|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to . If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.|
|WikiProject Biography||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Christianity / Catholicism||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
||It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
I'm wondering to what extent Scott Hahn can be termed a "Catholic theologian", since he has no ecclesiastical degree (e.g., S.T.D.) in this area. The article on Hans Kung makes it clear that Kung is no longer a Catholic theologian, yet the credentials that were stripped from Kung are credentials that Hahn has never obtained. -- Cat Whisperer 03:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Cat Whisperer, what do you mean by credentials, the so-called venia legendi (issued by the church) or something academic? --Túrelio 07:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
He is a Roman Catholic who writes books presenting theological arguments for Roman Catholic Christianity specifically. Does that not make him a Catholic theologian? Augustine and Aquinas didn't have a Doctorate of Sacred Theology either... - AG, Stockport, UK.
- Augustine and Aquinas are Doctors of the Church; I hardly think Hahn compares to either one of them. And given that the Catholic Church goes to the trouble of supervising the accreditation of certain degrees as a means of assuring the public-at-large that Catholic theologians with those degrees accurately represent the teachings of the Catholic Church, I think it is important to clarify that Scott Hahn is in the same category as Hans Kung and any random person on the Internet with regard to this official certification. Speaking in analogy, Hahn doesn't have a driver's license, while Kung had a driver's license but it was revoked. Neither one belongs in the category of licensed drivers. -- Cat Whisperer 18:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
My opinion: he is Catholic, he is a theologian, he is a Catholic theologian. I think that the phrase "Catholic theologian" means to most people someone who is Catholic and a theologian. It is worth noting that he has no official degree from a catholic source that demonstrates his Catholic theologian-ness, but Franciscan University thought him enugh of a Catholic theologian to include him in their teology department. Catgirl667 3/12/2007
- I just want to point out that this reasoning would make Hans Kung a Catholic theologian as well, a conclusion that many people (including myself) are not comfortable with. The first sentence of the present article already makes clear that Hahn is a Catholic and a theologian. I don't see the benefit of using the term "Catholic theologian" to convey this information, as it will just confuse those readers for whom the term has the specialized meaning of being Vatican-accredited. -- Cat Whisperer 00:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
There really is no Vatican accredidation per se. A degree from a pontifical university is an ecclesiastical degree but it is the issuing of the Mandatum that confers upon the individual scholar certain credentials to teach "Catholic Theology" at a Catholic university. (Marquette is a Catholic University and that is where he received more or less, the Catholic credentials as a scholar.) The pontifical degrees are preferred for teaching in a catholic seminary but even that is not rigidly held as law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs)
- Are you saying that it was Hans Kung's mandatum that was revoked by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith? -- Cat Whisperer 03:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Home-rome.jpg
Image:Home-rome.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Someone at the above IP insists on replacing the article text
"Hahn started out as a Presbyterian minister and theologian with years of ministry experience in congregations of the Presbyterian Church in America, and Professor of Theology at Chesapeake Theological Seminary."
"Hahn started out as a Presbyterian minister and claims to have years of ministry experience in congregations of the Presbyterian Church in America, but there is no evidence he was ever ordained as a minister or served in this denomination. He was Professor of Theology at Chesapeake Theological Seminary, which is no longer in existence."
then (after I reverted this edit)
"Hahn was a Presbyterian minister and theologian for a few years and Professor of Theology at Chesapeake Theological Seminary, which is no longer in existence."
and most recently (after my second revert)
"Hahn started out as a Presbyterian minister with some experience in pastoral ministry and was a professor of Theology at Chesapeake Theological Seminary, which is no longer in existence."
The second time that I fixed this (I think, POV) edit (especially in the first version), I put in "citation needed" marker, because admittedly there is no citation listed. It has (as noted above) now been reverted again, with the citation needed marker still there. I have decided to post here for someone else to deal with it... I don't want to break any rules and as of yet have no experience adding actual citations to Wiki articles. The source information (note that I did not originally add the contested sentence) can easily be verified here: http://www.scotthahn.com/docview/view.phtml?doc=schedule/vbio.phtml&rdoc=Hahn%20Speaking%20Event%20I No attempt at any sort of dialogue has been attempted on the IP user's part, so I'm appealing for a more experienced Wikipedian to deal with this. I concede that the substance is no longer overtly POV, but it is still factually inaccurate, as Chesapeake Theological Seminary still exists: http://www.chesapeakeseminary.org/EN/history.htm
The article states: "Many people, using his wife's words, have started to call him 'Luther in reverse,' since a large number of Protestant pastors and Bible scholars have from then on followed suit in converting to Catholicism."  The link is to a podcast of an interview with Hahn which states that his conversion tape has been influential in conversions to Catholicism. (Fair enough.) The statement about a "large number of Protestant pastors and Bible scholars" as far as I can tell is unsubstantiated unless I missed something. The "Luther in reverse" comes off as braggadocio by his wife and is not appropriate for this article.Dale720240 (talk) 21:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
The "large number of Protestant pastors and Bible scholars" statement is unsourced, but it isn't false. As to "Luther in reverse"... that was not actual braggadocio, but an honest remark from his wife that can be found recorded in his book "Rome Sweet Home". I will currently maintain neutrality as to whether or not the "Luther in reverse" remark should remain. (I do warn you, though, if it goes, someone will probably put it back.) PsychoInfiltrator (talk) 00:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section., and are posted here for posterity. Following
|The article contains certain errors of fact. Chesapeake Theological Seminary ( http://www.chesapeakeseminary.org/ ) exists and continues to teach. However, more seriously, according to the Trinity Foundation ( http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=186 ) Dominion Theological Institute, not Chesapeake, invited Hahn to teach. Dominion later merged with Chesapeake. Hahn did not teach in Chesapeake Seminary itself.|
Last edited at 04:04, 24 January 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 05:36, 30 April 2016 (UTC)