The Traditional Text Edition of the 2019 Book of Common Prayer

[@ma-mo]

Thank you for reviewing this. It's a well constructed volume, and I like it much more than the original 2019. Even though I have this edition, I find (which is often the case) that I can't completely firm up my opinion of the book until I hear what R. Grant Jones has to say about it.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the kind comment, Moving About and Manipulating Objects! I also like it much better than the modern English edition.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

Does anyone know where I can get the 2019 BCP and Traditional Language 2019 BCP fairly cheap online? They are like $90 used, right now, and they don't seem to be in stock anywhere new, even on the publisher's website.

[@LL-fi4rr]

I’m glad I found your channel. You make really great content. Thanks!

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for that encouraging comment, LL!

[@tysonking6750]

I would be very interested in your take on the Coverdale and Douay Rheims psalters.

[@ThriftStoreBibles]

Thanks, this was a wonderful overview and I like how this reads. I'm most familiar with the 1928 and find I prefer traditional language for prescribed prayers and liturgy. And I appreciate that a present day prayer book has brought back "miserable offenders".

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Miserable Offender! I definitely prefer the traditional language edition myself, and I'd like to know how popular this newer/older BCP is within the ACNA. I wonder whether the denomination keeps track of such things.

[@josephr.gainey2079]

As stated in this video, the ACNA has just issued a traditional language editor (which you may download for free from their website or purchase in print). It doesn't use the 2019 revised psalter. The only problem I have with it is that on p. 8 it is stated that Scriptural texts come from the 1611 Authorized King James Version of the Bible. This is NOT correct. The Version used is that of the KJV readily available in stores today--the 1769 revision of the 1611 version. The 1611 has rarely been printed since the 1770s, and usually in editions for Biblical scholars. This is a pretty widely documented historical fact. Yet the compilers, and evidently the bishops of the ACNA, are oblivious to it. That raises the issue of what other basic facts of Anglican history are they ignorant of or chosen to ignore!

[@icxcnikalastname3317]

I would have liked the traditional language edition if it wasn't for the hunter Green cover. Which is the best traditional language edition presently available for purchase? There's so many & I can't afford to buy the wrong one

[@RGrantJones]

The Cambridge 1662 BCP I showed in this video is very good (ISBN 978-0521612425). There is also an international edition of the 1662 BCP, but I haven't seen it, and I think its cover is green also. The 1662 BCP is still popular among Reformed Anglicans. I'm most familiar with the 1928 American BCP, and the Oxford hardback is still available for purchase, I believe (ISBN 978-0195285062).

[@icxcnikalastname3317]

@@RGrantJones Thanks, I'll be researching the 1662 BCP, maybe ask my wife to buy it for me as a Christmas present. I know it's in print

[@kingpatriarch224]

My only fault with the 2019 BCP in either edition is the post-Vatican II festal and sanctoral calendar.

[@AmericanShia786]

Of course, I totally agree with you that the Traditional Language Version of the 2019 exceeds the original version in majesty. I have no purchased a copy yet because the Traditional Language Version has no ribbons. I am now disabled and so I don't want to try to add them on my own. I do own the original Deluxe Edition and the Pocket Edition of the 2019 BCP and quite like them. I don't like the Renewed Ancient Text Communion Service very much because its based on the bad English Translation of the New Catholic Mass, where modern liturgists borrowed from the Mozarabic Rite used in Muslim Spain by Catholics there. After the words of the Consecration, those Spanish Catholics would make a proclamation. That might have been helpful for Spanish Catholics in Muslim Spain, but Catholics in the West did not have a similar need. The New Mass and Folk Masses led my father to lose faith in the Catholic Church. Our Archdiocese saw the New Mass early, in 1969. I was 9. I hated what they did to the Confiteor and Gloria. As for the Gloria, the first time I attended a 1928 BCP Communion Service, I was surprised to see the Gloria placed at the end of the Service. I prefer it near the beginning, but it works at the end as well. The Confessional Lutheran Parish I attend has the Gloria where Catholics have it and sing the Nunc Dimittis after Communion. Thanks again, and keep making these great videos.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Phil! The first time I attended a formal liturgy of any kind (and most of the times since), the service followed the 1928 BCP; so for me the Gloria feels right when placed after communion, as a response to God, thanking Him for His wonderful gifts, especially the one just received. But that's merely a personal preference on my part. It certainly works well after the Kyrie also. Your comment has made me wonder whether anyone has written a detailed commentary on the Eucharistic services in the 2019 book. It would be useful to read an explanation for why the editors made the decisions that led to the current book. I'll have to explore the internet to see what I can find. (If you know of such an explanation, please let me know.) I'm also used to a one-year lectionary, one advantage of which is that all of the Sunday readings can be printed in a relatively thin BCP.

[@nendwr]

There seem to be subtle things where it doesn't have the traditional reading. The Collect for Purity leapt off the page there - I was expecting "Almighty God, unto whom all hearts *be* open", etc.

[@RGrantJones]

The 1928 American BCP reads 'are' in that spot. 'Traditional' in this context may mean 'similar to the '28 book'. Thanks for commenting, James!

[@danivuk2036]

Great job sir.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the encouragement, Dani!

[@bilinmeyennumara8006]

can I ask something @R. Grant Jones

[@bilinmeyennumara8006]

should i get the catholic bible revised standard version or should i get the nrsvce illustrated catholic bible

[@P-el4zd]

@@bilinmeyennumara8006 Personally, for everyday personal reading, I would get The Ignatius Bible - RSV 2nd Edition by Ignatius Press or the ESV-CE Catholic Bible, Cornerstone Edition, Black Cowhide Leather. I believe both are approved by the Catholic Church or if you don’t mine the old English the Douay-Rheims.

[@ettoredipugnar6990]

I prefer the Thees , thous , thine’s etc

[@RGrantJones]

I do too. Thanks for commenting!