St. Tikhons' University Review最新文献

{"title":"Church and state at the crossroads of epochs: the Declaration of metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) in the context of the relationship between the Earthly City and the Heavenly City","authors":"P. Khondzinskii","doi":"10.15382/sturii2023112.80-93","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturii2023112.80-93","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Apparently, until now, researchers have not paid attention to the fact that the “Declaration” of Met. Sergius Stragorodsky (1927) contains an almost direct quotation from Blessed Augustine's “De civitate Dei”, which speaks of the common joys and sorrows that in this life unite the citizens of the heavenly city and the citizens of the earthly city. As a consequence, the question arises as to what extent this borrowing could be, as well as whether this parallel legitimizes the ecclesiological (church-state) concept of Metropolitan Sergius. Evidently, Blessed Augustine was not among his favorite and even frequently quoted authors. This could result from the critical attitude towards the Bishop of Hippo, which was revealed even before 1917 by representatives of the “new theology”, whom Met. Sergius belonged to. However, since at the beginning of the 20th century “De civitate Dei” was too often the subject of church and public discussions, Met. Sergius, with his well-known erudition, could not be completely unfamiliar with it. At the same time, the conducted research shows that the position of Met. Sergius on the issue of church-state relations was changing throughout his life due to changing historical circumstances. Nevertheless, we can say for certain that his position was constant in the idea of the inviolability of the canonical structure of the local Church. This idea is formed against the background of the struggle for the restoration of the patriarchate. It considers the autocephalous local Church (not the diocese, as it was in ancient times) as a structural unit of the universal Church. Consequently, it implies the need to maintain a single church organization throughout the USSR. This, in turn, required the legal functioning of the Church, and, as a result, had a much greater dependence on the earthly city than blessed Augustine supposed.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132594211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Observation cases of 1959 on religious buildings as a repressive measure against church parishes","authors":"V. Nikonov","doi":"10.15382/sturii2023112.94-106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturii2023112.94-106","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the events connected with the next aggravation of church-state relations in the late 1950s. The author focuses on the organization of work on the inventory of property of church parishes, which was carried out in 1959. The Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church. All parishes operating in the post-war period were subject to revision. In order to implement this project, the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church developed standard forms with questions for distribution through its commissioners for parishes of all regions, territories and autonomous republics of the USSR. The questionnaires were based on the form of pre-revolutionary clear sheets. The forms filled out by the staff of the parishes were the so-called \"Observation cases for religious buildings (premises) belonging to religious associations (communities).\" Almost all of these documents have been preserved in the archives. The observational cases on the temples of the Moscow region were postponed in the Central State Archive of the Moscow Region (TSGAMO) in the fund 7383 (Authorized by the Council for Religious Affairs under the USSR Council of Ministers for the Moscow Region).The author comes to the conclusion that the inventory of parish property in the 1950s was of a repressive nature, due to the fact that the purpose of the whole event was to increase economic pressure on the Church as a whole and on the basic element of the church structure - the parish. In addition, the documents that compiled the Observation Files show that simultaneously with the information about the material values owned by religious associations, the authorities once again attempted to monitor all church activities at the parish level – to find out the extent of the religiosity of the population and the degree of its involvement in church life. The article is based on archival materials, a number of which are being introduced into scientific circulation for the first time.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"181 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121594544","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"“Do not drink with her or with him?” Towards the interpretation of Sirach 9:9","authors":"Aleksandr Sizikov","doi":"10.15382/sturi2023107.11-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023107.11-23","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, the author deals with the problem of Biblical literary criticism on the example of one of the problematic readings of Ben Sira (9:9). The majority of translations of Ben Sira are made either from the Greek sources or from Greek and Hebrew sources, achieving a certain textual compromise. The Greek text is usually corrected on the basis of the Hebrew text, however there are cases where the Hebrew text is corrected on the basis of the Greek one, and the emendations are introduced. Such an approach ignores the fact that Biblical books existed and were transmitted in various recensions, which were altered independently. Therefore, there reconstruction of the common archetype is hardly possible. The example of Ben Sira 9:9 contains a regulation for a young man to drink wine during a banquet, however, this regulation varies in different sources. There are not so many written evidences about banquets in Judea in the time prior to the events described in the Maccabean books, so the Ben Sira is one of the principal sources of information. The Greek text prohibits to drink wine and to talk to a married woman during a banquet, the restriction presupposes a married woman was admitted to such events and to be able to choose freely who to converse with. The Latin sources prohibit to recline with a married woman and to drink wine with her. The Hebrew text advises to avoid drinking wine with a husband and conversing with him. Most of the translations ignore the witness of the Hebrew text, a popular vocalized reconstruction of the original contains an emendation on the basis of the Greek text: the masculine pronoun is replaced with feminine one. The detailed analysis of the pericope Ben Sira 9:1–9 suggests the Hebrew text is apparently primary one, and the Latin and the Greek translations reflect social realties of Roman and Greek banquets respectfully.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116814255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The ‘Only begotten God’ (john 1:18) — a copyist error or a confession of faith?","authors":"P. Mikhaylov","doi":"10.15382/sturi2023107.24-44","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023107.24-44","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the famous alternative readings in the Gospel text ― the Only Begotten Son/Only Begotten God (John 1:18), which has a rich history in ancient theology. In the history of biblical studies, this verse is an interesting case of interaction between various types of Scripture ― Alexandrian and Byzantine. The reading under consideration ― the Only Begotten God ― refers to the ancient Alexandrian text, which has high characteristics and deservedly enjoys great confidence in biblical studies. A review and analysis of manuscript evidence based on the most recent and authoritative critical editions of the text of the New Testament Scripture, involving the latest special scientific literature. The internal expressive features of the New Testament theology and the theological language of St. John the Theologian, supporting the argument in favor of evidence of the unity of the Son and the Father. Opinions and conclusions are drawn regarding the considered phrase between the most outstanding and contemporary bibleists, including native scientists. Finally, an extensive patristic tradition of using the term Only Begotten God is attracted, which is localized in Alexandrian theology and in the adjacent individual theologians and calls for an extensive period of time of a quarter millennium from Clement to Cyril of Alexandria. On the example of this phrase, an assumption is put forward about the relationship between the Alexandrian type of the text of the New Testament and the Alexandrian theological school and tradition. The oldest cases of the use of the expression Only Begotten God in patristics also reveal another feature, possibly related to his appearance, namely, his primary circulation in the Gnostic script of Alexandrian origin (Valentine, Ptolemy, Heraclion), where, however, this name was endowed with very peculiar meanings. The most intensive period of use of the expression falls on the time of Trinitarian disputes of the fourth century, moreover, for all three conditional periods ― Arian, Omiousian and Eunomian. Relevant historical evidence is attracted and considered and a certain dynamics of use in heterodox theology is traced. Finally, the most important Orthodox theologian who widely used the name Only Begotten God turns out to be St. Gregory of Nyssa, who significantly enriched his initially Trinitarian sound by identifying Christological shades in it. For the theological interpretation of the material, the latest development of the Orthodox patristic scholar and theologian father John Behr ― the distinction of \"high Christology\" and \"low Christology\"","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"444 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134127900","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Natural virtues, truthful mind and the grades of the spiritual knowledge in the mystical and spiritual teaching of elder Artemy Troitsky","authors":"M. Shpakovskiy","doi":"10.15382/sturi2023107.62-85","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023107.62-85","url":null,"abstract":"In the present article I study a few fundamental aspects of mystical and ascetical teaching of starets Artemius of the Trinity contained in his 14 extant letters. Examination of these aspects is followed by the new identified sources of Artemius’s texts. I also pay an attention to the Slavonic translation of patristics (especcialy, to the ascetic genre) in order to show the intellectual context of Artemius working and to clarify some unclear moments of his views. The first aspect is his teaching on natural virtues, wich I consider for the first time. Artemius believes that human essence includes such virtues among the other properties of essence and, thereof, considers them to be put in essence originaly by the Creator. The corruption of the virtues is a consequence of the fall and the following replacement of virtues by non-essential passions. The second aspect is Artemius teaching on istinnyi razum (true knowledge, comprehension, reason), wich had been studying by scholars for a long time. I distinguish the philosophical (knowledge of beings), mystical (knowledge and contemplation through the exercise in virtues, love and faith) and Christological (knowledge and union with Christ) way of understanding of the istinnyi razum. The especial focus on the Christological way allows us to reveal the new sources of Artemius understending of istinnyi razum such as Corpus Areopagiticum and Gregory the Sinaite’s works and not to restrict them to the treatises of Isaac the Syrian. Finally, the third aspect is the hierarchy of the three states (grades) of man (flesh, state of soul and spiritual) from the point of view of the spiritual, incorporeal comprehension. I explain that flesh state is the beast-like state, as Artemius puts it; state of the soul is the grade, which indicate a Christian making the spiritual journey from wich he can stray. If we speak on hightest, spiritiual knowledge we should focus on the transtion from the comprehension of intelligible entities (the angels and the paradigms in the mind of the God) through bodily symbols to the direct comprehension of the spiritual world, which is belong to the such grade, as Artemius believe.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115087935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Nestorianist melkite: on the special features of christology of Suleiman of Gaza","authors":"Oleg Davydenkov","doi":"10.15382/sturi2023107.45-61","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023107.45-61","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the Christological doctrine of the Melkite writer Suleiman of Gaza, who occupies a special place in the history of Arabic-speaking Orthodox theology: for the Melkite tradition, it is with Suleiman that the era of the so-called “Arabic scholasticism” begins. The Bishop of Gaza is an example of a rather rare author among the Arab-Christian apologists, who freely borrowed theological ideas from heterodox sources. Thus, he borrowed his rational Trinitarian apologetics from his contemporary, the Nestorian Metropolitan Elijah of Nisibin. In this regard, it seems very interesting to check for such borrowings and the Christological teaching of Suleiman. Formally, his Christology is undoubtedly Orthodox, he teaches about two natures in Christ, professes the unity of His Hypostasis, affirms the personal identity of God the Word before and after incarnation. At the same time, his teaching on the unity of Christ is very reminiscent of the Nestorian concept of the “person of unity”. In general, Suleiman avoids using Christological terms and formulas that are normative for Orthodox theology, but at the same time unacceptable for Nestorianism. In particular, he does not use the name “Theotokos” in relation to the Virgin Mary. In addition, the Bishop of Gaza does not regard Christ’s humanity as own humanity of God the Word, and does not use theopaschitic expressions. In the doctrine of salvation, he is characterized, on the one hand, by an emphasis on the special role of Christ’s humanity, that is uncharacteristic for Orthodox soteriology, and, on the other hand, by a complete absence of the concept of deification. Analysis of the Christology of Suleiman of Gaza gives serious grounds to assume that in his Christological teaching he was also under the influence of Nestorian theology.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126557369","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Patriarch Alexy and archbishop Mark’s meetings in Munich in 1995 and in Tver in 1996","authors":"V. Bazanov","doi":"10.15382/sturii2023112.107-116","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturii2023112.107-116","url":null,"abstract":"In the mid-90s of the twentieth century, two bishops’ meetings of the Russian Orthodox Church the Moscow Patriarchate and the Church Abroad, i.e. Patriarch Alexiy II and the Berlin-German Archbishop Mark, quietly and almost imperceptibly took place. These meetings continue the policy of the understanding the paths of both parts of the Russian Orthodox Church and strengthening the dialogue. Using archival documents, the author in this article examines these meetings and also presenting their context. There were tensions in relations between the two parts of the Russian Church, and despite of all the tensions archbishop Mark visited Russia in 1996, where a meeting with the patriarch took place, which was a continuation of the meeting in Munich in 1995. In the Russian Church Abroad, there are attempts to resolve the problems that have arisen after the admission of banned clerics of the Moscow Patriarchate. The author concludes that in the ROCA there are tendency to move from the ideological positions and isolations towards realism. The internal discussions of ROCOR, caused by these bishops’ meetings, made it possible to raise the dialogue with the MP to a new level.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131057158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"G. F. Parrot’s memorandum to emperor Nicholas I on the foundation of the Professorial institute: a study and publication of the document","authors":"Yulia Gracheva","doi":"10.15382/sturii2023112.119-141","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturii2023112.119-141","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the activities of academician Georg Friedrich Parrot, associated with the emergence of the Professorial Institute in Dorpat. Parrot himself was for a long time a professor at Dorpat University and understood well the need to train national professors for the universities of the Russian Empire. Questions of public education turned out to be the central topic in the correspondence of G. F. Parrot with both Emperor Alexander I and Emperor Nicholas I. It was Parrot who became the author of the note Mémoire sur les universitiés de l'interieur de la Russie, the main idea of which was embodied in an educational institution established in 1827, designed to train domestic professors. Nicholas I generally supported Parrot's project, even though the project caused mixed assessments in the Committee for the Arrangement of Educational Institutions. For the fi rst time, Parrot's note is published in full and introduced into scientifi c circulation in French (original language) and translated into Russian. The location of the original note in the fund of the Committee for the Arrangement of Educational Institutions and its copy in the fund of the Department of Public Education has been clarifi ed. An analysis of scientifi c papers devoted to the organization and initial activities of the Professorial Institute showed that the researchers mainly turned to the documents of the Committee published at the end of the 19th century, and not to the original of Parrot's note. The author comes to the conclusion that the publication and full introduction into scientifi c circulation of the text of the project of Academician G. F. Parrot will be an important contribution to the history of the Dorpat Professorial Institute, university history, as well as the history of higher education in the Russian Empire.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127671745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Canon 7 of the III Ecumenical council: its history and reception in the context of the issue of the Immutability of the creed","authors":"P. Pashkov","doi":"10.15382/sturii2023112.11-34","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturii2023112.11-34","url":null,"abstract":"This publication discusses the history of the origin and reception of the definition of the Third Ecumenical Council on the Creed. This definition, drawn up in connection with the rejection of the statement of faith by Theodore of Mopsuestia, should, according to the plan of St. Cyril of Alexandria, to secure the Nicene Creed the status of the only symbolic text used in Baptism and the admission of heretics into church fellowship. The author shows that, although this rule was drawn up at the Council, it did not receive official approval and was not solemnly promulgated. In this regard, it did not enjoy authority in the Churches of Asia Minor and the Syrian region, where the forms of the Symbol, close to the modern Constantinople Creed, dominated. The article proves that at the Council of Chalcedon (451) a synthesis of various local traditions regarding the practice of reading the Creed was made: the so-called “Statement of the faith of 150 fathers”, traditionally associated with the Council of Constantinople in 381, received universal authority and began to be considered an authentic form of expression of the “Nicene faith”. To both versions of the text, which were henceforth considered one Creed, the Council attached the wording of the Ephesian ban on changing the Creed. At the same time, the concept of the immutability of the \"catholic faith\" in content was separated from the immutability of the Symbol by letter, with the possible emergence of new formulas (the latter should not have claimed the status of “symbols”). This idea relatively quickly received a reception in the East. In the West, the recognition of the Constantinople version of the text of the Symbol as authoritative occurs only in the 6th century, and initially in Rome. The Roman bishops, on the other hand, held for the longest time the literal inviolability of the Creed, even after the spread of the Filioque in the Latin West.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132864934","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Personalism in the theological anthropology of E. Brunner and in the sophiology of revd. Sergei Bulgakov","authors":"Maxim Pylaev","doi":"10.15382/sturi2023107.86-96","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023107.86-96","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to a comparative analysis of the personalist interpretation of the Christian kerygma in the dialectical theology of Protestantism (by E. Brunner) and in the Orthodox sophiological theology of the late S. Bulgakov. The author is interested in the problem of coherence of different forms of philosophical discourse, primarily metaphysical and non-metaphysical, within the framework of explication of the essence of Christianity. To what extent is the metaphysics of Plato and St. Gregory Palamas in the doctrine of Sophia by Rev. Sergei Bulgakov can coexist with the communicative, dialogic nature of the personality of F. Ebner and K. Jaspers? The article for the first time in Russian philosophical theology reconstructs the anthropology of E. Brunner, explores such concepts as \"responsibility\", \"being-in-God\", \"being-in-decision\" and others.The author compares E. Brunner's and K. Barth's conceptions of the Word of God. E. Brunner does not use metaphysics as the prerequisite for ontology. Being for him has a dialogical structure of the relationship (I and You) of man and God, the call to love and the response to love in the responsibility of man. Brunner defines human creation as 'creation in the Word of love'. \"With this Word God addresses man, communicates himself to him, gives him life\". The existential dimension of divine love is devoid of a cosmic dimension in the Swiss theologian and is not connected with the knowledge of the world in the natural sciences and metaphysics. He is indifferent to the objective aesthetics of the divine love kenosis. God for Brunner is understood primarily as love. It is the baseless mystery of God – the Word, eternally calling for a decision, responsibility, choice.E. Brunner's personalism looks more holistic, organic, thought out in its own way within the framework of modern philosophy. However, the extra-moral nature of human responsibility is not entirely obvious. It is difficult to imagine Christian love as an indicative and not an imperative. By the late S. Bulgakov, love belongs to the core of personality as activity. Absolute personality constitutes itself not as self-knowledge, but as active love. Love is not a property of the essence, but the essence itself. The Russian philosopher ontologizes love within the metaphysics of unity. S. Bulgakov interprets person's activitiestic principle and personality as a relationship from the perspective of rethinking the work-action of I. Fichte within the framework of the metaphysics of unity. It seems that without a radical transformation of ancient metaphysics (primarily Platonic and Aristotelian) a personalist interpretation of the Gospel becomes impossible.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"38 6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115243616","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}