Now don’t be shocked but it seems that people who don’t listen to bishops also believe bishops and priests are kinda’ unnecessary. Who’d a thunk it?
Here’s the lede from Boston.com:
Maryellen and Jon Rogers think they’ve seen the future of the Catholic Church: lay-led parishes. That is, parishes run by parishioners – except for the sacraments, which would still be led by a priest, of course.
You just know there’s a backstory here, right?
You might ask what makes the couple experts on the subject. It’s because for five years, their church – St. Frances X. Cabrini in Scituate – has been lay-led. It’s not by choice: St. Frances was padlocked by the Archdiocese of Boston five years ago. But for a back door left unlocked by chance, it would have been shut down.
Parishioners have occupied the picturesque church 24/7 ever since. At their five-year anniversary last Monday, that totaled 1,826 days.
All this time, St. Frances has been in a standoff with the archdiocese. The parishioners won’t leave their beloved church that they say they built in 1961, raising money and, in some cases, helping raise the roof. The archdiocese has said that its reconfiguration plan calls for the church to be shuttered, like the dozens of others it has closed due to dwindling attendance, funds, and priests. The pastoral needs of the flock can be met at St. Mary’s in Scituate, the archdiocese believes….
St. Frances vigilers say they understand the acute shortage of priests and funds, pointing to one priest who is covering three churches in Dorchester. “They need help, and we want to help,’’ says Maryellen Rogers. How? By letting the laity run the church: its buildings, finances, day-to-day operations, religious education, social action programs, even some religious services.
“The priest can show up for the sacraments, for weddings, baptisms, and funerals,’’ says Jon. “And let us focus on the jobs we do best.’’ For Communion at St. Frances, sympathetic priests have provided consecrated hosts.
The truth is, Catholic churches throughout the country are in financial free-fall, reeling from large settlements to victims of priest sexual abuse. At the same time – and partly for the same reason – church attendance and collections have dropped. Ditto for the number of priests, a graying population with fewer young men seeking the vocation.
The idea of lay-led parishes remains controversial, though under canon law it is allowed as a temporary measure in certain cases. “Why not make St. Frances this type of church and a prototype for the future?’’ asks Maryellen. “We have proven ourselves over the past five years.’’
Yes they’re quite the organized bunch but it takes a little more than that to be entrusted with running a parish, don’t you think? This group has already proven that they won’t listen to their bishops. They won’t listen to the Vatican. They’re in a legal standoff with the archdiocese. They talk the Church down in the media every chance they get. So why, I ask, then would the bishops trust them more when they’ve proven they aren’t to be trusted?
The Church already has plenty o’ disobedience. We’re all stocked up.
November 4, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I wouldn't trust any of these folks to run the pancake breakfast and Christmas bazaar. It's bad enough when the laity get to choose the hymns for daily mass. Actually, it's bad enough when most parish music directors also get to choose the hymns. There are plenty of empty Protestant churches begging for members…look to the Anglicans…or for even a lighter religious touch, the Unitarians.
November 4, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Would that these were all Adoration hours.
November 4, 2009 at 2:15 pm
So the future means we run parishes like the Episcopalians. Jee, that has worked so well for them.
November 4, 2009 at 3:20 pm
"This group has already proven that they won't listen to their bishops. They won't listen to the Vatican."
While this particular batch is no good but, that does not invalidate the concept. On the contrary, the Holy See has been progressively empowering the lay folks to address this looming pastoral challenge. The issue lies in the vocation, discernment, formation and ongoing training for the lay leaders.
November 4, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Fair point Rick. I can be for taking the load off of overworked priests–as long as that load is given to faithful Catholics with the understanding that the priest or bishop can give you the boot just for breathing funny in the office.
Scott
November 4, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Every time I read about a community flabbergasted, angry or even in revolt because the diocese is closing their parish, I just want to ask them, "How many vocations to the priesthood, diaconate, religious life or consecrated life do you produce each year? How many baptisms of children? How many confirmations? How many baptisms at Easter? Are you paying the upkeep of the parish *and* doing direct corporal works of mercy (not just contributing to this collection or that)?
If you don't have any answers to these questions, then your parish is not healthy. It doesn't matter how healthy you were in the past, it doesn't matter what you've done. If you didn't want your parish to be closed, you should have been evangelizing and catechizing, encouraging people to have families and discern vocations.
Of course, I don't think we should let our bishops off the hook either. The fig tree should have been pruned and fertilized before it was cut down for not producing good fruit.
November 4, 2009 at 4:59 pm
I'll take Anonomous' idea to the next level. If the people are having their 24/7 vigil, the Bishop might as well turn it into exposition. Re-orient the community on God, let them contemplate the obedience of the Son, and watch the problems wash away.
November 4, 2009 at 10:49 pm
"Parishioners have occupied the picturesque church 24/7 ever since."
On the exposition note, I wonder if these people who have occupied the church building for 5 years were capable of showing the same fidelity and reverence to the Blessed Sacrament.
In other words, if they can rally around squatting in the building but can't rally around perpetual adoration, then their focus is clearly on the wrong thing.
November 5, 2009 at 12:47 am
Wait a minute; I don't see anything wrong here. These people are trying to keep a church open and their faithful community alive. Nowhere are they saying, "we can do without priests". To the contrary, they are saying the priest's role is vital in that he administers all the sacraments. But they are doing their part in the administration in his absence.
I'm sorry, but IMHO these parishoners are in the right and their beloved parish should not be sacrificed to pay for the indiscretions of bad priests a mismanagement by a bad bishop (we all know who we are talking about here). What they are doing is no different than what has been going on in communities with no "parish priest" for centuries. It's simply the media spin on "this is the future of the church" that is wrong. Let's pray for these people that their parish will soon be blessed with a priest, which it sounds like they would welcome joyously.