Suchergebnisse

5.3 Corporate-style management5.4 Success on targeted preventative output; 5.5 Improved outcome; 6. Continental case: Amsterdam; 6.1 Specialised policy; 6.2 Intense and exclusive structures; 6.3 Games of management; 6.4 High risk targeted output; 6.5 Varying outcomes; 7. Comparative analysis of empirical findings; 7.1 Variation in governance arrangements; 7.2 Variation in the quality of outputs and outcomes; 7.3 Testing three hypotheses; 8. Conclusion and discussion; 8.1 Answer to the central question; 8.2 Theoretical implications; 8.3 Practical implications.

U naslovu rada je upitnik: to upućuje na pravnu problematiku koja još nije definitivno razriješena. Temeljno pravno pitanje na koje ovaj članak odgovara moglo bi se ovako formulirati: imaju li vjernici laici crkvenu vlast upravljanja ili u njoj mogu samo surađivati? Povod raspravi dale su dvije kanonske odredbe sadašnjeg Zakonika kanonskog prava: prva se odnosi na mogućnost suradnje vjernika laika u vlasti upravljanja (kan. 129, § 2), a druga na mogućnost da vjernici laici budu imenovani crkvenim sudcima (kan. 1421, § 2), što je služba povezana s obavljanjem odgovarajuće vlasti. Je li posrijedi nedosljednost u samom Zakoniku ili je moguće doći do sinteze? U pokušaju odgovora na to pitanje autori induktivnom metodom najprije govore općenito o vlasti upravljanja u Crkvi, a zatim o vjernicima laicima te općenito o njihovim pravima i obvezama u Crkvi. Zatim pristupaju analizi kan. 129, § 2 i kan. 1421, § 2, s posebnim osvrtom na izvore koji su utjecali na formulaciju tih kanona. Konačno, predstavljaju dvije škole, rimsku i münchensku, te dvije teorije, sakramentalnu i nesakramentalnu o izvorima i prenošenju svete vlasti (sacra potestas) u Crkvi. Moguće rješenje postavljenog pitanja i svojevrsnu sintezu u zaključku pronalaze u dvostrukoj izvornosti i dvostrukom prenošenju jedne i jedine Kristove vlasti u Crkvi: po sakramentu sv. reda i po kanonskom poslanju (missio canonica) u ime Crkve. ; Summary In this unsolved issue of the Canon law, the basic juridical question could be expressed in this way: do the lay faithful possess the ecclesiastical power of governance, or they can only participate in it? The discussion is motivated by two paragraphs of the current Canon Law. The first one deals with the possibility of collaboration of the lay faithful in the exercise of the power of governance (can. 129, § 2). The other one refers to the possibility for lay faithful to be appointed for ecclesiastical judges (can. 1421, § 2), which is linked to exercise of the power of governance. Is the Cannon law incoherent, or a synthesis is possible? The authors following the inductive method firstly explain the power of governance in the Church, then the status of the lay faithful, and their general rights and duties in the Church. Then the authors analyze the cannons 129, § 2 and 1421, § 2, giving particular attention to the sources that influenced the formulation of these canons. Finally, they present the theories of the Roman and the Munich school, the sacramental and the non sacramental theory, regarding the sources and transmission of the sacred power (sacra potestas) in the Church. The possible solution and synthesis are found in the double source and the double tradition of the one and only Christ's power in the Church, by the sacrament of Holy Orders, and the canonic mission (missio canonica) in the name of the Church.