(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Talk:Joseph Zen - Wikipedia Jump to content

Talk:Joseph Zen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

About auxiliary offered a sacrifice to commander in chief question

[edit]

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

[edit]

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?

[edit]

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

[edit]

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

[edit]

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

[edit]

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

[edit]

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.

第だい3263期き公おおやけ教きょう報ほう社しゃ論ろん

「偷拍事件じけん」的てき深層しんそう悲痛ひつう

近日きんじつ全ぜん城しろ觸さわ目的もくてき「偷拍事件じけん」，群ぐん情じょう議論ぎろん中ちゅう均ひとし認みとめ為ため要よう追究ついきゅう責任せきにん，要よう尋ひろ求法ぐほう律りつ解決かいけつ。我わが們認為ため無論むろん事件じけん是ぜ否いや涉わたる及犯法ほう行為こうい，最終さいしゅう有ゆう否ひ構成こうせい罪ざい行ぎょう，但ただし這行為こうい已やめ大だい大だい違反いはん了りょう人じん際さい間あいだ的てき道德どうとく規範きはん。

我わが們當然しか要よう強烈きょうれつ譴責けんせき這份刊かん物ぶつ，我わが們不但ただし譴責けんせき直接ちょくせつ執行しっこう者しゃ，更さら要よう譴責けんせき這份刊かん物的ぶってき出版しゅっぱん人じん。然しか而，譴責けんせき的てき背後はいご卻隱藏ぞう著ちょ更さら深層しんそう的てき悲痛ひつう──我わが們的社會しゃかい是ぜ何なん等とう的てき敗はい壞！這樣的てき「偷拍事件じけん」幾いく乎是每ごと隔へだた一段いちだん時日じじつ便びん會かい出現しゅつげん，但ただし同時どうじ亦また會かい很快便びん給人きゅうにん淡あわ忘了。

「偷拍事件じけん」並なみ非ひ只ただ局限きょくげん於侵犯人はんにん的てき私わたし隱かくれ，而是蘊含著ちょ更さら深更しんこう廣こう泛的道德どうとく敗はい壞。我わが們身處しょ二に十じゅう一世紀這樣的一個事事講求個人潛能發揮，個人こじん自主じしゅ性せい受尊重そんちょう的てき年代ねんだい。我わが們也不時ふじ被ひ提ひさげ醒這是ぜ一いち個こ講こう求もとめ「文化ぶんか多元たげん」的てき容よう忍にん年代ねんだい。容よう忍にん不同ふどう的てき意見いけん，容よう忍にん不同ふどう的てき價あたい值和道德どうとく觀かん。只ただ要よう不犯ふぼん法律ほうりつ，或ある找到法律ほうりつ的てき罅ひび隙すき，任にん何事なにごと都と是ぜ可か為ため的てき：這似乎變成へんせい了りょう現代げんだい社會しゃかい和わ現代げんだい人じん所しょ堅けん信しんじ不ふ移うつり的てき價あたい值信仰しんこう。然しか而，在ざい此信仰しんこう的てき背後はいご卻指涉わたる著ちょ一いち種しゅ價か值多元たげん、價あたい值相對そうたい──道德どうとく問題もんだい是ぜ見み仁じん見み智さとし的てき思おもえ維法則和のりかず想そう法ほう。人類じんるい愈いよいよ來き愈いよいよ相あい信しんじ只ただ有ゆう科技かぎ理性りせい，只ただ有ゆう經濟けいざい效こう益えき等とう事項じこう是ぜ可か以有客觀きゃっかん準則じゅんそく去さ定てい奪だつ，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。很不幸ふこう，此一現代人廣泛接受的信念，再さい配合はいごう著ちょ上じょう文ぶん所しょ言げん的てき極端きょくたん個人こじん主義しゅぎ的てき色彩しきさい，遂とげ出現しゅつげん了りょう只ただ要よう不ふ逾越法律ほうりつ，個人こじん便びん可か無限むげん量りょう地ち去さ追求ついきゅう自身じしん的てき利益りえき和わ慾望よくぼう上じょう的てき滿足まんぞく。

我わが們再不ふ相あい信しんじ有ゆう客觀きゃっかん的てき德行とっこう標準ひょうじゅん，更さら遑論宗教しゅうきょう上じょう的てき信仰しんこう和わ指導しどう了りょう。「偷拍事件じけん」其實是ぜ在ざい這樣的てき一個極度俗世化社會發展脈絡下孕育出來的。明あかり乎此，我わが們便更さら明白めいはく到いた為ため何なん像ぞう這樣的てき事件じけん會かい一いち再さい重じゅう演えんじ，也一再さい被ひ遺忘いぼう。

這是這一いち個こ世代せだい的てき悲哀ひあい，也在這意義いぎ下か，這是宗教しゅうきょう信仰しんこう失しつ落的悲哀ひあい！

---

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

[edit]

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

[edit]

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]

[edit]

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]

[edit]

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

[edit]

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/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joseph_Zen&oldid=1211943447"