Also of significance is how Milbank relates the parish to the Book of Common Prayer:
the way of life of a traditional parish cherishes liturgy itself as rhythm, inhabits custom and ceremony, values natural and human bonds, and is inherently sacramental. The widespread adherence to the Book of Common Prayer among rural congregations is evidence of this ... its rites open a strongly transcendent dimension and its every word has a material depth and sacramental potential.
This link between parish and Prayer Book reveals the nature of both. Both are common: shared rites, shared space, drawing a community into unity in Christ. Both sanctify the ordinary: the parish through the gathering up of place and of domestic, communal, and national life in prayer and thanksgiving, the Prayer Book through the rhythms of prayer throughout the year and by means of the occasional offices. Both draw us into Burke's rich vision of human flourishing, in which earthly life is not merely a series of "subordinate contracts for objects of mere occasional interest may be dissolved at pleasure" but, rather, "a partnership in all science, a partnership in all art, a partnership in every virtue and in all perfection. As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained in many generations, it becomes a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born".
It is because of this intimate relationship between parish and Prayer Book that the move away from Common Prayer to a wide diversity of uncommon liturgical texts inevitably undermines the parish. The parish as a common space requires Common Prayer, both in terms of the shared, unifying texts which shape and form us year after year, and the Prayer Book's vision of the occasional offices - common to us all - sanctifying the passage of life.
The Prayer Book does, however, raise some questions about an assumption made by Milbank in the article. While she critiques the anti-parish "mission-hub model", she nevertheless shares with its advocates the a key belief:
the Catholic Revival and the Parish and People Movement combined have put sacramental worship and a weekly eucharist at the heart of most parishes.
It is, of course, this very belief which drives many of the "mission-hub model" initiatives: a weekly eucharist is essential - a priest is needed for the eucharist - a priest cannot be in every parish every Sunday - therefore we need to replace the parish with an alternative structure. Perpetuating the notion that the eucharist must be the central act of Sunday worship inevitably leads to an anti-parish approach, undermining that very sacramentality of place which Milbank notes to be characteristic of Anglican Christianity.
There are two words entirely missing from Milbank's article: Mattins and Evensong. The Prayer Book's offices of Morning and Evening Prayer are not only what sustained most Anglican parishes over centuries past, they also have a vital role in sustaining parishes now and in the future. These offices can be led by deacon, reader, or lay leader, ensuring that in the multi-church context that is the norm for most rural parishes - in which the priest is more often than not elsewhere - Sunday worship can continue.
What is more, if the desire is (as, of course, it certainly needs to be) to grow congregations in a cultural context of very low church attendance, we really do have to ask if weekly Parish Communion is the best means of doing so. Introducing the unchurched or those on the periphery to the practices of confession and absolution, prayer, reading the scriptures, and offering praise can be done meaningfully and effectively through Mattins and Evensong. As Michael Ramsey warned in his famous essay 'The Parish Communion':
I believe also that there is still much to be learnt from the Matins and Sermon whereby congregations were nurtured in the Scriptures. May we never have a generation of worshippers unfamiliar with the Canticles and Psalms ... I am pleading that we may be careful about values which may be lost.
Referring to the occasional offices, Milbank states:
They should be at the forefront of our outreach for there is no easier place to preach the gospel and make it relevant to daily life.
Yes, this should be so. But what is said here about the occasional offices can also apply to regular Sunday Morning and Evening Prayer. These are liturgies with a much greater theological depth than the alternative 'Service of the Word' creations now too often encountered. They usually have a greater Scriptural content than the misnamed 'Service of the Word'. They provide a consistent rhythm of praise and prayer missing from the continually redesigned 'Service of the Word', when we know that consistent exposure to key texts shapes and forms us in a way that continually changing liturgies do not.
What is more, setting a target of Mattins or Evensong said in every parish Sunday by Sunday is an achievable goal. Minimal training is involved in preparing laity to lead the office in a meaningful, knowledgeable way. It ensures that the Church's prayer is offered in each parish week by week, following the rhythms of the liturgical year. It builds a community of prayer in each parish church, a prayerful centre at the heart of parish and communal life.
For this to be seriously considered, however, Anglicans need to move beyond the assumption that Holy Communion must be the central of Sunday worship, with all the negative consequences this has for the parish. It is an assumption which fatally undermines the vision of the parish church as a centre of prayer in each place. By contrast, Mattins or Evensong, Sunday by Sunday in every parish, can be a means of nurturing a community of prayer, shaped by reading of the Scriptures, offering praise, and confessing creedal faith. Sunday Mattins, in other words, should again become a characteristic of the once and future parish.
Comments
Post a Comment