
When it comes to buying books, as my other half would affirm, I am a one-woman ‘keep independent bookshops open’ dynamo. As most of what I want is secondhand, and as an affectionado of the usual internet sources (I use Amazon only when I have no alternative), I can usually keep within budget, but birthdays and Christmas are easy for family and friends – a booklist is provided. So when I say I am not in favour of more books, it is clear I must be referring to something other than my habit.
When I first went to church as a girl, the Rector was a firm “Book of Common Prayer” man. It came as something of a shock when I first encountered the mysteries of the Alternative Service Book. I liked Rite B, mainly because of the resonances with the BCP, but really couldn’y quite greet it with enthusiasm. But it was what was on offer, and being a good girl, I got on with it. Language mattered, but if this was the language my church wanted to use, best get on with it. What mattered more was who I encountered in the Eucharist.
I found the advent of Common Worship a change for the better, but still preferred to go to eight o’clock services where BCP was in use. I got used to Common Worship, and use it in my personal devotions, but there is a good deal of leeway given as to how one conststructs Communon Services, which I know some priests find a creative opportunity and others a “challenge’, but not ina good way. At last count, examining the Rector’s shelves, there were eight different books. At what point is enough, enough? For me, as for others, it’s time for well, frankly, a Book of Common Prayer.
There’s no reason why a revised single volume could not have modern and traditional language versions as the 2000 Common Worship has. I think the American Episcopal Church has a single volume, and maybe Audre could enlighten me?
This isn’t a call for some sort of liturgical reform, this is hardly the most important issue at the moment, but I think Cranmer got it right – a single Book of Common Prayer which we can carry with us and whose language infuses our own was a good idea in his day – it remains one. There are, I have discovered, situations in which you can have too many books.
Yes, a single new book would be a huge improvement. But where, in any of the English speaking churches is there anyone eloquent enough to replace Cranmer. Perhaps, if we scaled back to a BCP translated to modern language – but I’m not sure there are many I would trust with even that much lesser task.
LikeLiked by 4 people
That’s a very good point, dearest friend.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Indeed, it was my first thought.
The task of the small is to tear down the great.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The ACNA (Anglican Church in North America) has been working to produce a common language Book of Common Prayer. I even got to make suggestions at one point, although I don’t belong to the ACNA.
They did do a good job on the catechism, however – excellent lay-out for teaching and retaining the original intent.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I hope they succeed, Audre x
LikeLike
The NKJV is pretty good and could be used as a guide for changing the BCP, but the NKJV is copyrighted.
LikeLiked by 3 people
It ought to be perfectly possible to update the BCP – I don’t have to hand a copy of the 1928 BCP, but from memory it did a perfectly reasonable job. More does not always mean better, and in throwing away the BCP (yes, of course they claimed it was still the book of use, but try finding one parish where it was being used in the 1970s and 80s) the CofE threw out the baby with the bathwater.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Indeed it is quite adequate, and no doubt better than anything likely to be produced today. It is available online in a choice of formats.
http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/bcp.htm
LikeLiked by 2 people
My rule of thumb if I am adapting the KJV for quoting in a post on here is to change the pronouns and verb terminations, but otherwise leave the text undisturbed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jess – it depends who you ask. The Episcopal Church in the USA (ECUSA), changed the 1928 BCP in 1979 and again in 1984. I was still an Episcopalian in those days and suffered, along with most other congregants, suffered Rite One Sundays and Rite Two Sundays. (R1 being the 1928 and R2 being the 1979). That went over like a lead balloon. And then there were ‘hand outs’ of the changes in the 1984 to keep in the BCP so we could switch, at various times in the Mass, until the ’84 was printed. I have no idea what they use today.
But pretty much across the board, Anglican Churches use the 1928 BCP. Our ’28, near as I can tell, is the same as your 1662. I’m going to have to find a 1662 so I can research that but different quotes I’ve seen from the 1662 is word-for-word in the ’28.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Oh golly, I remember from my childhood the Rites A and B. It was so much easier with BCP.
LikeLiked by 1 person