| 390 – a personal comment in the notes section by Bishop Jevtic. Jevtic edited the book and compiled and collected all the notes. Popovic, Justin. “Na Bogocovecanskom putu” p. 390 Popovic, Justin. “Na Bogocovecanskom putu” p. 390 Popovic, Justin. “Na Bogocovecanskom putu” p. 390 Popovic, Justin. “Na Bogocovecanskom putu” p. 391 Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia Bishop Irenaeus (Bulovic), “Сербска яЦерковь и экуменизм”, Церковь и время ( 1998): p. 61-62 (in Russian) Velimirovic, Nikolai. ”Agony of the Church” Popovic, Justin. “Na Bogocovecanskom putu” p. 7 – Translated from Serbian. Подпишитесь на рассылку Православие.Ru Рассылка выходит два раза в неделю: Предыдущий Следующий Смотри также Unity, the One Cup and the Fire of God Fr. Stephen Freeman Unity, the One Cup and the Fire of God Fr. Stephen Freeman Ecumenism is back in the news and with it comes a deluge of misunderstanding and theological confusion. St. Nikolai Velimirovic and St. Justin Popovic on Ecumenism Julija Vidovic St. Nikolai Velimirovic and St. Justin Popovic on Ecumenism Julija Vidovic The term “ecumenism” has become charged with such emotions both negative and positive, depending on which side of the ecumenist dialogue you stand. The connotations range from politically correct to heresy. Author Julija Vidovic investigates ecumenism from the point of view of two great theological luminaries of the Orthodox Church in recent times, St. Nikolai Velimirovic and St. Jutin Popovic. Saint Hilarion (Troitsky). The Unity of the Church and the World Conference of Christian Communities Saint Hilarion (Troitsky). The Unity of the Church and the World Conference of Christian Communities This brilliant defense of traditional Orthodox ecclesiology by the Holy New-Martyr Archbishop Hilarion — who received a martyr " s crown on December 15th, 1929 —, does not seem to be well known, probably owing to its limited publication decades ago by a small monastery press in Canada. Комментарии Julia Cole 20 декабря 2016, 14:00 St Justin was not an ecumenist. |
| Bammel, «Trial» Bammel, Ernst. «The Trial before Pilate.» Pages 415–51 in Jesus and the Politics of His Day. Edited by Ernst Bammel and C. F. D. Moule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Bampfylde, «Light» Bampfylde, Gillian. «More Light on John XII 34.» JSNT 17 (1983): 87–89. Bampfylde, «Prince» Bampfylde, Gillian. «The Prince of the Host in the Book of Daniel and the Dead Sea Scrolls.» JSJ 14 (1983): 129–34. Bandstra, «Errorists» Bandstra, Andrew J. «Did the Colossian Errorists Need a Mediator?» Pages 329–343 in New Dimensions in New Testament Study. Edited by Richard N. Longenecker and Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974. Banks, Community Banks, Robert. Paul " s Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their Historical Setting. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980. Barag, «Castle» Barag, Dan. «King Herod " s Royal Castle at Samaria-Sebaste.» PEQ125 (1993): 3–18. Barc, «Taille» Bare, B. «La taille cosmique d " Adam sans la littérature juive rabbinique des trois premiers siècles après J.-C.» RevScRel 49 (1975): 173–85. Barclay, «Man» Barclay, William. «The One, New Man.» Pages 73–81 in Unity and Diversity in New Testament Theology: Essays in Honor of George E. Ladd. Edited by Robert A. Guelich. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978. Barclay, «Themes» Barclay, William. «Great Themes of the New Testament, II: lohn i.1–14.» ExpTim 70 (1958–1959): 78–82, 114–17. Bardtke, «Erwägungen» Bardtke, Hans. «Einige Erwägungen zum Problem «Qumran und Karaismus.»» Henoch 10 (1988): 259–75. Barkhuizen, «Lazarus» Barkhuizen, J. H. «Lazarus of Bethany–Suspended Animation or Final Death? Some Aspects of Patristic and Modern Exegesis.» Hervormde Teologiese Studies 51 (1995): 167–74. Barnard, «Judaism» Barnard, L. W. «The Old Testament and Judaism in the Writings of Justin Martyr.» VT14 (1964): 395–406. Barnard, Justin Barnard, L. W. Justin Martyr: His Life and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967. Barnard, «Logos Theology» Barnard, L. W. «The Logos Theology of St Justin Martyr.» DRev 89 (1971): 132–41. |
| P., 1987; Marcovich M., ed. Apologiae pro Christianis. B.; N. Y., 1994, 2005r; idem. Dialogus cum Tryphone. B.; N. Y., 1997, 2005r; Munier Ch., ed. Apologie pour les chrétiens. Fribourg, 1995. (Paradosis; 39). P., 20062. (SC; 507); Bobichon Ph., ed. Dialogue avec Tryphon: Édition critique, trad., comment. Fribourg, 2003. 2 vol.; рус. пер.: Преображенский П.А., прот. Памятники древнехристианской письменности в русском переводе. Т. 3-4. М., 1862-1863. (1864; 1891-1892; 1895; 1995 [репр. изд. 1891-1892 гг. под назв.: Св. Иустин - Философ и Муеник: Творения]) Библиогр.: СДХА. С. 765-770; Wartelle A. Bibliographie historique et critique de St. Justin, Philosophe et Martyr, et des Apologistes grecs du IIe siècle, 1494-1994, avec un supplément (1995-1998). P., 2001. Лит.: Хитров М. И. Св. Иустин философ-мученик и его время//Странник. 1877. 11. C. 153-169; 12. С. 265-291; 1878. 1. С. 3-22 (отд. отт.: СПб., 1878); Harnack A., von. Die Altercatio Simonis Iudaei et Theophili Christiani. Lpz., 1883. S. 75 ff. (TU; 1/3); Муретов М. Д. Философия Филона Александрийского в отношении к учению Иоанна Богослова о Логосе. М., 1885; Сергиевский А. Отношение первого христ. философа к языческой философии//ВиР. 1885. Отд. филос. Т. 2. Ч. 1. 9. С. 413-429; 10. С. 466-484; Zahn T. Studien zu Justinus Martyr//ZKG. 1886. Bd. 8. S. 1-84; Т[ареев] М. [И.] Вероучение св. Иустина мученика в его отношении к языческой философии//ВиР. 1893. Отд. филос. Т. 2. Ч. 2. 15. С. 112-140; 16. С. 141-167; 17. С. 218-236; De Faye E. De l " influence du Timée de Platon sur la théologie de Justin Martyr//Études de crytique et d " histoire. P., 1896. P. 169-187. (BEHER; 7); Гусев Д. В. Св. Иустин, философ и мученик//ПС. 1898. 5. Прил. С. 1-64; Hubik K. Die Apologien des hl. Justinus des Philosophen und Märtyrers. W., 1912; Goodenough E. R. The Theology of Justin Martyr: An Investigation into the Conception of Early Christian Literature and its Hellenistic and Judaistic Influences. Jena, 1923. Amst., 1968r; Keseling P. |
| Theophilus of Antioch quotes the Gospel and attributes it to John by 181 C.E. (Theophilus 2.22); Tatian, Claudius Apollinaris, and Athenagoras had earlier used it as an authoritative source. 797 2B. Second-Century Orthodoxy and the Fourth Gospel It is not likely that such an important work as the Fourth Gospel circulated anonymously; while it does not explicitly identify its own author, the recipients seem to have known the identity of at least the beloved disciple (21:23–24). In a much earlier period, travelers regularly networked the Pauline churches (e.g., 1Cor 1:11; 11:16; 14:33; 16:12,19 ; 2Cor 9:2 ), and any Pauline scholar approaching Gospels research will be astounded at the lack of networking that Gospels scholars sometimes assume among the early churches. Pauline scholars in this case work with a much more solid base of explicit data than Gospels scholars do (see our comments on networking of early churches in our discussion of John and the Synoptics in ch. 1 of our introduction). Earliest Christian tradition seems to have exercised some ambivalence toward this Gospel, however; it is not recognized in the Roman fathers until the late second century. 798 Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, neglects this Gospel in his epistles although the focused ethical material of Q and Paul was undoubtedly more useful for his largely hortatory purpose. 799 Although allusions to Johannine language probably appear in the early second century (especially in Polycarp), our earliest complete «orthodox» citation is from Justin Martyr in the mid-second century, 800 but since he cites the Fourth Gospel (3:3) only once (in contrast to his Synoptic citations), it is possible that he cites instead an agraphon from pre-Johannine tradition or a subsequent tradition based on John. Osborne notes that the statement could derive from a baptismal liturgy, but counters that there are «many [other] coincidences of thought and expression» between John and Justin that suggest the latter " s knowledge of the former; 801 some other scholars concur. 802 Some suspect that Justin knows the Gospel but argue that he does not cite it like the Synoptics or regard it as among the memoirs of the apostles. 803 Clearly, early Christians cited some gospels (especially Matthew) more than others (such as Mark), but such preferences do not necessarily connote disapproval of the works they cite less. 804 Further, Justin, like most other of the earliest Christian authors, does not name the authors of the Synoptics any more than he cites the Fourth Gospel directly. But the argument is one of probability, and the support it adds to our case is helpful but limited. 805 Justin does not name his source, and use of the Fourth Gospel does not identify its author. |
| In accordance with Orthodox tradition, Fr. Justin allocates the rich hagiographic material of the liturgical year according to the indiction. Each volume (for September, October, etc.) contains the lives of saints commemorated in the given month. Each life of a saint commemorated on the same day is given a special chapter. In addition, wherever space permits, a photograph is included of an Orthodox church or monastery named after the saint. The entire twelve-volume edition contains images of more than two hundred Orthodox churches that vividly demonstrate the characteristic features of the church architecture of Orthodox peoples from Alaska to Korea and Japan, and from Africa to India. The life of each saint is normally accompanied by photographs of ancient and modern icons of the saint. At the end of each volume there is an alphabetic index of the names of the saints whose lives are included in that volume. Fr. Justin was hoping to publish a thirteenth and final volume dedicated to the Paschal cycle, that is, to the Lenten Triodion and Pentecostarion. Simultaneously with the publication of The Lives of Saints, the lives of the most revered Serbian saints were published in separate editions. The publication of The Lives of Saints aroused great interest within the Serbian church community, especially among teachers of Serbian Church history in theological schools. These books are being currently used as textbooks for students in these schools. Abundant information on church history, hagiography, patristics, dogmatics – as well as canonical, pastoral, liturgical, and homiletic materials – is collected in the 8,300 pages of The Lives of Saints. Archimandrite Justin managed to make the Synaxarion not only a narrative text and an academic work, but also a work expressing deep theological authority. The edition soon became a bibliographic rarity. The value of Fr. Justin’s hagiological work is priceless for the Serbian Church. The lives of the Serbian saints contain the history of the Serbian Church and the Serbian state. The holy Nemanji dynasty – beginning with its holy forefather Simeon, founder of the Hilandar monastery on Athos, and his son St. Sava, the first Archbishop of Serbia, and ending with its final descendant, the Martyr Uroš – united crown and Cross, uniting the ecclesiastical and state history of the Serbs. Of invaluable help in theological education are the lives of other, non-Serbian saints, as well as the many quotations from the theological works of the Fathers, teachers, and holy ascetics of the Church published in this first complete Serbian Synaxarion. |
| John Anthony McGuckin Parousia MATTHEW J. PEREIRA The Greek term parousia, within the context of the New Testament, denotes the “presence” or “arrival” of Jesus Christ at the Eschaton (Matt. 24.3; 1Cor. 15.23 ). Early Christian expectations of apocalyptic salvation were foreshadowed in Palestinian literature, as can be seen by reference to the Old Testament pseudepigrapha and the Qumran texts (Russell 1964). The early church’s sense of the delay of the glorious return of Christ in judgment ( Jn. 21.21–23 ) provided Christians the opportunity to rearticulate the Parousia in a manner that reflected their own theological concerns, which were shaped within specific social and ecclesial settings (Aune 1975). Beyond exclusively focusing on the “last days,” patristic theologians extensively interpreted the Parousia as a present spiritual reality, part of the resurrection mystery, which pointed towards a future hope. In the early church the Parousia denoted a wide range of spiritual realities, such as the nearness of the gospel, the day of resurrection, Christ’s healing ministry, judgment, and accommodation to humanity. In his Letter to the Philadelphians Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 35-ca. 98/117) proclaimed that the gospel possesses the transcendent “appearance” of our Lord Jesus Christ, his passion and resurrection ( Phil. 9.2 ). Justin Martyr (ca. 100–165) interprets the Parousia as Christ’s power, whereby the Lord resurrects the dead and heals the sick upon his arrival. In his Dialogue with Trypho Justin Martyr also interpreted the deluge as a Christ-event; Noah and his family totaled eight people and thus allegorically represented the eighth day, which is when Christ “appeared” (had his Parousia) and rose from the dead (Dial. 88.2). Further, in his First Apology, Justin parallels the prophecy of Isaiah with Christ’s healing presence; it is at the Lord’s “coming” that the “lame shall leap ... the lepers be cleansed, and the dead shall rise” (I Apol. 48.2). In the Stromateis Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150–215) argues that the “advent” of the Savior will divide the believers from the disobedient (Strom. 1.18). The Lord’s arrival clearly reveals the spiritual state of each person, and thus ensures there will be only just judgment. Further, Clement teaches God has no natural relation with humanity, yet the Lord “accommodated” himself to our weakness (Strom. 2.16). In brief, Christian theologians in the first three centuries interpreted the Parousia as a fundamental christological event associated with Christ’s resurrection power, healing, judgment, and nearness to redeemed humanity. |
| John Anthony McGuckin Heresy JUSTIN M. LASSER The term “heresy” derives from the Greek term hairesis, which, in classical usage, typically meant “a diversity of opinion.” This usage was common within preChristian Hellenistic schools but acquired a new usage in the Christian era. In the Hellenistic schools a thesis or question would be offered and students or disciples would offer their opinions on the matter. In the case of a resulting diversity of opinion the matter would remain unresolved in a state of hairesis. In the classical schools the matter would be followed by extended debate and varying conclusions. In this usage “heresy” was the beginning of fruitful debate. On occasion these “heresies” would consolidate into cohesive “schools of thought.” These schools of thought are exhibited most clearly in the various ancient philosophical schools (i.e., the Epicureans, the Platonists, the Stoics, etc.). Though the schools had many disagreements they rarely “condemned” each other – they merely maintained different opinions. This classical usage of the term “heresy” was expanded in the Christian era. Whereas theologians such as Origen and Clement of Alexandria tended to view heresies as diverse schools of thought, other theologians, such as Irenaeus of Lyons and Justin Martyr, actively sought to characterize these diverse opinions or novelties as “corruptions” ofthe simple truth of the Christian faith handed down by the apostles. This move by the early heresiologists was not made out of vain intentions, but rested upon the belief that the Christian truth they were taught was not created but revealed and discovered. In this sense, Christian truth was not viewed as the result of theological speculation but as the recording and preserving of revealed truth. The simplicity and communicability of Christian truth was most important to the apologists such as St. Irenaeus and St. Justin, and became a paradigm for influential theologians such as St. Athanasius. It was a view that was first laid down in the Catholic epistles of the New Testament (see the letters of John, for example) which defined “those that had come out from among us” (heretical dissidents) as never having really belonged in the first place. |
| The problem of faith and knowledge was touched upon in one way or another by most of the Patristic writers. One outstanding contribution to this problem, however, changed all future church reactions to Hellenistic philosophy, to its methods of reasoning, and, as a result, to the natural sciences and nature itself. This influential force was the work of the great teacher Clement of Alexandria (d. ca. 211 – 215). Before considering his approach, however, it will help to consider what was said by other Christian thinkers before him. The Apologists and the Greek Religious Philosophy It is probably impossible to point to a definite moment in history when the “dialogue” between Greek religious philosophy and the Christian teaching began. In a sense, it is already present in St. Paul. In any case, Christian thinkers were not the first to enter such a dialogue, for the use of Greek ideas and categories for the interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures had begun well before Christianity appeared. The Bible used by the early church was in fact a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint. Philo of Alexandria (ca. 20 b.c. – a.d. 50) prepared the way for the future encounter of the Christian Church with Greek philosophical thought through his exegesis of the Greek Scriptures. The Christian Apologists, however, entered the dialogue with Greek philosophy in a rather instinctive, unsystematic fashion by appropriating certain intellectual resources of Hellenistic culture. Historians locate this starting point in the second half of the second century. In fact, the Apologists’ approach to Greek philosophy might be described as somewhat paradoxical. On the one hand, they accepted Greek ideas; on the other, they admitted a certain hostility to them. The writings of Justin Martyr illustrate this point very well. Justin allowed that Greek philosophy contained undeniable truths and valuable insights, but at the same time he claimed that traditional philosophy was full of errors and distortions when compared with Scripture. Following Philo, Justin argued that the Greeks had actually borrowed some of their ideas from the Scriptures, which had been revealed to Moses before the Greeks had had a chance to develop their philosophy. He claimed, for example, that Plato’s doctrine of creation, as formulated in the Timaeus, was borrowed from the account in Gen. 1 : l – 3. 34 |
| 198 Hengel states that the use of any apocryphal Gospel in Justin’s works ‘cannot be demonstrated convincingly’ (Martin Hengel, The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Collection and Origin of the Canonical Gospels (Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 2000), 20); Stanton likewise thinks, ‘there is no clear evidence for Justin’s knowledge of any gospels other than the canonical four’ (Stanton, ‘Fourfold Gospel’, 330 – 1). 200 Skarsaune, ‘Justin and his Bible’, 184, n. 63. Skarsaune cites for this view also P. Henne and D. Vigne. 201 Paul Foster, ‘The Relationship between the Writings of Justin Martyr and the So-called Gospel of Peter’, Justin Martyr and His Worlds, 104 – 12 at 112. 202 Tjitze Baarda, ‘Διαωνα – Συμωνα, Factors in the Harmonization of the Gospels Especially in the Diatessaron of Tatian’, Essays on the Diatessaron (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1994), 29 – 47, at 35. Andrew Gregory, ‘Jewish Christian Gospels’, in Paul Foster (ed.), The Non-canonical Gospels (London: T. & T. Clark, 2008), 54 – 67, at 61, says Epiphanius’ excerpts of the Gospel of the Ebionites ‘appear to contain material that depends on at least Matthew and Luke’ and ‘the presence of material that comes from Luke strongly suggests that this gospel may be better thought of as a gospel harmony rather than as a version of Matthew’ (p. 62). 203 For example, Bart Ehrman, Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003) , 141 – 2; 175, 238. 204 It is probably to this very notice that Eusebius had reference when he said elsewhere that he knew that Clement’s letter had been read publicly in churches. The fact that 1 Clement and 2 Clement are appended to the great fifth-century codex Alexandrinus is often cited as proof of their Scriptural status in some churches. Sinaiticus, a great fourth-century Biblical codex, contains Barnabas and The Shepherd at the end of the New Testament instead of 1 and 2 Clement. All four books belong to a loose category which Eusebius, Athanasius, and others considered ‘catechetical’ or ‘recommended’ and not ‘canonical’. They are probably best considered as appendices to the New Testament. |
| THE CHALLENGE OF PAGAN ROME AND THE ROMAN RESPONSE In addition to this early tradition that holds Peter and Paul as central to the foundation of Christianity in Rome, the ancient patriarchate of Rome was further enhanced by the various ways in which Christians responded to the surrounding community that threatened their religious identity. Christian intellectuals rose to the challenge of pagan apologists, whose opposition afforded them the opportunity to defend with eloquence a vigorous new faith against cults that promoted morally repulsive gods and goddesses. This apologetic process helped to shape both the public and internal self-identity of Roman (and other) Christians in relation to the Greco-Roman world. The anonymous 2nd-century (allegedly Roman) author of the Epistle to Diognetus argued the superiority of Christianity over paganism, idolatry, and Judaism’s ritual rigidity, and defended the manner by which Christians live as citizens of one world but detached from it as citizens of another, presenting an eloquent explanation of God’s plan for salvation in light of previous human understandings of God (Hall 2007b). For those who lacked opportunity or intellectual ability, martyrdom also provided Christians the occasion to refute by use of the body what the scholarly did using their rhetorical skill (a few, such as Justin Martyr, had the opportunity for both forms of witness). Concerned and angered by what were regarded as the “sins” of an unauthorized religion, various pogroms took place to cleanse Rome and appease the authorities who were anxious to put down what they believed to be a dissident and seditious cult, or a repugnant sect of Judaism, too much like a conspiracy to be tolerated. Chief among the martyrs were Peter and Paul, but included among the many that perished in these first persecutions at Rome were notable figures such as Ignatius of Antioch (107), Justin Martyr (165), and Hippolytus (236). While hard historical evidence with respect to Christian foundations at the direct hands ofPeter and Paul is inconclusive, it is generally admitted that both apostles died in Rome during the purge ofEmperor Nero, who was anxious to divert suspicion for a fire that destroyed ten of the fourteen districts of Rome in 64. |
|
|
