Thomas Cranmer and the Novus Ordo

Absolution at the 

catafalque in the 

Sarum Rite 

In my previous post, I mentioned that one of the arguments for discontinuity of the Reformation and Post-Reformation Church of England with the Church of England before the Reformation was the new liturgy imposed on the Anglican Church by the Prayer Books of 1549, 1552, and 1559.   If this break in liturgical Tradition signifies not continuity with the ancient Church of England but a new Church, how can we say that the Liturgical Reforms in the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church imposed by Paul VI (the so-called Novus Ordo) do not signify a break with historic Catholicism?  A Catholic who lived in the 1950’s or the 1850’s or the 1250’s would not recognize the current liturgy in the Catholic Church.  How then can we claim continuity?

The reason I bring up this question, of course, is that there are those on the lunatic fringe of Catholicism—or perhaps now beyond even the fringes of Catholicism—who make this argument that the Vatican II Reforms of the Liturgy are somehow equivalent to the liturgical changes made by various Protestant groups from Luther’s Deutsche Messe of the 1520’s to the far more radical revision of the liturgy followed a generation later by the Anabaptist tradition down to the Restoration Tradition with the Disciples of Christ and other Campbellite groups.  Why then does not the Novus Ordo represent a break in Catholicism? 

I think we can see the difference when we compare the liturgical changes in the Anglican Tradition in the sixteenth century with the Catholic experience after Vatican II. 

First: What happened in the sixteenth century Church of England.

In 1549 King Edward VI of England had published under royal mandate a new set of liturgical books for England that did not reform but which abandoned the traditional English rites in favor of entirely new rites.   There had been in England (including the Principality of Wales) for centuries four principal liturgical traditions: the Rites of Sarum (Salisbury), York, Hereford, and Bangor.  Sarum was by far the most common of these rites, the others being more or less localized in the dioceses for which they are named.  These rites preserved ancient English features and differed significantly, though not substantially, from Catholic Rites followed on the continent.   (There were a wide variety of different Catholic Rites in the Western Church as distinct local Rites had developed in the various ecclesiastical provinces and even dioceses.  The “Roman Rite” was but one of many.)  The English Rites—like most Western Rites followed the classic pattern of the Liturgy and used the “Roman Canon” (what is today called Eucharistic Prayer I).  The differences that made the English Rites unique were mostly in the various proper antiphons and in the lectionary and in the rubrics, though the offertory differed from some continental rites in as that it had but a single offering of bread and wine together accompanied by the prayer Suscipe Sancte Trinitas.  After the break with Rome, Henry VIII abolished the Rites of York, Hereford, and Bangor so that the entire kingdom followed the Sarum Usage.  Then, in 1544—still in Henry’s Reign—Cranmer introduced the English Litany, a vernacular set of versicles, responses and collects into the Sarum Liturgy replacing the Latin Litany used in the processional rites which were distinct to the Sarum Usage.  Finally, early in the reign of Edward VI, Cranmer introduced a set of vernacular prayers preparatory for Holy Communion into the Sarum Mass.  All this was done within the context of the ancient Sarum Rite.   But the 1549 book published by Royal Warrant abandoned the Sarum Rite for a Liturgy which, much like Luther’s 1523 Formula Missae, preserved the basic structure of the Mass but not only gave up many distinct Sarum prayers and traditions but eliminated every reference to Sacrifice.  Unlike Luther’s Formula Missae, Cranmer did not do away with the Canon of the Mass (Eucharistic Prayer), retaining only the Words of Institution, but he did eliminate any idea of Eucharistic Sacrifice both from the Canon and from any “offertory” prayers as the bread and wine were prepared. 

The 1549 Liturgy was meant to be the first step towards a more radical liturgy modeled on the Protestant worship found in the Reformed Churches on the Continent, in particular Geneva and Zurich.  The 1552 Prayer Book then introduced a far more Protestant liturgy.  While the 1552 Book left the Liturgy of the Word somewhat intact, moving the Gloria to a post-communion and stripping away the introit (the gradual and alleluia and any sequences had disappeared in the 1549 Book), the Eucharistic Rite was horribly mauled.  The rite placed the distribution of Holy Communion immediately after the Words of Institution, leaving the Canon to be finished in some post-communion prayers and moving the Lord’s Prayer to after Communion.  The purpose in putting the reception of Holy Communion immediately after the Words of Consecration was to emphasize that the Sacrament is given to us for eating Christ’s Body and drinking Christ’s Blood, not for adoration.    Moreover, the 1552 Prayer Book eliminated any vestments other than the surplice (the cope was optional in cathedrals and collegiate churches), the altar cross and candles, and indeed the altar itself (replacing it with a plain wooden table positioned in the chancel.)  All this was to take away any idea of sacrifice and/or its corollary, the priestly ministry of the ordained clergy. 

Cranmer’s intent was to eliminate the ideas

1.   that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice

2.   that Christ is physically present in the Eucharistic bread and wine and thus they can (or should) be adored. 

3.   That the minister of the Eucharist is a priest in the sense of one who is set aside to offer sacrifice. 

The ancient Sarum usage was restored when Queen Mary ascended the throne in 1553 but in 1559, the year after her death, the Protestant Liturgy was again restored by Elizabeth with the 1559 Prayer Book. 

Eleven years later, Pope Pius V—the same Pope who earlier that same year had excommunicated Elizabeth—issued a new Missal for most of the Western Church, eliminating the variety of Rites which had grown up and mandating a uniform Rite for most of the Western Church.  Only those places and those Religious Orders who could show that they had a unique Rite going back at least 200 years were permitted to retain their usages rather than adopt this Roman Rite.  This Roman Rite of Pius V was not the ancient and traditional Roman Rite but a Rite artfully constructed from elements taken from the principal rites of the Western Church.  It eliminated many of the repetitions common in the older rites and it embroidered the 16^th century usage of the Papal Chapel with various (and I would be willing to say, the best) collects, prayers, antiphons, sequences, etc) from different Rites used in the Western Church.  The Reform of the Liturgy following the Council of Trent not only introduced a new Missal, but it eliminated many old customs such as curtaining the altar from view during penitential seasons.  So as to give the faithful more access to the altar and the liturgy, the reforms of Pius V moved the altars from the distant east ends of churches closer to the people, relocating the choirs (in the sense of the chancels, not the scholae cantorum)  behind the altars in what had been the old presbyteria.  In those places where there had been a chancel screen blocking the view of the altar, the screens were torn down.  Most importantly, it gave the Catholic Church a more or less standard liturgical format. 

That liturgy of Pius V underwent minor changes over the centuries, especially under Pius X and then again under Pius XII.  But the Bishops present at the Second Vatican Council wanted a thorough reform of the Rites to facilitate the laity being given a full and intelligent participatory role in the Liturgy. 

The Reforms issued by Paul VI in the 1970 Missal were drastic compared to the earlier reforms of the 1570 Rites, but they were not revolutionary as had been Cranmer’s.  The theology and practice of Eucharistic Sacrifice were clarified and maintained.  The Sacramental nature of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist was reinforced by the prayers and rubrics.  Repetitions and accretions that had crept into the liturgy were eliminated and ancient practices, lost over the centuries, were restored.   Perhaps the most fundamental shift in the liturgy is that Scholastic Theology took a back seat to Patristic Theology and Praxis in designing the 1570 Missal.  But the main direction of the Liturgical Reforms of Paul VI were

1.   a wider and more increased use of scripture in the new lectionary

2.   the translation of the Mass into the language of the faithful to enable them to more consciously participate both in attentive listening and active involvement in the Liturgy

3.   the redistribution of ministries to restore to the baptized their proper role in the liturgy, most notably restoring the ancient ministries of reader and cantor. 

4.   a emphasis on the Sacrificial nature of the Mass as a participation in the One Eternal Sacrifice of Christ offered on Calvary

Cranmer’s liturgy was meant to be a break with tradition—both doctrinally and in praxis.  Paul VI’s reforms were built on tradition and were anxious to restore the faith of the Church as handed down from ancient times without the liturgy becoming anachronistic.  While a Catholic of the 1850’s or the 1550’s might not recognize today’s liturgy, Saint Augustine or Saint Ambrose or Saint Gregory the Great would.  The Liturgy of Paul VI is consistent with the Faith of The Fathers.

History of the Anglican Church XCI

An Anglican Church in the
Puritan Style

One more posting on the 1552 Prayer Book and this is the story of the “Black Rubric.”  Archbishop Cranmer, as radical as were the reforms he proposed in the 1552 Book of Common Prayer, had retained kneeling as the posture for receiving Holy Communion.  Some of the more radical reformers—the precursors of the Puritans of the next generations—objected to this and wanted the English Church to follow the Calvinist practice found in the Reformed Churches of Switzerland and of Strasbourg where the communicants received sitting as a clear indication that the Sacrament was a memorial of Christ but not his physical Body and Blood.   Cranmer refused to consider this change but the Royal Council ordered an addendum to the Prayer Book explaining that kneeling for Holy Communion was not meant to signify adoration of the Sacrament but to signify “a humble and grateful acknowledging of benefits of Christ…”.  Since the Book was already at the printers and the red inking had already be done, the “rubrics”—that is those parts that contain the directives for the service and which are printed in red to distinguish them from the text of the service which is printed in black—had been completed.  Thus the Council’s addendum was added but had to be printed in black ink.  It came to be known as the “Black Rubric.”  Here is the text of Black Rubric—with spelling updated to modern standards:

 Although no order can be so perfectly devised, but it may be of some, either of their ignorance and infirmity or else of malice and obstinacy misconstrued, depraved, and interpreted in a wrong part:  And yet because of brotherly charity willeth, that so much as conveniently may be, offenses should be taken away: therefore we willing to do the same.  Whereas it is ordained in the book of common prayer, in the administration of the Lord’s Supper, that the Communicants kneeling should receive the Holy Communion.  Which thing being well meant, for a signification  of the humble and grateful acknowledging of the benefits of Christ, given unto the worthy receiver, to avoid the profanation and disorder, which about the holy Communion might else ensue, Lest yet the same kneeling might be thought or taken otherwise we do declare that it is not meant thereby that any adoration is done or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental bread or wine there bodily received, or unto any real and essential presence there being of Christ’s natural flesh and blood.  For as concerning the Sacramental bread and wine, they remain still in their very natural substances and therefore may not be adored, for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians.  And as concerning the natural body and blood of our savior Christ, they are in heaven and not here.  For it is against the truth of Christ’s true natural body to be in more places than in one at one time. 

Why did Archbishop Cranmer refuse to have the communicants sit for Holy Communion?  Cranmer himself tended to prefer a somewhat ambiguous approach to the nature of Christ’s Presence in the Sacrament.   Though originally Lutheran in theological orientation, and later Calvinist, but this point Archbishop Cramer was basically a follower of the Swiss Reformer Huldrych Zwingli who taught that the Sacrament was simply a memorial of the Death of Christ and who rejected any sense of Christ being present except spiritually present in the heart of the believer by the believer’s faith.  But Cranmer also knew that the English—even those who accepted the Protestant faith—had a wide variety of understandings of the Sacrament and he was unwilling to force a uniform doctrine on them, at least in the liturgy.  There were those who, whether of Catholic or Lutheran leanings, still held for a real and corporeal presence of Christ.  There were those who, influenced by Calvin, held that Christ was truly present but not corporeally present in the Sacrament.  And there were those who, like himself, believed that the Sacrament was no more than a memorial that triggered a personal and interior response to Christ.  The Archbishop had worked to create a liturgy in which all could see their faith reflected and find some comfort, in the hopes that over time the single liturgy would solidify a single faith.  It was a vain hope, of course, as doctrinal ambiguity is the hallmark of Anglicanism to this day. 

When Elizabeth came to the Throne she did not have the “Black Rubric” printed in the 1559 Book, which was in several ways a (small) step back from the more radical Protestantism of the 1552 Book.  It did reappear in the 1662 Prayer Book in a futile attempt to keep the nonconformist and Presbyterian elements within the Church of England. 

The Black Rubric is significant because it clearly states, despite Cranmer’s wish for a certain liturgical vagueness, that the Church of England rejects the notion that Christ is present in the Eucharist in any physical sense.  By its naïve assumption that the Resurrected Body of Christ is nothing other than a resuscitated and assumed-into-heaven corpse, it reflects a false dichotomy between the resurrected Body of Christ “in heaven” and his Sacramental Body present not only in the Eucharistic Bread and Wine, but in the Church itself.  It is another indication of how the Church of England crosses over in the 1552 Prayer Book from a “Catholic” (albeit not “Roman”) Church to a Protestant Church.

When I started this series, I was far more positive on the continuity of the Church of England that I am now—having done considerable reading and research.  Yet I do think that it is essential that we always view the Church of England—and our own Church as well—in its historical context and realize that there is a certain evolution of doctrine and even of faith.  And we need to keep in mind that the 1552 Prayer Book has not been the final word in the Anglican theological liturgy.  We will see that the Book did not sit well with many because while it reflected the theology of Archbishop Cranmer and his friends,  it did not adequately capture the faith of the Anglican faithful.   Indeed the attempts to reform and refine it will bring down both the bishops and the Crown in the 17^th century—but that is a bit off in the distance yet.  

History of the Anglican Church XC

An 18th century

flagon for Holy 

Communion in the 

Anglican Church

The last posting dealt with Archbishop Cranmer’s reform of the Divine Office as he collapsed Matins and Lauds into Morning Prayer and Vespers and Compline into Evening Prayer.  Cranmer drew on the work of the Catholic Cardinal Francisco Quiñones and the Lutheran Archbishop Hermann von Wied and created an office that, if a bit verbose, was replete with scripture and prayerfully focused.  Over the centuries in subsequent editions of the Prayer Book it has been somewhat simplified to enhance its suitability for liturgical prayer and is in wide use today in Anglican and Episcopal Churches.  The Prayer Book Offices are, especially in their sung form, a real spiritual gem. Paul VI reportedly had a collection of phonograph records (back in the old days) of Anglican Evensong recordings as he recognized the solemn beauty of the sung Anglican Services.  But I now I need to cover what Cranmer did to the Eucharist which, like the daily offices, I had not dealt with in sufficient detail. 

In the 1549 Edition of the Book of Common Prayer—the first reform of the Liturgy—Archbishop Cranmer did not tinker much with the Mass.  It was translated into English, of course.  Altars were retained with the usual cross and candles.  Chasubles—or at the discretion of the minister, copes—were to be worn over the alb.  The Liturgy began with the traditional introit followed by the Collect for Purity which was taken from the medieval Missal’s Mass ad postulandam gratiam Spiritus Sancti.  This in turn was followed by the Kyrie, the Gloria, and the Collect of the Day and one or more additional collects.  (The various rites of the Western Church also had multiple collects up until the reform of the Missal under John XXIII in 1962.) Archbishop Cranmer dropped from the beginning of Mass the confession of sin and words of absolution—in the traditional Mass used as the “prayers at the foot of the altar” and then repeated again before Holy Communion—but retained them in the Communion Rite.  (I am old enough to remember when they were used twice in the “old Mass”—again, when the priest first came to the altar and a second time just before Holy Communion.)  In Cranmer’s 1549 Liturgy the gradual disappears from between the Epistle and Gospel.  The Gospel is followed by the Creed and then the sermon or homily.  There is then a collection for the poor and the priest reads a scripture verse that encourages  generosity towards the poor by the gathered faithful.  Those not receiving Holy Communion then depart; those who had informed the priest of their decision to receive Holy Communion that day remain and gather in the choir.

The priest meanwhile sets on the corporal or paten sufficient bread and in the chalice sufficient wine for the number gathered for the Eucharist. (Communion was to be distributed in both forms. There is no mention of communion being given in the communicant’s hand in the 1549 Prayer Book.) There are no accompanying prayers of offering as the gifts are prepared.  The preparing of the gifts is followed by the Preface with the Sanctus and Benedictus.  The Prayer of Consecration follows and several of the signs of the cross are retained, but there is no elevation of the consecrated elements.  The Lord’s Prayer is in its traditional spot, followed by the peace.  The Agnus Dei is moved to be sung during the distribution of Holy Communion, but—as mentioned earlier— the prayer of general confession and the words of absolution are inserted before Holy Communion.  There is a prayer after communion and the benediction taken from Philippians 4:7. 

This first Prayer Book certainly had its changes—an English liturgy, restoring the chalice to the laity, eliminating the elevation of the host and chalice, only those communicating remaining for the Eucharistic Liturgy to mention a few.  But by retaining the traditional altar, the vestments, the priest positioning himself at the altar with his back to the people—the changes appeared somewhat minimal, though they did trigger reaction in Cornwall and Devon where it was complained that the reforms had turned the Mass into “a Christmas Game,” meaning the sort of parodies of Church services that people, and especially children, did at holidays and feasts.   

If the first Prayer Book was moderate in it changes, the second Prayer Book—that of 1552—was revolutionary.  The vestments were done away with except for the surplice (though copes were allowed in cathedrals).   The altar with its cross and candles was gone, replaced by an ordinary table in the middle of the choir or in the nave and with only a linen cloth on it.  Gone too were the chalices and patens, replaced by pewter (or sometimes, silver) flagons for the wine and plates holding ordinary table bread.  But the liturgy itself was also drastically restructured.

The “Holy Communion” began with the Lord’s Prayer and the recitation of the ten commandments by the priest to which all assembled answered after each commandment was read “Lord have mercy upon us and incline our hearts to keep this law.”  The Gloria was moved from the beginning of the liturgy until after Communion.  Most startling—other than the physical arrangement of the church with “goddes board” (God’s Table) replacing the altar—was the rearrangement of the Eucharistic Prayer and the Communion Rite.  It was redesigned so that the reception of Holy Communion would follow immediately upon the words of Institution.  The prayer of confession and the words of absolution were moved from immediately before communion and placed after the offering for the poor and before the preface.  Then followed the preface with the Sanctus but the Benedictus was dropped.  The priest began the prayer of consecration, a severely truncated Eucharistic Prayer, but immediately after saying the words of institution, himself communicated and then gave Holy Communion to the assembled faithful kneeling around “Goddes’ Board” or “The Holy Table.”  Communion was followed by the Lord’s Prayer and then several prayers of thanksgiving.  The Gloria was then recited and the blessing—Philippians 4:7 with the Trinitarian benediction appended—was given to conclude the service.  This was clearly a Protestant Service—far more radically structured than anything Luther proposed for the German Reformation, though not as drastic as the Swiss and Strasbourg Reformers. 

There were other changes in the Prayer Book as well.  The exorcism, the anointing, and the chrism were omitted from Baptism.  (Holy Oil and Chrism were dropped all together—except for one rite which we will discuss in a future blog.) The infant being baptized was immersed in the font only once rather than the traditional three immersions.  The Funeral Service no longer included the celebration of Holy Communion or prayers for the dead.  One vestige of Catholic practice that remained was, though it is not very clear, the use of the reserved Sacrament for communion of the sick.  The ambiguity of that rite suggests that communion of the sick was not a sufficiently common practice to worry about the theological issues of reserving the Eucharist.  The instructions for the Service of Holy Communion is that any leftover bread and wine is to be returned to everyday use but, although bringing communion to the sick is included in the Prayer Book, it is not clear if the priest is to bring the Eucharist from the liturgy or celebrate the Eucharist privately in the home of the sick person.  As I said, the implication can be drawn that communion was fairly rarely brought to the sick at home or the instructions would have been more clear. 

Thus by the 1552 Book, the Church of England had clearly snapped its Catholic Roots and embraced Protestantism.  This does not mean that there is not continuity of the ancient Ecclesia Anglicana and the later Church of England but it does mean that the ancient Church had become “Reformed” in theology and practice and that means it was now a Protestant Church. 

The 1552 Prayer Book was only in use for about six months before King Edward VI died and his Catholic sister, Mary, ascended the Throne.  Mary immediately restored Catholic  worship, but when Elizabeth came to the Throne, the 1552 Book was revived with some minor modifications and then became the norm for Anglican Worship until the 20^th century.  

History of the Anglican Church LXXXIX

Anglican Evensong

Pardon for the hiatus but I had some unscheduled travelling that interrupted my normal routine.  And I realized that in my history of the Anglican Church, while I dealt with the Ordinal and its rites, I overlooked the development of the Daily Office in the Book of Common Prayer.  So before proceeding to Anglicanism in the reign of King James VI and I, let’s go back a bit to Thomas Cranmer and his Prayer Book.  Well—actually to see what Cranmer did, we need to go to a reform of the Breviary ordered by Clement VII—the same Pope who refused Henry VIII his annulment. 

Francisco de Quiñones was a Franciscan friar from Spain and a distant relative of and close advisor to the Emperor Charles V.  He belonged to the Reformed Franciscans—today’s O.F.M. group—and served as Minister General of the Observant Franciscans from 1523-27. In 1528 Quiñones was created Cardinal with the titular Church of Santa Croce in Gerusalamme.  About this time, Pope Clement VII commissioned Quiñones to reform the Roman Breviary and his very popular revision of the breviary was published in 1535 after several years of careful research of the ancient liturgies.   It was widely used but it also had its critics who were alarmed at Quiñones’ simplification of the rubrics and elimination of many of the accretions that had been added to the liturgy over the centuries.  The Cardinal did not design his breviary for the formal liturgical celebration of the daily offices, but to be used for private recitation and, much like the liturgical reforms that followed Vatican II, the Cardinal wanted to avoid the redundancies that made the Divine Office burdensome and detracted from its prayerfulness.  He expanded the scripture readings, ordered the psalms to avoid repetition, and eliminated unhistorical legends about the saints.  In his first edition, he also eliminated the antiphons, but this caused such a strong objection they were re-inserted the following year in a second edition and it was this second edition that enjoyed the greatest popularity. Despite its design for private prayer, it was often used in monasteries and collegiate churches for the public liturgical celebration of the daily prayers. Quiñones’ breviary  was banned by Paul IV in 1558 but continued to be used by many until it was replaced by the more traditional breviary of Pius V in 1568.  While it had no lasting influence among Catholics, Quiñones’ breviary reforms would be used by both Lutheran and Anglican reformers in their liturgical reforms. 

Herman von Wied was the Prince-Archbishop of Cologne who embraced Lutheranism in the 1540’s.  He also, with the help of the Reformed theologians Martin Bucer and Philip Melancthon, revised the daily liturgical offices in his diocese along the lines set out by Quiñones of avoiding repetition of the psalms and ordering sequential use of the lectionary.  Given the influence of Bucer it was an even more radical revision than Quiñones had proffered, removing any emphasis on the saints and eliminating any non scriptural readings.     

Thomas Cranmer had also tinkered with the Divine Office and his first proposal—still in the reign of the conservative King Henry VIII—retained the traditional order of Matins, Lauds, Prime, Terce, Sext, Nones, Vespers, and Compline, but by the time he was ready to publish a definitive Prayer Book in the reign of Edward VI, Cranmer had conflated Matins and Lauds into a Morning Prayer and Vespers and Compline into a single Evening Prayer, all but eliminating the “Little Hours.” Cranmer was familiar with the work of  both Quiñones and von Wied and drew on their reforms in producing his liturgy.  Bucer had moved from Germany by this point and was staying with Cranmer, pushing him ever more and more in a truly Protestant direction, and so Cranmer retained only the Te Deum from among the non-scriptural canticles, though he did make provision for a hymn to be sung at the Office. 

Cranmer’s structure seems a bit complex by our standards today—hardly “reformed” compared to the post-Vatican II Liturgy of the Hours.  It can be divided into several sections

Borrowed from the Private Prayers said to prepare one for the Morning Office.

A sentence of scripture with a penitential theme

An exhortation to repentance

A prayer of general confession of sin

A general confession.

A prayer of absolution by the priest

The Lord’s Prayer (first time)

A set of versicles and responses known as the preces

Borrowed from Matins

The Domine, labia mea versicle and response

The Deus in adjutorium versicle and response

The Gloria Patri

The invitatory psalm—psam 95

The psalmody (usually only one psalm unless in a Cathedral or Collegiate Church)

The Old Testament Lesson

A Canticle

Borrowed From Lauds

A New Testament Lesson

The Benedictus

The Apostles Creed

The Kyrie

The Lord’s Prayer—a second time

The suffrages

The Collects—the Collect of the Day, of Lent or Advent in those seasons, Collect for Peace, the Collect for Grace,

The Anthem or hymn

The Collect for the Sovereign and other State Prayers

The Prayer of Saint Chrysostom

The Benediction. 

Cranmer’s evening Prayer, drawn from Vespers and Compline, was somewhat more simple. 

The Lord’s Prayer

The Domine, labia mea versicle and response

The Deus in adjutorium versicle and response

The Gloria Patri

The Psalms 

The Old Testament Lesson

The Magnificat (Vespers)

The New Testament Lesson

The Nunc Dimitis  (Compline)

The Creed

The Collects

Of the day

For peace

Against peril

Overall, this reform of the Divine Office has been very successful.  My own experience is that while I prefer the Roman Breviary (current rite) for private prayer as it seems more conducive for a reflective personal recitation, the Anglican Liturgy with its expanded readings and reduced psalmody and with some cutting back on the number of collects and extraneous prayers works better for liturgical celebration.  I am not inclined to think that was always the case as for most of the sixteenth through nineteenth centuries it was simply a read service that droned on in a clerical monotone.  Cathedrals and the Oxbridge College Chapels most often had choirs to sing the services, but the average parish was mostly devoid of the musical talent to make these services the things of beauty they often are today.  Moreover, the Puritan disdain for organs and for music in general meant that most churches had no choice but to have a read service.  In many parishes, both in the Church of England and in the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States, read Morning Prayer was the standard Sunday Service with Holy Communion being celebrated only once or twice a month.  Combined with the long and too often dark sermons of the times, this just made Sundays an exercise in a relentless and turgid verbosity.  Sung Solemn Sunday Vespers, common in Catholic Churches of the larger European cities, by contrast was a riot of sound, color, and the smell of incense.  The Catholic service, being in Latin, was unintelligible to most of its congregation, of course, but remained relatively popular while the Anglican services drew only the most devout, leading over the centuries to an ever-steadingy decline in church attendance.  The Romantic revival and Oxford Movement of the nineteenth century would remedy this lack of the aesthetic aspect of Anglican Worship but that story is still a long way off.  We have a lot of Puritan ground to cover first.