"administrator"

  • Thread starter Thread starter didymus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

didymus

Guest
Again in a recent issue of our diocesan paper were several announcements of priests who had been appointed “administrators” of various parishes.

Is this now the correct term? Whatever happened to pastors? To me the administrator would be the person who runs the office.
 
I may be wrong, but some dioceses require that pastors have a certain amount of time in the priesthood. So an administrator might be a priest who has been assigned as the leader of a church, but can’t legally hold the canonical title of pastor due to insufficient time since ordination.
 
didymus said:
Again in a recent issue of our diocesan paper were several announcements of priests who had been appointed “administrators” of various parishes.

Is this now the correct term? Whatever happened to pastors? To me the administrator would be the person who runs the office.
Click to expand...
A priest who is assigned as administrator of a parish is like a pastor but does not have the same rights and protections found in canon law and can be reassigned more easily.

Usually a priests first assignment to head a parish will be as an administrator. Or if the priest is of a religious order he might be assigned as administrator.
 
ByzCath said:
A priest who is assigned as administrator of a parish is like a pastor but does not have the same rights and protections found in canon law and can be reassigned more easily.

Usually a priests first assignment to head a parish will be as an administrator. Or if the priest is of a religious order he might be assigned as administrator.
Click to expand...
Sadly, we have no new priests here in the Albany diocese so these are all transfers, none are being sent to their first parish. I guess it makes sense if this title makes it easier to reassign a priest because right now we are going thru a lot of parish closings and consolidations.

Part of what bugs me is seeing on parish bulletins:
Fr. John Smith, Administrator
Mary Jones, Assistant Administrator

which seems to imply a near-equality Fr. Smith & Ms. (in some cases Sr.) Jones.
 
During a time period when we were between bishops, pastors could not be assigned, but admnistrators could be appointed. For what its worth.
 
didymus said:
Sadly, we have no new priests here in the Albany diocese so these are all transfers, none are being sent to their first parish. I guess it makes sense if this title makes it easier to reassign a priest because right now we are going thru a lot of parish closings and consolidations.

Part of what bugs me is seeing on parish bulletins:
Fr. John Smith, Administrator
Mary Jones, Assistant Administrator

which seems to imply a near-equality Fr. Smith & Ms. (in some cases Sr.) Jones.
Click to expand...
It is near equality. but only as far as the technical administration of the parish goes, no where close when it comes to the Spiritual care of the Faithful.
 
Are any of these part of a ‘cluster’ that shares a priest.

This is sometimes done within diocese. There will be a 'Parish Life Administrator" that handles most of the budget, staffing, scheduiling, etc… with a priest who is responsible for overall supervision and the Sacramental needs of the parish. This same priest will have the same responsiblilty over 2 or 3 other parishes as well.

Sometimes, this “PLA” is a lay person, in the ArchDiocese of Detroit (where I live), only a Deacon may serve in this role.
 
In our diocese those that are label “administrators”" have several parishes that they are over seeing.

Or they are an “acting” pastor because the current pastor is on extended leave.

Ex: Pastor being on sabbatical.
 
Around here, they seem to appoint administrators as soon as a pastor leaves, then the administrator later becomes the pastor. It’s like an audition - if things work out with you and the parish, you’ll get to be pastor. If not, you can leave without much trouble.

Just my observations - nothing official.

Betsy
 
baltobetsy said:
Around here, they seem to appoint administrators as soon as a pastor leaves, then the administrator later becomes the pastor. It’s like an audition - if things work out with you and the parish, you’ll get to be pastor. If not, you can leave without much trouble.

Just my observations - nothing official.

Betsy
Click to expand...
I’ve seen this happen around here too, especially in cases where the parish has a reputation of being filled with ‘difficult’ parishioners. If an administrator seems to be a good fit for a parish then he will probably be named pastor.
 
In the Dallas diocese we have commonly seen priests assigned as administrators while the search was on for the actual pastor who would be assigned. We currently have our retiring bishop acting as pastoral administrator for the diocese until the new bishop is officially installed in about a month.

My parish lost our priest to illness a few years back and the bishop’s assistant, a very experienced priest who used to be the president of a Catholic university stepped in until our current pastor could be spoken with and wrap up his business in another parish. We are a huge parish with the 2nd highest mass attendance after the cathedral and quite a lot going on, so I think the bishop wanted to have someone experienced in charge during the transition of a few months.
 
What exactly is a “pastoral administrator”? Does it have to be a priest? Does it entail a certain amount of education?
 
A pastoral administrator can these days be a confusing term, Holland. Some parishes use the term to describe the DRE or Secretary or Parish Sister, some to describe an acting pastor. So there’s not exactly a set definition of the term.
 
didymus said:
Again in a recent issue of our diocesan paper were several announcements of priests who had been appointed “administrators” of various parishes.

Is this now the correct term? Whatever happened to pastors? To me the administrator would be the person who runs the office.
Click to expand...
In the proper sense, a parish (parochial) administrator is and must be a priest, appointed to provide pastoral care for a parish on some temporary basis. A few canons are more relevant than others.

Canon 515 §1. A parish is a certain community of the Christian faithful stably constituted in a particular church, whose pastoral care is entrusted to a pastor (parochus) as its proper pastor (pastor) under the authority of the diocesan bishop.

Canon 539:When a parish becomes vacant or when the pastor is prevented from exercising his pastoral office in the parish due to captivity, exile, banishment, incapacity, ill health, or some other cause, the diocesan bishop is to appoint as soon as possible a parochial administrator, that is, a priest who substitutes for the pastor in accord with the norm of can. 540.

Canon 540:§1. A parochial administrator is bound by the same duties and enjoys the same rights as a pastor unless the diocesan bishop determines otherwise. §2. A parochial administrator is not permitted to do anything which can prejudice the rights of the pastor or harm parish goods. §3. After he has fulfilled his function the parochial administrator is to render an account to the pastor.

A “parish/parochial/pastoral administrator” who is not a priest is an different matter, since the full pastoral care of a parish involves priestly powers to celebrate the Eucharist and absolve from sins. Those kinds of terms could easily be seen to confuse the distinction between the ordained priesthood who can exercise and provide pastoral care, and others who can “participate” in pastoral care.

But, it may been used in some places to describe the deacon or lay person mentioned in canon 517 §2 ( If, because of a lack of priests, the diocesan bishop has decided that participation in the exercise of the pastoral care of a parish is to be entrusted to a deacon, to another person who is not a priest, or to a community of persons, he is to appoint some priest who, provided with the powers and faculties of a pastor, is to direct the pastoral care.)

See the instruction “On Certain Questions . . .” regarding the somewhat sticky issue of titles and nomenclature at vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/laity/documents/rc_con_interdic_doc_15081997_en.html
 
Is there any reason why a priest would be called an administrator for 5 years, and not be eventually called a pastor? Why would a parish keep the same priest as administrator that long without him being made a pastor or replaced by someone who is called a pastor?
 
Where I formerly lived, the pastor became ill enough that he could not carry the full workload. An experienced former associate pastor was assigned back to the parish as administrator, eventually was named pastor, and the older, now-disabled priest remained in residence as pastor emeritus.

I’ve noticed that where I live now, priests who were formerly called associate or assistant pastors are now called “parochial vicars”. Am not certain if this is important or playing with words.
 
Thanks, everyone for your answers.
Looking at the parishes in the diocese that have websites, the pastor/administrator distinction does seem to be whether the priest has been there a long time.
I did notice that my former parish styles their priest “sacramental minister”. Not an official title, perhaps, but it does make clear why you need him.
 
mystified said:
Where I formerly lived, the pastor became ill enough that he could not carry the full workload. An experienced former associate pastor was assigned back to the parish as administrator, eventually was named pastor, and the older, now-disabled priest remained in residence as pastor emeritus.

I’ve noticed that where I live now, priests who were formerly called associate or assistant pastors are now called “parochial vicars”. Am not certain if this is important or playing with words.
Click to expand...
It was a change in the nomenclature of the law to indicate the role more properly.

Canon 545 describes the parochial vicar.
 
A priest, who acts as the pastor but is called an administrator, can be called such for several reasons:
  1. The priest is not incardinated into the diocese, meaning, they are a priest of another diocese or religious order.
  2. They have temporarily taken care of the parish. For example, if a priest is unexpectedly transfered or dies, an administrator is assigned until a pastor can be.
  3. The church is a mission, which does not have pastors. It has administrators. Mission church’s pastors are the pastors of whatever parish that church is a mission of. (get that? 🙂 )
A parish administrator, pastoral administrator, pastoral assistant, parish assistant, parish flack, etc. can be many things, but they generally refer to a layman or deacon who takes on some pastoral duties, such as religious education. They also may take on some of the temporal duties of the parish, such as managing facilities, making sure the bills get paid and doors unlocked and managing office staff. In any case, this isn’t a formal position that can be found in any formal church document. When the Church Universal speaks of “administrators”, she is speaking of priests who are, for whatever reason, not pastors but have care of a parish or diocese (for when a bishops is removed or retires and a successor has not yet been named). The layman who fills a pastoral associate position can be hired and fired at the pleasure of the pastor or ACTUAL administrator.

Hope that clears a little up.

Adam
 
In the canons, the term parochial administrator refers only to a priest, although the term does seem to have a wider informal use as Adam notes.

A couple of small clarifications might be taken into consideration here, though.

Incardination is not a requirement for a priest to be appointed as pastor. The diocesan bishop may appoint an extern, legitimately residing and ministering in the diocese, or a member of a religious institute, under similar conditions, as pastor. The fact of not being incardinated or being a “religious priest” does not result in any automatic status as parochial administrator. It is determined from the condition presented in canons 539-540 as indicated.

In examining the use of the term for missions, the bishop would refer to canon 516 §2. When certain communities cannot be erected as a parish or quasi-parish, the diocesan bishop is to provide for their pastoral care in another manner. The law does not indicate any particular nomenclature for this. But while this is not the same situation as described in canons 539 and 540, nothing would seem to prevent a diocesan bishop from applying the same term in such a case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top