返本开新:为什么和如何纪念宗教改革500周年

发布时间：2018-03-17 03:17

本文选题：路德　切入点：宗教改革　出处：《探索与争鸣》2017年10期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：关于宗教改革研究的主流研究范式,正在从强调"断裂"转向强调"延续",即从强调中世纪与宗教改革之间的断裂,转而强调中世纪(特别是晚期)与宗教改革之间的延续。借助前人对历史事实、历史解释和历史政治的三重划分来理解这一主流研究范式的转变,回顾前四次宗教改革百周年纪念和2017年500周年纪念的主要基调,并且对中国当下的文化与思想处境进行初步思考可以明确:对历史事件的理解不能仅仅停留于历史的说明,应该走向历史的解释,而这样的解释往往由于历史事件的多层面和多维度,以及研究者自身角度、立场和态度的不同而各有不同。其中,对于历史的政治解释只是诸多历史解释中的一种,并不能先天地成为唯一正确的或独一主导的历史解释;它应当接受其他解释的竞争与挑战,不仅要经得起对历史事实的分析研究的批判,而且要尽可能成为真正有文化责任感和历史使命感的历史解释。
[Abstract]:With regard to the mainstream research paradigm of religious reform, it is changing from emphasizing "rupture" to emphasizing "continuity", that is, from emphasizing the break between the Middle Ages and religious reform. It emphasizes the continuation between the Middle Ages (especially the late period) and the religious reform. With the help of the triple division of historical facts, historical interpretation and historical politics, we can understand the transformation of this mainstream research paradigm. Recalling the main tenets of the centenary of the four previous religious reforms and the 500th anniversary of 2017, and having a preliminary reflection on the current cultural and ideological situation in China, it is clear that the understanding of historical events cannot remain merely a historical account, Should move towards historical interpretation, and such explanations often vary according to the multidimensional and multidimensional nature of historical events, as well as to the different perspectives, positions and attitudes of the researchers themselves. The political interpretation of history is only one of many historical explanations, and cannot inborn become the only correct or sole historical explanation; it should accept the competition and challenge of other interpretations. It is necessary not only to stand up to the criticism of the analysis and research of historical facts, but also to become as much as possible a historical explanation with a sense of cultural responsibility and a sense of historical mission.
【作者单位】：北京师范大学哲学学院;北京师范大学价值与文化研究中心;
【分类号】：B979

【相似文献】