TEC new creed

[Naomi4Christ]

A handful of people in TEC like the New Zealand prayer. The vast majority think its awful.

That minority are still loved by God. Their views matter.

 

[SteveCaruso]

And hopefully there is a system of checks and balances to modify these fringe opinions.

However, what we have to remember is that Anglicanism represents the full breadth of the Christian faith, so there should be mechanisms for accommodating and valuing fringe beliefs.

Aye, we're "big tent." We have lots of people with all sorts of fringe beliefs.

But despite some outsiders' opinions, we do have consensus on a gamut of core issues.

 

[Albion]

What are these different opinions?

That the church is aiming to introduce a more modern-language version of the Lord's Prayer than is found in the current BCP or...that it isn't planning to do that..or that it probably will, but not one as radical as the NZ version.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

That the church is aiming to introduce a more modern-language version of the Lord's Prayer than is found in the current BCP or...that it isn't planning to do that..or that it probably will, but not one as radical as the NZ version.

Confused.com

Do you have a point of view as to the direction you would like to see?

 

[gordonhooker]

Is there a different version of the Lord's Prayer that are different in meaning.

We use two Lord's Prayers in our fellowship:

The main one we use is:

Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins
as we forgive those who sin against us.
Lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom, the power,
and the glory are yours
now and for ever.
Amen.

The other is:

Our Father, who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name;
thy kingdom come;
thy will be done;
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation;
but deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
the power and the glory,
for ever and ever.
Amen.

To me, they are equivalent, but the first one is in contemporary language and pretty much straight from the NIV bible, which is what we use.

I think it is important to update Prayer books regularly. We will always have the 1662, and iirc, all revisions start from there rather than the current Prayer book, so you don't end up with "Chinese Whispers".

Mission is a very important part of our church and telling new people about the Good News of Christ has to be done in words that they understand, and in ways that they relate to.

Our latest Prayer Book 'A Prayer Book for Australia' uses:

"Prayer Book for Australia

Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins
as we forgive those who sin against us.
Save us from the time of trial,
and deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours
now and for ever. Amen."​

I am not sure why we changed "but deliver us from evil," to "Save us from the time of trial" I can only assume it was because the Lords Prayer in Matthew 6:9-13 (NRSV) has something similar.

 

[gordonhooker]

From what I have heard from our local Parish trying to change the our "A Prayer Book for Australia" would be like trying to steer an aircraft carrier with a paddle pop stick.

 

[Albion]

Confused.com

Do you have a point of view as to the direction you would like to see?

Personally, I'm a traditionalist and don't favor changing things that do not need to be changed. TEC has two Communion rites at present and the Lord's Prayer versions found in them seem to me quite adequate to meet the needs of both traditionalists and modern language advocates.

 

[Paidiske]

We didn't have any liturgy at all, not even the Lord's Prayer, and that was at the main Sunday morning service.

Well, it would have been a liturgy, in that whatever a gathering of Christians do in worship is "liturgy." But it might well be an informal, extempore kind of liturgy rather than something formal and scripted.

Is there a different version of the Lord's Prayer that are different in meaning.

I have seen - years ago - something I thought was pretty terrible, which addressed God as Mother and so forth. Can't remember the details now, I'd gone to morning prayer on a one-off visit to this particular parish.

It might be legitimate to think of and pray to God as if God transcends gender, but as far as I'm concerned, if you're going to call something the "Lord's prayer" then it ought to be a rendering of the words of Jesus as recorded in the gospels.

However, what we have to remember is that Anglicanism represents the full breadth of the Christian faith, so there should be mechanisms for accommodating and valuing fringe beliefs.

Well, I'd disagree. Anglicanism is a broad tent, but there's plenty of Christianity that would be beyond the pale for Anglicanism.

For example, there are Christians who don't either baptise or have communion; they are Christian but Anglicans would not consider that they were practising the faith to its fullness. Or, on the other side, there are Christians who maintain practices which Anglicans rejected at the Reformation, and while they are Christian, Anglicans would insist that they are wrong about some things.

So while I have no desire to draw the boundaries so tightly that we exclude people with fringe beliefs, nor do I think every fringe belief needs to find expression in an authorised liturgy.

From what I have heard from our local Parish trying to change the our "A Prayer Book for Australia" would be like trying to steer an aircraft carrier with a paddle pop stick.

It will be easier to supplement with new authorised material. General synod passed a canon to allow for an approval process for new liturgies from the Liturgy Commission. To be authorised something has to be approved by the Liturgy Commission, the Doctrine Commission, two-thirds of diocesan bishops including all the metropolitans, and the diocesan council of a particular diocese. So if your diocese adopts that canon it will be able to avail itself of such resources through that (rather stringent) process.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

Thanks for taking the time to make a thoughtful response.

 

[Mary7]

Our latest Prayer Book 'A Prayer Book for Australia' uses:

"Prayer Book for Australia

Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins
as we forgive those who sin against us.
Save us from the time of trial,
and deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours
now and for ever. Amen."​

I am not sure why we changed "but deliver us from evil," to "Save us from the time of trial" I can only assume it was because the Lords Prayer in Matthew 6:9-13 (NRSV) has something similar.

That is the one they are using here in Mississippi.

 

[Tallguy88]

Do other countries not use the Book of Common Prayer? Despite the gripes I have with the ECUSA, the BCP is not one of them. One concise prayer book that has the basic beliefs spelled out, has multiple complete liturgies, multiple forms of daily prayer, a complete psalter, and is very user friendly. The Catholic Church has nothing like that. Only a Missal would come close, and those have many variants and are often not user friendly.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

Do other countries not use the Book of Common Prayer? Despite the gripes I have with the ECUSA, the BCP is not one of them. One concise prayer book that has the basic beliefs spelled out, has multiple complete liturgies, multiple forms of daily prayer, a complete psalter, and is very user friendly. The Catholic Church has nothing like that. Only a Missal would come close, and those have many variants and are often not user friendly.

Our services are “drawn from” Common Worship.

We put together our own services rather than following a set pattern.

They are different every week.

They have certain elements -confession, absolution, credal statement, readings, sermon, intercessions, offertory and blessing -but specific wording and order can change.

There is a lot of latitude within Common Worship.

 

[Paidiske]

The Book of Common Prayer (1662) is the standard of doctrine and worship for the Anglican communion. The American one is a 1928 (I think?) book which is unique to that province.

But most provinces don't use the 1662 book as the main resource for worship any more. In Australia we have had two prayer books since; the 1978 An Australian Prayer Book, and the 1995 A Prayer Book for Australia. I've really only "worked" with the most recent of those, although I have taken an occasional service from the earlier ones. I see the variants available within it as a strength rather than a weakness (you can choose the most appropriate for your context and occasion), but I wouldn't say it's all that user-friendly; you have to really know what you're doing to navigate it.

I've had some exposure to the latest British resources (Common Worship) and the New Zealand prayer book (bilingual English/Maori) and found both had their strengths. (Frankly Common Worship blows me away at how good it is; there is just so much there to work with).

Because we're now a global communion, and we have as a fundamental principle that "It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, and utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s Word. ... Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man’s authority, so that all things be done to edifying,"

a certain amount of diversity has become necessary to us. And of course, not all Anglicans speak English, and we have as another fundamental principle that the people ought to be offered worship in a language they understand, so that drives diversity as well.

 

[Albion]

Do other countries not use the Book of Common Prayer? Despite the gripes I have with the ECUSA, the BCP is not one of them. One concise prayer book that has the basic beliefs spelled out, has multiple complete liturgies, multiple forms of daily prayer, a complete psalter, and is very user friendly. The Catholic Church has nothing like that. Only a Missal would come close, and those have many variants and are often not user friendly.

Indeed, the BCP was a wonderful and needed development in church history. That's why it was heartbreaking to many people to have the 1549-1928 BCP be shelved in the USA in favor of the 1979 book, even though the new book was given the name, "Book of Common Prayer."

 

[seeking.IAM]

Since I have only every known the 1979 book (and have affection for it), I am curious why you deem it heartbreaking?

 

[Albion]

Since I have only every known the 1979 book (and have affection for it), I am curious why you deem it heartbreaking?

Well, I was referring to what I saw in other people, longtime members of the church. I probably would not use that word of myself, although I did not favor replacing the Book of Common Prayer with a Book of Alternative Services.

There were several reasons for that heartbreak. For one, it marked the end of Common Prayer. The 1979 book is full of alternate settings. That makes for confusion in some people who knew the old book almost by heart, but it's more important that it's no longer Common Prayer. It returns us, to some degree, to the assortment of worship materials that were the rule at the end of the Middle Ages and which the Church of England sought to correct.

For another, the more theologically-minded churchmen were deeply troubled, not so much by the use of modern language as by the switch from prayer that emphasized that we are sinners who have been redeemed by the blood of Christ to an emphasis upon God as a loving Father in general terms.

 

[seeking.IAM]

Thank you for that explanation.

 

[Tallguy88]

Indeed, the BCP was a wonderful and needed development in church history. That's why it was heartbreaking to many people to have the 1549-1928 BCP be shelved in the USA in favor of the 1979 book, even though the new book was given the name, "Book of Common Prayer."

I have no experience with the 1929 book. I've only been to services with the 1979 book and I also have a copy. I like it's Compline service.

 

[Tallguy88]

The Book of Common Prayer (1662) is the standard of doctrine and worship for the Anglican communion. The American one is a 1928 (I think?) book which is unique to that province.

But most provinces don't use the 1662 book as the main resource for worship any more. In Australia we have had two prayer books since; the 1978 An Australian Prayer Book, and the 1995 A Prayer Book for Australia. I've really only "worked" with the most recent of those, although I have taken an occasional service from the earlier ones. I see the variants available within it as a strength rather than a weakness (you can choose the most appropriate for your context and occasion), but I wouldn't say it's all that user-friendly; you have to really know what you're doing to navigate it.

I've had some exposure to the latest British resources (Common Worship) and the New Zealand prayer book (bilingual English/Maori) and found both had their strengths. (Frankly Common Worship blows me away at how good it is; there is just so much there to work with).

Because we're now a global communion, and we have as a fundamental principle that "It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, and utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s Word. ... Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man’s authority, so that all things be done to edifying,"

a certain amount of diversity has become necessary to us. And of course, not all Anglicans speak English, and we have as another fundamental principle that the people ought to be offered worship in a language they understand, so that drives diversity as well.

The current BCP in the ECUSA is the 1979 BCP. It has multiple "rites" for various services with "Rite I" being traditional language and "Rite II" being modern language. In the EC that I used to occassionally go to, they would have a Rite I service around 8:00 AM and a Rite II service about 11:00 AM. I think the continuing Anglicans in the USA use the 1929 BCP, though there are no such groups near me (or else I might have become one, rather than Roman Catholic, back in my seeker years).

 

[Albion]

a small point...but it is the 1928 American BCP which is very much in the style of the preceding versions. The 1979 book you are familiar with represented quite a substantial change from the 1549 through 1928 books.