Why we have rubrics

The purpose of liturgical law, rubrics, and tradition is... to prevent the arbitrary exercise of power.

But what to do when such rules are completely ignored and treated like they are ... irrelevant to the choices made over the structure of the liturgy?
(Jeffrey Tucker, in "How to Criticize Liturgical Music," Sacred Music v. 139 no. 2 [summer 2012], p. 61)

For many years, I worked in non-liturgical congregations: Baptists, then a southern Presbyterian congregation that in those days was thoroughly non-liturgical. That has changed since I left, perhaps in part because of my seventeen years of work among them, laying groundwork that made it possible for a new minister to introduce the Revised Common Lectionary and other innovations.

But of course there is always "liturgy." It simply goes by other names: "The order of service," or "How we do things," or "It has always been this way." And in places where there is not the Book of Common Prayer (or equivalent) widely distributed among the faithful, it becomes an "arbitrary exercise of power." It is done this way because the senior minister says so. Or in some cases, because one or more influential members of the congregation say so -- this is almost always unhealthy, even worse than when it is the minister's will that prevails.

Having seen this, I treasure the Book of Common Prayer. Because of this book, our liturgy is conducted in a manner that is connected with the larger traditions of the church, and is not subject to the whims of rectors or vicars, or even diocesan bishops. Ideally, this would be so. In practice, it often is not. And that brings me to Mr. Tucker's question: "What to do when such rules are ignored?"

I have no answer to that.