XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: hayesmstw@hotmail.com   
      
   On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 01:35:55 -0500, Larry Swain    
   wrote:   
      
   >Thanks for the clarification, but that makes him even more in the wrong   
   then.  By the time   
   >of the Norman Conquest the Irish church had long, long before (and calling it   
   the Irish   
   >church is problematic) conformed to Roman practice.  Most of the Anglo-Saxon   
   churches had   
   >been Roman in the first place, considering Gregory the Great as the apostle   
   of the   
   >English, and certainly by the mid-eleventh century after the Benedictine   
   Reform and Edward   
   >teh Confessor, there was really no hint of anything other than Roman   
   Christianity.   
   >And just where did Byzantium (the center of Greek Orthodoxy at the time)   
   consider the   
   >English and Irish churches as "Orthodox"?  The creed both were reciting was   
   the one with   
   >the filioque clause.   
      
   It was the post-Conquest bishop, Anslelm, who wrote "Cur Deus homo?" which   
   marked the biggest and most significant divergence from Orthodox theology.   
      
   But the central point I was making was that the Grail cycle fitted well with   
   the developments in Eucharistic theology that were taking place n the West at   
   the time.   
      
      
   --   
   Steve Hayes   
   E-mail: hayesmstw@hotmail.com   
   Web: http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm   
        http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/books.htm   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)