e Bi-Monthly Magazine of the Prayer Book Society MVolume , Number September/OctoberE
I I Where can I fi nd a church that uses the Prayer- Book? Page
Refl ections from the Editor’s Desk Page
e Public Language of Worship Page
Prayer Book Society Board of Directors at All Saints’ Wynnewood Page
e s: Changing the Language of Prayer & Worship Page
e s: e English Bible & the Language of Prayer Page
e s: Prayer Books & the Language of Worship Page Rowan Douglas Williams
Intimacy & Reverence in th Archbishop of Canterbury the Language of Prayer lmighty God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who in thy providence hast established Page the ancient See of Canterbury as the primary instrument of unity of the Anglican Com- munion of Churches, we pray for Rowan whom thou has called to be the Archbishop of A Love Story about a Con- ACanterbury. By the abundance of thy mercy, grant that he, repenting of his sins and conforming to tinuing Anglican Church thy holy law and wisdom, will enter into this holy offi ce in the fullness of the blessing of the Gospel Page of the same Lord Jesus Christ, thy Son, to whom with thee and the Holy Ghost be ascribed glory and dominion now and for ever. Amen. e list parishes using the Concerned Churchmen. is directory Where can I fi nd a BCP by state or area, does not tell what prayer book is used. church that their ecclesiastical jurisdic- You may order from the editor, Mrs. Jane Wtion (Episcopal Church or “Continuing Nones, Dupont Avenue South, Min- uses the Church”), and all of their services, if from neapolis, MN , telephone: () Prayer the , or the ones that use the . BCP. e Reformed Episcopal Church Please let us know of other parishes Book? uses a Prayer Book which includes both that use the BCP. We are glad to the (Church of England) and much know of them, and also that folks are from the . reading Mandate. Since we can only list An excellent reference is the Directory each parish once, it might be a good idea of Traditional Anglican and Episcopal to keep the issues of Mandate that have Parishes, published by the Fellowship of this column to use for future reference. Texas: Houston area • Chapel of St. Matthias • St. omas’ Episcopal Church (Reformed Episcopal Church) Sunday : am Holy Communion ( e Episcopal Church/Forward in Dayfl ower · Katy, TX e Rev. Kenneth G. Walsh, Jr., Priest- Faith) · Jackwood · Houston, TX in-Charge Mailing Address: P.O. Box Sunday : am Morning Prayer • St. John’s/Old South Anglican Church Houston, TX : am Holy Communion (Anglican Catholic Church) e Rev. Jason Grote, Vicar Skinner Lane Sunday : am Holy Communion • Church of the Holy Trinity Richmond, TX : am Holy Communion or (Reformed Episcopal Church) Mailing Address: P.O. Box Morning Prayer Byrne Avenue · Houston, TX Richmond, TX - : pm Evening Prayer / Sunday : am Morning Prayer & e Rev. Wayland N. Coe, Rector Sunday : am Morning Prayer Holy Communion e Rev. William Heard, Associate : am Holy Communion e Rev. Carol G. Rosaire, Jr., O/OSB, e Rev. Douglas Cadwallader, Assis- e Rt. Rev. Royal U. Grote, Jr., Rector Rector tant e Rev. “Bud” Colvis, Curate • St. Paul’s Anglican Church Update/Change from last listing e Rev. David Marshall, Deacon (Independent) • Trinity Church • Church of St. Peter Reds Bluff Road (Reformed Episcopal Church) (Anglican Province of Christ the King) Pasadena, TX Lake Ave. (Chapel at the Church Augusta Drive (Post Oak YMCA of the Good Shepherd) · Maitland, FL Building) · Houston, TX Sunday : am Holy Communion e Rev. Clay Shadeck Sunday : am Holy Communion • St. omas of Canterbury Sunday : am Holy Communion/ e Rt. Rev. S. Patrick Murphy, SSC, (Reformed Episcopal Church/Forward Morning Prayer Rector in Faith) · South Freeway (State e Rev. James Reber, Rector e Rev. David Sprunk, Assistant Highway ) · Houston, TX e Rev. Kevin Burks, Deacon e Rev. Hampton Mabry, Hospice Mailing Address: P.O. Box Please write the Rev. Fr. David C. Kennedy, Chaplain Houston, TX • SSC, at Cardinal Lane, Lantana, FL • St. Jerome’s Anglican Church Sunday : am Holy Communion - if you know of parishes that (Anglican Church, Inc.) : am Holy Communion or use the BCP. Needless to say it will River Plantation Drive Morning Prayer take along time to list them all! Praise God Conroe, TX - e Rev. James T. Payne, Rector for that!!!
T M September / October Volume , N umber Editor: e Rev’d Dr.. Peter Toon • Design/Layout: Boldface Graphics e Members of the Board of Directors of the Prayer Book Society: The Rev’d Wayland Coe (Texas); e Rev’d Joseph S. Falzone (Pennsylvania); Mr. Michael W. Freeland (Pennsylvania); Dr.. Herb Guerry (Georgia); e Rev’d David C Kennedy SSC (Florida); e Rev’d Jonathan Ostman III, SSC (Rhode Island); Mrs Marilyn Ruzicka (New York); Mrs Miriam K. Stauff (Wisconsin); e Rev’d Dr.. Peter Toon (England); Mr. Luther Dan Wallis (California); Mr. David Williams (Texas) & Mr. W. Denman Zirkle (Florida). MANDATE is published six times a year by the Prayer Book Society, a non-profi t organization serving the Church. All gifts to the P.B.S. are tax deductible. Recipients of Mandate are encouraged to send a minimum gift of .. Editorial and all other correspondence: P.O. Box , Philadelphia, PA . Phone --PBS-. Postmaster: Please send address changes to the above address. world-wide web address is http://www.episcopalian.org/pbs M PagePage E M Page E Refl ections from the Editor’s Desk e Rev’d Dr. Peter Toon of the Church of England. Further, he can look e Archbishopric of Canterbury forward to years in the post, in which time the t was announced on July that the Church of England, and the Anglican Communion Queen has nominated the Most Reverend of Churches, could change dramatically. Rowan Douglas Williams, MA, DPhil, DD, Rowan has so many excellent qualities that even IFBA, Archbishop of Wales and Bishop of Mon- the most pessimistic of us must see optimistic mouth, for election by the Dean and Chapter of possibilities for the Anglican Way with him as the Canterbury in the place of the Most Reverend senior Primate! But there are negatives. and Right Honourable George Leonard Carey, However much he tries to be gracious to, and BD, M , PhD, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, understanding of, other Primates he will not be Primate of All England and Metropolitan. accepted by a sizeable minority of them as a man e Most Reverend Rowan Wil- of God if he continues to embrace liams (born ) was educated (howbeit in a limited way) the at Dynevor Secondary School, doctrine of same-sex partnerships Swansea, then at Christ’s College, as approved by God. e fact that Cambridge where he read eol- he is against abortion will be wel- ogy. He studied for the priesthood comed by all but for most African and lectured at the College of the bishops toleration of homosexual- Resurrection at Mirfi eld from ity is a sin, even as homosexual to . practice is a sin, which unforgiven From to Rowan sends the sinner to hell. Williams was a tutor at West- Livingstone Mpalanyi-Nkoyoyo, cott House. He was a lecturer in the Primate of Uganda, where Divinity in Cambridge University the fi rst Christian martyrs were from to and Dean and young men who refused to engage Chaplain of Clare College from in sodomy, commented on July to . From to he rd: “We need to pray for Rowan also worked as honorary curate in because we are not sure about his the parish of Chesterton St George, Ely. In he beliefs. For us in Africa homosexuality is sin. If was made a Canon Residentiary of Christ Church, he does not change his mind there will be a lot of Oxford and Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, problems and divisions.” Oxford. He was elected Bishop of Monmouth in As I think of Rowan, whom I have known casu- December , and Archbishop of Wales in . ally for a long time since we were both doing doc- His many publications include e Wound of toral work at Oxford in the mid-s, the words Knowledge (), Resurrection (), e Truce of the evangelical hymn come to mind: of God (), Beginning Now: Peacemaking e- Down in the human heart, crushed by the ology (), Arius, Heresy and Tradition (), tempter, Teresa of Avila (), Open to Judgement (), Feelings lie buried that grace can restore, and After Silent Centuries (). Most recently Touched by a loving hand, wakened by he has published Lost Icons () and Writing in kindness, the Dust (). He has also edited e Making of Chords that were broken will vibrate once Orthodoxy () and jointly edited Love’s Redeem- more. ing Work (), an anthology of Anglican writing I believe that deep in the soul of Rowan is the on Spirituality. full, biblical and orthodox Faith of the Catholic Rowan Williams is married to Jane who teaches Church of God (has he not written splendidly of at Trinity College, Bristol. ey have a son and a aspects of this in some of his many writings?). I daughter, Rhiannon and Pip. His interests include hope that under the gracious pressure of the Holy music, fi ction and languages. Ghost, and the prayerful kindness of the people of e year old Welshman will be the youngest God, the chords of this wonderful symphony of Archbishop for years, the fi rst since the th truth (that we call the reformed Catholic Faith) century to take young children to Lambeth Palace will vibrate in him and through him to the Church and the fi rst since the reign of Bloody Mary in of England and to the whole Anglican Commu- to be appointed from outside the bench of bishops nion. M Page E M Page E Louis R. Tarsitano he Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ has become controversial again. Some con- gregations have removed it from their meeting places in the name of being “seeker friendly.” Others haveT rejected it, along with other National Flag is displayed in a central position, and symbols of the faith, for fear of erecting an idol. fl anked by the fl ags of other jurisdictions that are No other symbol, however, has been as central to honored, but not supreme). the historic English preaching of the Gospel or the Some of these customs, of course, are related Anglican Way. to Constantine’s vision of the Cross before the One of the earliest Christian poems in Eng- Battle of the Milvian Bridge: “in hoc signo, vinces” lish, “ e Dream of the Rood” (or “Cross”), was (“in this sign, you conquer”). e sense is that fi rst carved on an actual cross in the chancel of the Cross is the “sign” (symbol, standard, visible a church in the th century. It describes a holy referent) of the invisible power behind it. When vision: “Stained and marred, stricken with shame, Constantine raised up the Cross as his standard I saw the glory-tree shine out gaily, sheathed in for the battle, he raised it over the eagle of earthly yellow decorous gold; and gemstones made for empire. In a sense, the Church must always choose their Maker’s Tree a right mail coat” (Michael between the eagle and the Cross, as German Alexander, e Earliest English Poems). Christians discovered during the Nazi Reich. e e Maker’s Tree, the Glory-Tree, the Cross of Nazis understood the meaning of the Cross, and Christ (whether on the Holy Table or carried in so they forced compliant churches to hide it or to procession) is a standard, in the same way that the subordinate it to the Swastika. eagle was the standard of the Roman Empire. e ose who scruple about signs of reverence at use of the Cross as a standard is especially clear the crossing of a church, however, should put their when carried before the representative proces- minds to rest. Such acts of humility did not begin sion of the Church, just as the eagle went before as a reverencing of the cross (let alone the reserved a Roman (or for that matter, Napoleonic) legion. sacrament, which was often to the side in any case). Lifting up the Cross in this way is also related to Rather, they come partially from the behavior of the Brazen Serpent in the wilderness (cf. Num. : Roman citizens in a basilica-style public building, ; John :) and to our Lord’s “And I, if I be lifted where the center-front was the place of honor held up from the earth, will draw all men unto me” by the Emperor’s magistrate, who was honored as (John :). a place-holder for the Emperor. ey also began us, the Cross on the Holy Table is the stan- in the symbolic connection of the Holy Table with dard of the House of God in Christ, representing the Mercy Seat, in which the Incarnate Christ, God’s ownership of that particular house and of with his fi ve wounds, took the place of the mere all similar houses, just as the imperial standard golden cover placed on the Ark of the Covenant. marked off building belonging to the Roman e Mercy Seat was the foot-stool of the Divine Empire and as the standard of the Crown marks Presence, so that the reverence was rendered to English buildings today that represent the Mon- the invisible, but true, abiding Presence of God arch. If the Lion and Unicorn, as symbols and in his earthly house, as one bows when passing standards, are not idols, neither then is the Cross before the throne of an earthly monarch. an idol. e Cross is not worshipped, but stands us considered, nothing could be more rea- for the Kingship of the One who is worshipped. sonable than for the invisible King’s standard to be e Cross also marks the extra-territoriality displayed in his own house as a sign of his presence of the local church, so that it is an embassy of the and power. Nothing could be a better reminder to kingdom of heaven (much the way that the fl ag of, preach nothing save Jesus Christ, and him cruci- say, Iceland, fl ies before its American embassy). fi ed (cf. Cor. :) than the sign of the Cross. e In this way, too, the Cross marks the supremacy Glory-Tree belongs still in our hearts and in our of divine sovereignty over all others (as when the churches. M Page E M Page E e Public Language of Worship (Claims and clarifi cations on behalf of those who . We do not claim that the principles set out believe that it is right and proper in the third mil- below apply to prayer/worship in other languages lennium to use what is usually called “traditional such as German, French or Spanish, Hindi, Urdu language” in the addressing of God, the Father, the or Syriac. e idiom of prayer in public worship in Son and the Holy Ghost in Common Worship and English has its own unique history and principles. Prayer) Secondly, the positive. First, the negative. . We do claim that Public worship & Common . We do not claim that God does not hear Prayer ought to be and should be off ered to the prayers from his people that are badly composed Holy Trinity, the LORD God, in the best available and/or are grammatically incorrect. e LORD is form of language to make possible the expression gracious unto all who call upon him in humility of right doctrine, devotion, discipline and ethos in even though he expects us to pursue excellence in the congregation of Christ’s fl ock. our relations with him. . We do claim that the best available language . We do not claim that it is morally wrong and/ for worship/prayer ought to be the expression of or sinful to address God in “contemporary Eng- faithful, obedient and humble minds, hearts and lish.” e LORD hears and understands all forms wills. Yet we distinguish between a service of wor- of language for he is our Creator. ship for believers and a service of the Word for . We do not claim that every Christian con- seekers and enquirers. gregation in the English-speaking world ought . We do claim that in determining the best to abandon the use of modern “contemporary available form of language, the history and tradi- English” forms of worship immediately. We real- tion of usage in the English language should be ize, for example, that this would be impossible seen as very important and perhaps decisive. e especially for the millions of Roman Catholics who Church exists through space and time and we are are required to use only “contemporary English” part of a long and wide-ranging story of grace. or Latin. . We do claim that there is a specifi c language . We do not claim that there are not any plau- of worship and prayer within the history and expe- sible, attractive, reasonable and seemingly persua- rience of the English-speaking peoples and this is sive arguments off ered to Christian congregations given classic expression in the King James Bible to abandon the use of “traditional language” for of , e Book of Common Prayer of , in public prayer, a language which we recognize that the Hymns of Isaac Watts & Charles Wesley (& some people do not wholly, readily and immedi- others), in Statements & Confessions of Faith (e.g., ately understand. the Westminster Catechisms and Confession from . We do not claim or expect that the language the s) and in innumerable printed books of of evangelism used outside church services should sermons, catechisms, translations of Greek and be in “traditional English” since it needs to be in Latin texts, and the like. forms that the hearers understand immediately . We do claim that this long, deep and pro- and easily. However, it is diffi cult to remove found tradition of language for worship and prayer entirely all the traditional words from Christian should be seen as the primary idiom of prayer in communication since there is no modern equiva- the English language and be judged to have been lent for them. created in and by the providence of God for this . We do not claim that the laws/rules for per- purpose. Here the addressing of God by means of sonal prayer/devotions are identical with those “thee/thou” combines a sense of holy intimacy (via for public worship and common prayer – or vice the nd person singular) and of awesome rever- versa. How a person prays to God in private is ence (by long usage for this holy purpose) thereby entirely the concern of that person, while the way a producing a communion of Friend with friends person prays in public is the concern of all. and friends with Friend in the bond of charity. . We do not claim that the excellence of . We do claim that conservatism and even language is more important than the purity and archaism in language of scripture and prayer are humility of heart and spirit. God looks fi rst on the a proper balance to linguistic change, since the heart and then hears the words as from there. Yet destabilization of such language leads to an ero- he looks for and prefers excellence in speech from sion of meaning; and the disappearance of a clear his children. and common vocabulary of prayer with an objec- M Page E M Page E tive meaning is the disappearance of an important unwisely rejected in the social & cultural revolu- touchstone of unity. e “restatement” of classical tion of the s (and with it certain holy books & ideas into “contemporary language” often is inad- associations of doctrine and morality). Too much equate to the original meanings, and can even pro- changed too quickly for the good of the Church vide cover for deliberate changes. Further, such and for Christian stability. archaism in language is proper to the Word of . We do claim that this prayer language ought God, which speaks to us from its defi nitive utter- to be kept in use and availability in all Churches ance in the past, with an authority not derived that are biblically-based and orthodox. Such clas- from the present, or from relevance to the pres- sic prayer books as e Book of Common Prayer ent. Its diff erence from ordinary everyday speech (, , [Canada] etc.) should be prized, also expresses the distinction of sacred and secular widely available and used; the King James Bible appropriate to the holiness of God and out duty to () should be often read in churches; and the be holy as God is holy. Hymns of Wesley and Watts etc. sung. . We do claim that this idiom of public prayer e Rev’d Dr. Peter Toon and worship was rudely and widely but yet Prayer Book Society Board of Directors at All Saints’ Wynnewood On June th the PBS Board of Directors met was the offi ciant, celebrant and preacher at the in Philadelphia at the parish of All Saints’ Wyn- two services. And Mr Denman Zirkle in the newood. Notices assured the congregation of the total sup- As was reported in the last issue of Mandate port of the Prayer Book Society in its struggle for this parish, which uses the Book of Common orthodoxy and toleration in the Diocese of Penn- Prayer and rejects the ultra-liberal policy of the sylvania. diocesan bishop, is going through hard and test- e photo portrays and represents the support ing times. e bishop has refused to give a licence of the Board of the PBS for Fr. Eddie Rix, who is at to the interim priest, Fr. Eddie Rix. us while he the center, surrounded by (from left to right) Fr. does parish work and arranges for the daily and David Kennedy, Fr. Wayland Coe, Fr. Joe Falzone, Sundays services he cannot take any of them. Fr. Peter Toon & Fr. Jonathan Ostman. On Sunday June the Rev’d Dr. Peter Toon
M Page E M Page E Changing the Language e s: of Prayer & Worship et us consider two sets of facts.First of all in in the English-speaking world all the Protestant Churches used a traditional form of English in their worship and prayers. eir approach and Church of England prepared a revised edition of address to God in formal prayer, ex tempore prayer the Book of Common Prayer () which was Land hymnody used the second person singular eventually not approved by Parliament because of (“ ee/ ou”). its supposed “Romish” trends. However, in terms All this seemed natural to them even though of the language of prayer it was wholly in the very it was archaic because “You” had replaced “ ee/ same traditional language as the book from it ou” as the normal second person singular in was intended to replace and nobody thought this everyday speech. Further, though the Roman to be odd or wrong. Catholic Church services were virtually totally in It is a simple matter of fact that it was in the Latin their private books of devotion and unoffi cial s that the new Bible translations, the new translations of the Mass were in traditional Eng- Liturgies and the new Hymnody using “contem- lish, the English of the King James Version of the porary language” were planned and published Bible and the Book of Common Prayer. to be adopted – often after much trial use and In the second place in all the major heart-searching - by the leadership and then the Protestant Churches in the English-speaking membership of the major Churches. Amongst the world used what is usually termed “contemporary latter many went along reluctantly carried by the English” to distinguish it from the “traditional Eng- spirit of the times which required that “one move lish” used in worship for many previous centuries. with the times.” Further, the Roman Catholic used the same type But why, specifi cally, the s? A language of modern English for the Mass and other forms does not change overnight but evolves slowly, but of service. Only here and there did the tradition here there was no development and adaptation, of the use of the inherited language persist (e.g., only abrupt change. is surely tells us that the where the traditional Anglican Book of Common answer to the question about timing must be in Prayer and the King James Version of the Bible terms other than linguistic reasons for change. were used or where there were strict Presbyterians Languages do evolve naturally but this change was using classic th century forms). However, where not a natural evolution. e rapid move from the the “contemporary English” was used there were so-called “traditional” to the so-called “contempo- exceptions made for using the Lord’s Prayer in rary” is therefore more likely to be explained in the traditional form and singing hymns that used terms of religious, social and cultural factors and “ ee/ ou.” reasons. Against this background, we ask: Why did this revolution occur in the twentieth century rather Reasons for the revolution than the seventeenth or eighteenth or nineteenth Further, the answer will be more than the rea- centuries? sons given by those clergy and leaders who set the is is a good question for, in those times ball rolling in terms of the adoption of “contempo- — indeed going back into the seventeenth century rary” language in the s. For example, the cry — the use of “you” as the usual form of the second of evangelical Christians in America and Britain person singular was common. us it would not was for relevance, intelligibility, accessibility and have been illogical or irrational to begin to use simplicity. ey wanted to have a simple message “You” when addressing God in worship. Yet this from an accessible Bible using intelligible forms of did not happen. Obviously the form of address services in plan person’s speech in order to evan- using “ ee/ ou” was deeply embedded in reli- gelise their fellow citizens. ey believed that the gious expression and feeling by for it was “traditional language” with its mystery and poetic maintained without dissent thereafter. quality was not and could not be eff ective to this end. In short, God and Christ would only become e 1960s available and accessible and intelligible to the Further, we ask: Why did this revolution majority if these divine Persons were addressed occur in the s (using this expression to cover as “You.” the late s, the s and the early s) and Reasons off ered for totally new translations of not in the s or the s? In the s the the Bible (such as the New International Version), M Page E M Page E and replacements for the King James Version ( and gion, churches, families, institutions, education, its children, the Revised Version and the Revised politics and so on. And changes did occur and few Standard Version), were in terms of the availability escaped the full force of them. of better manuscripts of the Greek New Testa- ment, the presence of archaic words in the old Conclusion versions, and that no distinction was made in the So we can say with confi dence that the change original Hebrew or Greek between the addressing in the way that English-speaking people addressed of a human being and off ering prayer to God, in God was caused primarily by the revolution of the terms of the pronouns and verb forms used. s. What occurred was that a very long stand- Young Protestant Ministers were taught that ing, profound, deep tradition, wherein were the they could not trust the KJV for it was not an treasures of English religious devotion of many accurate translation of the originals; they needed centuries, was rapidly set aside as the Old ways a modern accurate version from which to preach in favour of the New (embracing the New was of to a generation young people who were rejecting course one of the themes of the s). the old ways. Further, young Anglican/Episcopal Much that is holy and even unique was lost to clergy were taught that the Book of Common the English-speaking peoples by this tremendous Prayer was not based upon the best texts of the change in the way in which we stand before and Bible in the original languages or the best under- address God, who is both the Holy One and the standing of the worship and doctrine of the Early Friend of sinners. And also much that belonged Church. ey needed not only an accurate version to the revolutionary ideas of the s was within but also a modern version for leading the people the “contemporary” language as it was adapted for in prayer. the public worship of God in the Roman Catho- At the same time, thousands of Roman Catholic lic Church and in the Bibles and Prayer Books of parishes had begun using “contemporary” Eng- Protestants. lish for their Masses and the Roman Church was To this day English-speaking Christianity has being shaken from top to bottom as it embraced not settled upon what exactly is the right form of aggiornamento (updating) and reaccentramento “contemporary English” to be used in Christian (recentering). worship. e abundance of Bible translations and What we need clearly to appreciate and grasp liturgical styles and types of hymns & choruses, is that underneath the call for relevance and the that come and go, testify still to the pluralism and claims that better scholarship was being used for subjectivism of the s. Bible translation and liturgical revision were other So we conclude that those who believe that they reasons, the underground springs that supplied ought to continue to use the inherited, classical the streams and lakes. ere were the ideas and English form of prayer should be treated courte- ideologies that made the s into a period of ously and sympathetically by the majority in the major discontent, change and revolution in the Churches. Adequate space and time should be western world and in America in particular. All given to them so that they can worship the Lord in who lived in this period breathed into their souls the beauty of holiness and preserve for generations some of this new air and ferment. Even those who to come the live tradition of classical and tradi- rebelled against the innovations and changes of tional worship of the Lord in English. And, further, the time were aff ected by them, so powerful were young people who have never experienced the they! traditional language and content of public worship In short, the revolutionary decade, which most should be encouraged and given the opportunities remember in terms of campus unrest, of protests to do so. against the Viet Nam war, of loud music, of com- munes and of rapid social changes especially in civil rights, was based on (a) relativism in morals (“All you need is love”) – thus situation ethics, (b) commitment to the New (thus ditching old ideas and ways), (c) religion as social activism P (thus marches and picket lines), (d) pluralism and egalitarianism (thus variety taken as the norm and encouraged), (e) the irrelevancy of the Church as an institution (thus the emphasis on community P B [koinonia]), (f) theology expressed as psychology, anthropology and sociology and (g) a turn to the S self (self-help, self-affi rmation, self-discovery and self realization). To describe all this is not to say . that it was all bad. Rather, it is to say that the stage was set for far reaching and rapid changes in reli- M Page E M Page E e English Bible e & s: the Language of Prayer or many centuries, the English-speaking peoples used a Bible in whose pages all people, including the unique Jesus of Nazareth, addressed God in the second person singular -- “O LORD our Lord, best results of modern scholarship as to the mean- how excellent is thy name in all the earth”, “hal- ing of the Scriptures, and express that meaning in Flowed be thy name” and “I thank thee, Father.” And English idiom which is designed for use in public this form of address to God was also imitated and and private worship and preserves those quali- maintained for centuries in their public worship ties which have given the King James Version a as the language of prayer, even when, from the supreme place in English literature.” th century onwards, the second person singular e Preface explains that, apart from the (“thee/thou”) ceased to be used in general conver- advances made in Biblical Studies, a major reason sation between human beings. for revision of the King James Version is the change since in English usage. e King James Version (known in Many forms of expression have become archaic, Great Britain as e Authorized Ver- while still generally intelligible – the use of thou, sion) thee, thy, thine and the verb endings –est and No translation of the Bible into English has –edst, the verb endings –eth and –th, it came to come near to the King James Version () in pass that, whosoever, whatsoever, inosmuch that, terms of infl uencing not only the character of the because that, for that, unto, howbeit, peradven- English language but also the religious belief of its ture, holden, aforetime, must needs, would fain, readers and hearers. behoved, to you-ward etc. Other words are obso- With good reason the King James Version has lete and no longer understood by the common been termed, “the noblest monument of English reader. prose.” Its revisers in expressed admiration for e greatest problem, however, is presented “its simplicity, its dignity, its power, its happy turns by the English words which are still in constant of expression…the music of its cadences and the use but now convey a diff erent meaning from that felicities of its rhythm.” which they had in and in the King James Ver- e translators in the th century, following sion. ese words were once accurate translations a long English tradition, chose to use the second of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures; but now, person singular in the way that it is used in the having changed in meaning, they have become original Hebrew and Greek. at is, they used it misleading... when the reference was either to God himself or Yet, though the translators dropped the use to a single human being. us Peter said to Jesus, of the archaic second person singular for human “ ou art the Christ…” And Jesus said to Peter, beings, they did retain it when either the Lord “ ou art Peter and on this rock I will build my Jesus or any person addressed Almighty God, the church” (Matthew :-). Further, when King heavenly Father. us “Hallowed be thy name” Solomon dedicated the Temple he prayed, “Lord (Matthew :) and “I thank thee, Father, Lord of God of Israel, there is no God like thee in heaven heaven and earth” (Matthew :). In doing this, above…”( Kings :). the translators followed the practice then common What became known as e Revised Version in American Protestant Churches where God () and e American Standard Version were was addressed in the second person singular as revisions of e Authorized Version () and they “ ee/ ou” while human beings both alone and continued the use of “thee/thou” as in the ver- together were addressed as “you.” sion. e New English Bible e Revised Standard Version In October delegates of the Church of e Revised Standard Version was an autho- England, the Church of Scotland, the Methodist, rized revision of the American Standard Version Baptist and Congregational Churches met and () and was published in (N.T.) and recommended “that a completely new translation (O.T.). In the Council of Religious Education should be made, rather than a revision [of the King of the Churches of the United States and Canada James Version]; and that the translators should be directed that the new version should “embody the free to employ a contemporary idiom rather than M Page E M Page E reproduce the traditional ‘biblical’ English.” Neither Hebrew, Aramaic nor Greek uses special In e New English Bible was published by pronouns for the persons of the Godhead. A pres- the University Presses. In the Introduction to the ent-day translation is not enhanced by forms that New Testament it is stated: in the time of the King James Version were used “In doing our work, we have constantly striven in everyday speech, whether referring to God or to follow our instructions and render the Greek, as to man. we understand it, into the English of the present us it was that in the name of scholarly day, that is, into the natural vocabulary, construc- accuracy the long, deep and sacred tradition of tions, and rhythms of contemporary speech. We addressing God as “ ee/ ou” was abandoned by have sought to avoid archaisms, jargon, and all this “offi cial,” commercially successful, and widely that is stilted or slipshod.” distributed version of the Bible for Evangelicals. However in direct address to God, and like the Revised Standard Version from America, the e Revised English Bible archaic “thee/thou/thy” is used because it was in e full edition of e New English Bible this way that ministers and congregations in Brit- appeared in and its successor e Revised ain prayed in the s. Even after two world wars English Bible appeared in . In the Preface there this idiom of addressing God was considered as is a brief explanation of the form of English used: the natural and normal way of prayer. Care has been taken to ensure that the style of English used is fl uent and of appropriate dignity e New International Version for liturgical use, while maintaining intelligibility Many conservative Protestants in America did for worshippers of a wide range of ages and back- not welcome the Revised Standard Version for its grounds. As the ‘you’-form of address to God is sponsorship by the National Council of Churches now commonly used, the ‘thou’-form which was was seen as giving it a liberal bias. So to help to sat- preserved in the language of prayer in e New isfy the felt need for a modern translation amongst English Bible has been abandoned.. such conservatives, there appeared e Amplifi ed us we see that by the year the traditional Bible (), e Modern Language Bible [ e language of prayer has been abandoned because it New Berkeley Version] (). e New American is believed that a modern form is commonly used. Standard Bible () and the widely popular para- phrase, e Living Bible (), all of which had e New Revised Standard Version limited appeal. In the Policies Committee of the National e story of e New International Version Council of Churches in the USA authorized the eff ectively begins in , and signifi cantly in the preparation of a revision of the entire RSV Bible. middle of the turbulent s, with the proposal It was published in under the title, e New from committees of the Christian Reformed Revised Standard Version. Church and the National Association of Evangeli- In terms of the addressing of God, the Preface cals for “a new translation of the Bible in contem- declares: “It will be seen that in the Psalms and porary English.” e New York International Bible other prayers addressed to God the archaic second Society provided the fi nancial sponsorship and the person singular pronouns (thee, thou, thine) and work was shared by many scholars from a large verb forms (art, hast, hadst) are no longer used. variety of specifi cally evangelical churches. Although some readers may regret this change, it e full Bible was published in and in the should be pointed out that in the original languages Preface it was stated: neither the Old Testament nor the New Testament Concern for clear and natural makes any linguistic distinction between address- English – that the New International ing a human being and addressing the Deity.” Version should be idiomatic but not us this Version widely used in the old-line idiosyncratic, contemporary not dated denominations has completely abandoned the – motivated the translators and con- traditional English Idiom of Prayer. sultants. At the same time, they tried to refl ect the diff ering styles of the Conclusion biblical writers. In view of the inter- With the change from “thee” to “you” which national use of English, the translators occurred in the s/s came further changes sought to avoid obvious Americanisms in language in the s/s, most importantly on the one hand and obvious Angli- inclusive language, to satisfy the demands of the cisms on the other… feminist lobby. us we see that “contemporary” As for the traditional pronouns, “thou,” “thee” language is much more than ceasing to address and “thine” in reference to the Deity, the transla- God as “ ee/ ou.” tors judged that to use these archaisms (along with the old verb forms such as “doest,” “wouldest,” and “hadst”) would violate accuracy in translation. M Page E M Page E Prayer Books ande the s: Language of Worship major part of any Christian act of worship is the engaging in prayers of praise, thanksgiv- ing, confession, petition and intercession. As these are addressed to God the Father through was most carefully preserved for the addressing of Jesus Christ the Lord, with the Holy Ghost (= Holy and referring to the Deity. And this state of aff airs ASpirit), there are occasions when pronouns must continued until after the second World War in all be used. And in English the choice at least from the parts of the English-speaking world. seventeenth century has been between “thou, thee, So it is not surprising that if we examine the thine, thy” or “you, your” for both sets can serve as editions of e Book of Common Prayer prepared second person singular for the Deity, who is one for use in countries, which achieved independence Lord and one God. from Great Britain, we fi nd that all of them main- tained the form of English created by Cranmer Classic English Prayer in the mid-sixteenth century, for this form had Together with the English Bible came the Eng- become for all intents and purposes the English lish Prayer Book known as e Book of the Common idiom of prayer. For example, the revised edition Prayer of . ere were further editions with of the Prayer Book produced for the Episcopal that of becoming the classic edition for the Church in , after the Declaration of Inde- Church of England and the British Empire. pendence from Great Britain, kept closely to the e primary translator and reviser of the Latin received Cranmerian form of language even where originals was the Archbishop of Canterbury, it included new collects and prayers to meet the omas Cranmer ( – ). In formal prose, needs of a new nation. And so did the revised edi- Cranmer was a master, having an exact ear for tions of this American Prayer Book in and phrases and sentences that could be repeated a . Even as late as the Anglican Church thousand times over and contained no infelicity or of Canada published a revised edition of the jarring tone. He deliberately intended “the language Prayer Book and in it maintained the traditional of the Book to be sonorous and slightly archaic; he language of prayer and worship. had no intention of letting his liturgy be sneered at for being modish or inferior to the old Latin. is Modern English Prayer archaic quality was highly signifi cant for the future Changes in the long-established English idiom of English; it saved it from being hijacked by the of prayer and worship only came into the Anglican pompous Latin and Greek vocabulary beloved by Family of Churches in the late s & s when many of his scholarly contemporaries.” various experimental liturgies were being used in What the use of e Book of Common Prayer preparation for the production and publishing of (along with the use of the English Bible of ) new prayer books. At fi rst these liturgies, even quickly achieved in the seventeenth century was though they had a new structure and content, used a distinctively English way of public prayer. is only the second person singular in addressing was based on the addressing of the Father, the Son God; but, as the years of experimentation went by, and the Holy Ghost in the second person singular and as the content of new Bible translations was ( ou, ee, y, ine) and included various known, the innovation of addressing God as “You” structures and forms of prayer (e.g., e Lord’s began and with it the use of what became known Prayer) and expressions of the Faith (e.g., the as “contemporary English.” Apostles’ Creed). erefore, when the new offi cial Prayer Books In homilies, sermons and addresses, given in began to appear they contained services in both or after the set Liturgy in the Church of England, “traditional language” and “contemporary lan- it became increasingly common after for guage.” us if one examines the American Prayer clergy to use “you” in the singular and the plural. Book of (erroneously and mischievously called Likewise, Nonconformist and Dissenting Minis- e Book of Common Prayer, rather than An ters (Congregationalists, Baptists etc.) addressed American Episcopal Service Book or the like), the human beings in the singular and plural as “you.” Alternative Service Book () of the Church Yet in the offi cial Liturgy of the Established Church of England, and the Book of Alternative Services and in the ex tempore prayers of the Nonconform- () of the Anglican Church of Canada, one fi nds ist Pastors the use of the second person singular that while there are both types of services, the bal- M Page E M Page E ance is very much in favour of the innovation. And Book of Common Prayer.” All the prayers in the leaders in all the Churches pressed clergy and con- book are in the “You” form even though it was gregations to use the new rather than the old, tell- intended to be used for the period of petition and ing them that the new were more relevant, helpful intercession after the Morning and Evening Offi ces and authentic. us in the s people changed from the Book of Common Prayer. the habits of a life-time in terms of the way they e editor, Dick Williams, in his Introduction addressed and referred to God. writes: “Nobody has ever written better prayers in By the end of the twentieth century “contem- English than Cranmer. But the English language is porary language” in liturgy (as with Bible transla- a living thing and changes…So this book is not a tion) meant much more than the language used by reaction against the Book of Common Prayer, or decent people in regular conversation or by good anything that it stands for. But it is an act of con- journalists in respectable newspapers. It meant fi dence in contemporary English.” is claim is language which deliberately rejected the old form perhaps confusing. He could have written and col- of addressing God and which incorporated the lected a book of prayers that related to what he saw basics of the feminist movement. In other words, as modern needs and concerns and he could have it was much more than the removal of archaic made sure that these prayers were in the idiom of words and the like, it was the creating of a religious prayer found in the Book of Common Prayer. But language intended to carry within itself a certain like most people in that decade, whether conserva- ideology and to do so in a simple way. tive or liberal, whether evangelical or high-church, Changes of a similar kind (but here from Latin he thought that he had to be committed to “con- to modern English) occurred in Roman Catholi- temporary English.” cism. After the Vatican II Council held in Rome in the s, the momentous decision was taken Conclusion to translate the Mass into the languages used by In many thought that “contemporary Eng- Roman Catholic people around the world. By lish” was simple, intelligible, relevant and acces- the International Committee on English for the sible. We now know that it has been the vehicle for Liturgy, making use of English texts produced by the introduction into the Church of innovations the International Consultation on English Texts, that originate in various human rights, feminist had produced an English translation of the Order and lesbigay movements. And as yet it has no of the Mass and this was then approved by the settled form as the abundance of revised forms National Hierarchies of Bishops. is translation since the s testify. into English did not look to the long-established English idiom of prayer and worship, but boldly attempted to use contemporary or modern Eng- lish. us not only is the form of the second person singular used “You” but also some of the themes of the revolutionary period of the s are seen in the way that the Latin original is translated. Returning to Anglicanism in the s, when liturgical experimentation was taking place, the P introduction of the addressing of God as “You” is clearly seen in Books of Prayers produced for use at the end of Morning and Evening Prayer. In Prayers for Today’s Church, edited by Dick Williams, appeared. In a Foreword, the Bishop of Liverpool, D. Stuart Blanch, wrote: “ e Book of Common Prayer is a child of its age and refl ects a prodigious insularity of thought and experience. It seldom voyages beyond these [British] shores and betrays little interest in the world-wide mission of the Church. It assumes the P B permanence and solidity of the social order as it then existed. It betrays little conscience for the sins S of an economic system which condemned so many of its citizens to penury and squalor. It belongs to a diff erent world, a smaller world.” And he ended: “I warmly welcome this collection [of prayers]…It is a book of common prayer in that it expresses our common concern for God’s world – and in that respect at least it deserves to stand alongside the M Page E M Page E Intimacy & Reverence in the Language of Prayer he modern era values a form of familiarity but has generally lost a sense of reverence and respect in relations between people. Whoever one is and whatever be one’s age one is addressed these days to many persons. on the phone and in public by one’s fi rst name by Looking back we can see that beginning in the peopleT whom one does not know or has not met. s, the decade of social and cultural revolution One is amazed to see small children addressing in the West, the Churches produced new Bible retired people by their fi rst name as if they were translations and new prayer books and new hym- long time buddies. nbooks in which, for the fi rst time in the history of public prayer and worship in the English language, Respect and familiarity God was addressed as “You.” Christians were told Respect for those in authority – judges, mag- then that this was “contemporary language” and istrates, policemen, schoolteachers – is also at an was needed to make the churches into relevant all time low, because respect for their offi ce, as institutions to face a changing world. Nobody refl ecting and objective order of reality, is at an all addressed his or her fellow human being as “ ee/ time low. ou” and so why should he or she speak to God in And what occurs in the general culture and with these archaic terms now? the general population easily slides over into the Yet we recall there was no historical experience majority of Churches. Pastors and priests, lay lead- in the English speaking world of addressing God ers and deacons, are all called by their fi rst names as “You” to draw upon, and this meant that the to encourage a friendly and accepting ethos. “You” came into the language of prayer without a So the sense of equality and familiarity is previous context of devotion and doctrine. Rather, absorbed into the style and language of prayer and it came with the only other context available, thus into much modern worship, especially “seeker the context of the s and its aftermath! And services.” God is addressed as if he were merely and this meant that with the “you” came the ethos of only a larger “You” than human persons who are familiarity and intimacy of a sentimental and non- also “you.” In fact, God seems to be thought of—or reverential kind. e primacy of the horizontal/ at least presented—as with us primarily as the One immanent and the this –worldly experientialism who is in the “horizontal” relation[ship] to walk, was simply strengthened and fortifi ed except talk, bless, affi rm and fellowship with us. ough where discerning persons sought to change this. his vertical relation[ship] from heaven to earth to Church leaders and liturgical experts told the us in not denied it is not taken as seriously. clergy and people that the move from address- Or, in theological terms, God is celebrated as ing God as “ ee/ ou” to addressing Him as immanent—with, alongside and in us -- but his “You” was simply a change in the word for the transcendence—over, above and beyond us - is second person singular and was only bringing merely acknowledged. the churches in line with the rest of the world. is primacy of the immanent in the contem- And to this day they continue to tell us that in the porary religious experience seems to be in contrast English-speaking world we have a straight choice to the plain sense of the Bible where the God who between “traditional language” and “contemporary is revealed in the witness of Holy Scripture is the language” and they claim that the latter is much Transcendent One who makes himself known as preferable. the Immanent One. e vertical is there before the But are they right? Yes and No. In part not in horizontal and the horizontal is energized by the whole. vertical. Traditional and contemporary God as “You” ey are right only in that they recognize that e fact that modern churches address Jesus in everyday speech we no longer use the second Christ, God the Father and the Holy Spirit as “You” person singular “thee/thou” but use what was certainly provides a congenial context and a ready once the second person plural “you” for both the means of maintaining familiarity and intimacy in singular and the plural. us to individual persons the relation[ship] to, and addressing of, the living as well as to groups of people we now say “you” God. And it seems to be acceptable and congenial – except in the Deep South where we have “you” M Page E M Page E and “you-all.” idiom and language of prayer using “You” to God. What the bishops and experts omit to recognize ere have been many experiments since the s and tell us is that with the use of the old form of and there are many going on at the beginning of the second person singular, “ ee/ ou,” there the new millennium. New translations of the Bible comes a style, a context and an ethos. First, there come and go and new liturgies appear and disap- is the sense of intimacy contained in the use of pear. us there is potentially a whole set of pos- the second person singular, and this harmonizes sible meanings and these depend upon the context with the Christian doctrine that God as truly “our from and in which we place this statement of love. Father” because through Jesus Christ we know Is it love as we know it through modern psychol- Him as “Abba, Father” (the Father of Jesus Christ, ogy and therapy, or through Hollywood fi lms, or no less). And, secondly, there is also, because of as we try to understand it through modern transla- centuries of usage in public worship, a sense of tions of the Bible? reverence, awe and holiness in the “ ee/ ou” e point is that “I love You, O Lord” does not so that He is “the holy Father.” e archaic ee/ easily and readily provide the religious and moral ou/ y/ ine functions in a particularly reli- meaning that is attached by context and long usage gious way and for our benefi t as believers so that – by style - to “I love ee, O Lord.” we combine the intimate with the reverential. And if this general point is conceded then the So if you or I were to pray in sincerity, “I love possibility emerges that before the so-called con- ee, O Lord”, the meaning would have its con- temporary language, that is being pressed every- text in the style of English generated by the King where upon the Church, can truly function as a James Version, the Book of Common Prayer and godly means and instrument to leads us to the Holy the Hymns of Wesley and Watts – that is, in the One, the Blessed Trinity of the Father, the Son and traditional English idiom of prayer. us it could the Holy Ghost/Spirit, it needs to have gained a not mean “love” as merely emotional feeling, or the context, a style that is worshipful and godly. Right modern being-in–love, or homosexual attraction, now, it possesses potentially many contexts and or liking someone. Rather it means a deep and styles and virtually of them are generated from the profound sense of attachment to and wholesome mindset, culture and ethos of our modern world or trust in God as the Infi nite and Eternal Deity, the from what is termed post-modernity. Creator, Redeemer and Lord of all, who is made erefore, it may not be so misguided after all known in the person we know as Jesus of Naza- for people—ordinary folks as well as academics, reth. It is an enduring act of the will to do and to the young as well as the old—to insist that they be unto God what He as God rightly deserves and want to continue to worship the Lord our God commands. using the classic idiom of prayer, as found in the However, if you or I were to pray “I love You, King James Version, the Book of Common Prayer O Lord” the meaning would have as its context and the hymns of Watts and Wesley. Here, at least, the use of love in modern English. is is because they may claim to be on safe ground! there has not yet developed a settled or coherent Please pray for the President and the Board of the Prayer Book
Society. M Page E M Page E A Love Story about a Continuing Anglican
Marilyn Ruzicka Church e’re ten years old and have celebrated our Birthday with Prayers and a Party!!! Saint omas of Canterbury Church in Halfmoon, Saratoga County, NewYork State, had a real battle and Route . e work was begun, and took over to survive from the very beginning. at battle was two years with both paid and volunteer labor. Wfought with love, as well as devotion of purpose, Donations of religious accoutrements came to which was to ensure the continuation of historic us from many sources, and we now have a lovely, Anglicanism in the Capital region. Not many par- white, country church. e fellowship we enjoyed ishes begin with nothing but a dream, and meet for working shoulder to shoulder with fellow parishio- nearly fi ve years in a rented facility. And yet, that ners was satisfying beyond measure. We now have very fact is what makes us what we are - a church saved enough money for a Steeple, and that project family who knows where they are going and why. is under way. As Episcopalians, Our Rector is the Rev- we watched our church erend William R. Andrist, from the s move on who has been with the with a new prayer book church all through the and a revisionist agenda. building process, and is We embrace progress - our much-loved spiritual but we love tradition too. leader. We are part of Family tradition, national a unity-minded ‘Con- tradition, and tradition in tinuing’ Church called worship fulfi ls a need; it the “United Anglican gives strength and secu- Church”, with Bishop rity and it adds richness Gilbert McDowell (a to living. former ECUSA priest) as When the Missionary Diocese of America our leader; Bishop Norman Strauss of Gloversville, (MDA) was formed by Episcopal Bishop Donald N.Y. is our Diocesan Bishop. We also have a Curate, Davies, the Albany Chapter of the Prayer Book the Rev. Dennis King, who recently joined us. Society was quick to respond. For six months We participate in a Food Pantry, have an active we were an off shoot of the Episcopal Church women’s group, the ‘Anglican Church Women’, a (ECUSA), until that Church decided we were no loosely organized Men’s group, Bible Study, and longer members - so, we started out on our own a fellowship time after Holy Communion services, under Bishop Davies. over coff ee and cake. Ten years ago our group of people, who were On Sunday, June th, ten years and two days committed to the scripturally sound prayer after our fi rst service, we celebrated with a Parish book, banded together and formed Saint omas Picnic on the church grounds. is followed the of Canterbury Anglican Church. Our fi rst service Holy Communion Service which is at a.m. was held on June th, , and for nearly fi ve years Our parish is dedicated to the Glory of God and the fl edgling parish worshipped in the Holiday in anksgiving for the many blessings that have Inn. A Building Fund was established with plans been bestowed upon us. We want to continue to to realize our dream of a building of our own. Our off er to God, and to the Community, the majesty, fi rst Rector was the Reverend Norman F. Strauss. beauty, richness and reverence of classic Anglican Our Building Fund grew, and in December, worship. land and a building were purchased. e structure Saint omas of Canterbury Church has a web and land had to be amenable to rebuilding, expan- site, www.st-thomas-of-canterbury.org sion, and have space for a parking lot. ese needs [Marilyn K. Ruzicka is Junior Warden of St. were met at Grooms Road in Halfmoon, a omas of Canterbury Anglican Church and is on good location between Exit A of the Northway the Board of Directors of the Prayer Book Society.] M Page E M Page E Williams Appeals to Pri- mates: Affi rms Lambeth Resolution On Sexuality From the Most Revd Dr Rowan Williams Archbishop of Wales and Bishop of Monmouth
Tuesday, rd July
My dear friends, You will be hearing today the news that I have accepted appointment as Archbishop of Canterbury. My fi rst reason for writing is to ask for yourprayers; I am deeply thankful that we are not strangers to each other, and I hope that the friendships formed in the Primates’ Meetings will continue and fl ourish as we work together under God. At the moment, I am chiefl y conscious of bringing to the task only the fear, the confusion and the sense of inadequacy that come from my personal resources. I have to trust that God will give (not least through your fellowship and intercession) what is needed—and that I shall have the grace to receive and respond to what he gives. I also write because I know that some disquiet has been expressed over the possibility of my appointment because of what are believed to be my views on certain questions, in particular on human sexuality. On this matter, I wish to say two things. First, an archbishop is not someone elected to fulfi l a programme or manifesto of his own devising, but to serve the whole Communion. He does not have the freedom to prescribe belief for the Church at large. I have indeed in the past written briefl y on the subject of theology and sexuality, and hope that what I have written has contributed to the continuing discussion; but my ideas have no authority beyond that of an indi- vidual theologian. Second, the Lambeth resolution of declares clearly what is the mind of the overwhelming majority in the Communion, and what the Communion will and will not approve or authorise. I accept that any individual diocese or even province that offi cially overturns or repudi- ates this resolution poses a substantial problem for the sacramental unity of the Communion. In both respects, I have to distinguish plainly between personal theories and interpretations and the majority conviction of my Church, and have always tried to make such a distinction when I have been questioned on this subject. Since the Lambeth resolution also commends continuing refl ection on these matters, my main hope will be to try and maintain a mutually respectful climate for such refl ection, in the sort of shared prayerful listening to Scripture envisaged by Lambeth. I hope too, very earnestly, that we can hold to the urgent common priority of mission and evangelism, and avoid the temptation of becoming trapped in questions where the politics of our culture sets the agenda. I believe with all my heart that through Christ we are given a unique and immeasurable gift, and that all our work as apostles and pastors and teachers must grow from our thankfulness to God. Once again, I ask your continuing prayers, and hope that we shall be able to work together in love and trust. I rely on all of you to ‘speak the truth in love’ to me and to preach the Good News of Jesus Christ to me so that I may be strengthened to speak for Christ to others. is comes with warm aff ection and gratitude. In Christ, owa ouglas illiams
e Society for the Preservation NONPROFIT ORG. of the Book of Common Prayer US POSTAGE PAID ( e Prayer Book Society) FORT WORTH, TX P.O. Box Permit No. Philadelphia, PA -
M Page E