Interesting post on liturgical matters from England

Fr. Ed Tomlinson writes about using the Book of Divine Worship liturgy and other matters  (Thanks Don Henri!) my emphases:

 

So how do we find the perfect balance? A way to ensure we maintain our distinctive charism whilst also contributing to mainstream Catholic life? During our most recent gathering as priests around our Ordinary at Allen Hall this theme was discussed. There our liturgist, Monsignor Andrew Burnham., stressed the importance of our eventually adopting the special Ordinariate Rite being put together at this time.

Unfortunately It will not arrive for a good while yet as it is currently being thrashed about in Vatican circles. But as we wait we are asked to consider adopting the ’Book of Divine Worship’ approved by the Holy See for interim use. We might suppose that this Rite, which uses the main Roman Canon but with Book of Common Prayer material and language- is a reasonable indicator of what will later arrive.

-snip-

Smaller Ordinariate groups may find it is simply not practical to adopt it at all, save on special occasions. For them bringing small customs to the current Roman Rite will suffice- such as Eastward celebration or the use of traditional hymnody. Alongside a larger diocesan presence they will witness to Anglican heritage in a subtle but important manner.

 

Meanwhile larger groups will clearly have a responsibility to deliver the liturgy that best reflects our Anglican patrimony. Not in such a way as to alienate cradle Catholics of course. Nor so as to distance us from the normative Roman Rite. And again this is where the sensitive balancing act comes in…

 

I love this!  I do hope they get permission to use something better than the 1979 American Prayer Book prayers in the present BDW.   We got permission in Canada to substitute our 1962 Book of Common Prayer for those places in the BDW where the 1979 prayers were put in as is.    We also have the Old English translation of the Roman Canon.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Interesting post on liturgical matters from England

  1. Don Henri says:

    Yes, encouraging, but it is still in a homeopathic quantity: Every Friday and one Sunday a month.
    Funny to see those Anglo-papalist Priests who in their CofE days would never have touched the heretic BCP Communion Service (to be fair the English 1662 BCP is much more heretic than the US or Canadian one) even with a 10 feet pole now using the BDW, that is the essentially a slightly tweaked BCP Antecommunion with the Roman Canon…
    But overall this is great news, all for the glory of God!

    + PAX et BONUM

  2. Peregrinus says:

    Thank you for this, Deborah.

    For the sake of clarity, though, the translation of the Latin of the Roman Canon in the BDW Anglican Use is best refereed to as sacral or hieratic English. “Old English” is a technical term like Middle English both of which refer to specific forms of English in Pre-Reformation Britain.

    I agree that this is good News from Msgr Burnham.

  3. Pingback: Interesting post on liturgical matters from England | Catholic Canada

  4. EPMS says:

    Not that I want anyone to liose his house, but was Hepworth not a university lecturer in addition to his TAC duties? Suely he is not currently subsisting on OAP.

  5. Rev22:17 says:

    Deborah,

    Fr. Ed Tomlinson wrote: We might suppose that [the Book of Divine Worship], which uses the main Roman Canon but with Book of Common Prayer material and language- is a reasonable indicator of what will later arrive.

    Yes, probably, with the caveat that the revision now in development probably will provide additional options that conform to the usage of the Church of England where it differs from that of other provinces of the Anglican Communion. These options certainly could include an additional “form” for the Eucharist based on one or another of the English missals preferred by Anglo-Catholics.

    Fr. Ed Tomlinson wrote: Smaller Ordinariate groups may find it is simply not practical to adopt it at all, save on special occasions. For them bringing small customs to the current Roman Rite will suffice- such as Eastward celebration or the use of traditional hymnody.

    Ah, not exactly. Whenever an ordinariate group officially has its own mass, it can use the “approved Anglican form” (the present Book of Divine Worship for now) even if a majority of those present are not members of the ordinariate or otherwise of the “Anglican Use.” Alas, the smaller ordinariate communities currently don’t have enough members or are too scattered to have their own Sunday masses, and thus worship at a regular mass of a diocesan parish that uses the ordinary form of the Roman Rite.

    As to liturgical music, much of the Anglican music has long been approved for use in Catholic parishes anyway, and many parishes have several masses with different styles of music. Here in the States, it’s pretty common for a parish to have one mass with a contemporary folk group, another mass with an organ and cantor, and perhaps with a full traditional choir — and one sometimes finds other combinations of instruments, such as a brass or woodwind ensemble or a string quartet. In England, the more likely scenario is that smaller ordinariate groups that assist in regular parish masses would simply choose whichever mass might use traditional Anglican hymnody.

    Norm.

    • One option which I hope will be included is the full text of the Prayer of Humble Access which is far more beautiful and expressive (It was in the 1928 American Prayer Book but not in the BDW):

      “We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies. We are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under thy Table. But thou art the same Lord, whose property is always to have mercy: Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen.”

      • William Tighe says:

        Re:

        “Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood, (*) that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us.”

        Has no one ever thought of restoring the words “in these holy mysteries” which were here (*) in the 1549 version, but which Cranmer omitted in 1552, as a result of the “devolution” of his eucharistic views towards Zwingli’s Zurich?

  6. Luke DeWeese says:

    It’s sad that those in the English Ordinariate only want to use the BDW once a month. That’s our heritage. We should all be using it every week.

    • Luke,

      Fr. Ed is only talking about his own Ordinariate Group in Pembury using the BDW once a month..
      This is mainly because of his particular situation in being simultaneously priest in charge of a small diocesan parish and chaplain of an Ordinariate group. Each community is quite small, so they usually do most things together.
      This is to my mind a most unsatisfactory situation. But at least he will be beginning to offer a distinct Anglican Use liturgy from time to time.

    • Don Henri says:

      Well, it’s already good that they are using it at all because most of them used the Roman Rite in their Anglican days. In facts, it will be for most groups a complete novelty to use an Anglican-ish form of Eucharist!

      + PAX et BONUM

  7. Deborah,

    Is it possible for me to obtain a copy of the BDW as officially amended for úse in Canada?

    David Murphy

    • Peregrinus says:

      The BDW Liturgy amended (with 2011 OF amendments) and Canadian “deviations” noted in blue type is available from the Office of the Ordinary in Houston.

    • johnfhh says:

      David,
      The rite used at Calgary is here:
      http://www.calgaryordinariate.com/
      click on Bulletins and Notices and each Bulleting contains the whole Mass for that particular Sunday.
      I do not know how far this is used across Canada.
      In England,
      The Customary of Our Lady of Walsingham has now been released, see
      http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/184825122X/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=

      Kind regards,
      John U.K.

      • Matthew the Wayfarer says:

        Looked all over Fr. Kenyon’s website, could not find the liturgy. Specify where it is please. Thank you.

      • Don Henri says:

        You have also a simpler pew missal of the Canadian Anglican Use here from St Edmund’s (St John’s Calgary is extremely high and many Tridentine things are added) http://www.stedmund.ca/documents/content_439.pdf

        + PAX et BONUM

      • Rev22:17 says:

        Don,

        Your link is most useful. Thank you!

        There is one point that requires clarification. I noticed the following in your link (italic and boldface in original).

        >> In the Prayers over the People: “Give grace, O heavenly Father, to Benedict, our Pope, to Douglas, our Bishop, and to all bishops and other ministers…”

        >> In the veri sanctus of the anaphora: “… together with thy servant Benedict, our Pope, and Douglas, our Bishop, and all the faithful guardians of the catholic and apostolic faith.”

        This is, of course, the proper usage for any congregation that is under the canonical governance of the bishop of the local diocese, either temporarily (while awaiting transfer to an ordinariate) or permanently. In the case of a congregation that is under the governance of a another prelate who is equivalent in law to a diocesan bishop, however, the proper usage is to substitute the canonical ordinary’s name and title for that of the diocesan bishop. In a parish of a territorial abbacy governed by an abbot named Ludwig, for example, the proper use is to replace “Douglas, our Bishop” with “Ludwig, our Abbot” in both of the above instances. In the same way, in a parish that is canonically part of the Personal ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter, the proper use is to replace “Douglas, our bishop,” with “Jeffrey, our ordinary,” in both instances.

        Of course, when an ordinary of an ordinariate celebrates mass, he replaces the references to “Douglas, our bishop,” with “me, your humble servant,” in both instances, in the same manner as a diocesan bishop celebrating mass in his own diocese.

        Norm.

      • johnfhh says:

        Matthew: Perhaps I did not explain clearly enough 😦
        Go to http://www.calgaryordinariate.com/
        Place the cursor over the ‘News & Events’ tab in the strip along the top, then click on
        ‘Bulletins & Notices’ which appears in the Drop-down menu. This will take you to a page with a list of .pdf files. Those labelled Bulletin are the Order of Mass for a particular Sunday.

        Don: I am not sure that St.Edmund’s rite is that far apart from St.John’s, tho’ I notice that the latter have the Angleus and Last Gospel.

        Norm: I notice that St.John’s prays for “Benedict our Pope, Jeffrey our Ordinary, and Frederick Bishop of Calgary” in both the Prayer of the Faithful and the Canon.

        Kind regards,
        John U.K.

      • Rev22:17 says:

        John,

        You wrote: Norm: I notice that St.John’s prays for “Benedict our Pope, Jeffrey our Ordinary, and Frederick Bishop of Calgary” in both the Prayer of the Faithful and the Canon.

        This form is proper for a mass that’s officially celebrated as a joint mass serving both a congregation of the ordinariate and a congregation of the local diocese, but it is also reasonable to use it whenever members of the diocese assist in an ordinariate mass. The key point here is that it is not invalidating.

        Norm.

  8. EPMS says:

    There are a number of OOLW groups, perhaps a third of the total, who do not meet every Sunday, so the Anglican Use mass is naturally not celebrated except when they worship as a group.

  9. Don Henri says:

    Well, Mgr. Barnes won’t do it, but not because he opposes such a move (on the contrary, he will adopt the new ordinariate liturgy when it is issued), but because the BDW is an American from of worship that would not fit in the English ordinariate.

    From a comment thread on his blog: http://bishedwins.blogspot.fr/2012/10/towards-pastoral-council.html#comment-form

    Independent21 October 2012 18:20

    As for being in touch with Anglican roots and English traditional culture – are a hymn book and former Anglican personnel enough? Have not the Americans of the Pastoral Provision set a good example by adapting the Book of Common Prayer and the King James’ Bible for Catholic Use with the Book of Divine Worship?

    Edwin21 October 2012 19:36

    A good example for America, maybe; but not for former Anglo-Catholics in England. The rich treasury of Tudorbethan English has largely passed us by. No doubt we shall learn (or in the case of the very elderly, like me, relearn) to value BCP’s cadences – but only when we have a version of the Mass authorised for our use. To try to use the Book of Divine Worship will not do – its bowdlerised BCP collects, for instance, grate on the ears of those who have used the Book of Common Prayer in times past. Meanwhile, the Customary of Our Lady of Walsingham (approved by our Ordinary)is a good place for us to begin.

  10. Matthew the Wayfarer says:

    I hope Father Tomlinson’s optimism is more correct than not and I have high regard and respect for Msgr. Burnham; however, I fear that what will come out of Rome will be more NOM (the so-called Ordinary Form) than BCP-English/Anglican Missal. Don’t trust non-English speaking Italians to ensure the Patrimony. In fact they may destroy it. I was hoping the Pope would be much more aware of what is going on with his ‘baby’ but I fear the Holy Father has been cut out of the loop and the ‘baby’ has been orphaned. Pray I am wrong.

    • Rev22:17 says:

      Matthew,

      You wrote: I was hoping the Pope would be much more aware of what is going on with his ‘baby’ but I fear the Holy Father has been cut out of the loop and the ‘baby’ has been orphaned.

      I would not be too worried about that. The pope’s direction in the matter, to make sure that the “ordinariate liturgy” now under development “meets the needs of” (diplomatic speak for “contains options that Msgr. Burnham deems acceptable to”) the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham, undoubtedly is quite clear. The pope also meets quite frequently with both the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, who undoubtedly are giving him regular updates on the committee’s progress.

      Norm.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s