What do you think?
Rate this book
The Catholic Church: A Short History
In this extraordinary book, the controversial and profoundly influential Hans Küng chronicles the Roman Catholic Church’s role as a world power throughout history. Along the way, he examines the great schisms—between East and West, and Catholic and Protestant—as well as the evolving role of the papacy, the stories of the great reforming popes, and the expansion of a global church infrastructure. The book concludes with a searching assessment of how the Catholic faith will confront the immense challenges posed in the new millennium by those seeking reform of traditional strictures.
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2001
89 people are currently reading
727 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 88 reviews
June 4, 2023
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 estoy bastante de acuerdo con una gran 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”.
4 🌞🌞🌞🌞
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 estoy bastante de acuerdo con una gran 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”.
4 🌞🌞🌞🌞
April 11, 2022
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.
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.
December 10, 2010
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.
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.
January 15, 2008
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.
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.
March 1, 2010
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.
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.
December 27, 2022
Elég fájdalmas olvasmány, legalábbis katolikusként - nem kellemes szembenézni azzal, mi mindent követett el az egyház. A könyv szerzője sok magától értetődőnek tűnő hagyományt, szokást, szabályt megkérdőjelez, és gyakran - úgy tűnik - joggal. Érdekes ezekről elgondolkozni, tanulságos egy történelmi folyamatként látni az egyház, illetve "Róma" és a pápák (persze vázlatos) történetét. Az egyik maradandó gondolata a könyvnek: a "római katolikus" kifejezés fából vaskarika, hiszen ha a katolikus egyetemest jelent, akkor ez a szűkítő előtag önellentmondás.
Furcsa, hogy az Európa Könyvkiadó által gondozott kötet meglehetősen sok helyesírási, elválasztási stb. hibát tartalmaz, ez kissé méltatlan a könyvhöz.
Furcsa, hogy az Európa Könyvkiadó által gondozott kötet meglehetősen sok helyesírási, elválasztási stb. hibát tartalmaz, ez kissé méltatlan a könyvhöz.
May 15, 2022
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.
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.
April 3, 2020
I really enjoyed this phenomenal & short venture in the history of the Christian faith. I got through it in only a couple days and for what it is - it's as good as it can be. Kung, from the unique perspective of a Catholic Priest banned from teaching Catholic theology, walks us through 2000 years of church history in only 200+ pages. He covers a vast amount of the major events of the Church from Jesus' death to modern day including the Roman Empire, the Schism, Middle Ages, Protestant Revolution, Romanticism, the Enlightenment, Modernity & more.
He is certainly not writing this from a neutral perspective; it could alternatively be called The Catholic Church: A Long Criticism. From someone like Kung who still loves and chooses to hope for the future of the Church in the world, I admire his honesty, perspective, self critique, and realism that is often missing from religious types. He is easy to follow although, coming from someone who is not Catholic, I had to do a lot of cross referencing which was part of the learning fun. I discovered a lot, not just about church history but the way it has constantly been interwoven in with world events, philosophies, and other religious thought.
If your looking for an intro to Christian History (from the Western/Catholic perspective), this is a great place to start. I look forward to reading more of Kung's (often controversial) work.
He is certainly not writing this from a neutral perspective; it could alternatively be called The Catholic Church: A Long Criticism. From someone like Kung who still loves and chooses to hope for the future of the Church in the world, I admire his honesty, perspective, self critique, and realism that is often missing from religious types. He is easy to follow although, coming from someone who is not Catholic, I had to do a lot of cross referencing which was part of the learning fun. I discovered a lot, not just about church history but the way it has constantly been interwoven in with world events, philosophies, and other religious thought.
If your looking for an intro to Christian History (from the Western/Catholic perspective), this is a great place to start. I look forward to reading more of Kung's (often controversial) work.
October 21, 2024
Wow. Kung asks all the sensible questions, which are also, oddly, the ones Catholics are afraid to ask:
Why compulsory celibacy and not voluntary? (MTTW 19:12, 1 TIM 3:2)
Why the need for dubious proofs of popes’ miracles just so that they can be canonized?
Why the alienation of laicized priests?
Why the “almost spooky battle against modern women who seek a contemporary form of life; prohibiting birth control and abortion (even in the case of incest or rape), divorce, the ordination of women, and the modernization of women’s religious orders”?
Why close churches and allow for the collapse of pastoral care instead of simply allowing for married priests, women priests, etc.?
Why defend the idea of papal infallibility when popes have proven themselves and their words so fallible?
Why did the church not take an anti-Nazi stance when it mattered? And why was Pope John Paul “silent about the mistakes of his papal predecessors” when addressing the church’s guilt in its response to the Holocaust?
Good book. Difficult, yes, but important reading, especially for Catholics, seems to me.
Why compulsory celibacy and not voluntary? (MTTW 19:12, 1 TIM 3:2)
Why the need for dubious proofs of popes’ miracles just so that they can be canonized?
Why the alienation of laicized priests?
Why the “almost spooky battle against modern women who seek a contemporary form of life; prohibiting birth control and abortion (even in the case of incest or rape), divorce, the ordination of women, and the modernization of women’s religious orders”?
Why close churches and allow for the collapse of pastoral care instead of simply allowing for married priests, women priests, etc.?
Why defend the idea of papal infallibility when popes have proven themselves and their words so fallible?
Why did the church not take an anti-Nazi stance when it mattered? And why was Pope John Paul “silent about the mistakes of his papal predecessors” when addressing the church’s guilt in its response to the Holocaust?
Good book. Difficult, yes, but important reading, especially for Catholics, seems to me.
June 30, 2017
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.
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.
January 6, 2014
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!
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!
February 28, 2014
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.
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.
August 3, 2007
Can one be proud of being Catholic anymore? Kueng's lost his nerve and can't seem to marshal much of a defense of Rome.
One star. The four missing stars are for missing what should have been the main point. The lone star is for making good points while missing the main point.
Not a good book to read if you're looking at traditional view of the Roman Church, which is what I was seeking. It's a revisionist history better suited to those who already have a pretty good grasp of what Rome is all about.
A better title would have been: The Catholic Church: A Critique from Within
One star. The four missing stars are for missing what should have been the main point. The lone star is for making good points while missing the main point.
Not a good book to read if you're looking at traditional view of the Roman Church, which is what I was seeking. It's a revisionist history better suited to those who already have a pretty good grasp of what Rome is all about.
A better title would have been: The Catholic Church: A Critique from Within
February 25, 2014
Katolícka cirkev od Hansa Künga možno nie je zásadným dielom o dejinách kresťanstva a katolíckej cirkvi, no je určite rukoväťou poskytujúcou základné argumenty a kritické otázky, ktoré vyjadrujú všetko to, čo trápi nielen ateistov, ale aj nezanedbateľnú časť veriacich, ktorí stále nestratili vieru v Krista, odmietajú sa však vzdať slobody a prekáža im predstieraná zbožnosť.
Čítajte viac: http://jozefkuric.blog.sme.sk/c/33692...
Čítajte viac: http://jozefkuric.blog.sme.sk/c/33692...
May 1, 2018
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.
October 16, 2014
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.
August 27, 2024
This is a book in the Modern Library Chronicles series, where gifted scholars, usually with long careers under their belts, are tasked with presenting sweeping overviews of a large subject for general readers. And, incidentally, they also appear to be expected to condense one of the big argumentative contributions that the scholar has contributed to the field. Sometimes the conflict between presenting a famous thesis and an overview of a historical subject is not a problem, but it is in this book. Hans Kung has made his name as a sharp critic of the historical claims of the papacy and the politics of the modern papal curia. This book is mostly a history of how a more egalitarian church of the Gospel lost its way through an ever-hardening church hierarchy with a Pope on the top, a hierarchy and particularly an ascendant papacy that was the creation of accident, politics, and outright fraud. Kung hopes that someday the Church may be restored to its original Gospel egalitarnianism.
Kung, an ordained Catholic priest, ably presents his evidence and his case, although much of his perspective and the evidence he draws owes a deep debt (bordering on indistinguishability) to what Orthodox and Reform theologians have argued about the papacy for at least six centuries now. Someone who knows little about the history of the papacy will no doubt learn much about its evolution and development. But as the book is always on the attack, it is hard to quite trust that one is learning the full story of the papacy itself, and there is no question of this book being any kind of comprehensive treatment of broader Catholicism, as just about everything that does not touch on the merits of church hierarchy falls to the wayside.
I left this book thinking more about Kung himself and his positions than about the Catholic Church. By all accounts, he identifies the wayward drift of the Church into un-Christian hierarchy as happening very early, perhaps even by the end of the first century CE, and that it fell victim to the forms of Roman imperialism a few centuries later and that the papacy was aggrandized by various political maneuvers, forgeries and power plays in the Early Middle Ages. If a church has, in one's view, deviated from the Gospel nearly since the time of the Gospel, and its highest institutions today are mostly the product of shams and worldly ambition, why does Kung remain attached to it? There have been innumerable Restorationist and Primitivist back-to-the-Gospel movements among Protestants and the Orthodox Church of the East has as worthy a claim to succession from Christ and the Apostles as the Roman West (and under Kung's presentation, perhaps quite a better claim). What is Kung trying to save?
Kung, an ordained Catholic priest, ably presents his evidence and his case, although much of his perspective and the evidence he draws owes a deep debt (bordering on indistinguishability) to what Orthodox and Reform theologians have argued about the papacy for at least six centuries now. Someone who knows little about the history of the papacy will no doubt learn much about its evolution and development. But as the book is always on the attack, it is hard to quite trust that one is learning the full story of the papacy itself, and there is no question of this book being any kind of comprehensive treatment of broader Catholicism, as just about everything that does not touch on the merits of church hierarchy falls to the wayside.
I left this book thinking more about Kung himself and his positions than about the Catholic Church. By all accounts, he identifies the wayward drift of the Church into un-Christian hierarchy as happening very early, perhaps even by the end of the first century CE, and that it fell victim to the forms of Roman imperialism a few centuries later and that the papacy was aggrandized by various political maneuvers, forgeries and power plays in the Early Middle Ages. If a church has, in one's view, deviated from the Gospel nearly since the time of the Gospel, and its highest institutions today are mostly the product of shams and worldly ambition, why does Kung remain attached to it? There have been innumerable Restorationist and Primitivist back-to-the-Gospel movements among Protestants and the Orthodox Church of the East has as worthy a claim to succession from Christ and the Apostles as the Roman West (and under Kung's presentation, perhaps quite a better claim). What is Kung trying to save?
April 6, 2025
What a book - what a writer. So well written, warts and all, history of the catholic church.
I imagine many catholics will hate this book, unless you are tired of the backwards power driven focus of the curia and what to see the church bought up to date.
So much of the church history is caught up in power plays and not humanity. So much of the teachings of Jesus seem to have been left behind in this focus on 'Do what I say and not what I do' attitude within the church.
Reading this as a book, not as research, it is also highly entertaining. If only more historians could write like this.
This book takes you from Jesus, the founding of the catholic church, the popes and many deeds done in their name based on forgeries, the split with the Eastern churches, treatment of the Jewish by the Catholics, the inquisition, renaissance, reformation and counter reformation, the scientific shift and the age of reason and secularity, before finally getting to the Pope John II and his backward facing ideas (mostly).
This is an amazing book of scope of such an institution in just over 200 pages. With recommendations for the future of the church which in the view of the author, is what it will need to survive.
I would recommend this book to Catholics (to know where you have come from) and everyone else, who would be foolish to believe the Catholic church has no bearing on your life - it has fingers everywhere.
I imagine many catholics will hate this book, unless you are tired of the backwards power driven focus of the curia and what to see the church bought up to date.
So much of the church history is caught up in power plays and not humanity. So much of the teachings of Jesus seem to have been left behind in this focus on 'Do what I say and not what I do' attitude within the church.
Reading this as a book, not as research, it is also highly entertaining. If only more historians could write like this.
This book takes you from Jesus, the founding of the catholic church, the popes and many deeds done in their name based on forgeries, the split with the Eastern churches, treatment of the Jewish by the Catholics, the inquisition, renaissance, reformation and counter reformation, the scientific shift and the age of reason and secularity, before finally getting to the Pope John II and his backward facing ideas (mostly).
This is an amazing book of scope of such an institution in just over 200 pages. With recommendations for the future of the church which in the view of the author, is what it will need to survive.
I would recommend this book to Catholics (to know where you have come from) and everyone else, who would be foolish to believe the Catholic church has no bearing on your life - it has fingers everywhere.
March 12, 2019
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.
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.
February 14, 2020
Don't be fooled by the short length of this book, or the background of the author. Kung packs a hell of a lot into 200+ pages.
It may be tempting to question a Catholic's partiality and ask whether one can be truly evenhanded or fairly critical of an institution they're part of. But Kung succeeds there too, pulling no punches about what he sees as the sins of the church over the centuries. You won't finish this knowing everything about the Catholic Church, but you'll understand a great deal more, and probably want to know more. That makes this book a profound success.
If you do read it, and want to know more about a pope he devotes some space to with good reason - Pope Pius XII, whose diplomatic efforts enabled Nazi Germany and whose failure to condemn the treatment of the Jews is a lasting shame for him - I highly recommend Hitler's Pope by John Cornwell. It goes into great detail about Eugenio Pacelli (Pius XII)'s accomplishments, and the appalling consequences, for which he never took responsibility.
It may be tempting to question a Catholic's partiality and ask whether one can be truly evenhanded or fairly critical of an institution they're part of. But Kung succeeds there too, pulling no punches about what he sees as the sins of the church over the centuries. You won't finish this knowing everything about the Catholic Church, but you'll understand a great deal more, and probably want to know more. That makes this book a profound success.
If you do read it, and want to know more about a pope he devotes some space to with good reason - Pope Pius XII, whose diplomatic efforts enabled Nazi Germany and whose failure to condemn the treatment of the Jews is a lasting shame for him - I highly recommend Hitler's Pope by John Cornwell. It goes into great detail about Eugenio Pacelli (Pius XII)'s accomplishments, and the appalling consequences, for which he never took responsibility.
July 31, 2025
Küng's A Short History is less a strict history book on the Catholic Church and more a commentary thereon. It is the author that makes this book intriguing, for his account of history is far removed from the biased hagiographic antihistories so often promulgated by what I call the Catholic-Apologetic Complex. You will not find Küng reading, for example, papal supremacy back into early church politics (nor would any expect this to be so given his history), nor does he ignore developments in conciliar theory such as Haec sancta. I think Küng particularly excels at demonstrating the impact of medieval law on the development of the modern "Roman system" and on how the histories of the First and Second Vatican Councils, often conflictingly, interact with it. On the other hand, one wonders if Küng is not sometimes too quick to condemn, if he does not paint too wide of a brushstroke with his depictions of historical ecclesiastical periods which do not agree with him. Overall it is a good read for those interested in the person of Küng as well as modern conciliarism and nouvelle théologie.
July 1, 2021
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)
May 24, 2025
Hans Kung admits from the very beginning 'the Catholic Church, this fellowship of believers, has remained my spiritual home to the present day.'
This book is an attempt by this author to answer his own question: did Jesus of Nazareth found a church at all?
The chapter headings are: The Beginnings of the Church | The Early Catholic Church | The Imperial Catholic Church | The Papal Church | The Church is Split |Reform, Reformation, Or Counter-Reformation | The Catholic Church VS Modernity | The Catholic Church - Present and Future.
This book left me hopeful, as in highlighting the reality of the Catholic Church, it gives the readers an opportunity to grasp the church's stumbles while it grew.
Kung wants and very skillfully brings the focus for active, attentive, listening church that does not divide on 'rite', or gender, or culture, or class.
This book is an attempt by this author to answer his own question: did Jesus of Nazareth found a church at all?
The chapter headings are: The Beginnings of the Church | The Early Catholic Church | The Imperial Catholic Church | The Papal Church | The Church is Split |Reform, Reformation, Or Counter-Reformation | The Catholic Church VS Modernity | The Catholic Church - Present and Future.
This book left me hopeful, as in highlighting the reality of the Catholic Church, it gives the readers an opportunity to grasp the church's stumbles while it grew.
Kung wants and very skillfully brings the focus for active, attentive, listening church that does not divide on 'rite', or gender, or culture, or class.
August 22, 2024
Küng doesn't just provide a short history of the Catholic Church, he's also relentless in criticizing his own church. As a protestant, I'm sometimes jealous of Roman Catholic's authority with regards to what is right doctrine. But Küng shows most definitely that they have been all but right and that it has failed to operate in the right way - with the 19th century as the worst example. Küng deromanticizes any notion of this church's infallibility for sure.
In the end, one wonders who or what Küngs final authority was. Certainly not his own church, certainly not the Fathers. Perhaps Scripture? (I figure that he has been jealous of Protestantism).
If I had to guess, based on his vision for the church on the last pages, I'd say his final authority became progressivism.
In the end, one wonders who or what Küngs final authority was. Certainly not his own church, certainly not the Fathers. Perhaps Scripture? (I figure that he has been jealous of Protestantism).
If I had to guess, based on his vision for the church on the last pages, I'd say his final authority became progressivism.
August 16, 2025
Nice overview of the history of the church including reformation and the rise of Islam as a threat to Catholic influence. The author does share their opinion like how the Catholic Church could’ve treated 95 Theses better and reach some sort of shared understanding. Or that there were some bad popes that did bad stuff like the Inquisition. I didn’t know Catholics were so strong about “sex only to have kids, no other reason”. I’ll be honest, it was hard to follow all the history like the Catholic Church splitting, when popes first started, etc. the two popes excommunicating itself came out of nowhere lol. Nice overview of Augustine’s life and his works, Confessions and City of God. Probably should read those.
January 19, 2017
It is important to read his forward/introduction to understand where he is coming from, his hermeneutic if you will. Definitely does not gloss over previous church abuses but due to publishing date does not deal with the current priest abuse scandals or comment on the most recent 2 popes. It is clear he was not a fan of John Paul II. He is also clearly coming from a Liberal/Reform point of view. Many of his theological assertions are not well supported within the text, although this wasn't meant to be a theological text, but this does affect his view and interpretations of history.
April 8, 2018
'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.
December 3, 2020
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
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
January 4, 2022
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.
January 24, 2018
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.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 88 reviews