Review of the book by Archim. Gabriel "Guide to liturgics on Orthodox worship in relation to the program for theological seminaries"

The book, the title of which we have written down, contains only the first part of the Liturgics and one chapter from the second, and yet it covers up to 35 printed pages. If the venerable author continues his work, then one might think that the second part of his book will be no less in volume. The very volume compiled and published by Fr. Gabriel's book in no way gives the right to look at it as a textbook on Liturgics, and therefore we must judge it as a manual - a manual on Liturgics. And the author himself calls his book a “guide.” Looking at the book about. Gabriel, as intended as a guide to the study of Liturgics, we must say that it is distinguished by an abundance of liturgical material. It is clear that the author spared neither time nor labor in extracting and collecting this material from various sources and manuals, which he listed in the “introduction” to his book. In terms of the abundance and richness of liturgical material, his book leaves far behind the published and existing textbooks for the study of Liturgics. But with the abundance and richness of liturgical material, the “Manual” of Fr. Gabriel suffers from numerous and very significant shortcomings. First of all, it should be noted that: 1) the author was insufficiently selective in the choice of material: he introduced into his “Manual” quite a bit of information that relates to the field of dogmatic and comparative (accusatory) theology, pastoral leadership, etc., and which (information), if they can occupy a place in liturgics, should be expressed in it briefly and concisely (see pp. 86–93, 193–196, 257, etc.). 2) With insufficient discernment in the choice of liturgical material, the author often collects erroneous information, cites facts and evidence that do not agree with reality and historical truth. Eg. on page 192 the author says that until the 4th century. at liturgical meetings of Christians, “apostolic decrees” were read to the catechumens, while the reading of these books for catechumens at Christians’ liturgical meetings was prohibited for another 85 ap. etc., yes, these books, while they existed in the first centuries of Christianity, were disciplinae arcani, and could not be read for the catechumens; on page 165 it is stated that the singing of the Nicene Creed during worship was practiced in all Eastern and Western churches back in the 4th century; or on page 42 it is noted that “the successors of the apostles, in times of calm, after terrible persecutions, at ecumenical councils and some local councils, determined in writing the entire constant and uniform order of worship, almost down to the details, preserved by the Orthodox Church to this day.” However, there is no way to indicate all the errors made by the author, since his book contains quite a few pages on which several errors occur in a row (See, for example, p. 340). Due to the author’s lack of discernment in choosing liturgical material, and the use of this material without proper verification and critical evaluation, the reader, guided by his book, can easily fall into gross errors and misconceptions. And even if the reader doubted the fairness and reliability of the historical information reported by Fr. Gabriel and, wishing to check his words from publicly available sources, turned to quotes and references in his book, then such an attempt on the part of the reader would remain futile, because the interlinear quotations are given by the author in too inaccurate, vague and general form. What, for example, can such references say: “the words of the blessed. Tertuliana”, “Clement of Alexandria speaks about agapes”, “see. apol. Justin the Martyr", "see. Liturgy of the Apostle resolutions, Ap. James and Mark", "Cyprian on the Lord's Prayer", "Dionysius of Alexandria. St. Basil the Great about the Holy Spirit, see Book of Degrees, Prologue and Chet-Minea”, etc., etc. We believe that even the most inquisitive, diligent and patient reader, encountering these and similar quotations, will come to a dead end and will not be able to take advantage of the instructions made by the author. 3) The author’s judgments, sometimes based on dubious facts and evidence, and sometimes based on nothing, in most cases suffer from ambiguity, confusion, darkness and do not give a clear picture of the matter. Eg. on page 33, the author tries to establish the concept of private worship, and in fact lists the types and types of Christian home pious exercises - private worship includes home reading of soul-saving books, conducting soul-saving conversations, etc.; or on page 46 the author expresses himself very vaguely about the reasons why Christians after 70 AD stopped gathering in synagogues for liturgical purposes. There are not only individual places, but even entire sections in the book of Fr. Gabriel, which are difficult for the reader to understand; such as departments on the musical technical side of church singing, on the features of architectural styles, etc. (see pp. 174 – 185, pp. 321 et seq.). 4) In general, the “Manual” of Fr. Gabriel does not have the character of a harmonious and processed system: there is no internal, unifying connection between the sections of his book; parts of one or another department are not always presented consistently (see, for example, p. 36, cf. pp. 38 – 39, etc.); in the solution of some issues there are repetitions, contradictions and even simple oddities. Eg. on page 50 the author says that “pagan Christians had no particular reason to translate images from paganism into their lives,” on the next page he states that “Christians were encouraged to use images by their former home life, to which (?) they were accustomed while in paganism”; on page 66 he says that “we have nothing original written regarding the liturgy from the first times of Christianity,” and a little further - on p. 67 notes that the liturgy of St. James is placed in the apostolic decrees and the revision of this liturgy in detail dates back to the 3rd century; or on page 155, to explain the concept of “participant”, give the example of “Monday’s prokeimenon”; on page 192 explains that until the 4th century. (when the canon of sacred books became monotonous) Christians read apocryphal and church books during services, which include, among other things, conversations of Ephraim the Syrian, Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil the Great, etc., on page 337 he states that St. Isaac’s Cathedral in St. Petersburg is an imitation of the Roman pantheon, which in turn is an imitation of the cathedral ap. Peter in Rome, which reflected a mixed style, and on page 326 the author notes that the pantheon was built 35 years before the birth. Christ. There are quite a few such blunders in the book of Fr. Gabriel, but it is neither possible nor necessary to write out all of them, since those indicated already sufficiently testify to the haste with which it was compiled and published. 5) If we pay attention to the external presentation of thoughts in the book of Fr. Gabriel, then from this side his work cannot be considered perfect: his speech is often not precise (for example, even the name of the headings does not correspond to their very content - see pp. 44, 63, cf. 51), not devoid of omissions and omissions, its design is heavy, sometimes incorrect and even not at all coherent, which anyone can easily see by reading at least a few pages from the “Manual” of Fr. Gabriel. In order not to be unfounded in your judgments about the book of Fr. Gabriel, we will give at least two or three examples of his speech. On page 252 we read: “The sign burned through incense is based on the Apocalypse..., on page 279 – “the figure of an oblong cross in the external appearance of churches is more often found in ancient monuments”..., on page 175 – “the rabbi read the reading of the Holy. Scriptures,” etc., etc. 6) Finally, one cannot help but notice that Fr. Gabriel admits his “Manual” was compiled in relation to the seminary program on Liturgics, but, strictly speaking, his “Manual” does not satisfy the requirements of either the previous or the new program on Liturgics in theological seminaries: his book contains a lot of unnecessary things compared to what is required by the new - existing program, for example. dept. about church architecture, and vice versa - there is not much of what was required by the previous program, and what is required by the existing one (for example, the department on liturgical books, sacred vessels and things, etc.). You might be interested in: