Canon law is required for all persons of that particular faith, Walter, and, while I cannot remember as it has been too long since I've looked at them, I believe there are only two sacraments written into Canon Law of the Anglican Church.
So far, so good, more or less . . .
There is no canon law requiring Anglicans to be married, ordained, receive unction, etc.; however these are still sacraments. I have never suggested they are part of canon law. That came up in Setanta's rants in which he drew assumptions of my intent based on nothing other than his own ill temper directed at me.
Don't let a little thing like the truth stand in your way. You continue to insist that what the Anglican church considers sacramental acts
, but not sacraments
, are, in fact sacraments. Good god, talk about pig-headed. This has nothing to do with any assumptions about your intent--and your remark about ill-temper directed at you (oh, poor suffering martyr) is made all the more ridiculous by describing what i have written here as rants. I was not ranting in the thread which was the genesis of your latest stalking horse, and when you made your silly and unsupportable contention there, i did not even bother to respond. Because you had not supported your contention, and it was silly. This topic has been re-engaged because you brought it up here. Your conceit, your know-it-all attitude toward questions of religion would not let it lie. You had to make a contention that i had "run off into the tall grass," inferentially defeated by your superior knowledge. Nothing could be further from the truth. I ignored you in the genesis thread because you had, as usual, made a statement from authority, and had, as usual provided support which was in fact no support for your contention.
We wouldn't be going over all of this again if you had not decided in your silly, know-it-all way, to contend that you had achieved a rhetorical victory to which you did not attain, and to which you are incapable of attaining.
The basis and requirements for marriage when Anglicans marry is written into Canon Law but this is in a different category from the issue of sacraments.
So that one wonders why you keep bringing it up.
I will refer you back to the links I posted supporting marriage as a sacrament.
Your first link is to a single congregation of the Anglican church in Adelaide, South Australia. Most people who are reasonable will understand why i say this is not an authority for the Anglican church, the web site for which i have already quoted and linked in these pages.
Your second link is for the Church of Ireland. We are discussing the Anglican Church. It's single reference to the definition of marriage as a sacrament quotes The Anglican Church of Canada News
. People who are reasonable will understand why i say this is not an authority for the Anglican church, the web site for which i have already quoted and linked in these pages.
Your third link is for a blog site--jeebus save us, it just gets loonier--people who are reasonable will understand why i say this is not an authority for the Anglican church, the web site for which i have already quoted and linked in these pages. People who are perceptive will note that the blog site is a venue for ranting on the gay marriage issue, and understand that such a source fails the cui bono
You have, typically, allowed your overwhelming conceit (that which lead you, when you first appeared at this site, to contend that others in a thread should listen to you because you are well-informed and well-educated, the obvious inference being that you considered all of the rest of us not
to be well-informed and well-educated; i won't even canvas the issue of just how well-educated and well-informed the content of your contributions to these fora actually make you appear to be), to suggest to you that you were the mistress of information not vouchsafed to others, and that you would scorn and enlighten them at once. You have hit the "I'm the victim of personal attacks" panic button here much more quickly than is usually the case, and it doesn't surprise me. Whenever you start spouting your statements from authority and scorning others as ignorant, and are subsequently shot down due to your native inability to sustain your point in debate and provide credible evidence for your contentions, you immediately retreat behind your favorite screen, martyrdom. Poor, poor Fox, so omniscient, so scorned, so put upon, but so noble and virtuous. Have a nice life Fox, i intend to hitherto dispense with any discussion of religious doctrine with you--you've already demonstrated both your ignorance of the subject and your inability to support your contentions. None of which will, of course, ever interfer with your belief in your superior knowledge and understanding. You are, truly, a legend in your own mind.