Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 March 2011
A previous article traced the formulation of the proposals for Prayer Book revision made by bishops Wren and Cosin in the years 1660–1. These proposals were entered in the ‘Durham Book’ (DB), and reached their final form in ‘Sancroft's Fair Copy’ (FC). In November 1661 the proposals were laid before Convocation, and, as amended in debate, were entered by Sancroft in the ‘Convocation Book’ (CB), a folio Prayer Book of 1636, the text of which differs in only a few particulars from the familiar ‘1662 Prayer Book’. A MS. copy of the complete text as revised was prepared concurrently in order to be subscribed by all members of Convocation. This was subsequently attached to the Act of Uniformity (1662), and is known as the ‘Annexed Book’ (AB). The course of the discussions which intervened between FC and CB remains obscure; the Convocation records are disappointingly sketchy, and there is very little external evidence. From what there is of the latter, and from analysis of the changes made, however, it is possible to discover the authorship of some of the alterations and additions, to identify the most influential figures in the discussions, and to recover a few proposals which failed to secure acceptance.
page 182 note 1 ‘The Making of the Durham Book’, printed in this Journal (vi. No. 1 (1955), 60–72Google Scholar).
page 182 note 2 CB and AB have both been reproduced in facsimile.
page 182 note 3 E.g., Cardwell, Synodalia, ii. 638 ff.
page 182 note 4 Introduction to the History of the Successive Revisions of the Book of Common Prayer, Oxford 1877Google Scholar, ccccix, cccx.
page 183 note 1 The Conformists Plea for the Nonconformists, London 1682, 28, 32. ‘Dr. Allen’ is Giles Alleyn, D.D.
page 183 note 2 Abridgment of Mr. Baxter's History, 1713, 159.
page 184 note 1 Printed in Jacobson, , Fragmentary Illustrations of the History of the Book of Common Prayer, London 1874Google Scholar. The MS., which at the time of publication was in the library of the dean and chapter of Windsor, has subsequently disappeared, and its whereabouts are unknown. It is bound up with a copy of Sternhold and Hopkins, Psalms (1578 ed.).
page 184 note 2 There are no intentional divergencies in the Ordinal, so presumably CB was available by the time that the copyists of AB reached that point.
page 184 note 3 About one-third of these readings are printed by Brightman, The English Rite, i. cc, cci. They are represented above by italics.
page 185 note 1 Op. cit., 26, 27, 21, 37.
page 186 note 1 The Validity of the Orders of the Church of England (1688), 42.
page 186 note 2 MS. Tanner 48 (1); not 43, as in Parker, op. cit., ccccxvi. No. 11 is added in the margin, with a different pen. Nos. 1, 3, 6 have crosses drawn through them; nos. 5, 7, 8 have lines. All these were rejected except no. 6; but nos. 9 and 11, which were also rejected, were not cancelled.
page 188 note 1 Liturgy …,, 35.
page 188 note 2 Works, ed. W. Jacobson, London 1854, i. 383 (Sermon Ad Aulam XV).
page 188 note 3 Life of Dr. Robert Sanderson (1678), f. 15.
page 189 note 1 E.g., Works, i. 28.
page 189 note 2 Works, ii. 115.
page 189 note 3 Considerations touching the Liturgy of the Church of England (1661), 22.
page 189 note 4 Op. cit., i. ccxxiii.
page 189 note 5 Op. cit., ii. 840.
page 189 note 6 Liturgy, 21.
page 189 note 7 Works, i. 191 (Sermon Ad Aulam VII).
page 189 note 8 Liturgy, 8.
page 190 note 1 Works, v. 41 (The Case of the Use of the Liturgy).
page 190 note 2 Works, i. 72 (Sermon Ad Aulam III).
page 191 note 1 Liturgy, 17.
page 191 note 2 Liturgy, 6.
page 191 note 3 Liturgy, 13, 14. The comparison is with the passage in parenthesis in the Thanksgiving.
page 191 note 4 Works, iii. 210.