Ethnic Parishes: Necessary or Divisive?

  • Thread starter Thread starter maritain
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

maritain

Guest
Hi,

I would be interested in your opinion on the concept of ‘ethnic parishes’ — that is parishes dedicated to the pastoral needs of a specific ethnicity. At one time in the US the Church was very much divided according to nationality - one was a Irish/Italian/German/Polish Catholic and worshipped with ethnic fellows. In the 50s it was considered almost a ‘mixed marriage’ for (say) an Italian and an Irish Catholic to wed.

Do ‘ethnic parishes’ contradict the universality of the Church or are they necessary to cater for the distinct pastoral needs of different nationalities? Should people worship according to their ethnic group? Is it the business of the Church to preserve the cultural heritage of Catholic immigrants? Or should Catholic immigrants be encouraged to assimilate with Catholics of the host nation?
 
They are neither essential nor divisive.

They are useful, in that they provide for more common identity than just “Catholic”…
They provide the only link to ethnic heritage for many; the generation between that was denied their ethnic language often claim to feel they have missed out. (My Dad missed out on study of Polish in his Catholic School upbringing. His step brother, 2 years older, was taught 3 languages throughout in that same school: English, Latin and Polish…)
 
Well, long ago, neighborhoods were identified by those who lived there. Immigrants tended to live in the same areas with one another, and many walked to church.

Today, at least here in town, Mexican immigrants do tend to worship in the same parishes, but again, those parishes are in areas where they live.

Now, there are Masses in Spanish in these parishes, and those are the Masses the Mexican folks attend. So if there is a divisive issue, it is in lieu of the language. That, imo, is the problem with Mass in the vernacular.
 
They fill up the same need as the TLM. Meeting places for a minority.
 
maritain said:
Hi,

I would be interested in your opinion on the concept of ‘ethnic parishes’ — that is parishes dedicated to the pastoral needs of a specific ethnicity. At one time in the US the Church was very much divided according to nationality - one was a Irish/Italian/German/Polish Catholic and worshipped with ethnic fellows. In the 50s it was considered almost a ‘mixed marriage’ for (say) an Italian and an Irish Catholic to wed.

Do ‘ethnic parishes’ contradict the universality of the Church or are they necessary to cater for the distinct pastoral needs of different nationalities? Should people worship according to their ethnic group? Is it the business of the Church to preserve the cultural heritage of Catholic immigrants? Or should Catholic immigrants be encouraged to assimilate with Catholics of the host nation?
Click to expand...
It is not black and white answer. Common Sense needed, please.Cheers:)
 
laszlo said:
They fill up the same need as the TLM. Meeting places for a minority.
Click to expand...
Thought-provoking.

Although the ethnic parishes in our city are actually quite large compared to the TLM parish.

I would hate for the Catholic Church in the U.S.A. to become like the public schools–forcibly integrating people by making them leave their friends for the sole purpose of having an equal mix of races and nationalities sitting in the pews with them at Mass.

In the U.S., we are free to attend church where we please. I think it’s nice when people can attend with their extended family, friends, and business associates.

It’s important that the ethnic parishes remain welcoming to people who are not of that ethnicity. I attended the Italian parish in our city for a few year (I played piano), and I am in no way, shape, or form Italian! But I always feel so welcome in that parish, and everyone is so friendly!
 
We had those in Connellsville, PA, no doubt they still exist.

The Irish church was literally a stone’s throw from the Italian church (not that they actually threw stones at each other). The Polish church was at the edge of town and the ‘eclectic’ church just up the hill from downtown. Of course, anyone was welcome to attend any of the churches, and the staggered Mass schedules were sometimes a real convenience.

There were also two (or was it three?) Byzantine rite churches.
 
laszlo said:
They fill up the same need as the TLM. Meeting places for a minority./
Click to expand...
That is a painful statement. It’s that way because it was suppressed for so long. I don’t see them as being similar at all.
At_Trent said:
Now, there are Masses in Spanish in these parishes, and those are the Masses the Mexican folks attend. So if there is a divisive issue, it is in lieu of the language. That, imo, is the problem with Mass in the vernacular.
Click to expand...
I agree.

But then again, Protestant churches have had different language churches for a long time. If a mass is in the vernacular, then it should be understood by those who attend.
 
Hmm. I’m an American Indian, or, to be P/C, a Native American, on Mom’s side, which means I am considered a tribal and clan member. (On that side of the family, we’ve been Catholic since pretty much the days of St. Isaac Jogues and company, by the way.) I think my ancestors (some of whom were fairly immediate ancestors) suffered plenty in the “melting pot.” My sainted father was Italian. His immediate ancestors suffered from discrimination and being forced to assimilate as well. Sadly, some agents of the Church were factors in this forced conformity in times past. And thankfully, it was the selfsame Church that ministered to the needs of my ancestors on both sides, and is now encouraging them in the expressions of their cultural identities.

What’s wrong with ethnic parishes? Isn’t a varied smorgasbord more pleasant than a pot of amorphous stew that is so boiled down it’s lost all flavor? Anyways, they all celebrate the same Mass, have the same sacraments, etc. It’s the expressions of popular piety that are the differing factor.

Even various religious orders have their own identities, their own charisms or gifts, based on the charisms of their founders. The Church respects these as well. Why not cultural and ethnic identities, so long as their expressions can be adapted to church teaching?

I love going to ethnic parishes, even those whose background is dissimilar to mine. I love their popular pious practices, and I’m a real sucker for their social events and festivals (especially the music and dancing, and let’s not forget that glorious food!)

The Catholic Church is universal, but that doesn’t mean it has to be completely in lockstep uniformity. That would be the Army. If I wanted to join the Army, I would have done so a long time ago.
 
Its fine to have ethnic parishes.If the priest speaks spanish why would I go there if I speak English.
 
Could one make a parallel between East Catholics and Ethnic parishes? After all, East Catholics were allowed to keep their Masses in part due to local traditions and customs gained over the course of several years.
 
Aramis said:
They are neither essential nor divisive.

They are useful, in that they provide for more common identity than just “Catholic”…
They provide the only link to ethnic heritage for many; the generation between that was denied their ethnic language often claim to feel they have missed out. (My Dad missed out on study of Polish in his Catholic School upbringing. His step brother, 2 years older, was taught 3 languages throughout in that same school: English, Latin and Polish…)
Click to expand...
That was my upbringing as well.

Bilingual and trilingual people seem to have fewer problems in this area. Those who insist everyone needs to know only English (and in their accents, of course) are going to encounter problems, and not only in their parishes.

All-vernacular-all-the-time liturgies are unsustainable in the long-run, no matter how you cut it. A common language which is immutable is needed. Christianized Latin has worked for over 1600 years; I don’t know why it can’t work for the next 1600 years.
 
maritain said:
Hi,Do ‘ethnic parishes’ contradict the universality of the Church or are they necessary to cater for the distinct pastoral needs of different nationalities? Should people worship according to their ethnic group? Is it the business of the Church to preserve the cultural heritage of Catholic immigrants? Or should Catholic immigrants be encouraged to assimilate with Catholics of the host nation?
Click to expand...
it was certainly a new experience from us when we moved to Cleveland upon our marriage and stumbled around looking for a parish. It was a few years before I realized Mass in the Church on our corner was in Hungarian, not Latin or another language.

yes they were certainly needed when they were founded in they heyday of Immigration from southern and Eastern Europe, or the bishops would not have established them. And yes since cultural customs and popular piety are a rich seedbed for faith of the people they should be respected and nourished. The language of prayer is not the language of work, business and education, and people should be allowed to pray in the language closest to their hearts. There was a percepton that the German and Irish priests were not attentive enough to the needs of immigrants, or simply overwhelmed by the numbers and difficulties integrating them in to existing parishes. Bishops then invited priests from the old country to found parishes, and sisters to establish schools, hospitals and other Catholic institutions.

You have to view this in the context of the general hostility to all things Catholic that pervaded American society, culture and politics in those years, and the near impossibility of Catholics having access to education and other social services we now take for granted in a protestant-dominated society.

In that backdrop preserving ethnic identity was part and parcel of preserving faith identity.

they are needed now to serve a new immigrant populations–not only Hispanics but Asian sub-groups like Filipinos, Vietnamese, or Indians and Africans. Where they come from countries where English is the dominant language that is not such a problem but the attitude of existing American parishes, which is anything but welcoming, is definitely a problem bishops must address.
 
ProVobis said:
That was my upbringing as well.

Bilingual and trilingual people seem to have fewer problems in this area. Those who insist everyone needs to know only English (and in their accents, of course) are going to encounter problems, and not only in their parishes.

All-vernacular-all-the-time liturgies are unsustainable in the long-run, no matter how you cut it. A common language which is immutable is needed. Christianized Latin has worked for over 1600 years; I don’t know why it can’t work for the next 1600 years.
Click to expand...
Didn’t quite work out East though, eh?

🙂
 
odile53 said:
Anyways, they all celebrate the same Mass, have the same sacraments, etc.
Click to expand...
That may be, but the understanding must be different if you find non-uniformity in communion and Mass attendance practices. Why, for example, in the Polish community does everyone (divorcees, cohabitants, etc.) go to Mass and about half receive, while in the English community, a quarter of Catholics attend Mass and virtually everyone receives?
 
Melchior said:
Didn’t quite work out East though, eh?

🙂
Click to expand...
I have nothing against learning Greek or Ukrainian, if that’s what you mean. In fact, many Latin scholars manage to work a little Greek in their studies as well.
 
Melchior said:
After all, East Catholics were allowed to keep their Masses in part due to local traditions and customs gained over the course of several years.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s a matter of what’s allowed or what’s not. Maybe that has a lot to do with those cultures not losing their faith? The Polish and Spanish Masses aren’t going away soon.
 
valentino said:
Its fine to have ethnic parishes.If the priest speaks spanish why would I go there if I speak English.
Click to expand...
But if the Spanish Mass is the only one available and you need to fulfill your Sunday obligation, what do you do then?
 
In my town there are (or were) the French, Polish, German, and Irish churches, so there was a lot of separation by ethnicity. However, you know what? At the time they were founded, they all had the same Mass - the TLM - despite the differences in ethnicity. If people wanted to they could hop from church to church and have the same Mass – they’d just be surrounded by different people. Nowadays ethnic church means one that uses a certain language, so it’s an entirely different meaning.

In my experience, ethnic-specific churches (in the modern meaning) divide. That’s how it is at my parish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top