Hans Kung: Help!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Madaglan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Madaglan

Guest
I’m reading this book by Hans Kung called *The Catholic Church. *I’ve heard the name Hans Kung before, and I know that he is a famous “Catholic” theologian; but I was horrified when I began reading his book. Not only does he attempt to undermine nearly every aspect of the Catholic faith, but he claims that he is making constructive criticism for the sake of a good reformation in the Church!

Anyhow the book really is beginning to shake my faith. Does anyone know of a good orthodox and catholic interpretation of Church history?–one by an erudite and faithful priest perhaps?
 
First of all put the book, down or burn it! You must remember that the devil will use people to try to shake your faith,in a very subtle way,in so-called rational arguments.What damage has already been done,write the questions down and post them.I will pray for you:) God Bless
 
Hello

I don’t know very much about this man, not I dare to give probably wrong anwers since I’m still studying theology and I need to learn many things, but I can tell you withour any doubt that Hans Kung is not catholic at all. He used to be, but he started to step out of orthodoxy and his teachings were condemned by the Church. As soon as he felt “free” from Rome he has started to try to undermine it.

It’s a sad story. I know of other man, Jacques Maritain whose teachings were also condemned when he stepped out of orthodoxy, but unlike Kung, his love for the Church of Christ made him to revise his teachings and came back to home.

That’s all I can tell you. Remember Luther. He suffered the same process.

I hope my little, humble and probably flawed help is of any use for you… 🙂

Blessings
 
The following is how Cardinal Ratzinger described Kueng’s relationship to the Church:

“Hans Kueng was deprived of the mandate to teach in the name and by the charge of the Church. That may have been bitter for him at first, but it was precisely what helped him to find his own totally personal path…Now he has retired, and a new commission to teach in the name of the Church would be even more pointless than before. Nor is he interested in that at all. He would rather that his theology be recognized as a valid form of Catholic theology. But he has taken back nothing of his contestation of the papal office; indeed, he has further radicalized his positions. In Christology and in trinitarian theology he has further distanced himself from the faith of the Church. I respect his path, which he takes in accord with his conscience, but he should not then demand the Church’s seal of approval but should admit that in essential questions he has come to different, very personal decisions of his own.”

[95-96, *Salt of the Earth: Christianity and the Catholic Church at the End of the Millennium. An Interview with Peter Seewald.]
 
40.png
Giennensis:
It’s a sad story. I know of other man, Jacques Maritain whose teachings were also condemned when he stepped out of orthodoxy, but unlike Kung, his love for the Church of Christ made him to revise his teachings and came back to home.
Click to expand...
Maritain was never condemned. Kung was responsible for Ratzinger getting a teaching position (Kung was supposed to suggest three names to Munich but instead he suggested only Ratzinger’s) as Ratzinger was also liberal back in the day. But as Kung noted, Ratzinger sold his head for a red hat.

Adam
 
Kung’s theology is horrific; however, I didn’t know there was a problem with his history. Perhaps we could start a list of factual errors in his Catholic history to help out those who would otherwise be tricked.
 
40.png
amarischuk:
Kung was responsible for Ratzinger getting a teaching position (Kung was supposed to suggest three names to Munich but instead he suggested only Ratzinger’s) as Ratzinger was also liberal back in the day. But as Kung noted, Ratzinger sold his head for a red hat.

Adam
Click to expand...
With all due respect, that’s neither true, nor Christian.

Before you starting throwing around slurs and accusatons, do some research. Show me where Ratzinger’s theology has changed in any significant way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top