Father Garza, settling into his new position as territorial director of North America, has issued a letter to members of the Movement, and I hadn't gotten past the fourth paragraph when I began to steam. Please understand that everything is slowing down, people are taking time away and I'm happy to leave the entire matter of reform on a back burner while they sort things out. But then we have a statement like the following, and must conclude that n o t h i n g will change -- the Legion has ever conflated itself with the Church, and they bluntly reiterate that a vocation to the Movement is no different with the very baptismal call itself. Consider this:
I have witnessed the love and self-giving of so many Legionaries, consecrated members, and other members of the Movement, and I know that everyone wants to live according to what God is asking of us. I know that everyone is making a big effort in this process through which God is leading us, and I admire each one's perseverance and fidelity to God's plan even though, in the concrete situation, the more "reasonable" option would have been to leave everything and go somewhere else. I know that God sees this faith and hope and that Christ is telling each and every one of us, "Blessed are those who believe without having seen" (Jn. 20:19-31). It hurts me to think that some have left, and I will continue thinking of them as brothers and sisters. In the end, we have all sought to do God's will and we can't forget all that we have shared and lived through together.
This is not even the meat and potatoes but the prologue, and already we find a slap at those who left, who didn't have the faith of the apostles remaining Legionaries, and a reminder of his own pain. As has been stated over the years, it's always painful for Legionaries to live (unless they're actually victims, and then they are marginalised and forgotten because of the sorrow caused by having to remember them).
It's late, the link is here, and perhaps you can wade through it yourselves -- though their trials and difficulties seem to have nothing to do with expressing contrition (or making restitution) but are related to the "beautiful task" of "returning to a foundational charism." How that works when their history is what it is remains a mystery, but they are resting securely, knowing that Jesus' words seem to have been precisely tailored to this situation.
UPDATE from "AnonObserv" in the combox:
Garza's absolutes have been part of the nomenklatura's strategy for some time. Those absolutes: 1) To keep insisting on a pre-existing charism, perfect and beautiful, even glorious for those suffering the present humiliations because of its supposed existence. 2)Power and authority at the end of the day are more important than charism. "Togetherness", all being under the same tent, is achieved not by the charism itself ofcourse, but by the supreme moderator controlling all. Authority is how they keep unity since in effect there is no charism.
I find it odd that LG should all of the sudden appeal to the history of 3rd orders, when for decades the LCs insisted that the RC was not a third order. Ofcourse I would agree with the latter given you need a charism for that, and even now when the Holy See's delegate is asked what that is, his response is, "Una Bella Domanda."
So we see the cult dynamics in full force still in this writing, especially in the insistence on the exercise of surrender to God's will which always goes in line with the organization's self-interest. Those who leave are considered, subtlely or implicitly, failures, heretics to the great cause. Note that everything is about the virtue of faith, nothing about the content of faith. The shot he takes at reasonableness is meant to keep membership from going there, from discerning the signs about whether God has been present in the historical witness of founder; about what really lies underneath the facade of orthodoxy and youthful glitter.
Fanaticism comes from suspending the judgement of reason enlightened by faith- and here we refer to the content of solid theological faith. Just as Jim Jones put his people above the Bible, so the LCs put themselves above an authentic charism shown in its witness.
UPDATE II: A recent comment has jogged this thought loose, or at least framed it in a way I hadn't adequately understood previously. As Christians, we submit to divine revelation and attach ourselves to manifestations of the Spirit, because we are weak, defective creatures. These gifts are treasures which guide us to holiness and invite us to be humble instruments in a larger plan.
Garza's premise is exactly backwards, because it says that the Holy Spirit hasn't made himself known yet, but since the members are good, well-intentioned and virtuous (being tenacious and charitable) then the Spirit is bound to follow and clarify the mission. Unfortunately, not only is "the cart before the horse" but there is grave pride and presumption in banking on their own human strength to drive the reform. It is backwards because they are not only not responding to a legitimate invitation (remember, their leader was "devoid of religious sentiment") but barging in, saying "we're here (and we're pure of heart!) so you must make room for us."
Gisele, what do you expect from someone who has been exiled to a backwater because he refused to get with the program?
You are right, it is the same old stuff, piety without the reality check. But then, this guy was one of the founders. I bet he wrote Envoy.
As a result of this, there will be more people heading for the door.
Posted by: **** | January 07, 2012 at 01:02 AM
My first impression of Fr Garza's letter is that he sounds like a scout leader who is hopelessly lost and panicky in a dark forest with no compass, no map and no real plan as darkness approaches trying to sound confident as he leads his group deeper into the woods.
Posted by: Dilbert | January 07, 2012 at 01:46 AM
I wouldn't put it as "sacrilège à noveau" but "conflation with the Church" fits perfectly as I see it. The Legion has overdone the Vaticanese book of style but has also made it void of real content. But since it sounds so perfect (on the surface), reality can as well be tuned to the style.
Posted by: Scipio's Buddy | January 07, 2012 at 04:58 AM
What I like the most are his claims of sharing a personal opinion and then making the text public through institutional channels...is he that silly to think he is credible? Or worse, is he fully aware he is speaking to members of a sect?
Posted by: Scipio Africanus | January 07, 2012 at 10:13 AM
The pharisees are in charge again! Don't even bother with the commandments. Luis Garza has summed up what it is to be a Christian in 21 pages! Forget the greatest commandment or the New Testament, God wants us ALL to be RC members and Legionaries. Who believes this crap?
Posted by: Justice | January 07, 2012 at 12:36 PM
Same old, same old. Yawn.
OT, but somebody I know has been receiving letters from current RC members informing him that since Rick Santorum's wife is Regnum, he needs to vote for him.
A quick google search did reveal some photos of Santorum at the 2003 Chicago YFE (is that the one where everyone waited with baited breath for Maciel to show up in his helicopter only to be disappointed the saint never showed up due to the fact some "enemies of the Church" and "workers of Satan" showed up with signs picketing the saintly pervert?), but that doesn't necessarily mean his wife is Regnum.
Anybody know for sure? This is the first I have heard of it.
(I hasten to add I am not posting this to start some political debate. I am simply personally interested as I have sensed something off with this guy, and Regnum involvement might explain at least some of my gut feelings).
Posted by: Gems | January 07, 2012 at 01:27 PM
"Blessed are those who believe without having seen" what it is they are believing in, without having seen that anything is there at all in the way of mission or charism. It's one thing to have faith in something which you cannot see but the content or nature of which you know....but to have faith in a nothing while waiting for nobodies to tell you what the object of your present faith is going to be???? This is insanity.
Posted by: mary ann | January 07, 2012 at 01:33 PM
@mary ann: thank you, that is what I meant. To infer that the guarantees offered by Christ stand for the legitimacy and future of L/R is absurd. One could even extrapolate from this that Luis' words are in some way divine, since they bring the annointed message to the RC faithful in order to expand on their particular "blessedness." Simply bizarre.
Posted by: giselle | January 07, 2012 at 01:41 PM
I don't know that he is bizarre so much as in over his head, and trying to control/influence the re-structuring of the consecrated when he clearly has no authority to do so. He is hanging on to the status quo for dear life just as it is slipping from his grasp.
Posted by: **** | January 07, 2012 at 02:15 PM
"Blessed are those who believe without having seen"
is there a deeper subtext to this? Really RC and LC members can still be very much in the dark about the extent of Maciel's "misdemeanours" because of the auto-censorship and control of information: they will ONLY believe what they have read in a letter or document signed by legitimate LC superiors.
Is this a call to hang onto the myth? To cherish blind faith and block out the truth?
I have a personal beef with Luis Garza Medina - I cannot bring myself to label him Fr. as he is a disgrace to the priesthood.
He is a two faced liar, he is a protector of paedophiles and I more besides.
**** I don't believe that Garza was demoted but was strategically moved for financial reasons: LC finance management is to be decentralised with each territory in charge of its finances. Previously, Garza in Rome was in charge of all the money. Now with this change in mind he has moved to New York.
Follow the money, find Garza.
Posted by: Aaron | January 07, 2012 at 02:18 PM
I'm with Aaron---I believe his move to the US was strategic and not in the least a demotion. But if making it appear a bit of a demotion works to the favor of the Legion (see! they are making some changes!), Garza would no doubt be all for it. Meanwhile, he is probably laughing up his sleeve that people actually believe he would tolerate a true demotion.
The god is Legion--every move made is for its sake. Because it is the lifeblood of those who thrive on its money and power.
If it needs to appear hurt and limping for a while, so be it.
I believe in the power of the shapeshifting thing called Legion to live quite a while longer, although it may appear in a different form at different times.
In the final analysis, good always wins out--but not necessarily in the time frame we would hope it to. From the recent naming of so many curial officials as the new cardinals (not to mention future pope-electors!), I'd say nothing is likely to change dramatically in the short term.
Garza apparently knows it, or he wouldn't dare to be so out there with the age old (astoundingly arrogant and blatantly theologically wrong!) Legion meme of conflating itself with the Church. He seems quite unperturbed--and perhaps with good reason. It's a strategy that has worked quite well for the Legion, even years after the revelation of Maciel as a child-molesting fraud.
Posted by: Gems | January 07, 2012 at 02:37 PM
When I read through the document more carefully the second time, I noticed that although it had little in the way of meaningful content, he was making effective use of mind control on his underlings. He keeps repeating that what is developing is God's plan or God's will (therefore not to be questioned). He takes the emphasis off his own failed ability to provide leadership in the reform process and makes it seem as if God is somehow working through the Church and God needs everyone to work together, especially continuing to recruit (helping souls find the love of Christ). He reminds them that their most precious gift from God is their vocation to their consecrated life that isn't really consecrated but sort of is.
He tells them to set their emotions aside for the good of the cause and uses the word "charity" a lot (charity ha a special meaning to those who have taken a solemn promise to never criticize).
Again in his summary (which is poorly written as a summary) he reminds them again that God through the Holy See is directing them and He has called them to this work (which will eventually be defined - but in the meantime don't stop recruiting). He discourages the use of reason and recommends that they just trust what God is doing and they must love God and serve Him.
His final sentence tells them to place nothing before the love of Christ. This has a hidden message that if they have thoughts about leaving then they are letting Christ down and being disloyal to Him.
I felt that there were extremely manipulative statements throughout designed to maintain control of peoples' behavior, information, thoughts and emotions by implying that God is sorting out the mess and it is their duty to do their part by switching off their brains and getting back in step. MM's spirit and work lives on.
Posted by: Dilbert | January 07, 2012 at 02:43 PM
Follow the money, find Garza. Quite true. He would say money is for the kingdom of God, but in the end, the only real reason why he is arguing not to let the 3GFs be autonomous as they should be is because that would mean to lose control of the girl's schools and of the fundraising they 3GF do
Posted by: Scipio Africanus | January 07, 2012 at 03:36 PM
Is there that much money in the USA for the Legion? Do they have members of Carlos Sim's calibre in the USA? Somehow I never got that impression in meeting the other ladies at conventions. Replacing a Bannon with a Garza always stuck me as an exile for the Garza.
But I could be wrong.
Posted by: **** | January 07, 2012 at 04:38 PM
Benefactors are falling to about 1/3. No money from schools like in Mexico. But the money flows through the US, my own scholarship was raised in Mexico and passed through a USA based facade called Omega (not the watches, obviously).
Posted by: Scipio Africanus | January 07, 2012 at 05:08 PM
Gems,
Rick Santorum's daughters were in Challenge in the early 'Oughts (in Clifton, VA iirc). I don't know about after that.
Newt Gingrich's "Nine Days That Changed the World" featured Fr Thomas Williams, LC, and Mr Gingrich is of course a convert from Atlanta who now lives in Mclean, VA. St John's in Mclean had been very much a Legion parish before a few years ago.
I DO NOT have anything to connect these dots but am much interested in additional data to fill in the picture, especially in the next month or so...
Posted by: Jeannette | January 07, 2012 at 05:33 PM
Santorum has been campaigning for a long time. If he was in Chicago, it was to campaign at the grass roots. Regnum Christi in the USA was so totally Republican that it would have been a natural fit. My impression of him at that Convention was that he was being heavily wooed.
Posted by: **** | January 07, 2012 at 06:13 PM
"I personally think that the Regnum Christi Movement does have the two distinctive notes of the third orders (participation in the charism and the same supreme moderator) and that for this reason it is one of them. There are those who would disagree since for Regnum Christi to be equated to a third order, it should have been established as such in the Legion’s constitutions."
Is Garza actually saying that the statutes of RC were approved without the organization even being canonically established? Is such even legit per Canon Law?
"In any case, for the purposes of this text, it is sufficient to regard the Regnum Christi Movement as an association of the faithful in dependence on a religious institute."
OK Scipio it looks like the RC Umbrella vision won't make it to the General Chapter. (Others have already pointed out Garza's obvious sense of humor in maintaining that these statements are "merely opinions". I really chuckled when I read that).
Just wondering when Garza is going to state his "opinion" as to what the charism is. As he points out in the prologue, they need to "understand, clarify and express" this little detail which of course means come up with one in the first place. As Garza is the only one articulating and publishing "thoughtful comments" about the Legion going forward he's obviously going to play an instrumental role in what makes it to the General Chapter.
Posted by: In RC But Not Of It | January 07, 2012 at 06:32 PM
Garza is playing mental gymnastics with the 3gf and if they were smart they'd call him on that whole paragraph B. Observe:
1)He distinguishes betw. the theological and canonical establishment of "consecrated persons" in an association. Apparantly it's possible to be consecrated theologically but not canonically.
2) But that's ok because the "consecration of life" has been recognized by competent ecclesial authority through approval of the RC statutes. The Church has granted them "ecclesial standing". As what? Well, as lay members obviously who make private promises in front of their superior who is NOT acting "nomine ecclesiae". Sounds like a personal consecration and the Church probably recognized it as such without any understanding of the communities or the pretense at living a true consecrated life - because the 3gf either weren't properly represented as such OR some shortcuts were allowed with approval from certain persons in the Curia. The purported "surprise" of the Vatican to find these communities of consecrated ladies volumes about previous lies somewhere along the way.
3) Promises are distinguished from vows - except that they apparently are the same thing. Because the CONTENT is the same - so they are really the same thing, see? (read #1 above regarding theology vs. Canon Law). All that "nomine Ecclesiae" stuff is just a technicality, apparently.
It all comes back to the same thing. Pretending they are consecrated doesn't make them so.
Posted by: In RC But Not Of It | January 07, 2012 at 07:54 PM
Currently, Regnum Christi does not have juridical personality. It was not erected by the authority and was never granted juridical personality. Only its statutes have been approved.15 The Legion of Christ is the entity that possesses goods, disposes of them, and has taken responsibility for the consecrated members, etc. All of this is done through the
general superior, who is constituted as the sole authority and on whom all decisions depend."
Is this the case for all of the Centers, as well, such as the Springhill Center for Family Development? If so, why isn't there any mention of the Legion on their website? I see only a link to RC, and no mention of who bought the property in the history.
Posted by: anon | January 07, 2012 at 09:05 PM
Jeanette, I'm afraid I cannot help you regarding Santorum and Gingrich since I've been a Ron Paul supporter almost from the start.
With regards to Garza's letter, I think he's raised some good questions regarding the future of LC/RC/3gf juridical structures. However, I still feel it is risky to move forward on these questions without a firm and appropriate conclusion to questions surrounding restitution to Maciel's victims. Simply put, I think rank-and-file RC, as well as potential supporters among the broader church community, are going to be reluctant to move forward on reform and renewal of structures so long as the big question of coverup and restitution still hangs over the movement.
Which is one of the big reasons I feel the best option for RC is to dislodge itself from LC and the 3gf, and become a diocesan-based movement under the direction of the diocesan bishop through the local pastor.
Posted by: pete vere | January 07, 2012 at 10:32 PM
**** I mean different companies, Incs, foundations etc set up for the Legion - Thornwood deals with a lot of this business, plus the LC fundraising machine is a big business in the USA.
We have heard before of how money was raised for seminarians in Mexico by 3gf, given to the local section superiors who then send it to a foundation in USA who fractured it into two parts for two seperate beneficiaries etc etc
Posted by: aaron | January 08, 2012 at 05:36 AM
Garza's absolutes have been part of the nomenklatura's strategy for some time. Those absolutes: 1) To keep insisting on a pre-existing charism, perfect and beautiful, even glorious for those suffering the present humiliations because of its supposed existence. 2)Power and authority at the end of the day are more important than charism. "Togetherness", all being under the same tent, is achieved not by the charism itself ofcourse, but by the supreme moderator controlling all. Authority is how they keep unity since in effect there is no charism.
I find it odd that LG should all of the sudden appeal to the history of 3rd orders, when for decades the LCs insisted that the RC was not a third order. Ofcourse I would agree with the latter given you need a charism for that, and even now when the Holy See's delegate is asked what that is, his response is, "Una Bella Domanda."
So we see the cult dynamics in full force still in this writing, especially in the insistence on the exercise of surrender to God's will which always goes in line with the organization's self-interest. Those who leave are considered, subtlely or implicitly, failures, heretics to the great cause. Note that everything is about the virtue of faith, nothing about the content of faith. The shot he takes at reasonableness is meant to keep membership from going there, from discerning the signs about whether God has been present in the historical witness of founder; about what really lies underneath the facade of orthodoxy and youthful glitter.
Fanaticism comes from suspending the judgement of reason enlightened by faith- and here we refer to the content of solid theological faith. Just as Jim Jones put his people above the Bible, so the LCs put themselves above an authentic charism shown in its witness.
Posted by: AnonObserv | January 08, 2012 at 07:09 AM
Pete: Garza has still a strong hold of the 3GF, so his stance will disturb any attempt of breaking away, which will be the ideal move, certainly
Posted by: Scipio Africanus | January 08, 2012 at 08:42 AM
"I find it odd that LG should all of the sudden appeal to the history of 3rd orders, when for decades the LCs insisted that the RC was not a third order."
We were definitely told the same thing. Also that everyone, LC, "consecrated" and "laity" were under the RC umbrella. Interesting deception put forth by Garza concerning this matter:
"For many years in our institutional life, we held two different ideas about our reality. One idea was that the ultimate reality was Regnum Christi. In fact, it was said that the Legionaries of Christ were priest members of the third degree of Regnum Christi. The other idea, which is the one that we have in the current statues of Regnum Christi, was to consider the Movement an association derived from the Legion as its apostolic instrument."
Two different ideas of their reality? Sounds like "What is truth?". Highly centralized organizations with controlling PTB's - especially one trained in Canon Law - don't allow "other realities" to cloud the picture. The reality behind the two "ideas" was that they were talking out of both sides of their mouth. The Vatican was hearing one thing, the membership (esp. the 3gf) quite another.
It's statements like this that prove the LC can't be trusted if Garza remains in any form of leadership - even if they do make full restitution to the victims, Pete. They won't reform. It's no surprise that in Garza's thoughtful, even-toned treatise he essentially advocates for the status quo.
Posted by: In RC But Not Of It | January 08, 2012 at 09:09 AM