www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings Which English Translation of the Bible Should I Use? by Metropoli

I would not go so far as to refer to Archpriest Sergey Bulgakov as an orthodox theologian. Some of his writings veered off into Sophiismm and other unOrthodox mindsets. Please be careful in the works of anyone arising out of the St Sergius Institute in Paris.

Alexandr

Alexandr,

Is the St. Sergius Institute affiliated somehow with St. Vlad's here in the States? I believe they have shared faculty at some point, but I was not sure if there was ever a formal connection.

God bless,

Gordo

There was a time when exegesis was understood through faith. The historical-critical method can be helpful to understanding biblical texts, but the methods cannot stand alone. I would be cautious at reading modern biblical scholars. The questions they ask and the assumptions they make are too often out of step with the poetic heart of scripture and with the wisdom of tradition. They come at the text from the outside of faith, and this has to be understood when reading them.

I find more joy in reading a commentary series which collects quotes from the Church Fathers. But I seek joy (true joy) and not intellectual mastery when reading scripture. The other day I was reading from St. John Chrysostom and his first Homily on the Statues http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/190101.htm . I came across a succient observation that remains relevant today:


It is good to understand differences between knowledge, understanding, and wisdom.

Terry

Well said, Terry.

Alexandr & Gordo,

I do not know enough about the current states of affairs with the Paris institute, but I do believe that Fr. Bulgakov himself was a saintly man. Fr. Hopko in his introduction to Bulgakov's book on the Orthodox Church says whatever else he is, he is no heretic. Even if some one does color outside the lines, that does not mean that they aren't brilliant and have something prophetic to say.

Was he creative? Yes.
Was he esoteric? Yes.
Was he idiosyncratic? Yes.

But he was also a neo-Patristic who was committed to the revival of the Church Fathers in the life of the Church. We do not have to agree with all his ideas. I actually find his books a wonderful read.

Creative theologians such as Fr. Bulgakov spur us on. He is proof that Orthodox theology has not stood stagnant for the last 1000 years.

Personally, I love the Russian Sophiologists- Bulgakov, Berdyaev, and Soloviev.

Oh yeah, and Fr. Bulgakov had a deep devotion to our Blessed Mother.

I am not condoning a blank rebuttal of all of Fr Bulgakov's works. Some were quite good. Others "rubbed shoulders", so to speak, with heresy. Others were openly heretical. Bulgakov was an indefatigable elaborator and promulgator of "Sophianism," who doubted the eternality of hell and therefore wrotesympathetically on the heresy of apocatastasis (that is, everyone will be saved), a heresy condemned by the Fifth Ecumenical Council in 553 A.D. Archbishop Seraphim calls Archpriest Bulgakov's teachings on Sophia "truly heretical..., with a Gnostic and pagan world view," leading to "dogmatic chaos" (ibid., p. 513). He calls Fr Bulgakov's transmission of Sophianism "not only an abnormal development of theological thought, but also the most serious sin. According to the Fathers, the gravest sin is the sin against the Orthodox Faith, because it is not rooted in excusable weaknesses of human nature, but is a sin of our spiritual nature depriving us of the grace of the Holy Spirit" (THE DEFENSE OF THE HERESY OF SOPHIANISM BY PROTOPRIEST S. BULGAKOV IN THE FACE OF THE BISHOPS' COUNCIL OF THE RUSSIAN CHURCH ABROAD, 1937, p.9). On October 17, 1935, a Bishops' Council of ROCOR condemned the teaching of Fr Bulgakov, declaring it heretical. If one is assured of one's competence to discern Truth from "questionable materials", then by all means read Bulgakov.

As far as Berdyaev, he is not Orthodox. As a matter of fact, in 1913 he wrote a blasphemous article criticizing the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church which caused him to be charged with the crime of blasphemy, the punishment for which was exile to Siberia for life. The World War and the Bolshevik Revolution prevented the matter coming to trial. Better he should have lived out his days in Siberia, maybe coming to terms with God, than to continue to espouse his "teachings".

Alexandr

I think this thread has gone far afield from its original purpose of discussing the merits of translations to the present discussion of the orthodoxy of exegetes.

With that, I think it would be best to close this present thread and ask those who wish to continue the discussions to start two new threads, one to discuss translations, and the other to discuss the orthodoxy of exegetes.

I am the guilty party for beginning this tangent in that the third post on this thread is mine where I introduce the tangential question.

In Christ,

BOB