Brian+ & Frank,

I think we have to be careful as traditionalists to distiniguish between 
essentials and non-essentials.  As venerable as the BCP Eucharistic 
lectionary is, it is not an essential of the Faith.  The Articles make it 
clear that the wisdom of the churches in given places and times can deem it 
pastorally useful to change or amend traditions of the church that don't 
touch upon essentials.  After all, we now take for granted all sorts of 
things which in the 16th century were striking breaks with past practice: 
vernacular liturgy, increased lay involvement, clerical marriage, and doing 
away with all sorts of medieval devotions.  Indeed, within Rome lots of 
voices were raised in protest after Vatican-2 over the move from the Latin 
Mass to the vernacular Mass.

As Anglicans, we must hold firm to the principle of lectionaries.  Too much 
of our identity has been shaped and informed by services obedient to set 
lectionaries.  But, it seems to me, that any given Church is free to devise 
any set lectionary it wishes to use.  Anything that takes one through 
Scripture regularly is good.  Certainly, some passages make more sense on 
given days--it would be funny to read a lesson about Jesus' baptism on, say, 
Easter Sunday--but if all of Scripture is edifying, I'd hate to imply that 
some Gospel lessons are better or truer than others.

(Actually, Easter is a good case in point.  Why does the BCP Gospel end 
prior to the Resurrection appearance...the "...and believed" clearly refers 
to John and Peter believing Mary's report that the tomb was empty not that 
Jesus had risen from the dead!)

Now, obviously, the task of remaining pastorally comprehensible to our 
contemporary scene takes all the wisdom of Solomon.  Steering the course 
between an archaeological church on the one hand and a revisionist church on 
the other is difficult, not least because each of us has a bias towards the 
one end or the other and deep down each of us wants the church with which we 
are most comfortable.  Frankly, I think there is a whole host of adaiphora 
which we ought to consider amending that make less and less sense in our 
world.  I think we've made two very important ones already--the new 
lectionary and allowing modern Biblical translations--that within my own 
parish have already begun to bear fruit.

I'd love to see us all, both traditional and conservative Anglicans, begin 
discussing the theological principals of Anglicanism and then address how 
best to convey those basic beliefs and customs in the 21st century.

Mark+