It’s Time to Talk Prayer Book

What?! Not another outrageous post on Anglicans Ablaze!!

By Robin G. Jordan

With the Anglican Church in North America’s Provincial Assembly barely a month away, it’s time to talk Prayer Book. I have prepared a list of questions and answers that I hope will prompt action. I am assuming my ACNA readers by now are acquainted with the 2019 Proposed ACNA Prayer Book. (If they aren’t, they need to be.) So here goes!

Is the 2019 Proposed ACNA Prayer Book agreeable to the teaching of the Bible? The short answer is no! Here’s why.

• The Bible teaches that Jesus established the Lord’s Supper not a sacrifice but as a commemoration of a sacrifice. When Jesus offered himself on the cross for the sins of the world, he did once for all time. He does not continue to offer or plead that sacrifice.


• In Matthew 26:29 Jesus describes as “this fruit of the vine, the contents of the cup which he had just described as “the blood of the New Covenant,” thereby indicating that he had been speaking figuratively and the cup’s contents had undergone no change in substance.


• In the Bible the Holy Spirit descends upon people, not inanimate objects such as bread and wine or water. When the descent of the Holy Spirit is invoked, his descent is invoked upon people, not inanimate objects.


• When John the Baptist said “Behold the Lamb of God,” he was looking at Jesus himself and speaking a prophetic utterance. He was not referring to Christ substantively present in the consecrated bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper.


• The miraculous feeding of the five thousand occurred well before the Last Supper and the institution of the Lord’s Supper. When Jesus described himself as “the Bread of Life” in the “I Am” discourses in the Gospel of John and goes on to talk about eating his flesh and drinking his blood, he is not talking about his substantive presence in the consecrated bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper. He is talking about how he has far greater value than the bread that he miraculously multiplied when he fed the five thousand. He is also talking about the kind of faith that being his disciple requires. Believing in him goes beyond following him because of the miracle that he performed out of a desire for more bread. It requires the spiritual equivalent of chewing him up, swallowing him down, and then digesting him, making him part of oneself.


• When believers eat the bread and drink the cup, according to Paul in his First Letter to the Corinthians, they proclaim Christ’s death until he comes again. Sharing the bread and cup is a proclamation of the good news, of Christ’s salvific work on the cross. Believers also participate in the benefits of his saving death.


• In the same letter Paul chastises the Corinthians for taking the Lord’s Supper too lightly and treating it like an ordinary meal, for not waiting for the latecomers and for treating them as if they are not part of the Body of Christ. He urges the Corinthians to take the Lord’s Supper with the seriousness that is due it and examining themselves before sharing the bread and the cup.


• The Bible does not teach that baptism and the gift of the Holy Spirit always go hand in hand. Some people may receive the Holy Spirit before they are baptized like Paul and Cornelius and his household or after they are baptized like the Samaritans and the Ephesians. Others may not receive the Holy Spirit at all like Simon Magus.


• The Bible teaches that regeneration is entirely the work of the Holy Spirit.


• The Acts of the Apostles is not describing a primitive form of confirmation in its account of how the Samaritans and Ephesians received the Holy Spirit. In the case of the Samaritans God was showing the Jews that the New Covenant extended to the despised Samaritans. In the case of the Ephesians God demonstrates that the gift of faith and the gift of the Holy Spirit are tied to each other.


• Paul is not describing a primitive form of confirmation or ordination in his reference in his Second Letter to Timothy to the gift God gave Timothy when he laid hands on Timothy. He is referring to the special gift that Timothy received through prophecy mentioned in his First Letter to Timothy.


• The Bible, while it teaches that marriage is an exclusive relationship in which a man and a woman make a lifelong commitment to each other, it does not teach that marriage is a sacrament that confers grace upon the married couple.


• The Synoptic Gospels and the Epistles of James contains references to the practice of anointing the sick with olive oil. This practice was found throughout the ancient Mediterranean world as well as the ancient Near East. They are not references to the administration of a sacrament but to a very common practice of the times.


• In the Bible God’s blessing is pronounced upon people, not inanimate objects—bread and wine, water, oil, salt, vestments, or buildings. References to Jesus’ blessing of the bread and the cup at the Last Supper in the Synoptic Gospels are references to Jesus’ giving thanks over the bread and the cup, which the Synoptic Gospels make clear. “The cup which we bless” to which Paul refers in the First Letter to the Corinthians can also be translated as “the cup over which we give thanks.”


• The Bible does not teach that any special gift or grace necessary for the administration of the sacraments is conveyed by anointing with blessed oil the forehead of a bishop or the hands of a presbyter.


• The Bible teaches that only the Holy Spirit confers spiritual gifts which are manifestations of the Holy Spirit himself present in the believer.

Does it conform to the principles of doctrine and worship of the Thirty-Nine Articles? The short answer is no! Here’s why.

• The Thirty-Nine Articles recognize only two sacraments ordained by Christ—Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.


• The Thirty-Nine Articles describe confirmation, absolution, ordination, matrimony, and anointing the sick with oil in part as a false understanding of apostolic practice and in part states of life allowed in Scripture.


• The Thirty-Nine Articles teach that baptism is efficacious only for those who rightly receive the sacrament. It does not tie the effect of the sacrament to a particular time.


• The Thirty-Nine Articles teach that only who rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the bread and the cup of the Lord’s Supper participate in the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross.


• The Thirty-Nine Articles reject the belief that Christ is really and substantively present in the consecrated bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper.


• The Thirty-Nine Articles further teach that the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was “not commanded by Christ to be reserved, carried about, lifted up or worshipped.”


• The Thirty-Nine Articles also teach that those who are wicked or lack a vital faith, while they eat the bread and drink the cup, do not participate in the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice. Therefore only those who have turned from sin in repentance to Jesus in faith should be admitted to the Lord’s Table.


• The Thirty-Nine Articles teach that Jesus, when he died on the cross, made a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. The Articles reject the belief that the Lord’s Supper is an extension of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

Does it clearly express the doctrine of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer? Does it respect the liturgical usages of the 1662 Prayer Book? The short answer is no! Here’s why.

• The proposed book bears a superficial resemblance to the 1662 Prayer Book but it is an entirely different book. The Prayer Book and Liturgical Task Force cannibalized textual material from the 1662 Prayer Book but the task force used this material in a different way from the way that it is used in the 1662 Prayer Book. Consequently this material no longer expresses the doctrine of the 1662 Prayer Book but an entirely different belief or set of beliefs.


• The Prayer Book and Liturgical Task Force made alterations and additions to the textual material that they cannibalized from the 1662 Prayer Book. These alterations and additions changed the doctrine embodied in this material.


• The Prayer Book and Liturgy Task Force also used textual material from other sources whose doctrine is not agreeable to the Scriptures or compatible with the doctrine of the 1662 Prayer Book.


• The Prayer Book and Liturgical Task Force added rubrics that mandate or permit practices that the rubrics of the 1662 Prayer Book do not mandate or permit. The omission of these practices from the 1662 Prayer Book was deliberate. The practices themselves or the doctrine with which they have had a long association conflict with Scripture or are incompatible with Scripture.


• In the 1662 Communion Service there is no offering of the bread and wine during the offertory or before or after the consecration of the elements. There is no showing of the consecrated elements to the congregation for adoration before the communion.


• The First Exhortation in the 1662 Communion Service advises those who cannot quieten their own conscience to seek the counsel of a “discreet and learned Minister of God’s Word” and talk with him so that this minister can, using the Scriptures, show them that God forgives repentant sinners and offer them spiritual counsel and advice, thereby enabling them to receive the sacrament with a quiet conscience. This exhortation does not refer to the practices of auricular confession and judicial absolution.


• As in the 1559 Prayer Book, the Prayer Humble Access in the 1662 Prayer Book serves a bridge between the Sanctus and the Memorial of the Institution of the Lord’s Supper and “a prayer of humble thankfulness and for ‘worthy reception.’” It echoes Isaiah’s response to his vision of God and the song of the angels around God’s throne.


• The 1662 Communion Service, like the 1559 Communion Service, moves immediately from the Words of Institution to the communicants’ reception of the bread and wine and makes the reception of the elements and not their consecration the  “unique liturgical highpoint” of the service.


• The 1662 Words of Administration maintain that the communicant feeds on Christ in his heart by faith with thanksgiving.


• Only after the communicants have received the bread and wine does one find any mention of a sacrifice other than Christ’s sacrifice on the cross in the 1662 Communion Service. The first sacrifice mentioned is the congregation’s “sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving” and the second is their offering of themselves to “a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice.” Both of these sacrifices are responses to Christ’s sacrifice. In their post-Communion location there is no possibility of the confusion of these two sacrifices with Christ’s sacrifice.


• The Declaration on Kneeling rejects the belief that Christ is really and substantively present in the consecrated bread and wine. It takes the position that the bread and wine undergo no change in substance. They retain their natural substances. Christ’s body is in heaven and cannot be more than one place at a time.


• The Thirty-Nine Articles provide the doctrinal standards by which the regeneration language of the 1662 Services of Baptism must be understood. 1662 Services of Baptism charitably assume that the sacrament has been efficacious for those receiving it. All the right conditions for the sacrament to have its intended effect are present or will be at some future time.


• The 1662 Service of Confirmation charitably assumes that the confirmands have received the fullness of the Holy Spirit. The service provides the confirmands with an opportunity to profess their faith in Jesus Christ, appropriate for themselves the baptismal vows their sponsors made for them when they were unable to answer for themselves, and to receive the prayers of the church for the strengthening of the Holy Spirit to keep this commitment. The bishop lays hands on the confirmands as a gesture of goodwill and concern.


• In the 1662 Marriage Service the couple exchange their vows in the presence of witnesses. The minister offers prayers for the newly-married couple, pronounces God’s blessing on the couple, and may exhort them in regards to the nature and duties of marriage.


• The 1662 Visitation of the Sick takes its cue from James 5:15-16 and emphasizes prayer for the sick.


• The 1662 Communion of the Sick is a shortened form of the Communion Service which a priest may conduct in the home of a sick person. If the sick person is for any reason unable to receive the bread and wine, the rubrics direct the priest to “instruct him that if he do truly repent him of his sins, and stedfastly believe that Jesus Christ hath suffered death upon the Cross for him, and shed his Blood for his redemption, earnestly remembering the benefits he hath thereby, and giving him hearty thanks therefore; he doth eat and drink the Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ profitably to his soul's health, although he do not receive the Sacrament with his mouth.” This particular rubric is an important statement of the 1662 Prayer Book’s doctrine of the Lord’s Supper.


• In the Ordinal annexed to the 1662 Prayer Book candidates for ordination to the diaconate are asked whether they “unfeignedly believe all the canonical scriptures of the Old and New Testament.


• In the Ordinal annexed to the 1662 Prayer Book the new deacon is given a New Testament and the new priest and new bishop are given a Bible. No prostrations during the singing of the Veni Sanctus Spiritus. No chalice for the priest (with wine in the chalice and a paten with wafer nestled in the chalice). No solemn vesting in blessed liturgical garments. No mitre and crozier. No anointing of the new priest’s hands and the new bishop’s forehead with blessed oil.

Is it well designed for the North American mission field? The short answer is no! Here's why.

• The rites and services of the proposed book are unnecessarily elaborate and long


• The proposed book’s rites and services contain numerous superfluous elements that should have been made optional or omitted.


• The proposed book’s rites and services are short on flexibility and adaptability.


• The proposed book’s rites and services were designed for the last century, not for this century. They resemble a number of the earlier trial liturgies from the 1960s and 1970s.


• The proposed book does not contain any alternative patterns of worship like Common Worship's Service of the Word and Common Prayer: Resources for Gospel-Shaped Gatherings's Service of the Word and Prayer which congregations can use when the services of Morning Prayer, Evening Prayer,and Holy Communion do not meet their needs.


• The proposed book’s rites and services were designed for the conventional settings of the cathedral, seminary chapel, and parish church. They are ill-suited to the non-traditional settings in which a large number of ACNA congregations hold their worship gatherings. These settings include private homes, storefronts, gyms, school cafeterias, hotel conference rooms, apartment building community rooms, university lecture halls, dance schools, shared church buildings, and any other space that they are able to rent or use free of charge.

Has the proposed book been authorized for use in the Anglican Church in North America? The short answer is no! Here's why.

• While the College of Bishops has endorsed the book, the Provincial Council has not adopted a canon authorizing its use and the Provincial Assembly has not approved such a canon.

Why then did the College of Bishops endorse the proposed book?

• You’ll have to ask the College of Bishops. Don’t expect a straight answer.

What can I do?

• Urge your diocese’s representatives to the Provincial Council to vote down a canon authorizing the use of the proposed book. Urge your diocese’s delegation to the Provincial Assembly not to ratify such a canon.


• You can refuse to buy the proposed book.


• You can refuse to use it.


• You can return any copies of the proposed book that you may have purchased and demand a refund.


• You can mount a protest wherever the proposed book is sold—at the Provincial Assembly, at your diocesan council or synod.


• You can urge your diocesan council or synod to adopt a resolution calling for its withdrawal from use.


• You can urge your bishop to withdraw his endorsement of the book.


• You can urge your bishop to ban its use in your diocese.


• Circulate this article. Post it on your church web page, blog, and Facebook page. Email it to as many people as you think may read it.

If you are really concerned about the current theological environment in the Anglican Church in North America, about the failure of its leaders to uphold authentic historic Anglicanism whose principles are based on the Holy Scriptures and articulated in the Thirty-Nine Articles and the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, these suggestions are the minimum that you can do to turn things around.

Once the 2019 Proposed ACNA Prayer Book is authorized, it will become the ACNA’s official Prayer Book and the province’s standard of doctrine and worship. Its supporters may argue that a lot of time and effort has gone into its preparation but that does not justify its authorization or its use. It is a highly-flawed book in terms of doctrine, practices, and missional usefulness. Despite what its supporters claim, it is not likely to be a gospel-advancing asset for the Anglican Church in North America. Churches on the North American mission field face enough challenges. They do not need a defective Prayer Book added to these challenges.

Image Credit: Christ the King Anglican Church, Edmonton ONT, ANiC