Catholics should end the liturgical war immediately. The Church needs an authentic improvement that will come out of the Constitution Sacrosanctum concilium. The post-compulsory improvement was not faithful to this constitution, and this needs to be seen clearly today. However, all changes cannot be rejected. Cardinal Walter Brandmüller made this call.
Walter Brandmüller is simply a 95-year-old cardinal of the Catholic Church. He is simply a theologian and historian of the Church; from 1998 to 2009 he was president of the Pontifical Committee of Historical Sciences.
In fresh years, the Cardinal has repeatedly been on top of the media.
He consistently criticized Benedict XVI for giving up the office of Peter, and especially how Benedict behaved after his resignation.
He besides powerfully opposed the doctrinal revolution for Francis' pontificate. In 2016, along with Cardinals Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffarra and Joachim Meisner, he sent the celebrated “dubia” to Francis, where he asked for concrete explanations in connection with the Apostolic Adhortation of Amoris laetitia.
In 2023 he directed another dubia to Francis, this time with Cardinals Raymond Burke, Juan Sandoval de Íñiguez, Robert Sarah and Joseph Zen. He asked the pope about issues specified as doctrinal evolution, the priesthood of women, or the blessing of LGBT couples. erstwhile Francis responded Cardinal Brandmüller and the another signatories sent another “dubia” demanding more precise answers from the Pope; the Pope did not answer to this letter.
Cardinal Walter Brandmüller now spoke on the liturgy. On the Austrian portal ‘Kath.net’ he published an extended essay in which he put circumstantial thesis: the liturgical improvement of St Paul VI went incorrect in many respects and is not faithful to the Second Vatican Council; however, those who reject any changes and reject Novus Ordo act improperly without the essential obedience; The Church needs a fresh liturgical improvement which will return to the intentions of the Council Fathers and bring distant the rite faithful to the church tradition, but with changes expected by Vaticanum II.
In his essay, the cardinal pointed out that in Christendom’s history, liturgy disputes were nothing new. In 1667 Patriarch Nikon and Tsar Aleksy I ordered a large liturgical improvement that led to a division in Orthodoxy and the formation of a sect of old rites, existing to this day. In the West, in the Enlightenment period, there were very sharp disputes over fresh singers. In France, the introduction of Missale Romanum in place of the Gallican liturgy. As this subject was summed up, doctrinal and dogmatic disputes are primarily of interest to intellectual environments, wider masses of believers are touched more by issues specified as differences in songs, prayers and so on. Godly formulas, habits – these are things that go very deep, deeper than many abstract theological formulas. This includes experience, hence acute reactions.
The cardinal's student felt that 1 could even say: the more trivial the matter, the more severe the dispute. But that is not the point, he notes, to ignore these things: it is not possible to turn upside down what has been passed on by the past, just due to the fact that individual raises the fashionable slogan of the "desirable thousand-year-old robe" which would conceal actual Christian treasures. We request to be careful and sensitive, not, as he writes, "use bulldozers."
The liturgical improvement of Pope Paul VI recognized the cardinal, but did not go well. The pontificate of Pius XII was followed by the pontificate of John XXIII, and with it a fresh climate in the Church. Suddenly, dialog with Marxism, existentialism, Frankfurt School, Kantem and Hegle began. The time has come for a full fresh knowing of theology – this is the hr of individualism of theologians and farewell to the past...
"This change had serious consequences for the liturgy," wrote the cardinal. "Frivolence, fast development, unbridled individualism – all of this has led in many places to reject the Mass for any of its own products that were complicated by celebrities [...]. The consequence was liturgical chaos and an unprecedented situation: despite the liturgical reform, there were mass departures from the Church," he said.
As a result, communities were bound up to argue this chaos, referring to the liturgy before the reform. "The more arbitrariness and chaos was on 1 side, the more severe was the refusal of any change on the another side," the cardinal wrote.
This resistance, although justified in many respects, was not, in his opinion, established theologically. ‘Novus Ordo was put into effect by the Pope, and so – despite all criticism – it had to be accepted in obedience," wrote the hierarch. As he added, Jesus Christ himself became "obedient unto death--and to the death of the cross"; therefore, in the Holy Mass this Christ's "obedience unto death" is present--that is why the celebration of the Eucharist cannot be celebrated in disobedience.
Unfortunately, the cardinal judged that the situation was not improving over the years. For some, the improvement proved inadequate and remained at its arbitrariness, treating mass very freely. Others insisted on the old ritual, speaking of the Mass of the All-Times. According to the cardinal, however, they forgot that the rite of mass not only developed over the years, but besides developed completely differently in the East and the West, according to the culture of each of these civilization circles. In fact, "the Mass of the All-Times," he acknowledged the purple, are only the words of transfiguration, which are conveyed in the Gospels.
The Cardinal pointed out that between the 2 “camps” there was inactive an “authentic liturgy, conscientiously, on behalf of the Church”.
According to Cardinal Brandmüller, the issue of the importance of Holy Mass has been at the centre of the dispute for decades. Even in the years before planet War II, a view arose as a consequence of modernism, which overemphasized or even absolutized an component of the supper, that is, a feast. This led to and continues to lead to abuse and even to liturgical blasphemy. This attitude, according to the cardinal, is the consequence of the “fundamental misunderstanding of the mystery of the Eucharist”.
After Paul VI's reform, much depended on a peculiar celebrity: he can either conscientiously follow Novus Ordo, but sometimes lets the imagination run chaotic and starts celebrating subjectively.
The Cardinal believes that a number of changes request to be made in order to end the Church's liturgical war due to the increasing difficulties. "Put down your weapons!" he called, referring to the title of the 1889 anti-war fresh Bertha von Suttner. Purpurat has a number of demands.
Firstly, it considers that the language should be "disarmed". There should be no question of the seriousness of the intentions of the another organization to the dispute – 1 should tolerate 1 another and avoid polemics. It should be possible for all to exercise a liturgy in accordance with the rules in force.
Secondly, both sides of the dispute should “supplify and impartially survey Chapter II of the Constitution Sacrosanctum concilium II Vatican Council’. This would let us to see "to what degree post-compulsory improvement has departed from this constitution", which Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre besides approved.
Next, a "peaceful and patient work must be undertaken on a careful improvement of the improvement that responds to real indications Sacrosanctum concilium‘. This should let a timely presentation of a improvement that will take into account the concerns of both parties to the dispute.
"Until then, erstwhile again, for God's sake, put down your weapons!" the cardinal concluded.
Sources: Kath.net, PCh24.pl
Pache
