October 24, 2014

Archbishop of Canterbury receives honorary doctorate at St. Vladimir’s Seminary

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Contact: Deborah Belonick, Advancement Information Officer
St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary
914-961-8313 ext 363 / 914-961-4507 FAX deborah@svots.edu http://www.svots.edu/

[SVS Communications / Yonkers, NY] — Dr. Rowan Williams began his New York City tour this past week with duties related to his role as Archbishop of Canterbury, but ended it by demonstrating his academic acumen and continued interest in the Orthodox Christian faith. On Saturday, January 30, 2010, the Anglican archbishop delivered the 27th annual Father Alexander Schmemann Memorial Lecture – this year titled “Theology and Contemplative Calling: The Image of Humanity in the Philokalia” – and received an honorary doctoral degree on the campus of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary.

During his visit, Dr. Williams also attended Divine Liturgy and had a lively and frank discussion with the theological faculty of St. Vladimir’s at a private brunch. After the Divine Liturgy, Metropolitan Jonah, primate of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA), and the Anglican archbishop both publically expressed their desire for a deeper personal friendship and their hope for deeper understanding and cooperation between their respective communions. Four hundred people attended the lecture and ceremony, distinguished by an episcopal presence from both the Orthodox and Anglican faiths.

The Anglican archbishop received the invitation to be this year’s Schmemann Lecturer for his pioneering work in Russian Orthodox studies and his long-standing interest in Eastern Christian studies. His doctoral work at Oxford University focused on Vladimir N. Lossky, a famous mid-twentieth-century Orthodox theologian; and his first book, Wound of Knowledge, was a study of spirituality from apostolic times to the sixteenth century.

Dr. Williams’s lecture on the Philokalia, a collection of monastic writings ranging from the fourth through the fifteenth centuries, reflected his massive knowledge on the subject. Beginning and ending with quotes from Fr. Alexander Schmemann’s classic work, For the Life of the World, he delivered a discourse on the spiritual battle that human beings must wage in journeying from a self-centered life to a life in Christ, according to the writings of the Christian ascetics. Additionally, the Anglican archbishop thanked the seminary for its “overwhelming warm and generous welcome,” which, he stated, crowned his first visit to St. Vladimir’s in 1974, and was all that he “had hoped and prayed for.”

Seminary Dean Archpriest John Behr in his remarks at the event said, “In and through all of this and more, Rowan Williams has made a great contribution towards the increasing knowledge of Eastern Orthodoxy in the West, and also helped the Eastern Orthodox themselves think through their own tradition, providing insights, asking questions, opening up dialogue; and for this we are truly thankful.”

Father John, who had been examined by Dr. Williams for his own doctoral degree at Oxford, saw an opportunity for the Anglican cleric to be this year’s Schmemann Lecturer coincident with his planned travels to the U.S. and also viewed his visit to the seminary campus to be an occasion to further Anglican-Orthodox relations. The faculty and Board of Trustees of St. Vladimir’s together voted to confer upon the archbishop a Doctorate of Divinity honoris causa at the event.

In his welcoming address at the event, seminary Chancellor and CEO Archpriest Chad Hatfield further noted the importance of a continuing Orthodox-Anglican dialogue, saying, “Only a few days ago I was in Russia where I was blessed to venerate the holy relics of St. Tikhon of Moscow, the former archbishop of North America. As a seminarian, I came to have such an attraction to this confessor and pastor. He was a friend of Anglicans, especially Bishop Charles Chapman Grafton of Fond du Lac. All of us here, who are Orthodox Christians living in North America, are the spiritual children of St. Tikhon, and, Your Grace, we, like St. Tikhon, extend our hand of friendship, and we bid you welcome!”

Metropolitan Jonah bestowed the honorary doctoral degree upon the archbishop. His Beatitude, who is also the president of St. Vladimir’s Board of Trustees, recently signed a concordat on behalf of St. Vladimir’s with Nashotah House, an Episcopal seminary, signaling the agreement of the two seminaries to work together for the preservation of the Orthodox-Anglican dialogue that began in the early twentieth century.

Matushka Juliana Schmemann, wife of Fr. Alexander, expressed her thoughts on the extraordinary visit, saying, “As diverse as our ways to the kingdom, as different as our journeys to the Lord, we are all united in our love of the Lord and in our joy to serve Him. This unity is reinforced by the archbishop’s coming to speak to us and to share in our universal love in Christ.”

A complex and controversial figure, Dr. Williams has been widely criticized in both Orthodox and conservative Anglican circles, particularly for his writings on homosexual unions (especially in his 1989 paper “The Body’s Grace”), and his promulgation of arguments in favor of the ordination of women, beginning at the 1988 Lambeth Conference. Conversely, he has equally challenged liberal theologians and post-modern atheists: he defended the bodily resurrection of Christ in the face of Anglican Bishop John Shelby Spong’s ridicule of the doctrine, and has poked holes in the logic of Richard Dawkins, author of popular anti-theistic books, including The God Delusion.

Particularly noteworthy among his audience was the attendance by bishops in the Anglican Church of North America (ACNA), a “Province-in-formation” within the global Anglican Communion formed in June 2008, representing a traditional, conservative, and “biblically-faithful way of following Jesus,” in opposition to many current practices that, its members say, are “accommodated and incorporated” by the Episcopal Church in the U.S. and the Anglican Church of Canada.

The Rt. Rev. Ray R. Sutton, the Ecumenical Bishop from the ACNA, stated, “With grateful hearts to Metropolitan Jonah, we welcome and rejoice over his vision and commitment to restoring Anglican-Orthodox dialogue. We who are faithful Anglicans thank St. Vladimir’s for its deep commitment to the faith once delivered and its love for others outside Orthodoxy who share likeminded love for the love and truth of Jesus.”

Likewise, the Rt. Rev. Jack Iker, bishop of the Diocese of Fort Worth in the ACNA, said, “The real significance of today’s events goes far beyond the awarding of an honorary degree to Dr. Rowan Williams. By conferring this degree upon the Archbishop of Canterbury, St. Vladimir’s has expressed respect and affection for Anglicanism, as well as a hope for a deeper relationship between Anglican and Orthodox Christians. Metropolitan Jonah has spoken of this new vision in a very inspirational way.”

Dr. Williams’s U.S. tour also included an address at the Desmond Tutu Center in New York City, and a meeting with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. His main purpose in the New York metro area was to participate in the 2010 Trinity Institute’s National Theological Conference themed “Building an Ethical Economy: Theology in the Market Place.”

Comments

  1. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Andrew says:

    Don’t you just love the paragraph that basically says Dr. Williams offends conservatives and liberals alike so that makes him ok to be honored. Its almost like SVS is grasping for an excuse. However, they still don’t get it.

    A complex and controversial figure, Dr. Williams has been widely criticized in both Orthodox and conservative Anglican circles, particularly for his writings on homosexual unions (especially in his 1989 paper “The Body’s Grace”), and his promulgation of arguments in favor of the ordination of women, beginning at the 1988 Lambeth Conference. Conversely, he has equally challenged liberal theologians and post-modern atheists: he defended the bodily resurrection of Christ in the face of Anglican Bishop John Shelby Spong’s ridicule of the doctrine, and has poked holes in the logic of Richard Dawkins, author of popular anti-theistic books, including The God Delusion

    And How many times do people have to hear that John Behr was examined by Rowan Williams for his doctorate. SVS is repeating that one just like the GOA repeats the phrase “The Green Patriarch who go that name from Al Gore”.

    • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
      Fr. Johannes Jacobse says:

      Yes, the disequilibrium of this comparison is self-evident. Spong is a shabby thinker, very shabby in fact. I’ve read the first three of his books (didn’t bother paying attention after that), reviewed one years ago, and found them largely incoherent and simple-minded. He exhibits the worst sort of moral posturing, and his reasoning is compelling only to those who think defiance or resistance is a virtue in and of itself (it isn’t, the value of either depends on the object). It is D-Team stuff. Richard Dawkins’ weakness is that he does not really understand religion. He penetrates no deeper than the cheap shots you see on television dramas. David Hart offers a fair treatment in the latest issue of First Things (see: The Dawkins Evolution).

      Advocating homosexual unions inside an established Christian communion however, is another thing entirely, especially with the credentials Dr. Rowans holds.

      Having said that, the paragraph does not posit any kind of moral equivalency. It merely points out that SVS is aware of Dr. Rowan’s stand against the moral tradition and in no way endorses it (leave aside for the moment the argument that the conferring the degree implies an endorsement). At the same time, SVS wanted to clarify that any assessment of Dr. Rowan’s work ought not to be reduced to his anti-traditionalist beliefs. Yes, the paragraph has a cluttered construction, but I see no attempt at moral obfuscation.

      Morever, the paragraph has to be read in context of the entire release. SVS is aware the controversy granting the degree has generated, and they are asking observers to frame the event in the larger context of his role as Archbishop of Canterbury, and to see it as an attempt to strengthen relations between the Anglican Church and Orthodoxy.

      I believe them when they imply that no endorsement of his views was intended by the invitation (which they do by stating the reasons Dr. Rowans is controversial with no defensive tone or justification). I think the invitation was extended innocently albeit naively.

      Thus, I am also willing to grant the suggestion (perhaps “furtive hope” might be more accurate) that the event might in fact work to strengthen the relations between traditionalist Anglicans and the Orthodox Church. Yes, it’s a stretch, but the fact that the faculty is clear that no implied endorsement exists, and the fact that a lot of traditionalist Anglicans came to the event, might prove to be positive in the long run. It’s not a home run, but if it gets a man on base, I’ll settle for it.

      George Michalopulos mentioned that the silver lining might be that other invitations like this one probably won’t be extended. He might be right. Also, perhaps SVS has recognized that their imprimatur reaches father then they realized.

      • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
        Andrew says:

        Father, all of the points you make about dialogue with Anglicans and SVS are correct. But lets remember SVS could have achieved everything it outlines in its press release WITHOUT honoring Rowan Williams with a doctorate.

        No matter how much we want to hope for the best, one cannot escape the fact that the SVS leadership blew it with by honoring Rowan Williams with a doctorate.

        The Rowan Williams debacle will be remembered in the OCA just like the Sarbanes debacle is remembered in the GOA. Both are sorry chapters in the history of American Orthodoxy.

        • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
          Fr. Johannes Jacobse says:

          I am willing to grant that maybe the invitation was a well-intentioned, albeit naive, mistake. I believe the press release confirms this. The Rowan Williams event however, differs from feting Sarbannes and other culture of death politicos for this reason: Even when the GOA leadership is made aware of how feting the politicians violates their responsibility to teach and uphold the moral tradition, and how it erodes their moral credibility and confuses the faithful, they continue doing it anyway. They just don’t care. I do not see this kind of defiance anywhere in the SVS press release.

          Remember, the Rowan Williams affair is a one time event. I don’t think we can say SVS is afflicted with the same illness of moral compromise. Mistakes? Sure. They happen. Recurrent outbreaks? I just don’t see it.

          • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
            Christopher says:

            Even when the GOA leadership is made aware of how feting the politicians violates their responsibility to teach and uphold the moral tradition, and how it erodes their moral credibility and confuses the faithful, they continue doing it anyway. They just don’t care. I do not see this kind of defiance anywhere in the SVS press release.

            Defiance is EXACTLY how I would describe the OCA/SVS defense of their entire ecumenical project. I see no difference between this and GOA’s leadership except I have more sympathy for GOA. It’s one thing for a lay person (such as a politician) to drop the ball. It’s another thing for seminary staff and bishops themselves to “erode their moral credibility and confuse the faithful”. If you cant keep your own house in order then you certainly can’t expect to rightly influence the wider political culture…

          • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
            George Michalopulos says:

            Christoper, I don’t see it as defiant at all. As a rule, defiant people don’t put out press releases that cover all the bases. This is just a classic case of CYA. They dropped the ball on this pure and simple. Williams was just going to be in town, he’s said and written wonderful essays in the past on Orthodox spirituality, there are close ties between him and a couple of the professors (and let’s not forget +Bishop Ware’s involvement in this, and he’s an EP bishop), so it seemed like a win-win. Bring ACNA bishops and give them one more chance to try and work things out, etc. And because the professoriate at SVS is primarily academically inclined, they couldn’t see the pastoral implications of such an inept move. They wouldn’t have put out the press release if this wasn’t all a big CYA.

            I’ll grant you that if we see more of these things in the future, then I’ll re-read the press release and the “defiant” tones will probably leap off the page at that point. I’ll definately apologize if I’m wrong.

  2. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    George Michalopulos says:

    Andrew, good points. However, I’m trying to look for the silver lining in this: and that is that I doubt very much that another such invitation will be extended. The trouble with academic institutions is that they get to be hot-houses for the intelligentsia, or vast echo chambers if you will. They very often don’t think things thru, or take into account the opinions of laymen, who are often viewed as rubes in the hinterland.

    You see this same dynamic operating in the liberal end of the political spectrum and their enablers in the lamestream media.

    Anyway, let’s hope that all such further conferrals (sp?) will be given only to Christians and academics who espouse traditionalist beliefs.

  3. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Christopher says:

    This is simply a continuation of the OCA’s liberal/progressive faith in “dialog”. I think the OCA’s leadership obviously including Jonah has not learned a thing about round table dialog and ecumenism (i.e. it’s fruits have been almost entirely negative for the last 90 years).

    I find it surprising that some of you think that such an invitation won’t happen again. I assure you the OCA has withstood a critical examination of this “dialog” for 30 years and has consistently rejected it as “fundamentalist”, etc. Based on my personal experience with Fr. Hopko the leadership is even quite prideful of their position and their standing above the unwashed who see scandal and worse in this.

    The Antiochians finally saw the light in 06(or whenever it was they left the NCC). In the OCA however you have commitment to the current failed model of ecumenism in all the significant leadership. I used to wonder if SVS is not the tail that wags the OCA dog on this but Jonah’s participation seems to be without distinction…

  4. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Christopher says:

    At the same time, SVS wanted to clarify that any assessment of Dr. Rowan’s work ought not to be reduced to his anti-traditionalist beliefs.

    We have already been over this. His “work” is nothing compared to the anti-traditionalist beliefs. His “work” makes no sense in any context outside of traditional Christianity except on a pure and abstract “academic” level. There is nothing to clarify except to say that Dr. Rowan is a modern academic with a doctorate. Only in the academic world (narrowly defined) is this important. SVS is supposed to be an Orthodox seminary first – not the secular academy.

    Thus, I am also willing to grant the suggestion (perhaps “furtive hope” might be more accurate) that the event might in fact work to strengthen the relations between traditionalist Anglicans and the Orthodox Church.

    This makes no sense either. Is the ACNA that naive to believe that Dr. Williams is on their side?!? We all understand their struggle and identity crises – but should the OCA be helping them flail about by reaching for straws like recognition from Dr. Williams. No! They should be helping them in their hour of need precisely by doing the opposite and helping them understand what it is that leads to the rejection of the Christianity in the first place. Instead of lighting a candle in the darkness the OCA has simply helped the ACNA praise the darkness.

    This whole episode (and by extension the OCA’s overtures) strikes me as manipulative……

    • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
      Fr. Johannes Jacobse says:

      His “work” is nothing compared to the anti-traditionalist beliefs. His “work” makes no sense in any context outside of traditional Christianity except on a pure and abstract “academic” level. There is nothing to clarify except to say that Dr. Rowan is a modern academic with a doctorate. Only in the academic world (narrowly defined) is this important. SVS is supposed to be an Orthodox seminary first – not the secular academy.

      I knew you were going to pick up on this. :)

      Two things are operating here I think. The first you point out: the natural inertia of academic culture. The second is that a lot of academics assimilate the popular caricature of cultural conservatives. I’m not as impatient with this however. It’s a cultural thing. That will change.

      It seems to me that the heart of what you are saying is the SVS betrayed its responsibility. What if, however, it just did not recognize the depth and reach of its own imprimatur? What if the reaction was something new? Remember, it’s a different leadership.

      You need to allow a little more room for mistakes, Christopher. Granted, time will tell if I am right or wrong. If I’m wrong, I’ll change my view.

      Is the ACNA that naive to believe that Dr. Williams is on their side?!? We all understand their struggle and identity crises – but should the OCA be helping them flail about by reaching for straws like recognition from Dr. Williams. No!

      Well, sure, but does this really describe the reality? The ACNA members are not stupid. They can tell whether they are being manipulated. The release stated that many ACNA members were at the lecture, and if they are not objecting in the same way you are (and they don’t seem to be), then maybe the reality is indeed different than how you describe it. They are big boys. They can figure this out.

      • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
        Christopher says:

        I took the ACNA to be looking past the person and at they symbol – trying to make the best of the situation given their own motivations and goals. Even if they do not see Dr. Williams for what he is the Orthodox should be helping them see it – not muddling the issues. Looks like a lot of politics and positioning, scratching of backs, etc. Seems like if your this patient with it in this context you would be just as patient with it for practical politicians.

        Of course I already disagree that this was a “mistake” – it was deliberate. As you put it with GOA, they just did not care (about the implications for traditional Anglicans such as Fr. Reardon and I were in the past). It’s a betrayal of responsibility that is not isolated – it’s an MO that goes back for some time.

        Your right in that it has it’s roots in a progressive/liberal culture and mindset, though I am not sure why you think it will change (unless you are simply referring to the fact that it will change with the winds of the culture). I see no evidence that they even see the need to be counter culture. Are you referring to the fact that these dinosaurs (i.e. the seminary staff and the bishops of the OCA) will eventually fall asleep in the Lord?? If Orthodoxy is going to have anything to say to Christians and the larger culture it’s going to have to be counter-cultural. Anyone know where that Church is?

    • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
      George Michalopulos says:

      Christopher, I don’t believe that ACNA is under illusions about the power of the ABC to correct the problems in ECUSA. Nor do I believe for a moment that the OCA is trying to buttress any such forlon hopes. I believe that +Jonah’s repeated offers to ACNA are correct: they need to jump the sinking ship and swim to the liferaft.

      Having said that, I believe what we are witnessing here is not any hope for theological reconciliation between ACNA and the ABC, but the pull of ethnic ties, pure and simple. We see this displayed in Orthodoxy even (although w/out the scandal of heresy). Though mundane things such as blood ties should never be a consideration (after all Jesus came to “divide father from son, mother from daughter, etc.) it is a powerful draw nonetheless. One in which all weak and fallen humans succumb to. Including we Orthodox.

      If you will permit me to expand on this:

      All of the ethnic jurisdictions cannot find the moral courage to cut their ties to their respective mother countries and come together in a spirit of love and friendship. The putative Episcopal Assemblies thus are a concession to our human weaknesses, that is, the necessity to remain tethered to the Old Country and the incessant harping on diptychs. Viewed properly, this concession and the Rube Goldberg apparatus that is going to serve as the EA’s operating principles are in reality a cause for scandal. (That’s why I think that they may ultimately fail.) I can assure you, if we Orthodox had evangelistic zeal and a proper understanding of Church formation, we would not need them.

      Even the OCA is not without sin in this regard: they broke their ties with Mother Russia because they had no choice; even then it took them 50 years to do so. What’s sobering about this, is that if it wasn’t for the depredations of Stalin and his successors, the OCA would probably still be an eparchy of Moscow. (God indeed works in mysterious ways.)

      Anyway, please forgive the rant. I’m just trying to be charitable to ACNA and maybe offer another perspective that those of who are Orthodox may not understand. (BTW, I hope I’m wrong about the EAs. I mean that I hope that they do succeed and independent and united local churches sprout up in every nation and that their ethnicity is based on the ethnos or nation in which they reside.)

  5. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Michael Bauman says:

    One cannot within a traditional Orthodox perspective isolate one’s beliefs from one’s work. It is either a violation of Orthodox anthropology or mere sophistry. Which am I to think, the leaders of SVS don’t care to be honest with themselves or don’t know the faith very well?

    “When one lies down with dogs, one gets up with fleas.” Heretical beliefs create heretical commentary. It is such a euphamism to express it as “anti-traditionalist” rather than calling it by its real name: apostasy or heresy.

    There, Fr. Hans, is real moral equivalency. All thought is equal, just some thought is more equal than others.

    We have to decide whether we want our bishops and other leaders to be organically part of the the community of faith or not. So far most folks seem quite OK with just letting the bishops do there own thing as they are irrelevant to our personal lives and faith. We can hold to the truth no matter what they do.

    That, too, goes against the teaching of the Church. The faith is not held by individuals, it is a trust of the entire community under the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit.

    If we continue to act as fancy-dress protestants, the Orthodox Church will become even more irrelevant than it is now. The Church will survive, by the grace of God, but most will have abandoned her.

    The bishops and leaders are simply acting as we have told them we want them to act since we have been largely apathetic and silent. Why should they not be surprised when some folks begin to hunger for real Orthoodox community and say so. Of course, that means that not only would the bishops be more present in our lives, we’d actually have to be obedient. Perhaps that’s why we’ve allowed them to drift away from us all these years?

    • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
      Christopher says:

      Amen! Excellent post.

      Our “robed betters” would answer this way (this is how Fr. Hopko answered a question from the audience at the lecture I attended – well, not quite like this ;) ) :

      If one is “strong in the faith” (he had a quote from a father) one can go talk to “lesbians and witches” and do all sorts of things that appear to “separate ones work from the faith” but in fact they know what they are doing – and have God’s grace to back them up. It only appears sophistic to the unwashed masses and those unfortunate enough to have been born a member of the peanut gallery. If we were faithful Orthodox we would recognize this charisma in our robbed betters – after all, they do teach theology. They are above the lessons of history, the spirit of the age, and the other mundane temptations the rest of us have to take note of. If they appear to be a Christianized version of Plato’s Philosopher Kings, well that’s because they are. It’s best just to enclose your check when you get the appeal and not ask questions that are far above your rank…

      • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
        Andrew says:

        Christopher, you are right. You almost feel like SVS and its glitterati are simply hoisting one giant noble lie on the faithful. The elitism here is perhaps the greatest tragedy.

        • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
          George Michalopulos says:

          We’ll know the final results of this only in the future. Will we see continued missteps by the faculty or will this most recent Schmemann Lecture be the last of its kind? Obviously, I’m holding out for the latter. In that case, it would mean that the faculty learned their lesson.

    • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
      George Michalopulos says:

      Michael, I’m glad that you pin a lot of the blame for this on the laity. I agree with you that the magesterium of the Church is to “be held in trust” by all Orthodox. Our bishops of course are held to a higher standard because they are tasked to be teachers but ultimately they can do nothing without us. We can hold them back and throw sand in their eyes and thus derail them from their mission.

      I’ve been hard on our bishops here in America, but I will say that in the matter of unity, they appear more receptive to it than the laity. (Of course, except for Russia, the Old World bishops have always been against it, so I can’t give the episcopate as a whole a pass.) I’ve run into just too many Orthodox laypeople who are at best apathetic about unity. I’d say only about 20% care about it making it happen, 30% are actively hostile, and the remaining 50% either don’t know or don’t care.

  6. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    David says:

    Sorry, but this is no different than Notre Dame giving Barack Obama an honorary doctorate.

  7. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Michael Bauman says:

    David, while I disagree with Notre Dame’s decision to grant an honoray degree to the President, he is the President. A political decision was made.

    Dr. Williams is nothing in relation to the hierarchy and teaching of the Church. He is an outside commentator who’s theological positions are severely at odds with the Church. To honor him with a degree from an Orthodox Seminary gives him more standing than he previously had and lends support to those who disagree with the traditional anthropology of the Church–an anthropology which has its source in the hypostatic union of man and God in Jesus Christ.

  8. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Oso says:

    I don’t think any of us in ACNA have any illusions about the ABC supporting us — he is IMHO very much in the thrall of Katherine Jefferts Schori of TEC which provides much of the financial support for the Anglican Communion Office. He seems very much the dithering academic, and very uncomfortable in the role of leading the Anglican Communion. To quote Winston Churchill’s description of Ramsay McDonald he seems a “sheep in sheep’s clothing”.

    Oso

  9. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    George Michalopulos says:

    Oso, another of my favorite Churchillianisms is his withering assessment of Clement Atlee (I believe): “He is a modest man with much to be modest about.”

  10. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Joseph says:

    What is most tragic is that Rowan Williams was speaking on a subject which no one outside the Church can lecture on (only a member of the Church can theologize), and, those in the Church never “lecture” on the Philokalia because you should have a blessing to read it in the first place, and, it is NOT something which should be approached academically. If they wanted to have Rowan Williams lecture they should have chosen an academic topic in the first place. It seems St. Vlad’s is straying here from the monastic spiritual tradition of the Church. Rowan William’s personal views on homosexuality and the Anglican Communion I find far less problematical than his “lecturing” on the Philokalia.

  11. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Andrew says:

    Hey SVS Readers and Faculty, Maybe you want to take back those honors you bestowed on Rowan Williams. Check this out from the British Media.

    Rowan Williams’s authority goes up in smoke as he replies ‘Pass’ to a question about future gay bishops

    Yes this is the man you gave a doctorate to. Nothing like giving an award to a bishop who actually says “Pass” to serious questions.

Care to comment?

*