New Book of Dogmatics “Corrects the Past”
April 1, 2008 by frmilovan
The following is, supposedly, a summary of the new book of dogmatics given by Serbian Bishop Ignjatije (Midic), bishop in central Serbia and also a professor at the Theological School in Belgrade. I say supposedly because I’ve only read about this online and don’t know if this is the actual text.
I welcome any comments from bloggers out there.
“The greatest problem of mankind and creation is death and that death is not a result of sin the way it’s being incorrectly taught by Christianity. Death is a natural thing for creation and it does not depend upon good and bad. That’s why its incorrect to teach of sin as the main problem of mankind as well as remission of sins, the Cross, suffering, repentance and moral cleanliness, fulfilling of commandments of God with the goal that God forgive sins. It’s totally crazy to think that man sinned against God and that’s why the Son of God became incarnate. Ethical norms are constantly changing and therefore, thinking of Christianity from an ethical perspective – fulfilling the commandments of God is theology that doesn’t hold water and not only is it wrong, it brings about large damage to the Church – catastrophically injures the Church and has tragic consequences for life and existence. The fulfillment of God’s commandments is not the goal of Christianity - it cannot solve problems but mires us even more deeply in them. That is the incorrect faith of the past centuries which has thrown Christianity to the margins of civilizations and history because of which Christianity has lost it’s important impact on society. We must not teach faith toward that past in which we mention sin, suffering, the Cross, remission, forgiveness, moral cleanliness and fulfilling the commandments of God. We must teach faith toward the future in which should only be mentioned good blessings (Eucharist). We in the Orthodox Church have bishops whose faith is turned toward the past and that is a negative dimension. But fortunately, there are those who are turned toward the future and that is a positive dimension. Students of the Theological School must be on the side of the positive, eschatological dimension to safeguard her and to put her forth as true, because if this fails, the students will be responsible. To best prepare for this task, we must not repeat what the Church has said which the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Fathers have said, but we must interpret their words. More correctly, read interpretations of them in the current theological literature of the day, most importantly the books of Metropolitan Zizuolos .”
Bear in mind that this is a summary almost certainly written by a critic of Bishop Ignjatije. I really can’t believe that any sane person, let alone a bishop, would actually write something like this. In other words, I’d bet that this is simply a hack job, the goal of which is to exaggerate and misrepresent Bishop Ignjatije’s ideas.
This really does sound faked– real modernists are far more subtle than this.
I agree. The modernists know how to walk the walk and talk the talk; that’s how they confuse those weak in their faith. It is doubtful one of them, (of which Bp. Ignatije may or may not be), would publish such blasphemy.
On the other hand, isn’t he one of the bishops pushing for the liturgical reforms?
April Fools?? !!!
If not should be.
Of course the tradition of April Fools originates back to the derogatory term used to identify those who believed Jesus was the Messiah (the “fools”), since He was crucified (on April 1) and did not “save Himself” from the cross.
Even still today in France it is known as the “Jour du Poisson” - the Day of the Fish- where the biggest joke you can play on someone is to put a fish, or a picture of a fish, (an early symbol for Christianity), on their back and to call them a fool.
If this is an April Fools joke, Lent is no time for such jokes and foolery. Please forgive me Father, brothers and sisters for this priggish response.
What is written here is shocking because it is so blatant where one expects subtlty from the enemy - but it’s from the enemy none the less. (there I go again). We don’t need Big Brother or the Ministry of Truth or Big Bishop to go back an reinterprete the Gospel or the Ancient Fathers for us. The TRUTH stands on its own.
I can’t offer much to this but I did some checking and this is not a joke. Metropolitan John Zizioulas exists and is supported by 2 Serbian bishops. retired Atanasije Jevtic and Ignjatije Midic. His views in regard to the human person is promoted by Dr. Davor Dzalto. I haven’t had an opportunity to research them and their views.
I have read and reread this passage trying to understand what he is saying and if I am possibly missing something. But I remain perplexed.
Father Milovan, I would love to hear your comments…..
While googling the metropolitan I landed on http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=15064.135
Actually I was hoping to hear from someone that might be more in the know and either refute this quote or confirm it.
Metropolitan Ziziuolas is quite big in Serbia. The first time I came in contact with him was maybe 5 or so years ago when I went to Serbia and picked up some diocesan magazines. I noticed that just about every one had an article by Metropolitan Ziziuolas. Later I learned of his popularity. He is very gifted but has been known to say things that are questionable.
He was quoted about a month ago giving his opinion of some Orthodox, particularly Russians who seem to be slowing the ecumenical process down a bit: “In the Eastern Church, especially in the Russian Church, there is a degree of insularity that leads to conservatism. There is an inability to face the challenges of the modern world, with tradition as an excuse.”
Fortunately, Metropolitan John’s popularity is on the decline; like everything faddish, he’s already becoming passe. His ideas are coming under increasing criticism by both Orthodox and non-Orthodox scholars. His star is rapidly fading.
Bishop Atanasije is not an uncritical fan of Metropolitan John, either. Vladyka Atanasije said the following at the Sretinsky Seminary in Moscow a few years ago:
“He is a very good theologian, deep, dynamic, knows the Fathers very well, but is always wanting to dialog with contemporary mission… He is also a good philosopher, he succeeds well there, he’s a good disciple of Florovsky, and I have trust in him, although I’m not in agreement with him on everything.”
And, in any case, Zizoulas himself would NEVER have written anything like what’s quoted above. He may be a bit “out there” in some ways, but there’s no doubt that he’s Orthodox.
I myself studied at St Vladimir’s and have read more “modernist” theology than is good for me, but I can spot a fake when I see one!
This was posted on a website in Serbia. It was taken and read by a monk (I think his name is Fr. Simeon, but I’m not 100% sure) and a priest (Fr. Zarko) at a symposium given on March 8, 2008 in Smederevo, Serbia - just before Great Lent. It has since been removed from the original website. The monk read this intro given by Bishop Ignjatije. For all of you that don’t believe it, get your hands on the new textbook of dogmatics and see for yourselves.
In contrast to those that think Ziziuolas’ star is fading, everyting I see and read (both Greek and Serbian) is that Ziziuolas’ star is still shining bright. His type of teaching (and worse) is currently being taught at Holy Cross in Boston. Heresies are taught to those theology students (I know one very well who is troubled by them) about the Theotokos and about women ordinations. Sound brazen? You bet, but it’s happening. Keep in mind that this is a Metropolitan that is living outside his Metropolia (he resides in England) and is bosom buddies with the archbishop of Canterbury and is the Patriarch of Contantinople’s “main man” on ecumenism. He and Bishop Ignjatije have also developed a “theory” or teaching of the death of the soul in addition to the other nonsense they teach above. Again, for all of you un-believers, go out and get this presentations of theirs. In summary, their teaching of the death of the soul is, besides a great heresy, a modernist, evolutionary bent.
I wish that the above was fake. Just because he is brazen doesn’t mean it’s not true. Look at the brazeness of the NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999 and the stealing of Kosovo last month. Very brazen. The point is that these people don’t care. Just like some of us, some of the enemies of Orthodoxy are sly and others are brazen. Because it’s brazen doesn’t mean it’s not true.
Bishop Ignjatije, Bishop Jovan (Mladenovic), Bishop Atansije (Jevtic) and a few others are INTENSIVELY pushing for liturgical reforms in our Church. Trying to modernize us. Trying to make us more appealing to whom? The Roman Catholics? Keep in mind that this same Bishop Ignjatije just last year held a meeting in Velika Plana in Serbia right after the Ravenna meeting that discussed the Primacy of the pope in the Middle Ages. It was in the context of accepting the pope as the head of the Christian Church, but trying to define his power and role. This in and of itself is heresy and blasphemous.
Because this is Lent, I apologize in advance for offending anyone but cannot apologize for the truth. We must stand up in defense of our Holy Faith. Our liturgy is not broke, it doesn’t need fixed.
I’ve never read anything from Met. John, but I do know he’s criticized widely (including quite vehemently by the new dean of St. Vladimir’s seminary in New York, Fr. John Behr). Sadly the wheat and tares grow together in the Church, and the Church’s patience with those in error is vast, awaiting their correction unless and until such ones begin dogmatizing their heresies and/or enter into communion with heretics. Look at how long the Orthodox Church put up with Rome’s errors before cutting them off from the Body of Christ– out of a sincere hope that they would correct themselves.
I don’t know why FC has placed “modernist” in quotations– modernism is a real thing that the Church will eventually have to formally condemn. It’s the heresy that is best summed up as, “we know better than our Fathers.” May God preserve us all from such ideas.
By that definition, we’re all heretics, each and every one of us!
I wasn’t “defining” anything– I was attempting to articulate the underlying assumption of modernism. The “we know better” attitude is present in all of us in some sense, yes, but modernism as a heresy is the attempt to redefine all the saving dogmata of the Church based upon that underlying assumption. For this mindset, it’s not enough that the fathers have explained it in this or that way– we know better now.
But your comment is a good reminder to search ourselves in humility for this idea. “In which areas of my life do I act on the assumption that somehow I ‘know better’ than the teachings of the fathers?” Too many– Lord, have mercy!
Well, knowing the views of bishop Ignatije, the summary really seems authentic in its essence; although I doubt the exact formulations. He has some highly problematic views, but it has nothing to do with “modernization” (sometimes called “restoration” ) or Zizioulas. I think Ignatije interprets Zizioulas wrongly in many instances. In that sense I find Dr. Davor Dzalto’s thought much more balanced in regard to Zizioulas, and much more creative (I recommend him strongly). On the other hand, I wouldn’t say that Zizioulas’ influence becomes less and less important. I think it becomes more and more present even outside the field of Orthodox theology. The problem is that almost all critiques and all promotions (in the style of bishop Ignatije) are based just on fragments of Zizioulas’ thought, not on a detailed analysis.