OF THE CALIFORNIA 345 APPENDICES APPENDIX I (Referring to pp. 10-15) ON BISHOP TORRY'S PRAYER BOOK It may be interesting to the reader, as Bishop Torry's Prayer Book is now very scarce, to be told what were the principal differences which it presented when compared with the English Prayer Book and the other Offices from which it was drawn. The Calendar had sixteen additional saints, of course mostly Scottish, taken from that prefixed to the book of 1637.1 Permission was given to parents to become sponsors for their children at Baptism, which was and, under certain conditions, still is the rule of the Scottish Canons; 2 and the Apostolic Benediction was provided for use at the conclusion when Baptism was administered apart from Divine service. In Confirmation the following formula was provided, which is still in use under Canon XL. of 1890: 3 'I sign thee with the Sign of the These were SS. David, January 11; Mungo, January 13; Colman, February 18; Constantine, March 11; Patrick, March 17; Cyril, March 18; Cuthbert, March 20; Gilbert, April 1; Serf, April 20; Columba, June 9; Palladius, July 6; Ninian, September 16; Adamnan, September 20; Margaret, November 16; Ode V., November 27; Drostane, December 4. 2 See the XVIIth Canon of 1838 and the XXXVIIIth of 1890. The latter has, section 2, In default of others the parents of the child may be admitted as Godfathers and Godmothers, and in cases of necessity, of which the clergyman shall be judge, one sponsor shall be deemed sufficient.' 3 As by the present Bishop (Wilkinson) of St. Andrews, whom I saw confirm at Muthill on 29 August, 1895, and by the Bishop (Dowden) of Edinburgh, who has sanctioned a form containing it published by the St. Giles' Printing Co., York Place, Edinburgh. The late Bishop of St. Andrews dropped it in 1862-63, after the General Synod of that date which adopted the English Prayer-book- -one of the points which much distressed Mr. George Forbes. Cross; and I lay mine hands upon thee, in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Defend, O Lord, this Thy child [or this Thy servant]' &c. The Office for the Communion of the Sick made provision for the use of the reserved Sacrament, which is also directed in the rubrics at the end of the Communion Office itself.' It was, however, in the Office for the Holy Communion' that the greatest freedom was taken and the greatest offence given. It is printed by Dr. Neale as an appendix to his 'Life of Bishop Torry,' in a very convenient manner, side by side with three others, from which and from traditional usage it was drawn. These three he calls Laud's' (1637), Nonjurors',' and Received Scottish Office.' It differed from the 'Received S. O.' in several points, one of the most obvious being the printing of the earlier part of the service 2 with rubrics, partly new and partly old. The first of these rubrics, though it might have much to be said in its favour, was too important to be introduced with so little authority. It runs thus: So many as intend to be partakers of the Holy Communion shall signify their names to the Curate at least some time the day before, The Priest shall reserve so much of the consecrated gifts as may be required for the Communion of the Sick and others who could not be present at the Celebration in Church; and when he administers to them he shall proceed as directed in the Office for the Communion of the Sick. This practice was no doubt adopted from the Nonjurors' Office of 1718, for which see Bishop Dowden The Annotated Scottish Communion Office, p. 321, Edinburgh, 1884. Bishop Jolly used to reserve for himself for Communion on Sundays and Festivals, as he only celebrated publicly five times a year (see his Life by Rev. W. Walker, p. 57, quoted by Bishop Dowden, ib. p. 328). I find the following rubric at the end of the Communion Office of the Church of Scotland bound up with an ordinary cheap modern English Prayer Book, and having the imprint of Alex. Murray, Church Bookseller, Aberdeen: According to a venerable custom of the Church of Scotland, the Priest may reserve so much of the consecrated gifts as may be required for the Communion of the Sick, and others who could not be present at the Celebration in Church. No rubrics, however, are found at the end of the Office in Bishop Falconar's text of 1764, which Bishop Dowden has reprinted as the one possessed of most authority. There is, however, no definitely authorised book. 2 Up to 1844 this had never appeared in print, the wee bookies' and other forms beginning with the Exhortation. The edition of 1844 is a handsome black-letter quarto, published in London by Burns, but the text (says Dowden, p. 277) is unfortunately not satisfactory. that he may ascertain that they believe all the Articles of the Catholic Faith, and are free from deadly sin, or if not, that they are truly penitent for it; and in the case of strangers, that they have been baptised and confirmed, and are regular Communicants of the Church. The next rubric refers to the case of a notorious evil-liver, and introduces the condition of receiving absolution before such a one may come to the Lord's Table. The use of the term 'Altar' in various parts of these rubrics could hardly be objected to by any one in Scotland, since it occurs though only once-in the rubrics of the 'Received S. O.' The following rubric is of some interest, as showing the position which Bishop Torry probably took at the Altar at the beginning of the service: The Altar, when the Holy Eucharist is to be celebrated, shall have a fair white linen cloth upon it, and the Priest, standing at the north side thereof, shall say the Lord's Prayer, &c. The alternative use of the 'Summary of the Law' for the Ten Commandments, and of the Collect 'O Almighty Lord and everlasting God, we beseech Thee to direct, sanctify, and govern, &c.' for the prayer for the Sovereign, is no doubt according to Scottish usage; so also are the response 'Glory be to Thee, O God' (not then O Lord'),' before the Gospel, and the words of the Priest, Here endeth the Holy Gospel,' and the response 'Thanks be to Thee, O Lord, for this Thy glorious Gospel,' after it. A rubric was introduced from the English Office requiring the curate to give notice of Holy Days, &c., but curiously enough the publication of the Banns of Matrimony in this place, which had been rightly preserved by the Nonjurors, was dropped in accordance with the common English printers' mistake. More remarkable still was the order for the dismissal of non-Communicants which represented Bishop Torry's own very strong opinion, and the practice of the Nonjurors, but had never found a place before, as far as I know, in any printed Office, So it is in Canon XXIX. of 1838, and so continued in later editions of the Canon of the due care of Churches; of reverent Behaviour and Attention in time of Divine service. But in the revision of 1890 the form prescribed is, what I believe is more correct, Glory be to thee, O Lord '-more correct as more definitely addressed to our Saviour, who is speaking to us in the Gospel. and was contrary to the feelings and practice of his own friends in the Cathedral of St. Ninian's. This is as follows: Then shall follow the sermon: and when the Holy Eucharist is to be celebrated, the Minister shall dismiss the non-Communicants in these or like words: Let those who are not to Communicate now depart.' In the remainder of the Office itself there are few, if any,' deviations from the 'Received S. O.' except the omission of the Amen after the words of Institution in the Consecration Prayer, and the changed order preserve thy body and soul'-following the English and Aberdeen use-instead of the Scottish 'thy soul and body.'2 But the rubrics at the end were also open to much comment. That about frequency of Communion prescribed that the Holy Communion shall be celebrated so often and at such times that every member of the Church of Scotland come to a proper time of life, may communicate at least three times in the year, whereof the Feast of Easter or of Pentecost or of Christmas shall be one,' thus dethroning Easter from its acknowledged supremacy. That about the elements was remarkable on both sides as making no reference whatever to wafers or wafer bread,' 3 and as naming the custom of mixing a little pure and clean Water with the Wine in the Eucharistic Cup, when the same is taken from the Prothesis or Credence to be presented upon the Altar.' Another gave permission for a celebration to take place in cases of necessity with only one Communicant besides the Priest. That for reservation has already been noticed. The last but one is as follows: It is customary for the Communicants in this Church to receive the Sacrament of our LORD's Body upon the palm of the right hand, 1 The omission of the words in the short Exhortation before the Confession 'meekly kneeling upon your knees,' noticed by Neale, is not really an omission. They do not appear in Bishop Falconar's text, and indeed are not in place, as the people are already kneeling. They appear in Skinner's Aberdeen copy of 1807. 2 See Bishop Dowden ut supra, p. 278. Neale does not notice this, as he seems to have followed Skinner's Aberdeen copy of the R. S. O. 3 The best and purest wheaten bread that conveniently may be gotten shall be used (not it shall suffice, &c.) for the Holy Communion.' The words 'such as is usual to be eaten' do not, however, appear. crossed over the left, and thus reverently raise It to the mouth, so as not to let the smallest Particle fall to the ground. The last provides for the omission of one of the exhortations when there is not a celebration. APPENDIX II (See pp. 108-113) COPY OF THE PASTORAL LETTER ISSUED BY THE EPISCOPAL SYNOD To all faithful Members of the Church in Scotland, the Bishops, in Synod assembled, send greeting : BRETHREN BELOVED IN THE LORD,— Ir must be only too well known to you all that a Charge delivered to his Clergy, in the month of August last year, by our Right Reverend Brother the BISHOP OF BRECHIN, and afterwards published by him, has called forth much opposition, and given rise, in an unusual degree, to anxiety and alarm. Our notice was drawn to the publication by two of our Body, at our ordinary Synod in September last; and again, when we met for special purposes in December, the same subject was brought before us more formally. Unfortunately we were not then all present; and such being the case, and there being a difference of opinion amongst us as to the course which it would be most expedient to pursue in so grave a matter, it was ultimately resolved to postpone the determination of it till our next ordinary Synod. At the same time, it is right you should be informed that there was but one feeling and one opinion expressed by those who were present, as there is now but one opinion entertained by us all (except the Bishop of Brechin), in regard to the publication itself. We unanimously regret that such a Charge should have been delivered and put forth by one of our Body. We regret it on other accounts, and because it forces upon us the painful duty of making known that we do not concur with our Right Reverend Brother in the views he has expressed on so material a point as the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist. We think those views, in |