Use of 1662 Book of Common Prayer

[Indifferently]

I don’t think the wording of the penitential prayer is at all contrary to Catholic teaching.

Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism are both anathematized by the Catholic Church.

That’s interesting. Especially given Trent’s doctrine of justification, which seems quite similar to semi-Pelagianism.

 

[Indifferently]

I haven’t warmed to the Liturgy of the Hours. I regularly use the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin, as I find that very theologically rich and love the Marian emphasis.

What sort of evangelical tradition did you come from, just out of interest?

 

[GKC]

Indeed, Art. X represents part of the Catholic faith that was retained by the Anglican revolters. I did not means to say that *all *the articles of religion individually are contrary to the Catholic Religion, but the articles generally, and most of them individually, are offensive either to faith or to the authority and discipline of the Holy See.

And Anglicans, generally, may affirm them, individually, or in toto, or reject them, similarly, in the sense that they, in that form, are not normative for Anglicans, in general.

But I suspect the first 5 pass muster, with Trinitarians, generally.

GKC

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I understand that many of the collects in the first English language Lutheran hymnals in America were taken from the Book of Common Prayer; sheer poetry.

 

[celestialhost]

What sort of evangelical tradition did you come from, just out of interest?

I was brought up in the charismatic movement, but I moved away from charismatic theology. I’ve attended Reformed Bapist, independent Evangelical churches, Brethren and a couple of Calvary Chapels. I was into dispensationalism for a long time. I’ve read plenty of Reformed theology, but I’ve never been convinced by it.

 

[Indifferently]

I was brought up in the charismatic movement, but I moved away from charismatic theology. I’ve attended Reformed Bapist, independent Evangelical churches, Brethren and a couple of Calvary Chapels. I was into dispensationalism for a long time. I’ve read plenty of Reformed theology, but I’ve never been convinced by it.

Interesting. Thank you.

 

[twf]

I haven’t warmed to the Liturgy of the Hours. I regularly use the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin, as I find that very theologically rich and love the Marian emphasis.

We’re expecting a new English translation of the Liturgy of the Hours in the next few (several?) years. It will be more faithful to the Latin text and should be a more formal, poetic English…akin to the new and improved English translation of the Mass. Perhaps that will suit you better once it becomes available. Nothing wrong with the Little Office though.

 

[Indifferently]

We’re expecting a new English translation of the Liturgy of the Hours in the next few (several?) years. It will be more faithful to the Latin text and should be a more formal, **poetic English…**akin to the new and improved English translation of the Mass. Perhaps that will suit you better once it becomes available. Nothing wrong with the Little Office though.

Interesting take on “poetic English”. The new translation of the Missal reads like it was translated by non-native English speakers.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I was brought up in the episcopal church and I much preferred the 1928 BCP to the 1979 BCP. I have never seen a copy of the 1662 BCP.

The collects are beautiful. I still have mine but do not use them for private devotion anymore. I keep them for sentimental reasons.

 

[celestialhost]

I was brought up in the episcopal church and I much preferred the 1928 BCP to the 1979 BCP. I have never seen a copy of the 1662 BCP.

In England, the 1662 version is the form of the BCP most often used. The 1928 BCP was rejected by our parliament and no further revisions were made. A more radical change to the Church of England’s liturgy was introduced in 1980, the Alternative Service Book. The use of the Book of Common Prayer faded out to a large extent, apart from handfuls of diehard parishes here and there. The Alternative Service Book was replaced in 2001 by a new modern liturgy, Common Worship.

 

[GKC]

In England, the 1662 version is the form of the BCP most often used. The 1928 BCP was rejected by our parliament and no further revisions were made. A more radical change to the Church of England’s liturgy was introduced in 1980, the Alternative Service Book. The use of the Book of Common Prayer faded out to a large extent, apart from handfuls of diehard parishes here and there. The Alternative Service Book was replaced in 2001 by a new modern liturgy, Common Worship.

The Episcopal 1928 and the proposed CoE 1928 are different books.

GKC

 

[twf]

Interesting take on “poetic English”. The new translation of the Missal reads like it was translated by non-native English speakers.

I couldn’t disagree more. All one has to do is compare the daily collects to see that the old and new translations are night and day. The original 1973 translation of the collect for the 19th Sunday in Ordinary Time:
Almighty and ever-living God,
you Spirit made us your children,
confident to call you Father.
Increase your Spirit within us
and bring us to our promised inheritance.

The revised 2012 translation:
Almighty ever-living God,
whom, taught by the Holy Spirit,
we dare to call our Father,
bring, we pray, to perfection in our hearts
the spirit of adoption as your sons and daughters,
that we may merit to enter into the inheritance
which you have promised.

This is one of thousands of potential comparisons. To me, the obsolete 1973 translation reads as mundane, dull, and empty when compared to the more faithful (to the Latin) 2012 translation. The language of spiritual adoption is very important Biblically and the new translation restores that language.
Eucharistic Prayer II is a good example where the language of the Holy Spirit coming upon the gifts as “due” has been restored - a very Biblical image.
The language may at times seem odd to the average English speaker, but it is a much more faithful rendering of the original Latin and preserves the rich imagery of the Church and Biblical tradition. Not everyone is of the opinion that liturgical language should equate common, vulgar street language.

 

[Novocastrian]

In England, the 1662 version is the form of the BCP most often used. The 1928 BCP was rejected by our parliament and no further revisions were made. A more radical change to the Church of England’s liturgy was introduced in 1980, the Alternative Service Book. The use of the Book of Common Prayer faded out to a large extent, apart from handfuls of diehard parishes here and there. The Alternative Service Book was replaced in 2001 by a new modern liturgy, Common Worship.

It should be noted that the Cathedrals and Colleges tend to use the Prayer Book for the Offices at least.

 

[Indifferently]

The Episcopal 1928 and the proposed CoE 1928 are different books.

GKC

Both containing the same eucharistic theology in radical departure from that of 1662. Quite a thing to ask the Holy Spirit to “sanctify” inanimate objects.

 

[Symphorian]

In England, the 1662 version is the form of the BCP most often used. The 1928 BCP was rejected by our parliament and no further revisions were made. A more radical change to the Church of England’s liturgy was introduced in 1980, the Alternative Service Book. The use of the Book of Common Prayer faded out to a large extent, apart from handfuls of diehard parishes here and there. The Alternative Service Book was replaced in 2001 by a new modern liturgy, Common Worship.

The number of parishes using the 1662 BCP exclusively is rather small as you say. However, use of the 1662 Prayer Book is still fairly common for early celebrations of Holy Communion on Sundays or for mid-week Communions. (And its use by Cathedrals as Novocastrian pointed out.) We have an active Prayer Book Society.

The proposed 1928 BCP paved the way for the First Series of Alternative Services that were authorized for use in the mid 1960’s. Most, if I remember correctly were just lifted from the proposed 1928 book although some were slightly modified.

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.

 

[7_Sorrows]

The Episcopal 1928 and the proposed CoE 1928 are different books.

GKC

You are so knowledgable of all things anglican GKC!

Why would they be different or how are they different?
I mean I realize that the episcopal church is not part of the CoE.

 

[GKC]

You are so knowledgable of all things anglican GKC!

Why would they be different or how are they different?
I mean I realize that the episcopal church is not part of the CoE.

Aw, shucks. And not really.

They were two different books, prepared for and by the two different Churches. Different Anglican jurisdictions could have different Books, though the divergence amongst them has grown, over recent years. I’ve not seen the proposed CoE book, just bits and pieces. I think it’s on line somewhere.

I have heard that it, like the US 1928 Book, was considered too Catholic for the reformed wing of the respective Churches. The 1928 Book prevailed, over here. Failed over there.

GKC

 

[Indifferently]

We celebrated the 1662 Communion service this morning. A wonderful liturgy.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

We celebrated the 1662 Communion service this morning. A wonderful liturgy.

Yes, a “wonderful liturgy” of many Anglican gifts to the Church.

 

[andrewstx]

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.

I still use the 1928 BCP for my devotions. Even though I am Orthodox. It is so easy to use.

The Liturgy of the Hours takes up four volumes and then constant flipping back and forth.

And the Orthodox Hours. fugeggabout it. It takes a library to read it. At least 13 books, one for the general form and then a separate volume for every month.