Metropolitan Anthony was a remarkable writer, author of many works in apologetics, dogmatic, pastoral and moral theology, hermeneutics, canon law and other disciplines. His ecclesiological opinions were influenced by A. S. [[Alexei Stepanovich Khomiakov|Khomiakov]]; from Khomiakov's view of the dogma of One Church, Metropolitan Anthony concluded that all [[heterodox]] churches were not part of the Church. He allowed the reception of converts through [[confession]] and [[chrismation]] strictly on the grounds of [[economy]]. Yet he taught that Orthodox bishops could receive Anglican clergy of that time merely by [[penance ]] [http://westernorthodox.blogspot.com/2007/01/why-anglicans-could-have-been-received.html "in existing orders."]

Thus Metropolitan Anthony considered not [[Golgotha]], but the sufferings in Gethsemane, as central to the Savior's feat of redemption. The bodily sufferings and death on the Cross were necessary so that the faithful would acknowledge the degree of His suffering. This view received criticism from some theologians, including [[John Meyendorff]] and [[Georges Florovsky]], with some going as far as to accuse Metropolitan Anthony of [[Pelagianism]]. Metropolitan Anthony wrote these views in prison, and when they were criticized, he withdrew them. [http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/qa3.htm] It is important to note that Metropolitan Anthony did not pioneer this theological view: it appeared in Russian theology in the 19th century as an attempt to counteract Anselmian atonement. Later theologians claimed that Metropolitan Anthony's views were completely Orthodox, but that the way in which he expressed them led [http://thoughtsintrusive.wordpress.com/2014/11/13/fr-seraphim-rose-and-the-dogma-of-redemption/ "some "] to misinterpret his teaching.