St Seraphim of Sarov on fasting

[Ken McRae]

Please forgive me for asking, but ...

Is it true that St. Seraphim of Sarov teaches that they are not true Christians who do not keep the Church fasts, as prescribed, especially on Wednesdays and Fridays?

Second, (whether or not St. Seraphim ever taught that,) does such a view as that, (of fasting within the greater scheme of things,) not come perilously close to a 'legalism' of sorts, or a 'legalistic' approach to salvation, as opposed to therapeutic, organic, and gracious?

Third (question), are catechumens bound by Church teaching to keep the fasts as though they were already baptised members of the Church?

Four, does the Church allow her children to freely particpate in those liturgical rites outside the particular rite(s) into which they were baptised? For example, is it permitted for Eastern rite Orthodox is participate freely and equally in the Western rite, similtaneous with their active participation in their original rite?

Kind thanks for your thoughts.

Ken

[Andreas Moran]

Is it true that St. Seraphim of Sarov teaches that they are not true Christians who do not keep the Church fasts, as prescribed, especially on Wednesdays and Fridays?

I haven't seen that St Seraphim said this exactly - do you have a source? The saint did say, 'We provoke the Lord with the breaking of the holy fasts. Christians are now even breaking the fast from meat during Great Lent. And likewise they are not keeping the fast on Wednesdays and Fridays. The Church, however, has set a standard rule of practice: those who do not keep the holy fasts also on Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year sin greatly.' (From 'The Joy of the Holy' by Harry M Boosalis, p. 47.)


Second, (whether or not St. Seraphim ever taught that,) does such a view as that, (of fasting within the greater scheme of things,) not come perilously close to a 'legalism' of sorts, or a 'legalistic' approach to salvation, as opposed to therapeutic, organic, and gracious?

Fasting, with other forms of ascetic endeavour, is a means to an end. But how shall we attain the stated end if we do not employ the prescribed means? It's tempting in our times, when any form of authority is questioned, to regard rules as unwarranted impositions and compliance with them as legalistic; therefore, we should be flexible and avoid feeling guilt at non-compliance and pride at compliance. It is true that the Church is a hospital not a legislature, and she prescribes remedies for our sick souls, not laws, the breaking of which will attract punishment. But what shall we say of a person who ignores medical advice? The Church being not some organisation but the Body of Christ guided by the Holy Spirit, what is our relationship with God and His Church if we disregard her rules of practice? I think, put this way, we can see what St Seraphim means by 'provoking the Lord' if we reject the practices prescribed by the Church.


Third (question), are catechumens bound by Church teaching to keep the fasts as though they were already baptised members of the Church?

I don't know.


Four, does the Church allow her children to freely particpate in those liturgical rites outside the particular rite(s) into which they were baptised? For example, is it permitted for Eastern rite Orthodox is participate freely and equally in the Western rite, similtaneous with their active participation in their original rite?

As to the first part of this, I'm not sure what example there might be apart from the western rite mentioned in the second part. We have had a warm debate about western rite and it is apparent that there is a division of opinion among clergy and laity of the Church about it. On the advice I have had, I would never attend a western rite liturgy.

[Herman Blaydoe]

Please forgive me for asking, but ...

Second, (whether or not St. Seraphim ever taught that,) does such a view as that, (of fasting within the greater scheme of things,) not come perilously close to a 'legalism' of sorts, or a 'legalistic' approach to salvation, as opposed to therapeutic, organic, and gracious?

It can be "legalistic" if you let it. But how can you be an athlete if you don't exercise? It is part of the training.


Third (question), are catechumens bound by Church teaching to keep the fasts as though they were already baptised members of the Church?

That is an "ask the priest" sort of thing. Generally speaking, it depends on the individual and the situation. Like any exercise regime, not everyone starts out bench pressing 400 pounds and running ten miles a day. You start with what the coach (priest) decides is appropriate for you and work your way up. But trying to jump right into it right away can be spiritually and even physically harmful for some people in certain situations.


Four, does the Church allow her children to freely particpate in those liturgical rites outside the particular rite(s) into which they were baptised? For example, is it permitted for Eastern rite Orthodox is participate freely and equally in the Western rite, similtaneous with their active participation in their original rite?

If your churches are in communion, you are allowed to commune. ROCOR has western rite parishes, the Antiochians obviously do. I am not aware of any restrictions between parishes. I know that I have NOT been told that I am not allowed to visit them. Ask the bishop. We call it "obedience". If the bishop says it is OK, then it is OK. If he has reservations and says it is not a good idea for his parishioners, then find another bishop. HUMOR ALERT. The preceding sentence was written with tongue firmly embedded in cheek. You obey your bishop as he remains faithful to the apostolic witness.

Or so it seems to this bear of little brain.

Herman the Pooh

[Andreas Moran]

You obey your bishop as he remains faithful to the apostolic witness.

You mean 'so long as'?

[Ken McRae]

Thanks for some very helpful replies. They're appreciated. It's not that I wish to find fault with one of the greatest of all the contemporary saints. I merely wish to understand his teaching better than I do.


I haven't seen that St Seraphim said this exactly - do you have a source?
St Seraphim of Sarov on Fasting (http://www.abbamoses.com/fasting.html): 'Once there came to him a mother who was concerned about how she might arrange the best possible marriage for her young daughter. When she came to Saint Seraphim for advice, he said to her: "Before all else, ensure that he, whom you daughter chooses as her companion for life, keeps the fasts. If he does not, then he is not a Christian, whatever he may consider himself to be."'
— From a sermon of Metropolitan Philaret, quoted in The Ladder of Divine Ascent, pub. Holy Trinity Monastery, pg.xxxiii.


The saint did say, 'We provoke the Lord with the breaking of the holy fasts. Christians are now even breaking the fast from meat during Great Lent. And likewise they are not keeping the fast on Wednesdays and Fridays. The Church, however, has set a standard rule of practice: those who do not keep the holy fasts also on Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year sin greatly.' (From 'The Joy of the Holy' by Harry M Boosalis, p. 47.)

I wonder if we may not harmonize the two sayings? In this second saying, St. Seraphim seems to clearly regard it a great sin for one to habitually break the prescribed fasts. I think the key word seems to be "habitually." The question, then, seems to be whether habitual sins, or habitually great sins can be reconciled with a life of true repentance and humble obedience to our fathers and holy Mother Church? If there is no true universal repentance, then how can there be any true salvation for those who freely chose habitual disobedience instead? Knowing full well that what they are doing is very, very wrong?


Fasting, with other forms of ascetic endeavour, is a means to an end. But how shall we attain the stated end if we do not employ the prescribed means? It's tempting in our times, when any form of authority is questioned, to regard rules as unwarranted impositions and compliance with them as legalistic; therefore, we should be flexible and avoid feeling guilt at non-compliance and pride at compliance. It is true that the Church is a hospital not a legislature, and she prescribes remedies for our sick souls, not laws, the breaking of which will attract punishment. But what shall we say of a person who ignores medical advice? The Church being not some organisation but the Body of Christ guided by the Holy Spirit, what is our relationship with God and His Church if we disregard her rules of practice? I think, put this way, we can see what St Seraphim means by 'provoking the Lord' if we reject the practices prescribed by the Church.

Yes, I see your point, and think I quite agree with it.


As to the first part of this, I'm not sure what example there might be apart from the western rite mentioned in the second part. We have had a warm debate about western rite and it is apparent that there is a division of opinion among clergy and laity of the Church about it. On the advice I have had, I would never attend a western rite liturgy.

The fact that both the Antiochian and Russian churches have approved the Western Rite is good enough for me. For me, or within me there is no debate about its canonical status. My question was more about whether someone baptized into one rite is permitted to move freely between different rites, like the Eastern and Western.

Let's say I was going to both churches, every second week. How would that work when it came to keeping the fasts, for example? Seeing the rules are slightly different for each rite? Would this tend to hinder one's proper spiritual development in some significant manner?

[Father David Moser]

St Seraphim of Sarov on Fasting (http://www.abbamoses.com/fasting.html): 'Once there came to him a mother who was concerned about how she might arrange the best possible marriage for her young daughter. When she came to Saint Seraphim for advice, he said to her: "Before all else, ensure that he, whom you daughter chooses as her companion for life, keeps the fasts. If he does not, then he is not a Christian, whatever he may consider himself to be."'
— From a sermon of Metropolitan Philaret, quoted in The Ladder of Divine Ascent, pub. Holy Trinity Monastery, pg.xxxiii.

However, note that this was pastoral advice specifically applicable to time and place and situation. So, if you are looking for a good Orthodox husband for your daughter, then his keeping of the fasts is an indication of his piety and could be included in your criteria as you evaluate your daughter's potential matches.



The fact that both the Antiochian and Russian churches have approved the Western Rite is good enough for me.

The difference of "rites" in Orthodoxy is nothing like the different "rites" (eastern and western) in Roman Catholicism. In the R/C tradition, you have to have permission to attend a parish of a different "rite" - in Orthodoxy it is simply a different parish and so no such "permission" is needed. However you should have only one spiritual father (your parish priest) and so even if you visit a different parish, you should continue to abide by the spiritual disciplines of your home parish as prescribed by your spiritual father.

Fr David Moser