A Look at the New Congregation for Clergy Guidelines

On July 20th, the Congregation for Clergy released a new set of recommendations to assist the direction of parishes in the Church’s evangelizing mission. Summaries of the 24-page document, which is titled “The pastoral conversion of the Parish community in the service of the evangelizing mission of the Church” have been provided by Crux and CNA, among other news outlets.

In Europe particularly, where clergy shortages and demographic change have led to massive overhauls that concerned the Vatican (in the the German diocese of Trier, to name just one instance), perhaps the recommendations may provide some safeguard against extreme measures or individual caprices, firstly by laying out the collaborative options available with more specificity, and secondly, by acknowledging that making changes in structure and approach is an organic process which necessarily involves all the members of a local Church: clergy and Faithful alike. The recommendations promote the overall goal of ensuring that the parish is a place of evangelization, while pointing out some of the right and wrong ways to approach this.

Given its length, we cannot fully examine all aspects of the document, but will attempt to give its broad outlines in this post, and to note a few areas of particular interest to our local situation.

The document may be read in its entirety at the Vatican’s own site here.

As a introductory point, it should be noted that these recommendations should not be interpreted as being new legislation. According to Vatican News:

The document does not promulgate any new legislation, but proposes methods to better apply existing rules and canonical norms. The aim is to encourage the co-responsibility of the baptized and to promote pastoral care based on closeness and cooperation between parishes….

[T]he first [part] (chapters 1-6) offers a broad reflection on pastoral conversion, missionary outreach, and the value of the parish in the contemporary context. The second part (chapters 7-11) dwells on the subdivisions of parish communities, various pastoral roles that make them up, and the ways in which the governing norms are applied.

Much of its language will be familiar. Paragraphs 3-6 introduce the essential goals, noting that Christian communities must make a determined missionary decision, quoting Pope Francis’ oft-repeated call to evangelize and engage the world rather than only focusing on self-preservation:

“If something should rightly disturb us and trouble our consciences, it is the fact that so many of our brothers and sisters are living without the strength, light and consolation born of friendship with Jesus Christ, without a community of faith to support them, without meaning and a goal in life. More than by fear of going astray, my hope is that we will be moved by the fear of remaining shut up within structures which give us a false sense of security, within rules which make us harsh judges, within habits which make us feel safe, while at our door people are starving and Jesus does not tire of saying to us: “Give them something to eat” (Mk 6:37)”^[3].

Urged on by this concern, the Church “faithful to her own tradition and at the same time conscious of her universal mission, she can enter into communion with the various civilizations, to their enrichment and the enrichment of the Church herself”^[4]. The fruitful and creative encounter between the Gospel and the culture leads to true progress: on the one hand, the Word of God is incarnate in the history of men, thus renews it; on the other hand, “the Church ^[…] can and ought to be enriched by the development of human social life”^[5], enhancing thereby, in our present age, the mission entrusted to her by Christ.

What is the parish?

Since its inception, the Parish is envisioned as a response to a precise pastoral need, namely that of bringing the Gospel to the People through the proclamation of the faith and the celebration of the Sacraments. The etymology of the word makes clear the meaning of the institution: the Parish is a house among houses^[10] and is a response to the logic of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, alive and active among the community. It is visibly characterised then, as a place of worship, a sign of the permanent presence of the Risen Lord in the midst of his People.

(Paragraph 7)

Not merely a territorial entity

The document goes on to note that territorial boundaries traditional to the parish have become in some ways blurred through increased mobility: “Ecclesial membership in our present age is less a question of birthplace, much less where someone grew up, as it is about being part of a community by adoption.” (paragraph 18) Sometimes this leads to a situation “where places of association are multiplied and where interpersonal relationships risk being dissolved into a virtual world without any commitment or responsibility towards one’s neighbour.” (paragraph 9)

The sanctuary of the poor

A ‘sanctuary’ open to all, the Parish, called to reach out to everyone, without exception, should remember that the poor and excluded must always have a privileged place in the heart of the Church. As Pope Benedict XVI affirmed: “The Gospel is addressed in a special way to the poor”^[35]. In addition, as Pope Francis observed “the new evangelisation is an invitation to acknowledge the saving power at work in their lives and to put them at the centre of the Church’s pilgrim way…. Oftentimes, the Parish community is the first place of personal human encounter that the poor have with the face of the Church.”  

(Paragraph 32-33)

Renewal over bureaucratizing:

In the process of renewal and restructuring, the Parish has to avoid the risk of falling into an excessive and bureaucratic organisation of events and an offering of services that do not express the dynamic of evangelisation, but rather the criterion of self-preservation.

(Paragraph 34)

Discernment is needed to avoid trauma and hurt to communities:

Taking into consideration the profound emotional and nostalgic bonds within a Christian community, pastors ought not to forget that the faith of the People of God is interwoven with familial and communal memories. Often, a sacred place can evoke important milestones in the life of past generations, where faces and occasions have influenced personal and familial journeys. In order to avoid trauma and hurt in the process of restructuring a Parish or, at times, diocesan communities, it is imperative that it be carried out with flexibility and gradualism.

In reference to the reform of the Roman Curia, Pope Francis emphasised that gradualism “has to do with the necessary discernment entailed by historical processes, the passage of time and stages of development, assessment, correction, experimentation, and approvals ad experimentum. In these cases, it is not a matter of indecisiveness, but of the flexibility needed to be able to achieve a true reform”^[43]. Accordingly, one should not act “hastily” in an attempt, as it were, to bring about immediate reforms by means of generic criteria that obey a “rational decision” to the detriment of those who actually live within the territory. Every plan must be situated within the lived experience of a community and implanted in it without causing harm, with a necessary phase of prior consultation, and of progressive implementation and verification.

(Paragraph 36. Emphasis added.)

Genuine renewal not imposed “from above”:

Naturally, a renewal of this sort is not the responsibility solely of the Parish Priest, nor should it be imposed from above in such a way as to exclude the People of God. The pastoral conversion of structures implies the understanding that “the faithful Holy People of God are anointed with the grace of the Holy Spirit; therefore when we reflect, think, evaluate, discern, we must be very attentive to this anointing. Whenever as a Church, as pastors, as consecrated persons, we have forgotten this certainty, we have lost our way. Whenever we try to supplant, silence, look down on, ignore or reduce into small elites the People of God in their totality and differences, we construct communities, pastoral plans, theological accentuations, spiritualities, structures without roots, without history, without faces, without memory, without a body, in the end, without lives. To remove ourselves from the life of the People of God hastens us to the desolation and to a perversion of ecclesial nature”^[44].

It does not pertain to the clergy alone, therefore, to carry out the transformation inspired by the Holy Spirit, since this involves the entire People of God^[45]. It is necessary, however, “to consciously and lucidly seek areas of communion and participation so that the anointing of the People of God may find its concrete mediations to express itself”^[46].

Consequently, the need to overcome a self-referential conception of the Parish or the “clericalisation of pastoral activity” becomes apparent. When it is acknowledged that the state of the People of God “is that of the dignity and freedom of the children of God, in whose hearts the Holy Spirit dwells as in His temple”^[47], this inspires practises and models by which all the baptised, by virtue of the gift of the Holy Spirit and their infused charisms, become active participants of evangelisation, in the style and modality of an organic community, together with other Parish communities or at the diocesan level. In effect, the whole community, and not simply the hierarchy, is the responsible agent of mission, since the Church is identified as the entire People of God.

(Paragraphs 37-38. Emphasis added.)

Fostering spiritual brotherhood among priests:

 Regarding the presence and mission of priests in the Parish community, the common life deserves special mention^[84]; it is recommended by can. 280, even if this is not an obligation for the secular clergy. In this respect, it is worth recalling the fundamental value of the spirit of communion, prayer and common pastoral activity on the part of clerics^[85], with a view to an effective witness of sacramental brotherhood^[86] and a more effective evangelising action.

When the presbyterate experiences community life, priestly identity is strengthened, material concerns diminish, and the temptation of individualism gives way to profoundly personal relationships. Common prayer, shared reflection and study, which must never be lacking in priestly life, can be of great support in the formation of an incarnate priestly spirituality in daily living.

In any case, it will be fitting that, according to his discernment and as far as possible, the Bishop take into account the human and spiritual affinity between priests to whom he intends to entrust a Parish or a grouping of Parishes, inviting them to a generous availability for their new pastoral mission in a common brotherhood^[87].

(Paragraph 63-64)

Addressing parish groupings and closings:

Paragraphs 46-51 deal with parish groupings and closures, and establish, among other things that:

Some causes [for parish suppression by “extinctive union” or “merger”] are not sufficient, such as, for example, the scarcity of diocesan clergy, the general financial situation of a Diocese, or other conditions within the community that are presumably reversible and of brief duration (e.g., numerical consistency, lack of financial self-sufficiency, the urban planning of the territory). As a condition for the legitimacy of this type of provision, the requisite motivations must be directly and organically connected to the interested Parish community, and not on general considerations or theories, or based solely ‘on principle’.

Apropos to the erection or suppression of Parishes, it must be borne in mind that every decision must be adopted by means of a formal decree, given in writing^[58]. Consequently, it is considered contrary to canonical norms to issue a single provision aimed at producing a reorganisation of a general character, either of the entire Diocese, a part of it, or of a group of Parishes, by means of a singular administrative act, general decree or particular law.

(Paragraphs 48-49)

With respect to the suppression of Parishes, the decree must clearly state the reasons that led the Bishop to make this decision. The just cause therefore, must be specifically indicated, it being insufficient simply to refer to the “good of souls”.

The act by which a Parish is suppressed must also make provision for the disposition of temporal goods in accord with the law^[59]; it is necessary to ensure that the Church of the suppressed Parish remains open to the faithful unless there are grave reasons to the contrary, after having heard the Presbyteral Council^[60] . . . .

Ordinarily, also in this case, the legitimate causes for decreeing such a reduction do not include reasons like the lack of clergy, demographic decline or the grave financial state of the Diocese.

(Paragraphs 50-51)

Clergy reassignments not a de facto aspect of restructuring:

Due consideration must be given to priests who have exercised their ministry with merit and the esteem of their communities, also for the good of the faithful, bound as they are to their Pastors by ties of affection and gratitude. The diocesan Bishop, when establishing a particular grouping, must not establish in the same decree that, since several Parishes are being entrusted to a sole Parish Priest^[74], that other Parish Priests, who may present and still in office^[75], are automatically transferred to the office of Parochial Vicar, or are removed de facto from their assignment.

(Paragraph 57)

A pastor is not merely a team leader:

Precisely because of the relationship of familiarity and closeness that is required between a pastor and the community, the office of Parish Priest cannot be entrusted to a juridic person^[91]. Apart from what is envisioned by can. 517, §§1-2, the particular office of Parish Priest may not be entrusted to a group composed of clerics and lay people. Consequently, appellations such as “team leader”, “équipe leader”, or the like, which convey a sense of collegial government of the Parish, are to be avoided.

(Paragraph 66)

While the earlier part of the document speaks in broad terms about the need for parishes to seek the best ways to live the missionary mandate, it is clear that any specific changes to accomplish this should arise in a context of respect for ecclesial relationships:

• those among the clergy,
• those within the parish community,
• those between the Faithful of the parishes and their pastors,
• those between parish communities,
• and those between all these groups and the diocesan bishop.

It would seem that these bonds undergird in many ways the apostolic work to which all Catholics are called. One might go so far as to wonder how the latter can be possible if the former is lacking.

So, if our diocese hopes to carry out its missionary mandate, perhaps some discernment is called for with regard to how these bonds are currently faring, and whether the ways and means so far employed (closed consultation with outside groups, mandatory adoption of canned programming, abrupt disruption of community ties) can be said to harmonize with the dynamic of ecclesial renewal described in the new recommendations.

If this answer to this is no, then are we not just constructing “communities, pastoral plans, theological accentuations, spiritualities, structures without roots, without history, without faces, without memory, without a body, in the end, without lives”?