| То, о чем говорится в Гал., было сделано, по крайней мере, лет за десять до того, как было написано послание, и за это время проблема разделения церквей с христианами евр. и языческого происхождения, вероятно, во многом ушла в прошлое. Из 1:12 видно, что Петр не проповедовал Евангелие своим читателям, тогда как в Деян. 16:6,7 предполагается, что Павел тоже не посещал никого из них. Наконец, некоторые исследователи говорят, что это послание не содержит персональных упоминаний об Иисусе, чего следовало бы ожидать от человека, который хорошо знал Его. См., однако, такие, напр., тексты, как 1:8, 13; 2:21–25; 3:14; 4:14; 5:1,2, а также другие ссылки в последующем комментарии. Необходимо дать читателям возможность самим сделать вывод по мере того, как они будут читать это послание. В целом ни одно из этих возражений не представляется убедительным. Большинство свидетельств – и внешних, и внутренних – по–видимому, подтверждают традиционную точку зрения о том, что автором Послания был апостол Петр. Где и когда было написано послание? В 5:13 автор передает приветствия из церкви в Вавилоне («избранная подобно вам церковь в Вавилоне»). Создается впечатление, что речь идет о какой–то поместной церкви в Вавилоне, однако совершенно ясно, что Петр в действительности не ведет речь о бывшей столице империи Навуходоносора. К тому времени она была уже разрушена дотла и лежала в руинах (исполнение пророчества Ис. 14:23 ). В Отк. 16:19 и 17:5 под «Вавилоном» понимается Рим, а в Кол. 4:10 и Флм. 24 (которые, скорее всего, были написаны в Риме) говорится, что Марк был там вместе с Павлом. В 2Тим. 4:11 указано, что Марк находится в Малой Азии, и Павел посылает за ним с тем, чтобы он вернулся, по всей вероятности, в Рим. Тот факт, что ни Павел, ни Петр в списке своих приветствий из Рима не упоминают друг друга, означает, что они не находились в одном месте во время написания своих посланий. Тем самым это подтверждает предположение о том, что Петр написал послание во время своего пребывания в Риме, о чем свидетельствуют также Тертуллиан (Against Heresies, 36) и Евсевий (Ecclesiastical History, 2. 25.8;2. 15. 2 и 3.1. 2–3). |
| 'Orthodoxy' did not survive by right in the early Church, but because it had people like Irenaeus and to this lies a clue to his grandeur and to his vigour. By Philip Kariatlis St Andrew's Theological College, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia Orthodox Christian.Info 5 сентября 2011 г. Sources: 1. The precise date on which he was born cannot be determined due to the lack of sources, however modern scholarship tends to place his birth c.a. 130 A.D. The birth of Irenaeus has been placed as early as 97 A.D. by Dodwell and as late as 140 A.D. by others. 2. Gnosticism and Marcionism were two great heresies which the early Church encountered in its early history. 3. The evidence that he was born in Smyrna is implied by the fact that he had St. Polycarp as teacher in his youth. However the fact that Irenaeus was in Smyrna as a boy does not demand that he be born there. 4. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, V. xx, 5 - 6. 5. Robinson, J.A., who is the editor of Demonstration of the Apostolic Teaching by Irenaeus argues that he studied under him in Rome as well. 6. Ecclesiastical History, V. i, 1 7. ibid, V. iv, 2 8. Cayre, F.A.A. in his Patrologie et Histoire de la Thiologie writes thai " il dut, sans doute, u ce voyage u Rome de n " Ktre pas victime de la persicution qui sivit " a Lyon en 177-178, etdont saint Polhin fut la plus illustre victime. " p.161 9. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History V, i. 7 10. Bishop Kallistos Ware, in his article " Patterns of Episcopacy in the Early Church and Today, An Orthodox View. " in Bishop, But p.11 11. By " presbyters " Irenaeus means " bishops, " A survival of the primitive New Testament usuage.12. Against the Heresies. IV, xxvi, 2 13. For Irenaeus the bishop is alter apostolus wheras for Ignatius the bishop is alter Christus. For Irenaeus, the bishop was someone who expressed the apostolicity of the Church whereas for Ignatius the bishop was someone who took care of his flock as a living icon of Christ. There is no contradiction in the two terms but simply a difference of emphasis; the terms are complementary. 14. Against the Heresies. IV. xxxvii, 7. 15. Dufourcq writes, " Son eveque surveilles les rares iglises qui y sont iparses, et, sans qu " on puisse pricisiment difinir son rruvre missionnaire, on voit que certaines iglises, celles par exernple de Besannon et de Valence, pritendent devoir u saint Irinie la premiere annonce de I " Evangile. " , cited in Cayri, FAA. opt. cit. p.162 16. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, V, xxiv, 18. 17. Quasten, J. Patrology. p.288 18. Q.S, Tetulliani, Adversus Valentinianos, ch. 5. Ed. by Aldo Marastoni (Padova, n.d. ), p.56, [ominum doctrnarum curiosis-simus explorator], taken from the article by Constantelos, D., " Irenaeus of Lyons and His Central Views on Human Nature. " Подпишитесь на рассылку Православие.Ru Рассылка выходит два раза в неделю: Комментарии Мы в соцсетях Подпишитесь на нашу рассылку |
| e.g. Pseudo Dionysius the Areopagite, The Mystical Theology,1.1-3 [ PG 3.997A-1001A/PTS 36, pp.141-144]. Basil the Great, Against Eunomios, 2.17 [ PG 29.608C ll.56-57 /SC 305]. ( Against Eunomius, trans. Mark Delcogliano and Andrew Radde-Gallwitz, FC v.122, (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2011), p.154). See Mantzaridis, Time and Man, p.7. cf. Basil the Great, Against Eunomios, 2.17 [ PG. 29.608C ll.40-41 /SC 305]. ( Against Eunomius, FC v.122, p.154). Maximus the Confessor, Amb.10.26 [ PG.91.1153B] in Andrew Louth, Maximus the Confessor (London/NY: Routledge, 1996), pp.124-125 and compare Amb.10.31 [ PG 91.1164B-C], 10.41 [ PG 91.1188A-B], Centuries on Theology, 1.69 and Various Texts on Theology [etc.], ( Philokalia II) 5.47-48. Also see Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite: " One can take eternity and time to be predicates of God since, being the Ancient of Days, he is the cause of all time and eternity. Yet he is before time and beyond time and is the source of the variety of time and of seasons. Or, again, he precedes the eternal ages [ aionon], for he is there before eternity and above eternity, and " his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom " " ( Divine Names,10.3 [ PG 3.940A/PTS 33, pp.216-217) ( Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, trans. Colm Luibheid and Paul Rorem, The Classics of Western Spirituality (NY: Paulist Press, 1987), p.121). For earlier affirmations of God being incomparable to His creation being uncreated see Irenaeus’ Against Heresies 2.25.3, 4.11.2, 4.38.1 and 4 as well as Novatian’s De Trinitate 2. ‘Kontakion for the Nativity of our Lord and God and Saviour, Jesus Christ in Tone 3’, The Divine Liturgy of Our Father Among the Saints John Chrysostom, U.K. Ecumenical Patriarchate text (Oxford: OUP, 1995), pp.72-73. cf. Basil the Great, Against Eunomios, 2.13 [ PG 29.596b ll.18-22/ SC 305]. ( Against Eunomius, FC v.122, p.147). cf. Athanasius, De Vita Antonii, §31ff. where the action of the fallen angels ‘subtle’ bodies is described. |
| Взгляд на науку в ее целостности и всеохватности ныне совершенно непопулярен и даже вызывает враждебность приверженцев современной точки зрения на науку как на четко дифференцированные направления с довольной узкой и строго профессиональной специализацией. Знание как универсальное и культурное отношение к миру не входит в образовательную программу среднего университета. 90 См., например, М. W. Laistner, Christianity and Pagan Culture in the Later Roman Empire, ch. 3. 92 Эта давнишняя проблема до сих пор находится в центре сегодняшнего диалога между наукой и религией. Однако, к сожалению, анализ этой проблемы в писаниях святых отцов (то есть святоотеческий синтез веры и знания) сегодня почти забыт. 95 Св. Ириней Лионский , Против ересей (St. Irinaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 2.10.4 [ET: Library of the Ante-Nicene Fathers (ANF),Translated into English with prolegomena and explanatory notes. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1955, 370]. 96 Выражаясь современным языком, такую точку зрения можно назвать панентеизмом. Пан-ен-теизм как философский взгляд радикально отличается от пан-теизма, в котором мир и Бог отождествлены. Панентеизм утверждает, что мир находится в Боге, поскольку мир конечен, а Бог бесконечен и как бы содержит в себе все. Православие не отрицает того, что утверждает панентеизм, но выражет это на другом языке: Бог присутствует в мире, но не на уровне своей сущности, а посредством своих нетварных энергий, которыми поддерживается все в мире. 97 Поэтому считается, что Климент первым употребил слово «богословие» в христианском контексте. 98 Важно иметь в виду, что общее отношение христиан к классической философии было подозрительным и даже враждебным. Например, св. Ипполит Римский в своем «Опровержении всех ересей» (Refutation of all Heresies) отождествляет философов с еретиками; Тертуллиан объявил, что христианам не стоит изучать философию и пользоваться ею. 100 Именно поэтому святые отцы не могли просто осудить языческую философию и образование в целом; вместо этого они предупреждали тех христиан, которые учились, чтобы при защите христианской веры они не использовали философские или научные идеи буквально, ибо действие может быть обратным. Они понимали все преимущества формальной стороны образования, то есть как метода обучения и демонстрации. Интересно, что если рассматривать под этим углом все философские системы, то в отношении христианского богословия они сходны. Эту мысль очень четко выразил Владимир Лосский , когда он писал, что «на Востоке вопрос соотношения между богословием и философией никогда не ставился», и поэтому «нет философии «более» или «менее» христианской». См. В. Лосский , Очерк мистического богословия Восточной Церкви, 35. |
| [xiv] Во всех древних цивилизациях – Египте, Вавилоне, Персии, Греции, Риме и многих других – в храмах различных богов всегда присутствовали женщины-священнослужители. Они исполняли культовые обряды и ритуалы, отлично владели искусством гаданий, прорицаний, заклинаний и заговоров, были посвящены в религию и мифологию. Их услугами непрерывно пользовались владетели, правители, полководцы и видные граждане, вследствие чего они обладали высоким социальным статутом. Например, весталки в древнем Риме выбирались из самых знатных патрицианских семей и занимали почетное положение в обществе. Их показания в суде имели решающее значение, они пользовались правом помилования преступников, а обида весталок наказывалась смертью. [xv] J.-J. von Allmen, “Is the Ordination of Women to the Pastoral Ministry Justifiable?”, in H. Karl Lutge (ed.), Sexuality-Theology-Priesthood (San Gabriel, n.d.), 35. [xvi] Irenaes, Against the Heresies 1:13:2 (ed. Harvey, 1:116-7); срв. Tertullian, The Prescription of Heretics 41:5 (CC 1:221). Epiphanius, Panarion 49:2:2, 49:2:5, 49:3:2 (ed. Holl, 234-4). Panarion 79:1:7 (ed, Holl, 476); ср. 78:23:4 (473) об антидикомарианах. [xviii] On the veiling of virgins 9:1 (CC 2:1218-9). Это было написано перед тем, как Тертуллиан присоединился к монтанистам. [xxii] Чтобы проиллюстрировать спекулятивный характер писаний защитников женского священства, приведем один пример. В конце своей статьи «Юния – женщина-апостол» Денис Преато пытается внушить нам, что Юния имела все прерогативы апостольского служения/допускаем, что остальная часть его выводов верна, хотя это и не доказано на сто процентов/: http://rado76.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/junia/. Мнение автора, однако, основывается на чисто теоретических рассуждениях – оно не подкреплено ни одним доказанным случаем существования женщины-апостола в то время. Если женщины могли бы быть апостолами, то тогда они должны были занимать половину этих «должностей» в Церкви. Иисус выбрал только мужчин Своими учениками, и это относится не только к двенадцати, но и к семидесяти/Лк. 10:1-17/. Мы не имеем никаких более поздних исторических сведений о женщинах-апостолах. Поэтому, как наиболее вероятные, оформляются две версии: |
| There were many comments under Frank Schaeffer’s tirade against Putin, against Orthodox Patriarchs, hierarchs, and clergy everywhere, and against Russians in general for not “rising up” against this “injustice”. One in particular pointed out the purely rhetorical failings of the article: Frank, Will you also talk about Obama's role in funding the terrorists that are massacring Christians? Here are a few things that I think are problematic about your article: 1. You claim that Putin “made it okay to persecute gay people in Russia.” Banning public displays of homosexuality and homosexual propaganda is not the same as making it okay to “persecute” homosexuals. We have laws against a lot of things in the U.S. Having such laws does not make it okay to commit violence against those who break them. 2. You claim that “a parade of priests have denounced any who question Putin” without making any reference to what parade you are talking about; no links, no explanation, nothing. 3. You find fault with Orthodox bishops partnering with heads of State on areas of common concern such as the spiritual and moral well-being of the nation. 4. You find fault with Orthodox bishops in America for not speaking out against Orthodox bishops abroad for joining forces with a head of State to address matters relating to the spiritual and moral well-being of the nation. 5. You compare Putin to Hitler. 6. You compare Orthodox bishops’ support of Putin to those who were silent over the alleged mass extermination of Jews and homosexuals in concentration camps. 7. You compare outlawing homosexual propaganda to alleged mass extermination of Jews and homosexuals under Hitler. 8. You equate American Evangelical support for Putin's ban against homosexual propaganda to their support of violence against homosexuals in Russia. 9. You imply that laws against homosexual propaganda in Russia have incited violence against homosexuals without providing more than a few photos and a couple of stories. No data has been provided showing that such violence occurs at a higher rate per capita in Russia than in America or any other country, or that such violence has occurred increasingly in Russia after this law compared to before. |
| Recently the Public Orthodoxy blog published a post by Rodoljub Kubat, entitled, Rebellion at the Heart of the Bibl e . Usually I would not respond to a piece referencing a revolt spreading throughout a land as far away from our own as Serbia. But given the revolts and rioting happening here in North America in the name of righteous indignation and justice, I thought it worth addressing his issue. Mr. Kubat asserts that to be faithful to the Biblical tradition, Christians must be rebels. He asks (rhetorically), “If Christians are silent or approving of injustice, are they on the path of the Kingdom of Heaven? If they rise up against injustice, then one might call that a rebellion, a rebellion against injustice.” He further writes, “Rebellion theology is prophetic theology. The prophetic movement originated sometimes in the 9th century B.C. It was essentially a revolt against social injustices, especially against abuses of power.” For Mr. Kubat, rebellion against the injustice in our society is at the heart of the Christian mandate, and so to refuse to take part in the rebellion constitutes lack of prophetic faithfulness to God. As examples of such rebellion Mr. Kubat cites the Israelites rebelling against Egyptian oppression, Jonah rebelling against God, and Christ’s ministry, especially His word in the Beatitudes, “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven”. Kubat writes, “Both the Romans and the Jewish leaders perceive [sic] Christ as a rebel” and the Church after Him was perceived as “an anti-social factor, whose members will not confess [sic] the emperor as God.” Later, “the monastic movement and flight to the desert was a rebellion against a world governed by injustice…This is especially seen in the example of St. John Chrysostom, a great theologian and fighter against injustice.” In Kubat’s view, the Church was (and should be) rebellious at its core, but later became too entangled with powers of the world and so proved itself unfaithful to its divine prophetic mandate. |
| He launched two ultimately unsuccessful Crusades against the Ottomans: in 1443 AD, reaching Sofia before retreating for the winter, and 1444 AD reaching the Black Sea city of Varna where he perished at the age of 20 in theBattle of Varna against the forces of Ottoman Sultan Murad II (r. 1421-1451 AD). Because of that, in Bulgaria theheroic Polish and Hungarian King is known as Vladislav Varnenchik (Wladyslaw Warnenczyk), i.e. Vladislav of Varna. The Second Bulgarian Empire (1185-1396) was conquered by the Ottoman Turks in 1396 (although some Bulgarianestates in the west may have survived for а few more decades). In 1396 AD, Hungarian King Sigismund of Luxembourg (r. 1387-1437 AD, later Holy Roman Emperor in 1433-1437 AD), organized a crusade against the Ottoman Turks which, however, ended in a disaster for the Christian forces in the Battle of Nicopolis (today’s Bulgarian town of Nikopol). The Crusades of the Polish and Hungarian King Vladislav (Wladyslaw) III Varnenchik were the last Christian campaign against the Ottoman Empire in the Late Middle Ages that had the potential to liberate Bulgaria. With its failure, Bulgaria remained suffering for centuries, a horrific period known as the Ottoman Yoke, and was liberated only in the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878. D uring his campaign against the Ottoman Empire in 1444, King Vladislav (Wladyslaw) III Jagello was in charge of an army of some 20,000 European Christian warriors, including Poles, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Wallachians, Ruthenes (Rusyns), Bulgarians, Croatians, Saxons, Lithuanians, and Crusader Knights of Pope Eugene IV (r. 1431-1477). The young Vladislav (Wladislaw) III Jagello inherited his father King Wladyslaw II Jagello as the King of Poland in 1434, at the age of 10. In 1440, Vladislav became also the King of Hungary, after a union between the Kingdoms of Poland and Hungary designed to unite their forces against the Ottoman Turks. After the first Crusade of King Vladislav and John Hunyadi against the Ottoman Empire, which reached Sofia in the fall of 1443, the Ottoman Sultan Murad II signed a 10-year truce with Hungary, and in August 1444 resigned from the throne in favor of his 12-year-old son Mehmed II (who later became Mehmed II the Conqueror after conquering Constantinople in 1453 AD). The new Crusade was organized under the auspices of Pope Eugene IV in anticipation of a new Ottoman invasion. The preemptive Christian campaign that later became known in history literature as theVarna Crusade led the old Sultan Murad II to return to the throne. |
| Does this sound familiar? It does if one pays attention to any mainstream media coverage of these controversial issues as they play out in law and society. But the victim status requires a story to back it up. Thus, perhaps the most common lament of the garden-variety homophile revolves around the alleged “tidal wave of anti-gay” hate crimes. An analysis of FBI statistics on hate crimes committed against homosexuals during the time period 2000-2008 shows that the probability of any individual homosexual being the victim of a hate crime during his or her entire life span is slightly more than one percent. Interestingly, “gays” are more likely to commit hate crimes against “straights” than “straights” are to commit hate crimes against “gays.” According to the FBI, there are 3.98 hate crimes committed by each million heterosexuals annually against homosexuals, and there are 4.44 hate crimes committed by each million homosexuals annually against heterosexuals. Violence against homosexuals by others gets all the press, but it is interesting to note that the great majority of anti-”gay” violence is committed by other “gays.” The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) is the leading tracker of violence against “gays” in the United States. According to the NCAVP’s statistics on anti-”gay” violence, 83 percent of all violence committed against “gays” is carried out by other “gays” in domestic situations. This does not even count “gay-on-gay” violence committed outside the home. This confusion is now pervasive in society, and questioning the agenda is simply not to be tolerated – especially among America’s youth. For example, the classical notion that universities should be “arenas for the free exchange of ideas” has been completely discarded in the United States. More than three-fourths of U.S. colleges and universities now possess codes of conduct that ban behavior and speech based upon, including many other things, “homophobia.” The danger that these codes represent to academic freedom far outweighs their usefulness. This has already been amply demonstrated, as many colleges have severely punished students for merely desiring to debate the topic of homosexuality. |
| John Argyropoulos. On the Procession of the Holy Spirit Joh.Bek. John Bekkos Apol. Apology for the Union of 1274 Ep.Joh.XXI. Epistle to Pope John XXI Un. On the Union of the Churches of Old and New Rome Joh.Cant. Emperor John VI Cantacuzenus Apol. Apologies for the Christian Religion against the Mohammedan Sect Or. Orations against Mohammed Joh.D. John of Damascus 1 Cor. Exposition of 1Corinthians from John Chrysostom Dialect. Dialectic Dialex. Dispute (????????) with a Manichean Disp.Sar. Dispute of a Saracen and a Christian F.o. The Orthodox Faith Haer. On Heresies Imag. Orations on the Images Jacob. Against the Jacobites Man. Dialogue against the Manicheans Parall. Sacred Parallels Rect.sent. On the Correct Thought (De recta sententia) Volunt. On Two Wills in Christ (De duabus in Christo voluntatibus) Ps.Joh.D. Trin. Pseudo-John of Damascus. On the Trinity Joh.Diac. John the Deacon Joh.H. John V of Jerusalem Const. Against Constantinus Cabalinus on the Images Icon. Against the Iconoclasts Joh.Maur. Carm. John Mauropus. Poems (Carmina) Just. Dial. Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho LeoM. Tom. Pope Leo I (the Great). Tome Leo II. Ep. Pope Leo II. Epistles Leo III. Ep. Emperor Leo III. Epistle to ‘Umar (Omar), Chief of the Saracens Leo IX. Ep.Petr.Ant. Pope Leo IX. Epistle to Peter of Antioch Leo Ochr. Enc. Leo of Ochrida (Bulgaria). Encyclical Leo Per. Lat. Leo OF Perejaslav. Against the Latins Leont.B. Nest.etEut. Leontius of Byzantium. Aginst the Nestorians and Eutychians Leont.N. Leontius of Neapolis (Cyprus) fr. Fragments Serm. Sermons Lib.Car. Caroline Books (Libri Carolini) Lib.diurn. Daybook of the Roman Pontifs (Liber diurnus Romanorum pontificum) Lit.Bas. Liturgy of Basil Lit.Chrys. Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom Lit.Clem. Clementine Liturgy Lit.Praesanct. Liturgy of the Presanctified Liut. Leg. Liutprand of Cremona. Narrative of the Legation to Constantinople Luth. Martin Luther Ep. Epistles Rom.Leip. Against the Famous Romanist in Leipzig Mac.Ant. Symb. |
|
|
