OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 23, 2014, 03:16:29 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Relationships between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy  (Read 7021 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,631



« Reply #90 on: August 02, 2010, 12:06:30 PM »

The 39 articles are not Orthodox. Neither are they Catholic, that's the point.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #91 on: August 02, 2010, 12:26:51 PM »

The 39 articles are not Orthodox. Neither are they Catholic, that's the point.

I'm saying the point is moot, because the articles don't necessarily disagree with said churches. Which is a contrast to Luther. Therefore, making them still very close to their roots.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,389



« Reply #92 on: August 02, 2010, 12:30:25 PM »

The 39 articles are not Orthodox. Neither are they Catholic, that's the point.

I'm saying the point is moot, because the articles don't necessarily disagree with said churches. Which is a contrast to Luther. Therefore, making them still very close to their roots.
Quote
The committee, after reviewing these "Observations," allowed in general the possibility that if Orthodox parishes, composed of former Anglicans, were organized in America, they might be allowed, at their desire, to perform their worship according to the "Book of Common Prayer," but only on condition that the following corrections were made in the spirit of the Orthodox Church. On the one hand everything must be removed from the Book that bears a clearly non-Orthodox characterthe Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican Confession, the Catechism with its protestant teaching about the sacraments, the Filioque, the idea of the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures as the sole source of the teaching of the Faith, etc. On the other hand, there must be inserted into the text of the prayers and rites contained in the Book those Orthodox beliefs which it is essentially necessary to profess in Orthodox worship—into the rite of the Liturgy, the profession of belief in the change of the Holy Gifts into the Body and Blood of Christ, and of belief in the sacrificial significance of the Eucharist; into the rite of ordination ([khirotonii]), the belief in the divine establishment of the ministry with its distinction of degrees, and the recognition of the distinctive right of the priest to offer the bloodless sacrifice. Into all the services in general prayers must be inserted addressed [sic] to the Blessed Mother of God, to Angels and Saints, with the glorification and invocation of them (direct), also prayers for the dead (especially in the Liturgy and the Burial Service). There must be included in liturgical practice, and put into the Book, the missing rites for the sacraments of penance, oil-anointing and unction, and the rite of consecration of churches (as distinct from the consecration of a house of prayer); and finally there must be introduced the cult of sacred images. But since the detailed changes in the "Book of Prayers," and, generally speaking, in Anglican liturgical practice together with the compilation of new prayers and even of entire rites can be carried out only on the spot, in America, in correspondence with existing demands and conditions, it is found desirable to send the "Observations" themselves to the Right Rev. Tikhon, the American Bishop. They will thus serve in the negotiations as materials for the determination in detail of the conditions on which Anglicans disposed to Orthodoxy can be received. As regards the reception of clergy from Anglicanism the committee has proposed (pending a final judgment of the question by the Church) to offer those who join a new conditional ordination.

http://anglicanhistory.org/alcuin/tract12.html
« Last Edit: August 02, 2010, 12:31:03 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,631



« Reply #93 on: August 02, 2010, 12:35:24 PM »

The 39 articles are not Orthodox. Neither are they Catholic, that's the point.
If one thinks the 39 articles are Orthodox, they should just stay orthodox Anglicans.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #94 on: August 02, 2010, 01:43:30 PM »

The 39 articles are not Orthodox. Neither are they Catholic, that's the point.

I'm saying the point is moot, because the articles don't necessarily disagree with said churches. Which is a contrast to Luther. Therefore, making them still very close to their roots.
Quote
The committee, after reviewing these "Observations," allowed in general the possibility that if Orthodox parishes, composed of former Anglicans, were organized in America, they might be allowed, at their desire, to perform their worship according to the "Book of Common Prayer," but only on condition that the following corrections were made in the spirit of the Orthodox Church. On the one hand everything must be removed from the Book that bears a clearly non-Orthodox characterthe Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican Confession, the Catechism with its protestant teaching about the sacraments, the Filioque, the idea of the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures as the sole source of the teaching of the Faith, etc. On the other hand, there must be inserted into the text of the prayers and rites contained in the Book those Orthodox beliefs which it is essentially necessary to profess in Orthodox worship—into the rite of the Liturgy, the profession of belief in the change of the Holy Gifts into the Body and Blood of Christ, and of belief in the sacrificial significance of the Eucharist; into the rite of ordination ([khirotonii]), the belief in the divine establishment of the ministry with its distinction of degrees, and the recognition of the distinctive right of the priest to offer the bloodless sacrifice. Into all the services in general prayers must be inserted addressed [sic] to the Blessed Mother of God, to Angels and Saints, with the glorification and invocation of them (direct), also prayers for the dead (especially in the Liturgy and the Burial Service). There must be included in liturgical practice, and put into the Book, the missing rites for the sacraments of penance, oil-anointing and unction, and the rite of consecration of churches (as distinct from the consecration of a house of prayer); and finally there must be introduced the cult of sacred images. But since the detailed changes in the "Book of Prayers," and, generally speaking, in Anglican liturgical practice together with the compilation of new prayers and even of entire rites can be carried out only on the spot, in America, in correspondence with existing demands and conditions, it is found desirable to send the "Observations" themselves to the Right Rev. Tikhon, the American Bishop. They will thus serve in the negotiations as materials for the determination in detail of the conditions on which Anglicans disposed to Orthodoxy can be received. As regards the reception of clergy from Anglicanism the committee has proposed (pending a final judgment of the question by the Church) to offer those who join a new conditional ordination.

http://anglicanhistory.org/alcuin/tract12.html

Fair enough.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #95 on: August 02, 2010, 01:47:04 PM »

The 39 articles are not Orthodox. Neither are they Catholic, that's the point.
If one thinks the 39 articles are Orthodox, they should just stay orthodox Anglicans.

BOOM, headshot. So much for substantial debate...
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Liz
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Church of England
Posts: 989



« Reply #96 on: August 02, 2010, 01:59:19 PM »

I hope we Orthodox can see that the conservative anglicans are Protestant at core.
Anglicans are the most pretentious of the Protestants.

Ignoring the blanket antagonizing statement, your understanding of what Anglican is lacking.

The protestant of the Anglican faith was purely a political rejection of the Bishop of Rome, while keeping the Catholic faith(as it was known at the time). Before King Henry, England had never been truly loyal to the Pope. In fact, after the great schism, it took war on Englad to secure it as part of the Catholic west. Prior to which, it maintained communion with the eastern churches.

My point is, Anglican "conservative" Protestantism is purely "protesting the pope". Which is distinct from the liberal Anglican churches that portray the American Protestant movement. This is exactly the reason why the Episcopal church originally tried to distance itself from that word... that is before that kind of Protestant became more prominent.

That's why I disagree with your first statement. Your second one is pure venom and not worth addressing.
Anglicans are supposed (historically, at least, before the logical acrobatics of the tractarians) to assent to the 39 articles, which are protestant.
They did away with the sacrifice of the Liturgy, the prayer to the saints, the prayer for the dead, the cult of images etc.
it is true that starting in the 19th century they started to reinvent themselves into something they had never been.
Unfortunately a few of these clever children of the reformation fooled some Orthodox into thinking that Anglicanism was what they said it was. They also came up with the branch theory.
Had the synod of my church which signed a paper whereby it recognized the "Anglican orders" about the reality of the Anglicanism on the field, that worthless pice of paper had never been signed.
I really doubt that in the twenties and thirties there was any English speaker in the synod.
They probably communicated in French.
 

The Thirty Nine Articles are concise statements of fundamental truths of doctrine, and, to a lesser extent, statements of church practice. They were used as a statement of belief, like a creed, for a new separate church. Saying that they are a peculiarly protestant phenomenon is a simplistic analysis. They have a similar position to some of the statements of the great councils of the early Church.  

In addition to this, it's worth thinking of Elizabeth I's statement on the new established Church, after she succeeded her Catholic sister.

'I do not make windows into men's souls'.

Bloody persecution of Catholics was quite common in Elizabeth's reign, but she wasn't about to enforce the extremities of Calvin or of the 39 articles, either. I suspect she herself was one of the first true 'Anglicans'.
Logged
Cymbyz
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 496



« Reply #97 on: August 02, 2010, 04:11:24 PM »

It was Elizabeth I who also made this little verse to explain her opinion of what Holy Communion is:

The Word of God, He spake it;
He took the bread, and brake it.
And what the Word did make it,
That I believe, and take it.

Remarkably Byzantine for someone who betrayed no knowledge of the Eastern Church.
Logged

The end of the world
is as near as the day of your death;
watch and pray.
 
 Yahoo! & WLM ID: Owen
Liz
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Church of England
Posts: 989



« Reply #98 on: August 02, 2010, 04:18:43 PM »

It was Elizabeth I who also made this little verse to explain her opinion of what Holy Communion is:

The Word of God, He spake it;
He took the bread, and brake it.
And what the Word did make it,
That I believe, and take it.

Remarkably Byzantine for someone who betrayed no knowledge of the Eastern Church.

Yes! I'm so glad you quoted that. My partner has often said how very 'Orthodox' that statement is. I love how she expresses total faith and trust in God and in the sacrament, yet makes it very clear that it is a mystery. I think that's utterly Anglican, and beautifully expressed. We participate; we trust; we sense the mystery. We do not presume to know more about the mystery than God has shared with us.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #99 on: August 02, 2010, 05:13:39 PM »

I don't follow, but I'm curious to learn.

What I mean is that it is clear either from a Byzantine ("Eastern Orthodox) or Oriental Orthodox perspective that by the time the Anglicans broke from what what is commonly called the "Roman Catholic Church" that neither of them had held the whole, complete, and universal faith of the Undivided Church for quite some time. You were trying to point out that the Anglicans essentially kept the faith that Rome had taught them. I pointed out that that does not matter to us as the faith of Rome was also deficient in our eyes.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #100 on: August 02, 2010, 05:16:54 PM »

Anglo Catholicism or Roman Catholicism?

Anglo-Catholicism is really more variant in the sorts of particulars that divine us from the Romans, but it is the case that there are significant amounts of Anglo-Catholics who are closer to us in faith than the standard Roman belief. Among those who tend more so to hold to orthodox particulars, the real common dividing point is Branch Theory. I don't think I have yet run across an Anglican who does not believe in some form of Branch Theory.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2010, 05:17:21 PM by deusveritasest » Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #101 on: August 02, 2010, 05:22:25 PM »

I hope we Orthodox can see that the conservative anglicans are Protestant at core.
Anglicans are the most pretentious of the Protestants.

Why, thanks.

I wouldn't say Anglicans were Protestants, historically.

Edward and Cramner took care of that.

Not sure what you mean? Edward comes before the Anglican Church got going. Now, he was Protestant!
Look at your Book of Common Prayer.

What about it? The BCP is Cranmer's work,

What in the blazes are you two talking about? The standard BCP of the Anglican church is that of 1662, not the 1549 one of Cranmer.

The idea of having a 'book of common prayer' originates with Cranmer's people (no idea if he's the eureka man, but he did most of the work compiling it). He's the one who's responsible for a lot of the beautiful language - the 1662 is just  a revision, isn't it? It's a while since I've looked at the two side-by-side, I could be wrong.

I don't know. It had a significant number of changes. Anyway, I think it's clear that the BCP you were talking about is not really Cranmer's work; the only 2 BCP's that were directly his authorship were 1549 and 1552.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #102 on: August 02, 2010, 05:26:00 PM »

Thanks for your response FormerReformer. Do all the Anglican Provinces/dioceses have women priests? While I do have a problem with women "priests" there are other things that seem to concern me more such as open communion... I don't know if this concept/practice is found throughout anglicanism but it seems very dangerous/irreverent to me.

I'd never thought of communion that way before. That's very sobering.

Yes, open communion is a very disturbing practice from a more conservative ecclesiological mindset. In this area there are 4 main communion policies (among Episcopal churches): "all are welcome", "all who seek Christ all welcome", all Christians, and all baptized Christians. These are all disturbing (in descending order of severity) because they all involve sacramental oneness without oneness in faith.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #103 on: August 02, 2010, 05:29:38 PM »

I hope we Orthodox can see that the conservative anglicans are Protestant at core.
Anglicans are the most pretentious of the Protestants.

Why, thanks.

I wouldn't say Anglicans were Protestants, historically.

Edward and Cramner took care of that.

True! Also, didn't John Calvin have something to do with the 39(41) articles of religion? I could be wrong about the articles of religion, but I thought I read about his influence in that area.






ICXC NIKA

There certainly were Calvinists who had influence on them, but John Calvin had remained restricted to Geneva for more than 20 years by the time the Articles were produced, so I doubt he had direct influence on them.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #104 on: August 02, 2010, 05:33:10 PM »

Saying that they are a peculiarly protestant phenomenon is a simplistic analysis.

Not really. They establish a number of points that are peculiarly Protestant and in contrast to those doctrines that are held in common between the "Apostolic" churches.

They have a similar position to some of the statements of the great councils of the early Church.  

Yes, some of what they say is sound and Patristic. But some of it is not.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Liz
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Church of England
Posts: 989



« Reply #105 on: August 02, 2010, 06:53:21 PM »

I don't follow, but I'm curious to learn.

What I mean is that it is clear either from a Byzantine ("Eastern Orthodox) or Oriental Orthodox perspective that by the time the Anglicans broke from what what is commonly called the "Roman Catholic Church" that neither of them had held the whole, complete, and universal faith of the Undivided Church for quite some time. You were trying to point out that the Anglicans essentially kept the faith that Rome had taught them. I pointed out that that does not matter to us as the faith of Rome was also deficient in our eyes.

Yes, this is an important point. I don't agree about who was 'wrong', but it's important to acknowledge what the Orthodox Church thought.
Logged
Liz
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Church of England
Posts: 989



« Reply #106 on: August 02, 2010, 06:56:18 PM »


I don't know. It had a significant number of changes. Anyway, I think it's clear that the BCP you were talking about is not really Cranmer's work; the only 2 BCP's that were directly his authorship were 1549 and 1552.

Well, I am not a scholar in theology. I simply compared the versions and to me, they looked very similar. Certianly much of the beautiful and important language that is familiar to Anglicans, derives either from Cranmer or from the KJB. Both are beautifully written.
Logged
Liz
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Church of England
Posts: 989



« Reply #107 on: August 02, 2010, 06:58:02 PM »

Thanks for your response FormerReformer. Do all the Anglican Provinces/dioceses have women priests? While I do have a problem with women "priests" there are other things that seem to concern me more such as open communion... I don't know if this concept/practice is found throughout anglicanism but it seems very dangerous/irreverent to me.

I'd never thought of communion that way before. That's very sobering.

Yes, open communion is a very disturbing practice from a more conservative ecclesiological mindset. In this area there are 4 main communion policies (among Episcopal churches): "all are welcome", "all who seek Christ all welcome", all Christians, and all baptized Christians. These are all disturbing (in descending order of severity) because they all involve sacramental oneness without oneness in faith.

Could you explain further? I am struggling atm. Is 'oneness of faith' something that exists the Orthodox Church by definition?
Logged
Liz
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Church of England
Posts: 989



« Reply #108 on: August 02, 2010, 06:59:17 PM »

Saying that they are a peculiarly protestant phenomenon is a simplistic analysis.

Not really. They establish a number of points that are peculiarly Protestant and in contrast to those doctrines that are held in common between the "Apostolic" churches..

They have a similar position to some of the statements of the great councils of the early Church.  

Yes, some of what they say is sound and Patristic. But some of it is not.

I agree. It is neither the one thing nor the other.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #109 on: August 02, 2010, 07:06:48 PM »

Thanks for your response FormerReformer. Do all the Anglican Provinces/dioceses have women priests? While I do have a problem with women "priests" there are other things that seem to concern me more such as open communion... I don't know if this concept/practice is found throughout anglicanism but it seems very dangerous/irreverent to me.

I'd never thought of communion that way before. That's very sobering.

Yes, open communion is a very disturbing practice from a more conservative ecclesiological mindset. In this area there are 4 main communion policies (among Episcopal churches): "all are welcome", "all who seek Christ all welcome", all Christians, and all baptized Christians. These are all disturbing (in descending order of severity) because they all involve sacramental oneness without oneness in faith.

Could you explain further? I am struggling atm. Is 'oneness of faith' something that exists the Orthodox Church by definition?

Uh.... I don't understand the grammar of that question. Could you rephrase?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.095 seconds with 47 queries.