Dogma of Redemption

[mikejalex]

Fr. Seraphim said:
"And then someone said, 'If you really want to know what's happening in Orthodoxy today, read Schmemann.' So I read it, and I was bored. I read more and I was still bored. I wondered what was wrong. And then I figured it out....."

Since this statement is a SUBJECTIVE assessment, albeit accurate, regarding how Fr. Seraphim FELT about Shememan, I am at liberty to express how I FEEL about Fr. Seraphim.

Fr. Seraphim has a good number of devotees, but the man was fascinated with the mysterious, the occultists, and anything related to eastern religions. He was unable to shed off his former love for Budhism. Fr. Seraphim received attention because of his familiarity with Russian, and the Slavic culture, which in turn fed the Slavic pride. This is the same pride that, in part, saw the final demise of the old ROCOR, and the re-establishment of Russian "bishops" abroad as feudal lords ( 19th century Russia) managing the "mother" church properties: real estates and others.

I have no temper , inclination or time for argumentations, I am expressing my thoughts for whatever they are worth. If a reader or a blogger is displeased with what I have written, the same may use any language to describe me and my coments.

[Ephrem]

Fr. Seraphim said:
"And then someone said, 'If you really want to know what's happening in Orthodoxy today, read Schmemann.' So I read it, and I was bored. I read more and I was still bored. I wondered what was wrong. And then I figured it out....."

To clarify, this was said by Fr. Herman, not Fr. Seraphim (Rose). I don't believe Fr. Seraphim was ever a monk at Jordanville, and neither did he attend its seminary. He was tonsured a monk at Platina by Bishop Nektary of Seattle. He also studied there privately in order to prepare for the priesthood, never actually attending a seminary.

That being said, it's probably best to start a new thread about Fr. Seraphim of you want to talk about him.

[jgress]

There are also previous threads about Fr Seraphim, which I would suggest reading through first.

[Suaidan]

Thank you for the reference (link), unfortunately, some of the Latin-minded, Augustinian "Orthodox", call Met Anthony a "heresiarch". I believe, the prolific mediocre writer named Moss promulgate this position.
Whereas in the seventies and eighties we suffered from scarcity of Orthodox materials in English; today, one has to protect oneself from damaging exposure to writers seeking publicity through controversy; fame instead of originality.

Didn't Abp Theophan of Poltava, whom some consider a saint, also consider Metr Anthony's work theologically questionable?

[Ephrem]

Didn't Abp Theophan of Poltava, whom some consider a saint, also consider Metr Anthony's work theologically questionable?

Indeed he did oppose Metropolitan Anthony's views, even accusing these ideas as being "heretical".

[Suaidan]

Didn't Abp Theophan of Poltava, whom some consider a saint, also consider Metr Anthony's work theologically questionable?

Indeed he did oppose Metropolitan Anthony's views, even accusing these ideas as being "heretical".

You don't say.

[Ephrem]

You don't say.

Yes, he and one other ROCOR hierarch (who later went to the MP) protested against Metropolitan Anthony's work, accusing it of being heretical. The ROCOR Synod subsequently did an investigation of the work and definitively approved the work. Later the same issue was raised by Abp Leonty of Chile, but Metropolitan Anastassy refused to allow it to be brought up in Sobor, saying that it had already been discussed once and for all.

Fr. Seraphim Rose later took up the side of Abp Theophan as well, but when he tried to get it brought up in Sobor, St. Philaret refused to add it to the agenda, as Metropolitan Anastassy had done before him.