Talk:Jon Sobrino

Biased View
This article seems to be written by the Pope himself. What happened to objectivity here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.100.191.184 (talk) 00:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

=Life= The sections on the life and works of Jon Sobrino should be expanded. This article right now is rated as a "stub." As such, in the long life of someone with many written works and newsworthy events in his life, the Wikipedia sections on his Life and Works should be at least as long as the section dedicated to a current controversy (see Vatican Notification). Otherwsise to the Wikipedia reader who knows little about Jon Sobrino, except what he/she is reading in this article, the current controversy gets undue weight and attention.

Works
This section only presents limited and fragmented quotes from this theologian without citation or context. The quotes selected for the Wikipedia article are focused on the subject of Christ's divinity - the subject of the controversy detailed in the "Vatican Notification section"- but the subject of Christ's divinity is not the primary focus of Sobrino's theological writings. It would be preferential in an encyclopedic work to delete the quotes from Sobrino altogether and replace them with an expanded neutral listing of the authors works (and maybe even a balanced listing of theological responses - some affirming and some challenging -- to Sobrino's works). Sobrino's theological writings are the subject of both study and debate. By singling out certain quotes and leaving out others, it jeopardizes the neutrality of the article and makes the article vulnerable to editing wars whereby authors quote Sobrino back and forth to make competing points. Debating Sobrino's theological arguments would be a great subject for a yahoo group, but doesn't have a place in an encyclopedic work.


 * yes it would be nice to have more things about Sobrino's work. However, Jon Sobrino received world attention due to some aspects of his teachings and therefore these should be highlighted. I can't agree on deleting these quotes. Deleting is tantamount to censorship, if I may conjecture. Ran9876 04:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Vatican Notification
The section on Vatican notification requires editing to include more sources. There are only two works by Sobrino questioned in the Vatican notification - Jesus the Liberator (1991) and Christ Liberator (1999). By simply stating "his works" in this Wikipedia article it implies all of his works are the subject of the Vatican notification. Sobrino also wrote a letter to the Father General of the Jesuits, Peter Hans Kolvenbach, responding to the Vatican notification, stating that it "misrepresents his theology" and Sobrino's response is not included or cited. In stating that other Catholic sources disagree with the Vatican's ruling, the article should include links or actual citations to these published criticisms.

The orthodox Catholic position has been since the Council of Calcedon that Jesus was both truly human and truly divine. Various right-wing groups within the Catholic Church, obvious opponents of people like Jon Sobrino, have tried to reduce Jesus to simply a divine person with little to say or to offer the suffering people of today. Yet reflecting on the meaning of Jesus being born in a common (poor) family such as the Holy Family, spending his time with common (poor) people like the Fishermen who made up his first apostles, and choosing to die on the cross in solidarity with all who have been unjustly accused throughout the ages suggests that God, who could have had his son become incarnate among splendor chose that his son become incarnate and walk with those who are poor. The point of this is simply to say that the presentation given here of Jon Sobrino's character and writings amounts to basically a rightwing ideological hatchet job of a basically good and honest man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.124.45.2 (talk) 04:56, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

- NOTE ABOUT CITATIONS Caution should be used in providing neutral or balanced source material for this article. EWTN's World News Service the only footnote besides a link to the Vatican notification itself. It would be preferential to also cite primary news sources or neutral news sources, or balance out citations from catholic news sources which promote a particular vision, mission or point of view in their coverage.


 * Regarding if Sobrino was forbidden to teach etc: the source is a horribly bad one. It's basically just a rumour. The Vatican issued no banning on teaching, publishing etc. and it was supposed that this would be left to the bishop; if the bishop did that or not appears not to be known. --90.237.12.156 (talk) 23:30, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * NCR wrote "Contrary to some early reports, the Vatican has not barred Sobrino from teaching or publishing". That source - now removed - was an example of the early reports that believed the CDF would barr Sobrino from teaching etc. Then someone assumed it was done by the bishop. This is the biography of a living person. Stating that his bishop did take sanctions, without a good source, is not really acceptable. --95.192.37.146 (talk) 04:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Be neutral
should comprise both Vatican notes and liberal remarks. Not one only.Liberatedto (talk) 08:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Liberatedto (talk) 08:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)