Cardinal Alfrink: reformer or destroyer?

"To this day, there has never been a more progressive cardinal in Europe," wrote the German magazine Der Spiegel in his obituary. Bernard Jan Alfrink, participant in the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and Archbishop of Utrecht. He led the most important diocese in the Netherlands from 1955 to 1975. 125 years ago, on 5 July 1900, he was born in Nijkerk.

A cardinal as a projection screen

Opinions about Alfrink are still divided today. Some see him as the gravedigger of the Catholic Church in the Netherlands, others as a pioneer of necessary reforms in the wake of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965). More than almost anyone else, he is a projection screen for the fantasies and illusions of those who demonise him or put him on a pedestal.

No, obedience was probably not his thing. Even as a young priest, Alfrink 's first attempt at a dissertation brought him into conflict with the Church's magisterium. However, his extraordinary academic talent was undisputed, and so he taught as a professor of Old Testament exegesis in Rijsenburg and Nijmegen between 1933 and 1951 - until Pope Pius XII unexpectedly appointed him Archbishop Coadjutor for Utrecht. After the death of incumbent Johannes de Jong in 1955, Alfrink rose to become archbishop and thus the highest-ranking bishop in the Netherlands.

His theological reputation also recommended him for the Council's preparatory commission, to which he was appointed by Pope John XXIII after his elevation to cardinal in 1960. At the Council itself, as a member of the Presidium, he commented on all important issues. His name is mentioned in the same breath as the other western driving forces of the reform-minded Council majority: Suenens, Lienart, Frings and Döpfner. His most important advisor was the Belgian Dominican and lateral thinker Edward Schillebeeckx (1914-2009). Nevertheless, Alfrink's statements were more moderate than radical in terms of the reform wing.

Cutting off the spokesman of the conservatives

The historian Roberto de Mattei cites an anecdote according to which Alfrink cut off the then Prefect of the Holy Office and spokesman for the conservatives, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, during the debate. Ottaviani had clearly exceeded his speaking time of ten minutes with a fiery plea against changes to the liturgy. In response, Council President Alfrink first rang a bell - and then had the most powerful man in the Vatican cut off the microphone.

Alfrink's unshakeable convictions included the image of a more collegial, less centralised church. In this respect, he promoted and welcomed the post-conciliar push for democratisation in the Dutch church - which soon turned into open rebellion against Rome. The so-called Dutch Catechism of 1966, approved by Alfrink, already contained various doctrines that set alarm bells ringing in the Vatican.

The Dutch Pastoral Council (1966-1970), a kind of Western cultural revolution, went even further, calling for the liberalisation of priestly celibacy and the pill, among other things. In the run-up to the vote, Paul VI had asked Alfrink to read out a Roman doctrinal letter and thus set out the Vatican line. However, the chairman of the bishops' conference wanted to leave the decision to the church assembly itself - and remained silent.

Stifling rebellion within the Church

It is pointless to discuss the extent to which he was actually still in control at this time. The fact is that the Vatican promptly accepted his offer to resign on his 75th birthday, as required by canon law - for health reasons, as it was rumoured. In the last years of his life, the ailing Alfrink had to watch as the important bishop's chairs in the country were filled by conservative candidates, thus stifling or suppressing the rebellion within the Church. However, Pope John Paul II did not miss the opportunity to visit the aged cardinal in person during his trip to the Netherlands in 1984.

The strong dechurching of the Netherlands is beyond question. Whether it happened despite or because of the exuberant reform endeavours of the time is open to speculation.