The working groups in this category examined how St. Camillus supports the family as the central unit of our faith.  Group 1 addressed the issue of how children are integrated into the worship and work of St. Camillus, Group 2 (in Spanish and in English) examined St. Camillus’ preparation for marriage, celebration of the sacrament of matrimony, and support for married couples.  Group 3 looked at issues of pastoral care – how available and approachable the pastoral staff are, how well they serve families and individuals in crisis, and how well the parish serves those with long illnesses or suffering bereavement.   In each group, there are notable strengths but also important weaknesses, which are discussed in the text below.

Pastoral & Family Care Group 1: Ministry to Family

This group examined how St. Camillus supports family life – by being family-friendly in the church and in church activities, by encouraging prayer at home, and by strengthening family relationships.  Although the discussion group was in English, a particular effort was made to include a range of ages, ethnic groups and native languages.  The group recognized that family events were a particular strength at St. Camillus.  The theme of better communication – which was reiterated by many of the survey groups – was also strong here.  The group noted that good things are happening in this area in various St. Camillus communities, but that people don’t know about what is happening in the communities outside their own.  Some examples included the prayer at home program (apparently going on in the Hispanic community) and the children’s liturgy (which only takes place at the 10:30 multicultural mass).

The group gave their highest score (2.2) to the statement, “This ministry provides programs and activities, such as family faith sharing, family-centered learning experiences, household prayer and family-based service opportunities.”  The group very strongly endorsed Gloria’s work with the youth and the new local Habitat for Humanity service opportunities.    The group’s next highest score (2) went to the statement “There are tangible signs that the parish’s effort to support and enrich family life are effective.”  All other scores were below “adequate.” The group noted that the parish makes some efforts to include children that families do not adequately support, citing in particular the children’s choir, which now performs only twice a year, because parents didn’t bring their children.  The group gave the lowest score (0) to the statement, “There is a well-maintained nursery staffed with properly trained and equipped personnel.”  The group discussed the need for such a program for the smallest children.  Their second lowest score (1.2) went to the statement “The parish offers programs and resources that foster healthy family relationships.”  They noted that programs in parenting skills are not offered.

The group also noted that there are some problems about older children.  Behavior issues (ranging from children eating full meals –such as bagels with cream cheese- and jumping around during mass, to teens playing video games in the lobby during Mass) need to be addressed.  A concerted effort to educate parents of their responsibilities towards their children, they agreed, should occur.  Parents must set expectations and rules for respectful worship.

The group noted that their feelings, and the congregation’s feelings , about a children’s liturgy are mixed.  First of all, this is only offered for the 10:30 mass, and it is largely staffed by teens.  The group offered that, on the one hand, young children are not able to fully understand the Mass, so separating the children helps the parents focus on prayer instead of child supervision.  On the other hand, some families wish to worship with their children and involve them in the liturgy.  The group sense was that a children’s liturgy should be offered, but that parents should feel free not to use it if their children are well-supervised.

° Parents should be encouraged to teach children about respect in church.  Pulpit announcements and preaching may help, but there is a need to create an overall atmosphere of respectful worship.                  ° A crash course in “parenting in church” might be offered by some parents who have effective strategies.       ° The Hospitality Committee might be asked to help facilitate establishing expectations about children’s behavior in church.    

 ° The children’s liturgy should continue at the 10:30 mass, and perhaps be offered at other masses, but it should remain optional as some families would rather worship together. The children’s liturgy should include some teaching about appropriate church behavior.                                                                                   ° Provide a staffed nursery or some kind of child care for babies, especially for the French and Spanish masses.

° Encourage more household prayer – perhaps with some brief “how to’s” in the bulletin.  Families need some guidance on this.

° St Camillus School students used to bring home prayers to share with their families.  Children should be encouraged to continue to do this.  Children should sometimes be asked to read prayers of the faithful.  

° The monthly Teen mass should continue to be promoted and publicized.  

 ° The youth group might consider encouraging members’ families to participate in its service projects and other activities.

Pastoral & Family Care Group 2: Marriage

These groups examined questions about how St. Camillus prepares people for the sacrament of marriage, how it performs the sacrament, and how it supports married couples.  Although both groups agree that the parish welcomes couples to participate in the sacrament as a source of grace for their lives, the assessments suggested that St. Camillus devotes significantly more resources to those planning to marry than it does to programs for support to married couples.

English Marriage Group:  This group found that St. Camillus’ greatest strength in the area of marriage preparation was how welcoming it is to couples that wish to marry.  They gave their highest score (3.0 – “very much so”) to the statement “The parish’s marriage preparation process is deliberately evangelizing and welcoming to unchurched and interfaith couples.” The group noted that the diversity of the parish community supports couples who would feel more comfortable at St. Camillus than in more homogeneous communities, especially intercultural and interreligious couples.   They also gave a high score (2.6) to the statement, “Marriage preparation is a ministry shared by both the priest/deacons and married couples.”  They noted that the priests do not put obstacles in the paths of couples, but instead encourage, advise and support them.  The group agreed that St. Camillus has found fewer couples willing to serve in this ministry than is needed.  The group was divided on the need for formal training of lay people to lead pre-Cana: the younger couples felt they had been well-trained by the older couples, but the older couples felt that formal training would help all of them.

In terms of weaknesses, the group noted that St. Camillus does not provide programs for the newly married, nor does it have a wedding coordinator to help with rehearsals and wedding ceremonies.  Questions about support in these areas received very low marks (0.1 and 0.4 respectively).  In terms of the ceremony itself, the highest marks (2.1 each) went to “Musical choices serve the liturgical nature of the rite and are theologically and pastorally appropriate,” and “The parish welcomes ministers of other denominations to participate in the celebration in ways appropriate to ecumenical guidelines.”  The group noted again in this category that a parish wedding coordinator is not available, and that the experience of each couple is dependent on their interaction with the priest or deacon conducting the ceremony, because the church can’t provide backup for them.

In terms of support to married couples, the group answered all questions at below the “satisfactory” level (2.0).  The highest mark in this category (1.6) was given to “The parish is sensitive to changing circumstances affecting marriage today and seeks to respond appropriately through the activities and resources it provides.”   It was mentioned that the different language communities have different approaches to marriage, and that in some communities people are choosing to get married after co-habitating or after a civil marriage.  The group noted that priests are strong supporters of couples and families, and that they often promote marriage support opportunities.  Overall, however, St. Camillus support for marriage enrichment was described as “haphazard .”  It was noted that volunteers promote Marriage Encounter or Teams of Our Lady on occasion, but these programs are not announced in the bulletin or conducted on a regular basis.    All but one statement (already noted above) received scores of 1.1 or below.  The group noted that there is no organized lay ministry devoted to this within the parish, and that there is not an active committee devoted to marriage enrichment.

° Find ways to attract, recruit and train new members for marriage preparation.  People who sign up at the ministry fair often don’t follow through, and this is a ministry that models and requires commitment  

 ° For any real improvement in the area of Marriage enrichment, there has to be an organized lay ministry. °Efforts to have family activities for socializing and provision of childcare during events (especially for single parents) should continue and increase.

 ° Some type of formal training for pre-Cana volunteer  facilitators would be very helpful.  

 °Find a way for the different language groups to share their experiences for marriage preparation.            

 ° The group did not necessarily recommend a parish wedding coordinator, but they did recommend looking further into the question of whether such a coordinator would help take some of the burden of the pastoral staff.

Spanish Marriage Group:  The Spanish group also found that marriage preparation was St. Camillus’ strength.  They noted the prenuptial program helps ground couples in scripture, improve their communications with each other, and better understand their calling in the church.   This group also concurred that there is not much done within the parish to support married couples.  The group noted that there are some programs within the Archdiocese to support married couples, but not at St. Camillus.  This group felt that the sacrament of matrimony at St. Camillus is not used as an evangelization opportunity as much as it should be.

Key Recommendations:

° Organize more retreats, or full-day retreats, for pre-Cana programs.  Couples should be encouraged to take more time to share their struggles and successes.  

 ° Create small communities of married couples to follow up pre-Cana, and to help couples consider a Christian perspective on enriching their lives together.

 °Encourage more participation during Masses of married couples, and more discussion of the sacred bond of Marriage.

 °Take more advantage of the opportunity to evangelize through wedding ceremonies.

Pastoral & Family Care Group 3: Pastoral Care

This group examined questions of pastoral availability, of counseling and spiritual direction, of services for the sick and bereaved, and of crisis intervention.  The group gave the highest scores in this area to Pastoral availability, which they rated as better than satisfactory in all respects.  They noted that availability for anointing of the sick, visiting the hospital and administering communion is well-coordinated and maintained (although it depends on a small number of people).  The group wished to specifically commend the friars, Mary Mudd and Sandra Perez for their work on this.  They also noted that the pastoral staff and lay leaders are visible at major gatherings, and that parish and staff volunteers respond in a pastorally sensitive and timely manner to drop-in visitors.  In pastoral availability, the lowest mark (2.1, which remains above satisfactory), was given to the question, “The parish bulletin/website provides adequate contact information so that parishioners can reach the pastor or his delegate both during and outside of office hours.”  The group felt that the website could be used more effectively.

On matters of pastoral counseling and spiritual direction, the group did not give any scores that were “adequate” (2) or above.  The highest score (1.7) went to the statement “The parish communicates effectively to parishioners information about available pastoral counseling and spiritual direction.”  The group felt that those who are trained in spiritual direction, such as Joan Conway, may not be used as effectively as they should be, and that the (brief) presence of Fr. Charlie Miller, who was a trained counselor, demonstrated how much this dimension could help meet the needs of the community.  The group gave its lowest score (0) to the assertion “Each year, an increasing percentage of parishioners is seeking pastoral counseling or spiritual direction when appropriate,” noting that the formal ministry does not exist.  The group expressed amazement that, although St. Camillus has a large wealth of resources in the form of professionals and persons with formal training in spiritual direction, we have not established this as a ministry.

On matters of care for the sick and homebound, and ministry to the bereaved, the group noted some significant strengths, especially “The pastor or his delegate is readily available to anoint the sick and dying and to comfort and counsel grieving families during the dying and the death of a loved one.”  And “The parish networks with other agencies and services in the community so as to ensure effective care giving without unnecessary duplication of services.” It was noted that the Spanish and French communities may not be fully served by these ministries – and recommended that these communities be asked directly.  The group felt that the most problematic weakness was the low score St. Camillus received for “The parish communicates effectively to parishioners information about these resources” (this received a score of 1.8).  As an example, they noted that only one of the ‘friends’ of “Caring Friends” would be likely to have lunch served at their funeral.  They noted that this is not a criticism – the group is comprised of parishioners over 70 who support each other but who can’t be reasonably expected to do their own outreach, or to serve for all funerals.  The group suggested that there is a dire need for coordinated and well-publicized support that has a standard of care that all parishioners have the option of receiving when a loved one passes away.  They also noted  that sometimes a group within the church wants to give special support for a funeral of a former member – but it isn’t always clear how they can help.  The group noted that other weaknesses include having no formal bereavement ministry (this received a score of 1.4), but they mentioned that establishment of such a bereavement support ministry would require commitment of a dedicated coordinator.

Regarding crisis intervention, the group cited the most significant strength as St Camillus’ active network with and support of community agencies that intervene in crisis situations.  They especially commended St. Vincent de Paul’s work, and the support of Langley Park provided collectively by St. Elizabeth, Our Lady of Mercy and St. Camillus, and the food pantry.  The group also noted that St. Camillus is welcoming to outside groups such as AA that provide ongoing crisis support.   The group did discuss the fact that, even in the outstanding ministries, the workers are not formally trained, which would further improve their ability to serve.  They offered the Food Pantry as a model of training: Food Pantry volunteers, receive training from Joan Conway, Jean Guevara, or someone designated.  A standard operating procedure is incorporated into the volunteer information sheet and is orally communicated, although it is not formally in place, and this SOP is updated as needed based on the demand and infrastructure.  They felt it important to note, however, that the food pantry is not designed to be true crisis intervention, but rather a specific service.   Weaknesses were shown by responses to the statements “There are staff/volunteers who are trained and available to assist in crisis situations through direct intervention or referrals” and “The parish communicates effectively to parishioners information about crisis intervention resources.”  In both cases, the group noted that St. Camillus could significantly improve.

° The website can be used more effectively if it is promoted, and people are aware that they can request services using medium.  However, it is not clear if web outreach will be meaningful to the French and Spanish-speaking communities.

 ° Establish formal spiritual counseling or spiritual direction at St. Camillus – the pastoral staff makes referrals but we have no formal services within the parish. Consider engaging Joan Conway in this ministry. 

 °Consider re-establishing the Group Spiritual Direction Program, which was halted due to a lack of time rather than a lack of interest. 

 ° The parish should establish a Social Worker or Social Concerns Minister who can refer people in true crisis to agencies that can help them, especially since this parish has many people living on the margins of financial, legal and psychological stability. 

 ° The Food Pantry needs to explore how better to serve the French speaking community at St. Camillus.     ° A group modeled on “Caring Friends” that has the capability to do outreach and respond to unexpected deaths is needed.

 ° The effectiveness of anointing the sick and visiting the homebound should be examined to make sure that the Spanish and French speaking communities are being fully served.

 °Consider establishing a bereavement ministry that can provide care, and better coordinate the services that already exist at St. Camillus.

Appendix: Statistical Results

BPP Family and Pastoral Care Study Area 1: Ministry to Family (including Domestic Church, Marriage Preparation, Marriage Enrichment, and Non-Traditional and Special Needs Households) Domestic Church was done by Group 1.  Marriage Preparation and Enrichment were done by Group 2 in English and in Spanish.  Non-Traditional and Special Needs was not included in the survey assessment.  Some questions were taken from this category and put into the By-Mass Survey to maximize number of respondents.

BPP Family and Pastoral Care Study Area 2: Pastoral Care (including Pastoral Availability and Support, Pastoral Counseling and Spiritual Direction, Sick and Homebound Persons and Bereaved Ministry, Crisis Intervention, and Minority and Diversity Issues)  Group 3 covered all aspects except the final one.  Minority and Diversity Issues was not included in the survey assessment.  Some questions were taken from this category and put into the By-Mass Survey to maximize number of respondents.

BPP Prayer and Worship Study Area 4B: Sacraments of Healing and Vocation- Marriage.  This examination of marriage ceremonies was incorporated into Group 2’s discussion of Marriage.