47.
31. ^ MacCulloch 1996, pp. 404–407.
32. ^ ^{a b} Marshall 2017, p. 324.
33. ^ Gibson 1910.
34. ^ ^{a b} Leonel 2006, p. 477.
35. ^ Leonel 2006, p. 476.
36. ^ Strout 2018, p. 315.
37. ^ Duffy 2005, p. 465.
38. ^ ^{a b c} Marshall 2017, p. 325.
39. ^ Strout 2018, pp. 314–315.
40. ^ Strout 2018, p. 319.
41. ^ Jacobs 2013, pp. 26–27.
42. ^ Strout 2018, pp. 319–320.
43. ^ Procter & Frere 1965, p. 27.
44. ^ Procter & Frere 1965, p. 34.
45. ^ ^{a b c} Jeanes 2006, p. 31.
46. ^ ^{a b} Moorman 1983, p. 18.
47. ^ Ryrie 2017, p. 16. sfn mistake: no target: CITEREFRyrie2017 (help)
48. ^ Hefling 2021, pp. 97–98, 101.
49. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. xviii.
50. ^ Ryrie 2017, p. xiv. sfn error: no target: CITEREFRyrie2017 (help)
51. ^ Ryrie 2017, pp. 16–17. sfn error: no target: CITEREFRyrie2017 (assistance)
52. ^ ^{a b c} MacCulloch 1996, p. 412.
53. ^ Duffy 2005, pp. 464.
54. ^ Winship 2018, p. 12.
55. ^ Hefling 2021, p. 105.
56. ^ Hefling 2021, p. 103.
57. ^ MacCulloch 1996, p. 386.
58. ^ ^{a b} Hefling 2021, p. 106.
59. ^ Jacobs 2013, pp. thirty–31.
60. ^ ^{a b c d} Jeanes 2006, p. 32.
61. ^ Hefling 2021, p. 107.
62. ^ MacCulloch 1996, p. 413.
63. ^ ^{a b c d due east f g h} "The Supper of the Lord and the Holy Communion, Normally Called the Mass". Book of Common Prayer. 1549. Archived from the original on 18 January 2022. Retrieved 25 February 2022.
64. ^ Hefling 2021, pp. 108–110.
65. ^ ^{a b} Hefling 2021, p. 111.
66. ^ Hefling 2021, p. 112.
67. ^ Hefling 2021, p. 113.
68. ^ Hefling 2021, pp. 102–103.
69. ^ Jeanes 2006, p. 25.
70. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 34.
71. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i j thousand l m} Jeanes 2006, p. 34.
72. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 34 and footnote 17.
73. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Marshall 2017, pp. 324–325.
74. ^ Jacobs 2013, pp. 34–35.
75. ^ ^{a b} MacCulloch 1996, p. 415.
76. ^ ^{a b c d e f} "Of the Administration of Public Baptism to Be Used in the Church". Book of Common Prayer. 1549. Archived from the original on 18 January 2022. Retrieved 9 April 2022.
77. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 35.
78. ^ ^{a b} Jeanes 2006, p. 35.
79. ^ ^{a b c d e f yard} Jeanes 2006, p. 36.
80. ^ ^{a b c} Jacobs 2013, p. 40.
81. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 39.
82. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 36.
83. ^ Duffy 2005, p. 466.
84. ^ Jacobs 2013, p. 42.
85. ^ ^{a b} Jeanes 2006, p. 38.
86. ^ Moorman 1983, p. 28.
87. ^ "Certayne Notes for the more playne explicacion and decent ministracion of thinges conteined in thys booke". Book of Common Prayer. 1549. Archived from the original on 8 April 2022. Retrieved 8 Apr 2022.
88. ^ Marshall 2017, pp. 340–341.
89. ^ MacCulloch 1996, p. 331.
90. ^ ^{a b} MacCulloch 1996, pp. 330–331.
91. ^ Leaver 2006, p. twoscore.
92. ^ MacCulloch 1996, p. 410.
93. ^ ^{a b} Haigh 1993, p. 174.
94. ^ Marshall 2017, p. 339.
95. ^ Duffy 2005, p. 470.
96. ^ Duffy 2003, pp. 131ff.
97. ^ Caraman 1994.
98. ^ Haigh 1993, p. 179.
99. ^ Duffy 2005, p. 472.

Bibliography [edit]

• Caraman, Philip (1994), The Western Rising 1549: the Prayer Volume Rebellion, Tiverton: Westcountry Books, ISBN1-898386-03-Ten
• Duffy, Eamon (2003), The Voices of Morebath: Reformation and Rebellion in an English Village, Yale Academy Printing, ISBN0-300-09825-1
• Duffy, Eamon (2005). The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, c. 1400–c. 1580 (2nd ed.). Yale University Press. ISBN978-0-300-10828-vi.
• Gibson, E.C.S (1910). The First and Second Prayer Books of Edward Vi. Lowest'south Library.
• Haigh, Christopher (1993). English language Reformations: Religion, Politics, and Club Under the Tudors. Oxford University Press. ISBN978-0-19-822162-iii.
• Harrison, D.E.W.; Sansom, Michael C (1982), Worship in the Church building of England, London: SPCK, ISBN0-281-03843-0
• Hefling, Charles (2021). The Volume of Mutual Prayer: A Guide. Guides to Sacred Texts. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780190689681.001.0001. ISBN9780190689681.
• Jacobs, Alan (2013). The Volume of Common Prayer: A Biography. Lives of Great Religious Books. Princeton University Press. ISBN9780691191782.
• Jeanes, Gordon (2006). "Cranmer and Mutual Prayer". In Hefling, Charles; Shattuck, Cynthia (eds.). The Oxford Guide to The Book of Mutual Prayer: A Worldwide Survey. Oxford University Press. pp. 21–38. ISBN978-0-19-529756-0.
• Jones, Cheslyn; Wainwright, Geoffrey; Yarnold, Edward; Bradshaw, Paul, eds. (1992). The Report of Liturgy (revised ed.). SPCK. ISBN978-0-19-520922-eight.
• Leaver, Robin A. (2006). "The Prayer Volume 'Noted'". In Hefling, Charles; Shattuck, Cynthia (eds.). The Oxford Guide to The Book of Mutual Prayer: A Worldwide Survey. Oxford University Press. pp. 39–43. ISBN978-0-19-529756-0.
• Leonel, Mitchell (2006). "Sanctifying Time: The Calendar". In Hefling, Charles; Shattuck, Cynthia (eds.). The Oxford Guide to The Book of Mutual Prayer: A Worldwide Survey. Oxford Academy Printing. pp. 476–483. ISBN978-0-19-529756-0.
• MacCulloch, Diarmaid (1996). Thomas Cranmer: A Life (revised ed.). London: Yale University Press. ISBN9780300226577.
• Marshall, Peter (2017). Heretics and Believers: A History of the English Reformation. Yale Academy Press. ISBN978-0300170627.
• Moorman, John R. H. (1983). The Anglican Spiritual Tradition. Springfield, Illinois, US: Templegate Publishers. ISBN0-87243-139-8.
• Pollard, Albert Frederick (1905). Thomas Cranmer and the English Reformation, 1489-1556. G. P. Putnam's Sons.
• Procter, F; Frere, W H (1965), A New History of the Book of Mutual Prayer, St. Martin'due south Press
• Strout, Shawn (September 2018). "Thomas Cranmer's Reform of the Sanctorale Calendar". Anglican and Episcopal History. Historical Society of the Episcopal Church. 87 (3): 307–324. JSTOR 26532536.
• Thompson, Bard (1961). Liturgies of the Western church building. Tiptop Books.
• Winship, Michael P. (2018). Hot Protestants: A History of Puritanism in England and America. Yale University Press. ISBN978-0-300-12628-0.

External links [edit]

• "The Book of Common Prayer - 1549". justus.anglican.org. Club of Archbishop Justus.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Common_Prayer_(1549)

Posted by: walleyvarom1999.blogspot.com

Share this post