A letter to a friend, containing some quæries about the new commission for making alterations in the liturgy, canons, &c. of the Church of England Jane, William, 1645-1707. 1689 Approx. 13 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 4 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2004-03 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A46648 Wing J453 ESTC R3439 12892125 ocm 12892125 95121 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A46648) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 95121) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 716:15) A letter to a friend, containing some quæries about the new commission for making alterations in the liturgy, canons, &c. of the Church of England Jane, William, 1645-1707. Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707. 6 p. s.n., [London : 1689] Caption title. By William Jane. Also ascribed to William Sherlock.--cf. Halkett and Laing. Reproduction of original in Huntington Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Church of England -- Liturgy. 2003-11 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2003-12 Aptara Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2004-01 Mona Logarbo Sampled and proofread 2004-01 Mona Logarbo Text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A LETTER to a Friend , Containing some QUAERIES about the New Commission for making Alterations in the Liturgy , Canons , &c. of the Church of England . SIR , IN Your last you seem much concerned about the New Commission , and desire my Opinion of it : I am very unfit to resolve your Doubts in this matter , having many of my own ; which I shall reduce into some Quaeries , hoping that you may have opportunity of consulting with some of the Commissioners , who may be able to give you a more satisfactory Answer than I can . First , Concerning the Nature of these intended Alterations . Q. I. Whether there be any Necessity of such Alterations in the Liturgy , or as some say of it ; ( Whatever may be pretended as to Canons and Ecclesiastical Courts : ) if there be any , for the Satisfaction of the Members of our Church , who generally believe there is none , why is not this Necessity made appear , and the reasons to the contrary confuted ? If there be none , enquire whether it be for the Reputation and Establishment of the Church , or for the encrease of Reverence and Devotion in the People to be so frequently meditating unnecessary Alterations . Q. II. If these Alterations be not pretended to be necessary , enquire what the fitness and expediency of them is ? Whether they are intended for the sake of the Church , or , for the satisfaction of Dissenters , or to serve both these ends together ? 1. If for the sake of the Church , should it not be first enquired whether the Church desire it , and what Alterations she desires ? Ought she not to be consulted in such matters as are intended for her advantage ? Should not the Convocation then have first met and considered , whether any Alterations at this time were expedient , before the Commissioners had troubled themselves to make such Alterations , and become bound in honour to defend them ? Or is it for the Peace and Unity and Edification of the Church , for some few assuming men to alter the Established Worship , to make it comply with their own private conceits , or to serve their own private ends ? 2. If for the sake of the Church , why should any thing be altered which hath the general Approbation of the true Members of the Church ? Why should such Ceremonies be taken away , or which is much worse , left indifferent , which they approved as useful to the external Decency and solemnity of Worship ? Why should such Prayers and forms of Worship be altered , which they find such great helps to Devotion , that they desire no material change , and believe they cannot be altered for the better by any meer humane Compositions . 3. If it be for the sake of the Church , will our Commissioners keep their eye upon the Primitive pattern which was the original Rule of our Reformation ? If they can alter our Worship and Discipline into a nearer and more exact Conformity to the ancient Primitive and Apostolick Churches ; this I grant would be for the advantage of the Church ; but ask them , whether it will be for the advantage of the Church to change the ancient Rules and Forms of Worship for some new Modern Inventions ? How shall we justifie our selves against the charge of Novelty and Innovation , if we reform away all the remains and characters of a Primitive and Apostolick Church . 2. If these Alterations be intended for the satisfaction of Dissenters , and to Unite them in the Communion of our Church . Q. I. Do they know what will satisfie Dissenters ? Whether they find any greater inclinations in them now to return to our Communion , then they have formerly had ? or whether after the fruitless tryals by the Commissioners at the Savoy in 61. and at the L. K. Bridgman's , where some of these Gentlemen were concerned , it be expedient to make a new and more dangerous experiment . 2. Whether it be possible in the nature of the thing , to give such satisfaction to Dissenters as shall restore them to the Communion of the Church without destroying the fundamental Constitution of the Church of England ? As for instance , Can any alterations in our Collects and Prayers ( while we retain a Form ) satisfie those who declare against all forms of Prayer as a quenching of the Spirit ? and then it is not altering the Liturgy , but taking it away , that must satisfie Dissenters . And not to multiply Quaeries , will the dissenting Preachers , who have been Ordained by Schismatical Presbyters , submit to Episcopal Ordinations ? or if they will not , will the People come into the Church without their Preachers ? or if the Commissioners should think fit to admit them as Presbyters of the Church without a Solemn Ordination , is it not a subversion of the Constitution , not only of the Church of England , but of the Catholick Church ? and are they sure that the Members of the Church of England will own such Presbyters ? 3. Inquire you whether it be reasonable at this time to make such alterations in our Worship in favour of Dissenters , without reasonable assurance of gaining them to our Communion ? and whether the temper and practises of our Dissenters at this time give any such assurance ? especially if the story of Northampton be true , that like Novatianus of old , they oblige their Communicants to vow or swear upon the Sacrament that they will never return to the Communion of the Church of England , which is said also to be a general practice . After this I suppose it will be needless to say , that these alterations can be intended both for the advantage of the Church and satisfaction of Dissenters , since from what has been said it seems impracticable to make such Alterations as shall satisfie Dissenters , and not give just scandal to the Members of our Church , and therefore here you are to inquire , I. Whether they ought not to have as tender a regard to the Members of our own Church , as to Dissenters ? As for instance : if many of our Communion will be offended to see others receive the Lord's Supper sitting , and it may be through the weakness of humane nature may Forsake our Communion for it , whether it be reasonable to drive these Men from our Communion out of meer hope to gain worse men in the room of them ? II. Ask if such alterations should make a Schism in the Church , would it not prove of more fatal consequence than this Present Schism ? Second , Some Queries concerning the Commission and Commissioners . Q ▪ I. Whether since the K. himself , besides his Solemn Oath at his Coronation , has so often declared his resolution to maintain the Church of England as by Law established , it be not more probable some of these Commissioners have procured this Commission from the K. to make such alterations , then that it proceeded from the K.'s own inclination ? II. Whether the known Character of some of the Leading men in this Commission be not reason enough to suspect the event ? Whether men who conformed with difficulty themselves , or upon Principles which Wise men fore-saw would destroy the Church in time , who have a Latitude to conform to a Church de facto , which has power on its side , and to conceal their own inclinations till it is time to show them , are not likely to do the Church of England a good turn when opportunity serves , and which perhaps they imagine now they have ? III. Whether when the House of Commons addressed to the King for a Convocation , it was not to prevent such a Commission as this ? which was then moved in the House of Lords by an eminent Person in this Commission , and a zealous promoter of it . IV. Whether there was any such hast of altering the best constituted Church in the World ( which honourable title some of these Commissioners in a good mood have in their Writings bestowed upon the Church of England ) that they could not expect the calling of a Convocation , but must have these alterations ready prepared for them by Commissioners ? V. Whether the effect of this will not be to check all freedom of debate in the Convocation , when these alterations shall be proposed to them as the judgment of the Commissioners , who will themselves be Men of the greatest Authority in the Convocation ? and who will be so hardy as to oppose what the Commissioners have done ? and thus ( as it may prove ) our Church may be changed and altered and transformed by Nine men , who may have tenderness and moderation enough to part with any thing but their Church-preferments : And what an imposition would this be thought on the Two Houses of Parliament , were as many Persons of as great Authority and Interest , and who had the disposal of State preferments in their hands , commissionated to prepare all Bills for their approbation ? VI. It should be Inquired whether the Convocation , when it meets , will have Authority to offer any new alterations , or to do any thing but approve what is so offered ? For the Convocation can go no farther than the King gives them authority , and that is expressed in the Commission only to approve . VII . If the Convocation have any authority , it should be considered of what dangerous consequence it may be , should the Convocation dissent from the Commissioners ? And whether to prevent this , it may not occasion as much closeting for the choice of Convocation men , as was lately practiced to pack a House of Commons ? Third , Some Queries concerning the fitness of the time for such alterations . Q I. Can it be thought a convenient time for such alterations as these , when the A. B. the Metropolitan of all England , and the head of the Convocation , and several other Bishops ( not to mention those of the inferiour Clergy ) who are as eminent for a prudent and well tempered zeal for the Church of England , as for their constant loyalty , are now under suspension ? Will not some be apt to question the Ecclesiastical Authority of such proceedings , when the Convocation is without its proper head , and deprived of the advice and counsel of so many principal members of it ? Will not others be apt to suspect , that this time is chose on purpose , because the A. B. and those other Bishops are now suspended , whose presence and authority in the Convocation they were afraid of , as sure and fast friends to the Church ? And if they are afraid of those reverend Persons who had before declared their readiness ( in their Address to K. I. against their publishing his Declaration for Liberty of Conscience ) to come to such a temper with reference to Dissenters , as shall be thought fit by a Parliament and Convocation , it is very suspicious that they intend something very unreasonable , which they feared would not pass a free Convocation , when those reverend and judicious Prelates were present . Q. II. Can it be thought a proper season to make any alterations in a well constituted and established Church , when the passions of men are in such a vehement fermentation ? when there are such struglings between the different parties in religion , and such different interests of State to serve by them ? Can we expect such fair dealing , such sedate and unbiassed councels , as ( if ever ) are necessary to alter or new-lay the foundations of a Church ? The reigns of Constantius and Valens will satisfie any man what may be expected from Councels and Convocations , when reasons of State must govern , and the late example of Scotland gives us no great reason to expect much better . Q. III. Is it a proper time to make alterations , and unsettle the foundations of the Church , when there are so many powerful Enemies , who watch an opportunity to pull it down ? I think it is not prudent , when a City is besieged to make a breach in the Walls , tho' it be to mend them : The Church of England will stand firm if we let it alone , but under a pretence of mending it , it will be an easie matter , when its strength and interest is divided , to raze its foundations . For a Conclusion , Sir , what the Parliament will think of this affair , I will not pretend to guess , but I shall only add , that upon the whole matter there seems to be great reason to have a jealous eye upon this Commission , and I hope the friends of the Church of England , in both Houses of Parliament , will be upon their guard ; especially it behoves the Clergy to be very careful what Members they choose for the Convocation , which is not now as formerly a matter of meer Ceremony and Form , since the present and future Safety of the Church depends on it , and it is seldom seen that there are any considerable Innovations in the Church , but have a proportionable influence on the State. I am , Sir , Yours . FINIS .