What is the Unchanging Principle? A Discussion of the Eucharistic Ordo in Anglicanism

In these times of threatened schism, perhaps it would be wise for the church to examine the basis of its unity, rather than the causes of division. In the worldwide Anglican Communion, a great diversity of liturgical texts, theological viewpoints, and styles of churchmanship are represented. Is there nevertheless an unchanging principle that undergirds the liturgy of the eucharist for Anglicans? This essay seeks to foster a conversation about the eucharistic ordo in Anglicanism. A discussion of the ordo may help remind us that an integral part of our purpose as church is to engage in Christ's mission of reconciliation in the world. This is indeed the very calling of the church, its essential leitourgia, the sacrament by which it becomes what it already is.

This essay discusses the concept of the eucharistic ordo-particularly as found in David Fagerberg and Gordon Lathrop, with attention to Alexander Schmemann, deference to Louis-Marie Chauvet, and apologies to Gregory Dix. The form is a rambling or reflection-not a scientific inquiry. This seems a particularly fitting way to discuss the peculiarly Anglican criteria of liturgical theology. After a brief word on the theological method employed, this essay will examine various definitions of the term ordo. A discussion of the definitions, their virtues, and their shortcomings follows, along with an attempt at a discussion and critique from an Anglican perspective.

The texts surveyed here represent sundry points on a wide spectrum of current liturgical thought. Various authors have been included not so much for their diversity of opinion, however, as for their engagement of the topic. The concept of eucharistie ordo, addressed in some means or other by various authors, does not attract the attention of all liturgical scholars and theologians. Given the definitional character of the task here, one might well start with a dictionary. A standard desk-reference dictionary defines ordo as "an annual calendar containing instructions for the Mass."1 Although describing the ordo as a calendar might inaccurately lead one to imagine a grid with twelve months consisting of 28 to 31 days each, this definition clearly indicates several tenets of a commonly held understanding of ordo. First, the ordo is at least a published document of some kind; whether calendar, book, or leaflet is immaterial. Second, it contains "instructions" for eucharistic worship; it implies rules, regulations, and rubrics of some sort or condition. It is, therefore, from this baseline assumption that the essay to follow proceeds, asking the question, what else-besides the written instructions-can be included under the umbrella of ordo?

Within Anglicanism, the authorized texts of liturgical rites have a kind of privileged place. The Prayer Book serves as the icon of the inherited tradition for American Anglicans, even though the texts have undergone numerous revisions since the first liturgies in English. Much of the material dates to the original English liturgy of 1549, although the order of some elements, the composition of various phrases, and many minutiae have changed. It is important to recognize that Thomas Cranmer, the leading figure in the development of the original sixteenth-century English prayer books, held as a guiding principle that the liturgy be translated into English-what the later Thirty-nine Articles would term as being "in such a tongue as the people understandeth," that is, in their vernacular language and idiom.2 This foundational Anglican principle is yet held in our time by the Standing Liturgical Commission, which states their explicit intention as producing rites in an American vernacular.3

Thus, any discussion of the Anglican ordo must include attention to textual detail and a concern for the people s understanding of the texts. Within the realm of texts, several particular aspects emerge as possible symbols of Anglican identity. Examples of specifically Anglican textual elements of the eucharistic rite include the classic forms of the Collect for Purity, the Comfortable Words, and the Prayer of Humble Access.4

In addition, scholars have long based theological claims on the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer. For instance, claims about Anglican belief in the real presence of Christ in the eucharist are frequently argued from the use of terms like "consecrated bread" in rubrics describing the proper disposition of a surplus after communion. So one could argue that the Anglican ordo is a variant of the Western Christian structure, with the addition of some specific texts and attention to the theological implications of the rubrics.

On the other hand, various authors have suggested that ordo is something quite apart from and beyond the text. Fagerberg offers an explication, comparison, and criticism of various methods and forms of liturgical theology, in which he brings to light several points, including the notion that the content of the ortZo is a grammar, code, or story. he clearly lays out a premise that what we are calling ordo is more complex and involved than simple written instructions or texts. Fagerberg sets the problem of the orrZo under three headings: the basic structure of the worship presupposed, the origin and development of that structure, and the meaning of the ordo-its theological content as the Zg% ora?i