Book of Common Prayer

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rose_Commander
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What is this 20 questions? LOL…Just tell me, Jim LOL…I don’t have a 28 prayer book or I’d look…:p:p I’m up too late for quizzes, man! :cool:
GKC said:
How’s it start in the 1928 BCP?

GKC
Click to expand...
 
Fraction?
GCMac87 said:
Rite I in the 1979 BCP allows for either the “We believe” (as in Rite II) or the “I believe” as in the 1928 BCP.

That being said, I did notice a different placement of the fraction during the mass between the 1979 and 1928 BCPs, along with a few other differences.

Gurney, here’s a link to the 1928 BCP justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1928/BCP_1928.htm

Admittedly, I’m more proficient in the 1979 BCP too.
Click to expand...
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
What is this 20 questions? LOL…Just tell me, Jim LOL…I don’t have a 28 prayer book or I’d look…:p:p I’m up too late for quizzes, man! :cool:
Click to expand...
I believe…

The 79 book, Rite I included, is novo-ordanized, subtly. I won’t try to do the details without the article I’m thinking of (I think Canon Francis Reed did it, long ago. But I would walk out of any parish using it.

Though it had a good touch, here and there.

GKC
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
Fraction?
Click to expand...
I’m referring to the Breaking of the Bread. In the 1928 BCP the fraction (breaking of the bread) takes place prior to the words of institution, in the 1979 BCP (both Rites) the fraction takes place after the Lord’s Prayer followed by “Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us.”
 
GCMac87 said:
Rite I in the 1979 BCP allows for either the “We believe” version (as in Rite II) or the “I believe” version as in the 1928 BCP.

That being said, I did notice a different placement of the fraction during the mass between the 1979 and 1928 BCPs, along with a few other differences.

Gurney, here’s a link to the 1928 BCP justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1928/BCP_1928.htm

Admittedly, I’m more proficient in the 1979 BCP too.
Click to expand...
Does it permit of “conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost”, as well as “conceived by the Holy Ghost?” How about “for us” or “for us men?”

GKC
 
GKC said:
Does it permit of “conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost”, as well as “conceived by the Holy Ghost?” How about “for us” or “for us men?”

GKC
Click to expand...
GKC, here are the two forms of the Nicene Creed in the 1979 BCP (the first is the same version used in Rite II)

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

I believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible;

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only-begotten Son of God,
begotten of his Father before all worlds,
God of God, Light of Light,
very God of very God,
begotten, not made,
being of one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made;

who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven,
and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary,
and was made man;
and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried;
and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures,
and ascended into heaven,
and sitteth on the right hand of the Father;
and he shall come again, with glory,
to judge both the quick and the dead;
whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost the Lord, and Giver of Life,
who proceedeth from the Father and the Son;
who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped
and glorified;
who spake by the Prophets.
And I believe one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church;
I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins;
and I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.
 
Thank you. I have no idea where either of my 79 books are.

Would you say that there is a substantive difference in the two versions?

GKC

OTE=GCMac87;6906681]GKC, here are the two forms of the Nicene Creed in the 1979 BCP (the first is the same version used in Rite II)

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

I believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible;

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only-begotten Son of God,
begotten of his Father before all worlds,
God of God, Light of Light,
very God of very God,
begotten, not made,
being of one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made;

who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven,
and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary,
and was made man;
and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried;
and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures,
and ascended into heaven,
and sitteth on the right hand of the Father;
and he shall come again, with glory,
to judge both the quick and the dead;
whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost the Lord, and Giver of Life,
who proceedeth from the Father and the Son;
who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped
and glorified;
who spake by the Prophets.
And I believe one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church;
I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins;
and I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.
 
GKC said:
Thank you. I have no idea where either of my 79 books are.

Would you say that there is a substantive difference in the two versions?

GKC
Click to expand...
There could be a historical-linguistic argument to be made, such as the case with the change of the phrase “to judge both the quick and the dead” to “to judge the living and the dead.” Primarily focusing on the greater significance of the term “quick” in contrast with simply “living,” although I would contend that very few people today would understand the difference between the words, or even that they would recognize that “quick” means more than just the opposite of “slow.”
 
GCMac87 said:
There could be a historical-linguistic argument to be made, such as the case with the change of the phrase “to judge both the quick and the dead” to “to judge the living and the dead.” Primarily focusing on the greater significance of the term “quick” in contrast with simply “living,” although I would contend that very few people today would understand the difference between the words, or even that they would recognize that “quick” means more than just the opposite of “slow.”
Click to expand...
Any theological difference?

Without focusing too closely on the idea of a Book of Common Prayer, why two versions of the Creed, available in Rite I? Why two Rites? As Read suggests, it is not linguistic, but Lex Orandi in action.

The mind-set that produced the 79 book produced the 2010 Episcopal Church.

GKC
 
GKC said:
Rite I, I guess. I used to have a better article bookmarked, from the APCK site, maybe I’ll find it. But here’s the late Peter Toon:

pbsusa.org/Articles/Connection.htm

It’s a Lex Orandi thing.

Does the Creed look a little off?

But I like a couple of things. Just wo’nt use the book.

GKC
Click to expand...
My bishop refers over 50 heresies in the 79, but gives no details.
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
I am sure the very orthodox, strict Catholics in here would tell you some of it is permissible as long as you don’t subscribe to the 39 Articles of Religion or catechism Q and A in the back as well as the actual liturgical responses and verbage that sounds too memorialist and/or not sacrificial enough to meet the Catholic criterion. Most of the collects, prayers, and other things are pretty denominationally neutral and “safe” for a Catholic. I love the BOCP. When I became Catholic it was a huge loss for me and since I’ve been back in the Anglican Church I have really enjoyed it like meeting up with an old friend again. What a beautiful, classic piece of literature, even if you’re not Anglican, it’s an amazing feat of authorship and religious expression and a piece of history.

And heck, if these Catholics are willing to sing “A Mighty Fortress” by Luther and “Amazing Grace,” which is about as Calvinistic as you can get, I don’t see how the BOCP would hurt! 😃
Click to expand...
Well with the Articles of Religion and the Catechism, I tend to edit those. I tweak the Articles to make it more Catholic or read up on Tract 90 written by John Henry Newman, and I either I replace the 1662 Catechism in the BCP with an edited Catechism from the Anglican Church of Canada, which is strangely more Anglo-Catholic than others, or I just replace it with the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Also, I always viewed the BCP as more safe for Catholics than some of the other Reformers’, or their disciples, writings like the Lutheran Book of Concord and others.
 
GKC said:
Rite I, I guess. I used to have a better article bookmarked, from the APCK site, maybe I’ll find it. But here’s the late Peter Toon:

pbsusa.org/Articles/Connection.htm

It’s a Lex Orandi thing.

Does the Creed look a little off?

But I like a couple of things. Just wo’nt use the book.

GKC
Click to expand...
Could you be referencing the book by Peter Toon and Louis R. Tarsitano about the '79
titled: Neither Orthodoxy Nor A Formulary (The Shape and Content of the 1979 Prayer Book of the Episcopal Church)?

Mark+
 
MarkBrown said:
Could you be referencing the book by Peter Toon and Louis R. Tarsitano about the '79
titled: Neither Orthodoxy Nor A Formulary (The Shape and Content of the 1979 Prayer Book of the Episcopal Church)?

Mark+
Click to expand...
No, but that’s good, too. I had completely forgotten it. I wonder if I have it around here. Must look. Thanks. Sad that both of them are gone, now.

I was thinking of Francis’ Read’s article, that I linked to above.

GKC
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top