عنوان مقاله [English]
Considering the fact that clergymen in Iran’s seminaries in general have had three approaches of reformism, revolutionarism and traditional/conservatism compared to Pahlavi political system and since the Islamic Revolution has divided clergymen into marked spectra of revolutionary ones and non-revolutionary ones, the present paper aims to make strong and weak points of revolutionary approach known from among the three approaches they have had in relation to socio-political changes during the Islamic Republic of Iran. To achieve this aim, main questions raised in the paper are: “How have revolutionary clergymen reacted to socio-political changes and what status has revolutionary approach in the 38 years passed the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran had in rebuilding new human and social environment?” the author claims that the revolutionary approach could not achieve its politico-social ideals and goals because, on one hand it neither could get rid of heavy shadow of traditional approach, nor could benefit from reformist approach. On the other hand, it could not, due its internal weakness, put into practice its concerned changes culturally, socially and politically since it faces a problem in separating the two “me”, meaning I am revolutionary and I am supporter of political system; since what “I am revolutionary” wants it to do and what “I support the Islamic Republic of Iran wants it to do can be two different things that at times result in conflict; therefore, their separation is a very difficult task. The author has tried to discuss, critically and politico-sociologically revolutionarism of seminary scholars and to deal with the issues associated as social phenomenon. The results and achievements of the article can be used for basic and applied investigations related to clergymen.