GIVING VOICE TO MY DISPLEASURE

 

 

            Monday evening, I joined approximately one hundred and fifty other members of St. Brigid and Sacred Heart parishes to participate in a ‘visioning session’ to determine the future of the Lexington Catholic Community.  I had hoped this meeting would provide us with a forum to express what it is that we want to see in our future.  Unfortunately, the meeting was conducted in a way that demonstrated that the BIG QUESTIONS had already been resolved.  These big questions, of course, pertain to whether or not the community of Catholics who worship in Lexington need two parishes or just one; whether we want two parishes or just one; whether we deserve two parishes or just one.

            I arrived at the meeting with a determination to argue strenuously that we not only deserved to have two parishes, but that we were abundantly supplied with the resources necessary to sustain two parishes.  Sadly, though, the meeting had been carefully planned in such a way that the question would not be whether we were to be reduced to one parish but how.  We have, for all intents and purposes, been invited to dig our own graves.  I was astounded to see how many people were eager to step up and grab a shovel.

            As the meeting began, we were invited to view – for the first time – a letter that Archbishop Sean sent to Fr. Colletti back on April Fourth.  The letter directed him to assume control of both parishes at the beginning of June and to spend a year taking the steps required to create one parish out of two.  When he spoke to us, Fr. Colletti made it clear that “Sacred Heart will never be the same again, and St. Brigid will never be the same again – both parishes will lose things that they liked.”  This prophesy will be realized, much to the grief of all of us, only if we allow it to happen.

            At one point during the meeting, I raised my hand just as the moderator announced that “we can’t take any more questions from the floor because we need to be moving along.”  Even though I had a lot to say, I wasn’t really that disappointed that I wasn’t called on.  It really wasn’t possible for everyone to have their say and, besides, I was so disturbed by the proceedings that I wasn’t sure I was ready to give an effective voice to the depth of my concern.  I’ve been thinking about the matter for two days, now, and I’ll use this forum to express myself.  Hopefully, the things I’ve written here will strike a chord with the people who are reading it.

            What I want to know – and I’m being very blunt – is why we’re so willing to cooperate with plans that are so obviously destructive.  How many times do we have to recall the story of the Emperor’s clothes before we come to understand that our ‘leaders’ on Lake Street are tragically deficient in both competence and credibility?  They’ve been authoring far more heartache than joy – and joy should be the hallmark of the Christian life.  These days, a lot of Boston-area Catholics are coming up short in the joy department.

            Jesus said, “My sheep will follow me, because they recognize my voice.  But they will not follow a stranger; they will run away from him, because they do not recognize the voice of strangers.” (Jn 10; 4, 5)  A bishop cannot be perfect, nor should anyone expect him to be.  A bishop can only make an earnest attempt to echo the voice of the Good Shepherd.  When he succeeds, the sheep follow him gladly.  When he fails, it’s up to the sheep to “run away”.  The sheep will know when to follow, and when to run, if they are attuned to the voice of the master.

            On May 25, 2004, when Archbishop Sean issued a decree of suppression to Sacred Heart (and to sixty-four other parishes) many of us “ran away” from that decree.  To his credit, the archbishop recognized his mistake and the decree was suspended.  Now, we’re faced with a directive that will not only put an end to Sacred Heart, but to St. Brigid as well.  Why are we getting ready to follow that directive?  Do we hear the master’s voice in this order?  It’s a question worth considering; but on Monday night that question was buried under the weight of a plan designed to come up with a vision for a single, unified parish.  The ‘one parish model’ was presented to us as a “done deal”.  Why are we accepting it?

            Another blunt question I have is, “Why are we all such dopes?”  We’re being presented this model of a unified community of Catholics as if it were a good thing, and many of us are actually buying into it.  If it’s such a good thing, why aren’t Catholics in Burlington clamoring for a Unified Community of Burlington Catholics?  Why aren’t Catholics in Woburn, Winchester, Arlington, Belmont and Waltham begging to be ushered into a single parish?  The answer seems too obvious to point out; but it might be that we need to have it pointed out.

            Catholics in other towns are glad to have a choice, and so should we.  Catholics in other towns want to make their presence felt in a diverse, authentic, catholic manner, and so should we.  When it comes to viable parishes, less is definitely not more, and we’re fools if we believe that it is.

            Leadership in the archdiocese in Boston has been stubborn in areas where other Catholic leaders have been flexible.  There are hundreds of parishes around the USA that do not have a priest for a full-time pastor.  There are fully functional, integrated parishes with a part-time pastor.  Other parishes have nuns, deacons or lay ministers serving as parish administrators.  There are many possible solutions to the ‘priest shortage’ issue – but the solutions can only arise where stubbornness has been overcome.

            If we give in to the inertia of stubbornness, we’re only making things worse for ourselves – and for our children.

 

Paul Bradford

June 29, 2005