| Nikolai did not despise the popular beliefs of Japanese people, but regarded them as a rich ’soil’ full of religious feelings. He made extensive travels throughout Japan, and everywhere encountered archaic folk beliefs of Jizo (a guardian deity of children) and Inari (the fox deity), writing in his travel diary: «Along the way, I met groups of dressed–up pilgrim women. They were dragging themselves, it seemed, to Jizo… On the whole, there is everywhere the desire of the people for pilgrimage. It is remarkable. It is impossible not to bear in mind this desire of the people when you introduce Christianity among them». (June 10, 1881.) American or English Protestant missionaries probably thought much differently of such cherished beliefs of the Japanese people. Of Buddhism, Nikolai wrote, «the teachings of fullness of Buddha’s love, of his readiness to save men at their first appeal, of insufficiency of men’s power for salvation, and of grace (tariki) irresistibly amaze us. It is possible that, listening in a Buddhist temple to some sermon, you will forget yourself and imagine you were listening to a Christian preacher». («Japan from the Viewpoint of Christian Mission», 1869.) Nikolai thought that Japanese people, although they were ’heathens’, were experiencing deep religious feelings and that Christianity could become firmly rooted in such natural religious feelings. This was how Nikolai intended to go about implanting Orthodox beliefs in the minds of Japanese people. He did not want to lure them out of their native religious feelings by Western learning, but attempted to transplant Christianity into the traditional religious ’soil’ of Japan — to infuse Orthodox Christianity into the Japanese spirit. His good knowledge of Japanese religious culture and history must have suggested to him this way of propagating the Gospel. He was convinced that by this method, he could gain an advantage over Protestant and Catholic missionaries in Japan. In general, the Japanese Orthodox Church has had a tendency to put more value upon Japanese traditional formalities than other Christian groups. It may be said that its conservatism has been partly due to Nikolai’s respect for Japanese culture. |
| Минск, 1998; Дом Божий: Три беседы о Церкви. М., 1995, 1998. Минск, Человек перед Богом. М., 1995, 2000; Жизнь. Болезнь. Смерть. М., 1995, 1997. Минск, 1998. Беседы о молитве. СПб., 1996; Воскресные проповеди. Минск, 1996; Начало Евангелия Иисуса Христа, Сына Божия: Беседы на Евангелие от Марка, гл. 1–4. М., 1998; Пути христианской жизни: Беседы. М., 1998. Литература: Наречение и хиротония архим. Антония (Блума)//ЖМП. 1958. 2. С. 10–15; Gibbard М. Twentieth Century Men of Prayer. L., 1974. P. 89–98; Митрополиту Сурожскому Антонию 75 лет//ЖМП. 1989. 11. С. 8–11; Crote G. An Orthodox Visionary: 75th Birthday Profile of Metropolitan Anthony//Church Times. 1989. June 16; Аверинцев С. С. Огонь остается огнем: Вступ. слово к интервью.//Звезда. 1991. 1; Он же. По ту сторону «традиционализма» и «либерализма»: О новых публикациях бесед и проповедей митр. Антония (Блума)//Континент. 1996. 87. С. 286–291; Кырлежев А. Митр. Антоний Сурожский – «заезжий православный миссионер» в России//Там же. 1994. 82. С. 220–236; Он же. Митрополит Сурожский Антоний //Итоги. 1996. Архиепископ Серафим (Соболев) Русская идеология Печатается по: Русская идеология. София, 1939 (репринт: Джорданвилл, 1981). Глава VI. Публикуемый текст выпадает из хронологической схемы настоящей антологии. Написанный в 1939 г., по техническим причинам он оказался в книге последним. В этом можно видеть и намерение составителя привлечь к тексту особое внимание. Владыка Серафим сегодня является одним из главных авторитетов для тех православных людей, которые опасаются каких-либо проявлений православного творчества в богословии, в межконфессиональных отношениях, в календарной системе, в обновлении языка и т. п. Архиепископ Серафим (в миру Соболев Николай Борисович; 1881–1950) – епископ Православной Российской Церкви (рукоположен в Симферополе 1 октября 1920 г. во епископа Лубенского, викария Полтавской епархии), затем Русской Православной Церкви за границей и с 1945 г. – Русской Православной Церкви (Московский Патриархат). |
| Pan-Orthodox Music Symposium Announced for June 2016 Minneapolis, MN – The International Society for Orthodox Church Music (www.isocm.com) will host a pan-Orthodox music symposium at St Mary’s Orthodox Cathedral from Wednesday, June 22 through Sunday, June 26, 2016. The event will include presentations and workshops, music reading sessions, rehearsals, and will culminate in a festive hierarchical All-Night Vigil and Divine Liturgy. The event will also feature a special concert by the critically-acclaimed vocal ensemble Cappella Romana. According to Archpriest Ivan Moody , ISOCM’s board chairman, the aim of this symposium is to bring together people involved in all aspects of music-making in the Orthodox Church – chanters, choir singers, composers, conductors and musicologists. Father Ivan said, “An event like this reinforces the idea that we can all learn from each other and together enrich the worship of the Church.” Father Ivan will present the keynote address on the symposium’s theme of “ Orthodox Liturgical Music: Finding Beauty and Prayer in the English-Speaking World ” on Saturday, June 25 during a session which will be open to the general public. Organizers hope the theme will inspire participants to reflect on their role and responsibility in creating a liturgical experience which engages the faithful in the liturgical life of the church. “Church musicians assist the clergy in leading the divine services,” said Dr. Kurt Sander, one of the organizers for the Minneapolis symposium, “It is incumbent upon us as directors, singers, and chanters to cultivate an impression of profound beauty within the liturgical act.” Dr. Sander was also instrumental in organizing the very successful pan-Orthodox music symposium held in Cincinnati in June 2014. As at that event, attendees in Minneapolis will have the opportunity to participate in daily choir rehearsals in preparation for the Hierarchical All-Night Vigil and Divine Liturgy which will take place on Saturday, June 25 and Sunday, June 26, 2016 respectively. |
| The two latest tablets from the reign of LabashiMarduk: Month/day/year: Tablet no.: III/11/acc. (=June 19) YBC 3817 III/12/acc. (=June 20 Evetts, Lab. No.1 (PD p.3) The two earliest tablets from the reign of Nabonidus: Month/day/year: Tablet no.: II/15/acc. (=May 25) Clay 1908, 39 (=BE VIII, 39) 111/18/acc. (=June 26) Strassm. 1889, 1 (=Nbn 1) At first glance these tablets seem to show an overlap of 26 days between the two reigns. But a closer examination of the texts shows that this is not tire case if the provenance of the tablets is taken into consideration. The Uruk king list credits LabashiMarduk with a reign of only three months, which is confirmed by the contemporary contract tablets, which are dated only to (parts of) months I, II, and III. According to Berossus he was plotted against and killed because of his wicked behaviour. The rebellion broke out almost immediately after his accession, evidently before he had gained control over the whole kingdom. This conclusion is supported by the fact that the tablets dated to his reign come from only four places: Babylon, Uruk, Sippar, and (one tablet) Borsippa. The earliest tablet dated to Nabonidus is from Nippur. No tablets dated to LabashiMarduk are from that city. And the latest tablets dated to him from Babylon, Uruk, Sippar, and Borsippa are all earlier than the earliest tablets from these cities dated to Nabonidus. Thus there are no overlaps between the two kings at any of these places. Professor Wolfgang Rbllig concludes: “Both, then, have ruled, or laid claim to the throne, at the same time, although at different places.” – W. Rollig in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie, Band 6 (Berlin and New York, 1980), p. 409. Emphasis added. (Cf. also GTR4, pp. 327, 328) This is shown in the following table: Nippur Babylon Sippar Borsippa Labashi Marduk, latest tablets II/22/acc. (=June 1) III/11/acc. (=June 19) III/12/acc. (=June 20) II/26/acc. (=June 5) Nabonidus, earliest tablets 11/15/acc. (=May 25) |
| On the evening of 08 June 1916, Metropolitan Makary opened the coffin containing the incorrupt body of Metropolitan John of Tobolsk. The body was washed, and clothed in new episcopal vestments. The body was then placed in a silver reliquary shrine, which was put into a new cypress sarcophagus. Both reliquary and sarcophagus had been purchased with donations from the faithful in Moscow and Tobolsk. During the Vigil on the evening of 09 June, there was a procession around the Cathedral, which stopped four times, at each stop “Eternal Memory” was sung in honor of Metropolitan John of Tobolsk. The Vigil and the Liturgy the next morning were concelebrated by the thirteen hierarchs, and many archpriests and priests. On the day of the Glorification, 10 June, which was the anniversary of the repose of Saint John of Tobolsk and was to become the day the Holy Church commemorates his memory, the sarcophagus was opened, and after the procession, was placed on the Cathedral square, for the veneration of the more than fifty thousand pilgrims who attended. After the ceremonies at the Cathedral, a procession was undertaken throughout the entire city of Tobolsk, with wonder-working icons of the Savior and the Mother of God. Stopping at the Annunciation Square, the Hierarchs and clergy read the Akathist to the Savior. Accompanied by a huge throng of pilgrims such as had never been seen before in Tobolsk, the procession returned to the Cathedral at 5 p.m.in the afternoon. On 11 June, the sarcophagus was placed inside the Cathedral, and, after the Liturgy, the Holy Synod’s Act of Glorification was read. Many telegrams were received in Tobolsk, expressing regret at not being able to attend the Glorification – from Tsar Nicholas II, the Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, the Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, the Archbishop of Chernigov, and many other hierarchs. It is not difficult to understand that such an event as the Glorification of Saint John of Tobolsk would have a profound effect on anyone – but perhaps even moreso a young monk zealous for the Orthodox Faith. – 21] |
| 96 Paunesku, T., Stojicevic, N., Vogt, S., Maser, J., Lai, B., Rajh, T., Thurnauer, M. and Woloschak, G. Intracellular Localization of Titanium Dioxide-Biomolecule Nanocomposites. Journal de Physique IV France, 104: 317-319, 2003. Paunesku, T., Stojicevic, N., Vogt, S., Maser, J., Lai, B., Rajh, T., Thurnauer, M. and Woloschak, G. Intracellular Localization of Titanium Dioxide-Biomolecule Nanocomposites. Journal de Physique IV France, 104: 317-319, 2003. 97 Woloschak, G. The New Biology and Its Impact in Biomedical Strategies Against HIV/AIDS. Zygon (June, 2004) 39(2): 477-486. Woloschak, G. The New Biology and Its Impact in Biomedical Strategies Against HIV/AIDS. Zygon (June, 2004) 39(2): 477-486. 98 Paunesku, T., Rajh, T., Wiederrecht, G., Maser, J., Vogt, S., Stojicevic, N., Protic, M., Lai, B., Oryhon, J., Thurnauer, M. C., and Woloschak, G. E. Biology of TiO2-olignucleotide nanocomposites. Nature Materials (May 2003) 2:343-346, published on-line 13 April 2003. Paunesku, T., Rajh, T., Wiederrecht, G., Maser, J., Vogt, S., Stojicevic, N., Protic, M., Lai, B., Oryhon, J., Thurnauer, M. C., and Woloschak, G. E. Biology of TiO2-olignucleotide nanocomposites. Nature Materials (May 2003) 2:343-346, published on-line 13 April 2003. 99 Lai, B., Paunesku, T., Vogt, S., Maser, J., and Woloschak, G. E. Second Workshop on the Biological Applications of Microbeams. International Journal of Radiation Biology (June 2004) 80 (6): 459-461. Lai, B., Paunesku, T., Vogt, S., Maser, J., and Woloschak, G. E. Second Workshop on the Biological Applications of Microbeams. International Journal of Radiation Biology (June 2004) 80 (6): 459-461. 100 Textbook: Radiation Toxicity edited by William Small and Gayle E. Woloschak, Kluwer Academic Press, 2006. Textbook: Radiation Toxicity edited by William Small and Gayle E. Woloschak, Kluwer Academic Press, 2006. 101 Engleman, Mark A., Woloschak, Gayle, and Small, William Jr. Radiation Induced Skeletal Injury. Radiation Toxicity, Ed: William Small, Jr. and Gayle E. Woloschak, Kluwer Academic Press, 2006. Engleman, Mark A., Woloschak, Gayle, and Small, William Jr. Radiation Induced Skeletal Injury. Radiation Toxicity, Ed: William Small, Jr. and Gayle E. Woloschak, Kluwer Academic Press, 2006. |
| 4. “Orthodox Insights into the Book of Revelation” by Mary Ford, Ph.D., Associate Professor of New Testament at Saint Tikhon’s Seminary – Wednesday afternoon, June 18, at 1:00 p.m. This lecture will focus on explaining and giving a correct interpretation for three of the most commonly misinterpreted aspects of the Revelation of Saint John—the book’s primary purpose, the Antichrist and 666, and the “rapture.” The presentation also will demonstrate what an inspiring, encouraging book Revelation actually is. 5. “Encouraging People to Seek Help from the Saints in Times of Suffering” by David Ford, Ph.D., Professor of Church History at Saint Tikhon’s Seminary – Thursday, June 19, at 9:00 a.m. This presentation will emphasize the importance for all Orthodox Christians of the Saints – through their examples, prayers, and ongoing presence in our midst – in helping us to bear sufferings, sorrow, and persecution with magnanimity and graciousness. Special attention will be given to Saints Polycarp of Smyrna, Timothy and Maura, John Chrysostom, Photios the Great, Tikhon of Zadonsk, Stephen and Angelina Brankovich, and Silouan of Mt. Athos. 6. “Clergy Health – Achieving the Proper Balance” by Archpriest Steven Voytovich, D.Min., Dean and Associate Professor of Pastoral Arts and Practice at Saint Tikhon’s Seminary – Thursday, June 19, at 1:00 p.m. “Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another; love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous.” (I Peter 3:8). Pastoral care for our faithful is greatly impacted by the depth of our own spiritual journey as it relates to manifesting compassion and love. This course will explore pastoral compassion and love as renewable and precious resources that need to be carefully tended in our own life and within our family, in order that those resources may be available to the persons to whom we are called to minister. All courses are available for Clergy Continuing Education credit, as approved by Archpriest Ian Pac-Urar. The cost, which includes lecture registration, room and board, is per person. |
| At the same time, the Synod took notice of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church Holy Synod’s decision of June 1, 2016, on the need to postpone the Great and Holy Council of the Orthodox Church set for June 18-26 and the Bulgarian Church’s refusal to participate in it if it is not postponed. In this connection, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church noted that the non-participation of even one of the universally recognized autocephalous Orthodox Churches in the Council ‘constitutes an unsurmountable obstacle for holding a Holy and Great Council’. These circumstances, as well as the concurrent ‘uncertainty as to the possibility for the Patriarchate of Antioch to attend the Holy and Great Council, just as the absence of a preliminary consensus on the Council’s Working Procedure and the document on ‘The Sacrament of Marriage and Impediments to It’ compelled the Holy Synod to recognize the need for urgent pan-Orthodox actions and to propose that His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople convene no later than the 10th of June an extraordinary Pan-Orthodox Pre-Council Conference to consider the situation and search for a way out of the existing extraordinary situation so that as a result of this conference the Orthodox Church could make a judgement as to the possibility for holding the Pan-Orthodox Council at the planned date. By the decision of the Holy Synod, this proposal was immediately sent to His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople and to all the Primates of Local Orthodox Churches. In His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew’s reply (Letter No. 676 of June 9, 2016) it is stated that the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Constantinople ‘deems a new extraordinary pan-Orthodox pre-Council conference impossible since there is no normative basis for it, while very few days have remained till the beginning of the work of the Holy and Great Council’. As for ‘the concerns of some fraternal Churches and the absence of clarity as to the possibility for them to participate in the Council’, the Primate of the Church of Constantinople expressed the confidence that ‘the efforts made to remove arising obstacles will be crowned with success, and all the Churches without exception will take part in the Holy and Great Council. Whereas its postponement or breakdown at the twelfth hour after decades of preparations’ will compromise our Orthodox Church at the inter-church and international level and inflict an irreparable damage on her authority’. |
| It may be easily accounted for, however, by the circumstances that brought Nabonidus to the throne. As explained by Berossus, LabashiMarduk was “only a child” at the time of Neriglissar’s death. “Because his wickedness became apparent in many ways he was plotted against and brutally killed by his friends. After he had been killed, the plotters met and joindy conferred the kingdom on Nabonnedus [Nabonidus], a Babylonian and a member of the conspiracy:” 531 the Hillahstele. where Nabonidus gives a similar description of LabashiMarduk’s character and of his own enthronement. 532 The evidence is that the rebellion that brought Nabonidus to power broke out almost immediately after LabashiMarduk’s accession, and that both of them ruled simultaneously for a few weeks, but at different places. It should be noted that all tablets known from the reign of LabashiMarduk are from three cities only, Babylon, Uruk, and Sippar, and that there was no overlap between the two reigns at any of these cities: Nippur Babylon Sippar LabashiMarduk, latest tablet: June 19 June 20 Nabonidus, earliest tablet: July 14? June 26 Dr. PaulAlain Beaulieu discusses the available data at some length, concluding that, “In consideration of all this evidence the usual reconstruction of Nabonidus’ accession seems correct. He was probably recognized as king as early as May 25 in central Babylonia (Babylon and Nippur), but outlaying regions would have recognized LabashiMarduk until the end of June.” 533 Thus, there is a wellfounded explanation for the brief overlap between the reigns of LabashiMarduk and Nabonidus. The accession of the young and – at least in some influential circles – unpopular LabashiMarduk caused a rebellion and Nabonidus, strongly supported by leading strata in Babylonia, seized power and established a rival kingship. For a brief period there was a double kingship, although in different parts of the kingdom, until LabashiMarduk finally was murdered and Nabonidus could be officially crowned as king. |
| 1880. Вып. 1-5. 1880-1883. 71. Поездка в Румынию архимандрита Антонина Капустина (библиографическая заметка)//Новое время. 1880. 1482. 72. Несколько страниц из хроники южнорусской епархиальной жизни в прошлом (XVIII веке)//РДСП. 1880. 30, 32—34, 37, 41. 73. Несколько страниц из хроники Киевской епархии XVIII и нач. XIX вв.//КЕВ. 1880. 5, 6, 10, 11. 74. Указатель Церковно-археологического музея при Киевской духовной академии. Киев, 1880. 75. Значение Пушкина в украинской литературе (речь)//Киевлянин. 1880. 1. 76. Миниатюры и заставки в греческом Евангелии XI—XII вв. и отношение их к мозаическим и фресковым изображениям в Киево-Софийском соборе//ТКДА. 1881. 5. 77. Японская коллекция в Церковно-археологическом музее//КЕВ. 1881. 12. 78. О степени самобытности украинской литературы XIX века//Киевлянин. 1881. 38, 39, 44, 52, 63, 64, 69, 89. 79. Дополнение к " Святительским песням " Лескова//Исторический вестник. 1881. 6. 80. Раскол и единоверие в царствование императора Николая I//РДСП. 1881. 30, 34, 36-38, 40, 42. 81. Раскол и единоверие с царствования Екатерины II до царствования Николая I//ТКДА. 1881. 8, 9. 82. V археологический съезд в Тифлисе//Московские ведомости. 1881. 259, 260, 262, 267, 271, 274, 276, 282. 83. Рукописная " четья " 1397 года западнорусского происхождения//Русский филологический вестник. 1881. 3. 84. Раскольничьи дела четверть века тому назад//Русский вестник. 1881. 12. 85. Материалы для истории Южной и Западной России в епархиальных ведомостях за прошлый (1881) год//Юг. Одесса. 1882. 2. 86. Поездка на V археологический съезд в Тифлис//ТКДА. 1882. 2. 87. Преосвященный Филарет Рижский как первый председатель Церковно-археологического общества. Киев, 1882. 88. Записка о состоянии Церковно-археологического общества при Киевской духовной академии за первое десятилетие его существования//ТКДА. |
|
|
