Response to "Soloviev and the Papacy"

Serge

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
3,198
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Age
54
Website
sergesblog.blogspot.com
Thanks for the link. Impressive article.

IIRC Berdyaev has his probs too - didn't the Russian Orthodox Church in Paris condemn or at least investigate his Soloviev-influenced views about 'sophia' in the 1920s?

My say about Ryland's take on Soloviev is on my blog, dated this past Sunday (23rd November).

The link to the blog is my signature below.
 

carpo-rusyn

Elder
Joined
May 8, 2003
Messages
383
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Philadelphia, Pa.
Apologies for the hatchet job. Please do remember that Fr Ryland doesn't represent the official position of the RCC. He should stick to drawing in the Prots. Like any convert he has a convert's zeal for RCC which in many cases tends to get off course.

Carpo-Rusyn
 

Linus7

Archon
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
0
Points
0
It is interesting that Fr. Ryland is a former Episcopalian. So is Harry W. Crocker, III. Crocker's book, Triumph:The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church, also features a hatchet job on Eastern Christendom.

I am not anti-Roman Catholic by any stretch. I think we agree about 99.99% of the time, and sometimes that .01% of disagreement is exaggerated.

Ecclesiology is a subject of which I find it very difficult to get hold.

The Church is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

It is the first of the marks of the true Church that I find perplexing.

I liked this quote from Berdyaev:

“Strictly speaking, it is not possible to speak about the re-unification of the two human worlds, the world of the Eastern-Christian and the world of the Western-Catholic. The Church - is one, and is the fullness thereof. The divisions and the non-fullness are but of people, only human history. And the division separating Orthodox and Catholic mankind is a human sin, a limitedness that is human. But the redeeming of the human sin and the overcoming of human limitedness is not to be gained by formal unias, by negotiations and agreements, by mutual concessions or reciprocal pretensions, but only by a transformation of the mutual attitudes of the two Christian worlds within the very deeps of the religious experience.”

 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,623
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
60
Location
Maryland
Linus7 said:
Ecclesiology is a subject of which I find it very difficult to get hold.

The Church is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

It is the first of the marks of the true Church that I find perplexing.
Well, it is the nature of sinful humanity, that human organizations are going to make sweeping exclusivist claims, regardless of whether these claims are true or not. And they will declare themselves holy, whether they are or not. Call it hubris.
 

Linus7

Archon
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Keble said:
Linus7 said:
Ecclesiology is a subject of which I find it very difficult to get hold.

The Church is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

It is the first of the marks of the true Church that I find perplexing.
Well, it is the nature of sinful humanity, that human organizations are going to make sweeping exclusivist claims, regardless of whether these claims are true or not. And they will declare themselves holy, whether they are or not. Call it hubris.
It is the lack of unity among churches of apparently apostolic foundation that I find difficult to understand, although I realize the divisions come down to sin, particularly, as you said, hubris.
 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,623
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
60
Location
Maryland
Serge said:
My say about Ryland's take on Soloviev is on my blog, dated this past Sunday (23rd November).

The link to the blog is my signature below.
I'm not quite sure exactly what I'm supposed to be looking for; the main thing I found was a link to an SSPX article in which I see major problems.

Two problems, to be precise.

FIrst of all, there's the classic "-ism" problem. Names and taxonomy are not the same thing. Anyone who does any vaguely serious botany (even gardening) come across this immediately: things with the same name aren't necessarily related. Christianity itself suffers from this. And "feminism" suffers from it worse than almost anything. Ordinarily from the perspective of taxonomy, one would go for the intersection of all the different sets of characteristics. So what is the intersection between Mary Daly and Feminists For Life? Or for that matter, between FFL and Planned Parenthood?? If one takes everyone's word as a self-identified feminist, then one must conclude that feminism is such a vague concept as to almost defy any definition at all (besides having something to do with the word "female"). The same problem bests the author of the article in some of his other attacks. "Inclusive language" has at least two distinct meanings, depending upon whom you ask.

The other problem is the "fruitcake" problem. Now, Mary Daly is a fruitcake. This is a woman who has quotes from animals in Gyn/Ecology-- literal quotes, in quotation marks. (See Footnote 47 to Chapter 10 if you don't believe me.) The Wickedary is, in its way, crazier. But every institution has its loons, and Orthodoxy is certainly no exception. And SSPX is definitely no exception. So if we start defining every group and -ism in terms of its loopiest members, we're all in trouble.

(As an aside, it's clear that Dr. Mago doesn't understand Peter Kreeft at all. Or chooses not to.)

That said, one has to wonder at anyone behind a "Sophianism" should be taken as the mouthpiece of any church. ::)
 

gbmtmas

Jr. Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Points
0
moronikos said:
Response by an Orthodox layman about more recent hackery by Fr. Ray Ryland--Catholic Answers anti-Orthodox hatchet man.
Good article. I have found from my own experience that Soloviev has, at times, been regarded as an important "representative" or theologian of Orthodoxy by a few Roman Catholics (who are familiar with his works). However, I have found that he has less impact in Orthodox circles (at least the ones I have seen), and has even been regarded in a negative light for his views about the Papacy and his sophiology.

PS: The referenced (http://www.zenit.org/english/) Zenit article (within the link that Moronikos provided us) states:

During and after his academic career, Soloviev published many works of logic, metaphysics, philosophy, theology and theosophy, an integration of theology and philosophy.
and:

His mind ranged far and wide among Western and even Eastern philosophies -- not to be eclectic, but to extract from many different systems of thought the truth they contained.
"Theosophy"??? Every time I see that word, I think of Madame Blavatsky (of New Age notoriety). :-X

gbmtmas
 

Serge

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
3,198
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Age
54
Website
sergesblog.blogspot.com
Keble, my friend:

Yes, that's what I was referring to. Good point: not everything that calls itself 'feminist' is necessarily evil.

Learnt a lot about Mary Daly from that article. What's fascinating is that because she is an ex-Thomist, on one level she knows better and as the article explains, she knows that what she says is, using the framework of the orthodox, indefensible. (Another way of putting it is she knows she's acting like a fruitcake.)

Re: Sophianism, I'd have no prob with Sophia-worship if we're talking about a white-hot Eastern European called Sophia - 'with my body I thee worship' as the Prayer Book marriage service says.
 
Top