An important comment was left by a woman named "Mary" on Amy Welborn's blog before comments were closed. It deserves an answer, so this seems to be the only available place. First, the comment:
What strikes me in the interview is the reaction of the diocesan clergy. Early in the interview, the bishop admits that the laity of Baltimore were not getting clear answers on matters of the faith from his priests, but when they approached Legionnaries, they got clear, orthodox explanations.
Then the priests applaud when the bishop announces that he is sanctioning the Legionnaries. This leaves a bad taste in my mouth- it seems that whatever faults the Legion has, the diocese is partly to blame for it.
I am a member of Regnum Christi and have never felt pressured at all to participate in anything I did not want to- as a matter of fact, when I was seriously contemplating a vocation to religious life in residency, I would have appreciated a bit *more* guidance and attention from R.C.
My response: There is some historical shorthand used in the Archbishop's explanation that requires expansion. It is very true that those of us who were drawn to the Legion were exasperated by the "fuzziness" that we found in the diocesan clergy. Homilies were pablum, CCD was wobbly, and most adult formation on the parish level was toxic to faith. We thirsted for orthodoxy and for solid advice in the confessional. We wanted safe havens for our children where they wouldn't be scandalised behind our backs.
In short: we were prime targets for the Legion, who knew the "market niche." I can remember being deeply moved the first time I saw the consecration in an LC chapel. Slow, reverent, pious. And we all sat quietly after Holy Communion making a long and sincere thanksgiving. It was all we wanted.
Later, as more and more men entered seminaries -- inspired by JP2 -- we were beneficiaries of a new generation of faithful priests. It was a breath of fresh air in dioceses across the country and a new springtime had its effects on catechesis, formation, reverence at Mass, and availability of the sacraments. The thirst was assuaged by these generous young men, and the need to look elsewhere for nourishment diminished. The Catechism was written, ETWN was broadcast coast to coast, and the faith was rejuvenated.
Thus, when Archbishop O'Brien then notes that his directive was met with enthusiasm, it leaps across those long years to the present, and his words were received by the new generation of priests who care deeply for their flocks and don't want the sheep ravaged by wolves.
One cannot connect their applause with any sort of dereliction of duty. There is blame to be attributed to the diocesan priests actions in the past, but that era is over, thank God. These younger priests know the suffering in the wake of the Legion. They also know a strong and reliable shepherd by his actions. I hope this explanation helps.
[As for the RC neglect of your real discernment, if you didn't express interest in a vocation with them, then they would naturally have no interest in your future. Sorry, but that's simply the way it is with this group.]