ACNA Ordinal and Prayerbook

So, you know that no ACNA clergy use the Prayer Book. Prove it.

 

I did not say no ACNA clergy do, please read what I type. The vast majority that I have met, that being rectors of parishes I have joined or attended, have not used one with any particular consistency. You'd have to go to services at these parishes and see for yourself.

 

I'm sure that trying to reform either ACNA or TEC is waste of time, but I'm not sure whether I'm happy or sad to see the time wasted.

 

In recent days I've been finding more and more Presbyterians taking up the 1662 BCP (with minor amendments) for personal worship and even for church worship. Isn't it interesting that non-institutional Anglicans are more conformed to the "Anglican Formularies" of the original BCP and Articles than than those that belong to those institutions. Anglicans cast aside the documents of their heritage and others have come along to reclaim them.

 

Presbyterians have been fleeing to the catholics and even the orthodox from their native institutions. In my view this example is more damning for the Presbyterians than anybody else because it shows them more willing to enjoy the magisterial liturgy and church than staying in the barren native walls.

 

Yes, there are two sizable movements among liberal Presbyterians that are driving them to Rome and to the East. One is the desire for increased sensory stimulation for eyes, ears and taste buds. Another is the "federal vision" movement which has drawn Presbyterians away from their confessions and toward a covenant of sacerdotal works. Some in fact have been drawn to Anglo-Catholicism for the same reasons. Nevertheless, in my earlier comment I was not talking about these sorts of Presbyterians.

As for the Prayer Book, it only serves to confuse our discussion if "BCP" is not the 1662 BCP. All the other "books of common prayers" are derivative. Some may call them valuable imitations and others may call them cheap imitations, but they are NOT "the BCP" unless you use a modifier.

 

I use the 1979 BCP of TEC for our various services. I like it and don't see why some object to it.

 

You have demonstrated yourself over an over to have views that conflict with the 1662 BCP, or to have views that are wholly undefined, so it's not surprising at all that you would find the "1979 BCP" (note the scare quotes) to be unobjectionable.

 

You have demonstrated over and over that you make rash judgments based on very little evidence.

 

In ANiC right now most parishes use either the 1962 BCP, the 1985 BAS, or the English Missal