Roczniki Teologiczno-Kanoniczne, 1977, T. 24, z. 2
Stały URI dla kolekcjihttps://theo-logos.pl/handle/123456789/9631
Przeglądaj
Ostatnie zgłoszenia
Pozycja Chrystologiczna doktryna Marcina Czechowica (1532-1613)Misiurek, Jerzy (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1977)Marcin Czechowic, the author of polemical works and Polish translator of the New Testament was beside his conteporary Gregory Paul of Brzeziny and the later F. Socyn one of the most important theologians of Polish brothers. His works centre round the teachings of Christ founded upon rejection of a dogma of one God in the Trinity. Czechowic attempted to create a conception of anthropocentric christology stressing that essentially Christ was true man. Czechowic rejected the Catholic doctrine of the so-called communicatio idiomaticum evident from the Scriptures, and of two natures in Christ. He refuted objections raised by Catholic and Calvinist theologians claiming that his view was substantiated by the Bible, which similarly to Protestant theologians he recognized as the only self-sufficient source for justification of any religious arguments. Thus he demanded that theological terms describing religious notions were literally taken from the Holy Writ. Any attempt at abstracting from the actual Biblical expressions was considered erroneous. Czechowic also claimed that Christ was God albeit utterly different from God the Father since Christ had not existed prior to being born of Mary, had no power of God from the beginning of his life but “augmented himself by the grace of God and people” and anything he did was achieved thanks to the power given Him by God the Father. Although Christ was true God, this was due solely to the fact of his being wondrously conceived in the womb of Mary, anointed by the Holy Ghost and made Lord over all things. Czechowic’s doctrine was not a original as he took many ideas from the King’s physician, G. Blandrata, most probably through Gregory Paul of Brzeziny. When interpreting the Sriptures he referred mostly to the works by Erasmus, Vatablo, Castelione and Beza. In spite of erroneous formulation Czechowic’s doctrine set the direction of Unitarian thought and was generally accepted by Polish brothers thus contributing to some modification within Protestant theology.Pozycja Status współczesnej teologii fundamentalnej na tle przemian w teologii i biblistyceNagy, Stanisław (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1977)The process of changes undergone by th e co n temporary theology and Biblical studies has forced fundamental/dogmatic theology to introduce several major modifications into the structure of its apologetics. Although this branch of theology is methodologically independent, it is also closely interelated with the other two departments and as such it can not remain unaffected by any of their developments. In the real of theology proper, fundamental/dogmatic theology must take into account recent conceptions of faith, revelation and the miracle of resurection as well as establishment of the Church and the part played in it by the Holy Ghost. A new view of the specific literary character of the Gospels provided by the contemporary Biblical studies must be also considered to gether with the findings of Biblical theology and the history of atonement. Thus dogmatic theology is a branch whose main task is to substantiate the accomplishment of revelation in Christ and the fact of its continuation in the scriptural commonwealth of the People of God corresponding to the actual community of Church. This compound apologetic argument aims at justifying the attitude of faith and the resultant theological reasoning. According to the Directions issued by the Holy See it should be achieved by inti al demonstratingin the contents of revelation these elements which may harmonize with man’s needs and development. It has visibly broadened the scope of dogmatic theology by adding apologic elements further supplemented by apologetic and introductory-theological arguments mentioned by the Directions. As far as particular problems included in the christological dogma are concerned especially the manner of employing the Gospels must be modified because of their singular character of theological and catechetical writings founded upon the actual words and deeds of Christ. Also the teaching of revelation must be revised with a particular stress being paid to the elements of atonement as well as its historical and personal aspects. A fresh value must be established for the formal element of miracle consisting in the supernatural sense given to it by God. A modification of the truth of resurrection a part from emphasizing its strictly wondrous character must take into account the fact that may be substantiated solely by referring to the consciousness of original Christian community relating the belief in resurrection to christophanies and the fact of empty sepulchre. The ecclesiological doctrine should formulate a new justification of the truth of establishing the Church. A part from dating its definitive establishment after the resurrection the part played by the Holy Ghost ought to be accentuated. Since Vatican Council II sanctioned the principle of joint action motivation of specific organizational structure of the Church will demand completing. Also the duty of belonging to the Churchcommunity of salvation will have to be justified anew as acatholic communities weregrant et by Vatican II status of ecclesiasticism and partial attachment to the Mystic Body of Christ and People of God. Thus compulsory integral attachment and insufficiency of partial attachment must be emphasized.Pozycja Autorstwo i struktura teologiczna "De vocatione omnium gentium"Bartnik, Czesław (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1977)The authorship of ”De vocatione omnium gentium”, a patristic work of certain importance for the development of Christian charitology has been ascribed for many years to St. Prosperus of Aquitaine (d. 455). The work has been also considered homogenous and written complete at a time. However the analysis of the employed theological notions, terms, meanings and reasoning accompanied by the comparison to the works of Prosperus, Leo the Great and Augustine seems to exclude Prosperus as the sole author. Only the first book, written rather late shortly before 460 (it is possible that Prosperus lived longer than 455) can be ascribed to the Gallic writer. Later the book was slightly modified and Book II was added and subsequently completed by some collective ending (Ch. 31-37, Book II). Book I is close to Augustine’s s trict treatment of predestination, while Book II and partly the ending reveal the more lenient and pragmatic attitude of Rome. The book seems to be eventually completed in Rome between 460 and 470, probably by Hilarus, Roman Deacon and the successor of Leo the Great at the Holy See (461-468).Pozycja Eucharystia w dialogu. Uzgodnienie Grupy z DombesNapiórkowski, Stanisław C. (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1977)The author gives a historical and theological introduction to the agreed statement of the Group of Dombes on the Eucharist which informs about the origins of the Dombes Group, its aims, methods of work and effects of nearly 40-years long activities, including topics of particular meetings in the years 1942-1970. He discusses in detail the 1967 theses on Eucharist (intercommunion), and then gives a general characteristic of the 1971 „Guidelines”, pointing out the three most important issues taken up by the authors: the presence of Christ in Eucharist, its trinitarian aspect and solidarity manifested in the sacrament. The presence of Christ is described in terms of anamnesis, that is to say a memento which brings into existence what it reminds of (a conception strikingly close to Vatican II). From Protestants the document demands greater respect for the extra usum elements of Eucharist, while Catholics are requested to implement the principle whereby Eucharist is preserved largely for the sick and the absent to consume. In Eucharist Christians encounter not only Christ but also other persons of the Holy Trinity, since in Eucharist we worship and thank the Father, while the Holy Ghost warrants the Eucharistic transformation. The document also expresses a deeper awareness of social effects of participation in one Eucharist, experienced by contemporary Christianity.Pozycja Richard Paciorkowski. Guérisons paranormales dans le christianisme contemporain. Varsovie 1976 ss. 168.Bartnik, Czesław (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1977)