"that praying, reading, and singing, in going to and at the grave," having been so abused, and no way beneficial to the dead, and having proved many ways hurtful to the living, should be laid aside. Nevertheless, the minister, if present, might put the people in mind of their duty.

This directory, however, was not to be so interpreted as to extend to the denial of any civil respects or deferences at the funerals of persons, suited to their rank and condition while living.

The Directory now agreed upon was intended to supersede the former Liturgy; and in order that there might remain no doubt on this subject, the following reasons were assigned for setting aside the whole service of the Common Prayer Book:

"Because," say they, "it is evident, after long and sad experience, that the liturgy used in the church of England, notwithstanding the pains and religious intentions of the compilers, has proved an offence to many of the godly at home, and to the Reformed Churches abroad. The enjoining the reading of all the prayers heightened the grievances; and the many unprofitable and burdensome ceremonies have occasioned much mischief, by disquieting the consciences of many who could not yield to them. Sundry good people have by this means been kept from the Lord's table, and many faithful ministers debarred from the exercise of their ministry, to the ruin of them and their families. The prelates and their faction have raised their estimation of it to such a height, as though God could be worshipped no other way but by the SERVICE-BOOK; in consequence of which, the preaching of the Word has been depreciated, and in some places entirely neglected. In the mean time, the Papists have made their advantage, this way, boasting that the Common Prayer Book came up to a compliance with a great part of their service; by which means they were not a little confirmed in their idolatry and superstition; especially of late, when new ceremonies were obtruded in the church daily. Besides, the Liturgy has given great encouragement

to an idle and unedifying ministry, who have chosen rather to confine themselves to forms, made to their hands, than to exert themselves in the gift of prayer, which our Saviour furnishes all those he calls to that office."

"For these and many other weighty considerations, relating to the book in general, besides divers particulars which are a just ground of offence, it is thought advisable to set aside the former Liturgy, with the many rites and ceremonies formerly used in the worship of God; not out of any affectation of novelty, nor with any intention to disparage our first Reformers; but that we may answer in some measure the gracious providence of God, which now calls upon us for a further reformation; that we may satisfy our own consciences; answer the expectations of other Reformed Churches; ease the consciences of many godly persons among ourselves; and give a public testimony of our endeavours after an uniformity in divine worship, pursuant to what we have promised."

The Independents could with difficulty be reconciled even to as much form as this new Directory contained, for fear of infringing on the liberty of prayer; but they acquiesced, and it passed the Assembly with great unanimity.

In the change now made in the forms of public worship, the following things before in use were entirely omitted, viz: the public reading of the Apocrypha in the churches-private and lay baptism— godfathers and godmothers-the sign of the cross in baptism-the private administration of the communion to the sick-the altar with rails was exchanged for the communion table-kneeling at the Lord's table was disused, but not forbidden-no burial servicethe ring in marriage disused--all peculiar garments for officiating ministers, and all saints' days, discarded.

The ordinance of Parliament for establishing the Directory, repeals the acts of Edward VI. and Elizabeth, by which the Liturgy had been established; and forbids the use of it in any church, chapel, or other place of public worship; appointing the use of

the Directory in its place. And thus the law continued, until the restoration of Charles II., when the Liturgy was again restored.

The Directory, however, was not immediately observed throughout the kingdom. Changes in the accustomed forms of public worship are always made with difficulty. Habit, with most people, is stronger than reason, or even law. Copies of the Directory could not at once be obtained, which was the reasonable apology of some; but others despised it, and continued the use of the Common Prayer, in defiance of the ordinance of Parliament, while others refused to be restricted by any form, or insisted upon making use of their own forms. The Parliament, to give encouragement and currency to the use of the Directory, called in all copies of the Common Prayer, and imposed a fine upon all who used it. By this ordinance, the Directory was ordered to be publicly read in every church in England and Wales, the first Sunday after it was received. The fine for using the Common Prayer was five pounds for the first offence; ten for the second; and for the third, a year's imprisonment. And for neglecting to read the Directory, as prescribed, every minister incurred a penalty of forty shillings; and any one who should write against it, or otherwise endeavour to bring it into contempt, should forfeit a sum not less than five, nor more than fifty pounds, to be given to the poor.

This attempt, by fines, and forfeitures, and imprisonment, to produce presbyterial uniformity in worship, is no more to be approved than those acts of Parliament by which Episcopal uniformity was established and enforced. Even wise and good men were long in learning that religious uniformity never can be effectually produced by compulsion; and if it could, it would be no more than a hypocritical compliance with rites and institutions, which the worshippers in their conscience disapproved.

The king, although his affairs were now in a serious condition, issued, on the 13th of November, 1645, a proclamation from Oxford, forbidding the use of the

new Directory, and enjoining the use of the Common Prayer. In this public paper, his majesty not only exercises his royal authority, but condescends to reason the case, offering objections to the Directory, and arguments in favour of the Liturgy.

CHAPTER XII.

Psalmody, or singing the praises of God.

MR. FRANCIS ROUSE, a highly esteemed member of Parliament, and one of the lay-members appointed to sit in the Assembly of Divines, having composed a metrical version of the book of Psalms, and this version having been communicated by the author to Parliament, was by their order sent down to the Assembly of Divines to be examined; and to judge whether it might be permitted to be used in the public worship of God in the churches. The whole matter was referred to a select committee, who after revising the work, and striking out such things as they disliked, reported in favour of the version, for the purpose in view. The principle was then adopted and acted upon, that in using the book of Psalms, in the praises of God, we should not only keep to the sense but to the words of the sacred text. After being two years under consideration, and much pains taken in its correction, it was adopted by the Assembly. From "Baillie's Letters," we learn, that, during this period, the version had been sent down to Scotland, by the Scottish Commissioners, and that it had there undergone a revision, and that the alterations suggested there, had been generally adopted. Baillie was much in favour of the new version composed by Mr. Rouse, and strongly recommended it to his countrymen, until in the contest of parties in the House of Commons, his friend Rouse seems to have taken part with those who were in favour of a free toleration of all religions. This seems to have staggered the amiable but rigid

Baillie not a little; and he on this occasion mentions another version, which he earnestly wishes that he had with him in London, as he thought it the best he had seen. It received the approbation of the Westminster Assembly, on the 14th day of November, 1645. It was then returned to the Parliament, with the Assembly's recommendation, and was by thern approved, and authorized to be used in all the churches. The form of recommendation, as given by Neal, is in the following words, "Whereas the honourable House of Commons, by an order, bearing date, Nov. 20, 1643, did recommend the Psalms, published by Mr. Rouse, to the consideration of the Assembly of Divines; the Assembly has caused them to be carefully perused, and as they are now altered and amended, do now approve them, and humbly conceive they may be profitable to the church, if they may be permitted to be publicly sung." Accordingly, they were authorized to be used in the worship of God by both Houses of Parliament, as was before mentioned.,

This version, however, although composed by an Englishman, and authorized to be used by all the churches in that kingdom, yet never went into general use, in that country; but having been transmitted to the General Assembly of the church of Scotland, was taken up for consideration in 1646; and the General Assembly, at their annual meeting, in 1647, appointed a committee to revise said version. The work of revisal was divided among the members of this committee. The first forty were committed to Mr. John Adamson, the second forty to Mr. Thomas Crawford, the third forty to Mr. John Raw, and the remaining thirty to Mr. John Nevey. These persons were directed to compare this version with that which had been in use in the Scottish church, and make such alterations as, in their judgment, would render the version more perfect. Copies were also sent down to the presbyteries, not only for their approbabation, but for their suggestions and remarks, which they were directed to transmit as soon as possible to the Commission of the Assembly; and the Commis-