[split from another topic]
It is highly unlikely that the currrent ROCOR-MP or even ROCOR-A (ROCA under Met. Agafangel) will consider glorifying Hieromonk Seraphim Rose of Platina especially now that his monastery at Platina, where he is buried, is under the Serbian Patriarchate, which is allied with the ecumenists in the MP and EP. When a saint is glorified, the bishops usually exhume the body of the saint. How could any jurisdiction who are not Serbians gain permission to exhume a body?
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.
What a relief ! I have been dreading that day [as one can tell by my alarm at the halo around fr Seraphim [Rose] at the ClassicalChristianity site. Elsewhere too. I consider that SO overdone.
So, do you assume that the access to the remains of any candidate being remotely considered for glorification is essentially a must ? I didn't realize that, though such examination would be obviously an important component in the hierarchs making their decision, if found to be incorrupt.
It never occurred to me that Rocor-A would be weighing canonizing Fr Seraphim [Rose] : he didn't have any real relation with them, as they seem mostly an East Coast ex-Rocor concern. As Fr Seraphim did not travel more than minor trips such as to Jordanville once to give a talk, probably few in the Mid-West or Eastern part of America knew much about him.
Maybe that assumption is not correct, it's off the cuff.
I believe ANY jurisdiction which canonized him would not be wise. And may even invite trouble for themselves.
Barbara wrote:What a relief ! I have been dreading that day [as one can tell by my alarm at the halo around fr Seraphim [Rose] at the ClassicalChristianity site. Elsewhere too. I consider that SO overdone.
So, do you assume that the access to the remains of any candidate being remotely considered for glorification is essentially a must ? I didn't realize that, though such examination would be obviously an important component in the hierarchs making their decision, if found to be incorrupt.
It never occurred to me that Rocor-A would be weighing canonizing Fr Seraphim [Rose] : he didn't have any real relation with them, as they seem mostly an East Coast ex-Rocor concern. As Fr Seraphim did not travel more than minor trips such as to Jordanville once to give a talk, probably few in the Mid-West or Eastern part of America knew much about him.
Maybe that assumption is not correct, it's off the cuff.I believe ANY jurisdiction which canonized him would not be wise. And may even invite trouble for themselves.
Why would that invite trouble? I thought Fr. Seraphim was well regarded by everyone. I admit I don't know much about him and I have read only one book of his, "Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future."
I guess I need to do more research...
Lydia wrote:Barbara wrote:What a relief ! I have been dreading that day [as one can tell by my alarm at the halo around fr Seraphim [Rose] at the ClassicalChristianity site. Elsewhere too. I consider that SO overdone.
So, do you assume that the access to the remains of any candidate being remotely considered for glorification is essentially a must ? I didn't realize that, though such examination would be obviously an important component in the hierarchs making their decision, if found to be incorrupt.
It never occurred to me that Rocor-A would be weighing canonizing Fr Seraphim [Rose] : he didn't have any real relation with them, as they seem mostly an East Coast ex-Rocor concern. As Fr Seraphim did not travel more than minor trips such as to Jordanville once to give a talk, probably few in the Mid-West or Eastern part of America knew much about him.
Maybe that assumption is not correct, it's off the cuff.I believe ANY jurisdiction which canonized him would not be wise. And may even invite trouble for themselves.
Why would that invite trouble? I thought Fr. Seraphim was well regarded by everyone. I admit I don't know much about him and I have read only one book of his, "Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future."
I guess I need to do more research...
To a certain extent, conservative New Calendarists and ROCOR pro-Unia types like to push Fr Seraphim as an example of a highly conservative English-speaking Orthodox figure who nevertheless appeared to have some anti-Old Calendarist views. It's similar to the conservative NCist veneration of Elder Joseph, Elder Paisios and similar figures. I think Fr Seraphim is not as bad as those others, since he never actually counseled Old Calendarists to join the New Calendar church; his animus was mainly against the Old Calendarists in ROCOR itself, i.e. the ones who later joined HOCNA, who had various other idiosyncratic theological views (some would say heresies, but this was before name-worshiping and "awake, sleepers"), which he lumped together with their very strict ecclesiological views as examples of "super-correctness".
One criticism I've heard of his veneration is that his asceticism was hyped up after his death. A former ROCOR monk I know tells me that, while he was certainly what you'd call a "good monk", he wasn't a great ascetic from what he heard from people in Jordanville who knew him. The intestinal disorder that killed him may have been caused by a diet of junk food, for example. I know this sort of sounds like people are judging Fr Seraphim, but if he's going to be properly canonized there should be a thorough investigation of his life and suitability for such a great distinction. Similar critiques have been leveled at the "holy elders" that are so venerated by the conservative NCists. E.g. Elder Paisios is said to have been clairvoyant, but many of his prophecies turned out to be false, including when he foretold his own death on Mt Athos, but ended up living longer, leaving the Holy Mountain and dying outside it, which is actually traditionally considered a very bad sign by Athonites.
That last sentence is new information for me : interesting.
Too, to corroborate the story of the former Rocor Monk cited by Jonathan, I repeat the story told by Abbot D. of St Paisius Monastery in Forestville, CA, the hub of activity in that decade for the St Herman Brotherhood. More actual work seemed to have done there than at Platina at that time. Many pilgrims attending Liturgies, nuns going back and forth to Russia, etc.
The Abbot, who I believe is with the same nuns at the Safford Arizona Convent, almost rolled his eyes when I asked him about the endless rumors floating in the atmosphere about Fr Seraphim's likelihood of canonization.
He said, "He was a righteous man. Nothing else."
This abbot had been close to the various endeavors of the St Herman of Alaska group for quite some years and was surely in a position to be able to gauge. His eyes had a look like, "All that veneration of Fr Seraphim is SO INFLATED...! He was a normal monastic."
But Fr. D. was polite enough NOT to say it. Hence, his clipped reply. That's how I read his response.
The perception about the junk food rings very true. I wouldn't be surprised at all.
What really was that ailment ? I seem to remember mention of peritonitis. But it was never crystal clear why this would be so advanced. I don't even know what peritonitis is, but it sounds dreadful !
Barbara wrote:What really was that ailment ? I seem to remember mention of peritonitis. But it was never crystal clear why this would be so advanced. I don't even know what peritonitis is, but it sounds dreadful !
Here is a link:
http://www.webmd.com/digestive-disorder ... treatments
Symptoms of Peritonitis
The first symptoms of peritonitis are poor appetite and nausea, and a dull abdominal ache that quickly turns into persistent, severe abdominal pain, which is worsened by any movement.
Other signs and symptoms related to peritonitis may include:
Abdominal tenderness or distention
Chills
Fever
Fluid in the abdomen
Extreme thirst
Not passing any urine, or passing significantly less urine than usual
Difficulty passing gas or having a bowel movement
Vomiting
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.
Thanks Maria. Sounds awful as described, but Fr Seraphim's case was a very extreme form of the illness from the
detailed descriptions of Not of This World, the first bio ? I didn't check the updated version, as the volume didn't hold my interest.
I always like to know truth, whatever it is. I feel there was something else going on that never was mentioned by
the 'official biographers'.
