Thought I’d mention another aspect of the case of the New York pastor who reportedly is denying the rights of children to be catechized and then receive the Eucharist because their parents aren’t attending Mass or (presumably) taking the kids ot Mass.
As we noted, what he’s doing is unlawful under Church law.
But in pointing this out, I didn’t dwell on one aspect of what he’s doing: Using bar-coded donation envelopes to track their attendance. Apparently, each family gets a batch of donation envelopes with a bar-code unique to them and are then expected to drop one in the plate each week.
Something that may immediately occur to you as problematic about this is that the pastor may be extorting donations out of the kids’ parents in exchange for allowing them access to catechesis and then the sacraments.
If he were doing this, he would be guilty of simony and subject to ecclesiastical penalties.
But that’s not what he’s doing.
THE ARTICLE MAKES CLEAR that he’s not charging anything. People are free to simply drop an empty envelope in the plate. (This has, presumably, been communicated to the parents in question. Otherwise, we’re back to a species of simony.)
Nevertheless, there’s a problem: There is NO REQUIREMENT WHATSOEVER that the faithful fulfill their Sunday obligation at the parish at which their kids are receiving catechesis. Canon law provides that:
Can. 1248 ยง1. A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass.
Parents are perfectly at liberty to go to a different parish, even a parish of a different rite, or even a Mass celebrated somewhere other than a parish (e.g., in a monastery) to fulfill their Sunday obligation.
If they exercise that prerogative, they won’t be at the erring pastor’s parish to drop their bar-coded envelope in the plate.
The pastor is thus not only obstructing the rights of the children to catechesis and the sacraments he is further violating the law by imposing on the families the burden to attend Mass at one particular parish (his) in order for their children’s rights to catechesis and the sacraments to be honored.
Any way you slice it, this guy’s in the wrong.
If Rome hears about this, they will not be pleased.
Good intentions on the part of the priest but an horrible execution. He took a wrong turn at every turn.
I remember when I was younger, a lot of people would leave mass right after communion and our Pastor would make a big deal out of it. One day, when the church was so full I had to stand in the back, I thought about sitting right in front of the doors so people who left early would have to go through me (I would have to move for them to open the door).
I did not go through with it. I could force people to stay in the church until the end of mass but that would only treat the symptom.
If Rome hears about this, they will not be pleased.
Because we so often hear about Rome laying the smackdown on those who violate canon law.
Hopefully in this case a chat with the pastor would clear it up (if you were attending Mass at another parish frequently), but maybe not.
And why should you have to explain yourself? I travel a lot to visit family and friends, and often go to Mass in another town. I’m glad I don’t have to schedule a sit-down with my pastor to explain my “problem”!
There was a big discussion of this over on Amy Wellborn’s blog. I think there’s too little information to make the judgment that the pastor is violating cannon law. Perhaps these children aren’t attending the classes. I understand that this is the parents’ responsibility, but still the children would not be prepared for the sacraments. Also, expelling the children from the classes doesn’t necessarily mean denying them the sacraments. I had a similar situation arise with one of my own children (who attends our parish school for crying out loud) when I inadvertently missed a “mandatory” meeting. I went up the chain of command at the RE office until I got satisfaction. I never had to talk to our pastor, but I was prepared to do so.
I agree that the bar-coded envelope story makes it seem like the pastor is conducting an IRS-like audit of Mass attendence. But do you think that if a family went to the pastor and said “Father, we take our grandma to Mass every Sunday at her parish”, that he would deny those children the sacraments? I don’t think so.
In summary, I think that, however unlikely (smirk), the media is sensationalizing this story. This event was probably the last of a series of steps to ensure that the children were adequately prepared.
I would suggest that the invitation for parishioners to drop empty envelopes into the collection baskets is a fig leaf.
That has the stigma of saying “we’re here, but we’re cheap”. Or worse “we’re here, but we’re poor”. I suppose each parishioner dropping in an empty envelope could scribble their monthly cash flow on the back to defend themselves, or explain that they choose to allocate their charitable givings in a different way, but how many would actually do that?
If the Pastor was really concerned that the children’s failure to attend Mass regularly rendered the religious ed either unproductive or even counterproductive, the simple answer is to make the CHILDRENS’ attendance at Mass a condition of enrollment in RE classes.
Half the time, I could never recall the safe place I had put our envelopes in so as to easily find them again, so I suppose we would have been considered no-shows! Now that I’ve switched over to a direct-deposit method, there’s no way of telling whether we are there or not, I suppose (other than a blank spot over in the choir).
Our parish has the direct payment as well. But an empty envelope is supposed to be placed in the basket anyway at Sunday mass.
A friend on the Fniancial Commision says the direct payment is to insure a steady flow of cash that avoids any attendence “problems”
I put the envelopes in the glove compartment of the family van. You never have to look for them and my wife can get them out while we rush to Mass trying not be be late.
My husband and I are trying to work up to tithing. Remembering to actually TAKE the envelope was the first step, and put SOME amount of money in it (and it took like a year. We’re slow people) now we’re working on a consistant amount of money, AND remembering to take the envelope… they might not be remiss in their sunday duties… they might just be incompetent, like me.
The bar-coding is a non-issue. Our parish numbers the envelopes (2225 for our family). Bar-coding or numbering is the same thing, only using different technologies to keep track – bar-coding just automates the process.
I haven’t read the article and don’t plan to. But as an observation, I generally don’t get worked up over secular reporting of religious issues. It’s not like they have an agenda (against the Church) or anything.
“If Rome hears about this, they will not be pleased.”
About as pleased of hearing about liturgical abuse. Rome may be displeased, but they won’t do anything about it.
I don’t know. I have the feeling that denying the faithful sacraments is one of those few places where Rome would move pretty fast. On the other hand, I don’t expect this case will come anywhere near that. An interview with the bishop will sort it out.
Rome won’t do anything…. But if it gets to the USCCB they will ask for a few million dollars to launch a study as to the cause and effects it has had. I’m sure the solution will involve more lay ministers…
There seems to be the assumption that the priest is acting in bad faith by presuming the parents’ lack of attendence at the local parish equates to a lack of church attendence. I disagree.
I do not see charity requiring one to assume that children would be sent to a CCD class in a parish that their parents do not attend. The fact that there may be exceptions would be cause for the parents to explain to that parish preist the circumstances so that scandal would be avoided. The idea of making the exception policy strikes me as silly.
So let me be the first and probably the only one to give this priest a that-a-boy. Granted, I would have been booted from my confirmation class, but God has given me many graces I don’t deserve. My presense there most likely wasn’t a blessing for anyone else.
I think 2 years is warning enough.
M.Z.:
From the article you linked to, the Pastor says: “Without habitual participation in the mass, religious education is incomplete.” Great, so let’s just make sure the religious education is nonexistent.
Alot of parents who aren’t perfect nevetheless strive to help their children end up better tha they are. Whenever tiny, tiny men like this Pastor get their rocks off on a power trip simply because they can, it pushes people to not even bother trying.
I think the last comment in the article was the kicker – “I walked out and I didn’t even want to be Catholic anymore.” I think it’s good that her family is going to another parish now, so maybe they will be Catholics. But I hope that instead of lapsing, they’ll take it as a wake-up call.
I understand the concern of the priest, though. My brother and I were third choice as godparents a few years ago. The other choices were revealed to be only marginally Catholic (and in one case, a practicioner of some paganism with “saints” in place of gods/goddesses).
As for the church envelope thing – what stigma about turning in an empty envelope? Maybe it’s just because I grew up in a poor area, but WHO is going to blackball me for empty envelopes? The money counters who rotate weekly? The church secretary? I mean, there are times recently when I’ve thrown in change from collecting returnable bottles, and no one has given me a cross-eyed look. If I feel ashamed, that would be a heaping helping of Pride, wouldn’t it? Besides, if I don’t turn in my envelope, I’ll get a lower ranking in the list of brides/grooms wanting a wedding in the church. (Although, I figure since I’m going to be 88 when I get married, I’ll probably be the first on the list.)
COMBOX SPAM DELETED.
IF YOU WANT TO SUGGEST A STORY IDEA, USE E-MAIL. BASED ON WHAT YOU WROTE, I CAN’T TELL IF A ROBOT OR A PERSON PUT THIS HERE. –JA
Jean – same here about not seeing a stigma. Our income isn’t too great and the envelope doesn’t usually contain very much, but I have yet to be blackballed from the Women’s Society or looked at askance if I take a second donut at the coffee hour.
As for the central issue – I’d really like to know more than is being reported. How many warnings did the parents get? Did the priest make it clear several times that this would be happening? What about the kids themselves – what did they think? I remember CCD classes with kids whose parents would drop them off for the kids’ Mass/CCD lessons and then burn rubber out of the parking lot. Many of those kids made it very clear that they didn’t want to be there in the first place; understandable, given that their parents weren’t exactly setting an example.
I’m not saying denying the sacraments is OK under any circumstances. My question is whether anyone involved *wanted* the sacraments in the first place.
My kids attend CCD at one parish while we attend mass at another. My wife helps teach our children at the one parish where we also take another woman and her kids to CCD because the other woman cannot drive. But we go to another parish for mass because their mass is more traditional. Unfortunately at the CCD classes at the more traditional church are on aa Sunday and the other woman whom we help has a child who visits her father every other weekend so we are forced to use the other church’s CCD program.
This is a bit off topic but wondering your take on my parish’s antics. Our RE director informed the first communion class that they were not “allowed” to receive on the tongue. Nor were they allowed to make any gestures before receiving the Eucharist ie, genuflecting, bowing or making the sign of the cross. What say you?
We have a neighboring parish that makes it mandatory for the Confirmation candidates to attend Sunday mass in order to be confirmed. They must sign in at their parish at mass. If they are visiting another they have to have that parish’s pastor sign the weekly bulletin and hand it in at the next class.
There are a hundred issues here.
1. Priests do not have a right to create impediments to the sacraments in addition to those contained in Canon Law.
2. Catholics living within the geographic territory of a parish have an obligation to support their parish financially, to an extent that is practical and within their ability to do so.
3. Catholics have a right to attend Sunday Mass outside their parish.
4. Given the size of parishes, and the frequent personnel changes among priests, the Sunday envelopes are often used as a measure of attendance and participation in Church life. They are a handy way of assessing whether the person who is asking to be a godparent, for example, is a practicing Catholic. This is not a perfect measure, however, and so if no envelopes have been handed in, further inquiry needs to be made.
5. I don’t know of any priest who scans the list of what people contribute before he makes any decision about them (other than when considering the possibility of hitting them up for more money).
6. Pity the poor priest though, who finds people he doesn’t know, who don’t apparently attend Mass, and who seek to have their child baptized, or to receive First Holy Communion or Confirmation, by getting on the list long after the practicing Catholics have been preparing. Parents do sometimes come to the priest a month before Holy Communion, for example. What is a priest to do? His experience tells him that this will be a social ritual for this family, and that he will never see them afterward. In fact, many of these folks don’t even stop to pick up the pictures of the event. The priest in the article seems heavy-handed, but he is reacting to a real pastoral problem.
Although, I think this method is a bit to rigid, I do emphathize with this Pastor’s problem. In our church, which is reasonably prosperous, we do have a subset of parents who want to farm out religious education to the parish and not bother to attend mass themselves. It is a tough question, because you don’t want to deprive these kids of the little religious education they will receive. On the other hand, some of these parents want this done for free, so they can spend their income on a $400/month car payment.
I think there are a number of pretty obvious prudential arguments against the pastor’s exclusion of these children from class participation, but if he extends this rule to exclude them from the sacraments as well, there will be some significant canonical problems too.
Hi Ed! Please say more!
While Catholics do have an obligation to support their local parish, they are not obliged to use enevelopes to do so. Jesus himself said in his Sermon on the Mount, “when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.”
I am a firm believer in tithing, and 10% of my gross salary is spent on charitable causes, my local parish being at the head of that list. But my box of envelopes goes straight from the maibox to the trashcan.
Would that I could Steve. I almost weighed in on this one, but one has to draw lines somewhere. Besides, Jimmy’s stuff is at about 90% agreement with what I would say, anyway. My skimming of the dozens of posts on this one see most people who disagree with Jimmy either A) simply not understanding what he plainly wrote, or B) differing on minor points which Jimmy wouldn’t quibble with anyway. Now, let’s see, someone said something about this weekend being the Fourth of July. Is it July already?
PS: I still have not forgiven you for saying, in your great Batman review, that the live action 60s version of Batman was “cheezy.” Must you deface all my childhood memories? That hurt.