Morning & Evening Prayer

13»

Comments

  • If you find a copy of the old Book of Common Prayer as Proposed in 1928 it has an Order for Prime and for Compline in the Appendix.

    Compline is also on the CofE Daily Prayer app, both in 1928 and CW form.
  • SirPalomidesSirPalomides Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    Not sure if this was already mentioned, but just to add more options/ chaos here's the online St Bede's Breviary using the 28/'79 American BCP's with a whole bunch of optional add ons and stylistic preferences.
  • ECraigRECraigR Castaway
    Also a good link, thanks!
  • Gosh. Since my (very recent) conversion, I’ve been praying morning and evening. But I’ve just been making it up as I go along, albeit with some general guidance from my parish priest. I feel like such a rebel ... !
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    edited September 2019
    Good for you @Timo Pax. If you find a set form of Morning and/or Evening Prayer is good and/or helpful for you, then use it. If not, don’t worry about it. (Albeit recognising that there may be some long-established wisdom in the set forms.)
  • Yes. Just because there are set forms doesn't mean you have to use them in private.
  • PDRPDR Shipmate
    We all spend a while casting about finding what works for us. It took me a couple of years to find what works for me, and every now and again it still needs adjustment. I am fairly terrible at winging it, and need a not of external structures. Others are the exact opposite and find than an external structure gets in the way so far as private prayers are concerned.
  • IME what is good at one time of life is not good at another. I cannot even do a progress line with mine, the last change was to incorporate something I stopped doing twenty years ago.
  • Indeed, Jengie Jon ... I am now doing something I stopped doing nearly 40 years ago! And much more serously than I did then! (More "religiously" too!!!)
  • MaryLouiseMaryLouise Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    Yes, @Galilit and @JengieJon my prayer life has been cyclical and not linear. With some constants, prayers and invocations that never lose their appeal.
  • PDRPDR Shipmate
    ECraigR wrote: »
    Matins needs it’s own huge volume? Well my my, maybe I will need to be hardcore! I’ve always wanted to be a monk, after all.

    Matins (a.k.a. - Vigils or Nocturns) is the mule of the monastic schedule and does most of the work. It contains about half of the psalter - including most of the long psalms - during the course of the week, and all of the Patristic readings, and the bulk of the longer Bible readings. Because lectio divina is one of the cornerstones of the monastic tradition, there are fewer long Bible readings in the MB than in the Liturgy of the Hours or the pre-1960 Roman Breviary.

    Compared to the 1960 Breviary Matins, the Monastic version is about twice the length. This morning (Tuesday) the Psalms appointed were:

    1911/60 Roman Breviary: 35 i - ii - iii; 37 i, ii, iii; 38 i, ii; 39
    1961 Monastic: 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 52 (I Nocturn) and 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59 (II Nocturn)

    The RB gets its nine psalms by dividing some of the longer ones, so 35 and 37 are both divided in three. RB Matins also had two short Bible readings, two responsories, and the legend for St Nicholas of Tolentino, and the Te Deum; whereas the MB had two very short Scripture lessons. I am reasonably familiar with the 1954 Anglican Breviary which is a translation/adaption of the 1911 Roman Breviary, and I reckon that on the 1955 or 1960 rubrics Matins usually takes about 20 minutes. The Monastic version is about 30-35 in private recitation; 45 - 50 minutes when you have three nocturns and 12 lessons. Generally speaking the Monastic Kalendar is a lot less crowded than the Roman Breviary or for that matter the 1979 BCP or Common Worship.

    The rest of the day there isn't much to choose between them in terms of length. The Lesser Hours are a bit more elaborate in the RB; in MB Lauds and Vespers are a little more complex, and the Lesser Hours are very simple indeed lacking the responsory of the Roman version, but also tending to have shorter psalms. For example, RB uses Ps. 118 and 119 at Prime, etc., on Sundays whereas MB uses Ps. 119 vv. 1 to 104.

    Which do I prefer?

    I can't stand the language of the modern LOTH - especially the Grail Psalter, which is as ugly in English as I am told the Pian Psalter is in Latin. Certain aspects of it are rather a harsh break from tradition, but it is fairly short - about 40 minutes all told in private recitation - and convenient. I just can't stand the English translation, and my Latin is not up to the original. On the whole, if I wanted a modern language office I would be more likely to go for Common Worship and add a Patristic lesson to MP.

    The Anglican Breviary and the 1911 Roman Breviary are OK, but the Psalter is unforgiving in that the Psalms are spread across all 56 offices said in the course of the week. It also does not help that the lesser Hours are at their longest on Sundays. If you follow the 1960 rules to the letter you loose between two-thirds and five-sixths of the patristic material, as a result I tend to use the 1956 rubrics which leave Sundays nine lesson, but cut the Athanasian Creed, and the prayers before and after the office, but leave the Patristic lessons more or less intact. The whole thing takes 60 to 70 minutes a day, most of it in 5 or 10 minute bursts.

    The Monastic Breviary's challenge is Matins which is going to be 30 to 45 minutes every day. When you have read through Matins of 12 Lessons you can understand why traditionally it takes 90 to 120 minutes to chant in quire. Lauds is fairly substantial - seven psalms, OT and Gospel Canticle - but the rest are fairly brief. As a result MB take 75 to 90 minutes in private recitation, but is harder to learn because no-one has ever thought about anyone actually learning the thing from a book rather than in quire.

    My own bugbear with the Breviaries is Prime, which creates a traffic jam in the morning. This tends to prejudice me against the Anglican Breviary where you cannot dodge Prime (as per post-Vatican II; pre LOTH practice) and do the whole psalter in a week. As a result I tend to end up saying Matins the previous evening (licit) and starting with Lauds, but I cannot say that the prospect of Matins of nine lessons at the end of a busy day fills one with Apostolic zeal. I came up with a quick and dirty fix with the Monastic Diurnal which eases the morning log jam enough.

    Even when I am not on a "Breviary-kick" I will tend to use Prime, etc., from the MB to supplement the BCP Office as I find I do better on the little and often schedule once I have got my morning devotions out of the way.
  • PDRPDR Shipmate
    (Previous post continued...)

    One thing I do have to say is that much of my commentary is very subjective - i.e. it is in the what works for me category. Like most clergy, my available time tends to be in the morning, whilst evenings tend to be a little more crowded, so I tend to favour something that is geared towards the 7am to 9am slot which is when I have quiet time, so Monastic Matins and Lauds work well, then the rest of the day I can 'top-up' on the short hours.

    This parish does not go in for the said office, so on weekdays I am on my own for the office. Sung office on Sundays is a different matter. I have never been able to track down any PECUSA/TEC requirement to read the BCP daily office privately, even though 'your guts are for garters' of you use any but the permitted forms in public worship. As a result, I have tended to take the attitude that what I read in private is very much my business provided it is not at complete variance with the Anglican tradition. The edition of the BM I use is the Society of the Sacred Cross/Community of St Mary version so it has Anglican roots, as reprinted by Lancelot Andrewes Press, though I ignore the WRO bits. I figure that it is close enough.
  • teddybearteddybear Shipmate Posts: 20
    Sometimes I use the Roman Franciscan LOTH or I will use the Franciscan Morning and Evening Praise, which was composed for the use of RC Third Order Regular congregations of sisters or brothers who don't take solemn vows.
  • PDR wrote: »
    We all spend a while casting about finding what works for us. It took me a couple of years to find what works for me, and every now and again it still needs adjustment. I am fairly terrible at winging it, and need a not of external structures. Others are the exact opposite and find than an external structure gets in the way so far as private prayers are concerned.

    I'm an oblate in a Benedictine community, and we use our own community breviary when in our semi-annual convocation, but we're allowed to pray an office that works for us otherwise. I'm terribly undisciplined and inconsistent lately, but what I find goes most smoothly is the BCP 1979 (USA) office. Probably helps that for years I've been a Wednesday-evening officiant in our parish, which definitely has a way of saying the office aloud in church, so all the various choices are easy to make without distraction. I've promised to pray two offices a day (our community's breviary has four). Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner.
  • PDRPDR Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Irrelevant aside

    @Oblatus - I have made several attempts to become a Benedictine Oblate but I always seem to get about halfway through the probationary period and something intervenes - an illness, a house move, a parish move - so I have yet to make it official. In truth I probably pull a bit more towards the Cistercian tradition (aa didn't grow up in Yorkshire for nowt, tha knaws) but I know myself well enough to know that the Benedictine tradition has a profound pull for me. We are all in the same struggle and there is something so perfectly balanced about the Benedictine way which is so simple but yet leads us forwards into the divine.
  • ComplineCompline Shipmate Posts: 19
    I've been getting a lot of mileage out of the Lancelot Andrewes Press edition of the Book of Common (the so-called 2009 BCP) for Morning and Evening Prayer lately. As far as the two main offices go, it's basically a souped-up version of the 1928 American BCP with some Anglo-Catholic additions (such as Marian antiphons at EP), a few more options (such as for OT canticles at MP), and a couple of things added back in from the 1662 (such as "O God make speed to save us" etc. at the start). There's also orders for prime, sext and compline (and of course missal-esque Eucharistic material with some Western Rite Orthodox twists, but that's of no practical use to me).
  • As a former Anglican who was at one time a Novice Oblate of a Benedictine monastery I found it very hard to pray much of the Office on my own. I am awed by the number of posters here who are faithful to a similarly weighty commitment. I gave the book(s) back to the monastery when I became Orthodox.

    Nevertheless, reading this discussion has lead me to look beyond the standard Orthodox prayer book somewhat unvarying morning and evening prayers, so I have begun experimenting with the Dynamic Horologion http://www.liturgy.io/orthodox where I can pick and choose whichever Hour best suits the time I have available that day. I really like the fact that it has the Troparia for the saint(s) of the day according to the Old Calendar that we use at my church.

  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    I think this is the most recent thread on such a topic, even though the last post was over 18 months ago.

    Some news for any shipmates who might be interested.

    The CofE has for some time put Daily Prayer on line in both Common Worship and 1662 versions, with the right psalms and readings and a link to download an app for mobile phone, pad etc. As of the last few days, they have started producing a podcast of the Common Worship iteration. If you already have the app, it has been updated so that you can run the podcast and follow the words. The basic versions of all are free.

    There are also 'mini' versions based on Common Worship Prayer during the Day.

    This is part of a CofE push to encourage people to pray more. At the moment, one can also sign up to receive daily emails on how to pray.

    This is the link. I've no idea whether one can download this from outside the UK, but there's no suggestion that one can't. One is though governed by UK time. Morning Prayer is only available from the small hours (00.15 GMT) and Evening Prayer from the early afternoon (14.00 GMT).

    The podcasts don't include Compline.


  • demasdemas Shipmate
    Jengie Jon wrote: »
    Well for about a century within the Reformed traditions individuals have been publishing their own form of daily prayer; a classic would be A Diary of Prayer by John Baillie

    I've tried several times to follow and stick to this, but find it hard going. Possibly it is simply down to the fact that it is hard for me to be as introspective and self aware as Baillie demands, especially in the evening.

    It does raise the question for me of what all this discussed daily prayer is for. Often it is sold as being like a spiritual tonic - something to make us feel better. Less grumpy. Stronger. Happier.
    Jengie Jon wrote: »
    the URC one1 is in my opinion unuseable

    I hadn't come across this one, so I followed the link. It is, um, interesting. Points for trying to break out of the mold, I suppose, but decidedly not my personal cup of tea. Do you know the history of it?
  • demasdemas Shipmate
    LOL, Enoch's bump confused me totally. Sorry for asking a question based on a two year old post!
  • Ethne AlbaEthne Alba Shipmate
    @Enoch , that is v helpful- thank you
  • MarthaMartha Shipmate
    I have really appreciated the Lectio 365 app from 24-7 Prayer, this past year. It certainly isn't the traditional Anglican offices, but they now have a day prayer and a night prayer each day. I find it has enough the same each day to provide familiarity, and enough different to keep me interested.
  • OblatusOblatus Shipmate
    For those familiar with Paul Hartzell's old Prayer Book Office, which took the USA 1928 BCP offices and put back what Cranmer had deleted centuries before, there's now an improved, much more usable version of that, the Anglican Office Book. (Disclaimer: I have no financial nor other vested interest in people buying this book. I bought one and find it interesting, although in the long run I stick to the modern kalendar).
  • Jengie JonJengie Jon Shipmate
    demas wrote: »
    Jengie Jon wrote: »
    the URC one1 is in my opinion unuseable

    I hadn't come across this one, so I followed the link. It is, um, interesting. Points for trying to break out of the mold, I suppose, but decidedly not my personal cup of tea. Do you know the history of it?

    It is almost certainly the work of an individual minister. There was a time when I might have found out who but that is gone. Both the Daily Prayer and the Evening Prayer, seem to me, to be the sort of prayer you might use at a church weekend or at a conference but not for regular daily use. So that is what I suspect they were designed for originally. With hindsight, I perhaps should have had a go myself at preparing an office for the book myself, but I was only at the start of my journey into doing that then.

  • demasdemas Shipmate
    Ah, thanks @Jengie Jon, that makes sense. And, although I can't see it working for personal private prayer, as I said I do appreciate the attempt at something different.

  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Enoch wrote: »
    I think this is the most recent thread on such a topic, even though the last post was over 18 months ago.

    Some news for any shipmates who might be interested.

    The CofE has for some time put Daily Prayer on line in both Common Worship and 1662 versions, with the right psalms and readings and a link to download an app for mobile phone, pad etc. As of the last few days, they have started producing a podcast of the Common Worship iteration. If you already have the app, it has been updated so that you can run the podcast and follow the words. The basic versions of all are free.

    There are also 'mini' versions based on Common Worship Prayer during the Day.

    This is part of a CofE push to encourage people to pray more. At the moment, one can also sign up to receive daily emails on how to pray.

    This is the link. I've no idea whether one can download this from outside the UK, but there's no suggestion that one can't. One is though governed by UK time. Morning Prayer is only available from the small hours (00.15 GMT) and Evening Prayer from the early afternoon (14.00 GMT).

    The podcasts don't include Compline.
    I don't know how many other shipmates of following this. I have been and find it quite refreshing. One thing that is quite interesting is comparing the different styles of chanting. The services are predominantly said but there is usually at least one piece of unaccompanied music, versicles, the psalm or a canticle. All stick to the text of Common Worship Daily Prayer, which is in itself a bit of a novelty. I had sort of picked up the impression hitherto that the 'serious musicians' imagine that their chants only fit 1662 words.

    I'm not that enthusiastic about chanting and don't know that much about it. I tend to associate it with boredom, as though it is not a coincidence that Te Deum and tedium sound the same. All the same though, the podcasts do enable one to compare different ways of singing prose.

    I suppose this is a matter of personal taste, but I have realised I prefer what I would call 'Anglican chant' compared with chanting in a more plainsong style, rather like pseudo-monks. The singers seem to use more than one style of plainsong, but they all seem much more at odds with the meaning of the words they are singing. It is as though the music has been designed to resonate nicely with the building and sound holy with the words being more or less irrelevant. I suppose they were when they were all in Latin. At least the 'Anglican chant' is more neutral.

    This may be something to do with the lines not ending on the right note - even if one posits that the chants might be composed in a different mode.

    There has been, though, one chant they have used for the Magnificat which sounds as though it just might perhaps have been pinched from - or got its inspiration from - the Russians. It's actually quite a good one.


    Does this shock shipmates who are serious church musicians?

  • questioningquestioning Shipmate
    I've just started using the C of E Daily Prayer app. I'm loving it!
  • Alan29Alan29 Shipmate
    Enoch wrote: »
    Enoch wrote: »
    I think this is the most recent thread on such a topic, even though the last post was over 18 months ago.

    Some news for any shipmates who might be interested.

    The CofE has for some time put Daily Prayer on line in both Common Worship and 1662 versions, with the right psalms and readings and a link to download an app for mobile phone, pad etc. As of the last few days, they have started producing a podcast of the Common Worship iteration. If you already have the app, it has been updated so that you can run the podcast and follow the words. The basic versions of all are free.

    There are also 'mini' versions based on Common Worship Prayer during the Day.

    This is part of a CofE push to encourage people to pray more. At the moment, one can also sign up to receive daily emails on how to pray.

    This is the link. I've no idea whether one can download this from outside the UK, but there's no suggestion that one can't. One is though governed by UK time. Morning Prayer is only available from the small hours (00.15 GMT) and Evening Prayer from the early afternoon (14.00 GMT).

    The podcasts don't include Compline.
    I don't know how many other shipmates of following this. I have been and find it quite refreshing. One thing that is quite interesting is comparing the different styles of chanting. The services are predominantly said but there is usually at least one piece of unaccompanied music, versicles, the psalm or a canticle. All stick to the text of Common Worship Daily Prayer, which is in itself a bit of a novelty. I had sort of picked up the impression hitherto that the 'serious musicians' imagine that their chants only fit 1662 words.

    I'm not that enthusiastic about chanting and don't know that much about it. I tend to associate it with boredom, as though it is not a coincidence that Te Deum and tedium sound the same. All the same though, the podcasts do enable one to compare different ways of singing prose.

    I suppose this is a matter of personal taste, but I have realised I prefer what I would call 'Anglican chant' compared with chanting in a more plainsong style, rather like pseudo-monks. The singers seem to use more than one style of plainsong, but they all seem much more at odds with the meaning of the words they are singing. It is as though the music has been designed to resonate nicely with the building and sound holy with the words being more or less irrelevant. I suppose they were when they were all in Latin. At least the 'Anglican chant' is more neutral.

    This may be something to do with the lines not ending on the right note - even if one posits that the chants might be composed in a different mode.

    There has been, though, one chant they have used for the Magnificat which sounds as though it just might perhaps have been pinched from - or got its inspiration from - the Russians. It's actually quite a good one.


    Does this shock shipmates who are serious church musicians?

    I think the idea behind chanting is that it is all about the words and not the music. The music just becomes the vehicle for carrying the words and not a thing that draws attention to itself. I plainsong the eight modes have a different feel to them to underline the overall sentiment of the psalm, and mercifully they don't do that Anglican Chant thing of going from major to minor for the happy verses of a miserable psalm.
    And chanting is deffo a thing that is meant to be done and not a thing that is meant to be just listened to.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    There was rather a good setting of the Lord's Prayer last night (Saturday 22nd May) which I hadn't heard them use before.
  • ZappaZappa Ecclesiantics Host
    Enoch wrote: »

    I'm not that enthusiastic about chanting and don't know that much about it. I tend to associate it with boredom, as though it is not a coincidence that Te Deum and tedium sound the same. All the same though, the podcasts do enable one to compare different ways of singing prose.

    I suppose this is a matter of personal taste, but I have realised I prefer what I would call 'Anglican chant' compared with chanting in a more plainsong style, rather like pseudo-monks. The singers seem to use more than one style of plainsong, but they all seem much more at odds with the meaning of the words they are singing. It is as though the music has been designed to resonate nicely with the building and sound holy with the words being more or less irrelevant. I suppose they were when they were all in Latin. At least the 'Anglican chant' is more neutral.

    This may be something to do with the lines not ending on the right note - even if one posits that the chants might be composed in a different mode.

    There has been, though, one chant they have used for the Magnificat which sounds as though it just might perhaps have been pinched from - or got its inspiration from - the Russians. It's actually quite a good one.


    Does this shock shipmates who are serious church musicians?

    Not this shippie. My taste in music is catholic, but I have no understanding of the stuff. nevertheless I sang in choirs, because apparently I have an acceptable voice. I can roughly tell when a tune goes up or down, how much it does so and how long it stays there. If it wobbles too much I hate it (yes I'm looking at you Mariah Carrey, and all you vibrato wobblers too, Joan Baez, Kiri te Kanawa, whoever).

    I hated Anglican chant when I sang in choirs. I hate it now. It drones along, seems randomly to slither up or down, often at ridiculous points in the (literary) phrase, and if I hadn't some sort of memory of the week's choir practice (oh look it slides down half a something in the middle of some random word then I would mime and hope some other tenors turned up. I preferred plainsong when I discovered it some years later (though I discovered Taizé before that and warmed to it). I never really "got" harmony - four different groups in the choir seemed to sing different tunes and somehow they fitted together, except when they didin't. I loved and love stirring hymn, though I prefer the words to have some sort of theological and spiritual meaning. I even like some written since 1920.

    But give me Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen (Bob Dylan, of course, too) or even the bloody [Dixie] Chicks any day. I can sing or think along to them whenever no one else is around. And I can to good old unison tunes in church, too. They too draw me to closer to my God. And I can always snooze/play with my phone* when the choir if god forbid there be one wobble around some obscure Latin ditty 36 times. Which is what they do when I preach/pray/preside so I suppose it's fair.

    *Actually I don't, but oh dear God I want to.

  • ThunderBunkThunderBunk Shipmate
    I was going to say that no display of proud clerical ignorance about music shocks me. Still true, just about. And yet no-one who is not ordained knows anything about liturgy, apparently.
  • TheOrganistTheOrganist Shipmate
    I was going to say that no display of proud clerical ignorance about music shocks me. Still true, just about. And yet no-one who is not ordained knows anything about liturgy, apparently.

    👏👏👏
  • PDRPDR Shipmate
    edited June 11
    Rossweisse wrote: »
    ...Cranmer was NOT INFALLIBLE! ...
    Close enough...

    Not infallible. But still a bloody genius and light years ahead of many (most?) modern liturgists.

    It saddens me when clergy I know talk dismissively about Cranmer and his liturgies and approvingly of "with it" liturgies that are wordy, clunky and just plain dull.

    MP and EP are brilliant on anyone's terms, though some clergy do succeed in messing them up quite badly, usually by letting the 'relevance' idol intrude too much.

    On the other hand, when it comes to the Communion service you have to accept Cranmer on his own terms. I am fairly Protestant in my outlook, so I am happy with the structure of the 1662 Communion service because I largely share Cranmer's theology. It's progress through the hearing of the Law, the proclamation of the Word, the preaching of the Gospel, through to repentance, absolution, and the Lord's Supper is an excellent expression of the Evangelical theology of the Lord's Supper as held by Bucer, Cranmer, and some French chap called Calvin who some folks seem to rate.

    I am surprised how many folks in my parish read some form of MP and EP. Some read the (1928 BCP) BCP office, others the Family Prayers out of the back of the book, and one of them reads Matins and Vespers from the 1941 Lutheran Hymnal. Of course, none of us would actually say anything about doing it unless specifically asked about it, but then you expect that of Anglicans.
  • ZappaZappa Ecclesiantics Host
    I was going to say that no display of proud clerical ignorance about music shocks me. Still true, just about. And yet no-one who is not ordained knows anything about liturgy, apparently.

    I wouldn't say it was "proud" ignorance in my case. I lament that I just don't get the spider's feet stuff. Or the wavelengths somehow changing and working or not working stuff.

    I'm "proud" that I don't get racial hatred. I lament that I don't get music - though I love listening to it.

    As for liturgy - I don't consider it a masonic secret. But like rugby there's a couple of ways of doing it.
  • Zappa wrote: »
    But like rugby there's a couple of ways of doing it.

    Indeed. Properly and the Other Way. ;)
  • PDRPDR Shipmate
    Zappa wrote: »
    But like rugby there's a couple of ways of doing it.

    Indeed. Properly and the Other Way. ;)

    I was thinking more 'League' and 'Union.' Being from 'Oop North' I am a League man myself.
  • PDR wrote: »
    Zappa wrote: »
    But like rugby there's a couple of ways of doing it.

    Indeed. Properly and the Other Way. ;)

    I was thinking more 'League' and 'Union.' Being from 'Oop North' I am a League man myself.

    Being from "daan sarf" (and having Welsh ancestry) my "properly" was of course referring to Union. If it doesn't involve the referee organising group wrestling matches it ain't rugby. ;)
  • I entirely agree with @Zappa 's classification of the (Dixie) Chicks, although I would also add Storm Large, whose "Angels in Gast Stations" is a remarkable sung meditation on death (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siWUidAlBqQ).

    More to the OP, over the pandemic I've been in occasional contact -- not much else being available-- with observant Anglican friends in the area. Such haphazard polling doesn't even constitute anecdotology, but like @PDR I note that Evening Prayer predominates in their practice. The two who spoke to me of reading Scripture told me that they followed the EP lessons, and one downloaded the day's psalm in various versions for her 5km walks-with-dogs. One told me that her Muslim partner sometimes joined her for the psalm reading, as mosque attendance was impractical for her. Another, when I asked why he preferred evening prayer, said it was practical for him to manage, with readings well-set out. Two other Anglicans attend local Latin churches, as limited attendance-by-registration is permitted--- their clergy are sympathetic and supportive (the Anglican diocese has just permitted limited outdoor services as of June 9).

    The franchise I frequent has FB webcast morning and evening prayer most days over the past year, with some major services on youtube (Ascension got 56 viewers, and Pentecost 63). It will likely not be until the autumn that we can see how our local interdict will have affected attendance and at what services.
  • Circuit RiderCircuit Rider Shipmate Posts: 6
    Not sure if this was already mentioned, but just to add more options/ chaos here's the online St Bede's Breviary using the 28/'79 American BCP's with a whole bunch of optional add ons and stylistic preferences.

    I really like this! Thank you!
Sign In or Register to comment.