| I have sinned by contempt for people, gloating over misfortunes others, self-reliance, pride and blasphemous thoughts. Forgive me, O Lord, and help me to become a better Christian. Sins of the tongue : I have sinned, my Lord, by idle talk, unnecessary laughter, speaking in the church and by using Your Holy Name in vain. I have sinned by criticizing others, by using rude words, yelling, and by making sarcastic comments. I have sinned by cursing people and wishing them evil, by mockery and insults. I have sinned by telling indecent jokes, bragging and breaking my promises. I have sinned by complaining, irreverent conversations and damning. I have sinned by spreading unkind rumors, gossiping, lying, slandering and denunciation. Forgive me, O Lord, and help me to become a better Christian. Sins through deeds : I have sinned, my Lord, by not loving You, my Creator and Benefactor, with all my heart and all the time as I should. I have sinned, by being selfish, lazy and by wasting time. I have sinned by careless and disoriented prayer, by missing church services and coming late to church. I have sinned by being disrespectful with my parents, by refusing to help them and to do what they said, by disobedience and stubbornness. I have sinned by negligence towards family needs and by failing to instruct my children in the Christian faith. I have sinned by self-centeredness, over-preoccupation with my career and success in life, greediness, stinginess and by failing to help the needy. I have sinned by over-eating, over-indulgence, breaking fasts, smoking, abusing alcohol, using stimulants, squandering resources and by gambling. Forgive me, O Lord, and help me to become a better Christian. I have sinned, my Lord, by looking at someone with lust, looking at indecent films or magazines, listening to music which evokes crude or lustful desires, listening to indecent jokes and stories. I have sinned by wasting too much time in front of a TV, by watching scenes of violence and sin. I have sinned by being obsessed with my appearance, by behaving in a tempting matter, masturbation, lasciviousness, sexual perversions, adultery, and other corporal sins which are too shameful to say aloud. |
| I have not preserved a love for God and for my neighbor nor have I made enough efforts, because of laziness and lack of care, to learn the Commandments of God and the precepts of the Holy Fathers. I have sinned: by not praying in the morning and in the evening and in the course of the day; by not attending the services or by coming to Church only half-heartedly, lazily and carelessly; by conversing during the services, by not paying attention, letting my mind wander and by departure from the Church before the dismissal and blessing. I have sinned by judging members of the clergy. I have sinned by not respecting the Feasts, breaking the Fasts, and by immoderation in food and drink. I have sinned by self-importance, disobedience, willfulness, self-righteousness, and the seeking of approval and praise. I have sinned by unbelief, lack of faith, doubts, despair, despondency, abusive thoughts, blasphemy and swearing. I have sinned by pride, a high opinion of my self, narcissism, vanity, conceit, envy, love of praise, love of honors, and by putting on airs. I have sinned: by judging, malicious gossip, anger, remembering of offenses done to me, hatred and returning evil for evil; by slander, reproaches, lies, slyness, deception and hypocrisy; by prejudices, arguments, stubbornness, and an unwillingness to give way to my neighbor; by gloating, spitefulness, taunting, insults and mocking; by gossip, by speaking too much and by empty speech. I have sinned by unnecessary and excessive laughter, by reviling and dwelling upon my previous sins, by arrogant behavior, insolence and lack of respect. I have sinned by not keeping my physical and spiritual passions in check, by my enjoyment of impure thoughts, licentiousness and unchastity in thoughts, words and deeds. I have sinned by lack of endurance towards my illnesses and sorrows, a devotion to the comforts of life and by being too attached to my parents, children, relatives and friends. I have sinned by hardening my heart, having a weak will and by not forcing myself to do good. |
| Despite the complete lack of theological support, the Patriarchal Encyclical suggests forming of a “League of Churches”—a forerunner of the W.C.C.—on the model of the recently founded “League of Nations.” He formulates eight basic points on which the necessary good relations and friendship among the “churches” will be built. It is quite telling that the presuppositions and methods from that time went on to be eleven points which constituted the basic “constants” of Ecumenism followed step by step with absolute fidelity until our own days. Every time one of these steps is completed, the preparation for realizing the next one begins. The Patriarchal Encyclical describes these points as follows: 1) “By the acceptance of a uniform calendar for the celebration of the great Christian feasts at the same time by all the churches. 2) By the exchange of brotherly letters on the occasion of the great feasts of the churches’ year as is customary, and on other exceptional occasions. 3) By close relationships between the representatives of all churches wherever they may be. 4) By relationships between the theological schools and the professors of theology; by the exchange of theological and ecclesiastical reviews, and of other works published in each church. 5) By exchanging students for further training among the seminaries of the different churches. 6) By convoking pan-Christian conferences in order to examine questions of common interest to all the churches. 7) By impartial and deeper historical study of doctrinal differences both by the seminaries and in books. 8) By mutual respect for the customs and practices in different churches. 9) By allowing each other the use of chapels and cemeteries for the funerals and burials of believers of other confessions dying in foreign lands. 10) By the settlement of the question of mixed marriages among the confessions. 11) Lastly, by wholehearted mutual assistance for the churches in their endeavors for religious advancement, charity and so on.” |
| 94. Because then, great would be the change for the better in every one, upon human lifés becoming tranquillized, and the common conduct (of all) being changed from its former wildness to something approaching to benignity; it is likely, that the common Saviour of all, the compassionate WORD OF GOD, would more particularly, and the more readily, make his Divine manifestation at a time that would be (most) suitable 255 . He accordingly came in by the mission of himself, and shewed forth to men,----who could by no other means arrive at the knowledge of the truth, by the instrumentality of a human vessel,----the God of truth. The God of truth did then, through the divine operations and astonishing miracles which were evident to all, shew forth the doctrine of heavenly teaching which respected His Kingdom; in order that by these, He might henceforth,----even as He had formerly afforded aid by means of the things already mentioned,----instruct the whole human race in the doctrine which is heavenly. It was impossible indeed, in ancient times, to make those who had been driven to the last stage of vice, pure by words (only), inviting (them) to the perfect knowledge of God, and to the better life of purity and of righteousness. On this account, just as Physicians prescribe their remedies to those who are sick and debilitated by pains and sufferings, not the healthy food proper for the robust, but things that give uneasiness and pain; and, should it be necessary, do not excuse themselves from applying cauteries and bitter draughts, to coerce the disease:----not the aliments proper for the healthy, but those suitable to the sick: but, when they have become convalescent, they will henceforth allow them to partake of wholesome and strengthening food:---- 95. So likewise the common Saviour of all, as the Shepherd and Physician of His rational flocks on earth, taught those----who had previous to His last divine manifestation entered into the many follies of a plurality of Gods, and had been maddened by the evils and fierceness attending (this) corruption of mind,----by bitter punishments, by pestilences, famines, and the continuance of wars against each other. And again, by excessive rains, by the withholding of the rains, and by calamitous strokes of lightning, did He annihilate these instances of obstinacy: besides, He afforded opportunity to the worshippers of the Demons to see, by the vengeance taken in the strokes of lightning sent upon the Idols, the reproach due to the error of a plurality of Gods. |
| Миссия не стоит в стороне от этих процессов, на всех без исключения наших подворьях ведутся серьезные и дорогостоящие ремонтные и строительные работы: где-то меняем в храмах окна и ремонтируем кровлю, где-то перестраиваем паломнические дома и благоустраиваем территории, где-то возводим новые объекты и строим другие новые планы. Святая Земля устала от одиночества без богомольцев-паломников, а потому всё и вся здесь готовятся к новой жизни «после ковида». «Интерфакс-Религия» /Патриархия.ru за темою Патриаршее приветствие участникам торжеств, посвященных 130-летию со дня преставления архимандрита Антонина (Капустина) : та звернення] закликали до негайного та припинення вогню у Газа В Торжества Православ " я начальник взяв участь у в Гробу Господнього в Начальник в день його Завершилося XII з «Православ " я — У XII з " Православ " я — " Кирила учасникам XII з «Православ " я — : та звернення] У церковних зв " пройшов круглий присвячений громад Патриаршее приветствие участникам торжеств, посвященных 130-летию со дня преставления архимандрита Антонина (Капустина) : та звернення] з Церкви В Торжества Православ " я начальник взяв участь у в Гробу Господнього в Начальник в день його з ключовими словами Свята земля – пандемия коронавируса – Руська духовна в ihmepb " ю «Исследуйте Писания». Патриаршая программа изучения Библии на приходах: первые итоги Священник Владимир Суханов: Военным госпиталям не хватает сестер милосердия Митрополит Казанский Кирилл: «Понимать мусульман — наша насущная потребность» Архимандрит Дамаскин (Орловский): Жития новомучеников — духовное лекарство, которое надо принимать всю жизнь Митрополит Будапештський Ватикан поступився у одностатевих пар «Это же капля в море!» Протоиерей Кирилл Каледа о почитании новомучеников Как избежать превращения церковной памяти в «память гетто»? И.о. Патриаршего экзарха Африки: Еще ряд священников желают перейти в Русскую Православную Церковь В.Р. Легойда: Виживання " глобальне Достучаться до сердец и приобщить воинов к святым таинствам Церкви Календарь ← → Богослужебные указания 31 березня 2024 р. |
| Studies of the manuscripts of the Swedish Chronicle are also important for understanding this work. The first printed edition was carried out in 1818. A new publication was made by Gustaf Edward Klemming in 1860. Klemming based his edition on the manuscript D 407 in the Royal Library which he thought to be a copy ordered by Olaus Petri and penned under his control. Klemming also paid attention to the so-called Codex Sernskoldianus, which he presumed to contain an earlier version of the Chronicle. Another edition was accomplished in 1917 by Joran Sahlgren who noted that Codex D 407 was penned by two different scribes who apparently worked without contact with Olaus Petri. The studies were continued by Lars Sjodin. He concluded that there are two versions of the Chronicle: the shorter and the longer, both composed by Olaus Petri. Another scholar, Efraim Lundmark, counted five versions of the Chronicle and expressed the opinion that Olaus was assisted by other authors, including Laurentius Petri. These views were rejected by Westin who was convinced that there are only two versions of the Chronicle and that it was Olaus Petri alone who wrote this work. My study of the manuscript D 407 confirmed that the text is marked by corrections by scribes A and B. The corrections made by ‘scribe B’ sometimes make the text less logical. This confirms the conclusion that Olaus Petri was assisted by another author who edited the work. Probably, Laurentius Petri was the editor. Laurentius’s comments to the Resolution of Vasteras touch upon issues mentioned in the Chronicle, and this indicates that the two brothers shared the interest in particular historical subjects. Laurentius Petri also acted as an expert on heraldic issues, in the course of the contest concerning ‘The Three Crowns’. Laurentius proved that Sweden, in the ancient times, consisted of two kingdoms – Gotaland and Svealand, which had different insignia: the Lion and the Three Crowns. Studying the amendments made by ‘Scribe B’ in Olaus Petris chronicle, I came to the conclusion that they accentuate the dualistic character of ancient Sweden, which was important for the heraldic debate. |
| Prolegomena. I.–Literature. §1. Editions. All the Editions of the works of St. Ambrose which preceded that of the Benedictines are very inadequate. Of these the chief are the following: 1 . Venice, a.d. 1485. 2 . Cribellius, a.d. 1490. 3 . Auerbach, Basel, a.d. 1492, reprinted in 1506, with a full Index. These are very faulty Editions. 4 . Erasmus, Basel, a.d. 1527, reprinted and re-edited by different persons, in various places [by Baronius amongst others, a.d. 1549]. 5 . Gillot Campanus, Paris, a.d. 1568. 6 . Felix de Montalto [afterwards Pope Sixtus V.], Rome, a.d. 1580–1585, reprinted at Paris, a.d. 1603. 7 . The Benedictines of St. Maur, Paris, a.d. 1686–1690, reprinted at Venice, a.d. 1748 and 1781, as well as with additions by Migne, Patres Latini, Vols. XIV.–XVII. 8 . A new edition by Ballerini, Milan, a.d. 1875–1886, founded on that of the Benedictines, but by no means superior to it. There is still room for a critical edition of the works of this great Father, which are unfortunately very corrupt, but in many points it is not likely that the work of the Benedictine editors can be improved upon. 9 . There are separate editions of some of the treatises of St. Ambrose, as of the Hexaëmeron and De Officiis Clericorum, in the Bibliotheca Patrum Eccl. Latinæ Selecta, Leipzig, Tauchnitz. The De Officiis has also been edited, with considerable improvements in the text, by Krabinger, Tübingen, 1857, and the De Fide and De Pœnitentia, by Hurter in the Vienna selections from the Fathers. §2. Translations. There seems to have never been any attempt to translate the works of this great Christian Father and Doctor in full. Some few treatises, De Officiis, De excessu fratris Satyri, De Virginitate, and several other short ones, appear in German, in the select writings of the Fathers, published by Kosel of Kempten. The Epistles have been translated into French by Bonrecueil, Paris, a.d. 1746; and the De Officiis and Epistles into English, the former by Humfrey, London, a.d. 1637; the latter in the Oxford “Library of the Fathers,” revised by E. Walford, London, 1881; whilst the De Mysteriis appears in a little volume of Sacramental Treatises, published by Messrs. J. Parker & Co., Oxford, under the supervision of the Editor of this volume. There is a very valuable little monograph entitled Studia Ambrosiana, chiefly critical, and unfortunately brief, by Maximilian Ihm. Leipzig, Teubner, 1889. |
| A complete translation of the Greek collection of the Homilies of Isaac the Syrian into the Slavonic language was done by the Bulgarian monk Zacchaeus at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Before that in Slavonic there existed only fragments of the works of Isaac (in particular those that formed part of thePandects of Nicon of Montenegro). In the second quarter of the fourteenth century on Athos there appeared yet one more Slavonic translation of the Homilies of Isaac made by the elder John. Both translations had become widespread by the fourteenth century, especially in monastic circles: this is attested by the numerous surviving manuscripts . At the end of the eighteenth century Paisius Velichkovsky edited anew the Slavonic translation of Isaac the Syrian, published in 1812, but suppressed by the censorship of the time and therefore was not widespread until 1854 when it was published for a second time by the Monastery of Optina Pustyn. In the same year of 1854 there was published a complete Russian translation of Isaac the Syrian made by the Moscow Theological Academy. In 1911 professor of the Moscow Theological Academy Sergei Sobolevsky translated anew the Homilies of Isaac the Syrian from the Greek . Only separate Homilies from this volume are today in the translation from the Syriac, which are Homily 76, translated by Sergei Averintsev , Homily 54, translated by me , Homilies 19, 20 and 21, also translated by me and Homily 1, translated by Alexei Muraviev . I express the hope that sooner or later in the hands of the Russian reader there will appear the complete text of the first volume in translation from Syriac, which would become a landmark in the mastering of the legacy of the great Syrian by our contemporaries. As for the second volume of the works of Isaac, then scholars knew of its existence at least since Bedjan’s edition appeared: he published fragments from it according to the text of the manuscript which later in 1918 was lost . However, in 1983, professor Sebastian Brock discovered in the Bodleian Library at Oxford another manuscript containing the complete text of the second volume and dated at the tenth or eleventh century . From this manuscript Dr. Brock made his own edition of the Discourses 4 – 44 from the second volume , comprising about half of its content. The other half of the volume includes Discourses 1 -3, from which the latter is divided into 400 chapters under the general heading of Chapters on Knowledge. This collection still awaits its publication, although there have already appeared its complete or partial translations into a number of European languages. |
| Metropolitan Alexander whom you mentioned and who was also suspended from serving by the Synod in Kiev had only one church. A conflict occurred in his community, and the majority of this church’s clergy avoided concelebrating with the hierarch who had fallen away. The principled decision of the hierarchs of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church to refuse to take part in the false council convened by you was caused not by some mythical “pressure from Moscow,” what would be impossible anyway in this political situation, but by the unity of the archpastors with their clergy and faithful. This unity cannot be jeopardized either by the gross interference of the Ukrainian authorities in the internal life of the Church or by the pressure on the Church exerted by the state and greatly increased in the recent months. This unity cannot be revoked with a stroke of the pen. In your letter you are trying to reinterpret the meaning of the complex of documents signed in 1686 by your predecessor, Patriarch Dionysius IV, and the Holy Synod of the Church of Constantinople. The matter of these historical documents caused no disagreements between our two Churches for hundreds of years. And now you say that you “revoke” the Patriarchal and Synodal Letter, because “outward circumstances have changed.” I suggested holding talks on this issue with the participation of authoritative historians, theologians and experts in the ecclesiastical canon law. You refused, alleging lack of time. I can only express my regret that your decisions, devastating for the unity of the Church, depend so much on “outward,” that is political, circumstances, about which you have no scruples of openly telling me. In your letter you once again repeat rather disputable assertions that the Church of Constantinople has the “exceptional responsibility to grant autocephaly” and to consider appeals from other Local Churches in accordance with the “spiritual meaning” of Canons 9 and 17 of the Council of Chalcedon. Yet, your interpretation of your alleged rights has never had church-wide acceptance. A considerable number of objections stated by authoritative commentators of the canon law speak against your understanding of the rights of the Throne of Constantinople to consider appeals. Thus, an outstanding Byzantine canonist, John Zonaras, writes, “The [Patriarch] of Constantinople is recognized as judge not over all the metropolitans but only those who are subordinate to him. For neither metropolitans of Syria, nor those of Palestine or Phoenicia or Egypt are summoned to his judgement against their will, but those of Syria are to be judged by the Patriarch of Antioch, those of Palestine by that of Jerusalem, while the Egyptian ones are judged by that of Alexandria who ordains them and to whom they are subordinate.” Neither do the present-day Local Orthodox Church recognize that you have such a privilege. |
| While the patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa has continued to be a Greek, in 2013there were several native African bishops, including the dynamic Metropolitan Ieronymos (Muzeeyi) of Mwanza, Tanzania (b. 1963). Poland The Orthodox Church in Poland received autocephaly from the Ecumenical Patriarchate in 1924. This was recognized by the Church of Russia in 1948. When the Soviet Union annexed eastern Poland after WWII, the Polish Orthodox Church lost about 80% of its membership. After political freedom came to Poland in 1991, ending its status as a satellite state of the Soviet Union, the new government granted the Orthodox Church equal legal status with the predominant Roman Catholic Church. This law also allowed the Orthodox to reclaim properties previously seized by the Roman Church. Since 1998 the Polish Church has been led by Metropolitan Sava (Hrycuniak) (b. 1938). In 2013the membership of the Polish Church was estimated at about 600,000, spread across seven archdioceses, including one in South America centered in Rio de Janeiro. The Czech Republic and Slovakia By 1925, there were two dioceses of Orthodox Christians in Czechoslovakia, both under the authority of the Serbian Orthodox Church. In 1942, during WWII, the especially effective and beloved bishop of the Czech diocese, Bishop Gorazd (Pavlik) (1879–1942), a former Roman Catholic priest, was executed by the German Nazi occupiers, along with hundreds of clergy and laity, and the Czech Orthodox Church was outlawed. Bishop Gorazd was glorified as a New Martyr by the Church in Serbia in 1961. After WWII, the restored Czech diocese, along with the Diocese of Presov in Slovakia, came under the authority of the Church of Russia. In 1951, the Orthodox Church in Czechoslovakia was granted autocephaly by the Church of Russia. This was not recognized by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, but after the fall of Communism and the establishment in 1993of the separate nations of Slovakia and the Czech Republic, the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia was recognized as autocephalous by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. This happened in 1998, as a unilateral action taken by the Ecumenical Patriarchate solely on its own accord (i.e., without reference to the previous autocephaly granted by the Church of Russia). |
|
|
