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

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  MONASTICISM
help Sort By:

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

LITERARY SOURCES FOR THE EARLIEST MONASTIC COMMUNITIES IN NORTH AFRICA (Zrodla literackie dotyczace najwczesniejszych wspolnot monastycznych w Afryce Polnocnej)

100%
Nehring P.
U Schyłku Starożytności. Studia Źrodłoznawcze
|
2010
|
vol. 9
99-113
EN
Our knowledge of the earliest monastic communities in North Africa comes primarily and almost exclusively from the writings of St. Augustine or from other works written by authors closely related to him. These literary sources represent specific categories with a strongly persuasive function and as such they belong to the prescriptive, apologetic or hagiographical writings. While studying any aspect of early monasticism in North Africa it is necessary to pay attention to the literary and rhetorical traits of the texts. The prescriptive works (Rule of St. Augustine, De opere monachorum) pointed to the ideal which could be perceived as a task to be completed by the monks themselves as well as by their superiors; the apologetic sources (Sermones 355-356) were to show that this ideal, seemingly imperfect as it was, functioned quite well; finally, the hagiographical sources (Vita Augustini) tried to convince the reader that the ideal had come true. The perfect and clearly established example of this ideal is found in the apostolic community in Jerusalem outlined in the Acts of the Apostles 4, 32-35.
2
Content available remote

AN OUTLINE OF GREEK CATHOLIC MONASTICISM IN THE CZECH LANDS AND CZECHOSLOVAKIA THROUGHOUT THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURY

88%
Zouhar J.
Konštantínove listy
|
2018
|
vol. 11
|
issue 2
151 - 167
EN
Byzantine-rite Christians have always been of little importance to general public living in Czechoslovakia, especially to inhabitants of Bohemia. Moreover, Slovak elites did not always choose an even-handed approach to the Greek Catholic Church. This was caused by the different character of Byzantine-rite Christians, very often Rusyns by origin. That was why the history of Byzantine-rite Christians was so complicated within the defined territory throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. It is even truer of Greek Catholic monasticism. Those who decided to be an enemy of the Greek Catholics had to start with the elimination of their elite – monks and nuns. The worst time for Byzantine-rite Christians came in the second half of the 20th century when the states where they lived were ruled by Communists regimes.
3

Wyzbycie się prywatnej wlaśnosci – teoria i praktyka w najwcześniejszych monastycznych wspólnotach z kręgu Augustyna

75%
Nehring P.
U Schyłku Starożytności. Studia Źrodłoznawcze
|
2012
|
vol. 11
59-82
EN
According to the theory present in both the prescriptive and hagiographical writings concerned with the functioning of the earliest monastic communities in Africa, a prerequisite and a necessary condition imposed on any member of a monastic community was to dispose of all his private property and belongings. The authors promoting this rule primarily referred to two New Testament texts (Matth. 19:12; Acts 4:32–25). The apostolic community of Jerusalem described in the Acts became even the model for Augustine’s monasticism (Praeceptum, Vita Augustini, Sermo 356). Furthermore, Augustine, taking advantage of his rhetorical mastery, tried to prove the superiority of common over private property in his preaching (Enarratio in Ps. 131, 5–7). However, the disposing of private belongings was an ambiguous practice in the everyday life of the communities established by the bishop of Hippo and entailed a whole range of restrictions of legal or social nature. The ambiguity concerned even Augustine himself. The extant sources do not clearly and unambiguously specify what he actually did with his family estate. The rather apologetic Sermon 356 depicts a whole collection of clergymen residing with Augustine in the bishop’s abode who could be reasonably suspected of having failed to dispose of their property on joining the monastery. The main part of the paper focuses, therefore, on a case study of those monks’ situation. Its aim is to explain why and how the monastic theory related to property issues clearly clashed with the actual monastic practice in the earliest Augustinian communities.
4
Content available remote

MONASTIC IDENTITY OF CONSTANTINE THE PHILOSOPHER AND METHODIUS AND THE FIRST SLAVIC TRANSLATIONS OF ASCETIC TEXTS

75%
Zozuľak J.
Konštantínove listy
|
2022
|
vol. 15
|
issue 1
3 - 10
EN
Before their arrival in Great Moravia, the Thessalonian brothers from Thessaloniki Constantine and Methodius lived in the Polychron monastery at Bithynian Olympus, which belonged to the most prominent monastic centres of the Byzantine Empire in the 9th century. There, they became acquainted with the Byzantine Hesychastic tradition, which served as the foundation for their own work and which they passed down to their disciples. The relative shortness of Constantine and Methodius’ stay in Great Moravia precluded the organizing of a monastic way of life in this territory. For this reason, Byzantine Hesychastic tradition only entered the Slavic cultural space with the help of their pupils, who transposed it to the Bulgarian Empire, where first monasteries appeared in the 10th century and became the centres of spiritual and cultural life. The first Slavic translations of ascetic texts The Longer Responses and The Ladder of Divine Ascent are directly linked to the period of establishing the monastic way of life in Bulgaria, on which Constantine and Methodius’ disciples significantly participated. These texts would become the practical handbooks on ascetic way of life for monks. Byzantine monastic practice and ascetic tradition had a marked impact not only on monks, but also on pious laypeople. For them ascetic texts became the models of virtuous life.
5
Content available remote

ANTÓNIOS-EMÍLIOS N. TACHIÁOS AND HIS CONTRIBUTION TO THE RESEARCH OF BYZANTINE-SLAVIC RELATIONS

75%
Zozuľak J., Delikari A.
Konštantínove listy
|
2024
|
vol. 17
|
issue 1
150 - 159
EN
Contemporary Slavic studies and Byzantology records many important researchers dealing with Byzantine-Slavic relations, who brought new knowledge in the given area and significantly advanced the research of the Slavic cultural environment in relation to the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire and the perception of the depth of the heritage of the Thessaloniki brothers Constantine-Cyril and Methodius for the whole Slavic world. One of the most important personalities that deserve attention is Antónios-Emílios N. Tachiáos, professor at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, whose contribution to the research of Byzantine-Slavic relations and the related Cyrillic-Methodist issue is significant and unquestionable in scientific circles. In this study, we will analyse the life and work of this important personality, who can be classified as a Slavist or a Byzantologist. Some of his works have been translated into several languages, but the texts he published in his native Greek remain inaccessible to the international scientific community. On the basis of his most important studies, which resonated the most in Greek and international scientific circles in recent decades, we will approach four main areas of research that Professor Tachiáos has devoted himself to in depth during his academic career: the influence of Byzantine hesychasm on the spiritual life of the Slavs, the Athos state and monasticism, Byzantine-Slavic relations and the Christianization of the Slavs through the missionary work of Constantine-Cyril and Methodius. He perceived the values of the cultural heritage of the Thessaloniki brothers and their sustainability in a broader context, which enabled him to bring a new dimension to the understanding of the relations between Byzantium and Great Moravia.
6
Content available remote

Osobnost procházející dějinami, stále záhadný Kristián Mnich kláštera sv. Emmerama v Řezně, nebo sv. Benedikta, Bonifacia a Alexia v Břevnově?

63%
Šrámek J.
Studia theologica
|
2008
|
vol. 10
|
issue 1
32-40
EN
The main aim of this essay is to answer the question, which is discussed in historical literature, of who is the author of the double-legend about the earliest Czech saints, St. Vaclav and Ludmila. There is very large number of learned studies about this question. But most authors were not interested in the personality of the writer, his family origins, social status etc., but rather in questions concerning the date of his writing/works. This legend was mainly dated to the 10th or 12th century, in extreme cases to the 14th century even (legend dating is still a matter for discussion). The author of this paper supports an origin of the legend from the 10th century contrary to general belief. Moreover, we do not speculate solely about the legend, but about its writer. It is common known that he was called Christianus and he was identified with Duke Boleslav I's oldest son, Strachkvas, a benedictine monk from monastery of St. Emmeram in Regensburg. This follows the description of Czech chronicler, Kosmas of Prague (11th/12th century). This hypothesis is not verifiable in each detail, but it is the most sophisticated and is the basis of this article. On the fringe of learned literature stands an opinion, which links Christianus/Strachkvas with the Czech monastery in Brevnov. So the purpose was to test this thesis. After research into the different spectra of contemporary sources we have to state that the thesis about Christianus' origin from Brevnov is false. There is no reason to declare it. No contemporary source alludes to Christianus as a monk of Brevnov, only as a monk from Regensburg. Identification with monastery in Brevnov was only an idea of scholars who wanted to find a concrete author of a famous controversial double-legend and from this view, Brevnov was only one acceptable possibility. But it is only speculation and we must refute it. Following this minimum of historical sources, which we have, we can faithfully argue only: Christianus was a literate man, a cleric, a Benedictine monk, maybe an episcopal candidate, writer, and in all probability a member of the Premyslid dynasty. Anything else is merely specualative.
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.