Fancy Dancy REPORT
FANCY DANCY
**Pic. 01
GROUP MEMBERS:
1. Ana
2. Leja
3. Nina
4. Maja
5. Sara
DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES
Chair: Leja
Secretary: Ana
Progress chaser: Sara
Time keeper: Maja
Reserve person: Nina
Title: Modern state and Church - aspects
**Pic. 02
Definiton
With the creation of a new democratic society based on human rights, particularly the right of freedom (which includes freedom of religion) has substantially altered the position of religious communities. It is also an issue of how to edit a new relationship between the state and church that has changed considerably by the constitutional principle of separation of state and religious communities. Why? Because in modern society and also in modern state the basic ground is that Church and state are sepparated. However, there is a growing problem nesting them in decision making and formulating of specific matters which relate exclusively to one or the other. Thus, despite the fact that strict rules are set, the church more and more "dictate" and enterfere in the matters which are under the auspices of the country. So the main problem is how to prevent religion influence decisions in our country and still remain "the foundation" of our country.
Research questions
1. Relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and the state in Slovenia up to 1991. Maja
2. Relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and the state in independent Slovenia. Maja
3. Why so much problems between state and church? Leja
4. "Free church in a free state". Ana
5. Church and state - differentiation, segregation, integration. Ana
6. The particular situation of Christian churches as the cornerstone of democracy and religious freedom. Sara
7. Agreement of the Republic of Slovenia with the Holy Seat. Sara
8. The relationship of Slovenian state to the New religious and spiritual movements. Nina
9. Relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and the state after the adoption of the new Law on Religious Freedom in Slovenia. Nina
Glossary
- cornerstone (figuratively) - osnova
- catholic canon law- stroga krščanska načela, pravila, ki so bila zavrnjena leta 1905
- 'folk church'- izraz označuje položaj, ki ga je imela cerkev na Norveškem. O njem govorimo ko sta izpolnjena dva pogoja- večina prebivalcev so verski pripadniki in tipični obredi brez verskih voditeljev.
- proselytism- spreobrnjenje
- ecclesiastical authority - cerkvena oblast
- implementation - izvajanje
- funation - osnova, temelj
List of literature
- Dragoš, Srečo. 2001. Cerkev / država: ločitev ali razločitev?. Teorija in praksa let.38, 3/2001 str. 440-455. Accessible on http://dk.fdv.uni-lj.si/tip/tip20013Dragos.PDF (accessed 19.3.2010)
- Hvala, Ivan. 2001. Država in Cerkev : laična država kot jamstvo. Od Ogleja do Haiderja : politične delitve in odnosi s sosedi. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za družbene vede, 2001.
- Lesjak, Gregor. 2007. Skica slovenske (novo)religijske tranzicije. Accessible on http://www.religije.info/DrzavaCerkev/glavna2.htm (accessed 20.3.2010)
- Stres, Anton. 1998. Cerkev in država. Ljubljana: Družina, 1998 - (Zbirka Pravičnost in mir, knj. 2).
- Šelih, Alenka and Pleterski, Janko. 2002. Država in cerkev: izbrani zgodovinski in pravni vidiki: mednarodni posvet, 21. In 22. Junija 2001 = State and church : selected historical and legal issues : international conference, June 21 and 22, 2001
- Šturm, Lovro. 2000. Cerkev in država : pravna ureditev razmerja med državo in cerkvijo. Ljubljana: Delo Tiskarna.
- Orlando, Staša. 2008. Odnos slovenske države do novih religijskih in duhovnih gibanj. Accessible on http://dk.fdv.uni-lj.si/diplomska/pdfs/Orlando-Stasa.pdf (accessed 9.4.2010)
Minutes of the 1st group e-meeting
The meeting was held via e-mail from 10th March (Wednesday) to 14th March (Sunday), 2010
Present: Nina, Sara, Maja, Leja
Absent: Ana
Agenda:
- Topic discussion and selection
- Defining problem
- Any other business
Item 1
Discussion: We talked about combining our PBL project with the project we have at Smrke's lesson, thus our topic must be associated with the subject of Sociology of religion.
Decision: So we reach the decision that we contact Marjan Smrke via e-mail and then we define our working title. After his confirmation we decided that our title will be Modern state and Church – aspects.
Item 2
Discussion: We discussed what we could include in our definition of the problem. Maja suggested that we could focus on secularization and the separation of the Church and state.
Decision: Maja will write a small draft of the problem. Next week we will contact M. Smrke and narrov our topic according to his suggestions. Leja volunteered to write the minutes of our first meeting.
Item 3
Discussion: We thought about problems we had communicating via e-mail.
Decision: So we decided that next meeting will be on Wednesday after English class on FDV.
Minutes taker: Leja
Chair: Leja
Minutes of the 2nd group meeting
The meeting held on Wednesday, 18th March 2010 at FDV
Present: Nina, Ana, Leja, Maja
Absent: Sara
Agenda
- Literature
- General discussion
- Defining the research question
- Assignments distribution
Item 1
Discussion: We started our meeting with discussion about literature. Leja and Ana did some research the day before and they proposed 4 books that they had found in the library.
Decision: Each girl will take one book home and review it more in detail.
Item 2
Discussion: We talked about our topic and found out that we have very different views on this topic. Particular, we debated about what the subject involves and what is relevant for our term paper.
Decision: We decided that we will be talking in more detail about this later when we read some literature and get more familiar with the analytical aspects of this problem.
Item 3
Discussion: We had some problems with division of tasks this week, because we were only four girls and we had to divide ten questions between us.
Decision: Nina then proposed that every girl writes at home at least two questions (if possible more), the girl who will had better literature will find more questions. All questions will be sent to Leja and she will chose ten of them which she thinks are relevant.
Item 4
Discussion: We discussed what else have to be done by this Sunday. We have to find the source of our profile picture that Ana has found on the internet. One of us will have to write our minutes of the second meeting. Our definition of the problem has to be written again and list of literature has to be post on our pbl site.
Decision: Ana volunteered to find the source of our profile picture. Nina will write minutes of the second meeting and Leja will rewrote the definition and post the list of literature on wiki.
Minutes taker: Nina
Chair: Leja
Minutes of the 3th group meeting
The meeting was held on Wednesday, 24th March 2010 at FDV
Present: Nina, Ana, Leja
Absent: Sara, Maja
Agenda
1. Rewriting definition
2. Task distribution
3. Any other bussiness
Item 1
Discussion: Our problem is still the definition of our project, because we have too many issues and we must to decite what is the main problem we will try to solve. Nina suggest that we could ask professor Smrke to advice what is the main problem between Church and state in Slovenia.
Decision: We agreed that we will ask professor Smrke to help us and then we will know how to continue. Than Leja will rewrite the definition.
Item 2
Discussion: On the second meeting we found ten questions to our problem so we had to decide who will do what. We were also in contact with Maja and Sara who were absent.
Decision: We agreed that every member of our group will answer two of the ten questions and start doing our report.
Item 3
Discussion: We know that we will have to submit our project soon so we started talking about structure of the task.
Decision: We decited, that each member of group will do its part of work and we will all send to Leja and she will corect the mistakes. We will create the report together.
Minutes taker: Ana
Chair: Leja
Minutes of the 4th group meeting
The meeting was held on Tuesday, 30th March 2010 at FDV
Present: Nina, Ana, Leja, Maja, Sara
Absent:/
Agenda
1. Rewriting definition
2. Task distribution
3. Any other bussiness
Item 1
Discussion: As we still have problems with the definition of our main problem, we asked professor Smrke for help. Profesor gave us some quite good new ideas about our report, but we can not relized them, because we do not have enought time to reorganized all things that we did so far.
Decision: We will not change our topic and we finally decided what is going to be our main problem (Leja will rewrite the definition).
Item 2
Discussion: Because some of our questions were a little bit out of our main topic we had to change some of them.
Decision: It is up to each one of us to start answering to the questions that we have.
Item 3
Discussion: We decided to do another page (Fancy Dancy REPORT) which link is allready on the top of this page.
Decision: We decited that each member of group will do its part of work and each one of us will go through our page and try to correct mistakes, that we have done so far. And we also decided that we will have another meeting soon.
Minutes taker: Maja
Chair: Leja
SOURCES:
**Pic. 01; Smurfette, accessive on: http://point001percent.wordpress.com/2009/05/08/ive-always-dreamed-of-looking-like/
(Accessed on 2nd March, 2010)
**Pic. 02; accessive on: http://www.polzela.si/files/images/T%20andraz_0.jpg (Accessed on 30th March, 2010)
Comments (1)
ana said
at 2:56 pm on Mar 4, 2010
u, nice!! :)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.