Scottish Prayer Book (1637)
James VI, the King of Scotland, united the Scottish and English crowns in a personal union, but not the two countries, on the death of Queen Elizabeth I in 1603.
[2] In the Church of England at the time of the Millenary Petition, conservative and reformed parties had long been sparring over the a variety of liturgical matters.
[7] Continental reformed worship became entrenched in Scotland but failed to make inroads in England during Elizabeth's reign, with the queen suppressing a formal effort to introduce modified versions of the Book of Common Order and celebration according to this pattern occurring in secret.
By 1617, James began renovating his Scottish Chapel Royal at Holyrood Palace away from Presbyterian form towards the ceremonial needs of the English services.
[14] It was the King's pressure that saw the Five Articles of Perth passed by the Kirk's General Assembly in 1618 and the Scottish Parliament in 1621, which introduced English practices such as kneeling at Communion, episcopal confirmation, and certain festal observances.
[15] Revision to Scottish worship had been active since at least 1601, but James pressed for these efforts to be accelerated on the advice of the Archbishop of St Andrews, John Spottiswoode.
The Scottish desire to adopt their own liturgy rather than that of England was not solely premised on national pride, as there were grievances with the English prayer book.
[22][note 5] Due to the ten-day to two-week lag between Scottish bishops sending a message and them receiving the King's response, Charles entrusted others with authority to address problems as they arose.
[25] On Sunday, 23 July 1637, the new prayer book was almost immediately met with a coordinated set of demonstrations against it and its perceived Romanized liturgy.
"[29][note 6] Walter Whitford, the Bishop of Brechin, was apparently aware of this and other violent reactions to the 1637 text: he celebrated his first service according to the new prayer book with two loaded pistols on the desk before him and visible to the congregation.
[33] According to Thomas Fuller, 1637 saw a "Scotch Nation full of discontents" and the prayer book's introduction was "as when the cup is brimfull before, the last (though least) superadded drop is charged alone to be the cause of all the running over."
Gordon Donaldson, agreeing that the prayer book's introduction was the "'last' drop", would challenge the assertion that it was "least" in prompting opposition that had "already organised into something little short of conspiracy.
"[34] George Gillespie's critique of the new liturgy was among the first, taking an apocalyptic tone in his disdain for the "disastrous mutation (to be bewailed with teares of blood)".
[36] In 1660, the Stuart Restoration saw the release of Wren from the Tower of London and the return of King Charles II and John Cosin.
Utilizing a 1619 folio copy of the English prayer book—now called the "Durham Book"—Wren and Cosin entered annotations of suggested changes.
[43] The Scottish churchmen had hoped to fully remove the Apocrypha, but Charles I overrode these efforts and preserved 12 chapters of readings from the Book of Wisdom and Ecclesiastes for use on six saints' days.
Since celebrating these saints' days were not mandated in the Church of Scotland, the Scots evaded the King's goal of requiring these readings.
[46][note 8] The connection of the consecration to Words of Institution was contrary to the Scottish Book of Common Order's formulation and therefore subject to Gillespie's criticism.
According to Kim, Charles may have intended to establish uniformity in worship across Britain under the 1637 prayer book;[51] Spinks considered this latter assertion to be "intriguing" but also "merely a conjecture".
However, Kim found that Laud and Charles I fatally erred in believing that Scotland would provide them a "smaller and supposedly more manageable country" where they could push their changes first.
