Peters, J, P.
The Eevison of the Prayer Book
New York, 1916

MzJMS

>Y^LE«WJMHYIEIf£SinFY°

FROM THE LIBRARY
OF
JOHN PUNNETT PETERS
YALE 1873

THE
REVISION OF THE
PRAYER BOOK

BY
THE REV. JOHN P. PETERS, D.D.
RECTOR OF ST. MICHAEL'S CHURCH
NEW YORK

NEW YORK
EDWIN S. GORHAM, PUBLISHER
11 WEST 45TH STREET
1916

I.— General

Apologia
IT is as a practical man, a devout user of the Prayer Book,
and almost a devotee thereof from my infancy, that I
venture to make these suggestions. While I have been
instructor and professor in colleges, seminaries and uni
versities, chaplain in Europe to English and American
churches, and in this country among Germans, yet for the
greater part of my ministry I have been a parish priest.
Thirty-eight years I have served in a large New York par
ish, chiefly among the poor, and twenty-three of those years
I have been its rector. But rather, I may say, I have been
rector of St. Michael's Church almost 100 years — since
1819 — in three generations, grandfather, son and grand
son. From early boyhood I planned and studied to become
a clergyman. The Church is in my blood. I am a Church
man of the Churchmen, a priest as it were from infancy,
and in Churchmanship and as touches the Prayer Book I
am therefore naturally a conservative. If then I criticise
I do it as so admiring that I can be content with nothing
but perfection, as so loving that I cannot bear ever to see
that Liturgy seem to any useless or feeble.
Liberty and Elimination
In the preface of the Prayer Book it is set forth that
"The particular forms of Divine Worship, and the Rites and
Ceremonies appointed to be used therein" are "indifferent
and alterable" and that "changes and alterations should be
made therein" — "from time to time," as it seems to be
"either necessary or expedient." Following this rule, the
Church of England did from time to time, for one hundred
years after the Reformation, change and alter its ritual, as
set forth in the Prayer Book, at first more, gradually less,
freely. Since 1664, however, there have been no changes in
the English Prayer Book — all attempts at further revision
having failed. With the organization of the American
Church attention was drawn, as our preface sets forth, to
"those alterations in the liturgy which became necessary
in the prayers for our Civil Rulers in consequence of the
Revolution." Having begun to make these alterations the
Convention, we are further told, "could not but, with grati
tude to God, embrace the happy occasion which was of-

4 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
fered to them (uninfluenced and unrestrained by any world
ly authority whatsoever) to take a further review of the
Public Service, and to establish such other alterations and
amendments therein as might be deemed expedient." The
revisers were much hampered by the attitude toward any
change of the authorities of the English State Church,
which was just then on the whole more State than Church.
The result of the revision was the American Prayer Book,
adopted in 1789, which represents a compromise between
those who wished more radical changes and the extreme
conservatives who wished no changes at all, with the bal
ance in favor of the latter. While, however, the changes
made were not on the whole considerable, the new book was
yet an improvement on its parent. This first American
book once adopted, the conservative sentiment made itself
effective in resisting all attempts at change for one
hundred years, until finally, in 1892, our present Prayer
Book took its place after a long agony of discussion in Con
ventions and through the Church at large. During the proc
ess of this revision the whole body of the Church was pro
foundly agitated as over a serious crisis; but in spite of
this long and frightened agitation the few changes made
were so insignificant that, with all respect, it may be truth
fully said that the mountain in labor had brought forth
a mouse. Liturgies are in their nature immensely conservative,
whether they be ecclesiastical, legal or social. So the
liturgies of the old Sumerians were retained in the
Sumerian language with slight changes and adaptations to
fit them to different localities for a period of at least 3,000
years, during more than half of which time the Sumerian
was a dead language, whila the old religion itself had
changed so profoundly that to the outsider it would at first
sight seem impossible to apply the old ritual to the new
faith. I need scarcely cite the similar familiar Instances
in the Jewish or the Christian Churches, as, in the latter,
the retention of the Latin language, Hellenistic Greek, old
Slavonic, Armenian, Syrian dialects and the like. Suffice
it to say that while Christians have not been in this regard
as bad as the Babylonians and Assyrians, we yet have shown
a tendency to make a fetish of the liturgy, and treat it as
the end and not the means, the reality and not the symbol;

JOHN P. PETERS 5
and while we of the American, English and kindred
Churches have not equalled the Roman Catholics, or the
Russians, the Greeks and the rest in blind adherence to
archaic tradition, yet still we have displayed enough of that
attitude to cause serious concern. Our liturgy was prob
ably the most beautiful ever created, but its beauty lay in
its vigor, its grace, its freshness and its adaptability to the
highest spiritual needs of its day. It must continue to
grow and to adapt itself to the new life, or else it will
wither, grow old and pass away; the spirit which gave it
beauty and power will vanish, and it will rot and clog the
ground. »
¦ The last half-century has seen the most rapid change
and development in almost every dirBction which the world
has ever witnessed. It has been a period of phenomenal
growth. This has produced profound unrest in every de
partment of life, and not least of all in religion and re
ligious observance. This period of growth and develop
ment has opened up to us as great treasures of knowledge
and experience in the religious as in the scientific, the in
dustrial and the political world; and yet during this period
we have theoretically changed our liturgy not at all. In
practice we have changed our liturgy materially, although
even here by no means so much as we have changed our re
ligion in the same time. Individual clergy and churches
have been making use i of a liberty which technically and
theoretically does not belong to them, until indeed we have
reached a point where liberty is becoming lawlessness and
is likely to cause trouble unless it is either licensed or regulated.
So far as the breach or disuse of rubrics is concerned in
this present license it should be said that there never has
been a real consensus of opinion in the Church itself as to
the meaning and effect of rubrics. Low Churchmen tra
ditionally were strict constructionists, regarding the rubric
as a hard and fast rule, not only obeying the rubric to the
letter, but prohibiting and excising everything which was
not specifically named or provided for by the rubric. High
Churchmen, on the other hand, regarded the rubric as a
minimum provision. Whatever was not absolutely pro
hibited in the rubric might be done, and further, every
rubric was itself subject to the rubric of common sense;
that is to say, special conditions allowed the disregard of

6 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
the rubric as written. The High Churchman felt himself
so permeated with the spirit of the Church and of Church-
manship that he need not concern himself about the strict
letter of the law. Modern or "Catholic" High Churchman-
ship has tended to go much further than this, while modern
Low Churchmanship has lost its grip altogether. In the
old sense we have neither High Church nor Low Church
to-day, nor rubrics either.
Is not the time ripe for such a change as will grant a
liberty which, being lawful, will be no longer license, and
which will enrich the Prayer Book with the wealth of our
new spiritual knowledge?
What is there in the Prayer Book about Missions? One
prayer. What is there of national aspiration and
patriotism? One pitiful little Thanksgiving service. What
is there of that burning enthusiasm for the brotherhood of
men, for the fulfilment of Christ's teaching of the kingdom
of God upon earth in the bettering of social conditions?
Nothing. Great as is our liturgical heritage, we must
recognize that in the Prayer Book those things which seem
to us most vital are practically without representation.
Or again: why should we forever perpetuate the repres
sions of the period of conflict of the Reformation? Why
must we go in chains and shackles because our ancestors
had to be bound to prevent them from criminal follies? We
may not pray for the dead, because forsooth in the Middle
Ages prayers for the dead were abused! What Christian
believes that life ends with the grave? And if it does not,
why should our prayers be merely for the Church militant?
We pray with no heart in any prayer in the Prayer
Book for the restoration of health to the sick. Do we not
really believe in the answer of prayer, that we dare not put
up a petition to God to heal the sick? Our faithlessness
there has driven men into Christian Science.
Nowhere in the Book is there any service of preparation
for the Holy Communion, albeit in the preface to the Holy
Communion we tell people to prepare themselves. Is it
any wonder that men, full of deep reverence for that most
holy service, feeling the need of preparation for the same,
should be teaching and practising Confession? This is a
natural outcome of the failure of the Church to provide for
a real need, because of the abuses of the Middle Ages.

JOHN P. PETERS 1
In the English Articles of Religion provision is made for
homilies to be read by the clergy to their congregations,
because at the time of the Reformation the clergy were so
ignorant that few could be trusted to preach for themselves,
and for that reason must be restricted in their privileges.
Ignorant, not capable of understanding and applying gen
eral principles, they must be directed in every detail.
Our condition to-day is very different. We have an edu
cated ministry which may be trusted, which is imbued with
principles and need not have every detail prescribed.
One thing more: The English Prayer Book was created
for the tight little kingdom of England, substantially
homogeneous throughout its length and breadth. We are
a vast country, one in language, various in race, tradition,
climate and need. The uniformity which was good for
little England at the Reformation is not necessarily good
for great America to-day, least of all precisely that same
uniformity. Has not the time come when we may give a
liberty which will allow the adaptation of our liturgical use
and liturgical principles to the diverse needs and conditions
of this nation, and which will combine modern aspirations
and knowledge with ancient experience and piety?
Some day the time will come, I believe, when we can
make the Prayer Book throughout recommendatory, not
mandatory, and I believe that in that form it will be
stronger and more widely used than at present. That day
will come, I think; but even if we are not ready for that
yet, there is still much that may be done in granting liberty,
and in enriching, as a part of that liberty, our liturgy.
If we are to enrich our liturgy we must commence with
elimination. When I complained to a member of the Commis
sion concerned with the last revision of the Prayer Book that,
while theoretically the use of the Psalter in the American Book
had been improved by the addition of more Proper Psalms
and Selections of Psalms, practically it had been injured
by the failure to print those selections separately, so that
they could be used (formerly we had ten selections
which were used, now we have twenty which are not
used) ; he replied that it was necessary to obtain space
in the Book and that for that reason the selections could
not be printed. If we are to enrich the Prayer Book, we
must obtain space by the omission of that which is useless,

8 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
at least under present conditions. Why should we print
twice over the tables of Proper Psalms and Selections of
Psalms, once at the beginning of the Book and once before
the Psalter? The latter is enough. Why should we print
a table to find the Dominical or Sunday Letter, a Table of
Movable Feasts, General Tables for finding the Dominical
or Sunday Letter, etc., and a table of the Golden Numbers?
They were useful to our forefathers. They are absolutely
useless to-day, possessing even a mild antiquarian interest
for not one person in a thousand.
All will agree, I trust, that this book is a Book of Com
mon Prayer, for the use of the common Christian man, and
not merely for the antiquarian or the historian; a practi
cal book, a spiritual book, a guide to life and devotion. If
so, I suppose we should omit from it those things which are
purely antiquarian, which have ceased to be used for devo
tion by any.
Does anyone to-day use The Order for the Visitation
of the Sick? Is this intended for the use of parish
priests? I should like to know if there is any parish
priest in the whole of the United States who habitually
uses, or who ever has used, The Order for the Visitation of
the Sick contained in the Prayer Book. Whether this was
originally a theoretical service invented by the closet
scholar I do not know; but I do know that it is not now
and has not been within the memory of man a service in
practical use. There are prayers and thoughts and ideas in
it which individually are beautiful, and some of which I
think all of us who are priests engaged in the practical ad
ministration of the Word to the sick and needy would like
to retain, but not in the form of the Order for the Visita
tion of the Sick. Any doctor will exclude it and its bearer
from the sick-room.
The Churching of Women: No one ever comes to me for
that service except a rare Englishwoman. To save the
beautiful idea contained in the custom of Churching women,
in 1892 there was prefixed to the "Thanksgivings to Be Used
after the General Thanksgiving" a "Thanksgiving of
Women after Childbirth." I venture to think that, where
women ask to be Churched at all, this prayer is the form of
Churching universally used in our Church. I regret to
say, however, that in spite of all instructions very few ever

JOHN P. PETERS 9
ask even for that, so that I have adopted the plan of
Churching women whether they would or no by using that
prayer before each baptism; whereat the mothers and the
husbands and all the friends are greatly pleased, for, though
they have not asked for it, when it is used they see the
fittingness of giving thanks and the beauty of it. If this
service is no longer used, why not omit it?
The Forms of Prayer to Be Used at Sea: I have many
times held service at sea, or attended services held by oth
ers. I never knew the most rigid rubrician to use this ser
vice. I should like to know if any of the Navy chaplains
use it, or if they would deem it a service practicable for use?
For the ordinary service at sea on commercial vessels an
entirely different form is desirable, and I fancy the same is
true for the Navy. Possibly a service for use in the Navy
and another service for use by chaplains in the Army should
be inserted in the Prayer Book. I am inclined to think,
however, that it would be better to have special services
for use in Army and Navy, printed separately. Our chap
lains would probably be the best advisers on this point.
Visitation of Prisoners: I should like to know whether
our chaplains in prisons use the form of prayer for the
Visitation of Prisoners? When I have visited prisons, I
have not. It would have seemed to me an impossible form.
If this and the other offices above mentioned are not
used, we shall be in a much better condition by omitting
them. We shall stand for what we really are, not for what
we are not, or what we once were, or what it was once pro
posed to make us, but which we never became. We shall
be honest and not false advertisers.
Considerable space would be gained by the omission of
the Litany and Suffrages and the Communion Service as
printed separately in the Ordinal. When the Ordinal is
printed by itself these are needed. When printed as part of
the Prayer Book they certainly are not.
Would it grieve the heart of anybody if the Articles of
Religion were now omitted, or would anyone prefer that
they should be completed by printing the Book of Homilies
with them? I fancy that I am one of the few modern
Churchmen who find little or no doctrinal difficulty with the
Articles. My difficulty is the practical one. What is the
use of them, and why should they be in the Prayer Book,

10 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
more especially since the Lambeth Conference has prac
tically protested against the bad habit of other sects,
Roman, Presbyterian and the like, in adding to the Catholic
Creeds, making obligatory of belief matters which never
were so in the Catholic Church, and which may not be made
obligatory if the Church is to remain Catholic?

II. — The Lectionary
THE general theory of our Lectionary is this : In the daily
lessons to read the Bible through in course, the Old
Testament in the morning, the New Testament in the
evening; on Sundays, and days or times of fasting or
feasting, to read special lessons appropriate to the theme of
the day or season. The theory is an admirable one, and if
properly enforced should make every child of the Church
thoroughly familiar with the Bible. But as in most places
daily Morning and Evening Prayer are not said, the rubric
should specially state that the tables for the use of the Bible
in daily service are intended for private as well as for public
devotion, that each communicant of the Church is urged to
read the Scriptures in course as here set forth, that all may
thus be united together in the study of the same Scriptures;
and that it is specially enjoined upon the clergy so to read
the Scriptures in private or in public in order that they may
lead and unite their people in such study. Further, the clergy
should be directed to teach their people from time to time the
great need of reading and studying the Bible, and to explain
to them the method and plan set forth by the Church in these
tables; and especially they should admonish them in Advent
and Lent, and on Holy Days and Sundays, if they be prevented
from attending divine service, to read for themselves the les
sons appointed for those days and seasons, both as a means for
their own instruction in the wisdom of God, and the knowl
edge of His Christ, and also as a way of uniting in thought and
worship with their brethren in the Lord. The rubric appoint
ing these lessons should not be altogether obligatory, however,
since at times it may be desirable for special reasons to use
other lessons, or it may be necessary to abbreviate the service,
as in colleges and schools, and hence to shorten the lessons, or
even to substitute a different series. These tables should
rather be regarded as generally to be followed, advisory as to
the method of daily reading of the Holy Scriptures; but what
ever series of lessons for daily use is finally adopted, the pres
ent Prayer Book series or the alternative lessons now on trial,
or something else, the present system should in general be
adhered to, of reading the Bible through in course.

12 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
To the special lessons now provided, for Holy Days, for
Lent, and for Rogation and Ember Days, should be added spe
cial lessons for all national holidays (we have them now for
Thanksgiving morning, but not for the evening) , to be printed
probably immediately after the Holy Day lessons, as the Roga
tion and the Ember Day are printed after the Lenten lessons,
and a table of lessons for Advent. The latter probably should
comprise as Old Testament lessons the great Messianic pas
sages from the prophets, and as New Testament lessons the
Book of Revelation. In general the Sunday, the Holy Day, the
Advent and the Lenten series should be made part of the
daily system in so far that books and parts of Old Testament
books used in the former should not be repeated in the latter,
except where necessary to preserve the sequence of narrative.
So Job, Lamentations and in general the prophetic portions
of Jeremiah might well be confined to Lent and the great Mes
sianic prophecies to Advent. For the second lessons in Lent
let the Gospels be read, but in such manner as that at present
the story of the Passion from each should be read in Holy
Week. The Gospels are the great book of the Church, its Bible
par excellence, which all should read and study first and fore
most, and Lent is the time when all are most willing to read
and study the Bible.
To combine the daily lessons with the Lenten and Advent
lessons without confusion or repetition due to the differences
between the secular and the ecclesiastical year would not be
difficult. The earliest day on which Ash Wednesday may fall
is February 4, the latest March 10. The earliest day on which
Easter may fall is March 22, the latest April 25. Use for the
lessons for these five weeks at either end of Lent such sec
tions of the Old Testament as are not in their nature consecu
tive, and which may be with the least loss omitted from the
course (as, under any system, the present included, some must
be omitted), such as the lessons from the Apocrypha, Proverbs
and Ecclesiastes or the non-historical selections from the Pen
tateuch. Let New Testament lessons be appointed from the
Epistles, Jude, Second Peter and Second and Third John being
allotted to the most doubtful days. In any event these will all
be read once in the year, so that they will never be omitted
altogether. The few uncertain days before Advent are so
few that they may be disregarded.

JOHN P. PETERS 13
Adjusting the general order of Bible-reading on such a
plan would probably require us also to commence our course
of reading after Easter, that is, on or about April 26, instead
of as at present with January 2, and would bring us to the end
of the historical books about the beginning of November. Thia
would assign November, December, January and part of
February to the prophets, except such as were reserved for
Lent, and give in the end about the same proportion as at
present. The New Testament adjustment would be very easy.
Such a system would, I think, give us a more consequent and
more intelligent arrangement of the Bible for course reading,
better adapted also to the Church's seasons, and would at the
same time render it possible occasionally to make the indi
vidual lessons more effective by some shortening of the same.
One book of the Old Testament is at present entirely
omitted from the Lectionary, namely, the Song of Songs, as not
adapted to edification in public use. Esther should be simi
larly omitted, and for the same reason. It was originally
placed in the Lectionary among the historical books on the
supposition that it was historical. It is now universally ad
mitted that it is not historical, but a romance connected with
ritual, just as the Song of Songs is not historical, but a ritual
collection of marriage songs. On the other hand, 1 Maccabees
should be used in the historical series immediately after Ezra
and Nehemiah. It is the story of a great period, and of a
great revolution in Jewish history, which was instrumental In
preparing for the coming of the Christ, and some knowledge
of which the Christian ought to have. The larger part of the
Book of Jeremiah, also, from Chapter xviii. on, but rear
ranged in chronological order, should be included in the his
torical, not the prophetical section of the Lectionary, as has
been done with Isaiah xxxvi.-xxxix. Such an arrangement would
throw much light to the ordinary hearer or reader of the Bible
on the history of the last days of the first Jerusalem and the
Temple of Solomon. The present arrangement of Jeremiah in
our Lectionary is hopeless.
I will not go further into details, as of the chronological
arrangement of the prophets in the Old Testament and the
Epistles of St. Paul in the New Testament, for fear that, while
such rearrangements would make the Bible more intelligible
to the user of these tables, I may frighten the reader of thia
paper by too great a mass of detail. Those things, after all,

14 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
while good in themselves, are not the really important issues
in the revision of our daily Lectionary.
Our Sunday Lectionary should, as at present, connect it
self with the themes for the day and the season, as indicated
in the Collect, Epistle and Gospel of the day. I venture to
think that some few changes might be made the better to
adapt some of the lections to the seasons or the days. So
Lamentations should, in my judgment, be confined to Lenten
week days and not used on Quinquagesima. The Gospel lesson
on Palm Sunday, if not the Gospel itself, should be the story
of Palm Sunday, the story of the Passion beginning with Mon
day in Holy Week.
More important than these questions of detail in the treat
ment of the Sunday Lectionary are the broader questions of
liberty and flexibility in the use of the lessons. At the last
revision of the Prayer Book some steps were taken toward the
shortening of the lessons, especially the Old Testament lessons,
by the omission of irrelevant verses at the beginning or close of
a chapter. It should be understood that the priest not only has
authority, but is expected to omit irrelevant verses or phrases
within the appointed passage in such a way as to make the
passage read intelligible to an intelligent hearer from begin
ning to end. Educated clergy should be able to do this, and
if it is not done some chapters of the prophets might as well
be read in Latin or in Hebrew. It should be the duty of any
reader of a lesson first to master that lesson thoroughly him
self, and then so to read it that it may carry its lesson to the
people, else it is no lesson. And further, the priest should
have authority, if in his judgment it is desirable, because of
some special event or occasion creating a peculiar theme for
that day, to substitute another lesson or lessons, in order that
the Bible and not his voice alone may bring to the people God's
message on that theme or for that occasion. For the present
discretion for "days of fasting and thanksgiving, especially ap
pointed, and on occasions of ecclesiastical conventions and
charitable collections," so often used as an ox-hide to cover
the whole field, should be substituted a free discretion. The
Sunday Lectionary should be optional, not obligatory, to guide
and help, not to hinder and to hamper. In the nature of the
case it would be generally used; but this freedom, giving a
high privilege, would impose a new and higher responsibility,
with the result that the lessons would be studied, appreciated
and read as they have not been heretofore.

III.-The Psalter

FOR many years the Psalms have been the object of my
special study and research; the more I have examined
them the more wonderful have they become for me. They
are the grandest hymn book the world has ever known.
It is good to read or sing them in any way at any time; but
just because they are so grand and so beautiful it is the more
to be regretted if the lustre of their glory be dimmed by mis
use. Through the ignorance of the period, on which light
had not yet fully shone, after the ages of darkness, they were
misused, yes, even sadly abused by the compilers of the Eng
lish Liturgy.
One great object of the English reformers was to restore
the Bible to the people, and to that end was prepared the
daily lectionary, which should cause it to be read through
consecutively in course. The Psalms were conceived of by
them primarily as Scripture to be read for instruction and
edification, not as hymns to be sung in worship; as is shown
by the headings prescribing the use of Scriptures in "the Ser
vice of the Church": "The Order how the Psalter is appointed
to be read"; "The Order how the Rest of the Holy Scripture is
appointed to be read." According to the letter of our rubrics
the Psalms may not be sung as Psalms, but are to be read
as Scripture, responsively, it is to be presumed, by priest and
people. But by long established custom the Psalms had been
set apart from the Scriptures. They were in constant use, and
in the daily monastic services theoretically at least the entire
Psalter was sung or chanted through from beginning to end
each week. This established division was recognized by the
Reformers, and the Psalms were accordingly set apart to be
used more frequently than the other books of the Bible; but
inasmuch as it was impracticable in two daily services to do
what had before been done in seven, a monthly roster was
substituted for the traditional weekly roster. By this arrange
ment, peculiar to the English Reformation Liturgy, with its
great emphasis on Bible-reading, and the consecutive reading
of the whole Bible, it was intended to insure the recitation by
all of all the Psalms at least once a month; whereas under
the old system of the theoretical weekly use of the Psalter,
owing to various exceptions and modifications which had

16 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
crept in, some Psalms were said many times and others not
at all; many were said by a few, and most by none. In ad
dition to this provision for reciting the whole Psalter once a
month as Scripture, provision was further made for the use of
certain Psalms, together with the New Testament hymns, the
Benedicite, Te Deum, Gloria in Excelsis, and Ter Sanctus, as
chants for use in the daily services, as introits or antiphons
in the Communion Office, an ancient use speedily abandoned,
or for special occasions, as at funerals, visitation of the sick,
etc. The purpose sought to be attained by this newly invented
method of using the Psalter, namely, of making the people
familiar with all the Psalms, was admirable and most com
mendable, the method chosen was curiously crass, and, it must
be confessed, unintelligent from the viewpoint of the Psalter.
The Book of Psalms was the hymnal of the Jewish Church.
As it has come down to us it is divided into five books, to con
form to the fivefold division of the Law, and at the end of each
book, except the last, is a doxology, treated by our reformers
as a component part of the immediately preceding Psalm, to
be sung after each Psalter from that book. This is the parent
of our liturgical use of a gloria or ascription of praise at the
close of Psalms and some chants, as also after the Lord's
Prayer. These five books of Psalms are each in themselves com
posite, compiled from previous collections and liturgies. They
represent a very long period of growth, covering the better
part of a thousand years, during which period some of them
were in continuous use, undergoing in that use great changes
to adapt them to changing conditions, practices and beliefs.
Similarly catholic are the Psalms in their local origin, repre
senting Dan and Bethel and Shechem, as well as Jerusalem.
Speaking roughly, the books of the Psalms are chronologically
arranged, the collections in the first three books (i.-lxxxix.) be
ing older than those in the last two; and speaking locally, the
Psalms having their origin in Israelite shrines are to be found
in the collections contained in books 2 and 3 (xlii.-lxxxix.),
and those originating in Judah in books 1, 4 and 5. But old
and new, Israelite and Judsean, were worked over and over
until all were fitted into the liturgy of the temple at Jeru
salem, and the most primitive anthropomorphic pictures of
God in the thunder storm (xviii., lxxix.), God in the sun (xix.a),
God as a rock, as a bull, as inhabiting the storm cloud, have

JOHN P. PETERS 17
been so spiritualized that the most prosaic literalist cannot
take exception to their use even in Christian worship.
The Psalter was primarily the sacrificial hymnal of the
temple, as indicated by its Hebrew title, Tehillim, sacrificial
shouts, or praise songs. It was the custom at the moment of
sacrificing the victim to utter a tehillah, or shout of praise.
The simplest form of tehillah was the Hallelujah, Praise Yah
(the primitive form of the name Yahweh or Jehovah), of
which a number of the later Psalms are variants or develop
ments. A rubric in that great thank-offering processional,
Psalm cxviii. 27, directing that at that point the victim be
made ready for the slaughter, indicates the moment of sac
rifice, and the succeeding verses contain the customary tehillah
or sacrificial praise cry of the thank-offering. There was no
sacrifice without a tehillah. With a little study almost anyone
can see the relation of many of these Psalms to various sac
rifices prescribed in the Hebrew Scriptures (see Leviticus and
Numbers), or to the rituals there ordained. So Psalm iv. is
for the daily evening sacrifice (we use it in the morning), and
iii. for the morning; vi. is for the guilt offering for unwitting
sins (Lev. iv.). Psalms xiv. and lxviii. are for the bringing in
of the Ark, and xx. and xxi. for the royal offering before and
after battle. Psalm xlv. is a marriage hymn, according to its own
statement; xlii. is for Tabernacles, and lxxviii. and its ilk ap
parently for Passover, chanting the story of Yahweh's deliver
ances. Generally the Psalters are single, one Psalm consti
tuting a selection, if we may so put it, but sometimes two or
more Psalms are united to form one Psalter or liturgy, as in
Psalms xix. and Ixxvii. or in 1 Chron. xvi. Generally the
Psalms are not grouped according to their contents, but now
and then Psalms for the same ritual are gathered in groups, as
li.-lxiv., cxx.-cxxxiv., and sometimes several under one heading,
as xc-xcix., cxlv.-cl. Occasionally the ritual use indicated
by the Psalm heading seems to be extra official and non-sacri
ficial, as in lvii., lviii., lix., Ixxv., appointed for the treading
of the grapes; or the Pilgrim Psalms, cxx.-cxxxiv., sung by the
pilgrims going up from the Captivity to Jerusalem for the
great feasts.
Here we have a secondary and yet very important use and
purpose of the Psalter. With the development of personal re
ligion after the Exile, culminating in the Synagogue, we begin
a new development of the Psalter. The synagogues were Bible-

18 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
classes. For their use were developed especially such Psalms
as Psalm cxix.; but the whole Psalter felt the influence of the
Synagogue. Christian worship inherited both from the Tem
ple and the Synagogue. Roughly we may say that in our own
Liturgy the Communion Service is the descendant of the Tem
ple, Morning and Evening Prayer of the Synagogue. In our
use of the Psalter, however, we have copied only the latter.
We use the Psalter as Bible lessons, not for praise and worship.
But no old Synagogue ever used the Psalter as we do.
They understood it better. Fancy cutting up a hymn book
into sixty selections, and directing that it should be read
through monthly at Morning and Evening Prayer. It is scarce
ly credible that anyone should do such a thing, and yet that
is what we of the English-American Churches have been doing
for 350 years; and the humor of it has scarcely struck us yet.
It is humorous, absurdly humorous, from our very unconscious
ness of our stupidity. It would surely be stupid to treat our
hymn books so; but at least the consecutive hymns in those
would have some relation to one another, whereas in the Jew
ish hymn book, the Psalter, owing to its method of compilation,
such is not the case. There grave and gay, penitential psalms
and jubilant chorus, requiem and wedding march, thank-offer
ing and Litany lie side by side. The Psalters which we use in
Church, therefore, when we read the day selections, are often
as ineptly and even absurdly combined as though we were to
read one after the other in immediate juxtaposition, as part
of our worship, Sunday after Sunday, such combinations as:
All hail the power of Jesus' Name.
Oft in danger, oft in woe.
Blest be the tie that binds.
From Greenland's icy mountains.
Saviour, when in dust to thee.
What shall we do with these glorious Psalms to relieve
them of this obloquy, and restore them to their proper place
in Christian worship? First, following the ancient custom of
the Christian Church, inherited from the Jewish Church, re
store them to their proper right of use in the Temple. Enrich
the Communion Service by providing for each Collect, Epistle
and Gospel a suitable introit or antiphon, selected from the
Psalms, which may be used.

JOHN P. PETERS 19
In Morning and Evening Prayer let us sing the Psalms, if
we will, as well as say them, and let us select Psalms suitable
for the day, to fit the lessons, to emphasize the thought of the
season, to enforce the teaching of the preacher, or just to com
fort or rejoice the hearts of the saints. Are we clergy fools
and unlearned that we cannot select suitable hymns from this
glorious hymnal? Do not murder and massacre this living
book and pass it out to us in butchers' morsels, rationed to us
in pound parcels. Let it live, and let us use it as a living
book. So we and all the people shall really know and love it.
Instead of the daily sixtieth portion of the Psalms for
Morning and for Evening Prayer, let each choose any Psalm
or Psalms he will from the whole Psalter. Give us also selec
tions of Psalms well chosen for use on the great Holy Days,
on Sundays and in special seasons; but let them be real selec
tions, not merely two or three or four Psalms strung together,
but Psalters made out of Psalms, joined and fettered together
into one whole, after the good old fashion in which the Jews
themselves handled the Psalms, in which we made our Venite;
the same method by which the Christian Church created the
Te Deum. Let these selections be printed before the daily
Psalter. For convenience let the Psalms otherwise be printed as at
present, and let those who desire continue to read them in
sixty portions. Only let us eliminate a few passages which are
not suitable for use in Christian worship, and which mar the
Psalter for that purpose. So, for example, let us excise the last
three verses of Psalm cxxxvii. Without them it is a very beau
tiful Psalm; and it ends quite fittingly with verse 6, for indeed
that is where it originally ended, the objectionable following
verses being later accretions. Omit from Psalm cix. verses
5-19 and 27, 28 and see what a beautiful Psalm remains. Psalms
lxix., lv. and xxxv. are among those that need similar treat
ment. Possibly it might be well to omit a few rubrics which we
now sing as part of the Psalms, as for instance: Psalm lxviii.,
11-16, the direction to the singers (female, by the way) to
sing at that point certain hymns, specified by title; the in
struction to the people in cvi., 46 to say Amen; or the direc
tion to the acolyte, in cxviii., 27, to bind the sacrifice, etc. Per
haps, too, the doxologies at the end of the various books might
be printed separately as such.

30 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
Literally, of course, our Prayer Book translation leaves
much to be desired ; but because it is poetry and not prose it is
liturgically and devotionally vastly to be preferred to the
King James Version and its dependents. Indeed it is more
accurate than they, because it is poetry, and only poetry can
translate poetry. Moreover, considered by itself and not as a
translation, the Prayer Book Psalter is a creation, a real con
tribution to the world's literature.

IV. — Morning and Evening Prayer
IN general it should be said that there has been a tendency
to exalt Morning Prayer and Litany at the expense of the
Holy Communion and of preaching.
The Prayer Book expects that Morning and Evening
Prayer shall be said every day in the year, and by implication,
certainly, it provides that they shall always be used on Sun
days, if there are any services at all on that day. This gives
Morning Prayer the preference over the Holy Communion,
and in practice it actually has had such a preference. It is
used every Sunday in the chief service of the day, Holy Com
munion only occasionally, and then after Morning Prayer has
first been said, and people are well tired; or if Holy Com
munion is used separately, it is used at a minor service. The
Litany also has the preference over the Holy Communion,
being used every Sunday, and commonly as a part of Morning
Prayer, with which service, called in the rubric "Morning Ser
vice," it is appointed to be read.
When I was a boy it was customary for the morning ser
vice on Sunday to consist of Morning Prayer, Litany and Ante-
Communion, with sermon, and on the first Sunday in the
month Communion in addition. In large congregations, where
there were many communicants, administration of Communion
each Sunday after such extended preliminaries was imprac
ticable, hence the anti-Oommunion practice, if I may be per
mitted the play on words. Sermons had to be eliminated or
reduced to very innocuous dimensions on Communion Sundays,
and even on ordinary Sundays the preacher was seriously
handicapped and preaching discouraged.
The men and women of to-day will not sit through as long
services as their fathers and grandfathers did. To a very
small degree this was recognized at the last revision of the
Prayer Book, and provision was made for a slight shortening
of Morning Prayer on Communion Sundays. The rubrics still
appear, however, to intend and hence to provide for the com
bination of Morning Prayer, Litany and Ante-Communion as
Sunday morning service, with occasional Communion Sundays.
In practice, as a result of a change of attitude toward the
Holy Communion, a large number, perhaps the majority of
churches, have in latter years adopted the practice of more

22 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
frequent, generally weekly, Communions. The Holy Com
munion is celebrated at an early hour, and the "Morning Ser
vice," to use the term in the rubric before the Litany, con
sists of Morning Prayer and Litany, with a sermon. The lat
ter service is the main service of the day. The former service
is sparsely attended, and without music. The latter is a choir
service, and on it clergyman and congregation expend their
principal energy. Once in a month the Communion is cele
brated at this service.
Is this a desirable condition? Should the Holy Communion
be subordinate to Morning Prayer and Litany? Should not the
rubrics at least give the preference to the Holy Communion by
providing that the Holy Communion shall be administered
every Sunday, and that on any Sunday when the Holy Com
munion is administered Morning Prayer may be omitted?
This would, it seems to me, set the two services in their proper
relation to one another, which relation under our present ru
brics seems rather to be reversed. In practice the probable
result would be that there would be a general weekly celebra
tion of the Holy Communion, and that the Holy Communion
would more frequently than at present be made the chief
morning service, being on such occasions used alone, without
Morning Prayer. Morning Prayer would still continue to be
used, and in many places, especially where and when less em
phasis was laid on frequent reception of the Communion, it
would be as at present the principal morning service. There
need be no fear that we should Jose this beautiful service. It
must be remembered, moreover, that in its scheme Morning
Prayer is the same as Evening Prayer, and by making the
lessons and chants interchangeable it can be made identical.
If, therefore, this service ceased to be used as commonly as at
present as the Sunday morning service, it would still con
tinue to be the Sunday evening service.
The scheme of Morning and Evening Prayer is very simple,
and at the same time dignified and beautiful. First there is
the salutation to the worshipper in the name of God and the
exhortation to holiness; then his confession of his unworthi-
ness to come into the Presence, and the following absolution.
His sins thus put away, he now addresses God as his Father,
in the Lord's Prayer. Then follows a study of God's word in
the Bible, prefaced by songs or readings from the Psalter, and
interspersed with Biblical hymns. Having been thus taught,

JOHN P. PETERS 23
he next expresses in the Creed his faith in God, and concludes
by asking for those things of which he has need, or rather of
which his community, religious and secular, has need — for it
is a common rather than an individual service — and returning
thanks for benefits received. While this general scheme leaves
little to be desired, it seems profitable, in view of the increas
ing complexity of our religious needs, to give it greater flexi
bility in order to adapt it to special circumstances, or for com
bination with other services, and perhaps also to differentiate
somewhat the Sunday from the daily services. Let us con
sider first the Sunday use in Morning Prayer, with certain
general propositions connected therewith.
Sunday Morning Prayer
A rubric provides that "on any day when the Holy Com
munion is immediately to follow, the Minister may, at his
discretion, pass at once from the Sentences to the Lord's
Prayer," etc. Why not rather: "On any day when Confession
and Absolution have been already used, or are to be used in
the Holy Communion, or the Preparation therefor, the Min
ister," etc.? It surely is not necessary to have Confession and
Absolution at each and every service. Once a day would
suffice; and preferably Confession and Absolution should be
connected with the Holy Communion. Why not also omit
altogether from Morning and Evening Prayer the second form
of Absolution, reserving this for the Communion Office?
It will be observed that in the First Book of Edward VI.
Morning Prayer, after the Sentences and Salutation, com
mences with the Lord's Prayer. With the Second Book, ex
hibiting the strong dominance of the Puritan element, comes
Confession and Absolution. The Puritan and Low Church
tendency was toward somewhat solemn, "sinner" services and
the increasing lengthening of prayers. The Catholic and High
Church tendency was toward relatively abundant song, praise,
responsive services, and, in penitential offices, the use of lit
anies rather than of prayers. Each sort should be represented
in the Prayer Book, neither should dominate.
The rubric prescribing the use of the Lord's Prayer pro
ceeds to direct that wherever "it is used in Divine Service" it
shall be said by minister and people together. This would
seem to cover all cases of its use, the Holy Communion in
cluded. The rubric preceding the first use of this prayer in

24 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
Holy Communion directs that "the Minister . . . shall say the
Lord's Prayer ... the People kneeling." Apparently this is
regarded by some as making an exception to the general ru
bric. At all events, it has become very common for the priest
to say this prayer alone, the people remaining silent; and
frequently it is said in a low tone of voice, as a private prayer,
after the pre-Reformation manner. Personally, I prefer to
have the Lord's Prayer here, as everywhere, said by all together,
partly because I am a democrat and a republican and hence
desire to see as little distinction as necessary between priest
and people, partly because I love hearty services in which all
join. This use of the Lord's Prayer by the priest alone has,
however, become so common and persisted so long that it may
be desirable to recognize and legalize it. We have in the Prayer
Book use two forms of the Lord's Prayer, the simple form as
at the commencement of the Holy Communion, in Baptism and
Matrimony, and the form with doxology added ("for Thine is
the kingdom and the power and the glory, for ever and ever")
as in Morning and Evening Prayer, and the post-Communion.
Why not provide that, wherever the latter form is used, all
shall say it together, while the former may be said by the
minister only?
For the case of places where chants cannot be sung, would
it not be well to provide that in place of any chant may be
used a hymn from the Hymnal? In many small parishes and
missions this would greatly help the service, relieving it of
coldness and adding interest.
The use of Psalms and Lessons has already been considered
in a previous paper.
Should not the Nicene Creed be reserved for the Holy
Communion, or at least printed only there?
In the Prayer for those in Civil Authority should be made
provision, as in Evening Prayer, for the governor of the state,
and perhaps also for the mayor of the city, or such other high
authority as it may be from time to time or in various places
expedient to name.
Is it not desirable, in order to maintain interest and atten
tion, to encourage participation by the people in certain of
the prayers, as in the General Thanksgiving, and perhaps the
Collect for the day?

JOHN P. PETERS 25
Before the General Thanksgiving should be inserted a ru
bric that special prayers are to be used at this point; and after
the General Thanksgiving a similar rubric in regard to Spe
cial Thanksgivings; and at the close a rubric providing that
after this may follow Hymn, Sermon, Collects, Anthem, Prayers
and Benediction at the discretion of the minister.
Sunday Evening Prayer
Omit altogether Exhortation, Confession and Absolution;
but provide in a rubric that they may be used, as in Morning
Prayer, if desired. Further, I would make the same sug
gestions as for Morning Prayer, with the additional proviso
"that one lesson and accompanying chant may be omitted, if de
sired. Omit from the rubric preceding the Prayer for the
President, the words "taken out of this book"; but otherwise
preserve the prayers, rubric and directions for use, as at
present. Add, as in Morning Prayer, a rubric providing for a
sermon, etc., if desired.
Daily Morning and Evening Prayer
Simplify by providing that in Morning Prayer as in
Evening Prayer the minister may pass at once from the
Sentences to the Lord's Prayer, that the Venite may be omitted,
that any Psalm or hymn may be used in place of the selection
for the day, or the Canticles, in both Morning and Evening
Prayer, and that one lesson and accompanying chant may be
•omitted.

V. — The Litany; Prayers and
Thanksgivings
WHY should the Litany be said on Sundays? Sunday
is, even in Lent, a feast day, for which an obligatory
penitential service certainly seems out of place.
This prescription of our rubric appears to be in
part a relic of Puritan gloom; in part it is due to
the feeling that, as most people would only come to
church on Sunday, it was desirable to provide that
everything should always be said on Sunday. Let the rubric
designate it as a service especially to be used on Wednesdays
and Fridays (as did John Wesley), and other fast days of the
Church, separately or with other services, at the discretion of
the minister. Provide, further, for the insertion in petitions,
where such insertions are appropriate, of special petitions for
individual needs ; and for the insertion before "Son of God, we
beseech thee to hear us," of further petitions for peculiar
occasions and needs, to be cast in the same form, and followed
by the same responses as the preceding. Reverse the order of
the two closing responses, so that "Grant us thy peace" may
follow, not precede, "Have mercy upon us."
Prayers and Thanksgivings upon Several Occasions
Here we need, as suggested in the first paper in this series,
great enrichment to keep the Church abreast of the larger
vision and the more complex requirements of these latter days.
In the first place, national occasions play too small a part, in
proportion to ecclesiastical. Even the one commonly used na
tional prayer in our collection of prayers is an adaptation of
a prayer in the English Prayer Book with a mere change of
names, but without provision for the different organization
of our national life. In England there is but one Parliament.
We recognize a divided allegiance to our State and to the
United States. This does not seem to have been taken into
account by the framers of our Prayer Book, whether out of
Federalist intention, or more probably from too close imita
tion of their English model. In reality we come more closely
and in more varied relations in contact with our state than
with our national authorities. The omission of them from

JOHN P. PETERS 27
our prayers in the first American Prayer Book was recognized
and in part repaired in the revision of 1892 by the insertion
of "the Governor of this State" after "President of the United
States" in the petition for the civil authorities in Evening
Prayer. A similar change should be made, as already sug
gested, in Morning Prayer, and in the special prayer for Con
gress. Perhaps, also, in all these cases, a further provision
should be made, in brackets, for the mention, at discretion, of
other authorities, as, for instance, of the municipality.
Prayers for national needs should, however, go further than
this. There should be a special service for at least one great
national celebration, Independence Day, as now for Thanks
giving. This might also furnish the general framework for
services on other national holidays, as Lincoln's and Washing
ton's Birthdays, Decoration Day and Columbus Day, where it
is desired to hold such services. Appropriate prayers and
thanksgivings for all such occasions should be provided, either
under the general Prayers and Thanksgivings or with the
special patriotic service suggested, or both, the more general
in one place, the special in the other.
The last revision began in a small way to recognize mis
sions. We should go further, recognizing the Church as a mis
sion, which exists to bring the Gospel to the poor and outcast,
the ignorant, the sick, the miserable, the unbelieving. Some
very beautiful prayers have been composed and set forth,
glowing with missionary zeal and humanizing love. One or
more such might well be added to our present single prayer
for missions. We should also have some recognition among
our prayers of the great change which has taken place in
industrial conditions and in our social concept, beseeching
God to teach us to remedy the prevailing wrong and injustice,
to practise brotherhood toward men, and to labor to bring in
the Kingdom. Surely glowing prayers on this great theme
have been composed, worthy to ascend to the throne of grace
and fitted to become a means through which God's grace shall
mold and influence His Church. One at least of these should
find place in the Book, and specifically there should be a suit
able prayer for Labor Day, either here or with the special
patriotic services above suggested.
The prayers "for fair weather," "in time of dearth and
famine," "of war and turmoils," "of great sickness and mor
tality" might well be rewritten to adapt them to modern needs

28 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
and conditions, and to make them readily suitable for use as
the framework of prayers, not only for ourselves, but also for
others — in tragedies such as the Chinese floods and famines,
the Armenian massacres, the Servian pestilence, the European
war, and various calamities and disasters at home and abroad.
To some extent also their theology should be revised, as by
the omission of phrases teaching, contrary to Christ's own
express doctrine, that these things are of necessity a punish
ment for the sins of the sufferers. That is an ancient belief,
which has persisted in the popular mind and the popular
theology. Job protested against it. Our Lord condemned it,
specifically, in the case of the man born blind, of those whose
blood Pilate mingled with their sacrifices and those on whom
the tower fell, but above all in general by His Crucifixion.
Still it persists in the popular mind, which is, however, no
excuse for teaching it in the prayers of the Church.
A complaint often made of the prayers used in non-liturgi
cal services is that they are not really prayers to God, but
exhortations or instructions to the people under the guise of
prayers. To some extent the same charge may be made
against some of the prayers in our collection, and especially
is this true in the case of the prayers for the sick. Their
intention does not seem to be to beseech God for the sick per
son's restoration to health, but rather to prepare the person
and his friends for his death. Moreover, the wording of these
prayers is such that it would seem they were not intended
to be used for any except those for whom there was small
hope for recovery. To the irreverent it might even look as
though they were so worded as to avoid the prayer test. "Pray
for my son, who is sick." He dies, and the father says:
"Prayer is vain." "Oh, no," is the answer; "our prayer had
an alternative, and that has been answered." I think we
should have at least one prayer which shall be a fervent
prayer for restoration to health, and which people will natur
ally ask for when they are sick, even if they do not think
they are going to die. We should have also a prayer suitable
for use before an operation.
Such prayers should be fervent prayers for restoration to
health, or for a successful issue of the operation. The prayer
of faith does always in heart say: "Thy will, not mine be
done"; but to express this outwardly in every prayer is to
kill faith in prayer. It is as though one were to say: "Thy

JOHN P. PETERS 29
kingdom come, but when and if you will; Give us this day
our daily bread, but not unless you think best to give it."
The man who habitually prayed like this would soon cease to
pray at all. Let us venture to pray for health as simply and
directly as we pray for rain or fair weather. We do not sup
pose that by prayer, as by some magic, we can charm God
and direct the universe, but we do believe that in any need we
may go to God as a child to a father, and that as a father He
will hear, and some way, somehow, answer us.
Perhaps the prayer for those going to sea needs also some
adaptation to modern conditions, and to be made available
for travel by land, at discretion. There are also other occa
sions for which prayers may be needed, and for which per
haps new prayers should be provided. When the Prayer Book
was formed there were no Sunday-schools, and the children did
not play the part they now do in the Church. There is no ser
vice in the Prayer Book suitable without much adaptation for
use as a children's service, and there are few prayers couched
in language which children can comprehend, except the Lord's
Prayer. Perhaps no prayers especially for the use of children
should be added to our present Prayers and Thanksgivings;
but should there not be some prayer touching the education
of our children in Sunday-school and in our other schools and
colleges. As over against these additions to the number of our
prayers may we not omit one of the two prayers, "For Those
Who Are to Be Admitted into Holy Orders," and "For Fruit
ful Seasons"?
In the Thanksgivings there should be in general a similar
enrichment and revision. Specifically, I would only suggest
that a direction be prefixed to "The Thanksgiving of Women
after Childbirth," providing that, if it has not been already
used, this prayer shall be used before Baptism. Surely for
nothing should thanksgiving be offered more than for this,
and it is a pity that so good a custom should fall into disuse.
I could wish also that while the mother gives thanks for de
liverance from "the great peril and pain of childbirth," both
father and mother should thank God for the birth of the child,
and that this thanksgiving might be framed accordingly.
There is no occasion on which father and mother together
should give thanks as for the birth of a child.

30 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
The object of enrichment of our "Prayers and Thanksgiv
ings upon Several Occasions" should not be to furnish a Vade
Mecum containing prayers suitable for every conceivable use
and occasion, to be used precisely as printed, but rather to
furnish carefully selected and sufficiently varied prayers suit
ably adapted for the most urgent needs and the most frequent
occasions, but so devised as to furnish the framework and
suggestion for prayers to be used in any need and on any
occasion. Some years ago, the head of a great American College in
Turkey told me that when possible he always asked an Episco
pal minister to make the Commencement Prayer, because if he
would pray without his book his prayer would be lofty and
dignified, and at the same time full of devotion and free from
banalities. Our Prayers and Thanksgivings should be so
framed as to fit him who uses them to pray to God at any time
and on any occasion in a manner which shall uplift to the
very presence of God both the hearts and the minds of those
with and for whom he prays.

VI.— The Holy Communion
A S suggested in Paper III., on the use of the Psalms, I
/\ would propose to enrich the Communion Office by the
jf ^ provision of antiphons or introits from the Psalms,
printed before the Collect, Epistle and Gospel of the
day, to be used at discretion. This is an ancient use of the
Church, and an ancient use of the Psalms, for which they are
pre-eminently adapted. As already stated, in the Jewish
Church, the Psalter was primarily the sacrificial hymnal of
the Temple. As such it would be supposed that the use of the
Psalms should be inherited, so far as appropriate, in our Com
munion Office. In point of fact they have been banished from
their old use as hymns in that office and relegated to daily
Morning and Evening Prayer, where they are used chiefly for
instructional purposes.
As a matter of detail I should like to join the chorus in
favor of a change in the third collect for Good Friday. Every
one seems to agree that the collocation "Jews, Turks, infidels
and heretics" is singularly infelicitous. And by the way, just
who are intended under those four categories? We know who
are intended under Jews and heretics; but who are Turks?
Supposedly Turks meant Moslems, but we no longer use the
name in that sense. Precisely what is meant by infidels f
Apparently it does not mean all who do not believe in Jesus
Christ, otherwise Jews and Turks would be superfluous. Does
it mean Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Confucianists, and in gen
eral all who are neither Jews, Turks nor Christians? or does
it mean those who in Christian lands have no professed re
ligion? From its position immediately before heretics it
would appear that the latter is intended. But if that be so,
and the names are arranged in descending scale, then it would
appear that to the framers of this prayer Jews were the worst
of all who are even worthy of mention, while Buddhists,
Zoroastrians, Confucianists and the like are quite beyond the
pale of God's mercy, and not to be prayed for at all.
Whatever it means, it is in its terminology very imperfect,
and in its implications shocking to our more developed Chris
tian conscience. Professedly a petition of love and mercy,
practically it calls names and arouses hate. Comparing the

32 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
two preceding collects it would seem that what we want here
to complete the logical sequence is a prayer for the conversion
of the world to the religion of Jesus. First we have a beau
tiful collect in which all men are included in the family of the
Father, whom Jesus died to redeem. Then follows a prayer
that those who profess His religion may serve Him truly. The
last prayer should then be for those who have not yet learned
to know Him, and do not profess His religion, that they may
be brought into that glorious fellowship of love; a prayer that
He would have "mercy upon all unbelievers; and take from
them all ignorance, hardness of heart, and contempt of thy
Word; and so fetch them home, blessed Lord, to thy flock, that
they may be made one fold under one shepherd, Jesus Christ
our Lord."
In the Epistle for the First Sunday after Easter, the non-
Biblical gloss should be omitted; viz.: "There are three that
bear record in heaven," etc. Its use in the olden time was a
pardonable mistake of the days of ignorance. With our pres
ent knowledge to give it to the people as Bible is simply to
lie. No informed person to-day believes that this passage was
in the Bible. It is universally recognized as a gloss; and as a
matter of common, every-day morality should be omitted from
the Epistle in our Prayer Book.
A Service of Preparation
The Church has provided two notices warning communi
cants in advance of the celebration of the Holy Communion,
and in those notices, as in the exhortation provided to be read
at the time of the celebration, great stress is laid upon the
need of preparation. Let the people diligently "try and ex
amine themselves before they presume;" "Search and ex
amine your own consciences . . . that ye may come holy and
clean." He who is perplexed in mind is to come to the "Min
ister of God's word" to receive "godly counsel and advice."
With all this emphasis on preparation, however, there is no
service of preparation for the Holy Communion provided. Those
clergymen who desire to carry out the doctrine and duty of
preparation, so emphasized, by assisting their people in their
effort to prepare, find themselves thrown on their own re
sources. One form of preparation, developed as a result of
this earnest desire to prepare fitly to receive the Holy Com-

JOHN P. PETERS 33
munion, joined with the lack of provision for such prepara
tion, has been private and auricular confession, as in the
Roman Church.
Preparation for the Holy Communion is an old practice in
the Church, and in the Church of the Reformation it was not
entirely eliminated. The Lutherans provide for a beichte or
confession, as a preliminary to the reception of the Holy
Communion, and it was my experience as a German chaplain
which made me conscious that we actually have such a ser
vice in the Prayer Book, but in germ, as it were, and com
bined with the Communion Service. My German congregation
always expected to make their confession on some day pre
ceding the reception of the sacrament, and I finally adopted
the expedient of using the ante-Communion Service plus Con
fession and Absolution as a beichte for that purpose. I then
realized that this service carries out very exactly the In
struction given in our exhortation to preparation for the Holy
Communion, namely, "to examine your lives and conversation
by the rule of God's commandments."
The two services, Confession or Preparation, and Holy Com
munion, were combined, apparently, somewhat in the same
way and for the same reason as Matins and the Litany and
Holy Communion were combined into one Sunday morning
service. It would seem as though the feeling was that every
thing must be massed on Sunday in order to make sure that
it should be used at all; and we have the material in our
Communion Service as it now stands for precisely that con
fessional service which is needed as a preparation for the
Holy Communion. The Litany of the commandments and
their responses, our Lord's Summary of the Law with the
ancient Kyrie Eleison, the warning and the exhortations to
Communion or their substance, the Confession and Absolution,
a Psalm, the Creed, with perhaps sermon and prayers, might
form an ante-Communion which could be used at discretion,
either separately, as a service of preparation and confession,
or with the Communion Service as an introduction to the
same. However it may be constructed, we certainly need, as
a practical matter, some form of confession or preparation,
call it which you will, for the Holy Communion.
The last General Convention made provision for the short
ening of the Communion Office in certain cases. Such a di
vision of the present service as is here proposed would render

34 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
possible a shortening which is very necessary, at least in large
churches, where a great number of communicants receive.
With the greatest speed consistent with dignity and reverence,
for such use the service as it stands is too long. Under our
present form and with our present method of administration,
the Communion cannot be given to five hundred or a thousand
communicants by the ordinary parish staff in a dignified and
orderly way, without a length of service which seems im
practicable. The Commandments
The Litany, composed of the Commandments and a Eyrie
Eleison, which is a peculiarity of the Anglican Liturgy, needs
to be reformed, as does the Catechism, by the substitution of
the Ten Words alone for the Ten Words, plus commentary
from the Book of Exodus, now used. Why, by the way, was
the form in Exodus preferred to that in Deuteronomy? A
comparison of the two passages, Exodus xx. and Deuteronomy
v., shows clearly that the comments, differing in the two
forms, are not part of the original Commandments. To use
those Commandments as we now do is, moreover, to teach,
with all the authority of the most sacred service of the Church,
what we otherwise tell the people is an old Jewish doctrine
which passed away with the institution of Christianity. Ac
cording to this teaching, the observance of the Sabbath day
is conditioned on the seventh day. The reason, according to
the commentary used, why we are commanded to observe the
Sabbath is because God rested on the seventh day and hence
that day is holy. Does anyone believe that to be a fact? If
so, in honesty and consistency, let him observe the seventh
day, as do the Jews and the Seventh Day Baptists. The com
mentary contained in Deuteronomy presents a different and a
much more appealing reason for the observance of the Sab
bath; but both explanations are after all but later commen
taries on the original Sabbath day commandment. We treat
the Ten Commandments as having an eternal value and there
fore in principle to be maintained even though the Jewish
dispensation has passed away, but that eternal value lies in
the commandment, not in the commentary. It is the Sabbath,
not the seventh day, which is commanded to be observed, and if
we use the Fourth Commandment as an instruction to our peo
ple, we should use it free from its local Jewish commentary.

JOHN P. PETERS 35
Liturgically, moreover, this whole Litany would be vastly
more effective if the commands were in their original form
of brief words, with answers following, as they are in general
at present in the Commandments of the second table. We
should then have something like this:
"I am the Lord thy God."
1. Thou shalt have none other gods but me.
2. Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image.
3. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord Thy God
for falsehood (or falsely).
4. Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.
5. Honor thy father and thy mother.
6. Thou shalt do no murder.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness.
10. Thou shalt not covet.
Prayers for the Dead
"The Prayer for the Whole State of Christ's Church Mili
tant" needs to be changed by the omission of the word "mili
tant" and by the introduction of material similar to that
which appears in the first Book of Edward VI., viz.: a thanks
giving: "Most high praise and hearty thanks for the wonder
ful grace and virtue declared in all thy saints from the be
ginning of the world," etc.; and a commendation unto God's
mercy of the departed, with supplication for everlasting peace
for them and that, at the general resurrection, "we and all
they which be of the mystical body of Thy Son all together
be set on His right hand and hear that, His most joyful voice."
The abuse of the doctrines of indulgence and purgatory
led to the abandonment by many of the Reformers of prayers
for the dead; but that is most un-Christian. It makes a di
vision between this world and the next, which the Christianity
of Jesus especially aimed to break down. Why may I not
pray for my beloved who have gone on as well as for my be
loved who are absent from me? While we can well under
stand the reaction of the Reformation period, yet to continue
that reaction and protest in our present practice is to make

36 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
the temporary abstinence of the sick the permanent diet of
health. The unfortunate prejudice against prayer for the
dead has now passed away. Christians of every school and
thought in and out of our Church are, I believe, in harmony
with the idea of offering prayer to God for the dead: at least
where I have offered such prayer, as I have frequently, in all
sorts of gatherings, everybody, including Unitarians, has
seemed to be in hearty sympathy, believing it to be as natural
and right to pray for them beyond as while they are here.
Our very doctrine of the Communion, as a Communion of
saints, of all believers here and beyond, through Christ in God,
involves this; and yet the prayers for our beloved dead, and
for the saints of the Church triumphant, have been omitted
from our Prayer Book.
We no longer have to fight those old fights of the Prot
estant Reformation. The scars should be obliterated and old
and new good things alike be used. So I would have in this
prayer for the whole state of Christ's Church an opportunity
to commemorate our departed saints, and provision not only
of thanks for all the holy ones who have passed on, but of
supplication for God's blessing upon them in the world which
we cannot see. Reservation
There is still another practice in connection with the Holy
Communion which, owing to its very serious abuses in the
mediaeval period, was abolished, but which has crept in again,
and that is the reservation of the Sacrament. It has crept
in because there is need of it. How often do we clergy carry
the Sacrament to the sick? I will venture to say that for ten
times that we should administer the Sacrament to the sick
we administer it once, because of the difficulties placed about
such administration. We cannot hurry at once to the house
of sickness to give the Sacrament. We must, in general, first
prepare the bread and wine, with the consequent delay of
preparation. Then when we have reached the sick chamber
we must take time to consecrate the elements, and in very
many cases such a service is more than the sick person can
bear. We should encourage the administration of the Sacra
ment to the sick, whereas now we discourage it. Undoubtedly
there were abuses connected with the reservation of the Sac
rament, its treatment as magic, the adoration, etc.; but we

JOHN P. PETERS 37
shall not cure those abuses by our present policy. Precisely
as in the body politic we find to-day that the checks and bal
ances which were meant to prevent abuses have at times
resulted in much greater abuses, so in the body ecclesiasti
cal the checks and balances of the post-Reformation period
have sometimes resulted in greater abuses than those they
were intended to correct. I submit that the neglect of the
Communion is a more serious abuse than that which it
was intended to restrain.
I have been summoned in the middle of the night or the
wee hours of the morning to a poor hovel where there was
not even light for me to read the service; and the need was so
urgent. If we are to give the Sacrament to such, we must
consecrate it in the church, and be prepared to carry it thence
to those who need it. It is my experience among the sick and
poor, my experience of the lonely and desolate ones who can
not share with us in the great feasts of the Church at Easter,
Christmas and the like, which makes me feel the need of per
mission to reserve the Sacrament, that I may carry that em
blem and means of Communion with their brethren and with
God to those who are shut off from the house of God. It is a
carrying out of the beautiful thought of the prayer for Good
Friday of the one family, with the one house, in which sym
bolically we all come together, even though we be in sick
rooms and unable physically to enter the church where our
brethren are gathered. If the Church is not to be a Church
only for the intellectuals, if it is to reach the ignorant, the
poor and the outcast, then due provision must be made for
their needs, and above all due importance must be given in
our ministrations to the outward, visible act and fact.
For a similar reason I would plead for the restoration not
of the rubric of the First Book of Edward VI., which directs
that the married couple must receive the Communion to
gether, but for a provision in connection with marriage of a
Communion service, so that believers may be encouraged to
make this a part of the ceremonies connected with their mar
riage; and for that reason it seems to me that there should be
provided, after the marriage service, for the use of such, a
special Collect, Epistle, Gospel, etc. Similarly in the case of
the Burial Service.
I believe that this is in general line with a movement of
the present time, not only in our own Church, but outside it,

38 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
for greater emphasis upon the Holy Communion as the special
symbol and means of brotherhood among ourselves and of
participation in our rights and privileges as children of God.
The Holy Communion is recognized as the central ceremony
of the Christian religion, a peculiar expression in outward
form of the doctrine of Christianity, the doctrine of love, of
sacrifice of ourselves and of service to our fellows.

VIL— The Offices
Baptism
MUCH space is unnecessarily lost in the present arrange
ment of the three services : Public Baptism of Infants,
Private Baptism of Children, and Baptism of Those of
Riper Years. There is unnecessary repetition. The
whole could be arranged as one service, avoiding repetitions
and retaining everything belonging to the three services.
The introductory paragraph, "Dearly beloved," etc., is sub
ject to a very common misinterpretation. Owing to the mon
astic attitude, which treated marriage as a lower state and
appeared to conceive of the natural relation of man and woman
in procreation as in itself sinful and real chastity as consist
ing only in the monastic life, there is a sore and sensitive spot,
as it were, in the Christian conscience on this subject, and
the result is that the words "conceived and born in sin" are,
by a very large number, understood as meaning that the act
necessary to bring human life into the world is sinful. So
the statement that "none can enter into the Kingdom of God,
except he be regenerate and born anew of Water and of the
Holy Ghost," is similarly misunderstood as meaning that no
one can be saved unless baptized, and that unbaptized persons,
infants and adults alike, are damned. It is in reality merely
a statement of the condition of entrance into God's visible
Kingdom, the Church, and not in itself a denunciation or dam
nation. In view, however, of the frequent misunderstandings
growing from past theological discussions and misapprehen
sions, might it not be desirable so to change the wording
that an intelligent man may not misinterpret these phrases?
In the last clause of this preface should the people be called
upon to pray to God that these persons "may be baptized with
water and the Holy Ghost"! It is stated at the beginning
that they must be regenerate and born anew of water and of
the Holy Ghost. There is no need of praying for the water,
which will be administered by the minister. What is to be
prayed for, and what was prayed for in the old form, as it
appears, for example, in the first Book of Edward VI., is the
Holy Ghost; that when the water is used by the minister, God
may give the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

40 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
The first of the two prayers succeeding the Preface should
be omitted. In the older service both were used for different
purposes. Very wisely, the first act in Baptism in the older
Book, from which the first prayer in our Book was derived,
has been omitted. The prayer should be omitted also. The
second prayer is the one appropriate for our present order,
and which connects itself properly with our present service.
The questions addressed to the sponsors and their answers
are not, in my judgment, as good as the older form. We have
shortened too much the part assigned to them, with the result
that their answers tend to be perfunctory. On the other hand,
we have introduced one answer not in the old form, the last
in the series, which is a decided gain. Roughly, I think a
much more effective catechism of the sponsors, one which
would bring home to them the meaning of their act and make
their promises more solemn, would be somewhat like this:
Dost thou, in the name of this child, renounce the devil and
all his works?
Answer: I renounce them.
Dost thou renounce the vain pomp and glory of the world,
with all covetous desires of the same?
Answer: I renounce them.
Dost thou renounce the sinful desires of the flesh, so that
thou wilt not follow nor be led by them?
Answer: I renounce them.
Dost thou believe in God, the Father Almighty, Maker of
heaven and earth?
Answer: I believe.
Dost thou believe in Jesus — and so following down to "the
quick and the dead"?
Answer: I believe.
Dost thou believe in the Holy Ghost — and so on to the end?
Answer: I believe.
Wilt thou obediently keep God's holy will and command
ments and walk in the same all the days of thy life?
Answer: I will, by God's help.
In the case of adults, I would add the two further clauses
of the old form:
What dost thou desire? Wilt thou be baptized?
Answer: Baptism. Answer: I will.

JOHN P. PETERS 41
Every parish priest knows the difficulty of instructing
sponsors and how ignorant they often are, in spite of all that
he can do. In many cases I venture to say that the sponsors
do not even know the Apostles' Creed, and too frequently the
questions as a whole convey very little meaning to their minds;
hence the necessity of expanding their catechizing and sol
emnizing their act, the more especially if we are to be a
Church for the plain people. The Catechism
What was said about the Commandments in connection
with the Communion Office should be repeated with even
greater emphasis in relation to the Commandments in the
Catechism. Why should Exodus be picked, to the exclusion
of Deuteronomy? Why should the child be taught that the
Commandments appear only in the twentieth chapter of
Exodus, and the form in Deuteronomy disregarded? What
ever may be said in excuse of the lack of understanding of
the Bible at the time of the Reformation, there is no excuse
to-day for teaching children as the Ten Commandments these
Commandments plus the commentary attached to them con
tained in the twentieth chapter of Exodus. As a child is
taught the Fourth Commandment in our Church at present,
it seems rather a reflection on its intelligence that it does
not grow up a Seventh Day Baptist or a Jew.
As we are Christians, and not Jews, the Commandments
should be followed by our Lord's Summary, as in the American
Communion Office. The "Duty towards God" the "Duty towards
my Neighbor" and "What desirest thou of God in this Prayer?"
should be entirely rewritten. As they stand at present they
are stunts for the memory; the wording is not intelligible to
the child of to-day, for whom the Catechism is supposed to be
intended, and the teaching does not fit present conditions.
The interpretation of the Sacraments is admirably terse, but
very difficult for the ordinary child to comprehend.
The Board of Religious Education should be taken into
consultation in considering the form of Catechism to be put
forth for the instruction of our children. Let it be as terse
and simple in content as the old form, but brought up to date
and expressed in language understandable by the child of to
day. It should be composed not merely or chiefly for the most
highly educated in the community, but put in such plain,

42 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
simple, direct language that any child of ordinary intelligence
and of age for confirmation can understand it. There is more
need of a change of wording in the Catechism, probably, than
in any other part of the Prayer Book, if it is to be of use for
the purpose for which it is set forth.
For a similar reason the rubrics at the close of the Cate
chism should be brought up to date.
Confirmation
The answer in Confirmation, "I do," is so very brief that it
is apt to be, for the large part of those who are confirmed,
altogether perfunctory. Increase the sense of responsibility
of those to be confirmed by giving them more to do and say.
Moreover, it will frequently, if not always, be the case that a
considerable number of the adults presented for Confirmation
were not baptized according to the form of our Church, and
therefore when they "renew the solemn promise and vow"
made by or for them in Baptism they do not, literally at least,
renew, ratify and confirm the vow and promise which we mean
that they shall renew, ratify and confirm, but some other.
It would, I believe, add to the solemnity and reality of the
Confirmation vow to have several questions and answers at
this point, and liturgically this would, I believe, add force and
beauty to the service. It is not necessary, perhaps, that there
should be so many responses as in the first Book of Edward
VI., nor is it necessary that the responses should be identical
in words with those of the Baptismal Office. Perhaps it would
be better if, with the same content, the form might be varied,
and "the devil and all his works," the "vain pomp and glory
of the world," and the like, be translated into more modern
language, provided always that this can be done without loss
of the picturesque and vivid style of the old words. Also, the
Articles of the Christian Faith might be summarized in the
admirable form which is incorporated in the Catechism, in
stead of given at length.
The last rubric in the Confirmation Service, "The Minister
shall not omit earnestly to move the Persons confirmed to come,
without delay, to the Lord's Supper," would, I believe, be
greatly strengthened, if First Communion were more specifi
cally recognized in the Book by providing at the close of the
Confirmation Service a special Collect, Epistle and Gospel,
with Psalm antiphon, which may be used at First Communion

JOHN P. PETERS 43
instead of the Collect, Epistle and Gospel of the day. In any
case special prayer or prayers for the First Communion
should be provided. I suppose that we all have had the ex
perience that certain of those confirmed regard Confirmation
in itself as the end rather than the Holy Communion.
Matrimony
Is it necessary to prescribe in the rubric the exact position
of the man and the woman, "the man on the right hand, and
the woman on the left"? That is English custom; but why
prescribe it by ecclesiastical authority, as though it were an
essential to a lawful marriage? In uniting in marriage Ger
mans of a certain rank, I have been obliged to reverse the
position, because, as they said, to use this position would cast
a slur upon the woman. It would be a left-handed marriage.
Let such a matter be left to the rubric of common sense
and local usage.
In the woman's pledge the words "and to obey" should be
omitted. They no longer conform to the requirements of civil
law or to social custom, as they did at the time when the book
was formed. The words are no longer used in a literal, but
rather in a Pickwickian sense. They constitute an appendix
vermiformis, always liable to become the seat of dangerous
irritation. In the rubric preceding the giving of the ring, it is pro
vided that "the Man shall give unto the Woman a Ring. And
the Minister taking the Ring shall deliver it unto the Man,
to put it upon the fourth finger of the Woman's left hand."
This ceremony implies, what the whole Marriage Service from
beginning to end implies: the recognition of a sacramental
character in Matrimony, which has, therefore, a special need
of God's blessing. A civil marriage is legal, but the children
of the Church are taught to have their marriage solemnized
also Dy a religious ceremony. When the representative of
the woman's family gives her out of that family to take an
other name and become the mother of a new family, he indi
cates by the method of his doing so that the consent and
approval of her family is conditioned on the approval and the
blessing of God. He does not give her hand to the man, but
to the minister, that he may give it to the man. Similarly, in
the ceremony of the ring, the woman refuses the ring until it
shall have received God's blessing. That is the significance

44 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
of the minister taking the ring from the woman and giving it
to the man to be put on the woman's finger; but as the service
now stands this action is apt to be unintelligent and perfunc
tory. There should be provided a prayer for the benediction
of the ring, such as many of us use at this point in the
ceremony. In the German custom two rings are used, one for the man
and one for the woman. Many Americans are of German, not
English descent, and there is no reason why our service and
our practice should be exclusively and insularly English.
Should it not be provided that, in case two rings are used, for
the man and for the woman, the same formula shall be re
peated by the woman which was used by the man?
When, at the formation of the American book, the post-
matrimonial service of the English book was omitted, much
that was important was lost and should now be restored.
There is no recognition whatsoever in the American book of
the purpose and intent of normal matrimony, namely, the
bringing of children into the world. This seems peculiarly
unfortunate at the present time and should be corrected. A
prayer for child-bearing and probably also a prayer for mutual
love and duty, modified from those in the English book, should
be provided in the American book. There should be provision
for the use of Psalms or hymns and a homily or instruction, to
be used at discretion.
The English rubric, "It is convenient that the new married
persons should receive the Holy Communion at the time of
their marriage, or at the first opportunity after their mar
riage," varied perhaps to read "on the day of their marriage,"
or "at the first opportunity after their marriage," should be
restored, and a suitable Collect, Epistle and Gospel provided
for cases where the Holy Communion is celebrated in con
nection with a marriage, or earlier on the same day. The
natural antiphon, if one is provided, would be from the forty-
fifth Psalm. Burial of the Dead
Has not the time arrived when, in mercy, we may omit the
first rubric, which forbids the use of this service for "any un-
baptized adults, any who die excommunicate, or who have
laid violent hands upon themselves"? Times and manners
have changed. We do not exterminate or curse our foes as of

JOHN P. PETERS 45
old, and we believe that we do not do so because of a better
comprehension of the teaching of Jesus Christ. For the same
reason we need not here pass a judgment which amounts to
a curse upon the dead.
The second sentence, from the Book of Job, should be given
in a correct translation. In its present form it is impossible;
correctly translated it is beautifully adapted to use here: "I
know that my Redeemer liveth and that He shall stand at the
latter day upon the earth: and after this my skin is destroyed,
then without my flesh shall I see God, whom I shall see for
myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not as a stranger."
In general the service for the Burial of the Dead is not
a service of hope and triumph and resurrection, except in the
lesson taken from First Corinthians. It is not a service for
the burial of the dead, properly speaking, but a service con
nected with the burial of the dead taken advantage of for the
instruction and warning of the family and friends. The whole
service should be brought into harmony with the chapter
appointed as the lesson, that it may tell of the Christian hope.
It should address itself directly to God on behalf of the de
parted, commending his spirit and praying for peace and
felicity for him in the heavenly kingdom.
It must be said that the selection of Psalms in the first
Book of Edward VI. is more cheering and better adapted
for use at this service than the selections here provided.
While our present selections are very beautiful as poems,
they represent the old view of the Jewish Church, that for the
individual death was the end; and indeed outside of the
Lesson that doctrine seems to dominate the whole service.
This service ought to ring with the triumphant Christian be
lief that this life is but the beginning; that death is not the
end, but only the passage from one stage to another in a glorious
immortal existence.
The sentences commencing "Man that is born of a woman,"
with which the service of interment begins, are conceived in
the Old Testament, not the New Testament spirit, and the
last of those sentences seems designed to frighten and shock
into righteousness the family and friends by taking this occa
sion to remind them that death will come to them too; warn
ing them that they do not know what evil may await the de
parted, and they had better take care that it do not befall
/

46 REVISION OF THE PRAYER BOOK
them also. We have read, and do read, other significations
and meanings into the words. We have become used to them.
Their musical resonance, the solemnity of their sound counts
in our ears, and we somewhat forget their implications; but
these sentences are not hopeful and uplifting, but the opposite.
The actual Committal is beautiful; but why omit the name
of the brother or sister whose body we are committing to de
struction? We christen a child N or M and so inscribe him
in the Kingdom of God. In marriage we pronounce the Chris
tian name, N or M. Surely in committing the body to the
ground we should name our departed brother or sister by the
Christian name by which he or she is inscribed in the
Kingdom of God. And further, why do we content ourselves
with the consideration of the body, omitting all mention of
the immortal soul of the departed and all prayer for his wel
fare and his happiness beyond? Is this also due to that same
old Jewish spirit which has unfortunately found expression
in our Burial Service? When we commit the body of the
deceased to destruction, we should commend the immortal soul
to God. Here, and in the prayers which follow, the time has
come, I think, when we may go back to the old form. Com
pare these prayers and this committal with the similar prayers
and committal in the first Book of Edward VI. See what has
been excised and what beauty and grace and hope have been
taken out of this service by that excision. Taking it all in
all, our own American book is superior to the Book of Edward
VI., but there are certain things, as I have already pointed
out, in which that book preserves a better and more Chris
tian tradition, and where we, on the other hand, suffer from
the abuses of the Middle Ages and the resulting reaction against
good and bad alike. Notably is this the case in the Burial
Service. The service of the first Book of Edward VI. is much
superior to ours.
There should be provided a suitable Collect, Epistle and
Gospel (and if an antiphon, would not the twenty-third Psalm
be appropriate?), in case the Holy Communion be celebrated
at or in connection with a burial. I am not an extreme High
Churchman nor a ritualist in the ordinary sense, but at my
father's funeral the most precious part of the service to me
was the Holy Communion which preceded it; and I think that
many a man who is not even as much of a High Churchman
as I am has had the same experience. Such a Communion Ber-

JOHN P. PETERS 47
vice would be still more appropriate and more effective if a
Collect, Epistle and Gospel were especially provided for this
purpose. Conclusion
In the first of these papers I suggested the possibility of
the elimination of certain offices and the introduction of others,
especially for public holidays. I shall not attempt to make
further suggestions in detail. Some will wish for services of
benediction, that we may have some form provided to suggest
to us at least a reverent and dignified way of blessing and
installing objects intended for use in the church. Others will
desire evangelistic services, some scheme or suggestion of a
form of service which will be of use in evangelistic work,
where our Church is unfortunately very weak at present.
The greater part which the children have come to play may
suggest to others still another need. Perhaps in that con
nection there might be introduced a litany of the Beatitudes,
which failed to find expression in the last revision, but which
won the suffrages of many.
The new mission of healing will lead others to ask for a
service, either to take the place of the present Visitation of the
Sick, or for use in the Church in supplication for the sick,
and in connection with this some would like the restoration
in some form of the ancient rite of anointing of the sick.
It seems to me that there is room for all these things in the
Prayer Book, and that all should find their place there. No
one school should dominate, but the Church Catholic, the living
Church of to-day, should find the Prayer Book adapted to its
present needs and looking toward future growth. There can
not be services for every single occasion, but the Book should
be a guide to the minister, giving him the framework and the
thought for services and prayers, suitable to all the variety
of needs of our religious life.
These are modest and moderate, not radical nor revolution
ary suggestions, practical and not partisan; and they are, I
humbly submit, in the spirit of the original framers of the
Prayer Book, to which we have been untrue in allowing that
book, which they expected would be altered and adapted from
time to time, to become old and hard and stiff, instead of keep
ing it ever fresh and young and buoyant.

3 9002 00858