life-after-RC

Removing the mask

Deirdre had some thoughts concerning the ongoing industriousness of the members of Regnum Christi, despite having neglected to fully absorb the horror of a paederast founder and decades of narcissistic duplicity. With nary an apology to those they maligned for years, or contrition for the money they raised to enable MM's very bad habits, they now throw themselves into parish work:

The rules don't apply to them.  They're indispensable.  They improve everything they touch.

Meanwhile, the truth is that, as good as being 'indispensable' feels, no one is. And sometimes, when the indispensable people who do everything for the priest and take over everything step back, a parish finds that there are a lot more people who area willing to pitch in and help--it's just that no one ever bothered to ASK them before, so they didn't feel like they had anything to contribute because the 'indispensables' seemed to have everything just so.

This led to Aaron's insight:

This has pulled a thought from my head - does the group dynamic allow RC members (for example) to behave in a way that they would not ordinarily behave if acting alone, independently: would they feel indispensable if they were doing something on their own but rather than as an RC member?

I know that that "I am indispensable" feeling is indeed common enough, and I say that as a Church organist! But other attitudes -- rudeness, uncharitableness, etc. -- stems from them holding up the RC mask: because they are RC their behaviour is not their own so to speak.

I suppose that if we could encourage members to think about their actions and words and challenge them to think if they would say the same things and act the same way outside of RC. In a similar way, working with children I have my teacher/authority voice and it took me a while to be able to know how to switch that off and not speak that way with kids outside of school -- with relatives, etc. Or indeed not to speak to my parents and siblings at the dinner table like that -- how condescending of me!

As for my own behaviour while in the group, I certainly did things with a gusto that was highly uncharacteristic. At the time, I thought it was "holy boldness;" but in retrospect, it was simply chutzpah that may have been grievously inappropriate. When linked to a group this dynamic, there is a mantle of audacity that allows one to step into perilous terrain with little thought.

One can easily make the case that this is simply "Biblical" (which is what we were taught) but it may also be part of a false persona that spreads a different kingdom at the expense of our own credibility later -- and that's very hard to face, but essential in terms of healing.

Canst thou love me, Kate?

This comment was just put on a very old thread, so I'm bringing it out to see daylight:

Did you hear about the $2 million addition to the Atlanta Regnum Christi building site? Where does this money come from during these very hard economic times? If from the pockets of parish members, for shame! If from Rome, for shame! If from parents of the girls sucked into the cult of RC,shame! From the "rich" Catholics, the far right? I would really like to know. I know of a RC order member who just returned from Mexico. If she & other RC's have been recruiting vulnerable Mexican girls, for shame! I am now coming to view this order as a type of welfare system; but it is a trap!

There are tremendous resources being placed in Atlanta:

• more than twenty 3gf's plus co-workers (though several will be working in Louisiana, Tennessee and Minneapolis);
• Four Legionary brothers (three of them working at Pinecrest);
• Thirteen Legionary priests (with the stipulation that sometimes "Father's" in the Legion are deacons. Suffice it to say that there are seventeen "Legionaries," with at least one being dedicated to Florida.)

The "head of school" is now a Legionary, which is an interesting title, given that there are still high, middle and lower school principals. So much hard work has gone into this school -- it would seem as though it has become the Legion's Crown Jewel:

KATHARINE: Is it possible dat I should love de enemy of France?

KING HENRY V: No, it is not possible you should love the enemy of France, Kate; but in loving me, you should love the friend of France; for I love France so well that I will not part with a village of it. I will have it all mine, and Kate, when France is mine and I am yours, then yours is France and you are mine (Henry V, Act 5, Scene 2).

[The play's epilogue showed the folly of such "love," and we must remember that France already belonged to Katherine -- despite Harry's glib promises....]

 

"Sectarian and exclusive"

There is a very good text called Spiritual discernment: Theology, History and Praxis, written by Manuel Ruiz Jurado, SJ (Professor of Spiritual theology at the Gregorian in Rome). It includes this passage about how to discern among ecclesial groups and communities:

1. Character: you must pay attention to their character. Do they think of themselves as a part or member of the Church, or do they claim to be "the Church," a kind of substitute for the global church institution, where they try to put all the components of ecclesial communion, as if only by participating in this spirit, as promoted by this particular movement could the whole Church be actualised? Such a character, although it has the appearance of universal communion, is sectarian and exclusive, since it considers all that is not like the movement as unfaithful to the Gospel, and themselves as the only faithful ones, thus denying any plurality of possible inspirations in the Church, which was the starting point of their own personality within the Church in communion.

2. Another important aspect will be the relationship established between the institution and the individual. Any attempt to disregard the personal vocation of the members, through violence or exploitation of the individual from the institution without possible appeal to higher authority, all non-absoluteness of God will be a bad sign. If you notice that the person is hampered in fulfilling his or her paramount obligations, the institution can not be accepted as divinely inspired.

Well, those are two pretty powerful points, which bear directly on the Legion and Regnum Christi. More importantly, this is the sort of toxicity that no one seems to be considering in the reform -- a poison that is different from the sexual perversions that stemmed from the founder. They both existed in his person, but the Legion (and reformers) seem all to ready to focus on the sexual peccadillos, while ignoring the other grave problem: the cultishness that flowed from this "sectarian and exclusive" view of the movement.

They text above is translated from the original Spanish, which is below for those who prefer to see that. (Please tell me if I have misrepresented his thoughts.)

1. Talante: hay que atender a su talante. ¿Se consideran una parte o miembro de la Iglesia, o pretenden presentarse como “la Iglesia”, una especie de sustitutivo a la institución eclesial global, en la que intentarían hacer entrar a todos los componentes de la comunión eclesial, como si sólo participando de este espíritu promovido por este movimiento particular se pudiese realizar la Iglesia en su totalidad? Semejante talante, aunque tiene apariencias de comunión universal, es sectario y exclusivista, puesto que considera todo lo que no es propio del movimiento como infiel al Evangelio y a sí mismos como los únicos fieles, con lo que se niega toda pluralidad de inspiraciones posibles en la Iglesia, que es el punto de partida de la propia personalidad dentro de la Iglesia en comunión.

2. Aspecto importante será también la relación que se establece entre la obra y el individuo. Todo intento de falta de consideración a la vocación personal de los miembros, de violencia o instrumentalización del individuo al grupo sin posibilidad de apelación a la autoridad superior, toda absolutización que no sea de Dios, será mala señal. Si se observa que se obstaculiza a la persona en el cumplimiento de sus obligaciones irrenunciables, la institución no puede ser aceptada como de inspiración divina.

Your family is not an apostolate

A faithful reader highlights an essential truth about the Movement:

Almost one year after leaving RC (and after 12 years of involvement up to 2nd degree 2nd level), I've just had another big "Aha!" moment thanks to you good people and the other post-RC blogs out there. 

My "personal light?" We were repeatedly told as wives and mothers that, although we have a vocation to RC, our family is our first apostolate.  This was the Movement's way to sound balanced and serenely sympathetic as we wept for our chaotic home lives. 

But it kept RC as our core identity and our families as "the thing we did for God." In truth it was just an insidious platitude with a BIG LIE at the heart of it!

The Truth is that my VOCATION is to be a WIFE AND MOTHER, and RC was the apostolate!!! Of course, it's not that either--it's an ANTI-apostolate that sucks the life out of one's ability to do real work for the Lord in freedom and Truth. 

But by making RC one's core identity (Core Convictions, anyone?), Maciel & Co. were able to make it excrutiatingly painful and confusing to try to leave--it was tantamount to not only betraying who God called me to be, but also abandoning my very identity.  RC was who I WAS, not something that I DID.

[This may have been said before] but for some reason it just sunk in on a deeper level, and I wanted to share this just in case someone still on the inside read this and had a lightbulb moment, too.

It cannot be said enough, because when grace kicks in, that's when you hear the message. It's like the pro-life message, lessons from your parents, and many other serious things in life, up to a point you cannot "hear" the truth, and when the time is right, it all clicks. Hard to explain, but a crystal clear moment for everyone who's been there.

I've tried to explain this verbal "switch" many times (and it was a centerpiece of my testimony with the CDF). When being introduced to RC, the recruit is told that Regnum Christi doesn't ask any more of its members than the standard prayers and devotions aligned with basic Catholicism: Mass, Rosary, daily prayer, Confession, regular retreats and apostolatic work. After nailing those in (RC-style) and establishing that the Movement is synonymous with the faith, that's when the mental switch takes place:

RC = Catholicism 101; therefore to walk away from the Movement is to walk away from the Church. That's the crisis in so many discernment stories, because members believe that to abandon this "vocation" is tantamount to abandoning Christ.

I know this point is a little different than that made by the insightful reader above, but the bottom line is the same: MM's methodology had a clever way of inserting itself into one's life of faith, so that it becomes the baseline of belief. That sets up the confusion over priorities and authentic discernment.

• The Regnum Christi Movement is not the Church;
• Your time spent in Regnum Christi doesn't define your vocation [amended];
• Your vocation to marriage and family life is not an apostolate;
• Leaving the consecrated life is not "divorcing Jesus" (Sorry, but that needs to be said. And if 3gf's can leave without commiting the slightest sin, then it's all the more true for married members.)

God is good -- and patient. Ask for the grace of discernment, and trust that many, many people are praying for you.

Where we are now

A reader assesses the current situation:

Oddly enough neither DePaolis, nor Ghirlanda, and certainly not much of LC leadership, have caught on to the core part of the crisis [which is based on the Legionary tendency to value money and power more than souls and mercy]. Even though the Visitors began to catch on to this obsession with self serving results and influence peddling with the glitterati, DePaolis stopped that reflection in its tracks when he had his first meeting with the Territorial Directors in Rome. He made it clear the work with "leaders" was to continue.  Of course DP calling the charism clear and beautiful fed the illusion as well. This cut the legs off a true reform of anyone on the inside--those men have now left, and future awakenings will render the same result eventually.

I believe DePaolis had some type of mandate to try to protect the Church's previous approval of the LC as much as possible, and that it was perceived that a structural dis-assembly of the LC work in Mexico would have left a very unwanted vacuum that the Church was not in a position to fill overnight. 

Basically I see two dynamics will gradually empty the ranks of the LC world in the coming years:

1. A basic hope only in the men themselves, the leadership and structure is totally irreparable. The men have a lot of priestly good in their hands to carry out, and eventually they will find the only way to honestly hold on to that for the long term good of the Church herself, is simply to serve the Church from some other place. The inability for an order to anchor its identity in inspiration and authentic sources really begins to grate on those who witness this over time.  Newcomers are always the least sensitive to this problem because they begin by idealizing some very limited experience that does not hold up over time. 
2. Eventually when other more healthy alternatives emerge to fill the needs of lay spirituality and catholic education(i.e. in Mexico) supporters and membership pools will dry up, and head for the better options that do not victimize them in the process.

Nothing says "management" like the Legion

Who knew that they could prepare college kids to be business managers, capable of taking home mad skill--by means of spending 89 days in Rome with Legionaries as personal leadership coaches?

As a Pre-University student at SSM, you will attend classes that have direct applications in the workplace. A Swiss School of Management program stands for much more than excellence in education, as our goal is to nurture leaders that can inspire others, demonstrate oustanding skills, and work in global environments. Take a look at our Pre-University Leadership program, and you will walk away with an experience to last a lifetime.

You'll be gratified to know that one of the five pillars of leadership is authenticity:

An authentic person says what they think and acts according to what they believe. There is no room for duplicity in a leader. We live in a century when distrust of leaders abounds, founded on demonstrated insincerity and duplicity of public officials, business leaders, and media stars.

By definition, a leader is someone that influences others in a distinct direction. When leaders are not true to themselves and true to others, they foster a culture of insincerity and duplicity. An effective leader must be able to instill trust and confidence in others.

And the cost?

11,000 € + 4,000 for lodging, 8 tours, insurance, weekday lunches and two weekend getaway leadership training sessions. The summer semester is 7,000 € for tuition, lodging, 6 tours, 1 weekend getaway trip to Tuscany and weekday lunches.

For college kids. Really. To learn Italian and Western Civ, and sip wine in Tuscan villas. My own children are too busy working multiple jobs and scraping together their FAFSA forms for the coming semester to dream of such things.

Scicluna is a treasure

Andrea Tornielli offers some background on Msgr Charles Scicluna, who has been at the heart of abuse investigations since 2002. This confirms my understanding that he has worked directly with Benedict on these matters, and has been the driving force behind the ongoing research necessary to unmasking clerical perversion.

When the question about what it had meant in terms of his life path, to be involved in these huge scandals, is asked, his face turns serious: “I understood that the Church did not crumble, despite these scandals, and this is precisely because its foundations are supernatural. There is no other way to explain it.”

“The Church – continues Scicluna – considers children’s’ innocence to be one its most precious treasures, and Benedict XVI’s leadership was and is vital. He had the courage to say: we have made a mistake here, here we need to change…” This is precisely what Ratzinger was referring to in his famous meditations for the Via Crucis on Holy Friday back in 2005, when he spoke of the “filth” that existed in the Church: “Those words came from three years of abuse case study; there was an awareness of the need to see priests’ sins for what they really were”.

Over the past few days, during his presentation of an international seminar dedicated to the fight against child abuse by priests due to take place at the Pontifical Gregorian University in February 2012, Scicluma used strong words to underline the fact that violence shown towards minors by clergymen constitutes “an abuse of spiritual power”. “Yes, it is true – adds the Maltese prelate – there is a specific difference between repeated abuse by a lay person and that carried out by a priest, on victims that expect to see in them the figure of the “good shepherd”. Scicluna’s face darkens and he looks saddened. “If a priest commits the abuse, the trauma caused to the victim is even deeper, the spiritual trust that existed is destroyed and a person’s faith is lost.”

Exactly. And remember the much of the intransigence he finds is in the curia itself, the fact of which doesn't indict the faith, per se, but only reminds us that personal sin is everywhere. Do read it all, and note the caveat in place for those invited to participate in the 2012 conference. It's brilliant, and marginalises those who may be looking for shallow, mundane solutions without having grasped the horrific wounds, which should be the paramount consideration.

Pray for this good man (who just celebrated the 25th anniversary of his priesthood) and that his dogged perseverence continues to shed light on the darkest corners of the institutional Church. Only in that way can we properly purge this "filth." Your own personal sacrifices in union with this intention are, of course, most welcome.