Even if you don’t accept everything he says, you
have to admit that Hans Kung makes a strong case for his diagnosis that the
Church is sick. You may not agree that it has “a debilitating and potentially
terminal illness,” but you will have a hard time disproving his contention that
“the Catholic Church is in its deepest crisis of confidence since the
Reformation.” Pope Benedict XVI said the Church has a disfigured face.
His book Can
We Save the Catholic Church? (William Collins, 2013) spells out Kung's diagnosis, points to “the Roman system” as the major cause of the Church’s
illness, and offers a prescription for recovery. The accumulation of power and prestige in Rome led to what Kung calls "the Roman system."
Kung is 86 years old. He served as a peritus (expert theological adviser) at
the Second Vatican Council, lost his license to teach as a Roman Catholic
theologian in 1979 when he publicly rejected the doctrine of papal infallibility,
and has continued to criticize the “Roman system” as the major flaw in the
Church’s mission to represent Christ.
After more than 50 years of study, experience and
pleading, Kung says he has published his diagnosis “only to fulfill my duty in
conscience to offer this service (possibly my last) to my Church, a Church
which I have endeavored to serve all my life.” Can We Save The Catholic Church? may well be his final effort to
spell out what he sees wrong with the Church and once again urge its members to
seek reform.
In this book he reviews Church history, summarizing
here the “critical, historical account of twenty centuries of Christianity”
which he published in 1994 under the title Christentum:
Wesen und Geschichte (published as Christianity:
Essence, History and Future in 2004 by Continuum).
Reviewing various historical and defining moments in
the Church’s history, Kung keeps asking whether the Church faithfully reflects
the original Christian message “which to all intents and purposes is Jesus
Christ himself” (57).
He decries the Inquisition of the past, but insists
that it is still operative today even if in a less physically violent form. He
notes the name change, from “Holy Office (of the Inquisition)” to the “Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith” (CDF), but explains that it “now practices more
subtle forms of psychological torture, and its proceedings continue to be
secret, which is one of the reasons why the Vatican was not permitted to join
the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights, which demands certain minimal
human rights” (290).
Kung, of course, has himself been subject to
investigation by the CDF because of his book questioning papal infallibility. Just six years after the close of Vatican II Kung was writing in Infallible? An Enquiry (Collins, 1971) that
“the Council put forward a magnificent programme for a renewed Church of the
future” (15), but “the people of God are being deprived of the fruits of the
Council” (22).
In his Disputed
Truth – Memoirs II (Continuum,
2007), Kung explained why he refused to go to the “colloquium” to which the CDF
had called him, describing its style as "hierarchical and heartless” (266), adding,
“I will in no way submit to an inquisitional procedure disguised as a ‘colloquium’
in which in the end there is no other possibility for me of safeguarding my
rights (something that is granted even criminals in civilized states) than
ultimately to subscribe to the Roman dictate if I don’t want to fall victim to
Roman sanctions” (268).
In effect Kung argues that the CDF will not discuss
but only condemn what it deems contrary to Church doctrine. Kung believes that
theologians need to be given an ear, an opportunity to explore, to seek the
truth. He believes that over the centuries Rome has shown itself capable of
learning, and he hopes that someday the organ of the inquisition will become an
organ of proclamation of the faith. “The
protection of the faith is better served today not through the exclusive
persecution of errors but through the positive promotion of Christian doctrine”
(266).
Inquisitorial practice, however, is only one of Kung’s
criticisms. Among other ailments of the Church are: 1) the
Roman monopoly of power and truth; 2) juridicism and clericalism; 3) hostility
to sexuality plus general misogyny; 4) theological vindication of the use of
force and war; 5) great financial power; 6) refusal to reform. All these ailments
are contrary to the Gospel and the health of the Church.
Failure to acknowledge the problems and refusal to speak up exacerbates the illness. Denial is not a redeeming or curative factor.
Failure to acknowledge the problems and refusal to speak up exacerbates the illness. Denial is not a redeeming or curative factor.
Kung goes on to list therapies for restoring the
Church’s health; among them are 1) exercise of pastoral leadership by office-holders, not a ruling dominium (often
a dictatorship) but rather a ministerium (healing
service); 2) reform dictated by the testimony of the Gospel not by canon law;
3) a papacy which maintains community with the Church (an idea that seems part
of Pope Francis’ style of ministry); 4) development of a Curia in accord
with Gospel values; 5) appointments based on competence rather than cronyism;
6) openness in and restructuring of Vatican finances (another concern of Pope
Francis); 7) allowing priests and bishops to marry; 8) opening Church offices to women;
9) inclusion of laity and clergy in election of bishops.
Kung concludes his diagnosis, therapy and prognoses
of an ailing Church with these remarks: “I have once again --this time at a very
advanced stage of life-- set forth in summary fashion my vision of a Church which
could fulfill the hope of millions of Christians and non-Christians alike. It
is a vision based on my experience over decades of careful study, and my
experience of struggling and of suffering for it. It is a vision of how the
Church could not only be saved and survive but also flourish once again” (331).
Offering his prognosis Kung said, “I hope very much
that this book will assist the English-speaking world in supporting Pope
Francis’s reforms by offering a precise historic and systematic analysis and
viable, practical proposals for reform” (xii)…Doubtless, Pope Francis will
awaken powerful hostility, above all in the powerhouse of the Roman Curia –opposition
which is difficult to withstand. Those in power in the Vatican are not likely
to abandon the power that has been accumulated since the Middle Ages” (337).
“Can we save the Catholic Church?” Kung asks, and
then provides a positive answer, “…sooner or later, we will once again become what
Christ founded us to be” (338).
