Hans Kung

[utunumsint]

Does anyone know of any goof resources on Hans Kung, his theology, critiques of his theology, etc… A friend of mine has developed an interest in his works and his autobiography. From what I understand, he rejects papal infalibility, and sees all religions as prety much equal.

God bless,
Ut

 

[CDNowak]

Does anyone know of any goof resources on Hans Kung, his theology, critiques of his theology, etc… A friend of mine has developed an interest in his works and his autobiography. From what I understand, he rejects papal infalibility, and sees all religions as prety much equal.

God bless,
Ut

…are their any other kind? (Miserere Mei, Domine)

I am sure there are some good books out their critiquing his Theology in detail, but George Weigel’s open letter is all that immediately came to mind

 

[utunumsint]

Part of the Catholic Civil war started around the time of Vatican II. I wonder if we are hearing the end of his ilk, or if they will eventually get someone into the Papacy.

God bless,
Ut

 

[CDNowak]

Part of the Catholic Civil war started around the time of Vatican II. I wonder if we are hearing the end of his ilk, or if they will eventually get someone into the Papacy.

God bless,
Ut

For the most part we are hearing the end (the younger generation has too much integrity too hold their beliefs and remain in the Church). Certainly they will not get one of their own in with the current crop of bishops and cardinals.

 

[Tomster]

Just for the sake of discussion, and correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that before his elevation to chair of Peter, Pius IX was considered a theological liberal. Whether that is true or not, it really isn’t for me to decide. But, if he was, we can see how the Holy Spirit protected him from promulgating false doctrine.

Having said that, we really have nothing to fear if a “Kung-like” bishop is elected to the See of Peter. The Holy Spirit has the matter well in hand if you will.

 

[utunumsint]

Just for the sake of discussion, and correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that before his elevation to chair of Peter, Pius IX was considered a theological liberal. Whether that is true or not, it really isn’t for me to decide. But, if he was, we can see how the Holy Spirit protected him from promulgating false doctrine.

Having said that, we really have nothing to fear if a “Kung-like” bishop is elected to the See of Peter. The Holy Spirit has the matter well in hand if you will.

Yes. He was a liberal hero for implementing a lot of liberal policies for the Papal States, including representative governments, etc… They wanted to parade him around as their spokesperson, but he started to get uncomfortable with the direction they wanted to take him. Apparantly he was kidnapped by some liberals, and that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. He became very orthodox, and even anti-liberal, having seen first hand how liberalism could get carried away with itself.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Tomster]

Yes. He was a liberal hero for implementing a lot of liberal policies for the Papal States, including representative governments, etc… They wanted to parade him around as their spokesperson, but he started to get uncomfortable with the direction they wanted to take him. Apparantly he was kidnapped by some liberals, and that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. He became very orthodox, and even anti-liberal, having seen first hand how liberalism could get carried away with itself.

God bless,
Ut

Thanks for confirming that for me.

 

[Rogerteder]

piux IX wasnt liberal like we see today though…he didnt question official teachings of the Church…

 

[FCEGM]

Does anyone know of any goof resources on Hans Kung, his theology, critiques of his theology, etc… A friend of mine has developed an interest in his works and his autobiography. From what I understand, he rejects papal infalibility, and sees all religions as prety much equal.

God bless,
Ut

Here are some articles of various lengths on Kung:

catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=67&repos=6&subrepos=2&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=33338&repos=4&subrepos=1&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=2930&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=6818&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=38994&repos=4&subrepos=1&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/commentary/otr.cfm?id=3334&repos=6&subrepos=4&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=2925&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=642281

ewtn.com/library/CHRIST/INQUIS.TXT

ewtn.com/library/CHRIST/PAPERR.TXT

 

[Tomster]

Here are some articles of various lengths on Kung:

catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=67&repos=6&subrepos=2&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=33338&repos=4&subrepos=1&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=2930&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=6818&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=38994&repos=4&subrepos=1&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/commentary/otr.cfm?id=3334&repos=6&subrepos=4&searchid=642281

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=2925&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=642281

ewtn.com/library/CHRIST/INQUIS.TXT

ewtn.com/library/CHRIST/PAPERR.TXT

Thank you so much Frances. Great work!

 

[ChadS]

Wouldn’t it be more appropriate in all of this to refer to Kung as Fr. Hans Kung? Even if you disagree with his theology and eccelsiology he is still a priest in good standing. I’ve noticed this elsewhere that when its a priest everybody loves it’s Father this and Father that, but as soon as you disagree with them all honorifics go out the window and they’re just Kung and McBrien.

ChadS

 

[utunumsint]

Thanks for those links Francis.

In one of the articles, Chad, it seems that he preffers the name Dr. Kung now.

It would seem to me based on the articles I read that Kung represents a very large disaffected catholic population from the 60, 70, and 80s, but that is about it. Most of the children born to those generations had the integrity to leave the church. Those that remain are usually orthodox.

When that cohort dies away, the church will be much smaller, but hopefully, there will be an end to this Catholic civil war, that Kung seems to be a standard bearer for.

The friend I have who has begun to read his books is of that generation. I am from the next. I find it sad that my generation has been given the task to preach to a cynical older generation, bent on contraception, married priests, women priests, etc… Seems this civil war has everything to do with the sexual revolution and progressice liberal tendencies within America.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Tomster]

Thanks for those links Francis.

In one of the articles, Chad, it seems that he preffers the name Dr. Kung now.

It would seem to me based on the articles I read that Kung represents a very large disaffected catholic population from the 60, 70, and 80s, but that is about it. Most of the children born to those generations had the integrity to leave the church. Those that remain are usually orthodox.

When that cohort dies away, the church will be much smaller, but hopefully, there will be an end to this Catholic civil war, that Kung seems to be a standard bearer for.

The friend I have who has begun to read his books is of that generation. I am from the next. I find it sad that my generation has been given the task to preach to a cynical older generation, bent on contraception, married priests, women priests, etc… Seems this civil war has everything to do with the sexual revolution and progressice liberal tendencies within America.

God bless,
Ut

Consider yourself blessed not having lived through all of that. I did and let me tell you it was a mess to say the least.

From my vantage point, at that time, the good sisters of St. Dominic, the Dominicans, braced us for what was coming. There were still plenty of older sisters still in the trenches teaching us about things like modernity and liberalism and warning us about them.

This is just an opinion on my part, but I believe Pope St. Pius X did a great job putting a lid on modernity in the early 20th century. The liberals, though, paid lip service to him and ran for cover and waited. They surfaced with a vengeance along with their minions mid-century. Holy Mother Church is still recovering from their onslaught. But I have cause for great joy because of the leadership of our present Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI.

 

[Major_Tom]

Does anyone know of any goof resources on Hans Kung, his theology, critiques of his theology, etc… A friend of mine has developed an interest in his works and his autobiography. From what I understand, he rejects papal infalibility, and sees all religions as prety much equal.

God bless,
Ut

Well, if you’re interested in him, a good place to start is his The Catholic Church: A Short History. I found it very well written, a quick read but with a lot of depth. I enjoyed it thoroughly. Also, a profile of him is included in the book The Modern Inquistion, by Paul Collins. Kung’s profile is told mostly in his own words, part biography, with a brief history that details his interactions with the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (coincidentally, run at the time by the current Pope Benedict). I found it fascinating also for the detail that it sheds on the Congregation functions.

 

[Major_Tom]

Yes. He was a liberal hero for implementing a lot of liberal policies for the Papal States, including representative governments, etc… He became very orthodox, and even anti-liberal, having seen first hand how liberalism could get carried away with itself.

God bless,
Ut

Representative governments constitutes “Liberalism getting carried away with itself”? Are you pining for the old days of monarchies?

 

[utunumsint]

Representative governments constitutes “Liberalism getting carried away with itself”? Are you pining for the old days of monarchies?

He supported representative government and implemented it in his papal states. So no, this does not include liberalism getting carried away with itself. Perhaps it had something to do with his kidnapping.
God bless,
Ut

 

[utunumsint]

Well, if you’re interested in him, a good place to start is his The Catholic Church: A Short History. I found it very well written, a quick read but with a lot of depth. I enjoyed it thoroughly. Also, a profile of him is included in the book The Modern Inquistion, by Paul Collins. Kung’s profile is told mostly in his own words, part biography, with a brief history that details his interactions with the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (coincidentally, run at the time by the current Pope Benedict). I found it fascinating also for the detail that it sheds on the Congregation functions.

I read the Amazon description of A Short History. Apparantly he sees in Christ the most democtratic of all religious leaders. Kung is pushing a populist opinion of the church and reject the idea of the pope as hierarchical leader. The people rise up against the elites… in this case, the church.

You know, what is funny about this is that populism and liberalism were the halmarks of Musolini’s rise to power. He certainly presented himself as a populist. He was a follower of William James’ pragmatism. And yet he was a brutal dictator. Its funny how populist ideology so often needs a dictator to implement their visions… It seems that populism, for Musolini, was whatever worked to keep him in power and in the favour of the people.

The issue I have with populism is that popular opinion shifts like the wind. Appeals to popular opinion eventual give rise to the suppression of one group or another. Much better an appeal to principle.

God bless,
Ut

 

[jfoges]

He supported representative government and implemented it in his papal states. So no, this does not include liberalism getting carried away with itself. Perhaps it had something to do with his kidnapping.
God bless,
Ut

I have read Infallible: An Inquiry by Hans Kung. It was published in the early 70’s and I think it is the book that got him in trouble. I don’t agree with the conclusions he makes, but the book does give a comprehensive treatment of the issue of infallibility. Kung is a gifted theologian, one just has to keep in mind that he is not infallible.