Сайт Архив WWW-Dosk
Удел МогултаяДобро пожаловать, Гость. Пожалуйста, выберите:
Вход || Регистрация.
06/07/20 в 01:58:20

Главная » Новое » Помощь » Поиск » Участники » Вход
Удел Могултая « Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2 »


   Удел Могултая
   Сконапель истуар - что называется, история
   Прочее и разное
   Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Предыдущая тема | Следующая тема »
Страниц: 1 ... 9 10 11  » Уведомлять » Послать тему » Печатать
   Автор  Тема: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2  (Прочитано 19903 раз)
Guest is IGNORING messages from: .
Kurt
Beholder
Живет здесь
*****


Асаблiва ж лясныя эльфы любiлi дранiкi з мачанкай.

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 3164
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #150 В: 09/22/05 в 15:58:17 »

on 09/22/05 в 12:42:43, Бенни wrote:
Я бы не сказал, что приведенный текст - чисто "никейский": ни Христос, ни Дух не названы Богом, говорится о пришествии, а не о воплощении Христа и т.д.

Невнимательно читаете:
"и во единого Христа Иисуса, Сына Божия, воплотившегося для нашего спасения" (св. Ириней)
 
Опять-таки, вопрос в том, что эти формулировки 2 века вполне вписываются в Никейский символ. И даже текстуально близки к нему.
Но в катаризм любого сорта настоящее христианство 2 века никак не лезет.
Зарегистрирован

З павагаю,
Kurt/Lenwe the Green Elf

"Мы же не можем оставить Людям лес неприбранным. А тут дело пяти секунд - был орк, стал экологически чистый труп... "(R2R)
"There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole." (Murphy's Law of Combat)
Бенни
Administrator
*****


б. Бенедикт

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 2542
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #151 В: 09/22/05 в 17:07:42 »

Виноват, "воплотившегося" пропустил. Но Сын Божий всё-таки не обязательно Бог.
Зарегистрирован
Kurt
Beholder
Живет здесь
*****


Асаблiва ж лясныя эльфы любiлi дранiкi з мачанкай.

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 3164
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #152 В: 09/23/05 в 01:02:44 »

а теперь прочітайте второй абзац моего ответа.
Зарегистрирован

З павагаю,
Kurt/Lenwe the Green Elf

"Мы же не можем оставить Людям лес неприбранным. А тут дело пяти секунд - был орк, стал экологически чистый труп... "(R2R)
"There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole." (Murphy's Law of Combat)
Бенни
Administrator
*****


б. Бенедикт

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 2542
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #153 В: 09/23/05 в 11:39:12 »

Прочитал. Полагаю, что Вы второй абзац моего предыдущего - тоже. И что скажете? Что Маркион - не настоящий христианин? Тогда ведь еще не было ясно, какая из веток приведет к ортодоксии.
Зарегистрирован
Kurt
Beholder
Живет здесь
*****


Асаблiва ж лясныя эльфы любiлi дранiкi з мачанкай.

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 3164
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #154 В: 09/23/05 в 14:37:40 »

Нет, Маркион не настоящий христианин.
 
"Он признавал существование двух богов. Один из них был суровым, ревнивым, но справедливым творцом мира (ветхозаветный Бог), однако Маркион считал его низшим богом (в силу несовершенства материального мира) и на этом основании отвергал еврейские Писания. Другим богом Маркион считал доселе неведомого Бога Любви, о котором возвестил Иисус Христос. Однако ученики Христа, согласно Маркиону, спутали Бога Любви с Творцом-Демиургом, а от иудеохристиан это заблуждение унаследовала и церковь. Только апостол Павел правильно понял учение Иисуса. Поэтому Маркион отвергал и новозаветный канон, признавая лишь десять посланий апостола Павла и «очищенное» Евангелие от Луки. Он учил, что, поскольку материя есть зло, христиане должны придерживаться нравственного и аскетического образа жизни, отказавшись от всего чувственного и прежде всего от брака, и что спасены могут быть только отвергнувшие Бога-Творца и уверовавшие в Бога-Христа. "
 
Все с ним и его учением было понятно с самого начала.
Поэтому его учение уже тогда (со 2 века) и было признано еретическим.
« Изменён в : 09/23/05 в 14:38:13 пользователем: Kurt » Зарегистрирован

З павагаю,
Kurt/Lenwe the Green Elf

"Мы же не можем оставить Людям лес неприбранным. А тут дело пяти секунд - был орк, стал экологически чистый труп... "(R2R)
"There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole." (Murphy's Law of Combat)
Бенни
Administrator
*****


б. Бенедикт

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 2542
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #155 В: 09/23/05 в 15:05:00 »

Откуда цитата? Кем признано? В чем это выражалось?
Зарегистрирован
Kurt
Beholder
Живет здесь
*****


Асаблiва ж лясныя эльфы любiлi дранiкi з мачанкай.

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 3164
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #156 В: 09/23/05 в 19:48:35 »

Из обычнейшей он-лайн энциклопедии http://www.krugosvet.ru/articles/33/1003327/1003327a1.htm
 
Можете также заглянуть в Карсавин Л. СВЯТЫЕ ОТЦЫ И УЧИТЕЛИ ЦЕРКВИ.
 
есть в библиотеке у кротова.
 
В чем выражалось? - Маркион был отлучен от Церкви.
« Изменён в : 09/23/05 в 19:49:51 пользователем: Kurt » Зарегистрирован

З павагаю,
Kurt/Lenwe the Green Elf

"Мы же не можем оставить Людям лес неприбранным. А тут дело пяти секунд - был орк, стал экологически чистый труп... "(R2R)
"There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole." (Murphy's Law of Combat)
Бенни
Administrator
*****


б. Бенедикт

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 2542
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #157 В: 09/23/05 в 23:05:36 »

Спасибо за ссылки. Т.е., насколько я понимаю, римская община, а возможно, и еще какие-то отказались от общения с ним. А кто из них настоящий - у Маркиона, вероятно, было другое мнение.
Зарегистрирован
Kurt
Beholder
Живет здесь
*****


Асаблiва ж лясныя эльфы любiлi дранiкi з мачанкай.

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 3164
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #158 В: 09/26/05 в 18:37:22 »

Что значит "община"?
Церковь.  
Маркиона еще до его прибытия в Рим отлучили.  
И его мнение по этому поводу мало кого интересовало.
 
Принцип: Хочешь быть христианином - будь им, а не выдумывай манихейские глупости.
Зарегистрирован

З павагаю,
Kurt/Lenwe the Green Elf

"Мы же не можем оставить Людям лес неприбранным. А тут дело пяти секунд - был орк, стал экологически чистый труп... "(R2R)
"There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole." (Murphy's Law of Combat)
Бенни
Administrator
*****


б. Бенедикт

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 2542
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #159 В: 09/27/05 в 19:03:44 »

Мани жил в следующем веке. А разве во времена Маркиона существовала Церковь как единая организационная структура с отлучениями глобального действия? Откуда это известно?
Зарегистрирован
credentes
Живет здесь
*****


Я люблю этот Форум!

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 936
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #160 В: 11/17/05 в 14:49:35 »

Курту:
 
Католическая Церковь на территории Южной Франции, по крайней мере в лице ее официальных представителей, как-то архиепископ Тулузы, епископ Памье, итд.
Зарегистрирован

Make the world insecure place for those who violates human rights

"Это Бог дает Добру Своё бытие, и Он есть его причиной..."
Джованни дe Луджио
Книга о двух началах (около 1240 г.)
credentes
Живет здесь
*****


Я люблю этот Форум!

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 936
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #161 В: 11/17/05 в 15:35:57 »

Quote:
Что характерно, вера "доникейского" христианина Иринея Лионского никак не расходится с никейским Символом веры.  
А вот с катаризмом несовместима.

 
Меня волнует только совместимость катаризма с Евангелием, а не с верой Иринея Лионского или с Символом веры.
Зарегистрирован

Make the world insecure place for those who violates human rights

"Это Бог дает Добру Своё бытие, и Он есть его причиной..."
Джованни дe Луджио
Книга о двух началах (около 1240 г.)
credentes
Живет здесь
*****


Я люблю этот Форум!

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 936
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #162 В: 11/17/05 в 15:55:39 »

Quote:
Но в катаризм любого сорта настоящее христианство 2 века никак не лезет.  
Нет, Маркион не настоящий христианин.  
Поэтому его учение уже тогда (со 2 века) и было признано еретическим.  
В чем выражалось? - Маркион был отлучен от Церкви.  
Что значит "община"?  
Церковь.  
Маркиона еще до его прибытия в Рим отлучили.  
И его мнение по этому поводу мало кого интересовало.

 
Начнем с того, что понятие о настоящем христианстве - довольно спорное.
Определенное количество христиан считало, что их мнение - настоящее. Кто-то считал, что нет.
Вы считаете, что именно это определенное количество, взявшее на себя смелость кого-то исключать, и есть настоящее христианство. Очень хорошо. Но исключали не только Маркиона, но и Яна Гуса, и Лютера, признававших Никейский Символ. Поэтому сам факт исключения еще ничего не значит.
Кроме того, я нигде не нашла очень форсируемой здесь точки зрения о том, что те, кто не признают Никейского символа, не являются христианами. Еретиками - да, заблуждающимися - да, но было бы интересно, если бы кто-нибудь привел текст о том, что еретиков не считали христианами, а также когда и кем это текст был принят. Потому что все наши споры - это смесь двух проблем: являются ли еретики христианами и чье христианство правильнее. Лучше бы было их не смешивать.
Тем более, что кое-кого из тех, кого считали еретиками, теперь таковыми не считают, хотя бы тех же Лютера и Кальвина. А Лютер, к примеру, считал еретиком Фому Аквината. И его мнение уже кое-кого интересовало.
Что же касается Маркиона, то он был учеником св. Павла, который крестил его наложением рук, и никогда не имел к нему никаких претензий. Посему мне трудно считать его не настоящим христианином, если его таковым считал апостол.
Зарегистрирован

Make the world insecure place for those who violates human rights

"Это Бог дает Добру Своё бытие, и Он есть его причиной..."
Джованни дe Луджио
Книга о двух началах (около 1240 г.)
credentes
Живет здесь
*****


Я люблю этот Форум!

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 936
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #163 В: 11/18/05 в 14:50:41 »

Кстати о Маркионе.
Католическая энциклопедия считает его заблуждающимся христианином, но тем не менее христианином.
 
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09645c.htm
I. LIFE OF MARCION
Marcion was son of the Bishop of Sinope in Pontus, born c. A.D. 110, evidently from wealthy parents. He is described as nautes, nauclerus, a ship owner, by Rhodon and Tertullian, who wrote about a generation after his death. Epiphanius (Haeres., XLII, ii) relates that Marcion in his youth professed to lead a life of chastity and asceticism, but, in spite of his professions, fell into sin with a young maiden. In consequence his father, the bishop, cast him out of the Church. He besought his father for reconciliation, I.e. to be admitted to ecclesiastical penance, but the bishop stood firm in his refusal. Not being able to bear with the laughter and contempt of his fellow townsmen, he secretly left Sinope and traveled to Rome. The story of Marcion's sin is rejected by many modern scholars (e.g. G. Krüger) as a piece of malicious gossip of which they say Epiphanius was fond; others see in the young maiden but a metaphor for the Church, the then young bride of Christ, whom Marcion violated by his heresy, though he made great professions of bodily chastity and austerity. No accusations of impurity are brought against Marcion by earlier Church writers, and Marcion's austerity seems acknowledged as a fact. Irenaeus states that Marcion flourished under Pope Anecitus (c. 155-166) [invaluit sub Aniceto]. Though this period may mark Marcion's greatest success in Rome, it is certain that he arrived there earlier, I. c. A.D. 140 after the death of Hyginus, who died that year and apparently before the accession of Pius I. Epiphanius says that Marcion sought admittance into the Roman Church but was refused. The reason given was that they could not admit one who had been expelled by his own bishop without previous communication with that authority. The story has likewise been pointed out as extremely unlikely, implying, as it does, that the great Roman Church professed itself incompetent to override the decision of a local bishop in Pontus. It must be borne in mind, however, that Marcion arrived at Rome sede vacante, "after the death of Hyginus", and that such an answer sounds natural enough on the lips of presbyters as yet without a bishop.  
 
Moreover, it is obvious that Marcion was already a consecrated bishop. A layman could not have disputed on Scripture with the presbyters as he did, nor have threatened shortly after his arrival: "I will divide your Church and cause within her a division, which will last forever", as Marcion is said to have done; a layman could not have founded a vast and worldwide institution, of which the main characteristic was that it was episcopalian; a layman would not have been proudly referred to for centuries by his disciples as their first bishop, a claim not disputed by any of their adversaries, though many and extensive works were written against them; a layman would not have been permanently cast out of the Church without hope of reconciliation by his own father, notwithstanding his entreaties, for a sin of fornication, nor thereafter have become an object of laughter to his heathen fellow townsmen, if we accept the story of Epiphanius. A layman would not have been disappointed that he was not made bishop shortly after his arrival in a city whose see was vacant, as Marcion is said to have been on his arrival at Rome after the death of Hyginus.  
 
This story has been held up as the height of absurdity and so it would be, if we ignored the facts that Marcion was a bishop, and that according to Tertullian (De Praeser., xxx) he made the Roman community the gift of two hundred thousand sesterces soon after his arrival. this extraordinary gift of 1400 pounds (7000 dollars), a huge sum for those days, may be ascribed to the first fervour of faith, but is at least as naturally, ascribed to a lively hope. The money was returned to him after his breach with the Church. This again is more natural if it was made with a tacit condition, than if it was absolute and the outcome of pure charity. Lastly, the report that Marcion on his arrival at Rome had to hand in or to renew a confession of faith (Tert., "De Praeser.," xxx,; "Adv. Mar.", I, xx; "de carne Christi", ii) fits in naturally with the supposition of his being a bishop, but would be, as G. Krüger points out, unheard of in the case of a layman.  
 
We can take it for granted then, that Marcion was a bishop, probably an assistant or suffragan of his father at Sinope. Having fallen out with his father he travels to Rome, where, being a seafarer or shipowner and a great traveler, he already may have been known and where his wealth obtains him influence and position. If Tertullian supposes him to have been admitted to the Roman Church and Epiphanius says that he was refused admittance, the two statements can easily be reconciled if we understand the former of mere membership or communion, the latter of the acceptance of his claims. His episcopal dignity has received mention at least in two early writers, who speak of him as having "from bishop become an apostate" (Optatus of Mileve, IV, v), and of his followers as being surnamed after a bishop instead of being called Christians after Christ (Adamantius, "Dial.", I, ed. Sande Bakhuysen). Marcion is said to have asked the Roman presbyters the explanation of Matt., ix, 16, 17, which he evidently wished to understand as expressing the incompatibility of the New Testament with the Old, but which they interpreted in an orthodox sense. His final breach with the Roman Church occurred in the autumn of 144, for the Marcionites counted 115 years and 6 months from the time of Christ to the beginning of their sect. Tertullian roughly speaks of a hundred years and more. Marcion seems to have made common cause with Cerdo (q.v.), the Syrian Gnostic, who was at the time in Rome; that his doctrine was actually derived from that Gnostic seems unlikely. Irenaeus relates (Adv. Haeres., III, iii) that St. Polycarp, meeting Marcion in Rome was asked by him: Dost thou recognize us? and gave answer: I recognize thee as the first born of Satan. This meeting must have happened in 154, by which time Marcion had displayed a great and successful activity, for St. Justin Martyr in his first Apology (written about 150), describes Marcion's heresy as spread everywhere. These half a dozen years seem to many too short a time for such prodigious success and they believe that Marcion was active in Asia Minor long before he came to Rome. Clement of Alexandria (Strom., VII, vii, 106) calls him the older contemporary of Basilides and Valentinus, but if so, he must have been a middle-aged man when he came to Rome, and as previous propaganda in the East is not impossible. That the Chronicle of Edessa places the beginning of Marcionism in 138, strongly favors this view. Tertullian relates in 207 (the date of his Adv. Marc., IV, iv) that Marcion professed penitence and accepted as condition of his readmittance into the Church that he should bring back to the fold those whom he had led astray, but death prevented his carrying this out. The precise date of his death is not known.  
 
II. DOCTRINE AND DISCIPLINE
We must distinguish between the doctrine of Marcion himself and that of his followers. Marcion was no Gnostic dreamer. He wanted a Christianity untrammeled and undefiled by association with Judaism. Christianity was the New Covenant pure and simple. Abstract questions on the origin of evil or on the essence of the Godhead interested him little, but the Old Testament was a scandal to the faithful and a stumbling-block to the refined and intellectual gentiles by its crudity and cruelty, and the Old Testament had to be set aside. The two great obstacles in his way he removed by drastic measures. He had to account for the existence of the Old Testament and he accounted for it by postulating a secondary deity, a demiurgus, who was god, in a sense, but not the supreme God; he was just, rigidly just, he had his good qualities, but he was not the good god, who was Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The metaphysical relation between these two gods troubled Marcion little; of divine emanation, aeons, syzygies, eternally opposed principles of good and evil, he knows nothing. He may be almost a Manichee in practice, but in theory he has not reached absolute consistency as Mani did a hundred years later. Marcion had secondly to account for those passages in the New Testament which countenanced the Old. He resolutely cut out all texts that were contrary to his dogma; in fact, he created his own New Testament admitting but one gospel, a mutilation of St. Luke, and an Apostolicon containing ten epistles of St. Paul. The mantle of St. Paul had fallen on the shoulders of Marcion in his struggle with the Judaisers. The Catholics of his day were nothing but the Judaisers of the previous century. The pure Pauline Gospel had become corrupted and Marcion, not obscurely, hinted that even the pillar Apostles, Peter, James, and John had betrayed their trust. He loves to speak of "false apostles", and lets his hearers infer who they were. Once the Old Testament has been completely got rid of, Marcion has no further desire for change. He makes his purely New Testament Church as like the Catholic Church as possible, consistent with his deep seated Puritanism. The first description of Marcion's doctrine dates from St. Justin: "With the help of the devil Marcion has in every country contributed to blasphemy and the refusal to acknowledge the Creator of all the world as God". He recognizes another god, who, because he is essentially greater (than the World maker or Demiurge) has done greater deeds than he (hos onta meizona ta meizona para touton pepikeni) The supreme God is hagathos, just and righteous. The good God is all love, the inferior god gives way to fierce anger. Though less than the good god, yet the just god, as world creator, has his independent sphere of activity. They are not opposed as Ormusz and Ahriman, though the good God interferes in favour of men, for he alone is all-wise and all-powerful and loves mercy more than punishment. All men are indeed created by the Demiurge, but by special choice he elected the Jewish people as his own and thus became the god of the Jews.  
 
His theological outlook is limited to the Bible, his struggle with the Catholic Church seems a battle with texts and nothing more. The Old Testament is true enough, Moses and the Prophets are messengers of the Demiurge, the Jewish Messias is sure to come and found a millennial kingdom for the Jews on earth, but the Jewish messias has nothing whatever to do with the Christ of God. The Invisible, Indescribable, Good God (aoratos akatanomastos agathos theos), formerly unknown to the creator as well as to his creatures, has revealed Himself in Christ. How far Marcion admitted a Trinity of persons in the supreme Godhead is not known; Christ is indeed the Son of God, but he is also simply "God" without further qualification; in fact, Marcion's gospel began with the words; "In the fifteenth year of the Emperor Tiberius God descended in Capharnaum and taught on the Sabbaths". However daring and capricious this manipulation of the Gospel text, it is at least a splendid testimony that, in Christian circles of the first half of the second century the Divinity of Christ was a central dogma. To Marcion however Christ was God Manifest not God Incarnate. His Christology is that of the Docetae (q.v.) rejecting the inspired history of the Infancy, in fact, any childhood of Christ at all; Marcion's Savior is a "Deus ex machina" of which Tertullian mockingly says: "Suddenly a Son, suddenly Sent, suddenly Christ!" Marcion admitted no prophecy of the Coming of Christ whatever; the Jewish prophets foretold a Jewish Messias only, and this Messias had not yet appeared. Marcion used the story of the three angels, who ate, walked, and conversed with Abraham and yet had no real human body, as an illustration of the life of Christ (Adv. Marc., III, ix). Tertullian says (ibid.) that when Apelles and seceders from Marcion began to believe that Christ had a real body indeed, not by birth but rather collected from the elements, Marcion would prefer to accept even a putative birth rather than a real body. Whether this is Tertullian's mockery or a real change in Marcion's sentiments we do not know. To Marcion matter and flesh are not indeed essentially evil, but are contemptible things, a mere production of the Demiurge, and it was inconceivable that God should really have made them His own. Christ's life on earth was a continual contrast to the conduct of the Demiurge. Some of the contrasts are cleverly staged: the Demiurge sent bears to devour children for puerile merriment (Kings)-- Christ bade children come to Him and He fondled and blessed them; the Demiurge in his law declared lepers unclean and banished them -- but Christ touched and healed them. Christ's putative passion and death was the work of the Demiurge, who, in revenge for Christ's abolition of the Jewish law delivered Him up to hell. But even in hell Christ overcame the Demiurge by preaching to the spirits in Limbo, and by His Resurrection He founded the true Kingdom of the Good God. Epiphanius (Haer., xlii, 4) says that Marcionites believed that in Limbo Christ brought salvation to Cain, Core, Dathan and Abiron, Esau, and the Gentiles, but left in damnation all Old Testament saints. This may have been held by some Marcionites in the fourth century, but it was not the teaching of Marcion himself, who had no Antinomian tendencies. Marcion denied the resurrection of the body, "for flesh and blood shall not inherit the Kingdom of God", and denied the second coming of Christ to judge the living and the dead, for the good God, being all goodness, does not punish those who reject Him; He simply leaves them to the Demiurge, who will cast them into everlasting fire.  
 
With regard to discipline, the main point of difference consists in his rejection of marriage, i.e. he baptized only those who were not living in matrimony: virgins, widows, celibates, and eunuchs (Tert., "Adv. Marc.", I, xxix); all others remained catechumens. On the other hand the absence of division between catechumens and baptized persons, in Marcionite worship, shocked orthodox Christians, but it was emphatically defended by Marcion's appeal to Gal., vi, 6. According to Tertullian (Adv. Marc., I, xiv) he used water in baptism, anointed his faithful with oil and gave milk and honey to the catechumens and in so far retained the orthodox practices, although, says Tertullian, all these things are "beggarly elements of the Creator." Marcionites must have been excessive fasters to provoke the ridicule of Tertullian in his Montanist days. Epiphanius says they fasted on Saturday out of a spirit of opposition to the Jewish God, who made the Sabbath a day of rejoicing. This however may have been merely a western custom adopted by them.  
 
Зарегистрирован

Make the world insecure place for those who violates human rights

"Это Бог дает Добру Своё бытие, и Он есть его причиной..."
Джованни дe Луджио
Книга о двух началах (около 1240 г.)
Бенни
Administrator
*****


б. Бенедикт

   
Просмотреть Профиль »

Сообщений: 2542
Re: Credentes: материалы по катарам - обсуждение 2
« Ответить #164 В: 11/20/05 в 12:46:43 »

[тред закрывается как слишком длиный. Обсуждение пересено в новый тред . Ципор]
« Изменён в : 12/02/05 в 12:46:22 пользователем: zipor » Зарегистрирован
Страниц: 1 ... 9 10 11  » Уведомлять » Послать тему » Печатать

« Предыдущая тема | Следующая тема »

Удел Могултая
YaBB © 2000-2001,
Xnull. All Rights Reserved.