Bioethical Dilemmas through Patristic Thought Content Type Journal Article Pages 32-37 Authors Archimandrite Makarios Griniezakis, St. George Monastery of Epanosifis, Heraklion, Crete, Greece Journal Human Reproduction & Genetic Ethics Online ISSN 2043-0469 Print ISSN 1028-7825 Journal Volume Volume 8 Journal Issue Volume 8, Number 2 / 2002.

The article considers the history of implementation and evolution of Accusatory theology in the Kyiv Theological Academy. The author shows the place where the controversy with other religions and other Christian denominations took place in the curriculum of the Kyiv Theological Academy after the introduction of the Statute of the religious schools of 1808–1814 in Kyiv. The article deals with the content of the lecture courses of Archbishop Smaragd, Archimandrite Antonin, Bishop Sylvester, Philip Ternovsky, and Bishop Augustine. The author (...) shows that the Accusatory theology was not an independent academic discipline at first, but it was part of the general course of theology. For the first time, lectures on accusatory theology were given in Kyiv in 1823. On the recommendation of the Commission of theological schools, teachers of this discipline were to use the book of the German Lutheran theologian Johann Ernst Schubert «Institutionum Theologiae polemicae» during the preparation of lectures. Comparison of this book with the lectures of hieromonk Smaragd shows that the work of the German theologian was used by the Kyiv teacher quite selectively. Next, the article shows how in the following decades the content of the course of accusatory theology varied, depending on the general situation in theological education in the Russian Empire. In particular, the changes that took place in the curriculum of the Kyiv Theological Academy in the 1840’s were characterized on the initiative of the Chief Procurator of the Holy Synod, Mykola Protasov. The author drew attention to the personal preferences of professors who found a reflection in their curriculum in Accusatory theology. In particular, Bishop Sylvester in his course substantially expanded the controversy with the latest philosophical currents that opposed Christianity. Instead, Philip Ternovsky and Bishop Augustine actively used the historical method, resulting in their courses representing the history of the controversy of the Orthodox Church with its various opponents. In the 1860’s, when a large-scale reform of theological education was being prepared in the Russian Empire, the idea of a radical revision of the accusatory theology teaching concept was heard at the Kyiv Theological Academy. At the same time, some professors even advocated the abolition of accusatory theology as an independent discipline and for joining it to the course of church history. Special attention is paid to the fact that the courses of accusatory theology in the Kyiv Theological Academy in the nineteenth century were based on typical contemporary ecclesiology and soteriology of that time. The purpose of the course was seen not in the equal dialogue with opponents, but in revealing their mistakes and attempts to convert them to the Orthodox Church. Article received 03.07.2019. (shrink)

Although Archimandrite Jovan Rajić's Catechism is not an original contribution to Serbian theology, the historical context of its origin makes it extremely significant. The theological analysis of the Catechism must therefore take into account the specific circumstances of its origin. Rajić's Catechism is significantly influenced by Latin theological heritage, which can be seen both in the layout of the material and in its content. However, at a given historical moment, by writing and publishing his Catechism, Rajić managed to prevent (...) another one in a series of attempts to unite the Orthodox Serb population in the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. The effects of Latin theological heritage on Rajić's work are significant, and these influences will continue in later times, so it is important that they are clarified and recognized. These impacts are manifested in many ways. The first one is reflected in the layout of the material, the second in its processing, and the third in the absence of specifically Orthodox viewpoints. Nevertheless, the final judgment on the Catechism must be made on the basis of the historical context of its origin. (shrink)

This article addresses the writing of the history of Russian philosophy from the first of such works—Archimandrite Gavriil’s Russian Philosophy [ Russkaja filosofija , 1840]—to philosophical histories/textbooks in the twenty-first century. In the majority of these histories, both past and present, we find a relentless insistence on the delineation of “characterizing traits” of Russian philosophy and appeals to “historiosophy,” where historiosophy is employed as being distinct from the historiographical method. In the 1990s and 2000s, the genre of the history (...) of Russian philosophy has grown increasingly conservative with regards to content, with histories from this period demonstrating an almost exclusive Orthodox focus. This conservatism, in turn, has contributed to widespread contention in recent years over the status of these philosophical textbooks—disagreements that often lead to either (1) further appeals to “historiosophical” methods; or (2) denials of the domestic philosophical tradition altogether, where the response to the query “Is there philosophy in Russia?” is emphatically negative. This article argues that the contemporary disputes over the development and preservation of the Russian philosophical canon are in many ways part of a larger debate over the roles of Orthodoxy and the history of philosophy in post-Soviet philosophical thought. (shrink)

Most of the manuscript monuments of Ukrainian spirituality of the XI-XVII centuries., preserved in our days, by their origin, origin, content, use, historical fate, are in many cases obliged to the Institute of monasteries and monks., copyists, compilers, editors, portholes, translators, proofreaders. This statement is supported by research by scientists of several generations of chronicle sources in a wide range - from outstanding chronicles and printed monuments of world and national significance of the level "Words on Law and Grace", "Tales (...) of the Past Years", Kiev-Pechersk Paterik to chronicles, chronographs, chronicles of local importance, as well as "chroniclers", diaries, records of outstanding representatives of Ukrainian monasticism - Kiev-cave archimandrites Yosafat Krokowski, Varlaam Yasinsky, saint, abbot of several Ukrainian monasteries Dimitri Tuptalsky, petimantry Tombs, abbot of Brest monastery Afanasii Filipovich and others. (shrink)

Two Councils dealt with the birth and rebirth of the Moscow Patriarchate: the general Council of Constantinople of 1593 and the local Council of Moscow in 1917. In the course of the discussions two speakers based their arguments in favor of the Russian Patriarchate on the authority of canons: they were the Patriarch of Alexandria Meletius Pigas and the archimandrite, later bishop and martyr, Hilarion Troitsky. Despite the common recourse to the most ancient and authoritative canonical sources, the perspectives (...) of the two speakers appear different. Meletius Pigas refers to the structure of the universal Church, that is to the number and order of the Patriarchal Sees, and he adapts all the legislation he quotes to this end. On the other hand, Hilarion Troitsky considers exclusively the particular Church and rather sees in those same canons the primary intent of safeguarding the ecclesiastical autonomy of local jurisdictions and, above all, the need for a Primacy in them. (shrink)

The paper examines the connections between the rector of Kharkiv Collegium, Archimandrite Lavrentii Kordet, and some of the close friends, acquaintances, and correspondents of Hryhorii Skovoroda. The main focus is on Kordet’s intellectual biography and the essential features of interpersonal communication among the faculty of Kharkiv Collegium in the second half of the 18th century. The study draws on the principles of network analysis and reconstruction of intellectual network models. The author argues that Lavrentii Kordet, Hryhorii Skovoroda, and some (...) of their friends connected with Kharkiv Collegium (Mykhailo Kovalynskyi, Yov Bazylevych, etc.) embodied the type of person whose identity centered on intellectual activity. They devoted a significant portion of their lives to academic teaching, cared about professional self-improvement, and kept up with the latest scholarly and literary works. These intellectuals engaged in active “academic communication” with their colleagues, which was designed to generate specific activities aimed at dissemination of learning. The community of which Lavrentii Kordet and Hryhorii Skovoroda were part clearly represented a new type of intellectual relations in the lands of Sloboda Ukraine. (shrink)

Im Jahre 1850 hat der russische Archimandrit Porfirij Uspenskij von einer Reise nach dem Sinai unter anderem vier Ikonen mitgebracht, die zu den ältesten ihrer Gattung gehören. Es handelt sich um eine Ikone mit der Darstellung der Gottesmutter, eine mit Johannes dem Vorläufer, eine Tafel mit der Darstellung zweier Heiliger, die durch spätere Inschriften als Sergios und Bakchos bezeichnet werden, und schließlich um eine weitere Ikone mit den Brustbildern zweier Heiliger. Nach dem Tode Uspenskijs kamen die Tafeln mit der übrigen (...) Sammlung 1885 in das Kirchlich-archäologische Museum an der Geistlichen Akademie Kiev, später (1940) in das Staatliche Kiever Museum für westliche und östliche Kunst. Beschreibungen oder Listen der Ikonen hat Uspenskij nicht hinterlassen, und auch sein schriftlicher Nachlaß gab keine Auskünfte. Bereits 1886 hat Petrov einen Katalog erstellt, und auch schon die Ikonen zumeist in das 6./7. Jahrhundert datiert. Auf diesen Katalog ist er jedoch später nicht mehr zurückgekommen. J. Strzygowski sah die letztgenannte Ikone, als sie auf dem 7. archäologischen Kongreß in Moskau 1890 ausgestellt war, und er hat sich ausführlich mit ihr auseinandergesetzt. Freilich war der Publikation noch keine vollständige Photographie beigegeben. Dann sind die Sinai-Ikonen anscheinend in einem Museumsführer 1897 publiziert worden. Eine ausführliche Untersuchung widmete 1902 Ajnalov diesen Ikonen, 1912 folgte die Publikation durch Petrov im Inventarband des Museums, die sich an den betr. Stellen eng an Ajnalov anlehnt, ja dessen Text wörtlich übernimmt. (shrink)

The glorious Sophia image of Nikolai Mokrogo, now completely forgotten, was the oldest national shrine and one of the first miraculous icons of Kievan Rus known to us. The name of the icon is associated with the "Miracle of the Infant in Kiev", which dates from the researchers no later than 1090. The legend tells about the marriage, which went to the pilgrimage to the relics of Boris and Gleb in Vyshgorod. They returned to Kyiv by the Dnipro in a (...) boat. In the road, a tired woman was asleep and dropped into the water a baby, which immediately drowned. Parents of the child turned to despair in despair. Mykola "having a great faith in him", asking for help. Indeed, the next morning the child of a bud was found undisturbed on the outside of the chambers of Sophia of Kiev: "... the child is lying wet in front of the image of St. Nikolai "[Leonid, Archimandrite. Life and miracles of St. Nikolai Mirlykysky and praise him. Investigation of two monuments of ancient Russian writing of the XI century. - St. Petersburg, 1881. - P. 90.] The icon of the saint, under which was found miraculously saved sv. Nicholas is a child in wet diapers, nicknamed Nikolay Mokrogo. For centuries it was located on the choirs of the St. Sophia Cathedral in the iconostasis of the Mykolaiv altar, on the right of the royal gates, occupying the place of the temple image. (shrink)

The mid fifth century was largely marked by a Christological controversy that began with private teachings of the ambassador of the Alexandrian see to Constantinople, the prominent Archimandrite Eutyches. The precise teaching of Eutyches remains somewhat obscure, since no written work by him is extant. Thus, everything that the modern historical scholarship knows about Eutyches’ theology comes from secondary sources, such as the writings of his opponents or scontemporary Synodal Acts. Consequently, the fine points of Eutyches’ Christological position are (...) subject of scholarly debate. However, on the basis of the unchallenged contemporary historical evidence, as it is found in the original trial of Eutyches for heresy at the Synod of Constantinople in 448 AD, a critical evaluation of Eutyches’ Christological position seems possible. In this article it was argued that the Christological teaching of Eutyches was inadequate in terms of the later Christological standard set at Chalcedon (451 AD). (shrink)

The difficulty of the task that the authors of this book have posed themselves is due in the first instance to the fact that this period has been very little studied in the history of philosophy. In applying the term "early Russian philosophy" to the set of ideas, images, and conceptions of a philosophical order contained in the cultural texts of the tenth through the seventeenth centuries, M.N. Gromov and N.S. Kozlov see it not simply as a specific stage in (...) the development of Russian philosophy but as a "very particular phenomenon that is qualitatively unique and requires special study" . Thus the authors declare their own position in the far from finished debate about the specificity of Russian philosophy and the distinctive features of its historical development. They rely not only on the vast treasury of early Russian texts that have come down to us but also on the scholarship of historians of literature, language, painting, architecture, folklore, and other areas of culture. Of course, the book also gives careful consideration to the few studies that have been devoted to the historical-philosophical analysis of early Russian culture, from the works of the Archimandrite Gavriil to the most recent works by Soviet and foreign authors published in decades just past. (shrink)

The Book of Historical Documents is an ancient Chinese written monument, a collection of addresses of the ruler to the subjects and of the subjects to the rulers. The philosophical meaning of Shu jing is that it mentions or refers to the issues of a broad ideological order. These brief references either gave life to philosophical ideas, or later, after appropriate interpretation, were used by the philosophers to authoritatively confirm their thoughts. The first complete Russian translation of Shu jing was (...) done by Archimandrite Daniil in the early 40s of the 19th century. The translation was undertaken, first and primarily, as a teaching material assigned to students of the Chinese Language Cathedra at the Kazan Imperial University. This cathedra was first one established in Russia and the second one in Europe. Archimandrite Daniel was its first head in 1837-1844. Unfortunately, the translator have never had a chance to publish his work. Sivillov for the first time in Russian and European Sinology used a purely Chinese commented edition of The Book. The canonical text used by Sivillov and later his followers was considered and understood through the prism of modern Neoconfucianism, which, in comparison with ancient and early medieval Confucianism, reinterpreted and significantly enriched the philosophical meaning of the Shu jing. In some points of understanding of the Neoconfucian interpretation of the ancient text, Archimandrite Daniil was not only ahead of, but also more successful than his later colleagues. The text of the previously unpublished Shu jing Chapter III Da Yu mo Russian translation by archimandrite Daniil is attached. (shrink)

Данная работа представляет собой первую часть исследования, посвященного становлению и трансформации канонического изложения истории философии Нового времени в русскоязычной философской литературе. Начиная с последних десятилетий XIX века в европейских и американских учебниках по истории философии окончательно фиксируется канон новоевропейской философии, который представлен нарративом о противостоянии двух главных эпистемологических традиций Нового времени: рационализма (в лице Декарта, Спинозы и Лейбница) и эмпиризма (в лице Локка, Беркли и Юма). Однако такое изложение истории новоевропейской философии возникает в противоборстве разных традиций (кантианской, гегельянской, позитивистской и (...) пр.), каждая из которых предлагала свои схемы классификации и упорядочивания философских систем Нового времени. Отражение этой борьбы можно найти в появляющейся в XIX веке русскоязычной учебной литературе по истории философии. Поэтому задача данного исследования — рассмотреть и проанализировать образы философии Раннего Нового времени в русскоязычной учебной литературе первой половины XIX века, чтобы выявить основные тенденции в формировании канона новоевропейской философии как с точки зрения его главных представителей, так и с точки зрения нарратива, который описывает динамику развития философской мысли XV–XVII веков. В центре рассмотрения данной статьи находится многотомная «История философии» (18–) архимандрита Гавриила (Воскресенского), которая оказывается проводником француз- ского влияния на российскую традицию историографии философии. В работе показано, что архимандрит Гавриил заимствует основную канву своего повествования из учебника по истории философии Селестина Иппо, который, в свою очередь, опирается на схематизацию историко-философского процесса, предложенную Виктором Кузеном. (shrink)

The article dedicated to the 200th anniversary of Dmytro Vasyliovych Pospiekhov, a philosopher, psychologist, theologian and translator, for the first time in the scientific literature, highlights the milestones of his academic biography and more than 50 years of professor’s tenure at the Department of Philosophy of Kyiv Theological Academy. Based on the analysis of a significant array of printed sources and archival documents, memories of colleagues and students of Dmytro Pospiekhov, the content and specifics of his educational, administrative, editorial and (...) publishing, translation activities at the Academy were revealed for the first time; his important role in the training of professional philosophers, the development of philosophical education and the spread of philosophical knowledge in the East Slavic territories was proven. Paying special attention to Dmytro Pospiekhov’s methods of teaching of philosophical disciplines, the author emphasizes his lecturing methodology, innovative for the theological academies of the time, as well as the heuristic, religious, educational, and moral impact on the students. A special emphasis is placed on Dmytro Pospiekhov’s scientific and editorial activities, his biographical and bibliographic studies, his role in the preservation and studying of the heritage of prominent philosophers and theologians of Kyiv Theological Academy of the 1820s‒1840s: Archpriest Ivan Skvortsov, Archimandrite Theophanes, Sylvestr Hohotskyi. Analyzing Dmytro Pospiekhov’s printed works for the first time, the author reveals the content and significance of his theological and philosophical study of the Book of Wisdom, which emphasizes the direct connection of this Judaic source to the philosophical teachings of Philo of Alexandria, Plato, and the Stoics. The author also draws attention to the significant research potential of Dmytro Pospiekhov’s manuscript heritage, linking it with the study of the prospects of determining his role in the development of psychological science in theological academies and the expansion of modern scientific ideas about the content and specifics of teaching of philosophical disciplines in Kyiv of the second half of the 19th Century. (shrink)

Publication date: 2 May 2019 Source: Author: Tetiana Tverdokhlib The article focuses on the pedagogical component in the content of Pastoral Theology in the Ukrainian educational institutions of the Orthodox Church, which were included in the system of religious education of the Russian Empire at the beginning of the nineteenth century – at the end of the 1860's. Basing on the studied works “On Positions of Parish Presbyters” by the bishop of the Smolensk Parfenii and the Archbishop of Mogilev, Georgii, (...) “Letters on Positions of Sacred Rank” by Olexandr Sturdza, “Pastoral Theology” by Archimandrite Anthonii, as well as programs, lecture notes and lecture reviews of lecturers of theological seminaries and the Kiev Theological Academy it has been established that much attention at classes on Pastoral Theology was paid to the preparation of future priests for the religious and moral upbringing of parishioners. The main forms and methods of teaching Pastoral Theology have been presented on the basis of the analysis of archival materials, historical, pedagogical literature. Attention is drawn to the widespread dissemination in the seminaries of rote learning and text dictating, despite the prohibition of such methods by the 1814 Statute. The quality of teaching and staffing of this subject in the secondary and higher Ukrainian educational institutions of the Orthodox Church in the period under research. It has been proved that Pastoral Theology in seminaries was on an equal footing with other branches of theology: teachers understood its great importance for future presbyters and paid much attention to the subject as distinct from the Kiev Theological Academy. (shrink)

This article attempts to reveal intercultural connections at the Kyiv Theological Academy at the beginning of the 20th century by reconstructing the spiritual biographies of two theological academy professors: Archimandrite (later, Archbishop of Berlin and Germany) Tykhon (Tymofii Liashchenko) and Petro Kudriavtsev. The article demonstrates how different cultural traditions intersected and combined in the spiritual experience of these figures. The author of the article argues that, as a result of revolutionary events in 1917–1919, both Kyiv Theological Academy professors experienced (...) transformations in personal cultural identity, and their spiritual biographies reveal a transition from Russian to Western European and a combination of both (Tykhon (Liashchenko) identities), and from Russian to Ukrainian ideological cultural orientation (Petro Kudriavtsev). (shrink)

In volume 4, L’età hegeliana II, on the first half of the nineteenth century outside of Germany and Great Britain, the team of researchers raised by Santinello has provided a comprehensive investigation of the French Joseph-Marie Degérando and Victor Cousin ; of the Italians Baldassarre Poli, Vincenzo Gioberti, Pasquale Galluppi, and Antonio Rosmini ; of the Spaniards Tomás Lapeña, Sebastián Quintana, Victor Arnau y Lamea, Tomás García Luna, and Jaime Balmes, of the Austrians Michael Klaus, Eduard Job, Gottfried Immanuel Wenzel, (...) and Johann Pleithner, of the Ungarian historians of philosophy between 1740 and 1840, and finally of the Russians Aleksandr Ivanoviè Galiè and Gavriil the Archimandrite. (shrink)