COMMON PRAYER
441 COMMUNICATIO IDIOMATUM
From respect, however, for the authority which orig- inally sanctioned the Scotch liturgy, and for other Bofficient reasons, it is hereby enacted, that the Scotch commanion office continae to be held of primary au- ^ority in this Church, and that it shall be used in all consecrations of bishops, but also at the opening of all general synods* — ^p. 29, 80. Although the Scotch com- manion office is thus established, it is worthy of notice that this canon does not prescribe what specific edition is to be used, almost every single bishop, in the lapse of years, having made additions, and even some changes, according to their own judgment or prefer- ence. In point of doctrine, the diffisrence between the English and Scotch offices is clear and unequivocal — the English offices being exclusively commemorative, and the Scottish most distinctly sacrificial. Besides which, the following usages are practised, not one of which is adopted in the English offices, viz. : 1. The mixing of water with the wine in the Eucharist ; 2. Commemorating the faithful departed at the altar; 8. Consecrating the elements by an express invocation ; 4. Using the oblatory prayer before distribution" (Eadie, s. v.). See Communion Sbrvicb.
rV. TTte American Prayer-hooh, — After the Ameri- can Bevolution the "Protestant Episcopal Church" was established as an organization separate from the Church of England in 1784. In 1786 a committee was appointed to adapt the English liturgy to use in this country, and they prepared a boolc which, however, never went into general use (The Propoted Book, 1786 ; reprinted in Hall, Rdiquim LMurgica, Lond. 1847).
^' At the General Convention in October, 1789, the whole subject of the liturgy was thrown open by ap- pointing committees on the different portions of the Prayer-book, wliose several reports, with the action of the two houses thereupon, were consolidated in the Book of Common Prayer, etc., as it is now in use, the whole book being ratified and set forth by a vote of the Convention on the 16th of October, 1789, its use being prescribed from and after the 1st day of Octo- ber, 1790. The American liturgy retains all that is excellent in the English service, omits several of its really objectionable features, brings some of the offices (the communion, for example) nearer to the primitive pattern, modifies others to suit our peculiar institu- tions, and, on the whole. Is a noble monument to the wisdom, prudence, piety, and churchmanship of the fiithers ot the American Church. By the 45th canon of 1882, it i%required that every minister sliall, before aU sermons and lectures, and all other occasions of public worship, use the Book of Common Prayer, as the same is or may be established by the authority of the General Convention of this Church. And in per- forming said service, no other prayers shall be used than those prescribed by the said book" (Hook, Church Dictionary, Am. ed. s. v.).
There seems to be a widely-difftised conviction, both in England and America, quite apart firom doctrinal considerations, that the forms of morning service, which are composed of wliat were formerly several distinct ser^ces, are too long for use. Bennett, in his Parct' phrase icith Annotations on the Book of Common Prayer (Lond. 1709, 8vo), observes that the using of the morn- ing prayer, the litany, and communion service at one and the same time, in one continued order, is contrary to the first mtention and practice of the Church. On this subject the Church of England Quarterly (Lon- don, 1866, p. 20) remarks, '* That our services are too long is generally, although not universally conceded. IWe is, no one will deny, much repetition in them as they are at present conducted; and the recitation of Ae Lord's Prayer six times on a sacrament morning may be taken as an instance. We recognise our lit- ^oxgy as deservedly endeared to our people ; and neither would we recommend, nor would they suffer, any alter- ations in it which would tend to lower its tone. A few verbal changes, the omission of a few rubrics, a new ar-
rangement of the UMmilng lessons, and we might go on without detriment for another three centuries. Much, too, must at all times be left to the discretion of the clergy." On this and other questions as to needed changes, see the Memorial Papers, containing the dt- cular and Questions of an Episcopal Commission ordered by the General Convention of the P. £. Church in 1863, edited by Bp. A. Potter (Phila. 1867, 12mo); Powys, Heoonstruction of the IMu^ (Lond. 1864).
** A writer in the London DaUy News (1867) relates the discovery, in the library of the House of Lords, of the copy of the Act of Uniformity, 14 Charles II, 1662, with the roll affixed containing the words of the Book of Common Prayer, which had been detached and lost from the copy deposited with the House of Commons. Technically and practically, therefore, the writer re- marlcs, the two rolls form ode engrossed act, and * noth- ing can be so distinct a proof that the prayers, psalms, rubrics, etc., are the law of the land' " (Nation, Sept. 19, 1867).
The most important works <m the Common Pra^yr, besides those cited in the course of this article, are Wheatly, Rational lUustraiion of the Common Prayer (London, 1720, fol. ; new ed. 1842, 8vo ; also in Bohn's Standard Library, 12mo); Comber, Companion to the Temple (new ed. Oxf. 1841, 7 vols. 8vo) ; Sparrow, Ra- tionale tqnm the Book of Common Prayer (new ed. Oxf. 1889, sm. 8vo) ; Bailey, The Liturgy compared tcith the Bible (Lond. 1838, 2 vols. 8vo) ; Palmer, On'gines Li- turgicm (Oxf. 1882, 2 vols. 8vo) ; Berens, Lectures on Catechism and Offices (Oxf. 1823) ; Procter, Hietory qf the Book of Common Prayer (Lond. 1866, 2d ed. 8vo) ; Cardwell, The two Liturgies of Edward VI compared (Oxf. 1888, 8vo) ; MaskeU, Monumenta JUtuaUa Eccle- sice AngUcana (Lond. 1846, 8 vols. 8vo); Freeman, Principles of Divine Service (Lond. 1866, 8vo); ChriS' tian Remenirancer, Oct. 1866, art vii ; Lathbury, His- tory of the Book of Common Prayer from the Reforma- tion (1868, 2d ed. 8vo); Cardwell, HiHory of Confer- ences for revision of the Common Prayer frtm 1668 to 1690 (Oxf. 1849, 8d ed. 8vo) ; Humphrey, Historical and Explanatory Treatise on the Common Prayer (Lond. 2d ed. 1866, 8vo) ; Stoddart, The History of the Prayer- book, and of its Formation from previous Liturgies, with a Draft showing how our present Liturgy might, wUh some alterations, he advantageously revised (md rear- ranged in more varied services (Lond. 1864, crown 8vo) ; The Annotaied Book of Common Prayer, being an His^ toriccU, Ritual, and Theological Commentary on the De- votional System ofihe Church of England, edited by John Henry Blunt (Lond. 1866, imp. 8vo). On the Amer- ican book, see Brownell, Family Prayer-book (N. Y. 1866, royal 8vo) ; BuUer, Common Prayer interpreted by its History (Boston, 1846, 12mo); Am, Church Re- view, Jan. 1868, art. L See Fobms of Pbatkr ; Lit- any; LlTUBOT.