| 9006 Diodorus Siculus 17.31.6; 17.39.2; 17.100.1. For friends of Cassander, see Diodorus Siculus 18.55.1. 9008 Epictetus Diatr. 4.1.45–50; Martial Epigr. 5.19.15–16; Herodian 4.3.5; inscriptions in Deissmann, Light, 378; cf. Friedländer, Life, 1:70–82, 4:58–74. Of Jewish tetrarchs and rulers, only King Agrippa I adopted this title in his coins; see Meyshan, «Coins.» The probably late and fabricated evidence of CPJ2:71–72, § 156a, and 2:76, §156b, nevertheless reflect earlier custom. 9009 1Macc 10:20; 15:28, 32; 2Macc 7:24; Let. Aris. 40–41, 44, 190,208, 225, 228, 318; Josephus Ant. 12.366 (though cf. 12.391); 13.146, 225; Life 131; Cornelius Nepos 9 (Conon), 2.2; 18 (Eumenes), 1.6; Chariton 8.8.10; cf. Sipre Deut. 53.1.3; Gen. Rab. 34:9. Cf. perhaps Sib. Or. 3.756 (probably second-century B.C.E. Alexandria); Deissmann, Studies, 167–68. The Roman title «Friends of the People» reflects an office advocating for the people but of less rank than being a leader in the Senate (Cicero Sest. 49.105; Prov. cons. 16.38). 9011 See Sherwin-White, Society, 47; also many commentators (Brown, John, 2:879; Barrett, John, 543; Michaels, John, 309; Stauffer, Jesus, 133). By contrast, Westcott, John, 271, thinks that in 19the phrase is «used in a general and not in a technical sense.» 9012 Cf. Strachan, Fourth Gospel, 179. That a contrast between closeness to Caesar and closeness to God " s agent could be intended is not impossible; cf. Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.7. 9015 E.g., Lysias Or. 2.2, §192; Aeschines False Embassy 30, 39; Demosthenes On the Navy-Boards 5; On the Embassy 62; Ep. 3.27; Strabo Geog. 8.5.5; Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.109 (but cf. similar interests in 1.111); 2.83; cf. Rhet. ad Herenn. 3.3.4 (societates atque amicitias); Maximus of Tyre Or. 35.7–8; Philostratus Hrk. 35.4 (for individuals). 9016 E.g., Xenophon Cyr. 3.2.23; Arrian Alex. 1.28.1; 4.15.2, 5; 4.21.8; 7.15.4; Plutarch Comparison of Lycurgus and Numa 4.6; Plutarch Pelopidas 5.1, 29.4; Epameinondas 17 in Plutarch S.K., Mor. 193DE; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades), 4.7; 5.3; 7.5; 14 (Datames), 8.5; 23 (Hannibal), 10.2; Josephus Life 30, 124. |
| 8550 See Trapp, Maximus, 237 (though sometimes repetition stems from treating a topic under various headings; cf. Dillon and Hershbell, «Introduction,» 3). On the rhetorical prominence of John " s repetitions in this discourse, see Kennedy, Interpretation, 85. 8551 Windisch, Spirit-Paraclete, 4, thinks 14:15–17 and 14are doublets and that the condition in 14may represent the same saying as in 15:10. Such observations are possible, though impossible to prove or disprove at our remove. 8553 Lacomara, «Deuteronomy,» 75. Some Jewish farewell discourses (e.g., Jub. 36) included exhortations to obey the law (see Bürge, Community, 26, summarizing U. B. Müller). On keeping the commandments, see further Pancaro, Law, 431–51. 8554 Also Sir 3:15–17 . Love is the highest motivation for obedience (Sipre Deut. 32.1.1). Cf. also «lover of the law» (φιλνομος) or «of the commandment» (φιλντολος) in CIJ 1:78, §111; 1:92, §132; 1:372, §509; cf. 1:372, §508. 8557 Josephus Ant. 3.192; b. Sank 39b; see also L.A.B. 42(God " s message); Sipre Deut. 176.1.1 (prophets); t. Sanh. 4(gift of Torah). 8558 E.g., 3 En. 2:4; " Abot R. Nat. 14A; 28, §57B; b. B. Bat. 10a; Sotah 48b; Num. Rab. 12:21; Deut. Rab. 6:14. 8560 God first loved his people ( Deut 7:6–8 ) and would keep covenant with them if they obeyed (7:9–10); thus, they should obey him (7:11). For a broader Mediterranean perspective, cf. also patrons» free gifts to clients, the continuance of which depended on clients» displays of gratitude (DeSilva, Honor, 148). 8561 Jesus speaks of keeping his commandments, but John " s verb often appears in conjunction with observing God " s commandments (Brown, John, 2:638). 8562 The primary function of the Paraclete promise is to stress Jesus» continuing presence (Berg, " Pneumatology,» 123). 8563 For the Spirit as Jesus» gift in John, see Büchsei, Geist, 490–98. For links between 14and 14:16, see Becker, Evangelium, 2:464. 8565 As Berg, «Pneumatology,» 72, points out, scholars have increasingly «recognized that the understanding of the paraclete must be centered upon the presentation in G [John] itself.» |
| 6686 For hostile spirits in the air realm, cf., e.g., Incant. Text 17.2; 43.6–7; T. So1. 2:3; 25:3; b. Git. 68b; Hag. 16a, bar.; Num. Rab. 12:3; Deut. Rab. 6:6; Eph 2:2 . Some expected magic spirits (PGM 1.179–182; 4.3043–3044; 12.67), «daemons» (Dillon, Platonists, 288), or deceased souls (Philo Dreams 1.135; Giants 9,12; Pythagoras in Diogenes Laertius 8.1.32; temporarily in Apoc. Zeph. 4:7) in the air realm. 6687 1 En. 10:4–5, 12; Jub. 5:6, 10; 10:7–9; Apoc. Zeph. 6:15. This was in Tartarus (Sib. Or. 1.101–103; L.A.B. 60:3; 2Pet 2:4 ; cf. T. So1. 6:3), probably after the analogy of the Titans (Hesiod Theog. 717–719; cf. Sib. Or. 1.307–323; 2.231). 6688 Cf. 2 En. 7; 1Pet 3:22 ; probably 1 En. 18:14–19:1. 6689 For antithesis in rhetoric, see Anderson, Glossary, 21–22; and our comments on the technique of comparison in John 13:23 . 6690 E.g., Freed, «Eg Eimi.» 6691 E.g., Lightfoot, Gospel, 134–35; Hunter, John, 89; Bell, I Am, 258. Cf. also Exod 3:14; Deut 32LXX. 6692 Stauffer, Jesus, 91, citing purportedly pre-Christian tradition in b. Sukkah 53a. 6693 Cf., e.g., Robert, «Malentendu.» 6694 Miller, «Christology.» 6695 Sanders, John, 224. Haenchen, John, 2suggests substituting «at all» for «beginning,» citing Ps.-Clem. Homilies 6.11. 6696 That «lifting up» includes the cross is nearly always recognized, although many also include the resurrection-ascension, as probably implied here (e.g., Holwerda, Spirit, 11). Pretending to dare onés hearers to act against the speaker " s counsel could be good rhetorical form (Rowe, «Style,» 147, on permissio or epitrope; Porter, «Paul and Letters,» 582), though this may function as a form of rhetorical παρρησα (see comment on 7:4). 6697 Bauckham, God Crucified, 64–65, thinks this passage combines Isaiah " s «lifting up» (52:13) with Isaiah " s «I am he» (41:4; 43:10, 13; 48:12). On Jesus» claim to deity here, see, e.g., Pancaro, Law, 59–63; Brown, John, 1:348. Bowman, Gospel, 267 finds here God on Ezekiel " s throne-chariot. |
| 6785 As noted by Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 24; see likewise Cicero Or. Brut. 40.137. Cf. returning the charges in other handbooks: Rhet. Alex. 36, 1442b.6–9; Rhet. ad Herenn. 3.3.6; Hermogenes Issues 39.1–5. 6786 E.g., Xenophon Hel1. 2.3.37. 6787 Thus Cicero Mur. 29.60, dealing softly with Marcus Cato. 6788 E.g., Horace Carm. 4.6. 6789 Dodd, «L " arrière-plan»; idem, More Studies, 46–47; cf. Dozeman, «Sperma» Dodd, More Studies, 41–42, heavily emphasizes the Abraham material here. Contrast Robinson, «Destination,» 123–24 n.1. 6790 For such sarcasm in the face of hostility, see, e.g., Silius Italicus 11.254–255; Matt 23:32; perhaps 1 Kgs 22:15. 6791 Thus Jesus employs parody (see Stibbe, Gospel 118; cf. Rev 13:3, 18; 17:8). Some later philosophers also spoke of hearing and speaking God " s message as if in his presence (Porphyry Marc. 15.258–259, though for him this means undistracted by bodily desires). 6792 See, e.g., Aeschines Timarchus 107; Cicero Pis. 2.3; Verr. 2.2.1.1–2; Agr. 24.63–64; Cat. 1.6.14; perhaps Acts 24:19. 6793 E.g., Rom 4:1 ; Sipre Deut. 311.1.1; 313.1.3; " Abot R. Nat. 23, §46B; 36, §94; b. Ber. 6b; Ned. 32a. Those not his descendants also could greet him with the honorary title «father» (T. Ab. 2:3A; 9:4B); in some sense he was father of the whole world (t. Ber. 1on Gen 17:5 ). Cf. «our fathers» in 6:31. 6794 E.g., Gal 3:7; 4 Macc 6:17, 22; 18:1. Later teachers even emphasized God " s special pre-creation forethought for the patriarchs (Gen. Rab. 1:4, citing Hos 9:10 ). 6795 Many Tannaim probably even denied the use of the phrase to proselytes (m. Bik. 1:4–5; Cohen, «Fathers»). 6796 Augustine Tr. Ev. Jo. 42.5.2 triumphantly reads the stones in that passage as Gentile Christians. 6797 Schnackenburg, John, 2:210. 6798 E.g., Mek. Pisha 16.165–168 (other opinions in 16.169–172); p. Ta c an. 1:1, §8; Gen. Rab. 55:8; 74:12; 76(Jacob " s merit); 84and 87(Joseph " s merit); Exod. Rab. 2:4; 15:10; 23:5; Lev. Rab. 34:8, bar; Num. Rab. 13:20; Song Rab. 4:4, §4; Pesiq. Rab. 10(in prayer); see further Moore, Judaism, 1:537. Some Tannaim suggested they could have used more merit (Sipre Deut. 2.1.1–4); some Amoraim attributed the exodus to the merit of, or faith in, Moses (Exod. Rab. 15:3; 16:1), to righteous acts (Exod. Rab. 1:28; Lev. Rab. 28:4; Num. Rab. 20:22), to the merits of Israelite women (Exod. Rab. 1:12; Num. Rab. 3:6, bar.), or to various factors, including patriarchal merits (Deut. Rab. 2:23). |
| Итак, само основание критики серьезно пошатнулось. Конечно, и сегодня есть ученые, которые считают, что евангелист зависит от синоптиков. Однако в этом случае, необходимо сразу указывать на то, что это уже маргинальная точка зрения, имеющая в своей основе не конкретную работу с текстом, а только собственные доктринальные представления. Естественно, сразу после того, как в кругах библеистики начала меняться научная парадигма относительно зависимости текста Иоанна от синоптиков, появились работы, в которых отстаивалась контекстуальная зависимость. Но тут, в чисто научном плане, исследователям приходится становиться на гораздо более зыбкую почву. И попытки провести контекстуальную зависимость особого распространения не получили, по той простой причине, что особо таковую обнаружить так же не удалось. Везде евангелист Иоанн обращается с деталями как власть имеющий. Напр. (1) ( John 1.40–42 ; cf. Mark 3.16 ; Matt. 16.18) (2) (John é.30–32; cf. Mark 8.1 if.) (3) ( John 6.67, 70 ; cf. Mark 3.16 ) (4) ( John 13.2, 27 ; cf. Luke 22.3) (5) ( John 9 .6L; cf. Mark 8.22–26 ) (6) ( John 4.44 ; cf. Mark 6.4 ) (7) ( John 12 .39L; cf. Mark 4.12 ) (8) ( John 12.25 ; cf. Mark 8.35 ) (9) ( John 13.20 ; cf. Matt. 10.40, Mark 9.37 ) (10) ( John 13.16 ; cf. Luke 6.40). И ладно было бы, ecdiv smyleлu автора можно было поймать на простой фальсификации, так нет, совсем наоборот, к тем сведеньям, которые отличны от сведений синоптиков, сегодня относятся более чем серьезно. То, что за Евангелием стоит солидная историческая традиция сегодня не станет отрицать НИКТО. Как подытожил этот вопрос Реймонд Браун: “И поныне находятся авторы, которые утверждают, что четвертое Евангелие нельзя рассматривать как серьезное свидетельство об историческом Иисусе, однако они представляют собой тип некритических традиционалистов, время от времени воскресающий даже в инославии”. Но, как не парадоксально, в этом случае автор (с большей или меньшей неизбежностью) становится очевидцем событий не имеющим нужды в каких-то текстах для того, что бы говорить о произошедших событиях. И что самое интересное, – в таких, на первый взгляд, противоречивых сообщениях, как напр. о дне празднования Пасхи (а я говорил уже в другой теме, что нет особой нужды видеть тут противоречие) большинство современных библеистов склоняются к хронологии четвертого Евангелия. В частности, даже данные астрономии (учитывая соотношение между лунным и солнечным календарями) говорят о том, что 14 нисана приходилось на пятницу в 30 и 33 годах (две самые принимаемые даты распятия Христа), в то время как на четверг только в 26 и 37. Впрочем, об этом, думаю, мы поговорим как-нибудь отдельно. |
| 6920 T. Ab. 8:9A. Cf. Homer Il. 21.107, where Achilles reminds Lycaon that Patroclus was a better man than he and died anyway (then slays him, 21.115–119). 6921 Commonly noted, e.g., Barrett, John, 351; Morris, John, 469. 6922 Q also polemicizes against false claims to descent from «Abraham our father» (Matt 3:9; Luke 3:8). 6923 See further comments by Neyrey, «Shame of Cross,» 126–27; our comments on 5:18. 6924 Publilius Syrus 597; Plutarch Praising, Mor. 539A-547F (esp. 15, Mor. 544D); 2Cor 12:11 ; see our introductory comment on John 5:31–47 . 6925 Also Bar 2:35 . 6926 Some later Jewish traditions allowed him to share it with Israel (Pesiq. Rab Kah. 21:2); see further the comment on 5:44. 6927 The claim is ad hominem (so Michaels, John, 144; Barrett, John, 351), but it does not strictly reject their physical ancestry here; rather, he exhorts them to function as children of Abraham ought (cf. 1Cor 6:6–11 ). 6928 Cf. revelation on the «Lord " s Day,» possibly an eschatological double entendre (cf. Shepherd, Liturgy, 78), in Rev 1(on the noneschatological aspect of the phrase, see Did. 14.1; Deissmann, East, 358–59; Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 65; perhaps also Ign. Magn. 9.1, but cf. Lewis, «Ignatius»). 6929 So Schnackenburg, John, 2:221, citing Jub. 15:17; Targum Onqelos; Philo Names 154, 161, 175; cf. Haenchen, John, 2:29. In Genesis, however, Abraham " s laughter undoubtedly functions as Sarah " s would (18:12–15; cf. 21:6). 6930 Hanson, Gospel, 126–28. 6931 4 Ezra 3:14; 2 Bar. 4:4; L.A.B. 23:6; Apoc. Ab. 9–32; Gen. Rab. 44:12. In Philo, Abraham encounters the Logos (Migration 174, in Argyle, «Philo,» 38; on Philo here, cf. more fully On the Change of Names in Urban and Henry, «Abraham»). 6932 E.g., Hunter, John, 94; Cadman, Heaven, 115; Morris, Studies, 221; Brown, John, 1:360; Bell, I Am, 197. Contrast McNamara, Targum, 144–45. 6933 E.g., b. B. Bat. 16b-17a, bar. Others also receive such visions; e.g., Adam (2 Bar. 4:3; " Abot R. Nat. 31A; 42, §116B; b. Sanh. 38b; Gen. Rab. 21:9; 24:2; Pesiq. Rab. 23:1); Joseph (Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 45:14 ); Amram (4Q544 lines 10–12; 4Q547 line 7); Moses (Sipre Deut. 357.5.11); and R. Meir (Num. Rab. 9:20). |
| 2249 Part of the question turns on onés definition of «magic» (cf. Aune, «Magic,» 1557; Blomberg, «Reflections,» 449), but to the extent that «religion» and «magic» are distinguished, the normal criteria readily distinguish Jesus from magic (Kee, Miracle, 214–15; Meier, Marginal Jew, 2:537–52; Twelftree, Exorcist, 190–207; Goergen, Mission, 173–75; Vermes, Religion, 6). 2250 Drane, «Background,» 122–23; cf. similarly Theissen, Stories, 296. Borg, Vision, 16, thus defines «charismatic» too broadly to be helpful here. Neusner, in «Foreword,» xxvii and idem, New Testament, 5,173, offers the harshest critique of Smith " s thesis. 2258 Harvey, Jesus, 100; followed also by Blomberg, «Reflections,» 450–51. See, e.g., m. Ta c an. 3:8; " Abot R. Nat. 6; b. Ta c an. 8a; 23ab; 24a-26a; p. Ta c an. 1:4, §1; 3:9, §§6–8; 3:11, §4; cf. Josephus Ant. 8.343–346; 14.22; Empedocles in Diogenes Laertius 8.2.59–60. For the link with corporate piety, see 1 En. 101:2; Pss. So1. 17:18; Gen. Rab. 13:14; Lev. Rab. 34:14; 35:10; Num. Rab. 3:12; cf. b. Ta c an. 19b; on the miraculousness of rain (included in the benediction of the resurrection), cf. b. Ber. 29a; 33a; Ta c an. 2b; 7a; p. Ta c an. 1:1, §2; Gen. Rab. 13:6; Deut. Rab. 7:6. Rainmakers are prominent in many cultures (e.g., Mbiti, Religions, 89, 234–37). 2259 Cf. Herford, Christianity, 50–51, 54–56, 211–15; Bagatti, Church, 95–96, 106–7; Manns, «Jacob.» P. Šabb. 14:4, §3, may provide another example, but is uncertain. 2260 Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 65; cf. Cangh, «Miracles»; Harvey, Jesus, 100 n. 10, following Smith, Parallels, 81–84 against R Fiebig. But this may have been less frequent than is often supposed; cf. Bourgeois, «Spittle,» 32–33. 2261 Harvey, Jesus, 115; in pagan accounts, see Blackburn, «ΑΝΔΡΕΣ,» 192. Contrast Isa 35:5–6, treated below. 2262 Concurring with Taylor, Formation, 128; against Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 101–3; Jeremias, Theology, 88–92. Jeremiase use of parallels to dismiss the authenticity of these miracles or to attribute them to psychosomatic activity (88–92) simply rests on his presupposition that modernity rejects the miraculous (89). |
| Христос 4 . Taken from Faber, ibid.. No. 5 «Quomodo perfectiones divinae in Christi Incarnatione elucescant», sect. 7 «Providentia». 11. 1–10 cf Faber: «Per Christum ergo nobis in maxima egestate de omnibus rebus necessariis ad vitam aeternam providit.» 11. 11–14 cf Faber: «Egebamus Doctore, in maximis ignorantiae tenebris: Christus suis doctrinis nos illuminavit.» 11. 15–22 cf Faber: «Egebamus Ductore, qui nostram infirmiiatem corroboraret et exemplo suo praeiret in virtutibus: Christus id strenue praestitit.» 11. 23–8 cf Faber: «Egebamus medico, qui vulnera animarum nostrarum curaret; et hocfecit Christus Sacramentorum medicina.» 11. 29–36 cf Faber: «Egebamus liberatore, qui pro nobis solveret débita ilia, quibus solvendis non sufficiebamus: et ecce accepimus liberatorem.» 11. 37–44 cf Faber: «Egebamus excitatore, qui corda nostra caelesti amore accenderet. Et hoc fecit Christus, innumeris beneficiis ad amorem Dei corda nostra inflammavit.» 11. 45–50 cf Faber: «Egebamus perpetuo in caelo advocato, qui causam nostram ageret: et ipse est, qui semper in conspectu Patris stat et vulnera sua ei repraesentat.» Христос 5 . Taken from Faber, ibid.. No. 7 «Cur tarn humilia sym bola, Intantiam, pannos, praesepe elegerit sibi Christus», sect. 4 «Ob redimendum hominem». 11. 1–8 cf Faber: «Christus in ipsa sua infantia specimen exhibere voluit victoriosi illius certam inis, quod adultus aliquando subiugaturus et spoliaturus erat daemones, ut sic initio statim m undus cerneret qualis puer hic futurus esset. Nam in stabulo iacet infans quasi fari nesciat, cum tamen aeterna Dei sit sapientia: Sic passionis tempore, quasi stultus et loqui nescius ab Herode est derisus.» 11. 9–16 cf Faber: «Nascitur nudus in maxima paupertate, quia non erat ei locus in diversorio: sic nudus quoque in crucem actus est, пес habuit ubi caput reclinaret, et mortuus, alieno sepulchre illatus est.» 11. 17–18 cf Faber: «In lucem editus, fasciis a matre vincitur et colligatur: et sic postea in passione funibus constrictus, raptus est ad mortem.» 11. 19–24 cf Faber: «Infans in praesepio reclinatur inter bovem et asinum, loco horrido et foetido: sic in monte Calvariae horrido etiam ac foetido deiectus est in crucem, et in ea velut lecto angusto et immitissimo positus inter duos latrones.» 11. 25–6 cf Faber: «Vagiit in praesepio more omnium infantium: sic etiam in cruce cum clamore valido et lachrymis preces obtulit, teste Apostolo ad Hebr. 5 11. 27–8 cf Faber: «Videmus igitur, quid haec Christi nascentis sym bola sibi velint?» |
| Вознесеся Христос 2 Taken from Meffreth, In Festo Ascensionis, where ten reasons are given why, «ex parte nostrae» (from our point of view), Christ ascended into heaven. 11. 13–22 cf Meffreth: «Prima vt fidem nostram quae est, de non visis, augm entaret, vnde ipse dixit, Ioann. quod Spiritus sanctus adueniens arg u et mundum de iustitia eorum , scilicet qui credunt, vt Augu. dicit. Ipsa quippe fidelium comparatio, infidelium est vituperatio: vnde subdit: Quia ad Patrem vado, & iam non videbitis me. Beati namque qui non viderunt & crediderunt, erit igitur vestra iustitia, de qua mundus arguitur, quia in me, quern non videtis, creditis.» 11. 23–6 cf Meffreth: «Secunda, vt spem nostram su bleu aret, vnde & ipse dixit, Ioan. Si abiero & preparauero vobis locum, iterum veniam & accipiam vos ad meipsum, vt, vbi ego sum & vos sitis. Per hoc enim, quod Christus humanam naturam assumptam in coelo collocauit, dedit nobis spem illuc perueniendi, quia vbi fuerit corpus, illuc congregabuntur & aquilae, vt dicitur Matth. 11. 27–30 cf Meffreth: «Tertia vt charitatem inflammaret, secundum illud Apostoli Colossenses 3.[l–2] Quae sursum sunt quaerite, vbi Christus est in dextera Dei sedens, quae sursum sunt sopite, non quae super terram.» 11. 31–4 cf Meffreth: «Quarta, vt per hoc reuerentiam nostram ad ipsum am pliaret. Dum enim in coelum ascendit iam non existimamus eum sicut hominem terrenum, sed sicut Deum coelestem, ad maiorem sibi reuerentiam exhibendam prouocamur.» 11. 35–8 cf Meffreth: «Quinta, vt viam eundi in coelum nobis demonstraret, secundum illud Micheae. A scendit iter pandens ante eos [cf AV: «The breaker is come up before them " ].» 11. 39–42 cf Meffreth: «Sexta, vt coelu m nobis reseraret. Deut. 28 Aperiet tibi Dominus thesaurum suum optimum, id est, coelum.» 11.43–6 cf Meffreth: «Septima, vt locum nobis in regno Patris sui prepararet, secundum quod ipse promisit loan. Vado, inquit, parare vobis locum, &c. vt vbi ego sum & vos sitis.» 11. 47–52 cf Meffreth: «Octaua vt patrem pro nobis interpellaret, secundum illud 1. loan. 2.[l–2] Aduocatum habemus apud Patrem Iesum Christum iustum, & ipse est propitiatio pro peccatis nostris» 11. 53–6 cf Meffreth: «Nona vt in coelo sedens quasi Deus, & Dominus nobis inde Spiritum sanctum & diuina dona donaret, vnde dixit loan. 16. Nisi ego abiero, paracletus non veniet ad vos, & dum assumptus fuero mittam eum vobis» 11. 57–60 cf Meffreth: «Décima, vt ipse ascendens in coelum desiderium nostrum post se traheret & prouocaret» (Pars aest., pp. 132–3). |
| Заповедь первая . Taken from Faber, Dominica 17 Post Pentecosten, No. 9 «Mysteria [on the Gospel for the day, viz. Matt. 22.35–46]», sect. 4 «Cur praeceptum dilectionis primum et maximum». 11. 1–I0 cf Faber: «Cur praeceptum dilectionis primum et maximum dicitur? Resp. Primo, quia finis praecepti charitas, inquit Apostolus 1. Tim oth. Nec solum praeceptorum omnium finis est charitas, verum etiam omnium sacramentorum et virtutum totiusque religionis Christianae, quae ultim ate eo tendit, ut hominem cum Deo bonorum omnium fonte perfecte coniungat, quod per charitatem solam fieri potest.» 11. 11–14 cf Faber: «Secundo. Quia omnia alia mandata comprehendit... Si vero diligat proximum, legem implevit, Roman. ac proinde malum non operabitur, nec ulla in re offendet proximum.» 11. 15–18 cf Faber: «Tertio. Quia maximum et praestantissimum est, quod Deo dare possumus; Charitas enim radix et fons est omnium bonorum et donorum.» 11. 19–20 cf Faber: «Quarto. Quia Charitas ostendit, quis et quantus sit homo.» 11. 21–4 cf Faber: «Quinto. Quia est vinculum perfectionis sicut nihil prosunt, inquit S. Chrysost. in cap. 3. ad Coloss, sed diffluuni partes navis, si desini tabulata, et contignationes, et ligamenta, quibus inter se devinciantur; ita nec virtutes caeterae aut virtutum opera, nisi in charitate fiant.«» 11. 25–8 cf Faber: «Sexto, quia maximam habet mercedem. Sic enim ait Apost. 1. Cor. 2. Oculuus non vidit, nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascendit, quae praeparavit Deus diligentibus se.» Греси противу Духу Святому . Taken from Faber, Dominica 4 Post Pascha, No. 1 «Iniuriae in Spiritum Sanctum quadruplices», sect. 1 «Quidam resistunt Spiritui Sancto». 11. 1–4 cf Faber: «Quidam resistunt Spiritui S... Huiusmodi vero obices numerantur a D Thoma 2.2. q. 14. ar. 2. sex.» 11. 5–8 cf subsect. 1 «qui desperant»: «Resistunt ergo Spiritui S. Primo qui desperant de Dei misericordia.» II. 9–12 cf subsect. 2 «qui praesumunt de misericordia Dei»: «Secundo, qui praesumunt de Dei indulgentia. Hi enim cum ad sua peccata abutantur Dei misericordia, reddunt se ilia indignos.» 11. 13–16 cf subsect. 3 «impoenitentes»: «Tertio, inpoenitentes, qui dolere de peccatis et resurgere ad gratiam nolunt.» 11. 17–20 cf subsect. 4 «obstinati»: «Quarto, obstinati, qui monitis Spiritus S. Ecclesiae et pastorum eius, nec non parentum aliorum que superiorum aures occludunt.» 11. 21–4 cf subsect. 5 «qui impugnant agnitam veritatem»: «Quinto, qui impugnant veritatem sibi perspectam. Quid enim hoc est aliud, quam lucem meridianam excludere et velle in tenebris errare?» 11. 25–8 cf subsect. 6 «qui fraternae gratiae invident»: «Sexto, qui fraternae gratiae invident. Hi enim ligare volunt manus Spiritus S. datori bonorum omnium, ne in alios sit liberalis.» |
|
|
