Talk:Hans Küng/Archive 1

Title

Someone is removing Hans Kung's title. He is a priest in good standing, thus is entitled to "Reverend Father" preceeding his name. Please do not remove honorifics because of your theological disagreements with Father Kung. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.245.36.136 (talk) 22:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Has Kung spoke out yet about his former colleage Pope Benedict XVI (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger)?

Yes, he has. He said in a German TV interview. He called the appointment of Ratzinger a "great disappointment". He goes on to say that "many others would have been better choices". Here he cited Martini and Lehman. But Küng also expressed some hope Ratzinger could return to his more conciliatory roots: "The (papal) office changes everyone". On a personal level Küng described Ratzinger as "distanced, cool and, if necessary, Machiavellian". (entire interview: rtsp://video.daserste.azzoo.net/realcontent/moma/050420_3_28.rm)

Has Kühn ever expressed his opinion of Nietzsche's idea of a pope: "I envisage a spectacle so ingenious and so wonderfully paradoxical at the same time, that all the deities on Olympus would have had occasion for immortal laughter — Cesare Borgia as pope."? (The Antichrist, § 61)Lestrade 15:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

As noted at the end of the article, they have subsequently had a cordial dinner together TMS63112 17:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup Tags

Added "verify source" tag to footnote on The Catholic Church: A Short History - it should have the page number for the quote. Puddleglum 18:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added the page number. -- Cat Whisperer 19:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hans Küng.jpg

Image:Hans Küng.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Original research on automatic excommunication

I am reverting, yet again, the original research that Kung may have suffered automatic excommunication, because it is unsubstantiated and uncited. There is no citation provided from any official Church source that Kung teaches heresy, and there is no citation from any canon lawyer that Kung's teachings "may" (weasel word) lead to automatic excommunication. -- Cat Whisperer 10:37, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

From Wikipedia's policy against original research, "Synthesis of published material serving to advance a position":

Editors often make the mistake of thinking that if A is published by a reliable source, and B is published by a reliable source, then A and B can be joined together in an article to advance position C. However, this would be an example of a new synthesis of published material serving to advance a position, and as such it would constitute original research. "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published this argument in relation to the topic of the article.

In the material at question, A = canon law, B = the facts of Kung's case, and C = Kung may be subject to the canon law censure of automatic excommunication. -- Cat Whisperer 11:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Criticism

I think should be added a section about criticism of Hans Kung. He seems for many a sort of "adventurous" and demagogical maverick. He seems to say many false statements like if they were true. For example, it´s totally wrong that celibacy it´s only a Middle Age invention. Celibacy is based in Jesus words when he says that there will be men that shall become eunuchs by the love of the kingdom of God. Celibacy was widely practised long before the 12th century, it only become compulsive back then. Even today, there are some married priests, at the Eastern Rites Churches and those who convert from Anglicanism. Other thing, it´s highly controversial his tendency to see the Church mostly as a political institution, rather the religious. He seems to be heavily influeced by philosophical materialism and rationalism, in the worst possible sense, too.213.13.241.162 (talk) 20:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

By all means add a section on criticism, but make sure it is robust. Citing Jesus's supposed support for celibacy would not sit right though

I'm not sure I would go along with the argument that Jesus backed a celibate priesthood - not least because he would not have anticipated the establishment of a regular 'Church' with a structure of priests, bishops, and popes after his death. This was an innovation responding to the needs of the times - and you could equally decide that his call to become 'eunuchs' applies to all Christians (men and women) and not just regular clergy. In any case Kung does address passages such as those of Matthew in his work, and tries to give it his own interpretation (one for example that has been drawn upon by the Orthodox church as opposed to the Catholic one). If we're going to have a section on criticism of Kung's work - and I don't mind that - then I think we have to be a bit more sophisticated in how we tackle it. Contaldo80 (talk) 17:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Jesus wasn´t against marriage. The Jewish tradition didn´t give any particular value to celibacy. A Jewish contemporary group of Jesus, the Essenians, practised celibacy and lived like monks. The exact quotation of Jesus can be seen as praising those who give up marriage for a higher purpose, like Jesus himself. The exact quotation is more or less like this : "There are those who are born eunuchs from their mothers womb, those who become eunuchs by the action of men, but there are also those who shall become eunuchs in spirit by the love of the Kingdom of God." Of course, Jesus didn´t institute celibacy as compulsive, but that´s basically because of these words that the Catholic Church decided to make it compulsive. St. Augustine himself, who was against compulsive celibacy, followed it al his religious life.213.13.242.124 (talk) 14:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Right so what we have is a situation where priestly celibacy was non-compulsory but a discipline widely practiced during the first millennium. But only became officially compulsory in the 11th century. But to get back to the article - it states Kung's view that "Everyone agrees the celibacy rule is just a church law dating from the 11th century, not a divine command." If you think we still need to insert a critique then suggest we find a suitable quote from a informed source which refutes this statement, and then we include. Contaldo80 (talk) 13:25, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

In order to meet NPOV, the point of view espoused by the Catholic Church needs to be included in this section regarding celibacy. The Church establishes celibacy based on Jesus' words in the Gospel of Matthew - see the Catholic Church article which has a nicely referenced note on the developement of celibacy [1] that could be used to improve this section on Kung. Thanks, NancyHeise ^talk 14:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't see that there's any NPOV issue here at all. Kung's views don't have to be neutral. What possible value would there be in setting out the official church line on celibacy in this article - it's not as if Kung doesn't know it inside out in any case. Contaldo80 (talk) 15:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

visit to America

The article seems to be internally inconsistent in saying Kung was invited to only one Catholic institution: St. Louis University is a Catholic Jesuit university. What are the facts about the "interdict"? The wikipedia article on "interdict" is not consistent with saying a pontifical university like Catholic U could "interdict" Kung. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaceman Phig (talk • contribs) 20:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Beliefs on the Holy Trinity

I think there is a evidence to suggest that Hans Kung has expressed a heterodox belief about the Holy Trinity. For instance, he is quoted in the Watchtower publications of the Jehovah's Witnesses as saying that the Holy Trinity is difficult to believe in and that it is incompatible with many non-Christian cultures. He has also been critical of the council of Nicea and has said that other dogmas such as the Incarnartion and the Sonship of Christ are also "offensive" to other religions. [2] [3] [4] ADM (talk) 20:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I can't see that it's for us in this encyclopeadia to express whether we think Kung is orthodox or not. There are plenty of Vatican officials employed to do that job. And to be fair, the Trinity can be difficult for many Christians to believe in - that's it's point as humans can never properly comprehend the complete nature of God. Likewise isn't it common sense to suggest it might be "incompatible with many non-Christian cultures" - that's not to say it's wrong? The incarnation and the Sonship of Christ are also offensive to muslims - no surprises here! Let's stop pushing a POV to show Kung up to be some sort of a heretic and focus on the article itself. Thanks Contaldo80 (talk) 09:50, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Quotes section

This section lack quotes from Kung that resulted in his license to teach theology being revoked. I think the section could be expanded. NancyHeise ^talk 13:58, 7 November 2009 (UTC)