Parish registration

[CMatt25]

Ok so this is confusing.

Easter Joy, had you not registered at your geographical parish but at another within your diocese, would you then be considered a member or parishoner of the parish you registered?

And it was said earlier only the geographical parish is obligated in the case of a funeral for instance. In your diocese, there would be no problem having a funeral wherever the person was registered?

And this all varies by diocese?

 

[CMatt25]

OK, sure.

Seriously, though, choose the parish that you want to bury you (should that be necessary before you move), register there, be active there, and make certain you contribute to the support of that church.

Easter Joy this is what I find confusing. Fr David said only the geographical parish is obligated in the case of a funeral for instance. But are you saying if you register at another, are active and donate, then there will be no problem being served by the parish one is registered at even if not the geographical?

 

[Pug]

Easter Joy this is what I find confusing. Fr David said only the geographical parish is obligated in the case of a funeral for instance. But are you saying if you register at another, are active and donate, then there will be no problem being served by the parish one is registered at even if not the geographical?

It depends on what is done in your diocese. The parish where you have registered, donated, and actively participated for a zillion years could refuse to do a funeral for you. In my diocese this supposedly doesn’t happen, but it could change.

Not that I’ll notice because I’ll be dead. My spouse would be upset, however. We’ve gone to the same parish almost our entire marriage, and we know many people there. I suppose we’ll get older and sicker, have to go into assisted living, move, have one or both of us die, and be completely disconnected from whatever parish buries us. The parish will be a stranger to us. But attending a different parish now won’t prevent this.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I have the same question CMatt25 has. Also, parishes in my region vary hugely, and I mean hugely. The geographical parish which I believe is closest to me:

(1) has very few Mass times, and almost no confession times. (And I’m sorry but I need both, rather frequently) What is posted as confession times does not take place.
(2) of the Masses that are said there, most are not in English. Ditto for simlar nearby parishes. (I live in a heavily ethnically diverse region.) I don’t happen to speak those languages, and there are no Latin Masses at “my” geographical parish.
(3) the church is almost always locked, except for liturgy. One can’t go and make a visit; also there is never adoration. The building is practically a fortress; it’s inaccessible most of the time. The opposite of welcoming and encouraging.

But only 8 minutes from my house is a beautifully traditional parish with N.O., E.F., and O.F. Masses, Confessions 7 days/week, and saintly priests. Adoration, all the devotions, etc. Congregation speaks English, and there are occasionally Europeans who go there, but I can understand the French and their accents. I go there several times a week.

Why, again, can’t I be a member? Because it is religiously and culturally appropriate for me?

(OK)

 

[Pug]

I have the same question CMatt25 has. Also, parishes in my region vary hugely, and I mean hugely. The geographical parish which I believe is closest to me:

There is absolutely no guarantee that your geographical parish is the one closest to you. In fact, it may be fairly illogical from a distance perspective. Ours divides based on roads, rivers and all sorts of things. You can be living in one town and be supposed to go the the parish in another town, even if you never naturally go to that other town for any reason (except forced by parish bounds). Probably it is also balanced by things like population, since our boundaries were redone recently. If the boundary between two dioceses falls inside a town, you also might not guess your parish correctly.

In other words, don’t assume. You must check. Do not assume your parish knows its own boundaries. Until recently, my local parish sometimes seemed rather clueless on the issue. You need to ask your diocese to be sure.

 

[Elizabeth502]

There is absolutely no guarantee that your geographical parish is the one closest to you. In fact, it may be fairly illogical from a distance perspective. Ours divides based on roads, rivers and all sorts of things. You can be living in one town and be supposed to go the the parish in another town, even if you never naturally go to that other town for any reason (except forced by parish bounds). Probably it is also balanced by things like population, since our boundaries were redone recently. If the boundary between two dioceses falls inside a town, you also might not guess your parish correctly.

In other words, don’t assume. You must check. Do not assume your parish knows its own boundaries. Until recently, my local parish sometimes seemed rather clueless on the issue. You need to ask your diocese to be sure.

Thanks, Pug, but I believe I checked quite awhile ago, and thus my post was mostly rhetorical, to make a point. Ironically, for sentimental reasons I would have preferred that this be the parish most appropriate for me, since it was my mother’s parish and where she got married. But it is 180 degrees today from what it once was, as is the safety of that neighborhood, etc.

 

[StJudePray4Me]

FrDavid96 said:

For years people said “it doesn’t matter” or “I’ll do as I please” (often the advice given here on these forums, mind you). The Archdiocese realized that this had become a problem, and had to fix it. Those people who said “I’ll just do as I please” are now very surprised when they need to go to their proper parish, they go to the wrong parish and make “demands” of the pastor, only to be told that they have to go to their own parish. They say things like “I’ve been registered here for years” or “I’ve been going to Mass here for years” but that doesn’t change things because they’re not approaching their own proper parish.

Hi there

I just wanted to point out that this is important as well, in combating the “cult of personality” that can sometimes grow up around a particularly well-liked priest. People become more focused on this priest and will “follow” him to his next parish, and the next, etc.

I know a few people who have done this, and it always bothered me. We had a well-loved priest when I first joined the Parish, and when he retired & was replaced, there was griping about our new pastor: “He is not as nice as Fr. LoveHim! He isn’t good with the kids as Fr. LoveHim! He is boring, Fr. LoveHim was never boring!” and a few people even said they were going to change Parishes.

I also know 2 families in a different diocese who have followed a particular priest to 2 new parish assignments. He is kind of radical and appeals to those who don’t like the rules, if you know what I mean.

 

[FrDavid96]

I have the same question CMatt25 has. Also, parishes in my region vary hugely, and I mean hugely. The geographical parish which I believe is closest to me:

(1) has very few Mass times, and almost no confession times. (And I’m sorry but I need both, rather frequently) What is posted as confession times does not take place.
(2) of the Masses that are said there, most are not in English. Ditto for simlar nearby parishes. (I live in a heavily ethnically diverse region.) I don’t happen to speak those languages, and there are no Latin Masses at “my” geographical parish.
(3) the church is almost always locked, except for liturgy. One can’t go and make a visit; also there is never adoration. The building is practically a fortress; it’s inaccessible most of the time. The opposite of welcoming and encouraging.

But only 8 minutes from my house is a beautifully traditional parish with N.O., E.F., and O.F. Masses, Confessions 7 days/week, and saintly priests. Adoration, all the devotions, etc. Congregation speaks English, and there are occasionally Europeans who go there, but I can understand the French and their accents. I go there several times a week.

Why, again, can’t I be a member? Because it is religiously and culturally appropriate for me?

(OK)

Elizabeth,

The reason why you can’t “be a member” is because a parish is a geographic location–not just a church building. It’s like I said earlier about state lines. Parish lines work the same way. If you don’t live there, you’re not a member–no matter what else. Registration doesn’t change this. In some parishes, people can be “registered non-parishioners” (that’s not an ecclesial term, but a simple description).

You can visit those other parish churches all you want–nothing, repeat nothing, wrong with that.

 

[Em_in_FL]

We’re actually “registered members” at two parishes.
Our “home parish” is across the street from where we live… we go to Mass there, send our kids to school there, have sacraments there, and send the majority of our donations there.
Our “other parish” is one that DH goes to daily Mass to on his way to work (convenient location). He’s established a very good relationship with the priests there, and actually prefers them to our home parish priests. We do give a monthly donation to this parish as well. So we’re on their mailing list and we get donation envelopes to this parish as well.

 

[FrDavid96]

Ok so this is confusing.

Easter Joy, had you not registered at your geographical parish but at another within your diocese, would you then be considered a member or parishoner of the parish you registered?

And it was said earlier only the geographical parish is obligated in the case of a funeral for instance. In your diocese, there would be no problem having a funeral wherever the person was registered?

And this all varies by diocese?

They’re not considered members of that other parish. The bishop’s current policy is to extend them courtesies as if they were members and that’s a key point–as if they were members. That’s his policy, and it’s his decision to make. He can do this because as long as they’re residents of his diocese, they are all his own parishioners, and he can extend faculties/delegation to any priest to witness marriages of his parishioners. The thing we have to keep in mind though is that the bishop is making an exception to canon law (a legitimate one that he has every right to make). He’s being generous in how the parish boundaries are applied with regard to marriages. He can withdraw that privilege at any moment. Some future bishop can likewise withdraw it.

It might not be the same way in the future. There is no guarantee that it will be, and considering the overall pattern we’re seeing in the US, and the acute shortage of priests, the most likely scenario is that in the future these boundaries will be enforced more strictly rather than less.

Similar policies existed in many dioceses in the US, especially those that had a large number of ethnic parishes. Even when these parishes ceased to be ethnic parishes canonically (even though the cultural aspects were still preserved) people were still allowed to register and be considered members. With so many churches closing, combining, etc. in the past couple of decades, many of those dioceses have had to enact policies strictly enforcing canon law with regard to boundaries. And that’s exactly where people have encountered problems. Most of those people just assumed that they would be able to have baptisms, weddings, funerals, etc. at what they considered to be their parish; then when the time came, they learned the hard way that they had to go through their own proper parish. It’s happening right now in many places in the US.

 

[FrDavid96]

Do I know what the policies are in our archdiocese right now? Yes. I literally called the chancery office, and was told to choose a parish. If I register in a parish and am active as a parishioner, by the direction of the archbishop I will be treated as if I have domicile there. The permission required exists, and is clearly stated in the marriage and funeral policies. A pastor who doesn’t like it will have to take it up with the archbishop, not the other way around.

Does this apply to someone who wants to register at a parish in the Diocese of Baker when he lives in the Archdiocese of Portland, or vice versa? I have no idea. Can I guarantee that things are not going to change when Archbishop Vlazny retires? No. Is that relatively soon? Yes. Do I expect his successor to change this? No. Does his policy in our archdiocese have a thing to do with anywhere else? No. Does this even have anything to do with me? No…because I chose to attend my true geographic parish.

Yes, by canon law the faithful have certain rights within their territorial parish that they do not have everywhere. I can say with certainty that there will be no need for permission from anyone to have me buried in my own parish. You are right: it is important for the faithful to realize that if they are granted permission to have access to the sacraments in other places that this is by the permission of their bishop, and that this may change. This does not mean that telling people that the bishop currently grants that permission freely is paramount to telling people to “disregard canon law.” It would be so if the permission were not being granted, it would be so if it were implied that what people have in parishes outside their geographic parish is theirs by right. In our archdiocese, though, it is not.

You ask, *“when the time comes that you have some problem or difficulty because you decided to heed their advice and just “do as you please” where will those people be?” *What is that problem going to be? That the OP is required to go to a parish he doesn’t want to go to? How is going to a parish he doesn’t want to go to right now going to change that? That he might go to some huge popular parish and find that it is closing because no one on the rolls live in its boundaries, so that the census is low? How is going to his geographic parish going to change that?

It’s a problem if people take a sense of entitlement when they register in a parish outside their geographic boundaries. You are wise to warn people that a diocese that currently grants the priveleges of domicile to those who regularly attend a parish at which they do not legally have true domicile may change that policy at any time. Otherwise, I don’t see how the problems you envision are going to be addressed by asking the OP to register in his geographic parish… not if his bishop, like mine, is currently tolerant of the practice. This does not rise to the level of flaunting canon law.

But what you apparently don’t know, and what you’re certainly not addressing here is what canon law has to say about parish membership.

When it comes down to it, you’re advising the OP to consider himself a member of a parish other than his own proper parish under canon law. Although you’re not using the words, and I think you’re not intending it this way, the end result is that you’re advising someone to disregard canon law.

You’re citing your own anecdotal examples of a local policy of weddings, and using that to advise the OP to choose whatever parish he likes best and consider that to be his own parish. That’s not how parish territories work.

 

[StJudePray4Me]

But what you apparently don’t know, and what you’re certainly not addressing here is what canon law has to say about parish membership.

When it comes down to it, you’re advising the OP to consider himself a member of a parish other than his own proper parish under canon law. Although you’re not using the words, and I think you’re not intending it this way, the end result is that you’re advising someone to disregard canon law.

You’re citing your own anecdotal examples of a local policy of weddings, and using that to advise the OP to choose whatever parish he likes best and consider that to be his own parish. That’s not how parish territories work.

This is interesting to me, because the Catholic school our children attend is changing some tuition policies for next year.

It had been, that if you lived in surrounding parishes, were registered and had a letter from the Pastor, you were considered “In-parish” and got a modest discount.

Now, they are saying that unless you are a member of THAT parish (the next town over) and contribute at least $1000 a year to them, you get no discount at all. So I suspect many parents from surrounding towns will “transfer” to the school’s parish, and give there instead of their home parish. No one ever mentioned that, after doing this, potentially for many years, you still not be entitled to services there. (Like your children’s weddings, etc)

Hmmm. I might have to mention that to the schools Pastor at the next PTA meeting.

 

[FrDavid96]

This is interesting to me, because the Catholic school our children attend is changing some tuition policies for next year.

It had been, that if you lived in surrounding parishes, were registered and had a letter from the Pastor, you were considered “In-parish” and got a modest discount.

Now, they are saying that unless you are a member of THAT parish (the next town over) and contribute at least $1000 a year to them, you get no discount at all. So I suspect many parents from surrounding towns will “transfer” to the school’s parish, and give there instead of their home parish. No one ever mentioned that, after doing this, potentially for many years, you still not be entitled to services there. (Like your children’s weddings, etc)

Hmmm. I might have to mention that to the schools Pastor at the next PTA meeting.

Status for Catholic schools is a whole different ball of wax.

With regard to tuition discounts, and eligibility to enroll, parishes can “consider” people as if they were proper parishioners (living within the boundaries). This all comes down to local parish and diocese policies. The point though is that they are treated as if they were parishioners, which is not the same thing as actual parish membership.

Keep in mind also, that it’s one thing to say “entitled” to have a wedding or funeral at a given parish (which canon law only stipulates is an outright right in one’s own parish) it’s another to say that these courtesies are extended to those who have been attending and donating for years. As you just said, these are questions you’ll have to address to your own pastor (or the pastor of the school).

 

[StJudePray4Me]

Status for Catholic schools is a whole different ball of wax.

With regard to tuition discounts, and eligibility to enroll, parishes can “consider” people as if they were proper parishioners (living within the boundaries). This all comes down to local parish and diocese policies. The point though is that they are treated as if they were parishioners, which is not the same thing as actual parish membership.

Keep in mind also, that it’s one thing to say “entitled” to have a wedding or funeral at a given parish (which canon law only stipulates is an outright right in one’s own parish) it’s another to say that these courtesies are extended to those who have been attending and donating for years. As you just said, these are questions you’ll have to address to your own pastor (or the pastor of the school).

Yes, I understand what you’re saying, and I wouldn’t go to the pastor “guns blazing,” lol. Just ask him to clarify, in case people don’t know. We don’t want to change parishes, so we are not, but I think we should all be clear about it.

 

[Elizabeth502]

They’re not considered members of that other parish. The bishop’s current policy is to extend them courtesies as if they were members and that’s a key point–as if they were members. That’s his policy, and it’s his decision to make. He can do this because as long as they’re residents of his diocese, they are all his own parishioners, and he can extend faculties/delegation to any priest to witness marriages of his parishioners. The thing we have to keep in mind though is that the bishop is making an exception to canon law (a legitimate one that he has every right to make). He’s being generous in how the parish boundaries are applied with regard to marriages. He can withdraw that privilege at any moment. Some future bishop can likewise withdraw it.

It might not be the same way in the future. There is no guarantee that it will be, and considering the overall pattern we’re seeing in the US, and the acute shortage of priests, the most likely scenario is that in the future these boundaries will be enforced more strictly rather than less.

Similar policies existed in many dioceses in the US, especially those that had a large number of ethnic parishes. Even when these parishes ceased to be ethnic parishes canonically (even though the cultural aspects were still preserved) people were still allowed to register and be considered members. With so many churches closing, combining, etc. in the past couple of decades, many of those dioceses have had to enact policies strictly enforcing canon law with regard to boundaries. And that’s exactly where people have encountered problems. Most of those people just assumed that they would be able to have baptisms, weddings, funerals, etc. at what they considered to be their parish; then when the time came, they learned the hard way that they had to go through their own proper parish. It’s happening right now in many places in the US.

Thank you, Fr., for this warning, and for your earlier response to me. I appreciate the practical (personnel) problems you enumerate. However, it might be well to understand that it can work the other way around, too. Parishes already characterized by sparse administration/service are in danger of being completely abandoned by Catholics like me who actually want to live their faith sacramentally and are tired of encountering locked, empty buildings. Difficult to “force” Catholics to attend a parish which is not servicing them. As for ceremonies like weddings and funerals, people may just seek an alternate venue – for example, a memorial service in an alternate location.

(As an aside – in response to an earlier poster who critized the ‘cult of personality’ – this is not about personality. The priests at the parish I attend will not win any personality contests, nor do they seek to. In fact, you’re not going to find a lot of priests like this, of any age, in modern America. One of them is quite the introvert, hardly a glad-hander. The other member of the duo is a total work-house, dawn to dusk, 7 days a week. I think these guys don’t take days off.)

The other aspect of this is the aspect of a vibrant community – whether that community is heterogeneous or homogeneous. The fidelity and donations of Catholics are also linked to a sense of relating to a community in which they are personally invested and to which they can relate. So perhaps dioceses around the country might want to take a look at a more sophisticated way of closing and combining parishes than “strictly” geographical indicators. For example, clusters of nearby ethnic parishes would make sense (in my area), in a number of instances. Of course, populations are not always static, particularly nowadays. But I’m just suggesting some elasticity on the part of diocesan administrations is important to parish survival.

 

[FrDavid96]

Thank you, Fr., for this warning, and for your earlier response to me. I appreciate the practical (personnel) problems you enumerate. However, it might be well to understand that it can work the other way around, too. Parishes already characterized by sparse administration/service are in danger of being completely abandoned by Catholics like me who actually want to live their faith sacramentally and are tired of encountering locked, empty buildings. Difficult to “force” Catholics to attend a parish which is not servicing them. As for ceremonies like weddings and funerals, people may just seek an alternate venue – for example, a memorial service in an alternate location.

(As an aside – in response to an earlier poster who critized the ‘cult of personality’ – this is not about personality. The priests at the parish I attend will not win any personality contests, nor do they seek to. In fact, you’re not going to find a lot of priests like this, of any age, in modern America. One of them is quite the introvert, hardly a glad-hander. The other member of the duo is a total work-house, dawn to dusk, 7 days a week. I think these guys don’t take days off.)

The other aspect of this is the aspect of a vibrant community – whether that community is heterogeneous or homogeneous. The fidelity and donations of Catholics are also linked to a sense of relating to a community in which they are personally invested and to which they can relate. So perhaps dioceses around the country might want to take a look at a more sophisticated way of closing and combining parishes than “strictly” geographical indicators. For example, clusters of nearby ethnic parishes would make sense (in my area), in a number of instances. Of course, populations are not always static, particularly nowadays. But I’m just suggesting some elasticity on the part of diocesan administrations is important to parish survival.

Then please understand that what you need to do is make that suggestion to the Holy See and propose that canon law be changed. But advising a stranger to set aside what’s in canon law based on one’s own experience of the fact that one bishop (at this moment) has relaxed the laws somewhat with regard to marriages doesn’t help the situation. When someone says “you can be a member of whatever parish you choose” even though that’s contrary to how canon law defines parish membership, it opens the door to a wealth of problems and misunderstandings. (not that you said it, but it has been said)

Seriously here, I’m not exaggerating when I say that it’s entirely possible that someone will say to a priest “Father, don’t tell me that I’m only a parishioner of the parish where I live because someone on the internet told me that I can be a parishioner anyplace I choose…” Believe me, that sort of thing happens quite often. Not necessarily with regard to membership, but with regard to other aspects of parish life. It does make for problems for priests because we are very often confronted by people who read things on the internet and think that they can trust internet posts more than they can trust their own pastor’s expertise on these things. And quite frankly, people often start with the conclusion, and then search the internet until they find just the answer they’re looking for; disregarding anything to the contrary of course.

That’s why the best thing we can do is to direct people who have questions about something that’s addressed in canon law to the canons themselves and what they actually say, rather than personal experiences that will almost certainly be different from someone else’s situation.

 

[Pug]

Thanks, Pug, but I believe I checked quite awhile ago, and thus my post was mostly rhetorical, to make a point. Ironically, for sentimental reasons I would have preferred that this be the parish most appropriate for me, since it was my mother’s parish and where she got married. But it is 180 degrees today from what it once was, as is the safety of that neighborhood, etc.

I just wanted to make sure; I thought you might be rhetorical.

I completely understand about the changing parish scenario. I’ve met a number of people impacted by this. The ethnicity of the parish completely changes within about 20 years, so that the older parishioners can have difficulty finding a place at their long-standing parish. The masses are predominantly in the wrong language, etc. Mostly I’ve found that people in this situation start attending a different parish, but perhaps this is because the ones that I’m likely to meet are the ones who left their parish. I’ve wondered if this will happen to my parish, since it has fairly recently become a dual language parish. There is no interaction between the congregations. It is like two parishes within a parish.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Father, I’m not suggesting that a ‘stranger’ write to the Holy See and urge canon law changes. (OTOH, I guess I don’t consider myself a “stranger” to the Church. Hmmm.)

I’m suggesting that Church administration converse with the Holy See about this, if Canon Law is the controller here. I’m suggesting that domestic dioceses might want to take a look at experiences such as Pug’s parish, and parishioners of many other parishes in this country, report. Not for the sake of personal preferences, but for the sake of the Church – its continuity, its financial health, etc.

Canon law is one thing. But worship and ongoing community is something else; it is personal, not legalistic or (primarily) geographical, particularly in the 21st century.

 

[Faith1960]

Just be sure you don’t live in a diocese that will give you grief for not registering in your official geographic parish. This appears to vary by diocese, so you’ll have to ask the parish staff when you register to find out the scoop.

When I returned to the church, we were about to move. DH and I had our marriage convalidated (is that the word?) in the church we lived in at the time. I wanted to stay there, even after we moved, but the priest kept trying to talk me into registering in the parish we would be near when we moved. We live close to both parishes, plus another, though closest to the one in our geographical area. He didn’t give me grief about it, but he obviously wanted me to register at the other parish, saying things like “you’ll get to know people in your community” etc. Now I’m glad I listened to him.

 

[Pug]

When I returned to the church, we were about to move. DH and I had our marriage convalidated (is that the word?) in the church we lived in at the time. I wanted to stay there, even after we moved, but the priest kept trying to talk me into registering in the parish we would be near when we moved. We live close to both parishes, plus another, though closest to the one in our geographical area. He didn’t give me grief about it, but he obviously wanted me to register at the other parish, saying things like “you’ll get to know people in your community” etc. Now I’m glad I listened to him.

I’m glad you’re happy with how it worked out! :bounce:

I’m sad when people unexpectedly have trouble with religious education or sacraments or other things on account of them not knowing how certain ways of doing things will affect them in the future. That sort of information doesn’t seem to grow on trees, unfortunately, so a person doesn’t find out until a bit too late, sometimes.

Oh, and yes, convalidated is the most likely thing, based on your description, unless you two didn’t do any exchange of consent. I’m glad you came back to the Church!