Models of the Relationship Between Church, State and Political Society: Neo-Thomists’ Arguments

Relations between religious organizations and groups with society and state and their regulation are among the most pressing issues in modern society. Radicalism that is traditionally inherent in several religious groups enforced by global geopolitical problems, make politicians and scientists to for new effective models of interaction between the state, society and religious organizations. Here we consider the models of such cooperation and interaction proposed by modern neo-thomism and especially one of its foundеrs prominent philosopher of law J. Maritain.Регулювання відносини між релігійними організаціями та їх групами з суспільством та державою є одними з найбільш актуальних питань сучасного суспільства. Радикалізм, який традиційно притаманний кільком релігійним групам, підкріплений глобальними геополітичними проблемами, робить політиків та вчених нових ефективних моделей взаємодії держави, суспільства та релігійних організацій. У статті розглядаються моделі такої співпраці та взаємодії, запропоновані сучасним неотомізмом, і особливо одним із його визначних філософів права Ю. Марітеном

Models of the Relationship Between Church, State and Political Society: Neo-Thomists’ Arguments

Relations between religious organizations and groups with society and state and their regulation are among the most pressing issues in modern society. Radicalism that is traditionally inherent in several religious groups enforced by global geopolitical problems, make politicians and scientists to for new effective models of interaction between the state, society and religious organizations. Here we consider the models of such cooperation and interaction proposed by modern neo-thomism and especially one of its foundеrs prominent philosopher of law J. Maritain.Регулювання відносини між релігійними організаціями та їх групами з суспільством та державою є одними з найбільш актуальних питань сучасного суспільства. Радикалізм, який традиційно притаманний кільком релігійним групам, підкріплений глобальними геополітичними проблемами, робить політиків та вчених нових ефективних моделей взаємодії держави, суспільства та релігійних організацій. У статті розглядаються моделі такої співпраці та взаємодії, запропоновані сучасним неотомізмом, і особливо одним із його визначних філософів права Ю. Марітеном

Signs of State and Their Historical Modifications

This study considers various historical types of the state and implementation of their universal characteristics by implementing a comparative analysis. It is shown that the traditional state had a private-law basis; a basis of the states of modern type is the public law; in the traditional state the territory acted in the form of the earth belonging to the state on the right of the supreme property; in the modern state as geographical space to which its power extends; supremacy of the traditional state was shown in the form of sovereignty, and the state of modern type - sovereignty; the power of the traditional state has property (personal), and the modern state - political (public) character. Historical types of the state differently realize its universal characteristics, getting the special signs which are historical modifications of these characteristics in the course of evolution

Cooperation of former Soviet Union countries and Ukraine with the European Union

This paper is focused on the development of conceptual approaches concerning the intensification of the military and political cooperation of eastern former Soviet Union countries and Ukraine with the European Union. The methodology of the research is based on the application of systematic research approaches to the analysis of the system of international relations. The analysis relates on the problems of cooperation between Ukraine and the European Union. Our finding shows that Ukraine should decide on the possibility of creating an inter-state defense and security union "Intermarium" with its neighbors - EU member states and NATO

Signs of State and Their Historical Modifications

This study considers various historical types of the state and implementation of their universal characteristics by implementing a comparative analysis. It is shown that the traditional state had a private-law basis; a basis of the states of modern type is the public law; in the traditional state the territory acted in the form of the earth belonging to the state on the right of the supreme property; in the modern state as geographical space to which its power extends; supremacy of the traditional state was shown in the form of sovereignty, and the state of modern type - sovereignty; the power of the traditional state has property (personal), and the modern state - political (public) character. Historical types of the state differently realize its universal characteristics, getting the special signs which are historical modifications of these characteristics in the course of evolution

The State Sovereignty and Sovereign Rights: the Correlation Problem

In this paper the question on the content of the sovereign rights and their relation to sovereignty was not enough developed in legal science. These issues are in the focus of present paper. In the traditional legal doctrine sovereignty is the category which expresses the content and scope of competences of the state in the domestic and foreign policy. The appearance of a new state automatically means the presence of its sovereignty. The loss of sovereignty leads to the termination of its existence as a subject of international law. The states are forced to self-restriction of their sovereign rights in international (interstate) communication, but without losing the sovereignty. As the human rights, the sovereign rights of the state in a certain sense can be treated as natural. The sovereign rights associate with the existence of the state and don’t depend on other non-legal factors. Conception of the states’ legal equality results in the identity and equality in sovereign rights that states can use on their own. The meaning of the sovereign rights consist of the determination and guaranteeing and clearly defined boundaries of the freedom of the state. Can sovereign rights change in the process of historical development of the states? What is the “measure” of changes of the sovereign rights volume? This rights are inherent to the state and as long as sovereign stats play the major role in international law, their strength remains ultima ratio.В статті розглядаються питання про зміст суверенних прав та їх співвідношення з державним суверенітетом, які недостатньо досліджені в юридичній науці. У традиційному розумінні суверенітет є категорією, яка виражає зміст і масштаб компетенції держави у внутрішній та зовнішній політиці. Поява нової держави автоматично передбачає наявність у неї суверенітету. Втрата суверенітету призводить до припинення існування держави як суб’єкта міжнародного права. В умовах глобалізації та регіональної інтеграції держави вдаються до самообмеження в реалізації своїх суверенних прав, але при цьому не втрачають свій суверенітет

The issue of the international legal personality of subnational units of the EU member states (a case study of German sub-federal units)

У статті автори на прикладі Федеративної Республіки Німеччина аналізують проблеми визначення міжнародної правосуб’єктності суб’єктів федерації, а також її специфіка в умовах членства федерації у складі ЄС

Механизм эволюции государства: системный подход

The article describes and analyzes in detail the state evolution mechanism. The authors show that many different theories and doctrines, various schemes for typologizing the evolutionary forms of the state have been developed over the long history of the existence of legal, philosophical and political sciences. The work content includes the discussion of the difficulties of developing rigorous theories of the evolution of state forms associated with the complexity and ambiguity of particular historical processes of state formation and development. The authors distinguish and consider the evolutionary features of the modern state, justify that the modern state as a historical type possesses a number of features that are not inherent (or partially inherent) in both the traditional and the proto-modern state, which form its evolutionary features, specificity of functioning and evolutionary transformation. In addition, the article identifies and analyzes four main innovative stages in the political and legal institutionalization of modern political domination: civil state, rule-of-law state, democratic rule-of-law state and social rule-of law state