Most Helpful Posts

Helpful Articles

Blog powered by Typepad

Comment Policy

  • All constructive comments will be accepted.
    Commenting anonymously is certainly permitted as long as it adds to the understanding of this topic. The point of this site is to foster love for Christ, while analyzing the place of Regnum Christi in the Church. (Please know that no one will be able to track your comments -- neither the readers nor the webmaster. We all understand the hesitancy in speaking about this experience and the fallout that can accrue. All comments will only bear the information you choose to reveal.)

« "Fealty to the myth" (I) | Main | Soliciting input »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Well stated critique of the problems with the charism. Father Benjamin's circular thought patterns on this vital issue leaves me quite dazed and confused. Just what is he trying to say? "Our charism is the kingship of Christ who calls people to be missionaries." Any diocesan priest can adopt this motto, too. Indeed, his last line concedes that this charism is also the charism of all the baptized faithful. There is no charism unique to LC.

The Kingship of Christ who calls people to be Missionaries?
Well, one thing has little to do with the other, I could say the holy robes of Christ which call people to be missionaries…..

Also, look back on the embarrassing video that the LC posted about its members being missionaries no matter where they were.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RnvCUWFR6k (by the way, the first speaker is out of the Legion)

These people need to take a few courses in Missionary Theology.http://www.unigre.it/struttura_didattica/Missiologia/index_en.php

Yes, Todd Belardi and Richard Voor are out. The video is from 2009

My experience was that they are much more about appearances and social structure than theology and bringing people to Christ. They are much more into entertaining and fundraising so they can keep the money flowing in. The question is, are they forming good and caring souls or are they just focused on people's net worth and keeping the family together so the funds don't dry out?

"The growth" has been "nothing short of extraordinary". How ironic, back in '08 (and before that) the Legion just loved to show off how much they could grow when the rest of the dioceses and congregations were dwindling. They loved to be looked upon. Who would have thought that two years later they would be living the scourge of having to lose vocations. But this the best part, Heereman basically blames on the modern world making it hard for young men to consider a vocation. So all in all the Legion will be the golden goose with or without vocations

This argument was up to us only in part, because it had already been judged by the conclusions of Apostolic Visitators and the actions taken later. If they (Visitators) had identified a inseparability between Founder and Institute, the question would have been closed immediatly, instead let that the Congregation went forward on his way with the charisma, implicitly admitted that she had perhaps already a valid charisma. It is also true that the Holy Father in the Bull of appointment said to review in-depth charisma, what we tried to do. We entered this charism within a larger entity, which was around the Founder: the Regnum Christi. It has identified a charism of Regnum Christi, who is lived in different ways, depending on vocations, laity, consecrated lay people and religious priests. It seems to us that the identification is quite accurate. But we have preferred - I mainly - MORE THAN TALK OF "CHARISMA", A COMPLICATED WORD, using the canon law, TALK ABOUT "PATRIMONY" AND "PATRIMONY OF THE INSTITUTE", that is, the institutional elements, because IF WE STOP AT THE CHARISMA AS FOUNDING AND SPIRITUAL SOURCE, WE ARE IN TROUBLE. But if we think in the institutional aspects and in the charisma that is delivered to the Church and approved by the Church, we can identify it: the religious priests, the laity , the consecrated lay people, who want to experience the mystery of Jesus announcing the kingdom, with the spirituality typical of the Kingship of Christ (...) If we think in all of this, we feel that the physiognomy, the spirituality of the Institute is quite clear and precise.

Estatua You refer to "consecrated" people and "approved by the Church". Are there any truly consecrated persons? The founder established a fraudulent form of "consecration" so that he could have power and control over them and be able to get rid of them when they were no longer of use to him. This arrangement serves the present masters just as well - free labor.
MM and other LC leaders after him pretended that everything was approved by the Church when it was not and used that lie as a means of controlling people in a sick way.
There was no divine inspiration in any of that and still isn't. Any appearance of spirituality is accidental and comes randomly and haphazardly from some of the members. The spirituality is a mask that has been used to get tax free money from benefactors such as Mrs Mee. The methodology and structure were established by MM with a primary purpose to satisfy his lusts and selfish desires. He trained other leaders to keep the same methodology so that they could benefit. Where is there any good in this and how do you separate out any of this from MM?

Sorry, Dilbert. It was my rough translation of VdP words. Giselle, please could you fix it?

Is this accurate? (and refresh your browser, since I tweaked it)

"This argument was only partly up to us, because it had already been judged by the conclusions of the Apostolic Visitators and the actions taken later. If they (the Visitators) had identified a inseparability between the Founder and the Institute, the question would have been closed immediately; instead the decision to allow the Congregation and the charism to continue implicitly admitted that [the Legion] perhaps already had a valid charism.

It is also true that in his Bull [which appointed dePaolis] the Holy Father said that there should be an in-depth review of the charism, which is what we tried to do. We considered the charism within the larger entity, which was the Founder: the Regnum Christi. The charism of Regnum Christi has been identified, and is lived in different ways, depending on vocations, laity, consecrated lay people and religious priests. It seems to us that the identification is quite accurate. But we have preferred - mostly I - RATHER THAN TALKING ABOUT "CHARISM", WHICH IS A COMPLICATED WORD, using canon law, TO TALK ABOUT "PATRIMONY" AND "PATRIMONY OF THE INSTITUTE", that is, the institutional elements, because IF WE CONSIDER THE CHARISM AS RELATED TO ITS FOUNDING AND SPIRITUAL SOURCE, WE ARE IN TROUBLE. But if we think in terms of the institutional aspects and the charism that has been delivered to the Church and approved by the Church, we can identify it: the religious priests, the laity, the consecrated lay people, who want to experience the mystery of Jesus announcing the kingdom, with the spirituality typical of the Kingship of Christ (...) If we think in all of this, we feel that the physiognomy, the spirituality of the Institute is quite clear and precise.

As far as I can tell, Dilbert, his answer assumes that the "consecrated" are legit. Still awaiting an approval of that translation.

If I hear that phony red robed bureaucrat say one more time that the poor Legionaries have suffered so much…
Pow, right in the kisser.

The comments to this entry are closed.