OK, so it’s not officially 2 parishes in one church, but many say it’s like that. The parish church of my youth is now comprised of an English speaking community and a Spanish speaking community with separate parish councils, schools of religion, liturgical teams, etc. Most of the long established leaders in this church have now left their parish because the current priest has been catering to the needs, desires and whims of the Spanish speaking community. I understand the need for the Church to be open to immigrant cultures, but I am not seeing a blending of cultures. Instead I see formerly anglo parishes splitting up and becoming hispanic parishes. .)
this is becoming common up north where I come from. if the demographics of the neighborhood change, over time the composition of the parish population will change. that has always been true particularly in big cities. The established parish community by definition must care for the pastoral needs of all those within the boundaries. The scenario you describe is one way this has been attempted.
In the heyday of immigration of many Catholic ethnic groups from Europe big cities established ethnic parishes, because these populations demanded priests from their own culture and language, so in a city like Cleveland you had Catholic parishes that were Italian, Slovenian, Polish, Lithuanian etc., and in the same territory, the older Irish or German parish that became the “generic” one. Over time as these populations moved to the suburbs, so did some of the parishes, or they merged, changed identity, or even closed.
the dual parishes arise because the number of those in the new group, usually Hispanic, but sometimes Vietnamese, Korean or other new arrivals who bring their Catholic faith and customs with them, has grown large enough to need their own parish, their own Mass, RE etc., but can’t build their own church. It is one way the bishops have addressed the situation.
There is a lot of debate on whether it is the best way. The debate has always been there, and will always be with us as long as we are a universal, multi-ethnic multi-cultural church.
But the mentality of “my granddaddy built this church and I want the Mass, RE, school and other programs to remain exactly as I remember from my childhood, and if THOSE people want to move in here they can just build their own church” is antiethical to the concept of parish and also hardly Christian.
If we are supposed to evangelize and bring in new people to the church, and to welcome Catholics who come from elsewhere, the fortress mentality is hardly the way to do it.
obviously the situation here has been somewhat different. Most Catholic parishes have been historically Mexican, and had to decide how to integrate first Anglos (who usually built their own parishes), and now must integrate growing numbers of Filipino, Indian, Vietnamese and other Catholics. There is a lot of debate on whether parishes, Masses, RE, programs etc. should be bilingual, or whether parallel masses & programs are better.
In answer to OP the way to meet the needs of all Catholics is with a Pastoral mentality, not with a circle the wagons and shoot strangers mentality.
since I see the thread has already been hijacked to a “Mexicans in the workplace” rant, I will also add a further historical note. Catholic parishes played a huge role in inculturating new immigrants, teaching English classes, job training, and other ways. They also played a huge role in honoring and helping preserve cultural and ethnic customs. Both have value, both are necessary in meeting needs, but the primary purpose of the parish is to celebrate Mass and the sacraments, confect the Eucharist, evangelize, catechize and give pastoral care to all Catholics in their boundaries, and to evangelize non-Catholics and the unchurched.
Our local workaround was to use one of the bilingual workers as an interpreter. Most of our Hispanics understood enough English that we seldom had to resort to this, though.