| 435 Brachtendorf J. Einfuhrung//Ibid. S. 7–12; Der menschliche Geist als Bild des trinitarischen Gottes: Ähnlichkeiten und Unähnlichkeiten//Ibid. S. 155–170. 436 Hill E. Augustine’s Method in “De Trinitate”: A Model for Textbooks and Catechisms//Ibid. S. 29–38. 437 Pepin J. Le tout et les parties dans la connaissance de la mens par elle-meme (De Trin. X 3, 5–4, 6). Nouveaux schemes porphyriens chez saint Augustin//Ibid. S. 105–126. 438 Kany R. Typen und Tendenzen der De Trinitate-Forschung seit Ferdinand Christian Baur//Ibid. S. 13–28. 439 Drecoll V H. Mens-notitia-amor. Gnadenlehre und Trinitätslehre in “De Trinitate” IX und in “De peccatorum meritis”/“De spiritu et littera” Ibid. S. 137–154. 442 Lang A. P. Leo der Große und die Dreifaltigkeitspräfation//SE 9 (1957). S. 116–162; idem. Anklänge an eine Heilig-Geist-Oration in einem Sermon Leons des Großen auf die Fastenzeit (Sermo 43)//SE 23 (1978/79). S. 143–170. 444 Loreti I. La pneumatologia di S. Leo Magno//Spirito Santo e catechesi patristica. Convegno di studio, Pontificale Institutum Altioris Latinitatis (Fac. Lettere cristiane e classiche), Roma, 6–7 marzo 1982/Ed. S. Felici. Roma, 1983. P. 133–153. 445 Stockmeier P. Dreifaltigkeit und Erlosung bei Leon dem Großen//Im Gespräch mit dem dreieinigen Gott (FS Wilhelm Breuning)/Hrsg. M. Böhnke. Düsseldorf, 1985. S. 197–208. 446 Lejay P. Le role theologique de saint Cesaire d’Arles//Revue d’histoire et de litterature religieuse 10 (1905). P. 135–188; Idem. Cesaire d’Arles//Dictionnaire de theologie catholique. Paris, 1932. T. 2, 2168–2185. 447 DorenkemperM. The Trinitarian doctrine and sources of St. Caesarius of Arles. Fribourg, 1953. 448 Morin G. Le traite de saint Cesaire d’Arles “De mysterio sanctae Trinitatis”//RB, 46 (1934). P. 190–205; idem. Le “Breviarium fidei” contre les Ariens produit de l " atelier de Cesaire d’Arles?//Revue d’histoire ecclesiastique, 35 (1939). P. 35–53. 450 Patio G. The Theology of Faustus of Riez amidst the Controversies in 5 th century Gaul. Roma, 2001. |
| The Fathers declare that the Trinity in Itself has no attributes. It is περοσιος, i.e., beyond all being, not merely “one and simple” (ν кα πλον), to the language of Greek philosophy. God, whether in His Essence or Energies, is far more than “indivisible” and “without qualities.” He is beyond “genus,” “species” and “differentia.” He escapes every similitude (μоιтητα), comparison (σγκρισιν) and analogy (παραβολν). According to Professor H. A. Wolfson, before Philo no Greek philosopher, including Plato and Aristotle, believed God to be completely unknowable and ineffable. The idea that “God has no name” was not found among them. Philo taught both Plotinus and the Church Fathers about the “incognisability” of God (Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism. Christianity, and Islam [vol. 2]. Cambridge [Mass.], 1947, pp. 110–126,160). Ekkehard Mühlenberg argues that St Gregory of Nyssa went beyond apophatic theology to the notion that, although God’s Nature cannot be known completely, He can be known in part only; it is a knowledge, however, which is hardly exhaustive (Die Unendlichkeit Gottes bei Gregor von Nyssa: Gregors Kritik am Gottesbegriff der klassichen Metaphysik. Gottingen, 1966, ss. 47f., 165f). B. Otis disagrees, contending that for St Gregory “...the creature is prevented by his creaturely nature from comprehending his Creator or God” (“Gregory of Nyssa and the Cappadocian Conception of Time,” in SP XIV (vol. 117). ed. by E. Livingstone. Berlin, 1976, 339). 83 This is the trinitarian formula adopted by St Basil, Gregory’s brother and mentor. Grillmeier offers a brief study on the subject in Christ in Christian Tradition: From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon (451). trans. by J Bowden. Atlanta, 1975, pp. 367–377. Perhaps, the most useful primary source for Gregorian triadology, Great Catechetical Oration, is Letter 38, found in Migne among the writings of St Basil (PG 32 325–341). The controversy surrounding the authorship of this letter – whether it was written by St Gregory or St Basil – is academic. |
| ---. “De virginitate.” In Gregoire de Nysse. Traite de la virginite. Edited by M. Aubineau. Sources Chretiennes, vol. 119. Paris: Cerf, 1966. ---. “Dialogus de anima et resurrectione.“ In Patrología Cursus Completus; Series Graeca, vol.. 46. Edited by J.-P. Migne. Paris: Migne, 1863. ---. “Oratio catechetica magna.“ In The Catechetical Oration of Gregory of Nyssa. Edited by J. Strawley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1903. Irenaeus. “Adversus haereses (liber 5).” In Contre les heresies [par] Irenee de Lyon, livre 5, vol. 2. Edited by A. Rousseau, L. Doutreleau and C. Mercier. Sources Chretiennes, vol, 153. Paris: Cerf, 1969. Isaac of Nineveh. “Asketica.” In Isaak – Asketika. Edited by Nikephoros Hieromonachos. Athens, 1895. Jerome. “In die dominica Paschac.” In Tractatus sancti Hieronymi presbyteri in librum Psalmorum. Edited by D Germanus Morin. In S. Hieronymi preibyicri opera. Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 78. Tumhout, Belgium: Typographi Brepols Editores Pontificii, 1958. ---. “Liber quaestionum hebraicarum in Genesim.“ In S. Hieronymi presbyteri opera. Edited by Paul de LaGarde. Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 72. Turnhout, Belgium: Typographi Brepols Editores Pontificii, 1959. ---. “Tractatus lix in Psalmos.” In Tractatus sancti Hieronymi presbyteri in librum Psalmorum. Edited by D Germanus Morin. In S. Hieronymi presbyteri opera. Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 78. Turnhout, Belgium: Typographi Brepols Editores Pontificii, 1958. ---. “Tractatus in Marci Euangelium.” In Tractatus sancti Hieronymi presbyteri in librum Psalmorum. Edited by D Germanus Morin. In S. Hieronymi presbyteri opera. Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 78. Turnhout, Belgium: Typographi Brepols Editores Pontificii, 1958. ---. “Tractatuum in Psalmos Series Altera.” In Tractatus sancti Hieronymi presbyteri in librum Psaimorum. Edited by D Germanus Morin. In S. Hieronymi presbyteri opera. Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 78. Turnhout, Belgium: Typographi Brepols Editores Pontificii, 1958. |
| This supposed opposition engendered a false view on the hostility between the trends of Sts. Joseph and Nilus. In actuality, both trends legitimately coexisted within the Russian monastic Tradition, complementing each other. As is evidenced from the Rule of St Joseph, its basis was complete non-acquisitiveness, and renunciation of the very concepts of " yours-mine. " The years passed. The monastery flourished with construction work and the efforts of St Joseph. As he grew old, he prepared himself for eternal life. Before his end he received the Holy Mysteries, then summoned all the brethren. He gave them his peace and blessing, and peacefully fell asleep in the Lord on September 9, 1515. The funeral oration to St. Joseph was composed by his nephew and disciple, the monk Dositheus Toporkov. The first Life of the saint was written in the 1540’s by a disciple of St Joseph, Bishop Sava the Black of Krutitsa, with the blessing of Macarius, Metropolitan of Moscow and all Russia (+1564). It entered into the Great Menaion Readings compiled by Macarius. A second edition of the Life was written by the Russified Bulgarian writer, Lev the Philologue, with the assistance of St. Zenobius of Otensk (October 30). Local veneration of St. Joseph was established at the Volokolamsk monastery in December of 1578, on the hundred year anniversary of the founding of the monastery. On June 1, 1591, the church-wide celebration of his memory was established under Patriarch Job. St. Job, a disciple of the Volokolamsk saint, tonsured St. Germanus of Kazan, and was a great admirer of St. Joseph. He wrote the Service to St. Joseph, which was included in the Menaion. Another disciple of Sts. Germanus and Barsanuphius was also the companion and successor to Patriarch Job, Hieromartyr Patriarch Hermogenes (February 17), a spiritual leader of the Russian people in the struggle for liberation under the Polish incursion. The theological works of St Joseph comprise an undeniable contribution within the treasury of the Orthodox Tradition. As with all Church writings inspired by the grace of the Holy Spirit, they continue to be a source of spiritual life and knowledge, and they have their own theological significance and pertinence. |
| 222 K.Froehlich, Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church, p.28. Стандартный пример: Иерусалим, по Кассиану («Собеседования египетских отцов», 14.8), буквально – город в Иудее, аллегорически – церковь , тропологически – душа, анагогически – небесный Иерусалим Царства Божьего. См. John Cassian: Conferences, trans. Colm Luibheid (Mahwah: Paulist 1985), p.160. 223 Цитированное высказывание принадлежит Ж.Даньелу, цит. по: B.de Margerie, The Greek Fathers, p.219. См. также развернутое рассуждение: J.Pelikan, Christianity and Classical Culture, pp.215–230, озаглавленное «Вера как исполнение разума» (Faith as the Fulfillment of Reason), и недавнюю статью J.A.McGuckin, «Perceiving Light from Light in Light (Oration 31.3): The Trinitarian Theologyof Saint Gregory the Theologian», GOTR 39 (1–2, 1994), pp.32. Philip Rousseau, Basil of Caesarea, pp.106–111, 322–323, отмечает чувствительность Василия к диалектическим хитросплетениям, против которых Каппадокийцы выдвигали буквальное истолкование авторитетного текста Писания, к которому затем следовало приспосабливатъ всякое иное знание. 226 Ibid., рр.1026–1027. В результате исторических исследований многие протестанты, как консервативные, так и либеральные, постепенно пришли к признанию роли предания в канонизации Писания, что составляет важный вопрос герменевтики и зкклезиологии. Например, Gordon D.Fee, Crospel and Spirit, p.17, пишет: «Большинство евангеликов предпочитают не замечать, что именно предание в этом смысле, под водительством Духа, ответственно за канонизацию Писания». 227 D.H.Kelsey. «Protestant Attitudes Regarding Methods of Biblical Interpretation», in Scripture, ed. by F.F.Greenspahn, pp.134–141; D.G.Bloesh, Holy Scripture, pp.192–195; Donald McKim, «Biblical Authority and the Protestant Reformation», ABD, Vol.5, pp.1032–1035. 228 См. соответствующие замечания и библиографию по академическому использованию Писания и библейской науке в главах 2 и 5. 229 Выражение В.Панненберга (Pannenherg), представляющее собой название одной главы из ero Basic Questions in Theology, Vol.1, trans. G.H.Kehm (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970), p.1. Очерк сложной истории авторитета Писания у протестантов см. в H.G.Reventlow, «Biblical Authority in the Wake of the Enlightenrment», ABD, Vol.5, pp.1035–1049. |
| Into this cycle of consuming and dying Christ, the “Second Adam,” came to restore humanity to its original calling by accomplishing that vocation, once and for all, in himself. Through his birth, death, and resurrection, he restored the lost integration of humanity and established the “new creation.” It is up to the individual Christian, however, to discover in him- or herself the realization of Christ’s accomplishment and presence, i.e., to arrive through him in the Holy Spirit (q.v.) at the manifestation of his likeness. All potential has been restored in Christ. The powers of sin and death have been overcome and “life reigns from the tomb,” to quote the Easter oration of Joh n Chrysostom (q.v.). Heaven and earth have been united forevermore. Nonetheless, in Orthodoxy the mystery of the image of God in every human being demands the possibility of both assent and refusal. The grace (q.v.) of Christ cannot be “irresistible.” Although the ontological condition of nature has been altered-or better, restored-in Christ, each person is required to bring his or her own will into conformity with the salvation that he, uniquely, has accomplished. This is the place for what Orthodox asceticism (q.v.) calls the “ordeal” (agon), the reeducation of the will. Nature has been healed, but the person-hypostasis, or irreducible individuality-of every human being is called, with the assistance of grace, to realize in itself what has already occurred through the union of human nature with the Second Person of the Trinity (the “hypostatic union”). Orthodoxy requires, in short, that every human person choose what he or she has already become in Christ Jesus. Hence, God permits his creature to be “tempted,” i.e., put to the test. This life is thus the “arena,” the place of combat-or better, the sphere of that choice required by the Creator out of respect for the mystery of his creature’s freedom (q.v.). In turning to the modern debate over human nature, particularly the issues of gender raised by contemporary feminism, “gay rights,” and “alternative lifestyles,” Orthodoxy displays at once a certain intransigence and a replay of debates from its own past in the patristic tradition. |
| Herewith instruct your people. Teach them to break their bread to the hungry, to gather together the poor that have no shelter, to cover their nakedness and not neglect those of the same blood, Isaiah 58:7 and now especially that we may gain a benefit from our need instead of from abundance, a result which pleases God more than plentiful offerings and large gifts. After this, nay before it, show yourself, I pray, a Moses, Exodus 32:11 or Phinehas today. Stand on our behalf and make atonement, and let the plague be stayed, either by the spiritual sacrifice, 1 Peter 2:5 or by prayer and reasonable intercession. Romans 12:1 Restrain the anger of the Lord by your mediation: avert any succeeding blows of the scourge. He knows to respect the hoar hairs of a father interceding for his children. Intreat for our past wickedness: be our surety for the future. Present a people purified by suffering and fear. Beg for bodily sustenance, but beg rather for the angels» food that comes down from heaven. So doing, you will make God to be our God, will conciliate heaven, will restore the former and latter rain: Joel 2:23 the Lord shall show loving-kindness and our land shall yield her fruit; our earthly land its fruit which lasts for the day, and our frame, which is but dust, the fruit which is eternal, which we shall store up in the heavenly winepresses by your hands, who presentest both us and ours in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom be glory for evermore. Amen. Oration 18 On the Death of his Father. This Oration was delivered A.D. 374. S. Gregory the elder died early in that year, according to the Greek Menæa on the 1st of January, though Clémencet and some others place his death a few months later. His wife, S. Nonna, survived him, and was present to hear the Oration, as was also S. Basil, who desired to honour one who had consecrated him to the Episcopate. The aged Saint, who died in his hundredth year, had originally belonged to a sect called Hypsistarii. Our knowledge of the existence and tenets of this sect is due to this Oration and to a few sentences in that of S. |
| The names of Gorgonia " s two sons are unknown. Elias states that they both became bishops. S. Gregory mentions her three daughters, Alypiana, Eugenia, and Nonna, in his will. The oration is marked by an eloquence, piety, and tender feeling which make it a worthy companion of that on Cæsarius. Funeral Oration on his Sister Gorgonia. 1. In praising my sister, I shall pay honour to one of my own family; yet my praise will not be false, because it is given to a relation, but, because it is true, will be worthy of commendation, and its truth is based not only upon its justice, but upon well-known facts. For, even if I wished, I should not be permitted to be partial; since everyone who hears me stands, like a skilful critic, between my oration and the truth, to discountenance exaggeration, yet, if he be a man of justice, demanding what is really due. So that my fear is not of outrunning the truth, but, on the contrary, of falling short of it, and lessening her just repute by the extreme inadequacy of my panegyric; for it is a hard task to match her excellences with suitable action and words. Let us not then be so unjust as to praise every characteristic of other folk, and disparage really valuable qualities because they are our own, so as to make some men gain by their absence of kindred with us, while others suffer for their relationship. For justice would be violated alike by the praise of the one and the neglect of the other, whereas if we make the truth our standard and rule, and look to her alone, disregarding all the objects of the vulgar and the mean, we shall praise or pass over everything according to its merits. 2. Yet it would be most unreasonable of all, if, while we refuse to regard it as a righteous thing to defraud, insult, accuse, or treat unjustly in any way, great or small, those who are our kindred, and consider wrong done to those nearest to us the worst of all; we were yet to imagine that it would be an act of justice to deprive them of such an oration as is due most of all to the good, and spend more words upon those who are evil, and beg for indulgent treatment, than on those who are excellent and merely claim their due. For if we are not prevented, as would be far more just, from praising men who have lived outside our own circle, because we do not know and cannot personally testify to their merits, shall we be prevented from praising those whom we do know, because of our friendship, or the envy of the multitude, and especially those who have departed hence, whom it is too late to ingratiate ourselves with, since they have escaped, among all other things, from the reach of praise or blame. |
| 27. Farewell, mighty Christ-loving city. I will testify to the truth, though your zeal be not according to knowledge. Romans 10:2 Our separation renders us more kindly. Approach the truth: be converted at this late hour. Honour God more than you have been wont to do. It is no disgrace to change, while it is fatal to cling to evil. Farewell, East and West, for whom and against whom I have had to fight; He is witness, Who will give you peace, if but a few would imitate my retirement. For those who resign their thrones will not also lose God, but will have the seat on high, which is far more exalted and secure. Last of all, and most of all, I will cry – farewell ye Angels, guardians of this church, and of my presence and pilgrimage, since our affairs are in the hands of God. Farewell, O Trinity, my meditation, and my glory. May You be preserved by those who are here, and preserve them, my people: for they are mine, even if I have my place assigned elsewhere; and may I learn that You are ever extolled and glorified in word and conduct. My children, keep, I pray you, that which is committed to your trust. 1 Timothy 6:20 Remember my stonings. Colossians 4:18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. Oration 43 Funeral Oration on the Great S. Basil, Bishop of Cæsarea in Cappadocia. S. Basil died January 1, A.D. 379. A serious illness, in addition to other causes, prevented S. Gregory from being present at his funeral (Epist. 79). Benoît holds that an expression (Epitaph, cxix. 38) in which S. Gregory says that his lips are fettered proves that he was still in retirement at Seleucia. This is an unwarranted deduction. In this Oration, § 2, the Saint, alluding to his illness in disparaging terms, alleges his labours at Constantinople as a more pressing reason for his absence: and says that he undertook the task according to the judgment of S. Basil. This implies that S. Gregory went to Constantinople before the death of S. Basil, or that he had then been influenced by his friend " s advice and was on the point of setting out – more probably the former, as we may be sure that, if S. |
| 361. S. Gregory, even after the lapse of many years, speaks of his ordination as an act of tyranny, and at the time, stung almost to madness, as an ox by a gadfly, rushed away again to Pontus, to bury in its congenial solitude, consoled by an intimate friend " s deep sympathy, his wounded feelings. Before long the sense of duty reasserted itself, and he returned to his post at his father " s side before Easter A.D. 362. On Easter day he delivered his first Oration before a congregation whose scantiness marked the displeasure with which the people of Nazianzus had viewed his conduct. Accordingly he set himself to supply them in this Oration with a full explanation of the motives which had led to his retirement. At the same time, as the secondary title of the Oration shows, he has supplied an exposition of the obligations and dignity of the Priestly Office which has been drawn upon by all later writers on the subject. S. Chrysostom in his well-known treatise, St. Gregory the Great in his Pastoral Care, and Bossuet in his panegyric on S. Paul, have done little more than summarise the material or develop the considerations contained in this eloquent and elaborate dissertation. In Defence of His Flight to Pontus, and His Return, After His Ordination to the Priesthood, with an Exposition of the Character of the Priestly Office. 1. I have been defeated, and own my defeat. I subjected myself to the Lord, and prayed unto Him. Let the most blessed David supply my exordium, or rather let Him Who spoke in David, and even now yet speaks through him. For indeed the very best order of beginning every speech and action, is to begin from God, and to end in God. As to the cause, either of my original revolt and cowardice, in which I got me away far off, and remained away from you for a time, which perhaps seemed long to those who missed me; or of the present gentleness and change of mind, in which I have given myself up again to you, men may think and speak in different ways, according to the hatred or love they bear me, on the one side refusing to acquit me of the charges alleged, on the other giving me a hearty welcome. |
|
|
