St. Ambrose of Milan, as an interpreter of St. Old Testament scriptures

Contents I. Exegetical works of St. Ambrose of Milan II. Isagogy of St. Ambrose III. Hermeneutics of St. Ambrose IV V Conclusion Intending to impose the exegetical views of St. Ambrose of Milan, based on his writings devoted to the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament, we consider it necessary to first outline the biography of St. Ambrose. This will shed light on some aspects of the issue we are investigating and will give us solid ground for a correct assessment of the exegetical works and views of St. bishop. St. Ambrose of Milan came from a noble Roman family. His ancestors were already Christians and among them they had a martyr for Christ - Soferida 1. His father, who also bore the name Ambrose, was for a long time the praetorian prefect of the Gauls, enjoyed great confidence in this position by the emperor and therefore had almost supreme power over a significant part of Europe 2. Here in Gaul, in the residence of the prefect, probably in Trier 3, in 340 4 St. Ambrose. He was the third of three children of this family. Older than him were his sister Marcellina and brother Satyr. Even in childhood, St. Ambrose was taught the truths of the Christian faith 5 . Soon the life of this pious family became dark. In the thirteenth, year 6 (352) of the life of his saint. Ambrose lost his father and moved to Rome with his mother and sister. This resettlement was important for him because here he could easily receive an education corresponding to his origin 7 . Like his father, he intended to devote his life to political activity. In view of this, he diligently studied the Greek language, which subsequently provided him with a very important service; carefully studied the Latin and Greek classics, to which he often refers in his works. He quotes Euripides 8, Sophocles 9 and Homer 10, imitates the way of speech of Terence, Livy, Lucan, Tacitus and especially his beloved Virgil 11. He became acquainted with the teachings of the great philosophers, studying them, in all likelihood, not in the original, but according to Cicero. He studied the works of Jewish writers - Josephus and Philo. With special attention, in the types of the intended area of ​​​​activity, St. Ambrose studied Roman law and eloquence. His studies in the latter area brought brilliant results. To be convinced of this, it is enough to take a quick glance at the works of St. bishop. After completing his education, Ambrose entered the field of public activity as a lawyer. Thanks to his connections and oratorical abilities, he very soon stood out from the others, so that the praetorian prefect of Italy, Probus, made him one of his assistants, then recommended him to the emperor Valentinian I, and the latter granted him (374) the post of ruler of Liguria and Emilia, giving him the rank and badge of proconsul. Remarkable, by the way, are the words of Probus - when Ambrose was sent to a post in Milan - which were, so to speak, a program and characteristic of Ambrose's future activities and, judging by what followed, a kind of prophecy. “Go and act, not as a judge, but as a bishop,” was Probus’ admonition to the new proconsul. Ambrose carried out his new position for four years with honesty and dignity. Meanwhile, in 374, Auxentius, the Arian bishop of Milan 12 died. Auxentius was the main champion of Arianism in the west. After his death, the Arians and Orthodox Christians made every possible effort to elect a successor from among themselves. Ambrose's duty was to be present at this election, in order to suppress possible unrest and establish peace. He hurried to the church. Here something happened that no one could have expected, and least of all Ambrose himself could have expected. When he addressed the people with an explanation of his duty to maintain order, suddenly, according to his biographer, the voice of a child was heard: “Ambrose Bishop.” Ambrose was a very popular ruler. The adherents of both sides knew that in him they would have a strong, honest and capable leader. His high rank, noble origin and pure life gained him universal respect. Taking the child's voice as a divine inspiration, both Arians and Orthodox unanimously elected Ambrose as bishop. Ambrose was amazed at this election. He considered himself unworthy of such a rank and his strength was insufficient for such a heavy burden. He had not yet been baptized, but was only a catechumen, he was only 34 years old and, having reached the highest civil positions as a young man, he never thought of joining the ranks of the clergy. Therefore, he tried with all his might to reject such an election. Like Chrysostom, he hides from society. However, yielding to the general and decisive desire, he could not, in the end, resist what, as he saw from the circumstances, was the calling of God. After his election, Ambrose was baptized by an Orthodox bishop. Having successively passed through various church positions, eight days after baptism, on December 7, 374, he was ordained a bishop. So suddenly the ruler of Milan became the bishop of the church of that city. Having taken a high ecclesiastical position, Ambrose, in order to fully meet his calling, to be not only a model of piety, but also a teacher of the Christian people, immediately began a thorough study of theology, in the field of which he possessed information common only to a layman. He frankly admits that, having been suddenly transferred from the civil tribunal to the episcopal see, he had little or even no theological education, and had to first learn himself what he was called to teach 13. He chose St. for himself as the main subject of study. Scripture. “I do not seek to appropriate to myself,” he writes, “the glory of the apostle, for who would dare to do this except those chosen by God Himself; - also the grace of the prophet, the strength of the virtue of evangelists, the prudence of shepherds; I desire to achieve only one thing: that diligence and that diligence in the study of the Holy Scriptures, which the Apostle indicated as the last - the main (ultimam) duty among the duties of the saints, so that through this diligence I can learn to teach” 14. Unable, due to my unpreparedness and urgent need, to respond to all the demands of the time - to study the Holy Scriptures. Scripture through independent study, Ambrose naturally strives to embrace the previously collected and known treasures of theological knowledge, diligently studies the interpretations of the Holy Scriptures of other fathers and uses them. Latin paternal literature provided him with little material in this regard. The West was still far behind the East. But, having knowledge of the Greek language, Ambrose had the opportunity to fill this gap in Latin literature. He, according to Augustine, zealously studied the works of Greek interpreters, especially Origen and Hippolytus and his contemporaries Didymus and Basil the Great 15. With outstanding abilities and diligence, with prudent use of time - these are the characteristics that distinguished St. Ambrose - he, undoubtedly, could soon master all the treasures of theological knowledge and begin a series of independent studies in the field of exegesis. But the circumstances of church and socio-political life, which required from him many-sided practical activities and, of necessity, distracted his attention from pursuing science, prevented this. Simultaneously with the study of St. Scripture and its interpretations by St. Ambrose had to wage an intensified struggle against the enemies of the church, and in particular against the Arians. The Arians, promoting his election, thought that, as a man of this world, he would willingly treat them with tolerance, but they were mistaken in this. Always supportive and loving in everything, St. Ambrose did not put up with the dogmatic wrongness of the Arians. Always and everywhere he is a zealous, direct and strong denouncer of Arianism and a defender of universal truth, boldly speaking out against its opponents, even the crowned ones. Calmly and decisively (in 385 and 386) he refused to satisfy the Arian queen Justina's demand - to transfer the church to the Arians. Neither warnings, nor threats, nor even armed force could shake his decision. He was ready to sacrifice his life, but not to betray the church - this heritage of Christ 16. He takes an active part in the Council of Aquileia (381) against the Arian bishops Palladius and Secundian). In general, St. the father uses all his strength to convert the lost to the path of truth, and the works of St. Ambrose, especially his letters, serve as clear evidence of his energetic struggle against the Arians 17. In addition to Arianism, St. Ambrose had to fight against many other heresies. In his letters, he repeatedly speaks against the Appolinarians 18, against Jovinian and his disciples 19, against the Manichaeans 20 and the Priscillianists 21. Ancient paganism also felt the powerful hand of St. Ambrose. Through his influence, Theodosius restored the Edict of Gratian in 382, ​​according to which pagan temples were deprived of their rights and privileges 22 and the altar of Victoria was removed from Rome 23 . The five-time petition of the Roman Senate to the emperor did not achieve its goal: the altar was abolished, and this time forever. With a fearless voice and a bold brow, with apostolic simplicity and sincerity, raising his hand for forgiveness or damnation, in the name of the moral law, St. Ambrose and in the field of socio-political life. With an authoritative word, he exhorts Theodosius the Great to repentance 24 after the bloody massacre in Thessalonica and, when this word did not bear fruit, he stops communication with the emperor and forbids him to enter the church 25 until he brings the required repentance. He alternately withstands the opposition of Valentinian I, Justina, Valentinian II, Maximus, Eugenius, Arbogast and Theodosius himself; but never wavers in his attachment to the imperial house and is his faithful servant and paternal adviser. Empress Justina herself, an Arian, knew St. from this side. bishop and often resorted to his help. At her request, after the bloody end of Gratian, he went (383) as an ambassador to the court of her enemy, the usurper Maximus, in Trier, made peace with him and thereby diverted the danger 26, both from Valentinian II and from Justina herself, who took custody of this latter. In 385 and 386, despite a serious disagreement with the imperial house over its demand to transfer the church into the hands of the Arians and to orders in favor of Orthodoxy from the usurper Maximus, St. Ambrose again sent as ambassador to Maxim and, in front of him, acted with all energy and determination in favor of his rightful emperor 27. And again his embassy was crowned with success. Such activities of St. Ambrose evoked complete respect and devotion to him from the emperors: Gratian died with his name on his lips 28, Valentinian II also deeply revered St. bishop; and although their friendly relations, due to the intrigues of Justina, were at times darkened, the emperor retained respect for St. hierarch until the last minutes of his life and greatly regretted that he could not see him at his death 29; Theodosius the Great, in the last hours of his life, also desired his presence 30. St. acted vigilantly. Ambrose and for the benefit of the smaller brethren. He responded to all requests from this environment. His voice was constantly raised against the oppression of the rich and against the deceitful deception of the beggars 31 ; he saved the persecuted and delivered the captives 32; he boldly armed himself against all the vices of his time, 33, etc. We do not need, in view of our task, to depict in detail the selfless love for others, charity and ascetic life that invariably adorned St. bishop. Suffice it to say that the personality of St. Ambrose was so great that she made an extraordinary impression on everyone. In his person, he presented to us one of the highest types of a great Christian bishop, who, with his faith, kindness and selfless self-denial, became a stronghold of both the church and his entire people. This is what Stilicho said about the death of St. Ambrose: “this is a mortal blow for Italy” 34. St. Ambrose died on April 4, 397 35. From what has been said, it is clear that in a short period of activity in the rank of bishop, with the mentioned versatile and difficult activities, St. the father, of course, did not have the opportunity to devote as much time to studying Holy Scripture as he would have liked, and could not achieve the results in this area that he would have achieved under other conditions. But nevertheless, for the study of St. Scriptures of St. Ambrose managed to do quite a lot. The fight against the enemies of the church and fatherland in this regard even had a positive meaning for him. She put before him the burning questions of exegesis, clarified the task and its direction. Explain the dark places of the Holy. Scripture, to find the spiritual meaning of biblical stories, to draw from them lessons and consolations that are so necessary amid the worries of everyday vanity, to answer the restless doubts of the mind and the vain impulses of the heart in an age full of burning questions and severe social disasters - these were the questions and the task that Ambrose had to resolve as an exegete. And he indulged in them with a zeal that never weakened, with a persistence that consumed his days and nights, with a touching and sincere modesty, but at the same time with a thoroughness and firm conviction in the truth of Christ’s teaching, which forced the bl. Augustine to look at him as one of the authoritative interpreters of St. Scriptures. The fruit of such labors was a series of exegetical works by St. Ambrose, dedicated to the interpretation of St. Scriptures, predominantly the Old Testament, - let us now turn to the consideration of these works. I. Exegetical works of St. Ambrose of Milan Exegetical works of St. Ambrose of Milan, dedicated to the interpretation of St. Old Testament Scriptures; their division, characteristics and time of writing. A general note about the exegetical writings of St. Ambrose All works of St. Ambrose according to the interpretation of St. The writings of the Old Testament can be divided into three groups: a) homilies, b) commentaries, and c) studies or treatises in the form of letters 36 . True, the very term “homily” in the works of St. Ambrose is not found, but a significant number of them are imprinted precisely by the character of the homilies and therefore can be classified as their category. The following works belong here: 37 1) A highly interesting and very important literary and historical work compiled by St. bishop in the last years of his life, - Hexaemeron in six books. Here St. Ambrose explains the text of the Bible with the addition of detailed character studies, partly speculative, partly moral, partly natural historical, partly poetically edifying. When composing this work, St. Ambrose, according to Bl. Jerome 38, used the works of Origen and more of Hippolytus and Basil the Great. In his interpretations, St. Ambrose sticks here mainly to the letters of the Holy Scripture. Scripture and explains almost verse by verse, avoiding, if possible, allegorical interpretations. He, for example, does not agree with Basil the Great that by darkness (Gen. 1:2) one can understand an evil force, by heaven, firmament and water - various virtues (virtutes intellegibiles, operatoriae and puricatoriae), by the beasts of the sixth day of creation - sinners and criminals 39. But with all this, he did not avoid the allegorical interpretation: in view of the heresies that existed at that time, St. Ambrose often dwells in detail on the explanation of those words and expressions of the Holy Scriptures that were in one way or another reinterpreted by heretics, and in these cases he uses an allegorical interpretation. Thus, fearing that on the basis of the word erat (in the saying: “the earth is invisible and unsettled.” Gen. 1:2) heretics can draw a conclusion about the eternity of the earth, St. Ambrose proves with various examples and with the help of allegory that the expression erat contains the concept of beginning. In the first expression of the Bible “in principio” he sees an indication of the temporality of the world, the incomprehensible speed and order of creation and, in addition, by this he means Christ, through whom God created heaven and earth 40, etc. 41. But the prevailing interpretation in the work under consideration is St. father is interpreted in a moral sense. We can say that the metaphysical and physical views of St. Ambrose in his Six Days are, as it were, applied. According to Bonar, the material creation of St. Ambrose serves as a veil to the moral world 42. The narration of the everyday life writer is given by St. Father has rich material for edification. The grass that appears in the morning and dries up in the evening seems to him to be an image of the perishability of life and glory 43, young storks feeding the old are a living example of mercy towards parents 44; bees - an image of hard work, a dog - loyalty 45, etc. Along with interpretations of this kind in St. Ambrose also contains explanations of a purely scientific nature in Shestodnevo. Against Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras and Thales, he proves that matter cannot be eternal. He contrasts the pantheism of some and the atomism of others, the fatalism and materialism of others with the lofty doctrine of one God, absolutely different from the universe that He created with His word. The presentation of these misconceptions and their refutation have undoubted merit and significance. “Those who in our time strive to formulate their own worldview, using all their strength to do so, would not say anything,” says Bonar, “more than what is contained in the books of Ambrose” 46. It should, however, be noted that in the series of explanations that Ambrose gives about the work of creation, the misconceptions of the ancients are more than once noticed. His natural scientific views often represent a rare mixture of scientific research with mythological, fabulous judgments. The holy bishop still adheres to the teaching of Aristotle's four primary elements - air, fire, earth and water 47. He takes seriously the harmony that he produces - as if the sky were rotating around the 48 axis. He treats with confidence the fabulous tales about the phoenix 49, etc. that were accepted and prevailed among the people. In all these and similar misconceptions and incredible information, St. Ambrose shares the common fate of his contemporaries. In general, the Sixth Day of St. Ambrose, despite his lack of independence, is a rare work for its time. The Christian worldview appears here with a new point of view, in comparison with the pagan worldview. In place of the blind laws of nature, the omnipotent will of God appears here. The Bible is considered a completely sufficient source for knowledge of nature. 2) Liber de paradiso. In this work, St. Ambrose talks about heaven; in the presentation of thoughts follows the order of St. Scripture and resolves the questions of what, what and where heaven was; what the ancestors did in it, how they fell into sin and what the consequences of this latter were. At the same time, he successfully resolves the objections of the Gnostic and Manichaean heretics regarding the commandment given by God to the first parents and their fall into sin. In view of the mentioned heresies, the interpretation of St. Ambrose are allegorical in nature here, although not exclusively: along with allegory, a literal meaning is also allowed; but from the unsuccessful combination of the latter with the former, clarity of expression suffers in places. 3) De Cain et Abel libri duo. This work is in close connection with the previous one and is, as it were, a continuation of it. In it, the author continues the interpretation of the book of Genesis 4:1–15. The nature of this work in terms of the method of interpretation is the same as that of the work “De paradiso” - although in the first the allegorical element predominates somewhat. Special attention to St. The bishop devotes in the work under consideration to an explanation of the sacrifices of Cain and Abel. At the same time, in order to edify his listeners, he very wittily compares the interpretation data of the dogmas of the Christian Church. 4) Liber de Noe el arca or De arca et Noe. In this work, St. Ambrose intended "Noe sancti vitam, mores, gesta et mentis altitudinem explanare." He pays special attention to explaining the structure of the ark and the global flood. When interpreting St. the bishop first establishes the literal meaning, then moves on to the allegorical meaning and concludes with an appropriate moral teaching. The content, plan and order of presentation are borrowed from St. Ambrose, partly from Basil the Great, partly from Philo. The views of the last St. the bishop dresses him in Christian clothing and enriches him with some passages from the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament. 5) De Abraham. This work consists of two books. In them St. Ambrose presents Patriarch Abraham to the readers' eyes as a role model, following which everyone should renounce vices and direct all the forces of their soul to absolute perfection. The form of explanation in both books is different. In the first book of St. Ambrose strives to present to the catechumens in the person of Abraham, so to speak, “Christian Cyropaedia”; in the second, he tries to penetrate into the inner meaning of the subject - and thereby edify the listeners; the first is replete with interpretation primarily in a moral sense, the second in an allegorical sense. These interpretations, together with the arguments given by St. Ambrose in favor of one position or another, are not distinguished by clarity and thoroughness 50 , and when detailed, they suffer from artificiality 51 and inconsistency 52 . The reason for this lies in the sources that St. used. Ambrose: This work, especially in the second part, is a reworking of the judgments of Philo 53. 6) Liber de Isaac el anima. In this work, St. Ambrose reveals the educational significance of Isaac and Rebekah. Isaac, with his birth and life, according to him, prefigured Christ, Rebekah prefigured the soul of man. In the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah, St. the father sees the image of the union of Christ with the soul reborn in baptism. As an illustration of the main idea, he cites the words of the book of Song of Songs and, based on it, presents the four degrees of the soul’s ascent to God. The interpretation of the Song of Songs is much artificial and difficult to understand. This is, in particular, the idea of ​​the four degrees of internal unification of the soul with Christ. But for all that, this is the work of St. Ambrose contains many attractive and edifying things. His thoughtful interpretations and witty combinations of thoughts are worthy of everyone's attention. 7) De Jacob et vita beata. This essay is divided into two parts: theoretical and practical; the first part teaches how to achieve bliss, the second indicates examples of bliss in biblical personalities. The first part is of a moral nature, the second is of a moral-exegetical nature. In the last St. Ambrose is predominantly occupied with the personality and main features of the life of Patriarch Jacob, and the main idea is often lost from sight by him, and he seems to be scattered in the details. When interpreting St. the bishop dwells on the explanation of the text in the moral sense and, mainly, in the allegorical-typical sense. 8) De Joseph patriarcha. In this work, St. Ambrose reveals two thoughts: a) Joseph is a model of virtue and b) Joseph is a type of Christ. Mainly St. the father stops at a second thought. He analyzes in detail the life of Joseph in his brothers and sees in it a prototype of future secrets. In terms of allegorical and typical interpretation, this book is undeniably the best. Its interpretations are distinguished by clarity and naturalness. In all this, edification and morality are not forgotten. 9) De benedictionibus patriarcharum. This book reveals and explains the blessings that Jacob imparted to his sons. After a short speech about the meaning of parental blessing, St. Ambrose, following the order of the Bible, explains the blessings of Jacob. His interpretations here are everywhere aimed at indicating Christ and the New Testament in the prophecy of Jacob, and therefore are imprinted with an allegorical-mystical character. Morality, with one exception (7, 33), is completely overlooked. 10) De interpellatione lob et David. This work consists of four books, they contain two thoughts: a) lamentation about the physical and spiritual misfortunes of people in general and b) lamentation about the well-being of the atheists and the miserable life of God-fearing, good people. The interpretation is carried out in an allegorical-mystical sense. In some cases, due to its depth and wit, the said work is of particular interest, although, in general, it is not without its shortcomings. So, for example, St. Ambrose here often gives words and expressions of the text a meaning that is not inherent in them due to the connection of speech 54. This lack of interpretation is explained by the fact that St. the bishop examines the thought of Scripture not in the context of speech, but fragmentarily, choosing passages that correspond to the moral theme he has outlined. A natural consequence of such an interpretation is the frequent deviation from the main idea. 11) Apologia prophetae David - is an extensive sermon written in defense of David regarding the crimes he committed - adultery and murder. The main idea is proven and illustrated by biblical examples. The interpretation, depending on its subject, is carried out either in a literal sense, as in the explanation of Ps. Relatively less material is available for understanding the exegetical views and techniques of St. Ambrose is represented by the following works of the same group: 12) De bopo mortis; 13) De fuga saeculi; 14) De Elia et jejunio; 15) De Nabuthe lesraelita and 16) De Tobia. All of them are imprinted with a more ethical than exegetical character. The second group of exegetical works of St. Ambrose is composed of his commentaries on the psalms. They originate, like all the above-mentioned works, from sermons, but must undoubtedly be classified as commentaries in the proper sense of the word: the explanation of each psalm is a complete whole, in which the interpretation is carried out verse by verse. The explanation is often preceded by an introduction with remarks about the writer, purpose and purpose of the psalm. All commentaries of this kind are preserved on twelve psalms: 1st, 35th, 36th, 37th, 38th, 39th, 40th, 43rd, 45th, 47th, 48th, 61st and 118th. It is very possible that St. Ambrose wrote an interpretation of a larger number of psalms: the book of psalms was his favorite book; but, in the absence of certain data, nothing decisive can be said about this. A typical work of this group is the commentary on Ps. 119. Among the exegetical works of St. Ambrose, this work occupies an outstanding place. The peculiarity of this psalm is alphabetism. Capital letters, according to Ambrose, are, as it were, the title of each octonary. He bypasses many etymological interpretations and, with the help of interpretation in the spiritual sense, brings the content of the octonary into agreement with its capital letter. In most cases, this interpretation is refined and artificial. The manner of interpretation is as in all interpretations of the psalms: it is explained verse by verse. However, interpretations are very different. Some verses are short and insufficient; in places only one word appears in the form of a note; at others, they are too drawn out, with his illustrations using biblical examples. As in all interpretations of the psalms, in the interpretation of Psalm 119 the text is often criticized 55, various interpretations are drawn upon 56; attention is drawn to options 57. The flow of thought in interpretations does not have strict logic. The transition from one verse to another is marked only by the expression sequitur versus. The meaning of interpretation is predominantly moral, but along with it there are interpretations in the mystical and allegorical sense 58 . Regarding interpretations of the psalms, in general, the following should be said. They are not easy to understand for everyone. Deviations from the main idea, interpretations similar to the interpretation of capital letters and the corresponding octonaries in Ps. 118, may seem undesirable to the exeget of our time. Despite this, they have their price and importance. To judge them correctly, one must keep in mind the purpose for which they were written. In his interpretations of the psalms of St. Ambrose does not mean to present an interpretation in the strict, scientific sense. “The purpose of their appearance,” notes Feesler 59, “is to teach Christians a knowledge of their duties and to inspire them to embody these latter in life through purity of morals and walking in piety.” The interpretations of the psalms achieved this goal in full force. To the third group of exegetical works of St. Ambrose should include those of his letters that have as their subject the interpretation of certain passages of the Holy Scripture. Scriptures, the resolution of various questions that arise when reading the word of God, etc. These rather numerous letters were written to St. Ambrose almost always in response to the requests of his friends who were looking for St. bishop to resolve his perplexities. They are like separate treatises, different in size, but in their method of interpretation, always reminiscent of commentaries. Among the letters of St. Ambrose's exegetical works may include the following: 6th, 7th, 8th, 19th, 27th, 28th, 29th, 30th, 31st, 32nd, 33rd, 43rd, 44th, 45th, 50th, 58th, 64th, 65th, 66th, 67th, 68th, 69th, 70th, 72nd. This group should also include the interpretation of certain passages from the Old Testament. These are the interpretations of some sayings from the books - Exodus, Deuteronomy, Ecclesiastes, the prophets - Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel. After what has been said about the volume, division and nature of Ambrose’s exegetical works, we must turn to chronological questions and distribute the mentioned works according to the time of their appearance. Unfortunately, there is little accurate information on this issue, and we are forced to limit ourselves in relation to many of the works of St. father with some more or less probable assumptions. The very first work of St. Ambrose is usually considered to be his work “De paradise”. This work, as he himself testifies, was written by him when he was “nondum sacerdos” 60. And since the bishop of St. Ambrose was dedicated on December 7, 374, then the writing of this work can be dated back to 375. To this work, as we said, the work “de Cain et Abel” is closely related and is, as it were, its continuation. At the beginning of the latter there is a mention of the former. The writing of this work can therefore also be dated to 375 or 376. The appearance of works can be attributed to the period from 376 to 386 - De Tobia, De interpellatione lob et David, Expositin in psalm. 118. The Apologia prophetae David appeared between 384 and 387. He is mentioned in the commentaries on the Gospel of Luke 61, published in 385 - on the one hand, and in it 62 the death of Gratian (387) is mourned - on the other. Then the works follow one after another: De Noe et arca, De Abraham, De Isaac et anima, De bono mortis, De fuga saeculi, De Jacob et vita beata, De Joseph patriarcha, De benedictionibus patriarcharum. All these works in themselves do not provide positive and indisputable data for resolving the question of the time of their appearance. However, we can find the starting point for this in the work De Joseph patpiarcha. Here, by the way, it is said that the biblical stories about Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob have recently been the subject of research by St. Ambrose. If so, then we can assume that all these works are close to each other in terms of the time of their appearance. The work De Joseph patriarcha - as far as can be judged from his mention of the courtier Kalinnik, executed in 387, after which this sermon was preached - appeared in this year 387. Around this year - some earlier, others later - in the period of 385 or 386 to 387 or 388, one might think, all the other works mentioned in this case also appeared. In a later period of the life of St. Ambrose, when he was, in his own expression senex 63, his work Hexaemeron appeared. The nature of this work - the predominance of interpretation in the literal sense - confirms the same idea. And church peace, restoration of church unity, entry into the church of heretics and pagans 64 - all these circumstances befell the Milan and all Italian churches with the death of Empress Justina in 388. and depicted in this work - give us the right to attribute its appearance to 389 or 390. The appearance of the work De Elia et jejunio, based on its mention of the victory of Theodosius and Valentinian in Milan over the usurper Maximus 65, can be attributed to 388 or 389: in this particular year the mentioned fact occurred. After all these works, St. Ambrose's works – De Nabuthe and Ennarationes in psalmos. The vices that reigned in society, according to Paulinus, in the period of 394–395, exposed in the first, and the antiphonal singing of psalms, mentioned in the interpretation of the first psalm, allow us to attribute the writing of these works to 394 or 395. St. Ambrose was of a truly Roman nature, inclined towards practical life more than towards abstract thinking. The stamp of this inclination lies on all of his, and in particular, exegetical works. They breathe with the warm love of a Christian heart. Excellent presentation enhances their dignity and significance. St. Ambrose treated his writings with great attention and special care if he intended to publish them. Before releasing the work, he submitted it to his faithful friend for review, who was supposed to inform the saint about all the shortcomings and gaps in it. “I know,” he writes in one letter to a friend, “how everyone can be deceived about their works. Consider whether there is fantasy and flattery in (his) composition, instead of pure faith and its unvarnished presentation” 66. II. Isagogy of St. Ambrose The doctrine of the meaning of Holy Scripture and its inspiration. Attitude of St. Ambrose to the LXX translation and other translations. His attitude towards canonical and non-canonical books. Information about the writers of the books of the Old Testament Holy Scripture, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, received its origin from God 67 and, as such, surpasses all human writings. It, expressing the look of St. Ambrose, in the words of the Holy Scriptures, is “the way, the truth and the life.” He calls him the luminary that accompanies us in the field of life and shows the path of the spirit 68. Priest Scripture, according to him, is pasture in which we rest and are strengthened; it gives healthy food - such as the law and the gospel, and pleasant food - such as the psalms and Song of Songs 69. It is like a sea into which various rivers flow: it contains pleasant and clean waters, and fresh life-giving springs that lead to eternal life; his word is honey; his sayings irrigate our soul with spiritual moisture 70 . Holy Scripture is paradise: in the book of Genesis the virtues of the patriarchs vegetate, in Deuteronomy the precepts of the law are sown, in the Gospel the tree of life bears good fruit 71 . Whoever bows before him, who has unraveled the meaning of the prophecies, recognized the height of the Gospel, and accepted the moral instructions of the apostles for fulfillment, he has acquired a rich treasure for himself 72 . The Holy Scriptures edify us in all things 73; everyone finds in it saving remedies for their wounds 74; with its commandments it heals our weaknesses and brings us salvation; it fills us with spiritual grace, strengthens us in goodness and dispels our passions 75; it is for us a refuge in temptations 76 . Of particular importance in influencing the spiritual world of man is St. Ambrose attributes to the psalms. “If all Holy Scripture,” he says, “breathes with the grace of God, then this should be said especially about the psalms. The very form of their presentation is poetic, he says. – While in the books of Moses this type of presentation occurs twice (Ex. 15 and Deut. 32), the psalms are continuous poetry: their content is songs in which the glory of God and His good deeds are sung for the purpose of reconciliation with humanity. Like the morning dew, the holy songs of the psalms fall from the sky and abundantly infuse the faith of people with a rain of spiritual grace. In the psalms we find answers to all the questions of life; everyone can find in them the saving means that are necessary for him specifically, for healing his passions. If anyone wants to study history and imitate the examples of their ancestors, all this will be briefly found in the psalm; If anyone wants to study the law, he will find in the psalms the commandment about love, in which everything is concentrated; if anyone is afraid of punishment, let him say: “Lord, do not rebuke me in your wrath, and do not punish me in your anger” (Ps. 6:2); if anyone wants to find an example of patience and meekness, let him read Ps. 7:5; If anyone wants to resist the attacks of spiritual evil, he will not find anything better in these types than to sing psalms, which is what David did. Psalms soften anger, dispel worries and remove sadness." 77 In general, Holy Scripture, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, our food, our delight 78, why should we read it daily and imitate what we read 79. Only under this condition will spiritual juice flow into all the veins of our soul and we will not be afraid of the temptations of our enemies 80; Only under this condition will we not be spiritually hungry and will be on the path to eternal life 81. The doctrine of the inspiration of Holy Scripture by St. Ambrose expresses this fragmentarily in many places in his works. In the language of St. Ambrose The Bible has no other names than sacra, divina, coeleslis scriptura. These names alone speak of how highly St. values ​​him. father of the book St. Scriptures. For him they are divine works. First of all, according to him, this should be said about the books of Moses. “Moses, according to Ambrose, when he writes: “In the beginning God created heaven and earth,” he speaks as a witness of the works of God. For if he accepted what he said to Pharaoh, when he liberated the people, from God (Ex. 4:12), then all the more this must be said regarding what he reports about heaven” 82. All the writings of Moses, says St. Ambrose, are based on divine revelation. “Moses did not write his own in them, but what was inspired and revealed to him, especially this should say about the creation of the world” 83. It is the same, according to the teaching of St. Ambrose, and the origin of the psalms. “What is a psalm? - he asks and answers: “this is an instrument of virtues, striking which with the plectrum of the Holy Spirit, the venerable prophet made heavenly sounds audible on earth” 84 . In other places regarding the inspiration of the psalms of St. Ambrose speaks out more clearly and decisively. He even seems to eliminate David's authorial activity when he says: “David said, or, better said, He who spoke through the prophets” 85 . David, according to St. Ambrose, “the organ of the divine voice, and the interpreter of the word of the Lord 86, in him the divine Savior speaks, the Holy Spirit speaks” 87. Particular attention on the issue of the inspiration of St. Scriptures of St. Ambrose turns to prophetic books. And this is quite natural. If anywhere, then it is here – in the activities and speeches of the prophets that the direct action of God on the human spirit is revealed. The original beginning of the prophecies of St. Ambrose points to God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. “The Lord speaks through the prophets,” he writes, “so they could not be mistaken” 88 . “What Jesus proclaimed through the prophets, he showed in the Gospel, and what He spoke through the prophets, he Himself fulfilled in the Gospel; His word was also a prophetic word” 89. “The Holy Spirit descended on the prophets,” says St. bishop, - and poured out on them with powerful force” 90. “The Prophet, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, represents, as it were, the mouth of God" 91. So, the books of Moses, psalms, prophetic books, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, books inspired by God. The same, according to his views, should be said about the entire Bible. This is what St. expresses. bishop, when he writes: “The Old Testament is the word of Christ,” “The New Testament is the word of Christ” 92. The inspiration and enlightenment of biblical writers in most cases is St. Ambrose assimilates the third person of the Holy Trinity - the Holy Spirit 93; then to the face of Jesus Christ 94; God the Lord in general 95. One day the inspiration of St. writers Ambrose assimilates all three persons of the Holy Trinity 96. The Holy Father decides the question of both the conditions and the form of inspiration. “For prophecy,” he writes, “the prophets were preparing; by playing musical instruments they attracted to themselves the grace of the Holy Spirit 97; they removed themselves from worldly thoughts and entertainments in order to be worthy and pure in accepting the grace of the Holy Spirit” 98. Further St. the bishop is trying to define or, more precisely, describe the very image of inspiration. Under the specified conditions on the part of the prophet, “to his spirit,” says St. Ambrose, - the grace of God is reported, - it suddenly pours out on him; The Holy Spirit descends on him. The prophet loses his temper, becomes embarrassed, falls into fear and plunges into the darkness of ignorance. Everything visible in the world becomes invisible and alien to him; at this moment he hears only the divine” 99. After this, according to Ambrose, such apparently strange actions of the prophets as appearing before the people without clothes and shoes are completely understandable and natural: they proclaimed not what and how they wanted, but what and how the Lord commanded them 100 . This is where the speech of St. Ambrose about the image of inspiration. The question of how closer communication between the Divine and the prophetic spirit takes place is addressed by St. Ambrose remains open. Undoubtedly, according to the teaching of St. Ambrose, books of St. The Scriptures are imprinted with a divine character: they are inspired by God. But how far does their inspiration extend? Taking into account the sayings of St. Ambrose - “St. the writers wrote not according to the rules of art, but according to divine inspiration, which is higher than any art: they wrote what the Holy Spirit inspired them” 101, we, apparently, would have some right to assume that he extends divine inspiration to the very art of writing, to the letter of Scripture. But this assumption is refuted in further words of the same saying. It says here that the rules of art were not abandoned by St. writers 102. And the question of St. Ambrose – “quanto examine scripturae divinae verba ponuntur?” 103 - decisively convinces us that the human side in the activities of St. writers - their consciousness, in his opinion, did not remain inactive. The term “examen” can only be applied to imperfect thought, in particular human thought: divine thought is all-perfect knowledge and, therefore, does not allow preliminary reflection and research in relation to itself. The title of David as the author of psalms, teacher of morals 104; an indication of the historical facts that served as the reason for the writing of this or that sacred work, etc. remarks made by St. Ambrose in his place, together with what was said above, convince us that St. bishop in the activities of St. writers with divine inspiration did not deny the participation of their personal consciousness and, therefore, distinguished two sides in it - divine and human. The attitude of these parties, according to all of the above, St. Ambrose, one can imagine it like this. Supernatural inspiration in the activities of St. writers prevail over their natural powers, so that the importance of the latter is secondary; but the supernatural influence does not suppress, however, the natural powers of man and does not darken his consciousness. During his exegetical research, St. Ambrose, as he did not know the Hebrew language, had to use not the original Bible, but its translations, and in relation to these latter, he was guided not by independent, but by already established views on them. The LXX translation was especially respected in his time. Most church teachers of the first centuries, not knowing the Hebrew language, used mainly this translation. In addition, the legend about the miraculous origin of the LXX translation made it, in the view of some fathers (for example, Augustine), an inspired translation. Respect for the said translation was naturally shared by St. Ambrose - with the significant difference, however, that he did not join the opinion about his inspiration. He highly values ​​this translation and recognizes its special merit in interpreting the history of creation and places it above the Latin translation. “Its meaning,” writes St. Ambrose about the translation of the LXX, “is distinguished by greater clarity (compared to other translations) and does not allow any doubts” 105, “it deserves great respect” 106. “We cannot everywhere convey the perfection of expression of the Greek language: it is distinguished by its special strength and sophistication” 107. Turning to the LXX translation and comparing it, with the help of the exegetical works of his predecessors, with the Hebrew original, St. Ambrose finds additions in it and approves of them. “It is not unnecessary,” he writes, “LXX men added many things to the Jewish” 108. Regarding Ambrose's use of the LXX translation, the following must be said. St. Ambrose undoubtedly had it at hand, as he himself says 109, and used it, which is evident from the fact that he, at least once, still quotes it under this name 110 and in many cases makes references to it in such expressions: “the Greek has”, “the Greek speaks” 111. That these names mean a translation of the LXX can be seen from a comparison of the text of Ambrose with the original text of the LXX. Usually there is a literal similarity. If sometimes there are deviations, then they are not significant and in essence are variants of the same text 112. In addition to the translation of LXX, St. Ambrose, in his interpretations, takes into account the translations of Aquila, Symmachus and rarely Theodotion 113. But he obviously places these translations below the LXX translation. He values ​​little, for example, the translation of Aquila and even sometimes treats it with distrust 114; he rarely turns, as we have noticed, to Theodotion’s translation. Using the LXX translation and other Greek translations for his own research, St. Ambrose, in view of the benefit of his flock, should have at hand a translation of St. books in a language understandable to these latter, that is, in Latin. Given his knowledge of the language, he could easily translate from Greek into Latin on his own, but in his time there was no urgent need for this. For a relatively long time, several Latin translations have existed in the West. The Latin translation was already in Africa in the 2nd century, and such a translation existed in Italy and other places. These were, as is currently believed, not reviews of the same translation, but independent translations, although perhaps not complete. Among all these translations, the one that Jerome has the advantage of is the one called “vetus editio”, “translatio vetus”, etc. 115, U bl. Augustine - “Itala” (by which the holy father wanted to show that the translation, which enjoys advantage among other translations, occurred in Italy) 116. This translation was generally known and was in general church use. It was undoubtedly laid by St. Ambrose as the basis for his interpretations 117. The agreement of Ambrose's translation with the LXX translation does not at all speak against this. Such agreement is a necessary phenomenon: Itala is a translation not of the Hebrew original, but of the LXX. Latin translation of St. Ambrose puts it lower than Greek. While the latter, in his opinion, imparts strength and expressiveness to the word of Scripture, the former weakens the true meaning of Scripture 118. Along with the Bible translation known as Vetus Itala, St. Ambrose also used other Latin translations. He often cites discrepancies from other codes and explains them 119. What kind of codes these were - variants or independent translations - is difficult to decide. St. Ambrose usually expresses himself vaguely about them: “alii habent”, “alii codices habent”, “in codicibus scriptum est”, etc. However, based on some passages from his writings, one can think that he was dealing in this case not only with variants, but in some cases with different translations. The St. quoted above convince us of this. Ambrose, in his writings, when explaining deviations from the text, the expressions are “alia interpretatio” 120, “alia editio” 121, and most importantly the remark to Art. 89 ps. 118th: “Graecus εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα posuit, quod diverse interpretati sunt translatores, alii “in aeternum”, alii “in saeculum"” 122, pointing directly to the translators. In the form of a more accurate and clear interpretation of certain passages of Holy Scripture, St. Ambrose uses, albeit second-hand, translations - Syriac 123 and Arabic 124. From what has been said about the attitude of St. Ambrose to the translations of the sacred text, it is clear that he treated them with attention, giving preference to what was due. It's just a pity that St. Ambrose was not familiar with the Hebrew language. He would not have failed to consider the original text and, thanks to this, would undoubtedly have further enriched his interpretations with content. On the question of the canon of St. Ambrose shares the views common to his time. The guiding principle in determining the canonical dignity of the books of Holy Scripture for him, as well as for his contemporaries and predecessors, was the canon of the Jews 125. But, as you know, the Jews had two views on the canon: the Palestinian Jews recognized as canonical only the books in the Hebrew Bible, and the Alexandrian Jews considered our non-canonical books to be canon. As a result, some church teachers of the first three centuries, who read the Bible in Greek, did not strictly distinguish between canonical and non-canonical books, calling the latter, like the former, “holy”, “sacred”. Based on the writings of St. It is difficult for Ambrose to say definitely which books he considered to be canonical and which books were non-canonical; it is difficult to establish a line between those others - and this, especially since St. Ambrose nowhere gives a complete list of the books he recognizes as canonical. Nevertheless, based on the few data that are presented in the writings of St. Ambrose on our question, we have the opportunity not to leave this last question open. In one of his works 126 he writes: “inveni Heptateuchum 127, inveni Regnorum libros, inveni prophetarum scripta, inveni psalmos, inveni Proverbia, inveni Ecclessiasten, inveni Cantica Canticorum.” Comparing this list of Old Testament books with the list of New Testament books, which follows in the same work below (“inveni admirabilem consiliarium Christum, inveni Paulum prudentem architectum”), it can be argued that St. Ambrose, both in the latter and in the first case, lists more important books: otherwise he would have to admit that of the books of the New Testament he knew only the Gospels and Epistles. Pavel. In any case, from the above list of books of the Old Testament it is clear that the canonical books of St. Ambrose lists: the books of Moses, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Kings, all the Prophets, Ezra, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs. In this list, comparatively Art. in our canon, the books missing are Job and Chronicles. But regarding these books it must be said that St. Ambrose looked upon them as essential parts of Holy Scripture. He often mentions Chronicles 128, devotes two books to the interpretation of the book of Job, and often uses both. Along with these books, St. Ambrose also uses non-canonical books. Judging by his attitude towards them, one might think that he attributes to them a dignity and significance equal to the canonical ones. He often refers to the book of the prophet Baruch, citing him under the name of the prophet Jeremiah 129. From the books of the Wisdom of Solomon and the Wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirach cites passages to prove his positions and calls them scripturae 130. He discusses Tobit in a special book and points out a role model in his virtue. Tobit calls the book prophetic, and Tobit - a prophet 131. In Esther and Judith he presents and praises an example of generosity, purity, prudence and moderation that stands out among other biblical examples. The non-canonical addition to the book of the prophet Daniel serves as a source for him to use on a par with canonical books 133. Often quoted by St. Ambrose the third book of Ezra. On its data, he substantiates his treatise “on the good of death” and proves that the true abode of the soul is beyond the grave. Referring to this book, he calls its testimony the testimony of Scripture. Further saying of St. Ambrose about Ezra - “he knew through divine revelation that the righteous would dwell in the future life with Christ and the saints” - and the expression he used when quoting the book of Ezra - “scriptum est” - common when using quotations from canonical books 134 - also makes us think that he considered this book to be an inspired book 135, canonical 136. A slightly different attitude of St. Ambrose to the books of Maccabees. He also uses them. In the person of Eleazar, the seven Maccabean brothers and their mother, they give him proof that a righteous man, despite misfortunes and torment, retains the strength and dignity of his spirit 137. But despite all this, he nowhere quotes them verbatim and does not call them by the usual name for canonical books - “scriptura” or “scriptura sacra, divina”, etc. Based on this, one can think that the books of the Maccabees by St. Ambrose did not consider books to be canonical. From what has been said it is clear that St. Ambrose did not exclude a single book from the Old Testament canon known in his time. At the end of this chapter, let's say a few words about the writers of the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament, according to the view of St. Ambrose. At the same time, there is no need to talk about the writer of each book, since on this point church teachers, in most cases, are in complete agreement. There are only a few books regarding writers who do not have this agreement. We will focus our attention on them. The first book, regarding the origin of which in ancient times there was disagreement, is the book of psalms. The writer of this entire book is St. Ambrose believes that he assimilates to David the writing of such psalms that obviously do not belong to him, such as Psalm 75 138, according to the LXX and Vulgate, in accordance with the original text, attributed to Asaph; ps. 41 139, inscribed with the name of the sons of Kareev; Ps.101 140, which appeared, as the content shows, during the Babylonian captivity. The inscription of these and other psalms, according to Ambrose, does not in the least contradict his position. Psalm 72 according to the LXX bears the inscription “Ψαλμος τῷ Ἀσάφ”, according to Ambrose – “psalmus Asaph”. But this Asaph, according to Ambrose, is King David, who depicted himself under the name of Asaph in a state of fall. As proof of this interpretation, St. Ambrose points out that the writer Ps. 72 appears to have been subjected to much suffering. This can be said, according to him, only about David, since nothing similar is known about Asaph. In the same way, St. Ambrose tries to reconcile the inscription of Ps. with the authorship of David. 43rd – “filiis Core”. The sons of Korah, according to him, are not the authors of this psalm, but the persons 141, the second one who was given it for singing. In a word, all the psalms, according to St. Ambrose is undoubtedly the creation of David. This view of St. Ambrose is undoubtedly wrong. But it was not only his personal opinion: it was shared by many other church teachers, like Gregory of Nyssa, bl. Augustine, Falastrius, etc. Writers of books - Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs of St. Ambrose rightly considers Solomon 142. But, in addition to these three, under the name of Solomon he quotes the Book of Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach. When quoting the latter, he clearly says once - “Solomon said”, another time - “the son of David said” 143. More often the book of the Wisdom of Solomon 144 is quoted under the same name. This quotation finds justification in the data of that time on this issue. The Book of the Wisdom of Solomon and the LXX bears the name “Σοφία Σολομών”. Moreover, both this book and the book of the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, together with the books of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs, at that time bore the general name of the books of Solomon. The Council of Hippo 393 and the Council of Carthage 397, as well as Pope Innocent I, in his letter to Exuperius of Toulouse, list the five books of Solomon. It is not surprising after this if some teachers of the church, such as Jerome 145 and St. Ambrose quotes many passages from the books – The Wisdom of Solomon and the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach under the name of Solomon. However, on the basis of some data, apparently, one should conclude that in this case we are dealing only with an inaccurate expression, and that St. Ambrose did not consider Solomon to be the writer of the two books of Wisdom. For example, in many places St. the bishop clearly speaks only about the three books of Solomon and at the same time always means the books - Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs 146. He cites these books as examples of the threefold sense of interpretation (scriptura naturalis, moralis and mystica). True, the expression of St. Ambrose - "Solomonis très libri ex plurimis videntur electi" 147 - may suggest a larger number of books written by Solomon; but even this, upon careful consideration, will not contradict the following conclusion. In addition to the five books mentioned, St. Ambrose does not mention a single book under the name of Solomon. Therefore, if in this saying of St. Ambrose wanted to talk about the works of Solomon, then, as Kellner rightly notes 148, he would have used the expression not “from many”, but “from five” books. Most likely, the expression “ex plurimis” should be applied to all the books of the Old Testament, and then the above saying will receive the following meaning: out of the many books of the Old Testament, there are three books of Solomon. To this understanding of this naming of St. Ambrose persuades us to testify to the blessed one. Augustine. After a list of the three books of Solomon, he writes: “about the other two books - the Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus (i.e., the book of the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach), which, due to their similarity with the language of Solomon’s books, are attributed to Solomon, scientists have no doubt that they do not belong to Solomon" 149. By the time of Augustine, this correct view of the controversial books had already been established. It is very likely that under the scientists who denied the books belonging to Solomon - the Wisdom of Solomon and the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, bl. Augustine meant in particular his respected teacher - St. Ambrose. All this leads us to the probable conclusion that St. Ambrose, citing under the name of Solomon, in agreement with the general view on this subject, the five named books, personally considered Solomon the author of three books - Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs. The book of the prophet Baruch is quoted by Ambrose under the name of the prophet Jeremiah 150. The writings of these two prophets are so closely related to each other that many church teachers, when listing the books of the Old Testament, do not mention the book of Baruch separately and consider it one with the writings of Jeremiah. Naturally, St. Ambrose, who used the views that had been created before him, followed in this case the general custom, calling the book of Baruch after Jeremiah. III. Hermeneutics of St. Ambrose Attitude of St. Ambrose to the main directions in the explanation of Holy Scripture and their representatives. General rules for the interpretation of Holy Scripture. Methods of interpretation: interpretation in the literal and spiritual sense During the period of the fathers and teachers of the church in the latter, in the east there were two schools or two directions of theological thought, which differed sharply from each other and were reflected in the way of interpreting the Holy Scriptures - the Alexandrian and Antiochian schools. In the theology of the first school, the dominant direction was speculative and abstract, in the second - rationalistic and practical. When explaining Holy Scripture in the Alexandrian school, mysticism and allegorism predominate; in the Antiochian school, they were primarily concerned with revealing the simple, literal meaning of Scripture, which follows from the context of speech and which was almost completely ignored by the Alexandrian exegetes. The most complete exponent of the first direction was Origen; The extreme representatives of the Antiochian school were Diodorus of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuet, while the best were Basil the Great and especially John Chrysostom. St. Ambrose was familiar with the writings of some representatives of both of these movements who lived before him and in his time, and he even had written relations with Basil the Great. But he himself, when explaining the Holy Scriptures, did not follow exclusively one of these directions: sometimes he is a follower primarily of Alexandria, sometimes of Antioch, in other cases - both at the same time. In one place he gives preference to the allegorical method of interpretation over the literal interpretation and says that “the letter kills, it shows falsely; the spirit gives life, it is true” 151, “the letter of the law brings a curse, but the spirit brings a blessing” 152. In another place, on the contrary, he asserts the need, first of all, to explain the literal meaning of Scripture and condemns Origen for his extreme allegorical interpretations 153. At the first stages of St. Ambrose, when he had special confidence in the interpreters of the Alexandrian school, the predominance of the allegorical method was noticeable in his interpretations. We see traces of this in the earlier works of St. bishop - especially in the works “about Paradise”, “Cain and Abel”, “Noah”, as well as in the works about “Abraham” and “Isaac”. Subsequently, under the influence of acquaintance with the works of the fathers of the Antiochian school, St. Ambrose frees himself from excessive enthusiasm for interpretation in the allegorical sense and becomes more solid in the matter of interpretation. The Six Days, the books about Elijah, Naboth and Tobias, partly the explanation of the first psalm, where the interpretation in the literal sense prevails, clearly speak of this. It can be said based on all this that St. Ambrose, without completely adhering to any of the indicated directions and not following any of his predecessors exclusively, borrowed from each what he found good for his own purposes. However, it cannot be denied that some of the predecessors of St. Ambrose in the field of interpretation of St. The Scriptures had a stronger influence on him. In the early days of his church-literary activity, according to Jerome 154, Origen had a particularly strong influence on him. Since we only have fragments of many of Origen’s works, it is very difficult to prove this influence indisputably. Nevertheless, this influence is quite likely and even undeniable. St. Ambrose respects Origen, speaks favorably of his interpretations of the Old Testament 155 and sees in him a man enriched with knowledge of the explanation of the Holy Scriptures 156. Apart from the method of interpretation, some of the views of Origen, assimilated by Ambrose, clearly indicate the influence of the former on the latter. However, in most cases this influence is reflected in borrowings of a casual and formal nature. In particular, this should be said regarding the eschatological views of St. Ambrose, borrowed from St. father of Origen on the basis and in the confidence that they seem to be based on the basis of Holy Scripture. Here is an example of this influence: Here and in the further comparison we see an almost literal borrowing of St. Ambrose from Origen's interpretations of the psalms, preserving their ideas and drawing conclusions. About the torment of hell of St. Ambrose, like many of his theologian contemporaries, repeats thoughts completely Origenian: “neque est corporalium stridor allquis dentium, neque ignis aliquis perpetuus ftammarum corporalium, neque vermis est corporalis etc.” (Expos. in Luc. lib VII, 205). Similar thoughts are in expos. in p.s. 119, III, 14, - in particular the idea that the righteous will be purified by fire on the day of judgment. But here we also find a difference from Origen. Agreeing with Origen regarding the purifying fire of judgment for the righteous, St. Ambrose distinguishes this latter from the fire of torment. Alius iste est ignis quo exuruntur peccata non voluntaria, sed fortuita, quem paravit servulis suis dominus Jesus, ut eos... emundet; alius ille ignis, quem deputavit diabolo et angelis ejs etc. (ibid. III); Meanwhile, Origen considers both the first and second fire to be essentially the same, only with a distinction between the consequences for the righteous and sinners: peccator venit quidem ad ignem ilium sicut Petrus et Paulus, sec non sic transiet sicut Petrus et Paulus (ibid. S. 182). The above comparison shows us the agreement of the views of St. Ambrose with the views of Origen and in the field of astrological knowledge of their time. These and similar excerpts and comparisons convince us that Ambrose followed Origen in his judgments, but, we add, he did not follow slavishly. Agreeing with Origen on some points, he differs significantly from him on others. Let us compare, for example, the work of St. Ambrose de Noe et acra with the second homily on Origen's Genesis (t. VIII, 130 ff.), and we will see that their allegorical interpretations here differ from each other. While Origen sees in the ark the image of the kingdom of God, and in the compartments of the ark multae mansiones apud pattrem, Ambrose sees in it the image of the human body with its various parts, etc. 157 Of the church fathers, the Antiochian school had a strong influence on St. Ambrose had St. Basil the Great. Vasily’s strong and energetic personality, as well as his ecclesiastical and literary works, full of delights, were of great importance to the saint. Bishop of Milan is of decisive importance. His influence was also reflected in the hermeneutical views of St. Ambrose, - on some sides, the methods of his interpretation, - and even on the very content of some of his exegetical works. One might think that the views of his Antioch teacher, St. Ambrose expresses in those cases where he asserts that, first of all, the literal or historical meaning of Holy Scripture must be explained. The influence of Antiochian views can also be attributed to the presence of that rich and sometimes very valuable exegetical material - in the form of philological explanations, critical comments regarding the text and translations of Holy Scripture, historical news, etc. - which should serve to clarify the literal meaning of Holy Scripture, and which the works of St. Ambrose. The same influence affected to some extent the content of the interpretive works of St. Ambrose; in particular, and especially in Shestodnevo, we find in places even literal borrowing from the writings of St. Basil the Great. Here are examples of this. Some of the passages Ambrose borrowed from Basil the Great represent a free translation of the original text. Such, for example, is the following passage from his Shestodnev: Many passages from the works of St. Ambrose are imprinted with the spirit and character of the works of St. Basil the Great. Such are, for example, the following passages: It should, however, be noted that when borrowing or reproducing the thoughts of St. Basil the Great St. Ambrose also makes his own independent judgments. “His performances,” says Ebert, “do not wear an alien lining, specifically Greek. Ambrose acted like Cicero: he adopted what he borrowed from the Greeks into his own individuality and completely assimilated it with the Roman way of thinking” 158. Considerable influence, especially in the early days of St.’s church and literary activity. Ambrose, had Judeo-Alexandrian philosophy in the person of its representative, Philo, to interpret it. The interpretation of this latter, due to their correspondence with the spirit of the times, was especially suitable for St. Ambrose. Given the desire for allegorization at that time, the historical side of the Old Testament was little appreciated. Therefore, it was necessary to add another to the literal interpretation, through which it would be possible to extract a sublime abstract idea from a historical fact, to find the hidden and deepest meaning of the sacred text. This interpretation of St. Ambrose found it from Philo and undoubtedly used it. The holy bishop does not quote Philo, but his sympathy with the latter and borrowings from his works, with a more or less careful comparison, are obvious. Let's turn to the comparison. Based on these and many other possible comparisons, it is quite possible to agree with Förster’s position, “that in places Ambrose’s sympathy with Philo and borrowing from his works is so obvious that Philo’s text can be judged from the works of St. Ambrose and in the text of this latter one can observe his misunderstanding of Filonov’s text” 159. However, it should be noted here that this borrowing concerns a more formal side. Prone to allegorical interpretation of the Alexandrian, St. Ambrose also retains his independence. The similarity and affinity with Philo is noticeable only when interpreting historical events; The dependence does not go further than this. Regarding the content of the ideas of St. Ambrose carefully and wisely guards the church's point of view. Reflecting the influence of these exegetes, the interpretations of St. Ambrose at the same time bear traces of his wide reading in the works of pagan writers. The holy bishop was brought up on the Greek and Latin classics and was well acquainted with the essential content of ancient philosophical systems. Thales and the atomists Pythagoras and Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, the Stoics and Epicurus 160 were also familiar to him, as were the Greek poets Homer and Euripides and the Roman writers Virgil, Cicero, Pliny and others 161, and he makes extensive use of them. He often confirms and explains his thoughts with their words, citing quotes and entire passages from them 162. Having entered the bishop's chair unexpectedly, without prior and necessary preparation, St. Ambrose naturally had to submit to these influences. And he, indeed, obeys them and sometimes draws with his full hand from the sources and manuals that were before him, compiles what he borrows and informs him of the system. It must be said, however, that the system comes from the pen of St. Ambrose not as an external, mechanical system in relation to him, but as organically connected with his spiritual life, as his own property. Holy Scripture, teaches St. Ambrose, there is our food 163, which, under the condition of daily nutrition with it, not only saturates us, supports our mortal life, but also leads to eternal life 164. But it appears like this only with correct knowledge and explanation of it. To correctly understand and explain it, it is necessary to go through, according to Ambrose, some preparatory steps and follow some general rules. A more or less correct understanding of Holy Scripture depends, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, first of all, on the moral preparedness of those starting to study it. The Holy Father advises each of these to first morally cleanse all the organs of his soul. “Cleanse your ears,” he says, “so that in a clean vessel you can receive the bright stream of teaching, so that defilement does not touch it; cleanse your spiritual eyes and the inner gaze of your soul, so that the blight of your sins does not weaken the sharpness of your spirit and does not cloud the gaze of a pure heart; then you can begin to speak divine sayings” 165. The second preparatory step to the interpretation of Holy Scripture, according to Ambrose, should be its careful teaching. Just as a warrior, before entering into a fight, must undergo preliminary exercises, improve himself in strength and dexterity, and everyone who begins to interpret the Holy Scriptures, according to Ambrose, must “anoint the hands of his spirit with the oil of reading the Holy Scriptures.” “Day and night,” he says, “we must exercise on the lists of Holy Scripture; We must strengthen our spiritual joints and members with this spiritual food” 166. But these two steps do not yet lead those who begin to interpret Holy Scripture to the desired goal and do not protect him from possible perplexities and errors along this path. In Holy Scripture there is much that is dark and incomprehensible, when explaining which it is easy to evade the true meaning of a certain passage and attribute a meaning that is not characteristic of it. It is necessary, therefore, to have a key to understanding the true meaning of the passage being interpreted; a criterion for explaining the Holy Scripture is necessary. And St. Ambrose indicates it when he says what, in the types of correct interpretation of the sacred. Scripture, which should be guided and what, in the same forms, should be avoided, and, thus, the question of the criterion for interpreting the Holy Scriptures. Scripture decides from the positive and negative side. In the first case, as a key to understanding the sacred. Scriptures, St. Ambrose points to the word of God. “In St. Scripture, he says, contains a lot of dark things, but careful and diligent study of it leads to knowledge of the highest secrets. We gradually learn the meaning of his words, and the meaning is revealed to us by the word of God. This word is the only key of understanding 167; it is when we reflect on the sacred. Scripture and find it difficult to understand and interpret it, often suddenly illuminates our spirit and makes accessible to our thoughts that which we were sure we could hardly find.” 168 “It is not in our power,” he says in another place, “to understand the Holy Scriptures; we must humbly surrender to it and not be proud if we have grasped its image or understood it in its literal sense” 169 . Thus, the first criterion for interpreting Holy Scripture, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose to serve the Holy Scripture itself, to which he teaches to “humbly surrender” in the matter of understanding the sacred text, and which, in turn, is the preparatory ground for a higher criterion - the word of God. Under the word of God, suddenly illuminating the exegete with the truth, St. Ambrose obviously means illumination from above. It goes without saying that such a criterion of interpretation, as a criterion of the nature of a purely subjective one, does not provide the interpreter with a true understanding of a certain passage. For him, the question will always remain open about what to take for illumination from above, and whether he is mixing his own inspiration with this latter? This is the bewilderment of St. Ambrose eliminates the issue of the criterion of interpretation from the negative side. He exhorts those who begin to study and explain the Holy Scriptures not to entrust themselves to false guidance. “If a pagan,” he says, “wants to achieve the Gospel or a catechumen wants to receive the fullness of the teaching and faith, then he must carefully watch so as not to fall into the hands of Photinus, Arius, Sabellius and other heretics, and suffer damage through a false interpretation of Scripture” 170. St. Ambrose does not give a direct answer to the question of what, in the face of this danger, should be held on as an anchor of salvation. But from the above sayings, by contrast, we can conclude that by the very exhortation to evade heretical leadership, he secretly instills the idea: when interpreting the sacred. The Scriptures should be kept within a fence that protects them from heretical influences, that is, within the fence of the church. The Church, and she alone opens, so to speak, eyes to illumination from above, indicates its true meaning and significance, and thereby ensures its power as a criterion. This is how one can convey the thought of St. Ambrose. Having established such a criterion, St. Ambrose, as we will see below, makes extensive use of Holy Scripture in revealing certain of its truths and more or less correctly elucidates the true thought of Scripture. For an accurate and comprehensive explanation of Holy Scripture, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, it is necessary to keep in mind its three meanings: sensus naturalis, sensus mysticus, - also rationabilis or intellegibflis 171, and sensus moralis or ethicus 172; the first is found in stories about natural truths; the second - when revealing supernatural truths; the third - when revealing moral precepts. It should, however, be noted that St. Ambrose does not always clearly and accurately draw the line between the indicated types of interpretation: in some names this line appears more, and in others less. This is explained, according to Ambrose, by the very content of the sacred books. “The Psalms, for example,” he says, “combine in themselves all types of explanation of Holy Scripture. The natural way of speech stands here next to speech about supernatural objects - here in the same place it speaks of angels and powers, the sun, moon and stars, the light of heaven, the water that was above the firmament (Ps. 53:9, 149:6). Elsewhere we talk about the mystical - about the secrets of St. anointing and next to this about building a tent (Ps. 89:21, 45:5). In the psalms, the Lord foreshadows that the Son of God, the High Priest, will come to earth, suffer for our sake and destroy our sins with his blood. At the same time, a thread of moral meaning runs through all this and is intertwined with the mystical; various images of virtues are indicated, rules of life are taught, the wounds of delusions are healed, morals are renewed and internal feelings are changed” 173. A clearer distinction between the three types of interpretation of St. Ambrose points out in separate books of Holy Scripture. These, according to him, are the books of Solomon. “Solomon,” he writes, “was involved in the threefold kind of wisdom, as philosophers taught about it - sapientia naturalis; moralis et rationabilis. He taught natural wisdom in Ecclesiastes, where it is proven that everything that exists in the world is vanity of vanities and everything is vanity; sapientia moralis is taught in the book of Proverbs and the highest wisdom in the book of Song of Songs, since here, under the image of the union of the heavenly Word with our soul, deep secrets are revealed." 174 A similar example, according to Ambrose, is the books of Moses - Genesis, Leviticus and Deuteronomy. “The Book of Genesis has a natural meaning, because it tells about how the sky, sea, earth and in general this whole world came into being; Leviticus has a mystical meaning, since it talks about the priestly sacrament; Deuteronomy is moral, since it outlines a person’s way of life in accordance with the requirements of the law” 175. This St. Ambrose does not want to say that each of the books mentioned can be explained only in one of the indicated and associated senses. Along with the type of explanation attributed to the famous book par excellence, St. Ambrose allows for its interpretation in another sense. He himself says that parables often contain, along with a moral meaning, a mysterious meaning 176 and sees an example of this in the saying of the book of Proverbs: “wisdom built for herself an house and established seven pillars, she laid down her sacrifice”... etc. (9.1), as well as in the saying of the Song of Songs: “let him kiss me with the kiss of his lips” (I, 1). Sometimes in the same verse St. the bishop finds a combination of all three meanings of interpretation. This, according to him, is the saying of the Song of Songs: “Where do you graze, where will you stay for the day? » 177. It is impossible not to notice, however, that with this interpretation, St. Ambrose there are obvious stretches. This is revealed, for example, when interpreting the saying of the book of Song of Songs I, 15 and 16: “Behold my bridegroom, my brother is truly handsome. Our bed is shady, the beams of our house are cedar, our boards are cypress.” “We can,” says St. Ambrose, - understand this in a moral sense. For where else is Christ glorified, if not in the deeds of his people.” “The natural meaning lies in saying 2, 3: I strove for his shadow and sat; its fruit is sweet in my throat.” “He who exalts himself,” notes St. Ambrose, above the earthly and dying for the worldly, avoids everything and neglects everything that is above the sun.” “The mystical meaning is found in saying 2, 4: “bring me to the house of wine, place love in me here.” Just as a vine entwines a vineyard, so Jesus Christ, the eternal vine, embraces his people with an embrace of love.” 178 The last example of interpretation, as more appropriate to the essence of the matter, can be accepted by everyone; the first two, as the fruit of an obvious stretch, can be considered less successful. Partly the examples given above, and mainly the following, convince us that three types of interpretation of the Holy Scriptures by St. Ambrose understands it as sensus obvius. In his interpretation of the wells dug by Isaac (Gen. 26:19), he pursues the idea that each of the indicated types of interpretation does not exclude the other: each of them allows interpretation in a different sense. Having spoken about digging wells, St. The bishop continues: “Who, reading this, might think that this is talking about earthly things more than about heavenly things? For Abraham digs wells and Isaac - such great patriarchs, or even Jacob, as we find in the gospel (John 4:12) - these sources of the human race, promises and faith?.. For what is a well of living water if not the depth of wisdom? From the well of the vision (appearance), Isaac began to dig wells so that the water of this source, first of all, would cleanse his rational soul and wash his eyes” 179. With this interpretation of St. Ambrose expressed that he followed a higher, spiritual meaning here, not paying attention to the literal meaning. In the spiritual sense, namely the moral sense, according to Ambrose, the well of injustice and enmity must also be explained. He writes: “he (Isaac) renewed the treasure that his father Abraham dug and about which the shepherds of Gerar argued, that is, the walls. But where there is a wall, there is division between the disputants, there is injustice; That’s why he called that well the well of injustice. He dug another treasure and, due to a disagreement that arose around it, called it enmity. In these last (storehouses) the moral meaning is indicated, because, with the destruction of division (mediastinum), enmity in the flesh of man is destroyed, which was realized symbolically in Isaac, and in truth through Christ. And, indeed, in this well pure water was later found as a moral teaching, useful for saturation. The storehouse of breadth means nothing more than knowledge of the natural. The last treasure of the oath, in which God appeared to him and said: “Do not be afraid, I am with you,” and will bless him, has a mystical meaning” 180. From this example, in connection with the previous ones, it can be seen that St. Ambrose, as we have noticed, does not put a strict line between the literal and higher meaning when he speaks of three types of interpretation. According to him, the literal meaning can be combined with others - threefold, as well as the highest spiritual meaning 181. But, on the other hand, there is no shortage of such sayings of St. Ambrose, where he more strictly distinguishes between spiritual and higher meaning. We find this in his works about Noah and Joseph, where, by the way, various names for the meanings of interpretation are indicated. Here, the literal meaning is usually examined first, and then the higher one. In the essay on Noah, the literal meaning - littera - is contrasted with sensus altior 182, or subtiliter interpretatio 183, altior interpretatio 184, alta interpretatio 185, altior sensus 186; the simple meaning - simplex intelectus 187, scripti explanatio 188 and scriptum seriesque verborum 189 is contrasted with aliegoria. What this sublime meaning is is usually not directly indicated; but from the interpretation itself one can see that this is a moral meaning. When the literal sense is called naturaliter, the higher sense is designated moralis 190. The matter appears somewhat differently in the work of St. Ambrose about Joseph. Here the highest meaning, by which is meant the mystical meaning, is almost everywhere designated by the term mysticus or mysterium 191: the literal one by the term historia 192. In other works, the expression “intellectus saecularis” 193 is used to denote interpretation in the literal sense, and the term spiritaliter 194 is used to indicate interpretation in the spiritual sense. More clarification and differentiation of types of interpretation in St. We don't find Ambrose. Summing up what has been said about the meaning of Holy Scripture, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, we, in general, must call upon the above three types of interpretation - natural, moral and mystical. What is the attitude of St. towards them? Ambrose in theory and practice? Coming out of that position of the priest. Scriptures that “the law of God is spiritual” (Rom. 7:14) and “the letter kills, the spirit gives life” (2 Cor. 6:14), St. Ambrose, in his theoretical judgments on this issue and in applying these latter to practice, gives preference to the spiritual, moral and mystical meaning. The letter of the Old Testament seems harsh to him, his worldview seems harsh to him 195 , the mystical meaning seems to him more witty, and the moral meaning more pleasant 196 . The mystical word of the saint. Scripture, according to him, is bread that strengthens the human heart, like healthy food; the exhorting, moral word of Scripture is pleasant and loving. “The lips of the righteous drip honey when he,” writes St. Ambrose, - in a word, restores souls broken by cruel blows and misfortunes 197. With such a theoretical view, St. Ambrose's interpretations are quite consistent. Sometimes almost completely ignoring the literal meaning, when interpreting a certain passage, he first of all strives to find out and establish the higher, spiritual meaning - first moral, and then mystical. These are his interpretations regarding the Jewish law in general and the ritual side of it in particular. “The letter,” he writes, “kills, shows falsely; the spirit gives life - it is true” 198. “No one thinks that one can be saved by the letter of the law, since the letter of the law brings a curse, but the spirit brings blessing” 199. “A Jewish scholar can show you every line of the Holy Scriptures. Scripture, but if you ask him about its meaning, he will answer you letter by letter... You go to the spiritual meaning, which is also in the law, and you will see that that (literal meaning) in comparison with this is nothing” 200. In accordance with this general position regarding the law of the Jewish St. Ambrose also expresses his views on the ritual side of it - sacrifices and circumcision, with the significant difference, however, that in the latter case he does not lose sight of the literal meaning. Without rejecting the literal understanding of sacrifices and circumcision, he plans to find out and establish their true meaning and significance with the help of a higher - moral and mysterious interpretation. In one of his letters 201 he says that the sacrifice had to be made as the law prescribes; but such a sacrifice was significant insofar as it pointed to Christ, His coming and suffering 202. Circumcision also had to be performed in accordance with the prescription of the law 203, but along with it there must also be spiritual circumcision: the heart and soul must be circumcised - the truth is, first of all, this. Carnal circumcision only indicates spiritual circumcision; then he circumcises the flesh, and this is sin 204. One cannot but agree with the general position of St. Ambrose that not everything in the Bible can and should be taken literally. Figurative tropical speech is characteristic of sacred biblical poetry, like any other. Then, with a literalistic understanding, not everything is sacred. Scripture will be acceptable to reason and, in any case, much will remain mysterious. Finally, literalism is incompatible with Christianity, the religion of the spirit, which constitutes the revelation and completion of the Old Testament economy. But on the other hand, one cannot help but notice that St. the bishop in his allegorical interpretations sometimes oversteps the proper boundaries, and in this case there can be no agreement with him. His view of the historical part of the Old Testament confirms this. In his works - about paradise, Cain and Abel, Noah, Abraham, Isaac - he adheres primarily to an allegorical interpretation. His interpretations here are so permeated with allegorism and mysticism that, apparently, there is no room left for a literal, historical understanding. But this, sometimes reaching extremes, tendency of St. Ambrose's interpretation of Holy Scripture in an allegorical sense finds justification both in his character and worldview, and in the conditions of his time. The Holy Father fell into the aforementioned extreme not so much due to the attraction of his inquisitive mind, like Origen, but rather due to the special inclination of his heart, which, being completely embraced by love for Christ, wanted to find him under every letter of the sacred text. He constantly contemplated Him at dawn and on quiet nights, He loved Him under the rubble of the poor and unfortunate; He was his life and joy. With such an enthusiastic, sacred-poetic mood of the soul, it is quite natural to be carried away by the sublime, allegorical interpretation. Such a passion will seem even more natural to us if we take into account that the allegorical method of interpreting Scripture was a common scientific technique of the great writers of the 4th century. Origen, Didymus, Hippolytus and Basil the Great served St. Ambrose as models, leaders and mentors in this regard. He studied them, was inspired by them in his church speeches and words, and imitated them. This interpretation was also consistent with the practical goals of St. bishop - exhortation and edification of the believers. Allegorical interpretation presents rich matter in this regard. Often, in an apparently insignificant word or expression of Scripture, allegorical interpretation reveals a wealth of most beautiful and edifying ideas. Finally, this method of interpretation is justified by the purely historical circumstances of St. Ambrose: he corresponded to the spirit of the times. Loose morals, instability of beliefs, malicious explanations of stories from the family life of the patriarchs, a persistent struggle against heretics - Manichaeans and Arians - all this gave special value to the allegorical method of explaining biblical texts and events. Exegetical techniques and means used by St. Ambrose in interpreting Holy Scripture in the literal and spiritual sense; interpretation a) historical-grammatical and b) mysterious-symbolic. Let's move on to the techniques and means by which St. Ambrose used the indicated methods of interpretation when revealing certain truths of Scripture. The literal meaning is closer and more undoubted; in it one can most accurately find the thought of the writer himself in its primary simplicity and expressiveness without any admixtures or reinterpretations of the exegete. Therefore St. Ambrose, especially in the later period of his literary activity, paid his attention to what the phrase itself says. In this he differs significantly from the exegetes of the Alexandrian school and especially Origen, and clearly belongs to the Antiochian school. Like the best representatives of this latter, in his works of later times he places the historical-grammatical method as the basis for interpretation. Means for carrying out this method from St. Ambrose was quite a lot. Almost every work of his is preceded by brief, but clear and definite information, introducing the reader into the spirit and meaning of Scripture and providing him with the necessary data about the time, place, author of the book of Scripture, etc. In the preface to Ps. l he gives a rather extensive speech, which we briefly cited above, about the spirit and meaning of the psalms. During the Sixth Day, before beginning to explain the book of Genesis, he provides information about Moses as the author of this book 205. He tries with special care to prove that the author of all psalms is David, and at the same time resolves the contradictions encountered in this position in the inscription of the psalms 206. Explores the historical reason for writing Ps.37 207 in the crime of David with Bathsheba indicates the reason for writing Ps.50 208; when explaining Ps.118, he often resorts to interpretation on historical grounds 209. True, his provisions and arguments are not always thorough and correct, nevertheless, as an expression of the desire to find the truth using a completely correct method, they deserve full attention. For the correct interpretation of St. Scripture must be read correctly. In this case, it is necessary to restore the original text: the restoration of correct reading is already, in a sense, its interpretation. To this, as we have partially seen, St. Ambrose pays due attention. He compares the Itala text with the Greek text, the translation from Hebrew into Greek with the translation from Greek into Latin 210. By using the Greek text, he tries to understand the meaning of the Latin. For example, to clarify the Word ampliare, he cites the Greek ἐριεγάλυνεν 211; the meaning of prodigia is explained through the Greek τὲρατα 212; forte is explained through τὰχα 213; semper – through διὰ παντὸς 214; in saeculum – through εἰς τόν αἰῶνα 215; finis – through τέλος 216; speravi – through ἐπήλπισα 217, etc. For the same purpose, St. Ambrose resorts to philology. He strictly distinguishes reclinatio from declinatio 218, firmly establishes the difference between peccator and praevaricator 219; strictly distinguishes between incola, advena and accola 220; accurately clarifies the difference between the expressions in mandatis credere and mandatis credere 221; assigns a different meaning to the word parazelus than zelus 222; strives to accurately understand the concepts associated with the words tentatio and probatio 223; strictly grammatically reveals the meaning of the particle et 224; pays attention even to the very arrangement of words; relatively often applies to the case the expression he once used: diximus sensum, etiam elocutionem consideremus 225, etc. A large role in the interpretation of St. Ambrose is played by the etymology of proper and common names. But here St. the bishop is less fortunate. Oὐρανός produces from ὁράσϑαι 226, αἴξ from αἴσσεν 227, perdix from perdere 228, νάφϑα supplies in connection with συνάπτεν 229. But especially important is his mistake in the production of οὐσία from οὔσα ἀεί 230. But the matter of interpretation in the sense of literal explanation cannot end there. The Bible tells us about distant times and concerns objects and relationships that are not found in modern life - therefore, in order to bring these latter closer to the reader’s consciousness, it requires new work from the exegete in the historical direction. St. Ambrose also pays attention to this side of the matter and reveals it by elucidating the Bible from itself. The means for this for him were biblical parallels and comparisons of holy places. Scriptures. In this regard, St. the bishop reveals rich erudition. He uses parallels especially widely, in terms of the intended goal. Often his works are so strewn with them that it is difficult to decide what constitutes their outline, what is the author’s own view. For example, to find out the meaning of the saying - “streams of tears flow from my eyes (Ps. 118-136)” - St. Ambrose gives six other passages of Scripture - parallel 231. When explaining the saying - “establish my steps (Ps. 118-133)” - he cites seven similar passages 232, etc. Such an abundance of parallel places, found in St. Ambrose's outstanding knowledge of the priest. The Scriptures certainly deserve attention and wonder. Give so many parallel sacred passages. Scripture in our time is not difficult. In the time of Ambrose, when there were no aids to this in the form of dictionaries and concordances of our days, such a phenomenon should be considered undoubtedly outstanding. But with all this, one cannot help but notice that St. On this path, Ambrose sometimes does not observe measures and oversteps the proper boundaries. One can agree with him when, when explaining the sayings of Psalm 119, 136 - “Decursus aquarum descendunt oculi mei” - he parallels the sayings: Ps. 6:7 - “lavabo per singulas noctes lertum meum lacrimis stratum meum rigabo”; Ps.101:10 – “Potum meum cum fletu miscebam”; – Lamentations 2:11 – “Defecerunt in lacrimas oculi mei” – and 3, 49 – “oculus meus obsorptus est.” 233 But this kind of parallel cannot be approved when St. Ambrose, to explain the ordinary word ibi in the saying Ps.35:13 - “ibi ceciderunt qui operantu iniquitatum” - cites the saying Ps.47:8 - “ibi dolores sicut parfurientis”; – Ps.87:4 – “memor ego Kahab, et Babylonis scientibus me. Etenim alienigenae, et Tyrus et populus Aethiopum, hi fuerunt ibi,” finally the saying of the evangelist Matthew 13:14, “ibi erit fletus et stridor dentium” and Job 1:21, “nudus ibi perham” 234. The meaning of “ibi” used in Ps.35 becomes clear from the context of the speech. But St. Ambrose for some reason avoids this direct method of clarification and, to his question of what “ibi” means, looks for an answer in a number of other indicated sayings, sometimes not quite corresponding to the intended purpose. In the saying of Ps.43:2 - “Patres nostri annuntiaverunt nobis”, as can easily be seen from the context of the speech, the expression patres is understood in a broad sense, in the sense of ancestors. St. Ambrose is not satisfied with this interpretation; cites a number of parallel passages and comes to the conclusion that here patres mean spiritual fathers in a figurative sense 235. With this method of interpreting Holy Scripture, when interpreting it on the basis of the indicated method of combining parallels, such shortcomings in the interpretations of St. Ambrose, as deviations from the main idea, incorrect explanations, ambiguity and obvious stretches. Therefore, to some extent, Rosenmiller is fair when he expresses himself this way regarding the interpretations of St. Ambrose: “...sequitur longa digressio, ubi bonus Ambrosius more suo multa loca Veteris et Novi Testamenti cumulat sine omne judicio” 236. Comparison of sacred places Scripture also plays a significant role in St. Ambrose while explaining the Bible to them from itself. The revelation of dogmatic and moral truths is entirely based on this foundation. With this sharp weapon (a comparison of Scripture passages) he opposes the heretics, fights the Arians and Novatians. And at the same time he uses not only the New, but also the Old Testament and, which deserves special attention, he uses the latter when revealing purely Christian dogmas, such as, for example, when revealing the dogma of the Holy Spirit. The same must be said regarding the revelation of St. Ambrose of moral truths. The basis for his revelation of the truth is always biblical history, a biblical example, as its illustration, and its proof is provided by the relevant passages from Holy Scripture cited here, which clarify the thought and confirm his position 237. The same goal - revealing the Bible from itself - is served by St. Ambrose's so-called method of accommodation. An example in this regard for him could be the timing of hymns used in the churches of his time; apostolic and gospel readings to a certain kind of historical events, days and hours. This Method, if it does not overstep the proper boundaries, is undoubtedly of great importance and has every right to exist. At St. He finds a prudent use for Ambrose. Let us give two examples of this. In a letter to his sister Marcellina, giving enthusiastic praise to the discovered remains of St. Gervasius and Protasius, he makes a remarkable comparison with the circumstances of the discovery of these remains, the words of the psalm and the book of Kings. “The heavens,” he says, “preach the glory of God. Look at my right hand, look at my left, look at the relics - this is the essence of heaven, which preaches the glory of God; these are the works of His hands, of which the firmament speaks. These are the days, between which the darkness of night does not pass (Ps. 19:2-3). God saw something insignificant: He revealed the remains of His martyrs, which were hidden under the hills, to His church. The Lord opened our eyes like Gehazi (2 Kings 6:16), and we saw the army that so often defended us, although we did not see it.” 238 Such accommodation is especially vividly carried out in the funeral homily of St. Ambrose on the death of Emperor Valentinian. Near Jerusalem, which appears in the book of Lamentations as weeping incessantly, St. Ambrose, in relation to the circumstance, means the church, which “cries inconsolably in the darkness of sadness, for the one who gave it a radiant shine with his firm faith and devotion has died.” “Tears are streaming down her cheeks,” he says, “that is, the church is crying in the face of its elders, who are her cheeks. The words now apply to the church: “the ways of Zion lament; his priests sigh; his maidens are sad, and he himself is bitter (Lamentations 1:4),” Turning then to Valentinian, he tells him on behalf of the church in the words of the Song of Songs: “I would lead you, I would bring you to my mother’s house; I would give you aromatic wine to drink” (Song.8:3). And in response to this, Valentinian puts into his mouth the words of Lamentation: “by the mercy of the Lord, we have not disappeared, for his mercy has not been exhausted - it is renewed every morning.” ( Lamentations 3:22–23 ) 239 . Such accommodation, as it is presented here in the dialogue between the church and the emperor, does not introduce into the interpretation of Scripture anything inappropriate or alien to its spirit. It is introduced here, no doubt, in order to more clearly show that the thoughts and love of everyone are entirely directed towards the deceased emperor and his house. In terms of establishing a correct understanding of biblical narratives, St. Ambrose does not leave without explanation the perplexities and contradictions that appear to him in Scripture. The bewilderment that arises when comparing the sayings of Ps.34:13 - “I (David) humbled my soul in fasting” - and Ps.130:2 - “if I did not humble myself, but exalted my soul” - St. Ambrose eliminates this with the following consideration: “David humbled his soul by fasting, in order to learn to put aside the arrogance of the body, but he exalted his soul through the mercy of God” 240. In contrast to the saying of Ps.40:1 - “blessed is he who looks upon the poor and needy” - to the act of Judas, who spoke out for the sale of the world of Magdalene and the distribution of money to the poor (Mark 14-5), St. the bishop is trying to find out and prove the idea that Jesus Christ makes a suggestion to Judas only because he had in mind to steal part of the money from the sale of the world 241. Similar decisions of St. Ambrose cannot, of course, be considered completely satisfactory. Nevertheless, one cannot but agree with its main provisions applied here. The attempts of St. Ambrose to reconcile the contradictions encountered on the basis of allegorical interpretation. An example of this can be seen in his letter to Gorantinian 242. Here, based on the allegorical interpretation of St. the father is trying to eliminate the contradiction in the sayings of the evangelist Matthew 2:6 and the prophet Micah 5:2. The expression “ὀλιγιστός εἰ” in the prophet Micah, which, according to him, is equivalent to the expression “in paucioribus”, is in contradiction with the expression of the Evangelist Matthew - “non es in paucioribus”. But this is a contradiction, according to St. Ambrose, only in the difference of words, and not of meaning (verborum discrepautia, non sensuum est). It is eliminated, according to him, by itself, if we take into account that the subject is discussed here not from one, but from two points of view, completely different. The prophet Micah speaks of Bethlehem as a house of bread, which, given the narrow road to it, few penetrate. In the Evangelist Matthew, Bethlehem is understood as a city in its relationship to Christ and, on the basis of this, is considered no less, not insignificant among those cities that did not recognize Christ. These are all the techniques and means by which St. Ambrose used in revealing and establishing the literal meaning of Holy Scripture. Let us now consider the methods and means by which St. Ambrose used it when interpreting Holy Scripture in an allegorical sense. This goal is served by a mysteriously symbolic interpretation of Hebrew letters, proper names and numbers. The mysterious interpretation of Hebrew letters, proper names and numbers was known even before Ambrose. It began in the Holy Place itself. Scripture. Here proper names are given a deep meaning. The naming of the ancestress Eve, the change of the name Abram to Abraham, the naming of the name John the Baptist, the Savior, clearly confirms this. Jewish exegetes, especially Philo, did not remain silent on this issue. According to the testimony of Jerome 243, this latter compiled a whole list of names, mysterious in their meaning, which rendered considerable service to Christian exegetes. The Alexandrian school, headed by Origen, also worked on the same issue. Origen carefully examined the meaning of proper names and used this in his interpretations. St. Ambrose did not know the Hebrew language and therefore naturally could not be independent in the field of Jewish etymology. In his mysteriously symbolic interpretations of Hebrew letters, proper names and numbers, he therefore follows the beaten path and follows in this regard the Jewish and Alexandrian exegetes. In his writings we find an open statement that he borrowed this or that from others. “We received information from others (com perimus), he writes, for example, that LXX men added a lot to the Hebrew text.” Regarding the Hebrew letters, he writes the following: ““Not” in Latin means “est” or, as we find elsewhere, “vivo”, “Mem,” he says, “for some interpreters it means “viscera”, for others - “ex ipsis””, etc. Based on what has been said, we can assume that in his mysterious-symbolic interpretations, St. Ambrose offers the reader what he had on hand on this issue from the works of his predecessors. It is difficult to decide who he followed in this regard in particular. Philo's etymology is lost. We also do not know the interpretations of Origen’s letters. However, based on the Kellner study we indicated, the following can be said regarding this. In the interpretation of the letters of St. Ambrose and in the interpretations of the same thing in Origen, as far as they are preserved in Eusebius, there is no literal similarity; on the contrary, there are ... frequent disagreements. It is very likely that St. Ambrose had at hand the interpretations on this issue of many predecessors and used them. He himself confirms this with his above-mentioned remark about the different interpretations of letters. The meaning of Hebrew letters, according to Ambrose, is very rich in its content 244. He reveals this meaning in connection with the interpretation of Ps.118. He divides this latter into the number of octonaries corresponding to the number of Hebrew letters and establishes an internal connection between the meaning of the letter and the content of the corresponding octonary. Moreover, a letter, according to his research, with its meaning always covers the content of the department corresponding to it and, thus, is, as it were, its theme. Let us give several examples of such an interpretation. "Aleph" means "doctrina". “From this the attentive listener must conclude that the following verses are full of teaching.”245 This interpretation of St. Ambrose is obviously too general. What is said here about the first octonary can be said about every psalm; even about each verse: each of them is rich in teaching. It was much more difficult for Ambrose to establish the connection between the second letter “Beth” and the corresponding octonary. But he finds her. The letter “Beth”, according to him, means confusio. This meaning of it, apparently, is in conflict with the first verse of the octonary, which speaks of correction. But this, according to St. bishop, is resolved by this consideration. Anyone who deviates onto the path of error and then realizes this becomes confused, is struck by the awareness of danger and strives for correction 246. After such an interpretation, the connection between the meaning of the capital letter and the content of the verses following it, according to Ambrose, is quite natural. The interpretation of the third letter is more successful compared to the interpretation of the preceding letters. The letter “Gimel” is assigned the meaning “retributio” and, accordingly, in its interpretation and agreement with the content of the octonary, we are talking about retribution 247. The letter "Daleth" of St. Ambrose ascribes two completely different and unrelated meanings - “fear” and “birth”. Despite this, he indicates a close relationship between these values. The corresponding octonary speaks of material birth, and such birth is not free from fear. Birth and fear, according to Ambrose, are intertwined and, thus, the correspondence of the indicated meanings of the letter and its correspondence to the content of the next octonary 248 is obtained. It was easier for Ambrose to establish a connection and relationship between the Hebrew “Not” and the Latin “est” or “vivo”. “Whoever exists must live; and what is necessary for real life is expressed in the following verses” 249. The interpretation of all letters continues in the same lines. “Fau” means “this is That One” or simply “That One,” namely Christ, salutare tuum, as he is called in v. 41. 118 ps. “Zain” – duc te, i.e. you must control yourself, dominate yourself; must direct his path to where the verses following this letter call. “Cheth” is fear, because the wise and righteous, who says in the following verses: “My portion is the Lord,” fears God. “Teht” – exclusio: whoever laments his sins, his joy in error is excluded, his joy disappears; whoever repents has first of all shame. This is done by David, who, after repenting of his sins, exclaims: “You have shown me good, Lord!” (Ps. 119:65). For a more complete interpretation of the Hebrew alphabet, St. Ambrose turns to other alphabetical works of St. Scriptures, such as the book of Lamentations of Jeremiah. This is particularly evident in the interpretation of the letters Tetli and Jod. The last St. the bishop assigns two meanings – “devastation” and “recognition”. This, according to him, is quite consistent with the internal affinity of these meanings. “Whoever suffers disaster quickly comes to admit his helplessness and asks for divine help.” But with this letter the prophet Jeremiah speaks of the devastation of Jerusalem (Lam. 1:10) and at the same time about its hope (Lam. 3:19, 30). Therefore, man - this is the primary creation of God, created by His hands - must always remain in hope 250. “Caph” means “they bowed down, they bowed their necks, they repented and humbled themselves before God. David did this and then cried out: “My soul fails for Your house” (Ps. 119:81). The prophet Jeremiah teaches exactly the same thing under this letter: “If a person is oppressed, then God will have mercy on him according to the abundance of His mercy” (Lam. 3:32). In order not to enter into details of the interpretation of other letters, we will briefly indicate their meaning, as it is given by St. Ambrose. “Lamed” means “cor or servo”; “Mem” – viscera and ex ipsis; “Nun” – unicus or pascua eorum; “Samech” – audi or firmamentum; “Ain” – oculus or fons; “Phe” – erravi or os aperui; “Zade” – consolatio; "Koph" – conclusio or aspice; "Resch" – caput or primatus; "Schin" – super vulnus; "Tau" – erravit or consummatio. Taking a general look at the given interpretations of letters, we must say the following about them. These interpretations do not always correspond to the true meaning of the letters. The fact is that the names of Hebrew letters were transferred to them, as is known, from sensory things. They designate, therefore, material, sensual things, and not abstract, supersensible things, as is the case with St. Ambrose. This is the disadvantage of these interpretations. But despite all this, one cannot help but see in them the profound thought and outstanding wit of the saint. bishop. He often creates in them original comparisons and unexpected, but at the same time relatively true, convergences. There is a lot of artificiality in them, but this is more likely the fruit of borrowing than independent invention. Names of persons, peoples, places, countries, as the names of letters, according to St. Ambrose, are very rich in the content of their meaning. In order to reveal this content, he carefully studies the etymology of names and achieves considerable results in this regard. It should, however, be noted that St. Ambrose is not independent in this area either. He draws material for these works, as we will see below, from Philo and Origen 251. Let's give some examples of interpretation. Abel, according to Ambrose, means: “qui omnia referret ad Deum pia devotus mentis attentione nihil sibi arrogans, ut cuperior frater (Cain); sed totum tribuens conditori quod accepisset ab eo" 252 . Philo interprets this name as follows: ἀναφέρον ἐπί Θεὸν πάντα 253. In Origen, this name is explained by the word luctus 254, that is, it is derived from the word “abal” instead of “habal”. The source of interpretation in this case for Ambrose was obviously the interpretation of Philo. “Abraham” –pater vanus 255, is in all likelihood a false translation of Philon’s expression “πατήρ ρατέωρος” 256. "Abraham" means, on the contrary, pater electus or pater filii; the first interpretation is borrowed from Philo 257, the last from the priest. Scripture 258, according to which the name “Abraham” means “father of many nations.” In addition, this is the name of St. Ambrose translates the word transitus 259, in agreement with the LXX (Gen. 14:13), where Abraham is called περάτης. Philo translates the name “Hagar” with the word παροίκησις 260, St. Ambrose - with the word advena or accola and gives the following reason for this: qui enim mediis utitur disciplinis, accola in habitat est sapientiae 261. Elsewhere he translates this name by the word habitatio 262. The Assyrians, according to Philo, are εὑϑύνοντες 263. At St. Ambrose 264, like Origen 265, there is a translation of this word equivalent to Philon’s, namely the expression dirigentes. But their symbolic interpretations are different. According to Ambrose, this expression indicates the courage of the soul, which excites a person to high and worthy activities; according to Philo - to passion, which gives rise to human weaknesses. The name "Basan" is interpreted with the word confusio 266, probably following Origen, who translates it with the expression αἰσχόνη 267. Philo 268 and Origen 269 interpret the name “Enoch” with the expression χάρις σου; St. Ambrose understands this name in a broader sense and conveys it with the expression “Dei gratia” 270. Philo interprets the name “Melchizedek” with the expression βασιλέυς δίκαιος 271, St. Ambrose explains it more precisely through the expression “rex pacis et justitiae”, while taking into account the name of Salem 272. The name “Moses,” both according to Philo 273 and Ambrose 274, means “taken from the water.” In the interpretation of the name “Noah” by the expression justus or requies 275 one can see the translation of Philon’s interpretation of this name by the expression ἀνάπαυσις; ἤ δίκαιος 276, which, incidentally, is also found in Origen 277. St. has Ambrose and such interpretations of names that neither Philo nor Origen have. These are, for example, the interpretations of the names “Charab” - the expression intellectus, “Oreb” - the expression omne cor 278. In the name Jezebel, St. Ambrose sees an indication 279 of a sinful inclination, probably referring to the personality of the queen: in fact, this name has the opposite meaning to that indicated by St. Ambrose - it indicates purity. To conclude this section, we present the interpretation of St. Ambrose of a name that has a special meaning for us, and the etymology of which is not always explained correctly and accurately: this is the name “Mary”. The interpretation of this name by St. Ambrose is not always the same, depending on the name of which person it refers to - the Mother of God or the sister of Aaron. In the first case, this name, according to Ambrose, means “Deus ex genere meo”, in the second - “amaritudo maris” 280. It is difficult to decide where the source of such an interpretation is. There is no mention of this name in Origen's works. Philo interprets it with the word ἐλπίς 281. Jerome gives us various interpretations of this name, namely: domina, illuminatio mea vel illuminans me; illuminatrix; finally, Stella maris, Smyrna maris 282. In these interpretations of Jerome one can see a similar interpretation of Ambrose, now indicated. One could give a whole series of similar interpretations of St. Ambrose 283. But the above are enough to establish a more or less correct view of the interpretation of St. bishop of this kind. Concerning them we can say the same thing that was told to us about the interpretation of letters. On some points it is not always possible to agree with them. In particular this must be said regarding the name "Abel". It is necessary to take the Hebrew “chebel” as the basis for its interpretation - only then will the concept of the mortal, the vain be obtained. For the name “Basan,” according to Kellner’s remark, 284 the root should be sought in the Arabic batnatum - solum molle, etc. In making such a conclusion, we are far from the idea of ​​belittling the dignity of the above and similar interpretations of St. Ambrose. Due to the wealth of wit and considerable profundity, his allegory in this case has its own dignity and meaning. Such a conclusion will have greater force for us if we take into account the state of knowledge at that time on this subject. That was a time when there was no undeniably established and detailed etymological data. Therefore, those gaps and imperfections that we encounter in the etymological research of St. are completely understandable and natural. Ambrose. The symbolism of numbers, as has already been partially noted, was known before Ambrose, even before Christianity. Pagan poets and philosophers dedicated their works to her. The Pythagoreans and Platonists dealt with it primarily. It was borrowed from them by the Jews, and then by the church fathers, who trusted Plato’s philosophy. The latter put a Christian spirit into the symbolism of numbers. St. Ambrose was also no stranger to this area. The example in this area in the person of Philo and Origen had a decisive effect on him. Their works on the symbolism of numbers represented St. The bishop has rich material and he makes extensive use of it 285. Let's look at examples of the symbolic interpretation of St. numbers. Ambrose. The number “one” means power, dominance; The singular number contains everything (in the hands), controls everything; one letter in Ps. 118 stands above eight verses: these verses say only what the meaning of that letter contains 286 . In the number “two”, the number of “separation”, there is of course emptiness and impurity 287. “Three” is a mysterious, sacred, saving number 288, it is primarily related to sacrifice. Abraham and Isaac came to the place of sacrifice on the third day. Moses, by command of God, had to offer a sacrifice on the third day after the exodus from Egypt 289. Finally, the number “three” is the number of the divine Trinity 290. The number “four” is especially important in its meaning. The mysterious importance of this St. number. Ambrose is revealed from God's promise to Abraham that his descendants in the fourth generation will be brought out of Egypt (Gen. 15:16); then from the fact that the middle of the week is the fourth day; - that there are four Gospels; - four mysterious beasts mentioned in the Holy Scriptures - from the four countries of the world, according to prophecy, the children of the church will gather - the first four numbers ultimately give ten (namely 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10); – four indicates four human ages, etc. 291 The numbers “seven” and “eight” are also of great importance in the symbolism of St. Ambrose. The number “seven” is rich in its content in relation to nature and man. There are seven planets from which the country “north” – septentrio 292 – got its name. A person has two eyes, two ears, two nostrils and a mouth; he masters the five senses, language and the power of generation; in his body one can distinguish seven external and seven internal parts 293. This number raises a person’s gaze; connected with it is the idea of ​​the seven gifts of St. Spirit; it is the number of completeness and universality, since the world was created in seven days 294. On the seventh day the Lord rested from his work and the number “seven” thereby became the number of rest 295. It is the number of peace, reconciliation: Jacob bows seven times before his brother in forms of reconciliation 296; the seventh year is a Sabbath year, and seven times the seventh is a jubilee year; seventy-seven times one must forgive a brother; seven times Naaman had to bathe in the Jordan 297. The number seven is sacred and pure: it is not mixed with others and is not derived from others, it is the basic number 298. Finally, the number seven is the Old Testament number 299. “Eight” is the New Testament number 300; on the eighth day Jesus Christ was resurrected and the day of salvation dawned for all mankind 301; on the eighth day, Christ the Savior was circumcised, which foreshadowed the cleansing of our body from all filth 302; circumcision was performed on the eighth day, since in seven days the world was stained by our sins; the first and eighth days are the days of our rebellion from sins, since we have risen with Christ and live with Him 303. In the interpretation of St. Ambrose numbers – “seven” and “eight”, in particular, in assigning the meaning of the Old Testament number to the first of them, and the New Testament to the second, the influence of Origen’s views is reflected. This interpretation deserves special attention, and we will dwell on it in more detail. It will be more or less clear to us why exactly the number seven is the number of the Old Testament, and eight is the number of the New Testament; seven is the number of the law, eight is the number of the fulfillment of the Gospel. Origen, in accordance with the prophecy of Daniel, divides the entire time before the Nativity of Christ into seventy weeks, counting each week as 70 years, including the Babylonian captivity forms one such week 304. These weeks span seven centuries. In the middle of the last week, according to Daniel, Jerusalem and the church will be destroyed, because the Jews will kill the Messiah. This was fulfilled in 70 A.D. This time forms the middle of the seventieth week; this entire week embraces the time from 35 to 105 A.D., when the gospel was proclaimed and established, according to the word of Daniel: “and one week will confirm the covenant to many.” From that time on, the world was freed from the deeds of darkness and began to bear fruit for heaven. According to Ambrose, we have eight world days here. Seventy weeks, - seven centuries or seven days, as St. Ambrose, there is an ancient time, a time of darkness, a time of Judaism 305. The eighth period that followed, which will not pass away, is the time of grace 306. Its beginning goes back to Christ, to His resurrection 307, but it will end with the second coming of Christ and the entry of believers into union with Him in heavenly Jerusalem 308. The two numbers “seven” and “eight” add up to fifteen. This last one, as a combination of two significant numbers, is also a significant number. It refers to both Testaments - Old and New. The prophet Hosea (Hosea 3:1-2) takes the harlot for fifteen pieces of silver, as a prototype of the church, which was made up of Jews and pagans, received perfect faith - the Old and New Testaments - hebdomas and octava 309. Fifteen Psalms of Degrees; by fifteen steps, according to Hezekiah’s prayer, the sun returns back and thus foreshadows that the true Sun of Truth will come, which will enlighten everything with fifteen steps - the Old and New Testaments 310. The number “fifty” means, according to the symbolic interpretation of St. Ambrose, “reconciliation,” since the fiftieth year of the Jews was a year of jubilee. In addition, it is the number of the Holy Spirit, since the Holy Spirit on the fiftieth day after Easter came down from heaven and poured out his grace into the hearts of believers 311. The numbers “three hundred” and “three hundred and eighteen” prefigure the suffering of Christ 312. This symbolism of 313 these numbers is taken from their written designation. To denote the number “three hundred,” the Greek τ or T is used, which has the likeness of a cross, which the Christian’s thought naturally leads to the cross, to the suffering of Christ the Savior. The same should be said about the second number. In Greek, the number three hundred and eighteen is denoted by the letters τ-ι-η, the first of them represents the cross of Christ, the second two are the initial letters of His name. This brief overview of the exegetical techniques and means of St. Ambrose in the historical-grammatical (literal) and allegorical interpretations can sufficiently convince us that he did not have a strict system, which he adhered to firmly and unchangeably. His views in this regard often lack clarity, strict definiteness and completeness in construction. The main points of interpretation of St. Ambrose: his teaching on the relationship between the Old and New Testaments; interpretation of Messianic psalms, prophecies and types The starting point of all interpretations of St. Ambrose is served by his view of the relationship between the Old and New Testaments. Interpretations of prophecies, messianic psalms and types are his revelation and clarification of this view. In view of such exceptional importance in the system of interpretation of St. Ambrose on the relationship between the Old and New Testaments, we will impose here the view of St. bishop on the relation of the Testaments and - further those points of interpretation that stand in more or less close connection with this main one - in particular, let's talk about his interpretations of the Messianic psalms, prophecies and types. On the question of the relationship of the Old Testament to the New during St. Ambrose there were two extreme opinions. One of them belongs to the extreme representatives of the Antiochian school, the other to the same representatives of the Alexandrian school. The first sharply severed the connection between the Old and New Testaments and believed the commonality of revelations not in the content, but mainly (if not exclusively) in the unity of the subject, in the original source. They argued that the New Testament mysteries, similar to the trinity of hypostases with one essence, are contained only in the New Testament gospel and could not be in the word of the Old Testament. Such a view - wrong from a dogmatic point of view - was not entirely safe from an exegetical point of view. Guided by it, the interpreter would deprive himself of the main support for correct interpretation - for the New Testament is a complete and absolutely true revelation of the Old - and would inevitably come to narrowness in judgment. The rejection of prophecy was a direct result of this false view of the relationship of the Covenants. The other extreme was among the Alexandrians, mainly Origen. With his mystical-contemplative direction, which flowed from deep Christian inspiration, this teacher finds in Moses the same as in the Apostle Paul, with the only difference that the first has images, the second has reasoning. The New Testament, according to Origen, was only a commentary on the picture that was painted by the Old Testament sacred writers. St. Ambrose in his interpretations tries to avoid these extremes and achieves this to some extent, although one cannot help but notice that he leans more towards the Alexandrians. His desire to find and establish the messianic meaning when interpreting the Old Testament clearly speaks for this. However, he argues quite correctly when he compares the Old Testament in its relation to the teaching of salvation with a deep and muddy source, from which, without the help of the New Testament, New Testament truths can hardly be clarified; - and when he speaks of the New Testament that it teaches in abundance the source of living water 314. The Old Testament, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, has as its task - to foretell Christ, to prefigure his suffering, to point to His resurrection, to awaken and cultivate hope for future bliss; The New Testament reveals all this in full: Christ Himself is clearly indicated and appears here 315. Although we do not yet have the complete truth in the Gospel, it is in heaven; but still we have her image in him, while the law was only her shadow 316. But a shadow cannot exist on its own. Therefore St. Ambrose quite rightly explains that the Old Testament, if determined from the New and not looking at the ultimate goal of the law of Christ 317, in itself has no dignity. He often repeats: “the letter kills, the spirit gives life.” The law, in its action, should not only be purely external, but, looking at Christ, it should internally transform and ennoble hearts. Therefore, the psalmist says: “The deep calls forth the deep with the voice of your swamps” (Ps. 41:8), i.e., the Old Testament calls to the New, so that it will accomplish sanctification and bring the fullness of grace 318. The Jews often did not see the spiritual side of the law. They accepted circumcision, but did not see that it should be a type of the future 319; “they did not see that it should also be a sign of internal purification” 320. This is planned, according to St. Ambrose, the further purpose of the law. He was supposed to arouse the consciousness of sinfulness - point out sin and moral corruption and thereby kindle zeal for salvation and the desire for it, as the beginning of deliverance 321. He had to be, according to the apostle, a nurturer in Christ (Gal.3:24). The Jewish people were stiff-necked and prone to unbelief. Therefore, the law, like a teacher, had to show the direct path to salvation for an unstable and weak people 322. Thus, the purpose of the law according to the teachings of St. Ambrose is double - on the one hand, to prefigure Christ and the mysteries of His kingdom, on the other, to lead and educate the Jewish people. Like the law, the psalms, according to the teachings of St. Ambrose, have as their task to foretell Christ and the mysteries of His kingdom. Therefore, a whole series of psalms - at least certain passages from them - St. the bishop interprets it in a messianic sense. This may include interpretations of the following psalms and passages from them of this kind. Ps.2:7: You are my son, today I gave birth to you 323. Psalms 3, 21 and 40, according to Ambrose, foreshadow the suffering of Christ 324. Ps.15:10 - “do not leave my soul in hell” - indicates, according to it, the resurrection 325. Ps.30 indicates the humiliation of Christ, His taking on the form of a servant 326. Ps.35:10, in accordance with 7, 27 of the book of Wisdom, teaches that Christ is the radiance of the eternal light - His Father - a mirror without blemish, because the Father is visible in the Son 327. Ps.44:2 speaks of the origin of the Son from the Father 328 . Ps.44:3 - about His superiority over people 329. Ps.68 - about His poverty, slander and reproach, which He endured for our sake 330. Ps.65 – psalm of resurrection 331. Ps.84 clearly prophesies the coming of Christ 332 . Ps.87:5 – teaches that Christ did not need anyone’s help in completing the work of salvation 333 . In Ps.88 Christ is represented as a king 334. The words of Ps.117 prefigure the suffering of Christ 335. Ps. 118 also often speaks of Christ 336 . Ps.131 prophesies the birth of Christ from the line of David 337 . “In short,” writes St. Ambrose, - in the psalms we find the whole life of Christ. In them he was not only born, but also endured saving suffering, lies in the tomb, ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father” 338. All these psalms and passages of psalms given here and many other sayings of the psalms that we find in the works of St. Ambrose, in fact, are partly directly messianic, but partly, at least, can be attributed to Christ. The prophetic scriptures, according to St. Ambrose, depicted in its entirety the image of Christ the Messiah. This view is held by St. Ambrose wherever he touches the prophetic writings. The latter, according to him, bear such a name because they represent Christ: “one cannot be called a prophet who did not prophesy about the Son of God” 339 . In addition to the prophetic writings, messianic prophecies are contained, according to St. Ambrose, and in other books of Holy Scripture. Nathan's prophecy to David: “I will raise up your seed after you, which will be from your sons, and I will establish your kingdom. He will build me a house, and I will establish His throne forever.” (1 Chronicles 17:11–13) – St. Ambrose refers to Christ and gives the following reasons for this. Solomon's kingdom came to an end; Only the kingdom of Christ has no end; Solomon was born during the life of David; about the seed it is said that it will come after the death of David 340. In the words of the book of Job - “the deep says: wisdom is not in me” - according to St. Ambrose, of course also Christ: “The abyss no longer encloses Him, for He has risen” 341. In the Old Testament, according to Ambrose, Christ was not only predicted, but also indicated. He participates, first of all, in creation; in His image man was created; He sent down fire and a bogey on Sodom. Christ is the one who appeared to Abraham and allowed him to kiss his feet; He could precisely say: “Abraham saw My day and rejoiced” (John 8:56) 342. Christ appeared in the form of an angel among the young men in the fiery furnace 343. The Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament, according to the interpretation of St. Ambrose, also contains an indication of the third person of the Holy Trinity - the Holy Spirit. He was an accomplice in creation: he flew over the water 344; He was at the creation of man: Job calls Him his Creator when he says: “The Spirit of God created me” (Job 33:4) 345. He accompanied Sampson in the camp (Judges 13:25) and remained with him until he allowed his hair to be cut; He returned his strength; this is the Holy Spirit (Judges 16:17), the Lord, as He is called below (Judges 16:20) 346. The psalmist calls him good when he says: “Your good spirit will guide me on the right path” (Ps. 142:4) 347. Isaiah calls him “the Spirit of wisdom” (Is.64:4) 348. He is called “all-fulfilling” (Wis.1:7) and “omnipresent” (Ps.139:7) 349. The Holy Spirit renews the face of the earth, without Him man returns to his dust (Ps. 103:29–30) 350. He is not separate from the Father, since He is the Spirit of His mouth (Ps. 32:6) 351. The chariot that the prophet Ezekiel saw in a vision at the time of Chebar (Ezek. 1) was moved by the spirit of life, the Holy Spirit 352. He was promised to people through the prophet Joel (Joel 2:28) 353. According to Ambrose, in the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament there are indications of a third person under other names. The psalmist calls Him the light of the brightness of the Lord (Ps. 4:7) 354. In the saying - “send your light and your truth” - (Ps. 42:3) by “light” you can mean the Holy Spirit and by the “truth” of Christ, or vice versa 355. The Holy Spirit is called the stream of joy that makes the city of the Lord glad (Ps. 45:5) 356; - with the oil of joy, with which Christ was especially anointed. (Ps. 44:8) 357. Many of these passages undoubtedly point to the Holy Spirit, but not all. The Holy Spirit is truly light and truth. It can be compared to a stream of fun. All these and similar expressions can be attributed to the Holy Spirit, but, we add, not in the strict sense. Strictly speaking, not all of the passages indicated can not always be understood exactly as St. Ambrose. St. Ambrose in this regard expands the boundaries of interpretation of Old Testament sayings in the New Testament sense. He follows the Alexandrian - Didymus. A further point that must be considered in connection with the question of the relation of the Old Testament to the New is the point about types. Prototypes, in essence, are nothing more than a special kind of messianic prophecies. The church fathers, following the example of Jesus Christ and the apostles, with special love and care were engaged in the interpretation of the Old Testament transformative persons and events. St. Ambrose was no exception in this regard. He finds Christ, the church, and the saving sacraments in the Old Testament not only predicted, but also pre-depicted by certain events and features from the life of biblical persons 358 and the law 359. Adam and Eve already prefigured the image of Christ and the church, because marriage, according to the word of St. Apostle Paul, (Eph.5:23) in Christ and in the church there is a great mystery 360. Christ is further represented in Melchizedek. He is the true king of truth and peace, without a mother in Divinity and without a father in humanity, He has neither beginning nor end 361. Abel's godly sacrifice points to the sacrifice that Christ voluntarily made for us 362. Isaac, born, beyond expectation, by Sarah in old age, in his very birth there is an image of Christ and even more - a prototype of Christ (the suffering one) in the sacrifice of him (Isaac) by Abraham. Like the Savior, he himself carried the sacrificial firewood, and, as the prototype of him, he was accompanied by his father 363. Sarah herself is also a type. Through the birth of Isaac, she predicted the Descendant - the second Adam, who would restore the life and freedom given to Adam - the first. The Messiah is prefigured in Jacob—in fact, in his two wives. Leah is the law, the synagogue, which Rachel surpassed, that is, grace or the church 364. Rachel is a prototype of the church. She hid the images of deities that the church does not recognize. It is quite appropriate, therefore, a monument was erected to her in the form of a pillar: the church is a pillar in the affirmation of the truth 365. Like Jacob, Judas is also a type of Christ. The two sons of his daughter-in-law Tamar are images of two Testaments, two peoples - Jewish and Christian 366. Zara first stretched out his hand from his mother's womb, and yet Perez was born before him - this means that grace was earlier than the law 367. Zara in itself is the image of Christ, Who was born according to humanity at the end of the ages, being according to Divinity in truth and power from the beginning. The red strand on Zara's arms indicates the cross and the shedding of the blood of Christ 368. The two sons of Abraham are a prototype of two peoples - Jewish and Christian 369. Joseph primarily represents the prototype of Christ. David also represents many things in Christ. His victory over Goliath foreshadows the victory of Christ over the devil. Both were in contempt and without help. The women who met David with singing and rejoicing (1 Samuel 18:6) are souls singing songs of praise to Christ. The king gave birth to the incestuous and fratricidal Absalom, as a sign that the incestuous and fratricidal people would desecrate the body of their Creator ascended to the cross 370. Finally, Moses and the prophet Jonah are also prototypes of Christ 371. In the pillar of cloud that walked ahead of Israel and showed him the way, St. Ambrose sees the image of both Christ and Mary. “Christ,” he writes, “came on clouds: He was shaded by the cloud of his body. This body was light because it was not burdened with sins. But that pillar of cloud also indicates that Christ entered a light cloud, namely Mary, the ever-virgin. She was a light cloud, because she remained ever-virgin; she conceived and gave birth not in sin, but by the grace of the Holy Spirit” 372. As images of the church, in addition to those mentioned, Ruth, the harlot Rahab and Bathsheba are also indicated; in them St. Ambrose sees a foreshadowing of pagan peoples already participating in the Christian sacraments 373. Solomon, having created the church in specie, prefigured in it the church in mysterio 374. Finally, Abel is the image of the church, Cain is the image of the synagogue 375. Like persons, Old Testament events and objects, according to St. Ambrose - prototypes of the mysteries of the New Testament. The Paschal lamb foretells the Lamb of God, the suffering Savior 376, our spiritual food, and also the remission of sins 377. The collection of manna to a certain extent prefigures the attitude of believers to the blood of Christ the Savior 378. Manna was perishable - it could only be eaten before sunrise. As soon as the Sun of Truth shone, as soon as the mystery of body and blood was revealed in all its power and brilliance, then this mortal bread gave way to another, and people began to enjoy this perfect 379. The water that came out of the rock is an image of living water, which will finally satisfy thirst in eternity 380. The Old Testament sacrifices foreshadow the sacrifice of Christ. Sacrificial animals foretell the properties of this sacrifice: the goat foretells the property in it that it will be a sacrifice for sins; a sheep - that it will be a voluntary sacrifice; lamb - that she will be the victim of the blameless lamb - Christ 381. The staff, thrown to the ground by Moses and transformed into a serpent, sensually represents the incarnation of Christ. Similar means in the hands of Moses. Raised to their chests, they were white as snow; omitted - took on their previous appearance. In the first case, they prefigure the Divinity in Christ, in the second, His perception of human flesh 382. The copper serpent prefigured Christ ascended to the cross 383. Especially a lot, according to St. Ambrose, prototypes of baptism. It is prefigured in the flood 384, in circumcision 385, in the passage through the Red Sea, in the source of Marah (Ex. 15:23 ff.) 386. Baptism is typically represented by sprinkling, with hyssop, the blood of a sacrificial animal 387; in the sevenfold immersion of Naaman the Syrian 388 ; - in many events from the life of the prophet Elijah, namely in his dividing the Jordan 389, the opening, according to his prayer, of heaven 390, in the devouring of his victim with heavenly fire 391. A similar thing is represented in the sacrifice for sin. Just as here, according to the book of Leviticus (chapter 4), the entire sacrificial animal must be burned, so in baptism the external person must be completely unified and renewed internally 392 . In the works of St. Ambrose, you can find more prototypes similar to the ones we have given; but those indicated are enough to see how widely he uses the Old Testament typology and what significance it has for him. It serves him as clear proof of the harmonious relationship between the Old and New Testaments. A beautiful image of this harmony of St. Ambrose sees the Transfiguration in the painting. Christ appears here in the middle between Moses and Elijah to foretell the unity of the Old and New Testaments 393. This unity is expressed, according to him, in the fact that the Old Testament itself, mysterious and full of prototypes, finds its fulfillment and completion in the New Testament 394. To sum up everything that has been said about St. Ambrose, as an interpreter of the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament, we come to the following conclusions. St. Ambrose, as Förster 395 and Kellner 396 rightly note, compared with his predecessors, does not show biblical exegesis a new path, basis and method. The above about his dependence on other interpreters of the Holy. The Scriptures and some comparisons of his interpretations with those of Philo, Origen and Basil the Great clearly confirm this. St. Ambrose wanted to be and actually appears before us in the field of interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. Scripture, as in the field of theology in general, by a man of pious tradition. He accepts the previously acquired treasures of theological knowledge and, on the basis of them, in accordance with the questions and needs of the time, interprets this or that truth, without substantiating it independently and originally. He was not an exegete, so to speak, by profession, and in his exegetical works he did not intend to present scientific interpretations of the Bible. His task, when writing exegetical works, was to confirm listeners and readers in the truths of faith and piety. This, by the way, explains the fact that among the interpretive works of St. Ambrose, we do not encounter a complete work devoted to a comprehensive explanation of this or that book of Holy Scripture or this or that biblical story. The Holy Father usually chooses for interpretation that which is more suitable to his task, and reveals the truth that is subject to his consideration from the side corresponding to his goal. For example, he spends a lot of time explaining the book of Genesis and yet does not give a complete interpretation of it. He interprets it fragmentarily, in parts - sometimes verse by verse, sometimes thematically; sometimes in a literal sense, sometimes in a moral and mystical sense. The same should be said about other exegetical works of St. Ambrose. An exception in this regard is his interpretation of some psalms, especially the interpretation of Ps. 118. They are no less, and in this last work a greater place is given to interpretation in the moral sense. In saying this, we are far from thinking of diminishing the dignity of the exegetical works of St. Ambrose and, together with Richter, unconditionally assert that Ambrose’s scholarship is not very thorough and broad; his interpretation of the Bible is artificial, confusing and strange, without the sharpness of dialectics and system..., they suffer from exaggeration and tastelessness; his speculation does not rise above the Nicene, Christian system 397. Fully agreeing that the interpretations of St. Ambrose are sometimes artificial and confusing, and sometimes suffer from exaggerations, we cannot, contrary to Richter, fail to note the extensive learning of St. father and in some places its thoroughness, as far as one can judge it from the wealth of material attracted by St. bishop to the interpretation of the Bible, both from the field of theology and from secular sciences. St. Ambrose, as we know, stood at the height of contemporary education. Interpretations of St. Ambrose, indeed, suffer from artificiality - excessive allegorism. But this circumstance finds justification, as we said above, both in the character and worldview of St. father, and in the conditions of his time. In his theology, when interpreting St. Scriptures, St. Ambrose does not rise above the “Nicene system.” But this trait constitutes the true dignity of St. Ambrose, as a zealous shepherd of the church, guardian of universal truth in its evangelical purity and integrity. On the other hand, one cannot fail to note the fact that he is the first of the Western Church Fathers to turn to the works of the Eastern Church Fathers for material to reveal biblical truths; boldly moves towards theological directions; The first of the Latin church teachers delved into the spirit of Greek writers and transferred all the treasures acquired here to Latin soil, and thus endured the process of uniting East and West in this regard. St. Ambrose, as Förster notes, can rightfully be called the founder of Western theology in the second stage of its development 398. In his interpretations, certain points of theological knowledge receive “special emphasis” and this determines the future development of church teaching in the West 399. Kellner continues and expresses this idea more sharply (not to say incorrectly). As a teacher and spiritual father of Bl. Augustine, St. Ambrose, he notes, is the founder of the trend that Augustine subsequently developed, and after him Thomas Aquinas 400. The lack of dialectical sharpness and system in the interpretations of St. Ambrose places him in this regard below other Western fathers, for example, Augustine. This gap and the above shortcomings in the interpretations of St. Ambrose are complemented by their undoubted merits, noted by us in their place. In conclusion, we cannot help but repeat part of what we said above. If the Lord had continued the life of St. Ambrose, he would have filled in the gaps in his interpretations, undoubtedly, would have freed himself from excessive enthusiasm for allegorism and would have joined the sound interpretation of the moderate Antiochians, which he was already approaching, thanks to Basil the Great. But he died after serving the church for twenty-seven years at the age of 57. Let us recall here the works of St. Ambrose for the specified period of service to the church for the benefit of society and the imperial court! Let us remember his tireless struggle against the enemies of the church - the Arians, Manichaeans and other heretics! Let us also take into account that exegesis was not the exclusive domain of St. Ambrose, on which he worked in the field of theological literature. In addition to exegetical works, he has works of a purely dogmatic and moral nature. After all this, don’t we have the right to look at the exegetical works of St. Ambrose, as works worthy of special attention, and St. himself. Give Ambrose the praise and honor worthy of his labors! Ambr. Exhortatio virginitatis 12. 62. Paulini, Vita s. Ambrosii 3. Exhort virg. 12, 82; De Virginitate III, 7, 39. The date of his birth is not well defined. In epist. LIX 3 noted that he was 53 years old, and, while Campania was calm, "nos in medio versanaur omnium molestiarum freto." This fits well with 393, when Arbogast and Eugenius entered Milan. If this date is established correctly, then Ambrose was born in 340. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completns, ser. lat., vol. XIV col. 48. De Noe. 1, 4; 16, 57; De Abr. 11, 10, 68. Studia Ambrosiana p. 83 sqq. The Orthodox Bishop Dionysius, expelled by the Arian Constantius, died in exile in the same year 374. De officiia ministrorum I, 1, 4. De off. ministr. I, 3, 13. Confessions VI, 3; Epist. XLII, 1. Eg Epist. 9, 10; 12, 12, etc. And his labors did not remain fruitless. “All of Italy,” writes Bl. Jerome, – again turned to the true faith.” De obitu Theodosii 28 and 34. Epist. 24; De obitu Valent. 28; Paulin. 19. De obitu Valent. 79; Wed P.S. 61 en. 23. De offic. ministr. 11, 15. De Elia 12; De Nabuthe F, 13, 6, 7. Sixtus of Siena (in the work “Bibliotheca Sancta”. Editio tertia. Coloniae 1586. Lib. quartus. p. 198.) shares the exegetical works of St. Ambrose, according to its external form, is divided into four groups: in libros, commentarios, tractatus et epistolas. This division finds incomplete justification in the writings of St. Ambrose. In most of his works we actually find the inscription “librі”; “explanations of the psalms”, inscriptions in Ambrose with the expressions “enarrationes” and “expositio”, are nothing more than comments; Among Ambrose's exegetical works there are also many explanations in the form of letters. It is difficult to decide what to classify as a group of treatises after all this. In view of this uncertainty, Kellner (in the work “Der heilige Ambrosius Bischof von Mailand, als Erklärer des Alten Testaments.” Regensburg. 1893) divides the exegetical works of St. Ambrose by the nature of their presentation in homily, commentaries, studies or treatises and periphrases, including the latter two letters - VI and IX. We accept this last division, adding the fourth heading to the third, in view of the generality of their character. Creations of St. We quote Ambrose from Min. They are placed in volumes XIV–XVI of his “Patrologiae curaus completus”. Epist. 84, 7 (XXII, 749): Nuper S. Ambrosius sic Hexaemeron illins (Origenis) compilavit, ut magis Hippoliti sententias Basilique sequeretur. Due to the loss of the works of Origen and Hippolytus on the question of creation, it is not possible to make a decisive judgment regarding the dependence of St. Ambrose from these primary sources. In any case, regarding Origen, judging by the surviving excerpts from his lost works, it was the most insignificant. Only in the discussion of what is the image of God in man can one discern the use of Origen. The influence of the writings of Basil the Great, on the contrary, is reflected in the Six Days of St. Ambrose in every page. The plan of the essay, the distribution of material, many thoughts represent, as it were, the common property of these saints. fathers. It should, however, be noted that this work, not independent in content, in the adaptation of St. Ambrose is, as it were, independent. Thanks to his amazingly receptive and lively spirit, what he borrowed from Greek-Eastern sources became, as it were, his own property. Ambr. I, 8, 28; II, 4, 17, VI, 2, 4. Ibid., 1. 2–4; V, 1, 4; I, 10, 36, etc. Histoire de saint Ambraise. M. L'abbe Baunard. Paris. 1871. p. 482. Hex. lib. I, p. VI, r. 10. Hex. Ibid. II, p. 11, r. 7. I, 4, 22, II, 8, 50, 53, 59, etc. Read more about this in Kellner, pp. 101–102. See explanation of Psalm 21. See Ambrose of Milan. For example, 18, 40; Wed 8, 55; 9, 19; 4, 22. E.g., 3, 3–5; 4, 2–6; 8, 16–20; 11, 6–18. For example, 9, 20; 10, 12 and 14; 17, 18–35; 19, 16 and 20 in others. E.g., 6, 2–4, 11, 4–9; 16, 17; 20, 27; 1, 7 and 5, 27; 12, 46–48; 22, 23, etc. Institutiones patrologiae. 1850. T. I, p. 679. This is discussed in detail in the section on inspiration. Ps. 118 expos. 14, 11; Rs. 43 en. 72. Ps. 118 expos.. 14, 2; De Cain. et Ab. II, 6. 19. De Cain et Ab. I, 6, 20; Ps. 48 en. 5. De interpell. Dav. II, 4. 18. Praefatie to the first psalm. De Cain et Ab. II, 6, 19. De Cain et Ab. II, 6, 22; Ps. 118 expos. 12, 28. Epist. 44, 1. Non sua Moyses, sed iufusa et revelata sibi scripsit, ea praecipue, quae sunt de constitutione mundi. Ps. I, II. Quid igitur psalmus, nisi virtutum est organum, quod sancti Spiritus plectro pangena Propheta venerabilis coelestis sonitus fecit in terries dulcidinem resultare. De Jac. II. 9, 39: divinae organum vocis et dominici sermonis interpres. Ps. 35; en. 1; Ps. 118 en. 21, 6. De Abr. II, 9, 61. De interpel. lob. I, 7, 25 and 8, 26 Ps. I en 11. Ps. 35 en. praef. 2; Ps. 118 expos. 8.53; Ps. I en. 33. Hex. I, 2, 7; De interpel. lob. I, 8, 26. De Spiritu Sancto I, 4, 55; II, 13, 143. De Abr. II, 9, 61:.. Cognoscimus, quia quando venit gratia Dei super propheticam mentem, subito irruit et inde incubuisse et cecidisse super prophetas Spiritum Sanctum legimus, quia accessum putitur et turbatur et timet et quibusdam ignorantiae et imprudentiae tenebris offunditur. Ps. 39 en. 5: Sunt et verae insaniae et forsitan prophetarum, qui in excessu mentis positi prophetabunt, repleti Dei Spiritu, ut quibusdam insanire videntur; eum propriae salutis immenmores, nudi plerumque et exalceati, sicut Esaias sanctus, per populos curreret, vocificantes non quae ipse vellent, sed quae a Domine juberenlur. Cp. Epist. 58. Epist. 8, 1: Non secundum artem scripeerunt, sed secundum gratiam, quae supra omnem artem est; scripeerunt enim, qnae Spiritus eis loqui dabat. Ps. 118 expos. 9, 13: sed quia septuaginta virorum sententias magis sequitur Ecclesia, et hic sensus est planior, et nihil offensionis admittit, quop posit aliqnibus scrupulum commovere. Hex. III, 5, 20: Multa non otiose a septuaginta viris Hebraicae lectioni addita et adjunct comperimus. De interpell. Iob. II. 6, 24. Hex. III, 5, 20; Ps. 118 expos. 9, 13. Ps. I en. 43; – 36, en. 4, 39; – 38 en. 24, etc. For example, in Ps. 118, 170, where, according to Ambrose, εἰσελϑέτω ἀξίωμὰ μου in LXX – εἰσέλϑοι τὸ ἀξίωμὰ μου; or in Art. 136 for the first - κατέοτησαν, for the second - κατέβησαν. E.g. De parad. 5, 27; Ps. 36 en. 70 and repeated at Ps. 43. For example, epist. 49, 4; epist. 57, 11. Ps. 37 en. 49: Sensus ergo nobis spectandus, est simper, quem etiam ipaum frequens translation ex Hebraeo in Graecum, ex Graeco in Latinum actenuare consuevit. E.g. Ps. 45 en. 15; Ps. 38 en. 30; Ps. 18 expos. 10, 12; 10, 38; 14, 29; 15, 38. Ps. 118 expos. 15, 28; Wed 4, 15. Ps. 118 expos. 12, 7; Wed De fide 4, 1: translators qui diverse interpretati sunt. For example, Melitona, bishop. of Sardicia, Athanasius the Great, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nazianzus, Rufinus and Jerome. Under Heptateuchum St. Ambrose refers to the first seven books of the Bible, and considers the books of Judges and Ruth to be one book. Expos. in Luc. III, 30, 39; II, 89. III, 8 and 9; De fide III, 10, 69. De Parad. 12, 54; De Jacob II, 8, 35; De bono mortis 6, 25. Hex. II, 4, 17; De fuga saec. 9, 52. Other churches held the same opinion. As a biblical book, this book is quoted by Barnabas, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Gregory of Nyssa and other fathers. Hex. II, 4, 17; De fuga saec. 9, 52 De interpell. lob. I, 1, 3. Ps. 36 praef. 1; De Isaac. et. an. 4, 23; Luc. expos. prol. 2. Ps. 36 en. 64; Epist. 37, 5. De parade. I, 6; 12, 54; Ps. I en. 48; Ps. 118 expos. 9, 11. De Isaac. et an. 4, 23; Ps. 118 expos. 1, 3; Expos. in Luc. prol. 2. De civitale Dei XVII, 20 (XLI, 554). De Cain et Ab. I, 9, 34; De fide I, 3, 28. Ad. August. epist. 112 (Migne XXII. 929). Ad Pammac. epist. 84. Expos. in p.s. 119. IV, 16. Wed, e.g. Ambr. – de Abr. I 6; Orig. -In gen. hom. 5. t, VIII, 174. Ambr. – de Abr. I c. 8; Orig. – Iu gen. hom. 8 (II, 197). Ambr. – de Isaac et. an. Wed 1; Orig. – In. gen. hom 10 (VIII, 218). Hex. I, 1, 2; De Noe et arca cp. 8; De abr. II, 7. 11; Hex. II. 2.6; De Abr. II, 8. De Noe et arca cp. 2 and 6; De abr. 10; Hex. 1, 8; V, 16; Epist. 43, ad Horant.; De Abr. I, 9. De Cain et Abel. II, 6, 19. De Cain et Ab. II. 6, 22; Ps. 118 expos. 12, 28, 33. Ps. 43 cm. 51 Ps. 118 expos. 8, 59. De parade. 12, 58; cp. Lue. expos. IV, 25. In Luc. expos. 2; Ps. 36 en. 64. In Luc. expos. prol. 2; Ps. 118 expos. 13, 223. De Isaac. et an. 4, 14: Recte dicit: “ubi pascis”? Quia regale est De Verbum: “ubi manes”, quia morale: “in meridiano”, quia mysticum. De Isaac. et an. 4, 27–29. De Isaac. et anima, 4, 21 Sg. De Isaac et an. n. 22; sp. 24–26; De Noe, 6, 14, where one place of the psalm (83, 4) is assigned a mystical and natural meaning. What St. Ambrose, in the higher (allegorical) sense, proceeds from the interpretation in the natural sense and closely adheres to it, this is clear from his interpretation on Genesis 6:14: Nibos facies in arca, where the ark appears to him as a “naturaliter” image of a person. De Noe VI, 14. De Noe et arca 11, 37 sq.; 17, 62; 23, 82; 33, 124. De Joseph. 7, 39, 9, 4 words. 10, 57; 12, 73 and many more. etc. De hen. 1, 5; Ps. 118 expos. 16, 28; 14, 23. Ibid., 11, 7: mysticus senens acutior est; moralis dulcior. De Abr. II, 11, 78; cp. 74, 4. De interpell. IV, I, 1 sq. For example, 15, 15, 16, 10 and 15, 17, 36, 22, 5. Hex. II, 4, 5 and V, 22, 73. De office. ministr. I, 25, 116, 117; I, 48, 235 sq.; Apol Dav. and Epist. 51, 7–9; Epist. 19.7–39. De ubitu Valentiniani. 5–9. Ps. 40, en. 3; cp. Ps. 38 en. 32; 39, 16; 43, 24; Ps. 118 expos. 2, 17 and 3, 41. Praef. de nom. Hebr. (XXIII, 771). Rs. 118 expos prol 3: Ipse quoque litterarum elemento, ut omnia Hebraen nomina, non sunt rationabilis interpretationis vacua atque immunia. Ps. 118 expos. I; 1 The usual meaning of “Alerh” is bull. Here the meaning is derived from the verb “alerh” or “alarh” which in the form diel means “to teach”. This etymology is borrowed from Eucebius. Rs. 118. expos. 2. 1. According to Kellner, this letter is produced by Ambrose, obviously from the Syriac beheth, Aramaic bahat, with the meaning perdefieri, confudi. Ps. 118 expos. 3, 1 sq. Gimel from gamal = tribuere, retribuere. Ps. 118 expos. 4, 2. The meaning of birth is in connection with the word dalet - door, since birth is a door, an entrance into life. In the second meaning, dalet is derived from the root word dalal = lanquidus, debilis fuit. Ps. 118 expos. 5, 1 sq. In all likelihood, this meaning is derived from the Arabic hawwat = hole, door. A detailed study of this issue can be found in op. Siehried. Die hebraiche Worterclärtung des Philo und die spuren ihrer Einwirkung auf die Kirchenväter. 1863. De sacrif. I, 1, 171, and quod det. pot. ins I, 197. In Math. comment Ser. 27 (XIII, 1635). III Leg. alleg. I, 103; de gigant. I, 271; de Cherub. I, 139; de mut. Πατὴρ ἔκκλεκτος ἠχοῦς – de mut. nom. I. 588. Homil. in num. 19, 3 (XII, 724). Ps. 67 n. 24 (XII. 1509). Hex. I, 3, 9; De Abr. 1,3, 16. Homil. in gen 2, 3 (XII. 168). II Somn. I, 677: ἐλπίς δὲ πὰρ’ ἡμῖν τοῖς ἀλληγορικοῖς ὀνομάζεται. Do nomin. Hebr. (XXIII. 789). More examples can be found in Kellner, pp. 47–50. From the works of Philo St. Ambrose used two works - a) De mundi opificio and b) Lib. I leg. allagoriarum. De Abr. H, 9, 66; Wed Philo, Quaest. in gen. 12. Serm. III; – de mund. opif. 1, 10. Epist. 44, 3; Wed Philo, de mundi opif. I, 28. Epist. 44, 4 and 15; De Noe et arca 12 40; Wed Philo, de mundi opif. 1, 28 and I leg. alleg. I, 46. De Noe et arca 12, 39; Wed Philo, de mundi opif. I, 23. In Math, comm. ser. 40 and 45 (XIII. 1656). Epist. 44, 5 and sqq. Ps. 118 expos. prol. 2. In the name of the Resurrection of Christ on the eighth day, according to St. Ambrose, many psalms are inscribed in octavam or in octava Luc, expos. V, 49; VII, 6 and 173. Ibidem, also De Abr. I, 3, 15; II, 7, 42. We also find this interpretation in St. Barnabas. With. 9 (II, 752). De bened. patr. 11, 51; Ps. 43 en. 57; Ps. 118 expos. 16, 39; Epist. 65, 8. Ps. 38 en. 25. Origen also teaches the same in his interpretation of the same psalm. Apol. Dav. 3, 12; Ps. 118 expos. 15, 8; Ps. en. 19. Interpell. Iob. I, 9, 30. Ps. 118 expos. 1, 7; 3, 2; 10, 17. Luc. expos. III, 8, and 39. De interpell Job. 1, 9, 29–30. De Spiritu Sancto II, 5, 32. De Spiritu Sancto II, 5, 44. Ibid., prol. 2, 5 and II, 1, 17 sqq. Typus it aque et figura nobis sunt gesta majorum Ps. 43, 58. Epist. 63, 43; Wed De myst. 8, 45. sq.; de fide III, 11, 88. Ibid.; De Cain et Ab. I, 2, 7; De Abr. I, 8, 71 and 72. Apolog. Dav. 3, 11; De Jacob et vita beata II, 5, 25. De Jacob et vita beata II, 7, 34. De Cain et Ab. I, 2, 7; De fuga saec. 4, 19. Luc. expos. III, 30; VIII, 40; Epist. 31, 7. Luc. exros. V, 94; Epist. 26, 6. De Spirita Sancto prol. 4. De official minister III, 15, 94. De Elia et jejanio 20, 83 sq. De off minister. III, 18, 107 sq.