Fabaceae - Tribu Sophoreae

Árboles y arbustos, raro lianas o hierbas, generalmente inermes. Hojas pinnadas, plurifolioladas. Racimos o panículas terminales con brácteas y bracteólas. Flores subactinomorfas a zigomorfas; cáliz pentámero, entero o lobulado, valvar o imbricado; pétalos 5 raro 1; estambres en número variado, generalmente 10, libres o unidos en la base; ovario 1-pluriovulado. Legumbres variadas, indehiscentes, raro dehiscentes. Semillas reniformes con hilo apical o lateral. La Tribu Sophoreae pertenece a la subfamilia Papilionoideae, familia Fabaceae (=Leguminosae), comprende 45 géneros tropicales y 393-398 especies (Pennington & al., 2005: 227). Análisis cladísticos de la morfología general y de polen muestran que la tribu Sophoreae no es un grupo monofilético y que está relacionado con la tribu Swartzieae, resultados que han sido corroborados por estudios moleculares. No obstante, se requiere la inclusión de mas géneros en los estudios de filogenia molecular para sugerir una nueva clasificación (Pennington & al., 2005: 227). De acuerdo a Polhill (1994) la tribu se organiza en 6 grupos informales, el grupo Myroxylon agrupa 11 géneros; solo 4 habitan nuestro país y 1 llega a Salta y al valle de Lerma; del grupo Sophora solo el género Sophora crece en Argentina con 2 especies, una de ellas en Salta y el valle de Lerma

Una renovadora exégesis del Quijote: “El secreto de Cervantes” (1939) de Azorín

This article approaches Azorín’s piece “El secreto de Cervantes” (“Cervantes’ Secret”, 1939) as a specimen of what José María Martínez Cachero called Azorín’s “cuento-crítica” (story/critique). “El secreto de Cervantes” is here ascribed to the so-called “esoteric” school of Cervantes studies that flourished in the second half of the nineteenth century. This paper also underlines Azorín’s appreciation for critics like Benjumea, Villegas, Polinous, Antequera and Castro, and signals Azorín’s previous interest in the interpretation of Don Quijote in his tale titled “El secreto de Miguel” (“Miguel’s Secret”, 1935). Finally, this article revisits “El secreto de Cervantes” and explains its innovatory exegesis of Don Quijote, i.e., that owing to its heteroglossic nature, Don Quijote prompts different interpretations in different readers.En este artículo se presenta la narración corta de Azorín titulada “El secreto de Cervantes” (1939) como ejemplo de lo que José María Martínez Cachero denominó los “cuentoscrítica” del autor monovero. Se enmarca “El secreto de Cervantes” en la corriente de cervantismo “esotérico” tan prolija en la segunda mitad del siglo XIX y se subraya el reconocimiento que en esta obra Azorín brinda a críticos como Benjumea, Villegas, Polinous, Antequera y Castro. Se resalta asimismo cómo el interés de Azorín por las interpretaciones del Quijote se había plasmado antes en el ensayo monodialogado de título “El secreto de Miguel” (1935). Finalmente, los contenidos de “El secreto de Cervantes” se someten a una reconsideración de la cual se extrae la novedosa exégesis que Azorín aporta a la cuestión de las interpretaciones del Quijote: que el Quijote no posee una única significación, por cuanto que su naturaleza polifónica lo predispone a inspirar interpretaciones distintas a distintos lectores

Elogio della musica del Chisciotte.

Incluso nella collana Elogi di Tullio Pironti, l’elogio –nato come conferenza per la Associazione Alessandro Scarlatti di Napoli- rispetta le caratteristiche di «leggerezza» che la stessa collana impone con una divisione in tre parti: 1) propone e commenta brevemente una antologia di passi del Ingegnoso idalgo don Chisciotte della Mancia e di altre opere di Cervantes (Entremeses) dedicati alla musica e alla danza; 2) immagina possibili contatti musicali di Cervantes a Roma e a Napoli durante la sua esperienza italiana (1569-1675); 3) commenta alcune rivisitazioni contemporanee napoletane del capolavoro di Cervantes (Mimmo Paladino)

Juridical Protection of the Sacrament of Penance

Autor je u članku obradio pravnu zaštitu sakramenta pokore, penitenta i ispovjednika (svećenik = prezbiter i biskup); radi razumijevanja kaznenih mjera u Crkvi autor je upozorio kako Crkva ima vlastito i prirođeno pravo kažnjavati prekršitelje (delinquentes) kanonskih zakona i zapovijedi, a to su isključivo njeni vjernici (kan. 11). Nakon iznesene stalne nauke Crkve da ima prirođeno i vlastito pravo kažnjavati svoje vjernike, autor je, egzegetsko-pravnom- metodom, obradio pojedine izabrane kanone iz Zakonika kanonskog prava iz 1983. godine, koji se odnose na pravnu zaštitu sakramenta pokore, penitenta i ispovjednika: kaznene mjere za svećenika koji bi odriješio sukrivca protiv šeste Božje zapovijedi; kažnjivo djelo svećenika koji bi navodio pokornika na grijeh protiv šeste Božje zapovijedi; kaznu za izravnu povredu sakramentalnog pečata; za povredu ispovjedne tajne za pokušaj podjeljivanja odrješenja. Autor je sve kanone obradio tako da je za svako kažnjivo djelo ustvrdio tri elementa kažnjivog djela: objektivni element, subjektivni element, zakonski element. Rad se temelji na izvorima i literaturi.The author in his article, using a juridical method, analyses the juridical protection of the sacrament of penance, the penitent and the confessor (priest or bishop), and explains the ecclesiastical penalties already in effect (latae sententiae) in the case of a violation of a law or precept relating to a confessor or penitent in the context of the sacrament of penance, or they should be by a judicial or administrative procedure declared (ferendae sententiae), and always with the intention of protecting the sacrament of penance. When it is a question of protecting the canonical order, the Church has the natural right, independent of other authorities to declare or impose specific penalties against the faithful (clerics or laity). The Church recognises human rights so that those wishing to do so, may seek recourse from the Church authorities in protecting their dignity. Having examined that Church law can proclaim or sentence penal sanctions, the author gives particular attention to the following: penal sanctions for those persons who attempt to absolute a partner in a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue (Cann. 1378, § 1); the manner of remission of excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See or of unreserved penalties which are remitted: the ordinary, canon penitentiary, confessor or any other priest; A punishable offence against a priest who solicits a penitent to commit a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue (Cann. 1387); ecclesiastical penalty for the person who directly violates the sacramental seal (Cann. 1388, § 1); penal sanctions against the person who should violate the confessional secret (Cann. 1388, § 2); penal sanctions against the person who attempts to give absolution, but does not have the authority to do so (Cann. 1378, § 2-3); and at the end of the article, the author forwards his conclusion where he emphasises that a person is required to have faith in the Church and always obey her, especially regading the protection of the sacrament of confession (penance), the penitent and the confessor. Laws need to be certain (ius est certum) so as to avoid biased interpretation and application of ecclesiastical laws, since there is particularly in our time, a feeling of ethical and moral relativism, hence a loss of the sense of guilt for sins committed against God, the Church (community) and the individual with whom it is necessary to live in peace and build a better world, a world as desired by Jesus Christ and his bride

Juridical Protection of the Sacrament of Penance

Autor je u članku obradio pravnu zaštitu sakramenta pokore, penitenta i ispovjednika (svećenik = prezbiter i biskup); radi razumijevanja kaznenih mjera u Crkvi autor je upozorio kako Crkva ima vlastito i prirođeno pravo kažnjavati prekršitelje (delinquentes) kanonskih zakona i zapovijedi, a to su isključivo njeni vjernici (kan. 11). Nakon iznesene stalne nauke Crkve da ima prirođeno i vlastito pravo kažnjavati svoje vjernike, autor je, egzegetsko-pravnom- metodom, obradio pojedine izabrane kanone iz Zakonika kanonskog prava iz 1983. godine, koji se odnose na pravnu zaštitu sakramenta pokore, penitenta i ispovjednika: kaznene mjere za svećenika koji bi odriješio sukrivca protiv šeste Božje zapovijedi; kažnjivo djelo svećenika koji bi navodio pokornika na grijeh protiv šeste Božje zapovijedi; kaznu za izravnu povredu sakramentalnog pečata; za povredu ispovjedne tajne za pokušaj podjeljivanja odrješenja. Autor je sve kanone obradio tako da je za svako kažnjivo djelo ustvrdio tri elementa kažnjivog djela: objektivni element, subjektivni element, zakonski element. Rad se temelji na izvorima i literaturi.The author in his article, using a juridical method, analyses the juridical protection of the sacrament of penance, the penitent and the confessor (priest or bishop), and explains the ecclesiastical penalties already in effect (latae sententiae) in the case of a violation of a law or precept relating to a confessor or penitent in the context of the sacrament of penance, or they should be by a judicial or administrative procedure declared (ferendae sententiae), and always with the intention of protecting the sacrament of penance. When it is a question of protecting the canonical order, the Church has the natural right, independent of other authorities to declare or impose specific penalties against the faithful (clerics or laity). The Church recognises human rights so that those wishing to do so, may seek recourse from the Church authorities in protecting their dignity. Having examined that Church law can proclaim or sentence penal sanctions, the author gives particular attention to the following: penal sanctions for those persons who attempt to absolute a partner in a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue (Cann. 1378, § 1); the manner of remission of excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See or of unreserved penalties which are remitted: the ordinary, canon penitentiary, confessor or any other priest; A punishable offence against a priest who solicits a penitent to commit a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue (Cann. 1387); ecclesiastical penalty for the person who directly violates the sacramental seal (Cann. 1388, § 1); penal sanctions against the person who should violate the confessional secret (Cann. 1388, § 2); penal sanctions against the person who attempts to give absolution, but does not have the authority to do so (Cann. 1378, § 2-3); and at the end of the article, the author forwards his conclusion where he emphasises that a person is required to have faith in the Church and always obey her, especially regading the protection of the sacrament of confession (penance), the penitent and the confessor. Laws need to be certain (ius est certum) so as to avoid biased interpretation and application of ecclesiastical laws, since there is particularly in our time, a feeling of ethical and moral relativism, hence a loss of the sense of guilt for sins committed against God, the Church (community) and the individual with whom it is necessary to live in peace and build a better world, a world as desired by Jesus Christ and his bride