In the action program proclaimed at the congress, it noted
the “insufficiently realized conclusions of the Council,” includ-
ing the insufficient striving for ecumenical dialogue and dia-
logue with nonbelievers. It listed among its tasks “the develop-
ment and spread of the theology of the Council at all levels of the
Church’s operation.”28 This included an emphasis on the Church
as the people of God, a bigger role for the laity, and the desire
to harmonize the execution of legitimate Church authority with
initiatives from below. Among its activities, it hoped to hold
“modernized” worship services for youth, educational lectures,
and public discussions and seminars.
At first, some Church circles were suspicious of the new orga-
nization. Václav Vaško recounts the initial resistance to the DKO
from the seminarians at Litome ̆řice, who suspected the new or-
ganization of being a continuation of the MHKD and presuming
to speak in the name of the Church. Vaško explained to them
that the DKO’s intent was not to speak for the bishops, but rath-
er to press the government into allowing the bishops to take up
their leadership responsibilities in the Church. Among those con-
vinced by Vaško was the future archbishop of Prague, Miloslav
Vlk, who invited Vaško to speak at Litome ̆řice, which he did to
a full house of seminary students who then took the DKO’s pro-
gram as their own.29
The regime, for its part, had mixed feelings about the DKO.
On the one hand, some Communist authorities anticipated that
the DKO, inspired as it was by a modern theology, would take a
positive stance toward Czechoslovakia’s social system, and that
a progressive wing in the movement could play the role formerly
played by the MHKD.30 On the other hand, the government ex-
- Ibid., 67.
- Balík and Hanuš, Katolická církev v Československu, 362n18; the original
source is Václav Vaško’s memoir, Ne vším jsem byl rád (Kostelní Vydří: Karmelitánské
nakl., 1999). - Cuhra, “Dílo koncilové obnovy,” 119–20.
114 JAMES RAMON FELAK