<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2008-09-09</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Megan Marion</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Checklist:
x Add TEMPHEAD, change DATE, validate
xAdd DIV TYPEs, validate
xReview structure, use FRONT,BODY, BACK or rarely GROUP
xCheck PB placement and completeness, ensure sequence of N=""
xProof title page(s)
xCheck HEAD TRAILER ARGUMENT EPIGRAPH OPENER CLOSER SIGNED SALUTE BYLINE
xCheck ^, oe, abq, italic I / J, _Initals, space between &amp;c.
xCheck # @ -- UNCLEAR LB FIGURE
xCheck q; startq endq Q
xCorrect illegibles from proofsheet
xCheck illegible page, para, line, span, word, dollar signs
xFinal validate

Corrected [  ] illegible groups out of [  ].
Converted [  ] illegible groups to GAP DESC="illegible".
DONE</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="B01762">
<STC T="W">B4093</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">51784411</BIBNO>
<VID>174833</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="petition">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<HEAD>An Humble PETITION unto the High and mo&s;t Honourable Courts of Parliament, that they would be plea&s;ed to condi&s;cend to the peru&s;ing of the&s;e &s;hort Notes, tending to the refining of the Booke of <HI>Common-Prayer,</HI> in a few Things.</HEAD>
<P>I Do not mi&s;like the holy <HI>Prayers</HI> of our Church, becau&s;e &s;ome things in or about them may be amended: but I de&s;ire an amendment of &s;uch things, as do either give &s;candall, or from which weak con&s;cientious per&s;ons do take &s;candall: that &s;o love, peace, and unity may be pre&s;erved in our Church, from which will follow <HI>&V;niformity</HI> and <HI>Conformity.</HI> For this end, I &s;hall give In&s;tances of &s;omething to be Added to the Book of Common-prayer; of &s;ome things to be Altered, and of &s;ome things to be Removed.</P>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="part">
<HEAD><HI>1.</HI> Of &s;ome things to be added.</HEAD>
<P>I read in the Common-prayer Book of <HI>Edward</HI> the &s;ixth, printed 1552. In the 10th. Petition of the holy <HI>Letany,</HI> this prayer: <HI>From the tyranny of the Bi&s;hop of Rome, and all his dete&s;table Enormities,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>O good Lord deliver us.</HI> But in our Common-prayer Books in the&s;e dayes, this Prote&s;tant prayer is quite left out: as if it were unlawfull for us to pray again&s;t Romi&s;h tyranny, and Popi&s;h dete&s;table Doctrines. It is meet therefore that this Prayer &s;hould be added, and re&s;tored to our Books of Common-Prayer, as it was in <HI>Edward</HI> the &s;ixths time.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="part">
<HEAD><HI>2.</HI> Of &s;ome things to be altered: <HI>As</HI></HEAD>
<P N="1">1. As you may &s;ee in the Kalender for the fir&s;t and &s;econd Le&s;&s;ons, many Chapters of the <HI>Apocrypha</HI> Scriptures are appointed to be read, as well as the <HI>Canonicall</HI> Scriptures. Now it is not meet that <HI>Apocrypha</HI> Scriptures, which are of a doubtful verity, &s;hould be made of equall autho|rity with the Canonicall Scriptures: wherefore it is meet, that there be an alteration, by putting away the Apocrypha Chapters, and putting in their rooms &s;o many Canonical Chapters.</P>
<P N="2">2. After the fir&s;t and &s;econd Le&s;&s;ons for Morning-Prayer, it is ordered, that the&s;e Le&s;&s;ons or Chapters <HI>&s;hall be &s;ung in a plain Tune.</HI> Now is this decent, when a man reads a Chapter, to &s;ing it? Or is it &s;o edifying, to &s;ing it, as it is to read it in a &s;ober and grave tone of voice? Like as a Judge on the Bench &s;peaks his Charge, or as the Sheriffe reads the Kings Proclamation, or as a School-Ma&s;ter reads a Lecture to his Schollars. In the Chapters &s;ometimes God threatneth us for our &s;ins, and &s;ometimes that glorious and fearfull name of the Lord our God is read, which we ought to fear, <HI>Deut.</HI> 28.58. And is it decent for a Mini&s;ter to read the&s;e things merrily, and with a &s;inging voice? Is it not meet then, that this &s;inging &s;hould be altered?</P>
<P>Be&s;ides in <HI>Cathedrall</HI> Churches, they &s;ing their Prayers, and is it not meet that this al&s;o be altered?</P>
<P N="3">3. The Book of Common-Prayer lacks a good <HI>Method:</HI> for the Mini&s;ter is forced in reading of Service, to turn &s;ome leaves backward, and then &s;ome leaves forward, and cannot read on to the next thing following, as he might, if things were methodically di&s;po&s;ed; now this would be al|tered.</P>
<P N="4">4. The la&s;t thing in the Book of Common-Prayer, is the forme for <HI>Con&s;ecration</HI> of Bi&s;hops to their office, which gives them their being, &amp; makes them Bi&s;hops. Now as I conceive, this <HI>Con&s;ecration</HI> ought to be in the <HI>Kings</HI> name: For the King is &s;upream head of the Church, and next under Chri&s;t in authority. And therefore Bi&s;hops ought to derive their office and authori<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">y therein from the King, as next under the King: but they are con&s;ecrated, not in the name of the King, but in the name of another and higher power, as from Chri&s;t, the holy Gho&s;t, and the Metropolitan, and &s;o they make them&s;elves to be next under Chri&s;t, and &s;o &s;houlder out of place the King, and deny his &s;upremacy: Now ought not this <HI>Con&s;e|cration</HI> therefore be altered?</P>
<P N="5">5. The Prayers of the Church ought to be without <HI>Tautologies,</HI> and unnece&s;&s;ary repetitions: For Chri&s;t &s;aid, that his Di&s;ciples &s;hould not be like the heathen in prayer, u&s;ing <HI>vain repetitions, Mat.</HI> 6.7. But our Common-Prayer Book is full of unnece&s;&s;ary Repetitions. For 1. the Lords Prayer is u&s;ed in an hours time over and over again, as twice in Morning-prayer, and once in the Pulpit in the Mini&s;ters former Prayer. 2. <HI>Gloria Patri,</HI> or <HI>Glory be to the Father,</HI> is in one hours time appointed to be &s;aid and repeated over and over again &s;ix or &s;even times. I could add other prayers al&s;o of like kind: Now is it not meet to alter this?</P>
<P N="6">6. In our <HI>Cathedral</HI> Churches they &s;ay their <HI>&s;econd Service</HI> in the Chancell or on the <HI>High Altar,</HI> not in the body of the Church, where the other &s;et Service is &s;aid. Now the <HI>high Altar</HI> is no more holy than the body of the Church; nor is it &s;o convenient for the peoples edification, becau&s;e they being afar off in the body of the Church, they can hardly hear what is read: And what rea&s;on can be rendred, why one part of the Service &s;hould be read in the body of the Church, and another part on the <HI>High Altar?</HI> And why &s;hould it be &s;o in a Cathedral Church, more than in all other Churches? Is it not meet that this be altered? 2. It is appointed in the order for the Communion, that the <HI>Table</HI> &s;hall &s;tand in the <HI>body</HI> of the Church or Chauncel, where Morning and Evening-Prayers are &s;aid: but now in the Cathedral Church, and in many others, the <HI>Table</HI> is hoi&s;t|ed up, and &s;tands on the <HI>High Altar:</HI> But this is not the place where Morning and Evening prayers are u&s;ually &s;aid, but the place for the&s;e is the body of the Church, and there u&s;ed in all common on Churches, and why then &s;hould it be otherwi&s;e in Cathedrals.</P>
<P N="7">7. As touching <HI>Bapti&s;me,</HI> the Prie&s;t is appointed to take the child in his arms, and to <HI>dip it into the water,</HI> unle&s;s the child be weak: &s;o then &s;trong children mu&s;t all of them be <HI>dipped</HI> into the water, as <HI>Anabapti&s;ts</HI> do: but this <HI>dipping</HI> is out of u&s;e in our Church; Is it not meet then to alter this <HI>dipping</HI> unto <HI>&s;prinkling</HI> of water?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="part">
<HEAD><HI>3.</HI> Of &s;ome things to be removed out of the Church: <HI>As</HI></HEAD>
<P N="1">1. As touching the <HI>Epi&s;tles</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pels,</HI> the&s;e are appointed to be read on <HI>Sundays,</HI> in <HI>Morning</HI> and <HI>Evening-Prayers,</HI> but I &s;ee no rea&s;on for it; for on <HI>Sundays</HI> we have an <HI>whole</HI> Chapter read for the &s;econd Le&s;&s;on, out of the <HI>Epi&s;tles,</HI> and another out of the <HI>Go&s;pels:</HI> what nece&s;&s;ity is there to read a <HI>part</HI> of a Chapter out of them? For we heard the Go&s;pel out of the four Evangeli&s;ts before, in the &s;econd Le&s;&s;on, and al&s;o the <HI>Epi&s;tle</HI> out of the <HI>Epi&s;tles</HI> of St. <HI>Paul</HI> and others: Is it nece&s;&s;ary to read the &s;ame matter twice in one hour? 2. After the whole Chap. of the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> and <HI>Epi&s;tle</HI> is read, what need is there to read al&s;o a piece, or a part of a Chapter out of the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> and the <HI>Epi&s;tles?</HI> and both the whole Chapter and a piece of one to be read the &s;ame day, <HI>viz.</HI> on <HI>Sunday,</HI> I &s;ee no rea&s;on for it. The <HI>Epi&s;tle</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> therefore con&s;i&s;ting but of a piece of the chapters read before, to me &s;eems &s;uperfluous, and therefore meet to be removed out of the Church.</P>
<P N="2">2. As touching <HI>Bapti&s;me,</HI> 1. of <HI>Godfathers &amp; Godmothers,</HI> who promi&s;e (what they perform not) that the child &s;hall be vertuou&s;ly brought up and learn the <HI>Creed, Lords Prayer,</HI> and the ten <HI>Commandements.</HI> I &s;ee no need for the&s;e <HI>Godfathers,</HI> &amp;c. Time was, in days of per&s;ecution, when the Chri&s;tian parents were &s;laughter'd, and martyr'd, then there was need that other Chri&s;tians &s;hould take care for the Chri&s;tian education of their Infants left behind: But we have no &s;uch per&s;ecution, our parents live with their children, &amp; ought to give them godly education, and &s;o there is no need of <HI>Godfathers</HI> to do it. 2. Of the <HI>Cro&s;&s;e</HI> in <HI>Bapti&s;me,</HI> it is confe&s;&s;ed by the Bi&s;hops, that the Infant is fully baptized before it be cro&s;&s;ed: what <GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="3 letters">d then is there of the cro&s;&s;e? May not per&s;ons of years have a cro&s;s on their fore-heads made after the Lords Supper, as well as Infants after <HI>Bapti&s;me?</HI> The&s;e things being needle&s;s, may &s;afely be removed out of the Church.</P>
<P N="3">3. Touching <HI>Matrimonie,</HI> it is appointed, that 1. the man &s;hall &s;ay to the woman, <HI>With my body I thee wor&s;hip.</HI> I leave it to con&s;ideration, whe|ther the&s;e words be fitting or not; and whether it be meet, that the more honourable per&s;on &s;hould wor&s;hip his inferiour. 2. It is ordered that the man &s;hall &s;ay, <HI>With all my worldly goods I thee endowe.</HI> Now the Law doth not allow the woman but her Thirds, but the Prie&s;t allows her all. 3. The man mu&s;t &s;ay, <HI>With this Ring I thee wed.</HI> Now what need of a Ring to te&s;tifie the Marriage, when they are fully marryed before, by their &s;o|lemn and mutuall promi&s;es each to other, made before God and the Congregation?</P>
<P N="4">4. Of our <HI>Ceremonies,</HI> note, that 1. whil&s;t we labour to pre&s;erve in honour, the prayers of our Church, the&s;e Ceremonies ca&s;t dirt on them, and render them odious: for ma|ny do mi&s;like the Common-Prayer Book, becau&s;e they &s;ee where this comes in, it draws after it the Romi&s;h Ceremonies. 2. Note, they are <HI>Innovations,</HI> being not in u&s;e in the Primitive Church. 3. Some of them are <HI>Jewi&s;h,</HI> as the Surplice, Cope, high Altar, Organ-pipes, &amp;c. Now the Temple where they were u&s;ed being down, and the Prie&s;thood who u&s;ed them, changed; why &s;hould we revive them? But others are <HI>Romi&s;h,</HI> invented at <HI>Rome,</HI> or came thence, as the Cro&s;&s;e in Bapti&s;me, kneeling at the Sacrament, holy or Saints dayes, with others. Now being the&s;e had no good Original, why &s;hould we follow Papi&s;ts in them? 4. They have been the cau&s;e of &s;ilencing many godly and painfull Mini&s;ters, and a bone of contention in the Church for many years, and one cau&s;e of the late War. But many &s;ay, St. <HI>Paul</HI> commanded <HI>Order</HI> and <HI>Decency,</HI> 1 Cor. 14.40. <HI>An|&s;wer</HI> 1. St. <HI>Paul</HI> meant it not of our Engli&s;h Ceremonies, for the Primitive Church u&s;ed none of them; they wor&s;hipped God in their Churches both orderly and decently, without our Ceremonies. 2. Chri&s;t forbad them, as <HI>Traditions of men,</HI> Mar. 7.2, &amp;c. And St. <HI>Paul</HI> forewarned us again&s;t them, as Traditions which are not according to Chri&s;t, <HI>Col.</HI> 2.8. Now Chri&s;t never appointed any of them: and &s;hall &s;uch Ceremonies be called indifferent things? and matters of Order and Decency? I wi&s;h the&s;e may be all removed, the which would tend to an everla&s;ting and well grounded Peace. But I leave all to the wi&s;dome of our mo&s;t Honourable Parliament.</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>By <HI>THEOPHIL&V;S BRABO&V;RN</HI></SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
