THE ANGLICAN BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER: ITS VIRTUES & VICES (Part 4)

THE ANGLICAN BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER:

ITS VIRTUES & VICES

OR

THE ALTERNATIVE WESTMINSTER DIRECTORY OF PUBLIC

WORSHIP (1645) CONSIDERED

Being the substance of a paper first presented to the

1989 Westminster Conference in London

by Dr Alan C. Clifford

PART 4

Puritan Worship: the Westminster Directory

To return to the Directory itself, the in-built ambiguities of Elizabethan Anglicanism, the constant threat of Romanism and the Romanizing measures of Archbishop Laud form the immediate backdrop to the Westminster Assembly. With political Puritanism in the ascendance, the scene was setto complete the English Reformation. With respect to a replacement for the BCP, various options were open to the Assembly as it commenced its work on 24 May 1644. These included the various Puritan editions of the BCP and other similar substitutes,30 together with an abridgment of Calvin's Form of Prayers for the Church and its Knoxian derivative, The Book of Common Order.31 However, the Assembly preferred to issue a work of its own composition.32

If the text of the Directory tends to obscure differences over alternative preferences, the Preface justifies the replacement of the BCP in no uncertain terms. While its virtues are not ignored, it had become an 'offense' to many of the godly at home and abroad. 'For, not to speak of urging the reading of all the prayers, which very greatly increased the burden of it, the many unprofitable and burdensome ceremonies', e.g. wearing the surplice, the sign of the cross at baptism, confirmation, bowing at the name of Jesus, etc., 'have occasioned much mischief' by troubling the consciences 'of many godly ministers and people'. Many good Christians have been 'kept from the Lord's Table' and 'able and faithful ministers' have been debarred from their ministry. The bishops had virtually insisted that use of the BCP was the only acceptable way of worshipping God. Preaching had been 'jostled out as unnecessary, or at best as far inferior' to the reading of the service. In short, the Prayer Book had become 'no better than an idol by many ignorant and superstitious people'. Accordingly, the 'Papists boasted that the book was a compliance with them in a great part of their service; and so were not a little confirmed in their superstition and idolatry, expecting rather our return to them, than endeavouring the reformation of themselves'. Furthermore, exclusive use of the BCP had promoted 'an idle and unedifying ministry', which contented itself with reading 'set forms' composed by others 'without putting
forth themselves to exercise the gift of prayer, with which our Lord Jesus Christ pleaseth to furnish all his servants whom he calls to that office'. These were the 'weighty considerations' which led the Assembly to 'lay aside the former Liturgy'.