| Title | : | The Catholic Church: A Short History |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 0812967623 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780812967623 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 272 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 2001 |
The Catholic Church: A Short History Reviews
-
نویسنده معتقد است که مسیحیت پنج دوره یا پارادایم داشته:
مسیحیت یهودی: اولین جامعۀ مسیحی که از یهودیان تشکیل شده بود که دغدغۀ اصلیشان رعایت یا عدم رعایت شریعت بود.
مسیحیت یونانی: که با گسترش مسیحیت در جهان مدیترانه شکل گرفت. دغدغۀ اصلی در این دوره، الهیات فلسفی و تبیینی دقیق از ماهیت مسیح بود.
مسیحیت لاتین: با متفکران لاتین و سپس مسیحی شدن روم شکل گرفت. دغدغۀ اصلی این مسیحیت، اخلاق، انضباط و سازمان کلیسا بود. در این دوره بود که کلیسا سازمانی منظم شد.
تا قبل از سازمانی شدن کلیسا در مسیحیت لاتینی، مسیحیت متناسب با هر پارادایم تغییر شکل می‌داد و بدون مشکل خود را با روح زمانه تطبیق می‌داد. اما سازمانی شدن کلیسا باعث جمود مسیحیت شد و پس از آن مسیحیت، جز انکار و تکفیر پارادایم‌های جدید (اصلاح دینی، روشنگری) نتوانست واکنشی به تغییر و تحول زمانه نشان دهد. در نتیجه اصلاحطلبان و روشنگران به ناچار از بدنهٔ کلیسا جدا شدند و به راه خود رفتند. -
WARNING: avoid this review if you are someone who believes that religion is one of the three topics that should not be discussed at the dinner table.
Catholicism 101: Final Exam
Required Text: The Catholic Church A Short History, Hans Kung, trans. John Bowden, Modern Library chronicles, 2003. Hereinafter referred to as “short history”.
Part One
Multiple-choice questions
1. According to the short history, who founded the Catholic Church?
A. Why, Jesus himself, of course. Next question.
B. Peter, who was entrusted to build the Church by Jesus and became the first Pope (see question no. 3).
C. Paul, who founded the first churches in the Gentile world.
D. His followers. Jesus did not found the Church, but from the earliest times, it has been a fellowship of those who believe in
Christ.
2. Was Jesus Catholic?
A. Isn’t that obvious? What the Catholic Church has always said and intended is what Jesus Christ himself originally said and
intended, so in principle Jesus himself would already been a Catholic. If you are a Traditional Catholic, it is mandatory for
you to choose this answer.
B. Of course not! As everyone knows, he was a Methodist, or at least a sort of a Protestant.
C. No. To call Jesus “Catholic” would be an anachronism, since the Church has not been founded yet during his lifetime. He was a Jew through and through.
D. It is doubtful whether a Church which is:
a. rigidly hierarchical;
b. stubbornly patriarchal; and
c. into celibacy as a condition for its priests
could claim Jesus as its own, when his teachings are contrary to such principles.
3. The Catholic Church bases its authority on Peter, who was the first Bishop of Rome. Does this claim have any scriptural or historical basis?
A. Of course! The Church wouldn’t make such claims without clear evidence. It’s all there in my sixth grade Catechism book.
B. No. Such claims have no historical basis whatsoever, not to mention scriptural. Pure Papist propaganda!
C. Again, it’s an anachronism. There was no Catholic Church during Peter’s lifetime.
D. We simply do not have any conclusive evidence, biblical or otherwise, that Peter was ever the first Bishop of Rome. And more importantly, there is also no evidence that the Bishop of Rome held any primacy over other Christian bishops during Peter's lifetime.
4. When did the requirement for priestly celibacy became mandatory in the Catholic Church?
A. It has always been mandatory for priests to be celibate since Jesus and Paul were celibates.
B. There has never been any such requirements prior to the Fourth Lateran Council of 1209.
C. It was promulgated by Pope Innocent III in the 13th century, but was never actively enforced until relatively late in the 16th century.
D. After the Second Lateran Council of 1139, when priestly marriages were regarded as a priori invalid, priests’ wives were regarded as concubines, and priests' children officially became the church's property as slaves, resulting in furious mass protest by the clergy.
5. The proceedings against the accused are secret. The informants are unknown. There is no cross-examination of witnesses, nor are there any experts. Accusers and judges are identical. Any appeal to an independent court is ruled out or is useless. These are the principles of which court?
A. The Roman Inquisition during the middle ages. But it’s much better now, as heretics are no longer burned at the stakes.
B. The Superior Court of Judicature during the Salem witch trials.
C. The People’s Court of North Korea.
D. The Holy Office; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which is the modern version of the Roman Inquisition.
6. How did the doctrine of papal infallibility came into being?
A. It’s biblical and should not be questioned by any loyal Catholic.
B. More Papist propaganda!
C. It originated from the teachings of Thomas Aquinas and other fathers of the church.
D. It was not officially promulgated until the controversial First Vatican Council in 1871, where its definition was challenged (unsuccesfully) by the majority of German and French episcopates.
7. What is the Second Vatican Council?
A. An abomination.
B. Finally, the Catholic Church recognized that Martin Luther was right.
C. It dragged the church to the modern age, somehow. But clearly not enough was done.
D. It is an epoch-making and irrevocable turning point for the Catholic Church. It integrated fundamental paradigms of the Reformation, the Enlightenment and modernity (anti-Semitism is not OK; there is salvation outside the church; democracy, human rights and science are good, etc.). Unfortunately, it was hampered by curia shenanigans and even now partially repudiated by reactionary church leaders.
8. So, what’s wrong with the Catholic Church today?
A. Nothing’s wrong with it whatsoever. Perish the thought.
B. Obviously, there’s something very wrong. But it is only to be expected from the Whore of Babylon.
C. Humans err. Priests molest. But a few black sheep are to be expected in a flock the size of the church.
D. The church is in trouble because it wants to roll back the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. The two main reforms that are desperately needed are those concerning the law of celibacy and the episcopal ministry. Without such reforms, the church will become a reactionary force that can't deal with modernity.
Part Two
Essay (approx. 100 words)
In your own words, what do you think of the short history?
It’s an interesting introduction to Hans Kung’s views, who like the current pope was a theological advisor to the members of the Second Vatican Council (his authority to teach Catholic theology had been rescinded since). He does a decent job covering the most salient points of the theological and institutional history. However, much of it is rather cursory, very opinionated (detractors would say biased) and could be confusing to readers who have no prior knowledge of the subject. He seems to be much more interested in airing his criticism (many of which I personally agree with) of the church’s theology. The book should really be called something like The Catholic Church: What’s Wrong With It.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: For all multiple-choice questions, D is the correct answer according to the short history. -
All religions are strange, but Catholicism is the weirdest of them all. I know this because I was brought up in the faith -- stumbling up steps, lighting candles, wobbling as I held a massive decorative Bible aloft just under the Reverend Father's eye during mass. Nothing can delete the religious impulse from a boy's brain more quickly than constant contact with nuns, combined with impressment as an altar boy. Yet Jesus of Nazareth remains an inspiring figure in my mind, and I thoroughly admire the message the Church delivers in liberation theology, and its moral opposition to unfettered capitalism.
Which is all to say that I really dug this heartfelt, often nasty history written by a priest who's currently forbidden from teaching Catholic Theology. Beginning with the tricky question of whether or not Jesus of Nazareth founded a church at all, Küng takes us on a wild cynical ride through darkness and light, stopping to point out forgeries and atrocities, while offering tributes to the geniuses who illuminate Church history (Augustine, Pope Gregory VII, Thomas Aquinas, Pope John XXIII, and Martin Luther -- whom he feels the Church is centuries behind in forgiving and removing from the list of excommunicated souls).
As the history gallops toward us and overlaps with Küng's own life, his anger is kept just under a boil -- not only does he despise the Church's constant rejection and neglect of women's issues (bear in mind that Jesus had nothing to say about contraception or abortion), he sees the grim, slow-moving utterly masculine Church hierarchy itself as an affront to the Gospel values it espouses. In fact his stern conclusions that the Church is in love with the Middle Ages (rather than the more hardscrabble communal world of Jesus), and "fixated on stereotyped images women" seem to me bigger problems than Church could ever handle, unless a real reformer takes the helm (this book was written before Ratzenberg was anointed). So in effect this history is both inspiring (in focusing constantly on the "golden thread" of Jesus's teachings) and cynical. Father Küng will most definitely enter by the narrow gate. -
Hans Kung is the Catholic that every Protestant will love.
He's not afraid to expose the ugliness of the Church's history along with its triumphs. This book will probably not sit well with Catholics. However, I believe he's a prophetic voice from within the Church much like Erasmus during the Renaissance, but not a separatist. I'd like to read his book Why I'm Still a Christian next. -
Si quieren un libro que defienda sin fundamentos a los asesinos de Cristo, deben leerlo. Repleto de información, navega por la historia de la Iglesia Católica pasando por un juicio visto con los ojos de la actualidad, lo que es un tremendo fallo.
Sin lugar a dudas, escrito por un teólogo muy estudiado, pero con ideas que actualmente han sido llevadas a la práctica por Francisco. Está bien no comulgar con el catolicismo, pero tampoco es echarle tierra a una institución que ha logrado subsistir al paso del tiempo. Y esto está plenamente justificado.
Pareciera un libro escrito por un judío infiltrado en la Iglesia Católica. -
Si Jesús viviera hoy, ¿sería católico?
Sirva esta pregunta como reseña sobre lo que trata el libro. Escrita por uno de los más famosos teólogos de los últimos tiempos, que incluso asistió como asesor al Concilio Vaticano II, y que perdió el favor del Cardinal Ratzinger por sus críticas a la deriva filosófica y religiosa que estaba tomando la Iglesia, el libro analiza con mayor o menor detenimiento la historia de la institución católica. Subraya en mayor profundidad aquellos temas en los que se muestra en desacuerdo con ella, sus muchos vicios y pecados, hecho que le ha costado la enemistad de numerosos católicos, empezando por el Papa Benedicto XVI, como ya he reseñado.
El libro es bastante conciso, aunque en algunos puntos he echado en falta una mayor coherencia a la hora de ordenar la narración, quizás sea culpa de una no muy cuidadosa edición. Pero te da mucho en qué pensar, y como estoy bastante de acuerdo con la mayor parte de sus reflexiones, me ha dejado una sensación de no sentirme sólo cuando las expreso en voz alta. Recomiendo su lectura a todos aquellos interesados en la historia de la religión en general y del catolicismo en particular. No apta para católicos “ortodoxos”. -
El libro intenta abordar la historia de la Iglesia. Solo decir eso debiera bastar para que quede claro que la empresa que se propone es harto compleja. Sin embargo también se propone a medida que la va presentando, ir introduciendo algunos elementos de la historia universal (europea al menos). Si bien esto no es mandatorio, el lector común agradece algunas referencias que es casi imposible tener todo el tiempo presentes. Al menos ayuda saber que hechos el autor considera los sobresalientes, aunque ignore otros. Es decir que la propuesta es de un relato sumamente complejo. Para colmo, el autor es un reconocido teólogo "crítico". Y lo que se propone es hacer una historia crítica de la Iglesia. Esto es: a medida que va presentando la historia, propone caminos alternativos, mezcla sus opiniones personales, discute con contrafácticos, etc. ¡Todo esto en apenas 200 páginas! Muy interesante todo, obviamente, pero a mi gusto quedan hilos colgando por todos lados.
El otro libro que leí sobre
Historia de la Iglesia es mucho más largo que este y sin embargo también me dejó la sensación de falta de profundidad. Tal vez tenga que encarar más estudios específicos sobre algún tema en particular. Aunque creo que mirar todo un proceso de una es una buena idea. En tal caso lo que quiero es un libro más "serio", y no tan para el gran público. De todas formas me quedo con ganas de leer un poco más sobre el Concilio Vaticano II, la historia de la Iglesia en los siglos XIX y XX, Francisco de Asís, León Magno, Orígenes.
Respecto de las críticas: no entendí porqué Küng se dice católico y no otra cosa. Medio que para él es todo lo mismo, y lo importante es que somos cristianos, que los evangelistas deberían ser más católicos y ortodoxos, los católicos más evangelistas y ortodoxos y los ortodoxos más católicos y evangelistas. Pero entre esos tres, a mi me da la sensación de que Küng es un luterano. Está obviamente más cerca de Barth que de Juan Pablo II. No me creo eso de que todos los papas son malos (salvo Juan XXIII). Aunque siempre me sorprende que la Iglesia siga existiendo a pesar de los hombres. Es como que a mí no me cuesta tanto estar de acuerdo con las opiniones de la Iglesia. Pobre, se ve que a él le genera los re conflictos. Y si en alguna cosa no estoy tan de acuerdo, me sale "hacer comunión" porque entiendo los motivos. Me parece que se pelea demasiado, no debe ser fácil ser papa. Me da la sensación de que se cree mucho porque lo invitaron al CVII. Al final terminó siendo un teólogo medio pelo.
Creo que Dios está re ausente en su libro. Una vez dice como al pasar: "bueno, también había gente copada en la Iglesia en ese tiempo". Y sigue. Para mí Dios mira más esa historia de la Iglesia. En un punto hace depender el futuro de la Iglesia de que aparezca un Juan XXIV que llame a un Concilio Vaticano III. Me parece que Dios no necesita eso, puede hacer lo que se le de la gana.
Para ser un libro crítico, es amigable. Para ser amigable es crítico. Yo soy de esos que han leído cualquier cosa, y no le tengo miedo a decirle a otros que lean. Obviamente hay libros que hay que pensar un poco con que base uno cuenta, si tiene con quien después discutir las ideas. Este es de esos: te recomiendo que lo leas, pero después lo discutimos. Küng presenta como verdad cosas que no son tan sencillas. La infalibilidad por ejemplo. Si uno lee solo este libro, parece obvio que es un disparate y hay que abolirla. Yo no entiendo mucho del asunto, pero él es de los únicos teólogos que siguen sosteniendo esa postura, y no me creo que todo el resto de los teólogos sean malos, ignorantes, o que no pensaron en el asunto. Hay más campanas para escuchar. -
I found this book fascinating. First of all, I was quite interested in the author's perspective. Far from being a person who wants to criminalize the entire Church and its history, Hans Kung is a Catholic theologian who, in the late 1970s, was hence forbidden to teach within the Church due to his progressive (i.e. common sense!) views. Kung traces the entire history of Christianity with a focus on the Catholic Church from the time of Jesus to pope John Paul II. It is an amazing sweep of history to digest!
Some of my favorite bits: how and why Christianity split from Judaism, why St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas were so significant, why the East-West Schism happened, the significance of the different branches of Protestantism following Luther, the significance of the Second Vatican Council (near successful effort in early-mid 1960s to modernize the Church), and his take on John Paul II (a second Ronald Reagan - overrated and likeable). Great stuff throughout.
The only issue I have with this book is that sometimes Kung assumes that the readers have a really solid understanding of Christianity. Nevertheless, it is a very scholarly and readable book jam-packed with information. It is only 207 pages - I felt like I read a book three times that long! -
A very interesting book from the controversial theologian, Hans Kung. He traces the formation of Catholic theology alongside the growth of the church from Acts, the Gospels, Peter and Paul, all the way up through the second Vatican Council and the pontificate of John Paul II. Throughout the narrative Professor Kung takes particular issue with the Papacy and the doctrine of papal infallibility. In fact, Kung places the formation of church government and the centralized power of the papacy at the heart of the Roman church history, detailing its conception, growth, and institutionalization, all of which he views as a mistake, or a power-grab based on forged, unlawful decrees. While acknowledging the need in-terms of efficacy and organization a system of bishops and priests, Kung disbelieves the moral authority of the Pope and the Church Magisterium, instead he would prefer a system like the Orthodox churches.
All the major figures of history are mentioned, but rarely expounded upon, after all this is a concise history. Kung is a deft writer and a good enough story teller and the prose moves quickly thus making this a rewarding read. Throughout the telling of the history Kung breaks through with his progressive brand of catholicism which is thoughtful, but predictable. -
The author longs for a return to the more fundamental and original assembly of the Apostles and Church Fathers with less of a focus on centralization and Petrine primacy. As such, the history as it is laid out highlights where each of these doctrinal changes began and eventually became a fixture in the Catholic Church as we know it today. Many questions are answered as to why the Church does the things it does, as well as when it started and what purpose it originally served. Very eye-opening.
-
Father Kung presents a short history of the Catholic Church. He starts with the beginning of the Church following the death of Jesus. Some of the points covered include the schism from the Jewish faith, the rule of celibacy, the Crusades, the Protestant Reformation, and the Second Vatican Council. I found Father Kung's work easy to read.
-
When you think of theological liberalism in the Catholic Church, you should think of Hans Küng. He is a liberal “Catholic” theologian par excellence and his short book on the history of the Catholic Church seeks to prove to the reader how at every point in her history the Catholic Church has abandoned the gospel in favor of church hierarchy, maintained an oppressive clericalism against women, and fostered corruption instead of justice. Though his complaints are legion, perhaps his biggest diatribe is the making of the ultramontane Church which he hopes to cure by future decentralization.
Indeed, while I have benefited much from his historical analysis I wonder why a Catholic theologian who prefers Martin Luther to Thomas Aquinas, one who explicitly denies that Jesus founded a Church, and who wants to protestantize the Church chooses to remain a Catholic and a priest. In the end, Küng longs for the Church to be liberated from her monstrous archaic past so that a "new" Church may emerge. No wonder why the Roman Curia stripped him of his title of “Catholic” theologian. -
In 2003 Random House Modern Library published Hans Kung’s paperback edition “The Catholic Church: a Short History” translated by John Bowden. This edition includes a very good discussion guide, an epilogue focused on grass root Church reforms, and a wonderful chronology of significant church and world events. Hans is a Swiss Catholic priest, professor, prolific author, and holder of a Doctorate in Theology. His ecclesiastical teaching authorization was withdrawn in 1979 because of his opposition to papal infallibility. Dr Hans King died a retired Catholic priest in the Spring of 2021. I recommend that readers begin the book by first reading his conclusion chapter, followed by the chronology, and then his introduction before reading the core chapters. This sequence provides a strong context for better understanding his views on Church relevancy, female ordination, and related social issues that reflect “the sign of our times.” (P)
-
'The Catholic Church: A short history' by Hans Kung is a historical chronicle of the Catholic Church. It explains what happened to make this church what and how it is today. What I found fascinating was the facts about how the Catholic Church reacted to historical events, such as the Holocaust and how people and councils made and formed it. It explains people such as Martin Luther, the Second Vatican Council and how and why they happened. It was like getting an inside perspective. I found the book riveting.
-
This is going to be a short review, much like Kung wrote a short history.
In a nutshell, this is exactly what the title says it is. It covers almost 2,000 years of history in a remarkably short amount of space.
Kung is not shy about voicing his disagreement with the official Church and this is evident all throughout the work.
This book would be helpful for people who are interested in either a summary of the history of the Catholic church or who wish to know a little more about Kung's disagreements with it.
Grade: B -
This was enlightening for me. I didn’t know much about the history of the catholic church in general until this book. Whether it was accurate or not in certain aspects, as I know some of the topics the author touches on are controversial within the Catholic Community, it felt as a great starting point for me to keep reading and learning about this Church and what they think. Although I do not agree with some concepts the author puts forward as a whole, the way he writes kept me wanting to come back and keep reading.
-
I left the Catholic Church, in which I was duly raised, about ten years ago, after reading a lot of Mexican history and realizing how damaging the Church's influence had been in my country. However, after reading Küng's take on the philosophy that gave birth to Christian thought, and especially after his well founded critic on how another Church is possible, I miiiight think of coming back to the flock. A lovely history book for the informed beginner on the subject.
-
Assumes that you have a basic understanding of world and church history already cause he covers everything from the foundation of the church by Christ and then to Peter all the way to modern times. My favorite quote which sums up his objective: “We would do well to remember that the history of the establishment of the church as an institution, as a political power, is one thing, and the history of the authentic life of Christians is another.”
-
I was looking for an introductory narrative history, which I didn't really get, but this view of a liberal-minded insider to the Catholic church is an interesting if sometimes rather dry and technical account of the institution's development.
-
Iako autor širi neke misli zbog kojih sam se u pojedinim dijelovima knjige pitao zašto jednostavno ne prijeđe na protestantizam, knjiga je dobar primjerak povijesti Katoličke Crkve napisane na sažet i čitak način.
-
written with great clarity
I am not a Catholic myself - I chose this book because I am interested in history - and in history you can't ignore the Church or religion in general
The writer's faith shines through, whilst at the same time he makes a great argument for reforms and is honest about history. Clearly extremely knowledgeable. I admire this writers clarity
(I certainly have not read this 4 times as Goodreads insists I have - its good but once is enough) -
The Catholic Church: A Short History should really be called The Catholic Church: Its History in Light of Papal Infallibility. The author sets out to prove that papal infallibility as set out in the First Vatican Council is not in keeping with the long history of the church. He believes that top down authority as buttressed by this dogma is stifling progress on the ordination of women, marriage for priests, contraception, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith procedures in trials, and other issues. He states that the majority of the laity have a different opinion on the above issues when it comes to the church hierarchy.
When I started reading this book I thought it would be merely informational. However, as stated above this book has a set message. So if you are looking for a quick history, I'd say you can learn a lot about the church but just be aware that is not the purpose of this book.
One quick aside, at the beginning of the book, Küng implies Nero set fire to Rome to blame it on the Christians. However, many historians agree that even Nero wouldn't set his own city ablaze or even that he blamed the Christians. (
"The Myth of the Neronian Persecution") -
2000 years in 200 pages. Mixed feelings of wonder, sadness, horror and hope.
