By the way fellows:  jerem is a she not a he.  Common mistake.

Let me give more details because it seems that some of you fellows are
confused as to whether I want to replace [A], [B], etc. with autotext field
codes or the autotext field entries.  I need to replace text within a
document- what text: [A], [B], [C], etc. with autotext entries, not autotext
field codes.  Why are there [A], [B], [C], etc. dispersed throughout the
document.  Because these represent areas that need to have variable
information inserted in these spots.  Typically, this is handled by doing a
merge, a base document carrying the standard text merged with a variable
document housing the variables.  Why is this not being handled with a merge?  
Because sometimes documents that are handled with a merge tend to lock up,
appear checked out and become one pain in the ____ to get unlocked as well as
giving problems (when trying to blackline the document) breaching the
relationship between the base document and the variable document involved in
the merge.  (I work with Imanage and whether this is an Imanage issue as far
as merges are concerned, I don't know but sometimes doing merges are, again
one big pain in the ___, sometimes they work smoothly).  So, someone came up
with the idea of foregoing the merge and handling this with having one
document that has these tags in it, loading up the variable information in
autotext (and by the way, whoever came up with the automated Autotext loader
- kudos to them - love that program - I use that to load up my autotext
entries) and then manually replacing all of these tags with the autotext
entries which are similarly named - [A], [B], etc.    This text - [A], [B],
[C], etc. can appear in a document more than once.  It is absurd for me to
have to select each one, call in the autotext entry then go to the next entry
and do the same.  At one point I tried to Find [A], highlight all of them and
then hit the autotext entry.  Does not work - it will only replace the first
highlighted [A].  Was not really married to that idea anyway because I would
still have to manually find each group (the [A]'s then the [B]'s, etc.)  It's
similar to your Find and Replace Autotext entries.  If I use that I have to
find all groupings of [A]'s, then do [B]'s and so on and so forth.  Too
tedious.  So I came up with this code:
Selection.HomeKey Unit:=wdStory
Selection.Find.ClearFormatting
Dim i as Integer = 4
With Selection.Find
.Text = "[A]"
.Replacement.Text = ""
.Forward = True
.Wrap = wdFindContinue
.Format = False
.MatchCase = False
.MatchWholeWord = False
.MatchWildcards = False
.MatchSoundsLike = False
.MatchAllWordForms = False
End With
Selection.Find.Execute
Selection.Fields.Add Range:=Selection.Range, Type:=wdFieldEmpty, Text:= _
"AUTOTEXT [A] ", PreserveFormatting:=True
Loop until i = 0

for each and every tag, which works perfectly and does so in 2 seconds flat.
What I didn't like about this was I had to tell it how many times each code
appears (since I didn't know how to loop this so it would keep finding and
replacing each tag) and then I came across this little bit of code: Set
myRange = ActiveDocument.Content

but I didn't know how to replace the last sentence so that it would replace
the [A] with an autotext entry that was similarly named(not autotext field
code, just wanted to emphasize that once again).  I replaced this last
sentence with the one that works in the previous code, but I keep getting
improper argument or something to that effect.  Since everyone is suggesting
all kinds of other techniques, I take it that there is no sentence that can
replace the ReplaceWith:="hello", Replace:=wdReplaceAll that will allow the
replacement to be an autotext code.  Is that correct?  I do find that a
little curious, since my original, primitive (but effective code) does have a
sentence in it that allows for an autotext replacement.  That primitive code
works beautifully replacing about 30 tags in a document in 2 second flat.

I'm going to try your array code and see if that does the trick but if
anyone is out there who knows that sentence I'm looking for, would appreciate
it.  Thanks all.

Hi Russ,

That must be why I posted it twice - on the grounds that you can't have too
much of a good thing :-|

Regards.

Ed

Greg,
You're right. Does Jerem really need to insert fields?
What advantage does he gain by inserting fields?

Your code should be faster, if there are less lines of code to process.
In my MacWord, I don't have the built-in commands of the newer versions.

Greg, another thing I noticed in your code.
I'm now under the impression that it would better most times to use:
For i = LBound(myArray) To UBound(myArray)
...not knowing how a potential users Option Base is set up.

Hi Greg,

Been there, done that, got whole rooms full of T-shirts :-(

Regards.

Ed