Do you know the reason why this was not done? I would have thought the Benedictines would have been one of the better choices.
God be with you.
**MY guess **is that there would be several complications. For starters the operation would have had to move to a Benedictine abbey. You can’t just pick up a network that size and move it and you can’t pick Benedictines and move them. Benedictines make a vow of stability. They do not transfer from abbey to abby. This move would have required opening a new Benedictine house. That’s easier said than done. You need all kinds of permissions from the local bishop and the Holy See.
Secondly, the Benedictines, like the Franciscans are in the process of returning to their roots, per the mandate of Vatican II. Even though the Rule of St. Benedict allows them to own property, it has two caveats. First, the Benedictines are enclosed. Their life is one of silence and solitude. They are dramatically cutting back the amount of time that they spend among lay people and the amount of service that they provide to lay people. In some abbeys they have reduced it to celebrating mass and in other houses no contact at all with the world, except for retreatants.
The second caveat is that they too are returning to the brother community. That is, they are not a community of priests. They are religious brothers who are monks, some of the brothers just happen to be ordained. So that the priesthood is accidental and not essential to their life. One or two priests are enough to hear their confessions and celebrate mass for them. Taking on this ministry would have inolved taking on the pastoral care of the lay people who are attached to EWTN. This is something that the Benedictine family is trying to cut out of their life, because it interferes with their service to the Church. As you know, the Camaldolese, Cistercians and Trappists are also Benedictine and their apostolate is to pray with the Church and for the Church. Running a network would not be a very quiet endeavor.
As to the Dominicans, I’m going to
guess that it would be inappropriate for them to take it. Even though they too can own property, they are friars. As per Vatican II, friars must return to the 13th century where it all started. The early Dominican Friars were itinerant preachers, theologians and university professors. EWTN does not fit that profile. It is a corporation, not a university, seminary or parish mission. You don’t just go in, teach or preach and leave, if you own it. They have had several Dominicans on EWTN. The reason why they have been very effective is because they have been very faithful to the vision of St. Dominic. They come, teach, film and are gone. That’s what friars do. We go in, do a job and disappear.
The Franciscans of the Eternal Word are a perfect fit for this ministry. They don’t own EWTN. They work for EWTN. They preserve the poverty that St. Francis commanded. They have time for brotherhood and prayer. They don’t have to be ordained to do most of the work that’s required of them. It’s a perfect fit. Like St. Francis said, “If we own property, then we have to be responsible for it. Why would the Lord want us to do that?” That was already being done by the monks and other orders of friars. Francis’ friars were to be detached from things, places and people. As I see it, the present arrangement provides EWTN with the Franciscan presence, but allows the friars the freedom to be as involved as possible, without being so involved that they become distracted from brotherhood and it allows them the freedom to leave when they choose to do so.
This is what the Poor Clares did. They founded it, under the direction of Mother Angelica and then they walked away. In any other religious order, a new head would have been appointed when Mother became ill or elderly. Because the Poor Clares are Franciscan, they’re not attached even to the thing they love. They can surrender it to someone else who will take good care of it, when the time comes. That’s what happened. The time came.
From where I sit as a Franciscan, the evolution of EWTN is beautiful, because it is exactly how Francis and Clare wanted things to go. We go in, plant the seed of the Gospel and when the plant is sturdy, we leave it to secular Catholics to care for it or to another religious order and we disappear without a fuss. What is important is the work of the Gospel, not our presence. Francis and Clare taught us to make ourselves dispensible. We were always supposed to support the secular, not take over. We have started many projects and taken over some, because they needed our talent. Once you find someone else with the necessary talent, you hand it over. This is true poverty.
I believe what the OP is expressing is difficulty with poverty. What I’m seeing in the original post is a difficulty letting go and letting things grow and change according to the Will of God and God’s plan. To us, Franciscans, this is awesome. For other people who do not share our worldview, this is very hard. I can certainly appreicate that. Change is a hard thing to cope with.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
