The “Why.”

Recently, diocesan leaders were asked to read an article to better understand the “why” of Uniting in Heart.

The article, entitled “Re-Imagining What a Catholic Parish Can Be:
A Destination for the 21^st Century” was written through an organization called Acts XXIX, in the Archdiocese of Detroit. The paper can be read in its entirety here.

The article was an interesting read. There were aspects about which most Catholics would agree, and other aspects, perhaps less so.

It outlines:

• How the COVID-19 crisis can serve as a catalyst for change, for reimagining how the Church should look and act.

• Difficulties faced in the Church: shortage of priests and resources, declining numbers after the abuse crisis, overworked clergy and personnel, a culture opposed to faith, the rise of the “nones,”etc.

• That both the world and the Church are suffering and that the Church should move forward via a path of radical change.

• That the radical change should occur by changing the standard parish model, which they assert is “broken and untenable.”

The authors invite us to “dare to imagine” a different sort of parish emerging, one in which:

•Three to six priests serve and live together under the leadership of a pastor who has the charism of leadership

• The other priests, who have complementary charisms to the pastor, are suddenly freed from the burden of serving as pastor, and are free to share their charisms and natural talents in a way that most are unable to do now, so as to pastorally care for the faithful and to unleash the gospel to the unchurched

This community of priests would be a protection from and remedy for many of the ills that plague priests today

-Loneliness

-Frustration

-Discouragement

-Burnout

-Various addictions brought on by the above

• Two to three deacons assist the priests and lay staff in the work of mission and outreach

-Access to the sacraments, especially Mass and confession, is available at times most helpful for the lay faithful in the 21st century

-Perhaps as many as three to four daily Masses, Two in the morning, one at noon, and one in the evening

-Confession offered daily by two priests who have the charism of mercy and who delight in being available as often as possible for the faithful

– Eucharistic exposition and benediction could more easily occur every day of the work week

• Because of the number of priests and deacons, the sick, homebound, imprisoned and others who are suffering, are regularly visited by those clerics with the appropriate charisms, thereby ensuring that nobody is forgotten or abandoned in their time of need and sickness

• Pastors have sufficient resources to move from maintenance to mission, both in terms of Personnel and Finances

• The team that assists the clergy could be composed of people to lead all of these critical ministries, all of them paid a just and living wage, for going out on mission:

-Chief of Operations

-Worship

-Evangelization

-Discipleship

-Marriage and Family

-Christian Service

-Business Manager

-Religious Education

-Youth Ministry

-Facilities

-Hospitality

-Technology

-Media

-Prayer Ministry

-Charisms

-Small Groups

• Because of the number of people on the team assisting the clergy, there are more brothers and sisters with whom to collaborate to unleash the gospel and to rally around and support each other when the “apostolic” era in which we live leads to moments that range from discouraging to threatening

• In addition to greater availability of the sacraments, the lay faithful regularly experience the following:

-The best of pastoral care

-The best of liturgical worship

-The best formation in equipping them for their unique task of evangelizing and sanctifying the world

-Great catechesis, both for youth and adults

-Excellent pre-marriage preparation and ongoing care for the domestic church

-Small group ministry and so many other things

• Sunday Masses are full or near capacity, significantly buoying up the clergy and lay faithful

• More diverse parishes are a natural outgrowth, offering opportunity for much-needed healing where the Church has acted more like the world than the Body of Christ

-This diversity and unity would be a most powerful witness especially among younger people, who are often scandalized by our all too often lack of diversity and unity

• Those who have not yet encountered the One who alone can rescue the world from the powers of Sin and Death would be in proximity to a thriving parish family where the best of shallow entry points are available so that Jesus can be met, the power of the Holy Spirit can be received, and the nightmare that is life apart from God can be ended.”

By what means could such a parish be built?

The authors explain:

“What might God be asking us to build today?
Perhaps the Holy Spirit is calling us to see these days we’re living in as an opportunity to reimage[sic] what a parish can be.

A diocese with, for example, 200 parishes, could be retooled to 40 or 50 parishes, where each parish becomes a true center of excellence for unleashing the gospel….”

So in the end, the authors’ solution to all the Church’s challenges and their prescription for renewed spiritual health would appear to lie in a program of drastic parish closures. A ratio of more than 3 closed for every one left open was the example offered in the Acts XXIX paper.

A few thoughts:

As most would agree, the challenges to our Faith today are not small. We have no wish to minimize them, and in fact can find common ground with the authors of the piece in terms of some of the problems we face–although many other things could be added to the list of things needing to be addressed.

The assumption here seems to be that the new mega-parishes will be so well-managed that they just will not have those issues that plague the Church: retaining teens and young people, gaining priestly vocations, etc.–as though these were primarily issues of resource allocation and programming.

Is this where we think the problems hurting our Church lie? Or do the roots lie deeper than management and programs? Was the Church built and its mission spread by well-paid, resource-rich individuals to begin with?

Secondly, like many such proposals, the authors tend to gloss over the negative consequences. It seems to be taken for granted that everyone will simply adapt to the “retooling,” that the loss of, in this case, over 75% of parishes (as suggested in the Acts XXIX article) will merely be unfortunate. The reality is that whole communities will be negatively impacted, and that some number of disheartened people will simply not return to the “retooled” Church for one reason or another.

We have pointed previously to the Gallup research that shows how past drastic changes at the parish level led to massive and seemingly permanent losses of members of our Faith. Is this merely a “regrettable” but acceptable loss?

Finally, behind all the positivity of language in such plans, one gets the sense that there is very, very little belief that the Church is likely to recover and grow. Some closures are inevitable, as we have acknowledged. Permanent closures on a massive scale, however, adopted as a new strategy, speak very little to hope, optimism or to the belief that God works even in small or poor communities. This will be transparently obvious to the world we’re hoping to evangelize.

People who point this out will likely be dismissed as being merely stodgy and fearful of change. (This may be why our clergy are spending the afternoon in conferences focused on accepting the “inevitability of change” and how to adopt “a desert spirituality” in times of change.)

Yet could we not also argue that the Church appears to be retreating from the world, despite its protestations to the contrary, when it becomes focused on creating surroundings that are more comfortable or more efficient by business standards? We retract the open arms of the Church from the places that need them the most, reducing her points of contact with mankind, leaving a trail of empty altars, while considering ourselves to be more “apostolic.”

To what extent will Acts XXIX’s line of reasoning be present in our own diocesan plan? Their article was presented as offering the “why” of Uniting in Heart. Does it also represent the “how“?

It is good for us to remember at this moment that we have entered the month in which the Sacred Heart of Jesus is traditionally honored. Let us, before all else, place our cares–and those of our bishop, priests, parishioners and our country–with Him, Who is always compassionate toward the troubled hearts of all people.