Dozens of South Jersey Catholic Churches Expected to Close

[GladCatholic]

Bishop Joseph Galante (above) made the announcement on Thursday afternoon that the 124 parishes across the southern part of New Jersey were being consolidated into 66

kyw1060.com/Dozens-of-NJ-Catholic-Churches-May-Close/1936946

My parish is scheduled to close–my full, in the black, totally paid for increasing membership parish had the planning recommendation ignored and the diocese has decided we will be one that closes. Seems the smaller, traditional-type parish is doomed because it’s not “large enough” to accommodate vast numbers of Catholics, so we’re being shipped off to circular shaped modern buildings. It’s a sad day in this Diocese. Hopefully, their next step will be to actually do something about the vocation crisis instead of butchering the Diocese further.

Sorry if I sound bitter…what’s being done is exactly what the Diocese under this Bishop wanted, under the guise of it being the “people’s decision.”

GladCatholic

 

[Catholic29]

Very sad!

I wish small traditional parishes wouldn’t have to go, but in light of scarcer clerical resources and redistribution of Catholic populations, this will be the wave of the future in most dioceses aound the country. Unless there is a dramatic upsurge in priestly vocations, driving further to attend Mass at a larger, more modern looking parish, is the bleak future facing many if not most US Catholics today.

The reasons for this are complex and many. But generally is a result of the abandonment of traditional moral and religious values, and dismal fertility rates among Catholics, greatly reducing the potential pool of priestly and religious candidates from what it was a few decades ago.

As bad as things are getting now, I fear we have yet to see the worst.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

When they started closing parishes in the Archdioceses of Boston, many people were shocked and outraged that they would close a parish which was in the black, with growing membership, while they kept open another parish in the same town, which was in the red and with mostly an older congregation.

The logic is, and I think its for all dioceses, that first and most of all, which parish can serve the largest portion of the population of Catholics, especially the poor. Also, they look at real-estate value and what the value of selling of one parish is compared to selling off another.

In one town, the parish which was in the black, had a relatively new building, and was located in the more affluent part of town, was the one they decided to close. The other parish, was near the center of town, was the older cathedral style of church building with lower real-estate value, and was in the red, they kept open.

The logic here was that, everyone in town, poor and rich, could get to the older church, whereas, the newer church, people had to drive and there is no public transportation in town. This would mean, that some people would not make it to that church. Also, the newer church property, will sell off fast and at a good price. The old cathedral style church, in the less attractive part of town, would not sell as fast or for the same type of money. So, it made sense to sell the newer parish.

Jim

 

[Catholic29]

When they started closing parishes in the Archdioceses of Boston, many people were shocked and outraged that they would close a parish which was in the black, with growing membership, while they kept open another parish in the same town, which was in the red and with mostly an older congregation.

The logic is, and I think its for all dioceses, that first and most of all, which parish can serve the largest portion of the population of Catholics, especially the poor. Also, they look at real-estate value and what the value of selling of one parish is compared to selling off another.

In one town, the parish which was in the black, had a relatively new building, and was located in the more affluent part of town, was the one they decided to close. The other parish, was near the center of town, was the older cathedral style of church building with lower real-estate value, and was in the red, they kept open.

The logic here was that, everyone in town, poor and rich, could get to the older church, whereas, the newer church, people had to drive and there is no public transportation in town. This would mean, that some people would not make it to that church. Also, the newer church property, will sell off fast and at a good price. The old cathedral style church, in the less attractive part of town, would not sell as fast or for the same type of money. So, it made sense to sell the newer parish.

Jim

True enough.

I guess this goes to show where there is one point for a parish closure, there are always others. Both equally valid, given demographics and socio-economic conditions are likely different from one city and diocese to another.

And if more Catholic families actually came to church and actually had more babies, maybe there would be a few more young men who would be open to discern the possibility of a priestly vocation, and then possibly more bishops wouldn’t see the need to shutter as many parishes.

Just a thought.

 

[bkovacs]

True enough.

I guess this goes to show where there is one point for a parish closure, there are always others. Both equally valid, given demographics and socio-economic conditions are likely different from one city and diocese to another.

And if more Catholic families actually came to church and actually had more babies, maybe there would be a few more young men who would be open to discern the possibility of a priestly vocation, and then possibly more bishops wouldn’t see the need to shutter as many parishes.

Just a thought.

Maybe if Vatican 2 wouldn’t have messed allot of things up, we wouldn’t be in this position today. It is a fact that church attendance started to decline only after V2, and the liturgical changes.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Maybe if Vatican 2 wouldn’t have messed allot of things up, we wouldn’t be in this position today. It is a fact that church attendance started to decline only after V2, and the liturgical changes.

Please, Vatican II had nothing to do with the decline in vocations, which is the main cause of parish closings.

Jim

 

[GladCatholic]

I’m not going to totally blame Vatican II, but the mamby pamby watered down teachings we’re getting in these parts are not helping vocations flourish. I’d love to see figures on vocations for the Diocese headed by orthodox God-oriented vs. community-oriented Bishops.

GC

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I’m not going to totally blame Vatican II, but the mamby pamby watered down teachings we’re getting in these parts are not helping vocations flourish. I’d love to see figures on vocations for the Diocese headed by orthodox God-oriented vs. community-oriented Bishops.

GC

The fall in vocations, has more to do with our culture, where the decline of morals coincides with the decline in vocations.

If Vatican II had not come, the Church would’ve declined, faster than it has.

The thing is, the Church is being purged of evil and mediocrity. People who are devote, are so, because of their faith, not because they’re conforming to rigid obedience, which was the mind-set before the 60’s.

I grew up in the 50’s and 60’s. I experienced the pre-Vatican II Church, and it wasn’t the way many young conservative Catholics, fantasize over.

Vatican II was called by Pope John XXIII. It was the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that did this. For anyone to say Vatican II is the cause of the decline of the Catholic Church, is to place blame on the Holy Spirit.

Myself, I believe if not for Vatican II, the Church would be on the brink of collapse by now. The Holy Spirit prevented this from happening.

I’m more optimistic about the quality of the Catholic Church today, than worried about the quantity of Catholics.

Jim

 

[GladCatholic]

The fall in vocations, has more to do with our culture, where the decline of morals coincides with the decline in vocations.

But the “culture” of the church itself changed with societal changes because of the religious who let it happen because of their misinterpretation of VII. The culture of the church wasn’t supposed to change and didn’t have to…so I’m hanging my hat on those folks are getting old and close to retirement, and from what I see, the young priests and even those in their 50s are far more orthodox in their teachings and far more “in love” with God than those who succumbed to their interpretation of VII.

GC

 

[JimR-OCDS]

But the “culture” of the church itself changed with societal changes because of the religious who let it happen because of their misinterpretation of VII. The culture of the church wasn’t supposed to change and didn’t have to…so I’m hanging my hat on those folks are getting old and close to retirement, and from what I see, the young priests and even those in their 50s are far more orthodox in their teachings and far more “in love” with God than those who succumbed to their interpretation of VII.

GC

I think you may have a fantasy version as to what the Catholic Church was like prior to Vatican II.

First off, families were much larger than they are today. So of course, more sons were available, to be called into the priesthood. Did Vatican II change the size of the families? No, it did not. In fact, culture did.

Second, in those days of large families, it was the tradition in many of the French, Italian and Irish families, to have one son, enter the priesthood. What happened is, sons felt pressure to enter the priesthood, and the result was that they made lousy priest. Believe me, we had some pretty angry and emotionally unstable priest back in the 50’s and 60’s, because of this. Sometimes having more priest isn’t as good as having less, but with better quality.

I’ll stand by my statement. Vatican II had nothing to do with the decline in vocations. The culture did. In fact, if not for Vatican II, we would be in worse shape than we are now. There’s no way the generations of the 60’s, 70’s an on, would’ve remained Catholic as they did, if not for the changes Vatican II brought.

Jim

 

[GladCatholic]

I don’t have a fantasy of it–I was alive for it…didn’t say it was perfect. I’ll stand behind my statement that “they” (whoever it is) let the culture infiltrate the church. I do know the churches here that provide good, solid teaching using more “traditional” (and believe me, I am not a traditionalist and I don’t long for the Latin Mass–I have an indult parish that offers it everyday not 15 minutes from me) elements in the Mass are full…the minimalist modern structures with priests that are high-fivin’ pals with the laity have dismal attendance. No wonder they have the room to absorb more people, except if they keep on the path that led them to being empty in the first place, they’ll remain empty and less people will attend Mass. If they don’t fix the vocation crisis, we’ll be chopping up the diocese again in another 10 years. Just an observation…

I am grateful though because we’ve a huge parish in a neighboring town with good solid preaching, reverence, chant, some Latin, a beautiful novus ordo Mass and the diocese can’t touch it because it’s got the highest attendance in the diocese and probably is one of the largest in the diocese.

If I understand you right, the vocation crisis is here because people are having less children? I know of a family with 3 sons, nice, traditional, God-loving family raised in the church. Two of the sons are priests.

GC

 

[KathleenElsie]

But the “culture” of the church itself changed with societal changes because of the religious who let it happen because of their misinterpretation of VII. The culture of the church wasn’t supposed to change and didn’t have to…so I’m hanging my hat on those folks are getting old and close to retirement, and from what I see, the young priests and even those in their 50s are far more orthodox in their teachings and far more “in love” with God than those who succumbed to their interpretation of VII.

GC

I agree. The teaching of moral truths seems to not be taught by the priests any longer. Moral and good old “wrong is wrong” just has tended to become “follow your conscience” and “do what feels good”

 

[sojo]

Everyone in South Jersey going through this will be in my prayers. I was attending Mass at various churches in San Francisco when they closed a series of churches there (I worked in SF, but my “home parish” was in an outside suburb), and it was a very painful period. I remember people standing outside their old churches crying, saying 4 generations had been baptized, married and buried there… just so very painful. Many protests, candlelight processions outside locked churches…

Yes, the larger, newer churches with adequate parking will be favored and some of the historic, traditional buildings will be abandoned. It is so sad, but the dioceses is trying to be good stewards with the parish money, and the upkeep on some structures (in San Francisco, Earthquake retrofit was a big issue)… well you know.

Oh gosh, will be definitely praying for everybody – it was simply awful here.

sojo

 

[Cajetan]

Seems the smaller, traditional-type parish is doomed because it’s not “large enough” to accommodate vast numbers of Catholics, so we’re being shipped off to circular shaped modern buildings.

That is very unfortunate.

 

[GladCatholic]

It is so sad, but the dioceses is trying to be good stewards with the parish money, and the upkeep on some structures

Oh, this reminds me of one other thing the diocese under Bishop Galante is doing–we’re going from something like 129 parishes to 66–reducing the parishes because of the priest shortage. Now, it seems to be we’ll have relatively few churches and now a higher percentage of priests not being pastors of parishes–and yet now they’ll be hiring 100 PAID lay people to oversee the various ministries and apostolates–I’m just shaking my head…not to be sarcastic, but it seems to me the diocese doesn’t value the priests they do have and really aren’t interested in generating any additional ones…it’s all about the community and little about God.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Sometimes I think that the priest shortage could be resolved by allowing more “late vocations” … there are seminaries that are full … at least one anyway [Cromwell, Ct.], and it ordains older men. But there seems to be an aversion (by the Church bureaucracy) to accepting older men [single straight men; widowers] as candidates for the priesthood.

 

[sojo]

I don’t know about the particulars of your situation, but is it possible the Priests in your diocese are overworked and begging the Bishop to hire lay people to help them out?

We are in Northern California (rural), no longer in San Francisco, but it seems that the Priests here thrilled whenever a ministry can be turned over to a lay person. These poor men who are so devote to their flocks are flat out exhausted.

Pray for vocations!!!

sojo

 

[sojo]

Sometimes I think that the priest shortage could be resolved by allowing more “late vocations” … there are seminaries that are full … at least one anyway [Cromwell, Ct.], and it ordains older men. But there seems to be an aversion (by the Church bureaucracy) to accepting older men [single straight men; widowers] as candidates for the priesthood.

It might vary by location. Some areas seem to solicit and attract late vocations more than others.

sojo

 

[barbara1949]

How many New Jersey Catholic Churches have closed in the last few years?

 

[gus]

I was under the impression that there has been an increase in vocations.
I keep hearing the seminaries are full.
Actually there was a large increase in parishishes from the 1950’s to the 1970’s
Perhaps parishes were overbuilt assuming continued growth.
I happen to be in a brand new parish which to a degree is being bulit on the projected population increases of my county.
To bad we couldn’t just move one of those beutifull eastern Churches here instead of building a blah building.
Costs are incredible.