My thoughts about priest known on EWTN leaving

Here’s my take about the high profile Franciscan priest from EWTN who has become involved with a woman and has left the friary in order to “discern his vocation.”

First of all I’m not shocked or surprised. Priests are human and there is of course always a certain percentage of those who take vows who find they are not truly faithful to their vocation, and they must leave. Because of the sacredness of their calling this is very distressing and disappointing when it does happen. Some are rather casual about leaving, while for others they feel the full gravity of the change in their lives and the impact their decision has on the community. Still, I must reiterate that it is of top priority that a priest serves Jesus Christ with serenity of mind and soul. If the priest is conflicted and serenity is lost, then the vocation is no longer true. As challenged as the Church is with vocations, the Church is never so challenged that it is benefited by a priest who has lost the serenity of mind of his vocation. This is where the sexual and other abuse originates, at its worst manifestation of lack of serenity and contentment in the service of Jesus Christ. In this case once a priest starts constantly thinking about someone else in an emotional attachment beyond the pastoral calling, he has lost his attachment to Jesus Christ as a priest. A priest is to be 100 percent to Jesus Christ; that is the definition of a Catholic priest! People keep trying to chisel percentage of time to Jesus as a priest, when they argue against the priestly vocation as it is presently mandated. I will get back to this point in a few sentences but first I want to make another point about why I am not shocked or surprised.

I never met the priest in question even though I spent a fair amount of time at EWTN and kept an eye out for him. He was always busy or traveling, apparently. He also hosts the “hippest” of the EWTN line-up, which is youth oriented. People have written, correctly, that this priest brought quite a percentage of showmanship and “TV personality” to this show. But I had an specific “Oh, oh” moment when I heard him mention on TV, in a homily I believe, that he JOGS IN THE MORNING. The moment those words were out of his lips I knew this priest would not stay in his vocation.

Anyone who has read articles about, “How to know when your spouse is cheating,” knows that taking special care with fitness and appearance is a warning sign. I have no problem with athletics, though I thought the basketball films a bit much. I know it is hip but last I checked Jesus is not in the hoop. The youth tend to need to see the prayerful side of the priests they look up to; they see plenty of “cool” music video type clips of people playing basketball. But it’s not unheard of for a priest to have a vanity or a quirk, and like I said, a priest is still a human being. So while I was not thrilled to the core of my being with the packaging of video of the priest’s athletic joys, I thought it was a “roll the eyes” type of thing, but not a risk. But the moment that he mentioned he jogs in the morning and had his “thinking time” I thought, if he is up early why is he not praying in the time he is spending jogging? I especially thought this because as we see, he is so avid a recreation sportsman during the free time anyway.

So I saw a vanity of time and of fitness/appearance that was contrary to one’s vocation as a priest. Worse, his mentioning it in a homily type of context really made me sit up and take notice, and not in a good way. People are poorly formed and stressed in faith. They are very well informed with people who jog in the morning and commune with nature. People need to hear why Jesus is King, Savior, and Messiah and is still living, relevant now and as future judge in everyone’s life. You only have people’s attention during that time, and only for a reasonable amount of time. The Bible is the source of endless inspiration and material for sermonizing and formation. Why would one use what I consider to be a “speaker circuit” tactic if one is a priest? I’ve listened to endless corporate talking heads that are paid to have an “opening” to their “lectures” that starts with a personal “reach the audience” type activity that leads into a talking point. I did not want the priest to be jogging in the morning, and I did not want to hear about it either. This priest has a corporate background (again, he’s said so in his show, more information I did not want to hear, because when one constantly works in reference to one’s previous career or lifestyle it creates a mood of casting back to pre-vocation thinking). The minute he said that he jogged and made it some sort of spirituality “lite” talking point, I knew he would not likely remain a priest. Jesus had to compete with vanity.

This is a temptation of the entire EWTN model which I did not like or approve of when I visited there. It is a slippery cliff (not slope, but cliff) the moment any one puts their mush in front of a camera and becomes a “personality” or “celebrity.” Even devout priests who have no challenge to their vocation and discernment speak and blog about potential pressures of broadcasting their Mass, and even the difference in self consciousness and self absorption (“the Mass is not about you” they remind themselves) between the NO and the Latin forms of the Mass (especially facing or not facing the congregation). Making a hip show and having a priest who has a strong very self aware and somewhat prideful personality is a severe temptation. Think about it. It is at least two hours out of the day of broadcast where the priest is thinking only about his appearance on TV, and not about his commitment to Jesus Christ. It is a severe occupational and societal job hazard in this media and appearance saturated culture. It is eye contact, appearance, and schmoozing by definition.

So I am not surprised at all. I feel great closeness, love and distress for the priests and brothers who have had a senior and respected member of their order basically ripped from the communal heart. But life goes on and I hope and pray that these devout and prayerful Franciscans will learn about the temptations as I have outlined above. Nothing brings people more to Jesus than being OF JESUS. The moment a priest becomes “part time” OF JESUS he is in trouble. This does not mean a priest cannot counsel, make TV appearances, and take part in events. But he must do a “Jesus check” about whether his time is still being spent on the outside but from the “inside” of Jesus, where the priest’s presence is illuminating Jesus, or whether the priest is becoming a performer, a personality separate from Jesus, or a self designated spokesman. The wise and serene priest knows the difference.

And now I will address the inevitable “this is why priests need to marry” squawking. No, this is exactly why priests must NOT marry. I’ve explained this before but let me explain It in two ways that this example illustrates. First of all, I have explained that a priest by definition is 100 percent for Jesus Christ. That is his “job description.” Where did this job description come from? From Jesus himself who gave himself 100 percent to God. Jesus was the first Catholic priest and all priests must follow his model of being 100 percent for him. When one marries one is negotiating and bargaining a huge chunk of life that is not OF JESUS in total. That is why there is the married deaconate, a fine and vital calling of great importance to the Church. A priest is 100 percent consecrated in the image of Jesus Christ, just as Jesus was himself to God. A deacon is a vital part of the Church religious lifeblood, but when the deacon raises and tends to a family he is not taking away from the 100 percent sanctification and dedication that a priest would if he were partly “of the world.” It does not matter that some Apostles were married; I mean let’s stop being deliberately naïve… Jesus had to start somewhere and he was going to start with mature men who were very likely married at the time Jesus came into public ministry. People act deliberately dumb on this point. PRIESTS ARE MODELING THEMSELVES AFTER JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF, NOT THE APOSTLES OR DISCIPLES.

People who do not understand that are being willfully ignorant. However, I also recognize many who were formed during weaker times have lost their understanding of the priest as the alternate or substitute Jesus Christ (not the step in guys for the Apostles and how they served in the beginning). A priest must not be disturbed from this 100 percent of time and focus of being within Jesus Christ, not sometimes yes and sometimes something else is more important. So it is not a mean spirited or antiquated “decision” that “could be changed if we wanted to.” It is not. Jesus Christ was who he was and as first priest he is the model for all succeeding priests.

A priest is the only religious figure who totally models himself after Jesus Christ as best as humanly possible. By this I mean the priest emulates the 100 percent devotion that Jesus gave to God. Being a priest is different from being a preacher. Being a priest is different from being a minister. Being a Christian priest is different from being one of the ancient Old Testament Jewish priests. Being a priest is different from being an Imam, who calls and guides the faithful in worship but who is not conducting sacrifice to God. The Mass is sacrifice to God and only a priest can conduct a Mass and manifest the interior Jesus Christ through the sacrament of Holy Eucharist. Jesus was one of a kind. He was the only religious figure to be born of a Virgin through the Holy Spirit. Other faiths do not point back to Jesus Christ as the total image of their religious figures. Look at the Anglican/Episcopal structure of married priests. Where did that come from? It came from the English King Henry VIII who persecuted and outlawed Catholics and made up his own faith so that HE could divorce and remarry. By definition Henry VIII imposed a secular blockage between Jesus Christ and the faithful today. Episcopal priests were not allowed to emulate Jesus Christ and serve him entirely from within with the sacraments. A Catholic priest is literally walking in the shoes of Jesus Christ and this is the only faith that maintains that continuity of the reality of Jesus Christ as he lived, and the continuing of his interior reality through the priest to current times. This is not an unfavorable comment toward the piety of individual married priests of other faiths. But it is a fact that married priests 1) cannot by definition be 100 percent of Jesus Christ in their time and devotion and 2) cannot perform the sacrament of Holy Eucharist EXACTLY as Jesus Christ did, alone and unconnected to the world. Married priests are not priests of the order of Jesus Christ because they have some percentage of time and heart that is attached to the world. A priest by definition is only attached to Jesus Christ.

Now I know that Eastern Orthodoxy permits married priests. Again, I am not diminishing at all the profound devotion these priests. This variation from the Catholic Church came from modeling the priests after the first Apostles. Remember that it was a lonely far flung job to evangelize and minister to early Christian populations. The Eastern Orthodoxy sustained their populations by emulating the Apostles and permitting married priests. The Catholic Church, however, was able to discern among the religious those who would follow Jesus Christ in total of model, the priests, and those who would be partly of the world and partly of consecrated vocation, the deaconate.

Here is my final point on the subject. Those of you who “advocate” for “married priests,” realize that this is what you are saying to God. You are saying, “God, humans are so weak and so self centered that there are no men who are willing to be celibate unmarried consecrated priests for you.” Whenever someone is saying they want the Catholic Church to “allow priests to married” they are confessing in front of God that humans are not up to the job of having a small proportion of the male population who faithfully follow Jesus Christ in the totality of their lives. Yet the evidence to the contrary is there. There are people who are serene and total priests of Jesus Christ in the world. When one argues that “yes, but vocations are failing so we should ‘allow’ married priests” again, you are saying, “God, eventually no one will want to be a celibate and unmarried priest.” Do you really think so poorly of the entire population of the world AND do you want to actually say that to God? If so you got bigger problems than you realize. If you are ignoring the reality of the true dedicated priests (“few” as they may be in some areas of the world) and betting that eventually “no one” will want to be a priest, you are offering God quite a severe assessment of humanity. And what would be the future of humanity if people become so weak that no one would “be a priest” unless “they could marry or have sexual relations?” How interested would God be in a faith that thinks so little of itself despite its own heritage of two thousand years, through thick and thin? The evidence continues to be to the contrary. I predict that many of the young people who are called to the priesthood (and deaconate) will be increasingly refreshed by total commitment and serenity to following the footsteps of Jesus Christ. Those who “have it all” and “rob Peter to pay Paul” find that they are not so serene and not so content. If there is not some portion, no matter how small, of men who cannot contain themselves sufficiently to be serene in their celibate calling to follow Jesus Christ, then what are the odds that humanity as a whole will contain itself to ensure its own survival? I think you all know the answer to that if you are honest.

So I urge you to praise, pray for and support the vocations of Catholic priests, rather than act like modern day Eves and tempters by advocating their weakness rather than their strength. What kind of parent says to the child, “Why are you even bothering doing that? You know you are only going to screw it up.” That is exactly what the tempters are doing when they paint the picture of the “suffering priest who is being deprived of sexual relationship.” You are predicting and glorifying in their supposed misery and failure of vocation as sure as if you mock your child as he tries to build his first science project, or write his first alphabet. What is it about this sick society that has to create victims everywhere, and ultimately rob people of their own inner strength and serenity?

Be prayerful and be understanding, but if a priest must leave because he is no longer to be 100 percent within Jesus Christ let him go. But do not then assume that everyone else must also be a victim of desire for the world. Admire the steadfastness of the Catholic priests who have been strong and faithful throughout the years, and who love the Lord with their entire beings, not the portion that they are able to schedule on their timesheets of life. Humanity depends on these men and they should not be diminished in anyone’s eyes. I can assure you that for the faithful priests, they are Jesus Christ’s “heroes.” He who was the first Catholic priest knows full well how the faithful priests love and serve him through their entire giving to him and to his flock. And God sees those who try to individually or politically to tempt, and he would wonder why those do not devote themselves to more worthy service of their fellow humans.

May God bless all priests who serve the flock of Jesus so faithfully. Continued prayers for vocations. Know that Mary, mother of all priests, prays for them too.