The Archdiocese of Detroit is undergoing the same sort of restructuring (though less of a dramatic consolidation than Cincinnati) using the same "families of parishes" term. Word on the street from the AOD is that priests have not bought into the idea. Reasons for the priest's resistence range from fear that individual priest autonomy will be compromised (especially among the priests who wouldn't be given a chance at the "super pastor" position to lead each family of parishes) to bolder claims that the restructuing is canonically illegal. It'll be interesting to see how it works out in Cincinnati. It seems to me the families of parishes model makes priests do most of the bending while parish closures makes parishioners embrace the greater sacrifice. I hope it works out and give props to Schnurr, but unforunately there's always going to be a few eggs that have to break to make this type of omlette.
In the neighboring (relative to the Archdiocese of Detroit) Diocese of Lansing, the "Realign Resources for Mission" committee is wrapping up its work, with final proposals to be submitted to the bishop by mid- to late October. Parishes are to be clustered, with priests to serve "in solidum" & encouraged (but not required) to live in community & pastors remaining pastors, under a "moderator" who leads the cluster. We in the laity have been told much care has been taken to make sure everything in up to snuff as far as canon law. In your charity, pray for us!
As a layperson myself, I have very little sympathy for the laity on this issue. The primary reason parishes close is that too many Catholics quit going to mass and were no longer active personally and financially. That's primarily why parishes die. It has less to do with the hierarchy and their failings.
My brother has been responsible for 3 parishes in the Diocese of Owensboro for a number of years now for a total of 205 people when they did their last parish directory. He is one of 4 priests in the diocese with 3 parishes. He's at one parish, the deacon resides in another, and he says Mass twice a week at the third.
Cincinnati Catholic here, relieved that the Archbishop is finally taking action. This is decades late. The holy hardworking priests in the Cincinati archdiocese are barely treading water. Many of these priests became pastors (and some already to parish regions of 2-4 parishes) between 1 1/2-3 years of their ordination. Would like to note that the statement that "parishes, which will share pastors, staff and infrastructure" glosses over the extreme difficulty of this task. A task for the pastors. The idea that the process was "designed to allow parishioners to reach conclusions about Church closures" also paints a somewhat unrealistic belief that parishioners will gladly volunteer themselves for closure. This again will be on the pastors. If only there was stronger leadership from the Archdiocese, courage to make those hard decisions, willing to be the "bad guy" who actually closed parishes. We are praying for grace and fortitude for all; but especially for our priests.
The Diocese of Pittsburgh is already in stage (3?) of this process, with the parishes consolidated and the buildings up for sale. Why isn't Pittsburgh considered the model here?
The Archdiocese of Detroit is undergoing the same sort of restructuring (though less of a dramatic consolidation than Cincinnati) using the same "families of parishes" term. Word on the street from the AOD is that priests have not bought into the idea. Reasons for the priest's resistence range from fear that individual priest autonomy will be compromised (especially among the priests who wouldn't be given a chance at the "super pastor" position to lead each family of parishes) to bolder claims that the restructuing is canonically illegal. It'll be interesting to see how it works out in Cincinnati. It seems to me the families of parishes model makes priests do most of the bending while parish closures makes parishioners embrace the greater sacrifice. I hope it works out and give props to Schnurr, but unforunately there's always going to be a few eggs that have to break to make this type of omlette.
In the neighboring (relative to the Archdiocese of Detroit) Diocese of Lansing, the "Realign Resources for Mission" committee is wrapping up its work, with final proposals to be submitted to the bishop by mid- to late October. Parishes are to be clustered, with priests to serve "in solidum" & encouraged (but not required) to live in community & pastors remaining pastors, under a "moderator" who leads the cluster. We in the laity have been told much care has been taken to make sure everything in up to snuff as far as canon law. In your charity, pray for us!
As a layperson myself, I have very little sympathy for the laity on this issue. The primary reason parishes close is that too many Catholics quit going to mass and were no longer active personally and financially. That's primarily why parishes die. It has less to do with the hierarchy and their failings.
My brother has been responsible for 3 parishes in the Diocese of Owensboro for a number of years now for a total of 205 people when they did their last parish directory. He is one of 4 priests in the diocese with 3 parishes. He's at one parish, the deacon resides in another, and he says Mass twice a week at the third.
Cincinnati Catholic here, relieved that the Archbishop is finally taking action. This is decades late. The holy hardworking priests in the Cincinati archdiocese are barely treading water. Many of these priests became pastors (and some already to parish regions of 2-4 parishes) between 1 1/2-3 years of their ordination. Would like to note that the statement that "parishes, which will share pastors, staff and infrastructure" glosses over the extreme difficulty of this task. A task for the pastors. The idea that the process was "designed to allow parishioners to reach conclusions about Church closures" also paints a somewhat unrealistic belief that parishioners will gladly volunteer themselves for closure. This again will be on the pastors. If only there was stronger leadership from the Archdiocese, courage to make those hard decisions, willing to be the "bad guy" who actually closed parishes. We are praying for grace and fortitude for all; but especially for our priests.
The Diocese of Pittsburgh is already in stage (3?) of this process, with the parishes consolidated and the buildings up for sale. Why isn't Pittsburgh considered the model here?