The Archdiocese of Boston has announced that it will be suppressing parishes rather than merging them, which means that all assets and liabilities will go to the archdiocese. Typically, the government officials quoted in the article mistake “resources” for money, when what Archbishop O’Malley was saying is that having fewer parishes in some areas will allow individual congregations to be larger, concentrating spiritual and physical resources in one parish when they have been spread out until now.
I have no problem with the plan. The current debt of the archdiocese has nothing to do with Scandal settlements (those are paid off from sale of archdiocesan property), but are the result of less money being donated. Granted people are giving less because (a) people are still mad at the archdiocese and (b) fewer people are going to Mass for various reasons. Still, the debts of the archdiocese must still be paid. I feel better about knowing that the archdiocesean institution is undergoing belt-tightening too. If we weren’t selling the archbishop’s residence, I might feel differently.
“people are still made at the archdiocese”… is this “made”, as in made man, like some of the contractors the RCAB has used to put up leaky churches (mine for one), or is it a typo, and you meant “mad”?
either way, it is an appropriate comment.
And now your comment doesn’t make any sense, Joe, because I fixed it.
But thanks for pointing it out.
Up here, they performed it at Newburyport HS, but I think it was by a troop.
They disquise their real intent by donating the moneys to the Women’s Crisis Center….
Click here, to see what I mean:
http://www.vday.org/main.html
The intend to do this play, on St. Valentine’s Day, the feast day of the Saint who died defending marriage (along with Thomas More and John the Baptist) “until the violence stops”.
And while your there: “don’t forget to get your Va****a Warrior T-Shirt at the V Day Store..
You will all love this which I found on equityfeminism.com:
“With backing from Planned Parenthood and others, the goal is to have The V***** Monologues produced at campuses around the nation. The open question is whether or not they’ll get to portray the “good rape” scene. Wendy McElroy in a column for LewRockwell.Com notes that the Feminist.Com press release specifically warns colleges thinking about performing the play that they will be given a special script and,
You must use the version of the script of “The V****** Monologues” that is included in the Performance Kit that you will receive. No other version of the play is acceptable for your production. Do not use the book of the play or versions of the script from previous College Initiatives. The new script must be followed. You may not edit any introductions or monologues. And you may not exclude or change the order of any of the monologues.”
http://www.equityfeminism.com/articles/2000/000029.html
This means, that Feminist.Com and Planned parent hood want the 13 year old “good rape” scene in the college versions of the play. No hidden agenda here!
As [url=http://www.equityfeminism.com]http://www.equityfeminism.com[/url] appropriately states:
“now it turns out that the big message of radical feminism is that women are nothing more than sex objects after all (who can benefit from a “good rape” even), and the path to liberation is saying “V*****” three times.”
This is a nifty way to fix the priestless parish problem and immanent threat of AMchurch girls trying to play priestess.
It’ll be kinda grim seeing the long line of C & E Catholics standing at a boarded up buildings on Christmas and Easter morning wondering where the Church went.
Its time to start ripping up registration cards, refusing wedding applications and excommunicating pro-abort Catholics like Menino and Galvin.
I think it naive to think this “Central Fund” will not be used to pay off the scandal settlements. This currently represents the largest archdiocesan debt. We have all heard the rhetoric that the scandal debt will not come from “Parish Resources”. Guess what? This is true. Guess again! Parishes which are suppressed are technically no longer a parish. The property will then be subject for immediate liquidation.
Does anyone question the fact that the “Raw Numbers” published in The Pilot are inherently stacked against small communities. Why is it that percentages were not used? Holy Trinity / Boston with only 250 registered has over 90% attendence! If the archdiocese wants to be fair why isn’t there a weekly sampling of the Sacrament of Reconciliation? This would be a real indicator how “dynamic” a community is. It would separate the men from the boys!
Ironically, I have no problem with paying settlements out of the central fund if you have to. The mess has been made and the money has to come from somewhere. If selling archdiocesan property and insurance settlements don’t do it, it has to come from somewhere. The Church isn’t just the archdiocese, it’s the parishes too and we’re all responsible for paying the debt if the archdiocese is.
The sacramental index wasn’t devised for the purpose of closing parishes or to determine how vibrant the community is. They came up with back in the 80s as a way of apportioning priests based on how much work was involved. Administering baptisms, marriages, and funerals take up an inordinate amount of a priest’s time and weddings doubly so, which is why there counted twice in the index.
Raw numbers are not going to be the only measure by which a decision to close is made, as the archbishop said. They are only a starting point. The intangibles will also be taken into account, which is why the first step involves the local communities examining themselves.
REPOST WITH CORRECTIONS:
Perhaps, I made its preliminary recommendations as far back as ‘96. Secular asset management strikes again, as efficient as a corporate MBA’s minimize their