THE BOOK OF DIVINE WORSHIP being elements of The Book of Common Prayer revised and adapted according to the Roman Rite for use by Roman Catholics coming from the Anglican Tradition. Approved by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops of the USA and confirmed by the Apostolic See (Newman House Press, 2003).
This book is rather large and heavy and has nearly 1000 pages in all. It is intended as a Pew Edition but will not fit into the normal-sized book holder in Pews.
It is presently used in the USA by not more than twenty congregations of converts to Roman Catholicism from the Anglican Way. However, it is important for the future because some Anglican jurisdictions (e.g., the Traditional Anglican Communion led by Archbishop Hepworth of Australia), that are seeking a uniate status with Rome, have indicated that they will be ready to use it.
It contains the Calendar for the Church Year, the Daily Office Lectionary, the Daily Office, the Litany, the Proper (Collects, Prayers over the Gifts & Preface), the holy Eucharist , Holy Baptism, Holy Matrimony, the Burial of the Dead and the Psalter. All of these come in two versions, the traditional and the contemporary and it is this provision that makes the book so large. The Litany alone is in one form, the traditional (even as it is in the 1979 ECUSA Prayer Book).
The literary sources used to compose these rites were The Book of Common Prayer (1928); and “The Book of Common Prayer” (1979) from the Episcopal Church USA, and the English translation of the Missale Romanum (1973 – International Committee on English in the Liturgy). Here it may be observed that the translations of Scripture and ancient texts used in the 1979 Prayer Book and in the Missal of 1973 were much influenced by the theory of dynamic equivalency as well as by the ideology of inclusivism and they do need revision.
The basis for the Daily Office and Litany are Rites One and Two from the 1979 Prayer Book, with some minor additions from the 1928 BCP and from Roman Catholic sources (e.g., additional supplications in the Litany). Likewise, the basis for the Propers are Rites One and Two from the 1979 Prayer with significant additions from the Roman Missal.
With respect to the Eucharist, the provision of Rites One and Two continues but here there is greater dependence (as one would expect) upon the Roman Missal. In Rite One the Canon of the Mass is the traditional Roman Canon in traditional English and in Rite Two the four Eucharistic Prayers of the Canon in contemporary English in the Missal are made available. Several observations may be made. Both Rites retain the opening Acclamation, “Blessed be God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit” (the novel formula of the 1979 book) rather than adopting the “In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” of the Missal. Both Rites provide the Creed in the first person singular only [its correct form for the Eucharist, cf. Credo….] and in the 1979 Rite One version. It is impossible to use only traditional language if one is using Rite One all the time because certain provisions are only given in contemporary form (e.g., the Easter Vigil Service) and also because the Creed is provided only in the traditional version then it is also impossible to use Rite Two completely in contemporary language.
The two services for Baptism are based on the provisions of the 1928 BC for Rite One and the 1979 Prayer Book for Rite Two but with modifications. And the same principle applies to the two Services for both Holy Matrimony and the Burial of the Dead.
Finally, the Psalter is first in the 1928 BCP version (the Coverdale) and secondly in the 1979 Prayer Book version. The latter is well known for its inclusion of inclusive language and begins, “Happy are they…” whereas the other traditional version begins (as it points to Christ the Man) “Blessed is the Man….”
I would hope that if this Book is to be used for uniate churches (e.g., TAC) that there will be a careful scrutiny of the use of language so that Rite One can have integrity and be only and always in traditional form -- and the same for Rite Two. Further, that the use of texts from the Missal which are now regarded by the Vatican as improper or erroneous translations be modified, and that a version of the Psalter in contemporary English be provided that does not contain the feminist ideology within it (which the ECUSA provided in its 1979 version!). Finally, that the Naming of the Blessed Trinity in Rite Two texts, in the form that this is taken over from the 1979 Book, be examined and adjusted to harmonize better with received Catholic dogma of the Trinity and Person of Christ.
The TAC and like-minded traditional Anglicans who move to Rome will miss the ancient Eucharistic Lectionary of the old Roman (Sarum) use that is printed in the classic BCP, even as they will also miss the use of the Name of the Trinity to denote the weeks after Whitsuntide until the arrival of Advent.
Finally, this BOOK is so large and heavy that I can see uniate Church parishes making their own Missalette of the Rite they use and of possessing few copies of the whole thing.
Peter Toon October 20, 2005
No comments:
Post a Comment