| The early Christian period is marked by the multitude of female martyrs who – even with their blood – helped the message of Christianity reach contemporary society. In the New Testament ( Lk. 8.2–3 ) we encounter references to women as sponsoring patrons of the early missionary efforts of Christianity. Priscilla and Aquila, a notable couple within the Pauline circle, probably sustained in a most decisive way the activity of St. Paul. The earliest reference to a deaconess is encountered in the Pauline Epistle to the Romans (16.1) and refers to Phoebe, a young sister from Kenchreae (near Corinth) whom Paul commends to the Romans. In the same chapter of his epistle, Paul refers to another nine women out of a whole of twenty-four notable people mentioned; among them, the above-mentioned Priscilla, the scholarly missionary and patron of the churches in Corinth and Ephesus. The notable female disciple Junia (mentioned together with Andronicus) is explicitly referred to as an Apostle; and she along with many other women (such as the explicitly named Mary, Tryphosa, Tryphaena, Persis, and so on) recall for us the early, apostolic, Christian environment where women played a vital role in the life of the church and its proclamatory mission. It seems that the role of the deaconess designated an ordained member of the church with specific duties and obligations. Sixty-four inscriptions from the Eastern Roman Empire testify to the existence of ordained deaconesses, while a few others refer to female presbyters (the meaning of which is not entirely clear). Part of the body of Christian texts which did not find their way into the New Testament, such as the apocryphal Acts of Paul and Thecla, recount the fascination of the young betrothed virgin who for three days and three nights, without eating or drinking, remained fastened to the window like a spider listening to the words of Paul (Kraemer 1988; Lipsius and Bonnet 1891). According to the Acts, Thecla followed Paul and when thrown to the lions she was miraculously saved. |
| John Anthony McGuckin Chrismation SERGEY TROSTYANSKIY Chrismation is the second sacrament of the Orthodox Church, part of the initiation (baptismal) mysteries. Through Chrismation one is anointed with specially consecrated oil of myrrh ( Ex. 30.25 ) in order to receive the gift of the “Seal of the Holy Spirit.” In Orthodoxy Chrismation normally takes place immediately after the baptism of water. It is an organic part of the baptismal mystery and is performed as its fulfillment. Chrismation conforms the initiate to Christ, “the anointed one” and opens the door to deification, in Christ, by the transfiguring grace of the Holy Spirit, who is the Illuminator and Sanctifier. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his baptismal catecheses of the 4th century, noted that by becoming partakers of Christ we are called “Christs,” since we receive the anti-type of the gift of the Holy Spirit. Thus, after being baptized with the sanctified waters, one receives this anti-type in the form of Chrismation, the same Holy Spirit with which the Savior was anointed in his earthly ministry by the Father. The sealing of the believer with Holy Chrism renders them into prophets, priests, and kings. The ancients widely practiced two types of anointing: social anointing and symbolic anointing. The Scriptures present the first type of anointing as being performed primarily as a sign of hospitality. In addition it was performed for healing purposes and also for the preparation of the dead for burial. In the two evangelical stories of the anointing of Jesus, the first concerning Jesus in the house of Simon the Pharisee ( Lk. 7.38–50 ) and the other relating the sign Mary of Bethany gave ( Jn. 12.3 ), we can see several of these strands coming together (also with allusions to the other type of anointing symbol). The sinful woman anoints Jesus when his host has neglected that honor, and he accepts it as a symbol of the redemption God brings through love. The anointing Mary offers (which carries overtones ofmessianic status) is rebuffed as a messianic symbol and accepted as a symbol of burial precisely because the evangelist knows that no human can ever anoint Jesus as the Messiah, rather it is a gift of the Father. For this reason, when the myrrh-bearing women come to anoint the Lord, they are unable to achieve their goal: in his resurrection the mysteries of glorification have already taken place. |
| Assuming the editorship of the Quarterly is a task equally exciting and daunting. «For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not first sit down and estimate the cost, to see whether he has enough to complete it? Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who see it will begin to ridicule him, saying, «his fellow began to build and was not able to finish " » ( Lk. 14:28–30 ). We rely, in this project, on those giving of their time to provide anonymous reviews of the submissions, on the members of the Advisory Board, on the support of the Seminary and its faculty, on donors and benefactors, as well as on a worldwide network of scholars and students of Orthodox theology. If the Quarterly is to confirm – by its cargo, as it were – the generous designation «flagship periodical of Orthodox scholarship», this can only be the fruit of a collaborative enterprise. We invite your contributions, suggestions, and support. Michael Zheltov Abstract At all times the Eucharist has been at the center of liturgical life in all of the Orthodox churches; the Russian Church was no exception. The article presents a survey of the basic attitudes and perceptions associated with the eucharistic liturgy in the various periods of the history of the russian Church, from its beginnings until our times. In particular, the article focuses on the development of the devotional practices as a precondition for the reception of communion and highlights the significant changes in the practice and understanding of the Eucharist throughout the history of the Russian Church. Keywords Russian Orthodox Church, Eucharist, liturgy, liturgical history, communion This article represents a broad overview and analysis of eucharistic practices and eucharistic theology in the Russian Orthodox Church throughout various periods of its history. The picture that emerges from the primary sources is quite dissimilar from the models that we may find either in classic dogmatic textbooks of the Synodal era (1721–1917) or in the twentieth century «neopatristic» theological works. It turns out that the place that the perception of the Eucharist and the participation in it occupied in the large-scale panorama of the Russian religious life in different eras was not exactly the same as we observe today. Therefore, a conscientious scholarly study of the history of the Russian Church and of its spiritual legacy must avoid anachronistic projections of later practices and understandings upon the evidence of earlier sources. The Origins |
| Peacemaking and Conflict Resolution in the Church Has there ever been a parish council free from conflict? Who has not experienced rancorous divisions among fellow parishioners? Who does not know Orthodox families who have gone through acrimonious divorces? We can shrug it off, saying such conflict is “normal” and do our best to survive it. But in reality conflict often leaves behind enduring damage – severed relationships, broken ties, people left scarred and embittered. Although Christ proclaims, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God,” too often we see the children of the Church embroiled in destructive conflict and controversy. Has there ever been a parish council free from conflict? Who has not experienced rancorous divisions among fellow parishioners? Who does not know Orthodox families who have gone through acrimonious divorces? We can shrug it off, saying such conflict is “normal” and do our best to survive it. But in reality conflict often leaves behind enduring damage – severed relationships, broken ties, people left scarred and embittered. Should we Christians not do better than this? Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could respond to conflict in gracious and constructive ways? Might we learn how to handle conflict so as to build relationships rather than harm them? I believe we can – that we can learn to see conflict as a way to minister to each other and to glorify God. We can harness conflict as a transforming power toward growth and healthy change. Christ gives us a model of handling conflict constructively when a young man approaches and asks his help in settling an inheritance. Instead of behaving as a judge, Christ addresses the underlying issue: “Take heed and beware of all covetousness, for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.” He then illustrates this truth in the parable of the rich fool. (Lk 12:13-21) When faced with conflict, we often focus on what the other person has done wrong. In contrast, scripture and Church tradition call us to focus primarily on what is going on in our own hearts when we are at odds with another. In the Lenten prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian, we are called first to see our own sins, and not to judge our brother. Why? Because according to scripture, the human heart is the wellspring of conflicts. “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.” (Mt 15:19) The heart’s central role in conflict is vividly described in the epistle of James: |
| Esto es narrado sólo por los tres primeros Evangelios. Herodes Antipas gobernaba Galilea y Perea; era hijo de Herodes el Grande, quien había ordenado el martirio de los inocentes en Belén. Casado con la hija del rey Aretas de Arabia, inició una relación extramatrimonial con Herodías. Ésta, descontenta con su matrimonio con Filipo, abiertamente se mudó al palacio habiendo antes conseguido la expulsión de la esposa legal de Herodes. El rey Aretas se sintió profundamente insultado y en nombre de su hija declaró la guerra a Herodes. Antipas debió partir a la fortaleza de Maqueronte, al este del mar Muerto, para comandar su ejército. Allí escuchó de Juan el Bautista como profeta que atraía multitudes y esperando encontrar apoyo en él para su campaña ordenó traerlo. Sin embargo, en lugar de apoyo escuchó del Bautista esta desagradable acusación: »No te es lícito tener la mujer de tu hermano» ( Mk. 6:18 ). Estas palabras irritaron especialmente a Herodías quien usó toda su influencia para incitar a Herodes para que eliminase a Juan. Temeroso del pueblo, Herodes no se atrevió a matar a Juan, y solo optó por encarcelarlo en la fortaleza de Maqueronte. Según el testimonio de san Marcos, Herodes respetaba a Juan, lo consideraba un hombre recto y santo y aceptaba más de una vez su consejo. Como toda persona de carácter débil, Herodes quiso acallar su conciencia haciendo unas cuantas buenas obras (sugeridas por el Bautista) para así compensar su pecado capital tan combatido por Juan. Herodes inclusive disfrutaba escuchar al Bautista pero no estaba dispuesto a renunciar a su pecado y finalmente, privó de su libertad a Juan en beneficio de la malvada Herodías. Así concluyó el ministerio de Juan, el último de los profetas véterotestamentarios. Partida de Nuestro Señor a Galilea. Conversación con la mujer samaritana. ( Mt. 4:12 ; Mk. 1:14 ; Lk. 4:14 ; Jn. 4:1–42 .). Los cuatro Evangelistas hablan sobre la partida del Señor a Galilea. San Mateo y san Marcos destacan que esto ocurrió luego del encarcelamiento de Juan el Bautista, mientras que san Juan agrega que el motivo de la partida de Nuestro Señor fue el rumor de que Jesús realizaba mayores milagros y convocaba mas gente que Juan el Bautista aunque, como dice el Evangelio de Juan, Jesús no bautizaba sino Sus discípulos. |
| He taught meekness and humility… He worked unprecedented miracles… People asked each other, “Who is He?” For never in Israel had there been a prophet greater than this… And they wanted to proclaim Him their king. But He did not want this. When the Pharisees and scribes saw that Christ was attracting more and more people, they feared losing their own influence, and succeeded in turning the Jews against Him. This was not difficult to accomplish. Ecstatic over His teaching and amazed at His miracles, the people did not delve deeper into the teaching, and therefore became blind instruments in the hands of Christ’s enemies. Meanwhile, Christ sternly rebuked the Pharisees and scribes for distorting the law, corrupting the people, and abusing their status. The Pharisees slandered Christ, accusing Him of violating the Law of Moses and teaching the people to do the same. The prophecy of St. Simeon the God-Receiver was coming to pass: Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many (Lk. 2:34). Who fell? The proud, vain, ambitious, and self-seeking leaders of the Jewish people! They should have accepted the divine teaching of Christ before all the others and become His disciples. But their abstract thinking prevented them. The Jewish people were not capable of deeply analyzing and correctly understanding the enmity between the Pharisees and the Miracle-Worker Who had appeared. They tended to follow their leaders blindly. That is why they showed themselves capable of attacking the One Who had only done good, before Whom they stood in awe, and Whom they had decided to declare their king. That is why the Jewish people turned against their Messiah, their Savior, Whose coming had been foretold by the prophets. Scarcely attentive to the ways of God, having stifled their own higher spiritual needs, the people did not recognize in the new Teacher the Savior of the world; and at the suggestion of their leaders, betrayed Him to a shameful, cruel death. But the Lord and Savior unmurmuringly fulfilled the mission entrusted to Him of redeeming the human race. He reconciled us with God. He made us once more beloved and close to Him. |
| “If we abandon our own desires and opinions, and endeavor to fulfill God’s wishes and understanding, we will save ourselves, no matter what our position, no matter what our circumstance. But if we cling to our own desires and opinions, neither position nor circumstance will be of help. Even in Paradise, Eve transgressed God’s commandment, and life with the Savior Himself brought the unfortunate Judas no good. As we read in the Holy Gospels, we need patience and an inclination to pious living.” “It is useless to accuse those around us and those who live with us of somehow interfering with or being an impediment to our salvation and spiritual perfection… Spiritual or emotional dissatisfaction comes from within ourselves, from inexperience and from poorly conceived opinions that we do not want to abandon, but which bring on doubt, embarrassment, and misunderstanding. All of this tires and burdens us, and brings us to a sorry state. We would do well to comprehend the Holy Fathers’ simple advice: ‘ If we will humble ourselves, we will find tranquility anywhere, without having to mentally wander about many other places, where we might have the same, or even worse, experiences.’” “One who wants to be saved must remember, must never forget, the Apostolic commandment: ‘Carry one another’s burdens, and thereby fulfill the Law of Christ.’ This commandment is of great significance; it one we must first and foremost strive to obey.” “Many desire good spiritual life in its simplest form, but only a very few actually fulfill their good intentions. These are people who steadfastly obey the words of divine Scripture that we must enter the Kingdom of Heaven by many sorrows, and who, calling upon God’s help, strive to endure without complaint the sorrows, ills, and discomforts they encounter, always keeping in mind the words of the Lord Himself that whosoever wishes to enter into life, must obey the commandments.” “The Lord’s most important commandments are Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven (Lk. 6:37) Moreover, those desirous of salvation should always keep in mind the words of St. Peter Damascene, that creation takes place between fear and hope. |
| The healing of our physical infirmities plays a central role in the sacramental life of the Orthodox Church. The sacrament of the anointing of the sick is usually administered to those who are grievously ill and is wholly dedicated to the purpose of healing the person both spiritually (and especially) physically. All of the other sacraments are dedicated to this same purpose to varying degrees. For example, the Eucharist is administered “for the healing of soul and body,” as is repeated in the prayer recited by the priest before each person’s communion. Orthodox tradition addresses even the ordinary concerns of Christians, as seen in its prescription for everyday life – fasting is an example of this, and is closely related to bodily issues. Clearly, the main goal of fasting is spiritual. Fasting is supposed to focus one’s attention on eternal and essential concerns and move one away from the mundane; however, by its very nature, fasting has profound physical and health dimensions. It is interesting to note that the fast prescribed by the church is completely in concert with contemporary recommendations by health professionals regarding diets intended to counteract the epidemic of obesity that is manifested in the western world: a general decrease in caloric intake, less meat and more fish, less fatty foods, more fruits and vegetables. Healing of the infirmed plays a central role in the life of the church today, following Christ’s example and directive: “They will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well” ( Mk. 16.18 ), as well as the parable of the merciful Samaritan ( Lk. 10.33–35 ). Christ’s directive was taken up by the apostles immediately after Pentecost: “Then Peter said, ‘Silver and gold I have not, but what I have I give to you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk’” (Acts 3.6). During Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, monasteries played a central role in the establishment of healthcare facilities (including psychiatric ones) in Orthodox countries. |
| 4.2. Параллелизм как смена точек зрения 4.3. Параллелизм как стереоскопия 4.3.1. Давид и его женщины: мастерство скупого портрета 4.3.2. Пастух и оруженосец: два Давида 4.4. Параллелизм как интертекстуальность 4.4.1. Что такое интертекстуальность? 4.4.2. Царь, патриарх и его жена: агада внутри Писания 4.4.3. Два пророка: развитие идеи 4.4.4. Эсфирь: повествование на фоне условностей 4.4.5. Руфь-моавитянка: эмансипация богословия от родового мифа 4.4.6. Ветхий Завет в Новом 4.5. Параллелизм и библейское богословие 5. Методология: в поисках классификации 5.1. Параллелизм звуков и слов 5.1.1. Звуковой параллелизм 5.1.2. Морфологический параллелизм 5.1.3. Ритмико-строфический параллелизм 5.1.4. Лексический параллелизм 5.1.4.1. Пары слов 5.1.4.2. Одно слово в двух значениях 5.1.4.3. Ключевые слова 5.1.4.4. Формулы 5.1.4.5. Рефрен 5.1.4.6. Слова одного семантического поля 5.2. Параллелизм образов: попытка классификации 5.2.1. В поисках адекватного подхода 5.2.1.1. Примеры существующих моделей 5.2.1.2. Необходимость многостороннего анализа 5.2.2. Новая модель классификации 5.2.2.1. Основные критерии Логические отношения между двумя элементами текста Основные функции параллелизма 5.2.2.2. Дополнительные критерии Критерии валентности: 5.2.2.3. Включать ли в классификацию формальные параметры? 5.2.2.4. Условные обозначения 5.2.2.5. Примеры 6. Анализ текстов 6.1. Псалом 7 6.2. Первая речь Иова ( Иов. 3 ) 6.3. История Иосифа ( Бытие 37 – 48 ) 6.4. Загадочный «жених крови по обрезанию» ( Исх. 2:24–26 ) 6.5. Параллелизм в книге пророка Ионы 6.6. Книга Притчей: образец многоуровневого параллелизма 6.6.1. Разнообразие как параллелизм? 6.6.2. Параллелизм и образный ряд 6.6.3. Параллелизм как принцип сочетания изречений 6.6.4. Параллелизм «на расстоянии”: сходные стихи в разных главах 6.6.5. Параллелизм как принцип сочетания тем 6.6.6. Параллелизм как принцип композиции всей книги 7. Библейский параллелизм и античная риторика 7.1. Сравнение 7.1.1. Параллелизм, исоколон, антитеза 7.1.2. Ценности и ориентиры |
| ности в Бозе почивших иерархов отечественной церкви». 7) Положения о премии имени профессора И. Н. Корсунского §3: «Премия присуждается Советом Академии ежегодно окончившему полный академический курс воспитаннику Академии, представившему отличное по своим достоинствам кандидатское сочинение по одному из следующих предметов, к области которых относятся оставленные профессором И. Н. Корсунским научные труды: Священному Писанию Ветхого и Нового Завета, греческому языку и его словесности, русской церковной истории или русской библиографии». 8) Правил о присуждении премий из процентов с капитала, пожертвованного Митрополитом Московским Макарием , утвержденных указом Святейшего Синода от 21 января 1885 года за 251, а) п. 7-й (в новой редакции утвержденной указом Святейшего Синода от 12 июня 1898 г. за 2946): «Третья и четвертая премии назначаются по окончании студентами академического курса в одно из заседаний сентябрьской трети тем из них, которыми поданы были все семестровые сочинения, назначенные им в течение первых трех курсов, и из них более половины означено баллом 5, и нет ни одного, имеющего балл ниже 4»; б) п. 8-й: «В случае, если окажется более двух студентов одного курса, которых сочинения удовлетворяют изложенным в предыдущем § условиям, преимущество отдается тем, у кого сумма баллов на сочинениях больше; в случае же равенства преимущество отдается за сочинения позднейших курсов предпочтительно пред предшествующими». – 9) Из окончивших в минувшем 1915–1916 учебном году курс воспитанников академии – а) лучшие семестровые сочинения за первые три курса представили: Кобранов Евгений (5, 5, 5+; 5-, 5, 5+; 5+, 5, 5+), Иванов Борис (5, 5, 5; 5, 5, 5; 5, 5-, 5), священник Ляде Серафим (5, 5+, 5; 5-, 5-, 5; 4 1/2, 5-, 4 1/2), Добров Владимир (5, 5, 5; 5-, 4+, 5-; 5-, 4 1/2, 4 1/2) и Розанов Николай (5-, 4 1/2, 5-; 4 1/2, 5-, 4+; 4 1/2, 5, 5), а–б) лучшие отметки на проповедях имеют: Кобранов Евгений (4 1/2, 5, 5, 5-), священник Воронцов Вениамин (4 1/2, 4 1/2, 4 1/2, 5), Ружицкий Константин (4, 5, 5-, 5-) и иеромонах Матфей (Олейник) (4+, 4 1/2, 5, 3-). – 10) §109 лит. б. п. 10, устава духовных академий. |
|
|
