Showing posts with label Pope Benedict XVI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pope Benedict XVI. Show all posts

Friday, July 20, 2012

Peaceful Revolt Against Roman Absolutism


I found this article on Hans Kung's call to all Catholics for a peaceful revolution against the absolutism of the papal power published in National Catholic Reporter. Hans Kung has been a consistent critic of the Vatican's conservative bloc. The conservative bloc, with Pope Benedict XVI as its prominent leader, controlled the Vatican's Roman Curia, and responsible in appointing conservative bishops in the local churches, and in silencing Church theologians who are perceived as reformists. Formed as the restoration movement in the Church today, they do not only derail the full implementation of the Vatican II but want to reform the Vatican II reformation. With the absolute power of the Pope, the reforms of Vatican II will be set aside and the restoration efforts of the conservative bloc are now on-going. Thus, Hans Kung urges all Catholics to be vigilant to protect the fruits of Vatican II and launches a peaceful revolution against Roman absolutism. This article is a good read. I included below the full video interview and its transcript "What Went Wrong With Catholic Church?" of Hans Kung by Anthony Padovado. Plus, the earlier video interview of Hans Kung titled "Catholicism Heading Back to Middle-Ages". Kudos.

Hans Kung urges peaceful revolution 
against Roman absolutism

'few people realize how powerful the pope is,' Kung said

By Jerry Filteau

Jun. 11, 2011

DETROIT -- Famed theologian Fr. Hans Kung has called for a “peaceful” revolution by world Catholics against the absolutism of papal power.

Monday, July 16, 2012

Hans Kung's Letter to the Bishops


I reproduce here the letter of Theologian Hans Küng to all Catholic Bishops. The open letter was first published in the Independent Catholic News last April 29, 2010 and republished on May 4, 2010. I also included his previous interview conducted by Laura Sheahen and published in Beliefnet last February 2004.


Venerable Bishops,

Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, and I were the youngest theologians at the Second Vatican Council from 1962 to 1965. Now we are the oldest and the only ones still fully active. I have always understood my theological work as a service to the Roman Catholic Church. For this reason, on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the election of Pope Benedict XVI, I am making this appeal to you in an open letter. In doing so, I am motivated by my profound concern for our church, which now finds itself in the worst credibility crisis since the Reformation. Please excuse the form of an open letter; unfortunately, I have no other way of reaching you.

I deeply appreciated that the pope invited me, his outspoken critic, to meet for a friendly, four-hour-long conversation shortly after he took office. This awakened in me the hope that my former colleague at Tubingen University might find his way to promote an ongoing renewal of the church and an ecumenical rapprochement in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council.

Saturday, June 30, 2012

Ratzinger's Jesus of Nazareth: A review by Lode Wostyn


Review Article: 
Jesus of Nazareth
Pope Benedict XVI and Joseph Ratzinger.
Jesus of Nazareth. NY: Doubleday, 2007.

by Lode Wostyn




Book reviews of Benedict XVI’s Jesus of Nazareth are written with caution and reverence. This is a book written by the Pope! Yet, Pope Benedict himself tells his readers, “This book is in no way an exercise of magisterium, but solely an expression of my personal search ‘for the face of the Lord.’ Everyone is free, then, to contradict me. I would only ask my readers for that initial goodwill without which there can be no understanding” (xxiii-xxiv). My goodwill made me buy and read the book. In this same spirit, I do not intend to contradict the book, but to situate it within the development of Christology after Vatican II. I have described this development in other studies; hence, I decided to work with a broad outline, without repeating the references mentioned in them.1 In my review, I will use the name Ratzinger because it is suggested in the way we have to treat the book: “not as an exercise of magisterium but as a personal search.”