Benedict’s ‘Legion’: Smaller, not much purer?
The story of the powerful and deeply conservative Legion of Christ society is one of the most sordid tales of the Catholic Church’s recent past, with the Legion’s founder, the late Father Marciel Maciel having covered his crimes and insinuated himself in Rome through the use of pious rhetoric and lots of cash.
It was not until Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was elected Pope Benedict XVI that the longstanding cries of Maciel’s victims began to be heard.
Now the AP’s Nicole Winfield reports that the expected top-to-bottom reform of the Legion is not happening, and members are fleeing:
One year later, none of the Legion’s superiors has been held to account for facilitating the crimes of late founder Rev. Marciel Maciel, a drug addict who sexually abused his seminarians, fathered three children and created a cult-like movement within the church that damaged some of its members spiritually and emotionally.
An Associated Press tally shows that disillusioned members are leaving the movement in droves as they lose faith that the Vatican will push through the changes needed. The collapse of the order, once one of the most influential in the church, has broader implications for Catholicism, which is shedding members in some places because the hierarchy covered up widespread sexual abuse by priests.
In an exclusive interview, the man tapped by Benedict to turn the Legion around insisted that the pope tasked him only with guiding the Legion and helping rewrite its norms – not “decapitating” its leadership or avenging wrongdoing.
Cardinal Velasio De Paolis ruled out any further investigation into the crimes of Maciel, who as a favorite of Pope John Paul II had been held up as a living saint despite well-founded allegations – later proven – that he was a pedophile.
“I don’t see what good would be served” by further inquiry into a coverup, the Italian cardinal said. “Rather, we would run the risk of finding ourselves in an intrigue with no end. Because these are things that are too private for me to go investigating.”
The outcome of this investigation will weigh heavily in the eventual verdict on Benedict’s approach to sexual abuse in the church. Read the rest here.
I fear that this will fuel rumors that Pope John Paul II knew about the problems and did not address them. If those rumors were ever substantiated, I think that would be a real blow to papal authority.
De Paolis represents the “smooth” Romanita way of downplaying the evils and demphasizing scandal at the expense of dealing with a problem honestly and realistically.
Part of that is to insulate higher ups.
But BXVI, of course, wants JPII on a pedestal so how much hard information will ever surface (maybe centuries from now) is not likely.
Over the last couple of years, George Weigel wrote a pair of blog posts on the First Things blog that, in light of this AP report, make for interesting reading.
The first, from February of 2009, entitled “Saving What Can Be Saved”, contains (besides palpable anger and disgust toward Maciel and the leaders of the order) Weigel’s recommendations for what should be done about the order. Note especially that he describes the characteristics of the person who should be charged with resolving the fate of the order, and also warns against some less decisive measures that, all else being equal, the Holy See would probably be inclined to pursue.
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2009/02/saving-what-can-be-saved
The second piece, from May of 2010, entitled “Next Acts in the Legionary Drama” is in response to developments: apostolic visitators had made a report to senior Vatican offiicials and the Holy Father. Weigel makes further recommendations in this piece. What is particularly interesting is to compare Wiegel’s recommendations in this piece to those in the first piece. It is clear that the Holy See was already proceeding with the less-radical measures that Weigel had specifically warned would not be sufficient. (An apostolic visitation is itself a measure that Weigel judged as likely to be inadequate). It seems that Weigel’s new set of recommendations are realigned to reflect this reality.
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2010/05/next-acts-in-the-legionary-drama
FWIW, in the past on this blog, Cathleen has commented that Weigel’s recommendations probably aren’t sufficient, or at least don’t address everything that needs to be addressed. (Cathleen, I hope I am recalling that correctly).
This AP piece suggests that even the half-measures that Weigel feared have not been followed up on. This is dispiriting – to say the least. The Holy See hasn’t demonstrated yet that it knows how to react decisively to a major crisis.
A solid report for the most part but there is an unfortunate tendency on the part of the journalist to make out that the Church knew more than it did, that Maciel was well known to have committed these horrible deeds even before the Church investigated him. Can anyone point to one Vatican official, and by that, I take it Nicole Winfield means a sufficiently high-placed cleric working in Rome, who continued defending Maciel even after the sex abuse allegations were established?
There’s also twisting of the Cardinal’s words, a number of “some people say” type set-up sentences. So De Palois reckons some Vatican officials knew, very few, but what did they know? They knew of allegations. I know that in today’s world, an allegation (Especially for the media) is an accusation and a declaration of guilt but it is not. If only Winfield and other reporters would stick to what we do know and leave the speculation to one side. Look at what happens when you tease the reader with worst case scenarios, “what ifs”, you get Cathleen Kaveny wondering about what Pope John Paul II really knew, and if he was aware, then Papal Authority will be in the firing line. Give me a break! You worry too much. Sit back and relax, go into the bathroom, turn the tap on and listen to the sound of the water or have a bowl of cornflakes. I know I will! :)
I think David’s post is a clear example of the ‘prove it” kind of apologetic in a world of secrecy that minimizes effectiveness in governnace.
Dealing with the sex abuse crisis in its multiple manifestations by Rome has not been handled well.
See the new Commonweal editorial on Ireland -which I thougt was perhaps too gentle – as the new survey of American Catholics shows ther eis not only widespread unhappines with the handling of the issue bu talso (of course) concomitanmt credibility problems.
So, David, go off tp the bathroom or whatever….
David’s post is a clear example of reasonableness Bob, if that is your real name. :)
“Vows of Silence”, Jason Berry’s book about Maciel which relied heavily on the testimony of former seminarians who had been abused by him, was published in 2004. Pope John Paul II died in 2005. The accusations had been made public long before Berry’s book. How could John Paul not have known?
“The papacy” is a succession of finite human beings. Those who put their faith in “the Pope” are bound to be disappointed.
I remember reading the Hartford Courant investigative articles about Maciel back in the ’90′s. The story was out there, and not just among the Legion or victims advocates.
This makes no sense to me. I cannot understand the logic of this cardinal. I really think that when Bishops or Cardinals are installed, they should receive some training from on managment from an MBA program.
Even if they are trying to protect, their colleagues, why on earth would you keep the LC senior leadership on? They should all be removed.
Besides, if these men (the leaders of the Order) are so concerned about the community, they should voluntarily step aside for the greater good. That they cannot see that is astounding.
Further, that the Cardinal who is supposed to be at arms length cannot see that is really astounding. Has he been completely inducted into their dysfunction?
LEt’s say that JP II was indeed the saint that so many believe he was. (Actually, I’d like to think that too.) Well, if that is so, then what could possible explain how this saintly man ended up ignoring the reports that must have reached him?
Maybe the reporters (the friends of Maciel, e.g., Sodano) did not report truthfully? Even if that was so, there is also strong evidence that Cardinal Ratzinger wanted to pursue an investigation of Maciel. So why did John Paul refuse his request? We really just don’t know, and we’re not going to know.
ISTM that JP II’s elimination of the office of devil’s advocate was one of the worst of his decisions. The current canonization process makes a mockery of the old one.
The most damning statement from dePaolis himself to the question – what is the animating spirit or charism? His response – “good question” but not a hint of an answer.
Slow death can be worse than a decisive decision that frees up folks who have been deceived. It is a cult – how can you find a “charism” in the midst of a cult?
Spend your time setting up support and transitions rather than playing some type of Romanita game.
Look–in America, if there’s a cover up, there’s a conspiracy theory to explain it. If this is perceived as a cover up, many people will think there’s a reason for it that extends beyond the general Italian concern with bella figura.
The Holy See hasn’t demonstrated yet that it knows how to react decisively to a major crisis.
I would go further than this: The Holy See has demonstrated already that it doesn’t know how to react decisively to a major crisis.
What I remember from previous thread on this subject is that the discussions led me to think that Pope John Paul II heard about the accusations against Maciel but would not listen, because he could not believe them. He could not wrap his mind around the possibility that the man was a fraud, a pedophile, a criminal.
What I have been wondering throughout all of the scandal’s twists and turns is: where have the Italian media been in all this? Why was it necessary for the Americans Berry and Renner to track down all the information they have made public about Maciel et al? Surely there must be investigative reporters in Rome, mustn’t there be? Why haven’t they pursued these stories better? Is the Italian press too afraid of the Vatican to look at it objectively?
This statement may tell us more than anything:
“Yet some suggest De Paolis’ reluctance to investigate the coverup is based on fears the revelations could point to complicity by Vatican officials, who defended Maciel even after the sex abuse allegations were established.”
“Even if they are trying to protect, their colleagues, why on earth would you keep the LC senior leadership on?”
But isn’t that what clericalism is all about? Circle the wagons. Admit no evil. Say up is down, in is out, anything to protect the good name of the system that has treated so many so very well and allowed some many who came from nothing to live a life of everything?
All one has to do is avert the eyes, not listen, swallow your conscience — and look at the catalog for the next really nice cappa magna and water silk frou frou.
Jimmy, I don’t have any reason to think that Pope John Paul II swallowed his conscience. He can very well have been firmly convinced that the gossip and reports were all despicable fabrications. In addition, in the last few years of his illness he might have no longer had the mental agility to adjust his mental picture of Father Maciel.
In any case, if there is a movement from people to leave the LC, the movement will shrink until it loses all power, and the situation might resolve itself in a natural way. What’s so wrong with that?
Claire:
“He can very well have been firmly convinced that the gossip and reports were all despicable fabrications.”
I remember someone saying that the Nazis used such propaganda against the Catholic Church and that may have been a reason for Pope John Psul II’s apparent dismissal of the reports. (In addition, his anti-Communist experiences in Poland may have influenced his ideas about liberation theology.
We are all influenced by our past.
Why would anyone expect the Vatican to take the typically American (that is, US) attitude that no time and expense and effort should ever be spared to investigate everything about every high-level scandal and to put as many people as possible in jail? Ours is an unusually unforgiving and vengeful culture.
David –
You still don’t get it. Try to put yourself in the place of a child who was terribly abused by a formerly trusted priest. Try. Then see if you still see the issue as an “unusually unforgiving and vengeful culture”. Keep trying.
I understand the crime, Ann, but not the punishment.
I have just read this astonishing thread. Some of the comments make me even miss Joseph S. O’Leary’s almost creative wishful thinking on the Oct. 14 KC/Finn thread, which Grant unexpectedly closed.
I have just finished digesting and commenting on Commonweal Magazine’s “Simplifying Scandal” editorial, which fortunately Bishop/Accountability.org has just picked up. I commend to each of you the comments thereto, especially comments #1 and #3, which may interest you. Those of you who are Subscribers or Contributors may wish to add your own comments.
Incidentally, I have followed AP’s Nicole Winfield’s Vatican reporting and that of other English language reporters closely for 18 months now. No one writing in English is better informed about, or has better sources in, the Vatican than Nicole.
Good night. I hope to return at some point to express my opinions in response especially to David Smith, whose opinions remind me at times of my Irish debate partner, Joseph S. O’Leary.
To uncover a conspiracy to cover -up why Marciel was given so long a protection and why the current Legion leadership is still in place… the easy answer would be that they have documentation of the Vatican cover-up…and at what level.? John le Carre’s Smiley would put all the ‘tells’ on a white board and connect the dots. And this is being done now by somebodies so just wait for the tale to out. Smiley knew he was dealing with brave men on both sides… there are no brave men in Rome I would guess.
Well, the article says the order is collapsing. May be that is the idea!
Claire’s comment is astute. With Maciel dead and the LC shrinking, it might not be such a problem in the near future. Still, I feel sorry for those who, figuratively, do not get in the life boats in time, especially if they have been so conditioned to believe that this is just a spiritual test to be endured. It might be more charitable for them to be told that the real challenge is to walk away from the debris and serve in an order founded by a saint, not someone with apparent borderline personality disorder. There is a need for a post-expose book that studies Maciel from a psychological perspective. What can we learn from this troubled, damaged soul? Was he the victim of sexual abuse as a child? I am not excusing him but there seems to have been a double personality at work here. If so, these might be a teaching moment for the Church to explore the conflict of mental illness and free will.
DePaolis approach is basically indefensible ,except to loyalists.
The interior question is JPII and the isue will remaion cloude di na world more populated by JPII priests and Bishoops who want him to be “the Great”
Don’t expect much help from the curials on that obe.
J.C.
My understanding is that the formation methods (including the one about silence) that were used by the Order were well known. From what I read, they seemed pretty strange and would harldy be able to produce mature, self-responsible people who are going to be serving in a leadership capacity for the Catholic community. I assume that these methods must have had to have been approved by the Congregation for Religious.
In the secular realm, quality assurance is part of almost every corporation to the point where some of it is even excessive. What on earth was the Congregation for Religous or Clergy or whatever body is tasked with approving consitutions and methods doing and were they in contact with the leadership and what if anything was said to them.
I don’t find it strange that the Curia tolerated the Maciel type of “spirituality”. Maciel just brought the top-down, closed-minds sort of spirituality that is already endemic in the Vatican to its ultimate strength and produced its ultimate product — spiritless robots. What mystifies me is that Benedict doesn’t seem to see yet that that is the sort of spirituality the Curia sells, though he might be improving. (See his Assissi speech.)
Ann, thank you for “spirtless robots”, a classic term that captures the LC reality. As to whether JP II knew early about Maciel, those who think not are hopelessly insincere and unwilling to face uncontroverted facts. He knew as much as he needed to know from at least the mid-80′s when Ratzinger refused to meet with Maciel seminarian victims and their local Roman canon lawyer, who was well known and respected by Ratzinger.
There is reliable credible evidence that Maciel made large cash payments often to JP II’s Polish secretary who dined daily with the pope and lived down the hall. Of course, JP II had to have known about his star appointee, Groer of Vienna , who holds the record for credible allegations of sexual abuse of young seminarians.
None of this was investigated honestly in the rush to beatify JP II, which was mainly a Hollywood-style staged extravaganza funded by wealthy right-wing groups, who contribute to the the Vatican to pressure governments, including in the US, to keep their taxes low. For support of these statements, please enter my last name in the NCR Search box as openers, since I cover many of these matters in detail there.
We will never clean up our Church if we just continue to slice the mystical baloney served up non-stop by the Roman clique, the mainly Italian curial cabal, the puppet bishops and the many well funded apologists, lawyers, professors, media members et al.
I have observed some very intelligent, sincere and honest bloggers here and believe that many of them must know in their hearts that what I am saying is the truth. If they want to ceaselessly deny this, that I submit is their problem.
Having learned, from my hopeless intellectual ping pong game with JSO on the Oct. 14 KC/Finn thread, that I can waste a lot of time with closed minded clerics, I will pass on for now and hope fair minded and committed Catholics at least skim some of my relevant NCR comments, articles, etc. I have no agenda other than the truth and protecting defenseless children from rape and other sexual abuse by sick priests who too often have been facliitated by cowardly and shameless bishops. Thanks again for “spiritless robots” and your many other spirited and authentic comments.