The edition with the slip case is available here: www.christianbook.com/common-prayer-bonded-leather-burgundy-slipcase/9780195285253/pd/85253 . A different edition is available here: www.amazon.com/1928-Book-Common-Prayer/dp/0195285069 .
Excellent review! Pope Benedict XVI said in his apostolic constitution, Anglicanorum Coetibus, “the liturgical books proper to the Anglican tradition, which have been approved by the Holy See, so as to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared.”
Thanks for commenting, Gil! I've never been to an Anglican Ordinariate service, but I suppose they must use something similar to the 1928 BCP in their liturgy. Antiochian Orthodox Christians who follow the Western Rite are permitted to use the Rite of St. Tikhon, which is very similar to the Holy Communion service from the 1928 BCP. One notable difference is that the Rite of St. Tikhon adds a prayer from the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (one that begins "I believe, O Lord, and I confess that thou art truly the Christ ...") before communion is distributed.
I do know that some Anglican Ordinariate folks have published parts of the 1928 American BCP for daily prayer, incl. morning and evening. You can find them at walsinghampublishing dot com
My Dear Sir, thank so much for this review. It was a walk down memory lane with my Anglo-Catholic upbringing, a world full of processionals & recessionals, communions & confirmation. We even had “Cubs” on Wed evenings in the parish hall. The vicar & his wife (no lady priest & partner thank you very much) lived in an old world 3 story vicarage. I always regret having been too young to be invited over for sherry. In hindsight the only thing missing was a profound sense that the Bible is the Word of God. Once again, thank you, Rev John Wilderspin BA, Th M FBC Brockville ON CDN
Thank you for taking the time to overview this prayer book. I appreciate your explanation of the morning prayers. I was given a copy of The Book of Common Prayer when I was transitioning from Judaism to Christianity. I love the book, but I never really understood how to use it properly for personal devotions.
When I attended a Lutheran communion service a few years ago, I didn't find it radically different from the BCP service. A visit to the Cradle of Prayer web site should clear up any uncertainties over Morning and Evening Prayer. Thanks for commenting!
@@RGrantJones I did not notice many, if any differences, when I attended an Anglican service; I am equally comfortable at both. You may be interested in the Lutheran daily devotional. It is a prayer/worship book for home use. I have enjoyed it. Here is the link: www.cph.org/p-11350-treasury-of-daily-prayer-regular-edition.aspx
I recently purchased a 1928 BCP from a seller on Ebay, and I love it. I've been using it for devotional reading, and plan on using it for Morning and Evening Office once I figure out the procedure (I'm new to the Anglican way).
The U.S. 1928 Book of Common Prayer is something that, even as a Lutheran, I cherish. I use the 1962 Canadian Book of Common Prayer more frequently and often, too, the still recent revision of the Reformed Episcopal Church's B.C.P., which is the easiest to follow (because of all its helpful tables for all sorts of things). I was a Lutheran as a small child and returned to Lutheranism after many years as a member of the Protestant Episcopal Church and of the Anglican Church of Canada. For a Lutheran, the chief defect, theologically, is the Anglican Holy Communion, which is far more Protestant than the more Catholic form of the Eucharist in Lutheran service books. However, the Morning and Evening Prayer services are of unparallelled beauty and seemly piety, and I use them frequently in my personal devotions.
Recently I have received the Service Book of the Western Rite of the Antiochian Orthodox Church. The eucharistic rite of St. Tikhon within it is essentially the B.C.P. Holy Communion service corrected from its Anglican-Reformed errors to conform with the eucharistic theology of Eastern Orthodoxy. As a Lutheran, this pleases me greatly, because Cramner's 1552 liturgy was full of Calvinist, even Zwinglian errors. What is good in purging the Anglican Holy Communion B.C.P. liturgy also applies to what Lutherans would agree is the true eucharistic theology of the Mass/Holy Communion.
I found a copy of this edition for a few bucks at a used bookstore and snatched it up. I've thought to use Morning Prayer in my devotions one of these days. The form is excellent.
Do you think you will review, at some point, the Commonwealth Ordinariate prayer book? It is called Divine Worship: Daily Office (Commonwealth Edition) (DW:DO (CE)) and is published by CTS. It appears to be out of stock at the time of my writing, but it is a very nice prayerbook. It contains Mattins and Evensong from the 1662 BCP, with restored minor hours, the 1961 lectionary (one-year cycle for feasts, solemnities, and weekdays, but a two-year cycle for Sundays) in RSV-2CE which comprises most of the book, collects from the ordinariate missal, supplementary texts (invitatories and patrimonial hymns), and some appendices. It is really a joy to pray and it is convenient for travel as it is a single volume with lectionary. It's also nice that it is straightforward so those unfamiliar with a prayerbook tradition aren't intimidated to join in prayer. I hope you do review it! I really enjoy your reviews. DW:DO (CE) does have some defects, of which I'm sure you'll make note, but it is a good prayerbook! PS I would be very interested in a side-by-side comparison with the North American Edition, which is quite different. Although many have reviewed both books (albeit not quite at your calibre), no one seems to have done a thorough side-by-side comparison of the Commonwealth and North American editions.
This was really interesting! I was vaguely familiar with the BCP but have never been part of a church that uses it. I enjoyed learning more about how it's used.
That’s interesting. why did the 1928 Anglican BCP take the Athanasian creed out, if you know? I know In the LCMS and pretty much all other confessional Lutheran churches we recite the A. Creed every Trinity Sunday and still retain it in all of our Lutheran books of prayer and our confessions so I was just interested why they would take it out. An Anglican friend of mine said they still recite the creed every year on Trinity Sunday but I’m not sure if that’s for every Anglican Church or not. Thanks for the video it was very informative. I’ve heard a lot of great things about the Anglican bcp I might just get one myself
Massey Shepherd has a paragraph that discusses the proposed American book of 1786, and he mentions that it dropped the Athanasian Creed and the Nicene Creed, and it omitted the phrase 'he descended into hell' from the Apostles Creed (as not in the original). British bishops and some New England clergy opposed the proposed changes, and a compromise was reached. Shepherd doesn't explain why, in the compromise, the Athanasian Creed was rejected. If I find an explanation, I'll try to remember to post it here. Meanwhile, let me say that the Athanasian Creed presents some difficulties. It incorporates a statement that implies that the Spirit proceeds from the Son. Since the Athanasian Creed also states that it is necessary to understand the Trinity as expressed in the Creed itself in order to be saved, it effectively damns the Eastern Orthodox. Since it is neither early, like the Apostles' Creed, nor approved by an Ecumenical Council, like the Creed of 381, I have no objection to omitting the Athanasian Creed from liturgical use. It seems to require too much of believers. I hope God will still save people who are not aware that "the Son is of the Father alone" or that the Holy Ghost is "not begotten, but proceeding." The Athanasian Creed, to the contrary, states that "except a man believe faithfully [these distinctions], he cannot be saved."
R. Grant Jones ahh ok I was thinking that might be the case. That makes sense I can see why they did that. I know Vat II also took the athanasian creed out of the Norvus Ordo as well for similar reasons. Lutherans Have always viewed the Filioque as a matter of heterodox and not heresy. So we wouldn’t say if someone doesn’t affirm the Filioque they can’t be saved but that they are in error just like In our confessions we have a condemnation of those who reject to baptize infants which is strong language but we’ve always understood that as gross heterodox and not full blown heresy where they can’t be saved. But yeah I’d agree the other creeds affirmed by the ecumenical councils hold more weight. But we retain the athanasian creed since we agree with the language used to describe the trinity and as more so of a condemnation of those who full on reject the trinity. But yeah the Filioque is a huge topic which merits I think a lot of dialogs with fellow Christians to hash out haha.
An interesting overview of the 1928 American BCP. When I sat down to watch, I was expecting you to go through the 1928 English BCP, but was pleasantly surprised! I found the many subtle differences between the two interesting. I like the addition of the section on Family Prayer into the American BCP (I think the 1959 Canadian BCP has this section, too), which is sadly lacking from the 1928 English BCP and the 1988 New Zealand Prayer Book.
Thanks for commenting, Peter! I believe I'll add the word 'American' to my description, so as not to mislead others. I'm not very familiar with the 1928 English book.
Another stellar review. FYI #1 I own the Kingsport Press revision 1977 ed. FYI #2 I also make my own ribbon markers for almost all of my bibles. I thought I invented this. Oh, well--guess not!
Though not currently Anglican, I still greatly enjoy using the Book of Common Prayer as a means of personal devotion. May I ask what expression of Anglicanism you fellowship with, Dr. Jones (Reformed, Anglo-Catholic, etc.)?
I'd like to attend a Reformed Anglican church, but there aren't any near me. Happily, I have no problem with Anglo-Catholic services based on the 1928 BCP (rather than the Anglican Missal). Thanks for the question, Parker!
@@RGrantJones Thank you for your response, Dr. Jones. I find a great deal of common ground with Reformed Anglicanism as well, and find the BCP being a very edifying devotional resource. I would certainly like to see more of a Reformed Anglican presence in the video-content world - similar to Jordan Cooper's material on Lutheranism, for instance. Thank you again for your time and response.
Yes, and I reviewed a few: the Knox Version, Challoner's Douay-Rheims revision, and a facsimile of the 1582 Rheims New Testament. I think they're all in the "Catholic Bibles" playlist. Thanks for commenting, Peter!
I'd prefer not to say -- but I will say that I've only seen the 2019 ACNA prayer book online. Perhaps one of these days I'll pick up a copy. Thanks for commenting, Fernando!
@@FernandoSerna1654 - I noticed that the ACNA published an edition of the ESV that includes the Deuterocanonicals. I may pick up a copy just to review it. I doubt I'd use it, since the font is reportedly only 8 points in height. The ESV-CE seems more reader friendly. anglicanhousepublishers.org/shop/the-esv-bible-with-apocrypha/
R. Grant Jones the ESV with Apocrypha is definitely not worth the investment. It’s essentially a glued pew Bible. Not to mention Crossway seems to have insisted on printing the Apocrypha in a smaller type due to its uninspired nature (which leads, strangely, to the canonical portion of Greek Esther being printed as though it isn’t canonical, as its Apocrypha contains the whole LXX book rather than just the additions).
Thanks for the clear overview, I have the Cambridge 1662 and it’s great, although I had to add ribbons to it as it came with none. I only added two (not very professionally either) but I think I need to add more as you have done. Do all editions include the Deuterocanonical books in the daily reading?
Ryan Santoni the only Lectionary I know without apocryphal books in the daily Lectionary is the first American prayer book in 1789, except it does contain apocryphal lessons on certain feast days. On the flip side, the 1689 “Liturgy of Comprehension” (an attempt reach a compromise with Puritans that ultimately fell through) uses the apocrypha regularly in the daily lectionary but never on feast days.
To supplement what HaHaVids has written, I think (but am far from sure) that the Reformed Episcopal Church's Prayer Book does not include Deuterocanonical books in the daily readings. I didn't find them when I looked here ( www.recus.org/documents/BCPComplete.pdf ). But I could have missed them.
Another thought is a book review on the newest English version I know of called the Passion Translation. It takes a lot of heat and I believe unjustly so. No translation is perfect, but it is poetic, it uses sources that are unusual to include in one translation. i.e it has notes you dont really see anywhere else. There are lots of other things I can say about it especially what it has to say about Jesus final words on the cross, there are some interesting notes for that in my volume.
R. Grant Jones so you are religious but not saved? You pray for forgiveness and yet, live against God daily? Jesus Christ came to save us and set us free from rebellion - you need to repent of your sins and call upon Jesus Christ for salvation. There is no reason to continue leading a sinful life - When Christ Himself will dwell within you and give you power over sin, death and the devil.
@@Jesus_Saves_66 Grant, as an Anglican you should know that "God's Child" is deluded about salvation. Salvation is God's free gift to His elect, whom He draws to Himself. The usual Arminian nonsense about the Sinner's Prayer and "accepting" salvation is wrong if one regards these as human decisions.
The edition with the slip case is available here: www.christianbook.com/common-prayer-bonded-leather-burgundy-slipcase/9780195285253/pd/85253 . A different edition is available here: www.amazon.com/1928-Book-Common-Prayer/dp/0195285069 .
Thank you, sir. Would you know by any chance how many times the Ps, OT, Gospels and Epistles are covered in a year if we followed the daily readings?
@@Valhalla369 - no, sorry. I haven't looked into that.
Even though I own - and regularly use - this same Book, I have still watched this video multiple times, because I so enjoy it.
Thank you, sir.
Excellent review! Pope Benedict XVI said in his apostolic constitution, Anglicanorum Coetibus, “the liturgical books proper to the Anglican tradition, which have been approved by the Holy See, so as to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared.”
Thanks for commenting, Gil! I've never been to an Anglican Ordinariate service, but I suppose they must use something similar to the 1928 BCP in their liturgy. Antiochian Orthodox Christians who follow the Western Rite are permitted to use the Rite of St. Tikhon, which is very similar to the Holy Communion service from the 1928 BCP. One notable difference is that the Rite of St. Tikhon adds a prayer from the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (one that begins "I believe, O Lord, and I confess that thou art truly the Christ ...") before communion is distributed.
I do know that some Anglican Ordinariate folks have published parts of the 1928 American BCP for daily prayer, incl. morning and evening. You can find them at walsinghampublishing dot com
My Dear Sir, thank so much for this review. It was a walk down memory lane with my Anglo-Catholic upbringing, a world full of processionals & recessionals, communions & confirmation. We even had “Cubs” on Wed evenings in the parish hall. The vicar & his wife (no lady priest & partner thank you very much) lived in an old world 3 story vicarage. I always regret having been too young to be invited over for sherry. In hindsight the only thing missing was a profound sense that the Bible is the Word of God.
Once again, thank you,
Rev John Wilderspin BA, Th M
FBC Brockville ON CDN
I suspect that significant omission is common to many congregations that use the BCP (not just Anglo-Catholic ones). Thanks very much commenting!
Like Cranmer l transition away from a real presence of bread & wine to a real presence of Word & Spirit. Blessings
Thank you for taking the time to overview this prayer book. I appreciate your explanation of the morning prayers.
I was given a copy of The Book of Common Prayer when I was transitioning from Judaism to Christianity. I love the book, but I never really understood how to use it properly for personal devotions.
When I attended a Lutheran communion service a few years ago, I didn't find it radically different from the BCP service. A visit to the Cradle of Prayer web site should clear up any uncertainties over Morning and Evening Prayer. Thanks for commenting!
@@RGrantJones I did not notice many, if any differences, when I attended an Anglican service; I am equally comfortable at both.
You may be interested in the Lutheran daily devotional. It is a prayer/worship book for home use. I have enjoyed it. Here is the link:
www.cph.org/p-11350-treasury-of-daily-prayer-regular-edition.aspx
Thank you! Have just purchased a 1662 and going to start 1st January 2024!😊
I recently purchased a 1928 BCP from a seller on Ebay, and I love it. I've been using it for devotional reading, and plan on using it for Morning and Evening Office once I figure out the procedure (I'm new to the Anglican way).
Thanks for commenting, Bradley. I recommend you follow along with these people to learn how it's done: cradleofprayer.org/this-weeks-prayers/ .
The U.S. 1928 Book of Common Prayer is something that, even as a Lutheran, I cherish. I use the 1962 Canadian Book of Common Prayer more frequently and often, too, the still recent revision of the Reformed Episcopal Church's B.C.P., which is the easiest to follow (because of all its helpful tables for all sorts of things). I was a Lutheran as a small child and returned to Lutheranism after many years as a member of the Protestant Episcopal Church and of the Anglican Church of Canada. For a Lutheran, the chief defect, theologically, is the Anglican Holy Communion, which is far more Protestant than the more Catholic form of the Eucharist in Lutheran service books. However, the Morning and Evening Prayer services are of unparallelled beauty and seemly piety, and I use them frequently in my personal devotions.
Recently I have received the Service Book of the Western Rite of the Antiochian Orthodox Church. The eucharistic rite of St. Tikhon within it is essentially the B.C.P. Holy Communion service corrected from its Anglican-Reformed errors to conform with the eucharistic theology of Eastern Orthodoxy. As a Lutheran, this pleases me greatly, because Cramner's 1552 liturgy was full of Calvinist, even Zwinglian errors. What is good in purging the Anglican Holy Communion B.C.P. liturgy also applies to what Lutherans would agree is the true eucharistic theology of the Mass/Holy Communion.
Excellent Review. Your reviews are the best Bible reviews on TH-cam. I like the 1928 American BCP as well as the 2019 BCP published by ACNA.
Thank you for the kind words, Philip! I've seen the 2019 BCP online, but I don't have a paper copy.
I found a copy of this edition for a few bucks at a used bookstore and snatched it up. I've thought to use Morning Prayer in my devotions one of these days. The form is excellent.
I agree. Thanks for commenting, Jay!
I have 1979 prayer book I also have the storter prayer as well. Great review Mr. Jones.
Thanks for the kind comment, Robert!
Do you think you will review, at some point, the Commonwealth Ordinariate prayer book? It is called Divine Worship: Daily Office (Commonwealth Edition) (DW:DO (CE)) and is published by CTS.
It appears to be out of stock at the time of my writing, but it is a very nice prayerbook. It contains Mattins and Evensong from the 1662 BCP, with restored minor hours, the 1961 lectionary (one-year cycle for feasts, solemnities, and weekdays, but a two-year cycle for Sundays) in RSV-2CE which comprises most of the book, collects from the ordinariate missal, supplementary texts (invitatories and patrimonial hymns), and some appendices.
It is really a joy to pray and it is convenient for travel as it is a single volume with lectionary. It's also nice that it is straightforward so those unfamiliar with a prayerbook tradition aren't intimidated to join in prayer.
I hope you do review it! I really enjoy your reviews. DW:DO (CE) does have some defects, of which I'm sure you'll make note, but it is a good prayerbook!
PS I would be very interested in a side-by-side comparison with the North American Edition, which is quite different. Although many have reviewed both books (albeit not quite at your calibre), no one seems to have done a thorough side-by-side comparison of the Commonwealth and North American editions.
Thank you for the recommendation! I'm not sure the Commonwealth edition is readily available here in the U.S., but I'll look into it.
This was really interesting! I was vaguely familiar with the BCP but have never been part of a church that uses it. I enjoyed learning more about how it's used.
Thanks for letting me know you enjoyed the video!
That’s interesting. why did the 1928 Anglican BCP take the Athanasian creed out, if you know? I know In the LCMS and pretty much all other confessional Lutheran churches we recite the A. Creed every Trinity Sunday and still retain it in all of our Lutheran books of prayer and our confessions so I was just interested why they would take it out. An Anglican friend of mine said they still recite the creed every year on Trinity Sunday but I’m not sure if that’s for every Anglican Church or not. Thanks for the video it was very informative. I’ve heard a lot of great things about the Anglican bcp I might just get one myself
Massey Shepherd has a paragraph that discusses the proposed American book of 1786, and he mentions that it dropped the Athanasian Creed and the Nicene Creed, and it omitted the phrase 'he descended into hell' from the Apostles Creed (as not in the original). British bishops and some New England clergy opposed the proposed changes, and a compromise was reached. Shepherd doesn't explain why, in the compromise, the Athanasian Creed was rejected. If I find an explanation, I'll try to remember to post it here.
Meanwhile, let me say that the Athanasian Creed presents some difficulties. It incorporates a statement that implies that the Spirit proceeds from the Son. Since the Athanasian Creed also states that it is necessary to understand the Trinity as expressed in the Creed itself in order to be saved, it effectively damns the Eastern Orthodox. Since it is neither early, like the Apostles' Creed, nor approved by an Ecumenical Council, like the Creed of 381, I have no objection to omitting the Athanasian Creed from liturgical use. It seems to require too much of believers. I hope God will still save people who are not aware that "the Son is of the Father alone" or that the Holy Ghost is "not begotten, but proceeding." The Athanasian Creed, to the contrary, states that "except a man believe faithfully [these distinctions], he cannot be saved."
R. Grant Jones ahh ok I was thinking that might be the case. That makes sense I can see why they did that. I know Vat II also took the athanasian creed out of the Norvus Ordo as well for similar reasons. Lutherans Have always viewed the Filioque as a matter of heterodox and not heresy. So we wouldn’t say if someone doesn’t affirm the Filioque they can’t be saved but that they are in error just like In our confessions we have a condemnation of those who reject to baptize infants which is strong language but we’ve always understood that as gross heterodox and not full blown heresy where they can’t be saved. But yeah I’d agree the other creeds affirmed by the ecumenical councils hold more weight. But we retain the athanasian creed since we agree with the language used to describe the trinity and as more so of a condemnation of those who full on reject the trinity. But yeah the Filioque is a huge topic which merits I think a lot of dialogs with fellow Christians to hash out haha.
An interesting overview of the 1928 American BCP. When I sat down to watch, I was expecting you to go through the 1928 English BCP, but was pleasantly surprised! I found the many subtle differences between the two interesting. I like the addition of the section on Family Prayer into the American BCP (I think the 1959 Canadian BCP has this section, too), which is sadly lacking from the 1928 English BCP and the 1988 New Zealand Prayer Book.
Thanks for commenting, Peter! I believe I'll add the word 'American' to my description, so as not to mislead others. I'm not very familiar with the 1928 English book.
Another stellar review. FYI #1 I own the Kingsport Press revision 1977 ed. FYI #2 I also make my own ribbon markers for almost all of my bibles. I thought I invented this. Oh, well--guess not!
Though not currently Anglican, I still greatly enjoy using the Book of Common Prayer as a means of personal devotion. May I ask what expression of Anglicanism you fellowship with, Dr. Jones (Reformed, Anglo-Catholic, etc.)?
I'd like to attend a Reformed Anglican church, but there aren't any near me. Happily, I have no problem with Anglo-Catholic services based on the 1928 BCP (rather than the Anglican Missal). Thanks for the question, Parker!
@@RGrantJones Thank you for your response, Dr. Jones. I find a great deal of common ground with Reformed Anglicanism as well, and find the BCP being a very edifying devotional resource. I would certainly like to see more of a Reformed Anglican presence in the video-content world - similar to Jordan Cooper's material on Lutheranism, for instance. Thank you again for your time and response.
I have a book like this but from 1545
Interesting. Much different than the Catholic Liturgy of the Hours.
Thanks for the view and comment, acardnal!
@acardnal You wouldn't happen to frequent the Catholic Answer's Forums would you? ;)
Do you have any translations of the vulgate in your arsenal?
Yes, and I reviewed a few: the Knox Version, Challoner's Douay-Rheims revision, and a facsimile of the 1582 Rheims New Testament. I think they're all in the "Catholic Bibles" playlist. Thanks for commenting, Peter!
Do you belong to a 1928 Prayer Book congregation or local church? Or ACNA?
I'd prefer not to say -- but I will say that I've only seen the 2019 ACNA prayer book online. Perhaps one of these days I'll pick up a copy. Thanks for commenting, Fernando!
R. Grant Jones Yes, I wish to respect your privacy. The ACNA Prayer Book looks good. They have embraced the ESV.
@@FernandoSerna1654 - I noticed that the ACNA published an edition of the ESV that includes the Deuterocanonicals. I may pick up a copy just to review it. I doubt I'd use it, since the font is reportedly only 8 points in height. The ESV-CE seems more reader friendly. anglicanhousepublishers.org/shop/the-esv-bible-with-apocrypha/
R. Grant Jones the ESV with Apocrypha is definitely not worth the investment. It’s essentially a glued pew Bible. Not to mention Crossway seems to have insisted on printing the Apocrypha in a smaller type due to its uninspired nature (which leads, strangely, to the canonical portion of Greek Esther being printed as though it isn’t canonical, as its Apocrypha contains the whole LXX book rather than just the additions).
@@HandJvlogs - Thanks for the warning, HaHaVids! I suspected as much ('glued pew Bible').
Thanks for the clear overview, I have the Cambridge 1662 and it’s great, although I had to add ribbons to it as it came with none. I only added two (not very professionally either) but I think I need to add more as you have done. Do all editions include the Deuterocanonical books in the daily reading?
Ryan Santoni the only Lectionary I know without apocryphal books in the daily Lectionary is the first American prayer book in 1789, except it does contain apocryphal lessons on certain feast days. On the flip side, the 1689 “Liturgy of Comprehension” (an attempt reach a compromise with Puritans that ultimately fell through) uses the apocrypha regularly in the daily lectionary but never on feast days.
To supplement what HaHaVids has written, I think (but am far from sure) that the Reformed Episcopal Church's Prayer Book does not include Deuterocanonical books in the daily readings. I didn't find them when I looked here ( www.recus.org/documents/BCPComplete.pdf ). But I could have missed them.
Thank you both!
Another thought is a book review on the newest English version I know of called the Passion Translation. It takes a lot of heat and I believe unjustly so. No translation is perfect, but it is poetic, it uses sources that are unusual to include in one translation. i.e it has notes you dont really see anywhere else. There are lots of other things I can say about it especially what it has to say about Jesus final words on the cross, there are some interesting notes for that in my volume.
Thanks for the suggestion, Peter! That's one that hasn't been on my radar scope. Now my curiosity is piqued.
Are you an Anglican, R. Grant Jones?
Yes, I am. Thanks for the view and comment!
R. Grant Jones so you are religious but not saved? You pray for forgiveness and yet, live against God daily? Jesus Christ came to save us and set us free from rebellion - you need to repent of your sins and call upon Jesus Christ for salvation. There is no reason to continue leading a sinful life - When Christ Himself will dwell within you and give you power over sin, death and the devil.
@@Jesus_Saves_66 - thank you for taking the time to comment, and for your concern over my salvation.
@@Jesus_Saves_66 Grant, as an Anglican you should know that "God's Child" is deluded about salvation. Salvation is God's free gift to His elect, whom He draws to Himself. The usual Arminian nonsense about the Sinner's Prayer and "accepting" salvation is wrong if one regards these as human decisions.
Good response brother.@@RGrantJones