It is useful when an academic scholar like Fr Andrew Stephen Damick makes taxonomical lists of heresies, or gives alternative definitions of ancient greek words, or dredges up textual obscurities, or lays out interesting historical suppositions, etc.
... but none of this guff from the "olive groves of academia" articulates the desert theology of the patristic tradition of, say, the Phikokalia, etc.
The desert fathers clearly understand heresy and deception because themselves embody and live out theology. They communicate their understanding by leading others to experience the same.
Academic "theologians" instead try to articulate rational propositions intelligible to the ratiocinating 'mind' alone. (I mean 'mind' and not 'nous.') Their propositions are intelligible even to non-Christians.
I don't want to generate heat, but my own view is that when an Orthodox priest writes "academic" books, he steps out of Orthodox tradition, and not just "patristic" tradition.
That's fine to do so, if one at least admits and acknowledges that that's what one is doing, and takes responsibility for the consequences.
This kind of academic fluff is enjoyable, like bubble-gum, but all too often it parades and pretends to be apologetic or pastorally motivated. Nuh, it's spiritual fluff.
Worse. It brings a worldly, rationalistic comprehension to spiritual quantities/qualities that need handling with reverence and holy fear.
The Ancient Faith Media project would probably even agree with my diagnosis above. How? Because they are like the "best students of orthodoxy in the world."
AFM's scholars like Fr Andrew generally say and speak clichés that are seemingly ortho-consonant with the best of tradition, because they studied it hard, but AFM's worldly ethos drags them unwittingly into actions and positions that are not consonant with their own clichés (hence its current 'COVID' debacle).
In my opinion, the "return to the fathers" of Fr Georges Florovsky was unscathed by the later attempt to undermine it.
One senses that this kind of academic scholar (Fr Georges) is able to embody actual, desert theology as well as treat with university academics, heretics (and the doubtfully orthodox) in their own language.
... but none of this guff from the "olive groves of academia" articulates the desert theology of the patristic tradition of, say, the Phikokalia, etc.
The desert fathers clearly understand heresy and deception because themselves embody and live out theology. They communicate their understanding by leading others to experience the same.
Academic "theologians" instead try to articulate rational propositions intelligible to the ratiocinating 'mind' alone. (I mean 'mind' and not 'nous.') Their propositions are intelligible even to non-Christians.
I don't want to generate heat, but my own view is that when an Orthodox priest writes "academic" books, he steps out of Orthodox tradition, and not just "patristic" tradition.
That's fine to do so, if one at least admits and acknowledges that that's what one is doing, and takes responsibility for the consequences.
This kind of academic fluff is enjoyable, like bubble-gum, but all too often it parades and pretends to be apologetic or pastorally motivated. Nuh, it's spiritual fluff.
Worse. It brings a worldly, rationalistic comprehension to spiritual quantities/qualities that need handling with reverence and holy fear.
The Ancient Faith Media project would probably even agree with my diagnosis above. How? Because they are like the "best students of orthodoxy in the world."
AFM's scholars like Fr Andrew generally say and speak clichés that are seemingly ortho-consonant with the best of tradition, because they studied it hard, but AFM's worldly ethos drags them unwittingly into actions and positions that are not consonant with their own clichés (hence its current 'COVID' debacle).
In my opinion, the "return to the fathers" of Fr Georges Florovsky was unscathed by the later attempt to undermine it.
One senses that this kind of academic scholar (Fr Georges) is able to embody actual, desert theology as well as treat with university academics, heretics (and the doubtfully orthodox) in their own language.
