Those Who Cannot Remember the Past Are Condemned to Repeat It
From a reader. Thank you for sharing, CPB:
I strongly agree with the OP by PMH, in my opinion and experience, it underlines one of the big concerns I have with the “UIH” plan. As stated in the OP, one of the great strengths of the US Catholic Church is its parishes. When I moved from Europe to the USA, it took me a long time to understand the reason behind this great strength.
In Europe, at the beginning of the 20th century, many governments decided to take control of the church buildings but to leave the right to the Catholics to practice their “cult” in them. That state of law persists today in many European countries. The effect of taking control of the buildings was immediate, the churches were beautifully kept (nice roof, nice furnace…etc…) but the number of faithful decreased dramatically over the following decades. The faithful felt unconnected from the place. And this was the plan all along, as stated by the Marxists leaders later: the goal of this takeover by the state was to prevent Catholics from being rooted in parishes with strong identities. Their predictions were that they would have to keep the parishes opened and beautiful (for the time being) but that by depriving Catholics of their sense of community, the churches will rapidly be emptied. Soon their predictions were realized. Catholics lost their faithfulness to their parish, and later their faith… which eventually allowed the government to sell the unattended buildings at a profit.
Over the second part of the 20th century, emptied churches and diminishing clergy led church authorities to reorganize dioceses along the lines of UIH. They asked the few remaining priests to rotate between parishes and shifted priests around from place to place every three years. The results of this was quite dramatic, the remaining European parishioners started to hop from parish to parish to find the priest that pleased them the most. The absence of rooting to a parish led to a cratering of donations. Many priests went into serious depression calling their new ministry the “pastoral of gas” meaning that they were just driving hours to cover the sacraments in huge “pastorates”. Vocations from parishes came to a full halt. Almost all sacerdotal vocations in Europe come from youth movements. Ungrounded pastorates with constantly rotating priests only play the role of sacramental supermarket. Almost no vocations come from parishes anymore. Why? Because without true friendships and common history through a community, Christ has very little opportunity and time to speak. Parishioners and priests are always in a hurry and can’t develop this long-term human bound.
However there is some hope: in the 10 to 20 year interim, many European bishops and priests have realized that the parish community with its buildings, its priests, its history is critical to the health of the faith and a strong response to the constant change happening in our world. Many priests have started to redevelop the parish life as is practiced in the USA. This includes the sacraments but also very simple human things such as parish dinners, sports, schools, parish groups, dances, music, festivals…etc… and yes even going away parties for leaving or retiring priest… I disagree that this is a frivolous need. We are not angels after all, and in this world, we do have a body that needs some concrete things to develop our love. As a parishioner in the US, I became so excited about feeling a true love for my parish that was something I had never experienced before… I think Christ Himself shows us that it is not a bad thing to be attached and grounded in a place with its own traditions and its own community. He became man living in a tiny village of a very uncivilized part of the world. He spent all His ministry in an area that cover about 1 square mile at most and met only a few people. In my opinion Christ had a parish and a very small and poor one.
Anyway all of this is to say that, in my opinion, dissolving parish identity into large pastorates with a uniformed practice controlled at the diocese level is going to destroy this strength and identity of parishes in the Lafayette diocese. As happened in Europe, I believe this plan will further reduce practice, donations and vocations, make parishioners more susceptible to shop around for parishes, decrease the faith in the diocese and very likely discourage the clergy. I don’t deny that there are serious material challenges in the diocese. Strong parishes did not prevent the erosion of practice, sexual scandals, diminution of donations…etc… However, in comparison with most of Europe, the diocese of Lafayette has a lot of natural and supernatural strengths to build upon thanks to its priests and parishes. Most parishioners in this diocese owe their faith to these parishes. Most young priests in this diocese saw their vocations developed thanks to a strong bound with a specific priest in a stable parish. Did Teamwork gather and consider these data? Off course not, these are not easily measurable data but they are the life and soul of this diocese. The full upheaval and probable demolition of parishes suggested by the UIH slogan and the “disgruntled catholics” post is very likely based on biased data by a secular firm. Why should we trust this firm to set our diocese course? I feel our bishop has been convinced by their shiny products that he will solve the material issues of this diocese… Will this plan makes more saints? I doubt it… Most saints in history were born in a poor but strong parishes.
Users Today : 15
Total Users : 152647
Total views : 501089
Who's Online : 0
18 Replies to “Those Who Cannot Remember the Past Are Condemned to Repeat It”
“What sort of father, when questioned about an upheaval in family life would say “I don’t have to tell you anything, and you can’t do anything about it. And if you question this or try to talk about it, you’re a bad child.” Well, he wouldn’t stop being a father… he just wouldn’t be a very good one.”
Thank you to CPB for the post. Thank you to E.B. for the comment.
Both brilliant and both deserving of the Bishop’s attention.
This all makes me so sad. What a month March was! First, we had the very harsh announcements of the widespread priests’ assignments. We knew this UIH shakeup was coming, but I think no one was prepared for the bluntness of the announcements. Ten days later we had the official announcement of the closing of the churches and the denial of the Sacraments because of the pandemic with no warning. No warning beforehand that people might want to go to confession before the churches closed. No warning that people might want to go to daily Mass before the churches were closed. Just another blunt announcement. The use of the words “priests are forbidden….” in the bishop’s announcement was especially telling for me. I did not see that in any other bishop’s statement. I checked to see if Archbishop Thompson used that language. He did not. And all of this turmoil during Lent, when our hearts should be focused on Christ. Pandemics have no heart, but we would hope that bishops and priests do. Alas. As if the sexual scandals in the Church at large were not enough to wound us, we now have to deal with the new business plan for the diocese and this pandemic which is stripping many families of health AND financial stability. I wonder what our parishes will look like when the dust settles. What will the census in the pews look like and what will people be able to give in the collections? What will parishes suffer if the Fruitful Harvest pledges can’t be fulfilled because of hardship of parishioners? In the end, this whole dilemma is about souls. How many are being lost because of the feeling that the laity does not deserve answers to any question we might have. In spite of my agreement will some of the things said here, my prayer is that in this next 2 weeks, the Red Wolf will pause this site and let people concentrate on the Passion of Christ and then Easter. Please find a live stream of Eucharistic Adoration online and pray that what lies ahead of us, because we can’t stop it, will be bring about the good of the Kingdom of God. Thankfully through technology, we can find Jesus and pray for the good of our diocese and an end to this pandemic. Make this Holy Week a fruitful one for the Glory of God.
Red Wolf keep up the good work. You are filling us with HOPE!
As one simply a Catholic mother to another, I have to disagree. My prayer is that the Red Wolf will continue to expose the deep-rooted problems with Uniting-in-Heart. The mysteries of Holy Week, the suffering and passion of our Lord, and the joy of Easter should inspire us to DO something to the Glory of His name. God is truth and we seek His truth. And, as the Bishop and his plan have done little in the name of truth or honesty, I ask Red Wolf, please continue posting! Yes, souls ARE being lost and there is not a moment to lose.
The Red Wolves have heard to you. Let us all enter into prayer- for our Church, for our families, and for ourselves. See you after Easter!
The fact that so many have to remain anonymous out of fear of retaliation really tells you all you need to know about what’s in the hearts of our local church’s leadership. Want to unite with that? Me neither. Matthew 7-20
CPB, thank you for your fantastic, insightful post. I’m grateful the Red Wolf chose to highlight it in this way. It’s had me thinking quite a lot.
I’m sure I’m not the only one who has wondered, if the church truly is an autocracy, why would the Red Wolf even bother to do this? What is the goal here? Is it simply to have a place to air one’s grievances and commiserate about the sad state of things? If we are powerless, then how CAN we stop from repeating the mistakes of Europe? Is this all in vain? I cannot speak for R.W., but I think what is being done here is very worthwhile.
First, we must acknowledge that the church IS an autocracy- and we have no wish that it be otherwise! No one here is advocating democracy for the Catholic Faith, and certainly no one wants rebellion. However, it is not correct, as some have asserted, that bishops have no obligations to communicate and consult with the laity. Bishops may have limited CANONICAL requirements… but they certainly are obliged to far more than those specific things enumerated in canon law. But the canonical recourse available to the laity IS in fact limited. As with most monarchies, rulers can be either benevolent or tyrannical, and it seems from the comments of at least one UIH apologist that the current leadership is quite content to be the latter. But that doesn’t mean we are wasting our time.
We MAY effect change. Perhaps not in the short or medium term, but in the long run, we may clean up a great deal with our efforts. Nothing cleans up like sunshine. “From one end of the heavens it comes forth; its course runs through to the other; nothing escapes its heat.” Leaders, perhaps most importantly spiritual leaders, must be held accountable, and we have the right to do so. (See Code of Canon Law 212 §2, 3). Naturally this must be done with great care and prayer, and not out of idleness or desire merely to tweak the nose of the those in legitimate authority. However, I don’t think a dash of wit or sarcasm is out of order, especially if any such leader should manifest gross callousness and spite, especially behind the veil of anonymity.
The problems faced in this regard go far behind our little diocese of Lafayette. Bishops are not bothering to listen to their people, especially the most faithful among them. The faithful are frequently told to sit down, shut up, and quit making trouble (but keep tithing). This seems very much to be the case with what the proponents of UIH acknowledge is a “radical change.” What sort of father, when questioned about an upheaval in family life would say “I don’t have to tell you anything, and you can’t do anything about it. And if you question this or try to talk about it, you’re a bad child.” Well, he wouldn’t stop being a father… he just wouldn’t be a very good one.
But it’s not only in the matter of governance that our Church leaders have failed us, both here and in other dioceses. Too many of our prelates are pompous beyond measure, and many are either weak or wicked to boot. The sexual and financial scandals flowing from these faults have been well documented elsewhere, and continue to pain all the faithful. Just as damaging as these corruptions, bishops and their mouthpieces are also afraid to stand up for Catholic doctrine when it is not politically correct. That is sadly the case here in our home diocese. Let’s be honest- the buzzwords like “vibrancy” and “mission” wouldn’t be so grating if they didn’t come from the same sources that spout pablum and fail to confront sin, confusion and heresy with clarity and courage.
The aforementioned UIH apologist saw fit at the conclusion of his comment to list some prescriptions for the ailments of the church and, not surprisingly, they were suggestions for the laity alone. Well, those of us following this project have some suggestions as well. And we have some questions to ask, and some information to share with the rest of the laity about what is really happening. I look forward to what the Red Wolf will bring us next.
Excellent! There are some profound insights here that beg for a response — a response from our bishop.
These insights are also excellent sources of meditation as we prepare to begin Holy Week.
I have no doubt that obstinacy will remain the tactic of our local leadership. UIH is after all bought and paid for. But Red Wolf has shined a much needed light on the secrecy and fear surrounding UIH and its forced implementation.
“ What sort of father, when questioned about an upheaval in family life would say ‘I don’t have to tell you anything, and you can’t do anything about it. And if you question this or try to talk about it, you’re a bad child.’ Well, he wouldn’t stop being a father… he just wouldn’t be a very good one.”
Amen
It’s great that this person has had these experiences in their own parish, but that’s the experience of one person in one parish. I don’t disagree that this doesn’t seem like a good idea, but I’d like to offer a counter-example from my own experience.
It seems like it’s the same 5-10 people doing everything for the parish. I’ve watched youth events have to be cancelled because they couldn’t get a second adult to chaperone 12 youth. I’ve watched Bible studies fall apart because only 3 or 4 people bothered to show up. I’ve seen Masses get taken off the schedule because there were only 25 people there, when the parish’s registration numbers should have been seeing 250-300. I’ve seen projects fall apart because of a lack of support and people leaving the parish in droves because none of them were invested enough to care what happened to it.
Yes, we absolutely should care for our parishes and be attached to them. But are we doing OUR part to keep them running? I think it’s something this program should absolutely be calling us out on. And maybe, just maybe, by coming together and bringing the entire parish together (and not just the same 25 people we always see), we’ll be able to get enough growth that we can turn the clock back on this.
The Lord said “feed my sheep,” not “count my sheep.”
And that’s great, but… there’s a lot of them that need taken care of
I think this is a great point and would argue that even churches with vibrant communities struggle with this. I just think that enacting a plan like Uniting in Heart would see those numbers fall even more (and I know we are not supposed to count sheep but we are, of course, dealing with practical realities).
I am fitting this in, not to reply to this comment but to put my 2 cents in. My wife & I have belonged to the Lafayette Diocese forever. We moved to Indy from Rensselaer and have enjoyed our relationships at Holy Spirit for several years. When the Bishop robbed Father Dan and sent a lesser man to take his place, plus seeing all this movement of personnel, we became upset. We have seen priests hurt by movement and/or demotion. We have seen the Precious Blood fathers sent back to Ohio or to other diocese (Been in the diocese since 1898 & helped meet the shortage of diocesan priests). Some priests have retired earlier than they planned. We have goofy changes made to the Mass from time to time. All by Bishop Doherty. We decided to check out the Indy Diocese and have move across the border – parish wise and are very happy. We wish we had done that may years ago. We that the good bishop for urging us to make the move. The Lafayette diocese has a great history, in spite of a couple of Bishops, but has taken all to the bottom of the barrel from our perspective. May God bless the clergy for staying to help.
“. . . but that’s the experience of one person in one parish.”
Wasn’t the description of what happened not just in one parish, but all across Europe?
I think that this reply misses the main thrust of CPB’s comment. It does not read as a personal experience of a single parish, rather it contextualizes a commentary about the consequences of a radical shift in methodology and ideology – specifically, a shift that aims away from family and subsidiarity (Catholic social teaching) and towards corporatization and a centralization of governance (Marxism) – that focuses on economic benefits prior to human or spiritual benefits.
The problem of the same 5-10 people shouldering the social burden of the parish is a red herring. These few faithful, are they are the last ember of a vibrant Catholic culture? Are they the very ones that have the “friendships and common history” with their pastor who has cultivated the love of Christ in their hearts, which prompts a consistency in Christ-like service? Are they the scrupulous who fear being “bad” Catholics? Are they the disenfranchised who have no other community?
Are we doing OUR part? These sound like a problems that the laity needs to solve with the help of the bishop and pastor, not ones the bishop needs to farm out to a consulting group who cares little for the personal/spiritual interests of the people. Maybe the bishop ought to think of this diocese as his family, not his business.
What I love about CPB’s post is that he lived it. He lived what the Uniting in Heart plan/process/culture is planning at this very moment.
The question is, is this what we truly want as a diocese going forward? Are the challenges presented by Partners Edge going to be solved by an artificial construct of social/parish engineering that will destroy parish identities?
Have the priests had the chance, together, to address the challenges with the bishop of this diocese, with the director of vocations, share their opinions, brainstorm? Or has the plan/process/culture been presented to them as, “Accept this, implement this, become this…or else?!”
And if there are problem priests/parishes, is the destruction as outlined by CPB the answer, or rather simply the best way not to confront them, to sideline them, while saddling the pastors who get them as assistants with yet another exhausting burden?
That’s a recipe for disaster. And one more thing as mentioned in another post, if the diocese doesn’t implement the UIH plan/process/culture, does the diocese have to repay what must have been an enormous $$$ grant by Eli Lilly?
Wonderful post from a heartbroken survivor.
I am so thankful Red Wolf decided to highlight this comment from yesterday. What an incredibly insightful post from someone who has lived through the destruction. I truly hope and pray that our Diocesan leaders will think about these things. It’s almost as if they have created Uniting in Heart as a self-fulfilling prophecy. “We have to plan for fewer Vocations and less revenue” *puts plan into action that cuts vocations off at the knees and creates such anger among the faithful that they stop giving money* “SEE!! We told you so! We knew this was coming!”