No abstract available / SYS THEOLOGY & THEOL ETHICS / DTH (SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY)

No abstract available / SYS THEOLOGY and THEOL ETHICS / DTH (SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY)

L’obiettivo della tesi è di indagare gli anni trascorsi a Venezia da Albino Luciani, anni non esaurientemente approfonditi dalla storiografia e sui quali la memoria storica è ancora divisa. L’evidenza principale che ne scaturisce è la difficoltà non solo di Luciani, ma di tutte le personalità che avevano ruoli di guida e di responsabilità all’interno della Chiesa, nel misurarsi con l’attuazione del Concilio Vaticano II. L’ipotesi interpretativa proposta è che il filo conduttore di tutta l’opera pastorale del presule bellunese sia stato uno sforzo di fedeltà alla tradizione romana e all’autorità papale seppur attraverso l’ammodernamento dei metodi pastorali utilizzati. Il patriarca di Venezia è risultato particolarmente rappresentativo di tutto un episcopato nazionale montiniano che ha attuato in Italia le ricezione conciliare secondo l’ermeneutica di Paolo VI. L’indagine, avendo cura di confrontare sempre il piano dell’omiletica e il piano delle reali scelte pastorali attuate, analizza a tutto campo l’operato di Luciani, dalle attività diocesane al suo apporto alla vita ecclesiale a livello regionale, nazionale e internazionale; ha inoltre il pregio di aver utilizzato come fonte importante materiale inedito reperito nei nove archivi storici utilizzati e in vari archivi personali. Infine, è corredato di un’ampia e interessante appendice che racchiude le testimonianze orali di venti testimoni scelti. / The aim of the thesis is to investigate the years passed in Venice by Albino Luciani, years not exhaustively studied by historiography and on which historical memory is still divided. The main evidence is the difficulty not only of Luciani, but also of all personalities who had leadership roles and responsibilities within the Church, in measuring itself with the realization of the Second Vatican Council. The interpretative hypothesis is that the main theme of all the pastoral work of the patriarch of Venice was an effort of fidelity to the Roman tradition and papal authority even through the modernization of the pastoral methods. The patriarch of Venice was particularly representative of a whole national Montinian episcopate which carried out in Italy the Council reception according to the hermeneutic proposed by Paul VI. The survey, comparing the plan of homiletics and the plan of the real pastoral options implemented, examines entirely Luciani’s work, from the diocesan activities to his contribution to regional, national and international Catholic Church. The thesis uses as sources important unpublished material retrieved in nine historical archives and in various personal archives. Finally, the thesis is accompanied with a wide and interesting appendix that contains the interviews with twenty chosen witnesses.

Comme son titre l’indique, la présente thèse porte sur la canonicité de la Conférence des évêques. Elle vise à réfléchir au degré d’autorité decette nouvelle institution spécifiquement latine. La Conférence des évêques est devenue un organe permanent, alors que le Synode desévêques né en 1965 sous le pontificat de Paul VI n’a pas reçu cette caractéristique. La Conférence des évêques est-elle une expression de lacollégialité épiscopale ? Le Concile Vatican II (1962-1965) l’a admise comme l’une des composantes de cette collégialité. Vatican II l’aconsacrée et institutionnalisée (Constitution Lumen Gentium et Décret Christus Dominus), mais sans parvenir à lever toutes les questionsliées à son autorité et à sa juridiction. Le Synode des évêques de 1969, dont le thème annoncé était précisément la collégialité vécue, a aussiabordé la question des Conférences épiscopales. À cette Assemblée synodale, le débat a concerné principalement les moyens à mettre enoeuvre pour réaliser une coopération réelle et efficace entre Rome et les Conférences épiscopales et pour garantir une meilleure autonomie àces Conférences, sans pour autant entraver la liberté du Pape, ni porter atteinte à l’autorité de l’évêque diocésain. Il s’en est suivi une plusgrande détermination des principes qui régissent d’une part les relations entre les Conférences épiscopales et Siège apostolique, et d’autrepart les liens des Conférences épiscopales entre elles.Mais ce débat n’a toujours pas été tout à fait dirimé, surtout quant à l’autorité magistérielle de la Conférence des évêques. La qualificationjuridique en 1983 par les soins de la codification latine semble n’avoir pas suffi. Témoigne de ce malaise persistant le Synode des évêques de1985. Celui-ci a formellement demandé une réévaluation de l’institution de la Conférence des évêques : « Puisque les Conférencesépiscopales sont particulièrement utiles, voire nécessaires dans le travail pastoral actuel de l’Église, on souhaite l’étude de leur « status »théologique pour qu’en particulier la question de leur autorité doctrinale soit plus clairement et plus profondément explicitée, compte tenude ce qui est écrit dans le décret conciliaire Christus Dominus n° 38 et dans le Code de droit canonique, can. 447 et 753 ». Cela aoccasionné deux efforts institutionnels, l’un consultatif (L’Instrumentum laboris de 1987 de la Congrégation pour les évêques), l’autre décisionnel (le Motu proprio Apostolos suos de 1998). Dans cette dernière norme de requalification théologique et juridique, le Pape Jean-Paul II réaffirme de manière plus décisive la spécificité de la Conférence des évêques. Ce vaste dossier peut sembler redondant et lancinant. Les chercheurs peuvent constater que le problème de l’autorité de la Conférence des évêques s’avère encore difficile à trancher. En effet, les principaux paramètres de l’édifice ecclésial ne sont-ils pas profondément interrogés ? / As it is suggested within the title, the present thesis focuses on the canonicity of the Conference of bishops. It aims to reflect the degree ofauthority of this new specifically Latin Institution. The bishops Conference has become a permanent body, while the Synod of bishops whichwas born in 1965, under Pope Paul VI did not receive this feature. Is the Conference of bishops an expression of episcopal collegiality? TheSecond Vatican Council (1962-1965) was admitted as a component of this collegiality. Vatican II was consecrated and institutionalized(Constitution Lumen Gentium and Decree Christus Dominus), but failed to raise any issue relating to its authority and jurisdiction. The 1969Synod of bishops, whose theme was announced, more precisely lived collegiality, also addressed the question of episcopal conferences. Atthe Synod Assembly, the debate has mainly concerned the means to implement in order to achieve a real and effective cooperation betweenRome and the bishops' conferences, and to ensure greater autonomy to these conferences, without impeding the freedom of the Pope, orundermining the authority of the diocesan bishop. There ensued a greater commitment to the principles which govern, on the one hand, therelationship between the Episcopal Conferences and the Apostolic See, and on the other hand, the links between the different episcopalConferences.But that debate has still not been completely invalidated, especially as it refers to the teaching authority of the Conference of bishops. Thejuridical qualification, in 1983, through the efforts of the latin codification seems to have been insufficient.The Synod of Bishops, in 1985, demonstrates this persistent discomfort. It has formally requested a reassessment of the institution of theConference of bishops: « Since the Episcopal Conferences are particularly useful, even necessary in the current pastoral work of theChurch, we want to study their theological " status " so that in particular the issue of their doctrinal authority would be more clearly anddeeply explained, taking into account what is written in the conciliar Decree Christus Dominus, item N° 38 and in the Code of Canon Law,can. 447 and 753 ». This situation derived to two institutional efforts: an advisory one (The Instrumentum laboris of 1987 of theCongregation for bishops), then another one, a decision (the Motu proprio Apostolos suos 1998). In this last theological standard and juridicalrequalification, Pope John Paul II reaffirms, more decisively, the specificity of the Conference of bishops. This extensive file may seem to beredundant and haunting. Researchers can notice that the problem of authority of the Conference of bishops remains difficult to determine. Infact, are the main parameters of the ecclesial structure not deeply questioned ?