Let's do a detailed discussion for each of the Articles of Religion

Thank you all for the support. It came to me to look at the articles a bit more properly having been checked a couple of times in discussion, especially by @rakovsky and being reminded by staff that the site has a high view of the articles. As a result of the venture I now have a much higher view of the articles than at any time in my life previously.

I am not sure what I will do next. Two things in my mind are a review of the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral which I touched on in one of the later articles, but which probably deserves it's own thread. I have developed a much higher view of Matthew Parker and Elizabeth I, and perhaps a more realistic view of Henry VIII. I also think I might look at the homilies a bit more closely. I think I have posted 2 of them, being the Homily of the Salvation of Mankind, and the Homily against Swearing and Perjury. They represent a very interesting insight into the life of the Church in the 16th Century, and whilst they are in a sense un-preachable in the contemporary environment they certainly hold a great deal of value in terms of content, and perhaps they offer a methodology that may be sensible in terms of the challenges of the clarity of the message given the numbers of less specifically traditionally theologically educated clergy with the rise of local ordained ministries.

I interestingly think I have changed my view of the Deutero Canonicals as a result of research and the discussion that was had here.

 

Have you ever noticed that the Reformed evangelicals who talk the most about adhering to the Articles tend to be the same people who refuse to read from the Apocrypha when it comes up in the lectionary? And, of course, they totally ignore those few occasions when a sentence of Scripture from the Apocrypha is included as an option in the liturgy. Each time I read those books, I see more connections to the Gospel. The Roman lectionary is really the best at visiting the pertinent texts. We could learn something in that regard. . .

 

I love all the Apocryphal books especially 3 & 4 Esdras and the Prayer of Mannaseh.

 

Increasingly, since revisiting this article, I have come to understand that that the Deutero-Canonical texts are scripture, meaning they are part of the bible. The thing that the Articles, and the Homilies do, is permit and encourage their use in all matters, save that of determining that which of necessity must be required of all to be believed unto the attainment of salvation.

I have started to talk more about the whole Bible and the Abbreviated Bible, rather than talking about Catholic and Protestant Bibles.