Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

St. George Lithuanian Considering Move… But Not to St. Thomas

July 22nd, 2009, Promulgated by Dr. K

St. George Lithuanian church, located down the road from St. Stanislaus and near the former Holy Redeemer church on Hudson Avenue, is exploring options to abandon its current church home for a new location that has yet to be determined. This can be found in a documented entitled “Comprehensive List of Questions and Answers” published by the Irondequoit planning group. According to the document, St. George parish can no longer “support its buildings” and its members “no longer live near the parish.”

The document goes on to mention that St. Thomas the Apostle, though not the first choice, was one option that St. George was considering for a possible move. This move would have provided even more financial support for St. Thomas, if only the diocese would have encouraged it. However, this is what the document says (emphasis added):

“The Bishop’s office met several weeks ago with Fr. Dominic & Fr. Gintaras to discuss plan/update/process for St. George?s relocation. Fr. Dominic mentioned STA as one of several parishes he contacted but it was not their 1st choice. At that meeting, we discussed what to take in consideration when relocating a parish. (needs, space, …) At that point of our discussion, we mentioned the importance of having a long term view when choosing a new location. It may not be wise to choose a campus within a pastoral planning group which may reduce the number of their sites within the next few years. … Our focus was not so much to discourage St. George about choosing STA, but rather, bringing awareness about changes which occur in some planning groups as they are looking for a new home/site.?

The planning group claims that their focus was not to discourage St. George from considering St. Thomas as a worship site, but that appears to be exactly what they have done. To tell the people of St. George that it would not be a good idea to select St. Thomas because of upcoming closures in Irondequoit appears to be a blatant attempt to discourage a move there, a move which could have strengthened St. Thomas and provided yet another reason why St. Thomas should be one of the three parishes to remain open. Instead, St. Thomas the Apostle is on the chopping block. Did the planning group allow the people of St. Thomas a fighting chance to keep their parish open? The above incident indicates that they did not. As does the following Q & A from the same document:

24. How about a fund drive to provide for the repairs at STA?

It would not seem responsible to have a fund drive for repairs at St. Thomas, or at any of our other parishes”

Above are two images of St. George Lithuanian. Click to enlarge.

Tags: , , ,


14 Responses to “St. George Lithuanian Considering Move… But Not to St. Thomas”

  1. You know who was brought up in St. George's Parish? A now sede-vacantist bishop Louis Vezelis, OFM. He lives at the friary on Mt. Read Blvd. He would probably give you a very blistering account of the parish under Bishop Clark and what happened after Vatican II.

  2. Anonymous says:

    I've heard enough, the DoR and the I.P.P.G. is clearly targeting St. Thomas and doing everything in their power to see that it closes.

  3. Dr. K says:

    Did not know that, Choir. I would love to hear his story.

    ~Dr. K

  4. Gen says:

    The whole matter is nauseating. The Diocese of Rochester must begin to truly and undeniably listen to its faithful. After Vatican II, the leaders of the Church said that it now belong to the laity. Well, I think the DoR has applied that too far in some cases and too narrowly in others. The diocesan-appointed commission of lay people can basically close a parish, while the vast majority of faithful laity want to keep said parish(es) open. Something's wrong and deeply flawed with that picture. The laity should have power over unfair treatment, but not over dispensing said treatment.

  5. Dr. K – Call up for an appt with him, but be prepare to hear some very intense criticism of the Catholic church since Vatican II. He is getting up in age now. Probably early 80s. Let me know if you go. Their website is

  6. Anonymous says:

    Would these people have put up the same opposition, say, if St. George wanted to move into Christ the King?

  7. I copy and pasted what you see below from another post. I hope all y'all don't mind. It's apropos here too.

    Saving St. Thomas is absolutely necessary for many reasons.

    First off, St. Thomas parishioners need justice and the DoR is not acting in a fair and just manner. They are being made a scapegoat for many of the bad decision made by Bishop Clark. We would have had priests to pastor these parishes if Clark had promoted vocations years ago. Clark had a politically-correct "filter" through which vocations would be approved or not.

    Second — Vatican II called for participation by the laity. STA laity is speaking now and has spoken years ago when the school was closed. But the Bishop doesn't get the "spirit of Vatican II" of the laity involvement because it doesn't fit with the Bishop's agenda. This is a Bishop that speaks out of both sides of his mouth. Remember Bishop Clark is a "Jadot-appointment". Read about Jadot —>

    Thirdly, in a different way, keeping STA open is a victory for Western Civilization. For many years, Christianity, but more specifically Catholicism has been kicked around by politicians and some of its own theologians. The "world" is trying to shut down the voice of the Catholic Church. It is our right to speak up and defend our Catholic faith, teach our Catholic faith, practice our Catholic devotions in our Catholic parish, pastor by an orthodox priest and, hopefully, one day soon, by a real unabashedly Roman Catholic bishop.

    Until then, we need to stick together and fight the DoR.

    To Persis: I truly mean this in the most charitable way possible —
    they (the diocese) may have the buildings, but WE have the faith!
    Wake up and smell the incense before it's too late.

    Oremus pro invicem.

    July 22, 2009 11:41 AM

  8. Anonymous says:

    I don't know if anyone else noticed this, but one reason Christ the King is being favored over St. Thomas is that they have their own Catholic school.

    Well, if you hadn't shut down St. Thomas' school, Bishop Matthew Harvey Clark, they would have one too!

    Dirty politics is at work here, I believe in my heart.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Since almost ever parish in the diocese is in pastoral planning and clustering, is there a single parish out there that would be available as a possible home for St. George? According to the Irondequoit planning group and the diocese, no, there wouldn't.

  10. Dr. K says:

    There's a lengthy history of St. George over on Wikipedia.

    Here is the link:

    ~Dr. K

  11. Excellent find, Dr. K. Thanks a real lot.

  12. Anonymous says:

    All of the blame for parish closings has to be put on Bishop Clark.

    He makes the first and last decision and runs the Diocese of Rochester with an iron fist.

    What do you think about an avalanche of post cards being sent to the Vatican, calling for Bishop Clark's retirement? I would put a blurry picture of Clark on the front of the post card.

    How much is a postage stamp for a post card being sent to Rome?

  13. Anonymous says:

    "How much is a postage stamp for a post card being sent to Rome?"

    A lot. Possibly more than 5 dollars.

  14. Anonymous says:

    If ST. George wants to move to St. Thomas, let them! Don't try and talk them out of it, don't try and push them away with scare tactics! There is some serious BS going on in Irondequoit.

Leave a Reply

Log in | Register

You must be logged in to post a comment.

-Return to main page-