Emphasis on laity - Letters - Letter to the Editor

National Catholic Reporter, Jan 25, 2002

* In your editorial, "The lay alternative to closing parishes" (NCR, Jan. 11), the writer suggests without any evidence that Vatican II "urged the laity to take hold of their church." This of course is incorrect since the church remains, by the will of Christ, hierarchically structured. Unfortunately, many in the church have, for whatever reasons, chosen to ignore this teaching since the council. As a result there has been an exaggerated emphasis on the laity, which has served to obfuscate the distinction between the priesthood of the faithful and the priesthood of the ordained. This has led to a lack of vocations and now the closing of certain parishes. While this is regrettable, the writer's claim that church could, with enough lay involvement, be "further along the way toward guaranteeing healthy eucharistic communities" could not be further from the truth.

As a result of all the confusion that has taken place since Vatican II, part of the church's vision right now is to maintain its distinctive hierarchical identity, even if this means the closure of certain parishes at the present time. The leaders are no doubt aware that it is better to have a small but orthodox church than a big church that makes a pretense of truth. It's not about numbers. The church doesn't run a popularity contest. I hope this puts the writer's doctrinal troubles and "suspicions" about the church's shepherds to rest.

PAUL KOKOSKI
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

* Your editorial on the lay alternative to closing churches raised some important questions about vision and the models of local church. I just completed a doctor of ministry degree. In my research for my thesis project on the rites of parish consolidation and closure, I was stunned by the heroism of religious, clergy and lay leadership throughout the past decade of parish restructuring. In many places it was done badly -- poor pastoral care for the ministers and communities involved and little follow-up on the consequences. People and communities were traumatized. There are a few signs of hope. Two things happen for people who make their way through this: A new sense of local church emerges from people who previously saw it only through the geographical lens of their own parish, and forgiveness of those who had to initiate the closure. NCR has a lot to offer to this issue if it can be honest with its perspective. The next decade will be a conflicted and tense time for U.S. parishes as the presbyterate declines. No one parochial model will be enough. Collaborative teams of religious ordained and lay leadership will take us through this next chapter of U.S. Catholic history. Let's take good care of them. Connecting communities in crisis with the ritual and pastoral resources of those that have negotiated this terrain well would be of great service.

(Fr.) MICHAEL WELDOM, OFM
Chicago

* Suppose that NCR's circulation was in a free fall before 1978, and that after a new publisher took the helm in 1978, circulation increased 70 percent worldwide, that circulation has decreased in the United States during the same time period, but many areas of the nation have participated in the worldwide circulation boom. Would it make any sense to criticize the publisher for declining circulation? Wouldn't it make much more sense if the American areas of declining circulation first learned from the visionary leader, and then learned from the lived experience of the parts of the country where circulation surged? Then why assail Pope John Paul II for the shortage of seminarians in certain parts of the United States, as NCR did in its editorial "The lay alternative to closing parishes"? According to the Annuario Pontificio, the number of major seminarians worldwide has increased from 64,000 to 110,000 since 1978 -- a growth of over 70 percent, far surpassing worldwide population growth. Rather than criticize the pope and turn our backs on Vatican II's vision of the celibate priesthood in the Latin Rite (see Presbyterorum Ordinis, no. 16), wouldn't it make far more sense to praise the Holy Father for the worldwide priestly vocation boom and learn from the lived experience of those American dioceses that are participating in the increase?

JEFF ZIEGLER
Steubenville, Ohio

* Your editorial points out the lack of courageous and imaginative leadership by many U.S. bishops. Appointing lay pastoral administrators is a helpful alternative to closing parishes. Many Catholics in the United States are not interested in internal church politics. They want to hear the good news of Jesus Christ, not the latest liberal-conservative arguments. They want faith communities that will minister to their needs, be with them in good times and bad, provide faith formation for their children and liturgies that. bring joy and hope. They do not want to have their parishes closed. This is an extremely painful experience. Some Catholics in the United States still do not accept that the number of priests available to serve us is declining. They presume that there will be a priest available for all weddings and funerals at any time. This is still possible in my parish, thanks to the generosity of our two retired priests. It is interesting to note, by the way, that people who expect to retire before age 65 want priests to keep working well into their 80s. My experience is that lay ministers finally are being accepted and appreciated by the majority of Catholics, and a growing number of lay people are taking ownership of their parishes. The "church" in their minds is no longer limited to clergy and religious. But I am deeply troubled by reports that young priests in some dioceses are "posturing, pompous and pretentious." Why are such men being ordained? And why do Catholics put up with their arrogant, unchristian behavior? The most troubling aspect of this is that good men will be discouraged from considering the priesthood.