At the risk of being unkind, I wonder whether in this context 'exalté' isn't for many people -including perhaps Prof. Osipov - synonymous with 'female'.
Let me just quote from something I wrote last year, when talking of the split between academic and 'mystical' theology that opens up from about 1350 in the West. It may or may not be relevant
"The fact remains that this split between mystical and academic theology is probably the key ‘problem’ with Catholicism, seen from the Orthodox standpoint. Trying to understand the divorce is not easy: there are clearly major factors in play, including a major change in social context, not least the fact that, from about Hildegard of Bingen onward, through Margaret of Porete, Catherine of Genoa, Saint Teresa of Avila, the Béguine movement and through into Marie Alacoque, the female side appears to be doing a lot of the running. At the risk of an oversimplification, the 'mystical' side becomes feminine and the academic, scholastic, becomes male. All this is intertwined from St Bernard of Clairvaux onwards, with a sponsal theology, which 'feels’ wrong from an Orthodox (and Protestant) viewpoint. Has anyone on the Orthodox side seriously examined and critiqued this Brautmystik? (...) At the same time, if we as Orthodox are going to play a part in this in the West, we have, among other things, to work out the position and contribution of pious, intelligent females.
no subject
Let me just quote from something I wrote last year, when talking of the split between academic and 'mystical' theology that opens up from about 1350 in the West. It may or may not be relevant
"The fact remains that this split between mystical and academic theology is probably the key ‘problem’ with Catholicism, seen from the Orthodox standpoint. Trying to understand the divorce is not easy: there are clearly major factors in play, including a major change in social context, not least the fact that, from about Hildegard of Bingen onward, through Margaret of Porete, Catherine of Genoa, Saint Teresa of Avila, the Béguine movement and through into Marie Alacoque, the female side appears to be doing a lot of the running. At the risk of an oversimplification, the 'mystical' side becomes feminine and the academic, scholastic, becomes male. All this is intertwined from St Bernard of Clairvaux onwards, with a sponsal theology, which 'feels’ wrong from an Orthodox (and Protestant) viewpoint. Has anyone on the Orthodox side seriously examined and critiqued this Brautmystik? (...)
At the same time, if we as Orthodox are going to play a part in this in the West, we have, among other things, to work out the position and contribution of pious, intelligent females.