At this weekend’s Masses in the Diocese of Gaylord, Bishop Jeffrey Walsh put an official notice of upcoming Diocesan church closings. He has named this process “Love. Communion. Mission.” The process has started; in his bulletin insert, he stated that he will shortly “begin drafting the diocesan pastoral plan. In January 2026, I will share it with priests for final feedback, and in February 2026, the plan will be announced publicly, with implementation beginning in July 2026.” He went on to state the following: “I anticipate some parish closures will occur, along with some altered parish structuring and Mass scheduling.”
A Long Time Coming
This “get ready for pain” announcement by Bishop Walsh has been expected by many of the faithful for a long time. On the Diocesan website, Bishop Walsh outlined major reasons for this drastic reshaping of the Diocese: decreased Mass attendance, baptisms, and weddings, and decreased vocations to the diocesan priesthood. Graphs showing decreased Mass attendance (which the COVD-19 diocesan reaction caused an acceleration of exodus of Church attendance – to be discussed below) and vocations are highlighted.
What’s Wrong With This?
Something very significant is missing from Bishop Walsh’s “plan”. We have discussed this on numerous occasions. At the heart of this situation is WHY? Why is the Diocese in this situation? What has led up to this moment? And also importantly, HOW should we respond?
Why is the Diocese of Gaylord shrinking?
Many reasons can be given, but just a few are necessary to get a bigger picture of the problem:
A lack of catechesis – for generations, Catholics in this Diocese and others have been poorly taught the basics of their faith or not taught at all. Fear and cultural norms kept people coming to Church, but what was the depth of their faith? A lack of well formed priests, especially after the 1960’s and 1970’s, led to a watering down of sermons, a withdrawal of priests and bishops teaching the faithful, and an overall collapse in any knowledge of the Catholic faith.
Scandals of the shepherds – The Diocese of Gaylord has been hammered by bishops who were just awful; Gaylord Diocesan Watch does not judge their souls, but the Bishops of the Diocese have at times behaved downright maliciously in their leadership and decision making actions. As an example, the disgraced Fr. Stilwell was not even temporarily removed from ministry despite credible allegations against him. Another example was Fr. Gardiner, who remained in ministry (despite the Diocese being made aware of his admission of sexual abuse of a minor) until the Michigan Secretary of State publicly noted his history in a published investigation of the Diocese. Other examples of sexual abuse of priests in the Diocese of Gaylord have been highlighted extensively on this website. Numerous other shortcomings of the Diocesan clergy have been noted. But it’s not even the abuses or mistakes that always get people fired up to walk away from the Church; it’s the response of the bishops to these tragedies which ruins trust and causes confusion, anger, sadness, and when one’s faith is shaky or compromised, can lead to that faith disappearing. In a related issue, a lack of appropriate vetting of seminarians has led to a crop of former priests. These priests who have walked away from their vocation seem to simply disappear; no more is heard of them. It’s as if they’ve walked off the job. Although it is understandable that they may have had some serious reasons for leaving, and they do have a right to their privacy, at the same time, the faithful who have foot the bill for their seminary training and salaries/benefits of priests (which all together amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars) also have a right to be given honest and thorough explanations for these men leaving one of the most important, if not most important, job a man can have.
In another example, the response of the Diocese to COVID-19 was just plain scandalous. Churches were closed, even before the State of Michigan closed its facilities. Churches were exempt from any legal action by the State of Michigan by the State of Michigan itself; despite this, at a time of national upheaval, the Church responded by shutting down. Then, after about two months, for no particular reason (other than maybe fears of financial ruin), the churches reopened with ridiculous rules (depending on the parish) such as mask wearing, social distancing, removal of Holy Water, and the banning of singing! In one parish, the priest wore a face shield on one side of the Communion rail but took it off when he was on the altar side of the Communion rail! The sacramental darkness from this time plus the absurd actions of clergy led to a 40% decline in Church attendance after churches reopened. Most of them never recovered.
Lack of holiness – this is a societal issue and is not the fault of Bishop Walsh or any clergy. It is the responsibility of the laity. Are we as faithful Catholics really faithful? Are we praying, sacrificing, sacramentally participating, and slogging through our lives as the Church instructs us to do? Or are we too steeped in the internet, social media, and selfishness to really make a difference? Are we too lazy and comfortable to do something we don’t like to do in order to advance the Kingdom of God? As a variety of famous clergy (such as Bishop Fulton Sheen) have said, true reform in the Church always comes from the laity.
How Should The Diocese Respond?
The response of Bishop Walsh seems to be one of resignment, of giving up and giving in. He stated some of the reasons for the Diocese shrinking, but he fails to take responsibility on behalf of the hierarchy for their share of this mess. Instead, we are given the bureaucratic, institutional response of positivity as he writes the following: “Together, as we look to the future, let’s do so with a firm sense of love, communion and mission.” Really? When many parishes have no baptisms or weddings planned for the foreseeable future? When the only Mass outside of a regular daily or weekend Mass is a funeral? Happy talk is disheartening and comes across as disingenuous; it destroys trust and respect for the Shepherd.
And on the flipside, where is the positivity to raise the banner of the Church and work to INCREASE vocations, to INCREASE Mass attendance, and to INCREASE the number of active Catholics in the Diocese? Although seemingly impossible, are these goals not reasonable to try and achieve? Could we not at least try and leave the rest to the will of God? The Bishop states he has held a series of listening sessions and engaged in a synodal approach to these issues. But is he listening to the heart of the Church and what it means to be Catholic?
Let us all pray and work harder to further the work of the Church.