| 10 . In Job, Hom. fg., lat. ex S. Hilario, 1029–30. Selecta, 1031–50; 17, 57–106. In Job. lib. 1–3, 17, 371–522. 11 . In Psalmos (Monitum, 1049–54). Horn. 1–5 in ps. 36, lat. Rufinus, 1319–68. – 1–2 – 37. -- . 1369–88. – 1–2 – 38, 1391–1410. Selecta, 1053–1686; 17, 105–150, (13) 12. In Proverbia. Selecta, 13, 17–34; 17, 149–160; 161–252 (Mai). 13 . In Canticum Canticorum. Hom. 1–2, lat. Hieronymus, 35–58. Libri 1–4. lat. Rufinus, 61–198 (monitum, 59–62); fg., græce, 17, 369–70. Ex parvo tomo, fg., 35–36. Excerpta procopiana, 197– 216: 17, 253–88 (Mai). 14 . In Isaiam (monitum, 215–18). Horn. 1–9. lat. Hieronymus, 219–54. comment. lib. I et 28, lat. Rufinus, 217–20. 15 . In Jeremiam (monitum, 253–56). Horn. 1–21, gr. et lat. (Hieronymus), 255–542; fg. ex hom. 39, 541–44. Selecta, 543–606. 16 . In Threnos. Selecta, 605–62. 17 . In Ezechielem. Hom. 1–14, lat. Hieronymus, 665–768. Ex commentariis, 663–66. Selecta, 767–826: 17, 287–88 (Mai). 18 . In Osee, 825–28. 19 . In Matthæum. Fg. e tomo 1, 2, 7, 829–34. Tomi 10–17, 835–1600. Vetus Interpretatio latina, 1599–1800. Scholia, 17, 289–310. Variæ lectiones (Lommatzsch.), 1909–46, gr. 1911–16; lat. 1917–46. 20 . In Lucam. Hom. 1–39, lat. Hieronymus, 1799–1902. Fragmenta ex Macario Chrysocephalo, 1901–10. Scholia, 17, 311–370. (14) 21. In Joannem (monitum, 13–20). Tomus 1–2, 21–184. – 4–5 (fg.), 183–196. – 6, 197–304. – 10, 305–398. – 13, 399–524. – 19–20, 523–680. – 28, 679–740. – 32, 739–830. 22 . In Acta apostolorum. Fragmenta, 829–832. 23 . In Epist. ad Romanos. Comment. lib. 1–10, lat. Rufinus, 831–1294. 24 . In Epist. ad Galatas, fg., lat. Rufinus, 1293–98. 25 . In Epist. ad Ephesios, fg., lat. Hieronymus, 1297–98. 26 . In Epist. ad Colossenses, fg., lat. Rufinus 1297–98. 27 . In I ad Thessal., fg. e lib. 3., lat. Hieronymus, 1297–1304. 28 . In Epist. ad Titum, fg., lat. Rufinus, 1303–1306. 29 . In Epist. ad Philemonem, fg., lat. Rufinus, 1305–08. 30 . In Epist. ad Hebræos, 1307–10. |
| Bernardo define el consentimiento voluntario o libre elección (libenim arbitrium) como «un hábito de autodeterminación del alma»; incluye tanto la expresión espontánea de la voluntad como un juicio concomitante del intelecto. La libertad, entendida en su forma más general como la ausencia de coerción externa, es la característica inalienable de la persona humana en cuanto humana. ¿Pero cómo podemos decir que son libres las personas humanas atrapadas desde la caída en el círculo sin fin del pecado? Bernardo introduce aquí, basándose en Pablo, su famosa distinción de los tres estados de libertad. Lo que siempre poseen los seres humanos, tanto antes como después de la caída, es el liberum arbitrium, o la libertad respecto de la necesidad (esto es, de la coerción externa), que asegura que los pecados que cometen son expresiones voluntarias de sus propias voluntades pervertidas. Lo que la humanidad perdió en la caída fue la libertad respecto del pecado, o libre consejo. Cristo restaura esta libertad a sus seguidores y de esa manera los pone en el camino que conduce a la posesión de la tercera libertad, la que corona, la libertad respecto del pesar (libre placer), esto es, el gozo indefectible de la bondad de Dios en el Cielo. El abad lo resume así: : «Aquí abajo, debemos aprender de nuestra libertad de consejo a no abusar del libre albedrío, de tal manera que podamos un día ser capaces de disfrutar plenamente de la libertad del gozo. Estamos así reparando la imagen de Dios en nosotros, y el camino está siendo pavimentado, por la gracia, para la recuperación del honor anterior que perdimos por el pecado.» Igual que la mayoría de sus contemporáneos, Bernardo encontraba la distinción entre imagen (imago) y semejanza (similitudo) de Gn 1:26 útil para describir cómo la humanidad retuvo su relación básica con Dios incluso después de la caída, pero que perdió su adecuación más elevada. Diferentes autores concebían esta distinción de diferentes maneras, e incluso Bernardo nos dio una cantidad de variaciones. En Gracia y libre albedrío la imagen es identificada con el libre albedrío, y la semejanza progresivamente restaurada es el libre consejo y el libre gozo; mientras que en los Sermones sobre el Cantar de los Cantares la imagen consiste en la grandeza (magnitudo) y la rectitud (rectitudo) del alma (y por tanto en lo que está perdido por el pecado), y la semejanza se encuentra en la simplicidad, inmortalidad y libre albedrío permanentes del alma. A pesar de estas variaciones en Bernardo y en sus contemporáneos, existe una base común para la antropología de la imago Dei del siglo XII, evidente en la convicción de que, aunque la humanidad ha caído en el pecado, permanece abierta a Dios (capax Dei), especialmente a la acción del Dios Trino que reforma los poderes del conocer y amar de la humanidad hacia la experiencia última de la imitas Spiritus, la unión amorosa con Dios en esta vida (cf. 1 Co 6:17). |
| Makarios, Hierodeacon. It Is Later Than You Think! American Aposde to the Russian People//«Pravda». Ru. 2002. Sept. 27. [Mansur, Mary]. “With the Saints Give Rest...”//Orthodox America. 1982. Rossi, Vincent. The American Acquisition of the Patristic Mind//The Orthodox Word. 1984. Р.267–274. Sherry, Matthew. A Warrior of the Spirit for Modem Times//The Orthodox Word. 1994. 327–333. Stephen, Fr. Fr.Seraphims Beginnings as an Orthodox Writer//The Orthodox Word. 1984. P.31–37. Stephens III, Dr.Raphael W. Fr.Seraphim Rose, Patron of the Unborn//The Orthodox Word. 1989. Р.157–160. Stolen Glimpses into the Inner World of Fr. Seraphim//The Orthodox Word. 1987. Р.300–303. Toner, Jamey. “Maranatha!”//The Orthodox Word. 1994. Р.321–326. Yentzen, Celia. A New Miracle of Fr. Seraphim//The Orthodox Word. 2004. P.217–219. The Twentieth Anniversary of Fr.Seraphims Repose//The Orthodox Word. 2002. Р.209–215. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose], A Mighty Pen Is Stilled//Orthodox America. 1982. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose]. Letters from Fr. Seraphim. Richfield Springs (N.Y.), 2001. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose]. My Advice to Converts//Again. 1994. Dec. 4. Vol. 17. Р.25–27. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose]. Personal Reminiscences of Fr. Seraphim//The Orthodox Word. 2002. Р.233–241. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose], The Royal Path of the Righteous Hieromonk Seraphim of Platina//Orthodox America. 2002. Р.6–7, 12. Young, Fr. Alexey [Hieromonk Ambrose]. Two Miracles of Fr.Seraphim//The Orthodox Word. 1984. P.44–45. Книги о.Серафима (Роуза), изданные на русском языке Аще забуду тебе, Иерусалиме/Сб. ранних работ. Мстиславль: Просветитель, 1995. Блаженный Иоанн Чудотворец. М.: Правило веры; Русский паломник, 1993. Блаженный Иоанн Чудотворец. Изд. 2-е. М.: Братство прп.Германа Аляскинского; Российское отделение Валаамского общества Америки, 1999. Божие откровение человеческому сердцу. М.: Братство прп.Германа Аляскинского; Российское отделение Валаамского общества Америки, 1994; 2-е изд. – М.: Московское подворье Свято–Троицкой Сергиевой лавры, 1997. |
| It is said that Fr. Sebastian baptized more people than any other Serbian priest of theWestern Hemisphere. St. Nikolai (Velimirovich) of Zhicha, Serbia, who buried Fr. Sebastian at the Zhicha Monastery when the latter reposed there in 1940, called him “a viceless man” and fittingly designated him “the greatest Serbian missionary of modern times.” Ten years after Fr. Sebastian’s repose, St. Nikolai wrote of him: “Here is a man who indebted all the Serbian race, especially all the Serbs and all the Serbian organizations in America. Should that man remain without a monument or any sign of honor on American soil? He does not need it. He did not wish it. All he wished to his last breath was the Kingdom of Heaven, which I believe he has obtained by the grace of his Lord. But his people need it; his posterity needs it. The Serbian people always cultivated the noble virtue of gratitude. Let them express their traditional gratitude to this remarkable Serbian — Father Sebastian Dabovich.” Today, nearly seven decades after his repose, Fr. Sebastian is being shown fitting honor and gratitude by the Serbian Orthodox Church both in the homeland and in the diaspora.With the blessing of Bishop Hrizostom of Zhicha and of Bishop Maxim of Western America, Fr. Sebastian’s remains have been unearthed from his grave in Zhicha Monastery in Serbia and are to be transferred to the St. Sava Church in Jackson, California: the first church founded by Fr. Sebastian, and the first Serbian Orthodox Church in the Western Hemisphere. On September 1 (n.s.), 2007, the Divine Liturgy will be celebrated in Jackson to mark this occasion, with numerous hierarchs and clergymen participating. The Liturgy will be followed by a memorial service for Fr. Sebastian, the interment of his remains in the St. Sava Church, and a talk on Fr. Sebastian’s life by the above-mentioned Bishop Irinej. In the eyes of many, these events are a step toward the Orthodox Church’s recognition of Fr. Sebastian as a saint. “Even now,” Bishop Irinej has written, “[Fr. Sebastian] is considered worthy of canonization among the Serbian people. May that day indeed come quickly! The epitaph on his tombstone at Zhicha Monastery reads most appropriately, ‘The First American Serbian Orthodox Apostle.’ Holy Apostle Sebastian, pray for us!” To commemorate the transfer of Fr. Sebastian’s remains to America, we are dedicating our 2008 Calendar to his memory. This Calendar presents photographs and descriptions of important people in Fr. Sebastian’s life and of churches which he either founded or served during the half-century of his pastoral ministry. A Life of Fr. Sebastian — the first full biography to appear in any language — is being published concurrently in our magazine, The Orthodox Word. |
| In Job, 13–470, monitum FH., 11–14. (Est Nicetæ Heracleensis catena.) In Proverbia, latine fg. (Peltanus), 469–78. In Ecclesiasten (Ducæus), 477–628. In Jeremiam, fg. (Ghisterius), 627–726. In Jeremiæ threnos (id.), 725–62; in J. epistolam (id.), 773–80. In Baruch (id.), 761–74. In Lucam (M.), 779–80. Notitia FH., 9–10; de Magistris, 9–12. ORIENTALES EPISCOPI. 1 . s. IV. Epistola ad Julium. 2 . s. V. Epistolæ et acta in synodico. 3 . a. 786. Epistola ad Tarasium, 98, 1467–76. 4 . a. 846. Epistola ad Theophilum imperatorem, 95, 345–86. 5 . a. 1443. Sententia synodalis adversus Metrophanem CP. patriarcham, 147, 532–5. – Epistola ad Joannem VIII imperatorem, 535–38. ORIGENES, S. III. 11–17. (Editio Delarue cum supplementis.) I. HexaplorUm quæ supersunt ed. Montfaucon et B. Drach, 15–16, 1–2–3 pars, ad 3008 sexies. Montfaucon. Præfatio, 9–20. – Præliminaria, 19–122 (cap. I-II). – Monitum in anecdota quædam, 121–22. Testimonia in veteres interpretes, 123–140. Ex præfatione edit. cod. syriaco-hexaplaris, 16; 2294–302. II. Exegetica (quæ sunt ex t. 17, ex G. Vide moni-tum, 9–17). (12) 1. In Genesim. Hom. 1–17, lat. Rufinus, 12, 145–262. Ex præfatione librorum, lat. Rufinus, 45–46, Ex commentariorum, t. 1, 45–46. t. 3 (?), 49–88 et 87–90, 91–92. Selecta, 91–146; 47–50; 17, 11–16. Monitum in exegetica in Genesim. 41–46. 2 . In Exodum. Horn. 1–13, lat. Rufinus, 297–396. Ex commentariis, 263–282. Selecta, 281–98; 17, 15–18. 3 . In Leviticum. Horn. 1–16, lat. Rufinus, 405–574. Selecta, 397–404; 17, 17–20. 4 . In Numeros. Horn. 1–28, lat. Rufinus, 583–806. Selecta, 575–84; 17, 21–24. 5 . In Deuteronomium. Selecta, 805–18; 17, 23–36. 6 . In librum Jesu Nave. Ham. 1–26, lat. Rufinus, 823–948. Selecta, 819–24; 17, 35–38. 7 . In Judices. Horn. 1–8, lat. Rufinus, 951–90. Selecta, 949–50; 17, 37–40. 8 . In Ruth, fg., 989–90. 9 . In I Regum. Hom. de Anna et Samuele, lat., 995–1012. Hom. de engastrimytho, gr.-lat., 1011–28. Selecta 991–96; 17, 39–48 (I); 47–52 (II); 53–58 (III). |
| 2 It is noteworthy that the participants in the First Congress of Orthodox Theology (Athens, November 29 – December 6, 1936) discussed a plan for a pan-Orthodox journal, called La Revue Orthodoxe, The Orthodox Review, or Orthodoxe Theologische Zeitschrift. This proposal, submitted by Prof. Nicolae Cotos of the University of Cernauti/Chernivtsi, was unanimously endorsed by the participants, but the project was partially accomplished only with the publication of the first issue of St Vladimirs Seminary Quarterly in the Fall of 1952. See the letter by Fr Alexander Schmemann addressed to Fr Georges Florovsky on December 20, 1948 in Paul Gavrilyuk, On Christian Leadership: The Letters of Alexander Schmemann and Georges Florovsky (1947–1955): Texts transcribed, compiled, translated, introduced, and annotated by Paul Gavrilyuk (Yonkers, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2020), 125–131 (especially 130). See also Proces-verbaux du Premier Congres de Theologie Orthodoxe a Athenes, 29 Novembre – 6 Decembre 1936, publies par les soins du President Prof. Hamilcar S. Alivisatos (Athenes: Impr. «Pyrsos» S.A., 1939), 451–454. 3 The Quarterly was always recognized as being «published by the Faculty of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, a graduate school of Theology for all branches of the Orthodox Church», but this project was undertaken during these decades either by one editor or by an editorial team as follows: Fr Georges Florovsky (Editor-in-Chief) and Julia D. Malinchoc (Managing Editor): vol. 1 (1952–53), no. 1 (Fall 1952) through vol. 3 (1954–55), nos. 3–4 (Spring-Summer 1955); Fr Georges Florovsky (Editor): vol. 4 (1955–1956); Fr Alexander Schmemann, Fr William Schneirla, and Dr Nicholas Arseniev (Editorial Board): vol. 1 (5) (1957), no. 1 (January) through vol. 3 (1959), no. 4 (Fall); Fr Alexander Schmemann, Dr Nicholas Arseniev, Fr John Meyendorff, and Fr William Schneirla (Editorial Board): vol. 4 (1960); Fr Alexander Schmemann (Editor), Dr Nicholas Arseniev, Fr John Meyendorff, and Fr William Schneirla: vol. |
| Less than a year after the celebration of the tenth anniversary of Fr. John’s priestly service he was granted by the highest Church authority one of the most honorable priestly orders, which deservedly crowned his genuine exploits in the Diocese of North America and the Aleutians. By order of the Holy Synod on May 6, 1906, Fr. John was elevated to the dignity of Archpriest. 22 Thus, there began a qualitatively new period in Fr. John’s service: having become one of the most respected archpriests of the Diocese thanks to his outstanding pastoral work in his parish and in diocesan administrative activities, Fr. John, at the initiative of Bishop Tikhon who valued him highly, became more and more deeply involved in resolving the most pressing issues of diocesan administration. In May 1906, Fr. John was appointed dean of the New York area of the Eastern States, 23 and in February 1907, he was destined to be one of the most energetic participants of the first North American Orthodox Council in Mayfield, which dealt with the rapidly increasing conversions within the Diocese of North America and the Aleutians in the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church in America, which was the basis on which the Orthodox Church in America was later founded. During the period 1903-1907, the Chicago-Streator parish, built by his labors, was transformed into one of the most self-sufficient and flourishing diocesan parishes. But however successful the external circumstances of Fr. John’s service in North America may have seemed, his deep, fervent homesickness for his beloved Russia, which he had only seen once for a leave of several months in recent years, and the necessity of providing his three elder children with an undergraduate education in Russia, compelled Fr. John to think about the possibility of continuing his priestly ministry in his native Russian land. A rather significant circumstance furthering Fr. John’s submission of an application for transfer back to Russia was the insistent request of his elderly and seriously ailing father-in-law, who was a clergyman of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, and who dreamt of handing over his parish to the guidance of such a deserving priest as Fr. John had shown himself to be. In accordance with his application, Fr. John received, on May 20, 1907, a release from his service in the Diocese of North America and the Aleutians, whereupon he began preparing himself for his move back to Russia. The week before their departure, however, Fr. John and his family had to bear some sudden startling news from Russia: Matushka Alexandra’s beloved parent had succumbed in advance of their return. In July 1907, leaving the Chicago-Streator parish which was so dear to his heart, and where he had given twelve years of missionary service, Fr. John set out for the unknown future that awaited him in his motherland, where he would spend the rest of his priestly service from thenceforth. 24 |
| Fr. Meyendorff was first of all known for his studies on the Byzantine theologian St. Gregory Palamas (14th century), whose theology can be considered as a true patristic synthesis. For this reason, the initial lectures were dedicated to the notion of “ neo-patristic synthesis, ” which had been introduced for the first time by Fr. Georges Florovsky, and which had been resumed by Fr. John. The initial lectures included: Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, “ Father John Meyendorff and ‘ Neo-Patristic Synthesis ’ ” ; Fr. Nikolaos Loudovikos, “ John Meyendorff and the Possibilities of a Modern Patristic Exegesis ” ; Dr. Ivana Noble, “ Patristic Synthesis or Non-Synthetic Dialectics? A Critical Evaluation of John Meyendorff " s Contribution. " The main theme of the scholarly discussions on Gregory Palamas in the last century had been the relationship between the theology of the hesychast theologian and the system of the “ hierarchies ” of Dionysius the Areopagite (or the “ Pseudo-Dionysius ” , the anonymous author of some writings which date from the end of the 5th century). In his Doctoral Dissertation, submitted at the University of Paris (Sorbonne), A Study of Gregory Palamas (Introduction à l ’ étude de Grégoire Palamas), Fr. Meyendorff — therein following the intuition of Fr. Georges Florovsky — had upheld the thesis that Palamas has applied a “ Christological corrective ” to the writings of Dionysius on the “ Celestial Hierarchy ” and the “ Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, ” the language of which is marked by a Neo-platonic flavor. Some Orthodox theologians have disputed this interpretation by Frs. Meyendorff and Florovsky, in particular, Fr. John Romanides. Some of the speakers in the next set of lectures shared the opinion of Romanides: Fr. Andrew Louth, “ Dionysius, Maximus, Palamas — and Meyendorff? ” ; and Pantelis Kalaitzidis, “ John Meyendorff and John Romanides: Two Different Approaches to Palamite Theology. ” However, Mr. Goran Sekulovski, lecturer in Patristics at the Institute, in his talk entitled, “ Fr. John Meyendorff, Reader of Dionysius the Areopagite, ” underlined the importance of Fr. Meyendorff ’ s study, in which the author points out that Palamas had replaced the mysticism of Dionysius within the context of the mystery of the Incarnation of Christ, which underlies all Christian spirituality and mysticism. For this reason, Mr. Sekulovski argued, there is no doubt that this study of Fr. Meyendorff still remains the basic study on this Byzantine theologian. |
| A special session was dedicated to the History of the Church, since Fr. Meyendorff was a renowned expert on the history of Byzantium and the Slavs. Dr. Pavel Pavlov presented a paper on the relationship between Gregory Palamas and the Islamic world ( “ Palamas ’ View on Islam: Byzantine Insights for Contemporary Society ” ). Dr. Marie-Hélène Congourdeau presented a paper on ‘‘ Nicholas Cabasilas and his defense of Gregory Palamas against the ‘ trifles ’ of Nicephoros Gregoras. ” Dr. Marie-Hélène Blanchet presented an analysis of the development of the use of the term " katholikos " in Byzantium ( " The Different Meanings of the Term ‘ katholikos ’ in Byzantium at the End of the Middle Ages: a Confessional Controversy ” ). Finally, Dr. Constantin Vétochnikov presented a paper on “ The Patriarchal Missions in the Russian Lands during the 14th and 15th Century. ” Transitioning to the last section of the rich and diverse program, dedicated to the Church in the contemporary world, a young scholar from Yekaterinburg, Mr. Andrey Levitskiy, talked about the activities and publications of Fr. Meyendorff in Russia ( “ Fr. John Meyendorff ’ s Publications in Russia: the Story of a ‘ Memorial Festschrift ’ " ) and the circumstances around the notorious “ autodafé ”— burning of books of, among others, Fr. Meyendorff and Fr. Alexander Schmemann, which had been organized in Yekaterinburg by Church authorities in 1998. During the last section, the lectures also touched on the role that Fr. Meyendorff had played in the Ecumenical Movement: Fr. Nicolas Lossky (St. Sergius Institute), Fr. John Meyendorff and the Ecumenical Movement ; Dr. Nicholas Kazarian (St. Sergius Institute), “ Fr. Jean Meyendorff and the WCC. ” Protopresbyter Boris Bobrinskoy, former Dean of St. Sergius, presented a paper on " Palamite Pneumatology in the Context of My Contacts with Fr. John Meyendorff, " in which he showed that Fr. Meyendorff had detected a possible breakthrough in the dead end, ancient controversy on the Filioque. |
| 601 В АП. (215, 1): μφτεροι δ τ πρς γγελαν, κδημαν, πηρεσαν, δουλεαν. Hauler (fr. 35, 20): et ad peregrinationem et ministerium et servitium ad jussionem episcopi paratissimus et mobilis sit. Ср. Функ. (214, 1). 602 Буквально: «и будьте одной душей, которая живет в двух телах». Hauler (fr. 35, 26): et duo (у Hauler " а ошибочно поставлено «domino» вместо «duo»; Функ исправил эту ошибку – р. 214, 4) corpora in una anima portantes. 603 Hauler (fr. 35,27): quantum sit ministerium diaconiae. АП. совершенно уклоняются от сирийского и латинского текста (215, 5): τν τς διακονας μισϑν. 606 АП (215,9): κν δ ψυχν πρ δελφο ποϑσϑαι, μ διστσωσιν. Hauler (fr. 36, 1): ut, si necessitas vos exegerit et animam pro fratre ponere, per ministerium vestrum ponatis nolite dubitare. 609 Hauler (fr. 36, 10): quia discipuli ejus sumus et locum Christi sortiti. В АП. все это сильно изменено. 611 Hauler (fr. 36, 12): quomodo dominus noster succingens se linteum et accipiens in pelve aquam recumbentibus omnibus nobis veniens lavit pedes etc. B АП. передается по Евангельскому тексту (215, 20). 613 В АП. (217, 1): ταπενωσεν αυτν, πς ν μες παισχυνϑσεσϑε,... Hauler (fr. 36, 19): nolite dubitare. 614 Hauler (fr. 36, 19): ut superinponentes et infirmis hoc faciatis, quia operarii veritatis estis, Christi exemplo succincti. Последних слов нет в АП. 615 В АП. (217, 5): ο γρ δ νϑρωπον ποιετε... ν μρ τποκοπς μν. Hauler (fr. 36, 23): nam si ita agitis, secundum hominem facitis ea... in die visitationis. 616 Надписание ΧVII главы в издании Gibson (Codex Harrisianus): «Справедливо, чтобы епископы заботились о сиротах, остающихся малыми, и их воспитании; и осуждение тех, кои, хотя и владеют кое-чем и не испытывают нужды, отличаются жадностью и принимают (известную долю) из даяний, приносимых в церковь для бедных и сирот. 617 Hauler (fr. 37, 1): qui habet pueram, id est filium; АП. Совершенно согласуются с сирийским текстом. 618 Hauler (fr. 37, 2): qui tempore nuptiarum possit eam accipere. АП. (219, 5): τν δ παρϑνον, χων υν δυνμενον ατ τας το γμου ραις σογχρονσαι συζεξ. |
|
|
