Extra, Extra

pone,

I certainly hope the COM makes a good decision based on the usual criteria. They should not give McGreevey special treatment. I hope the Diocese of New York does what they truly feel is right.

If the vicar of St. Bart's picked the timing of the release, that is somewhat disturbing - this should have waited. If, however, the vicar was asked by the Star Ledger to comment on something that was leaked to them by someone else, I think it would be very naive to believe that the timing was not chosen by someone working for McGreevey. Mr. McGreevey was a high-level NJ politician, who resigned after it was revealed that he had abused the public trust through nepotism, if nothing else. He then specially crafted the announcement of his future resignation to both make it falsely appear that he had to resign because he was gay (which is not true in NJ) and also specifically held onto power long enough to prevent the people of NJ from being able to VOTE for a replacement.

The man is a slick politician until he has proven he has changed. The timing is too perfect for it to have been a coincidence.

i appreciate your reply, bob smith, but chances are the COM are better situated to evaluate that than we outside commentors are - i mean, look at all the steps you posted!

it's also worthwhile to note that McGreevey didn't announce this - my understanding is that it was announced to the Star-Ledger by the vicar, and McGreevey confirmed it. Which would suggest that, since he didn't seem to pursue media coverage of it, it's not his priority.

He is obviously a person going through some traumatic and significant changes in his life. Putting him in a position of leadership is not right either for him or for those he would be in charge of.

I know of people who have been told they would have to wait because they had recently(!) gone through a divorce, lost a family member, had bad credit, or other potential problems. This is serious business. This is a question of whether a person is ready to take a leadership role. The process is stressful and life-changing - it's not a place to "discover yourself" when you already have significant problems to work out.

Why isn't Gothamist printing any of my comments on McGreevey?

I'm trying not to take it personally. Perhaps it's just another system problem?

i have a few fairly devout episcopalian friends, one of whom is soon to start ordination track at GTS. the episcopalians i know have been really inspiring models of forgiveness, openness, warmth, and nonjudgementality. perhaps we can take a lesson from them.

i daresay little of Gov. McGreevey's life, as conveyed by the newsmedia, offers us evidence of his true motives. granted, the mudthrowing between him and his wife has been vile, but if you think of him as a person instead of a figure on the newspaper, you think that maybe this person is experiencing some lifechanging things and is, well, finding his way. discerning, such as it is.

i think this is a wait and see sort of situation. if he becomes a priest - a process that takes years - chances are it's not a publicity stunt. who devotes years of their life (and the rest of it too) to a publicity stunt?

well put, bob smith.

The ex-governor's announcement today that he is seeking to become an Episcopal priest is another example of his soaring egotism. He may believe that he really has the desire to be a priest to do good, but the fact that this was leaked TODAY to take the spotlight away from the release of his wife's book makes it clear that his focus is more about the PR value.

I have some close friends who are seminarians at the General Theological Seminary and they are horrified, angry, and humiliated. They had to spend years in "the process" to be allowed to be accepted at GTS in the ordination track (the Master of Divinity program with the goal of becoming an ordained priest). Anyone can apply for non-ordination track classes just by applying to the seminary, but to be on the ordination track involves the following process:

1. The person must be a member of an Episcopal church for at least one year.

2. The person goes to the priest of their own church and speaks quietly, often for several months, about what it would mean to be a priest, whether he/she is called by God to be a priest, and about what it will involve. At any point, that priest can tell the person "no."

3. If the priest believes the person may be called by God to become a priest, the priest will form a parish (local church) Committee on Ministry (COM) of members of the parish. The person is now called an "aspirant."

4. The COM meets regularly with the person for many months, questioning the aspirant about what this means to them, why they feel called by God, what kind of priest they would be, and much more.

5. The COM makes a decision on whether they believe the aspirant is called by God to become a priest. They give their decision to the vestry (the lay leadership of the parish).

6. The vestry usually approves the decision of the COM. At this point, the aspirant has been approved by the parish. This is important, as there is a belief that priests are called by God and recognized by the people as one who has a call - thus, priests are sent by the people, not just by their own desires.

7. Now the aspirant begins the process at the diocesan (regional) level, where there is a Diocesan Commission on Ministry (COM). Note: a diocese is often based on geographical separations like states, although some populous states have more than one diocese. A diocese is headed by a bishop.

8. The Diocesan COM meets several times with the aspirant over a few months. In some dioceses, there is a discernment period of around six months where the aspirant works part-time as essentially an intern at another church (away from their home church). The priest of the discernment parish also gives a recommendation to the Diocesan COM.

9. During this stage, there are psychological tests, credit checks, background checks, and medical tests to make sure the aspirant is psychologically sound, has managed their finances well, and has no dangerous or unethical background. These are considered important because of the position of trust that will be given to those who become priests.

10. The Diocesan COM and the bishop make a decision on whether the aspirant should be sent to seminary. If they say approve, the person is now called a postulant, and is allowed to apply for the ordination track at a seminary.

11. The postulant applies to a seminary, and if accepted studies for normally 3 years in an ordination track Master of Divinity program at a seminary.

12. After leaving the seminary, the M.Div. graduate is first ordained a deacon and later, usually about 6 months after graduation, is ordained a priest by a bishop in the diocese where they will be working.

I think it is clear based on the news reports that Mr. McGreevey has not even met the requirements of step #1, since he just became an Episcopalian this past Sunday. The above process is more or less what is always required to become a priest in the Episcopal Church. Anyone can apply for an academic degree at a seminary and attend those classes, but being accepted to the ordination track has high standards, as you can see above. My friends that have gone through that multi-year (some as many as 6 or 7 years) process feel humiliated that something they were told was of such value and importance (and they believed it!) can seemingly be dodged by someone who has power and influence.

Perhaps this is all a PR stunt and Mr. McGreevey will not be approved by the process. He certainly shouldn't be publicly talking about what his plans are - at this stage he should be humbly and quietly meeting with his priest. His abuse of the process is just the most recent of the many ethical lapses that indicate he should have been rejected from the discernment process already.

To make it very clear, this is NOT about Jim McGreevey's sexuality. There are a number of seminarians at GTS that are gay and are openly welcome. This about not giving a position of trust to someone who has violated the public trust, violated the trust of his spouse, showed extremely poor judgment, is taking advantage of a sacred religious process as a PR stunt to take the spotlight away from his wife's book, and just in general is a morally despicable person.

Now, after all that, I cannot say that some day Mr. McGreevey would not be ready and able to become a priest. Certainly accepting him as a member of the church was the right thing to do. I remember a saying about giving a religious leadership position to someone who has committed immoral actions: "Only when the acts of virtue have become as notorious as the sin should he be given a place of leadership." Clearly, Mr. McGreevey has not yet finished acting in despicable ways - including this PR-focused way of announcing his current tactic to grab attention. Maybe he should spend a decade doing good work to show that he deserves being given a position of trust.

Now it looks like becoming an Episcopalian will probably be the hot new post scandal thing replacing rehab.