Are diocesan priests supposed to change parishes?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks! Makes me feel better…as I initially suspected the Code (or one article of the Code) has been taken without regard to the full context of the Code…perhaps the reason the Code should be left to trained and certified Canon lawyers, like the US Constitution should be left to professional Constitutional Lawyers, instead of simple cut-and-paste responses by us armchair Canonists!
 
I am not for sure what you mean by us armchair Canonists (guilty as charged) taking one article of the code out of context. I provided an answer to your issue the first time you brought it up on this thread and while it did not quote 1740 and 1741, it pointed out that they certainly covered the case of sexual abuse by pastors.
 
tafan2 said:
I am not for sure what you mean by us armchair Canonists (guilty as charged) taking one article of the code out of context. I provided an answer to your issue the first time you brought it up on this thread and while it did not quote 1740 and 1741, it pointed out that they certainly covered the case of sexual abuse by pastors.
Click to expand...
No offense meant. Your answer was fine. I never intended a personal attack on you or any of my other brothers and sisters. I was merely engaging in the open dialogue afforded us in this forum. Peace!
 
No offense taken, just pointing out that none of us are suggesting that any pastor who is no effective or has committed any type serious offense should be left in place or has any right to his office. But that is not the same as saying that a pastor remains in his position only at the pleasure of his bishop.
 
Phemie said:
It’s because of this canon that our bishop appoints mostly “administrators” and very few “pastors”. He then has the leisure of assigning them as needed.
Click to expand...
I do not think it is correct for a bishop to appoint a parochial administrator only so he has the leisure to reassign them as needed. A parish is expected to have a pastor. Parochial administrators are needed temporarily while waiting for a pastor to be assigned or due to a priest shortage, etc. But not just so that a bishop can contravene the normal structure of the Church.
 
adgloriam said:
I’m left wondering about those parishes that go 25 years without the sacrament of confession being encouraged.
Click to expand...
Bing!

We have Reconciliation scheduled twice a year: once during Lent, once during Advent. And sometimes not even that much, if our priest ended up being borrowed by too many other parishes to help out with theirs. This Advent, I haven’t noticed a Reconciliation schedule posted at all.

Yes, we could call and ask for a specific time-- but when Mass is at 8 AM, and he drove half an hour to get to us, and needs to drive half an hour to get to the 10:00 Mass at his main parish, you don’t really feel comfortable in asking him to drive here, squeeze in your Confession, and still have time to prep for Mass and start church on time… If you get here extra-early, you generally see them reading their Hours. (Presumably. Maybe it’s some other prayer). You don’t want to throw off their schedule by demanding them to do something else-- you understand that prepping for Mass isn’t just changing clothes.

Under his successors, they still offer Reconciliation twice a year. (Unless they get over-borrowed.) Even so, there’s still minimal participation… it’s very disappointing to see the lack of response, although it’s not surprising, because even the Sacraments classes treat Reconciliation like an afterthought.

So, yes. I understand. We’re poor. We’re rural. The priest is stretched thin over a wide geographic territory, and we’re lucky to have him for the things we do have. I’m grateful we have a parish in the first place.

But— when something gets neglected for 25 years, it gets neglected for a generation. And it’s hard to cultivate something in the children that wasn’t/isn’t present in the parents.
 
tafan2 said:
40.png
westie:
It is however, troublesome that a Bishop cannot overstep the Code, which seemingly sets the table for giving an institutional pass to sexual predators in the clergy if they are Pastors and not just parish priests…seems a change to the Code might be called for
Click to expand...
But this is not the case. Canons 1740 and 1741.1 would specifically apply to any pastor who was a sexual predator:

Can. 1740 When the ministry of any pastor becomes harmful or at least ineffective for any cause, even through no grave personal negligence, the diocesan bishop can remove him from the parish.
Can. 1741 The causes for which a pastor can be removed legitimately from his parish are especially the following:
1/ a manner of acting which brings grave detriment or disturbance to ecclesiastical communion;
Click to expand...
But this still has to be done in accordance with the procedures outlined in canon law. The priest can have his faculties suspended immediately and removed from ministry, but he remains the pastor of that Parish until such procedures (which include appeal rights) have been followed.
 
There is no actual provision that says a priest must be moved from parish to another after a prescribed period of time has expired.

I have heard that in a lot of US dioceses priests can be moved on after six years. I live in the UK and it appears to me we do not have that. Our current parish priest has been with us for 14 years. In my mother’s parish the priest retired last year after being there for 26 years. I am aware of other priests who have been in their parishes a long time.

I think ultimately the diocesan bishop has to look at the needs of the entire diocese, see how many priests he has and consider needs of particular parishes. he moves priests around as required.

I do believe there are provisions in canon law where a priest can appeal against the bishop’s decision to move him.
 
The best priest and parish I have ever seen was one where the priest had been there for over 30 years. Truly “father” to the parish he baptized confirmed, counseled, married, buried, the same people and families. He shared their joy and pain. Isn’t that what the vocation really is about?
 
I will pray for you, despair is a very difficult place to be, to see nothing but “badness” 😦
 
BlockquoteWhen our pastor is supposed to be our spiritual father, is responsible for guiding us to heaven, we think its best that he doesn’t get to know us too well? It really is crazy the more I think about it. On top of that, as your post alludes to, it seems to me to be downright cruel to priests. His parish is supposed to be his family. Oh, but every few years lets yank him away from his family> Blockquote
Click to expand...
Yes, when you put it like that, I have to agree.
 
There is a priest shortage in our diocese. Most of our priests are missionaries. Sad, isn’t it? We now need to bring priests in from countries our priests used to go evangelize.
 
It is sad. Perhaps one of the reasons is that the priesthood now appears to be a career. Perhaps if young men saw their dedicated parish prirst, who had been serving their family with love and heroism for 15-30 years, and actually came to kinew this holy man, they would be more likely to respond to God’s calling.
 
I think that’s a great point about long-serving priests being able to really build that relationship with the families in his parish. That can be a great blessing indeed.

I have seen the other side of it, though—parishes who had the same priest for decades, and things went unaddressed for that long. Then the new priest had a lot of catechesis to catch up on. No, we don’t call them “bread and wine” ministers". No, we do not just go back and grab unconsecrated hosts to add to the tabernacle when the ciborium is getting low. And so on and so forth.

In certain areas where people never go outside their parish, an entire generation or two can end up with a very skewed view of what it means to be Catholic.

I really don’t know what the best approach is. I can see the pros and cons of each. And since I know it’s not up to me, I just try to be at peace with whichever way it goes.
 
Last edited:
My diocese with the previous Bishop, priests changed parishes every 5-10 years, never stayed in the same parish past 10 years unless they were 50+ in age. It was a way they believed to grow the priest spiritually by handling the needs of many different and unique parishes.

Now with the new Bishop this isn’t the case. Priests aren’t really moved much anymore, certainly not every 5-10 years. And new priests are now being assigned as permanent pastors at the first parish they were assigned to after ordination with more frequency, and this was unheard of before.

So it’s however the Bishop wants to structure it
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
Perhaps if young men saw their dedicated parish prirst, who had been serving their family with love and heroism for 15-30 years, and actually came to kinew this holy man, they would be more likely to respond to God’s calling.
Click to expand...
It’s a nice thought, but (IMHO) it’s not realistic. First of all, the flip side of the coin is that, for every “dedicated parish priest who served 15-30 years with love and heroism”, you’ve got priests who are actually the opposite of good examples of priestly life. (And no, I’m not talking about the current abuse scandal.) So, if you don’t move priests, then potential discerners get to see 15-30 years of what happens when a “Spirit of Vatican II” pastor is at the helm. Or, 15-30 years of poor management. Or poor catechesis. Or favoritism. Or poor personal lifestyle choices.

It’s also been my experience that, when a pastor is changed at a parish, the muck gets kicked up and the things that are wrong in the parish get revealed. What’s that quote from Thomas Jefferson? “A little rebellion , now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.” Inasmuch as a change of leadership has the same effect, change is a good thing in parishes, too… 😉
 
My experience in 25 years at our parish, we have had 5 pastors. 1 left after 18 months due to leaving the priesthood, the other 4 were all excellent pastors. My approach would not change the situation of the one who left suddenly. So 4 for 4 is pretty good. I rarely here of people in surrounding parishes who do not like their pastors. So I strongly disagree with your assumption that only half the priests are good examples of priestly life. The vast majority of priests are.

As to Jefferson’s answer, simply out, he was horribly wrong. At a national level, the vast majority if revolutions end up being a bad thing and life goes worse. Politically speaking, change is almost always better when it evolves. In Jefferson’s defense, he made the statement in 1787, perhaps 10 years later after seeing the horrors of the French revolution, or 20 years later after seeing how a failed revolution produced the tyranny of Napolean, he would not have made the statement. But that is speculation on my part, as Jefferson’s philosophy was very inconsistent and it’s almost impossible to know how the man really felt about anything.

As to that ideal being applicable at a parish level,. Not my experience. My experience must differ than yours. Everytime we change pastors, a few people get all exited about the wonderful changes coming, but it actually sets things back a year or two. A new pastor always spends two years figuring things out before he will change anything of some bstance, and those two years of “dead time” simply allows the much to become more ingrained in parish life.

A parish is not a company. Your ideal works in companies and management. A new guy comes in at most levels of management and is expected to kick up the much. It never happens at a parish. Just the opposite.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top