tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3184924268238537722.post7181376544060462201..comments2023-03-27T05:27:42.498-07:00Comments on Roses at Noon: In Defense of the White RoseRuth Hanna Sachshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00481493209521686732noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3184924268238537722.post-70176136207353208652014-03-21T21:16:47.569-07:002014-03-21T21:16:47.569-07:00Anthony, while I totally respect your right to you...Anthony, while I totally respect your right to your opinion, I challenge you to find anything that Alexander Schmorell himself wrote that would support that opinion. Or even things that contemporaries of his wrote or said about him.<br /><br />First-hand accounts (his letters, his Gestapo interrogation transcripts, his friends' words) depict a young man whose Russianness was the single most important element of his life. That informed everything else about Alexander Schmorell. It influenced his dress, the literature he read, the people he associated with. He deemed himself Russian Orthodox not because he was particularly religious (he was *not* religious), but because he was Russian.<br /><br />To claim otherwise is to rewrite history.<br /><br />And we have that from the most authentic source available: His half-brother, Erich Schmorell.Denise Elaine Heaphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09798324268105614942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3184924268238537722.post-4386119062440688382014-03-21T18:59:47.464-07:002014-03-21T18:59:47.464-07:00I struggle to understand how anyone can make such ...I struggle to understand how anyone can make such confident judgments about another person's motivations, which are often hidden even from that person. Why separate Alexander Schmorell's faith from his ethical judgments? This sounds suspiciously like what you call others to avoid, namely, imposing one's own view of things onto another person. Americans in particular like to assume that "religion" is easily separable from more public aspects of our lives, such as "ethics." This is a very 18th-century view, and one that is foreign to historic Christianity. Is it really possible for a religious believer to see anything at all apart from their faith? If faith is something extrinsic to one's life, then I suppose the answer is yes. This is how many people today, including those who do not practice a religious faith, see things. But this is to assume a view of Christianity that is actually opposed to that faith; faith is not something added to one's life, but the very means through which we see, interpret, and live our lives. Even a cursory knowledge of the great writers of the Christian tradition would prevent someone from reducing faith to something like "belief," which can be neatly divorced from the rest of one's life and judgment. Then it's possible to take something we may think is more important, such as "ethics," and privilege that. Perhaps the Russian Orthodox Church wasn't as foolish, or devious, as you make it seem. Anthonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12990057223724944636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3184924268238537722.post-52355981026807868912012-05-03T22:14:12.051-07:002012-05-03T22:14:12.051-07:00"we need writers who 'get' Rudolf Ste..."we need writers who 'get' Rudolf Steiner and his Philosophy of Freedom" I agree wholeheartedly. What can help is a new online “Philosophy Of Freedom Study Course” available at http://www.philosophyoffreedom.com. Its free and includes videos, illustrations, observation exercises and diagrams to help study the book. In this book Rudolf Steiner gives his principles of free thinking and morality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com