The Confession at Mattins and Evensong: "correspondent affections"

Having considered the exposition of the Exhortation and Absolution at Morning and Evening Prayer by John Shepherd in his A Critical and Practical Elucidation of the Morning and Evening Prayer of the Church of England (1796), we turn to the Confession. He notes how the opening words of the Confession draw attention to a wider characteristic of the Prayer Book liturgy, the titles by which it addresses God:

Before we enter upon the first part of the confession, we shall here particularly notice, once for all, a beauty and propriety, which, in our admirable Liturgy, we may everywhere observe. I mean the extreme care of the church in framing introductions to her prayers and collects. In all her addresses to the Deity, she has, it may almost be said, uniformly selected such titles, attributes and perfections, as are most appropriate to the petitions to which they are prefixed, and best calculated to produce correspondent affections in the minds of those that use them. Whoever, with an eye to this point, will examine the prayers, and collects, throughout all our different offices, will be highly gratified, and convinced of the general truth of the remark.

As an elucidation of the position, we take the introduction to the general confession, merely on account of its standing in the front of the Liturgy. In this prayer we humbly confess our manifold sins to the God, whom we have offended, and supplicate his pardon. In the introductory part of the prayer, we address God, under the appellation of Almighty and most merciful Father.

This title, Shepherd states, wonderfully holds together the utter transcendence of God and the grace of God revealed in Jesus Christ:

The first title, Almighty, denotes the greatness of him, whom we have offended, his Omnipotence and absolute dominion over all his creatures. Now the reflection that we have deliberately, and presumptuously, offended that Being, from whose power there is no escaping, from whose wrath nothing can deliver us, must fill our hearts, with terror, and dismay.

But though we have offended a terrible and Almighty God, the second term, most merciful Father, reminds us, that he still retains the affections, as well as the name of a Father: Of all fathers he is the most merciful.

Omnipotence will teach us humility, and contrition. His infinite goodness will inspire faith and hope. If the terrors of the Almighty affright us, and seal up our lips, the contemplation of his mercy, and pity, will open them again; and the united sense of these two perfections, will dispose us to make a sincere confession, and prevailing supplication at the throne of grace.

We might compare the opening of Cranmer's general Confession with those in some contemporary forms of Morning and Evening Prayer.  In TEC's BCP 1979 Rite Two it is "Most merciful God"; in CofI BCP 2004 Order Two it is "Heavenly Father". Both these books, however, in their Rite One/Order One versions, retain Cranmer's opening title: "Almighty and most merciful Father". 

It is a title which holds the tension between and unity of sheer transcendence and grace abounding.  This tension draws us to more wonderfully comprehend grace, flowing unmerited from sheer transcendence. It also brings us to comprehend that grace is no feeble or transitory state, for it is the grace of the God who is utterly transcendent, eternal, and One. Neither "Most merciful God" nor "Heavenly Father" quite convey this tension and unity. 

We see the same characteristic in the Absolution at Morning/Evening Prayer and the Holy Communion.  At Mattins and Evensong in 1662 and TEC Rite One/CofI Order One, the Absolution opens with "Almighty God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ". Similarly at the Holy Communion, "Almighty God, our heavenly Father". As with the general Confession at Morning and Evening Prayer, the tension between and unity of transcendence and grace is conveyed. By contrast, the Absolution at Rite Two/Order Two Morning/Evening Prayer and Holy Communion opens with "Almighty God", failing to convey both the tension and unity of transcendence and grace.

It is this tension and unity which, as Shepherd states, "produce[s] correspondent affections": transcendence humbling us, grace comforting us. Now, obviously, this is certainly not to say that the language of Cranmer's liturgy automatically moves the heart. Nor that the language of contemporary rites cannot move the heart to discern such tension and unity. It is, however, to suggest that Cranmer's language here is both more potent and possesses a greater theological and pastoral wisdom than contemporary rites. The equivalent phrases in the contemporary rites are univocal and this, perhaps, is their chief weakness. The Gospel brings us to encounter the One who is the transcendent and gracious redeemer, righteous One and forgiving father. It is fitting that the language of the liturgy should draw us into this truth and grace.