I was Orthodox for many years. Including a general confession and absolution within the Eucharistic liturgy has always felt strange to me. As I said above: I think some people want the Eucharistic liturgy to be some sort of catch-all: Bible readings, check; Sermon, check; confession and absolution, check; communion and thanksgiving, check; etc. There is also the Daily Office, private reading and devotion, fasting and abstinence, auricular confession to the priest (if needed), etc. These things should occur with the Eucharist. It's not the job of the Eucharistic liturgy to do everything, if that makes sense. I'm not saying that's necessarily what you're saying, but I do think that's a common mindset. Omitting the general confession and absolution in no way invalidates the Liturgy.
Having attended the Roman rite for as long as I have, including occasionally the TLM where the confiteor is done not once but twice, I’ve become pretty accustomed to the kitchen sink approach to the Sunday service. And though I pray the office at least a few weeknights, I don’t hear any words of absolution unless I hear them on a Sunday. So it is nice to have them spoken.
I can certainly understand that. My own preference is for it to be included as well. I'm just saying I understand why they exclude it sometimes. I don't think it's the result of any illegitimate intent, at least not in the instances I've seen.
All I’m saying is, whatever the liturgy is, just do it, you don’t have the permission to take stuff out or put your own things in.
I had a look at Rite II penitential rite in the ‘79 BCP and the rubrics don’t use the word “may.” Perhaps he forgot it. I plan on meeting with him to ask him some questions and I’ll put this one on my list.
It is not common, but it does happen in the OCA, but in Oriental Orthodoxy a general confession and absolution is the norm for the Armenians and with the Assyrian Church of the East it is also the norm. https://www.oca.org/questions/sacramentconfession/general-confession
That's very interesting. I did not know that about the OO liturgy. I think OCA has had some Western influence, but I'm not sure. I was never in the OCA so my knowledge of it isn't firsthand.
Ok, but most liturgies have some degree of flexibility. Christ Our Passover vs. Venite in Daily Morning Prayer; dropping the antiphons during the Triduum in the Roman Divine Office; shortening/eliminating the Psalms in Orthodox Vespers; etc. Some variation is not only permissible, it is actually desirable. As the Preface to the Book of Common Prayer puts it: It hath been the wisdom of the Church of England, ever since the first compiling of her publick Liturgy, to keep the mean between the two extremes, of too much stiffness in refusing, and of too much easiness in admitting any variation from it. For, as on the one side common experience sheweth, that where a change hath been made of things advisedly established (no evident necessity so requiring) sundry inconveniences have thereupon ensued; and those many times more and greater than the evils, that were intended to be remedied by such change: So on the other side, the particular Forms of Divine worship, and the Rites and Ceremonies appointed to be used therein, being things in their own nature indifferent, and alterable, and so acknowledged; it is but reasonable, that upon weighty and important considerations, according to the various exigency of times and occasions, such changes and alterations should be made therein, as to those that are in place of Authority should from time to time seem either necessary or expedient. Accordingly we find, that in the Reigns of several Princes of blessed memory since the Reformation, the Church, upon just and weighty considerations her thereunto moving, hath yielded to make such alterations in some particulars, as in their responsive times were thought convenient: Yet so, as that the main Body and Essentials of it (as well in the chiefest materials, as in the frame and order thereof) have still continued the same unto this day, and do yet stand firm and unshaken, notwithstanding all the vain attempts and impetuous assaults made against it, by such men as are given to change, and have always discovered a greater regard to their own private fancies and interests, than to that duty they owe to the publick.
I just linked the article about the OCA. I know very little about it but I do remember reading it and found the article on it.
I actually really love the Armenian General Confession Prayer https://www.armenianchurchlibrary.com/files/confession.pdf I am not sure I could do a private confession that good
Personally, if there were no general confession & absolution, I wouldn't miss it. I just don't feel like I need the priest to tell me God has forgiven me, because I'm confident of it already. But I don't begrudge those who feel benefited by it.
This was the first instance I ever ran into it, when this new rector showed up. Sigh... As to your other question about leaving out portions of the Eucharist, there is a section in the 1979 BCP following Rites 1 & 2 called "An Order for Celebrating the Holy Eucharist," which appears to give a vague outline of which elements must be in the service but gives a lot of freedom to improvise (confession/ absolution is not a required element). See here: http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/euchr3.pdf
I have been in a number of different parishes over the years, and I’ve never known the rubrical flexibility allowed by the current Prayer Book to be abused like that. But, as C.S. Lewis put it, our job as laypersons is to take what the Church gives us and make the best of it.
Maybe I'm about to get embarrassed, but I'm pretty sure the OG Anglican Liturgy excludes the confession during Easter. It has some connection to the Early Church practices/approach to Easter. I'm surprised this is not a thing in ACNA. It's pretty common across the Anglican world, not just in the Episcopal Church. It's also a thing in the Roman Catholic Church too, they can exclude the Act of Penitence during Easter. If they're excluding it outside of Easter then that is...odd. Surely not permitted, even in TEC.
I could not find a rubric to that effect in the 1662, nevertheless the custom makes some liturgical sense. It doesn’t seem problematic unless it’s abused.