Saturday 4 February 2017

Forward Together in Hope -or into lamentation?

It is a while since I put a post on the blog, so I hope I still have some readers out there!

We all know there is a dwindling number of priests, which is a problem that needs to be addressed. But the answer is not the currently-favoured Western idea of ‘lay-led communities’, since sheep without shepherds caused Our Lord to lament (Matt.9v6). Do we want to intentionally create the kind of communities over which our Lord laments? Indeed, communities without a priest are local incarnations of a decapitated Christ: not simply sheep without shepherds, but bodies without a head. In short, the Body of Christ loses its integrity as local incarnations of the Risen Lord. In our Diocese we have sought to address the dwindling number of priests by our ‘Forward Together in Hope’ programme, which is now reaching its final phase. It seemed to me to hold out great hope of encouraging the laity to be more active and take on more roles under the oversight of their shepherds.

Such activity of the laity has always been part of my ministry. In two of my previous parishes I established teams of lay-minister Chaplaincies for the local general hospitals. In my last parish we encouraged an increase in the number of folk who had roles and responsibilities within the parish so as to provide a sense of belonging and ‘ownership’. Some felt all they could do was run coffee mornings or a cake stall; others were happy to ensure the Church was clean and well-cared for as a fitting place for worship; others consistently cared for the parish garden, while others took on roles as Catechists, Children’s Liturgy leaders or Piety Stall management. Others took on the responsibility of being Parish Visitors to the sick, housebound and bereaved via the Legion of Mary; others formed a small rota of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, Readers, and Servers for the liturgy, while others took on the roles of Bookkeeper, Financial Returns Officer, Tax Benefit claims (Gift-Aid) Administration, and Vulnerable Persons Representative. In short, there was room for everyone who wanted to some ownership in the parish. In fact, 25% of our Mass attendance took on some –even if small- active part in the care and running of the parish. A few were unhappy (such are present in every parish) in their distaste for the following of liturgical norms wherein we used some Latin for the Novus Ordo Ordinary (as per Sacrosanctum Concilium 36, 54, 116); did not encourage the sign of peace (it was explicitly never forbidden but I omitted the optional invitation) and perhaps because on the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum I introduced the Traditional Mass with vernacular readings and vernacular hymns (so that each Sunday Mass encompassed and catered both for those who like the vernacular and those who like Latin).

Should ‘Forward Together’ emphasise such roles as those above under the oversight of the priest; if we promote the priesthood in line with Our Lord’s desire to have shepherds for the sheep, ‘Forward Together’ can be a real work of grace. As it is, it might turn out to be very problematic -it might have deteriorated into a programme with the inherent danger of establishing of lay-led parishes with priests little less than visiting, wandering Sacrament-providers; a programme promoting local manifestations of a decapitated Christ: bodies without a head; sheep without shepherds. In that case, and since from the inception of the programme the stated aim was ‘to encourage Catholic communities to flourish with or without a resident priest’, it would not surprise me to hear the programme described as social engineering, with a pre-determined outcome being sought: lay-led parishes.By the time this programme is fully enacted, our Bishop will have retired back to his native land -a wise decision, since retiring into the Diocese where one has been the Ordinary will always give the impression that one cannot let go of control and hopes to influence one's successor 'by advice and knowledge'. I therefore applaud the Bishops decision to return home.

I have heard the establishing of lay-led parishes described as a ‘movement of the Holy Spirit’. I beg to differ: not only does deciding upon a goal and then seeking out ways to establish it attempt to force the hand of the Holy Ghost, but it puts Him at loggerheads with Christ who lamented sheep without shepherds, for the response of Christ to such a situation as we have today was very different; it was ‘The harvest is plentiful, but the labourers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest to send labourers into His harvest.’ What we need is not a giving-in to the falling numbers of clergy but a genuine push to encourage vocations to the priesthood; a programme to seek out labourers for the Lord’s harvest by providing sound doctrine in schools and parishes; liturgy that raises the mind and heart to God (rather than today’s style which holds it earthbound as a celebration of the people). We need to see the promotion of the priest as a man with a sacramental configuration and intimate relationship with Christ. We talk about the clergy as servants, and that is without doubt true. But we cannot ignore the fact that the service provided by the priest is one of being a co-worker with and under the Bishop in teaching, sanctifying and governing (CCC §1563). If we are not promoting the seeking of shepherds for the sheep as our Lord requested, we cannot claim to be biblical in our theology and this (we were told in seminary) was at the core of the Vatican II renewal. 

Perhaps all we need to do when priest numbers dwindle is amalgamate bordering parishes into one parish under one Pastor, with one Church being the Parish Church and the others Mass –centres. If this is financially impractical, sell the other Churches –many of which are products of the 1950’s and 60’s following an post-war increase of vocations. It is not easy to do, but it can be done. I had a second Church closed on me in my last parish and I took the flack, not the Bishop and his advisors, even though there was a long consultation before the closure; even though the Bishop said the Closing Mass, and even though all that could be installed in the remaining Parish Church was so installed, from Stations of the Cross and parish statues to vestments, chalices and altar Crucifix. The excuse that these are worshipping communities to be valued and fostered holds no water, since they become the sheep without shepherds which caused Our Lord to lament; they become incarnations of a decapitated Christ. The emotional pain of losing one’s Church can be tempered with good explanation and good pastoral care -such as increased visiting in the closed areas and transfer of transferable items such as those listed above. Are we willing to take that risk?


  1. Well said Father Gary. What concerns me is that Forward in Faith seems to omit any planning for the future of the priesthood. It has been said that at one of the initial meetings the question was posed about this very subject & the questioner was put down, quite forcibly, from the podium.

    I am proud to call myself a traditional Catholic but I find it worrying that some of the upper echelons of the lay leadership seem to find this abhorrent. If I may quote just one instance; I wrote to Northern Cross (as is my wont) concerned about the number of Muslim children attending our (mainly secondary) schools. This concern had been flagged up nationally as being of concern. Because of my letter I was removed from the Diocesan Appeal Panel although I am an experienced panellist & chairman & have served to diocese for many years. Should we not, as Catholics, expect that our Catholic schools should retain a Catholic ethos which is not watered down to pander to the PC brigade? Our people still pay a great deal to maintain our schools & yet there is a sizeable minority of non Catholic teachers there. It has been said (see NX February 2017 letters) than such a mix helps our children but what they forget that there is only One, Catholic & Apostolic Church & all else are false religions. It was only late in the 1950s that Catholics were allowed to be present at non Catholic services & I think that in hindsight we can see why.

    I know, personally, of 2 young men (in their 20s) who put themselves forward as candidates for the diocesan priesthood & were both sent away to get more experience of the world.

    1. Thank you, David.
      I do hope the questioner at the meeting was not so forcibly put down. How sad that the question was not answered in a way which affirms the need for shepherds.
      I think you are right that schools should retain a Catholic ethos, but I think it needs to be recovered before it can be preserved and fostered. I do not object to Muslim children taking up unused places; without full numbers our schools will close -added to which Muslims might be more likely to challenge weak moral teaching on life issues in the classroom.
      That two potential shepherds have been turned away is sad too, but some experience of life can be good. In my case, having worked as Registered Nurse in critical care units, acute surgical wards and medical wards, I came with a lot of experience in people-management and dealing with families in crisis situations. I was not well accepted by the priests in my first deanery because, I was told by the bishop, they thought I was too confident for a newly ordained priest. I was in my mid thirties by that time too. I suspect what they meant was I was too committed to Tradition and too ready to have my say. So they best think twice if they want prospective students to have life experience and confidence when, it seems, they really want to mould 'boys' into their own preferred preferred shape.
      God Bless.

  2. Glad to see you back Father. Happy New Year.

    While I totally agree with you about encouraging vocations to the priesthood, I must admit that I am wary of any vocations to the priesthood in the pontificate of Francis. Good grief...if it's possible, we would be in more trouble than we are now.

    I am joining the FSSP parish in my city. The priest in charge of our parish has decreased the amount of times confession is available, and he put out guidelines for when one should go for confession. ...he's worried about people being much too scrupulous in this day and age. Imagine!

  3. Thank you, GC.
    I hope 'Forward Together' does not omit a solid vocations push; my fear is that it will, and I'm with Our Lord on wanting shepherds for the sheep.
    God Bless.

  4. Glad to see you are hanging-in there! My diocesan bishop, a'company-man' from head to toe, has inaugurated a programmme: "Strengthening our presence as church: a journey of hope" involving the re-structuring of parishes. Closures and disposals to follow.[Check "Angelqueen" this a.m.:"Vacant Catholic Church will become Mosque" for outrageous example in USA.] Adjacent diocesan bishops have co-opted FSSP, ICKSP, et al to alleviate the problem and, at the same time, save relatively iconic churches. So far my bishop appears not so inclined even to invite the Ordinariate to take-up a to be vacant church [too Catholic in worship perhaps?] Laity and Permanent Diaconate his answer [unusual diocese as to absence of any P.D. to-date - unlike Liverpool who cite their wives in the Directory.] There is one great church with superb wide public transport connections scheduled for closure - but its location in a strong Muslim area may well dictate an end use - though ideal for SSPX [some chance]. My bishop preached at a Traditional parish, shortly after arising, on a lay-led church - it was also the first anniversary of a curate at that church, but no mention. Bishop in relation to the same church, upon hearing the parish priest was in the Confessional - opined: "good luck to him", implying a waste of time. As I see it priests are to be reduced to scurrying around Confecting The Sacrament and leaving it at to the 'in' laity - I have witnessed such in France, it will now be with us. The bishop also promotes Laeticia, et al.

    1. Thank you, Sixupman,
      We see it not only in France but elsewhere; it is the Church aping the world where the idea that if anyone is gong to have their dignity affirmed it means by not having their options limited.
      Sad that the Bishop could not point out the parish anniversary of a prisdt in the parish, and seemed dismissive of being in the Confessional. My fear for FTIH will create, as you indicate, a promotion of "priests reduced to scurrying around Confecting The Sacrament and leaving it at to the 'in' laity..." It will then be a case of promoting the very situation over which Our Lord lamented. Sad reflection on the spirituality of today; 'we have moved beyond Christ' comes to mind.
      God Bless.

  5. In my opinion, one of the biggest mistakes the H&N diocese made was not inviting in one of the traditional orders . Many neighbouring areas have reaped the rewards of doing so. ( one need only look at the huge success of the Oratorians in York to see the positive effects ).
    This 'Forward in Hope' plan, seems to me, to adopt a 'lay down and die' attitude, and a 'do what we' can strategy.
    We need priests and they will only appear again when the Gospel is taught is a clear, orthodox and unambiguous way in both school and seminary.
    Paul Dewhurst

    1. Thank you Paul.
      I think involving the laity is vital today, but not a sheep without shepherds. I simply fear that FTIH will be a programme of closure and decapitation of communities. I see nothing positive in that.
      God Bless.


Please comment using a pseudonym, not as 'anonymous'.
If you challenge the Magisterium, please do so respectfully.
We reserve the right to delete from comments any inflammatory remarks.
If we do not reply to your comment it is through lack of time rather than interest.