At the beginning of the century many who had been brought up in Puritan traditions thoroughly disliked the custom of congregational responses.  They called it ’a tossing of tennis balls,’[1127] and set it down as one of the points of formalism.[1128] Partly, perhaps, from a little of this sort of feeling, but far more often for no other reason than a lack of devotional spirit, that cold and most unattractive custom, which prevailed throughout the Georgian age, of making the clerk the mouthpiece of the congregation, fast gained ground.  This, however, was much less general in the earlier part of the period than at its close.  In Queen Anne’s time there were many zealous Churchmen who both by word and example endeavoured to give a more hearty character to the public worship, and who thought that such ’unconcerned silence[1129] was a much greater evil than the risk of an occasional ’Stentor who bellowed terribly loud in the responses.’[1130] Most people are familiar with the paper in the ‘Spectator,’ which describes Sir Roger de Coverley at church, and his patriarchal care that his tenants and dependents should all have prayer-books, that they might duly take their part in the service.[1131]

The period which immediately followed the Revolution of 1689 was not one when minor questions of ritual, upon which there was difference of opinion between the two principal parties in the English Church, were likely to rest in peace.  Turning eastward at the creeds was a case in point.  There was quite a literature upon the subject.  Many Low Churchmen, among whom may be mentioned Asplin, Hoadly, and Lord Chancellor King, contended that it was a papal or pagan superstition which ought to be wholly discontinued.  The High Church writers, such as Cave, Meade, Bingham, Smallbroke, Whiston, Wesley, and Bisse, answered that it was not only the universal custom in the primitive Church, but edifying and impressive in itself as symbolising unity in the faith, hope of resurrection, and expectation of our Saviour’s coming.  The usage was very generally maintained.

The injunction of the 17th Canon, to bow with reverence when the name of the Lord Jesus is mentioned in time of divine service, was observed much as now.  In the recital of the Creed it was the general custom.  At other times, High Churchmen were for the most part careful to observe the practice,[1132] and Low Churchmen did not.  Later in the century the canon was probably observed much more generally in country villages than among town congregations.  Bisse observed that it was a primitive usage which ought least of all to be dropped at a time when Arian opinions were abroad.[1133]