A view from the pews

The author of this piece asks to remain anonymous as she hopes to continue involvement in reconfiguring the way we ‘do’ church.

[s2If current_user_can(access_s2member_level2)]There’s an organisational management adage – ‘Poor planning on your part, doesn’t make it an emergency on mine’.

It’s great advice. Planning helps prepare people to cope with change. It’s why we have preparation protocols for natural disasters, and then communicate those protocols to those who could be affected. If the disasters don’t eventuate, all that is wasted is some community time. If it does eventuate, then people have a much more nuanced view. Good preparation hasn’t lessened the devastation flooding or bushfires can cause, but it has improved people’s chances of coming through with lives and property intact. People are much more amenable to adaptations if they’ve been informed of issues, had options explained and given time to adjust. Or alternatively, you can prepare for a particular scenario, fail to communicate your thinking, and then be surprised by people’s poor reactions.

Yesterday, I was among Mass-goers in south-east Melbourne given a letter from Melbourne Archbishop Peter Comensoli that effectively informed parishioners they were in the middle of an emergency [my word] that would require them to reconfigure the way they do church.

I am in one of the parishes that borders Bayside Catholic Mission (BCM) – a bringing together of several parishes in one hub. It seems that this hub is now
to swallow (incorporate) several other parishes and then be split into three groups: north, central and south.

This letter doesn’t explicitly explain why we need to do this, though all of us who have continued to attend Mass through Covid and the aftermath have seen congregations decrease, and it’s been obvious for 30 years that the number of priests available to serve existing parishes has dwindled, with many of the current priests retired or nearing retirement age. So, you would have had to have your head buried in the sand if, as a member of a church community, you thought things were going to continue as they had.

Change therefore, is not the issue. It is how this change is being planned for and communicated that causes concern.

The letter says that on 16 May various pastors of the Bayside area were called to meet with the vicar general Joe Caddy and auxiliary bishop for the southern region Tony Ireland. ‘It was a most cordial and productive night. There was a great willingness among all the priests to be open to the future, and to consider the best way of utilising the resources available.’

‘From this gathering, there was an agreement in principle that the circumstances were right to consider reconfiguring of the parishes comprising the Bayside area… I hasten to say that no decisions have been made in this regard, but it is time to recognise the need to move on this soon, and to now invite your direct and considered engagement in discerning the optimal future arrangements.

‘I will now ask your pastors to open local conversations with you and your neighbouring communities to hear your thoughts on the future, and I will consult with the leadership of the archdiocese as we seek to walk together.’

The letter may say no decisions have been made but the archdiocese’s current dealings with our priests and the implementation of the BCM two years ago give clear indications that ‘consultation’ means different things to the archdiocese and churchgoers.

Two years ago, Melbourne was still in the grip of various Covid lockdowns. Any widespread consultation would have been impossible. Anecdotally, the BCM implementation has been a disaster. Existing programs from thriving parishes fell into abeyance because there was little leadership in how to effect the change.

More recently, the priests asked to distribute yesterday’s letter were given two hours on Friday morning to comment and suggest changes. This arrogance does not bode well for any consultation. Nor does it say much for the archdiocese’s duty of care to those in its employ.

I’m not adverse to more community focused parishes – prayer and family groups, sharing the Rosary, and membership of social justice groups such as St Vincent de Paul. Remote and rural communities long had to forge their Catholic identity without regular access to the Mass – perhaps a visiting priest every three months or so.

I would make a couple of observations, however. First, our archdioceses have a twofold duty – they are charged with the pastoral care of their pastors and parishioners, but also to wisely husband resources and prepare for the future.

Sudden change neglects the pastoral aspect, but more importantly archdioceses have failed in their duty to prepare for the future. As indicated earlier, no one should have been in any doubt that churches in Western nations have been facing a staffing crisis for decades. Where has been the planning to counter this? Where has been the nurturing of lay people in leadership roles and theology, the encouragement of deacons – male and female, faith formation, real and prolonged consultation?

In October the wider Church will have its Synod on Synodality. Pope Francis has made it clear that clericalism is an anathema to a successful Church.
It seems that Pope Francis’ words and wishes have yet to percolate down to this corner of the world. [/s2If]