Do offices of ministry to minorities have a future? I am concerned about the future of diocesan offices that minister to the concerns of minorities. I believe they are at risk of being restructured in ways that will leave them ineffective or dismantled altogether, their full potential never realized.

I believe it is ineffective, for example, to take a director in a leadership position, reduce his status to "coordinator," close his office and relocate him to a dormitory-style setup with other minority coordinators answerable to someone not of their race who determines what is important concerning their constituents.

This doesn't look good for race relations, economic justifications notwithstanding.

What a frustrating and complicated situation this has to be for all involved.

Since I have experience as a founding director of a diocesan office of black Catholic ministry, I will focus on the church's ministry to blacks.

Offices of black ministry --- OBMs --- first were established more than 30 years ago to promote the church's apostolate in black communities that doubted blacks were welcome in the church. There are now 55 such offices throughout the U.S. They sponsor annual Black History Month Masses, Martin Luther King Jr. celebrations, uplifting liturgies reflecting black cultural contributions, conferences for black youth, etc.

Less publicized are OBMs' mediation in parishes experiencing racial tension and participation on diocesan committees that contributed to, for example, the U.S. bishops' pastoral letter on economic justice.

But there are two obstacles surrounding OBMs that could be adversely affecting how others assess them:

(1) While blacks and pastoral teams serving in significantly black parishes faithfully participated in OBM programs, nonblacks in general, and noticeably those in diocesan decision-making positions, did not; they were never required to. Besides, some nonblacks sincerely did not believe that OBM programs pertained to them. They seemed content to allow blacks to be the Pied Pipers when it came to other blacks joining or remaining in the Catholic Church.

(2) OBMs themselves became proficient in developing very affirming programs. They repeated these year after year. Perhaps they could have turned over annual projects to local parishes well versed over time in how to coordinate them. OBMs became like bodybuilders who flexed one arm brimming with muscles but did not flex the other arm as much --- the one uniquely positioned to reach decision-makers in the diocese, especially those who assign their budgets, and to help them see the significance of the education offered not just for blacks but for the whole church.

The other arm still is needed to point out respectfully but firmly those instances where the local church thinks she is doing well in the area of race relations but is not. Such work requires diplomacy and spending time with one another.

I know of a diocese that recently closed its offices for black ministry and Spanish ministry. It thanked the two directors for good work but said their services no longer were needed since the diocese was "going in a different direction."

What troubles me most about this was the exclusion of those experienced directors from the meetings prior to the final meeting that announced the new direction. Why were some at the discussion table, but not those being discussed?

Many church leaders readily admit they don't have all of the answers about how to proceed in these financially troubling days. Some have called in "efficiency experts" who may be giving bad advice on how to make cuts swiftly and, supposedly, with as little pain as possible.

I wonder why they have to call in anybody. Why can't they just sit down and talk to one another?

Carole Norris Greene is a columnist with Catholic News Service.