The Rise and Fall of 'Anglo-Orthodoxy'

The Commision for Orthodox-Anglican Dialogue in Cardiff, June 1996. Source: zizioulas.org

Alexey Khomyakov was probably the greatest lay theologian of the modern age. He was also a huge Anglophile. He loved the English people, the English nation. He also had a deep respect for the Church of England. In Khomyakov’s view, Anglicans sought to avoid the extremes of Catholic globalism and Protestant individualism. It looked to the Church Fathers for its theology; liturgically, it held fast to local custom. In this, it resembled his own Russian Orthodox Church.

And yet, even in the 1850s, he saw that Anglicanism’s days were numbered. Writing to his friend William Palmer (the theologian, not the poisoner), he issued this warning: “The position of Anglicanism is completely defined. It is a narrow ledge of dubious terra firma, beaten by the waves of Latinism and Protestantism, and crumbling on both sides into the mighty waters. The position cannot be maintained, but where is the egress?"

In Khomyakov’s view, the Church of England had only one hope: return to Holy Orthodoxy.

And, for a while, this seemed possible—even probable.

For instance, in 1961, Michael Ramsey was elected the 100th Archbishop of Canterbury. Ramsey fell in love with Holy Orthodoxy as a seminarian. Throughout his career, Ramsey worked tirelessly to unite the Church of England to the Orthodox Church. He was a friend to both Athenagoras I of Constantinople and Alexey I of Moscow.

One major influence on Ramsey’s thinking was the theologian Derwas Chitty, an Anglican theologian who himself came very close to becoming Orthodox in the 1920s. Not only did Chitty side with “the East” right during the Great Schism: he argued that the Protestants and proto-Protestants were, essentially, trying to reinvent the Orthodox wheel. Speaking to his fellow Anglicans, he once said:

I do ask you not to rule out of court, as most of us appear to have done in the past, the possibility that in the 11th Century Schism between East and West there were fundamental issues involved, and that in these the East was right and the West wrong; and that this breach was but one aspect of a disastrous, tyrannical revolution within the Western Church itself. In the light of this possibility, I would suggest as a fruitful field of research for a Mediaevalist, the hints in the Spiritual Franciscans, Wyclif, the Moravians, and perhaps elsewhere, of an underground tradition in the West—or was it only a wistfulness?—that the pure Faith, lost or obscured in Rome, had remained with the Greeks. And I would urge on your notice the fact that on every issue on which the Reformers of the 16th Century broke from Rome, Roman faith and practice were deeply, if subtlely, different from the Greek. I would suggest that, both then and subsequently, all the divisions of Western Christendom have been rooted in the search for some elements of Christian Life which would have been found in Orthodoxy.

Chitty went on to suggest that the Church of England stop using the Filioque, place the epiclesis at the center of the Anglican Mass, return to the use of leavened bread, a ban on Realist church art in of favor of traditional iconography and Byzantine-style mosaics. These are just a few of his proposed reforms, all of which aimed to “Hellenize” the Church of England.

Ramsey and Chitty were enthusiastic supporters of the Fellowship of St. Alban and St. Sergius, which seeks to strengthen ties between Anglicans and Orthodox Christians. Among the founders of the Fellowship were Sergius Bulgakov and Georges Florovsky. Anthony Bloom—also known as Met. Anthony of Sorouzh—served for a time as its chaplain. Roman Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury from 2003 to 2012, also belonged to the Fellowship. So did Met. Kallistos Ware, of blessed memory.

In The Inner Kingdom, Ware notes the influence of both Ramsey and Chitty upon his decision to become Orthodox. At that time, prospects for Orthodox-Anglican union were so strong that, when he first approached a Greek bishop about converting to Orthodoxy, the bishop turned him down! Instead, he encouraged Ware to remain within the Church of England—to serve as “an ‘Anglo-Orthodox’ leaven.” This is how closely the Orthodox and Anglican communions had drawn to one another.

Fast-forward about half a century. The Anglican Communion has been torn apart by theological liberalism. The Church of England has descended into civil war over issues like same-sex marriage, abortion rights, and women’s ordination. 

From the Orthodox perspective, the state of “conservative Anglicanism” is its own tragedy. The Global South, which has largely resisted theological and moral progressivism, nevertheless leans toward evangelicalism. These “conservatives” have, in their own way, departed from the Patristic vision Khomyakov admired. 

Then, yesterday, Sarah Mullally was appointed the first female Archbishop of Canterbury. This is definitely a point of no return. Ms. Mullally is the first woman to occupy an ancient primatial see. (The word “occupy” is especially apt.) There is no question now: there is no trace of apostolicity left in the Church of England. Khomyakov’s “narrow ledge” has well and truly crumbled. 

So, what happened? Why didn’t Ramsey and Chitty’s vision come to pass? The answer is deceptively simple.

The Orthodox Church is not defined by a certain set of dogmas or liturgical customs. Those things are important, of course! But the Church of England couldn’t “become Orthodox” simply by dropping the filioque and using leavened bread. First and foremost, the Orthodox Church is the Body of Christ. It is the house built on stone. All others are built on sand and will be washed away.

Read also