Dear Brothers and Sisters,
 

Recently, I saw the article from The Minnesota Star Tribune with the rather provocative title: “Most drastic reduction of Catholic parishes ever seen in Minnesota is underway” by Berg, J. (2026, April 26). The deck or drop head continues, “The diocese covering central Minnesota is merging 131 parishes down to 48 and closing several churches.” Though I do not have a subscription to the Star Tribune and have not actually read the article itself, I was rather struck by the choice of headline used (I understand that often the author does not choose the headline, but rather the editor(s) of the paper). It is likely functionally true to say that going from 131 parishes down to 48 in the Diocese of St. Cloud is the largest numerical reduction to take place in this state, but it is still perhaps a bit deceptive. The overall number of parishes are being reduced, and we will be looking at closing and relegating church buildings, but the headline can make it seem as though there will be only 48 church buildings remaining open. And if someone were to only read that headline, they might come away with the mistaken impression that only one church will remain open for each parish. In reality, the majority of plans submitted to the bishop (ours included) have multiple sites remaining open for Mass and the sacraments.

​​

Further, this reflects the reality that our diocese was one of the worst in the country in parishes per priest ratio. Many other dioceses had taken steps to address issues as they arose, and consolidated parishes a few at a time as the number of priests and the population of Catholics changed. In the Diocese of St. Cloud there have been very few of those types of mergers or closures, with a pervasive reluctance to closing parishes. This mentality led to things getting more and more stretched out, with fewer priests having to cover more and more territory. Obviously, the subject of closing parishes or church buildings is very emotional and contentious, and most people do not like rocking the boat. But as time passed and the issues continued to rise, it became more and more evident that something had to be done. The bishop, after much consultation, decided it would be better to address the problem in whole rather than drag out the process by doing things piecemeal. Thus, the situation we have now where it is the “most drastic reduction ever seen in Minnesota”. I, personally, am grateful that our bishop has decided to take action rather than keep kicking the problem down the road. I know that it will cause tension and controversy, and that some people will be upset. I also might not agree with every decision made or how those decisions are implemented, but I recognize the need for change and to look at things from the big picture. And we all need to be in this together so that we can adapt to what must be done and focus on the mission of the universal Church – to praise God and work for the salvation of souls.

​

Peace in Christ,

Father Timothy