Roczniki Teologiczne, 1998, T. 45, z. 3
Stały URI dla kolekcjihttps://theo-logos.pl/handle/123456789/6771
Przeglądaj
Ostatnie zgłoszenia
Pozycja Współczesne uwarunkowania sprawowania sakramentu pokutyDerdziuk, Andrzej (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Wezwanie do ewangelizacji w perspektywie jubileuszu roku 2000 w świetle nauczania Jana Pawła IIJeżyna, Krzysztof (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)During his last pilgrimage to homeland John Paul II said in his address delivered in Gorzów Wielkopolski that he had received a task from the Primate Wyszyński to introduce the Church into the third millennium of Christianity. This idea runs through in all the documents of the Holy Father; it is in them that he places his considerations within the perspective of the Jubilee Year 2000. In his letter Tertio millennio adveniente the Pope stated that the Great Jubilee is a “hermeneutic key” of his pontificate. The encyclicals devoted to the Persons of the Holy Trinity, adhortations and social encyclicals unveil the great programme of the preparation of the Church for the Jubilee of the birth of the Son of God. The essence of this preparation, according to John Paul II, is to take up responsibility for the Church and its mission in the world. The Pope stresses that a responsibility for the Church concerns all the baptized, including those lay people who not only are in the Church but also are the Church. The programme of the preparation for the Jubilee is most fully expressed in Christians’ call to evangelization. The Church puts this call into practice when it remains an evangelized and evangelizing Church. Today, however, taking into account the signs typical of modern times, the Holy Father calls upon us to new evangelization. Its essence is that it is to preach, with a new zeal, the novelty of the evangelical address, using new methods and forms to reach the modem man. The purpose of the new evangelization is to restore the Christian tissue of social life, first the tissue of church fellowships, and then, through the testimony of life, to rebuild the Christian tissue of human society. The call to evangelization has a moral character, for it defines responsibility for the preaching of faith, but also morality which issues from the latter. The new evangelization becomes then the preaching of morality of new man in Christ.Pozycja Czynna miłość bliźniego w służbie nowej ewangelizacjiMojek, Stanisław (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Heideggera interpretacja złaMroczkowski, Ireneusz (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Heidegger’s attempt to understand evil is inherently linked with a criticism of traditional metaphysics and an attempt to build existential analitic. In as much as traditional metaphysics has forgotten - according to Heidegger - about being, so much it has contributed to the building of nihilism. Its incapacity was most expressly manifested in Nietzschean proclamation about the death of God. The author shows the essence of Heidegger’s criticism as well as his attempt at a new way to think Being. This new way would always undergo development, yet it made the author of Sein und Zeit claim that being a man consists in taking the risk incessantly. Man becomes a rift, through which Being itself is revealed. Violence and force characterize the essence of human being, yet they should not be evaluated from the point of view of moral good and evil. Violence and force are, as it were, the price for a possibility to win Being from being. Such anthropological approach makes it that Heidegger cannot put forward the “problem of evil” Limiting thinking to the horizon of the truth of Being leads to the relativization of freedom and captivity, truth and falsehood, good and evil. Therefore Heidegger was in trouble to articulate in full voice a true judgement about the Holocaust. At best one can say that Heidegger perceived evil as a way to reveal Being, but did not ask about evil.Pozycja Wartość życia ludzkiego z perspektywy encykliki „Evangelium vitae”Nagórny, Janusz (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)John Paul II has besought us that human life be respected in all stages of its development. His appeal stems out, above all, from the fundamental value of that life. Sacredness and sanctity of human life may never be reduced to the quality of life, understood in a materialistic and utilitarian way. Referring himself to the message of the encyclical Evangelium vitae, the author depicts the value of human life in the light of that Gospel of life, whose essence and centre is the person, the life and the saving work of Jesus Christ. This, however, does not mean that the natural level should be abandoned, for man is able to recognize the essential value of human life in the light of reason. Accordingly, the author emphasizes first the significance of an integral concept of human life for the reading out of the value of human life. While stressing the spiritual and corporeal unity of man, we defend ourselves on the one hand against the error of biologism in its approach to human life, and on the other, we may duly read out the place of corporeality within human life. It is true that the Gospel of life shows the value of life, first of all, in relation to Christ, but it has its origin in the act of creation. For the creation of man unveils the special value of human life in relation to other creatures. This special character of human life is all the more recognized by people within the framework of the Covenant. It is Jesus Christ who makes the most complete perspective for the reading out of the value of human life. Incarnation and resurrection, the whole work of salvation, unveil the ultimate perspective of human life in the gift of “eternal life, and in no way do they belittle the earthly stage of human life. Just the opposite, man already here participates in a “new life,” that is in the life of God alone. Sacredness and sanctity of human life is then most profoundly justified in the Gospel of life. To know and to recognize the value of life is to be called upon to its development and protection, therefore the commandment, “you shalt not kill” is grounded exactly in the recognition of the value of human life.Pozycja Anglikańska teologia moralna w XVIII i XIX wiekuNowosad, Sławomir (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)After a very fruitful period of Caroline Moral Theology „the Church of England entered upon the dry and barren period of one hundred and fifty years” (L. Dewar). The 18th century saw the process of naturalization of the Christian morality and its main figure in the Church of England in this aspect was bishop Joseph Butler (d. 1752) with his „Fifteen Sermons”, „Analogy of Religion” and „Dissertation on the Nature of Virtue”. His moral philosophy works were for a long time prescribed readings for ordinands. Serious social changes of this and the following centuries led to revivals of both Evangelical and Catholic traditions of Anglicanism and their moral teaching. Among the Evangelicals it was the group nicknamed „the Clapham Sect” together with William Wilbeforce (d. 1833) that became the most influential. The Catholic revival was above all connected with the Oxford Movement and its leaders like: John Keble (d. 1866), Edward B. Pusey (d. 1882) and the most famous of them all, John Henry Newman (d. 1890), in his last years a cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church. As far as moral theology is concerned, however, the Tractarians did not produce a distinctive moral theology but re-published the Caroline works or used contemporary Roman Catholic manuals. Mention should be made of the school of Anglican social thinkers including: Frederick D. Maurice (d. 1872) with his „Christian Socialism”; Charles Gore (d. 1932) with his „liberal Catholicism” and famous essays of „Lux Mundi” edited by him; William Temple (d. 1944) with his emphasis on the conquering of this world for the Kingdom of God.Pozycja Ojciec - to rodzic czy „starszy brat”?Rosik, Seweryn (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)In his text the author wants to answer the following question: what position should a father occupy in a family? Is he to be an authentic parent or else he is to become, as it were, his daughter’s or his son’s “older brother”? The second variant of his function is being postulated by the contemporary trends which liberalize the basic values of an authority. Grounding oneself on the anthropologic-social and theologico-moral presuppositions the author proves that the importance of a father within a family is of priority and calls for respect and obedience. At times it is criticized if it does not draw on the Supreme Authority, on God, for its educative and formative power. Only the latter Authority is the fundament of the whole order of life, especially the family life.Pozycja Dawstwo organów a obowiązek poszanowania integralności ciała ludzkiegoWróbel, Józef (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Modem day’s ethical, theological and moral reflection do not have any serious reservations about donorship, if it conforms to clearly specified principles, both of ethical and medical nature. Referring to interpersonal solidarity in justifying the donorship of organs, tissues or cells, is today commonly justified in view of anthropological, ethical and theological reflection. It is also officially affirmed by the Magisterium of the Church. Referring, however, in this kind of operations to the principle of solidarity does not give, of itself, an answer to a serious objection. The latter results from the sanctity of human organism and indisposability as a whole and in its particular parts. This reservation, however, is not a more serious problem, if one understands well the sense of respect for the integrity of human organism. The said sanctity does not allow for human life or health to be taken in possession. It does not allow for an arbitrary manipulation of man’s biological structures or treating them as material objects. At the same time, however, the sanctity in question does not deprive man of the right to interfere in those structures when it is demanded by the care for health, neither does it negate man’s participation in a prudent administration of life and health in accordance with God’s intention. An express indication of that indication being man’s calling to perfection and his fulfillment of his personal mission within the earthly reality (as an active participant of the work of creation) and in human fellowship. Love and gift of oneself made for others is the noblest expression of that mission, its pattern being the Person of Jesus Christ in His earthly mission, especially in His death on the cross. There is yet one more question to answer: was Pius XII wrong when he firmly excluded nontherapeutic infringement upon the integrity of human organism, and John Paul II changed the teaching of the Church in the question under consideration? Not in the least! It was already Pius XI who formulated, and Pius XII would repeat, the principle that man may, for important reasons, dispose of his own body, his organs, but only within their natural finality. That principle is invariably topical. What is changed in both cases - in the teachings of Pius XII and John Paul II - is the anthropological viewpoint. While Pius XII limits himself to the finality of organism, John Paul II speaks about the finality of organism as a constitutive element of the human person. As particular parts which make up human organism have no sense or finality beyond this organism, to which they belong, in the same manner organism in itself has no sense, value or its proper finality, along with its organs, tissues and cells, if it does not remain within the function of the person as such. Consequently, if it is not linked with the finality of his or her existence, with his or her fulfillment of vocation in the perspective of participation in the created reality and in the perspective of salvation. Ultimately, this means that man, in proportion to some important reasons, may dispose of himself, of the elements of his corporeal structure in as much as such integrity is included within his proper, as a person, finality. Thus it does not mean an arbitrary possession of oneself. It does not make him unable to fulfil the mission given to him by God, and does not destroy his place in the history of mankind.Pozycja Sprawozdanie z przebiegu sympozjum „Człowiek - sumienie - wartości”Derdziuk, Andrzej (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Sprawozdanie ze spotkania Sekcji Polskich Teologów Moralistów na temat: „Tożsamość i metodyka nauczania teologii moralnej”. Zakopane 30.04.-2.05.1997Jeżyna, Krzysztof (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Stephen Ross White. Authority and Anglicanism. London: SCM Press Ltd 1996 ss. 138.Nowosad, Sławomir (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Bibliografia teologicznomoralna za rok 1996Wróbel, Józef (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Kronika Sekcji Teologii Moralnej KUL za rok 1996/97Nowosad, Sławomir (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Wojciech Bołoz. Życie w ludzkich rękach. Podstawowe zagadnienia bioetyczne. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Akademii Teologii Katolickiej 1997 ss. 240.Derdziuk, Andrzej (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Ks. Franciszek Greniuk. Katolicka teologia moralna w poszukiwaniu własnej tożsamości. Lublin: RW KUL 1993 ss. 220.Rosik, Seweryn (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)Pozycja Henryk Skorowski SDB. Moralność społeczna. Wybrane zagadnienia z etyki społecznej, gospodarczej i politycznej. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Salezjańskie 1996 ss. 251.Jeżyna, Krzysztof (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1998)