Dr. Chartres, Bp. of London: 350th Anniversary of 1662 Book of Common Prayer

http://sedangli.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/fit-for-sacred-themes-and-devotion/

May 8, 2012

tags: 1662, BCP, bishop, cathedral, London, Prayer Book, St Paul's

by AAK

Dr. Chartres, Bishop of London.

An address by the Bishop of London at the 350th anniversary of the 1662 edition of the Book of Common Prayer
St Paul’s Cathedral – May 2, 2012

Archbishop Cranmer commandeered Old St Paul’s on Whitsunday 1549 to demonstrate the new English liturgy from the Book of Common Prayer. The Lord Mayor and the worthies of the City of London were present but the Bishop of London boycotted the occasion which was further marred by the failure of the Select Preacher to turn up.

Today the presence of their Royal Highnesses, the Lord Mayor locum tenens, the Archbishop of Canterbury [this time in harmony with the Bishop of London] and a host of witnesses from all over the world, together testify to the historic and enduring significance of the Prayer Book tradition as we celebrate the 350th anniversary of the 1662 edition.

The Prayer Book in English was the centrepiece of an audacious cultural revolution. Stephen Gardiner, the Bishop of Winchester, was one of those critical of the scheme to introduce an English liturgy. He dismissed the argument that it was desirable for the language to be “understanded of the people” and the mode of conducting the services such as to render them audible. The bishop protested that “it was never meant that the people should indeed hear the matins or hear the mass but be present there and pray themselves in silence.” The barriers of language and audibility were actually conducive to genuine devotion.

This protest from one of the most intelligent conservatives of the day illuminates the radicalism of what was published as the First Book of Common Prayer. It was an audacious attempt to re-shape the culture of England by collapsing the distinction between private personal devotion and public liturgical worship in order to create a godly community in which all and not just the clergy had access to the “pure milk of the gospel”. The result would be a sense of English nationhood crystallising around the biblical narrative of God’s dealings with the children of Israel.

And what English! Tyndale’s translation of a large part of the Bible and Thomas Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer made of English a language fit for sacred themes and devotion. Cranmer’s was a very distinct achievement. Whereas Tyndale was the heir to previous experiments in turning the Scriptures into English going back to Wycliffe’s version, there had never been a liturgy in English.

But one of the functions of a liturgy is to preserve words and the possibility of an approach to God which is hard or impossible to express in the language of the street.

Cranmer distilled his liturgy from his studies of the Christian past and especially of the patristic period – the first five centuries; the springtime of the Church.

In the Preface to the First Book of Common Prayer, of 1549, he appeals to the authority of the “auncient fathers” as a guide in liturgical matters. Queen Elizabeth I, in her letter to the Roman Catholic Princes of Europe, amplified the point “that there was no new faith propagated in England, no new religion set up but that which was commanded by Our Saviour, practised by the Primitive Church and approved by the Fathers of the best antiquity”.

But the liturgical inheritance was drastically pruned and simplified. The accent was on hearing and understanding not on seeing as in the theatre of late mediaeval religion.

There was, however, growing opposition to any set form of liturgy. The Puritans valued spontaneity and the unpremeditated devotional voice and privileged original sermons and prayers over readings from liturgical texts. They also resented the traditional sources from which the Prayer Book was composed.

The survival of symbols like the ring in marriage and the signing of the cross in baptism was attacked as was even the simplified version of traditional clerical vesture. Milton excoriated traditional vestments as “guegaws fetched from Aaron’s old wardrobe”.

The agitation against the Prayer Book led to its suppression during the Commonwealth but the sufferings of Prayer Book loyalists during that period gave the book a powerful aura which contributed to its restoration with the monarchy. Our Book of Common Prayer was annexed to the Act of Uniformity which received Royal Assent in May 1662 and so became a part of the law of England. It remains a doctrinal standard for the Church and an indispensable part of our identity.

In a book published in 1662, Simon Patrick comments on the rites and ceremonies of divine worship and approves “that virtuous mediocrity which our church observes between the meretricious gaudiness of the Church of Rome and the squalid sluttery of fanatic conventicles.” Of course we would be too polite to say such things now but the Prayer Book offers a simple and moderate system for a whole life from baptism to last rites and seeks in its rubrics and ceremonies to embrace the whole person and not merely the cerebellum.

In more recent times both the Bible and the Prayer Book have been more and more edited out of public discourse and increasingly also expelled from school. Cultural amnesia is supposed to be a gateway to a kinder and more tolerant world while there has also been a cult of the new-fangled.

There was a fascinating example of the lingering antipathy to our cultural and religious inheritance in the reaction to the Royal Wedding in Westminster Abbey last year. In the acres of commentary in the secular press there was no criticism of the couple’s decision to use the traditional language form of the service. Then a week later the Church Times published letters from clergy expressing exasperation “that the language of the liturgy remained buried in the past” and “that once again the opportunity to present the church in a more up to date way was missed”.

A week after that, however, another clergyman wrote to point out that the three who had decried the “stuffy service” were born respectively in 1960; 1951 and 1937. The royal couple [born 1982] had chosen the service and the author of the letter observed that “it would appear that nothing dates so rapidly as yesterday’s modernity”.

Thanks to the labours of the Liturgical Commission the influence of the Prayer Book in the new Book of Common Worship is more prominent and we still have direct access to the original.

There is a challenge in every generation to distinguish between tradition, the living stream of spirit-filled wisdom, and traditionalism, which is the obstinate attachment to the mores of the day before yesterday.

We live at a time when there is an urgent need to articulate a fresh narrative about the English nation now enriched as it is in this great cosmopolitan city with people who bring their own distinctive narratives. After the financial crisis what we seem to be offered so frequently is the prospect of a return to “normality” defined in exclusively economic terms. Is it not already clear that we must prepare for a new normal, a narrative about Our Island Story which is realistic about our changed place in the world but which contains the seeds of hope?

The Book of Common Prayer which immerses us in the whole symphony of scripture; which takes us through the Psalms every month; which makes available in a digestible but noble way the treasury of ancient Christian devotion has a beauty which is ancient but also fresh. If our civilisation is to have a future the roots must be irrigated and the texts which we choose to pass on to our children have the power to create a community which does not merely dwell in the flatlands of getting and spending but which sees visions with prophets, pursues wisdom with Solomon and lives with the generosity of the God who so loved the world that he was generous and gave himself to us in the person of Jesus Christ our Lord.

Amen.

John Whitgift: "Articles Touching Preachers and Other Orders for the Church, A.D. 1583

http://www.luminarium.org/encyclopedia/articles1583.htm ARTICLES TOUCHING PREACHERS AND OTHER
ORDERS FOR THE CHURCH, A.D. 1583




Archbishop John Whitgift,
the third Cantaur of Elizabeth 1

WHITGIFT was elected archbishop on August 24, 1583. He was confirmed a month later. The first act of his episcopate was to issue, after consultation with the bishops of the province, the following Articles. They were sent to the bishops October 19, who were required to supply the archbishop with information as to conformity in their dioceses.

[Reg. I. Whitgift, fol. 97 a.]

St. Margaret's Anglican Church
Rector:  John Whitgift, 1572-1577
Rev. Whitgift would have used the
1559 BCP and sartorial vestments
of ABC Parker's Advertisements.
Meanwhile, sectarian Puritans were disturbing
the peace--even contrary to Jean Calvin's
recommendations.

I. That the laws late made against the recusants be put in more due execution considering the benefit that hath grown unto the Church thereby, where they have been so executed, and the encouragement which they and others do receive by remiss executing thereof.

2. That all preaching, reading, catechiZing and other such like exercises in private places and families, whereunto others do resort, being not of the same family, be utterly inhibited, seeing the same was never permitted as lawful, under any Christian magistrate, but is a manifest sign of schism, and a cause of contention in the Church.

3. That none be permitted to preach, read, or catechize in the church or elsewhere, unless he do, four times in the year at the least, say service, and minister the sacraments, according to the Book of Common Prayer.

4. That all preachers, and others in ecclesiastical orders, do at all times wear and use such kind of apparel as is prescribed unto them by the book of Advertisements and her majesty's Injunctions anno primo.

5. That none be permitted to preach, or interpret the Scriptures, unless he be a priest, or deacon at the least, admitted thereunto according to the laws of this realm.
6. That none be permitted to preach, read, catechize, minister the sacraments, or to execute any other ecclesiastical function, by what authority soever he be admitted thereunto, unless he consent and subscribe to these Articles following, before the ordinary of the diocese wherein he preacheth, readeth, catechizeth, or ministereth the sacraments, viz.:

(I) That her majesty, under God, hath, and ought to have, the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons born within her realms, dominions, and countries, of what estate, either ecclesiastical or temporal, soever they be; and that no foreign power, prelate, state, or potentate hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, preeminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within her majesty's said realms, dominions, and countries.

(2) That the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering bishops, priests, and deacons, containeth nothing in it contrary to the word of God, and that the same may lawfully be used, and that he himself will use the form of the said book prescribed in public prayer and administration of the sacraments, and none other.

(3) That he alloweth the book of Articles of religion, agreed upon by the archbishops and bishops of both provinces, and the whole clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year of our Lord God 1562, and set forth by her majesty's authority, and that he believeth all the Articles therein contained to be agreeable to the word of God.

7. That from henceforth none be admitted to any orders ecclesiastical, unless he do then presently show to the bishop a true presentation of himself to a benefice then void within the diocese or jurisdiction of the said bishop, or unless he show unto the same bishop a true certificate, where presently he may be placed to serve some cure within the same diocese or jurisdiction, or unless he be placed in some cathedral or collegiate church, or college in Cambridge or Oxford, or unless the said bishop shall then forthwith place him in some vacant benefice or cure.

8. And that no bishop henceforth do admit any into orders, but such as shall be of his own diocese, unless he be of one of the universities, or bring his letters dimissory from the bishop of the diocese, and be of age full twenty-four years, and a graduate of the university, or at the least able in the Latin tongue to yield an account of his faith, according to the Articles of religion agreed upon in Convocation, and that in such sort as that he can note the sentences of Scripture whereupon the truth of the said Articles is grounded, and bring a sufficient testimonial with him of his honest life and conversation, either under the seal of some college in the universities, where he hath remained, or from some justice of the peace, with other honest men of that parish, where he hath made his abode for three years before; and that the bishop, which shall admit any into orders being not in this manner qualified, be by the archbishop, with the assistance of some one other bishop, suspended from admitting any into orders for the space of two years.

9. And that no bishop institute any into a benefice, but such as be of the ability before prescribed: and if the Arches, by double quarrel or otherwise, proceed against the said bishop, for refusal of such as be not of that ability, that the Archbishop of Canterbury, either by his own authority or by means procured from her majesty, may stay such process, that the endeavour of the bishop may take place.

10. That one kind of translation of the Bible be only used in public service, as well in churches as chapels, and that to be the same which is now authorized by the consent of the bishops.

11. That from henceforth there be no commutation of penance, but in rare respects and upon great consideration, and when it shall appear to the bishop himself that that shall be the best way for winning and reforming of the offender, and that the penalty be employed either to the relief of the poor of that parish or to other godly uses, and the same well witnessed and made manifest to the congregation; and yet, if the fault be notorious, that the offender make some satisfaction, either in his own person, with declarations of his repentance openly in the church, or else that the minister of the church openly in the pulpit signify to his people his submission and declaration of his repentance done before the ordinary, and also in token of his repentance what portion of money he hath given to be employed to the uses above named.

As persons of honest, worshipful, and honourable calling may necessarily and reasonably have occasions sometimes to solemnize marriage by licence for the banns asking or for once or twice without any great harm, so for avoiding generally of inconveniences noted in this behalf, it is thought expedient that no dispensations be granted for marriage without banns, but under sufficient and large bonds, with these conditions following:

First, that there shall not afterwards appear any lawful let or impediment by reason of any pre-contract, consanguinity, affinity, or any other lawful means whatsoever.

Secondly, that there be not at that present time of granting such dispensation any suit, plaint, quarrel, or demand moved or depending before any judge, ecclesiastical or temporal, for and concerning any such lawful impediment between such the parties; and

Thirdly, they proceed not to the solemnization of the marriage without the consent of the parents or governors.

Lastly, that the marriage be openly solemnized in the church. The copy of which bond is to be set down and given in charge for every bishop in his diocese to follow; provided that whosoever offendeth against this order be suspended ab executione officii for one half-year.

---

Documents Illustrative of English Church History.
Henry Gee and William John Hardy, eds.
New York: Macmillan, 1896. 481-484.Available at Google Books

Common Prayer, Uncommon Beauty

By Jonathan Aitken from the February 2012 issue

The magnificent Book of Common Prayer has been going strong for 350 years.

Last year, this column and the world celebrated the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible. This year brings the 350th birthday of another magnificent monument of early modern English—the 1662 Book of Common Prayer (BCP). All who savor the riches of our common linguistic heritage should rejoice in its commemoration. For the BCP's combination of spiritual wisdom and literary beauty gives it a following far beyond the ecclesiastical frontiers of Anglicanism, Episcopalianism, and the Church of England that originally commissioned it.

The BCP was the creation of Thomas Cranmer, a Tudor statesman blessed with a genius for the writing of prose bordering on poetry. A court favorite of King Henry VIII, who made him Archbishop of Canterbury, Cranmer compiled the various prayers, collects, and orders of worship that eventually emerged as the 1662 prayer book. However, before it could be published in its final form its principal author was burned at the stake for his Reformist sympathies during a period of Catholic repression.

Although these power struggles have long since been forgotten, Cranmer's majestic command of the English language lives on. In the words of his leading biographer, Diarmaid MacCulloch: "Millions who have never heard of Cranmer or of the muddled heroism of his death have echoes of his words in their minds."

These echoes of Cranmer's gift for language ring down the centuries because he had a perfect ear for cadences that are both beautiful and eternal. He wanted "a mere ploughboy" to be able to remember the BCP's most powerful phrases. He did not hesitate to borrow from the finest spiritual writers of his time such as Miles Coverdale, an early translator of the Psalms, and Archbishop Reynolds, who authored the prayer of General Thanksgiving. Yet the most sparkling gems of the BCP were Cranmer's own compositions such as:

We have erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep. We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts. We have left undone those things which we ought to have done. And we have done those things which we ought not to have done. And there is no health in us. (General Confession)

Or:

Lighten our darkness we beseech thee O Lord; and by thy great mercy defend us from all perils and dangers of this night. (Collect for Evening Prayer)

In my own love of the rhythms and resonance of such prayers I am conscious that I may be one of a dwindling band of English old fogeys. My familiarity with Cranmer's language dates back to the 1950s, when hardly any form of liturgy other than the BCP was used in Britain's schools and churches—as had been the case for the previous 300 years. But in the last half-century, evangelicals and modernists have elbowed out the BCP, replacing it with liturgical practices whose flexibility is all too often equaled by its banality.

American worshippers of various denominations may find the arguments for and against the BCP to be an esoteric British debate between the cult of quaintness and the pressures of political correctness. Yet excellence is excellence whatever the current fashion, and Cranmer's words, like Shakespeare's, have survived because they are "not of an age, but for all time.

For more, see:
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/20/common-prayer-uncommon-beauty