Repozitórium index

In his 1583 ritual entitled Agendarius, which was innovative in many respects in comparison to its Hungarian predecessors, Bishop Miklós Telegdi of Pécs, the administrator of the diocese of Esztergom, added sample-like sermons to the rituals of the administration of the sacraments accompanying the great turning points of life (viz. baptism, confirmation, wedding etc.). He was presumably guided chiefly by pastoral considerations. For the second edition of 1596 (published after Telegdi’s death), the editors added a second funeral sermon, clearly intended for a more educated, urban audience – judging from the scholarly Latin quotations and the general tone. A comparison of the structure and content of the two speeches provides useful conclusions as to what the ecclesiastical authorities of the time considered advisable to preach at the time of death to mourners lacking basic schooling and what to the more learned audience.

My study approaches Unitarian sermon literature from the perspective of church discipline. There are several reasons for this: 1) Historical records of reception are scarce because in the early modern age, only a handful of Unitarian sermons could be published. 2) it was uncommon among Unitarian preachers to use theoretical works (ars concionandi/praedicandi) until the end of the 17th century, they learned instead by observing the written and oral practices of their colleagues. 3) Because of the medium of the manuscript, most early modern Unitarian sermons did not survive beyond the 17th–18th century. Therefore, in our exploration of the rules and ideals of sermon literature as well as the attitudes of followers, preachers, and schoolmasters to the genre, we are forced to rely on inferences based on the norms, especially the offences recorded in (ecclesiastical) court protocols.

Isten, aki megbán valamit, aki változtat egy korábbi döntésén – egyike azoknak a különös képzeteknek, amelyeket egyik holland professzor ilyen cím alatt foglalt össze tanulmányában: „Isten árnyoldalai az Ószövetségben”. Ezek a képek jelentős szerepet játszanak abban, hogy sok mai bibliaolvasó közelebb érzi magához azt az Újszövetséget, amelyben Jézus Istennek a „fényesebb” arcát jelentette ki. De mit jelent az, hogy Isten megbán valamit? Egyáltalán használhatjuk-e ezt a kifejezést Istennel kapcsolatban? Nem zárja-e ki tökéletessége azt, hogy ő bármit is megbánjon? Hogyan egyeztethető össze a megbánó Isten gondolata Num 23,19-cel vagy 1 Sám 15,29-cel, melyek a megbánást, akárcsak a hazugságot olyan emberi tulajdonságnak tekinti, amely valamilyen módon idegen JHVH szellemiségétől?