On the Theological Virtues

The First Sunday in Epiphanytide

O LORD, we beseech thee mercifully to receive the prayers of thy people which call upon thee; and grant that they may both perceive and know what things they ought to do, and also may have grace and power faithfully to fulfil the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Epiphany of our Lord

O GOD, who by the leading of a star didst manifest thy only-begotten Son to the Gentiles: Mercifully grant, that we, who know thee now by faith, may be led onward through this earthly life, until we see the vision of thy heavenly glory; through the same thy Son Jesus Christ, who with thee and the Holy Ghost liveth and reigneth, one God, world without end. Amen.

Epiphanytide is a season of growth, and if there is to be a summary of what we ought to grow in, it would probably be given by St Paul in his first epistle to the Corinthians, “So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love,” (1 Cor 13. 13). These virtues have been spoken of time and again by many Christian authors. As CS Lewis puts it in Mere Christianity, “The "Cardinal" [virtues] are those which all civilised people recognise: the “Theological” are those which, as a rule, only Christians know about.” Taken along with the four cardinal virtues, of which temperance is one, they are known as the seven heavenly virtues and held in opposition to the seven deadly sins.

The three theological virtues of faith, hope and charity, which in the previous citation was rendered as love, have particular meanings in this context. CS Lewis did not mean, for example, to imply that a non-Christian could not have faith of any type or that non-Christians are all bereft of hope, indeed it is possible for Christians to experience elements of these non-Christian virtues. They are, as Lewis notes, peculiar, to Christianity. Someone might easily expound the virtue of temperance, which was considered a virtue in antiquity by Greeks and other non-Christians, yet they would not speak of the virtue of, for instance, charity, at least not as it is understood and presented here in its Christian context.

Much like how Lewis decried the linguistic change of meaning for the word temperance, he decries its narrowed definition for charity. In modern English, if you ask anyone of the meaning of charity, its definition would be some variation on alms giving or giving to the poor and less fortunate. This is why, as in the example given above from the English Standard Version - Anglicized, the term charity is sometimes rendered as love. The definition of the theological virtue of charity is most simply given as Christian love or agape love.

Agape love is the self-sacrificing love of God towards man (Jn 3. 16) and our desire to reciprocate that love back towards God. It is a love that even in its human context stems from God, and runs through him. In his Four Loves, Lewis creates distinctions between love, dividing it into affection, friendship, eros and charity (agape). He describes the first three as natural loves, and makes the statement that, “the natural loves are not self-sufficient,” in that they can be exhausted; as Lewis goes on to put it, “Something else, at first vaguely described as “decency and common sense,” but later revealed as goodness, and finally as the whole Christian life in one particular relation, must come to the help of the mere feeling if the feeling is to be kept sweet.” Put another way, God's love must be lived and supported through relationship with God if it is to be sustained.

The second theological virtue is hope. It is not hope in a secular sense. Anyone can hope there will be good weather, but in this sense they are merely expressing a preference. Christian hope is a certainty that is given to us by God’s presence in our lives and the promise of redemption made through Jesus Christ that will lead to true life with God. It stands in opposition to certain forms of secular nihilism that see pointlessness and necessarily despair as inherent parts of the human condition. This dichotomy is truly realised when you ask if such a thing as Christian nihilism is possible, and by definition it is not. Christianity is a religion of hope; hope for a future in which the sin and destruction of the world will be no more.

Holding this hope in our hearts and minds is one of the great virtues of Christianity. Not simply because it can help lead to a more positive outlook on life, but also because of the inspiration such hope provides to lead a good life in the present while we aspire to the greatness of the future. It is the Christian hope that was inspiration for many great reforms throughout the centuries as CS Lewis notes:

If you read history you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were just those who thought most of the next The Apostles themselves, who set on foot the conversion of the Roman Empire, the great men who built up the Middle Ages, the English Evangelicals who abolished the Slave Trade, all left their mark on Earth, precisely because their minds were occupied with Heaven.

It is this desire to live the Godly life that is encapsulated in the virtue of Christian hope. Not mere hope, but a transforming demeanour that encourages Christians to do good and bring the King of Heaven nearer to perfection on Earth.

The final theological virtue is faith. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church describes it:

Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that he has said and revealed to us, and that Holy Church proposes for our belief, because he is truth itself. By faith “man freely commits his entire self to God.” For this reason the believer seeks to know and do God’s will. “The righteous shall live by faith.” Living faith “work[s] through charity.”

Lewis notes that there is something deeper to faith that purely belief in God, and the Catechism begins to note this as well. In speaking of believing in God and what he has said, the Catechism refers in one manner or another to a decision of faith based on reason. You weigh the evidence for and against faith in God and come to your conclusion. While it is possible new evidence may ultimately occur that challenges your faith, it is not reason that is the primary opponent of faith, but generally our emotions and personal desires. Consider for a moment someone for whom tragedy strikes. In a moment of anger over what has happened, they may convince themselves that their faith was misplaced. Or even if there is some situation in which their faith is inconvenient, they may be tempted to simply say it is so. Lewis describes this as the challenge of holding on to your faith, once decided by reason, in the face of changing moods. “That is why Faith is such a necessary virtue: unless you teach your moods “where they get off,” you can never be either a sound Christian or even a sound atheist, but just a creature dithering to and fro, with its beliefs really dependent on the weather and the state of its digestion.” In this, he speaks to a truth which can also be particularly difficult for Christians, for whom they can accept God, but ultimately only on their own terms in which their faith conforms God to what they find comfortable, easy or preferable. If your doctrines are not sound, if you allow them to waver based on mood and ease and preference, your faith is weak; it is only partially there in that you accept only in some form that God exists, but perhaps miss the second part noted in the Catechism, that you accept what he has said and revealed to us.

It is for this reason that true faith, as described in the Catechism and by Lewis, is so essential as a Christian virtue. In this treatment of the virtues, it has been approached in the reverse order from that provided by St Paul, even though he cites agape love as the greatest of the three. The virtues build upon one another. It is possible to have some form of faith without hope, but it is not possible to have hope without faith. In presenting them in reverse order, the hope is that it is easier to see the essential need for a foundation in firm faith, in order to allow hope and charity to flourish.

On the Evils of Contract Bridge

The Epiphany of our Lord

O GOD, who by the leading of a star didst manifest thy only-begotten Son to the Gentiles: Mercifully grant, that we, who know thee now by faith, may be led onward through this earthly life, until we see the vision of thy heavenly glory; through the same thy Son Jesus Christ, who with thee and the Holy Ghost liveth and reigneth, one God, world without end. Amen.

The Baptism of our Lord

O HEAVENLY Father, whose blessed Son Jesus Christ did take our nature upon him, and was baptized for our sakes in the river Jordan: Mercifully grant that we being regenerate, and made thy children by adoption and grace, may also be partakers of thy Holy Spirit; through him whom thou didst send to be our Saviour and Redeemer, even the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Epiphany of our Lord is actually the 6th of January, but is often transferred to the preceding Sunday. It is a continuation of a season that includes the Nativity, Circumcision, and Baptism of the Lord. In secular terms, it is also the first Sunday after New Year’s Day, which caps off the secular ‘Holiday Season’ of Christmas and New Year’s. For the Americans, this is a season which begins after their Thanksgiving in the end of November. This year in particular, the American shopping holiday of Black Friday--which truly does speak to the supremacy of materialism in modern Western culture--was larger in places like Canada and the United Kingdom than any time previously, despite the fact that Thanksgiving is not celebrated in the United Kingdom and is celebrated as Harvest Thanksgiving in October in Canada.

It is a season in which consumerism and consumption are foremost in the minds of many. In its secular context, even the best messages to come out of Christmas are consumerist and materialist, speaking to the joy of giving things and even ensuring that all receive something and are able to have a feast on Christmas. At worst, it is a season in which we show off. We consume giant feasts, and treat all our relations and friends with gifts and we drink considerable amounts of alcohol, particularly on New Year's Eve. Even for those of us who focus our celebrations on Advent and the Nativity of Christ, there is a strong pressure to conform to these pressures. Santa Clause is just as prominent in Christian households as non-Christian households.

The pressure of secular culture can be overwhelming and it's not surprising that it infiltrates even Christian households, and it’s something that detracts from what CS Lewis describes as one of the cardinal virtues of Christianity in his Mere Christianity. He later goes on to describe and define temperance in a section that gives the title to this blog post:

One great piece of mischief has been done by the modern restriction of the word Temperance to the question of drink. It helps people to forget that you can be just as intemperate about lots of other things. A man who makes his golf or his motor-bicycle the centre of his life, or a woman who devotes all her thoughts to clothes or bridge or her dog, is being just as “intemperate” as someone who gets drunk every evening. Of course, it does not show on the outside so easily: bridge-mania or golf-mania do not make you fall down in the middle of the road. But God is not deceived by externals.

The point Lewis makes is two-fold. First, the great piece of mischief he refers to is the fact that in modern English, temperance has come to be associated with the abstinence from drink, rather than, “all pleasures; and it meant not abstaining, but going the right length and no further.” Second, and perhaps more importantly, he points out that it is the substituting of the excess of things for God in our lives.

When we allow the influence of the world to affect our views of Christmas and how it should be celebrated, however imperceptibly, we are shifting our focus away from Christ. Whenever we allow something--be it consumerism or a love of contract bridge, as Lewis notes--to replace the focus of our lives, albeit temporarily, from Christ to that other thing, we run the risk that Christ will be completely supplanted in our lives.

In his epistle to the Romans, St Paul reminds us that, “you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves to righteousness,” (Rm 6. 17-18). In this, he reinforces the words of Christ who is recorded in the Gospel of John as saying, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free... Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin... So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed,” (Jn 8. 31-35).

Intemperance here refers to the sins of lust and gluttony. Holy Scripture’s prohibitions (Prv 6; Gal 5) are clear and many Christians over the centuries have spoken to the impact of the sins of intemperance on our lives. In his Summa Theologica, St Thomas Aquinas wrote on the nature of both lust and temperance. His work remains one of the most influential in Western Christianity, indeed CS Lewis’s own writings on the cardinal virtues in Mere Christianity are based on the definitions of the cardinal and theological virtues.

Epiphany is a time in which we remember Christ's manifestation to the gentiles, and it caps of a time when we celebrate God's love for mankind: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life,” (Jn 3. 16). It is a time when we are meant to be fully focused on the one who saves us from slavery to sin, yet the secular world is telling us instead to focus on something which will lead to sin. 

This is a season in which we are meant to contemplate the importance of the incarnation. It is a time when we are reminded of the joy of the personal relationship we can have with God which is enabled through Christ. Instead, for many it is a season in which they are encouraged to view it as positive we buy gifts, eat giant feasts and, in the case of New Year’s, drink. These are presented as virtues: generosity, peace and joyfulness. 

As we enter Epiphanytide, a time of growth and renewal when we are reminded of these truths of the incarnation, we should seek to grow truly in faith, the freedom of Christ, and in true virtue, temperance.

On Revision of the Prayer Book

The Sunday After Christmas Day

ALMIGHTY God, who hast given us thy only-begotten Son to take our nature upon him, and as at this time to be born of a pure Virgin: Grant that we being regenerate, and made thy children by adoption and grace, may daily be renewed by thy Holy Spirit; through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the same Spirit, ever one God, world without end. Amen.

In 2010, the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada mandated that the Faith, Worship and Ministry department create a Liturgy Task Force to further review and modify authorized liturgies for the Anglican Church of Canada. Recently, the Task Force released its first Trial Use liturgy for the Daily Offices, and it speaks to a very particular vision of liturgy and liturgical reform that is rooted in a  view that sees the language of, not simply the Prayer Book, but even the Book of Alternative Services as no longer being both ‘faithful and fair’. While the rationale for the proposed daily offices does not particularly define what is meant by faithful and fair, or how the Prayer Book or BAS are not faithful or fair, the notes on the revised Psalter written by the Rev Dr Richard Geoffrey Leggett provides in his words an explanation that the meaning is to provide language that is:

(i) faithful to the intent of the writers of the psalms as poems expressing the relationship between God and the people of Israel and (ii) fair to current users of the psalms who have found the predominately masculine language a barrier to the integration of the psalms into the life of prayer and worship.

In essence, the Liturgy Task Force is saying that language that refers to God as Father creates a barrier to praise of God, as does the use of language such as referring to humanity simply as ‘man’ as has been the case in many Bible translations, and is the case in the text of the Prayer Book, though generally not in the Book of Alternative Services.

While the rationale provides for two other practical reasons for this proposed revision—namely that in the current form you must flip back and forth between pages as you work through the liturgy rather than being able to simply read through it linearly and also that the lectionary and selection of canticles and prayers is limited—it seems that language is the driving force behind this revision, as these more practical concerns could be addressed without any actual change to the liturgy itself, simply through the publication of a revised lectionary for the daily offices or in the case of the former issue, through the use of technology similar to the Church of England’s Daily Prayer app which allows Apple and Android users to have an electronic prayer book which automatically inserts the daily readings into the Matins, Vespers and Compline services and allows the user to linearly read through the entire service.

The Liturgy Task Force has suggested that the language of the BAS, and by extension the Prayer Book, is deficient in either faithfulness or more likely fairness. If this is the primary revision of the text, then it suggests the Task Force views this as the primary hindrance to the use of currently authorized liturgical texts on the Daily Offices. It then seems the appropriate response is a comparison of how the revised proposed Daily Offices read as compared to, for instance, the Offices of the Prayer Book. While in the context of the Psalter faithfulness would be held up against the Psalms of the Bible, in the context of the Daily Offices, the Solemn Declaration states that our faithfulness is to be found in the Anglican Formularies: the Book of Common Prayer, the Ordinal and the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. In this case, then, the Prayer Book should be the standard for faithfulness.

The Daily Offices begin with a penitential rite. In the Prayer Book, it reads as follows for Morning Prayer:

DEARLY beloved brethren, the Scripture moveth us in sundry places to acknowledge and confess our manifold sins and wickedness; and that we should not dissemble nor cloke them before the face of Almighty God our heavenly Father; but confess them with an humble, lowly, penitent, and obedient heart; to the end that we may obtain forgiveness of the same, by his infinite goodness and mercy.
And although we ought at all times humbly to acknowledge our sins before God; yet ought we most chiefly so to do, when we assemble and meet together to render thanks for the great benefits that we have received at his hands, to set forth his most worthy praise, to hear his most holy Word, and to ask those things which are requisite and necessary, as well for the body as the soul.
Wherefore I pray and beseech you, as many as are here present, to accompany me with a pure heart and humble voice unto the throne of the heavenly grace.

In order to be faithful and fair, the revised Daily Office proposes the following substitute: “Let us confess our sins against God and our neighbour.” This is the alternate invitation to confession in the BAS. Can it be said to be fully faithful to the Prayer Book? In the Prayer Book, the invitation to confession reminds us that Scripture commands us to confess in order to obtain forgiveness of those sins by virtue of God’s infinite mercy. The proposed new liturgy provides no rationale for confession. It fails to inform us of God’s infinite mercy and compassion for us. It fails to inform us of that Scriptural mandate to confess our sins.

Some similar problems arise in the confession as well. The confession of the Prayer Book:

ALMIGHTY and most merciful Father, 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 offended against thy holy laws, We have left undone those things which we ought to have one, And we have done those things which we ought not to have done; And there is no health in us. But thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us, miserable offenders. Spare thou them, O God, which confess their faults. Restore thou them that are penitent; According to thy promises declared unto mankind in Christ Jesu our Lord. And grant, O most merciful Father, for his sake, That we may hereafter live a godly, righteous, and sober life, To the glory of thy holy Name. Amen.

Contrast that with the proposed revised confession:

God of all mercy, we confess that we have sinned against you, opposing your will in our lives. We have denied your goodness in each other, in ourselves and in the world you have created. We repent of the evil that enslaves us, the evil we have done and the evil done on our behalf. Forgive, restore and strengthen us through our Saviour Jesus Christ, so that we may abide in your love and serve only your will. Amen.

The Prayer Book begins with poetic imagery: we are lost sheep who have strayed from the Father. It then lists ways in which we sin: following our own desires rather than God’s, offending against God’s laws, failing to do what we ought to and doing what ought not to be doing. In essence this can be further broken down into two parts. The first two list ways in which we offend against the Law which was made obvious in the confession for the BAS which very clearly referenced the summary of the Law: love God and love your neighbour as yourself. The same intent holds here, while the second two points show the ways we make these offences, either by failing to do something we ought to do (passive) or doing what we should not (active).

The confession used in the revised rite follows something of a similar pattern, but again in the quest for ‘fair language’ it has lost its faithfulness. We sin by opposing God’s will in our lives, denying God’s goodness in each other, ourselves and the created world. While the Law, the ten commandments, previously served in the Prayer Book as the ultimate definition of sin, and Christ’s summary of the Law in the BAS, this proposed rite goes further by making its own summary which is just to say opposing God’s will. The problem with such a definition, is that while the Law and Christ’s Summary of the Law are defined in Scripture, God’s will can mean many things. The Law is a part of God’s will, and part of his will which applies to all mankind. Yet at the same time, God’s will is also individual in that he has purposes and designs for every single person. The discernment of God’s will in our lives is a personal responsibility, and by framing sin in terms of God’s will, the Liturgy Task Force has framed sin in terms that are thus discerned individually as well. This is neither faithful—in the sense that it again loses the fullness of the Prayer Book—and neither is it fair in that it lacks clarity. Doubtless the Liturgy Task Force did not include this confession, which is actually from a TEC resource called Enriching our Worship I published in 1998, with the intended desire that these should be the results, but ultimately that is the first concern that must be raised. A similar problem exists with the confession’s definition of how we sin. While the Prayer Book says it involves acts and omissions, the revised rite suggests sin is caused when we deny God’s goodness in each other, ourselves and the world. We can turn to Scripture to define the Law; we cannot turn to Scripture to define God’s goodness in a single place; it is in the fullness of Scripture that God’s goodness is found.

Interestingly enough, this confession lacks the criteria identified by the Liturgy Task Force in terms of language which they sought to change, namely gendered language. This holds true in the confession of the BAS (p. 46). So the question then is why is it even being changed? Whenever a liturgical text is opened up for specific purposes, it can be very tempting to make additional changes, whether they be for reasons of literary preference, theological preference or otherwise.

The Prayer Book remains the standard of our faith and will continue to. The fullness of Anglicanism is found within it, and the ultimate expression of Anglican Doctrine as well. As it says in the Solemn Declaration:

And we are determined by the help of God to hold and maintain the Doctrine, Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded in his Holy Word, and as the Church of England hath received and set forth the same in ‘The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of England; together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, pointed as they are to be sung or said in Churches; and the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons’; and in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion; and to transmit the same unimpaired to our posterity.

The Nativity of our Lord, 2014

Christmas Day

O GOD, who makest us glad with the yearly remembrance of the birth of thy only Son Jesus Christ: Grant that as we joyfully receive him as our Redeemer, we may with sure confidence behold him when he shall come again to be our Judge; who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, now and ever. Amen.

The Nativity of our Lord

ALMIGHTY God, who hast given us thy only-begotten Son to take our nature upon him, and as at this time to be born of a pure Virgin: Grant that we being regenerate, and made thy children by adoption and grace, may daily be renewed by thy Holy Spirit; through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the same Spirit, ever one God, world without end. Amen.

In this the love of God was made manifest among us,
that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him.

1 St John 4. 9

    GLORY be to the Father, and to the Son,
and to the Holy Ghost;
    As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be,
world without end. Amen.

The Holy Gospel is written in the second chapter of the Gospel according to Saint Luke beginning at the first verse.

In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to be registered, each to his own town. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the town of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. And while they were there, the time came for her to give birth. And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.

And in the same region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with fear. And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.” And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,

“Glory to God in the highest,
    and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!”

When the angels went away from them into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let us go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us.” And they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger. And when they saw it, they made known the saying that had been told them concerning this child. And all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them. But Mary treasured up all these things, pondering them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.

On the Use of the Prayer Book

The Fourth Sunday in Advent

RAISE up, we beseech thee, O Lord, thy power, and come among us, and with great might succour us; that whereas, through our sins and wickedness, we are sore let and hindered in running the race that is set before us, thy bountiful grace and mercy may speedily help and deliver us; who with the Father and the Holy Spirit livest and reignest, one God, world without end. Amen.

Advent

ALMIGHTY God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armour of light, now in the time of this mortal life, in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility; that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious Majesty, to judge both the quick and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, now and ever. Amen.

For most people familiar with the Prayer Book, they will have used it for the service of Holy Communion which begins on page 67 and runs about twenty pages long. The Prayer Book itself is over 700 pages long, though, so what is contained in the remainder of the Book, and what use is it outside of Sunday services?

The Prayer Book, unsurprisingly, contains some related elements. The section immediately following the service of Holy Communion is titled The Christian Year and contains the collects and readings appointed for every Sunday throughout the Christian calendar and also contains a number of supplementary collects for Holy Days. Following this is the Psalter which contains the Book of Psalms, arranged to be read or sung responsively and ordered for use in the Daily Offices throughout the calendar month. There are sections for private prayers and suitable for family prayer, and finally there are the Daily Offices themselves.

The Daily Offices evolved over the centuries as a practice of regular daily prayer. There are many instructions on prayer in the Bible, perhaps most famously in Lk 11. 2-4 where Jesus gives us the Lord’s Prayer. In other places there are exhortations to pray without ceasing (1 Thes 5. 17) and in all circumstances (Phil 4. 6). Some advice to the early Christians advised a practice of praying the Lord’s Prayer three times a day, once in the morning, once in the evening and once at night. This practice would have been familiar to many of the early Christians as there was a similar Jewish practice of prayer at particular hours. The Psalms were often used during these prayers, in addition to the Lord’s Prayer. There were references to the office of Morning and Evening prayer as early as the second and third centuries, but these would ultimately be expanded by the monastic traditions who added new times for prayer, and particularly to St Benedict of Nursia who strongly encouraged the praying of the Daily Offices for those of the Benedictine orders. Compline, Night Prayer, is also attributed to the creation of St Benedict.

When Archbishop Thomas Cranmer began to assemble the first Book of Common Prayer in the early 16th century, he sought to simplify the offices (of which there were at eight). For many people, it would be impossible to pray many of the daily offices because they were working in the fields. Cranmer simplified these to Matins (Morning Prayer) and Vespers (Evening Prayer, also known as Evensong). In the Canadian Book of Common Prayer, an order for Compline was ultimately separated from Vespers and included as its own liturgy for use later at night than Vespers. Despite its inclusion, and the fact that it is technically a Daily Office, usually when this term is used it still is only meant to refer to Morning and Evening Prayer, which are located at the very start of the Book of Common Prayer.

The Daily Offices may be led by laity or clergy, and as their history shows they often were engaged in by laity as a form of daily devotional prayer. Given their historical origins, they offer a link to the Christian past. They offer a way of praying through the Psalms regularly as well as additional readings. As the services are short, they are simple to, with regular practice, memorize.

Morning Prayer follows a simple format of exhortation to confession and confession and absolution concluding with the Lord’s Prayer, readings and canticles concluding with the Apostle’s Creed, appointed collects and prayers of the people, interspersed with anthems if desired, the prayer of St John Chrysostom and concluded with the Grace. Evening Prayer is even simpler, with a similar penitential introduction, readings and psalms concluding with the Gloria Patri, additional Bible readings with canticles, often nunc dimittis and magnificat, and concluding again with the Apostle’s Creed. A number of prayers and responses are then read or chanted before the liturgy concludes.

Taken together, both offer an opportunity for regular prayer and reading at the start and end of the day, helping to restore a rhythmic prayer life like that of the early Church, while also helping to read regularly through the Bible be it the Psalms or the lessons.

While not a daily office, the Forms of Prayer to be used in Families which begins on Page 728 provides prayers suitable for many common family occasions. There are prayers for the morning and evening, in the event that the full Morning or Evening Prayer cannot be said, grace at meals, prayers for family members and other occasions.

Finally pages 37 – 61 have thematically labelled collects suitable for diverse occasions.

Many Christians find prayer difficult. Spontaneous prayer can be challenging at first; figuring out what to say and how to say it. This is particularly true for some Christians who may fear they are saying things the wrong way or are simply unfamiliar with Christian prayer. There are many diverse and sundry forms of prayer, but the Prayer Book offers a resource that can be a model and guide, starting with the formal offices or even just offering collect prayers for specific circumstances or occasions, on which we can ultimately develop our own prayers.

The language and use of the Prayer Book helps us to build a prayer life with God which is intimate and sound, and helps us to pray God’s will. The prayers it offers are theologically sound, and as we use them it helps to instruct us in how we ought to pray in order to pray God’s will, something which can also be a struggle for the new Christian.

The Prayer Book is a resource that carries with it countless uses outside of a Sunday mass, and it is one with which all Anglicans ought to familiarize themselves.

On the Language of the Prayer Book

The Third Sunday in Advent

O LORD Jesu Christ, who at thy first coming didst send thy messenger to prepare thy way before thee: Grant that the ministers and stewards of thy mysteries may likewise so prepare and make ready thy way, by turning the hearts of the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, that at thy second coming to judge the world we may be found an acceptable people in thy sight; who livest and reignest with the Father and the Holy Spirit, ever one God, world without end. Amen.

Advent

ALMIGHTY God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armour of light, now in the time of this mortal life, in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility; that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious Majesty, to judge both the quick and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, now and ever. Amen.

The language of the Prayer Book is archaic, there is no getting around it. While it is variously described as being more contemplative, solemn or formal than the alternative and modern language services available in the Book of Alternative Services, the reality is merely that the diction is archaic. The Book of Common Prayer of 1662 uses language of the day, but the language is now 350 – 450 years old, and the Canadian Prayer Book of 1962 models its language on that of the 1662 Prayer Book. So while it clearly is archaic, is it solemn, stiff and formal as it is otherwise described, or is it just our unfamiliarity with the way the language is employed that makes it so?

Here is a simple comparison between the language. The collect for Advent above is said each week during advent from the Book of Common Prayer. The collect for Advent from the Book of Alternative Services follows:

Almighty God, give us grace to cast away the works of darkness and put on the armour of light, now in the time of this mortal life in which your Son Jesus Christ came to us in great humility, that on the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious majesty to judge both the living and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever.

In this example, the prayers have largely been unchanged; the Book of Alternative Services merely updated the language to modern use, for the most part. Some of the more obvious changes beyond mere word order are the change of, “thy Son Jesus Christ,” to, “your Son Jesus Christ, and, “him who liveth and reigneth,” to, “him who lives and reigns.” In the latter example it is simply a matter of it being the proper suffix for a third person singular present tense verb. In modern English, the suffix of –eth has been replaced with –s. In the former example, however, the change is a bit more complex. Thy is similarly an archaic form of your, which is used in the Book of Alternative Services translation, however it ignores one critical point. Thy was also the singular informal form of you. Many languages maintain such a distinction. In French, tu is used as the informal second person singular, and the second person plural vous is used as the second person singular in formal circumstances. This same usage is found in Spanish with tú and usted. In modern English, the form of you is used in both cases, and it is therefore impossible to tell if it is formal or informal, singular or plural, without some form of context. In the archaic form of English used in the Prayer Book, however, this informal use of thy is preserved. Far from being formal, the use of this archaic language, when properly understood, reminds us of the deeply personal relationship we engage in with God through the liturgy. Its use, according to Sue Careless, suggests intimacy, affection and love and reflects a type of speech which would be used with a close friend or beloved, in contrast with you and your which would have been used with someone for with whom the relationship was more formal or distant.

In understanding that context of linguistic use, reading the Prayer Book constantly highlights the intimacy of the personal relationship we hold with God through Jesus Christ. In the modern language of the Book of Alternative Services, there is nothing to suggest that we do not have that personal relationship, but neither are there sufficient context clues to us, for instance in the collect example used, to suggest that intimacy and informality that is expressly stated in the Prayer Book’s language.

Beyond the reminder of informality, by virtue of the archaic language, we set the liturgy apart from our daily lives. Much like how we might dress with intention of worship, our use of language reflects a clear desire to set this time apart for the sacred worship of God. The language of the Prayer Book is poetic and quite beautiful. As has been referenced previously, the Prayer Book and King James Bible are viewed as seminal English literary work and revered as such even by non-Christians merely for their beautiful use of the English language. As anyone knows, when you translate poetry, it does not always translate well; some of the beauty of the Prayer Book is lost in the modernised language of the Book of Alternative Services.

Aside from setting ourselves apart, it is also a reminder of an important truth. As we sing in the hymn Diademata, God is, “ineffably sublime.” He is so great we cannot describe him in words. If we cannot properly describe him in words, how can we even attempt it using simple or common words? The fact that the use of these words is today largely limited to their religious context helps remind us that our normal vocabulary is insufficient. As David Mills argues, we use the language of the Prayer Book to, as best as we are able, express truths beyond words.

The language of the Prayer Book, as this post first recognized, is archaic. It needs to be understood. Ultimately, however, that is no different than any other aspect of the liturgy. The meaning behind the high mass cannot always be understood simply by participating in it, and some effort needs to be made to understand the history and symbolism behind different acts and even words. With the language of the Prayer Book it is little different: we must make an effort to understand the words we say, because behind them stands the doctrinal theological fullness of the Anglican tradition.

The language of the Prayer Book is a precious deposit of the Anglican tradition. In learning the language of the Prayer Book, we become one step closer to unlocking the full potential of the Prayer Book as a tool of faith in the Anglican tradition.

On the History of the Prayer Book

The Second Sunday in Advent

BLESSED Lord, who hast caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant that we may in such wise hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that by patience and comfort of thy holy Word, we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which thou hast given us in our Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen.

Advent

ALMIGHTY God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armour of light, now in the time of this mortal life, in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility; that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious Majesty, to judge both the quick and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, now and ever. Amen.

When the Church of England gained its independence from the Bishop of Rome, there was no equivalent to the Prayer Book in use in England. Different books existed for different rites. For instance, the Sarum Rite Missal which provided for the Eucharist, The Breviary provided for the daily offices while The Ritual included rites related to the other sacraments such as baptism, marriage and the funeral rites. The Pontifical was the Bishop’s book which included rites for ordinations.

These were maintained during the reign of Henry VIII who, despite having removed the Pope’s temporal authority over the Church and Realm of England, did not support continental reformers in the Protestant movement. It was not until the reign of his successor, Edward VI, that Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Cranmer was able to compile the first version of the Book of Common Prayer, which collected the various offices and sacraments together, and provided for them in English. The title Book of Common Prayer can be misleading to some because Common was not meant to refer to it as being ordinary, but rather that it was shared by all. This was in keeping with the restoration of the practices of the early church of holding services in the local vernacular, rather than the later practice which had developed in the Western Roman Church which had required all services to be held in Latin regardless of local vernacular and whether or not the people would understand anything.

Cranmer’s work began in 1547 upon Edward VI’s coronation and the first version of the Book of Common Prayer was completed and authorized for use in 1549. It represented a slightly reformed theology, in keeping with Cranmer’s personal views, and collected the daily offices, readings for Sundays and Holy Days throughout the year, the Holy Communion, baptism, confirmation, holy matrimony, visitation of the sick and burial. An ordinal with rites for the ordination of Bishops, Priests and Deacons was added in 1550. The entire Prayer Book was only intended to be temporary and was supplanted by a new version in 1552.

The 1552 Prayer Book included several more revisions from the 1549 version, adjusting and removing certain aspects of Roman influence and doctrine. By the time of the 1552 version, it was quite explicit in the Prayer Book that humanity could offer no works to God which would contribute to their salvation, in contrast with Roman doctrines on salvation. Other aspects of Roman practice remained, however. The Sarum Rite was created in the 11th century, and thus it included within the Nicene Creed the filioque. The filioque has been preserved in the Book of Common Prayer since, however several ecumenical statements between the Anglican Communion and Eastern Orthodox Church have stressed that future revisions of Anglican Liturgy would remove the filioque clause.

With the death of Edward VI in 1553, however, the Roman Catholic Queen Mary I took the throne, and the Marian persecutions began as Roman practices were restored. Thomas Cranmer was burned at the stake in 1556, however his work survived him as Cranmer’s 1552 Book of Common Prayer was restored in 1559 upon the coronation of Queen Elizabeth I. Over the next hundred years, several more revisions would take place as the English Civil Wars would challenge the religious status quo in England.

At the relative end of this bloody and destructive period, a new Prayer Book was published in 1662. This final version for the Book of Common Prayer, published along-side the Ordinal, represented a final acceptance of the fractured reality of English Christianity. While the previous Prayer Books were essentially used by all Christians in England, by the time the 1662 Prayer Book was published, it was the book used by Anglicans, while nonconformist protestants would develop their own liturgical books and styles. The 1662 Prayer Book represents the first truly Anglican Prayer Book, through it continues to hold to much of the language and theology of Cranmer’s original 1549 version.

The 1662 Prayer Book is viewed, alongside the Ordinal and 39 Articles of Religion, as one of the formularies of Anglicanism, as its doctrine fully reflects the breadth of Anglican doctrine in the way that was desired of the 1552 Prayer Book, which continental German reformer Martin Bucer hoped would make “fully perfect” the doctrines made implicit in the 1549 Book.

In addition to its doctrinal implications, the Book of Common Prayer 1662 is considered a literary classic, having introduced many phrases into the English language. While it was written in the language of the people, Cranmer maintained a particular poetic style that has made the Book of Common Prayer a classic along the lines of Shakespeare and the King James Bible. Such lines include, “speak now or forever hold your peace,” from the sacrament of Holy Matrimony or the even more famous, “ashes to ashes, dust to dust,” from the funeral rite.

As Anglicanism spread throughout the world with the expansion of the British Empire, so did the Book of Common Prayer. The Prayer Book has been locally adapted in many places, sometimes with more or less changes. In Canada, the 1962 Prayer Book minimally updates the language—mainly adjusting spelling to more conventional modern spelling while maintaining the original language and poetry—and rather simply adding some local observances, prayers suitable to local occasions and so forth. Others, such as the American Episcopal Church’s 1979 Book of Common Prayer represent a significant break from the 1662 Prayer Book tradition.

While the Book of Common Prayer remains extremely popular, it has been supplanted, both in England and in Canada, by modern alternative service books. Common Worship was introduced in the Church of England in 2000, and contains significantly revised liturgies, far less restrictive rubrics and updated language, while the Anglican Church of Canada had similarly authorized the Book of Alternative Services in 1985 with similar modifications. While these books have become the most commonly used, their strongest proponents do tend at least to view them as being in continuity with the Prayer Book and reflective of the theology and doctrine espoused by Cranmer.

The modern philosopher Roger Scruton, however, takes the approach of a purist, saying that, “To describe the new services as ‘alternatives’ to Cranmer is like describing Eastenders as an ‘alternative’ to Shakespeare, or Lady Gaga as an ‘alternative’ to Bach.” Debates over the effect of language are central to the discussion of the continued relevance of the Prayer Book, and the utility of modernised alternatives such as Common Worship and the Book of Alternative Services.