A story about the ’78 Conclaves that even Andrew Greeley failed to uncover!

As a follow up to what I wrote HERE about the dreadful piece attack piece on Church teaching through undermining infallibility by Hans Küng published by the even more dreadful National Schismatic Reporter (aka Fishwrap) I received the following from a priest friend.  It is amusing enough to deserve it’s own post. I’ve slightly anonymized it.

You might recall that, in my own post about the Küng piece, I added: “Francis is about as likely to renounce his infallibility as Küng is to renounce his own.”

Now, the fun anecdote:

I was in Rome in 1978 for the election of both JPI & JPII.

A year later Fr Angel Anton was lecturing to us on Ecclesiology at the [Gregorian University] in 2nd year Theology and had listed a couple of Kung’s books on the reading list.

When Kung’s license to teach as a Catholic Theologian was revoked, Fr Anton gave us a blow by blow account of the on-going saga between Kung and, first, the German Bishops and, then, the CDF.

Here’s THE big story about the Conclaves that even Andrew Greeley had failed to uncover.

During the summer of 1978 Cardinal Hume was also staying at the ___ and he heard that some of the other Cardinals wanted to propose Kung as a candidate for the Papacy. [My Jesus! Mercy!] So they sent Kung an urgent telegram to see if he would accept the nomination.

“Certainly not” came the reply “If I became Pope, I would no longer be infallible.”

And there it is.  Some might chalk this up as an urban legend, and I had heard something like it in the past, but we can all agree that…

Se non è vero è ben trovato!

Some sharing options...

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liberals, Lighter fare, Linking Back, Mail from priests and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to A story about the ’78 Conclaves that even Andrew Greeley failed to uncover!

  1. benedetta says:

    And if Kung were in charge, and no doubt he seems to lay claim to a missed entitlement, we all know that it would be infallibility and then some, on steroids, for anyone who dares to question the dogmas of the totalitarian-progressives! It would be very like that “Plane Ride Infallibility” EOTT piece of a few weeks back. Certainly, a lot of his stuff is already “enforced” in quite a lot of places around, with a vengeance!

  2. Benedict Joseph says:

    Not lured there by word of Father Z (as has happened), but by another zone of Catholic information, I dived into the Kung pep rally over at “Fishwrap” and made a few comments of small merit as is my wont. Surely it is a precinct of invincible ignorance, contrariness, cognitive dissonance, emotional infirmity, invincible ignorance, and plain perversity. It almost leaves you speechless. Adults presenting mindless notions and reactions that defy reason. Then, of course, there is the man at the center of attention, who makes a substantial living off of sitting at his desk – narcissistic in the extreme and enabled by his devotees who regard him as brilliant.
    If the body of Roman Catholic theology is found so deficient by an individual or groups of individuals, why are they unable to move on to a locus amenable to their perceptions? What prevents them from leaving an environment by its essence contrary – unsympathetic – to their perceptions – and establishing their own association? Is it fear? Is it contrariness? Is it contempt? Is it anger? Surely it is not love or loyalty for the Church of Jesus Christ. How could it be?
    There appears from their musings nothing to love of Roman Catholic theology based on Holy Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition, the Magisterium but some nostalgic echo of loyalty to something they deem unworthy of belief. A kind of existential homesickness? Have we been waiting two thousand years for the revelation of Kung’s confections? There have been holy and wise men and women in our history unlike this individual and his disciples. One sees in the likes of Augustine, Francis, Thomas, Teresa, John Newman, et al., a deepening of, an adherence to the faith, not its mutilation. Emersion into the depth of the Holy Trinity, to the person of our Lord, Jesus Christ, conformity to His will, the life of virtue –to ascetic practice. This is not to be found in the “veiled-atheism” hawked in the “theological” academy inhabited by Kung and the denizens of his classroom.
    New wine? New skins. Certainly there is a disposable plastic bottle available to cap off the soft-drink fraudulence peddled by the likes of Hans Kung.

  3. VexillaRegis says:

    Charles E Flynn, thank you, that link made my day! Haha!

  4. Charivari Rob says:

    Well of course Andrew Greeley wouldn’t have uncovered that – he only wrote stories.

    Blackie Ryan, on the other hand…. HE would’ve figured it out!

  5. Orlando says:

    Kung is a washed up “Andy Warhol” theologian who’s 15 minutes of fame expired right around the time people realized bell bottom pants looked ridiculous on everyone . Please let’s just ignore is useless rumination and get back to saving our Church from the retreds of the 1960s. The orthodox faithful will lead the way organically as they always have. Brick by brick, confession by confession we are making a difference. As for my family and I , we say an extra Rosery every time our Holy Father gets on and airplane and draw inspirations from the brave Saints that preceded us to stay vigilant and not get discourage, albeit as difficult as that can be on some days . Recall that during the darkest days Holy Mother Church, the Holy Spirit gave us our greatest Saints .