Archbishop Of Canterbury Has Only Met God In RO CHURCH

[Ekaterina]

Okay......not I'm confused.....I looked up Luke 7:41-43 and I truly do not understand what that has to do with the conversation?????

A very confused Katya

[CGW]

If an Orthodox Christian leaves the boundaries of Orthodox theology, he will not find God. God might choose to reveal Himself -- which He often does, but He is doing this with the hope that the person will be drawn toward the true faith, which is Orthodoxy.

That won't set well with you, CGW; however, it would be very strange for me, an Orthodox, to stand by anything else.

Ah, but it is that word "stand" that is precisely the point, because now the matter has been moved from the experiential to the propositional. Experience has been subjugated to interpretation, which is here the slave of the proposition of Orthodox exclusivity.

Again I am led to the conclusion that "There is very little intellectually that separates the true Anglican from the Orthodox, but what does separate the two is experiential and truly vast" is nonsense. You go to an Orthodox liturgy and Rowan Williams (as a teenager) went to an Orthodox liturgy and perhaps had the same experience as you. Yet it appears that his Anglicanism and your Orthodoxy, in terms of the propositions defining either, were what made them two different experiences with two different meanings. And I went to Anglican liturgies as a teenager, and I cannot see how that experience could possibly have been meant to tell me to find an Orthodox church. At the time I was only barely conscious of Eastern Christianity, and not at all capable of actually attending an Orthodox liturgy even occaisionally.

[AndyHolland]

Dear CGW,

With all due respect it was not my intention to argue your religion. There is a reasonable expectation that those in this forum are Orthodox and we are arguing "our" religion.

"What you claim for Orthodoxy is also true of Anglicanism. One cannot understand Anglicanism at all by reading about bishops "teaching" on the subject of abortion."

I fully understand the truth of the above statement. However, "I" will take some liberty in arguing "my" religion. However such arguments are thorny and one cannot come to the fullness of truth through such thorns:

If one is in league with Satan in the murdering of Holy Innocents, then perhaps it is time to evaluate where one is and where one must go to find salvation. Silence, according to St. Maximos the Confessor, can be interpreted as approval.

What-so-ever we do not unto the least of these His Brethren, we do not do unto Him. And who is less in this "modern" world than the Fetus or Embryo?

If the Lord was refering to His own precious body when He stated that the temple be destroyed, and in three days He would rebuild it - then what temple is invaded by the Abomination of Descration Standing where it ought not? "I" (Chief Sinner) can regard no Holier place than the womb of a woman Baptised in the name of the Holy Trinity, and no greater abmonination than murder within her sanctified womb as a daughter of the new Eve.

Heresy is a denial of the fulness of the Incarnation, and as a new Heaven and new Earth have been declared, then the santity of all human life is beyond question to a worthless sinner such as myself who dares take the name "Christian".

For these, and every other reason that can be found in every passage of Holy Scripture, it was crystal clear that Anglican Bishops had gone off the deep end into the wide abyss, and either "I" had to find a narrow path up, or foresake everything that "I" believed.

The real experience came later.

andy

[Ebor]

For these, and every other reason that can be found in every passage of Holy Scripture, it was crystal clear that Anglican Bishops had gone off the deep end into the wide abyss.....

All Anglican Bishops? or some or a few? There are many more Anglican Bishops then there are just "Episcopalian" i.e. ECUSA ones on this world.

Perhaps you did not know about "NOEL" the National Organization of Episcopalians for Life.

Was this topic the sole or main reason that you decided to go to EO?

Ebor

[AndyHolland]

Glory to Jesus Christ

The one who loved more is the one who is forgiven more. The point being that having been outside the Church, one experiences a sort of relief of debt that is not experienced by those who are cradle Orthodox.

In the secular world, one may have credit card debt, car debt, house debt, farm debt, commercial debt etc... Each form of debt has its relief that is experienced when the debt is paid. In a similar way, while we all share many common debts, the convert experiences a form of debt relief that is different from those who are cradle Orthodox.

This leads to an appreciation that - for example, the "car" is paid off - and the spiritual conveyance, the Church, is on the proper road with some of the tolls covered by EZ pass (OK - that last bit on tolls was a joke, Father Seraphim of blessed memory forgive me but I couldn't help myself).

andy

[Ebor]

There is no valid historic, scriptural or theological reason for the Anglican Church to exist outside of Holy Orthodoxy.

That may depend on just what is meant by "Holy Orthodoxy". I've seen many writings/postings on-line that equate EO with only Byzantine/Eastern litergy/music/ etc. Anglican/England was never "eastern" in those regards. No historical reason? How was England to link up with EO when Henry VIII broke with Rome?

There is distain in some EO circles for "Western Rite" Orthodoxy, because it is not somehow "real" with all the "western" stuff.

So where are they to go without being looked down on as "western" or made to deny what they were?

I apologize if that reads as tense.

Ebor

[AndyHolland]

Dear Ebor,

Yes there are plenty of good Anglicans who are very Orthodox in their views - but I was a bit suprised by attitudes and opinions of those who were supposed to be leading the flock.

I was in the diocese of Pittsburgh, and corresponded and personally talked to Bishop Duncan, and came to the sad conclusion that the most effective thing I could do was leave. He is probably one of the best Bishops in the US, but his silence against the heretics of his church I took to be approval. After we left, he became far more outspoken.

At the same time, the Orthodox are very clear about historic Church teaching, but also the governance is fundamentally different. We are governed by "what seems right to the Holy Spirit and to us", and "us" includes those who went before and will come after. The Orthodox are not as bound to the temporal Episcopate as those in the EC in terms of conscience.

Bad bishops come and go, but Orthodoxy remains forever - unchanged in essence.

andy