CONTENTS. Occasion of The Letter; viz. contemplated Synod in reference to the Questions likely to be discussed, probably affected by the Declaration Form of Declaration in 1552 and 1662 compared History shews that both Forms had the same object Popular view of the Real Presence indicated in the Declaration, shewn Conversation beween Abp. Cranmer and Bp. Bonner 1549 Prayer Book of 1549 designed to secure Ancient Doctrine, proved by :- Letter from Duke of Somerset to Cardinal Pole, June 4, 1549 A CARNAL Presence the main dread of the Reforming party, exemplified Peter Martyr's Disputation at Oxford, June 1549 Three Disputations at Cambridge, June 1549 Articles ministered to W. Phelps by Bp. Hooper, Ap. 1551 Profession of John Wynter in Gloucester Cathedral, Nov. 1551 Art. xxix. of 1552-3 represented the then authoritative belief of the The Declaration on Kneeling first appeared in P. Book of 1552 Apparent cause of it, viz. the new Rub. ordering Kneeling at reception 36 PAGE. Bucer's complaint of the 1st Book Articles against Bishop Ferrar, Jan. 1553-4 Continued fear of a revival of the Doctrine of a Carnal Presence and Disputation at Oxford, Dr. Smith and others v Bp. Ridley, 1555 Summary of preceding Writings, Disputations, Conversations, and Comparison of Terms allowed and disallowed therein These Considerations the safest guide to the meaning of the Declaration Absence of the Declaration from the P. Book of Elizabeth-probable Previous question (to Bp. Guest)" Whether the Sacrament were to be Parker and Grindal wished to secure Reverence-ordered Wafer Bread Grindal's view of the Real as distinct from a Carnal Presence 66-8 Incidental proof of the Doctrine then held, found in Elfric's Ang. Sax. Omission of the Paragraph the Declaration, in Art. xxix. 1571 The Declaration restored to the P. Book in 1662, though thought un- Burnet's account of the cause of their yielding The restoration of it proposed by Bp. Gauden Probable co-operation of Gauden and Gunning to clear it of words TRANSUBSTANTIATION the only opinion of the Real Presence excluded High language on the subject sanctioned by Cranmer, Ridley, and others Reference to unpublished Letter of Cranmer to the Privy Council, "de- The Letter no proof of his alleged disbelief (in 1552) in Consecration PAGE. 80-2 82-4 Foxe's "Life, State, and Story of Thomas Cranmer," 1553 Rubric in the P. Book of 1552 as to the unconsecrated Elements Proceedings at Trent and difficulty of agreement with Calvin and others Moderation of the Article-Vehemence of the Trent Decree JOHN KNOX probably the actual complainant of the Rubric on Kneeling, Duke of Northumberland's Letter to Cecil, Oct. 28, 1552 Duke of Northumberland's 2nd Letter to Cecil, Dec. 7, 1552 Letter from Knox, Ap. 14, 1553-Laing's life of Knox The Chancellor (Goodrick Bishop of Ely) not likely to have been opposed Further proof of Knox being the objector to the Rubric, in Weston's Incidental proof from Foxe's Note on Weston, that the Doctrine of the Knox probably did not object to Kneeling at Sacrament as being an act Nor on account of his opinions on Eucharistic Presence But from his antipathy to Transubstantiation and dread of a Carnal Knox approved and signed Articles of 1552 at the time he objected to Eucharistic Article of 1552 opposed Transubstantiation, Ubiquitarian- Knox's objection to Kneeling probably not Doctrinal but Ecclesiastical . Apparent policy of Cranmer in framing the Declaration upon the The well-considered terms of that Article (especially as compared with Conclusion from these considerations-That the Original Declaration was only designed to deny the Presence commonly held to be in- Cranmer's Letter corrects Dr. Cardwell's supposed Royal Authority of Dr. Cardwell's mistake as to the Editions in which the Declaration ap- peared, and as to the Order in Council giving evidence of alarm about Cranmer's Letter seems to shew that "reverently" in the Rubric of 1662, as to Consumption of the remains of the Sacrament, means 104-5 105-8 Cranmer would probably have used the Rubrical term "reverently" Therefore he would have required from all the same posture at Com- Standing, the proper and reverent posture of the Celebrant: Kneeling This shown in the new or altered Rubrics of 1662-all designed to pro- 128-9 |
