| 1981. Bd. 67. S. 148-212; Wisplinghoff E. Eine unbekannte Urkunde des Papstes Lucius III.//Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter. Bonn, 1982. Bd. 46. S. 81-84; Hiestand R. Initienverzeichnis und chronologisches Verzeichnis zu den Archivberichten und Vorarbeiten der Regesta pontificum Romanorum. Münch., 1983. P. 342-382; Thiel M. Das Privileg Papst Lucius " III. für das Stift Aschaffenburg von 1184. Aschaffenburg, 1984; Diehl P. «Ad abolendam» (X.5.7.9) and Imperial Legislation against Heresy//BMCL. N. S. 1989. Vol. 19. P. 1-11; Robinson I. S. The Papacy 1073-1198: Continuity and Innovation. Camb., 1990; Schmidt U. Lucius III.//LexMA. 1991. Bd. 5. Sp. 2162-2163; Constable G., Somerville R. The Papal Bulls for the Chapter of St. Antonin in Rouergue in the XIth and XIIth Cent.//Speculum. Camb. (Mass.), 1992. Vol. 67. N 4. P. 828-864; Sauser E. Lucius III.//BBKL. 1993. Bd. 5. Sp. 304-307; Merlo G. G. Lucio III//Enciclopedia dei Papi. R., 2000. T. 2. P. 308-311; Vones L. Lucius III//Dictionnaire historique de la papauté/Éd. Ph. Levillain. P., 1994. P. 1062-1064; Ligato G. Lucio III e la difesa della Terra Santa//Studi sull " oriente cristiano. R., 1998. T. 2. N 1. P. 109-135; M ö hring H. Zwei aiyubidische Briefe an Alexander III. und Lucius III. bei Radulf de Diceto zum Kriegsgefangenenproblem//Archiv für Diplomatik. Köln etc., 2000. Bd. 46. S. 197-216; Locatelli R., Moyse G. «Causam dominus papa nobis commisit terminandam»: Quatre actes de juges délégués par Lucius III pour l " abbaye d " Acey au lendemain du schisme victorin (1181-1184)//Inquirens subtilia diversa: D. Lohrmann zum 65. Geburtstag. Aachen, 2002. P. 85-108; Spies H.-B. Verona, Hauptwirkungsstätte Papst Lucius " III. und Ausstellungsort seiner Urkunde vom 21. Dez. 1184 für das Stift Aschaffenburg//Mitt. aus dem Stadt- und Stiftsarchiv Aschaffenburg. 2002/2004. Bd. 7. S. 213-223; Lewis A. Deux lettres inédites du pape Lucius III pour la collégiale de Notre-Dame de Mantes//Bibliothèque de l " École des chartes. 2003. |
| Constantinides, Michael, Archbishop of North and South America, 1892–1958. The Orthodox Church. With an introduction by Joannes Gennadius. London: Williams & Norgate, Ltd., 1931. 168 p. “Books referred to in this volume”: p. 165–166. Evdokimov, Paul. L’Orthodoxie. Neuchatel, Switzerland: Delachaux et Niestle, 1959. 351 p. (Bibliotheque theologique.) Bibliography: p. 347 –348. Fedotov, Georgii Petrovich. The Collected Works of George P. Fedotov. Editor, Richard Haugh; translated from Russian by Richard Haugh and Nickolas Lupinin. Vaduz, Liechtenstein: Buchervertriebsanstalt; Belmont, MA: Notable & Academic Books [distributor], 1988-. Vols. 1, 3–4 have imprint information from label on t.p. Originally published: Belmont, MA: Nordland. Contents: 1. St. Filipp, Metropolitan of Moscow. 2. A Treasury of Russian Spirituality. 3–4. The Russian Religious Mind. 5. Peter Abelard. FitzGerald, Thomas E. The Orthodox Church. Westwood, CT: Greenwood Press, 1995. Florovsky, Georges. Collected Works of Georges Florovsky. Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Co., 1972-. V. 4, 6–11, 13–14 published by Buchervertriebsanstalt, Vaduz. Contents: 1. Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View. 2. Christianity and Culture. 3. Creation and Redemption. 4. Aspects of Church History. 5–6. Ways of Russian Theology. 7. The Eastern Fathers of the Fourth Century. 8. The Byzantine Fathers of the Fifth Century. 9. The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century. 10. The Byzantine Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers. 11. Theology and Literature. 12. Philosophy: Philosophical Problems and Movements. 13–14. Ecumenism. Hackel, Sergei. The Orthodox Church. London: Ward Lock Educational, 1971. 48 p. (Living religions series.) Bibliography: p. 45. King, Joh n Glen, 1732–1787. The Rites and Ceremonies of the Greek Church, in Russia; Containing an Account of Its Doctrine, Worship, and Discipline. London: Printed for W. Owen, 1772. Reprinted: NY: AMS Press, 1970. xix, 477 p. Lossky, Vladimir. Orthodox Theology: An Introduction. Translated by Ian and Ihita Kesarcodi-Watson. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1978. 137 p. Chapters 1–4 were originally published in Messager de l’Exarchat du patriarche russe en Europe occidentale, 1964–1965, as a series of related pieces under title: Theologie dogmatique. |
| 5 Вторая и третья книги более или менее соответствуют 1-му собранию Исаака на сирийском языке. Ср. Chialà S. Dall’ascesi eremitica... P. 334–338. 7 Ср. Isaac of Nineveh (Isaac the Syrian). «The Second Part», Chapters IV–XLI/Ed. S. P. Brock. Louvain, 1995. P. XXXIV. 8 Первые результаты этого исследования были опубликованы в предисловии редактора к итальянскому переводу арабского Исаака: Isacco di Ninive. Grammatica di vita spirituale/A cura di V. Ianari. Cinisello Balsamo, 2009. P. 21–27. 9 Ср. S. Isaaci Syri Antiocheni Homiliae/Ed. P. Bedjan. Parisiis, 1903. P. 398–409. Буква «ч» указывает, что текст в коллекции присутствует лишь частично. 10 Ср. Isacco di Niniυe. Terza collezione/Ed. S. Chialà. Lovanii, 2011. P. 3–9 (текст), 3–16 (перевод). 14 Ср. Los cinco tratados sobre la quietud (šely) de Ddšo’Qatry/Ed. F. del Rio Sánchez. Sabadell-Barcelona, 2001. P. 47–56 (текст), 123–128 (перевод). 23 Ср. Isaac le Syrien. (Euvres spirituelles – II: 41 Discours recémment découverts/Tr. A. Louf. Bégrolles en Mauges, 2003. P. 100, 102–104. 25 Ср. Los cinco tratados sobre la quietud... P. 69, 81, 82 (текст) и 135–136, 142–143 (перевод). 39 Ср. Los cinco tratados sobre la quietud... P. 57–61, 69–77 (текст) и 128–130, 135–140 (перевод). 45 Об арабском переводе «Бесед» Иоанна Отшельника см. Brock S. John the Solitary, On Prayer//Journal of Theological Studies. Vol. 30. 1979. P. 84–101, в частности p. 85 и 101. 46 Но нам известно о существовании арабского перевода его комментария к «Раю отцов», о котором свидетельствует эфиопский перевод с арабского. См. Witakowski W. «Filekseyus», the Ethiopic Version of the Syriac Dadisho Qatraya’s Commentary on the «Paradise of the Fathers»//Rocznik Orientalistyczny. T. 59. 2006. P. 281–296. 48 Опубликован Беджаном в приложении к его изданию 1-го собрания как труд Исаака, см. Chialà. Dall’ascesieremitica... P. 76–77. 49 Некоторые сирийские манускрипты передают две беседы, представленные в виде отрывков из «Пятой части» трудов Исаака, но их авторство остается сомнительным. Издание этих текстов, снабженное итальянским переводом и комментарием, см. Chialà S. Due discorsi ritrovati della Quinta parte di Isacco di Ninive?//Orientalia Christiana Periodica. Vol. 79. 2013. P. 61–112. |
| Завершая, хочу отметить, что иеромонах Плакида (Дезей) готовит второе издание французского перевода творений аввы Исаака 16 , взяв за основу греческое критическое издание, которое переводится и на русский язык. Кроме того, в Центре восточных исследований Лёвенского университета намечается составление лексического указателя к греческому, арабскому и грузинскому древним переводам. 1 Феотокис жил в Константинополе, в Молдавии и Германии. В 1776 г. он прибыл в Россию, в 1779 г. стал архиепископом Славянским и Херсонским, в 1786 – архиепископом Астраханским и Ставропольским. В последующее время и до самой смерти был игуменом Данилова монастыря в Москве, где и погребен. 2 Θεοτκης Ν. Το σιου πατρς μν σακ πισκπου Νινευ το Σρου, τ ερεθντα σκητικ. Leipzig, 1770. P. XII. 4 Géhin P., Guillaumont Cl., Guillaumont A. Evagre le Pontique. Sur les Pensées. (Sources chrétiennes, 438). P., 1998. P. 99. 5 Archimandrite Vasileios. Abba Isaac the Syrian. An Approach to his World. Montréal, 1999 P. 7. 6 См. Brock S. Some Uses of the term theoria in the Writings of Isaac of Nineveh//Parole de l’Orient. 1966. N 22. P. 417–419; Idem. Discerning the Evagrian in the Writings of Isaac of Nineveh: a Preliminary Investigation. Adamantius 15 (2009). P. 60–72. 8 См. Seppälä S. In Speechless Ecstasy. Expression and Interpretation of Mystical Experience in Classical Syriac and Sufi Literature. Helsinki, 2003. (Studia Orientalia, 98)· 9 См. Isaac of Nineυeh (Isaac the Syrian). «The Second Part», Chapters IV–XLI/Ed. S. P. Brock. Louvain, 1995. P. XVII. 10 См. Louf A. Isaac le Syrien. Oeuvres spirituelles – II 41. Discours récemment découverts. Abbaye de Belfontaine, 2003. P. 77. 12 См. Brock S. Syriac into Greek at Mar Saba: the Translation of St. Isaac the Syrian/Ed. J. Patrich. The Sabaite Heritage in the Orthodox Church from the Fifth Century to the Present. Leuven, 2001. P. 206–207. 14 См. Kessel G. Sinai syr. 24 as an Important Witness to the Reception History of some Syriac Ascetic Texts. Sur les pas des Araméens Chretiens. Mélanges offerts à A. Desreumeaux. P., 2010. P. 195–207. |
| Lines 11–12: Not only did They have this love, They are this love. For, as the Apostle John says, «God is love» (1 John 4:8). Line 20: Sent by the Mind as the Messenger to the world... Just as the spoken word is a messenger of the mind, so is the Son the Messenger of the Father (see the commentary on chapter 2, lines 14–29). Chapter 5 Line 24: This is the perfect love, the original unity, the original harmony, the final mystery To which no human thought has ever succeeded in rising. Cut off from the world, alone with God in the forest, St. Gregory Nazianzen was one who went beyond all human thought in beholding the Light of the One Triadic God. In one of his mystical poems he writes: «From the day whereon I renounced the things of the world to consecrate my soul to luminous and heavenly contemplation, when the supreme intelligence carried me hence to set me down far from all that pertains to the flesh, to hide me in the secret places of the heavenly tabernacle; from that day my eyes have been blinded by the Light of the Trinity, Whose brightness surpasses all that the mind can conceive; for from a throne high exalted the Trinity pours upon all, the ineffable radiance common to the Three. This is the source of all that is here below, separated by time from the things on high.... From that day forth I was dead to the world and the world was dead to me». 800 Chapter 6 Line 4: They dwelt in the Darkness that was before darkness... The former Darkness is that of the Divine Incomprehensibility, as in apophatic theology; the latter darkness is the physical darkness that came into being when light was created. Line 7: By Thinking which is beyond thought, the Primal Essence creates. «God», says St. John Damascene, «contemplated all things before their existence, formulating them in His Mind; and each being received its existence at a particular moment, according to His eternal thought and will». 801 Lines 10–11: with these two hands of the Mind, Thought becomes deed. St. Basil the Great († A.D. 379), when speaking of the creation of the angels, traces the manifestation of the Three Persons in the work of the creation in the following way: «In the creation, consider first the primordial cause of all that has been made – this is the Father; then the operating cause – which is the Son; and the perfecting cause – the Holy Spirit: so that it is by the will of the Father that the heavenly spirits are, by the operation of the Son that they come into existence, and by the presence of the Spirit that they are made perfect». 802 |
| But the question here is: if the ark is a type of the Church, then why were there both the clean and unclean animals in it? Because there are different people in the Church. Note that sin in the Church is not the sin of the Church, but a sin against the Church. And we read further in Genesis: Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he (Gen. 6:22). This is a very important note! Noah, as just in his generation, does all that the Lord pointed out to him. Chapter seven begins with the words: And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation (Gen. 7:1). Pay attention: again is repeated the words in this generation —it’s always emphasized. Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth. For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth. And Noah did according unto all that the Lord commanded him (Gen. 7:2-5). And again is repeated the word we already read: Noah did according unto all that the Lord commanded him. Do you see why Noah was saved? And who is saved in the Church? Those who do that which the Lord commands them. For 120 years Noah was building this ark; for 120 years the message of salvation and warning of destruction rang out. But the people said: “Noah, have you lost your mind? Where are you planning to float to? There’s no rain! (The land was then watered with abundant dew.) The sea is far, and you’re building such a large ship… How do you plan to get to the sea with it?” And Noah answered: “There will be rain—and not just rain, but a flood!” And he heard: “What flood?! What are you saying? Water from heaven—it’s unbelievable. Everything is fine; there will be no flood; everything’s alright! You, Noah, are just a fanatic.” |
| On another occasion, the monastery cook told Saint Callinicus that they had no more flour. He replied, “Let us place our hope in the Mother of God and in Saint Nicholas, and we shall want for nothing.” The saint went to his cell to pray before the holy icons, asking Saint Nicholas to help them. A miracle took place that evening after Vespers. A cart with two drivers came to the monastery with a load of flour. They asked Father Charalampus, the ecclesiarch, where to unload the flour which their master had sent as a gift. When the monk asked for the name of their master, they said that he wished to remain anonymous. Saint Callinicus served a Molieben of Thanksgiving to Saint Nicholas, and then went to bless the flour, which was used to bake bread for the consolation of the brethren. In 1827, a certain man came to the monastery when Saint Callinicus was speaking to his Spiritual Father, Pimen. The man asked if he might borrow fifty lei (Romanian currency). An hour after this man had left; a young man came to Saint Callinicus and kissed his hand saying, “Holy Father, my father has died. Before his death he told me to give one thousand lei to the monastery. I do not have the full amount now, but here are five hundred lei, and later on I will bring you another five hundred lei.” Saint Callinicus realized that the person who had requested the loan of fifty lei had been sent by God to test his mercy and his love, and so he received ten times that amount in return. Father Pimen asked him, “What were you thinking, Father Callinicus, when you gave alms to that man?” The saint replied, “I wanted to give one hundred lei, but I did not have that much. I gave him fifty and received five hundred. As the Gospel says, ‘Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy’ (Matt. 5:7).” After Matins one morning in July of 1829, Saint Callinicus was in his cell reading the Life of Saint Nicholas. When he got to the sixth chapter, he fell asleep from weariness after the all-night Vigil. Suddenly, Saint George appeared in his armor and Saint Nicholas in the vestments of a bishop. Behind them was Father George, the late igumen of Cernica. |
| I mean, what have wrinkles or corpulence, leanness or fatness, or any other condition occurring in a nature that is ever in a flux, to do with the other life, stranger as it is to any fleeting and transitory passing such as that?” The subsequent development of the symbolic interpretation of “coats of skins” can also be found in the theological treatise “The life of Moses”, where St Gregory refers not to the abovementioned places in the book of Leviticus, but this time finds some parallels in the book of Exodus, which tells of how God appeared to Moses in the guise of a burning bush. Addressing the prophet “in the flame of fire from the midst of a thorn bush”, God commands him to take off his shoes (Exod. 3:5). Interpreting these words, Bishop Gregory of Nyssa notes: “That light teaches us what we must do to stand within the rays of the true light: Sandaled feet cannot ascend that height where the light of truth is seen, but the dead and earthly covering of skins, which was placed around our nature at the beginning when we were found naked because of disobedience to the divine will, must be removed from the feet of the soul.” Although in his “Commentaries on the Book of Genesis” (Chapter 2) St Ephrem the Syrian gives greater significance to the literal meaning (like St John Chrysostom), he does not ignore the symbolic aspect of Genesis 3:21: “ These coats were either made from animal skins or made anew, because, according to Moses, the Lord made these coats and clothed Adam and Eve in them. One may imagine that our ancestors, having touched theirwaistbands with their hands, foun d that they were wearing robes made of animal skins, which were possibly killed before their very eyes so that they would eat their meat and cover their nakedness with skins, and in their very death saw the death of their own bodies.” Professor A.I. Sidorov notes that St Athanasius of Sinai (7 th century) “can trace the origins of his interpretation of the ‘coats’ to Philo of Alexandria, according to which, they are our present nature, our crude biological state, so different from the transparent bodies of paradise but, departing in a personal side note from the interpretation that was widespread in the writings of the ancient church, he remains, examining the anthropological problem from a Christological and soteriological perspective, within the general course of the patristic tradition.” According to St Maximus the Confessor, the donning of “coats of skins” signified that “strife was introduced to the elements of the human body and for this reason it became crude and corruptible, susceptible to suffering and death. |
| Чего нельзя было сказать о латинском Западе, где эта каноническая норма достаточно строго соблюдалась. См. об этом вопросе: Петр (Л’Юилье), архиеп. Правила... С. 146. Socrates Scholasticus. Historia ecclesiastica//TLG 2057.001. Book 2, chapter 7, line 5–8. Перевод на русский язык см.: Сократ Схоластик. Церковная история. Книга II, глава 7 [Электронный ресурс]/URL: (дата обращения: 22.03.2021). Socrates Scholasticus. Historia ecclesiastica//TLG 2057.001. Book 2, chapter 40, line 138–139; chapter 43, line 24–26. Перевод на русский язык смотри: Сократ Схоластик. Церковная история. Книга II, глава 40; 43 [Электронный ресурс]/URL: , (дата обращения: 22.03.2021). Ex Ecclesiasticis Historiis Philostorgii: epitome, confecta a Photio Patriarcha. Ex libro nono historiae//PG 65. Col. 576. Sozomenus. Historia ecclesiastica//TLG 2048.001. Book 4, chapter 28. Созомен Эрмий (Саламинский). Церковная история. СПб., 1851. С. 297–299; Theodoretus. Historia ecclesiastica//TLG 4089.003. Page 170, line 11. Page 173, line 16. Феодорит, еп. Кирский. Церковная история. М.: Изд-во «Российская политическая энциклопедия»; Православное товарищество «Колокол», 1993. С. 132–133. Вероятно из Назианза, т. к. эта важная деталь биографии святителя остается на данном этапе все еще невыясненной. В своих работах Ж Бернарди (Bernardi J. Grégorie de Nazianze… P. 175), свящ. Дж. Макгакин (См.: McGuckin J. Saint Gregory of Nazianzus... Р. 239), К. Морескини (См.: Moreschini C. Introduzione a Gregorio Nazianzo... P. 11) и К. Уайт (См.: Gregory of Nazianzus. Autobiographical poems… Р. XVI) указывают на селевкийский монастырь св. Феклы как на место, откуда святитель был призван в 379 г. на Константинопольскую кафедру. Нам ближе в этом вопросе позиция митрополита Илариона (Алфеева) (См.: Иларион (Алфеев), митр. Жизнь и учение... С. 64), согласной которой свт. Григорий после продолжительного пребывания в уединении внял просьбам горожан Назианза, возвратился в родной город и продолжал там епископское служение, откуда впоследствии отправился в столицу (См.: Gregorius Nazianzenus. De vita sua. 545–551). Эта версия находит подтверждение в сообщениях историков Сократа (Книга 5, глава 7) и блаж. Феодорита (Книга 5, глава 8), а также агиографа пресвитера Григория Кесарийского (См.: Gregorii Presbyteri vita... P. 156, 158). Сам свт. Григорий в стихотворении «О себе самом и о епископах» загадочно пишет, что он пришел в Константинополь, покинув землю Каппадокии, «но не народ или какую-нибудь из моих обязанностей». См.: Gregorius Theologus. De seipso et de episcopis//PG 37. Col. 1173. Перевод на русский см.: ТГБ II. С. 237. |
| Like other motifs in the Fourth Gospel, John employs the revelatory motifs surveyed in this chapter to support his divine Christology. The signs suggest that Jesus is one greater than Moses, and Jesus, God " s agent, joins God the Father as the supreme object of salvific, revelatory vision and knowledge. Our following chapter examines some more explicit christological motifs among John " s titles for Jesus. 1955 Bultmann did, however, lay to rest the excessive dependence on Paul postulated in Harnack, Wrede, and Bousset (Ashton, Understanding, 51–52). 1956 The case is overstated by Goulder, «Friend,» who suggests that the Gospel " s beloved disciple is Pau1. 1959 Some writers have examined the Johannine concept especially by comparison with Hellenistic analogies to it (Gärtner, «Know»). 1960 Tenney, John, 308–9, thinks John uses his two terms for knowing interchangeably except when using them together. 1961 E.g., Epictetus Diatr. 2.14.19 uses both οδα and γινσκω. Επιστμη is especially common, though lacking in John. For the literary desirability of variation, see Aulus Gellius 1.4; Cicero Or. Brut. 46.156–157; Fam. 13.27.1; and further examples in our comments on «love» in our following chapter, pp. 324–25. 1964 Heraclitus Ep. 6, to Amphidamas (Cyn. Ep. 196–97); of grammar in Porphyry Ar. Cat. 75.37–76.24. 1965 Diogenes Laertius 7.1.47; cf. Herillus in 7.3.165. On Stoic dialectic " s definition of knowledge, see Long, Philosophy, 122; for some other categories in Stoic logic, cf. Mates, Logic, 36–41. 1970 Heraclitus Ep. 6, to Amphidamas; cf. Athenaeus Deipn. 5, §218F, where Socrates» admission of ignorance is ridiculed. 1973 On the Skeptics, see Murray, Philosophy, 23–24; the Skeptic position became the background for much Stoic polemic for materialism. 1980 Plotinus Enn. 1.4. For the nature of επιστμη as an activity of the mind, see Maximus of Tyre Or. 6, esp. 6.5. 1983 Nilsson, Piety, 47–48; Grant, Religions, XXII-XXIII; Allen, Philosophy, 19; Marshall, Enmity, 192–93,201; also Plutarch Demosthenes 3.2. Diogenes Laertius 1.40 attributes the proverb to Thaïes. |
|
|
