No need to fear schism claim modernist theologians

As they busy themselves creating the conditions for one - Cathcon comment

Knop: "Historically, the church has changed permanently".

Currently, the Church in Germany is in the middle of a reform process, the Synodal Path. Theologian Julia Knop is a member of the Synodal Assembly and demands: The Church must not fall behind the standards of its time.

Between demands for reform on the one hand and their rejection on the other: the Church in Germany is debating its future. Before the next plenary meeting of the Synodal Path reform project, the Erfurt dogmatist Julia Knop talks in an interview about different diagnoses of the current church situation and why they make it difficult to find a common solution.

Question: Professor Knop, the Catholic Church in Germany is currently engaged in many profound debates. Only recently, the Vatican expressed criticism of the German reform process Synodal Path. The Freiburg theologian, Magnus Striet says that we need not fear a schism, a division of the Church - that has been going on for a long time. Do you agree with that?

Knop: I don't find this old term helpful to describe the massive alienation of many Catholics from the official church and its worship. But of course it is true: there are immense conflicts and tensions in the Church. It is about how we want to be Catholic today - in the 21st century, in the face of a horrendous history of guilt in the Church. I am glad that these debates are finally being held.

Question: However, the current situation of the Church is judged differently...

Knop: The main issue is how one assesses abuse and cover-up by clerics. Is this abuse of power typical of the Catholic Church system or is it alien to the system? Is abuse of power favoured or prevented by the church's self-image? The MHG study and all subsequent studies identify typically Catholic factors that favour abuse and cover-up by clergy. I consider it highly problematic to still deny this.

Question: Does the respective diagnosis lead to different approaches?

Knop: Those who think that abuse has nothing to do with the church's self-image are outsourcing the problem. They invest in education and prevention, but reject the need for church reform. In this perspective, the solution is rather to protect the existing power relations and to reaffirm the sexual doctrine. On the other hand, those who see abuse as symptomatic of problematic dimensions of the church's self-understanding take a more fundamental approach: questions of power, ministry, gender roles and sexuality. In this perspective, it would be precarious not to correct teachings and structures that have proven to be conducive to abuse. This is the starting point of the Synodal Path.

Question: The Synodal Path sometimes leads to heated debates. How realistic is it for the two positions to come together?

Knop: That is very difficult because the diagnosis is fundamentally different and one perspective sees a problem in the solution approach of the other and vice versa.

At the upcoming fourth Synodal Assembly, the topics will include the basic rights of believers in the church and the perpetuation of synodal structures.

Question: If you take a step back, the debates do not seem so strange. Already at the turn of the 19th century, theology argued about how the church should understand itself - as a system removed from time that preserves eternal truths, or as a system that has itself become historical.

Knop: If one thinks of church doctrine as removed from time, one must not change a single letter of it. Those who still think this way today therefore already consider the request of the Synodal Path to be wrong, to critically question doctrines and structures. But we only know God's will in human interpretation, God's word only in the words of men. Church doctrines and structures did not fall from heaven, they have grown historically. That is precisely why they can also be developed further. If they no longer prove themselves in faith and life, they must be corrected. For they are not an end in themselves.

Question: In 1910, the cultural philosopher Ernst Troeltsch asked in an essay whether the Church only offers the faithful ready-made truths or stands with them as seekers.

Knop: Since the Second Vatican Council, the Church has seen itself as seeking together with people. It wants to implement its understanding of the Gospel in society - always in the knowledge that it is on the way and has not yet reached its goal. This also applies to its institutional form. Historically, the Church has been in a constant state of change. In the process, it has always taken its measure from contemporary politics and society, albeit belatedly. This is also possible and necessary today. We must not lag behind the intellectual or cultural standards of our time.

Even more: as a church, we could actually realise the best of a liberal-democratic culture. Those who recognise God's image in every human being and profess the freedom and equality of God's children should actually be at the forefront of the human rights movement, stand up against discrimination of any kind - and prove this first and foremost in their own context.

Question: Not many people see the Church as a pioneer in these matters.

Knop: Because certain structures are deeply inscribed in the church system. Let's take clericalism as an example, which is recognised as a problematic factor of abuse. Clericalism is not a subjective but a structural problem. A priest who behaves in a clericalistic manner is acting entirely in accordance with the system. This is because the Catholic Church still maintains a corporative society in 2022. The difference between clergy and laity permeates canon law and worship, the power structure and the self-image of the church. A few hundred years ago, this may have seemed plausible and contemporary. Today it is anachronistic: a bizarre special world. This is highly problematic theologically. And it puts priests in the precarious situation of defining themselves not from their vocation and task but from their difference to the laity.

Cathcon: she has form on this topic.   It is not very edifying to see a fully member of the pseudo-clerical lay elite in Germany complain about clericalism.  She speaks in absolutes, she exaggerates the notion of the priesthood of all believers which would ultimately become meaningless, depriving the Church of her teaching office and the Sacrificial priesthood.  It is much, much healthier to have a priesthood of some of the believers, related but distinct from the body of believers.

Question: Another look at the coming synodal assembly in September. What will be the decisive points?

Knop: In the first reading, for example, a text on the introduction of fundamental rights of believers in the church and one on dealing with abuse of adult women will be discussed. Second-reading texts may already be adopted, for example on the consolidation of synodal structures at all levels of the Church, on the compulsory celibacy of priests, on the magisterial re-assessment of queer sexuality and on the corresponding consequences in Church labour law.

It remains to be seen whether the awareness of the problem regarding sinister ecclesiastical concepts and realities that has grown in recent months will now be matched by a willingness to reform and, above all, a will to act. This is where the bishops, above all, are called upon. Overcoming toxic structures, concepts and habits begins in the mind. But to be sustainable, it needs more than the good will of a good shepherd. What is needed is a legally and, if necessary, doctrinally reliable basis. The bishops must stand up for this. Also vis-à-vis Rome.

Source