St Mary's

A Courageous Voice: Hans Kung and His Contribution as a Leader

A Reflection for St Mary’s-in-Exile by Greg Latemore – 30^th & 31^st October 2010 -

Readings; Wisdom 11:22-12:2 and Thessalonians 2:11 – 2:2 & Luke 19:1-10.

The Story of Hans Kung

Hans Kung is a Catholic priest and theologian whom I studied when I was at the Seminary. I’d like to refer to him this morning/evening – he recently wrote an Open Letter to the Catholic Bishops of the World.

Just type ‘Hans Kung Open Letter to the Bishops’ on Google. I have some copies for those without a computer or access to the internet.

Kung was born in Switzerland in 1928. He studied at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome and at the Sorbonne, was ordained in 1954 and is still a priest. His doctorate (1964) was on the theology of Karl Barth. He and Joseph Ratzinger were both advisers (peritus) at the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), and its youngest expert theologians.

He wrote Infallible? An Inquiry (1971) which led to an investigation by Rome and in 1979, his authority to teach in a Catholic University (missio canonica) was withdrawn. The University of Tubingen, in Germany, gave him the Professorship in Ecumenical Theology at the same University anyway, which he held till his retirement in 1996. Hans Kung is currently President of the Foundation for a Global Ethic.

Hans Kung and Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) are contemporaries. In his second Memoir, Disputed Truth, Kung asks “[Are we] on the same wavelink?” and then writes …

“ We both come from conservative Catholic families. And from an Alpine landscape, he from Bavaria, I from Central Switzerland. We both love mountains and lakes. We are contemporaries, less than a year apart. Ratzinger was born on 16 April 1927, I on 19 March 1928. But of course, the son of a policeman who grows up in a police station, who after his father’s retirement lives in a modest cottage and attends a clerical boys’ seminary from the age of twelve, grows up differently from a merchant’s son in a hospitable middle-class family in the town square, the focal point for all the members of the extended family. This atmosphere is not a well-guarded one dominated by police or clergy, but is lively and open to the world”. (Disputed Truth 2008, Page 6)

Table: Apparent Similarities & Differences

My own experience of Kung is brief but still very clear. We studied his books Church (1967), On Being a Christian (1974) and Infallible? An Inquiry (1971) at the Seminary. They were deeply researched, well written and surprisingly accessible. I head him speak in 1974, the year before I was ordained priest. He gave a speech at The University of Queensland. Of course, he couldn’t do this in a Church: that would be too much for the bishops! After his lecture, he was asked: “Dr Kung, you criticise our Church more than anyone outside it. Why are you still a Catholic, let alone a priest?” His answer was truly inspirational – “ You only criticise what you love. And you can best criticise from within”.

Kung is an articulate, committed Catholic and a courageous voice in today’s conservative Church. He is anchored in the biblical and early Church tradition. For the current pope, the early Church is merely a backdrop to Christendom and he seems to be mainly interested in the restoration of a Catholic Europe. Kung says that Ratzinger also sees in Judaism only the historic roots of Christianity and he doesn’t take it seriously as a valid path to salvation.

Kung has had the courage and the credibility over many years to challenge the bishops and the papacy. I think it is insightful that Kung refers the bishops to the model of the apostle Paul who dared to oppose Peter “to his face since he was manifestly in the wrong” (Galatians 2:11). In his open letter, I like how Kung chronicles the many ‘missed opportunities that this papacy has passed up’.

Kung respects the bishops as “venerable” but he also challenges the teaching authority of the Church. He is a clear voice for ‘faith seeking understanding’ and a credible ‘thought leader’.

Leadership

Speaking of leadership, John Fitzwater, on the leadership team, has asked me to say something about leadership as the Preparation Meeting happens/happened tomorrow/today.

The literal meaning of leadre, a Norse/Viking word, is the “furrow in the field” or “the wake of a ship”. Leadership is taking people somewhere with you.

There are many frameworks or theories of leadership. Here is just one:

Kouzes and Posner in The Leadership Challenge (2002) say that leadership is about  five (5) ‘practices’. Leaders -

• challenge the process
• inspire a shared vision
• model the way
• enable others to act and
• encourage the heart.

We could well ask, “Do leaders and do our leaders – challenge, inspire, provide a good example, empower us and motivate us?”

Great leadership is transformational not just transactional, that is, it transforms how people think, feel and behave. They help people find meaning and make sense of their world. This is indeed rare. Barack Obama, the American President, has been truly inspirational but has had a few recent ‘wicked problems’ to address; leadership is more than just giving a few inspirational speeches. The Catholic hierarchy doesn’t even do that – they seem to have ‘gone missing’.

Further, the sobering reality is that hubris often affects those who acquire authority. Manfred Kets de Vries (The Leadership Mystique 2001) says it is no surprise that a fish rots from the head down! He says leaders need a ‘healthy narcissism’, enough self efficacy to be effective, but not too much to become tyrants. To cure hubris, de Vries advocates humanity, humility, humour, hope.

Leadership and the Church

There are substitutes for leadership – shared vision and shared values. The truth is that the hierarchy and the papacy are largely irrelevant to thinking Catholics and have been for years. Is this such a bad thing, when all the Roman Curia expects and allows is dependency?  Just look at the fan club websites for Benedict XVI and George Pell’s – these are merely sycophantic testaments to childish dependency. Is that who we are supposed to be as modern Catholics? I think not. Modern research says that authentic leadership empowers followers: it does not elicit mere naïve obedience.

The pope should be ‘servant of the servants of God’ (see Note 1). This is what Kung highlighted in his book Infallible (1971) and which got him silenced in 1979. The list of those silenced by the Congregation of the Faith is long and distinguished. Many are some of our greatest Catholic thinkers: Eduard Schilebeecks, Charles Curran, Leonardo Boff, Jon Sobrino, Matthew Fox, Yvonne Geberra, Hans Kung etc.

If I could draw a brief parallel with today’s Gospel reading (Luke 19:1-10). Jesus chose Zacchaeus as his host for dinner even though he was un-conventional. Zacchaeus still “welcomed Jesus warmly”. Surely, liberal theologians like Kung are also worthy hosts of the Jesus story? And echoing Paul’s letter today (2 Thessalonians 1:11-2:2) is Jesus not also “glorified” by the contribution of scholars like Kung whom the Vatican cannot tame?

Instead, thankfully, here at St Mary’s-in-Exile, we do not look to the pope for “royal consciousness” but we explore the truth for ourselves with a “prophetic imagination” – to use Walter Brueggmann’s phrase (The Prophetic Imagination 1978).

Leadership at St Mary’s

Who leads us at St Mary’s and how do we lead ourselves? As Rob Goffee from the London Business School asks “Why should anyone be led by you”? I often use his question in the leadership programs I conduct through The University of Queensland – it personalises the challenge of leadership.

We are all equals in the eyes of God but with different gifts. Might I ask you and myself – “how well do we exercise leadership?” At times, my own contribution to this faith community and to those in need has been less than enthusiastic. I too am challenged by what I say today/tonight – and by the courageous example of Hans Kung and Fr Terry and Fr Peter and all of us who choose to live ‘in exile’.

I ask “In this exile, who are we becoming, and what are we doing?” We will ever have an exodus out of exile to the promised land?! But you know what? Maybe like heaven, this already is the promised land!

Conclusion

Kung’s answer to the missed opportunities under Benedict XVI is not despair or schism. He ends his ‘Open Letter’ with six positive proposals to give voice to the current crisis:

1. Do not keep silent
2. Set about reform
3. Act in a collegiate way
4. Unconditional obedience is allowed to God alone
5. Work for regional solutions
6. Call for a Council.

My own proposal is this –

Let us conserve but not preserve our faith. Much of conservative Christianity today, is only interested in belief in dogma. Faith is not belief in dogma. Not an active, dynamic, adult faith anyway. Faith is not something wrapped in dogma preserved in formaldehyde. It is a journey of wonder to the sacred, taken intelligently and taken together.

Let’s not just pray, pay and obey!

As fellow exiles, let us continue to enquire, challenge, explore and hold on to the ‘truth which sets us free’ (John 8:32).

Thank you for being here and for listening to me.

Greg Latemore

Note 1…

Servus servorum Dei, “servant of the servants of God”, was a title first used by Pope Gregory 1^st – “the Great” (540 – 604. He attributed it to  himself as a lesson in humility.