I have absolutely no inside knowledge about the diocese in question. However, being that I am active in one parish in which there has been “closure talk” recently, let me just say that sometimes closures are not necessary and are knee-jerk reactions to dwindling attendance which in turn is actually the result of very poor local administrative decisions.
For example, at least one poster here mentioned affiliated schools. In our case, what has been happening is unbelievably bad leadership on the part of the principal of that school. Unlike many other Catholic schools which require regular attendance at Sunday Mass and/or regular minimum contributions to the church (in addition to whatever contributions are required to the school, as a condition of school registration), this principal has been letting the families be completely irresponsible in this regard. The families are not impoverished: far from it. Rather, they live in tony suburbs 10-20 miles away, and drive their children in, in their SUV’s. (Major bad decision #1, a decision which has not been monitored by the pastor. We had to bring it to his attention, and to suggest a 180-degree on the policy.)
Second, Mass attendance dwindled after the parish reduced its Masses (eliminating the Saturday vigil), locked the Church for most of the time, etc. Parishioners were major turned off, began to attend other parishes nearby which were open, and began donating (instead) to those parishes. That in turn (not surprisingly) reduced the parish coffers even more, resulting in “closure talk” and “What will be do? What will be do?”
Third, now and then a pastor is out of touch with what Catholics currently hunger for and what those Catholics have shown they respond to. He was shocked to learn that parishionners want more frequent confession opportunities, Mass occasions, and open chapels – in, at the very least, some kind of rotating schedule among a cluster of several cooperating nearby parishes whereby the faithful would know where to go on any day of the week for sacraments and private prayer.
The pastors – the one leaving and the one coming – never bothered to avail themselves of the only-too-willing and cooperative parishioners, who were eager to provide free services (saving parish outlay) in addition to their weekly cash donations. (Manual labor, administrative help, domestic help – all gratis.) This was certainly an example of Not Asking (so You Will Not Receive). Once again, it became up to the parishioners, at the brink of their parish closing (which still might) to offer this as an additional, if minor, avenue of financial rescue.
So, sometimes lay people have rational and legitimate reasons for reacting angrily, when such situations could have been avoided by not burying heads in sand, so to speak, and by being forward-looking, proactive before a community faces A Point of No Return. It’s just difficult for me to believe that somewhere, in every diocese/archdiocese, there is not at least one person – lay or clergy – who can offer ideas, support, leadership to an overwhelmed pastor who is perhaps too close to the situation to envision a solution, and/or who lacks leadership skills himself. What he does not lack is a mouth and a voice.
This only speaks to any situation in which a community might be so upset that they would be inclined to “dig their heels in” out of frustration with people who have a history of being non-responsive. (And because some people assume that all parish closures are unavoidable. Not even close.)
