CathInfo.com

novusordowatch.org/2021/04/hells-apostle-called-to-judgment-uber-modernist-theologian-hans-kung-dead-at-93

“Give an account of thy stewardship…” (Lk 16:2)
Hell’s Apostle Called to Judgment:

Über-Modernist Theologian Hans Küng Dead at 93
Big news on Easter Tuesday: One of the world’s most dangerous, most notorious, and most prolific apostates has been called to judgment.
We are talking about the Swiss theologian Fr. Hans Küng. According to reports, the famous “church critic” died in his sleep on April 6, 2021, at his home in Tübingen, Germany.
Born on Mar. 19, 1928, Kung was ordained a priest for the diocese of Basel, Switzerland, on Oct. 10, 1954, clearly one of the most fateful mistakes in ecclesiastical history.
The Holy Office under Pope Pius XII took notice of Kung right away. Although his denial of the Faith later became manifest and tenacious, Kung always remained a priest in good standing with his diocese. He taught “theology” at the University of Tübingen since 1960.
Together with Fr. Joseph Ratzinger (“Pope Emeritus” Benedict XVI), Fr. Kung was one of those suit-and-tie-wearing “theological experts” at the Modernist Second Vatican Council (1962-65), called to his advisory role as a competent “Catholic theologian” by “Pope” John XXIII. By contrast, the then-orthodox Catholic University of America issued an interdict against Kung in 1963 for his lecture “The Church and Freedom”. Though Ratzinger and Kung went separate theological ways, with Ratzinger preferring a more moderate Modernism (which, being moderate and therefore not as easily identifiable, is actually more dangerous, as Fr. Felix Sarda shows in Liberalism is a Sin), whereas Kung decided to go full-steam ahead and reason Modernist principles to their logical conclusions.
Due to his performance at the council, Mgr. Joseph Fenton called Küng “king of the nuts” in his personal diary. But Fenton also spoke against Kung in public, such as in this article:

• “The Roman Curia and the Ecuмenical Council” by Mgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton (1963)

• Hans Kung Endorses “Pope Francis” – ‘Nuff Said! (2013)
• Hans Kung welcomes Francis’ “Evangelii Gaudium” (2013)
• Hans Kung No Longer “Pope Critic”, finds Francis awesome (2014)

• Hans Küng: Francis Allows Free Discussion on Infallibility Dogma (2016)

SPIEGEL: Professor Küng, will you go to Heaven?
Küng: Well I certainly hope so. [German: “Das hoffe ich doch sehr.” NOW comment: The way the answer is phrased in German suggests not the theological virtue of hope but a presumption that he is deserving of Heaven and it would be an affront to him should he not be admitted.]
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.
(Hans Kung, “Ich hänge nicht an diesem Leben”, Der Spiegel, Dec. 9, 2013; underlining added; our translation.)

• Apostate Hans Kung going blind, ponders Euthanasia ѕυιcιdє

What shall I, frail man, be pleading?
 Who for me be interceding,
 When the just are mercy needing?

The article above states:  'By the early 1970s, Hans Kung had become a notorious denier of the dogma of papal infallibility as defined at the First Vatican Council in 1870. His 1971 book Infallible? An Inquiry generated untold controversy.'

This is the interesting bit. Like a Fr W. W. Roberts in 1870,. Hans Kung also knew that the 1616 decree defining and declaring a heliocentric reading of Scripture formal heresy was an act of the papal ordinary Magisterium and infallible. But because the history of churchmen since 1820 allowed the flock to believe heliocentrism was proven, the only conclusion was that the dogma of infallibility was itself proven wrong.

In 1633 Pope Urban VIII confirmed this 1616 decree as absolute, irreversible and thus had to be an infallible act. In 1820, when the Holy Office was discussing giving an imprimatur to Settele's book advocating heliocentrism as a scientific proven fact, the head of the Holy Office Fr Olivieri agreed it was infallible, as the record of the time tells us;

Olivieri: ‘In his “motives” the Most Rev. Anfossi puts forth “the unrevisability of pontifical decrees.” But we have already proved that this is saved: ’ ---Retrying Galileo, p.213

So how did he save the decree's papal infallibility and go along with the 'proofs' for heliocentrism. Here is how.

Olivieri: ‘In his “motives” the Most Rev. Anfossi puts forth “the unrevisability of pontifical decrees.” But we have already proved that this is saved: the doctrine in question at the time was infected with a devastating motion, which is certainly contrary to the Sacred Scriptures, as it was declared.’ ---Retrying Galileo, p.213

Yes, he managed to have his cake and eat it, his papal infallibility safe by saying the infallible 1616 decree was against a violent moving Earth, but now that modern astronomers say an orbiting Earth has not a violent movement the Church can now keep its infallible decree but that it does not apply to a non-violent orbiting Earth. All the Popes since 1820 went along with this decision 'without comment.' In fact it was a fixed-sun interpretation of Scripture that was defined as heresy, it had nothing to do with a violent Earth. Olivieri made this up to get the popes to allow heliocentrism as a scientific truth and thus have to reinterpret Scripture accordingly.

As we know from the history of the Galileo case after 1820, because the 1616 decree was taken as proven wrong, there began a history of DENIAL that the 1616 decree was an infallible decree. The dogma now depended on this denial. Lots of ploys and excused were conjured up over 200 years to persuade the world that papal infallibility was NOT proven wrong with the acceptance of heliocentrism.  

But Fr Roberts and Hans Kung did their investigations that showed them the 1616 decree was infallible, and this led them to conclude the Vatican I dogma of papal infallibility was proven wrong by the Holy Office's and papal acceptance of heliocentrism.

In other words it was the acceptance of heliocentrism by the popes since 1820 that led Hans Kung into his heretical rejection of the dogma of infallibility. God only knows what other heresies this led Kung into.

Now, I'm a firm believer in geocentrism ... and even lean toward a flat immovable earth, but I might be interested in studying precisely what was condemned and why.