On a typical Sunday, a worshipper entering an Anglican church will be greeted at the door but not necessarily given a prayer book or hymn book. The words might be projected onto a screen or printed as a booklet, card or service sheet. Creativity, variety and flexibility are the order of the day. Generally speaking, in the Church of England today there is little uniformity in liturgical practice and invariably the liturgy will come from Common Worship (2000) rather than from The Book of Common Prayer (1662). The transition from ‘thee and thou’ to ‘you who’ in biblical translations, hymns and liturgy took place over the past 60 years. But before that some congregations (notably at communions and weddings) became familiar with another liturgy, taken from The Book of Common Prayer with the additions and deviations proposed in 1928. The background to these ‘additions and deviations’ is to be found in the Prayer Book controversy of the 1920s. Given the widespread use of the Book, and to make it legal for the first time, some of the contents subsequently appeared in The Alternative Service Book (1980).

The ‘Deposited’ Book of 1927–28 was a direct outcome of the Royal Letters of Business issued to the two convocations. Earlier in 1906 the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline had published its lengthy report, and had concluded that ‘the law of public worship in the Church of England is too narrow for the religious life of the present generation’ and that ‘the machinery for discipline has broken down’. Furthermore some action had to be taken to reform the ecclesiastical courts in order to rein in the activities of errant clergy. Anglo-Catholics (and it was mostly Anglo-Catholics) were a law unto themselves and the bishops were unwilling or unable to curb their deviations from, and additions to, The Book of Common Prayer. Some of their innovations were regarded at the time as being ‘clearly inconsistent with and subversive of the teaching of the Church of England.’ Alongside the liturgical irregularities, there were varieties of clerical attire and ritualistic practice which some of their opponents regarded as being a foreign intrusion, decidedly un-English and even effeminate.

Over the course of the next 20 years (and only delayed by the First World War) the lengthy progress of Prayer Book revision took place. Generally speaking, the bishops (with a few notable exceptions) were in favour of the proposals, but it was estimated that 90% of the laity were against a new book. There was still a widespread objection to Roman Catholicism, and a doctrinal objection to transubstantiation and to the reservation of the consecrated elements. Clerical opposition to the proposed book came from all parties within the Church of England – Anglo-Catholics, modernists and Evangelicals – and outside from most nonconformists (apart from the Unitarians and the Presbyterian Church of England).

Between 1920 and 1935, 59 Measures received the Royal Assent. In those 15 years only four of them were rejected by Parliament – the City of London churches, the proposed bishopric of Shrewsbury and the two Prayer Book Measures of 1927 and 1928. But was the State to restrict the mission of the church? After the Deposited Book had been twice rejected by Parliament, the bishops determined to establish the principle that the church ‘must in the last resort, when its mind has been fully ascertained, retain its inalienable right, in loyalty to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to formulate its faith in him, and to arrange the expression of that holy faith in its form of worship.’ Years later this fundamental principle bore fruit in the Prayer Book (Alternative and other Services) Measure (1965). This enabled the Church of England (and without recourse to Parliament) to create official new liturgies as alternatives to The Book of Common Prayer.

At the time, the national identity was defined by a ‘doctrinal uniformity and national Protestantism’ (p 24); of the relationship between the established church and Parliament; of the Protestant Reformation and the Church of England; and of the complimentary partnership of the Authorised Version (1611) and The Book of Common Prayer. Given all of these factors as symbols of national identity, Dr Maiden has a surprising omission. Following the parliamentary rejection of the Deposited Book in 1927, those MPs who voted against it were presented with a commemorative Bible, on the front of which was an embossed impression of the Houses of Parliament and inscribed, ‘In grateful remembrance of December 15, 1927.’ The following year, after the second defeat, other Bibles were given to those additional MPs who had voted against the Measure. The congregation of Christ Church, Coventry were clearly delighted with the outcome. ‘To many of us it meant a wonderful intervention of God to save our church from the peril and shame of forsaking its consistent loyalty to Holy Scripture, so dearly won at the Reformation.’ For them, ‘The Word of God [was] “the secret of England's greatness” and the only authoritative standard as to true worship, in grateful appreciation of your stand for the truth in voting against that Measure so subversive of the Reformation Settlement.’Footnote ¹ Following the second rejection, the PCC recorded their profound gratitude to God for his answer to prayer, and the hope ‘that he may graciously continue to preserve our church from unscriptural error.’Footnote ²

John Maiden's book started life as a PhD from the University of Stirling (2007) and is a well researched and coherently argued piece of scholarship. However, there are a number of unnecessary repetitions, factual errors (eg the Welsh Church was disestablished in 1920 not 1914) and many of the quotations and references taken from Hansard are incorrect. Though the book is not written from a liturgical perspective, it would have been much improved if there had been some greater awareness of the liturgical debates of the day both in England and throughout the Anglican Communion. However, since the book is about ‘the subject of identity’ (p 2) and not liturgy then it will suffice.