What is a Co-PP? The question posed in two separate editions of The Irish Catholic over recent weeks has certainly caught the attention of priests, judging from the feedback I have received from all over Ireland. Many priests, it seems, find themselves appointed as Co-PPs and know little about what that means.
One who ministers in a large diocese reported his experience there. He wrote as “PP (in effect) or Co PP or God-knows-what” and added that “this ridiculous title was brought in without the slightest consultation” to his diocese… Wherefore synodality indeed.
My correspondent also believed that “partnerships/ families of parishes are clerical solutions” and went on: “What we need I believe is to form leaders at local parish level who will succeed us in the parishes.” Which I believe also.
So what is a Co-PP? Maybe I am asking the wrong question. Instead of asking that, maybe I should ask what a moderator is, the one in charge? Unlike the title ‘Co-PP’, the title ‘Moderator’ is found in the Code of Canon Law. When you read from Canon 542 on, you see that when a group of priests jointly take care of a group of parishes, their work is done under the direction of the moderator (which makes it sound like he is the boss). Furthermore, in juridical affairs, only the moderator acts in the person of the parish or parishes entrusted to the group (Canon 543). Everything you read here makes it seem that the Co-PP is much less than what a PP was. But it’s not all bad.
Clerical wags once had a title for priests who were not quite parish priests, whether their title was ‘priest-in-charge’, or Rector of a church, or Administrator, or head of a mission. ‘Jumped-up curates’ was their moniker. Maybe this is what I, as a Co-PP, really am — a curate, senior or junior, with “notions”. Maybe my fellow Co-PPs and I, who willingly gave up the title PP at the suggestion that a Co-PP was much the same thing, were ever-so-slightly misled.
But maybe there is an upside to my new designation. Maybe it means that I can trundle along under the radar, doing those things I was ordained for: preaching God’s word, presiding at the sacraments, being close to people in times of sorrow or loss, praying a little, golfing a little, holidaying a little and generally hanging out with the people of the parish in all their ways. Meanwhile the moderator gets the privilege of negotiating terms for employment of sacristans and secretaries, and going through all the legal niceties to do with selling a field here or disposing of a closed school there — keeping the charity regulator and Revenue (and the diocese) happy. Given a choice between endless paperwork and pastoral work, I know which appeals to me (even if JUC rather than Co-PP should be my suffix).
What do you think? I’ll be happy to hear your verdict on my conclusion: frbernard1984@gmail.com.
The use of Latin is not entirely dead
Latin was always a popular language in clerical note-keeping, before GDPR restricted its use. I once inherited a visitation book where my predecessor made comments in his own brand of Latin. Bellum (war) was a common note, either inter sponsos (domestic) or cum invicem (fighting with the neighbours). He also had his own way of alerting a successor to someone who wasn’t the full shilling: min hab, he would note. This use of Latin is not entirely dead. A colleague recently told me his way of encouraging participation in ministries by coax-iorum. Which probably translates straight to Irish as ‘plámás’!
Funny how history repeats itself…
Every Saturday night, I talk with a priest-friend on the phone. When I had written the main article on this page, I told him about it and my ‘jumped-up curate’ status. He told me the origins of the description. Apparently Fr John Walsh, who once lived in the house where I dwell, was appointed to the care of this parish, while it was still a mensal parish of Skibbereen. A friend congratulated him on becoming a PP, to which he replied that he was no PP but rather an administrator, really just a ‘jumped-up curate’. Funny how history repeats itself.