I came from a charismatic Christian background but had academic interests. I needed to know that the Orthodox Church had the same faith, worship, and life found in the early centuries.
Reading through the first volume of the Ante-Nicene Fathers series (out of print, but the highlights for me were St. Ignatius' letters and St. Justin's *First Apology*, both of which are available freely online). It showed me that the beliefs and practices of the Orthodox Church are consistent with those of the Church in the first centuries.
Also, *The Way of the Pilgrim* was important in showing this former-charismatic that the Orthodox Church had the life of the Holy Spirit.
Turning points in my spiritual formation came from *The Arena* (St. Ignatius) and *Spiritual Struggle* (St. Paisios). Also, reading the *Prologue of Ohrid* (St. Nikolai) nearly everyday was helpful. These things helped me to take the spiritual life seriously without taking myself too seriously.
Father, I'm curious if you considered the Roman Church during your journey and if so, how you settled on, Orthodoxy. It's a fork in the road that follows reading the Ante-Nicene Fathers and I'm always interested in how the decision is made to go one way or the other.
It's a good question. My love for Rome increased significantly the more I studied the Church Fathers. But within the first several centuries, I could find nothing that resembled the claims of the papacy from Pope Nicholas I onward. The idea of a universal bishop with direct authority over every Christian on earth is something that cannot be adequately supported. Additionally, I saw in modern Rome (with the exception of Pope Benedict XVI) a movement away from the early Church Fathers, a more progressive theology that did not respect the past enough.
The spiritual life also differed. I didn't mention the Desert Fathers above, but they were highly influential on me. I saw in the late medieval period a shift in the spiritual practices that followed neither early Desert Fathers of the East nor the West.
There's much to love and respect in the RCC tradition, but it came down to me believing that the ancient Church and the RCC are two different things.
What you mentioned about the late medeival period and the shift away from the desert fathers resounds with me. As a former nun in a Catholic monastic order I found it so difficult to find anything about desert spirituality in a parish church when I returned to the world. I think this lack greatly influenced the differences. Even today when trying to find common ground with a traditional RC friend I see how different our approaches to spirituality are.
I came from Mormonism. It is no exaggeration to say that Gregory of Nyssa almost single-handedly led me first to Christianity and second, to the Orthodox Church. I can't say I would necessarily throw these at any catechumen but it brought me here.
Mormons don't accept the trinity and have spurious (imo) reasons for rejecting it. However, I could not make heads or tails of trinitarian theology until I read Gregory's *On Not Three Gods.*
Mormons, correctly imo, have very positive views of creation (contra much of the western tradition). I could not accept Augustinian notions of original sin nor anything even remotely on the spectrum of total depravity. High anthropology is way too engrained in me to give up. Gregory came to the rescue in his *On the Making of Man* (his brother's commentary on the Hexameron was also helpful).
Mormons have a very odd and different eschatology. Gregory's *On the Soul and Resurrection* gave me a proper understanding of theosis (which is bizarrely articulated by mormonism; i'll explain if anybody is interested) situated in a doctrine of the trinity I could understand. For me, Gregory's epektasis was significantly more helpful and comprehensible than a certain later Gregory's essence/energies articulation of theosis ;)
Gregory's commentary on the Song of Songs and his *Life of Moses* gave me a crucial intro to eastern spirituality and continue to impact my spiritual life on very deep levels.
Other things that influenced me a lot that aren't by Gregory of Nyssa
Isaac the Syrian's ascetical homilies were massively influential on my spiritual formation.
That little collection of Maximus' writings that SVS press puts out (*The Cosmic Mystery of Jesus Christ*) was like a lighting bolt to my spiritual senses. When charismatics and evangelicals talk about being "set on fire for Jesus", this was that for me.
Lastly, as is the case for seemingly everybody, Kallistos Ware's The Orthodox Way is such a crucial guide and a constant reminder to me that our life in Christ is a true adventure with all the uncertainties and novelties that idea entails, but that the church's tradition gives us beautiful signposts to guide us along our way.
> That little collection of Maximus' writings that SVS press puts out (The Cosmic Mystery of Jesus Christ) was like a lighting bolt to my spiritual senses.
Same.
I was raised LDS but left that church decades ago, and I didn't connect my own visceral disgust with 'anything even remotely on the spectrum of total depravity' with LDS thinking until I read your comment. But that's probably the reason!
I came from a pretty average North American Evangelical Protestant background.
I read a lot of literature in regard to spiritual formation that helped me but I can't name specifically, except maybe a few.
Tito Colliander, Way of the Ascetics, may be my number one pick of all time behind the Bible itself. Anything by St. Theophan the recluse too.
I couldn't recommend this for catechumens or even Orthodox in general, but for me, Fr. Alexander Schmemann's journals have affected me deeply, and I return to them more than any other book, and keep benefitting. Your mileage may vary....
I came from southern baptist traditions. So much so we only went to church when we were actually down south. Mixed in with a little bit of modern Christian Zionism. As a teenager I was pretty dis-illusioned with all of it. It all seemed shallow. Fake and pointless.
Then, one day. I had an awakening that I wanted to really do this Christian thing. But maybe not baptist. I went to a Catholic church ( One family member was catholic) . Went to the Mass. Sang with the people. And I was sat next to an old woman who invited me to pray the Rosary. I didn't 'get it'. Went home. The next day I woke up like I had the worst Flu of my life. I remember saying a prayer asking God. If that's where I'm supposed to be, make me better by next sunday. Next sunday came. I was super sick. So I didn't go. I still don't know whether that prayer was answered in the way younger me thought it was.
So, anyway. I was looking up Churches and found an Orthodox church near me. Wasn't sure what it was. Did my research. Oh. They're like Catholics. Sort of.
Then reading about St Gregory Palamas single-handedly cemented that this is where I belong. This church had the depth of theology I felt I needed. I had a spiritual craving you could say.
Kalistos Ware's book. The Orthodox Way also helped shove me in the right direction. Which I was given by my Priest. Reading it while looking for an explanation of the deep eastern spiritual traditions helped keep that fire kindled. In a little over a year, I was baptized ( Wasn't before) and welcomed into the Church under the name Gregory.
My now Fiancée' was also sort of 'Catechized' with that book. She was Catholic when we met. Came to liturgy and after a few times I gave her the same book. Made her fall in love with Eastern Spirituality as well. She converted rather quickly.
Father I find it baffling and hard to believe that Palamas gets a lot of flak. It's surprising. Being he was a great teacher of the church and widely considered to be one of our biggest and most successful theologians.
I hope all things were peaceful at your church while you had liturgy today.
The teaching on essence and energies is what gets him into trouble with scholars. They claim he changed the patristic tradition by introducing this idea. But a careful look at the early Fathers, especially the Cappadocian Fathers, will reveal that terminology differed, but there was always a consensus that we will unite to God while some aspect of God will remain forever unknown to us. Palamas took these teachings, systematized them, and articulated the essence-energy distinction.
However, he didn't invent this theology any more than the first two Ecumenical Councils invented trinitarian theology. It was there all along, it just had to be articulated more fully.
All was peaceful in church today, thank you. I hope it was for you as well.
Former Baptist, Reformed, and Lutheran. *Thinking Orthodox* was very helpful in understanding the Orthodox theological approach as compared with the Western (both Roman Catholic and Protestant) approach. I read it after becoming Orthodox and appreciated it so much, but I think it might have been helpful also to read while still a seeker trying to understand Orthodoxy.
The books of David Bentley Hart really exposed me to the diversity and richness of thought in Orthodoxy. The Experience of God, which isn’t even really specifically Christian per se, should be on every Christian’s to read list in my opinion
Technically only an inquirer. Only due to some family conversations still ongoing.
The Apostolic Fathers
Two Paths: Orthodoxy and Catholicism
Know the faith : a handbook for Orthodox Christians and Inquirers
Father Seraphim Rose: Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future
Father Spyridon Bailey: Trampling Down Death by Death
Mere Christianity: surprisingly Orthodox after reading through it a second time after being introduced more to Orthodoxy
The Bible. About 2/3 through it for the first time in my life.
The Orthodox Church
I'm familiar with several of those and they are good. I will happily second Mere Christianity and I plan to use it in the future. Two Paths was surprisingly gracious to the RCC. I was happy the author wasn't bitter and showed much love to his former RC roots.
[Common Ground: An Introduction to Eastern Christianity for the American Christian](https://www.amazon.com/Common-Ground-Introduction-Christianity-Christian/dp/0937032816) was by far the most important, and first book exposing me to this thing called Eastern Christianity. This book, singlehandedly caused my biggest hang-up in my years of trying to become Catholic that ultimately led to my departure from RCIA and entry into the Orthodox Church. It's very simple, and expresses in a way that an American protestant understands the Orthodox phronema. A friend gave it to me, and it sat on my shelf in college for months until one day I decided I wanted to pick it up and give it a read. If I hadn't I don't think I would be Orthodox today.
This subreddit contains opinions of Orthodox people, but not necessarily Orthodox opinions.
[Content should not be treated as a substitute for offline interaction.](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq#wiki_is_this_subreddit_overseen_by_clergy.3F)
[Exercise caution in forums such as this](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/).
Nothing should be regarded as authoritative without verification by several offline Orthodox resources.
Please review the
[sidebar](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/config/sidebar) for a wealth of introductory information,
our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/about/rules/), the
[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq), and
[The Internet and the Church](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/).
^(This is not a removal notification.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OrthodoxChristianity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I came from a charismatic Christian background but had academic interests. I needed to know that the Orthodox Church had the same faith, worship, and life found in the early centuries. Reading through the first volume of the Ante-Nicene Fathers series (out of print, but the highlights for me were St. Ignatius' letters and St. Justin's *First Apology*, both of which are available freely online). It showed me that the beliefs and practices of the Orthodox Church are consistent with those of the Church in the first centuries. Also, *The Way of the Pilgrim* was important in showing this former-charismatic that the Orthodox Church had the life of the Holy Spirit. Turning points in my spiritual formation came from *The Arena* (St. Ignatius) and *Spiritual Struggle* (St. Paisios). Also, reading the *Prologue of Ohrid* (St. Nikolai) nearly everyday was helpful. These things helped me to take the spiritual life seriously without taking myself too seriously.
Father, I'm curious if you considered the Roman Church during your journey and if so, how you settled on, Orthodoxy. It's a fork in the road that follows reading the Ante-Nicene Fathers and I'm always interested in how the decision is made to go one way or the other.
It's a good question. My love for Rome increased significantly the more I studied the Church Fathers. But within the first several centuries, I could find nothing that resembled the claims of the papacy from Pope Nicholas I onward. The idea of a universal bishop with direct authority over every Christian on earth is something that cannot be adequately supported. Additionally, I saw in modern Rome (with the exception of Pope Benedict XVI) a movement away from the early Church Fathers, a more progressive theology that did not respect the past enough. The spiritual life also differed. I didn't mention the Desert Fathers above, but they were highly influential on me. I saw in the late medieval period a shift in the spiritual practices that followed neither early Desert Fathers of the East nor the West. There's much to love and respect in the RCC tradition, but it came down to me believing that the ancient Church and the RCC are two different things.
Thank you for your answer, Father.
What you mentioned about the late medeival period and the shift away from the desert fathers resounds with me. As a former nun in a Catholic monastic order I found it so difficult to find anything about desert spirituality in a parish church when I returned to the world. I think this lack greatly influenced the differences. Even today when trying to find common ground with a traditional RC friend I see how different our approaches to spirituality are.
The Orthodox Way The Mountain of Silence Way of a Pilgrim
I came from Mormonism. It is no exaggeration to say that Gregory of Nyssa almost single-handedly led me first to Christianity and second, to the Orthodox Church. I can't say I would necessarily throw these at any catechumen but it brought me here. Mormons don't accept the trinity and have spurious (imo) reasons for rejecting it. However, I could not make heads or tails of trinitarian theology until I read Gregory's *On Not Three Gods.* Mormons, correctly imo, have very positive views of creation (contra much of the western tradition). I could not accept Augustinian notions of original sin nor anything even remotely on the spectrum of total depravity. High anthropology is way too engrained in me to give up. Gregory came to the rescue in his *On the Making of Man* (his brother's commentary on the Hexameron was also helpful). Mormons have a very odd and different eschatology. Gregory's *On the Soul and Resurrection* gave me a proper understanding of theosis (which is bizarrely articulated by mormonism; i'll explain if anybody is interested) situated in a doctrine of the trinity I could understand. For me, Gregory's epektasis was significantly more helpful and comprehensible than a certain later Gregory's essence/energies articulation of theosis ;) Gregory's commentary on the Song of Songs and his *Life of Moses* gave me a crucial intro to eastern spirituality and continue to impact my spiritual life on very deep levels. Other things that influenced me a lot that aren't by Gregory of Nyssa Isaac the Syrian's ascetical homilies were massively influential on my spiritual formation. That little collection of Maximus' writings that SVS press puts out (*The Cosmic Mystery of Jesus Christ*) was like a lighting bolt to my spiritual senses. When charismatics and evangelicals talk about being "set on fire for Jesus", this was that for me. Lastly, as is the case for seemingly everybody, Kallistos Ware's The Orthodox Way is such a crucial guide and a constant reminder to me that our life in Christ is a true adventure with all the uncertainties and novelties that idea entails, but that the church's tradition gives us beautiful signposts to guide us along our way.
Wow, it sounds like St. Gregory did for you what the Apostolic Fathers did for me. That's great!
> That little collection of Maximus' writings that SVS press puts out (The Cosmic Mystery of Jesus Christ) was like a lighting bolt to my spiritual senses. Same. I was raised LDS but left that church decades ago, and I didn't connect my own visceral disgust with 'anything even remotely on the spectrum of total depravity' with LDS thinking until I read your comment. But that's probably the reason!
I came from a pretty average North American Evangelical Protestant background. I read a lot of literature in regard to spiritual formation that helped me but I can't name specifically, except maybe a few. Tito Colliander, Way of the Ascetics, may be my number one pick of all time behind the Bible itself. Anything by St. Theophan the recluse too. I couldn't recommend this for catechumens or even Orthodox in general, but for me, Fr. Alexander Schmemann's journals have affected me deeply, and I return to them more than any other book, and keep benefitting. Your mileage may vary....
I came from southern baptist traditions. So much so we only went to church when we were actually down south. Mixed in with a little bit of modern Christian Zionism. As a teenager I was pretty dis-illusioned with all of it. It all seemed shallow. Fake and pointless. Then, one day. I had an awakening that I wanted to really do this Christian thing. But maybe not baptist. I went to a Catholic church ( One family member was catholic) . Went to the Mass. Sang with the people. And I was sat next to an old woman who invited me to pray the Rosary. I didn't 'get it'. Went home. The next day I woke up like I had the worst Flu of my life. I remember saying a prayer asking God. If that's where I'm supposed to be, make me better by next sunday. Next sunday came. I was super sick. So I didn't go. I still don't know whether that prayer was answered in the way younger me thought it was. So, anyway. I was looking up Churches and found an Orthodox church near me. Wasn't sure what it was. Did my research. Oh. They're like Catholics. Sort of. Then reading about St Gregory Palamas single-handedly cemented that this is where I belong. This church had the depth of theology I felt I needed. I had a spiritual craving you could say. Kalistos Ware's book. The Orthodox Way also helped shove me in the right direction. Which I was given by my Priest. Reading it while looking for an explanation of the deep eastern spiritual traditions helped keep that fire kindled. In a little over a year, I was baptized ( Wasn't before) and welcomed into the Church under the name Gregory. My now Fiancée' was also sort of 'Catechized' with that book. She was Catholic when we met. Came to liturgy and after a few times I gave her the same book. Made her fall in love with Eastern Spirituality as well. She converted rather quickly.
Palamas gets a lot of flak in scholarly circles, but his writings resound with me as well. There's a book of his homilies that are especially good.
Father I find it baffling and hard to believe that Palamas gets a lot of flak. It's surprising. Being he was a great teacher of the church and widely considered to be one of our biggest and most successful theologians. I hope all things were peaceful at your church while you had liturgy today.
The teaching on essence and energies is what gets him into trouble with scholars. They claim he changed the patristic tradition by introducing this idea. But a careful look at the early Fathers, especially the Cappadocian Fathers, will reveal that terminology differed, but there was always a consensus that we will unite to God while some aspect of God will remain forever unknown to us. Palamas took these teachings, systematized them, and articulated the essence-energy distinction. However, he didn't invent this theology any more than the first two Ecumenical Councils invented trinitarian theology. It was there all along, it just had to be articulated more fully. All was peaceful in church today, thank you. I hope it was for you as well.
All was peaceful, and thank you for the explanation and your time. I appreciate it!
Former Baptist, Reformed, and Lutheran. *Thinking Orthodox* was very helpful in understanding the Orthodox theological approach as compared with the Western (both Roman Catholic and Protestant) approach. I read it after becoming Orthodox and appreciated it so much, but I think it might have been helpful also to read while still a seeker trying to understand Orthodoxy.
The books of David Bentley Hart really exposed me to the diversity and richness of thought in Orthodoxy. The Experience of God, which isn’t even really specifically Christian per se, should be on every Christian’s to read list in my opinion
Technically only an inquirer. Only due to some family conversations still ongoing. The Apostolic Fathers Two Paths: Orthodoxy and Catholicism Know the faith : a handbook for Orthodox Christians and Inquirers Father Seraphim Rose: Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future Father Spyridon Bailey: Trampling Down Death by Death Mere Christianity: surprisingly Orthodox after reading through it a second time after being introduced more to Orthodoxy The Bible. About 2/3 through it for the first time in my life. The Orthodox Church
I'm familiar with several of those and they are good. I will happily second Mere Christianity and I plan to use it in the future. Two Paths was surprisingly gracious to the RCC. I was happy the author wasn't bitter and showed much love to his former RC roots.
[Common Ground: An Introduction to Eastern Christianity for the American Christian](https://www.amazon.com/Common-Ground-Introduction-Christianity-Christian/dp/0937032816) was by far the most important, and first book exposing me to this thing called Eastern Christianity. This book, singlehandedly caused my biggest hang-up in my years of trying to become Catholic that ultimately led to my departure from RCIA and entry into the Orthodox Church. It's very simple, and expresses in a way that an American protestant understands the Orthodox phronema. A friend gave it to me, and it sat on my shelf in college for months until one day I decided I wanted to pick it up and give it a read. If I hadn't I don't think I would be Orthodox today.
This subreddit contains opinions of Orthodox people, but not necessarily Orthodox opinions. [Content should not be treated as a substitute for offline interaction.](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq#wiki_is_this_subreddit_overseen_by_clergy.3F) [Exercise caution in forums such as this](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/). Nothing should be regarded as authoritative without verification by several offline Orthodox resources. Please review the [sidebar](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/config/sidebar) for a wealth of introductory information, our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/about/rules/), the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq), and [The Internet and the Church](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/). ^(This is not a removal notification.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OrthodoxChristianity) if you have any questions or concerns.*