Talk:Foolishness for Christ

Merge

It would be a good idea. This article postdated Yurodivy by over a year, and the editor who contributed it may not have been aware of the older article. This one presents a peculiar POV ("maverick asceticism"?) and uses a non-standard translation to express the concept; it's usually "Fool for Christ.

However, in the long run both these articles need to be combined as part of something more general. They discuss the Fool-for-Christ as almost exclusively a Russian context, but as this article notes it was known in Constantinople. It is, however, not exclusive to Eastern Christianity, but under the name "Holy Fool" was also known in the West. (Although I have to admit I know of no sainted Western Fools-for-Christ.) It might be best to have an article Holy Fool (now a redirect to Yurodivy) that treats the subject comprehensively. TCC (talk) (contribs) 11:13, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Fool

I don't think it would be appropriate to merge yurodivy (holy fool)with "Foolishness in Christ" because the holy fool as far as I know is a literary archetype present in both Southern and Russian literature separate from this other entry.

However, it's also a genuine class of saint who manifests Foolishness in Christ, and indeed most of the article talks about them as saints and not literary figures. There's no real reason to have separate articles, especially since Fools-in-Christ are not strictly Russian -- nor, for that matter, are they strictly Orthodox contrary to some claims I've seen. TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, since Yurodivy is specifically Russian Christian form of "holy fools", the Foolishness in Christ should be concerned all of them in a general manner (and being about Christianity, it would exclude the Muslim version). This article could include mainly specific yurodivy or details concerned to them. - Skysmith 09:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There is no Muslim form of Foolishness in Christ. And your link is inappropriate. This is not the "wisdom of the fool" but a particular type of ascesis. That article misstates the meaning of "holy fool" in the Christian sense, which is how it applies in the Middle Ages, since it's simply the Western Christian name for the same thing. TCC (talk) (contribs) 10:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

No, there is no Christ-related "fools" Islam but that religion has its own version of "holy fools" (some of them sufis). And no, the article I linked to is not the best possible - Skysmith 11:23, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

None of you know what the hell you are talking about -- sqwauk, sqwauk -- so shut up and live a little life. its all in your head. :D Yurodivyigoes 03:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

The concept of Fool for Christ is present throughout the Eastern churches, not just Russian Orthodoxy. Shouldn't it be shown as its own article? Majoreditor 03:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'm going to set up a separate article for Fool for Christ shortly. Majoreditor 20:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

No one did the move, so I did. I'm also going to fix the redirect, Fool for Christ. This is a very popular saying in the English-speaking world, and even though I have Russian ancestors, this is the English Wikipedia.

If we need separate articles, I'm happy to help. For example the primary article could have sections on Fool for Christ and the Yurodivy. I'd also like to know more about non-Christian traditions that may have a similar kind of holy fool. Maybe Buddhism? --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The concept is also found in Hinduism. I merged "Crazy for God" here, which mentions other traditions. Maybe there should be two articles. This one on the specificly Russian tradition and a new one on the general concept across many traditions. (This could be a good source to start with:BELIEF UNBRACKETED: A Case for the Religion Scholar to Reveal More of Where He or She Is Coming From) Steve Dufour (talk) 16:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

20th century?

According to the article about her, she lived in the 18th century and was canonized in 1988. That maked her an 18th century f-f-c... --Illythr (talk) 18:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Rasputin

The material on Rasputin definitely violates NPOV and is taken almost word for word from a single source: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/mar/18/biography.isobelmontgomery

The Wikipedia Rasputin article is vastly different from this, which makes definitive claims about what is certainly disputable--including the material in Wikipedia's own article. Please fix! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.99.18.252 (talk) 20:46, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

No, T, it is not. And copivio is fixed, if you check it. Hafspajen (talk) 21:23, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Foolishness for Christ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111205145816/http://www.powells.com/ink/schaeffer.html to http://www.powells.com/ink/schaeffer.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090211224000/http://www.hds.harvard.edu/news/bulletin/articles/prothero.html to http://www.hds.harvard.edu/news/bulletin/articles/prothero.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:05, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

"On fire for God"

This would benefit from a short explanation of the symbolism of fire pertaining to the Holy Spirit, of which there are (at least Christian) references to the Holy Spirit acting as a guide, or directing action, which I think is very relevant to the main topic. Also, the content currently in the section is unsourced, or at least unclear as to the source, and I don't think it counts as common knowledge. Musicalmather (talk) 18:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

References

Content from Makarii Marchenko

I removed the following content from Makarii Marchenko, although I thought it might be useful to add to this article. See that page history for attribution.

The (yurodivy) юродивый, the Russian version of foolishness for Christ, is a peculiar form of Eastern Orthodox asceticism. The юродивый is a Holy Fool, one who acts foolish in the eyes of men.

The prototypical story of the Holy Fool is that of the young man who asks to accompany the prophet Elijah:

One day a fervent disciple asked Elijah for permission to accompany the prophet on one of his many journeys. "You may come with me," said Elijah, "if you promise not to ask any questions about anything I do. For as soon as you ask for an explanation, we must part company." The young man promised and they started on their way.

As night fell they came to the house of a poor man whose only possession was a cow. The man and his wife received Elijah and his young friend gladly, gave them food to eat and a comfortable place in which to sleep. Before they left in the morning, Elijah prayed that the poor man’s cow should die. The disciple was surprised at the prophet’s prayer, but he kept his promise and did not ask any questions.

The next night they stopped at a mansion. The rich man paid no attention to his guests, offered them nothing to eat or drink, and sent them to sleep in the barn. As they were leaving the next morning, Elijah noticed a wall, near the house, that had crumbled away. Elijah prayed that the wall repair itself; and the wall rose before them complete and whole. Again they went on their way. And again the disciple refrained from asking questions.

The next day they came to a magnificent temple, with pews of gold and pews of silver. But none of the worshipers invited the wayfarers to their home. They went on their way and Elijah prayed that all the worshippers should become leaders. The disciple’s bewilderment grew, but again he refrained from asking questions.

At the next town they reached all the people were friendly and welcomed the strangers, offering them food and drink. When they had rested and were ready to leave, Elijah prayed that God should give them one leader. The disciple could contain himself no longer and asked: "Where is the justice of your prayers, Elijah?"

And Elijah answered: "The poor man’s wife was destined to die the day we left them, and I prayed to God to accept the cow as a vicarious sacrifice. Under the crumbling wall of the rich miser was hidden a treasure of gold which he would have discovered had he rebuilt the wall himself. The grudging worshipers in the temple will all become leaders and be ruined by many disputes. But the inhabitants of this good town, united under one wise leader, will always prosper."

"Now," said the disciple humbly, "I see that there is always justice in God’s acts, even when the evildoers seem to prosper." "Yes," said Elijah. "And now, also, since you have asked for an explanation, we must part company."

A variant of this story is also found in the Koran, in the 18th Surah, where Moses and El Khidr travel together.

This foolish behavior "is caused neither by mistake nor by feeble-mindedness, but is deliberate, irritating, even provocative." Such behavior is meant give society in general and individuals in particular some insight into their own behavior.

Daask (talk) 18:14, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

References