Good question! I’ve always wondered about this policy. It seems more of a practical, career-oriented policy, but not necessarily in the best interests of the faithful. How are we supposed to be a family if we get a new father every 6 years (or less)?
Our former pastor said that one reason our diocese moves priests every so often is because priests are interchangeable and so the faithful don’t get too attached to any one priest. Our former associate pastor and current pastor basically swapped parishes. When our former pastor finally agreed to be reassigned, it seemed like at least 100 families followed him to his new parish. I know of a couple of people at our parish who come from our current priest’s old parish(es).
But then, dear Catholic wife,could you possibly imagine having to change your husband every two or three years as we have had to do here in recent years with our pastors ?
cooo
that a record. In the Church I go to admittedly Anglican am still wondering if our current priest will last his 5 year contract because we hardly had one for longer the a couple of year. Though like you guys priests can stay forever. I am more used to interregnum than life with a priest though this one quickly found a way for me to ‘speak’ with him and helped my faith grow the way it been needing for over 23 years…This not quite correct:
In the US, the USCCB as clearly permitted a specific period of time
And pastors do have specific rights according to canon law. During their period of appointment, they cannot be arbitrary removed by their Bishop, it must be for cause if they do not want to be removed. We had a pastor moved about a year after receiving his 2nd 6-year appointment letter. The Bishop had to talk him into it.
I understand this, and I definitely have experienced these transitions, including those that have been very difficult. The long-time pastor (20+ years) of one local parish died about 6 years ago. He was a wonderful man and a wonderful priest, but for a long time after his death, the parish bore his “stamp”. It was somewhat difficult for the new pastor to walk in his footsteps, and thankfully the Bishop chose the perfect priest for the transition. He has recently retired, and a new pastor has taken his place. I recently visited and realized that this was no longer “Fr. ____'s parish” . I realize that these things don’t always go well, however, and I’ve seen the other side, too That doesn’t change the fact that this sort of turnover is less than ideal for the faithful, in terms of our relationship to the parish and to the priest. No, the parish is not about the priest, but the priest is not meant to be a mere administrator of sacraments and finances at the parish. He is meant to be our spiritual father, and it takes time to build a relationship of love and trust. There used to be a lot more stability among the people in a parish, as well, with multiple generations belonging to the same parish, for their whole lives. I think the church has typically envisioned a parish as a family, with the priest at the head, rather than the administrative unit that it is the current model.
I was going to say something similar, but you did it more delicately than I could have.
Thank you. Indeed there is something to be said for the “old model” (Western & Eastern alike).At face value it seems like a good idea to use regular priests to “staff” parishes. If there are priests in religious orders and a shortage in parishes then use the regular priests to staff the parishes.
Sure they could be, but who would benefit? Whether one wants to believe it or not, not all diocesan priests are suited to full-time parish work. Yes, the administrative type mentioned, along with those priests who are full-time teachers, can (and very often do) serve as “weekend assistants” in parishes, to help with extra Masses, but to force someone who is not pastorally inclined into a pastoral position would be a disaster for the parish and for the priest himself.
It is very true that not all priests are suited to being pastors. Unfortunately, there are no simple solutions to the woeful shortage of priests. It would, though, be more appropriate if the need arises to appoint diocesan priests to parochial work. They were ordained for the diocese and it’s the diocese’s role to staff the parishes. It might not be the ideal solution. But, IMHO it should be diocesan priests who staff parishes. Unless it’s their charism priests from orders shouldn’t be taken away from their order’s work to staff parishes.
There’s really nothing wrong with a parish being in the charge of regulars, the post-conciliar term “charism” notwithstanding. The Order or Congregation is under no obligation to accept charge of any parish. If they do, they do. It’s their collective decision. And if they later so decide, there are ways that they can abandon it.
There are agreements between dioceses and religious communities. A number of parishes in my own diocese are served by priests from religious communities. It was a suggestion that regular priests be taken from their communities to serve in parishes that I asserted was ill advised. Unless, their community does this it would be as inappropriate to take regular priests from the work of their community to undertake parochial work as it might be to appoint curial priests to pastoral roles.