Is the Synodal Path following the special path followed by "German Christians" of Nazi times?

A statement from Cardinal Koch

At the press conference after the Plenary Assembly of the German Bishops' Conference, the Chairman, Bishop Georg Bätzing, accused me of harshly criticising the Synodal Path with a Nazi comparison in an interview with the "Tagespost". He gave me the ultimatum to retract this "unacceptable lapse" and "apologise immediately".

I reply immediately but I cannot retract my basic statement, simply because I have in no way compared the Synodical Path to a Nazi ideology, nor will I ever do so. Rather, the facts are as follows:

Synodal Path not compared with "German Christians".

In the interview, I was asked the question that one could hear again and again "that there are supposedly new sources of Revelation": "The spirit of the times and - let me call it that - feeling obviously plays a role there. Can the teaching of the Church be changed in this way?" I have also tried to answer this generally formulated question in a general sense. It was important to me to recall the Barmen Theological Declaration in this context, because I still consider it important today, also for ecumenical reasons. In order to make the content comprehensible to those reading it, I had to briefly note what this declaration responded to. In doing so, I did not in any way compare the Synodal Path with the mentality of the "German Christians", nor did I want to do so. Just as the so-called "German Christians" - thank God - did not mean all German Christians, I in no way had all Synod members in mind with my statement, but only those Christians who represent the assertion formulated in the question. And I hope to be able to continue to assume that this assertion is not the opinion of the Synodical Path.

Bätzing threatens Cardinal Koch

In order to avoid a possible misunderstanding, which has now occurred, however, to my regret, I have added a second paragraph, which I want to quote here in its entirety, because for me it is the most important: "The Christian faith must always be interpreted in a way that is both true to its origins and in keeping with the times. The Church is therefore certainly obliged to take note of the signs of the times and to take them seriously. But they are not new sources of Revelation. In the three-step process of faithful knowledge - seeing, judging and acting - the signs of the times belong to seeing and by no means to judging alongside the sources of revelation. I miss this necessary distinction in the orientation text of the ." In this context alone, I have formulated a criticism of the orientation text, but in no way criticised the Synodal Path with a Nazi comparison. When Bishop Bätzing stated in the press conference that the signs of the times are "sources of knowledge and for the development of doctrine", then I can certainly agree with him. But sources of knowledge are something different from "sources of Revelation" - apart from the fact that I consider this term to be very problematic in itself. And then immediately the further question arises as to which "signs of the times" are assumed to be sources of knowledge and with what interest.

In this regard, I perceive open questions in the "Orientation Text" and in other texts of the "Synodal Path". And in this respect I am not alone. Anyone who reads the second supplement of the "Tagespost", for example, will notice that similar questions are posed to the "Orientation Text" by an Old Testament scholar, a dogmatist, a practical theologian and a philosopher, all of them university professors of merit. So my critical comment cannot simply be an expression of a completely mistaken theology.

Not the intention to hurt

It was in no way my intention to hurt anyone. I simply assumed that we can also learn from history today, even from a very difficult one. As the strong reaction of Bishop Bätzing and others show, I have to realise retrospectively that I failed in this attempt. And I have to perceive that memories of phenomena and occurrences during the National Socialist era are obviously taboo in Germany. To those who feel hurt by me, I apologise and assure them that this was not and is not my intention.

However, I cannot take back my critical question. I did not raise it out of "pure fear that something would move" and not with the intention of "delegitimising", as Bishop Bätzing accuses me of doing, but out of theological concern for the future of the Church in Germany. For behind my question is the much more fundamental question of what is meant by "Revelation". I do not see this question sufficiently clarified in the texts of the Synodal Path. I would be grateful if this important question were subjected to further theological clarification.

Source