What Is Up With Sr. Vassa?

[tapi]

No she doesn't . She is a mouthpiece of the EP which was supposed to stop after severing ties with them. She is defiantly against her bishop.

I believe you are not entirely correct on that, considering that for example, her recent article on the history of distribution of Holy Communion and the spoon was prepared at the very request of Met. Mark.

 

[Dorothea]

I've heard of Archbishop Lazar, but who's Jay Dyer?



Same here.

For some reason I always got a weird Protestant-youth-minister-esque vibe from Sr Vassa and never listened to her podcasts. Something about a monastic that isn't the abbot or abbess, or a priest, broadcasting online just seems a little odd to me.

I tried listening to a couple of her podcasts years ago when she became known. TBH, I found her boring and uninspiring.

 

[rusmeister]

Yes, she did give bad advice to that mother, and was roundly criticised for that, including by me.

You should not be surprised that I left that out, because we were talking about her recent Facebook posting, that doesn't even mention homosexuality. If I were criticised in every post for things I said in other posts, I wouldn't want to post much.

We need to avoid the "slippery slope fallacy" whereby we avoid talking about relevant topic A, because we are afraid that it may lead to irrelevant or harmful topic B. Just because we don't want to discuss (and shouldn't) whether Jesus was begotten, not made, doesn't mean that we cannot discuss communion spoons (whose form have changed radically from the Early Church).

We do need to speak about spoons and autocephaly and the Church calendar because Orthodoxy looks a bit chaotic in the way that it is responding to a changing world. Leaving everything to oikonomia in practice means that we invite innovation, just what you seem to oppose.

And we need to speak about divorce, precisely because as you say it is a "huge issue". There is a heterogeneity of praxis in the Orthodox Church that is remarkable and maybe that needs to be corrected, but we can't do that if we cannot talk about it without being labelled a "modernist".

Slippery slopes are a reality, and while something can be characterized as a slippery slope fallaciously, it by no means follows that therefore there are no slippery slopes. Capitulation on human sexuality is indeed a very real slippery slope, and the "fallacy" claim (the fact that some claims can be fallacious) has been used again and again to pooh-pooh that truth.
I see no problem with talking about spoons, autocephaly, and the calendar, and even divorce. Talking about it does not make one a modernist. Adopting the principle that the Church needs to change its doctrines in order to adapt to changing times, that is, to the world, rather than holding to the doctrines and adapting ourselves to the Church is what makes one a modernist, and she is pretty squarely on the side of adapting the Church to the world, so she is definitely a modernist, as I already indicated how that is so.
We SHOULD be careful with labels. But if a person in the Church teaches, for example, that Jesus Christ is a created Being rather than begotten of the Father before all ages, we have no choice but to label that person a heretic. When the label is appropriate and true, then it is right to apply it, as long as it is done with care.

 

[ZaidaBoBaida]

That, and all the positive comments her picture is receiving. There is a story of a monk who was complimented on his beautiful hair. He responded by dunking his scalp in scalding hot water so his hair would fall out. He felt that he was vulnerable to vainglory, so got rid of the potential cause.

Plus, here hair seems kind of stylish to me - and no grey hair when she's almost 50??? Not impossible but improbable. I mean if she doesn't want to be a nun anymore that is fine with me, and none of my business. But, I kind of wish she'd say.

 

[InnerPhyre]

It’s totally fair to criticize her political and religious positions that you may disagree with but criticizing her for posting a picture of her hair and speculating about her spiritual choices and questioning her religious vocation is not. I have met her a couple of times and she is a kind person and an astute religious scholar. I left edified both times I met her.

 

[InnerPhyre]

I must also mention that I have seen several monks in “civilian” clothes when it was necessary and appropriate and it never made me question their sanctity. I have also heard bishops tell dirty jokes and use curse words and again, never questioned their vocation or position.

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

I must also mention that I have seen several monks in “civilian” clothes when it was necessary and appropriate and it never made me question their sanctity. I have also heard bishops tell dirty jokes and use curse words and again, never questioned their vocation or position.

Interesting.

What jurisdiction ?

.

 

[InnerPhyre]

I’m not here to spread gossip. Im not going to name names and jurisdictions. I’m just defending a woman who I have met and found holy, intelligent, and honest.

 

[rusmeister]

I think IP is right in that judging anyone based on a photo we may very well not know the whole context to is very risky business. (I'm reminded of the anecdote of the saint caught buying cigarettes)

That said, I do understand why people should react with suspicion when a monastic becomes high-profile in general, and especially if she is generally seen, not in a sisterhood at a convent or whatever, but as an independent operator who's not hiding in a desert cave. It goes against what we generally understand monasticism to be. But I would say that worrying about her hair to be the least of the issues. It may be a symptom of something more serious, but just be careful about judging on the basis of stuff like that alone. It's not wise.
But judging her words IS wise, if we are coming from our Tradition, seeking truth, ourselves accepting correction from the consensus of that Tradition. WE should always start from a place of, "Is this what the fathers taught? Is the the sum of Scriptural teaching? (ie. not cherry-picking, but finding confirmation and clarification from the fathers and saints?) and even change our own minds if it turns out that something WE think isn't.
Obviously, she says some very true and wise things from that Tradition. I don't think anyone here denies that SOME of what she says is on-target and necessary. The entire issue is her words and teachings that are not.

 

[InnerPhyre]

I think IP is right in that judging anyone based on a photo we may very well not know the whole context to is very risky business. (I'm reminded of the anecdote of the saint caught buying cigarettes)

That said, I do understand why people should react with suspicion when a monastic becomes high-profile in general, and especially if she is generally seen, not in a sisterhood at a convent or whatever, but as an independent operator who's not hiding in a desert cave. It goes against what we generally understand monasticism to be. But I would say that worrying about her hair to be the least of the issues. It may be a symptom of something more serious, but just be careful about judging on the basis of stuff like that alone. It's not wise.
But judging her words IS wise, if we are coming from our Tradition, seeking truth, ourselves accepting correction from the consensus of that Tradition. WE should always start from a place of, "Is this what the fathers taught? Is the the sum of Scriptural teaching? (ie. not cherry-picking, but finding confirmation and clarification from the fathers and saints?) and even change our own minds if it turns out that something WE think isn't.
Obviously, she says some very true and wise things from that Tradition. I don't think anyone here denies that SOME of what she says is on-target and necessary. The entire issue is her words and teachings that are not.

I do not disagree with any of this. Discern ideas and thoughts. I don’t agree with everything she says. We should do this with everything we hear, nomatter who it comes from. Even St. John Chrysostom seemed to suggest that the Theotokos was a sinner. I just hate people judging her based on a photo.

 

[InnerPhyre]

To correct, I hate the fact that people judge her based on a photo. I didn’t mean to sound as though I hate people who did so. I love you all

 

[E.C.]

Jay Dyer's a recent convert who's very into conspiracy theories and telling popular Orthodox figures they're wrong and evil.

Wow....

I tried listening to a couple of her podcasts years ago when she became known. TBH, I found her boring and uninspiring.

I heard one and had the same reaction.

I know a priest who was a professor at St Tikhon's Seminary several years ago. He once told me that he avoids reading new books from contemporary Elders until they've been out for a while. The reason being that among the seminarians "the latest book" becomes a fad. So, seminarians will read the book just to say they've read it and yet completely miss the point of what that Elder was trying to say (99% of the time it boils down to some fashion of "love one another"). Call me a cynic, but I tend to have similar views whenever the Orthodox World is talking about "the latest podcast".

 

[Not David]

Wow....


I heard one and had the same reaction.

I know a priest who was a professor at St Tikhon's Seminary several years ago. He once told me that he avoids reading new books from contemporary Elders until they've been out for a while. The reason being that among the seminarians "the latest book" becomes a fad. So, seminarians will read the book just to say they've read it and yet completely miss the point of what that Elder was trying to say (99% of the time it boils down to some fashion of "love one another"). Call me a cynic, but I tend to have similar views whenever the Orthodox World is talking about "the latest podcast".

Jay Dyer is great! Though I have not got into his theories about Hollywood