| P. 171-191; Junglas J. P. Die Irrlehre des Nestorius. Trier, 1912; Loofs F. Nestorius and His Place in the History of Christian Doctrine. Camb., 1914; Pesch C. Zur neuern Literatur über Nestorius. Freiburg i. Br., 1914; Abramowski R. Untersuchungen zu Diodor von Tarsus//ZNW. 1931. Bd. 30. S. 234-262; Amann E., Tisserant E. Nestorius//DTC. 1931. T. 11. Pt. 1. Col. 76-323; Флоровский. Вост. отцы V-VIII вв. С. 4-16; Schwartz E. Drei dogmatische Schriften Iustinians. Münch., 1939. Mil., 19732; Vries W., de. Die syrisch-nestorianische Haltung zu Chalkedon//Das Konzil von Chalkedon: Geschichte und Gegenwart/Hrsg. A. Grillmeier, H. Bacht. Würzburg, 1951. Bd. 1. S. 603-635; Riedmatten H., de. Les Actes du procès de Paul de Samosate: Étude sur la Christologie du IIIe au IVe siècle. Fribourg, 1952. (Paradosis; 6); Scipioni L. I. Ricerche sulla Cristologia del «Libro di Eraclide» di Nestorio: La formulazione teologica e il suo contesto filosophico. Fribourg, 1956; Sullivan F. A. The Christology of Theodore of Mopsuestia. R., 1956; Grillmeier A. Das Scandalum oecumenicum des Nestorius in kirchlichdogmatischer u. theologiegeschichtlicher Sicht//Scholastik. Freiburg i. Br., 1961. Bd. 36. S. 321-356; idem. Mit ihm und in ihm: Christologische Forschungen u. Perspektiven. Freiburg i. Br.; Basel; W., 1975; idem. Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche. Freiburg i. Br.; Basel; W., 1989. Bd. 2. Tl. 2: Die Kirche von Konstantinopel im 6. Jh. S. 431-489; 19903. Bd. 1: Von der Apostolischen Zeit bis zum Konzil von Chalcedon (451). S. 506-515, 614-634, 646-672, 707-726 (англ. пер.: Christ in Christian Tradition/Collab. T. Hainthaler; transl. J. Bowden. L., 1965. Vol. 1: From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon (451). P. 260-270, 338-360, 373-399, 433-452); Anastos M. V. Nestorius was Orthodox//DOP. 1962. Vol. 16. P. 117-140; Abramowski L. Untersuchungen zum Liber Heraclidis des Nestorius. Louvain, 1963. (CSCO; 242. Subs.; 22); eadem. Die Christologie Babais des Grossen//OCA. 1974. Vol. 197. P. 219-245; eadem. |
| Weis K., Die Erziehungslehre der drei Kappadokier, Freiburg i. Br. 1903. Скабаланович H., Византийская наука и школы в XI веке, в журнале: Христианское чтение 34 (1884). Соколов И., Состояние монашества в Византийской Церкви с половины IX до начала XIII века (842–1204), Казань, 1894. Делание Arnou R., πρξις et θεωρα. Etude de détail sur le vocabulaire et la pensée des Ennéades de Plotin, Paris 1921; переизд. Roma 1972. Grégoire de Nazianze, cc. 49 слл. Joly R., Le thème philosophique des genres de vie dans l’antiquité classique, in Mémoires de l’Académie royale de Belge, classe Lettres 51,3, Bruxelles 1956. Maurer C., πρσσω.., in Kittel 11 (1977) 27–62. Špidlik T., La theoria et la praxis chez Grégoire de Nazianze, in Studia Patristica 14 (TU 117) 358–364. Дело Божие Bertram G., ργον.., in Kittel 3 (1967) 827–886. Chenu M. -D., Lavoro, in Sacramentum mundi, vol. IV, Brescia 1975, cc. 666–679. Hausherr I., Opus Dei, OCP 13 (1947) 195–218; Études de spiritualité orientale, OCA 183 (1969) 121–144. Rivière J., Mérite, DThC 10,1 (1928) 574–585; 612 слл.: Tradition patristique. Аскеза Amand D., Ascèse monastique de saint Basile, Maredsous 1948. Bonaiuti E., Le origini dell’ascetismo cristiano, Pignerol 1928. Cognet L., L’ascèse chrétienne, Paris 1967. Dublanchy E., Ascétique, Ascétisme, DThC 1,2 (1923) 2037–2077. Gaucheron M., Ascèse, in Catholicisme 1 (1948) 890–892. Guibert J. de – Olphe-Galliard M. – Willwoll A., Ascèse, ascétisme, ascétique (théologie), DS 1 (1937) 936–1017. Hausherr I., S. Théodore Studite. L’homme et l’ascète (d’après ses Catéchèses), in Orientalia Christiana 6,1 (1926). · Kretschmar G., Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem Ursprung frühchristlicher Askese, in Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 61,1 (1960) 27–67. Lohse B., Askese und Mönchtum in der Antike und in der alten Kirche, München 1969; см. рец.: T. Špidlik, OCP 38 (1972) 488. Roldanus J., Le Christ et l’homme dans la théologie de VAthanase de l’Alexandrie, Leiden 1968. Strathmann H. – Keseling C., Ascèse, RAC 1 (1950) 749–795. |
| Wey H., Die Funktionen der bösen Geister bei den griechischen Apologeten des zweiten Jahrhunderts nach Christus, Winterthur 1957. Хранение сердца Adnès C., Garde du coeur, DS 6 (1967) 100–117. Adnès C., Nepsis, DS 11 (1982) 110–118. Agulles E. J., Bienaventurados los puros de corazôn, Valencia 1965. Dupont J., Les béatitudes, Bruges 1954; 2-е изд., Paris 1973, cc. 557–603 (библиогр.). George A., «Heureux les coeurs purs, ils verront Dieu», in Bible et vie chrétienne 12 (1956) 71–77. Guy J. C., Examen de conscience chez les Pères de l’Église, DS 4 (1961) 1801–1807. Hausherr I., Hésychasme, Étude de spiritualité, OCP 22 (1956) 273–285: nepsis; OCA 176 (1966) 225–237. Hausherr I., La méthode d’oraison hésychaste, in Orientalia Christiana 36 (1927) 134–142. Olphe-Galliard M., La pureté de coeur d’après Cassien, RAM 17 (1936) 28–60. Raasch J., The Monastic Concept of Purity of Heart and its Sources, in Studia Monastica 8 (1966) 7–33, 183–213; 10 (1968) 7–55; 11 (1969) 269–314; 12 (1970) 741. Vernay R., Attention, DS 1 .(1937) 1058–1077. Различение духов Bardy G., Discernement des esprits chez les Pères, DS 3 (1957) 1247–54. Cholet A., Discernement des esprits, DThC 4 (1911) 1375–1415. Colombas G.M., Discernimento degli spiriti (diacrisis), DIP 3 (1976) 705–706. Dingjan F., La discrétion dans les Apophtegmes des Pères, in Angelicum 39 (1962) 403–415. Guillet J., Discernement des esprits dans l’Ecriture, DS 3 (1957) 1222–47. Hausherr I., Direction spirituelle en Orient, DS 3 (1957) 1024–1028: La diacrisis. Marty F., Le discernement des esprits dans le Péri Archôn d’Origène, RAM 34 (1958) 147–164, 253–274. Places É. des, Вступ. ст. к кн.: Diadoque de Photicé, SC 5ter (1966) 42–48. Доп. библиогр. см. в кн.: DS 3 (1957) 1275, 1279 слл., 1285, 1291. Испытание совести Guy J. С., U examen de conscience chez les Pères de l " Église, DS 4,2 (1961) 1801–1807. Liuima A. – Derville A., Examen particulier, Там же, 1838–49. Восемь лукавых помыслов Bacht H., Logismos, DS 9 (1976) 955–957. |
| Три трактата против Паламы: Brevis expositio nefandarum haereseum Palamae ( κθεσις πτομος τν το Παλαμ πονηροττων αρσεων) (cod. Monac. 223, f. 16–26); Altera expositio et confutatio nefandarum haereseum Gregorii Palamae ( τρα κθεσις κα νεσκευ τν το Παλαμ πονηροττων αρσεων (cod. Monac. 223, f. 65–124); Quinque dissertationes antirrheticae adversus Palamam ( ντιρρητικο λγοι κατ τν ατν πονηροττων αρσεων), [dissertatio prima] (cod. Monac. 223, f. 124–163). Ост. четыре слова изданы Надалом 6 .1479). Confutatio epistolae Palamae ad Acindynum e Thessalonica missae ( πιστολ το Παλαμ νεσκευασμνη, ν π Θεσσαλονκης πσταλεν τ κινδν) (cod. Monac. 223, f. 32–51). Письмо св. Григория Паламы , послужившее предметом опровержения, изд. Мейендорфом 6 .933). Adversus Barlaam libri V (cod. Mon. 223, листы утеряны?; Marc. gr. 155). Завещание (Marc. gr. 155, f. 17r-34v). Письма 1483 . Karpozilos A. Seventeen letters of Gregorios Akindynos (Cod. Monac. Gr. 223)//Collectanea Byzantina. Roma 1977. 65–117. (OCA 204). [Ориг., англ. пер., комм.]. 1484 . Loenertz R. Gregorii Acindyni epistulae selectae IX//EEBS 1957. 27. 89–109. 1485 . Letters of Gregory Akindynos. Greek text and English translation by Hero A. C. Washington, DC 1983. LIII, 465. (Corpus fontium historiae Byzantinae 21: Dumbarton Oaks Texts. 7). [Парал. англ. пер.; греч. текст=TLG 3192/1]. Morris R.//JThS 1985. 36. 503; Papadakis A.//Spec 1985 (Oct.). 60:4. 932; Beyer H.-V.//BZ 1987. 80. 378–384. 1486 . Loenertz R. Dix-huit lettres de Grégoire Acindyne analysées et datées//OCP 1957. 23. 114–144. же://LoenByz 6 .583). 1. 81–110. Приписываемое соч. Περ οσας κα νεργεας принадлежит Прохору Кидонису (см. 6 .1878). Утерянные антипаламитские соч. 1487 . Phanourgakis В. γνωστα ντιπαλαμικ συγρμματα το Γρηρορου κνδνου// Κληρονομ α. 1972. 4. 285–302. [Автор исходит из несоответствия цитат из Акиндина у св. Григория Паламы дошедшим соч. Акиндина и обосновывает гипотезу о том, что Палама цитирует 4 несохранившихся произв.: Гомилия к собору, Λιβλλος, О благодати, Об энергии в главах божеств. Максима. См., однако, выше, с. 383–384]. Исследования |
| 439 Lucas, «Enfants Terribles,» 9 and Request for Transfer to the OCA by the Ben Lomond Presbytery, February 12,1998, available at (accessed January 24, 2013). 441 Request for Transfer to the OCA by the Ben Lomond Presbytery, February 12, 1998, available at (accessed January 24, 2013). 442 Metropolitan Philip to Petitioning Presbytery, February 14,1998, available at (accessed January 24, 2013). The claim to laicize Anderson is quite peculiar, since Anderson was simply a priest the OCA had loaned to the Antiochian Archdiocese. Technically, Metropolitan Philip could only renege the loan and send Anderson back to the OCA, where it would be up to Metropolitan Theodosius to decide what to do with Anderson (whether to discipline him or assign him to an OCA parish). 443 See The Opinion of the Superior Court of Santa Cruz for Metropolitan Philip v. Steiger (2000) 82 Cal. App. 4th 923 Cal. Rptr. 2d 605] available at (accessed January 22, 2013). 444 Fr. David Anderson, however, returned not to the OCA, but to the Roman Catholic Church, and serves as an Eastern Catholic priest. 446 Archpastoral Directive, August 7, 2008. This was seen as a restatement of the earlier 2003 directive. One of the puzzling aspects to this directive, however, was Philips contention that «it has been clear since the disintegration of Orthodox unity which existed in North America since 1917, that the Arabic-speaking Orthodox people in North America have been exclusively under the pastoral care of the Self-Ruled Antiochian Archdiocese of North America. Similarly, the Greek speaking Orthodox people ... have always been under the pastoral care of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.» There never was jurisdictional unity in America prior to 1917 even though one could argue there should have been. See Matthew Namee, " The Myth of Past Unity,» paper delivered at St. Vladimir " s Seminary, June 20, 2009, available at (accessed January 25, 2013). More puzzling, though, is the reference to languages and ethnicities, since the overwhelming majority of the Ben Lomond parishioners were former members of the EOC and, therefore, not ethnically Arab. Such a phyletistic approach is at odds with the narrative so often portrayed (of a metropolitan who unites and sees no room for ethnic division). See, for example, Bishop Josephs words claiming Metropolitan Philip never forgets that «we are an Orthodox Christian community, rather than a member of this or that ethnicity.» See «Metropolitan PHILIP in View of His Bishops,» available at http://www.antiochian.org/node/18574 (accessed January 24, 2013). Likewise, this was a theme in Gillquist’s book Metropolitan Philip: His Life and His Dreams. See, especially, Philip " s 1984 sermon where he himself decried ethnic jurisdictionalism. |
| While in Tikhvin, Metropolitan Herman, Archbishop Job and members of the OCA delegation were guests at a dinner in their honor hosted by the governor, mayor and other officials. Father Sergei Garklavs was presented with keys to a house in the city of Tikhvin as a sign of gratitude for the years he served as the Tikhvin Icon’s guardian. Patriarch Aleksy also awarded Fathers Sergei and Alexander Garklavs the Order of Saint Sergius for their efforts in returning the icon. In commemoration of the icon’s return, the Garklaves presented an icon of Saints Tikhon and John Kochurov holding a model of Chicago’s Holy Trinity Cathedral to the Dormition Monastery. Metropolitan Herman, Archbishop Job, and members of the OCA delegation attended the Vigil on Saturday, July 10 at Saint Petersburg’s massive Cathedral of Saint Isaac. Earlier in the day, they prayed before the relics of the Blessed Xenia of Saint Petersburg and visited a number of other churches. The following morning, they concelebrated the Divine Liturgy with Metropolitan Vladimir in the Cathedral of the Kazan Icon of the Mother of God, after which Metropolitan Vladimir once again thanked Metropolitan Herman for the return of the Tikhvin Icon, and presented with a large hand-painted copy of the Tikhvin icon which will hang in a prominent location at the Chancery of the Orthodox Church in America. Metropolitan Vladimir wished Metropolitan Herman and the delegation a safe journey back to the US. Metropolitan Vladimir also presented to Mr. John Mindala, OCA photographer, the order of St. Alexander Nevsky in recognition of his efforts to produce high quality prints and images of the Tikhvin icon for use by the Orthodox Church in America and Russian Orthodox Church. Other members of the OCA delegation included Protopresbyter Robert Kondratick, OCA Chancellor; the Very Rev. David Brum; Archimandrite Zacchaeus [Wood], OCA Representative to the Moscow Patriarchate; Archdeacons Alexei Klimitchev and Isidore [Brittain]; and Messrs. Peter Ilchuk, Alexis Liberovsky, Jason Vansuch, and Joel Wilson. Also attending the various services associated with the icon’s historic return was a group of three-dozen pilgrims on a trip especially arranged byF.O.S. Tours for the Orthodox Church in America, led by Mr. David Lucs. |
| It is also important for the OCA to engage in periodic face-to-face discussions, which are far better in strengthening ties than mere phone calls, e-mails, and casual encounters at other gatherings. OCA.ORG: What are your general impressions of the Czech-Slovak Church? FR. E: It was a bit of whirlwind. We, of course, had an opportunity to spend a lot of time with Metropolitan Krystof. We also meet Archbishop Juraj from southern Slovakia and Bishop Joakim, Vicar in Moravia. In Prague, we met the Ukrainian ambassador to the Czech Republic, while were welcomed by the Mayor of Brno, the Czech Republic’s second largest city. We were struck by the youthfulness of the Church’s hierarchs, Chancellor, Secretary, and numerous clergy. The Czech-Slovak Church is clearly a “young Church.” We were equally impressed with the three monasteries we visited, which offered a glimpse into the incredible life that they are developing. Many of the monastics come from various places in Czech and Slovakia as well as other central and eastern European countries. There is definitely a growing monastic movement, not unlike that found in North America. Finances, of course, are a difficulty, but the monasteries offer a wonderful witness to the faith. We were surprised by the similarities between the Czech-Slovak Church and the OCA, as I mentioned earlier. Just as the OCA went through a transitional period decades ago which resulted in the widespread use of the English language in worship, they are striving to introduce the use of Czech and Slovak, in addition to Church Slavonic. A revival of traditional iconography mirrors that found in North America. And they too are seeking to find their voice in an extremely secular country. [It is said that the Czech Republic is one of the world’s five most secular countries.] Involvement of youth in Church life is a priority as well. But we saw that Metropolitan Krystof is a dynamic and beloved leader who is working through these, and related, issues. It was also interesting to note that the Czech-Slovak Church also embraces a substantial number of converts, not unlike the OCA and other North American Orthodox jurisdictions. Curiously, this movement began much earlier than in North America, in the aftermath of World War I. There were villages throughout Bohemia and Moravia that saw a rise in Orthodox population through the conversion of local people. One village, we were told, had three churches – Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox. Amazingly, all three were established by the same man, who converted eventually to Orthodox Christianity. |
| Bishop Stephen (Lasko) was appointed by the Church in Albania in 1965 to be Metropolitan Theophan’s successor. In 1971Bishop Stephen led his flock into the newly formed Orthodox Church in America (OCA), within which it became a distinct diocese. This move finally resolved the canonical status of the majority of Albanian parishes in America. In 2013, the Albanian diocese of the OCA, under the leadership of Bishop Nikon of New England, had about a dozen parishes. Meanwhile, Bishop Mark’s diocese continued its existence within the Patriarchate of Constantinople. After the fall of the extremely atheistic Communist government in Albania in 1990, this very small group of parishes helped significantly with the restoration of the Church in Albania, which had been virtually destroyed by the Communists. In 2013this jurisdiction was led by Bishop Ilia (Katre), who began his tenure in 1982. The Bulgarian Orthodox in America Bulgarian immigration to America became significant after 1903, when several thousand Bulgarians arrived as the result of an insurrection in Macedonia. Being quite scattered, they generally attended Russian churches, although as early as 1907 the first Bulgarian parish was established in Madison, Illinois. Gradually, other parishes were formed, and apparently, in 1909, a small Mission was organized for them within the Russian Missionary Diocese. However, in the 1918 listing of the parishes of the Russian Diocese in America there is only one parish that is designated as “Boulgarian” – in Toronto, Ontario. In 1922, the five Bulgarian parishes in North America came under the care of the Mother Church in Sofia, Bulgaria. Bishop Andrey (Velichky) became the first bishop for this diocese in 1938. In 1949, the Russian Church in Exile oversaw the establishment of several parishes for recent Bulgarian immigrants. In 1976, most of the parishes of this Bulgarian Church in Exile joined the Orthodox Church in America (OCA), becoming a constituent diocese of the OCA. Its hierarch, Bishop Kyrill (Yonchev) (1920–2007), became the OCA’s Bishop of Pittsburgh (r. 1976–2007). At that time the Bulgarian diocese consisted of about 15 parishes. In 2013, it had about 20 parishes under the leadership of Bishop Alexander (Golitzin) of Pittsburgh (b. 1948), who was consecrated as Bishop of Toledo and the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in 2012. |
| OCA services were initially held in English in the bell tower Church of St. Symeon the Stylite at St. Daniel's Monastery until a suitable church could used by the OCA in Russia. The lot fell on St. Catherine's Church in-the-Fields because of its central location and size. On St. Catherine's Day 1994 the first prayer service in the church in more than sixty years was conducted jointly by the primate of the Russian Orthodox Church His Holiness Alexy II, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the primate of the Orthodox Church in America His Beatitude Theodosius, Archbishop of Washington and Metropolitan of All America and Canada. Fr. Daniel Hubiak was appointed rector of the recently returned church. Among the worshippers at this joyous occasion was Mikhail Vladimirovich Przhevalsky, grandson of the famous Russian explorer. Mr. Przhevalsky, now deceased, shared with the younger generation of new parishioners his memories of being an altar boy at St. Catherine's before its closure by the communists. His most vivid recollections are of the visits to the parish by Patriarch Tikhon, who had earlier spent ten years of his episcopal career as head of the Russian Orthodox Church in the USA. It was St. Tikhon who gave his blessing to the first translations of the liturgical services from Church Slavonic into English and it was St. Tikhon who first considered the possibility of an autocephalous American Church. And now it was the turn of a living eyewitness to describe how this saintly bishop preached the word of God in a church that would come to represent the interests of Orthodox Americans in Moscow some seventy years later. The OCA's mission is to minister to English-speaking Orthodox Christians in Moscow. Among the regular parishioners there have been Americans, English, Australians, Dutch and Belgians, as well as Orthodox Christians from the conventionally more traditional Orthodox countries such as Greece, Serbia and Romania. The growing community is, of course, made up overwhelmingly of Russians of all ages and backgrounds. The OCA representation church in Moscow provides for them a unique window upon world-wide Orthodox, a means of coming to know the truth of the Orthodox adage that it is the faith, not nationality, that brings people together. St. Catherine's OCA Church has become a byword in Moscow for the unity and the universality of the Holy Orthodox faith. |
| OCA Metropolitan Council Meets for its Regular Spring 2022 Session Source: OCA Pravmir.com team 18 February 2022 Photo: OCA The regular Spring Session of the Metropolitan Council of the Orthodox Church in America took place on Wednesday and Thursday, February 9-10, 2022. Due to ongoing limitations and concerns caused by the pandemic, these meetings were conducted by video conference. Under the presidency of His Beatitude Metropolitan Tikhon , the Council conducted general business reviewing and discussing reports that were previously submitted in writing. The Council heard a report from His Beatitude who highlighted events of church-wide significance and his own archpastoral work in his diocese, the dioceses currently under his locum tenancy, as well as his primatial work. The complete text of Metropolitan Tikhon’s address can be found here . Archpriest Alexander Rentel, Chancellor of the Orthodox Church in America, presented his report highlighting his activities and the work of the Chancery, especially personnel changes and the annual performance evaluations conducted in January. The Property Committee updated the Council on the sale of Westwood (the Chancery property) and reported that no viable offers have been received to this point. Marketing strategies going forward will be discussed in the coming weeks. The Property Committee also presented a resolution to begin the relocation process of the Chancery by establishing an office in the greater Washington, D.C. as early as July 2022. Metropolitan Tikhon and Priest Alessandro Margheritino, Secretary of the Orthodox Church in America, would both relocate at the same time while the rest of the staff remains at Westwood until the beginning of 2023. The resolution, which was adopted with overwhelming support by the Metropolitan Council, is not considered final until it is presented and approved by the Holy Synod at the upcoming Spring 2022 Session in March. Father Alessandro also presented his report noting updates on technology issues, reporting on the work of SMPAC, the hiring of Ms. |
|
|
