So we went to the "Dinner and Dialogue" tonight. Not. A. Dialog. This was the format: You (meaning the parishioners) submit questions on a 3X5 card, and Deacon Dean would supposedly answer them, as long as there was time. One way communication.
The sense of weakness on the part of a leader who cannot actually engage with parishioners was revealing.
Yea, I almost felt sorry for him...almost.
ReplyDeleteVery revealing indeed. First the council's decision was based on finances, later God? First builings don't matter, but yet A/C does? It was very confusing, not a dialogue in the slightest. It was just another pulpit for the Deacon to push his plan. I used to wonder why so many left, honestly I don't anymore.
ReplyDeleteI'm very sad for this parish and community.
My decision to go elsewhere was made tonight.
We understand completely, Triste. God bless you for attending the meeting--your faithfulness will be rewarded elsewhere, to God's glory and your blessing.
ReplyDeleteI was present, too. I submitted several questions but only one was addressed due to time. It was the last one (I believe). "If reg. parishioners were indep. surveyed and the majority decided they wanted to keep two worship sites would you agree?" To sum up his answer in a tiny nutshell, "No." He dug himself deeper into a hole when he started off by saying this isn't a democracy...but he completely p*ssed me off (sorry about that)when talked about discernment...almost implying that parishioners really wouldn't be able to discern this issue -- just them. How arrogant.
ReplyDeleteI understand the desire to leave the parish, and if you feel so inclined, make those intentions known to the ASP Central Office and the "why" behind your departure.
For now, I won't be doing that. I am feeling too..."empowered!"
I also was at the meeting. No dialogue. Unbelievable. The final straw of misinformation and untruth for me was when the deacon spoke of the fact that the churches were established on ethnic population, Irish at St. Mary's and Italian at St. Vincent's and that they had outlived their value. Yes he said that. He should read pages 145-146 of A Century of Grace (St. Mary's Centennial History) and see that St. Vincent's and St. Pat's were established because Fr. Bustin was concerned about the size of the community at St. Mary's getting too large and the expansion geographically of the members. Dean on the other hand says that one Church with 2400 families will enhance the community because we will have more resources (financial?) for "vestments, music and sound systems" So much for people getting to know one another in order to grow in love for one another as his opening prayer suggested. This was my first encounter with the parish other than Mass and I am so upset that I can understand the exodus of so many and he says "it is a delicate issue to reach out to those that leave. Where is that love and care and concern and courage toward "his" parishoners. I have never felt so dismissed as a person, as a Christian/Catholic and treated so condesendingly as at that meeting and I am a life long 70 year member ofthe Catholic church.
ReplyDeleteAmen, Evelyn. Its like you read my soul and put into words what I was unable to say. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteMy husband stayed home to get our children to bed so I basically summarized the meeting for him. He had a hard time with some of what I told him, but made a very good point. The church (buildings) are all we have -- that is only place we experience any type of community. There are no Parish Festivals, there is no Bingo, we don't serve a meal to the less fortunate on Thanksgiving.
We usually go to the 9:30 AM Mass and see the same people (although less and less of them) week after week...THAT IS OUR CHURCH COMMUNITY! Yes, I know we can go to Mass at St. Mary's and we receive Jesus in the Eucharist in the same way. (But, we can also go to St. Mary Our Mother, or St. Catherines for Mass too)
We are transplants to this area so we don't have the history here that many of you have. (Although, both of our boys were baptized at SVdP)I used to work in church ministry as I have stated above, and never before have I felt so "dismissed." (how could I possibly discern what is right for this church, right?!?)
As a registered member of All Saints Parish I should have a "say" in its direction. And I say...KEEP ST. VINCENTS AND ST. MARY'S. If my Pastor or Pastoral Administrator doesn't care about the feelings and concerns of his entire "flock," then he is not being pastoral -- he is only administrating. Perhaps that is why this feels more like a business and less like a Parish Community. Maybe I should look into diversifying my "spiritual portfolio."
There is no dialogue with Dean, that is precisely why he is ineffective as a leader. He been told this repeatedly, but fails to take the advice of those who truly have tried to help him. Dean's need to control and to protect himself are 2 characteristics that are his downfall. He may give the impression that he is giving (as in hosting a dinner dialogue) but, in actuality, there is only taking- mostly your valuable time.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the Leader this morning I found myself thinking that Deacon Dean's speech sounds so very similar to what the CPP BOE have been saying about their facilities. He talks about funding, facilities,emotions,traditions. The powers that be will disregard what the people want because they know what is best..they will tear down our beautiful historic buildings and either sod them over or build apartments. What a wonderful idea!
ReplyDeleteThe guy is stuck on himself. He has to have his picture stuck in the bulletin and in the paper. This whole mess is all about his desire to be in the spotlight and be in control. We deserve better. 3X5 index cards...what a way to chicken out!
ReplyDeletedean and gilanski will both have their way...mega church....mega school...
ReplyDeleteHow often last night Dean said that it is not the buildings but ommunity. The buildings are secondary. Well, why then has all the discussion been on buildings....facilities and only a mention of community. Community will be enhanced by one big church for 2400 families. I just do not understand. The bigger the group the more you relate?
ReplyDeleteAnother thing....discernment is what these committees did. It is like no one except the chosen few Dean appointed or selected has the power of the Spirit to discern. What about our Baptism? If only Dean could offer a signal that he listens. His approach last night was to talk, talk and talk, mentioning emotional ties and grief. What many people in the pews hear from each other is anger at the lack of honest and consistent DIALOGUE when asked for such. Can no one in administrationb hear that as well as grief? Please Dean, if you advertise a Dialogue let it be according to the definition of dialogue: "a conversation between two or more people; an exchange of ideas and opinions on a particular issue."
Deacon Dean has once again showed how out of touch he is with the community he is suppose to be serving. He is out of touch regarding the music (too much) , the length of mass (too long), what sort of youth ministry we'd like, and now how many churches will best serve us. Maybe some day in the future it will become necessary to go down to one church, but I don't believe we are there yet and perhaps we won't be there for decades. This whole situation is not being handled well. It is happening way too fast, the numbers don't add up, and it's being done without any serious consideration of parishioner's input.
ReplyDeleteMy family is very discouraged with the church. I would like to stop contributing to the church but feel an obligation to help it. I don't like that 25% of my contributions go to support a school educating 109 students when they say we have to close all but one church. Something is very amiss.
It seems very obvious that the school will be next to go. I believe Dean knows that and is not making it public until later. Otherwise he would lose more support from St. Mary's people and from the families who attend the school. It seems calculating but it was clear that this parish is strictly business after Thursday.
ReplyDelete.what is with the anonymous Posts? I thought that was turned off.
ReplyDeletewhy should we turn it off just because Dean and his followers don't like it. Don't see the difference if you sign anonymous or use a name that is not your own. Just a thought
ReplyDeleteIt was suggested that we do not sign anonymous anymore but I agree with Anonymous above about signage that is not one's real identity. Furthermore after Thursday's meeting of complete lack of dialogue I understand the need for this blog. There just is no place for people to express the results of their discernment and sometimes to dialogue with others and sometimes to express displeasure in some form.
ReplyDeleteI am very disappointed. One of the first questions asked at the "dialog" was for the parish to post a detailed facilities budget online, broken down by building (St. Mary's, St. Vincent's, etc.) and by type of expense (utilities, repairs, insurances, etc.) Deacon Dean declined to do this, saying that it was more information than what the average parishioner wanted to see. But when he is considering selling one of the parish buildings and claims that this is for financial reasons, OF COURSE we need to see a breakdown by building. How much will actually be saved? Moreover, I agree with the previous comments that this parish is being governed by finances above all. Whom do we worship anyway? Who is our leader? Jesus Christ or the Almighty Dollar? This one-way dialog is not a dialog at all, but just another forum for Deacon Dean to make his one-sided arguments. It is a shame what this parish is coming to. What would Archbishop Sheen do it a situation like this?
ReplyDeleteMy question was a technical one, not an objection. I frankly understand the need for anonymity considering the toxic nature of the situation.
ReplyDeleteI am very disappointed with Deacon Condon. I have in the past defended him as I thought he was not just another Dioceses apparatchik, and was at least able to be worked with. They say that the true measure of a leader is how they are in crisis or controversy. He has gone into the bunker and has put his hands over his ears.
His idea of "Dialogue" is obviously the same as the progressives, which is to talk people to death until they submit to your obviously genius idea, that they should realize the genius of, except for the fact they are too stupid to understand, so you need to explain it to the dumb sheep until they give in.
The question now becomes, What's next? I for one am not leaving, and I pray others will not, as this is what they want. To drive enough of us out so they can do exactly what they want.
CP Tom,
ReplyDeleteI was also disappointed and angered at the non-dialog dialog. It was clumsy and in the final analysis embarrassing for Dean. But I'm over it.
A leader must make decisions. Dean, a leader, after an extended period of discernment, with the help of our parishioners of the three Councils, made a decision on the facts and opportunity at hand. That is what he is supposed to do. I don't know why he can't just come out and say that plainly. That Dean is clearly under-challenged in the tact, communications and personnel management areas is clear. That should not separate us from the reality which this parish confronts. I believe, with all the facts I have at hand that Dean and the Councils have set a proper, although wrenching, path forward. I do not see a need to demonize the basic process. We disagree with the style of our parish leader. Can we not see our way around that? Must we sacrifice our spiritual energy on this dead end resistance to Catholic authority? I would suggest we turn our energy to each other and the need to be together in faith. That is an unobstructed and loving path. In that direction and with that confidence, we should each extend a personal invitation to whoever we know to come back to the church/parish. In the face of Dean's demeanor and rigidity, we should choose and build community. There is no need to rely on parish administration to grab hold of that wonderful gift given to us by Christ. It is up to us to make this new direction vibrant and sustaining. I for one, want that more than I want Dean's head.
Talk of 'they' should stop. Let there be no mistake that Christ wanted us one way, as 'we.' Take down the battle flag and make peace instead. Let's not let Dean be the obstacle any longer. Let's begin moving on, realizing it's going to take some time.
I love this parish. I remember when it was St. Mary's for me. Now it is All Saints. In the reality of our faith community, St. Patrick's went away. Now St. Vincent's. Enormously wrenching as it is, it is the reality that time has delivered to us. It is time to accept that, in the name of preserving our parish and its community.
Bill, Thanks for your heartfelt comments. I hope to see you at Sunday's meeting. How truly sad to think that tearing down the churches and the communities they serve will somehow preserve the parish. It hasn't so far...
ReplyDeleteWhat is so hard for the SOP folks to understand the fact that we do not really have a say in the matter. The Catholic Church is Not A Democracy. Your local leaders are chosen for you by middle management (diocese) and them by the upper management. (Vatican and the Pope) Sometimes you get good ones. Other times not so much. (Even some popes in past history were less than savory) Either way hopefully the ones in charge will make the best decisions they are able to with the resources they have. I don’t think that demonizing Deacon Dean is helping very much. Yes he is underwhelming in tact and communication skills but he won’t be here forever. Maybe it will be better without him maybe we'll get someone worse. Either way nothing stays the same. Change is inevitable. Resistance is an option.
ReplyDelete1:58 Good insight. The problem may be that because Dean is so unpopular and so unwilling to compromise his views, many people do not want him to succeed in any area. So, even if they don't leave the parish, they stop supporting programs and activities. This is their way of "sticking it" to him. Not saying that this is the best approach, but believe that this may be the case.
ReplyDeleteDeacon Dean said we have input. There was an insert to the bulletin. We are to give feedback and he listens.
ReplyDeleteOh. I guess we don't have a say. I guess we are still the Church of yesteryear:
Pay. Pray. Obey.
Bill,
ReplyDeleteI truly enjoy your perspective and passion to forge a way in Christian unity. I would like to comment on something you said...
"Talk of 'they' should stop. Let there be no mistake that Christ wanted us one way, as 'we.' Take down the battle flag and make peace instead."
In order for the "theys" to stop and the flag to come down, parishioners need to feel that their options/discernments are of value. We were told otherwise Thursday night. (repeatedly) For me, I don't feel like I am waving a flag -- unless it is all white. I don't mean I am surrendering, rather let us ALL surrender to God's will, together. God gave us ALL the ability to discern His will in our lives. Deacon Dean, The Pastorial Council, Finance Council and Facilities Committee cannot discern for ALL of us...we need to do the discernment TOGETHER. If it truly is God's will that SVdP be sold to PH then we will come to that conclusion together as a community with the help of the Holy Spirit. That is true discernment...and that is Faith!
You also wrote: "In the reality of our faith community, St. Patrick's went away. Now St. Vincent's. Enormously wrenching as it is, it is the reality that time has delivered to us."
You speak of time. God's time and our concept of time differ greatly. What is the rush? All in God's time. If this is what God wants for our parish wouldn't we better honor God by slowly going through the process. If some parishioners are uneasy lets take some time to pray and think about it more and gather input from the parishioners. Better we discover now if we "misinterpreted" God's answer to our prayers -- before SVdP church sees the fate of St. Patrick -- because "rebuilding" a church is definitely NOT in our budget.
Anonymous of 1:58 PM...Including all parishioners in the discernment process is like saying "we are all members of the Body of Christ." It doesn't say that we are a Democracy! And, yes, we do have a say in the matter for God speaks to us and in us and through us...The true "shepherds" know this and value all the diverse gifts their flock has to offer.
ReplyDeleteMary,
ReplyDeleteThe nature of discernment is really the issue here. So I'm going to go and discern a response to your thought provoking message. Just wanted you to know I read it and I'm thinking about it.
Sadly, the person posting the original comment got up and left after hearing the answer to the first question. Overall, the session was extremely helpful, but unfortunately, there were way more questions that there was time to answer. Had this been turned into a dialog, even less information would have been shared. And, contrary to the letter to the editor, Fr. Lew did not screen the questions; he just pulled them off of the pile -- first in, first answered. He did make an attempt later to combine a few questions asking the same or similar questions. Folks, the need to consolidate into one building has been on the table for at least 10 years. It won't be long before we have only one priest, and our parish (and surrounding community is getting smaller).
ReplyDeleteI believe there were several questions before I got up and left, friend. I saw how it was going, and it was just what I expected, sadly. A gathering that was touted as a dialog should have been a dialog. This sort of dishonesty is why parishioners have withdrawn support.
ReplyDeleteThe 'need' to consolidate is up for debate. I hope you attend Sunday's meeting.
To anonymous 11:09 p.m.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to have information that comes right from the administration so why do you not identify yourself as so many of us are doing. Has anyone done some demographics of the area's future so we can go on fact regarding the future growth of the parish? Like,what account has been given to the possible influx of Spanish speaking in the area. Already the Methodist is planning Spanish services to accomodate them. Has any projection been given to an increase in mumbers given that with a new administration, at some point, there will be the return of several families according to this blog. Has anyone reached out to those who have left to seek accuracy in future numbers? What about the call to evangelization that the Catholic church has been emphasizing for a few years now. Have we taken that seriously with any program other than RCIA? Here again a lay group within the parish could help. I am sorry to say this but from the original presentation to now there does not seem to be any information regarding any of this. the church is more than a building as we have heard.So, let's consider other aspects of it before we rush to demolition.For the life of me it soes not make sense to demolish a building and the n add on to another in a few years due to numbers (the administrator made a passing reference to such at D&D)And, I have been given the impression from the D&D meeting that PH would wait on their proposal so just what is the rush to tear down. Give the people beyond the hand picked committees, a chance to contribute to the end result and it may be quite different.
Anonymous of 11:09 PM you wrote..."Overall, the session was extremely helpful, but unfortunately, there were way more questions that there was time to answer. Had this been turned into a dialog, even less information would have been shared."
ReplyDelete"extremely helpful," to whom? I was there and came in about 7:30 PM and almost didn't stick around...because it was not a dialog but a Q-n-A session. But, I guess it was helpful to me in one way...Deacon Dean basically said that we (the less than 5% of the parish population found in the staff, Parish & Finance Councils, and Facilities. Com.) has decided that this is best...we have discerned it...and since this isn't a democracy (!!!!), they don't need our (the other 95% of parishioners) help in the discernment. If that would have been said earlier...I too would have walked out. Nothing like telling people that you are supposed to "pastor" that their questions and concerns do not matter because, "we have discerned them for you." WHY?!?
You said it was "unfortunate" that there were more questions than time...of course there would be, when there was little more than an hour for questions. As for a "dialog" allowing for less information, I disagree...There is a "flow" with a dialog, a give and take of sorts, and perhaps there would have been a little more "brevity" on both the "give" and "take"...but, I guess we will never know.