Jump to content

Talk:Joseph Zen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

About auxiliary offered a sacrifice to commander in chief question

I removed the section About auxiliary offered a sacrifice to commander in chief question from the main article and put it here as quoted below. I have difficulty to understand this paragraph. To be honest, I can't even be sure if it is appropriate to retain it in the article (original author/editor of this section please refer to Wiki standard Wikipedia:Patent_nonsense). If somebody thinks it should be retained, please re-write the text before putting it back.

orally in November, 2003, bishop Zen once on "[ [ auxiliary gives offers a sacrifice to commander in chief ] ]" the title to summon clique member's to the saint was Mao Ch'ich'ang the brother, in these five brothers, Mao Ch'ich'ang the brother is seen for bishop Zen 's old friend, therefore, the brother has specially made this title for Mao Ch'ich'ang.

-Raphaelhui (talk) 03:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copy Editing

Can someone correct the English in this article. I would but,to be honest, I don't understand it properly —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.248.225.148 (talk • contribs) . 12:30, December 22, 2005

I'm working on the copy editing of this article. I did a bit late-night yesterday, and I'll finish reading it today. CowmanTalk 19:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All done! The section has consistency in listing of dates and is perfectly readable to a native (or non-native) English speaker now. I had to remove one or two sentences that did not make sense in order for accurate information, though that information is in the edits I made notes about it in. Feel free to put up the {{copyedit}} back if there are more problems in the future and random people like me will see to fixing it. CowmanTalk 02:05, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet a cardinal?

Joseph Cardinal Zen is already a cardinal. According to the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church, he has already been a cardinal once the pope announced his appointment. Can. 351 §2 states that "Cardinals are created by a decree of the Roman Pontiff which is made public in the presence of the college of cardinals. From the moment of the announcement they are bound by the duties and possess the rights defined by law." For further information, please refer to: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P19.HTM —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrickleungnufc (talk • contribs) 11:28, 26 February 2006

I was initially going to post here as to why and then move the page back. However after doing some specific research Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Western_clergy)#Cardinals it seems that this is the correct title for this person. I was unaware of this particular guideline, but instead I thought that the basic Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) was inline and that the title should be just "Joseph Zen". But now I see you are correct. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 16:23, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
According to Can. 351 §2, he is a cardinal as soon as the Pope reads his name to the college of cardinals. The college meets during a consistory, so the cardinalate of bishop Zen becomes effective then, not now. If Zen or Benedict were to die before March 24, Zen would not be a cardinal, because he's not one yet. In the announcement from the vatican, the pope specifically nominates the fifteen new cardinals, who will be elevated in the consistory of March 24, and have been invited to concelebrate thier first mass as a cardinal with the pontiff on the 25.Gentgeen 02:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms

Where can I get an image of Zen's coat of arms? Thank you. — Instantnood 21:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC) Biography of Zen User:TonySapphire 10:11, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. — Instantnood 09:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too pro-Beijing

I can feel that this article is too pro-Beijing! Should I add the NPOV tag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pro-democracy (talk • contribs) 05:00, February 25, 2006 (UTC)

May be besides criticisms, someone should add a paragraph talking about his contributions. User:TonySapphire 05:38, 26 February, 2006 (UTC)

Serious Vandalism in the article

Should the administrators semi-protect this article?User:TonySapphire 06:44, 27 February, 2006 (UTC)

I have semi protected this article due to the continuing vandalism. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 06:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Easyfinder issue

Cardinal Zen did not say a word publicly on the Easyfinder issue. Oriental Daily News wrongly used his quote in APRIL 2006 (before the incident occured!), in which he appreciated the Next Media as the most independent press. The stance of the Catholic Church on this issue can be found in Kung Kao Po and Sunday Examiner (3.9.2006), in which they regarded this event as a result of the ideology of moral relativism.

第3263期公教報社論

「偷拍事件」的深層悲痛

近日全城觸目的「偷拍事件」，群情議論中均認為要追究責任，要尋求法律解決。我們認為無論事件是否涉及犯法行為，最終有否構成罪行，但這行為已大大違反了人際間的道德規範。

我們當然要強烈譴責這份刊物，我們不但譴責直接執行者，更要譴責這份刊物的出版人。然而，譴責的背後卻隱藏著更深層的悲痛──我們的社會是何等的敗壞！這樣的「偷拍事件」幾乎是每隔一段時日便會出現，但同時亦會很快便給人淡忘了。

「偷拍事件」並非只局限於侵犯人的私隱，而是蘊含著更深更廣泛的道德敗壞。我們身處二十一世紀這樣的一個事事講求個人潛能發揮，個人自主性受尊重的年代。我們也不時被提醒這是一個講求「文化多元」的容忍年代。容忍不同的意見，容忍不同的價值和道德觀。只要不犯法律，或找到法律的罅隙，任何事都是可為的：這似乎變成了現代社會和現代人所堅信不移的價值信仰。然而，在此信仰的背後卻指涉著一種價值多元、價值相對──道德問題是見仁見智的思維法則和想法。人類愈來愈相信只有科技理性，只有經濟效益等事項是可以有客觀準則去定奪，而一切價值事務只是表達個人或某一族群人的主觀想法而已。很不幸，此一現代人廣泛接受的信念，再配合著上文所言的極端個人主義的色彩，遂出現了只要不逾越法律，個人便可無限量地去追求自身的利益和慾望上的滿足。

我們再不相信有客觀的德行標準，更遑論宗教上的信仰和指導了。「偷拍事件」其實是在這樣的一個極度俗世化社會發展脈絡下孕育出來的。明乎此，我們便更明白到為何像這樣的事件會一再重演，也一再被遺忘。

這是這一個世代的悲哀，也在這意義下，這是宗教信仰失落的悲哀！

---

Sunday Examiner (3rd September 2006)

Editorial - Commentary

What-you-can-get-away-with morality

A record 2,612 people are reported to have expressed their distaste and disapproval to the Television and Entertainment Licencing Authority (Tela) over the front cover splashing of a naked Gillian Chung Yan-tung, by local, glossy gossip weekly magazine owned by press baron, Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, of the NextMedia group. A scoop photograph, snapped surreptitiously of the young Hong Kong pop star, in her dressing room, at the Arena of Stars in the Genting Highlands in Malayasia, was gleefully gobbled by Easy Finder and plastered across the territory as the catch of the day.

The upset over the publication is not directed at the content of the photograph, but at the covert manner in which it was obtained, coupled with the insensitivity of the publisher in making the decision to place slyly obtained material so brazenly on public display.

Chung is devastated. Conscious that she is regarded as some kind of a role model for young people, she admitted to local Hong Kong press that she is now “feeling uneasy” about facing them.

Beyond condemnation of the immediate perpetrators of the plot and the happy collaborators at Easy Finder and NextMedia, there lies a further responsibility. There is a deep sorrow, which prompts a questioning of the general health of society. Undoubtedly there will be a scouring of the legal codes governing the activities of the media industry, coupled with a fine comb search for loopholes. However, it can also be argued that no matter what is the outcome of the legal jockeying, such an action does violate basic moral norms of decency.

While there is outrage today, people will quickly forget. However, the matter is not just an affront to Chung, but a reflection of moral bankruptcy. In the 21st century, we are being reminded of the extent to which our rights to privacy are being denied and the ease with which it is being done.

This is an age of diversity, which demands a high level of tolerance, and we can tolerate different value systems and moral codes where crime is not involved. However, when value or morals are only defined according to legal loopholes explored and exploited by the silks and wigs, moral value is no longer a driving force in determining what is good or bad in human behaviour.

This reflects an ideology of relativism, where moral stance is defined in terms of what you can or cannot get away with. The only sphere in which absolute values are still revered objectively seems to be economics, where you either make money or you do not. Sadly, other domains of public interest seem to have been cast into the subjective basket to be looked upon according to a list of personal tastes and sensitivities.

Our age encourages individualism and, short of criminal activity, people are free to follow their interests and desires without limit. However, when the criminal is more likely to be defined by subjective impulse rather than community reflection and traditional cultural and religious wisdom, we will continue to have the crass displayed unashamedly and continue to wonder what will come next.


Excellent. I was hoping someone would put the source as the Oriental Daily News report most certainly did not reflect Church teaching. An English translation would be good too for English wikipedia. Of note, in the Chinese Wikipedia it was noted that the quote featured in Oriental Daily News was from APRIL 2006 -- before the incident occured! --mintchocicecream 11:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 22:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Cardinal Zen motto.JPG

Image:Cardinal Zen motto.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 insure 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.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Joseph Zen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:10, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Joseph Zen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:58, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shanghainese pronunciation

It's at odds with Shanghainese#Finals, according to which no word in Shanghainese can end in [ɲ]. 37.47.194.205 (talk) 10:43, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joseph_Zen&oldid=1211943447"