Why are so many catholic services these days sub-par? Whether it’s an event or a ministry or some kind of media, catholics are quite used to it being less than what they’d otherwise expect. I hesitate to make such generalizations, but this is generally true.
I’m not trying to take away from the things we do well (there are many). But there are many other things we do very poorly. Some blame this on a lack of money. I blame it on a lack of economy.
By economy I mean: The complex of human activities concerned with the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. And I’m not talking about our American or world economy here. I’m talking about the economy of the Church.
I suspect that our crutch is our charity - or, rather, an incomplete and short-sighted view of what we feel is charitable. A charity that lacks justice. Allow Pope Benedict to explain:
“If we love others with charity, then first of all we are just towards them. Not only is justice not extraneous to charity, not only is it not an alternative or parallel path to charity: justice is inseparable from charity, and intrinsic to it. Justice is the primary way of charity or, in Paul VI’s words, ‘the minimum measure’ of it.” - Pope Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate
Let’s take an example of a ministry that puts on retreats for parishes. Such a ministry usually provides the retreat at a lower fee than such a kind of retreat should really cost to put on. They do this by either providing a sub-par retreat or by underpaying themselves. They do this most often because many parishes can’t afford to pay what it should cost. This seems rather charitable of them - in the short term.
The problem is that it can also undermine the Catholic economy. In charity, we can’t only consider the short-term effect. We need to consider much more. We need to also consider what is charitable in the long-term. And we need to consider what is just…to everyone.
The workers providing the retreat are owed a just wage. And while it’s awful nice of them to try to get by without it, the lack of a just wage is still a lack of justice (a minimal measure of charity). And it has lots of bad consequences for everyone.
The lack of a just or living age for the retreat worker means they’re limited in making a better retreat. It means they have to spend valuable time finding other means of support, whether through second jobs or through often cumbersome fundraising. It means a lower quality retreat. It means an often unsustainable operation that, in the longer term, puts them “out of business” (which means no more retreats).
It’s a vicious cycle plaguing the Catholic Economy. And this applies to everything, not just retreats. Musicians, speakers, gift shops, events, media, catechesis, catholic businesses and other services are all caught in the same cycle.
Now, some of that is because the service or product being provided truly is low quality. But our “charity” crutch, unfortunately, has also enabled such low quality operations to “thrive” (by rewarding it at all) while also creating conditions where high quality services are unmarketable and, therefore, non-existent.
Another problem is something some of the higher quality and well-off services do. Because they have other means (maybe plenty of money from something else they do), they offer their service at less than what it’s worth. They feel charitable because they “don’t need the money.” This is the same thing (although by different motivations) as predatory pricing.
Predatory pricing is when a (usually big) business (who makes plenty of profit somewhere else) drastically drops prices in a particular market, often below costs, in order to gain market share and drive other competitors out of business. Basically, they are able to offer a price so low on a particular product or service that it becomes an unsustainable market for competitors. This is precisely what some Catholic service providers do - albeit they certainly aren’t intending to do this. As I said, they are likely trying to do the right and just thing! But the effects of their “charity” can be destructive to the Catholic economy.
Anywhere we offer something for free or below cost, this is a danger. It may seem like the right and charitable thing to do. But it is often unjust to others and counterproductive in the long term. This isn’t always the case (so please don’t misunderstand me), but it needs to be a bigger consideration than it currently is for us if we want to improve our Catholic economy - and therefore the work of the Church.
Pope Benedict says, “justice must be applied to every phase of economic activity, because this is always concerned with man and his needs. Locating resources, financing, production, consumption and all the other phases in the economic cycle inevitably have moral implications. Thus every economic decision has a moral consequence.”
And, although speaking of global markets here, it certainly applies to communal economies as well when Pope Benedict also warns of the dangers and “temptation of seeking only short-term profit, without regard for the long-term sustainability of the enterprise.”
All of our decisions should in some way regard the long-term sustainability of the enterprise (here, the Catholic economy). We can’t always seek short-term charity at the expense of long-term charity.
It sounds a bit cold-hearted or silly to say that sometimes helping people means not helping them. But I think it’s true. What I mean is that, in many situations, what will help those poorer groups or parishes who can’t afford something most is establishing an economy of service that works and is sustainable. One where each entity involved receives just compensation. Yes, that likely makes a service more expensive. But it also makes it sustainable by accepting a true, fair market value for the service that allows each entity providing the service to participate effectively. It also promotes growth and progress.
If we insist on making something available at a cost that any parish can afford, we’ll end up making it unavailable to everyone because the service will not be able to sustain itself, period. On the other hand, if we at least start by serving those parishes/groups who can afford it right now, not only will those efforts inevitably trickle into the Church in ways we can’t predict and help everyone as a whole, but the operation can eventually get the kind of scale it needs to offer legitimately lower prices to those others still in need.
And if you are a Catholic service provider who “doesn’t need the money,” I would suggest this: Ask for and accept a just payment for your services. It’s much more healthy for the “Catholic economy” and much more just to others for that transaction to take place and for you to make your fair price. Then, if you don’t need it, put it toward a good cause yourself (subsidiarity).
The Catholic economy has huge potential. But we’ve got to get off of our crutches and start to think outside the box a bit. This isn’t a call against charity at all. It’s a call to a more complete charity.
Comments
Post a Comment
Finally, someone’s talking about it!
However, this is true for more than just Catholic service providers - one of the biggest problems of the church is the lack of a justice wage for parish staffs. We pay part-time wages for full-time work, or pay not enough to live on.
My husband (in my biased opinion) is very gifted in the New Evangelization. In fact, he even spent 7 years of his single life working for the church in various ways, including in a parish. In the parish situation, he was paid 20 hours a week, but typically was there at least 40. An opportunity opened for him to work full-time in a parish again about six months ago, but we couldn’t afford a $20,000 pay cut and still support our family.
The bottom line is until we start paying LIVEABLE wages for parish employees, we’ll continue to only get young singles, old women, and those that are independently wealthy or in a second or third career. If we truly want the best and brightest minds working full-time to further the kingdom of God, we have to make it financially possible for them to live.
Midwest Girl - yes, this most definitely applies to all who work for the Church directly as well! All of the same concepts apply.
I love my church community to no end. I’ve been forced by circumstances to move further away from them twice but I joyfully remain the most loyal of parishioners.
My wife is music director. Her salary doesn’t go up and I can live with that. But I kind of want her to ask for money for her cantors. Twenty bucks a mass? Thirty or forty. Aren’t they worth it? How about for her musicians?
Seems like we have ten capable singers (and one or two not so capable… like me) led by my wife on piano and another three or four musicians. At the same time, we struggle to get seven eucharistic ministers or four ushers or three lectors. Why not (at least modestly) reward these trained and talented people who use their skills to draw the faithful more deeply into prayer?
I get it. We’re a parish in debt and can’t spend where we can’t spend. But I’m thinking that a lot of those cantors would just turn around and donate the money back. But they’ll all know that they were treated as the professionals they are and the ministry would thrive that much more. And thus the parish would.
Charity shouldn’t come here in the form of waiving your fee. But in collecting what you’re justly worth, and choosing to give it back, or pay it forward.
Crazy?
I’m the wife of a Catholic school teacher. He’s paid a lot less than a public school teacher is. So, I’m certainly sympathetic to the idea that Catholic teachers (and staff) should be paid more. But I have to say: it’s not “the Church” that’s unwilling to pay its workers higher wages—it’s the people in the pew. It’s not “the parish” that’s unwilling to support its schools—it’s the parishioners. It’s us.
Midwest Girl, et al,
For all that I acknowledge the tribulations that the average parish staff suffers, I think anonymous at 9:20 made a good point: If we wish to see the wages for a parish’s paid laborers to improve, we’ll need to address how much we each, as individuals and families, contribute to the parish’s ability to pay for such wages. Never forget, the only place that money will typically arrive from is..us.
I would also comment though, that when a pastor insists on “doing it right”, especially for Mass, the parish often will have a much easier time of getting things done. When the priests of a church place the skilled practice of the faith at the top of their priorities, they likely will find volunteers coming out when needed, primarily because everyone understands that various tasks can’t happen if we all wait for Father or an administrative assistant to do it.
So, Matthew, does this really mean you’re finding price resistance from parishes to your Flocknote service?
My parish looked at FlockNote, thought it was cool but for what it costs, it was not worth changing our current mode of just sending out e-mails and making phone calls.
@anon—Bingo! WE are the problem. Look at the dollars collected each Sunday at Mass and divide by the number of those present. My guess is that it will average $10 per person. For a family of four that’s $2080 per year. Is that tithing, i.e. 10% of our income for the year? Do you mean among the four of us the family only makes $20,800 per year? If so, we’re living in poverty. But the reality is we’re probably paying close to a $1000 a year just for cable and NetFlix. We too often pay God out of what’s left over after we pay ourselves. That’s exactly backwards. Our personal finances belong to God as much as our other moral actions.
Church economies change when churches are filled with disciples who create a culture of disciples and apostleship where it is normal to 1) give; 2) be passionate about the mission; 3) whose charisms are manifesting, discerned, and exercised for the sake of the Kingdom; 4) have big visions for the Kingdom; 5) take risks for the Kingdom.
In Atlanta last week, 42,000 college students (18 - 25) gathered at the Georgia Dome for Passion 2012 (can you even image a Catholic event called Passion?). They gave 1.2 million to combat slave trafficking.
World Youth Day is the fruit of a Pope with those qualities. But we need local parishes with those qualities. But it won’t happen as long the percentage of disciples in a typical parish is in the single digits.
The presence of lots of disciples changes all kinds of economies - spiritual, creative, financial, missional, relational. Because the response of personal faith, of the obedience of faith, unleashes the power and gifts of the Holy Spirit and the graces of the sacraments.
A parishoner at my home parish is an extremely gifted website designer. The parish asked him and another parishoner to design the parish’s new website and he began going through the machinations to do just that. Those of us working for the parish (I was youth minister at the time) filled out surveys, went to website meetings, a host of activities. Well, the parish took all of the information this guy and team had collected and promptly turned around and gave it to a national business that specializes in churning out church websites. It cost less, you see. At no time did the parish indicate they were going to do this. They flat out used this guy. Should parishoners donate more? Sure. Is that the whole problem? Not at all.
Sorry Matthew, but you are out of the boat on this one. Since when do we need a lot of money to put on a “good show” about Jesus. Your crying about poor quality retreats is baseless as it is all about Jesus & getting right with Him & not being entertained. The comments about poor wages in the parish & “professionals” that “entertain” us (usually painful) are pathetic. It should be all about helping each other & not making money off of them. I doubt that this will get posted, but, for once, you are wrong. This reminds me of one of our city official that voted a pay raise for the school supervisor; saying that “good education is expensive.” Wrong, we don’t have a good educational system in our city, & it is because we are over-paying for poor results. Happy New Year! +JMJ+
My guess is that charity runs as deep as faith. Unfortunately, many parishes are not very inspiring at stimulating either.
Mary Heegin - actually, not at all. We’ve found virtually no resistance on the price point of flockNote. If it helps you cut 1-2 snail mail-outs per year, it easily pays for itself for the entire year. For less than a single cell phone bill for most parishes it allows your entire parish staff to coherently organize all communications going out via email, send bulk email (something most parishes are unable to do if they have large email lists without getting their own email server blacklisted), send bulk text messages, allow ministry leaders to register and manage their member info and for everyone to send out professional looking email newsletters (something we’re continuing to improve upon all the time). It also allows you to track email opens and it manages bounces (bad email addresses) automatically. It does a lot of other stuff, too, that are necessary (and often required by law) for large email lists, like letting people subscribe and unsubscribe whenever they want.
That’s how most parishes use it and seem to have found it more than worth the small monthly or yearly cost. It does a lot of other stuff, too, all for the same price. But it depends on what your parish wants to do and what other tools you may already be using as to whether you find the same value there. So if you already have something that works, that’s great! If your parish is only interested in using one aspect of the service, shoot me an email and we can work out a price that’s fair if you’re open to it.
But I want to be clear, no, that wasn’t actually at all on my mind when writing this post and I don’t want people to get the wrong impression.
JMJ - I’m not sure what to say as it seems you read too much into my post. I never said anything about entertainment or putting on a show about Jesus. ??? And I certainly never promoted the idea of just making money off of people just to make money. I’m talking about being sensitive and aware of how our actions impact a system, an economy of charity. And recognizing that if we’re smarter about it we can help more people.
You make the implication that I suggested that it should be about anything other than helping people. This entire post is about helping people better and helping more of them with the limited resources we have.
With the example you gave about your school supervisor, it’s making my point. Not once do I suggest that simply paying people more money would fix anything by itself. The reason a lot of school systems get poor results despite higher wages is because there are other barriers to the “market” (or the education economy) working properly. They’ve reduced or removed the mechanisms that incentivizes better performance and results and linking it to the pay and the value of the work performed. That would be justice. That’s what we need more of.
Thx, Matthew but using Constant Contact w/Twitter, FB and mobile integration along with phone and parish bulletin, our direct communication w/parishioners works well and inexpensively. Not sure if Flocknote cost worth the effort to change. Good luck convincing others!
“Anon” brought up a valid observation through her astute comparative use of teachers’ salaries in both public and parochial school systems. And wouldn’t it be equally interesting to find out how much some of the same people who perpetually complain about the rising costs of maintaining their local schools, especially the public systems, will hardly peep when their cities and towns announce how much their local solicitors and planning boards have to spend on counter-feasibility studies, whatever, when it comes to assessing the respective “benefits” of hosting a gambling casino, or worse, gambling casino resort.
Watch the same “Silent Cals” of our times concerning the virtue of putting their money where their mouths, heads and hearts are, (or should be) and you won’t have to need any hearing devices to hear ‘em whinin’, “That pastor, bishop now want an extra five bucks! Don’t they know it costs me an extra five to make down to Mohegan Sun?”
No wonder Jesus used economics so often to get his points across.
I’m not sure what to think about this. I mean historically works of the Church have been largely run by patronage and donation - hospitals, art, education, monasteries… Even Chartres Cathedral was built entirely by donation of material and labor, for the Glory of God.
Also, old women and singles have always been the ones running certain programs, it’s just in the past they were usually wealthy or part of congregations so they didn’t need “living” wages. Wealth and age have always given people the freedom to serve in certain church ministerial capacities - no one has ever been able to support a family on a ministerial salary.
It seems to me that a greater injustice has been done to believers in recent history by people/programs with resources who’ve used them poorly to propagate something less than Truth, a watered down faith, and then who’ve demanded a premium price for them in our parishes. So on one hand what we’ve given to the parish has gone to subpar resources, and then those of us who have sought after something more substantial in our faith lives are paying again for that.
Benedict has proclaimed this the “Year of Faith.” I truly believe a renewal of Faith will revive the Catholic economy, if not the material economy, certainly the other important economy - the economy of salvation.
This must be the “subject of the times”....not my time. @Grace:“Also, old women and singles have always been the ones running certain programs, it’s just in the past they were usually wealthy or part of congregations so they didn’t need “living” wages.” How wrong you are! In my time husband’s worked and women stayed home, not because we were wealthy, but because we believed in the role of women in the home. I don’t know of anyone in my church parish who was “wealthy”.
We young & old women of the Church volunteered in the school and in the Church. In the school we ran things to make money for the school/church…we did office work gratis, cleaned the church, gratis, helped in the school, gratis, etc. In today’s world, the word VOLUNTEERING has gone out of style. I cannot believe a person in the choir would get paid. Shouldn’t they offer their gift from God, back to God and the same for cantors and ushers, etc. Years ago, these things were an honor to be asked to do. I can understand the organist being paid or the janitor, but to serve the church? no way. As to teachers today [since the nuns are gone] they know they will be paid less, if they don’t like the salary, they can go into the public school system. As an experienced secretary, I have done office work for the church, gratis also when I worked for Hospice after my husband died, I gave them one day free as thanks for their help, & I had no income at the, also no Soc.Sec. This whole article is not about “giving” it is about “paying”. I guess my generation was the last VOLUNTEER GENERATION. If anyone wants to belong to a church today, they need to pay to belong. Sad.
I think so much of this has to do with a decline in vocations… young people today want to “do ministry”, but not give their lives completely to Christ. In the past, with more Priests and religious around, there were tons of things sponsored by the Church, provided by the “charity” of souls who had taken a vow of poverty.
As someone who is used to being underpayed if paid at all for work within the church that would otherwise pay well, I can’t thank you enough for writing this.
While I strongly agree with you Matthew, and also Dennis DiMuzio- Dennis, tithing, that is, 10% of one’s income, is NOT required by the Church. Canon law says support of the pastor and parish, not a percentage deal.
This article is abosolutly shameful. People are already having enough trouble making ends meet and now you want to deprive them of retreats and other spiritual activities. I can’t believe anyone would call that justice. Religion can not be made just another commodity to be bought and sold. All people should have access to activities and items that would enhance their spiritual journey irregardless of their ability to pay. God bless groups that attempt to make these things cheap enough for everyone to be able to enjoy them. We can not serve God and Mammon. God must come first. The poor will always be with us Christ said and if the church isn’t addressing their needs than who is?
Matthew—Thanks for this insightful post. One of the “injustices” I committed as a volunteer was turning down a salary as the Director of RCIA. I didn’t need the money and thought my service would be a way of “giving back” to God. I did this for 10 years, and 4 pastors). When it became my time to move on, the original understanding of why I didn’t ask for pay was long gone. The parish expected somebody to do the quality of work I did for “free.” The ministry floundered for the next couple of years. A check once a month would have been a tangible reminder to the parish that such a position required considerable expertise, many hours (scheduled and unscheduled), and the ability to walk through the political landminds that all parishes have.
As somebody employed by a campus ministry program, I know there are some jobs that are suited to volunteers and some that aren’t. I’ve noticed that somehow our Protestant brothers and sisters have a lot less resistence to paying for church work (e.g. wages of pastors). While a whole lot of volunteering happens, Protestants are much better at recognizing that for some work you have to pay, and pay a living wage.
Finally, it’s a sad reality that not all churches will be able to pay for quality ministry and services. The poor will always be among us. Yet, we do a disservice to those churches (and those who can pay) if we don’t hold up fair, just compensation and “quality” as the “norm,” not the exception.
I blogged about this a couple years ago in relation to what we’ve learned doing Theater of the Word Incorporated: http://thwordinc.blogspot.com/2010/01/bad-catholic-art.html .
This is from my post, “But the problem is once you start a downward spiral, it’s hard to break free. Whatever came first, we now have parishes that won’t pay what it costs to book a good theatrical performance because they don’t value the quality of a good theatrical performance because the producers themselves don’t value the quality, and even if they did they might not be able to afford to produce it for a market that won’t pay for it. Much of the bad Catholic cultural material that’s out there is free, and you get what you pay for; you can also only realistically give as much as you get paid for – so the neglect continues and festers, with both producers and consumers to blame.”
Ask the protestant church down the street where most of your parish’s kids go on Wednesday nights whether or not financially investing in a youth minister is a good idea.
Angela Welliver - I “want to deprive them of retreats and other spiritual activities”? Wow, that’s not a very charitable view of what I wrote. I’m sorry if you misunderstood me, but my entire point is to make such services sustainable and therefore better and MORE available to those who can’t afford them. And that requires sometimes sacrificing some immediate benefits for the benefits that help many more people in the long-term.
Mary P and Kevin - Thank you for those extremely appropriate examples of exactly the kinds of things I’m talking about.
Seems until there is an overhaul of the church/diocesan structure, this is not going to change. In my opinion, Bishops control too much of parish money by annual assessment. I fully support helping out less advantaged parishes in some of their needs, but parishioners deserve to have their donations and tithes stay in their own parish. The incessant 2nd Sunday collections for everything under the sun going elsewhere becomes a burden on families to sustain consistent giving. Does it ever occur to our Bishops that they are trying to do more than we can afford and spend what we do not have? Many of the programs initiated and paid for by a diocese need a financial review of their true value —both spiritual as well as practical.
I have frequently remarked on the generosity of one church where I play at Midnight Mass every Christmas, because they’ve always paid me although I never asked. On the most recent occasion somebody replied, “Well of course, if they don’t pay you why should they pay the music director who found you?” I was dumbstruck, because although I argue all the time about how we value people and professions and about paying people what they’re worth, and have even (rarely) turned down work when I felt taken for granted or undervalued, it never occurred to me in this situation. It’s not that I think they are paying me out of self-interest, but what he said is so true.
So, let’s say you really do want to donate your time. The IRS does view barter as a transaction, or so I understand, though I have no idea how that even begins to be enforceable. However, even when the goods aren’t tangible, perhaps there is some way to quantify the market value of what volunteers do and write it off? I don’t know if that is legal or practical. I do know that there is a mileage write-off when you drive to do charity work.
It is long past time to revisit this issue. For example, we use our charity money to ‘love’ committed alcoholics or drug addicts, who, by their very choices, have destroyed their families whom suffer greatly. We help the worst of the worst while letting catholic people struggle or go hungry and homeless, making them feel selfish for asking for insufficient help. The times are a changing and perhaps it is the right thing to get back closer to the Scriptural descriptions of what charity is and take care of our own who are in dreadfully bad shape, but did all they could when times were better.
Here’s a thought regardng public school vs parochial school teachers’ salaries: what if the public (tax payer funded) teachers were in fact overpaid…and not that parochial teachers were underpaid, as is normally assumed. What would happen if the government didn’t have a near monopoly on education? What if union membership was voluntary? (In our state it is not). What if market forces were in effect and people didn’t have to send their kids to school full time, but could send them to the classes they wanted to send them to? How might that affect the salaries of teachers, both public and private?
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.