Hopko and Schmemann?

[ArmyMatt]

In your modernist seminaries and private schools, you dare to promote romantic sentiment in place of Father-exalted reason, and call it God's noetic insight. In this you blaspheme the nous of St. Gregory Palamas in favor of Emerson's "iron string".

do you actually have evidence for this?

 

[Cappadocious]

do you actually have evidence for this?

Seminarian anecdotes generally, if I can get access again I will cite Met. Heirotheos. for a believable one now, look at Rus's labeling of my argument "reason" of the sort that should be discarded as opposed to "faith."

The transformation of faith as faithfulness into "faith" (holding an emotionally-charged thought as true in one's mind without seeking the why) is one of the cruelest tricks of modernism. Only in this view can reason be cast as inimical to faith. St. Maximus would have been baffled

 

[ArmyMatt]

Seminarian anecdotes generally, if I can get access again I will cite Met. Heirotheos. for a believable one now, look at Rus's labeling of my argument "reason" of the sort that should be discarded as opposed to "faith."

The transformation of faith as faithfulness into "faith" (holding an emotionally-charged thought as true in one's mind without seeking the why) is one of the cruelest tricks of modernism. Only in this view can reason be cast as inimical to faith. St. Maximus would have been baffled

but none of this is what I learned in seminary, and Met Heirotheos is not a seminary teacher, at least not the teacher in any seminary here in the States, and every one of my professors encouraged us to seek the "why" (even playing devil's advocate when needed). and your discussion here with rus has nothing to do with seminary education.

I don't know what seminary you are talking about, but it's not the one I went to.

 

[rusmeister]

He's saying the use of the word "gay" is legitimate, Matt. He refuses to consider when and why the word arose in its current usage: his position is, because people say it, it is a good, right and true word. That is his position. He implies it to be reasonable, while refusing to reason. Then he implies that we are Scholastic anti-Palamites for thinking that reason is a good thing in its place.

Capp, you keep talking about "a demonstration", I say "Fine", and give you a demonstration - both the known traditional meaning of the word, the historical failed attempts to use it as a sexual euphemism, its resurrection in the '60's SPECIFICALLY to do what it has done, achieve social tolerance of the behavior, and the continued existence of the word "gaeity" for good measure, which is not as a matter of fact used to refer to sodomic desire.

You have no good response to that, no good response to the Flintstones, which kills any suggestion that people continued to associate the word with sexuality prior to 1970, you INSIST on defending a bad modern word, and then have the gall to imply that we are "modernist" for suggesting that we talk more like the Church fathers, or at least, our ancestors.

As Russians would say, "Фу!"

 

[HoleyHermit]

Like I don't even know what y'all are arguing about. All us kids know that gay means silly. Fogies alla time gotta be nattering about something.

 

[jckstraw72]

Rus didn't deny the role of reason. He denied one particular person's version of "reason."

 

[ArmyMatt]

He's saying the use of the word "gay" is legitimate, Matt. He refuses to consider when and why the word arose in its current usage: his position is, because people say it, it is a good, right and true word. That is his position. He implies it to be reasonable, while refusing to reason. Then he implies that we are Scholastic anti-Palamites for thinking that reason is a good thing in its place.

Capp, you keep talking about "a demonstration", I say "Fine", and give you a demonstration - both the known traditional meaning of the word, the historical failed attempts to use it as a sexual euphemism, its resurrection in the '60's SPECIFICALLY to do what it has done, achieve social tolerance of the behavior, and the continued existence of the word "gaeity" for good measure, which is not as a matter of fact used to refer to sodomic desire.

You have no good response to that, no good response to the Flintstones, which kills any suggestion that people continued to associate the word with sexuality prior to 1970, you INSIST on defending a bad modern word, and then have the gall to imply that we are "modernist" for suggesting that we talk more like the Church fathers, or at least, our ancestors.

As Russians would say, "Фу!"

he spoke of what we learn in our "modernist" seminaries and how we use the modernist holding on to the romantic ideal of what is true without seeking the why, which, if true, would be a fair critique. however, in the past 3 years I have been at seminary I am pretty sure I have not seen him sit in any classes, so I don't know how Capp would know what I have been taught.

 

[ArmyMatt]

and I would also add that this whole thread started out as a response to a FB group's condemnation of Frs Hopko and Schmemann. seeing as how rus, jckstraw, and myself basically went through errors we saw in their teaching, but also affirmed their positive impact on Orthodoxy, that kind of disproves that we used any simple emotional notion of faith devoid of any critical thinking.

 

[HaKatz]

Fr Hopko's introductory works are excellent. I haven't read any of Fr. Schmemann's works. I would say use discernment when reading their works regardless. If in doubt, try consulting the Bible, Patristics, and your priest.

 

[rusmeister]

One thing Shmemann did for me was to put me on the knife's edge. I HAVE to take Communion; I don't see how I can refuse to (unless one has been canonically forbidden to); I don't see it as a choice of the individual at all. He forced me to realize that I am ALWAYS unworthy of it, I ALWAYS have to repent, and very frequently confess, and rceive with fear and trembling. I almost never stand with those on the left that aren't Communing, not because I "have been a good Christian", but because no choice is left but to repent, confess, and eat and drink as commanded. To be afraid to do it, and afraid NOT to do it.

Hopko's erudition on Church history rocks. He is so eminently listenable, I can recommend him both to recalcitrant inquirers and even to my students struggling to understand English.

 

[rusmeister]

Like I don't even know what y'all are arguing about. All us kids know that gay means silly. Fogies alla time gotta be nattering about something.

Well, if you admit you don't know, then you let those that claim to know deal with it. You can watch and try to understand, though I'd think even a fifth-grader could understand that a word that always meant something good and jolly suddenly used as a euphemism for an abomination is a word we ought not to be using. All it takes is to have the facts pointed out to you. Once you understand what euphemisms are, that they can be and are used for evil purposes, including this one, then defending their usage would make you an accomplice of the evil. Just like abortion (also an evil euphemism), or anything else. If we had insisted on "baby murder" prior to RvW, there would be no legal abortion today. But we caved on the euphemism, and here we are.

If you live long enough, you might become a fogie, too!

 

[HoleyHermit]

If you live long enough, you might become a fogie, too!

Just a little levity. I'm well into fogiedom. The shell only makes me look young.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

One thing Shmemann did for me was to put me on the knife's edge. I HAVE to take Communion; I don't see how I can refuse to (unless one has been canonically forbidden to); I don't see it as a choice of the individual at all. He forced me to realize that I am ALWAYS unworthy of it, I ALWAYS have to repent, and very frequently confess, and rceive with fear and trembling. I almost never stand with those on the left that aren't Communing, not because I "have been a good Christian", but because no choice is left but to repent, confess, and eat and drink as commanded. To be afraid to do it, and afraid NOT to do it.

Hopko's erudition on Church history rocks. He is so eminently listenable, I can recommend him both to recalcitrant inquirers and even to my students struggling to understand English.

Me too. My parish is ROC, with many coming from a tradition of communing just a few times a year. Father Schmemann in his Appendix of the book Great Lent speaks directly against infrequent communion. And it's a good thing, because I still feel a certain peer pressure not to commune as often, though our priest encourages it as well.

 

[tapi]

disregard

 

[ArmyMatt]

I will add, in addition to the Word of the Cross, Fr Tom's CDs on The Death of Christ and our Death in Him and his talk on Sin are both full of great stuff

 

[Cappadocious]

basically went through errors we saw in their teaching

I disagree with all of them on this and that but...

Someone mentioned Fr. Hopko taught some Nestorianism... what did they have in mind? Copts usually come at him for denying the Hercules parallel

 

[Cappadocious]

but none of this is what I learned in seminary, and Met Heirotheos is not a seminary teacher, at least not the teacher in any seminary here in the States, and every one of my professors encouraged us to seek the "why" (even playing devil's advocate when needed). and your discussion here with rus has nothing to do with seminary education.

I don't know what seminary you are talking about, but it's not the one I went to.

First, referring to a trend that spans 2nd rate private schools, seminaries in the states, etc. As for Met. Heirotheos he is represented by (the monk, was it?) Christopher Veniamin, is he not?

 

[Cappadocious]

He's saying the use of the word "gay" is legitimate, Matt.

Nah, I've got no personal attachment to it. That's your prerogative

his position is, because people say it, it is a good, right and true word.

Who would describe any word that way besides a neo-neo-platonist wannabe, talking about arete and the good the true and the beautiful off the cuff? Don't put that on me.

Then he implies that we are Scholastic anti-Palamites for thinking that reason is a good thing in its place.

uhhhhh

Capp, you keep talking about "a demonstration", I say "Fine", and give you a demonstration - both the known traditional meaning of the word, the historical failed attempts to use it as a sexual euphemism, its resurrection in the '60's SPECIFICALLY to do what it has done, achieve social tolerance of the behavior, and the continued existence of the word "gaeity" for good measure, which i s not as a matter of fact used to refer to sodomic desire.

You are missing a connecting premise. *why* does this have to do with legitimacy?

You have...no good response to the Flintstones...you...have the gall to imply that we are "modernist" for suggesting that we talk more like... our ancestors.

Dying! smh !!!

 

[ArmyMatt]

I disagree with all of them on this and that but...

Someone mentioned Fr. Hopko taught some Nestorianism... what did they have in mind? Copts usually come at him for denying the Hercules parallel

well, I don't care what the Copts accuse him of, but substitutionary atonement was one thing he taught, and as quoted in the Winter Pascha, that Mary was not a Virgin during her giving birth to the Lord.

 

[ArmyMatt]

First, referring to a trend that spans 2nd rate private schools, seminaries in the states, etc. As for Met. Heirotheos he is represented by (the monk, was it?) Christopher Veniamin, is he not?

no, Met Heirotheos is not represented by Dr Veniamin, who is not a monk. the only thing is Dr Veniamin has translated for him at times.

and I asked evidence for the modernism as you defined it. repeating there is an issue you see is not the same as showing evidence for the issue