Biblical Interpretation and Covenant Theology in the Form of Church Prayers and the Forme of Prayers: a Comparative Study of the Two Genevan Worship Books

Home , Sacramental union, Thomas Lever

Biblical Interpretation and Covenant Theology in The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers: A Comparative Study of the Two Genevan Worship Books

Joon Won Kim

A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Knox College and the Graduate Centre for Theological Studies of the Toronto School of Theology. In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Theology awarded by Knox College and the University of Toronto.

Biblical Interpretation and Covenant Theology in The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers: A Comparative Study of the Two Genevan Worship Books

Joon Won Kim

Master of Theology

Knox College and the University of Toronto

2019

Abstract It is well known that John Knox was influenced by John Calvin and it is often suggested that

Knox’s worship book contains no significant variations from Calvin’s. When comparing their liturgical works, however, these two worship books have notable differences. Taking a comparative and analytic approach, this thesis shows the differences between two Genevan worship books, Calvin’s The Form of Church Prayers and Knox and his co-authors’ The Forme of Prayers. As well as identifying the changes and evaluating them against two criteria—Knox’s unique style of biblical interpretation and covenant theology—this thesis also argues that the authors of The Forme of Prayers, who were English and Scottish exiles in Geneva, had certain purposes in writing: they sought to recover biblical worship and renew their future nations in a biblical and covenantal way by adopting Knox’s unique understanding of Bible and covenant, which was far more radical than Calvin’s.

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to my thesis supervisor, Dr. Stuart Macdonald who has constantly encouraged me in the accomplishment of this study. While I was taking his two courses, I was deeply attracted by the Scottish Reformation. I also express thanks to Dr. John A. Vissers and Dr. David

Neelands for their encouragement and advice over the course of my master’s program. I would like to extend my appreciation to Dr. Jane E. A. Dawson for meeting me while I was in

Edinburgh. There has also been immeasurable support from my professors, friends, and colleagues in Korea. To all, many thanks. I would like to thank my beloved mother, parents-in- law, sister, sister-in-law and her husband, for their generous financial and moral support over the years. Special thanks go to Hyemin Lee and Yijoon Kim, my wife and son. Without their support and sincere love, this study would never have been accomplished.

iii

Contents

Introduction ...... 1

Chapter 1. Introduction: The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers ...... 5

The Form of Church Prayers ...... 6

The Forme of Prayers ...... 9

Chapter 2. The Interpretation of the Bible and Covenant Theology: Calvin and Knox ...... 18

Interpretation of the Bible: Calvin and Knox ...... 19

Covenant Theology: Calvin and Knox ...... 28

Chapter 3. Changes in The Forme of Prayers ...... 35

Changes in the Prayers in “The Sunday Morning Service” ...... 36

Changes in "The Form of Marriage" ...... 42

Changes in "The Visitation of the Sick" ...... 46

Changes in “The Ministration of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper” ...... 49

The Added Sections ...... 53

Changes in The Forme of Prayers and the Future English and Scottish Nations ...... 56

Conclusion ...... 59

Bibliography ...... 62

Appendix A ...... 69

A Table of Comparison Between The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers—The Marriage Service

Appendix B ...... 78

A Table of Comparison Between The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers—The Visitation of the Sick and Of Burial

List of Appendices

Appendix A: A Table of Comparison Between The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers—The Marriage Service

Appendix B: A Table of Comparison Between The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers—The Visitation of the Sick and Of Burial

v Introduction

In May 1559, John Knox was on a boat headed for the port of Leith, Scotland. The boat was not the French galley in which he had once been a slave, nor the boat he used to flee from England under Queen Mary’s reign and persecution. It was a boat that was a call to war. He had been called upon by the Scottish people to fight against the Catholic regent, Mary of Guise. In his bag there were his theological weapons, including several copies of his co-authored worship book, The Forme of Prayers. Three years after Knox’s return to Scotland this work would become the authorized worship book in Scotland.

In the sixteenth century, a number of liturgical texts were published by reformers, including Martin Luther, Martin Bucer, John Calvin, and John Knox. These reformers’ liturgical texts carried not only the authors’ theologies, but also their biblical hermeneutics. When John Calvin suggested people sing the Psalter, for example, he cited several verses from the Bible to substantiate the view that the Psalms are the best songs for glorifying God. To give one another example, Knox denounced the Catholic Mass as an idolatrous form of worship because he thought it was invented by man, and not by the word of God.1 It is possible in this way to identify an author’s theology of worship or their biblical hermeneutic by carefully analyzing their liturgical works. It is also possible to determine theological or hermeneutical differences and similarities from a comparison of two or more liturgical texts.

Defining the Issue and Setting the Agenda

This thesis is a comparative and analytic study which compares two Genevan reformed liturgical books, La Forme des prières et chantz ecclésiastiques, avec la manière d' administrer les sacremens, et consacrer le mariage, selon la coustume de l'église ancienne (The Form of Church Prayers and Hymns with the Manner of Administering the Sacraments and Consecrating Marriage according to the Custom of the Ancient Church, hereafter, The Form of Church Prayers) by John Calvin, and The Forme of Prayers and Ministration of the Sacraments, &c.

1 John Knox, The Works of John Knox, collected and edited by David Lang (Edinburgh: Thomas and George Stevenson, 1854–64), 3:34. Hereafter this reference will be cited as Works followed by the appropriate volume and page number.

1 2 vsed in the Englishe Congregation at Geneua and approued, by the famous and godly learned man, Iohn Caluyn (The Forme of Prayers and Ministration of the Sacraments, &c. used in the English Congregation at Geneva and approved by the famous and godly learned man, John Calvin, hereafter, The Forme of Prayers) written by the following Scottish and English authors: John Knox, William Whittingham, Anthony Gilby, John Foxe, and Thomas Cole.

The correlations between the theologies of John Calvin and John Knox have been studied by many scholars, but the significant differences between their two Genevan worship books, in terms of the authors’ different perspectives on worship, the Bible, and the concept of covenant, require further research consideration. The Forme of Prayers, as it is widely known, was modeled on The Form of Church Prayers. As many scholars have argued, both books can be considered reformed liturgical works; however, they cannot be regarded as the same. Although they share a similar structure, themes, and even similar procedures of public worship, The Forme of Prayers was not a simple translation or an imitative adaptation. The theology, the use of the Bible, and the instruction in The Forme of Prayers seem more radically biblical and covenantal than in The Form of Church Prayers.

Earlier secondary literature indicates that some parts of The Forme of Prayers are slightly different from The Form of Church Prayers, but does not investigate the reasons for or implications of the differences; instead, previous scholars have generally concentrated on the similarities between the two books. The Liturgical Portions of the Genevan Service Book, written by William D. Maxwell, for example, compares the two Genevan worship books and argues that they are very similar.2 Only recently have several scholars argued that it is necessary to compare Calvin and Knox’s theologies in order to recognize that the two reformers cannot be regarded as the same. For example, while William D. Maxwell argued that Knox was strongly attracted by Calvin’s forms of worship as well as his theological teachings, recent scholars, including V. E. D’Assonville, Jane E. A. Dawson, Richard G. Kyle, and Richard L. Greaves, have presented significant evidence to illustrate disagreements between the two reformers, especially regarding their biblical interpretations and covenantal theologies. The arguments of these scholars suggest that the traditional perspective needs to be reconsidered in relation to worship. This project thus discusses the agreements and disagreements between the two reformers by focusing on the two

2 William D. Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions of the Genevan Service Book (Westminster: The Faith Press Ltd., 1931).

3 worship books.

The main argument of this thesis is that the differences between the two worship books originate from the following two elements: 1) the two reformers’ different approaches to the Bible, and 2) their different perspectives on covenant theology. These two elements gave the authors of The Forme of Prayers a particular purpose: not only to purify worship, but also to effect biblical and covenantal renewal in their future nations. To support the argument, this thesis compares the two worship books, identifies the changes, and evaluates them using two criteria: Knox’s unique biblical interpretation and his covenant theology. Finally, this thesis argues why and how the authors revised The Form of Church Prayers when compiling The Forme of Prayers.

Methodology of the Study

Primary Sources

Among the various editions of The Form of Church Prayers, this thesis uses the first Genevan edition, which was published in 1542, rather than the first or second Strasburg edition, because the authors of The Forme of Prayers appear to have used the first Genevan edition as their main source. Since this work was originally written in French, the English version, translated by Henry Beveridge, is used in this thesis.3 The Forme of Prayers also has various editions, but the original edition, published in 1556 in Geneva, is used here. A comparative and analytic study of the two primary texts is the methodology of this study. The relevant primary texts are reviewed in order to discern Calvin and Knox’s theologies therein and to discuss the similarities and differences between the two reformers. The historiographies of the mid-sixteenth century and the secondary literature are also reviewed in order to discern the historical background of the two Genevan worship books.

Comparative method

There are many similarities and differences between the two worship books. Although they have similar structures, their tables of contents are not identical. For more precise comparison, the four parallel sections from each book and the added sections in The Forme of Prayers will be

3 John Calvin, John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, edited and translated by Henry Beveridge (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2009), 2:100–108. Hereafter this reference will be cited as Tracts and Letters followed by the appropriate volume and page number.

4 reviewed. The parallel sections are as follows: a) General prayers in the Sunday Morning Service, b) Form of Marriage, c) Visitation of the Sick, d) The Administering of the Sacraments. In order to compare the similarities and differences between the two reformers, selected primary sources and relevant secondary literature are introduced and discussed.

Analytic method

It is necessary to examine exact sentences and phrases in order not only to find the changes but to identify each author’s intention. Because of the different original languages of the two books, it is impossible to collate The Forme of Prayers word by word with The Form of Church Prayers. It is nevertheless still possible to indicate the changes and to identify the theological differences between the two.

Procedure

In order to compare the two Genevan worship books and link them to the thesis statement, this thesis is divided into three chapters: In the first chapter, the historical background and major features of both books are introduced. In the second, the two reformers’ different views on the Bible and covenant theology are reviewed in order to test the premise that the changes in The Forme of Prayers were based on Knox’s unique biblical interpretation and covenant theology. In the last chapter, the changes in The Forme of Prayers are presented and evaluated.

Chapter 1. Introduction: The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers

In the sixteenth century, the reformers wrote, compiled, and revised many liturgical works. In the reformed tradition, Ulrich Zwingli, Martin Bucer, Guillaume Farel, Valérand Poullain, Johannes Oecolampadius, John a Lasco, John Calvin, and John Knox published their own liturgical works.4 Among these, John Calvin’s Form of Church Prayers and Knox and his co-authors’ Forme of Prayers were notable, because these two worship books influenced the tradition in radical ways.5 The Forme of Prayers—written by English and Scottish reformers in Geneva— was taken to England and Scotland and accepted by the Scottish Parliament and later by Puritans in England.6 Eventually, this book became a model for the Westminster Directory for Public Worship in 1645. The two Genevan worship books were not published without incident, however. Both Calvin and Knox were expelled by the city authorities because of their strict position on worship; they both composed their worship books in places of exile, Strasburg and Geneva; and they both came back to their city and country respectively, bringing their worship books with them.

The two reformers shared not only similar historical circumstances, but also liturgical, biblical, and theological thinking, and these elements are revealed in their worship books. Liturgically, these two books convey the reformed liturgy; biblically, they are solely based on the Bible; and theologically, covenant theology is their nucleus. They differ, however, in some fascinating ways. The following discussion introduces the historical background and general features of the two Genevan worship books.

4 Bard Thompson briefly introduces each reformer’s liturgical works in Liturgies of the Western Church (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980).

5 William D. Maxwell, A History of Worship in the Church of Scotland (London: Oxford University Press, 1955), 49. He notes, “The Strasbourgian and Calvinian, and following the Scottish, reformation of worship was startlingly radical.”

6 Jane E. A. Dawson, “Patterns of Worship in Reformation Scotland,” in Worship and Liturgy in Context: Studies and Case Studies in Theology and Practice, ed. Duncan B. Forrester and Doug Gay (London: SCM Press, 2009), 142.

5 6

The Form of Church Prayers Historical Background

John Calvin was not only a systematic theologian, but also a pioneer of reformed worship. His works on worship influenced many reformers and still have an impact in many disciplines. His view on worship can be found in many of his works, including The Institutes of the Christian Religion, the Necessity of Reforming the Church, and The Preface to the Psalter. As is well known, Guillaume Farel (1489–1565) strongly requested that Calvin stay in Geneva in order to help the reformation there. After several refusals, Calvin accepted Farel’s request and became a minister in the city of Geneva. At the start of 1537, Calvin submitted a document, “Articles Concerning the Organization of the Church and of Worship at Geneva,” to the city magistrates. In this document, Calvin strongly advocated two practices: the frequent celebration of the Lord’s Supper and the exercise of discipline.7 He argued that Christ’s church should administer the Lord’s Supper on every Lord’s day, or at least once a month.8 However, Calvin’s request was not accepted by the city magistrates, and he was banished from the city in 1538 without yielding his strict position on the frequent administration of the Lord’s Supper.9

After banishment from Geneva, Calvin moved to Basel; however, Martin Bucer then summoned him to Strasburg, “and by heavy persuasion, including further mention of God’s wrath, prevailed upon him to accept.”10 By comparing Calvin to Jonah, Bucer persuaded Calvin to keep his vocation from God as a minister and a teacher.11 In his commentary on the Psalms, Calvin refers

7 Thompson, Liturgies of the Western Church, 188.

8 Calvin also argued, “plainly, this custom which enjoins us to take communion once a year is a veritable invention of the devil, whoever was instrumental in introducing it.” John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, edited by John T. McNeill and translated by Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960), IV, xvii, 46. Hereafter this reference will be cited as Institutes, followed by the appropriate book, chapter, and section.

9 Bruce Gordon, Calvin (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009), 80. Gordon indicates that the main issue of the banishment was the use of the Bernese rites in the city of Geneva and the issue of the frequent celebration of the Lord’s Supper was one of the reasons. See also Dairmaid MacCulloch, The Reformation: A History (New York: Viking, 2003), 190–192.

10 Thompson, Liturgies of the Western Church, 189.

11 Randall C. Zachman, “John Calvin,” in The Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, ed. Paul T.

7 back to Bucer’s warning:

By this means set at liberty and loosed from the tie of my vocation, I resolved to live in a private station, free from the burden and cares of any public charge, when that most excellent servant of Christ, Martin Bucer, employing a similar kind of remonstrance and protestation as that to which Farel had recourse before, drew me back to a new station. Alarmed by the example of Jonas which he set before me, I still continued in the work of teaching. And although I always continued like myself, studiously avoiding celebrity…12

Eventually, Calvin became a minister to a group of French exiles at Strasburg from 1538 to 1541. Before he came to Strasburg, the German authorities had not permitted the French congregation to celebrate the Lord’s Supper, unless the group used a liturgical book, La maniere et fasson (The manner and method) by Guillaume Farel.13 After Calvin’s arrival, a monthly celebration in accordance with the custom in the German churches under the leadership of Bucer was permitted.14 According to John M. Barkley, “it is not known whether or not there was some agreement, for, if so, it has not been recorded, that the services of the French congregation should approximate to those of the German churches.”15

Maxwell argues that Calvin seems to have had “a high opinion of the worship established in

Nimmo and David A. S. Fergusson (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 136.

12 John Calvin, Commentaries on Psalms, translated and edited by James Anderson (Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library, n.d.), http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom08.html (accessed May 31, 2018), 27.

13 The full title is La maniere et fasson qu'on tient en baillant le sainct baptesme en la saincte congregation de Dieu: et en espousant ceulx qui viennent au sainct mariage, et à la saincte Cene de nostre seigneur, es lieux lesquelz Dieu de sa grace a visité, faisant que selon sa saincte parolle ce qu'il a deffendu en son eglise soit rejecté, et ce qu'il a commandé soit tenu. Aussi la maniere comment la predication commence, moyenne et finit, avec les prieres et exhortations qu'on faict à tous et pour tous, et de la visitation des malades (The Manner and Method of Performing Holy Baptism in the Holy Congregation of God, and of Marrying Those Who Come for Holy Marriage, and in the Holy Supper of our Lord in the Places which God by his Grace has Visited, Performed so that according to his Holy Word that which he has Forbidden in his Church might be Rejected and that which he has Commanded might be Retained. Also the Way in which Preaching Begins, Proceeds, and Ends, with the Prayers and Exhortations Made to All and for All, and of the Visitation of the Sick). A revised edition was published in Geneva in 1538. For more information on this book, see Christopher Elwood, The Body Broken: The Calvinist Doctrine of the Eucharist and the Symbolization of Power in Sixteenth-Century France (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 41–44.

14 John M. Barkley, The Worship of the Reformed Church (London: Lutterworth Press, 1966), 17.

15 Ibid.

Strasburg, for he adopted it almost word for word.”16 According to Maxwell’s research, Calvin was able to publish his worship book, The Form of Church Prayers, which included “several psalms in French metre, with the melodies, for congregational singing.”17 When Calvin returned to Geneva, he revised The Form of Church Prayers and published it in 1542. Several selections of the psalter were added in this book. This first Genevan edition of 1542 was revised later in 1547 and 1559.18 The first edition of this book was lost, but a copy of the second edition of 1542 is archived at the University of Geneva.

Features

The Form of Church Prayers has four parts: Forms of Prayer for the Sunday Service, Form of Administering the Sacraments, Form and Manner of Celebrating Marriage, and Visitation of the Sick. The detailed structure of the 1542 edition was as follows:

Letter to the Reader (extended in 1543 with further sections on music and singing) Musical section Prayers for the Sunday Service Baptism The Lord's Supper Marriage Visitation of the Sick

Regarding the Letter to the Reader, Alasdair Heron states: “The Letter to the Reader, both in the shorter 1542 and the longer 1543 version, seeks to give an account of the aims and intentions of this pattern of worship, as do the Explanations of the Reform of Baptism and of the Lord's Supper at the end of the respective sections.”19

In the first section, a model of the Sunday morning service is presented with several sample prayers to be led by a minister; the second section describes how pedobaptism and the Lord’s Supper need to be administered in church; the third section is about the order of celebrating

16 William Maxwell, An Outline of Christian Worship (London: Oxford University Press, 1936), 112.

17 Ibid., 113.

18 Again, this thesis uses the first Genevan edition in 1542 because Knox and his co-authors seem to have revised this edition.

19 Alasdair Heron, “Calvin and the Genevan Form of Prayer and Praise,” The Church Service Society Record 45 (2009–2010): 6.

9 marriage; and the last section gives instruction on visiting a sick person. Each section carries concise but specific instructions on how these sacraments and this pastoral care should be carried out in a reformed manner. Compared to the traditional Roman Catholic rites, Calvin’s worship book—along with other reformed worship books—omitted the Entrance Ceremonies, the Sacrifice of Mass, the Offertory Rites and simplified the Service of Reading, the Eucharistic Prayers, and the Communion Cycle.20

According to Yosep Kim, Calvin’s Form of Church Prayers has three features of the reformed tradition: “The Word of God should take the center of the worship, unnecessary and superstitious human elements should be eliminated for the simple worship, and service and fellowship should be followed worship in life.”21 He argues that the principle of worship, which is based on the word of God, is revealed in every part of The Form of Church Prayers. Calvin sought to eliminate superstitious vanity and tried to make worship straightforward. The addition to The Form of Church Prayers of the Ten Commandments, the Apostles’ Creed, and self-reflection before participating at the Lord’s Table shows Calvin’s intention of reforming worship.22 Kim’s research is noteworthy because the three features of The Form of Church Prayers he argues for are also found in The Forme of Prayers, as will be discussed later.

The Forme of Prayers Historical Backgrounds

It is necessary to consider the historical circumstances of the years 1554–1556 in order to understand the birth of The Forme of Prayers, which was triggered by trouble in Frankfort-on- Main (hereafter, Frankfurt). After Queen Mary I (Mary Tudor)’s ascension in England, many English and Scottish reformers fled to the continent between 1554–1558, to places such as

20 For information about the Order of the Roman Catholic Mass, see Thompson, Liturgies of the Western Church, 25–91.

21 Yosep Kim, “Calvin’s Reformed Theology and Worship in ‘the Form and Prayers and Songs and the Church in Geneva’ (1543),” Korean Reformed Theology 33 (2012): 86–93. In this article, Kim also argues that Calvin wrote The Form of Church Prayers in order to apply the theology of reformation into actual practice. The custom in Korea is to provide an English language title and an English language abstract. The article itself is in Korean.

22 Ibid.

Geneva, Frankfurt, and Strasburg. In June 1554, an English group of exiles, led by William Whittingham (1524–1579), arrived in Frankfurt. The magistrates in Frankfurt allowed the English congregation to use a building for their worship services, although under the condition, “the Englishe shulde not dissent from the French men in doctrine or ceremonyes, least they shulde thereby minister occasion of offence.”23 The congregation agreed on the issue of doctrine, but they did not agree about the ceremony the French congregation used. Instead of following the French ceremony, they revised the Book of Common Prayer—written and compiled by Thomas Cranmer— that they had brought with them from England and used this initially.24 In this revised version, according to Knox’s report, “the Litany, Surplice, and many other things [were] also omitted, for…in those Reformed churches such things would seem more than strange.”25 They also revised the order of worship.

After modifying the style and order of worship, the English exiles in Frankfurt sent letters to exiles in other cities inviting them to join their community:

Yea & we assure you on good advisement, that throghe gods grace, when we shall be assembled togethers, such orders will be taken, that besides that our nation is hable to fornishe, we shall have the Citie most forwarde to procure others. Yf any wolde pretende the hardenes of the Contrie, & charges, our experience may sufficiently satisfie him, who having travelled throghe most parts, wher the gospell is preched, have not founde so many commodities for loss charges.26

After sending letters to other congregations in several cities, the congregation in Frankfurt

23 Works, 4:10.

24 The exiles referenced Valérand Poullain (1509–1557)’s worship book, Liturgia Sacra. Poullain was a French Calvinist minister for the French exiles in Glastonbury, England. Poullain revised Calvin’s Form of Church Prayers and used it in the worship service. More detailed information can be found in Jack C. Whytock, “A Scottish Tapestry of Reform: John Calvin, Valeer and Poullain and Some Scots,” The Canadian Society of Presbyterian History Papers 34 (2009): 12–26.

25 Works, 4:4; See also Bryan D. Spinks, From the Lord and “The Best Reformed Churches”: A Study of the Eucharistic Liturgy in the English Puritan and Separatist Traditions 1550–1633 (Roma: C.L.V.- Edizioni liturgiche, 1984), 70–76.

26 Letters from Exile, Documents of the Marian Exile, http://www.marianexile.div.ed.ac.uk/ documents/ Frankfurt-Continent-540802.shtml#5408 (accessed May 3, 2018). Jane Dawson and her colleagues at the University of Edinburgh collected and organized the letters and documents of the Marian exile groups and the continental reformers, including Peter Martyr Vermigli and John Calvin. These letters and documents are significant because they are helpful in discerning not only the historical background, but also the liturgical issues between the two English groups of exiles.

11 elected John Knox, James Haddon (d. 1156), and Thomas Lever (1521–1577) as their ministers.

John Knox—who had been a bodyguard to George Wishart (1513?–1546), a prisoner of war, a slave on a French galley for nineteen months, and a minister at Buckinghamshire and Newcastle—fled from England and became an exile on the continent in January 1554.27 Knox disembarked at Dieppe first and continued to Geneva, where John Calvin had ministered. Knox stayed there for a few months before responding to the invitation from the Frankfurt exiles, joining them in November 1554. When he arrived in Frankfurt, he found that there had been a debate in the English-speaking congregations on the continent. The exiles in Strasburg and Zurich wanted to use the Book of Common Prayer, but Knox and other exiles in Frankfurt did not. One of the major issues was the posture of kneeling for communion. Knox and his followers denounced kneeling at the altar as a superstitious practice, an opinion Knox had already expressed in a letter to the congregation in Berwick in 1552:

To teach the point, kneeling at the Lord’s Supper I have proved by doctrine to be no convenient gesture for a table, which has been given in that action to such a presence of Christ as no place of God’s Scriptures teach unto us. And therefore kneeling in that action, appearing to be joined with certain dangers no less in maintaining superstition than in using Christ’s holy institution with other gestures than either he used or commanded to be used, I thought good amongst you to avoid, and to use sitting at the Lord’s Table, which you did not refuse, but with all reverence and thanksgiving unto God for his truth, knowing, as I suppose, you confirmed the doctrine with your gesture and confession.28

In another document,29 addressed to the Privy Council, Knox presented his opinion on the right posture at the table: “Kneeling is the gesture most commonly of suppliants, of beggars, of such men as, greatly troubled by knowledge of misery or offense committed, seeks help or remission, doubting whether they shall obtain the same or not.”30

In 1555, the English exilic groups in Strasburg sent Richard Chambers (d. 1566) and Edmund

27 Jane Dawson, John Knox (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2015), 83.

28 Peter Lorimer, John Knox and the Church of England: His Work in Her Pulpit and His Influence Upon Her Liturgy, Articles, and Parties (London: Henry S. King & Co., 1875), 261.

29 Although it is not clear whether the author was John Knox or not, Iain R. Torrance asserts that it was “almost certainly Knox.” For a further discussion see his article “A Particular Reformed Piety: John Knox and the Posture at Communion,” Scottish Journal of Theology 67, no. 4 (2014): 403.

30 Lorimer, John Knox and the Church of England, 271.

Grindal (1519–1583) to Frankfurt to request the use of the Book of Common Prayer; however, John Knox and William Whittingham did not accept their request. They argued that they would accept the Book of Common Prayer if “[the congregation in Strasburg] coulde prove of that [the Book of Common Prayer] to stande withe God’s Worde, and the countrie permit, that shuld be graunted them.”31 At the same time, Knox and Whittingham summarized the Book of Common Prayer, translated it into Latin, and sent it to John Calvin in Geneva in order to seek his opinion on this issue. In this letter, titled “A Description of the Liturgie, or Booke of Service, that is Used in Englande,” Knox and Whittingham claimed that the elements in the Book of Common Prayer were not appropriate.32 Calvin’s response arrived in February 1555. Calvin answered, “In the Liturgie of Englande, I see that there were manye tollerable foolishe thinges; by theis wordes I meane, that there was not that puritie whiche was to be desired.”33 Despite Calvin’s letter, the two parties could not reach agreement.

In the midst of this conflict, Richard Cox and his followers arrived in Frankfurt in March 1555. The new group argued that they wanted to use the Book of Common Prayer.34 Cox and Knox had debated several times, but they could not reach an agreement because the followers of Knox remained “unhappy about the use at Frankf[u]rt of some elements of the Book of Common Prayer and about the treatment of John Knox who had been a minister to the congregation.”35 In the end, Knox was accused by Cox’s followers of contempt of the Emperor Charles V. Knox wrote an article entitled “A Faithful Admonition” in 1554, and in this article he denounced Emperor Charles V, saying: “suche as the Emperoure, which is no lesse enemy unto Christe then ever was Nero.”36 Eventually, Knox had to leave Frankfurt on March 26, 1555. After Knox’s departure, Cox and his followers gathered former English clergy members, elected new church leaders, and despite objections by Christopher Goodman, settled their liturgy as the Book of

31 Works, 4:17.

32 Works, 4:22–27.

33 Works, 4:29.

34 Works, 4:32.

35 Jane Dawson, “‘Satan’s bludy clawses’: How the exile congregation in Geneva reacted to the Marian persecution,” work in progress paper, in author’s possession, 9.

36 Works, 3:308.

Common Prayer.37 In April 1555, Cox and his followers sent a letter to Calvin and this letter gives details of the controversies between Cox and Knox:

For we gave up private baptisms, confirmation of children, saints’ days, kneeling at the holy communion, the linen surplices of the ministers, crosses, and other things of the like character. And we gave them up, not as being impure and papistical, which certain of our brethren often charged them with being; … We retain, however, the remainder of the form of Prayer and of the administration of the Sacraments, which is prescribed in our Book, and this with the consent of almost the whole church, the judgement of which in matters of this sort we did not think should be disregarded.38

This controversy in Frankfurt has been evaluated by many scholars from many different perspectives. Marshall Knappen sees it as a political power game between nationalism and internationalism.39 Martyn-Lloyd Jones believes that the controversy was the starting point of the Puritan revolution.40 Martin Simpson and Peter Meney view this event from their own perspectives; Simpson argues that Knox and his followers wrote a biased article about the trouble in Frankfurt in order to justify themselves;41 Meney sees this trouble in Frankfurt as caused by a troublemaker, Knox, a separatist and a hyper-Calvinist.42 These opinions are noteworthy and are based on reasonable sources. However, these scholars do not consider theological or doctrinal perspectives in reaching their conclusions.43

37 University of Edinburgh, “Letters from Exile: Documents of the Marian Exile,” http://www.marianexile.div.ed.ac.uk/documents/Goodman-Vermigli-550325.shtml#_ftnref4 (accessed May 3, 2018).

38 Works, 4:56.

39 Marshall M. Knappen, Tudor Puritanism: A Chapter in the History of Idealism (Chicago: Chicago University Press 1939), 118–133.

40 David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Puritans: Their Origins and Successors (Edinburgh: Banner of Trust, 1987), 275.

41 Martin A. Simpson, John Knox and the troubles begun at Frankfurt: comprising a critical commentary on “A brieff discours off the troubles begonne at Franckford ... A.D. 1554,” John Knox's narrative of his expulsion from the city, with annotations, and an analysis of Rudolf Jung's “Englische Flüchtlingsgemeinde” (1910) (West Linton: M.A. Simpson, 1975).

42 Peter L. Meney, ed., The Troublemakers at Frankfurt: A Vindication of the English Reformation (Boise: Go Publications, 2003).

43 For more recent discussions about the Controversy in Frankfurt, see Timothy Duguid, “The ‘Troubles’ at Frankfurt: A New Chronology,” Reformation and Renaissance Review 14, no. 3 (December 2012): 243–268, and Jane Dawson, “Scotland and the Example of Geneva,” Theology in Scotland 16, no. 2

Meanwhile, Jane Dawson argues that this trouble affected Knox’s future character: “In the future he was suspicious when he had no need to be, and unforgiving and uncompromising when challenged. For the remainder of his life he harboured a distrust of those holding senior positions within the Church of England.”44After being banished from Frankfurt on March 26, 1555, Knox proceeded to Geneva where Calvin taught and ministered. Calvin and the city magistrates welcomed him. After Knox’s arrival, a party of English Calvinists from Frankfurt joined in Geneva. Ten days after their arrival, Calvin presented their needs before the city Council for its sympathetic consideration;45 and the petition was later accepted. By November the “Knoxian” group was “sufficiently settled to constitute themselves formally as a church and share the use of the ‘Auditorire’ building [St Marie de la Nove] with the Italian exile congregation.”46 Knox and four other ministers at Geneva—William Whittingham, Anthony Gilby (1510–1585), John Foxe (1516/17–1587), and Thomas Cole (1520–1571)—wrote The Forme of Prayer and it was published in Geneva in 1556 by John Crespin (1520–1572): “They were all of one mind, so they now took [The Liturgy of Compromise—which was compiled and revised by John Knox and William Whittingham and used until before Richard Cox’s arrival in 1555] and without substantially altering it added a Preface, a collection of fifty metrical Psalms in English, and an English translation of Calvin’s Catechism, and sent it to John Crespin’s press, whence it was issued on February 10, 1556.”47 Knox, returning to Scotland in 1559, brought a couple of copies with him also—though these were not the first to reach that country—and this Forme of Prayers was eventually accepted as the standard of worship in the Church of Scotland. After 1564, it “gradually became known as the Book of Common Order, though it seems more commonly to have been spoken of as the Psalm Book. It continued in use until the Westminster Directory superseded it in 1645.”48

Jane Dawson states that The Forme of Prayers, with the Geneva Bible, was the Genevan

(Autumn 2009): 55–73.

44 Dawson, John Knox, 108.

45 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 6–7.

46 Dawson, “‘Satan’s bludy clawses’,” 9.

47 Ibid., 8.

48 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 9.

15 congregation’s noteworthy work: “Less obvious sources for the impact of the persecution can be found in the two major products of the Genevan congregation: its liturgy [The Forme of Prayers] and its biblical translation [the Geneva Bible].”49 She continues, “As well as expressing the congregation’s own attitude, these products became the chief transmitters of this understanding of the Marian persecution to future generations of Protestants within England and Scotland.”50

Features

The Forme of Prayers has three parts: 1) Forms of Prayer and Orders for the Sacraments, etc.; 2) Fifty-one Metrical Psalms with the melody lines; 3) Calvin’s Catechism translated into English and a few prayers for private and family use.51 The table of contents is as follows:

The Preface 1. The confession of the Christian faythe. 2. Thorder of electinge Ministers, Elders, and Deacons. 3. Thassembly of the Ministery every thursdaye. 4. An order for the interpretation of the scriptures, and answeringe of dowtes, obserued euery mundaye. 5. A confession of our synnes vsed before the sermon and framede to our state and tyme. 6. An other confession for all states and tymes. 7. A generall prayer after the sermon, for the whole estate of Christes Churche. 8. The ministration of Baptisme, and the Lordes Supper. 9. The forme of Mariage, the Visitation of the Sycke and the Maner of Buryall. 10. An order of Ecclesiasticall Discipline. 11. One and fyftie Psalmes of Dauid in metre. 12. The Catechisme of M. Caluyn. etcet.52

The parallel chapters between The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers—the underlined sections above—are similar; the added chapters in The Forme of Prayers also seem to have been influenced by Calvin. Maxwell notes that the Forme of Prayers “passed through successive editions in its English form. There was no change made in the orders themselves, but additional prayers were included as alternatives, many of them drawn from Huycke’s English

49 Dawson, “‘Satan’s bludy clawses’,” 8.

50 Ibid.

51 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 79.

52 Works, 4:150.

16 translation of Calvin’s service book after slight revision.”53 Bard Thompson also argues “by structure and text, [The Forme of Prayers] belonged to the liturgical tradition of Strasburg and Geneva, although some few parts of the book came immediately from the English rite, notably the first section of the Communion Exhortation and portions of the Marriage service;”54 Gordon Donaldson argues: “The language and thought of [The Forme of Prayers] owe a certain amount to the [Book of Common Prayer], clear echoes of which can be found here and there.”55 These scholars’ arguments are noteworthy because The Forme of Prayers seems to be obviously modeled on The Form of Church Prayers. However, the changes in The Forme of Prayers raise a question about why and on what criteria Knox and his co-authors revised The Form of Church Prayers.

The Preface in The Forme of Prayers, which seems to have been written by William Whittingham, illustrates the historical background and the purpose in writing. In this Preface, as Dawson describes, the authors explain that “its solidarity with Protestants in England had encouraged them to draw up” the liturgy:56 “we, to whome though God hath geven more libertie, yet no lesse lamentinge your bondage then rejoysinge in our owne deliverance frome that Babylonicall slavery and antichristian yoke.”57 There are other passages which also show their purposes in writing:

[H]aving now obteyned by the mercifull providence of our heavenly Father a free Churche for all our nation in this moste wourthy citie of Geneva, we presented to the judgment of the famous man John Calvin, and others learned in these parties, the Order which we mynded to use in our Churche: who approving it, as sufficient for a Christian congregation, we put the same into execution, nothing douting but all godly men shall be muche edified therby.58

For as ceremonies grounded upon God's Woorde, and approuved in the New Testament,

53 Maxwell, An Outline of Christian Worship, 122.

54 Thompson, Liturgies of the Western Church, 290.

55 Gordon Donaldson, “Reformation to Covenant,” in Studies in the History of Worship in Scotland, edited by Duncan B. Forrester and Douglas Murray (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996), 40.

56 Dawson, “‘Satan’s bludy clawses’,” 9.

57 Works, 4:160.

58 Works, 4:161.

are commendable (as the circumstance thereof doth support), so those that man hath invented (thogh he had never so good occasion thereunto), if they are once abused, import a necessity, hinder God's Woorde, or be drawen into a superstition, without respect oght to be abolished.59

Therfore, deare Brethrene, being hereby persuaded, and with many moo reasons confirmed (which opportunitie permitteth not here to writ) we have contented our selves with that wisdome which we have learned in Godes booke, where we be taught to preache the Woorde of God purely, minister the Sacramentes sincerely, and use prayers and other orders thereby approved, to the increase of Godes glorye, and edification of his holye people.60

The above citations are just a few examples, but it is possible to recognize that Knox and his co- authors had certain purposes: purifying worship and renewing their future nations in a biblical and covenantal way. In order to accomplish their purpose, the authors of The Forme of Prayers made several changes; and these changes can be re-evaluated in light of the criteria of Knox’s brand of biblical interpretation and covenant theology. In subsequent discussions, these criteria are introduced and applied to the four sections in The Forme of Prayers.

59 Works, 4:162.

60 Works, 4:164.

Chapter 2. The Interpretation of the Bible and Covenant Theology: Calvin and Knox

Calvin, a theologian of the Bible, constantly insisted that true worship should be based only on the Bible. Knox, also a man of the Bible, kept the same principle throughout his life. On the basis of their strong belief, they never accepted the Roman Catholic liturgy, because they thought it was a human invention, and not based on God’s commandments. Instead, they wrote or compiled their own worship books full of verses from the Bible and interpretations of those verses.

A second shared feature of the two reformers’ theologies is their covenant theology. For Knox, the doctrine of the covenant formed the core of his theology, and although there have been debates about whether or not the covenant was Calvin’s core concept also, it is quite clear that the doctrine was important to him and influential for his theological descendants.61 Both drew this doctrine from the Bible and applied it to all aspects of Christianity. Covenant theology was thus central, influencing also the desire to reform worship in a biblical way. For Knox, as well as for Calvin, covenant theology cannot be divorced from theology, especially regarding the concept of worship. One of Knox’s favourite words in his writings is “covenant.” He believed that God had chosen people to keep his covenant; and from this belief, he regarded his own nation, England, and later Scotland, as the new Israel.

The two reformers had slightly different methods of biblical interpretation and different views on covenant theology, however. While previous scholars illustrate the similarities between the two, more recently there have been arguments that Knox’s biblical interpretation and covenant theology cannot be regarded as the same as Calvin’s. In this chapter, the two reformers’ biblical interpretations and covenant theologies are introduced and compared intensively, because this thesis argues that the changes in The Forme of Prayers are based on some unique emphases in Knox’s theology.

61 In the subsequent discussion these debates will introduced briefly.

18 19

Interpretation of the Bible: Calvin and Knox Calvin’s Interpretation of the Bible

John Calvin’s eagerness for reformation of worship is revealed in his many works. For example, in his letter to Emperor Charles V, titled “The Necessity of Reforming the Church,” Calvin defends Martin Luther by writing that the reformation should be continued for the purpose of the restoration of pure worship.62 In this letter, he argues that only the Bible should be the prime authority, especially regarding the reformation of worship, since “the true and sincere worship which alone God approves, and in which alone He delights, is both taught by the Holy Spirit throughout the Scriptures and is also, antecedent to discussion, the obvious dictate of piety.”63 He also shares “the common Protestant conviction that preaching the word was one of the most critical factors that needed to be re-introduced and maintained as a vital part of public worship.”64 According to Yosep Kim, Calvin insists that the worship God deserves is not decorated by human inventions, but is written in God’s commandments.65 To examine and evaluate Calvin’s theology of worship, it is necessary to explore his style of biblical interpretation first; but since Calvin’s approach to the Bible has been studied and discussed by numerous scholars, this discussion will be brief.

As many scholars have illustrated, Calvin’s biblical interpretation is characterized by emphasis on the authority of the Bible and the illumination of the Holy Spirit.66 The authority of the Bible is the core element in Calvin’s interpretation. He regards the authority of the Bible as God’s sceptre: “Now, that king who in ruling over his realm does not serve God’s glory exercises not kingly rule but brigandage. Furthermore, he is deceived who looks for enduring prosperity in his

62 Tracts and Letters, 1:123–234.

63 Ibid., 127.

64 Elsie Anne McKee, “Reformed Worship in the Sixteenth Century,” in Christian Worship in Reformed Churches Past and Present, ed. Lukas Vischer (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003), 17.

65 Yosep Kim, “Calvin’s Reformed Theology and Worship,” 81. The custom in Korea is to provide an English language title and an English language abstract. The article itself is in Korean.

66 Hans-Joachim Kraus, “Calvin’s Exegetical Principles,” Interpretation 31, no. 1 (January 1977): 9.

20 kingdom when it is not ruled by God’s sceptre, that is, his Holy Word.”67 Calvin claims the prime authority of the Bible by emphasizing God’s authorship of the Bible: “We ought to remember what I said a bit ago: credibility of doctrine is not established until we are persuaded beyond doubt that God is its Author. Thus, the highest proof of Scripture derives in general from the fact that God in person speaks in it.”68

Calvin then links the authority of the Bible to the illumination of the Holy Spirit:

Let this point therefore stand: that those whom the Holy Spirit has inwardly taught truly rest upon Scripture, and that Scripture indeed is self-authenticated; hence, it is not right to subject it to proof and reasoning. And the certainty it deserves with us, it attains by the testimony of the Spirit. For even if it wins reverence for itself by its own majesty, it seriously affects us only when is sealed upon our hearts through the Spirit. Therefore, illumined by his power, we believe neither by our own nor by anyone else’s judgment that Scripture is from God.69

Examining Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, Hans-Joachim Kraus notes that for Calvin, the God who speaks to humanity through Scripture is confirmed and verified by the Spirit of God working within the person; and he also argues that “[b]elief in the Bible and interpretation of the Bible both are included in [the nexus of the Word of God and the Holy Spirit].”70

Not only in the Institutes of Christian Religion, but also his other writings, especially his letters and commentaries, Calvin consistently upholds the authority of the Bible and the illumination of the Holy Spirit. For example, in the letter titled “Brief Form of a Confession of Faith,” Calvin writes: “Now we do not seek the exposition of them in our own brains, but derive it from the constant usage of Scripture, and the common style of the Holy Spirit.”71

Knox’s Interpretation of the Bible

67 Institutes, Prefatory.

68 Institutes, I, vii, 4.

69 Institutes, I, vii, 5.

70 Kraus, “Calvin’s Exegetical Principles,” 9. In this article, Kraus identifies Calvin’s approach to the Bible in eight characteristics.

71 Tracts and Letters, 2:162.

Unlike Calvin, Knox does not systematize his biblical interpretation nor write a book such as the Institutes in order to explain his understanding. It is nevertheless not difficult to discover his view of the Bible, and his biblical interpretation can be characterized by the following three principles: an Old Testament emphasis, a literal interpretation, and a prophetic hermeneutic.72 These three principles in Knox look similar to Calvin’s principles, but the claim that Knox’s principles come directly from Calvin is disputable. Three recent scholars—V. E. D’Assonville, Richard G. Kyle, and Jane Dawson—have stressed the differences between Calvin and Knox’s approach to biblical interpretation.73 The subsequent discussion outlines features of Knox’s interpretation and explains how these differ from Calvin’s approach.

Old Testament Emphasis

The first aspect of Knox’s biblical interpretation is his Old Testament (over) emphasis. It is quite clear that Knox emphasizes the Old Testament over the New Testament. D’Assonville illustrates this: “Right from the outset we must state plainly that Knox’s view of the Scriptures is, in general, dominated by his basic premise, viz. Deut. 12.32, which gives his theology its own peculiar formal character. One remarks immediately that it is a premise based on the Old Testament.”74

Knox also uses the Old Testament in order to argue that true worship should be based on God’s commandments. He cites many stories and phrases from the Bible, most of which are from the

72 Richard Kyle, “John Knox’s Methods of Biblical Interpretation: An Important Source of His Intellectual Radicalness,” Journal of Religious Studies 12, no. 2 (1986): 57–70. See also Richard Kyle, “The Hermeneutical Patterns in John Knox’s Use of Scripture,” Pacific Theological Review 17, no. 3 (1984): 19–32. In this paper, Kyle identifies six patterns in Knox’s biblical interpretation: Old Testament emphasis, literal interpretation, interpretation by the Holy Spirit, interpretation by established principles, prophesying, and interpretation by the congregation. See also, Young Mog Song, “The Relevance of the Reformed and Presbyterian Thought in Terms of the Use of the Old Testament in the New and its Significance Focused on John Calvin, John Knox, and the Geneva Bible (1560),” Korea Reformed Journal 35 (2015): 41–72.

73 The issue of Calvin’s influence on Knox’s thought has been discussed widely. According to Kyle, there are three groups of scholars; the first places a strong emphasis upon Calvin’s spell over Knox before they met each other in Geneva; the second group agrees about Calvin’s influence on Knox, but not before 1554; the third group emphasizes non-Calvinistic influences on Knox. Kyle puts himself in between the second and third groups. See his research in The Mind of John Knox (Lawrence, KS: Coronado Press, 1984), 17–19.

74 V. E. D’Assonville, John Knox and the Institutes of Calvin: A Few Points of Contact in Their Theology (Durban: Drakensberg Press, 1969), 73.

Old Testament.75 Among his works on worship, a sermon entitled “A Vindication of the Doctrine that the Sacrifice of the Mass is Idolatry,” is a crucial example. In this long sermon, Knox gives two syllogisms to identify false and idolatrous worship:

[First,] All wirschipping, honoring, or service inventit by the braine of man in the religioun of God, without his own express commandment, is Idolatrie: The Masse is inventit be the braine of man, without any commandment of God: Thairfoir it is Idolatrie.76

[Second,] All honoring or service of God, whairunto is addit a wickit opinioun, is abominatioun. Unto the Masse is addit a wickit opinioun. Thairfoir it is abominatioun.77

Then, to strengthen and support these statements, Knox draws stories from the Old Testament: the stories of King Saul, Nadab and Abihu, Joshua, Isaiah, and Jeremiah. Although he cites a story of the Council of Jerusalem from Acts, Knox mainly cites from the Old Testament. For Knox, the Old Testament is not only a compilation of God’s commandments, but is also a touchstone for evaluating true worship. Knox uses the Old Testament, not only to interpret the other texts in the Bible, but also to understand events in history. His emphasis on the Old Testament links to the second feature of his biblical interpretation, literal interpretation.

Literal Interpretation

For reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, a literal interpretation was the main approach to the Bible. Regarding the issue of the relationship between the substantive content and the literal form of the Bible, these reformers emphasized the substance over the literal form (Luther) or maintained a balance between them (Calvin).78 According to Kyle, Luther and Calvin had different approaches to the Bible:

Luther can be found accentuating substance over literal form. For instance, because the message of James (with its emphasis on good works) ran encounter to what Luther believed the substance of Scripture to be (gospel and grace), he depreciated that epistle’s place in the canon. Calvin, however, maintained a balance between the substance and the letter of the Scriptures. On the one hand, Calvin was too conservative to tamper with the

75 Kyle gives many examples from the Works of John Knox. See, “The Hermeneutical Patterns,” 21.

76 Works, 3:34.

77 Works, 3:52.

78 Kyle, “John Knox’s Use of Scripture,” 26.

letter (e.g., canonicity) of Scripture. On the other hand, he assigned primary authority to the substantive content.79

Interestingly, Knox’s literal interpretation seems to echo Zwingli’s approach to biblical interpretation rather than Calvin’s. Kyle states that “Both [Knox and Zwingli] believed that the Bible is clear in itself and that difficult verses can be cleared up by reference to other texts. The idea that the church or any other person should become the interpreter of the Bible was intolerable to Zwingli, for the Word of God is clear and lucid in and of itself.”80 Unlike Luther and Calvin, Knox placed the literal forms of the Bible above the substantive content or essential significance. Knox also expressed his literalness by “bombarding readers” with phrases such as “the plain Word of God,” “the express Word of God,” or “the strict Word of God.”81

The Prophetic Hermeneutic

His Old Testament emphasis and literal interpretation led Knox to regard himself as a prophet or a trumpeter of God. As Stuart Macdonald comments, “Knox famously saw himself as a watchman who identified danger and drew it to the attention of people by blowing his trumpet in warning.”82 He firmly believed that God was calling him to proclaim God’s commandments to a people living in a corrupt time:

For considering my selfe rather cald of my God to instruct the ignorant, comfort the sorrowfull, confirme the weake, and rebuke the proud, by tong and livelye voyce in these most corrupt dayes, than to compose bokes for the age to come, seeing that so much is written (and that by men of most singular condition), and yet so little well observed; I decreed to containe my selfe within the bondes of that vocation, whereunto I found my selfe especially called.83

Thus, rather than just interpreting the Bible (usually the Old Testament) and writing books for the age to come, Knox gave prophetic messages to the rulers and the people, especially in Scotland and England, because he regarded those two countries as the new Israel. Sharing Dawson’s view,

79 Ibid.

80 Kyle, “John Knox’s Methods of Biblical Interpretation,” 60.

81 Works, 3:34, 35, 37, 38; 4:437, 468; 5:516. See also, Kyle “John Knox’s Methods,” 62.

82 Stuart Macdonald, “John Knox, the Scottish Church, and Witchcraft Accusations,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 48, no. 3 (Fall 2017): 642.

83 Works, 6:229. This is the beginning of a sermon written in 1565.

Macdonald writes: “Early in his career, Knox identified England with the Old Testament of Israel. After his disappointment at the course that English Reformation took and after the unlikely success in Scotland, Scotland became the new Israel.”84 For Knox, the stories in the Old and New Testaments are recurrent events, especially in his own world. According to Kyle, Knox “often transferred people and events from the Bible to his own day so literally that historical repetition occurred;”85 Kyle also illustrates this feature in Knox’s prophetic interpretation: “[Knox’s] prophetic hermeneutic—his method of applying the Old Testament burdens of Israel almost literally and unequivocally to the religious and political situation of his day—powerfully influenced his prophetic pronouncements.”86 The most obvious example of this equation can be found in his letter titled “An Admonition or Warning That the Faithful Christians in London, Newcastle, Berwick, and Others, May Avoid God’s Vengeance both in this life and in the life to come. Compelled by the Servant of God John Knox.”87 This letter is full of warnings and calls to repentance:

Of these and of many mo lyke places, the generall offences of that pepill appeiris to haif bene, defectioun frome God, embrassing of fals religioun, schedding of innocent blude, justificatioun of thame selves, and defence of thair iniquitie; while yit thay aboundit in reif, murther, oppressioun, leis, crafty practeis, deceat, and manifest idolatrie, following the tred of thair fatheris; who, under Manasses and Ammon Kingis, (of whome the ane in the begynning, the other all his lyfe, maintainit ydolatrie,) had bene the ring leaderis to all abominatioun, suche as in Englande ar Winchester and mo.88

Kyle argues that not only Knox, but also the Marian exiles and early Puritans employed this prophetic interpretation: “[They] applied scriptural examples to contemporary affairs and often led to tenuous historical analogies, largely designed to promote current ideas and policies.”89 Throughout his whole life as a prophet of God, Knox kept proclaiming God’s commandment,

84 Macdonald, “John Knox, the Scottish Church, and Witchcraft Accusations,” 642.

85 Kyle, “John Knox: A Man of the Old Testament,” The Westminster Theological Journal 54, no. 1 (Spring 1992): 68.

86 Richard Kyle, “Knox and Apocalyptic Thought,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 15, no. 4 (Winter 1984): 458.

87 Works, 3:161–215.

88 Works, 3:173.

89 Kyle, “John Knox’s Methods of Biblical Interpretation,” 62.

25 especially for renewing worship in a biblical way.90 He knew this calling of God more than anyone else. His loyalty to God’s calling made him preach strict and strong messages to anyone he believed worshipped God in vain. He denounced not only the Roman Catholic clergy, but also the noblemen, regents, and even queens of Scotland and England whenever he thought they were worshiping God in idolatrous ways.

Different Approaches to Biblical Interpretation: Calvin and Knox

Knox, a reformer of the sixteenth century, accepted the method of biblical interpretation the previous reformers had adopted and developed, although his method was slightly different from Calvin’s. While Calvin’s biblical interpretation was characterized by the authority of the Bible and the illumination of the Holy Spirit, Knox’s approach was focused more on Old Testament emphasis, a literal interpretation, and a prophetic interpretation.

Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments

Both Calvin and Knox were concerned with the continuity and discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments, and both were concerned with the uniformity of the two Testaments. Calvin wrote two chapters about the correlation between the Old and New Testaments in the Institutes. One chapter is about the similarities, the other is about the differences. In these two chapters, Calvin argues that the two Testaments are the same in essence, but different in the way of fulfillment. For Calvin, “The covenant made with all the patriarchs is so much like ours in substance and reality that the two [Testaments] are actually one and the same. Yet they differ in the mode of dispensation.”91 Calvin identifies five aspects to the difference between the two Testaments. D’Assonville amplifies these five aspects as follows:

1) In the Old Testament God manifested the celestial heritage in earthly blessings

2) The Old Testament “exhibiting only the image of truth, while the reality was absent, the shadow instead of the substance, the latter (i.e. the New Testament) exhibiting both the full truth and the entire body.”

3) There is a difference between the Law, “calling a doctrine of the letter” and the Gospel

90 Ibid. Kyle indicates that Knox’s vocational calling from God to purify worship is also found in Zwingli.

91 Institutes, II, x, 2.

“a doctrine of the spirit.”

4) The Old Testament is a testament of bondage and the New a testament of liberty

5) The Old Testament is a covenant with one people only, viz. Israel; the New includes all peoples whom the Gospel of Christ reaches.92

In contrast, Knox stresses the Old Testament and the continuity between the two Testaments. Kyle and D’Assonville argue that Knox’s overemphasis on the Old Testament is a point of difference between him and Calvin.93 The following two examples show Knox’s reliance on the Old Testament:

That God hath appointed death by his law, without mercie, to be executed upon the blasphemers, is evident by that which is written, Leviticus 24.94

[T]he law of God, universally geven to be kept of all men, most evidently declare; which is my last and most assured reason, why, I say, yee oght to remove from honours and to punish with death such as God hath condemned by his owne mouth.95

As D’Assonville states, “Knox’s and Calvin’s views of the Scriptures also differ radically in their vision of the relationship between the Old and the New Testament. To Calvin there is no essential difference between the two Testaments, but in the mode of administration. In Knox these differences are so much in the background that the relationship between the two testaments is one of identity.”96

Literal Interpretation

When Calvin wrote about the literal interpretation of the Bible, he also emphasized the internal witness of the Holy Spirit. He indicated that a reader of the Bible should seek the Holy Spirit’s assistance because the Holy Spirit not only illuminated the authors of the Bible but also helps

92 D’Assonville, John Knox and the Institutes of Calvin, 72.

93 Kyle, “John Knox’s Methods of Biblical Interpretation,” 58; D’Assonville, John Knox and the Institutes of Calvin, 71–75.

94 Works, 5:224. In his writing, “On Predestination,” Knox made this comment on Servetus’ death.

95 Works, 4:498. This sentence from Knox’s tract titled “The Appellation of John Knox from the cruel and most unjust sentence pronounced against him by the false bishops and clergy of Scotland, with his supplication and exhortation to the nobility, estates, and commonality of the same realm.”

96 D’Assonville, John Knox and the Institutes of Calvin, 75.

27 readers when they approach the Bible:

[The] Word itself is not quite certain for us unless it be confirmed by the testimony of the Spirit—is not out of accord with these things. For by a kind of mutual bond the Lord has joined together the certainty of his Word and of his Spirit so that the perfect religion of the Word may abide in our minds when the Spirit, who causes us to contemplate God's face, shines; and that we in turn may embrace the Spirit with no fear of being deceived when we recognize him in his own image, namely, in the Word.97

Knox, however, puts his emphasis on the literal form over the substance of the Bible, taking his basic premise from Deuteronomy 12:32: “If I be well remembered, Moses, in the name of God, says to the people of Israel, ‘All that the Lord thy God commandis thee to do, that do thow to the Lord thy God: add nothing to it; diminyshe nothing from it.’ Be this rewill, think I, that the Kirk of Christ will measur Goddis religioun, and not by that which seams good in thare awin eis.”98 It is no exaggeration to say that Knox’s approach to the Bible was based on a literal interpretation.

This premise led Knox not only to interpret the Bible literally, but also to proclaim literally interpreted messages to the people in his day. While Calvin kept emphasising that the Holy Spirit’s illumination was essential in reading the Bible, Knox directly transferred the messages and stories from the Bible to his day. Nothing was to be omitted and nothing added.

Prophetic Hermeneutics

As Kyle notes, Calvin’s eschatological theology seems to have influenced Knox’s apocalyptic thought.99 However, Knox’s prophetic interpretation was also derived from his own unique biblical interpretation. Kyle evaluates that “Knox’s failure to adequately recognize the Bible’s discontinuity, not only between the Old and New Testaments—but between biblical history and his day—is related to this peculiar method of interpreting Scripture, called either ‘prophesying’ or the ‘prophetic hermeneutic.’”100 However, Knox’s prophetic interpretation seems to have encouraged people in Scotland and England to keep their faith and the covenant with God, and

97 Institutes, I. ix, 3.

98 Works, 1:197. In the debate in 1547 between John Knox and John Winram—the Subprior of St. Andrews—Knox clarified this premise when advocating his principle of biblical interpretation.

99 Kyle, “Knox and Apocalyptic Thought,” 468.

100 Richard Kyle, God’s Watchman: John Knox’s Faith and Vocation (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), 50.

28 this seems to have developed into a congregational prophetic hermeneutic. According to Kyle’s research, “the group or congregation played an important role” in Knox’s scheme of biblical interpretation and this also affected The Forme of Prayers:

Knox went to great pains to prevent anarchy and subjectivity in scriptural interpretation. The alleged Anabaptist idea that the Holy Spirit might reveal one truth to one person for a certain text and something entirely different to another particularly concerned Knox. He felt that the explanation of the individual must agree with that of the congregation. In fact, the [The Forme of Prayers], A Letter of Wholesome Counsel, and the Book of Discipline set down similar criteria for group procedures.101

As noted, the main features of Knox’s biblical interpretation, i.e., the Old Testament emphasis, the literal interpretation, and the prophetic interpretation, all differ from Calvin’s Bible principles. As will be shown in the following chapter, the changes in The Forme of Prayers, clearly prove that this work is primarily based on Knox’s unique biblical interpretation.

Covenant Theology: Calvin and Knox Calvin’s Covenant Theology

Although there has been much debate about whether Calvin was a covenant theologian or not, it is quite clear that the concept of covenant is a significant theme in Calvin’s theology.102 For Calvin, the Bible is full of the concept of covenant and its explications. He also believed that God’s covenant was made not only with the Old Testament patriarchs, Moses, and David, but also with contemporary believers, since God’s covenant is eternal. In his Institutes, Calvin expresses his basic concept of covenant:

This is not for the sake of earthly happiness, but because he delivers them from death, he preserves forever and keeps in his everlasting mercy those whom he has chosen as people;103

101 Ibid., 49.

102 Everett H. Emerson, “Calvin and Covenant Theology,” Church History 25, no. 2 (June 1956): 136. Emerson indicates that Calvin is not regarded as a covenant theologian because the covenant is not a basic element of his theological system. There have been many debates about the correlation between covenant theology and Calvin. This thesis assumes that covenant theology is significant in Calvin’s entire theology. For more on this issue, see Peter A. Lillback, The Binding of God: Calvin’s Role in the Development of Covenant Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001).

103 Institutes, II, x, 8.

[Covenant] became new and eternal only after it was consecrated and established by the blood of Christ.104

Let us then set forth the covenant that he once established as eternal and never perishing. Its fulfillment, by which it is finally confirmed and ratified, is Christ.105

Calvin also emphasized the concept of covenant in order to illustrate the sacraments, i.e., the Lord’s Supper and baptism: “Since the Lord calls his promises ‘covenants’ and his sacraments ‘tokens’ of covenants, a simile can be taken from the covenants of men;”106 “A sacrament is a seal by which God’s covenant, or promise, is sealed;”107 “Indeed, a sacrament ought, by God’s sure promise [covenant], to encourage and comfort believers’ consciences, which could never receive this certainty from man.”108 These are only a few citations showing that for Calvin, the covenant is not marginal, but is a significant concept in his entire theology, including his liturgical theology.

Knox’s Covenant Theology

Many scholars have categorized Knox’s covenant theology as primarily a political concept, because he applied the concept of covenant to political circumstances. For example, Roger A. Mason argues that Knox “had thrust the covenant firmly into the political arena.”109 However, the main political issue had to do with idolatrous magistrates who worshipped God in vain. The political and the liturgical issues thus cannot be separated in Knox’s theology.

According to Richard L. Greaves, covenant theology began to appear in earnest in Knox’s writings late in 1553 or early in 1554.110 After being an exile on the continent and until his death,

104 Institutes, II, xi, 4.

105 Institutes, II, xi, 4.

106 Institutes, IV, xiv, 6.

107 Institutes, IV, xix, 2.

108 Institutes, IV, xix, 2.

109 John Knox, John Knox on Rebellion, ed. Roger A. Mason (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), xx. See also Richard Kyle, “The Origins and Early Development of English Covenant Thought,” The Historian 31, no. 1 (November 1968): 23–26

110 Richard Greaves, “John Knox and the Covenant Tradition,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 24, no. 1

30 he wrote many treatises that include the concept of covenant. The main writings to include the concept are “An Admonition or Warning” of 1553 and “Appellation” of 1558.111 In these two tracts, Knox introduces and clarifies his exposition of the concept of covenant. It is necessary to review these tracts in order to discern his covenant theology, especially regarding idolatrous worship. These two tracts are also helpful in tracking how Knox’s concept of covenant is modified over the course of five years.

An Admonition or Warning

When Knox faced the choice of attending mass, being martyred, or taking flight, he left for the city of Dieppe in January 1554. In this frustrating circumstance, Knox wrote his exposition of Psalm 6 and several tracts. An Admonition or Warning was one of them. According to Jane Dawson, Knox saw attendance at a Catholic Mass as “participation in idolatry and an automatic renunciation of one’s Protestant faith, adding the sin of apostasy to the idolatry of the worship of false gods.”112 Knox thus took up a pen in order to warn people in England, especially in the cities of London, Newcastle, and Berwick. This letter was “not a systematic work, and hardly could have been, given the circumstances surrounding its composition.”113 The kernel of this letter or tract was simple; “breaking the covenant would bring upon England the same chastisement that God had inflicted upon his people in the Old Testament.”114 Knox proclaims:

This is the league betuixt God and us, that He alone sall be oure God, and we salbe his pepill: He sall communicat with us of his graces and gudness; We sall serve him in bodie and spreit: He salbe oure saifgard frome death and dampnatiuon; We sall siek to him, and sall flie frome all strange Godis. In making whilk league, solemnedlie we sweir never to haif fellowsehip with ony religioun, except with that whilk God hath confirmit be his manifest Word.115

Knox never accepted Catholicism because he felt it was not only idolatry before God, but also

(January 1973): 23.

111 Works, 3:161–215; 4:461–520.

112 Dawson, John Knox, 83.

113 Richard Greaves, Theology and Revolution in the Scottish Reformation (Grand Rapids, MI: Christian University Press, 1980), 115.

114 Ibid.

115 Works, 3:190–191.

31 broke the covenant between God and his chosen people, so in this work he strongly recommends people flee from idolatry and not break the covenant. Greaves summarizes the tract in light of Knox’s covenant theology:

A man truly in league with God could not permanently leave that band and be damned. At the same time, a man apparently in covenant with God could forsake it and be condemned. Yet even if such a person continued his apparent adherence to the covenant, he could not be saved because he would always have been reprobate. In [An Admonition or Warning] Knox was, thus, using some rhetorical warnings that his theology could not support.116

This letter clearly shows Knox’s hostile position towards Catholicism and the Mass. He put forward three reasons why the covenant obligations require avoidance of idolatry. First, the followers of idolatry do not let believers keep their covenant with God. Second, God’s wrath can never be quenched until the idolaters are destroyed; hence believers should be enemies of the idolaters. Third, God shows his mercy and love to the true believers; by contrast, the mercy of God is shut up from the idolaters.117 In this letter, Knox also introduces Abraham—who leaves his native country, which is defiled by idolatry—in order to encourage the people in his country to avoid idolatries.118

The Appellation

Five years after writing An Admonition or Warning and two years after writing The Forme of Prayers, Knox wrote another letter, The Appellation. This is commonly categorized as one of Knox’s political writings, but the aim of this letter is to warn the people of Scotland not to participate in idolatrous worship. After his visit to Scotland, in 1555–56, Knox was condemned as a heretic, and accused as a false teacher and seducer of the people by the Roman Catholic prelates there.119 Knox then wrote a letter to the nobility, estates, and commonwealth of Scotland in order to urge the nobility not only to keep their faith, but also to protect their people from the idolatrous ruler. Dawson states that “rather than confining the nobility to defending and

116 Greaves, “John Knox and the Covenant Tradition,” 25.

117 Works, 3:192–194.

118 As to the circumstances, Knox seems to cite this story of Abraham in order not only to warn the people of Scotland but also to justify his choice of escape from England.

119 Works, 4:438.

32 maintaining their kin and friends, [Knox] wanted nobles to recognize the religious obligations of their office and their spiritual kindred. Throughout The Appellation, he suggested actions already familiar to the Scottish nobility.”120

As he nearly always did, Knox included in The Appellation several stories from the Old Testament in order to urge people to stand firm on the covenant between God and his chosen people. Among many citations from the Old Testament in this letter, two examples are significant regarding the issues of covenant and worship: the story of King Asa from 2 Chronicles 15 and the story of the Mosaic covenant from Exodus 34. With the story of King Asa, Knox depicts the covenant which was made between the sovereign and his subject to serve God and to maintain his religion. Knox then transfers this story to the nobility of Scotland:

[This] is the fyrst, which I would your Honours should note, of the former wordes: to witt, That no person is exempted from punishment, if he can be manifestly convicted to have provoked or led the people to idolatrie. And this is most evidently declared in that solemned othe and covenante, which Asa made with the people to serve God, and to mentaine his religion, adding this penaltie to the transgressours of it.121

Knox also transfers the story told in Exodus 34 from the Old Testament to his day in order to remind people—especially the nobility—that idolatry is not acceptable by those who must keep their covenantal relationship with God under all circumstances:

To this same law, I say, and covenante are the Gentiles no lesse bounde, than somtyme were the Jewes, whensoever God doth illuminate the eyes of anie multitude, province, people, or citie, and putteth the sworde in their own hand to remove such enormities from amongest them, as before God they know to be abominable. Then, I say, they no less bound to purge theyr dominions, cities, and countries from idolatry, than were the Israelites, what tyme they receaved the possession of the land of Canaan. And moreover, I say, if any go about to erect and set up idolatrie, or to teach defection from God, after that the veritie hath bene receaved and approved, that then, not only the Magistrates, to whom the sword is committed, but also the People, are bound, by that othe which they have made to God, to revenge to the uttermost of their power the injurie done against his Majestie.122

Interestingly, Knox’s concept of covenant is modified from his previous tract in 1554. In An Admonition or Warning, Knox simply suggests the people of Scotland and England avoid

120 Dawson, John Knox, 158.

121 Works, 4:500.

122 Works, 4:506.

33 idolatry; in The Appellation, however, he develops his principle of active resistance against the idolatrous civil authorities. According to Greaves, “[Knox] argued that it was the responsibility of the people as well as the kings, nobles, and magistrates to see that Christ was truly preached. If the civil authorities were negligent or tyrannical, the people were obliged to provide and defend preachers against any who would persecute them.”123 It seems that Knox strengthened the concept of covenant in order to urge people not only to avoid the idolatrous in person but also to resist the idolatrous magistrates as part of their covenant obligations.

These two tracts, like his other writings, show Knox’s strong and strict position against idolatrous worship and even against the wicked magistrates who broke the covenant. For Knox, the covenant with God is not confined to a person or a community; it is a national issue. As Dawson states, Knox “presented a simple set of logical steps from repentance to covenant renewal. Like Old Testament Israel, England [and Scotland] would become again a covenanted people.”124

Different Approaches to Covenant Theology: Calvin and Knox

According to Jong Hun Joo, the concept of covenant was the principle underlying liturgical thought for reformed theologians including Calvin.125 For both Calvin and Knox, as reviewed above, covenant theology was a mainstay of their liturgical works. Greaves simply notes that Knox’s view of the covenant in relation to the sacraments was influenced by Calvin through The Form of Church Prayers and perhaps his commentaries.126 Knox’s general understanding of covenant, however, was slightly different from Calvin’s. According to Greaves, the common supposition that Knox’s covenant theology was dependent on Calvin needs to be reconsidered.127 Greaves offers two points to support his argument: first, the concept of the covenant reflected in

123 Greaves, “John Knox and the Covenant Tradition,” 28. Knox wrote that “for I speak of the people assembled together in one body of a commonwealth unto whom God has given sufficient force, not only to resist, but also to suppress all kind of open idolatry.” John Knox, John Knox on Rebellion, 196.

124 Dawson, John Knox, 167.

125 Jong Hun Joo, “Calvin on the Sacramental Union with God,” Korea Reformed Journal 36 (December 2015): 215.

126 Ibid., 32.

127 Greaves, “John Knox and the Covenant Tradition,” 23.

An Admonition or Warning does not reveal Calvin’s influence on Knox’s thought;128 second, although Calvin did not ignore a person’s obligations in the covenant, “[such obligations] were subjugated in importance to the promissory aspect.”129 In Institutes, Calvin writes: “Consequently, in this way he wills to keep in their duty those admitted to the fellowship of the covenant; nonetheless the covenant is at the outset drawn up as a free agreement, and perpetually remains such.”130

Knox was closer to other reformers, including William Tyndale, Heinrich Bullinger, John Hooper, and Johannes Oecolampadius, who essentially dealt with the covenant as a conditional promise calling for humanity’s reciprocal obedience:131 “To be sure, Calvin admitted that uprightness and sanctity of life were required of those in the ‘covenants of … mercy’, but he did not threaten divine abrogation of the covenant if those conditions were not met. Knox did.”132

Both Calvin and Knox considered covenant theology significant, and both understood the concept of covenant as the heart of the relationship between God and his chosen people. However, their different views on the concept, like their different biblical interpretations, led them to different applications, as can be seen especially in their worship books. In the next chapter, I discuss how their different biblical interpretations and covenant theologies are reflected in the changes in The Forme of Prayers.

128 Ibid., 25.

129 Ibid., 31.

130 Institutes, III, xvii, 5.

131 Greaves, “John Knox and the Covenant Tradition,” 31–32.

132 Ibid.

Chapter 3. Changes in The Forme of Prayers

When John Knox, William Whittingham, John Foxe, Thomas Cole, and Anthony Gilby put their heads together to write a new worship book and to find an appropriate model, they might have recalled the bitter period in Frankfurt of 1554–1555. For all of them, and especially for Knox, the purging of idolatrous worship and the restoration of true worship was the first and most urgent task. There had already been many new worship books composed by reliable reformers, including Martin Bucer, Valérand Poullain, and John Calvin, but they would have been cautious, because they would not have wanted to repeat the same result as in Frankfurt. They chose Calvin’s The Form of Church Prayers as the model of a new worship book, but they did not adopt it as it was. Instead they made several significant changes, based on particular criteria.

In this chapter, the changes in The Forme of Prayers are presented and then linked to Knox’s biblical interpretation and covenant theology. The four sections that parallel Calvin’s Form of Church Prayers are examined: the three divided prayers in the section of “The Sunday Morning Service,” the section on “The Form of Marriage,” the section on “The Visitation of the Sick,” and the sections on “The Ministration of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.” Those four sections share similar structure and content with The Form of Church Prayers, although the content and emphasized themes are different. These differences can be identified by comparing the two Genevan worship books closely.

The section on “The Sunday Morning Service,” consists of three prayers, including Confession of sins and Intercessional prayers. In this first section, the parallel section in The Form of Church Prayers was modified in accordance not only with Knox and his co-authors’ theology, but also their circumstances. The section on “The Form of Marriage” also parallels The Form of Church Prayers, although here the authors not only adopted Calvin’s liturgy, but also included many liturgical phrases from the Book of Common Prayer, even though Knox’s view on the Book of Common Prayer was generally hostile. The next section, “The Visitation of the Sick,” gives a short yet precise instruction on visiting a sick person. This section is also found in The Form of Church Prayers, but is much shorter. In this section, the authors’ intentional brevity can be inferred by examining its frame. The fourth section, “The Ministration of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper” gives detailed instruction and exhortation on how to administer these sacraments.

35 36

First, in order to compare the two Genevan worship books, the parallel sections in The Form of Church Prayers are introduced and examined briefly. Second, the changes in The Forme of Prayers are given. After comparing the two books and identifying the changes in The Forme of Prayers, the changes are evaluated. Lastly, this thesis briefly reviews the four added sections in The Forme of Prayers. Those added sections, which were not based upon sections in The Form of Church Prayers, also convey Knox’s biblical interpretation and covenant theology. We will see that the changes and added sections originate from Knox’s biblical and covenantal theologies, and the changes and added sections show the authors’ purpose in writing—i.e., recovering biblical worship and renewing their future nations in a biblical and covenantal way.

Changes in the Prayers in “The Sunday Morning Service” Changes

The section on “Forms of Prayer for the Church” in The Form of Church Prayers provides instruction for the Sunday morning service. The Forme of Prayers follows The Form of Church Prayers, but is divided into three prayers: “A confession of our synnes vsed before the sermon and framede to our state and tyme (A Confession of our sins used before the sermon and framed to our state and time),” “An other confession for all states and tymes (Another confession for all states and times),” and “A generall prayer after the sermon, for the whole estate of Christes Churche (A general prayer after the sermon, for the whole estate of Christ’s Church).” According to Maxwell, “it was natural, therefore, that the orders of their services should be closely connected with those of Calvin; and such a connexion can be clearly discerned in the case of the Sunday Morning Service.”133 The contents of the two sections have a similar structure— confession of sins, prayer for pardon, metrical Psalm, prayer for illumination, offering for the poor, prayer of intercession and the Lord’s prayer, Apostles’ Creed, Psalm in metre, and Blessing—but they are not exactly the same.134 John M. Barkley presents the organized order of the Sunday Morning Service in The Forme of Prayers and compares it with The Form of Church Prayers. He subdivides the Sunday Morning Service in The Forme of Prayers into two parts, the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Faithful as follows:

133 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 17.

134 Ibid., 18.

LITURGY OF THE WORD

Confession of sins (choice of two, one based on Calvin) Prayer for pardon Metrical Psalm Prayer for Illumination Scripture reading Sermon

LITURGY OF THE FAITHFUL

Intercessions (reminiscent of Calvin, but an independent compilation) Lord’s Prayer Apostles’ Creed (read by Minister because no metrical version) Scriptural Warrant (as in Calvin) Exhortation Prayer of Consecration (reminiscent of Calvin, but independent compilation) Fraction Delivery Communion (Scripture read meanwhile) Post-communion (based on Calvin) Metrical psalm ciii. Aaronic or Apostolic Blessing135

Confession of Sins and Prayer for Pardon

The confession of sins is located at the beginning of the order in both The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers.136 The most obvious change in The Forme of Prayers is the additional part, “A CONFESSION OF OUR SINS, FRAMED TO OUR TIME, OUT OF THE 9. CHAPTER OF DANIEL.” According to Michael S. Springer, this addition of a confessional prayer from the book of Daniel, seems to be derived from a worship book, Forma ac ratio, written by a Polish reformer, Johannes A’Lasco (or John a Lasco, 1499-1560):137 “Although there

135 John M. Barkley, The Worship of the Reformed Church (London: Lutterworth Press, 1966.), 23–24. The words in the brackets are Barkley’s.

136 In The Form of Church Prayers, the Sunday morning service starts with a proclamation by a minister: “Our help is in the name of the Lord, who made heaven and earth. Amen.” This proclamation is the verse of Psalm 124:8. Meanwhile, The Forme of Prayers starts the Sunday morning service without this proclamation.

137 Michael S. Springer, Restoring Christ’s Church: John a Lasco and the Forma ac ratio (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007), 90. The relation between Knox and Lasco was significant because Knox was influenced by Lasco in many ways, especially regarding liturgical theology. See also Dawson, John Knox, 72; 79–

38 are no further extant records regarding this practice from the London congregations, there is evidence suggesting that the refugees embraced Lasco’s ceremony and continued to use it after they relocated to the continent. The English exiles that settled in Geneva in 1555 employed this same ceremony, including Lasco’s characteristic focus on Daniel 9.”138 Maxwell partially agrees with this view:

It has been stated by some that this Confession of sins is derived from P[o]ullain, but there is no evidence for that view, nor is such a prayer to be found in any of P[o]ullain’s Liturgies. The idea of composing it may, however, have been derived from A’Lasco’s direction in his service framed for public calamities in the 1555 edition of his Forma ac ratio….It should be noted, however, that if this prayer was influenced by A’Lasco’s Forma ac ratio, it must have been composed at Geneva, and not at Frankfort, but this may have been quite possible, and is, indeed, probable.”139

However, Maxwell argues that this confessional prayer is probably an original composition of the compilers of The Forme of Prayers, because “A’Lasco’s Forma ac ratio does not contain such a prayer [written in The Forme of Prayers];” Maxwell continues, “There is no doubt, too, that it especially suited [the authors of The Forme of Prayers]’s case, for they were exiled from their own Church and nation because of the ‘public calamity’ of Edward’s death and Mary’s accession.140 Jane Dawson also asserts that the prayer in accordance with Daniel 9 is an original prayer, not found in other reformed liturgies.141

The remaining sections of the Confession of sins in The Forme of Prayers, “AN OTHER CONFESSION FOR ALL STATES AND TIMES,” share the same structure and expression with The Form of Church Prayers. However, the last paragraph in The Forme of Prayers is different, following instead Calvin’s form of the Absolution, Christ’s work as the basis of forgiveness is emphasized142 “not for the worthynes thereof, but for the merites of thy dearely beloved Sonne Jesus Christe, our onely Savyour, whom thou hast already given an oblation and offering for our synnes, and for whose sake we are certainly persuaded that thou wylt denye us nothinge that we

80; 313.

138 Springer, Restoring Christ’s Church, 90.

139 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 94.

140 Ibid.

141 Dawson, “‘Satan’s bludy clawses’,” 11. See also Spinks, From the Lord, 78.

142 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 97.

39 shall aske in his name, according to thy wil.”143

Prayer of Intercession

The most obvious change in the section of “The Sunday Morning Service” is in this Prayer of Intercessions. Although both Genevan worship books suggest a minister offer a long prayer after the sermon, the Forme of Prayers has a different structure and content. In The Form of Church Prayers, in response to God’s Word and the sermon, the church made the Prayer of Intercession “for those in authority and for all sorts and conditions of men.”144 This prayer of Calvin, often known as the “Great Prayer,” is divided into several parts by subject: prayer for all rulers (magistrates), prayer for all pastors (ministers), and prayer for people in danger and under persecution. According to Maxwell’s research, Calvin’s Great Prayer in The Form of Church Prayers is derived directly from the third alternative Canon in the German Psalter of 1539.145 Calvin “added to the German Prayer a long paraphrase of the Lord’s Prayer (the German liturgies used only the Lord’s Prayer), and this appeared in the earlier editions of his [Form of Church Prayers], though it was discarded and the Lord’s Prayer simpliciter substituted.”146 Although Maxwell does not suggest a reason for the addition and omission, it is reasonable to suppose that Calvin not only used the Lord’s Prayer for intercessional prayer, but also to emphasize it for teaching purposes, as he did in his Institutes of the Christian Religion.147

In The Forme of Prayers, in contrast, the prayer of intercession is focused on the people under persecution, with the rest of the prayer reduced or omitted. The authors’ circumstances seem to be reflected in this change. When the authors of The Forme of Prayers wrote the book, they were all exiles from the Marian persecution. Moreover, as Dawson notes, “the circumstances prompting their move from Frankfurt to Geneva fostered the belief among the Genevan

143 Works, 4:181–182.

144 Thompson, Liturgies of the Western Church, 191.

145 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portion, 101; 188–198.

146 Ibid., 101.

147 Institutes, III, xx, 34–49.

40 congregation that they had undertaken a second exile.”148 However, they believed that God would never forget them because they were God’s chosen people. Instead of mourning their situation, they made impassioned pleas for God’s help:

And seinge we lyve nowe in these most perillous tymes, let thy Fatherly providence defende us against the violence of all our enemies, which do every where pursue us; but chiefly againste the wicked rage and furious uproares of that Romyshe idoll, enemie to thy Christe;149

…so we moste humbly beseche thee to shewe thy pitie upon our miserable contrie of England, which once, through thy mercie, was called to libertie, and now for their and our synnes, is brought unto moste vile slavery and Babylonicall bondage;150

Roote owte from thence, O Lord, all raveninge wolves, which to fyll their bellies destroie thy flocke.151

Bard Thompson argues that this Prayer of Intercession in The Forme of Prayers resembles Calvin’s Great Prayer.152 Maxwell, by contrast, suggests that while Calvin seems to follow Martin Bucer’s Strasburg Liturgy, the prayer in The Forme of Prayers is “an independent work of the compilers …though in some paragraphs, there are textual similarities, as will be seen if it is compared carefully with the French and German prayers.”153 Either opinion is possible, but Maxwell’s seems more likely because the prayer in The Forme of Prayers reflects the authors’ own religious and political circumstances in their countries and as refugees on the continent. Although the two sections have similar structures and shared expressions, when compared and examined, the two prayers seem to have different themes and purposes.

148 Dawson, “‘Satan’s bludy clawses’,” 10.

149 Works, 4:183.

150 Works, 4:184.

151 Works, 4:185. See also Dawson, “Satan’s bludy clawses’,” 10–11. Dawson states that “the biblical image of wolves, made so familiar by William Turner’s run of polemics in the Edwardian period, was used to emphasize the anger at the clerical persecutors.”

152 Thompson, Liturgies of the Western Church, 306.

153 Ibid., 101. Maxwell also provides a table of comparison between The Form of Church Prayers and Martin Bucer’s worship book, in his The Liturgical Portions, 188–198.

Criteria of Revision

The changes in the section on the Sunday Morning Service in The Forme of Prayers may be minor, but they do suggest a different view of biblical interpretation and covenant theology. First, the addition of the prayer, in accordance with the prayer in Daniel 9, reveals Knox’s covenant theology. Although scholars have debated whether Knox and his co-authors cite this prayer from Lasco’s Forma ac ratio or not, it is clear that the prayer in Daniel 9 carries the concept of the covenant. Daniel’s prayer, as well as the prayer in The Forme of Prayers, start with a depiction of God who keeps his covenant: “O Lord God, mighty and dreadful, who keeps covenant and shows mercy to those who love him and do his commandments (9:4).” It is reasonable to assume that Knox and his co-authors cite Daniel’s prayer because of its covenant theme.

Moreover, Daniel’s prayer also suggests the punishment of God toward the law (covenant) breakers: “Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy Law, and are turned back, and have not heard thy voice: therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the Law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him (Daniel 9:11, Geneva Bible).”154 As seen in the previous chapter, this sentence parallels the sentence in Appellation: “The Law of God, universally given to be kept of all men, most evidently declare; which is my last and most assured reason, why, I say, we ought to remove from honours and to punish with death such as God hath condemned by his own mouth.”155 For Knox and his co-authors, who wanted to emphasize the covenant between God and his chosen people and to warn the people not to worship God in an idolatrous way, this prayer provided a good model.

Second, “A Prayer for the Whole Estate of Christ’s Church” reflects Knox’s approach to biblical interpretation and covenant theology. In this prayer, stories from the Old Testament are directly transferred to the circumstances in Knox’s age. The authors write of the “moste vile slavery and Babylonicall bondage” and the danger of “all raveninge wolves, which to fyll their bellies destroie thy flocke,” expressions directly linked to the stories of the Babylonian Captivity and the Book of Ezekiel. Knox and his co-authors seem to believe that the persecutions, especially in

154 The Geneva Bible was translated by William Whittingham and his co-translators in 1560.

155 Works, 4:498. This sentence is in Knox’s tract titled “The Appellation of John Knox from the cruel and most unjust sentence pronounced against him by the false bishops and clergy of Scotland, with his supplication and exhortation to the nobility, estates, and commonality of the same realm.”

England by Queen Mary Tudor and her Roman Catholic prelates, are no different from the stories of the Old Testament. As Knox does in his other works, the authors appear to transfer the stories of the Old Testament in order to identify their persecutors as God’s enemies.156

This prayer also conveys a sense of Knox’s covenant theology. Although there is no direct use of the word “covenant,” several phrases such as “thy chosen people,” “our bonden dutie,” and “with a carefull kepinge of all thy commaundementes,” are chosen, and these phrases are important expressions of covenantal language, not only in the Bible but also in Knox’s other works.

Changes in "The Form of Marriage" Changes

The section on “The Form of Marriage,” in The Forme of Prayers is based on The Form of Church Prayers. Interestingly, however, The Forme of Prayers includes several sentences, parts, and rubrics from the Book of Common Prayer. Maxwell presents detailed information about how The Form of Church Prayers and the Book of Common Prayer are combined in The Forme of Prayers. According to Maxwell, four sentences, three minor rubrics, and one major part from the Book of Common Prayer are added; plus one sentence from St. Augustine’s De moribus ecclesiae catholicae et de moribus Manichaeorum (The Catholic and Manichaean Ways of Life), and one rubric from The Forme of Prayers.157

Changes from Various Sources

From The Form of Church Prayers

The structure and the main theme in “The Form of Marriage” in The Forme of Prayers are not different from The Form of Church Prayers (see Appendix A). Although the order of the marriage celebration is slightly different, The Forme of Prayers has a similar structure as The Form of Church Prayers: exhortation before taking vows, asking the witnesses about impediments, wedding vows from the bridegroom and from the bride, exhortation, minister’s

156 In this prayer, the authors denounce the Roman Catholic prelates as “the Romyshe idoll,” and depict England as “our miserable contrie.” Works, 4:183, 184.

157 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 149–159. Maxwell also indicates that Calvin’s marriage service was based on Farrell’s La maniere et fasson.

43 prayer, and blessing.

“The form of Marriage” in both worship books starts with instruction about the publication of the banns in the church or in the congregation, in accordance with the old Church custom.158 The instruction is slightly changed in The Forme of Prayers, however. While The Form of Church Prayers indicates that the banns need to be published in the church on three Sundays (according to the tradition), The Forme of Prayers does not specify the period of publication: “To the intent that if any person have intereste or title to either of the parties, they may have sufficient tyme to make theyr challenge.”159 The other change is that the following paragraph from The Form of Church Prayers is omitted in the Knox version: “The Father of all mercy, who of his grace has called you to this holy state for the love of Jesus Christ his Son, who, by his holy presence, sanctified marriage, there performing his first miracle before the Apostles, anoint you with his Holy Spirit to serve and honour him together with one common accord. Amen.”160

From the Book of Common Prayer

Three sentences are added to the exhortation. The first sentence is located at the first part of the exhortation: “DEARLIE beloved Brethrene, we are here gathered together in the sight of God, and in the face of his Congregation, to knytt and joyne these parties together in the honorable estate of Matrimony, which was instituted and auctorised by God hym self in Paradise, man beyng then in the state of innocencie.”161 The second sentence is in the middle of the biblical explanation of marriage: “Signifyinge also unto us the mysticall union that is betwixt Christe and his Churche[.]”162 The third sentence is at the end of the biblical explanation: “forasmoche as God hathe so knytt theym together in this mutuall societie to the procreation of children, that

158 Ibid., 149. Maxwell states, “[T]his practice was continued in all branches of the early Reformed Church, the banns being published at the main service of the day.”

159 Works, 4:198.

160 Tracts and Letters, 2:125.

161 Works, 4:198.

162 Works, 4:198.

44 they should bryng theym up in the feare of the Lorde[.]”163

In addition to these sentences, one major part is also added: a challenge to the couple to be married:

I REQUIRE and charge you, as you will answer at the daye of judgement, when the secretes of all hartes shalbe disclosed, that if either of you do knowe any impediment whie ye may not be lawfully joyned together in matrimony, that ye confesse it; for be ye well assured, that so many as be coupled otherwise then Godes Woorde dothe allowe, are not joyned together by God; neyther is theyr matrimony lawfull.164

Three minor rubrics replace the rubrics from The Form of Church Prayers: “Here the Minister speakethe to the parties that shalbe mariede, in this wise;” “If no impediment be knowen, then the Minister sayeth;” “If no cawse be alleaged, the Minister procedith, sayinge…”165 The Blessing also comes from the Book of Common Prayer, not from The Form of Church Prayers: “The Lorde sanctifie and blesse you; the Lorde power the riches of his grace uppon you, that ye may please hym, and lyve together in holy love to youre lyves ende. So be it.”166

Meanwhile, one short phrase, “and to the increase of Christ’s kingdom,” in the Exhortation comes from Augustine’s work, and the sentence, “Even so I take her before God, and in presence of this his Congregation,” followed by the bride’s vow, look to be original and the authors’ own product.

Criteria for Revision Unlike other sections, “The Form of Marriage” in The Forme of Prayers, includes content from the Book of Common Prayer. These inclusions are surprising because as noted above, Knox (and his co-authors), had an unfavourable view of the Book of Common Prayer, although Knox states he once had a good opinion of the prayer book: “First, it is thought expedient, devised, and ordeaned, that in all parochines of this Realme the Commoun Prayeris be redd owklie on Sounday, and other festuall dayis, publictlie in the Paroche Kirkis, with the Lessonis of the New

163 Works, 4:199.

164 Works, 4:199–200.

165 Works, 4:199–200.

166 Works, 4:202.

45 and Old Testament, conforme to the ordour of the Book of Common Prayeris”167 Later, however, he changed his mind about the Book of Common Prayer. He thought that some points, including kneeling at the Lord’s Supper, should be changed or removed from the worship service because he felt these were superstitious and idolatrous practices. Knox was even expelled from the congregation in Frankfurt because of the debate about using the Book of Common Prayer.

However, there is no doubt that this section, “The Form of Marriage,” cites many expressions from the Book of Common Prayer. The citations are as follows:

DEARLIE beloved Brethrene, we are here gathered together in the sight of God, and in the face of his Congregation, to knytt and joyne these parties together in the honorable estate of Matrimony, which was instituted and auctorised by God hym selff in Paradise, man beyng then in the state of innocencie.168

Signifyinge also unto us the mysticall union that is betwixt Christe and his Churche.169

[F]orasmoche as God hathe so knytt theym together in this mutuall societie to the procreation of children, that they should bryng them up in the feare of the Lorde[.]170

I REQUIRE and charge you, as you will answer at the daye of judgement, when the secretes of all hartes shalbe disclosed, that if either of you do knowe any impediment whie ye may not be lawfully joyned together in matrimony, that ye confesse it; for be ye well assured, that so many as be coupled otherwise than Godes Woorde dothe allowe, are not joyned together by God; neyther is theyr matrimony lawfull.171

These citations convey Knox’s methods of biblical interpretation and covenant theology. Biblical grounds from the Old Testament and covenantal expressions are found therein. In particular, the expressions “his Congregation”; “mysticall union that is betwixt Christe and his Churche”; and “joyned together by God” are covenantal language. It is reasonable to think that the phrases cited from the Book of Common Prayer were considered acceptable because they do not weaken, but instead strengthen the biblical understanding of marriage through the image of the covenant.

167 Works, 1:275.

168 Works, 4:198.

169 Works, 4:198.

170 Works, 4:199.

171 Works, 4:199–200.

Changes in "The Visitation of the Sick" Changes

“The Visitation of the Sick,” is the most obviously different section, apart from those on the sacraments, in The Forme of Prayers. There are just a few verbal dependences on and structural similarities with The Form of Church Prayers (see Appendix B).172 In The Form of Church Prayers, the section has three paragraphs with the following elements: identifying visitation of the sick as a duty of a minister, relieving the sick from the fear of death, impressing on the sick that God’s judgement is real and also that judgement can be redeemed by Christ’s salvation, and doing all these with the Word of the Lord.

In The Forme of Prayers, the section is far shorter than in The Form of Church Prayers, having only three sentences (see Appendix B).

The first sentence starts with an explanation of why visiting the sick is an aspect of a minister’s work; a minister’s duty in the visitation of the sick is twofold: relieving the sick with the Word of God and convicting the sick of their sins. The second sentence is about medication. The third requires the minister to offer a private or public prayer for the sick.

Although a couple of phrases in the section on “The Visitation of the Sick” look similar to the expressions in The Form of Church Prayers, there are changes. First, while The Form of Church Prayers identifies a visitee as someone “with afflictions whether of disease or other evils, and specially at the hour of death,” the Forme of Prayers does not specify this. Second, the Forme of Prayers indicates that not only a minister, but also other people can help a sick person with both spiritual and physical aid, while the Form of Church Prayers does not specify this. Third, the Forme of Prayers also indicates that, if it is required, the minister can commend the sick person in public prayers to the congregation, while the Form of Church Prayers does not mention public prayer by a congregation.

Finally, “The Visitation of the Sick” is followed by a section “Of Burial,” in The Forme of Prayers. Calvin does not include this. Only one sentence is written: “The corps is reverently brought to the grave, accompagnied with the Congregation, withowte any further ceremonies;

172 See Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 161.

47 which beyng buriede, the minister goeth to the church, if it be not farre of, and maketh some comfortable exhortacion to the people, towchyng deathe and resurrection.”173

Criteria of Revision

There is neither a specific verse from the Bible nor a sentence or phrase linked to the concept of the covenant that helps explain these alterations. Although the authors suggest that a minister needs to console the sick person with “the sweet promises of God’s mercy through Christ” and “beat [the sick person] down with God’s justice” if he or she is not touched with the felling of his or her sins, it is hard to link these expressions directly to Knox’s biblical interpretation or covenant theology. The authors even shorten The Form of Church Prayers. Knox and his co- authors seem to make this section simple and brief. It is hard to find any scholarly commentary on this issue. Although Maxwell indicates that there is no verbal dependence on Calvin, Poullain, or Huycke—“the [content] is closely related to the last part of the directions in both P[o]ullain and Huycke, who in their turn are a slight amplification of Calvin”—he does not discuss why the authors of The Forme of Prayers even amplify Poullain and Huycke’s section.174

Instead of adding supplementary comments on the visitation of the sick, Knox and his co-authors add a suggestion about congregational prayer or visiting the sick in groups. In order to find the authors’ intention in adding this suggestion, it is necessary to review Knox’s view on private baptism and communion. While Calvin and Poullain were prepared to permit private baptism in extreme cases, Knox did not accept private baptism and communion under any circumstances. Jasper Ridley notes, “the rigidity of Knox’s opposition to private baptism may almost be said to be an original contribution of his own sixteenth-century theology.”175 Iain Torrence also notes that “the primary theological arguments were over … whether or not baptism and communion may in emergencies be administered in private.”176 For Knox, baptism and communion should be administered in public, or in front of the congregation. According to The First Book of Discipline—one of Knox’s works after his return to Scotland— the sacraments should be

173 Works, 4:203.

174 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 161–164.

175 Jasper Ridley, John Knox (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968), 195.

176 Torrence, “A Particular Reformed piety,” 407.

48 administered “on the ordinary days of preaching.”177 Similar to the objection to private sacraments, Knox and his co-authors seem to suggest that people visit the sick in groups and pray for them in public, in order not to make the visitation of the sick a private matter.

Those sections can also be linked to the authors’ purpose in writing: consideration of their future nations. The authors sought to give detailed instruction to their congregations in England and Scotland. Compared to Calvin’s instruction on the visitation of a sick person, the authors of The Forme of Prayers give shorter, but stricter and firmer rules about such visits. They need to explain how the visitation of a sick person is different from the Catholic Sacrament of Extreme Unction or Final Anointing.178 The authors explicitly write that the purpose of the visitation of a sick person is to relieve pain or fear in mind and body. It is not a sacrament of unction for a person close to death, but pastoral care or congregational care for someone who is ill.

Moreover, the authors also give short but certain instruction on the order of burial. Calvin does not explain why he excludes the order of burial in The Form of Church Prayers. Perhaps a burial did not happen often in the city of Geneva, or perhaps Calvin thought that he could give appropriate advice when a burial did occur, because the city of Geneva was not of great size. The authors of The Forme of Prayers, however, had to consider their future nations. It would be impossible to manage every burial in Scotland and England, and so they needed to give firm and certain instruction about the process.

Since this section is brief, it is hard to find Knox’s biblical interpretation and covenant theology here. However, several instructions about congregational prayer, gathering for a sick person, and burial can be linked to Knox and his co-authors’ objection to the Roman Catholic sacraments and also to the authors’ consideration of their future nations.

177 The First Book of Discipline of 1560 was written and compiled by “six Johns,” i.e., John Knox, John Spottiswoode (1509/10–1585), John Willock (d. 1585), John Row (1526–1580), John Douglas (1500– 1574), and John Winram (1492–1582). The article about administering the public sacraments is in the ninth section, “Concerning the Policy of the Church.”

178 At the Second Vatican Council, this Sacrament of Extreme Unction was changed to the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick.

Changes in “The Ministration of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper”

In a previous paper I wrote comparing The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers, the sections on the sacraments from each book are reviewed.179 Several points from that essay have proved helpful in supporting the idea that The Forme of Prayers contains the concept of covenant.

Changes

The Sacrament of Baptism

While both The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers share a similar structure, there are a couple of differences between the two.

First, in The Form of Church Prayers, the section on administering baptism starts with an instruction about the days on which baptism is to be held and its public nature. It is declared that baptism is permissible “either on the Lord’s Day, at the time of catechizing, or at public service on other days,” and concerning its public nature, it is explained that “as baptism is a kind of formal adoption into the Church, so it may be performed in the presence and under the eyes of the whole Congregation.”180 In The Forme of Prayers, however, the Order of Baptism starts with a prohibition against the administration of the sacraments by females—“that for asmoche as it is not permitted by God’s Woord, that We men should preache or minister the Sacraments.”181 The days and the public nature of baptism follow, as in The Form of Church Prayers. The above prohibition is not aimed at the role of women, but concerns the elimination of a Roman custom. At that time, there were urgent situations where a mother would try to baptize her child herself rather than wait for a priest. According to William Maxwell: “this was written with an eye to the Roman custom which permitted midwives (women) to baptize in cases of extreme necessity, if it

179 Joon Won Kim, “A Comparison Study Between Two Liturgical Texts in Geneva,” an essay submitted to a reading and research course, “Key Scottish Liturgical Texts,” on December 3, 2018. In author’s possession.

180 Tracts and Letters, 2:113.

181 Works, 4:186.

50 were seen that a child might die before a priest could be summoned. Our Reformers did not consider Baptism in such cases to be necessary to salvation.”182

The instruction on how to conduct a baptismal ceremony is also different. While The Form of Church Prayers simply says that “the minister baptizes [the child],” The Forme of Prayers gives further detailed instruction: “When they have prayed in this sort, the Minister requireth the child’s name, which knowen, he saith” and “as he speaketh these words, he taketh water in his hand and layeth it upon the childes forehead: which done, he giveth thanckes.”183 Although the biblical meaning of the use of water is described in both The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers, the latter has a detailed explanation of the procedure.184

The Sacrament of The Lord’s Supper

Despite similarities the Forme of Prayers would seem to have with the Book of Common Prayer in the matter of the Lord’s Supper, it is clear that The Forme of Prayers is closely modeled on The Form of Church Prayers.185 The noteworthy differences between the two Genevan worship books are noted below.

First, unlike the section on baptism, the first instruction about administering the Lord’s Supper in The Forme of Prayers is more concise than in The Form of Church Prayers. The latter starts by pointing out three issues: the receivers’ self-examination, the limited access given to strangers, and to young people who are not instructed well, and finally how a minister should preach about the Lord’s Supper.186 Instead of giving any such instruction, The Forme of Prayers simply indicates frequency in administering the Lord’s Supper: “The day when the Lordes Supper is ministered, which commonlye is used once a monthe, or so oft as the Congregation shall thinke

182 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 111.

183 Works, 4:190–191.

184 Tracts and Letters, 2:114; Works, 4:188.

185 See C. J. Cuming, “John Calvin and the Book of Common Prayer: A Short Note,” Liturgical Review 10 (1980): 80–81. See also Spinks, Do This in Remembrance of Me: The Eucharist From the Early Church to the Present Day (London: SCM Press, 2013), 295.

186 Tracts and Letters, 2:119.

51 expedient, the Minister useth to saye as followeth.”187 The frequency of the Lord’s Supper is a major difference between the two books. Although Calvin does not specify the frequency of the Lord’s Supper in his Form of Church Prayers, he does in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. The authors of The Forme of Prayers, however, are explicit in saying that the Lord’s Supper is to be once a month. It is hard to know if the authors reject Calvin’s opinion about weekly celebration of the Lord’s Supper or not. When The Forme of Prayers was written, however, there is no doubt that the authors already knew Calvin’s view. In this situation, the authors seem to be considering their future. The reformation in Scotland was only beginning and none of them could have assumed that the Scottish government would allow the weekly administering of the Lord’s Supper. Or perhaps, they chose Calvin’s second suggestion: the monthly observance. It also seems that they regarded this issue in a serious light, because they put the instruction about frequency at the start of the chapter.

Another difference relates to instruction about excommunication. While The Form of Church Prayers devotes only one paragraph to the sample list of people who are not eligible to receive communion, the exhortation in The Forme of Prayers is full of warnings against the sins of excommunicates, even though there is another chapter on excommunication. The Forme of Prayers even compares excommunicates to Judas Iscariot:

Therfore if any of you be a blasphemer of God, an hinderer of slaunderer of his Worde, an adulterer, or be in malice or envie, or in any other grievous cryme, bewaylle your synnes, and come not to this holy Table, lest after the takynge of this holy sacrament, the Divell entre into you as he entred into Judas, and fill you full of all iniquities, and bring you to destruction bothe of bodye and soule.188

The manner of sitting at the table represents another major difference. While The Form of Church Prayers makes no mention of the manner of sitting or kneeling at the table, The Forme of Prayers clearly gives instruction about sitting: “The Exhortation ended, the Minister commeth doune from the pulpet, and sitteth at the Table, every man and woman in likewise taking their place as occasion best serveth: then he taketh bread, and geveth tahankes, either in these words

187 Works, 4:191.

188 Works, 4:193.

52 following, or like in effect.”189

Criteria of Revision: Knox’s Covenant Theology

As briefly outlined, the sections on Administering the Sacraments in The Forme of Prayers are based on The Form of Church Prayers. However, the authors added, omitted, and revised several phrases and expressions. These changes especially convey Knox’s covenantal theology. As Kyle notes, Knox “regarded baptism as primarily a sign, a manifestation of the believer's first entrance into the household of God and league with him. If baptism signifies the first entrance, the Lord's Supper declares the covenant and continual league with God by which Christ nourishes the believer.”190 The word “covenant” is plainly specified in the section on Administering Baptism and the Lord’s Supper three times: “doing us therby to wyt, that our infants apperteyne to him by covenaunt, and therfore oght not to be defrauded of those holy signes and badges wherby his children are knowen from Infidells and Pagans”; “that we beinge putt in minde of the league and covenant made betwixt God and us, that he wilbe our God, and we his people, he our Father, and we his children”; and “This cuppe is the newe Testament or covenant in my bloude, doo ye this so ofte as ye shall drinke therof, in remembrance of me.”191

There is a phrase, “the covenant of salvation,” that is used in The Form of Church Prayers, but the word “covenant” simply modifies the term “salvation.” In The Forme of Prayers, however, the word “covenant” is used to explain the relationship between God and the baptized infant or baptized people. According to Kyle, The Forme of Prayers “approaches the subject of infant baptism in the light of the covenant obligation.”192

Knox’s covenant theology is not directly presented in relation to the Lord’s Supper. The hard line towards excommunication, however, does suggest Knox’s covenantal theology. Unlike Calvin’s short exhortation about excommunication, The Forme of Prayers gives a long and strict

189 Works, 4:194.

190 Richard Kyle, “The Major Concepts in John Knox’s Baptismal Thought,” Fides et historia 21, no. 1 (January 1989): 22.

191 Works, 4:187; 4:189; 4:192.

192 Kyle, “John Knox’s Baptismal Thought,” 26.

53 exhortation and is not generous at all. For the authors, receiving the Lord’s Supper unworthily means breaking the covenant, because the Lord’s Supper conveys the New Covenant that Jesus established.

Although there are several phrases and expressions which seem to be linked to Knox’s understanding of biblical interpretation, the major concept or theme in this section reflects his covenant theology.

The Added Sections

While Calvin wrote only four major sections in his Form of Church Prayers, Knox and his co- authors enlarged The Forme of Prayers by adding several supplementary sections and appendices as follows:

The confession of the Christian faythe (The Confession of the Christian Faith) Thorder of electinge Ministers, Elders, and Deacons (The Order of Electing Ministers, Elders, and Deacons) Thassembly of the Ministery every thursdaye (The Assembly of the Minister on every Thursday) An order for the interpretation of the scriptures, and answeringe of dowtes, obserued euery mundaye (An Order for the Interpretation of the Scripture and Answering of Doubts, Observed on Every Monday) An order of Ecclesiasticall Discipline (An Order of Ecclesiastical Discipline) One and fyftie Psalmes of Dauid in metre (One and Fifty Psalms of David in Metre) The Catechisme of M. Caluyn. Etcet (The Catechism of Master Calvin and et cetera)193

These added sections are not found in other reformed liturgical books, including The Form of Church Prayers.

Brief features of the added sections

The Confession of the Christian Faith

In this section, an exposition of the Apostles’ Creed is given. The content and structure seem to be influenced by Calvin’s exposition of the Creed in the Institutes of the Christian Religion and

193 In David Laing’s collection of The Works of John Knox, the two appendices, the Metrical Psalms and the Catechism of John Calvin, are not reprinted.

Catechism.194 In particular, the exposition of the phrase “descended into hell,” follows Calvin’s perspective.195 The most notable feature in this confession is the “three tokens, or marks” of the Church of Christ. For the early reformers in the Reformed tradition, including John Calvin and Heinrich Bullinger, the marks of the True Church are twofold—the preaching of the Word and the right administration of the sacraments. John Knox and his co-authors, however, add Ecclesiastical Discipline as the third mark of the Church of Christ:

The third marke of this Church is Ecclesiasticall discipline, which standeth in admonition and correction of fautes. The finall ende wherof is excommunication, by the consent of the Churche determyned, if the offender be obstinate. And besides this Ecclesiasticall censure, I acknowledge to belonge to this church a politicall Magistrate who ministreth to every man justice, defending the good and punishinge the evell; to whom we must rendre honor and obedience in all thinges, which are not contrarie to the Word of God.196

This addition of the third mark is significant because scholars regard the Belgic Confession of 1561 or the Scots Confession of 1560 as the first documents to contain Ecclesiastical Discipline as the third mark of the True Church. However, The Forme of Prayers of 1556 is ahead of these documents. For Knox, obviously, Ecclesiastical Discipline is based on the Bible. In the marginal notes on this third mark, four biblical chapters are given: Matthew 18, Luke 17, Leviticus 19, and Ecclesiastes 19,197 and the last phrase, “which are not contrarie to the Word of God,” is the authors’ admonition about obedience to the Word of God.

Of the Elections and Offices of the Ministers, Elders, and Deacons

According to Maxwell’s research, the sections on the elections and offices were influenced by Calvin’s practice: “[I]n their method of appointing and ordaining their Ministers the English

194 As is commonly known, when John Calvin first wrote his Institutes of the Christian Religion in 1536, he expounded upon the Apostles’ Creed in the second of the six chapters. Later, after several revisions, the final edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion in 1559 had been expanded into four books and eighty chapters, in accordance with the structure of the Apostles’ Creed.

195 See Eun-Seon Lee, “Formation of Knox’s Reformed Theology and its Characteristics,” Korean Reformed Theology 37 (2013): 104–106.

196 Works, 4:172–173.

197 Works, 4:172.

55 congregation at Geneva followed Calvin’s practice closely.”198 In these sections, the authors identify the main tasks of ministers as preaching the Word of God, administering the sacraments, and executing church discipline: that “he distribute faithfully the Word of God, and minister the sacraments sincerely....Therefore the pastor’s or minister’s chief office standeth in preaching the Worde of God, and ministering the sacraments….[I]f so be the Congregation, uppon juste cawse, agreeth to excommunicate, then it belongeth to the minister, according to their general determination, to pronounce the sentence, to the end that all thinges may be done orderly, and withoute confusion.”199 In supporting these main tasks, The Forme of Prayers specifies that a ministerial candidate should undergo a strict process: a candidate needs to be checked whether he “have good and sownde knowlage in the Holy Scriptures, and fitte and apte giftes to communicate the same to the edification of the people,” and then “[the examiners] enquire of [a candidate’s] life and conversation, if he have it times past lyved without slander, and governed hym selfe in suche sorte, as the Worde of God hath not heard evel, or bene slandered through his occasion.”200 The Forme of Prayers does not give detailed instruction for the elders and deacons, but specifies that they cannot preach the Word of God and minister the sacraments because those practices are limited to a minister, and “they differ from the ministers, in that they preache not the Worde, nor minister the Sacraments.”201

The Weekly Assembly of the Ministers, [Elders, and Deacons]202

This section gives instruction about the Assembly or the Consistory. The main purpose of the Consistory was to correct the pastors or ministers’ errors and faults: “Therefore it is to be understand that there be certayne fautes, which if they be deprehended in a minister, he oght to be deposed; as heresie, papistrie, schism, blasphemie, perjurie, fornication, thefte, dronkennes,

198 Maxwell, The Liturgical Portions, 58.

199 Works, 4:174.

200 Works, 4:175.

201 Works, 4:176.

202 David Laing, the editor, notes: “The words within brackets are supplied from the editions 1561 and 1562,” Works, 4:177.

56 usurie, fighting, unlawfull games, with suche like.”203

Interpretation of the Scripture

The Forme of Prayers also specifies that a congregation needs to gather once a week in order to listen to the Word of God and comprehend it. It was allowed that anyone who attended this meeting might speak or ask about the Word of God. If a dispute arose, a moderator was to be appointed to sort out the problem; the Consistory was convened to solve the issue.

Changes in The Forme of Prayers and the Future English and Scottish Nations

As seen above, the changes in The Forme of Prayers are significant. While Calvin’s Form of Church Prayers conveys his reformed theology of biblical interpretation and covenant, the biblical and covenantal elements in The Forme of Prayers are more radical. From the use of those themes in The Forme of Prayers, the authors’ purpose in writing of The Forme of Prayers can be inferred: it is to purify worship and renew their future nations as more biblical and covenantal.

The authors—especially, Knox—had come through various hardships. They were refugees who fled from England and Scotland because of their rulers’ threats and persecutions. They were threatened by the Roman church authorities because they denounced the Roman liturgy. They confronted the English Protestant congregations’ divisions over usage of the Book of Common Prayer. Knox was expelled by the followers of Richard Cox because of his strict position on the Book of Common Prayer and his co-authors joined him in Geneva. They needed to write or compose a new reformed, biblical, and covenantal worship book for themselves and their congregations. It was not easy work, however, although several worship books had already been written by Martin Bucer, Valérand Poullain, Guillaume Farel, and John Calvin. These existing worship books were written in French or Latin, not English, and moreover, the previous reformers’ worship books needed revision, because, in Knox and his fellow authors’ view, the existing worship books were not reformed enough. Eventually, they decided to compose a new

203 Works, 4:178.

57 worship book, The Forme of Prayers, with Calvin’s Form of Church Prayers as its base, because that seemed the closest to reformed worship.

The Forme of Prayers was modeled on The Form of Church Prayers, although the authors of The Forme of Prayers made changes—added, omitted, and strengthened it— at several points in order to make their reformed theology clearer. First, Knox’s unique biblical interpretation in The Forme of Prayers was a key for purifying worship and renewing the authors’ nations. Knox was influenced by Calvin’s approach to biblical interpretation, but he developed his own interpretation in a more radical way. His over-emphasis on the Old Testament, and his literal and prophetic interpretation demonstrated in The Forme of Prayers show that the authors sought to reform their nations in a biblical way.204 As Knox always said, he did not want to accept any idolatrous and superstitious ceremonies. In his view, if a ceremony lacked biblical grounds, it was idolatrous worship, hence the Roman Catholic liturgy, especially the Sacrifice of the Mass, was idolatrous because it had no biblical basis. The same was true of other Protestant liturgies that did not follow this precept, including the Book of Common Prayer. Only God’s word had the prime authority to judge whether a ceremony was right or not.

In order to strengthen these criteria, Knox not only cited stories from the Old Testament, but also applied them to his day. As a trumpeter of God, Knox also warned people not to engage in idolatrous worship because God hated it and would punish them without mercy. In writing The Forme of Prayers, Knox and his co-authors seemed to encourage people in their countries to purify worship. They thought that the religious and political circumstances in England and Scotland were harsher than in the city of Geneva. They could not watch what they considered to be idolatrous worship encroach on England and Scotland. In order to prevent the Roman Catholic Mass, but also to renew worship in a biblical way, they needed to make The Forme of Prayers more biblical than The Form of Church Prayers. According to Richard Kyle, Knox’s view on idolatrous worship stemmed from his Old Testament hermeneutic. Kyle also states that “Knox depicted the Scottish Reformation as a re-enactment of Israel’s fight against idolatry.”205

204 For more information of Knox’s co-authors’ biblical interpretation, see David Wright, “John Knox’s Bible,” in The Bible as Book: The Reformation, ed. Orlaith O’Sullivan (London: The British Library & Oak Knoll Press, 2000), 51–63.

205 Richard Kyle, “John Knox and the Purification of Religion: The Intellectual Aspects of his Crusade against Idolatry,” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte - Archive for Reformation History 77 (December 1986): 266.

Although Kyle does not link The Forme of Prayers to Knox’s anti-idolatry theme, it is reasonable to regard The Forme of Prayers as one of his major works against idolatrous and superstitious worship.

Second, the covenant theology in The Forme of Prayers was also a key concept for the authors’ future nations. While previous covenant theologies were used to explain the relationship between God and his chosen people, Knox developed this theology and regarded it as his weapon against idolatrous worship, i.e., the Sacrifice of the Mass. The covenant was a “means of moving his drive for the purification of religion from an individual to a corporate basis, and ultimately inciting a rebellion against ‘idolatrous’ (Catholic) rulers.”206 Knox thought the reformation in Scotland (and England) should be a covenantal movement, because he believed that God had made a covenant not only with the Israelites in the Bible, but also with Scotland and England. Knox also believed that the covenant nations should keep their covenant with God under any circumstances. A critical means of keeping the covenant was by separating oneself from idolatry. For Knox, it was permissible to rebel against idolatrous rulers in order to keep the covenant with God. Jane Dawson rightly states that “from the Old Testament prophets [Knox] had appropriated the language of the people of God returning to their covenant obligations by abandoning political alliances with idolatrous or ungodly nations.”207 Although this radical concept was not written in The Forme of Prayers, Knox and his co-authors seem to have held this principle in their minds.

These two key elements run through the length and breadth of The Forme of Prayers. Sometimes they are exposed directly, and sometimes they are beneath the surface, as in the “Form of Marriage” and the “Visitation of the Sick and Of Burial.” The added sections also bear indubitable marks of painstaking care for the authors’ future nations. The changes in The Forme of Prayers reveal that the authors were seeking to purify worship and base their future nations on the Bible and the concept of the covenant.

206 Ibid., 279.

207 Dawson, John Knox, 167.

Conclusion

This thesis began from the premise that The Forme of Prayers was modeled on John Calvin’s Form of Church Prayers, but that the authors of The Forme of Prayers seemed to have the additional purpose of recovering biblical worship and renewing their future nations in a biblical and covenantal way. In order to prove the thesis statement, this paper has examined the differences between The Forme of Prayers from The Form of Church Prayers and evaluated these differences using two criteria: Knox’s unique method of biblical interpretation and his covenant theology.

When The Forme of Prayers was published in 1556 in the city of Geneva, it was not considered a revolutionary worship book either for the Protestant movement as a whole or for the Reformed tradition. There were already many liturgical works and worship books, including by Martin Bucer, Valérand Poullain, Guillaume Farel, and John Calvin. Even so, The Forme of Prayers is distinguishable from these other worship books, including The Form of Church Prayers. The authors of The Forme of Prayers could not have been satisfied by those materials because of the circumstances in Scotland and England they sought to address. Knox and his co-authors chose Calvin’s The Form of Church Prayers as a model for their new worship book, but felt that The Form of Church Prayers needed to be revised in certain areas.

The elements in Knox’s unique biblical interpretation—his over-emphasis on the Old Testament, his literal interpretation, and his prophetic stance—led him to regard himself as a trumpeter of God. He continued denouncing idolatrous worship, including the Roman Catholic liturgy and even several ceremonies found in the Book of Common Prayer. Knox’s covenant theology is also significant here. Among various theological concepts, Knox’s covenant theology is the nucleus. These two key elements seemed to lead Knox and his co-authors to make The Forme of Prayers more biblical and covenantal than The Form of Church Prayers. Moreover, in The Forme of Prayers, the authors’ purpose in writing can be discerned: it was to recover biblical worship and renew their future nations in a covenantal way.

This project has four major implications. The first is a reconsideration of the relationship between the two Genevan worship books, The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers. There have been many scholars who have worked on the sixteenth-century reformers’ liturgical texts, including the two Genevan worship books, and there also have been studies

59 60 comparing the two worship books. However, those studies have usually focused on the similarities between the two books. The Forme of Prayers had been regarded as a Scottish or English version of The Form of Church Prayers. The changes identified and discussed in this thesis, however, show what a focus on differences between these two Genevan worship books reveals.

The second implication is a reconsideration of the differences between Calvin and Knox in terms of their styles of biblical interpretation. The general understanding in the scholarly literature is that the two reformers’ positions on the interpretation of the Bible are not significantly different. Their worship books, however, illustrate differences in their biblical hermeneutics. These differences seem to have originated from their different theologies. For example, the sermon “A Vindication of the Doctrine that the Sacrifice of the Mass is Idolatry,” written by Knox, shows his dependence on the Old Testament. In this sermon, he identifies the Roman Catholic Church with King Saul in 1 Samuel. This is a good example of Knox’s hermeneutic of the Bible as based in the Old Testament, and as both literal and prophetic. Knox believed that one person or event from the Bible could be extracted and coupled with a person or event from the present. By contrast, for Calvin—according to D’Assonville—a correct view of the Bible is that the reader should consider time, place, and people in order to see the difference, not only between the Old and New Testaments, but also between the Bible and the present.208 There are many other indications that the two men’s biblical interpretations were different. In this respect, some recent scholars notably argue that Knox’s theology needs to be dissociated from Calvin’s, especially in terms of their approach to the Bible. For example, Kyle argues: “Any tabulation must be headed by Calvin, but it does not end there. Besides Calvin, the other Reformed theologians such as Wishart, Zwingli, Bullinger, Bucer, Beza, and Pierre Viret also had an important influence on Knox.”209

The third implication is a reconsideration of Knox’s covenantal theology in The Forme of Prayers. One of Knox’s major theological features is his covenantal theology. As seen above, Knox developed the covenantal concept largely in a political context and then applied it to The

208 D’Assonville, John Knox and the Institutes of Calvin, 72–73.

209 Kyle, The Mind of John Knox, 19.

Forme of Prayers.210 Jane Dawson argues that Knox simply inferred that a direct parallel could be drawn between Old Testament Israel and Edwardian England, since he considered both kingdoms in covenant relationship with God.211 This new approach in the scholarly literature has not yet been applied to The Forme of Prayers. Although the word “covenant” is not frequently used in The Forme of Prayers, it seems that covenantal theology is one of the underlying themes of the book. The covenantal relationship between God and his chosen people appears to be assumed in each prayer and instruction.

The fourth implication is a reconsideration of the liturgical and ecclesiastical circumstances of the two worship books. It is necessary to discuss differences in the situations in which Calvin and Knox wrote them. Calvin tried to renew worship only against the Roman Catholic tradition. Knox and his co-authors, meanwhile, needed to refute Anglican ceremonies as well; although Calvin suggested Knox accept some controversial but tolerable issues from The Book of Common Prayer. Knox’s strong position on renewing worship triggered conflict in Frankfurt: he strongly rejected not only Roman Catholic traditions but also Anglican liturgical practices, such as kneeling at the altar and private baptism, because he identified these as idolatrous. Knox and his co-authors also knew that Calvin had struggled with the city administrators and had been expelled from the city. In order to avoid the same fate in their homelands, they needed to think about how they might adopt the reformed worship without causing conflict.

Although these implications have not been fully discussed in this thesis, the necessity of reconsidering the relationship between Calvin and Knox has been raised. Although the two Genevan worship books share similar structure, contents, and theology, they nevertheless reflect the two reformers’ different approaches to the Bible and covenant theology.

210 Greaves, “John Knox and the Covenant Tradition,” 26–27.

211 Dawson, John Knox, 78–79.

Bibliography

I. PRIMARY SOURCES

Calvin, John. John Calvin: Tracts and Letters. Edited and translated by Henry Beveridge. 7 Vols. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2009. [The translated second Genevan edition of The Form of Church Prayers is in vol. 2, 100–128]

———. Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion. The Library of Christian Classics. Vol. XX and XXI. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960.

———. John Calvin: Writings on Pastoral Piety. Edited and translated by Elsie Anne McKee. New York: Paulist Press, 2001.

———. The Writings of John Calvin. Edited by Wulfert De Greef. Translated by Lyle D. Bierma. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993.

———. Commentary on Psalms. Translated and edited by James Anderson. Grand Rapids: Christian Classics Ethereal Library, n.d. Accessed May 31, 2018. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom08.html.

Knox, John. The Works of John Knox. Edited by David Laing. 6 Vols. Edinburgh: Thomas and George Stevenson, 1854-64. [The first edition of The Forme of Prayers is in vol. 4, 141– 214]

———. John Knox on Rebellion. Edited by Roger A. Mason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

II. SECONDARY SOURCES Books

Barkley, John M. The Worship of the Reformed Church. London: Lutterworth Press, 1966.

D’Assonville, V. E. John Knox and the Institutes of Calvin: A Few Points of Contact in Their Theology. Durban: Drakensberg Press, 1969.

Dawson, Jane E. A. John Knox. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015.

Donaldson, Gordon. “Reformation to Covenant.” In Studies in the History of Worship in Scotland. Edited by Duncan B. Forrester and Douglas Murray, 37–57. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996.

62 63

Elwood, Christopher. The Body Broken: The Calvinist Doctrine of the Eucharist and the Symbolization of Power in Sixteenth-Century France. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Forrester, Duncan B. and Doug Gay eds. Worship and Liturgy in Context: Studies and Case Studies in Theology and Practice. London: SCM Press, 2009.

Gordon, Bruce. Calvin. New Haven: Yale University Press. 2009.

Greaves, Richard L. Theology and Revolution in the Scottish Reformation. Michigan: Christian University Press, 1980.

Kim, Joonglak. 스코틀랜드 종교개혁사, 존 녹스에서 웨스트민스터 총회까지, (seukoteullaendeu jonggyogaehyeoksa, jon nokseueseo weseuteuminseuteo chonghoekkaji); The History of Scottish Reformation, From John Knox to the Westminster Assembly of Divines. Seoul: Blackbearbooks Korea, 2017.

Knappen, Marshall M. Tudor Puritanism: A Chapter in the History of Idealism. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1939.

Kyle, Richard G. The Mind of John Knox. Lawrence: Coronado Press, 1984.

———, God’s Watchman: John Knox’s Faith and Vocation. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2014.

Lillback, Peter A. The Binding of God: Calvin’s Role in the Development of Covenant Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.

Lorimer, Peter. John Knox and the Church of England: His Work in Her Pulpit and His Influence Upon Her Liturgy, Articles, and Parties. London: Henry S. King & Co., 1875.

Lloyd-Jones, David M. The Puritans: Their Origins and Successors. Edinburgh: Banner of Trust, 1987.

MacCulloch, Dairmaid. The Reformation: History. New York: Viking, 2003.

McKee, Elsie Anne. “Reformed Worship in the Sixteenth Century.” In Christian Worship in Reformed Churches Past and Present, edited by Lukas Vischer, 3-31. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003.

Meney, Peter L. The Troublemakers at Frankfurt: A Vindication of the English Reformation. Boise: Go Publications, 2003.

Maxwell, William D. John Knox’s Genevan Service Book, 1556: The liturgical portions of the Genevan Service Book used by John Knox while a Minister of the English congregation of Marian exiles at Geneva, 1556-1559. Edited by William D. Maxwell. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1931.

———. An Outline of Christian Worship: its development and forms. London: Oxford University Press, 1936.

———. A History of Worship in the Church of Scotland. London: Oxford University Press, 1955.

Moon, Hwarang. 예배, 종교개혁가들에게 배우다. (yebae, Jonggyogaehyeokgadeurege baeuda); Theology of Worship among the 16th Century Reformers. Seoul: Christian Literature Center, 2017.

Redding, Graham. Prayer and the Priesthood of Christ: in the Reformed Tradition. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2003.

Ridley, Jasper. John Knox. New York: Oxford University Press, 1968.

Torrance, Thomas F. Scottish Theology: From John Knox to John McLeod Campbell. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996.

Thompson, Bard. Liturgies of the Western Church. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.

Simpson, Martin A. John Knox and the troubles begun at Frankfurt: comprising a critical commentary on "A brieff discours off the troubles begonne at Franckford ... A.D. 1554", John Knox's narrative of his expulsion from the city, with annotations, and an analysis of Rudolf Jung's "Englische Flüchtlingsgemeinde" (1910). West Linton: M.A. Simpson, 1975.

Spinks, Brian. From the Lord and ‘The Best Reformed Churches’: A study of eucharistic liturgy in the English Puritan and Separatist traditions 1550-1663. Roma: C.L.V.-Edizioni liturgiche, 1984.

———. Do This in Remembrance of Me: the Eucharist from the early church to the present day. London: SCM Press, 2013.

Springer, Michael S. Restoring Christ’s Church: John a Lasco and the Forma ac ratio. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007.

Wright, David. “John Knox’s Bible.” In The Bible as Book: The Reformation, edited by Orlaith O’Sullivan, 51–63. London: The British Library & Oak Knoll Press, 2000.

Zachman, Randall C. “John Calvin.” In The Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, edited by Paul T. Nimmo and David A. S. Fergusson, 132–147. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016.

Journal Articles

Cuming, C. J. “John Knox and the Book of Common Prayer: A short note.” Liturgical Review 10, no. 2 (1980): 80–81.

Dawson, Jane E. A. “Scotland and the example of Geneva.” Theology in Scotland 16, no. 2 (Autumn 2009): 55–73.

Duguid, Timothy. “The ‘Troubles’ at Frankfurt: a new chronology.” Reformation and Renaissance Review 14, no. 3 (December 2012): 243–268.

Emerson, Everett H. “Calvin and Covenant Theology.” Church History 25, no. 2 (June 1956): 136–144.

Greaves, Richard L. “John Knox and the Covenant Tradition.” The Journal of Ecclesiastical History 24, no. 1 (January 1973): 26–27.

———. “The Nature of Authority in the Writings of John Knox.” Fides et historia 10, no. 2 (Spring 1978): 30–51.

Heron, Alasdair. “Calvin and the Genevan Form of Prayer and Praise.” The Church Service Society Record 45 (2009–2010): 2–19.

Joo, Jong Hun. “Calvin on the Sacramental Union with God.” Korea Reformed Journal 36 (December 2015): 213–238.

Kim, Yosep. “‘제네바 예배모범’에 나타난 칼빈의 예배개혁신학과실천적의미연구 (jeneba yebaemobeomtee natanan kalbinui yebaegaehyeok sinhakgwa silcheonjeok uimiyeongu); Calvin’s Reformed Theology and Worship in ‘the Form and Prayers and Songs and the Church in Geneva’ (1543),” Korean Reformed Theology 33 (2012): 86–93.

Kraus, Hans-Joachim. “Calvin’s Exegetical Principles.” Interpretation 31, no. 1 (January 1977): 8–18.

Kyle, Richard G. “The Origins and Early Development of English Covenant Thought.” The Historian 31, no. 1 (November 1968): 23–26

———. “The Hermeneutical Patterns in John Knox’s Use of Scripture.” Pacific Theological Review 17, no. 3 (1984): 19–32.

———. “John Knox’s Methods of Biblical Interpretation: An Important Source of His Intellectual Radicalness.” Journal of Religious Studies 12, no. 2 (1986): 57–70.

———. “John Knox and the Purification of Religion: The Intellectual Aspects of his Crusade against Idolatry.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte - Archive for Reformation History 77 (December 1986): 265–280.

———. “The Major Concepts in John Knox’s Baptismal Thought.” Fides et historia 21, no. 1 (January 1989): 20–31.

———. “John Knox: A Man of the Old Testament.” The Westminster Theological Journal 54, no. 1 (Spring 1992): 65–78.

Lee, Eun-Seon. “녹스의 개혁파 신학사상 형성과 특성: 제네바 예배서를 중심으로(nok-su-uy kay- hyek-pha sin-hak-sa-sang hyeng-seng-kwa thuk-seng: eylk-cey-ney-pa yey-pay-se-eylm- lul cwung-sim-u-lo); Formation of Knox’s Reformed Theology and It’s Characteristics.” Korean Reformed Theology 37 (2013): 84–116.

Macdonald, Stuart. “John Knox, the Scottish Church, and Witchcraft Accusations.” The Sixteenth Century Journal 48, no. 3 (Fall 2017): 637–652.

Molen, Ronald J. Vander. “Anglican Against Puritan: Ideological Origins during Marian Exile.” Church History: Studies in Christianity and Culture 42, no. 1 (March 1973): 45–57.

Song, Young Mog. “개혁파와 장로파의 ‘신약의구약사용’ 이해와의의: 존 칼빈, 존 낙스, 제네바성경(1560)을 중심으로(gaehyeokpawa jangnopaui tsinyaguiguyaksayongt ihaewauiui: jon kalbin, jon nakseu, jenebaseonggyeong(1560)eul jungsimeuro); The Relevance of the Reformed and Presbyterian Thought in Terms of the Use of the Old Testament in the New and its Significance Focused on John Calvin, John Knox, and the Geneva Bible (1560),” Korea Reformed Journal 35 (2015): 41–72.

Torrance, Iain R. “A particular Reformed piety: John Knox and the posture at communion.” Scottish Journal of Theology 67, no. 4 (November 2014): 400–413.

Whytock, Jack C. “A Scottish Tapestry of Reform: John Calvin, Valérand Poullain and Some Scots.” The Canadian Society of Presbyterian History Papers 34 (2009): 12–26.

Unpublished Article

Dawson, Jane E. A. “‘Satan’s bludy clawses’: how the exile congregation in Geneva reacted to the Marian persecution.” Work in progress paper, in author’s possession.

Kim, Joon Won. “A Comparison Study Between Two Liturgical Texts in Geneva.” A final essay submitted to a reading and research course, “Key Scottish Liturgical Texts,” on December 3, 2018. In author’s possession.

Website

Dawson, Jane E. A. “Letters from Exile: Documents of the Marian Exile.” The University of Edinburgh. 2012. http://www.marianexile.div.ed.ac.uk

APPENDIX A

The Table of Comparison Between The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers— Marriage Service

The structure of the table is similar to a chart in Maxwell’s The Liturgical Portions. While he compared the English and Latin editions of The Forme of Prayers in his book, I have chosen to compare here each section of the marriage service in The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers in the parallel columns. It should also be noted that for the sake of easy comparison the long paragraphs of both texts have been broken up.

FORM AND MANNER OF THE FORME OF MARIAGE CELEBRATING MARRIAGE

After the banes or contracte hathe byn It is necessary to observe that in celebrating publisshed tbre severall dayes in the marriage it is published in the Church on three Congregation, (to the intent that if any person Sundays, that any one knowing of any have intereste or title to either of the parties, hinderance may timeously announce it, or any they may have sufficient tyme to make theyr one having interest may oppose it. chalenge,) the parties assemble at the This done the parties come forward at the begynning of the sermon, and the Minister, at commencement of the Sermon, when the tyme convenient, saythe as followeth: Minister says: OUR help be in the lord who made heaven and earth. Amen. OF MARIAGE.

The Exhortation.

DEARLIE beloved Brethene, we are here

gathered together in the sight of God, and in the

face of his Congregation, to knytt and joyne

these parties together in the honorable estate of

Matrimony, which was instituted and

67 68

auctorised by God hym selff in Paradise, man beyng then in the state of innocencie.

For what tyme God made heaven and earth, God, our Father, after creating heaven and and all that is in theym, and had created and earth, and all that therein is, created and formed fasshoned man also after his owne similitude man after his own image and likeness, to have and likenes, unto whome he gave rule and dominion and lordship over the beasts of the lordship over all the beastes of the earth, fisshes earth, the fish of the sea, and the birds of the of the sea, and fowles of the ayre; he said, It is air, saying, after lie had created man, It is not not good that man lyve alone; let us make hym good that the man be alone, let us make him a an helper like unto hym selff. And God brought help meet for him. (gen. i. 26; ii. 18, 21, 22.) a faste sleape uppon hym, and toke one of his And our Lord caused a deep sleep to fall upon ribbes and shaped Eva therof; doying us therby Adam, and while Adam slept God took one of to understand, that man and wife are one body, his ribs, and of it formed Eve, giving us to one flesshe, and one blood. Signifyinge also understand that the man and the woman are unto us the mysticall union that is betwixt only one body, one flesh, and one blood. (Matt. Christe and his Churche; xix. 6.) [F]or the which cawse man leaveth his father Wherefore the man leaves father and mother and mother and taketh hym to his wife, to kepe and cleaves to his wife, whom he ought to love company with her; the which also he ought to just as Jesus loves the Church, or, in other love, even as owr Saviour loveth his Churche, words, the true believers and Christians for that is to say, his electe and faithfull whom he died. (Eph. v. 25.) congregation, for the which he gave his liffe. And semblably also, it is the wives dewtie to And likewise the woman ought to serve and studie to please and obey her howsband, obey her husband in all holiness and honesty, servyng hym in all thynges that be godly and (1 Tim. ii. 11;) for she is subject to and in the honeste; for she is in subjection, and under the power of the husband so long as she lives with governance of her howsband, so long as they him. (1 Pet. iii. 5.) contynew both alyve. And this holie manage, beyng a thynge most And this holy marriage, ordained of God, is honorable, is of suche vertue and force, that

69 of such force, that in virtue of it the husband therby the howsband hathe no more right or has not power over his body, but the woman: power over his own bodie, but the wyfe; and nor the woman power over her body, but the likewyse the wyfe hathe no power over her own husband. (1 Cor. vii. 4.) body, but the howsband;

[F]orasmoche as God hathe so knytt theym together in this mutuall societie to the procreation of children, that they should bryng theym up in the feare of the Lorde, and to the increase of Christes kyngdome.

Wherfore, they that be thus couppled Wherefore being joined together of God they together by God, can not be severed or put a can no more be separated, except for a time by parte, oneles it be for a season, with th’assent of mutual consent to have leisure for fasting and bothe parties, to th’end to gyve theym selves prayer, taking good heed not to be tempted of the more ferventlie to fastyng and prayer; Satan through incontinence. (Matt. xix. 6; 1 gyvyng diligent hede, in the meane tyme, that Cor. vii. 5.) their longe beyng aparte be not a snare to bryng And they ought to return to each other. For in them into the daunger of Satan through order to avoid fornication each one ought to incontinencie. And therfore to avoyde have his wife, (1 Cor. vii. 2,) and each woman fornication, every man oughte to have his owne her husband, so that all who have not the gift of wyffe, and every woman her owne howsband: continence are obliged by the command of God so that so many as can not lyve chaste, are to marry, in order that the holy temple of God, bownde by the commandement of God to mary, in other words, our bodies, be not violated and that therby the holye temple of God, which is corrupted. (1 Cor. iii. 9; vi. 15, 16.) For seeing our bodies, may be kept pure and undefined. that our bodies are members of Jesus Christ, it For synce owr bodies are now become the very would be a gross outrage to make them the members of Jesus Christe, howe horrible and members of a harlot. (1 Cor. vi. 16.) Wherefore detestable thyng is it to make theym the we ought to preserve them in all holiness. For members of an harlot! Every one oght therfore whoso pollutes the temple to kepe his vessel in all purenes and holines; for of God, him will God destroy. whosoever polluteth and defileth the temple of God, hym will God destroye.

Here the Minister speakethe to the parties that shalbe mariede, in this wise: I REQUIRE and charge you, as you will answer at the daye of judgement, when the secretes of all havtes shalbe disclosed, that if either of you do knowe any impediment whie ye may not be lawfully joyned together in matrimony, that ye confesse it; for be ye well assured, that so many as be coupled otherwise then Godes Woorde dothe allowe, are not joyned together by God; neyther is theyr matrimony lawfull.

You then, N. and N., (naming the bridegroom and bride,) knowing that God has so ordained it, do you wish to live in this holy state of marriage which God has so highly honoured; have you such a purpose as you manifest here before his holy assembly, asking that it be approved?

They answer. Yes. If no impediment be knowen, then the The Minister. Minister sayeth: I TAKE you to wittenes that be here present, besechyng you all to have good remembraunce I take you all who are here present as hereof; and moreover, if there be any of you witnesses, praying you to keep it in which knoweth that either of these parties be remembrance: however, if there is any one who contracted to any other, or knoweth any other knows of any impediment, or that either of lawfull impediment, let theym nowe make

71 them is connected by marriage with another, let declaration therof. him say so. If no cawse be alleaged, the Minister procedith, sayinge: If nobody opposes, the Minister says: FORASMUCHE as no man speaketh agaynste this thynge, Since there is nobody who opposes, and there is no impediment, our Lord God confirms your holy purpose which he has given you, and let your commencement be in the name of God, who has made heaven and earth. Amen.

The Minister, addressing the Bridegroom, says: [Y]ou, N., shall proteste here before God and his holy congregation, that you have takyn, and Do you, N., confess here, before God and his are now contented to have N., here present, for holy congregation, that you have taken, and your lawfull wyfe and spowse; promisyng to take N., here present, for your wife and spouse, kepe her, to love and intreate her in all thynges whom you promise to keep, loving and accordyng to the dewtie of a faythfull maintaining her faithfully, as is the duty of a howsband, forsakyng all other durynge her lyfe; true and faithful husband to his wife, living and briefelie, to lyve in a holy conversation holily with her, observing faith and loyalty to with her, kepynge faythe and trewthe in all her in all things, according to the word of God poyntes, according as the Worde of God and his and his holy gospel? holie Gospell dothe commaunde. The Answere.

Answer, Even so I take her before God, and in Yes. presence of this his Congregation.

The Minister to the Spowse also sayethe:

You, N., shall proteste here before the face of Then addressing the Bride, he says: God, in the presence of this holy congregation, that ye have takyn, and are now contented to You, N., confess here, before God and his have, N., here present, for your lawfull holy assembly, that you have taken, and take, howsband; promisynge to hym subjection and N. for your lawful husband, whom you promise obedience, a forsakyng all other duryng hys to obey, serving and being subject to him, lyfe; and fynallie, to lyve in a holy conversation living holily, observing faith, and loyalty to with hym, kepinge faithe and truethe in all him in all things as a faithful and loyal spouse poyntes, as Godes Worde doth prescribe. owes to her husband, according to the word of God and his holy gospel? The Answere.

EVEN so I take hym before God, and in the Answer, presence of this his congregation. Yes. [The Minister then sayeth :]

Then the Minister says:

The Father of all mercy, who of his grace has called you to this holy state for the love of Jesus Christ his Son, who, by his holy presence, sanctified marriage, there performing his first miracle before the Apostles, anoint you with his GIVE diligent care to the [words of the] Holy Spirit to serve and honour him together Gospell, that ye may understande how our with one common accord. Amen. Lorde wolde have this holy contracte kept and observed; and how sure and faste a knott it is, Listen to the Gospel how our Lord intends which may in no wyse be lowsed, accordyng as that holy marriage should be kept, and how we be taughte in the 19. chapter of S. Mathewes firm and indissoluble it is, according as it is Gospell:—

73 written in St. Matthew, at the nineteenth chapter: "The Pharisies came unto Christe to tempte hym and grope his mynde, sayinge, Is it lawfull for a man to put away his wife for every lighte cawse? He answered, sayinge, Have ye not The Pharisees also came unto1him, tempting read, that He which created man at the him, and saying unto him. Is it lawful for a man begynnynge, made theym male and female? to put away his wife for every cause? And he sayeng, For this thyng shall man leave father answered and said unto them. Have ye not read, and mother, and cleave unto his wife, and they that he which made them at the beginning, twayne shalbe one flesshe; so that they are no made them male and female; And said, For this more two, but are one flesshe. Lett no man cause shall a man leave father and mother, and therfore put asonder that which God hathe shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be cowpled together.'' one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, If ye beleve assuredlie these woordes which but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined owr Lorde and Saviour did speake, (accordyng together, let not man put asunder. as ye have hard them now rehearsed owte of the Believe, in these holy words which our Lord holy Gospell,) then may you be certayne, that uttered, as the gospel narrates them, and be God hathe evyn so knytt you together in this assured that our Lord God has joined you in holy state of wedlocke. Wherfore applie your holy marriage: wherefore live holily together in selves to lyve a chaste and holie lyfe together, good love, peace, and union, keeping true in godlie love, in Christian peace, and good charity, faith, and loyalty to each other, example; ever holdinge faste the band of according to the word of God. charitie withowte any breache, kepinge faithe and trueth th'one to the other, even as Godes Woorde dothe appoynte.

Let us all with one heart pray to our Father.

God, all mighty, all good, and all wise, who from the beginning didst foresee that it was not

74 good for man to be alone and therefore didst create him a help meet for him, and hast ordained that two should be one, we beg of thee, and humbly request, that since it has pleased thee to call these persons to the holy state of marriage, thou wouldst deign, of thy grace and goodness to give and send them thy Holy Spirit, in order that they may live holily in true and firm faith, according to thy good will, surmounting all bad affections, edifying each other in all honesty and chastity, giving thy blessing to them as thou didst to thy faithful servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, that haying holy lineage they may praise and serve thee, teaching them, and bringing them up to thy praise and glory, and the good of their neighbour, through the advancement and exaltation of thy holy gospel. Hear us, Father of Mercy, through our Lord Jesus Christ, thy very Then the Minister commendeth theym to dear Son. Amen. God, in this or suche like sorte:

THE Lorde sanctifie and blesse you; the

Lorde powre the riches of his grace uppon you,

that ye may please hym, and lyve together in

holy love to youre lyves ende. So be it. Our Lord fill you with all graces, and anoint you with, all good, to live together long and holily.

APPENDIX B

The Table of Comparison Between The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers— Visitation of the Sick and the Burial

The structure of the table is similar to a chart in Maxwell’s The Liturgical Portions. While he compared the English and Latin editions of The Forme of Prayers in his book, I have chosen to compare here each section of the visitation of the sick in The Form of Church Prayers and The Forme of Prayers in the parallel columns. The section of the burial in The Forme of Prayers follows in the right column. It should also be noted that for the sake of easy comparison the long paragraphs of both texts have been broken up.

VISITATION OF THE SICK. THE VISITATION OF THE SICKE.

The office of a true and faithful minister is not only publicly to teach the people over whom he is ordained pastor, but) so far as may be, to admonish, exhort, rebuke, and console each one in. particular. Now, the greatest need which a man ever has of the spiritual doctrine of our Lord is when His hand visits him with afflictions, whether of disease or other evils, and specially at the hour of death, for then lie feels more strongly than ever in his life before pressed in conscience, both by the judgment of God, to which he sees himself about to be called, and the assaults of the devil, who then uses all his efforts to beat down the poor person, and plunge and overwhelm him in confusion. And therefore the duty of a minister is to BECAWSE the Visitation of the Sicke is a visit the sick, and console them by the word of thyng verie necessarie, and yet the Lord, showing them that all which they notwithstandyng, it is hard to prescribe all rules suffer and endure comes from the hand of God, appertaynyng therunto, wee refer it to the

75 76 and from his good providence, who sends discretion of the godlie and prudent Minister; nothing to believers except for their good and who, accordinge as he seethe the pacient salvation. affected, either may lift hym up with the swete He will quote passages of Scripture suitable promesses of Godes merey through Christe, if to this view. he perceive hym moche afrayde of Godes Moreover, if lie sees the sickness to be thretenynges; dangerous, lie will give them consolation, which reaches farther, according as lie sees them touched by their affliction; that is to say, if he sees them overwhelmed with the fear of death, he will show them that it is no cause of dismay to believers, who having Jesus Christ for their guide and protector: will, by their affliction, be conducted to the life on which he has entered. By similar considerations lie will remove the fear and terror which, they may have of the judgment of God.

If he does not see them sufficiently [O]r contrarie wise, if he be not towched oppressed and agonized by a conviction of their with the felinge of his synnes, may beate hym sins, he will declare to them the justice of God, downe with Godes justice. before which they cannot stand, save through his mercy embracing Jesus Christ for their salvation. On the contrary, seeing them afflicted in their consciences, and troubled for their offences, he will exhibit Jesus Christ to the life, and show how in him all poor sinners who, distrusting themselves, repose in his goodness, find solace and refuge. Moreover, a good and faithful minister will duly consider all means which it may be proper to take to console the distressed, according as he sees them affected: being guided in the

77 whole by the word of the Lord. Furthermore, if the minister has anything Evermore like a skilfull phisition, framyng whereby he can console and give bodily relief his medicine accordyng as the disease to the afflicted poor, let him not spare, but show requireth; and if he perceyve hym to wante any to all a true example of charity. necessaries, he not onelie releveth hym accordyng to his abilitie, but also provideth by others that he may be furnissed sufficiently.

Moreover, the partie that is visited, may, at all tymes, for his comforte, sende for the Minister; who dothe not onelie make prayers for hym there presentlie, but also, if it so requyre, commendeth hym in the publique prayers to the Congregation.

OF BURIALL.

THE corps is reverently brought to the grave, accompagnied with the Congregation, withowte any further ceremonies; which beyng buriede, the minister goeth to the church, if it be not farre of, and maketh some comfortable exhortacion to the people, towchyng deathe and resurrection.