There also has been considerable movement among groups-in-formation, with the result that several have been closed or rendered inactive after losing their priests. But there's been an interesting counter-development: certain OCSP priests have attracted the attention of diocesan bishops. My regular correspondent reports,
Fr Seraiah['s] diocesan responsibilities have suddenly gone from assisting at two local parishes to being the administrator of those parishes, necessitating a change in service times for the Ordinariate group[. T]he diocese may expect significant work from the Ordinariate priest in return for his housing etc, which reduces his focus on the group.Elsewhere, my correspondent notes,
The OCSP is moving on to a model where a priest is in charge of a small group of Ordinariate faithful with whom he had no prior connection and in addition a diocesan parish or a chaplaincy. Fr Sly, for example, is the pastor of Our Lady of Sorrows, Kansas City, the Associate Pastor of St Therese, KC, and the administrator of Our Lady of Hope Ordinariate group, which he took over from Fr Davis. Where does this last rank on his list of priorities? The division between those who are hustling (in the good sense) in the OCSP and those who are coasting is all too clear.If a diocesan bishop sees an OCSP priest saying BDW mass for 12 or 20, whereas hundreds nearby may need a pastor, the bishop is going to try to make good use of available resources. This is particularly true if the bishop gets the impression that the OCSP priest is an effective administrator. I would note that neither Fr Seraiah nor Fr Sly is a Nashotah House alum. These appear to be in less demand.
I think in practice we're starting to see a demonstration that the ordinariate model is not a good use of resources, and that the resources it does provide in some cases are not useful.