Waterland and "our excellent Liturgy"

In his discussion of ancient liturgical practices in A Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, as laid down in Scripture and Antiquity, Waterland recognises that the Communion Office in BCP 1662 differs from many of the "old Liturgies" with regards to both the invocation of the Holy Ghost and the memorial and oblation. Does the absence of these from 1662 weaken the apostolic and catholic credentials the High Church tradition claimed for the rite?

In terms of the invocation of the Holy Ghost, Waterland denies that evidence for it can be found before "the fourth century, and indeed towards the middle of it". Even then, the point of the invocation coheres with, rather than contradicts, Waterland's Reformed Eucharistic theology: invoking the Spirit over the bread and wine is "to make them authentic and effective representatives of our Lord's body and blood". As such, the petition in the 1662 Prayer of Consecration he then regards as having the same intent and fulfilling the same purpose:

Hear us, O merciful Father, we most humbly beseech thee; and grant that we receiving these thy creatures of bread and wine, according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood.

Waterland states of what he terms this "invocation":

This was part of the ancient invocation; and it expresses the thing formerly prayed for, without specifying the particular manner, or means, viz. the immediate operation of the Holy Spirit: though that also must of course be understood and implied, upon Christian principles taught in Scripture. After all, I see no reason why it may not be justly thought as modest, and as reverent, to beg of God the Father the things which we want, understanding that he will grant them by his Holy Spirit, as to make a formal petition to him, to send his Holy Spirit upon the elements or upon the communicants; unless Scripture had particularly ordered some such special form, to be made use of in our sacramental solemnities, which it has not done.

What, then, of the memorial and oblation, "a very ancient, eminent, and solemn part of the Communion Service"? Here too Waterland regards it as present in "substance" in 1662:

we have still the sum and substance of the primitive memorial remaining in our present Offices; not all in a place, but interspersed here and there in the exhortations and prayers. In a previous exhortation, we read; ' Above all things ye must give most humble and hearty thanks to God the Father, &c. for the redemption of the world by the death and passion of our Saviour Christ both God and man,' &c. There is the sense and signification of the ancient memorial, only under a different form. In the Post-Communion, we beseech God 'to accept our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, and to grant remission of sins to us and to the whole Church, by the merits and death of Christ Jesus.' Which words contain the substance of what was anciently the appendage to the memorial.

Rather than regarding it as somehow defective, Waterland rejoices in "our excellent Liturgy", not least when contrasted with the liturgies of Latin West and Greek East, mindful of "the lateness of those Liturgies, as we now have them, and of the confused state wherein most of them are". For Waterland, "our Communion Service", because it is both catholic and reformed, shares the strengths of other rites but without their weaknesses:

Upon the whole, though all human compositions must have their defects, more or less, I am persuaded, that our Communion Service, as it now stands, is as grave, and solemn, and as judicious, as any other that can be named, be it ancient or modern. It may want some things which were well inserted in other Offices; but then it has well left out several other things, which most Liturgies are rather burdened with, than benefited.

(The quotations are from Chapter X, 'Of the Sanctifying Grace of the Holy Spirit conferred in the Eucharist'.)

Why I support the ordination of women: a High Church reflection

A number of commenters on this blog have asked about my occasional expressions of support for the ordination of women to all three orders. With some hesitation, I have decided to post a summary of my own views on this matter. The hesitation is because I have sought on this blog to focus on issues and themes which can unify those who identify with or have respect (grudging or otherwise!) for what we might term 'classical' Anglicanism (the Anglicanism of the Formularies and - yes - of the Old High Church tradition). Some oppose the ordination of women (and I have friends and colleagues who do so, Anglo-Catholic, High Church, and Reformed Evangelical). Some of us support it (again, friends and colleagues covering a wide range of theological traditions). Below, I have organised my thinking around 5 points (needless to say, no reference to Dort is implied). 1. The Declaration for Subscription required of clergy in the Church of Ireland states: (6) I promise to submit ...

How the Old High tradition continued

Charles Gore's 1914 letter to the clergy of his diocese, ' The Basis of Anglican Fellowship ', can be regarded as a classical expression of the Prayer Book Catholic tradition. A key part of the letter - entitled 'Romanizing in the Church of England' - addressed the "Catholic movement", questioning beliefs and practices within it which tended to "a position which makes it very difficult for its extremer representatives to give an intelligible reason why they are not Roman Catholics". Gore provides the outlines of an alternative account and experience of catholicity within Anglicanism, defined by three characteristics. What is particularly interesting about these characteristics is their continuity with the older High Church tradition. Indeed, the central characteristic as set out by Gore was integral to High Church claims over centuries: To accept the Anglican position as valid, in any sense, is to appeal behind the Pope and the authority of t...

1928 practices and the 1979 book: unthinking conservatism or popular piety?

Those responsible for Earth & Altar - a new blog emanating from a group within TEC - are to be congratulated for an excellent contribution to wider Anglican discussion and debate. The commitment to "an expansively conceived credal orthodoxy as fully compatible with LGBTQ inclusion, gender equality, and racial justice" is an important part of a wider retrieval of creedal orthodoxy within what we might call the post-liberal generation. It is in this spirit that I want to respond to a recent post on the site by Andrew McGowan , Dean of the Berkeley Divinity School at Yale and Professor of Anglican Studies at Yale Divinity School. Against the background of another round of "ill-defined" liturgical revision in TEC, he understandably urges that a fuller reception of the 1979 BCP should occur before further reforms. In doing so, however, he takes aim at what he describes as "clinging to the ritual structures of 1928" while using the text of 1979. We ...

laudable Practice

Search This Blog