The Pastoral Ministry

EVALUATION

T h e P a s t o r a l M i n i s t r y o f t h e E l i z a b e t h P a r i s h

Presented to: Mons David Cappo

Presented by: Paul Sharkey

Date: November 2009 Table of Contents

1. Evaluation Context and Purpose...... 4 1.1. Evaluation Provenance...... 4 1.3.1.The Suburbs in the Elizabeth Parish...... 4 1.3.2.The Catholic Parish...... 6 1.3.3.The Elizabeth Parish...... 6

2. Methodology...... 7 2.1. Participant Observation...... 7 2.2. Parishioner Surveys...... 8 2.3. Ministry Leader Survey...... 8 2.4. Interviews...... 9 2.5. Analysis of Artefacts...... 9

3. Findings...... 9 3.1. Mass-Centre Closures...... 9 3.2. New Vision for the Parish...... 10 3.3. Satisfaction Levels with the Parish...... 13 3.4. Mass Count...... 16 3.5. Parish Leaders...... 18 3.6. Ministry Leader Survey...... 20 3.7. Parish Ministries...... 24

4. Discussion of Findings...... 26 4.1. Amalgamations and Closures...... 26 4.2. Change Management...... 27 4.3. Some radical shifts in leadership structure...... 28 4.4. The relationship between the Catholic school and the wider parish...... 29

5. Conclusions...... 33

6. Recommendations...... 34 6.1. Recommendations for the Elizabeth Parish...... 34 6.2. Recommendations for the Archdiocese of Adelaide...... 36

References...... 38

Appendix A: Pastoral Ministry Overview...... 39

Appendix B: Parishioner Survey...... 42

Appendix C: Ministry Leader Survey...... 47

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 2 Executive Summary

This Report was commissioned by Mons David Cappo and an Interim Report was presented in January 2009. This release of this final report was timed to allow the effects of changes in leadership structure to become apparent and for further data to be obtained from the 2009 Mass Count.

This evaluation of the pastoral ministry exercised within the Elizabeth parish provides an important opportunity for reflecting on emerging forms of ministry within the Archdiocese. The parish has recently been amalgamated and has undergone significant changes of leadership role and structure, including the loss of a resident parish priest and the institution of new ministerial roles. As such, this evaluation is significant not only for the Parish but more broadly, given that changes such as those experienced at Elizabeth are unfolding across the Archdiocese at this time.

The amalgamation of parishes, closure of Mass Centres, the institution of new leadership roles and the loss of a resident parish priest inevitably gives rise to angst on the part of community members who have invested themselves strongly in the structures, roles, places and rituals which have become both familiar and treasured.

The Parish Pastoral Team has faced these challenges and there is good evidence to suggest that they are making headway with them. The decline in the Mass count has been arrested and the satisfaction levels reported in this evaluation are surprisingly high.

There is however no evidence of complacency on the part of parish leaders – including the leaders of its Catholic schools. The recommendations made at the end of this Report provide compass bearings for the issues which need to be addressed if the mission of the Church in Elizabeth is to flourish in response to the call of the Gospel.

The recommendations also focus on issues which need to be taken up at a diocesan level. The Elizabeth experience will be repeated in different ways in communities across the Archdiocese as the Church responds strategically to the imperatives of its internal and external environments.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 3 1. Evaluation Context and Purpose

1.1. Evaluation Provenance The Evaluation was commissioned by the Moderator of the Curia at the request of the Pastoral Ministry Team in the Elizabeth Parish.

1.2. Evaluation Purpose The following purposes were agreed for the evaluation:  to evaluate whether / how the parish amalgamation and the restructuring of the Parish Pastoral Team has affected the pastoral ministry exercised within the parish  to identify the structures and resources that have supported or hindered pastoral ministry within the parish  to establish whether parish structures and/or roles within the Pastoral Ministry Team can be fine-tuned to make the pastoral ministry within the parish more effective  to establish what this model of pastoral leadership might have to offer to other parishes within the Archdiocese.

1.3. Background 1.3.1. The Suburbs in the Elizabeth Parish

The Elizabeth Parish is mapped in Figure 1 and covers such suburbs as Elizabeth South, Elizabeth Grove, Elizabeth, Elizabeth Park, Elizabeth North, Smithfield, Andrews Farm, Davoren Park, Munno Para and Craigmore. Many of these suburbs are among the most disadvantaged in Australia (Kilmartin, 1994).

Elizabeth in South Australia is an area where second and third generation unemployment is becoming increasingly common and it could benefit from a program which harnesses people's sense of belonging to an area and provides goals and some meaning to their lives (Kilmartin, 1994).

With this in mind, the pastoral ministry exercised within the Elizabeth parish has the potential to deliver powerful outcomes to a community that is much in need of them.

Whilst there is significant poverty within the suburbs of Elizabeth parish, it is a district with a strong sense of identity and many of the people who live there feel passionate about their community and its value. Some of the older residents have watched their suburb grow from paddocks into the established urban community that it is in the present day. The area was opened up in the late 1950s and early 1960s and there are still community members who contributed to the building of Churches and other Church assets and property, sometimes directly by their own sweat and skill. It is understandable that the passions of some of these people are aroused easily when faced with the closure of properties they have built, baptised or buried loved ones from. Changes to Mass times or variations in Parish structure are less dramatic than the closure of a Mass-centre but can give rise to considerable angst and conflict nonetheless. It is not always easy for an outsider to establish just what is at stake in the

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 4 concerns that are raised by individuals who are dealing with changes to the communities they have spent a lifetime building.

The pace of change is unlikely to slow any time soon as the Elizabeth area is scheduled for significant urban development and growth over the coming decades. A significant urban renewal and development project is scheduled for the Playford North area. A billion dollar opening up of 314 hectares of new housing land and the rejuvenation of 3,300 Housing Trust homes in the Smithfield Plains and Davoren Park suburbs has the potential to double the population in the Peachey Belt in the coming decade (Russell, 2008).

Figure 1: Map of the Elizabeth Parish

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 5 1.3.2. The Catholic Parish

A Parish is defined in Canon Law as ‘a definite community of the Christian faithful established on a stable basis within a particular church; the pastoral care of the parish is entrusted to a pastor as its own shepherd under the authority of the diocesan bishop’ (Canon 515 § 1). In an address to a group of French bishops making their ad limina visit to Rome, John Paul II offered the following description of the Parish:

… it is essentially the parish which gives the Church concrete life, so that she may be open to all. Whatever its size, it is not merely an association. It must be a home where the members of the Body of Christ gather together (John Paul II, 1997, n. 3).

The properly functioning Parish is much more than a club or an association for Catholics; it is a spiritual home. In the normal course, the Parish is the place where the ‘spiritual goods of the Church’ are made available to Catholics as their entitlement – ‘especially the word of God and sacraments’ (Canon 213). Australian Catholics have come to understand the role of the Parish Priest as being central in making the life of the Church available to them. Weekly celebration of the Eucharist on a Sunday in the Parish has been a hallmark of Catholic identity. The traditional parish leadership model has been expressed by a full-time resident Parish Priest leading the parish with any other staff being appointed to roles that are clearly subordinate to the Parish Priest’s authority. This traditional model has been significantly disrupted within the Elizabeth parish and one of the issues to be canvassed in this evaluation is the new roles which have emerged and the people’s response to them.

Once a Parish is established, it becomes a ‘public juridic person’ and is therefore ‘perpetual by its nature’ (Canon 120 § 1). Parishes can however be ‘suppressed’ (closed) or ‘notably altered’ by the diocesan Bishop (Canon 515 § 2). Parishes are notably altered when they are divided, joined to another parish or when their boundaries are altered. The amalgamation of the Elizabeth North and South parishes into a single entity called the Elizabeth parish represents a notable alteration by the diocesan bishop and will provide another point of focus for the evaluation.

1.3.3. The Elizabeth Parish

In early 2007 the Elizabeth North and Elizabeth South parishes were amalgamated into an entity which was called the Elizabeth parish. Amalgamation discussions had been underway for many years prior to the amalgamation occurring with the amalgamation process becoming especially intensified and structured in the 12 months leading into 2007. Amalgamations of parishes can give rise to strong emotions on the part of parishioners and parish leaders can be significantly challenged as the amalgamation process unfolds. Some of these challenges are considered in this evaluation.

Many of the Churches within the Elizabeth parish were built on a village model within walking distance of the smaller shopping centres which were established when the area was first opened up. Most of the Churches were built in the first instance as multi-purpose rooms within a school so that during the week they were used as learning spaces to become Churches on Sunday. Money was in short supply when the buildings were erected and so some of the parish plant is in serious disrepair. In some cases Churches have closed and have been incorporated back into the school architecture. As one looks at the map in Figure 1, one gets a sense of a series of villages, each of which has shops, a school and a Church within easy walking distance for those living in the neighbourhood. It is not always easy for an

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 6 outsider to understand what is involved in moving from one Church community to another that is a relatively short distance away. The closure of the St Gerard’s Mass-Centre in Peachey Rd provides a good case in point. At first glance, the distance from St Gerard’s to St Thomas More Church in Laverstock Rd seems miniscule on the map – a mere two kilometres. Closer examination shows that a railway line separates these two communities and so the distance between the two churches doubles when the circuitous route around the railway crossing is taken into account. Four kilometres by modern standards is however still a small distance to travel to Mass for people who are used to driving across suburbs to access the services they need. Not everyone feels this way however and in any case, as one of those interviewed for this evaluation pointed out, those who cannot drive are required to catch two buses which on a Sunday can amount to two hours travelling time – each way. A relatively simple barrier such as a railway line can introduce significant separations into communities so that people on one side of the line rarely access services or communities on the other.

Leaving to one side distances on a map, the difficulties associated with moving from one Mass-centre to another are not understood purely in terms of physical proximity. Some of the people interviewed in this evaluation evidenced a clear sense of micro-identification with their particular neighbourhood and the prospect of moving from their local Mass-centre to a nearby one was not at all attractive for them. Later in this evaluation, a three level analysis is proposed where layers of meaning and symbolic significance are identified underneath surface level phenomena such as distances between points on a map.

2. Methodology The evaluation employed case study methods such as participant observation, interviews and analysis of artefacts. In terms of the formal evaluation parlance, the evaluation could be considered as a responsive approach within the interactive form (Owen, 2006). The evaluator worked interactively with members of the Parish Pastoral Team to gather and validate data. Surveys were administered for three purposes: firstly, to obtain the views of a broad range of people; secondly, to allow all parishioners to contribute to the evaluation and thirdly, to complement the participant observation to provide a context for undertaking the interviews. Themes which emerged in the analysis of surveys were explored at greater depth in the interviews.

2.1. Participant Observation The participant observation focused primarily on the operations of the Parish Pastoral Ministry Team where such characteristics as ecclesiology, orientation to mission, operational style, decision making processes and general interpersonal dynamics were observed. The Participant Observation began formally in June 2008 when the evaluator met with members of the Parish Pastoral Ministry team to finalise the Evaluation Plan. The evaluator attended meetings of the Pastoral Ministry team and also meetings of school leaders on a regular basis during the course of the evaluation. Informal participant observation had actually taken place from November 2007 when the evaluator facilitated a Planning day with both the Pastoral Ministry team and the leaders of the four schools in the Parish. The evaluation has therefore drawn from some 24 months of participant observation of the Parish Pastoral Team and its ministry of the Parish Pastoral Team and its ministry.

Artefacts such as the description of the Parish Ministries given in Appendix A were developed in meetings where Participant Observation occurred. These meetings provided the

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 7 evaluator with the opportunity not only to observe the relationships and orientations of parish leaders, they also provided the opportunity to develop descriptions of parish services which had not been documented to that point.

2.2. Parishioner Surveys Whilst the participant observation focused on the leadership of the parish, data relating to the experience of parishioners was gathered by a survey offered to all parishioners after each Sunday Mass over a three week period. The survey was developed on the basis of the evaluation’s purpose statement and therefore focused on the following categories: the parish amalgamation, the restructuring of the Parish Pastoral Team, the pastoral ministry of the parish and the structures, roles and resources that have supported or hindered that ministry. The survey is reproduced in this Report as Appendix B.

The survey was included as an insert in the Sunday Mass parish bulletin for parishioners to complete and return by the following week. Twenty one surveys were returned in the first week and these were entered into a Database that had been purpose-built for the evaluation. Surveys were included in the Bulletins for two subsequent weeks and a total of 55 surveys were returned. It did not seem likely that further surveys would be returned unless there was a significant drive for this to occur and the assessment was that it was unlikely that further returns would yield radically different responses from those that have already been obtained.

The administration of surveys to Mass-attending parishioners obviously obtains responses from relatively engaged members of the parish. In fact the first batch of surveys was completed by those in attendance at a Parish Forum conducted after Mass and it might be expected that these surveys in particular might represent the views of relatively well-disposed and engaged members of the parish.

The Parish Pastoral Team, along with the evaluator, was also keen to include the perspectives of people who were less enchanted with the life of the parish and two strategies were devised to encourage these people to respond to the survey. One strategy that was initially developed in this regard was to send a survey to anyone who had not collected their “Planned Giving envelopes”. The Pastoral Associate wrote to each of these families and indicated that we were currently evaluating the life of the parish and would value their feedback by way of a completed survey. None of these surveys was returned.

A second strategy to reach out and include the voices of the alienated or disaffected was to ask one of the longer-serving members of the Pastoral Team to identify people who she believed had disengaged from the parish. The evaluator then made contact with them to invite their participation in the evaluation by completing a survey. A small number of these parishioners were interviewed and their voices enriched the findings of the evaluation.

2.3. Ministry Leader Survey A second survey was developed for leaders of the various ministries within the parish (Appendix C). The survey repeated many of the questions from the general survey distributed to parishioners but leaders were asked in the first seven questions of this survey to reflect on their experience as leaders of a pastoral ministry within the parish. The Pastoral Team identified leaders of the various ministries and a copy of this survey was sent to them for completion. Themes from the surveys were explored further at interview with parish leaders.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 8 2.4. Interviews As indicated, a number of parish leaders, including school leaders, were interviewed, along with some parishioners who had been identified as being disaffected for one reason or another. The Ministry Leader Survey provided a framework for the interviews of parish leaders. The interviews of disaffected parishioners followed a less structured schedule with the parishioner simply being asked to talk about their experience of the parish pastoral ministry and the interviewer asking for elaboration or clarification where necessary.

2.5. Analysis of Artefacts A variety of documents and artefacts provided rich data for the evaluation. The role statements of members of the Parish Pastoral Team provided a basis for exploring perceptions of roles and their relationship in a team context. Demographic data distributed in Deanery workshops provided an important source of statistics for the Elizabeth area. Minutes from parish meetings before and after the amalgamation provided a historical context for the pastoral ministry presently being exercised.

3. Findings 3.1. Mass-Centre Closures As indicated in Figure 1, in the decade between 1997 and 2006, four Mass-centres were closed in the Parish: St Gerard’s, St Mary Magdalene’s, St Mary’s and St Patrick’s. Whilst St Mary’s and St Patricks have been closed for some time, St Gerard’s and St Mary Magdalene’s were closed when the Elizabeth North and Elizabeth South parishes were amalgamated in the last Sunday of January in 2007. The aftershocks of the closure of St Gerard’s and St Mary Magdalene’s still reverberate within the parish and present the Pastoral Team with ongoing pastoral challenges which are being addressed. One of the members of the Parish Pastoral Team made the following observation about the communities within the Parish.

The North and the South will take a generation to sort out. Many of those from St Anne’s in the South have an Irish background and the Church is beautifully finished and clean. St Thomas More’s has more of a Scottish background and has had a more laissez faire history with more of a recreational focus. They are however now beginning to go to each other’s Mass-centres. This is huge progress.

There are many other perspectives that could be provided on the differences between the two parishes that existed prior to the amalgamation. The purposes of the evaluation are not however served by rehearsing the details of the differences from the past – differences which have sometimes descended into acrimony. Initially the evaluator had thought that it would be a case of ‘the North’ versus ‘the South’. As the evaluation unfolded however it became obvious that there were further differences even within what had previously been the Elizabeth North or the Elizabeth South parish. For example, in the North, the St Gerard’s Mass-centre (now closed) was located very closely to the St Thomas More’s Mass-centre. Notwithstanding this physical proximity, the differences between the community were rather marked, at least in the minds of some of those who participated in the evaluation. The following comment from a St Gerard’s parishioner who now no longer attends Mass in the parish provides an example of the feeling between the two communities.

The people of St Gerard’s have never been accepted at St Thomas More’s. As long as I have known it, we have always been divided. Nobody speaks to you at St Thomas More’s.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 9 Members of the Parish Pastoral Team continue to attend to the grievances people raise about their experience prior to and after the amalgamation. There is some acknowledgement that the closure of St Gerard’s was not handled well in the sense that the Church building has been vandalised and has fallen into disrepair. One of the members of the now defunct St Gerard’s Mass community indicated that he and another member had recently visited the site and observed candlesticks, altar cloths and a chalice strewn about the floor. These objects were filled with meaning for him and his upset at seeing them treated in this way was obvious. When members of the Parish Pastoral Team were presented with this claim however, they categorically rejected it. Whilst the facts around the closure of St Gerard’s are contested, what is clear is that some members of that community still grieve over its closure and present the Parish Pastoral Team with particular pastoral challenges which they are currently addressing.

The deterioration of the St Gerard’s property was further exacerbated by the fact that a contract of sale was signed but the buyer withdrew from the purchase, leaving the property sale in abeyance over a period of some months. The site became derelict in this time and this has not helped those who were having difficulty with the amalgamation to move on and accept the changes and become actively involved in the community that wishes to welcome them. Some of those who participated in this evaluation reported feeling let down by promises which they believe were made to them by leaders who have now departed the parish. The issue of leadership and change management is considered at greater depth below in Section 4.2. Whilst there is clear evidence that the current Parish Pastoral Team is healing wounds that were inevitably caused by the amalgamation and associated role changes, there is also evidence that the sickness of previous leaders and the succession of appointments which needed to be made at relatively short notice has also had a harmful impact. The importance of skilled change management practice is highlighted in this analysis.

3.2. New Vision for the Parish Thus far the focus of the evaluation has been with the demographics and physical amalgamation of the parish. A new vision for the leadership of the parish has emerged alongside these significant factors and has driven the responses made to them. This vision has found expression at a number of levels. The most obvious of these is the changed leadership roles within the parish and these are discussed below. Equally significant however is the ecclesiology that permeates the vision of the team as it moves forward into mission.

The Parish Vision Statement is reproduced in Figure 2. The following dimensions of parish life are given some prominence in the vision statement: community, liturgy, education, the Word, service, witness and outreach. The priest leading the parish also occupies a full time position as a lecturer in Scripture at Catholic Theological College located within Flinders University. His contemporary approach to theology and Church is strongly evident in the outlook and orientation of the Parish Pastoral Team and it has permeated the broader life of the parish. A very strong emphasis in his leadership and in the discourse of the Parish Pastoral Team is the call to mission that comes from one’s baptism.

Members of the parish are encouraged to consider how they can be involved in the dimensions of parish life represented in the ‘petals’ of the diagram in Figure 2. The diaconal (service) dimension of this call is a point of particular focus at the time of completing this evaluation. For example, the evaluator was asked to facilitate a recent Parish Pastoral Team meeting convened to clarify roles of team members. The Priest Moderator provided a brief input at the beginning of this meeting on diaconal ministry and he drew effectively on his

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 10 expertise as a Scripture scholar to invite members of the Pastoral Team to consider their roles in the context of the diaconal dimension of the parish vision. A more common approach for the type of role clarification session would have been to work within a Human Resources frame to analyse the work that needed to be done, clarify role descriptions, etc. The fact that the group was encouraged to look at their work through a theological lens meant that the outcomes from the session were foundational and exploratory rather than pragmatic and finalised. Whilst people in the team worked well together during the session and appreciated the opportunity to ground their work in a theological foundation, the comments of one or two team members at the end of this meeting and elsewhere in the course of the evaluation made it apparent that they are eager for practical issues to be resolved and especially in regard to clarifying the roles of individuals within the team. The commitment to vision and praxis on the part of the Priest Moderator makes it unlikely that any shortcuts will be taken as roles are gradually clarified over a number of years by working in a collaborative way and by continually returning to the parish vision and exploring the implications of the espoused theology for practice. This issue is discussed further in Section 3.5 below.

The diaconal dimension of the life and ministry of the parish is grounded in the sacrament of baptism. Each member of the parish, by virtue of their baptism is committed to one another in Christ and is therefore called to serve (rather than be served), just as Jesus did. The strong emphasis placed on the baptismal call challenges each parish member to explore how they are called into ministry. This baptismal emphasis challenges the traditional understanding where the Parish Priest is the focal point for parish ministry. Each member of the parish is challenged to discern the mission to which they are called. The sacramental role of the ordained priest does not have to be diminished by affirming the common priesthood of all of the baptised. There was clear evidence throughout this evaluation that parishioners and team members alike respected the role of the priest and understood very clearly the unique facets of his role within the parish community.

It would be surprising if the deep-seated change process in which the parish is still engaged did not give rise to turmoil and angst on the part of some, particularly those who find change less easy to deal with. As one person put it: ‘I know I am getting a bit old for new things’. The amalgamation of parishes, the replacement of resident parish priests with new roles such as Priest Moderator, Deacon and Pastoral Director as well as the greater emphasis placed on the call to ministry that flows from baptism, all represent significant and even radical change for many Catholics. The following comment captures the sense of wanting to return to what was treasured in the past.

We were asked to use a eucalyptus branch for Palm Sunday instead of Palm branches. We were told this is because we are not in the Middle East. The Mass is not conducted properly. The Holy Communion host at St Thomas More’s is too thick – you can hardly chew it. Fr Michael says no flowers, no candles. What is wrong with decorating the Church? St Gerard’s was beautiful. Like a florist shop.

On the one hand these complaints such as these can seem trivial. As we shall see however in Section 4.1, surface phenomena can point to deeper issues underneath. There were times during the amalgamation process in 2006 when feelings were running particularly high – even to the point where one or two leaders received hate mail from opposing factions. Notwithstanding these moments of considerable angst and without in any way discounting them, the data presented below in Section 3.3 demonstrates that the satisfaction levels of parishioners are generally surprisingly high, especially when all of the changes are taken into account.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 11 The Vision of the Elizabeth Catholic Parish is

An Inclusive Eucharistic Community In the Catholic Tradition United in Jesus Reaching out to all

We have been, we are and will continue to be a baptised community of believers. We unite with Jesus to serve the families and neighbourhoods of Elizabeth. As a Eucharistic community we rely on the work of God to inspire us to be open to the hopes, griefs, joys and anxieties of our people, especially those most in need. As a people of prayer we wish to join with all believers to come to a deeper appreciation of God’s love. We recognise the need to be open to new learnings, new ways, to the Spirit moving us as we become more fully aware of our baptismal call. The dimensions of parish life in the Elizabeth Catholic Parish are:

Liturgy & Faith Education & Sunday Spirituality of listening to the Word Eucharist (Kerygma & Didache) (Leitourgia)

Jesus, heart of Communion (koinonia)

Service to others Pastoral Witness, Outreach (Diakonia) (Marturia)

Figure 2: Elizabeth Parish Vision Statement

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 12 3.3. Satisfaction Levels with the Parish Questions 7 and 8 in the Parishioner Survey were included as a means to gauge whether people report higher levels of satisfaction with the parish before the amalgamation, or after it. The surveys were completed in 2008 – approximately 12 months after the amalgamation had taken place. The two questions were worded as follows: Question 7: How satisfied are you with the life of the parish at this time?

Question 8: If you were actively involved in the parish two years ago, how satisfied were you with the life of the parish at that time? Parishioner responses to Questions 7 and 8 are provided below in Figure 1. Respondents were asked to make a mark on a continuum between ‘Extremely Dissatisfied’ (scored as 0) and ‘Extremely Satisfied’ (scored as 10).

The raw scores to these two questions are presented below in Figure 3. The scores are arranged so that those who are more satisfied now after the amalgamation appear on the left hand side of the chart and those who have become dissatisfied because of the amalgamation appear on the right hand side of the graph. This data paints a surprisingly positive picture of the current satisfaction levels within the parish.

A differential view of these responses is presented in Figure 4 and a pie chart is employed in Figure 5 to represent the shifts in satisfaction levels as the parish changes have unfolded 2006 to 2008. Once again, only a very small slice of the pie represents those people who were satisfied before the amalgamation and dissatisfied now.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 13 Parish Satisfaction 2006 Compared to 2008

Extremely Satisfied

Extremely Dissatisfied

2006 Satisfaction Level 2008 Satisfaction Level Figure 3: responses to Qns 7 and 8 - satisfaction levels 2006 (pre-amalgamation) and 2008

Responses to Qn 7 are represented in the purple bars: How satisfied positive about the parish now (in comparison to 2006) are are you with the life of the parish at this time? represented on the left hand side of the graph.

Responses to Qn 8 are represented in the blue bars: If you were Respondents who report similar levels of satisfaction in 2006 and actively involved in the parish two years ago, how satisfied were 2008 are shown in the middle of the graph. Those who were more you with the life of the parish at that time? positive in 2006 than they are now are shown on the right hand side.

The responses have been sorted on the basis of the difference Figures 2 and 3 analyse these responses in greater detail. between the 2006 and 2008 responses. Respondents who are more

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 14 Comparison level 2006 to 2008 Extremely dissatisfied in 2006 and extremely satisfied in 2008

Satisfaction level remains unchanged from 2006 to 2008 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41

Extremely satisfied in 2006 and extremely dissatisfied in 2008 Respondents

Figure 4: Satisfaction comparison levels – 2006 to 2008

This line graph shows that most respondents report being more 6 respondents were slightly more positive in 2006 than they were in satisfied with the life of the parish in 2008 than they were in 2006. 2008.

21 respondents are more satisfied with the life of the parish in 2008 Only 4 respondents were significantly more positive in 2006 than than they were in 2006. they were in 2008.

14 respondents reported the same level of satisfaction with the parish in 2006 as they did in 2008.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: November, 2009 15 Satisfaction Level 2006 to 2008

Currently Significantly satisfied and no more satisfied signficant now than in difference 2006 between 2006 31% and 2008 55%

Currently dissatisfied but was satisfied in 2006 7%

Currently satisfied but slightly m ore satisfied in 2006 7%

Figure 5: Proportional satisfaction comparison levels – 2006 to 2008

3.4. Mass Count One of the most significant measures of parish ‘satisfaction’ for Catholics is the ‘Mass Count’ which is conducted annually in the month of May for each parish within the Archdiocese.

The Mass Count from 2006 to 2008 is as follows:

 2006: Elizabeth North (335) + Elizabeth South (222) = 557  2008: Elizabeth (amalgamated parish) = 413  2009: Elizabeth = 419

Approximately a quarter of the parish dropped out of the Mass Count over the period of the amalgamation – between 2006 and 2008 – and this is obviously a matter of considerable concern. In the Deanery analysis of these figures however, it is noted that the loss of the vigil Mass at St Mary Magdalene’s ‘clearly saw some parishioners move to Salisbury’ (Russell,

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 16 2008). Given the ill health of the leaders, the amalgamation of the parishes, the closure of half of the Mass-centres and the loss of the traditional ‘Parish Priest’ model of leadership, it is not surprising that some depletion would occur as a consequence of the amalgamation. As has been noted, the Mass count dropped by approximately 25% between 2006 and 2008. The black line in Figure 6 represents the Mass Count projection that was developed in 2007 by the Archdiocese for the parish. As can be seen, the Count for 2007 was slightly lower than what was projected but this trend was reversed in 2009 with the Count being higher than the projection. If these trends continue, in 2010 the parish will be well ahead of what the Archdiocese was expecting in terms of the numbers at Church on Sunday. This result is to the credit of members of the parish and its leadership.

500 Elizabeth South 400 Elizabeth North

300 Elizabeth (amalgamated) 200 Elizabeth (2007 projection) 100

0 2006 2008 2009 2010

Figure 6: Mass Count in the Elizabeth Parish

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 17 Thus far the Mass Count analysis has been intra-parish from one year to another. Whilst this is a useful measure, it is also illuminating to consider what proportion of people living in the suburbs within the Elizabeth parish nominate themselves as being Catholic on the Census form and what percentage of these actually attend Mass. These proportions are represented in Figure 7. The population of people living in the ABS Census Districts within the Elizabeth Parish was 64,705. Of these 9,601 identified themselves as being Catholic in the Census and of these, 557 people were at Church at Mass on Sunday. The Mass Count of 557 represents 5.8% of those listed as Catholic in the census and this figure is approximately half of the average across the Archdiocese. It will be interesting to see over time whether the Elizabeth Parish is able to lift this attendance rate so that it moves closer to the Archdiocesan average, and perhaps even surpasses it. This will be a significant achievement.

Elizabeth Parish Catholics, non-Catholics and Mass Attenders 2006 Census and Mass Count

non-Catholics in the boundaries of the Elizabeth Parish 9,601 Catholics in parish not attending Mass

54,547 Mass attending 557 Catholics

Figure 7: Demographics of the Elizabeth Parish

3.5. Parish Leaders As has been mentioned, prior to the amalgamation, the Elizabeth parishes were served by a number of resident parish priests. Soon after the amalgamation occurred, a Priest Moderator was appointed along with a Deacon who was also given the role of Pastoral Director. A brief recent chronology of parish leadership and structure is presented in Table 1 and it is obvious at a glance that the parish has had significant and continuous changes of its leadership since 2005. Fr Leon Czechowicz became ill and his assistant acted in his place and then Fr Peter Dunne became ill and Fr Mark Sexton was Acting Parish Priest across two parishes. The appointment of a Priest Moderator in 2007 after the parishes were amalgamated, along with the appointment of a Deacon who was initially also the Pastoral Director of the parish introduced further change into the leadership structure and these roles have continued to evolve over time. Recently the combined Deacon/Pastoral Director role was separated into two roles to prioritise the diaconal ministry within the parish and to ensure that it was not diluted by the exigencies of administrative leadership. Members of the parish are still feeling the effects of these rapid changes in leadership and members of the Parish Pastoral Team are still feeling their way into roles that are evolving and not yet well-defined. As has been noted above however, the satisfaction levels remain surprisingly high.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 18 Year Event 1996 Fr Leon Czechowicz appointed Parish Priest to Elizabeth North parish 2002 Fr Peter Dunne appointed Parish Priest to Elizabeth South 2002 - May Fr Mark Sexton appointed Assistant Priest to Elizabeth North 2004 - Feb Archdiocese indicates that within 5 yrs, the two parishes will be served by 1½ priests 2004 – Nov the amalgamation conversation begins 2005 Fr Leon Czechowicz is ill and sometimes away from the Elizabeth North parish with Fr Mark Sexton Acting as Parish Priest 2005 – Nov recommendations regarding name and logo 2006 – Feb Amalgamation date decided – last Sunday in January 2007 2006 – Jan Fr Leon Czechowicz is appointed to another Parish and Fr Peter Dunne is additionally appointed as Parish Priest of Elizabeth North. Fr Mark Sexton remains as Assistant Priest to Elizabeth North and is additionally appointed Assistant Priest to Elizabeth South. 2006 - May Sr Margaret Tully is appointed as Pastoral Visitor 2006 - Nov Fr Peter Dunne leaves parish due to sickness and Fr Mark Sexton is Acting Parish priest of both parishes 2007 - Jan St Gerard’s and St Mary Magdalene Churches are closed on the last Sunday in January 2007 - Feb Elizabeth North and Elizabeth South parishes amalgamated on the first Sunday in February with Fr Mark Sexton appointed as Acting Parish priest of the newly formed Elizabeth parish 2007 - Apr Fr Michael Trainor appointed to Elizabeth Parish as Priest Moderator with Fr Mark Sexton being appointed to another Parish and Mons Jim O’Loughlin being appointed as Assisting Priest 2007 - Apr Daryl Hicks appointed as Pastoral Director to Elizabeth Parish 2007 - Jul Daryl Hicks ordained as Deacon 2007 - Nov Debbie Ripley resigns as Pastoral Associate 2008 - Feb Josie Cirocco appointed as Pastoral Associate 2008 - Jun Ann Connolly appointed as Baptism Coordinator 2008 - Nov Eileen Patterson resigns as Family Faith Coordinator 2009 - Jul The roles of Pastoral Director and Deacon separated with Fran Renshaw appointed as Pastoral Director and Daryl continuing on in the Deacon role Table 1: A Brief Recent Chronology of Parish Leadership and Structure

Distinctive features of some of the leadership roles in the parish are considered below in Table 2. As has been indicated, members of the Parish Pastoral Team are still clarifying how their roles work individually and together in a team context. This clarifying process is taking time and is an evolving work in progress. The sharing of pastoral authority and responsibility across the roles within the team expresses in a tangible way the parish vision for each of the baptised to explore their own call into mission and ministry.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 19 Ecclesial Ministers

 Priest Moderator: a priest entrusted by the bishop in accordance with Canon 527 § 2, with the pastoral care of a parish within which there is a Pastoral Director. The Priest Moderator delegates some of his pastoral responsibilities to the Pastoral Director.

 Pastoral Director: a person other than a priest, who is entrusted with the formal, public, responsible leadership and pastoral care of a parish community, as specified by a diocesan bishop in accordance with Canon 517 § 2. This person exercises a leadership role of responsibility for the day-to-day operations of a parish community, in collaboration with a Priest Moderator designated by the Archbishop. The Pastoral Director will be responsible for the pastoral and administrative responsibilities delegated to her or him by the Priest Moderator in a discernment process led by the Archbishop’s nominee.

 Deacon: a personal, living sacrament of διακονία (service), witnessing to the service of others, encouraging and enabling it in the wider Christian community. Deacons have an immediate relationship with the Bishop. They serve the Bishop directly in the ministry of the local Church. Deacons care for those at the margins of society and the Church. They are also called to service of the Word – to preach and to evangelise. Deacons are ordained ministers who collaborate with the priests in the pastoral care of the local church under the leadership of the bishop. It is important that deacons are seen and see themselves not as substitute priests, but as ministers who live out the unique diaconal vocation that is a gift of God to the church.

 Pastoral Associate: a person who collaborates with a Priest, a Priest Moderator or a Pastoral Director in the formal public, responsible leadership and pastoral care of a parish or pastoral area. In the exercise of this ministry, a Pastoral Associate will normally be responsible for the coordination of a number of areas of pastoral ministry.

Table 2: Ecclesial Ministers – these definitions are taken, in large part verbatim, from Ministry Formation (Archdiocese of Adelaide, 2006).

As was indicated above in Section 1.3.2, the typical parish leadership model in Australia has been to have a full-time parish priest who resides in the parish with any other parish staff being appointed to roles that are clearly subordinate to the Parish Priest’s authority. The appointment of a Priest Moderator entails the delegation of some of the priest’s pastoral and administrative authority and responsibility to others within the parish. The classic delegation occurs to the person holding a Pastoral Director’s role. Initially the Deacon in the parish was also the Pastoral Director and this duality was later separated to allow the Deacon to be relieved of administrative responsibility to focus more on his diaconal ministry. A Pastoral Director was appointed to allow this to occur. Rather than delegating his administrative authority to one person in the Parish Pastoral Team, the Priest Moderator has emphasised a collaborative approach with decision making being shared among the team. This leadership style has been challenging for those who prefer a more autocratic and ‘decisive’ approach. Those who prefer to share authority and decision-making are however very affirming of it.

3.6. Ministry Leader Survey A range of responses from questions 4 to 7 in the Ministry Leader Survey are presented below in Table 3. As might be expected, the rewards for these leaders lie in the relationships they have with parishioners and the experience of growing as a person in response to the experiences one has in ministry. As one team member noted, this growth can sometimes

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 20 occur in surprising ways. The grief that some parishioners still feel as a consequence of the amalgamation provides an issue for the leaders to continue addressing in their ministry. The parish does not have many financial resources and this finds expression in a number of ways. The age of the parish plant and its need for maintenance and upgrading provides a significant challenge. ICT infrastructure is limited and ‘cumbersome’ with some members of the team feeling hampered in their work whilst waiting for the right equipment to be provided to them. An upgrading of administrative policies and procedures is occurring. One team member noted that one of the big challenges is to reach out to the many Catholics living in the parish who are not actively engaged in the life of the Church. Another challenge is to educate parishioners about the new forms of ministry and liturgy that will emerge given that there is now no longer a parish priest who resides in the parish. There is a strong sense that the Parish Pastoral Team knows that it is moving forward but that there is still a lot that needs to be done to realise the vision. A very attractive sense of optimism and commitment to mission and evident in the following comment made by one leader in an evaluation interview: ‘I am 72 years old – I think it is the best time to be in the parish – it is very challenging but it is wonderful – it is frightening but we have to face the fear and get on with it, no point in focusing on the fear – I wouldn’t want to be anywhere else’.

4. What is rewarding for you in your role?

 aligning the pastoral action with our parish vision  the prayerfulness of people has nourished me to become more spiritual and prayerful myself  working with particular ‘wisdom’ people in the team with great intellect – the same is true of parishioners with their life-experience  working with the aged or house-bound, the sick and bereaved  parishioners have been very welcoming – there is a sense for me of being at home  I have done things that I never would have expected to in my life: conducting funerals, organising a placement of a young refugee …  I love working in the two schools, love developing curriculum and spirituality

5. What is challenging for you in your role?

 coming into a parish that is still dealing with the amalgamation grief  with all due respect to previous leaders, it has been difficult to get a feel for the status of tasks – some things have either not been done or have gone with the people: buildings have been run down and this has affected hospitality, administrative practices are not always where they need to be  there are so many people to contact / build a relationship with – not enough time – the longer you are here, the more there is to do  we are all floundering a little, finding out who is doing what – I can see more clearly now what needs to be clarified  our main challenge is that we only really touch less than 5% of the Catholics in our area  initially not having a priest was the challenge – now it is how to keep a sacramentality alive without it becoming an academic exercise

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 21 6. What resources or changes would make it easier to work in your role?

 improved finances would allow us to implement pastoral strategies  educating parishioners so that they are able to enter the new paradigm we are moving into  professional development of staff  ICT communication does hamper us – very cumbersome  I am hoping to get a computer this week – that will make it easier  human resources are very strong, the team is very strong, as are the volunteers – technology and money are low  I think we need a priest on site – this is in no way a criticism of Michael or Jim – it is going to take a generation before the people move on so that they see the Word as being the equivalent as the Eucharist  someone in the CEO R.E. Team who understands what is happening in parish  our R.E. lesson plans are predicated on an assumption that students are experiencing the Church outside of school – we need to revise the curriculum so that it reflects the actual situation

7. The Parish Pastoral Team is endeavouring to work in a shared decision making model with other leaders in the Parish. Please comment on your experience of the leadership of the parish pastoral Team.

 within the pastoral team we are encouraged to engage in shared decision-making  we are moving into a new paradigm by developing realistic strategies to include the baptised in the life of the parish – matching skills and desires to parish needs  I think our focus in the parish has been to try to get as many people to minister in leadership in the parish – to see it as their ministry – our role is to support the leaders – it is slow but going well  a lot has happened since the amalgamation – it has moved from one person doing most things to a team approach – this has been a good thing  I think they have tried to set up structures to meet together – the Parish Education Team meets a lot but I haven’t been asked to be part of it  sometimes the pastoral Team is too big to meet with us – some members of the team are not overly focussed on the school in their role

Table 3: Responses to Questions 4 to 7 from the Survey of Leaders

A PMI (Plus, Minus and Interesting) analysis has been used in Table 4 to present responses of various parish leaders in interviews about their experiences as leaders in the parish. These responses present a rich picture of parish life and provide a good feel for where the parish is at the present time and what its opportunities and challenges are for moving forward.

‘Plus’ Responses

 I am 72 years old – I think it is the best time to be in the parish – it is very challenging but it is wonderful – it is frightening but we have to face the fear and get on with it, no point in focusing on the fear – I wouldn’t want to be anywhere else  I love being in the parish – it wasn’t part of my career plan but I enjoy it – God works in mysterious ways  we have done a lot but we have a long way to go

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 22  the ministry of the baptised is emerging – there is more of a sense of involvement and that is the way of the future – greater collaboration and consultation  the recent Parish Dinner was the best one I have been to in all my years of ministry – last year there was only 1 or 2 tables from the North, this year it was half and half  I think team ministry in parish is a great way to go – I am happy to be here for that reason – honours people’s gifts

‘Minus’ Responses

 the Leadership Councils will hopefully become more autonomous – they are still relying on some leaders within the Pastoral Team  overall we (the members of the Parish Pastoral Team) work well but there is still potential for improvement – I still can’t talk freely because one of the members doesn’t listen and stonewalls  the building is in serious disrepair and there is a lack of security at night time  the people were previously used to having Mass every day – this has been a huge loss – some have left, for some they will never accept, others have moved on  we need to involve youth more and we need new people to proclaim the Word – some people seem to think they have it for life  the sale of the block of land did not go through – hopefully the sale will happen again as the property is looking very decrepit and the parishioners who live nearby are getting very upset  we do need to establish a support for the sacraments program – I was Acting in this role last year and that is why people still come to see me  I would like to see the things that need to be done get done – that is hard though – once we have the finances, this will happen  I have found it hard to come to the shared decision-making model, our work as a team is not based on a constitution – I used to be very important in my own business, now I have to go for a walk when I see the Moderator making the decision  the Pastoral Team is quite elderly – I don’t know that we make the decisions that the young people would be interested in  slowly and surely we are commissioning people and educating them – we are working towards more formal groups  we are moving too quickly – more training and preparation is required  it has been more of a takeover than an amalgamation in the minds of quite a few of the older people not wanting to let go – many of the members of the Parish Council were from the North  some people have been hurt – I was involved for two years in developing a new logo and motto – When Michael came in, that all got binned, now we can’t even find the data – I find that disappointing  it has been a huge change for schools – the hardest thing apart from the sacramental life was that we had no one to care for us in times of crisis – admittedly this was early in the life of the parish, I think things are better now  at this point in time, I have had to step back because it is hurting too much – I have been an REC in the parish and have always felt part of the parish team, now I don’t – I don’t know much about the program or vision – maybe because they are unclear about what they are doing  I don’t know where to go – in 5 years time I don’t know how we will be different from the school down the road – If Eucharist is the summit, then how do we get them in touch with that?

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 23 ‘Interesting’ Responses

 we need to focus on hospitality  none of this is new – when people came out in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s the immigrants from the UK had to start with nothing  we have an ‘Archive in Action’ team which documents the life of the parish – heals the hurts from the amalgamation – a series of morning tea oral history sessions with members to the parish to capture and respect the past  we can provide a Liturgy of the Word and a Communion Service for a funeral – the Mass on Sunday that follows is a special focus for the family – this is the way of the future  the Parish has been required to accept that the priest-centred model no longer exists – everyone knows that this is where it is heading – emphasis is on the ministry that comes from baptism  I think Michael is excellent, his homilies are great – it is a shame that we don’t see that in the schools – if we could have Michael in the school, it would be fantastic – having said that, many of our teachers could give better homilies to our students than one or other of the priests that we have had in the past  for our students what is most relevant is their poverty – I would be appointing community workers, social workers etc  I still don’t think people have got a hold on how the impact of the separation of parish and school is going – we need a parish presence in the school, this is what I am concerned about – there needs to be a visual that the children can relate to – in the past this is the Parish Priest but it needs to be someone else now – hard to see who given the Pastoral Associate, Deacon etc are so busy – we haven’t introduced members of the team very much

Table 4: Interviews of parish leaders – Plus, Minus and Interesting

The Parish Pastoral Team is an energetic and committed group of people. They are being challenged to feel their way into roles that are new for the parish, and indeed for the broader Church. Many Team members are new to the parish and one of the challenges is for them to establish deeper relationships with the people they are called to serve. The collaborative approach to decision making is challenging for one or two members who are used to a more decisive exercise of authority. Roles are evolving and it will take some time before each team member is clear about how all of the roles work together for the sake of the mission. Considerable maturity has been required on the part of some team members who have either had to surrender elements of a role they had cherished or taken up a role while the previous incumbent was still present in the group. It is easy to imagine how a less emotionally mature group may have had more conflict in such a context. There were indications that one or two members had difficulty with each other’s approach but these difficulties were managed without rendering the team dysfunctional. One of the challenges for the team over time will be to increase the level of responsibility accorded to local people and also to develop the leadership of younger people. A number of team members are elderly and one of the team members noted that their challenge will be to find ways to enter the world of the young person. Notwithstanding these challenges, the outlook of the group remains positive, vital, open to fun and committed to mission.

3.7. Parish Ministries A rich range of ministries are exercised in the Parish and these are represented in Appendix A. The range of pastoral services is extensive, especially given the relatively meagre resources of the parish. The services are organised around the dimensions of ministry

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 24 specified in the Parish vision: Diakonia (service), Leitourgia (Liturgy), Marturia (witness and outreach), kerygma and didache (faith education and spirituality of listening to the Word).

The list of ministries specified in Appendix A is indicative, not exhaustive. For example, the list does not include the ministries exercised at the two Colleges in the parish. It is also difficult to understand what actually happens within a ministry simply by considering its label. The faithfulness and commitment of visitation to housebound, sick or elderly parishioners is not conveyed in its fullness simply by providing the title ‘Pastoral Visitor’. The celebration of funerals in large number, especially with people who have little to do with the life of the Church does not convey the commitment to mission and outreach on the part of the Deacon. The careful and sustained efforts of the Pastoral Associate to encourage local leadership and responsibility for areas of parish life or her follow through on any number of issues (such as the conduct of this evaluation) is often hidden and unsung work. The juggling of commitments by the Priest Moderator to provide pastoral leadership that is life-giving for the people and enabling for the leaders provides a sign of hope for the future. The wisdom and commitment to ministry of the Assistant Priest and the unassuming and ongoing call into outreach and engagement by the Baptism Coordinator all weave important threads into the fabric of pastoral leadership and ministry offered to the parish. The recent appointment of the Pastoral Director provides a much-needed sign of the Church’s capacity to delegate responsibility for pastoral leadership to a woman.

The danger in referring to the work of individuals such as these in the Parish Pastoral Team is that the work of those not mentioned is not acknowledged. Whilst it is possible here to acknowledge the work of a small number of individuals, the work of the whole community is honoured nonetheless. The parish only survives because of the work of dozens of people who labour in it and for it, often without seeking reward of any kind, other than that of the fulfilment associated with responding to the call of one’s baptism. A particularly important task for the parish is continue developing the autonomy and skills of the Leadership Councils. Whilst the leadership of the Parish Pastoral Team is easy to see and describe, it is the leadership shown by parishioners that provides the soil into which the seeds of the gospel are planted and bear fruit. The parish will survive and flourish only if the leadership and commitment of parishioners is enabled and called into its full vitality. The commitment to ongoing formation and faith education will be an important ingredient in the success of this movement forward into vitality and life.

The work of Tammy Bruecher as the Community Development Officer was cited by a number of people as providing a good example of a role that has the potential for the parish and the school to work together in a much closer partnership. Tammy is employed by the three parish primary schools and is responsible for developing the social capital of people. She coordinates programs in a variety of areas according to need: playgroups, financial management, preparing an evening meal (making a shopping list, cooking, etc), computer courses, etc. This work is not easy as people can lack the confidence or the energy and community engagement to come along. Some projects have been successful whereas others have had very low numbers. One of the Principals noted however that it is a very successful role, even though numbers would not indicated that just yet. Another of the principals felt that those outside the schools were yet to understand the potential of this role and what it might do for the wider parish.

The involvement of St Patrick’s Technical College in the ‘GetSET for Your Future’ program piloted at the Elizabeth TAFE Campus provides a further example of how the schools can provide a powerful contribution to the local community. The participants of this program are young (15 -20 years old) and have a wide variety of issues that have prevented them from

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 25 fully engaging with the normal education system: pregnant teens, literacy and numeracy difficulties, dysfunctional family backgrounds, anti-social or behavioural issues. The ministry undertaken with marginalised groups such as these is very difficult and demanding for those who take it on. Not withstanding the challenging nature of the work, one of the benchmarks for the Elizabeth parish’s faithfulness to the call of the Gospel will be the extent to which its resources have been allocated to those neighbours in their midst who are poorest and most in need.

The responses of parishioners to the various ministries and services offered to them in the life of the parish are too numerous to include in full as an appendix in this report but are available for those who are interested at the following location: http://online.cesanet.adl.catholic.edu.au/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-12947

It will be interesting to see how the rich array of parish ministries evolves over time in response to the parish vision which encourages each parishioner to discover the call into ministry that comes from their baptism.

4. Discussion of Findings 4.1. Amalgamations and Closures A quote from a Liverpool Archbishop is often repeated as the definition for organisational culture: ‘the way we do things around here’ (Gallagher, 2003, p. 15). This definition of culture has been criticised from the perspective that it is not so much a matter of ‘what people do’, but rather ‘what people feel about what they do’ (Arbuckle, 2000, p. 4 – emphasis in original). The observable behaviours in a particular setting are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to understanding a group’s culture. Underneath the observable phenomena lies a matrix of perspectives, values, commitments, assumptions and feelings and these are not necessarily obvious simply by looking at the observable behaviours.

Those who approach the study of organisational culture from the perspective of cultural anthropology can be critical of the superficiality of some studies of organisational culture in the managerial literature (e.g. Schein, 2004; Arbuckle, 2004). From the perspective of cultural anthropology studies which focus merely on observable behaviour fail to come to terms with the hidden and complex aspects of life in groups (Schein, 2004, p. 7). Schein cites a number of examples from his practice as an organisational consultant where he misread what was happening in the organisation because he interpreted the observable behaviours wrongly. His assumptions as an outsider differed from the shared assumptions of the organisation’s members. Schein argues that making sense of an organisation requires taking a ‘cultural perspective’ – learning to see the world through cultural lenses – becoming competent in cultural analysis. ‘Once we learned to see the world through cultural lenses all kinds of things begin to make sense that initially were mysterious frustrating or seemingly stupid’ (Schein, 2004, p. 6).

Schein (2004) identifies three levels at which cultural analysis must be undertaken: 1. artefacts – all the phenomena that one sees, hears and feels 2. espoused beliefs and values – the sense of what ought to be, as distinct from what is 3. basic underlying assumptions – the implicit assumptions that actually guide behaviour, that tell group members how to perceive, think about, and feel about things (Schein, 2004, pp. 25, 28).

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 26 Schein’s analysis is that artefacts, beliefs and values are only understood if one understands the basic underlying assumptions. He is critical of many studies of organisational culture because there is a shallow and hasty transition from observation of externalised behaviour to characterisation of culture. If one does not decipher the pattern of basic assumptions that may be operating, one will not know how to interpret the artefacts correctly or how much credence to give to the articulated values (Schein, 2004, p. 36).

Religious leaders who are sensitive to the culture of the organisations they lead, are attentive to what lies beneath the surface behaviours and artefacts. Culturally sensitive leaders develop an appreciation of the community’s beliefs and values and the assumptions which undergird those beliefs and values. It is only when leaders have developed a depth understanding of a particular organisation’s culture that they are well-placed to exercise leadership in ways that respond to way the organisation ‘ticks’.

Part of the art of leadership is to know how to read beneath surface behaviours to identify underlying beliefs and values and the assumptions and worldview that gives rise to those beliefs and values. There are times when the leader is able to work within the frame that is presented and there are times when leadership entails changing that frame. For example, it was clear in 2006 prior to the amalgamation that significant numbers of parishioners from the St Ann’s community were distressed with a proposal that the Mass times for the amalgamated parish be as follows: 6 pm Vigil Mass at St Ann’s, 8 am Sunday Mass at Thomas More, 10 am Mass at St Thomas More. Members of the St Ann’s community felt that they were being disadvantaged by such an arrangement and so the Mass times were arranged as follows: Vigil Mass to be shared between equally between the two communities (changing over at Daylight Savings time to St Ann’s for the Summer and back to St Thomas More for the Winter; 8.30 am Sunday Mass at St Ann’s and 10 am Mass at St Thomas More.

At other times it will not be possible to accommodate the desires of community members and so the leadership must re-frame the issue so that a solution is found. An example here is the reframing that occurred in relation to the conduct of funerals. Because a priest is generally not available during the week, the Deacon conducts most of the funerals in the parish and the family is invited to the following Sunday Mass where their loved one’s life is celebrated in the midst of the community. This solution appears to have worked to some degree because whilst the presenting issue was for a priest to be found to celebrate funerals, families seem to be accepting a funeral celebration led by a Deacon when they are also linked to the eucharistic celebration on the Dies Domini for the parish. These kinds of solutions only work when leaders are able to look underneath the presenting issues and behaviours to discern underlying values and worldviews. Of course it is not always possible to come up with a solution that everyone accepts. Sensitivity to the underlying meaning of presenting behaviours does however place the leader in better position to develop responses which lead the people through difficult moments or issues.

4.2. Change Management The positive response of so many to the changes in the Elizabeth parish has been surprising because greater negativity could have been expected from people whose parishes were amalgamated and who then lost their resident Parish Priest soon afterwards. The fact that grief and negativity has not been more pronounced is testament to the resilience and openness of the people, and also to the leadership of the community that has occurred across these changes.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 27 That having been said, there are clearly a number of people who have not responded well to the changes. Some are only just beginning to move out of their grief and anger at the changes which have occurred. For them, a fulcrum of Catholic identity – whether in the parish or in its school – is the Mass celebrated by the resident Parish Priest. As one of the members of the Parish Pastoral Team has noted:

The parish has been required to accept that the priest-centred model no longer exists. Everyone knows that this is where it is heading. Our emphasis is on the ministry that comes from baptism.

There is a great deal of research on the strategies that are effective in leading a change process. For example, the following steps can be found in Kotter’s (1996) change management model: establish the need for urgency; ensure there is a powerful change group to guide the change; develop the vision; communicate the vision; empower staff; ensure there are short-term wins; consolidate gains; embed the change in the culture. As has been indicated there is a strong emphasis on vision and shared exploration and decision making in the way the Elizabeth parish operates. Parish assemblies occur regularly to share the vision and to develop it. The following are among the characteristics identified by Kotter (1996) for a change vision to be effective: imaginable, desirable, feasible, focussed, flexible and communicable.

From a Catholic perspective, the change management process must also be grounded in a vision of what it means to be Catholic. Considerable creativity will be required to develop pastoral strategies that are authentically Catholic, cognisant of the dwindling numbers of priests and resonant with the culture of the people in the parish. The change process must ensure that essential features of Catholicism as a sacramental and liturgical tradition are maintained and new strategies for maintaining communion with the Archdiocese will need to be created as the resident parish priest model gives way to new forms of parish leadership.

The change management style observed in this evaluation tended to be evolutionary, relational and responsive rather than planned in a linear and rational way. Roles have changed as issues have emerged. The change process is vision-driven and emergent, rather than being run along the tracks of a pre-specified blueprint. It is obvious at times that some people desire greater clarity and less fuzziness. Mostly though there was a sense in the leadership team that whilst there is a lot yet still to do, much has already been achieved. The satisfaction levels of parishioners noted above provides a further affirmation of the change process. Whilst the age of the Parish Pastoral Team has been noted as a challenge, its wisdom provides a positive counterpoint. The capacity to see underneath issues and to make the changes necessary to respond authentically and non-defensively to those issues perhaps only comes with a certain level of maturity.

4.3. Some radical shifts in leadership structure The traditional parish leadership model for Catholics has been to have a full-time resident Parish Priest lead the parish with others working in roles clearly subordinate to the authority of the Parish Priest. The authority of the priest was organically linked in the minds of parishioners to his ordination and to his sacramental ministry in the parish. The movement into a collaborative model of parish leadership with a variety of leaders – both ordained and lay – working together in a team model represents a very significant shift for Catholics.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 28 The appointment of a Priest Moderator who does not live in the Parish and who has significant responsibilities as a University lecturer and who emphasises the ministry of all the baptised, thereby delegating much of his authority, has challenged the parish to develop new forms of leadership and ministry. The priest is now no longer be able to celebrate a daily Mass in the parish and new arrangements need to be made for funerals, marriages and the sacramental life of schools. The priest now no longer is the decision maker in the first instance with the broad range of issues that emerge in parish life. He no longer is intimately involved in school Boards and selection panels for school leaders. New forms of communion need to be established, not only within the parish but also beyond it to the broader Church.

The appointment of a female Pastoral Director challenges parishioners to look towards the authority and leadership of a lay woman for the day-to-day operations of the parish. The appointment of a Deacon challenges the parish to understand what a person working in this role offers to the parish and to differentiate that contribution from the ministry traditionally exercised by a Parish Priest – and for that matter, from the ministry exercised by the Pastoral Director. The temptation to see the Deacon as a ‘mini-priest’ does not honour the unique role that the Deacon plays. Parishioners are further challenged to understand how the parish ministry is exercised in a variety of other roles such as the Assisting Priest, Pastoral Associate, Pastoral Visitor, Family Faith Coordinator, Baptism Program Coordinator, Communications Officer and Parish Administrator. Many of these roles have been around for some time in parishes but a shift from the traditional Parish Priest model of leadership has the clear potential to reconfigure other roles and relationships across the parish.

The emergence of a team approach has sometimes been a little ‘messier’ and less efficient than more traditional or hierarchical forms of leadership but the advantage is that some new people are stepping up to take responsibility for various ministries. It would be surprising however if all involved were making the transition without problems arising. The REC and Principal roles are also affected by changing parish structures and these shifts give rise to new challenges and opportunities. The RECs, for example, are called to work with other religious leaders in the parish in new ways beyond their school to structure and deliver programs of formation with families. RECs who have relied upon the celebration of eucharist in the school as a cornerstone for building the school’s Catholic identity are challenged to find new ways for that identity to be created in a pastoral context where there is no resident Parish Priest and there are few students who appreciate or even know the form of the Mass.

4.4. The relationship between the Catholic school and the wider parish Five Catholic schools are located in the Elizabeth parish (see Figure 1). Three of the schools (St Mary Magdalene’s, St Thomas More and Catherine McAuley School) are R to 7 ‘parish schools’ in the sense that the parish is directly involved in their governance. St Columba College is an R to 12 school jointly owned by the Anglican and Catholic Churches and St Patrick’s Technical College is an Australian Technical College that is now owned and operated by the Archdiocese. The commitment of the people who work in these schools is obvious and the diverse ways in which they respond to the needs of the students and their families is both edifying and a powerful sign of the Church’s presence in the midst of the Elizabeth community.

The replacement of a resident parish priest with a Priest Moderator has been a keenly felt loss by some of the school leaders. For these leaders, a touchstone of the Catholic school’s religious identity and connection with the parish was the Mass said by the priest in the school. For these leaders it has been an enormous challenge to reconstruct the school’s

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 29 religious identity when there is now no longer a priest available to celebrate the eucharist regularly with students in the school. Not all school leaders have experienced the changes in such deficit terms however: one school leader felt more connected to the parish than ever before, simply because the new roles and approaches challenged everyone to be more involved than they had been. Some leaders were quite realistic about the fact that changes needed to be made to the traditional model, given the declining numbers of priests. Other leaders were more than realistic; they were optimistic about what might be achieved in our time as people choose to respond to the call of the Gospel.

Whilst liturgy is recognised in this evaluation as being a ‘source and summit’ for Christian life, it must also be recognised that traditional pastoral strategies such as Masses in schools have over a number of decades proved themselves to be ineffective in terms of inviting students or families into the life of the Church in any meaningful or sustained way. Whilst, given their own commitment to the eucharist, the grieving of some school leaders over the loss of a regular celebration of the eucharist in their school is understandable on an emotional level, a more rational evaluation would admit that students and their families have only been touched superficially by the celebration of the eucharist in the school. New pastoral strategies and forms of catechesis are required if the families are to be evangelised in any substantial way.

Over the course of the evaluation it was apparent that even those who were most opposed and disillusioned by the loss of the traditional model of the resident parish priest were beginning to come to terms with what had occurred at the time of the amalgamation. Their interactions became less angry and their questions began to address deeper issues associated with the new roles and responsibilities emerging in the parish. The following comment from one of the school leaders captured well the sense of loss and uncertainty that has emerged in this time of transition.

I still don’t think people have got a hold on how the impact of the separation of parish and school is going. We need a parish presence in our school. This is what I am concerned about. There needs to be a visual that the children can relate to. In the past this is the Parish Priest but it needs to be someone else now. Hard to see who given the Pastoral Associate, Deacon, etc are so busy. We haven’t introduced members of the team very much. I don’t know where to go, where to search to. In five years time, I don’t know how we will be different from the school down the road. If Eucharist is the summit, then how do we get them in touch with that?

New forms of presence of the wider parish need to be developed if families in the school community are to experience a Church that survives the graduation of the student from the school. No matter how vibrant the school’s liturgy, pastoral care and outreach is, if those communal experiences depend on enrolment for access, families will cease to find a home in them once their child graduates. If the school is to become a site for building Church, then a sufficient number of ecclesial experiences need to be developed that include the wider parish. School families may well be a primary target point for the experiences in the first instance but the experiences need to intentionally include the wider parish so that the families can continue to participate and belong, even after their child graduates from the school.

Three models of parish school relationship are presented in Figure 8. The challenge identified in this evaluation is for the schools to move from a Model 2 relationship into Model 3. Model 1 is rejected by most educators in the current age because its limitations have been clearly recognised. The school’s mission in Model 1 is to send the students in the direction of the parish Mass on Sundays. (The model fails because schools have little or no

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 30 control over what families decide to do on Sundays and many parishes do not have the resources to welcome families, even if they decided to attend.) Because educators have realised the fruitlessness of the Model 1 relationship, many of them have ‘invited’ the parish into the school or have encouraged families to ‘visit’ the parish in one context or another. Essentially, a Model 2 school operates as an entity that is connected to the parish but separate from it. A Model 3 school has the parish in its midst as an integral part of school life. The shift from Model 2 to Model 3 is tricky and asks for creative and sustained leadership.

The comment above from the school leader employs Model 2 terminology to reflect on the presence of the parish in the school. A Model 3 approach would be to create roles that were both parish and school. The Community Development worker referred to in Section 3.7 has the potential to become such a role. Such a worker builds the capacity of the community to develop experiences that are needed by them and led by them. School families may well provide a primary target group for these communal experiences but the experiences are designed so that the wider parish is authentically and deliberately included. All possible steps would be taken to ensure that the community boundaries are wider than the school so that families continue to be involved regardless of whether one of their members was enrolled in the school.

Senior leaders in the Archdiocese have described schools as being the ‘jewel in the crown’ or the ‘future of the Church’. Whilst these characterisations are affirming, schools will only provide sustainable experiences of Church when they are able to move into a Model 3 mindset. The challenge in the Elizabeth parish, as it is across the rest of the Archdiocese, is to find a way to develop roles and pastoral strategies that sit authentically within the Model 3 frame. The parish is present in the Model 3 school as an integral and daily dimension of school life. The parish is integral to the life of the school and yet transcends it. By virtue of enrolling their child in a Model 3 type of school, families encounter the wider parish in a variety of attractive ecclesial experiences that provide them with the opportunity to continue accessing the Church regardless of whether they still have a child in the school.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 31 Model 1 Relationship The School is NOT Church

This model is common with committed Catholics who see School is the Sunday gathered community in the parish as the only NOT Church authentic expression of Church. The ecclesial dimension of School the Catholic school is rejected. not Church The mission in this model is to shift weekday school families into the Sunday gathered community. Catholicity of Catholic The model FAILS because: School is measured by the movement of people from  the choices that families make about what to do on the School community Parish Sunday lie outside the control of the school which is understood not to Church  weekday school families are disinclined to transplant be Church into the Parish themselves out of the school into a different Sunday Church that gathers on community Sunday.  the Sunday community has a low capacity to welcome school families – especially when most of the Sunday community is elderly

Model 2 Relationship Church EQUALS School Church School = School This model is common with school leaders who recognise IS Church the ecclesial dimension of their school and who understand the difficulties associated with Model 1 relationships. The mission in this model is to make school as positive an experience of Church as possible (with little connection School is THE Church for being made to the broader parish). families in the school The model FAILS because: because more than 85%  to be Catholic is to be in communion with the broader of these families do not Parish Church and to celebrate the Day of the Lord experience the broader Church parish – e.g. at Mass on  once students graduate from school, in this model they Sunday graduate from Church

Model 3 Relationship Growing Church out of School This model is deceptively difficult to implement. Institutions such as ‘parishes’ or ‘schools’ do not change easily. They Family Centred each have their own integrity and tend to relate to each other Church as separate entities. Leiturgia Kerygma A single ecclesial (Liturgy) The mission in this model is to grow the Church out of a (Proclaiming) community that builds school site by making many multi-layered connections with Church out of the So is the broader parish in such modes as liturgy, service and Family is school community by Parish creating strong and social. Church So is multi-layered bonds to other parts of the local Diakonia The model demands: School Church. (Service)  the creativity to develop ‘ecclesial’ experiences that are So are a range of other 1. Recognisably much authentically Catholic, genuinely integrated with the life integrated services more than a school of the school but opened out into the broader community Koinonia 2. Organic integration Didache  community development skills so that families are (Community) of all constituent (Teaching) elements enabled to develop experiences that are attractive and life-giving to them as well as being ‘owned’ by them  a sufficient number of experiences that genuinely include those who are not students or families of current students Figure 8: Models of Relationship between the Catholic School and the Wider Parish

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 32 5. Conclusions The basic conclusion to be drawn from this evaluation is that the Parish Pastoral Team and its ministry is affirmed, notwithstanding the very significant challenges and difficulties which have emerged in the context of the amalgamation that has brought the Elizabeth Parish into being. The sickness of leaders, the succession of Acting leadership appointments, the amalgamation of parishes, the closure of Mass Centres and the quite radical changes in leadership roles are among the factors that have shaped the context for the ministry exercised by the Pastoral Team. In evaluating the pastoral ministry the tense and sometimes acrimonious history within and between the two constituent parishes also needs to be acknowledged. Just as important to acknowledge is the resilience and commitment that has characterised the parish’s response to the challenges it has faced in recent years.

In the light of the difficulties and challenges mentioned above, it is not surprising that the Mass Count dropped by approximately 25% at the time of the amalgamation over the period 2006 to 2008. Whilst this decline at the time of the amalgamation was and is alarming, the trajectory of that decline has been reversed within a relatively short time of the Parish Pastoral Team being formed. The 2009 Mass Count is ahead of the 2007 Archdiocesan projection and on current trends the 2010 Mass Count will be well ahead of the projected figure (see Figure 6). The satisfaction level of parishioners reported in this evaluation is also surprisingly high with most respondents reporting that they are more satisfied with the life of the parish in 2008 than they were in 2006 prior to the amalgamation (see Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5).

Notwithstanding the affirmation of the Parish Pastoral Team and its ministry, there is neither room for nor evidence of complacency within the leadership of the parish. The following comments sum up the commitment to mission and ongoing development that was typical of the team: Our main challenge is that we are still touching less than 5% of the Catholics in our Parish. There are so many people to contact and build a relationship with. Not enough time. The longer you are here, the more there is to do. We have already achieved a lot but there is much more that lies ahead of us.

The following recommendations are made in the same spirit of mission that Parish Pastoral Team members themselves advocated throughout the course of this evaluation. In making these recommendations, the evaluator is aware that many of them apply equally well to parishes across the Archdiocese. New forms of leadership and pastoral service need to be created if the mission of the Church is to be sustained and strengthened in the decades ahead. The Elizabeth parish is already facing challenges that other parishes have yet to confront at any depth. The way forward is not straight but perhaps it never has been.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 33 6. Recommendations 6.1. Recommendations for the Elizabeth Parish 6.1.1. That the pastoral ministries continue to be strengthened in the parish in accord with the Parish Vision The parish vision includes dimensions such as the following: community/communion, liturgy, faith education, service, pastoral witness and outreach. A rich array of ministries is presented in Appendix B. Despite the richness of the current offerings, parish leaders (inclusive of school leaders) are not complacent. ‘We have already achieved a lot but there is much more that lies ahead of us’. Although much has been done to respond to the needs of those who continue to grieve over issues associated with the amalgamation or the closure of Mass centres, the ministry of outreach and healing continues. The Parish vision also calls every parishioner to discern the call to mission that comes from their baptism. This call will inevitably lead to the ongoing shaping and strengthening of existing services as well as the initiation of new ones. The active leadership of local people in such bodies as the Leadership Councils will significantly shape the parish’s capacity to grow and develop ministries in response to the needs of its people.

6.1.2. That the roles of the members of the Parish Pastoral Team continue to be clarified both within the team and across the broader parish The Parish Pastoral Team is a pleasant group to meet and work with. High levels of psychological maturity and patience have been demanded of members of the Parish Pastoral Team as roles have evolved in an ongoing way since the inception of the parish. Team members have had to cope with a variety of challenges in this regard:  entering a role feeling ‘underdone’ in terms of preparation and formation  juggling a role with other significant responsibilities  surrendering significant (and cherished) aspects of a role  moving into a role previously occupied by someone still present in the Team  authority and responsibility of role being recognised by parishioners who are still learning what the new roles entail – for example: o parishioners who still look to the priest in relation to responsibilities which have been delegated to other roles o parishioners who see the Deacon as a mini-priest o parishioners who are unwilling to accept the authority of a female parish leader o parishioners who are unwilling to accept the priestly ministry being exercised by priests in roles other than a resident parish priest Alongside the clarification of roles is the challenge of formation and capacity building so that those who take up leadership positions in the parish are equipped and enabled to rise to the challenges of their roles.

6.1.3. That the parish administration infrastructure continue to be developed

A number of parish leaders referred to the run down and inadequate nature of some of the parish plant and infrastructure such as ICT technology or skills and procedures in the administrative area. The efforts currently being made to remedy these deficiencies need to be continued. A lack of finances hampers the efforts that are being made. A number of

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 34 respondents hoped that the sale of the St Gerard’s property would provide some impetus forward in this regard.

6.1.4. That the parish and its leaders engage in critical conversation regarding the implications for parish pastoral structures and plant of the planned developments in the North of the Parish – e.g. Munno Parra and Blakeview developments.

The expansion of the suburbs in the Playford North area was described in Section 1.3.1. The massive development and rejuvenation has the potential to double the population in the coming decade. The significant population expansion planned for the northern area of the parish presents particular challenges because most of the parish plant is currently located in the south. The critical conversation and discernment undertaken by the parish will need to include school leaders as well as appropriate planning personnel from the Catholic Education Office and the City of Playford.

6.1.5. That the relationship between each Catholic school and the wider parish be more deeply integrated and reshaped to reflect the new roles in the Parish Pastoral Team and the renewed parish vision of outreach and diakonia

The schools in the Elizabeth parish have had many decades of valued partnerships with their parish. These partnerships will necessarily need to take a very different form in the decades which lie ahead. The institution of the Parish Education Meeting comprised of Principals, Deputies, RECs and chaplains with representatives from the Parish Pastoral Team provides a vehicle for reshaping the school / wider-parish partnerships as does the formation of the Interim Faith Education Council.

As has been argued in Section 4.4, schools provide parishes with a significant opportunity to engage in outreach ministries to families who have chosen a Catholic education for their children but who are not actively involved in the life of the parish. If these ministries are to continue to provide points of access to the Church after the student graduates from the school, a sufficient number of experiences need to be created that are accessible and inclusive of the broader parish beyond the immediate school community. Elements of such experiences are depicted in Model 3 in Figure 8. The creation of these experiences in sufficient number and quality will require a significant shift of mindset for parish and school leaders alike. New ‘Model 3’ roles will need to be created. Resourcing implications are obvious if one or two community development people need to be appointed to those roles. The skills required by those appointed to such positions are outlined in Recommendation 6.1.6.

6.1.6. That the parish’s ministries of outreach and diakonia be strengthened and developed

One of the members of the Pastoral Team noted that 95% of families in the parish remain untouched by the experience of the wider parish beyond the school. The lives of these families have become disengaged over some decades with traditional Catholic pastoral forms, structures, beliefs and rituals. New forms and expressions of outreach are required if these families are to be included in the parish’s mission of evangelisation. The following are among the core capabilities identified as being required by those who would engage in the outreach ministries.

Those who lead ministries of outreach are able to:  reflect theologically from a Catholic place  understand and appreciate the contemporary outlook and mindset of families – especially those families not currently engaged in the life of the Church beyond school

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 35  be creative and devise pastoral strategies and structures that connect with those families in new ways  network and offer effective invitations to families, especially those families who are in special need or those who are not engaged with the life of the Church  build the capacity of community members so that the community develops initiatives that matter to them – as distinct from ‘delivering services’ to community members that the leaders feel they need

6.2. Recommendations for the Archdiocese of Adelaide 6.2.1. That programs of formation for ecclesial leaders (ordained and lay) emphasise the development of the skills and outlook necessary for enablement and outreach at the parish level

Those who lead parishes into the future will increasingly rely upon the leadership shown by parishioners. A range of interpersonal and educational skills are required to develop this leadership. Further skills are also necessary for the development of the ministries of outreach and diakonia and these are described above in Recommendation 6.1.6. Imagination, resilience, creativity and a commitment to working with others in partnership to answer the call of the Gospel will be hallmarks of parish leaders who are able to develop the new approaches and strategies that are required. Diocesan programs of formation need to emphasise the development of these skills and attitudes.

6.2.2. That the process of amalgamating parishes be seen as an exercise in change management and exemplary practice be employed using the most expert support available

Some of the skills necessary for change management were described in Section 4.2. When an amalgamation or a ‘notable alteration’ of a parish is necessary, there is some evidence to suggest that diocesan support resources for the parish are better applied after the decision has been made rather than by way of preparation. There are skilled Catholics work in a variety of roles who could provide good advice to a Parish Leadership Team moving through the change process if they were called upon to do so. The Archdiocese may support parishes by offering a consultant to the Parish Leadership Team for a defined period of time (e.g. 12 months) after the amalgamation. Whilst such a consultancy role cannot provide a replacement for skilled leadership at the local level, it may help support and guide such leadership. Some centralised training for a small number of such consultants could equip them for this role. It does not seem impossible to imagine that suitably skilled Catholics from the business world or from senior leadership positions within the Archdiocese might be prepared to offer such services on a voluntary basis.

The reason for suggesting that support be offered to a parish after a decision has been made, rather than before is that some of the extended preparation at Elizabeth seemed to create more heat than light. Perhaps a certain amount of heat is unavoidable as people grieve over the loss of dimensions of community they have treasured. Asking two separate parishes to spend a year or more debating amalgamation possibilities does not necessarily seem a good use of energy, particularly when some aspects of the amalgamation are relatively obvious and known in advance. Once the parameters of a decision are known, the energy can then be spent on issues relating to the implementation of the decision or to aspects that are open to negotiation. In a practical sense, changes often need to be made by the Archdiocese at short notice to parish structures or leadership personnel and there are some advantages in having a process that can be quickly actioned and does not rely upon years of preparation.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 36 6.2.3. That the Archdiocese engage strongly with the Priest Moderator and Pastoral Director upon appointment as formal delegations of pastoral responsibility are negotiated

The Vicar General’s office and advisors give careful consideration to the appointment of Priest Moderators and Pastoral Directors. Often the timelines for such appointments are tight and the Priests and lay people involved are not necessarily well-versed in all of the issues that need to be considered as the partnership is established. Some consideration has been given in the Archdiocese to the issues which surround the appointment of Pastoral Directors – e.g. the work of Cathy Whewell (2008) and the People in Ministry Standing Committee of the Executive of the Curia. Further reflection and guidance is however desirable.

The relationship between the Priest Moderator and Pastoral Director evolved in a number of stages over the past two years and continues to evolve. Whilst this evolutionary process has unfolded without too much harm being caused to those involved or to the wider parish, considerable maturity has been required on the part of the Deacon as he has stepped away from his duties as a Pastoral Director and on the part of the incoming Pastoral Director as she has moved into her role with the incumbent still present in the Parish Pastoral Team. Other members of the Pastoral Team also made noted their desire for greater role clarity. There is a recognition of the fact that roles are being clarified over time but patience is required.

The evolution of the pastoral ministry delegations has worked in the Elizabeth context because of the strength of the relationships and the psychological maturity of those involved. These strengths cannot be presumed to be present generally as relationships between Priest Moderator and Pastoral Director are established. A formal process of delegation that is facilitated by a senior person in the Archdiocese who is familiar with the issues would help form the partnership, clarify roles and lay a firm foundation for the relationship going forward.

6.2.4. That senior leadership within the Archdiocese work with personnel from the Catholic Education Office to develop much more deeply integrated parish/school partnerships which reflect the declining numbers of priests, emerging lay ecclesial ministries and the current realities of family life

Most schools are currently operating in the second of the three models presented above in Figure 8. Here the school operates as a separate entity from the wider parish, even though in many cases the relationship between the school and the wider parish may well be a very positive one. Because so few families are involved in the wider parish beyond the school, unless the parish is present in the school in an organic and integrated form, the involvement of the family in the life of the Church will cease at graduation.

The shift from Model 2 into Model 3 partnerships presents a deceptively difficult challenge for both school and parish alike. The shift is however essential if schools are to deliver on the hope that they are ‘the future of the Church’. Great creativity and commitment are required on the part of both leaders in both the school and the wider parish. The ‘outreach capabilities’ specified in Recommendation 6.1.6 are essential for any person appointed to the community development roles necessary for animating the Model 3 ministries.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 37 References

References

Arbuckle, G. (2000). Healthcare ministry: Refounding the mission in tumultuous times. Minnesota: The Liturgical Press.

Archdiocese of Adelaide. (2006). Ministry Formation. A working document produced by the Director of Pastoral Planning in the Archdiocese of Adelaide.

Code of Canon Law. (1983). http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM accessed on 28 September 2009.

Gallagher, M. (2003). Clashing symbols: An introduction to faith and culture. London: Darton, Longman & Todd.

John Paul II. (1997). The Vocation of the Parish. L’Osservatore Romano, February 5.

Kilmartin, C. (1994). Regional disadvantage and unemployment. Family Matters, 37(April), 42-45.

Kotter, J. (1996). Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Owen, J. (2006). Program evaluation: Forms and approaches. (Third edition). Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

Russell, P. (2008). Parish of Elizabeth (SA). Paper produced in advance of the Baptism at the Heart of Ministry Conference.

Schein, E. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Whewell, C. (2008). Working paper towards a plan for ecclesial leadership for the Archdiocese of Adelaide (Version 7). Archdiocese of Adelaide.

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 38 Appendix A Appendix A: Pastoral Ministry Overview Pastoral Ministry

Pastoral Services Coordinated by the Parish Pastoral Team

Diakonia (Service to Others) Leitourgia (Liturgy & Sunday Eucharist)  Australian Technical College – Northern  Ministers Fraternity: Monthly lunch; Shared Adelaide: Monthly Board; OH&W Committee; Service St Columba; Anzac Day Service Chaplain Review Committee  Funerals: Requiem; Liturgy of Word; Mass –  Vandalism: 15 broken windows; 2 leadlight Week Days; Liturgy of Word + Communion  Bulletin: Liturgy/news; Stones/interest; P3  Parish Prayer Notices  Baptisms  Money Transfer to Bank  Sunday Liturgy W/E Masses in 2 Mass centres  Human Resources – Volunteers: Identify, invite, (St Ann’s & Thomas Moore) with 300-500 provide formation, support and allocate responsibilities into being stewards of service and ministry Marturia (Pastoral Witness, Outreach)  Human Resources – Salaried Staff: Recruit;  School Visits; Council meets; Services; School allocate responsibilities; define and measure events eg sports days, feast days, openings; accountabilities; provide ongoing formation and Men’s Breakfast review  Compliance Requirements: Identify criteria for compliance and systems required Kerygma & Didache (Faith Education and Spirituality of listening to the Word)  Legal Requirements: Awareness and application of legal requirements for the parish  Sacraments of Initiation: within Infant Baptism, RCIA and Family Faith Formation (FFF)  Parish Finance & Administration: Effective and Programmes efficient financial and administrative system for the viability and sustainability of the pastoral life  Infant Baptism. Was Pastoral Associate, then of the parish in compliance to Archdiocesan Pastoral Director, now Church Community and policy & Canon Law. Team approach.  Social & Fundraising: To enhance the sense of  RCIA - Mon nights with Priest and Pastoral belonging and ownership to a community Associate then with Peg Clarke (volunteers). Now Church Community and Team approach.  Information Technology: Establish and maintain sound communication and mode of operation  FFF (heavy priest/Pastoral Team involvement, now only at celebrations. Now Sunday based.)  Administration: Database management; Website; Emails administration; Notice boards; Central  Schools (before -heavy priest presence – Mass filing; Registers; Equipment and facilities; The within schools. Now formal meetings once a Bulletin term.)  Buildings and Grounds: Establish and maintain  Marriages (rare, one-off. Priest preparation. Now safe, secure and aesthetic surroundings and Deacon preparation) facilities  Funerals (prev. priest and pastoral associate, now  Resources – Manage parish resources to be deacon, occasionally priest supported by Sr accessible to ministry groups and parishioners: Margaret) Liturgical resources; Resource Centre (books, DVDs, music); Children’s Liturgy resources;  Adult Education (prev. not much beyond formal Music; Holy Goods; Book sales; Office supplies; external education. Now many internal Housekeeping & grocery supplies workshops and formation sessions)  Archives

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 39 Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 40 Pastoral Services coordinated by the Mercy Cluster schools

Leitourgia (Liturgy)  Shared Campus Activities  Staff Prayer  Prayer in the classroom  Whole School Liturgies  Class Liturgies  Prayer at the beginning of meetings with families  Communion Service  Special Prayer Services for special focus – eg for our own community members  Scripture studies  Staff Retreat  Liturgies that reflect the Liturgical Year: Feast Day Celebrations; Ash Wednesday; Assumption; Holy Week; Advent; Graduation

Kerygma/Didache (Faith Education and Spirituality)  Structured RE Curriculum - Crossways  Staff Meeting Focus  PD Development – Masters eg  Induction program  Involvement in Family Faith Formation  Symbols around the school  Program Achieve – Social Skills Program  Made in the Image of God – Human Sexuality Program  Curriculum Focus on outreach – eg Project Compassion  School Newsletter  Monday Morning Prayer  Liturgies  CEO Courses  Retreats  Transition Program – High School and from Kindergarten

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 41 Diakonia (Service to Others) Maturia (Pastoral Witness – Outreach)  Serving the Catholic Community through  Fundraising Education o St Vincent de Paul  Out of School Hours Care o Moore St  Special Educuation Programs o Project Compassion  English as a Second Language Programs o Charities Week  Indigenous Education o Earthquakes appeal and other charities  School Counsellor  Community Worker – Elizabeth  Community Worker – Elizabeth Community Community Connections. Connections: Play groups, Parent workshops  Counsellor  Support networks, referrals to other agencies  Transition into High School – support  Making education possible by restructuring fees,  Kindergarten visits  Parent Information  Fee reductions nights/interviews  Supporting children with special  Literacy courses for parents needs  Free Justice of the Peace Services  Supporting success stories (highlighting)  Buddies  Support in grieving situations –  Providing a Safe Environment e.g. Seasons for Growth  Year 7 Leaders – Committees  Fredrick Ozeman Foundation – 3 properties used to support families with  Speech Therapy accommodation  Music Lessons  Global/Local Events  CEO Consultants  Activities  Newsletters o Resthaven, The Granville Centre, Nursing  School tours/Enrolment Homes interviews o Making Soup  Morning Teas o Giving tree  Round Table/Trauma Training o Can drives  Carols Night o Blanket Appeal  Fete  Student Leadership  Sustainable Garden o Buddies Leaders  Parish Freezer o SRC  Shared Campus Activities o Sports Captains  Liaising between 3 Mercy o Year 7 Committees schools

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 42 Communio (Being in Communion)  Welcoming  Inclusive  Impossible new chance – Being Mercy  Parent involvement – reading, excursions etc  Communication – newsletter, web page, school board, Tammy  Celebration – Liturgies, Assemblies, Classroom  Buddies  St Mary Magdalene Chapel available to community  Opening up of Hall to community  Working together as a Mercy Cluster – through administration, liturgy, staff development and sporting activities.  RECs working together.  Aboriginal Elders Village

Paul Sharkey → Evaluation of the Pastoral Ministry in the Elizabeth Parish: October, 2009 43 Appendix B

P a s t o r a l M i n i s t r y E v a l u a t i o n

Appendix B: Parishioner Survey

Parishioner Survey 2008

for the Elizabeth Catholic Parish

Over the past few years several changes have occurred in the Parish of Elizabeth. One of these was the Archbishop’s appointment of a Pastoral Moderator whose primary ministry was to be elsewhere while moderating the pastoral life of the parish. The Archbishop also appointed a pastoral director. From these appointments many things occurred. A renewed parish team, parish forums from which grew a new parish vision, a pastoral council and finance council, to name a few.

After the first year of implementing this new pastoral ministerial scenario, the Archbishop appointed Mr Paul Sharkey from the Catholic Education Office, to undertake a formal review of the new ministry structures of the parish.

This survey is one of the ways that Paul is seeking to gain parishioner feedback. The Parish Pastoral Team and the Parish Pastoral Council would be grateful for your time in completing this survey.

We invite you to share your experience of the parish and what has happened over the past years. This will help us in our ongoing planning for future ministry directions and the life of the parish.

Please feel free to remain anonymous or to provide your name at the bottom of the survey if you are happy for us to contact you for clarification if needed. You will see that we have included some questions regarding gender and age. We hope these will help us to discern any patterns relating to these factors.

Please ask any members of the Parish Pastoral Team or Pastoral Council if you have any queries about the Survey.

Please feel free to attach further sheets of paper to this survey if you require more space to describe your experience.

Please tick the correct statement, where applicable, and supply the further information requested in the open ended questions. 1   . Are you male or female? Male Female

2 Please tick your age below: .  under 20 years  between 20 and 29  between 30 and 39  between 40 and 49

 between 50 and 59  between 60 and 69  between 70 and 79  80 or over

Appendix A → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 44 3 Do you live in the Elizabeth Parish? .  Yes – How many years______(yrs)  No (please go to Item 4)

4 Are you actively involved in the Elizabeth Parish? .  Yes  No (please go to Item 9)

5 How many years have you been actively involved in the Elizabeth Parish? . ______(years)

6 How often do you usually attend Mass in the Elizabeth parish? (please tick) . `  weekly  fortnightly  monthly  less often  rarely

7 How satisfied are you with the life of the parish at this time? (please circle below) .

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Extremely Extremely Dissatisfied Satisfied

8 If you were actively involved in the parish two years ago, how satisfied were you with the . life of the parish at that time? (If you were not actively involved, please go to Item 10.)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Extremely Extremely

Dissatisfied Satisfied

9 Were you actively involved in the Parish before the amalgamation of the Elizabeth North . and South parishes occurred?  Yes  No (please go to Item 14)

1 Which Elizabeth Parish were you previously active in? (please tick) 0  Elizabeth North Parish .  Elizabeth South Parish

Appendix A → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 45 1 Do you feel the parish has changed since the amalgamation? 1  Yes .  No (please go to Item 14)

1 How has the parish changed since the amalgamation? 2 . ______

______

1 Were you actively involved in the Parish before the current Pastoral Ministry team was 3 formed (with the appointment of a Priest Moderator and Deacon)? .  Yes  No (please go to Item 16)

1 How has the parish changed since the appointment of a Priest Moderator and Deacon? 4 . ______

______

1 Do you belong to any groups in the parish? 5  Yes .  No (please go to Item 20)

1 What parish groups do you belong to? 6 .

______

1 How would you describe your experience of being in these groups? 7 . ______

______

Appendix A → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 46 1 Are there any new groups that you would like to see established in the parish or changes to 8 existing groups that would make it easier for you to participate? . ______

______

1 Please describe any other experiences that you have of the life of the parish or its pastoral 9 services. . ______

______

2 The Parish Vision Statement and a diagram representing the various dimensions of parish 0 life are reproduced at the end of this Survey. Have you read the Parish Vision Statement . before? The Statement and diagram seek to reflect important elements of Parish Life. How well do they express what is most important about the Parish from your perspective? ______

______

2 Are there any changes that you would like to see in the Parish? 1  Yes .  No (if no, go to Item 24)

2 What changes would you like to see in the Parish? 2 . ______

______

Appendix A → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 47 2 How do you feel about being in the Parish at this time? 3 . ______

______

2 Please make any further comments that you feel would help us to understand your 4 experience of the Parish and where you would like it to head in the coming years. . ______

Please feel free to remain anonymous or to provide your name below if you are happy for us to contact you for clarification if needed.

Name: ______(optional)

Phone: ______(optional)

Appendix A → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 48 Appendix C Appendix C: Ministry Leader Survey

P a s t o r a l M i n i s t r y E v a l u a t i o n

Ministry Leader Survey

Please tick the correct statement, where applicable, and supply the further information requested in the open ended questions. 1 . What is your name?

2 What is your role in the parish? .

3 How long have you served in this role? .

4 What is rewarding for you in your role? .

5 What is Challenging for you in your role? .

6 What resources or changes would make it easier for you to work in your role? . `

7 The Parish Pastoral Team is endeavoring to work in a shared decision making model . with other leaders in the Parish. Please comment on your experience of the leadership of the parish pastoral Team.

8 How satisfied are you with the life of the parish at this time? (please circle below) .

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Extremely Extremely

Appendix B → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 49 9 If you were actively involved in the parish two years ago, how satisfied were you with . the life of the parish at that time? (If you were not actively involved, please go to Item 10)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Extremely Extremely

1 Were you actively involved in the Parish before the amalgamation of the Elizabeth 0 North and South parishes occurred? .  Yes  No (please go to Item 14)

1 Which Elizabeth Parish were you previously active in? (please tick) 1 .  Elizabeth North Parish  Elizabeth South Parish

1 Do you feel the parish has changed since the amalgamation? 2  Yes .  No (please go to Item 14)

1 How has the parish changed since the amalgamation? 3 .

1 Were you actively involved in the Parish before the current Pastoral Ministry team was 4 formed (with the appointment of a Priest Moderator and Deacon)? .  Yes  No (please go to Item 16)

1 How has the parish changed since the appointment of a Priest Moderator and Deacon? 5 .

1 Do you belong to any groups in the parish? 6  Yes .  No (please go to Item 20)

Appendix B → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 50 1 What parish groups do you belong to? 7 .

1 How would you describe your experience of being in these groups? 8 .

1 Are there any new groups that you would like to see established in the parish or changes 9 to existing groups that would make it easier for you to participate? .

2 Please describe any other experiences that you have of the life of the parish or its 0 pastoral services. .

2 The Parish Vision Statement and a diagram representing the various dimensions of 1 parish life is reproduced at the end of this Survey. Have you read the Parish Vision . Statement before? The Statement and diagram seek to reflect important elements of Parish Life. How well do they express what is most important about the Parish from your perspective?

2 Are there any changes that you would like to see in the Parish? 2  Yes .  No (if no, go to Item 24)

2 What changes would you like to see in the Parish? 3 .

2 How do you feel about being in the Parish at this time? 4 .

2 Please make any further comments that you feel would help us to understand your 5 experience of the Parish and where you would like it to head in the coming years. .

Please feel free to provide your phone number below if you are happy for us to contact you for clarification if needed.

Appendix B → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 51 Phone: ______

Appendix B → Elizabeth Parish – Interim Report: February 2009 52