- Nov 26, 2019
- 13,948
- 7,343
- 50
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Generic Orthodox Christian
- Marital Status
- Celibate
A concern I have, which was prompted by an article on the RCL by a Canadian Anglican priest in the sadly defunct journal Liturgy Canada (perhaps my Canadian Anglican friend @Andrewn is familiar with it) regarding most of the three year lectionaries including that of the Novus Ordo Missae and the Revised Common Lectionary is they delete verses 27-32 from the Epistle on Maundy Thursday. The only exception was the Episcopalian BCP 1979 lectionary, which has now been replaced by the RCL, which allowed for the priest to read 27 through 30, which is enough, but the 1928 BCP lectionary and the 1662 had the priest read from the start of the institution narrative in 1 Corinthians 11 to verse 32, which was also the practice in all other traditional one year lectionaries.
Yet, since the 1979 BCP lectionary, which I quite liked, allowed for reading througj to verse 30, I should like to ask my dearly beloved Episcopalian brethren (which it seemed appropriate to refer to using the lovely Cranmerian phrase which is such a beautiful example of Anglican liturgt), my dear friends @Deegie @Jipsah seeking.I AM and [USER=307356]@PloverWing who I have been blessed to know almost since I first joined the forum nearly six years ago, would any of you happen to know if a priest get in trouble if he read past verse 26 and included the pericope on not partaking unworthily without special prior authorization? Also given that the Episcopal Church practices open communion, how is this pericope interpreted? My understanding from historic Anglicanism is that the announcements of the intention of the priest to celebrate Holy Communion given at least two Sundays out (since there are two forms in the old BCP) were intended to give the faithful time to spiritually prepare, and in modern Anglicanism the laity can of course decline to partake if they feel they have done something that would preclude them, and many, perhaps most Episcopal priests offer auricular confession in addition to the congregational confiteor ante communionem and the confession at Evening Prayer, and the Prayer for Humble Access, which are intended to prepare the congregation.
I know some priests do read all the way to verse 32 despite the RCL change, indeed, given the diversity in Episcopal worship these days, which I like, for example, St. John’s in Detroit uses the 1928 Book (I thought they were Continuing Anglican and was shocked to discover that parish is an Episcopal parish in good standing, but a friend of mine in the Diocese of Baton Rouge told me there were a number of parishes in places like Virginia, mostly low church parishes, some of which being among the parishes which when using either the 1928 or 1979 BCP use Morning Prayer as their primary morning service much of the time; St. John’s in Detroit is Anglo Catholic, but these parishes are using the 1928 lectionary. And you also have parishes like St. Thomas Fifth Ave and certain others which have a boys choir - St. Paul’s Cathedral in San Diego has been trying to revive one since Covid shut down their school, but you also have other parishes with different styles of worship. As I believe I have said before, this liturgical diversity without disunity facilitated by the 1979 BCP and to some extent toleration of the 1929 BCP, and the provision in the 1979 BCP allowing for traditional language implementations of its services, is something I really like (the latter resulted in the Anglican Service Book of 1994). It lets different parishes worship in a manner that suits them.
Edit: I accidentally posted this in another thread, where I thought I had deleted it before posting it here, and my friend @seeking.IAM replied there; I do apologize for any confusion. If any of you get pinged twice, that was my mistake.
Yet, since the 1979 BCP lectionary, which I quite liked, allowed for reading througj to verse 30, I should like to ask my dearly beloved Episcopalian brethren (which it seemed appropriate to refer to using the lovely Cranmerian phrase which is such a beautiful example of Anglican liturgt), my dear friends @Deegie @Jipsah seeking.I AM and [USER=307356]@PloverWing who I have been blessed to know almost since I first joined the forum nearly six years ago, would any of you happen to know if a priest get in trouble if he read past verse 26 and included the pericope on not partaking unworthily without special prior authorization? Also given that the Episcopal Church practices open communion, how is this pericope interpreted? My understanding from historic Anglicanism is that the announcements of the intention of the priest to celebrate Holy Communion given at least two Sundays out (since there are two forms in the old BCP) were intended to give the faithful time to spiritually prepare, and in modern Anglicanism the laity can of course decline to partake if they feel they have done something that would preclude them, and many, perhaps most Episcopal priests offer auricular confession in addition to the congregational confiteor ante communionem and the confession at Evening Prayer, and the Prayer for Humble Access, which are intended to prepare the congregation.
I know some priests do read all the way to verse 32 despite the RCL change, indeed, given the diversity in Episcopal worship these days, which I like, for example, St. John’s in Detroit uses the 1928 Book (I thought they were Continuing Anglican and was shocked to discover that parish is an Episcopal parish in good standing, but a friend of mine in the Diocese of Baton Rouge told me there were a number of parishes in places like Virginia, mostly low church parishes, some of which being among the parishes which when using either the 1928 or 1979 BCP use Morning Prayer as their primary morning service much of the time; St. John’s in Detroit is Anglo Catholic, but these parishes are using the 1928 lectionary. And you also have parishes like St. Thomas Fifth Ave and certain others which have a boys choir - St. Paul’s Cathedral in San Diego has been trying to revive one since Covid shut down their school, but you also have other parishes with different styles of worship. As I believe I have said before, this liturgical diversity without disunity facilitated by the 1979 BCP and to some extent toleration of the 1929 BCP, and the provision in the 1979 BCP allowing for traditional language implementations of its services, is something I really like (the latter resulted in the Anglican Service Book of 1994). It lets different parishes worship in a manner that suits them.
Edit: I accidentally posted this in another thread, where I thought I had deleted it before posting it here, and my friend @seeking.IAM replied there; I do apologize for any confusion. If any of you get pinged twice, that was my mistake.
Last edited: