Book of Common Prayer (1928, England)
Opposing what they saw as an Anglo-Catholic revision that would align the Church of England with the Catholic Church—particularly through expanding the practice of the reserved sacrament—Protestant evangelicals and nonconformists in Parliament put up significant resistance, driving what became known as the Prayer Book Crisis.
Instead, this latter faction advocated the adoption of ceremonial and some liturgical practices from the Catholic Church, such as celebrating Communion facing eastward, placing candles and a cross on the altar, and vestments.
[3]: 239 [note 1] Opposition to ritualist practice led in the 1890's by John Kensit and his Protestant Truth Society further challenged Anglo-Catholics, who were represented by the English Church Union and Viscount Halifax.
[5]: 150–151 The linguistic issues within the prayer book, many of which were derived from Thomas Cranmer's translation of Latin, left pastors many "trip-wires" with theological and ministerial implications that could not be easily explained.
In March the next year, Davidson and Prime Minister Arthur Balfour authorized a review of the state of church discipline to address the debate between Anglo-Catholics and their opponents.
[3]: 240 [10]: 29 This report asserted "the law of public worship is too narrow for the religious life of the present generation", particularly with regard to the desire for ceremony and historic continuity as violations of policies including the Ornaments Rubric were widespread.
Among the recommendations was to begin revising the vestiture rubrics, formally initiating the process for a new prayer book authorized by a Parliamentary Act of Uniformity.
John Wordsworth chaired a group of five bishops who issued a report on the rubric in 1908 with the assistance of leading moderate Anglo-Catholic liturgist Walter Frere.
[3]: 240 [10]: 28 The report's assertion that chasubles were legal elicited protest; the upper house of the Convocations of Canterbury and York passed a resolution that was less supportive of this view.
Attempting to create a balanced committee, the evangelical bishop Thomas Drury was appointed alongside Arthur James Mason, Frere, Frank Edward Brightman, and, from 1912 onward, Percy Dearmer and Percival Jackson.
[5]: 159 From 1911, a convocational drafted rubric that had been intended to prevent "extra-liturgical devotions" by authorizing reservation exclusively for communing the sick served as the standard for diocesan permissions.
Further, the perceived "timeless sanctity" of both the 1662 prayer book and the King James Version of the Bible saw many defend the dated language of both texts as essential for worship.
The House of Bishops passed the Revised Prayer Book (Permissive Use) Measure that accepted these recommendations—including reservation of the sacrament[10]: 32 —without modification in October that year,[10]: 32 publishing the liturgy with suggested changes as NA 84.
[3]: 241 [7]: 218 [note 5] The Green Book, published in October 1922, took a scholarly and Anglo-Catholic view particularly visible in its support for commemorations of Saint Joseph and the Falling Asleep of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Parsons", reflected what prayer book historian Geoffrey Cuming called "a remarkable combination of sound liturgical craftsmanship, modernist theology, and high-flown liberal sentiment.
Soon, the matter garnered popular attention with the most partisan Anglo-Catholics and evangelicals opposing the proposed text for polar reasons:[7]: 219–220 the former on the basis that it was too Protestant and the latter on the ground it contained new and old forms of "popery".
"[19]: 81 Anglo-Catholics framed their practices as in line with English norms, arguing that the popular masonic rituals were more complicated than Catholic ones and comparing vestments to Forester regalia.
In 1927, Dearmer suggested Anglo-Catholic opposition to the revised prayer book was a "determined attempted to destroy the Church of England" coordinated by the papacy.
[19]: 83 Evangelicals understood Protestantism as underpinning the relationship between the monarchy, Parliament, and the established church, pointing to the anti-papist language in the coronation oath as a contract to preserve English and British religious identity.
The committee's 24 November report found "no change of constitutional importance is involved" and declared the revision as keeping with the coronation oath's promise "to maintain the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law".
[20]: 457 Joynson-Hicks, popularly known as "Jix", had previously voiced his dissent towards the revision following its passage by the National Assembly in July and his 15 December speech proved influential on the other members.
Rosslyn Mitchell of the United Free Church of Scotland gave a similarly stirring and crucial speech,[4]: 1 drawing upon the English Reformation and accusing the Deposited Book of promoting the doctrine of transubstantiation.
After a spate of new pro- and anti-revision literature, the latter including The Prayer Book Crisis by Joynson-Hicks,[22]: 125 the new measure failed on 14 June in the House of Commons with a larger majority of 266 to 220.
In September that year, a motion was brought before the Welsh Governing Body requesting consideration of the English Deposited Book; the archbishop replied that action would not be taken until "the proper moment has arrived."
The motion towards consideration was carried by a great majority but intentional inaction by the Bench of Bishops meant the issue of Welsh prayer book revision would not be revisited until 1943.
[24]: 128 The Episcopal Church of Scotland's Primus, Walter Robberds, refused Davidson's request for a letter calling upon Scottish parliamentarians to vote for the revision on the grounds such a statement could cause trouble.
[21]: 38 [22]: 127 In particular, clergy preferred performing the marriage office without the 1662 prayer book's referencing of "men's carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have no understanding", though Cummings reported that some couples enjoyed retaining the older form and the discomfort it brought their relatives.
Bishop Arthur Headlam noted in his 1927 The New Prayer Book that the new rubric was introduced for the purpose of "peace" and "order", as prohibiting Eucharistic vestments was "impossible".
[30]: 62 Frere's influence brought some borrowing from the 1549 and 1637 prayer books to the new rite, including an Epiclesis calling the Holy Spirit into the sacramental elements.
Additionally, the rubrics for episcopal consecration now mandated they occur on only holy days or Sundays and a new collect was added for the simultaneous ordination of deacons and priests.
