May/dune 1999 Volume 18, Numbers MANDATF THE BI-MONTHLY MAGAZINE OF THE PRAYER BOOK SOCIETY WHITSUNTIDE 1999 — 450 years of THE COMMON PRAYER in English

Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, editor of the first Book of the Common Prayer, 1549 Almighty and eternal Father, by whose providence this Episcopal Church received the Book of Common Prayer from the Church of England for the ordering of her prayers and praises; grant us also the help of Thy grace to worship Thee with understanding and holy fear, in spirit and in truth, and in the blest com­ munion of saints; through Christ our Saviour, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost, one God, world without end. Amen.

THE LIVING PAST FOR THE PRESENT AND INTO THE FUTURE CONTENTS

3. Reflections from the Editor's Desk: Reading Scripture. 4. The Preface of The Book of the Common Prayer (1549). 5. The Common Prayer (1549-1928) as daily order. 7. The Eucharistic Heart of the Prayer Book - the Lectionary 8. John Merbecke, Musician and Biblical Scholar. 9. An Ordination First in Shreveport, Louisiana. 11. An Incredible Claim by David Mills 12. Devotions and the Common Prayer. 13. A Letter from the P.B.S. to Seven Primates. 14. A Continental Congress: "Let us reason together." 15. A Letter from the Archbishops assembled in Singapore 16. A Bidding Prayer for the 450th Anniversary.

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 traditionahst society — though it does receive holy tradition gratefully. 4. It is not a reactionary society, existing only by opposing modern 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 holiness 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 Episcopalians, 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 Anglican Formularies, witness. 5. It seeks to do the above through lectures, seminars, pubhcations, 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.

Editor: The Rev'd Dr Peter Toon MANDATE, Vol 18. 3. 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.or2/Dbsl928

2 MANDATE; May/June 1999 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church Reflections from the Editor's Desk

The Rev'd Dr. Peter Toon READING THE BIBLE AS AN ANGLICAN

f I love or desire to read the Bible alone and thus seek to inter­ one who is in communion with the Father through the Son and with pret it alone, then what are the basic rules for such reading that the Holy Spirit, as one who desires to know God more intimately I I can leam from the way that the Anglican Books of Common and serve Christ more faithfully, as one who looks for inspiration, Prayer (1549-1928[USA] 1962[Canada]) use Holy Scripture? teaching and instmction to help him love God more thoroughly and First of all, I must share the basic faith (that "Jesus Christ is Lord") to love his neighbor as himself, even as Christ loves him. I will of (a) the apostles and evangelists who wrote the documents of the know that all meaning I find in the Bible will and must contribute New Testament and (b) the churches that decided (in the 3rd and directly or indirectly to the loving of God the Holy Trinity and the 4th centuries) which of the many available documents claiming loving of the neighbor. apostolic origin were to be included within the Canon called the New Testament. Thus I shall not seek to "major on minors" and I shall not make prominent that which is peripheral, but I shall seek to use Scripture In other words, rightly to appreciate and understand what the as God's Word written for my salvation, sanctification and edifica­ apostolic writers have written I need to hold some basic beliefs tion within the body of Christ, the household of God the Father. with them so that I can enter then mind. Bearing this is mind, I am not surprised that the teaching of Further, rightly to understand why these books and not others the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer and the Creed is seen are in the New Testament and what was taken to be their basic pur­ by traditional, orthodox Christians, including Anglicans, as of pose, I need also to share the basic beliefs ofthe Church ofthe third basic importance in the creating of a structure of the Christian and fourth centuries. It was this Church which decided to include mind, not only for right reading of the Bible but also for right them in the Canon alongside the books received from the Jews, the praying and right hving (see The Catechism in the classic B.C.P.). very books Jesus used and interpreted, and the books we call the Old Testament. Further, I am not surprised to leam that the Bible is God's Word written in One Book, with its Two Testaments. The many books So it is not surprising that the formation ofthe basics of a Chris­ within the two Testaments of the one Book are unified by being tian mind has been seen throughout the centuries ofthe Church as a inspired by the same Holy Ghost and they all point in one direction prerequisite for reading and beginning to understand Holy Scrip­ - to the Father through the Son and with the Holy Spirit. ture — that Canon used by the Lord Jesus (Old Testament) and then that addition to the Canon created by His apostles and evange­ Then also I am not surprised to see that the first [Hebrew or lists (New Testament) and collected by His Church. Old] Testament is to be read, understood and interpreted in the light of the [Greek or New] Testament since Jesus the Messiah clearly Therefore, as a pious reader of the Bible desiring to unlock its came to the Jews not to destroy but to fulfill the Law and the Proph­ doors, I must seek to know GOD, the Holy Trinity, as He is de­ ets. So I shall happily read the Lessons appointed in the Lectionary scribed and confessed in the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds. I must from both Testaments; and I shall pray the Psalter daily not as a be a disciple and servant of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, Jewish believer but as a Christian, with and in the Lord Jesus Christ the Lord Jesus Christ, Incamate God, who was born of the Virgin as a member of His Body. Mary, was crucified and raised from the dead for our salvation. Finally, I am not surprised to leam that since no part ofthe One In addition, I must know how to pray because the Bible is a Bible exists in and of itself but as part of the whole, my duty is to collection of books intended to be read prayerfully and medita­ interpret Scripture by Scripture (the analogy of faith) and the more tively. Thus the Lord's Prayer will be my primary prayer as well as difficult parts by the clearer and, very importantly, I am to keep in the source and model of all my prayers, including the adoption of mind that the purpose of the whole Bible is to help sinful man by the discipline of the daily Moming and Evening Prayer. Finally, I God's grace to love God, the Holy Trinity, with all his being and to must know the Commandments, how I am to live as a servant and love his fellow human beings as he loves himself. adopted son of God, and how I am to love God with all my heart and soul and mind and strength and love my neighbor as myself. "Blessed Lord, which hast caused all Holy Scripture to be writ­ The Bible's truths become clear to those who are seeking to live the ten for our learning; grant us that we may in such wise hear them, virtuous life as Christ's disciples for God's glory. read, mark, learn and inwardly digest them, that by patience, and comfort of thy holy Word, we may embrace and ever holdfast the With this basic Christian mind (the mind of "mere Christian­ blessed hope of everlasting life, which Thou hast given us in our ity") I will be able by God's grace and guidance to read the Bible as Saviour, Jesus Christ. Amen." (Thomas Cranmer, B.C.P., 1549) 't

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: May/June 1999 3 THE PREFACE OF "THE BOOK OF THE COMMON PRAYER" (1549)

HERE was never any thing by the wit of man so well Yet, because there is no remedy, but that of necessity there devised, or so sure established, which in continuance of must be some Rules; therefore certain Rules are here set forth; Ttime hath not been corrupted: As, among other things, it which, as they are few in number, so they are plain and easy to may plainly appear by the Common Prayers in the Church, com­ be understood. So that here you have an Order for Prayer, and monly called Divine Service. The first original and ground for the reading ofthe holy Scripture, much agreeable to the mind whereof if a man would search out by the ancient Fathers, he and purpose of the old Fathers, and a great deal more profitable shall find, that the same was not ordained but of a good purpose, and commodious, than that which of late was used. It is more and for a great advancement of godliness. For they so ordered profitable, because here are left out many things, whereof some the matter, that all the whole Bible (or the greatest part thereof) are untrue, because here are left out some uncertain, some vain should be read over every year; intending thereby, that the Clergy, and superstitious; and nothing is ordained to be read, but the and especiahy such as were Ministers in the congregation, should very pure Word of God, the holy Scriptures, or that which is (by often reading, and meditation in God's word) be stirred up agreeable to the same; and that in such a language and order as to godliness themselves and be more able to exhort others by is most easy and plain for the understanding both of the readers wholesome Doctrine, and to confute them that were adversaries and hearers. It is also more commodious, both for the shortness to the Truth; and further, that the people (by daily hearing of thereof, and for the plainness of the order, and for that the rules Holy Scripture read in the Church) might continually profit more be few and easy. and more in the knowledge of God, and be the more inflamed Furthermore, by this order, the curates shall need none other with the love of his trae Religion. books for their public service, but this Book and the Bible: by But these many years passed, this godly and decent order of the means whereof, the people shall not be at so great charge for the ancient Fathers hath been so altered, broken, and neglected, books, as in time past they have been. by planting in uncertain Stories, and Legends, with multitude of And whereas heretofore there hath been great diversity in Responds, Verses, vain Repetitions, Commemorations, and saying and singing in Churches within this Realm; some fol­ Synodals; that commonly when any Book of the Bible was be­ lowing Salisbury Use, some Hereford Use, and some the Use of gun, after three of four Chapters were read out, all the rest were Bangor, some of York, some of Lincoln; now from henceforth unread. And in this sort the Book of Isaiah was begun in Advent, all the whole Realm shall have but one Use. And if any would and the Book of Genesis in Septuagesima; but they were only judge this way more painful, because that all things must be begun, and never read through: after like sort were other Books read upon the book , whereas before, by the reason of so often of Holy Scripture used. And moreover, whereas St. Paul would repetition, they could say many things by heart: if those men have such language spoken to the people in the Church, as they will weigh then labour, with the profit in knowledge, which daily might understand, and have profit by hearing the same; the ser­ they shall obtain by reading upon the book, they will not refuse vice in this Church of England these many years hath been read the pain, in consideration of the great profit that shall ensue in Latin to the people, which they understand not; so that they thereof. have heard with then ears only, and their heart, spirit and mind, have not been edified thereby. And furthermore, notwithstand­ And forasmuch as nothing can be so plainly set forth, but ing that the ancient Fathers have divided the Psalms into seven doubts may arise in the use and practice ofthe same; to appease portions, whereof every one was called a Noctum: now of late all such diversity (if any arise) and for the resolution of all doubts, time a few of them have been daily said, and the rest utterly concerning the manner how to understand, do, and execute, the omitted. Moreover, the number and hardness ofthe Rules called things contained in this Book; the parties that so doubt, or diver­ the Pie, and the manifold changings ofthe service, was the cause, sity take any thing, shall always resort to the Bishop of the Dio­ that to tum the book only was so hard and intricate a matter, that cese, who by his discretion shall take order for the quieting and many times there was more business to find out what should be appeasing of the same; so that the same order be not contrary to read, than to read it when it was found out. any thing contained in this Book. These inconveniences therefore considered, here is set forth Though it be appointed in the afore written Preface, that all such an order, whereby the same shall be redressed. And for a things shall be read and sung in the Church in the English Tongue, readiness in this matter, here is drawn out a Calendar for that to the end that the congregation may be thereby edified; yet it is purpose, which is plain and easy to be understood; wherein (so not meant, but that when men say Mattins and Evensong pri­ much as may be) the reading of Holy Scripture is so set forth, vately, they may say the same in any language that they them­ that all things shall be done in order, without breaking one piece selves do understand. Neither that any man shall be bound to from another. For this cause be cut off Anthems, Responds, the saying of them but such as from time to time in Cathedral Invitatories, and such like things as did break the continual course and Collegiate Churches, Parish Churches and Chapels to the of the reading of the Scripture. same annexed shall serve the congregation. +

4 MANDATE: May/June 1999 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church et all things he done among you (saith St.Paul) in a seemly and THE COMMON PRAYER "Ldue order." — (Archbishop Cranmer, AS DAILY ORDER B.C.P. 1549, "Of Ceremonies") Louis R. Tarsitano "O Lord our heavenly Father, almighty and everlasting God, which hast safely sider living beings, and not less so. We call the torture of small brought us to the beginning of this day: animals "immoral" precisely because we perceive in them a higher purpose than as objects to be tortured. We avert our eyes defend us in the same with thy mighty from the sight of a dead animal on the highway because we do power; and grant that this day we fall into not want to contemplate the transformation of a beautiful order into a horrible chaos. no sin, neither run into any kind of dan­ When we conduct a meeting of human beings, we insist on ger, but that all our doings may be ordered objective "rules of order," and the first item of business is the adoption of an agenda, a stated purpose for the meeting. We ob­ by thy governance to do always that is ject to a meeting without fixed rules of order or a stated purpose as "unfair," "immoral," and "without authority." At the same time, righteous in thy sight: through Jesus Christ we expel people from a meeting when they refuse to submit to our Lord. Amen." the order spelled out in the rales and are found "out of order." — (B.C.P. 1549, Mattins) At the highest level of being, there is God, who, in the eternal loving communion of the Blessed Trinity, the Three When a mechanical device ceases to function, we say that it in One and the One in Three, is both purpose and order. The is "broken" or "out of order." All such devices have some sort of divine love is purpose and the divine communion is order, stated purpose, a particular job that they are intended to per­ but these may not be separated in God, or in God's creation, form, and when they do not, we attempt to put them back into without attacking the source of both morality and reality. "working order," or we discard them and replace them. Mankind was created in the image and likeness of God for What constitutes "working order," moreover, is not prima­ eternal love and communion with God, and in God with other rily a matter of private judgment. The intention of the designer men. The subordinate communions of man with man and of man or inventor must be taken into consideration, as well as the ex­ with creation fell into disorder with man's failure to love God. pectations and definitions of the society in which we hve. A The Son of God became man to offer the obedient love for which watch, for example, is designed to keep time, and that is what a man was created, by his one sacrifice once offered, and to re­ society that builds and uses watches expects from it. A watch store creation to its proper order and purpose on the Last Day in that no longer keeps time is no longer a watch, but a disordered the General Resurrection ofthe dead (see Romans 8:19-23). collection of parts that serves no purpose, or at least not the pur­ Rejection of purpose and order pose of a watch. We have seen to our profound sorrow in the twentieth cen­ One might, for sentiment's sake, keep a broken watch in a tury the results of repeated efforts to divide God's purpose and drawer with other memorabilia, but to wear a broken watch is order from creation. Communism offered us the order of an ant­ something completely different. To "redefine" a broken watch hill, without love for God or man or creation, except as a crime as a "bracelet" is, at least, an eccentricity. To go further, how­ against the state. Nazism and Fascism proclaimed love for an ever, and to demand that the designer and all of society redefine abstract ideal of a particular people, with a hatred for all other the purpose of all watches, so that keeping time is no longer a peoples, who were to be exterminated in factories of death, like criterion for a watch, is to commit an enormity against them. To Auschwitz or Buchenwald. Materiahsm, most dangerously of go further still, and to insist that "time" and "order" be redefined all, has denied any purpose or order for existence, and it has to include a non-functioning watch is to offend against reason given us sweatshops, toxic waste, consumerism, loveless sex, and reahty. and the self-indulgent destruction of marriage and the home. Purpose and Order in the Creator and in His Creation The world around us is broken and out of order, but we can­ Purpose is the stracture of morality, and order is the struc­ not discard it or replace it because we are not God. Nor can we ture of reahty. We began by considering inanimate objects, but purpose and structure become more important when we con- DAILY ORDER continued on page 6

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: May/June 1999 5 DAILY ORDER continued from page 5 covenants upon which the Episcopal Church was organized in 1789 were unalterably based on the Book of Common Prayer ask God to discard or replace this world because we are part of continue to use it. it. We must appeal, instead, to God in his mercy to save this The Book of Common Prayer, with its unflinching obedi­ world, to restore among us his purpose of love and his order of ence to God's purpose and order, remains today the absolute communion. And these things God has already done, by and in remedy for the barbarities that must follow from any effort to and through his Son Jesus Christ. The Church, the Body of Jesus redefine or to abandon the purpose and order of God's Church. Christ, is, moreover, the means that God has chosen for the con­ The Prayer Book lays out an entire Christian life, from tinued restoration of his purpose of love and his order of com­ cradle to grave, 365 days a year, in the "working order" of munion on earth. the Two Great Commandments: love of God and love of It was, then, a further element ofthe tragedy of this century neighbor. From Baptism to burial, the forms and offices of that beginning in the 1960s and 1970s so much of the Church the Prayer Book take us deeper, day by day, into a commun­ succumbed to the deadly sin known variously as "sloth" or ion of love with God the Father, through God the Son, and "accidie"—a kind of boredom with "the same old thing," even if by God the Holy Ghost. The Daily Offices of Morning and "the same old thing" is life itself. The old prayers, the old pur­ Evening Prayer not only teach us, they enable us to begin pose, and the old order of the Church had to go, in order for and end our days at peace with God, and at peace by God's Christians to engage in an endless new joumey of "self-discov­ grace with all men. ery." That such a "joumey" would reduce the Church in so many The Epistles and Gospels read at the Holy Communion observers' eyes to just another "ism," to just another fraudulent provide us with a yearly exposition of the Gospel of Jesus claim on man's obedience, seems to have escaped almost every­ Christ, organized around a memorial of Christ's own life one, revisionists and those who were cowed by them alike. from Advent Sunday until Ascension Day, culminating in There was one major exception. The heated debates in the Pentecost and then the celebration of the Blessed Trinity, churches about the replacement of tried and trae formularies followed by the preaching of God's kingdom as it was com­ like the Anglican Book of Common Prayer were not fundamen­ mitted to the Apostles and the undivided Church. The les­ tally about who liked what liturgy, but about the purpose and the sons of the Daily Offices do not teach us "about the Bible"; order of the Church. Those who understood the significance of they are the Bible laid out to be read through in the year. the formularies, those books of doctrine, discipline, and wor­ The Holy Communion feeds the Body of Christ and ship that "form" Christian life, corporate and personal, were not makes that Body visible sacramentally, to be fed and to be bored with them. They recognized the extreme danger to the fed upon. The faithful, whose entire lives have been formed Church in doing away with her ancient forms—the loss of her according to God's purpose of love and formed into God's way of life, which had been dedicated from the time of the order of eternal commumon are made elements of the Sac­ Apostles both to the highest purpose, God's love, and to the per­ rament themselves. There are no games with definitions here, fect order of communion in and with God. no affronts to reason or reality. What we see is the will of In 1979, when the Episcopal Church replaced the Book of God obeyed and a people made holy by the grace of a consis­ Common Prayer (along with the centuries of purpose and order tent Christian life. that it represented, both before and after the Reformation), it For our lives to have a Christian form, we must govem them offended against reason and reality by giving its "new book" the by the disciphne of a Christian formulary. The moment that we same name as the old formulary. It erred just as much as if it had take up the Book of Common Prayer as the form of our Chris­ redefined the word "watch" to include a stone, had called a meet­ tian living is the moment that we can be certain that God's pur­ ing without order or purpose, or declared that "love of God" pose and order have become our purpose and order. It is at that now meant "love of self." moment that God begins to heal us from disorder and barbarity, Yes, decent people did their best to impose on the new book and from the confusion and disunity that are their fraits. the purpose and order of the old formulary, but their success If some strange ceremony promised such miraculous results was limited by the stracture and intention of the new book itself. we would be quick to seize upon it. How much simpler it would The Church would appear doomed to fulfill the prophecy of Will be to arrange our lives around the Book of Common Prayer that Durant: "History is aprocess of rebarbarization" (The Pleasures has healed so many generations of Christians before us. How of Philosophy, 222). But is she? much better for the Church to be in the "working order" that God intends for the Purpose, Order and Common Prayer Body of Christ. All we need is the will to The historic Book of Common Prayer (1549-1928) is not a be what God has called us to be. All else liturgy lost in archaeological antiquity. It remains the standard has been provided for. # of doctrine, discipline, and worship in every province of the The Rev'd Dr. Louis Tarsitano is the Anglican Communion, except in the Episcopal Church in the Rector of St Andrew's Church in United States, which represents less that 3% ofthe Communion's Savannah, Georgia. membership. Even in America, those who understand that the

6 MANDATE: May/June 1999 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church he eucharistic lectionary is at the heart of the Common Prayer tradition. The Collects, Epistles and Gospels comprise the Tlargest part of the classical Book(s) of Common Prayer THE (from 1549 - 1928[USA] - 1962[Cda]). Along with the liturgical m Psalter, they account for more than half of the Prayer Book. The same cannot be said for most of the books of alternative liturgies currently on offer in the smorgasbord of consumer prayer, includ­ EUCHARISTIC ing of course the so-called 1979 American B.C.P. f. l An outstanding feature HEART OF THE The Collects, Epistles and Gospels are both one of the most outstanding features of Common Prayer and its most neglected. It is, perhaps, not too much to say that the failure to attend to the David Curry :• •. ' credal or doctrinal understanding of Scripture embodied in the eu­ charistic lectionary has meant the loss of Common Prayer and, more as the relation between Sundays within the seasons and even be­ seriously, the loss ofthe Common Faith for Anglicans. The eucha­ tween the seasons. ristic lectionary is, incidentally, the oldest and the most ecu­ menical part ofthe Book of Common Prayer. It (not Bishops) is Effects of the adoption of modern biblical criticism at the heart of the Common Prayer tradition! In the enthusiasm to embrace the "new" eucharistic lectionaries Archbishop Thomas Cranmer didn't invent the eucharistic — themselves in their three-year format deriving from the modem- lectionary in 1549. He took over what in fact belonged to the essen­ ist Roman Catholic Church's questionable adoption of modem bib­ tial continuum of liturgical prayer in the westem church going back lical criticism — it has been claimed that the older eucharistic to the period of the Fathers. He made modest changes to it and if lectionary lacked coherence and, particularly, that there was a dis­ anything simplified and sharpened its logic. Later, others would do location of the epistles and gospels for at least half the year. Such the same, such as Bishop John Cosin in 1661-2, adding a few Col­ an argument, even at face value, concedes at least that there was a lects, Epistles and Gospels where needed but in conscious accord logic, a place from which things became dislodged. with the overall doctrinal pattem of the lectionary itself. The irony is that Anglicans should have claimed this as an ar­ For Cranmer and his successors, the Collects, Epistles and gument for adopting the new Roman-based three-year cycle of three Gospels were critical to the project of opening out the Scrip­ readings. Ironic, because the dislocations which arose over changes tures to everyone. They were opened out in the confidence of then made in the late Middle Ages, and subsequently embodied in the doctrinal or credal understanding; in short, in the confidence of post-Tridentine Roman Catholic lectionary, were avoided by what they are and what they have to say about our identity with Cranmer's use of the Sarum Missal. The changes primarily con­ God in Christ. cerned two things: provisions of Propers for what were formerly "Dominica vagans" — empty Sundays on account of Embertide The Collects, Epistles and Gospels provide the interpretative vigil ordinations — and the common observance of Trinity Sunday framework for reading and praying the Scriptures in the pattern of on the first Sunday after Pentecost in 1334. It had been instituted the Church Year both at the Daily Offices and at the Sunday Of­ earlier in England, in 1162, but without disturbing the sequence of fices. They express the scriptural content of the formative pattem epistles and gospels. The complaint about the dislocation of epistles of common prayer. and gospels is simply groundless with respect to the Common Prayer The fact that the eucharistic lectionary has a logic, a coher­ tradition. ence and an integrity is perhaps the first point to be recovered. Ignorance married to arrogance has resulted in the icono­ This was the commonplace of understanding for a host of devo­ clastic destruction of the heart of Common Prayer. Only the tional and theological writers. The integral character of the lectionary fragments remain. Churches will "observe", for instance, "Laetare" is succinctly captured by Anthony Sparrow (17th cent): in the first or "Mothering" Sunday in Lent IV, but without its scriptural basis. half of the year, "we ran, as it were, through a great part of the The traditional Propers after all — the Epistle from Galatians 4 and Creed, by setting before us in an orderly manner the highest Mys­ the Gospel of the feeding of the multitude from John — have disap­ teries of our Redemption by Christ"; in the second half of the year, peared. In general, the hold of the older logic still obtains in the the Creed rans through us, as it were, in the application of saving sense that its credal quality is carried over into how people some­ doctrine to the habits of moral and holy lives. "The Sundays after times think the new lectionaries. But in fact, the interplay of the­ Trinity", John Henry Blunt observes, "may be regarded as a sys­ matic and semi-continuous reading of Scripture they present have tem illustrating the practical life of Christianity, founded on the very little connection to the credal form of the older lectionary. truths previously presented, and guided by the example of our Blessed Lord". The interplay of justification and sanctification so "Historical" reconstructions and speculations have sup­ crucial to the Common Prayer tradition is embodied in the stmc­ planted theological understanding in the ordering of the read­ ture of the eucharistic lectionary itself. ing of Scripture in the Church's life of prayer. The "new" lectionaries assume the primacy of the synoptic gospels, hence the We have forgotten this, just as we have forgotten the relation between the Collects, Epistles and Gospels of each Sunday as well HEART continued on page 10

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: May/June 1999 7 JOHN MERBECKE (C.1505 - C. 1585) MUSICIAN AND BIBLICAL SCHOLAR

or centuries the Daily Offices and Mass had been sung/ The content of his The Booke of Common Praier Noted chanted in God's Church and this tradition continued (1550) provided services for the Preces and responses, Finto the sixteenth century and through the English Ref­ Mattins, Evensong, Benedicite, Quincunque Vult, Holy Com­ ormation. After the publication of the first English Book of munion and the Burial of the Dead. The music consists of the Common Prayer in 1549, there appeared with official adaptations of plainsong from the Latin Rites and tunes com­ approval a further book containing the music for singing the posed in a similar style by Merbecke himself. services. It was entitled. The Booke of Common Prater Noted (1550), that is Musical Notes for the Common Prayer, and Judith Blezzard has written: "The underlay is syllabic the composer was John Merbecke. (It is probable that he had throughout and phrase climaxes are typically reserved for composed the music for the English Litany of 1544 also.) important words. He adopted a special form of rhythmic notation, probably with the aim of achieving speech rhythm Merbecke's music did not have much time to be heard in music. Further, he used only four note shapes, 'strene note" and used in English cathedrals, colleges and churches be­ (breve), 'square note" (semibreve), 'pycke' (minim) and cause of the publication of the revised Prayer Book of 1552, 'close" (breve with pause for cadences). He also used the the death of Edward VI and the restoration of Roman Ca­ 'prycke", a dot lengthening the preceding note by half. tholicism under Mary. It was not until the nineteenth century Merbecke explained the system in his preface and it is clear that it was revived for use in Anglican worship by Anglo- that he intended the note values to be interpreted exactly, Catholics. Portions of it are printed in the Hymnal 1940 of rather than in the freer manner associated with plainsong" the Protestant Episcopal Church, USA. (The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, Vol.12). # Merbecke was the organist at St. George's Chapel, Windsor. In 1543 he was arrested for heresy (that is for his advanced Protestant views on the Mass). Though two others arrested with him were put to death, he was set free but his writings destroyed. (However, John Foxe, the martyrologist, thought that Merbecke had also died and wrote so in the first n t jrio Mt ^ edition of his Book of Martyrs, 1576.) Nevertheless, on re­ fccontcpneD Cb mucfteof tfte £>;Der turning to Windsor, Merbecke persevered with his project of comrngpja^rasitttobe ronsm for a Concordance and was able later in 1550 in a friendly religious environment to publish the first Concordance to the arc WeD onlp t^efc iljzt!|:l English Bible, dedicated to Edward VI. nil. (totes'of notes, In his music for the English Common Prayer, Merbecke followed the basic requirements of John Calvin of Geneva SK^ftrtl note is a (Irene note anD is and of Archbishop Cranmer — "for every syllable a note" in ^^atoene, Xfytttttmb afimarenote, monophonic settings. Thus he adapted chant and created a anftfc a tempfejene* %$t Hi* a ppctte functional plainsong, which is what Cranmer, who appar­ anDts amimpmmej3nDtol)en*tf)eret£a ently had little love of polyphony or choral music, wished. p^m (>F tliefqtiarenote, tyatp^cbt The aim was to provide music which could be sung by the is ftalfc m nwcfte asttje note clerks and also by the congregation and which in its simplic­ ity and accessibility promoted the beauty of holiness in the tbatgoetDbefojeft. ictK praise of the Holy Trinity. tt&tsado^anDis onlpWttsatfino Thus Merbecke's music contrasts with that of other six­ ofabrrfc teenth century composers (Christopher Tye, Thomas Talhs & The four note shapes explained in the preface to Thomas Morley) who were primarily interested in composing Merbecke's 'The Booke of Common Praier Noted'(1550) music (polyphony) for choirs and who prepared the way for the later Anglican Chant of the late seventeenth century.

8 MANDATE: May/June 1999 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church AN "ORDINATION FIRST" FOR CRANMER THEOLOGICAL HOUSE

The Communion Service was according to the Rite contained in the 1928 B.C.P. which is used regularly in Christ's Children's Chapel. The celebrant was the Reformed Episcopal Bishop, Royal Grote, who gives permission for the use of the 1928 B.C.P. in his diocese, even though it is not the official prayer book of the R.E.C. About 40 people were present but there was no official representative of the local Episcopal Bishop of W.Louisiana present, even though he had been informed of the event.

By this device the seminary placed two of its students in the work force; St. Francis Parish _ of El Paso (ECUSA) got two assistants and the Bishop of the Rio Grande circumvented the nor­ n ecclesiastical first took place on March 24, 1999, in the mal procedures for ordination in dioceses of the ECUSA. Further, omate. Bavarian style, Christ's Children's Chapel built by the Ugandan bishop placed two of his deacons as missionaries in a AAllen Dickson for the use of his employees and families at foreign land. his distribution center in Shreveport, Lousiana. The chapel is also used by the small seminary of the Reformed Episcopal Church called QUESTIONS ARISING OUT OF A CONCERN FOR GODLY ORDER: Cranmer Theological House as well as a congregation ofthe R.E.C. In classical polity should two bishops simultaneously ordain one Between 10.30.a.m. and noon on this special Wednesday, the person? Right Rev'd Terence Kelshaw of the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio No. It is (to say the least) extremely rare for two bishops to Grande and the Bishop of the local Reformed Episcopal Church ordain a man to the diaconate. Apparently in this instance ecumeni­ diocese, the Right Rev'd Royal Grote jointly ordained two young cal feeling took precedence over historic practice. men — Douglas Jean Martin & Joseph Wilson Patterson III - as deacons. ORDINATION FIRST continued on page 10 They ordained these men from the Reformed Episcopal Church to work in another jurisdiction, the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande, and at St. Francis Church in El Paso where Fr. Johnson, who was present at the ordination, is the rector.

The two candidates were presented by the multi-millionaire owner ofthe factory to which the seminary and chapel are attached, the Rev'd Mr. Allen Dickson (an Episcopalian), and by the Dean of the Seminary, the Rev'd Dr. Ray Sutton (a Reformed Episcopa­ lian). They explained that these men were being ordained deacon for the Bishop of Namirembe (Uganda),Samuel Balagadde Ssekaddee, but that they would serve in the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande under Kelshaw rather than in Uganda.

The service used for the ordination was that for making of dea­ cons from the 1979 prayer book; the litanist and preacher was Kelshaw. At the ordination the ordination prayer was said by both bishops to­ gether for each man and both bishops laid their hands simultaneously upon each one. The ordination certificate with Bishop Kelshaw's seal also had on it the name of the Ugandan bishop.

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: May/June 1999 9 ORDINATION FIRST continued from page 9

Are all the bishops involved (from Uganda, Rio Grande, Westem Louisiana and the Reformed Episcopal Church) actually in full Communion with each other? This matter is not clear but their full Communion is surely necessary for such an event to have trae vahdity and integrity in the Church of God. Will the two deacons ever go to serve in Uganda ? Apparently never. The plan is that they serve in the Diocese of Rio Grande and eventually be received into the Episcopal Church from the Ugandan Church which they have not visited. Such a plan is, to say the least, odd and irregular. Since the 1662 B.C.P. is the Prayer Book of Uganda and since the R.E.C. is moving to adopt the 1662 B.C.P. for itself, why was this Book not used for both the ordination and for the Holy Communion! Apparently Bishop Kelshaw believed that as an ECUSA bishop he had to use the latest ECUSA Rite for ordination and the RFC representatives believed they should use the 1928 B.C.P. Rite which they normally use in the Chapel at Shreveport for Holy Commumon.

FINAL COMMENTS On reflection and so that all things be done "decently and in order" it would seem that it would have been better had the ordina­ tions taken place in the Diocese of the Rio Grande using the Ordi­ nal of 1662, that Bishop Kelshaw had alone ordained them, that the two young men spend at least a summer or two in the Ugandan Church, and that a representative ofthe Ugandan bishop as well as representatives of the Reformed Episcopal Church had been present as observers. *%* The two deacons with Bishop Kelshaw in background.

HEART continued from page 7 three-year cycle of Matthew, Mark and Luke. Even more, the ghostly anti-doctrinal. The various historical approaches belonging to con­ presence of the mythical "Q" is assumed in the ordering of read­ temporary biblical criticism all carry with them philosophical and ings, for example, the inclusion of the "Bread of Life" discourse theological presuppositions. It could hardly be otherwise. But the from John's gospel in the midst of reading Mark. limits of historicism are beginning to be seen. It cannot account for the texts it reconstructs (and deconstructs!). It is hardly an adequate For the older eucharistic lectionary a theological primacy was basis for the church's reading of Scripture. It is ironically ahistorical accorded to the Gospel of John. Theologically, the question of which in terms of how the church has historically read and prayed the gospel is earliest is a subordinate concem. Ultimately, the question scriptures. "what is history", too, has to be considered philosophically and theologically. Perhaps, just perhaps, it is time for history to come home to theology. And perhaps, just perhaps, the place to begin is at The ascendancy of modem biblical criticism has resulted in the center, at the biblical heart of the matter, in the recovery of primacy being given to the historical. It has resulted in the uneasy the sense of Scripture as "a doctrinal instrument of salvation", and unhappy tension between theology and history. And it has as Cranmer and Hooker put it. Perhaps, just perhaps, we might been observed that everything before the rise of modem bibhcal begin to recover for our church and our minds the eucharistic criticism in the late 18th century is ipso facto pre-critical and fun­ lectionary of the classical Books of Common Prayer. It just might damentalist. It is a big broom indeed that so cavalierly consigns to be to find ourselves on the road to Emmaus, like the disciples "our the same dust-bin of history the incredible diversity of approaches hearts bum[ing] within us...while he talked with us by the way and to biblical interpretation belonging to the church's life, a diversity while he opened to us the Scriptures". That is the heart ofthe mat­ sustained, it must be said, by the credal understanding of Holy Scrip­ ter, especially where "he was known of them in the breaking of the ture. It would be hard to say in what meaningful sense any of it bread". # could be termed "fundamentalist" — a category, after all, which is really a product of bibhcal criticism itself. The Rev'd David Curry is Rector of Christ Church, Windsor, NS, Canada The historical approach can also be seen to be fundamentally

10 MANDATE: May/June 1999 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church HE latest issue of The Anglican, published by the Anglican Society T and the General Theological Semi­ nary in New York, includes articles by two . patriarchs of mainstream Episcopalianism, Prof. Reginald Fuller's "On Saving Cranmer" and Dr. Boone Porter's "What Can 1928 Teach Us?", making a number of sensible criticisms ofthe 1979 book, to by David Mills the effect that it has lost or given up much of substance and continuing importance. my opinion, is its claim that the 1979 Book gies, which dominate and define the book, The extremes of left and right of Common Prayer does not deserve to be break with the Book of Common Prayer caUed, and is not, 'a' or 'the' Book of Com­ not only in language (important if not cru­ Of equal interest, though for a differ­ mon Prayer of the Episcopal Church." cial in itself) but in doctrine and in the sort ent reason, is the President's column by of mind and heart they are intended to General's Prof. Robert Wright. It is titled It would take some time to disentangle form, as Drs. Fuller and Porter's essays "The Book of Common Prayer & those to the logic of that sentence and respond to suggest. Its Left & Right," and in it he claims that his caricature — surely, for example, he advocates of the 1979 book and continu­ is not in favor of divorce as such, as his One can prefer the new rites while ac­ ing revision thereof face two "extreme wording imphes, nor can he really think it cepting that they are in fact new, and there­ claims." (The middle, always the place to fair to say that Mandate opposes fore call them something new. The Church be, is occupied by himself and his allies.) ecumenism in general. But notice that he of England named its collection of new seems to believe (note that "most") that rites the Alternative Service Book while "To the left of middle stands a vague holding to the traditional view of sex and leaving the Prayer Book intact, putting into and amorphous mass of persons who are order, opposing "inclusive" language (for effect the position Prof. Wright finds so calling for 'the Prayer Book unbound'," God, I assume he means), and disagree­ unbehevable. he writes. These people believe that tech­ ing with the Presiding Bishop are "incred­ nology has made "The printing of one ible," which means, as the dictionary at A political definition Book of Common Prayer obsolete, and hand puts it, "too extraordinary and im­ At the end of his article Prof. Wright that the confusion and dispersal of Angli­ probable to admit of behef." declares that the Anglican Society "stands can doctrine is so well entrenched that squarely in the middle between them [the None of these positions would have there are no longer any main lines, any "extremes"], affirming the 1979 Book of seemed incredible to St. Paul — nor seem central body, of Anglican belief to be ex­ Common Prayer and whatever future re­ incredible to him now, for that matter — pressed in one Prayer Book or liturgy." vision the Episcopal Church may decide nor to the Pope or the Orthodox or most to make of it." This is his definition of He does not answer them, but merely Anglicans in Africa and Asia. I can un­ Common Prayer: "whatever the Episco­ claims that "it is difficult to make a spe­ derstand Prof. Wright disagreeing with pal Church may decide to make of it." cific analysis of this movement." I am not them on these questions, but to call the usually more liberal than Prof. Wright, but positions incredible is itself incredible. It It is a legitimate definition but an I must say they ought to be engaged, for is, if anything, parochial. unstable one. It means that "Common the questions they, and their comrades Prayer" is not fundamentally a theological among the church growthers, raise are A book of common prayer? or liturgical or historical but a political important ones. And important, I would But to the point of his attack: that it is thing. It means — this is the possibility I have thought, for the reasons Prof. Wright absurd to think the 1979 book not a book mentioned above — that if the General and other liturgists once gave for writing of common prayer. He does not convince, Convention approves, the "extreme" of a a new Book of Common Prayer, includ­ and in arguing his position exposes him­ Prayer Book Unbound may become the ing the need to respond to changes in the self to a possibility I do not think he wants center, and complete liturgical anarchy culture. to open. therefore become by definition "Common Prayer." # "To the right of middle," he contin­ Surely it is clear that a book contain­ ues, is the Prayer Book Society. "Although ing two radically different rites, and a host David Mills is director of publishing at Tnnity Mandate opposes women's ordination, of altematives within them, is by defini­ Episcopal School for Ministry, a senior divorce, inclusive language, ecumenism, tion not a book of common prayer, in the editor of Touchstone: A Journal of Mere liberationism, 'new doctrine,' and the po­ sense, the historic sense, that all who use Christianity, and the editor of The Pilgrim's sitions taken by Presiding Bishop Frank Guide: C. S. Lewis and the Art of Witness it will be engaged in the same prayer. And (Eerdmans). Griswold, its most incredible assertion, in surely it is also clear that the Rite II litur­

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: May/June 1999 11 DEVOTIONS AND THE COMMON PRAYER Louis R. Tarsitano

once heard a priest talking about his first month in a new This was the situation in England in 1549. Five major vari­ parish. Everything seemed to be going well, until he was ants or "uses" of the common prayer (the Salisbury, Hereford, I visited by a delegation of "concerned parishioners." They Bangor, York, and Lincoln) had developed within one national missed the silent opening prayer and blessing said by their pre­ church. The first Enghsh "Book ofthe Common Prayer" replaced vious rector, who would pause before leaving the sacristy, lift these multiple uses with a single use for the entire Church of his hand in the doorway, and then enter the sanctuary. It made England. Henceforth, the public prayer of the local church, as the whole service seem holier, they said. representative of the entire Church, would follow a unified com­ Perplexed, the new priest phoned his predecessor, an ac­ mon disciphne. quaintance, to ask him about it. "The architect made the steps This discipline, however, did not preclude local customs or from the sacristy to the sanctuary too steep," he explained. "No devotions. As the essay "Of Ceremonies" at the end of the Book offense, but I'm a good bit taller than you, and I kept hitting my ofthe Common Prayer explained: head on the top ofthe doorway. I got into the habit of putting my As touching kneeling, crossing, holding up of hands, knock­ hand up so that I wouldn't bang into it." ing upon the breast, and other gestures: they may be used or left What happened next is what interests us here. Rather than as every man's devotion serveth without blame. offer this mundane explanation and disappoint the piety of his What this statement does preclude is any effort to impose people, the new priest began raising his arm and saying a prayer what is merely local or personal on the entire Church as neces­ before entering the sanctuary, and this practice remained a be­ sary for salvation or for trae common prayer, or to intrude it into loved part ofthe local devotions. the Church's common public prayer as if it were (or should be) There is little of vice and much of virtue in such practices, common to all. There is a time and a place for additional de­ but what if they are universalized, so that low doorway or not, votions, and that is after the duties of the common prayer every priest in every parish must raise his hand? Over time, the have been accomplished and apart from the common public accumulation of similar merely local devotions, understood or worship of the congregation, so that no member of the not, would begin to smother the Common Prayer of the Church Church is compelled to engage in them as the price of entry under its weight, obscuring what is truly universal for all Chris­ to the common worship that he is obligated to offer to God. tians in worship. Thus, the historic Prayer Book does not offer universal de­ Communion is not merely an idea, or simply an invis­ votions, but only the requirements of a complete common prayer. ible spiritual state. God himself willed that the communion There are no Prayer Book forms for the rosary, the Stations of of his Church have a concrete, visible reality that signified the Cross, or additional Holy Week devotions developed before the even deeper spiritual reality behind it when he gave the the Reformation, any more than there are Prayer Book forms for Church the sacraments of Baptism and the Holy Commun­ Post-Reformation hymn singing, prayer groups, or prophecy ion, as the kernel of her common prayer. The other forms and meetings. administrations of the common prayer are not arbitrary addi­ tions to it, but follow from the necessities of a life in commun­ These are private devotions, even if they are shared by an ion with God. The Daily Offices, the Solemnization of Matri­ entire local congregation, and there is not a one of them that mony, the Visitation of the Sick, the Burial of the Dead, and the would not be enhanced by its following after one of the classic ordination of the Church's ministry proceed from the universal Prayer Book forms, such as the Daily Offices or the Litany, so needs of the life of every Christian community, in every time that it is securely rooted in the Holy Scriptures and the common and every place. faith ofthe Church. At that point, too, those who did not wish to participate in them could quietly and politely leave others to their The common prayer, of course, is not the limit of prayer, devotions. either personal or corporate; but it is the common discipline that identifies the communion of a local church with the one Church There will always remain a fundamental difference be­ of Jesus Christ. Local customs and popular devotions are part of tween devotions, which are useful to some, and the common the character of the local church, and they have always been prayer, which is necessary to all. Maintaining that distinction permitted to the "members in particular" of Christ's Body. But is not an act of minimalism, but an act of charity that pre­ when customs and devotions crowd out the common prayer, re­ serves both the integrity ofthe universal Church and the free­ place it, or take precedence over it, the communion ofthe whole dom of the local congregation to express its own piety. Of all Church is endangered. Something other than the universal be­ the great formularies of the Christian churches, the Book of comes the test of "trae faith." Common Prayer is the most charitable in this regard. #

12 MANDATE: May/June 1999 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church LETTER TO SEVEN PRIMATES

n February 1999, seven archbishops/presiding bishops of the Anglican Communion jointly signed and sent a letter to Presiding Bishop Griswold, urging him to seek to persuade his fellow American bishops to conform then teaching and diocesan practice to the Iresolutions of Lambeth 98 on sexual morality. In a reply dated March 10 and on the advice of nine named American bishops, Griswold politely refused the godly advice of the Primates and invited them to visit the dioceses where the "gay agenda' is being pursued. On April 10-12, these same Primates (or their representatives) met at Singapore with an American delegation from conservative groups [e.g., E.S.A. & First Promise] within the ECUSA, order to hear the petitions ofthe latter for help from abroad in establishing an orthodox missionary diocese or province in North America, separate from the ECUSA, but traly a member of the Anglican Communion of Churches. The Prayer Book Society, which has been carefully monitoring all these developments, sent the following letter to the Primates, urging them to help the American conservative groups to recover the historic formularies as a necessary preparation for any possible future reforms in North America. __—_____—-———-——"""—""'' !

__.___—————^-^" Easter Monday, 1999 1

secondary authorities supporting ^ ^ ^.^

May our exalted Lord D V Yours truly,

The Prayer Book Society. ____—-

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: May/June 1999 13 A CONTINENTAL CONGRESS "Come, let us reason together/' saith the LORD. he two presbyters who wrote the book. The Way, the Truth and the Life, the Anglican Walk with Jesus Christ, which was given to the bishops at the Lambeth Conference in 1998 by the Prayer Book Societies, have made a joint Proposal to biblically-minded TEpiscopalians and Anghcans in America. What follows is the substance of the text of the Proposal, which is offered to our readers for then careful consideration. Having read reports of the joint efforts of various groups, societies and organizations at then roundtable in Atlanta on March 8 [and with Primates in Singapore April 10], it occurs to us on historical grounds that there is an important next step that needs to be taken to ensure the success and recognition of the proposed new province. To build upon what has already been accomplished, a kind of "Continental Congress" of American Anglicans is urgently needed. While the effort to estabhsh a new Anglican province in the United States had to begin with small groups, now is the time to involve larger groups of the faithful and to engage with them in answering in advance some of the reasonable questions that the Primates of other Anglican jurisdictions will surely need to ask. For example, "For whom do you speak," "What is your basic polity," "What are your formularies, and are they consonant with the Anglican Way?" The formularies are our past and common law. They need to be in the front of the entire effort for the sake of its legitimacy. Discussing them in public, demonstrating their reasonableness, takes an important weapon away from our opposition. Public meet­ ing and open discussion deprives the opposition of its advantage as a known public quantity. If done properly, the public appeal of a public congress of faithful Anglicans should develop social momentum, not only among Episcopalians, but also among the general populace. If the ECUSA cannot be shamed into yielding up property claims to the cooperating faithful, it can at least be revealed as an authoritarian (if not totalitarian) and materialistic entity, which revelation will only confirm the justice of forming a new province and its legitimacy in comparison to the grasping ECUSA. Further the foreign bishops and jurisdictions, whose fellowship we will need as much as then recognition, will be able to make our common case for action to the rest of the Anglican Communion with the assurance that anyone can know and understand what the Americans are about. For the sake of discussion, the "Continental Congress" of Anglicans should invite representatives of organizations, present dioceses, continuing jurisdictions, and so forth. This congress should be a public event to discuss why a province is needed and what it should be (not yet "will be") like. We can't tell who the "players" are, until there is such a meeting; and we can't know what the "game" is, until some rules are agreed on. The announced agenda of debatable issues should be something like: 1) The need for a province 2) The spiritual goals of such a province: a) The recovery of the Holy Scripture as the final authority in doctrine, discipline, and worship; and b) The historic Anglican Way as a means of accomplishing this 3) The constitutional authority of the province, to be objectified in the following formularies, subject to the Scriptures: a) The 1662/1928 Book of Common Prayer as the primary liturgy and interpreter of all other allowed liturgies [e.g., the American ECUSA Prayer Book of 1979 & the ASB of England 1980]; b) The 39 Articles of Religion; c) The Ordinal (as in 1662/1928); d) The American canon law as of the last competent commentary (1952; 1954 ed. White and Dykman) 4) Proposed amendments to 3 (d), regarding such issues as the ordination of women, marital discipline, etc., with these beginning suggestions: a) a moratorium on the further ordinations of women, and the protection of those who do not accept their orders, with the stipulation that in further discussion it is the propriety of ordaining women which is the proposal that must be positively proved to be consistent with Scripture and the practice of the Church.; b) That existing ecclesiastical judgments of marital nullity be left undisturbed, but that as of a target date such as January 1, 2000 (or even 2001) no clerical marriage after a civil divorce decree or ordination of divorced and remarried candidates will be permitted, saving only the case of those who have submitted to a validly constituted marriage tribunal, with a finding that on the basis of objective impediments that pre-existed the attempted marriage no true spiritual union occurred. However long it takes to hammer out something like this, the Primates should not be asked to recognize or assist the proposed province until such work is accomplished. And the representatives of the province should be prepared to receive the Primates' godly counsel about any other matters that must be dealt with in order to maintain the integrity of the Anglican Way and of the Anglican Communion. With the help of God, such a next step into making our common cause public and known, should bear good fruit for the cause of faithful Anglicans here and abroad. We offer this proposal in the fear of God and to His glory not in the name of any organization but simply and initially in our names as presbyters in the Church of God as desiring unity in the Anglican Way.

Members of organizations within the ECUSA and of Anglican jurisdictions outside ECUSA have shown interest and there is a possibility that the Congress will occur in the Fall of 1999.

14 MANDATE; May/June 1999 The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church A Letter from the Archbishops assembled in Singapore to the Organizations who sit around the Round Table of the First Promise Movement.

15 April 1999 Dear Brothers and Sisters, We greet you joyfully in the name of our risen Lord! It has been our privilege to spend these days with your representatives here in Singapore. We have worshipped and prayed together, listened carefully to their presentations, and wrestled with the urgent and vital matters that they have raised. Some of us who came here had our joumey paid through your great generosity and we thank you for that. Let us tell you straight away that we hear your cry, and are committed to action which in God's time will help in the reformation of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America and restore its biblical witness throughout your nation. We have studied your particular proposal for intervention and with other relevant questions want this to be considered more widely by the Primates in the Anglican Communion. We are aware of the seriousness of the circum­ stances that prompted this request and we assure you of our commitment to pursue this matter to a satisfactory conclu­ sion. We are also concemed that vulnerable parishes in ECUSA should receive the episcopal visitation they need. As a step towards these goals we are writing to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold and the Primates of the Anglican Communion. You will understand that we cannot give you the text of the letters ahead of their delivery. We can though assure you of the following: 1. The intemational Communion is becoming more alert to the urgency of the situation you face. We will do all we can to ensure that our fellow primates are sufficiently informed. 2. We will be asking for compliance with the Lambeth Resolution on Sexuality and the resolution requiring respect for bishops unwilling to ordain or license women. We will request that these matters be included on the agenda of the Joint Standing Committee of the ACC and Primates in September 1999 and in the Primates' Meeting in March 2000. 3. We are planning a further meeting of concemed Archbishops to take place in November to monitor progress. We will invite a small group to represent you and to be a resource for us. 4. Practical steps will be taken to strengthen pastoral support for parishes that have this need. Finally we ask you to pray for us as we continue to address these difficult matters. We cannot take short cuts, but neither will we allow official procedures to postpone indefinitely necessary action. May we have wisdom and grace, and may you be encouraged and given strength to persevere. Yours in Christ, The Most Rev Maurice Sinclair Primate of Southern Cone The Most Rev Emmanuel Kolini Primate of Rwanda The Most Rev Moses Tay Primate of South East Asia The Most Rev Harry Goodhew Archbishop of New South Wales,Australia The Most Rev Jonathan Onyemelukwe Archbishop of Nigeria (Province II) and representing Primate of Nigeria The Rt. Rev Evans Kisekka Representing Primate of Uganda

The Prayer Book Society welcomes all genuine help from Anglican leaders abroad in the efforts to bring renewal according to the Word of God to the Episcopal Church in the U.S.A. The Society is not a member of the Round Table of the First Promise Movement, but it does take an active interest in what is going on and seeks to offer advice to the organizations who sit there. Let us all pray that this initiative will gain momentum and that it will lead either to real renewal within the ECUSA or the amicable creation of a second Province of the Anglican Church/Way/Gommunion in America, a province wherein traditionalists have a real place and where the historic forms of worship are valued and used.

The Prayer Book Society of the Episcopal Church MANDATE: May/June 1999 15 GIVING THANKS TO GOD FOR THE GIFT OF THE COMMON PRAYER

f~^r~y/7iidding prepared for use in the Divine Service at the 450th Anniversary {^yQCvfThe Book of Common Prayer during Whitsuntide 1999. Sw Dearly beloved in the Lord, we are met together to render thanks to Almighty God for the gift which we have received at His hands of The Book of Common Prayer, and for the great benefits which it brought to our forefathers, as also to ourselves; acknowledging and accepting with grateful hearts its decent and comely ordering of the Divine Service and Liturgy of the Church in our own tongue; whereby our people have been edified through the knowledge of God revealed in Holy Scripture and have offered in the con­ gregation with humble and obedient hearts their sacrifice of prayer and praise. And first let us remember with gratitude all those whose translations of the Bible laid the sure founda­ tions of this scriptural worship, especially William Tyndale, martyr, and Miles Coverdale, bishop; together with the later scholars and divines who diligently compared and revised their work in the enduring Version authorized in 1611: and to their names let us join that of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury whose skill and judgment composed the English Litany in the reign of King Henry VIII and contrived and shaped the First Prayer Book of 1549. In particular, let us remember those who in 1789 in Philadelphia revised the Enghsh Prayer Book for use as the Book of Common Prayer of the Episcopal Church. Let us also thank God for the noble tradition of our sacred music and for every other adornment of the Liturgy and Offices of the Church agreeable to the use of the Book of Common Prayer. Futhermore, let us offer to Almighty God our hearty thanks for the apostolic zeal which has carried the Prayer Book overseas to our brethren of other nations and of other tongues the model and the inspiration of their doctrine and worship, and to bind together in one fellowship the whole Anghcan Communion. Finally, to these our thanksgivings let us add our prayers that we be mindful of the heritage that has been entrusted to us in the Church of Christ: that we may have grace to use the Book of Common Prayer, and all God's other gifts by us inherited, to the edifying of his Church and to the sanctifying of our common life; that in all things God will teach us to worship Him in spirit and in truth.

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 Philadelphia, PA 19128-0220 LOUISVILLE. KY Permit No. 879