Skip to main content

A Successor Collection?

I appreciate Bishop Duncan’s address to GAFCON this past week. The text may be found here: http://www.acn-us.org/etc/2008/anglicanism-come-of-age.pdf
Much of what he says is helpful and I recommend it to my readers. My only question, at first reading, is about what he says regarding the need for the Anglican Church to develop “some successor collection to the 1662 Book of Common prayer….” He is right to say that there needs to be liturgical uniformity in the Communion and that much uniformity has been lost (thanks, as I understand it, to the innovative service books of the West – there may be other influences of which I am uninformed). However, must some new “collection” be the answer?

I do not believe there is anything wrong with the 1662 tradition. It has, theologically and liturgically, what we are concerned to be maintained in the Communion. Provision is already made in the rubrics for “occasional services” which allow creative use of the Prayer Book. Why not find the answer in a re-affirmation of the 1662 tradition? It is very hard for us modern westerns to critique our tendency toward the chronological snobbery fallacy.

Of course, Duncan may have in view simply a Prayer Book that is 1662+. By that, I mean a prayer book that keeps the 1662 tradition but provides guidance for other services, such as Compline. There does need to be some kind of direction given by the church for other services beyond those currently in the 1662 tradition to guard against the innovations that the more creative, but less theologically astute, among us always have an itch to develop.

Below are Duncan’s words, in the place I am addressing, with my comments in brackets.

Prayerbook Christians

One of the great losses of Anglicanism in the 20th century was the Book of Common Prayer [well, it has been lost in certain bodies]. We were [and still are] what we prayed. Lex orandi, lex credendi. Until the 1960’s everywhere in the world we prayed the same words, even if in translation. The theological and ascetical [does he mean aesthetical? Surely.] foundation of Anglicanism must be recovered in the 21st century. There can be no Global Settlement without it. How we can have widely varying liturgical texts across the Provinces of the Communion, and still have a common language for prayer and a consistent and reliable theology, is one of the greatest challenges before us [I think the matter for these is already present; is it that great of a challenge? It seems to me most are in basic agreement. I keep thinking, though, that ECUSA people, and their friends in Canada and England, like their 1979, et. al., and don’t want to give up things they’ve grown to like].

Like the emergence of a new Instrument of Unity adequate to a Global Settlement of Anglicanism, some successor collection to the 1662 Book of Common Prayer must emerge [it is this “must” that I question], to guarantee Anglicanism’s coherence and glorious (and reliable) life of worship. But how this shall come about is in God’s gift alone, yet come about it must [yes, something must be done, but must it be altogether a successor?]. This, too, is the future of 21st century Anglicans who are themselves at their best.

I hope you will comment on my post, especially if you see how I might be enlightened in some fashion.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Courageous Leadership - Evensong, June, 2023

The texts are Joshua 24 and Galatians 2.

How Great Jesus Is! Hebrews 7, Sept. '23 Evensong

 

What’s right with the Church

This piece is published in the most recent issue of the St. Luke's Episcopal Church (EMC) Sentinel . I thought I'd pass it along. What’s right with the Church By the Rev. Victor H. Morgan It is not hard these days to hear what’s wrong in the Church. Samuel John Stone words penned in 1866 seem very contemporary: “By schisms rent asunder, By heresies distrest.” A few weeks ago, for example, a friend of mine in England told me she had attended an ordination service in which one of the hymns had been altered so as to remove the word “Saviour”, seemingly because the one ordering the service no longer believed that the human family needed rescue and hence a “saviour”. A second example, on this side of the Atlantic, includes a Seattle female minister, the Rev. Ann Holmes, who recently announced that she was now both a Muslim and Christian. What, of course, makes her announcement so startling is that within Islam there can be no incarnation of the one