Sergius Bulgakov: The Most Interesting Theologian in the World

Image | This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Sergius Bulgakov: The Most Interesting Theologian in the World

  1. brian says:

    Love this series you do, Father.

    And the fellows you pick really are interesting . . .

    Like

    • Fr Aidan Kimel says:

      Thanks. Given that I’ve been blogging a lot on Bulgakov recently, I thought it timely to “re-blog” this “Most Interesting Theologian” pic.

      But I’ve kind’ve run out of “interesting theologians.” I’m open to suggestions!

      Like

      • Agni Ashwin says:

        What about John Scottus Eriugena (d. 9th century)?

        Like

      • brian says:

        Father,

        I wanted to look through all the theologians you have chosen, but I have not found the time. You may have already done the following, but I suggest Philip Sherrard and Christos Yannaras.

        Like

  2. matushkamarychristine says:

    I like it!!

    Like

  3. ddpbf says:

    Good one. ๐Ÿ™‚
    Father, did you have chance to read Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos (Hierotheos Vlachos). If, you did, it would be nice to see him in this series. Altough he reserves title of theologian just for three persons. ๐Ÿ™‚

    Like

    • Fr Aidan Kimel says:

      Haha. And who are Met Hierotheos’ three theologians? Let me guess: St Gregory Palamas … Fr John Romanides, and … himself? ๐Ÿ™‚

      I’ve been thinking of doing one on Romanides, but he is one of my least favorite theologians. Maybe I need to start a new series: “Least Interesting Theologians in the World.” ๐Ÿ˜‰

      Like

      • ddpbf says:

        Nope, Saint John the Theologian, Saint Gregory the Theologian and Saint Symeon the Theologian. Three Theologians, par exellance. I think Metropolitan Hierotheos is having more respect to Metropolitan John of Pergamon than to fr. John Romanides…

        Like

        • Fr Aidan Kimel says:

          I happily sit corrected … but I am surprised to hear that he is positive about Met John.

          Like

          • ddpbf says:

            Well, their relation is complex. But I dont think that Metroplitan John is criticized for his theology, rather for some of his deeds, and involment in Eccumenism. Hierotheos wrote introduction for edition of collected lectures from Dogmatics, which Zizioulas held when he was professor at University of Thessaloniki. Most vocal criticist of Met. John from theological point is fr. Nicolaos Loudvikos. Mostly on field of understanding of Person.

            Like

          • ddpbf says:

            Sorry for missinformation. Metropolitan Hierotheos wrote recomendation for Metropolitan John’s most famous study: “Unity of Church in First Three Centuries”

            Here is quote ” “… The Bishop is in the form and the place of
            Christ’s presence with his special ministry and
            is a successor to the holy Apostles; he is not
            simply “a necessity, for the preservation of
            order”. One should be reminded of the
            important analysis made by the Metropolitan
            of Pergamon, Dr. John Zizioulas, in his classic
            study “The Unity of the Church in the Divine
            Eucharist and the Bishop”. In this study, one
            can find all of the essential material which
            indicates that the Bishop does not merely
            preside over the Divine Eucharist in order to
            impose order on the charismas of the
            Christians, but that he actually comprises the
            unity of the Church, together with the Divine
            Liturgy…”
            — Rev.Metropolitan of Nafpaktos, Fr.
            Hierotheos Vlachos–

            Like

        • Fr Aidan Kimel says:

          It might be noted that Met Hierotheos’ Empirical Dogmatics is largely based on the teaching of Fr John Romanides.

          Like

          • ddpbf says:

            That is true. Yet, afaik Met. John quoted Fr. John quite few times in positive context. Both are considered to belong to Neo-Patristic and Eucharistic Schools. FWIW, on Theological Faculty at Belgrade, works of both were used as literature for Christian Anthropology (and Met. Hirotheos’). Of course Fr John have reputation for some exagerations …

            Like

  4. whitefrozen says:

    Etienne Gilson, maybe? Kierkegaard? Pascal?

    Like

Comments are closed.