Fr Hans Kung becomes a sedevacantist.
#31
(05-24-2012, 06:16 AM)Benno Wrote: Of course all the liberals are effectively sede. Duh. That's part of the reason why I don't understand so much sympathy for sedes around here. They may talk different but they come to the same conclusion for the same reasons. :afraidsmiley: :readrules:

I think Benno is on the right track here. Since Kung has always rejected the primacy for all practical purposes, he's been a sede for a long time. Or in his world whoever might be in the chair is irrelevant. Of course, if we had a pope who decided to please Kung, would Kung then argue that he's infallible?  :LOL:

C.
Reply
#32
But the whole point of Kung-ish people is that they'll never be pleased. They need to disagree, to protest. We used to call them protestants.
Reply
#33
This is extremely ironic. He's gone completely in the other direction from the CMRI and Fr Cekada's lot. I suppose you might call Fr Kung a 'left-wing sedevacantist' and Fr Cekada, Donald Sanborn and Daniel Dolan 'right-wing sedevacantists'.
Reply
#34
Quote:I had been thinking the same before. How can a priest that is invalidly ordained, suddenly become validly ordained

The older ordination rite didn't suddenly become invalid after Paul VI promulgated to new ordination rites as Kung seems to be suggesting. Rome has conceded the SSPX priests are validly ordained in publicly released written declarations from 1995 onward. I don't think it was even in question before then.
Reply
#35
(05-24-2012, 08:47 AM)MichaelNZ Wrote: This is extremely ironic. He's gone completely in the other direction from the CMRI and Fr Cekada's lot. I suppose you might call Fr Kung a 'left-wing sedevacantist' and Fr Cekada, Donald Sanborn and Daniel Dolan 'right-wing sedevacantists'.

Yes. And isn't that a wonderful thing? An early indication of the good fruit can come of this reconciliation.

Maybe Eberhard Schockenhoff will be next.

Followed by George Weigel and the gang at First Things, and other assorted Neo-Cons and K-Street Catholics who stand to lose.

No reconciliation gives them an unmerited victory.
Reply
#36
(05-24-2012, 08:47 AM)MichaelNZ Wrote: This is extremely ironic. He's gone completely in the other direction from the CMRI and Fr Cekada's lot. I suppose you might call Fr Kung a 'left-wing sedevacantist' and Fr Cekada, Donald Sanborn and Daniel Dolan 'right-wing sedevacantists'.

Yes I see your point. It does indeed seem ironic. But, then again, perhaps they are very much soul brothers.

Eventually the extreme Left will meet up with the extreme Right.
Reply
#37
(05-24-2012, 09:07 AM)Adam Wayne Wrote:
(05-24-2012, 08:47 AM)MichaelNZ Wrote: This is extremely ironic. He's gone completely in the other direction from the CMRI and Fr Cekada's lot. I suppose you might call Fr Kung a 'left-wing sedevacantist' and Fr Cekada, Donald Sanborn and Daniel Dolan 'right-wing sedevacantists'.

Yes I see your point. It does indeed seem ironic. But, then again, perhaps they are very much soul brothers.

Eventually the extreme Left will meet up with the extreme Right.
You can say that again.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)