Studia Theologica 2013, 15(2):226-237 | DOI: 10.5507/sth.2013.0261531

Ježíšovo příbuzenstvo u Ambrosiastera

Vít Hušek

Ambrosiaster on the Relatives of Jesus

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.

Keywords: Ambrosiaster; Genealogy of Jesus; Jerome; Marius Victorinus; Helvidius; Augustine

Zveřejněno: červen 2013 

Zobrazit celý článek

Reference

  1. Ambrosiastri qui dicitur commentarius in epistulas Paulinas, ed. H. J. Vogels, CSEL 81/1-3, Wien: ÖAW, 1966-69.
  2. Pseudo-Augustini Quaestiones Veteris et Novi Testamenti CXXVII, ed. A. Souter, CSEL 50, Wien: ÖAW, 1908.
  3. S. Cooper, Marius Victorinus' Commentary on Galatians, Oxford: OUP, 2005. Přejít k původnímu zdroji...
  4. Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe, Ambrosiaster's Political Theology, Oxford: OUP, 2007. Přejít k původnímu zdroji...
  5. Theodore de Bruyn, "Ambrosiaster's Revisions of His Commentary on Romans and Roman Synodal Statements about Holy Spirit," REAug 56 (2010): 45-68. Přejít k původnímu zdroji...
  6. Stephen Cooper & David G. Hunter, "Ambrosiaster redactor sui: The Commentaries on the Pauline Epistles (Excluding Romans)," REAug 56 (2010): 69-91. Přejít k původnímu zdroji...
  7. Marie-Pierre Bussières, "Le public des Questions sur l'Ancien et le Nouveau Testament de l'Ambrosiaster," Annali di Storia dell' esegesi 24 (2007): 161-180.
  8. Marie-Pierre Bussières, "L'esprit de Dieu et l'Esprit Saint dans les Questions sur l'Ancien et le Nouveau Testament de l'Ambrosiaster," REAug 56 (2010): 25-44. Přejít k původnímu zdroji...
  9. Pierre Nautin, "Le Premier échange épistolaire entre Jérôme et Damase: Lettres réelles ou fictives?," FZPhTh 30 (1983): 331-344.
  10. Andrew Cain, "In Ambrosiaster's Shadow: A Critical Re-Evaluation of the Last Surviving Letter Exchange between Pope Damasus and Jerome," REAug 51 (2005): 257-277. Přejít k původnímu zdroji...
  11. Annelie Volgers, "Damasus' Request. Why Jerome Needed to (Re-)Answer Ambrosiaster's Questions?" StPatr 43 (2006): 531-536.
  12. Marie-Pierre Bussières, "L'influence du synode tenu à Rome en 382 sur l'exégèse de l'Ambrosiaster," Sacris Erudiri 45 (2006): 107-124. Přejít k původnímu zdroji...
  13. Annelie Volgers, "Ambrosiaster: Persuasive Powers in Progress," in Erotapokriseis: Early Christian Question-and-Answer Literature in Context, ed. A. Volgers & C. Zamagni, Leuven: Peeters, 2004, s. 99-125.
  14. Yannis Papadoyannakis, "Instruction by Question and Answer: The Case of Late Antique and Byzantine Erotapokriseis," in Greek Literature in Late Antiquity: Dynamism, Didacticism, Classicism, ed. S. F. Johnson, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006, s. 91-105.
  15. Sextus Iulius Africanus, Epistula ad Aristidem, 26-29, in Christophe Guignard, La lettre de Julius Africanus à Aristide sur la généalogie du Christ, TU 167, Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011, s. 302-305.
  16. Ambrož, Expos. Lc. III,15 (CCL 14, 83).
  17. Jeroným, Comm. in Matth. I,1,16 (CCL 77, 9).
  18. H. Vogels, "Prolegomena," in CSEL 81/1, lii-lvi.
  19. Marius Victorinus, In Gal. I,1,19 (CSEL 83/2, 110).
  20. Augustin, In. Gal. 8 (CSEL 84, 63).
  21. Pelagius, In Gal. 1,19 (Souter, 311).
  22. Jeroným, De vir. ill. 2 (PL 23, 609A).
  23. Jeroným, In Gal. I,1,19 (CCL 77A, 37-38).
  24. H. Vogels, "Ambrosiaster und Hieronymus," Revue bénédictine 66 (1956): 14-19. Přejít k původnímu zdroji...
  25. Jeroným, Contra Helvidium 3-8 (PL 23, 194-201).

Tento článek je publikován v režimu tzv. otevřeného přístupu k vědeckým informacím (Open Access), který je distribuován pod licencí Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), která umožňuje distribuci, reprodukci a změny, pokud je původní dílo řádně ocitováno. Není povolena distribuce, reprodukce nebo změna, která není v souladu s podmínkami této licence.


Zpět na obsah