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

[JReducation]

Why the unwarranted cynicism?

These brave men are sacrificing family and everything they know to come to a country that can’t even foster enough vocations for itself. How many of them will not be able to be home when their parents are dying? In effect, these men are missionaries coming to many dioceses which have reverted to mission territories. (One of the differences between a “Mission Territory” instead of Diocese is that a Mission Territory is a region that is dependent on outside priests.)

These men are serving in many dioceses with undercurrents of hostility to vocations and the priesthood in particular. Many of them will be treated as second-class citizens because they are Africans or Asians who speak with accents serving in very demanding lily-white suburban megaparishes–places that have 100 “eucharistic ministers” and bizzaro liturgies yet have never sent a man to seminary.

Back home, these priests may not have as many material possessions, but they would have all the comforts of home and they would be put on a pedestal since they come from societies which actually revere the priesthood.

These men are not just missionaries, but in some ways they are martyrs as well.

Add to this that if they are secular priests, they come at the invitation of a bishop. No secular priest can leave his diocese withou the invitation of a bishop and the permission of his bishop back home.

If they are members of religious communities, their life is the same as it was back home, because the large international religious orders follow the same rule, lifestyle, schedule, chain of command, and ascetical practices around the world. A good example are Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity. Where ever they go, they live as Indians. It’s in their constitutions. The same applies for order of men.

There is not much advantage other than we have better highways here. I’m not sure if that’s an advantage.

As to going home, secular priests may visit their families yearly and more often if they live within driving distance.

Religious can only visit their family when the community allows it. Some are never allowed to do so. This varies from one religious order to another.

JR

 

[JReducation]

A parish without at least a part-time priest is not a Catholic parish. It is a Catholic social fellowship.

We have to be careful here. A parish is more of a new world concept. In Europe the parish was usually equivalent to a county in the USA and there was usually one central church in the largest town and smaller chapels that were unstaffed where priests would go to periodically. They were like outposts.

This model is alive and well in much of Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America and Australia. We have a more structured definition of parish with boundaries and a staff etc.

JR

 

[Lepanto]

In Europe the parish was usually equivalent to a county in the USA and there was usually one central church in the largest town and smaller chapels that were unstaffed where priests would go to periodically. They were like outposts.

JR

That’s where the “part time priest” qualifier comes in.

 

[ethelzguy]

Why the unwarranted cynicism?

Where is the unwarranted cynicism?

It is rather plain, that the standard of living of the diocesan priest in the US is far better than it would be for a priest or lay person in many of the third world countries that we attract priests from.

The priesthood in the US clearly offers an opportunity for a better standard of living, along with the honor of serving God in his Church. A “win-win”, if you will.

The priesthood in the US, to a “home-grown” on the other hand, represents sacrificing “the good life” for most young lads. A sacrifice that most, obviously, aren’t willing to make.

It’s not cynicism, it’s the plain truth of the matter. Look at so many of our poor, rural towns in the US now. Investigate how many high school graduates of these poverty-stricken towns join our military.

It represents an opportunity to serve our country, and it’s a ticket out of a likely impoverished life. A parallel can easily be drawn.

 

[Lepanto]

Where is the unwarranted cynicism?

Because you are questioning the motives of missionaries.

Unless they state that they are coming to the US for its higher material standard of living or you can read their minds, you shouldn’t be second-guessing their intentions. For all you know, they may view an assignment in the US as a hardship.

 

[JReducation]

Lepanto and Ethelzguy may both be making a valid point, but are coming from different perspectives. It is true that the life of a secular priest in the USA is materially more comfortable than that of a secular priest in a developing nation. But don’t let that fool you. I served in the missions in developing nations. Secular priests are well paid, according to the standards of the local economy. Of course there are some perks that they do not have, which our secular priests have.

Also, remember that not all of our secular priests are paid. Secular priests who live in community usually have an allowance from the community. They do not receive a salary as a diocesan priest gets. They often share their material wealth in common. A Vincentian is a secular priest. However, because he lives in community, his community is paid for his services and he is given an allowance. He does not get the full salary as would a diocesan priest. He will never own a condo or a beach house, as a diocesan priest can, because he doesn’t make enough money to purchase these things. He enjoys the other benefits that come from being a secular priest, but not the economic benefits.

That being said, secular priests who come to the USA from developing nations usually come for one of two reasons. The local bishop borrows them from a foreign diocese, because he’s short. They come with a genuine missionary spirit. The truth is that a bishop cannot force a secular priest to leave his diocese to serve in another diocese. Secular priests do not owe their bishops this kind of obedience. Bishops have no jurisdiction outside of their diocese. Only religious make vows of blind obedience and poverty. They have to go where they are sent and they may be not attached to places or people. Religious superiors have jurisdiction around the globe.

A secular priest who comes from a foreign diocese to serve in the USA comes voluntarily driven by a missionary spirit.

The other reason why some secular priests come from a foreign diocese to serve in the USA is to attend school in the USA. Some dioceses are very poor and cannot afford an American graduate school education. Priests who come to study in the USA come to achieve their doctorate degrees in secular or religious studies.

Education in the USA is one of the most expensive in the world. Bishops make alliances between them. An American bishop will hire a foreign secular priest, because he needs him, but allows him to remain part of his home diocese in another country. The home bishop allows the priest to come to the USA and pay for his expenses out of his pocket.

Obviously, the salary of a secular priest is not enough to pay for a $100,000.00 degree. These priests often have sponsors and scholarships to pay for their education. Their home diocese will chip in some money and the host diocese will pay him a salary for his services. This way the priest has money to live.

In any case, there is nothing wrong with any of these arrangements. They are not mercinary and they are not for economic advancement. Unless a secular priest is incardinated into the host diocese, he must return to his home diocese when the bishop calls. The gain is only temporary.

Fraternally,

JR.

 

[Joannm]

The other reason why some secular priests come from a foreign diocese to serve in the USA is to attend school in the USA. Some dioceses are very poor and cannot afford an American graduate school education. Priests who come to study in the USA come to achieve their doctorate degrees in secular or religious studies.

Education in the USA is one of the most expensive in the world. Bishops make alliances between them. An American bishop will hire a foreign secular priest, because he needs him, but allows him to remain part of his home diocese in another country. The home bishop allows the priest to come to the USA and pay for his expenses out of his pocket.

Obviously, the salary of a secular priest is not enough to pay for a $100,000.00 degree. These priests often have sponsors and scholarships to pay for their education. Their home diocese will chip in some money and the host diocese will pay him a salary for his services. This way the priest has money to live.

In any case, there is nothing wrong with any of these arrangements. They are not mercinary and they are not for economic advancement. Unless a secular priest is incardinated into the host diocese, he must return to his home diocese when the bishop calls. The gain is only temporary.

Fraternally,

JR.

We have many foreign priests in our diocese who are in this situation. Since our parish is close to two major Catholic universities, our parish is a good choice for priests who are studying to live, which is good for us since we usually have a steady supply of priests who can assist when their studies don’t get in the way.

 

[ethelzguy]

Because you are questioning the motives of missionaries.

Unless they state that they are coming to the US for its higher material standard of living or you can read their minds, you shouldn’t be second-guessing their intentions. For all you know, they may view an assignment in the US as a hardship.

I am NOT “questioning the motives of missionaries”. I am stating obvious fact. A priest from the Phillipines can, and does, enjoy an better standard of living here than he likely would back home.

Have you ever actually had personal discussion with a “foreign” priest? I have. They often speak openly of the hardships they faced “back home”. Many of them are “on loan” from their home dioceses.

At our neighboring parish, they have a parochial vicar from the Phillipines whom I speak with often. His “loan” has been extended more than once.

His apartment is very nice here. But, he refuses to use his air conditioning in the Texas heat, because (as he puts it) he doesn’t want to get used to it, and then return to the Phillipines. His windows are always open.

How ironic, that poor countries are exporting priests (either permanently or on loan) to the USA because they are needed here in a “missionary” capacity.

 

[KathleenElsie]

I am NOT “questioning the motives of missionaries”. I am stating obvious fact. A priest from the Phillipines can, and does, enjoy an better standard of living here than he likely would back home.

Have you ever actually had personal discussion with a “foreign” priest? I have. They often speak openly of the hardships they faced “back home”. Many of them are “on loan” from their home dioceses.

At our neighboring parish, they have a parochial vicar from the Phillipines whom I speak with often. His “loan” has been extended more than once.

His apartment is very nice here. But, he refuses to use his air conditioning in the Texas heat, because (as he puts it) he doesn’t want to get used to it, and then return to the Phillipines. His windows are always open.

How ironic, that poor countries are exporting priests (either permanently or on loan) to the USA because they are needed here in a “missionary” capacity.

The priests from overseas tend to be in my experience less likely to “feminize” or make gender “neutral” the readings and homily. Have longer available times for confessions and on more days. Work with the youth groups and encourage Catholic Schooling and/or homeschooling. Don’t take as many “personal days” off and are generally available to those in need. So yes they are in a “missionary” situation here in the USA.