|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: new vicar- changes
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
But *why*? Cooking your own liturgy is not the CofE's tradition. It is, as I understand it, a Reformed tradition, and that's fine. But a common- and I mean very substantially common- liturgy is one of the core parts of the CofE's identity. Not, I think, that Colin Buchanan was ever particularly in the CofE mainstream, as far as identity went.
[ 13. February 2018, 19:34: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Well, in a way, I miss the little eau-de-nil Series 3 Communion booklet of 1973!
For all its shortcomings, it was user-friendly, IMHO, with clear type (say the black, do the blue, IIRC).
There are authorised CW booklets out there - the Additional Curates Society publishes one, which follows CW pretty closely (adding in one or two Carflick bits).
On studying one, I saw that it would do very nicely at Our Place for the usual Sunday/weekday Eucharists, with everything the congregation needs.
Seasonal bits (Invitation to Confession, The Peace, Preface, Blessing/Dismissal) said by the priest don't have to appear in print in the people's book.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
But *why*? Cooking your own liturgy is not the CofE's tradition. ...
Isn't it? It strikes me as being very much part of the Anglo-Catholic tradition to claim to know better than the Prayer Book, to change the order in which things happen, and to try to get away with inserting extra bits purloined from either the 1549 prayer book or the Roman Missal depending on taste.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RdrEmCofE
Shipmate
# 17511
|
Posted
quote:
Isn't it? It strikes me as being very much part of the Anglo-Catholic tradition to claim to know better than the Prayer Book,
Wasn't The Prayer Book itself a new recipe for prayer built upon the foundation of what went before but influenced by new theological insights.
Cranmer was a 'Chef' par excellence, was he not.
--------------------
Love covers many sins. 1 Pet.4:8. God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not holding their sins against them; 2 Cor.5:19
Posts: 255 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
But *why*? Cooking your own liturgy is not the CofE's tradition. ...
Isn't it? It strikes me as being very much part of the Anglo-Catholic tradition to claim to know better than the Prayer Book, to change the order in which things happen, and to try to get away with inserting extra bits purloined from either the 1549 prayer book or the Roman Missal depending on taste.
You're quite right Enoch. Some of the same people would go to stake in order to have bishops but cut off their right hands rather than obey one.
But I suppose they would argue, we're not cooking our own liturgy; we are attempting to reclaim the liturgy of the Catholic Church which is ours by right. Or something like that. Also,in practice, however idiosyncratic some priests and churches were with their liturgy, they would use the same rite week after week, day after day. Unlike some modern experimentalists who chop and change all the time. There is a difference.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
ISTM that poor Cranmer became embroiled in the political brouhaha of his time, and was (I suppose) forced, in a sense, to change the 1549 English version of the Mass to the odd concoction of 1552.
One wonders what might have transpired if 1549 had remained the norm.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
But *why*? Cooking your own liturgy is not the CofE's tradition. ...
Isn't it? It strikes me as being very much part of the Anglo-Catholic tradition to claim to know better than the Prayer Book, to change the order in which things happen, and to try to get away with inserting extra bits purloined from either the 1549 prayer book or the Roman Missal depending on taste.
but that's not 'cooking your own'
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
georgiaboy
Shipmate
# 11294
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
ISTM that poor Cranmer became embroiled in the political brouhaha of his time, and was (I suppose) forced, in a sense, to change the 1549 English version of the Mass to the odd concoction of 1552.
One wonders what might have transpired if 1549 had remained the norm.
IJ
Cranmer was to some extent 'a very flexible man.' Henry 8's lapdog/attack poodle in the matter of The Divorce, constantly being swayed by continental reformers in matters theological/liturgical. Recanting his protestant faith under Q Mary (but then withdrawing the recantation before going to the stake.
All but the more virulent/violent prods would today, I think, agree that 1549 was much better than 1552.
On the subject of liturgical style/literacy, however, he was hard to beat.
And certainly in the political mess that followed the death of King Henry, neither he nor King Edward was equal to the power politics of the Privy Council.
--------------------
You can't retire from a calling.
Posts: 1675 | From: saint meinrad, IN | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
but that's not 'cooking your own'
It is if you're the one who chooses which bits to add or leave out where, and which cupboard you take them from. It is, even more, if you get to choose when you can look down your noses at those who don't make exactly the same selection as you do.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by georgiaboy:
... All but the more virulent/violent prods would today, I think, agree that 1549 was much better than 1552. ...
Terrible though it may seem even to whisper such a thing on this board, but I don't think many regular churchgoers, whether virulent/violent prods, easy-going MotRers, or even quite a lot of affable AffCaths either know or care.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by georgiaboy:
... All but the more virulent/violent prods would today, I think, agree that 1549 was much better than 1552. ...
Terrible though it may seem even to whisper such a thing on this board, but I don't think many regular churchgoers, whether virulent/violent prods, easy-going MotRers, or even quite a lot of affable AffCaths either know or care.
And according to Diarmaid McCulloch's bio of Blessèd Thomas, the martyr preferred 1552 over 1549, which he felt made far too many concessions to the unadvanced. The 1549 is closer to the TEC, South African, and Canadian books than the 1552, but that is perhaps for another thread.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I don't think there is any "perhaps" about it! ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
/slight tangent alert/
IIRC, the 1549 Communion rite is still available for use in the C of E, though I think you need the Bishop's permission. It sometimes gets 're-enacted' liturgically, as part of a training course, for example.
Having said that, the service booklet would need to be rendered in modern spelling!
Here is the first part of the service, rendered as a Low Mass without music - not a particularly high quality film, BTW, but sufficient to give a flavour of this first English-language Mass.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I don't think there is any "perhaps" about it!
"Perhaps" is Anglican-speak for "certainly."
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
... Here is the first part of the service, rendered as a Low Mass without music - not a particularly high quality film, BTW, but sufficient to give a flavour of this first English-language Mass. ...
I accept that the sound quality isn't very good, but as an illustration of what I'm complaining about when I've described on these boards a typical Anglo-Catholic Communion Service of 50 years ago as "turn your back on the congregation, hunch over the altar and mumble" that could hardly be bettered.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Puzzler
Apprentice
# 18908
|
Posted
To think that our new vicar could have been of that ilk!
When considering what sort of person was wanted, the PCC stated a preference , if forced to one extreme or the other, for low church rather than ultra high, so in that respect we got what we wanted. Just wish he would prepare properly for worship, not have to ask someone half way through.
Posts: 27 | From: England | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
@Enoch - well, I didn't say I particularly liked the flavour!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
@Puzzler - I agree that good preparation is essential, however familiar or unfamiliar the liturgy might be. There's no excuse for sloppiness, which is unworthy of the Lord we are supposed to be worshipping.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Equally true for Nonconformists, by the way - I hate sloppy rambling unthoughtout services.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
I expect the same could apply to RC services - one hears of slap-dash Masses, edifying to neither beast or man.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
but that's not 'cooking your own'
It is if you're the one who chooses which bits to add or leave out where, and which cupboard you take them from. It is, even more, if you get to choose when you can look down your noses at those who don't make exactly the same selection as you do.
No - did the whole of it, not bits - when I was in an urban priority area, the Roman Rite suited the level of literacy of the congregation - they couldn't cope woth the verbosity to which Anglican liturgies are prone.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
[QUOTE] ...according to Diarmaid McCulloch's bio of Blessèd Thomas, the martyr preferred 1552 over 1549, which he felt made far too many concessions to the unadvanced.
That is certainly my understanding. One interesting question is what Cranmer might have done had he been allowed to continue for a few more years. As far as I can see, even 1552 was not the end product as far as he was concerned.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Puzzler
Apprentice
# 18908
|
Posted
All- age worship (Morning Prayer) this morning.
Service lasted 44 minutes and that included about 10 minutes of extraneous material ie various additional notices, welcome to a new family, a birthday, with three lots of applause......no psalm, no canticles, no robes, no candles, no choir, piano not organ, no reverence, sermon of dubious theology, lost his place because he swapped the order around.
Can I bear to go again?
Posts: 27 | From: England | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged
|
|
RdrEmCofE
Shipmate
# 17511
|
Posted
quote:
[Enoch] I accept that the sound quality isn't very good, but as an illustration of what I'm complaining about when I've described on these boards a typical Anglo-Catholic Communion Service of 50 years ago as "turn your back on the congregation, hunch over the altar and mumble" that could hardly be bettered.
Yes but you can thank the Oxford Movement for all that.
Cranmer would have had the altar in the nave, with the priest facing North, not East.
--------------------
Love covers many sins. 1 Pet.4:8. God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not holding their sins against them; 2 Cor.5:19
Posts: 255 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Puzzler:
All- age worship (Morning Prayer) this morning.
Service lasted 44 minutes and that included about 10 minutes of extraneous material ie various additional notices, welcome to a new family, a birthday, with three lots of applause......no psalm, no canticles, no robes, no candles, no choir, piano not organ, no reverence, sermon of dubious theology, lost his place because he swapped the order around.
Can I bear to go again?
I suppose it all depends on your expectations, but at least it was only 44 minutes.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
RdrEmCofE said:
quote:
Cranmer would have had the altar in the nave, with the priest facing North, not East.
On the north side of the Lord's Table, facing south, I think you mean.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
@Puzzler - sounds pretty dire, but it need not necessarily be so. An All-Age service could well include robes (alb and stole), candles (2 on the altar), piano, and reverence.
It need not include 10 minutes of notices, applause, faffing around because of lack of preparation, or a sermon of dubious theology (though that's perhaps a subjective opinion).
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Does anyone know enough about the 1549 prayer book to know whether the priest continued to face east with his back to the congregation, as in the previous Latin version and as in the youtube? My impression is that the instruction to be on the north side wouldn't have come in until either 1552 or 1559, but I don't know.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Does anyone know enough about the 1549 prayer book to know whether the priest continued to face east with his back to the congregation, as in the previous Latin version and as in the youtube? My impression is that the instruction to be on the north side wouldn't have come in until either 1552 or 1559, but I don't know.
On this continued tangent....The rubric just before the Great Thanksgiving reads: quote:
Then the Priest, turnyng hym to the Altar, shall saye or syng, playnly and distinctly, this prayer folowyng...
and in two other places the rubrics direct the priest to either face the Holy Table or Lord's Borde, or to turn and face the people. This would suggest that 1549 assumed ad orientem celebrations, but it wouldn't surprise me if some of the more "advanced" clergy had already introduced north-ending it. As well, the rubrics direct that communicants "tary in the quire," women on one side, men on the other, before receiving.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
