The first story comes to us from the Catholic News Service: Baltimore Archbishop explains suspicion of Legionaries.
Now, this is quite a shocker, to begin with. The Archbishop is not just suspicious of the Legion, but he also plans to kick it ot of his archdiocese! Of course, I clearly respect whatever
decision an archbishop makes because, well, he's an archbishop. But why would he be so suspicious of such a reputedly orthodox and faithful order as the Legion of Christ? Could there be some link here with the anti-Catholic left? Perhaps. When I first considered the vocation, I contacted the Legion and was overwhelmed by their kindness and devotion. I almost packed my bags and left before even graduating high school! However, such fervor often kindles suspicion among the less-faithful, who see such true faith as troubling. When I first mentioned the Legion to a certain nun subscriber to cox.net, incidentally the domain name with the most hits on my page (go figure!), I was told that the Legion was bad, that it was overtly militant in its language, and that it should be avoided. This coming from a person well-known to espouse grievously heretical views which I will not state here. I rest my case.In other news, President Bush visited with the Pope yesterday and there are strong rumors that he may be considering converting to Catholicism! In some other articles I read, the President has clearly admitted that he finds greater depth and richness in the history, traditions, and theology of the Catholic Church as opposed to "evangelism"! Despite disagreeing over the Iraq War with the Pope, both men have agreed strongly on just about every other point. However, consider that earlier this week the President repudiated his earlier bravado rhetoric vis-à-vis the war as harmful. Does this spell a shift towards a more peaceful demeanor? Will President Bush follow Jeb's steps and become Catholic? We shall see. Pray for him.
Moving on, praise God, the good old Irish held strong. Yesterday the Irish people rejected the EU's Lisbon Treaty by a national referendum, striking a blow to the measure and putting heavy pressure on Britain to hold its own referendum. The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property- a really awesome group- stated the reasons why such a measure's destruction would be so crucial.
Apart from effectively eradicating whatever remains of Europe's Christian civilization, the Lisbon treaty would destroy the national sovereignty of its member states including Ireland- which is still staunchly Catholic and pro-life- and would impose the voice of a relatively tiny and quasi-dictatorial body known as the European Union in Brussels and Strasbourg. Of course, the EU is raving mad about the opportunity to destroy any remaining pro-life resistance to its message of death and replace it with its "progressive" framework of indiscriminate abortion, contraception, euthanasia, pornography, etc. So, God bless Ireland.
Well, that's all for today from the De Profúndis News Service. My name's Anthony. Have a great weekend!
13 comments:
I applaud your orthodoxy, devotion, and Puerto Rican/Cuban heritage. Don't be scandalized by the Archbishop of Baltimore's statement, letter, and interview. It is possible to be orthodox and sinful, orthodox and bad in your methods, orthodox and a cult. The devil is orthodox, or, as St. Paul says, "The devil believes, and trembles." You might have found with the Legion what many found: the kindness can evaporate when you are in or too poor or sick or even when you notice something not right and say something about it. As you probably know, the Legion routinely violated canon laws in its practices (some of which have been ordered stopped by Benedict XVI) and its founder was considered guilty enough of absolutionis compliciis by the Vatican to be given what is ordinarily a punishment, but which, without a trial, due to his age and illness, was only a "request." As forother sex crimes of which he was accused, the statute had passed, both civil and canonical. Thank God you escaped having to recover from the Legion or from Regnum Christi - I went to one formation meeting and saw immediately that it was a pyramid scheme, using orthodoxy but built on a personality cult of a man who had many signs of a sex abuser. But that was just my initial reaction; later, I learned worse. Praise God that He has been able to do some good with all us flawed human beings, and praise God that the Archbishop does judge by appearances, but investigates and protects his flock.
Yes I am aware of the charges brought up against Fr Maciel. His are the only major problems of which I am aware, and he obediently spent the end of his life in prayer and penance. I do believe the number of problems caused are minimal and do not at all invalidate the overall good work of the Legion. Many new orders in the Church have run-ins that are ultimately resolved.
I spoke many a time with seminarians in Cheshire, Connecticut, where the main seminary is, and found them to be very devout and faithful people. I do not consider it a blessing or a sign of God's liberating me from some curse that I did not go to seminary there; I simply felt it necessary to finish college (or at least high school) before making a decision and, frankly, I was not mature enough to decide that.
I am suspicious of the Archbishop because of his targeting the Legion, a notably orthodox group, instead of going after more deviant groups, of which there are many, especially in the Baltimore-DC area. I suspect it to be a small sign of a greater spiritual ulcer which our culture is suffering.
So you think the ONLY POSSIBLE REASON the Archbishop has taken this action is because he maybe left-wing?
How do his requests reinforce his possibly being left-wing?
Maybe the Archbishop has made these requests because - as countless testimonies have shown - the Legion within a diocese acts for its own purpose and to its own end and does not account for itself to the bishop.
If I was a Bishop I would really want to know what every group and organisation is doing.
The Bishop has not asked them to change their behaviour except in their work with minors.
I applaud this for the safety of the children and I applaud his requests for TRANSPARENCY instead of SECRECY.
I really cannot see any other agenda.
The Legion frequently tags its "enemies" as liberals, but the reality is the legion is a secretive and closed organisation.
The friendly brothers you met and spoke to vow to god to always have a smile "because a legionaries face belongs to others" and to only ever speak good and show cheeriness. REGARDLESS of how they feel.
It is this type of deception that I don't think is holy.
In re-reading my post there may appear to be an aggressive tone of voice - it is not intended, I apologise if it appears that way.
You can read the LC's spirituality on this webpage:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Censored_Legion_de_Cristo_and_Regnum_Cristi_document_collection/en
The legion recently has taken another website to court for publishing this material online - material which the Legion keeps as a secret for "insiders" only - and in an attempt to silence former members who were criticsing it by speaking out about their experiences - including abuse of all types, examples of LC deceit, examples of LC acting as paralel church within diocise etc.
(the website was www.exlegionaries.com)
The Legion was successful as the website did not have enough funds for this legal battle and reached a settlement out of court to prevent further debt.
Here's a titbit which I think underlies paralelism:
"Where there are [non-legionary]priests who support and do not obstruct our work, we will always have an open and fertile field in which to work for the cause of Jesus Christ. In contrast, and we have seen this, where there are priests who do not support the work of Regnum Christi, our advancement is halted by obstacles encountered at each step along the way. For example, in the very work of vocational drives, we see that the word of a parish priest is at times the determining factor in whether a youth says “yes” or “no to the Legionary vocation."
Some quotes which I find a bit scary:
"63. Following the footsteps of Jesus Christ, who — out of love for the mission He received from the Father — sublimated familial affections, live your religious consecration with a sense of separation from your family."
"4) prepare families with prudence and skill when one of their sons is called into total submission so that they may accept with singular pleasure the gift granted to their son and may with each passing day become more integrated into the Movement."
"9. The face of the legionary belongs to others. Always display happiness and serenity as a manifestation of inner richness. At the other extreme, avoid all sign of depression, insecurity or timidity. Do not display a worried, sad, melancholy or disgusted face, or show an exaggerated form of happiness."
And here's an unusual one for good measure:
"264. A bunch of grapes is held on the plate with the left hand and the grapes are taken one by one with the right hand. The seeds and skin can be placed on the side on the plate."
First off, I never once wrote that the ONLY POSSIBLE REASON why the archbishop would consider booting the Legion is because he is a leftist. I never once wrote that. You can't allege that. My mentioning this as A possibility, not THE ONLY possibility, is merely because I've seen and heard of this dozens of times before. The fact that the newspaper to which he reported his views is known for its heterodoxy is in itself a bit incriminating. But, again, I rest my case. Believe what you want to believe about what I wrote. It's in black and white.
Now, your tone in your first comment, which is not vindicated by your apology, is dripping with the sort of hypocritical skepticism that has caused so many to fall away from the Church. Is it a crime for a seminarian from a perfectly legitimate order to have a kind, welcoming, and receptive demeanor with a candidate for the vocation? Would you prefer they treat me like a piece of dung they stepped on in the grass? Seriously.
I finish with this. I can not begin to tell you how unbelievably sick and tired I am with the insistence, the persistence, this despicable gad-fly repetition without end of this "safety for the children" and "priests are evil" hogwash. Has not the Church taken measures to put an end to this issue? Did not the Pope come all the way from Rome to apologize and to make unexpected amends? Does the illicit behavior of the founder of the Legion automatically condemn the rest of the entire order, making them suddenly all suspected sexual deviants? This is absolutely ridiculous! When are people going to forgive and move on? If a politician does some sexually deviant act, he goes to court, has his day in the spotlight, and then it's over. But with the Church it has not been over. This is incessantly repeated and it needs to stop. This is Satan's work attempting to destroy the sanctity of the Church, which has ever held the worth and dignity of every human from birth to death in highest esteem.
So don't infect my blog with this Church-smearing filth or I'll delete your posts!
Defending and praising an Archbishop's methods of protecting his flock by demanding accountability and protecting the church against paralelism is attacking the church?!!!
I was a legionary for five years. I was recruited from the age of 14 and entered the novitiate at the age of 16.
I was lied to from the very first time I met a legionary priest and I was lied to and witnessed instituional deception by legionaries ever since.
They lie and they lie easily.
I don't know what how you would like to be treated but I would appreciate honesty from the seminarians I met in any seminary. I know that on first time meetings we should all be polite and on best behaviour, but I don't expect the stepford brothers every time I meet them or know them - even after years of "knowing" them.
Yes I believe that there are many many good intentioned legionaries and regnum christi, people who came from good homes and who have great faith and devotion - I was one of them - but I believe that good intention is wasted in the legion which manipulates and deceives.
I am not talking about hearsay, just about what I have witnessed.
And to be honest the defense of the legion which you provide sounds like it comes straight out of the legionary manual for defending itself.
Are you defending it with your own logic or the logic that the LCs have told you?
That is a rhetorical question, and to clairfy there isn't an actual manual for LC defense. Not that I know of.
You may remove my posts if you want, you can hide and deny things if you so choose, I am not an anticatholic, I am not an anti papist, I do not promote female ordinations etc etc but my conscience moves me to do all I can to protect people from the LC abomination that has ruined many lives, seperated families, divded parishes and schools, hurt its seminarians and abused the vulnerable within it.
In step with the church? Obey your archbishop.
PS I fail to see the hypocrisy in any of my words.
Wow, this discussion is really "de produndis", out of the depths. I think that there are valid points all around, and I think that a measure of trust is due the Archbishop, since he has been totally above board with all of this, and has given reasons for his actions, much more than most actions by most members of the church.
Particular victims can sound hostile. Is is a lot of their own battle with their own victimization that spurs their tone and vehemence at times. But that is the truth with many situations of abuse, sexual or not, within the bounds of "church" or outside of those bounds.
But I really believe that discussing all of this is healthy and can only lead to a purified vision of our own salavation in the Church. Thanks Anthony for providing this forum.
My defense of the Legion comes simply from my defense of the Church, which unfortunately has seen as many attacks from within and from without. But I digress.
I did not write this post to unearth the purported horrors of the Legion. I never read any Legionary texts or spoke in depth with seminarians. However, I have done research and consider the order noteworthy.
I already stated that whatever the archbishop said goes. The point is moot. What's done is done.
I do wish we could discuss the other things that I mentioned more as I consider them much more interesting topics...
Maybe the questions to be asked are these: Is the Legion of Christ REALLY orthodox? Is secrecy an indication that there may not be complete orthodoxy? Is working on the margin of a diocese and a bishop a possible mark of being less than orthodox? Is orthodoxy enough, or can doctrinal orthodoxy alone make a group good in and for the church?
That's a great question to ponder. There've been many religious groups throughout church history that have been secretive. Perhaps the Legion does certain things secretly to foster a sense of exclusivity and belonging within the organization? Who knows.
Maybe our urge to have religious groups be totally open is not so much from a concern about orthodoxy, because people who are fervent enough will be orthodox on their own, but rather stems from our democratic thinking, which in part places high value on openness and accountability. However, is this really necessary? I think that many things within the Church, such as papal communiques and even the Conclave, are secret for a myriad of reasons, one of which I believe is the simple fact that we don't need to know everything that is going on.
I do not believe that, ultimately, the tragic scandals of late were caused by a lack of openness, but certainly a grievous lack of personal responsibility on the part of both the perpetrators but also their shepherds, the bishops. Of course, many would argue, as I would, that the overall trends and changes in Church structure, theology, and the like since VII have fostered an atmosphere where such scandals are more likely, and there is in fact much data to support that hypothesis.
And how about that President considering Catholicism, eh?? ;)
Post a Comment