Priestless parishes: a "Crisis" or an "Emerging Parish Leadership Paradigm"

[Lepanto]

This Emerging Parish Leadership Paradigm is exactly what we do have but it is most certainly not a solution but a treatment to a problem. Unfortunately this treatment is exactly what many people want, who despise\envy the Priesthood of Christ and see authority as something to be taken.
As an example, if I get into a car accident, the dressing on my wounds are treatment to the situation but are not what everyone wants. Not everyone should be in a crisis situation, it is not the ideal in the same way it is not the ideal to have everyone involved in a car accident. What we should have is healthy people in the same way we should have a healthy Church.

Those who see their roles as EMHCs as an entitlement are a perfect example of this.

EMHCs should pray every day that the time will come that they are no longer needed.

 

[JReducation]

I understand your concern, and agree that the ideal is a Parish Priest acting as pastor.

This is not my idea. It comes from the scripture. The Bishops are the only pastors. The local presbyter (priest) is the Bishop’s delegate. Since the early years of the Church the only delegate of a Bishop is an ordained priest. Even deacons cannot be pastors. In fact, the term pastor is incorrectly used in the United States.

If we look at other languages and countries, as well as Church documents, the term Pastor refers to Bishops. The local priest who administers a parish is the the Parrochial Vicar, the Vicar or the Curate. Pastor is a North American term (US and Canada). I have no idea how we messed this up.

Yet I see first hand the danger that lies in putting the laity in the position of Pastor.

In many developing countries, especially Africa, Asia and South America they have parish administrators. They are usually lay people (secular and religious) and sometimes deacons. This is not new. This practice dates back prior to the Middle Ages when Abbots and Abbesses were ecclesial administrators. Most abbots were not priests. They were the highest ranking authority in the local Church. The were in charge of ecclesial territories that today we would call parishes and even deaneries. All priests in the area answered to them concerning administrative matters.

This was later picked up by the Franciscans. When Francis founded his order, they were to be an order of Brothers and so are to this day. The Superior never needs to be a priest and permanent deacons are forbidden, to prevent the order from losing its character as a mendicant order and becoming a clerical institute. Francis was the only friar who was called Father, even though he was not a priest. The priests who joined the order then and today are subject to the authority of the superior, whether he is a priest or not.

This is just a little historical background on where the concept of administrator over priest comes from. It’s a very old monastic and mendicant concept. It was in place because diocesan priests were not educated. Only an educated man or woman was ever elected to the office of Abbot or Abbess. When the Franciscans came around they blew that out of the water, because Francis forbade education during his first 20 years as Superior General. Many superiors of priests were not educated. Anthony of Padua got Fancis to grant an indult that allows friars to get an education. The indult is still in place.

As we see this idea of a parish administrator has its roots in tradition, even a diocesan administrator who is not a bishop, such as an Abbot. This is not a novelty. It’s just that we had not seen this in the United States. In Europe it’s part of Catholic history.

I am in a Parish where we have a lay parish administrator and can hardly identify with your parishes situation. We have Masses denied from being done because the Lay Parish Administrator does not like the Priest who is always available, and we have to then go with a Liturgy of the Word.

I have no idea how to answer this, because I have no idea what your parish administrator finds objectionable about these priests. In an ideal setting, you use whatever priest is available. Even the most sinful priest is better than no celebration of the Eucharist. But that’s just my opinion.

When you have the Priesthood denigrated to the point where we accept the absence as not a Crisis, then we have a big problem.

It is definitey a crisis. Did you see my post where I try to explain the causes of the crisis?

I would say that, though you used Catholic Answers Forum as an example in another post of “everyone” wanting Priests.

Allow me to explain this so that there is no confusion. Many CAFers have an attitude that no one except Father can meet their needs. They are very dismissive of Deacons, Sisters, Brothers or Secular Religious. That kind of mentality adds to the crisis because it places more demands on the priests. There are many areas of ministry that other do very well and do not require the Sacrament of Holy Orders. We have a Lay Brother who is our parish’s theolgian. He is also the Superior of the community. He makes sure that we always have a pastor. He handles all negotiations with the local bishop and his superior. This allows the pastor to run the parish. We have another Lay Brother who is an excellent spiritual director and retreat master. He does not work for the parish. He runs the community’s retreat house. But when you need a spiritual director, you can call on him, because he lives right next door to the Church and he hardly ever says no.

There are people on CAF who would not want to see a Lay Brother as superior over the Pastor in a parish or as a spiritual director. That’s what I was referring to. I once referred someone on CAF to a Lay Brother whom I know has a degree in Mystical Theology and many years of experience guiding souls and he said that he would not go unless it was a priest. His parish priest did not have the time, because he was in a one man parish. This is where many CAFers cut their noses to spite their face.

This is why we don’t have more religious brothers in the USA. There are many in other countries who do many wonderful works in parishes.

This is not so in the more “progressive” dioceses where Priests are looked at just as Sacrament Machines who are in that place until the Church loosens up and allows the Laity to take over.

That’s not progress. That’s silliness. That’s the clericalization of the laity. Only clerics can administer sacraments or preach. End of story.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Joannm]

Why not rely more heavily on the permanent deacons? Have one or two at each parish, who administer that parish, and then have a priest, something like the old time circuit rider preachers, whose job is to say mass, hear confessions, deal with funeral, healing, and marriage masses (while the deacon could handle massless marriages and funerals), and do the other strictly priestly duties (leaving everything else to the Deacon) for 3 or 4 parishes? When people needed consoling, non-confession counseling etc. they could seek out the Deacon.

One of the problems with this is that most deacons have full time jobs and need to support a family. Our deacon spends only about 5 hours or less at the parish a week. He has 5 kids, house and car payments and the parish could not give him enough pay to support his family.

 

[Aramis]

Many Permanent Deacons would love to be able to live a life of being the parish pastoral associate and administrator. Most, however, will be unable to afford that.

There are very real issues in such arrangements.

Confession being the largest.

Now, in many dioceses, the parish pays the diocese for the priest, the diocese then issues the check.

One solution would be to make more men priests… But whom? Roman “Unmarried Priests Only” rubrics are a discipline. One we may see an end to in our lifetimes… maybe, or maybe not…

But the laymen being in charge is just wrong.

 

[Phemie]

Our new pastor seems to have come in to the parish with the mandate to prepare us to be without a priest in the not too distant future – he’s only here for 3 years.

I know that he has inherited a dysfunctional parish after 4 years of a pastor who didn’t want to be there and didn’t care about anything that went on. No finance council, no parish council, no religious education beyond preparation of Confirmation & First Communion, no scheduled Confession; children going out for a ‘liturgy of the word’ which was nothing more than a coloring book exercise with parents sitting around chatting, etc, etc,

He’s got a lot of work on his hands and his vision for the parish doesn’t mesh with what the parishioners want: a priest who’s always there being daddy to a bunch of toddlers, rather than a father guiding young adults to go out on their own.

 

[Lepanto]

Wouldn’t you agree that crises often cause the emergence of new paradigms or models in order to compensate?

JR

Yes…but not all change is for the better. The new paradigm may exacerbate the root problem, (as I believe it will in this case).

 

[BSHoop96]

I understand your concern, and agree that the ideal is a Parish Priest acting as pastor.

Yet I see first hand the danger that lies in putting the laity in the position of Pastor. I am in a Parish where we have a lay parish administrator and can hardly identify with your parishes situation. We have Masses denied from being done because the Lay Parish Administrator does not like the Priest who is always available, and we have to then go with a Liturgy of the Word.

When you have the Priesthood denigrated to the point where we accept the absence as not a Crisis, then we have a big problem.

I would say that, though you used Catholic Answers Forum as an example in another post of “everyone” wanting Priests.

This is not so in the more “progressive” dioceses where Priests are looked at just as Sacrament Machines who are in that place until the Church loosens up and allows the Laity to take over.

“We in the Latin Rite don’t seem to know what to do with deacons.”

I agree, it seems we are still in an experimental stage with Deacons in the Latin Rite.

I do not think that having the laity stand in as “Pastors” is a good idea at all, seeing the results in Protestant groups, and my own parish. We should look back at our traditions to see how we should move forward to the future.

God Bless
Scylla

I am curious. What makes certain people think they can have so much say in the Church? Is it more common with people who have converted from a Protestant background where that would be more acceptable and common involvement? Or is it just that people, converts or not, are on a power trip? I realize that there are always some people like that in any group, whether it’s a religious group or work, etc., but we seem to hear a lot in these threads about members of the parish running the show and I was just wondering. And this isn’t a slam against converts. I am a convert.

 

[stbruno]

Personally, I think we all should be doing a novena for vocations to the priesthood. I know in my heart that God is calling plenty of men, however they are either ignoring the call or are trying to drown it out with the noise of secularism, or they don’t feel or get the support they need to consider the priesthood. When I was a kid, the priests were in the classroom regularly asking us, so do you want to be a priest. Now the priests rarely visit a classroom, and they don’t even do a homily on becoming a priest let alone approaching someone about it. So the crisis is to get men to open their hearts to God’s calling…and it is a calling.

There are places enough in the church for everyone to spread the gospel message by our baptism, but we need priests to give us the Holy Eucharist. So pray with me…Lord, open the ears and hearts of the men whom you have callen. Let them become more aware each day of your presence in the Holy Eucharist. May they have a hunger & thirst to share in your kingdom on earth in the special vocation of the priesthood. We ask all these things through Jesus &the Holy Spirit, through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Amen.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

There are some parishes that turn out multiple vocations every year. There are some that haven’t turned one out in decades. Has the Conference of Bishops ever done a study of the multiple vocation parishes to see what they are doing differently that results in so many vocations?

Once this is known, a “how to” booklet should be distributed to all parishes and they should be encouraged to emulate the vocation filled parishes.

I have to believe that there is not a lack of vocations, but that the embryonic vocations are being aborted before they can come to fruition.

 

[MadCow1024]

I feel we’re at the edge of a crisis.

In my diocese, we’re going through an exercise to link and consolidate parishes. We’re preparing for a time when we may have less priests and other resources needed to keep individual communities viable. I can’t imagine how much worse this would be if we didn’t have 23 men in various stages in seminary formation.

I have to believe that many of us are simply not listening for a call.

The “Emerging Parish Leadership Paradigm” idea makes me cringe.

 

[KathleenElsie]

I feel we’re at the edge of a crisis.

In my diocese, we’re going through an exercise to link and consolidate parishes. We’re preparing for a time when we may have less priests and other resources needed to keep individual communities viable. I can’t imagine how much worse this would be if we didn’t have 23 men in various stages in seminary formation.

I have to believe that many of us are simply not listening for a call.

The “Emerging Parish Leadership Paradigm” idea makes me cringe.

In some places when a young man tell of an interest in the priesthood he is told that he is toooo young to make any decisions. No junior seminaries exist in most diocese and the ones that are affiliated with the carious monasteries are not promoted by the bishops.

Maybe if we start listening to what the youth are saying when they feel they “might” be called there would be no crises.

 

[T700]

Priestless parishes: a “Crisis” or an “Emerging Parish Leadership Paradigm.”

(My diocesan newspaper uses the latter apellation.)

How do you view it?

Similar to saying, “Sinking ship: Crises or Emerging Swimming Lesson Paradigm”.

 

[JReducation]

I believe that social values and changes in those values have negatively affected the number of men who enter the priesthood. But I also see a naivete on this thread. People seem to be ignoring other important factors that are producing a declining number of parish priests.

1. Religious Orders are recognizing that parish ministry is really the function of secular priests, not religious. They are not taking on new parishes, but allowing the ones they have to continue until none of the religious want to staff them. Then they return them to the Bishops. They are often choosing to take parishes in poorer neighborhoods too.
2. In the past, most men who entered religious orders were destined to be ordained. This is not longer the case. Many men enter religious orders and are never ordained, because they do not request Holy Orders or because the Order does not want to ordain. Only clerical institutes have to ordain their members. Order of Friars, Mendicants or Monks do not have to ordain their members. It’s not necessary for their charism or for their existence.
3. New religious communities of men are on the rise and most of them are for religious Brothers only, no priests.
4. Younger religious who are priests are dong other ministries that conform more to the mission of their order, especially working and living among the poor.
5. Secular priests do not have to serve in parishes. There are many new ministries that attract their talents and their attention.
6. Many dioceses are no longer paying priests’ salaries. The parish has to pay it. If the parish cannot afford it, they don’t get a priest. Most dioceses are changing to the self-employed model. The priest is self-employed. Therefore, he has to make enough money to pay his FICA and taxes. Some parishes can’t afford to hire too many priests. Larger institutions can.
7. Religious Orders and diocese now require that a priest have at least eight years of college nd graduate school education, write a thesis, pass a comprehensive examination and achieve at least a four-year Master’s Degree before they can be eligible for ordination. On top of that religious orders require six years of religious formation before a man can make final vows. You cannot be a deacon or priest if you’re not in final vows.
8. Many religious orders will not accept men who join with the intention of becoming a priest. They want men who want to live the consecrated life. The decision to ordain is made after the individual has completed six years of formation, made perpetual vows. The decision is between the individual, the house in which the individual lives and the major superior. All three must agree or there is no ordination.
9. If a parish can’t afford a religious community, religious can’t take on the assignment, even though they may wish to do so. In our parish we have a religious community of seven. Three work for the parish. The parish pays the community enough money that they can cover the expenses of the seven and send money to the Motherhouse for the care of the elderly and sick religious and to the house of formation for the novices and junior professed. Religious need income, because they do not get any subsidy from the Church. Every religious community must be financially self-sufficient. They are not eligible for things like social security for their seniors or medicare. The care of the elderly and healthcare is affecting religious communities as much as any other family in America.
10. Religious, more than any other group, find the laity to be invasive. The laity doesn’t know when to step back and allow the religious to live their religious life. The laity wants religious to be like diocesan priests, available to the parish 24/7. Also, religious have complained to their superiors that the laity abuses and is dismissive of those religious who are not priests. This causes divisions within the religious community when lay brothers try to serve the laity in capacities such as spiritual directors, marriage counselors, parish administrators, superior of the house etc and the laity treats them as if they were flunkies who were not good enough or smart enough to become priests. Some religious communities have pulled out of parishes to protect their members from exposure to this kind of treatment. In other words, many lay people have a sense of entitlement.
11. May young secular priests feel that their private life is under the microscope of the laity. They want to remain secular so as not to have the constant supervision and direction that religious have. But some lay people feel they have to provide this for the young secular priest.
12. Families are encouraging their sons to be professionally and fiancially successful, not to be priests.

I don’t see these points being addressed on this thread. I don’t see anyone saying, “if we want more parish priests, we have to change the way that we treat them, change our expectations, and accept that they are going to come from the secular clergy, not the religious orders and let us leave the religious orders to follow their charisms instead of expecting them to serve us. Let us accept that a diocesan priest is a secular man with a life and rights that we have to respect and promote.”

It seems there is a lot of lamenting, but not enough mea culpas coming from the laity.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[MadCow1024]

I don’t see these points being addressed on this thread. I don’t see anyone saying, “if we want more parish priests, we have to change the way that we treat them, change our expectations, and accept that they are going to come from the secular clergy, not the religious orders and let us leave the religious orders to follow their charisms instead of expecting them to serve us. Let us accept that a diocesan priest is a secular man with a life and rights that we have to respect and promote.”

It seems there is a lot of lamenting, but not enough mea culpas coming from the laity.

Maybe I have a slightly skewed view of the world, but my expectation is that parish priests should come from the secular clergy. The religious orders should not have to suppress their individual charism in order to staff parishes.

We, the laity, need to be willing to pay the price in time, treasure, and with our sons, if we want to have priests. This is not someone else’s problem to solve, we need to contribute to the solution.

 

[JReducation]

Maybe I have a slightly skewed view of the world, but my expectation is that parish priests should come from the secular clergy. The religious orders should not have to suppress their individual charism in order to staff parishes.

We, the laity, need to be willing to pay the price in time, treasure, and with our sons, if we want to have priests. This is not someone else’s problem to solve, we need to contribute to the solution.

I don’t see why you call yourself “MadCow”. Your approach to this is very sane indeed and very Catholic.

I sometimes think of how we want a strong armed forces for our nation, but we don’t want our sons and daughters to join the service. It’s a very similar attitude that we have toward the clergy.

We want to be protected, but we don’t want to supply the demand.

I don’t hear many parents suggesting the priesthood, religious life or the armed forces as career options to their high school senior sons or daughters.

I must confess, the I’m guilty of this too.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Lepanto]

Priestless parishes: a “Crisis” or an “Emerging Parish Leadership Paradigm.”

(My diocesan newspaper uses the latter apellation.)

How do you view it?

Looking around on the internet, I found a perfect example of what this thread is about (other examples are not hard to find).

aodonline.org/AODOnline/Lay+Leadership+12132/Lay+Leadership±+Mission+Possible.htm

“The new face of church leadership…YOURS!”
[A very misleading and irresponsible slogan, not to mention one that is theologically and canonically problematic. ]

Looks to me like someone within the Archdiocese of Detroit is working overtime to blur the lines of distinction between priests and “professional church ministers” seeking a new “career.”

 

[eucharisteo]

I agree, there aren’t enough parents offering up their children as sacrifices for the priesthood. I am guilty for not having my children led to the military, however, I’ve encouraged it if they want it. But I strongly encourage our 3 children to consider vocations to the priesthood and religious life. Here’s my hope… oldest to youngets Diocesan or Franciscan Friar, Franciscan Friar and Carmelite Nun. That’s my constant prayer. My suffering is offered for their vocations. My wife feels the same way if she shares the truth with me. But I know we would both love to have grandchildren. But we’d prefer to have priests and a nun.

My future priest just walked in…gotta go.

 

[JReducation]

I agree, there aren’t enough parents offering up their children as sacrifices for the priesthood. I am guilty for not having my children led to the military, however, I’ve encouraged it if they want it. But I strongly encourage our 3 children to consider vocations to the priesthood and religious life. Here’s my hope… oldest to youngets Diocesan or Franciscan Friar, Franciscan Friar and Carmelite Nun. That’s my constant prayer. My suffering is offered for their vocations. My wife feels the same way if she shares the truth with me. But I know we would both love to have grandchildren. But we’d prefer to have priests and a nun.

My future priest just walked in…gotta go.

Be careful with the Franciscan Friar request. The three branches of the Franciscans do not automatically ordain every man. They must complete six years of religious formation and make final vows for life. Then they must request Holy Orders. The Major Superior and the house in which the friar lives have the final say on whether or not a friar can be ordained. Many friars are denied ordination, because the Franciscans have a surplus of priests. The law of the Church is very clear. They must return to being a Mendicant Order of Brothers. The determination on ordination takes factors in several things: the needs of the Order, the wishes of the Community, the wishes of the individual friar, and the qualifications of the friar.

A friar may be bound to the order until death and never be ordained, if the Major Superior and his brothers vote against it. The friar never knows this until AFTER he has made vows for life.

Generally, the request for Holy Orders is seriously considered and rarely denied, but there is no guarrantee in the Franciscan life. It’s not the friar’s choice. It’s the Order’s choice. Christ speaks through the Order.

The Carmelite nun won’t have to deal with that problem. LOL

Fraternally,

JR

 

[KathleenElsie]

Maybe I have a slightly skewed view of the world, but my expectation is that parish priests should come from the secular clergy. The religious orders should not have to suppress their individual charism in order to staff parishes.

We, the laity, need to be willing to pay the price in time, treasure, and with our sons, if we want to have priests. This is not someone else’s problem to solve, we need to contribute to the solution.

Yes we need to be willing to give our greatest treasure here on earth. Our children and grandchildren to God. Many secular catholics are unwilling to even consider that the religious life is something for their children to aspire to.

In our small Catholic homeschool group we have already had some go into religious life and others discerning God’s will. And no we are not SSPX we go to the same parishes that the majority of Catholics go to, the local one. It is just that our kids see us living what we teach. The children and youth that have chosen are choosing to go to the more traditional seminaries and orders not the local Diocesan ones.

 

[ethelzguy]

For some, Vatican II is “to blame” for our current shortage of priests. However, as time passes, it appears that our shortage come from a more secular cause.

In the United States, we have enjoyed an incredible uptick in our standard of living over the last 50+ years. We now take for granted things that only the affluent could even dream of back then.

Back then, the difference in lifestyle for a parish priest was equal to, or in some cases better than his “married with children” siblings. Today, that is simply not the case. Also, back then, it was quite the “badge of honor” for a family to give a son or brother to the priesthood. Nowadays, it’s “oh yah, my brother the priest”

This is a peer pressure/materialistic societal issue.

Parents raise their children to seek material success. Just look at the bumpers and back windows of vehicles as you drive about today…countless stickers proclaiming in some form, how “special” thier kids are. What you won’t see, is a sticker proclaiming that “My Son is in the Seminary”.

We also have an explosion of non-Catholic, Chrisitan churches as compared to back then. While the Catholic church still requires most priests to remain cellibate, other churches do not. As a case in point, I offer my daughter and son-in-law. They were both raised Catholic. They both left the church. He is a youth minister at a Bible Church. In their view, they can have a spouse, a family, a nice salary and standard of living comparable to their friends. The can also claim honestly, that they are devoting their lives to Christ. The idea of a cellibate priesthood to them, is archaic and irrelevant. The firmly believe that you can serve Christ with your life and not forgo a “normal” lifestyle.

The causes of our priest shortage are many. Lamenting that shortage will not fix it.