Anglican Use Mass – differences? Similarities?

Yesterday at the USCCB meeting it was announced that the Anglican Ordinariate for the USA would be set up officially on 1 January 2012 according to the provisions in Pope Benedict’s Anglicanorum coetibus.

I get questions occasionally about the liturgical worship of former Anglicans who are now in union with Rome.  I must admit I don’t know much about it.

Today, however, someone sent a link to a page with two embedded videos.  One of them shows the consecration during an Anglican Use Mass.


It might be helpful for the whole readership here, and for me, to have a discussion of some of the differences and similarities of Anglican Use worship and the Roman Rite.

And Benedict XVI is the Pope of Christian Unity.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. pledbet424 says:

    Wow. I didn’t realize that Anglicans worshipped this way. If I didn’t know otherwise, I would have thought I was looking at a traditional Catholic chapel. They seem more catholic than many “Catholic” parishes I’ve attended Mass at through the years. Let them in the Church by any and all means.

  2. jhayes says:

    The “Book of Divine Worship” is online at

    According to Cardinal Wuerl’s speech this week, The Ordinariate will have the option of using either this or the Roman Missal.

  3. jhayes says:

    The “Book of Divine Worship” is online at

    According to Cardinal Wuerl’s speech this week, The Ordinariate will have the option of using either this or the Roman Missal.

  4. pledbet424: They seem more catholic than many “Catholic” parishes

    And that, friend, is why they had such a cold shoulder from some church authorities under the Pastoral Provision.

  5. pledbet424 says:

    I for one will be glad to have them in the Church. If there is one of these parishes in the Denver area, and they become Catholic, I will attend one of their Masses gladly.

  6. Thomas in MD says:

    Maniple alert!

  7. aladextra says:

    The Book of Divine Worship will probably be augmented by a new Missal for the use of ordinariates currently being assembled at Rome. The BDW is recognized as a a bit of a mish-mash that has great value, but is not ideal, by most existing Anglican Use communities. I think we can look forward to an even more improved rite, (for one in accordance with Liturgicam Authenticam) for the use of the ordinariates at some point in the next year or two. Unfortunately the Eucharistic Prayer translations are just pasted in from the Novus Ordo 1970 translation. Simply updating it with the new translation would be a start.

  8. RichardT says:

    There is an interesting lecture on Ordinariate worship here, by Mgr Burnham:

    It seems that the Ordinariate in England will not use the (American) Anglican Use, but is preparing (with the various Vatican dicasteries) a new use (or is it a new form?).

    I don’t know whether the American Ordinariate will use that or the existing Anglican Use, or indeed something else.

  9. Gil Garza says:

    The Anglican Use is a usage of the Roman Rite. This is why it’s called the Anglican Use. Anglicans in England are more likely to celebrate the Holy Mass using the Roman Missal which is exactly what you see in the video. The 4th Eucharistic prayer is heard according to the new 3rd Edition of the Roman Missal. What you are seeing isn’t the Anglican Use ritual (aka Book of Divine Worship). Rather, it is simply the new translation of the Roman Missal.

  10. A video of a complete Anglican Use Mass gives a better sense of its special features than just the brief video of the consecration. E.g.,

    This might remind you more of a solemn high Tridentine Mass than any Novus Ordo Mass you’ve seen.

  11. AnnAsher says:

    When the Anglican Use Mass becomes available near where I attend TLM I am going to go check it out in person. Interesting – they are being “housed” by the most liberal, liturgical dancingest, TLM hatingest, parish in the Diocese.

  12. AnAmericanMother says:

    I’ve never heard the hymn Nicaea used for the Sanctus (it’s in Hymns A&M and well known to most Anglicans/Episcopalians) but it works all right.
    What is noteworthy for Catholics is — that’s the congregation singing. It can be done.
    Just about any “high” Anglican/Episcopal parish (whether under the Pastoral Provision or still contemplating Going Straight Over to Rome) will celebrate ad orientem, use the correct vestments, incense, chant, etc. They will also use the “old” prayer book (1662 or 1928) with suitable amendments to the Eucharistic Prayer, etc. that was meddled with by Edward VI & his naughty crew.
    If you want to see an entire Mass, here’s a video. This is Our Lady of the Atonement in Houston TX. More conventional Anglican chant (unison or parts) is used for the Sanctus and other Mass parts.
    The old 1940 Hymnal is a gold mine of Mass parts. There’s an entire section of settings in the back, including Gregorian (although they don’t CALL it Gregorian, just like our parish doesn’t call our psalm settings “Anglican Chant”.)

  13. AnAmericanMother says:

    Henry Edwards,
    Great minds travel the same channels . . . at least on YouTube!
    A friend of mine is a parishioner at Atonement. She sent me the DVD from which that video is taken, and I passed it on to the rector of our local nosebleed-high Episcopal parish. He later became the chaplain of the Episcopal sisters who converted recently, and I understand he has now completed seminary and has been ordained as a Catholic priest.
    Sooner or later, all the faithful Episcopalians and Anglicans are going to wind up back in the fold. Some of us just take a more roundabout way than others.

  14. AnnAsher says:

    @an American Mother – interesting to know it is the congregation singing as in the Byzantine Catholic Divine Liturgy as well. When the congregation tries to chant where I go to TLM it sounds like an awful mess. We’ve been silenced. ;)

  15. Seamus says:

    “Unfortunately the Eucharistic Prayer translations are just pasted in from the Novus Ordo 1970 translation. Simply updating it with the new translation would be a start.”

    Actually, pp. 314-320 of the Book of Divine Worship contains an “Old English Translation” of the Roman Canon that is very nice and gives the new ICEL translation a run for its money. (“Old English,” by the way, appears merely to mean “traditional, KJV-ish English,” not Anglo-Saxon.) When I first attended an Anglican Use Mass, I heard the words “Remember, O Lord, . . . all who here around us stand,” I had a pleasant shock of recognition, for this was a literal translation of the Latin “Meménto, Dómine, . . . ómnium circumstántium,” which I think is much more evocative than the new translation, which instead says, “Remember, Lord, . . . all gathered here.”

  16. AnAmericanMother says:

    The “high churchers” here who had not yet converted took matters into their own hands, there was a lot of ad-libbing going on.
    The nosebleed-high parish I used to attend used the 1662 BCP, but for the consecration used a seventeenth-century-sounding translation of the Latin of the Sarum Rite (that was according to the rector, who is the gentleman I mentioned above). I was never able to discover exactly who was responsible for that translation (we were around the corner from Emory University so it may have been a sympathetic individual in the Classics department), but it was much better than the awful patch job currently in use.

  17. jaykay says:

    I had come across the website of the Anglican Use parish of Our Lady of Walsingham – also in Houston – some years ago, and was intrigued at the liturgical resources on the site. One of these is their Missal, at this link:

    It seems to me to be basically the Book of Common Prayer/Book of Divine Worship with the Roman rite Preparation of the Gifts inserted in its modern 1970 format, and then using a “sacral” language for the Roman Canon, before reverting to the BDW format for the Communion rite, including the Prayer of Humble Access (” We do not presume to come to this, Thy table, …”)

    This is described as “Rite One”, so perhaps there is another rite, maybe with modernised language? However, it’s not given on the website.

    This Missal dates from 2003 so I presume they’ll be updating the parts taken from the Roman Missal in line with the recent changes?

  18. AnAmericanMother says:

    Do they always use the same chant for the ordinary of the Mass?
    I really think the key to getting the congregation singing is to use the same, simple chant EVERY Sunday, insofar as that’s possible. It can be a bit dull for the choir (and I suppose for the celebrant) but the steady repetition of music that is easy for the average untrained person to sing will get them singing. We always chant the “Our Father” to the Missa de Angelis setting, in every Mass (whether Latin or English), and a visitor commented to me a couple of weeks ago that our congregation was singing it very enthusiastically. (Of course, that may have been because a religious education class of 60-75 middle schoolers was visiting from the Methodists and everybody figured they better sing or be shamed . . . :-D )
    (that’s the real problem with a lot of the “pop” music in use in many Catholic parishes. It is actually quite difficult to sing, with all the awkward leaps, syncopation, etc. I’d rather sing Palestrina than Joncas any day. Musically consistent, sensible, predictable. What a relief!)

  19. dominic1955 says:

    I’ve been to the local TAC church in my town, and they use the Anglican/American (can’t remember which one) Missal which is basically just a traditionally worded translation of our traditional Mass though it had some sort of bidding prayers in the middle of it. The pastor uses the Anglican Breviary which is likewise a traditionally worded translation of the old pre-55 Breviarium. He also told me they did the Sarum Rite once in a while as well. I basically told the pastor what the first poster in this thread said, you guys, though Anglicans, look a lot more “Catholic” than any of our own Roman Rite parishes save the FSSP parish.

    I really wish these Ordinariates would use these translations of the old Mass and the Sarum Rite. The BDW is just basically a fancied-up NO.

    I also still wonder what really is this “Anglican Patrimony” anyway? The priest in the video is wearing a fiddleback, how much more “Roman” can you get? Much of the Anglo-Catholic/Oxford Movement adherents adopted a very Italianate Catholicism which doesn’t exactly make me think “English” but whatever.

  20. jhayes says:

    One of the commenters on the YouTube site (apparently a parishioner) said that they use the liturgy in the video for three Masses each Sunday and the Latin Novus Ordo for the fourth.

  21. AnAmericanMother says:

    The “Rite One”/”Rite Two” stuff is a holdover from the notorious Episcopalian prayer book revision of the late 60s and early 70s.
    The liturgical committee of the national church started by attempting to stuff down our throats a banal translation that is so suspiciously similar to the “lame duck” Catholic translation that I suspect a conspiracy (or at least a common origin).
    The problem was that Episcopalians (unlike the Catholics) had been using a good English translation for three hundred years (the 1662/1928 BCP) and knew better. Pledges were revoked, endowments were yanked, people left in droves, new denominations were formed, screaming matches were held in the vestry, etc. etc.
    It was getting down to pitchfork-and-torches time, so a ‘compromise’ was reached in the 1979 BCP: “Rite II” is the modern version, “Rite I” preserved most (though not all) of the 1928 BCP. Like all Episcopalian compromises, it didn’t really work. The ‘modern and with-it’ parishes went exclusively to Rite II, while the nosebleed-high and the traditional (not the same thing – you can be Low Church and very traditional, those are the folks who are going to the evangelicals) stuck with Rite I.

  22. irishgirl says:

    Very interesting, watching the clip. I don’t think I’ve seen an Anglican Use Mass ‘in action’.
    I recognized the tune for the Sanctus: ‘Holy, Holy, Holy’, composed by Reginald Heber. Pretty cool adaptation!
    An American Mother-how ‘nosebleed-high’ was your old Episcopal / Anglican parish?
    I’d like to know, if and when there’s an Anglican Ordinariate parish in my area, it would be all right to attend one of their Masses. As far as I know, I have not heard of any local Episcopalians who want to ‘swim the Tiber’ and join the Ordinariate.

  23. John UK says:

    Interestingly, this is not the BDW, but the newly-corrected translation – Eucharistic Prayer IV. If I am not mistaken, this is from the Ordinariate of Our Lady in Walsingham, Tunbridge Wells Group, meeting in Pembury, see –
    and the celebrant is Fr.Ed.Tomlinson, who took a coetus into the Ordinariate earlier this year.

    What it does give is some idea of Anglican ars celebrandi

    Henry and others have posted links to the BDW in action.

    Kind regards,
    John U.K.

  24. jaykay says:

    “It was getting down to pitchfork-and-torches time,”

    Love it, AnAmericanMother :)

    Thanks for that explanation. I did suspect that a large element of cut-and-paste was behind it. Yes, I agree that that format is very patchy. For example, the 1970 Roman Preparation of Gifts jars a lot with the traditional Sanctus and Canon. Even if they insert the new revised “Preparation” it’ll still stick out, because of the lack of the “thees and thous”.

    John UK: thanks for that explanation that the “new” EPIV was being used in the video. Wow! It certainly shows how the new translations, when declaimed properly and reverently, are very worthy indeed.

    Of course, ad orientem helps. A lot.

  25. I had helped out with the Kansas City Anglican Use Parish when it was getting started.
    I helped Fr. Ernie and others get started and serve at the Anglican use mass.
    I really found it quite prayerful and edifying.

    I miss helping out in the parish and Serving as well, but You can catch some images and videos that I had taken on my Flickr that can be found here:

    This Video shows quite a bit of the Canon: if you can excuse my baby grunting in the background.

    As time went out we would have more Solemn Liturgies but these were taken from some of the early days when we were just starting out.

    Hope this helps some of you, and please say a Prayer for Fr. Ernie Davis and the KC Anglican Use Community.

  26. acardnal says:

    Cardinal Wuerl was asked by a bishop at the USCCB conference yesterday if attending Mass at a church in the new Ordinariate would satisfy one’s Sunday obligation and he replied in the affirmative. Although they will be using approved Anglican liturgical texts, the Ordinariate is a part of the Catholic Church. Hooray! Can’t wait to go.

  27. AnAmericanMother says:

    You can skip around through the whole Mass in that link from Atonement. You can get a little more flavor of the traditional Anglican ceremonial there – berettas deployed in the processional, kneelings, bowings, incense, Gospel procession (and a chanted Gospel with responses) etc. The Kyrie is a very pretty English setting that we used to sing in our old parish.
    We had two parishes — one was about as high as it is possible to get, the classic “more-Roman-than-Rome” parish – Our Saviour Virginia-Highlands. There’s a family story about the first time we attended that parish as a newlywed couple, husband was still a Methodist. The incense, chanting, Rosary, lady-altar and all the rest freaked him out pretty badly, and then the rector (Fr. Roy Pettway, may he rest in peace) preached on Purgatory!
    We moved to the other side of town, and our new parish was still very “high” in ritual – although they only brought out the incense for high holy days. Was always less theologically Catholic, although still (in the beginning) pretty orthodox. We lasted through several rectors, each less high and more heterodox than the last — the parish followed the downward track of the national church pretty closely, only a few years behind.
    Since there’s a pastoral provision, I would think attendance at an Anglican Use Mass ought to fulfill your obligation, so long as the parish and priest have actually been received into the Church. Sometimes it’s hard to tell, so I would ask!!! I would think anybody who had wandered into Our Saviour back in the days when Fr. Pettway was the rector would have sworn on a stack of Catechisms that they were in a Catholic church!

  28. Thanks also John UK. That explains why the video Father Z posted did not sound like Anglican Use to me (since it’s not). I’ve heard that many Anglo Catholics in the UK use the Novus Ordo instead of the so-called Anglican Use liturgy. Whereas many in the US use not the (Anglican Use) Book of Divine Worship but the Anglican Missal (aka Knott Missal), which is the Tridentine missal translated into Elizabethan English.

  29. Daniel says:

    I believe that all of the Anglican Use parishes in the United States may use an RSV Lectionary that had been produced by Ignatius Press. There was a recent story that they had bought the existing stock from Ignatius and had made them available to the Ordinariate in England.

    It’s not altogether clear to me as when Anglicanorum Coetibus was announced a Book of Divine Worship was displayed in one of the following press conferences as being the basis upon which any liturgy might eventually be developed from. It seems more recently it has been said that the BDW is only approved for use in the United States. I take it that means that it is not permitted to be used in England and their only choice is either the Ordinary or Extraordinary form of the Roman Missal? Apparently the BDW has somewhat of a U.S. flavor to it, being developed from the Book of Common Prayer as had been adapted by the Episcopal Church.

    In a recent story about the development of the BDW, it was mentioned that the only texts that were permitted to be considered to become part of it were ones that had been approved for use by the Anglican Communion. It was said that various Anglican Missals that were in common use at the time did not actually have official approval by the Anglican Communion, and therefore were not allowed to be considered for the BDW. It seems that they might have otherwise liked to have used Offertory prayers from it, and were instead required to use those from the Roman Missal.

  30. RichR says:

    While in dental school in San Antonio, TX I was a member of the Anglican Use flagship parish, Our Lady of the Atonement. It was heaven on earth. It truly was my oasis of sanity during a very stressful time of my life. Many weeks, I’d just barely hang in there with my daily struggles because I could say, “Only X number of days until Sunday Mass.”

    Quite frankly, I prefer that liturgy to a TLM or NOM. Hieratic English, ad orientem, beautiful singing, adult male altar servers, altar rails, amazing architecture and homilies to boot.

    If you have the chance to visit one of these parishes, by all means do so.

  31. Daniel says:

    Our Lady of the Atonement is actually in San Antonio, and Our Lady of Walsingham (the parish) in Houston.

    The vast majority of the new translation that effects the responses by the congregation won’t effect the BDW. They have always responded “And with thy spirit”, “Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldst come under my roof, but speak but the word and my soul shalt be healed”, etc. The changes being made to the Gloria and Creed will basically be to what the BDW had always used. The one thing that I’ve heard will be changing is the Memorial Acclamation, where “Christ had died, Christ has risen, Christ will come again” had been used. I’m not sure what the parish will use, though the tune has been the one set for the Latin which translates to the “We proclaim your death O Lord…”

  32. pfreddys says:

    Uh, oh, they use “for you and for all” in the consecration of the wine. Hopefully, they will soon correct that. Just as in only eleven day we will finally have that corrected.

  33. Sister H. says:

    TWO QUESTIONS – 1. Can any ordinary Catholic join an Anglican Ordinariate parish?
    2. Where can we find a list of parishes that will be joining the Ordinariate (hoping for one in my area!)?

  34. John UK says:

    (please note I write from the UK, and am not familar with developments on your side of the big pond)

    From the 17th.century, there were some adaptations of the Book of Common Prayer Order for Holy Communion such as restoring the Prayer of Oblation to the body of the Canon, but that was more or less all that was done until the 19th century (in the 18th century there were considerable revisions done by the Non-Jurors, a body who left the Church of England after the Revolution of 1688 (so called for they were unable in conscience to take the oath of allegiance to the new monarchs, William and Mary) and by other groups outside the C.of E. The Episcopal Church in Scotland was distinct from the C.of E. and also revised the BCP, and as the Episcopal Church in the United States derived its episcopal orders from the Church in Scotland, it was the Scottish Liturgy which heavily influenced the American Prayer Book.
    To return to England, from the 19th.century onwards the habit of unofficially supplementing the BCP from older sources, either <Missale Romanum or the Sarum Misal, became widespread among high churchmen.
    This resulted in the publication of The English Missal, published by Knott in 1912, which ran into five editions of the Altar size, and of The Anglican Missal published by the Society of St.Peter & St.Paul in 1921, which had a slightly different translation and had more Anglican Canons. Both were also produced in pew-size editions for the laity. The altar-books were
    handsomely typeset in red and black and the plainchant was particularly fine.
    The Anglican Missal is online at
    and the English Missal (reset) in parts at (side-by-side with the Latin) and (propers).
    In a crude nutshell, 2 groups emerged amongst Anglo-Catholics: both treated the Reformation as being an act of the state, and therefore to be ignored liturgically (other than the vernacular). One group saw the consequence of this as a need to return to Sarum, the other saw in contemporary Roman liturgy how the rite in England would have evolved had there been no Reformation.
    Following Vatican II, many English anglo-catholic clergy of the latter group therefore adopted the legitimate vernacular of the revised Roman rite as hteir mark of catholc understanding.
    In America, in contrast, it seems as some have pointed out, there was an identification of ICET English with the aberations of theology and catholic order which were then (1970s) in the Episcopal Church, and therefore loyalty to the existing translations was seen as a mark of catholic understanding.
    By the time the Church of England caught up with the US, 20-30 years later, the use of the revised Roman rites was widely established – hence the use by Fr.Ed and others of the Roman Missal before and after entering the Ordinariate.

    Interesting to see how the Anglican Use continues to use the solemn and ferial chants of the Missale Romanum Prefaces, unlike the hybrid of the new Roman Missal (though an improvement on what went before).

    Kind regards,
    John U.K.

  35. bernadettem says:

    Actually if you compare the Canon to the Sarum Use it is almost exactly the same, which is the Gregorian Canon used in the Traditional Latin Masses. Rome decided to take some of the responses from the 1979 BCP and the Ordinary Form. This was not what the Anglican Use priests desired, and they have done an excellent job of keeping the flow with what they were given.

    There is only one AU parish that uses Rite II and the priest is from England. Rome is now working on a revised version for the Anglican Ordinariate and hopefully one of the Missals will be used. There might be a different usage in England than in the US, as Anglicans have always used more than one liturgy throughout the world.

    If Rome bases the new liturgy on a missal and the BDW, the result will be very close to the EF in English.

    At OLA and other AU parishes there are Latin Rite Catholics who actually are registered there. I think in time Catholics who wish to belong to these parishes will have no problem joining one.

    I am waiting to see if my Bishop who I have been told was against the Ordinariate and he is also against celebrating the TLM, will be changing his attitude now that the Holy Father has spoken. My parish is very traditional and the Bishop is not friendly to us. Thank God that the CDF will be the authority that the Ordinariates are under and not the local Ordinary. I think it is just in many cases ignorance of what the Anglican Use is and this is why so many bishops have not been open, also many are not conservative regarding the liturgy.

  36. Centristian says:

    I’ve always been a fan of the Anglican style of worship and so I think it’s great that that style has been welcomed, more and more, now, since Anglicanorum Coetibus, into the Latin Rite. The precision involved in high English pomp and ceremony, the robed sextons and wanded vergers, the robed and surpliced choirs, the coped and homilists, the unbelievably dexterous thurifers, the vimped croziers, the velvet birettas, the embroidered altar rail cushions, the formal Elizabethan English…all of that is just right up my liturgical alley, I have to confess. I would really love to be able to attend an Anglican Use liturgy (regardless of which approved book is used) on a regular basis, therfore. They are few and far between at the moment in the USA, however (as are Anglicans, generally, and Anglicans who have swum the Tiber, particularly).

    Any time I’ve ever been to a “broad church” Episcopalian service, even those have impressed me as more “Catholic” looking and sounding than your typical Roman Catholic Mass (despite the presence of female clergy), which, of course, is a sad thing to acknowledge. Beyond typical “broad church” Anglican worship, “high church” Anglican liturgy can be, to the casual observer, almost indistinguishable, at times, from the pre-Conciliar Roman Catholic liturgy in its externals (with the exception of the language, of course). Fiddleback chasubles, birettas, incense, lace, and all the rest of the pre-V2 liturgical eye candy (and nose candy) tend to abound in both “high church” Anglican (Protestant) and Anglican Use (Roman Catholic) worship.

    Attending an Anglican service, a Catholic can only observe, of course, and not participate since it simply isn’t kosher. I always refrain from participating with a heavy heart, however, since it all seems so much more like the way a Catholic ought to worship than the way a Catholic typically does worship! I hope, therefore, that one day an Anglican Use worship site will materialize within driving distance of where I live, so that I may have the opportunity to licitly worship in that high English style that I so admire, and which, I think, so enriches our Latin Rite by its inclusion.

  37. Martial Artist says:

    @Sister H.,

    This Google Map of Emerging Anglo Catholic Ordinariates Worldwide shows all of the parishes believed by the map’s creator as likely to become a part of the relevant Ordinariate. Most are in the UK and North America.

    The map appears to have been updated as recently as 3 days ago. I hope that is of some help to you.

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  38. ChrisWhittle says:

    The Anglican Use Mass is similar in ritual to the Traditional Latin Mass except that it’s done in Elizabethian English.

  39. smcollinsus says:

    pfreddys: The Anglican Use had no choice but to use “for you and for all”. Other ‘narative’ parts of the Eucharistic Prayer are in traditional English. But the ‘words of institution’ needed to exactly the same as all other churches in union with Rome. So, I’m sure it will be corrected very soon.

  40. Conchur says:

    The BDW has been approved by Msgr Newton for use in the UK by those of a Prayer Book background who wish to use it. Fr Jonathan Redvers-Harris of the Isle of Wight & Portsmouth Ordinariate Group uses it.

  41. jhayes says:

    Regarding joining an ordinariate parish (this is from a blog rather than an official source. I can’t vouch for its accuracy, although it sounds plausible).

    General Roman Catholics in the United States will be free to attend Anglican ordinariate parishes, societies and missions. They may even become members of such groups, though they themselves will remain under the episcopal authority of their diocesan bishop. They will not be eligible for ordinariate membership unless they have immediate family who are already within the ordinariate. That being said, Roman Catholics who marry Anglican Catholics, or who baptize their children in an ordinariate parish, will then have access to membership in the ordinariate in addition to parish membership. Let me reiterate, a general Roman Catholic DOES NOT need to be a member of the ordinariate to be a member of an ordinariate parish. Parish membership and ordinariate membership are separate. That being said, a young Roman Catholic married couple could easily join an ordinariate parish as full members, even though they would still be under the episcopal authority of their Roman diocesan bishop. Then the couple could baptize their newborn children in that same ordinariate parish, if they so desire, and that would make their children automatically ordinariate members as well as parish members. Then the parental couple could themselves apply for ordinairate membership, if they so desire, because their children are already members of the ordinariate by baptism…..

    Full Article

  42. Stephen D says:

    The priest in the video is Fr. Ed Tomlinson, a great chap with some interesting insights on his blog.

  43. BobP says:

    Sorry but there is only one 1962 Missal and it’s in Latin. There are no substitutes.

  44. Henry Edwards wrote:

    Whereas many in the US use not the (Anglican Use) Book of Divine Worship but the Anglican Missal (aka Knott Missal), which is the Tridentine missal translated into Elizabethan English.

    This was the missal used by the All Saints Sisters in Catonsville prior to their conversion to Rome. Also known as the “Missale Anglicanum”, it does follow the Tridentine model, but with an Edwardian canon (IIRC) in addition to the Roman Canon (in Latin in an appendix). “Knott” is a reference to the publisher. It also has the “Collect for Purity,” the “Prayer of Humble Access” and other Anglican elements. Ironically, it was this Mass during my visits to the sisters which brought me back to the Traditional Latin Mass.

    The missal has in recent years benefited from a reprint, and you will probably be hearing more about it, as the current climate in relations with Rome would put its use in a more favorable light.

  45. At our Anglican Use parish in Boston St. Athanasius, we have three different ordinaries that we use throughout the year. For Christmas, Epiphanytide and Eastertide (and major feast days such as Annunciation), we use the 2nd Communion Service found in the Hymnal 1940 composed by Healy Willan. During Advent and Lent, we use the 4th Communion Service, which is based on Missa IX (Cum Jubilo). During the rest of the year we use the 5th Communion Service by Leo Sowerby, with the Gloria from the Scottish chant psalter. The congregation has no problem at all singing along.
    We also, in addition to hymns, have a small schola that chants the Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Offertory and Communion. These are taken from the Anglican Use Gradual and from a not quite published Communion Chants book (which has the antiphon from the AUG with the appropriate psalm verses for a longer chanting during communion).

  46. edm says:

    Forgive me, but I see very little in this video that is what has been described in many places as “Anglican Patrimony”. The text isn’t even remotely Anglican. The music isn’t a true setting of the ordinary but rather a hymn tune. The ritual at the altar is neither that of a “typical” (even with allowances for local variance) Sung or High Mass. Looks like a hybrid. The ritual by the people isn’t the usual either, for example, standing up to recite the Creed (which in a typical Sung or High Mass would have been sung, not said). I would not offer this as an example of what the liturgy of the Ordinariate should be.

  47. Fr Martin Fox says:

    I’m curious: as it is a usage of the Roman Rite, does that mean any Roman priest may celebrate this liturgy? Or are there restrictions? I realize he’d need to learn it.

  48. jhayes says:

    Fr. Christopher Phillips , who was a member of the committee that produced the Book of Divine Worship, argues for more use of the Missals in constructing the new liturgy for the Ordinariates.

    The various editions of the Anglican Missals are undoubtedly part of Anglican tradition, since their very purpose was to enhance and enrich the Prayer Book liturgy, moving it in a more Catholic direction. These Missals were used by Anglo-Catholics within the Anglican Communion throughout the world. Those of us who entered into full communion through Blessed John Paul’s Pastoral Provision a generation ago, were using some version of the Anglican Missal up until the time of our reception, and those Anglicans awaiting their reception into the Church through the Ordinariate continue to worship according to a traditional Anglican Missal.

    Certainly, the Ordinariate Catholics who wish to use the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite – or even the Extraordinary Form – have full permission to do that. It is stated very clearly in Anglicanorum coetibus, and in fact that is presently the preference in the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham in England.

    However, for those who will enter the Ordinariate in the United States, or Canada, or Australia, there is a clear preference for a liturgy which exhibits a hermeneutic of continuity with the historic Missals which have been foundational to the spirituality which has brought us home to the Holy Catholic Church.

    The Church has called for an Anglican Ordinariate liturgy. We know this liturgy is to have the Book of Divine Worship as its starting point. The Book of Divine Worship is now poised to be enriched and completed by what we have known in the various editions of the Anglican Missal. Therefore, to ignore the Missals in the development of a global Anglican Use liturgy for use in the Personal Ordinariates would be not only a rupture with the past, but it would miss the clear expectation expressed in Anglicanorum coetibus, to maintain those good things from our Anglican heritage which have nurtured our faith.

    Read the whole article

  49. jhayes says:

    Fr. Phillips explains why the Missals were not used in constructing the BDW:

    We should notice an important statement within that section of Anglicanorum coetibus, where it refers to “…the liturgical books proper to the Anglican tradition, which have been approved by the Holy See…” One of the principles expounded by some members of the 1983 committee was a requirement that the only material that could be used in the Book of Divine Worship was material which could be found in a Prayer Book which had been approved by an official Anglican body. It was this (mistaken, I believe) requirement that kept out liturgical material from the traditional Anglican Missals, which had not received such authorization, even though such material was very much a part of Anglican tradition. But Anglicanorum coetibus states clearly that the Ordinariates may use elements of the Anglican tradition “which have been approved by the Holy See,” with no reference to previous official Anglican approval.

  50. BenedictXVIFan says:

    @Sister H.
    Nobody answered your first question, and I believe the answer will be Yes, anyone can join an Anglican Ordinariate parish, given that anyone can attend Mass there.

  51. eulogos says:

    Fr. Fox, After the Scranton Anglican Use group was received into the church, but before their pastor, Fr. Bergman, was ordained a Catholic priest, several priests from the diocese of Scranton celebrated the Anglican Use mass for them, using “Rite I” from the Book of Divine Worship. This was done every Sunday for most of a year I think. (Steve Cavanaugh probably knows the timing better than I). This was a much appreciated generosity on the part of then Bishop Martino.

    That Rite starts using the Book of Common Prayer language. It ought to be said in Cranmer’s favor that even though these words were not familiar to the priests involved, they flowed easily and without mistakes off their lips. Then it switches to the Roman canon-the EF canon, as translated by a contemporary of Cranmer into the language at that time. This was a quite literal translation made for study (and for criticism by Protestants, alas) and not for proclaimation. (Literal except for the translation of “pro multis” which was changed as explained by a commenter above.) There was a bit of stumbling over this part at first. Since it closely follows the Latin, this translation, even in Elizabethan English, sounds very different from Cranmer. I found that transition a bit startling until I got used to it. After the canon, in very jolting modern English, comes the “Let us proclaim the mystery of faith.” and “Christ has died” etc. Then, with relief, back to Cranmer for the final prayers.

    The translation of “pro multis” as for all, and the “Let us proclaim the mystery of faith” were imposed on the Anglican use rite in Rome. This was in the 1980’s. I have had my suspicions about this. Of course the rationale cited above applied to the “pro multis” issue, but I think something else was involved. If you think there is resistance to the “EF” now… well back then this was a dark and fobidden subject and those who hankered for or insisted upon the old mass were not well looked upon, to say the least. And what were two of their main issues? The “for all” translation of “pro multis” and the “Let us proclaim the mystery of faith” rather than “The mystery of faith” which presented the sacrifice which had just taken place. My guess is that someone in power did not want the Anglican Use to become a refuge for *those* people. The climate is so much better now that I feel sure “Let us proclaim” will be absent , and it will be “for many” when the liturgy for the Ordinariate takes shape.

    Anyway, yes, Fr. Fox, if your bishop allows it, you can celebrate with the Anglican Use liturgy. There are groups wanting to join the Ordinariate who don’t have a priest. There is one in Rochester, NY I know about. But I somehow doubt if the bishop of Rochester will spare a priest for them; he has few to spare, and their type of liturgy is hardly to his taste. I hope the Ordinariate finds one who has converted without his parish who is willing to be their pastor.

    Susan Peterson

  52. Any Catholic can attend Mass at any Catholic church: Anglican Use, Maronite, Syro-Malabar, etc. As for “joining” an Anglican Use or Ordinariate parish, that depends on what is meant by join. I’ve been attending services at an Anglican Use parish for about 7 years; I’m on the mailing list, edit the monthly newsletter, lead the schola, etc. But, really, am I a member? If the parish joins the ordinariate, I am not likely to be eligible to become a member of the ordinariate, as I was baptized a Catholic as an infant and all my life was a member of my local territorial parish (wherever I found myself). But I’ll continue to attend.
    People in a situation like Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio or Our Lady of Walsingham in Houston are different: there you have people who were baptized in a Catholic, Anglican Use parish, who perhaps have children so baptized, who have never, really, been Anglican (meaning members of the Episcopal church or one of the Continuing Anglican bodies), but who are in a different situation than me.

    Fr. Fox asks if any priest may use the Anglican Use. My understanding is “No”, with a caveat: a Catholic priest who is serving, even as an occasional substitute, an Anglican Use parish may celebrate according to the rites in the Book of Divine Worship. We have one priest here in Mass. who has trained himself to do so, and I know that there were several priests in Scranton who said Mass according to the BDW for the St. Thomas More Society when they were first received into the Church but before Fr. Bergman was ordained.

  53. jhayes says:

    BenedictXVIFan, according to the excerpt I posted above on 16 November at 4:15 pm, you can join the parish but you can’t join the ordinariate unless you have immediate family who are already within the ordinariate. That will leave you part way between two worlds, but how much of a practical problem it might be probably won’t be known until here is some experience with it.

    You might want to look back to that earlier post.

  54. Rebekah says:

    From my friend TJ, who wanted to add to the discussion:

    Very high-church, very traditional, very catholic Anglican here. Tell you the truth, the Book of Divine Worship is one of the major reasons I would have trouble joining an Anglican Use church. To put it together they took the bastard-child 1979 prayer book and then shoe-horned in stuff directly from the Novus Ordo RCC mass.

    I have several issues with this. First of all, we already have a liturgy that is as right and beautiful and orthodox and catholic as anything else you’ll find – either directly from the 1928 BCP or as modified in the Anglican Missal. It doesn’t NEED fixing.

    But second – and mainly – is the utter lack of respect demonstrated by how the BDW was put together. The second thing Cranmer ever translated into English 500 years ago (the first was the litany) was the central part of the communion service, and this has passed down nearly intact ever since. It was translated under Henry who was not going to brook any liturgical or doctrinal changes and who was rather highly involved in these things. It is the same liturgy that Pius V explicitly accepted as valid as part of his overtures to Queen Elizabeth in 1570 to heal the breach with England. To the Pope there, at that time, the English liturgy was acceptable as it was.

    So why, now, does it NEED to be fixed by shoving in the N.O. consecration?

    It seems just part and parcel of Rome’s demand that, in order to heal the breach, Anglicans must also deny any validity to anything they have been for 500 years. The demand is that the English are simply a part of the Latin rite and so any excursions from that rite are granted as privilege, not by right. But that ignores the reality. Say what you want about how this situation came to be, the reality is that there have been 500 years of liturgical development on both sides since the split – with the vast majority of the changes coming on the Roman side. My church, today, worships with a prayer book only slightly different from that originally published in 1559. That was before Trent. Why not recognize that, in that time, what was once one rite has truly become two different ones? Why demand conformance to the Roman rite, even where the English traditional liturgy has always been recognized as orthodox?

    By all means, demand doctrinal conformance as part of a condition of communion. That’s just common sense. And if there are parts of the liturgy determined to reflect bad doctrine, change it. But if a healing between Rome and Constantinople happens, it won’t be on the condition that the Greeks give up the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom and replace it with the Novus Ordo mass. Why treat the Anglicans with so much less respect? Especially considering that in an objective comparison between the NO RCC mass and, say, the 1928 Anglican liturgy, the RCC will not stand out as superior.

    How we, as Anglicans, worship doesn’t need fixing. Our ecclesiology does.

  55. Hidden One says:

    Dear Rebekah’s friend TJ,

    I am a young convert; I was raised a rock band Presbyterian. Concurrently with my intellectual conversion to the Catholic faith, I became an ardent traditionalist, devotee of Pope Benedict’s vision for liturgical reform, and came to a deep and abiding love of the liturgies that gave the Roman Church her Saints. I have attended and even served beautiful Masses that gave glory to God, as they are supposed to. I’ve also attended Masses that did not do such as they should. Many more of the latter than the former, in fact. But I have never regretted my conversion. Never once.

    Make all the arguments for and against this and that in the liturgy that you want, and receive whatever responses, but cross the Tiber, and better our liturgies from the inside. I do not say that you are wrong about the Anglican liturgy and its history! But, I do say that would be wrong to allow the liturgy on this side of the river to keep you from coming in.

    From one convert to one who should convert: come on over. You said that there was some more stuff for you to sort out, too. That’s fine, but make sure that it isn’t stuff that really shouldn’t be keeping you over there. It can all be sorted out – I’m morally certain of it – and then you can come over.

    The water’s warm; the bridge is wide. Don’t let issues of human respect, human foibles, and church bureaucracy keep you on the wrong side of the Tiber.

    Oremus pro invicem.

    In Christ,
    Hidden One

  56. jhayes says:


    In the excerpts in my two posts above, (Nov 17 , 9:12 and 9:23 am) Fr. Phillips makes the argument for basing the new Ordinariate liturgy on the Anglican Missal.

  57. Cato says:

    This is Rebekah’s friend TJ. I hope this discussion is still getting attention so this won’t get lost…

    I re-read what I wrote last night and I guess I came across as a bit more confrontational than I intended. Let me if I can express how I – and many others like me – feel.

    Fr. Z has said many times that he highly appreciates traditional Anglicans coming over to Rome because of how liturgically-minded we are. Because we care about our worship and do it the “old way”. That’s not just some fluke – that is an essential part of what it means to BE Anglican. To quote from the Oxford Guide to the Book of Common Prayer: “…it has become something of a commonplace for Anglicans to identify themselves as Anglicans by their liturgy. Other churches may be anchored in confessional documents, or doctrinal formularies, or a systematically articulated theology, or the pronouncements of magisterial authorities. Anglicans – so they are wont to say – are different. The Anglican anchor is worship, whereby ‘worship’ is meant the Book of Common Prayer.”

    So, it just feels a bit…off, I guess, to say, “We respect how seriously you take worship. So seriously that you have not made major changes to your liturgy in almost 5 centuries. We not only respect that, but it is because of this dynamic that we are excited about you joining us. Oh, and by the way, the first condition of you joining us is changing how you worship – at the most important heart of your most important ritual.”

    I like that it was said above that the Anglican Missal may be used to inform future Anglican-Use worship. My parish worships with the Missal, and I highly recommend it. Still, saying that material from it will be used to modify the existing Book of Divine Worship still feels weird. I mean, why does it NEED to be played with? Instead of writing Anglicans a new liturgy – no matter how informed it is by past material – why not take the Anglican Missal and, if nothing stands out as invalid, just say, “Hey, this is good. Use it,” and then move on?

    Our worship is the heart of who we are. If you want us to be who we are with you, instead of apart from you, that dynamic needs to be respected. Having our traditional liturgy re-written by those who are not a part of this community/identity in order to “fix” it so it is more Roman and less English just feels like disrespect. I know a lot of traditional Anglicans don’t feel the same way – that’s why they’ve already crossed the Tiber. But I also know a LOT of traditional Anglicans DO feel this way, and it is an impediment to union. Rome can be scary enough anyway, but especially when it seems – as it sometimes does – that the unity you desire with us is the unity the lion desires with the antelope.

Comments are closed.