Liturgy Differences
Perhaps you have noticed that during Holy Communion, certain words are added to the end of the Sanctus that are not in the Prayer Book. I am, of course, referring to the words "Blessed is he who cometh in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest." This is one of two notable omissions found in the 1928 and other BCPs. The second omission is the word "Holy" from the Nicene Creed: "And I believe one [Holy] Catholic and Apostolic Church". In this "Pondering", we will examine why these were omitted and why we now include one of them.
Let us begin with the Benedictus at the end of the Sanctus. It is noteworthy that the BCP has not always omitted this. In 1549, Cranmer had included the Benedictus with a slight translation alteration reading, "Blessed is he that commeth in the name of the Lorde: Glory to thee, O lorde in the highest." (Emphasis mine). Additionally, it was always a part of the Sarum Missal without alteration before the Reformation. To understand Cranmer's reasoning for altering and then omitting this, we need to look at the Sanctus in general. The Sanctus is the Seraphic hymn heard by the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 6:3. This angelic hymn is also in Revelation 4:8. A form of this was used in Jewish synagogues before its use in the Church sometime before the end of the 3rd century. Since the 3rd century, it has been found throughout the historic liturgies with the Benedictus added to the end as the Messianic acclaim of our Lord given at His Triumphal entry into Jerusalem in Matthew 21:9. The Benedictus began to be added as an option back into the liturgy at the end of the Sanctus in the English Proposed (1928) and the Scottish (1929) BCP's.
But why did Cranmer change the words and then take them out altogether? It is thought that Cranmer may have been doing one of two things: protecting against bad theology, or because the Benedictus was not part of the angel's words given in Isaiah or Revelation. Besides the words not appearing with the Angelic hymn, “The Annotated Book of Common Prayer,” edited by Rev. John Henry Blunt, says that it is possible that Cranmer was protecting the people from falling back into the Medieval thinking that Christ is being re-sacrificed on the altar. Blunt quotes The Mirror of our Lady [A.D. 1530], which says, "And so [the Benedictus] is sung here in the mass, in worship of our Lord’s coming in the Sacrament of the Altar. And therefore at the beginning of Benedictus ye turn to the altar and make the token of the Cross upon you in mind of our Lord’s Passion, which is specially represented in the Mass." That is, not that they rightly believe that Christ is sacramentally present, but that his sacrifice is made present again. By altering the words from "Hosanna" to "Glory be to thee," it is possible that Cranmer was trying to avoid the imagery of Christ's coming into our midsts and, therefore, move away from the idea of re-sacrificing Christ and the "Romish doctrine of transubstantiation."
The second omission is a little more straightforward. The English Reformation was part of an ad fontes movement. This emphasized a movement back to the sources (i.e., the Bible and the Early Church). Cranmer, when compiling the Book of Common Prayer and its rites, paid careful attention to the ancient liturgies and relied on the best sources and transcripts available to him. When it came to the Nicene Creed, some of the early manuscripts (particularly the Latin manuscripts from Rome and Spain) omit the word "Holy," while other early manuscripts that we have now include it. Back in the 16th century, they had no way to distribute copies of ancient manuscripts en masse. Many reliable manuscripts, not destroyed by fires, floods, and conquests, were in monasteries scattered throughout the Christian world. Cranmer certainly believed the Church to be holy, as is attested by the Apostles' Creed, which says " I believe in...the holy catholic Church." But when it came to the Nicene Creed, he was trying to be faithful to the oldest and best manuscripts he had during his day, whether they were right or wrong, not because he disagreed with the theological statement.
What does all of this mean for us today and the liturgy? Well, I think that it reminds us that Cranmer was compiling this within a certain context. Even Rome has clarified that they do not believe they are re-sacrificing Christ every time they celebrate the Mass. So, we should join our voices with the angels, with Scripture, and with the tradition of the Church in singing the Sanctus and the Benedictus, for Christ our King is really sacramentally present. And whether or not we include "Holy" in the Nicene Creed's "one Catholic and Apostolic Church," we do not disagree with it, and we confess it all the more in the Apostles' Creed.
God's Peace,
Fr. Aaron