The anthology is the first publication in Russia in which the works of Orthodox Christians and "heretics" covering almost a millennium and a half are brought together under one cover. Many of the texts included in the Anthology have been translated into Russian for the first time, and the accompanying articles have been written taking into account the latest achievements of modern patrological science.

The problems of the volume cover polemics with Gnosticism, the formation of the foundations of church doctrine, Origenism, triadological and Christological disputes, the formation of Christian anthropology and other issues that are key to understanding the world of Eastern Christian theology and culture.

Anthology of Eastern Christian Theological Thought. Orthodoxy and heterodoxy. In 2 vols. ed. by G. I. Benevich and D. S. Biryukov; ed. G. I. Benevich. Moscow, St. Petersburg: Nikeya-RKhGA, 2009. (Smaragdos Philocalias; Byzantine Philosophy: vol. 4-5)

Original Djvu - http://mirknig.com

ru Trushova If you found a mistake in the book, write to saphyana@inbox.ru ExportToFB21, FictionBook Editor Release 2.6 05.04.2013 OOoFBTools-2013-4-5-16-13-56-1411 1.0 Anthology of Eastern Christian Theological Thought. Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy Volume 1. Nikea – RHGA Moscow, St. Petersburg. 2009

Anthology of Eastern Christian Theological Thought. Orthodoxy and heterodoxy. Volume 1

Introduction (G. I. Benevich)

This two-volume "Anthology", prepared by the publishing house of the Russian Christian Academy for the Humanities, is a continuation of the project that began with the publication of the two-volume "Anthology of Medieval Thought"[1]. Nevertheless, in anticipation of the materials included in this "Anthology", it should be noted that it is not just a collection of texts and studies of theologians and philosophers of the Eastern Middle Ages, primarily Byzantine; We are dealing with a completely different world than the medieval Western one. This world, although it is farther away from us in time, is in a certain sense much closer to us. This can be seen at least from the fact that until recently it was banned.

In fact, the situation with the study of Eastern Christian theological thought in Soviet times was even worse than with Western medieval thought; the latter, although extremely poor, was studied in secular universities, some monuments were even published. As for the world of Eastern Christian theology, then, with the rarest exceptions, even in theological educational institutions, not to mention secular ones, the process of publishing, commenting and comprehending works representing this world was practically stopped. The fate of the assimilation of Eastern Christian thought in Russia was not so fortunate even after the fall of communist ideology; If the study of scholasticism was quickly and easily introduced in the philosophical departments of universities, since no one had to prove its significance for the history of philosophy, then Eastern Christian thought manages to get a "registration" in the philosophical departments in modern Russia with great difficulty, despite the fact that many works have been published in the West over the past century. proving the existence of "Byzantine philosophy" or "philosophy of the Fathers", which can and should be studied within the framework of the course of the history of philosophy[2].

The reason for this rejection of Byzantine thought by secular universities, especially by the departments of philosophy, is obvious: it appears to be confessional, relating more to theology than to philosophy, and theology from this point of view should be studied in the corresponding theological schools, seminaries and academies. There is some truth in this approach; It consists in the fact that, in contrast to Western medieval thought, it is extremely difficult to single out a purely philosophical aspect in Eastern Christian thought, in the sense of the word to which we are accustomed when we speak of the philosophy of antiquity or the philosophy of the Modern Age. Even those authors who in the Eastern Christian tradition have earned the name of "philosopher," such as Maximus the Confessor,[3] although sometimes there are purely philosophical proofs and arguments that are not based on Revelation, i.e., the Holy Scriptures. Scripture and Tradition, however, these proofs, firstly, are quite rare, and secondly, they are still verified and supported by the data of Revelation and in one way or another are built into the theological thought referring to it. There are exceptions (among the most notable is the great philosopher and scientist of the sixth century, John Philoponus), but they only confirm the rule. Indeed, with regard to the work of the same Philoponus "On the Eternity of the World, Against Proclus", in which he, practically without referring to Revelation, proves that the world is not eternal, but created, there are heated debates among scholars whether Philoponus wrote it as an apologist for Christianity or followed one of the traditions in Hellenistic philosophy. In fact, the commentator on Aristotle, Philoponus, with his numerous philosophical works (not textual, but original and creative) is one of the few exceptions, since he is known both for his "purely philosophical" writings and for his theological writings (although here he earned the reputation of a heretic, a "Monophysite" and a "Tritheite"). As a rule, philosophy and theology in Eastern Christian thought are so intertwined that it is extremely difficult to draw a clear distinction between them. In Byzantium, of course, there was a tradition of commenting on Aristotle and, to some extent, other ancient philosophers; now and then the Byzantine Christians turned to the study of the Neoplatonists, and in this specific sense it is possible to speak of philosophy in Byzantium, but this was not the "nerve" of the intellectual life of the Byzantines (as we shall call the Romans who did not think and write in Latin).