Hell’s Apostle is overjoyed…
Hans Küng: Francis Allows Free Discussion on Infallibility Dogma
Earlier this year, the world’s most notorious apostate claiming the name “Catholic” — after Jorge Bergoglio himself, of course — sent an open appeal to “Pope” Francis to allow free discussion of the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility (declared in 1870 by Pope Pius IX). Tied to the publication of Volume 5 of his Collected Works, which is specifically dedicated to the topic of infallibility, Fr. Hans Kung sent a letter to the “Pope”, asking that the dogma be re-opened for discussion:
Receive this comprehensive documentation and allow a free, unprejudiced and open-ended discussion in our church of the all the unresolved and suppressed questions connected with the infallibility dogma. In this way, the problematic Vatican heritage of the past 150 years could be come to terms with honestly and adjusted in accordance with holy Scripture and ecumenical tradition. It is not a case of trivial relativism that undermines the ethical foundation of church and society. But it is also not about an unmerciful, mind-numbing dogmatism, which swears by the letter, prevents thorough renewal of the church’s life and teaching, and obstructs serious progress in ecumenism. It is certainly not the case of me personally wanting to be right. The well-being of the church and of ecumenism is at stake.
I am very well aware of the fact that my appeal to you, who ‘lives among wolves,’ as a good Vatican connoisseur recently remarked, may possibly not be opportune. In your Christmas address of Dec. 21, 2015, however, confronted with curial ailments and even scandals, you confirmed your will for reform: ‘It seems necessary to state what has been — and ever shall be — the object of sincere reflection and decisive provisions. The reform will move forward with determination, clarity and firm resolve, since Ecclesia semper reformanda.’
I would not like to raise the hopes of many in our church unrealistically. The question of infallibility cannot be solved overnight in our church. Fortunately, you (Pope Francis) are almost 10 years younger than I am and will hopefully survive me. You will, moreover, surely understand that as a theologian at the end of his days, buoyed by deep affection for you and your pastoral work, I wanted to convey this request to you in time for a free and serious discussion of infallibility that is well-substantiated in the volume at hand: non in destructionem, sed in aedificationem ecclesiae, ‘not in order to destroy but to build up the church.’ For me personally, this would be the fulfillment of a hope I have never given up.
(Hans Kung, quoted in “Infallibility — Hans Kung appeals to Pope Francis”, National Catholic Reporter, March 9, 2016; italics given.)
Well, now the “Pope” has responded, and Kung is overjoyed: Francis has given the green light!
On the evening of April 26, the National [Non-]Catholic Reporter published Kung’s reaction:
On March 9, my appeal to Pope Francis to give room to a free, unprejudiced and open-ended discussion on the problem of infallibility appeared in the leading journals of several countries. I was thus overjoyed to receive a personal reply from Francis immediately after Easter. Dated March 20, it was forwarded to me from the nunciature in Berlin.
In the pope’s reply, the following points are significant for me:
- The fact that Francis answered at all and did not let my appeal fall on deaf ears, so to speak;
- The fact that he replied himself and not via his private secretary or the secretary of state;
- That he emphasizes the fraternal manner of his Spanish reply by addressing me as Lieber Mitbruder (“Dear Brother”) in German and puts this personal address in italics;
- That he clearly read the appeal, to which I had attached a Spanish translation, most attentively;
- That he is highly appreciative of the considerations that had led me to write Volume 5 of my complete works, in which I suggest theologically discussing the different issues that the infallibility dogma raises in the light of holy Scripture and tradition with the aim of deepening the constructive dialogue between the “semper reformanda” 21st-century church and the other Christian churches and postmodern society.
Francis has set no restrictions. He has thus responded to my request to give room to a free discussion on the dogma of infallibility. I think it is now imperative to use this new freedom to push ahead with the clarification of the dogmatic definitions, which are a ground for controversy within the Catholic church and in its relationship to the other Christian churches.
(Hans Kung, quoted in “Fr. Hans Kung says Francis responded to request for free discussion on infallibility dogma”, National Catholic Reporter, April 26, 2016; italics given.)
For all those who may have forgotten who Fr. Kung is: Born on March 19, 1928 in Sursee, Switzerland, he was ordained a true Roman Catholic priest on October 10, 1954, for the diocese of Basel. The Holy Office under Pope Pius XII took notice of the Swiss apostate right away. Despite his manifest and tenacious denial of the Faith — including the dogma of the Most Holy Trinity — Kung to this very day remains a priest in good standing with his diocese (currently headed by “Bishop” Felix Gmür). He has been teaching “theology” at the University of Tubingen since 1960.
After numerous quarrels with the Novus Ordo Vatican’s Congregation for the Destruction of the Faith, on December 15, 1979, the Congregation’s Prefect, “Cardinal” Francis Seper, declared several of Kung’s books to contain errors incompatible with Catholic — even Novus Ordo! — teaching and announced that Kung was no longer permitted to teach theology under the name of “Catholic” and could not be considered a Catholic theologian (see the Novus Ordo “Acta Apostolicae Sedis” 72 , pp. 90-92).
Despite his clear heresies and the dangerous influence he held as an active university professor, the Vatican did not excommunicate Kung, did not suspend him, and did not even remove his priestly faculties. The effect was that Kung continued teaching as before at the same university, though no longer as part of the “Catholic” faculty. He became professor of “ecumenical” theology instead. The secular world has long hailed him as a courageous “rebel Catholic” and frequently consulted him on “controversial” Catholic questions as a “critical voice of reason” against (what they perceived to be) the militantly-hardline Vatican.
In the fall of 2013, Kung announced that he is gradually going blind, suffers from Parkinson’s Disease, and is mulling whether to commit suicide (“euthanasia”). We covered this in the following post:
In late 2013, the German leftist magazine Der Spiegel conducted an interview with Kung about a possible self-induced exit from this earthly life. The opening lines of the interview, which was never published in English, are absolutely telling about the spiritual state of this man and his “faith”:
SPIEGEL: Professor Küng, will you go to Heaven?
Küng: Well I certainly hope so. [“Das hoffe ich doch sehr.”]
SPIEGEL: What would indicate that you will go to hell [instead] is you being a heretic in the eyes of the Church.
Küng: I am not a heretic but a critical reform theologian, who, in contrast to many of his critics, does not use medieval theology, liturgy, and canon law as his standard but the Gospel.
SPIEGEL: Does hell even exist?
Küng: All the talk about hell is a warning that a man can completely miss the meaning of his life. I do not believe in an eternal hell.
SPIEGEL: If hell means losing the meaning of life, then that is a fairly earthly conception.
Küng: Sartre says that hell is other people. Men make their own hell, for example in wars like in Syria or also in an unscrupulous capitalism.
This speaks volumes. Kung is no Catholic but a heretic who doesn’t like the label; he trashes the incredibly rich Catholic theology of the Scholastic age; he denies the dogma of hell (as well as virtually all other dogmas); he claims that his own theological junk is the fruit of an authentic understanding of the New Testament; and he presumptuously announces that of course he will go to Heaven (the original German conveys the sense of presumption, not the Catholic virtue of hope). In fact, Kung is such an obvious Modernist that even the secular interviewer noticed, who immediately caught on that hell loses or at least completely changes all its meaning if it is simply reinterpreted as a “warning not to miss the purpose of life”.
That Kung himself has missed the purpose of life is evident from the fact that he has expressly stated he may kill himself, since according to him there is “no point” to being alive as a theologian who, due to Parkinson’s and progressing blindness, cannot read or write anymore.
The true and ultimate purpose of every human life is the Beatific Vision, to enjoy Eternal Perfect Bliss by seeing face to face the very Trinue God — Father, Son, and Holy Ghost — whom Hans Kung denies.