Liturgical Trends

everbecoming2007 · Nov 26, 2015

Wgw said:
As an interesting aside, I know of an ECUSA parish that used Rite 3 to serve the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. So whereas it does lend itself to potential abuse, one can use it to serve various ancient liturgies not in the BCP with minor modifications; for example I suppose you could serve a Syriac Orthodox Qurbono Qadisho with some tweaking.

I myself wish/hope that rather than representing a sort of watered down 79 BCP or worse, the new American BCP might include a broader range of authentic anaphorae. By authentic, I of course mean those with some established anicent use, for example, those from the liturgies of St. Basil, Ss. Addai and Mari, and what have you, as opposed to certain contrived contemporary anaphorae.

I myself did a study on an experimental BCP with such a system in place which would be usable either by Anglicans or Western-Rite EOs which I might share at some point. I adapted the anaphorae in question into the framework of the eucharist from the 1928 Deposited Book (C of E).

Some time ago I did come across a youtube video featuring an ECUSA parish offering a liturgy which they claimed to be that of St. John Chrysostom. I do wonder if it is really appropriate for us to do this. I understand that different rites of the universal church have at times influenced and borrowed from one another. So long as one rite is not imposing itself on another as has sadly happened in the past with Latin practices and theology forced on the East I do not see this as a problem. Nor do I see any problem with individuals who may choose to adopt certain practices from other traditions or branches of the Church: for example, an Anglican who says the Jesus prayer. But aside from the fact that Anglicans and Eastern Christians do share a common origin in the Christian religion and therefore share certain features in common the distinctive theology, liturgy, and spirituality of the Church of England and her offshoots did not grow out of the same cultures, histories, or patrimonies that have given rise to Eastern Rites. Is it really right for us to adopt someone else's tradition wholesale like that? especially when we have our own?

There are some Eastern Rite Lutherans but in at least some of those situations that tradition arose because Eastern Christians became Protestants and reformed their own Eastern liturgies. This does not seem to be the situation you are describing however. I know that many Orthodox would be very sensitive about any real or perceived misappropriation or maltreatment of their traditions, especially by outsiders to their cultures. Many are highly offended even by Western influences that have appeared in Eastern Catholic rites that were once Orthodox a few centuries ago. I am already aware of at least one parish in San Francisco that claims to offer an Eastern liturgy but it is anything but. If Rite III becomes a way to offer Eastern liturgies there is no doubt in my mind that we'll innovate with those as much if not more so than we have our own, and even more sadly they will not even be ours to tinker with.

Wgw · Nov 26, 2015

everbecoming2007 said:
Some time ago I did come across a youtube video featuring an ECUSA parish offering a liturgy which they claimed to be that of St. John Chrysostom. I do wonder if it is really appropriate for us to do this. I understand that different rites of the universal church have at times influenced and borrowed from one another. So long as one rite is not imposing itself on another as has sadly happened in the past with Latin practices and theology forced on the East I do not see this as a problem. Nor do I see any problem with individuals who may choose to adopt certain practices from other traditions or branches of the Church: for example, an Anglican who says the Jesus prayer. But aside from the fact that Anglicans and Eastern Christians do share a common origin in the Christian religion and therefore share certain features in common the distinctive theology, liturgy, and spirituality of the Church of England and her offshoots did not grow out of the same cultures, histories, or patrimonies that have given rise to Eastern Rites. Is it really right for us to adopt someone else's tradition wholesale like that? especially when we have our own?

There are some Eastern Rite Lutherans but in at least some of those situations that tradition arose because Eastern Christians became Protestants and reformed their own Eastern liturgies. This does not seem to be the situation you are describing however. I know that many Orthodox would be very sensitive about any real or perceived misappropriation or maltreatment of their traditions, especially by outsiders to their cultures. Many are highly offended even by Western influences that have appeared in Eastern Catholic rites that were once Orthodox a few centuries ago. I am already aware of at least one parish in San Francisco that claims to offer an Eastern liturgy but it is anything but. If Rite III becomes a way to offer Eastern liturgies there is no doubt in my mind that we'll innovate with those as much if not more so than we have our own, and even more sadly they will not even be ours to tinker with.

On this point, I have seen some EOs object to the Anglican parish that used the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom according more or less to the Byzantine Rite. I myself think that where Anglicans use anaphoras from other rites, it is best to integrate them into the "order of service" of the Western Rites, specifically the various configurations of Holy Communion one finds in different BCPs; this avoids both the problem of being accused of attempting to poach Orthodox, and of confusing Anglicans used to a specific service structure.

Interestingly the traditional liturgy quotes the Prayer of the Second Antiphon, which is attributed to St. John Chrysostom, but in fact, we also find this prayer in other Byzantine Rite liturgies like that of St. Basil (it occurs in the common "Liturgy of the Catechumens"), and also in the Armenian Rite liturgy.

Albion · Nov 26, 2015

shanethetheologian said:
The LCMS is in love with the children's sermon too. It is one of the factors that first caused me to investigate continuing Anglicanism. I have never seen a continuing parish offer a children's sermon and I certainly have no intention of incorporating it after my ordination. I would relish the opportunity to revise one of the ancient eastern liturgies for use on high feast days but I am committed to the principle of 'common prayer'.

I've never seen one in a Continuing Anglican church, either.

BTW, I appreciate your comment about Common Prayer. This, which used to be thought of as one of Anglicanism's great strengths, seems fast to be losing its appeal, even among Anglicans you'd think would resist. The urge to tinker or to "have one of our own" is awfully strong, apparently.

SteveCaruso · Nov 26, 2015

Wgw said:
As an interesting aside, I know of an ECUSA parish that used Rite 3 to serve the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. So whereas it does lend itself to potential abuse, one can use it to serve various ancient liturgies not in the BCP with minor modifications; for example I suppose you could serve a Syriac Orthodox Qurbono Qadisho with some tweaking.

Aye, that was the point of Rite III -- to allow such things to be possible, on occasion, to enrich traditional Episcopal worship while not being the principal form used every Sunday (as according to the rubric). The original resolution, however, was to have Rite III be allowed as the principal form of worship and allow bypassing the traditional forms altogether. In the end, the final text of the resolution did require that the liturgy be submitted to the Bishop and their approval beforehand.

The original resolution and its clarifying statement:

Resolved, the House of _______ concurring, That The Episcopal Church authorize “An Order for Celebrating the Holy Eucharist” (BCP 400) for use at a principal Sunday or weekly celebration of the Holy Eucharist.

Explanation
In a world that changes so rapidly, making liturgy culturally and contextually relevant is increasingly challenging. Liturgy needs to be dynamic and fresh in order to speak to the culture, and our process for revising the Book of Common Prayer or authorizing new liturgies can be long and arduous. Authorizing “An Order for Celebrating the Holy Eucharist” to be used at principal Sunday or weekly celebrations would allow congregations to create worship that is meaningful to their context. Use of this flexible “Order” is already happening in such contexts as Common Cathedral, and will be essential to the success of prophetic evangelism.

This left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. It said to me, "Some of us don't like the common liturgy. Changing the BCP is too hard. Let us do what we want anyways."

Thankfully, this is what was passed:

Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, That a bishop exercising ecclesiastical authority may authorize a congregation to use “An Order for Celebrating the Holy Eucharist” (BCP pp. 400-405) at a principal Sunday or weekly celebration of the Holy Eucharist, if the Eucharistic Prayer is written and submitted in advance of its use to the Bishop; while the BCP states that the rite “is not intended for use at the principal Sunday or weekly celebration of the Holy Eucharist,” the BCP does not forbid its use in such contexts.

In this case there is some oversight.

Wgw · Nov 26, 2015

SteveCaruso said:
Aye, that was the point of Rite III -- to allow such things to be possible, on occasion, to enrich traditional Episcopal worship while not being the principal form used every Sunday (as according to the rubric). The original resolution, however, was to have Rite III be allowed as the principal form of worship and allow bypassing the traditional forms altogether. In the end, the final text of the resolution did require that the liturgy be submitted to the Bishop and their approval beforehand.

The original resolution and its clarifying statement:

This left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. It said to me, "Some of us don't like the common liturgy. Changing the BCP is too hard. Let us do what we want anyways."

Thankfully, this is what was passed:

In this case there is some oversight.

You are of course quite right; that said, there are several dioceses in which some parishes get away with what one might well term liturgical murder.

Meanwhile, while everyone is busy devising novel ways to celebrate the Eucharist, it seems in the US especially that finding parishes serving choral evensong or morning prayer can be, at best, deeply frustrating. I say this as someone who would attend such services at Episcopal or ACNA parishes when I travel in the US according to their availability.

Padres1969 · Nov 28, 2015

Nope, never seen anything odd. Just a nice standard Rite II mass every week.

Wgw · Feb 27, 2016

Wgw said:
As an interesting aside, I know of an ECUSA parish that used Rite 3 to serve the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. So whereas it does lend itself to potential abuse, one can use it to serve various ancient liturgies not in the BCP with minor modifications; for example I suppose you could serve a Syriac Orthodox Qurbono Qadisho with some tweaking.

I myself wish/hope that rather than representing a sort of watered down 79 BCP or worse, the new American BCP might include a broader range of authentic anaphorae. By authentic, I of course mean those with some established anicent use, for example, those from the liturgies of St. Basil, Ss. Addai and Mari, and what have you, as opposed to certain contrived contemporary anaphorae.

I myself did a study on an experimental BCP with such a system in place which would be usable either by Anglicans or Western-Rite EOs which I might share at some point. I adapted the anaphorae in question into the framework of the eucharist from the 1928 Deposited Book (C of E).

@shanethetheologian and @SteveCaruso , and also @Simon Crosby, I have it in mind to upload a PDF of this or copy paste the relevant bits into the blog feature on this site so you can read and comment; I would be very interested to know if you feel I had properly integrated the ancient prayers into the structure of the Western Rite / Anglican liturgy in a manner that could be regarded as organic and not eclectic.

Padres1969 · Feb 28, 2016

Wgw said:
You are of course quite right; that said, there are several dioceses in which some parishes get away with what one might well term liturgical murder.

Meanwhile, while everyone is busy devising novel ways to celebrate the Eucharist, it seems in the US especially that finding parishes serving choral evensong or morning prayer can be, at best, deeply frustrating. I say this as someone who would attend such services at Episcopal or ACNA parishes when I travel in the US according to their availability.

I'd check the Cathedral in diocese you are visiting. Can't speak for all diocese or cathedrals, but my own has both daily morning prayer and evensong along with a daily Eucharist. I suspect the larger the church, the more likely you'll find what you're looking for.

Simon Crosby · Mar 1, 2016

Wgw said:
@shanethetheologian and @SteveCaruso , and also @Simon Crosby, I have it in mind to upload a PDF of this or copy paste the relevant bits into the blog feature on this site so you can read and comment; I would be very interested to know if you feel I had properly integrated the ancient prayers into the structure of the Western Rite / Anglican liturgy in a manner that could be regarded as organic and not eclectic.

I would really like to see that.

Wgw · Mar 1, 2016

Simon Crosby said:
I would really like to see that.

I'll format it and PM you guys in the next few days.

Simon Crosby · Mar 2, 2016

Wgw said:
I'll format it and PM you guys in the next few days.

Looking forward to it

Padres1969 · Mar 2, 2016

Wgw said:
I'll format it and PM you guys in the next few days.

Can you copy me on that as well. It sounds intriguing if nothing else and I admit my curiosity is piqued.

Wgw · Mar 2, 2016

Padres1969 said:
Can you copy me on that as well. It sounds intriguing if nothing else and I admit my curiosity is piqued.

Certainly. My goal is to produce a solidly traditional alternative to the 2018 BCP, based on my love for Anglicanism.

It comes in three flavours: a low church variant, a high church variant, and an Anglo Catholic variant; the low church version stems from a service book I was developing for traditional Methodistd,,based on Wesley's redacted BCO, when I opted to cross the Tigris into Syriac Orthodoxy.

There is a slight Orthodox influence in these works in terms of the selection of multiple anaphora, and in terms of certsin assumptions about the order of services (which were in fact once true with regards to Anglicanism, the old order of Mattins, Litany and Communion). There are also reccommendations for the specific hymns to be used throughout the year, which reflects a bit the Orthodox typikon (which mandates the hymns).

SteveCaruso · Mar 2, 2016

How did I miss this? I'd love to see it, too.

Feuerbach · Mar 3, 2016

Wait, what?!? I want to be included as well if you please. :wave:

Wgw · Mar 3, 2016

You bet. I'll loop you in.

Wgw · Mar 7, 2016

@Simon Crosby, @Padre1969 , @Feuerbach , @shanethetheolgian , @SteveCaruso

This was originally intended to be a traditionalist liturgy for Methodist use, so I incorporated into a primarily Anglican structure some elements from the 19th century BCP derivative Devotional Services, by the noted Congregationalist minister Rev. John Hunter (which is a beautiful work of liturgy, probably the greatest liturgical text produced in Protestantism outside of the Church of England). At present I am working on adapting this to work with a more purely Anglican order of service (I am debating which to use as the base; most likely I will use one of the Scottish-derived ordos as the basis, owing to their inclusion of an Epiclesis; probably, for ease of compatibility with the large number of American continuing Anglican parishes, the 1928 American BCP).

http://www.christianforums.com/xfa-...use-in-the-anglican-communion-service.199234/

Please let me know what you think.

In the Methodist service book, which is very nearly complete, this was included as one of three communion services, the others being a nearly word for word adaptation of the version from John Wesley's Sunday Service Book of 1786 (which is itself virtually identical to that in the 1662 English BCP, albeit adjusted for use in the newly independent American colonies), and an adaptation of the somewhat shorter order of service found in the 1965 Methodist Episcopal Book of Worship.

When the inability to find a local UMC parish that was both broadly traditional in terms of liturgics (organ music, hymns from the actual hymnal) and theologically conservative (it tended to be either/or) drove me to Orthodoxy, I suspended work on the project, but am now keen to revive it, and also to publish derivatives for Continuing Anglican and generic Protestant usage.

I have an evil plan to subvert liturgical Protestantism by publishing service books that contain subliminal messages promoting Orthodoxy.

Subterfuge is the most fun way to do ecumenical reconciliation, after all.

Feuerbach · Mar 7, 2016

Thank you for sharing. I'll review it when I have time today.

So what you're saying is that after failing to find an appropriate UMC parish if you had gone to a Continuing Anglican parish for Mass you'd be one of us, but the Antiochians got you first? ^_^

Thanks again!

Wgw · Mar 7, 2016

Feuerbach said:
Thank you for sharing. I'll review it when I have time today.

So what you're saying is that after failing to find an appropriate UMC parish if you had gone to a Continuing Anglican parish for Mass you'd be one of us, but the Antiochians got you first?

Thanks again!

There were no continuing Anglican parishes in my area, otherwise I might well have gone that way. However I had a fascination with Syriac Orthodoxy since I was 15, and simply availed myself of the opportunity to make a change.

My belief is that the future of Anglicanism and Methodism lies in Orthodoxy; I think such a reunion would have happened in the 1920s had it not been for the October Revolution. There is btw an interesting connection between John Wesley and Orthodoxy; he was apparently secretly (and uncanonically) consecrated a bishop by the Greek Orthodox Erasmus of Arcadia, something he could not reveal under the praemenuire act, but which he refused to deny.

I regard some of the high church continuing Anglican provinces as functionally Orthodox (I also regard some RC dioceses and eparchies in this manner).

Feuerbach · Mar 7, 2016

I am optimistic that there will be future conversations between Orthodoxy and the Continuing Anglican movement. As the Continuing Anglican churches in this country move closer toward real union (the APA, ACC, ACA, and DHC are taking some big steps) it will perhaps make these kinds of conversations more feasible.

Liturgical Trends

Well-Known Member

Pray For Brussels!

Facilitator

Translator

Pray For Brussels!

Episcopalian

Pray For Brussels!

Episcopalian

Piously skating by.

Pray For Brussels!

Piously skating by.

Episcopalian

Pray For Brussels!

Translator

Continuing Anglican

Pray For Brussels!

Pray For Brussels!

Continuing Anglican

Pray For Brussels!

Continuing Anglican

Similar threads