Makarii bulgakov 1816 1882 then a young hieromonk and

This preview shows page 167 - 169 out of 270 pages.

Makarii Bulgakov(1816-1882), then a young hieromonk and baccalaureate at the Kiev Acad-emy was more compliant. He was summoned to St. Petersburg in 1842 to teach theology, replac-ing Afanasii who declined to teach it and preferred to concentrate on teaching others. Makariihad not previously studied theology, and he felt more affinity for, and interest in, historicalthemes. He wrote his school thesis on the history of the Kiev Academy, and in doing so he musthave even become acquainted with old course and conspectus manuscripts on theology from thetime of Catholic influence. Most likely this was the source of his own personal sympathy for Ro-man Catholic handbooks and systems. At the academy Makarii listened to the lectures on dog-matics given by Dimitrii Muretov (1806- 1883), 241twice subsequently archbishop of Khersonand Taurida. But he did not learn scholastic ways from Dimitrii. We can judge Dimitrii's theol-ogy lectures by only a few fragments recorded in student memoirs. Dimitrii attracted, and irre-sistibly attracted, the truly meek and humble heart. But this “feeling of the heart” never de-scended to a rhetorical or sticky sentimentalism. His feeling of the heart resided in the spiritualelement and soul. In his lectures he tried to link theological problematics with their spiritualsources and religious, experience. One always detects the constant curiosity of his searchingmind. Dimitrii's outlook must now be reconstructed from his sermons. He loved to deliver ser-mons, especially ones on dogmatic themes. He spoke very simply, yet he was able to express re-ligious conceptions precisely in simple, almost naive, words and reveal an inward perspectiveeven in prosaic details (for example, read his sermon on time and eternity given New Year's167
Day). By his dogmatic inquisitiveness, the power and exhaustiveness of his reasoning, his gift ofplastic definition, Dimitrii reminds one most of all of Filaret of Moscow. Moreover, Dimitrii hada charming simplicity and wonderful humility. Khomiakov highly valued Dimitrii whom heknew personally when Dimitrii was bishop of Tula.In a real sense Dimitrii should be included in the Alexandrine current in Russian Churchlife. He was educated in those books and under those impressions. He shared a common taste oreven passion for philosophy with Innokentii. Even as a theologian Dimitrii remained a philoso-pher. He began with the data of Revelation and the testimony of the Word of God, but immedi-ately proceeded to a speculative discovery of the meaning and power of dogma. He was not anhistorian, although he supported the historical method in the exposition of dogma. He was nevera westerner — his creative independent mind and his mystical realism saved him from that.Dimitrii had no direct influence on Makarii, for whom philosophical investigation of dogmaheld no interest. Makarii states that immediately after he arrived in St. Petersburg, Afanasii sub-jected his knowledge of theology to a strict examination, “especially where it touched on points

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture