between Cranmer and Dudley was complete and the regent effectively killed the canon law bill in the House of Lords. As with the first Prayer Book, the origins and participants in the work of its revision are obscure, but it was clear that Cranmer led the project and steered its development. It had begun as early as the end of 1549 when the Convocation of Canterbury met to discuss the matter. Late in 1550, the opinions of Martyr and Bucer were sought on how the liturgy might be improved and they influenced the revision significantly. The view of the spiritual presence was clarified by the use of entirely different words at the offering of the bread and the wine to the communicants. New rubrics noted that any kind of bread could be used and any bread or wine that remained could be used by the curate, thus dissociating the elements from any physical presence. The new book removed any possibility of prayers for the dead, because such prayers implied support for the doctrine of purgatory. The Act of Uniformity 1552, which authorised the book's use, specified that it be exclusively used from 1 November. The final version was officially published at almost the last minute, owing to Dudley's intervention. While travelling in the north of the country he met the Scots reformer John Knox, then based in Newcastle. Impressed by his preaching, Dudley selected him to be a royal chaplain and brought him south to participate in the reform projects. In a sermon before the king, Knox attacked the practice of kneeling during communion. On 27 September 1552, the Privy Council stopped the printing of the new Prayer Book and told Cranmer to revise it. He responded with a long letter using the argument that it was for Parliament with the royal assent to decide any changes in the liturgy. On 22 October, the council decided to keep the liturgy as it was and to add the so-called Black Rubric, which explained that no adoration was intended when kneeling at communion. The origins of the statement which eventually became the Forty-Two Articles are equally obscure. As early as December 1549, the archbishop was demanding that his bishops should subscribe to certain doctrinal articles. In 1551 Cranmer presented a version of a statement to the bishops, but its status remained ambiguous. Cranmer did not devote much effort to developing the articles,