Father Schmemann on monasticism

[Troy Duker]

I am curious what my others on this forum make of Father Schmemann's writing on Monasticism. I found this on a blog called Bumi Dipijak.


"More and more often it seems to me that revising the monasticism that everybody so ecstatically talks about–or at least trying to revive it–can be done only by liquidating first of all the monastic institution itself, i.e. the whole vaudeville of klobuks, cowls, stylization, etc. If I were a staretz–an elder–I would tell a candidate for monasticism roughly the following:


–get a job, if possible the simplest one, without creativity (for example as a cashier in a bank);


–while working, pray and seek inner peace; do no get angry; do not think of yourself (rights, fairness, etc.). Accept everyone (coworkers, clients) as someone sent to you; pray for them;


–after paying for a modest apartment and groceries, give your money to the poor; to individuals rather than foundations;


–always go to the same church and there try to be a real helper, not by lecturing about spiritual life or icons, not by teaching but with a “dust rag” (cf. St Seraphim of Sarov). Keep at that kind of service and be–in church matters–totally obedient to the parish priest.


–do not thrust yourself and your service on anyone; do not be sad that your talents are not being used; be helpful; serve where needed and not where you think you are needed;


–read and learn as much as you can; do not read only monastic literature, but broadly (this point needs more precise definition);


–if friends and acquaintances invite you because they are close to you–go; but not too often, and within reason. Never stay more than one and a half or two hours. After that the friendliest atmosphere becomes harmful;


–dress like everybody else, but modestly, and without visible signs of a special spiritual life;


–be always simple, light, joyous. Do not teach. Avoid like the plague any “spiritual” conversations and any religious or churchly idle talk. If you act that way, everything will be to your benefit;


–do not seek a spiritual elder or guide. If he is needed, God will send him, and will send him when needed;


–having worked and served this way for ten years–no less–ask God whether you should continue to live this way, or whether change is needed. And wait for an answer: it will come; the signs will be “joy and peace in the Holy Spirit.”




Entry for Tuesday, January 20, 1981 in his Journals

[Andrew]

Fr. Alexander had his ups and downs... some of what he is saying here is beneficial for all Christians, but the other part of liquidating Orthodox monasticism is pure modernism. His views here are pretty much disproven by Elder Ephraim's efforts in the US, the revival of the Holy Mountain, and the current scandal in the OCA (which has a lot to do with a lack of monastic basis for ecclesial life).

[Father David Moser]

I am curious what my others on this forum make of Father Schmemann's writing on Monasticism.


"More and more often it seems to me that revising the monasticism that everybody so ecstatically talks about–or at least trying to revive it–can be done only by liquidating first of all the monastic institution itself, i.e. the whole vaudeville of klobuks, cowls, stylization, etc.

In this I think Fr Alexander is all wrong. He himself was not a monastic, nor did he associate with monastics. Fr Alexander was a scholar, quite intelligent and given to academic pursuits. He had no real model for monastic endeavor as both the Paris school from whence he came and the American Metropolia (now the OCA) at that time had at that time pretty much abandoned monastic institutions. In the Russian Church in the diaspora the monastic institutions pretty much only survived in ROCOR. As time went on, monastic life grew again in the OCA, but it still was much influenced by the period of its neglect. Fr Raphael, having been a monastic at St Tikhon's might be able to comment better than I on this point (and in fact I would welcome any correction in my perceptions from him)


If I were a staretz–an elder–I would tell a candidate for monasticism roughly the following:

And Fr Alexander was wise enough to know that he wasn't a staretz - however many of his students and followers did not share his wisdom and turned him into one in their minds.




–get a job, if possible the simplest one, without creativity (for example as a cashier in a bank);


–while working, pray and seek inner peace; do no get angry; do not think of yourself (rights, fairness, etc.). Accept everyone (coworkers, clients) as someone sent to you; pray for them;
...


This is excellent advice, not for a monastic but for anyone wishing to live a simple God pleasing life in the world. With a few adjustments, this is a good rule for those who remain as non-monastic unmarried adults in the world (not everyone, imo, is called to either monasticism or marriage). And that last line about re-evaluating every 10 years, I would suggest would be the means by which a person might discern a latent monastic or marital calling (I would make it every year rather than every 10 - but that's a minor adjustment).

Fr David Moser

[Troy Duker]

What really caught my attention about this writing is that I am attracted to monasticism and/or the celibate (secular) consecrated life, if there is a such thing. This seems to be a good Rule for a person seeking the latter of the two vocations previously mentioned.

[Nina]

give your money to the poor; to individuals rather than foundations;

I love this.

[Troy Duker]

Yeah I like that too Nina, especially in lieu of listening to a Podcast by Matthew Gallatin (Ancient Faith Radio) called Beggars and Saints.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

The most serious mistake from that time was the open disavowal of the ascetic life as essential to Orthodoxy. Quite likely this arose as a sign of what can happen if we go on for too long without this ascetic aspect to our lives. Motivated by fear of asceticism this then becomes disdain and even hatred. It is supported by argument and many eager listeners as to why death to oneself is a thing of the past.

Like running from ones conscience however it is a losing endeavor in the long run. The temptation for intelligence and compelling arguments is strong. Simplicity sees the truth however and continues to build her temple.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Andreas Moran]

In this I think Fr Alexander is all wrong. He himself was not a monastic, nor did he associate with monastics. Fr Alexander was a scholar, quite intelligent and given to academic pursuits. He had no real model for monastic endeavor as both the Paris school from whence he came and the American Metropolia (now the OCA) at that time had at that time pretty much abandoned monastic institutions.

And Fr Alexander was wise enough to know that he wasn't a staretz - however many of his students and followers did not share his wisdom and turned him into one in their minds.

I respectfully agree with Fr David's opinions.

[John W.]

You can see an icon of Fr. Alexander Schmemann on the wall of the "Church of Holy Wisdom" at New Skete: http://holytrinityorthodox.org/photos/new_skete.htm (Left hand column, go four down)

Along with Fr. Alexander, you have icons of Dorothy Day and Mother Teresa. If you think that's bad, look at those who are depicted on the other side...

[Father David Moser]

You can see an icon of Fr. Alexander Schmemann on the wall of the "Church of Holy Wisdom" at New Skete:

This is not the general opinion of Fr Alexander - even by his most ardent supporters. You have to pin this one on "New Skete" which seems to be anxious to "canonize" new saints at the drop of a hat.

Fr David Moser

[Nina]

Yeah I like that too Nina, especially in lieu of listening to a Podcast by Matthew Gallatin (Ancient Faith Radio) called Beggars and Saints.

Thank you for recommending it, Troy. It started playing and then it interrupts and goes to the live stream... I am trying though again to maybe save it but it has a strange behavior. Did you experience the same problem?

[Andreas Moran]

You can see an icon of Fr. Alexander Schmemann on the wall of the "Church of Holy Wisdom" at New Skete: http://holytrinityorthodox.org/photos/new_skete.htm (Left hand column, go four down)

Along with Fr. Alexander, you have icons of Dorothy Day and Mother Teresa. If you think that's bad, look at those who are depicted on the other side...

They could do an icon of Father Anatoly, from the film 'Ostrov'.

[Troy Duker]

Thank you for recommending it, Troy. It started playing and then it interrupts and goes to the live stream... I am trying though again to maybe save it but it has a strange behavior. Did you experience the same problem?

No Nina, I didn't experience that, weird???

[Father Serafim]

I am curious what my others on this forum make of Father Schmemann's writing on Monasticism. I found this on a blog called Bumi Dipijak.


"More and more often it seems to me that revising the monasticism that everybody so ecstatically talks about–or at least trying to revive it–can be done only by liquidating first of all the monastic institution itself, i.e. the whole vaudeville of klobuks, cowls, stylization, etc. If I were a staretz–an elder–I would tell a candidate for monasticism roughly the following:


–get a job, if possible the simplest one, without creativity (for example as a cashier in a bank);


–while working, pray and seek inner peace; do no get angry; do not think of yourself (rights, fairness, etc.). Accept everyone (coworkers, clients) as someone sent to you; pray for them;


–after paying for a modest apartment and groceries, give your money to the poor; to individuals rather than foundations;


–always go to the same church and there try to be a real helper, not by lecturing about spiritual life or icons, not by teaching but with a “dust rag” (cf. St Seraphim of Sarov). Keep at that kind of service and be–in church matters–totally obedient to the parish priest.


–do not thrust yourself and your service on anyone; do not be sad that your talents are not being used; be helpful; serve where needed and not where you think you are needed;


–read and learn as much as you can; do not read only monastic literature, but broadly (this point needs more precise definition);


–if friends and acquaintances invite you because they are close to you–go; but not too often, and within reason. Never stay more than one and a half or two hours. After that the friendliest atmosphere becomes harmful;


–dress like everybody else, but modestly, and without visible signs of a special spiritual life;


–be always simple, light, joyous. Do not teach. Avoid like the plague any “spiritual” conversations and any religious or churchly idle talk. If you act that way, everything will be to your benefit;


–do not seek a spiritual elder or guide. If he is needed, God will send him, and will send him when needed;


–having worked and served this way for ten years–no less–ask God whether you should continue to live this way, or whether change is needed. And wait for an answer: it will come; the signs will be “joy and peace in the Holy Spirit.”




Entry for Tuesday, January 20, 1981 in his Journals

Fr Alexander Schmemann (in his Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy) writes about what he calls the ‘rise’ of monasticism. He describes the failure of the Church to reconcile itself with the secular world with the result that some Christians literally renounced the world and went to the desert rather than live in a society dominated by secularism. This failure, he claims gave rise to monasticism, as we know it today. Fr Alexander points to the life of St Anthony as the standard of the monastic ideal. Later this was further developed by St Pachomius the Great, then St Basil etc..

Schmemann while admitting that monasticism is only one expression of the original concept of Christianity which ruled the life of the early Church, implies that it was based a negative reaction to the times. Hence the quote:
<"More and more often it seems to me that revising the monasticism that everybody so ecstatically talks about–or at least trying to revive it–can be done only by liquidating first of all the monastic institution itself, i.e. the whole vaudeville of klobuks, cowls, stylization, etc. If I were a staretz–an elder–I would tell a candidate for monasticism roughly the following:

–get a job, if possible the simplest one, without creativity (for example as a cashier in a bank).>

I think this negative reaction to the ascetic life is the fruit of Fr Alexander’s schooling in the modernistic Theology of Bulgakov and Berdaev.

Monasticism on the contrary is a natural longing or striving to live like the Saviour and His Most Holy Mother – the Ever Virgin Mary. In this sense, monasticism is born not from failure or rejection of the world but rather from success in a life that is in the world. “In the world, but not of it”. For Schmemann this is a dichotomy. But for traditional Orthodox Christians this is life itself. Our Lord, the Theotokos, St John the Theologian and St Paul and the majority of ascetics lived a monastic life in the world. Desert dwellers branched out from this, not from failure or compromise.

The interpretation of monasticism as a ‘protest’ of ascetics against the secularization of the Church is in my opinion, academic, ‘professorial prattle’ – to quote Archpriest Lev Lebedev.

[Andreas Moran]

I think this negative reaction to the ascetic life is the fruit of Fr Alexander’s schooling in the modernistic Theology of Bulgakov and Berdaev.

I've heard it said that monasticism is an alien concept for the Jewish mindset (with obvious exceptions) and that's why people like Schmemann had this negative reaction.

[Andrew]

I've heard it said that monasticism is an alien concept for the Jewish mindset (with obvious exceptions) and that's why people like Schmemann had this negative reaction.

Can you clarify this a bit more? Was Fr. Alexander Schmemann Jewish?

[Max Percy]

They could do an icon of Father Anatoly, from the film 'Ostrov'.

What, if anything is the significance of Fr. Alexander giving a blessing with his left hand?

With regard to Fr. Alexander on Monasticism, his quote read to me as nothing more than being wary of the reduction of monasticism to "costumes" and dressing up for status or deception. It seems to me that he was concerned about anything that suggested or reinforced an inauthentic proclamation of the Gospel

[Andreas Moran]

Can you clarify this a bit more? Was Fr. Alexander Schmemann Jewish?

I understood that he was. I think they told me this in Russia. Certainly his dismissive attitude to Russia is characteristic of many Russian Jews. 'For me', he wrote, 'Russia could disappear, die, and nothing would change in my fundamental vision of the world.' No Russian would write that! He was critical of what he thought was Solzhenitsyn's 'idolizing obsession' (as he put it) with Holy Russia.

[Troy Duker]

This is starting to sound like a weird conspiracy theory.

[Olga]

What, if anything is the significance of Fr. Alexander giving a blessing with his left hand?

This is a blunder on the part of the iconographer. A clerical blessing is always made with the right hand. The only exception to this that I know of is the blessing with both hands given by bishops and higher orders of clergy. A blessing is never given with the left hand alone.

[Matthew Namee]

I understood that he was. I think they told me this in Russia. Certainly his dismissive attitude to Russia is characteristic of many Russian Jews. 'For me', he wrote, 'Russia could disappear, die, and nothing would change in my fundamental vision of the world.' No Russian would write that! He was critical of what he thought was Solzhenitsyn's 'idolizing obsession' (as he put it) with Holy Russia.
Schmemann was not a Jew. That was an old rumor from the 1970s which was spread by people who disagreed with his positions on various matters. The same rumor went around about Fr. John Meyendorff. You can read about Schmemann's childhood and family in his wife's book, My Journey with Father Alexander. I once asked Fr. Thomas Hopko (Schmemann's son-in-law) about Schmemann's views on monasticism, and he said that Schmemann had no problem with it and that his longtime spiritual father, Fr. Cyprian Kern, was a monastic. He just didn't like an Orthodoxy that was fixated on externals rather than the "one thing needful," as he liked to say. As for his apparent disdain for Russia, his Orthodoxy was quite larger than any nationalistic sentiment. In fact, Russia did die and Orthodoxy survived. Schmemann never liked the idealization of a mythical "golden age" of Orthodoxy, be it 19th century Russia, 4th century Byzantium, or 1st century Palestine. The same principle is at work both here and in his feelings toward monasticism -- a lack of attachment to externals. Granted, he could be abrasive and even shocking sometimes, but remember too, his most critical writings are in his own personal journal, which he never intended for publication. These were the man's private feelings; it's not like he was preaching sermons in an effort to drive people away from monasteries.

[Rick H.]

I understood that he was. I think they told me this in Russia. Certainly his dismissive attitude to Russia is characteristic of many Russian Jews. 'For me', he wrote, 'Russia could disappear, die, and nothing would change in my fundamental vision of the world.' No Russian would write that! He was critical of what he thought was Solzhenitsyn's 'idolizing obsession' (as he put it) with Holy Russia.







This is starting to sound like a weird conspiracy theory.







Schmemann was not a Jew. That was an old rumor from the 1970s which was spread by people who disagreed with his positions on various matters. The same rumor went around about Fr. John Meyendorff . . .

. . . Schmemann had no problem with it and that his longtime spiritual father, Fr. Cyprian Kern, was a monastic. He just didn't like an Orthodoxy that was fixated on externals rather than the "one thing needful," as he liked to say.



Dear Mr. Namee,

Thanks for helping us to cut through the nonsense with great speed. Your post here is a landmark post for me in the true sense of the word. In this whole exchange for that matter there is much fodder for thought in terms of those who are fixated on the externals and the response of these to those who are not fixated in this way. And, yes, as I read of Schmemann's thoughts about Russsia that you have shared, it occurs to me to ask of all, How big is your Orthodoxy?

In Christ,
Rick

[Andreas Moran]

How big is your Orthodoxy?

In Christ,
Rick

Does that mean you don't want an American Orthodoxy after all, Rick? Wink.

[Where are the smilies? I can't see how to put one in.]


Schmemann was not a Jew. That was an old rumor from the 1970s which was spread by people who disagreed with his positions on various matters.

If so, that's as distasteful as it's bizarre.

As to Russia's role in the Great Scheme of Things, it will be interesting to see whether the prophecies of Elder Paisios and various Russian elders come true.

[Seda S.]

...The same principle is at work both here and in his feelings toward monasticism -- a lack of attachment to externals. Granted, he could be abrasive and even shocking sometimes, but remember too, his most critical writings are in his own personal journal, which he never intended for publication. These were the man's private feelings; it's not like he was preaching sermons in an effort to drive people away from monasteries.

This is true. But he had preserved his diaries and they were published after his death and now everybody can read them in the Internet. I was told about those diaries and was given the link to the website where they have all of it. I started to read, and even not belonging to Eastern Orthodoxy, could not continue reading. I saw it was harmful for my soul. I thought, why have his relatives published his diaries? Then I thought again, then why had he preserved them? Perhaps he had the desire to tell the people in some way what he really thought.

[Matthew Namee]

This is true. But he had preserved his diaries and they were published after his death and now everybody can read them in the Internet. I was told about those diaries and was given the link to the website where they have all of it. I started to read, and even not belonging to Eastern Orthodoxy, could not continue reading. I saw it was harmful for my soul. I thought, why have his relatives published his diaries? Then I thought again, then why had he preserved them? Perhaps he had the desire to tell the people in some way what he really thought.
I didn't know Schmemann's journals were on the Internet, and I certainly would not recommend them to everyone. As someone who already had a deep appreciation for Schmemann's published writings, I found his journals to be insightful and inspiring. But I can see how others might be scandalized. No doubt there are many people who keep journals or diaries, and just because they don't destroy them does not mean that they intend for all the world to read them. Anyway, I'm glad Schmemann's journals were published, but I think they are best read as an addendum to his published works, and in most cases they are not appropriate for inquirers or those not already very familiar with Orthodoxy.

Additionally, I found the private Schmemann to be very much the same as the public Schmemann. He wasn't two-faced, nor did he misrepresent himself to the public. That he struggled and became frustrated (and recorded it in his journals) seems perfectly natural to me.

[Seda S.]

He wasn't two-faced, nor did he misrepresent himself to the public. That he struggled and became frustrated (and recorded it in his journals) seems perfectly natural to me.

I'll tell you the truth (but only whispering into your ear with the hope no one will stone me here :)). I think he was a really honest man. And I aggree with many of his thoughts. But I didn't like the style of his writing in some places, or, I could say, his 'spirit'. That is why I stopped reading his diaries. I am not Eastern Orthodox and I want to keep the love in my heart towards your Church. I should confess, not always I am able to do that. I'm imperfect, that's why such writings harm me. But as for the EO believers who can read them, many of them surely will be greatly scandalized, while some will be benefited from them (like freeing oneself from some illusions). So I don't know if it was correct to put those diaries on the Internet.

[Rick H.]

Does that mean you don't want an American Orthodoxy after all, Rick? Wink.

[Where are the smilies? I can't see how to put one in.]




Andreas--Father Schmemann was one of the major influences on me in my personal journey to Eastern Orthodoxy. Father Schmemann speaks today through his writings of the Beauty of an American Orthodoxy, and he defines it more clearly than I ever will. In my book he is a champion of Eastern Orthodoxy and a Father in the true sense of the word.--Rick

[Nina]

But even if he was Jewish... and then what? They are people too, created by God. No? My great-grandmother hailed from that part of the world also, but she has been a great influence and greatly honored on my maternal family (and we are all from as far as we can trace back Christian Orthodox) since she was an exceptional person.

[Nina]

As to Russia's role in the Great Scheme of Things, it will be interesting to see whether the prophecies of Elder Paisios and various Russian elders come true.

It is not Russia, it is not England, it is not Greece, it is not Paraguay, it is not America, it is not New Zealand and so on. It is the Orthodox in a complete and perfect meaning of the word. It is the chosen people of God. Those who are the seed of Abraham.

[Nina]

Andreas--Father Schmemann was one of the major influences on me in my personal journey to Eastern Orthodoxy. Father Schmemann speaks today through his writings of the Beauty of an American Orthodoxy, and he defines it more clearly than I ever will. --Rick

But, Rick this is not consistent with the "how big is your Orthodoxy".

[Rick H.]

But, Rick this is not consistent with the "how big is your Orthodoxy".



I know this is not very clear Nina, but really it is dead on.

I'll pick back up with this soon in the AO II thread, God willing. Thanks for mentioning this.

In Christ,
Rick

[Nina]

As for his apparent disdain for Russia, his Orthodoxy was quite larger than any nationalistic sentiment.


Father Schmemann speaks today through his writings of the Beauty of an American Orthodoxy.


Ok, Rick, since you will explain it further thank you and I look forward to it. Just to let you know that the pieces above do not fit in my puzzle, given this:



Dear Mr. Namee,

Thanks for helping us to cut through the nonsense with great speed. Your post here is a landmark post for me in the true sense of the word. In this whole exchange for that matter there is much fodder for thought in terms of those who are fixated on the externals and the response of these to those who are not fixated in this way. And, yes, as I read of Schmemann's thoughts about Russsia that you have shared, it occurs to me to ask of all, How big is your Orthodoxy?

In Christ,
Rick

[Andreas Moran]

Andreas--Father Schmemann was one of the major influences on me in my personal journey to Eastern Orthodoxy. Father Schmemann speaks today through his writings of the Beauty of an American Orthodoxy, and he defines it more clearly than I ever will. In my book he is a champion of Eastern Orthodoxy and a Father in the true sense of the word.--Rick

As you wish, Rick, but as to Father Schmemann being a champion of Orthodoxy (why do you use the word 'Eastern' if you want your Orthodoxy to be so big?) and a Father, I am with those who would disagree. I wonder - is there a difference between American Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy in America? There's Orthodoxy in Britain but no British Orthodoxy. Might we rather think of 'Orthodoxy in the English-speaking world' - we here are a group of English-speaking Orthodox from around the world? Just a thought . . .

[Andreas Moran]

It is not Russia, it is not England, it is not Greece, it is not Paraguay, it is not America, it is not New Zealand and so on. It is the Orthodox in a complete and perfect meaning of the word. It is the chosen people of God. Those who are the seed of Abraham.

Where does that leave the prophecies?

[Nina]

Where does that leave the prophecies?

The prophecies deal with the chosen people in the case you refer to. When Saints have said things about 'grace' in Russia, or any other place in the world that is meant for the chosen people. Not everyone included in the borders of a country is chosen. As we know also from the Bible.

[Matthew Namee]

At the risk of misrepresenting Schmemann, I would say that he was fearful of the conflation of ethnic identity and Orthodoxy. The movie My Big Fat Greek Wedding is a humorous example of this. The groom-to-be is baptized (without proper catechesis) and then observes, "I'm Greek now." Obviously this is an absurd misunderstanding, but how many people call themselves Orthodox simply because of their ethnic background while ignoring the teachings of the Church? Language, geography, inherited physical characteristics -- these are very fluid things. Languages evolve, borders change and disappear, ethnicities blend and change. But Jesus Christ remains the same, and his body, the Church remains the same. Schmemann wanted people to focus less on that which changes and more on that which does not change. It's not an indictment of appreciation for heritage so much as it is a desire to properly orient one's priorities.

This probably isn't the place for it, but I agree that there is a difference between "Orthodoxy in America" and "American Orthodoxy." Orthodoxy in America is the simple presence of Orthodox Christianity in the New World (or the United States, depending on your definition). American Orthodoxy, it seems to me, is bound up with the Church allowing Americans who are Orthodox to be culturally American, as opposed to forcing them to adopt Greek, Russian, etc. customs and externals. I'm a fourth-generation Lebanese, and I feel no need to learn Arabic to be truly Orthodox. My wife has ancestors who arrived on the Mayflower, and I'll happily teach my son about it. There is no need for us to reject all that is Western culture in an effort to adopt forms which are cultural rather than essentially Orthodox. Rather (and this is what I think Schmemann was advocating) we should seek to allow Orthodoxy to transfigure whatever culture we are in. St. Paul used the Greek language and (pagan) monument to the Unknown God to spread Christianity. The Greek Fathers baptized the pagan philosophers, rejecting what was incompatible with the faith but accepting what was useful. Likewise we should do the same with whatever culture we happen to find ourselves in. Thus there is nothing about "Holy Russia" which needs to be recreated save for whatever holiness and truth might be found there.

[Olga]

Matthew, this post of yours is a gem. Well done!

[Herman Blaydoe]

Matthew, this post of yours is a gem. Well done!

I certainly agree and hope at least the last paragraph ends up over in the AO thread!!

[Andreas Moran]

Thus there is nothing about "Holy Russia" which needs to be recreated save for whatever holiness and truth might be found there.

I would be a mistake, I believe, to see in Russian Orthodoxy a conflation of faith and ethnicity, heritage, and custom. Russian Orthodoxy is not about 'customs and externals': it is about holiness, truth, and witness. It must be recalled that the traditions and customs of Russia before 1917 were irrecoverably destroyed during the Soviet period. Almost nothing remains. So, Russian Orthodoxy is not, so far as I can see, bound up with anything except holiness and truth, and witness. The persistence of holiness and witness to the truth within hell on earth, the Russian Golgotha, is what I understand by 'Holy Russia'. That holiness, witness and truth are unchanging. Orthodoxy in Russia survived because, though millions perished, the gates of hell could not prevail against it: could not prevail against the Russians' witness to holiness and truth, not against lost customs and externals. I don't see that we can give lessons to Russian Orthodox Christians on where to orient priorities.

[Nina]

I would be a mistake, I believe, to see in Russian Orthodoxy a conflation of faith and ethnicity, heritage, and custom. Russian Orthodoxy is not about 'customs and externals': it is about holiness, truth, and witness. It must be recalled that the traditions and customs of Russia before 1917 were irrecoverably destroyed during the Soviet period. Almost nothing remains. So, Russian Orthodoxy is not, so far as I can see, bound up with anything except holiness and truth, and witness. The persistence of holiness and witness to the truth within hell on earth, the Russian Golgotha, is what I understand by 'Holy Russia'. That holiness, witness and truth are unchanging. Orthodoxy in Russia survived because, though millions perished, the gates of hell could not prevail against it: could not prevail against the Russians' witness to holiness and truth, not against lost customs and externals. I don't see that we can give lessons to Russian Orthodox Christians on where to orient priorities.

Yes and I agree. Actually the Russian Orthodox should teach the rest of others, on how to practice Orthodoxy in the midst of persecution since the times of Antichrist are not past, but ahead.

And since we are Christians here we must remember that rivalry is also opposite of 'love thy neighbor':


A proud person cannot tolerate anyone that is superior to him — and in meeting him, either becomes envious or his rival. Rivalry and envy go hand in hand, and he who has one of these passions, has both of them. (Ephraim of Syria)

[Andreas Moran]

Actually the Russian Orthodox should teach the rest of others, on how to practice Orthodoxy in the midst of persecution since the times of Antichrist are not past, but ahead.

Exactly - which is the point of the prophecies.

[Nina]

Exactly - which is the point of the prophecies.

:D Yes and we are talking about the same thing all the time.

I just wanted to make a distinction between the Orthodox, and nominal Orthodox. Or on another level between an Anya who is pious and an Anya who is not. Although there is always hope even for Anya the non-pious, like there is for me.

Ciao for now, because later I might start a thread 'Universal Orthodoxy' since I am from this Universe; and my roots are illusive here, but real in Paradise (or so I like to think!).

[Max Percy]

This is a blunder on the part of the iconographer. A clerical blessing is always made with the right hand. The only exception to this that I know of is the blessing with both hands given by bishops and higher orders of clergy. A blessing is never given with the left hand alone.

Isn't this a fairly basic blunder, especially for an iconographer and for the monks there? I vaguely recall hearing that the iconographer/s were from Jordanville, but I am not positive about that

[Father David Moser]

Isn't this a fairly basic blunder, especially for an iconographer and for the monks there? I vaguely recall hearing that the iconographer/s were from Jordanville, but I am not positive about that

I doubt sincerely that anyone from Holy Trinity Monastery/Seminary in Jordanville would consider Fr Alexander a saint. Fr Alexander is considered by most of the Jordanville grads I know to be at best a renovationist and someone who was headed off in the wrong direction.

Fr David Moser

[Max Percy]

I doubt sincerely that anyone from Holy Trinity Monastery/Seminary in Jordanville would consider Fr Alexander a saint. Fr Alexander is considered by most of the Jordanville grads I know to be at best a renovationist and someone who was headed off in the wrong direction.

Fr David Moser

Probably, but the icons do not have a nimbus, so I do not know if sainthood is exactly what is implied. Perhaps respect/reverence by the Fathers at New Skete. Also, at the risk of being overly crass, work is work. Also, along the lines you mention about the Jordanville opinion Re: Fr. Schmemann, could the left hand blessing be a jab? I don't mean to go all Da Vinci code on you

[Father David Moser]

Probably, but the icons do not have a nimbus, so I do not know if sainthood is exactly what is implied. Perhaps respect/reverence by the Fathers at New Skete. Also, at the risk of being overly crass, work is work. Also, along the lines you mention about the Jordanville opinion Re: Fr. Schmemann, could the left hand blessing be a jab? I don't mean to go all Da Vinci code on you

Jordanville is not New Skete. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum. You have to recall that Jordanville is the primary monastic center of ROCOR and New Skete is the liberal fringe of the OCA.

As for Fr Alexander - during the time he was a professor at St Vladimir's (the OCA seminary) he exchanged a number of open letters/articles in a kind of written debate with Fr Michael Pomazansky of Holy Trinity Seminary (the ROCOR seminary). I doubt that anyone at Jordanville would even consider painting an iconographic portrait (with or without halo) of Fr Alexander Schemman. And no, no one at Jordanville would paint an "icon" as a "jab" at someone else. That is too close to "mocking" that which is holy.

Fr David Moser

[Matthew Namee]

I would be a mistake, I believe, to see in Russian Orthodoxy a conflation of faith and ethnicity, heritage, and custom.
I never said anything about Russian Orthodoxy or Russian Orthodox Christians in general. I was talking about the concept of "Holy Russia," i.e. the idealization of a certain period of Russian history. In fact, we are called to make whatever time period and geographical location we happen to be in "holy." In any case, the period considered to be "Holy Russia" had much which was quite unholy. I am quite content living in 21st century America with all its many shortcomings. I think this is something akin to Schmemann's attitude on the matter: that rather than look back longingly on a great past, we should work out our salvation here and now, wherever God has placed us.

[Andrew]

I think I have posted on Fr. Alexander before somewhere in another thread about him...
His theology is basically the product of the 60s. He wanted to free Orthodoxy from Western theological hangups - by relying on the methodology of French Catholic scholars and theologians who helped shape Vatican II. His Orthodoxy is basically a "Vatican II" Orthodoxy. Some of his works are vergy good and profitable, whereas others are very weak and contribute to the heresy of "Baptismal theology" and ecumenism. He was instrumental in forming the OCA, but at the same time it is very much possible that the OCA will cease to exist, another failed attempt at creating an American Orthodox Church before the time was right. But at the same time, it was largely due to his writings and preaching that the OCA encourages frequent communion for the laity.

To my understanding, he does not lie in line with the Patristic phromena... that does not mean his works are to be entirely discounted, though.

I think all of the same critiques apply to Metropolitan John Zizioulas, only I think the implications of some of the teachings of Met. John are more damaging and heretical than Fr. Alexander's.

[Olga]

I concur with Fr David's comments, and add that it would be an utter travesty of iconography to attempt to make a political point through the painting of an icon (with halo) or iconographic portrait (no halo).

For the same reason an iconographer should not sign his name on his work (even the practice of writing "by the hand of ..." is incorrect, though unfortunately all too frequent), icons are painted to reflect and illustrate the doctrines and truths of the Church, and must never be vehicles for political or social viewpoints, or the artist's self-expression. Enough damage already has been done to iconography by artists (including, I'm afraid, some who are Orthodox) whose works resemble icons in artistic style, but are little more than propaganda pieces.

The paintings in the New Skete church portraying non-Orthodox people are a case in point. A visitor to this church could easily assume that Mother Theresa, Dorothy Day, Pope Paul VI and Abp Michael Ramsey are held in good standing by the Orthodox Church, and that they may well be candidates for consideration for sainthood. It was a grave and incomprehensible mistake to allow such images to be painted on the walls of an Orthodox church. As for the Orthodox figures, time will tell if Fr Alexander Schmemann, Patriarch Athenagoras, or Fr Lev Gillett will be proclaimed as saints in the future. At least Mother Maria Skobtsova was recently glorified as Newmartyr Maria of Paris and Ravensbruck.

[Andreas Moran]

I never said anything about Russian Orthodoxy or Russian Orthodox Christians in general. I was talking about the concept of "Holy Russia," i.e. the idealization of a certain period of Russian history. In fact, we are called to make whatever time period and geographical location we happen to be in "holy." In any case, the period considered to be "Holy Russia" had much which was quite unholy.

My main point was that Russian Orthodoxy is not characterised by mere custom and externals and is not some pious, historical tableau. The forms of the Russian Church are Orthodox, not cultural. The concept 'Holy Russia' does not mean - or should not be taken to mean - any fixed period in Russia's history, and I don't know to what period you refer. At any given time in Russia there was the unholy with the holy, as there is now. In all places at all times, the tares grow with the wheat. The concept 'Holy Russia' is not an abstraction but a spiritual reality manifested by the faithful of Russia in their witness. As such, it refers to the mystical role Russia has in God's Providence for His world as the saints attest. It is not a dream of the past nor is it fiction. Nor is it chauvinism. 'Holy Russia' and Russians cannot be separated as you suggest they can. 'Russianness' and Orthodoxy are intertwined. It was western influences on the upper classes and intelligentsia in the decades before 1917 and the consequent falling away from true Orthodoxy which brought disaster to Russia. A land so soaked in the blood of so many martyrs must mean there are many seeds for the Church. Russian Orthodoxy is deeply eschtatological and Russian Christians look to the future. They know that after every Crucifixion comes Resurrection. How else could they have survived their Golgotha? And we should remember that this Golgotha happened not just in the 1920's and '30's but even in the 1960's and 70's: see, for example, the life of Father Zosima +2002. 'Holy Russia' is as much about the camps, Butovo and later persecution as it is about any time before 1917, arguably more so. It is also about its future. Russian Orthodoxy can exist outside Russia but not without it.

[Max Percy]

Jordanville is not New Skete. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum. You have to recall that Jordanville is the primary monastic center of ROCOR and New Skete is the liberal fringe of the OCA.

As for Fr Alexander - during the time he was a professor at St Vladimir's (the OCA seminary) he exchanged a number of open letters/articles in a kind of written debate with Fr Michael Pomazansky of Holy Trinity Seminary (the ROCOR seminary). I doubt that anyone at Jordanville would even consider painting an iconographic portrait (with or without halo) of Fr Alexander Schemman. And no, no one at Jordanville would paint an "icon" as a "jab" at someone else. That is too close to "mocking" that which is holy.

Fr David Moser

Yes, that makes sense

[Max Percy]

Jordanville is not New Skete. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum. You have to recall that Jordanville is the primary monastic center of ROCOR and New Skete is the liberal fringe of the OCA.

As for Fr Alexander - during the time he was a professor at St Vladimir's (the OCA seminary) he exchanged a number of open letters/articles in a kind of written debate with Fr Michael Pomazansky of Holy Trinity Seminary (the ROCOR seminary). I doubt that anyone at Jordanville would even consider painting an iconographic portrait (with or without halo) of Fr Alexander Schemman. And no, no one at Jordanville would paint an "icon" as a "jab" at someone else. That is too close to "mocking" that which is holy.

Fr David Moser

Yes, that makes sense, although I do not think that affiliation alone, anywhere necessarily guarantees anything

[Father David Moser]

Yes, that makes sense, although I do not think that affiliation alone, anywhere necessarily guarantees anything

Agreed, mere affiliation is of no consequence. My point was simply that the speculation that an iconographic protrait of Fr Alexander Schmemmann having its genesis in Jordanville is extremely unlikely due to the circumstances of "affiliation".

Fr David Moser

[Mary M.]

"More and more often it seems to me that revising the monasticism that everybody so ecstatically talks about–or at least trying to revive it–can be done only by liquidating first of all the monastic institution itself, i.e. the whole vaudeville of klobuks, cowls, stylization, etc. If I were a staretz–an elder–I would tell a candidate for monasticism roughly the following:



–get a job, if possible the simplest one, without creativity (for example as a cashier in a bank);



–while working, pray and seek inner peace; do no get angry; do not think of yourself (rights, fairness, etc.). Accept everyone (coworkers, clients) as someone sent to you; pray for them;



–after paying for a modest apartment and groceries, give your money to the poor; to individuals rather than foundations;



–always go to the same church and there try to be a real helper, not by lecturing about spiritual life or icons, not by teaching but with a “dust rag” (cf. St Seraphim of Sarov). Keep at that kind of service and be–in church matters–totally obedient to the parish priest.



–do not thrust yourself and your service on anyone; do not be sad that your talents are not being used; be helpful; serve where needed and not where you think you are needed;



–read and learn as much as you can; do not read only monastic literature, but broadly (this point needs more precise definition);



–if friends and acquaintances invite you because they are close to you–go; but not too often, and within reason. Never stay more than one and a half or two hours. After that the friendliest atmosphere becomes harmful;



–dress like everybody else, but modestly, and without visible signs of a special spiritual life;



–be always simple, light, joyous. Do not teach. Avoid like the plague any “spiritual” conversations and any religious or churchly idle talk. If you act that way, everything will be to your benefit;



–do not seek a spiritual elder or guide. If he is needed, God will send him, and will send him when needed;



–having worked and served this way for ten years–no less–ask God whether you should continue to live this way, or whether change is needed. And wait for an answer: it will come; the signs will be “joy and peace in the Holy Spirit.”



Entry for Tuesday, January 20, 1981 in his Journals





This is excellent advice, not for a monastic but for anyone wishing to live a simple God pleasing life in the world. With a few adjustments, this is a good rule for those who remain as non-monastic unmarried adults in the world (not everyone, imo, is called to either monasticism or marriage). And that last line about re-evaluating every 10 years, I would suggest would be the means by which a person might discern a latent monastic or marital calling (I would make it every year rather than every 10 - but that's a minor adjustment).

Fr David Moser

Fr. David, bless.
This is an old thread, but I was interested in what adjustments you would make to Fr. Schmemann's advice. I agree with you that not all are called to monasticism or marriage. Or at least, that many of us may have to wait many years before marrying.

Back in the early 80s it was easy to work a simple job and still live in a decent neighborhood,but now, that's virtually impossible. It wouldn't advisable for women to live in dangerous areas, nor should simple living mean co -habitating with vermin and insects.

Any ideas?

In Christ,
Miss Mary

[Christophoros]

Interesting comments regarding Fr. Alexander Schmemann by Archpriest Andrew Phillips:

Comparing Notes: The Diaries of Fr Alexander Schmemann and Russian Church Unity in the Diaspora

http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/compnotes.htm

[John Konstantin]

Thanks for the link Christophoros. I love reading anything Fr Andrew has to say.

[Darlene Griffith]

What an excellent, well-balanced article. Attending an OCA parish, I can see some of the negative influences from the secularist, anti-Orthodox piety of which this author speaks. Still, he is very merciful in many respects to Schmemman compared to other articles I have read criticizing the man.