Catholic Education and Social Services
From Archbishop: Inside the Power Structure of the American Catholic Church (San
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989) About the only thing I can get on the front page of the local newspaper is the
closure of a school. Because of federal budget cuts, we are opening shelters, soup kitchens, and we are
back to the things we did before the Roosevelt administration. Archdioceses run many programs, and it is impossible to examine all of them in this
book. This chapter will examine the two largest archdiocesan programs: education and
social services. The first is primarily a parish-based program, while the second is
usually run independently of the parishes. Both programs began as a response to the needs
of poor Catholic immigrants in a hostile environment. The programs grew in size and
quality and now compare favorably with similar programs run by state or private agencies.
They have also expanded their services beyond the Catholic community to the public at
large, especially the poor. Supporting and overseeing Catholic education and Catholic social services is an
important responsibility of the archbishop. It is a difficult job because these are large
and complex organizations, but it is made easier by the fact that these are usually the
most professionally organized and managed programs in the archdiocese. The superintendent
of schools and the director of Catholic Charities normally have more management training
and experience than other archdiocesan administrators. In addition, the programs have
secular counterparts from whom they can learn and to whom they can be compared. Although these programs are very different, the concerns of the archbishops are focused
on similar issues in both programs: governance, finances, and Catholicity. There are 7,659 Catholic elementary schools, 1,391 high schools, and 233 colleges and
universities in the United States. Most of the colleges and universities are run by
religious orders independent of the local bishop, but 60 percent of the high schools and
practically all of the elementary schools are the responsibility of the bishops. Although
the number of schools has declined since its peak in 1966, archdioceses still run some of
the largest school systems in the country, sometimes larger than any public school system
in their state. The Chicago archdiocese has 12 high schools with 5,409 students and 345
elementary schools with 116,509 students. While all archbishops view Catholic schools as the ideal, they also recognize that most
Catholic children are in public schools. There are almost 2 million children in Catholic
elementary schools and 708,000 in Catholic high schools, but there are 3 million
elementary students and 804,000 high school students in parish religious education
programs (CCD). Most of these students are taught by volunteers. These programs are judged
to be ineffective by 37 percent of the religious education directors who run them. A difficult problem facing any archbishop is how to stress the importance of Catholic
schools without seeming to denigrate the importance of religious education, and vice
versa. If he constantly harps on the importance of Catholic schools, those involved in
religious education will feel slighted. If he puts more resources into religious
education, the school people will feel he is getting ready to abandon Catholic schools. The archbishop is ultimately responsible for the education programs of the archdiocese.
He must be particularly concerned about governance (who decides what), finances (how much
does it cost and how is it paid for), and the Catholicity of the education programs. In his concern for governance, the archbishop must structure the archdiocesan offices
to deal with both Catholic schools and religious education programs. Most archdioceses
have a separate office for each. In some archdioceses (like Baltimore, Chicago,
Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, New York, Philadelphia, Washington) a vicar or
secretary for total education or Christian formation has under him a superintendent of
schools and an archdiocesan director of religious education. He might also have under him
the seminaries and offices for youth ministry, campus ministry, lay ministry, and family
ministry. The idea of one education department flowed from attempts to implement the bishops'
pastoral letter on education, "To Teach as Jesus Did," which stressed that there
was one educational mission. Sometimes there is a cooperative atmosphere between the
school and religious education offices, but sometimes each office goes its own way until a
conflict arises over scheduling, policy, or resources. Cooperation and communication are
further inhibited when the offices are in different buildings as in Louisville. The
secretary for education or the archbishop attempts to resolve disputes and improve
communication and cooperation between the two offices. Some superintendents of schools complain about the secretariat system because it places
someone between them and the archbishop. Because of their size, complexity, and
importance, Catholic schools have many problems that require the archbishop's attention.
Every superintendent wants direct access to make sure the archbishop understands his
position on school issues. "In our system, the schools are but one division of
many," complained the superintendent of schools in Newark who later quit. To
communicate with the archbishop "you fight up through the secretary of education,
then he fights up through the vicar general and chancellor. The layers of bureaucracy can
fog some of the thoughts that are given." To alleviate this problem, some secretaries
for education will bring along the superintendent when they see the archbishop about a
school issue. In some archdioceses (like Atlanta, Denver, Dubuque, and St. Paul), the secretary may
also be the superintendent of schools. In small dioceses with limited resources, the
religious education office may simply be one or more persons who also deal with the
religion curriculum in the school office. This is unsatisfactory to those involved in
religious education who fear they will get short shrift despite the fact that they teach
more Catholic children than do the Catholic schools. None of these organizational structures is ideal. They work only if the people get
along with each other and respect their separate ministries. If they don't, someone,
either the archbishop or his vicar, will have to bridge the gap or replace the people. Most archdioceses have a board of education that advises the archbishop on educational
policy. Some board promoters want them to be independent like public school boards, but in
most cases board proposals cannot take effect without the approval of the archbishop.
Although a board is technically only consultative, the archbishop may delegate to it much
authority by, in fact, rarely overruling it. Confrontations are rare since the bishop
keeps control over board membership and influences board proposals as they are being
developed. Some archbishops take an active role as chairman of the board of education, but
most do not attend their meetings but leave them to their vicar for education or their
superintendent of schools. The education office staffs the board, preparing agenda,
reports, and minutes. It also acts as liaison between the board and the archbishop.
Archdioceses with successful boards tend to have training programs to educate board
members to their role. Some archdioceses (like Atlanta, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Denver, Indianapolis,
Milwaukee, Mobile, Omaha) have one board for both schools and religious education, while
others have separate boards for each. While a number of vicars and archbishops praise the
joint boards for providing a comprehensive overview of educational policy, superintendents
of schools and archdiocesan directors of religious education often complain that they do
not get enough time with the joint boards. After trying boards of total education, the archdioceses of Kansas City and Seattle set
up separate school boards. The board of total education "was an unwieldy board,"
according to the Kansas City superintendent of schools. "You really didn't get a lot
accomplished and the schools were always accused of taking all the time." "The needs were so different," reports the Seattle superintendent. "The
time being spent, particularly on school crises, was so out of proportion that they chose
to have different boards." Joint boards devote most of their time to school issues
because they are constantly pressing. Boards have been active in drawing up or revising educational policies and procedures.
They provide a good sounding board to give community reaction to ideas or questions from
the vicar for education or the superintendent of schools. Sometimes they are involved in
the opening, consolidating, or closing of schools. Often they are concerned about
personnel policies and finances: school office budget, teachers' salaries, tuition, and
fund-raising. Some boards also serve as appeal panels for fired teachers or principals. The religious education office oversees and encourages the religious education program
in the parishes. Its small staff usually divides up the archdiocese by regions or by grade
levels. One or more persons may be responsible for training catechists and/or supervising
directors of religious education in parishes. There are an estimated five thousand
professional religious education directors in the United States (defined as a full-time
employee with a master's degree in theology or religious education with at least three
years experience). Most (83 percent) are women. In some archdioceses (like Baltimore, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Omaha, Mobile,
Washington), the religious education office is responsible for both the parish
catechetical program and the school religion program. In other archdioceses, the school
office has its own religious education staff. Having the religious education experts in
one office is thought to be more efficient, but some school officials do not like this
approach. "You isolate religion out of the curriculum, make it something that happens
in the schools but not a total part of the school," says Rev. Stephen O'Brien of the
National Catholic Education Association. "Secondly, the superintendent of schools
doesn't have authority over the religion curriculum, which is bad because that is in his
critical area." In Baltimore, the religious education office develops programs for the schools, but the
superintendent implements them. The religious education staff dealing with schools sits in
on meetings of the school office and provides lines of communication between the two. The
superintendent and principals are responsible for the entire curriculum in the schools,
and if they opposed a religious curriculum plan, it would not be adopted. The Baltimore
superintendent thinks that their system works well although he was worried at the
beginning. "It's the way we relate to each other that makes it work," he says.
"We meet every two weeks and share everything. Everyone supports each other. When you
have a problem, they are there to help you." Some archdiocesan offices of religious education (like Washington) have broad authority
to determine who can be hired as directors of religious education in parishes, what
training is necessary for catechists, and what texts can be used. For example, most
archbishops require that the textbooks have imprimaturs in order to ensure their
orthodoxy. A few also require that the parish director of religious education have a
degree in theology or religious education. Some also require that catechists go through a training program and become certified.
"Unless the catechists are trained," explains the director of religious
education in Miami, "you have someone teaching Trent, another teaching Vatican I, and
another teaching Vatican II, or Vatican III!" Often there are levels of
certification, one for beginners and the last being a master catechist who helps other
catechists. In other archdioceses, the religious education office makes recommendations, but the
pastor does what he wants. Sometimes strict requirements are not imposed because so few
qualified people are available. In archdioceses with few Catholic colleges, requiring a
degree in theology or religious education for parish directors of religious education may
be unrealistic. In addition, there is a limit to what can be demanded of volunteer
catechists. Training programs and workshops for catechists are provided, but not
mandatory. Most religious education offices act as a clearinghouse or placement service for people
interested in getting jobs as parish directors of religious education. Some archdiocesan
religious education offices interview and screen people who want to be parish directors of
religious education. Most offices have a resource center with books, films, videos, and
other teaching materials, or they may share a resource center with the school office.
"We have 350 video tapes," reports the director of education in St. Paul.
"The smallest parish can have the best speakers, people like [the Scripture scholar]
Ray Brown." Religious education offices constantly try to get pastors and parishes to take
religious education more seriously. Some pastors cut corners by hiring young,
inexperienced people as youth ministers and directors of religious education. Adult
religious education is often nonexistent, although the RCIA program for adult catechumens
has been very successful in a number of archdioceses. Some religious education offices
also run, or help parishes run, sacramental preparation programs (pre-Cana, pre-Jordan). A delicate job of archdiocesan religious education offices is to mediate disputes
between pastors and directors of religious education. Disputes can occur over the program
itself, but also over salaries, benefits, responsibilities, and authority. When the chips
are down, the pastor almost always wins, but the office tries to defuse disputes by
facilitating communications and understanding. Job descriptions and model contracts are
drawn up by the office for use by pastors and parish education committees. Sometimes conflicts arise between those running the religious education and those
running the school. The classrooms may be used after school for the religious education
program. The sacramental preparation programs for both groups of children must be
coordinated. And if a religion teacher in the school is also the director of religious
education in the parish, he may be getting contradictory instructions from different
bosses. Conflict can also occur over parish funds. The director of religious education in
Louisville notes that "we have had parishes that were happy with the DRE's [directors
of religious education], really profited from them, but it came to the point where they
said, `We can't afford it.' I blame it mainly on the financial drain that the schools have
put on the parish." Improving religious education usually means spending more money.
If the parish is pouring lots of money into the parish school, resources may be limited.
The pastor has to referee these disputes, but sometimes the archdiocesan offices get
involved. Religious educators can also be caught in the middle in areas that are disputed in the
church today. According to the Denver secretary of education, they "get caught
between what parents want to do, what the parents experienced, what the current theology
is saying to them, what canon law might be saying, what Rome might be saying, what the
bishops might be saying, all of which might be somewhat different." In every archdiocese, schools are one of the largest and most complex ministries.
Somehow, policies have to be determined and implemented on a wide range of issues
affecting students, faculty, and administrators: admissions, expulsion, tuition, hiring,
firing, salaries, textbooks, curriculum, insurance, maintenance. The power of the various
actors (archdiocesan board of education, vicar for education, superintendent of schools,
unions, principal, pastor, parish council, parish education committee, teachers) are
different in different archdioceses. "In spite of its image as a hierarchical
organization with universally enforced norms, the church's policies and practices of
governance and accountability are neither uniformally defined nor universally practiced in
Catholic schools," reports Lourdes Sheehan, executive director of the National
Association of Boards of Education at the National Catholic Educational Association.
"What really happens in schools depends on personalities, policies and politics at
the local level." The school office, headed by the superintendent of schools, is usually one of the
larger offices in the archdiocese, but it is always smaller and less powerful than a
comparable public school office. The Denver superintendent of schools has a staff of three
people although a local school district of similar size (13,000 students) has a central
office staff of fifty. Normally the office will be divided in two parts, one dealing with primary schools and
one with high schools. Some (like Detroit, Los Angeles, New Orleans) have staffs that are
responsible for schools in different parts of the archdiocese. In Indianapolis, the
superintendent of schools explains that each of her thirteen staff members has a number of schools under their jurisdiction. They go out
and interview the principals of all our schools, go over their goals and objectives for
the year, try to establish contact. If the principal needs some consultation, this person
is the one that they call on. In Indianapolis, most of the thirteen staff persons also have a curriculum specialty. A
school office may also have persons dealing with finances (although this is usually
handled by the finance office), government relations, and staff development. The school
office will also act as a clearinghouse or placement service for people seeking jobs as
principals or teachers. Archdiocesan school offices have less power over parish schools than their public
school counterparts have over public schools. But some archdiocesan school offices have
more power than others. Determining at what level decisions should be made is not easy.
"For tuition, teachers' salaries, hiring, selection of books, for the whole range of
school issues," explains the Washington superintendent of schools, "there is no
magic point where you can draw the line and say, `Everything on this side of the line is
parochial and everything on this side is diocesan.'" Some archdioceses are more centralized than others. When control is decentralized,
superintendents speak of a federation or "system of schools" as opposed to a
"school system," which is more centralized. In a centralized system, the
approval of the superintendent of schools would be required for the hiring of a principal.
School policies, procedures, curriculum, textbooks, and testing would be mandated.
Officials from the school office would visit and evaluate schools. In a decentralized system, the school office staff is small. For example, in Cincinnati
the office has only two persons. The pastor hires whom he wants as principal, with or
without consultation with the parish school board. "Guidelines" might be issued
by the school office, but the pastors and principals can ignore them. "It is to their
advantage to follow the guidelines," explains the director of education in St. Paul,
"because the guidelines can be on very difficult and technical matters, and they need
the help." Various factors push archdioceses toward centralizing power while other factors push
toward decentralization. Decentralization is encouraged by the principle of subsidiarity
that calls for decisions and work to be done at the lowest possible level. Pastors,
principals, and local boards of education are presumed to know their schools and want what
is best for them. Without their active involvement, the schools will not survive. Nor are
school offices sufficiently staffed to govern schools directly. Normally, the
superintendent is not trying to take control away from the parish staff but trying to get
them to take their responsibilities more seriously. The involvement of the laity on local school boards has also been a decentralizing
influence. Although these boards are advisory, participation brings a sense of ownership
that is hard to override. In addition, to the extent that parish schools are locally
financed, they have a great deal of autonomy. Pastors pay the bills and therefore control
their schools. Most observers agree "the important decisions regarding personnel and
finances are largely made at each individual school; the diocesan superintendent of
schools plays a lesser role than the public school counterpart in that position." On the other hand, many factors, such as the hierarchical structure of the church,
encourage centralization. Government laws and regulations (everything from fire
regulations to sex discrimination laws) tend to encourage centralization, because the
school office will act to make sure the schools comply. If the schools are accredited,
policies and procedures are more likely to be uniform and supervised by the school office.
Archdioceses also tend to play a larger role in regional or consolidated schools, because
there is no one parish to take responsibility. And when faced with difficulties, the
pastor or principal often turn to the school office or archbishop for help. Schools with
financial problems ask for archdiocesan funds, and outside funding means more outside
control. If a number of schools have financial problems, the archdiocese will likely
mandate planning and budgetary procedures. And when conflicts arise, someone often complains to the school office or the
archbishop. Angry parents will write the archbishop. A fired teacher or principal will
appeal to the archdiocese. School conflicts can also develop into law suits and insurance
claims for which the archdiocese may be liable. As a result, archdiocesan policies and
procedures are developed to protect the archdiocese on matters like hiring, contract
renewal, firing, liability, etc. Often pastors and principals welcome archdiocesan
guidelines on complex and controversial issues because they relieve them of the
responsibility and the burden of working out their own policies and procedures. The more
complex the area, the more likely the central office has more expertise than the local
school. The replacement of religious by laity has also encouraged more centralization. In the
past, religious communities saw to the training, selection, and supervision of sisters
working as teachers and principals in parish schools. Local pastors and school boards do
not usually have the expertise to carry out these responsibilities for their lay
faculties. Concern about the qualifications and Catholicity of lay principals and teachers
has increased the archdiocesan involvement in their selection, in-service training, and
supervision. Also encouraging greater centralization are archdiocesan school boards. After examining
an issue, a board is apt to recommend an archdiocesan program or policy. Superintendents
recognize that a recommendation from the board carries more weight than one that simply
comes from their office. What superintendents and archbishops might be afraid to do on
their own because of local opposition, they can more easily do on the recommendation of
the archdiocesan board of education. The primary function of the school office is to supervise and support the schools'
academic and religious programs. Most archdioceses have curriculum experts who can help
teachers in curriculum development and the choice of textbooks. The school office
primarily works with the principals in the hopes that they will then lead their schools.
In some archdioceses, school officials visit and evaluate schools. In others (like
Indianapolis, Santa Fe, Washington), the schools are visited by accrediting teams from the
state or private school associations as a means of guaranteeing their academic quality.
Most superintendents are happy with this arrangement. But in some localities, the
relations between the Catholic school office and public school administrators are not
good. "We are fighting with the state," reports the Omaha superintendent of
schools. "They make life difficult every chance they have. They act like the sooner
we close, the better." Even where the relationship is fairly good, state accreditation means that the Catholic
schools must follow the state's philosophy of education. "If you become accredited,
you must meet their criteria," explains the superintendent of schools in Denver,
"and their criteria don't always fit into what we might perceive to be in the best
interest of our schools." For example, a state may require teachers to be locally
certified even though they already are certified in another state. This is especially a
problem for religious who during their lives teach in a number of states. The school office pays special attention to the religion curriculum. As with religious
education programs, archbishops require that religion textbooks have imprimaturs to ensure
their orthodoxy. While one adult text (Christ Among Us) had its imprimatur removed
at the insistence of the Vatican, texts for children have been for the most part
noncontroversial, except when they deal with human sexuality. Some conservative Catholics
have objected to any sex education in Catholic schools. More problematic are the teachers. In the past, the bishops simply trusted the nuns to
teach orthodox doctrine at a time when there was little dissent in the church. Today, many
who teach religion in Catholic schools are lay. A few have theological degrees, but others
have little or no formal training in theology, especially in archdioceses (like Oklahoma
City) with few Catholic colleges. A few archbishops are concerned about the theology the
teachers may have learned at some Catholic colleges, but mostly they are concerned about
teachers who have limited knowledge. Often the school office or the religious education
office will run workshops and training programs for religion teachers. Some archdioceses
require teachers to be certified as catechists. The issue of Catholicity goes beyond a simple concern for orthodoxy. Sometimes it is
simple neglect. One religious education official describes visiting a school with the
archdiocesan superintendent. After sitting in on classes they met with the principal. I said to her point blank, "If I didn't see a crucifix in each classroom, I would
never know this was a Catholic school." You know what her answer was? "I know
it." She had been principal for five years. She walked into a bad situation facultywise, so
her emphasis for five years has been to build up her faculty in everything but religion. So I looked at her and said, "So you have five groups of children who are not
Catholic out in the community now." "Oh, but I am going to get to it this year." When we walked out the door, the superintendent and I wondered if we should padlock it. Religious educators speak of the school as a community of faith. Besides the academic
instruction, liturgy, prayer, and Christian service are part of the faith community's
life. Since the key person in the school for making this happen is the principal, many
archdioceses require that principals be practicing Catholics because to be a leader of a
faith community takes more than academic and administrative competence. For the same
reason, some superintendents are reluctant to hire as principals qualified persons who
have spent all of their lives working in public schools. Some superintendents also organize workshops to indoctrinate new teachers with the
philosophy and theology of Catholic education. A number of dioceses use programs developed
by the National Catholic Education Association. "We have 5,500 teachers, and there is
always a turnover of teachers," explains the superintendent of schools in New York.
"We have to constantly educate them to the purpose of Catholic schools." One
archdiocese requires that all teachers be certified catechists even if they do not teach
religion. The Catholicity issue is more complex in inner-city schools where a majority of the
black students are non-Catholic. Catholic schools are the most successful evangelizing
tool available to the church in the black community. At the same time, the schools try to
respect the religious freedom of non-Catholic parents and their children. Most schools
teach the Catholic faith to both Catholic and non-Catholic students. Other denominations
are treated with respect, and grades are based on knowledge and not belief. Another recent issue confronting Catholic schools is what to do with unmarried pregnant
students and teachers. The traditional response was to throw them out of school because
they have been involved in activity unacceptable to Catholic teaching. According to this
view, for the school to do nothing would be to condone the activity. On the other hand,
some now argue that such policies encourage abortions by punishing those who do not have
an illegitimate child aborted. A major problem confronting Catholic schools is financing. Although Catholic schools
are run more cheaply than public schools, they constantly have trouble making ends meet.
"Our school budget--for parochial schools, twenty-nine diocesan high schools, and the
seminary--runs $105 to $110 million each year," explains Cardinal Krol. "So we
are a bit busy trying to meet that budget." Some archdiocesan school offices (like
New Orleans) review and approve parish school budgets. Usually school budgets are not
examined at the archdiocesan level unless the parish or school is requesting archdiocesan
funds (see chapter 5). Once a school is built and paid for, the major cost of running a school is labor:
salaries and other personnel costs amount to over 75 percent of a school's budget. Other
big items would be insurance and utilities. Catholic schools in the past were heavily
subsidized by the low-cost labor of religious women. The decline in the number of sisters
has necessitated hiring lay teachers, who cost much more than the sisters ever did.
Increased employment opportunities for women also mean schools must pay more to attract
good teachers. In addition, the church is becoming aware that it must practice what it
preaches about just salaries. But the higher the salaries, the higher the cost of running
the schools. Teachers salaries are sometimes set by the school and sometimes by the archdiocese. In
a few archdioceses (like New York, Philadelphia, and San Francisco), high school teachers'
salaries are set through collective bargaining between the archdiocese and the teachers'
union. When the school sets the salary, the archdiocese often offers optional guidelines. Salaries are set with one eye on public school salaries and one eye on tuition.
Catholic school teachers are almost always paid less than public school teachers. Some
Catholic schools pay 90 percent or better of the public scale, but others pay much less.
In New Orleans, some inner-city schools were paying 50 percent of the city scale. "If
we can keep our teachers in this diocese at 75 percent to 80 percent of the public school
system," says the New Orleans superintendent of schools, "I think we are in
excellent shape." The Washington archdiocese pays teachers only about half of what
public school teachers receive. As a result, 40 percent of the lay teachers have less than
three years experience as teachers. Most teachers prefer teaching in parochial schools. But where the pay differential is
too wide, the parochial schools lose their more experienced teachers to the public
schools. "Unless we do something about the teachers' salaries, we are going to lose
all of our schools anyway," says the superintendent of schools in Washington.
"The simplest way to handle the teachers' salary issue is to charge the parents more
money in tuition." Tuition is a major revenue source for Catholic schools, accounting for 43 percent of
their revenues, up from 39 percent twelve years earlier. To increase revenues, a school
must attract more students or raise tuition. There is great reluctance to increase tuition
charges. "If we charge the parents more money in tuition," says the Washington
superintendent, "we run into the problem of becoming elite and driving people
away." If tuition increases cause enrollments to decline, then revenues will fall.
"If the enrollment in an eight-room school is less than 150," explains the
director of school planning in Washington, "it is going to be in financial
trouble." Proponents of higher tuition point out that some parents pay more for child care than
Catholic schools charge for tuition. "People will tell you how when they went to
school, tuition was $20 a family," recounts the superintendent of schools in Detroit.
"Yet they will pay $1,600 for preschool at commercial day care centers and then
complain because the Catholic first grade is $600 or $700." Many poor parents are willing to pay high tuitions to keep their children in a Catholic
school. In the archdiocese of Washington, inner-city parents formed committees to recruit
students and to collect tuition from nonpaying parents. They realized that without these
measures their schools would close. Most parishes are able to subsidize their schools with money from the Sunday
collection. Nationwide, 46 percent of the school budget is covered by a parish subsidy. A
school with children from a neighboring parish will sometimes get help from that parish,
too. The parishes with the biggest collections, however, tend to have affluent
parishioners who could afford the tuition anyway. The small collection of a poor
inner-city parish will be of little help to its school. How much money a parish should give its school is a debated issue. The more money going
to the school, the less money is available for other parish programs. In addition, if a
parish charges significantly less tuition than a neighboring parish, families with school
children will transfer to that parish. A few archdioceses (like Mobile, Milwaukee, and
Newark) put a limit on the percentage of the school budget that can come from the parish
or on the percentage of the parish budget that can go to the school. On the other hand,
school officials point out that a good portion of this money would not come to the parish
if it did not have a school. For example, parents would not run fund-raising activities
like bingo if their children were not in the school. And some parishes require parents to
"donate" a certain amount to the church if their children are in the school. The archdiocese, if it has money, can also be a source of funds for parish schools, as
was explained in chapter 5. Archdiocesan money can sometimes keep a borderline school
open, but a school in serious trouble will eventually close. "We make a huge effort
to keep open all of our inner-city schools," says Archbishop Hannan of New Orleans,
"because the black ministers and the blacks in general have told us that is the
greatest contribution we can make to them." But some archdiocesan officials wonder
how long Catholics will be willing to support inner-city schools whose black students are
predominantly non-Catholic. Schools with Hispanic students stress the Catholic character
of their students when competing with black schools for archdiocesan funds. In most cases, parish and archdiocesan subsidies are simply given as grants to the
school for general operations or capital improvements. Some school finance experts argue
that subsidizing operating expenses is inefficient. They believe that the schools should
charge full cost for tuition and then use these subsidies for scholarships. Under this
system, those who can afford it will pay full cost; those who cannot, would be eligible
for scholarships. Although this may be an intellectually rational system, politically it is hard to sell.
"Just the words full cost really can scare a lot of people," explains the
superintendent of schools in Baltimore. Wealthier parents, who also contribute to the
parish, object to significant increases in tuition. Middle-class parents complain of the
humiliation of applying for financial aid. School finance experts note, however, that
these same parents have no qualms about applying for financial aid when their children go
to college. So far, archdioceses have been more successful implementing such programs on
the high school level rather than in elementary schools. Finally, state and local governments may be sources of funds for parochial schools,
although Supreme Court decisions have made this very difficult. Typically the funds have
been given for school lunches, secular textbooks, transportation, nurses, guidance
counseling, remedial mathematics and English, bilingual education and state-mandated
testing programs. In New Mexico, accredited Catholic schools receive about $5,000 each for
textbooks from the state. The New York archdiocesan schools received about $3 million a
year (mostly for English as a second language and guidance) until the Supreme Court ruled
that these programs could not be run in the Catholic schools but had to be done off
campus. Schools get into financial trouble when enrollments decline and tuition income falls.
"We don't close any schools," explains Archbishop May of St. Louis, "but
people do when they no longer send their kids to them. If there is no enrollment, we have
to consolidate or close that school. That wasn't our decision, it was the decision of the
parents." Especially hard hit have been rural and inner-city schools where population changes
have meant fewer school-age children, fewer Catholics, or fewer parents who can afford the
tuition. Sometimes a change in school administration or policy makes the schools less
attractive to the parents. Whatever the cause, unless the enrollment decline is reversed,
the school will become a bigger drain on parish and archdiocesan finances. Many archdiocesan school officials believe that with proper leadership no school need
close unless there are simply no children in the neighborhood. "Population and
enrollment should be the basic reason why schools are closed or merged," says the
superintendent of schools in Washington. "But finances and personalities often get
tossed into the ring. Even the poorest of schools have created ways to continue where
there has been a will and enthusiasm to do it." He found that schools are closed
"because a principal comes in who can't deal with people, and the parents decide they
are going to switch rather than fight." Others blame school closings on pastors and
principals unwilling to deal with the financial and enrollment aspects of the school. If the enrollment decreases, the financial viability and the academic quality of the
school suffers and the school may have to close or merge with a neighboring school.
Closing schools is very controversial. Some archdiocesan officials consider it even more
traumatic than closing a parish. The decision to close a school very often leads to
picketing the archbishop by parents, students, and alumni of the school. If the school is
in the inner city, its closure will be decried as another example of the church's lack of
concern for blacks and Hispanics. When Archbishop O'Connor arrived in New York, he found a
number of schools that were waiting for approval to close. He refused because he did not
want to become known as the archbishop who closed schools his first year in office. No school closes without the approval of the archbishop, but sometimes the situation is
so desperate by the time it reaches his desk that the decision is inevitable. In the
worst-case scenario, the first sign of trouble comes in the spring when a new pastor
requests a subsidy to cover a large deficit for the current school year. This comes as a
complete surprise to the archbishop, because the finance office is not monitoring the
parish and school finances. An examination of the parish and school books reveals that the
previous pastor consumed the parish savings to keep the school open. In addition, he
postponed maintenance to cut costs. The school building needs major repairs, and the
Environmental Protection Agency wants the asbestos removed from the school at once.
Meanwhile, early registration shows a significant decline in enrollment for the coming
year. The pastor thinks that the situation is hopeless and wants to cut his losses and
close the school immediately. His announcement comes as a surprise to the faculty and
parents who were not consulted or kept informed about the situation. If the school is to
close, the decision should be made quickly so that students and faculty can make plans for
the coming year. If the school and finance offices are monitoring the parish and the school, the
archbishop should not be surprised by a last-minute crisis. Rather he will be faced with a
situation that gradually gets worse. If the pastor and principal are consulting and
sharing information with the parents and other parish leaders, they too will be aware of
the problems. Some archdioceses have an involved process that must be followed before a
school can be closed: Open hearings must be held; the pastor, parish council, and school
board must concur in the decision; neighboring parishes must agree; the decision must be
announced a year in advance; and every effort must be made to find other Catholic schools
that will accept the students. Such procedures do not eliminate the pain, but they do make
the decision-making process more open. But an open process can also have negative effects. Publicly discussing the problems of
a school and its possible closure discourages donations and encourages parents to put
their children in other schools. "The word, `viability study,' uttered no louder than
a whisper in the bottom of a cellar in an inner room was enough to kill the enrollment in
any school," reports the superintendent of schools in Newark. As a result, she
instituted a three-year process requiring all schools to forecast and plan their futures. Often the decision is not to close a school but to consolidate it with a neighboring
school. This strengthens the financial and academic viability of both schools by combining
their enrollments. Consolidating or clustering schools (as was done in Baltimore's inner
city) requires significant archdiocesan planning. Ideally, the best building at the most
central location becomes the consolidated school, but preferences of pastors and
parishioners and local finances play an important role. The problem with consolidated schools, according to the superintendent of schools in
Detroit, is that "everybody's school is nobody's school." The governance and
financing of a consolidated school requires a clear understanding of the relationship of
the two parishes to the school: what students can attend, what do they pay, how much do
the parishes subsidize the school, what say do the pastors have in hiring and school
policy, and how are disputes settled? Unless there is a clear, written agreement on these
issues, problems will arise. For example, the pastor will say that the student may live in
his parish, but the parents don't come to church or don't contribute. He therefore refuses
to subsidize the student's education. Frequently troubles arise when new pastors arrive on
the scene who were not involved in the original consolidation. Everyone agrees that the principal and pastor are the two key people in a parochial
school. The most helpful thing that an archbishop can do for a parish school is appoint as
pastor a priest who is sympathetic to Catholic education, as was discussed in chapter 6.
"I get really nervous in the spring before the priests' appointments until I know who
is going to be in those schools," confesses the superintendent of schools in Omaha.
"As the pastor, so goes the school. You can see a turnaround over night, positively
or negatively." The other key person is the principal. "If you have a key administrator,"
explains the New Orleans superintendent of schools, "a good leader, who knows what
Catholic education is about, knows how to work with the finances, knows how to work with
the local school board and work with the pastor--if he or she has those qualities, we are
off to a good start." Principals are appointed in many different ways. The principal of a regional school
(with students from two or more parishes) will often be hired by the school's board. If a
religious community has responsibility for the school, the community will appoint the
principal from among its members. If a parish school is not the responsibility of a
religious community, the pastor will appoint the principal under whatever guidelines are
set by the archdiocese. The restrictions range from practically none to the requirement
that the superintendent of schools approve the appointment, as happens in New Orleans.
Sometimes the archdiocese requires that the principal have certain credentials or
experience. The pastor's choice might be restricted to a list of approved candidates who
have been screened by the school office, as is the case in New York. Or the archdiocese
may require that the parish board of education be involved in interviewing and selecting
the principal. Even if he is free to select whomever he wants, a pastor will sometimes ask the school
office for help in hiring a principal. The school office usually has a list of people
looking for positions as principals. In addition, it can advise him on ways of proceeding
that will protect him from making a bad choice. However the principal is chosen, he or she
and the pastor must be able to work together for the good of the school. If there is
conflict between the principal and the pastor, the school office can act as mediator, but
ultimately the pastor will win unless he is moved or the archbishop intervenes. An archbishop cannot spend a great deal of time running the school system or the
religious education programs, but he needs to keep informed on Catholic education because
the tough decisions and problems eventually end up on his desk. The religious education
director of Miami explains the things he would take the archbishop: Certainly the opening or closure of any program, the financial status of programs, the
trends in programs, the Catholicity part, any problems that might arise, any community
involvements. On the other hand, the archbishop might come with various requests for
involvement of the department in some area, whether it be in pro-life or in the drug
scene. On the school side, opening, closing, or consolidating schools must always have an
archbishop's approval as would any major fund drive or borrowing. Schools with financial
difficulties or conflicts will be brought to his attention. Major changes in policy
concerning finances, personnel, or the religious character of schools will need his
approval. "There is no clear-cut rule as to what goes to the archbishop,"
explains the St. Louis superintendent of schools. But any problem "that could either
cause media attention or an upheaval in the parish would be appropriate for the archbishop
to know and not be caught by surprise." When he does turn his attention to education, an archbishop can have a tremendous
impact. Although many schools are closing, some archbishops (Hannan of New Orleans and
Strecker of Kansas City, KS) are opening new high schools. Others encourage pastors in new
suburban parishes to open elementary schools. But often the initiative must come from the
parishioners. "If there are enough people wanting a new school and willing to assume
the responsibilities," said one archbishop, "then we will back them up."
Even in closing schools, archbishops can help by encouraging planning so that the closure
of one school benefits others. Depending on the funds available to them, archbishops can also help schools
financially. "Szoka is very strong for schools," reports the superintendent of
schools in Detroit. "He has put a ton of money into schools." A number of
archbishops (Bernardin, Hickey, O'Connor, Sheehan) have attempted to raise money for
endowments for Catholic schools although these efforts have not yet had a significant
impact. Archbishops can also make decisions that will cost schools money. Shortly after
arriving in New York, Cardinal O'Connor committed the archdiocese to raising teachers'
salaries. The day-to-day operations of the schools will be left to others, but the archbishop
needs to approve questions of policy. For example, although he would not be involved in
the hiring of principals (except for diocesan high schools in a small archdiocese), he
would approve the policies and procedures governing the hiring and firing of principals.
Any change in policy that will be mandated will be approved by him, especially if it
affects the relationship of the pastor to the school. Often these policies are recommended
by school boards whose meetings the archbishop rarely attends, although he usually
controls who is appointed to the board. One of the most important positions filled by an archbishop is that of superintendent
of schools. He needs to find an experienced, hardworking but diplomatic person whose
vision of Catholic schools is similar to his. The superintendent is the key person for the
archbishop in working with the archdiocesan board of education, pastors, and principals. The superintendent of schools often comes to the archbishop for help and advice in
dealing with pastors, especially if the superintendent is not a priest. The archbishop
knows the priests better than the superintendent, and the archbishop's power of persuasion
is greater. "If I have a principal problem, I handle it right here," explains
the Atlanta superintendent of schools, who is a religious woman. But if it is a pastor problem, I take it to him because I do not want to get caught in
the middle between him and one of his priests. He will ask me some hard questions, and he
will say, "I will talk to Father for you." I have had many things cured
there--in one instance, the removal of a pastor. Finally, the archbishop can support Catholic education by his presence at liturgies,
graduations, workshops, and conferences. Archdiocesan educators will invite him to speak
at important meetings of teachers, catechists, and parents. Articulating a vision of
Catholic education in homilies and speeches is seen as part of the teaching role for the
archbishop. Simply thanking and encouraging teachers in their work is also important. The Catholic church runs innumerable social service programs for the poor, sick,
hungry, homeless, handicapped, emotionally disturbed, unemployed, teenage runaways, unwed
mothers, battered women, abused children, refugees, alcoholics, drug addicts, prisoners,
victims of AIDS and others in need. The variety of programs is extraordinary. Some
programs occur in large institutions like hospitals, nursing homes, orphanages, and
low-cost housing units. Others are run out of neighborhood centers, shelters, foster
homes, group residences, day care centers, and parishes. Some programs give emergency
assistance at a time of crisis, others attempt long-term solutions to problems through
counseling, education, and preventive services. When added together the Catholic church is the biggest nongovernmental provider of
social services in the United States. In 1987, the 646 Catholic hospitals treated over 40
million patients. In 1986, Catholic Charities agencies provided services to 8.7 million
individuals including 2.6 million families. The largest number of people (5.2 million
individuals and 1.4 million families) received emergency and food services. Counseling was
provided to over 700,000 individuals and 300,000 families. Over 240,000 individuals and
90,000 families received refugee resettlement and immigration services. Over 100,000
individuals and 50,000 families were helped by pregnancy services, and almost 4,000
adoptions were processed. Support services (day care, respite care, home health care,
homemaker services) were provided to over 600,000 individuals and over 200,000 families.
The agencies provided housing services to over 180,000 individuals and 119,000 families.
Out-of-home care services were provided for 182,000 individuals (of whom almost 150,000
were children) and almost 120,000 families. Some of these programs are run by professionals, others by volunteers and most by a mix
of the two. Of the over 170,000 individuals providing services in Catholic Charities
agencies, 79 percent are volunteers and 15 percent are paid staff. Over half the
volunteers have some specialized training. Of the paid staff, 60 percent are professional,
12 percent are managerial, and 19 percent are clerical and support staff. Professional
expertise is required for refugee resettlement, health care, marriage counseling,
psychological counseling and therapy. Often these programs and their staffs are certified
by the state or professional associations. "We insist that every Catholic service in
the diocese be licensed even though state law exempts them," says the director of
Catholic Charities in St. Louis. "If they can't qualify for a license, they ought to
be out of business, because it's minimum standards." Certification helps ensure the
archbishop and outside funding sources that the programs are being run on a professional
basis. Part-time volunteers also help in numerous programs and are especially active in soup
kitchens, shelters, day care, the St. Vincent de Paul Society, various youth programs,
shut-ins visitation, crisis centers, and hotlines. Sometimes professionals volunteer their
time as in Washington where two hundred doctors and dentist donated their services to the
homeless. Renew and other programs since Vatican II have stimulated numerous parishioners
to get involved as volunteers in various social ministries. Providing training for these
volunteers is an important function of the professional staff. A few volunteers end up
working full time, as in St. Louis where a woman volunteer runs a shelter for the
homeless. "One of our roles in Catholic Charities is to provide opportunities for people to
serve," explains the St. Louis director. The volunteers are seen, not simply as free
workers, but also as people to be influenced. In Baltimore, the director of Catholic
Charities found that preaching to parish groups about social justice "bored people to
death." Instead, he set up a program for parishes that involves close to three
thousand volunteers who prepare and serve one meal a month in their food program. These
volunteers are primarily from the suburbs "where they don't come into contact with
the poor on a regular basis," he says. "They get to see who they are. They are
not evil ogres; they are human beings. They have dignity like everybody else. It gives an
understanding of what social justice and social policy is all about in this country." More than any other church organization, Catholic social services must quickly respond
to environmental factors. The programs emphasized in different archdioceses vary, and they
also vary over time in a single archdiocese depending on community needs and the funds
available. The need for orphanages, for example, has declined with the number of orphans
and the rise of alternative programs. At the same time, increased numbers of elderly have
called forth a response. "When I first came in, a lot of money went to child
care," recalls the director of Catholic Social Services in Philadelphia, "that
was reduced each year to more and more services to the elderly." In 1970, the San Francisco Charities programs were primarily counseling and child
welfare. "Now those components represent less than 15 percent of our activity,"
reports the director. "There was major growth in parish social ministry, aging
services, community organizing, immigration services, housing development, prison
visitors, and emergency programs like food programs." Taking care of the immediate needs of the poor, hungry, and homeless has always been a
concern of the church. When the government took responsibility for these needs during the
New Deal and Great Society, Catholic Charities emphasized professional programs for
counseling and child welfare. These programs attempted to go beyond emergency help and
tried to provide long-term solutions through counseling, therapy, and training. But as a result of the Reagan administration budget cuts, "We are seeing
increasing numbers of people knocking at our door for alms, for financial help,"
reports the Hartford director of Catholic Charities. "We are opening shelters, soup
kitchens, and we are back to the kinds of things we did before the revolution of the
Roosevelt administration." In Philadelphia, a Catholic shelter was opened for bag
ladies. "Then women [in psychiatric hospitals] were deinstitutionalized [by the
state]," reports the director of Catholic Social Services. "Then we got battered
women and children who didn't have anywhere to go." Besides social service programs, the church has also started or supported advocacy
programs aimed at changing unjust social structures through education, community
organizing, and lobbying. "It is not enough to take Mrs. Jones and her three kids out
knocking on doors trying to find her an apartment," explains the director of Catholic
Charities in Hartford. "Housing is a major problem and needs legislative
attention." Sometimes these advocacy groups are parish-based community groups. Some are coordinated
out of constituency-oriented offices like an office for black or Hispanic Catholics.
Sometimes they are centered in a peace and justice commission whose aim might be
"consciousness raising" among the public, especially among Catholics. These
programs can be very controversial because they challenge the political and economic
status quo. In Mobile, when Catholic Charities "tried to do civil rights work
directly, openly, there was a direct effect on fund-raising," recalls the director. As a result, advocacy agencies are usually kept separate from service agencies like
Catholic Charities, lest they endanger the funding of traditional programs.
"Charities offices do a lot of begging," explains the San Antonio director.
"You can't make people mad and get their money. We're better off separate. If the
social justice people raise hell, that's tough. Be mad at them, don't be mad at us."
At the same time, the two often work informally together, with the service agencies
providing programs for those being represented by the advocacy groups. When the social programs of an archdiocese are all added together, they often make the
church the largest provider of social services in the state, second only to the state
government itself. In Chicago, Catholic Charities has 192 services, an $80 million budget,
and about 3,200 employees. If the spending of independent Catholic agencies were included,
the figure would be higher. The New York director of Catholic Charities estimates that
total spending on Catholic social services in the archdiocese exceeds $1 billion a year,
$600 million of which would be in hospitals. The archbishop is ultimately responsible for the social services done by the
archdiocese. As with the schools, his primary concern is over governance, finances, and
Catholicity. He is also concerned about how the programs fit into the overall priorities
of the archdiocese. Catholic social services are organized and governed in a variety of ways. Some
programs, like hospitals, are separately incorporated with their own boards of directors.
In the past, a majority of the board members and the administrators would be religious,
but today they are often lay. These independent boards (which may or may not include the
archbishop or his representative) set policy, hire personnel, and are legally and
financially responsible for the program. Some archdioceses prefer independent organizations for which they are not legally or
financially responsible. Even a program started by an archdiocese might be spun off as an
independent entity. In Miami, Catholic Charities started a program for runaway teenagers.
"We found that the exposure to liability in that program is so great," explains
a Miami official, "that we separated the program from our services. We're now running
it independently." On the other hand, if they are Catholic organizations, in the
public mind they are often identified with the archdiocese for good or ill. If an independent organization is self-funding and avoids controversy, the archbishop
will usually leave it alone. Although he lacks legal authority over separately
incorporated organizations, if they want archdiocesan money or his support in getting
outside funding, he can set conditions. For example, in Philadelphia a Hungarian home for
the aged was told it would have to accept any Catholics, not just Hungarians, if it
received archdiocesan money. Likewise, in Hartford, the archbishop sent the director of Catholic Charities as a
"consultant" to an institution that suddenly ran a $160,000 deficit after having
balanced budgets for years. "They view us as intruders giving them advice that they
don't necessarily want, like all wages have to be frozen," explains the director of
Catholic Charities. "We are not trying to take them over. We try to be as diplomatic
as possible. Nobody wants to see them go under, but nobody wants the diocese to suffer a
major embarrassment either because of significant indebtedness or poor management or
whatever it might be." There are also social programs under the direct legal control of the archbishop. The
boards of directors of these organizations would be advisory to the archbishop, who would
appoint their members. They would make recommendations on policy, finances, and personnel,
but he would have the final say. The budget of these programs would be reviewed as part of
the archdiocesan budgetary process. New programs would need the archbishop's approval,
especially if they cost more money. The top administrators would be chosen or approved by
him or his representative. During the 1960s and 1970s there was a tremendous growth in the number and size of
social service programs. Greater resources and increased demands from the environment
stimulated diversification of services and expansion to new clientele, as would be normal
in any organization. Some agencies, especially those that were self-financed, operated
without much archdiocesan supervision of their work and finances. As the number and size
of these organizations grew, archbishops began to worry about controlling these complex
multimillion dollar operations that seemed to be off doing their own thing. They also
feared that these organizations were losing their Catholic identity. When government
cutbacks forced these agencies to seek more and more archdiocesan money, archbishops
became concerned about controlling costs, eliminating duplication, and coordinating
services. When the directors of these programs reported directly to the archbishop, he rarely had
time to supervise them. Today, many archbishops have vicars or secretaries for social
services to coordinate and supervise all of the social service programs of the
archdiocese. Often (as in St. Paul) these secretaries are also the directors of Catholic
Charities, usually the largest archdiocesan social service agency. Catholic Charities often acts as an umbrella for a variety of archdiocesan
organizations and programs. The staff of Catholic Charities might be organized by
geographical regions (e.g., different counties or vicariates) or it might be organized by
services (to children, to elderly, to homeless, to parishes, etc.). It might also include
administrative staff, such as a business manager and grants writer. "The desire of the archbishop," explains one director of Catholic Charities,
"is to streamline the human services network of the diocese so that there is a
cleaner chain of command and greater accountability and better coordination of
services." It is usually through the budgetary process that the archbishop or his
delegate asserts control. Thus, if an organization wants money, the archbishop requires
them to report their activities and finances to his vicar. Even if an agency is legally
independent, its desire for archdiocesan funds will often make it conform. Besides financial problems, complaints can also bring an organization to the attention
of the archbishop. Complaints may come from pastors, donors, employees, or clients of the
agency. If the complaints are serious and well founded, he acts on them personally or
through his administrators if the organization is under his control. If it is an
independent agency, he will try persuasion. If he does not succeed, he may distance the
archdiocese from any legal or financial responsibility for the organization. Catholic social services is a multimillion dollar operation in all but the smallest
dioceses. Across the country, the total income to Catholic Charities agencies (which do
not include all Catholic social services) was over $600 million in 1986. The largest
amount, 45 percent, comes from government fees and grants. This is followed by church
sources (20 percent), program service fees (17 percent), and United Way (10 percent). Of
the church money, less than half comes from diocesan grants or the Catholic Charities
appeal. In archdioceses, the pattern is similar. For example, the St. Paul Catholic Charities
gets only $800,000 of its $10 million budget from the archdiocese. In Philadelphia, the
Catholic Charities drive raises about $6 million from the parishes and United Way provides
another $2 million. With third party payers and government contracts, this is parlayed
into about $75 million. A few Catholic Charities are almost totally dependent on the
archdiocese for funds. The Louisville Catholic Charities, for example, gets 90 percent of
its $1 million budget from the church. Most organizations do some fund-raising. The Catholic Charities in St. Paul raises an
additional $350,000 through a membership campaign. Certain programs, like those dealing
with children, raise money more easily than others. Food and clothing drives can also
receive popular support. If a program has a popular cause and a charismatic leader, like
Covenant House in New York and Boys Town in Omaha, fund-raising is easier. Some programs (hospitals, nursing homes, counseling centers, adoption agencies) receive
some money in fees from the beneficiary, his insurance company, Medicare, or Medicaid.
Fees for people without insurance are usually based on the person's income. But
"there are always people who fall through the cracks," explains the director of
Catholic Charities in New York. "If an illegal alien gets sick and goes to the
hospital, he has no money or insurance. He can't apply for Medicaid; [the government
would] toss him out of the country. So there is always a certain amount of free care or
charity care for the poor." Some programs can get government grants or contracts. Often a government will fund the
program because it realizes that the church can do the program more cheaply and
efficiently, with less politics. Money for resettling refugees comes from the federal
government. "The bishop called me in April of 1975 and said, `Vietnam has fallen. How
many refugees can we take?'" recalls the Mobile director of Catholic Charities.
"I agreed to 100. We got 3,200." A number of states purchase services from Catholic Charities for delinquent or
handicapped children. "Primarily we get from the state government monies for
residential care of children--dependent, neglected, delinquent, abused children,"
explains the St. Louis director of Catholic Charities. "These are youngsters that the
local juvenile court has taken into custody away from their parents." Similarly,
after a court case stopped Louisiana from exporting mentally retarded children for
treatment in Texas, the state asked Catholic Charities to start a program for them. Also
in New Orleans, "We use about fifty of our schools for the federal program of giving
hot lunches to the elderly in the neighborhood," reports Archbishop Hannan. "The
federal government has asked us to begin a program of feeding 8,000 elderly in their
homes." Low-interest government loans have also financed numerous nursing homes and homes for
the aged. Low-cost housing run by the church agencies is also financed through
low-interest loans from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In New
Orleans the mayor told the archbishop that the city was not going to do anything about
housing and that he wanted the archdiocese to take responsibility for it. Similarly, three
cities near Seattle asked the archdiocese to run low-income housing for the elderly,
"because we understand that you will be here and you won't disappear," they told
the director. In New Haven senior citizens asked the archdiocesan office of urban affairs
to take over the nutrition project for the elderly because it had been politicized by city
politicians. Sometimes Catholic Charities benefits from government programs because no one else
wants them. "We got the first Head Start programs, the first Neighborhood Youth Corps
programs going in Alabama," recalls the director of Catholic Charities in Mobile.
"We ran these programs when nobody else would touch them." But in other places,
Catholic Charities might have to compete with other providers for the funds. United Way also funds some social programs run by the church, especially programs for
children, elderly, and families in need. The level of cooperation with Catholic social
services varies from community to community. The more Catholic the area and the more
professional the Catholic Charities, the more likely it is to get major funding from
United Way. In Indianapolis, the archbishop gives a matching corporate contribution to
United Way for contributions from archdiocesan employees. Sometimes, as in Baltimore and
Los Angeles, the archdiocese agrees to not have a separate Catholic Charities fund drive
when it participates in United Way. Sometimes this money goes to Catholic Charities as a
block grant (as in Baltimore), in other cities each program must apply individually. The type of programs funded varies from area to area because of local needs and the
preferences of the people in charge of the local United Way. For example, Catholic
Charities in Indianapolis and Omaha could not get United Way funding for family
counseling, whereas in Hartford, Catholic Family Services gets about half its money from
the sixteen United Ways in the archdiocese. Some United Ways are having nonprofits bid against each other. For example, a United
Way will say, "We have $100,000 for counseling. Who will provide the most hours of
counseling?" The competition for United Way money is getting fierce.
"Organizations that have traditionally been funded by government sources,"
explains the director of Catholic Charities in Hartford, "are beating down the doors
to get into United Way. But the fund drive is barely adequate to keep pace with inflation
for existing members." Sometimes the United Way avoids controversy and supports
traditional programs like Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and recreational programs. Some archdioceses (like St. Louis) have made it clear that if Planned Parenthood gets
funding from United Way, they will withdraw from the program. In St. Paul, the archdiocese
does not request much United Way money for its unwed mother program because, "if the
United Way supports that too much, then the abortion people will want their share,"
explains the director of Catholic Charities. The Miami archdiocese has no such problem.
"They are very receptive to our needs," explains one church official. "The
Catholic church has a strong voice in Dade County." In Philadelphia, United Way and the archdiocese had an agreement that it would not fund
anything in conflict with the teaching of the church. "Some feminist-abortion groups
screamed that we were controlling United Way," recalls Cardinal Krol. They pushed
United Way to adopt "optional giving" whereby the donor can indicate what
institution he wants his money to go to. We wrote to United Way that we did not want the change. But they pressured, so we
yielded. The fact of the matter is that the optional funding has benefited no one as much
as the Catholics. So they had the nerve to come and ask whether we would want to back away
from it. We said, "Look, this was not part of our agreement. You proposed it, we objected.
Finally, for your sake, we agreed. Now you are asking us to damage ourselves by pulling
away. We will not do it." Programs funded by the archdiocese are often programs that no one else will fund. For
example, many residents oppose shelters or soup kitchens because they encourage
"undesirables" to stay in their neighborhoods. Politicians will back away from
such opposition. In addition, advocacy programs that challenge the political and economic
status quo are not popular. In Seattle, the Hispanic Legal Action office is funded with
money raised by the archbishop. Sometimes an archdiocese will temporarily finance a program until it gets started and
can find other funding. For example, Catholic Charities in St. Louis opened a halfway
house for alcoholic women with archdiocesan money in the hope that others would pick up
the funding. The San Francisco Catholic Charities opened a shelter for homeless youths.
"Public funding wouldn't touch it, they wanted nothing to do with these kids,"
explains the director. "We ran it for two years on a nickel and a dime. This was a
church basement operation, yet every night it sheltered 20 kids who, if they weren't with
us, were going to be out in the street turning tricks." After proving that the
program could work, they got the state government to fund it. "If we can prove the
effectiveness of a program, we get the public sector to buy it," he says. "Then
we get to move our limited charity dollars over to whatever the next thing is that needs
doing." An archdiocese will also fund programs with a special Catholic character. In St. Paul,
the annual appeal funded a program for unwed mothers, a social justice program, and the
divorced and separated center. It is difficult to get nonchurch money to finance parish
outreach programs. Offices for black Catholics, Hispanics, and other ethnic groups are
usually funded by the archdiocese because they deal with both social and religious
concerns. In Newark, the archdiocese funds religious education programs for the
handicapped done by Catholic Community Services. Likewise, in Louisville, church funding
supported a parish outreach program and a pastoral ministry to the sick and elderly. Finances determine to some extent what social services are provided by the church. If
outside funding can be found for a program, the archbishop will rarely object to it unless
he fears being stuck with the program when the funding ceases. Some people complain that
some agencies will do programs that can get funded rather than programs that meet needs.
One director described an agency that had been providing elderly care for fifteen years.
When funding for elderly care was cut, "they started looking around" and found
the state was willing to fund a program for latch-key children. "Because they need
money to survive, they will go where the money is," he says. But expensive programs without outside funding are a problem. A number of Catholic
Charities have de-emphasized one-on-one counseling. "You just can't afford to do
that," explains the St. Paul director. "It is too expensive." On the other
hand, some archdioceses, like Baltimore, have been able to keep their counseling programs
because of fees and funding through United Way. St. Louis recently opened a family
counseling center in an affluent section of the archdiocese that is financed by the local
parishes. Some archdioceses had to admit that they could not afford to provide adequate services
to the handicapped. San Antonio Catholic Charities, after funding a one-person office for
the disabled for a few years, concluded that an office without supporting staff was
"just a front." The position was transferred to the religious education office
so it could hire a specialist on religious education of the handicapped. "It is all
we can do," explains the director of Catholic Charities. "There are a lot of
city, state, and county programs for the handicapped." Programs requiring large
professional staffs require money from government and other sources. Money from government sources is never certain. "Government ideas change,"
explains Bishop Martin Lohmuller, vicar general of Philadelphia. "If the government
decides that it is going to provide these services directly instead of purchasing them
from voluntary agencies, then we are just out of business." Most Catholic Charities
were hurt by Reagan administration cutbacks. "We have experienced $2 to $3 million in
cuts since 1982," reports the director of Catholic Charities in New Orleans.
"Before 1982, 90 percent of our money was from the government and about 8 percent
from United Way. Now we are running about 70 to 80 percent government, 8 percent United
Way, and the rest of the money we raise ourselves." A reduction in government funding can be devastating for individual programs. The
Connecticut department of mental health gave the Hartford Catholic Charities a grant for
services to Hispanics. "They cut the grant," reports the director, "we cut
the service." Sometimes an archdiocese can keep a program going temporarily. "If
we see a deficit and we know six months from now there is going to be another source of
revenue," says the Hartford director of Charities, "then we scramble like the
dickens to keep that program alive for six months until the other flow starts. But if we
look down the pike and don't see anything coming, that program goes." When the state told the Newark director of Catholic Community Services that it was no
longer going to fully fund a residential program for eighteen deinstitutionalized persons,
she told them she would close it. "They didn't believe I was going to give up
$100,000," she recalls. But keeping the program would require taking $15,000 to
$20,000 from other programs that she felt had a higher priority. "We closed the
program. The end result was they gave me almost as much money to do other kinds of things
and the people have been put into boarding houses." Similarly in New York, "We have closed six or seven child care centers since the
1970s," says the director of Catholic Charities. They are just losing money and they are not going to be able to recoup. You can cut
staff, but if you cut staff to the point where you are not providing quality service, it
doesn't make sense. There are 10,000 children under care today. Fifteen years ago, we had
50,000. Philadelphia had the same experience where, because of federal block grants to the
state, "the money allocated for child care is becoming more limited," reports
the director of Catholic Social Services. Despite the needs of battered and abused
children, "we closed a lot of specialized programs. Anything that required
psychiatric supervision and therapy. They are costly services. I am not going to cut the
quality of service, so we end up cutting the number that are served." Outside funding can also mean outside control. The administrator of Catholic Charities
in Chicago describes the typical pattern in dealing with state funding: They always come in very good the first year, because nobody else has done it and we
are willing to take it on. The third year, the government is starting to get finicky with
a lot of red tape about it. Then the fifth year, the government wants to run it
themselves. The Chicago Catholic Charities had serious disagreements with the state department of
family and children services. "They are underfunded, so they would do a more shallow
intervention with children than we would want to do," explains the administrator of
Catholic Charities. And "we have a family orientation. Some of our programs return 90
percent of the kids to their families within eighteen months. The state is much more
towards severing parents' rights. Unfortunately, it often comes through as a power
struggle or a financial struggle, but the root of the thing has been a philosophical
struggle." In New York there was conflict between the city and the archdiocese over Executive
Order 50, which prohibited funding to organizations discriminating against homosexuals.
"We are not concerned about how many homosexuals are in the program," explained
Bishop O'Keefe, then vicar general. "We never ask anybody. The question is, who is
going to run these agencies?" Similarly, there have been court challenges to giving
preference to Catholic parents in the adoption of Catholic children. Recently many archbishops have become concerned about the Catholic character of the
social services provided by their archdioceses. All archbishops would agree that Catholic
agencies should not be involved in activities contrary to church teaching. In a counseling
center, for example, Catholic identity requires "that nobody who works there will
counsel children in a way that would violate Catholic teaching," explained Bishop
O'Keefe. "You don't have to believe, but you can't send kids to an abortion
mill." Likewise, in Hartford, the Catholic Charities must check with the archbishop
before allowing anyone other than a validly married Catholic couple to adopt a Catholic
child. Some social programs downplayed their religious character or their church connections
in order to get outside money. "Because 80 percent of our dollars came from
government funding," explains the director of Catholic Community Services in Newark,
"people became intimidated or felt that we had an obligation to somehow deny our
church orientation. I absolutely disagree. We help people on a nonsectarian basis, we hire
people on a nonsectarian basis, but we are a church organization." Some intimidation can come from government funding sources. One archbishop was asked to
sign a statement that his religious faith had nothing to do with the social services
provided by the archdiocese. He was also asked to change the name of the St. Vincent de
Paul Society to Mr. Vincent de Paul. He refused. Some programs can remain very professional but lose their Catholic character when the
religious staff is replaced by a lay personnel, as occurred in the children's institutions
in St. Louis. "There are no religious in them, and they have forgotten about teaching
religion," complains the director of Catholic Charities, who recently got the school
office to set up a religious education program for these institutions. Some Catholic social service programs have large numbers of non-Catholic employees (for
example, one third of the Catholic Charities employees in Chicago). Questions are being
raised about hiring personnel solely on their professional competence without considering
their religion and values. For example, in Mobile, when the Catholic Charities board was
considering candidates for a counseling position, the Episcopalian chairman of the board
asked if they were Christians. Some professionals "would never dream of asking that
question of an employee," complains Archbishop Lipscomb. "They tell you, `That's
unprofessional.' Well, it is also un-Catholic to do it the other way, and we are first Catholic
social services." Most archbishops support running social service programs under Catholic auspices
because they believe that helping people in need is required by the gospel. They also
recognize that social programs can present a good image of the church to the community.
When Archbishop Hurley arrived in Anchorage, Catholic social services was a one-nun
operation. "We were asked to take over the state care of the handicapped because that
had failed twice," he recalls. "I was very eager because the church needs to be
out in the public as part of the community serving the community. Having shown that we
could do it, we were the targets for `Could you do more if you had the money?' I kept
saying yes." But some talk of only doing programs that are "Catholic," although this is
never clearly defined. For some it appears to mean programs that flow from the pro-life
concerns of the bishops, while for others it means programs that respond to the
preferential option for the poor. Sometimes it means programs that are aimed at the
parishes. But it rarely would mean that the beneficiaries are only Catholic. In Chicago,
for example, Catholic Charities estimates that 65 to 75 percent of its caseload is
non-Catholic. For many involved in social services, their Catholic character comes more from
motivation and spirituality than from the mechanics of the programs. As a result,
indoctrination and formation of new employees becomes important, as do opportunities to
articulate and celebrate shared Christian values. This becomes particularly important when
staffs become predominantly lay and when there are large turnovers in personnel. At the same time they are concerned about the Catholic character of these programs,
many archbishops also see social services as an area of ecumenical cooperation. It is not
unusual for non-Catholics to be involved with Catholic Charities. The chairman of the
board in Mobile is an Episcopalian, as is the director of Catholic Charities in San
Francisco. Cooperation also occurs with Protestant and Jewish social service agencies. In
Los Angeles, one shelter for the homeless operates as a partnership of twelve different
organizations. "The county provided two wings of a hospital; the state and United Way
provided some money," explains the director of Catholic Charities. "The southern
California ecumenical council provides volunteers, the Disciples of Christ provides
transportation, Travelers Aid and Lutheran Social Services provide intake, Jewish Family
Services provides job development, and we provide fiscal management and staffing." Many Catholic social services programs are run independently without any relation to
other archdiocesan programs, including the parishes. This is especially true of agencies
and institutions run by professionals who get most of their money from fees, contracts,
and grants so that they have little financial dependence on the archdiocese. In many
archdioceses, these agencies are being challenged and asked what they do for the parishes,
especially when they seek archdiocesan money. Pastors often complain that although millions of dollars are being spent on social
services, the programs never help them. "We don't need institutional programs,"
pastors told the director of Catholic Charities in New Orleans. "We don't know what
to do with women and children when they appear at the rectory at night with no place to
go." The director responded by installing a 24-hour hotline to meet their needs.
"We take the person off the hands of the priest that night and work out some solution
the next day." Many charities directors are responding to complaints from pastors by stressing parish
outreach in their programs. In Newark, a parish outreach coordinator, whom pastors could
call for information and referrals, was hired for each county. In addition, social
concerns coordinators were hired who "spend 90 percent of their time out in the
parishes talking to social concerns groups, talking to deaneries, and the like." The National Conference of Catholic Charities also developed a parish-outreach program.
"It does an assessment of the parish, what the strengths and weaknesses are, what are
their resources, and what can you do to match these things," explains the St. Paul
director who was the president of the National Conference of Catholic Charities. "It
works wonderfully well, then they change the pastor. You get some top-down SOB in there
who throws it all out. It is frustrating as hell." Parish outreach involves the education and training of volunteers in parish social
concerns committees, St. Vincent de Paul societies, or other groups attempting to help
people in need. Outreach coordinators connect these parish groups with archdiocesan
agencies that can help them or whom they can help. In New York, for example, the
department of aging in Catholic Charities is "working with over 140 parishes in their
senior citizens program," says the director. "It is a whole range of
programs--nutritional, recreational, transport services." In addition, many archdioceses, rather than having all of their staffs
"downtown," have opened offices in parishes. In Philadelphia, Catholic Social
Services pays the salaries of social workers in inner-city parishes. Baltimore has a
counseling program based in about sixty parishes that operates mostly in the evening for
family counseling. The archbishop is ultimately responsible for archdiocesan social services, but he
usually has no expertise in the area. One Catholic Charities director recalls a
conversation he had with an archbishop on the relation between bishops and Catholic
Charities. The archbishop said, The trouble is, a bishop is supposed to be a [expletive deleted] know-it-all. We all
went to Catholic schools, we understand that. We all went to Catholic seminaries, and we
all understand that. Most of us have worked in tribunals and we understand that. Most of us have never been inside Catholic Charities. We do not know anything about
that, so we are suspicious of it, we are afraid of it, we want to leave it alone, we are
benign. If we are not benign, we want to take it over and control it. Few archbishops (Cooke, Mahony, Stafford) have experience in Catholic social services.
A few archbishops, like Archbishop Hannan of New Orleans, are very active in promoting
social services. But in most archdioceses, the archbishop pays little attention to the
social service programs except when they want money or when they get into controversy. If
the archbishop has a secretary for social services or a director of Catholic Charities
whom he trusts and a board that does its work responsibly, he will usually let them do
what they think best. The St. Paul director of Catholic Charities, who has the confidence of his archbishop,
explains the kinds of things he would take to the archbishop: Anything that is controversial, we check with him, like the service to gays and
lesbians. Or where we need his clout for financial backing. We remodeled the children's
home for $3 million. He gave a token $75,000, then we said to the foundations that the
diocese is doing what it can. The day-to-day operation, he doesn't get involved in. He doesn't want to, and he
doesn't need to. We alert him to potential PR problems. Some of the stuff we get into can
be very controversial in the diocese, just so he is aware of it. In most archdioceses, if social services wants to start a major new program, it will
have to get the archbishop's approval. Frequently he will ask if anyone else is doing it.
"We don't want to duplicate services," explains Archbishop Flores of San
Antonio. "The first thing we ask is, `Is anyone else doing it? Do we need to get
involved? Can we afford to get involved because we are involved in other things?'"
The archbishop's permission will also be needed for borrowing money. Some archbishops, like Archbishop Hannan, are real activists in pushing and developing
social service programs. Because the mayor of New Orleans told him that the city was going
to do nothing about low-income housing, Archbishop Hannan put the archdiocese heavily into
housing, including 6,000 apartments for elderly. In addition, the archdiocese was asked to
take over six low-income housing projects that were being poorly run by the local housing
authority. On the other hand, Cardinal Krol in Philadelphia opposed involvement in
low-income housing lest the church end up looking like a slum landlord. Other archbishops, after taking office, have changed the directions of social service
programs in their archdioceses. For example, Cardinal Hickey found that Catholic Charities
was doing little for the blacks in Washington, DC. Its adoption service had not even
sponsored any black babies. In addition, the professionals running the agency were more
interested in counseling services than in soup kitchens and shelters. He, on the other
hand, felt the program should serve the poorest of the poor. Some archbishops are also important spokesmen on social issues. When American Motors
announced the closing of a Milwaukee plant with 6,000 workers, the archdiocesan social
concerns delegate came to the archbishop. "He asked, `Would you be willing to make a
statement with the governor asking American Motors to sit down with the employees?'"
recalls Archbishop Weakland. "I said, `Great idea.' Then he does the rest of the work
and I get in front of the cameras and get all the praise." Similarly, in New York,
Cardinal O'Connor called for a moratorium on the conversion of single-occupancy hotels to
condominiums. Catholic education and Catholic social services are two of the largest programs in an
archdiocese. As large complex organizations, they require sophisticated management of
their finances and programs. In simpler days, the archbishop might have gotten involved in
the direct supervision of programs, but today he is usually forced to act through a
superintendent of schools, a director of religious education, or a director of Catholic
Charities who is more knowledgeable and experienced then he is. As a result, if these
people do not have his trust, they will soon be replaced. Nevertheless, the archbishop would become involved in approving any major change in
policy affecting these programs, especially programs that would require archdiocesan funds
or directly impact on pastors or other important constituencies. Anything that would cause
a major controversy, the archbishop wants to know about ahead of time. No archbishop wants
to learn about something for the first time from the newspaper. The control mechanism most frequently used by the archbishop in overseeing archdiocesan
programs is the budgetary process. At budget time, agency directors must report on their
programs and answer questions. Here the archbishop can set priorities by favoring one
program with funds rather than another. But in the normal course of events, the changes
are incremental rather than drastic. Many of the factors examined in this chapter when discussing education and social
services are also important when examining other archdiocesan programs. The issues of
governance, finances, and Catholicity are important for every program. In addition, the
role of middle managers at the cabinet level are becoming common for other areas besides
education and Catholic social services. Finally, in all areas of church governance,
consultation and conflict avoidance are important. Not surprisingly, the Catholicity of archdiocesan programs is a major concern of
archbishops and their top staff. A secular social service or educational program, while
good in itself, is not enough. The programs must be in keeping with the teachings of the
church and reflect gospel values. The concern for orthodoxy has been reinforced by Rome in
its dealings with the American hierarchy, as will be seen in the next chapter. 1. "General Summary: Complete Statistics for Archdioceses
and Dioceses of the United States," The Official Catholic Directory 1988 (New
York: P. J. Kenedy & Son, 1988). 2. J. Stephen O'Brien, Mixed Messages: What Bishops and
Priests Say about Catholic Schools (Washington, DC: National Catholic Educational
Association, 1987), 59-75. 3. Thomas P. Walters, National Profile of Professional
Religious Education Coordinators/Directors (Washington, DC: National Conference of
Diocesan Directors of Religious Education, 1983), 56. 4. The Third Plenary Council of Baltimore (1884) legislated
that a school commission should be established in each diocese, but prior to the 1960s few
dioceses had active boards. For a history of diocesan school boards, see M. Lourdes
Sheehan, R.S.M., "A Study of the Functions of School Boards in the Educational System
of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States," (Dissertation at Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1981), 52ff. 5. Walters, National Profile, 10-11. 6. M. Lourdes Sheehan, R.S.M., "Policies and Practices of
Governance and Accountability," in Personnel Issues and the Catholic Administrator,
ed. J. Stephen O'Brien and Margaret McBrien, R.S.M. (Washington, DC: National Catholic
Educational Association, 1986), 1. 7. Theodore Drahmann, FSC, Governance and Administration in
the Catholic School, NCEA Keynote Series No. 5 (Washington, DC: National Catholic
Educational Association, 1985), 15. 8. Robert J. Kealey, FSC, Curriculum in the Catholic School,
NCEA Keynote Series No. 9 (Washington, DC: National Catholic Educational Association,
1985). 9. Medard Shea, C.F.X., "Personnel Selection," in Personnel
Issues and the Catholic School Administrator, ed. O'Brien and McBrien, 13-33. Also,
Francis Raftery, SC, The Teacher in the Catholic School, NCEA Keynote Series No. 8
(Washington, DC: National Catholic Educational Association, 1985). 10. Edwin J. McDermott, S.J., Distinctive Qualities of the
Catholic School, NCEA Keynote Series No. 1 (Washington, DC: National Educational
Association, 1985). 11. Muriel Young, C.D.P., "New Wine in New Wineskins:
Challenge to Administrators," in Personnel Issues and the Catholic School
Administrator, ed. O'Brien and McBrien, 65-70. 12. Terence McLaughlin, Catholic School Finance and
Church-State Relations, NCEA Keynote Series 5 (Washington, DC: National Catholic
Education Association, 1985). 13. O'Brien, Mixed Messages, 77. 14. John J. Augenstein and Mary O'Leary, O.S.U., "Just
Salaries and Benefits," in Personnel Issues and the Catholic School Administrator,
ed. O'Brien and McBrien, 35-64. 15. O'Brien, Mixed Messages, 77. 17. The Official Catholic Directory 1988. 18. "1986 Social Services and Social Action Summary,
Catholic Charities USA" and 1986 Annual Survey Catholic Charities USA
(Washington, DC: Catholic Charities USA, Undated [1987?]). 19. 1986 Annual Survey Catholic Charities USA, 2-3. 20. James D. Thompson, Organizations in Action (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1967), 46-48. 21. 1986 Annual Survey Catholic Charities USA, 6-7. 22. Alexandra Peeler, Parish Social Ministry: A Vision and
Resource (Washington, DC: National Conference of Catholic Charities, 1985).
By Thomas J. Reese, S.J.
Copyright © 1989 by Thomas J. Reese, S.J.
All rights reserved
For the previous chapter and table of contents, see Chapter 6
and Contents.
Archbishop Kelly
Director of Charities, Hartford, CTEducation
Governance: Archdiocesan Offices
Religious Education
School Governance
Catholicity
Finances
Closing and Merging Schools
Principals and Pastors
The Archbishop
Catholic Social Services
Governance
Finances
Catholicity
Serving the Parishes
Archbishop
Conclusion
Footnotes
See also: