Question about "River of Fire" by Kalomiros

[gurneyhalleck1]

I found myself a touch bit puzzled by that statement as well. Nothing in anything I've read of Father Schmemann said any thing like that?

By "the Eucharist as something secondary", are you referring to the fact that he thought priests should preach homilies?

 

[Kristos]

Well mostly they criticise him for his views on lithurgical practices. In his works he claimed that they were lacking in certain ways and need reformation, whatever the reasons. For example his view on the Eucharist as something secondary, similar to the protestant views on it. Basically the church is against any form of reforms or "revivals" and It's looking with suspicion on anybody making such efforts. Of course Schmemann himself might not have had bad intentions when making such claims and we do not necessary blame him.

As you are probably aware there has been a growing modernist movement in the Orthodox church and many hard line priests from Eastern Europe have written against certain people considered to be proponants of it.(like Schmemann, Kalomiros, Al. Men, Kalistos Ware and others)

I can't imagine anything being further from the truth. Have you read his book "The Eucharist"??? - for Fr Schmemann the Eucharist was not secondary to anything, rather everything is fulfilled in it and by it. The Eucharist for him was the crowning of our sacramental life in the church. Asserting that he saw the Eucharist as secondary is preposterous.

 

[InnerPhyre]

Do not read Kalomiros. He is basically an Orthodox modernist and this is dangerous. Also, stay away from Alexander Shmemann and Alexander Men. Unintentionally of not, they have heavily deviated from the ancient teachings of the church. Instead you should focus on the works of Fr. Seraphim Rose who will clear your head on what ancient Orthodoxy really is and how modern interpretations of it are dangerous. In his works he will direct you to other traditional church fathers whose works you should also read if you want to get into Orthodoxy.

I realise being in the United States will expose you to modernist works which have always been easily propagated there. It's very difficult to discern... at least here in Bulgaria we still have a branch of the priesthood which always reacts whenever we get some twisting of the ancient teachings(they also try to propagate them here).

....Seriously? Stay away from Fr. Alexander Shmemann but Fr. Seraphim Rose is the way to go? Because Seraphim Rose definitely doesn't have any kind of new fangled wacky teachings?

 

[jckstraw72]

Do not read Kalomiros. He is basically an Orthodox modernist and this is dangerous. Also, stay away from Alexander Shmemann and Alexander Men. Unintentionally of not, they have heavily deviated from the ancient teachings of the church. Instead you should focus on the works of Fr. Seraphim Rose who will clear your head on what ancient Orthodoxy really is and how modern interpretations of it are dangerous. In his works he will direct you to other traditional church fathers whose works you should also read if you want to get into Orthodoxy.

I realise being in the United States will expose you to modernist works which have always been easily propagated there. It's very difficult to discern... at least here in Bulgaria we still have a branch of the priesthood which always reacts whenever we get some twisting of the ancient teachings(they also try to propagate them here).

God bless you! (although I also like Fr. Schmemann, but not nearly as much as I like Fr. Seraphim)

 

[InnerPhyre]

Well mostly they criticise him for his views on lithurgical practices. In his works he claimed that they were lacking in certain ways and need reformation, whatever the reasons. For example his view on the Eucharist as something secondary, similar to the protestant views on it. Basically the church is against any form of reforms or "revivals" and It's looking with suspicion on anybody making such efforts. Of course Schmemann himself might not have had bad intentions when making such claims and we do not necessary blame him.

As you are probably aware there has been a growing modernist movement in the Orthodox church and many hard line priests from Eastern Europe have written against certain people considered to be proponants of it.(like Schmemann, Kalomiros, Al. Men, Kalistos Ware and others)

With regard to Schmemann and his "revival," you need to understand the culture of Orthodoxy in America that he was responding to. People here were receiving Holy Communion once a year or even less and that was the norm. Priests were not even offering the Eucharist to the faithful. They would come out with the chalice, say "In the fear of God, with faith draw near" and turn right back around.

A Christian people who do not receive the Eucharist are a dead people. It is largely because of Fr. Schmemann that the correct view of the Eucharist has now prevailed throughout most of the United States. Unfortunately, you will still see churches here where literally no one will receive Holy Communion and that is something that we are still having to fight against.

 

[jckstraw72]

Boris, have you seen this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usmHsiU_ZCU

i think its embarassing for us Americans that Bulgarians are remembering him on the day of his repose, and what did our parishes do? His monastery held a pilgrimage in his honor, but what did our parishes do?

 

[Lukaris]

With regard to Schmemann and his "revival," you need to understand the culture of Orthodoxy in America that he was responding to. People here were receiving Holy Communion once a year or even less and that was the norm. Priests were not even offering the Eucharist to the faithful. They would come out with the chalice, say "In the fear of God, with faith draw near" and turn right back around.

A Christian people who do not receive the Eucharist are a dead people. It is largely because of Fr. Schmemann that the correct view of the Eucharist has now prevailed throughout most of the United States. Unfortunately, you will still see churches here where literally no one will receive Holy Communion and that is something that we are still having to fight against.

This!!^^^^^ (thank you, Inner Pyre)

Sometimes I wonder if Fr Alexander was saying that the Eucharist was being rendered as something secondary by negligence from the church itself & then his statement was misconstrued & mistranslated outside America.

 

[Kristos]

This!!^^^^^ (thank you, Inner Pyre)

Sometimes I wonder if Fr Alexander was saying that the Eucharist was being rendered as something secondary by negligence from the church itself & then his statement was misconstrued & mistranslated outside America.

I suppose that is possible if people are basing their opinions on out of context snippets and proof texting. I honestly don't know how anyone could think such a thing after actually reading Fr Schmemann's book on the Eucharist.

I also don't understand why Fr Men is dragged into this - the man was martyred for his faith! - perhaps we should respect that a little bit even if his theology wasn't perfect - he has received his crown.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

This is what I said in post #19 yo!

With regard to Schmemann and his "revival," you need to understand the culture of Orthodoxy in America that he was responding to. People here were receiving Holy Communion once a year or even less and that was the norm. Priests were not even offering the Eucharist to the faithful. They would come out with the chalice, say "In the fear of God, with faith draw near" and turn right back around.

A Christian people who do not receive the Eucharist are a dead people. It is largely because of Fr. Schmemann that the correct view of the Eucharist has now prevailed throughout most of the United States. Unfortunately, you will still see churches here where literally no one will receive Holy Communion and that is something that we are still having to fight against.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Sounds like I'm going to have to read some Alexander Schmemann. I would also say that if it wasn't for Met. Kallistos Ware, Met. Hilarion Alfeyev, Fr. Meyendorff, and others who are often labeled as "modernists" I never would have encountered Orthodoxy or given it much thought.

yeah, I would say you should. as gurney said, let the haters hate. Fr Schmemann is no more a "liberal modernist" than Fr Seraphim is a "slobbering fundie." yeah, he had a different approach, but in the end, he was a loving pastor who labored for his flock. just like Fr Seraphim. Fr Herman and Fr Alexander mutually forgave each other after Fr Seraphim's repose, which was just before Fr Schmemann's.

oh and in reading For the Life of the World, Fr Alexander states clearly that the Eucharist must be central to our lives. so I dunno where the whole Eucharist is secondary comes from.

there are unofficial icons of Fr Alexander, and not just in fruity places like New Skete.

 

[ArmyMatt]

i think its embarassing for us Americans that Bulgarians are remembering him on the day of his repose, and what did our parishes do? His monastery held a pilgrimage in his honor, but what did our parishes do?

I see what you did there. Fr Seraphim basically said the same thing when the Greeks started venerating St John before the Russians did.

 

[Boris89]

It is largely because of Fr. Schmemann that the correct view of the Eucharist has now prevailed throughout most of the United States. Unfortunately, you will still see churches here where literally no one will receive Holy Communion and that is something that we are still having to fight against.

Alright, maybe I was overreacting with what I had read about him. I am just very suspicious of what has been declared true Orthodoxy in the last century and am careful when choosing what to read. And I also give the same advice to anyone with interest in the faith like truthseeker32. Considering how far we are from the Orthodox way of life in the past centuries, the more conservative our approach is, the better.

Boris, have you seen this?

i think its embarassing for us Americans that Bulgarians are remembering him on the day of his repose, and what did our parishes do? His monastery held a pilgrimage in his honor, but what did our parishes do?

That was interesting, I hadn't seen it until now. This is an old style Orthodox church (they follow the Julian calendar and are against the adoption of the Gregorian which the main church body has done.) It was a good video and I thank you for it. God bless you too.

 

[Ignatius21]

Alright, maybe I was overreacting with what I had read about him.

Had read about him, or had read from him?

 

[Boris89]

Had read about him, or had read from him?

Does everybody need to be a wiccan in order to realise it's dangerous?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Does everybody need to be a wiccan in order to realise it's dangerous?

you really comparing the liturgical errors of Fr Schmemann to Wicca? that's a tad much. nothing Fr Schmemann wrote was dangerous. it's the same stuff folks do to Fr Seraphim Rose:

I don't like Fr Seraphim, and his stuff should be avoided

What do you mean?

His soul after death and end times stuff is to literal, and that has been scandalous to many.

You realize he says that it should not be taken literally, right?

Well I guess I jumped the gun on what he wrote, and the less gnostic sounding stuff the better

Have you ever read anything he wrote?

Do you need to be a Wiccan to know that it's dangerous?

 

[Boris89]

you really comparing the liturgical errors of Fr Schmemann to Wicca? that's a tad much.

You caught the word and missed the point. One does not need to have read or tried every single thing in order to know it should be avoided.

nothing Fr Schmemann wrote was dangerous.

Sure? Unfortunately the man has participated in the ecumenist movement. This alone means he should be looked at with at least a slight suspicion. He may have written good stuff, but that alone does not guarantee everything he wrote should be trusted. Only a very experienced theologian will be able to discern right and wrong. I am not one and never plan to be one - i'm just an average Joe and for my own safety I prefer avoiding his stuff, given the fact that he was an ecumenist.

it's the same stuff folks do to Fr Seraphim Rose:
Have you ever read anything he wrote?

By Fr. Seraphim? Yes I have, although not every single piece of his works. What he's doing is an attempt to keep Orthodoxy the way it was without any change which modernists try to make. Just for an example, let's take the aerial toll houses (Schmemann in particular may not have written about them, but that's not the point here) - they have always been a part of the teachings of the church. Some of the greatest saints have talked about them - St. Macarius of Egypt, St. Antonius the Great, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and also later saints like St. Theophanes the Recluse among others. But today a new fashion has emerged - branding them as a "gnostic heresy" without paying attention to what the saints have said about them. Just because it's scary and people like to feel more calm about what awaits. For me, the old ways are the safest. What you decide to believe is of course, your decision and I wish you all the best!

 

[jckstraw72]

well lets be fair. yes, it seems he has formed a hasty judgment on Fr. Schmemann, but he wasn't saying Fr. Schmemann and Wicca are comparable - he was just using an extreme case to make his point obvious.

 

[ArmyMatt]

You caught the word and missed the point. One does not need to have read or tried every single thing in order to know it should be avoided.

no I got that, I just don't think that Fr Schmemann should be avoided. Fr Seraphim even talked against doing that with other Orthodox in his bio

Sure? Unfortunately the man has participated in the ecumenist movement. This alone means he should be looked at with at least a slight suspicion. He may have written good stuff, but that alone does not guarantee everything he wrote should be trusted. Only a very experienced theologian will be able to discern right and wrong. I am not one and never plan to be one - i'm just an average Joe and for my own safety I prefer avoiding his stuff, given the fact that he was an ecumenist.

just because someone participates in the ecumenical movement, does not make them an ecumenist. and I say this being one who wishes we would pull out of the WCC and all that malarky.

By Fr. Seraphim? Yes I have, although not every single piece of his works. What he's doing is an attempt to keep Orthodoxy the way it was without any change which modernists try to make. Just for an example, let's take the aerial toll houses (Schmemann in particular may not have written about them, but that's not the point here) - they have always been a part of the teachings of the church. Some of the greatest saints have talked about them - St. Macarius of Egypt, St. Antonius the Great, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and also later saints like St. Theophanes the Recluse among others. But today a new fashion has emerged - branding them as a "gnostic heresy" without paying attention to what the saints have said about them. Just because it's scary and people like to feel more calm about what awaits. For me, the old ways are the safest. What you decide to believe is of course, your decision and I wish you all the best!

I am a firm believer in the toll houses, and I agree with Fr Seraphim more than I do Fr Schmemann. I, like jckstraw, just also like Fr Schmemann as well. I even said earlier that I agree that his liturgical theology is suspect, but that does not mean we avoid him altogether. as Fr Seraphim says, we embrace the man and his correct teaching. there is much in Fr Schmemann that is not liberal or modernist.

well lets be fair. yes, it seems he has formed a hasty judgment on Fr. Schmemann, but he wasn't saying Fr. Schmemann and Wicca are comparable - he was just using an extreme case to make his point obvious.

yeah, a hasty judgment on my part (forgive me Boris).

 

[Boris89]

(forgive me Boris).

I understand your view now. You haven't offended me in any way, don't worry. I'm also apologising If I have offended somebody and may God be with all of you.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I understand your view now. You haven't offended me in any way, don't worry. I'm also apologising If I have offended somebody and may God be with all of you.

we're cool man, you did not offend