In September 2000 a small parish in the north west of England (and the Lancaster Diocese) lost its priest. Well not really, it knew where he had gone but it was a long way from Seascale, the home of St Joseph parish. Actually readers of Catholic Voice and with good memory might just recall that early in 2000 there was a very upbeat article in Catholic Voice about this small parish of seventy addresses, boasting that it was the diocese’s largest geographical parish, it had England’s highest mountain; it had the smallest church, St. Olaph’s and Anglican; the deepest lake, Wastwater; and it held annually the biggest liar contest. It was about to celebrate its ruby anniversary. It was on a roll.

Well it is still on a roll, but not one the parish could have predicted.

In May of that year it was told its priest was being moved. But then priests are moved they call it the autumn manoeuvres. In July the parish was told their parish priest was not to be replaced. Ah, now that is different. Between then and September the parish mobilised and managed to ensure that however it was to be served it would remain a parish in its own right. It still is and is still rolling.

About ten years ago it was blessed in getting a parish priest who, rather like Pope John XXIII, opened windows and let light and wind (spirit?) in. A Pastoral Parish Council was formed and importantly it was given a constitution that defined its role, its limits and its relationship to the parish priest. No one then could have predicted the importance of that decision. The Pastoral Parish Council in the main was the Parish priest’s consultative body, his source of parishioners’ feedback, his parish thermometer and source of help.

The parish grew up and took initiatives. It refurbished the house for its father; it redecorated its church for our Father. It was alive. Of course lively people need restraining as well as encouraging; but it worked.

After six years it exchanged its priest for another priest. The Pastoral Council took on more responsibility and became more knowledgeable and more involved in the processes of parish life, liturgical, financial, pastoral, educational, formative, and participative. This was collaborative ministry in real time.

The Parish continued to grow in maturity if not numbers.

So when the parish was informed that no replacement priest was planned there was anger at not being involved in the decision; there was frustration at not knowing what future was planned (or not!) for it, and without consultation; but there was determination that the last ten years of growth and development were not to be cast aside; there was determination that it would survive as a parish, as an Eucharistic Community. It was by now confident that it was capable of administering itself. Its Pastoral Council was willing to take on that responsibility. And so the Diocese accepted this and eventually the Pastoral Parish Council was appointed as Canon Law allows, as the administrator of the parish. Meanwhile the departing priest negotiated a Sunday Eucharist and one weekly Eucharist from a neighbouring parish, ten miles away. The Deanery agreed to provide other support on a request basis. So what kept the light burning?

Yes, the Holy Spirit without a doubt; but what were her instruments?

The existence of a Pastoral Parish Council meant there was a nucleus of active parishioners informed and willing who could be mobilised, ready to take on the administrative responsibilities; far more important were the parishioners themselves who were determined that they were not going to have a chapel of ease supplied from another parish; they did not want a Mass centre but they wanted to preserve a community and they were prepared to support a Pastoral Parish Council elected by itself and not imposed.

Twelve months on where are we? Still rolling!

Yes, of course it is hard work. We are a small parish. We have a good supply of retired people who are able to give time and sometimes jeopardise their marriages for the greater good. We are a dispersed parish; half live in the village, local to the church, the other half come from surrounding villages and communities within a radius of ten miles. There are enough skills to maintain the house and church using tradesmen only for the bigger jobs.

Each member of the Pastoral Council has taken on a co-ordinating role for a major activity or responsibility in the life or maintenance of the parish. They are encouraged to recruit parishioners to join them in execution of that role. Involvement is spread as widely as possible to ensure each member is recognised as needed and wanted.

We have a Liturgy group who meet monthly to plan our liturgy and decide what support we need from the deanery.

A pastoral group who look after the sick and housebound and arrange Communion for them and visit them in hospital or home. It ensures that the sick and housebound have access to a priest. We are therefore grateful for the support from our neighbouring priest.

A catechetic group is mainly involved with the children who all attend non-Catholic schools in the area.

An "Office " Committee does the routine administration jobs including rotas for all the "jobs" and ministries and the mail, etc. Perhaps more important than all is a Financial Committee wholly independent of the Pastoral Council. There is a social committee; we have found that with fewer services in the church we need to meet more often socially to maintain the community. Because of low numbers we make most of these events ecumenical thus serving another purpose. There is a committee responsible for communications, which is important. It is difficult to communicate effectively when you do not have a pulpit at your disposal! Without a priest visiting and exhorting it is more difficult to maintain contact with those who can’t attend our services regularly or with those who have to seek Mass in neighbouring parishes. To counter this we ensure all non-attending members get a mailed copy of our weekly bulletin which is now our main communication medium. We maintain the house as a parish house to ensure the parish has a home and can accommodate a visiting priest or religious.

At the same time we have to recognise the dangers of "independence". Who restrains over enthusiasm founded on limited theology? Who exercises discipline in liturgy? Who motivates and encourages in formation and spiritual development? Administration can become an objective in itself; all the time we have to ask what are we administering and to what end.

At this stage of our development all we can say we are aware of the problems and we are working on them!

We have just concluded one full year of administering our own parish; we are still motivated; still in existence; still balancing the books! still looking forward with hope, still working on it.

Independence is heady stuff; objectivity, integrity, self-criticism, and humility are essential ingredients to orthodoxy! In our first year everyone subordinated their own aims, even their prejudices! to the needs of the Parish. Visit us on our website, read our weekly bulletins; watch our progress and take heart if you feel under threat. http://web.ukonline.co.uk/seascale.rc

There have been two conferences hosted by Ushaw College, the Seminary of the northern province, to look at the problem of a diminishing number of priests. If you can bear with me I would like in the next two editions to bring you up to date with these conferences and their conclusions. The problem goes beyond St. Joseph’s, Seascale. You may be next! As they say in West Cumbria, "see yer!"

Two parishes, one priest or one priest two parishes. In the 1970s I was living in France. It was apparent that the French were not as well served with priests numerically as we were at home.

I remember on one long weekend, hiring a canal cruiser for a trip down the Saone. And yes youngest boy insisted on having his turn at the helm and rammed the concrete jetty and yes we tied up too tightly in the lock and as the water rushed in it filled our boat and nearly sank us.

On Saturday we tied up at a rudimentary pier (the one rammed by son no. 3). We asked about Mass next day of two women in widows weeds crossing the unpaved village square outside the church. They told us they didn’t have a priest that weekend but we were welcome at their Eucharistic Service - in 1974!

Sunday; the church, huge and smelling musty as only French village churches can, had a congregation of about 30 women and two men. Who conducted the service? The two in widows weeds. Who distributed Holy Communion? The two in widows weeds. 1974! I can’t remember whether there was a homily but I know who would have given it if there had been one!

The problem of priest shortage is nothing new. It is not unique to us. We in the UK have been spoilt; priests and laity alike. In 1998 there was one priest for 822 Catholics in the UK; in Europe 1 for 1,336; in Asia 1 for 2,551, and in South America 1 for 7,945. So who is short of priests?

I suggest our problem is clinging on to what we know best, for security. Change is scary and needs courage. I remember complaining at work of constant changes in the organisation. At one time the metrology lab reported to the quality manager; next time round it reported to the technical services manager. The parts receiving inspection department was at home with the quality manager, next time it was with the procurement manager; after all he was responsible for buying the rubbish!

Logical! So my boss explained organisation and structure are tools. When the needs change you change the tool. For years we had a church/diocesan structure that served the needs based on an ample supply of priests and a compliant laity in a society that respected authority.

Today? We cannot expect the organisation and structure of yesterday to satisfy the needs of today. The solution is not the facile one I have heard expounded of parents encouraging their children to go to the seminary. We have all seen the problems created by children acting out their parents’ vocations.

Recently I gave you an upbeat report of St Joseph’s parish in Seascale. The organisation as well as the mindset of the parish had to change to meet the needs of a parish without a parish priest. The problem was that it happened by default and not according to any known plan.

A not dissimilar situation in the Middlesbrough diocese inspired a couple in early retirement to persuade their Bishop to let them settle in an empty presbytery and minister to the parishioners. After many trials they won over the parishioners and they now minister to a thriving community served by a priest from a neighbouring town. This experience persuaded them to ask Ushaw College to host a session for the Northern dioceses to explore (or explode!) this widespread problem.

As they perceived it no diocese in the UK was exempt from this problem but equally none appeared to have a strategy for tackling it. When you can predict with fair accuracy what your manpower is going to be for the foreseeable future you have no excuse for burying your head in the sand and hoping that the Holy Spirit will solve your problem. Even the Holy Spirit can lose her patience; did our Catechism call it presumption?

What is so encouraging about the initiative being proposed for central Preston, without judging whether it is the right solution, is that the problem is being tackled and the Holy Spirit will now come into her own. Laity perceive the shortage of priests as creating a problem for them. But it is also a problem for the priests who are now being asked to do the impossible with consequences to their health and effectiveness and a failure to meet expectations. It may even be a threat to the expression of the vocation they had committed to.

In January about 40 priests, nuns and laity attended a conference to explore this problem and to air it and hopefully inspire the powers that be to face it head on. Manifestly the ordination of women and married men and an increase in the permanent deaconate could contribute to a reduction of the problem. But these arguments are not productive in the present climate. The solutions have to start from where we are now.

When asked was the meeting a success I answer ‘yes’, because the problem was being recognised and it was in the public forum of priests and laity. Inaction was being challenged. There was recognition that there was not a simple single solution to satisfy all situations but equally that this was not an excuse for failing to develop a strategy to tackle the general problem and generate particular solutions for particular cases.

We examined the different manifestations of the problem and the way it was and was not being tackled; we did it in mixed groups of priests, laity and religious and it was interesting to see the difficulty in agreeing a solution acceptable to each participant - without an authority to lead and insist; priests couldn’t relinquish or delegate the authority and responsibilities they saw vested in them by Canon Law; laity could not get their heads round no daily Mass and laity ministering to laity.

The importance of this first review was that it raised particular questions that needed tackling in a follow on session. This took place in September this year and was again facilitated by Ushaw College. Lancaster Diocese was well represented with Canon Cookson and Father Ainsworth who with characteristic modesty avoided the photographer! Not so the bold laity on the accompanying photo above.

Three examples of the problem and present solutions were reviewed: the Middlesbrough Diocese Parish where a lay married couple live in the parish house and effectively administer the rural parish: two parishes in Liverpool, one numerically large but small in area and one numerically smaller but widespread and ministered to by one overstretched priest and a religious sister; and finally St Joseph’s Seascale, rural, remote and ‘elderly’.

Next month I hope to highlight the issues that were discussed and the initial responses. Maybe you would think them through in the meantime. Discuss them, because unless there is a meeting of the minds on the fundamentals we will not arrive at acceptable solutions. We need an agreed framework in which to apply appropriate solutions to diverse problems. Theology of Parish and Priesthood: active mission or merely maintenance?

Management for change; don’t re-invent the wheel; models exist, tried and tested; horses for courses. Formation and support; priests and people need formation especially in a changing environment; the priesthood can be a lonely vocation, emotionally, socially, spiritually. The secular priesthood isn’t a ‘community based’ vocation.

Tony Ivinson.

A couple of editions ago I exposed our parish to the gaze of the whole diocese in an effort to show how one rural parish tackled the problem of losing its Parish Priest.

Last month I wrote in the wider context of the alleged shortage of’ priests and touched on two conferences hosted by Ushaw College, our seminary in the north. The conferences were inspired by two lay people from St.Mary’s, Wycliffe in the Middlesbrough Diocese, Hilda and Michael Hedley.

The first conference managed to open the issue. Its success was exactly that. It spawned the second conference which explored three very different examples of the problem; the Middlesbrough success story of Hilda and Michael, who persuaded their Bishop that they, non parishioners - incomers! - should occupy an empty presbytery and put themselves at the disposal of the parish without a resident priest. They had to win over the parishioners and the local priest.

The second example was your own diocesan rural parish of St. Joseph, Seascale.

The third example was so different to both of the previous rural parish problems; two large urban parishes, Our Lady of Sorrows and St.Philomena’s in Liverpool. These two parishes were served by one priest, Father Philip and Sister Margaret where funerals alone averaged about one per day! If that doesn’t tell us all that a single simple universal solution will not get near to solving the problem nothing will. But equally it doesn’t mean a strategy can’t be evolved for looking at the problem and the variety of issues.

The problem will not be solved by adopting a single inflexible structure or organisation. The old cliché of "horses for courses" comes to mind.

After being exposed to these experiences it was time to get down to serious thinking. But just so that you don’t think here was a bunch of 40 like-minded priestly, religious and lay people, endowed with sweetness and light, let me assure you the whole spectrum of Catholicism was there and exposed.

Of course there was a lot of common fertile ground but there were patches of swamp and brambles. We said last month there were priests who insisted that Canon Law imposed responsibilities and commands of good husbandry that would not allow them to hand over control of parish finances and allow them to delegate tasks: laity who insisted that their daily Masses and multiple Sunday Masses were not negotiable; priests who said that the lack of vocations was "your" problem.

You weren’t encouraging your children and inculcating a desire to dedicate their lives to God through the priesthood. Ouch! So it was fun too!

Under the guidance of Father Chris Fallon groups tackled many issues. Of course it was no more than an exploration. There are no answers for you here. But hopefully there is some bait to tempt you to start discussing the problem in your own deanery or parish. At sometime perhaps you will be consulted. We have an obligation to bring informed response to the problem not an emotional and intransigent one. And whether we, priests and laity, like it or not, it will mean change, big change, and insecurity, and massive compromises.

So among the questions to be faced were:

What is a parish for? What makes it viable? How does a priest belong to a parish? How does one manage change? How does one avoid or cope with resentment, people’s feeling of anger, grief and loss, insecurity?

Should we be aiming to maintain the separate identity of each parish? What is a parish? What is its mission, its purpose?

What is the place of the Eucharist in the life of a Catholic community? Masses: do we go for quantity or quality? convenience or effort? What is the secular priesthood? What is the relationship between priest and people?

Who should be doing the planning for change and preparing the priests and the people? Lets look at some of the items that were explored at Ushaw.

The first attempt at getting to the nub of this issue produced a definition that emphasised "maintenance" rather than "mission", i.e. the Parish/Church is a service centre where one goes to satisfy the obligations of the laws of the Church and get support in crisis; concerned essentially with its own members; the priest is the "service engineer".

Eventually this evolved into a Parish being a communion of communities, nourished by the Eucharist, hearers of the Word, inspired by the Holy Spirit, whose focus of unity is the priest and whose endeavour is to carry our Christ’s mission. Now that is as far as they got in the time but it may be a good starting point for you. What does parish mean to you? What is the essence of parish; the bits that must be retained versus what you can sacrifice?

This group was at pains to point out that we must not re-invent the wheel. Management of change is a well trodden path in commerce and industry; expertise and experts exist. Experiences of other churches and in other countries should be researched.

For example, in the diocese of Boston, USA, parishes have been clustered for Mission. We don’t need to ape anybody but we can learn from mistakes as well as successes. We can adapt.

The group pointed out that priests have different talents and enthusiasms and advantage should be taken to explore and capitalise on them - horses for courses. We should not be fearful of funding specific jobs in administration and management at parish level. Lay Ecclesial ministry should be explored.

People as well as priests need formation and development. Both need training in skills as well as knowledge. Parishes need to invest if they want to survive. Investment costs. Parishioners are not the only ones who need support; they are not the only ones who feel hurt and lack of security. Parishes need continuity of theology, of liturgy and of direction. Collaborative ministry is two way.

Other aspects were discussed as:

4. Diocesan issues - structure, communication, planning and preparation, listening, leadership as opposed to dictatorship, formation.

5.Finance. Who should manage parish finances? Should a parish be run as a business? With strict financial controls and budgets? How many parishes have a Finance Committee in accord with Canon Law?! Should the parish close if it can’t support itself financially? If not, who pays?

All these issues and questions need debating at every level in the diocese, deanery and parish. There is not necessarily a single "right" answer and certainly not an answer universally applicable. The debate is not what is the solution for my neighbour and other parishes but what is the answer for my parish. As I write there is a running correspondence on this subject in the TABLET, so far dominated by members of our diocese.

One issue is the one of consultation or the lack of it. The lack of it in the case of St. Joseph’s caused the most hurt and anger, not the loss of a resident priest in itself.

Consultation presupposes an informed audience; one educated in the fundamentals of the issues at stake. Equally the consulted expect a competent review and research of all suitable models by the proponents of any solutions. Management of changes of the magnitude envisaged demands professionalism of the highest order. Amateurs should tread warily. You only get one bite at these sort of cherries.

If you are persuaded to dip your toe into this pool I can’t recommend highly enough the material on the Ushaw website http://www.ushaw.ac.uk   Click on ‘news’.

Don’t miss Father Fallon’s presentation which explores concepts of parish (professionally!); "How can we sing the Lord’s song in a strange land?"

One idea not pursued was whether the present structure or organisation or theology has any bearing on the lack of enthusiasm exhibited by our children’s generation for the Church; should-we perhaps take this into account if we are forced to reorganise because of a lack of priests? Perhaps we can explore this some other time.

There just may be a connection between the present order, the lack of enthusiasm, and the shortage of vocations. Could it all be solved with one blow? Of the Holy Spirit!