Sorry, but that train has left the station. I refuse to go through another incarnation of Fr. Kimel’s further chrysalis-like transformations. I’ve been to the puppet show, and I’m not biting.
I read the “About” section of the blog. There is of course reference to the tragic death of his son, which is difficult for an outsider to read – may the Lord comfort Fr Kimel and his family.
But there are also some interesting comments on the various branches of christianity of which Fr Kimel has been a member:
[blockquote] “I have learned one thing since becoming Orthodox: Orthodoxy is theologically more diverse than most Orthodox want to admit. The boundaries established by the Ecumenical Councils are clear and well-defined, but when it comes to other theological issues and questions, Orthodox theologians often disagree, sometimes quite contentiously.”[/blockquote]
NB, as Fr Kimel makes clear, he is part of Eastern Orthodoxy. The same comments may well however apply to Oriental Orthodoxy.
Although for reasons of space I have only picked out those parts that intrigued me, it would be better to read all of it. Fr Kimel does not come across as contentious, but rather sharing his observations as an insider:
[blockquote] “I quickly learned that when an Orthodox Christian prefaces his remarks with “The Fathers teach …†what you will probably end up hearing is not what the Fathers really did teach or what the Holy Orthodox Church authoritatively and irreformably teaches but rather one person’s very fallible, and occasionally ignorant, opinion, cloaked in the rhetoric of infallible dogma. “The Fathers teach†is the Orthodox equivalent to the evangelical pronouncement “The Bible teaches†and the Catholic pronouncement “The Church teaches.†These appeals to authority in order to preemptively close debate can be quite frustrating.” [/blockquote]
I can identify with his frustration, in the sense of having been informed on a number of occasions by EO converts that EO church teaching is very clear on a particular point, and then being met with incomprehension when I asked cradle orthodox friends about that point!
[blockquote] “The Catholic Church has the Pope to resolve doctrinal controversies, though anyone acquainted with Catholic theology knows that Catholic theologians have no compunction about disagreeing with the Pope on just about anything and everything.”[/blockquote]
Anyone with close friends who are RC can identify with the foregoing!
[blockquote] “But who authoritatively speaks for the [Eastern] Orthodox Church? Like any other Orthodox priest, I have my favorite Eastern theologians—Alexander Schmemann, John Zizioulas, John Meyendorff, Hilarion Alfeyev, Kallistos Ware, John Breck, John Behr, Paul Evdokimov—but I have been bluntly told by more than one Orthodox priest that they are unreliable, progressive, heterodox, modernist, ecumenical. Oh my.” [/blockquote]
Oh well, interesting to see that things are not really much different in EO, RC or Anglican circles!
I think Father Kimel has been led on a voyage of discovery around the ancient churches, in much the same way as St Paul travelled round ministering around the churches of the Mediterannean in a fascinating although clearly sometimes painful journey. It is not many people who have been priested and able to explore and report on all three of the largest denominations.
In some ways it is, in the best sense, very Anglican that openness. Perhaps [although I don’t think he will see it that way at the moment] in due course his quest may lead him back to us, but it really doesn’t matter. I will continue to enjoy his letters home and found his article on one of the St Gregory’s discussion of the Trinity most interesting and thought provoking. Through Eastern eyes, and all that.
#6 Pageantmaster,
Well, one is either led or one is wandering about seeking some sort of ideal or intangible. From the people I’ve known who have bounced about among the churches seeking that perfect expression of Christ’s Church on Earth, one family wound up joining the Branch Davidians in Waco, TX (very tragic, Google if you’re unfamiliar), a few joined the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists, one returned to Buddhism, and a whole bunch have become agnostics or non-practicing Christians. The search took on a life of its own until it ended in utter absurdity or disillusionment. That one dear family lost their lives.
I’m certainly not predicting anything about Mr. Kimel and my heart goes out to him. But it is the fact that he is so quick to seek Holy Orders in each of his new churches that is so concerning when prudence would have one rest and find one’s feet for a long while first. In that, I think it’s easier to see “my will be done” rather than “Thine.” And I’d rather not watch what happens in the future. It’s not as if Christendom is short of writers, preachers, bloggers, or personalities!
Sorry, but that train has left the station. I refuse to go through another incarnation of Fr. Kimel’s further chrysalis-like transformations. I’ve been to the puppet show, and I’m not biting.
I am very glad to see Fr Kimel writing again. Blessings upon Fr Kimel and his iconic weblog.
I read the “About” section of the blog. There is of course reference to the tragic death of his son, which is difficult for an outsider to read – may the Lord comfort Fr Kimel and his family.
But there are also some interesting comments on the various branches of christianity of which Fr Kimel has been a member:
[blockquote] “I have learned one thing since becoming Orthodox: Orthodoxy is theologically more diverse than most Orthodox want to admit. The boundaries established by the Ecumenical Councils are clear and well-defined, but when it comes to other theological issues and questions, Orthodox theologians often disagree, sometimes quite contentiously.”[/blockquote]
NB, as Fr Kimel makes clear, he is part of Eastern Orthodoxy. The same comments may well however apply to Oriental Orthodoxy.
Although for reasons of space I have only picked out those parts that intrigued me, it would be better to read all of it. Fr Kimel does not come across as contentious, but rather sharing his observations as an insider:
[blockquote] “I quickly learned that when an Orthodox Christian prefaces his remarks with “The Fathers teach …†what you will probably end up hearing is not what the Fathers really did teach or what the Holy Orthodox Church authoritatively and irreformably teaches but rather one person’s very fallible, and occasionally ignorant, opinion, cloaked in the rhetoric of infallible dogma. “The Fathers teach†is the Orthodox equivalent to the evangelical pronouncement “The Bible teaches†and the Catholic pronouncement “The Church teaches.†These appeals to authority in order to preemptively close debate can be quite frustrating.” [/blockquote]
I can identify with his frustration, in the sense of having been informed on a number of occasions by EO converts that EO church teaching is very clear on a particular point, and then being met with incomprehension when I asked cradle orthodox friends about that point!
[blockquote] “The Catholic Church has the Pope to resolve doctrinal controversies, though anyone acquainted with Catholic theology knows that Catholic theologians have no compunction about disagreeing with the Pope on just about anything and everything.”[/blockquote]
Anyone with close friends who are RC can identify with the foregoing!
[blockquote] “But who authoritatively speaks for the [Eastern] Orthodox Church? Like any other Orthodox priest, I have my favorite Eastern theologians—Alexander Schmemann, John Zizioulas, John Meyendorff, Hilarion Alfeyev, Kallistos Ware, John Breck, John Behr, Paul Evdokimov—but I have been bluntly told by more than one Orthodox priest that they are unreliable, progressive, heterodox, modernist, ecumenical. Oh my.” [/blockquote]
Oh well, interesting to see that things are not really much different in EO, RC or Anglican circles!
It sounds as if perhaps the beginnings of healing are underway. Thanks be to God for that, and blessings upon Fr. Kimel and on his family.
Yep, agree with wyclif. He’s changed so many times that I doubt he’s done and I’d rather not know how it continues and ends.
#5 Oddly enough, I don’t see it that way Teatime.
I think Father Kimel has been led on a voyage of discovery around the ancient churches, in much the same way as St Paul travelled round ministering around the churches of the Mediterannean in a fascinating although clearly sometimes painful journey. It is not many people who have been priested and able to explore and report on all three of the largest denominations.
In some ways it is, in the best sense, very Anglican that openness. Perhaps [although I don’t think he will see it that way at the moment] in due course his quest may lead him back to us, but it really doesn’t matter. I will continue to enjoy his letters home and found his article on one of the St Gregory’s discussion of the Trinity most interesting and thought provoking. Through Eastern eyes, and all that.
#6 Pageantmaster,
Well, one is either led or one is wandering about seeking some sort of ideal or intangible. From the people I’ve known who have bounced about among the churches seeking that perfect expression of Christ’s Church on Earth, one family wound up joining the Branch Davidians in Waco, TX (very tragic, Google if you’re unfamiliar), a few joined the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists, one returned to Buddhism, and a whole bunch have become agnostics or non-practicing Christians. The search took on a life of its own until it ended in utter absurdity or disillusionment. That one dear family lost their lives.
I’m certainly not predicting anything about Mr. Kimel and my heart goes out to him. But it is the fact that he is so quick to seek Holy Orders in each of his new churches that is so concerning when prudence would have one rest and find one’s feet for a long while first. In that, I think it’s easier to see “my will be done” rather than “Thine.” And I’d rather not watch what happens in the future. It’s not as if Christendom is short of writers, preachers, bloggers, or personalities!