Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: sionnsar
How odd is this? They affirm the 1662 BCP, ordinal, and 39 Articles as the traditional formulary and then direct you to one part of it in the 1979 TEC Prayerbook! Surely they must know the doctrines contained in this prayerbook do not match the 1662 BCP or any of its successors? Do they know that the 1662 Ordinal does not allow for the ordination of women? Did they notice when turning to page 867 that this is a section called "historical documents" which is intended for historical curiosities of the Episcopal Church? Hardly a place to locate one of your formularies!

But, in point of fact, that's where a completely accurate statement of the formulary will be found by 99% of the people reading the CANA FAQ, since very few of them will have the 1662 BCP or the 1928 American BCP.

8 posted on 12/30/2006 4:58:26 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: RonF
But, in point of fact, that's where a completely accurate statement of the formulary will be found by 99% of the people reading the CANA FAQ, since very few of them will have the 1662 BCP or the 1928 American BCP.

You may be on to something. If 99% of the people in CANA are continuing to use a 1979 BCP, they will have an uphill time of it.

9 posted on 12/30/2006 7:58:48 PM PST by Huber (And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. - John 1:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson