Garza's version of events

The following account is from the RC State of the Section meeting held in Atlanta on Sunday, 9/25/2011, at 7:00 pm, during which Fr. Luis Garza, LC was asked: "Was there a cover up?" His answer is summarised as follows:

November 2004 was the 60th anniversary celebration in Rome and all was fine. But shortly afterwards, the Holy See began an investigation to finally lay to rest the accusations against Maciel. The Vatican began the investigation thinking that he was innocent and just wanted to clear his name for the sake of history, but later, as the investigation proceeded, they realized that he was guilty.

Garza said, “But we did not know this--we learned it later from the press.” Garza said that around this time Maciel was evasive and vague. He went to Cancun for two or three months. Then a lady appeared. (Garza was referring to Norma.) In September or August of 2005, Maciel went to Cotija and he stayed there for two or three months, but the lady was there too. Some consecrated ladies were staying with the lady (Norma.) Garza said that "very few thought this was an affair." Garza said "but Maciel's brother became concerned." The brother told Maciel that this would destroy his work, it would destroy what he had spent his whole life building.

But, according to Garza, dementia ensued for Maciel, and he wasn't thinking or behaving rationally. They somehow got Maciel's nephew involved [original notes not clear here] but Maciel went and spent time in Colombia, and then he went to Houston. And he would only allow the lady to travel with him.

Finally, in February 2006 Malen Oriol went to speak to Garza about her concerns. Malen asked Garza to intervene. She claimed that the lady was taking advantage of Maciel.

At about that time, the CDF called Fr. Alvaro and told him that Maciel was guilty [Garza did not say what he was guilty of] but the CDF did not provide proof and Garza did not believe the CDF. [Yes, that's what Garza said. He said "I did not believe the CDF." At this point Garza apologized, saying he was sorry he did not believe the guilt at that time.]

Then he mentioned John Allen [reporter for the National Catholic Reporter] and that there was a leak to the press, but Garza still thought Maciel was not guilty. So he said that the problem was where to take Maciel? Rome? No, that wouldn't do. Mexico? No, no good either. So they decided to send him off to Jacksonville, FL.

He mentioned that Maciel's uncle, San Rafael Guizar, was to be canonized on October 15, 2006, and Maciel was insisting that he would go attend the celebrations. Apparently LCs had a tough time keeping Maciel away from the event.

Then Garza described being in Jacksonville with Maciel and Norma and how he began to think that perhaps there WAS something wrong. He said that at one moment he looked at her and said, it's true, isn't it? And Norma broke down crying, so relieved to finally be recognized as Maciel's wife, saying, "We've been together for 28 years."

He described her as not very educated, and said that women were better suited for this type of situation -- so he had the consecrated women talk with her to get the rest of her story. He actually said that the consecrated women involved with taking care of Norma (they were assigned to be her companions/caretakers per Maciel's wishes) “deserve a statue or something." He said that this was all at the end of 2006.

So then in February/March 2007 they tried to start figuring out what to do, because Garza had done his own private investigation (including having DNA tests run.) He described being on an airplane and getting the email saying that the test results for Normita were "positive." He forwarded the email to Alvaro, who replied, asking "positive yes? or positive no?" Garza's point was that they still just could not believe that Maciel had a flesh & blood daughter.

Anyway, they started to think that they needed to "tone down" the Maciel image. But Alvaro was rather stuck, because everybody just wanted to hear more and more about Maciel. Garza said that he knew for certain (from DNA tests) that Normita was Maciel's daughter around September/October 2007.

In December 2007 Maciel got the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Garza was there and described Maciel's reaction as very strange to him. Said he did not act as someone who had just been told he had only a few months to live. Garza ordered a type of "lock down" at the Jacksonville house where Maciel was living. The LCs who were attending to him were told to stay put--they would not be given new assignments. It was not explicitly stated that Norma and her daughter were living there, but it did sound like it. In any case, they were around a lot. And Maciel had previously told Norma to stay away from Garza. (Maciel told Norma that Garza "would do evil" to her.)

So Maciel died on January 30, 2008. The LCs had asked Norma to convince him to confess before death, but he would not. At the very end, when Maciel was in a coma, Fr. Alvaro absolved him.

And Garza and Alvaro were wanting to keep things toned down on Maciel's passing, but unfortunately, there was a Men's Convention in Cotija at the time, so more people came than were wanted or expected.

Garza said that they started to tell some, about 50 LCs in November 2008, because they decided to make the truth known very slowly. He called it a "great miscalculation," because in January 2009 the news was leaked to the press. He said that the situation was very badly managed and resulted in "disenfranchising" many. He repeated that they did not try to cover this up, that that would have been like trying to cover the sun with your finger.

When asked if Maciel ever admitted to wrongdoing, he said no. He described Maciel as a psycopath whose moral knowledge was very weak.

It must be noted that this answer was met with a standing ovation from the RC members present.

Comments

[pete vere]

I'm starting to wonder if Fr. Garza is playing Professor Snape to Maciel's Voldemort. Not only is he openly throwing Maciel under the bus - something the rest of the LC leadership appears reluctant to do publicly - he appears to be taking out himself, Fr. Alvaro and other key players as well.

What is also interesting is that Fr. Garza appears to be protecting Norma, Maciel's brother, the 3gf and the rank-and-file LC/RC involved, giving them the benefit of the doubt.

[Another ExLegionary]

somebody wake me when they're done applauding one another for sitting on the faces of the victims all these years. svergognati really doesn't start to cover it.

[Scipio Africanus]

Pete: This is obviously an "agreed" version of the facts.
1. The Holy See did not begin the investigation believing he was innocent, although it could be true they did not have the evidence yet, the key piece of evidence was a video of Maciel with one of his lovers in bed handed in by his secretary, Fr. Rafael Moreno. Garza obviously knew about this. Strangely the Legion superiors exiled him to Brazil and gave strict indications to LC priests in Rome not to hear his confession by any means.
2. The retirement of Maciel from the leadership was forced, that was acknowledged by Maciel himself speaking to professors in Rome, and he did not react well to the indication (not a very "holy" reaction)
3. How could anyone believe they knew he was guilty from the press? Obviously the CDF showed up with her veredict and with the basic evidence against him. Who can believe they said we are condemning him but we will not give you our reasons for doing so?
4. I know for sure they were receiving notice for at least ten years of Maciel's misconduct in homosexual, and heterosexual wrongdoing. I.e. he was seen by legionaries in conyugal attitudes with a lady and found in an hotel room with a male companion.
Garza's most brilliant move was to convince Malen Oriol and Maria Elena Serrano (the 3GFs he is speaking of)that they were the ones unveiling the truth, while he knew everything beforehand. So he could appear as the one doing the clean up job.
And finally, if he knew everything months before the may 2006 communique, how could he sign the Legion's statement comparing Maciel with Jesus Christ? No, my dear Fr. Garza, this has been a cover up from the very begining, and you have played your role of the bad cop (Alvaro is the good one) and Sodano has given you the Vatican support for the cover up.

[Scipio's Buddy]

Too many alarms didn't sound because they had been disconnected. And of course, without the alarms, there was no need to be too concerned... So the "system" was quite effective, but "reality" imposes itself.

[Aaron]

-Garza does not mention sexual abuse at all.

-Garza covered up sexual abuse (ie he has not ever reported it to civil authorities, has always announced his disbelief of accusations, has left accused priests to administer to children, or has moved them to a different country if not hemisphere).

-Maciel warns perhaps the only person he was close to, in his own twisted way, that Garza would do evil things to her.

-Maciel was covered up and protected by Garza and the cupula for decades. Accusations have been made for a LONG time: he makes no mention of his own attitude towards Maciel before 2006 (ie the hartford courant etc)

There was a MASSIVE coverup operation underway in the Legion in 1997 when that article came out: LCs were forbidden to read it, to talk about it, to hear about it, they had to walk away from any conversation and report anything they heard or saw related to it and more importantly report immediately to the superiors if they saw any LC not obeying these rules. The meeting itself, where these rules were conveyed, was not to be discussed: we walked out of there as if nothing had happened. Meeting? What meeting?

- No cover-up? Just a massive control of information and heavy censorship. I would wonder what his idea of cover-up involved? Perhaps with that much power he meant: we did not perform a cover-up in that we did not use jedi mind tricks on the pope nor did we buy influence with rupert murdoch etc etc.

Perhaps worst of all, I think that Garza believes his innocence.

At the very best, Luisito, you have been grossly negligent resulting in the continuing sexual abuse of many, the torture of the same victims being discredited, a loss of faith and trust of many - so put that in your harvard pipe and smoke it.

[Scipio Africanus]

Buddy, the big question is then: who unplugged the alarms? Not Maciel, certainly.

[reid]

Somebody unplugged the alarms at the Vatican as well.

[Anon out of RC]

"But, according to Garza, dementia ensued for Maciel, and he wasn't thinking or behaving rationally."

Did he ever think or behave rationally? He was with Norma for 28 years lying thru his teeth! He abused seminarians in his 20s and threw them out as evil doers. Dementia is a nice out. Fr. Garza needs to study the narcissistic, lying personalities of cult leaders and admit what Maciel was.

[reid]

If Garza ever does that, Anon out of RC, he'll come face to face with the truth that he and others in the legion fabricated and fostered a personality cult that aided a monster in committing his crimes. He admits as much when he says "they" needed to tone down the Maciel image, the very image he and others plagiarized and ghost-wrote into existence. Garza and others in the legion would then have to face the truth that their defense of mm, which steamrollered mm's victims, was based upon the very lies that they themselves concocted in creating the mm and legion image, their golden calf.

For Garza and other legion higher-ups admitting the truth to themselves is not likely - as Aaron points out, they believe in their innocence. No, years of not calling things by their names and outright lying are pernicious habits that make acquiring self-knowledge very difficult. But, not to worry, we have been assured that the legion is "basically sound."

[In RC But Not Of It]

Garza's interview with Joan Desmond of the Register in July 2011:

"Q: When, precisely, did you know about Father Marcial Maciel’s record of sexual abuse?

A: There had been accusations in the press since the 1990s. The Holy See issued a communiqué in May 2006 that was more shocking. In fact, a month before, the Holy See communicated to us that the founder was found guilty of the charges against him. I didn’t believe that, I am sorry to say.

In June 2006, there was the appearance of a lady with whom Father [Maciel] had a child. At that time, I decided to do an investigation of my own, and by September of that year, I was sure he had fathered a child. Little by little, more evidence came in. By 2008, we had most of the picture."

Seems Garza left out a few details in this interview and is not quite accurate on some of the dates. Good thing he brushed up on his notes before speaking to the Atlanta section.

[PWC]

FACT: various cardinals in Rome had seen video footage of Maciel and Norma, knowing of the affair by DECEMBER 2004 (if not earlier). One in particular worked to convince Maciel not to accept re-election as Superior General at the General Chapter of JANUARY 2005. This conversation took place in DECEMBER 2004, when the cardinal in question admitted that he had already seen the video of Maciel and his "wife".

FACT: In APRIL 2006, on Palm Sunday, Martha Wegan admitted that the Holy See "already knew who was telling the truth [in the Jose Barba et al. case] and that the Holy See was just trying to decide what to do about it"

FACT: "Garza said that they started to tell some, about 50 LCs in NOVEMBER 2008, because they decided to make the truth known very slowly"

FACT: MARCH, 2010
"COMMUNIQUÉ
regarding the current circumstances
of the Legion of Christ
and the Regnum Christi Movement
March 25, 2010
Solemnity of the Annunciation of the Lord

Introduction

As we are gathered for the annual meeting of the territorial directors with our general director, we wish to write to our brothers in the Legion of Christ, to the consecrated and all the members of Regnum Christi, our families and friends who accompany us at this juncture in our history, and also to all those who have been affected, wounded, or scandalized by the reprehensible actions of our founder, Fr Marcial Maciel, LC.

It has taken us time to come to terms with these facts regarding his life. For many, especially the victims, this time has been too long and very painful."

***A few months might be "very badly managed"

But over 5 years is a coverup attempt.

During those 5 years, recruiting continued under false pretenses, at least partially. During those 5 years, fund raising continued. During those 5 years, ReGAIN was sued to protect the writings of a "psycopath whose moral knowledge was very weak". During those 5 years members of the Legion contiued to call Maciel's accusars liars in public. When Maciel died, Corcuera issued a statement extolling the psycopath.

[reid]

And while we're at it -- if Garza really believes that he is innocent, then he's a silly quack who swallows his own snake oil.

[In RC But Not Of It]

From 2010:

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/legion-of-christ-officials-were-unaware-of-founders-double-life-clarifies-congregations-vicar-general/

[In RC But Not Of It]

Question:

Do all psychopaths go to heaven?

[Deirdre Mundy]

I did a lot of reading on psychopaths earlier this year (husband was on a kick and kept bringing home books like Snakes in Suits and The Psychopath test..)

And one thing jumped out at me as especially interesting.
Psychopaths have no feelings of guilt. So if they kick a puppy, for instance, they don;t FEEL bad. But this just means it's more important for a psychopath to have an objective standard to measure actions against.

In the Catholic Church, it doesn't matter if you FEEL that something you did was wrong or not. An examination of conscience is an objective list. You can recognize your sinfullness even if you don't FEEL sinful-- feelings can be a guide, but they're not the rule...

So, even a Catholic Psycopath should be able to say.... understand that child abuse is a sin.....

And how could someone make it all the way to ordination w/o figuring that out?

Maciel may have been defective from birth, but he had the tools he needed to judge right and wrong. He KNEW what God wanted, he still freely chose to say no.

[Mary Ann]

ook at the timeline. Hilarious!

In Feb 2006, they "find out" he is guilty. Then, in Feb 2007, a whole year later, they "tried to start figuring out what to do." Another whole year passes, and Maciel dies in Jan 08. Then nearly ANOTHER year passes before they start to tell "some" LC's.
THREE entire years! Hilarious that he can say this with a straight face. But, of course, if you say, "and then" and "and then" and elide over the dates....it seems like 3 years is barely enough time to get over the shock. Poor dear shocked souls.

Are those RC in attendance INSANE?

[Mary Ann]

So in a 2011 address to RC Garza directly contradicts his statements to CNA in 2010. Is there no shame? Is no one in the Legion able to put 1 and 1 together?

[Lauretta]

And we must remember Fr. Jose Anton's "confession" from several years ago about the fact that he had personally spoken with several men who had been sexually abused by Maciel but it had not been traumatic. When had he spoken with these men? So, here was someone who had never been mentioned as one of the top echelon who knew of the abuse years ago.

[giselle]

Ah, but Dierdre, they FEEL bad when people look at them funny (or criticise them in any way) for following a pervert, which says that their responses are there, but all screwed up. Every Legionary who has spoken has spoken of his OWN pain.

As for that news account, In RC, thanks. Garza says, in part:

“I mentioned the case of three older priests who, after the death of our founder, said they had knowledge of some information. I pointed out that one of them explained that he never denounced [Maciel] because he had no way of proving what he had learned and because Father Maciel, because of his authority as founder and general director, had been idealized by many.”

There's the catch in his own words. If HE had to throttle back the veneration, then that "idealisation" that had prevented the men from speaking was in-house propaganda by his own admission. (Of course we all know this, but HE has to say it.)

Yes, the timeline is bunk, the excuses are lame, and the fault lies entirely with them. That's why this account is so valuable, because it conflicts even with his previous accounts, not to mention the truth.

[Mary Ann]

One year, the FBI informed us that our famous CFO was under investigation for fraud. We kept it quiet to preserve the reputation of our corporation. Two years later, we learned that he was indicted but given probation because of age - for something we refused to believe he did. A year after that, we discovered our CFO in the act of embezzling our investors' funds. For a year, we discussed what to do about it. Another year later, we decided we should think about toning down the rosy promises we made our investors. A year after that, we removed him from his financial responsibilities (except for his favorite accounts) but allowed his famous face on all our brochures. Then our CFO was taken ill, and we needed to take steps to protect our stock value during his passing, so we kept things quiet except among a few people. But then some irresponsible and scandalous newspapers publicised the totally unfounded allegations. Good thing our investors are still with us...

[Scipio Africanus]

You got it Mary Ann...it's all about the money

[In RC But Not Of It]

Garza's just following tried & true LC tactics - disclose as little as possible and only when absolutely necessary. And if you can obscure or lie about some of the details so much the better.

[Little Light]

How could Alvarito demand a death bed confession from someone who has dementia? That´s like trying to get Reagan to recount Iran-Contra. Maciel had a lucid mind even after two open brain surgeries. His ability to recover from all sorts of accidents was un-natural...I would hate to suggest a pact with the devil...Anyway, where was I? oh, yeah, dementia. We can see where this is heading. Reduce responsibility for Maciel - beef up their lost cause charism while our unsung hero Garza rewrites history to explain away all of his past sins and promote himself. What we need now is another RC Family Convention and all the Maciel protectors can further brainwash their RC followers with nice powerpoint presentations and long speeches by the true legionary ideologues - Alvaro, Garza, Bannon, Kearns among others. Can you feel the love ?

[In RC But Not Of It]

Contrast Garza 2010:

"“Neither Father Alvaro Corcuera, LC, the General Director of the congregation, nor I, nor other superiors of the congregation hid or sought to hide the conduct we began to slowly learn about after Father Marcial Maciel resigned his post as General Director,” Father Garza stated.

“Nevertheless,” he continued, “it has taken time to completely grasp and examine, as best possible, the veracity of the accusations against our founder. Beginning in the Summer of 2008 after obtaining sufficient certainty of the facts, we gradually began to personally inform the superiors of the congregation, the religious members of the Legion of Christ, the consecrated men and women and the other members of the Regnum Christi Movement ... and finally the media and society, expressing our profound sorrow for those gravely reproachable actions.” "

With Garza 2011:

"So then in February/March 2007 they tried to start figuring out what to do, because Garza had done his own private investigation (including having DNA tests run.) He described being on an airplane and getting the email saying that the test results for Normita were "positive." He forwarded the email to Alvaro, who replied, asking "positive yes? or positive no?" Garza's point was that they still just could not believe that Maciel had a flesh & blood daughter.

Anyway, they started to think that they needed to "tone down" the Maciel image. But Alvaro was rather stuck, because everybody just wanted to hear more and more about Maciel. Garza said that he knew for certain (from DNA tests) that Normita was Maciel's daughter around September/October 2007."

[In RC But Not Of It]

"And Garza and Alvaro were wanting to keep things toned down on Maciel's passing, but unfortunately, there was a Men's Convention in Cotija at the time, so more people came than were wanted or expected."

As usual, pin the blame on someone other than the PTB. This time it's the men of Regnum Christi who get nailed.

This particular lie is completely lame-o. The "men's convention" doesn't begin to explain the crowds (including lots of youth) who were said to be present at the funeral. That's likely better explained by the LC's continued "image management" of their disgraced founder. You can bet that there was an organized effort to bring in the masses of adoring fans. And that doesn't quite fit a picture of "wanting to keep things toned down".