I have argued in the past that there has been a massive failure of nerve in the study of religion in the context of the modern research university; that it failed to live up to the scientific objectives enunciated for the field in late nineteenth-century European academic communities. The "comments" here on the current state of the science (or sciences) of religion constitute, in part, a kind of informal critical history of the field known as "Religious Studies." I suggest here that the overall development of the field might actually indicate a positive trajectory since its inception in late nineteenth-century Europe. This essay, therefore, may mitigate somewhat my recent claim (with L. H. Martin) that it is highly unlikely that the scientific study of religion will actually some day come to dominance in religious studies departments in our modern universities.
Příspěvek je věnován polskému básníkovi Macieji Kazimierzi Sarbiewskému (1595-1640), jednomu z nejvýznamnějších latinských básníků 17. století a známému literárnímu teoretikovi. V Polsku patřil k nejpopulárnějším autorům před Henrykem Sienkiewiczem. Byl také nazývám sarmatským nebo latinským Horaciem. V Evropě je známý díky svému dílu Lyricorum libri tres. Papež Urban VIII. udělil Sarbiewskému titul poeta laureatus. Sarbiewski byl jezuitským kaplanem ve Vilniusu, odkud byl povolán králem Vladislavem IV. Vasou na královský dvůr. Autor se v příspěvku věnuje i oblibě Sarbiewského u českých a slovenských romantických spisovatelů (K. H. Mácha a C. Zoch). Poté recepci Sarbiewského v českých odborných příručkách a slovnících. and The article deals with Maciej Kazimierz Sarbiewski (Mathias Casimirus Sarbievius, 1595-1640) who was Europe's most prominent Latin poet of the 17th century, and a renowned theoretician of poetics. He was the first Polish poet to become widely celebrated abroad and the most popular Polish author before Henryk Sienkiewicz. He became known as Horationis par ("the peer of Horace") or the Sarmatian Horace and "the last Latin poet". His European fame came out of his first collection of poetry, Lyricorum libri tres (Three Books of Lyrics). An expanded edition, Lyricorum libri IV (Four Books of Lyrics), was so successful in Europe that it was released in 60 editions in different countries. During a stay in Rome, Sarbiewski was crowned poeta laureatus (poet laureate) by Pope Urban VIII. Sarbiewski was a Jesuit priest at Vilnius University and court preacher to Polish King Wladyslaw IV Vasa. The author also deals with the reception of Sarbiewski in Czech and Slovak romantic poetry (K. H. Mácha, C. Zoch) in Czech teachers' and encyclopedic book, too.
This article summarizes previous debates on the relationship between myth, biblical exegesis and theology in Catharism, and studies the different configurations of these forms of thinking in all extant Cathar texts. In the mid-20th century, the relationship was discussed mostly as a question of the origin and nature of Catharism, understood either as a continuation of Gnostic or Manichean mythology within medieval Europe, or Christian evangelical reformism based primarily on the Scripture. However, myth, biblical exegesis, and theology need not be seen as mutually exclusive, and the interpretation of larger Christian culture now acknowledges the important part myth plays in biblical exegesis and theology. In Cathar Christianity, the relationship of these forms shifts during the 13th century, just as in the larger family of 13th-century Western Christianity it belongs to, but still these forms neither contradict each other nor does one replace the other. Today the question is not which of these forms was earlier or more important in Cathar Christianity but how different extant texts interpret and enrich previous thought using these forms inherited from the wider Christian tradition.
The paper discusses particular documents of St. Pius X (1903–1914) in which, within his efforts to reform the Church (and within the Church particularly to restore the formation of future priests), he recommends the doctrine of St. Thomas Aquinas: besides notes issued at various occasions, these are breve In præcipuis laudibus (23 January 1904), antimodern encyclic Pascendi Dominici gregis (8 September 1907) with motu proprio Sacrorum Antistitum (1 September 1910) and especially motu proprio Doctoris Angelici (29 June 1914) with XXIV Thomistic theses (27 July 1914) attached.
This response deals with some aspects of Luther Martin and Donald Wiebe's paper "Religious Studies as a Scientific Discipline: The Persistence of a Delusion". The authors think that the human mind in general constantly tends towards religiousness and thus comprehensive scientific inquiry into religion is actually impossible. They argue that "such study is not ever likely to occur in that or any other setting" (p. 9). They also stress that they were deluded in the past and argue that especially (or only) the cognitive approach can help us to elucidate the proclivity towards religiousness. I partly agree with them, particularly that the promotion of "extra-scientific" agendas in Academia is questionable, but I do not see it as such a serious problem. The reduction of the biases to only "religious" agendas is mistaken. The history of the field is a history of diverse "extra-scientific" agendas which change in accordance with social development and prevailing political interests. I present the situation from a central and eastern European point of view. At the same time, I argue that many scientific fields deal with the same issue, even if not to such an extent. This is because religious studies, more than other disciplines, attracts scholars with a special inclination toward religion. I also argue that scholarly results are much more important than "personal" agendas. Also, the aspiration of religious studies as presented by Martin and Wiebe seems to me too idealistic, perhaps utopist and thus unrealizable.