"But it is a fact, that until it is made published, it means nothing."

So now, instead of accusing others of lying about the approval, you are simply stating that until published authorization means nothing. Of course that is rather silly because ones needs authorization first then a Liturgikon is published. One doesn't publish first then ask for authorization later unless you are the Canadian Bishop's Conference.

The bishops are under no obligation to make any of the contents of the IELC's and COC's correspondence public and it is likely they will not. As I stated earlier, the new Liturigkon could be published without anything but reference to the protocol number of the document giving authorization, just as the current Liturgikon does. Will you then accuse the hierarchs of lying and publishing the new Liturgikon without approval?

Fr. Deacon Lance

Let's move this converstion to Faith and Worship.

Times have changed a bit since 1965. If they publish something with a protocol number and a date on it, someone is bound to be able to check with Rome and find out what's what.

Incognitus