www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization Parish "Closing" vs. Mission, Vision, Planning and "old people"

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Some of the responses and comments to the recent parish closing in the Eparchy of Passaic serve to beautifully underscore the concepts that we have been talking about all along in this whole area of renewal and evangelization.

I am not commenting on the parish "closing" itself as it is not my place to do so and I do not know the full story. But what is signifcant is that that occurence and others like it simply point to the need for our Church to rediscover our Mission to be the Mystical Body of Christ on earth and to have a comprehensive Vision to carry out our Mission and a Plan to realize the Vision. This would be of tremendous help to the whole parish "closing" issue with all of its accomanying trauma. As I continue to say (because I have lived it) there should never be language such as parish "closing" when there is a sense of Mission, Vision and a Plan.

The entire Eastern Catholic world in America simply needs to be brought together and be shown the 'state of the union.' Then, a positive, comprehensive, evangelical plan can be presented where any type of seemingly major move such as a "closing" becomes not just a "closing" but actually a renewal, a part of a bigger, more beautiful plan for a vibrant present and future. This can only happen in a very radical and comprehensive way ("raze it to rebuild it" as I will never stop saying.) With this approach, everyone has a sense that we are in this together and we are all part of a bigger plan. We are all going to the "Superbowl."

A parish does not "close" per se. That language is far too final and negative. Rather a parish, monastery, or whatever entity is simply transformed, transfigured into part of a great, fruitful vision. If Church leadership can communicate to the rank and file in this way the major and radical change that must happen for our Church will become something very compassionate, inclusive and motivating. Of course, nothing can be done pefectly but nonetheless, having a vision and plan will extricate the necessary radical renewal process out of the hands of death and set it in the context of where it truly belongs--life-giving.

As many of you have said,(and praise God, keep saying it!!)the Eastern Churches must journey vertically deep into their authentic selves for their renewal. But this also means returning FIRST to a RADICAL sense of Biblical spirituality, stewardship, etc.

Just a note about our "old people" in regard to radical renewal. I appreciate very much the sensitive posts concerning our older people. However I would like to champion their cause:

Having been through radical change with "old people" for 23 years as a priest I can tell you that, believe it or not, it is NOT the "old people" who have the hardest time with change. Don't underestimate them. Just because they are "old" does not necessarily mean that they are automatically resistant or traumatized by the specific type of change that we are taking about in the Church. In fact, my experience has shown me that it is actually some of the younger people who can be the most resistant to change. The older people most often move through change in the Church with great dignity. Change might be more challenging for the eldery in other spheres but I can tell you, with great admiration for them, that it will be our elderly who will most easily enter into a process of renewal for their beloved Church. I will address in detail the reasons for this (when I finally get my blog going.) This is an important topic because being careful not to traumatize our eldery is the one myth most conviently used by our Church to resist change. Our Church's resistance to change has become a refined art. It goes like this: First we define our Church as being made up of mostly "old people" who can't change or who are slow to change. Then out of a phony compassion we find it all too convenient NOT to change because of our "old people." Or we claim that change has to move at a snail's pace so as not to "offend" our "old people." BUT, the thing that is NOT waiting, NOT moving at a snails pace is the death of the Church to which our "old people" have given so much. We are not being compassionate to our old people by refusing to set about in HASTE the renewal of THEIR own beloved Church which is in a free fall to extinction. In truth we are only USING our "old people" as an excuse not to take the leaps in Faith.

Making "haste," toward renewal does NOT mean moving forward recklessly or insensitively. But it does mean being sensitive enough and caring enough of our "old people" to give them their greatest joy before they pass on--to hear once again the sound of a baby crying in their Church.

--Fr. Thomas J. Loya, STB.,MA.

Amen! Amen! Amen! The older members of our beloved Church were among the first to welcome us as visitors and are the first to offer kind instruction to us even now. You are exactly correct. It isn't the elderly who block change. They love our babies. It's those who have a vested interest in keeping the Church just the way it is because change would be a threat to their control.

CDL

Fr. Tom,

You are correct. What do you recomend for the parishoners in Bridgeport? How about Long Island?

In light of your post Father, I feel I need to clarify my post in another thread regarding dealing with the older members of our parish. I can only speak to this issue from my own limited experience which is from within my own parish. Many of our older members have been some of the strongest supporters of our restorative efforts, but I have also experienced what can almost seem irratioanal anger towards these changes. In our parish, this has come primarily from some of our oldest members. The converstaion usually goes something like," I've been a member of this church for 60 years and I've never seen anything like that!" or "You're trying to make us Orthodox!" It is in the context of dealing with this type of confrontation that I was trying to share what I thought was an enlightening perspective on the psychology behind some of these responses, so that when we encounter them we might be a little more prepared to deal with them in a civil and compassionate way. I have seen these conversations degrade into a shouting match which is neither Christian or productive.
Now, that being said, I agree we can't allow our desire for civility and compassion to become an excuse for doing nothing. We must go forth with courage and conviction, and in no way diminishes the fact that the changes you speak of must take place if we are to survive and fluorish.

The discussion concerning the closing of some parishes in the Eparchy of Passaic has given me some time to reflect upon Father's position here.

What if Bishop Pataki is doing what he can, perhaps in ways that are unpleasent, to help bring about a vision of evangelization. I know, it doesn't seem like it given the apparent injustices. But consider this, a majority of our Churches are on life support of one kind or another. They will be closed sometime soon unless radical changes are made. Suppose Bishop Pataki has for years tried to encourage some of these Churches to unite with others to make strong survivable Churches that can live long into the future. Suppose Bishop Pataki has had to close some Churches as a last resort before they drive the Eparchy into bankruptsy. Suppose he is closing them to stem a hemorrage. Suppose he is collecting enough money from these Churches before they become a complete financial loss so that new congregations can start in growing areas.

If that is his mission it could well turn out to be a great blessing.

If we believe in God's Providence, perhaps this is precisely what is happening.

Dan L

I firmly believe that there must be some "method to his madness". The issue as I see it is that this is done harshly and brings "scandal upon the Church". It doesn't really matter what we do for evangilization if this series of "scandalous closings" is not addressed correctly. And it's been going on for 20 years, they still haven't got it right so I don't see why they will in the near future as long as Andrew Pataki has a position of power. Look at Bishop Andrew's 10 years in Parma and 10 years in Passaic...with over 15 parishes closed (my understanding is most if not all were closed in a horrendous manner) a loss of over 70,000 souls from the two eparchies during that time span (conservative estimates) is not good for evangilization when people see they can work hard, pray hard, give offerings, all to have it squandered and the "door slammed in your face". I hope I'm wrong but until their is some sort of Laity "checks and balances" we can build the most beautiful churches, have the most Eastern liturgy reach out to the masses and we will not grow. (Bishop Andrew being out of Parma 10 years and at least the numbers published only show the "bleeding stopped" but growth has not occured. The Roman Catholic church is going through this downward spiral as well. We are living in the 21st Century. As long as there are no "checks and balances" and the vision is not communicated I can not see people who are eager to join the Catholic Church.

Dear Job:

It's hard for me to see the relevance of this statement to the present discussion on the BCA happenings and on the perceived "incompetence" of the Most Rev. Andrew Pataki.

Also, I don't believe your quoted statement is a fair and an accurate assessment of the state of the Latin Church in the U.S.

Yes, there are some Roman parish closings and there are mergers and/or consolidations. But, on the whole, we are healthy and thriving, not just surviving or, worse, struggling! We still have more than 19,000 parishes nationwide, each having an average of more than 3,000 parishioners supporting their well-being.

More importantly, I think Bishop Pataki and the Eparchy's administration are at a disadvantage in this Forum as they have not been afforded an opportunity to present their side of the issues.

Understandably, they may not want to come here and air their dirty linen and it is, therefore, more appropriate for you to have an audience with the Passaic Eparchy administration rather than crucifying the Bishop here, in a public forum.

As it is, we, the sideliners and spectators, cannot grasp the total picture and, accordingly, we see your accounts as probably tainted with self-serving allegations.

Amado

Glory to Jesus Christ!

They have every opportunity to reply. I don't think there is anyone on this Forum who wouldn't welcome Bishop Andrew's comments on this situation and others.

Of course, specifically regarding Holy Trinity in Bridgeport, he and the parish administrator had several opportunities, from what Job has said, to answer parishioners' questions -- e.g., about finances and the parish register -- over the past two years. They refused to do so.

Or are you calling Job and those of us who are familiar with this situation liars?

You say "crucify"; those of us actually toiling under his regime see it as making transparent what has, for far too long, been hidden.

(And lest you accuse me of making criticisms from behind a veil of anonymity, I would point out that my given name is easily discoverable by simply doing a search.)

If cannot grasp the whole picture, then why make such a nasty remark? Your post could have easily concluded with your second sentence.

In Christ,
Theophilos

Dear Theophilos:

I, for one, would welcome his Most Reverend, Bishop Pataki, to present in this Forum his side on the issues.

But how?

Perhaps, your group should contact the parish administrator or the Parish Finance Council/Committee if they agree to name their representative to this discussions.

But do you expect them to make public the problems leading to the parish closing? I think the proper place for these discussions is at the Eparchy's offices, not here.

I am not privy to any of these events, that's specifically the reason why I raised the possibility of a representation from the parish and/or eparchy to answer Job's allegations. There being none, I still think it is inappropriate for Job and your group to be presenting a one-sided view on the issues.

I never called Job nor your group "liars." I said that:

Meaning, this is a one-sided presentation of the facts. To us, strangers to the "conflict," it is NOT the total picture.

This does not in any way obviate your right to air your grievances in a proper manner.

That was merely an allegorical reference to someone, like Bishop Pataki, who has not been afforded a chance to rebut allegations against him. In this Forum, Bishop Pataki or his representative, has not uttered a single word in his defense because he may not know that he is being called on the carpet. (That's the missed opportunity we are talking about.)

It should be enough that we know Job and your group are under the Passaic Eparchy.

I think my post contains nothing nasty as you seem to imply and should not lead to an angry retort on your part.

Amado

And with the blogosphere [amywelborn.typepad.com] , the scandal of how this was carried out is going to get wide attention. Perhaps our Council of Hierarchs, even if unwilling to discuss how to keep churches open, can at least discuss how to avoid such humiliating scandal.

Ouch!
and that one leads to this one:

http://pauca_lux_ex_oriente.blogspot.com/2005/11/you-dont-only-have-right-to-remain.html#comments

%*#$@ that Internet, LOL! No secrets

Sam

How old is Bishop Andrew? (...that is, if we are worried if he cares about following the canon laws).

78.00

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Evangelizers,

Please! Remember this is not a forum for negativity and exchanging indignations. This is a forum for the free expresssion of creative, charismatic, evangelical, visionary ideas. Don't get stuck on specific incidences such as Bridgeport. It always evolves into unnecessary quibbling. This is unproductive We don't have time to waste. We need constant creativity, forward looking ideas and action, vision, zeal, encouragement, empowerment, rethinking, implementing, penance and prayer. Remember, whether it is Bridgeport or whatever, everything points us to a need to look at(and creatively design)the big picture. (Bridgeport was in a small way a bit close to home for me too. The pastor who built the current church building was married to my great aunt.)

My suggestion is that people try to enter into a dialogue with Bishop Pataki or any and all Eastern Catholic Bishops about creative evangelical ideas and plans of actions. Encourage our bishops to make all of their decisions and and moves within a context of a bigger picture that when explained thoroughly and compassionately is well received by most of the flock. Encourage our bishops to believe in the persuasive power that an irrefutabley wise and beautiful vision will have. We absolutely do not need to be involved in any negativity. We have a blank canvas before us, a chance to rebuild an entire Church. This should be exciting, invigorating and captivating. It is a gift that we are being given. We have never before in our history been as free as we are now to rebuild ourselves according to our authentic selves. What are we waiting for? Just DO IT!!!

Thank you, Former Reformer for your fine thoughts. You are right on target in this regard. We need to constantly explain and teach the wonderful "why" behind authentic change in our Church. In fact, in every discussion in every venue I have ever been involved in that has to do with evangelization and renewal the ONE THING that always bubbled to the surface above everything else was the need for our faithful and our clergy to be continualy educated.

Every single homily should have in some way a pedagogical dimension to it and this is so easy to do in the Eastern Christian tradition. We should be constantly teaching and learning. With rare exception, everyone is guranteed, repeat, guaranteed to move ahead with renewal and vision when they are shown the wisdom behind it. How can they not?--the Gospel is by nature contagious and our Eastern Christian spirituality is just so captivating. The trick is simply to be faithful to both--RADICALLY faithful, to rediscover "old" things and to see them in a new way.

--Fr. Thomas J. Loya

Glory Forever

The fight is for all Byzantine Catholics in America. The people in Bridgeport have a laundry list of corespondence to the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church (including Cardinal Ratzinger before he was elected Pope). I can not speak about the other parishes in CT, MA, NYC, LI, NJ, IL, NJ & PA. When Metroplitan Basil asks not to be in the loop, you know the problems are huge.

By the way, you should try calling the Chancery office in West Patterson and ask to speak to our Chief Sheppard. He has a bull dog at the front lines. You have a better chance at getting through in NYC and speaking with Cardinal Egan.

It is a shame. May God have mercy.

Basil