Mary in Modern Orthodox Theology

A. Louth
{"title":"Mary in Modern Orthodox Theology","authors":"A. Louth","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198792550.013.43","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the Eastern Orthodox approach to Mary is based on the rich devotion to the Mother of God found in the liturgical worship and iconography of the Orthodox Church, there is a deep reticence about embarking on dogmatic definition in Mariology. The thought of four twentieth-century theologians is discussed: Bulgakov, Lossky, the Romanian Stăniloae, and Evdokimov. Bulgakov’s extensive reflection on Mary began with a short book, The Burning Bush, directed against Roman Catholic Mariology, tracing its erroneous doctrine back to the Scholastic notion of pura natura, his positive exposition of Mariology being drawn from liturgical texts. Bulgakov’s reflection on Mariology is intimately bound up with his Sophiology. Lossky’s reflection on Mary sees a close link between Mary and the Holy Spirit, something developed further by Evdokimov. Stăniloae’s Mariology is puzzling, apparently absent from its natural place in his Dogmatics, although compensated for in his discussion of the intercession of the saints.","PeriodicalId":150556,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Mary","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of Mary","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198792550.013.43","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Although the Eastern Orthodox approach to Mary is based on the rich devotion to the Mother of God found in the liturgical worship and iconography of the Orthodox Church, there is a deep reticence about embarking on dogmatic definition in Mariology. The thought of four twentieth-century theologians is discussed: Bulgakov, Lossky, the Romanian Stăniloae, and Evdokimov. Bulgakov’s extensive reflection on Mary began with a short book, The Burning Bush, directed against Roman Catholic Mariology, tracing its erroneous doctrine back to the Scholastic notion of pura natura, his positive exposition of Mariology being drawn from liturgical texts. Bulgakov’s reflection on Mariology is intimately bound up with his Sophiology. Lossky’s reflection on Mary sees a close link between Mary and the Holy Spirit, something developed further by Evdokimov. Stăniloae’s Mariology is puzzling, apparently absent from its natural place in his Dogmatics, although compensated for in his discussion of the intercession of the saints.
现代正统神学中的玛丽
虽然东正教对玛利亚的态度是建立在对天主之母的丰富奉献的基础上的,在东正教的礼拜仪式和肖像中发现,在玛利亚学中,对教义的定义有着深刻的沉默。本书讨论了四位二十世纪神学家的思想:布尔加科夫、洛斯基、罗马尼亚的斯特洛涅亚和叶夫多基莫夫。布尔加科夫对玛丽的广泛反思始于一本简短的书,燃烧的灌木丛,直接反对罗马天主教的玛丽学,将其错误的教义追溯到纯粹自然的经院哲学概念,他对玛丽学的积极阐述是从礼仪文本中提取的。布尔加科夫对唯物主义的反思与他的《诡辩论》密不可分。罗斯基对玛利亚的反思看到了玛利亚和圣灵之间的密切联系,这是叶夫多基莫夫进一步发展的。斯特尔尼洛埃的《圣母学》令人费解,显然在他的《教条论》中没有自然的位置,尽管在他对圣徒代祷的讨论中得到了补偿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信