| 187 Cf., e.g., the redactional structure of m. " Abot 2:9, where Johanan ben Zakkai asks five disciples a question in positive form, commending the answer of the fifth; when he repeats the question in negative form, he receives mainly the same answers in negative form, and again commends the fifth. 188 Theon Progymn. 1.93–171; cf., e.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.23–25 with Oldfather " s note referring to Plato Apo1. 29C, 28E (LCL 1:70–71). 189 Contrast tedious repetition in some earlier literature, e.g., Homer Il. 8.402–408, 416–422 (except the change from first to third person). 190 See esp. Lyons, Autobiography 29–32. Lyons advises reading such texts critically, not completely rejecting their historical value (p. 66). Vividness was important for rhetorical style (Cicero De or. 2.45.189; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 7), and some writers might add details to augment dramatic effect (Plutarch Alex. 70.3). 191 Aune, Environment, 82. Shuler, Genre, 50, cites Aristotle Rhet. 1.9.5 to the effect that it is appropriate to bestow praise on a man who has not actually done a given work, if his character is such that he would have done it. But this may imply praise for character or for already reported deeds consistent with that character rather than intentional fabrication of events. 192 Thus, for instance, Polybius criticized «tragic historians,» who «improperly combined fictional drama with factual history» (Aune, Environment, 84). Yet tragic elements, praised in poetry (Quintilian 10.1.64), were not out of place in even the strictest of historians. Without fabricating events, Tacitus certainly stamped many of them with tragic coloring (e.g., Ann. 5.9). 193 Shuler, Genre, 11–12; cf. Bowersock, Fiction as History, 1–27. See esp. Lucian Hist. 7–13; in A True Story 1.4 he complains that novelizers failed to recognize how obvious their «lies» were. Herodian (1.1.1–2) shares this criticism despite his own rhetorical adjustments (cf. Whittaker, «Introduction» xxxviii-xxxix)! The complaint also appears in mythography (cf. Philostratus Hrk. 24.1–2). |
| Dorotheus of Gaza (fl. c. 525). Member of abbot Serido’s monastery and later leader of a monastery where he wrote Spiritual Instructions. He also wrote a work on traditions of Palestinian monasticism. Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 315–403). Bishop of Salamis in Cyprus, author of a refutation of eighty heresies (the Panarion) and instrumental in the condemnation of Origen. Ephrem the Syrian (b. c. 306; fl. 363–373). Syrian writer of commentaries and devotional hymns which are sometimes regarded as the greatest specimens of Christian poetry prior to Dante. Eucherius of Lyons (fl. 420–449). Bishop of Lyons c. 435–449. Born into an aristocratic family, he, along with his wife and sons, joined the monastery at Lerins soon after its founding. Eunomius (d. 393). Bishop of Cyzicyus who was attacked by Basil and Gregory of Nyssa for maintaining that the Father and the Son were of different natures, one ingeneratc, one generate. Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260/263–340). Bishop of Caesarea, partisan of the emperor Constantine and flrst historian of the Christian church. He argued that the truth of the gospel had been foreshadowed in pagan writings but had to defend his own doctrine against suspicion of Arian sympathies. Eusebius of Emesa (c. 300-c. 359). Bishop of Emesa from c. 339. A biblical exegete and writer on doctrinal subjects, he displays some semi-Arian tendencies of his mentor Eusebius of Caesarea. Eusebius of Vercelli (fl. c. 360). Bishop of Vercelli who supported the trinitarian teaching of Nicaea (325) when it was being undermined by compromise in the West. Fastidius (c. fourth-fifth centuries). British author of On the Christian Life. He is believed to have written some works attributed to Pelagius. Faustinus (fl. 380). A priest in Rome and supporter of Lucifer and author of a treatise on the Trinity. Filastrius (fl. 380). Bishop of Brescia and author of a compilation against all heresies. Fulgentius of Ruspe (c. 467–532). Bishop of Ruspe and author of many orthodox sermons and tracts under the influence of Augustine. |
| 170 . Levinson 2008: Legal Revision and Religious Renewal in Ancient Israel/Bernard M. Levinson. – Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008. – XXVI, 206 p. 171 . Lichtenstein 1982: Chiasm and Symmetry in Proverbs 31 /M.H. Lichtenstein//CBQ. – 1982. – Vol. 44, 2. – p. 202–211. 172 . Lim 2007: The Book of Ruth and Its Literary Voice/Timothy H. Lim//Reflection and Refraction. Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld/Ed. by Robert Rezetko, Timothy H. Lim and W. Brian Aucker. – Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2007. – p. 261–282. 173 . Linafelt 1999: Ruth/Tod A. Linafelt. And, Esther/Timothy K. Beal; David W. Cotter, editor; Jerome T. Walsh, Chris Franke, associate editors. – Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1999. – XXV, 90, XXII, 130 p. – (Berit olam). 174 . Lindars 1987: Joseph and Asenath and the Eucharist/Barnabas Lindars//Meaning and Method: Essays Presented to Anthony Tyrrell Hanson/Ed. by Barry p. Thompson. – Hull: Hull University Press, 1987. – p. 181–199. 175 . LLT: Library of Latin Texts. Series A, В [Elecronic resource]. – Electronic data. – [Turnhout]: Brepols Publishers, 2002–2008. – Mode access: 176 . Loader 1992: Ruth 2:7: an old crux/J.A. Loader//Journal for Semitics. – 1992. – Vol. 4, 2. – p. 151–159. 177 . Loader 2001: David und seine Ahnmutter im Buch Ruth/J.A. Loader//Begegnung mit Gott: gesammelte Studien im Bereich des Alten Testaments/James Alfred Loader. – Frankfurt a. M.; New York: Peter Lang, 2001. – p. 43–54. (Wiener alttestamentliche Studien; Bd. 3). 178 . Lyke 1998: What does Ruth have to do with Rahab? Midrash «Ruth Rabbah»” and the Matthean genealogy of Jesus/Larry L. Lyke//The Function of Scripture in Early Jewish and Christian Tradition/Ed. by Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders. – Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998. – p. 262–284. 179 . Lyons 1987: A note on Proverbs 31, 10–31 /E.L. Lyons//The Listening Heart: Essays in Wisdom and the Psalms in Honor of Roland E. Murphy/Ed. by Kenneth G. Hoglund [et al.]. – Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987. – p. 237–245. |
| Den Boeft J. Δξα in the Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons//Studia Patristica. Vol. 18(3). 1989. P. 111–118. Brunt P. A. Marcus Ayrelius and Christians//Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History/Ed. C. Deroux. Brussels, 1979. P. 483–520. Chagny A. Les martyrs de Lyon de 177. Lyon, 1936. Colin J. L’empire des Antonins et les martyrs gaulois de 177. Bonn, 1964. Dehandschutter B. A Community of Martyrs: Religious Identity and the Case of the Martyrs of Lyons and Vienne//More than a Memory. The Discourse of Martyrdom and the Construction of Christian Identity in the History of Christianity/Ed. J. Leemans. Leuven, 2005. P. 3–22=Dehandschutter B. Polycarpiana. Studies on Martyrdom and Persecution in Early Christianity. Collected Essays. Leuven, 2007. P. 237–255. Demougeot E. A propos des martyrs de 177//Revue des Études Anciennes. Vol. 68.1966. P. 323–331. Den Boeft J., Bremmer J. Notiunculae martyrologicae IV//Vigiliae Christianae. Vol. 45. 1991. P. 105–122. Den Boeft J., Bremmer J. Notiunculae martyrologicae V//Vigiliae Christianae. Vol. 49. 1995. P. 151–158. Farkasfalvy D. Christological Content and Its Biblical Basis in the Letter of the Martyrs of Gaul//Second Century. Vol. 9.1.1992. P. 5–25=Christianity in Relation to Jews, Greeks, and Romans/Ed. E. Ferguson. New York, 1999. P. 279–300. Fishwick D. The Imperial Cult in the Latin West. Studies in the Ruler Cult of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire. Vol. 3: Provincial Cult. Pt. 3: The Provincial Centre; Provincial Cult. Leiden; Boston, 2004. Frend W. H. C. Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church. A Study of Conflict from the Maccabees to Donatus. Oxford, 1965. Goodine E. A., Mitchell M. W. The Persuasiveness of a Woman: The Mistranslation and Misinterpretation of Eusebius’ Historia Ecclesiastica 5.1.41//Journal of Early Christian Studies. Vol. 13.1. 2005. P. 1–19. Griffe E. La Gaule chrétienne à l’epoque romaine 1. Des origins chrétiennes à la fin du IVe siecle. Paris, 1964. Guillaumin M.-J. “Une jeune fille qui s’appelait Blandine”. Aux origines d’une tradition hagiographique,//Epektasis. Melanges J. Danielou/Ed. J. Fontaine, C. Kannengiesser. Paris, 1972. P. 93–98. |
| Dawson, Ibid. Dawson, ibid. 168. Young, Biblical Exegesis, 61. Cf. St Gregory of Nazianzus, Panegyric on St Basil, Oration 43.11, discussing the many benefits of education, comments that “from secular literature we have received the principles of enquiry and speculation.” Trans. in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, vol. 7 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983). Cf. M. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), esp. 350-80; J. L. Kugel and R. A. Greer, Early Biblical Interpretation (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986). P. Ricoeur, Essays on Biblical Interpretation (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 51. See the comments by J. Barr, Holy Scripture: Canon, Authority, Criticism (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983), 70. St Justin Martyr, First Apology, 31.7, ed. by M. Marcovich, PTS 38 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1994); trans. in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987). St Ignatius of Antioch, Philadelphians, 8.2-9.3, ed. and trans. by K. Lake, The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 1985). St Irenaeus of Lyons, Against the Heresies [=AH], 4.26.1; ed. A. Rousseau et al, Sources chretiennes, 100, 152-3, 210-11, 263-4, 293-4, (Paris: Cerf, 1965-82); trans. in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987). Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, 6.1.1, ed. and trans. by H. E. Butler, Loeb Classical Library, 4 vols. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 1925-30). Cf. St Irenaeus of Lyons, Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, 87, trans. J. Behr (New York: SVS, 1997). G. Florovsky, “The Function of Tradition in the Ancient Church,” in his Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View (Vaduz: Buchervertriebsanstalt, 1987), 75. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 6.15.125.3, ed. O. Stahlin, 3 rd ed. rev. by L. Fruchtel, GCS 52 (Berlin: Akademie, 1960); trans. in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987). Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, 2, ed. R. S. Moxon (Cambridge Patristic Texts, 1915); trans. in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980). |
| In spite of the stringent requirements placed on organisers by SA Health, the event ran extremely smoothly. Several speakers addressed the gathering, including Martin Iles (Managing Director of the Australian Christian Lobby), Tom Kenyon (former Labor and current Family First candidate for the SA upper house), Joanna Howe (Professor of Law at the University of Adelaide), Claire Scriven (MLC for Labor in the SA upper house) and Senator Claire Scriven (Liberal member of the Senate). A common theme among the presenters was the need for people of faith to engage more directly in the political process, in order to get people aligned with the pro-life cause pre-selected by their parties, and ultimately elected into parliament where they can push the changes through (the same tactics the pro-abortionists have been using for decades). As part of this overall strategy, Professor Howe also announced an exciting new initiative called the “ Enid Lyons List ”. For decades, a pro-abortionist group by the name of Emily’s List has been responsible for helping pro-abortionist women get into parliament. So successful have they been, that of all the lower-house female MPs in SA, only one of them – Member for Enfield, Ms Andrea Michaels – voted against the final abortion-to-birth Bill (and the Orthodox faithful noted with pride that she is one of their own). Enid Lyons was a mother of twelve, and the first female to be elected to the Federal House of Representatives and to serve in a Federal Cabinet. She was herself a staunch anti-abortionist, and this organisation was established in her honour to help more pro-life women get into parliament. Those present also heard miraculous testimony of a mother who was pressured to abort her child due to a supposed brain abnormality detected at their 20-week scan, only to give birth to a healthy baby girl. Her testimony is proof of the need for reform in this area. In all, in the wake of last year’s potentially demoralising loss in the South Australian parliament, this was an encouraging result, and bodes well for the future of the pro-life cause in this State. |
| Gregory of Nyssa, St (c.330 – c.395): Greek Father. Extracts from his writings: From Glory to Glory, ed. J. Danielou and H. Misurillo (London, 1962; St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, New York, 1979). Gregory Palamas, St (1296–1359): Archbishop of Thessalonica, Greek Father, defender of the Hesychast tradition of prayer. See J. Meyendorf, A Study of Gregory Palomas (London, 1964; St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, New York, 1974) and St Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality (St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, New York, 1974). Gregory the Theologian, St (329–89): commonly known in the west as ‘Gregory of Nazianzus’, one of the three ‘Great Hierarchs’. His celebrated Theological Orations may be found in Eng. tr. in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second series, vol. vii (Oxford, 1894). Hermas (2nd century): author of The Shepherd, to be found in J.B. Lightfoot (tr.), The Apostolic Fathers (London, 1891). Ignatii (Brianchaninov), Bishop (1807–67): Russian spiritual writer, author of On the Prayer of Jesus (London, 1952) and The Arena (Madras, 1970), both translated by Archimandrite Lazarus (Moore). Ioannikios, St (c.754 – c.846): Greek ascetic, monk at Mount Olympus in Asia Minor, opponent of the Iconoclasts. Irenaeus of Lyons, St (c.130 – c.200): Greek Father, a native of Asia Minor; knew St Polycarp of Smyrna; in later life Bishop of Lyons. Besides a long work Against the Heresies, he wrote a short Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, tr. J.A. Robinson (London, 1900). Isaac the Syrian, St (late 7th century): Bishop of Nineveh, Syriac Father. His Mystic Treatises are tr. by A.J. Wensinck (Amsterdam, 1923). Isaias of Sketis, St (died 489): Greek monk, first in Egypt and subsequently in Palestine. John Chrysostom, St (c. 347 – 407): Archbishop of Constantinople, Greek Father, one of the three ‘Great Hierarchs’. The best known of his many writings is On the Priesthood, tr. G. Neville (London, 1964; St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, New York, 1977). John Climacus, St (?579 – ?649): also known as ‘John of the Ladder’; Greek spiritual writer, abbot of Sinai, author of The Ladder of Divine Ascent, tr. Archimandrite Lazarus (Moore) (London, 1959). |
| These three essential meanings of the parousiacosmic transfiguration, resurrection, and judgmentare not subjects of detailed speculation by Byzantine theologians; yet they stand at the very center of Byzantine liturgical experience. The feast of the Transfiguration (August 6), one of the highlights of the Byzantine liturgical year, celebrates, in the «Taboric light,» the eschatological anticipation of Christ» " s coming: «Today on Tabor in the manifestation of Thy Light, O Word, Thou unaltered Light from the Light of the unbegotten Father, we have seen the Father as Light and the Spirit as Light, guiding with light the whole of creation.» 450 On Easter night, the eschatological dimension of the Resurrection is proclaimed repeatedly: «O Christ, the Passover great and most holy! O Wisdom, Word, and Power of God! Grant that we may more perfectly partake of Thee in the day which knows no night in Thy Kingdom.» 451 The parousia, as judgment, appears frequently in Byzantine hymnology, particularly in the Lenten cycle. In this cycle, too, active love for oné " s neighor is often emphasized by the hymnographers: «Having learned the commandments of the Lord, let us follow this polity: let us feed the hungry, let us give drink to the thirsty, let us clothe the naked, let us welcome strangers, let us visit the sick and the prisoners, so that the One who comes to judge the whole earth may tell us: come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the Kingdom which is prepared for you.» 452 The only subject on which Byzantine theologians were forced into more systematic and theoretical debates on eschatology was the medieval controversy on purgatory. The Latin doctrine that divine justice requires retribution for all sins committed, and that, whenever «satisfaction» could not be offered before death, justice would be accomplished through the temporary «fire of purgatory,» was included in the Profession of Faith signed by emperor Michael VIII Paleologus and accepted at the Council of Lyons (1274). 453 The short-lived union of Lyons did not provoke much debate on the subject in Byzantium, but the question arose again in Florence and was debated for several weeks; the final decree on union, which Mark of Ephesus refused to sign, included a long definition on purgatory. 454 |
| But apart from that, as is evident from the letter of the martyrs, Pothinus was still living, and was, therefore, the canonical Bishop of Lyons. In order to accept that Irenaeus was Bishop at the time when he composed the letter in the name of the martyrs of Vienne and Lyons, we have to suppose either that this letter was written after the martyrdom of Pothinus (which would be incompatible with the purpose and content of the letter), or that when Irenaeus wrote the letter he was Bishop of Vienne, and was later transferred to Lyons which would conflict with the existing ancient tradition which, as we have seen, knows no Bishop of Vienne by the name of Irenaeus. There remains no choice, then, but to accept that Irenaeus was simply a presbyter at the time when he wrote in the name of the brethren in Vienne and Lyons, and succeeded Pothinus in the see of Lyons – and only Lyons – after the latter’s martyrdom. d) In consequence of the above, Eusebius’ obscure statement that Irenaeus “oversaw” (episkopei) the “paroikies in Gaul”, does not imply that he was the only Bishop in that region in charge of more than one Church; instead, it should be regarded as a transposition of the concept of the rights of the metropolitan, already well developed in Eusebius’ day, to the time of Irenaeus when such rights had not yet been definitively formed. Such anachronisms are common in Eusebius as we saw in the case of Pontus and Crete 313 . If in the foregoing cases, Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History gives the mistaken impression that one Bishop headed more than one Church, in reference to Palestine, Eusebius gives the opposite and, as will be shown, equally mistaken impression that more than one Bishop was heading one and the same Church. Thus referring to Alexander of Jerusalem, he writes that he “was thought worthy of that bishopric, while Narcissus, his predecessor, was still living”, and therefore describes the episcopacy of Jerusalem as “the presidency of Narcissus with him [i.e. Alexander] 314 ”. |
|
|
