I'm thinking I'm terms that our tradition has prioritzed a specific book as important & the Canons make a distinction (even if eg EOW become BCP, the distinction exists) such that Episcopalians should be able every Sunday to worship in accordance with the BCP, even if other things are offered.
I'd concede that other supplements are certainly viable. And I can see how, yes, those are still communal. I suppose it seems to be that the BCP still has a priority of place that should remain respected such to be always offered until changed.
As to last. Yes, I'll have to admit that's true. With one service it becomes a matter of evaluation I suppose. & with the priority of the spiritual tradition it becomes a focus on the BCP as is, with supplements and alternatives only as secondary. I'd have to think more about that detriment.
I just don't see how the approved alternatives detract from experiencing worship when they are closely aligned with BCP as a spiritual/canonical addendum if not physically in the book itself. I also only have 1 service and play with the form frequently/seasonally (within the confines allowed).
Hmm. I didn't intend "distract". Nor never use other things in general. It's more that the status of the BCP makes me think each individual Episcopalian ought to have access to a regular service somewhere (at minimum) to a BCP service as canons define it as an expression of our core community text
I guess my push back is, as long as you're offering BCP on the "regular" that doesn't mean you couldn't or shouldn't offer alternative liturgies from time to time, especially when you're the only option in town. We're a wide, diverse communion and it's good to remind ourselves of that.
I think this is further influenced by my experience of growing up in and serving in rural/small town churches, where licensed liturgies can open up new expressions of God for folks who otherwise won't often if ever experience Episcopal worship anywhere else.