In a lecture at Virginia Seminary to commemorate the 450th anniversary of the Anglican Common Prayer, the Lutheran scholar, Gordon W. Lathrop, stated: “American Episcopalians are in the forefront of those who know and teach that liturgy is more than text.” And then he pointed to the book, Shaped by Images (1995), by William Seth Adams for illustration of this point.
He proceeded to claim that: “One way to understand the remarkable pages 400-401 at the center of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer -- the text-less ‘Order for Celebrating the Holy Eucharist’ -- is that they are the very hermeneutical key to the entire book.” That is, these pages provide “ a way to understand how the other texts of all the rites have their meaning as they are used in a shaped communal action.” Further, “they are not an after-thought for ‘informal services,’ but they are an opening of the book towards its future, an awareness that the book of the church is always in process…” (See Virginia Seminary Journal, January 2000, for the text of the lecture).
What Professor Lathrop asserts is not new. We have been hearing for several decades from liturgists and bishops about “the shape of the liturgy” and that common prayer is to be seen not as a common text but as a common structure with common elements, allowing a variety of forms of words.
So what is on pages 400-401? The barebones structure of the Eucharist as envisaged by those who produced the 1979 prayer book. Parishes are free to insert material of their choice under the eight headings -- Gather, Proclaim, Pray, Exchange the Peace, Prepare the Table, Make Eucharist, Break the Bread & Share the Gifts of God.
In 1979 it was assumed that the material to fill in the spaces would be taken from the 1979 book itself, but now with the creation of more official Rites as Supplementary Texts (e.g., Enriching Our Worship, 1998) by the ECUSA, and with the existence of ecumenical web-sites containing all kinds of suggestions, the possibilities for experiment and novelty are immense. Further, with the pressure from the feminist lobby for “gender-neutral” or “feminine” names for God and forms of address to God, this possibility of novelty increases all the time, as congregations dare to move further away from traditional “God-language” and moral discourse.
Thus Common Prayer in the Episcopal Church is now effectively a minimal common structure wherein can be inserted anything on the one hand from texts of historical orthodoxy in traditional or modern language to on the other hand texts celebrating the goddess, Sophia.
It is important to note that this common structure is not the same structure as found in the classic Book of Common Prayer (1549 onwards) and that it is not possible to fit the content of the historic BCP into the modern structure without changing its doctrine thereby.
Onthe first and last days of the General Convention at Denver, as well as at the prominent Sunday Eucharist, the Rite used was not from the 1979 Prayer Book but from the booklet, Enriching Our Worship (1998) and was thus in inclusive language.
But what from the point of view of traditional Anglicans is judged as a great loss (for to them Common Prayer means a common text not merely a common structure), from the position of modern Lutherans ready to join with modern Episcopalians is considered a great boon.
Why so? Lutherans have never had the equivalent of the Common Prayer as Text. They have never had Liturgical Formularies (e.g., as the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, the Ordinal and the Articles of Religion) to unite them. Rather they have been a Confessional Church (“We believe, teach and confess…”) based upon the Augsburg Confession, and the structure of their worship has been guided in principle not by a common text but by common structures. Their Liturgical Books are not primarily collections of texts but essays on how to lead liturgy and teach the Faith. This is not to say that many Lutheran parishes have not used virtually the same services, but it is to say that for them common prayer does not mean a common text but a common (and minimal) structure for Word and Sacrament.
As the ECUSA and the ELCA [Evangelical Lutheran Church of America] move towards a practical union from January 1, 2001, Lutherans such as Dr Lathrop rejoice because the ECUSA has moved to the position in terms of common prayer where the ELCA can truly be glad. In effect the ECUSA has come to the position adopted by the Lutheran leaders in the 16th century concerning Rites and Ceremonies. What matters is not a common text but a common structure.
Thus it seems that there is room in the uniting Episcopal-Lutheran body for all types of Lutherans and Episcopalians to be united in a common worship because they have reduced common prayer to a common structure, wherein they can insert material of choice. Thus one parish will seek to be orthodox in doctrine and morality while another will knowingly be neo-pagan. This will be possible because on the one side the Augsburg Confession and on the other the Anglican Formularies will be merely “historical documents.”
The Rev’d Dr. Peter Toon June 2000