I don't get to church as often as I'd like for a variety of reasons, but when I do, it's usually because there's a Communion service and I feel the need for spiritual nourishment [of course!]. My church does Communion once a month, so when I do make the effort to go, am I right to expect them to stick to their own order of service? They often skip passages, and when they read the prayer of consecration, whizz through it so quickly it makes me feel they really shouldn't bother! Today's excuse was that '...we are a bit pushed for time, so we'll go straight to the prayer of humble access" - thus missing the prayers of confession so no absolution? preface is missed out 'lift up your hearts...holy holy holy' no prayer of humble access, though they did do it today! prayers of consecration - rushed but there & no actual touching or lifting of the vessels the Lord's Prayer is often missed out altogether hardly ever a Blessing at the end, though today they decided to say it It's an Anglican evangelical church, so doctrinally it's the right one for me, but if they profess to be Anglican and go to the effort of designing, and distributing an order of service, am I being petty to think that they should use it fully? And as for their comment about being a bit pushed for time, so we'll abbreviate Communion even more than usual, I feel that it's being disrespectful of the institution and thus disobeying our Lord's express command to treat Communion in such a way. Can anyone reassure me that their explanation, when challenged - that "God works in all things, so even if we don't say it all, it's still OK" is satisfactory? I just feel that when I do get myself to church, I want to feel fully 'forgiven and refreshed' by Holy Communion.
I my opinion you are absolutely and 100% right, and if they don't conscientiously follow the liturgy, they are violating the prescribed course of God. Remember that liturgy is the way we worship God, it's the divinely ordained course of worship. Not only did our Lord dutifully attend all Old Testament liturgies, and even read in the Synagogue the prescribed reading for the day, but he composed his own formula of prayer, for us to follow. So at your worship not only must the minister follow the liturgy as told him by the Church, but he must do it reverently, and pray all Rites and Prayers (of absolution on our behalf etc), with the utmost intention.
The rubrics do not require a general confession and absolution. The rubrics (330 and p. 359) state, "On occasion, the Confession may be omitted." So called "Rite III" permits a confession but does not require it. Everywhere I have attended church confession/absolution was a normal part of the rite. Rite I requires a priestly blessing. Rite II and so-called "Rite III" do not. There is no provision for omission of the Lord's Prayer from Rite I or Rite II. So-called "Rite III" doesn't require it, though for Anglicans to omit is strikes me as odd. It has never been omitted in my experience. The sursum corda is required in Rite I, Rite II, and so-called "Rite III". There is no lawful way to omit it. I have never experienced it being omitted. The Sanctus is not required in so-called "Rite III". A proper preface is not required. Prayers C and D do not have them. The Prayer of Humble access is never required. It is permitted in Rite I. Rite II really has no room for it unless one is willing to stretch a point and call it an "anthem" under the rubric on p. 364. (I deem this a flaw in Rite II.) The "Break the Bread" portion of so-called "Rite III" seems broad enough to make room for it. The rubrics require that the president at least "lay a hand upon" the bread and cup. This rubric is repeated on every authorized prayer of thanksgiving. At the very least the president should stretch his hands out over the bread and the cup. So if they omit the Lord's prayer and sursum corda, and fail to perform any sort of manual acts, you have grounds for complaint. Furthermore, the rubrics for so-called "Rite III" explicitly state that it "is not intended for use at the principal Sunday or weekly celebration of the Holy Eucharist." (p. 400). If they are relying on "Rite-III" rubrics for their main service on Sunday, they are misusing those rubrics.
I wouldn't like that approach. I attend an Anglo-Catholic parish. We follow Rite I exactly as printed in the BCP.
The idea of the Book of Common Prayer was that they were the prayers we had in common. As Anglicans the collect for Purity and the Prayer of Humble Access are good Anglican fare, and part of our heritage and legacy. I don't have a problem with their being a modern and contemporary liturgy, I just feel that some of the shape and form of the liturgy where do do things 'decently and in order' are a good thing. A wag one said that the Church of England was a divers group of people loosely bound together by a Prayer Book - dare I say a prayer book that very few of us use any more. The Sursum Corda (lift up your hearts) ties us back to the most ancient of the rites.