Fidelity to Living
Tradition:
An Interview
with Dean John Erickson
[Fall,
2003]
by
Fr. John Shimchick
Educated
at Harvard and Yale, it would be easy to imagine that Professor John Erickson,
the new Dean of St. Vladimir’s Seminary, is primarily an intellectual.
Yet, while there is certainly an intellectual side to him, those who
have known him over the nearly 40 years since his reception into the Orthodox
Faith, or others who have just had casual conversations with him, will
recognize a man with broad interests and experiences in Orthodox life.
Well
read in many areas, he is personable, a wonderful storyteller, and a
remarkably good cook (my wife uses his recipe each year at Easter for “cheese
pascha”). Much to his surprise
he is perhaps best known to many lay people for his work from the 1970’s and
1980’s in church music, often done in collaboration with his wife Helen.
He has, in fact, been greatly influenced by “the aesthetic aspect of
Orthodoxy, of which music is such an important part; the affective aspect of
Orthodoxy, the holistic approach to life that one can see and feel in Orthodox
worship.” Erickson remarks:
“It may be tempting to think that I read my way into Orthodoxy.
I would say rather that ‘I sang my way into Orthodoxy.’
Even though I don’t sing very well, it was worship - the Church’s
worship - that formed me in Orthodox church life, and it’s certainly worship
that I always turn to when I’m upset, when I’m worried, when I’m
otherwise preoccupied. It’s
liturgical music that gives me some comfort.”
Raised
in northern
Minnesota
, far from any local Orthodox churches, he was limited to simply reading
whatever he could find about the Orthodox Faith.
His first regular contact with Orthodox Christians took place during
his college years at Harvard. He
had an Orthodox roommate whose father was a priest, as was that of another
fellow student, Serge Schmemann. While
in college he began visiting St. Vladimir’s Seminary where he met Frs.
Alexander Schmemann and John Meyendorff, and Professor Serge Verhovskoy (whose
daughter Olga was also at Harvard and was, coincidentally, Helen’s
roommate). “These people took
theology seriously. They were
concerned about ultimate questions. They
were devoted to truth. They also
were very much engaged with the real world.
They were people with ideas of all sorts.
They were at home with books. I
got to appreciate much more about Orthodoxy then I had been able to gain by
any book knowledge.”
The
vision of the Seminary faculty also included their concern for the place of
Orthodoxy within American life: “What
was striking for me was the hope that St. Vladimir’s Seminary offered for
Orthodoxy in
America
, for Christians in
America
generally. They believed that
Orthodoxy had something to say to the world today, something to say to the
world I knew. And they presented
Orthodoxy as a place where even a plain old American like me could fit in.
So, I entered the Orthodox Church in St. Vladimir’s Seminary chapel
in 1964, nearly 40 years ago. It
seems hard to believe it was that long ago, because I remember it as though it
were yesterday.”
His
parents, while not familiar with Orthodoxy were nevertheless very supportive.
His father, however, had one concern:
“My father’s first question was whether I would have the same
patron saint and the same name’s day – because this was something we
celebrated in our family. I
assured him that this was the case, and he was very pleased.”
Erickson
has been teaching Canon Law and Church History at the Seminary since 1973, and
became Dean in July 2002, following the retirement of Fr. Thomas Hopko.
While there have been laymen who have served as dean at other Orthodox
seminaries throughout the world, he is the first at St. Vladimir’s.
What, given the personalities and strengths of the former deans, does
he bring to the position, and how does being a layman shape this role?
To such questions Dean Erickson replies rather simply:
“At this point, I suppose, the main strength that I bring to this
position is that I’ve been associated with the seminary a long time and also
with Orthodoxy for long time.” Also,
being a convert immediately identifies him with what continues to be a growing
reflection of the Seminary community and Orthodoxy in
America
. “1978 was the last year that a
majority of entering students at the Seminary were cradle Orthodox.
Our parishes throughout the
United States
, often across jurisdictional lines, are peopled by converts like me.”
As
for being the Dean of the Seminary?
“I would say that, being a convert and a layman, I can understand and
speak to people who are also converts and laymen.
In addition, in the actual operations of the Seminary, in some ways
being a person who is not immediately involved as a confessor of students and
faculty is also an advantage – not simply because of the time that might be
involved but because it’s possible to avoid some of the conflicts of
interest that beset some of my predecessors.
Poor Fr. Meyendorff would complain from time to time about students
coming to Confession and then ending by asking if they could have an extension
on a paper. I would not want to be
in the position of encouraging what would be called a ‘bad’ confession on
the part of a student who had cheated in my class, for example.
“At
the same time, in my relations especially Orthodox settings, it might be an
advantage at some point for me to be a priest.
In my early years at St. Vladimir’s there was little need or reason
for me to be ordained – I would have been the fifth or sixth priest in the
Seminary chapel. I certainly didn’t
want to tempt students into thinking that the only way people can serve in the
Church is by being ordained. At
this point, however, the situation may have changed, and certainly in some
circles it would be very useful for the Church and for the Seminary for me to
be a priest, to be able to represent that pastoral ministry which is part of
the main reason for our existence. Certainly
this is not ruled out even now. From
time to time I even have dreams of retirement, and one of the most wonderful
things being retired might offer would be to become a parish priest.
The life of our parishes has always been for me very exciting.
One of the great joys of being Dean is that I’ve had many more
opportunities to visit parishes in many parts of the country.
I hope that this will continue, because this is where the life of our
Church in
America
really is going on and - I hope - going forward.”
Dean Erickson, his wife Helen, and others who converted in the 1960’s
represented a “first generation” of converts to Orthodoxy in America,
converts to a Church that was itself starting to become more open in many
places – through the use of English, less emphasis on ethnic identify, etc.
Can he observe any noticeable differences in the motivations or
attitudes of those who convert today?
“Certainly
when I became Orthodox, I had no dreams of becoming Dean of St. Vladimir’s
Seminary. It never occurred to me
as a possibility. In those days,
it would have been very easy for a convert like me to feel like an outsider.
I was very thankful that this was not the case - that people encouraged
me in various ways. In any case,
in those days people entering the Orthodox Church did so with the expectation
of being transformed by the Church, of orienting their lives to the Church,
and not the vice versa. They had
no grandiose dreams of transforming the Church.
They had no grandiose dreams of setting Orthodoxy on a new and better
path. Today, in many cases, people
enter with a lot of ideas of what Orthodoxy is or what Orthodoxy should be.
They are much more eager for an opportunity to demonstrate their own
ability to transform and reform Orthodoxy.”
“Another
change, I would say, is that we find a far greater diversity in converts.
Throughout the decades people have converted to Orthodoxy because of
its claims to present Christian truths in integral form, in their most
compelling form. But today
converts come from a wider variety of religious – or non-religious -
backgrounds than once upon a time, and very often they have less experience of
actual church life then even I had back in those days.
This means that at the Seminary, just as in church life generally,
there is very little that we can take for granted any longer.
There’s no longer a shared educational background, there’s no
longer a shared experience of church life.
New students no longer arrive at the seminary with a common stock of
conceptions and misconceptions about Orthodoxy.
They arrive with an incredibly wise range of conceptions and
misconceptions. This makes it
necessary to spend more time getting to know each person as an individual.
This also makes it important to go back to basics.
You can easily find people with a fine ability to explain the essence
and energies structure in the theology of St. Gregory Palamas but with very
little practical experience of church life.
All this is relatively new.”
When
theological education is discussed one sometimes hears that there are
particular approaches represented by different seminaries.
Can it be said that there is a St. Vladimir’s “school” or “approach”
to theology, worship, and pastoral work?
“The
answer has to be ‘yes’ and ‘no.’ Very often St. Vladimir’s Seminary
is associated with ‘Eucharistic ecclesiology’ as pioneered by the ‘
Paris
School
’ at St. Sergius. At St.
Vladimir’s this was exemplified by people like Fr. Schmemann and Fr.
Meyendorff. But anyone familiar
with St. Vladimir’s Seminary in their days recognized that there was no one
single approach to theology. The
approach to theology of people like Professor Verhovskoy and Professor
Arseniev in many ways was different, though not necessarily opposed.
In any case, certainly the Seminary was always much more diverse then
people sometimes credit it.”
“There
were, however, some unifying elements. First
of all, there was the conviction that Orthodox theology should be
characterized by fidelity to a living Tradition.
Fidelity to Tradition is not simply the repetition of past formulas.
It requires that Orthodox theology be able to address new situations,
including the situation of Orthodoxy in
America
. In addition, there was an
emphasis on the Seminary - and the Church itself - as a community, and above
all as a worshipping community. The
idea that worship is a collection of rites performed to serve God with no
relationship whatsoever with the people present or absent – this was foreign
to the Seminary. Emphasis was on
the entire community – students, faculty, staff -
gathered together for worship.”
“In
terms of pastoral work, the emphasis at St. Vladimir’s again was on fidelity
to Tradition, but students were always reminded of how important it is to be
able to articulate this Tradition - how important it is to put it into
practice - in new situations and new contexts, including our North American
context. The professors we all
remember best from those days – Fr. Schmemann, Fr. Meyendorff, Professor
Verhovskoy, Professor
Areseniev and so many others – were Russians.
In some cases they spoke with very amusing accents.
But their vision was always global.
They were not content simply to try to recreate
Russia
in
America
, and they weren’t content simply to emphasize one or another old world
heritage. Their interest was the
continuing relevance of Orthodoxy for our world.”
You
are a specialist in Canon Law and Church History.
Are there lessons and mistakes from history that we as Orthodox have
not learned, and perhaps risk repeating ourselves?
“One
temptation in the history of Orthodoxy has been to identify this or that
system of this world, this or that empire, with the
Kingdom
of
God
. And along with this have come
the temptation of ethnicism and the tendency to emphasize our particularities.
Another temptation common enough today is a relatively recent one -
the tendency to dichotomize, the tendency to emphasize how
different we are from everyone else, how different we are especially from the
West. This tendency to dichotomize
very often leads to triumphalism – the idea that with us everything is
right, with us everything is good, and that with everyone else everything is
bad. This triumphalism, on the one
hand, is spiritually dangerous. It
creates pride where maybe we should have more humility; we should recognize
the dark aspects of our own past as well as its glorious moments.
This triumphalism also undermines any evangelical message that we have
to the world. Very easily and all
too often, we create stereotypes of others; we spend our time denouncing ‘straw
men.’ This makes our witness to
the world much less persuasive than it would be if we were a little more
honest about ourselves and more willing to see others as they are rather than
as we think they are.”
St.
Vladimir’s Seminary is located within several hours driving time of the
majority of our diocesan parishes. According
to Dean Erickson there are a number of ways that we can mutually encourage
each other’s work. One of the
most important things that parishes can do “is simply to be open to visits
from people from St. Vladimir’s Seminary.
This may seem self-evident, but it’s not always so.
I have strongly encouraged faculty and staff to be much more open to
invitations and to visiting parishes, whether in a formal or an informal way,
especially here in our New York/ New Jersey area.
And how could the Seminary be of support to our parishes?
This is where we would appreciate input from the parishes themselves.
I hope that the parishes in our area will suggest what we here at the
Seminary can do to help them in ways that are truly meaningful.
We don’t want to intrude, we don’t want
to impose a program or an agenda. I
hope that you will tell us what we can do to be most helpful to you.”
How
can this be done? First, Dean
Erickson is open to being emailed directly at: jhe@svots.edu.
In addition, the Seminary has, for many years now, been sponsoring
lecture series at various sites here in the northeast, and it may be possible
to have even more of these. In
addition, there are usually quite a large number of priests attached to the
Seminary chapel. Sometimes it’s
been possible to utilize these clergy when diocesan priests need a replacement
for vacation or illness.
Seminary
students are also involved in “field education.”
It is hoped that there can be continued placement of students in
diocesan parishes, which will allow them opportunities to participate in many
aspects of parish ministry. Parishes
are encouraged to support the summer internship program of the Orthodox Church
in
America
, whereby seminarians are given the opportunity to spend an entire summer
working in a parish, under the supervision of the parish priest and helping
the parish priest. This provides a
wonderful experience for our seminarians and would make them much more
effective pastors in the future.
Parishes
here in the
New York
/
New Jersey
area are encouraged to come to events at the seminary.
Many people are familiar, of course, with the annual Education Day,
held the first Saturday in October. People
may be less familiar with the many events that take place in the new
Rangos
Building
. There is the annual Father
Alexander Schmemann Memorial Lecture, which this past year was delivered by
Professor Albert Raboteau, an African-American Orthodox professor at
Princeton
University
and member of the diocese. One can
learn about these events by checking the Seminary’s website: www.svots.edu.
Finally, there are the resources of St.Vladimir’s Seminary Press and
Bookstore (800-204-BOOK).
When I
was one of his students, Professor Erickson often suggested books that he
hoped we had read or, at least, should read.
Besides the Scriptures and the generally required theological
literature, what I wonder, would he like his students to be reading today?
“These
days, there are more mainstream, mass-market books that touch on Orthodoxy or
that raise issues relevant to Orthodoxy in the world today than was the case
in the past. One of these is
Phillip Jenkins’ The Next Christendom: The
Coming of Global Christianity, a book that came out from Oxford University
Press last year. This book, I
think, presents in a very convincing way the great growth of Christianity in
what was once called the “
Third World
.” It also demonstrates, in very
gloomy ways, the decline of Christianity, especially in
Western Europe
, but also, very likely, a coming decline of Christianity and Orthodox
Christianity in
Eastern Europe. It’s important that Orthodox
Christians be familiar with what’s going on in our world today.
I would hate to say that the best thing we can do is get up in the
morning and read the New York Times, but I do think that it is more important
than ever to be aware of the world in which we live - the world in which are
called to witness to our faith - and also to be aware of the many ambiguities
of it. We have to be aware of its
wonderful accomplishments, but we also have to be aware of the shallowness
that one finds so often, and of the sense of hopelessness felt so often by
young people today - and for that matter by many others.
What do we have to say to the world in which we actually live?
I would encourage people to read not only great classics now, but also
books of current interest.”
Finally,
is there one thing that Professor Erickson could identify now that, in his
eventual retirement speech, he would like to say was accomplished during his
tenure as Dean?
“I
would like to be able to say that, in my term as Dean, the Seminary remained
true to its most basic principles, true to the vision that has guided the
Seminary through so much of its history. I
would identify at least three areas here.
First of all, I would emphasize the Pan-Orthodox character of the
seminary - the concern for Orthodox unity that the Seminary has had through so
much of its history. Second, I
would emphasize the importance of Tradition – of living Tradition - and
therefore the need for critical appropriation of this Tradition on the part of
our students. They must be
familiar with the Fathers of the Church, with Scripture, with church history,
etc., but they also must be able to relate all this learning to our
contemporary situation. Finally, a
third area - something that for me and for the Seminary has always been very
important – would be an emphasis on the holistic nature of Orthodox theology
and Orthodox theological education. Seminary
education is not just a matter of accumulating a certain number of credits.
It involves formation in virtually every aspect of life, in all of our
reactions. For this reason
participation in the worship life of the seminary community has been an
integral part of seminary education. This
is also why community service, expressed in such humble things as work on the
breakfast crew, has been an important and continuing part of seminary
education. This is why we have
always tried to maintain the residential character of the seminary, with
single students with us, married students, their families, the faculty and
their families, living in close proximity.”
“I
would hope, at the end of my time as Dean of St. Vladimir’s Seminary, to say
that we have remained faithful to this animating vision of the Seminary:
faithful to its concern for Orthodox unity, faithful to its concern for
appropriation of our Tradition, and faithful to its emphasis on community, all
of which have provided the context for theological education.”
[Special thanks to
Anastasia Shimchick for help in transcribing this interview.]