How long did it take you to get used to your current parish?

[ProVobis]

Saving souls for lack of a better term is what Christianity is all about in the final analysis. It is what we have that no other organization offers!

Definitely! The way I look at it is that we are not a community of saints…yet. For us to think otherwise, we commit the sin of presumption. I believe confession is as important as communion if not more so. Sorrow for our sins (and not ignoring them) will get us past our Immediate/Particular Judgement so we can become in the eternal communion with others.

 

[Faith1960]

As soon as we became involved with our time, talent and treasure it quickly became our home. I’m a firm believer in finding what you can do for your parish. The more you give, the more your heart expands in an abundant love for your parish community.

I totally agree.

 

[HelenRose]

It took some time because my church is a small rural church and it often seemed like I was at a stranger at a family reunion. Everyone was friendly but it was awhile before I belonged.

My advice to myself was.

I think that the time that it takes to become comfortable in a new parish will depend on how much a person can take part.

Washing dishes after dinners is a great way to get to know people.
For me, I can always be in a choir. Instantly I am at home. In and out of churches, I have always been in choirs so this has been a real blessing for me.

Also, within reason, go with the flow. Don’t compare. Just keep your eyes and heart open to the needs of those around you. There are always lonely people in any congregation. There always work to be done.

On a practical side of things, one needs to be aware of the normal human behavior such as the power controlling people who always are present where ever people get together. Take all this with a grain of salt and just enjoy being with the people.

 

[Cat]

Thank you for explaining. I think we are almost on the same page. I certainly do not believe Christian love of neighbor is an emotion and neither is that solid spirituality. It is not based upon whim or the sentiment of the moment. * It is a matter of the will*.

Definitely.

We must always give the Lord His due first (a part of the 1st commandment). In praise and adoration and in prayer (the Mass has been said to be the greatest prayer.) From what is inside on an interior level based upon our positive response to Christ - that is what pours forth and motivates us to do the practical works of charity; the “practical” is the fruit that comes from “love” of God.

 

[ProVobis]

Maybe you don’t call that a treat. I do. If you want to use another more formal word, that’s fine, but I’m OK with “treat,” because that’s just what it is.

Well as the opening to the Mass has gone through hundreds of years, *Introibo ad altare Dei. Ad Deum qui laetificat juventutem meam. * (“I will go in to the altar of God. To God who gladdens/refreshes my youth.”) Treat enough, for me.

 

[UpUpAndAway]

Not really IMO. Confession lines reflect the deeper spirituality of the Catholic community. In my experience I’ve seen priests usually adapting to the parish lifestyle and habits, and not the other way around. Very few will request confession but if they see a confession line, they are more likely to stand in line. If very few are known to attend Mass on Jan 1, as another example, then chances are only one or perhaps two Mass(es) will be scheduled on that day. In a parish of 7000 families, it’s pretty sad that there are so many who don’t take the Holy Day obligation seriously.

Sorry if I was unclear. What I meant when I said “whether people avail themselves of it is another matter” is that the priests can only make the sacrament available. They cannot oblige the parishioners to come and confess. In this parish, the presence or absence of a line for confession doesn’t seem to affect any given person’s decision to confess. If it did, then there would either always be a line or there would never be one. As it is, sometimes there’s a line and sometimes there isn’t. If you can explain this, you’re a better person than I. Fortunately, Father has stubbornly refused to cut scheduled confession times even if no one comes to confess for weeks. (Yes, that has happened.)

I’m not surprised, OTOH, to read your observation on priests adapting to the parish and not the reverse. It saddens me. Priest(s) and parishioners should work together, and this isn’t possible if only one (or worse, neither) side is willing to work out whatever differences may arise. Given the fierce resistance our current pastor encountered when he first arrived in the parish and tried to change, well, everything, I’m surprised he didn’t beg the archbishop for another assignment. :sad_yes: Classic irresistible force vs. immovable object. It was partly his fault for wanting drastic changes all at once, but it was also partly the parishioners’ fault for expecting absolutely **nothing **to change. In the 4½ years that have lapsed since, he’s managed to sneak some of those modifications in anyway. But there is so much that remains to be done, and Father isn’t going to be with us forever.

 

[Cat]

Sorry if I was unclear. What I meant when I said “whether people avail themselves of it is another matter” is that the priests can only make the sacrament available. They cannot oblige the parishioners to come and confess. In this parish, the presence or absence of a line for confession doesn’t seem to affect any given person’s decision to confess. If it did, then there would either always be a line or there would never be one. As it is, sometimes there’s a line and sometimes there isn’t. If you can explain this, you’re a better person than I. Fortunately, Father has stubbornly refused to cut scheduled confession times even if no one comes to confess for weeks. (Yes, that has happened.)

I’m not surprised, OTOH, to read your observation on priests adapting to the parish and not the reverse. It saddens me. Priest(s) and parishioners should work together, and this isn’t possible if only one (or worse, neither) side is willing to work out whatever differences may arise. Given the fierce resistance our current pastor encountered when he first arrived in the parish and tried to change, well, everything, I’m surprised he didn’t beg the archbishop for another assignment. :sad_yes: Classic irresistible force vs. immovable object. It was partly his fault for wanting drastic changes all at once, but it was also partly the parishioners’ fault for expecting absolutely **nothing **to change. In the 4½ years that have lapsed since, he’s managed to sneak some of those modifications in anyway. But there is so much that remains to be done, and Father isn’t going to be with us forever.

The basic rule regarding people and organizations is that young people and new people need to be patient and wait before bringing in any big changes. Little changes will be OK–e.g., changing the furniture around in your new office, or hanging a new piece of art.

But anyone who walks into a company, organization, club, church, or family, and tries to make big changes is cruisin’ for a bruisin’ , as my mother (R.I.P.) used to say! It’s just common place psychology–people don’t want their stuff messed with by someone who doesn’t know them and doesn’t know how the organization works day to day.

Once the new person or the younger person has been around for awhile and gained the TRUST and admiration of many of the people in the organization–especially the “movers and shakers” in the organization–then the new person can start to slowly and carefully change things, making sure that every step of the way, he/she has the support of the movers and shakers.

That’s just the way it is. It’s no use railing against it, because trying the other approach–coming in and sweeping all the “old” stuff out of the way and replacing it with “new” stuff–DOESN’T WORK and ends up in disaster, tears, and often, some form of dismissal or departure.

Frankly, I think it’s a good way to do things. It prevents dictators from taking over. It helps develop trust between people. There are a lot of good reasons to slow down and take your time!

 

[ProVobis]

… I’m surprised he didn’t beg the archbishop for another assignment. :sad_yes: Classic irresistible force vs. immovable object. It was partly his fault for wanting drastic changes all at once, but it was also partly the parishioners’ fault for expecting absolutely **nothing **to change. In the 4½ years that have lapsed since, he’s managed to sneak some of those modifications in anyway. But there is so much that remains to be done, and Father isn’t going to be with us forever.

As the priest collects his paycheck/insurance from the bishop/diocese, he is somewhat limited in what he himself wants. He’s basically the administrator of the parish. It is unfair I think to ask him to change much in the parish. Or even the bishop, for that matter, as bishops are often transferred themselves by Popes, who themselves, resign or die. Parishes OTOH pretty much seem to remain as they have been for the last 40 years or so. In the inner cities this seems to have taken its toll, however, forcing closings and mergers. Outside of this are parishes where the retirees are the major benefactors, basically “stuck in the 70’s,” so it will take time for the younger members with no particular love for that period, to have any influence.

 

[UpUpAndAway]

The basic rule regarding people and organizations is that young people and new people need to be patient and wait before bringing in any big changes. Little changes will be OK–e.g., changing the furniture around in your new office, or hanging a new piece of art.

But anyone who walks into a company, organization, club, church, or family, and tries to make big changes is cruisin’ for a bruisin’ , as my mother (R.I.P.) used to say! It’s just common place psychology–people don’t want their stuff messed with by someone who doesn’t know them and doesn’t know how the organization works day to day.

Once the new person or the younger person has been around for awhile and gained the TRUST and admiration of many of the people in the organization–especially the “movers and shakers” in the organization–then the new person can start to slowly and carefully change things, making sure that every step of the way, he/she has the support of the movers and shakers.

That’s just the way it is. It’s no use railing against it, because trying the other approach–coming in and sweeping all the “old” stuff out of the way and replacing it with “new” stuff–DOESN’T WORK and ends up in disaster, tears, and often, some form of dismissal or departure.

Frankly, I think it’s a good way to do things. It prevents dictators from taking over. It helps develop trust between people. There are a lot of good reasons to slow down and take your time!

For the most part I agree, but what if something has to be changed immediately and there is no time to get used to each other first? We had a few such situations, where necessary change was imposed because there was no choice. It wasn’t that Father prefers things some other way—we should never have been doing what we were doing. (I’m deliberately being vague here.) I get tired of hearing “it’s been like that for 15/27/42 years.” Well guess what, people: it’s possible to do something wrong for 15/27/42 years.

It was never my intention to turn this thread into a discussion on my particular situation, but I have to ask: Everyone got off on the wrong foot from Day One of our pastor’s arrival in the parish, and there’s no way to unring that bell. All we can do is deal with the situation we have today. How? I wasn’t active in the parish at the time our current pastor was installed (I was, in fact, trying to leave the country but you see how well that worked since I’m still here ), and since becoming involved I’ve attempted to be an instrument of peace but there’s been very little movement on that front. If those who are already here before I came forward can’t forgive each other and move on, what in the world are new arrivals to the parish going to think when they see this? How can we present a welcoming image to new parishioners under these circumstances? And who would be off their rocker enough to want to volunteer for anything in a parish that’s essentially at war with itself?

As the priest collects his paycheck/insurance from the bishop/diocese, he is somewhat limited in what he himself wants. He’s basically the administrator of the parish. It is unfair I think to ask him to change much in the parish. Or even the bishop, for that matter, as bishops are often transferred themselves by Popes, who themselves, resign or die. Parishes OTOH pretty much seem to remain as they have been for the last 40 years or so. In the inner cities this seems to have taken its toll, however, forcing closings and mergers. Outside of this are parishes where the retirees are the major benefactors, basically “stuck in the 70’s,” so it will take time for the younger members with no particular love for that period, to have any influence.

With you on all of that. In the past two years I’ve learned more about how this archdiocese functions than I ever wanted to know, and then about three truckloads more.

Come to think of it, I have very few problems with parishioners my age or younger. Perhaps the older members, some of whom have been serving the parish longer than I’ve been alive, feel my presence is somehow threatening to them. Not to make light of that possibility, but I have no more influence in the parish than any other parishioner does.

I also want to clarify that I’m not asking for anything. I do what’s asked of me. It has never occurred to me to speculate on whether what Father asks me to do is coming from him directly or from the archbishop through him. He will often request for my (name removed by moderator)ut on how to implement something new or improve on an existing approach, but in the end I take no action without his approval.

 

[ProVobis]

I get tired of hearing “it’s been like that for 15/27/42 years.” Well guess what, people: it’s possible to do something wrong for 15/27/42 years.

Indeed.

Perhaps the most vocal resistance I’ve heard at my local church is when they introduced the Spanish Mass on Saturday evenings. To this day it bothers some as they feel forced to cut their “cake-eating” events after the 5pm English Mass, as well as clear the parking area. But from what I’m hearing this directive of having a Spanish Mass was directly from the Vatican, not particularly addressed to our parish but to our diocese.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

It was never my intention to turn this thread into a discussion on my particular situation, but I have to ask: ** Everyone got off on the wrong foot from Day One of our pastor’s arrival in the parish, and there’s no way to unring that bell. All we can do is deal with the situation we have today. How?** I wasn’t active in the parish at the time our current pastor was installed (I was, in fact, trying to leave the country but you see how well that worked since I’m still here ), and since becoming involved I’ve attempted to be an instrument of peace but there’s been very little movement on that front. If those who are already here before I came forward can’t forgive each other and move on, what in the world are new arrivals to the parish going to think when they see this? How can we present a welcoming image to new parishioners under these circumstances? And who would be off their rocker enough to want to volunteer for anything in a parish that’s essentially at war with itself?

I have a couple friends who are going through similar situations. In the first case, the person was at a very liberal parish and loved it. They are very progressive-minded as it is so the idea of the women servers handling virtually the entire Mass except the Gospel, the general absolution services and no regular Confessions, the homilies delivered by guest speakers, and the organ being shelved in favor of guitars, drums and recorded KLOVE hits was right up his alley. They got an extremely conservative priest who did away with all the open-minded “advances,” returned them to the “dark ages” and fired the entire staff. I told my friend to not only grin and bear it but to be thankful for finally having a priest who was pointing them in the right direction. He didn’t like my advice, but from what I’ve heard a lot of the parishioners have come around, at least to some degree.

In the other case, the friend’s parish was part of a small parochial region consisting of two parishes that was folded into another region consisting of three or four parishes (so now 5-6 total). The priest in charge of the region is harsh, disagreeable and used to having things his way. He’s made some changes that appear to have been made just for the sake of showing who’s boss and he tends to neglect the other parishes in favor of his home parish. Without going into more detail, it’s a very difficult and unfortunate situation. This friend is very heavily involved with their parish and has no intention of switching to another. In his case I really can’t offer any advice that makes things even marginally better. All I can really suggest is that he ride it out because the overall situation is expected to undergo several big changes in the next 2-3 years, so if he can endure until then, things might be better. They could be worse, too, but at least there’s a possibility of improvement.