The 1662 Book of Common Prayer: A Brief History of a Love-Hate Relationship

The Book of Common Prayer of 1662 has something of a chequered history. It is a history of which Americans who are discovering the book for the first time usually are not aware. They may acquire a romantic view of the book which it really does not deserve. In this article I am going to look at the love-hate relationship that Anglicans have had with the 1662 Book of Common Prayer over the past 350 odd years.

Two years after the death of Oliver Cromwell on May 1, 1660 the Convention Parliament invited Charles II to become the King of England. The period which followed Charles II’s ascension to the English throne is known as the Restoration. Episcopacy was restored to the Church of England in the same year. New bishops were consecrated to fill the vacancies on the episcopal bench.

The old Prayer Book that had served the Church of England for more than eight decades had been abolished in 1645 and its use made punishable by fine and imprisonment. One of the first tasks of the Restoration bishops was the drafting of a new Prayer Book.

While Charles II was still in France, a delegation of Presbyterians had petitioned him not to restore the Prayer Book or the surplice. Charles promised them a conference to consider their objections.

At the Savoy Conference held in 1661, the Presbyterians and the Puritans presented a laundry list of “exceptions” to the Prayer Book and proposed an alternative liturgy. The bishops, however, were willing to make only a few concessions such as the use of the King James Bible for the Epistles and Gospels of the Communion Service and the use of the Manual Acts during the Words of Institution.

The use of the new Book was mandated by the Act of Uniformity adopted by Parliament in 1662. Clergy who refused to use the Book were ejected from their livings.

The 1662 revision of The Book of Common Prayer is often described in the literature as having not made any changes of great significance in the English Prayer Book, but this description of the 1662 revision is not an accurate one. The Restoration bishops made 600 changes in the English Prayer Book, and a number of these changes did have notable implications for future generations of Anglicans.

The 1662 revision shows the influence of the 1637 Scottish Prayer Book, which the Scottish bishops drew up at the instigation of Charles I and Archbishop of Canterbury William Laud. While Laud himself did not have a hand in its preparation, the book is sometimes referred to as the “Laudian Liturgy.” The book provoked a furious reaction from the Scots who preferred the more reformed Book of Common Order, caused a war, and led to the abolition of Episcopacy in the Church of Scotland.

The 1662 Book of Common Prayer was used in the British North American colonies during the seventeenth and eighteenth century. In the newly formed United States of America, it was soon replaced by the 1789 Prayer Book. In Canada it was replaced more than a century later by the 1918 Prayer Book. While the 1662 Prayer Book is the official Prayer Book in the Church of England, the Anglican Church of Australia and some other Anglican provinces it has been supplemented or replaced by newer service books in all Anglican provinces.

The 1662 Book of Common Prayer is recognized by some Anglican provinces as a historic Anglican formulary—providing with the Articles of Religion of 1581 and the Ordinal of 1661 a standard of doctrine and worship for these provinces with the same provinces reserving the right to depart from the doctrinal and worship principles of these formularies where they do not agree with the doctrine and practices of the particular Anglican province. It does not enjoy this standing in all Anglican provinces.

The Articles of Religion, commonly called the Thirty-Nine Articles, were adopted by the Church of England in their final form as its confession of faith in 1571. They were approved by Parliament and received Elizabeth I’s royal assent. Among their purposes is to set the standard, second only to the Holy Scriptures, by which the doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer and other rites and services used in Church of England are interpreted. Their acceptance as historic Anglicanism’s confession of faith is what sets “confessional Anglicans” apart from “non-confessional Anglicans,” not the acceptance of the three creeds or the use of a particular service book or ordinal. Confessional Anglicans are free to use any service book or ordinal, which conforms to the teaching of the Bible and the principles of the Articles of Religion. The Articles affirm all three creeds.

The 1662 Book of Common Prayer and the 1661 Ordinal, which is appended to it, largely became historic Anglican formularies by happenstance. The 1689 Proposed Book of Common Prayer would have replaced the 1662 Prayer Book if the Glorious Revolution had not put William and Mary on the English throne. The religious settlement that followed the ascension of William and Mary eliminated the need for a service book that comprehended the Non-Conformists and established the Protestant, Reformed religion as the official faith of the realm and of the Church of England.

The 1662 Book of Common Prayer has been translated into numerous languages and has been used in various parts of the world where Anglican missionaries have planted Anglican churches. In the places in which the book has been used, local clergy have adapted the book to local circumstances. They have shortened its rites and services and made additions, alterations, and omissions to the rites and services. While in some places the book may have been used as it was authorized in 1662, in most places that has not been the case. One of the earliest abbreviations of the 1662 Prayer Book for use in North America was John Wesley’s The Sunday Service of the Methodists in North America: with Other Occasional Services, published in 1784.

Dissatisfaction with the 1662 Book of Common Prayer can be traced as far back as its adoption. The Non-Conformists refused to use the book in their churches and consequently lost their livings. Under the provisions of the Coventicles Acts of 1664 and 1670, they were banned from holding gatherings of their own.

After the Glorious Revolution in 1689 a body of Anglicans refused to swear allegiance to the new monarch, William of Orange, on the grounds they could not in good conscience abjure the oath of allegiance that they had made to his predecessor, James II, who had fled to France. This body of Anglicans was known as the Non-Jurors and had members not only in England but also in Scotland.

The Non-Jurors would divide into two parties—the Usagers and the Non-Usagers, so-called due to their opposing positions on what the Usagers regard as four ancient “usages”. These usages included the mixed chalice of wine and water, the invocation of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the consecrated elements, a prayer of oblation of the consecrated elements, and prayers for the dead. The Usager party claimed that a celebration of the Holy Communion in which these usages were omitted was invalid. The Usagers also believed that Christ, offered himself for the sins of the world, not on the cross but at the Last Supper, and only died on the cross. 

While the Non-Usagers were content to use the 1662 Prayer Book, the Usagers developed their own liturgies. The Scottish Usager Non-Juror Communion Office of 1764 would influence the Communion Service of the 1789 Book of Common Prayer.

Dissatisfaction with the 1662 Book of Common Prayer was not confined to the seventeenth and eighteenth century or to the fringes of the Anglican Church. In the third decade of the nineteenth century the Oxford Movement brought the drawbacks of the 1662 Prayer Book in sharp focus. On one hand, the Tractarians put the 1662 Prayer Book on a pedestal and caused what might be described as a Prayer Book revival. On the other hand, they systematically went through the 1662 Prayer Book and reinterpreted everything that they could in a Catholic sense. This sparked an intense debate over the doctrine and liturgical practices of the 1662 Prayer Book with Evangelicals and Protestant High Churchmen on one side and the Tractarians on the other.

The Tractarians would appropriate the label of “High Church” for themselves, maintaining that they were the true High Churchmen in the Church of England. They also claimed that they were the true Churchmen, those who genuinely represented the faith of the Prayer Book.

One of the consequences of the debate was that it prompted some Church of England Evangelicals to question the Protestantism of the doctrine and liturgical practices of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer themselves. Like their counterparts in the Protestant Episcopal Church USA, they saw a need for Prayer Book revision. In the PECUSA Evangelical Episcopalians were questioning the doctrine and liturgical practices of the 1789 Prayer Book. 

Among the consequences of these developments was the formation of the Free Church of England in the United Kingdom and the Reformed Episcopal Church in the United States. Both bodies would adopt revised liturgies. The REC would launch a mission in the United Kingdom and this mission and the FCE would eventually unite to form what is the modern-day FCE. The FCE would produce the 1956 FCE Prayer Book, a revision of the 1662 Prayer Book which moves that book in a more Evangelical direction.

In 1861 the Committee of the Liturgical Amendment Society (Ireland) With the Assistance of a Number of the Clergy and Laity in England and Ireland drew up proposed amendments to The Book of Common Prayer, which, if they had been adopted, would have moved the 1662 Prayer Book in a more Protestant direction. Among the changes that they proposed was the option of reading the Summary of the Law in place of the Ten Commandment. They did not, however, consider to be appropriate the 1789 American Prayer Book’s option of reading the Summary of the Law in addition to the Ten Commandments. They also sought to restore the original 1552 language of the Declaration on Kneeling.

The Evangelical wing of the Church of England was not the only wing of that Church dissatisfied with the 1662 Book of Common Prayer in the nineteenth century. The Catholic Revival that the Oxford Movement initiated would result in a desire for reconciliation and reunification with the Church of Rome in some quarters of the Church of England. The “Romanists” as their contemporaries called them sought to Romanize the English Church in doctrine and practice to the point where the Pope would welcome the Church back into the Roman fold. They made numerous unauthorized changes in the 1662 Prayer Book and used English translations of the Post-Tridentian Roman Missal. Their hopes were dashed when Pope Leo XIII  refused to recognize Anglican Orders in 1896.

It must be noted that while the Romanists were ritualists, ritualism was not confined to the Romanists and therefore we should not assume that all nineteenth century ritualists were Romanists. Some were Romanists; others had no desire to reenter the Roman orbit.

Dissatisfaction with the 1662 Book of Common Prayer was not confined to these two wings of the Church of England. We see a growing interest in other quarters of the English Church for the revision of the Prayer Book. 

Parliament would authorize two significant changes to the Prayer Book in the nineteenth century. It authorized changes to the Tables of Lessons and the separation of Morning Prayer, Litany, and Holy Communion. 

In 1907 a commission was formed to consider proposals for the revision of the Prayer Book. This commission would eventually produce the ill-fated 1926 and 1928 Proposed English Prayer Books, both of which were rejected by Parliament. Although the 1928 Proposed English Prayer Book was rejected by Parliament, it did see use in the Church of England. Several bishops permitted its use in their dioceses on the basis that the book had been approved by Convocation. A number of the proposals for the 1928 Alternative Order for Communion would be adopted in the 1929 South African Communion Office.

The rejection of the 1928 Proposed English Prayer Book did not bring Prayer Book revision to an end in the Church of England. Rather those seeking to revise the Prayer Book would take a different approach. In 1980 an alternative service book was authorized to supplement the rites and services of the 1662 Prayer Book and in 2000 the Common Worship service book was authorized—again as supplement to the rites and services of the 1662 Prayer Book. 

This approach spared the Church of England the kind of conflict that Episcopal Church experienced when that body replaced the 1928 American Prayer Book with the 1979 American Prayer Book. With the authorization of these two service books the use of the 1662 Prayer Book has fallen into desuetude.

There have been various attempts to revive interest in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. They have seen limited success in parishes where parishioners prefer the older Prayer Book to the newer service books.

One of the major drawbacks of the 1662 Prayer Book is its archaic and unfamiliar language. It no longer conforms to an important principle of Anglican worship, which is articulated in the book itself, and is found in Scripture. This principle is that the rites and services of the Church should be conducted in the vernacular, “the language or dialect spoken by the ordinary people in a particular country or region.” 

Prayer Book English, however, has fallen into desuetude in the country of its origin and is not used widely in English speaking-countries. It is limited to a very tiny segment of the population. The younger generations show little interest in learning it. This drawback has prompted a number of schemes for its translation into the vernacular. Only a few of them have seen the light of day and what is presented as a translation often proved to be a revision.

One of the temptations of translating a liturgy into the vernacular is the temptation to correct its shortcomings. What may be eloquent in Prayer Book English may not sound eloquent in the vernacular. To make a text more eloquent often requires departing from the original wording, phrasing, and structure of the text.

By contemporary standards the texts of the 1662 Prayer Book are often unnecessarily prolix. They contain too many words and are tediously lengthy. They reflect the way of speaking of a bygone age.

The archaicness and unfamiliarity of its language and the prolixity of its texts render the 1662 Prayer Book as unsuitable for the North American mission field. Unlike the United Kingdom, the United States does not have pockets of Anglicans who are still loyal to the 1662 Prayer Book and who contribute to the illusion that there is a place for the book on twenty-first century mission field. There is a place for the book but it is not the place that those championing its use believe.

Interest in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer has waxed and waned in the United States. When the late Peter Toon became the president and CEO of the Prayer Book Society of the USA he was a strong advocate for traditionalist Anglicans’ use of the 1662 Book of Common Book. His championing of the 1662 Prayer Book received a lukewarm reception at best from traditionalist Anglicans in the United States, who were largely wed to the former Protestant Episcopal Church USA’s 1928 Book of Common Prayer. 

In the period leading up to his untimely death and the formation of the second Anglican Church in North America Toon did call for a moratorium on the continued use of the various Prayer Books that the various groups which formed the ACNA were using and urged them to use the 1662 Prayer Book in their place. He believed that these disparate groups’ use of the 1662 Prayer Book would help unite the groups and bring them closer to the central Anglican theological tradition in their beliefs and practices. This proposal met with a largely unenthusiastic response. 

Toon also played a role in the preparation of two service books for the then Anglican Mission in Americas (AMiA)—Services in Contemporary English from The Book of Common Prayer of 1662 (2006) and An Anglican Prayer Book (2008) Both service books were based in part on Toon’s earlier translation of the 1928 Prayer Book into contemporary English. An Anglican Prayer Book contained an American rite and a Canadian rite as well as an English rite in recognition that the earlier book had shown interest in a contemporary language version of the 1662 Prayer Book, while present, was not strong in the AMiA.

The 1662 Book of Common Prayer continues to attract interest in some quarters of the North American Anglican Church. This interest has prompted me to take a close look at the 1662 Communion Service. My own Prayer Book studies suggest that the 1662 Communion Service is a flawed rite, which is ill-suited for use on the North American mission field. This is not to say that the 1662 Communion Service does not have any redeeming features but rather that its shortcomings outweigh its positive characteristics. In upcoming articles in this series, I am going to examine each component of the 1662 Communion Service and draw attention to its strengths and weaknesses.

All Hallows Evening Prayer for Sunday Evening (January 31, 2021) Is Now Online

All Hallows Evening Prayer begins with the Service of the Light, an ancient tradition dating to the second century if not earlier. Justin Martyr in his First Apology, circa 150, mentions the practice of bringing in the first lamp of the evening and singing a hymn of praise to Christ as the Light. The Phos hilaron, literally “cheerful or joyous light” is the oldest hymn that has come down to us and which is not in Scripture. 

Participants in All Hallows Evening Prayer may wish to light a candle at the beginning of the service and more candles during the singing of the Phos hilaron. The lighting of candles helps set the service apart as a time of prayer. The candles are extinguished at the conclusion of the service.

The Scripture reading for Sunday evening is John 15: 1-11 Jesus the True Vine. The homily is titled, “A Branch of the True Vine.”

The dismissal song, Karen Schneider Kirner’s arrangement of Steven C. Warner’s “I Am the Vine” for keyboard, guitar, cantor, and assembly is available from GIA Publications.

The link to Sunday evening’s service is: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/2021/01/all-hallows-evening-prayer-for-sunday_30.html#more

Please feel free to share the link to Sunday evening’s service with anyone whom you believe might benefit from the service.

If an ad plays when you open a link to a video in a new tab, click the refresh icon of your browser until the song appears. An ad may follow a song so as soon as the song is finished, close the tab.

Previous services are online at https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/

 
May this service be a blessing to you

Saturday Lagniappe: The Language in Which We Sing May Spread COVID-19 More Easily than Others and More

Research Finds Singing in Some Languages Could Spread COVID-19 More Easily than Others Singing in German was determined to have the hihest risk of spreading the virus. Regrettably singing in English was not included in this study. English, however, belongs to the Low German family of languages but is not quite as guttural as High German. A fascinating study. I will post more research on singing and COVID-19 as I come across it.

Why the West Is Antihistorical If we paid more attention to history, we would not be surprised by such developments as Christian Nationalism and the Neo-Nazi resurgence. As Winston Churchill observed,"Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters Review: ‘Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters’ by Abigail Shrier

Squeaky-Clean Christianity A G-rated faith has nothing to say to an X-rated world.

Has Your Guest Services Culture Turned Toxic? How can you spot a toxic guest services culture? Like poison, it’s often unnoticeable until it’s too late. But there are three attitudes that might indicate toxicity amidst your team....

7 Easy Ways to Ruin an Otherwise Great Sermon, Message or Talk (and How to Fix It) If you’ve ever spoken in front a group, tried to motivate a team or if you prepare a message almost every week like many of us do, you’ve probably wondered what makes for a great talk.

Strange Authority Speakers: 12 Concerns If any of these are true of your ministry, I would urge you to honestly talk through this post with a church leader or two. If several of these are true of someone you listen to, maybe you shouldn’t be listening to them?

These 3 Elements Should Be in Every Funeral Sermon Don’t preach them into heaven. Don’t preach them into hell. Just preach the gospel for the people who are there.”

How Preaching the Psalms Counsels the Hurting While no pastor can — or should even try to — specifically address every possible hurt in every sermon, much of the brokenness and hurt that people are experiencing can be addressed by applying the Psalms.

Growth in Kids and Parents Co-Viewing Media Dale Hudson shares his thoughts on how churches can take adavantage of these phenomenon.

VIDEO: Children and Family Ministry at a Distance How churches can pivot to help during the pandemic. 

Before You Tweet Criticism: Six Considerations John Piper offers much needed advice on how Christians should relate to others on social media. For Christians relating to others in an ungracious manner on social media is not justifiable in any way if we are truly followers of Jesus.

All Hallows Evening Prayer for Saturday Evening (January 20, 2021) Is Now Online

Saturday evening is traditionally considered the first eve of the Sunday that it precedes. The second eve of that Sunday is Sunday evening itself. Sunday begins at dusk on its first eve and stretches into the evening on its second eve. The Anglican tradition is not alone in offering prayer on both eves. So do the Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, and Orthodox traditions. Baptists, Presbyterians, and other devote Christians also prepare for Sunday on Saturday evening and worship God on Sunday evening as well as Sunday morning. It is one of the many ways that Christians practice their faith. Whether you belong to a particular faith tradition or to none at all, we welcome your participation in All Hallows Evening Prayer.

The Scripture reading for Saturday evening is John 14: 1-14 Jesus the Way to the Father. The homily is titled, “One Path or Many Paths?”

The dismissal song, Craig Phillip’s anthem, “The House of Faith Has Many Rooms” is available from Selah Publishing Company. It was originally commissioned for and was premiered at the 1998 Mississippi Conference.

The link to Saturday evening’s service is: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/2021/01/all-hallows-evening-prayer-for-saturday_29.html#more

Please feel free to share the link to Saturday evening’s service with anyone whom you believe might benefit from the service.

If an ad plays when you open a link to a video in a new tab, click the refresh icon of your browser until the song appears. An ad may follow a song so as soon as the song is finished, close the tab.

Previous services are online at https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/

May this service be a blessing to you.

Friday's Catch: Christian Nationalism and the US Captol Riot and More

Christianity on Display at Capitol Riot Sparks New Debate The Chrstian Nationalist view of church and state strongly resembles that of radical Islam and has no basis in Scripture despite the claims of its adherents. In the past similar ideologies have resulted in large-scale persecution and forced conversions by zealots not just of non-Christians but also other Christians. These ideologies are tied to some of the bloodiest pages in Church history.

Our Attraction to Idols Remains the Same, Even When the Names Change How false worship today resembles false worship in the Old Testament.

Is Now the Time for House Churches? In an Anglican context a corresponding question is "Is now the time for lay administration of the sacraments?" As long as the Anglican Church restricts the administration of the sacraments to ordained clergy, house churches are not a viable option for Anglicans.

Should I Plant a House Church? [Podcast] Daniel Im and Ed Stetzer discuss house church planting.

Meet Generation C It may very well be that in years to come we will talk about the generation that follows “Generation Z” as “Generation C” (short for COVID) as a Bank of America Research report suggests. While they won’t remember the pandemic, it is being surmised that they will be distinct from Generation Z in four ways....

How to Create the Perfect Church Website Before your church’s website can even completely load, the average visitor has already formed a first impression. It takes just 50 milliseconds. In a flash, they’ve already decided whether they want to continue engaging with you (through your site) or move on to the next church on their Google search results page.

Thursday's Catch: Where Two or More Are Vaccinated and More

Where Two or More Are Vaccinated: Advice for Churches in 2021 Five science-based suggestions to gather and worship safely as COVID-19 vaccines roll out.

6 Long Term Problems Churches Only Noticed Recently Here are several realities exposed in 2020 that were not simply a function of the year and will need our attention going forward.

Be Reasonable for the Sake of the Gospel The comments of some "Christians" are not only a serious hindrance to the cause of the gospel, they raise questions about whether the individuals who are making the comments are really disciples of Jesus. They show little evidence of having been influenced by Jesus' teaching and example. Since God alone knowns their hearts and therefore we must give them the benefit of the doubt, their public witness to Jesus leaves much to be desired.

New Kentucky Law Seeks to Protect Born-Alive Abortion Survivors For any baby born during an abortion procedure, Kentucky’s Senate Bill 9, requires treatment “as a legal person…with the same rights to medically appropriate and reasonable care and treatment.” A birth certificate must be issued, and parents aren’t held liable for the actions of medical professionals.

How You Can Help Save the Lives of the Unborn Krissie Inserra offers some very good advice. We can also support the pro-life cause by encouraging the US Congress and state legislatures to strengthen the social safety net of the country and the state for pregnant women, mothers, and children. Lack of resources is one of the reason that women may consider an abortion. Being pro-life involves not only protecting the lives of the unborn but also ensuring all the vulnerable have adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and education.

Stop Multitasking: it Makes you Dumber (and 4 Ways to Improve) Multitasking does not help us manage our time better or to become more productive. Earlier research suggests that the human brain is incapable of multitasking--doing several tasks at the same time but jumps from one task to the next and back again.

Catechism Is for College Kids, Too When confronted with challenges from a world tilted against their faith, students can falter.

How Evangelism Is Kind of Like Fishing (Repost) The three fishermen that Jesus called as his disciples did not fish with rod and reel or a cane pole. They rowed their boat where they believed from past experience that they would find fish and cast their nets into the water. Sometimes they returned to shore with a catch of fish; othertimes, an empty boat.

Wednesday's Catch: Change in the Church and More

8 Things I Have Learned about Change in the Church Chuck Lawless shares some things that he has learned about change in the local church over the past four decades.

3 Keys to Making Change Stick in your Church Change is inevitable. And unless a church creates healthy change in itself, it will soon become obsolete. Numerous empty or almost empty churches in Europe, America’s inner cities, and Canada bear witness to that.

5 Ways Judgmental Christians Are Killing Your Church Jesus said Christians should be known for how deeply we love. Yet studies show that in the eyes of many non-Christians, we’re known for how deeply we judge, not for how deeply we love.

Virtual Healing Groups? One Expert Says It's Possible Rev. Dr. Nicole Martin of the American Bible Society unpacks a unique ministry method.

Half of U.S. Protestant Pastors Hear Conspiracy Theories in Their Churches While Americans have been caught in a whirlwind of conspiracy theories the last several months, many pastors say they hear such unfounded claims from their church members.

All Hallows Evening Prayer for Wednesday Evening (January 27, 2021) Is Now Online

Sanctifying the week with prayer, offering thanksgiving and praise even in times of trouble and praying for others and ourselves, is one way that we dedicate our lives to God’s service. Due to our circumstances we may be prevented from ministering to others as we might wish to do, but we can still lift them up to God in prayer. All Hallows Murray’s weekly services of Evening Prayer offer a pathway to prayer, prayer that rises from our innermost being to the One who is the Guardian and Shepherd of our souls.

The Scripture reading for Wednesday evening is John 13: 31-35 The New Commandment. The homily is titled, “The Mark of a Disciple.”

The dismissal song, Davin Barton’s anthem, “A New Commandment,” for SATB and keyboard is available from Augsburg Press.

The link to Wednesday evening’s service is: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/2021/01/all-hallows-evening-prayer-for_26.html#more

Please feel free to share the link to Wednesday evening’s service with anyone whom you believe might benefit from the service.

If an ad plays when you open a link to a video in a new tab, click the refresh icon of your browser until the song appears. An ad may follow a song so as soon as the song is finished, close the tab.

Previous services are online at: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/

May this service be a blessing to you.

Tuesday's Catch: The Power of Words and More

Why Your Words as a Leader Matter More Than You Realize Words have power so be careful what you say.

Expect Less (and More) of Your Pastor in Addressing Current Events Pastors are not called to offer a running commentary on current events.

Why Are U.S. Churches More Politically Polarized Than U.K. Churches? Last week, Trevin Wax talked with Andrew Wilson, pastor of King’s Church London, about differences between the United Kingdom and the United States in the way our congregants view politics.

Our Politics Is Cracking Under the Weight of a Thinning Civil Society To put it bluntly, our politics cannot handle the amount of weight we currently expect of it. As a result, we are experiencing two unsustainable consequences.

The Great Unraveling The old order is dead. What comes next?

Why Does It Seem Like the Smartest People Are the Ones Who Reject Christianity? [Video] This question will be particularly acute for college students because their professors are often the ones who don’t believe.

10 Questions to Ask when Providing Pastoral Care by Phone or Video Chat Circumstances sometimes limit pastors and other church leaders from ministering to people face-to-face. When this happens, we have to be even more diligent to ensure that none of God’s flock are neglected. Otherwise, the “out-of-sight, out-of-mind” syndrome will likely lead to their spiritual decline, which in turn will make them less likely to return to church once their circumstances change. Moreover, a lengthy lack of pastoral care by true shepherds can also result in a growing susceptibility by church members to the smiles and wiles of false teachers who appear on their TV and computer screens.

Why Corporate Worship Should Include Corporate Confession Serious Christians would never discount the importance of confessing our sins to God as a vital spiritual discipline. They have, however, debated the place of such a practice in corporate worship.

What Are We Willing To Pray? If we look back on our prayer life these last few months, what has it been like?

Clearing Away the Liturgical Clutter

Earlier articles in this series are “A Proposed Supplemental Eucharistic Prayer and Post-Communion Thanksgiving for The Book of Common Prayer (2019),” “Workarounds for the 2019 Anglican Standard Eucharistic Rite: A Guide for Reformational Anglicans,” and “The Early Reformed Eucharistic Prayer, Its Characteristics, Its Use, and Its Implications for Reformational Anglicans.”

I recall a conversation that I had with an elderly priest of my acquaintance more than a decade ago. At the time I questioned the necessity of the additions that he had made to the Prayer Book Communion Service—ceremonies and devotions from the Anglican Missal. He insisted that they were part of “our” worship. I thought to myself, “They are a part of your worship. But they are not part of the people’s worship. Your worship and the people’s worship are not the same thing.” The additions were what he had become accustomed to doing. From a liturgical perspective they were redundant or superfluous. They did not enrich the service in any way. They simply made it longer and more tiresome. 

After having sung an entrance hymn, it was pointless to recite an introit—a snippet of a psalm which had at one time served as the entrance song of the rite. The assembly had already sung an entrance song, in which the priest had “processed” down the church’s short central aisle, proceeded by an aging acolyte with a processional cross. It was time to move onto the next component of the Prayer Book service. The Prayer Book service itself was too long as it was. There was no benefit to making it more tedious.

For the priest in question the additions which he had made to the Prayer Book Communion Service were steppingstones to worship. For him they were familiar rituals that he performed when he officiated at a celebration of Holy Communion. But for myself and, I suspect, for the other members of the congregation, they were hindrances to worship. The other members of the congregation went along with these additions because they otherwise might not have a priest to administer the sacrament of Holy Communion on Sundays. When he did poll the congregation about some major changes to the service, they expressed their preference for the order of the Prayer Book service.

If one strips a celebration of the Holy Communion down to its barebones, here is what is necessary—Scripture readings, a sermon, prayers of intercession, a penitential rite (self-examination, confession of sin and declaration of forgiveness), preparation of the elements, praise and thanksgiving to God, and communion. Everything else in our eucharistic celebrations are accretions that the liturgy of the eucharist has accumulated over the centuries. They are like knickknacks that Great Granny collected and which we hang onto for sentimental reasons rather than throw them out. We do not need them to celebrate the Lord’s Supper. We may come up with all kinds of rationalizations for hanging onto them, but those rationalizations are just that—rationalizations.

We have no need of the Opening Acclamation, the Collect for Purity, the Decalogue, the Summary of the Law, the Kyries, the Trisagion, the Gloria in Excelsis, the Salutation, the Collect of the Day, the Nicene Creed, the exchange of the Peace, the ingathering and presentation of the people’s gifts, the Fraction, the Lord’s Prayer, the Prayer of Humble Access, the Words of Distribution, the Post-Communion Sentences, the Post-Communion Thanksgiving, the Blessing, and the Dismissal. All these elements can be tipped onto the liturgical trash heap. They are extraneous.

We can even celebrate the Lord’s Supper without the Scripture readings, a sermon, and the prayers of intercession. A formal penitential rite was also originally not a part of the Lord’s Supper. The people gathered. The bread and the cup were prepared. The president offered praise and thanksgiving, the elements were shared, and the people left. By the time of Justin Martyr instruction and intercessory prayer had been added to the Lord’s Supper and the deacons immediately afterwards brought the elements to those who were too sick to attend.

Shocked?

How then do we go about determining what should be included in our celebrations of Holy Communion? I have found these questions and questions like them useful in making such a determination.

Does this particular component embody the teaching of the Bible? Does it reflect biblical practice? Is it agreeable to biblical teaching? Is it agreeable to biblical practice? Does the rite need this particular component to embody or be agreeable to biblical teaching? Does the rite need a particular form or practice to be agreeable to biblical practice if and when it is warranted? May the biblical doctrine expressed by this particular component be expressed by alternative forms and practices? If so, what forms and practices?

Embodying biblical teaching and agreeing with biblical teaching are not the same thing. When component of a rite embodies biblical teaching, it gives expression to that teaching. When it is agreeable to biblical teaching, it is not contrary or inconsistent with biblical teaching or practice. While something may not be expressly forbidden by the Bible, it may give expression to doctrine that conflicts with biblical teaching or it may take the form of a practice that is clearly at odds with biblical practice and the Bible contains nothing that genuinely justifies ignoring biblical practice. It is not necessary to follow all biblical practices, but it is important to not ignore biblical practices that may have a bearing upon what we have been doing.

For example, we cannot argue from Scripture that it is necessary to pray that God sanctify the water in which we are about to baptize someone. We find no evidence of the practice in Scripture. But we do find evidence of baptisms in which there is no mention of prayer before the baptism. If there was prayer, this detail is omitted. It was not considered important.

Now we might argue that Scripture does not specifically forbid the practice and therefore we may invoke the Holy Spirit’s sanctification of the water in the font—the normative principle. However, the Holy Spirit’ sanctification is not invoked in regard to inanimate objects in Scripture, only in regard to people. So, invoking the Holy Spirit’s sanctification of the water in font, while it is not expressly forbidden, runs counter to what the Scriptures teach, that is, the Holy Spirit sanctifies people, not inanimate objects—water, bread and wine, olive oil, cloth, salt, etc.

On the other hand, praying for the baptismal candidate does not run counter to what the Scriptures teach. If we examine the 1552 baptismal rites, we will find that the prayer before the baptism is a prayer for the baptismal candidate that he should receive the benefits of the sacrament. It does not petition God to sanctify the water in the font. It is consistent with what Scripture teaches. Later prayers such as the 1662, 1789, 1892, 1928, 1979, and 2019 prayers break with what the Scriptures teach.

After we have subjected each component of the service to the Bible test, we subject it to the Thirty-Nine Articles test, using a similar set of questions. In the preceding case the prayers at the font from 1662 on arguably break with the principles of the Articles of Religion. Article XXIII refers to “ministering the Sacraments in the Congregation” but says nothing about “consecrating” the Sacraments. However, these later prayers give the priest an increasingly larger consecratory role. So, they may be viewed as running counter to principles of the Articles of Religion as well as the teaching of the Bible.

The third test to which we subject the components of the service is the pragmatic test—the test of practicality, flexibility, adaptability, and sensitivity to changes in language, attention span, and related factors.

Our measuring sticks so to speak are the Bible and secondly the Articles of Religion. We may use the 1662 Book of Common Prayer as a measuring stick to the extent that it conforms to these two other measuring sticks.

Our third measuring stick is what will work in this day and age, what the task of making disciples on the North American mission field demands. This is an important measuring stick, next to the Bible and the Articles of Religion.

Except where a particular form or practice is the only form or practice by which a particular doctrine of the Bible or principle of the Articles found in Scripture or derived from Scripture may be expressed, we do not need retain that form or practice. We may use other forms and practices in their place provided that these forms and practices give expression to that doctrine of the Bible or principle of the Articles. This may include a particular order of service or pattern of worship.

We cannot operate from the assumption that what worked in the past will work now. Retreating to the past is not the way to reach and engage the unchurched in the present. When we do that, we are putting our preferences and tastes first. 

Nor can we operate from the assumption that what works in one locality will work in another. If we operate from these assumptions, we will not be faithfully fulfilling the Great Commission. 

This is not to say we cannot use the old where it may be well-used. The key is that what we choose to use has the objective capacity to be well-used in the twenty-first century, and not just clutter our rites and services and serve no useful purpose other than self-gratification. Its use must also not run counter to the teaching of the Bible or the principles of the Articles of Religion. 

Monday's Catch: 4 Ministry Trends to Watch in 2021 and More

4 Ministry Trends to Watch in 2021 There is, however, something to be said for understanding the times in which we live. If we can discern widespread activities and trends in evangelical churches, we should consider their implications and trajectory for ministry in the coming years. Here are four things to watch for....

Young Leaders in Aging Church While this article concern the decline in younger clergy in the United Methodist Church, its findings may be applicable to other denominations which are experiencing a similar decline.

Americans’ Trust of Pastors Hovers Near All-Time Low Could America's distrust of pastors be affecting denomination and churches' ability to recruit younger clergy? Young people are drawn to professions that enjoy public respect, particular the respect of their peers.

3 Strategies for Cultivating a Biblically Literate Church According to Lifeway Research, more than 1 in 4 Protestant church attenders fail to read their Bible at least once a week. Less than half say they read their Bible more than once a week. In our society of literacy and Bible accessibility, this Bible neglect is concerning. The more our people neglect their Bibles the less they will know, obey, and enjoy the Lord Jesus Christ. Less Bible means the body of Christ embodies him less faithfully, less joyfully, and less effectively.

9 Questions to Evaluate If Your Church Is a Holy Church Personal holiness does not appear to be a major concern of today's church if the lives of its members are anything to go on. Today's Christians appear more concerned with pointing out the specks of sawdust in other people's eyes than they are removing the sequoia logs from their own.

The Pivot in Our Mission: Find the Evangelism Style That Excites You (Repost) This article was originally posted on the Exchange in May 2020. How to create momentum for evangelism that will cause believers to engage is a relevant subject today as it was then.

All Hallows Evening Prayer for Sunday Evening (January 24, 2021) Is Now Online

The weekly services of All Hallows Evening Prayer are ecumenical. They employ material from a variety of sources, Anglican, Baptist, Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, and Roman Catholic. Services are normally posted on Wednesday, Saturday, and Sunday evenings and may be posted at other times.

The Scripture reading for Sunday evening is John 13:1-20, Jesus Washes the Disciples’ Feet. The homily is titled, “The Many Faces of Jesus.”

The dismissal song, Rise Up & Sing’s arrangement of Tom Colvin’s “Jesu, Jesus, Fill Us with Your Love” for cantor and assembly is available from Oregon Catholic Press (OCP).

The link to Sunday evening’s service is: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/2021/01/all-hallows-evening-prayer-for-sunday_23.html#more

Please feel free to share the link to Sunday evening’s service with anyone whom you believe might benefit from the service.

If an ad plays when you open a link to a video in a new tab, click the refresh icon of your browser until the song appears. An ad may follow a song so as soon as the song is finished, close the tab.

Previous services are online at: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/

May this service be a blessing to you.

Saturday Lagniappe: Waking Up after QAnon and More

Waking Up After QAnon: How Can the Church Respond? As QAnon and other conspiracy theories begin to lose traction, pastors and church leaders face a decision. We can pretend that conspiracy theories were never really a threat to our congregation and simply move on unchanged. Or we can ridicule the foolishness of those in our congregations who were deceived by conspiracy, driving them out of the church and perhaps into the arms of whatever movement steps into the vacuum of QAnon. Or, we can engage our people refocusing their attention back to the gospel and learn how we need to disciple better.

Inauguration Sows Doubt Among QAnon Conspiracy Theorists Will Americans who bought into the fantasy narrative of the cult-like QAnon be attracted to other forms of extremism in the United States. America's Neo-Nazis are banking on it.

How to Thrive Through Transition The bottom line, hard-to-believe truth is that the path to thriving faith on the other side of any transition—including this pandemic—is plain, but many won’t take it. Jen Oshman's observations from over two decades, combined with real sociological data, are surprising.

A Long Obedience in the Same Direction Rural pastor Matt Hensley writes about the importance of staying faithful.

Six Core Things Teens Need from the Church The reasons people walk away from God are as varied as the individuals themselves. But there are six core things teens need from their churches and Christian communities to help them wrestle with tough questions, live beyond a borrowed faith, and stay strong in a world of tremendous pressure.

All Hallows Evening Prayer for Saturday Evening (January 23, 2021) Is Now Online

All Hallows Evening Prayer was launched in June 2020 as an online ministry to those who are unable to attend in-person services due to the COVID-19 pandemic or who are otherwise home-bound and to those who wish to sanctify their week with regular weekly services of Evening Prayer. Services are normally posted on Wednesday, Saturday, and Sunday evenings and may be posted at other times. 

The Scripture reading for this evening is John 12:44-50 Summary of Jesus’ Teaching. The homily is titled, “Words of Spirit and Life.”

This evening’s second psalm, Heather Sorenson’s arrangement of Psalm 121, “I Lift My Eyes Unto the Hills,” for SATB choir is available from Hal Leonard and Shawnee Press. The dismissal song, Bernadette’s Farrell’s paraphrase of Psalm 19, “Your Words Are Spirit and Life,” is available from Oregon Catholic Press (OCP).

The link to this evening’s service is: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/2021/01/all-hallows-evening-prayer-for-saturday_23.html#more

Please feel free to share the link to this service with anyone whom you believe might benefit from the service.

If an ad plays when you open a link to a video in a new tab, click the refresh icon of your browser until the song appears. An ad may follow a song so as soon as the song is finished, close the tab.

Previous services are online at: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/

May this service be a blessing to you.

Friday's Catch: 4 Reasons Christians Are Disengaging From the Church and More

4 Reasons Christians Are Disengaging From the Church Here are four reasons Carey Nieuwhof sees people are disengaging from the church in record numbers right now.

Evangelicals in a Post-Trump World What does Biden’s inauguration and the post-Trump world mean for American evangelicals? Here are a few likely possibilities....

Creative Ideas for a COVID-19 Ash Wednesday I can remember a time when only Roman Catholics sported ashes on their forehead on Ash Wednesday. Episcoplians read the the Penitential Service from the Prayer Book on that day. Now Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, and even Baptists are Wearing ashes. However, wearing ashes is not necessary to signify our repentance. Deeds that reflect our turning away from sin are.

What Is Worship Music? In our worship on Sundays and other occasions is the music a "ornament" or “an embodied form of praying"? It makes a big diiference.

Connecting Without Live Streaming Everyone is feeling the effects of COVID-19. Many churches aren’t able to worship in-person right now, but some churches have easily made the switch to live streaming. For a myriad of reasons, streaming to Facebook or other platforms might not be a great option—especially for churches with smaller congregations, in rural communities, or with older demographics. Beyond Sunday worship services you might also wonder how to have community with the church when you’re not physically together. Here are some other options to stay connected with your congregation when you’re unable to connect in-person.

5 Ways to Use MailChimp for Church Marketing Robert Carnes explains why he is a fan of MailChimp and how can MailChimp help your church with marketing.

Called to Walk in the Light as Children of Light

For better or worse we all are influencers. We can be a positive influence in people’s lives or we can be a negative one. We can appeal to better angel of their nature. We can urge them to give others the benefit of the doubt. We can draw their attention to the fact that it is easy for us to misjudge the intentions and motives of others. Or we can bring out the worst in people. We can encourage suspicion and distrust. We can feed their perceptions that they have been unfairly and wrongfully treated and therefore are entitled to nurse grudges and exact revenge.

As Christians, as followers of Jesus, the choice has been made for us. Jesus calls us to be a positive influence—to be light and to be salt. We are called to be peace-makers, not nurturers of ill-will and fomenters of conflict.

When Jesus talks about causing division, he is not talking about deliberating turning people against each other and inciting hatred and strife. He is acknowledging that families and communities will strongly disagree over him and his teaching. Some will accept him and his teaching; others will reject not only him and his teaching but anyone who accepts them. They will persecute those who do. We have seen this happen when Muslims and Hindus embrace the Christian faith.

Christians are called to be in the world but not of the world. This means that we cannot retreat into our own fantasy bubbles on our own social media platforms any more than we can isolate ourselves in our own communities and schools separate from the rest of the world. We are called to be witnesses to Jesus, to represent him and his teaching in the world. We cannot do that if we withdraw from engagement with our fellow human beings.

There is a very real temptation to draw back from engaging the community and its unchurched population at a time when we should be actively engaging them even more than we have in the past. This is attributable to a number of factors. One is the rapid social change that that the United States has been experiencing in the last sixty years. Another factor is the political polarization and the tribalization of US society, which has not left American churches unaffected. Politics has become an idol in many American churches, displacing Jesus and his teaching in the hearts of their clergy and congregations. Rather than treating those who have a different political opinions from themselves as Jesus taught his disciples to treat others, they are treating them in ways that are seriously at odds with his teaching. This has led some observers to conclude that adversarial politics has become America’s new religion.

Adversarial politics has no place in the Christian Church. An issue that divides my community is the appropriateness of a statue of General Robert E. Lee on the courthouse square, erected early in the twentieth century and commemorating Kentucky’s Confederate war dead. Members of the community, faculty and students of the local state university, and the town council has called for its removal. They view it as a symbol of racism, white supremacy, Jim Crow politics, and slavery. The county board and what may be best described as a Southern heritage preservation group have opposed its removal. The latter group is made up largely of people from outside the community and even from outside the state. When those seeking the removal of the statue organized protests supporting its removal, this group organized counter-protests. One of the organizers of these counter-protests is local in so far as he lives in a neighboring county.

I know people on both sides of the issue. They are for most part churchgoing Christians. The protestors seeking the removal of the statue view the counter-protesters as bigots, racists, white supremacists, and worse. On the other hand, the counter-protestors regard the protestors as antifa, anarchists, communists, Marxists, and socialists. Both sides have demonized each other. 

I cannot say to what extent the counter-protestors are racially motivated. Those I know want to preserve what they view as their Southern heritage. The accusation that the protestors are antifa, anarchists, communists, Marxists, and socialists is ludicrous. The protestors consist of idealistic students and respectable members of the community. Few, if any, have read Das Kapital. None of them advocate the overthrow of all forms of government or the public ownership of the means of production. They support the local police. What largely divides the two groups is what the statue represents to them.

What I am seeing is Christians using issues like this one to justify the avoidance of dialogue with their fellow-Christians and their withdrawal onto social media platforms where extremism, hate, conspiracy theories, and the advocacy of violence is rife. It is doubtful that these Christians will be a moderating influence upon these social media platforms. The evidence points to the opposite. 

The Bible warns us about the dangers of keeping the wrong company, how evil companions can lead us astray. Doing things in the darkness is not Jesus’ way. We were called into the light to walk as children of light. We cannot let our light shine before others and glorify God with our lives, if we hide in the darkness. We must put our trust in God and walk boldly in the light.

Thursday's Catch: The Tools You Need for Successful Blogging and More

The Tools You Need for Successful Blogging Brandon Cox shares some of his favorite blogging and online publishing tools.

9 Tangible Benefits of Bible Reading for Your Church The more often people engage in Scripture--a minimum of at least four times a week, the greater the effect it have upon key areas of their lives.

Short on Volunteers? How to Rebuild Your Volunteer Team During COVID-19 You don't have to wait until things get back to "normal." You can start building/rebuilding your team now by using some of the following principles and tips.

Why You Can’t Do Social Media Alone By taking a multi-person approach involving staff and volunteers to running its social media, a church can see three huge benefits to its social media.

Why Biden's Bible Is So Big Millions of viewers on Wednesday were astonished at the size of the aging leather-bound Bible used when President Joe Biden took the oath of office, a volume substantially larger than the common pocket-sized editions of Holy Writ.

Wednesday's Catch: The Patriotic Idolatry and More

The Patriotic Idolatry Donny Friederichsen draws attention to how American exceptionalism and Dispensationalist theology have contributed to theology becoming the handmaiden of political agendas in the United States.

The Question is Not Whose Side is God On? ...but are you on God's side?

Failed Trump Prophecies Offer a Lesson in Humility The apostle Paul warns us that prophecies are subject to those making them. Rather than being a special revelation from God, they can be the product of wishful thinking and a fertile imagination. The late Ian Watson, himself a leader in the charismatic movement in the Anglican Church, warned his fellow charismatics about giving more weight to special revelation than to Scripture and urged them to subject all thinking to Scripture.

Why You Should Think Twice Before Sharing That Next Viral Post About Human Trafficking Where children are concerned, one should always check the source of the information. A number of Christians have been misled by innacurate or false information circulating on the internet. As Shayne More warns us in this article, passing on this information to others can have real-world consequences.

Leaders and their Listening: at which of the 4 Levels do you listen? The most basic of all human needs is the need to be understand and be understood. The best way to understand people is to listen to them. Listening occurs at several levels. Charles Stone describe four fundamental levels in his article.

What’s Still Working with Online Small Groups The reception to online groups ... has met with a mixed reaction. Let’s talk about what’s not working, and then examine the bright spots that are working.

7 Deadly Sins of Small Group Ministry I believe there are at least 7 deadly sins of small group ministry. I also believe they are forgivable, but there is a consequence. In this case the consequences almost always affect unconnected people, group leaders and group members.

A Simple Test to Evaluate Your Outward Focus and Evangelistic Potential Take this simple test and learn more about your outward focus and your evangelistic potential.

All Hallows Evening Prayer for Wednesday Evening (January 20, 2021) Is Now Online.

All Hallows Evening Prayer is a ministry of All Hallows Murray and is an outworking of All Hallows Murray’s mission to show and share the love of Jesus. Services are normally posted on Wednesday, Saturday, and Sunday evenings and may be posted at other times. 

The Scripture reading for this evening is John 10: 1-18, Jesus the Good Shepherd. The homily is titled, “Jesus Is Your Shepherd Too.”

This evening’s second psalm, David Ashely White’s choral arrangement of Carl P. Daw Jr.’s paraphrase of Psalm 23, “The Lord My Shepherd Guards Me Well” is available from Selah Publishing. The dismissal song, Mack Wilberg’s arrangement of the American folk hymn, “Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing” for SATB voices and organ is available from J W Pepper. Both are marvelous settings and would make a wonderful addition to any choir or schola cantorum's repertoire. 

The link to this evening’s service is: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/2021/01/all-hallows-evening-prayer-for_20.html#more

Please feel free to share the link to this service with anyone whom you believe might benefit from the service.

If an ad plays when you open a link to a video in a new tab, click the refresh icon of your browser until the song appears. An ad may follow a song so as soon as the song is finished, close the tab.

Previous services are online at: https://allhallowsmurray.blogspot.com/ 

May this service be a blessing to you.

Tuesday's Catch: Dethrone Politics and More

Dethrone Politics When a sizable segment of the population says that political affiliation matters more than religious identity, we’re witnessing something greater than mere polarization; we’re watching the transmutation of politics into religion. For many Americans, it’s not that politics supersedes religion, but that politics is their religion.

How Do Love for God and Love for Others Relate? The Two Greatest Commands as One? This is a lengthy article but it is a worthwhile read.

7 Reasons We Must Be Patient with Church Change Some changes are so immediately needed – like the sudden changes COVID required – that we must move quickly as church leaders. On the other hand, many changes necessarily take longer than we might like – and it’s wise to be patient.

10 Goals for Your Groups Ministry in 2021 Ken Braddy offers 10 goals for groups in your church. As he puts it, "It’s a way of preparing to take on 2021, to fight for the spiritual health and wellbeing of our members, and to encourage people to once again regather for regular Bible study."

How To Write A Worship Song: 3 Tips To Get Started A good hymn or worship song does more than generate worshipful feelings, it serves as a means which God uses to transform our lives.

Monday's Catch: Five Moves Churches Are Making in the Second COVID Spike and More

Five Moves Churches Are Making in the Second COVID Spike Churches need to prepare for the next spike which the health experts are warning that the new, more infectious variant may cause in March. The vaccine rollout has been slow and plagued by a number of problems.

Don’t Drop the Rock! The fall of Christian leader can have a ripple effect that can cause widespread harm.

Ministry With, Not Merely To One of the servers at a former church of mine was born with Downs Syndrome. At another church a woman with developmental disabilities served with me in the hospitality ministry.

‘Paul and the Gift’ Is the Gift That Keeps on Giving Theologian John Barclay distills and updates his game-changing study of God’s “incongruous” grace in Christ.

9 High-Impact Leadership Lessons from 2020 Your outcomes in 2021 will largely be based on what you learned and how you grew in 2020.

Don't Edit Your Prayers The use of formal prayers in corporate worship can shape our expectations on how we should pray. These expectations can form a barrier to less formal, more conversational prayer which many Anglicans and Episcoplaians must overcome in order to grow in their prayer life.

An Unhealthy Craving In 1 Timothy 6:3-5, the Apostle Paul is addressing the character and manipulation of false teachers. In context, Paul is stating that false teachers have an unhealthy craving for controversy. This is, of course, undoubtedly true. However, this principle applies to all Christians as well.

What is the Difference Between an Analog Vs. a Digital Mixer? Both an analog mixer and a digital mixer can deliver fantastic sound, but they represent different ways of thinking about the process and the finished result.

The Early Reformed Eucharistic Prayer, Its Characteristics, Its Use, and Its Implications for Reformational Anglicans

What are the distinguishing characteristics of the early Reformed eucharistic prayers? A number of the early Reformed leaders compiled eucharistic liturgies. Among these leaders was Zwingli. Bucer, Farrel, Calvin, Coverdale, a Lesko, Cranmer, and Knox. A comparative study of these liturgies enables us to identify several characteristics that distinguish the eucharistic prayers used in these liturgies from earlier and later eucharistic prayers. I use the term “eucharistic prayer” in a technical sense. They are eucharistic prayers in so far as they are prayers of the eucharist. 

One of the distinguishing characteristics that these prayers share is that they are not prayers of consecration. We are accustomed to thinking of eucharistic prayers as consecratory prayers. These prayers do not serve that function. Rather they are prayers for the communicants. They may more accurately be described as prayers before communion or prayers before the Lord’s Supper.

Unlike Luther’s German Mass, they do not use the Words of Institution to consecrate, or set apart, the bread and wine for sacramental use. Rather they use the Words of Institution as a Scriptural warrant for the church’s celebration of the Lord’s Supper. The Words of Institution may be read separately form the eucharistic prayer. This is another distinguishing characteristic of the early Reformed eucharistic prayers.

A third distinguishing characteristic of the early Reformed eucharistic prayers is that they do not contain an invocation of the Holy Spirit to bless and sanctify the bread and wine. Reformed theologians did not find any support for this practice in the Bible. On other hand, they did find evidence of the practice of praying for the Holy Spirit to infill human beings. They therefore concluded that such an invocation was not consistent with the teaching of the Bible. Early Reformed eucharistic prayers are, as Peter Martyr Vermigli put it, “prayers for men,’ not “prayers for bread and wine.”

In his First Apology, the earliest account of a eucharistic celebration, written around circa 150, Justin Martyr makes not mention of any invocation of the Holy Spirit upon the bread and wine in his two descriptions of the eucharist in Rome. In the first description the president of the eucharist “offers praise and glory to the Father of all in the name of the Son and the Holy Spirit” and “gives thanks at some length” that those gathered “have been deemed worthy of these things.” In the second description the president “offers prayers and thanksgiving to the best of his ability and the people assent, saying the Amen….” The practice of invoking the Holy Spirit does not appear in eucharistic prayers until later.

Because it appears in these later prayers, some liturgical scholars assume that it was also a feature of the eucharistic prayers in Justin’s time, but Justin’s account does not support this assumption. If such an invocation was as important part of the earliest eucharistic prayers as these scholars maintain, one might expect Justin to refer to it. If anything, the invocation of the Holy Spirit upon the elements in later eucharistic prayers and the offering of the consecrated elements as a sacrifice point to how quickly the early Church fell into error and departed from the teaching of the Bible. Those who argue that because the early Church did it, we should do it too, choose to ignore the fact that ancient error is nonetheless error and its antiquity or wide-acceptance does not make it any less error. Error was rife even in New Testament times. The argument that the doctrine of the early Church was purer because the early Church was closer to apostolic times does not hold water. While church tradition can perpetuate truth, it can also perpetuate error. For this reason, Protestants insist that it should be tried by the test of Scripture as Bishop J. C. Ryle put it.

The compilers of the Anglican Church in North America’s The Book of Common Prayer (2019) in adopting an invocation of the Holy Spirit appeal to what they describe as an “ecumenical consensus.” They neglect to mention that this so-called “ecumenical consensus” does not represent all denominations and churches and does not enjoy the recognition of all Anglicans. For example, An Australian Prayer Book (1978) contains six eucharistic prayers, none of which contain an invocation of the Holy Spirit on the elements. Common Prayer: Resources for Gospel-Shaped Gatherings (2012) contains four eucharistic prayers. None of these eucharistic prayers contain such an invocation. The rationalization that the compilers of the 2019 Book of Common Prayer use for their adoption of such an invocation in the book’s eucharistic prayers is simply justification for what amounts to personal preference. From a Reformed point of view it is a preference for a practice that has no support in Scripture but is contrary to biblical practice.

A fourth distinguishing characteristic of early Reformed eucharistic prayers is that the only sacrifice to which these eucharistic prayers refer is Christ’s offering of himself on the cross for the sins of the world. There is no reiteration or reoffering of Christ’s sacrifice or pleading of his self-offering. They do not suggest that Christians, when they celebrate the eucharist, participate in any way in Christ’s sacrifice. They are the beneficiaries of his sacrifice but not participants in it. They do not support the Lambeth doctrine of eucharistic sacrifice any more than they do the Medieval and modern Roman doctrine of eucharistic sacrifice.

Early Reformed eucharistic prayers may include other elements such as thanksgiving and praise, intercessory petitions for Christians rulers, the congregation, and the sick, petitions for the forgiveness of sin, and petitions for worthy reception but these elements vary from prayer to prayer. A number of early Reformed eucharistic prayers are prolix and wordy but these characteristics are not particular to early Reformed prayers. They are more particular to the times and the kind of formal speech that people used in addressing kings and princes. A number of the early Reformed prayers like Thomas Cranmer’s 1552 Communion Service’s eucharistic prayer incorporate elements from the Medieval Roman Canon such as the Sursum Corda and the Sanctus.

How does the 1662 Communion Service’s eucharistic prayer stack up to the early Reformed eucharistic prayers? The short answer is not very well. This is not immediately obvious because the 1662 Communion Services’ eucharistic prayer uses texts from the 1552 Communion Service’s eucharistic prayer. The Restoration bishops made several changes that negate its Reformed credentials. The changes put the prayer in a tradition that goes back the 1637 Scottish Canon, the 1549 Canon, and the late Medieval Sarum Canon. They substituted “the Lord’s Table” for “God’s board” in the rubric before the Prayer of Humble Access. They labeled the section of the prayer, "Almighty God, our heavenly Father” as “the Prayer of Consecration.” They added the manual acts to the Words of Institution and an “Amen” to the end of the prayer. They added a rubric directing the priest to “consecrate” more bread and wine with the Words of Institution if he ran out of bread and wine during the distribution of the communion elements. They also added rubrics directing that the priest cover what remained of the “consecrated” elements with a “fair linen cloth” and consume them after the service with the assistance of members of the congregation. These changes represent a decided shift away from the doctrine of the Reformed eucharistic prayer of the 1552, 1559, and 1604 Communion Services.

A part of the problem is that we have become so accustomed to these changes after using the 1662 Book of Common Prayer for the last 350 odd years, we do not recognize them for what they are and how they affect the doctrine of the Communion Service. The widespread acceptance of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer and the 1661 Ordinal as historic formularies blinds us to their defects. The two not only have defects but they also have contributed to the proliferation of Anglican service books, which some Anglicans deplore.

We must also remember that the 1662 Book of Common Prayer and the 1661 Ordinal were the work of the Restoration bishops who, with the exception of the Bishop of Norwich Edward Reynolds, were Laudian High Churchmen and Arminians. Both Bishops John Cosin and Matthew Wren had been influenced by the two early High Churchmen, Bishops Lancelot Andrewes and John Overall who were also the founders of the Arminian wing of the Church of England.

Andrewes combined the eucharistic prayer of 1552-1604 Communion Services with the first Post-Communion Thanksgiving from these Communion Services in imitation of the 1549 Canon and used it in his private chapel. He adorned with chapel with many church ornaments from pre-Reformation times. He also placed the table against the east wall and used elaborate ceremonial which included bowing, genuflecting, and kneeling.

Andrewes and Overall were close friends. Cosin was at one time Overall’s secretary. Cosin and Wren played a leading role in the 1662 revision of the Book of Common Prayer.

Among the changes that Cosin had wanted to make to the 1604 Communion Service was to add an invocation of the Holy Spirit like the one that the Scottish bishops had incorporated into the eucharistic prayer of the 1637 Scottish Communion Office. But due to fear of the kind of reaction that the Scots had to that communion office, the language of the 1604 Communion Service’s eucharistic prayer was kept. The introduction of the 1637 Scottish Prayer led to the Bishops’ War and the abolition of Episcopacy in the Scottish Church.

What we see in the 1662 revision is not just a dilution of the Reformed doctrine of the 1552-1604 Communion Services but a movement away from that doctrine. A parallel movement is discernible in the 1662 baptismal services with the addition of a petition for God to sanctify the water in the font in the prayer before the baptism. This petition reflects the influence of the 1637 Scottish Prayer Book and is redundant. Earlier in the service the Ark Prayer states that God, by the baptism of his Son Jesus Christ, sanctified the Jordan River and “all waters” for the mystical washing away. of sin. There is no need to ask God to sanctify what he has already sanctified!

This change would bear fruit in the twentieth century and in this century. The prayer before the baptism would become modeled upon what by the twentieth century had become to be viewed as a proper eucharistic prayer—a prayer with an invocation of the Holy Spirit to bless and sanctify the matter of the sacrament. This view had its antecedents in the thinking of the Usager wing of the Non-Juror movement. The Usagers took the position that the eucharist was invalid unless the eucharistic prayer contained such an invocation. The prayer before the baptism would be drafted to give emphasis to the priest’s role not just as an administrator of the sacraments but as the consecrator of the sacraments—the minister to whom God had at his ordination with prayer, laying on of episcopal hands, and anointing with blessed oil had been give the special gift or grace to transmogrify or confect bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ and to infuse the water in the font with the power to wash away sin. The baptismal rites of the 1979 and 2019 Prayer Books are examples of the kind of fruit that this change would bear.

The baptismal services of the 1662 revision also inherited the problematic language of the baptismal services of the 1552, 1559, and 1604 Books of Common Prayer, which the Tractarians and others have interpreted as teaching baptismal regeneration. This is not surprising since the Laudian High Churchmen had a high view of the sacraments. It is one of the distinguishing characteristics of their school of churchmanship.

One of the results of the disparity between the theology of Anglicans who are Reformed in their theological outlook and the doctrine of the Prayer Books that they are expected to use—1662 Prayer Book, 1928 Prayer Book, 1979 Prayer Book, 2019 Prayer Book, and so on is that they find themselves in the unenviable position of using services books that do not embody their theological views and defending their use of these service books. Among the reasons that they find themselves in this position is the persistence of the belief that everyone must use the same Prayer Book. However, uniformity of doctrine and worship is a lost cause in this day and age. The denomination-wide use of only one service book is a thing of the past. We may not wish to admit it but uniformity of doctrine and worship was illusionary in the days when a single Prayer Book was used. Different clergy used the book differently. They made additions, alterations, and omissions—some authorized and others not. Prayer Book revision was the denomination catching up with its clergy and congregations.

If North American Anglicans who are Reformed in their theological outlook want a service book that embodies their doctrinal views and reflects their worship practices, they are not going to find it in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer or a modern English translation of the 1662 Prayer Book. They certainly will not find it in the 1928 Prayer Book, the 1979 Prayer Book, or the 2019 Prayer Book. They will have to produce their own rites and services. This may come as a disagreeable surprise to some of us but it is a reality of the day and age in which we live.

We can choose to live in a fantasy world in which we imagine that all kinds of people eventually will come out of the woodworks, exclaiming their delight at finding a church that uses the 1662 Prayer Book or its modern-English translation or we can live in the real world, in which lengthy services in Jacobean English hold little appeal for most people, churchgoers and non-churchgoers, and do not lend themselves to online use. Jesus commissioned his disciples, which includes ourselves, to make disciples of all people groups. He did not commission them or us to push a particular service book. The purpose of a service book is to advance the progress of the church’s mission and not the other way around.

If the optional invocation of the Holy Spirit is dropped from the eucharistic prayer in my article, “A Proposed Supplemental Eucharistic Prayer and Post-Communion Thanksgiving,” the resulting prayer is one that fits the distinguishing characteristics of the early Reformed eucharistic prayers. It does not mirror any one of these prayers. It does incorporate textual material from the 1552 Communion Service’s eucharistic prayer with some additions that make it more useful in a twenty-first century context. Does it need some further tweaking? Most likely. But it offers an example of how Reformational Anglicans—those who have been influenced by the Reformed doctrines and principles of the English Reformation and those who have a Reformed theological outlook can draft worship resources for their own use, worship resources that are in line with their own beliefs and which may inspire others to make use of them, others whose thinking otherwise might be influenced and shaped by the eucharistic prayers that they find in worship resources like the 2019 Book of Common Prayer.

It makes no sense for Reformational Anglicans to hobble themselves with an older Prayer Book, even in a modern English edition, that does not serve them well on the North American mission field. This is putting one’s preferences before evangelistic engagement, a practice that has proven over and over again to be to the detriment of churches that follow it. The claim that a Reformational Anglican network of churches or an individual Reformed Anglican church and its clergy are seeking to preserve doctrinal purity rings hallow since the 1662 Book of Common Prayer only partly embodies Reformed doctrine and contains much that conflicts with that doctrine.

Reformational Anglicans need rites and services that embody, teach, and reinforce what they believe. They need rites and services that are understandable and practicable and which can be tailored to the circumstance of the churches that are using them. Reformational Anglicans need rites and practices that are winsome and which will arouse a positive response from clergy and congregations outside their tradition and outside the Anglican Church, clergy and congregations that share their beliefs or which may be led to adopt them. They need rites and services which will enable them to further the cause of the gospel rather than create obstacles to people hearing the gospel and responding to it.

As long as Reformational Anglicans use rites and services that do not reflect the Reformed doctrines and principles of the English Reformation, they will never take their rightful place as the heirs and interpreters of the English Reformation, historic Anglicanism, and the central Anglican theological tradition.