This service followed the Order of Holy Communion of the 'Alternative Services Series Two' of the Church of England, authorized for use from 1966 to 1979, and was the first revised Eucharistic liturgy after the unfortunate Book of Common Prayer proposed in 1928 (approved by the Church, but twice rejected by the Parliament). This liturgy, unlike the fairly traditional 1928 revision followed the pattern of the 1549 BCP and Scottish-American rite , was the first attempt at a 'new direction' in liturgical reform. The language was modernised, but still retained some traditional words, such as ‘thou’ when addressing God, and almost all the singing texts.
Our village church still has this exact same style of delivering this. Also on an old organ, it has the same sound, look and feel of this recording. Thanks for posting this, I had to hunt around for a long time to find a version that captured what I felt at that time.
@S. Albans "after the unfortunate revised Book of Common Prayer proposed in 1928". The only "unfortunate" thing was the liturgical vandalism that has bereft us of this beautiful reverence. I know this is Series 2, and as such (in 1970 I was but five years old) the rot had barely begun. In the name of making the Church "relevant" and patronising us children of the day by telling us that "we could not understand the old words with 'thou' and 'thee'" - that was what I most of all hated and resented in priests - the clergy went from parish to parish as Dutch Elm Disease went from tree to tree, with the same culturally devastating results. And how "relevant" did they make the Church? And in this cultural vandalism done in our name, though none of us (not in my circle of friends) ever wanted it, did it grow the Church so it now bursts at the seams with young people? I trow not! And yes, you can all call me old and conservative today, but back in those days I myself was a child, and this was most definitely NOT done in my name!
The 1928 BCP was a godly book in line with traditional Anglican teaching-high church, yes, but moderate. Parliament's rejection plunged the CoE into liturgical anarchy, and the hope of liturgical uniformity, which had sacrificed two martyred archbishops, Cranmer and Laud, finally died out.
I haven't heard a Merbecke setting for ages which is a shame. I think the Boomer generation dislike it having been subjected to badly rendered versions of it in their youth.
What a wonderful video. A remnder of what we have lost...
It's still like this in some places! Not all is lost
I do so agree!
Beautiful, such practices should be come more common again.
I always loved the crossings out, sellotaped in additions, arrows, etc in the Missal
This service followed the Order of Holy Communion of the 'Alternative Services Series Two' of the Church of England, authorized for use from 1966 to 1979, and was the first revised Eucharistic liturgy after the unfortunate Book of Common Prayer proposed in 1928 (approved by the Church, but twice rejected by the Parliament). This liturgy, unlike the fairly traditional 1928 revision followed the pattern of the 1549 BCP and Scottish-American rite , was the first attempt at a 'new direction' in liturgical reform. The language was modernised, but still retained some traditional words, such as ‘thou’ when addressing God, and almost all the singing texts.
Our village church still has this exact same style of delivering this. Also on an old organ, it has the same sound, look and feel of this recording.
Thanks for posting this, I had to hunt around for a long time to find a version that captured what I felt at that time.
Your parish is blessed and very lucky.
@@instantinople3796 would be interesting if we did..!
@S. Albans "after the unfortunate revised Book of Common Prayer proposed in 1928". The only "unfortunate" thing was the liturgical vandalism that has bereft us of this beautiful reverence. I know this is Series 2, and as such (in 1970 I was but five years old) the rot had barely begun. In the name of making the Church "relevant" and patronising us children of the day by telling us that "we could not understand the old words with 'thou' and 'thee'" - that was what I most of all hated and resented in priests - the clergy went from parish to parish as Dutch Elm Disease went from tree to tree, with the same culturally devastating results. And how "relevant" did they make the Church? And in this cultural vandalism done in our name, though none of us (not in my circle of friends) ever wanted it, did it grow the Church so it now bursts at the seams with young people? I trow not! And yes, you can all call me old and conservative today, but back in those days I myself was a child, and this was most definitely NOT done in my name!
The 1928 BCP was a godly book in line with traditional Anglican teaching-high church, yes, but moderate. Parliament's rejection plunged the CoE into liturgical anarchy, and the hope of liturgical uniformity, which had sacrificed two martyred archbishops, Cranmer and Laud, finally died out.
I haven't heard a Merbecke setting for ages which is a shame. I think the Boomer generation dislike it having been subjected to badly rendered versions of it in their youth.