Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Relations between the Orthodox and the Anglicans in the Twentieth Century: A Reason to Consider the Present and the Future of the Theological Dialogue

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the Brill platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites

Taking as a starting point the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1902-4, which celebrates one hundred and ten years in 2012 (1902-2012), attention is given to its contribution to Anglican-Orthodox dialogue. A decisive landmark in Anglican-Orthodox relations and in the formation of the Ecumenical Movement was the visit of the Greek Church delegation to the USA and England in 1918 and the discussions with Episcopalians and Anglicans on Christology and Triadology (‘Trinitarian theology’) as well as ecclesiology. The process of this dialogue is examined here through the evaluations of three distinguished Greek Orthodox figures, carefully chosen as representative of their time, and in the light of such innovations as the ordination of women. This study emphasizes that the ecclesiological and theological proximity of Orthodoxy and Anglicanism is a solid basis for the continuation of their theological dialogue. The documents of Moscow (1976), Dublin (1984) and the Cyprus Statement (2006) prove that there is sufficient common ground to continue a fruitful discussion.

1. fn11) Actually they are two Encyclicals (1902 and 1904) that, due to their content, are considered as one.
2. fn22) The question of unity is put forward in this particular Encyclical as follows: ‘whether it might be possible to prepare the (at present) anomalous way which leads to such a goal until the completion in due course of the whole task, whereby might be fulfilled to our joint satisfaction and benefit our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ’s saying about one flock and one shepherd.’ For the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1902 see V. Istavridis and Ev. Varella (eds), Ιστορία της Οικουμενικής Κινήσεως (History of the Ecumenical Movement) (Thessaloniki: Patriarchal Institute of Patristic Studies, 1996), pp. 321-332.
3. fn33) Op. cit.
4. fn44) Through the unity and unanimity between the Orthodox Churches ‘the great moral strength of the holy Orthodox Church of Christ may be demonstrated once again to the world; for its source is her possession of the unchanging truth, and its strong lever is the unbreakable unity of the local Churches’ (Patriarchal and Synodical Encyclical of 1902, cited above).
5. fn55) Ν. Matsoukas, The Ecumenical Movement: History – Theology (Thessaloniki: P. Pournara, 2008), pp. 218-219.
6. fn66) See the relevant text in John Karmiris, The Orthodox Church in Dialogue with the Heterodox Churches (Athens, 1975), p. 20.
7. fn77) We follow the established term, used in the respective literature. See indicatively, V. Istavridis and Ev. Varella (eds), History of the Ecumenical Movement, cited above, p. 292. [In the 1904 Encyclical they are referred to as ‘The Christians of the East’ (in Greek: οι κατά την Εώαν … χριστιανοί), see op. cit., p. 331].
8. fn88) The 1904 Encyclical begins with the basic statement that ‘Having greater and better hopes, we ought to pay more attention both to the so-called Old Catholics and to those of the Anglican Church, since they show more respect and regard to the holy Orthodox Church of Christ.’ In particular for the Anglicans, the Encyclical reckons that ‘We also consider those of the Anglican Church who have turned towards the Orthodox Church to be worthy of no least sympathy and feelings of reciprocity; and on not a few occasions they have confirmed their fraternal attitude towards us.’ See op. cit, pp. 327-332.
9. fn99) The Encyclical inaugurates in that way a new method of approaching the other Churches. As it has been characteristically sustained (by the Great Protopresbyter father George Tsetsis) the proposal of the Encyclical about a meeting of theologians representatives of Orthodox Churches every three years in the purpose of studying this issue, although it was not implemented due to the peculiar conditions of that time, formed the basis for the later foundation of all the bilateral theological dialogues, introduced by the Orthodox Church during the second half of the twentieth century, upon initiative of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Georges Tsetsis, Η συμβολή του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου στην ίδρυση του Παγκοσμίου Συμβουλίου των Εκκλησιών (The contribution of the Ecumenical Patriarchate) (Katerini: Tertios, 1988) pp. 31-50, here p. 50. For further details on this issue see Vassiliki Stathokosta, ‘The relationship between the Church of Greece and the World Council of Churches 1948-1961, based on the Archives of the WCC’ (PhD diss. in Greek, University of Thessaloniki, 1999), p. 39.
10. fn1010) These positions of Professor Alivizatos were written in June 1922. See Ham. Alivizatos, ‘Η ένωσις των Εκκλησιών. Ορθόδοξοι και Αγγλικανοί’ (The union of Churches: Orthodox and Anglicans) Ημερολόγιον της Μεγάλης Ελλάδος (Diary of Great Greece), pp. 435-442.
11. fn1111) See indicatively John Karmiris, Θεολογικά Θέματα (Theological Issues) (Athens: Offprint from the Orthodox Press, 1978), p. 40.
12. fn1212) Minutes of the Preliminary Committee of the Holy, Orthodox Churches convened in the Holy and Great Monastery of Vatopedi at the Holy Mountain, 8-23 June 1930 (Constantinople, 1930), p. 144.
13. fn1313) For further information on these relations of the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth century see indicatively V. Istavridis, Ορθοδοξία και Αγγλικανισμός κατά τον Κ΄ αιώνα (Orthodoxy and Anglicanism in the twentieth century) (Thessaloniki: Offprint from Gregorios Palamas, Vol. 502-505, 1960), pp. 7-8.
14. fn1414) Fifty volumes, issued during the period 1838-1881.
15. fn1515) Lykourgos, Alexandros, Έκθεσις περί της εις Αγγλίαν μεταβάσεως αυτού (Report on his visit to England) (London, 1871); Balanos D., ‘Ο αρχιεπίσκοπος Σύρου, Τήνου και Μήλου Αλέξανδρος Λυκούργος’ (The Archbishop of Syros, Tinos and Milos Alexandros Lykourgos), Theologia 1 (1923), pp. 180ff; Istavridis V., Ορθοδοξία και Αγγλικανισμός κατά τον Κ΄ αιώνα (Orthodoxy and Anglicanism in the twentieth century) (Thessaloniki: Offprint from Gregorios Palamas, V. 502-505, 1960) pp. 5-6. For the contribution of Alexandros Lykourgos in the development of the ecumenical movement, it is very interesting to see the study of the Metropolitan of Mesinia, Chrysostomos Savvatos, Ο Αλέξανδρος Λυκούργος, αρχιεπίσκοπος Σύρου, Τήνου και Μήλου (1866-1875) και η συμβολή του στην ανάπτυξη της οικουμενικής κινήσεως (Alexandros Lykourgos, Archbishop of Syros, Tinos and Milos, 1866-1875, and his contribution in the development of the ecumenical movement) (Athens: Offprint from the honorary volume of the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece in the memory of the Blessed Archbishop of Athens and All Greece Christodoulos, 2010).
16. fn1616) V. Istavridis, Ορθοδοξία και Αγγλικανισμός κατά τον Κ΄ αιώνα (Orthodoxy and Anglicanism in the twentieth century), op. cit., p. 8. Methodios G. Fouyas, Metropolitan of Pisidia (formerly Archbishop of Thyateira and Great Britain), Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism (Athens: Nea Sinora, 1996, trans. of the second English edition by Hr. E. Gianoulas), pp. 98-101. For the relations between the two Churches during the nineteenth century in general, see Hieronymus Kotsonis (archimandrite), The canonical view on communication with the heterodox (Intercommunio) (Athens, 1957), pp. 14-10.
17. fn1717) For the process of the Anglican-Orthodox relations in the nineteenth century the following work is very important: Edward Casinec and J. Robert Wright (eds), Russo-Greek Papers 1863-1874 (New York: Norman Ross Publishing, 2001).
18. fn1818) Hieronymus Kotsonis, The canonical view on communication with the heterodox, cited above, p. 194.
19. fn1919) V. Istavridis, Ορθοδοξία και Αγγλικανισμός κατά τον Κ΄ αιώνα (Orthodoxy and Anglicanism in the twentieth century), cited above, p. 10.
20. fn2020) Meletius IV:http://www.ec-patr.org/list.
21. fn2121) The National Schism (1914-1917) left its mark on the country, since the conflict between the Prime Minister Eleftherios Venizelos and King Constantine about whether Greece should enter World War I or not triggered a series of extreme events that led to the formation of a separate country in Northern Greece, by Venizelos, with Thessaloniki as its capital. King Constantine abdicated the throne and left Greece, upon intervention of the ‘Entente’. This situation led the country to national schism and the Greek society to crisis, while it affected the relations with the Greeks of the diaspora.
22. fn2222) Ger. Konidaris, Ο Αμίλκας Σ. Αλιβιζάτος (1887-1969) εν τη Εκκλησιαστική Ιστορία της Ελλάδος (Hamilcar S. Alivizatos in the Church History of Greece), p. 22. Also see the website of the Academy of Athens: http://www.academyofathens.gr/.
23. fn2323) Ger. Konidaris, Hamilcar S. Alivizatos, op. cit. p. 22.
24. fn2424) See R. Rouse and S. C. Neill (eds), A History of the Ecumenical Movement 1517-1948 (Geneva, 31953), pp. 548-549. See Ham. Alivizatos, Η προσπάθεια του Amsterdam (The Amsterdam Assembly), p. 31.
25. fn2525) J. Karmiris, The Orthodox Church in Dialogue with the Heterodox Churches (Athens, 1975), p. 44.
26. fn2626) On October 26th 1918 an unofficial meeting was held between representatives from the Church of Greece under the chairmanship of the Archbishop of Athens and his suite and the Episcopal Church in America. Information about the thematology of this meeting is found in the archives and in particular in the relevant Report that was drawn. See Project Canterbury, The Episcopal and Greek Churches: Report of an Official Conference on Unity between members of the Episcopal Church in America and His Grave, Meletios Metaxakis, Metropolitan of Athens, and his advisers, October 26, 1918 (New York: Department of Missions, 1920): http://anglicanhistory.ord/orthodoxy/newyork1918/.
27. fn2727) The Greek delegates were totally convinced that the famous Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican Church ‘by no means constitute the basis of their doctrinal teaching’. See the report of professors Archimandrite Chrysostomos Papadopoulos and Hamilcar Alivizatos to the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece: Ορθοδόξων και Αγγλικανών Θεολογικαί συζητήσεις (Theological discussions of Orthodox and Anglicans: Brief Report of the unofficial discussion of the Ecclesiastical mission under the Metropolitan of Athens and the delegates of the Anglican Episcopalian Church in America and England, in Athens, 4 February 1919), Εκκλησιαστικός Κήρυξ (1919), pp. 518-522, at p. 521.
28. fn2828) See the report of professors Chr. Papadopoulos and Alivizatos to the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece, cited above, pp. 518-522.
29. fn2929) V. Istavridis, Ορθοδοξία και Αγγλικανισμός κατά τον Κ΄ αιώνα (Orthodoxy and Anglicanism in the twentieth century), cited above, pp. 7-8.
30. fn3030) See the report of professors Chr. Papadopoulos and Alivizatos to the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece, cited above, pp. 518-522.
31. fn3131) See op. cit, p. 518-522.
32. fn3232) The representatives were the Metropolitan of Didimoteicho, Filaretos Vafidis, P. Komninos, K. Pagonis and K. Kalinikos. See V. Istavridis, op. cit., p. 15; J. Karmiris, The Orthodox Church in Dialogue with the Heterodox Churches (Athens, 1975), p. 44.
33. fn3333) J. Karmiris, The Orthodox Church in Dialogue with the Heterodox Churches, op. cit, p. 44.
34. fn3434) Damaskinos (Metropolitan of Switzerland), Θεολογικοί Διάλογοι: Μια Ορθόδοξος Προοπτική (Theological Dialogues: An Orthodox Perspective) (Thessaloniki: Αφοί Κυριακίδη, 1986), p. 22.
35. fn3535) Hugh Wybrew, Anglican-Romanian Orthodox Relations, pp. 229-344, here pp. 334-8: http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/rcl/16-4_329.pdf/. On the issue of the Recognition of Anglican Orders by the Church of Romania see ‘Project Canterbury: Documents related to the Rumanian Recognition of Anglican Orders’, The Christian East (July, 1937), pp. 6-10: http://anglicanhistory.org/orthodoxy/ru_doc_1937.html/.
36. fn3636) For detailed information concerning the encounter between the two Churches during the twentieth century and the agenda of the dialogue see Hier. Kotsonis, The canonical view on communication with the heterodox (Intercommunio), pp. 20ff; V. Istavridis, Ορθοδοξία και Αγγλικανισμός κατά τον Κ΄ αιώνα (Orthodoxy and Anglicanism in the twentieth century) op. cit.; Methodios G. Fouyas, Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism, cited above pp. 101-116; Will Adam, Legal Flexibility and the Mission of the Church (Farnham: Ashgate, 2011), chapter 10.
37. fn3737) The validity of the Anglican ordination was recognized as follows: in 1922 by the Church of Constantinople; in 1923 by the Patriarchate of Jerusalem and the Church of Cyprus; in 1930 by the Patriarchate of Alexandria; in 1936 by the Church of Romania but not by the Churches of Greece and Russia, see Adam, op cit, ch 10.
38. fn3838) See the work of Christos Androutsos, The validity of Anglican orders from an Orthodox point of view (Constantinople: Republication from the Εκκλησιαστική Αλήθεια, 1903).
39. fn3939) J. Karmiris, Τα Δογματικά και Συμβολικά Μνημεία της Ορθοδόξου Καθολικής Εκκλησίας (The Doctrinal and Symbolic Monuments of the Orthodox, Catholic Church), Vol. Β’ (Athens, 1953), p. 1035.
40. fn4040) Th. Stragkas, History of the Church of Greece from Reliable Sources, 1817-1967, Vol. IV (Athens, 1972), pp. 2254-5. Also, Εκκλησία 17 (1939), p. 315.
41. fn4141) Hier. Kotsonis (Archbishop of Athens), Περί του κύρους της Ιερωσύνης των Αγγλικανών από της απόψεως του Κανονικού Δικαίου της Ορθοδόξου Εκκλησίας (On the validity of the Anglican Orders from an Orthodox Church Canon Law point of view) (Athens, 1958), pp. 35-36.
42. fn4242) This position was expressed in 1975 by Prof. Karmiris and remains timely until today. See J. Karmiris, The Orthodox Church in Dialogue with the Heterodox Churches (Athens, 1975), pp. 43-44.
43. fn4343) In particular for the contribution of Professor Alivizatos in the inter-Christian collaboration see Vassiliki Stathokosta, ‘The Theological and Ecumenical Thought in Greece during the twentieth century: The contribution of Hamilkar Alivizatos,’ in Vassiliki Stathokosta, Ορθόδοξη Θεολογία και Οικουμένη: Μελέτες - Άρθρα (Orthodox Theology and Ecumene: Studies - Articles) (Athens: Parresia, 22011), pp. 103-156.
44. fn4444) Professors Alivizatos and Karmiris were members of the Academy of Athens. Also they had held leading positions in the Greek Ministry of Education.
45. fn4545) 1935-44. The report of the commission was published in 1944. E. J. Palmer (ed) Dispensation in practice and theory with special reference to the Anglican Churches (London: SPCK, 1944). Part II was by Alivizatos and entitled ‘”Economy” from the Orthodox Point of View’.
46. fn4646) See Waddams, Herbert, ‘Tribute to Dr. Hamilcar Alivisatos’ in Ευχαριστήριον, honorary volume for Hamilcar S. Alivizatos, on the occasion of forty five years of scientific action and thirty five years of regular professorate (Athens, 1958), pp. 504-505.
47. fn4747) See Ham. Alivizatos, ‘Ορθοδόξων και Αγγλικανών θεολογικαί συζητήσεις (Theological discussions of Orthodox and Anglicans) Εκκλησιαστικός Κήρυξ 9 (1919), pp. 518-525.
48. fn4848) Ham. Alivizatos, Η ένωσις των Εκκλησιών: Ορθόδοξοι και Αγγλικανοί (The union of Churches: Orthodox and Anglicans), cited above, pp. 435-442, here p. 437.
49. fn4949) His estimations in detail were that the Anglican Church ‘remained faithful to Catholicism’ as it had been formed until the ninth century, when the Church was one and undivided. Consequently the Anglican Church remained ‘faithful to the Orthodox Catholicism’. Alivizatos Ham., op. cit. pp. 435-442, at pp. 437-8.
50. fn5050) Op. cit. pp. 435-442, at pp. 440-1.
51. fn5151) See indicatively Alivizatos, ‘Η μυστηριακή έννοια του μυστηρίου της θείας Ευχαριστίας παρά τοις Αγγλικανοίς’ (The sacramental meaning of the Sacrament of Eucharist for the Anglicans), Θεολογία Vol. Α’ (1923), pp. 68ff.
52. fn5252) See Vassiliki Stathokosta, The relationship between the Church of Greece and the World Council of Churches 1948-1961, based on the Archives of the WCC, op. cit., p. 305.
53. fn5353) J. Karmiris, Ορθοδοξία και Προτεσταντισμός (Orthodoxy and Protestantism) (Habilitation dissertation, University of Athens, 1937), pp. 310ff., 377.
54. fn5454) J. Karmiris, op. cit, pp. 313-314.
55. fn5555) See indicatively the positions of the Metropolitan of Pella, and later of Thessaloniki, Panteleimon Papageorgiou, who always appreciated the intermediary role of the Anglicans in the Church of Greece - WCC relations. See the letter on the 7.1.1949: Metropolitan Panteleimon to Oliver S. Tomkins: ‘Panteleimon, Metropolit de Salonica, 1947-1961.’ For the archive material of the WCC, in which this letter is included, as well as other details on this issue see the study of Vassiliki Stathokosta, Relations of the Church of Greece and the WCC, 1948-1961, cited above.
56. fn5656) J. Karmiris, Θεολογικά Θέματα (Theological Issues) (Athens: Offprint from the Orthodox Press, 1978), p. 37.
57. fn5757) Panayiotis N. Trebelas on the Ecumenical Movement and the Theological Dialogue (Athens: ‘Brotherhood of Theologians: The Saviour,’32007), p. 50.
58. fn5858) P. Trebelas, ‘Note submitted by professor P. Trebelas during the meeting of the Theological School on June 30th1939 after a discussion on the validity of Anglican orders,’ Εκκλησία 34-35 (1939), p. 291.
59. fn5959) Panayiotis N. Trebelas on the Ecumenical Movement, cited above, pp. 48-49. In order for Trebelas to strengthen his positions on the unacceptable consequences from the principle of Comprehensiveness and the doctrinal syncretism, he invoked the statements of an English Prime Minister in the English Parliament (1938) See: op. cit., pp. 51-52.
60. fn6060) According to this theory, Rome, Constantinople and Canterbury constitute the internal unity of the Old Church. The differences that separate them can be eliminated through retreats, in order to return once more to ‘the unity of these three centers and the restoration of the one, undivided Church that is already divided.’ Trebelas, as Orthodox, rejected Branch Theory as well. See on this issue Panayiotis Ν. Trebelas on the Ecumenical Movement and the Theological Dialogues, cited above, pp. 48-50.
61. fn6161) Panayiotis N. Trebelas on the Ecumenical Movement and the Theological Dialogues, cited above, p. 60.
62. fn6262) Op. cit., p. 71.
63. fn6363) In this case, the question addressed by Trebelas to the organizers of the Pan-Orthodox Conference is characteristic; a question about whether their purpose was to ‘be finally free to try and resolve your problems through the theology of love’: Panayiotis N. Trebelas on the Ecumenical Movement and the Theological Dialogues, cited above, pp. 71-72.
64. fn6464) Op. cit., pp. 71ff.
65. fn6565) The purpose of the Orthodox was to expound the Orthodox position and ‘enable their Anglican brethren to come to what, in their view, would be a proper appreciation of the matter’, in other words to avoid a decision pro the ordination of women. See The Dublin Agreed Statement 1984: http://www.anglicancommunion.org/ministry/ecumenical/dialogues/orthodox/docs/pdf/the_dublin_statement.pdf/.
66. fn6666) See the report of the special conference of the Anglican – Orthodox Commission, July 1978 ‘Athens Statement 1978’, Harding Meyer and Lukas Visher (eds), Growth in Agreement I, Reports and Agreed Statements of Ecumenical Conversations on a World Level: 1972 – 1982 (Geneva: WCC, 22007), pp. 50-56, here p. 52, §§ 9, 10.
67. fn6767) In 1962 the visit of the Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey to the Phanar, during the patriarchate of Athenagoras, marked the reconstruction and reactivation of the Joint Commission on the Orthodox-Anglican dialogue.
68. fn6868) It is written that both words ‘in discussion of ecclesiology is of medieval and modern Western origin’. See Papandreou Damaskinos, Metropolitan of Switzerland, Θεολογικοί Διάλογοι: Μία Ορθόδοξος Προοπτική (Theological Dialogues, An Orthodox Perspective) op. cit., pp. 225-233; The Moscow Agreed Statement 1976: http://www.anglicancommunion.org/ministry/ecumenical/dialogues/orthodox/docs/pdf/the_moscow_statement.pdf/.
69. fn6969) Op. cit.
70. fn7070) Jeffrey Gros FSC, Harding Meyer and William G. Rusch (eds), Growth in Agreement II, Reports and Agreed Statements of Ecumenical Conversations on a World Level, 1982-1998 (Geneva: WCC, 2000), pp. 77-104, at p. 83.
71. fn7171) The Dublin Agreed Statement 1984, §. 2: From Moscow to Lambeth (1976-8): http://www.anglicancommunion.org/ministry/ecumenical/dialogues/orthodox/docs/pdf/the_dublin_statement.pdf/.
72. fn7272) Jeffrey Gros FSC, Harding Meyer and William G. Rusch (eds), Growth in Agreement II, pp. 77-104, at p. 78.
73. fn7373) Jeffrey Gros FSC, Harding Meyer and William G. Rusch (eds), Growth in Agreement II, op. cit., p. 78.
74. fn7474) The Church of the Triune God: The Cyprus Statement agreed by the International Commission for Anglican-Orthodox Theological Dialogue 2006 (London: The Anglican Communion Office, 2006).
75. fn7575) A similar wish was expressed by the Orthodox at Agia Napa/Paralimni, Cyprus, 2-9 March 2011. See Inter-Orthodox Consultation for a Response to the Faith and Order Study: ‘The Nature and Mission of the Church’: A Stage on the Way to a Common Statement (Faith and Order Paper 198, 2005 WCC), § 10. http://www.oikoumene.org/fileadmin/files/wcc-main/2011pdfs/NapaCommunique.
76. fn7676) As the Orthodox stated at Agia Napa, Cyprus, 2-9 March 2011: ‘It has been only since the 19th century that Orthodox theologians have begun to arrive at a systematic “ecclesiology”, often in response to the challenge of the encounter with Christianity outside of Orthodoxy.’ See Inter - Orthodox Consultation for a Response to the Faith and Order Study, op. cit.
77. fn7777) ‘… συναισθήσει της κοινής ευθύνης διά την διάρρηξιν του αρράφου χιτώνος του Χριστού …’
78. fn7878) J. Karmiris, The Orthodox Church in Dialogue with the Heterodox Churches (Athens: 1975), pp. 88-89.
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/17455316-00803006
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/17455316-00803006
2012-01-01
2016-02-13

Affiliations: 1: Faculty of Theology, Theological School, National and Capodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimioupolis, Ano Ilisia, Athens 157 72, Email: vstathokosta@theol.uoa.gr, URL: http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Name:*
    Email:*
    Your details
    Name:*
    Email:*
    Department:*
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
     
     
     
    Other:
     
    Ecclesiology — Recommend this title to your library

    Thank you

    Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation