Use of 1662 Book of Common Prayer

  • Thread starter Thread starter celestialhost
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ad_Orientem said:
The Anglican congregation I used to be part of used the 1928 American BCP, and for private devotions I said Morning & Evening prayer out of that book:

Forms of Prayer to be used in Families (via Society of Archbishop Justus)

There is nothing in these prayers offensive to faith or morals; on the contrary, they are quite “Catholic” in flavor.

In the BCP generally, there *are *things offensive to faith (e.g. the substitution of Protestant rites for the sacraments; the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, and other Protestant omissions and substitutions); but there’s nothing wrong with Morning and Evening Prayer in themselves, especially as a private devotion.

When I became Catholic, my priest said it was fine to use these for my own private devotion, and for awhile I did. Eventually, however, I switched over to the Liturgy of the Hours, because it is the official prayer of the Church.
Click to expand...
You are speaking of course of the famous Tract 90. Or infamous to Calvinistic Anglicans. It was written on the cusp between Newman’s CofE days and his conversion.
 
andrewstx said:
You are speaking of course of the famous Tract 90. Or infamous to Calvinistic Anglicans. It was written on the cusp between Newman’s CofE days and his conversion.
Click to expand...
Some insights on Tract 90 would be appreciated 🙂 Like a thread devoted to Neuman.
 
Symphorian said:
Common Worship 2000 is a very comprehensive liturgical resource running across several volumes and gives a great deal of flexibility - including the use of ‘Cranmerese’ as well as contemporary English forms for Holy Communion and the Offices of Morning and Evening Prayer.
Click to expand...
Do you not thing it’s a disadvantage that it requires several volumes? The great thing about the 1662 BCP is that it was just one comprehensive self-contained volume that every party in the Anglican church could use. Any lay person can buy their own affordable copy of the BCP.

The Catholic church rather has the same problem with the Divine Office; it’s in three huge volumes. How many lay people would fork out for all three? Of course, you can buy the cheap Shorter Morning and Evening but the complete Divine Office is rather intimidating prospect…
 
celestialhost said:
Do you not thing it’s a disadvantage that it requires several volumes? The great thing about the 1662 BCP is that it was just one comprehensive self-contained volume that every party in the Anglican church could use. Any lay person can buy their own affordable copy of the BCP.

The Catholic church rather has the same problem with the Divine Office; it’s in three huge volumes. How many lay people would fork out for all three? Of course, you can buy the cheap Shorter Morning and Evening but the complete Divine Office is rather intimidating prospect…
Click to expand...
I like the word “Common”, in BCP.

GKC
 
celestialhost said:
Do you not thing it’s a disadvantage that it requires several volumes? The great thing about the 1662 BCP is that it was just one comprehensive self-contained volume that every party in the Anglican church could use. Any lay person can buy their own affordable copy of the BCP.

The Catholic church rather has the same problem with the Divine Office; it’s in three huge volumes. How many lay people would fork out for all three? Of course, you can buy the cheap Shorter Morning and Evening but the complete Divine Office is rather intimidating prospect…
Click to expand...
It was of course ++Cranmer’s intent to have a common English language ‘use’ in one volume as opposed to the variety of Medieval uses in Latin with their multiple volumes and complexities. He once said something to the effect about the old books that ‘it took longer to look up what to say than to actually say it.’

With Common Worship, a lay-person would be able to get by with the main volume of plus a Bible. This volume contains MP, EP and Compline; Lectionary; Psalter, Canticles; rites for Holy Communion and Collects. (And a few other bits and pieces.)

Having said that, I rather miss the days when we were BCP or ASB only as these books contained the readings for Sunday Eucharists throughout the year as well as those for major Holy Days/Saints Days.

As a child I remember going to church with my 1662 BCP bound up with a copy of Hymns Ancient & Modern so everything was in one book. Now we seem to end up with a plethora of paperwork in the pews; service booklets, hymn books, sheets containing the readings, parish bulletin etc etc!
 
Symphorian said:
It was of course ++Cranmer’s intent to have a common English language ‘use’ in one volume as opposed to the variety of Medieval uses in Latin with their multiple volumes and complexities. He once said something to the effect about the old books that ‘it took longer to look up what to say than to actually say it.’

With Common Worship, a lay-person would be able to get by with the main volume of plus a Bible. This volume contains MP, EP and Compline; Lectionary; Psalter, Canticles; rites for Holy Communion and Collects. (And a few other bits and pieces.)

Having said that, I rather miss the days when we were BCP or ASB only as these books contained the readings for Sunday Eucharists throughout the year as well as those for major Holy Days/Saints Days.

As a child I remember going to church with my 1662 BCP bound up with a copy of Hymns Ancient & Modern so everything was in one book. Now we seem to end up with a plethora of paperwork in the pews; service booklets, hymn books, sheets containing the readings, parish bulletin etc etc!
Click to expand...
I have a 1886 Episcopal Book, bound with the corresponding hymnal. Would be very useful, at that.

GKC
 
The 1662 BCP is absolutely heretical and offensive to the Catholic faith. Check out this gem from the communion service.

WHEREAS it is ordained in this Office for the Administration of the Lord’s Supper, that the Communicants should receive the same kneeling; (which order is well meant, for a signification of our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy Receivers, and for the avoiding of such profanation and disorder in the holy Communion, as might otherwise ensue;) yet, lest the same kneeling should by any persons, either out of ignorance and infirmity, or out of malice and obstinacy, be misconstrued and depraved: It is hereby declared, That thereby no adoration is intended, or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, or unto any Corporal Presence of Christ’s natural Flesh and Blood. For the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural substances, and therefore may not be adored; (for that were Idolatry, to be abhorred of all faithful Christians;) and the natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in Heaven, and not here; it being against the truth of Christ’s natural Body to be at one time in more places than one.

This is unadulterated Calvinism. This alone would ruin the whole book for me. Why not learn Latin and pray from a Catholic office?
 
QNDNNDQDCE said:
The 1662 BCP is absolutely heretical and offensive to the Catholic faith. Check out this gem from the communion service.

WHEREAS it is ordained in this Office for the Administration of the Lord’s Supper, that the Communicants should receive the same kneeling; (which order is well meant, for a signification of our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy Receivers, and for the avoiding of such profanation and disorder in the holy Communion, as might otherwise ensue;) yet, lest the same kneeling should by any persons, either out of ignorance and infirmity, or out of malice and obstinacy, be misconstrued and depraved: It is hereby declared, That thereby no adoration is intended, or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, or unto any Corporal Presence of Christ’s natural Flesh and Blood. For the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural substances, and therefore may not be adored; (for that were Idolatry, to be abhorred of all faithful Christians;) and the natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in Heaven, and not here; it being against the truth of Christ’s natural Body to be at one time in more places than one.

This is unadulterated Calvinism. This alone would ruin the whole book for me. Why not learn Latin and pray from a Catholic office?
Click to expand...
That is the infamous “Black Rubric”.
 
7_Sorrows said:
God only understands Latin?
Click to expand...
No, but OP would certainly have a hard time understanding a Latin office if he had no knowledge of the language. And he said that he doesn’t like the current liturgy of the hours.
 
QNDNNDQDCE said:
The 1662 BCP is absolutely heretical and offensive to the Catholic faith. Check out this gem from the communion service.

WHEREAS it is ordained in this Office for the Administration of the Lord’s Supper,
that the Communicants should receive the same kneeling; (which order is well meant, for a signification of our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy Receivers, and for the avoiding of such profanation and disorder in the holy Communion, as might otherwise ensue;) yet, lest the same kneeling should by any persons, either out of ignorance and infirmity, or out of malice and obstinacy, be misconstrued and depraved: It is hereby declared, That thereby no adoration is intended, or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, or unto any Corporal Presence of Christ’s natural Flesh and Blood. For the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural substances, and therefore may not be adored; (for that were Idolatry, to be abhorred of all faithful Christians;) and the natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in Heaven, and not here; it being against the truth of Christ’s natural Body to be at one time in more places than one.
This is unadulterated Calvinism. This alone would ruin the whole book for me. Why not learn Latin and pray from a Catholic office?
​
Click to expand...

BTW I was a Catholic Franciscan and I participated in choir in the four volume daily office. But we did it in English. After I left I continued to use the one volume Christian Prayer. Rosary was in Latin though.
But I got tired of using the Guide and buying a mew one every year, and the constant turning back and forth in the book.

So I started using the 1926 American book, in which the Calvinistic 'black rubric did not occur.

I still remember some Latin, and the Marian Hymns after Compline.​
 
If you like the beauty and simplicity of the traditional BCP orders for Morning and Evening Prayer, but are concerned that they might not agree with Catholic teaching, you should check out the new Book of Common Prayer, published in 2009 by Lancelot Andrews Press (andrewespress.com/). It is based on the 1928 American BCP, but is intended for former Anglicans who are now in the Orthodox Church, but continue to use the Western Rite. Thus, while the incomparable Cranmer/Coverdale language has been preserved, there is much material that has been edited, corrected and added to bring the texts into conformity with Eastern Orthodox teaching and, therefore, has no conflict with Roman Catholic teaching, either.* The Filioque has been deleted from the Nicene Creed, in accordance with text of the First and Second Ecumenical Councils. Also, devotions and hymns to the Mother of God and the saints have been added, as have forms for private confession, baptism and confirmation. The rubrics for the [corrected] rite of Confirmation assume that the rite will be administered by the priest immediately after Baptism (which is assumed to be by triple immersion), as in the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Eastern rites of the Roman Catholic Church. The historic Roman Canon of the Mass is provided on p. 972 as an alternative, both in Latin and in the original English translation by Miles Coverdale. I suppose it is too much to hope that this wonderful Prayer Book would be authorized for use in the new Anglican Use ordinariates. Be that as it may, the same press also publishes the St. Dunstan’s Plainsong Psalter, which has received widespread praise and contains, in addition to the 150 Psalms set to the classic plainsong tones, all the traditional Marian hymns, the Great Litany, Mass settings and much else (in English, of course).

*Actually, since the book includes propers for a number of post-Schism feasts and saints, such as Corpus Christi, the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the Holy Rosary, the Holy Family, the Seven Sorrows of Mary, St. Francis de Sales, St. Joan of Arc, St. John Vianney, St. Teresa of Avila, Ste. Thérèse of Lisieux, St. Francis of Assisi and St. Clare, etc., etc., this new BCP is even more RC than Eastern Orthodox in its schedule of feasts and saints days.
 
So there is a new BCP for episcopalians or anglicans who are now part of the orthodox church?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top