Jan 27, 2010 -- 12:14PM, Prajna wrote:

I wonder and also curious as to what everyone, I guess all 5 of us, think about Seraphim Rose of Platina becoming a Saint?  I know that among many laity he is already called "Blessed Seraphim Rose of Platina" but will he ever become a canonized?  Under what jurisdiction? 

I know that many many people like him and pray to him but weren't there some writings/teachings of his that were kind of off the wall?

well, he did have that "toll house" thing, which is prett out there.  but then, many saints of the Chruch have taught some things which were not accepted by the Church.  so that alone doesn't disqualify him (although it should certainly cause a more in depty review than might otherwise be the case).  And as you know, canonization in the Orthodox Chruch is sort of a bottom up process, so the very fact that there are some who already revere him as a saint says something. 

I am definitely not a fan of his, based primarily on the toll house thing, but also on some of his followers.. but if that were a true indication of whether someone was worthy, Jesus would be out, given some of HIS followers, so I try not to let that cloud my judgment too much.

in the end, it's not the Chruch which makes the decision anyway, but God, right?  The Chruch does it's best to identify folks who are worthy of emulation, but the Chruch isn't God, and I'm sure that some who were recognised as saints perhaps weren't so saintly, and others (probably a great many) lived their saintly lives unknown to anyone, and therefore unrecognised. 

The way I figure it, the point of recognition of sainthood is to give people an example to follow.  and of course, what is presented to people about someone recognised as a saint generally IS worthy (we rarely hear every single aspect of the saints life, right? just the "good" stuff).  therefore, in some ways it doesn't matter if this or that saint really lived up to whatever standard of saintlyness God may have, (If God even has such a standard).  They can still serve as an example to us.  The function of RECOGNISING them is more about recognising that in them which is worthy.  In the case of Seraphim Rose, he brought Orthodoxy to many Americans who had never heard of it.. so in some ways is eqivalent to, say, Cyril and Mythodius (both saints of the chruch specifically FOR enlighting the Slavs).  Many saits are canonised based on one specific thing such as this.

Even Lazar Puhalo, perhaps the most ardent of those opposing the tollhouse teaching, has said that this in no way implies that Seraphim Rose can't also be saintly. 

anyuta64 expressed my own feelings very succinctly on the subject of Seraphim Rose. I'm also "not" a fan but I will admit to his value in translating many Russian writings that we would otherwise not have. As for the toll house idea, it's just too off-the-wall for serious consideration.

Apr 21, 2011 -- 11:14AM, jlb32168 wrote:

Bump for LittleLess

I don't have the book with me here with me, LLes. 

Suffice it to say that a Google search limiting the domain to "Seraphim Rose", "aerial toll houses", and "metaphorical" produced 127 hits in six hundredths of a second.  Where I to do a search on other engines I could probably expand it even more.

Now . . . unless you're prepared to say that all of us who mentioned it are making it up, that is, that he felt they were metaphorical in nature, it might be wise of you to concede that Fr. Seraphim believed in their metaphorical nature.