MODEL A: MULTI-PARISH MODEL

One priest is assigned to be the pastor of more than one parish. The parishes maintain their individual canonical status and are separate communities of faith. This model is sometimes called the "twinning" of parishes. Each parish may have its own separate staff; some staff positions can be shared or all staff positions can be shared between the two parishes.

Strengths

Weaknesses

● Maintains each community

● It doesn’t solve Masses per week per church

● No capital expense

● Strain on priest

● May impact collections

● May need to hire more lay staff to administer

● Fewer Masses would overcrowd with impact on parishioners and parking

● Might lead to folks going to other parishes and therefore a financial impact

● Temporary solution

MODEL B: MULTI-PARISH TEAM MODEL

Distinct Parishes remain intact but pastoral responsibility for two or more parishes is assigned to a team.  The team may be one of priests (fewer in number than the number of parishes), deacons, religious and laity.  Each parish maintains its separate identity with its own parish council and other structures, but all the team members serve all the parishes.  Sometimes one member of the team may have responsibility for a particular parish.

Strengths

Weaknesses

● Communities intact

● Mass schedule confusing

● More involvement of members

● Recruiting members of committees

● Need strong team

● If roles are not clarified, this is a problem

● Need manager

● Finance questions…centralized?

● This would be a transition-structure would be in place
    if a priest is lost

● A lot of negotiating to set up - including everyone

● Can’t maintain separate identities – confusion & loss of identity

MODEL C: MERGED PARISH MODEL

A merger takes place when two or more parishes join together to form a new or consolidated parish. The new canonical parish, usually with a new name, obtains the assets as well as the liabilities of the parishes which formed it. A merger may center all parish activities at one site or continue to use two or more building sites. A merged parish may also build a new church in a new location.

Strengths

Weaknesses

● Better economics
     -  collapse some functions
     -  one building → less costs

● Land availability

● Smaller staff requirement

● Ability to raise the capital $s

● Drawing off larger base to fund one church

● More work on the staff

● Blending the parish community

● Less Priests serving the parish community

● Stronger Youth Program

● Full-time staff personnel
     -  expenses
     -  changes the way we operate

● Youth together both at school and church

● Blending of cultures (ability to accomplish this)

● Music staff

● No guarantee if parishes merge, that there will be enough Priests;
     problem is ongoing – may need to be closed in the future

● Better capacity & layout
     -  church seating
     -  other events

● Lose some of the intimacy

● Critical mass for events

● Probably less people (?) required to support events

MODEL D: MISSION MODEL

A mission church is not a separate parish but a church serving a community of people who are under the pastoral care of a particular parish. Although a mission church has its own name and may keep its own sacramental records, ordinarily all aspects of its administration are the responsibility of the pastor of the parish to which the mission is attached.

Strengths

Weaknesses

● Consolidation of administration and funding

● Loss of identity

● Loss of control of funding

● Loss of parishioners

MODEL E: DO NOTHING MODEL

Although this model is not among those identified by the diocese, it has been suggested by parishioners who have attended previous discussions. Parishes under this model would maintain the current status as individual parishes with individual pastors and separate parish structures until such time as parish staffing was altered by the diocese, and then a decision would be made by the diocese about which model it chooses to implement.

Strengths

Weaknesses

● Allows for more options to develop down the road

● Surrenders “control” of parish changes to non-local
     decision makers

● Forces all of us to make a leap of faith – that events will turn
     out “OK”

● Doesn’t allow time to prepare for whatever model is
     eventually chosen

● Delays/impedes individuals’ acceptance of whatever
     eventually happens

● “Wastes” talents/brains of those who have ideas & energy
     toward solving the problem

MODEL F:: LAY MINISTER/CIRCUIT RIDER PRIEST MODEL

Although this model is not among those identified by the diocese, it was recommended as part of the cluster discussion last year. Parishes under this model would maintain the current status as individual parishes. A qualified and trained lay minister, employed by the parish, would be responsible for the administration of the parish, while the spiritual needs would be serviced by a priest who would schedule himself to meet the sacred and liturgical needs of the parish, when available. The priest might service many parishes in this manner.

Strengths

Weaknesses

● Lay administration would free Priest for spiritual needs

● Mass schedule for 1 Priest is too demanding

● Both parishes could stay open

● Both churches too small for fewer Masses

● Would involve fewer changes

● Both churches couldn’t accommodate all the parishioners

● Workload “ministerially” is too great for an older Priest to
     go back and forth

● Model doesn’t address the root cause of the problem,
     which is shortage of Priests.

● Would still have to maintain 2 churches, etc.