November/December 1998 Volume 17, Numbers

THE BI-MONTHLY MAGAZINE OF THE SOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER WHICH

U

TOJlllllllKWIIMffllfm

B.C.P.. ORDINAL & 39 ARTICLES CONTENTS

3. Reflections from the Editor's Desk; Am I inconsistent on Formularies? 4. Common Prayer and the Book of Common Prayer: How are they related? 5. FORMULARIES 1. Forms, Formulas and Formularies of the Anglican Way. 7. FORMULARIES 2. The present agony of the Anglican Way. 8. FORMULARIES 3. God's creation: Existence with Forms. 9. FORMULARIES 4. Jesus Christ, form of God and form of Man. 10. The Common Prayer and the Renewal Movement. 11. The first American Book of Common Prayer (1789). 13. The '79 Rehgion of the American Episcopal Church. 15. Archbishop Cranmer, Midwife or Father. 16. An Intemet Mission for an Anglican Future.

What is the Prayer Book Society? First of all, what it is not: 1. It is not a historical society — though it does take history seriously. 2. It is not merely a preservation society — though it does seek to preserve what is good. 3. It is not merely a traditionalist society — though it does receive holy tradition gratefully. 4. It is not a reactionary society, existing only by opposing modem trends. 5. It is not a synod or council, organized as a church within the Church. In the second place, what it is: 1. It is composed of faithful Episcopalians who seek to keep alive in the Church the classic Common Prayer Tradition of the Anglican Way, which began within the Church of England in 1549. They wish to worship the Lord in the beauty of hohness and in a dignified and understandable English. 2. It claims that the Constitution of the Episcopal Church gives to rectors and parishes, as well as individual Episcopahans, the right to use the last genuine Book of Common Prayer in America, the 1928 BCP. 3. It is committed to educating and informing people of the nature and content of the Common Prayer Tradition, and its use for Holy Communion, the Daily Offices, Baptism, Funerals, family prayers and personal devotions. 4. It is involved (in cooperation with sister societies in Canada, Britain and Australia) in maintaining and teaching that Biblical Faith, Order and Morality to which the Common Prayer Tradition, along with the other Anghcan Formularies, witness. 5. It seeks to do the above through lectures, seminars, publications, phone conversations, an intemet web site and work in local churches. Its educational outreach is called the Cranmer-Seabury House of Studies.

TO MAINTAIN THE ANGLICAN WAY SUPPORT THE PRAYER BOOK SOCIETY Especially consider giving specific support to the Cranmer-Seabury House of Studies Send your gift to the Philadelphia P.O.Box. 35220 Philadelphia, PA 19128 Call 1-800-727-1928 for details. MANDATE Editor: The Rev'd Dr Peter Toon MANDATE, Vol. 17. 6. is published six times a year by the Prayer Book Society, a non-profit organization serving the Church. All gifts to the P.B.S. are tax-deductable. Recipients of Mandate are encouraged to send a minimum gift of $28.00. Editorial and all other correspondence: P.O. Box 35220, Philadelphia Pa. 19128. Phone 1-800-PBS-1928. Postmaster: Please send address changes to The Prayer Book Society, P.O. Box 35220, Philadelphia, PA 19128.

World-Wide Web address is http://www.episcopalian.org/pbsl928

2 MANDATE: November/December 1998 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church Reflections from the Editor's Desk

The Rev 'd Dr. Peter Toon AM I INCONSISTENT ON FORMULARIES?

everal readers have suggested that I am inconsistent in my thousands of loyal Anghcans who still want to use the classic BCP, requests for the right use of the classic Book of Common and although the Council was favorably disposed to giving its sup­ SPrayer (1662/1789/1892/1928 USA) within the present Epis­ port, certain bishops on the Council insisted that the classic BCP copal Church and within a [possible] future, orthodox Province of could only be used with their specific permission, under conditions the Anglican Way in America. May I attempt to demonstrate that I set by them. Fr Kim and I, knowing our constituency, had with am not inconsistent? Thank you. regret to say that we were not prepared to agree any form of words which suggested control by Bishops - for such is not the style or 1. With the unstinting, generous and energetic help of the Rev'd the ethos of the historic PECUSA and of the historic Anghcan Way. Dick Kim of Detroit, I sought to persuade the Council of the The notion that a bishop is the chief liturgical officer is a post- 1970's American Anglican Council last year to make a statement con­ notion. ceming their support ofthe right of parishes and priests to use the classic Book of Common Prayer for their common worship 2. In addressing the First Promise movement and the Episcopal and prayer. Synod of America, I have taken a different line of argument. Since they have made it clear that the future of the Anglican Logically this meant that the classic Book of Common Prayer Way is most probably only to be preserved in a new Province was being relegated from its historic position as a Formulary of the Anglican Communion for North America, I have sought of the Anglican Way to that of being another of the growing to argue that they ought, therefore, to retum to the classic for­ list of "altemative service books" on offer within the ECUSA. mularies of the Anglican Way and leave behind the formular­ However, working within the official position ofthe post 1970's ies of the post 1970's ECUSA. Episcopal Church there seemed to be no other way of bringing in the classic Book of Common Prayer as an altemative to the The Formularies of the post 1970's ECUSA are all found bound use of that which is by the decision of the General Convention within the pages of the 1979 prayer book. They are that which is called "The 1979 BCP" (but which Book is in structure, con­ called "The BCP of 1979" and "The Ordinal of 1979" (with a sta­ tent and style exactly the same as the 1980 Alternative Service tus of an historical document being given to the Articles of Reli­ Book of England and 1985 Book of Altemative Services of gion). I do not need to press the point that there is a vast difference Canada). between the classic BCP (1662/1928) and that called "the BCP of 1979" as well as between the English Ordinal (1552-1662-1928) Arguments in support of accepting or conceding free use of and "The Ordinal of 1979." the 1928 BCP today within the Church ofthe General Conven­ tion were these: Since the religion of the 1960's & 1970's has brought much pain and disorder and loss of spiritual and moral authority to the (a) Since many loyal and generous Episcopalians still want to ECUSA, I have suggested that any new Province ought to retum to use it, why seek to stop them? (Note that the Prayer Book the Formularies of the pre-1970's Church and thus establish as its Society is still supported by many people and as the older foundation below but alongside Sacred Scripture, the classic BCP supporters are promoted to glory younger ones come along (1662/1928), the classic Ordinal (1552-1928) and the Articles of to take their place!) Religion as adopted by PECUSA in 1801. In this context and with (b) There was a resolution passed in 1979 at General Conven­ the classic foundation, the Province could then allow the use of tion allowing the use ofthe 1928 BCP when the priest and Books ofAltemative Services and the new Ordinal as long as they parish informed the local bishop of their intention and re­ were interpreted within the doctrinal foundation of the classic For­ ceived his blessing. mularies. (c) Once a prayer book has been through the long process of 3. My apparent inconsistency relates to pressing for the use of the acceptance (including two General Conventions) then that classic BCP in two different ecclesiastical contexts. I desire prayer book is always a prayer book of the Episcopal that people be given freedom to worship the Father through Church, even if it is not the current edition of it. Therefore the Son and with the Holy Spirit in the communion ofthe saints the 1928 BCP is a book in print and ready to be used and as their brothers and sisters in Christ have done in English in those who decide to use it will tell the bishop of their de­ the Anglican Way since the 1540's. The classic BCP is printed cision. in over 150 languages and each day it is used in many of these. I want freedom for American Episcopalians to be authentic Although Bishop Stanton of the American Anglican Council Anglicans. #• was very receptive to what Fr. Kim and I put to him on behalf of the

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: November/December 1998 3 the Church of England and of the Anghcan Communion of Churches to the worship and service of the Father almighty through His only THE begotten Son and with the Holy Spirit. Lex orandi, lex credendi, the law of praying is the law of believing, and the law of believing COMMON PRAYER is the law of praying, is a principle that is fundamental to the Angh­ can Way. AND BOOKS OF Variations in the Book of Common Prayer through its various editions in Enghsh and its existence in 150 other languages (begin­ ning with the Latin in the early days of Elizabeth I when Latin was COMMON PRAYER the common tongue of the universities and schools) are to be ex­ pected. However, they do not take away from the commitment to the godly order for all, from archbishop to new members and from "here is One Common Prayer of the Anghcan Way and it is king/president to lowly peasant, from woman to man and from teen­ expressed in the various editions of the Books of Common ager to grandparents. A Prayer (editions from the English 1549/1552 through to the The BOOK of Common Prayer is therefore the written expres­ Canadian BCP of 1959/62) and in over 150 languages. sion of the content of the Common Prayer. The BOOK can always The Common Prayer is a biblical, traditional and godly way be gently adapted and developed according to the basic principles for the congregation, Christian family and individual, baptized be­ of the Common Prayer itself. And this is what was intended in the liever to relate to God the Holy Trinity as the disciples of Christ revision process begun in the 1950's and 1960's in the Episcopal Jesus, the Lord, in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church Church of the USA. Had the work continued as it had begun (and within God's world, for 365 days a year and for every year of the not taken a very different track) then we would have had (I think) a present age. revised Book of Common Prayer for America in a language like that of the RSV and with such additions as, for example, liturgies The basis of the Common Prayer is the daily offering of praise for Holy Week. through the daily offices wherein the psalms (the prayers of Jesus Christ) are central and so is the meditative reading of the Holy The genius of the Anglican Way with its reformed catholic Scriptures. Linked to this is the petitionary and intercessory prayer character as a jurisdiction of the one, holy, cathoUc and apostolic of the Litany and the celebration of the symbolic meal of the new Church is the Common Prayer. It provides for God's people a dis­ covenant in the Eucharist each Lord's Day and on other holy days. ciplined, godly and biblical way of being worshipping and praying In the Holy Communion the church is fed and strengthened by heav­ Christians in an evil age, and in preparation for the joy and satis­ enly manna as she communes with her Bridegroom. factions of the life of the age to come as the redeemed people of God. Then in the Common Prayer there is provision for the entry into the world (the churching of women), the entry into the church When, as in the ECUSA since the 1970's, the Common Prayer of God (holy baptism & confirmation), the entry into the state of is set aside and in its place we get the commendation of variety in matrimony together with the visitation ofthe sick, the burial ofthe discipline and doctrine via a "Book ofAltemative Services" as the dead, and so on. Here is a total way for the faithful people of God new lex orandi, then we know that a major paradigm change has on this earth. occurred in the basis of the life of this Church. The new lex orandi has produced a lex credendi ofthe new Episcopal Church, and it is Obviously this Common Prayer is common because it is the summarized in "An Outline of the Faith" within the 1979 prayer norm for ALL wherever they are and whatever their status in life. book. It is seen practically in the continuing doctrinal changes which There can be a minimal participation or a maximal participation by began in the 1970's and continue into the 1990's. persons, families and congregations. The basic stmcture and uni­ formity are necessary in order to train us in good habits and right Where a new "Book of altemative forms & rites" ( as in the discipline; they are also necessary to help us know what is freedom English ASB or the Canadian BAS) is placed alongside but below and how it is to be exercised within our duty to God and our the classic BCP then the status and use of the new services is to be neighbour. received within the received doctrinal tradition ofthe classic BCP. The new are not intended to erase or cancel the classic ones: rather So the Common Prayer is a godly order for the people of the they are intended to supplement them. However, they can be (and Anglican Way and it is expressed and set forth in a series of edi­ have been) misused and treated as if they were not supplementary. tions of The Book of Common Prayer in English (1549 through to 1962) as well as in many editions in many languages around the Though the ECUSA calls its '79 book. The BCP, the ECUSA world (in most of these editions the basis is the 1662 BCP to which is not any longer officially committed to the Common Prayer. Rather, local prayers and forms are added). The latest edition of this Book at best it is committed to services which have a common stracture in the USAis 1928, which is arevision oftheAmerican 1789/1892 but wherein is great variety. BCP — which is itself an adaptation to American needs of the 1662 A call for a retum to the Common Prayer is therefore nothing BCP, which itself is a revised edition of the 1552/1559 BCP. to do with a 1662 or 1928 Prayer Book Fundamentalism. It is a call The Book of Common Prayer has been always a Formulary of to retum to the biblical Christianity ofthe classic Anglican Way, of the Anglican Way since it expresses the doctrinal commitment of which one formulary is the traditional Book of Common Prayer. +

4 MANDATE: November/December 1998 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church o live a Christian life is to live the pattem of Christ, spiritu­ ally, physically, and morally. It is to live according to the Tforms the Church has received from her Master and estab­ lished in obedience to him, to the glory of the Father and the con­ version of the nations of the world. Thus, St. Paul summarizes his instructions about the life and worship of the Church by saying, 1. FORMS, FORMUL "Let all things be done decently and in order" (1 Corinthians 14:40). AND FORMULARIES According to the form St. Paul's "in order" is kata taxin, which also means "accord­ OF THE ANGLICAN WAY ing to the accustomed or given form." We retain the Greek word taxis in Enghsh, as the first element of the word taxidermy, which means the arrangement of an animal skin over a form. The sense of tian forms of thought, word, and deed in the life of the Church. The what St. Paul wrote, then, is not "according to some form," but ancient liturgies are formularies, giving shape to the universal wor­ "according to a particular, proper form." Just as a taxidermist is ship of the Christian Church and demonstrating the permissible lim­ expected to arrange the skin of a bird in the form of a bird, and not its of local embellishments and emphases within a single, perma­ in the form of something else, the Church is expected to arrange nent order of divine worship. her life in the form that Christ has given his Church, through his No ecclesiastical body on earth has the authority to change Apostles. Any other form would be, at best, a misunderstanding of these formularies as they have been received by the undivided the form and nature of the Church, as if a taxidermist did not recog­ Church without demonstrating first to a similarly undivided Church nize that he had been given the skin of a bird and tried to mount it that some error, demonstrable from Holy Scripture, has been made on the form of a rabbit. At worst, a knowing effort to substitute a in them. Local and regional churches do retain the authority to adopt different form for that given by Christ through the Apostles would subordinate formularies of their own, but only if their local formu­ be a denial of Christ himself. laries are in agreement with the formularies of the undivided Church. Thus, the formulas of Christianity do matter, because they are the means of maintaining and living the forms given by Jesus Christ The Forms of the Anglican Way to his Church. And it was the practical necessity of preserving the At the time of the Reformation in the 16th century, the Church formulas that maintain the forms of Christian life that gave rise to of England produced certain formularies. These are the Book of written records ofthe formulas, call formularies. A formulary is "a Common Prayer, the Ordinal, and the Thirty-Nine Articles of Reli­ collection or system of formulas; a statement drawn up in formu­ gion, supplemented in 1603 by a revised code of local canon law. las; a document containing the set form or forms according to which She took this action on the basis of her status as a national church, something is to be done (especially one that contains prescribed in two provinces, in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of forms of religious belief or ritual)" (OED). Jesus Christ. A formulary It is usual to refer to the religion of the Church of England, and of the national churches derived from her as "Anglican," from the In Latin, a "formulary" was originally a person, a lawyer Latin title Ecclesia Anglicana (or "English Church)" used in medi­ (formularius) skilled in the formulas that expressed and maintained eval documents. It is important to recognize, however, that her life the law. When St. Paul and later St. Clement of Rome intervened in in the one Church of Jesus Christ began when Britain was a prov­ the Church of Corinth, they called on the Corinthians to maintain ince of the Roman Empire and centaries before the Angles and Sax­ their Christian belief and practice according to the forms and for­ ons arrived to call their new home "Angleland." Thus, it is a simple mulas that the Church had received from Christ. The Apostle and error of fact to claim that the Anglican Church "began" in the Ref­ the Apostolic Father did the duty of a formularius, but Apostles and ormation, or even with the late 6th century mission of St. August­ Church Fathers are not immortal. ine to evangelize the newly arrived Anglo-Saxon pagans. The bish­ More was needed than their personal gifts and prestige to main­ ops of a five-centuries-old Christian Church met Augustine on the tain the proper form of the Church. It was necessary to write down beach. the Apostles' and Fathers' teaching as "formularies," just as it had The existence of the Church of England at the time of the Ref­ been necessary to write down the Apostolic preaching of the Gos­ ormation cannot be in doubt, so the purpose of the Anglican formu­ pel from which the formulas ofthe Christian Faith are derived. The laries of that period cannot have been to call her into being. Rather, Gospel, along with the rest of Scripture, is primary, of course. What the Anglican formularies were devised to preserve the forms and is derived can never be of precisely the same authority as that from formulas ofthe doctrine, discipline, and worship that the Church of which it is derived. Nevertheless, the written formularies of the England had received in and from the undivided Church. To the Church are authoritative and binding since they are the product of extent that they were controversial, they were so because they ad­ the apostolic ministers to whom Jesus Christ entrusted his Church dressed the controversies of that period over innovations introduced and upon whom the Holy Ghost descended for their guidance in all into the Westem Church during the Middle Ages and the constantly truth. expanding claims of the Bishop of Rome to universal ordinary au­ The ecumenical Creeds are examples of formularies, since thority over every Christian church in the world. they maintain the formulas in words for summarizing and express­ ing the Tmth revealed in the Holy Scriptures. The codes of canon law are formularies, preserving the formulas that maintain the Chris- FORMULARIES continued on page 6

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: November/December 1998 5 FORMULARIES continued from page 5

Widespread calls for a "reformation" of the Church, as a re­ The formulas that govern these matters are simple. To be a true tum to Scriptural, apostolic, and patristic norms within Christian­ local church is to obey the formularies ofthe undivided Church. To ity, had issued from virtually every national church in the West for be a true Anglican church is to obey the Anglican formularies pro­ centuries before the actual English Reformation. In the event, the duced to maintain the ancient order within the Anglican Way. + English reformers proceeded on the basis of the Scriptures them­ selves, understood according to the faith and practice of the undi­ L.R.T. vided Church as recorded in the ancient formularies. The formular­ ies of the Enghsh Reformation, therefore, were aimed precisely against innovation. They are merely reassertions and reiterations of the formulas and forms that had constituted the order of the undi­ vided Church. WITH THY SPIRIT Articles, Prayer Book and Ordinal The Thirty-Nine Articles, for example, are neither a new creed hy do we keep on saying, "And also with you" nor a new confession of faith. The ecumenical Creeds are still the when it ought to be "And with your/thy spirit?" creeds and confessions of the Anglican churches. The Anghcan Way W of following Jesus Christ does not depart from or add to the Creeds of the universal Church. The Articles are merely an instrument for Notice the the R C Mass.— in five translations of the Latin: ending controversies about the changeless Faith of the Church in V. Dominus vobiscum favor of the settled teaching of the Apostles andFathers, to be found in the Church's universal formularies. There is nothing in the Ar­ R. Et cum spiritu tuo ticles than cannot be corroborated from the Scriptures and the Fa­ Except the English which has " and also with you" in­ thers. stead of "And with your spirit" other major European languages Similarly, the Book of Common Prayer is not a "new liturgy." stick with genuine translations of the Latin. It is simply the recovery of the ancient forms and formulas of wor­ ship and sacramental administration in vernacular English, making Et avec voire esprit. them available to every member of an English speaking Church. The discipline of the Book of Common Prayer is the order of the Und mit deinem Geiste undivided and universal Church, which fact explains why it has E con il tuo spirito been possible to translate it into some 150 other vernacular lan­ guages without a loss of its ability to guide the people of the Church Y con tu espiritu into the form of life that Jesus Christ has given to his Church. The Ordinal, likewise, as a formulary subordinate to the an­ There is no doubt that the Enghsh translation "and also cient formularies of the Church, provides for the lawful and sure with you" is wrong. "Et cum spiritu tuo" is a greeting which transmission of apostolic authority to the bishops, priests, and dea­ can only be made by a Christian assembly to an ordained man cons of the Anglican churches, without addition to or subtraction since the reference is to the spirit of holy ordination which is from the ancient order of the Church. The Enghsh code of canon central in his celebrating the holy Eucharist/Mass aright in law, and those similar codes derived from it in other Anghcan na­ Christ's name. tional churches, is a local addendum to the canon law of the whole "And also with you" seems to have been invented as a Church of Christ. Its central principle is that no local church may translation, and is now justified by revisionist liberals (inside legislate contrary to either the Holy Scriptures or to the received and outside the Roman Church) as such, in order to take away practice and discipline of the undivided Church. the unique vocation and ordination ofthe Christian priesthood, One need not, of course, be an Anghcan for the sake of salva­ perhaps on the basis that "in baptism we all men and women tion. The churches of the Anghcan Way do not claim to be the one alike receive all possible ministries in potential." Church of Jesus Christ, but only a communion of national churches obedient to Jesus Christ in accordance with the forms and formulas In the Apostolic Tradition which points to usage circa AD of the Apostolic and Patristic Church. The Anglican Way does hold, 200 it is "Et cum spiritu tuo." The Fathers certainly under­ however, that a body of Christians must conform to the formularies stood this sentence to be a reference to the presence of the of the undivided Church in order to claim to be a true local church Holy Spirit in terms of the gift of ordination to the bishop or within the one Body of Christ. The Anglican Way further asserts presbyter.. that it is not fidelity to the formularies ofthe universal Church that Why don't the clergy teach the people to respect Holy has caused division among Christian churches. Rather, division has Order and their ordinations and to respond to them by saying followed from unwarranted departures from the forms supported 'And with thy/your spirit"? # by the ancient formularies and additions made to them without the consent of the entire Church that they are consistent with the faith once delivered to the saints.

6 MANDATE: November/December 1998 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church he Preface of the American Book of Common Prayer, adopted Tin Philadelphia, in 1789, contains the following paragraph: It seems unnecessary to enumerate all the different alter­ ations and amendments [in this book]. They will appear, and it is to be hoped, the reasons of them also, upon a 2, THE PRESENT AGONY comparison of this with The Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England. In which it will also appear that OF THE ANGLICAN WAY this Church is far from intending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point of doctrine, discipline, For this new formulary to be Anglican, it must be consistent and worship; or further than local circumstances require. with other Anghcan formularies. It contains, however, merely "traces of what has gone before." The "local circumstances" referred to are explained earlier in the Preface as "in consequence ofthe Revolution." The result ofthe Further, for this new formulary to serve as an adequate basis American Revolution and the adoption of the United States Consti­ for the Episcopal Church in the United States to claim that it re­ tution was to produce a civil state unlike that of any other in which mains a true local church within the one Church of Jesus Christ, it the Christian Church had lived and evangelized. Although the Ameri­ must be consistent with the forms and formulas of the undivided can Prayer Book was adopted before the Bill of Rights, it was clear Church. It fails in this regard as well, since its Trinitarian language, even then that the Church would not be established or headed by a liturgical formulas, mistranslation of the Scriptures (especially in monarch as the chief layman, as had been true in England. the "Psalter"), confused or false teaching (especially in the "An Outline of the Faith"), and unisex "Ordinal" all fall short of the Apart from adjustments to this change in civil polity, however, requirements of the formularies of the undivided Church. the Preface is clear that no departure from the ancient formularies, Furthermore, the adoption of this book and the approval of the or from the particular formularies of the Anghcan Way, was in­ "ordination" of women are clearly outside the authority of any na­ tended by the newly independent American Church. Furthermore, tional church to legislate for its people or to impose its will on the the bishops of the Church of England had refused to consecrate rest of the Church of Christ. These actions are null and void, and bishops for the American Church until the chief American formu­ they cannot bind the conscience of any Christian. The real effect of lary, the Book of Common Prayer, was in agreement with their own these actions was to render the Episcopal Church, stripped of its Prayer Book. proper formularies, "formless and void" (tohuw bohuw. Genesis 1:2) The American Book of Common Prayer (which includes the as a national church of any description. Ordinal, as well as the Articles of Religion as specifically adopted While Anglican churches in other industrialized nations have by the American Church in 1801) was revised twice, in 1892 and not yet gone quite as far, their continuing gradual abandonment of 1928, consistent with the principles of its first adoption. In the years the Anglican formularies or their denial of their binding authority following 1928, the American Church, along with many other na­ places them in similar jeopardy of self-destruction as tme churches. tional churches in the industrialized world, began to retreat from Not to be something in particular, a living exhibit of a living tradi­ the authority of the Anglican formularies. tion rooted in the ancient Church, is to be nothing at all. And it is a lie to call oneself an Anghcan apart from the Anglican formularies. Fatal departures In 1976, the General Convention ofthe Episcopal Church made In conclusion two fatal departures from the faith embraced in 1789. The first was What has been observed in the case of the churches of the An­ the claim to legalize the "ordination" of women, contrary to the glican Way is equally trae of all other local or national churches, Scriptures and nineteen centuries of Christian formularies. The sec­ and of all other communions within the one Church of Jesus Christ. ond was to introduce a replacement for the Book of Common Prayer, All are obligated to conform themselves to the forms, formulas, which it illegitimately called by that name, to be finally adopted in and formularies of the undivided Church. All find their Christian 1979. In hearings at the General Convention of 1997, in Philadel­ identity in maintaining the particular subordinate formularies that phia, Frank Griswold, then chairman of the Standing Liturgical define and give shape to their households within Christ's Church. Committee and soon to be elected Presiding Bishop of the Episco­ The formulas ofthe Christian rehgion are just as objective and pal Church, freely admitted that the American Church had replaced unchanging as the chemical formula for water. Changes in the Chris­ the traditional Prayer Book and that it was the only Anglican church tian formulas do not produce "a different kind of Christianity" any­ in the world to have done so. more than a change in the chemical composition of water can pro­ While this admission surprised some people, it should not have. duce "a different kind of water." God's creation is fixed, whether in As early as 1976, in a review article in The Anglican Theological the creation of water or in the creation of his Church. Review, Aidan Kavanagh, a Roman Catholic scholar, had noted: The Body of Christ will find her peace and unity, not in experi­ First, the Book as a whole is clearly not a mere updated mentation, but in obedience to the forms that God has given. Obe­ revision of its predecessors since 1549 [the date of the dient Christians have everything in common with the saints of the first English Prayer Book]. It is nothing if not a new for­ undivided Church. Those who disobey and deny the forms that God mulary that contains some structural and phraseological has given, and who abandon the formulas and formularies that main­ traces of what has gone before but which goes quite be­ tain them, will have nothing in common but their desolation. # yond it (LVIII, No. 3, 362). L.R.T.

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: November/December 1998 7 God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said. This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man (Genesis 2:21-23). The woman is "made" ("formed" or "built": banah) from GOD'S CREATION Adam's bones and flesh into her own proper form of humanity, which is complementary to that of Adam. Adam does not do this, EXISTENCE WITH FORM since he is asleep. It is God alone who made the woman and gave her a particular form, and it is God who presents the woman to Adam for naming, signifying Adam's authority over her under God. he mere existence of matter is not the whole of God's God shapes not only their bodies, but also their proper relation to creation of the world from nothingness (ex nihilo). There is himself and to one another. Tanother element - form and shape: To summarize, thus far we have seen that everything that ex­ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. ists, except for God himself, is his creation from nothing, which he And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness has given a shape or form according to his purposes, including the was upon the face ofthe deep. And the Spirit of God moved human race. These forms are dynamic, rather than static (as in Pla­ upon the face ofthe waters (Genesis 1:1-2). tonic "ideas" or Aristotelian "forms"), in that they follow from God's In the first sentence, God calls creation into being. The re­ own knowledge of himself and from the undivided life of the Fa­ mainder of the creation account is God's purposeful transforma­ ther together with His Son and Holy Spirit in the Blessed Trinity. tion, through his Word and Holy Spirit, of what exists but is "form­ The forms cannot be static because they cannot stand alone apart less and void" (Hebrew :to/zMw bohuw) into the variety of subordi­ from God. They must be dynamic forever, literally an expression nate "shapes" or "forms" that he wills for it, so that it is made a of God's infinite power, because these forms are an expression of coherent whole. This "whole," which is creation taken altogether, God's active and living will, so that their perfection can only be also possesses a summary, governing shape or form, which St. John accomplished in a right relation with him. Thus, the forms of cre­ describes in these terms: ation are spiritual, physical, and moral. Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy plea­ Enter the Devil sure they are and were created (Revelation 4:11). The devil is not a god who can create or destroy, but he has God's revelation of His mind provided in Scripture allows us been permitted to rebel against God Almighty. This rebelhon is to summarize the overall shape of creation in these terms. It is the distinguished by the devil's assault on the creative forms of God. expression of God's glory in living and in order — even as the The devil rebels, first, against the proper form of angels, seeking to Blessed Trinity lives in an undivided order of divinity, meaning, be other than what God has created him to be. Second, the devil purpose, and love. Within that order of God's good pleasure in liv­ rebels against the God-given forms ofthe physical universe, whether ing and creating is the creation of man, who is made in God's im­ natural or supernatural, and in particular against the created form age and likeness to have dominion over the earth in subordination of mankind. only to God himself (Genesis 1:26-28). Since annihilation is beyond the limits of devil's creaturely power, he directs his efforts at returning all things, even himself, to In the image and after the likeness the state of being "formless and void" {tohuw bohuw). He tempts Man's being cannot properly be separated from God's image Christ in the wilderness with the goal of deforming the Godhead and likeness, or from an absolute subordination to God, without through an act of disobedience by the Son against the Father, even the result of death (Genesis 2:16-17). Nor may this image and like­ though he knows that a victory on his part must necessarily erase ness be understood as merely spiritual, so that the physical details even his own form of life by its deformation of the forms of cre­ of man's life and living are rendered a matter of indifference. The ation, all of which depend upon the order of the Godhead (Mat­ form of man's body, and thus of his bodily life, are explicitly part thew 4:1-11). of God's creative purposes: "And the LORD God formed man of The Son of God is made man in the world, however, because the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of of the devil's first and successful assault on the form of mankind, life; and man became a living soul" (Genesis 2:7). and through mankind on the form of the universe. By his success­ The life of the human race possesses a God-given form in ev­ ful temptation of Eve, the devil separated her from her husband, ery detail, physical and spiritual. Nothing about man, or about any­ and then with her husband he separated mankind from God in dis­ thing else in creation, is excluded from God's purpose and sover­ obedience (Genesis 3:1-6; 2 Corinthians 11:2; ITimothy2:12-14). eignty. Even the differentiation of man into male and female forms The form of human life, intended for communion in and with God, of humanity is a deliberate act of God. Both male and female are was instantly distorted. The man was set against the woman, and made in the image and hkeness of God (Genesis 1:27), and share a they were set against God and the rest of creation (Genesis 3:7-13). common human vocation to a life of etemal fellowship with God. A free mankind, subordinate by creation to God alone, surrendered But God creates Adam, the man, first; and from Adam God itself to the bondage of sin, Satan, and death. Further, because man creates the woman Eve: fell into sin, the entire creation over which he had been given do­ And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, minion under God also fell into bondage (Romans 8:20). And in its and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up bondage God sent it a Saviour in the form of God and the form of the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD man. # L.R.T.

8 MANDATE: November/December 1998 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church esus Christ, the Son of God made man, is that living hope of man's salvation, and through man's salvation by and in him. JHe is the liberation of creation from vanity. The Etemal Son of God becomes man to restore mankind to that created form which glorifies the Father: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to 4. JESUS CHRIST, be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in THE FORM OF GOD the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even AND THE FORM OF MAN the death ofthe cross (Philippians 2:6-8). Jesus Christ is Tme God of Trae God. He possesses a perfect divine nature by right as the only-begotten Son of God, so that he The proper form of the Church is the beloved Bride called to has no need to cling to that divine nature as if he had stolen it. be one flesh with Jesus Christ the Bridegroom, who has purchased There never was a time when the etemal Son was not God, or not her and cleansed her with his own Blood (Ephesians 5:25-28; Rev­ with the Father and the Holy Ghost in the Godhead. He is "in the elation 19:6-9; 21:2; 21:9). Within this great and definitive form of form of God" because he is God as the One God knows himself in the unity ofthe Bridegroom with his Bride, just as there were in the the etemal hfe of the Blessed Trinity. He does not cease to be God first creation of man, there are given subordinate forms, for the when he becomes incamate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary. reconstruction of the humanity of the members of the Church: Rather, He becomes perfect man, with a perfect human nature as And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, well, while remaining one Person in whom the divine and human evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the per­ natures are united forever without change, confusion, division, or fecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the separation. edifying ofthe body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity He is in the form of man, the rebellious servant of God, with­ of the faith, and ofthe knowledge ofthe Son of God, unto out participating in that rebelhon or sinning. In the proper form of a perfect man, unto the measure ofthe stature of the fulness man, He is obedient to God, his Father in heaven, in all things, even of Christ (Ephesians 4:11-13). to his death on the cross as the perfect willing sacrifice for the sins Salvation and the form ofthe Church cannot be separated, with­ of all mankind. Because He becomes incamate. He demonstrates out separating the Church from Christ. by his human physical nature that the physical nature of mankind In creation, the details of the God-given forms of human life may bear the image and likeness of God. and ofthe world under man's dominion could only be separated from Jesus Christ is the Second Adam, the new Adam who takes the mankind's particular, personal existence by sin. It was the devil who place of the old as the model or form of a redeemed humanity: "For persuaded man to depart from the created forms, and it is Christ as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 who died to retum mankind and the rest of creation to the origi­ Corinthians 15:22). Where the first Adam sinned, condemning all nally righteous forms of God. Therefore, arguments that the "idea," that God had placed under his authority, Jesus Christ the Second the "effect", or the "benefit" of salvation can be separated from the Adam is entirely and redeemingly obedient to his Father in heaven. form of life that Christ has given in the Church can only proceed Just as the account of creation given in Genesis begins with God's from the warped logic of the Fall, or from the devil himself. calling the heaven and earth into being, but focuses primarily on To be redeemed in Christ is to be re-conformed to the Father's God's giving of form to what He creates, the account of redemp­ good pleasure, in the unity of the Body of our Savior, who is the tion that makes up the rest of the Scriptures, following the record of summary or "recapitulation" (Greek anakephalaiosis) of the per­ man's fall, focuses on Jesus Christ who reforms a fallen creation to fect forms that express the Father's will in creation: restore it to the perfection of his Father's will. While salvation is an Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, ac­ accomplished work of Christ and of his one Sacrifice once offered, cording to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in the restoration of the created form of man and of the world will not himself: That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he be complete until the Last Day and the general resurrection of the might gather together in one [anakephalaiosasthai] all dead. On that day, man, heaven, earth, the totality of God's cre­ things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are ation, will be perfectly reformed. on earth; even in him: In whom also we have obtained an In the meantime, the Church exists in the world to be a medi­ inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose ating form between the Personal perfection of Jesus Christ and the of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own final perfection of the entire created order in him. The descent of will: (Ephesians 1:9-11). the Holy Ghost at Pentecost (Acts 2) transforms the body of be­ The "dispensation" is the "economy" (Greek oikonomia), the lievers into the Body of Christ, a Body of God's promise of com­ order or arrangement of the laws that govern a household, in this plete redemption in the perfecting of the forms He has created: case the household of God, ruled by the decrees of his will. It is the That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted final putting into order, since it is the order ofthe "fullness of times." in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the It is achieved by the Father's gathering together (his "recapitula­ word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also tion") of the forms and reahty of all creation, both in heaven and after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit earth, in Jesus Christ. Thus, to suggest that there can be a "church" of promise. Which is the earnest of our inheritance until without forms is as foolish as insisting that there can be a creation the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise or a redemption of creation without forms. # of his glory (Ephesians 1:12-14). L.R.T.

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: November/December 1998 9 THE COMMON PRAYER AND THE RENEWAL MOVEMENT

hy do people in the "renewal movement" in the Epis­ 8. The classic Common Prayer is not evangelistic, in the sense copal Church in the USA and in the Anghcan Church that it is felt not to be welcoming and it does not seek to Wof Canada not see clearly that Anglican Christian iden­ bring people into "personal relationships" with Jesus. tity is formed by, and grounded in, the classic Common Prayer and that in the long term orthodoxy will only be preserved when 9. Going back to, or even using the Common Prayer, will not the lex orandi (law of praying) is the Common Prayer? guarantee good preaching and teaching (if it did then there would have been a constant revival in the church in the pe­ Here are the kinds of assertions heard within charismatic riod of its total use!) parishes and groups conceming the Common Prayer. 1. Liturgy is a TOOL. One can use any liturgy if it is believed What can be briefly stated in response? to be "faithful to Scripture." One does not really always need a. The Common Prayer is not to be understood as providing a a liturgy. Having the same liturgy week by week can so eas­ service for Sunday or for any other day. Rather, it is a GODLY ily lead to the trath of the statement "familiarity breeds con­ ORDER, a GODLY PROVISION, for 365 days a year, for tempt." Further, "mix and match" services have a strong ap­ congregation, family, and individual persons. It provides the peal to many people because for them "variety is the spice means of a relating to the Holy Trinity, to the Father through of life". True worship, it is said, has nothing to do with uni­ the Son and with the Holy Spirit, for 24 hours each day and formity in worship but may be helped by a liturgy. every day. It covers life from birth to death in this age. It is a stractured way based solidly upon the Holy Scriptures of 2. The use of the Rite II material in the 1979 American Prayer disciplined hving before God as we walk in and with Jesus Book (= the Book of Alternative Services in Canada) is an Christ with the Holy Spirit and in communion with the saints, historical accident. It was there and was used when the re­ living and departed to be with Christ in glory. newal movement was around. What is wanted is everyday language and simple messages - a point made crystal clear b. The Common Prayer does not provide for Evangelism but in the lyrics ofthe "praise songs" most favored. The modem for the results of Evangelism. It is a stractured form of godly prayer books fulfil this need and want. living for those who are on their way into, or are actually within, the Household of God. Through Evangelism repen­ 3. Some peoples minds simply close when they hear "Thou, tant and believing persons are brought into the Thee, ye, shouldest and wouldest" (just as the minds of oth­ Catechumenate and thus into the study of the Catechism. ers close when they hear the latest computer jargon). So clas­ Then Baptism/Confirmation, Daily Prayer, and weekly Holy sic texts just cannot be used if the aim is to reach new people. Communion follow. The Lord's Supper is not an evangelis­ 4. DISCIPLESHIP is seen as very important. Jesus is Lord. tic service as such, since it is only for those who are bap­ tized, believe the Gospel and turn from their sins. Thus corporate worship is logically (at least) secondary, per­ haps peripheral. Further, using an unfamiliar language in c. Alongside the basic use of the Common Prayer (be it in the worship services can cause an unwarranted separation be­ classic dignified English ofthe 17th century or in a modem tween parts of people's lives - one language for work and dignified English or in Swahili or in whatever language) play, worship and evangelism needed. there ought to exist all kinds of other forms of Christian 5. The old idea of pursuing excellence in music, symbolism, activity for mission, evangelism, social service, apologetics, dress and words in worship is not appropriate - it is seen as and so on. While simple language and attractive means ought a barrier to discipleship for most people. Better to go for a to be used to help bring people into saving knowledge of the good average kind of offering/presentation, wearing jeans God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, there ought to be and looking and smelling good. an expectation that as converts grow in spiritual and moral and biblical knowledge they will appreciate the pursuit of 6. The classic Common Prayer is seen as too penitential and excellency ("we press on towards the goal...") and thus they gloomy. There is too much emphasis in the BCP on the Fall will feel and see the value of the classic Common Prayer. and Sin and Repentance. What is needed today is celebra­ tion in terms of feeling joyful about our "relationship with d. If any renewal parishes want to think about the possibility Jesus" and with each other. of bringing the regular and disciplined use of the Common Prayer into their experience of the Lord our God, the 450th 7. The classic Common Prayer is perceived as not emphasiz­ anniversary of the origins of Common Prayer of the Ecclesia ing the local "community of faith" sufficiently - it does not Anglicana occur in 1999 and provide a good opportunity to really provide for warmth of fellowship and there is no pass­ start. # ing of the peace in its rites.

10 MANDATE: November/December 1998 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church THE FIRST AMERICAN BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER.

n the 1780's the Episcopal Church in the newly independent vest and for independence. The new Prayer Book had to be United States of America had a variety of options in terms what acceptable in America by Americans as an American, and no I kind of Church it intended to be. The legal links with England longer British, Prayer Book. and with the monarchy were broken. It was now an autonomous 2. Another concem was to maintain a genuine continuity with Church. Further, the new and primary political language after the the mother Church in terms of both the Ministry (its new bish­ Revolution of 1776 was of "rights" and thus the Episcopal Church ops were consecrated in Scotland and England in the 1780's) knew that in human terms it had the right to do its own thing, to go and Worship/Doctrine. Identity, roots and connections were its own way in the land of "the right to life, liberty and the pursuit deemed to be important and to provide meaning and purpose of happiness". in a new and expanding society. Already the word "denomina­ There were various options open to the Episcopal Church as a tions" was in use to indicate the differing forms of Protestant mainline eastern and southem denomination. It could go the way Christianity in America, and Episcopalians were determined of the rational religion of the Enlightenment and have a Deist or to make sure that their historic denomination had a clear and Unitarian liturgy. In contrast, it could go with the Methodists, who distinctive character so that it was not confused with the Meth­ were originally evangelical and pietist Anghcans, and it could use odists or Presbyterians. the version of the Enghsh Prayer Book which John Wesley had This commitment to continuity with its Reformed Cathohc and adapted for their use. In the event, it decided to stay close to the yet Protestant inheritance, while being open to freedom of growth Anglican Way, the Reformed Cathohc and Scriptural religion, ex­ and development, is captured in the Preface to the first American pressed through the historic Episcopate and the Common Prayer Book of Common Prayer, dated, Philadelphia, October, 1789. "This Tradition, to which it had been committed during its long years as a Church is far from intending to depart from the Church of England colonial part of the National and Established Church of England. in any essential point of doctrine, discipline or worship; or further As befitted a new democracy, the major decisions to remain in than local circumstances require." Among the circumstances were, the Anglican Way and in communion with the Church of England of course, the changed relation to Great Britain because of the Revo­ were taken at General Conventions in Philadelphia in 1785 and 1789. lution and the need to pray pubhcly for local civil rulers rather than We must remember that those members of the General Con­ for the King in London. vention in Philadelphia who were active in revising the Prayer Book 3. Yet another major concem was to preserve the bibhcal charac­ in 1789 represented the educated urban, eastern and southem es­ ter of Common Prayer. In terms of the biblical scholarship of tablishment of the time. They were influenced by European culture the time (which we now see was affected by latitudinarianism), and were familiar with the history of the Church of England. In this meant that they both added and removed bibhcal and tra­ particular they were more than a little interested in the proposed ditional material. revision of the BCP (1662) which was made by those of latitudi­ narian sympathies in the Church of England in 1689 after the "Glo­ (a) They added specific lections from the OT and the NT for rious Revolution." Though this revision was not adopted in En­ Morning and Evening Prayer on Sundays and Holy Days gland, the Americans saw all kinds of parallels between their own - we recall that the major public service on Sundays at situation in 1789 and that of Britain after the arrival of William and that time was often Mattins. Mary to replace James II. Thus the proposals of 1689 are referred (b) They added a new and altemative Preface for Trinity Sun­ to in the Preface to the first American Book of Common Prayer as day which was intended to be more bibhcal and less meta­ "a great and good work which miscarried at that time." physical than that of 1662. Not using technical terms such But we must also remember that the Anghcan Churches in the as "Substance" and "Persons", it read: "For the precious colonies of America had known only one Prayer Book for well over death and merits of thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord, and for a century, the BCP (1662). Many people knew its Collects by heart the sending to us of the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, who and their own private and family prayers were influenced by the are one with thee in thy etemal Godhead..." forms of piety and prayer in this Book. Thus few if any wanted (c) They removed OT verses from the common prayer which revisions which would cause the loss of this heritage. they believed had reference only to the Jewish dispensa­ WHY REVISE THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER? tion — e.g., in Moming Prayer the last four verses from the Venite, exultemus Domino (Psalm 95) were omitted What were the basic concems of those who had the task of and replaced them by verses 9 & 13 from Psalm 96. revising the English BCP (1662) for use by a people who claimed the right under God the Creator "to life, liberty and the pursuit of (d) They did not include the Latin Creed known as the happiness"? Quincunque Vult (Athanasian Creed) because some thought that it required for salvation a more inteUectualized faith than 1. Obviously one concem was to make sure that the Common does the Holy Scripture. Thus unlike the BCP (1662), the Prayer of the people was truly Common Prayer for America, BCP (1789) has only two creeds, the Apostles' and Nicene. taking into account the new governmental and political strac- ture together with national days of celebration - e.g., for har­ FIRST AMERICAN continued on page 12

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: November/December 1998 11 FIRST AMERICAN continued from page 11

(e) In "The Ministration of Holy Baptism" the word "sin" the 1780's were the [rejected] proposals of 1689 in England for was substituted for "sins" at two significant places in the revising the Book of Common Prayer (1662) in a Protestant direc­ 1789 text. First of all, in the Prayer at the beginning ofthe tion in order to enlarge its comprehensiveness, and thereby enlarge service and then, secondly, in the Address to the Godpar­ the committed membership of the National Church. We also leam ents. Thus the 1789 text speaks ofthe gift of God through of some of their concems in promoting revision of the BCP. They Holy Baptism as "the remission of sin." Probably the wished, for example: American revisers had in mind primarily the stain or the 1. To provide for the shortening of the Sunday services. guilt of original sin (Romans 5). 2. To eliminate repetitions of prayers. 4. While wishing to be bibhcal, they also sought to take the ex­ 3. To allow a choice of psalms rather than a fixed order using all, ample of the Fathers of the first five or so centuries seriously and to look to a new translation of the Psalter. and so had a concem to follow the Early Church. They were much aware of the attempts by the Non-Jurors and by the Scot­ 4. To include hymns from the New Testament and OT Prophets tish Episcopal Church to rewrite the Prayer of Consecration in in services. The Order for Holy Communion of the BCP (1662) so that it 5. To use of a Psalm or Anthem in the Communion Service (as in reflected the content ofthe Eucharistic Prayers used in the an­ the 1549 BCP). cient centres of Orthodoxy in the East. So they departed from 6. To remove those bibhcal verses or passages which they judged the model provided by The Order for Holy Communion in the to be inexpedient for mixed assemblies (e.g., references to ho­ BCP of 1662 and followed in general, but not slavishly, the mosexuality) or obsscure and unedifying (e.g., genealogies). model provided by the Scottish Communion Office of 1764. 7. To remove from the Lectionary readings from the Apocrypha. And in a sense they looked back to the first, short-lived BCP of 8. To revise some Collects, Epistles & Gospels for Sundays. 1549. 9. To remove or make optional the Athanasian Creed. This meant that the Consecration Prayer was much longer than 10. To initiate a review of the Catechism, Calendars, Rubrics and that in the BCP (1662) which only contains thanksgiving for the Articles of Religion. atoning death of the Lord Jesus and a recital of the original institu­ tion ofthe Lord's Supper. In the BCP (1789), after the recital ofthe Most of these concems were those expressed in the proposals Institution ofthe Sacrament by the Lord Jesus, there is "The Obla­ for reform in 1689 and can be found also in the book. Free and tion" (the offering up to God the Father of thanksgiving, memorial Candid Disquisitions Relating to the Church of England (London, and holy gifts of bread and wine) and "The Invocation" (the calling 1749) and other proposals for reforming the liturgy from the eigh­ on God the Father by His Word and Holy Spirit to make these gifts teenth century. truly the Body and Blood of His Crucified and Exalted Son). The proposed book leaned doctrinally towards latitudinarianism and therefore excluded both the Athanasian and the Nicene Creeds 5. They were concemed that the common prayer of and for the as well as the clause,"he descended into hell," of the Apostles' people be truly comprehensive as well as edifying for as many Creed. Further, it did not use the word "priest," substituting for it, as possible. They wished that the services be "comfortable to "Minister." all people desiring to live in Christian conversation" and "prof­ It soon became obvious that the Proposed Book was not ac­ itable to the estate of this realm." This explains in part why ceptable either to a majority of Episcopalians in America or to the they were fascinated by the attempts in England to widen the Archbishops in England. However, it was not wholly set aside for Common Prayer in order to accommodate the Dissenters and it was in the hands of the revisers in 1789 as they prepared a more Nonconformists who had been excluded by the terms of the conservative version of the Common Prayer for their Church. Restoration Settlement under Charles II in 1660-1662. The Prayer Book of 1786 was not, however, wholly forgotten One example ofthe desire to include as many as possible with­ by American Episcopalians. It was reprinted with modifications out offence was the shortening of the initial Exhortation in "The for use in 1873 by the schismatic and evangelical Reformed Epis­ Form of the Solemnization of Matrimony." Omitted in the BCP copal Church led by Bishop George David Cummins. Happily, this (1789) are the three "causes for which matrimony was ordained by Church now uses the BCP (1662). God" — the procreation of children; a remedy against sin, and the "mutual society, help and comfort" of the man and woman. "As a CONCLUSION remedy against sin" was not the kind of thing genteel people wished So it was that the 1789 Book of Common Prayer replaced the to hear on a wedding day! 1662 Book of Common Prayer as a formulary of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the USA. Later, this new American Church THE PROPOSED BOOK of 1786 added the Ordinal (1792) and the Articles of Religion (1801) as The BCP of 1789 was not the first prayer book produced by further Formularies. The three Formularies stayed in place until the independent American Church. From the Philadelphia Conven­ the 1970's when they were replaced by a new kind of Prayer Book tion of 1785 came "A Proposed Book of Common Prayer" which and a new kind of Ordinal (allowing women priests) and the Ar­ was published in April 1786 but never authorized and never given ticles were relegated to the status of "historical document." Thus approval as a genuine Book of Common Prayer by the Archbishops the new Episcopal Rehgion of the 1970's was created. #• of the Church of England. In the long Preface of this Proposed P.T. Book we leam how important to some American Episcopalians in

12 MANDATE: November/December 1998 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church THE '79 RELIGION OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH

fter the profound shake-up of American society and cul­ The second major change in the 1970's was the introduction ture in the 1960's, the Episcopal Church [ECUSA] made of the doctrine and practice of the ordination of women by the Gen­ Asome dramatic changes in the next decade in its received eral Convention of 1976. This novelty did not enter the Church doctrines of the Christian Faith, ways of public worship and because of careful study of the Scriptures or of the Anghcan tradi­ administration of the sacraments as well as its rales (canon law) tion or because of ascetic prayer seeking the mind of the Lord our governing its intemal life. God. Rather, it came in as one major aspect of the Church's re­ Since the last change in the decade of the 1970's was the final sponse to the human rights movement, a movement which is so approval in 1979 of a new Prayer Book for the ECUSA, the revised powerful in American society and culture. In fact, it came at first religion created in the this decade of the 1970's by the ECUSA illegally for women were ordained before the General Convention may be called in short, "The '79 Religion." If the "law of prayer is authorized it! A woman, it was held, is as competent and as able to the law of believing" then the style, stracture and content of the do the job of a minister of religion as a man. Further, women and 1979 Prayer Book is the law of believing for the Episcopal Church men have equal rights. Therefore, a woman can be and indeed ought into the 1980's and beyond. to be (where called) a minister of rehgion and there is no reason for Although thousands, maybe over a million, left the ECUSA as delay. Significantly and contrary to the mind of the Anglican Com­ and after these changes were introduced, the majority who remained munion and of the Lambeth Conference of 1998, this doctrine of often welcomed them. Some claimed to witness a new freedom as the ordination of women has been mandated as a teaching of the they felt they saw their Church becoming relevant to modem life ECUSA to be received by all clergy and all laity holding office. and open to new possibilities as a dynamic and inclusive "commu­ Having established a doctrine from the values of contempo­ nity of faith." rary culture, the Church then began to read the Scriptures with this mindset. Old texts thus suggested new meaning and the new mean­ Three major changes ing justified the innovation! And where old texts would not allow The first major change to the hfe of the Church in this decade new and supportive meaning for the ordination of women they were concemed the rules governing holy matrimony. In a major conces­ classed as belonging to a doomed and evil patriarchalist, androcentric sion to what sociologists now call "the divorce culture," canon law and sexist culture. In this connection the apostle Paul has been par­ was modified by the General Convention of 1973 in order to make ticularly singled out for criticism as a hater of women or at least a it easier for a communicant to be married a second (even a third) sexist rogue! time in church after being divorced. Thus when the new Prayer With the entry of women into the ordained ministry as "a right" Book with its service for marriage was introduced six years later, it there also entered the Church much of the agenda of the feminist was generally understood to be a service for persons not only in a movement. Thus we see in the 1979 prayer book not only a new first but also in a second or third marriages. Regrettably thereby, Ordinal which allows the ordination of women as bishops, priests serial monogamy was given the force of law by the ECUSA and and deacons but also a new form of language which has been called this is well reflected in the high percentage of divorced and remar­ non-excluding, inclusive and expansive. This new language is most ried clergy and laity within its membership since the 1970's. evident in the Psalter and in the Canticles of Rite II. (Of course in With this change of canon law has also gone a change in the new Rites since those of 1979 this expansive language has been way in which the Scriptures are read (or not read). In public wor­ increasingly used both of "humankind" and of "God[dess]". The ship the "hard" words of Jesus on this matter conceming "the two result is that in 1998 it is a major offence in parts of the ECUSA to shall become one flesh" and "no-one is to separate them" are often call "God" by the revealed Name of "the Father.") omitted from lectionary readings. Further, when these "hard" say­ The third major change was the adoption by the General Con­ ings of our Lord are examined by "the experts", ways are often ventions of 1976 and 1979 of a new Prayer Book for the Church to found to minimize their meaning and their impact on today's church. replace that known as The Book of Common Prayer (1928). In the Thus in 1998 the reahty of divorce and remarriage is taken for title of this Book there is reflected the serious departure from the granted by both liberals and conservatives in the ECUSA and any­ commitment to seeking and speaking the Trath (as it is in the Lord one who dares to question it is seen as a disturber of the peace. It is Jesus who is the Trath) which had been apparent for some time in noteworthy that even proposals from conservative anglo-catholics the ECUSA. Since the 1979 Book is clearly a collection of a vari­ and evangehcals to renew the Church since the 1970's have care­ ety of services (e.g., it has two forms of Moming and Evening Prayer fully avoided the topic because too many of their supporters are and multiple forms ofthe Eucharistic Prayer), it ought to have been affected by "the divorce culture" within the Church. called "A new American Prayer Book" or "A Book of Altemative In the so-called "heresy trial" of Bishop Walter Righter in 1997, Services" or the like. Contrary to the evidence of its intemal con­ the fact that he has three wives alive and has been divorced and tent and against the form and shape in all official Prayer Books remarried twice was not an issue! Rather the issue was that he had since 1549, it was named The Book of Common Prayer (1979) as if ordained a "gay priest." At the trial, it may be claimed that "the it were simply and only a revision of the classic and received Book divorce culture" was seeking to hold back the more recent "lesgay culture." '79 RELIGION continued on page 14

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: November/December 1998 13 '79 RELIGION continued from page 13 of Common Prayer of 1662, 1789, 1892 and 1928. Books much Others in the Church including the Presiding Bishop, deeply like the 79 Book in other parts of the Anglican world were given a affected by the liberationist movements, especially the feminist title truthfully to reflect their content - e.g. in England, "An Alter­ and lesgay lobbies, as well as by modem ecumenism, think and native Service Book" of 1980. publicly state that "The '79 Religion" actually still contains the As Truth was not reflected in the title so neither is Trath re­ major faults ofthe older and classical Anglican Way. Feminists are flected in the contents. Certainly much of the material looks as committed to new doctrines and new Names of "God" and lesgays though it is or can be genuine, orthodox Anglican teaching and are committed to new social and sexual morahties. To propagate prayer based upon the Scriptures as understood in the ancient Church their cause and to maintain their agenda, they have moved beyond of the Fathers and in the Enghsh Reformation of the 16th and 17th the religion of the 1970's, which they see as only the beginnings of centuries. However, on a closer examination one finds that new renewal. And they claim that what they now proclaim as trae is, in doctrine and new forms of worship have been introduced and that fact, what was aimed at in the 1970's but was imperfectly reahzed these generally reflect the hberal theology ofthe 1950's to 1970's. in the changes in doctrine, bible translation, marriage, ordination There are new doctrines or new formulas of the Holy Trinity, and worship of that decade. the Person of Jesus Christ, the nature of sin and salvation, the sac­ What seems clear is that once the windows of God's small raments and of the character of public worship. They are found household called the ECUSA are opened wide and the strong winds primarily but not exclusively in the Rite II material. At the same of modemity (followed by post-modernity) are allowed to blow time remnants of the classic forms are retained generally but not through the household then great changes occur and continue to universally in the Rite I material. The new Catechism of the 1979 occur. If the windows are closed reasonably early, then we have Book, which was written in order to summarize the doctrines con­ "The '79 Religion" in the ECUSA household, but if they are left tained in the Rite n material, provides a brief statement of many of open longer, or stay open permanently, then we have the modem these novel doctrines. The point from where this Catechism starts feminist and lesgay religions. And which of us knows what will indicates that the new theology begins from "humankind" and come next? reaches up to "God" out of human experience. In contrast, the clas­ Much of the cultural battle in the modem Episcopal Church is sic Anglican Way begins with the movement of the Father through between the supporters of "The '79 Religion" (e.g., such groups as the Son by the Holy Spirit towards us in creation, revelation and First Promise, American Anglican Council & Episcopal Renewal redemption. Then our response is to the Father through the Son and Ministries) and the advocates of the post '79 religion of the femi­ with the Holy Spirit in the Body of Christ. nist, lesgay and revisionist liberal lobbies. The supporters of the There ought to have been and there could have been a conser­ former give the impression that the ECUSA will be orthodox if it vative and creative revision of the 1928 Book of Common Prayer accepts their 1970's agenda! They claim that their position has been for the last quarter of the century and into the new millennium; and strengthened by the conservative resolutions of the Lambeth '98 this could have been offered both in a traditional language form Conference, especially the rejection of homosexuality as an ac­ and in a modem language form. The ECUSA did not do this but ceptable form of sexual expression. chose instead to create a new form of public prayer and occasional Unless the Church, or a remnant within, is ready to retum to offices for its own use. the classic foundations of the Anglican Way in the Holy Scriptures In the spirit of the iconoclasm of the 1960' s and the ecumenism and in the authentic Formularies (the classic B.C.P. and Ordinal of the 1970's, it abandoned its received Book of Common Prayer with the Articles and pre-1970's canon law) there is no hope for and created a different kind of Prayer Book in order to accommo­ renewal. # date episcopal rehgion to the values of a changed America. In ac­ P.T. cepting the new prayer book it sought to remove the classic Book of Common Prayer from its pews. Many leaders knew that where they were seeking to lead the Church was in a path condemned by the (CRANMER continued from page 15) teaching of the traditional Book. Thus it had to go and be forgot­ ten! Its advocates had to be demonized! There is, despite the apparent odds against it, a place in God's world for the authentic Anglican Way in which there is a disci­ In conclusion plined comprehensiveness wherein varieties of interpretation ofthe The only vocal and committed supporters of "The '79 Reli­ classic BCP are tolerated, but where the Common Prayer is truly gion" remaining in the ECUSA at the end of the twentieth century used daily, weekly, yearly as the form of the godly life for congre­ are: (a) the social conservatives who normally vote Republican and gation, family and individual persons. want to preserve the status quo in Church and parish and (b) the Traditional Anghcans pray that the members of the First Prom­ conservative evangehcals and charismatics and anglo-catholics who ise movement, the American Anglican Council, Episcopalians are usually involved in one way or anther in modem church growth United, the Episcopal Renewal Movement, the Episcopal Synod and missionary outreach and who claim that the texts and rites of and other Episcopalians will actually consider very seriously the "The '79 Rehgion" are more user-friendly. Both groups and types recovery of the classic tradition of Common Prayer for their vision (a) and (b) enjoy the liberties of the new rehgion but do so within of the renewal of the Episcopal Way in the USA. There is no godly the constraints of what they feel is still a traditional Church, with and orthodox future staying with the 1979 prayer book and the long roots in history and with a proud past. They may be called 1979 ordinal as formularies because they serve to undermine the conservative liberals. authority and perspicuity of Holy Scripture. +'

14 MANDATE: November/December 1998 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church ARCHBISHOP CRANMER, MIDWIFE OR FATHER.

pparently some people seem to think that the meaning of The Book of Common Prayer as a formulary of the Angli­ A can Churches is fixed by Archbishop Cranmer's supposed formed catholic tradition of the renewed Ecclesia Anglicana. state of mind when he supervised the preparation and publishing of In the eighteenth century, amongst Non-Jurors and in the tiny the first two editions of The Books of Common Prayer in 1549/ Episcopal Church in Scotland, a desire to enlarge the Commumon 1552. For example, some Anglo-Catholics claim that, "He became Office of the BCP 1662 in a patristic direction led to the following an extreme Protestant in terms of the Eucharist and the presence of ofthe stracture ofthe Consecration Prayer from the Liturgies ofthe Christ in relation to it. The BCP 1552/1559/1662 is too Protestant. eastern patriarchates. (The American 1789 BCP followed the Scot­ It must be supplemented with catholic material." tish model.) This movement was, however, anti-papist and simply The interest in the mind and doctrines of Cranmer and his fel­ claimed "to enrich" the Order for Holy Communion by returning in low reformers is a legitimate historical study. However, the Angh­ part to the form of the Consecration Prayer in the first Prayer Book can Way has never been known as the Cranmer Way: it is, there­ of 1549. fore, not like Lutheranism and Calvinism. Cranmer is not seen as In the late eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries, in the wake the founder of a new church or of a school of churchmanship and of the evangehcal revival, the widespread reading of Foxe's Book theology. He was the Archbishop of Canterbury at a critical time in of Martyrs and the publication of the writings of sixteenth-century the history of Ecclesia Anglicana and was blessed with a wonder­ Anglican reformers, the interest in what precisely Cranmer and his ful sense of English prose (but not poetry!). He is to be regarded as colleagues intended was fostered and thus a specifically evangeli­ a midwife rather than a father of the reformed cathohc movement. cal interpretation of the Prayer Book developed, and with it a spe­ In 1559, when Elizabeth I began to reign, the second and more cific preference for the 1552 edition as "the most truly protestant obviously Protestant edition of The Book of Common Prayer, that prayer book." Naturally Anglo-Catholics countered with claims con­ of 1552 (not that of 1549) with minor revisions, became the Prayer ceming the 1549 BCP as "the only truly cathohc BCP" and the Book of the Church of England, and the same book, with further need to supplement the BCP of 1662 with cathohc material. We very minor changes, became the Prayer Book from 1604 until need to realize that both the evangelical and the anglo-catholic in­ suppressed for a while in the 1640's and 1650's. At the Restoration terpretations ofthe Common Prayer are minority ones and that the the new edition of The Book of Common Prayer (1662) was in standard one is that produced by the Elizabethan and Caroline di­ substance the same as 1559 and 1604, but with further gentle vines, and confirmed often in later Anglican teaching. This inter­ revisions. prets the BCP as being first biblical and then patristic, and also reformed cathohc and anti-papist. This interpretation may justly How are we to interpret the meaning of The Book of claim to be the primary one within the Anghcan Way. It is by far Common Prayer ? and away the most learned, biblical and satisfying. The meaning is to be located primarily in the collective teach­ The evangehcal Protestant interpretation emphasizing the Prot­ ing ofthe bishops and divines ofthe Church of England from 1559 estant character of the BCP because of its biblical character and its through to 1662 - Jewel, Hooker, Andrewes and so on. In general embodiment of justification by faith (so Charles Simeon spoke of they interpreted the BCP from within their commitment to the open "this most excellent liturgy") is adequate but not sufficiently deep. Bible of the Reformation, the doctrine of salvation by grace, and The Anglo-Catholic interpretation seeing the 1549 BCP as truly their knowledge of the Early Church (One Canon with Two Testa­ Catholic and the BCP 1559-1662 as tolerable but not really suffi­ ments, interpreted via Three Creeds and the teaching of Four Coun­ ciently cathohc can be misleading and can undermine the Anglican cils and the accumulated wisdom of Five centuries of development.) Way. Unlike the other two interpretations it is logically if not prac­ The latter reference to the Early Church is assumed, for example in tically pro-papist. both the Ordinal and in the draft of the Canon Law produced in Today in England many but not all Anglo-Catholics in the in­ 1571 by a panel of bishops. First, comes the biblical revelation as fluential Forward in Faith Movement now actually use only the expressed in the Canon of Scripture, then the Creeds and the basic modem Roman Catholic Missal and Breviary. They see no future liturgical tradition. Attached to these are the patristic writings as for Anghcan Rites and Formularies. In the USA many Anglo-Catho­ the classical commentary on Scripture, Creeds and tradition. lics welcomed and use the 1979 prayer book because it had some of What Cranmer, as the editor in chief of the first two editions of the things that that they wanted - e.g. the Gloria at the beginning of The Book of Common Prayer, himself believed on this or that point "the Mass" and specific provision for Holy Week services. Others, was not a factor of any weight for these divines. They treated the a minority, stayed with the 1928 BCP, supplementing it from the Prayer Book not as the possession or creation of one person, but as old Roman Missal and Breviary. the Church's book and thus to be understood from within the re­ (CRANMER continued on page 14)

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: November/December 1998 15 •^•wiwwwMwiiirrwrMinMmrmr«ririmriwrTriTm^ AN INTERNET MISSION FOR AN ANGLICAN FUTURE

nglican Christianity is both Catholic and Reformed. It has a grounding in the Scriptures, the tradition ofthe Early Church, the riches of the Medieval Church, and the clear attention to a Reformed faith, with its emphases on Salvation by Faith, A and devotion to God's Word. All of this is bound up for Anglicans in the Scripturally-based doctrine and devotion of The Book of Common Prayer. Angli- 1 cans have no Magisterium, no Teaching Office, no special Confession, outside the Scriptural doctrine of the Prayer Book, the i Ordinal, and the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. These three are known as the Formularies of the Anglican Way. | The essential question is this: Is our doctrine to be grounded in Scripture or in various liturgies which do not stand under the i authority and rale of Scripture? So a primary part of the educational program of the Prayer Book Societies of the Anglican Communion of Churches is the open and serious discussion of theological issues, and a recovery of the understanding of the Anglican Way. The Societies seek seeks to serve two purposes: First, as an educational resource for those who may be unfamiliar with the complexities of Scripture, theology, and Church history, but who are believing and faithful communicants of the Anghcan Communion. The Anglican Way is not just for experts or activists. Second, in supporting a process of rediscovery whereby knowledge and understanding of The Book of Common Prayer is enhanced, both in parishes, the larger Church, and all theological training colleges. Anglicans deserve to receive and know the riches of their Christian inheritance. To serve these purposes, the societies' websites featuring articles (and other links) by various authors, from pamphlets, news­ letters, and elsewhere. We hope to encourage discussion, to inform and challenge, to articulate clearly the evangehcal and educa­ tional aims of the Societies, and to promote the understanding and use of The Book of Common Prayer as a scriptural system of nurture for life in Christ. Further, these websites will contain information and texts conceming the 450th anniversary of the Common Prayer early in 1999, for use later on the year. The Societies' websites can be found at: The Prayer Book Society of Canada: http://www.prayerbook.ca The Prayer Book Society of England: http://churchnet.uscm.ac.uk/prayerbook The Prayer Book Society of USA: http://www.episcopalian.org/pbsl928 : i ...

The Society for the Preservation of the Book of Common Prayer NON-PROFIT. ORG. (The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church) U.S. POSTAGE P.O. Box 35220 PAID Philadelphia, PA 19128-0220 LOUISVILLE. KY Permit No. 879