Judeo-Christian writings introduce the concept of a „seal” as one of the basic terms defining Baptism. It is related to the Jewish apocalyptics and the Apocalypse. In that context, the „seal” is identified with the Name of Jesus. As the Judeo-Christian tradition gradually vanishes, the identification of the seal with the name of Jesus also disappears. Instead, there is a return to the theology of St Paul, who wrote about being sealed by the Holy Spirit. The image of Baptism as the seal of the Holy Trinity also begins to appear. In the Latin literature of the 3rd century, the concept gradually assumes the form of a separate rite – being anointed by a bishop – thus, it is more and more strongly associated with the granting of the Holy Spirit. In the 4th century, the term „seal” is no longer used in relation to Baptism. It continues to define Baptism in the East, but in the 4th century, apart from Cyril of Jerusalem, very few people use it. It is carefully avoided by the Fathers following the Alexandrian tradition, John Chrysostom of Antiochia does not seem to like it, either.

Uno dei problemi maggiori della cristologia odierna viene costituito dalla questione della scienza e coscienza di Cristo. La tradizione cristologica dopo il Concilio di Calcedonia non sempre sapeva presentarle in modo capace di salvaguardare l’integralità dell’umanità di Cristo. La soluzione medievale classica con la triplice scienza di Gesù non sembra più sostenibile oggi, di fronte allo sviluppo della riflessione critica sul Nuovo Testamento e della riflessione antropologica. Le soluzioni alternative fin’ora elaborate invece (come quella di K. Rahner, fondata sulla distinzione tra scienza implicite e explicite) non sembrano soddisfacenti. L’ipotesi dell’esperienza mistica, che indica il “meccanismo” di tale esperienza come fondamento antropologico per la formazione dell’autocoscienza di Cristo pare essere una strada promettente. Infatti non esige una teoria di conoscenza esclusiva e particolare, costruita per spiegare la scienza di Gesù (e di lui solo) e nello stesso tempo permette di spiegare come è nata la sua autocoscienza filiale, di cui testimoniano i più antici strati della tradizione cristologica del Nuovo Testamento.

Gershom Scholem, the founder and main authority of modern research on Jewish mysticism, strictly connected the first ancient stage of this religion phenomenon, so called Hekhalot or Merkavah mysticism, with Gnosticism (in its broad definition). Sholem’s complex view was questioned by some authors of younger generation, however the relations between main ideas of Gnosticism and early Jewish Mysticism have not been yet precisely characterized. In first part of this paper I examine the Jewish milieus from which Gnosticism emerged such as Qumran community, Philo’s Therapeutes, baptistic sects and followers of Simon Magus. Then I compare some main ideas of Hekhalot Mysticism and Gnosticism in order to find dependencies and discrepancies between them. As a result of this analysis it can be stated that there is no common core in Gnostic and Hekhalot tradition. The latter did not possess a fundamental Gnostic opposition between Good Father and Demiurge, divine spark and matter. At first sight there is a delusive similarity in scheme of ascension of the soul but in deeper analysis it cannot be stated any longer. Mutual dependencies are rather minor and they occur especially in the field of magic. If we want to call the esoteric knowledge of Hekhalot mysticism a Gnosis we should stress that it is not a Gnosis of Gnosticism. The aim of these two ways of ascension to the Heaven was definitely different. When the Gnostic practiced a self-salvation, Jewish mystic used his specific Gnosis as means of reaching God’s Throne and God itself – what was for him an ultimate aim.

Theology always serves the needs of the current teachings of the Church that are addressed to a modern man. The subject of heaven and a man destined to live in unity with God was always important in the Catholic Church’s teachings. The article looks at the question of human existence in heaven and gives the picture of it on the basis of some catechisms and sermons. As for heaven, it is the place and the state of supreme happiness and perfection, it is the perfect life in the constant presence of God. A man’s destiny in turn is to be in unity with God. The picture of ‘a man of heaven’ is created by us, by all those who live on earth whereas the fundamental task and the sole aim in life of every Christian is to ‘look for heaven’ and make it more and more real and true.

Contemporary homilets of German language area are vividly interested in a message and historical nature of evangelical description of miracles.Like in the Gospels whose character is of historical-kerygmatic nature – similarly in description of Jesus miracles they are closely united and create both the event and the meaning element.In the apostolic preaching the theological interpretation of miracles has been united with their existence and narration. To explain the listeners the contents of miracles in the best way, the preacher ought to distinguish in them a literary form, a kerygmat and an event. If the preacher wants the kerygmat to be understood and still actual, he is obliged to accentuate historicity of miracles of Jesus. In this way, the preacher will be able to act against the tendencies of lay and liberal specialists in religious studies who undermine historicity of the Gospel – also description of miracles.Therefore, looking properly at evangelical description of miracles – and through them – the preacher will be able to bring closer to us the redemptive wonders of Christ who „is just miracle of all miracles” (Alfred Läpple).

Artykuł podejmuje analizę konceptu motywacji w filozofii Edyty Stein, zwłaszcza w jej pracy zatytułowanej Psychische Kausalität. Autorka rozróżnia motywację w sensie ścisłym i ogólnym. Perspektywa fenomenologiczna pozwala jej uniknąć zbytniej racjonalizacji motywacji ludzkiej i przede wszystkim ukazać ją w całym jej bogactwie. Analizy motywacji nie można oddzielić od ludzkiej wolności, świadomości i wszelkich aktów wewnętrznych. Analizy asystentki Husserla charakteryzuje perspektywa noetyczna, która staje się wręcz koniecznością metodyczną, gdyż pozwala uniknąć częstego błędu redukcji przyczynowości psychicznej do fizycznej. Ta perspektywa pomaga w sposób racjonalny ukazać, że ludzkie motywowanie nie jest określane jedynie przez noematyczne motywy, ale także przez wcześniejsze akty i przeżycia.

Twórczość G. E. Moore’a (1873–1958) stanowi przykład par excellence zastosowania metody analitycznej przy rozwiązywaniu podstawowych zagadnień etycznych. W swoim programowym dziele Principia Ethica Moore jest zainteresowany nie tyle w dawaniu nowych rozwiązań, ile w krytyce zastanych koncepcji filozoficznych. Ogłaszając tzw. błąd naturalistyczny, stwierdza, że predykat «dobry» jest niedefiniowalny. Dzieje się tak, ponieważ jest niezłożony i jako taki nie podlega dalszej analizie. Możemy natomiast mówić o rzeczach dobrych. Za takie filozof z Canterbury uważa przyjemności międzyludzkiego obcowania i radość doznawaną wobec piękna. W sferze etyki normatywnej, w przypadku Moore’a, możemy mówić o tzw. utylitaryzmie idealnym. Słusznym («right») działaniem jest to, które przyniesie w efekcie najwięcej dobra. Dobro samo w sobie jest poznawalne jako ewidentne i nie wymaga dalszego uzasadnienia. Słuszność moralna, określająca nasze obowiązki, nie jest ewidentna sama z siebie, co pociąga za sobą arbitralność oceny sytuacji etycznych i, konsekwentnie, relatywny charakter norm moralnych. Ze względu na specyficzną metodę poznawczą istnieją przesłanki, by zaliczyć Moore’a w krąg intuicjonizmu teleologicznego. Optowanie za etyką skoncentrowaną na specyficznie pojętym dobru prowadzi do ostrego podziału miedzy teorią i praktyką etyczną. Pomimo tej trudności Moore ze swoją metodą uprawiania etyki okazuje się dobrym nauczycielem dla pragnących wejść w arkana analizy filozoficznej.

Das immense Anwachsen der Kommunikationsmedien und ihre vermehrte Verfügbarkeit hat außergewöhnliche Möglichkeiten zur Bereicherung nicht nur für das Leben des Einzelnen, sondern auch der Familien mit sich gebracht. Zugleich aber stehen die Kinder, die Jugendlichen und die ganzen Familien vor neuen Herausforderungen, die von den verschiedenartigen und oft widersprüchlichen Botschaften ausgehen die von den Massenmedien vermittelt werden. Der vorliegende Artikel hat sich ein Ziel gesetzt, diese Situation der verschiedenartigen Auswirkungen der Medien im Licht der wissenschaftlichen Reflexion zu stellen. Wir beschäftigen uns zuerst mit den Problemen, wie man von den Medien in den Familien Gebrauch macht, und in welcher Weise umgekehrt die Familien und die Sorgen der Familie von den Medien behandelt werden. Unsere Hauptgedanken konzentrieren sich auf dem Bereich der Erziehung zur verantwortungsbewussten Gebrauch der Medien, das heißt anders, zur asketischen Erziehung. Wir bemühen uns, den Begriff der Askese, den man heutzutage vernachlässigt und missachte, ins Licht zu bringen und seine Bedeutung für den verantwortungsvollen Gebrauch der Medien zu zeigen. Die Medien werden täglich in vielen Wohnungen und Familien als vertrauter Gast willkommen geheißen. Um richtig mit ihnen umzugehen, muss man die Selbstdisziplin und den kritischen Sinn haben. Dazu braucht man zu erkennen, daß die Medienleute in der Tat Aufseher und Verwalter einer ungeheuren geistlichen Kraft sind, die zum Erbe der Menschheit gehört und dazu bestimmt ist, die ganze menschliche Gemeinschaft reicher zu machen. Die Menschen können in den Medien eine Quelle der Hilfe, der Ermutigung und der Inspiration finden, wenn sie sich bemühen, als eine Lebens- und Liebesgemeinschaft asketisch zu leben und auf diese Weise jungen Menschen gesunde sittliche Werte beizubringen und eine Kultur der Solidarität, der Freiheit und des Friedens zu fördern.

Traditional folk devotional practices in nowadays Lithuania are found in the Church calendar, among the prayers, hymns and songs of national feasts, memorable days or additional devotions (Hours of Our Lady, the Rosary of Our Lady and of Jesus‘ Name, performed orally or by singing, Samogitian Calvaries, Stations of the Cross, Lamentations on the Passions of Christ and Mourning Psalms in commemoration of the dead. Among them, there are special feasts of different Lithuanian saints and the blessed. In the course of centuries, Lithuania had a lot of prominent people, wise rulers, brave men or sages. Among them there are blessed archbishop George Matulaitis and Michael Giedraitis who are on the way to beatification, but so far not proclaimed as saints. The only Lithuanian saint is St. Casimir. There are quite a lot scientific theological, historical, art research (iconographic) materials about the cult of St. Casimir either in Lithuania, or all over the world, but practically there no materials about the folk devotions and rituals, concerning St. Casimir. Historical sources claim the cult of St.Casimir to be of local origin, i.e., worshiped only in separate regions, having either historical or neighbouring contacts with Poland. Historical facts confirm that: Pope Clement VIII by his breve (1602 XI 07) raised the feast of St. Casimir in Lithuania and Poland to a higher liturgical degree (sub ritu dublici), in other words, proclaimed his cult as local, i.e., for Lithuania and Poland. His successor, Pope Paul V, made it universal and included St. Casimir’s prayers into the Missal and breviary. In 1636 Pope Urban VIII proclaimed St. Casimir the patron of Lithuania, and allowed his feast to be celebrated with solemn liturgy. That is why he bears the name Magnus Ducatus Lituanus. As there are close Catholic contacts between Poland and Lithuania, the aim of the research is to reveal ethno-cultural contacts of St. Casimir’s devotional practices in Poland and Lithuania. In order to reach the purpose, such tasks were raised: firstly, to reveal St. Casimir’s devotional practices in Lithuania; then, to set the origin of these practices and their intercultural ethnic ties. The research done allows to make such conclusions: firstly, the cult of St. Casimir in Lithuania is of local origin, i.e., he is worshiped in separate Lithuanian regions, having either historical, or neighbouring contacts with Poland (Highlands and Suvalkija); secondly, St. Casimir’s devotions consist of 10 customs. They are: 12 stations of St. Casimir’s pious life, processions with palms; women, hiding their hair and faces under a kerchief and walking afoot as a symbol of chastity; a cloth, that vestured St. Casimir’s relics, put into pieces and venerated; fasting; giving alms to the beggars; lying cruciform on the ground, playing with signal musical instruments and singing of hymns; thirdly, from 10 ritual customs, 6 are of Polish origin, 4 – of local origin, 3 – from the teachings of the Church or the personal life of St. Casimir; fourthly, the most ethnographically rich region is eastern and south-eastern Lithuania (Highlands and Dzūkija): 4 are in Vilnius diocese, 2 – in Panevėžys diocese and 1 – in Kaunas archdiocese. Suvalkija (Vilkaviškis diocese) has got 2 ritual customs. All the ethnographic regions have a common ritual custom – singing of hymns. The fifth thing is ritual customs of local origin: women, hiding their hair and faces under a kerchief and walking afoot as a symbol of chastity, a cloth, that vestured St. Casimir’s relics, put into pieces and venerated. Using of these customs witness the respect and love of Lithuanian Catholics to St. Casimir. The sixth thing is that, during the missions of Jesuit sodality, came solemn processions with the palms in honour of St. Casimir. And the last conclusion is that Polish religious culture influenced Lithuanian folk devotions in forming such ritual customs as: walking of twelve stations, devoted to St. Casimir’s pious life, special prayers, said to his honour, singing of special hymns or other sonic expressions, like playing the signal instruments. The results of the research prove the thesis, that devotions to St. Casimir are the obelisk of Polish and Lithuanian spirituality, a symbol of fights for religious freedom, against paganism, Protestantism, Islam and Orthodoxy. They were influenced by the historical – geopolitical situation, by the Jesuit order in Lithuania with their sodalities, colleges and wide area of their missions.

Nel presente articolo sono state raccolte insieme e descritte le informazioni riguardanti le ordinazioni episcopali (luogo, tempo e circostanze) dei successivi vescovi ordinari (poi arcivescovi metropoliti) ed aussiliari di Katowice. I pastori della Chiesa di Katowice, presi qui in considerazione, sono (nell’ordine cronologico): Augusto Hlond (consacrato 1926, ordinario 1925–1926, poi arcivescovo metropolita di Gniezno e Poznań, primate di Polonia e cardinale), Arcadio Lisiecki (consacrato 1926, ordinario 1926–1930), Stanislao Adamski (consacrato 1930, ordinario 1930–1967), Teofilo Bromboszcz (consacrato 1934, ausiliare 1934–1937), Giulio Bieniek (consacrato 1937, ausiliare 1937–1978), Erberto Bednorz (consacrato 1950, coadiutore 1950–1967, ordinario 1967–1985), Giuseppe Kurpas (consacrato 1963, ausiliare 1962–1991), Ceslao Domin (consacrato 1970, ausiliare 1970–1992, poi vescovo ordinario di Koszalin–Kołobrzeg), Janussio Zimniak (consacrato 1980, ausiliare 1980–1992, poi vescovo ausiliare di Bielsko-Biała–Żywiec), Damiano Zimoń (consacrato 1985, ordinario dal 1985, arcivescovo metropolita dal 1992) Gerardo Bernacki (consacrato 1988, ausiliare dal 1988), Pietro Libera (consacrato 1997, ausiliare dal 1996, anche segretario generale del Episcopato Polacco – dal 1998), Stefano Cichy (consacrato 1998, ausiliare 1998–2005, poi vescovo ordinario di Legnica) e Giuseppe Kupny (consacrato 2006, ausiliare dal 2005). Ulteriormente è stata presentata nel presente articolo la questione principale delle linee di successione apostolica dei vescovi trattati nel quadro di questa elaborazione. Cioè A. Hlond, A. Lisiecki, S. Adamski, T. Bromboszcz, G. Bieniek, E. Bednorz, G. Kurpas, C. Domin, J. Zimniak, D. Zimoń, G. Bernacki, S. Cichy e G. Kupny appartengono alla linea polacca del primate Giacomo Uchański, invece soltanto P. Libera appartiene (come il Papa Benedetto XVI) alla linea romana del cardinale Scipione Rebiba. I suoi scelti legami sono stati mostrati negli schemi grafici aggiunti al testo.

Artykuł Jiříego Hanuša poświęcony jest rozwojowi sytuacji w czeskim Kościele katolickim po 1989 r. Podzielony jest na kilka części tematycznych. W części pierwszej autor śledzi rozmiary zniszczeń w różnych sferach życia kościelnego po okresie tzw. normalizacji (1969–1989). Część druga stanowi próbę przedstawienia reakcji przedstawicieli Kościoła na rewolucję 1989 r. oraz sposobu religijnego interpretowania tych wydarzeń. W części trzeciej przedstawione są różne programy odnowy Kościoła wraz z ich pozytywnymi i negatywnymi stronami (program Tomaša Halíka, pragmatyczny program oficjalnej hierarchii), w czwartej zaś ukazane zostały problemy, z jakimi spotyka się dzisiejszy Kościół – sekularyzacja społeczeństwa, polaryzacja w łonie samego Kościoła, kwestia wydziałów teologicznych, rozliczenie z przeszłością itp. Mimo wszystkich wyżej wymienionych problemów, Kościół przeżywa obecnie okres wolności i możliwości, które nie mają precedensu we współczesnej dobie.

Le scuole latine in Slesia nei secoli XVI e XVII, mettendo in pratica principi della paideia umanistica, furono alveria, dove i giovani imparavano la pietà, scienza dello stato e della civiltà. Tra queste vie dell’educazione si trovava la retorica, in cui, seguendo Quintiliano, la morale è una pars gravissima. Le virtus e disciplina costituiscono, secondo Quintiliano, una condizione fondamentale e necessaria per raggiungere la perfezione nell’arte della parola e, quindi, nella vita civica. I maestri devono guidare gli studenti come per mano (manuductio), affinché essi aumentino la loro scienza, ma anche crescano nella virtù. Questo postulato si manifesta particolarmente nell’orazione De disciplina scolastica di Melchior Laubanus (1567–1633). Lo Slesiano di Szprotawa precedette trenta anni Amos Komeński.