Dear Brothers and Sisters,

 

I want to address the concern that I have heard a few times about the merger and closing of church buildings. I have heard it said that closing buildings will end up costing more since the remaining church buildings would need to build or do renovations to accommodate an increase in people. Or, if there is an upswing in people coming to the Church or becoming Catholic in the future, we would have to look at establishing new parishes and building new churches rather than just use the ones that already exist.
 

This is a topic upon which I think you could have reasonable debate and disagreement, since none of us can perfectly predict the future, but I would hold that the idea is missing some important aspects. First, it is possible and maybe even probable that after a merger like ours there would be a desire for some kind of building project – whether it is for office space, worship space, classrooms, kitchen, parking, or whatever. But I would disagree that the expense would be caused only by the merger. For example, if we merge and St. Mary in Milaca becomes the Primary Church, there will likely be a desire to do something with the kitchen and hall space – which are in need of update and more space – whether by remodeling or possibly adding on to the building. Or if St. Louis Bertrand in Foreston became the Primary Church there would be a desire to add more parking spaces or create an easier drive-up entryway for bringing people right to the door; or other needs such as expanding the worship space or building a bigger gathering space. And while that all may be true, the reality as we have experienced it in so many ways across our diocese is that if there was not a merger/closing, Milaca would still want to add to their building and Foreston would still want to add to theirs. Instead of having one project, you have two. We have seen time and again where one parish will build a new gathering space and it becomes a new attraction for the community and has benefits for activities in the parish, so then the neighboring parish feels they have to build something similar to try to ‘compete’, otherwise they feel their parishioners might go to the other parish. Not closing buildings does not save money – it often costs money.
 

Or, because there is not enough people or financial support in smaller parishes, you have zero projects being done and are left with buildings that do not effectively meet the needs of the people, are not attractive or not conducive to activities or gatherings. Not only that, but you still have to maintain those buildings. Maintaining for a while might be feasible, but eventually there are going to need to be major projects such as roof replacement or tuckpointing which wipe out any funds and make it difficult or impossible to plan any possible improvements. And when each parish has to cover those building costs, it again does not save money – it only makes it harder to improve.
 

Peace in Christ,

Father Timothy