| Исаак С. Λ. LXXIII, σ. 428. Ср. Григорий H. De Orat. Dominica. Or. III. T. XLIV, col. 1156C. Cp. E. Феофан. Толков. Посл. Колос. и Филим., стр. 155–156. 1450 Григорий Н. De virginitate, c. XIII. T. XLVI, col. 384A. Cp. Исаак Сир . Λογ. XXIII. σ. 134. 1451 Изречение аввы Пимена. Древ. Патерик. X, 77, стр. 216 (в Verb. Senior, соответствующего нет). 1460 Nisi purgata fuerit a cogitationibus alienis, contemplative non potest orare Deum. Verba Sen. XII, 13, col. 942D-943A (cp. Патерик, § 16, стр. 287). 1461 Григорий Н. Or. XXXIX, c. IX. T. XXXVI, col. 344B. Cp. Or. XX, C. IV, col. 1069A. Григорий H. De oratione Dominica. Or. I. T. XLIV, col. 1132D. De virginitate c. V. T. XLVI, col. 348B. Василий B. Sermo ascet. II, c. I, col. 372AB. И. Кассиан. Collat. IX, c. IV, col. 774B–775B. Макарий E. De patientia et discretione c. XXV, col. 885C. Исаак C. Epist IV, σ. 574. 1462 И. Кассиан. Collat. IX, c. IV, col. 775AB: curemus mentem ab omnibus terrenis vitiis expurgatam cunctisque mundatam faecibus passionum ad sublimitatem perducere naturalem, ut ita ad Deum oratio ejus nullo vitiorum pondere praegravata conscendat. 1465 Pratum Spirituale, c. CLXXXVI1, col. 2I7CD (изречение аввы Иоанна игумена монастыря на горе Елеонской): qui virtutem possidere voluerit, nisi prius oderit virtuti ex diametro contrariam malitiam, eam acquirere ac possidere non potest. 1468 Климент A. Paedag. Lib. I, C. II, col. 253A. Cp. Еп. Петр. Указание пути ко спасению, стр. 90: «главное препятствие к достижению совершенства составляют страсти, которые прежде всего я должно подавлять». 1469 И. Дамаскин. De fide orthodoxa. L. III, c. XIV, col. 1045A. Cp. Макарий E. Homil. IV, c. VIII, col. 477D. 1473 Авва Дорофей. Doctr. XII, c. V, col. 1757AB. Cp. Макарий E. De perfectione in Spiritu c. II, col. 844A. Cp. И. Златоуст. T. LV, col. 52–53. 1476 Василий Вел. Homil. in prine. Proverbior. II, col. 409A. Ср. Евагрий. Cap. pr. c. LXXI, col. 1244В. Исаак С. Λογ. LXXXI, σ. 457. Cp. Е. Феофан. Начерт. Хр. Нрав., стр. 289. |
| Изъяснение трудных мест Божественного Писания. М. 2003 С. 27 « … человек сотворен по образу Божию в означение его обладания над бессловесными животными». Затем Григорий Богослов подтверждает ту мысль, что человек должен был посредством заповеди, данной ему в раю достигнуть совершенства. «Древо было хорошо для употребляющих благовременно, но не хорошо для простых еще и не умеренных в своих желаниях, подобно как и совершенная пища не полезна для слабых и требующих молока.» Свт. Григорий Богослов .//Собр. творений в 2 т. Минск – Москва, 2000. Т. I Слово 45. На святую Пасху. С. 809. 104 Cyr. Alex. Glaphyra in Pentateuchum. ΛΟΓ. Α. Περι του Καιν και του Αβελ. δ. 69. 48:21. TLG. 4090/97. Ср. рус пер. Свт. Кирилл Александрийский . Глафиры или искусные объяснения избранных мест из Пятикнижия Моисея//Библиотека отцов и учителей Церкви. М., 2001. Т. IX. С. 28. 119 Cyr. Alex. Glaph. in Pent. 69, 24:32 – 46. TLG 4090/97. Ср. рус. пер. Свт. Кирилл Александрийский . Глафиры или искусные объяснения избранных мест из Пятикнижия Моисея//Библиотека отцов и учителей Церкви. М., 2001. Т. IX. С. 13. 122 Αthan. Alex. De incar. Verb. 44, 4:3. (ed. Kannengiesser, C. Paris, 1973. TLG 2035/2). Ср. рус. пер.Свт. Афанасий Великий . Слово о Воплощении Бога Слова. Восточные отцы Церкви//Антология. М., 1998. Т. I С. 248. 127 Αthan. Alex. De incar. Verb. 25, 5:1. (ed. Kannengiesser, C. Paris, 1973. TLG 2035/2). Ср. рус. пер.Афанасий Вел. Слово о Воплощении Бога – Слова//Творения в 4 т. М., 1994. Т. 1, С. 222, 223. 131 Αthan. Alex. De incar. Verb. 24, 2:2 – 8. (ed. Kannengiesser, C. Paris, 1973. TLG 2035/2). Ср. рус. пер.Свт. Афанасий Великий . Слово о Воплощении Бога Слова. Восточные отцы Церкви//Антология. М., 1998. Т. I. С.46. 132 Αthan. Alex. De incar. Verb. 24, 5:7. (ed. Kannengiesser, C. Paris, 1973. TLG 2035/2). Ср. рус. пер.Свт. Афанасий Великий . Слово о Воплощении Бога Слова. Восточные отцы Церкви//Антология. М., 1998. Т. I. С.46. 135 Излагая здесь частично учение св. Афанасия о Лице Господа Иисуса Христа, мы не ставили перед собой цели раскрыть эту тему всесторонне. |
| The same conclusions can be made very accurately by reading the canons decreed by the council of Nicea. In it we find for the eventual anticipated lifting of penances terms of the root “filanvrjpia.” The rather conciliatory measures in regard to the Novationists and Paulianists are described without being qualified by a particular word. The decision concerning Melitios is said to have been inspired by a spirit of humanity (“filanvrjpoteron kinhveishc ths Synodoy”). The verb “oikonomein,” as well as the substantive “oikonomoc” and “oikonomia,” is found very frequently in the canonical literature of the fourth century, but their sense rests very near to the first meaning or the sense immediately derived by semantics. If the concrete substantive “econome” is not used for the bishop in the canonical texts, it is explained by the desire to avoid confusion. In fact, it seemed good very early on that the bishop be assisted in the management of goods in the diocese by a cleric having the title of econome. On the other hand, the participle verbal substantive is used to indicate the bishops. Thus the council in Constantinople in 382 speaks of those who raise accusations “kata tjn oikonomoyntjn tac Ekklhsiac.” The verb itself is normally used to indicate the exercise of the Episcopal function. There is in this case the same meaning as “dioikein.” In canon 2 of Constantinople in 381, the two verbs are alternately employed for purely stylistic reasons: the bishop of Alexandria must alone manage (“oikonomein”) the affairs of Egypt; those of the diocese of the Orient must manage (“dioikein”) those of that region; those of Asia must manage (“dioikein”) those of this diocese and those of Pont, those of Pont. Those of Thrace must manage (“oikonomein”) those of the diocese of Thrace. As we see, the usage of these two different verbs resulted in effect from rhetoric. This is a grammatical construction in the form of chiasm. In classic Greek, the verb already has a meaning derived from “distribute,” “organize,” from which comes their canonical use to indicate the nature and duration of penances, in other words, to “fix the terms.” The verb “oikonomein” is frequently used in the series of canons 56 to 74 of Saint Basil, which are in fact a reproduction with some modifications of the Kanonikon of Palladios of Aramea. |
| Алексий 11 декабря 2018, 12:23 Павел, а что такое " соответствующее осмысление прочитанного " ? На что, на какое мерило, на какой камертон вы будете ориентироваться, чтобы понимать: соответствующе ли вы осмыслили или не соответствующе? А камертон этот, как я считаю, и есть -- ваш опыт. Если, к примеру, в острой ситуации сумели повести себя по-христиански, так, как писали святые Отцы, так, как повёл бы Себя Христос -- значит, осмыслили соответствующе. Нетрудно возгревать себя, лёжа на боку с " Добротолюбием " в руках. Но много ли в этом толку, если огонь не распространится дальше дивана? Иоанна_ 11 декабря 2018, 12:17 Монаху Паисию не нужна была никакая литература, когда рядом был старец Тихон, в течение многих лет кормивший его духовной кашей с ложечки. Но наша реальность такова, что настоящее духовное руководство - это роскошь, не многим доступная. Остаются книги, и слава Богу, что они есть. Иоанна_ 11 декабря 2018, 11:59 Спасение не трудно, но мудро, - это сказал кто-то из румынских старцев. И откуда же взять мудрость, как не из книг? Книги - это и есть ОПЫТ духовной жизни, предусмотрительно собранный и записанный нашими предшественниками, тружениками на ниве духовного делания. Упование на свой, самоличный опыт - самонадеянность. Опыт рождается от преодоления искушений и исправления ошибок и дорого стОит. Опыт собирается по крупицам и требует правильного осмысления. И помогает этому -изучение чужого опыта. А рвение при отсутствии глубокого знания предмета в такие дебри может занести, что потом на буксире не вытянешь. Здесь уж точно: такие случаи есть, и известно о них не только из художественной литературы. Алексий 11 декабря 2018, 10:53 Елена, не приписывайте мне то, что я не говорил и не подразумевал, эта страсть обидчивости очень быстро приводит ко греху осуждения. Насчёт святоотеческой литературы: вы можете открыть сейчас Ареопагита, Григория Паламу или Симеона Нового Богослова и не понять ровным счётом ничего; и это ещё полбеды -- хуже, если вам покажется, что поняли, от этого один шаг до прелести. |
| 297. Apparent Compounds . – Sometimes words often used together come to be written as one word (cf. § 1, note): thus, Δισ-κοροι sons of Zeus (i.e. the Dioscuri, Castor and Pollux), πο-πμπω send away. Such words, although they are usually classed among compound words, are not real compounds, but only apparent. 298 89 . Compound Verbs . – Verbs can be compounded (see § 207) only with prepositions (which were originally adverbs modifying the verb): thus, πι-βλλω throw on. Note. – It must be noticed that in denominative verbs formed from compound nouns the verb is not compounded. Thus, πεθοµαι means obey, but disobey is not but πειθ (-ω), a denominative verb formed from -πειθς disobedient. 299 90 . Inseparable Prefixes . – Certain words used to form the first part of compound words have no separate existence. The most important are: 1 . ν- (before a consonant -, usually called alpha privative) not, like Latin in-, English un-: thus, ν-αιδς shameless, -θεος godless. 2 . – conjunctive: thus, -λοχος bed-fellow. 3 . δυσ– (the opposite of ε well), ill, dificult: thus, δσ-ποτµος ill-starred, δυσ-χερς hard to handle. 4 . μι– half-: thus, μ-θεος demigod. MEANING OF COMPOUND WORD 300 . The meaning of most compound words is at once evident from the meaning of their parts. In nearly all of them the first part limits or determines the meaning of the second part: thus, ψευδ-μαντις false prophet, μ-δουλος fellow-slave, -γραφος unwritten, μφι-θατρον round theater, χειρο-ποητος hand-made, ργυρ-τοξος silver-bowed=having a silver bow, γλαυκ-πις bright-eyed. 1 . Observe that compound nouns may be either substantives or adjectives, and that often a verbal clement in a compound word may have either an active or a passive meaning: thus, compare λογο-γρφος speech-writer with -γραφος unwritten. Note. – In compound words whose last part is a verbal formed by the suffix –ο– the written accent regularly stands on that part of the word which indicates the agent (or instrument): thus, μητρο-κτνος mother-slayer, matricide, µητρ-κτονος mother-slain, i.e. slain by a mother; λιβο-βλος stone-throwing, λιθ-βολος struck by stones. When the written accent is on the last part of the word, it stands on the penult if that is short, otherwise on the ultima: thus, λογο-γρφος speech-writer, but λογο-ποις speech-maker, στρατ-ηγς army-leader, general. |
| Being a priest himself Jeremiah knew the law well and so he was no doubt familiar with the contents of Leviticus, the volume that more than any other part of the Mosaic law addressed the priests, and quite naturally he would also know the contents of chapter 26 with all its promises of rewards for faithfulness and dire threats about punishment for disobedience. However, even at that he never quotes from this chapter, and even though he in his prophecies mentions the Judean exile reasonably often he never connects it with a sabbath rest for the land. So, RF’s claim about Leviticus 26 and his ‘point of departure’ doesn’t hold water, it is as farfetched as the other parts of his homespun yarn. Actually, the Bible itself furnishes some very clear evidence about the text from which the Chronicler took the parts of his statement about the ‘sabbath rest’ mentioned in connection with Jeremiah’s prophecy: the relevant words in 2Chronicles 36:21 corresponding ones from Leviticus 26:34 ‘adratsetah ha’arets ‘et shabbetoteyha kol-yemey hashammah shabbatah untilsheenjoyed theland hersabbaths alldays tobedesolate sherested ‘az tirtseh ha’arets ‘etshabbetoteyha ...kol-yemey hashammah tishebat then shewillenjoy theland hersabbaths ...alldays tobedesolate shewillrest These statements are nearly identical, the only differences being found in the words expressing time, namely the two introductory particles and the tenses of the first and the last verb in each of them: in Leviticus the first particle is ‘az an adverb signifying ‘then’, here clearly referring to the future, while the Chronicler has ‘ad, a preposition meaning ‘until’, pointing back in time. Both use the same verbs, in almost the same grammatical form, namely qal, 3rd prs sg fem, the only difference being in the tense; the first verb is ratsah (‘to enjoy’), for which Leviticus has the future tirtseh (‘she will enjoy’), while the Chronicler has the preterite ratsetah (‘she enjoyed’), signifying the past. Then the final verb is shabbat, (‘to rest’), with the Chronicler it is in the preterite, shabbatah, (‘she rested’), while in Leviticus it is tishebat (‘she will rest’), in the future tense. The subjects, the direct objects and the time adverbials, also the verbs following (hashammah, ‘to be desolate’) are identical in both clauses. |
| The first Christian «apostles» were probably distinguished from prophets because they were sent on missions while Jesus was with them in the flesh ( Mark 6:7–13, 30 ). True apostles were apparently defined partly by their message of revelation. Most probably saw themselves as «sent» with a revelatory message to Israel like prophets of old, until Paul expanded the categories (like Jeremiah as a prophet to nations; Jer 1:5 ; Rom 11:13 ). Most significantly, early Christian apostles used Moses as a primary model ( John 1:14 ; 2Cor 3 ). Although the noun appears in John only at 13(where it clearly functions as cognate in sense to the verb), at least some Johannine Christians used the term for the Twelve (Rev 21:14) and for Christian leaders until the end (Rev 18:20; false ones in Rev 2:2). If the prophetic use of the verb probably stands behind the general sense of the early Christian «apostle,» it is even more likely to stand behind the use of the verb in this Gospe1. 4. Johannine Usage of Agency John portrays Jesus as God " s agent, his authorized, reliable representative. Although John " s Christology is incarnational, it is also a «sending» Christology, 2724 the latter theme reflecting the divne love that originates the sending. 2725 Like the prophets of old, Jesus was an agent not of humans but of God. In the case of the Johannine Jesus, images of God sending divine Wisdom forth from his holy heavens to instruct the wise 2726 (or, less closely, angels sent from God) 2727 are a still nearer part of the context. The Jesus tradition and early Christianity already included the portrait of Jesus as the Fathers agent (e.g., Mark 9:37; 12:6 ; Matt 10:40; 15:24; 21:37; Luke 4:18, 43; 10:16; Acts 3:26; Rom 8:3 ; Gal 4:4 ), 2728 but John emphasizes this motif more fully. Another important element in the significance of the sending motif is that messengers even in the OT were often servants. 2729 The servant of a king held a high position relative to those the servant addressed (albeit a sometimes uncomfortable one when the people were in rebellion, 2 Kgs 12:18), but was always subordinate to the king. Although commissioned agents in the first century were not always of lower social status (especially in betrothal arrangements), they relinquished their own status for the commission given them, in which they were authorized by the status of their senders. Equally, when one sent onés son ( Mark 12:6 ), the messenger position was necessarily one of subordination to the sender. Although the concept of agency implies subordination, it also stresses Jesus» functional equality with the Father in terms of humanity " s required response: he must be honored and believed in the same way as must be the Father whose representative he is (e.g., John 5:23; 6:29 ). |
| 2703 P. Git. 1:1, §1. For discussion of how a sender could nullify an agent " s task, see p. Git. 4:1, §1; the stricter rule required speaking to the agent (see m. Git. 4:1). 2704 E.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 6.88.2; Diodorus Siculus 40.1.1; Josephus Life 65, 72–73, 196–198; 2Macc 1:20. Cf. Zenós dispatch of two fellow scholars in his place in Diogenes Laertius 7.1.9. 2705 Diodorus Siculus 4.10.3–4; Josephus Ant. 8.220–221. 2706 Cf. Euripides Herac1. 272; Xenophon Anab. 5.7.18–19, 34; Apollodorus Epitome 3.28–29: Polybius 15.2; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 8.43.4; Diodorus Siculus 36.15.1–2; Dio Cassius 19.61; Appian R.H. 3.6.1–2; 3.7.2–3; 4.11; 8.8.53; Valerius Maximus 6.6.3–4. This was important, since receivers of news sometimes responded positively or negatively to messengers depending on the news they received (e.g., Homer Il. 17.694–696; 18.15–21; Euripides Medea 1125–1129; Appian R.H. 12.12.84; Arrian Ind. 34.4; 35.1; 2Sam 1:15; 18:20, 22 ; Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.35, 37). 2707 Homer Il. 1.334; 7.274–282; 8.517; Aeschines Timarchus 21; Cicero Phi1. 13.21.47; Herodian 6.4.6. Ambassadors who risked their lives merited special honor ( Phil 2:25–30 ; Cicero Phi1. 9.1.2). 2708 M. Demai 4:5; t. Demai 2:20; cf. also Aeschines Timarchus 21. 2709 B. B. Qam. 102ab. 2710 Wenham, Bible, 114–15. In the broader Mediterranean culture, cf., e.g., Demosthenes Or the Embassy 4–5. 2711 E.g., Appian R.H. 9.9.3 (196 B.C.E.). 2712 E.g., the ideal herald Aethalides in Apollonius of Rhodes 1.640–648. 2713 Cf. Euripides Herac1. 292–293. 2714 The sense of a cognate noun and verb need not agree, but given the noun " s absence in the LXX and the verb s prominence there in a manner analogous to early Christian usage, it seems likelv that the noun here reflects a Christian usage coined to match the cognate LXX verb (albeit in less technical use in secular vocabulary). 2715 Joshua by Moses (Josh 14:7; cf. Josh 11:15); Barak by Deborah ( Judg 4:6 ); Saul " s messenger? ( 1Sam 19:20 ); David (allegedly) by Saul ( 1Sam 21:2 ); angels from God (e.g., Judg 13:8 ; Tob 12cf. Gen 24:7 ); cf. messengers in 1 Kgs 18:10; 19:2;2Kgs 1:2,6,9,11,13; etc. A disciple may be " sent» as his master " s representative (the false but believable claim in 2 Kgs 5:22; cf. 2 Kgs 9:1–4). |
| According to researchers, the very concept of the created object’s nature (φσις) is one of the central ontological notions of Saint Gregory. According to Johannes Zahhuber the term can denote a real object as well as its essence, understood as a complex of properties which make up the object’s natural essence. 32 Nature as essence is characterised by a certain defining formula or the logos of nature ‘λγος τς φσεως’. 33 However, in our view, a careful study of the Saint’s Eucharistic texts gives reason to clarify the difference between natural properties and the logos which are almost equated in the above-cited study. Although Johannes Zahhuber notes the differences in object’s nature and its essential qualities from random properties, yet the article does not discuss St. Gregory’s concept of nature in a sacramentological aspect. 34 To describe the changes occurring in natural elements and objects, St. Gregory uses several ancient Greek verbs and their derivatives. Most often for this purpose he uses derivatives of the verb ‘λλοιω’ (18 times in his Apologia in Hexameron). Second in frequency come the derivatives from the verb ‘μεταβλλω’ (14 times). It is no accident that the name of the force that changes natural objects has two epithets derived from the two most commonly used verbs (μεταβλητικν τε κα λλοιωτικν δναμιν). 35 Much less often in various places in his Apologia in Hexameron the Saint used derivatives of the verbs ‘μεταποιω’ (3), ‘τρπω’ (2), ‘μετατθημι’ (2), «μεταβανω» (4). Analysis of the verbs usage context used in the Apologia in hexaemeron and in all of St. Gregory’s works gives reason to conclude that the Saint most often employed them generally and not as fixed terms with a clear range of theological meanings. Nevertheless, we were able to note some tendencies in the use of above mentioned verbs and their derivatives in the textual heritage of St. Gregory. If most of the mentioned verbs have a wide array of meanings, indicating changes without specific preferences, the verb μεταποιω was noticed to have a priority range of characteristic meanings. Analysis Of The Verbs ‘ΜΕΤΑΠΟΙΩ’ AND ‘ΛΛΟΙΩ’ And Their Derivatives Usage |
| Describing the Eucharist sacrament in the aforementioned Oratio catechetica St. Gregory uses other terms also, mentioning twice the change of eaten food into body and blood by an alternative force ‘δι τς λλοιωτικς δυνμεως’. 40 In contrast to the above term, the latter term is used only twice to describe the natural digestion process. The first is used in this essay to describe the natural process only in one place – where it is mentioned the transformation (μεταποησιν) 41 of wine into blood in that same process of natural digestion. However, except for predominant use of various derivatives of the verb ‘μεταποιω’ in describing the Eucharist Sacrament, we encounter a new term that is never used by St. Gregory to describe nature’s natural processes in the whole body of his writings. This is the participle of the verb ‘μεταστοιχειω’, which is used at the end of the section dedicated to the Holy Eucharist to describe the changing nature of the Eucharistic bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. 42 In contrast to the above natural processes where a change of an object’s essential properties is identified by the Saint with a change in its nature, we can say that in the Eucharist sacrament the exact opposite occurs. The Saint speaks of the change of the material Gifts nature, while maintaining all of their manifested properties. The natural properties as perceived by sight and taste (τν φαινομνων) remain unchanged, yet the nature ( φσις) of the proposed substance during the sacrament undergoes a qualitative change. This simple observation allows us to clarify St. Gregory’s definition of nature as the logos of the material object not always identifiable and displayable through its external characteristic properties. In the same place the saint says that Christ namely ‘through the flesh’ (δι τς σαρκς) communicates Himself to all believers ‘blending with their bodies so that through union with the Immortal man also can partake of incorruption’. 43 Thus Holy Communion brings an abundance of spiritual gifts with spiritual properties, meanwhile closely connected with specific and renewed physical properties. Analysis Of Use Of The Verb ‘ΜΕΤΑΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΩ’ And Its Derivatives |
|
|
