Abstract
The author of the study follows research on Bolzano in relation to the reformed tradition of the Catholic clergy in 19th and 20th century. She problematizes the view on Bolzano and the whole Czech enlightenment, which has a lot to do with conservative Catholic evaluation of enlightenment as such, particularly the Czech one.
Bolzano and Bolzanism cannot be interpreted in terms of the Trident council, but it is necessary to understand that Bolzano's stands were expressions of his discovered truth, which was not intended to retreat from orthodoxy in any way. When Bolzano states several times that he stays on the positions of Christian orthodoxy, he is right.
He is also right when he says that he is a Catholic, because he considers Catholicism as the most perfect religion. However, he was not in accordance with definitions of orthodoxy and he even might not have been.
His grandiose attempt is indeed a modern step. The author denies many alleged mutual agreements between the representatives of the late enlightenment and the radical modernists (excluding formal ones).
The author considers that the decisive fact is the commitment of priests to resist the secularization and strive for new presence of Christ's message by such means that would have been understood by people. Both Czech and German representatives of the late enlightenment and the Czech modernists have got that effort in common.
The Czech modernists tried to be unique, but in fact they must have continued in the process that was there before them. The author in her study also pays attention to the newly discovered Anton Krumbholz's manuscripts, which were found in the course of cataloguing of manuscripts of National Museum in Prague.
They are sermons from 1821 to 1848.