The article, written in the form of an academic interpellation, addresses a series of tensions inherent in the attitudes adopted by humanists in defense against contradictions within the discipline, which often lead to the self-degradation of the humanities themselves. Such contradictions are usually resolved by resorting to one of the extreme attitudes that tear difficult cognitive complexities apart. Such practices are symptomatic of a variety of problems that need to be taken into account in university-level teaching and research; above all, however, their presence demonstrates that in the decades to come the discipline will need hightened receptiveness to such phenomena, based on authentic concern for the quality of the cultural rootedness of publications within the humanities – both within the historical and the present day canon of the discipline. The article also points to the pitfalls of the unilateralization of academic reflection and to the perils of reductionism – especially in the context of individual responsibility for the quality of contemporary reflection and for the formulas of reference to the tradition of the classics of thought. The author analyses a cross-section of phenomena testifying to the urgency of the problem of the self-degradation of the humanities in university practice, and thereby formulates the horizon of the postulated academic debate with the view to attaining a new quality of functioning of the humanities and social sciences as integrally related.
W czasie podboju i kolonizacji Ameryki hiszpańskiej Kościół katolicki miał co najmniej dwa różnorodne sposoby porządkowe: a) Kościół hiszpański i b) Kościół misyjny. Istniała wyraźna różnica między nimi, poczynając od grup etnicznych, wśród i dla których działały, metod pracy duszpasterskiej, stylu liturgii, treści katechezy, praw kościelnych, a nawet tożsamości księży, którzy mieli być kapelanami tylko jednej z tych społeczności. Niemal od samego powstania instytucji Kościół katolicki w Nowym Świecie miał zdolność różnicowania swojej działalności apostolskiej w zależności od grupy etnicznej, która go tworzyła. Zaszczepienie hiszpańskiego Kościoła w miastach kolonialnych w Ameryce było stosunkowo łatwe. Jednak zbudowanie nowego Kościoła - Kościoła misyjnego - wymagało stworzenia nowego modus operandi dla jego działalności apostolskiej. Praca misyjna wśród Indian nie mogła być powierzona któremukolwiek księdzu lub bratu, który czułby się powołany do podjęcia działań wśród Indian, ale zakonnikom i księżom specjalnie dobranym, by zamieszkać wśród ludności rodzimej i przygotowanym inaczej niż duchowieństwo świeckie. Pierwsze trzy Synody w Limie i ich równoległe Synody w Meksyku poruszyły tę kwestię na kilku swoich posiedzeniach. W artykule staram się przedstawić ówczesnych misjonarzy Indian, którzy choć niejednokrotnie nie uchowali się od niedoskonałości i błędów, umieli wypełniać misję z logiką i z apostolską odwagą, przestrzegając instrukcji synodów.
EN
In the era of the conquest and colonization of Hispanic America, the church had at least two different manifestations: the Spanish church and the missional church. There was a marked difference between the two, beginning with the ethnic groups that made them up, methods of pastoral work, style of liturgy, content of catechesis, ecclesiastical laws, and, even, identities of priests destined to be chaplains of one of the two groups. Practically, from the founding moment the Catholic Church in the New World had the ability to differentiate its apostolic action according to the ethnic group that comprised it. Relatively easy was the implantation of the Spanish church in colonial cities in America. However, the founding of the new church – missional church – required the creation of a new modus operandi of its apostolic action. Such work could not be conferred on any priest or brother who felt called to undertake activities among the Indians, but on men specially selected and prepared in a different way than the secular clergy. The first three Lima Councils and their parallel Councils of México addressed this issue in several of their sessions. The article will seek to present those Indian missionaries who, although sometimes erred, knew how to carry out the mission with solid logic and apostolic courage, obeying the synod instructions.
The article compares two approaches of subjectivity: ‘tragic subjectivity’ and ‘ironic’ one. Both of them include different anthropology. Tragic subjectivity is most fully expressed in commitment to values. Tragic protagonist is the one who by acting according to his commitment to values becomes self–conscious. However, subjectivity which emerges from tragic vision cannot exist in postmodern times, because of some reductions which postmodern philosophy has brought. Ironic subjectivity took the place of the tragic one. This subjectivity manifests in negation. Ironic protagonist understands freedom as being uncommitted, as an abstraction from the externality. This escape from reality brings to the subject the feeling of self–doubt. In the end of the article the author shows that ironic project is not a remedy for the problems which appear from postmodernity and suggests that new form of tragic vision (which again brings to the notion of ‘humanity’ special content) is possible.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.