Katrin Fuchs and Reinhold Grimm: Two pastors explain how the categorization of the buildings is received in the communities – a call for rethinking
MAIN SPESSART
7
Min.
The Catholic Church in the Diocese of Würzburg is in a state of upheaval – at least as far as real estate financing is concerned. Churches, parish homes, vicarages are under scrutiny. What is used and how? What might no longer be needed?
The result of this categorization will determine how much money the parishes will receive from the diocese for the maintenance of their buildings in the future. The rest is their problem. Because the owner of the real estate is not the diocese, but the respective church foundation. The municipalities have to comment on the proposals from Würzburg by October 1st.
This process poses a great challenge to local people, parishioners and ministers alike. Much depends on the attitude with which you approach the project: a chance for a new start or a loss of what is familiar? Katrin Fuchs and Reinhold Grimm from the coordination team of the pastoral space in Marktheidenfeld spoke to our media company about possible perspectives.
How do local people react to the categorization process?
Fuchs: From time to time you hear resentment and voices saying that this is not possible, that there are no more grants for a certain building. It is therefore important to explain that we are only at the beginning of the process and now have five months to give our assessment of it.
That sounds complex.
Grimm: A number of vicarages in our pastoral space have long since been abandoned. Often because they are no longer used. There used to be almost three times as many vicarages as there are now. There wasn’t that much excitement. There is unrest above all because the connection between the rectory and the thought: “We’ll get/have another priest” is very pronounced. But to take Hafenlohr as an example: the vicarage there has long since been rented out. The two priests who live there live in a normal apartment in the village.
What room for maneuver do the teams have, do the people have in the next phase?
Fuchs: There can or may be one B church per parish community. Not all of the five parish communities in the Marktheidenfeld area have yet chosen one. Some say they have no natural center at all. One possibility would be to raise one further to the front so that it gets more grants. It is the same with the parish homes. A supra-local parish home can or should be named, which then gets the most money. Würzburg, the moderator, Pastor Alexander Eckert and I thought about what could make sense as a supra-local one. But since we don’t know everything either, it now goes to the communities, who can say which is most suitable.
Grimm: In my opinion, you have to ask yourself the question: What can we still afford in the long run? Or what new trains of thought do we have to allow ourselves?
Fuchs: There’s plenty of scope there. If a congregation said we no longer needed this church and were now rebuilding it for housing suitable for the elderly or for day care, the diocese would probably scream yay and say we support that.
How much resonance is there with regard to such considerations?
Fuchs: I haven’t noticed much so far. The focus is that people want to keep their church.
Grimm: There is a lot of reaction, but no action. We waited to see what the diocese would bring. Between the first information meeting to categorize the churches last year and the second to categorize the other buildings there were 327 days that we spent waiting. We could have used that to consider how to proceed with our churches. If someone tells me something and I like it, then I’m satisfied, if I don’t like it, then I complain or criticizee. To use the freedom to think about what we want for the future, what works, what doesn’t work – that hardly ever happens.
how come
Grimm: This is a type thing, but also a system history. In systems, people are more inclined to participate as long as things go well. I suppose it’s no different in policy areas, it’s rare that people say let’s see what we can do. That’s not a typical church problem, but we’re getting it in the church now too.
That everything runs from top to bottom is a criticism of the Catholic Church that one often hears. There is now room for maneuver here, you just have to use it?
Fuchs: You could say that. This is perhaps also directed at us pastoral workers, that we have to be more aggressive in showing that there are opportunities and leeway. Many are not even aware of this.
Grimm: We are not an institution that is used to acting, also in other areas. We are seldom the ones who take matters into our own hands and say, let’s think ahead, because problems are coming our way.
Who could initiate a departure?
Fuchs: There are still many people who are committed. There are many ideas, also in the sense of fundraising, to acquire funds and to make something out of the buildings on site. Perhaps there is sometimes a lack of support from us full-time employees or even more the courage to say: “Just do it.”
Grimm: I see a great deal of responsibility among the full-time employees. We studied, we get paid. I see it as our task to take up impulses and pass them on or to give impulses ourselves. This is perhaps happening in committees, but not openly in the community.
Where is the faith in all of this?
Grimm: He falls by the wayside, he doesn’t play a big role.
Fuchs: We ask ourselves that sometimes too. There are so many things pouring in on us from the outside. Sometimes I wonder why I studied theology.
Grimm: The question is legitimate. The amazing thing is that we hardly ask it. The buildings can only be seen in the service of something – community, places of faith. Against this background, it is no longer just a question of whether I want to keep the church because I want to keep the church, but whether it still offers what it is actually intended for. But the question does not arise in this sober trial.
Fuchs: Perhaps our buildings also hinder us when it is said that faith lives where people gather around Jesus. As it was in early Christianity in the houses where people ate together. We carry around 200 to 300 years of ballast with us.
Grimm: I see a problem in the fact that we are currently doing the opposite. When people cultivate a community of faith, the question of structure arises. We start with the structural question and consider whether there is still faith in it. Belief doesn’t play the role at the moment, but the structures, the preservation of structures, the change of structures.
As a counter-argument, one could make the point that old churches in particular arose from centuries of people’s beliefs. This raises the question of whether or not you should give it up.
Grimm: It’s not about tearing down churches. But it could be about whether churches are given new functions and not only used for worship. Because there are fewer and fewer church services. The question is how I can use these buildings in other meaningful ways and for the benefit of people, perhaps also for non-religious causes.
Can you live in churches?
Fuchs: In my opinion yes, and you even have to.
Grimm: Perhaps a brothel is less suited to set up in a church. But as long as they are things that serve the community or life, a church can also be used in other ways. It doesn’t have to be cleared out or torn down right away. She would have to profaned become.
Fuchs: For me it’s no problem if you have a reception in the church, stay together after the service and drink coffee and eat cake. I can’t imagine that God would have anything against that. Jesus was the first to live and eat with humans.
The structure of the Catholic Church would allow a change of use?
Fuchs: Yes, because the church foundation is the owner, represented by the church administration. Everyone can get involved in church administration, everyone can be accountable. The diocese cannot say anything against that.
Grimm: If something were to happen on its own, I can’t imagine that the higher authority would say no, we don’t want that. Because independence would also mean that there was no pressure from the others, from the next level.
How does the diocese communicate about categorization? Do you feel taken or is that imposed?
Grimm: I don’t think they knew what they were getting themselves into. What happens in this process is factually sensible and necessary. The question of what we can still afford had to be tackled for a long time. But that’s bigger than planned, you can tell by the demands and excessive demands of some people who were involved. I think so too – but that’s nothing new us in the church – that the content was not very well thought out in terms of motivation, encouraging people to be more active, more creative, not just waiting for Würzburg. This moderation process is missing.
Fuchs: I’ll sign that, we’ll leave it as it is.
What will the next five months bring?
Grimm: That will depend very much on how the local authorities take up the idea of informing the communities. The congregation means those who are still interested in the congregation. The fact that the period is so short is perhaps not so practical.
Fuchs: The creative process doesn’t have to be completed in October, does it?
Grimm: My fear is that our full-time employees, who are already overburdened anyway, will not be so gripped by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost that they suddenly develop their creative streak. Then some discussions will take place in committees and the communities will not be taken along. Afterwards you are surprised that people are so passive. Taking people with you will be a tedious business, but it’s even worse if you don’t. Because then everything stays the same. We try to initiate what is possible. But you can only carry dogs to hunt in limited numbers.
What is your message to the people who care about their church?
Fuchs: Inform yourself, break down the doors of committees and pastoral workers, ask questions and contribute ideas.
LENA SCHWAIGER
#tearing #churches #Photo #Pat #Christ