The Unfriendly Folks of the ACNA

The compilers of the 2019 Proposed ACNA Prayer Book adapted enough textual material from the Episcopal Church's The Book of Common Prayer of 1979 that the 2019 book can be described as a knockoff of the 1979 book. This can be seen from a careful examination of the two books. In the world of fashion knockoffs are cheap versions of the latest fashions produced for sale to the larger public. They are made from less expensive materials and do not exhibit the quality of workmanship that went into the original.

From my brief interaction with an administrator of the Anglican Church In North America (Unofficial) Facebook discussion group it is evident that whoever is running that group prefers not to have the defects of the 2019 Proposed ACNA Prayer Book drawn to public attention. It is noteworthy that the book in question to my knowledge has never been formally adopted by the ACNA and it was left to the individual dioceses of the ACNA to decide what service books might be used in their churches.

Despite the ACNA’s hyping of the book and its traditional language version, the 2019 Proposed ACNA Prayer Book is inferior to a number of Anglican service books with which I am familiar. It lacks the flexibility needed for the North American mission field. It also departs from what has historically been Anglican doctrine and practice in a number of key areas.

In the post I submitted I queried what lay behind the interest of the younger generations in older prayer books like the 1662 BCP and the 1928 BCP. Both service books, while they use Tudor English, differ from each other in doctrine and practice. The 1662 BCP was a prayer book revision compiled by the High Church Restoration Bishops who were influenced by the 1637 Scottish Prayer Book. It represented in a number of ways a departure from the 1552-1559-1604 family of prayer books.

On the other hand, the 1928 BCP is an early 20th century compromise between the Anglo-Catholic and Broad Church wings of the then Protestant Episcopal Church. It shares a number of features with the Church of England’s unsuccessful prayer book revision efforts of 1926 and 1928. Its communion office has roots in the unorthodox Scottish Usager Non-Juror communion office of 1764, an office whose eucharistic doctrine denied that Christ offered himself on the cross for the sins of the world and required a dual consecration of the elements.

From what I gathered from the comments the interest in these prayer books and their rites has more to do with their connection with the past and presumed antiquity than it does their doctrine or practices. The administrator’s rude dismissal—“go somewhere else”—kept me from exploring what was motivating this interest. I'm surprised that he did not toss salt at me as the Japanese do to unwelcome visitors. Such an inhospitable attitude will not help the ACNA to flourish and grow!!