04-06-2021, 02:22 PM
The Angelus - March 1980
THE RECENT condemnation of Hans Küng by the Vatican was welcomed by many. While it is evident that excommunication as a heretic is certainly in order for Küng, who has denied the most basic Catholic dogmas, the fact that it was declared that he cannot be considered a Catholic theologian has far-ranging effects.
What many Catholics fail to grasp by Küng's ouster is that his downfall has shaken the very core of the evil existing within the Church and against which we have waged a tireless battle.
It must be remembered that Küng was the theologian of the Second Vatican Council. He was the theological brain for the German speaking bishops at the Council. Thus he represented the most powerful coalition at the Council, comprised of the bishops of Germany and Austria. Their influence was of such magnitude as to warrant a book, aptly titled The Rhine Flows into the Tiber. Küng also was a personal consultant to many of the most powerful bishops attending Vatican II, including Cardinal Bea, Cardinal Villot, Cardinal Suenens, and was said to have been consulted by a host of American bishops who will certainly blush to have their names associated with their now-deposed hero. Küng was also the advisor for many of the non-Catholic observers, including the Anglicans and a host of Protestant sects. Small wonder that the Anglicans and non-Catholic denominations were the first to come to his defense following his condemnation. Küng was, in fact, the darling of the Liberals, the rising star of the Progressives. The Council was permeated with his thought and saturated with his theological input. Now that Küng's star has been shot down, where does that leave the Council?
It is quite obvious that if the top theologian of the Council, who directed much of its theological content is not Catholic, then the decisions arrived at by that Council are, at the very least, suspect. If Küng cannot be considered a "Catholic" theologian, then can the Council be considered "Catholic"? The obvious answer has to be NO! This is what was wrong with the Council from the very start. Many of those who influenced it were not Catholic. Therefore, much of what came out of the Council was not Catholic. The Vatican, by its denouncement of Kü ng, has admitted this. Whether willingly or unwillingly, the Vatican has now cast doubt upon the instrument which was used to create the greatest single attack on Catholicism, the Second Vatican Council.
The influence of Küng, of course, goes much further than the Council. For years, his books attacking the divinity of Christ, the divine origin of the Church, and papal infallibility, have been the standard texts for Catholic colleges, universities, schools, and seminaries. Many of the priests ordained in recent years cut their teeth on his rubbish. In many Catholic institutions, including the Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C., and especially the Dominican College in that same city, the works of Küng, Chardin, Curran, Schille-beeckx, and Dulles, all either condemned or under investigation by Rome, form the nucleus of courses in the theological department and are standard required reading. These textbooks are not supplements to the course, but the basic texts from which the students are expected to derive the knowledge with which they will minister to the faithful.
It is obvious that if these seminarians are educated with non-Catholic materials (the Vatican says they are not Catholic), then they will, in fact, be un-Catholic in their formation, un-Catholic in their thinking, un-Catholic in the execution of their duties, and most important of all, un-Catholic in what they transmit to the flock from the pulpit and altar. (I would have included the confessional; but the new priest does not bother to hear confessions anymore.)
One would expect that if the American bishops are serious in their claim to recognize the Pope as the sovereign authority within the Church, they, would immediately issue orders that all of Küng's works be removed from Catholic institutions across the country. The exact opposite is, in fact, true. A check shows the works of Küng still on Catholic university reading lists, and still available on the library shelves and in campus bookstores. Moreover, courses based on the works of Küng and his heretical cohorts are prominently listed on university curricula.
When will the bishops decide to back up the Pope? How long will it take the bishops to act to restore the faith of the people? If the bishops claim to be true shepherds and claim to be loyal to the Pope, I challenge them to prove it by taking the following actions:
When the Holy Mass is restored, and only then, will God restore His blessings to His faithful.
Catholic bishops of America, the challenge has been given. Either prove your loyalty to Rome and your Catholicity by accepting it—or turn in your crosiers and make way for the true Church Militant, whose loyalty is not in question!
[Emphasis mine.]
Hans Küng
by Father Hector L. Bolduc
THE RECENT condemnation of Hans Küng by the Vatican was welcomed by many. While it is evident that excommunication as a heretic is certainly in order for Küng, who has denied the most basic Catholic dogmas, the fact that it was declared that he cannot be considered a Catholic theologian has far-ranging effects.
What many Catholics fail to grasp by Küng's ouster is that his downfall has shaken the very core of the evil existing within the Church and against which we have waged a tireless battle.
It must be remembered that Küng was the theologian of the Second Vatican Council. He was the theological brain for the German speaking bishops at the Council. Thus he represented the most powerful coalition at the Council, comprised of the bishops of Germany and Austria. Their influence was of such magnitude as to warrant a book, aptly titled The Rhine Flows into the Tiber. Küng also was a personal consultant to many of the most powerful bishops attending Vatican II, including Cardinal Bea, Cardinal Villot, Cardinal Suenens, and was said to have been consulted by a host of American bishops who will certainly blush to have their names associated with their now-deposed hero. Küng was also the advisor for many of the non-Catholic observers, including the Anglicans and a host of Protestant sects. Small wonder that the Anglicans and non-Catholic denominations were the first to come to his defense following his condemnation. Küng was, in fact, the darling of the Liberals, the rising star of the Progressives. The Council was permeated with his thought and saturated with his theological input. Now that Küng's star has been shot down, where does that leave the Council?
It is quite obvious that if the top theologian of the Council, who directed much of its theological content is not Catholic, then the decisions arrived at by that Council are, at the very least, suspect. If Küng cannot be considered a "Catholic" theologian, then can the Council be considered "Catholic"? The obvious answer has to be NO! This is what was wrong with the Council from the very start. Many of those who influenced it were not Catholic. Therefore, much of what came out of the Council was not Catholic. The Vatican, by its denouncement of Kü ng, has admitted this. Whether willingly or unwillingly, the Vatican has now cast doubt upon the instrument which was used to create the greatest single attack on Catholicism, the Second Vatican Council.
The influence of Küng, of course, goes much further than the Council. For years, his books attacking the divinity of Christ, the divine origin of the Church, and papal infallibility, have been the standard texts for Catholic colleges, universities, schools, and seminaries. Many of the priests ordained in recent years cut their teeth on his rubbish. In many Catholic institutions, including the Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C., and especially the Dominican College in that same city, the works of Küng, Chardin, Curran, Schille-beeckx, and Dulles, all either condemned or under investigation by Rome, form the nucleus of courses in the theological department and are standard required reading. These textbooks are not supplements to the course, but the basic texts from which the students are expected to derive the knowledge with which they will minister to the faithful.
It is obvious that if these seminarians are educated with non-Catholic materials (the Vatican says they are not Catholic), then they will, in fact, be un-Catholic in their formation, un-Catholic in their thinking, un-Catholic in the execution of their duties, and most important of all, un-Catholic in what they transmit to the flock from the pulpit and altar. (I would have included the confessional; but the new priest does not bother to hear confessions anymore.)
One would expect that if the American bishops are serious in their claim to recognize the Pope as the sovereign authority within the Church, they, would immediately issue orders that all of Küng's works be removed from Catholic institutions across the country. The exact opposite is, in fact, true. A check shows the works of Küng still on Catholic university reading lists, and still available on the library shelves and in campus bookstores. Moreover, courses based on the works of Küng and his heretical cohorts are prominently listed on university curricula.
When will the bishops decide to back up the Pope? How long will it take the bishops to act to restore the faith of the people? If the bishops claim to be true shepherds and claim to be loyal to the Pope, I challenge them to prove it by taking the following actions:
Quote:1. Publicly acknowledge the errors of Küng, Curran, et al., and publish a warning against them in all Catholic publications.
2. Order the works of Küng, Curran, Chardin, and others removed from all Catholic institutions.
3. Remove Curran, Dulles and all other heretics from their position at Catholic institutions where they are currently using that position and the donations of the faithful to destroy the Church, while leading millions into heresy.
4. Return to the Traditions of the Church which have been approved and recognized by two thousand years of holy popes, martyrs, and saints.
5. Recognize and authorize the return of the Latin Tridentine Mass thus assuring that the supreme Sacrifice, instituted by Christ and purchased by His Precious Blood, will be returned to the altars of the Church and accomplish through its salvific action, the sanctification of the Church and its quick return to normalcy.
When the Holy Mass is restored, and only then, will God restore His blessings to His faithful.
Catholic bishops of America, the challenge has been given. Either prove your loyalty to Rome and your Catholicity by accepting it—or turn in your crosiers and make way for the true Church Militant, whose loyalty is not in question!
[Emphasis mine.]
"So let us be confident, let us not be unprepared, let us not be outflanked, let us be wise, vigilant, fighting against those who are trying to tear the faith out of our souls and morality out of our hearts, so that we may remain Catholics, remain united to the Blessed Virgin Mary, remain united to the Roman Catholic Church, remain faithful children of the Church."- Abp. Lefebvre