New Prayer Book

Discussion in 'Liturgy, and Book of Common Prayer' started by Jeffg, May 14, 2019.

  1. Will_

    Will_ Member

    Posts:
    49
    Likes Received:
    36
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    That's a good question due to the similarities in the names, but those really are two different BCPs. The "proposed 1928 BCP" refers to a version that was put forth for adoption in the Church of England but never got the votes in Parliament to be adopted - hence the name "proposed". Wikipedia has an entry on it that can be read here:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Common_Prayer_(1928)

    The 1928 BCP that is still used in some U.S. jurisdictions is, of course, an American version that did get the needed approval.
     
    Liturgyworks and Shaun like this.
  2. Liturgyworks

    Liturgyworks Member

    Posts:
    36
    Likes Received:
    24
    Country:
    US
    Religion:
    Orthodox Christian
    The latter is the Deposited Book intended by the Church of England to replace the 1662 book, but which was blocked by Parliament (although a majority of Anglican members voted for it). I like it slightly more than the 1928 American book, because it includes offices for Prime and Compline, and features the English style Preces to the Divine Office (“O Lord make haste to help us...”), which was introduced in the US in the Rite I liturgy of the 1979 BCP, but previously we followed the Scottish format and used a shorter Preces, which one finds in the 1928 BCP.

    You can compare all of the above, and most other BCP editions, here:
    http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/england.htm
     
    Dave Kemp and Will_ like this.
  3. Liturgyworks

    Liturgyworks Member

    Posts:
    36
    Likes Received:
    24
    Country:
    US
    Religion:
    Orthodox Christian
    Something made easier by the fact that the American book did not require the consent of non-Anglicans in the House of Commons. The C of E now has more autonomy on liturgical matters, which is in theory good, except it resulted in the propagation of Common Worship. In general, however, the experience of Anglican liturgical diversification in the former colonial provinces and the national provinces outside of England, provides us with a fascinating study into the pros and cons of a state church vs. the separation thereof.

    This also creates a correlation with the experience of the state Lutheran and Reformed churches formerly and presently existing in what became the German Empire, the Netherlands, and Northern Europe, and of course, the national churches of the Orthodox communions (most of which existed historically, but several of which disappeared into the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and to a much lesser, but still unfortunate extent, the Moscow Patriarchate (resulting in, for example, the temporary suppression of Georgian liturgical traditions), due to Turkocratia, only to re-emerge in the 19th and 20th century, in a manner similar to how regional Patriarchates in Western Europe, for example, those using the Gallican Rite, were forcibly converted to the Roman liturgy and lost their ecclesiastical autonomy in the 10th century, on the eve of the Great Schism).
     
    Dave Kemp and Will_ like this.
  4. Peteprint

    Peteprint Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    695
    Likes Received:
    624
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    High-Church Laudian
    The posting I made was redundant, but I don't know how to delete it.
     

Share This Page