Bookmark and Share
My Photo


    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.


« Cross profs! | Main | The narrowminded, reactionary, fundamentalist Vatican... »

Monday, February 09, 2009



Hence Joseph Ratzinger is now Pope Benedict XVI and Hans Kung is, well, Hans Kung.


The whole post is golden, but the line about turning wine into water is priceless. That really is Kung in a nutshell!1


I was ready to say, "now Carl, the title of your post seems to go a little bit too far...". But then I read your post. And I sighed. And I had to agree.

It's unfortunate, too- you're exactly right that Küng is a brilliant man. Some of his early work was quite good, and it's shame to see the banality of his recent work and thought.


Kung' generation of liberals that is growing very uncomfortable. They have been very careful. When criticizing Cardinal Ratzinger they they could be quite harsh. When talking about the pope they needed to be more careful. Now Cardinal Ratzinger is pope. They seem to have grown less a cautious. Even liberal publications are having trouble calling the Catholic.

PArt of it is frustration. They are getting old and victory on their pet issues seems to be slipping further and furhter away. Every church except the Catholic church is becoming more liberal. But they don't see God in that. They see the church as a purely human institution. So they blame a person. Pope Benedict is the obvious choice. But how can a Catholic see the pope as evil?

They don't see it by younger people do. If I want to be liberal why would I become Catholic? Why not Anglican? When it comes down to it, why not atheist? What is there that Hans Kung offers me that Richard Dawkins does not? Pope Benedict may have some hard teachings but at least he beleives in something.

Jackson (Augustine)

What a sad farce.


" If he wanted to, he could (1)authorize contraception over night. (2)permit the marriage of priests,(3) make possible the ordination of women and allow (4)eucharistic fellowship with this Protestant churches. What would a Pope do who acted in the spirit of Obama?"

I was wondering how many of these are even "correct" by a stretch. I figure

(1)Not without trashing Humane vitae and subsequently John pails theology of the Body (and consistent Church teaching)

(2)Yes: but only while upholding the practice and superiority of Priestly chastity.


(4) Probably not.

But- I'm not studied on each matter.. What say you good folk???


I'm sorry I would not ever disparage our Late Great Pontiff even with a innocent typo

It is (properlY) Pope John Paul II


When I was growing up mainline Protestant, Kung's "On Being a Christian" was on the desks of all the church staff. Which might explain a bit of mainline woes.


Prof. Kung accurately notes that President Obama presently has the praises of "the world" while the Pope acts contrary to the demands of the world, and that the Pope is "sceptical" about the Reformation. But on what understanding of Catholicism is any of this other than as it should be? Didn't St. Paul say something about not conforming to the world? Is it even possible to accept the Reformation and continue to identify as a Catholic?

Sandra Miesel

Borrowing a phrase from Kathy Shaidle, if the Church is so repressive, how come Hans Kung isn't a lampshade yet?


Breathtakingly inane.


I think Kung has a point. If the Pope lets him remain in communion with the Catholic church, why can't the Pope open the floodgates to let all the dissenting protestants in? Seriously, I would like to be in communion with the rest of my family and their qualms with the Catholic faith are no worse than Kung's.


Randy sez: "They are getting old and victory on their pet issues seems to be slipping further and furhter away."

You know, I have been gradually coming to this conclusion also. When I look at the world of today, I can usually separate "liberals" (as a catch-all term) into one of three categories:

(1) those past their "prime" (50's and beyond), frothing at the mouth at the world's persistent resistance to their ideas;
(2) the intellectual progeny of (1), driven into a furor by the leftist ideas of the past, adding energy and enthusiasm to the mix, but having no real thought or reflection; and,
(3) clueless youth, who are too wrapped up in all the distractions of the modern world to give a crap about anything except their personal enjoyment.

(1) is older than (2) is older than (3). Ergo, radicalism is waning as the progeny of Left are becoming ever more ignorant. Combine that with the fact that the devout will easily out-breed the liberal in a few generations, and the fate of the radicals is sealed. We just have to make sure that the "Category (2)'s" are prevented from using the State against the devout. They are already getting desperate, and desperation breeds coercion.

Sandra Miesel sez: "Borrowing a phrase from Kathy Shaidle, if the Church is so repressive, how come Hans Kung isn't a lampshade yet?"


Rev. Denis Charles- Gray

A topic or phenomenon that I would welcome having for discussion/dialogue would be the alleged cultic tendency among various spokesmen representative of EWTN oriented Catholics, to glorify or even idolize Mother Angelica Pope John Paul ii and of course Mother Theresa.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight


Ignatius Press

Catholic World Report


Blogs & Sites We Like

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad