Prayer Book faith?

The Book of Common Pryaer is rceiving a lot of attention in this its 350th year. It might seem odd that a publication, which according to the Canons of the Church of England, promulgates our doctrine, should get treated to such adverse reactions as it does.

Now don't get me wrong, I am not a person who deeply mourns the passing of the Book Of Common prayer as the mainstay of the liturgical life of the Church of England, what I am unhappy with is our inability, seemingly, to come up with liturgy that really embraces, as a Christian community, who we are before God.

Part of this, of course, is to do with an increase of congregational participation in liturgy. Words and sentences have got shorter and easier to accommodate wider participation. Changes in the structure of language and the meaning in words mean that our corporate expression is constantly adapting and pushing back horizons.

The Book of Common prayer itself is a product of conflict and settlement – many of us know that it went through several revisions between its first widely published form in 1549 and its current usage in the 1662 edition. But even during this period there were various editions in circulation - estimates are that at some points there were nearly 300 editions in England and all in use.

As such the Book of Common prayer reflects both the old catholicism of England and influences from the new continental protestantism of the time. Fashions and beliefs swung back and forth in the editions – the Puritans scrapped the whole thing for a time, but by 1662 with the nation once more settling into monarchy a new settlement was needed.

It really needs to be acknowledge, that whatever our perceived current liturgical needs, the Book of Common Prayer is a masterful collection of liturgy which reflects both a specific and inclusive range of theology. Perhaps its most common thread is that human beings are those who have “wandered and strayed like lost sheep, and followed the devices and desires of our own hearts” (and will continue to do so). But then always immediately after this acknowledgement of our lack of relationship with God comes the reminder of God's mercy and an exhortation to more holy living.

The Book of Common Prayer weaves together themes of salvation through the death and resurrection of Christ and the incarnational reality of the sanctification of all our lives in the person of Jesus. The Bible is use extensively in forming its texts, readings are set out week by week and still there is sacrament in its pages.

Anyone who argues that the Church of England is weak on doctrine has not read the Book of Common Prayer. The problem is, many of those who have read it, find it not as it was written – an accomodation of the views of the time, but restrictive and out of touch with modern life.

This is no call, as I stated, to reintroduce everything that was, but it is a call to re-examine our task of liturgy, both as individuals and a church. What we are doing and why we are doing it matters. Importantly liturgy communicates with God but it also communicates to those around us who God is and how we live in our faith.

Why is it, that in 300 years, we have been unable to come up with words which universally express ourselves as well as the Book of Common Prayer? Perhaps we are afraid in our rather unsettled settlement in England that we will rend the fabric asunder if we try to enter a dialogue. But if we do not really grapple with our liturgy are we in danger of ending up with a rather vague lowest common denominator kind of religion which really is not sure what it believes in at all.