Liturgy Damages the Church?The reformed liturgy promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1969 has caused "extremely serious damage" to the church, according to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. "I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part on the collapse of the liturgy." Ratzinger makes this charge in his autobiography, according to a report by John Thavis and Lynne Weil of the Catholic News Service. The title of the book, published in German, translates: From My Life: Remembrances 1927-1977. Ratzinger says the crux of the problem is that the liturgical reform was "presented as a new structure, in opposition to the one which had been formed through history." Pope Paul VI, however, fully intended the reform to be presented as an organic continuation of the church's 2,000 years of worship. In his Apostolic Constitution, in which he promulgates the missal, he wrote: "No one should think, however, that this revision of the Roman Missal has come out of nowhere. The progress in liturgical studies during the last four centuries has certainly prepared the way." According to the CNS article, exactly what the German cardinal objects to is not clear. He has said elsewhere, however, that he would like to return to having the priest celebrate with his back to the assembly. While some offices of the Vatican might see this as the root cause of the alleged downfall of Western Catholicism, very few ordinary Catholics —even those who hearken for some of the elements of the "good old days"— would want to go back to this practice. However, Ratzinger may have identified part of the problem with the liturgy in this suggestion. He believes the liturgy has become too focused on the personality of the priest, and he may be right. But this is not a problem with the reform. It is a problem with presiding style. Any liturgist —liberal or conservative— will contend that the presider should try to be transparent in the liturgy. Newer priests do not seem to be learning the skills that they need in order to preside effectively. It should be noted that these remarks appear in Ratzinger's autobiography, which has no ecclesial standing as a teaching document. With his high position in the church and his personal closeness to Pope John Paul II, it seems probable the cardinal would have published his concerns in a document that carried a bit more authority if he could have found any support in the Vatican for doing so. Finally, Ratzinger's proposal that the church has been extremely and seriously damaged must be rejected. The church is alive and well. It is, in fact, thriving in places like Africa, Korea and Latin America. No one doubts there are problems with the implementation of the liturgical reform. But that's no reason to throw the baby out with the baptismal water. |