Newman and Strossmayer on the Relationship Between the Church and the State (I)

IF 0.1 0 LITERATURE Anafora Pub Date : 2020-06-29 DOI:10.29162/anafora.v7i1.11
Šimo Šokčević, T. Živić
{"title":"Newman and Strossmayer on the Relationship Between the Church and the State (I)","authors":"Šimo Šokčević, T. Živić","doi":"10.29162/anafora.v7i1.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relationship between the Catholic Church and the state, and between the Church and the state in general, is a very topical issue, and theoreticians at the present time provide various models that render assistance to the comprehension of that relationship. The complexity and extensiveness of the problem necessitates that it should be dealt with in two parts (articles). Basically, our objective was to represent the deliberations of John Henry Newman (1801‒1890) and Josip Juraj Strossmayer (1815‒1905), which we consider to be exceptionally valuable and relevant even today. Through such an analysis, we intended to examine how the deliberations of these two great thinkers of the nineteenth century may contribute to a better cooperation between the Catholic Church and the state in present‐day Europe. In this, the first article, in which we deal with Newman’s and Strossmayer’s perceptions of the relationship between the Catholic Church and the state, at the very outset we feature the context in which Newman and Strossmayer each take a closer look at that relationship. This context is characterized by liberalism, but with numerous negative connotations that suffocate the originally positive meaning of liberalism. A negative context of liberalism is an aggravating circumstance in the comprehension of the relationship between the Catholic Church and the state, and on the other hand, from the position of a modern liberal state, Newman’s and Strossmayer’s comprehension of history, in whose center is the principle of God’s Providence, is also qualified in this way, which simultaneously renders the Catholic Church consistent and authentic, unlike the modern liberal state, which frequently assumes utopian and ideological characteristics. For this very reason, that difference regularly seems insurmountable. Finally, we observe that the issues are additionally complicated by the erroneous notion of the Dogma of Papal Infallibility, which is not understood in the spirit of harmony between the conscience and an Authority.","PeriodicalId":40415,"journal":{"name":"Anafora","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anafora","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29162/anafora.v7i1.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The relationship between the Catholic Church and the state, and between the Church and the state in general, is a very topical issue, and theoreticians at the present time provide various models that render assistance to the comprehension of that relationship. The complexity and extensiveness of the problem necessitates that it should be dealt with in two parts (articles). Basically, our objective was to represent the deliberations of John Henry Newman (1801‒1890) and Josip Juraj Strossmayer (1815‒1905), which we consider to be exceptionally valuable and relevant even today. Through such an analysis, we intended to examine how the deliberations of these two great thinkers of the nineteenth century may contribute to a better cooperation between the Catholic Church and the state in present‐day Europe. In this, the first article, in which we deal with Newman’s and Strossmayer’s perceptions of the relationship between the Catholic Church and the state, at the very outset we feature the context in which Newman and Strossmayer each take a closer look at that relationship. This context is characterized by liberalism, but with numerous negative connotations that suffocate the originally positive meaning of liberalism. A negative context of liberalism is an aggravating circumstance in the comprehension of the relationship between the Catholic Church and the state, and on the other hand, from the position of a modern liberal state, Newman’s and Strossmayer’s comprehension of history, in whose center is the principle of God’s Providence, is also qualified in this way, which simultaneously renders the Catholic Church consistent and authentic, unlike the modern liberal state, which frequently assumes utopian and ideological characteristics. For this very reason, that difference regularly seems insurmountable. Finally, we observe that the issues are additionally complicated by the erroneous notion of the Dogma of Papal Infallibility, which is not understood in the spirit of harmony between the conscience and an Authority.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
纽曼与斯特罗斯迈耶论教会与国家的关系(一)
天主教会与国家之间,以及教会与国家之间的关系,是一个非常热门的问题,目前的理论家们提供了各种模型来帮助理解这种关系。这个问题的复杂性和广泛性要求分两部分处理(条款)。基本上,我们的目标是代表约翰·亨利·纽曼(1801-1990)和乔西普·尤拉吉·斯特罗斯迈尔(1815-1905)的审议,我们认为这些审议即使在今天也非常有价值和意义。通过这样的分析,我们打算研究这两位19世纪伟大思想家的思想如何有助于天主教会和当今欧洲国家之间更好的合作。在这篇文章的第一篇文章中,我们讨论了纽曼和斯特罗斯迈尔对天主教会和国家之间关系的看法,从一开始,我们就详细介绍了纽曼和斯特罗斯迈尔各自对这种关系的看法。这种语境具有自由主义的特征,但也有许多消极的含义,窒息了自由主义原本的积极意义。自由主义的负面语境是理解天主教会与国家关系的一个加重情节,另一方面,从现代自由主义国家的立场来看,纽曼和斯特罗斯迈尔对历史的理解,其中心是上帝的天意原则,也符合这一点,这同时使天主教会具有一致性和真实性,而不像现代自由主义国家那样经常表现出乌托邦和意识形态的特征。正是由于这个原因,这种差异似乎经常无法克服。最后,我们注意到,教皇不可侵犯性教条的错误概念使问题更加复杂,人们没有本着良心和权威之间和谐的精神来理解这一概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Anafora
Anafora LITERATURE-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Historical Metafiction: Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan Novels as a Postmodern Rethinking of History Moderno kazalište iz estetskih perspektiva Yellowstone and the western revival O književnoj životinji u Kanižlićevoj Svetoj Rožaliji Sjena moje mame: Narativi o demenciji
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1