The subject of this thesis is the history of the iconoclastic controversy that originated in the 8th century Byzantine church. Christian art flowered in the time of the Emperor Justinian and in the 8th century the iconoclastic controversy arose. The full-dress iconoclastic controversy started at the beginning of the 8th century, was dealt with by successive General Councils until the matter was solved when the 7th Nicene council of 787 approved the veneration of images. These became idolatry, threw church and society into chaos so that the Pope and the emporer and their supporters over the course of two centuries developed their own Christologies. At that time images were at the heart of the people(Minjung)’s faith. There is always a tendency for religious feelings to be transformed by images.This writer in concentrating on the 8th century controversy has reviewed its historical background, occasion and results and has attempted to deal with the question of images in relation to present day church worship. Idolatry through worship of symbols finds fulfillment in Eucharistic theology for that visualizes the presence of Christ.

In the history of the church, there have always been both a quest for the true church and a call for personal and communal reform and renewal. Most frequently the predominant model for this reform and renewal was the ecclesia primitiva. The notion of the ecclesia primitiva in the church history has most frequently referred to the apostolic church as portrayed in such New Testament passages as Acts 4:32ff, but has sometimes been extended to cover either the pre-Constantinian church or the whole patristic period. The first known use of the term ecclesia primitiva dates at least from the fifth century. One may find occasional references to the idea of the ecclesia primitiva in Merovingian documents. Also, during the Carolingian period, the idea of the ecclesia primitiva remained and was used primarily to signify the ideals of the common and apostolic life. The idea was current, especially among those groups interested in the reform of monastic and canonical life. The use of the term ecclesia primitiva is seldom found in the tenth-century documents but the idea remained and was widely revived in the middle of the eleventh century and later on was used to promote the ideal of monastic and canonical reform. The idea of the ecclesia primitiva was also associated with the search for the most perfect form of the Christian life. The idea became so common by the middle of the twelfth century that sometimes it was simply used to refer to the institutions believed to have existed in the early church, very occasionally implying that in the early church Christianity had not achieved the fullness of its development. In general the idea of the ecclesia primitiva in the Middle Ages was most commonly associated with the following of the apostolic life and the practice of having all things in common and living a simple and communal life. The reform on the model of the primitive church has been a primary motive for dissent since the early Middle Ages. Reformation, especially of the Anabaptists, was the culmination of the efforts to restore the primitive church. The ecclesia primitiva has been the model for the reform and renewal toward the true church within Protestantism as well as within Catholicism throughout the history of Christianity.

해상노동법이란 선원의 노동에 관한 일체의 관계를 규율하는 법제도의 전체를 말한다. 해상노동이 육상노동과 구별되는 특수성으로는 위험성, 고립성, 책임의 중대성, 이사회성 등을 들 수 있다. 이러한 해상노동만이 가지는 특수성을 충분히 고려한 해사노동기준이 마련되어야, 선원의 지위 향상과 권익 보호를 실질적으로 달성할 수 있다. 선박 자체가 국제성이 강하므로, 그곳에서 이루어지는 해상노동 역시 매우 국제성이 강하다 그러므로 어느 나라에서 해상노동에 관한 입법을 할 때에는 국제적 관계를 충분히 고려하여야 한다. 따라서 이 논문은 해상노동법의 판단에 관한 사적 연구를 통하여 그 입법 정신을 밝히고, 이에 관한 국내법 제정지침을 제시하고자 한다.

The 16th century was a epoch-making time in the intellectual history of Korea because of the appearance of two greatest scholars, Nammyeong(南冥) Jo Sik(曺植) and T'oegye(退溪) Yi Hwang(李滉) who were leaders for the direction from the time forward in the intellectrual history of Korea. The difference of academic thinkings and political ideas between them clearly exposed at the beginning was one of the origins of the prosperity from 16th to 17th century in our intellectual history as their disciples were founding principal schools. On the other hand, it also brought about such serious matters as the start of confrontations and discordances between two leading schools. As Nammyeonghakpa(南冥學派) went on disorganization as a school after 17th century as well as downfall in the political world, it had been intensively under political oppression other than T'oegyehakpa(退溪學派) even in the political position similar to it within the political world. But, the negative understandings and evaluations of Nammyeonghak(南冥學) or Nammyeonghakpa in the next generation had virtually started from the discordance and conflict with T'oegye in academic thoughts and political ideas. Yi Hwang who considered as his own duty to restore the soˇngnihak(性理學) because of his awareness of the time being as a corruption conflicted undoubtedly with Nammyeong and his school, by bringing up the dispute of deviation from soˇngnihak's orthodoxy in the academic thinkings of Jo Sik made a difference with him. It also meaned the open of harsh criticism or denial against Nammyeonghak and its school. Such criticisms or negative opinions for Nammyeonghak grew in place after the severe criticisms for Chong Yinhong(鄭仁弘) who was a follower of Jo Sik. The typical critic was the Noronpa(老論派) of soyin(西人) from Yulgok(栗谷) Yi I(李珥) to Taekdang(澤堂) Yi Sik(李植). Especially Yi Sik among them tried to build the foundation of political justification by giving a criticism for Nammyeonghakpa including Chong Yinhong. Along with it, he also tried to give a harsh criticism in a full scale against Nammyeonghak through his large number of writings. After the members of Noronpa of Soyin were influenced by or followed his critical opinions, it ended up to the peak of criticism in the line of Nong'am(農巖) Kim Changhyup(金昌協) and his disciples. Kim Changhyup took a strongly critical and negative position other than Song Siyeol(宋時烈), his master, had a flexible position against Nammyeong. In the end, his negative opinions spreaded out and developed into an intensive criticism in the line of Chong'am (正庵) Yi Hyeon'ik(李顯益) who was his loyal disciple. However, in spite of the harsh journey of Nammyeonghak which had been denied even the worth for its being in history, it came to be a comeback because of its revaluation movement by the scholars of Kyeong sang Namdo(慶尙南道) province in 19th century. As it was in the 19th century of the crisis era, a group of scholars in the province started the revaluation movement of Nammyeonghak and its actual values. The movement was growing much more and continued steady to 20th century. Those flows of Nammyeonghak in the intellectual history of Korea became one of the principal reasons of understanding newly of the merit of Nammyeonghak and its reappearance. In brief, still within such continuous circumstances in crisis up to now, we started to revaluate the worth for Nammyeonghak's being as the valid thought even in our times.