Who knows what the Cardinal is thinking.

Here's a cynical guess: of those 38 parishes, there are only 20 or 25 that he actually does want to close. He threw another dozen in for two reasons: first, so that when eventually the news comes out that he's only going to close 20 after all, people outside those parishes will be so relieved that the media will have favorable echoes and it will seem as though he listened to people's arguments; second, so that the list of 38 parish closings  can be scrutinized and will not reveal any sort of bias he might have and prefer to keep hidden - the 20 or 25 real target parishes are hidden among the 38.

My guess would be that St. Thomas More was just thrown in for good measure and will be salvaged in the end.

Claire, How long were you a fly on the wall at the Curia?

Solvent parishes with large bank accounts and/ or prime real estate are very attractive to money hungry bishops. Always first look for the money trail.

Some thriving parishes are targets simply because they are thriving no matter the money.

Here in Cleveland St. Peters a downtown thriving parish with a dynamic pastor was put in the same cluster as the Cathedral. So it was obvious that St. Peter's would be closed. The parish and its pastor went into schism and set up their own thriving community elsewhere. Of course Rome reversed the bishop's decision along with quite a few others because of lack of due process on the part of the bishop.

I've heard of Episcopal churches named after St. Thomas the Apostle, but the St. Thomas More Episcopal Church? I'd like to be invited to the "No Hard Feelings, Tom, Reconciliation Service" if the transfer comes to pass. ;)

Church is treating the 17000 married deacons as chopped liver. Many could be fully ordained and they and their spouses could keep these parishes open. And Being Open with a renewed spirit.. Most deacons are retired or very near to retire  and could live in the rectory and  maybe rent their present home etc.    NY Parishes are old enough to have been fully paid for..... if foolish re-financing doesn't bite them. ..Close em and they will stay sold/closed for 200 years and no Catholic HS will ever carry the name Dolan.  

From my (disad)vantage point here in the rural Upper Midwest, where we are isolated from the seats of power and influence, the local parish seems to be going rogue. We are supposed to be under the pastoral care of an "administrative priest" in a nearby parish, but all the locals have ignored him, and he had to get hard-nosed about some financial matters. Some people were fired or quit (no one is sure which), and lachrymose e-mails with unsubstantiated accusations were circulated. A follow-up feel-good meeting in which the admin priest underscored that we were "separate, but under one pastor" was met with some skepticism.

Since the "senior priest in residence" (actually the only priest in residence) is quite ill and often too sick to say mass, though he continues to live in the rectory with assistance, a lay member of the parish led prayers a few Sundays ago. She did not give a homily, strictly speaking, but held forth during the announcements about an issue she has been beating for years and that most parishioners are sick of hearing: Why it is a travesty for Catholics to put up a Christmas tree and/or creche before Christmas Eve. 

Just as this diatribe had started to raise the admin priest's currency with the locals, he showed up last Sunday with a buckwheat pancake mix to be served at the monthly parish breakfast instead of the regular mix. Sadly, this new mix required milk and eggs, which were not on hand. Something was cobbled up with non-dairy creamer, but the results weren't too good. Factions are now forming up over whose obligation it was to provide the requisite additional ingredients. 

I am not making this up.

And, whoa, the Catholics bought a church from the Anglican Episcopalians and called it St. Thomas More? Someone had a sly sense of humor ... or was still deeply bitter about the English Reformation!

Sorry, I guess others got the Thomas More joke, too. Maybe the Episcopalians would buy it back and call it St. Thomas Cranmer (f.d. October 16 in the BCP calendar for anyone in an ecumenical mood ...).

Tom: thanks, but it is not just the Curia who play those games, unfortunately. They happen in the secular world as well...

Jean, you ought to write a book about that parish of yours!

Jean, I.m really depressed about hearing your pancake uproar.. Being a long time resident of both coasts I was told the Midwest was going to save the US Church [according to my wife with Iowa roots]. Who can I believe now?    )- :

Jean, I am sorry, and a little bit outraged, about the pancake ukase. But I stand fully behind the lady who wants to keep Christ in Christmas by keeping him out of Advent and the simultaneous Happy Holidays Shopping and Profitmaking Season. (Not that being right will do the lady or me any good.)

Why it is a travesty for Catholics to put up a Christmas tree and/or creche before Christmas Eve.

Wait. My creche is out on the mantel, but with the main character missing: baby Jesus is not supposed to be in the creche until after Christmas Mass. Right now the Mary and Joseph and other figurines are staring at an empty crib. Isn't that how it is in every Catholic household?

Advent wreath? Isn't that a protestant custom??

(Not sure why they have it in my church!)

The Archdiocese actually bought St. Thomas More church from the Reformed Church, which had  bought it from the Episcopalians.  I think the RC to RC deal involved an agreement to display a TULIP in perpetuity.

I was one of "the elect" chosen to represent my parish in the "Making All Things New" process.  The "new" reality for my parish is that it will be closed.

It's been a frustrating and heart-breaking process. I come away from the process feeling the closures were a done deal from the outset and the process was just cover.

It is rumored that the Archdiocese spent a great deal of money on the consultants from the Reid Group, an outfit with no roots in New York nor the east coast.  From the get go I was frustrated that this outside group of consultants was brought in.  Here we are in NYC, home to some of the best consultant groups in the world, and the resources of our community went to these outsiders who know nothing of our realities.   There has been little transparency about how much these consultants cost the Archdiocese.  I find that really insulting when limited resources are a major reason for closures.  How many parishes could have been spared if the resources wasted on the Reid Group were spent to support actual strengthening of our communities of faith?

The Reid Group promised all this support for us and we received nothing from them from the day our "cluster" sent our final response last summer until a few days ago.  No communication or support when the closure was announced in November.  The first communication came last Friday when we received a cold, useless email that included this gem:

For parishes that will be merging next August, this will be your last Advent and Christmas season in your current parish community.  We will offer a number of suggestions for you to consider implementing in Update #2 next week.

Note -- we received this email on Friday December 12th, informing us we will receive suggestions for implementing something for the last Advent and Christmas in our church sometime this week.  In other words these Reid Group suggestions for Advent are to be implemented sometime after the 3rd Sunday of Advent.  Even the Christmas suggestions are useless and woefully late.  Assuming they actually get to us this week -- what parish doesn't have its Christmas activities planned?  I guess in the Reid Group world, the ones they are helping to close.

Jack, Nevertheless, that email will figure in the numbers rhe Reid Group provides to your cardinal archbishop to show him the group earned its money. Remember, it is not about you.

I stand fully behind the lady who wants to keep Christ in Christmas by keeping him out of Advent and the simultaneous Happy Holidays Shopping and Profitmaking Season.

It isn't the message; it's the tone and frequency that gets wearing.

Right now the Mary and Joseph and other figurines are staring at an empty crib. Isn't that how it is in every Catholic household?

Used to be, but the cats started swiping the sheep and batting them up and down the hall like hockey pucks. 

"I come away from the process feeling the closures were a done deal from the outset and the process was just cover."

This is a common impression. After the round of closings in Boston at the time Law resigned, a group of Catholic laity attempted to assemble as much information as possible to see if they could detect rationales. They offered the following.

1. More parishes were closed than financially necessary in order to protect the diocese against future financial loss.

2. More parishes were closed than necessary because of declining priets in order to anticipate future priest declines.

3. A single parish was kept open in each town even if it was not very viable while second vibrant parishes were closed in  towns that had more than one.

4. Larger parishes were given a second inexperienced priest in preference to keeping another parish open by assigning it an inexperienced pastor.

I don't think there is a deacon who is only "partially" ordained, is there? Ordination is rather like pregnancy in that way.

Our parish in the Bronx is self-supporting. The Archdiocese has decided to merge it into another over  our objections. I thought from the beginning the planning process was bogus; these decisions were all made before they convened a planning group.

And in a nearby parish that the Archdiocese is closing in a few months, they transferred out the long time pastor in July and dumped it on a younger priest to shut it down   A pretty shoddy thing to  do to both the former pastor and the new one- but especially the new one I think. I'm at the point where I feel that, if there is decision to be made, the Archiocese will make the wrong one.

When is the sacramental church in which the Eucharist is the source and summit of our life going to get the message that priests are necessary and that the unbiblical clerical club will destroy the Church if it does not reform?

Peggy, you mentioned a "good pastor." I've noticed a lot of stand-up guys whose parishes are being closed, or priests who have been pastors for years and now are suddenly "administrators" (a step down).

I wonder, if one did an analysis, would it prove to be the case that there's a "payback" going on? Maybe I'm too suspicious. But I remember one of these priests saying to a friend of mine, when it came to protesting some outrageous thing the Archbishop was doing (I forget what) that he might as well speak up because "What are they going to do to us? Send us to bad neighborhoods? We're already in bad neighborhoods." I've noticed his parish is now going to be closed.

And, on the other hand, some of the worst (most rigid, unpastoral, doctrinaire) types seem to be given more authority, and bigger churches to pastor. There's nothing like a major reorganization to consolidate power.

I sure hope I'm wrong about this. 

Having worked  on several "Strategic Agenda " steering committees as a faculty representative, I have encountered a number of groups and individuals who sell their expertise to institutions whose  chief executives want to change institutional structures and processes  in a way they know many "stakeholders" will resist. They specialize in " unfreezing" resistant elements in the system and "re-freezing" them in a more desirable configuration. These outfits are very slick and glib, describing the changes they want to make in glowing terms and disparaging the status quo. Everything is seen to be in need of fixing ASAP. And action must come "sooner rather than later."  The Reid group's plan as laid out on the Archdiocesan website looked eerily familiar when I first went through it. And I wouldn't be surprised if Claire's analysis of the way this last move has been rolled out is on target. It's just the sort of thing one might expect. Nothing is as convincing as a little faux spontaneity at the right moment.

Susan, my county government must be using the same consultant, although there is a depressing sameness to most of these outfits.   In our case, it's not the closing but the building of something that usually generates a long list of potential sites, some of which are so laughably unsuitable that people show up at various meetings in a state of apoplectic shock, for instance, the fire chief who proposed tearing down a church and taking over its surrounding three acres in the middle of an expensive residential neighborhood for a new fire station.  I really thought the church's pastor would have a heart attack or stroke right there at the civic association meeting.  Sites for evaluation are also suspiciously spread throughout the jurisdiction so as to make it clear that no constituency is too wealthy or well-connected to escape the possibility of hosting needed but potentially unpopular projects.  Now that I have lived there for umpteen years, I know that it's a big ruse and that of many sites on any list, only two or sometimes just one are real, and I usually know which one or two that would be.  Of course, this process does have its uses.  At least one reason for the technique is that if you have to purchase private property having "alternative" sites helps to keep the negotiations from getting out of hand.  It also certainly helps generate civic involvement of new homeowners.

But at bottom, I think that as in Boston, you really shouldn't have to conduct a study to figure out why the church is making the decisions that it does.  It almost feels like the church decides not to give explanations simply to reinforce that it doesn't have to, that it holds power.  Why not just say how the criteria are going to be applied and explain why you make exceptions when you do so?

Parish closings? Bah! The Church needs to think bigger. Close some archdioceses. Merge others. Big financial savings. Little downside. Solves the archbishop shortage problem. What? There is no shortage of archbishops? Oh.

 Rita, we have been wondering where all the pastors of the newly closed churches will go. At the moment there are an awful lot of "administrators." Appointing them was one way to assure that changes could be made with less resistance. Pastors apparently have some rights. Our recently appointed young administrator  seems hopeful that he will soon be named pastor, and I imagine other administrators named recently and assigned to churches that have not been designated as redundant feel the same way. But what will happen to them now? 

Pastors have rights under canon law.  I don't think "administrators" have the same rights if any at all.

Church skullduggery .... d'ya think?

"The Reid Groups's plan as laid out on the Archdiocesan webstie looked eerily familar when I first went through it."

The Reid Group was involved here in the Cleveland Diocese in a very sophisticated diocesan fund raising effot.

1. They divided the parishes into several waves of fund raising spread over a couple of years. Each parish was assigned a targeted amount. However the parish target was not announced until a substantial amount of the target was raised.

2. Each parish member was assigned an amount. As a retired Ph.D. from the public mental health system mine was only $3000. A friend, widow of an MD, was assigned $30,000. They started with the wealthiest and worked their way down.

3. Each parish got to keep 30% of the money up to the targeted amount, but got to keep 70% of the money over the target amount.

Our parishes are businesses and we should deal with the managers as a business management.

I wrote the pastor telling him to tell the bishop he wasn't going to get any extra money until the American Bishops get out of politics. Don't simply say no but send a targeted message.

I told the pastor the parish could get my whole $3000 (with only the 10% tax to the bishop since our parish has a school) if the Eucharist Prayer was sung at least one Mass each Sunday (I often travel 20 miles to a parish which does this). Again tell them what they have to change to get your money.

Long before Francis I decided we needed a poor church for the poor. Fortunately our large wealthy parish has a Foodbank and a SVDP society. Each gets a third of my money.

The defacto strategy of church management appears to be to give more services (special programs) to fewer and fewer peope at a greater cost per person. They need incentive to reach out to people, and get their money from more people and more church attendance. So we should offer our time and talent but not any more money.

Jack - Dallas Diocese also used this same group - the Reid team came from the same effort in Boston.  Think that the driving force behind this type of diocesan foundation fundraising is Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas who is the USCCB finance leader.  His history is setting up long range foundations that earmark funds to various diocesan departments e.g. social, seminary, parishes, schools, etc.

Went through the same fund raising process that you describe and like you, have told both the pastor and bishop that he gets my money only if certain targets are met.  Our pastor did negotiate a larger refund (or less tax) because of the nature of our school and its student make up.  But, unfortunately, the pastor used that tax reduction to renovate his rectory - without any type of parish board input, approval, etc.

Farrell appears to be positioning this *financial, fundraising game plan* across the USCCB - his first move in coming to Dallas was to purchase a $1 million+ home for himself justifying the purchase as a way to meet and raise money from the 1% Catholics (rich).  80% of the diocesan paper is always focused on photo ops of the bishop and the 1% Catholics in various fundraising events.

Bill -Shades of the "benefice" system of earlier centuries in which priests were tied to endowed positions rather than living parish communities, and people often chose to become priests in order to  have a nice secure living, and then often farmed out their duties to others. That is why Ignatius and his early companions as priests even before they decided to become a religious order, took vows of poverty as well as chastity.

I am for a mostly voluntary (poor) church for the poor in which most lay ministers, deacons and priests would be volunteers (i.e.unpaid). In a ways it goes back even further to the early church in which presbyters and bishops like the various pagan priests were drawn from the upper classes as a civic duty and honor. Unfortunately that helped get the clergy into bed with the elite and the imperial power structure but in the modern advanced economies about half the population has the wealth to be able to do voluntary ministry on a least a part-time basis during their work lives and full time for a decade or two in retirement.

I wholeheartedly endorse Ms. O'Brien-Steinfels's "Note to Editors".  The Reid Group has quietly become the go-to group for dioceses/ archdioceses throughout the US in this business of shutting down parishes.  There is practically no reporting about them.  All I've been able to find is a wacky story about their alleged Masonic connection.  Per their own website (http://thereidgroup.biz/about-us/our-clients/ ), they have been involved the business of "reorganization" and "planning" in these dioceses:

Archdiocese of Anchorage, AK
Archdiocese of Indianapolis                                                                                                                     Archdiocese of Newark, NJ
Archdiocese of New York                                                                                                                     Archdiocese of Seattle
Diocese of Evansville, IN
Diocese of Green Bay, WI
Diocese of Madison, WI
Diocese of Manchester, NH
Diocese of Orlando, FL
Diocese of Peoria
Diocese of Pueblo, CO
Diocese of Reno, NV
Diocese of Rochester, NY
Diocese of Saginaw
Diocese of St. Petersburg, FL
Diocese of Scranton, PA
Diocese of Syracuse, NY

Based on comments here, this list is not exhaustive.  Thoughtful reporting on this group would be very welcome.

Peggy @ 5:45

The Archdiocese, despite its size, is like a small town. Especially among the priests. After all, they're lifers, most of them. Everybody knows everybody, more or less. And if the archbishop doesn't know his priests he ought to. There's the priests' council and the personnel board decisions to which he must attend, not to mention the day-to-day interactions. 

I was thinking of Cardinal Egan, actually. Remember when an anonymous letter was circulated by some priest, saying they were all demoralized by how he was running the diocese? Egan was very bitter and vengeful. It was ugly. And Egan's still around, you know, and I believe he advises Dolan. You don't have to look far to find vendetta material! 

Again, this is pure speculation; I have no evidence this is true. But I wonder, because it does happen. Law kept the list of the priests who signed the petition to get him out of Boston. It was not forgiven.

Bill DeHaas and Jack Rakosky's comments on the fund-raising tactics of the Reid Group gave me a sense of deja vu.  We just went through a big shake-down (excuse me, capital campaign) in our diocese.  Don't know if the Reid group was involved or not. I'm trying, not very successfully, not to resent it.  The tactics, mentioned in the comments, were pretty in-your-face and aggressive.  I know our priest didn't like it, but of course he was stuck with the company line.  I know a few people in our parish said they would have to cut back on their donations to the local parish to meet their pledge to the archdiocese.  I think it should be the other way around.  My husband has a better attitude than I do, maybe it will rub off on me.