📖The Nature of the Liturgical Crisis: Rupture instead of Reform
The liturgical crisis that has afflicted the Latin Church for over half a century cannot be understood merely as a matter of "abuses" or a flawed implementation of a well-intentioned reform. The root of the problem lies in the very nature of the reform promulgated by Paul VI, which constituted a fundamental rupture with the received liturgical tradition. The Novus Ordo Missae is not merely a new edition of the Roman Missal, like those that occurred throughout history, but rather a rite constructed by a committee, with underlying principles and a theology that depart drastically from the rite that developed organically over millennia (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. 93, 150).This "fabrication, the banal product of the moment," as it has been described, replaced a vital process of growth and maturation with a technical artifact, created to cater to a specific modern mentality (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. 78). While organic development enriches and deepens what already exists, the post-conciliar reform operated through suppression, simplification, and radical reconfiguration, resulting in a rite that, in many respects, is formally and materially different from its predecessor.
👑Hyperpapalism as the Interpretive Key
A transformation of such magnitude only became conceivable and executable due to an inflated and distorted understanding of papal authority, a phenomenon aptly termed hyperpapalism. This view transforms the Pope, who is the guardian of authentic Tradition, into an absolute monarch whose will is law, treating the Catholic inheritance as his personal possession to be modified as he pleases (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. xxii, 93).
This mentality represents a radical departure from the traditional conception of the papacy. The Pope is not an unlimited sovereign but the primary guarantor of obedience to the received faith. With respect to the liturgy, his role is that of a gardener who cares for a living plant, respecting its internal laws of growth, not that of a technician who builds new machines and throws the old ones on the junk-pile (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. vi, 205). Hyperpapalism ignores that papal authority itself is contained within and handed down by Tradition. By placing the will of the pontiff above Tradition, it subverts the fundamental order of the Catholic faith.
⚖️The Limits of Papal Authority in the Liturgy
The Pope's authority, while supreme, is not unlimited; it is at the service of Sacred Tradition. The liturgy is a "given," an apostolic heritage that has matured in the faith and life of the Church over centuries. It is not something that can be "manufactured" by ecclesiastical authorities (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. 172). Orthodox rites are living realities, born from the dialogue of love between the Church and her Lord, and they condense the faith, prayer, and life of entire generations (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. 96-97).
Therefore, the attempt to abolish an immemorial rite and replace it with a new creation is an ultra vires act, that is, one that exceeds the limits of papal authority. The Pope does not have the ontological or moral power to decree that tradition is no longer tradition, or that a radical innovation should be considered a continuity. The very idea that a Pope could forbid orthodox liturgical forms that have been sanctified by time is "quite alien to the Spirit of the Church" (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. 96). Authority was given for edification, not for destruction, and the suppression of a sacred patrimony is a destructive act.
⛪Edification vs. Destruction: The Purpose of the Petrine Office
The Petrine office exists for the edification of the Body of Christ. A liturgical reform that results in the "disintegration of the liturgy" and causes "devastation" instead of reinvigoration cannot be seen as a legitimate exercise of this edifying authority (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. 78-79). The reform of Paul VI, by systematically discarding or rewriting prayers that expressed doctrines such as the propitiatory sacrifice, human weakness, the necessity of grace, and the danger of damnation, weakened the transmission of the lex credendi (Kwasniewski, 2022, p. 87-89).
Instead of edifying, the new liturgy, with its modular structure, its numerous options, and its horizontal orientation, sowed confusion, instability, and a loss of the sacred. The destruction of received forms inevitably led to a devaluation of the values that these forms contained and transmitted. The crisis of faith, the fall in vocations, and the general decline in religious practice after the Council cannot be dissociated from this wound inflicted upon the heart of the Church: her sacred liturgy.
🧭Conclusion: An Ecclesiological Crisis with Liturgical Consequences
The liturgical crisis is, in its essence, a symptom of a profound ecclesiological crisis. It reveals a conflict between two conceptions of the Church and of authority: one that sees the Church as an organic reality, growing faithfully from its apostolic heritage, and another that sees it as an institution whose form and content can be redefined by the will of the reigning authority.
The imposition of the Novus Ordo Missae and the suppression of the traditional rite were only possible under the premise of hyperpapalism. Therefore, a true liturgical restoration requires more than ceremonial adjustments; it demands a theological correction, a return to an authentic understanding of Tradition as the supreme norm for the entire Church, including the Pope. The way forward is not to attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable, but to humbly return to the liturgy that the Church, in her centuries of wisdom, has bequeathed to us as the pillar and ground of her faith and prayer.
📚References
Kwasniewski, P. A. (2022). The Once and Future Roman Rite: Returning to the Traditional Latin Liturgy after Seventy Years of Exile. TAN Books.