Roczniki Teologiczno-Kanoniczne, 1981, T. 28, z. 2
Stały URI dla kolekcjihttps://theo-logos.pl/handle/123456789/10382
Przeglądaj
Ostatnie zgłoszenia
Pozycja Antropologia teologiczna Piotra SemenenkiMacheta, Kazimierz (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)The theological anthropology of Piotr Semenenko is based on one fundamental principle, the biblical idea of the image and likeness of God. In the construction of this idea the author employs trinitarian and chistological exemplarism. Man has been created in the image and after the likeness of God in order to be the partner of God’s love. The image and likeness of God is actualized in man first in ontological character, because by virtue of the act of creation all the structure of his existence, natural and supernatural, nature and person, show trinitarian and chistological likeness. Since the likeness refers to the supernatural plane and in its initial state is created by God, its growth and perfection is the moral duty of man. By co-operating with God, man, by the end of his days, attains to full and perfect likeness, which becomes fixed in eternal life, and which is the basis of the full and final union of man and God in love.Pozycja Sens bytuBartnik, Czesław (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)We speak not only of the epistemological or psychological but also of the ontic sense of things. Not only an end, thing, condition or stage of development, but most of all, the reality of „person” is the ontic sense. The sense of the cosmos is to be found in rational beings, the sense of rational beings in personal being; the sense of personal being in its most interior personification, i. e. the most subjective self, the term of all personification is found in the personal God. The sense of God Himself is discovered in the Holy Spirit as Love personified, „Person”, therefore, is the most sense-creative being. The sense of being is not merely „flattened” to common achievements and advantages. It spreads dramatically over existence and non-existence, life and death, good and evil, truth and falsehood. But all is transformed into the sense of „person” who, to some extent, surpasses all nonsense, even non-redemption.Pozycja Spór o sens i granice prymatu rzymskiego. Pryncypialna przyczyna wielkiej schizmy według Friedricha HeileraKoza, Józef Stanisław (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)Pozycja Viktor E. Frankl. Nieuświadomiony [sic!] Bóg. Tłum. B. Chwedeńczuk. Warszawa 1978 ss. 184.Nastalska, Danuta (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)Pozycja René Latourelle. L’accès à Jésus par les Evangiles. Histoire et herméneutique. Paris–Montréal 1978 ss. 270. Desclée.Szmydki, Ryszard (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)Pozycja Cud jako znak i symbolRusecki, Marian (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)In the theological-biblical literature the category of a sign has been accepted to define a miracle. According to the author a sign, which by nature refers to another reality, does not express the presence of God in a miracle too well. Therefore, he makes a hypothesis that the notion of a miracle as a sign should be supplemented with the category of a symbol in the more recent understanding. Rejecting the traditional interpretation of a symbol as connoting another reality, sometimes tantam out to a myth, the author discusses the notion of a symbol as combining two heterogeneous realities. In terms of this interpretation the notion contains and expresses another reality. In that sense it could be helpful in defining a miracle, which would be a union of God and man, because in a miracle God acts first of all in man, through man and for man. Through the extraordinary and visible action of God man would enter the specific union with God and would become a new being.Pozycja Pokuta w ujęciu protestanckimNapiórkowski, Stanisław Celestyn (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)This paper is conceived as an attempt to acquaint Polisch Catholic moralists, gathered at their annual symposium, with the Protestant approach to the subject of penance First, the author presents the standpoint of M. Luther (point 1), of the Lutheran symbolic books „Liber Concordiae” (point 2), of Lutheran orthodoxy and pietism (point 3); and than shows the modern Protestantism exemplified by Evangelical Lutheran Church in Polish People’s Republic (the Old Protestantism) and the Polish Church of Christian Baptists (the New Protestantism). After having exposed the Protestant standpoint, the author formulates a number of questions adressed to the Catholic theologians, eg.: (1) the question of contrition and confession of sins: do the Catholics in the practice of penance see the difference between them clearly enough? do not they overestimate sometimes confession to the disadvantage of contrition? (2) the question of treating the sacrament of penance as legal procedings does not the Gospel oblige us to understand the sacrament of penance rather as a scence of God’s mercy? what does await the sinner in the confessional: a righteous judge or the Forgiving Redeemer? would noth it be necessary to shift the emphasis? is the picture of the court trial really a suitable analogy here? (3) the question of combining spiritual guidance with the sacrament of penance: does the sacrament instituted in order to be, according to the fine expression of the Fathers, „another anchorage after shipwreck” , develop in the right direction? not questioning the need for spiritual guidance, one should ask whether it must be right in the sacrament of penance, and whether its development, particularly in some circles, does not change too much original sense of the sacrament? (4) the question of the changeable and unchangeable in the Dogma of Trent: what, in the Tridentine exposition of the sacrament of penance, is a dogma and what is a historical shape of the institution? whether not too much is considered non-reformable, and whether it is not why deep concern is sometimes expressed when new forms of performing this sacrament are proposed?Pozycja Badania nad strukturą zdania teologicznegoGóźdź, Krzysztof (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)In the modern theological methodology a controversy has been held on whether there is a difference, and of what kind, between scientific (or ordinary) and theological language, and hence, between the sentences of science and of theology. The author tries to answer this question with the help of the most recent formulations, especially, made by the methodologists linked with Catholic theologists, referring however to moderate analytic philosophy. The author claims that theological sentences, like scientific ones, develop from ordinary language in a sense. Ordinary language is growing partially religious by referring to another non-empirical object, i.e. to God. The theological and scientific senteces do not differ in form, especially in terms of logic and methodology. However, they do differ in origin, because theological sentences stem from faith and from experience guided by faith. Faith however does not enter the very structure of sentences. Similarly, the humanities are based on the so-called natural faith. Theological language, like ordinary one, has two dimentions: assertive and non-assertive. Both these dimentions refer to two subject planes: empirical and non-empirical. Assertive clauses are fundamental but the importance of a non-assertive one increases, especially as an object of a predicate. In conclusion, the structure of a theological sentence is as follows: we have assertive clauses with the established scientific status, non-assertive clauses seeking for such status, and communication, i.e. the way both these planes are related to man, and especially to faith, which generates them.Pozycja Dialog katolicko-prawosławny w świetle nauki Kongresów Welehradzkich 1907-1936Górka, Leonard (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)One very interesting paragraph in the attempt at dialogue between the Churches of the East and West was the series of seven International Congresses (1907-36) at Velehrad in Moravia (today’s Stare Město in Tschechoslovakia), a place devoted the memory of saints Cyril and Methodius. This article is an attempt to make more accesible some of teaching and experience in the Velehrad movement. The Congresses uncovered large areas of common agreement, among them the Church organisation and governement, the basic meaning of „unity” and „schism”, and the alleged juridicism and overcentralisation of the Roman Church. Over and above the doctrinal area, the Congresses demonstrated clearly the ignorance each Church had in the contemporary theological developments of the other Church, as well as the need for a continued apreciation of the deep historical and psychological roots of present attitudes. The ultimate key to a practical approach to reunion was, of course, to learn about each other’s doctrine, but even more, to learn to love each other as true brothers in Christ.Pozycja Georg Söll. Mariologie. Handbuch der Dogmengeschichte. Bd. 3 fase. 4. Freiburg–Basel–Wien 1978 ss. VI+255. Herder.Napiórkowski, Stanisław Celestyn (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)Pozycja John A. T. Robinson. Truth is Two-Eyed. London 1979 ss. CXI+161. SCM Press LTDJaskóła, Piotr (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)Pozycja Wolfgang Beinert (wyd.). Maria heute ehren. Eine theologisch-pastorale Handreichung. Wien–Freiburg–Basel 1977 ss. 320. Herder.Napiórkowski, Stanisław Celestyn (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1981)