Someone knowledgeable about the Anglican Catholic Church of Canada and the Traditional Anglican Communion sent me this:
The Status of the XXXIX Articles in the TAC
The Constitution of the ACCC specifically stated that it maintains the ‘Doctrine’ set forth in the Thirty Nine Articles of Religion, but this was inconsistent with other provisions of the Constitution. e.g., the Constitution provides that as a Province or “member Church” of the Traditional Anglican Communion, the ACCC has no legislative authority to determine matters of doctrine.
Matters of doctrine were to be dealt with according to the Victoria Concordat. The Victoria Concordat confirms that no Province or member Church can determine matters of doctrine. The Concordat does not mention the Articles of Religion in its Fundamental Declarations. On the contrary it affirms the “doctrinal principles” set out in the Affirmation of St. Louis. Not only does the Affirmation of Saint Louis not mention the Thirty Nine Articles of Religion, it repudiates certain of the Articles in its doctrinal position on the number of sacraments, etc.
Therefore the Articles of Religion as the “doctrine” of the ACCC are ultra vires TAC Provinces and therefore of no force or effect.
The tradition of having the newly ordained “assent” to the Articles is a vestige of the practice of the Church of England. There was no legal requirement for it, and improper to ask an ordinand to assent to something that is contrary to the doctrine of the Church as expressed in the Concordat and the Affirmation of Saint Louis.
Well, it is as I had understood it: the College of Bishops of the TAC determines doctrine. Now I guess the parting of the ways for Hepworth and the bishops that followed him and those remaining in the TAC was whether adopting the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) by the College of Bishops was legitimate in light of the Concordat and the Affirmation of St. Louis.
Interesting. Thanks everyone for carrying on a civil discussion about this.