^^Thanks, authio. I suppose I'm speaking here of one Catechism book that we all can agree upon and touches upon all that we believe. Why don't we have one central Catechism book? As for the quote by His Grace, Bishop Melchisedek, I like it but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with my concerns regarding a book that teaches what Eastern Orthodox Christians believe.
One, although the CCC is all the rage now, that is only the last decade or so: before 1992, the Vatican didn't have one (the Roman catechism wasn't so used). In the past, the ones in Orthodoxy (St. Peter Movila's Orthodox Confession of the Catholic Church, St. Philoret's Longer Catechism) was produced in one Church and was adlopted by the others in time. Since Orthodoxy isn't a confessional denomination, it doesn't lend itself to a synopsis in a catechism.
Thanks, Isa. What do you mean by 'confessional denomination'? You can PM me if you like.
LOL. No, I can go on the record.
Confessinalism is like US Constitutionalism (in the broad, not originalist/strict constructionist sense, although there is a relation): there are authoratative statements of the confession upon which the confession is predicated and to which all the members, to use the Vatican's words, "must give Full Assent of Faith" "a religious assent [which] religious submission of mind and will must be shown" and "must be firmly accepted and held." (Lumen Gentium, Code of Canon Law, Donum Veritatis). Both a confessional denomination and the US government are codified, and all members must subscribe to that codification. In constrast Great Britain has an uncodified government and does not subscribe to entrenchment (the idea that the constitution can be modified only by extraordinary means: in GB any monarch and the parilament, who are fully sovereign, can change any aspect of the Constitution). Paradoxically, the British system is the more conservative one than the US.
Thus Lutheranism is predicated to the Augsburg Confession (most confessional Lutherans subscribe to the Book of Concord, but all Lutherans, confessional or "non-confessional," subscribe to the Augsburg Confession); Presbyterianism (at least when it was consolidated as a seperate denomination) was predicated on the Westminster Confession of Faith; etc. Anglicanism went into a crisis when the granting of independence to the American colonies (which still had and has Anglicans) and the crown granting of the right to those loyal to the Vatican as the head of the church in England to sit in parliament: Anglicanism was (and ultimately is) predicated by the Supremacy Act of the English crown.
The Vatican now predicates itself on the CCC, something here and elsewhere some of them have tried to deny (though not explaining how, if the Vatican's teaching is not predicated on the CCC, how is the lack of something comparable in Orthodoxy a "lack"). The Roman had a similar role, but since it was intended only for priests and not the general consumption. It is this general intent of the CCC (including to those who don't subscribe to the Vatican's dogma) which has created this "need."
St. John of Damascus would be the first to admit that his "Exact Expostion of the Orthodox Faith" does not draw the line down the center of the road on which we must toe, but rather the crenelations on both sides of the road which tell you, when your drive on them and they make that rumbling sound, that you are going off the road and warn you to get back on. This is shown by it being the third part of one work "the Font of Knowledge," starting with the "Philosophical Chapters"-which tell you how to detect truth from falsehood-to the "On Heresies"-which gives examples to flee from-proceeding to the "Exact Exposition"-which gives examples to cling to. He is not codifying dogma for the basis of the Faith, he is providing an overview for the practice of that Faith based on the experience of membership in the One, Holy, Catholic and Orthodox Church.