| Материал из Православной Энциклопедии под редакцией Патриарха Московского и всея Руси Кирилла Содержание ВСЕНОЩНОЕ БДЕНИЕ [церковнослав. ; греч. γρυπνα, παννυχς; лат. vigilia], в широком смысле слова - аскетическая практика, состоящая в отказе от сна и продолжительном молитвословии в ночное время суток; в богослужении правосл. Церкви - особый комплекс служб суточного круга, к-рый совершается в определенные дни и должен, согласно уставным указаниям, продолжаться от захода солнца до рассвета. Ночная молитва в древней Церкви Хотя в ВЗ упоминаются молитвы среди ночи (Пс 62. 7; 87. 2; 91. 3; 118. 55, 62, 148; 133. 1; Неем. 1. 6), практики регулярной ночной молитвы в ветхозаветные времена не существовало. Первые сведения о регулярных ночных службах в иудейской традиции появляются в кумран. рукописях: согласно «Уставу общины», треть всех ночей года отводилась для собраний, на к-рых читалось Свящ. Писание, изучался Закон Моисеев и совершались некие благословения (1QS 6. 6-8). Кроме того, каждый член общины должен был совершать молитвословия в начале, в середине и в конце ночи (1QS 9. 26-10. 3; ср.: 4Q 503. Fr. 16). Филон Александрийский рассказывает об общине терапевтов, к-рые каждый 49-й день ожидали восхода солнца для совершения молитв ( Philo. De vita contempl. 89). В книгах НЗ неоднократно повествуется о том, как в особых случаях на протяжении всей ночи молились Иисус Христос (напр., перед избранием 12 апостолов (Лк 6. 12), перед Преображением (Лк 9. 28), в Гефсимании перед арестом (Мф 26. 36)) и апостолы (напр., Павел и Сила перед освобождением из темницы (Деян 16. 25)). О частых бдениях пишет ап. Павел (2 Кор 6. 5; 11. 27). Наставления бодрствовать, трезвиться и быть внимательными к себе, помня об искушениях, нападениях диавола и Втором пришествии Христовом, неоднократно встречаются в апостольских писаниях (1 Петр 5. 8; 1 Кор 16. 13; Кол 4. 2; 1 Фес 5. 6; Откр 3. 2, 3; 16. 15; ср.: Деян 20. 31). Для последующей христ. аскетической традиции и возникновения практики В. б. особое значение имеют наставления о непрестанной молитве (1 Фес 5. 17; Еф 6. 18). |
| Makarios, Hierodeacon. It Is Later Than You Think! American Aposde to the Russian People//«Pravda». Ru. 2002. Sept. 27. [Mansur, Mary]. “With the Saints Give Rest...”//Orthodox America. 1982. Rossi, Vincent. The American Acquisition of the Patristic Mind//The Orthodox Word. 1984. Р.267–274. Sherry, Matthew. A Warrior of the Spirit for Modem Times//The Orthodox Word. 1994. 327–333. Stephen, Fr. Fr.Seraphims Beginnings as an Orthodox Writer//The Orthodox Word. 1984. P.31–37. Stephens III, Dr.Raphael W. Fr.Seraphim Rose, Patron of the Unborn//The Orthodox Word. 1989. Р.157–160. Stolen Glimpses into the Inner World of Fr. Seraphim//The Orthodox Word. 1987. Р.300–303. Toner, Jamey. “Maranatha!”//The Orthodox Word. 1994. Р.321–326. Yentzen, Celia. A New Miracle of Fr. Seraphim//The Orthodox Word. 2004. P.217–219. The Twentieth Anniversary of Fr.Seraphims Repose//The Orthodox Word. 2002. Р.209–215. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose], A Mighty Pen Is Stilled//Orthodox America. 1982. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose]. Letters from Fr. Seraphim. Richfield Springs (N.Y.), 2001. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose]. My Advice to Converts//Again. 1994. Dec. 4. Vol. 17. Р.25–27. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose]. Personal Reminiscences of Fr. Seraphim//The Orthodox Word. 2002. Р.233–241. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose], The Royal Path of the Righteous Hieromonk Seraphim of Platina//Orthodox America. 2002. Р.6–7, 12. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose]. Two Miracles of Fr.Seraphim//The Orthodox Word. 1984. P.44–45. Книги о.Серафима (Роуза), изданные на русском языке Аще забуду тебе, Иерусалиме/Сб. ранних работ. Мстиславль: Просветитель, 1995. Блаженный Иоанн Чудотворец. М.: Правило веры; Русский паломник, 1993. Блаженный Иоанн Чудотворец. Изд. 2-е. М.: Братство прп.Германа Аляскинского; Российское отделение Валаамского общества Америки, 1999. Божие откровение человеческому сердцу. М.: Братство прп.Германа Аляскинского; Российское отделение Валаамского общества Америки, 1994; 2-е изд. – М.: Московское подворье Свято–Троицкой Сергиевой лавры, 1997. |
| Др. известным аргументом сторонников гипотезы принадлежности Крестителя к секте кумранитов является указание на то, что все евангелисты описывают суть служения Иоанна в пустыне словами пророчества Ис 40. 3: «Глас вопиющего в пустыне: приготовьте путь Господу, прямыми сделайте в степи стези Богу нашему», т. е. именно Иоанн является приуготовителем этого «пути Господу» (Мк 1. 2-3 (ср.: Исх 23. 20; Мал 3. 1); Мф 3. 1-3; Лк 3. 3-6 (ср.: Лк 7. 27); Ин 1. 23 (самоидентификация Иоанна как «гласа вопиющего в пустыне»)). Точно так же местонахождение К. о. в пустыне и центральная идея ее богословия описываются в «Уставе общины» словами Ис 40. 3 (1QS 8. 12-16). Кумраниты понимали этот стих как призыв, обращенный «Голосом» к избранным,- «отделиться от местопребывания людей кривды, дабы уйти в пустыню» с определенной целью (1QS 8. 13-14) - «проложить там дорогу Господу» (ср.: 4QS MS E 1. 3, 4), т. е. «путь» для последнего действия Господа в пустыне (ср.: Лк 3. 7-9; Мф 3. 7-10; Charlesworth. 1997). На определенное сходство Крестителя с кумранитами должен также указывать аскетический образ их жизни, к-рый, напр., проявлялся в обычае одеваться и в особенностях пищи (Мк 1. 6; Мф 11. 18; Лк 7. 33). Креститель ел саранчу и мед: во-первых, данные особенности жизни Иоанна частично соотносятся со свидетельством CD 12. 11-15, где упомянута саранча (описан ритуально чистый способ приготовления) и может подразумевать мед, очищенный от пчелиных личинок ( Charleswort. 1999. P. 367-368; описание дискуссии о пище Крестителя см. в: Kelhoffer. 2005: автор приходит к выводу, что при имеющихся данных вопрос не получает однозначного решения); во-вторых, эти особенности могут быть объяснены его решением не принимать к.-л. вещи и пищу от других, как это предписывалось правилами чистоты у кумранитов и ессеев вообще (ср.: 1QS 5. 16-17; Ios. Flav. De bell. II 143; Charlesworth. 1999. P. 366-367). Аскетизм Иоанна (ср.: Лк 1. 15) нек-рые исследователи связывают с тем, что он прошел начальные ступени инициации в К. о., но покинул ее, лишь частично приняв обеты. Так, согласно гипотезе Чарлзуорта ( Charlesworth. 1999; Idem. 2006), Креститель, привлеченный идеями кумранитов, мог «пройти ранние стадии инициации» (ср.: 1QS 6, 21) и «принял обеты безбрачия и абсолютного отделения от других» ( Charlesworth. 1999. P. 361), но отказался произнести проклятия против «людей Белиала» во время ритуала обновления Завета (1QS 2. 4-10, 11-18), т. к. и сам был из священнического рода ( Charlesworth. 1999. P. 363-364). |
| It is said that Fr. Sebastian baptized more people than any other Serbian priest of theWestern Hemisphere. St. Nikolai (Velimirovich) of Zhicha, Serbia, who buried Fr. Sebastian at the Zhicha Monastery when the latter reposed there in 1940, called him “a viceless man” and fittingly designated him “the greatest Serbian missionary of modern times.” Ten years after Fr. Sebastian’s repose, St. Nikolai wrote of him: “Here is a man who indebted all the Serbian race, especially all the Serbs and all the Serbian organizations in America. Should that man remain without a monument or any sign of honor on American soil? He does not need it. He did not wish it. All he wished to his last breath was the Kingdom of Heaven, which I believe he has obtained by the grace of his Lord. But his people need it; his posterity needs it. The Serbian people always cultivated the noble virtue of gratitude. Let them express their traditional gratitude to this remarkable Serbian — Father Sebastian Dabovich.” Today, nearly seven decades after his repose, Fr. Sebastian is being shown fitting honor and gratitude by the Serbian Orthodox Church both in the homeland and in the diaspora.With the blessing of Bishop Hrizostom of Zhicha and of Bishop Maxim of Western America, Fr. Sebastian’s remains have been unearthed from his grave in Zhicha Monastery in Serbia and are to be transferred to the St. Sava Church in Jackson, California: the first church founded by Fr. Sebastian, and the first Serbian Orthodox Church in the Western Hemisphere. On September 1 (n.s.), 2007, the Divine Liturgy will be celebrated in Jackson to mark this occasion, with numerous hierarchs and clergymen participating. The Liturgy will be followed by a memorial service for Fr. Sebastian, the interment of his remains in the St. Sava Church, and a talk on Fr. Sebastian’s life by the above-mentioned Bishop Irinej. In the eyes of many, these events are a step toward the Orthodox Church’s recognition of Fr. Sebastian as a saint. “Even now,” Bishop Irinej has written, “[Fr. Sebastian] is considered worthy of canonization among the Serbian people. May that day indeed come quickly! The epitaph on his tombstone at Zhicha Monastery reads most appropriately, ‘The First American Serbian Orthodox Apostle.’ Holy Apostle Sebastian, pray for us!” To commemorate the transfer of Fr. Sebastian’s remains to America, we are dedicating our 2008 Calendar to his memory. This Calendar presents photographs and descriptions of important people in Fr. Sebastian’s life and of churches which he either founded or served during the half-century of his pastoral ministry. A Life of Fr. Sebastian — the first full biography to appear in any language — is being published concurrently in our magazine, The Orthodox Word. |
| 2 It is noteworthy that the participants in the First Congress of Orthodox Theology (Athens, November 29 – December 6, 1936) discussed a plan for a pan-Orthodox journal, called La Revue Orthodoxe, The Orthodox Review, or Orthodoxe Theologische Zeitschrift. This proposal, submitted by Prof. Nicolae Cotos of the University of Cernauti/Chernivtsi, was unanimously endorsed by the participants, but the project was partially accomplished only with the publication of the first issue of St Vladimirs Seminary Quarterly in the Fall of 1952. See the letter by Fr Alexander Schmemann addressed to Fr Georges Florovsky on December 20, 1948 in Paul Gavrilyuk, On Christian Leadership: The Letters of Alexander Schmemann and Georges Florovsky (1947–1955): Texts transcribed, compiled, translated, introduced, and annotated by Paul Gavrilyuk (Yonkers, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2020), 125–131 (especially 130). See also Proces-verbaux du Premier Congres de Theologie Orthodoxe a Athenes, 29 Novembre – 6 Decembre 1936, publies par les soins du President Prof. Hamilcar S. Alivisatos (Athenes: Impr. «Pyrsos» S.A., 1939), 451–454. 3 The Quarterly was always recognized as being «published by the Faculty of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, a graduate school of Theology for all branches of the Orthodox Church», but this project was undertaken during these decades either by one editor or by an editorial team as follows: Fr Georges Florovsky (Editor-in-Chief) and Julia D. Malinchoc (Managing Editor): vol. 1 (1952–53), no. 1 (Fall 1952) through vol. 3 (1954–55), nos. 3–4 (Spring-Summer 1955); Fr Georges Florovsky (Editor): vol. 4 (1955–1956); Fr Alexander Schmemann, Fr William Schneirla, and Dr Nicholas Arseniev (Editorial Board): vol. 1 (5) (1957), no. 1 (January) through vol. 3 (1959), no. 4 (Fall); Fr Alexander Schmemann, Dr Nicholas Arseniev, Fr John Meyendorff, and Fr William Schneirla (Editorial Board): vol. 4 (1960); Fr Alexander Schmemann (Editor), Dr Nicholas Arseniev, Fr John Meyendorff, and Fr William Schneirla: vol. |
| Less than a year after the celebration of the tenth anniversary of Fr. John’s priestly service he was granted by the highest Church authority one of the most honorable priestly orders, which deservedly crowned his genuine exploits in the Diocese of North America and the Aleutians. By order of the Holy Synod on May 6, 1906, Fr. John was elevated to the dignity of Archpriest. 22 Thus, there began a qualitatively new period in Fr. John’s service: having become one of the most respected archpriests of the Diocese thanks to his outstanding pastoral work in his parish and in diocesan administrative activities, Fr. John, at the initiative of Bishop Tikhon who valued him highly, became more and more deeply involved in resolving the most pressing issues of diocesan administration. In May 1906, Fr. John was appointed dean of the New York area of the Eastern States, 23 and in February 1907, he was destined to be one of the most energetic participants of the first North American Orthodox Council in Mayfield, which dealt with the rapidly increasing conversions within the Diocese of North America and the Aleutians in the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church in America, which was the basis on which the Orthodox Church in America was later founded. During the period 1903-1907, the Chicago-Streator parish, built by his labors, was transformed into one of the most self-sufficient and flourishing diocesan parishes. But however successful the external circumstances of Fr. John’s service in North America may have seemed, his deep, fervent homesickness for his beloved Russia, which he had only seen once for a leave of several months in recent years, and the necessity of providing his three elder children with an undergraduate education in Russia, compelled Fr. John to think about the possibility of continuing his priestly ministry in his native Russian land. A rather significant circumstance furthering Fr. John’s submission of an application for transfer back to Russia was the insistent request of his elderly and seriously ailing father-in-law, who was a clergyman of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, and who dreamt of handing over his parish to the guidance of such a deserving priest as Fr. John had shown himself to be. In accordance with his application, Fr. John received, on May 20, 1907, a release from his service in the Diocese of North America and the Aleutians, whereupon he began preparing himself for his move back to Russia. The week before their departure, however, Fr. John and his family had to bear some sudden startling news from Russia: Matushka Alexandra’s beloved parent had succumbed in advance of their return. In July 1907, leaving the Chicago-Streator parish which was so dear to his heart, and where he had given twelve years of missionary service, Fr. John set out for the unknown future that awaited him in his motherland, where he would spend the rest of his priestly service from thenceforth. 24 |
| 601 В АП. (215, 1): μφτεροι δ τ πρς γγελαν, κδημαν, πηρεσαν, δουλεαν. Hauler (fr. 35, 20): et ad peregrinationem et ministerium et servitium ad jussionem episcopi paratissimus et mobilis sit. Ср. Функ. (214, 1). 602 Буквально: «и будьте одной душей, которая живет в двух телах». Hauler (fr. 35, 26): et duo (у Hauler " а ошибочно поставлено «domino» вместо «duo»; Функ исправил эту ошибку – р. 214, 4) corpora in una anima portantes. 603 Hauler (fr. 35,27): quantum sit ministerium diaconiae. АП. совершенно уклоняются от сирийского и латинского текста (215, 5): τν τς διακονας μισϑν. 606 АП (215,9): κν δ ψυχν πρ δελφο ποϑσϑαι, μ διστσωσιν. Hauler (fr. 36, 1): ut, si necessitas vos exegerit et animam pro fratre ponere, per ministerium vestrum ponatis nolite dubitare. 609 Hauler (fr. 36, 10): quia discipuli ejus sumus et locum Christi sortiti. В АП. все это сильно изменено. 611 Hauler (fr. 36, 12): quomodo dominus noster succingens se linteum et accipiens in pelve aquam recumbentibus omnibus nobis veniens lavit pedes etc. B АП. передается по Евангельскому тексту (215, 20). 613 В АП. (217, 1): ταπενωσεν αυτν, πς ν μες παισχυνϑσεσϑε,... Hauler (fr. 36, 19): nolite dubitare. 614 Hauler (fr. 36, 19): ut superinponentes et infirmis hoc faciatis, quia operarii veritatis estis, Christi exemplo succincti. Последних слов нет в АП. 615 В АП. (217, 5): ο γρ δ νϑρωπον ποιετε... ν μρ τποκοπς μν. Hauler (fr. 36, 23): nam si ita agitis, secundum hominem facitis ea... in die visitationis. 616 Надписание ΧVII главы в издании Gibson (Codex Harrisianus): «Справедливо, чтобы епископы заботились о сиротах, остающихся малыми, и их воспитании; и осуждение тех, кои, хотя и владеют кое-чем и не испытывают нужды, отличаются жадностью и принимают (известную долю) из даяний, приносимых в церковь для бедных и сирот. 617 Hauler (fr. 37, 1): qui habet pueram, id est filium; АП. Совершенно согласуются с сирийским текстом. 618 Hauler (fr. 37, 2): qui tempore nuptiarum possit eam accipere. АП. (219, 5): τν δ παρϑνον, χων υν δυνμενον ατ τας το γμου ραις σογχρονσαι συζεξ. |
| Fr. Meyendorff was first of all known for his studies on the Byzantine theologian St. Gregory Palamas (14th century), whose theology can be considered as a true patristic synthesis. For this reason, the initial lectures were dedicated to the notion of “ neo-patristic synthesis, ” which had been introduced for the first time by Fr. Georges Florovsky, and which had been resumed by Fr. John. The initial lectures included: Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, “ Father John Meyendorff and ‘ Neo-Patristic Synthesis ’ ” ; Fr. Nikolaos Loudovikos, “ John Meyendorff and the Possibilities of a Modern Patristic Exegesis ” ; Dr. Ivana Noble, “ Patristic Synthesis or Non-Synthetic Dialectics? A Critical Evaluation of John Meyendorff " s Contribution. " The main theme of the scholarly discussions on Gregory Palamas in the last century had been the relationship between the theology of the hesychast theologian and the system of the “ hierarchies ” of Dionysius the Areopagite (or the “ Pseudo-Dionysius ” , the anonymous author of some writings which date from the end of the 5th century). In his Doctoral Dissertation, submitted at the University of Paris (Sorbonne), A Study of Gregory Palamas (Introduction à l ’ étude de Grégoire Palamas), Fr. Meyendorff — therein following the intuition of Fr. Georges Florovsky — had upheld the thesis that Palamas has applied a “ Christological corrective ” to the writings of Dionysius on the “ Celestial Hierarchy ” and the “ Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, ” the language of which is marked by a Neo-platonic flavor. Some Orthodox theologians have disputed this interpretation by Frs. Meyendorff and Florovsky, in particular, Fr. John Romanides. Some of the speakers in the next set of lectures shared the opinion of Romanides: Fr. Andrew Louth, “ Dionysius, Maximus, Palamas — and Meyendorff? ” ; and Pantelis Kalaitzidis, “ John Meyendorff and John Romanides: Two Different Approaches to Palamite Theology. ” However, Mr. Goran Sekulovski, lecturer in Patristics at the Institute, in his talk entitled, “ Fr. John Meyendorff, Reader of Dionysius the Areopagite, ” underlined the importance of Fr. Meyendorff ’ s study, in which the author points out that Palamas had replaced the mysticism of Dionysius within the context of the mystery of the Incarnation of Christ, which underlies all Christian spirituality and mysticism. For this reason, Mr. Sekulovski argued, there is no doubt that this study of Fr. Meyendorff still remains the basic study on this Byzantine theologian. |
| A special session was dedicated to the History of the Church, since Fr. Meyendorff was a renowned expert on the history of Byzantium and the Slavs. Dr. Pavel Pavlov presented a paper on the relationship between Gregory Palamas and the Islamic world ( “ Palamas ’ View on Islam: Byzantine Insights for Contemporary Society ” ). Dr. Marie-Hélène Congourdeau presented a paper on ‘‘ Nicholas Cabasilas and his defense of Gregory Palamas against the ‘ trifles ’ of Nicephoros Gregoras. ” Dr. Marie-Hélène Blanchet presented an analysis of the development of the use of the term " katholikos " in Byzantium ( " The Different Meanings of the Term ‘ katholikos ’ in Byzantium at the End of the Middle Ages: a Confessional Controversy ” ). Finally, Dr. Constantin Vétochnikov presented a paper on “ The Patriarchal Missions in the Russian Lands during the 14th and 15th Century. ” Transitioning to the last section of the rich and diverse program, dedicated to the Church in the contemporary world, a young scholar from Yekaterinburg, Mr. Andrey Levitskiy, talked about the activities and publications of Fr. Meyendorff in Russia ( “ Fr. John Meyendorff ’ s Publications in Russia: the Story of a ‘ Memorial Festschrift ’ " ) and the circumstances around the notorious “ autodafé ”— burning of books of, among others, Fr. Meyendorff and Fr. Alexander Schmemann, which had been organized in Yekaterinburg by Church authorities in 1998. During the last section, the lectures also touched on the role that Fr. Meyendorff had played in the Ecumenical Movement: Fr. Nicolas Lossky (St. Sergius Institute), Fr. John Meyendorff and the Ecumenical Movement ; Dr. Nicholas Kazarian (St. Sergius Institute), “ Fr. Jean Meyendorff and the WCC. ” Protopresbyter Boris Bobrinskoy, former Dean of St. Sergius, presented a paper on " Palamite Pneumatology in the Context of My Contacts with Fr. John Meyendorff, " in which he showed that Fr. Meyendorff had detected a possible breakthrough in the dead end, ancient controversy on the Filioque. |
| If persons showed sufficient interest, Fr. Daniel was not shy about having his missionaries broach major questions quickly. Even in the first conversation, they might ask nominal Orthodox if they wanted to repent, go to confession, and start receiving Communion. On the other side of things, they would ask the unbaptized fairly quickly if they would like to be baptized. Of course, not all people proved receptive to being engaged so rapidly, and Fr. Daniel noted that secular people, in particular, tended to need a more “unhurried” pace. 19 Out of genuine concern for such people, Fr. Daniel urged accommodation and longer-term dialogue. If someone showed interest, he was not to be neglected or rejected. Early on, Fr. Daniel and his lay missionaries often engaged in quite polemical and apologetic speech, as is typified in his book A Protestant’s Walk Through an Orthodox Church . 20 However, later in his career, Fr. Daniel recognized that frequently one need not be polemical and raise and dispatch objections to Orthodoxy when dealing with the non-Orthodox. Often times, simply telling people what Orthodox Christianity actually is on its own terms proved to be enough. 21 For Fr. Daniel, missions was not the work of an elect few, but the work of a whole community. Thus, it was not enough to have people go out and preach, but the local church had to have internal organelles geared toward the reception of those who had been reached. To this end, Fr. Daniel used catechism classes to prepare interested persons for baptism or reconciliation to the Church. In addition to completing catechism, he also required potential converts to read through all four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles on their own before he would receive them into the Church. Obviously, going through this process indicates a great deal of commitment, and that is precisely what Fr. Daniel sought in converts. 22 Baptism was not the end of the process of conversion for Fr. Daniel. After reception into the Church, there was an expectation that the new Christian would “enter into the life of the Church” by “studying Holy Scripture.” 23 To this end, Fr. Daniel led a weekly Scripture class at his parish. He also, perhaps more significantly, organized his people into “Gospel circles.” These “Gospel circles” were groups of lay people who met regularly to study the Gospels together. 24 Fr. Daniel clearly viewed active engagement with the Scriptures as essential both to the health of the local parish and to its missionary life. |
|
|
