This is a safe harbor for inquirers and catechumen to ask questions and share their journey into Holy Orthodoxy. Please be kind to our newcomers and warmly welcome them. All Forum Rules apply. No polemics. No heated discussions. No name-calling.
A theme I have found in Fr. Seraphim Rose's works is, opposition to a kind of hardness that he noticed. Here is an example of his views:
He thought it was excessive to question whether or not the Church within Russia 'had grace'. He was concerned that the 'super-correct' were too hard of heart, in declaring this or that person a 'heretic' and so on.
He recognized, however, that anyone taking their faith seriously in today's world may as well be a 'crazy convert'.
Is there a risk that TO people have a fault of hardness of heart, that Fr. Seraphim would term 'super-correct'?
A theme I have found in Fr. Seraphim Rose's works is, opposition to a kind of hardness that he noticed. Here is an example of his views:
He thought it was excessive to question whether or not the Church within Russia 'had grace'. He was concerned that the 'super-correct' were too hard of heart, in declaring this or that person a 'heretic' and so on.
He recognized, however, that anyone taking their faith seriously in today's world may as well be a 'crazy convert'.
Is there a risk that TO people have a fault of hardness of heart, that Fr. Seraphim would term 'super-correct'?
This risk of having hardness of heart needs to be carefully watched by all people: True Orthodox, World Orthodox, Catholics, Protestants, and pagans.
This is why the Invitatory of the Divine Office states: "If today you hear the voice of the Lord, harden not your hearts." This message reminds us of the Pharoah of Egypt during Exodus as he was chastized for his own hardness of heart.
Some in World Orthodox judge the True Orthodox as being "super-correct." Yet, this appears to be a guise to cover up their own inadequacies and sins. For example, a few people in World Orthodoxy have even admitted hiding the fact that they are fasting by eating meat when in the company of others. Then when someone asks them why they have meat on their plate, they accuse them of not minding what is on their own plates. Isn't this behavior called baiting and trolling? And isn't this the height of hypocrisy?
Another example was given by a priest in World Orthodoxy who was enjoying a Lenten supper with his family at a restaurant after the Wednesday Pre-Sanctified Liturgy. Almost immediately, a parishioner recognized him, and said, "Father, my family and I were wondering if it were possible to have Lobster with the butter sauce. After all, Lobster just does not taste good without butter." The priest said exasperatingly, "Of course, have the butter." [and in a softer voice] "but it appears that you have missed the entire point of the fast." To remedy that situation so that people would not be tempted, the parish started having shared Lenten meals at the parish hall.
When I was in the post-Vatican II Roman Catholic Church, the more modernistic *Cafeteria Catholics would accuse the Traditional Catholics of being "super correct" with the accusation, "One should not be holier than the Pope." Some in World Orthodoxy, have changed that accusation to, "One should not be holier than the EP." Instead of comparing ourselves with fellow sinners, shouldn't we be imitating Christ, the Theotokos, and our Holy Saints? Aren't we to be perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect?
Another thing that happens in some Orthodox jurisdictions is this new prohibition of lobster and crab as "meat" during Great Lent, when these seafoods were not even considered to be "meat" in the Ancient church, but food that the poor would eat. With the downturn in the economy, instead of prohibiting lobster, crab and shellfish, wouldn't it be better if the richer folks in the parish would contribute money to the church so that everyone could enjoy a lobster or crab fest on a Sunday during the Fast?
* Cafeteria Catholics is a phrase given to modern Roman Catholics who pick and choose which dogmas they will believe or which traditions they will practice, so if they do not like to fast, they would not fast. If Catholic women believed that women should be ordained to the priesthood, these women would seek ordination even if it meant their excommunication.
A theme I have found in Fr. Seraphim Rose's works is, opposition to a kind of hardness that he noticed. Here is an example of his views:
He thought it was excessive to question whether or not the Church within Russia 'had grace'. He was concerned that the 'super-correct' were too hard of heart, in declaring this or that person a 'heretic' and so on.
He recognized, however, that anyone taking their faith seriously in today's world may as well be a 'crazy convert'.
Is there a risk that TO people have a fault of hardness of heart, that Fr. Seraphim would term 'super-correct'?
I have also read this in Fr. Seraphim's writings. Yes, there is a danger in True Orthodoxy of people being "super-correct." Back when I was in World Orthodoxy, I assumed that pretty much everybody in TO would be what Fr. Seraphim coined as "super-correct." But when I actually met TO people, such as clergy in my synod and a monastery of a different TOC synod, I found that my pre-judgment was wrong. While there are definitely "super-correct" people in TO, I have met very few of these in person. Most of these super-correct people I have only encountered online.
Fr. Seraphim discussed how one must follow the Royal Path, away from Ecumenism on the one side and super-correctness on the other. That's what the TO Church seeks to do. I agree with Fr. Seraphim that it is dangerous to declare which synods do, or do not, have grace. The confession of faith of the synod I belong to does not make a declaration about other synods regarding this matter. I know that there are people in other synods who interpret the "grace question" by saying that heretics and schismatics do not have grace in their sacraments, but as to the precise moment when God withholds his grace from their sacraments, we do not know. I believe that this interpretation is more in line with what Fr. Seraphim taught.
Troparion of St. Philaret of New York
Let us the faithful now come together to praise our father, protector and teacher the pillar of the Orthodox faith and firm defender of piety even the wondrous hierarch Philaret and let us glorify our Saviour Who has granted us his incorrupt relics as a manifest sign of his sanctity.
A theme I have found in Fr. Seraphim Rose's works is, opposition to a kind of hardness that he noticed. Here is an example of his views:
He thought it was excessive to question whether or not the Church within Russia 'had grace'. He was concerned that the 'super-correct' were too hard of heart, in declaring this or that person a 'heretic' and so on.
He recognized, however, that anyone taking their faith seriously in today's world may as well be a 'crazy convert'.
Is there a risk that TO people have a fault of hardness of heart, that Fr. Seraphim would term 'super-correct'?
I have also read this in Fr. Seraphim's writings. Yes, there is a danger in True Orthodoxy of people being "super-correct." Back when I was in World Orthodoxy, I assumed that pretty much everybody in TO would be what Fr. Seraphim coined as "super-correct." But when I actually met TO people, such as clergy in my synod and a monastery of a different TOC synod, I found that my pre-judgment was wrong. While there are definitely "super-correct" people in TO, I have met very few of these in person. Most of these super-correct people I have only encountered online.
Fr. Seraphim discussed how one must follow the Royal Path, away from Ecumenism on the one side and super-correctness on the other. That's what the TO Church seeks to do. I agree with Fr. Seraphim that it is dangerous to declare which synods do, or do not, have grace. The confession of faith of the synod I belong to does not make a declaration about other synods regarding this matter. I know that there are people in other synods who interpret the "grace question" by saying that heretics and schismatics do not have grace in their sacraments, but as to the precise moment when God withholds his grace from their sacraments, we do not know. I believe that this interpretation is more in line with what Fr. Seraphim taught.
It may be that the Novus Ordo, and the World Orthodox, are more judgmental respectively of traditionalist Catholics and TOC members, than vice-versa; that the latter are concerned about the way the truth is expressed but more understanding about it, whereas the former are a bit uncertain, not wanting a challenge.
It may be that the Novus Ordo, and the World Orthodox, are more judgmental respectively of traditionalist Catholics and TOC members, than vice-versa; that the latter are concerned about the way the truth is expressed but more understanding about it, whereas the former are a bit uncertain, not wanting a challenge.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
A traditionalist priest once explained that true Christians are like beam of lights in this modernist dark world.
The Light shines in the darkness, and those in darkness complain that the Light hurts their eyes. They do not want to be purified, illuminated, and sanctified because it takes too much effort and frankly, it hurts and is very uncomfortable. That is why they complain about those who pray and fast because true Christians remind them of their own failures to observe Christ's commandments, especially to love and pray for their enemies.
Then when someone asks them why they have meat on their plate, they accuse them of not minding what is on their own plates. Isn't this behavior called baiting and trolling? And isn't this the height of hypocrisy?
