- Status
C
curlycool89
Guest
Even though that’s fairly vindictive of them, I think the towns are on the correct side of the law. The Bishop really just needs to remind these parishioners that he is the Church in that diocese and he can close and merge parishes if he wishes.
B
Bob_Aliano
Guest
One of those churches, St. Michael’s in Lynn, is where my parents were married, where I was baptized and where the Polish side of my family attended for at least sixty years.
The bishop, at least his legal staff, should have seen this coming and sold those properties as soon as he closed them. This will likely lead to copy-cat tax attempts across America since many other parishes in several cash-strapped states were closed as well. Child abuse by rogue priests, the pain just keeps on and on and on…
The bishop, at least his legal staff, should have seen this coming and sold those properties as soon as he closed them. This will likely lead to copy-cat tax attempts across America since many other parishes in several cash-strapped states were closed as well. Child abuse by rogue priests, the pain just keeps on and on and on…
D
Digitonomy
Guest
"curlycool89:
What parishioners? These parishes have already been shuttered or merged.
What parishioners? These parishes have already been shuttered or merged.I’m not sure it’s vindictive. While I’m not familiar with the political and economic situation for the area in the article, I recall one city I lived in was unhappy with the slow pace of downtown redevelopment. It was mentioned that the low property taxes were one cause, since there was little cost for property owners to just sit on their properties and wait years for value to go up before putting them to use. Higher taxes would presumably induce property owners to rent or sell in order to either cover the cost of taxes, or escape them.
D
Dale_M
Guest
In two of the churches, St. Frances X. Cabrini in Scituate and St. Jeremiah in Framingham, former parishioners are squatting and holding prayer vigils to protest the closure of their former church. This has been going on for at least a couple years.
S
Santi2
Guest
Could they not invite a priest to celebrate Mass once in a while? That way, nothing would contravene “use” as it would still remain a place of worship. There’s a Church in the borough where I used to live where Mass is celebrated once a month because the Catholic community in the area has significantly diminished. But, the Church is still there and maintained by faithful, elderly parishioners.
E
EmperorNapoleon
Guest
It’s very sad to me, even as a non-Catholic, to see these beautiful cathedrals being left to rot until they become so dilapidated and such a safety hazard that the city is left with no choice but to demolish them. This is happening all over the country. Why doesn’t the Church sell them so they can, at least in part, be preserved? Or perhaps the town would be open to the idea of allowing the properties to remain tax exempt so long as whatever money that would have been collected from taxation goes towards the upkeep of the property.
B
Bruce_in_Iloilo
Guest
Selling doesn’t necessarily mean preservation. More often than not sold churches are torn down or turned into condos or other uses, most likely the former.
Often one of the top reason for closing the churches is the cost of maintaining the buildings (e.g. fixing leaky roofs and windows, bringing them up to code, etc.) especially given how few use them. Should the church really pour good money after bad to keep expensive buildings dormant?
The Archdiocese clearly needs to decide what to do with these buildings. The question is how long should that take. I think that we should give them more than a few years, especially since the closing and merging process is still continuing. Afterall some of these properties are irreplaceable, not only the buildings but the land and location themselves. Once they are sold, unless they are sold to another church, they will be gone forever. I am not sure that a 2,000+ year old organization should rush such decisions so that they are done within a few years. They should make sure the buildings don’t become eye-sours or dangerous but they should be allowed to take their time.
Whether the towns are on the right side of the law, they are clearly violating the spirit of the law and have adopted a counter-productive policy. Towns shouldn’t be taking money from the Church, which could be used by the Church for a number of public-benefiting projects – that’s the reason to the tax exemption. Churches and other charities provide important public services, often better and more efficiently than governments. Taxing charities makes it more difficult for them to do good work. Of course, town employees would go after charities; they are trying to protect their jobs. Understandable but in the long run, not good public policy.
C
curlycool89
Guest
I’m sorry, that should have been protestors. The Bishop owns the buildings, kick them out all ready (I’m sorry if that’s cold, but as the Ordinary for the diocese, you need to draw the line and remind the faithful who’s in charge).
They have asked, and the Bishop has declined. I believe it said they were appealing to the Vatican (I’m not really sure how, I didn’t think the Vatican dealt with things like this).
T
thealtonroute
Guest
Good! I hope states across the country tax every closed Catholic church. Many of these churches never should have been closed in the first place. Churches should belong to the parishioners who maintain them, not to a bishop!
S
Santi2
Guest
Thanks. It’s a shame that they found the need to appeal against the Bishop’s decision in that way. Unfortunately, and sadly, when the Parish community diminishes to a trickle, as with the accompanying funds to maintain bricks and mortar, the only alternative is closure.
On the matter of taxation, change of use is paramount over here, which I presume is the same over there. And, it does not seem to be the case that change of use has been implemented. Just closed. Closure does not change the status as it is not dissimilar if the Church were to undergo massive refurbishing and parishioners had to attend another Church in the meantime. Perhaps, the Bishop can appeal “re-organisation” with tax authorities until he can decide what to do with unused Churches?
There are old and unused Churches over here which have been deconsecrated and sold off to property developers. I am quite uneasy about that but, only because some Churches have tombs in them and around grounds. Some are removed but, some purchasers take the property “as is”. I do not think I could live with the latter.
T
thealtonroute
Guest
Some of the parishes closed in the Boston Archdiocese were among its wealthiest. St. Pat’s in Cleveland, OH, was just closed this past Sunday, despite having 1000 or so parishioners.
C
curlycool89
Guest
Actually, canonically all property in the diocese belongs to the bishop and no one else.
T
thealtonroute
Guest
I know property belongs to the bishop, but it’s not right at all. There is some sort of exception for renovation, but in a case close to home a parish remodeled its church extensively and shortly after completion was told it would close. Bishops will learn to behave only when control of property is stripped away from them and priests.
C
curlycool89
Guest
“Bishops will learn to behave”? The Bishop is the Church. Who are you that you can think you can tell a bishop how to behave?
L
Lutheranteach
Guest
I’m not sure making them pay property tax on the those properties is really proper, however, I do think any city would and should expect the diocese to keep the properties, secure and maintained until sold or if the diocese chose to, raze the buildings and maintain the lots.
T
thealtonroute
Guest
There are more than a few bishops who have behaved terribly. It’s up to the laity to watch these guys. Look at the mess the Catholic Church in Ireland finds itself. The Boston Archdiocese was pillaging parishes because it was broke.
- Status