I wasn't very surprised at what is going on in DC with Catholic Charities. I don't know how the parishes are set up in the Archdiocese of Washington but I know in the diocese that I live in everything is listed under the parish and the diocese. And I know that they can make decisions to take space from a parish building but the parish is still responsible for utilities etc. Moved an office from the chancery to the parish for a short period of time. The parish lost badly need space for a year.
It's sad that some in the USCCB would go out of their way to create a public spectacle; to intentionally put the church in a bad light publicly to support an agenda that is so obviously and clearly contrary to the Church. It is the willingness of those supporting wrong behavior to throw bombs and light fires that intimidates those who support what is right from confronting them. As a result, whoever is willing to create the most collateral damage is usually the side that wins by default over those with a more developed sense of responsibility and stewardship.
So if the parish is legally (civil and canon) separate, but the pastor has pledge loyalty to the bishop, then isn't it a moot point? The priest "can" do whatever he wants with his parish buildings, but if the bishop says otherwise then the priest should follow the bishop, right? Of course, a good bishop would listen to his priest, etc etc.
also, a real question: who legally (civil) owns the church/school of a parish? Does it list some group that doesn't really exist like the parish council, who is appointed by the whim of the pastor? does it change with each pastor change?
Finally a point: now these 2 numbskulls never let me think of "parish" as the church building, but as the canon law definition of the collection of the people living in a geographic region (or something like that).
Another great one. Quite an enjoyable read.
I wasn't very surprised at what is going on in DC with Catholic Charities. I don't know how the parishes are set up in the Archdiocese of Washington but I know in the diocese that I live in everything is listed under the parish and the diocese. And I know that they can make decisions to take space from a parish building but the parish is still responsible for utilities etc. Moved an office from the chancery to the parish for a short period of time. The parish lost badly need space for a year.
It's sad that some in the USCCB would go out of their way to create a public spectacle; to intentionally put the church in a bad light publicly to support an agenda that is so obviously and clearly contrary to the Church. It is the willingness of those supporting wrong behavior to throw bombs and light fires that intimidates those who support what is right from confronting them. As a result, whoever is willing to create the most collateral damage is usually the side that wins by default over those with a more developed sense of responsibility and stewardship.
So if the parish is legally (civil and canon) separate, but the pastor has pledge loyalty to the bishop, then isn't it a moot point? The priest "can" do whatever he wants with his parish buildings, but if the bishop says otherwise then the priest should follow the bishop, right? Of course, a good bishop would listen to his priest, etc etc.
also, a real question: who legally (civil) owns the church/school of a parish? Does it list some group that doesn't really exist like the parish council, who is appointed by the whim of the pastor? does it change with each pastor change?
Finally a point: now these 2 numbskulls never let me think of "parish" as the church building, but as the canon law definition of the collection of the people living in a geographic region (or something like that).