| Wherefore, if that city is rightly held as prophetically representing the Church of the Gentiles, to wit, as brought down by penitence, so as no longer to be what it had been, since this was done by Christ in the Church of the Gentiles, which Nineveh represented, Christ Himself was signified both by the forty and by the three days: by the forty, because He spent that number of days with His disciplesafter the resurrection, and then ascended into heaven, but by the three days, because He rose on the third day. So that, if the reader desires nothing else than to adhere to the history of events, he may be aroused from his sleep by the Septuagint interpreters, as well as the prophets, to search into the depth of the prophecy, as if they had said, In the forty days seek Him in whom you may also find the three days – the one you will find in His ascension, the other in His resurrection. Because that which could be most suitably signified by both numbers, of which one is used by Jonah the prophet, the other by the prophecy of the Septuagint version, the one and self-same Spirit has spoken. I dread prolixity, so that I must not demonstrate this by many instances in which the seventy interpreters may be thought to differ from the Hebrew, and yet, when well understood, are found to agree. For which reason I also, according to my capacity, following the footsteps of the apostles, who themselves have quoted prophetic testimonies from both, that is, from the Hebrew and the Septuagint, have thought that both should be used as authoritative, since both are one, and divine. But let us now follow out as we can what remains. Chapter 45.– That the Jews Ceased to Have Prophets After the Rebuilding of the Temple, and from that Time Until the Birth of Christ Were Afflicted with Continual Adversity, to Prove that the Building of Another Temple Had Been Promised by Prophetic Voices. The Jewish nation no doubt became worse after it ceased to have prophets, just at the very time when, on the rebuilding of the temple after the captivity in Babylon, it hoped to become better. |
| A complete translation of the Greek collection of the Homilies of Isaac the Syrian into the Slavonic language was done by the Bulgarian monk Zacchaeus at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Before that in Slavonic there existed only fragments of the works of Isaac (in particular those that formed part of thePandects of Nicon of Montenegro). In the second quarter of the fourteenth century on Athos there appeared yet one more Slavonic translation of the Homilies of Isaac made by the elder John. Both translations had become widespread by the fourteenth century, especially in monastic circles: this is attested by the numerous surviving manuscripts . At the end of the eighteenth century Paisius Velichkovsky edited anew the Slavonic translation of Isaac the Syrian, published in 1812, but suppressed by the censorship of the time and therefore was not widespread until 1854 when it was published for a second time by the Monastery of Optina Pustyn. In the same year of 1854 there was published a complete Russian translation of Isaac the Syrian made by the Moscow Theological Academy. In 1911 professor of the Moscow Theological Academy Sergei Sobolevsky translated anew the Homilies of Isaac the Syrian from the Greek . Only separate Homilies from this volume are today in the translation from the Syriac, which are Homily 76, translated by Sergei Averintsev , Homily 54, translated by me , Homilies 19, 20 and 21, also translated by me and Homily 1, translated by Alexei Muraviev . I express the hope that sooner or later in the hands of the Russian reader there will appear the complete text of the first volume in translation from Syriac, which would become a landmark in the mastering of the legacy of the great Syrian by our contemporaries. As for the second volume of the works of Isaac, then scholars knew of its existence at least since Bedjan’s edition appeared: he published fragments from it according to the text of the manuscript which later in 1918 was lost . However, in 1983, professor Sebastian Brock discovered in the Bodleian Library at Oxford another manuscript containing the complete text of the second volume and dated at the tenth or eleventh century . From this manuscript Dr. Brock made his own edition of the Discourses 4 – 44 from the second volume , comprising about half of its content. The other half of the volume includes Discourses 1 -3, from which the latter is divided into 400 chapters under the general heading of Chapters on Knowledge. This collection still awaits its publication, although there have already appeared its complete or partial translations into a number of European languages. |
| Dexinger, «Limits» Dexinger, Ferdinand. «Limits of Tolerance in Judaism: The Samaritan Example.» Pages 88–114 in vo1. 2 of Meyer and Sanders, Self-Definition. Dexinger, «Taheb-Vorstellung» Dexinger, Ferdinand. «Die Taheb-Vorstellung als politische Utopie.» Numen 37 (1990): 1–23. Dey, World Dey, Lala Kalyan Kumar. The Intermediary World and Patterns of Perfection in Philo and Hebrews. SBLDS 25. Missoula, Mont.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1975. De Zwaan, «Language» De Zwaan, J. «The Use of the Greek Language in Acts.» Pages 30–65 in vo1. 2 of The Beginnings of Christianity. Dibelius, «Initiation» Dibelius, Martin. «The Isis Initiation in Apuleius and Related Initiatory Rites.» Pages 61–121 in Conflict at Colossae: A Problem in the Interpretation of Early Christianity Illustrated by Selected Modern Studies. Edited and translated by Fred O. Francis and Wayne A. Meeks. SBLSBS 4. Missoula, Mont.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1973. Dibelius, James Dibelius, Martin. James: A Commentary on the Epistle of James. Revised by Heinrich Greeven. Translated by Michael A. Williams. Edited by Helmut Koester. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976. Dibelius, Jesus Dibelius, Martin. Jesus. Translated by Charles B. Hedrick and Frederick C. Grant. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1949. Dibelius, Paul Dibelius, Martin. Pau1. Edited and completed by Werner Georg Kümme1. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1953. Dibelius, Studies Dibelius, Martin. Studies in the Acts of the Apostles. Edited by Heinrich Greeven. London: SCM, 1956. Dibelius, Tradition Dibelius, Martin. From Tradition to Gospe1. Translated from the 2d German ed. by Bertram Lee Woolf. Greenwood, S.C.: Attic Press, 1971. Dibelius and Conzelmanm, Epistles Dibelius, Martin, and Conzelmann, Hans. The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles. Translated by Philip Buttolph and Adela Yarbro. Edited by Helmut Koester. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972. Diel and Solotareff, Symbolism Diel, Paul, and Jeannine Solotareff. Symbolism in the Gospel of John. Translated by Nelly Marans. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988. |
| 282 On the whole, Duns Scotus was followed by the majority of theologians of the Franciscan order, and also by not a few outside it, as, for instance, by Dionysius Carthusianus, by Gabriel Biel, by John Wessel, and, in the time of the Council of Trent, by Giacomo Nachianti, Bishop of Chiozza (Jacobus Naclantus), and also by some of the early Reformers, for instance, by Andreas Osiander. 283 This opinion was strongly opposed by others, and not only by the strict Thomists, and the whole problem was much discussed both by Roman Catholic and by Protestant theologians in the XVIIth century. 284 Among the Roman Catholic champions of the absolute decree of the Incarnation one should mention especially François de Sales and Malebranche. Malebranche strongly insisted on the metaphycical necessity of the Incarnation, quite apart from the Fall, for otherwise, he contended, there would have been no adequate reason or purpose for the act of Creation itself. 285 The controversy is still going on among Roman Catholic theologians, sometimes with excessive heat and vigor, and the question is not settled. 286 Among the Anglicans, in the last century, Bishop Wescott strongly pleaded for the ‘absolute motive’, in his admirable essay on «The Gospel of Creation.» 287 The late Father Sergii Bulgakov was strongly in favor of the opinion that the Incarnation should be regarded as an absolute decree of God, prior to the catastrophe of the Fall. 288 III In the course of this age-long discussion a constant appeal has been made to the testimony of the Fathers. Strangely enough, the most important item has been overlooked in this anthology of quotations. Since the question of the motive of the Incarnation was never formally raised in the Patristic age, most of the texts used in the later discussions could not provide any direct guidance. 289 St. Maximus the Confessor (580–662) seems to be the only Father who was directly concerned with the problem, although not in the same setting as the later theologians in the West. |
| Metropolitan Alexander whom you mentioned and who was also suspended from serving by the Synod in Kiev had only one church. A conflict occurred in his community, and the majority of this church’s clergy avoided concelebrating with the hierarch who had fallen away. The principled decision of the hierarchs of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church to refuse to take part in the false council convened by you was caused not by some mythical “pressure from Moscow,” what would be impossible anyway in this political situation, but by the unity of the archpastors with their clergy and faithful. This unity cannot be jeopardized either by the gross interference of the Ukrainian authorities in the internal life of the Church or by the pressure on the Church exerted by the state and greatly increased in the recent months. This unity cannot be revoked with a stroke of the pen. In your letter you are trying to reinterpret the meaning of the complex of documents signed in 1686 by your predecessor, Patriarch Dionysius IV, and the Holy Synod of the Church of Constantinople. The matter of these historical documents caused no disagreements between our two Churches for hundreds of years. And now you say that you “revoke” the Patriarchal and Synodal Letter, because “outward circumstances have changed.” I suggested holding talks on this issue with the participation of authoritative historians, theologians and experts in the ecclesiastical canon law. You refused, alleging lack of time. I can only express my regret that your decisions, devastating for the unity of the Church, depend so much on “outward,” that is political, circumstances, about which you have no scruples of openly telling me. In your letter you once again repeat rather disputable assertions that the Church of Constantinople has the “exceptional responsibility to grant autocephaly” and to consider appeals from other Local Churches in accordance with the “spiritual meaning” of Canons 9 and 17 of the Council of Chalcedon. Yet, your interpretation of your alleged rights has never had church-wide acceptance. A considerable number of objections stated by authoritative commentators of the canon law speak against your understanding of the rights of the Throne of Constantinople to consider appeals. Thus, an outstanding Byzantine canonist, John Zonaras, writes, “The [Patriarch] of Constantinople is recognized as judge not over all the metropolitans but only those who are subordinate to him. For neither metropolitans of Syria, nor those of Palestine or Phoenicia or Egypt are summoned to his judgement against their will, but those of Syria are to be judged by the Patriarch of Antioch, those of Palestine by that of Jerusalem, while the Egyptian ones are judged by that of Alexandria who ordains them and to whom they are subordinate.” Neither do the present-day Local Orthodox Church recognize that you have such a privilege. |
| Wherein one ought to admire the saints. Wherefore we never ought to admire those who affect these things, for these powers, but rather to look whether they are perfect in driving out all sins, and amending their ways, for this is granted to each man not for the faith of some other, or for a variety of reasons, but for his own earnestness, by the action of God " s grace. For this is practical knowledge which is termed by another name by the Apostle; viz., love, and is by the authority of the Apostle preferred to all tongues of menand of angels, and to full assurance of faith which can even remove mountains, and to all knowledge, and prophecy, and to the distribution of all one " s goods, and finally to the glory of martyrdom itself. For when he had enumerated all kinds of gifts and had said: To one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge, to another faith, to another the gift of healing, to another the working of miracles, etc.: 1Corinthians 12:8–10 when he was going to speak about love notice how in a few words he put it before all gifts: And yet, he says, I show unto you a still more excellent way. 1Corinthians 12:31 By which it is clearly shown that the height of perfection and blessedness does not consist in the performance of those wonderful works but in the purity of love. And this not without good reason. For all those things are to pass away and be destroyed, but love is to abide forever. And so we have never found that those works and signs were affected by our fathers: nay, rather when they did possess them by the grace of the Holy Spirit they would never use them, unless perhaps extreme and unavoidable necessity drove them to do so. Chapter 3. Of a dead man raised to life by Abbot Macarius. As also we remember that a dead man was raised to life by Abbot Macarius who was the first to find a home in the desertof Scete. For when a certain heretic who followed the error of Eunomius was trying by dialectic subtlety to destroy the simplicity of the Catholic faith, and had already deceived a large number of men, the blessed Macarius was asked by some Catholics, who were terribly disturbed by the horror of such an upset, to set free the simple folk of all Egypt from the peril of infidelity, and came for this purpose. |
| Dororheus of Gaza. “Insmictiones.” In Patrologiae Cursus Completus; Series Graeca, vol. 88. Edited by J.-P. Migne. Paris: Migne, 1860. Ephrem the Syrian. “Hymni de Paradiso.” In Des Heiligen Epbraem des Syrers Hymnen de Paradiso und Contra Julianum. Edited by E. Beck. Corpus Scrtptorum Christianorum Orientalium, vol. 174. Louvain, Belgium: Secretariat du Corpus SCO, 1957. 1 6 ---. “In Genesim Commentarii.” In Sancti Ephraem Syri in Genesim et in Exodum. Edited by R. M. Tonneau. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, vol. 152. Louvain, Belgium: Secretariat du Corpus SCO, 1955. ---. Sancti patris nostri Ephraem Syri et Jacobi episcopi Edesseni interpretationum in Genesim collectanea, 1. Edited by J. A. Assemani. Sancti Patris Nostri Ephraem Syri Opera Omnia. Tomus I. Rome, 1737. Fulgentius of Ruspa. “De fide ad Petrum seu de regula fidei.” In Opera. Edited by J. Fraipont. Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 91a. Tumhout, Belgium: Typographi Brepols Editores Pontificii, 1968. Gregory of Nazianzus. “De filio [oration 29].” In Gregor von Nazianz. Die funf theologischen Reden. Edited by J. Barbel. Dusseldorf, Germany: Patmos-Verlag, 1963. ---. “De substantiis mente praeditis [carm. 7].” In Carmina dogmática. Edited by J.-P. Migne. Patrologiae Cursus Completus; Series Graeca, vol. 37. Paris: Migne. ---. “De theologia [oration 28].” In Gregor von Nazianz. Die funf theologischen Reden. Edited by J. Barbel. Dusseldorf, Germany: Patmos-Verlag, 1963. ---. “In Sanctum Pascha [oration 45].” In Patrologiae Cursus Completus; Series Graeca. vol. 36. Edited by J.-P. Migne. Paris: Migne, 1862. Gregory of Nyssa. “De creatione hominis sermo alter [Sp.].” In Gregorii Nysseni opera, suppl. Edited by H. Hoerner. Leiden: Brill, 1972. ---. “De creatione hominis sermo primus [Sp.].” In Gregorii Nysseni opera, suppl. Edited by H. Hoerner. Leiden: Brill, 1972. ---. “De opificio hominis.“ In Patrologiae Cursus Completus; Series Graeca, vol. 44. Edited by J.-P. Migne. Paris: Migne, 1865. |
| As to the demons, these false and deceitful mediators, who, though their uncleanness of spirit frequently reveals their misery and malignity, yet, by virtue of the levity of their aerial bodies and the nature of the places they inhabit, do contrive to turn us aside and hinder our spiritual progress; they do not help us towards God, but rather prevent us from reaching Him. Since even in the bodily way, which is erroneous and misleading, and in which righteousness does not walk – for we must rise to God not by bodily ascent, but by incorporeal or spiritual conformity to Him – in this bodily way, I say, which the friends of the demons arrange according to the weight of the various elements, the aerial demons being set between the ethereal gods and earthy men, they imagine the gods to have this privilege, that by this local interval they are preserved from the pollution of human contact. Thus they believe that the demons are contaminated by men rather than men cleansed by the demons, and that the gods themselves should be polluted unless their local superiority preserved them. Who is so wretched a creature as to expect purification by a way in which men are contaminating, demonscontaminated, and gods contaminable? Who would not rather choose that way whereby we escape the contamination of the demons, and are cleansed from pollution by the incontaminable God, so as to be associated with the uncontaminated angels? Chapter 19.– That Even Among Their Own Worshippers the Name Demon Has Never a Good Signification. But as some of these demonolators, as I may call them, and among them Labeo, allege that those whom they call demonsare by others called angels, I must, if I would not seem to dispute merely about words, say something about the good angels. The Platonists do not deny their existence, but prefer to call them good demons. But we, following Scripture, according to which we are Christians, have learned that some of the angels are good, some bad, but never have we read in Scripture of good demons; but wherever this or any cognate term occurs, it is applied only to wicked spirits. And this usage has become so universal, that, even among those who are called pagans, and who maintain that demons as well as gods should be worshipped, there is scarcely a man, no matter how well read and learned, who would dare to say by way of praise to his slave, You have a demon, or who could doubt that the man to whom he said this would consider it a curse? Why, then, are we to subject ourselves to the necessity of explaining away what we have said when we have given offense by using the word demon, with which every one, or almost every one, connects a bad meaning, while we can so easily evade this necessity by using the word angel? Chapter 20.– Of the Kind of Knowledge Which Puffs Up the Demons. |
| Юридическая консультация: Совместно с рубрикой «Вопрос – ответ» сайта www.miloserdie.ru . На вопросы отвечает юрист Александр Морозов. (Милосердие.ru). Как устроить в московскую школу 17-летнюю девочку-сироту, оказавшуюся в нашей многодетной семье, не оформляя над ней опекунства? Приводится ряд конкретных советов юриста А. Морозова //Фома. - – август 2009. – С.60. – (раздел « Люди », рубрика « Семейный совет », подрубрика « Юридическая консультация »). Когда начинать воспитание? //Фома. - – август 2009. – С.61. – (раздел « Люди », рубрика « Семейный совет »). Материал включает две подрубрики: Опыт. «Ответ однозначен – с рождения…» /Ирина Круглова , Москва//Фома. - (76) – август 2009. – С.61. - (раздел « Люди », рубрика « Семейный совет. Опыт »); «Каждый ребенок – индивидуальность, каждая семья – отдельный мир, рецептов для всех не найти. Но есть общие принципы:…» /Екатерина Рытова , Санкт-Петербург//Фома. - (76) – август 2009. – С.61. - (раздел « Люди », рубрика « Семейный совет. Опыт »); « Если бы Богородицу в детстве не воспитывали, как бы Она в храм вошла в трехлетнем возрасте? ..» /Ирина Волкова , Ростов-на-Дону//Фома. - (76) – август 2009. – С.61. - (раздел « Люди », рубрика « Семейный совет. Опыт »); Советы батюшки. Почему детей до семи лет не исповедуют? Объясняет священник Александр Гаврилов , настоятель храма в честь иконы Божией Матери «Знамение», д. Турыгино Ленинградской обл. Фото Демида Костырева//Фома. - (76) – август 2009. – С.61. - (раздел « Люди », рубрика « Семейный совет. Советы батюшки »). СМЫСЛОВАЯ ГЕОГРАФИЯ (раздел). – С.62-71. Воронеж. Байдарочные походы как молодежная миссия: Поход должен продолжаться . Автор – Константин Мацан . Очерк о миссионерских байдарочных походах во главе со священником, которые воронежские православные студенты проводят в Воронежской и Борисоглебской епархии. Фото из архива Миссионерского отдела Воронежско-Борисоглебской епархии, Владимира Ештокина//Фома. - – август 2009. – С.62-63,64-66,68-71. – (раздел « Смысловая география », рубрика « Воронеж. Байдарочные походы как молодежная миссия »). |
| Послесловие: В лето 7017 (1509) спиана бысть сия книга август Минея повелением и желанием господина Протасия епископа резанскаго и муромскаго в преименитом граде Переславле резанском. См. 483. 591. (451.) Минея служ. мес. август, полууст., напис. около 1514 года, в лист, 295 листов, заглавная заставка киноварная. Список сей содержит все, что показано в предыдущих 5. Впереди на белом листе: Памвинская месяц август. См. 467. 592. (452.) Минея служ. мес. август, полууст. в два столбца, XVI века, в лист, 201 лист. Службы на числа 24 и 26 те же, какие под 590. Впереди на порожнем листе Варсонофия Замицково. См. 469. 593. (490.) Минея служ. мес. август, полууст., XVI века, в четверть, 191 лист, сходна с предыд. 592. По листам вшизу подпись о выдаче сей книги в село Шухобалово та же, что под 476. 594. (478.) Минея служ. мес. август, полууст., нач. XVII века, в четверть, 341 лист. Службы те же, какие в предыд. двух списках; 16 числа повесть о пренесении нерукотв. Образа та же, что под 589. 595. (557.) Минея служ. мес. август, полууст. четкий, нач. XVII века, в четверть, 262 листа. 596. (502.) Минея служ. мес. август, полууст., XVII века, в четверть, 466 листов. Ркп. подмочена, прибавления те же, какие в предыдущих, в самом конце написана еще служба препод. Александру свирскому . Служба 10 августа еже от Едеса в Константинград пренесение св. Убруса, положена во всех списках, 1-го августа Милостивому Спасу – только в трех. 597. (438.) Службы, избранныя из 8 месяцев, начиная с января, полуустав четкий, в два столбца, напис. 1511 года, в лист, 349 листов, заглавного недостает. Первоначально службы были избраны из Миней всех месяцев и составляли огромный фолиант. По счету тетрадей недостает 331 листа, а по счету глав 64 служб. Листы помечены по-древнему в XVII веке: .м.т.=9, 40, 300. Из русских Святых службы помещены святителям: февраля 12 Алексею московскому, мая 23 Леонтию ростовскому; преподобным: июня 9 Кириллу белоозерскому, июля 5 Сергию радонежскому вместе с Афанасием афонским (см. 568), 15 св. Князю Владимиру, 24-го муч. Борису и Глебу (паремии см. 4). В службе Успению пресв. Богородицы по 6 песни положено чтение (см. 681 л. 420), также и по окончании службы нерукотвор. Образу Господню (там же л. 526). Под 24 августа служба святителю Петру московскому , 26-м Сретению иконы пресв. Богородицы Владимирской, в самом конце, отдельно, сент. 20 Михаилу кн. чсрниговскому и Феодору. |
|
|
