The Anglican Tradition of Common Prayer – Part 3

By Robin G. Jordan

Why do some Anglican congregations use a traditional Book of Common Prayer in their church services?

A common reason some Anglican congregations use a traditional Book of Common Prayer in their church services is that they have become attached to a particular liturgy and a particular way of celebration of that liturgy so that other forms of worship and other ways of worshiping are not meaningful to them. For them the particular liturgy and the particular of way of celebration of the liturgy may serve as a springboard to prayer. They provide the route by which these Anglicans draw near to God and enter his presence. The particular liturgy and the particular way of celebration may also have become infused with a mystical significance for them.

Another common reason is familiarity. The congregation using a traditional Prayer Book is composed largely of members of a particular age group. The traditional Prayer Book that they are using is the one they used when they were children and teenagers. It was the Prayer Book that was used when they were confirmed and when they were married. It was the Prayer Book that was used when their children were baptized. It is so familiar to them that they cannot understand the difficulty that other people may have with it. They were able to learn its language. Both in their minds and aloud they ask the question, “Why cannot other people learn its language too?”

It is a good question. What happened in the 1960s that led to the abandonment of the language of the traditional Prayer Book that had served generations of Anglicans and Episcopalians? Why was it in such a short space of time after hundreds of years of use identified as a barrier to prayer? The Tudor English of the traditional Prayer Book is not Latin. It is not that far from the language that we speak everyday. It is classified as Modern English. Most of its vocabulary is familiar to today’s English speaking population. The Tudor English poetry and plays of William Shakespeare are still taught in high school, even earlier. The Tudor English King James Version is the most common Bible offered for sale despite the plethora of more recent translations. Tudor English hymns are sung in today’s churches alongside contemporary Christian and praise and worship songs. A number of the earlier choruses were written in Tudor English.

The spate of Bible translations that use gender-neutral language may offer an explanation. The change in language of the Prayer Book was largely a cultural development. The desire to make the Prayer Book more accessible to a larger group of people was the ostensible reason for the change but a shifting of cultural attitudes motivated the change.

Most services in so-called contemporary English are services in a form of good liturgical English and not the real vernacular—the slang of teenagers and young adults, the tech-talk of computer geeks, or the patois of the streets. This points to one of the realities of today—and I would add—of the sixteenth century Tudor England. To live in today’s world we must be proficient in a number of dialects. A dialect is a variety of a language differing from the standard in vocabulary or pronunciation or idiom. If English is a second-language, we may speak a different language at home. It may be an African language or dialect, Arabic, Cambodian, Farsi, Haitian Creole, Japanese, Mandarin, Maya, Spanish, Vietnamese, or any of a number of languages, including First Nations and Native American languages. A number of tribes are seeking to preserve their language and culture from extinction, and are teaching them to a new generation. In Ireland the younger generations are learning to speak Irish. Books and newspapers are published in Irish, and radio stations broadcast in Irish. The contemporary trend is toward being poly-lingual and saving traditional languages and cultures from desuetude and oblivion.

In sixteenth century Tudor England every county had its own dialect. In some parts of the country you might find more than one dialect in the same county. English in its many dialects was not the only language. On the island of Man, the people spoke Manx; in Cornwall, Cornish; and on the Channel Islands, French. To live outside your county, you needed to be proficient in what would become known as the King’s English.

When I was a boy in England in the 1950s, the counties still had their own dialects. I spent one summer in Somerset and came back rolling my ‘r’-s and pronouncing my ‘s’-s as if they were ‘z’-s. Your family might live in a county for generations but the locals would regard you as “foreigners.” Your family spoke the King’s English and not the local dialect. You still might be regarded as “foreigners” even if you knew the local dialect and could converse in it fluently. How you pronounced the King’s English might reveal your county of origin, your grammar school, or your university.

I have lived in the South for fifty-odd years and the way people speak and the words they use differs from region to region, state to state, and even county to county. In New Orleans where I lived and worked for a number of years, they also vary from the district to district. In certain districts of the city the Black residents retain in their vocabulary words that you might have heard in an earlier century or in the British Isles—words like “cheek”—saucy speech, “cross”—out of temper, angry with, and “vex”—annoy, distress.

A third common reason is that it establishes the identity of the congregation. It says who they are. It distinguishes them from other congregations. They are traditionalists and they use a traditional Prayer Book. They also use traditional ornaments, ceremonial, music, and vestments. A visitor may come away from one of their services with the strong impression that they place a high value on tradition and a traditional way of doing things.

A fourth common reason is that a particular traditional Prayer Book gives best expression to what a particular Anglican congregation believes. They may use the 1928 Book of Common Prayer because they subscribe to its Catholic doctrines of eucharistic presence and eucharistic sacrifice, baptismal regeneration, confirmation, and its Catholic teaching that the dead benefit from the prayers of the living. They are able to supplement its texts with additions from various manuals such as The American Missal and The Anglican Missal that bring its theology even closer to their own.

A fifth common reason is that a traditional Prayer Book provides continuity with the past. It serves as a link with previous generations of Anglicans and Episcopalians. A sixth common reason is that a traditional Prayer Book offers an element of stability in a constantly changing world. It is something that seemingly has not changed in a world in flux.

Anglican congregations who use a traditional Prayer Book in their church services can give you a host of other reasons why they use it.

What is my own thinking on the use of a traditional Prayer Book in church services?

I do not agree with Anglicans who wish to discard the services of the traditional Prayer Book due their language or their liturgical form. In this opening decade of the twenty-first century a number of writers have documented an interest in liturgy and vintage worship in the younger generations especially those with a post-modern, post-Christian mindset. This population segment is particularly drawn to worship that organic, multi-sensory, participative, and interactive.

The popularity of Wicca in the same population segment points to ceremonial and ritual needs that this new religion is meeting. Wiccan rites are liturgical albeit they are usually written for the occasion. Wiccan rites are also organic, multi-sensory, participative, and interactive. Traditional Prayer Book services offer continuity with the past—something that Wicca cannot offer since it is essentially a modern construct even though it based on what are sometimes called “the Old Ways.” They also offer something else that Wicca cannot offer—the gospel of divine grace.

There are also stirrings of interest in Reformed worship. Among the characteristics of Reformed worship are plenty of Scripture, reverent, and simple. The 1552 Prayer Book, upon which the 1662 Prayer Book is based, has been described as “the flower of Reformed liturgy.”

North American Christians especially evangelicals are susceptible to the vagaries of fashion as are their non-Christian contemporaries. This includes changes in fashion in worship. What is fashionable today may not be fashionable a year from now.

The services of the traditional Prayer Books are a part of the legacy that past generations have bequeathed to us. Recalling the words of Thomas Cranmer, we should not despise them because they are old. Where the old may be used well, we should not reprove them only for their age. It is good stewardship to make use of them where and when they can be used, if they are Scriptural and theologically sound.

The modern linear service that those who would do away with liturgical forms of service favor appeals to people with a modern mindset. The focus of this type service is the preaching message. Everything else sets up the sermon—songs, video clips, testimonials, drama, interviews, etc. An invitation usually follows the sermon. This type service works well in those parts of the country where a substantial portion of the population still has a modern mindset. It works well here in western Kentucky. However, it does not appeal to everyone. A very large part of the population is unchurched.

To me it makes no sense to rely upon one approach to reach the unchurched population. What works in one part of the country may not work in another. Each church needs to be come an expert on its ministry focus group, other population groups in its community, the regional culture, and any subcultures. It needs to tailor its approach to its ministry focus group. It needs to discover what will work for it and what it can do reasonably well with its resources.

What concerns me is how churches are using the services of the traditional Prayer Book, what traditional Prayer Book they are using, and what doctrine its services uphold and propagate. If we do use the traditional Prayer Book services, they should meet certain criteria, which I discuss below.

We should also do everything we can to facilitate the newcomer’s learning of the language of the traditional Prayer Book. It should not be left to chance. This will also help the other worshipers in the congregation learn more about the doctrine of the traditional Prayer Book that they are using. The exposition of Prayer Book doctrine and how it is agreeable with Scripture should be a regular part of our teaching.

One of the purposes of the Prayer Book, if it was compiled in accordance with Cranmerian principles, is instructional. Thomas Cranmer took to heart the apostle Paul’s injunction: “Let all things be done for edification” (1 Corinthians 14:26 NKJV). The liturgies that Cranmer compiled are clearly designed with this purpose in mind. This includes the order for the administration of Holy Communion and the occasional offices, as well as the orders for Morning and Evening Prayer. Building up the people in the Christian faith and way of live was for Cranmer a top priority.

The congregation should also be taught how they can make the best use of the Prayer Book in their private devotions. This includes not only using the Table of Lessons to guide their daily Scripture reading but also mediating upon the prayers, Psalms, and liturgical texts of the Prayer Book and incorporating some of them into their prayer time. Scripture is best read in a leisurely, or unhurried, manner and aloud, with attention to what God may be saying to us in the passage we are reading. The reading of Scripture aloud even when read privately is a practice that originated with the early monks and is a practice from which we can derive great benefit. They were mindful of the words of the apostle Paul: “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17 NKJV).

In reading Scripture aloud, we not only read God’s word but we also hear God’s word. We are attending to God’s Word with both sides of our brain. We should also have paper and pencil handy and jot down anything in a passage that particularly draws our attention. After we have finished our Scripture reading, we may want to mediate upon these words or verses and pray in response to them. I would recommend keeping them in a notebook and looking back over them from time to time. God may have more to say to us through them. Through daily Scripture reading God renews our minds, and instructs our hearts. God also quickens [inspires], confirms, and strengthens our faith in him.

The Litany, or General Supplication, is fairly comprehensive, and is a useful guide for our own prayers. As we look over its supplications, the Holy Spirit will draw to our attention those who need our prayers. Other prayer concerns will also be brought to our attention.

I am also convinced that the best salesmen for the traditional Prayer Book are the members of the congregation using it. It has nothing to do with any kind of sales pitch that they might make. It has everything to do with what kind of Christians they are. Other things that are going to convince first time worship visitors and newcomers of the value of the traditional Prayer Book is the warmth and sincerity of the welcome, the vibrancy of the worship, the quality of the music, the quality of the preaching, the friendliness and approachability of the congregation, the quality of the nursery, the quality and creativity of the Children’s Ministry, the quality of the small group ministry, the cleanliness of the restrooms, and the over-all atmosphere of the church.

I have no objection to the use of alternative services in a good contemporary liturgical English together with the services of the traditional Prayer Book; provided that compilers of the services, including those of the traditional Prayer Book, applied these three important Cranmerian principles in their compilation. First, the services must be Scriptural. The texts used in the services are taken from Scripture or are consonant with Scripture. Second, the services must instruct in sound doctrine. This means that the doctrine of the services must be sound. Their doctrine is grounded in the Bible and the Reformation. Third, the services must also congregational. The congregation plays more than a small part in the service. Provided further that the services must give clear expression to the biblical teaching of The Book of Common Prayer, 1662, and that they must show proper respect to its liturgical usages.

I also have no objection to the use of local patterns of worship, subject to the same provisos. Whatever forms of service or patterns of worship are used in Anglican churches, they should clearly demonstrate that those who put them together recognize and accept the Thirty-Nine Articles as the doctrinal standard of Anglicanism, alongside the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal and that they interpret the Articles as their compilers intended and with consideration of their historical context. It should also be evident that for those who put them together the 1662 Prayer Book is the authoritative standard of worship and prayer.

I see a place for the old and the new in our worship. Just like hymns and worship songs, the prayers and liturgical texts that we use in our services are a part of the witness of past generations to their own generation, to us, and to future generations. In our own day we will add to this legacy and pass it on to the next generation. It is one of the ways that Christians build up the faith of those that come after them. Death may have closed their eyes but it cannot silence their voices. They speak to us across the gulf of time that separates us and urge us not to be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified, and to manfully fight under his banner, against sin, the world, and the devil, and to continue Christ’s faithful soldier and servant unto life’s end.