St. Vladimir’s Seminary and Undergraduate Education

Fr. John H. Erickson

St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary

Consultation of the Orthodox Theological Society in America and the Office of Vocation & Ministry, Hellenic College Cenacle Retreat Center, Chicago, Illinois June 12, 2008

For the first fifty years of its existence, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary was involved in undergraduate education in a variety of ways, but this involvement can best be described as peripheral and accidental, regardless of the form it took. St. Vladimir’s did not have – and did not claim to have – a distinctive vision of Orthodox undergraduate education in America. Rather, it had a distinctive vision of Orthodox theological education in America. Put simply, the seminary was committed to the idea that Orthodox clergy in America need the level of education considered normal in other denominations if they are to provide an effective witness in American society. Put even more simply, they need a college education as the foundation for their theological training.

St. Vladimir’s was established in 1938, but the inspiration behind it can be traced to the first decades of the 20th century. In 1905 (Belavin), then head of the North American mission diocese of the and later Patriarch of Moscow, established a seminary in Minneapolis MN for the training of future clergy. This seminary, subsequently transferred to Tenafly NJ (1913), offered a four-year program in liberal arts and theology similar to that of seminaries in pre- revolutionary Russia or elsewhere in Europe, i.e., it reached a level corresponding roughly to that of an American junior college or “normal school.” Only the most promising students could hope to go on for graduate-level work in one of Russia’s four theological “academies.” Unfortunately the Russian Revolution of 1918 brought an abrupt end to these early educational endeavors. Financial support for the North American seminary – not to mention further graduate-level study – dried up, and in 1923 the seminary was forced to close.

By the 1930s the need for an Orthodox seminary in America had again become painfully obvious to the leaders of most of the Orthodox jurisdictions in America. Under the leadership of Archbishop Athenagoras of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese and with the concurrence of Metropolitan Platon of the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church in America, or “Metropolia,” plans began for a united seminary that would serve all the Orthodox in America. After the latter’s death in 1934, support for this project waned in the Metropolia. When the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese did at length succeed in

1

establishing a seminary, in Pomfret CT in 1937, it was intended for young men of the Greek Orthodox faith who would complete two years of preliminary studies there, chiefly in Greek language, and then go on to established schools abroad for further training. But within the Metropolia hopes for reestablishment of a seminary – with even loftier aspirations – were not dead. In 1937 Platon’s successor, Metropolitan Theophilus, asked Dr. Basil Bensin – a graduate of the Moscow Theological Academy and former teacher at the Minneapolis and Tenafly seminaries – to prepare a report on theological education for the Metropolia’s upcoming Sixth All-American Sobor, or council. Bensin’s report has been described as the “spiritual charter” for St. Vladimir’s Seminary. He outlined the need for a seminary that would meet the standards expected by other denominations in America, served as they are by clergy with college degrees. The global situation of Orthodoxy, he argued, has changed since the days of the seminary in Minneapolis and Tenafly. America has the potential to become one of the great centers for world Orthodoxy, but the Orthodox Church will not fulfill its mission here if it does not possess a theological school in the full sense of the word, a school capable of raising Orthodox witness to its historic level, of defending the faith, of proclaiming it in the midst of a largely secularized Western society. The seminary therefore must be not just an institution for the training of candidates for but also a real graduate school of theology integrated within the American system of education. Specifically, Bensin proposed reopening of the seminary in City, in conjunction with Columbia University. (See “St. Vladimir’s Seminary 1938-1958,” an unsigned article by Fr. , in St. Vladimir’s Seminary Quarterly for summer 1958, published also as a separate extract, p. 3.)

Bensin’s proposal met with a mixed response at the Sobor. Some regarded the idea of requiring seminarians to get a college degree as an unnecessary luxury. In the end, the Metropolia decided to establish two schools: a pastoral school at St. Tikhon’s Monastery in South Canaan PA, and – along the lines envisioned by Dr. Bensin – St. Vladimir’s Seminary in New York City. The latter was officially inaugurated on October 3, 1938. After a year of operating out of Metropolia churches in New York City, the seminary found its first home in White Hall, at General Theological Seminary. “Regular students” pursued a five-year joint program leading to a B.A. from Columbia and a diploma from St. Vladimir’s. “Advanced students,” i.e., those already having a B.A. degree, took only seminary courses. The faculty was small. By 1941 it numbered six, most of whom were graduates of pre-revolutionary Russian academies or universities. The Dean, Makary (Ilinsky), had been an instructor at the seminary in Minneapolis and later dean when it moved to Tenafly. The student body – consisting of four “regular students,” two “advanced students,” and one “special student” – was not much larger.

The entry of the United States into World War II brought new challenges for the fledgling seminary. Among other things, admissions had to be curtailed. But following the war, the seminary at last gained the possibility of becoming a true graduate school of theology. A number of distinguished émigré academics from Europe joined the faculty, including Eugene Spektorsky (jurisprudence), Nicholas O. Lossky (philosophy), George P. Fedotov (hagiology, church history), Nicholas Arseniev (spirituality, world religions),

2

Alexander Bogolepov (canon law), Bishop John Shahovskoy (pastoral theology), and of course Fr. Georges Florovsky (patristics). Later they would be joined by a younger generation of scholars, chiefly from the St. Sergius Institute in Paris. These included Serge Verhovskoy, Fr. Alexander Schmemann, and Fr. . At the request of Metropolitan Theophilus, Prof. Fedotov prepared a report for the Metropolia’s Seventh All-American Sobor in 1946, which outlined concrete steps that could be taken in order to realize Basil Bensin’s earlier vision for the seminary. In 1947 the seminary moved into somewhat more spacious accommodations “uptown” at the corner of Broadway and 121st Street, in a collection of apartments rented from Union Seminary, and in 1948, in recognition of the seminary’s progress, the Metropolia’s Synod of decided to transform the seminary into a “theological academy,” the Russian version of a graduate school or university faculty. This transformation was officially sanctioned when the New York State Board of Regents granted the seminary a Provisional Charter later in the same year and an Absolute Charter in 1953.

The designation of St. Vladimir’s as an “academy” would have remained an empty gesture had it not been for a significant increase in enrollment. Entering students included a number of veterans of the armed forces, who – financed by the GI Bill – were now able to pursue a college degree as well as theological training, something that before the war would have been impossible in many cases. Displaced persons from Orthodox Eastern Europe, often sponsored by ecumenical friends of the seminary, were also numerous. In addition, the pan-Orthodox emphasis of Florovsky and his associates helped induce hierarchs from several jurisdictions besides the Metropolia – most notably the Antiochian Archdiocese – to send their candidates for ordination to St. Vladimir’s.

Initially the program of study remained much as it had been before the war. “Regular students” pursued a five-year program of course work concurrent with B.A. studies, many in Columbia’s School of General Studies (which was – and is – geared to students from “non-traditional” backgrounds), others in Columbia College, others still – as indicated in the Bulletin for 1952-53 – at New York University or “some other university” in New York City; the institutions in question generally accepted up to thirty credits in course work done at St. Vladimir’s towards fulfillment of their own B.A. requirements. “Advanced students” – i.e., those already having a B.A. degree – typically completed requirements for the seminary’s diploma in two years. “Special students” included everyone from elderly Russian ladies eager to hear Prof. Arseniev lecture on mysticism to doctoral candidates at Columbia University and Union Seminary. If, however, the seminary was ever to receive degree-granting authority from the state and national accreditation from the Association of Theological Schools (ATS), some significant changes were needed. Among other things, the seminary had to disentangle its graduate-level program from instruction aimed primarily at undergraduates. This slow process began in the mid-1950s, around the time that a new generation of post-war American students – young men like David Drillock and Thomas Hopko – were entering the seminary. Of the total student body of thirty to forty students, roughly half were still enrolled in college whether at Columbia or elsewhere, but at the seminary these students now pursued a “pre-theological program,” which included courses in languages, liturgics,

3

music, and some electives in other fields but not the more advanced courses of the graduate theological program.

At the same time that the seminary was moving from a pattern of concurrent collegiate and theological study to one of sequential pre-theological and theological study, it also was searching for a permanent home of its own. At length, in 1962, the seminary acquired the core of its present campus in suburban Crestwood NY. With this and other tangible assets in hand, and with its basic program of study clearly established at the graduate level, the seminary became an associate member of the ATS in 1966 and received state authorization to award the degrees of B.Div. (later M.Div.) the following year. But the seminary continued to maintain a “pre-theological” or “collegiate” division in its new location. In the summer of 1962, an agreement was worked out with nearby Iona (then a small Roman Catholic liberal arts college for men), whereby up to 30 credits of college-level courses in theology (including biblical studies and church history), philosophy, languages, and the arts could be applied towards B.A. requirements. Beginning in 1974, similar arrangements were made with Concordia (a coeducational college of the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, with strong programs in music and education).

There were certain advantages, but also certain disadvantages, to maintaining the collegiate division. In principle, it provided a nurturing environment for a spirited cadre of students who could be impressed into service for summer octets and other forms of outreach and who in time would serve as the spiritual backbone of the theological division. Ideally, its “pre-the” courses were crafted in such a way as to provide a solid foundation for subsequent study in the M.Div. program without becoming simply light- weight versions of the M.Div. courses. At the same time, these courses could be offered to the general public as part of an extension program. While these courses did not shorten the length of time needed for eventual completion of the M.Div. program (three years), they did lighten it somewhat, since students could take Greek as undergraduates, allowing them greater flexibility in selection of courses thereafter. In addition, the collegiate division provided a convenient “home” for the seminary’s diploma programs in liturgical music and religious education. A student completing the collegiate division with a diploma in one of these areas could serve the church in a meaningful way without continuing in the M.Div. program. Ideally, all this was true. But critics of the collegiate division (including the ATS) could question whether its continued maintenance was a proper use of institutional resources. Why should the already-stretched faculty and staff of a graduate school of theology spend so much of their time and energy on an undergraduate program?

While its advocates could point to the various ways in which the collegiate division benefited the Church and the seminary, its critics gradually gained the upper hand – and for a variety of reasons. While enrollment in the collegiate division remained steady, at least until the 1980s, the ratio of collegiate division students to theological division students declined. In the 1960s, the ratio of collegiate to theological students was approximately 1:2. With the growth of the theological division, this ratio gradually declined to 1:3 and even 1:4. Meanwhile the composition of both divisions was

4

changing. The average age of students entering the theological division was rising, as was the number of married students. In the collegiate division, a few students still came directly from high school, but these sometimes lacked the clear sense of vocational direction that had characterized earlier generations. Others came much later in life; today they might even be classified as “late vocations.” With these demographic changes, maintenance of a common school spirit and a common code of behavior became ever more difficult. By the 1980s, as other opportunities for higher education and a real “college experience” expanded, enrollment in the seminary’s small pre-theological program became less and less attractive. Numbers declined, exacerbating problems of morale as well as inconveniences relating to such practical matters as transportation to and from college classes. In 1985, as part of a wider reform of the seminary curriculum, the college-level diploma programs in liturgical music and religious education were upgraded to become part of a graduate-level M.A. program. In the 1985-87 and 1987-89 editions of the seminary catalog, the collegiate division continued to be listed among “other educational opportunities” available at St. Vladimir’s Seminary, but the listing of courses for that division – hitherto unrealistically ample – shrank to a size that more accurately reflected the division’s marginality. New admissions appear to have ended in 1988, the seminary’s fiftieth year. St. Vladimir’s had finally become what its founders intended it to be: a graduate school of theology.

Since then, a few individuals have expressed disappointment that the seminary terminated the collegiate division. Some of these have been alumni nostalgic for a vanished past – and, after all, who could forget those golden autumn afternoons when pre-the / the rivalries were played out on the football field or the food fights that occasionally broke out in the refectory back in the days when the vast majority of SVS students were young, single male carnivores. But a few of those expressing disappointment have focused on the need for some Orthodox alternative to the secularity of the modern American college campus. I appreciate their concern, but I question the feasibility of some of their proposals. The idea of an Orthodox college, committed to academic excellence but also thoroughly imbued with spiritual values, is attractive. Yet I wonder how many Orthodox parents would encourage their children to choose such a college over a Harvard or a Stanford. Given the history of denominational higher education in the United States – whether Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, or Orthodox – prospects for the future of such a college seem bleak. It will become either more and more secular or more and more sectarian. More feasible, in my estimation, would be an enhanced presence of Orthodox Christian Fellowships (OCF) or similar groups on college and university campuses. But discussion of such questions must be deferred to our next session, which – as the program indicates – will be devoted to “new involvement of Orthodox in higher education.” Older forms of involvement, such as the pre-the program at St. Vladimir’s, form part of the historical record, but they offer no compelling vision for the future. But, oh, what memories! Football, food fights, and friendships that last for a lifetime.

5

Resources:

Bulletins of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary for the period 1948-1953, and Catalogs for most years since then.

Phone interviews with Fr. Thomas Hopko and Prof. David Drillock, spring 2008, and extended reminiscences of the former as recorded in July 2005.

A Legacy of Excellence: St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary 1938-1988, Crestwood NY: Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1988.

Orthodox America 1794-1976, ed. Constance J. Tarasar and John H. Erickson. Syosset NY: Orthodox Church in America Department of History and Archives, 1975.

[Alexander Schmemann] “St. Vladimir’s Seminary 1938-1958,” extract from St. Vladimir’s Seminary Quarterly for summer 1958.

The Seminarian, published by the students of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary. New York City: September 1941.

6