THE NEW PRAYER BOOK. III. 105 1636. tian emperors in the Primitive Church.' The Prayer CHAP. Book, as yet unpublished, was already placed under the guardianship of the law of the Church. To assert that it contained anything repugnant to the Scriptures,' or that it was corrupt, superstitious, or unlawful,' was to incur excommunication.1 The Prayer Book dis Popish. Like the Canons, the Prayer Book was submitted to no ecclesiastical body whatever.2 Of the few liked as Bishops who had been consulted, not one had any knowledge of the temper of the nation; and one of them, Wedderburn, Bishop of Dumblane, had spent many years of his life in England. He strongly advocated the omission, from the sentences spoken at the Administration of the Communion, of the clauses which owed their origin to the second Prayer Book of Edward VI. These clauses, he said, seemed to relish somewhat of the Zwinglian tenet that the Sacrament is a bare sign, taken in remembrance of Christ's passion.' This argument, as a mere matter of reasoning, may have been good enough. clauses from the first Prayer Book of Edward VI. which he proposed to retain lent themselves easily to the Calvinistic doctrine of a real, though spiritual presence. What was wanting to Wedderburn was the imaginative eye which could see beyond the shelves of his episcopal library to the manses of the country clergy, and the ability to discover that any unnecessary change was certain to arouse suspicion. Nothing can be more unfair than to argue 1 Canons. Laud's Works, v. 583. The 2 For the earlier history of this Prayer Book, see Pers. Government of Charles I., i. 354. 3 Laud's Works, iii. 357. Wedderburn, however, was not the first to originate the proposal. It is acted upon in the MS. corrections, probably made in 1628, to a Prayer Book now in the British Museum. Egerton MSS., 2417. CHAP. 1636. The Prayer The moderates. that the authors of this unlucky liturgy had any intention of approximating to the Roman ritual; but they could hardly have given greater offence if they had introduced the missal at once. If the old forms of prayer contained in Knox's Book of Common Order were to be abolished, it was only natural that a bewildered people, who had not even been consulted on the subject, should ask themselves what was the hidden object with which the change had been made. Other alterations, slight in themselves, pointed in the same direction as the omission of the strongly Protestant clauses in the Administration of the Communion. Another defect was almost equally fatal. Whether the book were Popish or not, there could be no doubt that it was English. It had been touched and re-touched by English hands. The knowledge that this had been the case was enough to make it odious in Scotland. If the gift offered by Laud had been one of priceless value, it would have been dashed scornfully aside. In such a cause as this, the clergy and their congregations were certain to be of one mind. Here and there, no doubt, there were a few men who, like Robert Baillie, of Kilwinning, had done their best to fit themselves into the scheme of Church government which existed around them, but who kept themselves as much as possible aloof from Bishops on the one side, and from fanatics on the other. It was precisely men of this class that Charles was doing everything in his power to alienate. Yet there is every reason to believe that neither Charles nor Laud had any conception that the new Prayer Book would meet with any serious opposition. It has sometimes been asked whether Charles was urged on by love of despotism or love of religion. It does not need much knowledge of his character to see that neither of these formed THE NEW PRAYER BOOK. the motive power. What he was doing he did from a love of order, combined with sheer ignorance of mankind. He could see nothing in the book but the decent comeliness of its arrangements and the wellchosen suitability of its expressions.1 107 CHAP. 1636. Oct. 18. Orders to enforce the use of the Book. To the very last, Laud thought more of polishing the language of the Prayer Book than of securing for it a favourable reception. It was printed and reprinted, Prayer till it seemed to have reached typographical perfection. In October 1636, Charles wrote to the Privy Council informing them that, 'having taken the counsel of his clergy,' he thought fit that the book should 'be used in God's public worship.' In December a proclamation ordered every parish to adopt it, and to procure two copies of it before the following Easter.2 Dec. 1637. Delay in ance. Easter came, and still the book was not ready. Rumours were rife that it had been seen in England, its appearand that it differed from the English Prayer Book in addition of sundry more Popish rites.' Others whispered that it was merely the Mass in disguise. As time went on, the impending danger grew more terrible in its vagueness. Yet it is worthy of notice that there was as yet no thought of resistance. The utmost to which extreme Puritans ventured to aspire was permission to form themselves into a non-conformist body, worshipping apart with the connivance of the Government.3 At last, in the spring of 1637, the long-dreaded May. It reaches 1 One of the parts of the book which gave offence was the direction Scotland. for the position of the minister at the consecration. See Burton, Hist. of Scotland, vi. 424. The book at Lambeth, which has Laud's annotations, differs from the Scottish book in directly ordering the eastward position. Possibly, though the handwriting is Laud's, the suggestion may have been Wren's. 2 The King to the Council, Oct. 18. Balfour, ii. 224. to the Prayer Book. 3 Baillie, i. 4. The Preface CHAP. III. 1637. May. Temper of the nobility. June. volume reached Scotland. In May every minister received orders to buy two copies on pain of outlawry. The Bishops, though they had never consulted their synods on the preparation of the book, now called them together to urge them to obedience. Openly no word of resistance was heard. It was hard for a single minister to expose himself to certain ruin. But in private men spoke their minds more freely. The Book, they said, was more Popish than the English one. It had no authority either from Assembly or Parliament. The Scottish Puritan feeling and the Scottish national feeling were rising higher every day. It was hardly likely that the temper thus aroused would be suffered to die away for lack of leadership. With one or two brilliant exceptions, the Scottish nobles of that day were not remarkable for ability. But they had the habit of authority which had long been lost by the English Peers, and they would ill brook the continuance of a system which placed the Bishops above their heads. It is easy to speak of the zeal of men like Rothes and Loudoun as sheer hypocrisy. It is far more likely that they felt strongly in a direction in which it was their interest to feel strongly. Men of advanced age could indeed remember that the yoke of Presbytery had once been as heavy as the yoke of Episcopacy. Men even of middle age knew nothing of Presbyterianism except by report. They saw the Bishops outvying them in the Royal favour, and reducing them to comparative insignificance even on their own estates. Whatever religious feeling was in them had been nurtured through the old Calvinistic doctrine, and jealousy for the national honour of Scotland burnt in them as strongly as in their tenants and dependents. It is impossible to say with certainty what truth THE READING OF THE BOOK. 109 CHAP. III. 1637. June. meeting at there may be in the story that a meeting in which some of the malcontent nobles took part with the leading clergy and a few of the devouter sex,' was held in Edinburgh for the purpose of organising resist- Alleged ance.1 Attachment to tried religious forms is always Edinburgh. stronger in women than in men, and it may well be that some of the Edinburgh ladies stirred up the indignation of the fishwives and serving-women of the city. But no mistake would be greater than to imagine that they created the spirit which they directed. The insult to the Scottish nation and the Scottish Church was one to kindle resentment in the humble and the exalted alike. July 23. The read ing of the Book. July 23 was at last fixed as the day on which the patience of the citizens of Edinburgh was to be put to the test, in the hope that the submission of the capital would furnish an example to the rest of the country. The confidence felt by the Bishops received a rude shock. At St. Giles', recently erected into the Cathedral Church of the new diocese of Edinburgh, a large number of maid-servants were gathered, keeping seats for their mistresses, who were in the habit of remaining at home till prayers were over and the preacher was ready to ascend the pulpit. The Dean opened the book and began to read. Shouts of dis- The tumult approbation from the women drowned his voice. "The Mass," cried one, "is entered amongst us." "Baal is in the Church," called out another. Opprobrious epithets were applied to the Dean. Lindsay, the Bishop of Edinburgh, ascended the pulpit above the reading desk, and attempted to still the tumult. He begged the noisy zealots to desist from their profanation of holy ground. The words conveyed an 1 The story comes from Guthry's Memoirs, 23. It was written down after the Restoration, and is certainly inaccurate in its details. at St.Giles'. |