In fact, the photo of the Pentecost mass shows a crowd filling the space. However, some pieces of this puzzle don't quite fit. My regular correspondent points out that the work being done on this space represents a major financial outlay, and I agree. In fact, it seems to indicate that an experienced contractor and an architectural firm are involved. This would be what a diocese would require in such a project -- in poking around the web, I've seen diocesan guidelines for construction projects, which require serious planning, review, and approval. For comparison, this is what's required in current expansion plans at our diocesan parish.
Houston simply does not have these resources, which makes me think that this project is being supervised and financed with the help of channels outside the OCSP. This is clearly something bigger than has otherwise been undertaken by the OCSP. I'm now beginning to realize that this is what caused the joint letter from Bps Lopes and Barnes -- the size of the project must have come to Barnes's attention, and it probably led to a serious sit-down over what was going on.
However, to call the project a "mission", which is the word used in the bishops' letter, is disingenuous. As my regular correspondent points out, "the term 'mission' is not used in the OCSP, which has three categories: group-in-formation, quasi-parish, and parish." I'm not sure exactly what a Catholic canonical mission consists of, but an Anglican mission is not financially self-sustaining, and its budget and decisions come from the diocese, not a vestry. If the size of the Murrieta facility is any indication, if it's a "mission" of the Irvine group, the tail is wagging the dog.
So this is a big deal, and my guess is that Bp Barnes saw this before any lay observers did, and there had to be a sit-down to get it past him. One issue is how little publicity there has been about this project, despite its size. This is another indication of the amateurishness behind the OCSP. If this is something worthy of the effort and investment, why is it such a secret? Shouldn't this be the subject of a professional announcement from Houston? If they don't want to upset Bp Barnes by making a big deal of it, why bother with the effort at all?
My guess is that the money behind this is coming from Mr Busch of the Busch Group, which owns the building where the Irvine group has been meeting. An adult -- indeed, a wealthy philanthropic adult -- would require adult supervision of a project that is clearly going to run close to seven figures. One thing that's going to have to change at some point is the guy who publicizes the effort with campy St Georges is going to have to be told to put his efforts in places where they can be more effectively used, and Houston is going to have to wake up to this.
Someone must have gone to Mr Busch, or some equivalent donor, with a serious proposal that included realistic projections. The size of the Pentecost crowd suggests there may have been some basis for these. This may be reflected in the apparent association of Fr Barbour with a renewed California effort. We'll have to see.
On the other hand, God is not mocked. The same guy whose idea of outreach has previously been beer breakfasts and whiskey barbecues is going to have to be serioused-up or put in a much subordinate role. Houston is going to have to become a much more professional operation to sustain something like this as well.
