Hopko and Schmemann?

[jckstraw72]

Frankly, my sincere hope is that anti-evolutionism is anathematized, so

will you fight for the righteous cause of de-canonizing and condemning St. Theophan the Recluse, St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, St. John of Kronstadt, St. Barsanuphius of Optina, St. Ambrose of Optina, St. Luke of Simferopol, St. Justin Popovich, St. Nikolai Velimirovich, St. Paisios the Athonite, St. Gabriel Igoshkin, St. Hilarion Troitsky, St. Nektarios, St. Nicholas Pokrovsky, St. Paul Andreyev, St. Sebastian Dabovich, St. Thaddeus Uspensky, St. Varlaam Nikolsky, and St. Vladimir Bogoyavlensky

and of preventing the canonizations of Elder Cleopa (Ilie), Elder Joseph the Hesychast, Elder Paisios (Olaru), Elder Sophrony, Elder Philotheos (Zervakos), Patriarch Pavle, Schema-abbot John of Valaam, Fr. George Calciu, and Hieromartyr Daniel (Sysoev)?

just wonderin'. if we're gonna do this, let's do it right.

 

[gzt]

Not everybody who like Origen got booted.

 

[jckstraw72]

but Origen, the one who taught incorrectly, on Genesis no less, did. even after the fact. he's actually the perfect model for such a righteous, God-pleasing crusade!

 

[ArmyMatt]

and those saints who liked Origen, still were not followers of his heretical teaching.

we would also have to change how we do Vespers, since the de-pheloned priest standing and praying before the closed Royal Doors is an icon of Adam stripped of his glory, lamenting before the closed gates of Paradise.

 

[rusmeister]

The key stumbling block for moderns is their faith in their secular educations; that those educations produce truth as reliable as that of Holy Tradition and therefore equal to it. This leads them to reject the consensus of the Church fathers in favor in that faith in that education. The logic goes "How could a million scientists be wrong?"

For me the answer is simple. If they were all taught wrong from the get-go, and taught in the same general way of thinking, then they can all come to the same conclusions a hundred million times, conclusions that will always be in error because they cannot observe those past times to correct the errors. They must forever rely on calculations, and assumptions - on faith that what they do they do rightly, and that there are no unknown variables. And I know enough about modern education to see precisely how this situation happened.

I choose to trust the Church fathers. If we are wrong, then we must suppose ourselves in some way superior to them, as "knowing better than they", and look to our revelation from worldly wisdom, rather than from holy men inspired by God. God forbid!

Synthesis seems like a good idea at some point in life. I just see now that it really is not necessary. I'll take the faith of children, and old ladies, in things that seem absurd to the world.

 

[All4Christ]

Perhaps the anathemizing of evolution or anathemizing of anti-evolution is a bit OT for this thread?

 

[HoleyHermit]

Perhaps the anathemizing of evolution or anathemizing of anti-evolution is a bit OT for this thread?

I certainly didn't expect the Evolution Inquisition. [Turns and looks expectantly.]

 

[AMM]

I certainly didn't expect the Evolution Inquisition. [Turns and looks expectantly.]

 

[ArmyMatt]

I certainly didn't expect the Evolution Inquisition. [Turns and looks expectantly.]

hahaha, well played

 

[All4Christ]

I certainly didn't expect the Evolution Inquisition. [Turns and looks expectantly.]

Btw...welcome

 

[Cappadocious]

as someone who actually sat through all three of Dr Veniamin's classes, this is not true.

That's what a modernist would say, relying on empirical data of the past. Also why do you change the word "three" to refer to something non-Triune? Intent matters along with original meaning, you should leave the states for a Christian nation like Russia where three is always Trinitarian.

 

[Cappadocious]

a particular word has a particular history and root meaning that is not completely lost in legitimate usage,

No demonstration has been provided for your intentionalist aboriginalist theory of language

 

[rusmeister]

I'll give you a demonstration: the word "gay". Its core meaning of merriment has NOT been lost, despite the horrendous abuse the word has been put to, and that you seem to approve of, ignoring its fundamental state of being an evil euphemism.

And the proof of that is in the word "gaiety". As long as that word exists, you cannot alienate "gay" from the concept of merriment, just as the coiners of the euphemism counted on, that merriment should be associated with vile acts.

 

[HoleyHermit]

I can make no judgement on his Orthodoxy, but Fr. Thomas Hopko is still my favorite podcaster. If you wander deep into this hermit's cave, speak no ill of Fr. Tom lest you get pinched. With love and charity, of course.

Btw...welcome

Thank you. But, since you launched my career, I'm your fault. I do not envy you the heavy burden.

 

[ArmyMatt]

That's what a modernist would say, relying on empirical data of the past. Also why do you change the word "three" to refer to something non-Triune? Intent matters along with original meaning, you should leave the states for a Christian nation like Russia where three is always Trinitarian.

well, seeing as how I still am in regular contact with him and I had my last class with him only a month ago, I am not relying on data from the past. also, I did not mean triune, I meant three as in three. and thirdly, seeing as how I am a member of the military, I am just fine being an American. and I don't know what that last point had anything to do with anything we are talking about.

plus, what you said here under all the unneeded snark had nothing to do with the fact that what you said about Dr Veniamin is just incorrect

 

[jckstraw72]

and it is all completely besides the point of why i invoked Dr. Veniamin in the first place

 

[All4Christ]

I can make no judgement on his Orthodoxy, but Fr. Thomas Hopko is still my favorite podcaster. If you wander deep into this hermit's cave, speak no ill of Fr. Tom lest you get pinched. With love and charity, of course.

Thank you. But, since you launched my career, I'm your fault. I do not envy you the heavy burden.

He's one of my favorites as well His podcasts helps me a lot considering my background!

Also, thanks for the forewarning I will wait in trepidation to see what happens!! j/k

 

[Light of the East]

yes, I agreed to this earlier. my point is that St Justinian's theology has no reason to be suspect. yes, some aspects of his life or what he did are, but not in his theology. the point of this whole thread is the theology of Frs Hopko and Schmemann, which do have errors to be wary of. St Cyril of Alexandria was a little heavy handed when it came to certain heretics, but his theology was spot on. this is not about sins committed, as much as errors and/or heresy preached.

St. Justinian may have been a great theologian, but Augustine is also considered a saint and respected in the East, yet his musings on Original Sin are the locus for the heresy of Calvinism.

Having said that, I have read that Justinian's desire for a united kingdom caused him to oppose apocatastasis, and one wonders where he got off doing that after it had been taught for 400 years?????

IMO, that is just as bad, no matter how brilliant the rest of his theology is, as Augustine's trashing of 400 years of teaching on anthropological realities to come up with the idea of the "massa damnata" and Original Sin sending all but a small number of the elect in to eternal torment.

Justinian putting his own thoughts and desires into theology would not be the first time that someone was led by his emotions and outer desires to achieve a goal and used God to get there.

 

[ArmyMatt]

except that is not the history. Origen had people condemning his theology in the early 300s, so the idea that universalism was the teaching of the Church is not true. and the idea that Justinian was led by his emotions is also false.

 

[Light of the East]

except that is not the history. Origen had people condemning his theology in the early 300s, so the idea that universalism was the teaching of the Church is not true. and the idea that Justinian was led by his emotions is also false.

Matt - to say that people condemned his theology is far too broad a statement. They condemned parts of it, such as the strange idea of pre-existent souls.

As for the teaching of Patristic Universalism prior to Augustine, I am currently reading a book which has numerous quotes from men who are considered saints in the Church and whose orthodoxy is impeccable.

It was merely a suggestion that Justinian was led by certain desires to do those things which would unite the empire. I have no proof one way or the other. This is the frustrating thing about reading "historians." They are almost always influenced to say certain things by the agenda which drives them. It can make finding the truth very problematic.