| Ultimately, they led the religiously blind and deluded to a denial of the saving Mysteries and the fundamental teachings of Orthodoxy, outside of which there is no knowledge of God: the teaching of the Most Holy Trinity and the teaching of the Incarnation of the God-man our Lord Jesus Christ. If decisive measures were not taken, “all of Orthodox Christianity would be doomed by heretical teachings.” So the question was posed for history. The Great Prince Ivan III, enticed by the Judaizers, invited them to Moscow. He had two of the most prominent of the heretics made archpriests, one at the Dormition, the other at the Archangel Michael cathedrals of the Kremlin, and he summoned to Moscow even the arch-heretic Skhariya himself. All those close to the prince were led astray by the heresy, beginning with the clerk heading the government, Theodore Kuritsyn, whose brother became a ringleader of the heretics. Even the in-law of the great prince, Elena Voloshanka, accepted the Judaizers. And finally, the heretical Metropolitan Zosimas was installed upon the bishop’s Throne of the great Moscow Hierarchs Peter, Alexis and Jonah. St Joseph and St Gennadius, Bishop of Novgorod (December 4), called for a struggle against the spread of the heresy. St Joseph wrote his first epistle “Concerning the Mystery of the Most Holy Trinity” while still a monk at the Paphnutiev Borov monastery in the year 1477. From the very beginning the Dormition Volokolamsk monastery became a bulwark of Orthodoxy in the struggle against the heresy. Here St Joseph wrote his chief works, The Enlightener, engendered with his fiery anti-heretical epistles, or as the monk himself unassumingly called them, “book exercises.” The works of St Joseph and Archbishop Gennadius were crowned with success. In 1494 the heretic Zosimas was deposed from the bishop’s Throne, and in the years 1502-04 the malicious and unrepentant Judaizers, who blasphemed against the Holy Trinity, Christ the Savior, the Most Holy Theotokos and the Church,were condemned at a church council. |
| Having said that, Pravmir provides daily articles from an autonomous news service, weekly wall newspaper for churches, lectorium, photos, videos, hosting and servers. Editors and translators work together towards one goal: to make our four websites possible - Pravmir.ru, Neinvalid.ru, Matrony.ru and Pravmir.com. Therefore our request for help is understandable. For example, 5 euros a month is it a lot or little? A cup of coffee? It is not that much for a family budget, but it is a significant amount for Pravmir. If everyone reading Pravmir could donate 5 euros a month, they would contribute greatly to our ability to spread the word of Christ, Orthodoxy, life " s purpose, family and society. Donate Related articles Christ’s Compassion and Integrity: On the… Priest Philip LeMasters No one likes a hypocrite, someone who says one thing and does another. As Christians, we… Also by this author " “Let Us At Least Die Like Christians!” Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov) In the book “Everyday Saints” there is a section about a monastery in Russia which had fallen into… " “All of Us Are a Generation of People Born Blind”: On the Sunday of the Blind Man Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov) But why did the Savior heal him in particular? Why was this miracle of God manifest in this… " Paschal Greeting from Another World: On Radonitsa Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov) Once an ascetic of the Kiev Caves Lavra went on Pascha day to the famous caves where hundreds… More Today " s Articles “Le monde entier reste silencieux au… pravmir_com_team Depuis le 12 décembre 2022, la région de l " Artsakh, où vivent 120… “The whole world is silent about… Natalia Nekhlebova Since December 12, 2022 the region of Artsakh, where 120,000 Armenians live,… The Importance of Patiently Letting Down… Priest Philip LeMasters If there is any virtue that seems completely foreign to our culture… Most viewed articles Functionality is temporarily unavailable. Most popular authors Functionality is temporarily unavailable. RSS About Contact Us Donate Pravmir.ru © 2008-2024 Pravmir.com Developed by Hamburg Church Studio |
| Coptic Icons The characteristic features of Coptic icon painting can already be seen in the fourth century: the large eyes and ears on a small head, the confident lines, the naive and childlike depictions. The Copts themselves are certain that iconography was born in Egypt, which they convincingly demonstrate by comparing the iconographic canon with works of ancient Egyptian art. Coptic icons are childlike, sincere, and very expressive and vibrant. The Coptic tradition of icon painting was formed under the influence of ancient Egyptian and Greek art. The characteristic features of Coptic icon painting can already be seen in the fourth century: the large eyes and ears on a small head, the confident lines, the naive and childlike depictions. The Copts themselves are certain that iconography was born in Egypt, which they convincingly demonstrate by comparing the iconographic canon with works of ancient Egyptian art. Incidentally, the most common subject is, of course, the flight of the Holy Family into Egypt. Since the 1960s the neo-Coptic school of iconography has continued the tradition of the Coptic school. We offer our readers these extraordinary Coptic images of Christ, the Theotokos, and the saints. Old Testament Noah’s Ark Crossing of the Red Sea Jonah in the Belly of the Whale Appearance of the Angel Tobias New Testament The Annunciation The Nativity of Christ The Holy Family The Flight into Egypt The Flight into Egypt The Flight into Egypt The Flight into Egypt The Flight into Egypt The Flight into Egypt The Flight into Egypt The Nativity of Christ The Meeting of the Lord The Meeting of the Lord St. John the Baptist The Theophany The Theophany The Theophany The Wedding at Cana The Wedding at Cana The Multiplication of Loaves The Lord Feeds the Crowd with Five Loaves of Bread The Healing of the Blind Man The Good Samaritan Christ with the Samaritan Woman The Entrance into Jerusalem The Mystical Supper The Mystical Supper The Crucifixion The Resurrection of Christ |
| Ultimately, they led the religiously blind and deluded to a denial of the saving Mysteries and the fundamental teachings of Orthodoxy, outside of which there is no knowledge of God: the teaching of the Most Holy Trinity and the teaching of the Incarnation of the God-man our Lord Jesus Christ. If decisive measures were not taken, " all of Orthodox Christianity would be doomed by heretical teachings. " Thus, the question was posed for history. Grand Prince Ivan III, enticed by the Judaizers, invited them to Moscow. He had two of the most prominent of the heretics made archpriests, one at the Dormition Cathedral, the other at the Archangel Michael Cathedral of the Kremlin, and he even summoned to Moscow the arch-heretic Skhariya himself. All those close to the prince were led astray by the heresy, beginning with the clerk heading the government, Theodore Kuritsyn, whose brother became a ringleader of the heretics. Even the in-law of the grand prince, Elena Voloshanka, accepted the Judaizers. Finally, the heretical Metropolitan Zosimas was installed upon the bishop " s throne of the great Moscow Hierarchs Peter, Alexis and Jonah. St. Joseph and St. Gennadius, Bishop of Novgorod (December 4), called for a struggle against the spread of the heresy. St Joseph wrote his first epistle " Concerning the Mystery of the Most Holy Trinity " while still a monk at the St. Paphnuty of Borov monastery in the year 1477. From the very beginning, the Dormition Volokolamsk monastery became a bulwark of Orthodoxy in the struggle against the heresy. Here St. Joseph wrote his chief work, The Enlightener, which came out of his fiery anti-heretical epistles; or as the monk himself unassumingly called them, " book exercises. " The works of St Joseph and Archbishop Gennadius were crowned with success. In 1494 the heretic Zosimas was deposed from the bishop " s Throne, and in the years 1502-04 the malicious and unrepentant Judaizers, who blasphemed against the Holy Trinity, Christ the Savior, the Most Holy Theotokos and the Church, were condemned at a church council. |
| Petja trat aus dem Flur hinaus, spähte in der Dunkelheit umher und trat zu den Fuhrwerken hin. Unter den Fuhrwerken schnarchte jemand, und um sie herum standen, ihren Hafer kauend, gesattelte Pferde. In der Dunkelheit erkannte Petja sein eigenes Pferd, das er Karabach 1 nannte, obwohl es ein kleinrussisches Pferd war, und trat zu ihm hin. »Nun, Karabach, morgen wollen wir Ehre einlegen«, sagte er, roch an den Nüstern des Tieres und küßte es. »Sie schlafen nicht, gnädiger Herr?« sagte ein Kosak, der unter dem einen Fuhrwerk saß. »Nein. Ah … du heißt ja wohl Lichatschow? Ich bin eben erst zurückgekommen. Wir waren zu den Franzosen geritten.« Und nun erzählte Petja dem Kosaken ausführlich nicht nur von seinem Ritt, sondern auch warum er mitgeritten sei und warum er der Ansicht sei, daß man besser daran tue, sein Leben aufs Spiel zu setzen, als so aufs Geratewohl etwas zu unternehmen. »Na, nun sollten Sie sich aber schlafen legen«, meinte der Kosak. »Nein, ich bin es so gewohnt«, antwortete Petja. »Sind denn vielleicht die Feuersteine an euren Pistolen abgenutzt? Ich habe welche mitgebracht. Brauchst du welche? Du kannst von mir bekommen.« Der Kosak schob sich ein wenig unter dem Fuhrwerk hervor, um Petja mehr aus der Nähe anzusehen. »Das kommt daher, weil ich gewohnt bin, in allen Dingen sorgsam zu verfahren«, sagte Petja. »Manche Leute handeln unbedacht, blind drauflos, ohne Vorbereitung, und dann nachher bereuen sie es. Das liegt nicht in meinem Wesen.« »Das ist recht«, sagte der Kosak. »Ja, da fällt mir noch etwas ein: bitte, lieber Mann, schleife mir doch meinen Säbel; er ist nicht mehr recht …« (Aber Petja scheute sich zu lügen: der Säbel war noch nie geschliffen worden.) »Kannst du das machen?« »Warum nicht? Das kann ich schon.« Lichatschow stand auf, kramte in einem Bündel herum, und bald darauf hörte Petja den kriegerischen Klang von Stahl und Wetzstein. Er stieg auf das Fuhrwerk hinauf und setzte sich auf den Rand desselben. Der Kosak unter dem Fuhrwerk schliff den Säbel. |
| »Ihr habt mir Kränkendes gesagt, ich niemandem«, entgegnete Wjera. »Madame de Genlis! Madame de Genlis!« riefen lachende Stimmen noch von der andern Seite der Tür zurück. Die schöne Wjera, durch deren Reden sich alle so unangenehm berührt und gereizt fühlten, lächelte; anscheinend ohne daß das, was ihr gesagt worden war, irgendeinen Eindruck auf sie gemacht hätte, trat sie an den Spiegel und brachte ihre Schärpe und ihre Frisur in Ordnung; während sie ihr schönes Gesicht betrachtete, schien sie immer kühler und ruhiger zu werden. Im Salon nahm das begonnene Gespräch seinen Fortgang. »Ach ja, meine Teuere«, sagte die Gräfin, »auch in meinem Leben ist nicht alles voller Rosen. Ich kann nicht blind dagegen sein, daß bei dem ganzen Zuschnitt unseres Lebens unser Vermögen nicht mehr lange vorhalten wird! Und das Schlimmste dabei ist der Klub und meines Mannes Gutherzigkeit. Selbst wenn wir auf dem Land wohnen, führen wir kein stilles, ruhiges Leben: da finden Theateraufführungen und Jagden und Gott weiß was alles statt. Aber wozu sprechen wir von mir? Wie hast denn du eigentlich deine ganzen Angelegenheiten zurechtgebracht? Ich bewundere dich oft, liebe Anna, wie du bei deinen Jahren so ganz allein weite Strecken im Reisewagen auf der Landstraße hin und her jagst, wie du bald nach Moskau, bald nach Petersburg fährst, zu allen Ministern, zu allen vornehmen Leuten gehst und alle zu behandeln verstehst; ich bewundere dich! Nun, wie hat sich denn alles einrichten lassen? Siehst du, ich, ich verstehe mich auf all solche Dinge nicht.« »Ach, liebes Herz«, antwortete die Fürstin Anna Michailowna, »Gott wolle verhüten, daß du je erfährst, wie schwer es ist, als Witwe ohne Stütze zurückzubleiben und für einen heißgeliebten Sohn sorgen zu müssen. Aber man lernt schließlich alles«, fuhr sie mit einem gewissen Stolz fort. »Mein Prozeß hat mich in mancher Hinsicht klug gemacht. Wenn ich eins dieser großen Tiere notwendig sprechen muß, so schreibe ich ihm ein Billett: ›Die Fürstin Soundso wünsche Herrn Soundso zu sprechen‹ und fahre persönlich in einer gewöhnlichen Droschke nötigenfalls zweimal, dreimal, viermal zu ihm hin, bis ich erreicht habe, was ich brauche. Was so einer dann von mir denkt, ist mir ganz gleichgültig.« |
| The west looks on as corruption and bigotry rule in the " new Ukraine " Vadim Novinsky Two years ago, the west looked at Ukraine with enthusiasm. These days, the sentiments are closer to despair and fatigue. My country has not had the European breakthrough that was promised. Those who came to power in Kiev to the applause of western elites now hope that their international partners will turn a blind eye to the way they run the country. And that’s not what ordinary Ukrainians need. In early September, dressed in military uniform, about 20 young nationalists launched an attack in Kiev against an independent TV channel, setting tires ablaze and throwing a smoke bomb into the building, causing a fire that damaged the first and second floor. One journalist was seriously injured. Those who organised this act of terror remain unpunished. Law enforcement agencies and other government bodies have ignored calls from EU institutions, politicians and human rights groups to carry out a comprehensive and unbiased investigation. After the TV station attack, a man accused of organising the crime boasted about it and threatened another channel, but police say they cannot identify any suspects. What kind of justice can be expected if just before the attack, MPs from Ukraine’s ruling coalition called for the TV channel to be punished for its allegedly “unpatriotic” editorial policy? This is how impunity for bigots paves the way for more violence. Activists throw tires as they block the entrance of the Inter TV channel in Kiev on the 5 September. Photograph: Sergei Supinsky/AFP/Getty Images Ukraine’s government relies heavily on continuing western support to stabilise the withering economy and assist the country in its confrontation with Russia. To secure this, the Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko, consistently boasts of his unequivocal devotion to European democratic values and the rule of law. What’s actually going on in the country makes those affirmations meaningless. |
| ПСН. а хозяин, что чирей, где хочет, тут и сядет. Т.е. пожива, потрава. В новых известиях о Флорентийском соборе, ст. г. Шевырева в Журнале Министерства народного просвещения 1841 г. Генварь, стр. 73. στραπ κ πνλου, молния из навозу. Diogenian. ПАМИД. и мужик не дрогнет. Там же: Грызут орешки меж дел для потехи. Иначе: не была. Из Юридических актов видно, что уличенный на суде говорил: «Мой грех ко мне пришел». ПАМИД. Грех сладко, а человек падко. Употребл.: Грехи сладки, а люди падки. Hulaj dusza bez kuntusza. Гуслица река в Богородском у., на коей селения названы Гуслицами; разводимый там хмель слывет гуслицкою, богородскою травою, гусляком. Давность (praescriptio), как средство приобретения, основанное на долговременном владении, когда факт переходит в право. Χρνια ββαιος μρτυς ς λθειαν, древность есть верный, надежный свидетель истины. Тобол.: До слова крепись, а дав слово, держись! Новгород.: Не давши (слово?), крепись, а давши, не вертись! Lasse die Todten in Ruh. Малоросс.: вовка пиймати. Боль, муж. р. больной и болезнь, так жаль, быль в старинном языке. «Крестьянин на правеже сбит с ног». Акты юридические I, 30. Говорится в Сибири. Дан. 6, 22. Equi donati dentes non sunt inspiciendi. S. Hieronym. Сербск.: Даровноме зубе се не гледа. Слов.: Darovanému koni ne treba do zub hledet. Польск.: Darowanemu koniowi nie patrzw zby. A cheval donné on ne regarde pas à la bride. Einem geschenktem Gaul guckt man nicht ins Maul. См.: A. Глаголева Умозрительные и опытные основания словесности. СПб., 1834, IV, 101–102. Wer würdigen giebt, empfängt. Gifts are blind nien’seyer. «Дары ослепляют очи мудрых». Втор. 16, 19. Сравни: Мзда и мудрых ослепляет. Рязанск.: Даст Бог дождь, будет и рожь. «Иже дает убогим, не оскудеет». Прит. 28,27. Т.е. ездят, или не ездят. Δ μραι γυγαικς εισιν ηδιστα, ταν γαμ τις κκφρη τεθνηκοαν. Тобольск.: Дважды молодому не быть. Ухом называется в Тверской губ. одна из железных скобок, в которую продевают закладню для запора ворот. ПАМИД. Не добро дом без ушей, а храм без очей. В Житии св. Петра и Февронии Муромских, рукоп. XVII века: «Не лепо есть быти дому без ушию (т.е. без пса), а храму без очию (т.е. без стража)». |
| “Machine” Rationality of a Political Program Verkhovensky, possessing a strong, mechanical will seeking power, found a just as machine-like political program that corresponded to his nature. Its basic positions amount to the following points: Two vectors have united in this criminal-political program – the “machine” rationality of soulless villains with the demonic irrationality of maniacs run amok. One of the most impressive paradoxes of Verkhovensky’s personality is just that surprising combination of “machine likeness” with a maniacal enthusiasm for destruction. It accords the figure of the political fiend an especially sinister character. With the direct participation of this unfeeling “machine” for producing disorder, events in the novel take the form of an oncoming squall, chaos enthroned, when a dozen murders and suicides are committed, along with several bouts of madness and a grandiose fire from arson. As a result the world enclosed in the novel’s textual frame begins to resemble a monstrous bestiary, where there is an absence of love and mercy, where there is only ruthless struggle of all against all. Dostoevsky saw one of the sources of this chaos in the philosophical mindsets of rationalistic, materialistic, and atheistic content that penetrated from the West. Falling on Russian soil, the doctrines of Darwin, Mill, Strauss, and other representatives of European “progressive” thought, as a rule were taken in the Slavic consciousness, untried by many centuries of philosophical schooling, as adamantine philosophical axioms. Moreover, practical conclusions were often drawn from them, conclusions the possibility of which Western teachers had not suspected. Art by Sergei Yukhimov Of course, positive knowledge did not directly teach anyone villainy. And if Strauss, Dostoevsky notes with unconcealed irony, denied and mocked Christ, alongside that for man and humanity he demonstrated the most earnest love and desired their most radiant future. But then here is what seems to me indubitable – give all these contemporary higher teachers the full opportunity to destroy the old society and build a new one – then there will come such darkness, such chaos, something so crude, blind, and inhuman, that the whole construction would collapse under the curses of humanity before it could be completed. Once it has rejected Christ, the human mind can reach the most astounding results. That is an axiom. Europe, at least in the higher representations of its thought, rejects Christ, and as is known, we are obligated to imitate Europe. (21, 132-133) |
| Dehandschutter 1979=Dehandschutter B. Martyrium Polycarpi. Een literair-kritische Studie. Louvain, 1979 (BETL 52). Dehandschutter 1990=Dehandschutter В. A «new» text of the Martyrdom of Polycarp. – Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 66, 1990, 391–394. Dehandschutter 1993=Dehandschutter B. The Martyrium Polycarpi: a Century of Research. – ANRW II.27.1, 485–522. del Verme 1993=del Verme M. The Didache and Judaism: the παρχ of Didache 13, 3–7. – Studia Patristica 26, 1993, 113–120. del Verme 2001=del Verme M. Didaché e origini cristiane: Una bib- liografia per lo studio della Didaché nel contesto del giudaismo cristiano. – Vetera Christianorum 38, 2001, 5–39 (продолжение следует). di Leila 1977=di Leila A.A. The Book of Daniel. Garden City, NY, 1977 (The Anchor Bible 23). Didache in Context 1995=The Didache in Context. Essays on Its Text, History, and Transmission/Ed. C.N. Jefford. Leiden: Brill, 1995 (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 77). 422 p. Dihle 1962=Dihle A. Die Goldene Regel. Eine Einführung in die Geschichte der antiken und frühchristlichen Vulgärethik. Göttingen, 1962. Dinkler 1962=Dinkler E. Kreuzzeichen und Kreuz. Tav, Chi und Stauros. – JbAC 5, 1962, 93–112 [перепечатано с дополнением в: Idem. Signum Crucis. Aufsätze zum Neuen Testament und zur Christlichen Archäologie. Tübingen, 1967, 26–54]. Donadoni 1975=Donadoni S. Les graffiti de l’église de Sonqi Tino. – Nubia. Récentes recherches. Actes du colloque nubiologique international au Musée National de Varsovie. 19–22 juin 1972/Sous la rédaction de K.Michalowski. Varsovie, 1975, 31–39. Draper 1993=Draper J.A. The Development of «The Sign of the Son of Man» in the Jesus Tradition. – New Testament Studies 39, 1993, 1–21. Draper 2000=Draper J.A. Ritual Process and Ritual Symbol in Didache 7–10. – VChr 54, 2000, 121–158. Ehrman 1983=Ehrman B.D. The New Testament canon of Didymus the Blind. – VChr 37, 1983, 1–21. Fischer 1974–1975=Fischer J.A. Die ältesten Ausgaben der Patres Apostolici. Ein Beitrag zu Begriff und Begrenzung der Apostolischen Väter. – Historisches Jahrbuch 94, 1974, 157–190; 95, 1975, 88–119. |
|
|
