1662 is the Standard for ACNA

Discussion in 'Liturgy, and Book of Common Prayer' started by Magistos, Aug 11, 2019.

  1. Magistos

    Magistos Active Member Anglican

    Posts:
    148
    Likes Received:
    107
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    Not sure if this should go here or in Theology and Doctrine, but I thought that this was an interesting article that clears up some questions about the 2019 BCP and what the standard is.

    Common Authority in the Midst of Uncommon Prayer
     
  2. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    1,019
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Yup the 1662 is authoritative for the entire Gafcon, worldwide, as it's in its 2008 founding charter. We should do better in studying and rediscovering the beauties of the 1662 rather than trying to come up with new liturgies.
     
    Dave Kemp, Anglo-cracker and Will_ like this.
  3. Fr. Brench

    Fr. Brench Active Member Anglican

    Posts:
    81
    Likes Received:
    116
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    I just read that article today, too; I thought it was great!

    The unfortunate reality though is that very few of us Americans have really looked at the 1662 prayer book very closely, so a lot of our reverence for it is only just lip service. A lot of us have a lot of learning to do if we're going to live up to what Deacon Brashier described in his article.
     
    Magistos and Shane R like this.
  4. Shane R

    Shane R Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    315
    Likes Received:
    349
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    A few days ago, I learned that a jurisdiction on the fringes of the continuing movement has standardized on the 1662 and RSV-Catholic Edition. Now there's a dichotomy one does not see every day.
     
    Stalwart likes this.
  5. Magistos

    Magistos Active Member Anglican

    Posts:
    148
    Likes Received:
    107
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    Very true, unfortunately. I've read through the 1662, but I'll have to pull out my copy and keep it handier than I have. I'm not an ordinand in any way (though when I retire, who knows), but I do like to be informed in my faith - something that I love about Anglicanism - it encourages informed faith.
     
    Fr. Brench likes this.
  6. Magistos

    Magistos Active Member Anglican

    Posts:
    148
    Likes Received:
    107
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    That is definitely something. :D
     
  7. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    1,019
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I mean, the criticism we saw from the Anglo-Catholics of the 1662 is really a figment of the 19th and 20th centuries. It's dying down (as we see), and it certainly didn't exist prior to the Ritualist movement of the 1850s. Nor can it be born out by the close reading of the text itself. All of their complaints about the black rubric (etc), are no closer to the truth than was the evangelical criticism of the same book as 'too catholic'. Both of those criticisms are coming from the two movements which themselves are essentially disappearing. The 1662 is still here with us, and all of a sudden more doctrinally binding now than it's been in our lifetimes.

    The fact of the matter is, the 1662 is one of the most successful liturgies in the history of Christendom, on par with the 1589 Latin rite, and the 1500s Slavonic Orthodox rite. (Luther's German Mass would've been a 4th one, if they managed to preserve it.) You simply cannot buy or manufacture centuries. If you make a liturgy now, you'll need to wait 400 more years to see if it will be as effective (in creating and nurturing faith across millions of people), as the 1662 was. This makes 1662 the gold standard. And yes I can address unfounded criticisms of the black rubric or this or that. It was all rubbish, from the pens of self-important nabobs who had left little that was eternal during their lifetimes.
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2019 at 9:35 AM
  8. PDL

    PDL Member Anglican

    Posts:
    97
    Likes Received:
    77
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    I think that would be a desperate criticism of it. If that is all one has to criticise it one does not have much criticism of it. I would hope criticisms of the BCP would go deeper than that.

    However, on a practical level I would offer that criticism not only of the BCP but any liturgical book. They are far easier to use if headings, sub-headings, etc. are in a different colour than the text. With the text itself it really does help if the rubrics (whether you make them red or not) and what is to be actually said are in different colours. As for the words to be spoken, again, a distinction between what a single priest or other minster says and all say is very helpful. I, for one, would have no issue at all if an edition of the BCP was published in this way.
     
  9. Rexlion

    Rexlion Active Member

    Posts:
    311
    Likes Received:
    199
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    I'm in the Diocese of the Living Word which the article mentions. The '79 books were pulled out and replaced with the 2019 BCPs as soon as the rector got back from the conference. :thumbsup:
     

Share This Page