Laity in lieu of pastor

[commenter]

Code of Canon Law, chapter VI:
§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."

What’s the intent of this provision?
In my large US diocese they began appointing sisters and deacons in charge of a few small parishes, now they appointed a lay person to a 1500 family parish, with a grammar school.

The policy is to have one or more priests visit as sacramental ministers, and another in theory in charge. But the one “in charge” of the big parish is well into his 80s. His position is separate from the regular “sacramental minister” in this and other parishes, though he might say Mass of course.

We do have a priest shortage, but we also have lots of tiny parishes with no school, close together. The media has made much of this “breakthrough”, an opportunity for a lay woman.
Was this provision intended for remote mission locations?
@acanonlawyer

 

[TomH1]

I always thought this provision was for missionary areas and not where there was an established hierarchy. i live in the UK and have never heard of this happening. What a lot of our dioceses have done is rather than have one priest caring for two or more parishes is the bishops have merged parishes. Therefore, we may have one priest per parish but the parishes are fewer in number and much larger than previously. However, to the bets of my knowledge no parish has been given over to the care of a lay man or group of lay men.

 

[commenter]

My US Diocese has had a lot of different ethnic parishes in close proximity in the core city, and older suburbs. Some have been closed, some are now 2 separate Worship Sites" under a single pastor, sometimes 2 parishes share a pastor.

People fight to the death to keep older, tiny parishes open, serving mostly seniors.

It is troubling the diocese is using persons other than a shepherd to pastor the “sheep herd”. At least a deacon is (if appointed to lead), like the bishop, in Holy Orders, and is in a kind of unity with the diocese that a layperson is not, even if they have a Masters degree in Pastoral Ministry.

 

[ajfrab]

In our area of the U.S., the term is Parish Life Coordinator. They are not pastors, but should be considered more as an administrator. In our diocese, we have had several parishes where a deacon or a religious sister was appointed the PLC. Priests–many retired or from a nearby monastery, would be scheduled for scheduled Masses and other sacraments as required. Of course, the deacon would minister as allowed by his faculties. And, as the Canon states, pastoral care is directed by a priest who has the powers of a pastor. But the day to day operational functions of the parish are the responsibility of the PLC–with the help of the parish lay ministry.

 

[commenter]

And, as the Canon states, pastoral care is directed by a priest who has the powers of a pastor.

It seems more like having a priest as
symbol. If the priest is of advanced age, not the usual sacramental minister, and not at the parish that frequently, he would likely have little effect on the parish, let alone powers of a pastor.

A better solution would be to use only deacons, or better, to use an active priest as pastor of 2 parishes, or 3 worship sites, directly supervising a lay administrator assisting on some matters.

 

[acanonlawyer]

Was this provision intended for remote mission locations?

I think it’s fair to say that those who were in favor of the norm were from more missionary locales since places like Europe and the USA were not experiencing any shortages of priests in those days (although some could perhaps see problems on the horizon).

In any case, the canon is open to broad interpretation in the sense that it can apply wherever there is a shortage of priests.

The very important document “Ecclesia de mysterio” makes these observations on c. 517.2:

The right understanding and application of this canon, according to which “si ob sacerdotum penuriam Episcopus dioecesanus aestimaverit participationem in exercitio curae pastoralis paroeciae concredendam esse diacono aliive personae sacerdotali charactere non insignate aut personarum communitati, sacerdotem constitat aliquem qui, potestatibus facultatibus parochi instructus curam pastoralem moderetur”, requires that this exceptional provision be used only with strict adherence to conditions contained in it. These are:

a ) ob sacerdotum penuriam and not for reasons of convenience or ambiguous “advancement of the laity”, etc.;

b ) this is participatio in exercitio curae pastoralis and not directing, coordinating, moderating or governing the Parish; these competencies, according to the canon, are the competencies of a priest alone.

Because these are exceptional cases, before employing them, other possibilities should be availed of, such as using of the services of retired priests still capable of such service, or entrusting several parishes to one priest or to a coetus sacerdotum .(75)

In any event, the preference which this canon gives to deacons cannot be overlooked.

The same canon, however, reaffirms that these forms of participation in the pastoral care of parishes cannot, in any way, replace the office of Parish Priest. The same canon decrees that “Episcopus dioecesanus (…) sacerdotem constituat aliquem qui potestatibus et facultatibus parochi instructus, curam pastoralem moderetur.” Indeed, the office of Parish Priest can be assigned validly only to a priest (cf. Canon 521, § 1) even in cases where there is a shortage of clergy.(76)

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...ocuments/rc_con_interdic_doc_15081997_en.html

Dan

 

[commenter]

Dan,

Thank you for your always excellent response. Your usual remuneration in spiritual Bitcoin is on the way @acanonlawyer

Commenter