Cornerstone of the Church

During His earthly life, the Lord Jesus Christ hid His Divinity. In the days of His flesh He was “the hidden God.” Christ did not cast down the beads of His sublime truths before swine. When His face shone with the light of Tabor on the Mount of Transfiguration, the people under the mountain could only observe a demoniac, grievously suffering. This concealment of the Divine was undoubtedly not without reason. Otherwise, wouldn’t all of humanity be like Simon Peter, who, after a miraculous fishing trip, fell at the feet of Jesus and said: Depart from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man (Luke 5:8)? The conversation between Christ and his disciples, in which He spoke about the stone that lies at the foundation of the Church, is also distinguished by the nature of secrecy and, as it were, mystery. Christ went (χαι εζηλυεν – Mark 8:27; Matt. 16:13 – ελυων, but HW many others. Cf.: Gold. εζελυων) with His disciples to the extreme north of Palestine, into the borders (εις τα μερη Matthew - εις τας χωμας ) of Caesarea Philippi, to the sources of the Jordan. Christ seemed to be avoiding the city (εις τας χωμας Mr.); He was on the way (εν τη οδψ Mr.). According to Ev. Luke, Christ was in a prayerful mood of spirit (προσευχομενον) and alone with His disciples (προσευχομενον – συνηντησαν, occurrerunt – αυτψ οι μαυηται ). Both solitude with students and a state of prayer are all signs of the importance of the moment, signs that the subsequent conversation will have especially deep meaning and significance. Being in a remote and secluded area alone with His disciples, the Lord Jesus Christ asks them a question: Who do people say the Son of Man is? 1. Christ asks about the opinion of the common people (in Luke: οι οχλοι). “For what,” says St. John Chrysostom, - He asked first not about their opinion, but about the opinion of the people? So that they, having expressed the people's opinion, are then asked: Who do you say Me to be? - by the very order of the questions they were raised to a higher understanding and did not begin to think about Him as lowly as the people.” 2 Christ's question has a double meaning. He, first of all, asks about those opinions that were widespread among the people about Himself personally; in the mouth of Christ the name “Son of Man” meant Himself. But this same name, taken from the book of the prophet Daniel (Dan. 7:13–14), was the generally accepted designation of the Messiah during the earthly life of the Lord. Therefore, at least for the disciples, the question of Christ was the question of who the Messiah is, what is His nature, whether He is God or man 3 . The people's opinions about Christ were known to the disciples, and they list these opinions in response to Christ's question. They said: “Some for John the Baptist, others for Elijah, and others for Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” The national evangelists report on these opinions on another occasion (Mark 6:14–16, Luke 9:7–8) and the same opinions are listed there. It is known from the gospel that Herod Antipas considered Christ to be the risen John the Baptist (Matthew 14:1–2, Mark 6:14). Elijah was expected as the forerunner of the Messiah based on the prophecy of Malachi about the appearance of Elijah the Tishbite before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord (Mal. 4:5). The scribes said that Elijah must come first (Matthew 17:10, Mark 9:11). Christ indicated the fulfillment of Malachi's prophecy on John the Baptist (Matthew 11:14, 17:12–13, Mark 9:13). Nothing is known about the expectation before the coming of Christ of Jeremiah or one of the other prophets; mentions of Jeremiah in the Second Book of Maccabees (2 Macc. 2:1–9, 15:12–16, 3 Ezra 2:18) do not provide grounds for any definite conclusions 4 . Mark and Luke omit Jeremiah's name. There were, therefore, people who considered Jesus Christ generally to be one of the resurrected prophets, regardless of the coming of the Messiah 5 . Detailed research about all these popular opinions cannot have any special theological significance 6 . When the apostles listed the various opinions about Christ that were widespread among the people, He asks them: Who do you say that I am? υμεις δε τινα με λεγετε ειναι. The very form of the question shows that He expects from His closest disciples and followers an opinion that can be contrasted with popular opinions. “When Christ asked about the opinion of the people, then everyone answered His question; when about their own, then Peter, the mouth of the apostles, always fiery, the head in the face of the apostles, does not tolerate, warns and says: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16)." 14:33). However, the confession of Christ through the mouth of the Apostle Peter within the limits of Caesarea Philippi retains its exclusive significance. "confession" is a clear and established conviction. Interpreters and commentators pay attention to the fact that in Peter's answer all the words are with a member: about Χριστος ο υιος του υεου του ζωντος. Peter confessed Jesus Christ to be the only begotten Son. God's. Particularly important in this case is the name of God alive. In the Bible, God is called alive in contrast to soulless idols (Isa. 37:4, 17; Dan. 6:26; 2 Cor. 6:16; 1 Sol. 1:9, etc.). God is original life. Origen, when interpreting the present passage of St. Matthew calls God ζων παρα την αυτοζωην 8. The Father has life in Himself (John 5:26). Having life in Himself, God is the source of life for the creature, which He maintains in a state of life. According to Peter’s confession in Christ, God revealed himself to the world as alive. John the Theologian calls Christ the Logos of life - o λογος της ζωης (1 John 1:1). In Him was life (John 1:4; 1 John 5:11). It is also given to Him to have life in Himself (John 5:26). He said about Himself: I am life (John 11:25). His words are life (John 6:63). He generally gives life to the world (John 6:33), for He came that they might have life (John 10:10; 1 John 4:9). He is the Author of life (Acts 3:15). Christ is your life, writes the apostle. Paul (Col. 3:4). It is impossible not to pay attention to the fact that the famous Code of Beza (D) instead of ζωντος reads σωζοντος - You are the Christ, the Son of God who saves. This reading retains the flavor of the parallel Aramaic-Syriac text. The Greek ζωντος in Syriac translations (peshito and kuret.) corresponds to //. But this same word or those derived from the same root in other cases correspond to the Greek σωζειν: so in Mr. 15, 31 Greek εσωσεν Syriac // and σωσαι, in John. 4.42 Greek about σωτηρ Syriac 9 //. The life spoken of in the gospel can therefore be understood as salvation. God revealed Himself to those who save in His Only Begotten Son, Who became incarnate on earth. Peter’s confession expresses the same truth as in the words of John the Theologian: God sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might receive life (ινα ζησωμεν - that we may live) through Him (1 John 4:9. Compare 1:2), why he who has the Son of God has life, and he who does not have the Son of God does not has life (1 John 5:11–12). In the words of the ap. We must see Peter as a confession of the great mystery, the great truth of the incarnation on earth of the Only Begotten Son of God. Peter's Confession is the same as John's - about λογος σαρξ εγενετο χαι εσχηνωσεν εν ημιν, although the glory of this Logos was ως μονογενους παρα πατρος (John 1:14). In this confession there is a great religious (τηςευσεβειας) mystery: God (ος?) appeared in the flesh (1 Tim. 3:16). Patristic authorities also encourage us to see this very mystery in the words of Peter’s confession. St. John Chrysostom says that Christ, asking the question to his disciples, strongly desired that they would confess His incarnation 10. But St. speaks especially well. Isidore Pelusiot in a letter to Serinus: “These words: You are Christ, the Son of God, mean the union of two natures, which the Son of God magnificently accomplished in Himself for our salvation.” 11 Consequently, the seed of church Christology and soteriology is laid in Peter’s confession. Catholic authors try to prove that Peter’s confession belongs only to him; he answered Christ only on his own behalf. Peter did not know the secrets of the heart to confess the common faith. Between the question and the answer there was no conference of the disciples and no general commission was made to Peter 12. But one should hardly think necessarily about a special revelation that happened only to Peter at that moment. In Art. 15 Christ did not ask His disciples any riddle. He asked them about the opinion established among them, which was different from the opinions of the people. Christ's second question is completely identical in nature to the first. What do people say (λεγετε) about Me? What are you saying (λεγουσιν) about Me? The same verb is used. In one form or another, the disciples apparently already said the same thing about Christ. Their opinion seems to exist in the matter of Christ as already existing as the various opinions of the people. The apostles heard Christ’s Sermon on the Mount and were eyewitnesses of how Christ allowed Himself to be called the son of David (Matt. 9:27, 12:23, 15:22), probably knew about the revelation at baptism, remembered that Christ ordered an answer to John the Baptist (Matthew 11:4–6) and that He Himself spoke to the people about John on this occasion (Matthew 11:7–15). All this could convince the apostles of the divine dignity of their Teacher. Near Caesarea Philippi, Apostle Peter only especially fully expressed this conviction of the apostolic face 13. Obviously, Apostle Peter was in this case only “the mouth of the apostles,” as John Chrysostom calls him 14 . The same view is expressed by the blessed. Jerome 15, St. Ambrose of Milan 16 and Blessed. Augustine 17. Peter's confession can be called the apostolic confession. In the person of the “elect” (Luke 6:13; John 13:18, 15:16, 19), humanity confessed the great truth of the salvation of people through the incarnation of the Son of the living God. In response to the confession of the apostles, Christ said to Peter: Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven (Matthew 16:17). In these words, Christ characterizes the confessed truth from the point of view of its origin. This truth was not revealed by flesh and blood (σαρξ χαι αιμα). “Flesh and blood” - Hebraism (in the Syriac New Testament text //) is not used in the Old Testament, but is often found in rabbinic literature and in the New Testament. In the Talmud and Midrash, man, in contrast to the eternal and highest being of God, is always called flesh and blood 18. In the New Testament, σαρξ χαι αιμα also serves as a descriptive expression to designate carnal and mortal man as distinguished from eternal and spiritual beings (See 1 Cor. 15:50; Eph. 6:12; Gal. 1:16; Heb. 2:14). Consequently, the great religious mystery of the incarnation of the Son of God was recognized by the apostles by special revelation. The same thing is said here as in Matt. 11, 27: no one knows the Son except the Father (see also Luke 10:22) and 1 Cor. 12:3: no one can call Jesus Lord except by the Holy Spirit 19. Indeed, in the flesh and blood of the Jewish people of the time of Christ there was no idea of ​​​​the incarnation of the Son of God and there was not even favorable soil for this idea. “The idea of ​​Emmanuel, who in His divine-human face revealed the most ideally perfect nature, went beyond the limits of the then Jewish, as well as sinful human consciousness in general” 20. The thought of God incarnate seemed to the Jews not only a temptation, but also blasphemy. The Jews said to Christ: We do not want to stone You for a good deed, but for blasphemy and because You, being a man, make yourself God (John 10:33). When the Lord at the trial recognized Himself as Christ, the Son of God, the high priest tore his clothes and said: He is blaspheming! Now you have heard His blasphemy! What do you think? They answered: he is guilty of death (Matthew 26:63–66; Mark 14:60–64; Luke 22:70–71). In one place of the Jerusalem Talmud the idea that God can have a Son is called blasphemous, 21, and in another we read: “Rabbi Abba said: if a man says to you: I am God, then he is lying” 22. In the dialogue between Justin the philosopher and Tryphon, we can see how the idea of ​​the incarnation does not fit into the consciousness of the Jew: “you are trying to prove something incredible and almost impossible that God underwent birth and became a man” 23. The same Jew definitely expresses his messianic aspirations: “we all expect that the Messiah will be a man from men - γενησευαι "24. St. Hippolytus of Rome speaks similarly about the messianic aspirations of the Jews: “His birth, they say, will be from the line of David, not from the Virgin and the Holy Spirit, but from husband and wife, as it is determined for everyone to be born - from a seed." 25. In science, even the thesis is formulated according to which the Jewish messianic concepts do not provide material for the doctrine of the peculiarity of the pre-existing Christ 26. In any case, in Jewish theology, the Messiah is conceived as a human king and ruler, only endowed by God with special gifts and powers 27 Already in the Christian period, all heresies that arose under the influence of Judaism deviated from the truth precisely in resolving Christological issues. The Judaizers, in the words of Eusebius of Caesarea, had a meager and humiliating concept of Christ. They considered Him a poor and ordinary man, who was recognized as righteous only for the improvement of his character and who was born from the union of a husband with Mary 28. Ebionites, says St. Irenaeus of Lyon, - “they do not accept into their souls by faith the union of God and man” 29. The history of the doctrine of the Logos, one might also add, shows that more than one Jewish thought was that σαρξ χαι αιμα that could not reveal the truth of the Incarnation, because the deism of Palestine, the pantheism of Hellas, and the syncretism of Alexandria are equally far from this truth. Such was the will of God that this great religious truth should be hidden from the wise and prudent, but revealed to infants (Matthew 11:25–26; Luke 10:21). Having indicated in response to Peter’s confession the source and origin of the confessed truth, the Lord speaks further about the meaning of this truth and points to the consequences of the very fact of the incarnation: And I say to you: you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). The play on words, noticeable in the Greek text (σν ετ Πετροζ χαι επι τανιτη τη πετρα), sounds even clearer in the Aramaic-Syriac text //: where in Greek - Πετροζ θ πετρα corresponds to the same word. In this case, πετρα denotes the object απεχαλυψε of verse 17. Christ says to Peter, as it were: “You have expressed the truth revealed to you. Your name may be a metaphor for this truth. She will be the rock on which My Church will stand, and will be the fundamental truth of the faith of My disciples” 30. An explanation of the words of Christ is given to us by the one to whom they were directly directed - St. Peter calls Christ a living stone, rejected by men, but chosen by God, precious, for it is said in Scripture: behold, I lay in Zion a cornerstone, chosen, precious; and he who believes in Him will not be put to shame (Isa. 28:16). So He is a treasure to you who believe, but to those who do not believe, the stone which the builders rejected, but which became the head of the corner (Ps. 117:22), is a stone of stumbling and offense (1 Pet. 2:4, 6-7). In his speech before the Jewish authorities, St. Peter also spoke about Christ: He is the stone that was neglected by you builders, but became the head of the corner, and there is salvation in no one else (Acts 4:11). The prophecy of Psalm 117 about the stone was applied to Himself by Christ Himself (Matthew 21:44; Mark 12:10–11; Luke 20:17), and the prophecy of Isaiah is also applied to Christ by the apostle. Paul (Rom. 9:33), who himself calls Christ a rock (1 Cor. 10:4), the cornerstone on which the whole building of the Church is harmoniously built (Eph. 2:20–21), so that no one can lay any other foundation than the one laid, which is Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 3:11). All these places of St. The Scriptures show how characteristic the New Testament writers are of the idea of ​​Christ as a stone; They have fully assimilated the prophetic image and assimilated it in application to Christ. When Christ just spoke in response to Peter’s confession about the stone, using the image of the building of a house, and in the apostle. Peter, and the other apostles immediately had a familiar prophetic image in their minds. The Holy Fathers and Teachers of the Church when interpreting Matt. 16:18 By stone they sometimes mean St. Peter, but more often Christ Himself or the confession of Peter. These are the interpretations of St. John Chrysostom 31, Rev. Isidora Pelusiota 32, blessed. Jerome 33, Hilary of Pictavia 34, St. Ambrose of Milan 35, St. Gregory the Theologian 36, St. Epiphany of Cyprus 37, St. Cyril of Alexandria 38, blessed. Theodorit 39, blessed. Augustine 40, Cassiodorus 41, Rev. John of Damascus 42, blessed. Theophylact 43, etc. “Christ created the Church on the theology (επι τη υεολογια) of Peter,” says Nilus Kavasila, Archbishop. Solunsky 44. But what does it mean to create the Church on Christ Himself or on the confession, on the faith of Peter? The Fathers of the Church in their interpretation of Matt. 16:18 do not answer this question, but we can find a sufficient answer in general in patristic theology. It is not the theology of Peter, as the sum of theoretical positions and objects of faith, that lies at the foundation of the Church. Demons also believe in the Divinity of Christ (James 2:19); they confessed Christ like the apostle. Peter (Matthew 8:29; Mark 1:24), but they are outside the Church 45. The faith or confession of Peter lies at the foundation of the Church in its objective meaning, and Christ is the foundation of the Church in the sense in which He was confessed. Ap. Peter confessed the incarnation of the Son of God and Christ as the incarnate Son of God. Not an idea, not a truth, but the very fact of the incarnation of the Son of God is the rock on which the Church is built. The Church is a direct consequence of the Incarnation. Christ’s words to Peter inextricably link Christology with ecclesiology. The religious assembly of the Old Testament people was called Jehovah's kahal. In the Old Testament, an image of a building was attached to the Jewish people; the same verb οιχοσομησω was used as in Matt. 16:18, meaning both creation and re-creation. This is how the prophet Jeremiah says about Israel: “I will create you and you will be recreated” (Jer. 3:14. LXX σε χαι οιχοσομηυηση 46). In Old Testament words, Christ speaks of New Testament truths 47, speaks of the re-creation of humanity by the incarnation of God and the creation of a new religious whole - the Church. In the words of Christ the essence of all New Testament and church theology is given, and this theology, in turn, with its general spirit and meaning confirms our understanding of the Gospel text. Christ spoke about the new birth (John 3:3–7) and the apostle. Paul is about regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5). If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17 Comp. Gal. 6:15). But the new creation in many respects repeats the first creation. God created man by taking dust from the ground (Gen. 2:7). The first man from the earthy earth; as is the earthy one, so are they that are earthy, and we have borne the image of the earthy one (1 Cor. 15:47–49). From the earthy nature of man, although from the purest Virgin, God's Word, incarnate, borrows flesh and creates a new man in Himself (Eph. 2:15) - “not in the sense that Christ presented an example of this new man, but in the fact that He is the second Adam, the Head and Progenitor of the new humanity” 48. Confessed the truth of the incarnation of St. Peter says that people became partakers of the Divine nature, which is the great and precious promise (2 Pet. 1:4). At the first creation, God breathed into man's face the breath of life and man became a living soul (Gen. 2:7). In the new creation, the Logos did not limit itself to the perception into unity of the hypostasis of the earthy human nature, but also blew, saying: receive the Holy Spirit (John 20:22), and with a stormy breath, everyone was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:2–4), so that the new Adam is the life-giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45). The old things have passed away, all things are now new (2 Cor. 5:17). The Spirit of God lives in the new creation (Rom. 8:9–11; 1 Cor. 3:16); By him we live and move and have our being (Acts 17:28). By the Spirit, Christians will be built into the habitation of God (Eph. 2:22). We must bear the image of Adam in heaven (1 Cor. 15:49), and into this image we are transformed from glory to glory by the Spirit of the Lord (2 Cor. 3:18). The old man, which is being corrupted by the deceitful lusts, is put aside from his former way of life, and the new man, created according to God, is put on in righteousness and true holiness (Eph. 4:22–24). Even through the mouth of the ancient prophet, the Lord said: there will be a new heaven and a new earth (Isa. 65:17), and we expect a new heaven and a new earth (2 Pet. 3:13), and the prophet of the New Testament has already seen this heaven and this earth (Apoc. 21:1). With the incarnation of the Son of God, the process of renewal of human nature began. This process takes place in the Church, gradually but steadily. The gates of hell will not prevail against her - αυτηζ (Matthew 16:18). Αυτηζ can refer to both πετρα and Εχχλησια. Origen also considered it best to refer to both 49. The gates of hell, no matter how much they strengthen (χατισχυσουσι), cannot stop the process of renewal of creation, which began in the incarnation and which, on the basis of the incarnation, continues in the Church. The renewal of creation will take place consistently and unchangeably until He who sits on the throne says: Behold, I am creating everything new! It's done! I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end! (Apoc. 21:5–6). All patristic soteriology can only serve as a revelation of the truth expressed by Christ near Caesarea Philippi. Spiritual theologians of the Church pointed out the basis of salvation in the incarnation of the Son of God and combined Christology with ecclesiology. We will limit ourselves to just a few examples. Even in the second century, mainly in anti-Jewish polemics, church writers spoke of the Church as a new people 50 that received its beginning in the incarnation of the Son of God. We meet this in the letter with the name of Barnabas. The Father commands Christ to prepare for Himself a holy people (14:5-6). Christ came to prepare a new people for Himself (5, 7); For the sins of the new people He offered His flesh (7:5). “The words of Scripture that the Father says to the Son apply to us: “Let us make man in our image and likeness” (Gen. 1:26). At the end of time, the Lord accomplished the second creation in us (δευτεραν πλασιν). The Lord says: “Behold, I will do the last as the first.” We are recreated, as the Lord again says from another prophet: “Behold, I will take away hearts of stone from them and put hearts of flesh in them” (Ezek. 11:19, 36:26), for He was to appear in the flesh and dwell in us (6:12–14). Thus, in the epistle of Barnabas, the idea of ​​a new humanity or Church stands in the closest connection with the fact of the incarnation. The concept of a new humanity stands at the center of general views and St. Ignatius the God-Bearer on Christianity 51. For him, Christianity is οιχονομια ειζ τον χαινον ανυρωπον (Eph. 2:15), and the new man is identified with the Church (Eph. 4:24). But in the second century St. spoke especially clearly about the basic meaning of the incarnation and about the Church as a consequence or fruit of the incarnation. Irenaeus of Lyons. “Others,” writes St. Irenaeus, - they do not attach any importance to the descent of the Son of God and the economy of His incarnation, which the apostles announced and the prophets predicted that through this the perfection of our humanity should be realized. And such should be counted among those of little faith" 52. Christ “brought everything new in that He, who was proclaimed, brought Himself. For this very thing was predicted, that something new (novitas) would come, which would renew (innovatura) and revive man” 53. “The Word of God Jesus Christ our Lord, in His immeasurable goodness, became what we are, that He might make us what He is.”54 “Jesus Christ, the Son of God, out of excellent love for His creation, condescended to be born of a Virgin, through Himself uniting man with God” 55. The creation is perfected, since it has become conformable and co-corporeal (conformatum et concorporatum) with the Son. The creation receives the Word and ascends to Him, surpassing the angels and becoming in the image and likeness of God 56. “What happened in the Lord is also accomplished in us, since the body follows its Head” 57. The new recreated humanity of St. Irenaeus also calls it the Church. “God is pleased to take the Church, which will be sanctified through communion with His Son” 58. “The Church receives adoption (adoptionem) to God through the Lord” 59. It is known how important the idea of ​​deification was in the theology of the ancient Eastern Church, starting from the 4th century 60. Occupying a central place in church theology, this idea harmoniously combined Christology, soteriology and ecclesiology into one integral and sublime system. “The Word put on a created body so that in Him we could be renewed and deified” 61. “He became man in order to deify us in Himself” 62. “This is the main thing in the Savior’s economy in the flesh - to bring human nature into unity with itself and with the Savior and, having destroyed the evil section, restore the primitive unity: just as the best doctor, with healing medicines, reconnects a body that has been dismembered into many parts” 63. “Our nature returns again to its previous state” 64. “The Word, existing in the beginning and with God, and the Word, Himself existing God, Who in the last days, through communion with the humiliation of our nature, became flesh out of love for mankind, and, uniting through it with man, took into Himself all of our nature, so that through dissolution with the Divine (nature) the human would be deified, and with the firstfruits of these the entire composition of ours would be sanctified nature" 65. Christians are grounded in the humanity of Christ 66 . The fact of the incarnation of the Son of God and the idea of ​​a new humanity are connected with the idea of ​​the Church especially clearly by St. Cyril of Alexandria and Rev. Maxim the Confessor. St. Cyril writes: “The Only Begotten determined a certain, refined by the wisdom appropriate to Him and the advice of the Father, a way for us ourselves to converge and mingle in unity with God and with each other, although each separated from the other by souls and bodies into a special personality - namely (this way): in one body, obviously his own, blessing those who believe in Him through the sacramental communion (Eucharist) - makes them co-corporeal both to Himself and to each other. Therefore, the Church calls the Body of Christ, and we are individual members according to Paul’s understanding” 67. For St. Kirill, the new humanity, which came into being through the incarnation of the Son of God, and the Church are, as it were, interchangeable concepts, and Rev. Maxim, citing the words of St. Paul (Eph. 1:11–23, 4:11–16) about the Church, immediately begins to talk about the sacrament of the incarnation. “The secret was hidden from centuries and generations, but now it is revealed through the true and perfect incarnation of the Son and God (other reading - Yιου του Θεου), who united to Himself by hypostasis (χαυ υποστασιυ) our nature inseparably and unmerged, who united us to Himself, as it were, as the firstfruits of His holy, intelligently and rationally animated flesh, which is from us and ours, and deigned (us) to be one and the same with Him according to His humanity, as we were predestined before the ages to be in Him, as members of the body” 68 . For Rev. Maxim “the holy Church of God is the image (ειχων) of God, because it, like God, unites believers” 69. Thus, patristic theology sees the incarnation of the Son of God as the basis of our salvation and the cornerstone of the Church, and in the light of this theology under the stone in Matt. 16:18 we can understand the Son of God incarnate or the incarnation itself, not a doctrine about him, not an idea, but a fact 70. Our modern school theology falls under the reproach of St. Irenaeus of Lyons, reproached for lack of faith, because it does not place the truth of the incarnation of the Son of God at the forefront 71, and does not connect this truth with the truth of the Church, as it should be according to the word of the Lord Himself 72. But the Church even now lives by the same ideal of deification that she lived by in ancient times, for which her outstanding theologians and teachers fought until they bled to death. One has only to listen to church hymns, read carefully the church prayers - the hymn of the incarnation is heard everywhere and invariably, and the doctrine of the incarnation in liturgical books is presented in patristic terms. Having fallen under influences alien to the Church, those who founded school dogma neglected the stone of incarnation, but for the Church it still lies at the forefront. The Church sings a particularly dogmatically deep and beautiful hymn to the Incarnation on the day of the Nativity of Christ. Even on the day of the forefeast, at Compline it is sung in the canon: “Do not marvel now, O mother, seeing like a child, from the womb of whom God bore before the star: for to raise up and glorify with one another the fallen nature of man has clearly come.” And in the service for the holiday itself we hear: “Having seen the Creator perishing of man, with whose hands he created, he bowed down to the heavens; this, from the Virgin truly incarnated, everything exists (ολον ουσιουται - accepts his whole being)” 73. “Wisdom, Word and Power, this Son of the Father and Radiance, Christ God... has renewed us in manhood ( ανεχτησατο )” 74. “Everything for us ( χαυ ημαζ ), having become poor through the earth from the very unity and communion, you have made God” 75 . “He who became like (us) through union with (our) mortal wretchedness and the perception of earthly flesh made (us) partakers of the Divine nature” 76. “God the Word, who was with God in the beginning, wanting to preserve our being, which was weak from ancient times, now strengthens (it), descending Himself into a new (with him) communion and again making (it) free from passions” 77. “The people named after Christ, having achieved what they desired, and having been worthy of the coming of God (in the flesh), are now awaiting life-giving renewal." And the wealth of this theology lies in the same great revealed truths that Peter confessed on behalf of the apostles near Caesarea Philippi and which the Lord confirmed and supplemented in His answer to Peter: the beginning of the salvation of human nature and the foundation of the Church was laid by the very fact of the incarnation and incarnation of the second Hypostasis of the Most Holy Trinity. The Textus receptus reads τινα με λεγουσι with most uncials - DEFGHKLMS, codices Italz, etc. The Syriac texts at this point contain only free transmission. Diat. ar. de me. See The old syriac gospels or Evangelion da-Mepharreshe, edited by Aqnes Smith Lewis. London MCMX, p. 43. The combination of ουιος του ανυρωπου with the first person personal pronoun is completely unusual for weather forecasters, which is why critical publications omit με along with ХВ with vg cop syr hr aeth It int cod Or im3521. It is possible that με in the text of Matthew is an insertion from Mr. 8, 27 Luke. 9, 18, where there is only this one pronoun. On Mt. demon 54.1. Creations, ed. St. Petersburg. Spirit. Academician vol.7, p.552. St. also sees this shade in Christ’s question. John Chrysostom: “Showing how much He desires that His incarnation be confessed, He says: Son of man,” meaning by this the Divinity, as He often does in other places. This is what he says: no one has ascended into heaven except the Son of man who is in heaven (John 3:13); and in another place: if you see the Son of man ascending, where he was before” (John 6:62). On Mt. demon 54.1. Creations vol. 7, p. 553. I. Liqhtfoot especially insists on the same meaning of Christ’s question: quaerit Christus, non tarn, an Messiam ilium agnoscerent; quam, Messiam agnoscentes, qualemnam eum conciperent? Liqhtfoot cites as proof that the Greek τινα, like the Hebrew, asks non tarn de persona, quam de qualitate personae. Horae hebraicae et talmudicae in quattuor evangelistas. Lipsiae 1684. p. 375. cm. Thedor Zahn. Das Evangelium des Matthaus. Leipzig 1903. S. 533 Anm. 54. Matt. in Art. 14 uses pronouns: οι μεν – αλλοι δε – ετεροι δε. At Mr. and Luke. in the second and third cases αλλοι. For the meaning of αλλοι and ετερος in the New Testament, see Friedrich Blass' Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch vierte, vollig neugearbeitete Aufiage besorgt von Albert Debrunner Gottingen 1913, § 306. S 178. G. B. Winer''s Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms 8-te Aufl. Von Paul Wilh. Schmiedel. II. Theil. Gottingen 1898, §26, 6a-b. S.244. The conjectures and detailed arguments of commentators (see, for example, J. H. A. Hart. Cephas and Christ. The journal of theological studies, vol.IX, 1908, pp. 15–24) about popular opinions are not approved by the blessed one. Jerome, who writes: “I am surprised that some interpreters look for the reasons for the errors of individual people and invent very long explanations on the question of why some saw John in our Lord Jesus Christ, others - Elijah, others - Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” Creations, part 16. Kiev 1901, p. 157. St. John Chrysostom. On Mt. demon 54, 1. Creations vol.7. p.553. In Math. T. 12, 9. Migne, PG., t.13, col.996B. The coincidence of the reading of Codex D with the Syriac texts is not accidental. In this code they find “clear signs of the influence of Syriac phraseology” (F. H. Chase. The old Syriac element in the text of Codex Bezae. London 1893. The Syro-Latin Text of the Gospels. London 1865. pp. 76–100), they see a strong influence of the Diatessaron (which is the thesis substantiated by Dr. Heinrich Joseph Voqels in his work: Die Harmonistik im Evangelientext des Codex Cantabrigiensis. Leipzig 1910. Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, hetrausgeg von Adolf Harnack und Carl Schmidt 3. Reihe 6Band, Helf 1a) Hermann Freiherr von Soden states about the same code: “8 von Ta geradezu inficiert. ist.” Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments. I.Th.II. Abt. Berlin 1907. S. 1640. Ha Matt. demon 54, 1. Creations, vol.7, p.553. Book 1, writing 236. Creations, part 1. Moscow 1860, p.145. Jos. Knabenbauer. Evangelium secundum S. Matthaeum. Pars altera. Parisiis 1893, p.51. Cfr. Th. Zahn. Das Evangelium des Matthaus. SS. 629–530. P. M. J. Ladrande. “Evangile selon saint Marc. Paris 1911, p.204. On Mt. demon 54, 1. Creations vol.7, p.553. “Peter confesses on behalf of all the apostles.” Creations, part 16, page 157. Respondit prae ceteris, immo pro ceteris. De incarn. cap. 4. Migne. PL., t.16, col.827. Unus pro multis dedit responsum. Serm. 76, 1. Migne, PL., t. 38, col.479. Cfr.Serm.270, 2 (in die Pentecostes IV): Petrus unus pro ceteris, unus pro omnibus. Dr. August Wunsche. Neue Beitrage zur Erlauterung der Evangelien aus Talmud und Midrasch Gottingen 1878. S.194. cm. Lightfoot has examples. Horae hebraicae, p.376. Srvn. and 1Jn. 4:15: “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and He in God.” Prof. M. D. Muretov. Christ as the bearer of the infirmities and diseases of humanity. Theological Bulletin, 1900, vol. 1, p. 446. Just. Dial. cTryph. cap. 68.Ed. Otto, p. 240. Philos IX, 30. Migne, P.G., t. 16, col. 3411 A. This thesis is substantiated very extensively and convincingly by Prof. N.N. Glubokovsky. Annunciation of St. Apostle Paul according to his origin and essence, book. 1. St. Petersburg. 1905, p.247 ff. 875. book II. St. Petersburg. 1910, pp.214–224. 1093 approx. 871. book III, St. Petersburg. 1912, p.9 approx. Srvn. prof. prot. A.V. Smirnov. Messianic expectations and beliefs of the Jews around the time of Jesus Christ. Kazan 1899, pp.324–326. Prof. M.D. Muretov. Theological Bulletin, 1900, vol. 1, pp. 446–450. D. EmilSchurer. Geschichte des judischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. 4-te Aufl. 2Bd. Leipzig 1907. §29. Euseb. H.E. Ill 26, 1–2. Cfr. Epiph. Haer. XXX, 2. 3. 2. 29– ll.Hippol. Philos. VII34. Migne, PG., t.16, col.3342B. Iren. Contra haer. Ill 21, 1. IV 33, 4. V 1.3. Contra haer. VI,3. Works in trans. prot. P. Preobrazhensky. St. Petersburg. 1900, p.447. Cfr. W. S. Alien. A critical and exegetical commentary on the gospel according to S. Matthew. 2 ed. Edinburgh 1907, pp.176. 178. On Mt. demon 54, 2: on this stone, - i.e. on religion - τη πιστει της ομολογιας. Migne, P.L., t.58, col.534. Creations vol.7, p.554. Ha Matt. demon 82, 3: created the Church on the confession (επι τη ομολογια) of Peter. Migne, P.G., t.58, col.741. Creations vol.7, p.824. Explanations, for 1 chapter. ate, to Gal.: promising at his confession to lay the foundation of the Church. Creations, vol. 10, p. 729. “It pleased Him that everyone should learn that undoubted confession, which Peter, inspired by Him, laid as the unshakable foundation on which the Lord created His Church.” Book I, letter 235 to Serin. Creations part 1, p. 145. On Mt. 16:18: To Simon, who believed in the Stone or Christ, He gave the name Peter. Creations part 16, page 159. Compare. on Mt. 7, 26: On this rock the Lord founded the Church; The Apostle Peter received his name from this stone. Creations part 16, page 52. De Trinitate VI, 36: super hanc confessionis petram Ecclesiae aedificatio est. Migne, P.L., t.10, col.186C. VI, 37: Haec fides Ecclesiae fundamentum est. Ibid., col.187A. De incarnatione 5, 34: fides est Ecclesiae fundamentum; non enim de carne Petri, sed de fide dictum est, quia portae mortis ei non praevalebunt. Migne, PL., t.16, col.827 Oral.32, 18: one is called a stone and the foundations of the Church are credited to it - about μεν Πετρα χαλειται , χαι τους υεμελιους της Εχχλησιας πιστευεται .Migne, PG.,t.36, col.193C. Creations part 3, ed. 3. Moscow 1889, p.123. Panarius. Er. 59, 7: Peter confessed Christ as the Son of the living God, and heard: on this rock of unshakable faith (τη πετρα ταυτη της ασφαγης πιστεως) I will build My Church. Migne, P.G., t. 41, col. 1029B. Works, part 3, Moscow 1872, p. 37. A little higher, Peter is called the stone that lies at the foundation of the Lord’s faith - Κυριου. De Trinitate dial. 4: πετραν, οιμαι, παρωνυμωζ, ετερον ουδεν, η την αχατασειστον χαι εδραιοτατην τον μαυητου πιστιν αποχαλων, εφ χαι αδιαπωτως ερηρεισται τε χαι διαοεπηγεν η Εχχλησια Χριστου. Migne, PG.,75, col.865C. In Jes. lib.4, cap.44, 23: I think He calls the disciple’s steadfastness in faith a stone. Creations part 7. Moscow 1889, p.463. Tolkov. on 1 Cor. 3, 11: Blessed Peter, or better yet, the Master Himself, laid this foundation. For when Peter said: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16), the Lord answered: On this rock I will build My Church (18). Therefore, do not call yourselves by human names; for the foundation is Christ. Migne, P.G., t.82, col.249A. Creations part 7. Moscow 1861, p.188. In loan: tract. 124, 5: On the rock that you confessed I will build My Church. For the stone was Christ (1 Cor. 10:4). Peter himself was created on this basis. But no one can lay any other foundation than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus. Consequently, the Church, which is based on Christ, in the person of Peter receives from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven, i.e. the power to knit and solve sins. Sancti Aurelii Augustini opera omnia, ed. monachorum ordinis sancti Benedicti, t.3. Parisiis 1837, col.2470 C-D. Retract. I, 21: it is not said: you are petra, but: you are Petrus. The Stone (Petra) was Christ, whom Peter confessed, as the whole Church confesses Him. Opera, t.I, col.68A. Serm. 76, 1: Stone - Christ; Peter is a Christian people... So, he says, you are Peter, and on this stone that you confessed, on this stone that you knew, saying: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God, I will build My Church; those. on Me Myself, the Son of the living God, I will build My Church. I will build you on Me, not Me on you. Serm. 270, 2 (in die Pentecostes IV): I am a stone (petra), you are Peter (Petrus). For the stone is not from Peter (neque a Petro petra), but from the stone Peter, because Christ is not from a Christian, but a Christian is from Christ. And on this rock I will build My Church, not on Peter as you are, but on the rock (supra petram) which you confessed. Expos, in. psal. 45 vers.5: Commoveri non potest Ecclesia, quae in solidissima petra, hoc est Domino Christo noscitur esse fundata. Migne, P.L., t.70, col.330C. Homil. de transfigur. Domini 6: ου σιιρξ , ουχ αιμα , ουχ ανυρωπινη διανοια , αλλ ο Πατηρ μου ο ?? Αυτη η πιστις η αχλινης χαι αχλονητος , εφ ην ως πετραν η εχχλησια εστηριχται. Migne, PG., vol.96, col.556A. Srvn. above (col.553B), where Christ Himself is named - η πετρα της ζωης. Russian translation in Christian Reading, 1842, part 3, p. 179. 177. See Evangelist, part 1: this confession that you confessed will be the foundation of the believers. De primatu papae, lib. II. Migne, P.G., t.149, col.708C. Srvn. above the words of Rev. John of Damascus in approx. 42. See Augustin. Contra Cresconium I, 29, 34. Migne, P.L., t.43, col.463–464. Cfr. J. H. A. Hart. Cephas and Christ. The journal of theological studies, vol. IX, p. 38: Banah is used... by Jeremiah in reference to the restoration of Israel after the exile. The latter use is more obviously a possible source of this present phrase. On the Old Testament basis of New Testament ecclesiological terms, see Vladimir Troitsky. Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church. Sergiev Posad, 1912, pp. 14–18. – It is impossible to say with certainty what term Christ used in this case. In Syriac texts, the Greek εχχλησια has different words: Matt. 16, 18, Matt. 18, 17. Prof. DI. Bogdashevsky (now Bishop Vasily). Epistle of the Holy Apostle Paul to the Ephesians. Kiev, 1904, p.406. In Math. t.12, 11 Migne, PG., t.13, col.1004 B. See Vladimir Troitsky. Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church. pp.88–101. See F. Loofs. Leitfaden sum Studium der Dogmengeschichte. 4-te Aufl. Halle 1906. §15, 2. S.99. Proof of the Apostolic Preaching, ch. 99. Rus. translation in Christian Reading. 1907 part 2. Contra haer. IV 311. Migne, P.G., t. 7, col.1083C-1084A. Works, St. Petersburg. 1900, p.414. Contra haer. V praef, PG., t. 7, col. 1120V. Works, page 446. Contra haer. Ill 42 PG., t. 7, col. 856B. Works, page 225. Contra haer. V 36.3. P.G., t. 7, col. 1224B-C. Works, page 528. Contra haer. IV 34.4. P.G., t. 7, col. 1086B. Works, page 417. Contra haer. IV 20.12. P.G., t. 7, col. 1042A. Works, page 377. Contra haer. V 32.2. P.G., t. 7, col. 1211A. Works, page 515. See about this prof. I. V. Popova. The idea of ​​deification in the ancient Eastern Church. Moscow, 1909. St. Athanasius Vel. Against the Arians II, 47. Works part 2. Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra 1902, p.324. St. Athanasius Vel. To Adelphius, ch. 4. Creations part 3. Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra 1903, p.306. St. Basil the Great. Ascetic statutes, chapter 18. Creations part 5. Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra 1901, p.360. St. Gregory of Nyssa. Antirritik, chapter 55. Creations, part 7. Moscow 1865, p.192. St. Gregory of Nyssa. Antirritic, ch. 15. Creations part 7, p. 86. St. Ephraim of Syria. Commentary on 3 Cor. 3. 32–33 Prof. M.D. Muretov. Apocryphal correspondence of the Apostle Paul with the Corinthians. Sergiev Posad 1896, p.XXIII. Interpretation of the Gospel of John, book. 11, ch. 11. Creations part 15 Sergiev Posad. 1912, p.109. BY. Ambiguorum liber. Migne. P.G., t. 91, col. 1097A-B. Cfr. cap. theol I, 25. PG., t.90, col.1135B-C. Mystagog. cap. 1. Migne. P.G., t. 91, col. 668B. Cfr. col.664D. Scriptures of St. fathers and teachers of the Church related to the interpretation of Orthodox worship, vol. 1, St. Petersburg. 1855, pp.303,300. By stone, Catholics mean the Apostle Peter and reason like this: “The Church of Christ is an assembly, a society of people. And that which imparts stability, strength, unity to each assembly or society, and to which all belonging to the society must diligently adhere and follow, is authority or the power of control and direction. True power must possess every society and direct it towards what it was created for. An authority is needed with which society would be strong, with which it would be preserved in unity. If there is no such authority, then the society is not worthy of its name: there will only be individual and scattered members. If someone submits himself to this authority, he thereby defines himself as a member of society. Since Peter is the one on whom Christ will create His Church, the highest authority in the Church is thereby promised for the future. The words of Christ contain the promise that He will cause Peter, by his power of government, to promote true firmness towards unity, or, in other words, that Peter will stand guard over all that truth which gives the building a solid foundation.” Jos Knabenbauer. Evangelium secundum S. Matthaeum, pars altera, p. 55. We reject this interpretation as too worldly (concern for the prerogatives of an individual bishop) and completely wretched and pathetic in the ideological and theological sense. Even the best works on soteriology, which decisively broke with the legal doctrine of salvation borrowed by our theology from Western extra-church scholastics, are not entirely free from this reproach. (Such, for example, is the work of Archbishop Sergius. Orthodox teaching on salvation). March 11–13, 1914 The Academy was visited by the English scientist W.H. Frere, with whom I had to talk about the organization of teaching at their college (College of the Resurrection, Mirfield). He gave me a small brochure - Notes on theological training, which (p. 5) contains a teaching plan. In the dogmatics column, my attention was drawn to the titles of two sections: the incarnation (incarnation) and the extension of the incarnation (distribution of the incarnation). I asked what the second section was about, what “the extension of the incarnation” was. W.H. Frere replied that this title contained the doctrine of the Church and the sacraments. The Church is therefore defined as the extension or continuation of the Incarnation. Is it possible that at this point extra-church theology is closer to the truth than our school theology? Especially for this last one, of course! Canon of Cosmas, canto 1, trope. 2. Canon of Cosmas, canto 1, trope. 3. Canon of Cosmas, canto 5, trope. 1. Canon of Cosmas, canto 3, trope. 3. We carry out in Russian translation prof. E. Lovyagina. Liturgical canons in Greek, Slavic and Russian languages. Book 1. St. Petersburg. 1855, p. 5. Canon of John Canto 6, tr. 1. Lovyagin, p. 18. Canon of John canto 9, tr. 2. Lovyagin, pp. 21–22 December 26 on the poem of the stichera of John the monk. On praisetech Slava (Germanovo). You might be interested in: