Religious life after the church union of Berestia

Church Union of Berestia agreement, proclaimed in 1596, between the Ruthenian (Ukrainian-Belarusian) Orthodox church in Poland and Lithuania and the Holy See. The recognition of the pope as the head of the church and the implications of this position for the faith, morals, practices, and church administration were accepted by the Orthodox clergy. For his part, the pope agreed to the retention of the Eastern rite and confirmed the administrative-disciplinary rights and autonomy of the Kyiv metropoly.

Various circumstances brought about a crisis in the Ukrainian Orthodox church in the second half of the 16th century: the Turkish conquest of the seat of the patriarch of Constantinople in 1453; difficulties in the Ukrainian-Belarusian Orthodox church, such as declining discipline; the creation of the Moscow patriarchate in 1589; Protestant influences; and the Polonization of the Ukrainian upper classes. The Orthodox bishops worked out a plan for establishing ties with Rome at their sobors in 1590–4. The initiators of the plan hoped to gain not only ecclesiastical benefits from the union, but also an end to the Polonization of the upper classes and equality for the Orthodox church and its clergy in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The union was supported by leading Polish circles because it was politically and religiously advantageous to them.

The union was announced by the papal bull Magnus Dominus on 23 December 1595. In January and February of 1596 the rights and privileges of the Uniate church were worked out and were guaranteed by the bull Decet Romanum Pontificem of 23 February 1596. After Ipatii Potii and Kyrylo Terletsky returned from Rome, a sobor was called in Berestia for 16–20 October 1596. The sobor split into two groups—for and against the union with Rome—and thus two councils went on concurrently. The Polish king Sigismund III Vasa issued a proclamation in support of the union. The Apostolic See was represented at the sobor by the Roman Catholic bishops of Lviv, Lutsk, and Kholm, and the Polish government and crown were represented by several senators.

32) The idea of civil society covers the major themes of Western political tradition. Identified originally in the eighteenth century as related to the sphere of social interdependence, in the nineteenth century have been used to characterize the other side of social life that ex
показати повністю..32) THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY COVERS THE MAJOR THEMES OF WESTERN POLITICAL TRADITION. Identified originally in the eighteenth century as related to the sphere of social interdependence, in the nineteenth century have been used to characterize the other side of social life that existed outside the state. This indicates the different content elements such as suspilnist and individualism that defined political opinion in the past two centuries. Civil society is also the area and "natural sympathy and sociability", according to Adam Smith, and the scene where a man, "acting as a private person and treating others as a tool, converts itself to the vehicle and becomes almost a toy in the hands of strangers forces ", according to Marx's famous definition of market relations [5]. This - the scope of "rights" of property, politeness, but also economic exploitation. It is based on legally a free person, but also on the association of free individuals. However, in addition to state regulation of civil society is still governed by formal laws. Thus, the public sphere is still determined individuals.

 

Thus, not surprisingly, the modern use of the term, due to very different interpretations, tends to be too general and often suffers a lack of analytical depth analysis. Works by various authors such as Ferguson and Marx, Hegel and Adam Smith, Tocqueville, and Gramsci calls the modern "perevidkryttya" civil society [6]. Add to this confusion is also a strange and somewhat asymptotic development of the term in the twentieth century. As tso-/11/ho idea of civil society, although ignored for decades the main Western and pivnichnoamerykanskymy studies of social philosophy and political theory, continued (and continues) to cause heated debate among the "leftist" intellectuals and critics both from the former state-socialist regimes of Eastern Europe, and from post-industrial Western societies. In fact, significantly only after the recent transformations of Eastern European politics and society the idea of civil society again gained circulation among wide circles of academic, professorial and just an educated public.