Distinction Between Church and Worship Site
by Joanna

When the bishop first announced the mergers/closings in our
diocese, I thought the term "worship site" was just another of
Galante's meaningless terms, like the fictional "Church of South
Jersey." In other words, I didn't really think it meant anything
of significance. I just thought he was again eschewing all things
traditionally Catholic, proper terminology included.

Since then, however, I've had the time to do some research and
ask a lot of questions. As it turns out, there is a very
meaningful distinction between a "church" and a "worship site."
Here it is:

CHURCH: the consecrated building where the parish community
gathers to celebrate the Eucharistic Liturgy, the Sacraments and
their life together as the Body of Christ.

WORSHIP SITE: an auxiliary location where Eucharistic Liturgy is  
celebrated when either the distance to the parish Church is  
prohibitive or the Church lacks adequate capacity to accommodate  
parishioners attending the Liturgy.

Interesting, eh?  So it looks like no one is safe, not even those  
churches designated primary and secondary "worship sites."

How utterly degrading for the bishop to designate a Church, home
to the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus in the
Blessed Sacrament, nothing more than a "worship site." (By way of
comparison, places typically deemed "worship sites" tend to be
dining halls, gymnasiums, auditoriums, etc.)

If you know someone in a parish designated a primary or secondary  
"worship site," please make them aware of this meaningful
distinction. If they don't wake up and fight this now, by the
time Galante closes these churches to implement the next step
in his "vision" it could be too late.