| Michael Prokurat, Alexander Golitzin, Michael D. Peterson Скачать epub pdf IMPERIALISM IMPERIALISM. While the urge to dominate and build empires is universal among human beings and their societies, this term has a specific application to the history of the Orthodox Church. Inheriting the ideology of the Roman Empire as civilizer and pacifier of the world (see, for example, Virgil’s Aeneid), the newly Christian Empire under Constantine (q.v.) and his successors took over and promulgated a “baptized” version of this imperial theology. (See Church and State.) The oikoumene of Byzantium (qq.v.) theoretically embraced all Christians and sought-in theory, at least, and under Justinian (q.v.) in fact-to effect this dominion. Where possible, this was accomplished via the tools of diplomacy and armed force and, where impossible, through an elaborate hierarchy of titles bestowed by the imperial court on neighboring rulers. The latter, if only by a kind of fiction, preserved the theory of a family of nations presided over by the one emperor. Following the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Empire (qq.v.) in 1453, the universal claims of the Christian emperor found two claimants. Under the Sultans the Ecumenical Patriarch (q.v.) was given effective rule over all the formers’ Christian subjects. Later, with the advent of the Phanariots (q.v.) to power within the patriarchate, this rule was translated into an active Greek imperialism in the modern sense, leading to the suppression of the native hierarchies of the Empire’s Slavic and Romanian Orthodox subjects. The second claimant, the Russian tsar with the Church of Russia, displayed much the same policy of narrowly nationalist political and ecclesiastical conquest. All Orthodox within the tsardom were subjected to Russian political and ecclesiastical rule. These included the peoples of Western Rus’ (modern Ukraine and Belarus), Russian Moldavia (Bessarabia), and Georgia. One may note that the progress of the same imperial idea was different in the West. With the crowning of Charlemagne in 800, and the fabrication of the Donation of Constantine, the papacy laid claim to the presidency of the Christian oikoumene (qq.v.). It put these claims into effect during the Gregorian Reforms of the 11th-13th c. That the latter era was also the period which saw the definitive split between Orthodoxy and the Roman Catholic Church (q.v.) is not accidental. The two imperialisms in Orthodoxy (q.v.), Constantinopolitan and Muscovite, have come close to splitting the Church. The earlier competition between East and West succeeded in doing so. Читать далее Источник: The A to Z of the Orthodox Church/Michael Prokurat, Alexander Golitzin, Michael D. Peterson - Scarecrow Press, 2010. - 462 p. ISBN 1461664039 Поделиться ссылкой на выделенное |
| John is calling his audience to a full confession of resurrection faith: Jesus is God in the flesh, and therefore his claims cannot be compromised, for synagogue or for Caesar. John will settle for no faith less secure than this. Further, while Thomas " s faith by sight is accepted, the faith without sight expected of John " s audience is greater (20:29; cf. 2Cor 5:6–7 ; 1Pet 1:8 ). It is grounded in the beloved disciplés testimony sampled in the Gospel (20:30–31), confirmed to hearers by the Paraclete (15:26–16:15). 10778 E.g., Ellis, Genius, 297–98; Minear, «Functions.» The «signs» include the resurrection chapter (esp. 20:27, 29) but also the rest of the «signs» in this Gospel (with, e.g., Lightfoot, Gospel, 336). 10779 E.g., Aeschines Timarchus 196; Cicero Fin. 5.32.95–96; Or. Brut. 40.137; Polybius 39.8.3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Demosth. 32; Thucyd. 55; Musonius Rufus 6, pp. 54.26–56.11 (esp. 54.26; 56.7–11); Aelius Aristides Fifth Leuctrian Oration 43–44; Rhet. Alex. 36,1443b.l5–16; 1444b.21–35; 37, 1445b.21–23; Hippolytus Haer. 10.1; Anderson, Rhetorical Theory, 181–82; less fully, cf. Matt 28:18–20; Rom 16:17–19 . Of course, open or abrupt endings also appear, as in Mark 16 (see our comments on Mark 16:9–20 above, on the resurrection tradition). 10780 E.g., Isaeus Estate of Cleonymus 48, out of fifty-one paragraphs. Often they come at the conclusion of the proofs, though this might be near the work " s end (Cicero Quinct. 28.85–29.90), possibly relevant here; they could also conclude a section (Xenophon Hel1. 3.5.25, ending book 3; 4.8.19, ending only some events; Polybius 2.71.7–10, esp. 2.71.7–8; Cicero Fin. 3.9.31; Quinct. 19.60). 10781 Aeschines Timarchus 111. After his closing summary (Polybius 39.8.4–6), Polybius adds only closing comments (39.8.7–8). 10782 Achtemeier, «Miracle Workers,» 176. Even if redactional, Homer " s claim that Aeneas would rule the Trojans (Il. 20.303–308) is pre-Virgil and virtually invited the sort of development one finds in Virgil Aeneid. 10783 E.g., Valerius Maximus 2.7.5; 3.8.ext.l; Musonius Rufus 10, p. 78.22. Epideictic bards might also complain that time provided the only limit on their praises (Pindar Nem. 4.33–34; O1. 2.95; Pyth. 4.247–248; cf. Heb 11:32). In many oral genres, one should limit onés examples (Menander Rhetor 2.4, 393.25–30). 10787 Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 55; Isaeus 19–20; Demosth. 42,46, 58; Lit. Comp. 11. More detailed discussion might await another occasion, but he needed to use most wisely the space that he had (Demosthenes 32; Isaeus 14); he wanted to avoid wasting the reader " s time (Demosthenes 40). |
| Beowulf is a great poem, and like the Aeneid or the Iliad is something to be read and pondered over. The most immediate thought that came to my mind, however, is that Beowulf represents the end of paganism. Conservative Christians are often found lamenting that the world is returning to paganism. I’ve often felt there is something off about this prescription. Whatever the modern world is suffering from is not caused by reading too much Cicero or having heroes like Pious Aeneas. C.S. Lewis believed something similar and expressed his thoughts in the short poem Cliché Came Out of Its Cage. “You said ‘The world is going back to Paganism’. – Oh bright Vision!” Lewis exclaims. He then describes the pagan world of sacrifice made of young men standing in silent respect before their elders, of reverence for the age being as seasonable as rain, and of men dying in defense of their city. He further praises the Northern Pagans, from which Beowulf sprang, who believed the world would end in anarchy, but that the righteous would be found worthy to stand with the gods at the final defeat. He described women who walked back into burning buildings to die with the men of the city, and obedient daughters who were guided by their venerable mothers. Lewis closes by asking, “Are these the Pagans you spoke of?” and then sharply commands to “Know your betters and crouch.” G.K. Chesterton, who no doubt influenced Lewis on the topic, put it much more succinctly by saying: “I am very glad that our fashionable fiction seems to be full of a return to paganism, for it may possibly be the first step of a return to Christianity. Neo-pagans have sometimes forgotten, when they set out to do everything the old pagans did, that the final thing the old pagans did was to get christened.” If the modern world is returning to paganism its end will not, as the leftists believe, be mankind’s return to a state of nature where he peacefully eats acorns with his fellow man. However, neither, as the conservatives believe, will it mean the end of the world. The end of paganism is Beowulf. |
| 9298 Bultmann, John, 575; Tasker, John, 181; Isaacs, «Spirit,» 398; Holwerda, Spirit, 62. For a critique of Bultmann " s total exclusion of eschatology from the Fourth Gospel, see, e.g., Brown, «Paraclete,» 130–31. 9299 Hunter, John, 155. Westcott, John, 231, sees it as the church. «Coming One» also functioned as a title for the Messiah in the Johannine community (e.g., 6:14, 11:27; cf. 2 John 2 ). Berg. «Pneumatology,» 217–18, shows the weaknesses of the view that the text here means Jesus as the one to come, or the new reality or age initiated in Jesus, but nonetheless concludes (p. 236) that «the things of Jesus,» rather than apocalyptic secrets of the end, are in view. 9302 Lutkemeyer, «Paraclete,» 228; cf. Swete, Discourse, 123; the Roman Catholic position of Gabriel Moran in Toon, Development, 99–103. 9303 Forestell, «Paraclete,» 173–74. Cody, «Paraclete,» 174, suggests that the Spirit indicates which things of the present will be of ultimate significance in the future. 9304 Johnston, Spirit-Paraclete, 137–41; Boring, Sayings, 102; Bürge, Community, 215. The phrase is normally futuristic (Bauer, Gingrich, and Danker, Lexicon, 311 ; Black, Approach, 132, finds here an Aramaism), but cf. 14:2–3. Cf. Berg, «Pneumatology,» 216–18, 235–36, who suggests tha; John is correcting this eschatological interpretation by placing it in a different sort of context; and Hamilton, Spirit, 38, who speaks of the future benefits revealed in the present in the exalted Lord Jesus. In Wis 8:8, Wisdom knows both ancient things and τα μλλοντα (cf. the same phrase for things in the near future signified by an omen, in Philostratus Hrk. 33.5). 9305 4Q268 frg. 1, lines 3, 8. Many ancient writings spoke of divine knowledge of what was, is. and is coming, the last naturally being the most difficult (Homer II. 1.70; Plutarch Ε at Delphi 6. Mor. 387B; Egyptian Book of the Dead spell 172.S-3; Jub. 1:4; Sib. Or. 1.3–4; 11.319–320; Barn. 1.7: see Keener, Revelation, 98, on Rev 1:19). 9307 Bengel, Gnomen, 2:454; Lenski, John, 1092. Cf. Johnston, Spirit-Paraclete, 139; Boring, Sayings, 102. Later writers could also take prophecies unfulfilled in earlier works» accounts as points of departure for their own (compare, e.g., Troy " s Aeneas in Virgil Aeneid with Homer I1. 20.303–308). |
| 47 Cf., e.g., the opening Virgilic lines of the Aeneid removed by the final editors (LCL 1:240–241, esp. n. 1). 48 Aune, Environment, 128. Thus Josephus thoroughly revised an earlier draft of the War into better Greek (Ag. Ap. 1.49–50); some think the earlier version was an Aramaic draft, probably circulated among Parthian Jews (cf. Hata, «Version»), though the thoroughly Greek character of Josephus " s current work might count against this. One could also adapt earlier works; Josephus seems to have employed the War as his main source for the comparable portion of the Antiquities (Krieger, «Hauptquelle»); 3 and 4 Maccabees adapted material in 2Maccabees (Gardner, «Mqbym»). 49 Thus allowing such literary techniques as foreshadowing (Quintilian 10.1.21). Editing provided the writer a chance to craft the material; thus, e.g., Epictetus " s Discourses undoubtedly bear less of Arrian " s stamp than the Enchiridion, where Arrian organizes and summarizes Epictetus " s teachings. 50 Burridge, Gospels, 203; Aune, Environment, 82, citing Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.47–50; Lucian Hist. 16,48; Demonax. 51 Although the old source theories concerning proto-Mark and proto-Luke are unfashionable, it is likely that proto-gospels existed temporarily (though unlikely that they were published); cf. Streeter, Gospels, 199–222; Taylor, Formation, 6, and appendix A; Wenham, «Parable.» 55 See esp. Wuellner, «Arrangement.» Some forms of speeches did allow random sequence, however (Menander Rhetor 2.4.391.19–28; 392.9–14; 393.23–24). 58 Cf. Bruns, Art, 24–25; Tenney, John, 40–41. Murray, «Feasts,» prefers John " s chronology to that of the Synoptics; Sanders, Figure, 68, thinks it hard to decide; but Bordiert, «Passover,» 316 may be correct that John intends most of the Passover material theologically. 61 Burridge, One Jesus, 20; Alexander, «Production,» 86,90; Dewey, «Oral-Aural Event,» 145–47; cf. e.g., Diogenes Laertius 1.122; Cornelius Nepos 25 (Atticus), 14.1; Cicero Att. 2.1; 12.44; Seneca Controv. 1.pref.19; Seneca the Younger Ep. Luci1. 95.2; Statius Silvae 2.pref.; Iamblichus V.P. 21.98–99; other sources in Keener, Matthew, 297. Perhaps they would be read after the Lord " s Supper, a sort of dinner ( 1Cor 10:21; 11:20–34 ; Jude 12). |
| Some also argue that ancient biography, in contrast to modern biography or novels, plays down characterization, but this is not accurate. Characterization was often accomplished by how a story was told rather than by specific comments, 124 but such comments do appear often enough in biographies, 125 and rhetoricians often described a person " s character directly to make a case (Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.50.63). Theophrastus even provides, in graphic and often humorous ways, thirty basic character types (such as a flatterer or one overly talkative) that offer various kinds of examples (Char, passim). At other times the storytelling was certainly sufficient. Even in Greecés ancient epic poetry, the stark characters of wrathful Achilles, proud Agamemnon, and clever Odysseus are impossible to miss. Ancient literature abounds with developed examples of dysfunctional relationships; for example, Dido in Virgils Aeneid appeared exceptionally susceptible to Aeneas because she had never recovered from her first lovers death. In contrast to some later psychologizing approaches, some ancient biographers also proved reluctant to speculate concerning their characters» inner thoughts, though this again is not a rule (see Arrian Alex. 7.1.4). History, too, was written differently then than in modern times. Biographies were essentially historical works; thus the Gospels would have an essentially historical as well as a propagandistic function. As Aune writes, … while biography tended to emphasize encomium, or the one-sided praise of the subject, it was still firmly rooted in historical fact rather than literary fiction. Thus while the Evangelists clearly had an important theological agenda, the very fact that they chose to adapt Greco-Roman biographical conventions to tell the story of Jesus indicates that they were centrally concerned to communicate what they thought really happened. 126 Ancient biographies and histories were different genres, yet (as the contemporary debate over the genre of Luke-Acts shows) the former can draw on the principles of the latter enough to allow considerable overlap (thus our examples in this chapter from ancient histories as well as biographies). Yet claiming a basically historical function by ancient standards does not mean that the Gospel writers wrote history the way modern historians would; ancient historiography proceeded on principles different from those of modern historiography. (To insist otherwise is to force ancient works into a genre that did not yet exist.) Because ancient historians lacked most historiographie tools that are now commonplace and were concerned to produce an engaging as well as informative narrative, 127 their motives in writing and hence their treatment of details do not conform to modern standards of historical analysis. |
| 3255 E.g., Sophocles Searchers 212–215 (Sei. Pap. 3:44–45); Euripides Antiope 69–71; Pirithous 22–24 (Sei. Pap. 3:124–125); Virgil Aen. 1.28; Ovid Metam. 2.714–747; 3.1–2, 260–261; 4.234–244; 5.391–408; 10.155–219; 14.765–771; Achilles Tatius 1.5.5–7; Apuleius Metam. 6.22; Apollodorus 3.8.2. On very rare occasions a mortal escaped, outwitting the deity (Apollonius of Rhodes 2.946–954). 3257 E.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.244–246,275; Athenagoras 20–22; Theophilus 1.9; Ps.-Clem. 15.1–19.3. 3258 E.g., Euripides Bacch. 94–98; Appian R.H 12.15.101; Ovid Metam. 3.261–272, 280–309; 4.416–530. 3259 E.g., Euripides Hipp. 1–28,1400–1403 (because deities desire honor, Hipp. 8); Apollonius of Rhodes 3.64–65. 3263 E.g., Ovid Tristia 1.2.4–5. Even if Homer authored both the Iliad and the Odyssey, it remains noteworthy that the former portrays a much less harmonious pantheon; later Roman sources (e.g., the Aeneid) also portray their deities more favorably than the Iliad. 3264 Odysseus in Euripides Cyc1. 606–607. In prayer, pagans often piled up as many names of the deity they were entreating as possible (e.g., Homer I1. 1.37–38, 451–452; 2.412; PGM 4.2916–2927; Cleanthes» Hymn to Zeus; more restrained, ILS 190) and reminded a deity of favors owed, seeking an answer on contractual grounds, as many ancient texts attest (e.g., Homer Il. 1.39–41; 10.291–294; Od. 1.61–62,66–67; 4.762–764; 17.240–242; Apollonius of Rhodes 1.417–419; Virgil Aen. 12.778). 3265 E.g., Pliny Nat. 2.5.17; Seneca Dia1. 7.26.6; Nat. 2.44.1–2.45.1; Maximus of Tyre Or. 5.1; 35.1. 3268 Cf., e.g., Diogenes Laertius 7.1.134, 148; Seneca Nat. 1.pref.13. Pantheism was also more widespread (cf. Virgil Georg. 4.221–222, 225; Aeschylus frg. 34, from Clement of Alexandria Stromata 5.14, p. 718; Aeschylus LCL 2adds Philodemus On Piety 22). 3270 Frequently, e.g., Epictetus Diatr. 2.1.25; cf. the identification also in Ps-Aristotle De mundo (according to Grant, Gods, 78). 3271 E.g., Chariton 3.3.16; Plutarch Isis 1, Mor. 351DE; T. T. 8.2.4, Mor. 720A. Cf. Plato Alcib. 1.124C: Socrates spoke of his guardian (επτροπος) as θες. |
| Biichner К. P. Vergilius Maro, der Dichter der Romer. S. 344–352,432–440. 165 Poschl V. L " epopee romaine//Association Guillaume Bude. Actes du X " congres. Toulouse, 8–12 avril 1978. P., 1978. P. 139–156 (144–145). 166 WlosokA. Die Gottin Venus in Vergils Aeneis. Heidelberg, 1967AlbrechtM. v. Romische Poesie. Texte und Interpretationen. Heidelberg, 1977; Die Kunst der Spiegelung in Vergils Aeneis//Hermes. 93.1995, S. 5464; Einheit und Vielfalt von Vergils Lebenswerk//Gymnasium. 90.1983. S. 123–143. 167 Albrecht M. Einheit und Vielfalt… S. 126. 168 Parry A. The Two Voices of Virgil " s Aeneid//Virgil. 1966. P. 116. 169 Ibid. P. 120. 170 Ibid. P. III. 171 Williams R. D. Virgil//Greece and Rome. New Survevs in the Classics. 1967. I. P. 32. 172 Otis B. Virgil: A Study in Civilised Poetry. L„ 1963. 173 Putnam M. C. J. The Poetry of the Aeneid: Four Studies in Imaginative Unity and Design. Harvard, 1965. 174 Гаспаров Μ. Л. Указ. соч. С. 34. 175 Putnam Μ. C. J. Op. cit. P. 196. 176 BiichnerK. P. Vergilius Maro, der Dichter der Romer, S. 344–352; Wlosok Vgl. A. Vergils Didotragodie: Ein Beitrag zum Problem des Tragischen in der Aeneis//Studien zum antiken Epos/Hrsg. v. H. Gorgemanns u. E. A. Schmidt. Meisenheim a. Glan, 1976. S. 228–250. 177 Wilson J. R. Action and Emotion in Aeneis//Greece and Rome. 1969. N 16. P. 67–75. 178 Quinn К. Virgil " s Aeneid: A Critical Description. L„ 1968. 179 WlosokA. Vergil in der neueren Forschung. S. 146. 180 Выражение, употребленное в докладе американского исследователя У. С. Андерсона «Дикция и поэзия в»Энеиде»» на Международной вергилиевской конференции, которая состоялась и сентябре 1981 г. в г. Маитуе. 181 Ср. следующие рецензии: Otis В.//Classical Journal. 1968. 64. P. 371; PoschI K//Anzeiger fur die Altertumswissenschaft. 1969.22. S. 5–6; v. AlbrechtM.//Gnomon. 1970.42. S. 95. 182 Newman J. R. Augustus and the New Poetry (Collection Latomus, vol. 88). Bruhelles. Berchem, 1967. 183 См. примеч. 120. 184 Georg. IV, 563–566. 185 пастбища… сёла. 186 |
| Theoph.Nic. Theot. Theophanes of Nicea. Sermon on the Theotokos Theor. Disp. Theorianus. Disputations with Narsai IV Theot. Demonstration That Mary Is Theotokos Thos.Aq. Graec. Thomas Aquinas. Against the Errors of the Greeks Thos.Ed. Nat. Thomas of Edessa. Treatise on the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ Thphyl.CP. Ep.Petr.Bulg. Patriarch Theophylact of Constantinople. Epistle to Czar Peter of Bulgaria Thphyl.Ochr. Lat. Theophylact of Ochrida (Bulgaria). On the Things of Which the Latins Are Accused Tim.I. Ep. Timothy I, Nestorian patriarch. Epistles Tim.Ael. Chalc. Timothy Aelurus, Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria. Critique and Refutation of the Definition at Chalcedon Troph.Dam. Trophies of the Divine and Unconquerable Church of God and of the Truth against the Jews in Damascus Verg. Aen. Vergil. Aeneid V.Moh. Life of Mohammed Vosk.Chron. Chronicle of Voskrosensk ИЗДАНИЯ И СЕРИИ ACO Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum. Strasbourg, 1914-. Allacci Allacci, Leone [Leo Allatius]. De ecclesiae occidentalis atque orientalis perpetua consensione. Cologne, 1648. Arendzen Arendzen, Johann, ed. Theodori Abu Kurra De cultu imaginum libellus. Bonn, 1897. Badger Badger, George Percy. The Nestorians and Their Rituals. Vol. 2. London, 1852. Barth-Niesel Barth, Peter, and Niesel, Wilhelm, eds. Joannis Calvini Opera Selecta. 5 vols. Munich, 1926–36. Bek. Die Bekenntnisschriften der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche. 2 nd ed. Gottingen, 1952. Bidez-Parmentier Bidez, Joseph, and Parmentier, Leon, eds. The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius with the Scholia. London, 1898. Bonwetsch Bonwetsch, G. Nathanael, ed. Doctrina Jacobi nuper baptizati. Berlin, 1910. Boor Boor, Carl Gotthard, ed. Theophanis Chronographia. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1883–85. Borovkova-Majkova Brightman Brightman, Frank Edward, ed. Liturgies Eastern and Western. Vol. 1: Eastern Liturgies (no more published). Oxford, 1896. Carr Carr, Simon Joseph, ed. Thomas of Edessa. Treatise on the Nativity of Our Lord Christ. Rome, 1898. CCSL |
| Ибо если город Ниневия имеет смесников (συμμχτους) пастырями и стражами (fortes) и если всякое лжеучение и все ложные гипотезы знания происходят от смесника (а symmicto); то следует опасаться, что нет никого, на кого не переходила бы злоба смесника (συμμιχτου). При этом заметь, что ее сказано; «в кого не проникла злоба твоя, смесник» (σμμιλτε), но; «но на кого не нападала». Ибо часто стрелы ложных учений сыпятся на нас и стремятся проникнуть как бы в тайник души; но когда мы запираем ворота, то хотя смесник нападает на нас, устремляясь со всею своею силою, и делает это беспрестанно, однано, нападая, он, при помощи Христа Господа и при охранении сердца нашего со всею осторожностию (Притч. 4), не может проникнуть. Слово excetra, означающее собственно змею или гидру и употребляемое блаж. Иеронимом в отношении к Руфину (напр. ниже при объяснения ст. 8—12, и в начале второй книги толкований на пророка Аввакума), в данном случае указывает, по-видимому, на водяную болезнь. В некоторых изданиях стоит, in тегга nosmra, т. е. в нашей земле. Vergil. Aeneid. IV, 733. Citharaedus — поющий под звуки цитры. Вместо tumultum в некоторых списках стоит tumulum (холм). Под именем гидры и Сарданапала здесь разумеется Руфин. См. выше стран. 292, примеч. 1. Подобного рода сравнением пользуется блаж. Иероним также в письмах к Алгазии и к Рустику монаху (Творения блаж. Иеронима ч. III. Киев, 1880, стр. 171 и 277). В рукописях и в прежних изданиях вместо Merrhae стоит myrrhae. Собственно род саранчи без крыльев. То есть над телом. По церковно-славянскому переводу. Собственно род небольшой саранчи, как видно из предшествующего объяснения блаж. Иеронима. Информация о первоисточнике При использовании материалов библиотеки ссылка на источник обязательна. При публикации материалов в сети интернет обязательна гиперссылка: " Православная энциклопедия «Азбука веры». " (http://azbyka.ru/). Преобразование в форматы epub, mobi, fb2 " Православие и мир. Электронная библиотека " (lib.pravmir.ru). |
|
|
