You wrote:
“Robert Keating Smith from the Anglican web site whose link is above clearly states that the men in question championed EASTERN ORTHODOX Christian principals.”
What he didn’t champion was evidence for you two statements:
1) “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
and
2) “Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’.”
Oh, and Nikas, I want you to look at this and tell me what it proves:
http://www.pravoslav.gts.cz/hus_hp.htm
You completely ignored it so far this morning. Gee, I wonder why?
Tell us what it all means, Nikas. Okay?
“Since the Anglicans also say these men and movements were a rejection of Latin Christianity in favor of the Greek rite they qualify for Orthodox sainthood.”
What? 1) Who are the Anglicans to decide who can become an Orthodox saint? Seriously, that’s like saying Swedish Lutherans get to decide who becomes a Chaldean Catholic saint. How do you figure that? 2) That still doesn’t address the two statements you have repeatedly dodged posting evidence for. Here they are again:
1) “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
and
2) “Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’.”
The Anglicans provide a neutral third party corroborating evidence that the Orthodox did not make up their claim that the Moravians of the 15th century that revolted against Rome did so as orthodox Christians (that is for the church established by the Greek missionaries).
I don’t care if you don’t like the evidence. I am not trying to change your mind I am trying to show you for a fraud. From your claim to a PhD to your claim that the Orthodox pulled out of thin air any link to the Moravians.
Anyone reading this will now see my evidence and judge accordingly that those making the link to the Moravian people’s Christian origins are justified to include their Greek Christian roots (by Greek I mean eastern Roman Greek rite - which is labeled “orthodox” these days by laymen.