Discussion in 'Faith, Devotion & Formation' started by bwallac2335, Jul 29, 2019.
If you were going to buy a BCP would you buy and why?
I have a 1928 and 1979. I would recomend the 1928 if you are new to anglicanism as it conforms closely to the 1662 (or so I've heard) and so is an orthodox and historic expression of anglican worship and belief.
I would recommend the 1662, the orthodox formulary for Anglicans worldwide.
The American 1928 is another good option, a couple of changes made due to the liturgical movement of the 19th century, but with a few more prayer options added, such as the Family Prayers which are great for mornings and evenings.
I have both, and use the 1662 for my main foundational prayers, while swinging to the 1928 when I need a couple of extra prayers such as 'for the spirit of prayer' or 'a prayer for the birthday'.
I'd agree with either the 1662 or the 1928 BCP. While I have a 1928 BCP myself, I have been finding this site, which is oriented towards the 1662, to be quite helpful:
An example would be the Morning Prayer for July 29:
I would recommend either the US 1928 or the new ACNA 2019. Few Anglicans in America use the 1662 for parish worship, and the TEC 1979 is considered problematic by many conservatives.
The 1928 is loved by traditionalists, and the new ACNA BCP is going to be, sooner or later, the standard of that particular body. Also, it has the advantage of being in more modern English than either the US 1928 or the 1662.
I also like the REC BCP, but that is used by a limited number of parishes, even in the REC.
Well, all I can say personally is to check out all of the above mentioned BCPs. Which ever one you feel most comfortable with, go with it. Different people enjoy/feel comfortable with different versions. Let the Holy Spirit guide you.
I myself would recommend the US 1928 and/or the 2019 ACNA BCP.
I have a 1662 and a 1979 as well, but I find a depth of spirit in the two I recommend, and the 2019 has become my daily use BCP.
I wouldn’t buy any of them, with a few exceptions; rather, I would read them and download them from here: http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/england.htm
The exceptions are, if I could afford either, and if one could be found, one of the limited print Standard Editions of the 1892 and 1928 American BCPs, set by JW Griffith. In particular, the extremely rare subscriber’s edition of the 1892 book, with somewhat Art Nouveau illustrations in the margins. The 1928 Standard Edition represents the apex of liturgical typography, but it and another form of the 1892 Standard Edition are available for download at the link provided above, or rather, PDFs which are clean and faithful recreations of them. Also worth owning would be the Holy Communion Service from Series Two of the Trial Liturgies of the Church of England, which is extremely beautiful, the last traditional liturgy they developed before the corrupting influence of the Novus Ordo and Liberal Catholicism ruined everything; the booklet that it was printed in features lovely typography, with “bluebrics”. One can also download a scan of that from the link posted above.
If you can get, depending on where you live, a 1662, 1928 American, 1979 American or 1962 Canadian BCP free of charge or at a low cost, that might be useful if unlike me you dislike ebook readers. When the dreaded new ECUSA BCP comes out, 1979 BCPs should be widely available.
The 2019 BCP is also available online. If ACNA commissions a Standard Edition of it, which the Protestant Episcopal church did with the 1892 and 1928 editions, and were going to do with the 1979 (they ordered a beautiful prospectus from Arrion Press in Chicago), I would probably buy it.
I don't like reading things online really. If given the choice I will always choose to own a hard copy instead of relying on the internet.
I bought the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, Enlarged Edition, and I love it.
That's awesome, what is the enlarged edition like?
It is about A5 size, so not very big, but lovely and clear print.
Use the online copies to peruse the different books at your leisure, then you'll be in a better position to choose which one(s) you'll want to get hard copies of. I'd echo the recommendations of getting either the 1662 or 1928 for the traditional anchor, and the 2019 for the popular modern expression.
But most importantly, get the book that your church or parish uses! Being in a state of common prayer is important
That is something that I have wound up thinking, too: if you are considering affiliating with a local parish, the BCP version you buy really should be whatever version that parish uses. I would imagine that the ACNA 2019 BCP will certainly become more widespread in use as more ACNA parishes adopt it.
I just ordered the 1929
You mean the 1928 American book?
If you can find a replica of the Standard Book of 1928, Updike’s masterpiece of typography, which at a minimum influenced what you just obtained, or better yet, the real thing, and you have the money, get it.
Also if you have the money, there is a version of the 1979 BCP which is rendered into traditional language and with the silliness expurgated (for example, Rite II Eucharistic Prayer C no longer evokes Star Trek), called The Anglican Service book. The Rite I offices in the 1979 BCP I consider to be slightly better than in the 1928 BCP, because for some reason the early American books omit from Mattins and Evensong a portion of the Presces:
Minister. O God, make speed to save us;
Answer. O Lord, make haste to help us.
Rite I in the 1979 book corrects this, but unfortunately I know not of a single Anglican or Episcopalian parish anywhere which serves the Rite I offices from the 1979 BCP. And Compline, etc, are only in Rite II, thus one needs an Anglican Service Book to avoid the horror.
I come from a background in which daily prayer books were not used (even growing up Roman Catholic I had no exposure to them). So pardon me if this sounds like a strange question to you all (I don't mean to step on toes). Um, I can see the benefit of using a prayer book if one cannot think of anything to say to God, but other than that circumstance isn't it more effectual and won't it likely be more fervent if a prayer comes from the heart, unscripted, in one's own words?
It somehow seems apropos to read from the enlarged version, so as to magnify God. Just kidding!