Prayer Book Revision

Simon Crosby said:

The other beliefs come out in the propers and gospel lessons and the ordinary of the services themselves.

Click to expand...

The congregation doesn't recite most of this, however.

If the Creed is not recited liturgically, we have essentislly done away with it and have ceased to be Anglican

Click to expand...

Albion said:

The congregation doesn't recite most of this, however.

Click to expand...

What they don't recite, they hear and participate in, through prayer. Lex orandi, lex credendi!

Simon Crosby said:

What they don't recite, they hear and participate in, through prayer. Lex orandi, lex credendi!

Click to expand...

Well, "recite" is what you claimed in your earlier post as essential to "Lex orandi, lex credendi," so that's what I replied to. You're free to change your mind, of course.

I think we have to remember the liturgical quality of Anglicanism, "lex orandi, lex credendi." If the Creed is not recited liturgically, we have essentislly done away with it and have ceased to be Anglican.

Click to expand...

Albion said:

Well, "recite" is what you claimed in your earlier post as essential to "Lex orandi, lex credendi," so that's what I replied to. You're free to change your mind, of course.

Click to expand...

Well, I should perhaps clarify "recite." There are several very good choral settings of the creed, by Healey Willan, Herbert Howells amd others, that are sung by the choir, recited by the choir, if you will, and not by the congregation. This is what I meant: the creed must be a part of the liturgy. It must be heard.

CanadianAnglican said:

http://livingchurch.org/greener-prayer-book

This Article on The Living Church caught my eye, and in particular this comment: "[The Rev. Ruth Meyers] described the Nicene Creed as “a stumbling block for many,” and wondered if a creed is necessary during the Eucharist, given the Great Thanksgiving’s robust affirmation of God’s work in Christ. The use of modern creedal texts alongside the Nicene Creed might be a creative opportunity for engaging worshipers."

I'm trying to wrap my head around this. If the Creed is no longer viewed as necessary, and indeed is a hindrance to faith, what exactly does that faith look like?

Click to expand...

How does she see the Nicene Creed as a stumbling block? It's a simple statement of the basic Christian faith. Without what it contains you really start to have trouble claiming to be Christian. Not to mention the simple fact that the creed is one of the uniting articles of faith between several different denominations and churches both inside and outside the Anglican communion. And mind you I'm saying this as a fairly liberal Episcopalian who is in favor of most of the changes that have been made, but like Bishop Curry, this is something that is really kind of basic Christian.

Aye, if the Creed has become a stumbling block, then there are bigger problems afoot.

I have no problem with Nicene, Apostles', or Athanasian Creeds per se.
My only question is this:
Is recitation of a creed a truly ESSENTIAL element of celebrating the Holy Eucharist?
The BCP 79 appears to assume so...since it must be recited at the principle Sunday liturgy.
But, given the fact that we retell salvation's story (in part, week in and week out, and more fully at the Easter Vigil) and in the Eucharistic Prayer(s) we basically hit all the main tenets of the faith, could a credal recitation not be deemed repetitive?

I have wondered this since my childhood. Why stop the flow of a beautiful whole prayer to make a corporate doctrinal profession, and then carry on?

The Creed as part of the liturgy apparently dates from the Fifth Century AD and appears in just about every historic liturgy, Eastern, Roman, and Anglican. The purpose is to assert the faith of the church as asserted by the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople to the exclusion of any non-conforming ideas that might be added to the liturgy later on.

chalice_thunder said:

I have no problem with Nicene, Apostles', or Athanasian Creeds per se.
My only question is this:
Is recitation of a creed a truly ESSENTIAL element of celebrating the Holy Eucharist?
The BCP 79 appears to assume so...since it must be recited at the principle Sunday liturgy.
But, given the fact that we retell salvation's story (in part, week in and week out, and more fully at the Easter Vigil) and in the Eucharistic Prayer(s) we basically hit all the main tenets of the faith, could a credal recitation not be deemed repetitive?

I have wondered this since my childhood. Why stop the flow of a beautiful whole prayer to make a corporate doctrinal profession, and then carry on?

Click to expand...

It is not absolutely essential for the validity of the thanksgiving, the prayers of consecration, no. I believe I've seen weekday masses in the Catholic Church in the Novus Ordo rite that do not contain a creed. But it always concerns me when I hear people asking if something is absolutely essential. It seems like people think if it isn't absolutely essential for a sacrament to be true and valid then we should just chunk it like it's worthless, whatever it is: beauty, architecture, art, certain prayers, and so on. (Not that you're saying that.)

As to repetition that's simply a part of liturgy. That gets it into your soul, your bones, your blood. We repeat some things year by year, others by the season, others weekly (and sometimes daily). We say the Our Father every week. Every day at least twice if you are devoted to the Daily Office. What's wrong with repetition? Should we get rid of the Our Father, too?

chalice_thunder said:

I have no problem with Nicene, Apostles', or Athanasian Creeds per se.
My only question is this:
Is recitation of a creed a truly ESSENTIAL element of celebrating the Holy Eucharist?
The BCP 79 appears to assume so...since it must be recited at the principle Sunday liturgy.
But, given the fact that we retell salvation's story (in part, week in and week out, and more fully at the Easter Vigil) and in the Eucharistic Prayer(s) we basically hit all the main tenets of the faith, could a credal recitation not be deemed repetitive?

I have wondered this since my childhood. Why stop the flow of a beautiful whole prayer to make a corporate doctrinal profession, and then carry on?

Click to expand...

Essential to the Eucharist, no. It's not always recited during daily liturgies so it's not absolutely essential.

But it has been an integral part of liturgies for the better part of 1600 years. And with good reason, yes we retell parts of salvation's story week in and week out and fully during the Easter Vigil, but the Creed serves as a short summary that we retell every week to continually remind ourselves of the overall story that those other bits and pieces we get throughout the liturgical calendar fit in. On top of that it serves as a benchmark of belief and unifying statement for Christians around the world and across denominations. If anyone walks in off the street and witnesses an Anglican liturgy on Sunday they'll walk out at the very least with the explanation the creed provides of what basic Anglican belief's consist of. So it's a reminder both to the faithful and outsiders of what we believe. Repeating that weekly is not disruptive, but rather reaffirming and beautiful in it's own right IMO.

Padres1969 said:

It's not always recited during daily liturgies

Click to expand...

All daily Anglican liturgies do recite at least the Apostles' Creed, if I'm not mistaken, no? All forms of Matins and Evensong across the Communion do. In the Episcopal Daily Office, it's also used in Noonday and Compline as well.

SteveCaruso said:

All daily Anglican liturgies do recite at least the Apostles' Creed, if I'm not mistaken, no? All forms of Matins and Evensong across the Communion do. In the Episcopal Daily Office, it's also used in Noonday and Compline as well.

Click to expand...

Nope. Go to daily noon mass at my parish every Thursday and we don't typically recite any of the 3 major creeds during a standard weekday mass. The Nicene Creed is reserved for pretty much every Sunday (rare exceptions the Apostles Creed is used such as Easter Vigil) and the greater Feast Day weekday masses. And my parish is pretty traditional when it comes to liturgical matters (the congregation pitches a fit when the candles aren't lit in the proper order).

If I'm not mistaken, and any Catholics in the house can correct me if I'm wrong, this is similar to the Catholic practice where the Creed is not typically said during daily mass either but rather reserved for Sunday and Solemnities.

I just double-checked and you're right. For the Eucharist, the rubric is for the Nicene Creed to be recited "On Sundays and other Major Feasts". But for major non Eucharistic daily services (Matins, Evensong) the Apostles' Creed is required.

SteveCaruso said:

I just double-checked and you're right. For the Eucharist, the rubric is for the Nicene Creed to be recited "On Sundays and other Major Feasts". But for major non Eucharistic daily services (Matins, Evensong) the Apostles' Creed is required.

Click to expand...

Ok so that makes sense. Eucharist on Sundays and major feasts, Nicene. Non-Eucharist daily, Apostles. Since a Daily Eucharist is neither, neither creed is required

Albion said:

The Creed as part of the liturgy apparently dates from the Fifth Century AD and appears in just about every historic liturgy, Eastern, Roman, and Anglican. The purpose is to assert the faith of the church as asserted by the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople to the exclusion of any non-conforming ideas that might be added to the liturgy later on.

Click to expand...

Not so much the liturgy; the creed was rather added for catechtical reasons, and it fit naturally into the transition from the Liturgy of the Catechumens to the Liturgy of the Faithful, since after all, if you are of the faithful, you know the Creed, or are in the process of learning it in the case of children. It reminds people of what the faith is.

Note that the liturgical use of the Apostle's Creed and Quincunque Vult is a purely Western practice, although you can find a modified version of the latter in A Psalter for Prayer, a rather good little translation of the Russian Psalter I have in ebook form.

The Eastern churches: Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Nestorian, only use the Nicene Creed of 381 with minor changes in wording, and never with the filioque.

I tend to look at the Nicene Creed as more useful than the other two, since it more clearly proscribes Arianism than the Apostle's Creed, and is not potentially off-putting like Quincunque Vult. Although I have to say, I think we need some off-putting in Anglicanism right now. I like the idea of making Quincunque Vult obligatory at Prime, which appears in some prayer books.

I am working with another member on a traditionalist version of the BCP for the Americans to use as an "answer" to the new one; you saw earlier his integration of ancient anaphoras into his original text for the Methodists. One question of interest we are exploring together is what the ideal Anglican cycle of services ought to look like in small parishes, larger parishes and cathedrals.

Simon Crosby said:

I am working with another member on a traditionalist version of the BCP for the Americans to use as an "answer" to the new one;

Click to expand...

There are a bunch of these already, so I must say that such an "answer" now seems about 40 years late.

In any case, I am no one to speak, as I'm working on a Rite I version of my Breviary which puts Noonday and Compline into traditional language, uses the 1928 Psalter, and has versions of the Rite 2-only Canticles adapted from the Great Bible.

SteveCaruso said:

There are a bunch of these already, so I must say that such an "answer" now seems about 40 years late.

In any case, I am no one to speak, as I'm working on a Rite I version of my Breviary which puts Noonday and Compline into traditional language, uses the 1928 Psalter, and has versions of the Rite 2-only Canticles adapted from the Great Bible.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I did something similar for Compline as found in the 1979 American BCP but later adopted an official version aurhorized by ECUSA predating the new prayer book: it is of course traditional since it predates the modern style liturgies. I enjoy adapting and writing private versions of the Office but do not plan on promoting them. I also compose private devotions that largely derive from traditional Anglican Offices and Eucharistic liturgy. I value private devotions that point toward our liturgies.

everbecoming2007 said:

did something similar for Compline as found in the 1979 American BCP but later adopted an official version aurhorized by ECUSA predating the new prayer book: it is of course traditional since it predates the modern style liturgies.

Click to expand...

Aye that's the 1914 Book of Offices form, yes? That's more than pre-dating the "new" Prayer Book, it also pre-dated the 1928 BCP as well.

The forms for Noonday and Compline that I've put together conform to what's allowable under the 1979 BCP rubrics. There is significant wiggle-room with casting the language into traditional form ("...[In] other services contained in this Book celebrated in the context of a Rite One service, the contemporary idiom may be conformed to traditional language") but not so much wiggle-room in terms of structure.

SteveCaruso said:

There are a bunch of these already, so I must say that such an "answer" now seems about 40 years late.

In any case, I am no one to speak, as I'm working on a Rite I version of my Breviary which puts Noonday and Compline into traditional language, uses the 1928 Psalter, and has versions of the Rite 2-only Canticles adapted from the Great Bible.

Click to expand...

This sounds exquisite and perhaps you might let us incorporate it into our project. The Noonday Prayer and the Canticles specifically would be of great use as we have no traditional source for these; we do have sources for Prime, Matins, Evensong and Compline; we are taking these from the 1928 Deposited Book. The Canticles would be very nice, taken from the Great Bible, as our plan all along has been to put Phos Hilarion in Evensong with a rubric requiring it or the alternative Psalm be sung in place of the Magnificat, with the Magnificat or the alternative psalm replacing the Nunc Dimitis, if Compline is to be served later, thus allowing for the restoration of the traditional use of the Magnificat at Vespers and Nunc Dimitis at Compline common to most forms of the Western Rite (the Phos Hilarion on the other hand is, as I am certain ypu know, but other members might not realize, from the Byzantine Rite of the Eastern churches).

Thus, it will be possible for a parish to divide Choral Evensong into Vespers and Compline, if desired. I like to think of the actual text as Evening Prayer as a service that is essentislly of a vesperal nature, that could be used either for Vespers exclusively, or also, as Cranmer intended, and as is often the case, as a replacement for Compline as well. But I do believe we ought to use Choral Evensong to refer to the combination of Vespers and Compline in the Office of Evening Prayer, and thus we can refer to the various settings of it, like the famed Gloucester Service or St. Augustine's Service or Chichester Service or other settings of Evensong by Herbert Howells, whereas when Evening Prayer is served followed by Compline, we should call it Vespers, and ensure it begins ideally with Phos Hilarion in the Eastern tradition, and ends with the Magnificat, and that Compline uniquely is enriched by.

Morning Prayer in turn is of course a combination of Matins, Lauds and Prime, but in traditional High Church Anglican usage, I have quite often found that Prime is more frequently said before it, as a sunrise service, and Morning Prayer is said before the Litany and Holy Communion. If a parish or cathedral also has said services and multiple chapels this can all get quite complex.

I don't know what the Order of the Holy Cross or our other beleaguered monastics do right now, but a proper monastic usage using, say, the 1928 American BCP or the structurally very similiar 1928 Deposited Book of the Church of England, would be to use Morning Prayer or Mattins as the replacement for a midnight office, perhaps followed by a said service of communion, and then in the morning, serve Prime, the Litany and a Choral Eucharist, for the benefit of pilgrims, day visitors and people using the abbey as their parish church.

Cranmer alas never provided us with a satisfactory office of midday prayer, and the High Churchmen who gave us the 1928 American and English books were not Anglo Catholic enough to try. Only the 1962 Canadian Book of Prayer made an effort at this, but it is exceedingly brief; too short I think.

That, and the traditional language adaptation of Midday Prayer the 1979 American book in the Anglican Service Book (1990), are the only such services in traditional language, and to be blunt the version in the Anglican Service Book is much preferrable to the Canadian version or the modern language service from whence it was derived; unfortunately, it is not in the public domain.

So perhaps you could PM me a link to your version or we might exchange e-mails; if you did grant us permission to use your settings in our book we would give you full credit, and indeed I think we would love to do that as your name would I have no doubt add a certain gravitas to our work, which will itself be released into the public domain.