Scott Hahn

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mea_Culpa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mea_Culpa said:
This condescending attitude is common to all the people that have written on here to criticize Dr. Hahn. Do you think only people with Ph.D.'s in theology should be allowed to read about the Faith? I also detect more than a little jealousy of Dr. Hahn’s success in evangelizing both those inside and outside of the Church.

Instead of trying to tear down Dr. Hahn with gossipy stories about the books he assigns in his classes, you should try to build up the Church. In the process, you might find you also have something to say that people want to hear.

Envy of another’s spiritual good is one of the six sins against the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
Mea Culpa, I completely agree with you. There is absolutely nothing stopping anyone on this thread from getting their PhD in Theology, quiting their jobs, and spending every waking moment spreading the gospel for the rest of their lives. Write those best sellers, but of course you’ll give them away, because that’s the kind of person you’ll be. Don’t waste my time with your envy. Come on people, I want to see one of you put Dr. Hahn in his place, show him and the rest of us how it is done.
 
Thank you for providing this quote. It was wholly appropriate to present this to address the charge against Scott explicitly made on this blog.
Prayer_Warrior said:
For what it is worth, Scott Hahn expressly denies that the Holy Spirit is feminine as was so scandalously misrepresented by NOR. Here is his letter to their editor:

I’m sure Scott Hahn appreciated our Holy Father’s words in his book Jesus of Nazareth, where he talks about the maternal-like love of God, His mercy, which is spoken of in Scripture in verses such as Is 66:13 “As one whom his mother comforts, so I will comfort you” and Is 49:15, “Can a woman forget her suckling child, that she should have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you”. Our Holy Father rightly states, and clearly Scott Hahn agrees, that “God is neither a man or a woman, but simply God, the Creator of man and woman.”(p.140) Yet, He is described in scripture in a maternal sense. Pope Benedict points out, " The mystery of God’s maternal love is expressed with particular power in the Hebrew word rahamim. Etymologically, this word means “womb,” but it was later used to mean divine compassion for man, God’s mercy."(p. 139). I would be willing to bet that Scott Hahn knew that before Jesus of Nazareth was ever published.
Click to expand...
 
thanks prodigal son. that is a really nice website. a good resource!!

i will try to research it and see what it has to offer!
 
masha said:
I’ve read some of Scott Hahn’s books, been to a Bible study with his wife, and had the chance to observe him somewhat at Franciscan University, where he teaches some theology classes.

The theological issues that Ron Conte has with him are all in his books. I’m sorry I can’t give exact citations right now, but as so many here have read most of his books, they should be easy to find. Some of them are problematic for obvious reasons, others require a more indepth look at Catholic theology as much of the problem lies with the attitude that generally accompanies such viewpoints.

One of the biggest problems with Scott Hahn’s writing is the way he presents his material. He writes pop-theology for a crowd of converts or re-verts, his style is so basic so as to be almost banal. But his material is speculative. He isn’t writing basic theology to help laymen more fully understand their faith, he’s selling his semi-othodox ideas to an audience unprepared to challenge them.

In A Father who Keeps His Promises, for example, Scott Hahn claims that the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch “though not infaillible per se.” is authoritatively and bindingly accepted by the Church. This is not at all true. Hahn either misunderstood, or misrepresented the Church’s more open view of the Pentateuch, and presented it to his unsuspecting readers, who most likely are not terribly familiar with the Church’s guidelines for exegetes.

Scott Hahn does not publish in upper level theology journals. He does not present his ideas to his peers for review and critique. In theological circles, he is not considered to be a theologian so much as a student of theology, because his ideas, while not always Catholic, are far from novel.

At the University, Mr. Hahn not only assigned all of his own books for several theology classes (avaliable only new), he used only one or two in class, leaving students saddled with unnecessary and expensive extra books. (for those who have be out of school for quite some time this is not only extreme academic pride, it also shows very little consideration for his students, who are paying upwards of $300 per semester without the added burden of Scott Hahn’s books.
Click to expand...
 
Chancellor,

We already responded to these charges against Scott. Resubmitting them seems vastely unfair. Have you read our posts? We have addressed every point including the need for one to separate theological hypotheses about scripture from personal attacks. Please respond to these comments if you want to take issue but don’t re-post without staying with the thread… pretty please with sugar on top?
40.png
Chancellor:
 
That was like a Charlie Brown “good grief” because Chancellor re-posted negative comments about Scott Hahn after we were diligent to respond to each element incuding the need to separate personal attacks from theological disagreements.
deborahaz said:
??? are we missing something ???
Click to expand...
 
i know. that was funny. i kept waiting to see if something would follow.
maybe chancellor doesn’t know or that was chancellor’s point?

good grief!!! LOL
 
“You will know them by their fruit”. (Matt 7:16)

From what I have seen, heard and read Scott Hahn has produced excellent outcomes. He has had a positive influence on many, many people. He has been instrumental in converting countless people.

Now, Hahn is human like all of us and it strikes me that he is an extraordinary human. He deserves our consideration and regard.

Is he perfect? No, I doubt it. Is he good? Yes, very good.

I do not want to compare Hahn or anyone for that matter with Jesus but would like to remind everybody that even Jesus had enemies! And how!

I am sure Hahn can live with his:rotfl:

:whacky:

:hmmm:
 
notsmart said:
Do you think its because of his association with Opus Dei that triggers concern?
Click to expand...
Is there a thread on Opus Dei? For many reasons I wince when I hear Opus Dei mentioned but confess that I really know very little about them.

:confused:
 
Chancellor said:
Scott Hahn’s teaching has had a powerful positive effect on the faith of a great number of Catholics. The fact that the criticism of him is so shrill and hostile is leading me to change Hahn from the category of “teacher” to that of “prophet”.

As Jesus said: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I have wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!”

OH NO!! We have just caught Jesus acting motherly and wanting to act in a fashion customarily assigned to females!!

Could it be that all of this touting of male superiority among some of our CA friends is just bigotry trying to disguise irtself as orthodoxy?

The Chancellor
Click to expand...
What a splendid post. Earlier I read a couple of posts and couldn’t believe what I was reading so I immediately posted something in Scott Hahn’s defence.

When I have been on other forums where anti-Catholics and non-Catholics have a go at the Church I notice the underlining antagonism. Then I went to another forum that was mainly Catholic and the mood was more relaxed. And then I came here…

We would expect that as part of the Family of God we would indeed differ and raise questions about our doubts or interpretations. But we would not bring out an arsenal…!

I am not a theologian or intellectual and I find Scott Hahn’s writings so clear and even poetic. One of the posters here said Jesus himself used parables and simple language. Hahn’s books are so easy to read. He is a gem.

Yes, gems are beautiful and when we contemplate a diamond for instance we will ignore the flaws. All diamonds have flaws. I have not found any flaws in Hahn’s teachings for the reasons stated above. I found myself elated and enchanted by much of what he has to say. He inspirational and unique.

So I suggest that our other “family members” on this forum be more gracious. One does get the impression that there is some jealousy and maybe a tinge of envy.

Thank you again for your post Chancellor - it was fair indeed.

:clapping:

:tiphat:

:whistle:
 
tm30 said:
Prophet? Sheesh. Now that kind of reponse is reason #1 it’s important not to let controversial positions go unaddressed. Here we have a person who is so enthralled with Mr. Hahn, he/she will declare him a prophet before questioning his views.

That’s frightening, and it has nothing to do with a “male superiority” complex.

I take it you’re in favor of women priests, too? (since you oppose “male bigotry”)?
Click to expand...
:tsktsk:

Relax! Take it easy! :love:
 
tm30 said:
Scott Hahn is a good man. I’ve been to his talks. I’m grateful for the good he’s done, not only in theology, but in bringing his Protestant colleagues into the fold. But we can’t let the cult of personality get in the way of a discerning spirit. Hard questions need to be asked about certain of his speculations. It’s not wrong to do so.
Click to expand...
Fair statement

:tiphat:
 
tm30 said:
All it takes is one to lead a soul into heresy. I’m not pronouncing judgment on Hahn’s body of work - I find some of it very insightful, but a lot of it has already been touched on in one form or another in Catholic thought.

That said, when one has a following and is as respected and listened to as Scott Hahn, you’d better believe that some “flat wrong” ideas is a bad thing. I’m not denying his humanness. We all err. But it can’t be swept under the rug when someone who garners such devotion goes askew, even in minor fashion. It’s a huge HUGE responsibility that he’s elected for himself, by publishing books and going on the speech circuit. His position as a mouthpiece of theology inherently demands little or no slack be given when there is controversy, confusion, or error. It goes with the territory.
Click to expand...
well said. we need to remember that. and i don’t feel those of us that might be a little skeptic should receive so much criticism that somehow we are not good catholics.
 
The issue is not about whether a Hahn critic is a good Catholic or bad Catholic.

The key issues are
(1) it remains to be proven that he has ever committed doctrinal error (no evidence provided here),
(2) criticisms of his personality should be separated from and evaluation of his theological/ scriptural hypotheses because to treat both simultaneously muddies the argument.
(3) whether he has truly overstepped a boundary that will mislead people away from the faith (no evidence provided here). Indeed, people have been coming TO the church and NONE of his teachings have been criticized by the magesterium NOR by Father Micahel Scanlon, NOR by the scholar and colleague Dr. Alan Schrek, NOR by anyone affiliated with EWTN.
deborahaz said:
well said. we need to remember that. and i don’t feel those of us that might be a little skeptic should receive so much criticism that somehow we are not good catholics.
Click to expand...
 
this is a reply to post #138 - i didn’t use the word critic, i used the word skeptic, there is a difference i think. i
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top