Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Hans Kung's Open Letter
Topic Started: Saturday, 17. April 2010, 00:19 (4,290 Views)
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Clare
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 13:39
I am not the pick'n'mix Catholic around here. I don't defend practices that the Church condemns.
You think there is a substantive difference between approving what the Church condemns and condemning what the Church approves?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
OsullivanB
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 12:06
...However, the thread might be more productive if posts focus on the ideas rather the the person. The topic is not Hans Kung. It is Hans Kung's open letter.
Where to begin!

Quote:
 
Missed is the opportunity for rapprochement with the Protestant churches: Instead, they have been denied the status of churches in the proper sense of the term and, for that reason, their ministries are not recognized and intercommunion is not possible.


That's because of the inconvenient reality that they are not real churches, and intercommunion with them is not possible.

Quote:
 
Missed is the opportunity for the long-term reconciliation with the Jews: Instead the pope has reintroduced into the liturgy a preconciliar prayer for the enlightenment of the Jews, he has taken notoriously anti-Semitic and schismatic bishops back into communion with the church,


There are those double standards. He wants the Church to recognise actual schimatics and heretics, but not traditional Catholics.

Quote:
 
... and he is actively promoting the beatification of Pope Pius XII, who has been accused of not offering sufficient protections to Jews in Nazi Germany.


"been accused of". Not good enough, Hans. Would you abandon the cause of Jesus because He had "been accused of" things?

Quote:
 
The fact is, Benedict sees in Judaism only the historic root of Christianity; he does not take it seriously as an ongoing religious community offering its own path to salvation.


That's because it isn't and it doesn't. Sounds like Kung is offering one of his pet theories over what the Bible actually says...

Quote:
 
Missed is the opportunity to help the people of Africa by allowing the use of birth control to fight overpopulation and condoms to fight the spread of HIV.


That will not help the people of Africa. Do people really believe that regular "protected" sex with AIDS carriers will somehow prevent the spread of AIDS? And his reference to "overpopulation" also demonstrates his anti-life mindset.

Quote:
 
Missed is the opportunity to make peace with modern science by clearly affirming the theory of evolution and accepting stem-cell research.


He wants the Church to affirm a false theory. And he wants the Church to approve of experiments on embryos. That must be what he means, because the Church already approves of adult stem-cell research.

Those are my preliminary observations.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Mairtin
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 14:03
Clare
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 13:39
I am not the pick'n'mix Catholic around here. I don't defend practices that the Church condemns.
You think there is a substantive difference between approving what the Church condemns and condemning what the Church approves?
It depends what it is.

Condemning something which the Church has always approved is different from condemning something which the Church had always condemned until a couple of decades ago. I do not condemn things that the Church has never condemned.

And yes, approving of something that the Church has always condemned is substantively different from condemning something that the Church had traditionally condemned, even if She appears to be approving of it now.

Writings from saints and popes can be produced to back up condemnations of modern practices. No such writings can be produced to back up dissent from constant Church teaching.

Basically, I am in better company, historically, than you, Mairtin! :P
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Gerard
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 13:03
Despite OsB's request, I think every poster so far has cast some aspersions on the good Hans.
Gerry the only criticism from me was
Quote:
 
Hans Kung seems to lay the blame too much on our present Pope. There are indeed severe problems in the Church, they need to be dealt with, but they have been developing for about forty years. Other mainstream Christian denominations have been losing members in the developed world. I do not think all the blame lies with Pope Benedict, in his present or former roles.

Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Appologies Rose I should not have said every ...

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Hans Kung
 
Missed is the opportunity for rapprochement with the Protestant churches: Instead, they have been denied the status of churches in the proper sense of the term and, for that reason, their ministries are not recognized and intercommunion is not possible.


How can we say that organisations consisting of God fearing men and women who gather to pray and worship God, are not Churches? There is nit picking about the finer points of "on this rock I will build my Church." Acknowledge they are churches, identify what good practices they have to offer, explain in plain English, not Vatican Gobbledygook, why their ministries and Eucharists are not recognised by the Catholic Church, then discussions are more likely to be successful.

How is the typical churchgoer from another denomination expected to understand the pronouncements that come from Rome? They are deeply hurt by the Catholic Church's refusal to condone inter Communion. Only a minority are educated to the standard required to follow the documents that emanate from the Vatican. The Catholic Church communicates with clergy of other denominations. We need to engage more effectively with their laity.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Rose of York
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 00:41
I do not think all the blame lies with Pope Benedict, in his present or former roles.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that all the blame lies with him, Rose, but he's a bit like Gordon Brown and Brian Cowen; just as neither of them can escape the fact that they were Chancellor of the Exchequer/Finance Minister and responsible for the policies that contributed to if not caused the present financial crisis in these islands, so the Pope cannot escape from the fact that as head of the CDF, he was responsible over the last 30 years for implementing many of the policies that have contributed to if not caused the crisis in the Church.

Also, he's now 5 years into his papacy which is longer than the total reign of some popes so he should have stamped his mark on it now; to be honest, I'm struggling to find anything that particularly marks out his papacy other than a series of high profile gaffes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Clare
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 13:48
Archbishop Lefebvre ... was a saintly, humble man, and a faithful priest who reluctantly acted to see that the faith was passed on in its integrity, while the establishment was selling out to the world.

And Hans Kung, for all his drivel about religious freedom, cannot stand Catholics who uphold the faith and the Church's traditions.
Hans Kung and Archbishop Lefevre were both intensely holy men, dedicated to the Church but both became convinced that the Church they passionately loved had taken the wrong direction.

One of the essential differences between them was that Kung remained within the Church to fight his case whilst accepting the Pope's authority, including the Pope's decision to suspend him as a theologian; Lefebvre decided to defy the Pope's authority and abandoned the Church to set up his own sect.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Rose of York
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 15:34
How can we say that organisations consisting of God fearing men and women who gather to pray and worship God, are not Churches?
It comes from the propensity of some theologians toend up thinking they know better than Jesus who simply said " For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.", not much chat about Protestants or Catholics there.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Rose of York
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 15:34
How can we say that organisations consisting of God fearing men and women who gather to pray and worship God, are not Churches?
St Paul said that anyone who preaches a different gospel is anathema.

Quote:
 
There is nit picking about the finer points of "on this rock I will build my Church."


It's not nitpicking. It is honesty.

Quote:
 
... explain in plain English, not Vatican Gobbledygook, why their ministries and Eucharists are not recognised by the Catholic Church, then discussions are more likely to be successful.


Why? Why do they care what we teach? It should make no difference to them.

Quote:
 
How is the typical churchgoer from another denomination expected to understand the pronouncements that come from Rome?


Some understand them and some don't. Either way, unless they convert, they do not accept them.

Quote:
 
They are deeply hurt by the Catholic Church's refusal to condone inter Communion.


The founders of their denominations must be turning in their graves! They didn't set up separate "churches" just so that one day their successors and followers could get together and worship with "papists"!
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Mairtin
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 16:04
Rose of York
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 15:34
How can we say that organisations consisting of God fearing men and women who gather to pray and worship God, are not Churches?
It comes from the propensity of some theologians toend up thinking they know better than Jesus who simply said " For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.", not much chat about Protestants or Catholics there.
No, it comes from the propensity of some heresiarchs to set up different "twos and threes to gather together", separately from the Catholics.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Mairtin
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 15:59
Clare
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 13:48
Archbishop Lefebvre ... was a saintly, humble man, and a faithful priest who reluctantly acted to see that the faith was passed on in its integrity, while the establishment was selling out to the world.

And Hans Kung, for all his drivel about religious freedom, cannot stand Catholics who uphold the faith and the Church's traditions.
Hans Kung and Archbishop Lefevre were both intensely holy men, dedicated to the Church but both became convinced that the Church they passionately loved had taken the wrong direction.

One of the essential differences between them was that Kung remained within the Church to fight his case whilst accepting the Pope's authority, including the Pope's decision to suspend him as a theologian; Lefebvre decided to defy the Pope's authority and abandoned the Church to set up his own sect.
I'm glad you recognise Archbishop Lefebvre's holiness, Mairtin. :)

However, whereas Archbishop Lefebvre accepted and upheld all that the Church has consistently taught, Hans Kung has produced a litany of all the teachings he objects to (which must surely be longer than the list of teachings he accepts!).

For all the superficial, "good standing" that Hans Kung has mysteriously managed to maintain, history will show that Archbishop Lefebvre was actually the faithful Catholic.

The Church of the future owes plenty to him, and nothing to Hans Kung.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

Gerard
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 15:26
Appologies Rose I should not have said every ...

Gerry
In fact, so far as I can see, there was only Clare. So, please carry on as you now are with the ideas not the man. And, please, everyone, this is about the specific ideas in a long and not simple document, which may prove in time to be an important document (and it may not). Kung himself, Lefebvre and many others can be discussed and have been discussed at length on other threads. :topicbaack: :hammer: :boxing:
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Clare
Saturday, 17. April 2010, 16:57
I'm glad you recognise Archbishop Lefebvre's holiness, Mairtin. :)
I've never questioned the Archbishop's holiness, Clare, or his passionate love for the Church or the fact that he genuinely believed that he was doing the right thing.

None of that, however, makes what he did right.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

For the love of Pete! :pl: :topicbaack:
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Add Reply