www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Anglicans or Catholics

This is question for our Orthodox brethren NOT in communion with Rome.

Who do you feel more akin to, a traditionalist Roman Catholic or a traditionalist Anglican/Episcoplian? Why?

Just curious.

in Christ,
Marshall

Dear Marshall,

Well, to answer your question, I hereby SUSPEND my communion with Rome for these next few minutes .

Anathema to Rome! Anathema to Rome! Anathema to Rome!

O.K., now that I'm no longer in communion with Rome right now, I would say that I feel closer to a traditionalist Anglican.

The traditionalist RC's may be nicer to us now than before, but I daresay they still see us as "schismatics" and in need of conversion to RCism, the Filioque et alia.

Now to undo the above . . .

Rome is received back into communion with us! (40 times).

There, I'm Orthodox in communion with Rome once again!

Alex

Really neither. I guess I kind of agree with Khomiakov on this. I think that there are points of similarity between Orthodoxy and each and points of difference between Orthodoxy and each, but that each of these has more in common with each other than it does with "Orthodoxy-not-in-communion-with-Rome".

Despite the views of some Anglican converts to Orthodoxy I still have a love in my heart for the Anglo-Catholic tradition and the Oxford Movement.

i have met too many Tridentinist Romans to not shudder when they start to speak of how everything is "going to the dogs" I am polite but also want to say "SMILE" or "Lighten Up!" They sure could use some of the joy of Filippo Neri!!

Yes. The Tridentineist Roman Catholics seem to have quite negative an bitter views of most of the world and any ecumenism in particular.

The Epsicopal Church has always been quite welcoming. It has freely shared with us Orthodox and our pastoral mission would be much the worse had it not been for their aid when we were in need.

Axios

traditional orthodox can also seem quite fanatical and anti-ecumenical,something that tridentine catholics are accused of all the time.I must say one thing about traditional latin catholics,they sure have some valid points and can explain traditional worship and doctrine quite well compared to a novus ordo catholic.anglicism can look like traitional catholicism but it still holds to protestant veiws,communion of saints,intercession of saints,the issue of papal primacy and so on.They also only focus on 2 sacraments,baptism and commnunion.Even though they acknowledge the rest of the sacraments.

Good points, Valentino - one can see from statements of the ROCOR or the Old Calendarist Greeks and others some very anti-ecumenical positions, not unlike some of the rhetoric of the ultra-traditionalist Tridentines.

I have a lot of respect toward traditionalist catholics. I am sure that most of the anti-orthodox views they show are not truly anti-orthodox, they just try to be consistent with their other possitions. I have met many traditionalist catholics who share respect and admiration for Orthodox liturgy and tradition. I believe they're also right when they criticize Rome for their week defense of Catholics in Orthodox countries (such as the case of Romania where the orthodox had a shameful participation in oppression of Catholics, and Rome left Greek Catholics alone.)

About Episcopalian "traditionalists", they are part of the same body which permits "ordination" of women and teach Protestant heretical teachings. No matter how reverent their services are, they just kid themselves, they are fully participating and supporting the Church of England which has transformed British christianity in a living circus of indifferentism, false feminism, false ecumenism, and some of the worst aspects of Western Protestantism.

The Anglo catholic movement would have more credibility if they had enough moral courage to leave the C of E and its counterparts. It's good that some of them have done that and placed themselves in a more consistent possition.

He is one of my favorite saints!

Logos Teen

Dear Brethern,

A Traditional Catholic or one having traditional beliefs, like myself are quite the same as our Greek Orthodox/Orthodox brethern, could be called Latin or Roman Orthodox. We are steep/attached to traditional liturgy,prayers and beliefs. I have no quarrel with my Orthodox brethern, in fact I am more energized spiritually by their prayers and liturgy.

Of course these are my humble opinions.

In Christ,
James

As I've said before, I've known some Anglicans who are Byzantine in their beliefs, but that does not make them some sort of Anglican Orthodox. Orthodoxy is about more than personal dogma and piety; it is about membership of the Community of faith. That logic may well apply to those who consider themselves 'Orthodox in communion with the Holy See' - from their own perspective at least, but from an Orthodox viewpoint there are far deeper ecclesiological points which we have discussed at length before - and on which we have agreed to differ.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Even deeper is the fact the Episcopalains have been kind to us. Love given and love returned.

Axios

I agree ... but ... Ecclesiological communion is everything but perhaps not quite everything. The strength of Roman ecclesiology is that it is able to acknowledge that our union in Christ is not necessarily identical to ecclesiological union. Eastern Orthodoxy has an ecclesiology that is cut and dry. One is either in or one is out. From this perspective, a Byzantine Church in communion with Rome is by definition un-Orthodox, no matter how "Orthodox" it may be theologically and spiritually.

The strength of Orthodox ecclesiology is its clarity. It knows it's the true Church and that all other Christian bodies are in heresy. But precisely at this point the weakness, and bad conscience, of Orthodox ecclesiology is also revealed.

Alleluia! Christ is risen!

Pax,
Fr Alvin Kimel+

i have deleted this post

Snoopy, I'm not sure why you have exploited this thread to issue a broad blast against the Anglican communion. But you are of course right. We do have serious problems. But one ministers where one has been planted.

I do suggest, however, that your comments about the hypocricy of Anglo-Catholics who remain in the Anglican Church are irresponsible and feckless. You know nothing of the spiritual and emotional pain we have had to endure over the past thirty years. And if one has a family, switching to Rome or Constantinopole is not an easy thing to do and entails great costs to wife and children.

Fr Kimel+