- Nov 26, 2019
- 11,128
- 5,685
- 49
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Generic Orthodox Christian
- Marital Status
- Celibate
Indeed, I have come across several of these, and I strongly approve of them. Some of them I encountered in the realm of the Eastern Orthodox churches, one was part of another Eastern church, i can’t remember which, one was Roman Catholic, and then there is the burial program of the United Synagogue (mainstream Orthodox Judaism in the UK under the Chief Rabbinate, which was held in recent years by the greatly respected Lord Sachs). Also in the US, some of the Freemasons have a program like this.
Indeed; the idea seems completely perverse to me. It strikes me as being a bit like simony. In Judaism and Christianity, burying the dead has always been exalted as a work of mercy. Funerals are very difficult for me to do, but it is a sacred and solemn responsibility and an opportunity to practice unconditional love in extremis demonstrating our faith in the Resurrection, and as the Jews eloquently put it, it is an exceptional work of mercy since those who are at rest cannot in any way repay the kindness. To me, refusing to do a funeral for lack of a fee would constitute almost per se simony (since strictly speaking, simony was understood by the early church as buying, selling or profiteering from the sacred mysteries of the Church; Simon Magus was understood by St. Irenaeus and others to have attempted to purchase ordination from the Apostles for his own pecuniary or other secular benefits, and became what we might call a protoheresiarchon by founding the earliest recorded Christian Gnostic sect, which according to Irenaeus and others, did involve what from our contemporary perspective, a sort of Scientology-style sale of sacraments.
Indeed, the interesting thing is that starting in 1892, what had been the very low church 1789 American BCP became more and more High Church, to the extent of a clear and unapologetic Anglo Catholicism being in evidence by the time of the 1979 BCP. Indeed, this is why the very low church Reformed Episcopal Church, which broke off from the Protestant Episcopal Church in the late 19th century because of opposition to the growing Anglo Catholic movement, did immediately start publishing its own BCP editions.
I have interestingly encountered low church American Anglicans online who would hypothetically prefer the 1662 BCP to the 1928 BCP, and regard it as more doctrinally authoritative; at the same time they don’t want to join the Reformed Episcopal Church due to its specific Calvinist-Reformed orientation, which is viewed as not being authentically Anglican, despite the REC now being a member of ACNA. Most traditional low church and indeed Anglo Catholic continuing Anglicans however seem very happy with the 1928 American book, because it accommodated both groups in a manner which I think was more dextrous than say, the 1962 Canadian book or the 1928 Deposited Book. In general, all of the 20th century BCP editions with the exception of the Irish BCP editions, and a few other specific cases, are very high church compared to the , whether we are talking about somewhat broad church editions like the 1928 American, 1962 Canadian, or 1984 Welsh editions, or the New Zealand book, or specifically and largely deliberately high church editions like the 1928 Deposited Book, the 1929 Scottish BCP, the 1938 Melanesian BCP, or the 1979 Episcopal book.*
Perhaps one reason I am not keen on the new 2019 ACNA BCP is that it does not continue along the high church trajectory the Episcopal church was following.
* The new replacement the Episcopal church is working on is causing me some distress, because I fear if its implemtation is imposed the way the 1979 BCP was imposed, it could cause another schism, or more membership decline; the Episcopal Church along with the United Methodist church has historically occupied a very important place in American society, and I find it impossible to consider recent tragic events in these beloved denominations with equanimity.
Upvote
0
