The OCAs Dalai Lama

[Anastasios]

Horrors such as this are why my OCA archbishop steers men who want to attend an Orthodox seminary FAR, FAR AWAY from St. Vladimir's seminary. I knew that it is bad at that place, but I had no idea that the teaching had shifted into insanity.

A few things here:

1) Fr Thomas is a retired dean. He has no standing there now, and since he has left his ideas have gotten progressively more outspoken.
2) One person is not the policy of St Vladimir's Seminary. Professors there are all individuals and they often disagree with each other. Just because Fr Thomas says x, y, or z, does not mean that that is the teaching of St Vladimir's Seminary.
3) I found that the education that I received at St Vladimir's Seminary was on the whole good. As with any endeavor, one must constantly be on the lookout though, as there will always be problems and false ideas floating around in any institution.
4) I wonder how you "knew" that it was a bad place before? When you visited the seminary, what was it about the place that you didn't like?

I don't agree with the OCA because of its ecumenism and adherence to the New Calendar but St Vladimir's is a seminary and a graduate school of theology; its pastoral training program is pretty good and its theological courses are very good. I did my thesis there on Metropolitan Petros of Astoria (GOC) so obviously they are not as one-sided as you would imagine.

Anastasios

[Anastasios]

Yes, good points (#1-3). I never have visited St. Vladimir's Seminary. (another useful "wet noodle" to pop me with) Rather, I formed my opinion from the books that they published. (Years ago, I belonged to their "book club", whereby I would receive everything that they published, at a slightly reduced price.) The overall picture emerged of a remarkably liberal institution, promoting ideas and beliefs which I could not make "fit" the conservative Orthodoxy to which I had converted. I reflexively "judged the tree [St. Vladimir Seminary] by its fruits [the books]". I may have been wrong in so doing, but it was a logical conclusion for me to reach.

In a way that makes sense, but you have to realize that the editors of the Press are not necessarily all faculty members and there is debate on some of the works published. I would not suggest that people new to Orthodoxy read most SVS books, as they are more suitable for those seasoned in Orthodoxy a few years. At any rate, alongside such liberal books as:

"Theology of Wonder"
"Conversations with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholemew"
etc

there are such treasures as the history series, the modern Greek theologians series (Panagiotis Nellas, Christos Yiannaris, etc) and the works of Fr John Behr which are newer and probably after you stopped subscribing. SVS tries to have a more open press, not promoting one point of view. I can see how this is problematic to some and praiseworthy to others, and I think it reflects a bigger problem that I noticed at SVS: not a clear distinction between pastoral and priestly training on the one hand and theological investigation on the other. You would not expect too much delving into speculation at the former as you would not want priests running around that have a cavalier attitude towards tradition for instance, but you WOULD want that at a theological academy because a seasoned theologian is one who explores and questions theological points, sometimes in creative ways, but who ultimately is obedient to the Church. In that process, some ideas are proven useful to the explication of Christian truth; in other instances, the thoughts and theologumena are found to be lacking. If we had two separate institutions: one for priestly training, and one for theology--we'd have a better idea of the scope and context of the books being published.

I'm sorry for this ramble; I'm kind of tired

Anastasios

[Edward]

I think you are beating a straw horse here and looking for errors in Father Thomas' comments. If you look at things in secular terms, the Roman Pope is the "de facto" leader of Christianity. This is not a good thing and I certainly do not believe we should be running to unite with him. But if you asked people around the world, especially non-Christians, to name a "Christian" leader, they would probably say the Pope. I think that is what Father Thomas is saying. So, when the Pope issues some type of statement, many non-Christians will assume that he is speaking for all of Christendom.

You will notice that the third highlight is not Father Thomas' words.

Edward
geh8988@gmail.com