Scott Hahn

  • Thread starter Thread starter CollegeKid
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would like to interject that in regards to Vatican II it seems only the USA has used that article to twist the truth to try and fit selfish ends. It is the love of self in this country that fertilizes evil and twists the truth.

There is nothing wrong with Vatican II. As with scripture it is intepreted by some to fit their own desires and not that of the Catholic Church.

Hence the problems with lack of or no confessions, women thinking they should be priests, premarital sex, and more… Vatican II never approved these things. But people have taken things like “deciding with a formed consciuous” to do exactly what they should not. This is because many do not have a formed conscoious and yet they decide.
 
Hahn has made some wonderful contributions to the faith. There is absolutely no question about that. His works have no doubt helped to lead people into (or back into) the Church and that alone is enough to congratulate him. On the other hand, his style of speaking and writing is often rather reductionist and not always well backed-up. His work often therefore appeals to what some might call “fundamentalist Catholics.”

While that’s certainly not all bad by any means (and a lot better than some of the stuff out there), he certainly lacks the depth and subtlety of someone like our current Pope back when he was a professor of theology.
 
JacktheCatholic said:
I would like to interject that in regards to Vatican II it seems only the USA has used that article to twist the truth to try and fit selfish ends. It is the love of self in this country that fertilizes evil and twists the truth.

There is nothing wrong with Vatican II. As with scripture it is intepreted by some to fit their own desires and not that of the Catholic Church.

Hence the problems with lack of or no confessions, women thinking they should be priests, premarital sex, and more… Vatican II never approved these things. But people have taken things like “deciding with a formed consciuous” to do exactly what they should not. This is because many do not have a formed conscoious and yet they decide.
Click to expand...
While I agree that V-II doesn’t directly support what you mention, I disagree when you say it’s a US problem. It’s a real miracle when a parish isn’t grossly effected by misinterpretations etc. Priests and bishops (unfortunately) and theologians all over the world have corrupted the Council, intentionally and not.:o
 
Scott Hahn is terrific. He tells it like it is, doesn’t soften things because it *might *reach somebody sometime. Straight to the point. We need more like him; him, Gerry Matatics, Fr. Corapi. Enough with the softies that do nothing but confuse the Faith for those ouside of the Church.
 
Scott and Kimberly Hahn’s book Rome Sweet Home was a big factor in pushing me along to convert.

I love them, they’re great.

My boyfriend likes them too, and he’s the most conservative Catholic in the world I swear!🙂
 
I think the St. Paul Center founded by Hahn is among the best Biblical teaching apostolates there is. For Catholics - non-Catholics too. Of course the RCC did not restrict reading of the Bible, but it has not encouraged it at all in a way that would equip Catholics to know and explain their faith. And not convert in huge numbers to “Bible based Christianity” as millions have in recent decades.

Dr. Hahn’s apostolate is now being used by some bishops to teach seminarians Scripture. Fr. Groeschel of NYC has invited the St. Paul Center to teach priests and seminarians in NYC.

Interestingly, CSSI has also exploded worldwide as a Catholic Bible study program - for groups. The CSSI founder, Gail Buckley, is profiled in the current issue of Envoy (a great magazine which is nice to see back in print) - like Hahn she is a former Protestant.

I fault some traditonalists for not being on fire/knowing the Bible as well as they know the TLM rubrics. What did Jerome say? IMO the Catholic church in the US has been blessed with having Hahn and Buckley. Just to name two.
 
The movie “Bella” has Scott and Kimberly Hahn, Tim Staples and
others listed in the credits. I know that Eduardo was very influenced in his “conversion” to living his Catholic faith deeply
by the book by the Hahns. I know that the movie has in turn
touched many and prevented more than a few abortions.
 
CollegeKid said:
Just curious- what do you guys think of Scott Hahn- is he a good theologian? Orthodox in his faith and teaching? For example, his books such as The Lamb’s Supper?
Click to expand...
I rather like his work that I have read and heard him speak in person once. I occasionally catch him on EWTN…

I usually tend to think of him more as a “Bible Scholar” rather than as a theologian… But to be sure, they go hand in hand.

I rather like his “every-man” appeal and his ease of reference in talking about the scriptures and the Mass and covenant theology.

Would I be making any sense to anyone if I were to say his use of pure Scripture and some Early Fathers give his works a sort of “primative church” appeal? At least in the sense he does not seem encumbered deeply in a particular eastern or western school of theological thought… Make any sense? yes? no?
 
Scott Hahn Rawks!!!

I highly recommend “Hail Holy Queen”. He does an awesome job of explaining who Mary is in scripture and showing how veneration of Mary/devotions to Mary are biblical.
 
I did not have time to read all the posts, so sorry if this has been said already.

Scott Hahn is an excellent speaker/writer/teacher. The important thing to remember is that his books all carry the nihil obstat and imprimatur. Perhaps some of the finer points of his scriptural exegesis are debatable, but they are only on points that are still points where Catholics can legitimately disagree with each other. He does not teach heresy. And if the Church came out definitively against something he said, I’m sure he would be the first to denounce it.

I noticed someone post a link to a New Oxford Review article, which I think is probably the best place to find what you are looking for as to the problems *some *“traditionalists” have with Dr. Hahn. The problem with the article is that it is not fairly written and many of the statements are based on misreadings of Dr. Hahn’s books. (On a side-note, I personally would not trust NOR for a balanced view of most things. I’ve found many of their articles to not be above personal attacks. For more info on NOR, click here).

One of the main problem seems to be with a portion of “First Comes Love” when he makes an analogy of the Holy Spirit as a bridal-maternal figure. You have to read it in context to see what he is and is not actually saying. The NOR article paints a very jaded and inaccurate picture of Hahn’s theology IMO. They carry illustrative analogies to ludicrous extremes in an attempt to prove their point.

Hahn is certainly not a “post VII” theologian. He is far more educated on the writings of the Church Fathers and the previous ecumenical councils than any of us here probably are. When I had him in class, his handouts on Original Sin were from the documents of Trent.

As far as being charismatic, I totally empathize with the mental image of charismatic = bad liturgy + touchy-feely mumbo-jumbo. I have found that is not always the case. If Dr. Hahn identified himself as “charismatic”, he would not mean it that sense for sure. I have met charismatic people and priests who are *very *serious about authentic liturgy and avoiding liturgical abuse. I think certain past happenings have justifiably led many “traditionalists” to have an aversion towards “charismatics.” But I think it is a mistake to write off all Charismatics as wacko.
 
Joe_5859 said:
The important thing to remember is that his books all carry the nihil obstat and imprimatur.
Click to expand...
I like Scott Hahn, but having these in no way helps his cause. You’d be surprised at some of the books they gave nihil obstats and imprimaturs to today. They just aren’t what they used to be.
 
SemperFidelis said:
I like Scott Hahn, but having these in no way helps his cause. You’d be surprised at some of the books they gave nihil obstats and imprimaturs to today. They just aren’t what they used to be.
Click to expand...
I wish I couldn’t agree - but I can’t not agree. IOW - I agree.

Without naming names, I think we all know there are some dissident publisher/theologians who routinely manage to get NO/Imprimatur seals…

Having said that, I still love Doctor Hahn and stand by my praise of him.
 
SemperFidelis said:
I like Scott Hahn, but having these in no way helps his cause. You’d be surprised at some of the books they gave nihil obstats and imprimaturs to today. They just aren’t what they used to be.
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree with that. Perhaps I should have picked a differet way to make my point 🤷
 
Poor Scott! He gets kicked around a lot but I think he is a good person and interesting to listen to and read. I was a student at College of St. Francis when he was teaching there (late 80’s) and he was a new Catholic then. He got a lot of gruff from the people in the area as he was amidst “Heterodoxy Central” in Joliet, although most in his department were solid. Some have been unkind to his memory there but I always defend him when I get the chance. 👍
 
kidderdoc said:
Poor Scott! He gets kicked around a lot but I think he is a good person and interesting to listen to and read. I was a student at College of St. Francis when he was teaching there (late 80’s) and he was a new Catholic then. He got a lot of gruff from the people in the area as he was amidst “Heterodoxy Central” in Joliet, although most in his department were solid. Some have been unkind to his memory there but I always defend him when I get the chance. 👍
Click to expand...
Yes, some traditional Catholics don’t like him but also some liberal Catholics. His works are not allowed on the reading racks of the parish nearest me. He is not the only one singled out to be sure. CUF and, ironically, The Latin Mass mag are a few others not welcome in that parish.

On a postive note, it is good to see so many on the traditionalist thread supporting Scott Hahn.
 
rien said:
Yes, some traditional Catholics don’t like him but also some liberal Catholics. His works are not allowed on the reading racks of the parish nearest me. He is not the only one singled out to be sure. CUF and, ironically, The Latin Mass mag are a few others not welcome in that parish.

On a postive note, it is good to see so many on the traditionalist thread supporting Scott Hahn.
Click to expand...
The prepnderance of self-identified “traditionalist” distaste for Doctor Hahn that I have seen seems to be general annoyance and distaste for the fact that he did not “trad up” and has found the ordinary form to be an acceptable starting or ending point in discussions about the Mass. Additionally his association with FSU and membership in Opus Dei seems to arise the ire or suspiscion of some.

More of a “guilt by association”/“he never became a card-carrying traditionalist” sort of resentment among most. Still one other guy I talked to fancies himself a devotee of St. Tomas Aquinas and broadly rejects listening to anything that does not eminate from a Thomist. You’ll have that I guess.

The fact that ultra-traditionalists and ultra modern liberals have distaste for him, may be a good sign he is a radical orthodox catholic!

Frankly, listening to Dr. Hahns stuff, I find it helpful and illuminating in my appreciation of the Eucharist - and I attend Byzantine Divine Liturgy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top