Fr Ivan Aquilina’s response to Hans Kung
From his blog (Hat Tip: St Barnabas blog)
(Clip)
The interview that appears on the Guardian (here) with the theologian Hans Kung is very illuminative…
…It is people like Fr Hans Kung that sadden me; they appear to me like snipers, turning every event into an opportunity for selling their past-their-sell-by-date goods.
The article in question needs looking at carefully, it betrays impatience and anger and a misrepresentation of certain facts. Kung’s experiment of global ethics is tired and in fact there is one already in place, it is called the Gospel.
Fr Kung starts by using the media created perceptions of the damage the Holy Father does in relationships with other faiths. It seems that the Pope must be punished as he does not worship at the altar of political correctness. The present pontiff is then equated with his predecessor Pius X and quite conveniently the title Saint is dropped from in front of his name, obviously Kung cannot allow any similarity between Pope Benedict and a canonised Pope, or accept that a Pope that fought modernity can be presented as a model of holiness. Traditionalists and extreme right are placed in one measure by Fr Kung, I wonder why?
The second paragraph is a sick joke. Fr Kung weeps the 60`s ecumenical strategy. That was another false dawn and as Cardinal Kasper said the road ahead as regards Anglicans is one of co-operation and not communion. Scaremongering is Kung’s next tactic when he writes about second class priests and Catholics not being allowed to join in the liturgy of those whom the Pope will admit in full unity with him. Where on earth did Kung pick this up from, he must either have inside knowledge of the forthcoming Apostolic Constitution or else he is perverse.
Fr Kung mentions the long process of ARCIC and like many he hoped that it would have led to a different place. The fact is that what happened in that process is that the two communions entrusted God to lead them on, if they have not arrived where they had hoped to then it is a question of seeking what the Spirit is saying to the Churches. However some Churches are happier to listen to the spirit of this world than the Spirit of the living God. Fr Kung seems to think that Rome stopped this process (did it? What about IARRCUM?) because there was “too much Kung theology”. What about some humility?
Kung takes exception that, as he puts it, Pope Benedict is restoring a Roman imperium (interesting choice of word by Kung as this is a loved one by European fascists). However as I see it, and I still await the Constitution, the pope is neither poaching Anglicans nor building anything, he simply is, in charity in truth, making place for those whose conscience makes it impossible to remain where they are.
Fr Kung sees this as thirst for power and a tragedy. I see it as an act of love, of genuine respect from Rome towards those who seek the unity of the Catholic Faith. The Pope has never said that any dialogue that is happening is going to be stopped or denied but that some may be ready and so are to be made welcome.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
