"Theology" schools breed spiritual ignorance

[Anastasios]

I am preparing a response, Justin. Thank you for your response. What I think is interesting, though, is that Fr. Tom Hopko served the 20th anniversary liturgy of Fr. Seraphim's repose at Platina last year.

anastasios

[Logos]

Well, I have read both of the articles, and there is a difference between the two. The one written by Hopko is academic, and would be find for someone who is interested in learning more intellectually about Orthodoxy. The one written by Saint Cyprian of Carthage is written for the one person who is famished spiritually. There is nothing wrong with Hopko's piece other than it is a dry, sterile piece of writing on Orthodoxy. The one written by Saint Cyprian is far from that. Saint Cyprian I think effectively communicates the wonderful mystery of baptism from the Orthodox frame of mind. Even though it is very short, it is still very rich in thought about Orthodox. I am not saying one is better than the other, other than St. Cyprian is writing to an audience that hungers spiritually for Christ, while Hopko's audience is the non-Orthodox, and those interested in it from an intellectual perspective.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Logos,

Of course what you are saying is correct and I would never say that one cannot learn something about Orthodox practice from these people, perhaps even allot.

I am just drawing a distinction that this "knowledge" is completley useless by itself and that they use these "learning" facilities to ready their priests.

Anastasios,

Let me qoute Heirotheos of Nafpaktos: "Barlaam insisted that knowledge of God depends not on vision of God but on one's understanding. He said that we can acquire knowledge of God through philosophy, and therefore he considered the prophets and apostles who saw the uncreated light, to be below the philosophers. He called the uncreated light sensory, created, and "inferior to our understanding". However, St. Gregory Palamas, a bearer of the Tradition and a man of revelation, supported the opposite view. In his theology he presented the teaching of the Church that uncreated light, that is, the vision of God, is not simply a symbolic vision, nor sensory and created, nor inferior to understanding, but it is deification. Through deification man is deemed worthy of seeing God. And this deification is not an abstract state, but a union of man with God. That is to say, the man who beholds the uncreated light sees it because he is united with God. He sees it with his inner eyes, and also with his bodily eyes, which, however, have been altered by God's action. Consequently theoria is union with God. And this union is knowledge of God. At this time one is granted knowledge of God, which is above human knowledge and above the senses."

(I will be waiting for you to say that the people at SVS are not philosophers )

Therefore, there is no place for an academy of learning about Orthodoxy except for those who are not trying to aquire knowledge of God from God Himself, but from men who themselves have probably never known it. Instead of a spiritual father, you have something like that of a secular teacher.

These schools rip people away from an environment of true learning, that is the local church, where the pursuit of knowledge is ONLY done through praxis under the guidance of that persons spiritual father.

The only place I can think is better than the local Church is a monastery where people are being trained to have unity and knowledge of God.

I want to add that all heresy in history has rationalism as its foundation. I can see plenty of rationalism coming out of SVS, and even the taste of heresy. One only needs to read the "Agreed statement on Baptism" to clearly see that.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Peter J. Hatala,

That is how all of his writing is(!), as well as Schmemann, and Meyendorf.(at least of what I read).

[Anastasios]

Schmemann was great. He lived Orthodoxy to the core, and that shows from his writings. He really got to the meaning of an issue and issued heartfelt calls to restore that meaning to our everyday life. Far from divorcing theology and praxis, Schmemann urged the Orthodox to reunite the two, to free theology from its captivity to rationalism, and for the believer to "breathe" Christ.

Schmemann's writings are so focused on Christ that I am amazed. They are fresh and vibrant.

As far as Hopko's writing... I would agree it is a bit dry. His true forte is public speaking. His cassette set "Word of the Cross" is excellent. It gets to the heart of Christianity. It's available from SVS press (and I am the person that duplicates and packages it!)

anastasios

[Justin Kissel]

I guess my question is, if Schmemann understands (or is in touch with, or whatever term you want to use) the mind of the Fathers, then why does he speak of Orthodox Saints like he does, as for example when he discusses Justinian in the book The Historical Road Of Eastern Orthodoxy (1963 edition, see pp. 144-168)? I've read two history books on Justinian written by Protestants that were more sympathetic than Fr. Schmemann.

Regarding Fr. Hopko and the Fr. Seraphim thing, that's very.. strange (I mean strange in an "curious" way). I have heard that after the repose of Fr. Seraphim (and before he went off into left field), Fr. Herman reconciled with many people whom he and Fr. Seraphim had previously been at odds with. Then again, the monastery isn't even ROCOR anymore. So... it all seems very confusing to me

Justin

PS. I don't say Schmemann couldn't come up with really wonderful insights, I still worry what will happen now that more conservative figures are gone though and only those following in Schmemann's mindset remain.

[尼古拉前执事]

Regarding Fr. Hopko and the Fr. Seraphim thing, that's very.. strange (I mean strange in an "curious" way). I have heard that after the repose of Fr. Seraphim (and before he went off into left field), Fr. Herman reconciled with many people whom he and Fr. Seraphim had previously been at odds with. Then again, the monastery isn't even ROCOR anymore. So... it all seems very confusing to me

Good point Justin, the monastery is Serbian Orthodox now, and thus in communion with OCA and ROCOR alike. A number of Serbs (and others I suppose), however, still do not trust the monastery after the nasty divergance into the New-Age that they took after Father Seraphim's repose.