The article focuses on a number of philosophical and theological bases for the Krakow conciliarism of the 1st half of the 15th century as a powerful reform movement.
PL
Zadaniem tego artykułu o doktrynalnych podstawach krakowskiego koncyliaryzmu pierwszej połowyXV wieku jest zwrócenie uwagi na niektóre aspekty podstaw filozoficznych i teologicznych tego potężnego prądu reformatorskiego.
The article presents the theological theories of Marsilius of Padua, one of the most original thinkers of the late Middle Ages. This aspect of Marsilius thought is often overlooked, as most researchers tend to concentrate on his political ideas. The author of the article first analyzes the foundations of Marsilius’ theology – his vision of salvation, the quasi-pelagian notion of grace, the concept divine law and the definition of the Church. Also analyzed in detail is the notion of priesthood and the concept of authority in the Church – his conciliar theory and rejection of the papal primacy. According to the author, Marsilius’ theology was radically anti-papal, anti-clerical. To a certain degree it anticipated theological ideas of the Reformation.
This article aims to answer the question how the Florentine council defined the election of the Pope, his competence and importance in the conductivity of the Church and how his function influenced on overcoming conciliarism. The council showed the leading role of the pope over the universal Church and identified specific tasks and priorities of the Bishop of Rome, and the procedures the election of the Pope. In case of vacancy of the Holy See, which arise in the course of the meeting the council, election of a new bishop of Rome is to take place where at that time shall debate fathers. Before entering the conclave electors take the oath to God and the Church. The Pope is the first and the highest shepherd of sheepfold of Christ and therefore he has to be a person caring for the salvation of all souls and the advantage of the whole Christian world. The Bishop of Rome has strongly profess and preserve the Catholic faith, according to the Apostolic Tradition, the councils common and holy fathers. The Pope has to be aware of his function and ready for the greatest sacrifices in the service of God and the faithful, and he has to take care of conducting and directing the path of salvation, the clergy and the Roman people, and he has to repair and remove anything that could be tainted with simony or concubine. He can’t follow the ties of kinship and shall be available for the faithful.
PL
Artykuł ma na celu odpowiedzieć na pytanie, w jaki sposób sobór florencki zdefiniował wybór papieża, jego kompetencje i znaczenie przewodnictwa Kościołowi oraz jak papieska funkcja wpłynęła na przezwyciężenie koncyliaryzmu. Sobór pokazał przewodnią rolę papieża nad Kościołem powszechnym i określił konkretne zadania i priorytety biskupa Rzymu oraz procedury jego wyboru. W przypadku wakatu w Stolicy Apostolskiej, który powstałby w trakcie obrad soborowych, wybór nowego biskupa Rzymu miał mieć miejsce tam, gdzie obradują ojcowie. Przed wejściem na konklawe elektorzy mieli złożyć przysięgę Bogu i Kościołowi. Papież jest pierwszym i najwyższym pasterzem owczarni Chrystusa i dlatego musi być osobą zatroskaną o zbawienie wszystkich dusz i o pożytek dla całego świata chrześcijańskiego. Biskup Rzymu ma zdecydowanie wyznawać i zachować wiarę katolicką, według tradycji apostolskiej, soborów powszechnych i świętych ojców. Papież musi być świadomy swojej funkcji i gotowy do największych poświęceń w służbie Bogu i wiernym. Ma także dbać o prowadzenie i kierowanie na drogę zbawienia duchowieństwa i ludu rzymskiego oraz musi naprawiać i usuwać wszystko, co może być skażone symonią lub konkubinatem. Papież nie może kierować się więzami pokrewieństwa, ma być dostępny dla wiernych.
The decree Haec Sancta approved by the Council of Constance at its 5th Session (6th April 1415) helped the Council fathers to put an end to the scandalous schism which since 1378 had divided the Latin Church between rival lines of claimants to the papal office. The Council of Constance declared for the superiority of the Council over the Pope. In Gallicanism the theory of the superiority of a General Council lived on for hundreds of years. The great body of the bishops of the nineteenth century had little sympathy with Gallican principles, which disappeared entirely after the definition of Papal Infallibility at the First Vatican Council in 1870. There are several requirements for a dogmatic, papal infallible pronouncement: (1) The pronouncement must be made by the lawful successor to Peter. (2) The subject matter must be in the area of faith and morals. (3) The pope must be speaking ex cathedra, that is from the very seat and office of Peter. In this way he must be specifically intending to proclaim a doctrine, binding the entire Church to its assent. If one or more of these elements is missing, there is no infallible pronouncement.
W dniu 14 stycznia 2016 roku w holu Biblioteki Jagiellońskiej otwarto wystawę Jan Hus – 600 lat później, zorganizowaną przez Czeskie Centrum w Warszawie oraz Bibliotekę Jagiellońską. Otwarciu towarzyszył polsko-czeski panel dyskusyjny. Wzięli w nim udział ze strony czeskiej dr Petr Janyška i mgr Jakub Smrčka, a ze strony polskiej dr Paweł Nowakowski oraz dr Tomasz Graff. Ilustracje stanowiące ekspozycję wraz z tekstami w wersji polskiej i angielskiej umieszczono na 18 tablicach, ukazujących życie i działalność Jana Husa, jego edukację, aktywność uniwersytecką, pisarską, kaznodziejską i śmierć na stosie w roku 1415.
EN
The exhibition entitled Jan Hus 600 years later – organized by the Czech Center in Warsaw – was opened at the Jagiellonian Library on 14th January 2016. It was followed by a discussion panel, the Czech part of which was represented by Petr Janyška Ph.D. and Jakub Smrčka M.A., while the Polish part was represented by Paweł Nowakowski Ph.D. and Tomasz Graff Ph.D. The exhibition consisted of illustrations with explanatory notes in Polish and Czech placed on 18 boards showing the life and work of Jan Hus, i.e. his studies, his academic and literary career, his preaching and his death at the stake in 1415.
From the very beginning of its existence the Orthodox Church on the Ruthenian lands and on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania created structures and organs indispensable for the normal functioning of the church institution, relating to the praxis of the Byzantine Church as well as to the canonical law. With the development of the church organism the role of councils grew progressively. The local councils of the Orthodox Church, based on the ancient principle of conciliarity of the Eastern Church, formed collegial organs deciding not only on the issues of theological and disciplinary nature, but equally in administrative and juridical matters. The councils of the Orthodox Church gathered primarily in case of important issues, demanding collegial examination. Usually the councils participated bishops, monks (above all archimandrites and hieromonks), married priests (basically namiestniks /i.e.bishop’s deputy/, protopops and krylosy /i.e. diocesan councils/) as well as princes and lay nobility. In the XVI century also representatives of middle class and church brotherhoods participated in the councils. Councils can be divided into the following categories according to the issues debated on them: 1) councils concerning internal church organization, 2) theological and disciplinary (juridical) councils, 3) councils concerning the canonical law, 4) councils dealing with canonisation of the saints. We have very few data about the local councils of the Orthodox Church on the Ruthenian lands before the Tatar invasion. We have more information about the ones that took place after the liberation from the Tatar yoke. The exact number and the time of duration as well as the subject of the debate of the councils are not known exactly. The Old Russian chronicles first of all mention elective councils. The least information was preserved about the councils concerning canonisation. Until the beginning of the XIV century the councils were assembled very rarely and they did not play an important role. Metropolitans equally did not have much power whereas the princes had a huge influence on the Church matters, including the strictly religious issues. The conciliar activity of the Orthodox Church on the Ruthenian lands as well as the territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania, though developed until the end of the XV century, only in the next century became much more dynamic
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.