Priestly dilemma - what would you do?

[LongJohnSilver]

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?

 

[Edward_H]

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?

Very interested in answers and help on this thread too. You must be in my parish.

 

[puzzleannie]

Su
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?

for the sake of discussion I will assume this is a hypothetical case although my guess is somebody who prefers one of those options, or #4 is of a mind to rebel against the new priest no matter what, is trying to pick a fight with you.

In general, most new priests (and new bishops) wisely decide to observe for a few months, get to know key people in key ministries, get to know parishioners, staff members and “department heads” (or people who think they are dept. heads and act like it). He then decides what things must be changed immediately which are simply wrong, he explains the change to the people responsible and then to the parishioners and implements it.

The hardest thing he has to do and sometimes the most necessary is firing people who are toxic to the community and liturgical life of the parish or diocese, that includes volunteers. That of course is when fireworks fly because he cannot explain his reasons for those decisions in public so people hear only one side of the story.

For more far reaching changes it is wisest to give people time to get acclimated, to catechize on the change if it is in liturgy, and to prepare the people. The very wisest most pastoral priest knows how to make the people who are responsible for implementing the changes feel as if it was their own idea in the first place.

By the end of the year most of the necessary changes should be in place, if not sooner. If there is a real crisis of authority the priest may have to wield a big stick earlier and with farther effect than he intended.

 

[thirddec]

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?

Above all else everything you do must be guided by the Holy Spirit and must be done with honesty, charity and love. Lets start with yourself first and the term orthodox. Its such a loaded word and in this case are you using it in the context of correct so therefore the other is wrong ? because if you are this doesnt seem to tie in with the It’s not terribad as there is no grey in bad or good.

Some of your statements are also very strange **The Liturgy is adapted to meet some of the parishioners wishes ** where did you get this idea? why some and not all ? now are you falling into the same trap. I could continue with this but in reality only you can be honest with yourself.

But nothing should be static; in truth maybe the previous priest felt pulled to a different mission in the parish than you do and focused his energy where the Spirit guided him and in so doing maybe let some important things slide. Rather than throwing out everything including the baby you need to assess the Parish more carefully as if you really were Christ and think what places could do with improving for the good of their souls and not your personal preferences. Thats tough but I would guess the promotion of more Confession would be one place that there can be no conflict. You could try to put together a committee of a range of people to start to raise your other possible changes. You have an opportunity here to rise above yourself and see how you can move the parish forward in Unity with the Holy Spirit as your guide. How can you develope the spiritual life of your parish without getting bogged down in what is just window dressing. You might be surprised how little resistance you meet to your changes if people can see what a caring person you are.

I feel for you because as this thread progresses I know already there will be the so called Traditional Bandwagon pushers that will just assume you should go in all guns blazing and what I have written is probably a bit all over the place. So in the spirit of real support for you I would reiterate Honesty and Prayerfullness and prioritise.

I think what you are doing devoting your life as a priest is wonderfull and I hope your parishoners realise this and even if they have to accept a few changes they can do it as an act of support for you

 

[Scoobyshme]

I would do it all at once, and be done with it.

Better to amputate the bad stuff rather than have it die a slow death by atrophy.

Not encouraging Confession is a bad thing. Very bad.

 

[LongJohnSilver]

I’m sorry thirddec, I didn’t want to raise the impression that this was a real situation that I’m in. It’s hypothetical and I’m not even a priest.

But I am very interested in the views of people and their advice, because it could help me with my work in my own parish in which I have some responsibilities.

 

[thirddec]

Its like the film Support your local sherif except substitute priest

Well done anyway

 

[JRKH]

Puzzleannie has given a very good and comprehensive answer.
The first 3 to 6 months after a change is a period of everyone getting to know each other and learning each other’s views, personalities, styles etc.

If it were me, and there were clear liturgical abuses, I would feel obliged to deal with such immediately. The Mass is sacred, and toe stepping or not, I would have to straighten such abuses out for I could not, in good conscience celebrate a mass that I knew was not pleasing to Almighty God.
The other thing I would wish to do, in addition to the things Annie mentions above like meeting with various parish leaders, is to give a series of homilies designed to both intorduce myself and to encourage the sanctity of the parish so that they and I may grow in holiness together.
The subject matter of these homilies would vary based on the specifics of the parish situation, but would be designed both to teach and to encourage. They would also be designed to ellicit comments (complaints or kudos) from parishoners. In this way the pastor gets the “lay of the land” and also can learn of people who are perhaps not currently active in ministry who he could call on later as changes progress.
After all if a parish is fairly “liberal”, there are likely more “convervative” minded people in the pews who have been “sidelined” by the current parish leadership.

It is important that the parish see it’s new priest as both accessible and as a leader; as firm, yet flexible. Likewise it is important that he understand that it is not his Job to “impose rules” (unless absolutely necessary) but rather to teach and to guide so that the parishoners understand, as much as possible, why this or that is permissable or not permissable.

So the bottom line to me is a combination of options 1 and 2. Certain things, especially those closely related to the priestly duties of the liturgy etc, may need to be addressed immediately and firmly. Other matters relating more to practice or to other parish ministries, can be approached more slowly.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

I’m sorry thirddec, I didn’t want to raise the impression that this was a real situation that I’m in. It’s hypothetical and I’m not even a priest.

But I am very interested in the views of people and their advice, because it could help me with my work in my own parish in which I have some responsibilities.

To me, the bottom line in all of this is Proper Catechesis.
To go in as one poster says and “do it all at once”, will create a great deal of hard feelings. I was in a parish once many years ago where this occurred and I can tell you that it can cause wounds that do not quickly heal.
The Church is a community. The very word “church” means community. We have authority, and guidelines, and rules, etc. but as thirddec pointed out, everything must be done with charity.

I spent many years as a Quality Assurance professional. In my job I had to try to get people, managers, even the owner of the company, to do things they needed to do but they didn’t see the purpose for it. In this case one must become an educator and not a policeman. Work to gain allies through Charity, Truth, and Love for God through obedience to His Church.
Even within the context of magisterial obedience, there is great latitude.

Peace
James

 

[puzzleannie]

The most effective scenarios I have seen played out in such situations–and pastor changes are always difficult–go something like this:

Pastor meets with all leadership, including, and first off, staff, PC and FC (Parish council and finance commission) and lay volunteer leadership of ministries and apostolates. When he is done with the parish he does the same with the school, if there is one.

Letting them know what he is doing and why, he “fires” everyone, paid and volunteer, in order to invite the Holy Spirit to guide direction, parish mission, and those who serve by leading ministries. He invites everyone to reapply for their current position, with a CV and updated resume, reminding them to highlight all their current contributions, and especially where they have grown their skillset and experience through their ministry. This is an affirming way of doing it, and they way they respond will tell them most of what he needs to know about who to keep and who to let go.

He does this in an atmosphere of acknowledging and affirming their gifts and contributions, and encouraging them personally, and as ministries, discern the direction in which the Holy Spirit is leading them at this time. He does this while catechizing the parish in the charismatic gifts (those given to individuals by the Holy Spirit to build up the Church–teaching, preaching, administration, service and so forth.)

It is critical he first builds a pastoral and administrative staff who share his vision, and the most effective pastors do this by inviting them to share their views in the context of vision and mission for the parish and for their ministry. He does it collaboratively without ever relinquishing or downplaying his own authority. He demonstrates that his decisions are made in prayerful discernment guided by the Holy Spirit, not as exhibitions of power.

The process is educational for him because he quickly learns who the “in crowd” is, the SSP (Same Six People who seem to run the show). The genius pastor does what business leaders do, creates VPs and puts them in charge of “nice to have but non-essential” endeavors that “need their unique experience and leadership qualifications.” That clears them out of their current entrenched positions to make room for the new leadership the Holy Spirit has been preparing all this time.

He also learns how the staff interact with each other, and with parishioners, and where the trouble spots are there. All paid employees know, or ought to know, they are employees at will and the wise parish or diocesan employee will have his resume, letter of resignation, and letter of intent to re-apply for his position, ready when a new pastor comes on board. His first priority is to get his staff behind him on the same page, eliminate from the outset sources of conflict and back-biting, and then start with a new PC and FC. He hand picks his FC but allows the parish to nominate and vote for PC, publicly after all Masses one weekend, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit actively invoked.

during this “shakedown” period the pastor if he is wise discerns who needs to move on and move out, and does this by encouraging them to explore new directions for themselves, and sometimes (not always) this necessary pruning can be done without hard feelings, resentments and backlash as the individuals involved are guided to see the action of the Holy Spirit in their movement as progress not rejection.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Every priest has a different style of preaching their homilies from the pulpit.

So the first thing would be to make the preaching style in this situation, more oriented toward teaching … some little “trivial pursuit” things [how many psalms are there?; what is the difference between fasting and abstinence; what is the difference between mortal and venial sins? How much does a priest get paid? What is the normal form for receiving Holy Communion and the normal form for going to confession? What is the difference between a homily and a sermon? What are the names of the priests’ vestments? Basic Baltimore Catechism 101 things.]

And then add some “seminar” things for adults. After work for an hour … 7pm to 8pm. The Real Presence. The latest film on the Shroud of Turin. Divine Mercy. Life of Fr. Solanus Casey. Saint Padre Pio. Discussion on favorite Christmas movies. The changes in the Mass over the years. “What’s so special about the Latin Mass?” The relationships between Saints Augustine, Ambrose, Jerome and when they lived and worked and what their role was in putting the New Testament, as we know it, together.

A series on some of the more famous saints and on the lesser known saints: Saints Monica and Augustine. St. Thomas Aquinas. St. Patrick. St. Joseph. St. Philomena.

Add Catholic Answers tracts to the literature rack in the vestibule of the church.

And then, lead by example: frequent confessional hours, more daily Masses, holy hours with Eucharistic Exposition, public Rosary, add prayers at the foot of the altar after Mass is over.

Get the choir to add some of the old Gregorian Chant hymns.

And gradually, over a month or so, get into the more “meaty” issues.

Where there are committees, add some of these things to their agendas.

Start a committee for Eucharistic Adoration … to start, expand and then after some years, Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration.

After the parishioners get comfortable with the pastor and the good information he is providing, then he can get into things like final judgement, right to life, end of life decisions, abortion, natural family planning & artificial birth control.

But to get into these major major things right off, if the parish has gotten a little “squishy” over the years, would lead to hardness of the ear drums.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

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.

 

[smichhertz]

I am not a priest, but if I were, I’d imagine I’d implement changes slowly.

I’d also pick one or two sticking points that I’d want to see implemented first, and start there. I find a piecemeal approach is better than a sweeping reform policy.

I would not force an immediate big change unless circumstances demanded it.

 

[Cricket17]

I belong to a “pretty good” (in Midwestern parlance) diocese that’s in the process of becoming VERY good. Lots of young, orthodox priests who are solidly with the Pope & our bishop. Some have gone all-out attempting to bring “outlier” parishes back into the fold. Others have introduced changes more gradually. While my personal preference would be the former, “shock & awe” approach, I have to admit it hasn’t worked particularly well. Better to lead souls along gently, but firmly, catechizing all the while so people UNDERSTAND the meaning behind the changes.

Not to take anything away from our wonderful, holy priests, but we should never underestimate the value of well-formed, spirit-filled layfolk to re-energize a congregation. Sometimes a good example is the best sermon!

In my small parish we’re blessed to have many different devotional activities, including First Friday Sacred Heart devotions, pre-Mass recitation of the Rosary, Sunday Mass in the Extraordinary Form, a Gregorian Chant choir, Rosary processions several times a year, an amazing Our Lady of Guadalupe celebration, & best of all, a well-attended Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration Chapel. Every single one of these activities was initiated–with permission of our pastor &/or the bishop–by a lay person.

 

[puzzleannie]

the biggest “new priest” problems happen in two cases, one is where the parish has really gone off the rails often not because the priest implemented “unorthodox” practices, but where his leadership style was to allow laity to have control over things that are properly his sole domain, liturgy being the most important and obvious. Those people become convinced that they are the parish leaders with the priest being a figurehead “needed only for sacraments–we do the rest”. Those are the most entrenched people, doing the most overall damage, and the hardest to remove, and leave the most destruction in their wake when they are pushed out.

The second is when a very long term beloved pastor retires or is moved, and a new priest takes his place. Padre Pio and John Paul II combined could not make these parishioners happy with their new priest. The new guy usually only lasts a year, and the people are so glad to see him go they gladly accept and warm up to their next pastor and adopt him as a father and brother. I think bishops know this and they have priests willing to be that interim guy, get the parish over the transition, and be willing to move and allow the next permanent pastor come in.

 

[JRKH]

the biggest “new priest” problems happen in two cases, one is where the parish has really gone off the rails often not **because the priest **implemented “unorthodox” practices, but where his leadership style was to allow laity to have control over things that are properly his sole domain, liturgy being the most important and obvious. Those people become convinced that they are the parish leaders with the priest being a figurehead “needed only for sacraments–we do the rest”. Those are the most entrenched people, doing the most overall damage, and the hardest to remove, and leave the most destruction in their wake when they are pushed out.

Agreed - especially the bolded part. This is a cas of the priest, for whatever reason, abandoning his post of “father” to the parish.

The second is when a very long term beloved pastor retires or is moved, and a new priest takes his place. Padre Pio and John Paul II combined could not make these parishioners happy with their new priest. The new guy usually only lasts a year, and the people are so glad to see him go they gladly accept and warm up to their next pastor and adopt him as a father and brother. I think bishops know this and they have priests willing to be that interim guy, get the parish over the transition, and be willing to move and allow the next permanent pastor come in.

Sounds like “Father O’Malley” in Going My Way and Bells of St Mary’s…

Seriously - I don’t know that I necessarily agree with this view, though I am sure there are cases of such. Much will depend on two things. The state of the parish (orthodoxy) at the time, and the character of the incoming pastor.

Peace
James

 

[Spirithound]

The second is when a very long term beloved pastor retires or is moved, and a new priest takes his place. Padre Pio and John Paul II combined could not make these parishioners happy with their new priest. The new guy usually only lasts a year, and the people are so glad to see him go they gladly accept and warm up to their next pastor and adopt him as a father and brother. I think bishops know this and they have priests willing to be that interim guy, get the parish over the transition, and be willing to move and allow the next permanent pastor come in.

My parish is now in our first pastor after the previous pastor of 15 years retired. I think it’s going quite well. I think the parish has warmed up to him, and it certainly helps that he gives great homilies.

 

[GratefulFred]

Puzzleannie, your responses are excellent, IMO!

I see a parish in two major parts. First, a place I go to publically worship God and receive the Sacraments. BECAUSE I am worshiping GOD HIMSELF and receiving HIS SACRAMENTS, I feel the need to know that public liturgy is spot on with Catholic Church rules from the highest level of the Church, and not reinvented by local people who want to exercise their own creativity.

The second part is the social ministry that occurs that make us a community. We are called to LIVE our Faith. Someone has to translate the principles of our Faith into service to others. Someone has to be there DAILY to provide these human services. In most parishes, that ‘someone’ is a team of people, some volunteers and others paid staff and paid professionals.

Leadership style changes with each leader and depends on that leader’s natural ability, training, experience, the situation at the present time, and finances. As others have said, one parish may have its act together carrying out the principles as Christ would have us, while another parish may be far off course. In one parish, a new pastor may be wise to keep staff, while in another parish he may need to clean house fairly quickly, while in a third parish, it may be wise to wait, observe, assess, and correct, before changing staff. It is a judgment call.

None of us have the complete picture and too often we think that what we ‘know’ is all there is to know. Seldom is that true in any organization, religious or secular. So trying to out guess the new pastor is fraught with peril.

Bottom line is to give the new pastor freedom to do what he thinks is required. We should give him the benefit of the doubt and look for ways to support him, and not judge him too quickly. He is a stranger to us and we are strangers to him. It takes time to get to know one another. Is seems wise to provide a positive atmosphere.

 

[thequeen]

I’m sorry thirddec, I didn’t want to raise the impression that this was a real situation that I’m in. It’s hypothetical and I’m not even a priest.

But I am very interested in the views of people and their advice, because it could help me with my work in my own parish in which I have some responsibilities.

I would say put a stop to the practices that go against the magisterium of the church and any thing else that is not orthodox to the Churches Dogma and everything else will fall into place

 

[thequeen]

for the sake of discussion I will assume this is a hypothetical case although my guess is somebody who prefers one of those options, or #4 is of a mind to rebel against the new priest no matter what, is trying to pick a fight with you.

In general, most new priests (and new bishops) wisely decide to observe for a few months, get to know key people in key ministries, get to know parishioners, staff members and “department heads” (or people who think they are dept. heads and act like it). He then decides what things must be changed immediately which are simply wrong, he explains the change to the people responsible and then to the parishioners and implements it.

The hardest thing he has to do and sometimes the most necessary is firing people who are toxic to the community and liturgical life of the parish or diocese, that includes volunteers. That of course is when fireworks fly because he cannot explain his reasons for those decisions in public so people hear only one side of the story.

For more far reaching changes it is wisest to give people time to get acclimated, to catechize on the change if it is in liturgy, and to prepare the people. The very wisest most pastoral priest knows how to make the people who are responsible for implementing the changes feel as if it was their own idea in the first place.

By the end of the year most of the necessary changes should be in place, if not sooner. If there is a real crisis of authority the priest may have to wield a big stick earlier and with farther effect than he intended.

Very well explained in fact this has happened recently in my own parish I take care of the Library on a vounteer basis and the new priest who is one of two new bishops elected in our diocese became our Pastor after our former one finally retired well our new pastor is more orthodox than our former one and he dismissed alot of the people who were very liberal in their thinking and as a result he dismissed my assitant in the library and some of the other people who had some very liberal views especially in the religious ed program and i am happy to say it has all worked out for the best