Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Kolokotronis

Metropolitan Jonah was once an Episcopal priest and he is the successor of St Tikhon (whom the Episcopalians are adding to their calendar of saints next month). He, more than anyone else, can serve as a “bridge figure” between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy,

I took the time last night read the 39 Articles of Religion again. It is interesting to note that Article XIX declares the Churches of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch and Rome to have erred. It does not say anything about the Church of Constantinople. It is important to know that Anglicans have never had problems with the Orthodox. No Archbishop of Canterbury was ever murdered in the name of Orthodoxy (unlike Archbishops Cranmer and Laud).

The ACNA Constitution affirms the the teachings of the first four councils of the undivided Church and the Christological clarifications of the fifth, sixth and seventh councils. Icons are not unusual in Anglican churches, but they are not central to worship like in Orthodoxy.

I think the biggest obstacle for Anglicans embracing Orthodoxy is not theology, but culture.


17 posted on 06/25/2009 4:46:24 AM PDT by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: bobjam; Kolokotronis
I think the biggest obstacle for Anglicans embracing Orthodoxy is not theology, but culture

Why don't you state what the Anglican theology is (if there is such a thing as one Anglican theology) and Kolo and I can tell you if it is cultural, theological or both.

I was already reminded on this thread that the Anglicans are predominantly (the operant word!) Calivinist in their theology. That in itself is a DOA difference that preculdes any interocmmunion unless one side gives up its theology in all but dogma of Trinity and Chriostology.

Where do Anglicans stand on Mariology? Intermediate state of the souls? Original Sin? Real Presence? Sacraments? Procession of the Spirit? And so on.

I would say that Anglicans and Orthodox share a lot precisely in their culture, superficially, and differ irreocncilibly in their thoelogies, exactly the opposite of what you are saying. Anglicans like ecclesial tradition, they are liturgical, and the High Church is in some ways "older" than the NO Catholic Church today.

So, they find a lot in common with the tradition-bound Orthodoxy. But this is just the surface; what's underneath is as different as night and day.

18 posted on 06/25/2009 8:57:05 AM PDT by kosta50 (Don't look up, the truth is all around you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: bobjam; kosta50

“Metropolitan Jonah was once an Episcopal priest and he is the successor of St Tikhon (whom the Episcopalians are adding to their calendar of saints next month).”

I am aware that Met. Jonah is both a convert and a former Episcopalian priest. I had not heard, but am not surprised, to hear that he claims to be the successor of +Tikhon. The Russian Orthodox Church as well as the Greek Orthodox Church likely disagree.

“He, more than anyone else, can serve as a “bridge figure” between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy,”

What is it with Western Christians and bridges to Orthodoxy? The Latins have tried that with the Uniates...with absolutely no success at all.

“I took the time last night read the 39 Articles of Religion again. It is interesting to note that Article XIX declares the Churches of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch and Rome to have erred. It does not say anything about the Church of Constantinople.”

That’s odd; an oversight perhaps? There is absolutely no difference in the theology of the Churches of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem and that of Constantinople. With Rome, of course, there is.

“Icons are not unusual in Anglican churches, but they are not central to worship like in Orthodoxy.”

So I have seen but the Anglicans at least of Elizabeth’s era and for a couple of centuries thereafter were committed iconolclast heretics.

“I think the biggest obstacle for Anglicans embracing Orthodoxy is not theology, but culture.”

I agree with Kosta. There is a sort of Anglo Orthodox mindset surviving in Anglicanism extending back to the pre-Council of Whitby era. That makes it easier for Anglicans to become fully Orthodox than for others. Culture at other levels, as in ethnicity, is another matter entirely. That can be a problem but with a little humility it can be overcome. Theology is the real problem. Yours is sort of an amalgam of Latin and Reformed and as such really is very, very different from Orthodoxy. Met. Tikhon may wish it were otherwise, but its not and the OCA is in no position whatsoever, especially since the reunion of ROCOR with Moscow, to change that.


19 posted on 06/25/2009 11:02:18 AM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson