Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Ch.7

Expand Messages
  • Helen Fedor
    O.k., I ll start this week s discussion. Spiesz lists, among Emperor Joseph s reforms, that priestly formation was removed from episcopal control and
    Message 1 of 7 , Oct 16, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      O.k., I'll start this week's discussion.

      Spiesz lists, among Emperor Joseph's reforms, that priestly formation was removed "from episcopal control and concentrated...in general seminaries". How did priestly education work before the reform? Were there any seminaries? And what does Spiesz mean when he says that they were educated "in the spirit of the Enlightment"? Were they given a broader education than just theology?

      H
    • Michael
      Helen, Joseph II reorganized the way the Church was treated in the Empire and granted virtual equality to other religions. He created a spritual court
      Message 2 of 7 , Oct 17, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Helen,

        Joseph II reorganized the way the Church was treated in the Empire
        and granted virtual equality to other religions. He created a
        spritual court commision to deal with all non-religious
        ecclesiastical matters. Marriage became civil affairs rather than
        tied to canon law.

        Joseph II closed about 700 monasteries and convents in the Austria
        Empire, mainly, those which he deemed not doing socially productive
        work. Those involved in education, caring for the ill, agriculture
        and trades continued to exist (Robert Kann, 191). The state formed a
        Religious Fund to control and finance parishes.

        So the state funding the Church in Slovakia and paying clerics'
        salaries come from this era.

        Before the reforms, all education took place in seminaries with
        education tightly controlled by the Church. Joseph opened up the
        seminaries to more Enlightenment ideas and loosened control from Rome
        and took a more active role in high ecclesiastical appointments.
        Even his mother, Maria Theresa, had ruled that the state had a right
        to rule on behalf of secular law and property when it concerned the
        Church. Joseph took it a step further as an Enlightened Despot.

        Michael

        --- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, "Helen Fedor" <hfed@...> wrote:
        >
        > O.k., I'll start this week's discussion.
        >
        > Spiesz lists, among Emperor Joseph's reforms, that priestly
        formation was removed "from episcopal control and concentrated...in
        general seminaries". How did priestly education work before the
        reform? Were there any seminaries? And what does Spiesz mean when
        he says that they were educated "in the spirit of the Enlightment"?
        Were they given a broader education than just theology?
        >
        > H
        >
      • J Michutka
        My Mic~utka ancestry can be traced to the beginning of the Makov parish records (1796), and I m slowly becoming very familiar with these records; so now that
        Message 3 of 7 , Oct 18, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          My Mic~utka ancestry can be traced to the beginning of the Makov
          parish records (1796), and I'm slowly becoming very familiar with
          these records; so now that we are reading about the 1800s, I'm
          enjoying learning more about the greater background to the village
          life I glimpse in the parish records (not that I wasn't enjoying
          Spiesz's book before this).

          Makov is NW of Zilina, and today is a border crossing to the Czech
          Republic (Moravia); it's also not terribly far from the Polish
          border. I can see in the Makov parish records that there was some
          inter-marriage with people from a couple of villages just over the
          Moravian border: the road splits just about at the border, going
          slightly SW to Velke Karlovice (maybe 10 km or so) and NW to Horni
          Becva (a bit over 10 km) in Moravia. So there must have been some
          easy backing-and-forthing going on between Makov and these Moravian
          villages in the 1800s.

          My question is, in the 1800s, how would Slovaks living near the
          Moravian border have perceived the border, since this was also
          (correct me if I'm wrong!!!) the border between the Austrian part of
          the empire (Moravia) and the Hungarian part (Slovakia)? Would they
          have thought that living conditions or taxation or the political
          situation (as it affected village life) were different from their
          situation just 10 or 15 km away? Would the differences be roughly
          equivalent to myself in Massachusetts and my cousin in Connecticut--
          different local gov't but we live our lives pretty much the same,
          except maybe sales tax is different and in CT you can't talk on your
          cell phone if you're driving on the highway (not that I would anyway)?

          Besides the possible notion of differences in gov't affecting local
          life, would there have been a concrete political border (like today's
          border control where they might check passports etc) as they went
          back and forth?


          Julie Michutka
          jmm@...
        • Claudia Medvik
          Again, I have to throw in some dust of historical reality, especially on the term enlightenment . Nothing is enlightment if it is forced on any populace by
          Message 4 of 7 , Oct 18, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Again, I have to throw in some dust of historical reality, especially on the term "enlightenment".
            Nothing is enlightment if it is forced on any populace by law. Famous examples of those in
            power who force their subjects to embrace their form of 'enlightenment" are legion; Hitler, Mao,
            Lenin, Cromwell, Henry VIII, ect. Maria Theresa and her son micromanaged their subjects lives to
            obsessive lengths. There were benefits, but there was to be sure, less and less individual freedom
            till they were less than serfs. For even serfs could marry without first meeting Imperial requirements.
            A despot is a despot. Intent is irrevelent to those who suffer under them.

            sorry,
            Claudia





            To: Slovak-World@yahoogroups.comFrom: mjkopanic@...: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 18:16:12 +0000Subject: [Slovak-World] Re: Ch.7




            Helen,Joseph II reorganized the way the Church was treated in the Empire and granted virtual equality to other religions. He created a spritual court commision to deal with all non-religious ecclesiastical matters. Marriage became civil affairs rather than tied to canon law.Joseph II closed about 700 monasteries and convents in the Austria Empire, mainly, those which he deemed not doing socially productive work. Those involved in education, caring for the ill, agriculture and trades continued to exist (Robert Kann, 191). The state formed a Religious Fund to control and finance parishes.So the state funding the Church in Slovakia and paying clerics' salaries come from this era.Before the reforms, all education took place in seminaries with education tightly controlled by the Church. Joseph opened up the seminaries to more Enlightenment ideas and loosened control from Rome and took a more active role in high ecclesiastical appointments. Even his mother, Maria Theresa, had ruled that the state had a right to rule on behalf of secular law and property when it concerned the Church. Joseph took it a step further as an Enlightened Despot.Michael--- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, "Helen Fedor" <hfed@...> wrote:>> O.k., I'll start this week's discussion.> > Spiesz lists, among Emperor Joseph's reforms, that priestly formation was removed "from episcopal control and concentrated...in general seminaries". How did priestly education work before the reform? Were there any seminaries? And what does Spiesz mean when he says that they were educated "in the spirit of the Enlightment"? Were they given a broader education than just theology?> > H>






            _________________________________________________________________
            Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare!
            http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Haidee Kupecz
            Hey, Julie, Who is your cousin in CT? Just curious. Also, where are they? I m in Unionville. See you later, Haidee haideec@yahoo.com aka Cutie Nose-Stockings
            Message 5 of 7 , Oct 18, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Hey, Julie,
              Who is your cousin in CT? Just curious. Also, where are they? I'm in Unionville.

              See you later,
              Haidee
              haideec@...

              aka Cutie Nose-Stockings (Elf Name)
              Chocolate Candy Cane (Christmas Name)



              ----- Original Message ----
              From: J Michutka <jmm@...>
              To: Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 11:33:11 AM
              Subject: [Slovak-World] Ch.7: Austro- vs -Hungarian

              My Mic~utka ancestry can be traced to the beginning of the Makov
              parish records (1796), and I'm slowly becoming very familiar with
              these records; so now that we are reading about the 1800s, I'm
              enjoying learning more about the greater background to the village
              life I glimpse in the parish records (not that I wasn't enjoying
              Spiesz's book before this).

              Makov is NW of Zilina, and today is a border crossing to the Czech
              Republic (Moravia); it's also not terribly far from the Polish
              border. I can see in the Makov parish records that there was some
              inter-marriage with people from a couple of villages just over the
              Moravian border: the road splits just about at the border, going
              slightly SW to Velke Karlovice (maybe 10 km or so) and NW to Horni
              Becva (a bit over 10 km) in Moravia. So there must have been some
              easy backing-and-forthing going on between Makov and these Moravian
              villages in the 1800s.

              My question is, in the 1800s, how would Slovaks living near the
              Moravian border have perceived the border, since this was also
              (correct me if I'm wrong!!!) the border between the Austrian part of
              the empire (Moravia) and the Hungarian part (Slovakia)? Would they
              have thought that living conditions or taxation or the political
              situation (as it affected village life) were different from their
              situation just 10 or 15 km away? Would the differences be roughly
              equivalent to myself in Massachusetts and my cousin in Connecticut--
              different local gov't but we live our lives pretty much the same,
              except maybe sales tax is different and in CT you can't talk on your
              cell phone if you're driving on the highway (not that I would anyway)?

              Besides the possible notion of differences in gov't affecting local
              life, would there have been a concrete political border (like today's
              border control where they might check passports etc) as they went
              back and forth?


              Julie Michutka
              jmm@...





              Yahoo! Groups Links





              ____________________________________________________________________________________
              Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more.
              http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Martin Votruba
              ... Everyday issues of ordinary life are rarely addressed in history books by comparison to the discussions of power politics among countries and aspects of
              Message 6 of 7 , Oct 18, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                > My question is, in the 1800s, how would Slovaks living near the
                > Moravian border have perceived the border, since this was also
                > (correct me if I'm wrong!!!) the border between the Austrian part of
                > the empire (Moravia) and the Hungarian part (Slovakia)? Would they
                > have thought that living conditions or taxation or the political
                > situation (as it affected village life) were different from their
                > situation just 10 or 15 km away?

                Everyday issues of "ordinary" life are rarely addressed in history
                books by comparison to the discussions of power politics among
                countries and aspects of lives of those who were at the top. I'd like
                to read about people's lives, too, Julie. So, the following will be
                just speculations loosely based on the few tidbits that I've seen here
                and there.

                Given the lack of the media, I'd assume that their broader awareness
                would be probably more limited than that of a person with their jobs
                and amount of education living next to a US state line today, while at
                the same time they'd perhaps be somewhat better informed on a
                practical level in those instances when they had family/friends across
                the border whom they'd visit with some regularity and with whom they'd
                discuss such issues.

                Differences between the Kingdom and the rest of the Habsburg lands
                were probably diminishing, slowly, slowly, during the time covered in
                this chapter. It was marked by increasing standardization between the
                Kingdom and the rest of the Habsburg lands. The Kingdom was still
                merely one of the provinces in "Austria" (the monarchy hadn't become
                "Austria-Hungary" yet). Having the same monarch, fighting the same
                wars against the same enemies would also be a source of some sense of
                unity for the people on both sides of the border.


                > would there have been a concrete political border (like today's
                > border control where they might check passports etc) as they went
                > back and forth?

                Not necessarily a border post. But A) the border was patrolled by the
                "finance police," we'd say border guards today except their job was
                not to catch people, who could cross the border wherever they wanted,
                but to prevent smuggling. And B) there were toll posts even within
                the Kingdom that excised county and other road taxes.

                As often, we end up with a fairly different organization of one's
                world from what we know: we can speculate that because of that, the
                border between the Kingdom and the Margraviate of Moravia appeared
                less "different" to them from what they knew was going on all around
                (there were road toll posts all over after all) than how we think of a
                border today, although there's no doubt that they were aware of the
                fact they weren't in "their" Kingdom once they crossed its border.

                The awareness of the differences in the broader sense as you put it,
                Julie, was certainly there with those to whom it mattered. I recall,
                e.g., an exasperated comment by one of the Slovak national-ethnic
                activists that it was of little use for them to discuss their
                strategies with the Czech activists in Prague: the Czechs kept
                suggesting nonsensical actions, because they knew nothing about how
                laws differed. Say, the Czechs would elaborate on the strategies the
                Slovak activists could employ to take up issue X formally with the
                Royal and Imperial office in Budapest. In the Kingdom, however, issue
                X was under a self-elected, self-governing regional body in which
                Budapest had no say.


                Martin
              • Sinbad Schwartz
                ... especially on the term enlightenment . ... Famous examples of those in ... of enlightenment are legion; Hitler, Mao, ... micromanaged their subjects
                Message 7 of 7 , Oct 18, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, Claudia Medvik <cmmedvik@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > Again, I have to throw in some dust of historical reality,
                  especially on the term "enlightenment".
                  > Nothing is enlightment if it is forced on any populace by law.
                  Famous examples of those in
                  > power who force their subjects to embrace their form
                  of 'enlightenment" are legion; Hitler, Mao,
                  > Lenin, Cromwell, Henry VIII, ect. Maria Theresa and her son
                  micromanaged their subjects lives to
                  > obsessive lengths. There were benefits, but there was to be sure,
                  less and less individual freedom
                  > till they were less than serfs. For even serfs could marry without
                  first meeting Imperial requirements.
                  > A despot is a despot. Intent is irrevelent to those who suffer
                  under them.
                  >
                  > sorry,
                  > Claudia
                  >
                  I haven't participated in this discussion nor have I read the book
                  but in order to be able to have a reasonable discussion it's
                  necessary to define terms. I would not agree with as broad a
                  definition as you propose.

                  Historically the term "Enlightenment", during the period that is
                  under discussion, was defined as a period of emphasis on reason over
                  superstition and hereditary authority. It was also called "The Age of
                  Reason". The following is perhaps closer to your definition:

                  "Enlightened absolutism (also known as benevolent or enlightened
                  despotism) is a form of despotism in which rulers were influenced by
                  the Enlightenment, a historical period. Enlightened monarchs embraced
                  the principles of the Enlightenment, especially its emphasis upon
                  rationality, and applied them to their territories. They tended to
                  allow religious toleration, freedom of speech and the press, and the
                  right to hold private property. (Definitely not the Hitlerian or
                  Maoist forms of "enlightenment"). Most fostered the arts, sciences,
                  and education

                  Enlightened absolutists' beliefs about royal power were often similar
                  to those of absolute monarchs, in that many believed that they had
                  the right to govern by birth and generally refused to grant
                  constitutions, seeing even the most pro-monarchy ones as being an
                  inherent check on their power. The difference between an absolutist
                  and an enlightened absolutist is based on a broad analysis of how far
                  they embraced Enlightenment. In particular, the Holy Roman Emperor
                  Joseph II can be said to have fully embraced the enlightened concept
                  of the social contract. In contrast, Empress Catherine II of Russia
                  entirely rejected the concept of the social contract while taking up
                  many ideas of the Enlightenment, for example by being a great patron
                  of the arts in Imperial Russia and incorporating many ideas of
                  enlightened philosophers, especially Montesquieu, in her Nakaz, to a
                  committee meant to revise Russian law."

                  RU
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.