Priestly dilemma - what would you do?

[Corki]

Our parish went through this several years ago. What our pastor did ruffled some feathers and we lost many parishioners. However, in hind sight, I am not sure there was a “better” way.

He made some changes immediately. For example, former priest did not say daily Mass or hear Confessions. New pastor immediately scheduled both. Another thing he did right away was move the tabernacle out of its hidden corner. Former priest did not use altar servers. New pastor recruited servers right away.

Some other things he changed very gradually. He bought bells and trained the altar servers to use them. One Lent he said he was adding kneeling for the Consecration and after the Agnus Dei. Most of the congregation “gave up” kneeling after the AD once Easter came around but he kept trying and now we kneel where the GIRM says kneel. We are 8 years in and he is still making little and not-so-little changes. We still lose people whenever something changes. We even lost families when he started having the bells rung at the Consecration. But we also have lots of new families.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Puzzleannie - just wanted to say thank you for your insight.

 

[thequeen]

I have heard that the only thing a new pastor should change in the first year are the lightbulbs.

I belonged to a parish where a new pastor came in. In his first homily on his first Sunday he said “I am here to make changes.” And he did.

Many parishioners left. The pastor started referring to his parish who was present and his parish in exile. Many of the people who stayed did so only because they figured they could outlast him.

He was appointed for a six-year term, but left after three years. He was unhappy the whole time he was there.

A new pastor came in and had to make lots of effort to heal what had happened. He reached out to people who had left and offered to meet with them and talk about what happened. He listened a lot. After a year or so he started to make small changes, mostly eliminating things the previous pastor had done.

Someone who is gung ho to make changes and do everything his way has the potential to do major damage to a parish and to the faith of the people.

Something like this happened at my parish I don’t want to go into details but i can identify with what you have just posted here.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

Suppose a priest is appointed to a new parish. He is faithful to the Magisterium, orthodox, he wants to do things the way they’re supposed to.
The parish under the previous priest however is less orthodox. The Liturgy is adapted to meet some of the parishioners wishes, confession isn’t very encouraged, etc. It’s not terribad, but a lot of things aren’t the way they’re supposed to.

The priest wants to make all the changes to meet the standards required by the Magisterium. Not simply because he likes rules, but because he thinks that’s best for his parish.

Would it be better to 1) start with all the right things from day one, make the changes sudden, thereby taking the risk of offending parishioners who might leave; or 2) make small adjustments in the course of the next few years, and continuing with most of the wrong habits the parish has? Option 3?

puzzleannie has given a few excellent responses.

I have a few questions I would want answered before I answered your hypothetical.

1. Is this new priest appointed as pastor of the parish, or is he a second priest under the pastor currently in place?
2. What are the specific changes he wants to make? Are we talking about small things which were done inaccurately, or big things which will require the congregation to change? Are we talking about opinions?
3. How long was the last pastor (assuming he is gone) in place, and was he well loved?

You cannot walk into a community and announce that their beloved leader was a heretic with no love for the Church and expect that community to follow you.

You only gave one specific, that confession is not encouraged. He can change that right away. He can make himself available often and preach often. I do not see why that would bother anyone. No one has to avail himself of the service being offered more often.

The non-specific complaint about Liturgy is the one which could be more problematic, or not. If he comes in and starts changing things in grand ways, even with the best intentions, without first learning about the community he has been called to shepherd, he does a disservice to his flock. He must first learn who is who, as has been suggested. He also must give them a chance to know him. Trust before change.

Risking offense is one thing. We all have to do it sometimes, and good leaders more often than most. A pastor must not be so afraid of giving offense that he cannot lead. If he has a choice, though, he should try to avoid giving offense. His job is to lead the flock home. He cannot do that if he is to cowardly to stand up for the Church, but nor can he do it if his flock does not listen to him.

 

[Corki]

You only gave one specific, that confession is not encouraged. He can change that right away. He can make himself available often and preach often. ** I do not see why that would bother anyone. ** No one has to avail himself of the service being offered more often.

If only that were true. I know that in our parish, simply scheduling Confession times when there had been none before was seen as a throw back to older Catholic teaching. Preaching about Confession was met with “I don’t come to Mass to hear about sin”. At least one whole RCIA class (all previously Baptized) had been brought into the Church without Confession. They were “personally offended” when Confession came back to the parish. Some felt that since the old pastor didn’t “do” Confession that it was optional and that they were free to continue their pre-Catholic belief in simply confessing privately without the Sacrament. It was a very big deal.

 

[Siochan_Leat]

If only that were true. I know that in our parish, simply scheduling Confession times when there had been none before was seen as a throw back to older Catholic teaching. Preaching about Confession was met with “I don’t come to Mass to hear about sin”. At least one whole RCIA class (all previously Baptized) had been brought into the Church without Confession. They were “personally offended” when Confession came back to the parish. Some felt that since the old pastor didn’t “do” Confession that it was optional and that they were free to continue their pre-Catholic belief in simply confessing privately without the Sacrament. It was a very big deal.

It sounds like they wanted to be Catholic in name, but not in practice.

This has been a very interesting thread.

Our parish had some troubles before I moved here. The former pastor of my church was arrested for soliciting sex. It really shook the parish to the core. A new pastor (our current one) was brought in to heal.

We found out from a neighbor (who runs the religious education program) that the current pastor was specifically trained to deal with parishes with serious problems. With him as pastor, the pews filling up again. So much so, a new much larger church needed to be built.

Things aren’t perfect with our pastor (what parish is?) but things have improved and the parishioners are beginning more programs for outreach. We’re moving in the right direction.

Now, if only they would discuss confession and ABC more often…

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

If only that were true. I know that in our parish, simply scheduling Confession times when there had been none before was seen as a throw back to older Catholic teaching. Preaching about Confession was met with “I don’t come to Mass to hear about sin”. At least one whole RCIA class (all previously Baptized) had been brought into the Church without Confession. They were “personally offended” when Confession came back to the parish. Some felt that since the old pastor didn’t “do” Confession that it was optional and that they were free to continue their pre-Catholic belief in simply confessing privately without the Sacrament. It was a very big deal.

I hope that those who appreciated the return of this essential sacrament voiced their joy at its return. I cannot understand why they would be bothered unless they were forced to take advantage, which would also be wrong. I guess people just don’t like change, and that is always the way. It does not make sense to me, but my parish has changed pastor twice in the past decade and each new pastor ushers in changes. There have never been problems like liturgical abuses, though, so that makes a difference.

Did the naysayers leave, or just voice frustration?

It is heartbreaking to hear that an entire parish has such a low view of this merciful sacrament.

 

[Corki]

Did the naysayers leave, or just voice frustration?

I would say about 50/50. Many left. Where I live, there are four parishes within a 25 minute drive so many just went to another parish with a more “modern” priest.

Some stayed and still grumble. I think some of these just think they will outlast our new priest. He’s been here over 8 years and the usual rotation is at 12.

And fortunately, some that were at first disgruntled have either come around or at least acknowledged that the new pastor’s view is more in line with the Church.

It is heartbreaking to hear that an entire parish has such a low view of this merciful sacrament.

I agree, it’s very sad.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

…so many just went to another parish with a more “modern” priest.

“More” modern than not having confession? What does that even mean? I am far from conservative. I hold hands when I pray the Our Father, I love contemporary music etc., I am usually on the other side if I enter into conversations of this kind. But I just cannot imagine my life, and certainly not my Church, without confession.

 

[Corki]

“More” modern than not having confession? What does that even mean? I am far from conservative. I hold hands when I pray the Our Father, I love contemporary music etc., I am usually on the other side if I enter into conversations of this kind. But I just cannot imagine my life, and certainly not my Church, without confession.

“Modern” in our diocese usuallly means the priests who express support for questionable policies such as women’s ordination, who are known for “creative” Masses, or who don’t have CCE programs.

In this case, some went to a parish where the pastor (the only priest) does not hear Confessions himself but regularly has another priest come in. So, I guess it’s easier to ignore Confession if the pastor does too.

The funny thing is that many of my neighbors went to a very old, very traditional parish. The pastor there was more modern in his homilies, but he still had Confessions regularly. A year or two after they left, that pastor retired and they got someone new who seems to be of the more conservative bent.

You can run but you can’t hide.

 

[valentino]

I would leave it up to priest.If the priest was in the dark about people leaving you might tell him.

 

[TheMc]

How you should handle it really depends on what the situation is, and what the issues are.

For things such as I have listed below, the theoretical pastor should fix ASAP:

• Mass settings that don’t follow the official texts
• An overuse of EMHCs
• Extremely secular music (drum set, etc…)
• Heretical “hymns”
• Communion in the hand, if needed (see the last line in RS No 92)
• Things such as female preaching, or similar atrocities
• Foot washing of women (when that time of year comes around)
• Expanded confession times (if needed)

Then there are things he should fix over time:

• Getting rid of female altar servers
• Fixing the lack of chant in the Mass
• Possibly offering a kneeler for those who wish to receive that way
• Those dreadful looking albs

 

[joanofarc2008]

How you should handle it really depends on what the situation is, and what the issues are.

For things such as I have listed below, the theoretical pastor should fix ASAP:

• Mass settings that don’t follow the official texts
• An overuse of EMHCs
• Extremely secular music (drum set, etc…)
• Heretical “hymns”
• Communion in the hand, if needed (see the last line in RS No 92)
• Things such as female preaching, or similar atrocities
• Foot washing of women (when that time of year comes around)
• Expanded confession times (if needed)

Then there are things he should fix over time:

• Getting rid of female altar servers
• Fixing the lack of chant in the Mass
• Possibly offering a kneeler for those who wish to receive that way
• Those dreadful looking albs

Excuse me but some of the things you mentioned seem to be your opinions rather than anything decided by ecclesiastical authority.

 

[TheMc]

Excuse me but some of the things you mentioned seem to be your opinions rather than anything decided by ecclesiastical authority.

Yes I’m aware that some of the things in the 2nd list are my personal opinion (but also the opinion of the church). The first, third, and fourth things in the second list are my personal opinion, but #1 is encouraged by the church, #3 is encouraged by the holy father, and #4, well, if you handle #1, there’s no reason not to do it.

Let me be clear though that the things in the first list (the ASAP list) are not my opinion, but non-negotiables.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Yes I’m aware that some of the things in the 2nd list are my personal opinion (but also the opinion of the church). The first, third, and fourth things in the second list are my personal opinion, but #1 is encouraged by the church, #3 is encouraged by the holy father, and #4, well, if you handle #1, there’s no reason not to do it.

Let me be clear though that the things in the first list (the ASAP list) are not my opinion, but non-negotiables.

Not trying to be smart but please show me the documentation from the GIRM that states that those who have their feet washed must be male. I have not heard this before.

 

[TheMc]

Not trying to be smart but please show me the documentation from the GIRM that states that those who have their feet washed must be male. I have not heard this before.

We are not allowed do discuss this in the forums, but I will PM the info to you.

 

[joanofarc2008]

It’s OK - I seem to have found the official statement without too much difficulty and you seem to be mistaken in the matter - at least for the United States. Here is the link. Being obedient means being faithful to the Magisterium.

 

[Spirithound]

He made some changes immediately. For example, former priest did not say daily Mass or hear Confessions. New pastor immediately scheduled both. Another thing he did right away was move the tabernacle out of its hidden corner. Former priest did not use altar servers. New pastor recruited servers right away.

This is an excellent course of action. Where there was no activity, now there is activity. It’s not so much “changing”, as “filling a void”. I was going to say that there is no way anyone could object to a mere “filling of a void”, but well…your next posts express otherwise…

 

[TheMc]

It’s OK - I seem to have found the official statement without too much difficulty and you seem to be mistaken in the matter - at least for the United States. Here is the link. Being obedient means being faithful to the Magisterium.

Please see my 2nd PM

 

[joanofarc2008]

Please see my 2nd PM

I did - and I disagree with you on many points. God bless,