Modernist lays out programme to change the nature of the Church and to destroy the priesthood

Theologian Hartmann: Reforms require a shift in how the Church is understood

In a new book, pastoral theologian Richard Hartmann advocates for a different perspective on the Church and its ministries. He calls for greater responsibility for the laity and a debate regarding the future of sacramental life. An interview.

The shortage of priests, structural reforms, and a waning connection to the sacraments are confronting the Church—and not just in Germany—with fundamental questions. Consequently, in his new book Die Kirche und ihre Ämter neu denken (Rethinking the Church and Her Ministries), Richard Hartmann, a pastoral theologian and professor emeritus from Fulda, argues for viewing the Church consistently through the lens of its mission. In this interview, he explains the implications this would have for the question of church ministries, sacramental life, and local congregations.

Question: Mr. Hartmann, why is the book being published now?

Hartmann: The impetus goes back a little while. I published a detailed essay on lay leadership of congregations in an anthology edited by canon lawyers Andreas Graßmann and Wilhelm Rees. I was asked to expand on those ideas. They are certainly not entirely new concepts—but they are ideas that are becoming relevant once again. After all, given the many challenges we face, we need a new sense of direction regarding the purpose of the Church.

Question: In what way?

Hartmann: Structural reforms in the dioceses, the drastic decline in the number of priests—and now pastoral staff as well—increasingly raise the question: How will the Church continue to live in the future, and who will sustain it? At the same time, we are seeing that the celebration of the sacraments is becoming increasingly irrelevant to many believers. If Church leadership fails to address this, the question of the Church’s sacramental structure risks being lost. Here, too, the question arises: Who actually sustains this structure? Is it just the bishops and priests? Or are there other forms that ought to have been considered long ago—forms that even have precedents in early Church history?

Question: So, at its core, is this about how the Church views itself?

Hartmann: Exactly. The Church needs to rediscover its mission. Everything should center on proclaiming the Kingdom of God. And that cannot be achieved through blanket standardization—like the widespread restructuring processes seen in various dioceses—but rather through people who are personally inspired and shape the Church based on that inspiration.

Question: You are therefore calling for a fundamental shift in perspective: the Church should no longer be defined by its existing offices; instead, those offices should be defined by the Church’s mission. What do you mean by that?

Hartmann: The crucial question should no longer be who holds the authority to make decisions, but rather who conveys the faith in a credible way. A faith community does not come into existence simply because a parish priest is present; it emerges where Jesus Christ is present in the sacraments. Priests play a primary role in supporting this, certainly. But the Church needs a different kind of formal ministry. Ever since the Würzburg Synod (1971–1975), there has been debate about how laypeople with permanent mandates can be more strongly recognized as agents of public ecclesial action. While I am not a proponent of attaching an official mandate to every single task, the less priests are able to handle all duties on their own, the more necessary it becomes for other people to receive an official commission.

Question: Which ministries do you have in mind? 

Hartmann: It involves tasks related to the community and leadership, but also ministries of proclamation—such as catechesis—as well as liturgy (leading worship and administering sacraments) and diakonia (service). The work being done here requires official recognition within the fundamental structure of our Church.

Question: You mentioned the sacramental structure of the Church—and critically questioned who actually bears responsibility for it. Does this mean that more people should be able to administer sacraments in the future?

Hartmann: First, we need a new discussion about what a sacrament is and how a sacrament evolves. That is a task for theology and the Church’s teaching authority. But the answer cannot simply be: a sacrament is whatever a cleric administers and offers. Sacraments make God’s presence visible within the Church’s actions. Consequently, we ought to consider whether the role of presiding over the Eucharist must necessarily be tied to the current structure of the priesthood.

Question: What would be the outcome of that?

Hartmann: Twenty years ago, I was in Latin America with a study group. While there, we attended a Sunday service at a base community. It was taken for granted that there were mixed forms of participation—instances where the expertise of the religious sisters who had prepared the service was not simply brushed aside. The priests who concelebrated did not do so merely by virtue of their leadership responsibility for that ecclesial unit. At the same time, it is worth looking at church history. In the early Church, there were different forms of responsibility for sacramental life. The sacrament of penance, for instance, was initially by no means tied exclusively to priests. Such experiences show that development is possible.

First, we need a new discussion about what a sacrament is and how a sacrament evolves. (...) But the answer cannot simply be: A sacrament is whatever a cleric administers and offers. — Richard Hartmann

Question: Within this line of thinking, what would be the genuine role or area of ​​responsibility for the priest?

Hartmann: For me, it is not primarily about areas of jurisdiction, but about the understanding of priestly ministry. In this regard, I certainly affirm my own work as a priest: We are sacraments for the People of God. Through the way we live and bear witness in diaconal and community settings, we are meant to be transparent to the greater reality of God. The primary question is not "What is he able or permitted to do?" Rather, it is about: "Who is this person, and how does his life point to Jesus Christ?" If we take that seriously, the discussion regarding church offices shifts as well.

Question: What role will the traditional parish play in the Church of the future?

Hartmann: In the future, there will have to be diverse forms of church life. Personally, during my time holding a university chair in Fulda, I always enjoyed collaborating with a village parish. At the same time, for decades I have seen associations, spiritual communities, and university chaplaincies that view themselves as vibrant centers of church life. These "dual structures"—existing alongside traditional parishes—ought to be encouraged. Diocesan structural reforms (Fulda is one example) explicitly include elements that institutionalize these non-parish forms of being Church.

Question: Everything you mention sounds like a long, uphill battle.

Hartmann: Yes. I observe two developments here: On one hand, there is growing uncertainty because the old models clearly no longer work. This opens up an opportunity to seek alternatives. On the other hand, a new willingness to engage in dialogue has emerged in many places—something evident, for instance, in the Church’s Synodal Path in Germany. Furthermore, new initiatives are already being ventured outside the formal legal framework.

Question: What is your general view on the subject of synodality?

Hartmann: The dialogue processes have changed a great deal. They have improved the atmosphere and motivated many people anew. However, I also see tensions: some decisions coming from the Curia—such as the recent rejection of lay preaching during Mass—seem to run counter to this spirit.

Question: Yet, both in person and in your book, you come across as very optimistic overall.

Hartmann: Yes. Polemics do not help the Church move forward. My aim is to build on existing developments and reflect on them further from a theological perspective. I have been a priest for 43 years. During that time, I have experienced many conflicts, but also many changes. Time and again, developments were set in motion that had previously seemed almost unimaginable. That is why I am convinced: the necessary shift in perspective is possible. Fundamental reforms will not succeed unless the understanding of Church and ministry changes.

Source