The latest on the Legionaries
Via John Allen at NCR: the Vatican’s statement on the findings of the “visitation” of the Legion of Christ. I find it puzzling in parts, but I’m guessing that has to do with the translation. Here’s a key excerpt:
The Apostolic Visit was able to determine that the conduct of Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado has caused serious consequences in the life and the structure of the Legion, which requires a path of profound revision.
The extremely grave and objectively immoral behavior of Fr. Maciel, which has been confirmed by irrefutable testimony, takes the form of true crimes and demonstrates a private life without scruples or authentic religious sentiment. That life was hidden from the great majority of Legionaries, above all because of a system of relationships constructed by Fr. Maciel, who was adept at creating alibis for himself and winning the trust, confidence and silence of those around him, reinforcing his role as a charismatic founder.
By discrediting and pushing away those who doubted the correctness of his behavior, as well as through a mistaken desire not to undercut the good the Legion was doing, they created a mechanism of defense around [Maciel] that made him immune to attack for a long time, consequently making an awareness of his real life extremely difficult.
The big question this raises, at least for me, is: have the other participants in that “system of relationships” been identified, and what will be the consequences? (And will we ever hear about it?)
As for what’s next for the LC and Regnum Christi, the statement says:
The Church has a firm determination to accompany them, and to help them in the path of purification which awaits them…. The Holy Father…has taken it upon himself to indicate very soon the form this “accompanying” will take, beginning with the appointment of a Delegate and a commission of study of the order’s constitution.
Sounds like they’re planning to maintain the order in some way. But stay tuned for details.
http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=0&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=pope+benedict
Pope aging visibly, says one story.
Pope attended meeting about Legion, says Post-Dispatch.
Pope to appoint interim superior for Legion, says another story.
Sounds like Maciel’s powerful order, like the Vatican itself, will weather the storm. (A tempest in a teapot does not sink Barque of Peter or the Legion of Christ.)
There seems to be an insistence that it was very difficult in the past to get to the truth about Maciel. This sounds to me like a defensive ploy designed to protect JPII and others.
I find their use of word ‘accompanying’ offensive. it has been a word that Liberation Theology has made it’s own. next you will here about Legionary ‘compadres’ …phew
I find it impossible to believe that the corruption of such an important leader, someone who could even be classified as a “cult leader,” would not result in corruption of the Christian life and witness of his followers as a group. The question of who is credible enough to take on the cleansing of such an institution, and who is dispassionate enough to see clearly what must be done, is a very difficult problem.
Someone on an earlier thread suggested “deprogramming” is the appropriate category for what must be undergone by Maciel’s followers. At the time I thought this might be harsh, but it has gradually come to seem more reasonable to me, as the facts of Maciel’s deception and systematic misuses of power have become clearer.
Here the word “purification” is used, but because the Church is “always in need of purification” this seems euphemistic and far too weak. Especially because we are today in a crisis of governance this is a terrible time to take on a scandal of these dimensions; I don’t see how it can be done. Better for this group to disband, as hard as this may be. The former Legionaries can join other existing religious communities and submit to their formation. Property can be donated. But the continuation of the group with just some shepherding along through the bad publicity seems like building on a swamp.
Any assumption that the Legionaries have a “charism” seems preposterous. Has any other group had a sociopath for a founder?
“as well as through a mistaken desire not to undercut the good the Legion was doing,”
Sounds like some of the cult leaders knew what was going on, and yet they are to remain in place.
Doesn’t sound as though you are going to get your prayers answered Rita.
Political cowardice is how I would describe it, and it will not turn out well I suspect.
This is my worry: I worry that there are some people who see the tendency to blind obedience in the LC as something they themselves want to make use of, by channeling it in what they believe to be better directions. They might think: Maciel was bad, sure-but what could a good religious leader do with all those pliable, docile, souls?
I myself wish Baltimore’s Archbishop O’Brien was the American representative on the Committee rather than Apb Chaput, for precisely these reasons. Why did the Legion get so far for so long: in my view: their image of piety. I want someone who proved himself before the “official line” changed of distinguishing image from reality making decisions on all this. I’d trust O’Brien on this, given his track record. Someone who saw the problem early–and who did not think the “good the Legion was doing” justified its means is crucial.
“Political cowardice is how I would describe it, ” I call it a wee bit of financial greed.
Let’s get real, folks. Until the Vatican can find geese that will lay more golden eggs at its doorsteps than have the LC and RC, there is not way they will be disbanded.
Anyone who doesn’t believe that money talks where the episcopacy walks is simply naive.
And the idea that the LC scandal is nothing more than a “tempest in a teapot” is amazing. What would REALLY be a scandal is this is not more than a tempest? (If yoGerelyn was being facetious, then I didn’t get it.)
Sorry, Jimmy, for being sarcastic about something so serious.
I was expressing what I think those in power think about it all.
The Holy See’s statement speaks of an intent to deal sincerely with all of those who, within and outside the Legion, were victims of “the power system devised by the founder.” The question occurs: that sick power system, wasn’t it central to the spiritual deformation of the legion members, as well as to Maciel’s personal cover-up? ( Read Jason Berry and Gerald Renner or look at the ReGain website.) And didn’t the Curial overseers in the Congregation for Religious approve warmly of that power system? What does that say about them? What does it say about the spiritual discernment of John Paul II that he so favored such a group?
Does anyone have a monopoly on the verb “accompany”? When I was in Australia, it was all the buzz, especially with regard to “accompanying” the young on their journey.
While I agree with Rita’s image of the continuation of the Legionaires as “like building in a swamp”, I disagree that it should be avoided. Members have committed themselves to the Legion, which means to each other. Depriving members of that community seems cruel, particularly given the jolt from the revelation of Maciel’s crimes.
Try it this way. Should the 12 apostles have been disbanded when their leader denied Christ 3 times? Or because Judas betrayed Christ? Their dedication to Christ should help the Legion to weather the consequences of Maciel’s sins. Whether they survive, flourish, or wither should not be decided by outsiders.
BTW, there was a sexual scandal in the early days of the Piarists that led to the suppression of the order for a time. (The founder was implicated only in the cover up, so it is not perfectly comparable.) The order was reestablished a few years later and became a basis for modern Catholic schooling. As Gamaliel said, id it is from God, we will fight it in vain.
Dear Jim McK,
Judas was not the founder of the apostles. And Saint Peter repented mightily. There’s no comparison here.
Do they commit to each other? Maybe you have inside sources. My impression, from what I’ve read, is no, not in a primary way. The emphasis on obedience and secrecy is ordered toward committing themselves to an ideal and an authority figure. The fact that in cults, for instance, people have a shared experience doesn’t mean that they are a community in the vital and wholesome sense of the term.
“through a mistaken desire not to undercut the good the Legion was doing, they created a mechanism of defense”
This is the same approach that the bishops and the Vatican have taken regarding abusive priests. It wasn’t a cover-up following revelations since the 90′s, it was a mechanism of defense that documents clearly show is decades old. If the pope is going to “accompany” the Legion on their path of purification, who is going to accompany the pope on his?
Sadly, the Legionaires appear to be a microcosm of the whole Church. There are solutions but nobody really seems interested in implementing the solutions.
I think Rita is right. Enough is enough. The Vatican letter speaks of “the necessity to redefine the charism of the Congregation of the Legionaries of Christ, preserving the true nucleus, that of being a “Militia Christi,” which distinguishes the apostolic and missionary action of the Church, and which is not identified with efficiency at any cost.”
So they want an “army of Christ,” demanding of its adherents military obedience, but no longer identified witn “efficiency at any cost” (or, one might put it, absolute ruthlessness)? But how, if they keep the Legion alive, given the way its leaders and middle management have been formed, can anyone guarantee that they can have been rendered harmless? Rather than “accompanying them in their journey” the Church might do better to free all its members from a thoroughtly contaminated institution. Let them breathe free for once, grow up, and venture out into the real world. And if the Legion is as wealthy as it is reputed to be, surely their unfortunate foot-soldiers deserve a fresh start in the free world at their exploiters’ expense.
How about breaking it up into smaller groups who would go for a year, one with the Jesuits, another with the Franciscans, or the Dominicans, or some other order that they might be interested in; and after that transition year they could think again about their vocation (or about returning to the secular world).
That’s what happens to religious who are having doubts about their vocation, I think: they are given a year to explore. I would have liked something like that — when everyone is having grave doubts about the LC order, take a year off from the order, then see how many people want to rebuild it. A clean break before possibly rebuilding.
But who am I to make suggestions. A mere lay person. All I know is that I am unsettled by the sexual abuse crisis. I do not see a way forward for the LC, and I do not see a way forward for the church. There is a large gap between the changes that the people in authority are open to, and the changes that I think are needed. Perhaps the reform of the LC will give us a small sample of the kind of changes that the Pope and the Vatican may be willing to consider.
More of the same – read the post/letter by Fr. Imbelli. The letter dates back to 2002 – other than that the letter focuses on events in Boston in 2002 and it talks about the bishops of the USCCB……it is painfully obvious that this same letter could be written in numerous conferences of bishops and needs to be addressed to the Vatican.
The letter mentions one of the ironies here and with the LC situation – basically, once a bishop is consecrated; there is little to no accountability; once a papal prelature is granted; there is little to no accountability. Read through all of the media stories over the since 1/1/2010 – you see a pattern in which Rome at times references some type of “mystical” centralized power but at other times, it really is up to the individual bishop?
This implementation only solidifies my opinion that Rome (B16) still does not understand the actual dilemma. Since 2002, there have been no attempts to hold bishops accountable – a handful of retirment/resignation acceptances – meaningless.
Now, we have an order that should never have been granted approval to begin with – the decision to try to “save” this order makes no sense. It places the image of past Vatican officials, the system, etc. over the members of this community who are in pain, hurt, etc. To exxagerate – most members of LC/RC have more in common with sex abuse victims than with the bishops who could only act to save the institution or this community and its questionnable charism. For a hierarchy that constantly utters “pro-life” – their actions or non-actions to protect victims (abuse or LC/RC) is beyond understanding. It is the opposite of pro-life.
Rita, religious orders, particularly traditional religious orders, are founded by Christ. New members come to the order because they are called by God. This identity, which is deeper than identification with the founder, has been a saving grace for many communities.
It is against that background that I suggest that corrupt individuals do not mean the community must be destroyed. Reform is possible in many cases, if not most. Shattering the community into a million pieces would be cruel imo. Many of them need to find their way through this together. Indeed they will find their way together, whether as a reformed Legion or as subgroups within other communities, by sharing apostolates, etc. (Besides, the only way the group could be effectively dispersed would be by a totalitarian leader following in Maciel’s dictatorial ways.)
Bill points to an interesting possibility. The Legion are victims of Maciel’s sexual violence; perhaps they should dedicate themselves to caring for other victims of sexual violence.
Fr Joeph K. I objected to the Legion’s use of the word ‘accompany’ because I’m friends with a family whose widowed rich aunt was put in a wheelchair taken to Legion campus to live out her days and conned out of millions. That’s not accompany . Christians must protect some words like ‘accompany’ and ‘solidarity’ ‘preferential option’ ‘community’ etc because the wise guys will seduce the innocent with these words. The Legion IMO were a sophisticated Hari Kishna like cult who targeted rich lonely Catholics, mostly women. . While we can’t monopolize words we need to call them out every time.
Jim McK, please get real. Enough with the pious platitudes. Comparing the Legionaries with the Twelve and the Acts of the Apostles? “Religious orders…are founded by Christ”? “Particularly traditional religious orders”? You are talking like a brochure advertisement. I can hear the strings in the background. An infomercial for “traditional religious life” and wearing the habit. Do you belong to Regnum Christi? If so, say so. Then I can see why you would want to preserve the group’s ideology at all costs, and why you say it is “founded by Christ” rather than admit the indisputable, painful, fact that it was founded by a known sociopath.
What you say about needing “a totalitarian leader” to disperse this group is not true. They serve at the pleasure of the Pope. The Pope can certainly pull the plug if he wishes, with as much or as little due process as he sees fit. There may be arguments in favor of continuing the Legionaries, but it’s not that they “can’t” be disbanded because Christ established them.
Yes, in some sense it is “cruel” to deprive addicts of drugs, or alcoholics of drink, or cult followers of their cult, but only if there is nothing in place to help these people come to a better self-understanding and rebuild their lives. And yes, it helps if they want to do so. And no, they usually don’t want to do so until the status quo becomes intolerable. Thus family interventions become necessary at times, not because one wants to destroy people but because one wants to help them.
I also thought of deprogramming, but perhaps it will be salutary and demystifying for the Legionaries to have always to remember that their group was founded by an abuser. This might be a permanent source of deprogramming. We have enough orders who idealize their founders and get them canonized. Out of the mud — and this is very sticky mud indeed — the lotus may blossom.
Seeing how Opus Dei are winning popularity and respectability — due to the niceness and virtue of their members — I do not despair of the Legionaries. (Of course one must wonder how much money went into the speedy canonization of the fanatical Msgr Escriva, OD’s founder.)
The NYT has an article on the Maciel affair today — Ratzinger comes across again as on the good side, but weak and procrastinatory. Sodano is on the bad side. But as we saw on Easter Sunday, Sodano and Ratzinger are the fastest of friends…
Nice pictures in the Italian TV reports: http://www.video.mediaset.it/video/tg5/servizio/165366/legionari-vaticano-accusa-il-fondatore.html#tc-s1-c1-o1-p1
Sandro Magister has posted some notes on the Vatican statement. He seems pretty confident the LC leadership will take a hit:
I agree with Cathy that O’Brien would have been a heartening choice to lead the inquiry. Maybe it’s the military background, but he strikes me as a hard-nosed guy who isn’t taken in by the appearance of piety.
A Dominican theologian with conservative reputation once told me that ex-Legionaries were some of the best priests he knew. He thought they got good early formation in spiritual discipline, but were never allowed to grow up spiritually. In order to become spiritual adults, they had to leave the Legionaries. Perhaps this is true of the order as a whole. Perhaps its members could do great things for the Church, but in order to do so they must leave the Legionaries behind.
Rita, I am astonished by the unreal approach many take to this crisis. I won’t vouch for the accuracy of the numbers, but they give a sense of the undertaking:
“It has priests working in 22 countries, and had 800 priests and over 2,500 seminarians as members by 2010. In the U.S. it operates 21 prep schools, a start-up university in Sacramento and the U.S.’s only three seminaries for teenage boys. Its lay movement Regnum Christi has approximately 70,000 members. It operates centers of education (minor seminaries, seminaries, schools and/or universities) in Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, Chile, Brazil, Ireland, France, Germany, Canada, the United States, and the Philippines.”
It was founded in 1936, meaning that some members have belonged for a long time. (Maciel was a member for 70 years)
Repudiating the religious commitment of these people is simply unrealistic. It may be that it will wither away, but a forced dispersal depends on an autocratic Pope exercising the kind of power that harmed the group to begin with.
And no, I am not a member of this group, or any of the other new movements. I just think spiritual and emotional nurturing is a better option that traumatizing people.
“seminaries for teenage boys” — Oh, no!
NYT this morning shows once again the priorities:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/03/world/europe/03maciel.html?scp=1&sq=maciel&st=cse
The 2500 boys and men in the Maciel seminaries should be sent home, imho, and the 800 priests sent to the Church’s 160+ other men’s orders, five to each, by random drawing.
http://www.catholiclinks.org/men.htm
Picking up on Prof. Kaveny’s thoughts and others about O’Brien…
All that money, those hyper-obedient seminarians, and RC members are just too much to pass up, as others note.
Survivor Jose Barba calls for a lay panel investigation of the Vatican’s handling of the whole Maciel case, but of course we will never get that examination of conscience.
I am sure the visitators were enthralled with the promises of fidelity and obedience from LC/RC, but they should have experienced what Archbishop O’Brien of Baltimore did with the Legion: all the pious words and promises meant nothing in action when the Legion went about its business as usual, much to O’Brien’s dismay. The visitators were taken in, delighted I am sure, with all the obsequious deference on display.
Here is O’Brien on his experience with the Legion (visitators take note):
O’Brien: But what goes on in the one-on-one counseling … there seems to be a tendency to say, ‘We represent God. You can tell us anything, and you better believe that what we tell you is from God too. If your parents disagree, we know better. We’re in the God business, and they’re really not.’ This is a caricature, but it’s there.
They sponsor father/son weekends. The father drives 14 hours, brings the kid up to New Hampshire and drops the kid off at 11:00 at night. Where’s the father going to stay? Well, there’s a place about 40 miles away you can stay, so the father’s sleeping in the car overnight. Next day they’re ready for the hike, but no, the fathers don’t go, it’s just the counselors and the kids. That’s the tendency.
Who’s in charge of this? Who’s responsible? Each time you meet with an official, [they say], ‘Oh, no, that didn’t happen, did it? You should have let us know right away. That’s not right.’ But it happens over and over again.
Have you spoken with other bishops who have had experiences with the Legionaries and with Regnum Christi?
I did, briefly. Our chancellor has called, I guess, maybe half a dozen other chanceries involved. They can almost finish the sentence, every sentence. It’s the exact same tactic everywhere. It gets me, because these are good, solid clergy I’m speaking with in the Legionaries, but they all seem to be so surprised all the time. Now if they’re really convinced that they have been misled, there’s something about their judgment that has to be called into question.
Read the whole interview at http://ncronline.org/node/123
What happens with those dioceses that have banned the Legion? Minneapolis-St. Paul, Columbus OH? Do they have to accept the Legion going forward? You do NOT changes stripes with such a group – a militia, no less
Claire,
I’m sure I posted the website for the Legion’s minor seminary in NH, where boys from 7th grade on are trained/brainwashed; that means 11-12 years of age: http://www.legionariesofchrist.org/eng/articulos/categoria.phtml?lc=se-241_ca-984_ci-801&width=1024&height=768
They still bleach Maciel’s history, here with his photo, can you believe it??, on the website. See all the founder’s photo with Vatican bigwigs:
http://www.legionariesofchrist.org/eng/articulos/categoria_secc.phtml?lc=se-238_ca-886_ci-887
On the ex-LC/RC website some months back, a financial officer wrote of a family that donated 500K for the renovation of the chapel at Center Harbor, NH, and that it was never built, the money diverted God knows where.
Gerelyn,
What the NYTimes left out is that Maciel’s reinstatement was a fraud. Cardinal Micara (forget first name) whom Maciel had given 10K cash shortly after WWII ended (a huge sum at the time), took advantage of the confusion during the interregnum between P12 and J23 to declare Maciel cleared. He was not head of the congregation in charge of clergy but just went ahead on his own. The proper documentation from the right congregation was never produced by the Legion. The main investigator let it go, apparently thinking there was nothing he could do in light of Maciel’s influence and counter attack.
Here is part of what was learned during that investigation:
http://www.regainnetwork.org/let/fedE.pdf 8-24-54 sworn statement by Federico Dominguez, LC
http://www.regainnetwork.org/let/FerE.pdf 8-23-56 sworn statement by Luís Ferreira Correa, L.C.
Seminarians Juan Vaca and Jose Barba among others lied to investigators under duress from the private vow they had taken never to say anything negative about Maciel. The ninth seminarian who recanted did so under enormous threatening pressure, and benefits for doing so. Maciel seemed and indeed was invincible.
The Vatican’s role is a wall of shame, including Ratzinger’s slap on the wrist to Maciel, after he became pope. He never spoke of the victims truthfulness, and left them to hang in very painful ambiguity. Better to rescue the Legion franchise instead.
Survivor Barba wants an independent investigation of the Vatican’s role, but as I said, not a chance when Benedict makes a crusade of deflecting blame for the scandal on everything and everyone except where it belongs: at home. No truth telling here. I am reminded of congressional hearings where investment bankers, ratings agencies, government enterprises, every executive who testified about the financial meltdown said, “Not I, not I.”
Carolyn
Look also at this:
http://www.regnumchristi.com/italiano/articulos/imprimir.phtml?se=359&ca=84&te=782&id=20048&opcion=1
It’s the homily preached in Rome at the legionaries’ University by card Rodé 30 days after Maciel’s death and TWO YEARS after B16 ordered Maciel to retire. It is a scandalous thing: he praises Maciel, and the legionaries .
The sworn statements and the gushing sermon? Yuck.
I’m practically certain Rode is one of the visitators. Yuck again.
My reaction to John Allen’s statement in the link to the Vatican statement at the top of this thread:
Is this the best he can do? “Maciel has also been accused of sexual abuse of former members of the order.” Thanks for nothing. Maybe Maciel abused, maybe not? He’s only “accused” after all, in Allen’s lexicon.
Does Allen also use “alleged” whenever possible? Can’t he spit out the straightforward words here that Maciel actually abused minor seminarians? What needs to happen for him to acknowledge that?
Here is word from Juan Vaca on the Vatican statement, an actual real live survivor of sexual molestation by Maciel, no qualifiers needed:
“They don’t say anything about all the harm, about how they treated us like liars,” said Mr. (Juan) Vaca, a professor of sociology and psychology at Mercy College in Dobbs Ferry, N.Y. “I have my dreams completely shattered.”
Help! Where is Jason Berry to cover this story?
There are two links to Allen’s identical coverage of the statement, both with no comments posted after two days:
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/vatican-statement-maciel-legionaries
http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/vatican-appoint-new-leadership-overhaul-legionaires?nocache=1#comment-111726
Mary,
God bless, alas, I do not read Italian. Still, the beaming photos are very clear. The Legion funded a vacation for Rode at a fancy resort, and it is not unthinkable to wonder how many other financial and various benefits he has received at their hands. One of those $1,000 Spanish hams the seminarians packed for delivery all over Rome one Christmas?
LOL, Frank Keating was on the money, so to speak, about organized corruption. There must be a Dan Brown novel here somewhere. If only it were a joke!
I searched for Legionaries of Christ in my state using Google. On the side of the window appeared the sponsored ads related to my search: “Become a Pastor” and “Contact a Lawyer”.
The Rode cappa magna/gold vestment fashion show. (Help, I need the comic interlude.)
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/cardinal-rod%C3%A9-photos-meditation
Carolyn
Rodé speaks in this homily with enormous admiration of Maciel.
An excerpt:
“Where we must look for the source, the source of this wisdom of this independence of spirit of Fr. Maciel? In his love for Christ, in his love for the Church. There is the secret of his life and the secret of his work.”
Actually the secret of Maciel’s life wasn’t his love for Christ.
It strikes me that Rodé spoke in this way when the pope already has found Maciel guilty.
Carolyn – there is a story going around Rome now that B16 will name the temporary head of the LC/RC – an Irish bishop, Brian Farrell, who has been in Rome for years and is one of the few LC bishops in the world.
We have his brother in Dallas – Keven Farrell (K-Far, an ex-LC priest who will not talk about his years in the LC) who just got two new auxiliary bishops this week. Think about that – there have only been 5 auxiliaries appointed totally in the US in the past 18 months and now Dallas got two. The last time this happened was Boston in 2006.
So, who continues to have influence? Why no separate, independent board? No mention of the money & properties in and behind the LC/RC? Sorry, this smacks of the same, continuous need to protect the institution and clericalism.
Bill – (Unprintable reaction to your news)
So, a Legion bishop might be appointed to lead the Legion out of its Legionary charism? Someone steeped in their formation process, brainwashed by the same system, and naive (or stupid?) enough to have bought into it in the first place. Anyone expect meaningful reform? Doesn’t he have to be deprogrammed himself?
Outrageous, but predictable in a disgusting way.
Condolences to Dallas for going from Grahmann to a coadjutor who ended up in Camden, NJ to K-Far.
Mary,
Is Rode so blind or so greedy? When those at the top exhibit such ignorance, why in heaven’s name would anyone follow? Keep it up guys, and just drive more people away.
Yes, after Benedict chose a non-verdict for Maciel, Rode and his ilk had every excuse to continue their plaudits for a sexual molester. So much for John Allen’s spin that everyone in Rome understood Benedict’s limp ruling to mean Maciel was guilty of sexual abuse.
Thanks for translation of the drivel.
“The Legion IMO were a sophisticated Hari Kishna like cult who targeted rich lonely Catholics, mostly women.”
Sadly. officials in the church have been doing this for 17 centuries. Augustine and Jerome fought over their rich patronesses. Spellman and Hayes did the same. This has a long tradition.
In the NY Times article cited today, note how Soldano was involved in the coverup of the LC. No wonder he rushed to loudly defend B16.
“Augustine and Jerome fought over their rich patronesses”. I think you must mean “Rufinus and Jerome”.
Augustine and Jerome never fought; they had a scholarly disagreement about the interpretation of Galatians 2, that’s all. They never met, and there is no way they could both have been vying for the same patronesses.
Joseph O’Leary wrote: “perhaps it will be salutary and demystifying for the Legionaries to have always to remember that their group was founded by an abuser.”
This raises an interesting point. It would be nice if they preserved the memory. But I rather doubt that they will. Look at Archbishop O’Brien’s dealings with them. They’ve continually behaved dishonestly.
Is it too paranoid to wonder about what will happen to the historical record about Maciel if the Legion continues to exist? There is a strong tendency to whitewash the past in the church, and if you add to it the incentives of keeping the property, community, and structures in place, there is a TREMENDOUS incentive to rewrite history concerning Maciel.
Much lying went on here initially and for seventy years. What assures anyone that it will stop now? For every document handed down that indicts Maciel, there are ten sources that will proclaim him saintly and innocent. Who will write the definitive record, historically? If the Legion continues to exist, they will write the record.
I would not be surprised if, in another generation, a revisionist history is written in which all the evidence of Maciel’s wrongdoing is either suppressed or called into question and he is “rehabilitated” as a hero of the church.
Rita, a terrifying possibility unless Benedict finds some backbone, and stops beating around the bush with the generalized, bleached language in the Vatican statement.
Nowhere has Benedict ever specified Maciel sexually abused minor seminarians, fathered numerous children, sexually abused his two sons, etc. The survivors are left hanging in terrible ambiguity and pain.
And yes, Rode was one of the visitators.
So the LCs have been investigated by someone who could not look at the reality of Maciel’s criminal activities even after he had fallen in disgrace and who, as a recipient of Maciel’s bribes, surely had no desire to probe more than superficially into that aspect of his life. And that was Pope Benedict’s choice.
I still see one faint possibility to redeem this choice: if the investigation team was structured like a tribunal, with some of its members chosen among the friends of the LCs so they can advocate for them, and some chosen among the opponents of the LCs so they can attack: like a prosecutor and defense attorney.
Otherwise the investigation is a travesty.
Actually, Carolyn, you may be mistaken. According to http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=101851, the five visitators were:
Archbishop Ricardo Blazquez Perez of Valladolid, Spain;
Archbishop Charles Joseph Chaput O.F.M. Cap. of Denver;
Archbishop Ricardo Ezzati Andrello S.D.B., of Concepcion, Chile;
Bishop Giuseppe Versaldi of Alexandria, Italy; and
Bishop Ricardo Watty Urquidi M.Sp.S, of Tepic, Mexico
Glad to be wrong, Claire.
I’m sure I read Rode was in the final drafting though, when Benedict sat in for an hour or so. As head of Congregation for Clergy or whatever the exact title, his role may still be consequential.
I gather Chaput has been sent on “visitations” before, namely Australia, where his reported reception was marginal. He does not inspire confidence for seeing below the surface the way O’Brien might.
Yes, Rode was at the meeting.
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1001848.htm
From that:
Although the five bishops acted independently, “they have reached a widely convergent evaluation and a shared opinion,” it said.
They handed in their reports to the pope and other top Vatican officials at a meeting that began April 30 and continued the next day. Participants included the three cardinals who will be involved in follow-up work on the visitation: Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state; U.S. Cardinal William J. Levada, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; and Cardinal Franc Rode, head of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life.
“widely convergent”
I wonder what that means.
How does one reform a cult?
How does one render reasonably safe an organization that attracted people willing to engage in cultlike behaviors, willing — without questioning — to subordinate their religious/spiritual (and perhaps temporal?) welfare to people in positions of authority?
How can one change a group qua group in such a scenario?
Given the Vatican’s penchant for hierarchy and obedience, can it reform such a group in what I think is by definition a potentially dangerous and objectively impossible task?
Is there any historical precedent for such a situation, in which a criminal and a crook started a new religious order, bribed the Vatican, and was good friend with the Pope? And if so, then what happened to that order?
Probably. Acts 5 has Gamaliel tell the Sanhedrin of a couple of groups who came and went quickly, and concludes with the advice “have nothing to do with these men, and let them go. For if this endeavor or this activity is of human origin, it will destroy itself. But if it comes from God, you will not be able to destroy them; you may even find yourselves fighting against God.” From that day to this, there have been groups motivated by human ambitions mixed in with others. (I would say groups inspired by God, but some here think such talk is unrealistic)
Certainly there have been attempts to reform religious groups throughout the years, implying that groups were in need of reform. The Robin Hood story has a corrupt abbot counterposed with a gluttonous friar, suggesting some level of corruption throughout society.
The Piarists in the 17th century were suppressed for 20 years, ostensibly for supporting Galileo. A recent book Fallen Order suggests that sexual abuse of minors may have been the real reason. The author even accused the sainted founder, Joseph Calasancz of being involved in the coverup.
Personally, I think institutionalizing the repentance, making it a clear part of the group’s history, is the most effective remedy. Suppression feeds into persecution feelings, and provokes a defensive reaction that tries to justify by sanitizing. Others think differently.
Are Legionaries officials reading Commonweal blog?
Today they withdrew the Rodé’s homily from the site:
http://www.regnumchristi.com/italiano/articulos/imprimir.phtml?se=359&ca=84&te=782&id=20048&opcion=1
Oh, Mary, how interesting — and incriminating. Certainly not beyond probability; their PR prowess is well established, and they are into communications (Zenit and National Catholic Register), the better to manage their image, yes?
The Wall St. Journal had a great article about icyte.com, a website where you can save a web page that might disappear. It’s Walter Mossberg’s column of April 21. You download a free web-browser add-on, and have the page as it appeared ad infinitum.
Thanks Carolyn
I didn’t know icyte.com.
George Weigel weighed in today with a six-point plan to “save what can be saved”.
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2010/05/next-acts-in-the-legionary-drama
Now how are the American bishops going to undo things like this:
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/15872
Blame JPII
I do blame JPII. Great find, Prof. Kaveny.
How did your background prepare you to form these priests?
Father Oscar Turrión: I was a founding student at the Legion’s minor seminary in New Hampshire in 1983 (Immaculate Conception Apostolic School in Center Harbor). Then I did my novitiate in Cheshire, Conn., and afterwards, studied humanities in Salamanca, Spain, then philosophy at the Gregorian University in Rome. Back in the United States in 1989, I spent four years at the minor seminary in New Hampshire as a formator. Before being assigned to Mater Ecclesiae, I was at the Notre Dame Center in Jerusalem.
See the school’s website (again) with all those youngsters from 7th grade on: http://www.legionariesofchrist.org/eng/articulos/categoria.phtml?lc=se-241_ca-984_ci-801&width=1024&height=768
Somewhere I heard the Center Harbor graduates were among the more malleable Legionaries, because they started so young. Turrion certainly has climbed the ladder.
How did the program start?
It was a request of John Paul II. He asked Father Marcial Maciel [founder of the Legionaries of Christ] if the Legion could do something for the formation of priests because he believed how good it would be for the Legion to have a seminary for bishops from all over the world so their seminarians could become rectors and formators in their own [diocesan] seminaries. Father Maciel saw this as the solution to that request he saw in the eyes and heart of the Vicar of Christ.
Why do many bishops choose Mater Ecclesiae for some of their seminarians?
From the very beginning they trust us and they believe in our formation.
This interview was last August. Why isn’t this seminary closed down already, and here we have Turrion extolling Maciel long after he was exposed as a molester.
How long before that link disappears, I wonder.
Meanwhile, see http://americanpapist.com/2009/01/text-my-observations-of-fr-alvaros-feb.html
for an account of a homily delivered by Fr Alvaro at a Mass of healing on February 8, 2009.
“He related a strange tale of his first meeting with Pope Benedict a year and a half ago. [...] The general impression (again, general because it’s hard to recall exactly what Fr. Alvaro was meaning), was that Pope Benedict was very concerned the challenges facing the Legion would cause them to lose heart and cease practicing their charism.
[...]
A second strange tale: Fr. Alvaro mentioned that during a recent meeting with Cardinal Rode, Rode said to him, in effect, that if the Legion stopped practicing its charism, Rode would “kill him.” This drew laughter. “
And here’s this: Regnum Christi: 4 point type at the bottom of the page, somewhere on the website.
http://www.conquestclubs.com/philosophy
I see the 4-pt type. Another good find. They have numerous groups under different names, all sounding very innocent.
George Weigel says the “grand narrative’ of the Legionairies and Regnum Christi must be revised to reflect the true history of Maciel.
Will Weigel revise his biography of JP II to reflect that JP II was at best gulled by Maciel or at worst, stubbornly refused to accept the evidence against Maciel??