Let me summarize his points:
- The Reformation was a "return" and not an "innovation".
- The primacy of Scripture in the Anglican tradition.
- The roles of tradition and reason in Anglicanism (not the same as the three legged stool Episcopalians teach).
- Innovation is not derived from Scripture or tradition but from (flawed) human reason.
- One should apply Scripture, tradition, and reason in that order to answer the question, "Is this an innovation or is it a return?"
Can you guess which examples would have caused an audience of Episcopalians to rend their clothes?
Yep, divorce, cohabitation, same-sex blessings, transgender liturgies, etc. Which were all correctly identified as innovations contrary to scripture and tradition.
The ACNA congregation nodded in agreement.
A congregation of Episcopalians would have turned into,
Or maybe not. A crowd of Episcopalian clergy certainly would have been irate, but a crowd of pewsitters just might have had their ears opened.
Just imagine what effect a steady diet of correct information might have on the Episcopal congo.
Ah, tis but a flight of fancy I know.
But, just imagine...