catechism-ish question

[archer75]

I need re-catechizing.

Can anyone recommend a work that handles the usual stuff and offers practical ways to understand things like the will?

 

[ArmyMatt]

I mean, if you want it systematic as we can get, I recommend the Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith by St John Damascene. biblically I gotta go with Wisdom of Sirach.

 

[ArmyMatt]

there’s also the anaphora prayers of the Liturgies (especially St Basil).

 

[ArmyMatt]

sorry, one more. St Innocent of Moscow’s “Indication of the Pathway to the Kingdom of Heaven” is another one.

 

[archer75]

sorry, one more. St Innocent of Moscow’s “Indication of the Pathway to the Kingdom of Heaven” is another one.

Thanks for all the ideas, Father Matt.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Thanks for all the ideas, Father Matt.

no problem.

 

[ArmyMatt]

and the Didache

 

[The Liturgist]

there’s also the anaphora prayers of the Liturgies (especially St Basil).

Oh yes. For this kind of edification, Father, I would also be inclined to ask your thoughts on the 1893 edition of the Divine Liturgy of St. Mark published by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria, which is freely available online, and the recent edition of the Divine Liturgy of St. James and the Presanctified Liturgy of St. James published by Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, if you have seen a copy of it yet (unlike most recensions of the Eastern Orthodox version of the Divine Liturgy of St. James, it can be regarded as both a good critical text and practical text, and it does not call for doing anything along the lines of serving the Eucharist in front of the iconostasis, or other things representing a departure from normal EO liturgics).

Also, what would you think of Orthodox Dogmatic Theology by Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky, as translated by Fr. Seraphim Rose?

Regarding St. John of Damascus, I love his work, but I would note that An Exact Exposition is only part of The Fount of Knowledge, which also contains among other things a thrilling heresiological section which addresses Nestorianism, Iconoclasm, Islam and other heresies which emerged after St. Epiphanius of Salamis wrote the Panarion, and for the rest, it includes the epitomes describing them from Epiphanius, which seems particularly apt in that St. Epiphanius in turn quoted St. Irenaeus of Lyons, so we could say that the Fount of Knowledge represents the third generation in a series of ancient Orthodox encyclopedias of heresy, in addition to its catechtical sections and its philosophical material, which is exquisite, and which frankly has always left me perplexed as to why Thomas Aquinas felt the need to write the Summa, unless if by some disaster the Western church had completely forgotten about and/or disregarded St. John of Damascus.

Also, as a fun fact, the Roman Catholics regard St. John as the last Patristic theologian, and everyone after him is considered a scholastic theologian. This view I was taught contrasts sharply with the Orthodox view, in which we might regard St. Symeon the New Theologian or St. Gregory Palamas or even St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite and St. Macarius of Corinth as Church Fathers as much as St. John of Damascus.

 

[The Liturgist]

sorry, one more. St Innocent of Moscow’s “Indication of the Pathway to the Kingdom of Heaven” is another one.

Now that is one I had not heard of, oddly.

By the way, it is somewhat controversial, but I personally found The Orthodox Way by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware helpful in my catechesis; the controversial aspect if I recall was what Metropolitan Kallistos, memory eternal, wrote about what was meant by “Eloi, eloi, lama sabacthani.” Less controversial is his historical and ethnographic introduction, The Orthodox Church.

 

[ArmyMatt]

For this kind of edification, Father, I would also be inclined to ask your thoughts on the 1893 edition of the Divine Liturgy of St. Mark published by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria, which is freely available online, and the recent edition of the Divine Liturgy of St. James and the Presanctified Liturgy of St. James published by Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, if you have seen a copy of it yet (unlike most recensions of the Eastern Orthodox version of the Divine Liturgy of St. James, it can be regarded as both a good critical text and practical text, and it does not call for doing anything along the lines of serving the Eucharist in front of the iconostasis, or other things representing a departure from normal EO liturgics).

I think St Mark was adapted by St Nektarios, so if the Church approves it, I say go for it.

Also, what would you think of Orthodox Dogmatic Theology by Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky, as translated by Fr. Seraphim Rose?

not bad, but some Lutheran baggage. it wouldn’t be my first recommendation (for what that’s worth).

 

[ArmyMatt]

Now that is one I had not heard of, oddly.

By the way, it is somewhat controversial, but I personally found The Orthodox Way by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware helpful in my catechesis; the controversial aspect if I recall was what Metropolitan Kallistos, memory eternal, wrote about what was meant by “Eloi, eloi, lama sabacthani.” Less controversial is his historical and ethnographic introduction, The Orthodox Church.

with him you just gotta go for his earlier editions.

 

[The Liturgist]

I think St Mark was adapted by St Nektarios, so if the Church approves it, I say go for it.

Current scholarship also indicates its the oldest liturgy, owing to the Strasbourg Papyrus, and it is also the liturgy in the Euchologion of St. Serapion of Thmuis, which Metropolitan Seraphim of Piraeus celebrated a few years ago (albeit in the avante garde style in which St. James is sometimes celebrated, with a holy table set up temporarily in front of the iconostasis, which is not indicated by the extremely minimal rubrics in the aroresaid Euchologion, which was a bishops’ service book).

not bad, but some Lutheran baggage. it wouldn’t be my first recommendation (for what that’s worth).

What about Teachings of the Holy Orthodox Church by Rev. Michael Azkoul? This work struck me as being similar in content to that of Fr. Pomazansky, albeit more polemical.

with him you just gotta go for his earlier editions.

Indeed, I think I have an older edition of The Orthodox Way, and from what I have read of The Orthodox Church, the first edition struck me as being somewhat livelier.

I was greatly saddened by the repose of Metropolitan Kallistos, memory eternal, as his scholarship along with that of Fr. John Behr, and some homilies by Metropolitan Philip Saliba, memory eternal, collectively advised my conversion. I am wondering if there were continuity plans for someone else to finish translation on Volume V of the Philokalia which His Eminence and Mother Mary were working on.

 

[ArmyMatt]

What about Teachings of the Holy Orthodox Church by Rev. Michael Azkoul? This work struck me as being similar in content to that of Fr. Pomazansky, albeit more polemical.

I would avoid him, as he is a schismatic.

Indeed, I think I have an older edition of The Orthodox Way, and from what I have read of The Orthodox Church, the first edition struck me as being somewhat livelier.

His Eminence also had more questionable theology in later additions.

I was greatly saddened by the repose of Metropolitan Kallistos, memory eternal, as his scholarship along with that of Fr. John Behr, and some homilies by Metropolitan Philip Saliba, memory eternal, collectively advised my conversion. I am wondering if there were continuity plans for someone else to finish translation on Volume V of the Philokalia which His Eminence and Mother Mary were working on.

memory eternal, indeed. Volume V has been translated I believe, just not by him.

 

[The Liturgist]

I would avoid him, as he is a schismatic.

I take it he is Old Calendarist?

His Eminence also had more questionable theology in later additions.

You know, if you were able to refer me to a critique of the later editions and the works of Fr. Michael Pomazansky, that could be extremely useful, because I am aware of only one specific criticism of later editions of The Orthodox Church and a criticism of the Orthodox Way which is not version-specific, and my knowledge of Lutheran theology as compared to Orthodox theology is probably not good enough for me to see where Fr. Michael is departing from the norms of Orthodoxy. It took me a while to be able to discern the differences between Scholastic and Orthodox theology and there exists a documented problem of Roman Catholic influenced texts, but once one understands what concepts are of Scholastic origin it becomes easier to distill the essence.

memory eternal, indeed. Volume V has been translated I believe, just not by him.

If its presently being published I need to get a copy... Although one could argue that since Volume IV has St. Gregory Palamas and St. Symeon the New one could conceivably stop there, and have a decent set of works, but I would really like to see the entirety of what St. Nicodemus and St. Macarius collected. Without the Metropolitan’s translation of the Philokalia I would never have read works by authors such as Nikitas Stithatos or St. Peter of Damascus.

I recently came across on Scribd the five volume Romanian Philokalia translated to English, which I had heard had more content than the Athonite original, but I suspect I misread something, as it was actually less content, although much of it was additional to what one finds in the Athonite version.

 

[Phronema]

I am wondering if there were continuity plans for someone else to finish translation on Volume V of the Philokalia which His Eminence and Mother Mary were working on.

Sister Christina, and others at the Monastery of St. George in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem (not to be confused with St. George's Monastery at Wadi Qelt) have indeed translated the 5th Volume of the Philokalia to English.

Here is a link to purchase it if you'd like. I'd just add that while they did an outstanding job on it there are some errors where portions of the text seemed to have been duplicated from other volumes. While I'm not sure how, or why that happened it is otherwise a good translation so far as I've been told by our previous priest.

Philokalia Vol V

 

[ArmyMatt]

I take it he is Old Calendarist?

yep

You know, if you were able to refer me to a critique of the later editions and the works of Fr. Michael Pomazansky, that could be extremely useful, because I am aware of only one specific criticism of later editions of The Orthodox Church and a criticism of the Orthodox Way which is not version-specific, and my knowledge of Lutheran theology as compared to Orthodox theology is probably not good enough for me to see where Fr. Michael is departing from the norms of Orthodoxy. It took me a while to be able to discern the differences between Scholastic and Orthodox theology and there exists a documented problem of Roman Catholic influenced texts, but once one understands what concepts are of Scholastic origin it becomes easier to distill the essence.

Fr Michael or Met Kallistos?

 

[The Liturgist]

yep

Fr Michael or Met Kallistos?

Forgive me, I meant to say the later editions of Metropolitan Kallistos and then separately the Lutheran influence you indicated was present in the writings of Fr. Michael Pomazansky.

 

[The Liturgist]

Sister Christina, and others at the Monastery of St. George in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem (not to be confused with St. George's Monastery at Wadi Qelt) have indeed translated the 5th Volume of the Philokalia to English.

Here is a link to purchase it if you'd like. I'd just add that while they did an outstanding job on it there are some errors where portions of the text seemed to have been duplicated from other volumes. While I'm not sure how, or why that happened it is otherwise a good translation so far as I've been told by our previous priest.

Philokalia Vol V

Thank you @Phronema

Would you say the literary style is comparable to that of the first four?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Forgive me, I meant to say the later editions of Metropolitan Kallistos and then separately the Lutheran influence you indicated was present in the writings of Fr. Michael Pomazansky.

gotcha. it’s not a work by anyone, just some stuff pointed out by a monk I know.

 

[The Liturgist]

gotcha. it’s not a work by anyone, just some stuff pointed out by a monk I know.

Would you be able to go into more detail on his opinions? It would be extremely edifying for myself and others I think, if you and he have time (which you might not, understandably, but if you do, it would be helpful).