权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

A Study of John Donne in Relation to King James and the Jesuits

约翰·多恩与詹姆斯国王和耶稣会士关系的研究

基本信息

批准号：
04801053
负责人：
TAKAHASHI Shohei
金额：
$ 0.77万
依托单位：
Niigata University
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for General Scientific Research (C)
财政年份：
1992
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
1992 至 1993
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/en/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-04801053/
关键词：
Civil obedience Temporal power Canon law Divine right of kings Regicide 王権神授説権力譲渡説暴君教皇の俗権忠誠の誓い

项目摘要

In this research I first made clear the attitudes of Robert Persons, William Barlow, and John Donne to King James' Oath of Allegiance. Next, I discussed the king-killing theory of the jesuits in relation to Mariana. In the former research I discussed how Donne in his Pseudo-Martyr disputed Barlow who defended the Oath. One of the reasons why Barlow failed in his defense was because he only fllowed Persons' way of argument. As he followed Persons' method -- investigation of the contents of the Oath, criticism of the two briefs and anti-Bellarmine -- he gives us the impression that he merely followed Persons. But Donne, who knew Barlow's defects well, discussed in his own way. He examined the divine right of kings, the Pope's temporal power, and the Oath as civil obedience which Barlow did not discuss or discussed insuffeciently. And my research makes it clear that Donne's Pseudo-Martyr surpassed Barlow's book by his logic, and minute investigation of past material.It was the catholics' regicide that James opposed strongly. Mariana, who was said to devise this theory, discussed a tyrant, not a king De Rege. Mariana was misinterpreted by the public, and Mariana=regicide was a label which become attached to him. In the latter research I dealt how Donne, who understood the differences between the jesuits view of a king and james', kept pace with james. It was shown how the Jesuits' theory of the transferring of power to a king by the people was quite different from James' divine right of kings, and no form of compromise was ever found between the two sides.

在本研究中，我首先明确了罗伯特·珀森斯、威廉·巴洛和约翰·多恩对詹姆斯国王效忠宣誓的态度。接下来，我讨论了耶稣会士与玛丽安娜有关的弑君理论。在先前的研究中，我讨论了多恩在他的《伪殉道者》中如何反驳捍卫誓言的巴洛。巴洛辩护失败的原因之一是他只遵循了珀森的论证方式。当他遵循Persons的方法时-调查誓言的内容，批评两份简报和反Bellarmine-他给我们的印象是，他只是遵循Persons。但邓恩，谁知道巴洛的缺陷很好，讨论在他自己的方式。他研究了国王的神圣权利，教皇的世俗权力，以及巴洛没有讨论或讨论不足的公民服从誓言。通过研究发现，邓恩的《伪殉道者》在逻辑性和对历史材料的细致考察方面超越了巴洛的《伪殉道者》，詹姆斯强烈反对的是天主教弑君。据说是玛丽安娜提出了这一理论，她说的是一个暴君，而不是一个德·雷杰国王。玛丽安娜被公众误解，玛丽安娜=弑君成为贴在他身上的标签。在后一项研究中，我探讨了多恩是如何与詹姆斯保持同步的，他理解耶稣会士和詹姆斯对国王的看法之间的差异。它表明了耶稣会士的权力转移到国王的人的理论是完全不同的詹姆斯的君权神授，双方之间没有任何形式的妥协。