| АУТЕНТИЧНОСТЬ: определенно подлинный текст до Исх. 32 , последующий текст может также содержать аутентичный материал. 47 . ТЕКСТ: Толкование на книгу Левит. НОМЕР РОСПИСИ: 657. РУССКИЙ ПЕРЕВОД: ТСО 22. Кн. 4. С. 461–479 (VI, 386–402). ИСТОЧНИК: Editio Romana Syr. I. P. 236–249. БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ: § 124 (Commentary on Leviticus). СОВРЕМЕННОЕ ИЗДАНИЕ: – РУКОПИСИ: Vatican. syr. 103 (IX-X saec.). СОВРЕМЕННЫЙ ПЕРЕВОД: – ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ: см. 622. ПРИМЕЧАНИЯ: текст входит в состав «Катен Севера», см. 621. АУТЕНТИЧНОСТЬ: исследователи допускают присутствие подлинного материала Ефрема в тексте комментария. 48 . ТЕКСТ: Толкование на книгу Чисел. НОМЕР РОСПИСИ: 658. РУССКИЙ ПЕРЕВОД: ТСО 22. Кн. 4. С. 480–506 (VI, 402–424). ИСТОЧНИК: Editio Romana Syr. I. P. 250–268. БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ: § 125 (Commentary on Numbers). СОВРЕМЕННОЕ ИЗДАНИЕ: – РУКОПИСИ: Vatican. syr. 103 (IX-X saec.). СОВРЕМЕННЫЙ ПЕРЕВОД: – ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ: см. 622. ПРИМЕЧАНИЯ: текст входит в состав «Катен Севера», см. 621. АУТЕНТИЧНОСТЬ: исследователи допускают присутствие подлинного материала Ефрема в тексте комментария. 49 . ТЕКСТ: Толкование на книгу Второзакония. НОМЕР РОСПИСИ: 659. РУССКИЙ ПЕРЕВОД: ТСО 22. Кн. 4. С. 507–538 (VI, 424–450). ИСТОЧНИК: Editio Romana Syr. I. P. 269–291. БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ: § 126 (Commentary on Deuteronomy). СОВРЕМЕННОЕ ИЗДАНИЕ: – РУКОПИСИ: Vatican. syr. 103 (IX-X saec.). СОВРЕМЕННЫЙ ПЕРЕВОД: – ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ: см. 622. ПРИМЕЧАНИЯ: текст входит в состав «Катен Севера», см. 621. АУТЕНТИЧНОСТЬ: исследователи допускают присутствие подлинного материала Ефрема в тексте комментария. 50 . ТЕКСТ: Толкование на Послания св. апостола Павла. НОМЕР РОСПИСИ: 1181–1194. РУССКИЙ ПЕРЕВОД: ТСО 60. С. 1–63. ИСТОЧНИК: S. Ephraemi Syri commentarii in epistolas divi Pauli nunc primum ex Armenio in Latinum sermonem a patribus Mekitaristis translati.Venetiis, 1893 24 . БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ: § 154 (Commentary on the Letters of Paul). СОВРЕМЕННОЕ ИЗДАНИЕ: – РУКОПИСИ: – СОВРЕМЕННЫЙ ПЕРЕВОД: – ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ: Bundy D. The Pseudo-Ephremian «Commentary on Third Corinthians»: A study in exegesis and anti-bardaisanite polemic//After Bardaisan: Studies on continuity and change in Syriac Christianity in honor of Professor Han J. W. Drijvers/ed. by G. J. Reinink and A. C. Klugkist (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 89). Leuven, 1999. P. 51–63; Hovhanessian V. Armenian manuscripts of the commentaries on the Letters of the Apostle Paul attributed to Saint Ephrem the Syrian//The Harp. 24. 2009. P. 311–327; Klijn A.F.J. A Note on Ephrem’s Commentary on the Pauline Epistles//Journal of Theological Studies 5. 1954. P. 76–78; Molitor J. Der Paulustext des Hl. Ephräm: Aus seinem Armenisch erhaltenen Paulinenkommentar untersucht und rekonstruiert. Rom, 1938 (Monumenta Biblica et Ecclesiastica 4). |
| Paul’s Epistles in the Early Church (Cambridge: University Press, 1967) 26–7. В 1Кор. 15:50 отцы видели нравственное значение. Несомненно, это толкование содержит «истинное и важное понимание». И все же «применяемое слишком автоматически… оно во многих случаях может привести к появлению серьезных искажений понимания (Павла)» (29). 178 On the Resurrection of the Dead, цит. по Nicolas Arseniev, Mysticism and the Eastern Church (Crestwood, N.Y., SVS Press, 1979) 27f; и в Georges Florovsky, “The Gospel of Resurrection ( 1Cor. 15 )”, в Paulus-Hellas-Oikoumene: An Ecumenical Symposium (Athens, 1951) 74. 179 Канон утрени Великой Субботы, стихи на песни 5 и 6, приводятся по Mother Mary and Archimandrite Kallistos Ware, trs. And eds., Lenten Triodion (London: Faber and Faber, 1978) 648f. 180 Georges Florovsky, “On the Tree of the Cross”, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Quarterly 1:3–4 (1953) 19. 181 In Joh., 4, цит. по Emile Mersch, The Whole Christ: The Historical Development of the Doctrine of the Mystical Body in Scripture and Tradition (Milwaukee: Bruce Co., 1938) 339–41. 182 Cerhard Kittel, ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 10 vols. (Grand Rapidas, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1964–1976) 2:532. 183 См. интересное рассуждение и ясно выраженную позицию по этому вопросу в Margaret E. Thrall, I and II Corinthians, Cambridge Biblical Commentary (Cambridge: University Press, 1965) 145ff. Для Павла тело – это не то, что отделяет одного индивида от другого, но скорее является «средством единения с другими». 184 «Это важнейшее богословское убеждение и рассматривается как общий фактор во всех видах христианского существования». Houlden, 62. 185 В Первом и Втором послания к Коринфянам Павел явно не поднимает вопрос о не-христианах, хотя общий суд, который упоминается в 1Кор.15:24 и слл., предположительно включает их. См. Lucien Cerfaux, Christ in the Theology of St. Paul (New York: Herder and Herder, 1959) 51. Общее воскресение может также подразумеваться в воскресении христиан, ибо любая теория миллениума, земного царствования Христа, следующего за парусией, но до конца времен, чужда Павлу и не вписывается в его богословие. |
| Halle, 1984; Bünker M. Briefformular und rhetorische Disposition im 1. Korintherbrief. Gött., 1984; Furnish V. P. 2 Corinthians. Garden City, 1984; idem. Theology in 1 Corinthians//Pauline Theology. Minneapolis, 1993. Vol. 2: 1 and 2 Corinthians/Ed. D. M. Hay. P. 59-89; idem. The Theology of the First Letter to the Corinthians. Camb.; N. Y., 1999; Klauck H.-J. 1. Korintherbrief. Würzburg, 1984; idem. 2. Korintherbrief. Würzburg, 1986; idem. Die antike Briefliteratur und das NT. Paderborn etc., 1998; idem. Die religiöse Umwelt des Urchristentums. Stuttg., 1995. Bd. 1; Kleinknecht K. T. Die leidende Gerechtfertigte. Tüb., 1984; Merklein H. Die Einheitlichkeit des ersten Korintherbriefes//ZNW. 1984. Bd. 75. N 3/4. S. 153-183; idem. Der erste Brief an die Korinther. Gütersloh, 1992. Bd. 1: Kap. 1-4; 2000. Bd. 2: Kap. 5, 1-11, 1; 2005. Bd. 3: Kap. 11, 2-16, 24 (совм. с Gielen M.); Watson F. 2 Cor. X-XIII and Paul " s Painful Letter to the Corinthians//JThSt. 1984. Vol. 35. N 2. P. 324-346; Beatrice P. F. Gli avversari di Paolo e il problema della Gnosi a Corinto//Cristianesimo nella storia. Bologna, 1985. Vol. 6. P. 1-25; Betz H. D. 2 Corinthians 8 and 9: A Commentary on Two Administrative Letters of the Apostle Paul. Phil., 1985; Sänger D. Die δυνατο in 1 Kor 1, 26//ZNW. 1985. Bd. 76. N 3/4. S. 285-291; Schottroff L. «Nicht viele mächtige»: Annäherungen an eine Soziologie des Urchristentums//Bibel und Kirche. Stuttg., 1985. Bd. 40. S. 2-8; Lührmann D. Freundschaftsbrief trotz Spannungen//Studien zum Text und zur Ethik des NT: FS H. Greeven/Hrsg. W. Schrage. B.; N. Y., 1986. S. 298-314; Martin R. P. 2 Corinthians. Waco, 1986; idem. The Opponents of Paul in 2 Corinthians: An Old Issue Revisited//Tradition and Interpretation in the NT: Essays in Honor of E. E. Ellis/Ed. G. F. Hawthorne, O. Betz. Grand Rapids; Tüb., 1987. P. 279-287; Rebell W. Gehorsam und Unabhängigkeit: Eine sozialpsychologische Studie zu Paulus. Münch., 1986; Belleville L. L. Continuity or Discontinuity: A Fresh Look at I Corinthians in the Light of First Century Epistolary Forms and Conventions//EvQ. |
| A. Paul and the Missions from Antioch//Bible Today. Collegeville, 1976. N 83. P. 738-752; Haenchen E. Die Apostelgeschichte. Gött., 197716; Horsley R. A. Wisdom of Word and Words of Wisdom in Corinth//CBQ. 1977. Vol. 39. P. 224-239; idem. Consciousness and Freedom among the Corinthians: 1 Corinthians 8-10//Ibid. 1978. Vol. 40. P. 574-589; idem. How Can Some of You Say that there is no Resurrection of the Dead?: Spiritual Elitism in Corinth//NTIQ. 1978. Vol. 20. N 3. P. 203-231; idem. Rhetoric and Empire and 1 Corinthians//Paul and Politics: Ekklesia, Israel, Imperium, Interpretation: Essays in Honor of K. Stendahl/Ed. R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, 2000. P. 72-102; Malherbe A. J. Ancient Epistolary Theorists//Ohio J. of Religious Studies. Cleveland, 1977. Vol. 5. P. 3-77; Schreiber A. Die Gemeinde in Korinth: Versuch einer gruppendynamischen Betrachtung der Entwicklung der Gemeinde von Korinth auf der Basis des ersten Korintherbriefes. Münster, 1977; Smith D. E. The Egyptian Cults at Corinth//HarvTR. 1977. Vol. 70. N 3/4. P. 201-231; Ellis E. E. Paul and his Opponents// Idem. Prophecy and Hermeneutic. Tüb., 1978. P. 80-115; Lerle E. Praktischer Kommentar zum Ersten Korintherbrief. B., 1978; Marxsen W. Einleitung in das NT: Eine Einführung in ihre Probleme. Gütersloh, 19784; idem. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher. Zürich, 1979; Plummer A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. Edinb., 1978r; Schenke H.-M., Fischer K. M. Einleitung in die Schriften des NT. B., 1978. Bd. 1: Die Briefe des Paulus und Schriften des Paulinismus; Thiselton A. C. Realized Eschatology at Corinth//NTS. 1978. Vol. 24. N 4. P. 510-526; idem. The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand Rapids, 2000; Williams C. K. Corinth 1977: Forum Southwest//Hesperia. 1978. Vol. 47. N 1. P. 1-39; idem. The Refounding of Corinth: Some Roman Religious Attitudes//Roman Architecture in the Greek World/Ed. S. Macready, F. H. Thompson. |
| Most of St Paul " s more general references to the ministry of deacons are to be found in his letters to the church at Corinth. Aside from their practical responsibilities, the deacons who served St Paul seemed to function as mediators and spokespersons for the community. This role continues to be represented today liturgically in the Church insofar as it is the deacon who leads the people in prayer and encourages their response. St Paul also employed deacons as fellow teachers bringing many to faith; and he regarded them as fellow ministers of God who were essential to the fulfilment of his own mission (1 Corinthians 3:5, 2 Corinthians 3:6; 6:4). They appear to have had a special responsibility for financial stewardship and the support of the poor (2 Corinthians 8:4, 2 Corinthians 9:1). This is corroborated by the example of the deacon martyr St Lawrence of Rome and many others who exercised this philanthropy. Using English translations of the New Testament alone it is sometimes difficult to notice and remember that the Greek word St Paul uses in these contexts is διακονοι which perhaps too often is simply rendered as “ministers”, “servants” or “(co-)workers” rather than “deacons”, but it seems to this author the office of the deacon is his more general reference. Of course, it could be the case that diakonia is more usually understood by St Paul in the general sense of the service of those called to a supportive but non-ordained ministry. Historically, this argument has been used by those seeking to limit the female diaconate or others who see no warrant in Scripture or Tradition for constraining such service within an ordained ministry. Chryssavgis on the whole seems to favour an actual diaconal reference in St Paul " s letters; and he may well be correct to (re)interpret in this fashion if only because a rather ill-defined ministry certainly evolved with more specific characteristics into the second and third centuries. St Ignatius certainly saw a deacon " s role in this way, that is, commissioned to a particular representational ministry. |
| 2586 See Hayman, «Monotheism,» though he probably overstates the case for the pervasiveness of dualistic monotheism. Cf. Fauth, «Metatron»; Abrams, «Boundaries»; Alexander, «3 Enoch,» 235. 2587 With Bauckham, God Crucified, 2–4,27–28, who believes Jesus in early Christian texts functions like Wisdom, being within the unique divine identity (26–42). 2588 Pritz, Jewish Christianity, 110; Flusser, Judaism, 620, 624. Barrett, John and Judaism, 48–49, thinks rabbinic teaching on God " s unity reflects some polemic against Christianity. 2590 For detailed argument, see most fully Bauckham, God Crucified, 2–15,26–42; cf. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 35; Wright, Paul, 63–72. 2591 Moore, Judaism, 1:437. Even later Judaism, however, regarded Gentile (as opposed to Jewish) adherence to Trinitarian views as Shittuf (partnership) rather than idolatry (cf. Falk, Jesus, 33–35; Borowitz, Christologies, 32; Berger and Wyschogrod, Jews, 33; Schoeps, Argument, 16–17). 2593 See comment on 1:1–18; further, e.g., Dunn, «John,» 314–16, who finds it pervasive throughout the Gospe1. 2594 Paul modifies Hellenistic (see Nock, Christianity, 34; Koester, Introduction, 1:162; Conzelmann, Corinthians, 145)–both Stoic (Moffatt, Corinthians, 106; Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, 130; Meeks, Christians, 91) and Platonic (cf. Grant, Gods, 48; Horsley, «Formula»)–and Hellenistic Jewish (Lohse, Colossians, 50; cf. Sib. Or. 3.277–278; Grant, Gods, 84–85) language here; his wording probably represents esp. an adaptation of the Shema (Goppelt, Theology, 2:83; Hering, 1Corinthians, 69; Bruce, Corinthians, 80), pervasive use of which is attested early, e.g., the Nash Papyrus (second century B.C.E.); m. Ber. 2:5. 2595 Some have seen elements of an Adam Christology (e.g., Martin, Carmen Christi, 116–18; idem, " Morphë»; Hunter, Predecessors, 43; Johnston, Ephesians, 41; Beare, Philippians, 80; Ridderbos, Paul, 74; Furness, «Hymn»); others have denied it (Glasson, «Notes,» 137–39; Wanamaker, «Philippians»; Bornkamm, Experience, 114) or held that Paul revised an earlier Adam Christology (Barrett, Adam, 71). Regardless of possible allusions to Adam as God " s image (e.g., Philo Creation 69; 4 Ezra 8:44; 9:13; L.A.E. 37:3; 39:3; Apoc. Mos. 10:3; 12:2; 33:5; m. Sanh. 4:5; h. Sanh. 38a, bar.; Gen. Rab. 8:10; Ecc1. Rab. 6:10, §1), Wisdom was God " s image in the ultimate sense (Wis 7:26; Philo Planting 18; Confusion 97; 147; Heir 230; Flight 101; Dreams 1.239; 2.45; Spec. Laws 1.81), which this text distinguishes from the human sense ( Phil 2:7–8 ), especially in presenting Jesus» divinity (cf. Phil 2:10–11 with Isa 45:23). Paul here assumes Christ " s préexistence (Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, 156–68; against Talbert, «Problem»); on other christological hymns stressing Christ " s préexistence, see Martin, Carmen Christi, 19. |
| Manuscript Evidence for Ancient Writings Author Written Earliest Copy Time Span Caesar 100-44 B.C. 900 A.D. 1,000 yrs 427-347 B.C. 900 A.D. 1,200 yrs Thucydides 460-400 B.C. 900 A.D. 1,300 yrs Tacitus 100 A.D. 1100 A.D. 1,000 yrs Suetonius 75-160 A.D. 950 A.D. 800 yrs Homer (Iliad) 900 B.C. 400 B.C. 500 yrs New Testament 40-100 A.D. 125 A.D. 25-50 yrs 24,000 Thousands of early Christian writings and lexionaries (first and second century) cite verses from the New Testament. In fact, it is nearly possible to put together the entire New Testament just from early Christian writings. For example, the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (dated 95 A.D.) cites verses from the Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. The letters of Ignatius (dated 115 A.D.) were written to several churches in Asia Minor and cites verses from Matthew, John, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. These letters indicate that the entire New Testament was written in the first century A.D. In addition, there is internal evidence for a first century date for the writing of the New Testament. The book of Acts ends abruptly with Paul in prison, awaiting trial (Acts 28:30-31 It is likely that Luke wrote Acts during this time, before Paul finally appeared before Nero. This would be about 62-63 A.D., meaning that Acts and Luke were written within thirty years of ministry and death of Jesus. Another internal evidence is that there is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Although Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus " prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation (Matthew 24:1-2 13:1-2 , Luke 21:5-9,20-24,32 no New Testament book refers to this event as having happened. If they had been written after 70 A.D., it is likely that letters written after 70 A.D. would have mentioned the fulfillment of Jesus " prophecy. As stated by Nelson Glueck, former president of the Jewish Theological Seminary in the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, and renowned Jewish archaeologist, " In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written between the forties and eighties of the first century A.D. " |
| 2608 Cf. the parallel construction in 1:25; see Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 233–38; Fahy, «Note»; Cullmann, Christology, 313; Cranfield, Romans, 2:467–68; Longenecker, Christology, 138; Ladd, Theology, 421. Those who dissent, noting that this is not Paul " s usual terminology, nevertheless concur that a doxology to Christ as «God» remains the most likely interpretation of the grammar (Hunter, Romans, 90; idem, Paul, 62–63). 2609 See Lightfoot, Notes, 106; Longenecker, Christology, 138–39; Bultmann, Theology, 1:129; but cf. Bruce, Thessalonians, 156–57. 2610 On Tit 2:13 , see Lock, Epistles, 144–45; Harris, «Deity,» 271; Cullmann, Christology, 313; Longenecker, Christology, 138; Bultmann, Theology, 1:129; cf. also 2Pet 1:1 . Greek-speaking Judaism typically extolled the «great» God (see Tob 13:15; 2Macc 3:36; 3Macc 7:2,23; cf. 1 En. 1:3; Epictetus Diatr. 1.16.16–17), esp. in Sib. Or. (1.165,268,282,316,323; 2.27,219; 3.56,71,91,97,162,194,246, 284, 297, 306, 556–557, 565, 575, 584,656–657,665, 671, 687,698, 702, 717, 735, 740, 773, 781, 784, 818; 4.6,25, 163; 5.176, 405). For the «Granville Sharp Rule» applicable here, see Blass, Debrunner, and Funk, Grammar, 144–45, §276, 228, §442; Dana and Mantey, Grammar, 147. 2611 Nock, Christianity, 32–33; Hengel, Son, 77; Ladd, Theology, 416; Longenecker, Christology, 132; idem, Ministry, 97; Bruce, Acts (English), 74; although this title becomes more prominent in Diaspora usage (cf. Schweizer, Jesus, 72; Bultmann, Theology 1:124; Conzelmann, Theology, 82–83), there is no extant stratum of earliest Christianity that completely excludes it. The supposed connection with the Mysteries (cf. Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 128) is weak (Hengel, Son, 77–78; Sheldon, Mysteries, 87–90). 2612 Hengel, Acts, 105; Longenecker, Christology, 121–24; Fee, Corinthians, 839; Ladd, Criticism, 210. Some regard the original meaning of the term as ambiguous (Simon, Stephen, 66; cf. Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 114–20), but a use in early Christian liturgy (eschatological, eucharistie, or both, e.g., Robinson, Studies, 154–57; idem, Coming, 26–27; Conzelmann, Corinthians, 300–301; Cullmann, Christology, 201–2; Hunter, Paul, 65; cf. Did. 10) would constitute a divine invocation (Fee, Corinthians, 838–39; Ladd, Theology, 341, 416–17; for divine usage elsewhere, cf. Marmorstein, Names, 62–63; Betz, Jesus, 108; Bruce, Paul, 117). |
| 498 Clarence Tucker Craig, «Introduction and Exegesis of I Corinthians», The Interpreter " s Bible, edited by George Arthur Buttrick (New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1953), Volume X, p. 13. Ниже Крейг добавляет, «... было точно установлено, что к первой половине второго столетия сборник посланий Павла активно циркулировал по территории и содержал наше послание...» 499 S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., «I Corinthians», The Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Nashville: Sourthwestern, 1962), p. 1228. 500 Если читателя интересует данная тема, советуем обратиться к восьмому изданию The Apostolic Fathers (Lightfoot), где все цитаты из Писаний выделены курсивом и легко просматриваются. Выше приведенные цифры я позаимствовал из неопубликованного эссе моего студента в университете Кевина Смита («References to Paul by Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement,» April 30, 1992). 501 См. Craig, p. 13; Johnson, pp. 1227–1228; Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, Revised Edition (Downers Grove: Intervasity Press, 19900, pp. 475–459; Merrill C. Tenney, New Testament Survey, Revised Edition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 19610, pp. 295–296; Hunter, Introducing the New Testament, pp. 97, 105. 502 Отметим, что предположение, содержит ли Первое или Второе послание к Коринфянам отрывки из более ранних посланий Павла к этой церкви, является спорным. По данному вопросу см. перечисленные в предыдущей сноске труды. 504 Эти альтернативные теории предлагают взамен буквального Воскресения какие-либо естественные процессы, якобы имевшие место на самом деле. Критики лишь предлагают различные продолжения для фразы: «Иисус не воскрес из мертвых; на самом деле произошло ...» 505 Имея дело с особым скептиком можно пойти еще дальше. Часто я (Хабермас) брал четыре факта из этого списка (1, 5, 6, 12), иногда добавляя пятый факт (3 или 7), чтобы показать убедительность фактов о Воскресении. О фактическом подтверждении каждого из этих пунктов; о том, как эти факты можно, развивая, превратить в очень веские доказательства в пользу Воскресения; а также о мнении более чем тридцати современных специалистов в разных областях, признающих историчность этих фактов, можно узнать из: Gary Habermas and J. P. Moreland, Immortality: The Other Side of Death (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1992), pp. 69–72, 246–247, footnote 69. |
| From failing to follow the eating discipline of fasting we learn how much we are surrounded by food everywhere: at home‚ at work‚ in our cars‚ in front of our TVs even in bed. Through fasting hopefully‚ we’ll be able to start replacing this constant material snacking with spiritual bits that nourish our souls with a much more filling and sustainable food. We can learn to “munch” on a few minutes of the Jesus prayer‚ to get “filled” by the lives of the Saints and “feast” by partaking in the Body of Christ during a Presanctified Divine Liturgy. The heavy schedule of Lenten services puts pressure on our busy schedules and could potentially highlight that we consciously or unconsciously waste a lot of time on frivolous activities. Learning to be better stewards of the time we received from God is a great Lesson of Lent as we become aware that “all things are lawful for me‚ but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me‚ but all things edify not” ( 1 Corinthians 10:2’) and that we should “ walk circumspectly‚ not as fools‚ but as wise‚ redeeming the time‚ because the days are evil.” (Ephesians 5:16-17). We can redeem the time that God has provided for us by participating in the timeless experience of the beautiful opportunities of prayer that are set in front of us during Lent. The heightened work of almsgiving we are called to achieve is yet another eye-opener‚ as we try to be more generous with our treasure and often we find out that‚ looking for the smallest bill in our wallet to hand out to a homeless person‚ May not be what Christ would want us to do. Caring for our fellow man reveals a camaraderie in life and in its unavoidable pain that strengthens our relationship in Christ and brings together His Body by realizing that “whether one member suffer‚ all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured‚ all the members rejoice with it.” (! Corinthians 1’:26) Fasting‚ prayer and almsgiving‚ the three pillars of Lent‚ are great opportunities for self-reflection and action for every Christian that is engaged in his personal growth in Christ. Yes‚ we will stumble and fall through Lent many a time‚ yet‚ by suffering the pain of failing‚ we May learn that every fall is an opportunity to rise “for though the righteous fall seven times‚ they rise again‚ but the wicked stumble when calamity strikes.” (Proverbs 24:16) |
|
|
