What is the difference between a Franciscan parish and a "regular" one?

[GreenHorse]

I posted previously about RCIA and being eligible (thank you for the helpful replies!)

I found a Franciscan parish fairly nearby that seemed welcoming, and called them. The priest (?) who I spoke with was amazing; very happy for my inquiry, took my name and number and sent it on, and encouraged me to introduce myself after mass this weekend. I’m definitely feeling like this is a route that God is opening for me.

What, exactly, is the difference between them and other parishes, structurally? I know they’re a specific order within the Church, but would my experience there be otherwise the same as any other parish? Are they “Brothers” or ordained priests? And I’m assuming they are still under the local Archbishop (Thomas Collins, who I’ve heard speak and is a very compelling person)? Or do they report directly to their order?

Apologies for all the questions, I’m just trying to wrap my head around what I’m getting into. I thought I was very knowledgeable about Christianity, coming from a Baptist background… currently learning otherwise XD

 

[otjm]

A Franciscan parish is a parish of a diocese or an archdiocese which is staffed by a Franciscan priest as either an administrator or a pastor (the difference not being particularly relevant as you generally can’t tell the difference - it is about authority over certain parish matters - not liturgy). If it is a large parish it might be possible that in addition to the priest, their might be a brother Franciscan (not ordained).

In general, most orders have been over time pulling back from staffing parishes, as that for most orders is not their charism. The history of the Franciscans, particularly in the southwest of the US involved setting up parishes and missions before much of the area became part of the US, so I don’t presume to speak for the orders. I am aware of 2 parishes, one Dominican and one Franciscan in the Portland area of Oregon, and I know there are Dominicans who are on campus at U of Oregon. So it is not as if all orders have pulled back from staffing parishes. As many, if not most dioceses in the US are less than overstaffed with diocesan priests, the orders help to alleviate gaps.

While orders may have both priests and brothers (with the exception at least of the Briggettine monastery in Amity, Oregon, which has only professed brothers), only a priest can say Mass, hear confessions, witness weddings (as well as deacons), and administer the Sacrament of the Sick.

The parish will be part of the diocese. The priest, being an order priest, may bring to the parish the charism of his order (Franciscans being evangelizers and models of poverty); but when he retires or is called by his order for other work, the next priest could be a diocesan priest. The parish might be impacted more by the difference in personalities than by a diocesan/order difference.

And as to poverty, I once heard a diocesan priest remark rather dryly that the order priests took the vow of poverty; he just lived it.

So, to an extent, they have two “bosses” if you will; one, the bishop, and the other, whomever heads their order. Running the parish is under the bishop, as the parish belongs to the diocese. The Order is not going to come in and tell the Franciscan priest how to run it; but if there are certain things as a Franciscan he is to do (such as prayer formats), then he takes direction from the order, and likely if the order needs his presence of a meeting, he would notify the bishop of his need to travel to the meeting.

 

[steve-b]

I posted previously about RCIA and being eligible (thank you for the helpful replies!)

I found a Franciscan parish fairly nearby that seemed welcoming, and called them. The priest (?) who I spoke with was amazing; very happy for my inquiry, took my name and number and sent it on, and encouraged me to introduce myself after mass this weekend. I’m definitely feeling like this is a route that God is opening for me.

What, exactly, is the difference between them and other parishes, structurally? I know they’re a specific order within the Church, but would my experience there be otherwise the same as any other parish? Are they “Brothers” or ordained priests?

Franciscans have both ordained, who are priests and bishops,… and not ordained which would be brothers.

GreenHorse:

And I’m assuming they are still under the local Archbishop (Thomas Collins, who I’ve heard speak and is a very compelling person)? Or do they report directly to their order?

It’s Both

But the bishop of the diocese has priority.

 

[BartholomewB]

Just a detail to add to @otjm’s very full answer to your question. The word “regular”, in this context, simply means that the parish is staffed by regular clergy rather than diocesan clergy. Regular clergy are those priests who are members of an order, such as the Franciscans, the Dominicans, the Jesuits, the Carmelites, the Claretians, the Redemptorists, and others. A diocesan priest belongs to no order but is directly subordinate to his diocesan bishop, and will normally expect to spend his whole life in the one diocese, while a Franciscan, a Jesuit, or any of the others, is at the disposal of his superiors in the order to be transferred anywhere in the world.

 

[TomH1]

I was drawn to this thread because it is a question that has been vaguely in the back of my mind for some time. I may be wrong but so far I do not think any answer has answered my particular query so I am going to add it. I know that when a parish is staffed by regular (religious) priests rather than secular (diocesan) ones a particular institute of consecrated life or society of apostolic life staffs the parish. He may be what Canon Law in Latin calls the parochus and is called here in the UK parish priest and in North America pastor. There may be other priests and there may be brothers in the same community and they serve in the parish, too.

However, is that all? In other words, are they simply providing the priest rather than the diocese doing so? Do they differ in another way? I heave read expression such as, ’ the [insert name of institute or society] own such and such a parish’. Does the institute of consecrated life or society of apostolic life have any other relationship to the parish? For example, could the institute or society own the parish property rather than the diocese? Of course, I do know the (arch)bishop is still the final authority because the parish remains a part of his (arch)diocese.

 

[BartholomewB]

For example, could the institute or society own the parish property rather than the diocese?

In some countries, at least, yes. When I was living in São Paulo, I attended Mass for several years in a Claretian parish, where the church and adjoining buildings, including a bookstore on one side and the priests’ house on the other, were all the property of the Claretian order. The church had originally been built by the Jesuits and transferred (sold?) to the Claretians back in the nineteenth century.

 

[dochawk]

When I was at the University of Santa Clara, a Jesuit school, the evening Mases were for the students, and the morning masses were really for St. Clare’s parish up the street, which the Jesuit community also served.

I always assumed that it was a regular parish, but the name gives pause . . .

The mission/university campus was transferred from the Franciscans to the Jesuits in 1850 or so . . .

 

[Herculees]

There is no such thing as a Franciscan parish!!! A parish by definition is a church of a diocese for people that live in a particular boundary. Having said that a Franciscan Shrine or Church is one that is owned by a Franciscan order that people may go there for Mass, Sacraments, or to pray, but unlike a parish they can not baptize/confirm/celebrate marriages nor funerals without the Bishop’s consent, and generally is an exception to the rule. Franciscans report directly to their local superior, then to their Provincial/Regional Superior, then to the Superior General, and finally to the Pope. Generally the Bishop is not involved with religious houses/churches unless something grievous pops up. Sometimes diocesan churches lack enough staff to have a diocesan priest as a pastor and the local Bishop may ask a religious community to staff it but it is still not a Franciscan parish but rather a parish church that happens to a Franciscan priest appointed as their pastor. Only a parish can baptize, celebrate First Communion, celebrate weddings/funerals without the explicit permission of the Bishop. I hope this explanation helps!

 

[PapyrusDouay]

Structurally… no, there likely won’t be much of a difference. But chances are the Franciscan Charism will play out more in the life of the parish. I don’t just mean Franciscan-type ministries, which may or may not happen depending on the pastor and the parishioners. But they way they pastor associates and interacts with the people, the way he manages the committees, the staff, office organization will likely be a little different. It will be influenced by his Franciscan formation. Of course individual priests will vary, and I’m a little biased, but the biggest difference in my opinion, and parishioners I’ve spoken to, is the sense of community and relationship with the pastor (or other friars) is different and distinctly Franciscan. I suspect…the charism of “fraternity” or “brotherhood” and other aspects of Franciscan life tends to permeate into the parish culture more, , and can create a distinct Franciscan community “feel”. Of course I’m biased, and I’m trying to explain something esoteric and unexplainable, but I think the biggest difference will be in how people relate to one another…I can’t explain it well, it’s just different…usually. I’d say check it out, talk to parishioners, and maybe you’ll find find it to your liking, and maybe you won’t notice a difference at all. Pax et Bonum.

 

[commenter]

Franciscans and other orders often operate shrine or other churches that are not parishes, but they can operate parishes too. technically there are no “Franciscan parishees” but rather it is a diocesan parish with a Franciscan rectory or monastery. The bishop oversees public Ministry, since laity are under the bishop, while order priests or brothers are under the Franciscan provincial.

Parishes are usually owned by the diocese but if a. Order owns the real estate that doesn’t really affect who has pastoral responsibility.

 

[PapyrusDouay]

Parishes are usually owned by the diocese but if a. Order owns the real estate that doesn’t really affect who has pastoral responsibility.

Yes, case in point, there is a Parish church and friary the Capuchin’s built in NYC. At one point we gave up responsibility for running that parish due to staffing, but kept the friary and the rest of the grounds. The bishop chose another community to minister there. They did for about 13 years even though we built it and still lived there. When that community decided to leave a couple years ago, it was up to the Bishop to find someone else to run it. (Fortunately he’s asked us if we wanted it back, and we accepted). Ultimate responsibility fell to the diocese and the bishop.

I will also note that even though it is a diocesan parish, Capuchins (and others) do consider this particular parish to be a “Capuchin Parish” in that our friars designed it and built it from the the ground up over 150 years ago, and have ministered there for all but about 13 of those years. Statues, stain glass art, other symbols are unmistakably Franciscan. Many of the parishioners feel a strong “connection” to the Capuchin order and Franciscan charisms there as well. It is very much, and always has been a spiritually “Franciscan parish”…mass attendance declined when we left, and rose when we got it back. A couple parishioners even told friars that they prayed daily we’d return. It’s a diocesan parish, but it’s also a “Capuchin Franciscan Parish”. It’s not the only one like that. And there are parishes we administer but are NOT like that, but when someone says a “Franciscan parish” or “Augustinian parish” this is the sense I get and the image that comes to mind: those diocesan parishes administered by the Order that have something distinctly Franciscan (or Augustinian, Jesuit, Benedictine etc) about them. Our role there isn’t just temporary or in a “fill-in” capacity, but is woven into the fabric and heart of the parish itself.

 

[commenter]

I agree, at a religious order parish I often visit, the parish bulletin gives updates on priests who formerly served there. Retired priests who serve part time often talk about their time in mission territories or other regions of the US. The parish passes along everything from the diocese but also some of the Order’s spirituality.

There is a sense that “you are part of the larger Church” in this parish, more so than other parishes.

 

[otjm]

Of course I’m biased, and I’m trying to explain something esoteric and unexplainable, but I think the biggest difference will be in how people relate to one another…I can’t explain it well, it’s just different…

Oh, I think you did a reasonably good job of explaining it.