Parish & school closings
Funny, the places you find yourself being quoted. Ted Landphair does a weekly radio segment on Voice of America called “American Life.” This week he looks at the suppression of Catholic parishes in Steubenville, Ohio, home of Franciscan University of Steubenville, my alma mater. He discusses the sad decline of the city and the decrease in population from the steel mill heyday.
He also quotes one of my blog posts from back in May on the closing of Immaculate Conception Parish and the Jesuit Urban Center in Boston. I think he slightly missed the context. The way he quoted me changed the sense a little, I think. See if you agree. Here’s what I wrote:
Do we want churches that are merely monuments to artistic expression and museums of our cultural history? Or should our parishes be places where families gather in community to worship the Lord as a body of believers that image the whole Church and Christ Himself?
And here’s what he wrote:
As the Boston Globe wrote about a constriction of churches in that city, “Each church closing means an irreparable loss of history, continuity, and culture.” And tears for the hard-working families who, in many cases, paid money they could barely afford to make their home churches elegant.
Some Steubenville Catholics have stoically accepted a viewpoint, recently stated by Dominico [sic] Bettinelli Jr., a former editor of Catholic World [sic]magazine, in response to the Boston situation. Churches are not meant to be “monuments of artistic expression,” he writes on his Web log, but rather, in his words, “places where families gather to worship the Lord as a body of believers.”
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that it can’t interfere in parish closings by the Archdiocese of Boston because of First Amendment restrictions. The ruling was in response to a lawsuit brought by parishioners from St. James the Great Parish in Wellesley.
The challengers said the land had been donated by a family and subsequent donations were made to renovate to the archdiocese on the condition that a church would always be located on the land.
The court wrote in its decision that “the claims in this case raise matters of internal church governance that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution forbids us to consider.”
The court said it can get involved in some property disputes between churchgoers and church leaders, but this case did meet the standard.
“Among the religious controversies off limits to our courts are promises by members of the clergy to keep a church open,” the court wrote.
Attorneys for the archdiocese wrote in their legal brief that the transfer of the property to the archdiocese was in a charitable trust, to use the property as a church for the benefit of the public and for the advancement of religion.
They argued that only the state Attorney General has legal standing to file lawsuits over alleged breaches of trust by a charity.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Boston | parish closing | court | lawsuit |
Here’s yet another op-ed in the Boston Globe criticizing the Archdiocese of Boston for closing parishes. Ironically, the photo used to illustrate the story is of the closing parish’s altar in 1949, in all its glory. That’s probably about when this inner-city parish was last full of families. That’s because this is Immaculate Conception Church in Boston’s South End, also known as the Jesuit Urban Center, which is a gay-magnet church and which was “wreck-ovated” not long ago in a disaster of modernism.
Unfortunately, the perspective in this column, like in too many other defenses of closing urban parishes, is not that of parish life and worship, but of cultural and architectural continuity.
With the imminent closing and sale of the Church of the Immaculate Conception in the South End comes yet another stage in the slow and agonizing cultural suicide of the Catholic Church in Boston. Each church closing means an irreparable loss of history, continuity, and culture, whether it be the closing of a feisty and proud ethnic parish, like the South End’s Holy Trinity, the closing of beloved neighborhood churches, often of some architectural distinction, such as Blessed Sacrament in Jamaica Plain, or the closing of a rare and important center of high culture and dedicated urban ministry like the Church of the Immaculate Conception.
The whole column lists the artistic and architectural significance of the church, the fact that it used to be “fashionable and elegant” with guest preachers and famous musicians. We are told of the former rector who ensured that there were enough funds to maintain the church. It’s not until halfway through the column that we hear of any type of service provided by the parish in the past. There’s certainly nothing about worship and community life.
The secret to keep your parish from closing
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Boston | Jesuit Urban Center | parish closing | church |
Speaking of closing parishes, they’re dealing with this on a massive scale on the Gulf Coast. A parish in Pass Christian, Mississippi, is suing the diocese because it won’t rebuild their church. But the implications are more wide-reaching, raising questions of the balance between clericalism and congregationalism.
Bishop Thomas Rodi of Biloxi, Mississippi, had decided to merge St. Paul Parish with Holy Family Parish after St. Paul’s—which was located on the beach—had been destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. About 150 parishioners have sued Rodi and the pastor of Holy Family, claiming that the property was deeded to the congregation, not the diocese, and that the diocese was only holding it in trust for the congregation.
This is not how the Church organizes parishes. Dioceses do not hold property in trust in that fashion and would not accept the sale or donation of property to the congregation itself and not the diocese. For one thing, the congregation does not exist independent of the diocese or bishop, that is a parish can only exist as part of a diocese or under the authority of a bishop.
The lawyer for the plaintiffs claims that the lawsuit is not about getting the parish rebuilt in the same location, but only about demanding an accounting for the assets of St. Paul’s. If that’s the case, then that’s their right under both civil law and canon law. Under canon law, a parish’s property belongs to it and cannot simply be appropriated by a bishop for his own use. He must account for it. If the parish is merged with another parish, then the closed parish’s property goes to the new parish. If a parish is suppressed, then it’s assets would go to the diocese, but they must follow proper procedure.
Bishop Rodi responded to the lawsuit with a public statement published in the diocesan newspaper and the local newspaper. In it he outlines the background of the situation, including the fact that there were originally three parishes in the town, one of them staffed by a religious order. But after the hurricane, the order decided to pull out of the parish. That left the diocese with a decision to consolidate the two parishes. At first they were going to maintain two locations, but then they changed their minds, saying that both financial and spiritual considerations led them to decide to rebuild only one.
The bottom line of the lawsuit is that it is an attempt to have the courts order the Catholic Church to have a church building at a specific place. If this lawsuit would be successful, it would mean, in effect, that the courts would tell the Catholic Church where God must be worshipped, where Mass and the other sacraments must be celebrated, and how the Catholic Church must use the financial resources of Holy Family Parish. This lawsuit attacks both the unity and liberty of the Church.
[…]
Any pastor desires to create unity in his parish and the pastor of Holy Family Parish reached the conclusion that having two churches would tend to have parishioners identify with one church building or the other rather than identify as one Holy Family Parish. One church building would also allow for a combining and strengthening of parish ministries, especially those associated with the celebration of the Eucharist, which have been weakened by the loss of so many parishioners. At present only about 700 individuals (not 700 families) attend Mass at Holy Family Parish.
[…]
This deeply saddens me since this lawsuit is not in keeping with our understanding of the fundamental nature of the Catholic Church. We are a church, not independent congregations. In faith, worship, and practice, we are in union with the successor of Saint Peter, the Pope. The Pope appoints the bishop of each diocese to serve as shepherd of the diocese. The bishop in turn appoints pastors to serve as shepherds for the parishes. The pastor is to minister for and with his parishioners. In making decisions affecting the good of the parish, he is to carefully consider the advice of the parishioners, especially his advisory committees, but the final decision is his as pastor.
I’m left with a couple of questions: The plaintiffs’ lawyer says they only want an accounting for the assets of the parish, while the bishop says that the lawsuit wants to tell the diocese where to build its churches. They can’t both be telling the truth. What does the lawsuit actually say?
Second, the tension between clericalism and congregationalism in the Church is one of the most contentious today, exacerbated by the Scandal and the perception of “a pray, pay, obey and ignore the pervert in the corner” mentality on the one hand and a “we are the church”, “it’s my parish”, “I don’t like that doctrine” mentality on the other. Finding the correct balance is one of the challenges we have to deal with.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | bishop | parish | Katrina | Pass Christian | lawsuit |
A New Hampshire state court has ruled that the city of Nashua may tax closed churches. Actually, it said it can previous property taxes it levied.
The Diocese of Manchester closed two Catholic parishes in 2003, but they were not sold until September 2004 and property taxes were levied and paid for 2004. In the time between the closing and sale, according to the diocese, they were used for storage of “religious items.” A lower court had ruled that the storage of religious items constituted religious use under the First Amendment and thus exempt from taxation. The higher court disagreed.
In the court’s ruling, Associate Justice James E. Duggan wrote, “the mere storage of religious objects in a deconsecrated church does not rise to the level of using or occupying the space for ‘religious purposes.’ ”
Duggan added, “Instead, it amounts to using the space for convenient interim storage” while the church was being sold.
He said the court’s ruling was consistent with case law and with “the legislative intent of religious tax exemption statute.”
I’m not sure what the state’s religious tax exemption law says, but it appears that in order to qualify for exemption a building must have a specifically religious purpose. But doesn’t that mean the state has to define what constitutes a particular religion’s mission and purpose?
What is often so troubling about court rulings on separation of church and state is that the state makes such distinctions all the time. The government and its agencies are constantly deciding what is an actual religion and what is not, what is a religious practice and what is not. (Otherwise every Tom, Dick, and Jim-Bob could declare his house is a church and his job is a religious practice and thus everyone could be exempt from taxes.)
Apparently the mayor of Nashua would prefer not to have to tax closed churches at all, but would rather see such churches remain open—or at least he recognizes that’s what his constituents would rather see.
Nashua Mayor Bernie Streeter said that while he’s happy with the court decision, he would have preferred the churches hadn’t become vacant.“While I am pleased the city prevailed, I don’t expect there is a mayor anywhere in this nation who looks forward to taxing former places of worship,” Streeter said.
“But as the city and the judge correctly pointed out, when a church becomes vacant or the land and buildings are not used for religious purposes, it becomes taxable property,” he said.
The diocese paid a total of $56,000 in taxes on the two properties.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Manchester | taxes | First Amendment | separation of church and state |
