Article XXXI: Of the one oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross

4 Responses

  1. matthew maclellan says:

    as one who is going through the process of being received into the anglican communon, it is this sense of grace that draws me nearer. the meekness is what grabbed me, as soon as i heard those words from the BCP: ‘we have erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep, trusting too much in the devices and desires of our own hearts’ – this is what draws me nearer, and which takes the greater-than-ritual sense out of the equation. Of course, there is something beyond ritual in the anglican service as well, but it lacks the sense of the priest acting as a sort of roman catholic dramatist and replaces it with something that is easier, at least, for myself to access on a prayerful level.

  2. Bob Chapman says:

    Not that there is anything “wrong” with Rite II (especially Eucharistic Prayer D), but–to my way of thinking–the [first] Rite I Eucharistic Prayer is the “Anglican Canon.”

    Something I remember saying to a fellow choir member at Christ Church, Rolla, Missouri, whilst studying at the university there in the 1970s was that we needed a Rite 1.5. That is, the traditional prayers, but in a more current language. The more current language would be primarily the removal of the thee and thy forms, which are actually the informal form of English (same as the “tu” forms in Spanish)–not the fake formal most people think they are. Correct communication is a Good Thing.

    One day I may post what form the next BCP should take, and how that it would allow historic or current language usage for all the prayers. Let’s say you start with ALL prayers approved by two successive General Convention in a mutually inconvenient language for everyone (Latin, per chance). But, since language needs to be in what the people understands, there would be a mechanism to allow localization of the approved standard BCP version into a language understood by a community (with a time frame process for an eventual one-off approval of a localized text by GC, recognizing that some localizations may not be in use long enough to take to GC).

    The only reason for (eventual) GC approval of a localized text is that liturgy is not a private matter. Those localized texts speak our common faith to the world. This common faith should allow language use that includes the Anglican Canon and the Hip Hop generation.

  3. Agreed with Mr Chapman. Updating the traditional language makes a lot more sense than writing new rites (no pun intended).

    The emphasis on grace is what draws me to Anglicanism as well. I try to keep that the focus when thinking about the Eucharist, but it is fun (and important) to think about the details. One question that’s interested me- when we receive the Eucharist, are we eating Christ’s body and drinking His blood that are presently in heaven? That’s what I assume. In that case, what did the disciples receive on Maundy Thursday, before Christ was ascended?

  4. Bob Chapman says:

    Maybe some good Anglican theology would help these people?