Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 7

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Chalcedon
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
100%
EN
The article discusses the relevance of the Chalcedonian dogma of Christian anthropology. The context of the discussion is the Western theologians’ pursuit of new forms of expression of the faith. However, the Chalcedonian Christological doctrine is not outdated. The truth of faith that Jesus Christ is True God and True Man has its important anthropological implications. This dogma constitutes the foundation of the Christian teaching on the human dignity.
EN
The role of the monks in the triumph over iconoclasm illustrates their traditional involvement in theological debates; monasticism thus appears not only as a school of spiritual perfection but also as a body, which feels responsibility for the content of the faith and for the fate of the Church as a whole. At the same time, the particularity of the monastic polity and ideology, its foundation upon the notion that "the Kingdom of God is not of this world", and its opposition to all compromises with "this world’s" requirements gave rise to a theology, which can properly be called "monastic". In contrast with the formal conservatism of official ecclesiastical circles and in opposition to the traditions of secular Hellenism, this theology happened also to be the most dynamic and creative current in Christian thought as a whole.
Vox Patrum
|
2000
|
vol. 38
521-535
EN
Evagrius Scholasticus, the author of Historia Ecclesiastica, written at the end of the sixth century, is unanimously regarded by scholars as a person - in proportion to his times - of broad horizons and objectivity. He is without any doubt an unusual writer. A good example of his originality is his description of the rule emperor Anastasius. Evagrius describes him very warmly, although the emperor was regarded as a partisan of the monophysites. Yet Evagrius, without any doubt a Chalcedonian writer, places Anastasius in heaven after his death; Justinian, on the other hand, is placed in hell.
PL
Konstytucja soborowa Gaudium et spes naucza wyraźnie, gdzie należy poszukiwać odpowiedzi na wszystkie pytania o człowieka: w Słowie wcielonym, w Jezusie Chrystusie, „nowym Adamie” (nr 22). Ta sama Konstytucja odnosi się w tym punkcie do soborów, które właśnie zgłębiły tajemnicę Chrystusa, w tym i do Soboru Chalcedońskiego (451 r.), wskazując tym samym na antropologiczne znaczenie jego słynnej definicji wiary. Na podstawie analizy Aloisa Grillmeiera oraz Adriana Măgdici niniejszy artykuł omawia dzisiejsze trudności filozoficzne w definicji osoby, i w odpowiedzi na to przedstawia jej chrystologiczne odróżnienie od pojęcia natury, wprowadzone w Chalcedonie (osoba nie jest naturą: ontologia dwupozio¬mowa), aby wyciągać z jej „negatywnego” pojmowania niektóre antropologiczne wnioski ważne dla naszej dzisiejszej cywilizacji zachodniej. Ona to cieszy się mianem „antropocentrycznej”, właśnie dlatego że przyswoiła osobę i jej centralne znaczenie od chrześcijaństwa.
EN
The Gaudium et spes constitution teaches where the answer to all the questions about man is to be sought: in the Incarnate Word, in Jesus Christ, “the new Adam” (No. 22). The Constitution relates here to the councils which explored the mystery of Christ, including the Council of Chalcedon (451), thus indicating anthropological meaning of its definition of faith. This article, based on analyses of Alois Grillmeier and Adrian Măgdici, discusses modern philosophical issues in the definition of person and, as a solution, proposes its Christological distinction from the concept of nature introduced by the Chalcedon (person is not nature: two-level ontology) to draw from its “negative” approach certain anthropological conclusions, important for our modern Western civilization called “anthropocentric” precisely because it incorporated person and its key status from Christianity.
IT
La Costituzione conciliare Gaudium et spes indica chiaramente dove si devono ricercare le risposte a tutte le domande sull’uomo: nella Parola incarnata, in Gesù Cristo, “nuovo Adamo” (n. 22). La stessa Costituzione rimanda in questo punto ai concili che approfondirono proprio il mistero di Cristo, tra cui il Concilio di Calcedonia (451), mettendo così in risalto il signi¬ficato antropologico della sua famosa definizione di fede. Sulla base quindi delle analisi in particolare di Alois Grillmeier e di Adrian Magdici, l’articolo affronta l’odierna difficoltà della filosofia nella definizione di persona e in risposta presenta la sua distinzione cristologica dal concetto di natura introdotta a Calcedonia (persona non è natura: ontologia a due livelli), per trarre da questa sua “negativa” concezione alcune conseguenze antropologiche importanti per la nostra odierna civiltà occidentale – chiamata “antropocentrica” proprio per aver assimilato la centralità della persona dal cristianesimo.
Vox Patrum
|
2018
|
vol. 69
257-283
PL
Artykuł omawia kwestię zależności między propagowaniem przez cesarza Herakliusza (610-641) chrystologicznej doktryny monoenergizmu a jej wpływem na poczucie religijnej tożsamości chrześcijan niechalcedońskich. Celem artykułu jest ukazanie, że propagowanie monoenergizmu zostało odebrane przez chrze­ścijan-monofizytów jako wyzwanie dla ich religijnej tożsamości ukształtowanej w okresie po Soborze Chalcedońskim (451) na podstawie odrzucenia Chalcedonu, bezwzględnej wierności nauce swoich Patriarchów oraz trzymania się terminolo­gii chrystologicznej Cyryla z Aleksandrii. Propagowanie monenergizmu stało się bodźcem do krystalizacji poczucia tożsamości religijnej u chrześcijan-monofizy­tów, które silnie rzutowało na poczucie tożsamości politycznej, wrogiej wobec rządu bizantyńskiego.
EN
The article discusses the question of interrelation between the promotion of Miaenergism and its influence on the sense of religious identity of non-Chal­cedonian Christians. The purpose of the article if to point that the promotion of Miaenergism was perceived by Miaphysites as an challenge for their religious iden­tity formed in the period after the Council of Chalcedon (451) on the basis of refu­tation of Chalcedon, absolute loyalty to the teachings of their Patriarchs, especially to Christological notions of Cyril of Alexandria. The promotion of Miaenergism became the stimulus that caused the crystallization of a sense of religious identity of the Miaphysites. The promotion of Miaenergism strongly influenced a sense of the Miaphysite political identity, opposite to Byzantine government.
Teologia w Polsce
|
2015
|
vol. 9
|
issue 2
213-230
PL
Sobór w Chalcedonie każe wyznawać Chrystusa nie „z” dwóch natur, ale „w” dwóch naturach. Zawdzięczamy to określenie „diofi zyckiej” chrystologii Leona Wielkiego. Dzięki papieskiej myśli człowieczeństwo Chrystusa zostało afirmowane. Chalcedoński drogowskaz prowadzi nie tylko w głąb misterium Chrystusa, ale wtórnie również ku tajemnicy człowieka.
EN
Contribution of the Western Church Christology summarized in Leo the Great’s thought turned out to be crucial in formulating the Chalcedonian dogma. The pope’s thought was formed also as a reaction to refl ection of schools in Alexandra and Antioch. The article mentions the relation between the pope’s Christology and soteriology. It stresses the role of Christ’s humanity in salvation of a man. One may say that owing to Leo’s “dyophysitic” Christology the Council Fathers affi rmed the humanity of Christ. From that perspective the Chalcedon Council is not only a guidepost on the way leading to the mystery of Jesus Christ, but it also secondarily indicates the mystery of a man
Teologia w Polsce
|
2015
|
vol. 9
|
issue 2
213-230
EN
Contribution of the Western Church Christology summarized in Leo the Great’s thought turned out to be crucial in formulating the Chalcedonian dogma. The pope’s thought was formed also as a reaction to reflection of schools in Alexandra and Antioch. The article mentions the relation between the pope’s Christology and soteriology. It stresses the role of Christ’s humanity in salvation of a man. One may say that owing to Leo’s “dyophysitic” Christology the Council Fathers affirmed the humanity of Christ. From that perspective the Chalcedon Council is not only a guidepost on the way leading to the mystery of Jesus Christ, but it also secondarily indicates the mystery of a man.
PL
Sobór w Chalcedonie każe wyznawać Chrystusa nie „z” dwóch natur, ale „w” dwóch naturach. Zawdzięczamy to określenie „diofizyckiej” chrystologii Leona Wielkiego. Dzięki papieskiej myśli człowieczeństwo Chrystusa zostało afirmowane. Chalcedoński drogowskaz prowadzi nie tylko w głąb misterium Chrystusa, ale wtórnie również ku tajemnicy człowieka.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.