Talk:Elizabethan Religious Settlement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Anglicanism Portal Elizabethan Religious Settlement is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as b-class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Anglicanism To-do:

[edit] Modern Take

Need some summary of contemporary scholarship that brings nuance to the term and even questions of its validity. Dan Knauss 15:43, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] English Reformation merger

This artile should be merged with that on the English Reformation. Roger Arguile 16:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Roger Arguile. It duplicates the English Reformation article and should be merged with it for the benefit of both. In any case the last paragraph,with no footnote page references , is to me meaningless. What does it mean? Should it not be either rewritten or deleted? I have read Haigh to try to understand it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick jones (talk • contribs) 16:25, 1 July 2007

I also agree, somebody be bold. -- SECisek 07:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I have done some work on this article and now think it should stay independent. -- SECisek 22:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prayer Book

How can the 1559 Prayer Book be regarded as a compromise between 1549 and 1552 when it is in fact 1552 with a few amendments? Frederick Jones . For an excellent article by an Evangelical scholar on the relationship between the two books try Google (PDF)Churchman 116-3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick jones (talk • contribs)

Can we not agree that it is a compromise in wording? that leaves open the disputed question of whether they teach a different doctrine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick jones (talk • contribs)

Can we have a page reference for the last footnote? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick jones (talk • contribs)