The Doctrine of the Proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book: A Recap

By Robin G. Jordan

This is the 6th and final article in a series on the doctrine of the proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book. Here is the whole series:

Part 1— Eucharist
Part 2 – Confirmation
Part 3 – Rites of Healing
Part 4 – Baptism
Part 5 – Ordination

As can be seen from the previous articles in this series, the proposed 2019 Book of Common Prayer of the Anglican Church in North America is decidedly unreformed Catholic in its doctrine and liturgical usages. The so-called Standard Anglican Eucharistic Prayer is modeled upon the Roman Canon and, while muted, embodies Roman Catholic doctrine. The so-called Renewed Ancient Eucharistic Prayer is modeled upon a Roman Catholic Eucharistic Prayer. Like the Standard Anglican Eucharistic Prayer, it also embodies Roman Catholic doctrine. Both the so-called Standard Anglican Rite and the so-called Renewed Ancient Eucharistic Rite contain other elements from Roman Rite. While the so-called “ecumenical consensus” is used as a rationale to justify a number of features of these rites, including the order in which the elements of the rite are arranged, it must be remembered that those who have appealed the most often to this supposed consensus have been those who wanted a more unreformed Catholic liturgy.

The confirmation rite of the proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book displays the influence of unreformed Catholic thinking. It affirms the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, a doctrine over which Anglicans have been historically divided. It takes the position that the Holy Spirit is automatically and invariably given at baptism, a doctrine that is not supported by Scripture, and is associated in the Anglican Church with those who have a high view of the sacraments.

“The rites of healing” of the proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book incorporate unreformed Catholic doctrine and practices. They include forms for the sacraments of penance and unction, the practice of auricular confession, the use of sacramentals, and the practice of reserving the sacrament and communicating the sick from the reserved sacrament. While they do not mention these practices by name, these rites tacitly permit the practices of the extreme unction and viaticum.

“The rites of healing” of the proposed book represent a repudiation not just of the standard of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer but also the doctrinal and worship principles laid out in the Thirty Nine Articles of Religion of 1571. The Jerusalem Declaration affirms these principles in its fourth point: “We uphold the Thirty-Nine Articles as containing the true doctrine of the Church agreeing with God’s Word and as authoritative for Anglicans today.”

In Being Faithful: The Shape of Historic Anglicanism Today, the GAFCON Theological Group stresses that acceptance of the authority of the Thirty-Nine Articles form an integral part of Anglican identity. Being Faithful: The Shape of Historic Anglicanism Today is GAFCON’s official commentary on the Jerusalem Declaration and its official interpretation of the declaration. It was commissioned to discourage alternative readings of the Jerusalem Declaration. I have reproduced the GAFCON Theological Resource Group’s statement concerning the position of the Jerusalem Declaration on the authority of the Thirty-Nine Articles below:

The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion (1571), a slight revision of Thomas Cranmer’s Forty-two Articles of 1553, were designed ‘for the avoiding of diversities of opinions’ and not as a comprehensive statement of Christian doctrine in the manner of some other Reformation ‘confessions’. They have long been recognised as the doctrinal standard of Anglicanism, alongside the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal.

The authority of the Articles comes from their agreement with the teaching of Scripture.

The Articles make no attempt to bind the Christian mind or conscience more tightly than Scripture does on matters of doctrine and Christian living. However, acceptance of their authority is constitutive of Anglican identity [Emphasis added].

In recent years, some member churches of the Anglican Communion have dispensed with assent to the Articles, presenting them as mere ‘historical documents’ or relics of the past. Not coincidentally, these same churches include the ones which have abandoned historic doctrinal and moral standards. For other churches, the Articles have formal authority but they have been neglected as a living formulary. The Jerusalem Declaration calls the Anglican church back to the Articles as being a faithful testimony to the teaching of Scripture, excluding erroneous beliefs and practices and giving a distinctive shape to Anglican Christianity [Emphasis added].

In its Fundamental Declarations the Anglican Church in North America equivocates in its acceptance of the authority of the Thirty-Nine Articles. But it is quite clear from its canons; its catechism, To Be a Christian: An Anglican Catechism; and the proposed 2019 Book of Common Prayer that the ACNA as a province does not accept their authority. Individual clergy, congregations, and dioceses may accept the Articles’ authority but the province does not as an ecclesiastical organization.

Bishop Jack Iker, when he returned from GAFCON 2008 reassured Anglo-Catholics that the new North American province whose formation the Primates’ Council had called for in the Jerusalem Declaration and Statement would not be bound by the Jerusalem Declaration. Ten years later that has proven to be the case.

Like the confirmation rite, the baptismal rite of the proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book embodies doctrine over which Anglicans have historically been divided. It makes no provision for those who do not subscribe to its doctrine even though they form a legitimate school of thought in Anglicanism. It also assigns a role to the priest, which reflects the influence of pre-Reformation Medieval Catholic Church and Medieval Catholic sacramental theology, a role that the English Reformers and historic Anglicanism rejected as contrary to Scripture.

The ordination rites of the proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book also reflect the same influence. They emphasize a sacerdotal view of the priesthood and a sacramental view of holy orders and apostolic succession historically associated with the Roman Catholic Church. They also affirm the Roman Catholic doctrines of eucharistic sacrifice and transubstantiation. They make no provision for those who do not subscribe to these doctrinal views and who stand in continuity with the English Reformers and historic Anglicanism.

The Anglican Church in North America contains the largest concentration of Anglican clergy and Anglican congregations in the United States and Canada, who are firmly committed to remaining faithful to the Bible and to historic Anglican beliefs and practices. Yet the proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book ignores their presence in the ACNA and treats them as a non-entity. If these clergy and congregations are not disturbed by the proposed book’s disregard of their existence, I believe that they need to wake up. The water in the kettle is heating up and they are paddling around oblivious to the danger to themselves. The proposed book is not something that a friend and ally would produce, not by any stretch of the imagination. It represents a clear and imminent danger to what they believe. They are fooling themselves if they think otherwise.

I am not advocating that these clergy and congregations run for the hills, as one of my readers advocates. Dispersing to other breakaway churches as he proposes would not in my considered opinion serve the cause of historic Anglicanism in North America. There is strength in numbers. Leaving the Anglican Church in North America should be the option of last resort and then it should be an orderly exodus to a North American province that has been formed to accomplish what the ACNA is failing to do—to genuinely represent Biblical Christianity and historic Anglicanism in North America. Just as elements of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church in Canada joined together to form the ACNA, elements of the ACNA, if it comes to that, can join together to form a new province.

What I do advocate is that those who genuinely represent Biblical Christianity and historic Anglicanism in the Anglican Church in North America take steps to make their dissatisfaction with the proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book known in the councils of the ACNA. They should give the ACNA an opportunity to revise the proposed book itself. However, if the ACNA is unwilling to revise the book, makes promises that it does not keep, or drags its feet, they should then take other steps. This means establishing a time frame within which the ACNA must revise the book, not going along with proposals to use the book and to revise it piecemeal, and networking with each other not just to oppose the book but to pursue common goals, maintain a united front, to make plans for the future, and to implement these plans. They need to end their isolation from each other and organize for their own preservation as well as for the furtherance of Biblical Christianity and historic Anglicanism and the spread of the gospel.

Related Article:
How to Respond to the Proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book