Question about visiting a Rite I Liturgy

[Adammi]

A friend and I were talking about how we have both attended church all of our lives, 35 years between the two of us. That's over 5,000 church services. We talk about the state of Christianity, but we may really have no idea of what Christianity really is because neither of us have been to more than 4 or 5 churches. We are visiting other churches just to see what other people are doing on Sunday morning. We prefer to go to the early morning services, like 8ish. The only Episcopal service at this time locally is Rite I. I'm not sure which rite is the more dominantly attended or emphasized. Will we receive a good sampling of ECUSA by attending a Rite I or should we change our schedule to make the Rite II?
What should we get out of an Episcopal Church in general?
What should we get out of a Rite I liturgy particularly?

 

[pmcleanj]

Most typically, the 8a.m. service is offered as a "service of obligation" -- meaning that people who have to get to work (or to the ski slopes, or to brunch) can get in, get it done, and get on with their Sunday. So it generally has no choir or music and uses the short forms of prayers or canticles when the option is given. I don't know why it's usually BCP (which is our equivalent of the American 'Rite I'): I think we just got into the habit of using the least-contraversial service because the people coming to this service don't have time to argue over things. That was three or four decades ago, and the BAS (which is our equivalent of the American 'Rite II) is hardly contraversial any more, but old habits are hard to break.

BCP (Rite I) is in pre-Elizabethan English. BAS (Rite II) is in late-20th-century English. That's the main difference -- that, and which page you turn to (in the States) or which colour book you pick up (in Canada).

All other differences -- and there may be many -- are more a function of the individual congregation than of the Rite being used.

 

[AngCath]

www.bcponline.org
You can glance through the Book of Common Prayer for the Episcopal Church.

 

[Timothy]

Most typically, the 8a.m. service is offered as a "service of obligation" -- meaning that people who have to get to work (or to the ski slopes, or to brunch) can get in, get it done, and get on with their Sunday. So it generally has no choir or music and uses the short forms of prayers or canticles when the option is given. I don't know why it's usually BCP (which is our equivalent of the American 'Rite I'): I think we just got into the habit of using the least-contraversial service because the people coming to this service don't have time to argue over things. That was three or four decades ago, and the BAS (which is our equivalent of the American 'Rite II) is hardly contraversial any more, but old habits are hard to break.

Of course, the irony is that at my Grandma's church, they offer a Common Worship communion in the traditional language at 8 am. That is, all the liturgical revisions except with 'thee' and 'thou'. They don't object to liturgical revision for theological reasons, just updating the english language of the communion service they object to...

 

[Colabomb]

BCP (Rite I) is in pre-Elizabethan English. BAS (Rite II) is in late-20th-century English. That's the main difference -- that, and which page you turn to (in the States) or which colour book you pick up (in Canada).

Actually, there is considerably more difference than just the english used. The Rite 1 Service is more Penitential, and contains the Beautiful prayer of humble access.

Also pamela, the Rite 1 Service is not just a service of "obligation". Some Christians honestly prefer the Rite 1 Service.

Its an unfair mischaracterization to say otherwise.

 

[higgs2]

Actually, there is considerably more difference than just the english used. The Rite 1 Service is more Penitential, and contains the Beautiful prayer of humble access.

Also pamela, the Rite 1 Service is not just a service of "obligation". Some Christians honestly prefer the Rite 1 Service.

Its an unfair mischaracterization to say otherwise.

I believe she was saying the 8:00 AM service is typically offered as a service of obligation, which usually features Rite I. I don't think she was saying that a "service of obligation" is necessarily a bad thing, either.

 

[Albion]

Actually, there is considerably more difference than just the english used. The Rite 1 Service is more Penitential, and contains the Beautiful prayer of humble access.

Also pamela, the Rite 1 Service is not just a service of "obligation". Some Christians honestly prefer the Rite 1 Service.

Its an unfair mischaracterization to say otherwise.

I also don't get the characterization of Rite I as "pre-Elizabethan English" as compared with Rite II as being in modern English.

Both rites are in modern English.

The differences are those you noted. Rite I is more penitential, more elegant, more personal, and -- most important -- it is the service (in modern language, of course) that comes from the historic Books of Common Prayer, 1549-1928.

 

[higgs2]

I also don't get the characterization of Rite I as "pre-Elizabethan English" as compared with Rite II as being in modern English.

Both rites are in modern English.

The differences are those you noted. Rite I is more penitential, more elegant, more personal, and -- most important -- it is the service (in modern language, of course) that comes from the historic Books of Common Prayer, 1549-1928.

We're fortunate to have both options as opinions vary widely on this.

 

[gtsecc]

We're fortunate to have both options as opinions vary widely on this.

Choice, with regard to the faith is NOT a good thing.
The Greek word for choice is heresy.
We are better off bowing the knee and carrying on the deposit of faith undefiled, than adding or subtracting from it like a narcissistic child, sure his way is better than his mother's.

 

[gtsecc]

One of the problems we are facing is thinking that some criterion other than the unified voice of the church is how we are to decide what to do. We have confused the current popular criterion of our secular world, democracy, as a criterion for understanding the faith. Do we take a vote to see if Jesus really is the Christ as the Jesus seminar did. I am a libertarian. If we could have multiple parishes with each one doing its own thing, for example, clown masses, Rite I, Rite 2, women priests, polygamous priests, [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] priests, etc…, I woudl support folk's "right" to choose. But, the Church has not revealed this as a way forward, so I don't think we can bow the knee to Christ and simultanious vote or negotiate what part of the faith we want, and how much we are willing to sacrifice for it.

 

[higgs2]

Choice, with regard to the faith is NOT a good thing.
The Greek word for choice is heresy.
We are better off bowing the knee and carrying on the deposit of faith undefiled, than adding or subtracting from it like a narcissistic child, sure his way is better than his mother's.

so you don't like rite II?

 

[Colabomb]

so you don't like rite II?

Unless he can find the VERY FIRST Christian Liturgy, under his own theology, he is choosing just as much as we are.

He should probably learn koine greek too. Oh, and cut out the role of priest, because initially there were only Bishops and Deacons.

Oh, and I know that vestments are out, the apostles were fishermen. Cheap tunics for all!

 

[higgs2]

Unless he can find the VERY FIRST Christian Liturgy, under his own theology, he is choosing just as much as we are.

He should probably learn koine greek too. Oh, and cut out the role of priest, because initially there were only Bishops and Deacons.

Oh, and I know that vestments are out, the apostles were fishermen. Cheap tunics for all!

Oh I don't know, seems simple to me. Just listen to the "unified voice of the Church"!

 

[Adammi]

You guys can continue talking about Rite I, but I think that we have actually decided to go for Ash Wednesday instead.

 

[Colabomb]

Oh I don't know, seems simple to me. Just listen to the "unified voice of the Church"!

What unified voice? Which Church?

When i hear the voice of "The Church" (ie the church fathers, who disagreed with each other constantly) I hear cacophony.

And people wonder why some of us go to the Bible above all lol.

 

[higgs2]

What unified voice? Which Church?

exactly!

 

[Albion]

You guys can continue talking about Rite I, but I think that we have actually decided to go for Ash Wednesday instead.

Ash Weds would indeed be a good time for a visit.

Back to the thread...what else should we have addressed for you (since things happened to run too much towards the Prayer Book rites)?

 

[Adammi]

Ash Weds would indeed be a good time for a visit.

Back to the thread...what else should we have addressed for you (since things happened to run too much towards the Prayer Book rites)?

Well, personally, I'm a deep respecter of the liturgy and history of Anglicanism. I have a BOCP and and have used it in my own private prayers for well over a year. I'm a young student of theology and if I had to pick a church with which I most agree, it would definitely be Anglicanism. However, I'm really not interested in changing local churches at this time in my life.

I believe that you can only get so much out of a book. While no expert, I don't think that I could learn much more without actually attending a local parish. So, I'm really looking for the practicalities of what I should know.

 

[gtsecc]

It is not funny or to be taken lightly.
I think there is much we can learn by listening to things the Church has proclaimed with one voice. I cannot for the life of me understand why people think this is such an laughable stance. It is gravely serious - at some point, our choice simply reveals that Anglicans are not the church. We are Christian because it is the truth, not because we like it. Is it hopeless to get anyone to understand?

 

[gtsecc]

Not funny! What is wrong with you?