Talk:Seraphim Rose
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Made a few changes. First, describing Fr Seraphim as single-handedly responsible for the spread of Orthodoxy in America is a trifle hyperbolic (SS Herman and Innocent, anyone?), so I toned that down a bit. Second, I changed his name to "Eugene" in all instances from his birth up to his monastic tonsure, to be consistent with standard hagiographic style.
It might be well to note in the article some more specific aspects of his writings. For example, that they tend to a more traditionalistic approach to Orthodoxy, that they are critical of modernism and ecumenism, etc. In fairness, we might also want to note that his writings are not universally accepted, with some Orthodox critics suggesting that they might be tinged with gnosticism.
Some mention of Father Herman/Gleb Podmoshensky might also be in order. JHCC 19:05, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Book mention
Perhaps there should be some mention of his extensive (exactly 1000 pages) biography by Hieromonk Damascene, Not of this World, from which I would guess most of the info in this article is taken? Tix 23:53, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Absolutely. There's an extensively revised version, too, entitled Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works.[1] ——Preost talk contribs 02:17, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Source?
What is the source of the homosexuality material? Is it in the book of his letters? ——Preost talk contribs June 30, 2005 03:37 (UTC)
- Take a look at the magazine article from Pomona College. JHCC (talk) 30 June 2005 13:46 (UTC)
That one doesn't seem to cite its own sources very well, unfortunately. Perhaps it's from the book of letters. ——Preost talk contribs June 30, 2005 15:59 (UTC)
- I wonder about the statement "shed his identity as a gay man". The statement suggests he participated in a gay lifestyle or subculture (such as it was at the time) which he gradually abandonned. Fr. Damascene's bio merely hints at this aspect of his life, but I don't see much to indicate this was the case. Of course, homo- and bisexuality wasn't uncommon in the beat community, but that always sruck me as having more to do with the rejection of bourgeois middle-class values than an affirmation of homosexuality as such. That may have come about later as a development of beat thought, but I don't know that it was an explicit part of that movement. I could be wrong, of course. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:34, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Homosexuality
I cleaned up the first sentence of the new paragraph in the Homosexuality section. However, this part:
- "There are even some close persons to Fr. Seraphim that assert they do not believe in his previous-to-conversion homosexuality and they contest the authenticity of his homosexual letters. Even though others claim that Fr. Seraphim continued to be a homosexual, intending by this either to condemn him, either to justify homosexuality in Orthodox Faith, their pretensions are not supported in any way."
is extremely awkward and violates a couple of WP principles. First, it is completely unsourced (I've added {{citation needed}} tags) and thus vulnerable to summary deletion. Second, there is an implied opposition to the POV of those claiming that Fr. Seraphim was and/or continued to be a homosexual; this violates WP:NPOV.
I would ask the author of this paragraph to clarify the following:
- Who are the persons asserting non-belief in pre-conversion homosexuality and where have these assertions been documented? (See Wikipedia:Verifiability for guidelines.)
- What is meant by "continued to be a homosexual"? Does this mean "continued to feel sexual attraction for other men" or "continued to practice sexual intercourse with other men" or indeed something else?
- Who are the persons intending to condemn Fr Seraphim by asserting his homosexuality and where have these intentions and assertions been documented?
- Who are the persons intending "to justify homosexuality in Orthodox Faith" and where have these intentions been documented?
- What is meant by "to justify homosexuality in Orthodox Faith"? Does this mean "a claim that the Orthodox Church should tolerate or accept homosexuality because Fr Seraphim was homosexual", or does it mean "a claim that the Orthodox Church does tolerate or accept homosexuality, as evidenced by Fr Seraphim being both homosexual and venerated"?
The paragraph opens up a couple of interesting avenues of exploration, but the addition of the above information would improve it immensely. JHCC (talk) 16:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks to whoever added the attributions. I have added {{citation needed}} tags to these attributions; could you please supply this information, in the interest of verifiability? Thanks.