Im still trying to sort out all the disparate threads that have come out of the desire to break away from the ECUSA. I think the ACC finds itself in an uncomfortable middle : too Catholic for the old guard Episcopalian, and too Protestant for the RCCer looking for tradition.
I just know Im sick and tired of the "its all Henry VIII's fault!" Just tells me people are woefully ignorant of Western civilization history.
I think the RCC needs a good swift kick every now and then - hence Martin Luther.
However
Am tired of hearing mainline Protestants talk about how good they were to throw out the baby with the bathwater and then wonder why people arent more cognizant of the history behind Christianity. I swear its amazing to me sometimes to hear a Protestant express amazement over some of the Old Testament teachings, or suddenly get a clue as to why the Jews considered the Tabernacle such a holy place to enter. As a catholic, my first response is " DOH!"
Now, has the ACC dropped the filoque? I know one of the Anglo-Catholic continuing Anglican groups has.
An Orthodox monk of whom I am very fond (whose monastery, incidentally, uses the Coverdale Psalter, rather than the translation from the LXX from Holy Transfiguration Monastery most of us English-speaking Orthodox use) has expressed the view that the non-filioquist continuing Anglicans are the only Western confession worth having ecumenical dialogs with. (Of course that was before the Latins got a Pope of Rome given to quoting Nicholas Cabasilas and Emperor Manuel II.)
Actually, we tend to be more Catholic (and more traditional) than most post Vatican II RCCs! We certainly consider ourselves no more protestant than the Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic Church.