Editing Book of Common Prayer (section)

===1559 prayer book===
{{main|Book of Common Prayer (1559)}}
[[File:Title page of 1559 Book of Common Prayer.png|thumb|right|A 1562 printing of the 1559 prayer book]]
Under [[Elizabeth I]], a more permanent enforcement of the reformed Church of England was undertaken and the 1552 book was republished, scarcely altered, in 1559.{{sfn|Procter|Frere|1965|p=94}} The Prayer Book of 1552 "was a masterpiece of theological engineering."{{sfn|MacCulloch|1990|p=27}} The doctrines in the Prayer Book and the [[Thirty-nine Articles|Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion]] as set forth in 1559 would set the tone of Anglicanism, which preferred to steer a [[via media]] ("middle way") between [[Lutheranism]] and [[Calvinism]]. The conservative nature of these changes underlines the fact that Reformed principles were by no means universally popular&nbsp;– a fact that the Queen recognised. Her revived [[Act of Supremacy]], giving her the ambiguous title of [[supreme governor]], passed without difficulty, but the [[Act of Uniformity 1558]], giving statutory force to the Prayer Book, passed through the House of Lords by only three votes in 1559.{{sfn|Starkey|2001|p=284f}} It made constitutional history in being imposed by the laity alone, as all the bishops, except those imprisoned by the Queen and unable to attend, voted against it.{{sfn|Guy|1988|p=262}} Convocation had made its position clear by affirming the traditional doctrine of the Eucharist, the authority of the Pope, and the reservation by divine law to clergy "of handling and defining concerning the things belonging to faith, sacraments, and discipline ecclesiastical."{{sfn|Clarke|1954|p=182}} After these innovations and reversals, the new forms of Anglican worship took several decades to gain acceptance, but by the end of her reign in 1603, 70–75% of the English population were on board.

The alterations, though minor, were, however, to cast a long shadow over the development of the [[Church of England]]. It would be a long road back for the Church, with no clear indication that it would retreat from the 1559 Settlement except for minor official changes. In one of the first moves to undo Cranmer's liturgy, the Queen insisted that the Words of Administration of Communion from the 1549 Book be placed before the Words of Administration in the 1552 Book, thereby re-opening the issue of the [[Real Presence]]. At the administration of the Holy Communion, the words from the 1549 book, "the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ ...," were combined with the words of [[Edward VI]]'s second Prayer Book of 1552, "Take, eat in remembrance ...," "suggesting on the one hand a real presence to those who wished to find it and on the other, the communion as memorial only,"{{sfn|MacCulloch|1990|p= 27}} i.e. an objective presence and subjective reception. The 1559 Prayer Book, however, retained the truncated Prayer of Consecration of the Communion elements, which omitted any notion of objective sacrifice. It was preceded by the Proper Preface and Prayer of Humble Access (placed there to remove any implication that the Communion was a sacrifice to God). The Prayer of Consecration was followed by Communion, the [[Lord's Prayer]], and a Prayer of Thanksgiving or an optional Prayer of Oblation whose first line included a petition that God would  "...accepte this our Sacrifice of prayse and thankes geuing...". The latter prayer was removed (a longer version followed the Words of the Institution in the 1549 Rite) "to avoid any suggestion of the sacrifice of the Mass." The Marian Bishop Scot opposed the 1552 Book "on the grounds it never makes any connection between the bread and the Body of Christ. Untrue though [his accusation] was, the restoration of the 1549 Words of Distribution emphasized its falsity."{{sfn|Jones|Wainwright|Yarnold|Bradshaw|1992|pp=313–314}}

However, beginning in the 17th century, some prominent Anglican theologians tried to cast a more traditional Catholic interpretation onto the text as a Commemorative Sacrifice and Heavenly Offering even though the words of the Rite did not support such interpretations. [[Thomas Cranmer|Cranmer]], a good liturgist, was aware that the Eucharist from the mid-second century on had been regarded as the Church's offering to God, but he removed the sacrificial language anyway, whether under pressure or conviction.{{sfn|Jones|Wainwright|Yarnold|Bradshaw|1992|p=104}} It was not until the Anglican [[Oxford Movement]] of the mid-19th century and later 20th-century revisions that the Church of England would attempt to deal with the eucharistic doctrines of Cranmer by bringing the Church back to "pre-Reformation doctrine."{{sfn|Jones|Wainwright|Yarnold|Bradshaw|1992|pp=106–109}} In the meantime, the Scottish and American Prayer Books not only reverted to the 1549 text, but even to the older [[Catholic Church|Roman]] and [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Eastern Orthodox]] pattern by adding the [[Oblation]] and an [[Epiclesis]] – i.e. the congregation offers itself in union with Christ at the [[Consecration]] and receives Him in Communion – while retaining the [[Calvinism|Calvinist]] notions of "may be for us" rather than "become" and the emphasis on "bless and sanctify us" (the tension between the Catholic stress on objective [[Real Presence]] and Protestant subjective worthiness of the communicant). However, these Rites asserted a kind of Virtualism in regard to the Real Presence while making the Eucharist a material sacrifice because of the oblation,{{sfn|Jones|Wainwright|Yarnold|Bradshaw|1992|p=108}} and the retention of "may be for us the Body and Blood of thy Savior" rather than "become" thus eschewing any suggestion of a change in the natural substance of bread and wine.

Another move, the "[[Ornaments Rubric]]", related to what clergy were to wear while conducting services. Instead of the banning of all vestments except the [[rochet]] for bishops and the [[surplice]] for parish clergy, it permitted "such ornaments ... as were in use ... in the second year of King Edward VI." This allowed substantial leeway for more traditionalist clergy to retain the vestments which they felt were appropriate to liturgical celebration, namely Mass vestments such as [[alb]]s, [[chasuble]]s, [[dalmatic]]s, [[cope]]s, [[stole (vestment)|stole]]s, maniples, etc. (at least until the Queen gave further instructions, as per the text of the [[Act of Uniformity 1559|Act of Uniformity of 1559]]). The [[rubric]] also stated that the Communion service should be conducted in the 'accustomed place,' namely a Table against the wall with the priest facing it. The rubric was placed at the section regarding [[Morning Prayer (Anglican)|Morning]] and [[Evening Prayer (Anglican)|Evening Prayer]] in this Prayer Book and in the 1604 and 1662 Books. It was to be the basis of claims in the 19th century that vestments such as chasubles, albs and stoles were canonically permitted.

The instruction to the congregation to kneel when receiving communion was retained, but the [[Black Rubric]] (#29 in the [[Thirty-nine Articles|Forty-Two Articles of Faith]], which were later reduced to 39) which denied any "real and essential presence" of Christ's flesh and blood, was removed to "conciliate traditionalists" and aligned with the Queen's sensibilities.{{sfn|MacCulloch|1996|p=528}} The removal of the Black Rubric complements the double set of Words of Administration at the time of communion and permits an action – kneeling to receive – which people were used to doing. Therefore, nothing at all was stated in the Prayer Book about a theory of the [[Real Presence|Presence]] or forbidding reverence or adoration of Christ via the bread and wine in the [[Sacrament]]. On this issue, however, the Prayer Book was at odds with the repudiation of [[transubstantiation]] and the forbidden carrying about of the Blessed Sacrament in the Thirty-Nine Articles. As long as one did not subscribe publicly to or assert the latter, one was left to hold whatever opinion one wanted on the former. The Queen herself was famous for saying she was not interested in "looking in the windows of men's souls."
 
Among Cranmer's innovations, retained in the new Prayer Book, was the requirement of weekly Holy Communion services. In practice, as before the English [[Reformation]], many received communion rarely, as little as once a year in some cases; [[George Herbert]] estimated it at no more than six times per year.{{sfn|Marsh|1998| p=50}} Practice, however, varied from place to place. Very high attendance at festivals was the order of the day in many parishes and in some, regular communion was very popular; in other places families stayed away or sent "a servant to be the liturgical representative of their household."{{sfn|Maltby|1998| p=123}}{{sfn|Furlong|2000| p=43}} Few parish clergy were initially licensed by the bishops to preach; in the absence of a licensed preacher, Sunday services were required to be accompanied by reading one of the [[Book of Homilies|homilies]] written by Cranmer.{{sfn|Chapman|2006| p=29}} George Herbert was, however, not alone in his enthusiasm for preaching, which he regarded as one of the prime functions of a parish priest.{{sfn|Maltby|1998| p=67}} Music was much simplified, and a radical distinction developed between, on the one hand, parish worship, where only the [[metrical psalms]] of Sternhold and Hopkins might be sung, and, on the other hand, worship in churches with organs and surviving choral foundations, where the music of [[John Marbeck]] and others was developed into a rich choral tradition.{{sfn|Procter|Frere|1965| p=125}}{{sfn|Marsh|1998| p=31}} The whole act of parish worship might take well over two hours, and accordingly, churches were equipped with [[pew]]s in which households could sit together (whereas in the medieval church, men and women had worshipped separately). [[Diarmaid MacCulloch]] describes the new act of worship as "a morning marathon of prayer, scripture reading, and praise, consisting of [[Daily Office (Anglican)|mattins]], litany, and ante-communion, preferably as the matrix for a sermon to proclaim the message of scripture anew week by week."{{sfn|Furlong|2000| p=43}}

Many ordinary churchgoers – that is, those who could afford one, as it was expensive – would own a copy of the Prayer Book. Judith Maltby cites a story of parishioners at [[Flixton, The Saints|Flixton]] in Suffolk who brought their own Prayer Books to church in order to shame their [[vicar]] into conforming with it. They eventually ousted him.{{sfn|Maltby|1998| p=44}} Between 1549 and 1642, roughly 290 editions of the Prayer Book were produced.{{sfn|Maltby|1998| p=24}} Before the end of the [[English Civil War]] (1642–1651) and the introduction of the 1662 prayer book, something like a half a million prayer books are estimated to have been in circulation.{{sfn|Maltby|1998| p=24}}

The 1559 prayer book was also translated into other languages within the English sphere of influence. A translation into Latin was made in the form of [[Walter Haddon]]'s ''Liber Precum Publicarum'' of 1560. Intended for use in the worship of the collegiate chapels of Oxford, Cambridge, [[Eton College|Eton]], and [[Winchester College|Winchester]], it was resisted by some Protestants.{{Sfn|Spinks|2017|p=10}} The [[Welsh language|Welsh]] edition of the Book of Common Prayer for use in the [[Church in Wales]] was published in 1567. It was translated by [[William Salesbury]] assisted by [[Richard Davies (bishop)|Richard Davies]].{{sfn|Mathias|1959}}