The whole Thyateira confession is over 140 pages long, and it's not online. Some libraries have it. It would be interesting to read more in it. But maybe most of it doesn't concern Anglicanism.
I suspect that would be unlikely. The concern of many of the groups is to ensure the purity of life before Vatican II. Their are some sites I have seen that say some less than attractive things about those who have held the Petrine Office since Vatican II (I cant find the site I had in mind, however it wasn't very nice). Whilst it may be possible to draw parallels I can;t see that it would make any conceivable sense for the two streams to have any relationship even approximating being in communion. Still we do live in a strange world, and the Holy Spirit achieves marvellous things. https://en.nursia.org/ may be a useful resource! also the wikapedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_Catholic
I thought that some of you might be interested in this article about the differences between Anglo-Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, written from an EO perspective by an English EO Priest who used to be an Anglican Priest. http://www.orthodoxresource.co.uk/comparative/anglo-catholic.htm He has also written this articl comparing the beliefs and practices of the RC and EO Churches http://www.orthodoxresource.co.uk/comparative/roman-catholic.htm And put the following article comparing Evangelicalism and EO belief http://www.orthodoxresource.co.uk/comparative/evangelicalism.htm
Anglo Catholicim seems to be changing its face Anglo-catholics seem to lean more Eastward than Rome recently. It is unfortunate though that those AC who are still in the Canterbury fold are becoming a minority, and any meaningful dialogue with the East seems more likely when done with the continuing churches. The writer seems to be positive about Anglo-Catholic - Orthodox relations though. One of the continuum bloggers highlighted once that the EO has no interest of reaching out to the Anglo-Catholics in the continuing movement because they are just a small fry (is there truth in this?).
I don't know whether there is truth in that, but I imagine that it would be hard for the EO to dialogue with the continuing movement simply because there are so many continuing Churches and they don't all speak with one voice. Not all continuing Churches have the same views as each other either. But, as you say, it is now getting more difficult for productive discussion between EO and the Canterbury communion due to issues such as female ordination. In the C of E I fear that over time there may well be more Female priests than Male priests!
The REC and the Orthodox Church in Russia have started talking. The ACNA is tagging along. Seems the Russian Church does not have as many problems with the REC as the ACNA one being WO. I do believe the Anglican Catholic Church is starting to reach out toward the Orthodox. If the traditional Anglicans could come together, I think we could have fruitful discussion with the Orthodox. Was it Whitby or Hertsford where Rome asserted authority and made the Anglican Church stop following the Orthodox calendar? Fr. Mark
I pray for the day when "any group" of Anglicans could be in communion with Orthodoxy. This matters to some of us who see Anglicanism as a continuation of the primitive church. Some say we seek validation from the older communions, but I doubt if that is what it is.
Twisted Mockingbird? You don't know too much about English History do you. That is ok, most Americans do not. Heck most Americans are ignorant of US History. Please read the following. Start with the Encyclopaedia Britannica. It gives a good over view of the situation concerning Synod of Whitby. Then move to Bede, Ecclesiastical History of the British People. The Synod of Whitby is covered on pages 187-93. Names the main players, Kings, Queens, Bishops and who is on the Eastern Side, which was the Traditional view of the Anglican Church and which held to the Latin or Roman view. One of the issues was also Easter. Any student of Church History knows the East and West still celebrate them on different dates. And there is evidence, thank you Pope St John Paul II for opening Vatican Records, that it was Christians from the Eastern Church who came to England prior to the Latin Christians. Gildas Sapiens 500-570, earlier Church Historian pre-dates Bede, Hippoltus of Rome in Refuting All Heresies (325) and Dorotheos of Type @362 all say it was the Eastern Christians who brought Christianity to England. An Outline of the English Reformation by the Rt Rev Frank Wilson D.D, S.T.D, Bishop of Eau Claire (@1940) takes the position it was at the Council/Synod of Hertford in 673 that was the final changing of the Anglican Church to a more Latin method. For a very academic read, you will have to be a member of JSTOR to read. The Council of Whitby: A Study in Early Anglo-Saxon Politics, Richard Abels. Journal of British Studies, Vol 23, No 1 Autumn 1983, p. 1-25. Peer reviewed. Not just anyone can get published in JSTOR. Maybe worth it to join for the wealth of information contained. I was lucky, my seminary paid for my membership for many years. There are 4 sources from the worlds of academia, church, secular for you to study. So before you use insulting language and try to insinuate a misdeed on my part, do your own homework. It would have served you better to take an approach of "ok, I have never hear of that before. Where can I go to read and study about this topic?" Blessings, Fr. Mark
At the time of the council of Nicea, Alexandria and Rome had different sets of Easter-tables. Alexandria followed a 19-year cycle, similar but not identical to the present-day Julian computus. Rome followed an 84-year cycle. The two sets of tables occasionally gave discrepant dates for Easter, but the number of these occasions was reduced by correspondence between bishops, who were sometimes able to compromise on the matter. The Festal Letters of Athanasius, and the Aramaic index to them, show this process at work. The 84-year cycle continued to be used in the West for centuries. Beginning in the 5th century it began to be displaced by the Victorian computus, an alternative 19-year cycle to the Alexandrine. Beginning in the 6th century the Easter-tables of Dionysius Exiguus began to be available, and this cycle, identical in its Easter-dates to the Alexandrine, eventually prevailed throughout the West. The northern Irish churches, and some British churches, in the 6th and 7th centuries used a peculiar variant of the 84-year cycle. They alleged Eastern origins for this practice, but they got that notion from Eusebius. In fact they were wrong; their computus was thoroughgoingly Western. And its lunar tables were badly out of alignmnent with the visible moon (as the Julian computus's are in our time). It was the 19-year cycle that was upheld at Whitby that moved Northumbria's computus in a more "eastern" -- and more accurate -- direction. I have the canons of Hertford here in front of me. They are: 1. Easter is always to fall in the 3rd week of the lunar month of Nisan, never in the second week. 2. Bishops not to meddle in each others' diocese. 3. Monasteries to be free of excessive episcopal interference. 4. Monks to stay in their monasteries. 5. Clergymen not to "run up and down where [they] list." 6. Clergymen not to perform clerical functions in another diocese without the diocesan bishop's permission. 7. Synods ideally twice a year, one to be held every year on 1 August at Clovesho. 8."No bishop shall set himself above another out of ambition." 9. On the number of bishops. 10. On marriage. I see nothing uniquely "Roman" in these canons. They are consistent with the Eastern canons that I have seen. The first canon is thoroughgoingly "Eastern." The identity of those who first brought Christianity to Britain (there was no "England" then, unless it was in Germany) cannot be established with certainty. I am skeptical of any claim that the early British church shared any features with Greek-speaking churches that were otherwise completely absent from the Latin church. The British church we hear about from Patrick and Germanus of Auxerre is a Latin-speaking church in contact with the Gaulish church. The church of Dumnonia, in Aldhelm's time, was using the Celtic-84 computus, a far-western variant of a western computus.
Archbishop welcomes Patriarch of Serbia to Lambeth Palace Thursday 13th October 2016 The Archbishop of Canterbury welcomed today His Holiness Irinej, Patriarch of Serbia. Archbishop Justin Welby invited His Holiness Irinej to make an official visit to the UK as an expression of the historic warm and strong relationship between the Church of England and the Serbian Orthodox Church, which reflects the enduring friendship of the two countries. More: http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.o...elcomes-patriarch-of-serbia-to-lambeth-palace
Homily of patriarch Irinej in St. Paul’s Cathedral 15. October 2016 "... I extend our special admiration to His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin. His acute sense of diligent responsiveness to burning issues, his awareness of the complexities of modern existence, his love of prayer and practical theology: the elegant efficiency and calm wisdom with which he holds together such an intricate Body as is the Anglican Communion globally—the care for his Church and for people across the globe, his commitment to Anglican-Orthodox dialogue included, are an inspiration to all..." More: http://www.spc.rs/eng/homily_patriarch_irinej_st_pauls_cathedral Patriarch mostly spoke about period century ago... Looks to me like there is no much to find in common in contemporary time : )
Two great resources to learn about Eastern Orthodoxy is Timothy Ware’s “The Orthodox Church”, and “The Orthodox Church Simple Guides” by Katherine Clark. Timothy Ware, alao known as Bishop Kallistos of the UK Orthodox Church, writes a very concise and easy to read (you’ll breeze through it, he’s a great writer) history of the Orthodox Church (Section I) and the Doxology of Orthodoxy (Section II). Unlike some sects of Orthodoxy, Kallistos believes the Roman Catholic Church isn’t heretical and lamenta the schism of 1054 A.D. and believes Catholocs get some things right. Katherine Clark’s very concise and short guide to the Orthodox Church is easy fo presuse ans go to the subjects you want like “regeneration,” “when dis Orthodox Church begin,” and what do services look like. Her book comes with photos (color and b&w) to help illustrate Orthodox belief and rites. Unlike Kallistos (Timothy) Ware, Katherine Clark is a seculsr outsider and so has no biases and merely reiterates facts. These are the best resources for your time and money. One from an insider (Bishop of Orthodoxy) and One from an oursider.
As an Eastern-Orthodox Christian, I can say that the description is quite accurate. The Archbishop of Armagh, John Bramhall, seems to have agreed with Orthodoxy more than with Catholicism. Interesting...
Many of the Caroline Divines (Anglican theologians during the reign of Charles I) were well-read in the Eastern Fathers, more so than most Anglican writers of the Reformation period.
Metropolitan Kallistos Ware’s book is to be reccommended, but the latter is not. In general, secular profiles of religions tend to contain errors, and the number of errors in mainstream Western publications concerning the Orthodox churches is spectacular. For example, the Blackwell Companion to Eastern Christianity and the Oxford History of Christian Worship contain some shocking errors, and encyclopedias tend to be even worse. The most bizarre errors occur in books about the Ethiopian Orthodox Church; people do not understand it or attempt to interpret it from a Western perspective and the result is madness. To truly understand a religion, you need information from someone who has practiced it. Thus I can say I truly understand Protestantism and Orthodoxy, and have a guess regarding Roman Catholicism, but there are aspects of Roman Catholic practice which make no sense to me as an outsider, for example, indulgences.
I had this same frustration with the most recent edition of "Mead's Handbook of Denominations." I had given some input to the editor, Dr. Roger Olson, when he had expressed some confusion about the status of the Reformed Episcopal Church. He responded and asked me a few follow up questions. Ultimately, he decided to give REC her own entry. When I got the book, I was truly dismayed at the inaccuracies in the entry for Continuing Churches. More than half of the content of that entry is wrong.