APA 6th Edition Malović, N. (2015). Laičnost – prilike i zablude. Crkva u svijetu, 50 (3), 427-444. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/147619
MLA 8th Edition Malović, Nenad. "Laičnost – prilike i zablude." Crkva u svijetu, vol. 50, br. 3, 2015, str. 427-444. https://hrcak.srce.hr/147619. Citirano 19.10.2019.
Chicago 17th Edition Malović, Nenad. "Laičnost – prilike i zablude." Crkva u svijetu 50, br. 3 (2015): 427-444. https://hrcak.srce.hr/147619
Harvard Malović, N. (2015). 'Laičnost – prilike i zablude', Crkva u svijetu, 50(3), str. 427-444. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/147619 (Datum pristupa: 19.10.2019.)
Vancouver Malović N. Laičnost – prilike i zablude. Crkva u svijetu [Internet]. 2015 [pristupljeno 19.10.2019.];50(3):427-444. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/147619
IEEE N. Malović, "Laičnost – prilike i zablude", Crkva u svijetu, vol.50, br. 3, str. 427-444, 2015. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/147619. [Citirano: 19.10.2019.]
Sažetak Considering the tensions and disagreements about the answer to the question what is the role of religion or an institutionalized religious community in public discourse, especially with regard to the political community, it is necessary to give some theoretical insights important for understanding the relationships between the Church and state in terms of the modern liberal state. Therefore, the first chapter discusses the relationship between politics and religion from 29 Usp. Josef Schmidt, Ein Dialog, in dem es nur Gewinner geben kann, u: Michael Reder, Josef Schmidt (ur.), Ein Bewußtsein von dem, was fehlt. Eine Diskussion mi Jürgen Habermas, Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp, 2008., 7993. 30 “Vjerno prianjajući uz evanđelje i vršeći svoje poslanje u svijetu, Crkva ima zadaću podržavati i uzdizati što god se istinito, dobro i lijepo nađe u ljudskoj zajednici; tako ona Bogu na slavu učvršćuje mir među ljudima.” (GS 76) 444 Nenad Malović, Laičnost – prilike i zablude the view of philosophy, particularly drawing on the thinking of Jürgen Habermas. Laicism in terms of secularity, i.e. separation of state institutions from the Church as an institution, does not exempt believers of their civic and political responsibility to the community in which they live. Religious people are equally called to take part in public discourse about the issues related to politics and the state in which they live as the irreligious people, just because they are as citizens equally responsible for the function of the state and because it’s primarily them who are as citizens concerned. In doing so they are obliged to express their beliefs in a language appropriate to public discourse. Also, irreligious people should be ready to accept the religious people who they meet in public political discourse as full partners in the process of public use of reason. Philosophy can offer a positive contribution to creating a constructive relationship between politics and religion in public discourse, which recently has been increasingly concerned with the issues of politics and religion. In the second chapter, using the analyses of a sociologist Hans Joas, the theses of the opponents and advocates of religion are confronted, but both appear to be unsustainable: 1. Modernization of society necessarily leads to secularization; 2. Secularization leads to moral decay. The former thesis proved wrong because of, among other things, misinterpretation of the religion of that thesis’ advocates. The latter thesis is refuted by the experience of modern secular states in which there has been no moral disasters. The refutation of the thesis of secularization calls for a new reflection on the essence of religion and modernization, and the refutation of the thesis of moral destruction calls for a new reflection on the connection between morality and religion. It obliges both parties to a new effort and investment in creating mutual trust and good will. The third chapter deals with the fact of plurality of a secular state and importance of politics in the context of civil society. It discusses the place and role of religion and organized religious community in civil society with emphasis on significance and consequences (both for the state and Church) of accepting the principles of religious freedom and private character of faith. Lack of understanding (intentionally or unintentionally) leads to deviations in the relationship between the state and Church. The conclusion presents some opportunities and misconceptions of (about) laicism.