INVALID WAYSPOT APPEAL Zabytkowa wikarowka
Title of the Wayspot: Zabytkowa wikarówka
Location: 49.937083,20.23762
City: Niegowic
Country: Poland
POI removed most likely as private property but Zabytkowa wikarówka/Historic curate house is historic place where the young priest used to live in 1950s.
In Poland catholic priests do not live in private property but in property owned by Catholic Church. Such places are owned by Catholic Church as well as all churches (buildings) in Poland. In other words this place belongs to all parishioners.
Zabytkowa wikarówka/Historic curate house is historic place where in the 1950s lived Karol Wojtyla future Pope Jan Pawel II. This place is visited by hundreds of thousands pilgrims each year.
Photo of whole building:
On front wall there is sculpture of Pope and inscription "Tu mieszkal 1948-1949"/"Here lived 1948-1949":
On front wall there is second sculpture of Pope and inscription "Biggest curate of the world who lived here":
Behind the building there is place designed to host visitors:
This historical place is always open for all visitors.
More information about this historical place:
- tags: church, church, museum, history
- "Wojtyła returned to Poland in the summer of 1948 for his first pastoral assignment in the village of Niegowić..."
Please restore this great place.
Thank you
Comments
Is it a single-family residential home right now, though? If there are people living there, unfortunately it's ineligible, no matter how much historic importance it has.
It is not. Priests live here and parishioners can come to them at any time of the day or night! This is parish property.
In Catholic Church priests cannot start a family and get married so it cannot be single-family :).
If someone insists that one priest is one family - there live few priests - few families :)
Moreover Priests cannot buy and own houses or land properties.
Such places are common Catholic Church property - just like all churches.
@Gajowy75-ING If you want to get technical about wording, sure, let's get technical.
A home is single-family if everyone living there belongs to the same household. So it doesn't matter if the residents formally qualify as a family. If there is a single priest living there, it's PRP and therefore ineligible. If there are 3 priests living there as housemates and share the same living space and household, it's considered PRP.
If this is a residential building that is not divided into several separate apartments/homes, I'd unfortunately consider this PRP.
I was there. Inside! There are 2 separate apartaments with separate kitchens and bathrooms.
That's great, it means it's eligible. Can you prove it somehow? Pictures, articles, open-access layout plants from the municipality/heritage committee, anything? If you can prove it, it should be restored, I hope.
According to this map (government owned), it belongs to a parish church.
One more evidence to show who is the owner of this plot:
Marked tekst: "land of churches and religious associations".
Source: https://mapy.geoportal.gov.pl/imap/Imgp_2.html?locale=pl&gui=new&sessionID=5591387
It does not matter who owns the property, a PRP still applies.
Hmm so church on the other side of the road is also PRP. I have heard that single God with family live there :)
I think this is a fairly simple matter. If you can prove that there are multiple apartments or households in the building, it should (and probably will) be restored. If you can't, it probably won't.
Ownership of the property is irrelevant. The profession of the inhabitants is irrelevant.
You are completely wrong.
Catholic church is like big corporation. They have hotel like buildings where they workers (young priests) live for some time. Building belongs to corporation/church and workers/priests live there for some short limited time - just like hotel guests. After some time young priests/wikary are moved to more permanent location - presbytery and actually here is the same case but residence time is longer.
Appeal Denied - Thanks for the appeal, Agent. We have taken another look but stand by our decision to retire this Portal.
You write "you are completely wrong", and then proceed to write a paragraph that doesn't contradict me in any way, but is entirely pointless.
If you spend as much energy on proving that the building contains multiple apartments as you spend on trying to educate me on the (utterly irrelevant) inner workings of the Catholic church, you'd still have a chance of getting your portal back.