Post Motivation
A friend was asking me the other day which volume of the 9-volume set would be the best to look into the background of the Baptismal Covenant. He had thought maybe Volume 1—perfectly understandably—as PBS I is about Baptism. But no! It turns out the first inklings of what we know today as the Baptismal Covenant doesn’t actually appear until PBS 26, the revision of the Trial Use PBS 18. (Furthermore, even the explication of PBS 26 in its very large supplement only contains the phrase “Baptismal Covenant” once; it wasn’t as nearly big then as it is now…)
In light of that, I thought it might be helpful to provide my guide to what’s in the various volumes and which ones you might be interested in for various purposes. In what follows, I will be relying quite a bit on the introductions I wrote to the 9 volumes, but I’ll be adding other thoughts and tidbits as well.
The Series as a Whole
The Prayer Book Studies (PBS) series documents the 26-year process of study and conversation that led to the adoption of the American 1979 Book of Common Prayer. It falls broadly into two parts, distinguished by the use of Roman numerals and Arabic numerals. PBS I-XVII were published by the members of the Standing Liturgical Commission between 1950 and 1966 to communicate research and draft liturgies leading towards a revision process; PBS 18-29 were published by the various drafting committees between 1970 and 1976 once the revision process was formally begun and the earlier drafts were being transformed into new usable liturgies leading up to the adoption of the new prayer book in 1979. Finally, PBS 30 and its commentary were an addition in 1989 to discuss inclusive and expansive language for God for further liturgical efforts.
The First Series, Part I (PBS I-XIV)
These fourteen studies that appeared in ten publications (four volumes contain two studies) systematically explore all of the liturgical materials within the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, incorporating scholarly research alongside input from clergy and congregations, concluding each study with a sample liturgy based on the study and reflection of the Commission.
Each of these fourteen studies begin with an identical preface laying out the guiding principles: to objectively and impartially inform the broader church on the principles and issues involved in the revision of each portion, not for the benefit of one theological party but to the education of all.
The overwhelming impression of these documents is of a committee, anchored by Bayard Jones, Morton Stone, and Massey Shepherd, Jr.–the professors of the leading Episcopal seminaries of the day–that accomplished its work in a careful and thorough fashion. A great deal of thought, discussion, and argument has gone into these materials. The results are careful and fairly conservative modifications, assuming a retention of the “traditional” Elizabethan/Jacobean idiom of the English Prayer Book and the King James Bible.
I’ve got a post in process about what I call the “American 1960 BCP”—what the prayer book would have looked like if we had received the prayer book as envisioned by the end of this comprehensive survey of the 1928 book. Spoiler: it would have been a relatively conservative update of the 1928 with some interesting catholic additions and retaining a certain Anglican identity lost in the triumph of the Liturgical Renewal Movement especially post-Vatican II…
PBS I/II
The initial study on Christian initiation specifically identifies Baptism and Confirmation as the two rites that have raised the largest numbers of suggestions and criticisms received by the commission. Not only were there complaints about the structure and intent of the baptismal liturgy, but even then the purpose and ecumenical implications of Confirmation were hotly debated.
This study provides the basic template that will be followed in many of the successive works: an historical survey incorporating the latest liturgical thought on the matter, a discussion of the principles of revision based on that historical and liturgical work, and a revised text of the rite for study and reflection–but not use. That last point is important; there was no mechanism for trial use at this time, so the liturgies could only be read and debated rather than fully experienced.
The historical survey here focuses mostly on the baptismal material in the Apostolic Constitutions. The rest is a brief drive-by of the medieval evolution, basically putting the separation of Baptism and Confirmation at the feet of the Scholastics, Peter Lombard and Thomas Aquinas in particular.
The second study focuses on the Eucharistic lectionary, considering the purposes of the seasons of the Church Year, then proposing a slightly amended version of the 1928 lectionary. At all points, keeping step with the contemporary Roman Catholic lectionary is kept in view. Of interest as well is a final section that advocates for largely retaining the historical text of the King James Bible except for certain words where the sense is no longer the same. In these cases, substitutes from the Revised Version are being considered–but no changed texts are included here.
PBS III
This third study on the Visitation of the Sick recommends a complete shift away from the rites of earlier prayer books and radically revamps the tone, structure, and intent of the rite. This study gives a first glimpse into what “radical” revision might look like, the boundaries of what “radical” might encompass, and the attention to earlier rites and patterns even when proposing something “radical.” It also represents a path not taken, as none of the forms here appear in the revised prayer book.
PBS IV
Weighing in at a whopping 360 pages, this fourth study on the Eucharist contains ten times more words than either PBS I or III. The first part, “The History of the Liturgy” rehearses the history of the Eucharistic rite from the New Testament to the present, incorporating the latest liturgical scholarship on the matter. A great deal of attention is given to the transition from the Latin Sarum Mass to the first Book of Common Prayer, comparing the texts section by section. From that point, each English prayer book is discussed including the Non Jurors and Scottish liturgies that would contribute to the American branch Each American book is then discussed in turn. Finally all Anglican revisions from 1928 to 1952 receive discussion.
The second part, “Proposals for the Revision of the Liturgy,” begins with General Considerations that are then implemented as every portion of the liturgy is discussed in detail, concluding with the proposed rite itself. The resulting rite is very similar–but not identical–to the current Prayer II of the Rite One Eucharist.
If your interest is in the history of the Eucharistic liturgy—especially the relationship between Cranmer’s 1549 and the Sarum Missal—I highly recommend getting ahold of this. This section presents a very thorough look from the earliest recoverable materials through the Anglican books—English, obviously, but also the changes in other bodies of the Anglican Communion up to the early 1950’s.
PBS V
This first study on the Litany follows the typical pattern with a historical survey, principles of revision, and a revised rite. It’s quite brief. The version of the Great Litany here contains some minor tweaks in terms of phrases and individual words and is substantially that found in the revised prayer book. It also includes a Byzantine-derived “Litany of St. Chrysostom” not included in the revised book.
PBS VI/VII
This second study on the Morning and Evening Prayer betrays by its brevity that it is a very modest revision of the 1928 rites. A few new canticles have been added, but psalms are still offered as alternates in Evening Prayer, and the concluding collects are largely those of former editions. The lectionary is not addressed at all.
The third study on the Penitential Office is a revision of the old Commination, a liturgy of repentance originally derived from the Sarum Ash Wednesday liturgy. While bound with the previous study, it does not pertain to the Daily Office. Here the commission is thinking through the sin and repentance from a mid-century psychological perspective. While little, if any, of this material ultimately appears in the revised prayer book, this study is helpful in illuminating their initial thinking around a modern approach to penitence.
PBS VIII
The other study not pertaining to the Daily Office in this volume, the fourth study contains initial work on the Ordinal: the making of deacons, priests, and bishops. Another conservative revision, it takes great pains to point out that the essential structure and intent of the rite is in no way changed. Thus, the shadow of Roman concerns regarding the efficacy of Anglican orders still lies upon this effort as well as implications for relations with other Anglican churches.
PBS IX
By far the largest study in this volume (although only half the size of PBS IV on the Eucharist), the fifth and final study tackles the Calendar and, in particular, the question of the liturgical celebration of sanctity. While there is the usual survey of historical materials and recent efforts across the Anglican Communion, it is noteworthy that in exploring historical and contemporary sanctoral calendars there is very little theological discussion of sanctity and how the notion of sanctity connects to Anglican theology as a whole. Thus–in my subjective opinion–the seeds for the ongoing controversy around the prayer book’s sanctoral calendar were sown here with the recommendation of such a calendar, but with no clear theology of sanctity to underpin it.
I find myself coming back to this study again and again when thinking about and writing on saints and sanctity in the Anglican Communion/Episcopal Church. If you have an interest in the Sanctoral Calendar, understandings and misunderstandings of it, this one is not to be missed!
The studies contained in this volume, PBS X-XV, hit the first major seam in the series. The first five studies (X-XIV) mostly deal with the pastoral offices, with the exception of PBS XII which takes on the collects of the Church Year, and should be seen within the broader context of PBS I-XIV. These fourteen studies that appeared in ten publications (four volumes contain two studies) systematically explore all of the liturgical materials within the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, incorporating scholarly research alongside input from clergy and congregations, concluding each study with a sample liturgy based on the study and reflection of the Commission.
The final study, PBS XV, is not–properly–a study of any particular liturgy. Rather, it is a plea directly from the Standing Liturgical Commission to the delegates of the 1961 General Convention for the adoption of the category of “trial use” in order that the liturgies produced by the Commission could be experienced by worshipping congregations and be tested in actual practice rather than in theoretical read-throughs.
PBS X/XI
This first study on Marriage is a now-typical gentle revision of the 1928 rite, primarily concerned with altering rubrics and words that have changed meaning. Other changes, like both rings now being blessed before either are given, are relatively minor.
The second study revising the former rite of the Churching of Women makes some major changes. Here the original prayer book logic for the rite–removing the ritual taint of childbirth from a new mother–is rejected and the rite is rethought and restructured as a communal thanksgiving for the birth of a child.Like the studies on the Visitation of the Sick (PBS III) and the Penitential Office (PBS VII), this study demonstrates the way the revisers reinterpreted a rite no longer in step with modern beliefs and attitudes.
PBS XII
Far and away the longest study in this volume, the third study picks up where PBS IX on the sanctoral calendar left off. Taking the list of recommended feasts and fast from there, this study provides the liturgical materials in terms of Epistles, Gospels, and collects for their Eucharistic celebration. The new groupings of saints such as Pastors, Missionaries, Theologians, etc. are first found here, and most saints share collects with a small group of like-minded souls (biographical collects having been explicitly rejected).
Propers for some weekdays of Lent are also given here, appointing Epistles and Gospels for Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. There is no sense yet of a dropping of the Pre-Lenten season.
PBS XIII/XIV
The fourth study on Burial is remarkably terse in its initial material. There is only the briefest sketch of historical development, and barely a nod to the principles of revision. The vast majority of the content is simply the revised rites which are lightly amended from their 1928 models.
The fifth study on the Institution of a Rector contains much more historical detail than Burial, as well as principles of revision. There are few revisions from the 1928 rite, with the exception of one alteration that already points a to a key shift in Episcopal public worship: whereas the institution in the 1928 rite could occur in the context of Morning Prayer, Evening Prayer, or Eucharist, this revised rite requires the celebration of the Eucharist by the newly instituted rector.
PBS XV
The fifth and final “study” in this volume is not a true liturgical study, but rather a plea to the delegates of the 1961 General Convention. It is a study in that it rehearses the history and failures of American prayer book revision based on the lapses of parliamentary procedure; it notes that the 1928 book was passed over a period of fifteen years and five successive conventions before all parts were ratified twice by both houses and that only because the 1925 convention halted all new business until the prayer book matters were completed! Indeed, a resolution to initiate a formal process of prayer book revision was passed by the House of Deputies in 1958, but never taken up by the House of Bishops. Rather than making the same mistake or worse, this study calls for new solutions to old problems, chiefly the designation of “trial use.”
First Series, Part II
These studies bring to an end the First Series–those studies designated with Roman numerals. They sit in an interesting place between what has come before and what will come after. These studies revisit ground already trod in the first series. Returning to them now is significant because two major shifts have occurred since the original studies were written.
First, the plea of PBS XV succeeded: the change to Article X of the Canons allowing “trial use” passed overwhelmingly by voice vote in the 1961 General Convention (before the publication of PBS XVI) and a second time in the 1964 General Convention (before the publication of PBS XVII). Thus, both of these are written looking forward to or actually receiving the benefits of trial use in actual worshipping congregations.
Second, these studies appeared in the context of the greatest ecclesiastical shift of the 20th century, the Roman Catholic reforms of Vatican II that took place between 1962 and 1965. For the first time in a millennium and a half, the Roman Catholic Mass was revised along 4th century lines and made available in vernacular languages; for the first time, Roman Catholic and Episcopal laity could compare the liturgies of their co-religionists and discover their similarities.
However, with these publications, the Episcopal Church had not yet turned the corner to full revision; that would not come until the 1967 General Convention. Thus, these two studies are the last words of academically inclined theoretical study. From the publication of PBS I-XV–that is, from 1950 to 1961–the membership of the Standing Liturgical Commission consisted of 20 people, 4 of whom remained in key roles the entire time. The time from 1961 to 1966 added 7 new people to that number. In other words, the First Series was governed by disciplined academic and ecclesiastical control that emphasized a cautious and reverent approach to the materials. What will come next will be a radical expansion of voices and authors at the same time that tight deadlines and turnarounds will be demanded from those crafting the new liturgies.
PBS XVI
This first study on the Calendar draws together the calendrical contents of PBS IX and XII into a usable form. The initial portion describes changes that have occurred within other Anglican Calendars as well as sanctoral changes wrought at Vatican II and their impact on the developing Episcopal Calendar. The proposed material presents the 12-month Calendar of observances, then the Collects, Epistles,and Gospels for the Fasts starting with the Ember Days of Advent and all Wednesdays and Fridays in Lent, the Rogation Days and the Summer and Fall Ember days. After the Fasts come the Lesser Feasts, starting with Channing More Williams on December 2nd through the Church Year until Clement on November 23rd. From there it takes on the Common of Saints, followed by the Propers for Special Occasions.
This proposed material would be accepted for trial use at the 1963 General Convention and would be published in 1964 as the first Lesser Feasts & Fasts.
This also brings us to our new shape of the Church Year with a dropping of the Pre-Lent section, but without the Triduum liturgies.
PBS XVII
Where there was not much change in the sanctoral material from the previous Studies, quite a bit was needed for this second study on the Eucharist. Indeed, this volume is explicitly framed as a report on PBS IV. Over 150 responses from groups large and small had been received by the time the drafting of this new study began in 1960–six years before its eventual publication. By that point it had become clear that a mere revision of the rite of PBS IV would not be acceptable, and that work would need to begin again from the ground up. In addition to offering critiques of PBS IV, the study also discusses changes due to Vatican II and includes a selection of consecration prayers from worldwide liturgical efforts through the 1950’s and 60’s.
Further changes in later studies would demonstrate that this proposed prayer, too, would be found lacking in several important respects.
Conclusion
I hope this has been helpful; if so, I’ll do a similar post on the Second Series (PBS 18-30)!
Super interesting.
At some point, if you have the time and inclination, I would like to hear about how the psalms were incorporated into the Prayer Book. I’ve read that they were included pretty much “as written” by the SLC, that there was no, or almost no discussion or debate about their contents, as Galley’s sub- committee was trusted to do this work.
I remain fascinated by some of the choices in the wording of the psalms in the Prayer Book, and was wondering if you could confirm what I’ve read, and (if so) if there’s any more detail somewhere about the detailed translation issues in the Psalter.
Apart from the fairly brief intro to PBS 23, the single best resource on the ’79 revision of the Psalter is *Auden, the Psalms, & Me* (https://amzn.to/4jSzdn1) by J. Chester Johnson who replaced Auden on the Psalms Committee. Highly recommend if you want to learn more about it!
> the single best resource on the ’79 revision of the Psalter is *Auden, the Psalms, & Me*
OMG, this is exactly what I’ve been looking for. Thanks soooo much.
You’re such an amazing and accessible resource, it really is much appreciated.