Comments for The Society of St. Seraphim of Sarov

Comment on Happiness by NeoChalcedonian

NeoChalcedonian — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:12:34 +0000

I need to learn more about this.

Comment on Condemnation comes from Lacking Self Knowledge by NeoChalcedonian

NeoChalcedonian — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 03:57:44 +0000

I was in greatly in need of this word. Thank you!

Comment on Christology Explained Simply by irishanglican

irishanglican — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:47:46 +0000

May God give us both a “penthos” in our Prayer of the Heart!

God Bless!

Comment on Christology Explained Simply by irishanglican

irishanglican — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:30:01 +0000

Thank you for your time and your statement of faith. As I have said, I value very much the Orthodox Faith! I have had my own feeble efforts…I was once a Roman Catholic Benedictine (for several years) after my time as a Royal Marine. I was younger then..lol I am 58 now. So I know a little about the interior life. I have gone through the education process also with both the D. Phil & Th.D. (I did get to sit under some big names along the way, be that as it may) Though I know knowledge can “puff up” as St. Paul said.
I am still just a pilgrim on my own journey, but I know I have others to care for and help along the way too. As I am now seeking to better understand you who are Orthodox (seeing by the way, some variation with others who call themselves Orthodox also…and not a homogony).
I am happy that you are there, and are who you are! We always need each other…the Body of Christ. And theosis is a constant desire for us all here! And yes indeed there is simply no Christian life without prayer! We are always in this need!
Finally, I did not write to teach you, or make argument, but to hopefully learn. I know my life is a composite of my experiences, but also much more by the grace of God,’the formation of Christ within.’ (Gal. 4: 19) This is as St. Paul calls it, something which is often a “travail in birth again”. But God is the potter and we are the clay. Oh that we would be more both active and passive in our way! Again, thank you for your time and help. Pray for me!

Fr. Robert

Comment on Christology Explained Simply by []

[] — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:19:36 +0000

Thank you.

But I must say that I’m not really looking for “balance”. Orthodoxy is the fullness of the truth, there’s no external criterion by which it can be judged, nor anything that can balance it, complete it, or be added to or subtracted from it. It is whole, perfect, and complete, flawless and once for all delivered to the Saints. Orthodox doctrine does not develop, and for us there can be no “filioque controversy” at all. I understand the Anglican and Protestant and Roman Catholic hermeneutic; it just has nothing to do with Holy Orthodoxy. There’s no succession without passing on intact and unaltered the Holy Creed of the Holy Apostles, along with and inseparable from the Apostolic understanding of it. Any succession that lacks these is a legal fiction.

But I’m not trying or wanting to get into an extended discussion of it. That would be really a discussion for another venue. This is a site for meditation on the writings of the Orthodox ascetics, in service to a society of people quietly saving themselves through prayer, reading the fathers, and bearing one another’s burdens. Orthodox theologians aren’t academics, but are in pursuit of the true theology - theosis - the deifying union with God, which can only be obtained through the lifelong journey and pursuit of true prayer. This is why the title of Theologian is given to but a few Saints who embody this for us, none of whom are doing academic theology.

If you should think of us, save us by your prayers.

Comment on Christology Explained Simply by irishanglican

irishanglican — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 17:48:23 +0000

Again, Gerald Bray’s article on the Filioque Controversy (The Dictionary of Historical Theology/Hart). Is very good and balanced, both historically and theologically. A must read really!

Comment on Christology Explained Simply by irishanglican

irishanglican — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 17:43:39 +0000

Thanks for this. As to the Filioque controversy, would that it was as simple as some would like to make it. I would admit perhaps that John 15: 26 “alone” would suggest an end of the discussion. But then there Gal. 4: 6, and there is Augustine, and his theology, etc. The issue can be maintained biblically and theologically I believe. I know the Creed is as authoritative as Scripture for the Orthodox, but for many in the West and some Anglicans, this must be seen from Scripture first, as well as Creed.

Comment on Christology Explained Simply by []

[] — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 15:15:23 +0000

I know of but don’t have handy access to Hart’s dictionary.

We’re not theologians, but we know a little about theology.

If you’re interested in this sort of thing, though, you may be interested in the work, “God, History, & Dialectic” which is available at http://www.filioque.com - it’s not cheap, but it’s 4 volumes.

Comment on Christology Explained Simply by irishanglican

irishanglican — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 22:01:16 +0000

Thank you for this quote: “He being one Son, dual in Nature, not dual in Person”…etc. This helps me to understand some perplexity on some aspects to Chalcedon. If you have acess to: The Dictionary of Historical Theology, Trevor A. Hart, General Ed.? See the article on Monophysitism, and make comment please?

Fr. Robert

Comment on Christ, fully God, fully Man by irishanglican

irishanglican — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 22:12:49 +0000

I would agree of course as being an Anglican rector (both Chalcendonian and Trinitarian) myself. I just wondered what the Orthodox make of this situation. Thanks. It is to be noted however, that Rome..RCC, has had some kind of moderate agreement with the these people.