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.)

« The beginning or the end? | Main | A spiritual hall of mirrors »


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

After reading these quotes from Pope John Paul II, St. John of the Cross and St. Julian, it appears that the road before the Legion is clear - dissolution and integration into other orders or parishes in the Church. There was no charism, the founder was corrupt and his evil influence continues on. This movement was of human origin, was after money, power and self-promotion, and allowed sexual, emotional and spiritual abuse of children and young adults. The fact that the leaders think that all they have to do is say "We're sorry" to abuse victims and continue on with business as usual says it all. A thousand years is like a blink of an eye to God - they-will-shut-down.

For more about what happens when a corrupt will is at the heart of an enterprise:

have always been concerned about the effect on all the members who were required by the old statutes and norms to "integrate their minds and spirits with the mind and spirit of the (quite probably demon possessed)founder".
That has spiritual repercussions and seems to have been taken very lightly by the Church, by current and past members. If I had integrated my spirit with MM I would be seeking out some people to do some heavy duty praying to try to achieve some inner cleansing.

I gave up on lack of charism in the Legion mattering to the institutional Church a while ago. In the beginning, I thought it would be a theological big deal, likely insurmountable. Now, not so much.

So what if an order of priests was founded by a child molesting criminal who created a psychologically, emotionally, and spiritually abusive environment through a set of bogus mostly non-approved rules and regs?

What matters is that it keeps bringing in the $$--and probably even more paramount, that the real story of how it thrived never comes out lest it air too much Vatican dirty laundry.

Who needs a charism when you are sitting on a gold mine?

Cdl. VdP certainly didn't seem to think lack of a charism is a big deal. Carry on, and don't flag like those cowards and weaklings who left, boys!

@Gems: well, as corrupt as some Vatican decision-makers may have been, the money tree is losing its leaves. Thus perhaps even at this belated hour, the right thing may be done.

Was going to take a break, but the interview shows a big chasm between concerns expressed and objectives outlined by the delegate. For example, for him RC is just fine, the cheating, lying, deception is all good as long as one is "obedient". Obedient to what and whom? The delegate is not obedient to the Church, by imposing his new twisted double speak definition of charism.

I wish the Mexicans all the best:
This could also be a basis for litigation in the US, that the Church is used as a front for cross border criminal, unlawful activities.
Lawsuit or no lawsuit, it be good that concerned faithful network, like it is done in France or Mexico, for example. Based on what the delegate said, this cancer is not going away.

I followed a link from Tom's article and it discussed the many powerful ties that Maciel had with the ultra wealthy in Mexico, including Carlos Slim. One still has to wonder if the Legion was not a grand scheme by powerful men to infiltrate and bring down the Catholic church from within. Even though one could be considered to need a foil hat for thinking this, it makes the most sense in many ways. If Maciel wanted the group only for his own immoral appetites, one has to wonder why he would target the wealthiest people. It would seem safer to keep a lower profile and not risk the exposure that could come from associating with such powerful people. And these people, such as Slim, continue to support the Legion. What is up with that since in the first article the UN is thinking of confronting the Vatican as a body concerning the sex abuse issue. I would think that wealthy people would want to distance themselves from a group that is the poster child for sex abusers in the Church. Makes no sense to me at all outside of a plot that is massive in scope.

Do we know that Carlos Slim is still a supporter of the Legion? I would have thought all the negative press would have been enough embarrassment that he would distance himself from the Legion. Maybe it's different in Mexico, maybe it's still an elite Catholic thing to be attached to the Legion?

Does Cardinal DePaolis himself really believe there is a Charism... I mean REALLY?

DePaolis's last interview of charism and founder:

I. "If they [The visitors] had judged that the institute were inseparable from the founder, there would have been no discussion. Instead, by foreseeing that the congregation would move forward along with its charism, they implicitly acknowledged that perhaps it already had a valid charism."

-Remember it was not the Visitors who discerned the separability of founder from the Legion, rather the Holy See did so, a priori, when it first sent the founder off to a life of penance. The visitors created a report trying to follow this pre-established narrative-- a report that still produced conclusions in private far beyond what this narrative could bare, hence it was discarded by DePaolis. He knows the visitors are under a vow of silence- so he will speak for them: "they implicitly acknowledged that perhaps it already had a valid charism." Note the modifiers 'implicitly' and 'perhaps'. We all remember the 2010 Communique never said the Congregation would simply move on with its charism- the truth was the visitors could not tell what the charism was...hence the need to 'define' it. That was in fact the first crack in the 'founder-bad' 'charism-good' narrative.

II. "However, following the Code of Canon Law, we have preferred—or at least I have preferred—to speak of “patrimony” or “patrimony of the institute,” by which I mean the institutional elements, rather than “charism,” since the latter is a somewhat problematic term. If we think of the “charism,” as the initial moment of spiritual wellspring, we will have difficulties. If, however, we think of the institutional aspects—that is of a charism as it is given to the Church and approved by the Church—we can identify, for example, “These are religious priests, laity, and consecrated lay persons who want to experience the mystery of Jesus as he announces the kingdom..."

OK, it seems we have truly a crisis never overcome by DePaolis only sidestepped. He gives up on charism, and take a legalistic tone. Let me translate: 'I cannot find a valid charism, so we will select certain things the group likes about itself, that the Church likes too-at least on paper- and call it a day.'
What DePaolis does not tell you is that the intentions of the founder, i.e. how he used the diverse elements, are also part of the patrimony of the institute. The was precisely how he did what he did-- the way he ordered the elements to a method of undeclared, unwritten and ungodly aims.

Finally in accordance with the central post of the thread: The whole reform was predicated on the never before tried assumption of the separability of a founder from his institute. Only on this pretext would the Church go forward with the LC/RC. As it turns out there is absolutely no prevision to prevent a return to the founder's intentions and methods.
1)No discernment of how the founder carried out his crimes and with whom was ever done
2)A history of 'shadow' norms and rules and methods has always existed along side of formerly approved Vatican constitutions.
3)There are no prohibitions expressed on personal devotions to MM expressed in public ways- Hence we see the resuming of 'unofficial' pilgrimages to the tomb of MM and soon enough a rewriting of history is bound to occur...

Hmm, I responded to you earlier, Les, but it seems to have disappeared. Anyway, this quote:

Mr. Slim’s relationship with Father Maciel and the Legionaries goes back decades and he continues to donate to the group’s charitable work, said his spokesman and son-in-law, Arturo Elías Ayub. Mr. Slim, now the world’s richest man, has donated a “good amount” of money to the Legion’s network of low-cost universities and plans to continue giving, Mr. Elías said. “We like the way the Legionaries educate,” he said."

from here:

would seem to indicate that Mr. Slim is indeed still supporting the Legion.

Lauretta, the article is from 2010. I don’t know much about Mr Slim, watched a couple of interviews of him on the web (one with is rival Rupert Murdoch, one with Larry King). He is obviously a very smart man. He apparently raised his own children in rather normal circumstances, despite his huge wealth. He is also a cut throat business man (probably would not get away with his tactics in the US). I personally find his apparent gouging of Mexican workers in the US with excessive phone charges when they try to call family back home in Mexico rather despicable. It is this type of ill-gotten gain that went to LCRC for its “good works”. It’s Robin Hood in reverse. Rob money from the poor, give it to the rich, so they can pretend to help the poor. But he does give a lot of money to education. I am not sure what his agenda is, he speak often of “civil society” in opposition to elected government, not sure what he means by that. I am sure his relation with LCRC was a mixture of what he thought were good intentions, with a business angle. There are pictures of him clearly being schmoozed /seduced by MM at some NY function (not the other way around).
Rich people, people in power have tried to use the Church to their own advantage, for centuries. This is nothing new. But they are also humans, they also deserve salvation. What I find less acceptable is when Church leadership allows itself to be corrupted by such people, instead of helping all people, rich or poor alike, to live according to the Gospels. Such Church leaders commit a triple sin: against the rich person for allowing that person to sin, against self, and against the Church. We will all be naked in front of God on judgment day.
AnonObserv, great post, thanks, on the money (no pun intended..).

Giselle, you don't identify "the man deeply affected by the Legion" - by accident?

@Mary Ann: No, his choice.

The comments to this entry are closed.