| In 909, when Viking raids on Mercia began, most of St. Oswald’s relics were translated from Bardney to Gloucester in Gloucestershire by Ethelflaed, daughter of Alfred the Great. The Priory of St. Oswald was founded in Gloucester and it existed till the Reformation. Surprisingly, a part of this tenth century priory has survived to this day (along with several other former monasteries in this city as well as its magnificent eleventh century Cathedral), and a Saxon cross was discovered there not long ago. St. Oswald’s head was later translated to Durham Cathedral and laid in the same tomb where St. Cuthbert’s relics rested. His head is believed to be there to this day. In late medieval times an arm of the saint was translated to Peterborough Monastery (now Peterborough Cathedral in Cambridgeshire) where the chapel in which the relic was held has survived, and there is a Roman Catholic church of St. Oswald in this city. Some minor relics were also kept in Ely (Cambridgeshire) and even abroad—in Ireland and many European monasteries and cathedrals, especially in Germany. Saint Oswald " s church, Bad Kleinkirchheim, Carinthia, one of many churches and place names which commemorate Oswald St. Oswald was considered to be not only one of universally venerated saints in England, but also one of the universal and most famous saints of all Europe. The baptismal name “Oswald” is still very popular in many countries of Europe. Seventy ancient churches were dedicated to St. Oswald in England, and taking into account modern Anglican and new Roman Catholic churches in England, the total number is now even more. There are important churches of St. Oswald in most parts of England, including the churches in both Heavenfield near Hexham and in Oswestry, associated with the Oswald’s victory over pagans and with his martyrdom. Some place-names, like Oswaldtwistle in Lancashire and Kirkoswald in Cumbria, preserve his memory as well. Outside England today St. Oswald is also venerated in Germany (where over twenty churches are dedicated to him), France, northern Italy, Ireland, Scotland, Portugal, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland, Slovenia and Australia. A portion of St. Oswald’s relics is most likely kept at Hildesheim in Germany, Lower Saxony. |
| While Pietism subtly and Deism more dramatically began minimizing doctrinal differences among the various Christian groups during the 17th century, sharply delineated creedal religion still held sway in most of Europe and in the Spanish, Portuguese, French, and English colonies in the New World. In the thirteen colonies along the Atlantic seaboard that would become the U.S.A., Puritan Calvinist theocracy prevailed at first in Massachusetts, Congregationalism in Connecticut and New Hampshire, the Dutch Reformed Church in New York, Presbyterianism in New Jersey, Swedish Lutheranism in Delaware, Roman Catholicism in Maryland, and Anglicanism in Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia. Full religious toleration prevailed first in the colonies of Rhode Island and Pennsylvania – both of which were founded on this basis during the 17th century. Rhode Island was established in 1635 by Roger Williams (1603–1683), who championed the right of every person to worship God “according to the dictates of his own conscience.” The colony of Pennsylvania (Penn’s Woods) was founded in 1682by William Penn (1644–1718), a follower of the English mystic George Fox (1624–1691), the founder of Quakerism (officially, the Society of Friends); Pennsylvania is still known as the Quaker State. Fox emphasized experiencing through silent meditation the “Inner Light of Christ” within one’s soul. In England, the publication of the King James Bible in 1611was an epochal event in the history of the English Bible. In 1646 the Puritan Oliver Cromwell (1599–1658) led a coup d’état against King Charles I, who was executed in 1649. Cromwell established a kind of military dictatorship in England that lasted until the restoration of the monarchy in 1660. The heavily Calvinistic Westminster Confession, endorsed by the Scottish Parliament in 1647 and the British Parliament a year later, became the law of the land, until 1660. In France, the Roman Catholic Church was troubled by Jansenism, a rigorist (i.e., moralistic and legalistic) movement based on the anti-Pelagian writings of Saint Augustine – especially his emphasis on the irresistible grace of God given only to the elect. The important French theologian and mathematician Blaise Pascal (1623–1662) was its most famous convert. |
| Bogoslovskie sobesedovanija po voprosu ob Anglikanskom svjašenstve mezdu Anglikanskoj i Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvami, in: mP 1967,7,45–53. «Bratoljubivyj nišij». Mistieskaja avtobiografija prep. Simeona Novogo Bogoslova (949–1022), in: Vest. Ekzarchata 4 (1953) 223–236; engl. in: The Christian East 7/8 (1953–54) 12 S.; griech. in: Gregorios Palamas 37 (1954) 156–164. Catholicity and the Structures of the Church. Some remarks in connection with the introductory paper by S.S. Verkhovskoy, in: St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 17 (1972) 41–52; russ.: Kafolinost’ i struktury cerkvi, in: Vest. Ekzarchata 80 (1972) 249–261. Christi Erlösertat am Kreuz und in der Auferstehung, in: StdO 1973, 3, 57–61; 4, 54–60; engl, in: Sobornost» 6 (1973) 446–458; franz. in: Vest. Ekzarchata 78/79 (1972) 107–120. Christi Heilswerk in Kreuz und Auferstehung, in: Orthodoxie heute 43/44 (1973) 1–10. La Commission inter-orthodoxe pour le dialogue avec les Anglicans (Belgrade, ler-15e septembre 1966), in: Vest. Ekzarchata 58 (1967) 74–106. La composition et la publication d " une confession unique de foi orthodoxe, in: Vest. Ekzarchata 54/55 (1966) 71–74. Conference pan-orthodoxe à Chambésy près de Genève, 8–15 juin 1968, in: Vest.Ekzarchata 64 (1968) 183–216. La Conférence Panorthodoxe sur l’île de Rhodes, in: Vest. Ekzarchata 40 (1963) 179–189. Le congrès international de Venise en commémoration du millénaire de Mont Athos, in: Vest. Ekzarchata 45 (1964) 30–31. Le 4 e Congrès patristique international à Oxford (16–21 septembre 1963), in: Vest. Ekzarchata 45 (1964) 26–30. Le XIX e Congrès international vieux-catholique à Vienne, in: Ekzarchata 52 (1965) 201–209. La Constitution dogmatique De Ecclesia: Point de vue d’un Orthodoxe, in: Irénikon 39 (1966) 477–496. Dans la lumière du Christ. Saint Syméon le Nouveau Théologien 949–1022. Vie – Spiritualité – Doctrine. Chevetogne 1980, 426 S. Data tradicionnogo teksta «Iisusovoj Molitvy», in: Vest. Ekzarchata 10 (1952) 35–38. La deuxième Conférence Internationale de la Société Théologique Orthodoxe en Amérique, in: Irénikon 46 (1973) 165–171. |
| 10 . In Job, Hom. fg., lat. ex S. Hilario, 1029–30. Selecta, 1031–50; 17, 57–106. In Job. lib. 1–3, 17, 371–522. 11 . In Psalmos (Monitum, 1049–54). Horn. 1–5 in ps. 36, lat. Rufinus, 1319–68. – 1–2 – 37. -- . 1369–88. – 1–2 – 38, 1391–1410. Selecta, 1053–1686; 17, 105–150, (13) 12. In Proverbia. Selecta, 13, 17–34; 17, 149–160; 161–252 (Mai). 13 . In Canticum Canticorum. Hom. 1–2, lat. Hieronymus, 35–58. Libri 1–4. lat. Rufinus, 61–198 (monitum, 59–62); fg., græce, 17, 369–70. Ex parvo tomo, fg., 35–36. Excerpta procopiana, 197– 216: 17, 253–88 (Mai). 14 . In Isaiam (monitum, 215–18). Horn. 1–9. lat. Hieronymus, 219–54. comment. lib. I et 28, lat. Rufinus, 217–20. 15 . In Jeremiam (monitum, 253–56). Horn. 1–21, gr. et lat. (Hieronymus), 255–542; fg. ex hom. 39, 541–44. Selecta, 543–606. 16 . In Threnos. Selecta, 605–62. 17 . In Ezechielem. Hom. 1–14, lat. Hieronymus, 665–768. Ex commentariis, 663–66. Selecta, 767–826: 17, 287–88 (Mai). 18 . In Osee, 825–28. 19 . In Matthæum. Fg. e tomo 1, 2, 7, 829–34. Tomi 10–17, 835–1600. Vetus Interpretatio latina, 1599–1800. Scholia, 17, 289–310. Variæ lectiones (Lommatzsch.), 1909–46, gr. 1911–16; lat. 1917–46. 20 . In Lucam. Hom. 1–39, lat. Hieronymus, 1799–1902. Fragmenta ex Macario Chrysocephalo, 1901–10. Scholia, 17, 311–370. (14) 21. In Joannem (monitum, 13–20). Tomus 1–2, 21–184. – 4–5 (fg.), 183–196. – 6, 197–304. – 10, 305–398. – 13, 399–524. – 19–20, 523–680. – 28, 679–740. – 32, 739–830. 22 . In Acta apostolorum. Fragmenta, 829–832. 23 . In Epist. ad Romanos. Comment. lib. 1–10, lat. Rufinus, 831–1294. 24 . In Epist. ad Galatas, fg., lat. Rufinus, 1293–98. 25 . In Epist. ad Ephesios, fg., lat. Hieronymus, 1297–98. 26 . In Epist. ad Colossenses, fg., lat. Rufinus 1297–98. 27 . In I ad Thessal., fg. e lib. 3., lat. Hieronymus, 1297–1304. 28 . In Epist. ad Titum, fg., lat. Rufinus, 1303–1306. 29 . In Epist. ad Philemonem, fg., lat. Rufinus, 1305–08. 30 . In Epist. ad Hebræos, 1307–10. |
| Re’ pri otkrytii Konferencii predstavitelej vsech religii V SSSR..., in: MP 1969,38–39. (1.7.1969). Pis " mo lenam Central " nogo komiteta VSC, in: MP 1969,10,3. Privestvie Glave Armjanskoj Cerkvi... Vazgenu I..., in: MP 1969 ,11,1. Rodestvenskoe privestvie... Afinagoru... Vselenskomu Patriarchìi, in: MP 1970,1,1. Interv’ju korrespondentu APN, in: MP 1970,1,2–3. Pis " mo Bl. Ieronimu, Archiep. Afinskomu i vsej Ellady, in: MP 1970,1,4. Re’ na Filaretovskom Veere v MDA 14,12,1969, in: MP 1970, 2 ,43–44. Paschal " noe poslanie..., in: MP 1970,4 ,1. Poslanie uastnikam Stokgol " mskoj Konferencii Miroljubivych sii po V‘etnamu (28.–30.3.1970), in: MP 1970,4,3. Obmen poslanijami po problemam Pravoslavija v Amerike (Afinagor – Aleksij), in: MP 1970,4,5–9. Poslanie Bl. Vasiliju, Predstavitelju Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi v Pol’še , in: MP 1970,5 ,5. Literatur: 9 Nojabrja 1967 goda – 90-letie Svjatejšego Patriarcha Moskovskogo i vseja Rusi Aleksija (A. Ostapov), in: MP 1967 ,12 ,4–9. 25 let Patriaršego sluenija. Prazdnovanie Jubilejnoj daty (V. Ovsjannikov), in: MP 1970,2,4–6. Svjatejšij Patriarch Moskovskij i vseja Rusi Aleksij. Biografieskij obzor dopatriaršego perioda izni i sluenija (A. Ostapov), in: MP 1970,2,7–16. Filaret (Vachromeev), Moskovskie Duchovnye Skoly pod rukovodstvom Sv. Patriarcha Aleksija, in: MP 1970,2,17–22. A.I. Georgievskij, Vospominanija o Sobore 1945 goda, in: MP 1970,2,23–24. Pitirim (Necaev) Etot prinadlefit Cerkvi, in: MP 1970,2,25–29. 20 let Pervosvjatitel’stva Sv. Patriarcha Aleksija (I.N. Šabatin), in: MP 1970,2,29–35. P. Sokolovskij,Sluzenie delu mira, in: MP 1970,2,36–40. Konina i pochorony Sv. Patriarcha Aleksija, in: MP 1970, 5,1–3. D. Ostapov, Poslednaja vesna Patriarcha Aleksija, in: MP 1970,6,5–12. Blaennyi put’ v nadede Voskresenija (V. Ovsjannikov), in: MP 1970, 6,12–58. Sv. Patriarch Moskovskij i vseja Rusi Aleksij. Biograficeskaja spravka, in: MP 1970,6,59–63. Stimme der Orthodoxie 1963, Heft 10: Festansprache des Moskauer Patriarchen (S.6–11); EB Nikodim (Rotov), Leben und Wirken des Hochhl. Patriarchen Aleksij, S.12–25; Erzpr. A. Ostapov, Auf dem Boden des Hl. Sergius, |
| We now have come to the central question in our discussion of the place of man in the universe: Why is the hypostasis of human beings an accomplished one, so that they can mediate between personal God and impersonal nature, or, in other words, Why do human beings exhibit such existences in the universe that resemble the image of the Divine and, at the same time, recapitulate in themselves the whole universe? Repeating the same question in different terms: Why does the humankind-event take place in the universe? We do not expect to reveal the answer in a form like “God created the universe and human beings in it because of this and this.” By posing this question, we simply want to express our main concern and argument that the mystery of the phenomenon of humanity in the universe can only be uncovered partially by the sciences in terms of the natural conditions suitable for the existence of life; the genuine problem of the humankind-event still remains a philosophical and theological issue, in which other (nonscientific) sources of human experience must be invoked. This points precisely to the fact that the human hypostasis is capable of insights and intuitions that are not accessible to discursive thinking. The question posed above is not scientific in origin. However, it follows logically from what we have discussed in a scientific context. This implies that a response to the question on the position of human beings in the universe will finally be theological in nature, based on the understanding as well as the direct experience of the cosmic meaning of the incarnation of the Logos of God and of the Christ-event. Before we turn to this issue, which is central for this chapter, it is important from a methodological point of view to rearticulate the meaning of the enhypostasization of the universe in the human hypostasis in rather contemporary terms, which are closer to present-day scientific discourse and its dialogue with science. We leave out for a while the question of the origin of the human hypostasis, assuming that it is somehow in place and that it initiates cognitive faculties in human beings. If describing these faculties empirically, or even philosophically, one can ask what it means that the universe is brought into being (that is, enhypostasized) or selected by observations. In other words, what are the epistemological consequences of our ability to know anything about the universe and how is this reflected in modern discussions about the status of cosmological knowledge as being anthropic by definition? These issues can be illustrated by examples from the concept of the anthropic principle considered in its epistemological dimension. From Anthropic Transcendentalism to Christian Platonism |
| New departments of theology have been set up in recent years and new study course are developing. We are in the process of writing textbooks for a bachelor’s degree in theology. Indeed, until recently no modern-day textbooks in theology were practically available. In the church theological schools and in the departments of theology in secular universities and colleges either literature published in the nineteenth century or in the twentieth century published in the emigration was used as theological textbooks. We now have the opportunity to create new textbooks. Under the Patriarch’s direct supervision, we are doing just this. We have published around thirty textbooks and at least as many still are waiting to be published. It is practically through these textbooks that we are devote our undivided attention to the entire spectrum of disciplines that come under theology as a branch of science. Why do I say that this project is under the direct supervision of the Patriarch? Not only because he gave his blessing to it, but also because literally every textbook that has come out in this series passes through his hands. He reads these textbooks after they have been reviewed in the theological schools, makes his own comments and notes, that is to say, he pays personal attention to this project. And occasionally, as a result of the Patriarch’s comments, we are obliged to rewrite completely some of these textbooks. Theology is a powerful international and inter-cultural resource. Religious figures who are highly educated have the opportunity to speak at international forums on religious issues. But this pertains not only to religious figures. It pertains to all those who study theology, since the theological disciplines throughout the world are much in demand. It is only in Russia that for seventy years theology did not exist in the educational expanse, while in many other countries theology did exist. When we talk with our partners in other countries, in particular, in western universities, we can see that a very high level of theological education exists in these universities. But our task consists not in copying the achievements of foreign universities and colleges, but in creating the possibilities for studying theology at a qualitatively high level in our native educational expanse. |
| The World Council of Churches In 1948, the World Council of Churches was formed in Amsterdam from the Faith and Order and Life and Work movements which met in Western Europe in the 1920s and ’30s. Throughout the process there was substantial Orthodox participation, led by the outstanding historian and theologian, Father Georges Florovsky (1893–1979). The Roman Catholic Church refused to take part in the founding of the WCC, along with many conservative Protestant and Pentecostal denominations. By the time of the second worldwide assembly of the WCC, held in 1954in Evanston, Illinois, the Orthodox patriarchates of Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch; the autocephalous Church of Greece; the Russian-American Metropolia; and the Romanian Episcopate in America all had become official members of the WCC. During this period, the leaders of the Russian Exarchate in Western Europe, as well as certain Russians who remained faithful to Moscow such as Vladimir Lossky (1903–1958) and Nicolas Zernov (1898–1980), also played a major role in ecumenical activity. In 1961, at the third worldwide assembly of the WCC in New Delhi, India, the Churches of Russia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Poland joined the WCC. The Russian Church in the ’60s was extremely active ecumenically, being led in this area by Metropolitan Nikodim (Rotov) (1929–1978), head of the Office of External Affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate. This activity was greatly curtailed in the ‘70s, most likely due to the changing political needs of the Soviet government, which continued to dominate official Church policy. One major highlight for Orthodox involvement in the WCC came in 1982with the publication of the Baptism, Eucharist, Ministry (BEM) document. This work shows very substantial Orthodox influence, especially concerning the real presence of the Holy Spirit in baptism, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and the three-fold ministry of bishop, priest, and deacon. Nevertheless, in the 1980s and ’90s, it became increasingly difficult for the Orthodox representatives in the WCC to make the voice of Orthodoxy clearly and unambiguously heard, since there were less than 20 Orthodox member Churches, but up to more than 300 Protestant bodies, all with an equal vote. Mounting frustration over this situation was manifested by the Georgian and Bulgarian Orthodox Churches dropping their membership in the WCC in 1997 and 1998 respectively, while the Russian Church suspended active membership in 1998. |
| Slovo: Blagaja Vratarnica, in: MP 1981,5,34. Re‘ na plenume Sov. komiteta zasdity mira (19.3.1981), in: MP 1981,5,39–41. 50-letie Trechsvjatitel " skogo podvor " ja v Parie: Poslanie, in: MP 1981,6,2–4; StdO 1981,8,5–9. Slovo v den’ otdanija Paschi, in: MP 1981,6,35. Privetstvennoe poslanie uastnikam zasedanija Raboego komiteta ChMK v Kieve, in: MP 1981,6,41f. Poslanie uastnikam IV sobesedovanija medu predstaviteljami RPC i Sojuza Ev. Cerkvej v GDR, in: MP 1981,7 ,54f; StdO 1981,8,3–4. 10-letie intronizacii Sv. Patr. Pimena: Slova..., in: MP1981,8, 5–16. Obrašenie к Archipastyram, kliru i mirian zapadnoukrainskich eparchiej v svjazi 35-letija L " vovskogo Cerkovnogo Sobora 1946 g., in: MP1981,8,17f. Slovo v Moskovskich Duch. Akademii i Seminarii, in: MP 1981, 8 ,23–24 . Slovo v prazdnik Preobraenija Gospodnja, in: MP1981 ,8 ,42f. Vstreca Glav i predstavitelej Cerkvej i religioznych ob-edinenij SSSR (Troice-Sergieva-Lavra, 1.6.1981), Re‘ i slova, in: MP1981,8,49–54. Zajavlenie, in: MP1981,9,2–3. Prazdnovane Pamjati Prep. Sergia: Slova i red», in: MP1981, 9,11–15. Poslanie Archiep. Ev.-Ljuteranskoj Cerkvi Latvii d-ru Janusu Matulisu, in: MP 1981,9,63. Poslanie uastnikam IV Gen. Assamblej Vseafrikanskoj Konferen- cii Cerkvej, Najrobi 2.–12.8.1981, in: MP1981,10,2–3. Medunarodnaja Mereligioznaja vstrea (Moskva 1.–2.10.1981): Re», in: MP1981,11,11–13; 16. Slovo v den» tezoimenitstva (9.6.1981), in: MP 1981,ll,18f. Slovo na godinim akte Moskovskich Duch. Akademii i Seminarii (14.10.1981), in: MP1981,12,8–9. Chram Boij. Propoved’, in: ÍMP 1981 ,12 ,32 . IV zasedanie Smešannoj bogoslovskoj komissii po pravoslavno- starokatolieskomu dialogu: Privetstvennoe slovo, in: MP1981 ,12,54f. Slovo v den» torestvennogo osvjašenija i otkrytija novogo zdanija Izdatel‘skogo otdela M.P., 22.9.1981 g., in: MP 1982,1,21. Slovo za veernim bogoslueniem v Nedelju syropustnuju, in: MP 1982,2,27, Slovo pered Novogodnim molebnom 31.12.1981, ebda 28f. Rei, proiznesennye vo vremja vizita v Finljandju, in: MP 1982,2,49. |
| The Diaconate Through Time – Before and After Nicaea In the period of Church history leading up to the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. the diaconate entered what Deacon John Chryssavgis calls its “golden age.” Although 1 Clement, the Didache and the Shepherd of Hermas all refer to the diaconate as a third order in the ministry of the Church it is St Ignatius of Antioch who warmly refers to the deacons as his “fellow servants” and “special friends.” “ The bishop presides in the place of God; the presbyters reside in the place of the apostolic college; while the service of Christ is reserved for my special friends, the deacons.” Across his writings St Ignatius refers to the deacons as fellow ministers with the bishop and the presbyters in the Liturgy, the Word, charity, administration and authority. There are corroborating references to the deacon’s ministry in the second century in the writings of St Justin Martyr and St Polycarp. So influential did these deacons become in the Church that some bishops, notably St Hippolytus, saw fit to remind them that they should be subordinate in accountability and authority to both the presbyters and the bishop. In a later period the tables would be turned on the deacons! As the Church grew numerically and in extent in this early period, the deacons’ influence strengthened along with their growing administrative responsibilities. Liturgically, the deacons led the people in prayer and often preached. With the bishop present their supportive roles eclipsed that of the priests. Pastorally they represented the people " s concerns to the bishop and assisted him in most of the practical aspects of his ministry. In times of persecution the deacon could also stand in for the bishop or the priest in performing baptisms and might even hear confessions in extremis. We know this from the letters of St Cyprian of Carthage, but the practice was not limited to North Africa. The philanthropic work of the diaconate, however, remained that essential characteristic which connected it to the servanthood of Christ in the Church. Most notable in this regard was the example of St Lawrence at Rome (258). This popular deacon and martyr presented the poor to the persecuting prefect as “the treasure of the Church.” In the period before the great Councils it was inconceivable that a Christian community and its bishop should be without a deacon and in many larger communities there were a number of these. |
|
|
