#292: Hans Kung's Call to Arms

EXCERPT:

By now Kung and Benedict have become iconic figures representing two distinct "takes" on Catholic life. Depending on your viewpoint, Kűng embodies either the courageous voice of authentic Catholic renewal from Vatican II, or the arrogant, even spiteful dissenter who would make a better Protestant. Similarly, Benedict XVI personifies either the heroic defender of authentic Catholic identity, or the backsliding, lapsed conciliarist bent on propping up a discredited pre-conciliar version of Catholicism.

Inevitably, then, either man's public pronouncements provoke both fervid praise and heated criticism. Kűng’s latest piece is no exception.

I have no particular interest in defending Kűng, but since he is calling on bishops to act, it makes sense to assess what such action might mean.

My own opinion: Kűng’s critique of Benedict's papacy includes some powerful truth, some personal attack, and some debatable history. But the letter’s importance depends less on these and more on his practical proposals, where he urges the Bishop to six actions. While much of Kűng’s letter earns the controversy he is provoking, a lot of the commentary strikes me as distracting us from these proposals. For once, it may be helpful to consider them out of context:

1. “Do not keep silent.” Does anyone doubt that the hierarchy’s age-old habit of silence has done more harm than good? Even when Bishops keep horrifying secrets only to “protect the Church from scandal,” they only cause worse scandal. Perhaps Kűng’s advice will fall on deaf ears if no bishops agree with him. But if they do agree, don't we hope they have the courage to say so?

…

4. "Unconditional obedience is owed to God alone." As a layperson, I do not always understand the constraints felt by clergy who have promised obedience to their superiors. But too often those constraints have allowed bad practices and even scandalous behavior to persist. Kűng’s point reminds us that, even in a hierarchy like ours, officials who fail to do the right thing will earn no sympathy by claiming "we were only following orders."

…

6. “Call for a Council.” More than 50 years after John XXIII called for Vatican II, the case for Vatican III grows stronger by the day. I can see three main arguments for convening the world's bishops: (a) the momentum of Vatican II's renewal has flagged, and passing on the torch of renewal to the next generation may require a rekindling that only a council can supply; (b) our growing global crisis of authority and credibility needs to be addressed at the highest level -- which is a council -- if the Church is going to recover its good public name in the foreseeable future; (C) the Europe-dominated hierarchy which gathered at Vatican II no longer reflects a Church that has gone global on all levels; a new council would be a more representative gathering that could put this global Catholicism on the map.

So while Hans Kűng’s critique of Rome and Benedict XVI are admittedly (and deservedly) controversial, his practical proposals seem good, constructive ideas that could only benefit the Church. It remains to be seen if he will be heard.