Father Seraphim Rose

[SpyridonOCA]

Father Seraphim seems to be one of the most respected, while at the same time most controversial, Orthodox writers of the 20th century. Overall, has his impact upon Orthodoxy in the United States been positive or negative? Or did he really not have a lasting impact at all?

[Kristos]

Father Seraphim seems to be one of the most respected, while at the same time most controversial, Orthodox writers of the 20th century. Overall, has his impact upon Orthodoxy in the United States been positive or negative? Or did he really not have a lasting impact at all?
Time will tell. No need to rush to a conclusion.

[SpyridonOCA]

I'd recommend not reading his books except under the approval and guidance of a spiritual father.

[Tsarina]

I recommend reading his books because his life and teachings teach us true Orthodoxy instead of plastic Orthodoxy. His work is authentic and his life is a positive influence on those who read about him.

[SaintPhotios]

I have no problem calling him St. Seraphim Rose.... I would recommend his books to anyone. In today's increasingly unorthodox society, he espoused true Orthodoxy with no apologies. When I was Roman Catholic, I was a devout follower of Padre Pio... I was thrilled to see someone that not only professed Orthodoxy with an equal level of zeal, but far exceeded in piety, humility, and wisdom.

[authiodionitist]

I concur with Spyridon: He should only be read with your spiritual father. He is one of the Blessed, to be sure, but his writings need supervision.

[ClementofRome]

He was my first introduction to EO. His "Life and Teachings" is a massive volume and I see no harm in anyone reading the biography. When one steps into HIS writings,.....ah, one may need some guidance.

[jckstraw72]

Positive (i Want This To Be All In Caps, But It Wont Let Me For Some Reason)

[Tsarina]

I have no problem calling him St. Seraphim Rose.... I would recommend his books to anyone. In today's increasingly unorthodox society, he espoused true Orthodoxy with no apologies. When I was Roman Catholic, I was a devout follower of Padre Pio... I was thrilled to see someone that not only professed Orthodoxy with an equal level of zeal, but far exceeded in piety, humility, and wisdom.

:amen:

Many people wouldn't have a problem in calling him "Saint" Seraphim Rose, i know i consider him a Saint, along with many other people that i know. A lot of people have already written icons of him to prepare for his canonization, which will probably happen soon.

[JustinHesychast]

Yes, I refer to him as St. Seraphim Rose. He is absolutely amazing.

His writings can be really... interesting... though.

[Oblio]

Positive (i Want This To Be All In Caps, But It Wont Let Me For Some Reason)

You must have SUPERPOWERS !

[Michael the Iconographer]

I have no problem calling him St. Seraphim Rose.... I would recommend his books to anyone. In today's increasingly unorthodox society, he espoused true Orthodoxy with no apologies. When I was Roman Catholic, I was a devout follower of Padre Pio... I was thrilled to see someone that not only professed Orthodoxy with an equal level of zeal, but far exceeded in piety, humility, and wisdom.
Only the Church has the authority to elevate someone to the level of sainthood.

[Michael the Iconographer]

:amen:

Many people wouldn't have a problem in calling him "Saint" Seraphim Rose, i know i consider him a Saint, along with many other people that i know. A lot of people have already written icons of him to prepare for his canonization, which will probably happen soon.
It is ok to write an icon of someone deceased as long as you do not give him the title saint or the halo prior to the Church recognizing him as being a saint. To do so before the Church recognizes someone as a saint is an act of disobedience on the iconographers behalf.

[JustinHesychast]

So... if I was an iconographer and my heterodox grandma died, I could make an icon of her? O.o

[Michael the Iconographer]

So... if I was an iconographer and my heterodox grandma died, I could make an icon of her? O.o
No, icons may only be made of Orthodox individuals, and may only be given a halo and the title saint when the Church has approved the veneration of that person as a saint. If you were an iconographer and were to do an icon of a non-Orthodox person you would be again in disobedience to the Church.

[repentant]

Only the Church has the authority to elevate someone to the level of sainthood.

Sorry Michael you are wrong here, the Church does not elevate anyone to Sainthood, God does. Or shall as say He makes people to be Saints. The Church only recognizes it. And it is the people of the Church who begin the recongnizition. And there are many who never will be reconized as a Saint by the Church, who truly are.

But as far as the OP..Fr. Seraphim Rose is like most pure and traditional Orthodox teachers, and is criticized by the liberal Orthodox as most pure and traditional saints of the Church are. The same things said about him, will be said about Elder Ephraim as well, unfortunatly. (Actually they are now) It is a shame that people refuse to reconize holiness when they see it..

[rusmeister]

Actually Repentant, I believe you are both right.

The grass-roots recognition enables the Church to recognize the Saints. And there are many saints, I am sure, that have never been recognized and some saints in God's eyes may be heterodox as far as we are concerned. But it also makes sense that there be rules about iconography and that people not make icons of whover they want to, so I believe Michael is right about the rules.

[repentant]

Not talking about icons, just that the Church does not elevate anyone to anything concerning sainthood.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Sorry Michael you are wrong here, the Church does not elevate anyone to Sainthood, God does. Or shall as say He makes people to be Saints. The Church only recognizes it. And it is the people of the Church who begin the recongnizition. And there are many who never will be reconized as a Saint by the Church, who truly are.

But as far as the OP..Fr. Seraphim Rose is like most pure and traditional Orthodox teachers, and is criticized by the liberal Orthodox as most pure and traditional saints of the Church are. The same things said about him, will be said about Elder Ephraim as well, unfortunatly. (Actually they are now) It is a shame that people refuse to reconize holiness when they see it..
Ok, Mr. Technical. God elevates people to sainthood, you are right there. And the cult of a saints following starts among the people. HOWEVER, the Church is the one who officially recognizes it and for an iconographer to take the bold step to declare a person a saint without the Church officially recognizing the sanctity of a person a direct act of disobedience on behalf of the iconographer to the Church. Only the Church has the authority to say "you may now put a halo and the title saint on an icon of a given individual." There is no error in my saying that. Have I spelled it out technically precisely now? I did not realize I need to use Aquinian precision in my explanation.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Actually Repentant, I believe you are both right.

The grass-roots recognition enables the Church to recognize the Saints. And there are many saints, I am sure, that have never been recognized and some saints in God's eyes may be heterodox as far as we are concerned. But it also makes sense that there be rules about iconography and that people not make icons of whover they want to, so I believe Michael is right about the rules.
There are rules, Rus, and they MUST be obeyed and any iconographer who disobeys those rules by giving the title saint or a halo to someone the Church has not glorified is disobedient and needs to be dealt with by his/her bishop accordingly. There are actually rules which govern iconography and it is because of those rules that iconography has remained for a constant for over 1700 years. I say 1700 years because before the Edict of Milan arround the year 315 A.D. which legalized Christianity the iconography was very, very primitive out the circumstances of the time.

[repentant]

Michael, please look at what I quoted you on. The word "icon" is no where in the quote..I already said I was not reffering to icons, but was reffering to your statement that the Church elevates one to Sainthood.

And FYI, the Church is all about technicality..

[Michael the Iconographer]

Not talking about icons, just that the Church does not elevate anyone to anything concerning sainthood.
The Church may not elevate them but they certainly recognize them officially and canonically for purposes of public veneration and NO ONE has the authority to declare a person a saint worthy of public veneration (including the insertion of the title saint and a halo in their icons) until the Church has officially approved of it being done for that person.

[buzuxi02]

Lets not get bent out of shape over semantics. We all recognize that upon a saint's glorification (canonization) the Church simply acknowledges the fact, and from that point on an iconographer can place a halo on the icon.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Lets not get bent out of shape over semantics. We all recognize that upon a saint's glorification (canonization) the Church simply acknowledges the fact, and from that point on an iconographer can place a halo on the icon.
That is what I was saying, but someone wanted to get technical and semantical with me so I had to spell it outright. I guess I need to make sure from now on all of my words have the precision of a lawyer speaking in court.

[repentant]

Michael, I think you need to look at back at what I quoted you on, and what you were reffering to, then see what I was talking about. You are getting all bent out of shape over things I either never said or was never reffering to. I never said anything about public veneration nor icons of uncanonized people, and I never quoted you on these matters either. I only said the Church does not elevate anyone to Sainthood, only God does that. Period. So please step back and chill.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Not worth saying.

[repentant]

I have no problem calling him St. Seraphim Rose.... I would recommend his books to anyone. In today's increasingly unorthodox society, he espoused true Orthodoxy with no apologies. When I was Roman Catholic, I was a devout follower of Padre Pio... I was thrilled to see someone that not only professed Orthodoxy with an equal level of zeal, but far exceeded in piety, humility, and wisdom.

Only the Church has the authority to elevate someone to the level of sainthood.

Sorry Michael you are wrong here, the Church does not elevate anyone to Sainthood, God does. Or shall as say He makes people to be Saints. The Church only recognizes it. And it is the people of the Church who begin the recongnizition. And there are many who never will be reconized as a Saint by the Church, who truly are.

But as far as the OP..Fr. Seraphim Rose is like most pure and traditional Orthodox teachers, and is criticized by the liberal Orthodox as most pure and traditional saints of the Church are. The same things said about him, will be said about Elder Ephraim as well, unfortunatly. (Actually they are now) It is a shame that people refuse to reconize holiness when they see it..

Michael here is the exact order of what was said. Saint Photios said what he said, then you replied to him with what you said above, and then I replied in turn. Did SaintPhotios say anything about public veneration or the writing of icons? Nope. Did you say anything about public veneration or icons in your reply to him? Nope. Did I say anything about public veneration or icons in my reply to you? Nope.

So please tell me how icons or public veneration came up at all in our conversation...? Now you did mention icons in other posts, talking to other people, but I did not coment on those replies. I only responded to your response to SaintPhotios in which you said that the Church elevates people to Sainthood, in which I said that you are wrong, God makes Saints, the Church only acknowledges them as Saints.

Please do not mock me, and act like you need to clarify yourself to me. You obviously got two different conversations confused and did not take my advice to look back and see what was said by whom to whom.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Again, it is not worth saying.

[repentant]

Michael you are the ignorant one. NOT EVERYTHING IS ABOUT ICONS!! Please show me where either I or SaintPhotios mentioned icons. Please do. You didn't even mention icons in your response to him. Why? BECAUSE HE NEVER MENTIONED ICONS. So quit your sarcasm, and get off your high horse. I tried to be civil to you, but I am growing tired off your mockery. I was even kind enough to repost EXACTLY what each of us said.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Whatever.

[buzuxi02]

Come on guys, kiss and make up. Repentant in fact this thread better ties in with your question on ROCOR. As you can see most of the members of the canonical churches view him as a saint yet he was not in communion with the canonical churches. We must decipher between politics and genuine schism.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Michael here is the exact order of what was said. Saint Photios said what he said, then you replied to him with what you said above, and then I replied in turn. Did SaintPhotios say anything about public veneration or the writing of icons? Nope. Did you say anything about public veneration or icons in your reply to him? Nope. Did I say anything about public veneration or icons in my reply to you? Nope.

So please tell me how icons or public veneration came up at all in our conversation...? Now you did mention icons in other posts, talking to other people, but I did not coment on those replies. I only responded to your response to SaintPhotios in which you said that the Church elevates people to Sainthood, in which I said that you are wrong, God makes Saints, the Church only acknowledges them as Saints.

Please do not mock me, and act like you need to clarify yourself to me. You obviously got two different conversations confused and did not take my advice to look back and see what was said by whom to whom.
Icons and public veneration came up in the conversation because Justin asked me a question and being an educated person on this subject I answered him.

[repentant]

Icons and public veneration came up in the conversation because Justin asked me a question and being an educated person on this subject I answered him.

Justin is not SaintPhotios and that is who you replied to with your comment on the Church elevating people to Sainthood, in which I replied that God makes Saints, not the Church, the Church only recognizes God's work. Icons where not mentioned AT ALL by Photios. He mentioned that he thinks of Fr. Seraphim Rose as a Saint. And did I not mention that you were also talking about icons in other conversations, and said that you confused conservations? Like I said, not everything is about icons...

[repentant]

Come on guys, kiss and make up. Repentant in fact this thread better ties in with your question on ROCOR. As you can see most of the members of the canonical churches view him as a saint yet he was not in communion with the canonical churches. We must decipher between politics and genuine schism.

It is not about kissing and making up, it is about people trying to make everything about things they are not. People can't get off the high horse, and admit they were wrong. Michael took me saying he was wrong too hard, and tried to twist everything around lilke I was confused. I don't get confused to easy. I am rather highly intelligent and logical.

I also consider Fr. Seraphim Rose saintly, but I thought that Platina Monastery, where he was from, and the St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, was part of the Serbian Diocese, not ROCOR...?

[buzuxi02]

It is not about kissing and making up, it is about people trying to make everything about things they are not. People can't get off the high horse, and admit they were wrong. Michael took me saying he was wrong too hard, and tried to twist everything around lilke I was confused. I don't get confused to easy. I am rather highly intelligent and logical.

I also consider Fr. Seraphim Rose saintly, but I thought that Platina Monastery, where he was from, and the St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, was part of the Serbian Diocese, not ROCOR...?
Not sure, but while alive he was definately ROCOR at a time when ROCOR was in communion with several different greek old calendarist churches.

[repentant]

Orthodox wiki does say he was a Hieromonk in ROCOR. I kind of thought he was ROCOR, but I do know his former Monastery is Serbian.

[rusmeister]

I dunno, guys, but in Orthodoxy I thought we were supposed to practice humility aimed at ourselves rather than others. All of us may fail at times, but isn't that what we should be striving for? (kind of the opposite of telling people they are ignorant doofuses or whatever)

Let's avoid the sin of offending our brother!!!

[Theophorus]

Fr. Rose was a brilliant man but presented Orthodox teaching in a simple and straight forward manner. He had the "patristic" mind of the Church.

this work
http://www.sainthermanpress.com/images/Book%20Covers/1887904026-Gen.jpg

is his greatest contibution to understanding the faith. I highly recommend it. All of his writings reach back and embrace the patristic understanding and preserve it for our generation.

Also, he not only spoke words of wisdom, he walked the talk. He overcame a great carnal sin and lived a life of dispassion. That goes a long way in my book considering his integrity and dedication to the way.

God bless Fr. Rose.

[ClementofRome]

OK, so what would the process be of Fr. Seraphim Rose' canonization. I see that it is agreed that the Church would recognize it, but could say, the ROCOR announce it and all of the others follow? Would it take the EP to announce it and then all follow......OCA recognize it and the rest follow? SCOBA recognizes it and the rest follow......MP announce it and the rest follow?

A tad confused.

Forgive me
Clem

[Theophorus]

OK, so what would the process be of Fr. Seraphim Rose' canonization. I see that it is agreed that the Church would recognize it, but could say, the ROCOR announce it and all of the others follow? Would it take the EP to announce it and then all follow......OCA recognize it and the rest follow? SCOBA recognizes it and the rest follow......MP announce it and the rest follow?

A tad confused.

Forgive me
Clem

Me too, but I would imagine it would begin with his spiritual children, or indirectly, those who are his "secondary" children. Has he been exhumed?

[Dorothea]

I just read about Fr. Seraphim on wikipedia so I could know about him. I've heard of him, yes, but I didn't know about him, his life, etc. He sounded like an amazing man. I think he would be a good inspiration to people, and I'm sure he is.

[buzuxi02]

OK, so what would the process be of Fr. Seraphim Rose' canonization. I see that it is agreed that the Church would recognize it, but could say, the ROCOR announce it and all of the others follow? Would it take the EP to announce it and then all follow......OCA recognize it and the rest follow? SCOBA recognizes it and the rest follow......MP announce it and the rest follow?

A tad confused.

Forgive me
Clem
It would be the church that glorifies (canonizes) him and that church would be the one he belonged to. Most likely ROCOR or possibly now MP (along with ROCOR concelebrating ) at that point all of Orthodoxy would accept it.

[nikolayalexandroff]

It would be the church that glorifies (canonizes) him and that church would be the one he belonged to. Most likely ROCOR or possibly now MP (along with ROCOR concelebrating ) at that point all of Orthodoxy would accept it.
Usually, AFAIK, every local Church glorifies her saints and informs other local Churches about glorification. I could say, in addition, that Fr Seraphim is very popular in Russia, and his books are nearly in every church bookstore. I think his impact is rather positive, than negative upon the Orthodoxy as a whole..

[Vasileios]

There is absolutely no question as to his influence. It is undoubtedly positive.

As for the advice of not reading his books, I can only understand it for The Soul After Death, which has proved to be more controversial than it should (IMO). But as for the rest of his works, including the wonderful biography by Hieromonk Damascene I really see no reason why not to read them.

As for the canonization process, since unfortunately he was a figure that some circles did not accept or did not get along with well, I guess his sainthood will take a few more years to be proclaimed, until all those voices will be silenced (as I believe they will be).

No glorification should evoke controversy and our Church is known for her patience ;)

As far as I know very few saints are canonized shortly after their deaths, that is certainly the case in Greece, with the record holder being a saint who God glorified so much we could not delay the canonization: St. Nectarios! (I believe it took some 50 years!).

Rumor has it the reord will be broken yet again by two contemporary saints, the elders Porphyrios and Paisios, both of whose recommendation and folder of miracles and lives have been given to the Ecumenical Patriarchate by bishop Hierotheos Vlachos, and who received a promise by HAH Bartholomew that they will be canonized in his lifetime. (I cannot remember if the list includes the elder Sophrony of Essex).

As far as I know there is not one single Orthodox person who doubts the sanctity of any of those elders, so there is no objection, no fear of controversy and no complaints when icons with halos find their place among the laity (although that is not the rule, they do exist). Countless exist of course without halos...

[jckstraw72]

Fr. Seraphim has not been exhumed -- someone asked about that at the retreat and Fr. Damascene said he had not been and there weren't any plans to do so.

But he also said differnet parts of the Orthodox world are more informal or more formal regarding the recognition and veneration of saints. For instance, a church in Russia which just installed a new iconostasis has included Fr. Seraphim with the New Russian saints, and he is widely referred to as St. Seraphim in traditionally Orthodox lands. Fr. Damascene was saying how Justin Popovich has not been officially glorified, but many people think he has been because he is widely referred to as St. Justin Popovich and there are icons of him and so on.

can there be Akathists written before someone is canonized? Cause there is an Akathist for Fr. Seraphim on the web, which I think is excellent.

[Theophorus]

Rumor has it the reord will be broken yet again by two contemporary saints, the elders Porphyrios and Paisios, both of whose recommendation and folder of miracles and lives have been given to the Ecumenical Patriarchate by bishop Hierotheos Vlachos, and who received a promise by HAH Bartholomew that they will be canonized in his lifetime. (I cannot remember if the list includes the elder Sophrony of Essex).


ELDER PORPHYRIOS: TESTIMONIES AND EXPERIENCES

I read that book a year ago, just amazing!!!!

[repentant]

Fr. Seraphim has not been exhumed -- someone asked about that at the retreat and Fr. Damascene said he had not been and there weren't any plans to do so.

But he also said differnet parts of the Orthodox world are more informal or more formal regarding the recognition and veneration of saints. For instance, a church in Russia which just installed a new iconostasis has included Fr. Seraphim with the New Russian saints, and he is widely referred to as St. Seraphim in traditionally Orthodox lands. Fr. Damascene was saying how Justin Popovich has not been officially glorified, but many people think he has been because he is widely referred to as St. Justin Popovich and there are icons of him and so on.

can there be Akathists written before someone is canonized? Cause there is an Akathist for Fr. Seraphim on the web, which I think is excellent.

Hmm that is kind of odd they haven't exhumed him. Usually when they think someone is sainyly, the exhume the body after 20 years or so, especially in the case of monks in a monastery.

It should also be known that Elder Joesph the Hesychast (pic in my profile) is considered a Saint, and is reffered to as a Saint. I have also seen icons-with halos-of him. I truly doubt anyone in Greece or Mt. Athos would deny his sainthood. I believe his canonization is on the way..

[Protoevangel]

There is absolutely no question as to his influence. It is undoubtedly positive.
Agreed! :thumbsup:

As for the advice of not reading his books, I can only understand it for The Soul After Death, which has proved to be more controversial than it should (IMO). But as for the rest of his works, including the wonderful biography by Hieromonk Damascene I really see no reason why not to read them.
Agreed again.

Yesterday, I found a brand new copy of "Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future (http://www.amazon.com/Orthodoxy-Religion-Future-Seraphim-Rose/dp/188790400X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-3051896-2945667?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189386113&sr=8-1)" on sale for $5.00. I am reading it now. So far it's excellent!

Also, I would recommend "God's Revelation to the Human Heart (http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Revelation-Human-Heart-Seraphim/dp/0938635034/ref=cm_lmf_tit_6/002-3051896-2945667)" to everyone!

[Protoevangel]

I just read about Fr. Seraphim on wikipedia so I could know about him. I've heard of him, yes, but I didn't know about him, his life, etc. He sounded like an amazing man. I think he would be a good inspiration to people, and I'm sure he is.
You can read more about this holy man here (http://www.deathtotheworld.com/seraphimrose/index.html).
There are also articles by him, and pictures of him there.

[Matrona]

I enjoyed Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future, and I think Fr. Seraphim should certainly be investigated for sainthood. I even ask for his intercessions on occasion (with the added phrase "if you have found rest in the arms of God" since he is not yet declared a saint).

However, I think that if the Church canonizes him it should be for his personal holiness, and not be used to drive Orthodox into accepting his more controversial teachings. Even saints can make mistakes, and I believe Fr. Seraphim made a few.

[Tsarina]

It is ok to write an icon of someone deceased as long as you do not give him the title saint or the halo prior to the Church recognizing him as being a saint. To do so before the Church recognizes someone as a saint is an act of disobedience on the iconographers behalf.

Interesting.

I have icons of Fr. Seraphim Rose both with and halo and couple without the halo. I thought it would be okay to put the halo on him. Then again, what do i know? I'm not the iconographer, you are.

[repentant]

The "halo no halo" canon has yet to be produced on here since I asked 3 or so years ago. There is no such canon on halos or no halos that I can find anywhere. Even the great iconographer and SAINT of the Church, St. Savvas of Kalymnos, wrote an icon of St. Nektarios and it was placed in the Church for veneration. St. Savvas, himself being a holy man and knew St. Nektarios, knew that St. Nektarios was a Saint. St. Savvas has never been condemned for this, and he himself has even been canonized.

I believe the "rule" of not writing halo's on an icon is to protect people from writing icons of anyone they feel like, and it is not a rule that is or needs to be followed to a t. Kind of like any canon is..

To say that writing a halo on a man that is 99.9% a Saint of God is wrong, or against the Church is absolutly ludicrous. To say that would be saying that St. Savvas was wrong, the Holy Monks and Elders who have and wrote icons of Elder Joseph and other Holy men like Elder Paisius and Elder Arsenios is questioning the holiness of the people themselves, and the holy people who allow the writing of the icons in the first place. I am sorry, and I know one person will be offended..but I think the Holy men of Mt. Athos, and the Holy men around the world are more spirituality in tune (as St. Savvas was) to allow icons with halos to be written, than those who are out in the world and think they know everything and follow some rule that doesn't even exist in the extreme way it is preached..

[Sacrum Silentium]

I agree with you Repentant, at least as far as holy men such as Saint Savvas goes. As you said, men such as him were very spiritually in tune and in the grace of God, and were more than capable of discerning whether or not one was a Saint in the eyes of the Lord.

BUT --

I don't know whether it's right or not for someone to write a halo on an icon of a holy person[or otherwise] if it causes controversy. A halo is a recognition of Sainthood, and I can see why it would be wrong to personally[pridefully] recognize someone as a Saint when a multitude disagree. We aren't the holy men you mentioned. Our personal discernment is weak, if at all evident.

Me? I'm not concerned if Father Seraphim has a halo or not on his icons, I'm comfortable asking for his prayerful intercession. I believe it's a matter of time, God's time, before he is canonized.

Just my input.

[repentant]

Yes Isaac, what you say is good. As I said in my post, the rule on no halo's until the Church canonizes is to protect people from making icons of their Parish Priest or just any person. Like any canon, if there is even a canon regarding this, it can be bent as well. St. Savvas is just one example of this happening..so there is no strict rule on it.

[SpyridonOCA]

Augustine of Hippo is recognized by the Church as a saint, even though some of his writings are questionable or easily misinterpreted.
http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8153.asp

The same could someday be true for Father Seraphim Rose.

[jckstraw72]

Fr. Seraphim is quite different than St. Augustine I think. Some of St. Augustine's stuff was really just not Orthodox, whereas Fr. Seraphim's stuff is quite frankly too traditional for some people today.

[jckstraw72]

as far as i know its his teachings on toll-houses and i guess St. Augustine to some degree that are controversial, although if you read his books on this matter you'll see that he is not forming his opinion but drawing from the universal Tradition of the Church.

[authiodionitist]

as far as i know its his teachings on toll-houses and i guess St. Augustine to some degree that are controversial, although if you read his books on this matter you'll see that he is not forming his opinion but drawing from the universal Tradition of the Church.
Blessed Seraphim was like Blessed Augustine in drawing on the Tradition of the Church. Have you read much of the Blessed Bishop of Hippo?

[jckstraw72]

i have not read all that much of St. Augustine. i meant that Fr. Seraphim's writings concerning St. Augustine's place in the Orthodox Church is what is controversial, as some deny Augustine's saintliness and think he is nothing but a heretic. Fr. Seraphim defended St. Augustine, drawing on Church Tradition and history to demonstrate his point. And from what I know much of what Augustine wrote was straight Orthodoxy, but that there were some problems, but he also later began to correct some mistakes, and also wrote that if anything he teaches does not agree with the Church then we should defer to the Church rather than him.

[Photios]

Blessed Seraphim was like Blessed Augustine in drawing on the Tradition of the Church. Have you read much of the Blessed Bishop of Hippo?

A point:

It really is Saint Augustine. He has been in the Calendar for many centuries.

My own patron saint argued against both those who uplifted St Augustine's teachings to highly, and those who called him a heretic, saying that either one was a way of dishonouring a great saint.

[Orthosdoxa]

Here's a story as I've shared before, as told to the best of my recollection by Fr. Chad, dean at St. Herman's:

Alaska has a very large Orthodox population. Alaska also has an incredible problem with substance abuse, mostly among the native population. And unfortunately, these things overlap sometimes. In many small villages, there are no jobs, no opportunities, and literally sometimes not even any roads to get out of the village very easily! St. Herman brought Orthodoxy to Alaska, but as we all know, being baptized Orthodox as a baby and growing up to live for Christ are not always the same thing. These families have been Orthodox for generations, but often it means nothing more than having a visiting priest baptize their babies, and then continuing to spend their days drunk. (In these isolated areas, it's not unusual for 6 or 7 priests to be responsible to 100 or so small village parishes, that they just get to when they can.)

Okay, so now you know the background. These families/villages need help - having priests who can get there more than a couple of times a year, being catechized properly (!!!!), etc. And of course, help with the substance abuse.

That's where this on-fire Protestant comes in. He knows nothing about Orthodoxy, but God bless him, he desires to help these folks that are trapped in this vicious cycle of substance abuse and poverty. So he and his wife are there for a while, doing what they can, and NOTHING seems to get through to them. He just can't understand it. He knows they're mildly involved in this Orthodox stuff and decides to learn about it, to see if it will help him, help them. There's some pilgrimage that the folks in the village he lives in go on, and he decided to go see what this Orthodoxy stuff was all about. He ends up in the middle of the woods, and all he can smell is incense - not to sound like John Denver, but it fills up his senses. He is enthralled by that heavenly smell. The people are hundreds of feet away (it was some kind of service, I'm not sure what they were doing, but obviously a priest was in the village at that point) but the smell has wafted all the way down to the forest. He goes home, and he can't stop thinking about that smell.

That night, he has a dream. In the dream, an Orthodox priest appeared to him and said: (oh man, this is where it gets good!!)

"My name is Seraphim Rose. You are going to do much work for the Church."

When he woke up in the morning, he was confused. He had no idea who Seraphim Rose was. Other than standing in the woods and smelling their incense, he'd had no contact with Orthodoxy, ever.

He decided to go see the priest who was still in town and ask him if he'd ever heard of a Seraphim Rose. Of course, the priest said yes, and handed him a book (whether it was by him or about him, I didn't catch.)

Long story short, it's about two years later, and the man and his wife are catechumens in the Orthodox Church.

LK

PS -I first posted this nearly three years ago, so I'm presuming they are out of the catechumenate and in the Church.

[jckstraw72]

ive heard that before. Holy Fr. Seraphim pray to God for us!

[repentant]

A story similar to those of the canonized Saints. Not too far until he is I bet.

[SeraphimSarov]

That's awesome, Orthosdoxa.

[Teke]

Father Seraphim seems to be one of the most respected, while at the same time most controversial, Orthodox writers of the 20th century. Overall, has his impact upon Orthodoxy in the United States been positive or negative? Or did he really not have a lasting impact at all?
I believe Fr Rose has had a positive lasting impact on converts in the US. One need only read his letters to converts to see his clear and practical approach in addressing their questions.

Converts tend to understand those who speak their language better than others whose speak they are not accustomed to.

Another Fr. who is a saint, also speaks clearly for American's to understand the Orthodox faith. He is St Theophan the Recluse, a former Calvinist. Which is likely why he is understood very well by American converts to Orthodoxy, being as he was also a convert.

I appreciate their work very much, in helping us converts to better understand Orthodoxy. :idea:

[SpyridonOCA]

I'll be happy about the day when Genesis, Creation and Early Man is back in print.

[Protoevangel]

I'll be happy about the day when Genesis, Creation and Early Man is back in print.
You've seen the note at St. Herman website?
Genesis, Creation and Early Man, by Father Seraphim Rose, is currently out of stock. We are now working on a new, expanded edition. At this point we do not have a release date, but we hope that the new edition will be out by the end of the year. When it is available, it will immediately be posted on this website.
I can't wait either. The book was loaned to me, and I couldn't put it down.

[jckstraw72]

that book is one of the most important books of our time.

[Vasileios]

that book is one of the most important books of our time.

Agreed. It is vitally important IMHO for every Orthodox to truly make up his mind about this issue. It will indeed, as Fr. Seraphim predicted be an issue we cannot choose to interpret as we wish...

Wonderful, wonderful book. Will definitely buy the extended edition.

[Tsarina]

ive heard that before. Holy Fr. Seraphim pray to God for us!

:crosseo: