Two Pecularities of The Book of Common Prayer 2019:

In my library I have a copy of the Lutheran Book of Worship: Ministers Desk Edition (1978). I am a student of Lutheran, Methodist, Reformed, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox liturgies as well as Anglican ones. There is a eucharistic prayer in the Lutheran Book of Worship, which is similar to the simplified modern version of the 1552 eucharistic prayer in Common Prayer: Resources for Gospel-Shaped Gatherings. The Notes on the Liturgy provide this description of the prayer.

”Blessed are you, Lord of heaven and earth…” is a thanksgiving prior to the words of institution, the recent custom of Scandinavian Lutheran churches.

A previous note states, “Use of the words of institution alone follows the custom of the sixteenth-century Lutheran Church Orders.” In these prayers the eucharistic prayer consists of the introductory dialog, or Sursum Corda; the preface, the proper preface, the Sanctus; and the words of institution.

The sixteenth-century Lutheran Church Orders are one of the influences discernible in Archbishop Cranmer’s 1552 eucharistic prayer. Cranmer added the Prayer of Humble Access after the Sanctus, the commemoration of Christ’s sacrifice, and the petition that those receiving the outward sign of the sacrament would also receive the inward grace.

Eucharistic Prayer IV in the Lutheran Book of Worship is a translation of the Anophora of the Apostles which is attributed to Hippolytus of Rome. The Notes to the Liturgy state:

Note that when this prayer is used, it should follow immediately the third sentence of the preface dialog, “Let us give thanks to the Lord our God….” The preface itself and the Sanctus are omitted. Prayer IV is recommended for use especially on weekdays or whenever a simple service is desired.

The Lutheran Book of Worship translation of the Anophora of the Apostles omits the preface, the proper preface, and the Sanctus like the original anophora.

What is the point of this discussion? Lutheran clergy and congregations using the Lutheran Book of Worship have six eucharistic prayers from which they can choose. Three prayers follow what the Notes on the Liturgy describe as “the ecumenical custom of a eucharistic prayer.” The fourth prayer, as I have already noted, is a translation of the Anophora of the Apostles. The fifth prayer follows the custom of the sixteen-century Lutheran Church Orders. The sixth prayer follows what was in the 1970s the recent custom of the Scandinavian Lutheran churches. The Introduction to the Lutheran Book of Worship sums up the thinking behind providing a variety of eucharistic prayers for the use of Lutheran clergy and congregations:

The services of the Lutheran Book of Worship embody the tradition of worship which received its characteristic shape during the early centuries of the Church’s existence and was reaffirmed during the Reformation era. As such, they are an emblem of continuity with the whole Church and of particular unity with Lutherans throughout the world. At the same time, the services are adaptable to various circumstances and situations. Freedom and flexibility in worship is a Lutheran inheritance, and there is room for ample variety in ceremony, music, and liturgical form [emphasis added].

In this regard the Lutheran Book of Worship is representative of a number of worship resources that were produced in the 1970s and 1980s. They enabled clergy and congregations to tailor services to their particular circumstances and situation. As we shall see, the adaptability of the services in these worship resources proved a gospel asset and not a liability.

ACNA clergy and congregations using The Book of Common Prayer 2019, on the other hand, have only two eucharistic prayers from which they can choose. Both are rather lengthy prayers for twenty-first century North American congregations. The first prayer is a fusion of the 1549 Canon and the 1928 Prayer of Consecration. Like the 1928 Prayer of Consecration it omits the Prayer for the Whole State of Christ’s Church from the canon and uses the 1789 American adaptation of the 1764 Scottish Non-Juror epiclesis. For an analysis of the doctrine of this eucharistic prayer, see “The Doctrine of the Proposed 2019 ACNA Prayer Book: Part 1.”

The second prayer is a fusion of Eucharistic Prayer II from Rite I of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer and Eucharistic Prayer A of Rite II which incorporates a small amount of textual material from the Anophora of the Apostles We will take a closer look at the so-called “Renewed Ancient Eucharistic Prayer” later on in the article.

The ACNA’s Prayer Book and Liturgy Task Force could have provided a larger selection of eucharistic prayers in The Book of Common Prayer 2019. The question is why did the task force limit users of the proposed prayer book 2019 to two prayers?

Rite I of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer is a discernible influence in the two eucharistic rites in The Book of Common Prayer 2019. They have the same structure as Holy Eucharist Rite I. Holy Eucharist Rite I also has only two eucharistic prayers. Elsewhere in the proposed prayer book 2019 Rite II is a discernible influence.

In the last two decades of the twentieth century it was not Rite I that accounted for the growth in a number of parishes and missions in the Episcopal Church. It was Rite II with its shorter, simpler, and less wordy services. Older church members attended the longer and wordier Rite I services. Families with young children and teenagers attended the Rite II services. When their grandchildren were visiting, the older church members also attended Rite II services. 

During the same two decades it was not Rite I that attracted evangelicals and charismatics to the Episcopal Church and liturgical worship. It was Rite II. 

Here in western Kentucky in the second decade of the twenty-first century the two Episcopal parishes that are flourishing use Rite II. 

What hurt the last Episcopal church planted in the region in the early 1980s was not Rite II. It was the damage that the national church caused the public image of the Episcopal Church with the consecration of Gene Robinson.

The churches that breakaway groups started in the region in the aftermath of the events of 2003 and which went back to using the 1928 Book of Common Prayer upon which Rite I is modeled are not thriving. They are very small and one church is on the verge of disbanding. 

With one exception the churches that breakaway groups started in Southeastern Louisiana in the 1980s and which also went back to using the 1928 Prayer Book disbanded after one or two years of existence. They were not able to attract anyone outside of their small base. This occurred in communities that were experiencing explosive growth and in which most startups benefited from this explosive growth. 

What Rite II offered congregations was more than contemporary language services. It offered flexibility and variety. In “Designed for Mission: The Typography of the ACNA’s New Prayer Book” Ben Jeffries claims that The Book of Common Prayer 2019 has more optional portions than any previous Prayer Book. However, a comparison of Holy Eucharist Standard Anglican Text and Holy Eucharist: Renewed Ancient Text with Holy Eucharist Rite II demonstrates the falsity of this claim. Of the three eucharistic rites Holy Eucharist Rite II is the most adaptable. An Order for Celebrating Holy Communion is even more adaptable than Holy Eucharist Rite II. 

The 1979 Book of Common Prayer has its drawbacks. Its doctrine is out of step with the doctrine of the historic Anglican formularies. But so is the doctrine of 1928 Book of Common Prayer. As for The Book of Common Prayer 2019 its doctrine is even more out of step with the doctrine of the historic Anglican formularies.

The limited selection of eucharistic prayers is not the only peculiarity of The Book of Common Prayer 2019. Each eucharistic prayer has its own service. However, with the exception of the prayers of the people and the eucharistic prayer, the two services are identical. This was a peculiarity of Texts for Common Prayer. It had two forms of Holy Communion, a long form for Sunday use and a short form for weekday use. The only difference between the two forms was the prayers of the people and the eucharistic prayer. The prayers of the people were just two different versions of the same prayer. The short form was not much shorter than the long form. It could be used only on weekdays. The two forms of Holy Communion were clear evidence that the Prayer Book and Liturgy Task Force was totally clueless when it came to the realities of the twenty-first century North American mission field.

Few new congregations have weekday celebration of the Holy Eucharist in addition to their principal Sunday service. New congregations may have their principal celebration of the Holy Eucharist on a weekday. New congregations usually do not have buildings of their own. They rent space. Or they use the sanctuary or worship center of a friendly church. The whole concept of having two forms of Holy Communion, one for Sunday use and the other for weekday use, was completely out of touch with the needs of these congregations. What they needed was a liturgy with more optional elements than fixed elements, a variety of forms for the prayers of the people, and a variety of eucharistic prayers, including one or more short prayers.

Having two eucharistic rites that are almost identical does not serve any purpose. If anything, it is a waste of space and adds to the cost of the prayer book. If the idea was to save the user from making too many page turns, there are other ways to reduce the number of page turns than having near identical eucharistic rites for each eucharistic prayer. A far more economical use of space would have been to have provided the so-called “Renewed Ancient Eucharistic Prayer” with its own Renewed Ancient Liturgy, modeled upon the primitive liturgies of the early Church. It would have provided congregations with a more streamlined entrance rite and simpler communion rite among other things.

This leads us to the next question, “Does the so-called ‘Renewed Ancient Eucharistic Prayer’ deserve that label?” A comparison of the so-called “Renewed Ancient Eucharistic Prayer” with Eucharistic Prayer II from Rite I and Eucharist Prayer A from Rite II shows that the prayer incorporates considerable textual material from both prayers.

It is right, our duty and our joy, always and everywhere to give thanks to you, Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.

Here a Proper Preface (pages 152-158) is normally sung or said

Therefore we praise you, joining our voices with Angels and Archangels and with all the company of heaven, who for ever sing this hymn to proclaim the glory of your Name:

Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of power and might, heaven and earth are full of your glory. Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is he who comes in the Name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.

Holy and gracious Father: In your infinite love you made us for yourself; and when we had sinned against you and become subject to evil and death, you, in your mercy, sent your only Son Jesus Christ into the world for our salvation. By the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary he became flesh and dwelt among us. In obedience to your will, he stretched out his arms upon the Cross and offered himself once for all, that by his suffering and death we might be saved. By his resurrection he broke the bonds of death, trampling Hell and Satan under his feet. As our great high priest, he ascended to your right hand in glory, that we might come with confidence before the throne of grace.

On the night that he was betrayed, our Lord Jesus Christ took bread; and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take, eat; this is my Body, which is given for you: Do this in remembrance of me.” Likewise, after supper, Jesus took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink this, all of you; for this is my Blood of the New Covenant, which is shed for you, and for many, for the forgiveness of sins: Whenever you drink it, do this in remembrance of me.” Therefore we proclaim the mystery of faith:

Christ has died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again.

We celebrate the memorial of our redemption, O Father, in this sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, and we offer you these gifts. Sanctify them by your Word and Holy Spirit to be for your people the Body and Blood of your Son Jesus Christ. Sanctify us also, that we may worthily receive this holy Sacrament, and be made one body with him, that he may dwell in us and we in him. In the fullness of time, put all things in subjection under your Christ, and bring us with all your saints into the joy of your heavenly kingdom, where we shall see our Lord face to face.

All this we ask through your Son Jesus Christ: By him, and with him, and in him, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all honor and glory is yours, Almighty Father, now and for ever. Amen

Now compare the prayer with the Anophora of the Apostles:

We give thanks to you God, through your beloved son Jesus Christ,whom you sent to us in former times as Savior, Redeemer, and Messenger of your Will, who is your inseparable Word, through whom you made all, and in whom you were well-pleased, whom you sent from heaven into the womb of a virgin, who, being conceived within her, was made flesh, and appeared as your Son, born of the Holy Spirit and the virgin. It is he who, fulfilling your will and acquiring for you a holy people, extended his hands in suffering, in order to liberate from sufferings those who believe in you.

Who, when he was delivered to voluntary suffering, in order to dissolve death, and break the chains of the devil, and tread down hell, and bring the just to the light, and set the limit, and manifest the resurrection, taking the bread, and giving thanks to you, said, "Take, eat, for this is my body which is broken for you." Likewise the chalice, saying, This is my blood which is shed for you. Whenever you do this, do this in memory of me.

Therefore, remembering his death and resurrection, we offer to you the bread and the chalice, giving thanks to you, who has made us worthy to stand before you and to serve as your priests. And we pray that you would send your Holy Spirit to the oblation of your Holy Church. In their gathering together, give to all those who partake of your holy mysteries the fullness of the Holy Spirit, toward the strengthening of the faith in truth, that we may praise you and glorify you, through your son Jesus Christ, through whom to you be glory and honor, Father and Son, with the Holy Spirit, in your Holy Church, now and throughout the ages of the ages. Amen.

As can be seen, the prayer owes more to Eucharistic Prayer II from Rite I and Eucharistic Prayer A from Rite II than it does the Anophora of the Apostles. The textual material from that anophora is used to pad out the textual material from Eucharistic Prayer II and Eucharistic Prayer A. The result is a rather lengthy prayer like the so-called “Anglican Standard Eucharistic Prayer." The prayer lacks the relative brevity of Eucharistic Prayer II and Eucharistic Prayer A. “Renewed Anglican Eucharistic Prayer” is definitely a misnomer.

The tedious length of the so-called “Standard Anglican Eucharistic Prayer” and the so-called “Renewed Ancient Prayer” makes both prayers unsuitable for the twenty-first century North American mission field. The two prayers also do not conform to the teaching of Holy Scripture and the principles of the historic Anglican formularies. The doctrine to which they give expression is further evidence of the unreformed Catholic doctrine of The Book of Common Prayer 2019.

The Book of Common Prayer 2019 clearly favors a particular school of churchmanship in the Anglican Church in North America despite what Ben Jeffires and others may claim. While the proposed prayer book 2019 may have some strengths, its shortcomings far outweigh its strengths.If the Provincial Council and the Provincial Assembly require its use in the ACNA, it will put a brake upon the province's growth and hamper its ministry and outreach for years to come.