ACNA Liturgical Revision

Many have asked in other venues about the ACNA prayerbook revision process that is ongoing.  For those who are interested, here is the guiding principles that committee is following, and here is the Ordinal they have produced.  This Ordinal is the first published liturgy from that group.  They plan to have a Eucharist produced by their convention this coming summer, but they have not released a text for any comment or review.

Any thoughts anyone would like to share about either the Ordinal or their Guiding Principles?

 

8 thoughts on “ACNA Liturgical Revision

  1. Maximilian Hanlon

    I am greatly disturbed that the proposed Ordinal does not include these words for the ordination of a priest from the historic Anglican Ordinal:

    “Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained. And be thou a faithful Dispenser of the Word of God, and of his holy Sacraments; In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.”

    Without those words, the Anglican doctrine of the priestly office is lost!

    Reply
  2. Fr. Robert Herrell

    First it is too long and too wordy. Twain said something like, “If given more time I could have made it shorter.” Take your time. And then the following makes me sick. Modern language is a crutch for the weak. It limits the depth of worship:4. ! Recommendation for the immediate future
    ! !
    A.! For the present:
    ! ! !
    1. ! A great strength of the 1928 American BCP and the 1962 Canadian
    ! ! ! !
    BCP is that they are books which clearly and consciously are in direct
    ! ! ! !
    succession to the 1662 prayerbook tradition. Both, however, can
    ! ! ! !
    become obstacles to modern comprehension because of their 16th
    ! ! ! !
    century language and limited acknowledgment of new approaches to the
    ! ! ! !
    sacramental life.
    ! ! !
    2.! The Church of England’s Book of Common Worship (2000) and the
    ! ! ! !
    Prayer Book for Australia (1995) include modern language versions of
    ! ! ! !
    most of the 1662 texts, the only caveat is that they also have many
    ! ! ! !
    additions beyond that of the 1662 texts. The Book of Common
    ! ! ! !
    Worship, in particular, has so many options that it is difficult to navigate
    ! ! ! !
    for both the celebrant and congregation.
    ! ! !
    3. ! Since those who prefer Cranmerian language are already using either
    ! ! ! !
    the BCP 1928 or the Anglican Service Book, there is no reason to
    ! ! ! !
    publish yet another traditional language book. A BCP for the ACNA
    ! ! ! !
    should be in modern language, with few variables, and closely relate to
    ! ! !
    ! the classical BCP texts.

    Page11
    ! ! !
    4.! The American BCP 1979 is self-consciously a revolutionary
    ! ! ! !
    composition, rather than a conservative revision of the 1928 BCP. It has
    ! ! ! !
    some redeeming characteristics, however. It is used by more than half of
    ! ! ! !
    the congregations surveyed by our Task Force, and it is relatively easy to
    ! ! ! !
    follow. Most importantly, it has been memorized by many people in our
    ! ! ! !
    congregations, and for those under the age of forty, it is the only prayer
    ! ! ! !
    book they have known. A modern language adaptation of the rite I
    ! ! ! !
    liturgies of the 1979 BCP should be a major priority in ACNA’s
    ! ! ! !
    immediate future.
    ! !
    B. ! Future Work to be done
    ! ! !
    1.! Modern language version of the 1662/1928 rites for Eucharist,
    ! ! ! !
    Baptism, and Ordination.

    Reply
  3. Scott Cline

    I’m a late-comer, here, but hoping that somebody will be able to respond to me nevertheless.

    I’m part of a church that worships in the Anglican tradition, but is not part of an Anglican diocese. We draw our liturgy from the 1928 BCP, but tweak it here and there; most notably, we follow the Lutheran reform of placing confession shortly after the call to worship, vs. the BCP placement of confession shortly before the Eucharist. I happen to agree with this reform.

    If I were to seek ACNA orders and plant an ACNA parish, would we be free to order confession after the call, in this way, or would we be beholden to the BCP arrangement?
    How much liturgical freedom can there be?

    Thanks so much for your time and help–it’s appreciated!

    Scott Cline

    Reply
    1. FrSutter Post author

      Scott, I suspect your question would be better posed in an ACNA forum. What you described, however, I think would be fine in any number of ACNA dioceses, at least in those that are Catholic. I would be happy to use it, personally.

      Reply
    2. Fr. Gary

      Scott;
      I am a member of the ACNA and in particular The Diocese of Cascadia. I find our bishop to be very open to liturgical liberality as long as it confirms to the 1662 BCP. I have found the ACNA to be a nurturing communion uniting the continuing church into one true united church of confessing Anglicans.

      Reply
  4. John Manton

    Father:

    The following text first appeared in TEC’s 1979 prayer book, a book that is clearly not within the BCP tradition:

    “Blessed be God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
    People And blessed be his kingdom, now and forever. Amen.”

    Yet this same text was copied verbatim by the ACNA revisionists for their new prayer book. Why is this opening acclamation included when it is not and never has been part of the BCP tradition?

    John Manton.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s