« EelmineJätka »
“ The necessary steps were not taken, for on the 22d of February, 1665, we find the following entry, "Deinde dicti Rmi et Reverendi Patres inter alia habuerunt in consideratione Billam pro strictiori observantia Divini cultus secundum Liturgiam publicam aliquantulum immutatam et approbatam in hac Convocatione, quain decreverunt dicti Rmi et Reverendi Patres presentandam fore Domino locumtenente Hiberniæ per eum et regis concilium in hoc regno promovend. et in Angliam transmittendam, ac pro expeditiori approbačone Regia ibm obtinend. decreverunt ulterius Samuel Dancer hujus civitatis bibliopolam mittendum fore in Angliam cum salario ei congruo constituto pro mensura operæ in solicitationem
impendendæ.' The Act of Uniformity passed in 1666, and in the same year the first edition* of the Prayer Book was printed in Dublin, which follows the order of the MS. now preserved in the Rolls Office,t but containing not only what it wants in the
“* Of this edition only one copy is known to exist, which is in the library of the Earl of Charlemont. It is a small quarto. "Dublin. Printed by John Crooke, Printer to the King's most excellent Majestie, and are to be sold by Samuel Dancer, Bookseller, in Castle Street. 1666.' The book, however, was printed in four parts, the Psalter having been printed in 1664, the Occasional Services in 1666, and the verse Psalms in 1661.
“ + Yet this book appears to have been printed from the English Book of Common Prayer with one variation in the rubric about ornaments; instead of 'as were in this Church of England', it is “as were in the Church of England.' The service for the 23rd of October is contained in the volume, but was evidently inserted after the book had been printed, for 'Finis.' is at the end of the services for the King's Birth and Return. The prayer for the Lord Lieutenant is not
commencement, but also the Occasional Services and the version of the Psalms by Sternhold and Hopkins. Of the MS. no further notice was taken until it unfortunately attracted the attention of the Record Commissioners in 1812, who, conceiving that it was in danger of being injured, cut it off from the Transmiss, and had it bound up in a separate volume. They did not make any entry of what they had done, and the only record of the fact that the volume had been recently bound, is in a pencil note written in the beginning of the volume by Archbishop Magee, who does not, however, mention that it had been separated from any other document. Fortunately the binding has not obliterated the holes in the leaves, through which the string, which formerly attached it to the Transmiss of the Act of Uniformity, passed, and the Transmiss itself is still preserved among the records, and has attached to it the severed strings. The evidence may be made still stronger, for Mr. Nash, who has for many years held an employment in the Rolls Office, remembers the whole transaction, and can testify to having seen the book attached by the strings, of which the fragments remain, to the Transmiss of the Act of Uniformity. On a representation of these facts to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, his Lordship has determined to attach the book again to the Transmiss, and to put on record Mr. Nash's testimony.
“I am, my dear Sir,
“C. R. ELRINGTON.
In addition to the evidence contained in Dr. Elrington's letter of the MS. Book having been attached to the Statute of Uniformity, Mr. Hardiman has favoured the Editor with the following communication.
In the year
“Dublin, 2d May, 1849.
“24, Lower Abbey Street. “Dear Sir, “I have to acknowledge the receipt of your
letter of 13th ult., respecting the MS. Irish ‘Book of Common Prayer,' and feel pleasure in communicating to you what I remember on the subject of your inquiry. In the 1812, the Commissioners on the Public Records of Ireland, appointed me a Sub-Commissioner on the department of the Office of the Rolls of Chancery here, where a great and important portion of the ancient Records, as well of the Chancery, as of the late Irish Parliament, were preserved. In the process of arrangement, soon after my appointment, I found the Book of Common Prayer attached to the ingrossed “Transmiss' of the 'Act for the Uniformity of Publique Prayer,' &c. in Ireland, to which was also attached an original writ or mandate of King Charles II. under the sign manual, and directed to James, Duke of Ormond, then Lord Lieutenant, &c. In the same year, 1812, the Commissioners ordered that the old Books of Reference and Indexes to the Records in the Department of the Rolls, should be repaired and rebound. Mr. M`Neil, a bookbinder, was the person entrusted with this work, and he having found the MS. Book of Common Prayer attached, as I have mentioned, to the Act of Uniformity, separated it
from the Act, for the convenience of binding; after which he bound the Book as it appears at present, and it has never since been re-attached to the Act.
“Though not acquainted with the object of your inquiry, nor, in truth, curious on the subject, it will give me pleasure to afford any further information in my power that you may require; and I remain, dear Sir,
“Yours very truly,
Combining the statements in these letters with the results of his own personal examination, the Editor has no doubt but that the Manuscript Book at the Rolls Office, Dublin, is the one that was originally annexed to stat. 17 & 18 Car. II. c. 6. (Ir.), although it does not correspond with the description given of it in that Act*
Stat. 21 & 22 Geo. III. c. 48. s. 3. (Ir.) extended stat. 42 Geo. II. c. 23. to Ireland; and consequently the Calendar annexed to the latter statute was substituted for the Calendar in the Manuscript Book. An accurate copy of this new Calendar and its accompanying Tables will be found in the subsequent pages of this publication.
The rules given by stat. 24 Geo. II. c. 23, for knowing where the Moveable Feasts and Holydays fall, appear to be inaccurate, and upon that subject Professor De Morgan has favored the Editor with some learned observations,
* It is an extraordinary circumstance, that there is no Book of Common Prayer in existence which answers to the one described in
which have been inserted at page 57 of this volume. The Editor avails himself of this opportunity to express his warmest thanks to Professor De Morgan for that important communication.
By the Act of Union* it was enacted by Article IV. that four lords spiritual of Ireland, by rotation of sessions, should be the number to sit and vote on the part of Ireland in the House of Lords of the parliament of the United Kingdom :
And by Article V., “ That the Churches of England and Ireland, as now by law established, be united into one Protestant episcopal church, to be called “The United Church of England and Ireland;'t and that the doctrine,
* Stat. 40 Geo. III. c. 38. (Ir.)
+ Notwithstanding the express language of this statute, such a mass of ignorance and prejudice prevails on the subject, that it has been urged by English Churchmen, belonging to that class who have hitherto enjoyed, and who, it can scarcely be doubted, still hope to enjoy, the monopoly of high preferments in England, and a large share of those in Ireland, that the Church in the one country stands upon a different footing from that in the other. In the eye of the law they are identical. Thus Bishop Jebb, in the House of Lords, 1824 (2 Pract. Theol. 434–437), justly observed, “We have lately heard frequent mention made of the Church of Ireland, and the Church of England. I have myself heard it mentioned in various companies, and I have read the doctrine in several publications, that the Church of England stands on a different footing from the Church of Ireland; and the one Church ought to be treated differently from the other. Now, against this doctrine, and against any conclusion deducible from it, I must solemnly protest. I know not, the law knows not, of any Church of England; I know not, the law knows not, of any Church of Ireland. I know, and the law knows, but of ONE reformed Episcopal