The concept of being Anglican is a deeply distressing one in today's Anglican Church. The rise of homosexuality, the accepting of heterosexual relationships in the Church and the ordination of women all come to mind as problematic heresies that have occurred. Many people have asked me how is that I am Anglican and Orthodox? The answer is quite simple, because Orthodoxy is a way of life, it is the way of the Fathers which is the way of Christ. We do not see in the history these new innovations and while many people would say that we need to "catch up with the times" the simple fact is that that is not how Christianity works.

Anglicanism is not about these things, it is not about the heretical 39 articles, it is not about the post-reformation junk that infested the Holy Church of God and led it to its current demise. It was about simply following the Fathers. The 39 articles was the first step in the protestant reformation to moving away from the Fathers, it is not an Anglican document at all, but rather it is a heretical text that moves away from the true spirit of the English Patrimony. So if it is not in the 39 articles, then where it is? Is it in the Book of Common Prayer? Is this the way we define Anglicanism? While the Book of Common Prayer is an amazing gift that comes out of the Anglican tradition, it is not the root of Anglicanism. So how shall we define? It is very simple, it is written in the Saints, it is a lived liturgical tradition that has continued up until the reformation (and a little afterwards). It is written in the writings of the Celtic Fathers, the writings of the English Fathers and everything in between. We even see champions in the Oxford movement who wished to throw out the heretical 39 articles for the truth of Catholicity. To be Anglican is a liturgical identity, deeply monastic and entirely holistic. It is to be rooted in scripture, in the Gospel of John, in the prayers of the English and Celtic Fathers. It is a way of life that predates the Anglican word and is found only in the silent cells of the monks and priests who built the church today. It is ancient, it is pre-denominational, it is Orthodox. Why? Because before the Protestant reformation these things did not exist for 1000 years of its existence. There were no pride flags, or women priests. There was no book of common prayer, there was no 39 articles. So if we say that to be Anglican is to be those things, we thusly limit ourselves to being formed in the 16th century and then we are not Apostolic.

No, like all great Christian civilizations, a people is defined by its liturgy. The Sarum rite, which has played a large part on the Anglican Church for almost 1500 years, has the par excellance of the Anglican identity. Even after the ban of the Celtic rites, the Gallican rite and many other rites of the Church, the Sarum rite continued, stronger than ever. The Sarum rite defines the Anglican character and it is why in the Orthodox faith we use the Divine Liturgy of St. Tikhon and are allowed the usage of the Sarum use from 1529 as well. Yet, it is not just that, but it is the monastic life as well that so characterizes the English identity, something that the reformation sought to destroy, much to the work of the devil. For the monastic life is something that is sacred and that not all men can participate in. They are the watchers on the walls, overseeing the Church with prayers and providing the upper-level defense against the attacks of the devil. No wonder we see the world falling apart, the Church under attack, monastic vocations have decreased exponentially over the period of the past 50 years. The parishes and laity raise their voices with the monks when they can, but it is the monks who provide the spiritual warfare against the enemy. Why are they efficient? Because they pray night and day, they continue the Liturgy of the Hours so that in every hour and minute, prayers are sent like incense before the Altar of God. While we have the Order of St. Columba in this deanery, the Order is not a monastic Order. The Celtic "monasteries" were never actually monasteries, there were a few but not many in reality. Monasteries at their root try to get away from the world to pray. The Celts developed their monasteries next to settlements, provided aid, food, clothing etc and the priests and brothers were married men. Even the Abbots, from evidence of the Durham monastery were married and the Abbacy was handed down from father to son well into the 13th century. These communities worked more like a Jewish Kibbutz then a monastery with a full host of trades and individuals that worked there, lived there and participated in communal life much like the first century Christians. Many of the "monasteries" that St. Columba built were this way, with one of the only outliers being Iona itself and even then it was near the King of the Dal Riada's main city. 

The Book of Common Prayer (BCP) sprang from this tradition, this tradition of bringing the domestic church back to prayer, back to the life of prayer, unfortunately very few people pray the daily prayers of the BCP, but its roots are tied to the Celtic missions and vision that the people were to live the "apostolic teaching, the fellowship, the ​temple prayers and the breaking of the bread" (Acts 2:42). In ​general, we have to understand that before 1054 there was no question of ​what is Orthodoxy, it was not a ​branch of Christianity. Orthodox Anglicanism is very simply this, following the Anglican followers how they have since the formation of the Celtic missions and the English missions since before the Great Schism. We must return to our roots and move away from the heretical ideologies that ​have been held, especially ​since the time of the ​"Reformation". If we are to be Anglican and Orthodox, we must reinvigorate ​the West. ​As St. Columbanus evangelized the ​West back to Orthodoxy before, we must do so again now. That Christ might be glorified.