"We don’t have to pick one or the other, or the compromise middle location (after the Offertory). All three locations have historic precedence, devotional value, and liturgical sensibility."
I would qualify that statement slightly with a feature of the 1662 BCP that I have noticed contrasted with the modern prayer books: that the old prayers of the people offered in the canon or in the offertory are focused on the church militant in its widest sense being offered via prayer to God as a consecrated offering, to the exclusion of all things outside of the church broadly understood. That is important for the location of the prayers. The modern prayers of the people have a different content and should not be offered with the liturgy of the faithful itself, because they are offering things not consecrated to God. What do I mean?
The thing that made this stand out to me is regularly praying the whole course of proper matinal prayers in the 1662 for the Lord's Day: mattins, litany, and antecommunion. The phrase in the 1662 prayers of the peope that made me wonder is the phrase "...all Christian Kings, Princes, and Governors". Why only the Christian ones? Why not all irrespective of faith?
That caused me to notice that the 1662 Litany, in fact, *does* pray for all nations and rulers irrespective of faith--but outside of the liturgy of the faithful and not within the offering of all things consecrated to God, including ourselves, our souls and bodies, in the eucharist.
So we have in the traditional Prayer Book and distinction between all things holy and unholy in the world for which we offer our prayers and supplications in mattins and the litany on the one hand, and the offering and oblation of our prayers specifically and *exclusively* for the consecrated, holy, and sacrificing church militant in her broadest and most expansive boundary within the liturgy of the faithful (either at offertory or in canon, as you note).
The modern prayers of the people meld together the content of the old litany and the old prayers of the people in a mix of the holy and the unholy and so really must remain outside of the liturgy of the faithful and especially outside of the offertory, I would suggest.
That's an interesting distinction you've observed there. I noticed that in one of the late versions of the sarum rite there was an option where a priest would pray for his bishop and Pope, and a bishop would pray for the king, in that intercessory moment at the beginning of the Eucharistic Canon. But I suppose that is also in the same vein as what you describe: praying for people whom God has anointed to carry out his ministry of governance in a holy manner, however imperfect they may be. Thank you!
Correct, thus why the 1662 offers prayers for "*all* Christian Kings, Princes, and Govornors". That is *not* a nationalistic prayer, because that includes Christians kings, princes, and governors anywhere, but it is an exclusivist prayer for only those kings, princes and governors that be Christians, and thus part of the "church militant here on earth".
"We don’t have to pick one or the other, or the compromise middle location (after the Offertory). All three locations have historic precedence, devotional value, and liturgical sensibility."
I would qualify that statement slightly with a feature of the 1662 BCP that I have noticed contrasted with the modern prayer books: that the old prayers of the people offered in the canon or in the offertory are focused on the church militant in its widest sense being offered via prayer to God as a consecrated offering, to the exclusion of all things outside of the church broadly understood. That is important for the location of the prayers. The modern prayers of the people have a different content and should not be offered with the liturgy of the faithful itself, because they are offering things not consecrated to God. What do I mean?
The thing that made this stand out to me is regularly praying the whole course of proper matinal prayers in the 1662 for the Lord's Day: mattins, litany, and antecommunion. The phrase in the 1662 prayers of the peope that made me wonder is the phrase "...all Christian Kings, Princes, and Governors". Why only the Christian ones? Why not all irrespective of faith?
That caused me to notice that the 1662 Litany, in fact, *does* pray for all nations and rulers irrespective of faith--but outside of the liturgy of the faithful and not within the offering of all things consecrated to God, including ourselves, our souls and bodies, in the eucharist.
So we have in the traditional Prayer Book and distinction between all things holy and unholy in the world for which we offer our prayers and supplications in mattins and the litany on the one hand, and the offering and oblation of our prayers specifically and *exclusively* for the consecrated, holy, and sacrificing church militant in her broadest and most expansive boundary within the liturgy of the faithful (either at offertory or in canon, as you note).
The modern prayers of the people meld together the content of the old litany and the old prayers of the people in a mix of the holy and the unholy and so really must remain outside of the liturgy of the faithful and especially outside of the offertory, I would suggest.
That's an interesting distinction you've observed there. I noticed that in one of the late versions of the sarum rite there was an option where a priest would pray for his bishop and Pope, and a bishop would pray for the king, in that intercessory moment at the beginning of the Eucharistic Canon. But I suppose that is also in the same vein as what you describe: praying for people whom God has anointed to carry out his ministry of governance in a holy manner, however imperfect they may be. Thank you!
Correct, thus why the 1662 offers prayers for "*all* Christian Kings, Princes, and Govornors". That is *not* a nationalistic prayer, because that includes Christians kings, princes, and governors anywhere, but it is an exclusivist prayer for only those kings, princes and governors that be Christians, and thus part of the "church militant here on earth".