Most Helpful Customer Reviews
9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A truly remarkable book, July 12, 2006
This review is from: St Symeon the New Theologian and Orthodox Tradition (Oxford Early Christian Studies) (Hardcover)
This is an excellent study on the life and teachings of St Symeon The New Theologian, one of the greatest saints of the Orthodox Church. The author integrates analyses of the mystical nature of the Orthodox Patristic Tradition and the nature of Orthodox mysticism as part of the Holy Tradition, with a thorough examination of St Symeon's approach to Scripture, worship and monastic life, and the ecclesiastic environment of 11th century Byzantium, just about the time of the schism between the eastern and western churches. In addition, we have here a captivating presentation of St Symeon's contribution to Orthodox Doctrine as viewed from the perspective of his anthropology, ecclesiology and mysticism, all made even more enticing through this saint's unique and bold style of expression. Of course, St Symeon's teachings on the Divine Light's nature and role in the process of theosis are given special attention. Last, Dr Alfeyev discusses St Symeon's place in the Orthodox Church, and the reverberation of his message around the world and across the centuries. In my opinion, this book is a must for serious students of Christian mysticism and Orthodox Christianity in general.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An outstanding work on Symeon the New Theologian, August 26, 2010
This review is from: St Symeon the New Theologian and Orthodox Tradition (Oxford Early Christian Studies) (Hardcover)
Alexander Golitzin, who translated Symeon's Ethical Discourses, rightly describes Alfeyev's work as: "the best introduction to Symeon presently extant in English, and it rivals the best I know of available in any other language." This study of the tenth-eleventh century Byzantine mystic in relation to his own Orthodox tradition is the published result of Alfeyev's Oxford doctoral dissertation, supervised by the well-known Orthodox scholar Kallistos Ware. It is objective, detailed, of great value to students, and enourmously informative.
Alfeyev is thorough in his analysis of Symeon with respect to his Eastern patristic heritage, establishing convincingly that the monk and mystic stands squarely within the Orthodox tradition. The reviewer who insists that Alfeyev overlooks Symeon's heretical Messalian tendencies does not do justice to Alfeyev's careful consideration of Symeon's doctrine of conscious awareness of divinity or his approach to the sacraments. The Messalians denied the reality of unconscious grace and were anti-sacramental, while Symeon allowed for unconscious grace and celebrated the sacraments. The similarities between Symeon and the ancient heresy have been judged by numerous scholars (for example Maloney, Lossky, Meyendorff, Krivocheine, Turner and of course Alfeyev) to be purely superficial. Alfeyev rightly relegates this tired debate to his footnotes.
Far from distorting Symeon, Alfeyev clearly acknowledges (p. 90) that Symeon pays more attention to the condition of the communicant than he does to the objective aspect of the Eucharist, and yet he also notes that Symeon, like Gregory of Nyssa, expects the Holy Spirit to be manifest at communion. Such an expectation makes it plain that the Eucharist for Symeon depends on the saving activity of God (which for Symeon centres on the Incarnation, and by extension divinises us through our participation in Christ, by the Spirit, at the Eucharist). The claim by the reviewer below that the Eucharist for Symeon does not depend on the work of God is quite misleading.
Alfeyev establishes Symeon's dependence on numerous patristic predecessors. In no way does he write a `hagiography' of Symeon. Rather, he painstakingly draws parallel after parallel between Symeon and earlier Orthodox theologians and mystics (patristic theology does not make such a distinction, and neither did Symeon) in order to put to rest any notion that Symeon stood outside his own tradition. Having recently completed a Master's thesis on the Immediacy of God in Symeon the New Theologian I am convinced of Alfeyev's conclusions. Alfeyev maintains that while Symeon may be one of the most striking voices in Byzantine theology his vivid account of his own experience of God bears true and faithful witness to his tradition. In my research I made much use of Alfeyev and am immensely grateful for his rigorous work on Symeon. Of all the secondary literature I sourced on Symeon, Alfeyev's work was the most important.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Theological Acumen?, April 3, 2004
By A Customer
This review is from: St Symeon the New Theologian and Orthodox Tradition (Oxford Early Christian Studies) (Hardcover)
Alfeyev's monograph on the eleventh-century monk Symeon the New Theologian is the culmination of about 15 years of study, aiming to show that Symeon's teachings are in harmony with the Greek Fathers. His mystical approach is given the most attention.
Some critics question the technique of the author of not defending his hypotheses, but merely accepting them as given and then going on to write about it. This is, of course, a problem if the text is being used in the scholarly sense, which it attempts to position itself as. Omissions of modern scholarship is noted by the reader, and when it is referenced, it is usually in a dismissive tone with inadequate reasoning.
A good example of this is the passing over of any Messalianism in St Symeon, except in footnote references! Or the old standby "this falls beyond the scope of this study" is used to ignore a debatable point when it would seem that the issue is actually central to the premise of the book.
More a work of hagiography, he ignores such statements that would seem heretical, or at least an opinion not held by the Tradition, such as Symeon's insistence that the reality of the Eucharist is dependent not upon the work of God, but the spiritual state of the communicant! I thought that was the whole point of the Eucharist- the forgiveness of sins unto union with God!
The main point I find here is that the saints are sometimes approach as too holy to be questioned. However, the question becomes, "What are they canonized for?" This study is too caught up with a blind approach to the past to be considered representative of the Tradition.
Stick with McGuckin's study. Other books of interest may include: Symeon The New Theologian (Cistercian Studies No. 41), Symeon, the New Theologian: The Discourses (Classics of Western Spirituality), Renouncing the World Yet Leading the Church: The Monk-Bishop in Late Antiquity, The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (Oxford Early Christian Studies)
On the Mystical Life: The Ethical Discourses : The Church and the Last Things,
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|