Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 2 Studia theologica

Years help

  1. 1 2014

  2. 1 2013

Authors help

  1. 2 Hušek V.

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Inpossibile est non peccare: Kategorie hříchů u Ambrosiastera

100%
Hušek V.
Studia theologica
|
2014
|
vol. 2
119-129
EN
In his Commentaries, Ambrosiaster repeatedly states that it is impossible for a man to avoid sins. This article examines the five quaestiones of Ambrosiaster where this statement is specified as a result of the author’s differentiation of sins. Quaestio 102 Against the Novatians reveals a comprehension for the “fragility of the human race” and defends the possibility of penance and remission of sins after baptism. In the three quaestiones on Psalms 1, 23 and 50 (q. 110–112), the author separates impietas as a more serious but avoidable sin, from a more general category of peccatum which is unavoidable, and defines the corresponding punishments. When examining the identity of the mysterious Melchizedek (q. 109), Ambrosiaster contrasts the human long-life effort and divine unchangeable eternity. In this context, the possibility to avoid all sins (for human nature, able to choose between sinning and not sinning) is seen as a higher degree of perfection than the divine impossibility to sin (because of his immutability) and is rejected for this reason. All this is an important completion to the theme opened up in the Commentaries.
2
Content available remote

JEŽÍŠOVO PŘÍBUZENSTVO U AMBROSIASTERA

100%
Hušek V.
Studia theologica
|
2013
|
vol. 15
|
issue 2
226–237
EN
Ambrosiaster’s exposition of the story of the twelve-year-old Jesus in the Temple (Luke 2:41–52) leads us, with the passage of 2000 years, to three questions associated with Jesus’ relatives: who was the father of Joseph (Quaest. 56), whether Jesus was a son of Joseph (Quaest. 75), and who are the “brothers of the Lord” (Comm. Gal. 1,19). These three themes also reveal certain characteristics of the author’s style and help us place the author within a broader context, both thematically and temporally. The clear formal structure of Quaestiones, the ease of the explanation submitted, the absence of other possible solutions, the absence of references to philosophy and literature, only sporadic references to the Fathers (discussed more in detail by A. Volgers) – all this corresponds to the hypothesis that the work was conceived as a pastoral-catechetical manual, designed for the practical needs of priests (and probably also drafted by a priest). The dispute over the “brothers of the Lord” demonstrates that Ambrosiaster did not hesitate to differ in his explanation from his contemporaries (Marius Victorinus, Jerome and Helvidius, in a broader context also Augustine and Pelagius), and also, thanks to recent observations by S. Cooper and D. Hunter, allows us to determine more accurately the time of the gamma version of his commentary on Galatians.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.