As a moral conservative I have admired Fr. Pavone's work for life, but I hesitate to jump to his defense and condemn the Vatican's action of laicization. First of all: as always, the devil is in the details. We don't know the details and will probably not get an accurate account of them, not from Pavone and not from the Vatican. I retain a strong personal inclination to give authority the benefit of the doubt, even in a Church rife with scandal, incompetence and corruption, because I know from personal experience that an authority is often not free to defend a decision publicly for a host of reasons.
Problems and Questions With Father Pavone
1. There is a contradiction between public advocacy and the work of a priest. Over 50 years ago a controversial advocate of another flavor, Monsignor Ivan Illich, voluntarily left the priesthood because he realized this conflict. The priest is the center of unity at the Eucharist, which unites those of various political views. If a priest publicly supports a specific party, candidate, or policy he becomes a polarizing, not unifying force in the community. If a priest feels compelled by conscience to work for a social cause, he needs to separate himself from the clerical state and pursue that mission, as did Illich. So there has always been a tension interior to "priests for life." Ministry to post-abortion victims in Rachel's Vineyard and attention to women considering abortions are surely good priestly work. But public advocacy, even for such a morally pure cause, is problematic on the part of a priest.
2. The problem gets worse with Pavone's flagrant support of Donald Trump. Priests and bishops are obliged to teach moral truths, such as the inherent evil of legal abortion. But a red line is crossed when they support specific candidates, parties or policies. This specific case is especially toxic given the grave scandal of bad example that the private life of Trump offers our young.
3. He apparently has a long history of conflict with Church authorities. He portrays himself as a victim of persecution. He declares: "When you defend the unborn you will be mistreated like them." Anyone who declares himself so flamboyantly as a righteous victim, especially within the Church, is (IMO) suspect. Do not accept the self-approval! The news reports that it is unclear in which diocese he is incardinated. This is quite ridiculous: he should simply identify the diocese. Or admit that he is not incardinated. The latter is probable. This means that he is functioning as a renegade, maverick priest, on his own. This seems right as he comes across as arrogant and self-righteous, lacking in docility, humility and obedience.
4. In a video he stood before what appeared to be an altar (which he claims was actually his office desk, unconsecrated, but decorated as an altar) on which lay a dead fetus. This gesture is at best melodramatic and histrionic, at worst sacrilegious towards the unborn as well as the Eucharist.
5. In a public tweet he condemned pro-choice Democrats with repetitive use of the expression "goddamn." This was later deleted. This language is not acceptable, especially for a priest.
6. He has suggested that he might deny absolution to a Democrat-voting confessant. I understand his logic: I also see a pro-choice vote as morally equivalent of one for a Nazi, a Communist, or a KKK zealot. But we face here a complex reality of wrong or, more accurately, ignorant consciences. It is a huge challenge to help others out of the darkness of such moral error. But suggesting the denial of absolution is counterproductive. It will polarize and infuriate many of fine intelligence and good heart who see themselves as pro-life but make a different political, pragmatic calculation on how to best protect life in policies. His statement was entirely dissonant with Catholic confessional practice. This involves the "inner forum" and a sacred confidentiality between penitent and priest. It is entirely different from the public reception of Holy Communion which, in the case of flagrantly abortion-supporting figures, becomes sacrilegious and scandalous.
Eventually a pattern emerges: Pavone uses his priesthood as weapon in his moral/political crusade. He displays an irreverence for the Eucharist, his own priesthood and the ministry of the clergy. He weaponizes his ordination to further his cause.
Political Clericalism
He is afflicted with a malady that is more prevalent on the Left: a political clericalism that abuses Ordination to advance a preferred policy or ideology. That sacrament bestows an authority on faith and morals, but not on public policy. Prudence on such is the domain specifically of the laity, not the clergy. Weaponizing priesthood, episcopacy or papacy to advance a pragmatic, social preference is arrogant, impudent and disrespectful of the sacrament of orders. This has particularly marred the papacy of Francis as he abuses his authority to promote his preferences on prudential issues like capital punishment, immigration, and global warming.
Moving Forward
The firm decision by the Vatican on Father Pavone may be good for the Church, for the pro-life cause in America, and for Father Pavone himself. (He is a priest forever by the seal of ordination so I will refer to him still respectfully as Father rather than Mister even as he is not permitted to function as such.) He has every right to legally appeal the decision, but it may be good for him to humbly submit and pursue his passion for victims of abortion by another path, without abusing his priesthood as a weapon in a political contest. A move into quiet, modest service would be contrary to his temperament but might benefit his soul.
At this time, in the wake of Dobbs, the pro-life movement faces many legislative battles at the state level. Pro-choice hysteria is at a fever pitch. But the priority must be to provide support for the many women with unintended pregnancies who will have no choice but to bring them to term. Perhaps Fr. Pavone can channel his immense competence and energy to provide for them.
Double Standard in the Church
With that said, however, we clearly see a double standard on the part of the Church. How many progressive priests have been laicized for political activism? Fr. Robert Drinan S.J. was a vicious abortion-advocate but remained a Jesuit in good standing and a celebrity among progressive Catholics. The notorious leftist activist Fr. Fleger was just returned to active ministry in Chicago with barely a slap on the wrist. An American Cardinal publicly endorsed Biden over Trump in 2019. This was more grave: Biden's policies are far more odious from a Catholic view and the endorsement came from a Cardinal, not a mere priest. Will he be disciplined by the Vatican?
Would that the Vatican could show such determination on both sides of the political spectrum in defense of the integrity of our liturgy and sacrament!.
May this zealous priest be guided by the Holy Spirit to serve the least in humility, obedience, docility.
May the Vatican and our bishops be guided by the Holy Spirit in prudence and wisdom to reverence human life in all its forms and protect the integrity and sacredness of the sacraments and priesthood.
May we all be guided by the Holy Spirit to fervently defend, cherish and honor human life, especially that which is powerless and vulnerable!
No comments:
Post a Comment