Episcopal: Rite 1 vs. Rite 2

[Contarini]

*Holmes (admitted) to have misled the Church, for he justified the failure to respond to the challenge of the Society for the Preservation of the Book of Common Prayer (SPBCP) in these words:

“They were correct when they said, as they did repeatedly and sometimes abrasively, that the theologies of the 1928 Book of Common Prayer and STU (Services for Trial Use. i.e., what was to become the 1979 book) were different. The SLC probably was strategically wise in not affirming this too loudly, but its members knew that the SPBCP was correct. There is a clear theological change." (emphasis added.)*

Link to article.

I link this not for arguments sake, just for education. Regardless of viewpoint, the reality that the Episcopal Church has suffered devastation since the time this has come in is clear. Not implying the theological changes caused it, they just parallel each other. So sad a beautiful tradition has been damaged so badly. I hope they manage to recover it somehow, though it looks like the chances are slim.

No dispute that there’s a theological shift. What I challenged was your particular claim about this particular omission.

The specific shift mentioned in the article you linked is a shift in the understanding of confirmation. Well, it’s true–the old Western understanding of confirmation isn’t tenable. It’s not the teaching of the early Church or of the Eastern Church.

And if the revisers were as duplicitous as your source claims, they were following in the footsteps of Cranmer. That doesn’t justify them, of course. But traditional Anglicans often have a high degree of amnesia about the problems in Anglicanism that long predated 1979.

Edwin

 

[GKC]

… And if the revisers were as duplicitous as your source claims, they were following in the footsteps of Cranmer. That doesn’t justify them, of course. But traditional Anglicans often have a high degree of amnesia about the problems in Anglicanism that long predated 1979.

Edwin

Sometimes.

GKC

 

[Contarini]

Sometimes.

GKC

I inserted “often” out of regard for you, because knowing you I know that this isn’t always the case (and to be fair, I know other traditional Anglicans who also recognize that there are problems that go back before 1979–in fact +Mark Haverland had an online article that explicitly discussed this)!

Edwin

 

[GKC]

I inserted “often” out of regard for you, because knowing you I know that this isn’t always the case (and to be fair, I know other traditional Anglicans who also recognize that there are problems that go back before 1979–in fact +Mark Haverland had an online article that explicitly discussed this)!

Edwin

Yeah, as you might guess, I was mainly trolling for a compliment. It’s been a hard week.

Might there be a link to +Haverland’s article available? My daughter attended his parish, back when he was Fr. Haverland, and she was in grad school in Georgia. I’d like to see what he said.

GKC

 

[Contarini]

Yeah, as you might guess, I was mainly trolling for a compliment. It’s been a hard week.

I’m very sorry to hear that.

Might there be a link to +Haverland’s article available? My daughter attended his parish, back when he was Fr. Haverland, and she was in grad school in Georgia. I’d like to see what he said.

GKC

The ACC website has been reordered since back in the day when I first read this article, and there is a lot more apologetic material, generally reflecting the same perspective (which makes sense since +Haverland is now the Archbishop). It doesn’t have Haverland’s name on it, but it used to–I don’t know how much of the general “Apologetics” material on the website he wrote himself. This appears to be the article I remember reading in the 90s. In searching for it, I also found this article which I found interesting.

Sorry again that you have had a rough week. I’m having a rough year in many ways (lost my job last year and am adjuncting and trying to find jobs to apply for jobs for next year), but God is good and there’s much to rejoice in (a new daughter, for instance, who was born on May 31).

God bless,

Edwin

 

[GKC]

I’m very sorry to hear that.

The ACC website has been reordered since back in the day when I first read this article, and there is a lot more apologetic material, generally reflecting the same perspective (which makes sense since +Haverland is now the Archbishop). It doesn’t have Haverland’s name on it, but it used to–I don’t know how much of the general “Apologetics” material on the website he wrote himself. This appears to be the article I remember reading in the 90s. In searching for it, I also found this article which I found interesting.

Sorry again that you have had a rough week. I’m having a rough year in many ways (lost my job last year and am adjuncting and trying to find jobs to apply for jobs for next year), but God is good and there’s much to rejoice in (a new daughter, for instance, who was born on May 31).

God bless,

Edwin

Many thanks, Edwin. I had not read either of those, though they, esp. the first, resonate well with me, and my own positions, as occasionally revealed in posts, seem to place me within the ACC perspective. I must study over the second article, but I think I could function within that paradigm; indeed, I think I do.

My week was not all that bad, I was just whining. I’d say your year would be accounted more stressful, and I hope you triumph over those trials, and I know you rejoice in your daughter. I certainly do, in mine, who is roughly 38 years older. You have a great deal to look forward to.

As, for example, RCIA, which I patiently have been expecting to hear of for some years now. Glad I was correct.

Good luck, God bless, and thank you again.

GKC