Decompression takes time

Many commenters have tried to explain their journey after associating with and supporting the mission of the Legionaries of Christ and the Regnum Christi Movement. In fact, if you'll notice and look above, that's exactly the point of this blog. This post gives a very good explanation of the anger of many, and explains their perplexity about why others cannot see what harms the Legion has done (and by the looks of the professions homily, are continuing to do).

I'm ... not thinking of anyone in particular here [while pointing out that] there's a lot of pride motivating them to stay in RC right now. Believe me. When I left the employ of the RC, it took me two years to decompress. Initially, I was relieved. But then I realized that I was denying something about myself that I simply did not want to believe: that I could have been sooooo blind and stupid to believe anything they told me in the first place. And to have put my entire family and career at risk was, in hindsight, insane (!). It was such a sad and embarrassingly stupid waste of four years of my time.

Then I was angry with myself. Then angry with particular individuals. And then I found a community of support--people who'd come to recognize that they had been abused as I had. And that helped. Alot.

Finally--for those of you who are still in RC, please understand some basic facts:

Maciel fathered children by two different women and supported them. Maciel was not Jaime Gonzalez or Juan Rivas or whoever he pretended to be to those people. He did not work for some international company, as he claimed. But he sent them money regularly. He paid for their educations. He paid for their food, their clothing, their houses and cars and spending money for bicycles and vacations in the Carribean and trips to Rome to visit with the Pope. Everything;

So, he misrepresented himself to you in order to steal from you. And he used Christ to do it. And you, unwittingly, stole from me.

You stole my time, my talents, my reputation, and my money. You took food out of my children's mouths and shoes from their feet. You robbed them of a psychologically and spiritually balanced life for years.

And I never even joined your organization. I just helped you to build it up. I gave you professional advice. I lent my face to your campaigns. I recommended your school to other like minded Catholic parents who wanting something good and wholesome for their children.

And you repaid me by insisting that my children be goaded and pressured to join your RC clubs--without telling me, without asking my permission. You told those children that they had a "vocation" to RC and made them feel guilty if they questioned your wisdom. And when I left, you whispered about "problems at home," or something about too much alcohol, or "we think he stole money from us."

But now you want us to understand that the Holy Spirit is still prompting you to stay in your organization because of your pure intentions. Your pure intentions were used by Maciel as a means to perpetuate a huge fraud on the Church.

When I realized these things, one of the things I did was contact the Bishop with whom I'd directly consulted to help regularize the relationship between the Legionaries and the local diocese to tell him directly that I never knowingly misrepresented myself or the school for which I worked in my efforts to bring that school into the fold. The Vicar General tracked me down in another state and called me directly to assure me that he and the Bishop knew. That was a huge relief.

Anyway, sorry that this is both long and strong but I still don't think that a lot of RC members understand what they've been involved in.

Comments

[Burt]

Does anyone one know what Fr. A said to the people in Atlanta?

[gregorbo]

Burt--go over to Cassandra Jones' blog and then to Pete Vere's (Catholic Light). I'm willing to bet the homily he gave yesterday is close to what he said in Atlanta--though I have no way of knowing.

[Katie]

This person expresses well what I tried to express yesterday to Still RC--why those on the outside are so disturbed that faithful fellow Catholics stay in and see nothing wrong with staying in. They seem to not to care for the rest of the Church.

[anonymous]

"It appears that your view and many on this blog believe LC/RC is a full blown cult and all priests and lay people are being led astray and have to leave it to heal and be true to the Church...is that how you see it?"

That's exactly how I see it, and I've been on the inside ... real deep ... for more than 10 years. You may only be able to see the good parts b/c you haven't seen the corruption and pure malice that exists deeper into the organization.

* * *

"my current opinion is that there is much good that can be done for the Church if LC/RC is fully reformed and the hierarchy (Fr A and company) switched out and the cultish attributes completely squashed."

There wouldn't be much left ... except a few study circles. And that you can organize through your parish.

[Anonymous]

I can't and won't speak for Still RC, but I think a lot of people are able to easily absolve themselves of any responsibility in the matter because they themselves didn't see these things happen in their sections. Therefore all this abuse happening is "other". And doesn't really apply in their particular situation. That allows them to wash their hands of the evil that was done by the organization.

I'm not saying I agree with it, mind you. But I suspect that is how a lot of people justify staying in the organization. They feel it has done so much "good" in their lives, they don't want to give up the "spiritual consolation" they feel, they love the security of being told what to do and think, and they are convinced THEY were not party to any of the evil perpetrated by the organization.

I keep thinking of that Fr. Anton Jose and his comment a few months ago about how any evil Maciel had done was "infinitely outweighed" by the good he had brought about. I wasn't able to wrap my head around it then, and I remain just as perplexed by that thought process today. It's like somebody is holding a scale, and all the "bad" is piled on one side and all the "good" is piled on the other. The LC/RC keep piling on all the perceived goods and seem convinced that if there are enough of them, the evil won't really matter because it loses out on the scale. So if an RC person feels all this "good" has been done in their lives and hasn't seen the evil happening, they are convinced the good has won out, and that's all that really matters.

I am probably not articulating this very well, but it's a way of looking at good and evil that seems SO out of line with what we believe as Catholics. I mean, Adam and Eve were PERFECT in paradise, effecting all sorts of "good", I am sure. But that ONE act of eating the apple was enough to get them kicked out of Paradise for permanently. God didn't get out the scale and put all their good acts on one side and their one evil act on the other in order to determine their fate.

Anyway, this way of looking at good and evil seems to permeate LC/RC thinking. I'm under the impression that as long as they convince themselves of all this "good" happening, they are easily able to absolve themselves of any evil that may be going on.

If anything, this scandal has probably whipped them into a fury of "doing good" so that they have more to pile on the scale in order to convince the world of their "goodness". If they can just stay in and produce enough good, people will realize how little the evil really matters and that they were right all along to stay with this group.

(Again, I don't mean to imply that I think my opinion in any way describes Still RC's motivations)

[giselle]

The way you write that, Anon, makes it sound almost like the passing of Ted Kennedy, which brought Chappaquiddick to the minds of many (disgruntled souls, no doubt). One pundit went so far as to say that if Mary Jo Kopechne had known the great good that Kennedy was driven to do to try to erase that bad mark on his character, she would have died willingly for the cause.

[Katie]

I have no doubt you are right, Anonymous. This is why I want so much to open their eyes to the rest of the Church. Whatever good a member may feel they have experienced through LC/RC, OBJECTIVELY this group has perpetrated a terrible, unspeakably damaging fraud on the whole Church. Many "members of Christ" are bleeding and/or in excruciating pain as a result. Many no doubt will experience agonizing crises of faith because of it. How grotesque, in the face of this, are protestations that it's done so much good and I feel called to stay in?

[anonymous]

"The LC/RC keep piling on all the perceived goods and seem convinced that if there are enough of them, the evil won't really matter because it loses out on the scale."

My momma always said: "The devil will tell you a thousand truths to get you to believe one lie."

Just sayin...

[anonymous]

Maciel/Jaime/Juan (whoever) "misrepresented himself to you in order to steal from you. And he used Christ to do it."

I think that last part is the most reprehensible. There is no good that can outweigh that. I simply don't understand how people can't see that.

[rc cynic]

I left in Feb...could not leave fast enough. As a team leader, the reactions of the women on my team confirmed it. The excuse used most often was that their experience was good and where would their families be without it. One wanted the bare minimum and only because she was a spiritual guide. One knew MM was guilty but the section was good for her and the family so she didn't care. There was concern that I was leaving the Church (apparently RC and the Church are the same). There was concern that I was harsh, judgemental and unforgiving about MM because he had served his time in "prayer and penance". I am so sad and so angry and sick at heart for all that I participated in and perpetuated by being involved in the movement...I am so sorry to those in and out of the movement, but especially to those victims that I had said were lying. There are women in my section making decisions about family life so that more time can be freed for apostolate. Vocation to the Movement was equated to vocation in marriage. Information is being withheld by equating it with a sin of impurity to seek it and rather we should trust our superiors for all information (LC priest in Bethesda). I was told by the head of a major apostolate that I should not have seen Fr. Berg's letter because it contained several injustices. When some women met Fr. Alvaro, it was like a fan club with fawning and picture taking...when will the insanity stop???

[giselle]

Don't forget the testimony that parses the line, "That was not my experience."

http://www.life-after-rc.com/2009/07/the-logic-of-my-experience.html

[Anonymous]

I figured out a while ago that the Legion is trying to pull the old switcheroo and is putting Alvaro out there as the next personality to be adored in the Legion. Exit: Maciel. All hail Alvaro.

My son (teenager) just raved about how holy Alvaro was and that he was so very close to our Lord. That God would show him the way to lead the Legion out of this mess. My son had the same awed tone he used to use when speaking of Maciel.

Don't be surprised if Alvaro is now the one flying in on helicopters while hundreds of swooning teenage girls scream and faint. The Legion knows what the people want and will be sure to hand it to them on a silver platter.

[FinallyOut&About]

Giselle, I've been reading here for some time now and am "very recently" former RC. I want to thank you for the linkback you included above because it describes my experience almost exactly - minus the part with the child/school.

It took until last month when I finally decided that it wasn't the good that mattered....if there was any evil about (as has been factually proven) that needs to be the focus....you know - millstones, and all that. All the good in the world is no excuse for continuing bad methodology.

Anyway, I just felt compelled to respond. I've hesitated until now because I take issue with the whole bashing LC/RC that goes on online - not here specifically - you are always most charitable...Honest yes, but charitable all the same.

Thank you for this place. I know it takes a considerable amount of your time.

God Bless!

[giselle]

May God grant you peace always, FO&A.

If we take away anything, let us remember authentic charity -- with its hard sayings and gentle touches. We're all on the same pilgrimage, friends.

[gregorbo]

I agree.

I've learned a thing or two being married and having children.

The least amount of joy--I'm overhearing it even as I type it--outweighs the human misery we construe for ourselves.

I cried tonight. I actually had to excuse myself to the back porch. And both of my sons came out to ask--are you okay Dad?

These are boys who are a little too young to remember our experience with RC. But two boys who both served at Mass today. And they asked--"are you okay Dad."

They actually came out to check.

And I am okay. But seriously. I weep. I weep out of frustration. I weep because it's so obvious to me how much God loves me through the faces of my boys, my girls, my wife.

What else do you need? This is langiappe beyond Christ's own sacrifice and yet some need some other formula? Some method? Some other way?

[Anonymous]

Gregorbo,

You have officially expanded my vocabulary, as I had never heard of the word lagniappe before.

My husband's love for me has taught me more about Christ's love than any other experience in my life.

I've heard so many people describe their "vocation" to RC as having been portrayed as equal to their vocation to marriage. It's like RC is an abusive husband. The wife is in denial about his abuse because he also buys her all sorts of "good" things and gives her all sorts of experiences she feels she may have missed out on if not married to him. Meanwhile, he continues to abuse her, their friends, their children, etc. But he has done so very much good for me! she tells herself. Where would I be without him?

How can an abusive husband (RC) who has such a twisted view of love (charity??) teach anybody about Christ's authentic love? The children of such a relationship will grow up with a very confused notion of what true love is. Seeing each other get beaten one minute, but having their father gush about love and give them great gifts the next.

Yet the wife continues to stick it out in the hopes that all the wonderful things her husband does will prove to the world that she was right to stay with him after all. Besides, it makes her feel good.

[giselle]

Very good analogy, Anon. You and I married good men in that respect. As for the abuse, many well-meaning husbands looking in see their wives' tears, their frustration and their overwork, and yet they have difficulty intervening. The Legion doesn't stress the primacy of the marital bond (other than lip service) and the husbands' suggestions to cut back or pay attention to the home are ignored. Thus they become a party to their wives' abuse through their silence. The castrati working to expand their ranks...

(As for docility, it's an excellent and necessary virtue, but not as the Legion promotes it.)

[Anonymous]

Re: docility

I think my problem with it has to do with its common usage in our language. We describe animals as docile when they allow themselves to be led around and controlled by their masters. I have found this to be the Legion's understanding of the term. If you raise any concerns or question the methodology, you are not being "docile".

The official virtue of docility is nothing like that. "The mark of the docile person is his willingness to be taught. But since docility is part of prudence — the virtue of realism — the only thing the docile person wants to know is the truth. The roots of docility are in humility and self-knowledge, while its fruits are in realism and practicality." (from this website http://catholicexchange.com/2003/07/10/81540/)

In this sense, the Legion has been completely INdocile. There has been no humility, desire for self-knowledge, or realism. The entire house of cards was built on a giant lie---a lie the Legion happily followed and lived for 65 years. There WAS no search for the truth, only adamant and vicious denial of it when anybody tried to sound the alarm.

[Mary Ann]

Who posted which part of this entry?

[giselle]

Of the original entry? Giselle wrote the introduction (first paragraph only) and the commenter (gregorbo) wrote all the rest. The second indentation was to set apart his reflexions, the last paragraph is his own.

[Still RC - For Now, Anyway]

gregorbo says:
"If they continue to recruit (and I don't accuse Still RC of doing so) without fully disclosing the present state of affairs, I find that deceptive and sinful."

Greg, In my opinion, the RC should not have been attempting any growth in membership for the past 3 years (since the Vatican Communique) without at minimum a definite plan for eradicating the person of the founder from the movement. (whether such an eradication is even possible I can't say as I don't have the theological and/or canonical expertise to make that assessment - I'm just stating what would need to be done - at a minimum - before resuming any growth).

Since Feb. 2009, all programs of "growth" should immediately have included at a minimum full disclosure of the founder's conduct, news releases and statements of the Legion, the commentary of the bishops AND the information re: the apostolic visitation. The point here is not so much whether "recruitment" should or should not continue as much as that those discerning a personal call to RC should be given FULL information so they can make an INFORMED decision.

I have no idea what the programs for recruitment currently include but I've been told that those in discernment in our section were informed of the apostolic visitation (have no idea to what degree this might have been spun, however). I've pushed for full disclosure and have been shut down. I'll continue to push as opportunity allows.

Katie says:
"This person expresses well what I tried to express yesterday to Still RC--why those on the outside are so disturbed that faithful fellow Catholics stay in and see nothing wrong with staying in. They seem to not to care for the rest of the Church."

Katie, please go back to Pete Vere's commentary in this matter (a few posts back) for a PROPER understanding of an individual's informed decision either to leave RC or remain within.

Also please know that one's membership in RC is NOT necessarily a "stamp of approval" for the organization "as is". A member who is vocal, both inside and out, about the current significant problems is still a member.

Anonymous says:
"I can't and won't speak for Still RC, but I think a lot of people are able to easily absolve themselves of any responsibility in the matter because they themselves didn't see these things happen in their sections. Therefore all this abuse happening is "other". And doesn't really apply in their particular situation. That allows them to wash their hands of the evil that was done by the organization."

Anonymous, I believe it's unacceptable to remain just because RC has served you well (and your family well). Those folks are probably not doing the discernment they need to at this point. Rather, one should be asking the question (at least in my view) "OK what possible reason is there to remain?" prayerfully discern that, then discuss with a spiritual advisor OUTSIDE the LC or RC.

Folks, let me also clarify that much of what I've written positively about RC is what I believe the members are capable of WITHOUT the influence of the Legion. The current setup promotes a complete dependency on the Legion for spiritual, apostolic and other guidance and direction. This needs to change and I hope it does. Believe it or not, I've seen it changing little by little in the past few years and in the case that the RC does survive apart from the Legion, I predict that even some of the Old Guard may change their tune and the newer members will easily be able to make the transition.

I am NOT, by the way, making a statement about whether RC SHOULD survive - I'm merely sketching out a few "if then's". I realize that might put me in the minority on this blog (but hey, I'm already an "enemy of the Church" per Fr. Paul Moreau AND a brainwashed Legion-Speaker per Giselle so why not complete the process of casting myself as an "outlier" in this entire discussion).

To me the most important thing is that it's being discussed. MM, the LC and the RC should be subjected to the views of the public square. Just keep in mind not ALL of those views are going to be "Giselle-speak" or "EXLC-speak". :)

[Katie]

I found Peter Vere's comment on the question unconvincing. I thought he, too, assumed (against the overwhelming evidence) a basic goodness and legitimacy in the organization as such. In such a case, personal discernment about whether to go or stay makes sense. Say I am a nun in a order that has gone nutty with feminism. Do I stay and try to help it rediscover its original mission or do I go and live out my vocation elsewhere among sisters who support me rather than drag me down? It's a very personal question, worked out between the self and the Holy Spirit. Only I can decide what is right in my case.
This situation seems to me very different. The organization is fraudulent. It has done untold harm to the Church. It has no valid origin to return to. It has no leg to stand on. Those who remain in it after learning the truth are, in my view, adding to the scandal and moral confusion it has caused.
I say again that to remain affiliated with it is OBJECTIVELY to stand in solidarity with it. It is to declare to the world your confidence in it and your relative indifference to the harm it has done and is doing to so many fellow Catholics.
That's how I see it.

[Still RC - For Now, Anyway]

Katie, I totally see your point and it's a very good one. The damage to the victims, the wound to the Church, and the complete loss of credibility of the LC at this point are some of the "fruits" that LC and RC must live with going forward. No amount of declaring that "it wasn't my personal fault if there are victims" would suffice on this (and yes, I have heard that argument from some of the members).

Even if the LC leadership consisted of the holiest of men, that would not necessarily save the LC from being taken apart. Likewise, the corruption among the LC leadership and the aspects of malformation offered RC members may not necessarily mean everything is bad about RC.

The issue of a charism is, in my view, the real OBJECTIVE issue here. The rest is more subjective and can be clarified, hopefully, with the intervention of the Holy See.

I WILL say that I wish I could conclude it were as cut and dry as you see it. And I completely empathize with your disgust at the evil done as well as the simplicity and forthrightness of your viewpoint. Usually I would have the same viewpoint and, in fact, I did have the same viewpoint earlier this year but a very frank discussion with a spiritual advisor OUTSIDE of RC and prayerful reflection following that has led me to conclude, albeit reluctantly, that it's not as simple as it looked. I wish it were.

[Pete Vere]

Kate, I understand your personal position and how it conflicts with what I stated. I also understand why you would question the basic assumption upon which stands the position I stated. That being said, you're entitled to express a personal position that contradicts the Church's current position.

I'm not. When people ask me these types of questions on a forum such as this, they're generally asking me as a canon lawyer rather than a private individual. Therefore I cannot go beyond what the Church permits.

The Church hasn't told people they must stay in RC, but it hasn't told them to leave either.

[Katie]

I don't think it's exactly right to say that my position "contradicts the Church's current position." My understanding is that the Church has not yet taken a definite position vis a vis the Legion, beyond disciplining Maciel, initiating a visitation, and generally letting it be known that there are grave problems and doubts. On those grounds, I think it would be wrong for any Catholic to charge a current member of LC/RC with anything like formal heterodoxy or schism for staying in. With gregorbo, I fully grant that current members are generally Catholics in good standing. I can't for a second imagine Still-RC still being RC if the Pope were to suppress the order.

But I think it's a different thing altogether to claim that some members are being called by God to stay in. That suggestion seems to me to go beyond the position of the Church as much as my position does, no? It implies that the group is legitimate.