Social Media Priest Scandals Expose Neo-Church Apostasy
EWTN News reports on February 6, 2026, about Italian “priest” Alberto Ravagnani leaving the clerical state after gaining social media fame, framing it as part of a broader crisis affecting clergy engaged in “digital evangelization.” The article cites Spanish “priests” Ignacio Amorós and Fernando Gallego diagnosing the situation through therapeutic language of “woundedness” and “vulnerability” rather than theological precision. This humanistic narrative exemplifies the neo-church’s abandonment of sacramental ontology and eternal truths.
Reduction of Priesthood to Therapeutic Humanism
The article’s core error lies in treating Holy Orders as a revocable psychological state rather than an indelible character imprinted on the soul (Council of Trent, Session XXIII, Canon IV). Ravagnani’s abandonment of priestly duties is lamented as personal tragedy rather than condemned as sacrilege against his eternal vocation. Amorós’ statement that “we are priests for all eternity” while simultaneously excusing abandonment of ministry exemplifies the neo-church’s doctrinal schizophrenia.
The post-conciliar sect reduces priesthood to a social function, evident in Gallego’s claim that priests must “maintain their role” like corporate brand ambassadors. Contrast this with Pope Pius XI’s Ad Catholici Sacerdotii (1935): “The priest is not a mere administrator… he is the living image of Christ upon this earth.” When sacramental reality is denied, priesthood becomes a performative act – hence Ravagnani’s metamorphosis from “influencer priest” to secular content creator follows logically from the neo-Mass’s annihilation of the ex opere operato.
Digital Evangelization as Modernist Trojan Horse
Amorós’ “Rebeldes Podcast” and Gallego’s Catholic Youth platform epitomize the cult of novelty condemned in Pius X’s Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907): “Modernists substitute vain popularity for divine appointment.” The article’s concern about priests “collaborating with product brands” ignores the greater scandal: treating the Gospel as content to be marketed rather than the unalterable deposit requiring obedience of intellect and will (Vatican I, Dei Filius).
Lamentabili Sane Exitu (1907) explicitly condemned the notion that “faith is based on a sum of probabilities” (Proposition 25) – yet the entire premise of “influencer priests” rests on quantifying apostolate success through engagement metrics. When Ravagnani gained “hundreds of thousands of followers,” the neo-church apparatus celebrated him; when he fell, they psychoanalyzed him. Both responses flow from the modernist error equating spiritual efficacy with worldly validation.
Eclipse of the Sacramental Worldview
Nowhere does the article mention Ravagnani’s duty to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass or hear confessions. Instead, Amorós speaks of priests “managing a decline” rather than being “excited” – language better suited to corporate burnout than shepherds responsible for immortal souls. The silence on grace, mortification, and eternal judgment reveals the neo-church’s naturalistic foundations.
Compare this to Christ’s warning: “No man who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:62). The true Church has always taught that priests abandoning their vocation risk damnation – not “new paths” as implied by Amorós’ trust in “the Lord’s plans for him.” Canon 1321 of the 1917 Code mandates automatic excommunication for clerics attempting marriage, yet EWTN presents this catastrophe as a pastoral “challenge.”
Symptom of Conciliar Apostasy
These scandals manifest the neo-church’s fundamental errors:
- Relativized Holy Orders: Vatican II’s Presbyterorum Ordinis redefined priesthood as “community leadership” rather than alter Christus.
- Secularized Mission: The “digital world” becomes new territory for dialogue rather than domain to conquer for Christ the King (Quas Primas, 1925).
- Abandoned Asceticism: Gallego’s advice to cultivate “humility” through social media engagement mocks the desert Fathers’ teachings on fuga mundi.
The article’s concluding worry about priests’ “appearance” on social media epitomizes the neo-church’s cosmetic morality. When Ravagnani advertised products, they fretted about commercialization; when he renounced his ordination, they diagnosed “vulnerability.” Neither response acknowledges the metaphysical crime of a priest rejecting his identity – for to do so would condemn the conciliar project itself.
Conclusion: Shepherds Who Become Wolves
Pope St. Pius X warned in Haerent Animo (1908): “The priest must be… holy because he walks with God.” The neo-church produces clergy formed by anthropology seminars rather than Thomistic manuals, therapeutic workshops instead of Eucharistic adoration. Is it any wonder they crumble under digital vanity?
These fallen “influencers” are not exceptions but inevitabilities of a sect that replaced the sacra potestas with social relevance. Until the Roman Catholic Church returns to its immutable foundations – the Mass of Ages, integral doctrine, and rejection of the conciliar anti-Rome – such scandals will multiply as signs of apostasy foretold (2 Thessalonians 2:3).
Source:
Why have some priest social media influencers left the priesthood? (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 06.02.2026