Pages

Saturday, July 24, 2010

The Anglican Tradition of Common Prayer—Part 4


By Robin G. Jordan

Does it matter what Prayer Book a church use in its services? Although you may hear a minister occasionally say that it does not matter what Prayer Book is used, he is not being honest with himself or with you. It matters a great deal what Prayer Book we use. A Prayer Book is more than a book of devotions. The texts of the services, the particular arrangement of elements in the service, the rubrics of the service, who says and does what in the service, and the inclusion of the service in the Prayer Book embody a particular theology, or way of thinking about God, his nature, his attributes, and his relation to us and the universe. Even the language of the Prayer Book has theological content. The second person familiar “thou” of the traditional Prayer Books say a great deal more about our relationship with God in one word than do the more recent Prayer Books with the more impersonal “you.”

One of the New Testament principles that Thomas Cranmer applied in the compilation of the First and Second Prayer Books of Edward VI was Paul’s dictum: Let all things be done for edification, for the upbuilding of Christ’s Church. Both Edwardian Prayer Books are intended to instruct in doctrine. The 1559 Elizabethan Prayer Book, the 1604 Jacobean Prayer Book, and the 1662 Restoration Prayer Book are in substance the 1552 Reformed Liturgy, the culmination of Cranmer’s liturgical achievement and the expression of his mature theology. Like the latter the 1559, 1604, and 1662 books are intended to be instructional, teaching and reinforcing a particular set of beliefs. Even if a particular book is not designed to instruct in doctrine, it still is instructional. It shapes people’s beliefs.

Every service of a Prayer Book has its own theology, as does the entire book. To complicate matters there may be two or more interpretations of the theology of a service or the book. One interpretation may be based upon the intent of the compilers and the historical context in which the services and the book were compiled; a second or third interpretation may be based on other considerations (e.g., the tradition of the Catholic Church). Among the reasons that the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion were adopted were as doctrinal standards for the interpretation of the Prayer Book.

Every change in a Prayer Book alters the theology of the Prayer Book even though the change may be a slight one. Theological changes stemming from the revision of a Prayer Book may be deliberate or unintended. They may reflect changes in the theology of the Anglican entity using the Prayer Book. They may not necessarily reflect the theology of all groups within that entity. Anglo-Catholic and liberal groups have dominated Prayer Book revision in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States in the twentieth century and the opening decade of the twenty-first century.

The history of Prayer Book revision in the United States has reflected a general movement away from the biblical and Reformation teaching of the 1662 Prayer Book. The 1789 General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church revised and adopted the Scottish Non-Juror Prayer of Consecration of 1764. In its unrevised form this particular Consecration Prayer taught that Christ offered himself for our sins at the Last Supper, not on the cross. Christ only died on the cross. It was also open to interpretation as teaching the doctrine of transubstantiation—the transmogrification of the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of Christ’s body and blood. The 1892 Prayer Book moved the American Prayer Book further away from the doctrine of the 1662 Prayer Book. The 1928 Prayer Book was far-reaching and radical in the changes that it made to the American Prayer Book. The 1979 Prayer Book’s abandonment of the language of the traditional Prayer Books, however, has tended to overshadow these changes. In its own sweeping changes the 1979 Prayer Book followed in the footsteps of its predecessor.

Among the characteristics of the American Prayer Book tradition is the lack of a standard by which new liturgies may be measured and tested. New American Prayer Books tend to reflect the theology of the group or groups dominating the Episcopal Church at the time they were adopted. In reaction to the 1979 Prayer Book its detractors tried to make the 1928 Prayer Book into that standard. However, the 1928 Prayer Book is hardly a prime example of continuity with the American Prayer Books of the past. Indeed it set precedent for the 1979 Prayer Book. Since subscription to the Thirty-Nine Articles has never been a mandatory requirement in the Episcopal Church, the Episcopal Church also has no doctrinal standards by which the American Prayer Book in its latest edition may be interpreted. The dominant group or groups in the Episcopal Church interpret the newest Prayer Book’s theology to the rest of the Church.

In the Anglican Church of Canada, the Anglican Church in North America, the Continuing Anglican Churches, and the Episcopal Church we see the incongruity of congregations and clergy that describe themselves as conservative and “Evangelical” or “Low Church,” which also use Prayer Books that are liberal and Catholic in doctrine—the 1928 Prayer Book and the 1979 Prayer Book. They are apt to ignore or minimize the inconstancy between what they purportedly believe and the doctrine of these Prayer Books. Other considerations (e.g., familiarity, long use, modern English) outweigh soundness of doctrine. We have come along way from the days when the Prayer Book service itself served to safeguard the congregation from unsound doctrine, as well as to instruct the congregation in sound doctrine.

In and outside of North America there is a growing trend to abandon Prayer Book services for local patterns of worship. This trend places whatever theology is imparted to the congregation solely in the hands of the clergy with the sermon as the principal means of teaching doctrine. It is in part driven by a mindset that sees churchgoers as consumers of religious goods and products and churches as the marketers and dispensers of these goods and products. It is in part motivated by a desire to preach the gospel to the congregation in an environment that does not put off the seeker. The modern linear service in which the preaching message is the focal point of the service is viewed as the best approach to accomplish this purpose. A formal liturgy is seen as a barrier to hearing the good news rather than as a means of proclaiming the gospel. Choirs, hymns, organs, robes, wall crosses, and everything else associated with the traditional church are also seen in this light.

A Prayer Book that combines eloquent language and sound doctrine is The Book of Common Prayer of 1662. The 1662 Book of Common Prayer is one of the venerable formularies of the reformed Church of England, along with the Thirty-Nine Articles, the Ordinal of 1661, and the two Books of Homilies issued in the reigns of Edward VI and Elizabeth I. They form the heart of “confessional Anglicanism,” the “Protestant Reformed Religion” of the Church of England. The GAFCON Jerusalem Declaration upholds the 1662 Book of Common Prayer as “a true and authoritative standard of worship and prayer” for contemporary Anglicans.

The 1662 Prayer Book does have some drawbacks. It does not have any prayers for the President of the United States, for the Congress, and the Supreme Court, the governor, the state legislature, and the state courts. It also does not contain any prayers for mission in the form of supplications in the Litany, Occasional Prayers, or petitions in the Prayer for the Whole State of the Christ’s Church Militant Here in Earth. This lack is easily rectified. A supplemental collection of prayers like the one my mother’s teachers’ college used in chapel can be compiled for use together with the 1662 Prayer Book. Prayers that are not contained in the 1662 Prayer Book can be printed in the service bulletin, as can the entire service. Suitable supplications or petitions for mission, as the case may be, can be inserted into the Litany and the Prayer for the Whole State of the Christ’s Church Militant Here in Earth. As noted in my previous article, “The Anglican Tradition of Common Prayer—Part 2,” a prayer for mission may be said after the Collect of the Day or before the parting Blessing, as in the 1926 Irish Prayer Book, where it does not unduly lengthen the service as does the lamentable practice of saying prayers and other devotions after the Blessing and closing hymn.

The 1662 Prayer Book, in its main and chief parts, contains the true doctrine of Christ. However, certain phrases and expressions found in the 1662 Prayer Book are open to mistaken or deliberately wrongful interpretation, and their proper interpretation has been the subject of heated debate. This should present no major problem if the people are instructed in the received interpretation of the 1662 Prayer Book.

The sister churches of the Reformed Episcopal Church in South Africa and the United Kingdom and Ireland have adopted revisions of the 1662 Prayer Book that either remove these expressions and phrases or so explain them to render their meaning clear and Scriptural. Some of the Services have been shortened where they are unduly lengthy especially when they are used in combination with other services. Services and prayers for certain special occasions have been added.

For congregations that are accustomed to praying in modern English, no complete version of the 1662 Prayer Book in modern English form has yet been published. Individual services in that form may be found a number of the more recent Anglican service-books published for use together with the 1662 Prayer Book. They include An Australian Prayer Book, 1978; Prayer Book of the Church of England in South Africa, 1992; An English Prayer Book, 1994; and A Prayer Book for Australia, 1995.

The 1662 Prayer Book, as a successor to the 1552 Prayer Book, enjoins more congregational participation in worship than the 1549 Prayer Book. Today’s congregations may be used to worship that is even more congregational and participatory. Unchurched people with a post-Christian, post-modern mindset are also attracted to worship that is congregational, interactive, and participatory, as well as multi-sensory and organic. In a future article I plan to look at ways that congregational participation in the liturgies of the 1662 Prayer Book may be expanded, and better stewardship of God’s manifold graces given to members of Christ’s Church may be exercised in their celebration.

3 comments:

  1. Can and does anyone listen to these healthy observations?

    Westerners are not auditors nor users of the 1662 BCP.

    Does the Nigerian Church use the 1662 BCP?

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1662, the only way to fly.

    Robin, I have a question. Do you have any resources on the establishment of saints days in the Anglican church? I'm trying to figure out when "Blessed Virgin Mary" was added to the Anglican calendar (15 Aug). Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. BTW, as I said elsewhere, there is no need to modify the 1662 BCP other than the change the collects for the English government to that for the American.

    No additional prayers are needed.

    ReplyDelete