Interesting development: revival of the Sarum rite

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maximian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I totally missed this as I had another special Candlemas Mass I was attending. But if they do another Sarum Rite Mass, I’d be totally down. The old Sarum Missal is one of the historic Missals I use to pray from. It’s available free via Archive.org.
 
Maximian said:
The Episcopalian Book of Common Prayer is derived from the Sarum Rite
Click to expand...
The current edition of the Episcopalian Book of Common Prayer is derived from older editions. The first edition is derived from the Book of Common Prayer (1662) of the Church of England. Cranmer who composed that borrowed a lot from the Sarum Rite which he knew. However, they are not the Sarum Rite, not even close.
 
To be picky, Cranmer was long dead (at the stake) in 1662. But he was responsible for the 1549 and 1542 Books of Common Prayer, the ancestor as it were of the 1662 BCP.
 
Indeed, Cranmer was dead when the fourth edition of the Book of Common Prayer (BCP) was published in 1662 during the reign of Charles II and imposed by the Act of Uniformity 1662. Nonetheless, Thomas Cranmer is still credited for the words in the BCP. Indeed, his prayers are considered far better than many prayers in modern English.
 
I was at this Vespers… it was totally amazing.

That day, the heat broke in the Church, so it was cold (not freezing) inside, which made the Vespers feel even more like Candlemass before the Council of Trent.

The only thing that would have made this experience more like the 13th century would have been if they removed the pews!

It was totally beautiful & truly amazing… I felt like I was in the movie Becket!

God Bless
 
PickyPicky said:
To be picky, that is what my phrase “derived from” actually means
Click to expand...
To be sure. What @TomH1 said was that Cranmer composed the 1662 BCP. Of course he and you and I know the 1662 BCP was “derived” from Cranmer’s BCP, which leaned on the Sarum Rite, which had been in widespread use in England. None of us disagree as far as I can see. I was just inserting a picky correction to the suggestion that the 1662 was “composed” by Cranmer although it was of course based on his work.
 
As an ex Anglocatholic I have a nostalgic affection for the Book of Common Prayer, and was quite disappointed to find that the Ordinariate barely uses it and seems to prefer the Alternative Service Book whose English is barely less bureaucratic than the English of the Novus Ordo.
 
It was my understanding that it is not permitted to celebrate mass (and by extension, other Divine services) according the Sarum Use these days.
 
Maximian said:
As an ex Anglocatholic I have a nostalgic affection for the Book of Common Prayer, and was quite disappointed to find that the Ordinariate barely uses it and seems to prefer the Alternative Service Book whose English is barely less bureaucratic than the English of the Novus Ordo.
Click to expand...
This is news to me. As I understand it the Alternative Service Book is no longer authorised in the Church of England. I am not sure that Catholics would be using a no longer authorised form of liturgy from a non-Catholic Christian ecclesial community. Indeed, I am fairly certain about this. It is my understanding that the Mass in the Ordinariate is celebrated according to the Roman Rite using either of the following three uses: the Ordinary Form, the Extraordinary Form or the Divine Worship Missal. The latter is particular to the Ordinariate. For the Divine Office the Ordinariate uses its own liturgical book called the Customary.
 
TomH1 said:
The latter is particular to the Ordinariate. For the Divine Office the Ordinariate uses its own liturgical book called the Customary .
Click to expand...
Correct. And if you look into the prayers th herein you will see where they derive from
 
It is not something I can do right now but I definitely intend doing so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top