with surplice and hood, 'tis enough to stifle any man, especially if he be a fat parson."-A Reply to a Relation of the Conference, &c. p. 100.

[677]

Cope represented on Bishop Crepghton's Effigy.

1671.] "Bishop Creyghton's effigy at Wells represents him as vested in a cope."-Ecclesiologist, vol. I. p. 50.

[678]

The Surplice worn in the Pulpit and in Perambulation, by the Vicar of Christ Church, London.

1641.] To the articles concerning his superstitious affection to the surplice and other popish practices, it was testified that he usually preached in his surplice, wore it when he went about the parish in the annual perambulation through the streets, and was so popishly affected and addicted to it, that even since his lying under the just condemnation of these things, he refused, on last Ascensionday, 1641, to accompany the parishioners in their perambulation, because they would not suffer him to wear the surplice, and read the Epistles and Gospels at the stinted places and corners of the streets, as formerly. And that he never read or pronounced the Name JESUS in either of the Sacraments, Epistles or Gospels, or in Sermons or Prayers (though then on his knees), but he most constantly ducked lowly at it."-The Petition and Articles, or several Charges exhibited in Parliament against Edward Finch, Vicar of Christ's Church in London, &c. pp. 6, 7. 4to. 1641.

[679]

Processions of the Rector and Fellows of Lincoln College, Oxford, in their Surplices.

1749.] "Custom for the rector and fellows of this college to go in procession through the street, all in their surplices, to S. Michael's parish church prayers on S. Michael's day, and to All-Hallows church on All-Saints' day, these churches, belonging to this college, being dedicated to these Saints on these days."— Oxoniensis Academia, p. 53, 1749.

[680]

Judgment of the present Bishop of Exeter concerning “the Use of the Surplice in the Pulpit," and the legal obligation of the use of Albs, Copes, and Chasubles.

"On this particular, I have no difficulty in saying, that Mr. Blunt has been right since he has preached in his surplice. The sermon is part of the Communion service; and whatever be the proper garb of the minister in the one part of that service, the same ought to be worn by him throughout. The rubrick and canons recognize no difference whatever. The rubrick, at the commencement of The Order for Morning and Evening Prayer,' says, That such ornaments of the church, and of the ministers thereof, at all times of their ministration, shall be retained, and be in use, as were in this Church of England by the authority of Parliament, in the second year of the reign of king Edward VI.'-in other words, a white alb plain, with a vestment or cope.' These were forbidden in king Edward VI.'s second book, which ordered that The minister at the time of the Communion, and at all other times of his ministration, shall use neither alb, vestment, nor cope: but being an archbishop or bishop, he shall have and wear a rochet; and being a priest or deacon, he shall have and wear a surplice only.' This was a triumph of the party most opposed to the Church of Rome and most anxious to carry reformation to the very furthest point. But their triumph was brief—within a few months queen Mary restored popery; and when the accession of queen Elizabeth brought back the Reformation, she, and the convocation, and the parliament, deliberately rejected the simpler direction of Edward's second book, and revived the ornaments of the first. This decision was followed again by the crown, convocation, and parliament, at the restoration of Charles II., when the existing Act of Uniformity established the Book of Common Prayer, with its rubricks, in the form in which they now stand. "From this statement it will be seen, that the surplice may be objected to with some reason; but then it must be because the law requires the alb and the vestment, or the cope.'

"Why have these been disused? Because the parishionersthat is, the churchwardens, who represent the parishioners-have neglected their duty to provide them; for such is the duty of the parishioners by the plain and express canon law of England (Gibson, 200). True, it would be a very costly duty, and for that

reason, most probably, churchwardens have neglected it, and archdeacons have connived at the neglect. I have no wish that it should be otherwise. But, be this as it may, if the churchwardens of Helston shall perform this duty, at the charge of the parish, providing an alb, a vestment, and a cope, as they might in strictness be required to do (Gibson, 201), I shall enjoin the minister, be he who he may, to use them. But until these ornaments are provided by the parishioners, it is the duty of the minister to use the garment actually provided by them for him, which is the surplice. The parishioners never provide a gown, nor, if they did, would he have a right to wear it in any part of his ministrations. For the gown is nowhere mentioned nor alluded to in any of the rubricks. Neither is it included, as the alb, the cope, and three surplices expressly are, among 'the furniture and ornaments proper for divine service,' to be provided by the parishioners of every parish.

"The 58th canon of 1604 (which however cannot control the Act of Uniformity of 1662) enjoins that every minister, saying the publick prayers, or ministering the sacraments or other rites of the church, shall wear a decent and comely surplice with sleeves, &c., to be provided at the charge of the parish.' For the things required for the common prayer of the parish were and are to be provided by the parish. If a gown were required, it would be to be provided by the parish.

"But the commissioners say, that Mr. Hill told them at the time of the inquiry, that he should not object to the use of the surplice, if it were not the badge of a party.' This, I am aware, is a very common cry. But I cannot forbear from saying, that if any of the clergy deserve to be called a party, in an invidious sense of the phrase, they who agree in violating the law of the Church ought to be so designated, not they who observe it. But in the present case I do not think that any such reproachful name would properly be applied to either the one or the other. Those who observe the law ought to be protected from all reproach by their faithfulness; they who do not observe it, by the long and general, however irregular, prevalence of such non-observance on the part of the clergy, and of connivance on the part of the bishops.

"There is one, and one way only, in which all appearance of party and division among the clergy, in this respect, may be avoided. I mean by all of them complying with the easy requisition of the Church, that they wear one and the same garb during the whole of

the Communion service, including the sermon, which, I repeat, is only a part of that service. And the experience which I have had, not only at Helston, but at several other places, of the great practical evils and scandals which have arisen, and are daily arising, from suffering the law of the Church in this instance to be set at nought, will make me earnestly call upon my clergy throughout the diocese to return to obedience to the law, by wearing throughout their ministration that dress which is provided for them, the surplice, if the use of the other more costly garments be not (as it is not desired by any that it should be) revived among us."-English Churchman, No. XCVIII.

The Mixture of Wine and Water in the Chalice.

[681]

Ordered in the First Prayer-book of Edward VI.

1548, 2 Edw. VI.] "Then shall the minister take so much bread and wine as shall suffice for the persons appointed to receive the holy Communion, laying the bread upon the corporas, or else in the paten or in some other comely thing, prepared for that purpose; and putting the wine into the chalice, or else in some fair or convenient cup, prepared for that use, (if the chalice will not serve), putting thereto a little pure and clean water."-Rubrick in the Communion Service.

[682]

Enjoined by Bishop Andrewes.

Temp. James I.] "Dein vinum è doliolo, adinstar sanguinis erumpentis in calicem haurit. Tum aquam è tricanali scypho immiscet."-Bp. Andrewes' Notes in Nicholls' Commentary, p. 45.

1620.] "Cæteris rebus ordine gestis, demum Episcopus sacram Mensam redit, (sacellanis utrisque ad aliquantulum recedentibus,) lotisque manibus, pane fracto, vino in calicem effuso, et aquâ admistâ, stans ait... ... Cum vinum, quod prius effuderat, non sufficeret, Episcopus de novo in calicem ex poculo quod in sacrâ Mensâ stabat effundit, admistâque aquâ, recitat clara verba illa consecratoria."Rubrick in the Form of Consecration of a Church or Chapel.

[683]

Practised by Bishop Andrewes.

Temp. James I.] "The practice of it was continued in the King's Chapel Royal, all the time that Bishop Andrewes was dean of it."Wheatley's Commentary on the Common Prayer, p. 286.

[684]

Enjoined in Prince Charles's Chapel at Madrid.

Ibid.] "That the Communion be celebrated in due form, with an oblation of every communicant, and admixing of water with the wine."-Collier's Eccl. History, vol. II. p. 726.

[685]

Practised by some of the most eminent of the Clergy. Ibid.] "Our Church forbids it not, for ought I know, and they that think fit may use it, as some most eminent do it at this day."— Collections of Bishop Overall in Nicholls' Commentary, p. 60.

[686]

Practised by Archbishop Laud.

"Laud, when rector of All-hallows, Barking,* introduced the practice into the church of that parish, where it continued to be observed in the last century."-"How shall we Conform to the Liturgy?" p. 189, 2nd edit., on the authority of Brett on the Liturgies, p. 404, edit. 1838.

[687]

Practised by the Church in Scotland.

"That the mixed cup was used through the times of Charles the First is, I think, clear from the rubrick of the Common Prayer, drawn up for the use of the church in Scotland under the direction of Laud and others, in which it is ordered, that the presbyter shall then offer up and place the bread and wine prepared for the sacrament upon the LORD's Table.' That I am correct in supposing the word prepared to mean mixed with water, is clear from the practice of the Scotch church, which has since 1637 always mixed water with the sacramental wine.”—British Magazine, vol. xx. p. 501.

* Brett is incorrect in stating that Laud was All-Hallows, Barking.-EDD.

"minister" (his word) of