We are celebrating a quarter century of A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa.
But what exactly are we celebrating?!
Naively, perhaps, I previously would have responded that we are celebrating a particular bound book first published in 1989. After that, there is a 1997, a 2002, and a 2005 edition.
But…
Other people have quite another way that the words A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa are understood. This approach, which is followed all the way to the highest positions in our church, understands A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa to refer to all the liturgical formularies binding on our church, complementing the Book of Common Prayer.
So, from their perspective, for example, although the alternative eucharistic prayers are not found in any bound publication, they are formularies of our church (binding agreements) and so are part of A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa. Similarly, the (about-to-become-even-more eccentric-if-Bill 6-passes) Notes on the Calendar – Te Maramataka, and Precedence in Liturgical Observance – Kupu Whakamarama – Ko Tēhea te Rā Tuatahi o Ngā Rā Hākari are part of it. A Form for Ordering A Service of the Word is part of it. And so is the poorly-thought-through, confused-and-confusing Alternative Form for Ordering the Eucharist (now possibly one of the weakest links in General Synod Te Hinota Whanui’s recent attempt to get its liturgical ducks in a row – something it will need to get right as it works towards implementing Motion 30).
In the Anglican Church of Or A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa can refer to the bound book I hold in my hand OR it can refer to…
Yeah nah.
Really? Definitely not what I’ve ever understood (or heard). In the words of my over-enthusiastic youth, that’s cray-cray!!
So, just to clarify, Brian: you like me understood ANZPB to be the physical book? Blessings.
I do.
Good to be on the same page on this, Brian. Others aren’t on the same page or chapter… If it affects a Motion-30-type thing in the future, we may yet see General Synod moving to have “NZPB” defined, just like they have started to attempt expanding the definition of “authorised services”. Blessings.
Perhaps they could use slightly different terms? Perhaps “A New Zealand Prayer Bookshelf”. Certainly if you have the full set of Common Worship materials here – so you get everything at least once – it’s about a 18″ of shelf space.
I think you are playing with words here, Bosco, and mixing up two distinct points!
Point 1 is, it is 25 years since ANZPB was published to great acclaim and that publication has shaped, influenced and supported the liturgical life of our church and, so we are constantly assured, the life of other churches. Nothing need impede the celebrations since it is an indisputable fact that 25 years ago ANZPB was published and our church began to use it.
Point 2 is, in 2014, looking backwards over various changes promulgated by GS, some of which are in the latest printing of the book and some of which are not, and looking around at the current and possibly about to be after 2016 GS and beyond, there is now a question as to what constitutes ANZPB? With associated questions such as, may I refer to an original 1989 edition as ‘ANZPB’ (given that it now contains some words which are no longer authorised)?
Perhaps a question which joins the two points together is this: if I held a party to celebrate 25 years of ANZPB being published, which edition of the prayer book should be on the table beside the cake? [!!]
I am certainly not playing with words, sorry, Peter.
What you call “Point 2” was already present at the time of your “Point 1”. In 1989 I would have picked up the single bound volume and called it “ANZPB”. Those who see “ANZPB” referring to all the liturgical formularies complementing BCP would also, just to give one example, have included the separately bound “The New Zealand Liturgy 1970”.
If I was putting books by cakes this year, I might put the 1989 single volume on one side, and the 2005 edition on the other (or have all the editions and printings there). They would have a plethora of other publications with the cake (good luck easily finding a list of these!). Which of these two options would you follow?
Blessings.
Point 2 is about variations to and developments of 1989 NZPB. Nothing to do with BCP or 1970 Liturgy.
I would celebrate the publication 25 years ago of NZPB. I would also host a lecture from an eminent NZ liturgiologist charting “Developments in ACANZP liturgical life since 1989: retrospect and prospect”
You seem to be missing the point of the blog post, Peter. You are simply treating ANZPB as the bound volume you find on your shelf (my approach). My post is saying, and I repeat myself: “Other people have quite another way that the words A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa are understood. This approach, which is followed all the way to the highest positions in our church, understands A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa to refer to all the liturgical formularies binding on our church, complementing the Book of Common Prayer.” In that view, just to stay with the one example I used, “The New Zealand Liturgy 1970″ is understood to have been part of A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa in 1989. You seem to be arguing against their understanding, which is fine, and doing so underscores that this is not just “playing with words”. Blessings.
Hi Bosco
Your play with words is to start with the celebration of 25 years of ANZPB (about which there should be no confusion) and then segue from that to ask the question what this book (or ‘book’!) currently consists of/is understood to consist of.
I have no problem with the second part, the question of current status. I do have a problem with raising doubts about celebrating the 1989 publication of the NZPB. That its subsequent history has become chequered is no reason to wonder what we are celebrating today.
Yes, Peter. You and I agree that about ANZPB there should be no confusion. There is. You and I think it is a book. Others, including significant leadership in our church, do not think the term refers to the bound book, and that the term did not refer just to the bound book in 1989 when the term first came into being. You are confused in the second paragraph of your comment – it is not that “its subsequent history has become chequered”. Rather than my repeating my explanation, please read my post and the explanatory comments again. Blessings.
Hmm. I think the word-play here is with you Peter.
When I was a child I was a great fan of Enid Blyton’s Famous Five series. At a younger age I had enjoyed The Magic Faraway Tree, but I never really got into The Secret Seven. The thing is, while represent a part of the Blyton corpus, it would be completely wrong to say a book in one series was also part of another. The Famous Five do not belong with the Secret Seven!
I agree with Bosco, and I am quite certain most would be in the same place: A New Zealand Prayer Book He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa is most definitely the collection of liturgies and other material collected together under that name and found in the bound volume of any particular edition. That doesn’t mean the other authorised liturgies and resources are of any less value or significance, they are simply not a part (at this time) of this collection.
There has been talk from time to time of an Alternative Services Book being produced (similar to the US), and that has gone through several permutations, including CDROM, loose-leaf folder, bound volume and website. Much like the often discussed mobile version of the Prayer Book (originally the Pierced Palm project), this has never actually gotten off the ground. Perhaps it should. Alternatively, if those in certain places really want to insist it is ALL ANZPB/HKMOA, the entire corpus of authorised resources might be included in the next printing of the book – either in numerous bound volumes a la Common Worship, or in one gigantic edition, like the Roman sacramentary I have in my office which so effectively flattened the collected pages of my thesis before binding!
Pax
Brian
Thanks, Brian, for the very helpful clarification. Blessings.
Hi Bosco
You haven’t actually provided evidence that in 1989 itself, when the highest levels of leadership in our church picked up a copy of ANZPB, some thought they were also (in some mysterious liturgicum fashion) picking up the 1970 Liturgy.
I am not disputing that subsequently some people have developed what could be called a revisionist understanding of ANZPB.
Yes, you are correct, Peter. The concept is a new one to me, and one that had not occurred to me. And you may very well be correct that it did not occur to anyone else in 1989. What I am saying is that currently there are people who see A New Zealand Prayer Book in 1989 in fact including, for example, The New Zealand Liturgy 1970, whether people in 1989 thought of that or not. As I think we have reached an impasse, Peter, it may help if one of us actually found some canonical references as to what is actually printed and bound into ANZPB, and/or who has authority to decide what is in the bound book and what is not. Blessings.
As soon as my appointment as Liturgy Tsar is ratified – I believe the ABC is in the country next week – all will be clarified.
Don’t tell anyone that I will be passing all proclamations in penultimate draft form by you and Brian before pinning them to our cathedrals’ doors.