Веры уподобление 2 . Taken from Polyanthea, ibid., the passage immediately following: «Granum sinapis membrorum viscera calefacit: fidei autem vigor cordium peccata comburit. Ille quidem asperum, algorem frigoris removet: haec autem delictorum diabolicum frigus expellit. Sinapis iniquos humores decoquit corporum: fides autem libidinum fluenta consumit. Per illud medicina capiti procuratur: per fidem autem spirituale caput nostrum, quod est Christus, saepius refovetur, fidei (juxta comparationem sinapis) odore sancto perfruimur. Serm. 1» (ibid.). Веры уподобление 3 . Taken from Polyanthea , ibid. 11. 1–4 cf Polyanthea: «Fides est radix omnium virtutum, & quod super hoc fundamentum aedificaveris, hoc solum ad operis tui fructus, & virtutis proficit mercedem. Ambrosius lib, de Chain & Abel.» (p. 427). 11. 5–8 cf Polyanthea: «Fides lampas est, quia sicut lampas illuminât domum, ita fides animam. Ioannes Chrys. super Matth. 25» (pp. 427–8). Гражданство . Although this poem is located in A among a large number of poems deriving from Faber, it appears to have been taken from Polyanthea, «Respublica». 11. 5–8 cf Polyanthea : «Bias dixit optimam esse Rempublicam in qua legem omnes perinde ac ipsum dominum & regem metuunt. Plut, in convivium septem sapientium« (p. 1010). 11. 9–10 cf Polyanthea: «Chilon Optimam asseruit esse Rempub, quae maxime leges minime autem rhetores audit.» (ibid.). 11. 11–14 cf Polyanthea: » Cleobulus illam Rempubl, maxime dixit bene compositam esse, ubi cives magis infamiam quam legem metuunt» (ibid.). 11. 15–18 cf Polyanthea: «Periander earn judicavit laudatissimam esse Rempubl, in qua cum reliqua aequalia existimentur, virtute quod melius, vitio autem quod detenus est, definiatur» (ibid.). 11. 19–20 cf Polyanthea: »Pittacus ea est, inquit, Respublica bene instiiuta, a cujus gubernaculis mali removentur» (ibid.). 11. 21–2 cf Polyanthea : «Thales optimam esse pronuntiavit Remp. quae cives neque praedivites nec admodum pauperes contineret» (ibid.). 11. 23–8 cf Polyanthea : »Solon illam civitatem optime habitari dixit, in qua viros bonos honoribus affici, contra autem, improbos poenis mos l " uerit. Stob. ser. 41. de Repub.« (ibid.). 11. 29–30 cf Polyanthea: " Solon rogatus, quomodo civitas in optimo statu degeret, dixit: si cives quidem magistratui obediant, magistrates autem legibus. Eod. ser. » (ibid.).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Simeon_Polocki...

Ite igitur ad metendas segetes nostras, et ut minus timeatis, parate mihi vehiculum: Ecce ego vobiscum ipsa in campos messura descendant. " » II. 7–18 cf Faber: «Ubi cum retractis ntanicis falcem arripuisset, et metere coepisset, (mirum dictu) subito in actu ipso ut erat inclinis, misera diriguit, et quasi marmoris effigies nec sem etipsam erigere, nec falcem e manu dimittere potuit, nec segetem: sed muta et nihil loquens similis simulachro stabat; tantum intuens intuentes. Concurrentes famuli rogant, ut a temeritate resipiscat, dicentes, fortem esse Deum Christianorum: sed ilia nihil respondebat. Iniectis ergo manibus earn erigere conantur, et falcem extorquere; sed frustra. Stabat enim im m obilis quasi m oles terrae affixa.» II. 19–24 cf Faber: «At ubi satis miraculi ac stuporis intuentibus ostenderat ipsique fam uli iam taedio affecti abire, ipsamque dimittere vellent; soluta ilia repente corruit, sontem que animant in ignem tartareum efflavit.» II. 25–30 cf Faber: «Quant levantes in vehiculum : En, inquiunt, qualem de agro manipulum die Dominico reportamus. Inde fam uli ad baptismum festinarunt, et vicini omnes diem Dominicum sedulo observare coeperunt.» Праздник 5 . Taken from Faber, ibid. No. 3 «Dierum festivorum profanatio reprehenditur». The poem summarises the whole sermon, though not in the same order, and with the addition of undesirable Sunday acitivities that relate to Simeon " s own environm ent. II. 9–14 cf sect. 3 «Alii choreas agunt», sect. 4 «Alii vacant com potationibus», sect. 5 «Alii ludis et spectaculis vacant». II. 17–18 cf sect. 1 «Otiantur alii et dormiunt». 1. 19 cf sect. 2 «Alii laborant in servilibus operibus». II. 21–6 cf sect. 6 «Alii nundinantur et lucra quaerunt». II. 27–30 cf sect. 7 «Alii luxum vestium parant». Published in Panenko and PLDR. Праздник 6 . Taken from Faber, ibid., sect. 2 «Alii laborant in servilibus operibus»: «Thomas C antipratensis 1. 2. Apum c. 49. nobili cuidam Germ ano, venationis gratia dies festos profananti ex uxore natam prolem canino capite, et auribus dependulis ad instar canis venatici.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Simeon_Polocki...

2. Здесь помещено послание к Стефану епископу Салоникскому, которому посвящен этот перевод. Предисловие это, равно как и весь дионисиевский перевод, отпечатаны в лучших сборниках правил у Гардуина (Collect. concil. Т.1. Р.1) и Мансия (Collect. concil. Т.1. Р.3). Греческий же текст этих правил сначала существовал в кодексах апостольских постановлений в последней главе (VIII,47), отдельно же издан был Григорием Гальвандером в 1531 году и в 1561 году Гентианом Греветом. 3. Дрей, протестантский богослов, в своих исследованиях об апостольских правилах высказал мысль, что Дионисий здесь под словом plurimi разумеет греков потому, что на Западе доселе еще не было никакого латинского перевода апостольских правил (см. его сочинение " Neue Untersuchung uber die constit. und canon. der Apostel " . Tubing. 1832. S.206). Последнее справедливо, но отсюда еще не следует того, что греческий текст этих правил тогда не был никому известен на Западе и особенно в Италии, где было так много понимающих греческий язык. 4. Он так говорит об этом в послании к Папе Ормизду: " Quos non admisit universitas, - ego quoque in hoc opere praetermisi " . Это второе собрания Дионисия не дошло до нас (Biener. De coll. Can. Eccl. Graec. 1827. Cap.12. P.11). 5. Bickell J. G. Geschichte des Kirchenrechts. Giessen. 1833. 6. См. Cours de droit canon. par Andre. Ed. Migne. Paris au mot droit. 1844. 7. Gratian dist. 16 praef. 8. Hist. Franc. V, 18 et 27. 9. Ballerini part.IV. Cap.1. Собрание Фульгенция можно видеть также и у Юстелла - Biblioth. jur. canon. Т.1. 10. Ballerini part.IV. Cap.2; Cf. Iustell. T.1. App. P.7; Mansi Concil. T.IX. Col.846-60. 11. Opusc. 33; adv. Hincm.; Laud. Cap.24. 12. А эти ученые были: Линдан (см. Chronic. praef. panopl.), Ламберт Грутер (см. Praefat. oper. Clement), Лорин (см. Comment. in Act. Apostol. Cap.XV), и Онуфрий (см. Платиново издание vitae Pontificum). 13. Albasp. observ. I,13. Это мнение было высказано также знаменитым архиепископом Петром де Марка (De concordia sacerdotum et imperio sev de libertate Ecclesiae Gallicanae. III,2).

http://lib.pravmir.ru/library/readbook/3...

The disciples respond in purely natural terms (6:7, 9). 5984 In this period two hundred denarii would represent a single worker " s wages for about two hundred (or possibly greater or fewer) 5985 days» work. 5986 Since in times of food shortages a day " s wages might provide little more than food for a poor family (and even under normal circumstances it would not provide ten times that amount), 5987 two hundred denarii could not begin to feed five thousand men plus some women and children (6:10), 5988 and five barley loaves (6:9) would do even less. 5989 As in John 2:5–9 , the silent protagonist allied with the disciples is one of the people without significant social influence, with whom some Johannine Christians could perhaps identify, a «lad» (6:9). 5990 Though the text does not emphasize this, that the lad shared his food (it can be safely assumed that the disciples did not force him to give it up) probably would have been seen as meritorious, or at least as the sort of incident that would be given this moral in later retellings. 5991 Barley was cheaper, hence accessible to the poor in larger quantity, than wheat (cf. Rev 6:6); 5992 the fish may have been dried. 5993 That the multitudes must «recline» (6:10) may suggest an allusion to the Passover (6:4). For normal meals people sat on chairs, but they reclined at banquets and festivals in accordance with the Greek custom probably adopted during the Hellenistic period. 5994 3. The Miracle (6:10–13) As noted in the introduction to this section (6:1–13), multiple attestation supports the probability that a massive feeding event occurred. But against what light would such an event be understood? Some find Hellenistic parallels more persuasive than Jewish ones. 5995 Visiting Greek deities might prevent food from running out, 5996 in ways similar to prophets in some biblical accounts (cf., e.g., 1 Kgs 17:14–16; 2 Kgs 4:3–6). Yet even were the original disciples or John " s audience more attuned to the reports of Hellenistic divine men than to the biblical prophets, the Hellenistic parallels for divine men accomplishing such feats seem relatively few. 5997 But given the importance of food to survival, it is hardly surprising that most traditions would emphasize divine intervention in providing it. 5998 The biblical examples of multiplied food stand much closer; John actually contains some verbal reminiscences of 2 Kgs 4:42–44. 5999 Early Jewish tradition also spoke of the miraculous multiplication of oil (cf. 2 Kgs 4:5–6) 6000 and food (Exod 16:18). 6001 One wonders why an increasingly hellenized church would create a Hellenistic story about Jesus then introduce biblical allusions when incorporating them into the Gospels. A Jewish context for Jesus» miracle seems more likely from the start.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

John repeatedly emphasizes Jesus» intimacy with the Father, sometimes in the language of him being with the Father (3:2; 8:29; cf. 8:38; 16:32), as Jesus also is with his disciples (cf. 11:54; 13:33; 14:9, 17, 25; 15:27; 16:4; 17:12). Jesus was with the Father before creation (17:5). Wisdom texts celebrated the special relationship between God and his Wisdom. Wisdom was present (παροσα) with God when he made the world; 3237 Wisdom lives together (συμβωσιν) with him; 3238 in later rabbis, Wisdom/Torah claims to be «with God» at creation. 3239 Johns Logos also has a special relationship with God, indicated in part by the προς with the accusative 3240 but even more so by continual reaffirmations throughout this Gospel of their close relationship. 3241 Although the image of father and son was not always one of intimacy and harmony (cf. Luke 15:12–13), 3242 the picture in this Gospel is that of a perfect, ideal father-son relationship (e.g., 8:29, 35–38). As Appold notes, the motif of Jesus» oneness with God, stressed throughout the Gospel, begins as early as this line. 3243 Although one scholar emphasizes John " s statements distinguishing Jesus from the Father (e.g., 14:28) and argues against Jesus» deity in the Gospel, 3244 the Gospel is equally clear in affirming Jesus» deity (1:1c, 18; 8:58; 20:28) and in distinguishing him from the Father. John addresses «an identification by nature of two distinct persons,» 3245 an image developed by the Athanasian faction at Nicea in a manner consistent with its roots. 3246 3. The Word " s Deity (1:1c) In this line it becomes clear that, although John employs the basic myth of Wisdom as the nearest available analogy to communicate his Christology, it proves inadequate. Jesus is not created like Wisdom ( Sir 1:4 ; John 1 :1b), but is himself fully deity (1:1c), bursting the traditional categories for divine Wisdom. 3247 It is not surprising that the early centuries of Christians felt that emphasis on Jesus» deity was a major reason for the Fourth Gospe1. 3248

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

Nicodemus calls Jesus «teacher» (3:2), which is a correct term for disciples to employ (1:38; 11:28; 13:13–14; 20:16), 4764 even if it is not a complete Christology by itself. Although the leaders may have thought themselves the appropriate guardians of sound teaching (9:34), Jesus teaches (6:59; 7:14, 28, 35; 8:20; 18:20), just as do the Father who sent him (5:20; 6:45; 8:28) and the Spirit who carries on his teaching (14:26). In this context, the most striking point is that Jesus is much more truly a teacher than the ignorant «teacher of Israel» who comes to him to learn (3:10). Although Nicodemus is not a completely reliable voice in the narrative, John elsewhere confirms Nicodemus " s recognition that God is with Jesus (8:29; cf. 1:1–2). 1B. Nicodemus Comes by Night (3:2) Scholars propose various reasons why Nicodemus came by night. Jewish teachers often studied at night, 4765 especially those who had to work during the day; 4766 thus Nicodemus may have come to receive instruction from a greater sage, namely, Jesus. More likely, he comes at night to avoid being seen (cf. 7:51–52; 12:42–43; 19:38); night was the time for secret (sometimes antisocial) deeds and whatever one wished not to be known. 4767 Nicodemus remains a secret believer at this point, not a disciple. 4768 Nicodemus here remains in solidarity with those who fear to confess Jesus lest they be expelled from the synagogue (12:42). 4769 In the story world, fear accounts for Nicodemus coming by night, but John probably also mentions «night» on a more symbolic level for his audience (cf. 13:30), bracketing the narrative with Nicodemus coming «by night» (3:2) and true believers leaving darkness to come to Jesus» light (3:21). 4770 In so doing, John foreshadows Nicodemus " s ultimate discipleship in 19:39–42. 4771 2. Birth from Above (3:3) Jesus responds to Nicodemus " s observation about Jesus» identity by calling him to a greater level of recognition. 4772 For this reason, some suggest that 3is a christological assertion.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

His self-revelation can induce even involuntary prostration (18:6), and confession of his deity becomes the ultimately acceptable level of faith for disciples (20:28–31). Where Jesus parallels Moses, he is greater than Moses (e.g., 9:28–29), as he is greater than Abraham and the prophets (8:52–53) or Jacob (4:12). Elsewhere, however, Jesus parallels not Moses but what Moses gave (3:14; 6:31), and even here, Moses should not get too much credit for what was «given through» (cf. 1:17) him (6:32; 7:22). Moses may have given water in the wilderness from the rock, but Jesus is the rock himself, the foundation stone of the new temple (7:37–39). How do Jesus» «signs» contribute to this high Christology (as they clearly must– 20:30–31)? Even though John has specifically selected them (21:25), most signs in the Fourth Gospel are of the same sort as found in the Synoptic tradition, which often applies them to the messianic era (Isa 35:5–6 in Matt 11/ Luke 7:22). As in the Synoptics, the closest biblical parallels to Jesus» healing miracles are often the healing miracles of Elijah and Elisha. But in some other signs, John clearly intends Jesus to be greater than Moses: for his first sign he turns water to wine instead of to blood (2:1–11; cf. Rev 8:8). Later he feeds a multitude in the wilderness and, when they want to make him a prophet-king like Moses (6:15), he indicates that he is the new manna that Moses could not provide (6:32). The walking on water sign (6:19–21) probably reflects faith in Jesus» deity even in Mark. In this broader Johannine context, the healing miracles themselves may further evoke one story about Moses: people who beheld the serpent he lifted up would be healed. Yet Jesus parallels not Moses but the serpent, through which healing came directly (see 3:14, in a context addressing Wisdom, Torah, and Moses). Those who «see» him (parallel Johannine language to «believe» and «know» him) are healed. The discourses that expound the miracles clarify this point further.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

7052 In either case, the works are plainly from the Father (cf. 5:20, 36; 10:25, 32, 37; 14:10–11; 15:24); believers» opponents could not accuse them of diverting God " s glory. That one «must» perform Jesus» works during the light is Johannine language for divine necessity (3:7,14, 30; 4:4, 24; 10:16; 12:34; 20:9). That people could not work after nightfall because it had grown dark was common knowledge (applicable to battles and other activities; 7053 used as an image in 11:10; 12:35); obviously, modern lighting was not available. John applies this image figuratively, as he does light, darkness, and night elsewhere (e.g., 1:4–5; 3:2; 11:10; 12:35; 13:30); but whereas in 11:9–10 the emphasis lies on Jesus» obedience to the Father " s timing, here it lies on Jesus» power as the light to impart sight to the blind, both literally (9:6–7) and figuratively (9:39–41). Jesus parabolically demonstrates that he is the light of the world (9:5; see comment on 1:4), alluding to his announcement earlier that day (8:12), by healing the blind. 1C. Spittle (9:6) The use of spittle appears elsewhere in the Jesus tradition ( Магк 7:33 ), including for healing blindness ( Магк 8:23 ). Many ancient reports of cures mention the use of a curative drug, 7054 even when Asclepius appeared to suppliants in his temple in dreams. 7055 Spittle was sometimes used superstitiously, to avert an ill, 7056 and sometimes associated with curative powers. 7057 That Vespasian reportedly healed blindness with spittle (Tacitus Hist. 4.81; Suetonius Vesp. 7) 7058 may suggest that John contrasts Jesus with the Roman emperor (Vespasian " s son Domitian was then reigning); the account seems to have circulated widely. More likely, however, the stories about both Vespasian and Jesus draw on purportedly curative properties of spittle more widely known. Jewish tradition sometimes reports curing through spittle, 7059 though Jewish custom probably borrowed it from the more widespread ancient custom. 7060 Such usage would have rendered its symbolic effect more comprehensible.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

Although healing the lame (5:5) suggests prophecies of the messianic era (Isa 35:6), Jesus» role in raising and judging the dead (5:17–29) belongs to no mortal in the Bible. Jesus is thus the one of whom Moses wrote (5:45–47)–a fitting introduction to the wilderness feeding where Jesus is the new manna ( John 6 ). When Jesus heals the blind man, the narrative reveals that being his disciple is greater than being Moses» disciple (9:28–29); he is a shepherd of Israel greater than Moses (10:1–18). The raising of Lazarus introduces Jesus as not merely a miracle worker like others (1 Kgs 17:22–23; 2 Kgs 4:35–36) but as the resurrection itself ( John 11:25–26 ). One therefore needs not only the signs but also their inspired interpretation, the testimony of the Paraclete and the disciples (15:26–27). Christology has implications for ecclesiology: Christ " s followers must be one (17:22), including ethnically (ch. 4); they must love one another (13:34–35; 15:12–17). Perhaps the Gospel polemicizes against early stages of division among believers that becomes full schism in 1 John 2 , a situation probably reflecting some of the Johannine communities. Their lives ( John 13:35; 17:21, 23 ; cf. 14:11–12) as well as their words ( John 17:20 ) thus constitute part of their witness, through which the world may believe. The function of witnesses for Jesus is the secondary motif of the proem (expressed in the Baptist material) and a primary focus of ch. 1, in which a witness interprets Christology for those who are not yet believers. But for John, witness includes how believers treat one another as well as what they proclaim. Jesus revealed the unseen God by his character of grace and truth (1:18), but his followers» love for one another must continue to do so (see 1 John 4:12 ). John " s Christological Distinctiveness John " s genre invites another question about his Christology. If John is a biographer and his speeches for Jesus reflect his understanding of the Jesus tradition, to what degree might his Christology reflect that of Jesus? Many features of Johannine Christology are attested in earlier Synoptic tradition, 2421 but John alone makes much of the Isaian divine «I am» claims.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

Theologically, the discourse underlines the theme of Jesus» continuing presence with his people. 8046 In place of an eschatological discourse preceding the passion, as in the Synoptic traditions and probably traditions known to the Johannine community (which was, however, also capable of eschatological interpretation; cf. Rev), John treats his audience to an emphasis on the present experience of Jesus» presence through his past return to them. 8047 7995 E.g., Becker, «Abschiedsreden.» For a thorough summary of views on composition and redactional questions, see Segovia, Farewell, 20–47. 8011 Johnston, Spirit-Paraclete, 127. First John has more in common with this discourse than with the rest of the Gospel (perhaps because this discourse focuses on Jesus» message to disciples), though this need not imply the Epistlés author redacting this discourse (Smalley, Epistles, xxix). 8012 " Day, «John,» 770; see further 736–37. Similarly Witherington, Wisdom, 248, who attributes the repetition to sapiential style and «successive discourses given in a short span of time.» 8022 The lack of emphasis may, however, speak against a eucharistie interpretation (pace Moloney, «Reading»). 8024 E.g., Plato Symp.; Xenophon Symp.; Cicero Tusc; Plutarch Dinner; T.T.; Athenaeus Deipn.; Aulus Gellius 7.13. For elements of a mock symposium, see Trimalchiós dinner in Petronius Sat. In a Diaspora Jewish setting, see Letter of Aristaeus (specifically, Hadas, Aristeas, 42–43), which may draw on 1 Esd 3–4 (the latter is not, however, a dinner setting); in the Gospels, Luke 7:36–50; 11:37–54; 14:1–24 (Aune, Environment, 122). 8025 Stauffer, Jesus, 118. Even after a main meal (perhaps occurring here in 13:2) had been finished, people could drink more (Xenophon Cyr. 8.4.9). 8027 E.g„ Homer I1. 13.95–124; Battle of Frogs and Mice 110–112, 132–159; Polybius 15.10; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 6.6.1–6.9.6; Appian R.H. 8.7.42; 8.17.116; C.W. 4.16.126; Arrian Alex. 3.9.5–7. Such exhortations, however, also occur outside military contexts (e.g., P.Tebt. 703.40–43).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

  001     002    003    004    005    006    007    008    009    010