St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series II: History. Russian Church History

The article deals with the notion of ars Dei (“art of God”) in philosophical and theological thought of St. Augustine of Hippo. It is argued that ars Dei is not only an intelligent design or knowledge which God had with regard to his creation, but also the divine Wisdom and Word of God, in whom exist the eternal and unchangeable forms and reasons of all things, according to which God not only knows, but also creates everything. It is notified, that the notion of ars Dei reflects the Neo-Platonic notion of the universal Intellect (νοDς) and also has an affi nity with the concept of the universal Logos, or “designing Logos” (τεχνικOς λMγος), as found in the works of Philo and in those of several Greek Fathers of the Church, as well as is a result of a development of the biblical notions of the Wisdom and Word of God, through whom all things were made. In the same time Augustine’s doctrine is truly without peer in contemporary philosophical and Patristic literature.

St. Augustine of Hippo, Neoplatonism, early Christianity, Patristics, trinitarian Theology, Cosmology.

1. Fokin A. R. Formirovanie trinitarnoi doktriny v latinskoi patristike. Moscow, 2014.
2. Dillon J. The Middle Platonists. L., 1977.
3. Hadot P. La metaphysique de Porphyre // Entretiens sur l’Antiquite classique. Geneve, 1965. 12. P. 139–140.
4. Hadot P. Porphyre et Victorinus. P., 1968. Vol. 1–2.
5. Majercik R. Porphyry and Gnosticism // Classical Quarterly. 2005. 55. P. 277–292.
6. Simmons M. B. Arnobius of Sicca: Religious Confl ict and Competition in the Age of Diocletian. Oxford; N. Y., 1995.
7. Waillis R. T. Neoplatonism. L., 1972.

Fokin Aleksei

The unique place which holds St. Augustine in the Western tradition make us to pay attention to the reception of his heritage in the Russian theology, that was sometimes so close to the western one. That why we examine the correlation between his ideas and the thought of the famous Russian theologian St. Philaret of Moscow. There we provide the correlation in thiadology, ecclesiology, in the doctrine of the pure love, in the relation to the grace and freedom. Our research let us to conclude that the correlation between these saint fathers was a rather complex phenomena. But we can witness that St. Augustine’s theology influenced St. Philaret. In the domain of triadology Augustine serves as a basis for his own thought. In the Doctrine of the Grace St. Philaret retain the “anthropological pessimism” characteristic for St. Augustine but tends to avoid the extremity of his position. St. Philaret also softens Augustine’s doctrine of the “pure love” and concentrates on the suffering as a testimony of its unselfi shness. The closest point in their heritage is a doctrine of the boarders of the Church, but St. Philaret uses different argumentation while defends the same theses. We may interpret their acknowledgement of these theses (with different argumentation) as an evidence of its truly patristic character.

blessed Augustine, Saint Filaret, triadology, augustinism, pure love, the boundaries of the Church, grace, freedom and predestination.

1. Sancti Aureli Augustini. Scripta contra donatistas / recensuit M. Petschenig. Vindobonae [etc.]: F. Tempsky [etc.], 1908.
2. Avgustin Avrelii, blzh. O Troitse: V 2 ch. Moscow, 2005.
3. Paskal' B. Mysli. M.: Eksmo-Press, 2000.
4. Reglament dukhovnyi // Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi Imperii. Sobranie pervoe. Saint-Petersburg, 1830. T. 6.
5. Filaret Moskovskii, svt. Mneniia, otzyvy i pis'ma. Moscow, 1905.
6. Filaret Moskovskii, svt. Nachertanie tserkovno-bibleiskoi istorii. Saint-Petersburg, 1816.
7. Filaret Moskovskii, svt. Slova i rechi: V 5 t. Moscow, 1873–1885.
8. Filaret Moskovskii, svt. Sobranie mnenii i otzyvov po uchebnym i tserkovno¬gosudarstvennym voprosam: V 5 t. Saint-Petersburg, 1885–1888.
9. Filaret Moskovskii, svt. Tvoreniia. Moscow, 1994.

Khondzinskii Pavel, archpriest

The present study continues a series of publications exploring “augustiniana” within the Russian ecclesiastical scholarship, i.e. the work of professors and students of Theological academies devoted to Saint Augustine and conducted prior to the Russian Revolution. In this paper we switch our attention from the person and heritage of the bishop of Hippo to so called Augustinian movements of the 17th century and in particular to Jansenism. We predominantly focus on two texts: Magister’s thesis of an alumni of Saint-Petersburg Theological Academy Ivan Troitsky (1859) — a future professor of his Alma Mater, and a paper of his pupil Vasily Bellavin — in future the Most Holy Patriarch Tikhon. The latter document dates back to 1891 and is based on currently unavailable Candidate’s thesis of Vasiliy Bellavin (1888). Our analysis has shown that although the content of the two explored documents is out of date (now that 150 years have elapsed since they were written), their signifi cance for the history of theology is out of doubt. The questions posed by Jansenism turned out highly relevant for the church life in Russia in the late 1850s as well as in the late 1880s — early 1890s. Jansenists reflected upon church hierarchy and its authority, the “enigma of humanity”, actual and potential state of human nature, grace and freedom, the role Holy Scripture in the life of the Church and every christian, religious upbringing and education. Another factor that elevated interest to Jansenists’ movements of the 17th century during the second of the above mentioned periods was the preparation to a new stage of the dialog with the Old Catholics who had joined the followers of Jansenists, i.e. with the Church of Utrecht. Treating Jansenists’ thought with sympathy the young Russian theologians proved open to consider without bias all truth seeking attempts leading to Orthodox tradition. However in both cases our authors soberly realised that Jansenists predominantly focused on fighting the challenges that triggered the birth of Jansenism, which never resulted in joining the true Church.

Russian Orthodox Church, theology, Saint-Petersburg Theological Academy, St. Augustine, Jansenism, Paschasius Quesnel, St. Tikhon (Bellavin), Ivan Troitsky, Ivan Osinin.

1. Avgustin (Nikitin), arkhim. Pravoslavno-starokatolicheskii dialog, in Bogoslovskie trudy. Iubileinyi sbornik, posviashchennyi 175-letiiu Leningradskoi dukhovnoi akademii. Saint-Petersburg, 1986. P. 47–62.
2. Arsen'ev I. V. Starokatolichestvo i ego otnoshenie k Pravoslaviiu. Moscow, 1893.
3. Dobronravov V. Desiat' let iz istorii starokatolicheskogo dvizheniia, in Khristianskoe chtenie. 1890. № 9/10. P. 257–317.
4. Dobronravov V. Istoriia starokatolicheskogo dvizheniia, in Khristianskoe chtenie. 1890. № 9/10. P. 257–317; № 11/12. P. 545–592.
5. Kopylova E. A. Uchastie Sankt-Peterburgskogo otdela Obshchestva liubitelei dukhovnogo prosveshcheniia v peregovorakh predstavitelei starokatolikov s Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkov'iu , in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi. 2011. Vol. 3 (40). P. 7–16.
6. Osinin I. T. Rimskii novyi dogmat o zachatii Presviatoi Devy Marii. Saint-Petersburg, 1858.
7. Sergeenko A., prot. Ocherki iz istorii starokatolicheskogo dvizheniia, in Bogoslovskie
trudy. 1960. № 1. P. 111–141.
8. Sukhova N. Iu. Blazhennyi Avgustin v kandidatskikh dissertatsiiakh rossiiskikh dukhovnykh akademii (1860–1910-e gg.) // Blazhennyi Avgustin i avgustinizm v zapadnoi i vostochnoi traditsiiakh / Pod red. N. Iu. Sukhovoi, prot. P. Khondzinskogo. Moscow: PSTGU, 2016. P. 232–246.
9. Sukhova N. Iu. Blazhennyi Avgustin v kievskoi dukhovno-uchebnoi traditsii (XIX — nachalo XX v.), in Trudy Kievskoi dukhovnoi akademii. Kiev, 2013. № 19. P. 189–202.
10. Sukhova N. Iu. Izuchenie naslediia blazhennogo Avgustina v vysshei dukhovnoi shkole Rossii (vtoraia polovina XIX — nachalo XX v.) // Blazhennyi Avgustin i avgustinizm v zapadnoi i vostochnoi traditsiiakh. P. 211–231.
11. Sukhova N. Iu. «Istoriko-bogoslovskaia revoliutsiia» v vysshei dukhovnoi shkole Rossii, in Filaretovskii al'manakh. Vol. 9. Moscow: PSTGU, 2013. P. 142–143.
12. Chistovich I. A. S.-Peterburgskaia dukhovnaia akademiia za poslednie tridtsat' let (1858–1888). Saint-Petersburg, 1889.

Sukhova Nataliia

The article deals with of St. Augustine and St. Filaret’s of Moscow views on state involvement in the conversion of heretics and schismatics to Orthodoxy. The study of St. Augustine and St. Filaret’s views on public authorities involved in the conversion of heretics and schismatics allows to have a fresh look at the value of coercive measures for the mission of the Church. Despite the fact that one of the authors lived at the dawn of the Orthodox Empire, and the other observed its decline, the theological issues of the question of compulsion in matters of faith has not significantly changed. Using measures of the state compulsion does not imply the termination of the church preaching. Without church activity coercion by the state is not generally allowed. These measures, in Saint’s opinion, are necessary to remove obstacles to joining the church unity to those who have already appealed to the Orthodox faith, but because of ingrained habits, are in schism. Of course, the external retaining factors are relevant only for the weak Christians, but it is very difficult for them to overcome external obstacles to the Church without help of the state, and in some cases even impossible.

Saint Philaret of Moscow, Saint Aurelius Augustine, the mission of the Church.

1. Bezhanidze G. V. Konstantin Zedergol'm chinovnik osobykh poruchenii i dukhovnyi syn prepodobnogo Makariia Optinskogo // Perepiska Konstantina Zedergol'ma so startsem Makariem Optinskim. Moscow, 2013. P. 24–25.
2. Bezhanidze G. V. Predstavleniia o sakral'nosti tsarskoi vlasti v Russkoi Tserkvi v Novoe vremia, in Russkoe bogoslovie: traditsiia i sovremennost'. Moscow, 2011. P. 75–89.
3. Bezhanidze G. V. Sviatitel' Filaret i ober-prokuror A. P. Tolstoi, in Filaretovskii al'manakh. Vol. 4. Moscow, 2008. P. 93–121.
4. Belolikov V. Z. Literaturnaia deiatel'nost' blazhennogo Avgustina protiv raskola donatistov. K., 1912.
5. Rodnikov N. P. Uchenie blazhennogo Avgustina o vzaimnykh otnosheniiakh mezhdu gosudarstvom i tserkov'iu sravnitel'no s ucheniem o tom zhe ottsov, uchitelei i pisatelei tserkvi pervykh chetyrekh vekov i srednevekovykh teokraticheskikh bogoslovov zapadnoi tserkvi. Kazan', 1897.
6. Bonner G. St. Augustine of Hippo. Life and Controversies. Norwich, 1986.
7. Willis G. G. Saint Augustine and the Donatist Controversy. L., 1950.

Bezhanidze Georgii

The article deals with those Russian translations from Pseudo-Augustine which were published in the 18th century. The popularity enjoyed by the texts inscribed with the name of the bishop of Hippo is witnessed by the fact that there exist several translations of each of them. The author compares the texts uniting them into groups according to their publisher and translator rather than taking each of them separately. The first of these groups is constituted by the translations made at the order of N. Novikov by V. Belyayev while the second one comprises the texts translated at the order of A. Syromyatnikov by protopriest K. Krizhanovsky. The peculiarity shared by the texts of the second group is ample commentaries appended to them. The diff erences in the variants upheld by the translators as well as the obvious attention given by the commentator to those places in the texts which contain notions of topical importance for the teachings of the Freemasons allow the author to put forward a hypothesis that the translations were made to counterbalance each other and that the second group aimed either at starting a dialogue with the Freemasons or at working out a set of arguments to counter their doctrine.

18th century, saint Augustinus, pseudo-Augustinus, translation projects, Russian translations of Greek and Latin patristic writings, freemasonry, Typography Company, N. Novikov, В. Belyayev, prot. Konstаntin Krizhanovsky, A. Syromyatnikov.

1. Vernadskii G. V. Russkoe masonstvo v tsarstvovanie Ekateriny II. Pg., 1917.
2. Longinov M. N. Novikov i Shvarts: Materiialy dlia istorii russkoi literatury v kontse XVIII veka. Moscow, 1858.
3. Longinov M. N. Novikov i moskovskie martinisty. Moscow, 1867.
4. Rodosskii A. S. Opisanie knig grazhdanskoi pechati XVIII stoletiia, prinadlezhashchikh SPb. dukhovnoi akademii. Saint-Petersburg, 1896.
5. Semennikov V. P. Sobranie staraiushchikhsia o perevode inostrannykh knig, uchrezhdennoe Ekaterinoi II. 1768–1783 gg. Saint-Petersburg, 1913.
6. Semennikov V. P. Knigoizdatel'skaia deiatel'nost' N. I. Novikova i Tipograficheskoi kompanii. Pb., 1921.
7. Tikhonravov N. S. Russkaia literatura XVIII i XIX vv. Moscow, 1898.
8. Pavel (Khondzinskii), sviashch. Blazhennyi Avgustin v russkoi dukhovnoi traditsii XVIII v., in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. 2011. Vil. 1 (33). P. 22–36.
9. Brecht M. Der mittelalterliche (Pseudo-)Augustinismus als gemeinsame Wurzel Katolischer und evangelischer Fromigkeit // Jansenismus, Quietismus, Pietismus. Gottingen, 2002. P. 54–64.

Golovnina Natal'ia

The article discusses the problem of the relation to the works of St. Augustine and the views of the representatives of the conservative theological episcopal start community — the middle of the 18th century. Metropolitan Stefan (Yavorsky) svyaschennomuchennika Metropolitan Arseny (Matseevich) and Archbishop Theophylact (Lopatinskii). Analyzing quoting St. Augustine in the work of Russian scholars, we can understand how and for what purposes they are treated to the authority of the ancient saint in what consisted their difference from the progressive part of the so-called “Russian avgustinistov”. As research shows, these authors are actively turning to the works of St. Augustine and quoted many times in his various works, but it does not make them representatives of the so-called “Russian Augustinian”. They use the authority of St. Augustine, to neutralize the possibility of using its own theological and political opponents.It should also be noted that due to the insufficient level of study of the works of the traditionalists of the 18th century., most of which are not only studied, but have not been published, and some are only open for the study of the manuscript. For this reason, it is impossible to adequately assess the level of reception of the ideas of St. Augustine in the Russian theology of the early period of the Synod. It can be concluded that they have the choice was made in favor of the perception of Augustine as the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, whose poetic images fi ll their sermons poetic and theological content, leading to edify necessary for the preacher to the moral conclusion.

Augustine, Metropolitan Stehpan (Yavorsky), Metropolitan Arseny (Matseevitch), Archbishop Theophylact (Lopatinsky), Russian Augustinianism, “Stone of Faith”, “The yoke of the Lord and the good time It’s easy”.

1. Grigor'ev A. B. Sochinenie mitropolita Riazanskogo i Muromskogo Stefana Iavorskogo «Igo Gospodne blago i bremia ego legko», in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. 2011. Vol. 6. (38). P. 101–115.
2. Dreksel', Ieremiia. Iliotropion, to est' obrashchenie Solntsa, ili Sozertsanie voli chelovecheskoi s voleiu bozheskoiu / Per. s lat. [Ioanna Maksimovicha]. Moscow: Univ. tip., u N. Novikova, 1784.
3. Zabelin I. E. Pervoe vodvorenie v Moskve greko-latinskoi i obshchei evropeiskoi nauki. Moscow: Univ. tip., 1887.
4. Izvekov D. G. Propovednicheskaia protivu-protestantskaia literatura na Rusi v pervoi polovine XVIII stoletiia, in Pravoslavnoe obozrenie. 1871. №1.
5. Maslov S. I. Biblioteka Stefana Iavorskogo, in Chteniia v istoricheskom obshchestve Nestora Letopistsa. Kn. 24. Vol. 2. Kiev, 1914.
6. Morev Ioann, prot. «Kamen' very» mitropolita Stefana Iavorskogo, ego mesto sredi otechestvennykh protivosektantskikh sochinenii i kharakteristicheskie osobennosti ego dogmaticheskikh vozzrenii. Saint-Petersburg, 1904.
7. Moroshkin I. A. Feofilakt Lopatinskii, arkhiepiskop Tverskoi, in Russkaia starina. 1886. № 1−2.
8. Platonov S. F. Moskva i Zapad. Berlin, 1926.
9. Pokrovskii N. A. F. Lopatinskii, in Pravoslavnoe obozrenie. 1872. № 12.
10. Popov M. S. Arsenii Matseevich, mitropolit Rostovskii i Iaroslavskii. Saint-Petersburg: [skl. izd. u avt.], 1905.
11. Samarin Iu. F. Stefan Iavorskii i Feofan Prokopovich // Cobr. soch. T. V. 1880.
12. Stefan (Iavorskii), mitr. Kamen' very. Moscow: Sinodal'naia tipografiia, 1728.
13. Stefan (Iavorskii), mitr. Kamen' very. Moscow, 1843.
14. Stefan (Iavorskii), mitr. Igo Gospodne blago i bremia Ego legko, in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. 2012. Vol. 1 (39). P. 87–113; Vol. 2 (40). P. 113–141. [Publ. A. B. Grigor'eva].
15. Feofilakt (Lopatinskii), arkhiep. Oblichenie nepravdy raskol'nicheskiia, pokazannyia vo otvetakh vygotskikh pustosviatov na voprosy chestnago ieromonakha Neofita, ko uveshchaniiu i prizyvaniiu ikh k Sviatei Tserkvi, ot Sviateishago Pravitel'stvuiushchago Sinoda k nim poslannago, sochinennoe poveleniem zhe Blagochestiveishiia Velikiia Gosudaryni nasheia Imperatritsy Elisaveti Petrovny Samoderzhitsy Vserossiiskiia pri Naslednike Eia Imperatorskago Velichestva, vnuke Gosudaria Imperatora Petra Velikago, Ego Imperatorskom Vysochestve, Blagovernom Gosudare Velikom Kniaze Petre Feodoroviche i pri Obruchennoi Neveste Ego, Eia Imperatorskom Vysochestve, Blagovernoi Gosudaryne Velikoi Kniazhne Ekaterine Alekseevne, i blagosloveniem Sviateishago Pravitel'stvuiushchago Sinoda napechatannoe v leto ot sotvoreniia mira 7254 ot Rozhdestva zhe po ploti Boga Slova 1745. Moscow, 1745.
16. Fokin A. Trinitarnoe uchenie blazhennogo Avgustina v svete pravoslavnoi triadologii IV veka, in Bogoslovskii sbornik PSTBI. 2002. № 9.
17. Khondzinskii Pavel, sviashch. Blazhennyi Avgustin v russkoi dukhovnoi traditsii XVIII v., in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. 2011. Vol. 1 (33).
18. Khondzinskii Pavel, sviashch. Dva truda ob istinnom khristianstve: Sviatitel' Tikhon Zadonskii i Iogann Arndt, in Zhurnal Moskovskoi patriarkhii. 2004. № 2. P. 62–73.
19. Tsvetaev I. V. Iz istorii inostrannykh ispovedanii v Rossii XVI–XVII vv. Moscow, 1886.

Grigor'ev Anton

Author supposes that the major social-politic events in European history of the fi rst half of the 20th century have as their root an eschatological utopian tradition that subdues the fact of world Redemption to progressive logic of history. The circle of theologians from Dominican and Jesuit’s Orders associated with Saulchoir (Tournai, Belgium) and Fourvière (Lyon, France) has proposed some theological responses for such kind of opposition to the Christian testimony in the world. They have evident correlation with each other in their general principals and common convictions in the inner structure of theology (cf. M. Blondel and M.-D. Chenu). The theological system has an experience of faith and obedience to the Church as its root, historical research (cf. «théologie de ressourcement», «positive théologie» or historical theology) as its foundation. Two great representatives of Catholic theology — Yves Congar and Henri de Lubac — followed that direction in their scientific works. Congar succeeded in his project of theology of unity that had to resolve two great schisms: 1) between faith and life, 2) between the Church and the world. He developed his ideas in two vectors of ecclesiology: historical ecclesiology (nature and theology of the Church) and practical ecclesiology (position of the Church in dialogue with the other confessions and external world). Henri de Lubac saw the beginning of the crisis of the world Christianity in the actual condition of contemporary theology as a result of inner opposition between reason and faith. His activity was directed at its overcoming. He edifies the structure of theology from the phenomenon of faith understood as a supernatural gift of God. Further lines were identified as a unity in social, historical and transcendent dimensions.

Eschatology, utopian tradition, theological programmes, postitive theology, speculative theology, théologie de ressourcement, ecclesiology, M.-D. Chenu, Y. Congar, M. Blondel, H. de Lubac, surnaturel.

1. Lakrua Zh. Moris Blondel', ego zhizn' i tvorchestvo // On zhe. Izbrannoe: Personalizm. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2004. P. 536–577.
2. Balthasar H. U. von, Chantraine G. Le cardinal Henri de Lubac. L’homme et son oeuvre. P.; Namur, 1983.
3. Blondel M. Les Premiers ecrits de M. Blondel. P., 1956.
4. Chenu M.-D. Une ecole de theologie: le Saulchoir // Alberigo G., Chenu M.-D., Fouilloux E., Jossua J.-P., Ladriere J. Une ecole de theologie: le Saulchoir. P.: Cerf, 1985. Р. 91–176.
5. Congar Y. Chretiens desunis. Principes d’un «oecumenisme» catholique. P., 1937.
6. Congar Y. Esquisses du mystere de l’Eglise. P., 1941.
7. Congar Y. Theologie // Dictionnaire de theologie catholique. T. 15 (1943). Col. 341–502.
8. Congar Y. Vraie et fausse reforme dans l’Eglise. P., 1950.
9. Congar Y. Jalons pour une theologie du laicat, 1953, 19642.
10. Congar Y. La foi et la theologie. Tournai, 1962.
11. Congar Y. Chretiens en dialogue. Contributions catholiques a l’oecumenisme. P., 1964.
12. Congar Y. Sainte Eglise — Etudes et approches ecclesiologiques. P., 1964.
13. Congar Y. L’Ecclesiologie du haut Moyen Age: de saint Gregoire le Grand a la desunion entre Byzance et Rome. P., 1968.
14. Congar Y. L’Eglise. De Saint Augustin a l’epoque moderne. P., 1970.
15. Congar Y. L’unite: Refl exions souvenirs 1929–1973. P., 1974.
16. Congar Y. Diversite et communion. Dossier historique et conclusion theologique. P., 1982.
17. Congar Y. Theologie historique // Initiation a la pratique de la theologie. Introduction. P., 1982. P. 233–262.
18. Flynn G. Yves Congar’s vision of the Church in a world of unbelief. Ashgate, 2004.
19. Le nouveau Petit Robert. Dictionnaire alphabetique et analogique de la langue francaise. Paris, 2008.
20. Lubac H. de. Apologetique et Theologie, in Nouvelle Revue Theologique. N. 57 (1930). P. 361–378.

Mikhailov Petr

Author analyzes in detail a text of the “Oratio...”, paying attention to composition, concepts, and rhetorical devices used by Karion Istomin in his panegyric reference to Princess Sophia Alekseevna with a gift of books, now known as Pseudo-Augustine’s Bogovidnaya Lubov’. Obviously, this event can be considered as the fi rst acquaintance with the “doctrine” of Saint Augustine at the Moscow court. The article reconstructs some contexts that are relevant to the choice of this particular book, made by Karion for Sophia Alekseevna. Love of God, creation of the City of God, the Good in Bogovidnaya Lubov’ are central, tightening concepts for understanding of mind, soul, and human senses. Russian intellectuals of that time including Karion Istomin, hoped that emphasis in “Oratio...” on these concepts could help strengthen human relationship with God, a necessity of wisdom, enlightenment, the light God-given mind, educational innovations within the faith, that they wished their state and its «citizenship» would have. The author draws attention to the presentation by Karion of five human senses, as physical and spiritual ones. Among them Karion prefers “hearing” that in a certain way contradicts with the main idea, represented in his book Bogovidnaya Lubov’. The article also focuses on the poetic preface to Bogovidnaya Lubov’, based on the rules of the baroque rhetorical poetics of the end of the 17th century, and addressed to Princess Sophia Alekseevna.

St. Augustine, Pseudo-Augustine “Manuale”, Karion Istomin, Princess Sophia Alekseevna, russian intellectuals of the 17th century, orthodox enlightenment, baroque rhetoric, eulogy, human and divine love, the mind, the heart, the soul, fi ve senses,

1. Brailovskii S. N. Odin iz pestrykh XVII stoletiia: Ist.-lit. issled.: V dvukh chastiakh s prilozheniiami. Saint-Petersburg, 1902.
2. Eleonskaia A. S. Russkaia oratorskaia proza v literaturnom protsesse XVII veka. Moscow, 1990.
3. Kalugin V. V. «Kniga sv. Avgustina»: oshibki perevoda ili raznochteniia originala?, in Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 9: Filologiia. 2013. № 4. P. 110–124.
4. Kalugin V. V. «Kniga sviatogo Avgustina» v russkoi pis'mennosti XVI–XIX vekov, in Lingvisticheskoe istochnikovedenie i istoriia russkogo iazyka. 2001. Moscow: Drevlekhranilishche, 2002. P. 108–163. URL: http://www.ruslang.ru/doc/lingistoch/2001/05-kalugin.pdf
5. Kalugin V. V., Onipenko N. K. Leksicheskii kriterii atributsii drevnerusskogo perevoda (Redemptor mundi: Iskupitel' mira), in Voprosy russkogo iazykoznaniia: Grammatika i tekst (K iubileiu G. A. Zolotovoi). Moscow, 2011. Vol. 14. P. 574–580.
6. Karion Istomin. Oratsiia pri podnesenii tsarevne Sofii Alekseevne knigi blazhennogo Avgustina «Bogovidnaia liubov'» (13 marta 1687 g.) // Brailovskii S. N. Odin iz pestrykh XVII stoletiia: Ist.-lit. issled. V dvukh chastiakh s prilozheniiami. Saint-Petersburg, 1902. P. 469–481.
7. Karion Istomin. Kniga Liubvi znak v chesten brak. Emblematicheskaia poema v stile russkogo barokko, ob"ediniaiushchaia iskusstvo, slovo i izobrazhenie. Prepodnesena Petru I i Evdokii Lopukhinoi po sluchaiu ikh brakosochetaniia. Moscow, 1989.
8. Kiseleva M. S. Intellektual'nyi vybor Rossii 2-i pol. XVII — nach. XVIII v.: Ot drevnerusskoi knizhnosti k evropeiskoi uchenosti. Moscow: Progress-traditsiia, 2011.
9. Pogosian E. A., Smorzhevskikh-Smirnova M. A. «Iako az na rany gotov»: Petr I na ikone Tallinskogo Nikol'skogo khrama, in Humaniora: Litterae Russicae. Tartu, 2009. P. 23–28.
10. Russkaia sillabicheskaia poeziia. XVII–XVIII vv. L., 1970.
11. Sazonova L. I. Karion Istomin, in Slovar' knizhnikov i knizhnosti Drevnei Rusi. Vol. 3 (XVII v.). Ch. 2. Saint-Petersburg, 1993.
12. Sazonova L. I. Literaturnaia kul'tura Rossii. Rannee Novoe vremia. Moscow, 2006.
13. Sofronova L. A. Kul'tura skvoz' prizmu poetiki. Moscow: Iazyki slavianskikh kul'tur, 2006.
14. Fonkich B. L. Greko-slavianskie shkoly v Moskve v XVII veke. Moscow: Iazyki slavianskikh kul'tur, 2009.
15. Shustova E. Iu. Simvolika serdtsa v emblematicheskom tekste l'vovskogo Apostola 1666 g., in Vestnik RGGU. 2015. № 9. P. 123–131.
16. Hippisley A., Luk’janova E. Simeon Polockij ’s Library. A Catologue. Bohlau Verlag Koln; Weimar; Wien, 2005.
17. Simeon Polockij . Rifmologoin. Eine Sammlung h.fi sh-zeremonieller Gedichte / Herrausgegeben von Antony Hippisley, Hans Rothe, Lidia I. Sazonova. [Simeon Polotskii. Rifmologion. Sobranie pridvorno-tseremonial'nykh stikhov. T. 1 / Podgotovka teksta, stat'ia i kommentarii Entoni Khippisli, Khansa Rote, Lidii Sazonovoi]; Bohlau Verlag Wien; Koln; Weimar, 2013. Band 1. S. I-CLX+ 480.

Kiseleva Marina

The article examines st. Dimitry’s of Rostov contacts with Kiev and Chernigov in 1701–1709. Dimitry’s correspondence is vast, but addressees of the most of the known letters are Dmitry’s Moscow friend and Great Russian hierarchs. Problem of st. Dimitry’s contacts with his Little Russian acquaintances still remain obscure. This article deals with the information of st. Dimitry of Rostov correspondence with addressees in Kiev and Chernigov and the circumstances of Dimitry’s visit to Chernigov in 1704. In time of his episcopal service st. Dimitry exchanged letters with Josaph Krokowski, archimandrit of Kievan Lauras and future metropolitan of Kiev. Letters were sent with agents of both hierarchs. This correspondence was devoted to the publication of the “Lives of the Saints” in the Lavra’s typography. There are no evedencies of st. Dimitry writing letteres to members of Chernigov clergy in 1701–1709, although st. John Maximovich archbishop of Chernigov sent his new books to Dimitry of Rostov. However in february of 1704st. Dmitry undertook a journey to Chernigov that left almost no traces in sources. The main evidence is record of Pachomios of Roman, a Moldavian ascetic, about himself meeting Rostov metropolitan in Chernigov in 1704. This trip was an exeptional event and could be connected with the demise of Parthenios Neboza, metropolitan of Holmogory, who died suddenly on 2 january 1704 in Yaroslavl. Author concludes that Dimitry of Rostov in 1701–1709 was not isolated from his old friends and mantained his ties with educated clergy of Little Russia during the years of his Episcopal service in Moscow and Rostov.

St. Dimitry of Rostov, St. John (Maksimovich) of Tobolsk, Joasaf Krokowski, ukrainian clergy, history of Russian Church.

1. Videneeva A. E. Ob istochnikakh po istorii Rostovskogo arkhiereiskogo doma XVIII v. v fondakh RGADA // Istoriia i kul'tura Rostovskoi zemli. 1993. Rostov, 1994. P. 152–154.
2. Evgenii (Bolkhovitinov), mitr. Slovar' istoricheskii o byvshikh v Rossii pisateliakh Dukhovnogo china, Grekorossiiskie Tserkvi. Saint-Petersburg, 1827. T. 2.
3. Ziborov V. K., Iakovlev V. V. Parfenii Neboza // Slovar' knizhnikov i knizhnosti Drevnei Rusi. Vol. 3 (XVII v.). Ch. 3 / Otv. red. D. S. Likhachev. Saint-Petersburg, 1998. P. 15–17.
4. Kameneva T. N. Knigopechatanie v Chernigove (1646–1818) // Problemy istochnikovedeniia. Moscow, 1959.
5. Lastovskii V. V. Ioasaf Krokovskii, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia. T. XV. M., 2011. P. 194–196.
6. Nikolaev S. I. Iz literaturnoi estetiki Petrovskoi epokhi // XVIII vek. Sb. 18. Saint-Petersburg, 1993. P. 218–229.
7. Nikolaev S. I. Literaturnaia kul'tura Petrovskoi epokhi. Saint-Petersburg, 1996.
8. Rubtsova M. L. Zhizn', trudy i epokha sv. Dimitriia Rostovskogo // Sviatitel' Dimitrii, mitropolit Rostovskii: Issledovaniia i materialy. Rostov; Spaso-Iakovlevskii Dimitriev monastyr', 2008. P. 15–152.
9. Titov A. A. Sinodiki XVII i XVIII vv. Rostovskogo Uspenskogo Sobora. Rostov, 1903.
10. Trekhletov E. Istoriia ili izvestvovanie, in Iaroslavskie gubernskie vedomosti. 1852. № 33. P. 292.
11. Trudy Poltavskoi Uchenoi Arkhivnoi Komissii / Vasilenko V. I. i dr., red. Vol. 13. Poltava, 1912.
12. Chistovich I. Novgorodskii mitropolit Iov: Zhizn' ego i perepiska s raznymi litsami, in Strannik. 1861. T. 1, fevral'. P. 61–145.
13. Shliapkin I. A. Sv. Dimitrii Rostovskii i ego vremia. Saint-Petersburg, 1891.
14. Uo D. K. Rasprostranenie novostei v Rossii XVII v.: epistoliarnyi opyt Patrika Gordona, in Quaestio Rossica. 2015. № 3. P. 119–140.
15. Fedotova M. A. O dvukh istochnikakh ukranskikh propovedei sviatitelia Dimitriia Rostovskogo (Foma Mlodzianovskii i Kornelii a Lapide), in TODRL. Saint-Petersburg, 1993. T. 48. P. 343–350.
16. Fedotova M. A. O neizdannykh sochineniiakh sviatitelia Dimitriia Rostovskogo: k postanovke problem, in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. III: Filologiia. 2014. Vol. 1 (36). P. 47–64.
17. Fedotova M. A. Epistoliarnoe nasledie Dimitriia Rostovskogo. Issledovanie i teksty. Moscow, 2005.
18. Filaret (Gumilevskii), arkhiep. Istoriko-statisticheskoe opisanie chernigovskoi eparkhii. Kn. 2. Chernigov, 1873.
19. Filaret (Gumilevskii), arkhiep. Istoriko-statisticheskoe opisanie Chernigovskoi eparkhii. Kn. 6. Chernigov, 1874.
20. E. P. B. Ioann (Maksimovich Ivan; 1651–1715), mitr. Tobol'skii i vseia Sibiri, svt. Sochineniia., in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia. T. 23. Moscow, 2010. P. 228–229.
21. Iankovskaia L. A. Literaturno-bogoslovskoe nasledie svt. Dimitriia Rostovskogo: vospriiatie iezuitskoi nauki XVI–XVII vv.: Dis. ... d-ra filol. nauk. Moscow, 1994.
22. Iatsimirskii A. I. Vnov' naidennyi avtograf sviatitelia Dimitriia Rostovskogo, in Drevnosti: Trudy slavianskoi komissii. 1902. T. 3. P. 132–138.

Krylov Aleksei

The emergence of the scholarly theology in Russia is a problem which is not solved yet in the modern historiography. The author off ers a suggestion about the key role of A. V. Gorsky (since 1860 — archpriest) in the development of the image of the scholartheologian of the second half of 19th — early 20th. He lived during the epoch of the significant shift in the development of theology in Russia. It was in that epoch emerged a higher ecclesiastical education in Russia. There had to be carried the research activity and the development of the theological discourse relevant with the challenges of the era. However, there were some essential contradictions. For example, the lack of opportunity to fully combine the ecclesiastical office with the academic vocation. Thus, some professors of the ecclesiastical academies, coming from the clergy, refrained from both monasticism and from marriage. Naturally, it was not a normative behavioral strategy in the context of the Synodal period and caused distrust of the contemporaries. However, this lifestyle promoted the institutionalization of the theology and thus contributed to the realization of the 1808–1814 system’s mission. Gorsky was the first who integrally fulfill this program of the scholarly theology. There is also an attempt to structure the elements of «scholarly theology» in the context of the Synodal period. It is possible to distinguish the following elements: 1. The estate (soslovie) identity; 2. Being outside of the church hierarchy; 3. The academic everyday life as a meaningful aspect of church ministry. The image of the scholar-theologian in Russia was strongly infl uenced by A. V. Gorsky and next generations of theologians combined those elements of Gorsky's academic practice.

Archpriest Alexander Gorsky, Russian theological scholarship, clergy estate, collective identities, the institutionalization of the scholarship, the system of the higher ecclesiastical education in Russia.

1. Agapova N. G. Povsednevnost' i paradigmy nauchnoi deiatel'nosti, in Chelovek v mire kul'tury: istoriia i kul'tura povsednevnosti: Materialy VII mezhdunarodnogo filosofsko-kul'turologicheskogo simpoziuma. Riazan', 2011. P. 16–25.
2. Aleksei (Lavrov-Platonov), arkh. Slovo pred otpevaniem zasluzhennogo professora Moskovskoi dukhovnoi akademii Petra Simonovicha Kazanskogo 16 fevralia 1878 goda, in Pravoslavnoe obozrenie. 1878. T. 1. № 3. P. 487–494.
3. Vorob'ev M. N. A. V. Gorskii i K. I. Nevostruev (k voprosu o soavtorstve), in Bogoslovskii sbornik. Moscow, 1997. № 1. P. 277–295.
4. Vostokov A. Kh. Opisanie russkikh i slovenskikh rukopisei Rumiantsevskogo muzeuma. Saint-Petersburg, 1842.
5. Vysochaishe utverzhdennoe 26 maia 1869 g. mnenie Gosudarstvennogo Soveta, ob"iavlennoe Senatu Sviateishim Sinodom «Ob ustroistve detei lits pravoslavnogo dukhovenstva» // Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi Imperii II. T. 44. Otd. 1. Saint-Petersburg, 1872. № 47138.
6. Vysochaishe utverzhdennyi 30 avgusta 1814 g. proekt Ustava pravoslavnykh dukhovnykh uchilishch // Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi Imperii I. T. 32. Saint-Petersburg, 1830. № 25673.
7. Gennadii (Gogolev), arkhim. Velikan uchenosti: Zhizn' i trudy protoiereia A. V. Gorskogo. Moscow, 2004.
8. Giliarov-Platonov N. P. A. V. Gorskii // Sbornik sochinenii. T. 2 / Red. K. P. Pobedonostsev. Moscow, 1899. P. 464–465.
9. Giliarov-Platonov N. P. Iz perezhitogo: Avtobiograficheskie zapiski. T. 1, 2. Moscow, 2009.
10. Glubokovskii N. N. Za tridtsat' let (1884–1914 gg.) // U Troitsy v Akademii. Moscow, 1914. P. 737-757.
11. Golubinskii E. E. Vospominaniia // Polunov A. Iu., Solov'ev I. V. Zhizn' i trudy akademika E. E. Golubinskogo. Moscow, 1998. P. 143–230.
12. Golubinskii F. A., prot. Istoriia obshchestva sostavivshegosia pod nazvaniem «Uchenykh besed» v Moskovskoi dukhovnoi akademii 1816 goda marta 1 dnia // U Troitsy v Akademii. Moscow, 1914. P. 1–10.
13. Golubtsov S. A., protodiak. Moskovskaia dukhovnaia akademiia dorevoliutsionnogo perioda. T. II: Kafedry i lichnyi sostav Akademii. Ch. 2: Biobibliograficheskii slovar' sotrudnikov Akademii. Moscow, 1987.
14. Gorskii A. V., prot. Iz pis'ma ot 18 noiabria 1842 goda k bratu Vladimiru Vladimirovichu v Pekin // U Troitsy v Akademii. Moscow, 1914. P. 402–403.
15. Gorskii A. V., prot. Dnevnik. Moscow, 1885.
16. Zhivov V. M. Razyskaniia v oblasti istorii i predystorii russkoi kul'tury. Moscow, 2002.
17. Zhurnaly Komissii pri Sviateishem Sinode po vyrabotke proekta novogo Ustava dukhovnykh akademii 18 marta — 27 noiabria 1909 g. Saint-Petersburg., 1909.
18. Kazanskii P. S. V zashchitu russkogo dukhovenstva, in Pribavleniia k Tvoreniiam Sviatykh Ottsov. 1881. Ch. 28. Kn. 4. P. 520–564; 1882. Ch. 30. Kn. 2. P. 564–638.
19. Kazanskii P. S. Vospominaniia ob A. V. Gorskom, in Bogoslovskii vestnik. 1900. T. 3. № 11. P. 544–560.
20. Kazanskii P. S. Perepiska s Aleksandroi Nikolaevnoi Bakhmet'evoi // U Troitsy v Akademii. Moscow, 1914. P. 510–589.
21. Katanskii A. L. Vospominaniia starogo professora. S 1847 po 1913 god. N. Novgorod, 2010.
22. Kefner N. V. Nauchnaia povsednevnost' poslevoennogo pokoleniia sovetskikh istorikov: Dis. ... kand. ist. nauk. Omsk, 2006.
23. Lebedev A. P. K moei ucheno-literaturnoi avtobiografii i materialy dlia kharakteristiki besprintsipnoi kritiki // On zhe. K moei ucheno-literaturnoi avtobiografii i materialy dlia kharakteristiki besprintsipnoi kritiki: Sb. pamiati A. P. Lebedeva. Saint-Petersburg, 2005. P. 17–43.
24. Listovskii I. S. Filaret, arkhiepiskop Chernigovskii. Chernigov, 1894.
25. Mel'kov A. S. Zhiznennyi put' i nauchnoe nasledie protoiereia A. V. Gorskogo. Moscow, 2006.
26. Pisaniuk S. Uchenaia deiatel'nost' professora protoiereia Aleksandra Gorskogo. Dipl. rab. Sergiev Posad: MDA, 1996.
27. Popov S. Rektor Moskovskoi Dukhovnoi Akademii protoierei A. V. Gorskii, in Bogoslovskii vestnik. 1896. № 1–12.
28. Postnikov P. Ocherki zhizni i deiatel'nosti Aleksandra Vasil'evicha Gorskogo // U Troitsy v Akademii. Moscow, 1914. P. 254–341.
29. Rodosskii A. S. Biograficheskii slovar' studentov pervykh XXVIII kursov Sankt-Peterburgskoi Dukhovnoi Akademii: 1814–1869 gg. Saint-Petersburg, 1907.
30. Smirnov S. I. Aleksandr Vasil'evich Gorskii // Protoierei Aleksandr Vasil'evich Gorskii v vospominaniiakh o nem Moskovskoi dukhovnoi akademii. Sviato-Troitskaia Sergieva lavra, 1900.
31. Sokolov V. A. Gody studenchestva (1870–1874), in Bogoslovskii vestnik. 1916. T. 1. № 3/4. P. 385–420.
32. Solntsev N. I. Istoricheskaia kontseptsiia arkhiepiskopa Chernigovskogo Filareta (Gumilevskogo) v rabote «Istoriia Russkoi Tserkvi», in Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni N. I. Lobachevskogo. Ser. Istoriia. 2003. № 2. P. 154–161.
33. Sukhova N. Iu. «Delo protoiereia Gerasima Pavskogo»: problema «istorizma» v russkoi bibleistike, in Filaretovskii al'manakh. № 10. M., 2014. P. 88–107.
34. Sukhova N. Iu. «Dukhovnaia uchenost'» v Rossii v pervoi polovine XIX v., in Filaretovskii al'manakh. 2012. № 8. P. 31–54.
35. Sukhova N. Iu. Dukhovno-uchebnaia reforma 1808–1814 gg. i stanovlenie vysshei dukhovnoi shkoly v Rossii, in Vertograd nauk dukhovnyi. Moscow, 2007. P. 15–52.
36. Sukhova N. Iu. Sistema nauchno-bogoslovskoi attestatsii v Rossii v XIX — nachale XX v. Moscow, 2009.
37. Tarasenko A. F. Zhizneopisanie Filareta (Gumilevskogo D. G.) // Filaret (Gumilevskii), svt. Istoriko-statisticheskoe opisanie Khar'kovskoi eparkhii. T. 1. Khar'kov, 2006. P. 9–46.
38. Feofilakt, igumen. Biblioteka Moskovskoi Dukhovnoi Akademii, in Bogoslovskie trudy. Iubileinyi sbornik. Moskovskaia Dukhovnaia Akademiia: 300 let (1685–1985). Moscow, 1986. P. 247–263.
39. Filaret (Gumilevskii), svt. Pis'ma 50 k・ A. V. Gorskomu, in Pribavleniia k Tvoreniiam Sviatykh Ottsov. 1884. Ch. 33.
40. Filaret (Drozdov), svt. Mneniia, otzyvy i pis'ma. Moscow, 1905.
41. Filaret (Drozdov), svt. Sobranie mnenii i otzyvov. Tom dopolnitel'nyi. Saint-Petersburg, 1887.
42. Friz G. L. Soslovnaia paradigma i sotsial'naia istoriia Rossii, in Amerikanskaia rusistika: vekhi istoriografii poslednikh let. Imperatorskii period: Antologiia. Samara, 2000. P. 121–162.

Liut'ko Evgenii

The publication introduces the first Russian translation of St. Columbanus’s letter to pope Boniface IV also known as Epistula V. St. Columbanus (c. 550–615) was one of the most prominent Irish missionaries on the Continent and founder of several monasteries across Burgundy and Northern Italy. He also maintained a keen interest in the ecclesiastical matters, which induced him to write letters to such figures as popes and bishops. The letter being published here has been written c. 613 on the subject of the Aquileian schism in Northern Italy — a conflict which came as an aftermath of the Three Chapters Controversy. Several churches of the region refused to condemn the three chapters as pope Vigilius was forced to do and broke off the communion with Rome. Columbanus, writing by request of king Agilulf, himself an Arian, made an attempt to solve the conflict by asking both parties to make concessions, and first of all to make the pope renounce the «shameful» position of pope Vigilius. Although this attempt was not successful, the letter, with its content and form, still stands as a remarkable document of the epoch which can provide valuable information about the schism in Northern Italy itself as well as Columbanus’s own views concerning this question.

St. Columbanus, Aquileian schism, Three Chapters Controversy, Vigilius, Boniface IV, Agilulf, Irish church, Irish missionaries, papacy, letters of St. Columbanus.

1. Chadwick N. K. The Age of Saints in the Early Celtic Church. L., 1961.
2. Charles-Edwards T. M. Early Christian Ireland. Cambridge, 2000.
3. Grey P. T. R., Herren M. W. Columbanus and the Three Chapters controversy — a new approach, in Journal of Theological Studies. 1994. Vol. 45. P. 160–170.
4. Hughes K. The Changing Theory and Practice of Irish Pilgrimage, in The Journal of Ecclesiastical History. 1960. Vol. 11. № 2. P. 143–151.
5. Hughes K. The Church in the Early Irish Society. Ithaca; N. Y., 1966.
6. Lapidge M. «Precamur patrem»: An Easter Hymn by Columbanus?, in Columbanus: Studies on the Latin Writings / M. Lapidge, ed. L., 1997. P. 255–263.
7. McNally R. E. The «tres linguae sacrae» in Early Irish Bible Exegesis, in Theological Studies. 1958. Vol. 19. P. 395–403.
8. Smit J. W. Studies on the Language and Style of Columba the Younger (Columbanus). Amsterdam, 1971.
9. Stancliff e C. Venantius Fortunatus, Ireland, Jerome: The Evidence of Precamur patrem, in Peritia. 1996. Vol. 10. P. 91–97.

Krivoshchekova Viktoriia