Those are not translations, those are the two rites for Holy Communion in ACNA's BCP2019. I suppose I could mention the influence of the book in the Continuum. Most of the clergy (who use the internet anyway) ordered one to see what it was all about. I don't know of any Continuing bishop of a reputable jurisdiction who has authorized those liturgies. I have heard a few reports of those in what my colleague in NC candidly labeled the 'Anglican miscellany' who have permitted use of portions or all of the material. I had to check out of the bulk of the discussion of the book because, as with any discussion of liturgy in the Continuum, certain Neanderthal-like individuals came out in force fast to grunt about the deficiencies of the book. I don't consider a poorly chosen word or an unfortunate rubric here or there to be earth shattering. The fact that it is designed with a 3 year lectionary was enough to get some cranks to declare it heretical. There was a huge uproar over the initial rubrics that prescribed what to do with any left over wine after the Communion such that ACNA actually made a modest change to it for the second printing because even their Anglo-Catholics were bent out of shape. My bishop dislikes the baptism service (p. 161). We haven't discussed his objections in depth but I went back and read it in detail to see if I could pick up on whatever it is he might be objecting to. I will say, the page entitled 'Concerning Holy Baptism' (p. 160) which precedes the rite is unfortunate; it does not make any mention of regeneration. The rite itself is unremarkable, except for not including a prayer of exorcism, but I have no objection to that. An exorcism prayer has been absent in BCP revisions for quite some time so it's not like this was an unprecedented change. The application of chrism oil is optional but again that is not anything that hasn't been seen before.