The passage in the Book of Amos 3:3–8 is often understood as Amos’ apology for his own prophetic mission, arguing that Amos (like any other of God’s prophets) had no choice but to proclaim God’s message when the Lord talked to him. After a detailed analysis of the passage, its structure, words and especially its internal logic and also taking in consideration the context of the entire third chapter, the author proposes a somewhat different interpretation. The text from Amos characterizes the nature of God’s word of judgement present in the third chapter and in the Book of Amos as a whole. It explains the Lord’s decision to punish expressed in 3:1–2 and described in the remainder of the chapter. God always issues a warning before doing something and the words of Amos here are such a warning.
In this paper, the author discusses Darwinism and evolutionism in an Italian context. It also presents two personages of Catholic thinking in Italy in the 1890s who were open to the idea of the evolutionary origin of man. Antonio Fogazzaro (1842–1911), a Catholic writer, anticipated in his vision what can later be found in the work of P. Teilhard de Chardin. Bishop Geremia Bonomelli (1831–1914) accepted the thesis of the American pioneer of the Catholic concept of the evolutionary origin of man, John Augustine Zahm. It is of interest that none of the above mentioned authors mentions Raffaello Caverni, who spoke in the same spirit as early as 1877. G. Mivart, an English pioneer in the Catholic reception of the evolutionary origin of man, is also not recalled. Fogazzaro does point out, however, the heritage of Antonio Rosmini, who anticipated in some way the possibility of the evolutionary origin of man in the first half of the nineteenth century. Although Fogazzaro and Bonomelli did not have any influence on the Czech theological scene at the turn of the twentieth century, the literary works of Fogazzaro were widely translated into Czech.
This paper is part of a larger scholar project focused on Catholic theologians and scholars between 1871 and 1910 who accepted the evolutionary origin of the human body in accordance with the so called Mivart theory, or rejected it. The author presents the life and writings of the French theologian and biblical scholar F. E. Gigot, who was active mainly in the USA. He then analysed the relevant parts of the first section of his special introduction to the Old Testament (1901), where he interprets the first and second chapter of the book of Genesis and demonstrates a more or less open attitude to the theory of the evolutionary origin of man. The name of this biblical scholar, internationally recognized in his day, is not recalled in contemporary literature in connection with the reception of the evolutionary origin of humankind in Catholic theology at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries. The discoveries help to correct the rooted conviction that the Catholic theologians of this period had an exclusively negative attitude towards the fact of evolution and the evolutionary origin of the human body. The study also includes an analysis of one passage of Augustine’s writing De Genesi ad litteram, where the author finds formulations which look like an offered hand across the ages to those who in 1871−1910, and also later, sought to theologically adopt the theory of the evolutionary origin – creation of man.
This paper is part of an academic project focused on Catholic theologians and scholars who either adopted the origin of the human body according to Mivart’s thesis in 1871–1910 or declined it. The author presents the forgotten Austrian apologist K. Hasert (1851–1923) and reconstructs elementary data about his biography on the basis of research into certain sources. The analysis of two monographs by the author demonstrates the openness to Mivart’s thesis with, however, certain reservations. It is rare evidence of the fact that the Catholic world was not divided predominantly between extreme advocates and opponents of Mivart’s thesis. It is probable that many were attracted by Mivart’s thesis, though they were also aware of its problems and waited for more solid data from contemporary palaeography.
This study presents the life and work of the French Catholic theologian M. D. Leroy (1828–1905) regarding the issue of the evolutionary origin of humans. His book, published in 1891, met with harsh reactions from the side of transformism opponents, after which it was followed by the process of the Sacred Congregation of the Index. The work was condemned and the author was reprimanded. Leroy formally submitted himself to the Congregation’s decision. The implicit dualism was the basic problem of the so-called Mivart thesis. Leroy claims that the human body can be called human, if the body is united with its essential form only, ergo its immortal soul. By means of the evolution, the creator could prepare a certain pre-human species, the substrate of the creation of a human body by the infusion of the immortal soul. The study by Leroy contains a number of new elements: an explanation of the apparently contradictory attitudes of Pope Leo XIII, a reference to the views of the remarkable French apologist F. Duilhé. Although he did not accept Leroy’s point of view, he did take sides on the right for liberal research in this area for Catholic theologians in 1897. There are essential links of the detection in between, as to what was the French and Czech natural science point-of-view in relation to Darwinism at this period. Leroy’s thesis is still relevant as it corrects the implicit dualism in the area of anthropology, which is implicitly presented in the widespread solution of the Catholic world today. The human body, in his view, came into being through evolution and was provided with a human soul at a certain moment.
The study is part of a research project focused on Catholic theologians and scholars who either accepted the evolutionary origin of the human body in accordance with Mivart’s thesis or denied it in years 1871–1910. The author presents the Padernborn exegete Norbert Peters (1863–1938) and a critical analysis of his book Glauben und Wissen im ersten biblischen Schöpfungsbericht (Gen 1:1–2:3), Paderborn: Verlag von Ferdinand Schöning, 1907. The above-mentioned author reacts to both the academic and popular writing of E. Haeckel. He argues as a biblical scholar that the description of the creation of man, as it is found in the first chapters of Genesis, is not an obstacle to openness to an evolutionary origin – the creation of the human body. Being a specialist in the Bible, however, he does not dare state whether this hypothesis is actually viable. The issue of the means of creation of the human body is, in his view, only a marginal question in theology. A methodologically highly disciplined approach can be observed, however, which is in many respects similar to the approach of contemporary Catholic theologians.
The author explains the origin of the name Elohim and subsequently the theophorical names of people that were derived from this name of God in the Old Testament in the postposition such as Daniel and in preposition such as Elżbieta and in preposition with postposition such as: Eliasz. The article entry is composed in the following way: names given in The Dictionary of Names Contemporarily Used in Poland, versions of the names in 29 languages, records of the names in the Old Polish and their origin, and finally, the names of distinguished people by the described name.
Bread and water are among the best-known Biblical metaphors for the Word of God. This article presents a study of their occurrence in the four Gospels against the backdrop of the Old Testament. However, an analysis of the explicit references to bread and water is not exhaustive with regards to the topic under discussion. Therefore, other terms that relate to them, such as food, spring, hunger, thirst, feeding, and drinking, are also of great interest. Studying the metaphors for the Word of God reveals both a continuation of the Biblical ideas within the four Gospels, as well as a total novelty in the expression of the Word that became flesh (Jn 1:14).
PL
Chleb i woda należą do najbardziej znanych biblijnych metafor słowa Bożego. Niniejszy artykuł przedstawia studium ich występowania w czterech Ewangeliach na tle Starego Testamentu. Analiza bezpośrednich wzmianek o chlebie i wodzie nie wyczerpuje jednak podjętego tematu. Dlatego przedmiotem zainteresowania są również terminy, które do nich nawiązują, jak pokarm, źródło, łaknienie, pragnienie, karmienie, picie. Studium metafor słowa Bożego wykazuje zarówno kontynuację biblijnych idei w czterech Ewangeliach, jak i całkowitą nowość w wyrażeniu tego Słowa, które stało się ciałem (J 1, 14).
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.