[when the lessons] set before us the wonderful handy-work of God in any of the Creatures ... Then it will be very seasonable to return this Song.
Comber's A Companion to the Temple and the Closet (1676) similarly declares that Benedicite is "always proper to be used" when reflecting on the created order:
it is always proper to be used after the History of the Creation ... And then we may in this Form learn the order of God's works, for the method is exact, and beginning with the Heavens and the hosts thereof descends to the air, the Earth and Sea reckoning up all the furniture of them; and concluding with a particular exhortation to the Sons of Men, who are concerned in them all to give praise to the Lord their maker, the Order will inform our understanding, the exactness quicken our memory, and the comprehensive and devout manner of address, will enlarge our affections, if we attend it, and desire to profit by it, and then it will need no other recommendations.
Secker's Six Sermons on the Liturgy (published in 1773) said of the Benedicite:
It ... might be justly preferred to the [Te Deum], whenever there is particular Occasion to return Thanks for the Blessings of Nature.
Secker likewise linked Benedicite to "acknowledgement of the Glory of God in his Works of Creation, the Memorial of which was the original Design of the Sabbath Day".
The same understanding is seen in Shepherd's A Critical and Practical Elucidation of the Morning and Evening Prayer of the Church of England (1796):
where the first Lesson treats of the creation ... Benedicite might with propriety and advantage be adopted in the place of Te Deum.
Mindful that most Prayer Book lectionaries now provide particular readings for the Rogation Days, focused on the God's gracious provision in and through the natural world, the Benedicite is indeed therefore most appropriate for these days at Mattins.
This, however, does not mean that the various commentaries make any exalted claims for the Benedicite. Nor, however, is there any embarrassment about it being derived from the Apocrypha. As Sparrow states, "And though it be not in the Canon of Scripture, yet it is an excellent Paraphrase on the 148 Psalm". This comparison with Ps.148 is repeated by Comber:
And though it be not in the Canon of Scripture, yet it is an excellent Paraphrase on the 148 Psalm; and comes so near it in words and sense, that we must reproach that, if we despise this.
Secker describes it as "an evident Imitation" of the Psalm, a point also made by Shepherd:
this very hymn is nothing more than a paraphrase, or amplification of the 148th Psalm, with which it corresponds in substance, and nearly in terms.
Shepherd goes on to provide a very Hooker-like defence of such use of a passage from the Apocrypha:
Though by our church it is not admitted to be either an inspired composition, or canonical Scripture, yet it is a very pious, as well as ancient form of praise, and well adapted to the purposes of devotion.
The question might then arise, 'why not replace Benedicite with Ps.148?'. This was proposed by the Liturgy of Comprehension and also became an alternative in the Church of Ireland 1878 revision. Perhaps the answer to the question, however, lies in Shepherd's description of Benedicite as an "amplification" of the Psalm. To continue to draw from Hooker, we might then see this as a means "whereby the Church doth also preach", part of the "divine excellencie" found in the "humane compositions" of the Apocrypha (LEP V.20.10). The Benedicite gathers up a vision of the created order proclaimed throughout Scripture and particularly expressed in Ps.148.
Here is a glorious example of the "much golde" to be found within the Apocrypha, which the church, "by arte and judgment" has learnt to separate from "a little drosse" also found within those books (V.20.12). We see this reflected in how PECUSA 1789 and Ireland 1878, both revisions which excluded the Apocrypha from the daily lectionary, nevertheless retained the Benedicite at Morning Prayer.
The commentaries, however, do admit that Benedicite was a rarely used option. Comber says that it is "seldom used"; Secker that "it is now very seldom used, at least in parochial Churches"; and Shepherd that it is "seldom repeated in the public service". Mindful that the Te Deum is, obviously, not the words of holy Scripture, it was not a case of preferring a canticle from the canonical Scriptures over the Benedicite. Much more likely as a cause of the Benedicite being rarely used was its length.
Something of this is seen in how various Prayer Book revisions provided for a shortening of this canticle. Ireland 1926, Scotland 1929, England's Proposed Book of 1928, and Canada 1962 include rubrics permitting the refrain "praise him and magnify him for ever" to be used at the end "of each group of verses". While a case could be made that the repetition is a significant aspect of the Benedicite, there are sound pastoral reasons to provide for such a prudent option, not least if it encourages use of the canticle.
Prayer Book commentaries over centuries demonstrate that Benedicite is a rich canticle particularly appropriate for Rogationtide, when we reflect on - in the words of the Homily appointed for Rogationtide - "the most deserved praise and commendation of Almighty God ... in the consideration of the marvellous creation of this world ... wherein his great power and wisdom might excellently appear". The canticle wonderfully draws us into a glorious vision of the created order as a pouring forth of God's "liberal and large goodness" (to again quote the homily). Such is the joy of saying the Benedicite at Prayer Book Mattins in Rogationtide, when it is "very seasonable to return to this song".
(The photograph is of Jeremy Taylor country on Rogation Monday, 2023.)
Comments
Post a Comment