Challenging priorities

We've flogged many ideas here concerning the Legion, which is the point of the blog -- to distinguish those areas in which the methodology is failing to be Catholic or even charitable. Last night, a question arose in the combox about TW's purported plan to return to ministry after a year's hiatus, perhaps in a diocese. The point of the query was to understand why this would be different than other clergy who had converted, bringing family members with them.

Canonist Pete Vere responded:

It would depend upon several factors:

First, does he desire to remain in the clerical state, or will he discern a call to return to the lay state (perhaps to be with and marry the mother of his daughter, assuming she is free to marry)?

Second, is there a diocese willing to take him in, whether permanently or on a temporary/probationary basis?

Third, is he free to leave LC and/or resume the practice of his priesthood? Cardinal De Paolis, Fr. AC or another lawful superior might have some concerns that lead to restrictions being imposed on Fr. TW.

Where will Fr. TW's physical health be in a year's time?

There are simply too many potential variables to speculate at this time.

Additionally, there's a big difference between a married non-Catholic minister who is received into the Catholic Church and subsequently receives Catholic ordination, and a validly-ordained Catholic priest under vow/promise of chastity/celibacy who conceives a child through an illicit extra-marital relationship.

In the first scenario, the former episcopal priest is presumed to have conceived his children lawfully within a valid marriage. The fact he was received into and subsequently ordained in the Catholic Church likely means that he was never Catholic in the past (or left as a child with his parents or guardian), meaning he was not subject to canon law or a vow/promise of celibacy/chastity at the time of the conception of children.

Therefore, there is no scandal involved with the former episcopal priest since it's pretty much assumed that married couples make love, which leads to the conception of children. In fact, openness to to lovemaking open to the conception and raising of offspring is a requirement for the valid exchange of marital consent (c.f. canon 1055). In fact, I would argue that by loading up RC parents with apostolate that takes them out of the home and away from the family for many hours a week, the movement may have undermined this fundamental of the marital relationship.

This allows us to revisit the troubling issue of priorities, which we all struggled with when not under strict obedience (such as in the Legion or "consecrated" houses). Those who had families were always pressured to give more to "the Kingdom" by hosting events, starting clubs, attending reflections and retreats, and mining friends and family for vocations. Thus, we had to choose between family life and the "vocation" to Regnum Christi. Of course, they could be combined if we had children who were eligible for the clubs, making a sort of two-fer: spending time with kids while fulfilling a commitment to the Movement. Otherwise, we were heaving food at them, exhorting them to be good, and running out the door.

Obviously, Dicken's character, Mrs Jellyby, comes to mind [Bleak House-go to 4:30 mark] who is so consumed with the poor starving babies in Africa that she neglects her own children -- and causing her own to "wish Africa was dead." But beyond the harried housewives in RC, it would seem that the same disordered priorities were exercised by the superiors of the Legion.

While realising that many of us are suffering from TW Fatigue, we will boil down the latest revelations to three main points:

1. Nobody can judge Fr Williams soul, but there are those in authority who are charged with judging his actions--and we pray for their discernment;
2. The primary wrong about which members of the Church are legitimately angry is the duplicity through which those in authority covered up a grave breach of trust;
3. The secondary concern is related to the Movement's inherent flaw through which member's are encouraged to neglect their legitimate duties in lieu of L/R priorities.  

To wit, Fr Williams said: "I foolishly thought that I had left this sin in my past, and that I could make up for some of the wrong I had done by doing the greatest good possible with the gifts God has given me."

This statement has been parsed already on many levels, but as an illustration of the third point, consider what he believed "the greatest good possible" to be. Not the quiet duty to family and integrity, which would require humility and oblation, but visible preaching and vaunted teaching. Where could have have gotten such an idea?

Comments

[Tom]

Pete, I think Dr Edward Peters wrote about the issue of canon law and married priests and I think he has a different opinion from you. Celibacy is not for everybody. St Paul says, when truly exercised, celibacy offers a spiritual depth that can not be attained when married. I think that is true. One can also argue the reverse, that being and staying married gives insights that a celibate person may never understand. Then again, I am just a joe the plumber in the Catholic world.

CCM, if we are talking about the same priest, that priest is a very dedicated husband, parent and grant parent, and never, ever, hid this, neither did the Church. So please, do not compare him to FTW. From the beginning as a Catholic priest, I think he had a tight rope to walk. He is neither celibate (his wife is openly part of the parish), nor is he poor (to his credit, he knows how to mange money to provide for his family). But I think because he was always a bit of an odd ball compared to his peers (he is one out of 100 or so married priests in the entire USA), he decided to associate himself uncritically with MM’s work, to give himself a patina of “orthodoxy”, that he may have thought eluded him otherwise. This was totally unnecessary on his part, imho. This is a sad story, because in his heart, he is a decent man. Being a married priest did not prevent him from being conned by MM’s works, although at some point, one also has to be an adult and take responsibility of own actions.

FTW did the total opposite. He was never married, he hid his child. Then LC hid all this while allowing him to teach to the world about “ethics” (he even wrote an article for Crisis Magazine not so long ago, where he twisted the words of Leo XIII). So there is multiple duplicity, personal and institutional. When FTW was forced to confess, he negated his parenthood, something I find totally despicable. FTW is lucky his kid did not punch him in his pretty face when he was pontificating on camera in the past. I hope the child and his mother milk LC for every cent they can, for their support, for their grand children, and future generations to come...

So there is always redemption and hope.

[Deirdre Mundy]

We've discussed this before, but a major flaw in the LC/RC spirituality is that big, flashy things are appreciated and small, faithful things are not. It's the elevation of the wealthy men at the temple over the widow and her mite.

The club leader is 'on fire' and 'bringing souls to Christ' while the little old lady in the pew praying quietly for the dead and straightening up forgotten graves in the cemetery is not.

The preference is for flashy spiritual bouquets over prayers uttered in private.

I frequently have run across members describing people or parishes as 'on fire' versus 'dead.' But sometimes the hottest fires are the smoldering ones hidden away. Therese of Lisieux wasn't especially flashy in her lifetime, for instance.

Another possible charism: Appearance over substance. While some in the movement try have both, the emphasis that the spirituality and leadership stresses is on the appearances.

And I think this stress might be more damaging for the reverts and converts than for the plain old Catholics involved-- especially for the people who DON'T have the counter-experience of an elderly family member who's served the church and others quietly, but faithfully for years. (Somehow, with these quiet souls, one only gets the big picture at the funeral, when everyone suddenly sees how all those little, solitary acts of charity (a grocery run here, a shoulder to cry on there) added up to a life lived in Love.)

The movement, with it's emphasis on flash and youth, actually turns people AWAY from the path to everyday sainthood within ones state in life.

[Deirdre Mundy]

(Not that I'm any good at the everyday holiness thing, but I know it when I see it, and I go to a lot of funerals for those types....hoping I get better with practice!)

[Scipio Africanus]

Bear in mind that the current praxis right now is to assure the fulfillment of paternal duties so this will generally mean he cannot excercise a ministry until the child can live on his own. Because it would not be suitable to use the money earnt as a priest to assit a child. He should find another type of employment

[The Monk]

"a question arose in the combox about TW's purported plan to return to ministry after a year's hiatus, perhaps in a diocese."

What is the source of TW's "purported plan to return to ministry?" I didn't pick up on that in any of the statements I read.

IF there is no credible source for such speculation I'm not sure what purpose is served by the discussion. Is their a source that warrants the propagation of such a rumor?

[Scipio Africanus]

Monk, it is quite clear that the correct thing to do is not to continue serving as a priest at least till he fulfiulls his paternal duties, and he should leave the Legion as well. Religious life does not admit duplicity of families...

[unsurprised]

@ Monk: I don't know what you would consider a credible source and i don't know that TW or LC are a credible source, however in
TW's first statement he wrote: "My superiors and I have decided it would be best for me to take a year without active public ministry to reflect on the wrong I have done and my commitments as a priest."

There is no indication or statement that he is leaving the priesthood or LC. The statement reflects a mindset of returning to active ministry after a year. Whether that happens after a year of discernment is something different, but the attitude and intent is reflected in the statement.

Is there a source that warrants the propagation of such a rumor? Well, the source is TW himself, and LC so considering their history i would answer your question as follows: no, since these sources are known to lie in order to protect themselves, a rumor is not warranted considering the source.

[Jeannette]

Pete,
Clarification? I was under the impression that a former Catholic who converted to the C of E, married and became an Episcopal priest and then reconverts to Catholicism, cannot be a married priest. Thx

[Mary Ann]

We have discussed what should have been done in the case of Fr. W, because we can't say that the Legion did wrong without some concept of what ought to have happened. However, this does not mean we need to come up with a plan for Fr. W's life.

Focusing on particulars is a red herring, one used purposely by cults (what flavor kool-aid would you like, dear?) to distract.

I think we should focus on publicizing the wrongs and harms of the Legion enterprise, for two reasons. First, to inform those inside and out, for their warning. Second, so that those who have the power (which is not us) might be moved to do something about it.

A Companions of Christ association is nice, but sort of ludicrous. Priests should be that to each other. They don't need a public association to get together, do they? Or has our Church become so institution-conscious that we need to have a PAF to have community?

[giselle]

@Mary Ann: I agree that we're often getting distracted, which is why I boiled down what I thought the three important points were. That said, though, canon law may prescribe something concering TW's options -- not that canon law has been strictly followed in the Legion thus far.

[Scipio Africanus]

Giselle: At least canon law forbids one like Thomas Williams to teach, and that is meridian clear, except for Corcuera. And no, they cannot allege they were ignorants in canon law, because the CLC say that too.

[Deirdre Mundy]

Mary Ann-- I think the deal with something like the Companions is that the bishop agrees to let them live in community instead of the typical practice in many dioceses, where a priest may be the only priest in his parish, his town, or even his county!

(We lived in one rural area where the pastor was the only priest in a 30 mile radius! If he wanted to socialize with another priest, he had to drive nearly an hour, and if he wanted to get together with 'a few buddies' it was more like 2 hours!

More densely populated areas (like my current town, which has 5 priests, has many priests in surrounding communities and is only about 45 minutes from an even more densly populated part of the diocese) don't have the same issues with priests who have no priest-friends within an easy drive. (In the town with the only priest for several counties, he socialized with friends from town. However, that led to its own problems, as then he was accused of having 'favorites' among parishioners because he had a couple of very close friends where he could spend an evening of dinner and conversation without having to have his 'pastor mask' on all the time. I think this is the reality that spawns groups like the companions.)

[Maria G.]

Dierdre, I loved your 10:03 a.m. post about those who pray quietly and whose ministries may not be flashy in any way. We can look at St. Therese's hidden and quiet life; we can also recall Jesus's words that the Father sees in secret. God knows our hearts.

[jdamelio]

@Deirdre,

Brilliant analysis of the current charism (or lack there of).

[Mary Ann]

Giselle, I agree with your three points, which do boil it down to quintessential Legion errors (including judging souls). There is a fourth, touched on by Dierdre: thinking that "gifts and talents" are the point, that "greatness" overrides basic Christianity and basic Christian morality. I think TW's case is a microcosm of the Legion.

Also, glad to know about the canon law stipulation...did not know that. But I bet it is only for things that are known. As long as things are secret, it is ok to do anything in the Church. See, having him step down for unspecified reasons might harm his reputation, and we can't have that. Clerical reputations are what it's all about. Did you know you can be excommunicated for publicly criticising a bishop? And it has been done in recent years.

[Melissa G]

Is anyone going to see the "For Greater Glory" Movie, which opens in theatre's soon? http://www.forgreaterglory.com/#synopsis
It is supposed to be a movie about the true story of the 1920's Christos wars in Mexico. Does anyone know if LC/RC are involved in this movie? It looks interesting, but all I can think about when I see the trailer for the movie is the lies Marciel told about his knowing Blessed Jose Sanchez del Rio.

[Pete Vere]

Jeanette:

Generally, that is correct. If a baptized Catholic leaves the Church, seeks ordination (whether valid or not) outside of the Church, then attempts to come back, he is irregular to receive ordination as a Catholic or to continue the practice of the orders (if they were validly received outside the Church). This is because of the ancient principal of Roman law that "one should not benefit from what one has stolen or received unlawfully." Thus the case for those born outside the Church is different in that it is presumed that never having been Catholic at the time of their ordination, they acted in good faith in seeking it outside of the Church.

I do know of one exception Rome made for a man who had left the Catholic Church as a teenager or adult, subsequently joined the Orthodox Church where he received ordination as a monastic (celibate) priest, then felt called years later to return to full communion with Rome. Rome allowed him to return as a priest, transfer to an Eastern Catholic Church, and continue ministering as a priest.

I believe there may also have been some exceptions for non-Catholic clergy who had been baptized Catholic as infants, but left the Church as children when their parents abandoned Catholicism for a non-Catholic church. However, I am not near my canon law library right now, so I would defer to Dr. Ed Peters if he states differently.

On another note, I'm actually currently taking an intensive course on pastoral psychology with a group of Catholic and Protestant clergy, pastors, religious and lay pastoral workers. Right now we're covering Attachment Theory and what happens when infants and young children are regularly separated from their primary and secondary caregivers.

Extremely interesting in light of the current conversation.

[Pete Vere]

P.S. Here's a brief overview of attachment psychology and early childhood, written for the average person: http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/attachment-supporting-young-childrens-emotional-wellbeing-2358

[charlotte]

This might be the wrong thread, but I am in the midst of reading; "OUT OF MORMONISM: A WOMAN'S TRUE STORY" by Judy Robertson (as recommended by a LARC poster)

"Sunday, THE DAY OF REST, was another good thing we learned in the Mormon Church. But we realized the good things didn't balance out the false things we were taught?

Another parallel to RC/LC that I noticed was the canned responses. When Judy Robertson and her husband approached the Mormon Bishop his response was, a patient dismissive phrase about how he knows that they'll be back. They received the same response whenever speaking with friends.

When I approached my team leader, territory director (at least I think that was her title) and a good friend; now keep in mind this was all done seperately on different days. All of them stated to me, "you have to be careful where you get your information from".

Another canned response that I heard whenever somebody brought up a concern about RC was, "no rc women I know would do that".

[charlotte]

Here is another parallel:

"The Mormon Church (lc/rc) seems to have it all together" Chet retorted.

"Yes, that's what we thought, too." Jim Robertson added, "That's why we joined. It looks great on the outside.

But the deep teachings of the Mormon (lc/rc) Church are not taught o the public. You only find that out once you're fimly entrenched in he culture."

[charlotte]

"...The only people who leave Mormonism (lc/rc)are not those who have moral problems and can't live up to the laws and ordinances of the church (lc/rc). There are many LDS that question the doctrine as we did. They didn't go down the tubes, either as we were told by the 'church' (lc/rc)."

[charlotte]

I don't know if mm copied LDS specifically or if his temperment (lc/rc should love this language) and mentality was wired to this way of thinking. I should point out that Jehovah's witness' are similar in this technique. Others here on LARC have also pointed to other groups who use similar techniques.

However, one thing that sticks out to me is the universal juvenile thinking within all of these groups. A sort of secret handshake if you can get into the elite club/clique.

This book ("OUT OF MORMONISM: A WOMAN'S TRUE STORY by Judy Robertson)would actually be a good book study for teenagers. Particularly if the teens had any involvement in rc/lc.

But it would be an especially good book study for our Catholic teens because it is easy to see these issues (poor doctrine, etc), and then as a parent/adult trying to teach right/from wrong to our children to go out into the world and discern the subtle: pretty/good externally does not necessarily equate true love/charity/virtues internally.

My apologies for not being as eloquent or grammatically correct as others here. But this little box makes it hard to review, not to mention all the caffeine on board on this beeeuutifuuuullll morning :)

[happy in diocesan life]

I was actually looking up Patrick Madrid's material and I too, Charlotte, came across that same book and recently read it. There was something else in there, in addition to your remarks, that caught my attention, that Mormons always feel like they are under attack, they are being persecuted; it seemed to be a necessary trait actually, to be a mormon meant constant persecution. Folks, the book Charlotte brings up is relatively short but shockingly like the LC. Many of you would say that and I would too before reading it, but this book nails it in deeply in the coffin. One last comment about persecution, at least since 1997, (maybe this was less a feeling in the 60s and 70s), but Fr Maciel and other superiors spoke about the LC enemies, being persecuted and then of course all of you know about not reading material outside of the prescribed list. Too this day, most LC bros, I'm afraid are going to give the same programmed answer "the Legion fills us in all we need to know," (with those "f...n dossiers of articles they read).
So persecution... like I said, it would sure seem that TW was "persecuted" by the LC so someone would pay for his kid and says some stupid quotes (last sentence of the blog) and not reveal the truth... but can the Legion really use the whole, "we are being persecuted like the Lord" bit anymore?!?!

[Vimal]

The actual Honua Kai Resort & Health spa is the pluticraar #1 holiday resort about N . Boasts along with the #2 holiday resort its Boasts : simply at the rear of several Months within Southern Maui that may cost you four times all the for you to hire and it is 1 / 3 the size and style. The Honua Kai may be the most recent holiday resort on Maui and it is 35 decades modern compared to any vacation resort upon Northern Boasts. The Honua Kai is a condo-hotel each property is actually privately operated then when the property owner is just not presently there the pluticraar rental property is placed into the hire pool area. Out of all the accommodations on Boasts the Honua Kai is often a accurate residence that is certainly 5-star as well as on Ka'anapali Beach front which is the #1 seaside within Offers. There is often a website that adopts fantastic detail regarding the Honua Kai *